NONLINEAR SHEAR-WALL ANALYSIS

By Maurice W. White· and J. Daniel Dolan 2

ABSTRACT: A finite-element program, WALSEIZ, capable of perform~ng nonlinear analysis of a timber shear
wall subjected to monotonic or dynamic loads is presented. Eac~ wall IS ~ompose~ of four elements: a b~am
element to model the framing, a plate element to model the sheathmg, nonhnear spnngs to model the sheat~mg­
to-framing connectors (the 10ad-di~~lacemen~ properties of whi~h vary dependl.ng on wheth~r monotonic or
cyclic loads are applied), and a blhnear spnng to model beanng between adJ~cent sheathmg panels. The
program can compute displacements at each of the nodes, forces, and stresses In each of the elements as a
function of applied load for monotonic analysis and as a f~nction of time for dynamic analys!s. R~sults fro!U
the program are compared with experimental data to vahdate the program. The program IS bemg ~sed In
investigations on the response of shear walls subjected to dynamic loads such as earthquakes and hurrtcanes.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Columbia University on 02/02/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION resist lateral loads, such as those resulting from earthquakes

The destruction that occurred during the earthquake in Los
Angeles demonstrates the importa~ce ~f the proper d~s.ign
of structures located in regions wIth hIgh seismIC actIvIty.
Cases of structures being separated from foundations due to
insufficient anchorage connections, collapse of entire wall sec-
tions and excessive architectural damage (i.e., cracks) oc-
curr~d because of the earthquake. Unfortunately, this is not
the first case of widespread structural damage resulting from
an earthquake. Similar cases of damage occurred in San Fran-
cisco in 1989, Mexico City in 1985, and Anchorage, Alaska
in 1964.
Timber shear walls usually provide the lateral resistance
for low-rise timber structures subjected to dynamic loads.
Earthquake disasters indicate that more ~etaile? in~ormation
on timber shear walls subjected to dynamic loadmg IS needed.
However, the volume of research on the dynamic behavior
of shear walls is minimal, primarily because of the expense
involved with dynamic experimentation. Due to the lack of
information on the dynamic response of timber shear walls,
provisions in the design codes are often based on static data
and engineering judgement (which does not necessarily mean
that every building will fail when subjected to dynamic load-
ing).
In order to gain more insight into the performance char-
acteristics of timber shear walls, a computer program, WAL-
SEIZ, has been developed. The program is capable of per-
forming both static and dynamic analysis of a shear-wall model
and of calculating the resulting displacements, forces, and
stresses. The benefits of the program are that it provides a
more economical means of performing dynamic analysis on
shear walls and a more efficient means of analyzing different
wall sizes and configurations than experimental testing does,
and it also allows for detailed information on load paths,
internal forces, and anchorage requirements to be deter-
mined.
BACKGROUND
Shear walls are one of the major components of a low-rise
timber structure. The primary purpose of these walls is to
'Asst. Prof., Dept. of Wood Sci. and Forest Products, Virginia Poly-
technic Inst. and State Univ., Blacksburg, VA 24061-0323; formerly,
Grad. Asst.. Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Virginia Polytechnic Inst. and State
Univ.. Blacksburg, VA.
'Asst. Prof.. Dept. of Wood Sci. and Forest ProdUClS, Virginia Poly-
technic Inst. and State Univ., Blacksburg, VA.
Note. Associate Editor: Steven M. Cramer. Discussion open until
April I. 1996. To extend the closing date one monlh, a written request
must be filed with the ASCE Manager of Journals. The manuscript for
this paper was submitted for review and possible publication on June
20, 1994. This paper is part of the Journal o/Structural Engineering, Vol.
IZI, No. 11, November, 1995. ©ASCE, ISSN 0733-9445/95/0011-1629-
1635/$2.00 + $.25 per page. Paper No. 8695.
and wind. They also provide some resistance to vertical load-
ing and act as partitions in a building. A typical timber shear
wall, shown in Fig. 1, has three main components: the fram-
ing, sheathing, and sheathing-to-framing connectors. In North
America, the framing usually consists of 38 mm X 89 mm (2
x 4 in nominal) lumber. It is covered with a sheathing ma-
terial, which is usually made of plywood, oriented strand-
board (OSB), or another structural panel product. The
sheathing is attached to the framing with connectors. Tra-
ditionally, these connectors have been dowel-type fast~ners
such as nails and staples. Recently, however, elastomenc ad-
hesives have been used as a connector material with some
success and some potential problems. Nails are used along
with the adhesive, but they only hold the sheathing in place
until the adhesive cures.
The typical deflection configuration for a shear wa~1 su:b-
jected to monotonic loading follows the pattern shown m FIg.
2, with the framing distorting into a parallelogram and !he
sheathing rotating and remaining rigid. The framing resIsts
most of the out-of-plane bending and some vertical load,
while the sheathing resists most of the in-plane shear. The
connectors play an important role in determining the shape
of the load-deflection curve of the wall and in resisting the
external load by dissipating energy as the nails distort (Tuomi
and McCutcheon 1978). The in-plane strength, which is a
measure of the magnitude of load that a wall can resist before
a limit state occurs, and stiffness, which is the relative de-
formability of a material under load (Davis et al. 1982), are
the most important characteristics in the determination of the
adequacy of a wall subjected to monotonic lo~ding. .
A wall subjected to dynamic loads has a typIcal defleCtion
pattern similar to that of a wall subjected to monotonic lo~~s,
but inertia effects are introduced into the system and ductlhty
along with stiffness become factors in the wall response. Duc-
tility is desirable in walls subjected to dynamic loads because
it prevents the loads from becoming excessively high. A ma-
FIG. 1. Primary Components of Shear Wall

JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING / NOVEMBER 1995/1629

J. Struct. Eng. 1995.121:1629-1635.

 ".. .
)."..........................
:: ii
•• if
II
::
""
••
t. ",.
••
II
I I I I :/
: :: i ;i
! Ii . Ii
.; Ii ! Ii
I; ii : ::
:' :: J ii
:
i if
:: :
; Ii
! iF i if
! Ii ; i;
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Columbia University on 02/02/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
i Ii ; Ii
i~ !i :,
;.~ :.: l.:
to........ ....•.•........
••••••• Fnming
-Sheathing
FIG. 2. Typical Deformation Configuration of Shear Wall
tenal or system that is truly linear-elastic will experience higher
loads up to the point at which failure occurs, while a system
with substantial ductility will experience higher loads only up
to a yield load. Therefore, the loads experienced by the duc-
tile system will be lower than those of the elastic system after
the yield point is reached if the displacements and initial
stiffnesses are equal. These characteristics of ductility and
lower yielding are incorporated in the seismic design. How-
ever, walls with excessive ductility are subject to extensive
displacements and costly architectural damage during earth-
quakes of high magnitude. Stiffness prevents excessive dis-
placements from occurring in the wall and thereby reduces
the extent of architectural damage. Therefore, a balance be-
tween stiffness and ductility is desirable in walls subjected to
dynamic loads.
The connectors are also important in the response of the
wall subjected to dynamic loading because they dissipate en-
ergy through hysteretic damping. Therefore, connectors that
produce large hysteresis loops can provide substantial energy-
reducing mechanisms. Friction damping at the connectors,
which occurs between the two members joined together, is
also helpful in dissipating some of the energy imparted to the
system.
The factors important in determining the performance of
shear walls subjected to dynamic loads, a combination of
ductility and stiffness, are different from factors important
for walls subjected to static loads. However, much of the
current seismic design code is not based on data determined
from dynamic testing. It is, however, based on data from
static tests of shear walls and by relating the performance of
buildings constructed with other materials to wood when sub-
jected to natural hazard loads such as earthquakes and hur-
ricanes. This is done because of the lack of structural com-
ponent test data for walls subjected to cyclic or dynamic loads.
The only dynamic tests on timber shear walls that the writers
are aware of are seismic shear-wall tests performed by Stewart
(1987), Dolan (1989), and Foschi and Filiatrault (1990), and
the cyclic shear wall tests performed by Stewart (1987), Gray
and Zacher (1988), Dolan (1989), and Hanson (1990). There-
fore, it is important that further research be performed in
this area. Unfortunately, this often becomes prohibitive be-
cause of the high cost of performing experimental dynamic
tests. However, development of a computer program that can
adequately simulate shear walls subjected to dynamic loads
1630 I JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING I NOVEMBER 1995
[.:, =::=~~ ..;,.:.:.:.:.;:...;.;..,;;..:..:..:;.: would reduce the cost of investigating various aspects of wall
performance.
ii
II
:: if
••
:: . :. 11 There have been some attempts to model the response of
.
II
..
"
"
shear walls. Foschi (1977), Falk and Itani (1989), and Kasal
• "
and Leichti (1992) developed finite-element models to sim-
ulate the response of shear walls subjected to monotonic loads.
The model developed by Foschi (1977) contained four ele-
ments (cover, framing, frame connection, and cover-to-frame
elements) and nonlinear connector behavior. Falk and ltani
!! (1989) developed a nonlinear finite-element model that ac-
Ii counts for the distribution and stiffness of fasteners connect-
!i
