Engineering Structures 141 (2017) 59–74

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

High-strength steel reinforced squat UHPFRC shear walls: Cyclic

behavior and design implications
Chung-Chan Hung a,⇑, Honghao Li b,c,d, Hong-Chi Chen a
a
Department of Civil Engineering, National Cheng Kung University, 1, University Rd, Tainan City 701, Taiwan
b
School of Civil Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology, 202 Haihe Rd, Harbin, Heilongjiang 150090, PR China
c
Key Lab of Structures Dynamic Behavior and Control of the Ministry of Education, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150090, China
d
Key Lab of Smart Prevention and Mitigation of Civil Engineering Disasters of the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150090,
China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Ultra-high performance fiber reinforced concrete (UHPFRC) is characterized by ultra-high compressive
Received 20 September 2016 strength and ductile tensile strain hardening behavior accompanied by dense fine cracks. This study
Revised 26 January 2017 experimentally investigated the seismic behavior of squat UHPFRC shear walls. For this purpose, four
Accepted 27 February 2017
squat shear walls were tested under displacement reversals, with the experimental variables including
the strength of steel reinforcement, shear stress demand for the wall, steel fiber, and dowel bar. In par-
ticular, the performance of squat UHPFRC shear walls reinforced with high-strength steel rebar with an
Keywords:
actual yield strength above 685 MPa was explored. The seismic behaviors of the squat walls were eval-
UHPFRC
Squat shear walls
uated using various performance measures, such as the hysteretic response, steel reinforcement strain,
High-strength steel reinforcement stiffness, strength, energy dissipation capacity, and detailed displacement component. The results
Seismic behavior revealed that the presence of steel fibers enhanced the strength, confinement, and crack-width control
ability of squat UHPFRC shear walls, allowing the walls to exhibit ductile flexural-dominant behavior
even when the shear stress demand for the wall was 20% greater than the code-specified maximum
allowable value. Furthermore, the proposed novel squat shear wall not only took advantage of the
ultra-high mechanical properties of high-strength steel and UHPFRC materials, but also resolved the con-
cern of the potential premature failure modes for high-strength reinforcement and concrete.
Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Reinforced concrete (RC) structural walls, also termed shear
walls, have an efficient lateral strength and stiffness for resisting
lateral forces [1–4]. They are commonly used in mid- to high-rise
buildings in earthquake-prone regions to reduce the lateral deflec-
tion of buildings subject to strong vibrations [5,6]. Based on their
characteristic behaviors, RC structural walls can be categorized
according to their aspect ratios, i.e., height-to-length ratios. Struc-
tural walls with an aspect ratio greater than two are classified as
slender walls and have flexure-controlled behavior. On the other
hand, when the aspect ratios of the structural walls are less than
two, such walls exhibit shear-dominant behavior, and are classified
as low-rise walls. In particular, they are termed squat walls when
the aspect ratios are less than one. Squat walls are often used in
bridge abutments, residential and industrial buildings, parking
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: cchung@mail.ncku.edu.tw (C.-C. Hung).
structures, and nuclear power plants. Their typical failure modes
include diagonal tension failure, diagonal compression failure,
web crushing, and sliding failure [7–9]. The shear-critical behavior
of squat shear walls causes these walls to have limited ductility
and stiffness and strength retentions [1,9].
High performance fiber reinforced concrete (HPFRC) is distin-
guished from conventional fiber reinforced cementitious compos-
ites (FRCCs) by its tensile strain hardening behavior accompanied
by dense hairline cracks [10]. In addition to the advantageous ten-
sile response, its compressive strength and ductility are also
enhanced compared to traditional concrete materials, due to the
confining effect provided by the discontinuous short fibers. These
enhanced properties of HPFRC have motivated researchers to
explore the benefits of using HPFRC in newly built structures and
structural repairing and rehabilitation [4,11–17]. In addition to
the experimental evaluation of HPFRC materials and structures,
various computational models have been developed to predict
the behavior of HPFRC under external forces [18–23]. Among the
HPFRC materials, ultra-high performance fiber reinforced concrete

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.02.068
0141-0296/Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
60 C.-C. Hung et al. / Engineering Structures 141 (2017) 59–74
(UHPFRC) is a unique class that has an ultra-high compressive
strength, which is commonly reported to be higher than 100 MPa
in literature. The ultra-high strength of UHPFRC stems from a tai-
lored mixing design, which has a high cementitious material con-
tent and an optimized gradation of granular materials with no or
minimal coarse aggregate. Unlike the conventional high-strength
concrete that has an extremely brittle failure pattern, UHPFRC pos-
sesses a substantially improved compressive ductility and residual
strength. Nevertheless, while extensive studies have shown the
superior mechanical and damage tolerant capacities of UHPFRC
at the material scale (e.g. [24–27]), there remain very few studies
on the application of UHPFRC for earthquake-resistant structural
elements (e.g. [28,29]).
The present study investigated the seismic behavior of a novel
squat UHPFRC shear wall reinforced with high-strength steel rebar.
The replacement of the normal steel reinforcement by the high-
strength one in squat shear walls creates an opportunity for
designers to use less steel reinforcement, thus simplifying the
placement of UHPFRC. In addition, due to the advantageous high
strength and high ductility characteristics of UHPFRC materials
under both tension and compression, the combined use of UHPFRC
and high-strength reinforcement could represent a feasible means
for resolving the undesirable damage patterns that could occur
when high-strength steel is used in conjunction with normal con-
crete materials. These damage patterns include splitting bond fail-
ure, excessively widening cracks, concrete crushing prior to steel
yielding, and buckling of steel rebar [30–32]. In order to study
the seismic performance of the proposed new squat RC walls, four
squat shear wall specimens were prepared and tested under dis-
placement reversals. The effects of high-strength steel reinforce-
ment, steel fibers, shear stress demands for the walls, and dowel
bars on the cyclic behavior of the squat walls were investigated.
2. Materials
Each squat shear wall was made using either the ultra-high per-
formance concrete (UHPC) or UHPFRC. These two concrete materi-
als had the same mixture proportions, except that the UHPFRC
contained additional discontinuous short steel fibers. The squat
walls were reinforced with steel bars with different nominal yield
strengths. Details of the materials employed for manufacturing the
squat walls are given below.
2.1. Uhpfrc
Table 1 presents the mix proportions of the UHPFRC material.
The components included Type I ordinary Portland cement, silica
fume, silica sand (with particle sizes ranging between 0.1 mm
Table 1
Mix proportions of UHPFRC (proportion by weight except for fibers).
Type I Portland cement Silica fume Silica sand
1 0.18 0.5
Table 2
Tensile properties of steel bars.
Type (nominal yield strength (MPa)) Size/Diameter Elastic modulus (MPa)
SD420 #4(D13) 190
#5(D16) 190
SD685 #8(D25) 223
SD785 #3(D10) 179
#4(D13) 208
#5(D16) 180
and 0.3 mm), quartz powder, polycarboxylate-based superplasti-
cizer, water, and high-strength hooked steel fibers. The steel fibers
had a length of 30 mm, diameter of 0.38 mm, specified yield
strength of 3070 MPa, and elastic modulus of 201 GPa. The steel
fibers accounted for 2% of the volume fraction of the UHPFRC
material.
2.2. Steel rebar
Steel bars with different nominal yield strengths were
employed in this study, namely, 420 MPa, 685 MPa, and 785 MPa.
Their actual tensile properties, which were obtained using direct
tensile tests, are summarized in Table 2. All the high-strength steel
bars showed an adequate tensile hardening behavior, with the
ratio of the ultimate strength to the yield strength greater than
1.25. In addition, they elongated to more than 10% of the original
length prior to fracture.
3. Wall specimens
Four squat shear wall specimens with identical dimensions
were manufactured and tested. The geometries of the squat wall
specimens are shown in Fig. 1(a). Each specimen consisted of a
UHPC/UHPFRC wall element with both ends connected to high-
strength RC blocks. In order to manufacture the wall specimen that
had different concrete materials in the wall element and the con-
necting RC blocks, the wall element was precast prior to the con-
struction of the RC blocks. As shown in Fig. 1(b), the precast wall
element had the dimensions of 1500 mm in length, 160 mm in
thickness, and 1320 mm in height. In particular, its top and bottom
ends were finished with jagged edges as shear keys to increase the
connection strength when later linked to the RC blocks. After the
two jagged ends of the precast wall element were embedded in
the forms of RC blocks, the high-strength concrete with a target
28-day strength of 70 MPa was poured to cast the RC blocks. The
erected wall element had a height-to-length ratio of 0.73.
The experimental variables of the wall elements included: (1)
the concrete material (UHPC or UHPFRC), (2) the strength of the
steel bars in the web region of the wall element (SD420 or
SD785), (3) dowel bars (presence or absence), and (4) the target
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0 0
shear stress demand (0.5 f cðMPaÞ or (0.83f cðMPaÞ). It is worth
mentioning that ACI 318 [33] requires the maximum shear stress
0
demand for RC shear walls to be less than (0.83 f cðMPaÞ in order
to prevent them from diagonal compression failure. The notations
and reinforcement details of the squat walls are summarized in
Table 3. Each specimen is denoted as ‘‘concrete type: UHPC or
UHPFRC” – ‘‘reinforcement strength in the wall web: NS (normal
Quartz powder Water and superplasticizer Fiber (by volume)
0.39 0.28 2%
Yield Strength (MPa) Ultimate Strength (MPa) Elongation (%)
455 655 14.2
454 648 24.3
706 921 16.5
849 1080 12.2
825 1054 11.4
793 995 10.6
 C.-C. Hung et al. / Engineering Structures 141 (2017) 59–74 61

