Transactions, SMiRT 16, Washington DC, August 2001 Paper # 1554

Study on Steel Plate Reinforced Concrete Bearing Wall for Nuclear Power Plants
Part 1; Shear and Bending Loading Tests of SC Walls

Ozaki, M. ~, Akita, S. 1, Niwa, N . 2, Matsuo, I. 2, Usami, S 2

1)The Kansai Erectric Power C o . , Osaka ,Japan
2) Kajima Corporation, Tokyo, Japan

ABSTRACT

Shear and bending loading tests of steel plate reinforced concrete walls (it is called SC walls) were conducted. The
series A was to observe typical shear ultimate state, the series B was for the bending yield and the series C to observe
influence of an opening. The results were investigated about fundamental structure characteristic of every SC wall which
assumed practical use. In the test of series A and B, a shear span ratio and a steel plate ratio were test parameters, the
influence of these parameters on load-deformation relationship and on the bending shear strength of SC wall was
investigated.

1. I N T R O D U C T I O N

A steel plate reinforced concrete wall (SC wall) has good resistance characteristic against earthquake. Beside the SC
achieves high quality in a building construction, because steel plate panels were fabricated as like in a factory at the site
(Fig.l)[1]. So it is effective for an important structure such as a nuclear power plant to apply it.It is important to study
bending and shear strength and the deformation characteristics of SC walls.
A few studies on SC structure were performed by the authors, and some test results on the shear destruction property
that is a typical characteristic of a SC wall are presented. It is regarded as need to study regarding structural characteristics of
case that the shear span ratio is big and case to include an opening in order to apply SC walls to real buildings. From the
viewpoint of above, tests of following three series of SC wall were conducted to investigate those characteristics.
Series A: five specimens reaching a shear ultimate strength before bending yielding
Series B: four test specimens of cases to become a shear ultimate after bending yielding and case to destroy after
bending ultimate.
Series C: An examination specimen which has an opening
/

Headed Stud

Steel Plate . ~*"

.x,,~ Tie Bar

"%.<.1 Fig.1 SC Structure

l.l~>.~\
• , "-.. ./ -
- .

2. T E S T P L A N

2.1 Outline of Specimen

(1) Series A
A list of specimens of series A is shown in Table 1, and the shape of specimen is shown in a Fig.2. All the
cross-sections of test specimens are the same. As the major factor which gives influence to bending shear property of a SC
wall, the shear span ratio (M/QD) and the steel plate ratio (T/t) are chosen as test parameters. M/QD value is decided by the
heightof a specimen, and 0.5, 0.7 and 0.85 were tested. T/t value is controled by the thickness of a steel plate of each
specimen with the range of paractical 50-150. Studs are welded inside of a steel plate as anchors with concrete. The stud pitch
B was decided in accordance with the plate thickness t which was to be B/t -- 30. A thick steel plate was used for flange in
order to flucture a web wall by shear stress before bending yielding. Material properties of specimen are shown in Table 2.

Bending Sliflbner(19mm)
Flange E-late.........J. ......................................................................................
.-
(6~m) ._~ Web Plale(2.3mm) [~._ _
i ,~-,~Kpi]Column Plate \_ ~ i~] ]
i " x d ~ (4.5mm) ] ~ ~ i ~'1 ]
Table 1. Summary of Specimen (Series A) ............. "~. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -1 -~-r~ -~ --- -~

Shear - Steel Ratio (T/t)

Span Ratio • 1
51 100 144
(M/QD)
(t = 4.5) (t = 2.3) (t = 1.6) Horizontal Section

0.5 2660
(H=945)
BS50T10 l
-Q 'i i .....................i......................i i' +Q
......... ~'- ...............4............... i~ ......
ii i ii
0.7
BS70T05 BS70T10 BS70T14
(H=1323) Web Plate(

Stud Bolt ~ ~ :.': i i i :l [

4 4 ~ ~
0.85
BS85T10
(H=16065)

I ii i. !i
]
l
1055 1~51
ii i

i ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::i
i! ~
1660
4000
i!
!i

1~5] 1055
(Unit" mm)