:: ing the sheathing to the framing. Kasal and Leichti (1992)
::
ii
.t
developed a nonlinear single degree-of-freedom finite-ele-
if ment model of a shear wall for use as a substructure element
ii in a three-dimensional analysis model. Stewart (1987), Filia-
Ii trault (1990), and Dolan (1989) developed finite-element
:: ::
:.t......•......•:-i models to simulate the response of shear walls subjected to
.......•....•
- dynamic loads. However, the models developed by Stewart
(1987) and Filiatrault (1990) were single-degree-of-freedom
models and could only examine the overall wall response.
The model developed by Dolan (1989) simulated the plate,
framing, and connector elements but the analysis time was
extensive and the program lacked the capability to calculate
forces or stresses.
PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
The program WALSEIZ is a culmination of the efforts
these programmers. The program is a modification of the
program developed by Dolan (1989) and utilizes the finite-
element method for analysis. The modifications include: a
reduced number of degrees of freedom in the plate, sheath-
ing-bearing connector, and sheathing-to-framing connector
elements to reduce the analysis time; the capability for mon-
otonic analysis (load control); the capability of calculating
forces and stresses; and expansion of the program to accom-
modate the analysis of larger walls with and without openings.
Assumptions in the model include: hinged connections be-
tween the top and bottom plates and the studs; framing ele-
ments that are homogeneous and isotropic; sheathing thick-
ness that is sufficient so that out-of-plane buckling is not
significant; and sheathing elements that are orthotropic.
Four elements are used to model timber shear walls in the
program. They are a framing element, which models the lum-
ber framing of the shear wall; a sheathing element, which
models the panel sheathing; a sheathing-to-framing connector
element, which models the dowel-type or adhesive fasteners
used to attach the sheathing to the framing; and a sheathing-
bearing element, which prevents adjacent sheathing elements
from numerically overlapping one another. Each element was
derived so that compatibility and equilibrium are attained.
The framing element is a common two-dimensional, line-
arly elastic, six-degree-of-freedom beam element with a linear
displacement field in the axial direction and a cubic displace-
ment field for the deflections perpendicular to the beam axis.
The formulation of the equation of motion for the framing
element is found in many finite-element texts, including that
of Cook et al. (1989).
The sheathing element is an eight-degree-of-freedom, or-
thotropic, linear-elastic, rectangular, plane stress element with
translations in the global X- and Y-directions at each of the
four corner nodes. It has a linear displacement field in each
direction and follows Kirchhoff's plate theory. The formu-
lation of the equation of motion for the framing element is
found in many finite-element texts, including that of Cook et
al. (1989).
The sheathing-to-framing connector element, which con-
sists of two independent nonlinear springs, models the resis-
tance that a connector would provide when displacement oc-
J. Struct. Eng. 1995.121:1629-1635.
 P-
I ~ P' - I" Sheal!llnl;
IF"I = (Po + Kzlamaxl) [1 - exp (-K~~maxl)]
Connector Framing
- K 3 (llil - lamaxl) for lal > lamaxl
~ ~
(lb)
where Ii = connector displacement; Po = Y-intercept of the
K z line; K o = slope of the curve at the origin; K 2 = slope
F of the curve at the maximum displacement; limax = displace-
}t ment at which the maximum load occurs (after which the load
capacity of the connector decreases); and K 3 = slope of the
/1 curve after the maximum displacement has been reached. The
/ : ~v hysteretic curve, used for cyclic loads, is shown in Fig. 4(b).
V/.I The curve, developed by Dolan (1991), is broken into four

