EFFECTIVENESS OF STEEL PLATE SHEAR WALL

PATTERNS IN A MULTI-STOREY BUILDING

PROJECT PHASE I

Submitted by

PATEL KAVINKUMAR YOGESHKUMAR

For the partial fulfillment of the award of the degree

of
MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY
(CIVIL-STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING)

Under the guidance of

Ms. DIPALI Y. PATEL

FACULTY OF TECHNOLOGY AND ENGINEERING

CHAROTAR UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

CHANGA-388421, GUJARAT, INDIA
DECEMBER 2016
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the PROJECT PHASE I entitled Effectiveness of steel plate
shear wall in a multi-storey buildings submitted by Patel Kavinkumar
Yogeshkumar (15PGCL025) to the Charotar University of Science and
Technology for the award of the Master of Technology (Civil - Structural
Engg.) is a bonafide record of research work carried out by him under my/our
supervision. The contents of this dissertation have not been submitted to any other
Institute or University for award of any degree, diploma or titles.

Faculty Supervisor (1)

Signature with Date:

Name: Ms. Dipali Patel:

Designation: Asst. Professor,

Organization: C.S.P.I.T, Changa.

i
 DECLARATION

I hereby declare that the thesis Effectiveness of steel plate shear wall in multi-
storey building submitted by me to Charotar University of Science and
Technology for the degree of Master of Technology (Civil - Structural Engg.) is
the record of work carried out by me during the period from June 2015 to May 2016
under the supervision of Ms. Dipali Patel. I also declare that this work has not
formed the basis for the award of any degree, diploma or titles by any other
Institution or University.

Signature and Date:

Name: Patel Kavinkumar Yogeshkumar

ID No: 15PGCL025

ii
 ABSTRACT

In this world of vertical development of civilization lateral loads such as earthquake

and wind forces are two most governing load in designing multi-storey buildings.
To counter this load various structure element and structure system are used in
last decades by engineers. In consideration of this, different type of steel plate
shear wall patterns in a multistoried buildings is studied to check their
effectiveness. Lateral load are the governing loads in design of multistoried
buildings, to counteract this type of loading proper structure are needed such that
load can be easily transferred through various structure. As Steel plate shear wall
are the most effective structural element to resist lateral load in steel building. A
multi-storey building with linear geometry will be analyze and studied for different
type of patterns. Patterns include X bracing type, staggered, diagonal and one bay
type. The patterns are generally the structure pattern which are better geometries
to resist lateral loads. Using ETABS each type will be examined and studied for
aspect such as inter storey drift and lateral displacement. The analysis will be done
using strip model, which is the most convenient way of analyzing steel plate shear
wall. Equilibrium static equation method will be analyze buildings. Each pattern is
selected in keeping mind their significance and effectiveness. Multi-storey steel
building with most effective pattern will tend to be most effective and optimized
design.

Key Words: Steel plate shear wall, high-rise building, seismic analysis, lateral
load resisting system, steel structures.

iii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CERTIFICATE ................................................................................... i

DECLARATION ................................................................................ ii

ABSTRACT ..................................................................................... iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................... iv

LIST OF FIGURES........................................................................... vi

LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................... viii

LIST OF ABBREVIATION ............................................................... ix

CHAPTER 1 ...................................................................................... 1

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 1

1.1 GENERAL ................................................................................... 1

1.2 SHEAR WALLS ........................................................................... 1

1.3 OVERVIEW OF STEEL PLATE SHEAR WALL ........................... 2

1.4 HISTORY OF STEEL PLATE SHEAR WALL .............................. 3

1.5 ADVANTAGES OF STEEL PLATE SHEAR WALL ...................... 4

1.6 ANALYTICAL METHODS ............................................................ 5

1.6.1 Modeling guide lines for Strip Model ................................ 7

1.7 METHOD OF SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF STRUCTURE ................ 7

1.8 USE OF STEEL PLATE SHEAR WALL OVER CONVENTIONAL

CONCRETE SHEAR WALL .............................................................. 8

iv
1.9 NEED OF STUDY ..................................................................... 8

1.10 OBJECTIVE OF STUDY ........................................................... 9

1.11 REFERENCE ............................................................................ 9

CHAPTER 2 .................................................................................... 11

LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................. 11

2.1 REVIEW OF RESEARCH PAPER ............................................ 11

2.2 REFERENCE ............................................................................ 22

CHAPTER 3 .................................................................................... 24

SOFTWARE VALIDATION ............................................................. 24

3.1 PROBLEM................................................................................. 24

3.2 PROPERTY AND PARAMETERS ............................................. 24

3.3 RESULTS.................................................................................. 27

3.3.1 Without Steel plate shear wall ....................................... 27

3.3.2 With Steel plate shear wall ............................................ 28

3.4 COMPARISON OF RESULTS................................................... 30

CHAPTER 4 .................................................................................... 34

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SPSW FRAME WITH BARE FRAME 34

4.1 PROBLEM................................................................................. 34

4.2 PROPERTIES AND PARAMETER ............................................ 34

4.3 RESULT .................................................................................... 38

v
 4.3.1 Base shear calculated for different frames are as follow.
............................................................................................... 38

4.3.2 Maximum displacement calculated at each level for

different frames. ..................................................................... 38

4.3.3 Axial force in column ..................................................... 40

4.3.4 Comparison of storey drift. ............................................ 41

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. 1 Strip model diagonal method ........................................... 7

Figure 1. 2 Seismic retrofitting of existing building using SPSW. ....... 8

Figure 3. 1 Plan of Steel Building ................................................... 24

Figure 3. 2 Plan of building with SPSW ........................................... 24
Figure 3. 3 Result of deflection obtained from ETABS software. ..... 27
Figure 3. 4 Deflection at storey level 8 for column 1 (C1), result from
ETABS. ........................................................................................... 27
Figure 3. 5 Deflection at storey level 1, results from ETABS. .......... 28
Figure 3. 6 SF BM and AF of column at level 8, result from ETABS. 28
Figure 3. 7 Deflection of column no.1 at sorey 8, results from ETABS.
........................................................................................................ 28
Figure 3. 8 Deflection of column 1 at storey 1, result from ETABS. . 29
Figure 3. 9 Result of storey deflection obtained with SPSW ............ 29
Figure 3. 10 axial Force, shear force and bending moment of column
1 at storey 8, result from ETABS. .................................................... 29
vi
Figure 3. 11 Deflection for column no.1of building with SPSW, result
from the paper. ................................................................................ 30
Figure 3. 12 Result of deflection obtained from software for normal
building and building with SPSW. .................................................... 30
Figure 3. 13 Result of shear force obtain from paper. ...................... 31
Figure 3. 14 Results of bending moment from paper. ...................... 32
Figure 3. 15 Result of bending moment obtained from the ETABS.. 32
Figure 3. 16 Result of Axial force obtained from paper. ................... 33
Figure 3. 17 Result of Axial force obtained from the ETABS software.
........................................................................................................ 33