Fig.2 Test Specimen (BS70T10)

Table 2 Material Properties (Series A)

Max. Stress

Material Size Yield Stress Max. Stress Young' s

Poisson' s
(kgf/cm 2) (kgf/cm 2) Modulus
Ratio
(kgf/cm 2)
Web 1.6mm 4484 5695 2090000 0.263
Steel Plate Web 2.3mm 3892 5134 1990000 0.267
Web 4.5mm 3525 5285 1910000 0.264
I *1 339 246000 0.207
Concrete
I1.2 362 248000 0.222
*1" BS85T10, BS70T10, BS70T05 *2: BS70T14, BS50T10

(2) Series B
A list of specimens of series B is shown in Table 3, and shape of specimen is shown in Fig.3. The test parameter is
shear span ratio (M/QD), the bending reinforced quantity and presence of an axial force. The cross-section of specimens is
same as series A. The thickness of a wall of all specimens was 230mm, and thickness of steel plate was 2.3mm (T/t=100).
Cross-section area to be effective for shear stress was fixed. No.1 specimen was especially designed to reach shear ultimate
state after the bending ultimate. Specimens except NO.1 were designed to be fractured by shear stress finally after having
yielded by bending stress. In No.3 specimen, an axial force equivalent to weight of a real building Was given. About No.4
specimen, the quantity of anchor rebar under a bottom of specimen was reduced, and influence of up-lift and influence of a
slip were examined. Anchor reinforcing rod was designed to be equivalent about 80% of yielding strength of a steel plate.
Material properties of specimen are shown in Table 4.
 Bending Stiffener(19mm)
Table 3 Summary of Spesimen (Series B) \ Web Plate(2.3mm)
Flange Plate I
Column Plate /
(3.2mm) ~ ¢)imm) ~ ~" -
Flange Plate
Shear-Span
Ratio s tld Bolt 4 0
2.3mm 3.2mm Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6¢ !
. . . . . .

115, 1660 l 115

L= 1890
0.85
No.1 BS50T10 Horizontal Section
(H=1606.5)
2660
1 ; t
No.2
Web Plate(2.3mm) "~
Stud Bolt ~ ' : : . ' . " - - " 1 I I
0.7 Axial Stress of 4~ L=32 @ 7 0 ~ ~ ~ i i i i i i i ! i i i i i i i i i i i I I ~1
(H=1323) No.3 Base Plate(16mm
30kgf/cm2 Applied

An Anchor is a Anch. . . . . , ' ~ ........... "i"

D29 L=870(30d) @84 },
',',}, _~ncnor
. i ~/ ',',
No.4 small quantity than I :,',,
[ .... D16 L--48d(30d) @104 ....
other Specimen
t 1055 1151 4000
1660 1t5 [ 1055 (Unit: mm)

Fig.3 Test Specimen(No.2)

Table 4 Material Properties (Series B,C)

Max. Stress
Material Size Yield Stress Max. Stress Young' s
Poisson' s
(kgf/cm2) (kgf/cm2) Modulus
Ratio
(kgf/cm2)
Web 2.3mm 4003 5206 2076000 0.274
Steel Plate Flange 2.3mm 4023 5204 2069000 0.271
Flange 3.2mm 4768 5861 2249000 0.255
I *1 344 225100 0.196
Concrete
I1,2 406 266000 0.219
No. 1----3 *2:No.4

Flange Plate BendingStiffener(19mm)

(6mm) ¢ Web Plate(23mm)
~Colnmn Plate X i~ ~] ]
(3) Series C
The shape of specimen is shown in Fig.4. The specimen
arranged an opening in the center of BS7010T which was ~.-'] Stud Bolt4~ ~ i ~ ]

typical specimen of series A. The side of opening was

reinforced with a steel plate of thickness of 2 times of the Horizontal Section
surface steel plate so that concrete did not slide. 2660

