Thin-Walled Structures 12 (1991) 145-162

Hysteretic Characteristics of Unstiffened Plate Shear

Panels

T. M. R o b e r t s & S. S a b o u r i G h o m i
School of Engineering, University of Wales College of Cardiff, Newport Road, Cardiff
CF2 1XH, UK
(Received 6 April 1990: accepted 10 June 1990)

ABSTRACT

A series of quasi-static cyclic loading tests on unstiffenedplate shearpanels is

described, All the panels tested exhibited adequate ductility and stable S-
shaped hysteresis loops, with the energy absorbed per cycle increasing with the
maximum amplitude of shear displacement. A theoretical model for
predicting the hysteretic characteristics is presented, which incorporates the
influences of shear buckling of the web plate and plastic yielding of the web
plate and surroundingframe. Theoretical predictions are compared and show
satisfactory agreement with the experimental results. The simplicity of the
theoretical model is such that it can be readily incorporated in nonlinear
dynamic analyses of steel plate shear walls.

NOTATION

b Width o f shear panel

d D e p t h o f shear panel
E Young's m o d u l u s
F Shear force
Flu Ultimate shear force of frame (columns)
Fwcr Critical shear force of web plate
Fw~ Ultimate shear force o f web plate
G Shear m o d u l u s
145
Thin-Walled Structures 0263-8231/91/$03.50© 1991 Elsevier Science Publishers Ltd,
England. Printed in Great Britain
146 T. M. Roberts, S. Sabouri Ghomi

h Thickness of web plate

If Second moment of area of columns
J Von Mises yield function (plastic potential function)
kcr Critical shear coefficient
Mfp Plastic moment of frame member (beam or column)
P Diagonal panel force
Pexl Experimental diagonal force for q = 1-6 mm
Pex2 Experimental diagonal force for q = 2.4 mm
q Diagonal panel displacement
S Length of frame member (b, beam; d, column)
W Panel shear displacement
Wfe Limiting elastic shear displacement of frame
WWCr Critical shear displacement of web plate
Wwe Limiting elastic shear displacement of web plate
Wwp Plastic shear displacement of web plate

Ratio of plastic strains along panel diagonals

F Proportionality constant
pcc, 8 pdd Plastic strains along panel diagonals
O Inclination of tension field
Inclination of panel diagonals
Poisson's ratio
(~cc, CYdd Stresses acting along panel diagonals
CYo Uniaxial yield stress
CYty Tension field stress at yield
O'xx, O'~, Stresses in x and y directions
O'xy Shear stress in x - y plane
"Ucr Critical shear stress of web plate

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, steel plate shear walls have been used in a number of
high-rise buildings, mainly in Japan and North America, to resist lateral
loads induced by wind and earthquakes. ~-7They have also been used to
strengthen existing buildings.7 Such shear walls consist of thin steel
plates, framed by columns and beams (as shown in Fig. 1) and possess
the beneficial properties of enhanced stiffness, stength and ductility,
stable hysteretic characteristics and a large capacity for plastic energy
absorption.
The majority of the steel plate shear walls constructed to date, and of
the experimental and theoretical investigations, have incorporated
 Hysteretic characteristics of unstiffened plate shear panels 147

/Beam
~J I'~-'~Column
J J I

. /i

J - /I

// ////// Fig. 1. Steel plate shear wall.