Figure 4. 1 Plan of G+15 Bare frame ............................................... 36

Figure 4. 2 Plan of G+15 Conventional SPSW frame. .................... 37
Figure 4. 3 Joint displacement of Bareframe, result from ETABS. ... 38
Figure 4. 4 Joint displacement of Conventional SPSW frame, results
from ETABS. ................................................................................... 39
Figure 4. 5 Differencein displacement for Bare frame and Conventional
SPSW frame. .................................................................................. 39
Figure 4. 6 Axial force for column no.1in Bare frame, result from
ETABS ............................................................................................ 40
Figure 4. 7 Axial force of column no.1 of Conventional SPSW frame,
result obtained from ETABS. ........................................................... 40
Figure 4. 8 Difference in axial force at each storey in Bare frame and
Conventional SPSW frame. ............................................................. 41

vii
 LIST OF TABLES
Table 3. 1 Property and parameters table. 25
Table 3. 2 Beam detail 26
Table 3. 3 Column detail 26

Table 4. 1 Properties and parameter 34

Table 4. 2 Beam specification 35
Table 4. 3 Column specification. 35
Table 4. 4 Base shear of different type of frame 38

viii
 LIST OF ABBREVIATION

SPSW Steel plate shear wall

AF Axial force

SF Shear force

BM Bending moment

ix
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL
In this era of vertical civilization, multi-storey buildings are achieving recording
heights as a number. Increasing height of building there is need of new structural
systems and structural elements to bear governing horizontal loads acting on a
building. They act as a cantilever standing on a footing, with governing lateral
loads. Lateral loads are generally earthquake and wind loads, occurring naturally
they are most lethal. To reduce multi-storey building storey drifts and build them
economically designers started using element called Shear wall. They are most
effective as they are more stiff and stable. Today in the world of construction shear
walls are getting much popular and one of the important structure of buildings.
Shear wall majorly increase stiffness in building giving them better quality to
sustain lateral loads. Absorbing maximum of lateral load acting on structure with
their higher moment of inertia in the direction of force.

Stability also increases in buildings using shear walls which reduces structures
deflection in approved limits. Lateral displacement of the structure can also be
reduced as a part of buildings stability.

1.2 SHEAR WALLS

In structural engineering, a shear wall is a structural system composed of braced

panels to bear the effects of lateral load acting on a structure. Wind and seismic
loads are the most common loads that shear walls are designed for. Shear wall
came in to existence when high rise building started to construct. They are the
most feasible way of countering the lateral loads.
Shear walls are made from wide variety of materials in world of civil engineering.
Timber shear wall
RCC shear wall

1
 Steel plate shear wall

1.3 OVERVIEW OF STEEL PLATE SHEAR WALL

They have the same behavior as steel plate girders cantilever from its one end
(base). An SPW frame can be idealized as a vertical cantilever plate girder, in
which the steel plates act as the web, the columns act as the flanges and the cross
beams represent the transverse stiffeners. The theory that governs plate design
should not be used in design of SPW structures since the relatively high bending
strength and stiffness of the beams and columns have a significant effect in the
post-buckling behavior.
Sustainable design of structures is to control failure in a building by pre-selecting
localized ductile damage so it act as the primary location for energy dissipation
when a building is subjected to extreme loading. The structure is designed such
that all inelastic action occurs at these critical locations (damages), which are
designed to act in a ductile and a most preferable manner. All other structural
elements are protected against damage by limiting the load transfer to these
elements to the yield capacity of the fuses. In SPSWs, the infill plates are meant
to serve as the fuse elements. When cracked during an extreme loading event,
they can be replaced at a reasonable cost and restore the building. In general,
SPWs are categorized based on their performance are the most convenient
structural element.
A significant amount of valuable research has been performed on the static and
dynamic behavior of SPSWs. Much research has been conducted to not only help
determine the behavior, response and performance of SPWs under cyclic and
dynamic loading, but also as a means to help advance analysis and design
methodologies for the engineering community.
Much research work is carried out in design and proper use of SPSW under cyclic
and dynamic loadings. This system is getting much well known in its market.
Types of steel plate shear wall:
(1) Stiffened steel plate shear wall
(2) Unstiffened steel plate shear wall

2
1.4 HISTORY OF STEEL PLATE SHEAR WALL

Since 1970s, steel shear walls have been used as the primary lateral load resisting
system in several modern and important structures. Initially, and during 1970s,
stiffened steel shear were used in Japan in new construction and in the U.S. for
seismic retrofit of the existing buildings as well as in new buildings. In 1980s and
90s, unstiffened steel plate shear walls were used in buildings in the United States
and Canada. Recently, many high-rise apartment buildings have been constructed
in the Asian region's using the frame-slab system, which consists only of reinforced
concrete columns, beams and slabs. As the height of building increases the lateral
loads as well as the vertical loads tends to control the design. The rigidity and
stability requirements become more important than the strength requirement. The
first way to satisfy these requirements is to increase the size of the members which
may lead to either impractical or uneconomical members. The second is to change
the form of the structure into something more rigid and stable to confine the
displacements and increase stability. The shear wall-frame system is a frequently
used structural scheme in moderately tall buildings (e.g. 20-40 stories). A shear
wall structure is considered to be one whose resistance to horizontal loading is
provided entirely by shear walls. An introduction of shear wall represents a
structurally efficient solution to stiffen a building structural system because the
main function of a shear wall is to increase the rigidity for lateral load resistance.
Sometimes it is inevitable to have openings such as doors, windows and other
types of openings in shear wall. Shear walls are vertical elements of the horizontal
force resisting system. Shear walls are constructed to counter the effects of lateral
load acting on a structure. In residential construction, shear walls are straight
external walls that typically form a box which provides all of the lateral support for
the building. When shear walls are designed and constructed properly, and they
will have the strength and stiffness to resist the horizontal forces.
Generally shear walls are well known in resisting lateral load swiftly. Concrete
shear wall has been used widely in construction industry since many decades. But
because of being light and thinner SPSW are getting command in the past two

3
decades. The steel plate shear wall (SPSW), also known as the steel plate wall
(SPW), has been used in a number of buildings in Japan and North America as
part of the lateral force resisting system. In earlier days, SPSWs were treated like
vertically oriented plate girders and design procedures tended to be very
conservative. Web buckling was prevented through extensive stiffening or by
selecting an appropriately thick web plate, until more information became available
on the post-buckling characteristics of web plates. Although the plate girder theory
seems appropriate for the design of an SPW structure, a very important difference
is the relatively high bending strength and stiffness of the beams and columns that
form the boundary elements of the wall. These members are expected to have a
significant effect on the overall behaviour of a building incorporating this type of
system and several researchers have focused on this aspect of SPWs. The energy
dissipating qualities of the web plate under extreme cyclic loading has raised the
prospect of using SPSWs as a promising alternative to conventional systems in
high-risk seismic regions. A further benefit is that the diagonal tension field of the
web plate acts like a diagonal brace in a braced frame and thus completes the
truss action, which is known to be an efficient means to control wind drift.

