Structures Congress 2011 © ASCE 2011 736

Design and Testing of Coupled Steel Plate Shear Walls

D.J. Borello1 and L.A. Fahnestock2

1
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Dalian University of Technology on 05/27/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Graduate Research Assistant, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, email: dborello@illinois.edu
2
Assistant Professor; Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University
of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, email: fhnstck@illinois.edu

ABSTRACT

The coupled steel plate shear wall (C-SPSW) system is emerging as a promising
configuration for resisting lateral loads in high seismic regions. A C-SPSW is
composed of two wall piers, which are special steel plate shear walls (SPSW), joined
at the floor levels by coupling beams. The C-SPSW configuration is expected to
retain the benefits of the conventional SPSW configuration and provide additional
structural efficiency while introducing greater flexibility related to building services
and function. However, current provisions do not address analysis and design of C-
SPSWs and further research is needed to develop these guidelines. As part of a multi-
institution NEESR project on steel plate shear walls, this research explores design
procedures for C-SPSW, which build on current provisions for conventional SPSWs.
These design procedures are evaluated in the context of a six-story prototype
structure. The response of the prototype structure under static loading is studied
using numerical models to investigate behavior and performance and to evaluate
design procedures. To further study C-SPSW behavior and to validate the design
procedures, a large-scale subassembly is being developed for laboratory testing. The
preliminary experimental setup and specimen design are described here.

INTRODUCTION

Steel plate shear walls (SPW) are a robust and economical lateral force resisting
system in seismic regions. A SPW is comprised of a steel frame (with either flexible
or rigid beam-to-column connections) with steel infill web plates as shown in Figure
1a. The frame columns and beams are known as vertical boundary elements (VBE)
and horizontal boundary elements (HBE) respectively. Commonly the steel web plate
is slender and unstiffened, providing negligible compressive resistance (Sabelli and
Bruneau 2006). Lateral force is resisted by developing diagonal tension in the web
plate post-buckling. The boundary elements anchor the diagonal tension field,

Structures Congress 2011

 Structures Congress 2011 © ASCE 2011 737

enabling the web plate to yield. The web plate yielding mechanisms dissipates a
significant amount of energy and provides excellent ductility.

INT.
HBE VBE HBE
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Dalian University of Technology on 05/27/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

EXT.
VBE VBE
CB

WEB WEB
PLATE PLATE

a. Conventional SPSW. b. Typical C-SPSW.

Figure 1. Steel plate shear walls.

The 2005 AISC Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings (AISC 2005) and
the 2005 ASCE 7-05 Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures
(ASCE 2005) introduced provisions for Special Steel Plate Shear Walls (SPSW). In a
SPSW the boundary elements are connected by moment connections and the web
plate is unstiffened and slender. The boundary elements are sized based on a capacity
design methodology to remain elastic under full yielding of the web plates. The
resultant of the web plate tension on the boundary elements is assumed to act at an
angle α, derived based on elastic strain energy (Thorburn et al. 1983).

In a typical building layout, it is not uncommon for the bay width of the gravity
columns to be over 10 m and the story height to be as small as 4 m. However, the
Seismic Provisions limit a SPSW panel length-to-height ratio to a maximum of 2.5
(AISC 2005). Therefore the designer may choose to place two SPSWs within a
single bay. The present research explores the behavior of Coupled Special Steel Plate
Shear Walls (C-SPSW). A C-SPSW system is comprised of two SPSWs linked by
coupling beams (CB) at the floor level as shown in Figure 1b. The C-SPSW system
is expected to maintain many of the benefits of the conventional SPSW system while
providing additional efficiency, energy dissipation and architectural flexibility.

Limited research has been conducted on the design, behavior and analysis of C-
SPSW systems. As part of a multi-institution NEESR project on steel plate shear

Structures Congress 2011

 Structures Congress 2011 © ASCE 2011 738

walls, C-SPSW behavior is explored. A preliminary design methodology is

introduced which is consistent with the existing SPSW provisions. Several six-story
prototype buildings are designed to validate the methodology. The prototype
buildings are analyzed under static push-over loading conditions. In order to further
explore the behavior of C-SPSWs, two large-scale specimens will be tested in the
NEES MUST-SIM facility at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. These
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Dalian University of Technology on 05/27/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

specimens will consist of the lower three stories of a six-story prototype building.
The loading and boundary conditions applied to the lower three-story subassembly
will be based on the analysis of the six-story prototypes.