~u
.f_\.e ...: sections, and the sections are governed by the following equa-
~u tions (the subscripts indicate the section number):
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Columbia University on 02/02/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 3. Schematic for Sheathing-Framing Connector: (a) before Flu = -PI + K 4 a + [exp(a11i) - 1],
Loading; (b) after Loading

p (2a,b)

I
I In( - PI - F z + K 4uZ + 1)
I az = IUzl (3a,b)
L.--'-- ~I--:--~--I~I
I~...""I F3" = PI + K 4a - [exp(a 3 Ial) - 1],

Load
In(P I - Fz + K 4 uZ + 1)
Pt1 - (u,.F.) \
a3 = IUzl (4a,b)
Load Envelope - - - "
\
F4 " = PI + K 4 a + [exp(a 41i) -1],
\
section 4 \\

..._::::::::f K• \ (5a,b)
\
\ where Ii connector displacement; PI load at zero de-
Oeftectlon
\
flection; K 4 = slope at zero deflection; U I _2 = maximum and
leCtion 1 minimum deflections; and F I _2 = maximum and minimum
\ " K. :t::::::>······ loads. The load-displacement relationships for both mono-
\
\
tonic and cyclic loads were determined by curve-fitting ex-
\ perimental data, and the data detail the relationship between
--
\
\
Hysteresis the bearing deformation of the main and side members, de-
... formation of the fastener material, and overall strength of
the connection. The equations for the hysteretic curve rep-
FIG. 4. Load-Displacement Curves for Connectors: (a) Mono- resent the load-displacement curve at maximum displace-
tonic; (b) Hysteretic ment. Small amplitude displacements are modeled using load-
displacement curves similar in shape to the virgin hysteresis
curs between concurrent points on the framing and sheathing. curve that blends into the curves of the hysteresis loop. Val-
Given the condition shown in Fig. 3(a), where points P on idation of the connector model involved monitoring a con-
the sheathing and P' on the framing are concurrent, an ap- nector and correlating the resulting load-displacement path
plied loading causes relative displacement between the points. with the theoretical load-displacement path. The result was
This displacement, shown in Fig. 3(b), represents the relative an almost one-to-one correlation between the two load-dis-
displacement of the connector, where liu is the x-component placement paths. Details of the validation are given by White
of the displacement and Ii v is the y-component of the dis- (1995).
placement. The connector displacement is determined by tak- The sheathing-bearing element is a bilinear spring with a
ing the difference between the framing and sheathing dis- high modulus of elasticity in compression and a low modulus
placements at that point. Once the displacement is determined, in tension (see Fig. 5), which is similar to a gap element. The
the corresponding connector load and stiffness are calculated high modulus in compression accounts for the effect of ad-
by using a load-displacement relationship for the connector. jacent sheathing elements bearing on each other, while the
The force-displacement relationship for a connector varies
according to whether a monotonic- or cyclic-load analysis is
performed. The curve for monotonic loading, shown in Fig.