1.5 ADVANTAGES OF STEEL PLATE SHEAR WALL

An SPW system, when designed and detailed properly, has relatively large energy
dissipation capability with stable hysteretic behavior, thus being very attractive for
high risk earthquake zones.
Because the web tension field acts much like a diagonal brace, an SPW system
has relatively high initial stiffness, and is thus very effective in limiting wind drift.
Compared to reinforced concrete shear walls, SPWs are much lighter, which
ultimately reduces the demand on columns and foundations, and reduces the
seismic load, which is proportional to the mass of the structure.
Compared to reinforced concrete construction, the erection process of an all-steel
building is significantly faster, thus reducing the construction duration, which is an
important factor affecting the overall cost of a project.

4
By using shop-welded, field-bolted SPWs, field inspection is improved and a high
level of quality control can be achieved.
For architects, the increased versatility and space savings because of the smaller
cross-section of SPWs, compared to reinforced concrete shear walls, is a distinct
benefit, especially in high-rise buildings, where reinforced concrete shear walls in
lower floors become very thick and occupy a large proportion of the floor plan.
All-steel construction with SPWs is a practical and efficient solution for cold regions
where concrete construction may not be feasible, as very low temperatures
complicate construction and freeze-thaw cycles can result in durability problems.
In seismic retrofit applications, SPWs are typically much easier and faster to install
than reinforced concrete shear walls, which is a critical issue when building
occupancy needs to be maintained throughout the construction time.
In the event of inelastic response, steel panels are more readily replaced, and
repairs are simple than for equivalent reinforced-concrete system.
Reduces seismic force demand due to higher SPW ductility characteristics and
inherent redundancy and continuity
Accelerates structural steel erection by using shop-welded and field-bolted steel
panels, and thus, less inspection and reduced quality control costs
Permits efficient design of lateral-resisting systems by distributing large forces
evenly systems.

1.6 ANALYTICAL METHODS

There are two different modelling techniques:

1) Strip Model
2) Modified Plate-Frame Interaction (M-PFI) model
The strip model represents shear panels as a series of inclined strip elements,
capable of transmitting tension forces only, and oriented in the same direction as
the average principal tensile stresses in the panel. By replacing a plate panel with
struts, the resulting steel structure can be analyzed using currently available
commercial computer analysis software. Research conducted at the University of

5
British Columbia by Rezai et al. (1999) showed that the strip model is significantly
incompatible and inaccurate for a wide range of SPW arrangements.
The strip model is limited mostly to SPSWs with thin plates (low critical buckling
capacity) and certain ratios.[10] In the development of this model, no solution has
been provided for a perforated SPSW, shear walls with thick steel plates and shear
walls with stiffeners. The strip model concept, although appropriate for practical
analysis of thin plates, is not directly applicable to other types of plates. Moreover,
its implementations have yet to be incorporated in commonly used commercial
computer analysis software.
In order to overcome this limitation, a general method was developed for the
analysis and design of SPWs within different configurations, including walls with or
without openings, with thin or thick plates, and with or without stiffeners.[11] This
method considers the behavior of the steel plate and frame separately, and
accounts for the interaction of these two elements, which leads to a more rational
engineering design of an SPSW system. However, this model has serious
shortcomings when the flexural behavior of an SPSW needs to be properly
accounted for, such as the case of a slender tall building.
Modified Plate-Frame Interaction (M-PFI) model is based upon an existing shear
model originally presented by Roberts and Sabouri-Ghomi (1992). Sabouri-Ghomi,
Ventura and Kharrazi (2005) further refined the model and named it the Plate-
Frame Interaction (PFI) model. In this paper, the PFI analytical model is then
further enhanced by modifying the load-displacement diagram to include the
effect of overturning moments on the SPW response, hence the given name of the
M-PFI model. The method also addresses bending and shear interactions of the
plastic ultimate capacity of steel panels, as well as bending and shear interactions
of the ultimate yield strength for each individual component is the steel plate and
surrounding frame.

6
 Figure 1. 1 Strip model diagonal method
1.6.1 Modeling guide lines for Strip Model

A minimum of ten strips are to be provided per wall panel.

Each strip is pinned at both of its ends to the surrounding beams or columns
as per its location in the wall panel.
Each strip has the width equal to the center to center spacing of the
consecutive strips.
Thickness of the strips is kept same as that of the plate.
The strips are normally inclined at 45 degree with the horizontal. The angle
of inclination shall be in the range of 38 to 45 degrees with the horizontal.
Slight variation in the angle does not affect the behavior of the model.
The connection of the beams of that panel with the columns shall be kept
pinned or hinged.

1.7 METHOD OF SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF STRUCTURE

The seismic analysis of a structure involves evaluation of the earthquake forces

acting at various level of the structure during an earthquake and the effect of such
forces on the behavior of the overall structure. According to IS 1893-(2002)

7
following methods have been recommended to determine the design lateral loads
they are:
a) Equivalent Static Method
b) Response Spectrum Method
c) Time History Method

1.8 USE OF STEEL PLATE SHEAR WALL OVER CONVENTIONAL

CONCRETE SHEAR WALL

1. Resist lateral load with lesser dimension and easy installation.

2. Reduce the wait of building comparatively, as the guage of SPSW is very small.
3. Can be used for seismic retrofitting of existing building. They are easy to install
and can be design easily for resisting lateral load.

Figure 1. 2 Seismic retrofitting of existing

building using SPSW.

1.9 NEED OF STUDY

Steel plate shear walls are much effective and lighter in weight.
To study and draft out the best effective pattern of steel plate shear wall in
a multi-storey building.

8
 Effective pattern will have lowest lateral displacement of storey inducing
lower lateral loads on structural elements.
Effective pattern will show lowest lateral drift.

1.10 OBJECTIVE OF STUDY

To study multi-storey steel building with steel plate shear wall.

Check effectiveness of different steel plate shear wall patterns using
ETABS software.
To study storey drift of each pattern of multi-storey buildings to conclude
their response under lateral loads.
To study lateral displacement of each pattern under lateral loads.
Sort out effective pattern so that economical multi-storey steel building
can be design.