plates that are stiffened to prevent shear buckling. In the early 1970s, a
Japanese contracting c o m p a n y conducted two series of tests on steel
plate shear wall panels. 8 In the first series, twelve panels
(2100 m m x 900 mm) having plate thicknesses ranging from 2.3 m m to
4.5 mm, with various stiffener configurations, were tested. All the panels
were surrounded by a rigid, pin jointed frame and were subjected to
several cycles of alternating shear loading. The tests confirmed that the
panels possessed adequate ductility (stable hysteretic characteristics)
and that the shape of the hysteresis loops was not significantly affected
by the stiffener configurations. In the second series of tests, two
specimens of a one bay, two-storey steel plate shear wall, one without
openings and the other with an opening in each storey, were tested. The
design of the two-storey test specimens was based on the results of the
first series of tests. An elasto-plastic finite element analysis, based on the
assumption that the web plates would not buckle, was carried out and
showed satisfactory correlation with the test results.
Recently, Kulak and co-workers 9-1j reported on a comprehensive,
large scale experimental and theoretical investigation of the static and
quasi-static cyclic loading behaviour ofunstiffened, thin steel plate shear
walls. The results of this investigation highlighted the beneficial post-
buckled reserve of stiffness and strength and stable hysteretic character-
istics, of unstiffened, thin steel plates. The theoretical analysis, which was
based on neglecting the critical (buckling) shear stress and replacing the
web plate with a series of inclined tensile strips, showed satisfactory
correlation with the test results.
Herein, an experimental and theoretical study of the static and quasi-
static cyclic loading behaviour of unstiffened plate shear panels is
described. A series of cyclic loading tests were conducted on small scale
models a n d based on the test results, a theoretical elasto-plastic model
for predicting the hysteretic characteristics of unstiffened plate shear
wall panels, has been developed.
148 T. M. Roberts, S. Sabouri Ghomi

EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION

Details of test specimens

Quasi-static cyclic loading tests were performed on unstiffened plate

shear panels, detailed in Fig. 2(a) and Table 1. The panels had aspect
ratios b/d equal to 1 and 1.5, and plate thicknesses h equal to 0.54 mm
(aluminium), 0-83 mm (steel) and 1.23 mm (steel).
The edges of the plates were clamped between pairs of rigid jointed
frame members, by two rows of 8-mm diameter, high tensile bolts. The
corners of the plates were cut away in a circular arc to clear the pins,

70 , b ( 300_; z , 5 0 L 7 0 -~

70 )ooooooooooooc
ooooooooooooo 0 It.O E]
Two rows 8ram bolts
on all sides

d
(300 (a)

701
£
0 [
Hydraulic grips of
testing machine

(b)

steel pm

~embly

Fig. 2. Details of test panels: (a) web plate and pin jointed frame: (b) hinge and load
application.
 Hysteretic characteristics of unstiffened plate shear panels 149

TABLE 1
Dimensions a n d Material Properties of Web Plates of Test Panels (h = 0.54 aluminium,
h = 0.83 and 1.23 steel: effective dimensions of plate b + 30 mm, d + 30 mm)

Test h b d E ~o Pex I Pex2

(mm) (turn) (ram) (N/mrne) (N/mm e) (N) (N)

SW 1 O.54 300 300 66 300 98 15 600 16 000

SW2 0-83 300 300 202 000 219 50 500 51 700
SW3 1.23 300 300 203 000 152 56 500 68 300
SWl3 0-54 450 300 66 300 98 19 000 19 800
SWl4 0.83 450 300 202 000 219 60 000 62 500
SWl5 1.23 450 300 203 000 152 59 000 75 200

resulting in effective plate dimensions 30 mm greater than the internal

dimensions of the frame. Two diagonally opposite pinned corners of the
panel were connected to the hydraulic grips of the testing machine, via
the hinge arrangement shown in Fig. 2(b). All components of the pinned
joints and hinges were machined very accurately, to minimise slack
during load reversals applied along the panel diagonals.
Tensile tests were performed on specimens of the three plate
thicknesses used to manufacture the test panels and their average
properties, Young's modulus E and yield stress tyo (0-2% proof stress) are
given in Table 1.