1
6

····
4(a), is governed by the following equations developed by 6Y 6Y
Foschi (1977) and modified by Dolan (1989) for displacements
CD ®
beyond the maximum load:
·. 6X

IF"I = (Po + K2 1lil) [1 - exp ( -Kolal)]

Po
Y

~x
i

"
j

,
:..J lIn J
for lal < lamaxl (la) FIG. 5. Sheathing-Bearing Element

JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING / NOVEMBER 1995/1631

J. Struct. Eng. 1995.121:1629-1635.

 low modulus in tension allows for free movement of the
sheathing panels when they are not bearing on one another.
This element functions in the following manner. The differ-
ence in the displacements of adjacent nodes on adjacent ele-
ments is calculated. The effect of bearing is included if the
nodes overlap and is neglected if the nodes do not overlap.
Analysis is performed by merging the stiffness, damping,
and mass matrices using conditions of compatibility (Holzer
1985), and then solving for the displacements using the New-
ton-Raphson for monotonic analysis and the Newmark-beta
method for dynamic analysis.
PROGRAM VALIDATION
Validation of the program consisted of the following: (1)
A comparison of the peak monotonic load from the experi-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Columbia University on 02/02/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
pacity of the experimental walls and the wall models was
calculated and is tabulated in Table 2. The largest percentage
difference was 2%. The difference could be because average
nail parameters were used or because localized bearing failure
(crushing) occurred around the framing connectors during the
experiments. However, the results seem to indicate that the
program adequately models walls subjected to monotonic
loading.
Two 2.4 m by 2.4 m (8 ft by 8 ft) 4-6 walls were modeled
in order to validate the dynamic capabilities of the model.
The models have geometries and mechanical properties sim-
ilar to those of the wall models used for the monotonic val-
idation tests. The walls were subjected to the acceleration
record of the S69E component of the 1953 Kern County,
California earthquake. The record, shown in Fig. 7 along with

the corresponding response spectrum shown in Fig. 8, con-

mental data and the program results to determine how ac-
curately the program predicts the load capacity of a wall; (2)
correlation between program results and experimental data
to determine the accuracy of the load-displacement curve for
monotonic analysis and the time-displacement history for dy-
40

35

30
~ r::::--
---
namic analysis; and (3) a correlation of the fast-Fourier trans-
~~
~
form (FFT) of predicted and experimental time-displacement
histories to determine the accuracy of the prediction of nat-
ural frequencies of the response for the wall.
~25
i
~2O
.. / ;:;i'

Two walls were modeled to validate the monotonic analysis 15 ~

capability of the program. Both walls were 2.4 m by 2.4 m
(8 ft by 8 ft), with 8d nails (diameter = 3 mm, length = 63.5 10 ~V
1/
I'
mm) spaced 10 cm (4 in.) along the perimeter of the sheating 5
and IS cm (6 in.) on the interior of the sheathing. The studs
were placed 61 cm (24 in.) on center. One wall was covered o
with two panels of waferboard sheathing and the other with
o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Displacement (mm)
two panels of plywood sheathing. The values used for the
sheathing and framing mechanical properties were based on
tabulated design values and the properties for the sheathing- 1- Experimenlal Data A. Program Results
to-framing connectors, found in Table 1, were based on ex-
FIG. 6. Comparison of Monotonic Plywood, Predicted and Ex-
perimental data from Dolan (1989). The sole plate of each perimental Data
wall was fixed, the ends of the studs pinned, and each wall
was subjected to a monotonic distributed load applied at the
TABLE 2. Results of Monotonic Program Verification
top sill plate, which increased at increments of 0.88 kN/m
(5.0 Ib/in.). The results from the program were compared to Nail Spacing Maximum Strength
Correlation
experimental data from Dolan (1989). The walls used in the Experi- Percent- coefficient
experimental study were 2.4 m by 2.4 m (8 ft by 8 ft) with mental Program age for
38 mm by 89 mm (2 in. by 4 in. nominal) spruce-pine-fir stud Sheathing Exterior Interior results results differ- monotonic
framing spaced at 61 cm (24 in.) on center. Four of the walls type (em) (em) (kN) (kN) ence curve
were sheathed with two panels of 9 mm (3/8 in.) waferboard (1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
and three of the walls were sheathed with two panels of 9 Waferboard 10 15 31.8 32.4 1.8 0.9965
mm (3/8 in.) three-ply Softwood plywood. The sheathing was Plywood 10 15 33.5 33.1 l.l 0.9938
attached with 8d common nails spaced at 10 cm (4 in.) on
the perimeter of the sheathing and 15 cm (6 in.) on the interior
of the sheathing. The load-displacement relationships from 0.2~--r---r---.---.----'----'
the computer models and the experimental data are plotted
in Fig. 6 for the plywood walls and model. The plot shows a 0.15+--+-:++--++--+--+---+----j
good correlation between the program results and the ex-
0.1
perimental data, and this is supported by the results of a
correlation ofthe load-displacement curves between each wall
model and the average of the corresponding experimental
data. The results of the correlation, shown in Table 2, reveal
a correlation coefficient of 0.9965 for the waferboard wall and
0.9938 for the plywood wall, which is considered to be ex-
cellent. The percentage difference between the ultimate ca-

