RESEARCH

AND DEVELOPMENT

BULLETIN

RD029.01D

Strength

of High-Rise

Shear Cross

Walls Section

-Rectangular

by A. E. Cardenas and D. D. Magura

Repdnted with permission from Response of Mulfisfoty Concrete Structures 10 Lateral Forces, SP-36, American Concrete Institth, Detroit, Mich., 1973, pages 119-l 50.

PORTLAND
Research

CEMENT
Construcoon

ASSOCIATION
Technology Laboratories

and Development/

This publication is baaed on the facts, tests, and authorities stated herein. It is intended for the use of professional personnel competent to evaluate the significance and Iimitations of the reported findings and who wi II accept responsibility for the application of the material it contains. Obviously, the Portland Cement Association disclaims any and all responsibility for application of tha stated principles or for the accuracy of any of the sources other than work performed or information developed by the Association.

r
I

~
I I I t I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

---------------------

---------------------

-------

i

-------~ 1
I ~

! 1

KEYWORDS: axial loads, bending moments, deformation, ductility, earthquake resistant structures, flexural strength, high rise building?, loads (forces), multistory building, reinforced concrete, research, shear strength, shear walls. ABSTRACT: Presents results of a laboratory investigation on the strength of shear walls for high-rise buildings. Six large rectangular shear wall specimens were subjected to static loads representing gravity and wind or earthquake forces. Results indicate that the flexural strength of rectangular ahear walls can be calculated using the same assumptions as for reinforced concrete beams. REFERENCE: Cardenas, A. E., and Magura, D. D., Strength of High-Rise Shear Walk–RectanguAzrOoss Section (RD029 .OID), Portland Cenmt Aasociation, 197S. Reprinted from Response of Multistory Concrete Sttudures to Lateral Forces, SP-36, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Mich., 1973, pages 119-150.

! ~ ~ : ~ ~ ~ ~ ! : ~ ~ I ~ I

-----------------------&

I I

-------------------------

---------

d

t

a f loads(forces). Cardenas was a research engineer w ith the Portland Currently he is a member of ACI -ASCE Committee Cement Association. Tacoma. E. Magura The results of a laboratory investigation on the strength of shear wal s or high-rise buildings are presented. D. reinforced concrete. the strength of high-rise shear walls containing minimum horizontal shear reinforcement is generally controlled by flexure..uct d ilit earthy. Lima and MS and PhD degrees in structural engineering from the Universi& of Illinois. ACI member J20nald D.research. search engineer with the Portland Cement Association. Six large rectangular shear wall specimens were subjected to static loads representing gravity and wind or earthquake forces. Cardenas is consulting. lateral rassure. ailure. Lateral Forces. Shear and Diagonal Tension and ACI Committee 442. Per~. he is chairman of the PCI committee on prestress 10sses.— w ACI member Alex E. Keywords axialloads. Currently. From 1968 to 1972. . strength. Mr.Strength of High-Rise Shear Cross Walls —Rectangular Section by A. Also. Wash. multistory uildings. ABAM Engineers Inc. framing systems. shearwalls. 426. deformation. He received BS and MS degrees in civil engineering From 1962 to 1969. Results indicate that the flexural strength of rectangular shear walls can be calculated using the same assumptions as for reinforced concrete beams. Magura is senior design engineer. Cardenas and D. quakeresist nt structures. shearproperties. Lima. Variables were the amount and distribution of verti cal reinforcement and the effect of the moment to shear ratio. . b high risebuildings. shear g steels. Dr. Magura was a refrom the University of Illinois.mgineer. He re ceived his CE degree from the Universidad National de Ingenieri5. s~ts. : flexural strength.bendingmoments.

Special Provisions for Walls. Special Provisions for Walls. Distribution of lateral loads to simulate interaction between frames and shear walls. 4) with and without web reinforcement. . cam be drawn as a result of this investigation: 2.2 Strength of High-RiseShear Walls-Rectangular CrossSection HIGHLIGHTS There is limited information regarding the strength of shear walls in buildings. The amount and distribution of vertical reinforcement in high-rise rectangular shear walls has a definite influence on load-deformation and energy absorption characteristics. 2. BACKGROUND Concrete wails in high-rise buildings are often used to carry lateral loads in conjunction with frames or frame-tubes (6. this terminology does not indicate that the carrying capacity of the wall is controlled by its shear strength. 3. Prior to the publication of ACI 318-71 (1).16. An investigation of shear wall structures can be subdivided into three parts: determination of the loads. of ACI 318-71. 4. only the Uniform Building Code (2) contained design provisions for shear walls.2. of ACI 318-71. The main features of the high-rise wall tests are: 1.16. Consideration o? gravity and lateral loads. 7). of ACI 318-71. Assumptions. 3. CONCLUSIONS The following conclusions 1. Results obtained from these six tests and seven others on low-rise walls were used to develop design provisions for shear walls (5).l strength of rectangular can be carried out on the basis of Section 10. analysis of the structural response and design of the structural members. Design for shear strength of rectangular shear walls can be carried out on the basis of Section 11. Since they carry the story shear they are generally called “shear wails. Tests of six lar e rectangular shear wall specimens. shear walls Design for flexura. To develop basic information. The strength of most rectangular reinforced concrete shear walls in high-rise buildings is governed by flexure rather than shear. the Portland Cement Association initiated a laboratory investigation of reinforced concrete shear walls in high and lowrise buildings.” However. The provisions are included in Section 11. The UBC provisions were based on shear tests of deep beams (3.