Fig. 1. Design details of test specimens (unit: mm).

Table 3
Reinforcement details of the squat shear wall specimens.

Specimen Web region Boundary element Dowel bars (SD785)

Horizontal steel Vertical steel Vertical steel (SD685) Confinement (SD785)
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
UHPC-HS-0.5 fc 10#3(SD785) 10#3(SD785) 4#8 #3@50 mm None
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
UHPFRC-NS-0.5 f c 10#4(SD420) 10#4(SD420) 4#8 #3@80 mm None
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
UHPC-HS-0.83 f c 14#4(SD785) 14#4(SD785) 6#8 #3@50 mm 10#5
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
UHPFRC-HS-0.83 f c 14#4(SD785) 14#4(SD785) 6#8 #3@80 mm 10#5

strength 420 MPa) or HS (high strength 785 MPa)” – ‘‘target shear section in the direction of shear force considered, and qt and f y
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
stress demand: 0.5 f c or 0.83 f c ”. For example, UHPFRC-HS- are the reinforcement ratio and yield strength of the transverse
pffiffiffiffiffi
ffi
0
0.83 f c refers to the wall specimen that was made using UHPFRC, steel, respectively. Although the enhancement in the flexural and
horizontally and longitudinally reinforced with high-strength steel shear strengths due to the addition of steel fibers was not consid-
bars in the wall web, and designed to have a target shear stress ered in the design phase, it will be discussed later in this study
0 using the experimental results. The boundary elements in each
demand of 0.83.f cðMPaÞ
squat wall were longitudinally reinforced with high-strength #8
All the walls were designed to reach the nominal flexural
(D25) steel bars and transversely confined by high-strength #3
strength before the shear capacity was exhausted when under dis-
(D10) steel reinforcement. The confinement spacing in the UHPC
placement reversals. The design value of M n =V n hS for each wall,
walls was 50 mm, whereas it was increased to 80 mm in the
which was calculated based on the actual material strengths, is
UHPFRC walls considering the additional confinement effect pro-
listed in Table 4, and was between 0.75 and 0.87; where hS is the
vided by steel fibers.
height from the wall base to the center line of the horizontal load
In order to evaluate the p performance
ffiffiffiffiffi
ffi of high-strength ffi steel in
pffiffiffiffiffi
applied by actuators (i.e., wall shear span), and Mn and Vn are the 0 0
squat walls, UHPC-HS-0.5 f c and UHPFRC-NS-0.5 f c, which
nominal moment and shear strengths, respectively. The contribu-
had the same target shear stress demands but different steel nom-
tion of dowel bars to the nominal flexural strength of the wall
qffiffiffiffi inal strengths, were designed to have the same values of qs,w fy in
0
was considered. Vn was computed as V n ¼ Acv ð0:25 f c þ qt f y Þ either reinforcement direction; where qs,w is the reinforcement
according to ACI 318 [33], where Acv is the gross area of the ratio, and fy is the steel yield strength. Furthermore, the two
pffiffiffiffiffi squat
ffi
0
concrete section bounded by the web thickness and length of the walls with a high shear demand, i.e., UHPC-HS-0.83 f c and

Table 4
Summary of experimental results of the shear wall specimens (units: MPa, mm, N).

Specimen Material properties of UHPC/UHPFRC SQUAT WALLS

Designs Experimental Results
Compressive Tensile Cracking Ultimate pn ffiffiffiffiffi
V Mn
hS Vn
Vp
maxffiffiffiffiffi Drift pc ffiffiffiffiffi
V Failure
Aw f0c Aw f0c Acv f0c
strength (MPa) strength (MPa) tensile strain(%) tensile strain(%) capacity (%) mode1
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
UHPC-HS-0.5 fc 166 5.3 0.02 0.02 0.52 0.75 0.43 1.5 0.23 F + DT
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
UHPFRC-NS-0.5 f c 125 7.5 0.04 2.22 0.54 0.81 0.61 3.0 0.37 F+S
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
UHPC-HS-0.83 f c 158 5.2 0.03 0.07 0.9 0.87 0.69 1.0 0.21 DC
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
UHPFRC-HS-0.83 f c 115 8.5 0.05 2.05 1.01 0.86 1.01 3.0 0.44 F + DT

Notes: F: flexure, DT: diagonal tension, DC: diagonal compression, S: sliding mechanism.
62 C.-C. Hung et al. / Engineering Structures 141 (2017) 59–74
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
UHPFRC-HS-0.83 f c, were designed to have identical web rein-
forcement details but different concrete materials. Fig. 1(b) shows
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
the reinforcement details of the precast UHPC  HS  0:83 f 0 c
wall element. Furthermore, in order to assess the effectiveness of
dowel bars in restraining the potential sliding mechanism that
was often observed in the failure mode of squat RC shear walls
[4,7], the two specimens with high shear demands were equipped
with 10-#5(D16) high-strength dowel bars.
In order to allow comparisons of wall strengths and facilitate
the discussion of wall designs within the context of the major code
provisions for the design of concrete structures, the strength-
related results of the walls in this study were expressed with nor-
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
malization to f c for eliminating the influence of varying concrete
strengths. Although this approach did not address the unique
mechanical properties of UHPFRC compared to normal concrete
materials, such as the tensile strain hardening behavior and con-
finement effect due to fibers, their influences would be explicitly
discussed using the experimental results.
4. Test instrumentation and load protocol
4.1. Material tensile and compressive tests
Compressive tests on standard cylinder specimens (100 mm 
200 mm), with a procedure conforming to ASTM C39, were carried
out to obtain the compressive strengths of the UHPC and UHPFRC
materials. In addition, direct tensile tests on dog-bone specimens
were performed to identify the tensile properties of the UHPC
and UHPFRCC materials. The configuration, dimensions, and test
setup of the dog-bone specimen are presented in Fig. 2. During
the tensile test, the elongation of the specimen within a gauge
length of 160 mm was monitored using two linear variable
displacement transducers (LVDTs) mounted on the two sides of
the specimen. The magnitude of the applied force was measured
using a load cell directly attached to the actuator. In order to sim-
(a) dimensions
Fig. 2. Tensile testing of dog-bone specimens.
ulate the quasi-static loading condition, both the compressive and
tensile tests were performed using a displacement control proce-
dure with a loading rate of 0.5 mm/min. For each batch of UHPC
or UHPFRC used for casting the wall element, three compressive
specimens and three tensile specimens were prepared and tested.
The average of the test results was employed as the representative
material property.
It is worth noting that tensile testing of strain-hardening
cementitious materials with multiple cracking patterns is a chal-
lenging task. Although AFGC [34] and JSCE [35] provide recommen-
dations on how to perform uniaxial tensile tests on strain-
hardening cementitious materials, testing standards, which define
the test setup and specimen geometry for fully characterizing the
tensile behavior of such materials, are currently not available. As
a result, a variety of tensile test setups exist in the relevant litera-
ture, as summarized by Wille et al. [36]. In particular, the mini-
mum dimension of the specimen mold used in the literature
ranged widely between 13 mm and 50 mm. Although attempts
were made in this study to reduce the potential of preferential fiber
orientation during casting by using the specimen mold with a
width and height (35/35 mm) longer than the length of the fibers
(30 mm), the preferential fiber alignment in the longitudinal direc-
tion of the specimen was not fully prevented, which enhanced the
tensile properties of the UHPFRC material specimen.
4.2. Cyclic loading tests on walls
The squat shear walls were tested under lateral cyclic loading
with the test setup shown in Fig. 3. The bottom RC block was fixed
to the strong floor through eight steel rods, with each having a
prestressed force of 1900 kN. Horizontal displacement reversals
were applied to the top RC block using three hydraulic actuators
with a total loading capacity of 3000 kN. The height between the
horizontal center line of the hydraulic actuator and the base of
the wall element was hS = 1700 mm. Fig. 4 presents the target drift
LVDT LVDT
(b) test setup
 C.-C. Hung et al. / Engineering Structures 141 (2017) 59–74 63