TABLE 1. Values for Connector Data

Sheathing Ko Po K2 ~max K3 P,
type (kN/m) (N) (kN/m) (mm) (kN/m) (N)
(1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
10 20 30 40 50 60
TIme (sec)
Waferboard 831 800 35.4 12.7 500 334
Plywood 972 639 42.4 12.7 500 334 FIG. 7. Acceleration Record of 1953 Kern County, California
Earthquake

1632/ JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING / NOVEMBER 1995

J. Struct. Eng. 1995.121:1629-1635.

 0.014~---.----"'---"'T""--'----""---' 3.5

3
/
0.012+----1---+--+--+---t----j
-:/
0.01+--++---1---1---1---t-----i
/
V
V
0.004 0.5
/
O.OO2+--1~-+-IH-
V 0.5 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
ExperImental Data
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Columbia University on 02/02/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

00 2 4 6 12
Frequency (Hz)
FIG. 8. Response Spectrum of 1953 Kern County, California
I ... RegIllllSion data - 45 degree line

Earthquake FIG. 10. Comparison of Predicted and Experimental Natural Fre-

quencies of Plywood Wall from Fast-Fourier Transforms (FFT)
20

15
TABLE 4. Results of Force and Overturning Moment Validation
for Walls SUbjected to Static Load
10
Hori-
I 5
A~ zontal Per- Over- Percent-
rv

i ~ ~N
11\1 Applied reaction centage turning Resisting age

Iro ~\
Sheathing load force differ- moment moment differ-
~
~ type (kN) (kN) ence (kN·m) (kN'm) ence
V (1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
·10 Waferboard 19.2 18.5 3.3 46.8 47.1 0.6
Plywood 19.2 19.1 0.4 46.8 47.6 1.6
-15