1.11 REFERENCE

1 Kharrazi, M.H.K., 2005, Rational Method for Analysis and Design of Steel
Plate Walls, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver,
Canada,
2. Driver et al., 1983, and Tromposch and Kulak, 1987)
3. Canadian Standard Association, 2003, Handbook of Steel Construction,
CAN/CSA-S16.1-01, Seventh Edition, Canadian Institute of Steel Construction,
Willowdale, ON.
4. Kharrazi, M.H.K., 2005, Rational Method for Analysis and Design of Steel Plate
Walls, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada,
5. Basler, K., 1961, Strength of plate girders in shear, Journal of the Structural
Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, Proc. No. 2967, ST7, PP. 151-180,
October 1961, Part I.
6. Basler, K. and Thurlimann, B., 1963, Strength of Plate Girders in Bending,
Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, 89, n. ST4, August.

9
7. Driver R.G.et. al., 1997, Seismic behaviour of steel plate shear walls, Structural
Engineering Report 215, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, Feb.

10
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 REVIEW OF RESEARCH PAPER

Ugale and Raut (2014) have studied on Effect of Steel Plate Shear Wall on
Behavior of Structure. They have carried out a study on a building under lateral
load such as wind and earth-quake (zone=III) with and without steel plate shear
wall. Focusing on steel saving, reduce foundation cost, increase span and speed
of erection. They have carried out static analysis on two type of steel moment
resisting buildings using STADD PRO software. Main parameters to be studied
were axial force, shear force, bending moment and deflection between building
with and without steel plate shear wall. The LYP steel plate is used for steel panel
and conventional A36 structural steel is used for boundary frame. The Von Mises
yield theory, which is known to be the most suitable for mild steel, is used for the
material yield criterion. Design data are as under of structure=M.R.S.F, Zone =III,
No. of stories =G+6, Lateral load resisting system=Steel plate shear wall, Height
of each storey=3m, Depth of foundation=3m, Thickness of slab=150mm,External
wall thickness=230mm, Internal wall thickness=150mm, shear wall
thickness=6mm width of strips=350mm, Angle of inclination of strip with
vertical()=45 degree, Unit weight of masonry=20 KN/m2, Floor finish= 2 KN/m2,
Live load= 4 KN/m2, Type of Soil= Medium, Seismic analysis= Seismic coefficient
method (IS1893-2002), Design of philosophy= Limit state method confirming to
IS800-2007.They conclude that SPSW containing building are more stiffer and
deflects less with less bending moment and shear force providing larger space.
Thus they conclude that steel plate shear wall are much economical then normal
concrete shear wall. Steel consumption a-can be reduced as well as foundation
cot can be reduced using steel plate shear wall in building frame.

11
Prof. Topalakat P and Kinnagi P. M. (2014) have carried out Parametric Study of
Steel Frame Building with and without Steel Plate Shear Wall. They have studied
the varying size of steel plate shear wall on the frame of building. The main
parameter are consider as shear force, bending moment, deflection and axial
force. They have analysis building frame using STADD PRO vi8. Modelling of steel
plate shear wall is done by strip modelling method. It is purely based on the
diagonal tension field action developed immediately after the buckling of the plate.
This type of modeling is recommended by the code of Canada, the CAN/CSA-S16-
01 in the analysis and design procedure of the SPSWs. In the analysis software
the steel plate in the wall panel is to be replaced by a series of truss members
(struts) or the strips along the tension field. There are two ways of modeling by this
method. One it is strip model and other one is multi angle strip model. Equivalent
static method is used to analysis the building frame, which is the simplest method
of analyzing and require less computational timing. The design base shear shall
first be computed as a whole, and then be distributed along the height of the
building based on simple formulas appropriate for building with regular distribution
of mass and stiffness. The design force can be easily distributed to each individual
lateral load resisting element. According to IS 1893 in the design of steel structure,
following load combinations as given in the IS 1893 (Part1): 2002 and IS 800 2007
are: 1.5 DL+1.5 LL+ 1.5RLL, 1.2 DL+0.6 LL+1.2 EL, 1.2 DL+0.6 LL-1.2 EL, 1.5
DL+1.5 EL, 1.5 DL-1.5 EL, 0.9 DL+1.5 EL, 0.9 DL-1.5 EL. .From results it is
concluded that steel frame building with SPSW has lesser deflection, shear force,
bending moment and axial force values compared to steel frame building without
SPSW. It is found that as the thickness of the steel plate shear wall increases
deflection, shear force, bending moment and axial force decreases. From results
of study conclude that steel plate shear walls have a large effect on the behavior
of frames under earthquake excitation.

Londhe R.S. and Chavan A.P.(2010) have studied behavior of buildings with steel
plate shear wall. The paper describes the analysis of high-rise steel buildings

12
frames with Steel plate shear walls (SPSWs) by using SAP- 2000 FEA program.
The primary variable in the analysis were presence of steel plate shear walls,
thickness of plate (5 mm to 10 mm) and aspect ratio (0.833 to 1.667 width-to-height
ratio). From the results obtained it is observed that, with the use of steel shear
walls in the buildings, the bending moments in the beams are observed to reduce.
The increase of shear wall thickness has a little effect on the bending moments
and shear forces of the beams and there is small decrease in the lateral
deflections. The storey drift increases with increase of aspect ratio while bending
moment and shear force show a considerable increase. For present work
equivalent static analysis is carried out for steel moment resisting building frame
having (G+6) storey situated in zone IV. The analysis is carried out using SAP2000
FEA program. The steel moment resisting building frame is analyzed by with and
without steel plate shear walls. The analysis of steel plate shear walls is done by
the strip modeling in SAP2000 FEA program. The other way building is analyzed
by varying the thickness of the steel plate shear walls from 5 mm to 10mm. and
lastly the building is analyzed by varying the aspect ratio i.e. the width to height
ratio. The strip modelling is to analyze the shear wall. The building is analyze by
IS 1893:2002 through equivalent static analysis method. The seismic weight of
the building is calculated by as per IS 1893:2002 (Part I). SAP2000 FEA software
is used for analysis. With the use of steel shear walls in the buildings, the bending
moments in the beams are observed to reduce due to the nearly equal and
opposite pull exerted by the vertical components of diagonal tension of the SPSWs
present on both side (lower and upper) of the beams. For topmost and bottommost
(plinth beam) beams, the bending moment and shear forces are observed to be
higher comparatively because of the pull exerted by the shear walls preset on only
one side of the beams (i.e. upper side of bottom beam and lowerside of top beam).
The presence of steel shear walls significant increase in the column loads
particularly in some of the lower columns. Change of thickness of the SPSWs has
a very small effect on the lateral deflection, bending moment and shear forces of
the building. Axial forces in the columns tend to increase slightly with the increase
of wall thickness of the shear walls, but towards the top they are found nearly