.**o.**”.*.*.**C< q . A number of investigations have been conducted in Japan..*. q .”...G.*. et. .8. as defined here.O....** .”.e..*. q . the frame may tend to pull the wall in the upper stories and push it forward in the lower stories (11....***.*.”. EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION Shear walk for high -rise buildings are usually designed to interact with other structural elements. * ?7 (a) Loads (b) Frame (c) Shear Wall Fig. lb and lC.JOJ*.. of shear walk extending over all or part of the height of the structure. 2a and 2b. Interactionetweenframeand shearwall b . .“. Frame ~~ + .*.e. only limited information (17 -20) is available in English.*.*.*. The test program considered only low -rise shear walls surrounded by a reinforced concrete frame and subjected to static loads.. (IO-14).**”.o.* + . 9).o. al.e.*.. ** A shear wall comprises one wall or a combination. spandrels and floor systems contributing to lateral stiffness.o *o*o q .e . Research concerning the behavior and strength of shear walls is scarce.*. However.”.O.e*e.. The analysis of the response of shear wall structures has also received wide attention.e .*..”.*.PCA Research and Development Bulletrn 3 Basic design information on the nature and magnitude of wind and earthquake loads has been described in detail (2. 6. . includes all beams. 1...*..*...O.*. Sume of the papers presenting analytical methods are contained in Ref.+. I Shear WolI .*. 16). 12).*.*. One of the most common systems found in practice 1s that of a frzune* interacting with a shear wall.*O**. (25) at MIT.< .<.e..c. 4 .. Bending moment and shear force diagrams resulting from these forces acting on the shear wall are shown in Figs. .*. .”.*!*! . the only systematic investigation concernin the strength of shear walls was carried out by Benjamin and Williams 721-24) at the University of Stanford. In the United States..**. Because of the different lateral stiffness characteristics of the frame and the wall.*.”..*.*. Computer programs intended for use in design are also available (15.e. The * A frame. This interaction causes a distribu tion of shear forces between the frame and the wall similar to that shown in Figs.*.** Figure la shows a frame-shear wall structure subjected to a system of lateral forces due to wind or earthquake. A continuation of this investigation for dynamic loads was carried out by Antebi. “.*..*.*.

c.O .0.O.:. The remaining shear force was equally distributed between the point of contraflexure and the base of the wall.*.:.*. In describing the specimen characteristics and test results on this re~rt. representing the effects of dead and live loads.e.: q OO.:. was applied at the point of contraflexure. the distribution of shear forces was chosen such that 50 percent of the total shear force..o.:. 2c..:. They are: axial stresses...~. Ranges for variables such as ment.:. magnitude of the axial grade were determined from built in the Chicago area and amounts of vertical and horizontal reinforcestresses.4 Strength of High-RiseShear Walls-Rectangular CrossSection ncf Vcf Centraf Iexure Vcf f {u.00..*. The laboratory specimen and the load distribution selected for this investigation were intended to simulate the conditions existing in the lower portion of a high-rise shear wall as shown in Fig. ...:.. f..:o: .O .. at the base of the wall...:.O.O.: 1 M T il (o) Sheer Diogrom (b) Moment Diogrom on a (c) Forces on Lower l%rt ion Fig.:.0...m q .*. V..*. reference is made to the orientation of a ~ear wall in a building rather than its position in the laboratory.:.:. . 12)..O... Vcf..*. Forces acting high-rice ehesxw#iU location of the point of contraflexure in the shear wall depends on many variables discussed elsewhere (11. concrete strength and reinforcement a survey of high-rise buildings designed and on the West Coast.* q *. the shear wall specimens in the laboratory were rotated 90° with respect to the vertical position of a shear wall in a building./e.**.**O.:.*. distributed between the point of contraflexure and the base of the wall.:. For convenience of testing. v :.* :.:..O.. however.:. In addition.:. 2.*. 2c.* .*. :. ..* #*. and story shears.: q *o*/o*o.:.*.:.OOO.*..O.. a shear force. The forces acting on that portion of the shear wall below the point of contraflexure are shown in Fig.* q . representing the re sultant shear force of the upper stories.*..ncf.0 :.:..:.:.o... Vcf.**.*.:0:.:..*a.:.

Two other specimens having the same cross sectional dimensions. The vertical steel tubes attached to each side of the wall were used to simulate lateral restraint and prevent A more detailed explanation of materials. but with a height of 12 ft. In the design of the test rig and loading equipment. 40m). The depth of the wall was ~ = 6 ft. In addition. Shear well specimen: dimensions and test setup . (7. apply the gravity loads. 3 in. by 75 “in. (L91 m) and the thickness> h = 3 in.PCA Research and Developmentt Bulletin 5 Figure 3 shows dimensions and test setup for four of the six specimens tested. particular care was taken to provide a fixed end condition at the base of the wall. The height of the specimen. The part of the specimen labeled “restrained area” in Fig. I Y . AU specimens had the same rectangular cross section.I v 1. The loading rods going through the laboratory test floor apply the Post-tensioning rods shown longitudinlateral forces to the wall specimen. (7. representing the portion of the wall between the base and point of contraflexure. J Arrangementfor laterallode b) Test Setup:Elevation Fig. (3. instrumentation was protided to measure base rotations due to elastic deformations of the restrained area and the loading equipment. 3. (6. Figure 4 shows the test rig used for the specimens with a height ~ = 21 ft. mentation and test procedures used is given in Appendix A. hWs21’(j’ + Il!o’ ‘ 6’9” -1 + i Laboratoryfloor + \ . a) Dimensions: lonView P m. (6.5 cm). was ~ = 21 ft.66 m) were also tested. 3 in. 3 was intended to represent the restraint condition at the base of the wall. 5 cm by 190 cm). TEST RESULTS Specimen Characteristics Dimensions and material properties for the six high-rise shear wall specimens tested are listed in Table 1. instrularge lateral deflections. 40 m).I v 1. ally in the figure.