PRELIMINARY DESIGN METHODOLOGY

A preliminary design methodology was developed for C-SPSW systems based on the
existing SPSW provisions, which proportion the SPSW at the plastic strength level,
assuming that the web plates have completely yielded in tension. The boundary
elements are then designed based on the capacity of the web plates. This capacity
design of the boundary elements can lead to a surrounding moment frame with
significant lateral resistance. Therefore an elastic analysis is performed to determine
the proportion of the story shear that is resisted by the moment frame (Sabelli and
Bruneau 2006). The web plates are then sized to resist the remaining portion of the
story shear. In a C-SPSW system, a larger portion of the lateral load is resisted by
frame action due to the coupling beams. Therefore, compared to conventional
SPSWs, a smaller portion of the story shear is resisted by the web plates, reducing
their required thickness.

The HBEs in a SPSW are permitted to develop hinges at their ends; however they are
to remain elastic within the span in order to anchor the web plates. At the design
strength level, the HBEs are subjected to the imbalance caused by the tension in the
web plates above and below. Since the web plates are thinner in the C-SPSW system
than the conventional SPSW system, the capacity design requirements are reduced,
allowing lighter HBEs to be selected.

In a SPSW, the vertical boundary elements are sized to resist the yielding of the web
plates as well as hinging of the HBE ends as shown in Figure 2a. Since a
conventional SPSW is symmetrical, both VBEs are identical. However, in a C-
SPSW, the four VBEs can be grouped into two categories; internal and external VBEs
(indicated on Figure 1b). In both VBEs of a conventional SPSW and the external
VBEs of a C-SPSW, the axial demand consists of the vertical component of the web
plate tension and the reactions from the HBEs, assuming plastic hinges have
developed at their ends. However, for the internal VBEs in a C-SPSW, the shears
developed in the CBs partially negate this axial force, as shown in Figure 2b (HBE

Structures Congress 2011

 Structures Congress 2011 © ASCE 2011 739

axial force not shown). For consistency with the capacity design and ultimate
strength methodology employed for the conventional SPSW system, the CBs in the
C-SPSW system are assumed to also develop plastic hinges at their ends.

Plastic Hinge
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Dalian University of Technology on 05/27/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Note: HBE axial force not shown

a. Plastic loads. b. Free-body diagram of VBEs.
Figure 2. Plastic strength mechanism.

The shears and moments in the VBEs can be estimated by considering each story
individually. The web plate tension component in the horizontal direction provides a
distributed load between the ends of each segment. Where an HBE connects to a
VBE, moment demands on the VBE above and below the connection are assumed to
be equal to half of the plastic flexural strength of the HBE. For the internal VBEs of
the C-SPSW system, moment from the CBs can be applied in a similar manner
(Figure 2b). The moments from the coupling beams are additive to the HBE
moments, increasing the shear and moment demands on the VBEs. However, the
axial load reduction in the VBEs that occurs due to the CBs has a more significant
effect and often internal VBEs are lighter weight than the external VBEs.

For preliminary purposes, the coupling beams were sized based on the size of the
HBEs. Since the design procedure is based on plastic strength calculations, the CBs
were selected based on their plastic moment strength compared to the HBEs. Further
research is warranted to develop CB design procedures to achieve the desired
performance.

PROTOTYPE DESIGNS

To validate the preliminary design methodology, three prototype six-story buildings

were designed. The geometry of the prototype building was based on the nine-story
SAC prototype buildings presented in FEMA-355C (FEMA 2000). Due to force
limitations for future experimental testing, the top three stories of the nine-story SAC
building were truncated. The basement was replaced with a fixed base at the ground
level. The bay width was slightly increased from 9.15 m to 9.56 m to match discrete
laboratory pier spacing. The elevation and floor plan of the prototype building are

Structures Congress 2011

 Structures Congress 2011 © ASCE 2011 740

shown in Figure 3. The gravity loads and story masses from the original prototype
buildings were used unmodified (1.0x106 kg for the first story and 9.9x105 kg for the
remaining stories).

5 BAYS @ 9.56 m
5 BAYS @ 9.56 m
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Dalian University of Technology on 05/27/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

5.5 m 5 Stories @ 4 m

5 BAYS @ 9.56 m
C-SPSW

a. Elevation b. Plan
Figure 3. Prototype building layout.