2.2 Test Method _Q i ! .................. i ..................

Using the oil pressure jack that push and pull was possible,
a static force of plus and minus of maximum 1000 tonf was
applied to the specimens in a horizontal direction shown in Web
photograph 1. The deformation and strain of steel plate were 4+ L=32 @70~ i i i ! ! i i ! ! i ! ! ! i ! i ! ! i ! ! l o~
measured. The deformations of flange wall were measured in -"1
detail to evaluate bending deformation in the others which . . . .
i! !!
measured a typical deformation of horizontal direction of top of
specimen. The quantity that subtracted bending deformation i i .................. q:: !~
i! i ii
from a deformation of top was considered to be a shear 1055 I ~15 1660 1151 1055 (Unit : ram)
deformation. And strains of a steel plate were measured, and 4000

cracking point, strain distribution property, shear resistance ratio Fig.4 TestSpecimen (Series C)
of a steel plate / concrete were evaluated.
 Photo. 1 Testing Appratus

3. TEST RESULTS

3.1 Series A
The test results of series A are shown in Table 5. The relationships between experimental load and bending deformation
/ shear deformation are shown in Fig.5 according to experimental parameters. From the Fig ..... the following things are
understood. As a value of steel plate ratio(T/t) decreases, the initial stiffness and the cracking strength increase inconsiderably.
The yield strength and the maximum shear strength increase by a value of T / t conspicuously. Deformation angles at the
yielding point and the maximum point do not change remarkably even if a value of T/t changes. Value of shear span ratio
(M/Qd) gives only a little influence to shear yielding strength. M/Qd is a smaller value, and maximum shear strength
increases. The relationship of experimental cracking strength and the square root of concrete strength is shown in Fig.6 and
Fig.7. c(Yt =l.2~/cG B and cTcr =4cGB which are common use on a RC wall show the average of experimental values.
The relationship of shear yield strength / the maximum shear strength and steel plate ratio is shown in Fig.8 and Fig.9. The
shear yield strength and the maximum shear strength are in proportion to the strength of the steel plate.

Table 5 Results of Test

Cracking by Yielding of Web Maximum

Cracking by Shear
Specimen Direction Bending Plate Strength
eQfc eRfc eQsc eRsc eQy eRy eQu eRu
90 0.04 110 0.39 428 2.93 573 7.17
BS70T10
-90 -0.04 - 110 -0.44 -577 -7.99

70 0.03 110 0.35 621 3.99 737 8.01

BS70T05
-70 -0.03 -120 -0.37 -710 -8.06

90 0.33 434 3.71 541 686

BS70T14
-85 -0.32 -521 -6.83

90 0.06 120 0.46 415 2.84 545 6.27

BS85T10
-89 -0.06 -129 -0.55 -526 -6.03

75 0.02 128 0.53 459 3.09 657 7.30

BS50T10
-80 -0.02 -140 -0.59 -627 -7.49

Q" Loading Force(t0, R" Rotation Angle(X 10-3rad.)

 (
..'-0~) ; . ; ; ..:.....
8o0 I , ,,/~..~ T/t=5-I I , °.i-, /.~. Tit=5 l: ] 8°°f I I
4oo6oo
I , ooo_o....
:M/QD=0.5
600 , ~--'~ q ~-.---- M/QD=0.5i 150
o
400 ) .......... ~. . . . i ...... , . .- . . . . . . . . 100

200

0 :
:
i V. _..XT.(~-144

-'~) !
/I V :Bending Cracking ~ [] : Y ~
A: S~hearcrc~ing
]~

;
of Web Plate
T/I= 144 !" T/'--`0!
. . . . . . . . . . . .