Test procedure

All panels were tested by applying equal and opposite loads along one
panel diagonal, using a Schenk 250 kN, servohydraulic, dynamic testing
machine (Carl Schenk (UK) Ltd, Bicester, Oxon). An x - y plotter
connected to the testing machine, enabled the diagonal load P versus the
corresponding displacement q curves, to be plotted automatically during
the tests.
For each test, tensile forces were applied along one panel diagonal
until the corresponding displacement reached a prescribed value,
generally 1.6 mm, which was well into the elasto-plastic range of the
panels. The panel was then unloaded and compressive forces were
applied along the panel diagonal, until the displacement in the opposite
direction reached a prescribed value, generally 1.6 mm. This process was
repeated to obtain at least four complete cycles of load, with the diagonal
displacement being increased by a prescribed amount, generally 0.4 mm,
in each direction during successive cycles. For all tests, the displacement
along the panel diagonal was controlled at a constant rate of 0-01 mm/s.
150 T.M. Roberts, S. Sabouri Ghomi

Skeleton curve

~steresis
/ ,oop

Fig. 3. Typical hysteresis loop.

Results

Before discussing the test results it is useful to define three terms; namely
the skeleton curve, hysteresis loop and energy dissipation (see Fig. 3).
The skeleton curve is the load-displacement curve that would be
obtained by increasing the load monotonically from zero, in each
direction. Due to irreversible plastic straining, the load-displacement
curve departs from the skeleton curve and the curve associated with
cyclic loading between two extremes is called a hysteresis loop. The area
contained within the hysteresis loop is the energy dissipated by the
structure during the loading cycle.
The hysteresis loops for all tests are shown in Figs 4-6. All the panels
exhibited stable S-shaped hysteresis loops with the amount of energy
absorbed per cycle increasing with the maximum amplitude of the
displacement. All panels were able to sustain at least four complete
loading cycles, involving large plastic strain reversals, without any
apparent reduction in load carrying capacity. A supplementary test on a
panel similar to SW1, with twelve complete loading cycles during which
the diagonal displacement was gradually increased to a maximum of
2.8 mm, confirmed that the panels possessed adequate ductility.
The maximum experimental diagonal loads Pex~ (at a diagonal
displacement of 1.6 m m during the first loading cycle) and Pex2 (at a
diagonal displacement of 2.4 m m during the fourth loading cycle) are
summarised in Table 1. As can be seen from these results and Fig. 6, the
1.23 m m steel plate exhibited significant strain hardening during the
hysteretic cycles.
Since the web plates of the test panels were relatively slender, they
buckled in shear at loads significantly less than the maximum loads
applied during the tests. A qualitative indication of the way in which the
shear buckles formed and reformed during the loading cycles is shown in
 Hysteretic characten'stics of unstiffened plate shear panels 151

P {kN)2o

I :
-2.4 -~.0 ' ' . . . .
2.0 2.+ 2.8

-2°l SWt
-30.~

' • ' 8

SW13

Fig. 4. E x p e r i m e n t a l hysteresis loops for tests S W l a n d SWI3.

Fig. 7. In general there was a tendency for the transition from elongated
buckles along one diagonal to elongated buckles along the other
diagonal, due to load reversals, to occur dynamically (unstable under
deflection control).

THEORETICAL MODEL FOR PREDICTING HYSTERESIS LOOPS

Panel with rigid, pin jointed frame

An approximate elasto-plastic model for the hysteresis loops of a slender

web plate, surrounded by a rigid, pin jointed frame (see Fig. 8(a)) and
subjected to predominantly shear loading, is illustrated in Fig. 8(b). Fwcr
and Fwu are the critical (buckling) and ultimate shear force of the web
plate and Wwe and Wwp are the limiting elastic and plastic shear
displacements.
From points O to A the response is assumed elastic and linear, even
though the plate may buckle at a shear force less than Fw,. After buckling
an inclined tension field gradually develops in the plate, which becomes
152 T. M. Roberts, S. Sabouri Ghomi

8O

P (kN) t
A ~

-2'-8 - ~ ' ~~ ~ ' " " ' 2,0

: 2'/.
: 2'8
~

SW2

-80

8O

I
8

Fig. 5. Experimental hysteresis loops for tests SW2 and SW14.