The prototype structures were configured with four sets of C-SPSWs (8 walls total)
along the perimeter in each direction (Figure 3). The shape of the design response
spectrum provided in ASCE 7 was used to determine the design loads (ASCE 2005).
However, since the SAC ground motions (Somerville et al. 1997) will be used for
future nonlinear analysis, the spectral ordinates from FEMA-355C (FEMA 2000)
were used. According to ASCE 7, the prototype building’s approximate fundamental
period is 0.55 sec. The design response spectrum is shown in Figure 4. The design
loads were determined using the ASCE 7 Equivalent Lateral Force Procedure. The
roughly inverted triangular load profile is shown in Figure 5.

The prototype buildings were designed with three different coupling beam sizes. The
coupling beams were selected to have 100%, 200% and 400% of the plastic capacity
(i.e., plastic section modulus) of the HBEs at each story (denoted CB/HBE). The
VBEs were selected from the W24 family (610 mm nominal depth); the HBEs were
selected from the W18 family (460 mm nominal depth). For the two lower CB/HBE
ratios the CBs were selected from the W18 family; for the remaining design they
were selected from the W24 family. With the selected geometry, the first story of the
building violates the panel aspect ratio limit (AISC 2005); therefore a rectangular
HSS restrainer was added (Tsai et al. 2010). The prototype with 200% HBE/CB ratio
is summarized in Table 1. Column splices occur at mid-height of the story.

Structures Congress 2011

 Structures Congress 2011 © ASCE 2011 741

7
Approximate Period

Spectral Resposne Acceleration (g)

1 6

0.8 5

Floor Leevl
0.6 4

0.4 3
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Dalian University of Technology on 05/27/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

0.2 2

0 1
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Period (sec) Vertical Distribution Factor

Figure 4. Design response spectrum. Figure 5. Lateral force distribution.

Table 1. Prototype Design based on 200% CB/HBE.

Story/Level Height tw VBEEXT VBEINT HBE CB
m mm
7 25.3 W18X40 W18X86
6 21.3 1.59 W24X94 W24X131 W18X40 W18X86
5 17.4 1.59 W24X94 W24X131 W18X40 W18X86
4 13.4 1.59 W24X162 W24X146 W18X50 W18X97
3 9.4 2.66 W24X162 W24X146 W18X50 W18X97
2 5.5 3.18 W24X370 W24X229 W18X50 W18X97
1 0.0 3.18 W24X370 W24X229 W18X211

During design, a strip model (Berman and Bruneau 2003) of the system was
constructed in SAP2000 (SAP2000 2009) to determine the proportion of the story
shear resisted by the web plates and to calculate deflections based on the ASCE 7
approximate amplified elastic deflection method (ASCE 2005). The strength-based
designs satisfied the deflection check.

NONLINEAR ANALYSIS

To validate design performance, the prototype buildings were modeled using

OpenSees (OpenSees 2010). Strip models were used for the walls, with the web
plates represented by 15 elastic-perfectly plastic truss elements oriented at an angle α,
which is based on the tension field behavior. The boundary elements were nonlinear
beam-column elements with fiber sections based on the OpenSees Steel02
constitutive model. The member depths were represented by rigid offsets. The
coupling beam constitutive models were calibrated based on link tests at Portland
State University (Dusicka and Lewis 2010). The lateral load was evenly distributed
between the four beam-column joints on each floor. The gravity load was initially

Structures Congress 2011

 Structures Congress 2011 © ASCE 2011 742

applied followed by incrementally increasing lateral load. A leaning column that

carried the tributary gravity load of the C-SPSW was also included to appropriately
capture the destabilizing effects of gravity-only columns. A corotational coordinate
transformation was used to capture geometric nonlinearities.

4000
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Dalian University of Technology on 05/27/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Experimental
3000 Analytical
2000
Base Shear (kN)

1000

-1000

-2000

-3000

-4000
-40 -20 0 20 40
First Story Deflection (mm)

Figure 6. Comparison of Driver (1997) experimental and analytical simulations.

The SPSW test that was conducted at the University of Alberta (Driver et al. 1997)
was used to validate the modeling assumptions. Base shear versus first story
deflection for the experimental and analytical simulations is shown in Figure 6. The
strip model closely traces the experimental response. Therefore the strip model was
deemed sufficiently accurate for evaluating global system response.

The prototype buildings were subjected to pushover analyses based on the Equivalent
Lateral Force load distribution (Figure 5). The base shear normalized by the design
load versus the roof drift is presented in Figure 7. The global response is
characterized by an initial linear region followed by yielding and strain hardening.
All three designs exhibit a similar stiffness; however the higher CB/HBE designs had
higher yield strength. This indicates that some of the benefits of the coupling are not
accounted for in the design process.