-20
o 2 3 456 7 8 9 10
Tlme (sec) the framing connectors. This was, however, considered to be
a relatively good correlation.
1- ExperIrnentaI data - Program resulls
A FFT of the load-displacement curve was taken for the
plywood and waferboard displacement traces. The peaks of
the FFT curves from the experimental data and the program
FIG. 9. Comparison of Dynamic Plywood, Predicted and Experi-
mental Data (Initial 10 s) results were determined and compared to determine how closely
the program predicts natural frequencies. The correlation be-
tween the program results and the experimental results, shown
TABLE 3. Results of Dynamic Program Verification
in Table 3, was 0.9990 for waferboard and 0.9998 for plywood.
Nail Spacing Correlation This indicates that the program does an excellent job of pre-
coefficient for Correlation dicting the natural frequencies in the response. A plot show-
Sheathing Exterior Interior displacement coefficient for ing the relationship between the natural frequencies from a
type (em) (em) trace FFT FFT for the experimental data and the program results is
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) shown in Fig. 10 for walls with plywood sheathing. All the
Waferboard 10 15 0.8345 0.9990 points would have been exactly on the 45° line had the cor-
Plywood 10 15 0.8456 0.9998 relation been perfect.
Validation of the force- and stress-calculating capabilities
of the program is impossible because of the lack of experi-
tained acceleration points for every 0.01 s and was 54.34 s mental data on forces and stresses in a shear wall. Therefore,
long. The output from the simulation runs for both walls was validation of the force and stress calculations consists only of
also compared with experimental data from Dolan (1989). a force balance for a wall model subjected to a static load of
The walls used in the seismic analysis segment of the exper- 19.2 kN (4,320 Ib), the results of which are shown in Table
imental study were similar in material properties and ge- 4, and traces of the axial force in a framing element and the
ometries to the walls used in the monotonic segment. A rep- shear stress in a sheathing element as a function of time,
resentative lO-s sample of the results of the computer models shown in Figs. 11 and 12, of a wall model subjected to the
and the maximum and minimum of the experimental data are Kern County earthquake. The results of the force balance
plotted in (Fig. 9) plywood walls and model. The figure shows show that the shears and moments at the base of the wall are
a close correlation between the experimental and program in equilibrium with the applied loads, while the force and
time-displacement time histories. The results of a correlation stress traces demonstrate the ability of the program to cal-
in the time-displacement histories between each wall model culate loads and stresses as a function of time.
and the average of the corresponding experimental data are The excellent predictions indicate that the reduction of the
shown in Table 3. Both walls had a correlation coefficient of degrees of freedom made to simplify Dolan's (1989) model
approximately 0.84. Derivations from a perfect correlation were acceptable. The sheathing thickness modeled was 9 mm
could be due to the fact that average nail parameters were (3/8 in.), which is the minimum thickness that Dolan's model
used or localized bearing failure (crushing) occurred around indicated the buckling of the sheathing should be ignored.
JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING / NOVEMBER 1995/1633

J. Struct. Eng. 1995.121:1629-1635.

 2tI CONCLUSIONS
20 A finite-element program, WALSEIZ, which is capable of
111
performing monotonic or dynamic analysis on timber shear
walls up to 4.9 m x 12 m (16 ft x 40 ft), was developed.
10 The program uses four elements to model a shear wall: a
framing element, sheathing element, sheathing-to-framing
~
A
& connector element, and a sheathing-bearing element. The
~ II \
I 0
IV IIy II IV
program is capable of calculating displacement, velocity, and
acceleration of the nodes, forces, and stresses in the elements
III as a function of time. Validation of the program consisted of
·10
analyzing wall models subjected to monotonic and dynamic
loading and comparing the results with existing experimental
·111 data. The program predicted the maximum strength of a wall
subjected to monotonic loading to within 2%, and correlated
·20
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Columbia University on 02/02/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

o 2 3 468 7 8 10 well with dynamic test results, with correlation coefficients

nme(aec) of 0.835 and 0.846 for displacements.
FIG. 11. Axial Force History of End-Chord Element In Plywood
Shear Wall (Initial 10 s) ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The writer wishes to acknowledge the support of the National Research
400 Initiative USDA/CSRS competitive grants program received through
Project No. 90-38420-5252.
300