fully developed and yields when the shear force equals Fwu. From A to B 1
the plate strains plastically and from B1 to C1 the plate unloads
elastically parallel to O-A.
The length O.C 1 is proportional to the plastic elongation of the panel
diagonal C-C in Fig. 8(a). The length O.D1 is proportional to the
corresponding plastic contraction of the panel diagonal D-D, and is
defined by
O.DI = /30.C1 (1)
The ratio/~ can be determined from the flow theory of plasticity and an
assumed state of stress in the plate.
D1-E1 is parallel to O-A. The loop now continues from CI to E1 to F1.
At E1 the plate buckles and from E1 to F1 an inclined tension field
develops in the plate. From F1 to G1 the plate strains plastically in the
opposite direction, after which it unloads from G1 to D1, parallel to
O-A. The plastic elongation of the panel diagonal D - D during the
second half of the cycle is assumed proportional to the length D1.D1.
Hence the length C1.C1, which is proportional to the corresponding
contraction of the panel diagonal C-C, is given by
 Hysteretic characteristics of unstiffened plate shear panels 153

4(1 4

-2'., -2'., ~ / ) ~ . . . . 2'.8

2.8

Fig. 6. E x p e r i m e n t a l hysteresis loops for tests SW3 a n d SW15.

C1.C1 = flD1.D1 (2)

C1-H1 is parallel to O-A. At H1 the plate buckles and from H1 to B1 an
inclined tension field develops in the plate.
Starting from B1, the second cycle is similar to the first cycle. The
lengths D1.D2 and C2.C2 are given by
D1.D2 = /3C1.C2 (3a)
C2.C2 =/3 D2.D2 (3b)
The parameters used to define the hysteresis loops of individual panels
are now defined |2 in accordance with an equilibrium solution developed
by Porter, Rockey and Evans, 13 for predicting the shear strength of
slender plate girders.
The critical (buckling) shear stress rcr of an assumed simply supported
plate, width b, depth d and thickness h (see Fig. 9(a)) is given by
kcrrt2Eh 2 ~o
Vcr = 12(1 - ,u2)b 2 <~ x f ~ (4)
154 T. M. Roberts, S. Sabouri Ghomi

i j

Fig. 7 Formation of plate buckles during cyclic loading.

b2 d
k~r = 5"35 + 4d2 for ~ > 1 (5)

b2 d
k~r = 5 . 3 5 ~ + 4 for~< 1 (6)

in which E is Young's modulus,/~ is Poisson's ratio and Oo is the uniaxial

yield stress. The critical shear force of the web plate Fwcr, is therefore
F , ~ = v~rbh (7)
It is assumed that during the post-buckled stage, a tension field,
inclined at an angle ® to the horizontal as shown in Fig. 9(b), gradually
develops throughout the entire web plate. 13 This assumed stress
distribution provides a lower b o u n d for the strength of the web plate,
provided that the surrounding frame members are strong enough to
sustain the normal boundary forces associated with the tension field. If
aty denotes the value of the tension field stress at which yielding occurs,
the total state of stress in the plate at yield, shown in Fig. 9(c), is defined
by
 Hysteretic characteristics of unstiffened plate shear panels 155

w~
-----~ D C

(a)

C b D
I i

Fw Wwe i Ww p

F
~o_ / A B1 .4,.
~---.-;.~,--., ---B2

_
/ // /..
/.,.... . - /,' Cbl

~wo,-- ___.~_~__jZ?2 ,
o2 /o, /~/_[~;..~'-" . . . . 02 Ww

/
d--. . . . .
/.-" ,,.s-1
~/ Y I
62 GI - ~I ] Fwu

Fig. 8. (a) Shear panel with pin jointed frame; (b) theoretical hysteresis loops.