07 kgf/cma) . 000 60. Properties of Test Specimens Mark Height % ft. psi 7420 6880 6780 6740 5900 5950 —. SW-3 W-4 SW-5 SW-6 21. 1 psi = 0.305 m.400 66.0027 I ‘y psi Axial Stress Nu/Lwh I psi 415 430 420 430 425 430 12. 4. where As = total area of vertical ~w = 75 in.200 65.0 21.0 12.0 —. 000 I — of 3 or more concrete area. !lWt setup for shearwall investigation TABLE 1 -Dimensions Concl Compressive Strength* f.000 60.000 60.300 61. 01).0230 0.0027 000100 0.0 615 585 565 590 _Jl_L—!— I cylinders in critical reinforcement.0 21.0230 psi I 0. 000 60.0027 0.0300 0. h=3 in.0027 0. J 60.000 63’000 61.000 70. (1 ft. + One-third of total vertical reinforcement concentrated within a distance 4w/10 from either extremity of cross-section (amount of reinforcement in interiop region Pm = 0.0 21.6 Strength of High-RiseShear Walls–RectangularCrossSection Fig.0027 0.— * Taken as the average ** p v E:. Reinforce ent Vertical Horizontal Amount Yield &mount Yield Stress Stress PV** fy ‘h I 0. = 0.000 60. e and Material Tensile Splitting Strength* f’Sp psi ::. = fi w .0027 0.0027 0.0300 0.

PCA Research andDevelopment Bulletin 7 and sW-3 had the same height. (6. 3 As —.0 percent. The nominal concrete compressive strength was 6000 psi (420 kgf/cm2 ) while the axial compressive stress in all specimens w as nominal 420 psi (29 kgf/cm2). 7!5 —. w-2. Specimen SW-4 had uniformly distributed reinforcement. 1 . ~ = 21 ft. Table 2 summarizes the test results for all six specimens. 5.. reinforcement used. specimens SW-l. Specimens SW-4 and SW-5 had a height of ~ = 12 ft. Specimen SW-6 was similar to SW-3 except for the distribution of flexural reinforcement.W=75° 60” ~ As —— 4—. fiear or horizontal reinforcement was constant for all six specimens at All reinforcement used met require0. 3“ Af=v’wh Pv = %i~wh (b) Concentrated (a) Uniform Fig.0 lW.40 m). while SW-5 had concentrated reinforcement. The corresponding moment to shear ratio was M/V = L O~w.66 m). ments of ASTM Designation: A-615-68. Their corresponding moment to shear ratio calculated at a distance lw/2 from the base of the wall was M/V = 2. The only variable was the amount of uniformly distributed vertical or flexural reinforcement which ranged between O. The mode of failure for each specimen is also listed. the bars were concentrated near the ends in the same manner as for SW-5. 5 shows the two distributions of flexural of flexural reinforcement. In SW-6. Boti specimens were designed for the same flexural strength but containing different distributions Fig.0027 times the concrete gross area. Grade 60 (4200 kgf/cma ). (3. Distribution f vertical o reinforcement in test specimens . T. 27 and 3.

concentration of reasonable amounts of vertical re enforcement near the ends of tall shear walls may prove advantageous. For these diagrams. For comparison purposes. no axial load was considered and the shear capacity was assumed to be adequate to develop the flexural strength. Axial compression on shear walls increases the moment capacity. 4.8iw or greater. axial compression reduces the ultimate curvature. the flexural strength and ultimate curvature of a shear wall with an amount of vertical reinforcement. AS a result. OL’J’ Log Lo% 2. streln compatibility and measured material properties including strain hardentng ** CeJculated from ACI 318-71 Code sheer stiength CWatiom + According to Eq. As in Fig.5 . (1 ktp-ft. for the same total amount of vertical reinforcement. Consequently.04 0. hdti.71 0..6 72. . were assumed to be 100 percent. Fig. at base ktp-ft. ~.5 41. klps 26.96 L 02 0. (1). 6 and 7 show that.78 FlexUral Strength Measured Moment. 379 650 1200 1139 1121 1154 kip-ft.5 7.6 108. 6.20 Flexure Flexure Flexure-Shear Flexure Flexure-fiear Flexure Calcu Measured lated ** elculate~ Vc + v~ Moment Sear at Observed .138 ton-m. 1 ktp = 0. Axial tensile loads decrease it.62 0.4 66. 25 percent. Comparison of trends in Figs.90 0.01 2. &psi= 0. t+ d used is O.—. ~.58 0. The inelas tic range of deformations is also improved by the concentration of the reinforcement. . 25 percent represents minimum reinforcement uniformly distrib uted across the wall. neglecting the presence of compressive loads in the design of shear walls may result in an overestimate of ultimate curvature and energy absorption.: Failure from Base Mark w-l XV-2 W-3 W-4 W-5 W-6 .003.0 :.. “ ~SS&~e~ ComPreeslve Umlting of concrete strain 0.78 0.. Vu..95 0.8 Strength of Hi&-Rise Shear Wails-Rectangubr CrossSection TABLE 2. o% 2. ~. at base Idp-ft. However. relationships for walls with Figure 7 shows idealized moment-curvature vertical reinforcement concentrated near the edges.Test Results Calculated Pemrneters Moment bR~*:ar R& w Mu/Vu at at lw/2 ultimate from Base 2.0’7 1.4 7. 6 shows idealized moment-curvature diagrams for rectangular shear walls with different amounts of uniformly distributed vertical reinforcement.265 &_kgf/cm” ) Load-Deformation Relationships Moment-curvature or load-deflection relationships of shear walls are significantly influenced by the smount and distribution of vertical reinforcement and the presence of axial load. the curve for pv = O. Calculated* Moment. = 0.70 L 13 L 12 L 15 1. — at 4/2. shear walls having more reinforcement near the ends have both higher moment capacity and ultimate curvature than those with uniformly distributed reinforcement.453 ton. Calculated ~+ Shear Strength Measured VU* &ear. 4:4 1.3 ::: 4.44 0.8 5. ok 0. 406 675 1073 1077 1078 1179 .: 1181 1108 .71 0./2 Mode of < ~. Pv = O.0 108.