200 APPENDIX I. REFERENCES

A AI
I~
II
f\
V \)
v York, N.Y.
-500
o 2 3 468 7 8
nme(aec)
FIG. 12. Shear-Stress History of Sheathing Element In Plywood
Shear Wall (Initial 10 s)
Therefore, the limitation imposed on this model is that the
sheathing modeled must have a bending stiffness sufficient to
prevent buckling. If a thinner or more flexible sheathing is
to be used, Dolan's more detailed model must be used in the
analysis.
FUTURE USES
The program is currently being used as a tool for further
investigations into the response characteristics of shear walls.
Openings are necessary in shear walls to accommodate doors
and windows, and have been shown to reduce the strength
and stiffness of a shear wall loaded monotonically (Pat-
ton-Mallory et al. 1985). However, no research has been per-
formed that examines the effect openings have on a shear
wall subjected to dynamic loading. The effect of the aspect
ratio is another area that has not been adequately examined.
Tests have been performed to characterize the effect that
aspect ratio has on the response of a shear wall subjected to
monotonic loading. However, research in the area of dynamic
analysis is lacking. WALSEIZ is currently being used to ex-
amine these phenomena so that shear-wall design can be per-
formed more accurately. In addition, the information pro-
vided by WALSEIZ can be used to develop performance
characteristics for a macroelement, which can be used to model
an entire structure.
1634/ JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING / NOVEMBER 1995
Cook, R. D., Malkus, D. S., and Plesha, M. E. (1989). Concepts and
IA
applications of finite element analysis, 3rd Ed., John Wiley & Sons,
Inc., New York, N.Y.
Davis, H. E., Troxell, G. E., and Hauck, G. F. W. (1982). The testing
of engineering materials, 4th Ed., McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New
Dolan, J. D. (1989). "The dynamic response of timber shear walls,"
PhD thesis, Univ. of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada.
Dolan, J. D. (1991). "A numerical model to predict the dynamic response
of timber shear walls." Proc., Int. Timber Engrg. Conf., Vol. 4,267-
274.
Falk, R. H., and Itani, R. Y. (1989). "Finite element modeling of wood
10 diaphragms." J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 115(3), 543-559.
Filiatrault, A. (1990). "Static and dynamic analysis of timber shear walls."
Can. 1. Civ. Engrg., Ottawa, Canada, 17(4), 643-651.
Foschi, R. O. (1977). "Analysis of wood diaphragms and trusses. I:
Diaphragms." Can. J. Civ. Engrg., 4(3), 345-352.
Foschi, R. 0., and Filiatrault, A. (1990). "Performance evaluation of
3M Scotch Grip Wood Adhesive 5230 for the static and dynamic design
of timber shear walls and diaphragms." Rep., Dept. of Civ. Engrg.,
Univ. of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada.
Gray, R. G., and Zacher, E. G. (1988). "Dynamic testing of wood shear
panels." Arch., 77(3),121-124.
Hanson, D. (1990). "Shear wall and diaphragm cyclic load testing; cyclic
shear fastener testing; and panel durability performance testing of
Weyerhaeuser sturdi-wood oriented strand board." Rep.. Prepared for
Ofc. of State Archit. of California, Struct. Safety Sect.
Holzer, S. (1985). Computer analysis of structures, Elsevier Publishing
Co., New York, N.Y.
Kasal, B., and Leichti, R. J. (1992). "Nonlinear finite-element model
for light-frame stud walls." J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 118(11).3122-
3135.
McCutcheon, W. J. (1985). "Racking deformations in wood shear walls."
J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 111(2), 257-269.
Patton-Mallory, M., Wolfe, R. W., Soltis, L. A., and Gutkowski, R.
M. (1985). "Light-frame shear wall length and opening effects." 1.
Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 111(10),2227-2239.
Stewart, W. G. (1987). "The seismic design of plywood sheathed shear
walls," PhD thesis, Univ. of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Tuomi, R. L., and McCutcheon, W. J. (1978). "Racking strength of
light-frame nailed walls." J. Struet. Div., ASCE, 104(7), 1131-1140.
White, M. W. (1995). "Parametric study of timber shear walls,"
PhD dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Inst. and State Univ.,
Blacksburg, Va.
APPENDIX 11. NOTATION
The following symbols are used in this paper:
al~4 = parameter used to define hysteresis loop;

J. Struct. Eng. 1995.121:1629-1635.

 F" force experienced by connector subjected to mono- slope of monotonic connector curve after maximum
tonic loading; displacement is reached;
maximum and minimum force of the hysteresis slope of hysteresis curve at zero displacement;
loop; Y-intercept of the K 2 line on monotonic connector
force experienced by connector subjected to dynamic curve;
loading; Y-intercept of hysteresis loop;
K" slope of monotonic connector curve at zero displace- maximum and minimum displacement of hysteresis loop;
ment; connector displacement; and
slope of monotonic connector curve at maximum dis- maximum connector displacement for connector sub-
placement; jected to monotonic loading.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Columbia University on 02/02/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING / NOVEMBER 1995/1635

J. Struct. Eng. 1995.121:1629-1635.