Structures Congress 2011

 Structures Congress 2011 © ASCE 2011 743

The story drift at 2% roof drift for the prototypes is shown in Figure 8. For the 100%
CB/HBE design, the maximum story drift occurs at the fifth floor level. However,
the 200% and 400% CB/HBE design achieves their maximum story drift at the fourth
and third floor levels respectively. The response of the 400% CB/HBE design is the
most uniform.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Dalian University of Technology on 05/27/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

2.5
6
100% CB/HBE
Base Shear / Design Base Shear

200% CB/HBE
2 5 400% CB/HBE

Floor Level
1.5

3
1
2

0.5 100% CB/HBE

1
200% CB/HBE
400% CB/HBE
0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 1 1.5 2 2.5
Roof Drift (%) Story Drift (%)
Figure 7. Bases shear versus roof drift of Figure 8. Story drift profiles.
prototype designs.

To assess the level of coupled behavior, the degree of coupling (Canadian Standards
Association 1994) was calculated as the ratio of the overturning moment resisted by
the couple formed by the axial force in each wall pier to the total overturning moment
(Figure 9),

M OT M OT
DC = = .
M TOTAL M OT + ΣM WALL

The degree of coupling (DC) is shown in Figure 10 versus roof drift. The degree of
coupling is initially constant since the system is initially elastic. In the 100%
CB/HBE prototype the DC drops as the CBs begin to yield, increasing the relative
stiffness of the individual wall piers to the coupling beams. However, as the CBs
yield, the DC once again levels off. The other two prototypes experience an initial
increase in the DC as the individual piers yield, lowering their relative stiffness. As
the CBs then begin to yield, the DC once again becomes constant.

Structures Congress 2011

 Structures Congress 2011 © ASCE 2011 744

1
100% CB/HBE
200% CB/HBE
0.8 400% CB/HBE

Degree of Coupling (DC)

0.6
M TOTAL
0.4
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Dalian University of Technology on 05/27/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
M WALL M WALL Roof Drift (%)

M OT
Figure 9. Illustration of Degree of Figure 10. Degree of coupling versus roof
Coupling drift of prototype designs.

EXPERIMENTAL SETUP AND TEST SPECIMENS

To further explore the behavior of C-SPSW system, two specimens will be tested in
the NEES MUST-SIM facility at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Each wall pier will be loaded by a Loading and Boundary Condition box (LBCB).
Each LBCB is able to impose six degrees-of-freedom in load, displacement or mixed-
mode control.

The maximum distance between the strong floor and the LBCB platen is
approximately 6 m. Two LBCBs will be placed in the closest position; the distance
between the centroids of the loading platens is approximately 2.7 m. The VBE base
plates and bottom HBE will be bolted into a 50 mm thick plate that will be
pretensioned to the strong floor. A similar connection at the top of the specimen will
be used with an adapter plate between the specimen and the LBCB platen.

Each test specimen will be a three-story subassembly of a six-story prototype frame

described above. Based on geometric constraints, the specimens will be constructed
at approximately half-scale (0.43 scale). Since the two LBCBs may artificially
constrain the top coupling beam, it will be excluded. The geometry of the test setup
is shown in Figure 11.

The VBEs of the prototype are assumed to be braced at each story (provided by the
lateral force resisting system in the perpendicular direction). The specimen will be
tied back to the strong wall at each VBE-to-HBE connection to replicate this design
assumption and to prevent global out-of-plane instability.

Structures Congress 2011

 Structures Congress 2011 © ASCE 2011 745

The control algorithms will be developed based on the behavior of the analytical strip
model described above. The displacements and loads at the top of the third story (i.e.,
at the top of the subassembly) for each wall pier under a pushover loading protocol
will be condensed down to six degrees-of-freedom. The relationship between these
demands will be analyzed and simplified mathematical expressions developed to
establish a control algorithm. These simplified controls will then be expanded to
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Dalian University of Technology on 05/27/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

allow for an arbitrary loading plan. The control algorithms will be validated on an
analytical model of the three story subassembly. The global and local behavior of the
bottom three stories of the six-story model will be compared to the response of the
subassembly model under the proposed control algorithms. The control algorithms
will be further vetted in the MUST-SIM small-scale laboratory using rubber
specimens.
6m

1.44 m 1.23 m 1.44 m

Figure 11. Elevation of experimental configuration.