'~cr O'ty O'xx

-4- ~,y
IE3f
S (b) (c)

xro c

c o y~
Fig. 9. Assumed stresses in web plate: (a) critical shear stress; (b) tension field; (c)
combined stress state at yield; (d) panel diagonals.
 156 T.M. Roberts, S. Sabouri Ghomi

Oxx = aty sin20 (8)

O'yy ~-~ O'ty C O S 2 0 (9)

Oxy = rcr + ~ Y s i n 2 0 (10)

The b o u n d a r y s h e a r stress axy, is a m a x i m u m w h e n O = 45 ° a n d

hence

O'xx ~ O'yy -- aty

2 (11)

o'xv = r , + Crty (12)

• 2

A c c o r d i n g to the Von Mises yield criterion, yielding o f the plate occurs

when
J(cr) = (Crxx -- Oyy) 2 -~ (O'yy -- O'zz) 2 ~ (O'zz -- O'xx) 2 '~ 6Crxy 2 + 6Cryz 2

+ 6azx 2 -- 2cro2 = 0 (13)

Hence, substituting eqns (11) a n d (12) into eqn (13), with cr,z =
Oyz = ¢rzx = 0, the value o f the tension field stress at w h i c h yielding occurs
is defined by the e q u a t i o n
O'ty2 "[" 3Z'crO'ty -b 317cr2 -- (to2 = 0 (14)
The ultimate shear force o f the web plate is n o w given by

Fw~ = axybh = ( r c r + ~ ) b h (15)

The critical shear d i s p l a c e m e n t o f the plate Ww~r, is given by

_ r~ d (16)
Wwcr G

in w h i c h G = E/2(1 + p) is the s h e a r m o d u l u s o f the plate. The limiting

elastic shear d i s p l a c e m e n t c a n be d e t e r m i n e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y by
equating the w o r k d o n e by the p o s t - b u c k l e d c o m p o n e n t o f the shear
force to the strain energy o f the tension field, i.e.

(Crxy - r c r ) b ; (Wwc - Wwcr) - ~Tty2bdh2E (17)

Substituting from eqns (12) a n d (16) a n d r e a r r a n g i n g gives

rcrd + 2atyd (18)

Wwc = G E
 Hysteretic characteristics of unstiffened plate shear panels 157

The ratio of the plastic strains along the plate diagonals C-C and D - D
in Fig. 9(d) can be determined from the flow theory of plasticity ~4
associated with the Von Mises yield criterion defined by eqn (13). In
accordance with this theory, the plastic strain increments along the panel
diagonals 6epic and ~epdd, are given by
aJ
6epcc = F ocr~c (19)
OJ
68pd d = r ~OO.d (20)

in which F is a proportionality constant, J is Von Mises yield function

(assumed plastic potential function) and a ~ and add are the stresses
acting along the plate diagonals, inclined at an angle ®d to the y-axis.
Noting that
OJ OJ OOxx OJ dot/ OJ OOxy (21)
dace - Oaxx Oacc + Ocr~ Oacc + Oax~y dace
OJ _ OJ OOxx OJ OOyy OJ OOxy (22)
O0.dd O0..xxOadd "JVO0"--~ Oadd "l" ~O0.x Oadd
0Cxx 0Oxx - sin2Oa (23)
00"cc 00"dd

OOyy = ~ = COS2Od (24)

Oacc O0"dd
0(Yxy _ 0Gxy
Oacc Oadd = sinOd cos®a (25)

and that axx, ayy and axy are as defined by eqns (11) and (12), the ratio of
the plastic strain increments along the plate diagonals fl, reduces to
fl = 6epdd = -- 6VcrSin20d + aty(1 -- 3sin2®d) (26)
6epcc 6rcrSin2Od + aty(1 -- 3sin2Od)
As defined by eqn (26), fl will be negative. However, a positive value offl
should be used in eqns (1)-(3) to be consistent with directions on the
hysteresis loops.
To ensure that the frame members can sustain the normal boundary
stresses O'ty/2, associated with the tension field (see eqn (11)), the
following condition, based on assumed simple supports, should be
satisfied,
a~hs2 (27)
Mfp > 16
158 T. M. Roberts, S. Sabouri Ghomi

in which Mfp and s (b or d) are the plastic moment and length of the
appropriate frame member. In relation to the steel plate shear wall
shown in Fig. 1, this condition applies to the columns and to the extreme
cross-beams, which are not restrained by adjacent plate panels. If this
condition is not satisfied, the value of a~ defined by eqn (14), should be
limited accordingly.