13
constant. Bending moments and shear forces show a considerable increase in the
values with the increase of the aspect ratio (i.e. increase of width of shear wall,
keeping height constant) of SPSWs. All the columns show an increase in the axial
forces and moment values for an increase in the width of shear wall at a constant
height. The storey drift is observed to increase with the decreases of the aspect
ratio of the shear walls.
Hiwrale D.C. and Pajgade P.S. have worked on design and analysis of steel
farmed buildings with and without steel plate shear wall. The present paper
describes the analysis and design of high-rise steel building frame with and without
Steel plate shear wall (SPSW). For present work equivalent static analysis is
carried out for steel moment resisting building frame having (G+6) storey situated
in zone III. Modelling will be done by using strip modelling. The analysis of steel
plate shear wall and the building are carried out using Software STAAD PRO V8i
SELECT series II. The main parameters consider in this paper to compare the
seismic performance of buildings are bending moment, shear force, deflection and
axial force. The models are analyze by equivalent static analysis as per IS
1893:2002 and design will be carried out by using IS 800-2007.They have found
that frame building with steel plate shear wall acts well in lateral load condition.
Large reduction in deflection is observed using steel plate shear wall while drastic
reduction in shear force, axial force and bending moment s observe in lateral load
resisting element.
Pundkar R.S. Alandkar P.M. (2013) have studied on Influence of Steel Plate Shear
Wall on Multi-storey Steel Building. For present work four models with different
SPSW locations ware analyzed for same geometry and loading. Four models of
building frame having (G+19) storey situated in zone III are then compared with
moment resisting frame (MRF) and X-braced frame. Modelling is done by using
strip modelling. The analysis of steel plate shear wall building is carried out using
Software SAP2000 V15. The main parameter considers in this paper to compare
the seismic performance of buildings for deflection. The analyze Response
Spectrum analysis as per IS 1893:2002 and design has been carried out by using
IS 800-2007. Various load combinations are used in the design of building as per

14
IS 1893-2002, it is found that the load combination 1.7(DL + EQ-Y) is responsible
for maximum deflection for all models. In the present analysis it was observed that
rolled steel sections for columns are not very much suitable to the adjoining beams,
hence various built up tubular sections are used for columns. Different column
combinations are used as per requirement of models. They have conclude that
taking shear wall away from centroid causes increases in deflection, that steel
plate shear walls have a large effect on the behavior of frames under
earthquake excitation. As the building weigh is also reduced to a limit steel building
with shear wall are more effective. The weight of building is reduced by steel plate
shear wall as the bending moment, shear force and axial force are lesser.

Maind V. V. and Mod. Shahezad together worked on Review on Seismic Response

of Multi-storied Steel Building by using Steel Plate Shear Wall and Steel Braced
System. This paper consists of review on the analysis of multistoried steel building
with and without Steel Plate Shear Wall (SPSW) and with different types of bracing
system. The aim of the project is to analyze steel frame building by using steel
plate shear wall at different locations and with different bracing system for same
geometry and loading. The analysis is carried out using Software ETABS 2015
and the models will analyzed by Equivalent Static Analysis and Response
Spectrum analysis as per IS 1893:2002.They have worked for The steel plate can
be used for high rise building to dynamic evaluation of lateral force resisting
system. The steel plate shear wall system is depending on the steel what we used
and it depends on design specification of building. Also by using SPSW system
the stiffness of the building is increased so we can adopt this system for multi-
storied building. Due to presence of SPSW total weight of steel in building is
reduced than building without SPSWs. Due to relatively small thickness of SPSW
compared to reinforced concrete shear walls and X-braced moment resisting
frame, from architectural point of view, steel shear wall occupy much less space.
After the analysis of the structure with different types of structural systems, it has
been concluded that the displacement of the structure decreases after the

15
application of bracing system. The maximum reduction in the lateral displacement
occurs after the application of cross bracing system. Bracing system reduces
bending moments and shear forces in the column. The performance of cross
bracing system is better than the other specified bracing systems. Steel bracings
can be used to retrofit the existing structure. Total weight of the existing structure
will not change significantly after the application of the bracings.

Verma G. and Maru S. (2013) reviewed Some Studies on Behavior of Steel Plate
Shear Wall in Earthquake Prone Area: A Review. SPSW subjected to cyclic
inelastic deformations exhibit high initial stiffness, behave in a very ductile manner,
and dissipate significant amounts of energy. General in 1970 steel plate shear wall
was the most economical and used structure as it was best for multi storied
buildings. On reviewing various theory and research work authors have conclude
that thin unstiffened steel plate shear wall (SPSW) is rapidly gaining popularity as
a very effective lateral load resisting system in highly seismic areas. A valuable
research works have been performed on SPSW worldwide to evaluate the static
and dynamic behavior of SPSW for the past three decades. A detailed summary
of these research and development activities on various aspects of SPSW systems
have been presented which might be useful for researcher and engineers in order
to formulate efficient seismic design and analysis techniques. Design methods
need to be developed for non-seismic loading, such as, wind, blast, fire, etc. In
order to make the analysis and design methods for SPSW convenient for practical
purposes new modeling techniques are also necessary. It is expected that actual
use of this relatively new lateral load resisting system will greatly increase in the
coming decade through an effective cooperation among researchers, code writers,
practicing engineers and developers.

Ronny P. and Bruneau M. (2014) have studied Seismic performance of steel wall
shear walls considering various design approaches. Analytical study was
conducted to investigate impact of formation of in-span plastic hinges on horizontal

16
boundary elements (HBEs) on the seismic behavior of SPSWs. The development
of in-span plastic hinges has significant consequences on the behavior of SPSW.
First check was deformations on the HBEs than can reach total HBE rotations
greatly exceeding 0.03 radians when the structure was pushed cyclically up to a
maximum lateral drift of 3%. Second check, collapse assessment of steel plate
shear walls with various structural configurations (e.g., panel aspect ratio, seismic
weight intensity, and number of story) was conducted to investigate impact of
sharing of story shear forces between the boundary frames and infill plates on the
performance of SPSWs. FEMA P695 methodology was used for this purpose. Non
liner pushover analysis was done over various storey drift. Using the nonlinear
static analysis and nonlinear time history analyses, significant consequences to
having in-span plastic hinges were identified. HBE spans can induce significant
accumulation of plastic incremental deformations on the HBE leading to partial
yielding of infill steel plate. All conventional SPSW archetypes met the FEMA P695
performance criterion for the R factor of 7 used in their design. By contrast, the
balanced archetypes designed with an R factor of 7 did not meet the FEMA P695
performance criteria. Adjusted seismic performance factors for the balanced
archetypes were obtained by design iterations with a lower value of R factor. Most
importantly, the balanced archetypes were found to have a higher probability to
suffer significantly larger interstorey drift than the conventional archetypes.
Savings in steel when designed balanced SPSWs with a lower R factor came at
the cost of the SPSWs developing larger interstorey drifts compared to the
conventional SPSWs under MCE ground motions.