(a) front view (b) side view

Fig. 3. Test setup of the squat shear walls (unit: cm).

6 The magnitude of the applied horizontal force was measured

4% using load cells connected to the actuators. The locations of the
4
2% devices for measuring the displacements and rotations of the wall
Dri Rao(%)

2 1% specimen are shown in Fig. 3. The lateral deflection of the wall was
0.25% 0.5%
0 monitored using a LVDT (with a stroke length of ±1000 mm)
0.375%
0.75%
attached to the top RC block and aligned to the center line of the
-2 1.5% hydraulic actuator. The measured wall drift was corrected for the
-4 3% possible slip and rotation of the fixed RC foundation. Moreover,
the strains of the longitudinal and transverse steel reinforcements
-6 5%
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 in the walls were recorded throughout the test using dense arrays
Cycle (number) of strain gauges, with locations shown in Fig. 5. In order to monitor
the deformation of the walls, an Optotrak Certus optical
Fig. 4. Applied reversed drift ratios. measurement system, consisting of markers and optical cameras,
was employed. An array of Optotrak markers in grids of
250 mm  250 mm were attached to one side of the wall element,
ratio history for the walls; where the drift ratio was calculated as as shown in Fig. 6. An additional row of markers were glued to the
the ratio of the deflection of the wall measured at the height of bottom RC block for monitoring the relative sliding between the
the hydraulic actuator to the height hS. Three cycles at each target wall element and the RC foundation, which was estimated as the
drift were applied.

Fig. 5. Locations of strain gauges (for clarity, only part of the reinforcement is shown. unit: mm).
64 C.-C. Hung et al. / Engineering Structures 141 (2017) 59–74
Fig. 6. Locations of the installed Optotrak markers.
Fig. 7. Notations used in calculation of the shear distortion.
difference between the horizontal coordinates of the markers at
the base of the wall and the bottom RC block.
The average shear distortion for the strip i in the wall element
shown in Fig. 6, li, can be estimated using Eq. (1) [2]:
0 0
ðd1  d1 Þd1  ðd2  d2 Þd2
li ¼
2H0 L0
The notations in Eq. (1) are shown in Fig. 7; where H0 and L0 are
the height and length of the strip, respectively, d1 and d2 are the
0 0
diagonal lengths of the strip before deformation, and d1 and d2
are the diagonal lengths of the strip after deformation. The lateral
displacement component of the wall element due to the shear dis-
P
tortion can be calculated as 4i¼1 li h0 , where h0 is the initial height
of the strip. Moreover, the average curvature along the wall height
can be estimated using Eq. (2) [4], with the assumption that cross
sections of the walls remain plane after loading:
L R
di  di
£i ¼
h0 L
L R
where £i is the average curvature (rad/m) of the strip i, di and di
are the lengths of the two edges of the strip i, and L is the horizontal
distance between the edge markers. The lateral displacement com-
ponent due to the flexural rotations within the region instrumented
P top
with Optotrak markers can then be estimated as 4i¼1 £i h0 hi [4],
top
where hi is the vertical distance from the mid-height of strip i to
the hydraulic actuator.
5. Evaluation of experimental results
5.1. Material properties of UHPC and UHPFRC
Tensile and compressive tests on the UHPC/UHPFRC material
specimens were performed on the same days for testing the squat
shear wall specimens. The obtained material properties are sum-
marized in Table 4. Both UHPC and UHPFRC showed ultra-high
compressive strengths with values at least larger than 115 MPa.
It is interesting to note that the presence of steel fibers reduced
the compressive strength from approximately 160 MPa–120 MPa.
This is likely because the mixer employed for preparing the
UHPFRC was a conventional planetary mixer for cement mortar,
which did not provide sufficient mixing energies required for the
fresh UHPFRC with high viscosity. For example, it was indicated
by Schachinger et al. [37] that the specific mixing energy for a
UHPFRC matrix made with 2.5 vol.% steel fibers and 0.3 vol.%
polypropylene fibers was 5.81 kW/h. Air bubbles with diameters
between 0.1 and 1 mm forming in this highly viscous UHPFRC
leaded to loss of strength of the hardened concrete. Fig. 8 shows
the uniaxial tensile stress-strain curves of the UHPFRC materials.
It can be seen that the UHPFRC materials exhibited a tensile strain
hardening behavior followed by a gradual softening behavior. The
ultimate tensile strength, peak strain (i.e., the strain at the ultimate
tensile strength), and failure strain for the UHPFRC materials were
about 8 MPa, 0.4%, and 2%, respectively. A representative cracking
pattern of the UHPFRC dog-bone specimen is also shown in
Fig. 8, in which dense narrow cracks can be observed.
5.2. Damage patterns and hysteretic responses of the squat walls
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
5.2.1. UHPC  HS  0:5 f c
Fig. 9(a)–(c) present the damage patterns of UHPC  HS
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
0:5 f c at different stages, i.e., yielding of boundary flexural rein-
forcement, yielding of transverse reinforcement, and the end of
the test. The corresponding drift demands at the various stages
are also noted in the figures. When the drift demand was less than
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
1%, the damage pattern of UHPC  HS  0:5 f c was dominated by
diagonal shear cracks, as shown in Fig. 9(b). No concrete spalling or
crushing was observed prior to 1% drift. The test results also show
that the specimen yielded in flexure prior to shear, with the bound-
ary flexural reinforcement and the shear reinforcement yielded at
ð1Þ 0.5% and 1% drifts, respectively. The shear resistance, V c , provided
by UHPC corresponding to when the shear reinforcement reached
A f d
its yield strain was estimated as V c ¼ V  s sy ; where V is the
external load on the wall specimen when the shear reinforcement
yields, fy is the actual yield strength of the transverse reinforce-
ment obtained by material tests, and As is the cross sectional area
of the transverse rebar. The obtained shear force was normalized
ð2Þ
Fig. 8. Tensile behavior of the UHPFRC materials.
 C.-C. Hung et al. / Engineering Structures 141 (2017) 59–74 65

(a) yielding of vertical steel (0.5%) (b) yielding of horizontal steel (1%) (c) end of test (1.5%)
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
Fig. 9. Damage patterns of specimen UHPC  HS  0:5 f0c.