Shear resistance of surrounding frame

For a steel plate shear wall with pinned beam to column connections, it is
reasonable to neglect the shear resistance of the frame members
(columns). However, if the beam to column connections are fixed, the
shear resistance of the frame may not be insignificant. Assuming that
plastic hinges form at the top and bottom of each column, as shown in
Fig. 10(a), the ultimate shear resistance of the frame Flu, and limiting
elastic shear displacement wfe, are given approximately by

4Mrp (28)
Fru- d

Mrpd 2
Wre = (29)
6EIr
in which Mfp a n d l r are the plastic moment and second moment of area of
the columns. A simple model for the hysteresis loops of the frame is
shown in Fig. 10(b), which can be superimposed with the hysteresis loops
of the web plate shown in Fig. 8(b), to obtain the hysteresis loops for the

~q Ff .Beam

T " j.J~ /L~ Coturnn (a)

di
'" j J¢/Plastic hinge Mfp

~Ef _ Wfe I- Wf p

_ ." j L / .,/" _,,- (b)

/ ~ .-I" .i
~': --/- r--- ~ Ffu

Fig. 10. (a) Plastic hinges in shear wall columns: (b) theoretical hysteresis loops for
columns.
 Hysteretic characteristics of unstiffenedplate shear panels 159

complete panel. To ensure that the columns can sustain the normal
boundary forces associated with the tension field, together with the
assumed plastic moments, the following condition, which corresponds
to eqn (27), should be satisfied,
Crtyhd2 (30)
Mfp > 8

Equation (27) should still be satisfied for the extreme cross-beams.

COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL A N D
THEORETICAL RESULTS

Theoretical and experimental results for the first three hysteresis loops
in tests SW1 and SW13 (0.54 mm aluminium plate with b/d= 1 and 1.5)
are compared in Fig. 11. The diagonal force P and corresponding
30
P (kN)20I
, n , ~ ~ •1 0 /.// .'""
-2~- 2 . ~ (mm)2"o 2"4

sW_~o,
-2°1

: : ...~J__, . ~ / f / ~ . ; ~ z~s,~ ~ ,/ " 2.4

SW13
Fig. 11. C o m p a r i s o n o f experimental a n d theoretical hysteresis loops for tests SW1 and
SWl3.
160 T. M. Roberts, S. Sabouri Ghomi

displacement q, are related to the panel shear force and shear

displacement by the equations
F = P cosOa (31)
w cos®j = q (32)
As can be seen there is generally good agreement between the theoretical
and experimental results. However, theoretical predictions are con-
servative for the following reasons:
(a) The boundaries of the web plate were assumed to be simply
supported which results in an underestimate of the critical
load.
(b) The elongated plastic buckles in the web plate (see Fig. 7) resist
load reversals more effectively than the assumed plastically
strained flat plate, since they act as inclined struts.
(c) The principal comprehensive stress was assumed to remain
constant after buckling. However, nonlinear finite element studies
carried out by Cesccotto et al. (reported by Dubas and Gheri ~5)
indicate that the principal compressive stress does not remain
constant after buckling but increases smoothly up to collapse.
(d) Strain hardening was neglected.