Mehdi H. K. et. al. (2014) worked on bending and shear analysis and design of
ductile steel plate walls. General analysis and design methodology that not only
accounts for the interaction of the plates and the framing system but also can be
used to define the yield and ultimate resistance capacity of the DSPW in bending
and shear combination. This proposed model provides a good understanding of
how the different components of the system interact, and is able to properly
represent the system's overall hysteretic characteristics. Simplicity of the method

17
permits it to be readily incorporated in practical non-linear dynamic analyses of
buildings with DSPW. In this paper an analytical model, the Modified Plate-Frame
Interaction (M-PFI) method, has been introduced, and it has been demonstrated
that the method predicts accurately the structural behavior of multi-storey steel
plate walls. A significant advantage of this method is that many design parameters,
such as the shear load-displacement values, strength, stiffness and limiting elastic
displacement for the steel plate, and plate-frame interaction can be evaluated
individually, and their effect on the overall wall capacity can easily be determined.
It is also important to mention that the M-PFI model considers the behavior of
DSPW not only for shear forces but also for overturning moments. This provides
the designer with great flexibility for the design of ductile steel plate walls. An added
benefit is that the method is suitable for incorporation in practical seismic design
provisions.

Qiuhong Z. and Abolhassan A. (2013), studied cyclic behavior of an innovative

steel plate shear wall system. In this system, steel walls are welded to the
boundary steel moment frame. The steel moment frame consists of very large
concrete filled steel tubes (CFT) at the edges, internal wide flange (WF) columns,
and horizontal WF beams. Most of the gravity is resisted by the CFT columns, and
lateral loads are resisted by the dual system consisting of the moment frame and
the steel shear wall. Cyclic static tests were conducted on two half-scale
specimens representing this system with different span-to-height ratio for the steel
wall panels. Throughout the test, the gravity load carrying CFTs remained
essentially elastic while non-gravity carrying lateral load resisting elements
underwent well-distributed and desirable yielding. Two different specimen were
checked using cyclic test. The behavior of shear wall system was very similar to
behavior of steel plate girders subjected to shear. After yielding at overall drift of
0.006, the steel shear walls buckled along the compression diagonal and
developed tension field along the tension diagonal. CFT column, has remained
almost totally elastic. Steel plate, WF beams and WF columns yielded extensively

18
and dissipated energy. Coupling beams underwent large cyclic inelastic rotations
near columns face. Both specimens failed after fracture of top coupling beam due
to low cycle fatigue. Fact that it is mostly shop-welded and field-bolted it is the most
economic

Jerman B. W. et. al. (2004) have worked on the study research needs and future
directions for steel plate shear walls. Despite these advantages, SPSWs are not
widely used because: i) traditional SPSW configurations result in large column
dimensions and prohibit the use of narrow walls, thereby reducing the systems
economy, ii) numerical models used to analyze SPSW systems are cumbersome
and overly time consuming for engineers, iii) SPSW system behavior is not well
understood, leading to conservative design requirements and further reduction in
economy, and iv) SPSWs have a lower flexural stiffness relative to concrete walls,
making their use in taller buildings more challenging. For analytical modelling a
new modeling technique is necessary to enable more efficient design of SPSWs.
Possibilities include the development of: super elements that merge an entire
panel of strips into one element with a certain number of nodes along each edge,
elements based on a tension membrane formulation, and the separation of the
analyses into macro and micro models (i.e., entire walls versus individual panels)
where strut or shell elements are used for macro behavior while the strip model is
used to determine. Important factors that must be researched include the required
strengths and stiffnesses of coupling beams, the distribution of coupling beam
strength and stiffness over the height of the SPSW, the magnitude of coupling
beam rotation demands, and the impact of coupling beam behavior on the
overturning stiffness of SPSW. It shows that proper configuration of steel plate
shear wall can be done using best pattern and placing of steel plate shear wall.

Sfandiar R.S. and Barkhordari M.A. (2008) studied investigation of thin steel plate
shear walls this approach uses slender unstiffened steel wall plates, which exhibit
nonlinear behavior at relatively small story drifts as they buckle out of plane. In this
paper, a nonlinear finite element model of a one single- and a four-story thin

19
(unstiffened) steel plate shear walls were developed, then by using saved energy
in plate and frame of the thin steel plate shear walls, portion of frame and plate
from total stiffness of the steel plate shear walls were separated and with varing
the columns flexural stiffness, variations of stiffness of the thin steel plate shear
wall, frame and plate; effect of interaction between frame and plate on frame and
plate stiffness; and also variations reactions in the plate length edge connection to
foundation are considered. A single and four-srory steel plate shear wall was
modeled using the finite-element methods and The models was loaded individually
with horizontal force 1500 KN at each floor level. Then models was elastically
analyzed, and by using saved energy in frame and plate of the thin steel plate
shear walls, portion stiffness of frame and plate from total stiffness of the thin steel
plate shear walls were separated. Inertia moment of the columns, stiffness of plate
is varied that by increasing inertia moment of the columns, tensity of this variations
is decreases. Variations of stiffness of plate by varying inertia moment of columns
at upper story is increased. Increasing inertia moment of the columns, Distribution
curve of variations of reactions is more uniformed. at upper story, effect of
interaction between plate and frame on increase stiffness of frame of thin steel
plate shear in comparison with only frame wall is increased and inertia moment of
the columns, this effect for each story is decreased.

Das Anirudha et. al. (2008) with ever increasing demands of efficient and reliable
design procedures, a shift towards performance-based seismic design (PBSD) is
necessary for these systems as well. In this paper, a new PBSD procedure for
SPSW systems based on target inelastic drift and pre-selected yield mechanism
is used. This design procedure is simple, yet it aims at an advanced design
criterion. A 4-story test building is designed based on the proposed procedure for
different target drifts under various earthquake scenarios. A 4-story steel frame
building with pinned beam to column connections is designed with one bay of steel
plate shear walls. Initially we consider the SPSW bay to have a span equal to the
story height. This span is later varied in order to consider design scenarios with
various aspect ratios of the steel plate panel. The SPSW is designed against

20
specific earthquake records for selected target ductility ( t) values. This ductility
is defined in terms of the roof displacement. The results show very clearly that this
method (along with a suitable adjustment of the beam dimension) is able to
achieve the target displacement ductility quite satisfactorily as well as the
procedure is simple and easy. For large drifts, the P- effects may not be
negligible. The method, at its present state, is applicable to SPSW systems with
pin-connected boundary beams.

Michel Bernau P.E. et. al. paper provides an overview of the current state-of-the-
art in steel plate shear wall design, including the 2005 AISC Seismic Design
Requirements for Special Plate Shear Walls (SPSW). This paper also discusses
some of the research in support of those design requirements. The strip model,
developed by others for the representation of SPSW, is described and plastic
analysis results for that model and their use in design are discussed. Finally, new
directions for SPSW research (to expand the range of applicability of this structural
system) are presented, including the use of light gauge and low yield-point steels,
strategic hole placement, and reduced beam sections are described in the context
of some recently completed and ongoing research. An overview of the design
requirement of steel plate shear walls in new and retrofit building construction has
been provided, along with an overview of research supporting those design
requirements. The strip model, developed by others for the representation of
SPSW has been described and plastic analysis results for that model and their use
in design has been discussed. Additional design considerations likely to appear in
US design codes have also been presented. Finally, new directions for SPSW
research including the use of light-gauge and low yield-point steels, strategic
placement of perforations in the infill panel, and reduced beam sections have been
described in the context of some ongoing research.