2500
1.2
2000 1
ACI-14-18.10
1500 0.8
0.6
Force (kN)

1000 Mn/hw
0.4
500

Shear stress(MPa)/
0.2
0 0
-500 -0.2
-1000 Mn/hw -0.4
1st Cycle
-0.6
-1500 O yielding of web vercal steel 2nd Cycle
• yielding of web horizontal steel ACI-14-18.10 -0.8
-2000 -1
x yielding of boundary element steel 3rd Cycle
-2500 -1.2
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5
Drift (%) Drift (%)

pffiffiffiffiffiffi
Fig. 10. Load-displacement responses of specimen UHPC  HS  0:5 f0c.

pffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
by Acv f c and listed in Table 4. It can be seen that the UHPC mate- significant. They ultimately caused the central lower portion of
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi the wall to spall significantly, due to the intense compression
0
rial provided a shear stress resistance of 0.23 f cðMPaÞ, slightly and tension reversals induced by cyclic loading. The test was ter-
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0 minated at 1.5% drift because the strength of the wall had dropped
less than the design value of 0.25 f cðMPaÞ specified in ACI 318
by more than 50%. The final failure pattern was shown in Fig. 9(c).
[33] for normal concrete.
The ultimate drift of the wall in this study was defined as the drift
Fig. 10(a) and (b) present the load versus drift responses and the
pffiffiffiffiffi
ffi corresponding to a retained strength equal to 25% of the wall’s
0
strength envelopes of UHPC  HS  0:5 f c, respectively. It can be pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
ultimate strength. The drift capacity of UHPC  HS  0:5 f c barely
seen in Fig. 10(b) that the maximum strength of
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi satisfied the acceptable drift of 1.5% required by ASCE 41
UHPC  HS  0:5 f c was reached at 1% drift and then sustained [38] for the life safety performance level. In other words,
until the 1st cycle to the 1.5% drift. It also shows that the calculated pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
UHPC  HS  0:5 f c might lose its load-carrying capacity after
nominal flexural capacity matched the experimental result quite
experiencing a design-level earthquake. It is worth mentioning
well, with a relative difference of less than 10%.
that no visible sliding displacement, which often occurs in squat
As the imposed drift history proceeded to the second cycle to pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
the 1.5% drift demand, localized diagonal cracks became more RC shear walls, was present during the test of UHPC  HS  0:5 f c.

(a) yielding of vertical steel (0.375%) (b) yielding of horizontal steel (0.75%) (c) end of test (4%)
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
Fig. 11. Damage patterns of specimen UHPFRC  NS  0:5 f c.
66 C.-C. Hung et al. / Engineering Structures 141 (2017) 59–74

pffiffiffiffiffiffi
0 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
5.2.2. UHPFRC  NS  0:5 f c 0
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi material provided a shear stress resistance of 0.37 f cðMPaÞ,
The damage of UHPFRC  NS  0:5 f c in the intermediate limit
which was 50% larger than the design strength of 0.25
state was characterized by dense narrow flexural and shear cracks, qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
as shown in Fig. 11(a) and (b). As the drift demand was increased f cðMPaÞ. Due to the enhanced shear resistance of the UHPFRC
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
to 1%, localized flexural cracks occurred. During the third cycle to material, the shear-dominant behavior in UHPC  HS  0:5 f c
the 2% drift, two localized flexural cracks merged into a was transformed into the flexural-controlled behavior in
continuous, long crack passing through the entire length of the pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
UHFRPC  NS  0:5 f c. Consequently, UHFRPC  NS  0:5 f c
wall, which caused visible wall sliding. This merged flexural crack
was able to maintain 70% of the ultimate strength until the 3% drift,
was further widened as displacement reversals continue. As a
and the drift capacity was promoted from 1.5% in
result, the sliding mechanism became more evident, and the wall pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
strength dropped by 30% after the 1st cycle to the 3% drift, as shown UHPC  HS  0:5 f c to 3% in UHFRPC  NS  0:5 f c. Moreover,
in the load-drift hysteretic responses in Fig. 12(a). The presence of the strength envelopes in Figs. 10(b) and 12(b) indicate that the
the wall sliding behavior also caused the pinching in the hysteretic ultimate flexural strength of the wall was enhanced from
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffi
ffi qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0 0 0
loops to be more significant. The loading test on UHPFRC  NS 0.43 f cðMPaÞ in UHPC  HS  0:5 f c to 0.61 f cðMPaÞ in
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi pffiffiffiffiffi ffi
0:5 f c was ultimately terminated at 4% drift because the wall 0
UHPFRC  NS  0:5 f c, with a 50% enhancement. This improve-
strength had dropped by more than 70%. In the comparison ment was partially due to the delayed shear failure in
between the actual flexural strength and the nominal strengths pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
UHPFRC  NS  0:5 f c, which allowed greater strain hardening
that are marked in Fig. 12(a), the results imply that
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi to develop in the flexural reinforcement, as shown by the recorded
UHPFRC  NS  0:5 f c, which had steel fibers, had an ultimate steel strains in the next section. In addition, the ductile tensile
flexural strength 37% greater than the nominal value. In addition, strain hardening behavior of UHPFRC with a high tensile strength
even though its ultimate strength exceeded the nominal shear of 8 MPa also contributed to the greater flexural strength of the
capacity calculated according to ACI 318 [33], no critical shear- UHPFRC wall. While using fibers in the squat shear wall led to
controlled damage was observed on the wall specimen due to the aforementioned advantages, it is worth noting that it was not
the enhanced shear resistance by adding steel fibers. able to prevent the sliding mechanism in the squat shear wall in
The inclusion of steel fibers led to substantially more and this study, as the drift demands was increased to more than 2%.
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
narrower cracks in UHFRPC  NS  0:5 f0c as compared to
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi pffiffiffiffiffiffi
UHPC  HS  0:5 f c. It also prevented localized diagonal cracks 0
5.2.3. UHPC  HS  0:83 f c
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
occurring in UHPC  HS  0:5 f c that ultimately caused signifi- Fig. 13 shows the damage patterns of specimen UHPC  HS
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
cant concrete spalling after displacement reversals. In addition, 0:83 f c. The damage pattern of UHPC  HS  0:83 f c was
the experimental results in Table 4 also show that the UHPFRC dominated by dense arrays of diagonal cracks prior to the 0.75%

2500
2000
ACI-14-18.10
1500
1000 Mn/hw
Force (kN)

500
0
- 500
- 1000 Mn/hw
- 1500
x yielding of boundary element steel ACI-14-18.10
- 2000 O yielding of web vercal steel
- 2500 •yielding of web horizontal steel
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5
Drift (%)
(a) hysteretic responses strength envelopes
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
Fig. 12. Load-displacement responses of specimen UHPFRC  NS  0:5 f0c.

(a) yielding of vertical steel (b) yielding of horizontal steel (c) end of test
(0.75%) (1%) (1.5%)
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
Fig. 13. Damage patterns of specimen UHPC  HS  0:83 f c.
 C.-C. Hung et al. / Engineering Structures 141 (2017) 59–74 67

3000
ACI-14-18.10
2400
Mn/hw
1800
1200
Force (kN)
600
0
- 600
- 1200
- 1800
x yielding of boundary element stee Mn/hw
- 2400 • yielding of web horizontal steel ACI-14-18.10
- 3000
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5
Drift (%)
(a) hysteretic responses (b) strength envelopes
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
Fig. 14. Load-displacement responses of UHPC  HS  0:83 f0c.