o%’ \ \ Limiting curvatures Cross Section 1 As 11/ I i !%rain Distribution at Ultimate 0 20 40 60 eo I00 Curvature. percent Fig. M. Moment-curvature relationships for rectangular shear walls 1200 1 I 1 I I I SU=0. M.81/W O...PCA R esearchand Development Bulletin 9 I 1000 - 1 -t- — I I t+ 800 -Pv” \ aw. 6. 7. Effectof reinforcement distributionn moment-curvature o .percent Fig.0%\ 600 “ \ \ d 400 .j \ o 20 40 60 60 100 Curvature. II!w ~“” 1 400 ~.zsh r L Moment. w..ltw Strain Distribution ot Ultimate 4 . ~. 200 .003 u C 1000 - 800 LW=25h Moment. percent 3.003 t-i * 0.Y 200 Pv=l.tiwatures o. { jmiiii..25% ~ 0. 600 percent T 14 & Cross Section 11’v~ 0..

Two of these can be classified as flexural while the third can be defined as a shear failure precipitated by the formation of a “flexure-shear” crack (27.-v- 800 - Moment. the curvature o ? SW-6. l millionth/in. however. Modes of Failure There were.138 Ton-m . gage length. 9 are average rotations measured over a 12-in. Moments were measured at the base of the shear wall and curvatures in Fig.4millionth /cm.-ft. A close-up of this fracture . Curvatures in Fig. with concentrated reinforcement is almost twice that of specimen SW-3 with uniformly distributed reinforcement. the potential ultimate curvature of sW-5 was not attained due to a premature shear failure. Calculated values for ultimate moments and curvatures were based on a limiting concrete compressive strain of O.0 ~ . =0. Figure 9 shows similar relationships for the two specimens with M/V = 1!0 ~w. 8. k. Values of measured and calculated ultimate moments and curvatures and ratios of ultimate to yield moments and curvatures are listed in Table 3. 8 of tests on specimens SW-3 and SW-6. Results for specimens SW-4 and SW-5 shown in Fig. in general. Measured mcment-curvature relationships Figure8 shows measured moment-curvature relationships forthe four test specimens with M/V = 2. In this case. Increase in ductility due to the concentration of reinforcement is apparentfrom the results in Fi . 9 also illustrate the influence of reinforcement distribution on the moment-curvature relationship. M.10 Strength of High-RiseShear Walls-Rectangular CrossSection . 400 - 0 50 100 150 200 Average curvature aver a40-in I kip-ft. ~. (1. = 0. 8 are average rotations measured by LVDT’s over a 40-in. (30 cm) gage length. three distinct modes of failure observed in these tests.00 m) gage length near the restrained area. At ultimate. 003. millionths/in. strain compatibility and measured material prQperties. Fig. ) Specimen SW.1 reached its flexural strength by fracture of some of the tension reinforcement at the base of the wall.

48 1.42 1. Meaeured relationships TABLE 3 ..7 3. All specimens. = 0.: . After the full elongation of the tensile reinforcement was exhausted. The behavior of this specimen is typical of an under-reinforced Its strength is reached by crushing of the concrete in the compressection.9 Test Results Calculated $U Millionths/in. Figure 11 shows the flexural hinge observed in most of the other test specimens.0027.4 3..18 1. hibited these characteristics.31 4J 7. Y. M. = 0. sion zone after considerable yielding of the tension reinforcement.13 1. 228 116 1:: 225 186 M m. p.Moment-Curvature Measured Mark SW-l SW-2 SW-3 SW-4 SW-5 SW-6 *U Millionths/in. 400 - 0 50 Average curvature moment-curvature overa 150 100 12-in.8 4.30 1. As a result of the low amount of reinforcement used.43 1. 9.4 millionths/cm zone is shown in Fig.millionths 200 Fig. ::: 3. 7. k. the bars fractured. and the relatively high cracking capacity of the shear wall.17 1. 1.37 1.PCA Research and Development Bulletin 11 1200 1 I SW-5 Yield I I I I 1 I 800 - Moment.35 1. exthe wall as shown in Fig.28 #u T Y 4. gage length.1 1 millionth/in. 1.1 2. This type of behavior produced a more uniform spread of cracks near the base of except sW-1 and SW-5.0 :.5 2. 11.ft. 10. 186 143 103 117 133 120 M m. .29 1. ofiy one crack formed at the base of the wall.

With increase in load. Moment-curvature relationships and flexural strength based on these assumptions were calculated with the aid of a computer. from the base.12 Strength of High-RiseShear Walls-R ectangub Closs Section Fig. Failure by fracture the reinforcement of Thethird type of failure observed in these tests wasdesignated’’flexureshear” failure. In addition. 12. For hand calculations. the effect of strain hardening of the reinforcement was taken into account. some of the shear reinforcement across the inclined crack fractured and the concrete crushed in compression. The development of this simplified approach is described in detail in Appendix B. the inclined crack in these specimens initiated from a flexural crack that started at a distance about equal to the depth of the wall. of ACI 318-71. Assumptions. As seen in Fig. ANALYSIS OF TEST RESULTS Flexural Strenqth The calculated flexural strengths listed in Table 2 were based on Section 10. a simplified equation for f lemral strength was developed. At ultimate. the flexural crack turned toward the support at an angle of about 45°.2. 10. Lw. The flexural strength of rectangular shear walls containing uniformly distributed vertical reinforcement and subj ected to an axial load smaller than that producing a balanced failure condi tion can be approximated as: .