]
:l

0
50

i i
.......
~, i ))-- - :
.]t V :Bending Cracking ~
i .......
/~ :Shear Crcking
[S]".Yielding of Web Plate
j0
]
-2007 ..... []" ........ - .......... i ..... 1]"" O:Max. S t r e n g t h ..... J-50 -200 '-/fi] i ...... ~ " O:Max. Strength '-].50
: i i , : Q: : Q U., /I:1 : ! 11 ! ~2 _ : , .9 ]
i -100 i e'
= -°4 0 0 ~/I.
/ i: :-,~Ji
,~. . If_ ~.: -:d_!:Ti--'rot2
i; ~!i ...ll..(~~F!
. ......
. i~]. [}-'- ,oo
-600 - ~ , r ................ ~ , - - - ~ s z oi o ~ ~ - - ' J -600 - " I
.... i.. . . . . . ~ ~szoFostl ,,_--* ~ ~-I--1
" I ~_~_sso~_~il a'i I t~~° l .' ]]~-OS7.0T141[ , "'h I ]-150
-8oo ...... , .... ._...~~"-7.;...':.,...Lt -800 •..... ~ . . i ........ i .... i .... i
-1.0 0 1.0 )) -10 0 10 30 d0 20 -~.o o " 'l:o '~ -~o o ~o ~o 30 40
( X 10-3rad.) ( X 10-3rad.)
Bending Deformation Angle Shear Deformation Angle Bending Deformation Angle Shear Deformation Angle
(1) Influence of T/t (2)Influence of M/QD
Fig.5 Comparison of Load-Deformation Relationships

70 1- . . ~ . 7o.,, ~........ ~....... i ....... i i ....... ! i ......]

c~)l-'-
r
IO :Test I i..... ! .... : .... :, ....
~'.lb:~e~t I . . . . .
!..... ; ...... i ..... i ......
]l-q: Reg.[l] ] 2,04~ --I
~o 50 A :Ref.[2] ? ]l,8{c.ai!
~-g" 50 =.-,
¢2

~=~°
D 40
r ! ": i l.~,~i-]7 !
30 ; ' : ~ .L-'7 t~

c.)~ 20

,o 10
01~t , 1, I ,.1 , .1. t .I ,. I..~.
00 100 200 300 400 5(30 600 700 800 0 00 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Compressive Strength of Concrete Compressive Strength of Concrete
c o B (kgf/cm2) c o" B (kgf/cm 2)

Fi~.6 Relationship between c a B and c a t Fig.7 Relationship between c a B and c r cr

250 . . . . . ............. ............ 250, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .....

I:::l O :T'est I i ::/1
.= 200 ~ I r-1 :Ref.[ll ~ ! ..~ I
= ~
~o ~-]V:Ref.[3] [ ......... ~"" "'Y ........ !" Vo 200 ................................. ; ........
~ ~ [~]+:Ref.[4] [ i /,~ i [
r.t3
150 ~_~A :Ref.[2] L..~....~..'.~... i ......... [ ~ 150 ......... O ...................
"- V z = p w ' s cry
~'~ [" :: ~ ! [O:Tes't I
;~ 100 . ~ 100~-- ..... ~ ........ ! ......... [D:ref.[1]] .... I
,x2 k, F ! i / V :ref.[3][ [
50 ....... "" ~ 5ol-- ...... i......... i ........ |+:ref.[411 ....!
[. ! i /A:Ref.[2]l l
0
:,'~JJ I i I I ~ 7 7 ~,12~I° }liTitl I I 1 ]
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 I00 150 200 250
2t/T.s cr y (kgf/cm 2) 2t/T.s cry (kgf/cm 2)
Fig.8 Relationship between Shear Yield Fig.9 Relationship between Maximum
Strength and Strength of Steel Plate Shear Strength and Strength of
Steel Plate

3.2 Series B
The test results are shown in Table 6, and the relationships of load and deformation are shown in Fig.10. About No.1
specimen, flange wall yielded by bending stress. After the yielding, the stiffness of specimen reduced by degrees, and the
maximum strength was observed after having exceeded deformation angle 10/1000rad. Partial compressive destruction was
observed in flange wall of specimen, and this specimen was fractured by bending stress. The reduction of strength of
specimen is small after maximum strength. As for No. 2 specimen, web steel plate yielded by shear stress after bending
yielding. A shear deformation progressed, and the maximum shear strength of shear was observed. BS70T10 of series A
which did not yield by bending stress is compared with this result, the yield strength and the maximum strength are smaller
than BS70T10 about 10%. The yield strength of steel plate materials used with series B was smaller than about 10% than
steel plates of series A. It can be considered that there is no effect of bending yield to shear yield strength. No.3 specimen
showed failure mode same as No.2. As for No.3 specimen. The strength of cracking and bending yielding increased by effect
of an axial force remarkably, and shear strength increased to some extent, too. As for the result of No.4 with a few quantities
of anchor, there is no significant difference to No.2.
Comparison of calculated bending yield strength / shear yield strength based on straight-line theory[5] and
experimental values is shown in Fig.11 and 12. The calculated values agree approximately with experimental values.
On maximum strength, comparison of calculated values of bending strength based on full-plastic cross-section
assumption[7] and experimental values of series A/B is shown in Fig. 13. The calculated values of shear strength in the Fig. 13
are based on evaluation method described in detail this report Part2 to show next. The calculated values agree well with
experimental values.