drift. At 0.75% drift, the UHPC in the middle region of the wall
slightly spalled off along the path of the diagonal cracks. At 1%
drift, a large area of the UHPC in the middle region on the back side
of the wall (not shown in the figures) spalled off due to the reverse
diagonal compression action. In addition, the UHPC crushed at a
bottom corner of the wall, causing the steel reinforcement to be
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
exposed. As shown in Fig. 14, UHPC  HS  0:83 f c reached its
ultimate strength during the 1st cycle to the 1% drift. However,
the strength of the wall dropped rapidly by 50% after completing
three repeated loading cycles to the 1% drift. At 1.5% drift, the
web region and two bottom corners of the wall crushed and
spalled more significantly, which also caused the steel reinforce-
ment to be exposed in a large area. The strength of the wall subse-
quently dropped by a total amount of 75% at 1.5% drift. Fig. 14(a)
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi for the design-level earthquakes specified in ASCE 41 [38].
shows that UHPC  HS  0:83 f c, which had no steel fibers, failed
in a shear-dominant mode with an actual shear stress demand of
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
0.7 f cðMPaÞ before the nominal flexural strength was reached.
It also shows that the actual shear strength of the wall was approx-
imately 30% less than the nominal value. In the meantime, the
computation results listed in Table 4 indicate that the UHPC mate-
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
rial only provided a shear stress resistance of 0.21 f cðMPaÞ,
which was 16% less than the design value. This implies that the
actual shear capacity of the squat UHPC shear wall with a high
shear demand was significantly overestimated by the shear for-
mula in ACI 318 [33]. This is likely because the brittle nature of
UHPC caused such a high-strength material to be vulnerable to
cracking and spalling under displacement reversals. As a result,
the effective cross-sectional area of the wall for providing shear
resistance was greatly reduced, and the aggregate interlock mech-
anism was also weakened. It can also be interpreted as that the
softened diagonal compression strut in the wall element, due to
the tensile strain normal to it [8,39,40], was likely more pro-
nounced for the UHPC wall than the normal strength concrete wall
because of the extremely brittle property of UHPC.
It is interesting to note that the increase in the target shear
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0 0
demand from 0:5 f cðMPaÞ to 0:83 f cðMPaÞ caused the failure
pattern of the squat UHPC walls to transform from diagonal ten-
sion to diagonal compression. Consequently, the loss in the wall
strength became more abrupt, and the drift capacity of the wall
decreased from 1.5% to 1.0%. Furthermore, the drift capacity of
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
UHPC  HS  0:83 f c failed to satisfy the acceptable drift of 1.5%
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
5.2.4. UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f c
The initial displacement reversals resulted in both flexural and
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
diagonal shear cracks on the specimen UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f c, as
shown in Fig. 15(a). Although both types of cracks became denser
as the drift demand increased to 1.5%, their widths remained nar-
row. At 2% drift demand, the flexural-shear cracks in both loading
directions started to localize, as shown in Fig. 15(b). At 3% drift, it is
interesting to note that a few more new localized flexural-shear
cracks occurred. This result implies that the bridging effect pro-
vided by the steel fibers was able to transfer the internal force
across the localized cracks to the undamaged part of the wall, thus
preventing the localized crack from rapidly widening. After the
completion of the 3rd loading cycle to the 3% drift demand, the

(a) yielding of vertical steel (b) yielding of horizontal steel (c) end of test
(0.75%) (2%) (3%)
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
Fig. 15. Damage patterns of specimen UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f c.
68 C.-C. Hung et al. / Engineering Structures 141 (2017) 59–74

3000 x yielding of boundary element steel ACI-14-18.10

O yielding of web vercal steel
2400 • yielding of web horizontal steel
Mn/hw
1800
1200
Force (kN)

600
0
-600
-1200
-1800 M /h
n w
-2400
ACI-14-18.10
-3000
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5
Drift (%)
(a) hysteretic responses (b) strength envelopes
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
Fig. 16. Load-displacement responses of UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f0c.

strength of the wall had dropped by 70%, and the loading test was wall. For the two squat shear walls with a high shear demand,
terminated. The final failure pattern is presented in Fig. 15(c). The the inclusion of steel fibers in the wall transformed the failure pat-
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
hysteretic loops in Fig. 16(a) show that UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f c tern from the diagonal compression mode to the flexural-shear
had a flexural strength of about 2700 kN, which was 20% larger mode. Consequently, the ultimate drift of the squat shear wall
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
than the nominal flexural strength of the wall. This enhancement was substantially promoted from 1.0% in UHPC  HS  0:83 f c
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
was mostly due to the improved tensile behavior of UHPFRC over to 3% in UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f c. It is worth mentioning that the
UHPC. Furthermore, although Fig. 16(b) shows that the actual pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
pffiffiffiffiffi
ffi 3% drift capacity of UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f c was 1.5 times greater
0
shear demand of UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f c was as high as 1.0 than the acceptable drift of 2% for the collapse prevention
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0 performance level suggested by ASCE 41 [38], implying that
f cðMPaÞ (which was 20% greater than the maximum allowable pffiffiffiffiffi
ffi
0
demand specified in ACI 318 [33] for preventing brittle compres- UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f c could maintain its superior load-
sion failure), the specimen was able to exhibit a flexural-shear con- carrying ability after experiencing the maximum credible earth-
trolled behavior without signs of diagonal compression failure. The quake events. Moreover, it is also noted that the two UHPFRC walls,
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
computation results listed in Table 4 also show that the UHPFRC i.e., UHPFRC  NS  0:5 f c and UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f c, per-
material was capable of resisting a shear force as high as 0.44 formed similarly well in terms of the strength retention and drift
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0 capacity. This implies that the increasing demands for the steel
f cðMPaÞ, about 76% greater than the design shear strength for
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi rebar stress and the wall shear strength had no adverse effects
0
normal concrete (0.25 f cðMPaÞ). Moreover, the test results on the hysteretic performance of the squat UHPFRC shear wall.
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
revealed that the use of dowel bars in UHFRPC  HS  0:83 f c
successfully restrained the sliding mechanism observed in
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi 6. Discussion
UHFRPC  NS  0:5 f c, even at a drift demand as large as 3%.
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
In contrast to the case of UHPC  HS  0:83 f c, in which signif- The performance of the squat UHPC/UHPFRC shear walls was
icant spalling and crushing were observed, no notable such dam- further evaluated using various performance measures, including
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
age occurred in UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f c, showing the effective the crack width, energy dissipation capacity, stiffness, reinforce-
confinement effect provided by steel fibers on the UHPFRC squat ment strain, and detailed deformation.

6 UHPC-HS-0.5√f'c
6
UHPC-HS-0.5√f'c
UHPFRC-NS-0.5√f'c UHPFRC-NS-0.5√f'c
5 5
Width of cracks (mm)

Width of cracks (mm)