PCA Research and Development Bulletin 13 Fig. Failure crushing the concrete by of . 11.

Calculated values are based on the ACI 318-71 shear strength equations for shear walls. sq.451 Jr observed at ultimate varied between 1. (1) where Mu = design resisting As f Y= k w= Nu c moment at section. in. in.7 Jr to 2. As indicated in and Fig. Measured values represent the nominal shear stress at a section located at a distance Lw/2 from the base of the wall.8J~ shezw stresses psi (0.14 Strength of High-RiseShear Walls-Rectangular CrossSectkm . the under strength fac tor.0. lbs. = total area of vertical specified horizontal reinforcement of vertical yield strength length of shear wall. Nominal 7. reinforcement. = distance from extreme compression axis.07 ~ kgf/cm2 ). psi. -lbs. (See Appendix B) @ = capacity reduction factor Shear Strenqth - fiber to neutral Calculated and measured nominal shear stresses at failure for all specimens are listed in Table 2. at section. Flexure-shear failure . in. positive if compression. 12. was assumed equal to 1. = design axial load. . The value of @. . . in.

it was assumed that the amount of shear reinforcement was sufficient to develop the full flexural strength of the two walls.y Absorption The area under the moment-curvature.?VA Research and Development Bulletin 15 Table 2. Enera. One of the sections considered was assumed to contain vertical reinforcement placed near the extreme tension and compression fibers. Newmark and Corning ( 9). Figure 13 shows idealized M . Energy absorption of shear walls .# relationships for two rectangular shear wall sections subjected to bending. no reduction in shear strength due to the proportions of the specimens. the variables that affect the energy absorption of walls are the same as those affecting their moment-curvature characteristics.+ Mu domnt Moment. For the other case. vu Curvature.33 and 1. had developed a shear stress greater than that calculated for $ = 1.35. that the ACI 318-71 equations for shear strength of high-rise shear walls provide a conservative estimate of the strength of these specimens. Furthermore. The total area of vertical reinforcement provided is such that both sections have the same flexural strength. If the recommended value of @= O..~. the measured to calculated shear strength ratios of specimens SW-3 and SW-5 are 1. Consequently. 13. was observed in any of these tests. The equations are based on the simplifying assumptions that the yield moment is equal to the ultimate moment and the M -0 relationship is elasto-plastic. the two specimens that failed in flexure -shear. Acme. The energy-absorbing capacity of the shear wall with reinforcement near the ends only can be calculated on the basis of the equations presented by Blume. M . It appears then. M My Vy . SW-3 and SW-5. In constructing these curves. the reinforcement was assumed to be uniformly distributed along the cross section. such as that postulated by Kani (27 ). diagram is a measure of the energy absorbing capacity of reinforced concrete members. + vu Fig. respectively.85 had been used..

The effect of gravity loads acting on shear walls should also be considered. the simpli&ing assumptions of Ref. This increase in load depends on the amount of vertical reinforcement and the presence of axial load. Graves. 13. construction joint details. Neglecting these loads does not necessarily lead to conservative designs. a~e the average increasing amounts of reinforcement. For earthquake resistant design. most rectangular shear walls contain a distribution of vertical reinforcement which is intermediate between those illustrated in Fig. capacity requires an increase in load. The authors thank E. J. adequate anchorage and splice lengths. SW-2 and SW-3 containing increasing amounts of uniformly distributed vertical reinforcement. H. among others. Assistant Manager. the moment at first yield is appreciably lower than that Consequently. the shape of their M . Important observations of these tests are listed at the beginning of the report under CONCLUSIONS. the transition from the yield to the ultimate at ultimate. W. for their constructive criticisms made throughout this investigation. particular emphasis should be placed on good detailing of the reinforcement. Directorj Engineering Development Department and J. Table 3 lists the moment-curvature characteristics for the six specimens tested in his investigation. Hanson. Laboratory Technicians B.16 Strength of High-RiseShear Walls-Rectangular CrossSection For the shear wall with the uniform distribution of vertical reinforcement. Doepp. decreases with / Measured value. (1. . Jr. Although no load reversals were considered in these tests. Characteristics of each specimen and measured and calculated test results are presented in Tables 1 and 2. Calculated values were obtained taking into account strain hardening of the reinforcement and using the assumptions of Chapter 10 of ACI 318-71. and O. B. Hognestad. in order to obtain a satisfactory performance. (9) cannot be directly applied. CONCLUDING REMARKS The results of this investigation have provided basic information on the behavior and strength of rectangular reinforced concrete shear walls for highrise buildings. FQrtland Cement Association. Manager. Kurvits performed the laboratory work. As shown in Fig.p relationship lies somewhere between the boundaries illustrated. W. Fullhart. Hummerich. In practice. Specimens SW-3 and SW-4 contained uniformly distributed vertical reinforcement while SW-5 and SW-6 represent an intermediate disof curvature tribution between uniform and concentrated. For spec imens SW-1. the ductility ratio $11~. 13. G. M. The influence of concentrating some of the vertical reinforcement near the ends of the cross section is illustrated by the results of specimens SW-3 through SW-6. Structural Devel opment Section. curvature over a 40-in. . A. Comparisons ratios of SW-3 with SW-6 and SW-4 with SW-5 show the increase in ductility when reinforcement is concentrated near the ends of shear walls. it is expected that the test results would not be affected because of the relatively small magnitude of the shear stresses. W. 00 m) gage length near the base of the walls. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This investigation was conducted at the Structural Development Laboratory of the Portland Cement Association under the direction of W. As a result. Corley.