The specimens will be instrumented with strain gages to capture boundary element
and web plate local behavior. Linear displacement transducers will be used to record
global displacements and to provide control feedback. To capture more localized
response of the specimen, with focus on the infill plates, a Nikon Digital Motion
Measurement (DMM) system, which uses light emitting diode targets on the

Structures Congress 2011

 Structures Congress 2011 © ASCE 2011 746

specimen, will be used. Additionally, a Nikon handheld laser scanner will be used to
capture high resolution deformed geometry of the specimens at intervals throughout
testing. In particular, this will allow accurate determination of the buckled shape of
the web plates.

CONCLUSIONS
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Dalian University of Technology on 05/27/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Coupling of special steel plate shear walls (SPSWs) is a logical choice in many
configurations. The literature does not adequately explore the design and behavior of
a coupled special steel plate shear wall system (C-SPSW). A preliminary design
methodology was presented which remains consistent with the current design
methodology for SPSWs. The design methodology is validated by designing three
six-story prototype structures. These structures are studied analytically under push-
over loading conditions. The three structures demonstrated similar initial stiffness
with a slight correlation between degree of coupling and yield strength (i.e., strength
increases as degree of coupling increases). Increasing the degree of coupling shifted
the floor with the highest story drift downward.

To further study the behavior of the C-SPSW system, three-story experimental

specimens will be used. These specimens represent the lower three stories of the six-
story prototype buildings at approximately half-scale. Control algorithms will be
developed to replicate the response of the lower three stories of a six-story building.
The layout of the experimental tests and instrumentation are presented.

Analyzing the C-SPSW system with time-history analysis will provide additional
understanding to the underlying mechanisms. These results will be used to confirm
that the design assumptions are valid. Completion of the experimental testing will be
used to validate the modeling assumptions and provide confidence in the analytical
results. Ultimately, the analytical and experimental results will lead to design
recommendations and allow for widespread application of the C-SPSW system.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation
under Grant No. (CMMI-0830294) as part of the George E. Brown, Jr. Network for
Earthquake Engineering Simulation and by the American Institute of Steel
Construction. The authors thank collaborators at the University of Washington,
Assistant Professor Jeffrey Berman, Associate Professor Laura Lowes and graduate
students Patricia Clayton, Mohammad Malakoutian and David Webster, for their
contributions to this research. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in

Structures Congress 2011

 Structures Congress 2011 © ASCE 2011 747

this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of those
acknowledged here.

REFERENCES

AISC. (2005). AISC 341-05 Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Dalian University of Technology on 05/27/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, IL.

ASCE. (2005). Minimum Design Loads for Buildings And Other Structures:
SEI/ASCE 7-05. American Society of Civil Engineers.
Berman, J., and Bruneau, M. (2003). “Plastic Analysis and Design of Steel Plate
Shear Walls.” Journal of Structural Engineering, 129(11), 1448-1456.
Canadian Standards Association. (1994). Design of Concrete Structures (A23.3).
Canadian Portland Cement Association, Ontario, Canada.
Driver, R. G., Kulak, G. L., Kennedy, D. J. L., and Elwi, A. E. (1997). Seismic
Behavior of Steel Plate Shear Walls. Structural Engineering Report No. 215,
University of Alberta.
Dusicka, P., and Lewis, G. (2010). Investigation of Replaceable Sacrificial Steel
Links. Portland State University.
FEMA. (2000). “FEMA 355 State of the Art Report on Systems Performance of Steel
Moment Frames Subject to Earthquake Ground Shaking.” Rep. No. FEMA-
355C, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.
OpenSees. (2010). Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation, University
of California, Berkeley, CA.
Sabelli, R., and Bruneau, M. (2006). AISC Design Guide 20 - Steel Plate Shear Walls.
American Institute of Steel Construction.
SAP2000. (2009). Computers and Structures Inc., Berkeley, CA.
Somerville, P., Smith, N., Punyamurthula, S., and Sun, J. (1997). “Development of
ground motion time histories for phase 2 of the FEMA/SAC steel project.”
Report No. SAC/BD-97, 4.
Thorburn, L. J., Kulak, G. L., Montgomery, C. J., and Engineering, U. O. A. D. O. C.
(1983). Analysis of steel plate shear walls. Dept. of Civil Engineering,
University of Alberta.
Tsai, K., Li, C., Lin, C., Tsai, C., and Yu, Y. (2010). “Cyclic tests of four two-story
narrow steel plate shear walls - Part 1: Analytical studies and specimen
design.” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 39(7), 775-799.

Structures Congress 2011