UHPC-HS-0.83√f'c UHPC-HS-0.83√f'c

4 UHPFRC-HS-0.83√f'c 4 UHPFRC-HS-0.83√f'c

3 3

2 2

1 1

0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Drift (%) Drift (%)
(a) flexural crack (b) shear crack
Fig. 17. Comparison of the maximum crack widths.
 C.-C. Hung et al. / Engineering Structures 141 (2017) 59–74
6.1. Crack width
The relationships between the drift demands versus the
maximum widths of flexural and shear cracks are plotted in
Fig. 17(a) and (b), respectively. The crack widths were measured
at the 1st cycle of the wall reaching the target drift. The measure-
ment was made by positioning the transparent crack scale cards
over cracks and then reading the corresponding scale. It can be
seen in Fig. 17 that the addition of steel fibers in the UHPC walls
effectively restrained the growth of crack width for both flexural
and shear cracks, particularly for the shear cracks. For example, it
substantially reduced the maximum widths of the flexural and
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
shear cracks in UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f c at 1% drift demand by
approximately two and six times, respectively, when compared
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
with the crack widths in UHPC  HS  0:83 f c. This result signi-
fies that the unique multiple cracking pattern of the UHPFRC at
the material scale led to more and narrower cracks in the squat
UHPFRC wall, consequently reducing the average crack width in
the structural scale.
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi significantly enhanced the initial stiffness of the specimen by
Furthermore, while UHPFRC  NS  0:5 f c and UHPFRC
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi about 40% and 30% for the walls with target shear demands of
HS  0:83 f c had similar flexural-shear failure patterns, it can
be observed in Fig. 17 that the maximum crack width in the latter
was smaller than that in the former throughout the test. This is
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi fibers gradually diminished as the drift response increases, since
because the smaller shear demand for UHPFRC  NS  0:5 f c
induced a smaller diagonal compression, thus leading to a greater
crack opening. The same reasoning also applies to the smaller crack
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi imens performed similarly, except for UHPC  HS  0:83 f c,
width observed in UHPC  HS  0:83 f c (having diagonal com-
pffiffiffiffiffi
ffi which ultimately failed in a brittle diagonal compression mode.
pression failure pattern) than in UHPC  HS  0:5 f c (having
0 pffiffiffiffiffiffi
diagonal tension failure pattern). Overall, the test results imply
that the combination of UHPFRC and high-strength steel rebar in
squat shear walls led to an appealing crack width control ability,
enabling a maximum crack width of less than 0.5 mm at a drift
demand of 0.5%.
6.2. Energy dissipation capacity
Fig. 18 presents the cumulative energy dissipation capacity ver-
sus the drift response for the squat shear walls. The energy dissi-
pated with a specified target drift was calculated as the enclosed
area of the hysteretic loop in the last repeating cycle to the target
drift. The results imply that the addition of steel fibers consider-
ably enhanced the energy dissipation capacities for the squat wall
having either moderate or high shear strength demands. For
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi elastic at a drift not larger than 0.5%. At the 1% drift demand,
example, at the drift demand of 1.5%, UHPFRC  NS  0:5 f c
showed a cumulative energy capacity about 30% larger than that
40000
Energy Dissipation (kN-mm)
30000
20000
10000 UHPC-HS-0.5√f'c
UHPFRC-NS-0.5√f'c
UHPC-HS-0.83√f'c
UHPFRC-HS-0.83√f'c
0 pffiffiffiffiffi
0 1 2 3 4 5
Drift (%)
Fig. 18. Energy dissipation capacities of the walls under displacement reversals.
69
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
of UHPC  HS  0:5 f c; and UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f c also had a
cumulative energy capacity about 60% larger than that of
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
UHPC  HS  0:83 f c. This is because the confining and bridging
effects provided by steel fibers effectively restrained concrete spal-
ling and crushing, successfully transforming the shear-dominant
behavior of the UHPC walls to the flexural-dominant behavior of
the UHPFRC walls. As a result, the hysteretic loop was fatter for
the squat walls with steel fibers.
6.3. Stiffness
The stiffness versus drift curves for the tested squat walls under
cyclic loading are presented in Fig. 19(a). The stiffness at a specified
target drift was computed as the slope between the force-drift val-
ues at the maximum and minimum target drifts, as illustrated in
Fig. 19(b). Each stiffness value was calculated at the last repeating
cycle to the specified target drift.
The results in Fig. 19(a) show that the inclusion of steel fibers
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
0:5 f c and 0:83 f c, respectively. It can also be seen that the dif-
ference between the stiffnesses of the walls with and without steel
the bridging effect of fibers became less effective as the crack
width increases. With regard to the stiffness retention, all the spec-
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
Furthermore, even though UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f0c had an actual
shear demand exceeding the code-specified limit, it still exhibited
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
a similar performance to UHPFRC  NS  0:50 f0c in terms of stiff-
ness retention. This implies that the steel fibers remained effective
in restraining crack localization and concrete crushing and spalling
when the wall was under such a high shear demand.
6.4. Steel reinforcement strains
Fig. 20 shows the strain profiles of the transverse steel rein-
forcement along the length of the squat shear walls at 0.25%,
0.5%, and 1% drifts. Because the data measured by the strain gauges
above the 1% drift gradually became invalid, they are not reported
herein. It can be seen in Fig. 20 that the transverse reinforcement in
all the walls, whether normal- or high-strength steel, remained
the normal-strength transverse reinforcement in UHPFRC
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
NS  0:5 f c already showed inelastic behavior, whereas the
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
high-strength one in UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f c remained in the
elastic stage. This can be attributed to the greater yield strain of
the high-strength reinforcement. It also signifies that the combined
use of high-strength steel and UHPFRC in squat shear walls is able
to sustain elastic behavior at a larger drift demand, thus likely
reducing the repair work needed after earthquake events. It is also
important to note that while the high-strength transverse rein-
forcement had a nominal yield strength of 785 MPa, which was
substantially greater than the maximum permitted value of
420 MPa by ACI-318 [33], its capacity could be fully exploited for
providing shear in the squat UHPC and UHPFRC shear walls in this
study.
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
In the comparison between UHPC  HS  0:5 f c and
0
ffi
UHPC  HS  0:83 f c, both specimens had similar strain demands
at 0.5% drift. Nevertheless, as the drift increased to 1%, the strain
demand for the former became 50% larger than that for the latter
despite its smaller shear strength demand. This is likely because
70 C.-C. Hung et al. / Engineering Structures 141 (2017) 59–74

250
UHPC-HS-0.5√f'c

Stiffness (kN/mm)
200 UHPFRC-NS-0.5√f'c
UHPC-HS-0.83√f'c
150
UHPFRC-HS-0.83√f'c
100

50

0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Drift (%)
(a) drift-stiffness curves (b) computation for the stiffness

Fig. 19. Stiffness of the wall.

drift = 0.25% drift = 0.5% drift = 1%

(a) Specimens with a shear demand of 0.5 √fc′ (MPa)

drift = 0.25% drift = 0.5% drift = 1%

Fig. 20. Strain profiles for transverse reinforcement at various drift demands.

pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
UHPC  HS  0:5 f c had more localized cracks and less exposed ior. In particular, despite the fact that using UHPFRC to replace
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi UHPC in the walls facilitated the flexural dominated failure mode,
steel than UHPC  HS  0:83 f c, thus causing a larger local
it significantly reduced the longitudinal reinforcement strain from
reinforcement strain where cracks localized. Moreover, the
0.007 to 0.0048 (about a 31% reduction) and from 0.0058 to 0.0044
addition of steel fibers significantly reduced the strain
(about a 24% reduction) in the cases with target shear demands of
demand for the transverse reinforcement by approximately 40%, qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0 0
signifying the enhanced shear strength of the concrete by adding 0:5 f cðMPaÞ and 0:83 f cðMPaÞ, respectively. This reduction in
steel fibers. the demand for the flexural reinforcement strain can be attributed
Fig. 21 shows the strain profiles of the boundary longitudinal to the advantageous strain hardening behavior of the UHPFRC
reinforcement along the height of the squat shear walls. It is materials under tension.
recalled that the boundary longitudinal reinforcement in all the
specimens had a high nominal yield strength of 685 MPa. When
6.5. Components of wall deformation
the drift demand was 0.5%, it can be seen that all the squat walls
had similar strain profiles, with the longitudinal reinforcement
Fig. 22 presents the relationship between the shear distortion
near the bottom of the wall just or about to enter the inelastic
and drift demand for each wall. It shows that using UHPFRC to
stage. As the drift demand was increased to 1%, the boundary lon-
replace UHPC in squat walls reduced the shear distortion. For
gitudinal reinforcement in all the walls exhibited inelastic behav-
example, at the 1% drift demand, the shear distortion in the UHPC
 C.-C. Hung et al. / Engineering Structures 141 (2017) 59–74 71

drift = 0.25% drift = 0.5% drift = 1%

(a) Specimens with a shear demand of 0.5 √ fc′ (MPa)

drift = 0.25% drift = 0.5% drift = 1%

Fig. 21. Strain profiles for longitudinal reinforcement at the boundary element.

(a) UHPC − HS − 0.5√f ′ c (b) UHPFRC − NS − 0.5√f ′ c

(c) UHPC − HS − 0.83√f ′ c (d) UHPFRC − HS − 0.83√f ′ c

Fig. 22. Relationships between shear distortions and drift demand.