A. Portland Cement As so Commentary. “Analysis of Plane Multistory Frame-Shear Structures Under Lateral and Gravity Loads?” Computer Program Series. W. Wall Derecho.” to be published in the ACI Journal.. Blume. No. M. ST3. 11. W. Portland Cement Association. I. Proceedings.. J. E. “Plsnning Concepts Using Shear Walls.” National Bureau of Standards. A. M. 1971. 1967. 1926. E. Proceedings. Pergamon Press. I. G. . ‘Introduction and Summary Design Procedures crete Shear Walls. V. E. OID. Rosenblueth. Khan.” American Concrete Institute. 68. Beams m Wear. F.. OID. 12. of ConTomii. June 1960.” “Design of Combined Frm_nes and Shear Walls. pp. pp. R. V. Lord. pp. 36 pp. 16. A. June 1964.. Illinois.” ACI Journal. Schweighofer. Part I. Frames. pp. and Hognestad. 1967.. 81-106. dePaiva. 49-99. A.” especially edited for United States . 91. and Siess. 1965.. R. V. April 1971. A.” Advanced Engineering Bulletin No. 1971. and Microys. and Prabhu. Davenport. W. No. H. 19-41. F.” Tall Buildings. R. Illinois. A. “Wear Tests of Reinforced Concrete Beans. 90. 66. Cardenas. Tall Buildings.. Skokie. 17.. H. No. ACI Committee 442. Pergamon Press. 3-45.” Tall Buildings. 1005-1007. Conference for Reinforced ConDetroit. J.. S. and Zipprodt. February 1967. A.” ciation.. 2. J. 7.. Slater. “Elastic Analysis of &ear Walls in Tall Buildings. Portland Cement Association. Skokie. “Design of Multistory Reinforced Concrete Buildings for Earthquake Motions.. S. and Holtz. ST5. “ShearWall Frame Interaction Special Publication SPO1l.PCY4 Research and Development Bulletin 17 REFERENCES 1. pp. V. SR097. C.” Portland Cement Association. Octo- 4. A. of Building Officials. International Pasadena.Japan Joint Seminar. 10. 5. 66. Skokie.. J. 14.” Proceedings ber 1965. pp. California. Illinois. 3. and Sbarounis. Pergamon Press. 12. pp. Illinois. 13. Frischmann. 62 pp. “Response of Buildings to Lateral Forces. Uniform Building Code. 1970. “The Treatment of Wind Loading on Tall Buildings. 9. Corley. G. February 1971. ACI Committee 318. ‘Interaction of Shear Walls and Proceedings. W. 1961.. 6. “Strength and Behavior of Deep ASCE. for Shear Walls. 1209-1222. L. . A. N. Newmark. ASCE. 78 pp. “Design Provisions Hanson. 1967. P. R. “Building Code Requirements crete (ACI 318-71 ). 14.. “Analysis of Shear W@lS Using Standard ComWter Program s. R. 2. Skokie. 8.” ACI Journal. . 318 pp. V. December 1969. H. M. 15.” ACI Journal. 90 pp. T. Proceedings. and Corning. 285-335.A Design Aid with McLeod.

No. N. 190 Ogura. J. 22. August 1960.. N. J. B. PCA Foreign Literature Study No.. Kani. May 1957..” Part ~4. Y. 35-41. K. O. R. . H. and Benjamin. 23. J. 28.” Muto Laboratory. Q. Japan Society of Architects Reprt No. “The Response of Shear Walls to ~namic Loads. Bresler. 3. 93. Tokyo. A.” ACI Journal.” Department of Civil Engineering. January 1967.. J. and Matsoura N. California. “How Safe are Our Large Reinforced Concrete Beams ?“ ACI Journal.” MIT Department of Civil and Sanitary Engineering.78 Strength of High-RiseShear Walls–RectangularCrossSectwn “X8. A. 37. Hsu. . 59 pp. ” Department of Civil Engineering. Tsuboi. Benjamin. and Williams. pp. 124. T. K. PCA Development Bulletin Hanson. No. “Behavior of One-Story Reinforced Concrete Shear Walls Contaimng Openings. ST3. Kriz. University of Illinois. TExperim. Akagi. 1. 1. Y.Experimental and Theoretical Study of Strength and Rigidity of Two-Directional Structural Walls Wbjected to Combined Stresses M. pp. J. C.. G. 6. 26. “Investigation of Shear Walls.entaI Study on Two-Story Reinforced Concrete Shear Walls. (DASA . No. Proceedings. H. August 1954. 30D33. V. 20. 55.Ex~erimental and Mathematical Studies of the Behavior of Plain and R&inforced Concrete Walled Bents Under Static Shear Loading. Kokusho. W. “Investigation of Shear Walls.” Proceedings. Experimental Study No. Suenaga. Antebi. N. University of Tokyo. G.Continued Experimental and Mathematical Studies of Reinforced Concrete Walled Bents Under Static Shear Loading. 3. J.. 12-20 and 40-44. T.Improvements 1960 -65... R. and Williams. Stanford University. J. Japan. R. V. Mass. 1959. A. Kurvits. N. K.1160). Stanford. ASCE. . and Mattock. and Hansenj R. pp. Urbana. V. “Facilities and Test Methods of PCA Structural Laboratory . Illinois. 605-618. “Tests to Failure of TwoStory Rigid Frames with Walls. . S. W. university of Illinois. Hognestad. November 1958. 669-708. A. and Kurvits. H.” Journal of the Wrtland Cement Association. “Facilities and Test Methods of PCA Structural Laboratory.. 24. . No. 25. and Shigenobu. No. and MacGregor. 536. pp.. H. ASCE. Illinois. Research and Development Laboratories. ” Journal of the Portland Cement Association. T. Urbana. A. and Kokusho. 131. 128-141.. “Review of Concrete Beams Feiling in Shear. Hanson. V. 343-372. 83.. E. Translated by T. Benjamin. :27. A. Stanford. 142 pp. R. O. A. Benjamin... Akagi. 21. H. ASCE. August 1959. Williams. V. Research 29. 1.. Also Transactions. 1959. Translated by T.if ornia. No. pp. 18. V. 64. B. pp. February 1967. August 1959. “The Behavior of One-Story Reinforced Concrete Shear Walls. No.. Cambridge. Stanford University.. K. J. V. pp. “Fundamental Study on Reinforced Concrete Shear Wall Structures . 290 pp. 2. Part 6. L. and Williams. 1959. 1. July 1953. V. February 1952. Proceedings. November 1967.. ST1. March 1967. Part 3 .. Utlm. Muto.” Transactions of the Architectural Institute of Japan.” Journal of the Structural Division. Cal.