SUMMARY A N D CONCLUSIONS

In recent years, steel plate shear walls have been used in a number of
high-rise buildings throughout the world, to resist lateral loads induced
by wind and earthquakes. The majority of such shear walls constructed
to date have incorporated web plates that are stiffened to prevent shear
buckling, which increases fabrication costs and does not take advantage
of the significant post-buckled reserve of stiffness and strength possessed
by slender steel plates.
Therefore, a series of quasi-static cyclic loading tests was conducted on
slender, unstiffened plate shear panels, to investigate their hysteretic
characteristics. All the panels tested exhibited stable S-shaped hysteresis
loops, with the energy absorbed per cycle increasing with the maximum
amplitude of the shear displacement. The test panels also exhibited
adequate ductility, being able to sustain at least four complete loading
cycles involving large plastic strain reversals, without any apparent
reduction in load carrying capacity. A supplementary test in which a
panel was subjected to twelve complete loading cycles, confirmed this
conclusion. The main disadvantage associated with the use of slender,
 Hysteretic characteristics of unstiffened plate shear panels 161

unstiffened web plates, is that initial imperfections a n d instability m a y

result in relatively large out-of-plane displacements, even u n d e r n o r m a l
service conditions.
A theoretical m o d e l has been developed for predicting the hysteretic
characteristics of slender plate shear panels, which incorporates the
influence of shear buckling o f the web plate a n d plastic yielding of the
web plate a n d s u r r o u n d i n g frame. The theoretical predictions have been
c o m p a r e d a n d show satisfactory agreement with the test results. The
simplicity of the theoretical m o d e l is such that it can be readily
incorporated in n o n l i n e a r d y n a m i c analyses of steel plate shear
walls, j2

REFERENCES

1. Anon. Hospital steel plate shear walls were designed for a 0"69G
earthquake. Architectural Record, (August 1978) 118.
2. Anon. Steel plate shear walls blunt the wind's force and carry gravity load in
a towered hotel. Architectural Record, (August 1978) 116-17.
3. Anon. Shear walls and slip forming speed Dallas Reunion Project.
Engineering News Record, (28 July 1977) 20-1.
4. Anon. Patent problems challenge spawn steel seismic walls. Engineering
News Record, (26 January 1978) 17.
5. Anon. Quake proof hospital has battleship like walls. Engineering News
Record, (21 September 1978) 62-3.
6. Troy, R. G. & Richard, R. M. Steel plate shear walls resist lateral loads, cut
costs. Civil Engineering, ASCE, 49 (February 1979) 53-5.
7. Baldelli, J. A. Steel shear walls for existing buildings. Engineering Journal,
AISC, 20(2) (1983) 70-7.
8. Takahashi, Y., Takeda, T., Takemoto, Y. & Takagai, M. Experimental study
on thin steel shear walls and particular steel bracing under alternating
horizontal loading. Preliminary Report, IABSE Symposium, Resistance
and ultimate deformability of structures acted on by well defined repeated
loads, Lisbon, 1973, pp. 185-91.
9. Thorburn, L. J., Kulak, G. L. & Montgomery, C. J. Analysis and design of
steel, shear wall systems. Structural Engineering Report 107, Department of
Civil Engineering, University of Alberta, Canada, 1983.
10. Timler, P. A. & Kulak, G. L. Experimental study of steel plate shear walls.
Structural Engineering Report 114, Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Alberta, Canada, 1983.
11. Kulak, G. L. Unstiffened steel plate shear walls: static and seismic
behaviour. Steel Structures: Recent Research Advances and their Applications,
Ed. M. N. Pavlovic. Elsevier Applied Science, London, 1986, pp. 561-80.
12. Sabouri-Ghomi, S. Quasi static and dynamic hysteretic behaviour of
unstiffened steel plate shear walls. PhD thesis, School of Engineering,
University of Wales College of Cardiff, UK, 1989.
162 T. M. Roberts, S. Sabouri Ghomi

13. Porter, D. M., Rockey, K. C. & Evans, H. R. The collapse behaviour of plate
girders loaded in shear. The Structural Engineer, 53(8) (August 1975) 314-25.
14. Zienkiewicz, O. C. The Finite Element Method in Engineering Science,
McGraw-Hill, London, 1971.
15. Dubas, P. & Gheri, E. Behaviour and design of steel plated structures.
European Convention for Constructional Steelwork (ECCS) Publication
No. 44, Applied Statics and Steel Structures, Zurich, Switzerland, January
1986.