72 C.-C. Hung et al. / Engineering Structures 141 (2017) 59–74
(a) UHPC − HS − 0.5√f ′ c
(c) UHPC − HS − 0.83√f ′ c
Fig. 23. Relationships between shear sliding and drift demand.
walls was about 0.006 rad whereas that in the UHPFRC walls was
less than 0.005 rad.
Fig. 23 shows the relationship between the sliding displacement
and drift demand. It can be seen in Fig. 23(a) and (c) that the slid-
ing displacements in the two UHPC squat walls were relatively
insignificant when compared to the UHPFRC ones. This is because
these two walls failed at a smaller drift (not larger than 1.5%)
before the major sliding mechanism was developed. Moreover,
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
although UHPFRC  NS  0:50 f c also showed a minor sliding
mechanism prior to the 1.5% drift, its sliding displacement
increased substantially along with the drift demand as the drift
became larger than 2%, as can be seen in Fig. 23(b). In particular,
the sliding displacement rapidly increased by 75% from the 1st
loading cycle to the 3rd at the 3% drift. This signifies that the
repeated loading cycles significantly intensified the sliding mecha-
nism because they deteriorated the long localized crack that
passed through the length of the wall. The results also reveal that
although the addition of steel fibers in the walls effectively
enhanced the shear and flexural behavior, as well as the crack
width control ability, it was not able to prevent the sliding mech-
anism. On the other hand, it can be seen in Fig. 23(d) that the max-
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
imum sliding displacement in UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f c was about
12 mm at the 3% drift, which was four times smaller than that in
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi pffiffiffiffiffi
UHPFRC  NS  0:5 f c. This result suggests that the addition of
dowel bars was able to effectively restrain the sliding mechanism
in the squat UHPFRC shear wall.
The lateral displacement of the squat walls mainly consists of
three components, i.e., flexural deformation, shear distortion,
and sliding displacement. These components for each squat wall
were estimated based on the measurement during the test.
Fig. 24 presents the effect of varying drift demands on the weight
(b) UHPFRC − NS − 0.5√f ′ c
(d) UHPFRC − HS − 0.83√f ′ c
of each displacement component. Fig. 24(a) and (c) show that
although the two squat UHPC walls had different shear demands,
the weights of their displacement components were similarly
characterized, namely, 50% of shear distortion, 40% of flexural
deformation, and 10% of sliding mechanism. This is likely because
their damage patterns were similarly dominated by the diagonal
shear mode.
While the lateral displacement of the UHPC walls was mainly
controlled by the shear deformation, the addition of steel fibers
altered this situation by increasing the weight of the flexural defor-
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
mation. For UHPFRC  NS  0:50 f c shown in Fig. 24(b), the con-
tributions to the total lateral displacement from the flexural
deformation and shear distortion were approximately the same
throughout the test. Before the drift demand reached 2%, together
they accounted for 80% of the total lateral displacement, and the
sliding displacement only accounted for 20%. Nevertheless, as the
drift demand was increased to more than 2%, the sliding displace-
ment gradually became more dominant. At 4% drift, the sliding dis-
placement accounted for 55% of the total lateral displacement of
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
UHPFRC  NS  0:50 f c. Fig. 24(d) shows that the weights of the
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
sliding displacement in UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f c were about 10%
and 20% prior to and after the 2% drift, respectively. These values
were substantially less than those in the case of
ffi
0
UHPFRC  NS  0:50 f c, again suggesting the effectiveness of
dowel bars in restraining the sliding mechanism. The alleviation
in the sliding mechanism facilitated the development of flexural
deformation, with the weight increasing from 40% in
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
UHPFRC  NS  0:50 f c to 50% in UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f c. This
increase in the flexural contribution also implies that
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f c had an improved hysteretic response,
with more stability and less pinching behavior.
 C.-C. Hung et al. / Engineering Structures 141 (2017) 59–74
(a) UHPC − HS − 0.5√f ′ c
(c) UHPC − HS − 0.83√f ′ c
Fig. 24. Proportions of the displacement components due to various mechanisms.
7. Conclusions
The work presented herein experimentally investigated the
(2). The unique multiple narrow cracking pattern of the UHPFRC
cyclic behavior of novel squat UHPC and UHPFRC shear walls rein-
forced with high-strength steel reinforcement. The high-strength
steel reinforced UHPFRC wall was able to exhibit an effective
crack-width control ability as well as ductile and stable hysteretic
responses before failing at 3% drift, even when the actual shear
stress demand for the wall was 20% larger than the upper
limit stipulated by ACI-318. The ample drift capacity of
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f c. The addition of steel fibers
UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f c allowed the wall to maintain its superior
load-carrying ability after experiencing the maximum credible
earthquake events. The other main conclusions of this study are
as follows.
pffiffiffiffiffi
ffi behavior. For the UHPFRC walls that had actual shear stress
0
(1). UHPC  HS  0:5 f c, which had no steel fibers and had an
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
actual shear demand of 0:4 f cðMPaÞ, exhibited a diagonal
tension damage pattern. It ultimately failed at 1.5% drift
with an actual ultimate flexural strength closely matching
the nominal strength. When the target shear stress demand
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
for the UHPC wall was increased to 0:83 f cðMPaÞ, the brit-
tle nature of UHPC caused the wall to be vulnerable to spal-
ling. The wall ultimately failed in a premature, brittle
diagonal compression mode at 1% drift, with an actual shear
strength 30% less than the nominal value. In addition, the
shear stress resistance provided by UHPC was only approxi-
73
(b) UHPFRC − NS − 0.5√f ′ c
(d) UHPFRC − HS − 0.83√f ′ c
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
mately 0.21
0
f cðMPaÞ, about 16% less than the code design
strength for normal concrete.
observed on the material scale could be successfully trans-
pffiffiffiffiffi
0
ffi
lated into the structural scale on UHPFRC  HS  0:83 f c
that had an actual shear stress demand as large as
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
1:0 f cðMPaÞ. In addition, concrete spalling and crushing,
which occurred in the UHPC squat walls, were inhibited in
pffiffiffiffiffi0
ffi
enhanced the wall flexural strength by 50% and the wall
shear capacity by as much as 70%, transforming the wall
hysteretic response from the original brittle shear-
dominant behavior into the ductile flexural-controlled
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0 0
demands of 0:6 f cðMPaÞ and 1:0 f cðMPaÞ, the exhibited
flexural strengths were considerably larger than the nominal
values, by 37% and 20%, respectively. The shear stress resis-
tance provided by UHPFRC reached as high as 0.44
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0
f cðMPaÞ, about 76% larger than the code design strength
for normal concrete. Moreover, the addition of steel fibers
in the UHPC walls also enhanced the energy dissipation
capacity and initial stiffness of the walls by more than
150% and 30%, respectively. It also reduced the longitudinal
and transverse steel strains by more than 20% and 40%,
respectively.
74 C.-C. Hung et al. / Engineering Structures 141 (2017) 59–74
(3). Although the use of UHPFRC in squat shear walls led to an
advantageous earthquake-resistant ability, it could not pre-
vent the sliding failure mode as the drift demand increased
to more than 2%. On the other hand, the addition of dowel
bars in the UHPFRC squat walls could effectively restrain
the sliding mechanism, with the sliding displacements only