Measured yield stresses for specific groups of bars used in each specimen are listed in Table 1. mally used at the PCA Structural Laboratory ( 28. The deformed bars were used as flexural (vertical) reinforcement and the annealed wire as shear (horizontal) reinforcement. 5. 3 in. pp. (8. Deformed bar sizes were No. Figure Al shows one of the specimens before casting. The height of the struts was selected to accommodate a tilt-up assembly underneath the double 3/4-in. 2-9. V. ~1 sPeci This procedure facilitated both the mens were cast in a horizontal position. 27-31. 3 in.91 m). Sheerwallbeforecasting .76 m) by 6 ft. PCA Development Bulletin D91. The formwork consisted of a double 3/4-in. Fabrication Because of the relatively large size of the specimens. Fig. No. No. May 1965. V. (1. Grade 60 (4200 kgf/cma ) deformed bars and annealed deformed wire was used in all speci mens. 4 and No. Reinforcement conforming to ASTM Designation: A-615-68. January 1965. 5 cm). 2. and the small thickness. 24-38. plywood base supported on 2x4 and 2x6 stringers. and V. 3. 2$1. No. 2. plywood base. 28 ft. The stringers were supported on 2x4 vertical struts properly braced. instrumentation and testing of six Methods and procedures employed were those norshear wall specimens. 9 in. pp. 1. May 1961. 7. pp. APPENDIX A DETAILS OF TEST SPECIMENS This appendix describes the fabrication. 7.PCA Research and Development Bulletin 19 and Development Laboratories. (7. manufacture of formwork and placement of reinforce ent and concrete.Al.

was 600 r psi (420 kgf/cm2).02 0.04 sq. it was necessary to anneal it to obtain a yield stress of about 60 ksi. all deformed wire reinforcement was commercially annealed at 1100° F in a gas-fired furnace for a period of one hour. Vertical bars were instrumented at a section near the base of the wall and also at a section a distance 4W from the base of the wall. 26 sq. = O. in.( 3 Fig. Yield . Based on these results. usually 10 days. The normal weight concrete used was made with a blend of Type I cement and 3/4 -in. ksi \ ‘o 0. Because of the relatively high yield stress of the wire.1 bars permitted measurement of the strain distribution alon the wall at these two sections. maximum size Elgin aggregate. Figure A2 shows representative stress-strain curves for both the deformed bars and deformed wire reinforcement used in all specimens.20 Strength of High-RiseShear Walls-Rectangular CrossSection The D4 (A = 0. Reinforcement stress-strafn ratitlo!mhips . cm) deformed wire reinforcement used conforme $ to ASTM Designation: A-496-64. All specimens were cured under ~lyethylene sheets for a period of 3 days. Instrumented ver tics.01 Strain Annealed Wire * Deformed Bars Stress. A2. Results of trial runs in the laboratory indicated that annealing the wire at 1100° F for one hour would provide the characteristics needed. Several horizontal bars placed within a heig x t ~ from 80 II x-\ 0. Concrete quality control was based on a measured slump of 3 ~ 1 in.stresses obtained for individual groups of reinforcement are listed in Table 1. Desi cylinder compressive strength at test age. Measured concrete strengths are listed in Table 1 in the text. Instrumentation Reinforcing bars were instrumented with electrical resistance strain gages.

A3. Fig. Out-of-plane deflections were measured near the cantilever end of the wall using mechanical dial gages reading to O. Loading and instrumentation .PC4 Research and Development Bulletin 21 base of the wall were also instrumented. These gages were located nem the base of the wall and at the extreme tension and compression fibers. Rotations near the base of the wall were measured with LVDT’s placed near the extreme tension and compression fibers of the specimens.40 m) high walls and 12-in. Applied axial and lateral loads were measured with load cells. (1. Lateral deflections of all specimens were meaSured at 3 ft. 66 m) high walls. (91 cm) or 18-in. Reactions at the restraining portion of the specimens were also measured with load cells. These gages provided of the strains produced by the shear deformations. (30 cm) for the 12-ft. an indication Gages were also placed on the concrete surface. 00 m) for the 21-ft. (45 cm) intervals from the base of the wall. 001 inches. Graduated scales were read with a precision level (28) that has an optical micrometer reading to O. (6. Other gages were placed at mid-length of the wall. (3. Gage lengths for measured average rotations were 40-in. 001 in. The LVDT’s were connected to directly measure angle changes.