Table 6 Results of Test

Cracking Strength (tf) Yield Strength (tf) Max. Strength (tf)

bending shear bending shear

+30.43 +75.44 +321.12 +424.00
No. 1
-29.48 -84.33 -319.10 -412.00
+55.78 +111.09 +441.15 +497.03 +516.26
No.2
-54.83 -106.57 -460.07 -500.97 -500.97
+71.44 + 160.48 +546.96 +546.96 +551.00
No.3
-89.80 -140.03 -448.03 -510.20
+55.70 +116.00 +413.40 +544.80 +558.70
No.4
-64.80 -108.40 -409.40 -498.50 -527.00

800, : : :

600 ~
"°I' .... ,. . . . • . . . . . . . . • ....
::IS
~4 0 0 ~ -~ ~r~ 400t11. . . . i. . . . .ii. . . . ._.~. _. . .i. . .~i. . / . ~i
300 "°I ........ ........ } . . . . . . . .

.... i .... ,. .... : .... : .... : ....

100
ov//;: ;:i
0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Bending Yield Strength from (tf)
Deformation 5 (mm) Straight-line Theory
Fig. 10 Load-Deformation Relationship Fig. 11 Comparison of Bending Yield Strength
between Calculated and Test
1.60 , , , , , ,

250 : / --..~
, ,
,
,
,
,
, ,

~ 1.40 ..... (2)'Test i .........................................

C) :Series A i / , f • Ref[2]
200 ---O :Series B ..... ~ i i i i i ',_ r~ 1.20 .... , i .........................................
;~ 1.oo
150 ...... ! .......... o- ........ : ...... ~1 0.80
~D

........ o ...... i ...... i ......

~ :~ o.6o

.,..~
~'~ o.4o --
~ ~ 50 c~ 0 . 2 0 ............. i .........................................
~ 0.00
0 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 .60
0 50 100 150 200 250
Calculated Max. Shear Strength (Part 2)
2t/T" s cry (kgf/cm 2) / Calculated Max. Bending Strength [7]
Fig.12 Relationship between Shear Yield Strength Fig.13 Comparison of Max.Strength between Calculated and
and Strength of Steel Plate Test
3.3 Series C
The load-deformation relationship is shown in Fig.14. A steel plate of a corner of opening yielded early, and buckling
of a steel plate was observed in the corner of opening by load of minus direction. The maximum strength was observed at the
deformation angle was 10/1000rad in the same of specimen BS70T10. But the maximum strength was about 80% of
BS70T10. A crack of steel plate occurred at the comer of opening. Progressing of the crack was slow, and resistance ability
of specimen did not suddenly deteriorate.
Methods to calculate the reduction coefficient of strength by an opening used for a design of reinforced concrete (RC)
structure are shown in Fig.15. The reduction coefficient given by equation (1)[5] or (2)[6] is used for RC structures.
Comparison of the calculated value that reduced the load values of BS70T10 which has no opening, using those coefficients
and test result of No.5 specimen is shown in Fig.16. The calculated values are corrected by equation (3) to decrease the effect
of the difference of concrete strength. The calculated value by equation (2) agrees well with the experimental values. The
calculated values by equation (1) gives evaluation of security side same as a wall of RC wall.