accounting for 10% and 20% of the total displacement prior
to and after the 2% drift, respectively.
(4). While alleviating the steel congestion, the use of high-
strength steel reinforcement to replace the normal one in
the UHPFRC squat walls could also delay reinforcement
yielding. More importantly, the strength capacity of high-
strength longitudinal and transverse steel reinforcements
installed in the UHPC and UHPFRC squat walls could be fully
exploited under displacement reversals, even though the
transverse reinforcement had a high nominal yield strength
of 785 MPa that was 87% larger than the maximum value
permitted in ACI-318.
In the present study, UHPFRC squat shear walls reinforced with
high-strength steel bars were suggested and their cyclic behavior
was experimentally investigated. The authors are currently prepar-
ing another paper that presents an efficient analytical model cap-
able of predicting the cyclic behavior of UHPFRC squat shear
walls with reasonable accuracy.
Acknowledgements
This study was sponsored in part by the Ministry of Science and
Technology, Taiwan, under Grant No. 104-2628-E-006-002-MY3,
and the experimental program was conducted at the National
Center for Research on Earthquake Engineering (NCREE), Taiwan.
The support of the high-strength steel reinforcement provided by
Tokyo Tekko Co Ltd, Japan is also greatly acknowledged. The opin-
ions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this paper are those of
the authors, and do not necessarily reflect those of the sponsors.
References
[1] Li B, Qian K, Wu H. Flange effects on seismic performance of reinforced
concrete squat walls with irregular or regular openings. Eng Struct
2016;110:127–44.
[2] Peng Y, Wu H, Zhuge Y. Strength and drift capacity of squat recycled concrete
shear walls under cyclic loading. Eng Struct 2015;100:356–68.
[3] Beko} A, Rosko P, Wenzel H, Pegon P, Markovic D, Molina FJ. RC shear walls:
full-scale cyclic test, insights and derived analytical model. Eng Struct
2015;102:120–31.
[4] Athanasopoulou M. Shear strength and drift capacity of reinforced concrete
and high-performance fiber reinforced concrete low-rise walls subjected to
displacement reversals (Ph.D. dissertation). Ann Arbor, MI, USA: University of
Michigan; 2010.
[5] Hung C-C, Lu W-T. Towards achieving the desired seismic performance for
hybrid coupled structural walls. Earthquakes Struct 2015;9(6):1251–72.
[6] Hung C-C, Lu W-T. A performance-based design method for coupled wall
structures. J Earthquake Eng 2016:1–25 (Published online 17 Jun 2016).
[7] Paulay T, Priestley MJN, Synge AJ. Ductility in earthquake resisting squat shear
walls. ACI J 1982;79(4):257–69.
[8] Hwang SJ, Fang WH, Lee HJ, Yu HW. Analytical model for predicting shear
strength of squat walls. J Struct Eng 2001;127(1):43–50.
[9] Hidalgo PA, Ledezma CA, Jordan RM. Seismic behavior of squat reinforced
concrete shear walls. Earthquake Spectra 2002;18(2):287–308.
[10] Naaman AE, Reinhardt HW. Proposed classification of HPFRC composites based
on their tensile response. Mater Struct 2006;39(5):547–55.
[11] Fischer G, Li VC. Effect of matrix ductility on deformation behavior of steel-
reinforced ECC flexural members under reversed cyclic loading conditions. ACI
Struct J 2002;99(6):781–90.
[12] Li X, Wang J, Bao Y, Chen G. Cyclic behavior of damaged reinforced concrete
columns repaired with high-performance fiber-reinforced cementitious
composite. Eng Struct 2017;136:26–35.
[13] Hung C-C, Su Y-F. Medium-term self-healing evaluation of Engineered
Cementitious Composites with varying amounts of fly ash and exposure
durations. Constr Build Mater 2016;118:194–203.
[14] Hung C-C, El-Tawil S. Seismic behavior of a coupled wall system with HPFRC
materials in critical regions. J Struct Eng 2011;137(2):1499–507.
[15] Qudah S, Maalej M. Application of Engineered Cementitious Composites (ECC)
in interior beam–column connections for enhanced seismic resistance. Eng
Struct 2014;69:235–45.
[16] Hung C-C, Chen Y-S. Innovative ECC jacketing for retrofitting shear-deficient
RC members. Constr Build Mater 2016;111:408–18.
[17] Hung C-C, Yen W-M, Yu K-H. Vulnerability and improvement of reinforced ECC
flexural members under displacement reversals: Experimental investigation
and computational analysis. Constr Build Mater 2016;107:287–98.
[18] Ruano G, Isla F, Sfer D, Luccioni B. Numerical modeling of reinforced concrete
beams repaired and strengthened with SFRC. Eng Struct 2015;86:168–81.
[19] Hung C-C, Su Y-F. On modeling coupling beams incorporating strain-hardening
cement-based composites. Comput Concrete 2013;12(4):565–83.
[20] Suryanto B, Nagai K, Maekawa K. Modeling and analysis of shear-critical ECC
members with anisotropic stress and strain fields. J Adv Concr Technol 2010;8
(2):239–58.
[21] Hung C-C, El-Tawil S. Hybrid rotating/fixed-crack model for high-performance
fiber-reinforced cementitious composites. ACI Mater J 2010;107(6):568–76.
[22] Hung C-C, Li S-H. Three-dimensional model for analysis of high performance
fiber reinforced cement-based composites. Compos B Eng 2013;45(1):1441–7.
[23] Hung C-C, Su Y-F, Yu K-H. Modeling the shear hysteretic response for high
performance fiber reinforced cementitious composites. Constr Build Mater
2013;41:37–48.
[24] Rossi P. High performance multimodal fiber reinforced cement composites
(HPMFRCC): the LCPC experience. ACI Mater J 1997;94(6):478–83.
[25] Makita T, Bruehwiler E. Damage models for UHPFRC and R-UHPFRC tensile
fatigue behaviour. Eng Struct 2015;90:61–70.
[26] Lampropoulos AP, Paschalis SA, Tsioulou OT, Dritsos SE. Strengthening of
reinforced concrete beams using ultra high performance fibre reinforced
concrete (UHPFRC). Eng Struct 2016;106:370–84.
[27] Hassan AMT, Jones SW, Mahmud GH. Experimental test methods to determine
the uniaxial tensile and compressive behaviour of ultra high performance fibre
reinforced concrete (UHPFRC). Constr Build Mater 2012;37:874–82.
[28] Hosinieh MM, Aoude H, Cook WD, Mitchell D. Behavior of ultra-high
performance fiber reinforced concrete columns under pure axial loading. Eng
Struct 2015;99:388–401.
[29] Hung C-C, Chueh C-Y. Cyclic behavior of UHPFRC flexural members reinforced
with high-strength steel rebar. Eng Struct 2016;122:108–20.
[30] Todeschini CE, Bianchini AC, Kesler CE. Behavior of concrete columns
reinforced with high strength steels. J Am Concr Inst 1964;61(6):701–15.
[31] Watanabe F, Lee JY, Nishiyama M. Structural performance of reinforced
concrete columns with different grade longitudinal bars. ACI Struct J 1995;92
(4):412–8.
[32] Tavallali H, Lepage A, Rautenberg J, Pujol S. Cyclic response of concrete frame
members reinforced with ultrahigh strength steel. ASCE/SEI 2011 Structures
Congress, Las Vegas, Nevada; 2001.
[33] ACI (American Concrete Institute) Committee 318. (2014). ACI 318 Building
code requirements for structural concrete (318–14). ACI-318, Farmington
Hills, Michigan.
[34] Association Francaise de Genie Civil (AFGC) – Service d’etudes techniques des
routes et autoroutes (SETRA). Bétons fibrés à ultra-hautes performances –
ultra high performance fibre-reinforced concretes, recommandations
provisoires – Interim recommendations; 2002. p. 153.
[35] Japan Society of Civil Engineers (JSCE). Recommendations for design and
construction of high performance fiber reinforced cement composites with
multiple fine cracks (HPFRCC); 2008. p. 113.
[36] Wille K, El-Tawil S, Naaman AE. Properties of strain hardening ultra high
performance fiber reinforced concrete (UHP-FRC) under direct tensile loading.
Cement Concr Compos 2014;48:53–66.
[37] Schachinger I, Schubert J, Mazanec O. Effect of mixing and placement methods
on fresh and hardened ultra high performance concrete (UHPC). In
Proceedings of the international symposium on ultra high performance
concrete, Kassel, Germany; 2004. pp. 575–586.
[38] ASCE (American Society of Civil Engineers). ASCE/SEI 41–13: Seismic
Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings. Reston, VA, USA: American
Society of Civil Engineers; 2013.
[39] Vecchio FJ, Collins MP. The modified compression field theory for reinforced
concrete elements subjected to shear. ACI Struct J 1986;83(2):219–31.
[40] Fukuyama H, Suwada H. Basic test on compressive properties of high
performance fiber reinforced cementitious composites (Part 2 Biaxial
Loading Test). Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting,
Architectural Institute of Japan, September, IV; 2003. pp. 421–422.