lateral load was applied by hydraulic rams. .(1) P#[~-c(l+P)]fj+Nu where Pv = As/Jwh f:131hc+P/c(l h= thickness of shear wall. Test Procedure After the specimens were set in the test rig. psi axis. psi Y= Nu = design axial load at section. When necessary. APPENDIX B STRENGTH EQUATIONS FOR FLEXURAL AS a part of this investigation. Figure A3 shows some of the locations where instrumentation was used in the specimens..22 Strength of High-RiseShear WalIs–RectangularCrossSection All of this instrumentation w as connected to continuous oscillographic re corders or strain indicator boxes as required. In addition. The axial compression force was then applied in increments. This distribution implies that the load producing failure is smal Yer than that at balanced failure conditions. Aw = depth or horizontal length of shear wall. all instrumentation was read and cracks were marked and recorded.85 Bl(c) and Bl(d): -#)$ . f: = specified compressive strength of concrete. The number of increments of lateral load to obtain failure was usually between 10 and 15.2. Figure Bl(a) shows the cross section of a rectangular shear wall subjected A . readings were taken to assess the effects of dead w eight and loading equipment. in. load versus deflection and load versus maximum compressive strain were continuously monitored on X-Y recorders throughout the test. From equilibrium of forces as shown in Figs. At the end of each increment. outof-plane deflections were checked. Assumptions. The assumed strain distribution at ultimate is shown in Fi . 003 P f specified yield strength of reinforcement. adjustments were made in the position of the hydraulic rams to insure that no large out-ofplane deflections occurred. i~. is assumed to be a continuous line of steel along the full length of the wafi. . The total area of reinforcement. c = distance from extreme compression fiber to neutral = cy/o. Bl(b). positive if compression. a simple equation to calculate the flexural strength of rectangular shear walls with uniformly distributed vertical rein-forcement was developed. . After each increment. of ACI 318-71 (l). to combined bending and axial load.. in. The solution is developed in accordance with Section 10. After the full axial load was applied. lbs. =0.

003 35 f. . without significant eliminating the terms containing ca/l~ and dropping reduces to: Mu = O. .. 5 AsfyAw (l+&j (l-f-) . Mu. . . B1. of the cross section becomes: J%= fhfyJw[(l+ ’#-)(+ -$)-$ p++?%)] Sy w w .C -1 4 R03CC -L /3c i-l (a) Crass Section (b) Stroin Distribution. Equabon (5) then Equation (5) can be approximated. .. becomes: c= ~ (d+o! from the extreme 2 u + 0..(2) where u+ and CY=. .(5) loss of ac.2. AC1318-71 compression fiber to the From Eq. . . (1) the distance neutral axis. .uracy...7. 19=&5 (c) Concrete Stress Distribution ond Axial Load fy (d) Steel Stress Distrithtion a strength rectangular he= walls of s Fig. . by f?l. (4) resisting moment.= The ultimate pv f . Assumptions t flexural g = a factor defined infection 10. c. ---1 -r /3 ...85j31 .PC21Research and Development Bulletin 23 0.(3) c Nu . (6) .

in.. In practice the magnitude of the axial compres~on load is almost always smaller than Nu = O. R?.0 1 \ I 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ fy= 60. (5). the approximate Eq. Nu = O. (5) is applicable up to Nu = 0. the proposed flexural strength equations should apply to most rectangular Shew walls found in practice. Since Eq. (6) compares very well with the results of the more exact Eq. The above derivations are limited to rectangular shear walls with uniformly distributed reinforcement and subjected to an axial load smaller than that producing balanced flexural failure. The results show that for the case of pure bending. from extreme . fiber to neutral axis. percent o Amaunt Fig.000 psi (4219 kgf/cm C) psi (281 kgf/cm~) Flexural Strength.0 Eq. 26 f& iwh.24 Strength of High-RiseShear Walls–Rectangular CrossSection Figure B2 shows a comparison of results using Eqs. sq. I I 2. 25 f: ~wh. Asfylx 1.0 Vert ica I Reinforcement. Two values of axial compressive load are plotted: Nu = O and Nu = O. I 3.425 PI f~ Awh. FlexUralstrength rectangular of shearwalls APPENDIX NOTATION As 4 c = total area of vertical = area of horizontal = distance reinforcement C at section.0 p. shear reinforcement compression within a distance.(6) ~ I I Lo of Uniformly Distributed 1 I 1 2. in. sq.000 f~= 4. (6) Eq. in. (5) and (6) for different amounts of uniformly distributed flexural reinforcement. s. Similar equations can be derived for different shear wall cross sections and for distributions of vertical reinforcement other than uniform.

stress carried by concrete.distance from extreme force. compressive strength strength of concrete. .2.. design axial load at section. in. 1498 . moment at the point of contraflexurd positive if compression. in. (Section 10.7. in. axis. depth or horizontal design resisting axial stress length of shear wall) in. compression fiber to resultant of tension root of specified compressive yield strength of shear wall. Asfy/~wh vertical nominal nominal f’ c spacing of horizontal shear permissible shear reinforcement. ACI ACI 318-71) at ultimate load at yield load PCA R/D Ser. psi psi of concrete. square specified specified thickness lbs. shear force at the point of contraflexure~ total applied design shear force at sectiom lbs. total design shear stress. psi total height of wall from its base to its toD in. at section. cy/o. psi psi lbs. story shear forces. 003 fraction 318-71) capacity A#h A#wh curvature curvature defining location reduction factor of the neutral (Section 9.2. lbs. in. of reinforcement. -lbs.

Illinois 60076 Printed in U.S. q market development.PORTLAND CEMENT Anorganization of cement manufacturers to improve and extend the uses of portland cement and concrete through scientific research. Skokie. RD029.A. nd Old Orchard Road.OID . engineering m I I ASSOCIATION field work.