Shishkin J. et. al. (2009), studied Analysis of steel plate shear walls using the
modified strip model. The strip model which is widely approved model to analyzed

21
steel plate shear wall. As this model is based on elastic structure response the
review was needed for accurate representation of yielding and deterioration of wall.
Using modified strip model angle can be changed for strips for profitable work. It
was found that capacity of steel plate shear wall with wide variety of configuration
vary little with varrying angle of strips. The modified strip model incorporate bilinear
flexure hinges positioned at the edges of the frame panel zones. For thin plate strut
can be removed from infill plate to obtain initial stiffness and to obtain ultimate.

2.2 REFERENCE

1. Ugale R B. and Raut H.R., (2014), Effect of steel plate shear wall on
behavior of structure, International Journal of Civil Engineering Research.
ISSN 2278-3652 Volume 5, Number 3 (2014), pp. 295-300.
2. Prof. Topalakat P. and Kinnagi P.M., (2014), Parametric Study of Steel
Frame Building with and without Steel Plate Shear Wall, Civil and
Environmental Research ISSN 2224-5790 (Paper)

3. Londhe R.S. and Chavan A.P., (2010), behavior of buildings with steel plate
shear wall, Asian journal of civil engineering (BUILDING AND HOUSING)
VOL. 11, NO. 1

4. Hiwrale D C. and Pajgade P.S.(2012), Design and analysis of steel farmed

buildings with and without steel plate shear wall, International Journal of
Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 3, Issue 6, June-2012
1 ISSN 2229-5518,
5. Pundkar R.S. Alandkar P.M., (2013), Influence of Steel Plate Shear Wall
on Multi-storey Steel Building, International Journal of Engineering
Research and Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622 Vol. 3, Issue 4, Jul-
Aug 2013, pp.1940-1945.
6. Maind V. V. and Mod. Shahezad , Review on Seismic Response of Multi-
storied Steel Building by using Steel Plate Shear Wall and Steel Braced
22
 System, International journal of research in engineering, science and
technologies.
7. Verma G. and Maru S., (2013), Behavior Of Steel Plate Shear Wall in
Earthquake Prone Area: A Review, International Journal of Engineering
Trends and Technology (IJETT) - Volume4Issue5- May 2013.
8. Ronny P. and Michel, (2014), Seismic performance of steel wall shear walls
considering various design approaches, Tenth U.S. National Conference
on Earthquake Engineering Frontiers of Earthquake Engineering July 21-
25, 2014 Anchorage, Alaska.
9. Mehdi H.K. et. al., (2014), worked on bending and shear analysis and
design of ductile steel plate walls, 13th World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering Vancouver, B.C., Canada August 1-6, 2004 Paper No. 77.
10. Qiuhong Z. and Abolhassan A., Cyclic behavior of an innovative steel shear
wall system, 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering
Vancouver, B.C., Canada August 1-6, 2004 Paper No. 2576.
11. Jerman Beffery W. et. al. (2004),research needs and future directions for
steel palte shear walls, asce library.
12. Sfandiar R.S. and Barkhordari M.A., (2008), studied investigation thin steel
plate shear walls, The 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering
October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China
13. Das Anirudha et. al. (2008), Design of steel plate shear wall considering
inelastic drift demand, The 14th World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China
14. Michel Bernau P.E. et. al., (2003), Steel plate shear wall buildings: design
requirement and research, ASCE libraray.
15. Shishkin jonnah j. et. al., (2009) studied Analysis of steel plate shear walls
using the modified strip model, ASCE library.

23
 CHAPTER 3

SOFTWARE VALIDATION
3.1 PROBLEM
For the analysis, the problem is taken from the paper Parametric Study of Steel
Frame Building with and without Steel Plate Shear Wall, presented by Topalakatti
P. and Kinagi P.M.,(2014), Civil and Environmental Research, ISSN 2224-5790
(Paper).
For the analysis they have used STAAD. PRO V8i.

3.2 PROPERTY AND PARAMETERS

The geometry of both building are shown in figure. In the design of steel structure,
following load combinations as given in the IS 1893 (Part1): 2002 and IS 8002007
are taken: 1.5 DL+1.5 LL+1.5RLL, 1.2 DL+0.6 LL1.2 EL , 1.5 DL1.5 EL, 0.9
DL1.5 EL.

Figure 3. 1 Plan of Steel Building Figure 3. 2 Plan of building with SPSW

24
Table shows property and parameters used by authors.
Table 3. 1 Property and parameters table.

1 Type of structure M.R.S.F

2 Zone III

3 No. of stories G+6

4 Lateral load resisting system Steel Plate Shear Wall

5 Height of each storey 3m

6 Depth of foundation 3m

7 Thickness of slab 50mm

8 External wall thickness 230mm

9 Internal wall thickness 150mm

10 Shear wall thickness 6mm

11 Width of strips 350mm

12 Angle of inclination of strips with vertical() 45

13 Unit weight of masonry 20 kN/m3

14 Floor finish 2 kN/m2

15 Live load 4 kN/m2

4 kN/m2 at intermediate

16 Type of soil Medium

17 Seismic analysis Seismic co-efficient method

(IS 1893-2002)

25
Member Specification:
Table 3. 2 Beam detail

Beam For steel building For SPSW building

B1 ISHB 225 ISWB 300

B2 ISHB 350 ISHB 200

B3 ISHB 225 ISWB 150

Table 3. 3 Column detail

Column For steel building For SPSWs building

C1, C4, C13, C16 TUBE 330 X 330 X 8 TUBE 330 X 330 X 8

C2, C3, C5, C6, C7, C8, TUBE 330 X 330 X 10 TUBE 330 X 330 X 10
C9, C10, C11, C12, C14,
C15

Problem validation is carried out using ETABS software. SPSW is modeled an

analyzed using strip model.

26
3.3 RESULTS
3.3.1 Without Steel plate shear wall

Figure 3. 3 Result of deflection obtained from ETABS software.

Figure 3. 4 Deflection at storey level 8 for column 1 (C1), result from ETABS.

27
 Figure 3. 5 Deflection at storey level 1, results from ETABS.
.

Figure 3. 6 SF BM and AF of column at level 8, result from ETABS.

3.3.2 With Steel plate shear wall

Figure 3. 7 Deflection of column no.1 at storey 8, results from ETABS.