-20 -10 0 10 20 ao 40
600 , i . ~ Max.i Strength! . . . . .

,oo
',
............. ~. . . . . . . . . . . ~
.~5-., ~ _ ~ J ,oo
lilY/71~ // ~ ~ /
.oo ............ .... "i ....... "/ .......

~-200
o .......... i ............. -! ....... '"
"i ; .......... " 50
o
-~ II I ...... ,oo
i ax. Strength , ,,
"60020 . . . . -'10 . . . . 0 10 20 30 " ' '40
Deformation (mm)
Fig.14 Load-Deformation Relationship

Photo.2 C r a c k Pattern after testing

.-I l° lh°h. l°1 1 • " "(1)

I-. yl
min. rI = l--T, r2 = 1 -

~iAel~~~ ,, ,II]~Z ,[~Ae

r3 = ]l -h:-I • "(2)

I Fc(SeriesC)
~ho~ / ~ ?.ip =Fi Fc(BS7OTIO) • . "(3)
(i=1,2,3)
lo
Fig.15 Effective Strut A r e a of SC wall [6][5]
 D e f o r m a t i o n A n g l e ( × 10-3tad)
6000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

50O
[ 4 ~z~;*"'~ " i S e r i e s ~
400 ..... 1.:-: ' : : --_ . . . . . .

300 ................ --

#,
200 ........... i i"°il'°xrl i ! p .............

100~'-- - [] : Experimental Max. Strength i. . . . . {. . . . !

i : Calculated Max. Strength i

0 . . . . . . . . i .... , .... ~ . . . . . . . . i .... i ............

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Deformation (mm)

Fig.16 Comparison of Load-Deformation Relationships

4. SUMMARY

Shear and bending loading tests of SC walls were conducted, and the following knowledge were confirmed.
(1) The shear cracking strength and the bending cracking strength are estimated by square root of concrete strength
same as RC walls.
(2) The shear yield strength and the maximun yield strength are in direct proportion to the steel plate quantity of web
wall. tt can be considered that there is no effect of bending yield strength to a shear yiled strength.
(3) Bending yield strength can be calculated bythe method on the basis of straight-line theory in common use. Bending
ultimate strength can be calcuated by the method on the basis of full-plastic cross-section assumption same as the
RC wall.
(4) The influence of an opening to the strength can be evaluated using method same as RC wall.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This report is based on the result of joint research for SC structure, organized by 10 power companies, 3 plant makers
and 5 building contractors. The authors wish to express their gratitude to Dr. Hiroyuki Aoyama, Dr. Hikaru Saito, Dr. Shio
Morita and Dr. Hiroshi Akiyama, for their helpful suggestions.

REFERENCES

[ 1] Takeuchi, M., Narikawa, M., Matsuo, I., Hara, K., Usami, S., Study on a concrete filled structure for nuclear power plants,
Nuclear Engineering and Design 179 (1998) 209-223
[2] Kitano, T., Akita, S., Nakazawa, M, Fujino, Y, Ota, H, Yamaguchi, T, Nakayama, T, 1997. Experimental Study on A
Concrete Filled Steel Structure (Part 4 Shear Test), Proceedings Annual meeting of Arch. Inst. Japan, Sep.: 1057-1058
[3] Akiyama, H., Sekimoto, H., Fukihara, M., Okuda, Y., Nakanishi, K., Hara, K., Usami, S., 1991. Compression and shear
loading test of a concrete filled steel bearing wall, Proc. llth SMiRT Conf. H12/2:323-328
[4] Fukumoto, T., Concrete Filled Steel Bearing Walls, IABSE Symposium Report 1987, Volume 55,467-472, 1987, Sep.
[5] AIJ Standard for Structural Calculation of Reinforced Concrete Structures,- Based on Allowable Stress Concept-,
Chapter 4, Article 19., 1999.
[6] Ono, M., Tokuhiro, Journal of Struct. Constr. Engng, AIJ, No.435, 1992, May: 119-129
[7] JEAG4601,1991. Technical guidelines for aseismic design of nuclear power plants (Suppl.), pp. 79-92