28
 Figure 3. 8 Deflection of column 1 at storey 1, result from ETABS.

Figure 3. 9 Result of storey deflection obtained with SPSW

Figure 3. 10 axial Force, shear force and bending moment of column 1 at storey
8, result from ETABS.

29
3.4 COMPARISON OF RESULTS

Comparing deflection obtained with the deflection of paper using bar chart.

Figure 3. 11 Deflection for column no.1of building with SPSW, result from the
paper.

Figure 3. 12 Result of deflection obtained from software for normal building and
building with SPSW.

30
Result obtained are shown using bar chart graph. Comparing both graph we can
conclude result given in paper are near about same. Percentage error lies in the
allowed criteria.

Figure 3. 13 Result of shear force obtain from paper.

Figure 3. 1 Result of shear force obtain from the ETABS software.

31
 Figure 3. 14 Results of bending moment from paper.

Figure 3. 15 Result of bending moment obtained from the ETABS software.

32
 Figure 3. 16 Result of Axial force obtained from paper.

AXIAL FORCE FOR COUMN NO.1

900
800
700
Axial force (kN)

600
500
400
300
200
100
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Storey level Series1 Series2

Figure 3. 17 Result of Axial force obtained from the ETABS software.

33
 CHAPTER 4

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SPSW FRAME WITH BARE

FRAME
4.1 PROBLEM

G+15 steel building is modelled using trial base error method, different sizes of
column and beam sizes are given in table 4.2 and table 4.3 given below. For
seismic analysis, Static coefficient method and zone V are taken.

4.2 PROPERTIES AND PARAMETER

The geometry of both building are shown in figure. In the design of steel structure,
following load combinations as given in the IS 1893 (Part1): 2002 and IS 8002007
are taken: 1.5 DL+1.5 LL+1.5RLL, 1.2 DL+0.6 LL1.2 EL, 1.5 DL1.5 EL, 0.9
DL1.5 EL.

Table 4. 1 Properties and parameter

1 Type of structure M.R.S.F

2 Zone V

3 No. of stories G+15

4 Lateral load resisting system Steel Plate Shear Wall

5 Height of each storey 3m

6 Depth of foundation 3m

7 Thickness of slab 150mm

8 External wall thickness 230mm

9 Internal wall thickness 150mm

10 Shear wall thickness 6mm

34
11 Width of strips 350mm

12 Angle of inclination of strips with vertical() 45

13 Unit weight of masonry 20 kN/m3

14 Floor finish 2 kN/m2

16 Type of soil Medium

17 Seismic analysis Seismic co-efficient method

(IS 1893-2002)

Table 4. 2 Beam specification

Beam For steel building For SPSW building

STOREY 1 to 9 ISMB 300 ISMB 300

STOREY 10 to 15 ISMB 200 ISMB 200

Table 4. 3 Column specification.

Column For steel building For SPSWs building

STOREY 1 to 5 TUBE 750x750x24 TUBE 750x750x24

STOREY 6 to 9 TUBE 450x450x20 TUBE 450x450x20

STOREY 10 to 15 TUBE 300x300x24 TUBE 300x300x24

35
Figure 4. 1 Plan of G+15 BARE FRAME

36
Figure 4. 2 Plan of G+15 SPSW FRAME.

37
4.3 RESULT

To compare results column no.1 is selected.

4.3.1 Base shear calculated for different frames are as follow.

Table 4. 4 Base shear of different type of frame

Type of frame Base Shear obtained (kN)

Bare frame 866.38

Conventional SPSW frame 380.1976

Base shear can be reduced using SPSW FRAME (380.19 kN) comparatively low
to Bare-frame (866.38 kN).
Comparing bare frame and conventional shear wall, reduction in base shear is
observed.
Percentage reduction in base shear is 56.12%.

4.3.2 Maximum displacement calculated at each level for different frames.

Figure 4. 3 Joint displacement of BARE FRAME, result from ETABS.

38
 Figure 4. 4 Joint displacement of SPSW FRAME, results from ETABS.

DISPLACEMENT IN COLUMN NO.1

displaecment (mm)

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
ground

storey 15
storey 2
storey 1

storey 3
storey 4
storey 5
storey 6
storey 7
storey 8
storey 9
storey 10
storey 11
storey 12
storey 13
storey 14
base

level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

BARE FRAME SPSW FRAME

Figure 4. 5 Comparison of displacement for BARE FRAME and SPSW FRAME.

Maximum displacement at top in bare frame is 76.478 mm, while for Conventional
SPSW is 25.518 mm.
Storey displacement reduction between bare frame and conventional SPSW frame
is 67.31% which is quite impressing.
SPSW reduces displacement of frame giving higher stiffness.
Thus SPSW system can be used to reduce displacement in frame to allowable
displacement for building according to Indian standard allowable value is .004H.

39
4.3.3 Axial force in column

Axial force at bottom in two frame obtained in ETAB software are as follow.

Figure 4. 6 Axial force of column no.1 from ETABS (BARE FRAME)

Figure 4. 7 Axial force of column no.1 from ETABS. (SPSW FRAME)

40
 AXIAL FORCE IN COLUMN NO.1
4000
axial force (kN) 3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
ground

storey15

storey14

storey13

storey12

storey11

storey10

storey9

storey8

storey7

storey6

storey5

storey4

storey3

storey2

storey1
base

level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level
17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
BARE FRAME SPSW FRAME

Figure 4. 8 Difference in axial force at each storey in Bare frame and

Conventional SPSW frame.
Maximum axial force at base in BARE FRAME is 3540.72 kN while for SPSW
FRAME it is 3204.84 kN.
From figure we can see that there is a change in axial force at bottom of two
frames.
Axial force of conventional frame is 335.88 kN less than bare frame at base,
difference reduces as strorey increases.

4.3.4 Comparison of storey drift.

STOREY DRIFT FOR COLUMN NO.1

0.003
storey drift (mm)

0.0025
0.002
0.0015
0.001
0.0005
0
ground

storey 1

storey 2

storey 3

storey 4

storey 5

storey 6

storey 7

storey 8

storey 9

storey 10

storey 11

storey 12

storey 13

storey 14

storey 15
base

level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

SPSW FRAME BARE FRAME

Figure 4. 9 Storey drift in SPSW FRAME and BARE FRAME.

41
Storey drift at top storey of BARE FRAME is 0.00091 and 0.00053 for SPSW
FRAME.
Top storey reduction in storey drift percentage is round about 35%.
We can observe vary optimum storey drift reduction in SPSW FRAME comparing
it to BARE FRAME.

42
 WORK TO BE DONE IN NEXT PHASE
Different SPSW patterns such as x-type, zigzag, etc. will be modelled in
ETABS using strip model.
Patterns will be analysed using seismic co-efficient method.
Bare frame will be compared with Conventional SPSW frame and various
patterns using response spectrum.

43