See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269873551

Shear strength of squat rectangular reinforced

concrete walls

Article in Aci Structural Journal July 2008

CITATIONS READS

23 518

3 authors, including:

Andrew Whittaker Bozidar Stojadinovic

University at Buffalo, The State University of N ETH Zurich
447 PUBLICATIONS 5,079 CITATIONS 178 PUBLICATIONS 1,626 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Development of methods, tools and guidance for seismic nonlinear soil-structure interaction analysis
View project

Structural Control View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Andrew Whittaker on 30 December 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ACI STRUCTURAL JOURNAL
Title no. 105-S47
Shear Strength of Squat Rectangular Reinforced
Concrete Walls
by Cevdet K. Gulec, Andrew S. Whittaker, and Bozidar Stojadinovic
Squat reinforced concrete walls (height less than twice the length)
are important structural components of both conventional and
nuclear safety-related structures. Predictive equations are available in
the literature to compute the shear strength of squat walls but the
scatter in the results for a given set of design variables is large.
The utility of five predictive equations is evaluated using data from
tests of 120 rectangular walls. The equation proposed by Wood in
1990 resulted in a median ratio of the predicted to measured
strengths close to 1.0 with a small coefficient of variation. Test
data are also used to quantify the loss of strength with repeated
cycling. The inter-cycle drop in strength and stiffness is significant,
with the largest reductions observed for walls with aspect ratios
less than 0.5.
Keywords: reinforced concrete; shear strength; squat walls; strength
degradation.
INTRODUCTION
Squat reinforced concrete walls, defined herein as walls
with a height-length ratio less than or equal to 2, are widely
used in conventional buildings and safety-related nuclear
structures. The typical behavior of such walls under quasi-
static cyclic loading in a standard test is shown in Fig. 1,
where only the first quadrant of the force-displacement
response of a rectangular reinforced concrete squat wall with
an aspect ratio of 0.5 is plotted (Synge 1980). This wall
attains its peak strength during the first cycle of loading to a
displacement of 10 mm (0.394 in.); its strength and stiffness
degrade rapidly with repeated cycling. Accurate evaluation
of both the peak and degraded strengths of squat walls is
important because conventional buildings are likely to
experience multiple deformation cycles at or beyond yield in
maximum earthquake shaking, and nuclear safety-related
structures will likely be subjected to multiple cycles of
loading to peak strength in safe shutdown earthquake shaking.
Building codes, manuals of practice, guidelines, and the
literature provide a number of predictive equations for the
peak shear strength of reinforced concrete walls. These
procedures use parameters such as aspect ratio, horizontal
reinforcement ratio, vertical reinforcement ratio, and axial
force to estimate the peak shear strength. Prior studies have
indicated that the scatter in the shear strength predicted by
these equations is substantial, which is problematic because
shear strength is the key variable for force-based design and
performance assessment. The topic of strength degradation
in structural walls is not widely reported in the literature.
Herein, the results of tests of 120 squat walls with rectangular
cross sections are compiled and reduced to evaluate peak
shear strength and to characterize strength degradation. The
experimentally measured peak shear strengths of the 120 walls
are compared with nominal shear strengths predicted by five
equations: 1) Chapter 21 of ACI 318-05 (ACI Committee
488
TECHNICAL PAPER
318 2005); 2) Chapter 11 of ACI 318-05 (ACI Committee
318 2005); 3) Barda et al. (1977); 4) ASCE/SEI 43-05
(ASCE 2005); and 5) Wood (1990). Nominal rather than
design strengths are used for the comparison because the
strength reduction factor is not intended to account for bias in
the strength equation. Reported material strengths and
member dimensions are used to predict nominal strengths.
The mean, median, and dispersion in the ratios of the
predicted to measured peak shear strengths provide insight
into the utility of each strength equation and the simplified
models on which the equations are based. The loss of shear
strength with repeated cycling to displacements equal to or
greater than that of the displacement associated with the peak
resistance is presented. Based on the observed comparisons,
one equation is identified as the most reliable of the five. Factors
to estimate the mean second- and third-cycle strengths as a
percentage of the measured peak shear strength are provided
as a function of the aspect ratio.
RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE
This study presents experimental data related to the shear
strength of squat reinforced concrete walls with rectangular
cross sections. The accuracy and reliability of five predictive
equations used widely in U.S. practice are investigated. Loss
of wall shear strength with repeated cycling to the same or
larger displacement is quantified. The data generated in this
study can be used to develop robust nonlinear macromodels
of squat rectangular walls for analysis and to validate
predictive strength equations developed in the future.
Fig. 1Load-displacement relationship of Wall 1 tested by
Synge (1980). (Note: 1 kN = 0.2248 kip; 1 mm = 0.0394 in.)
ACI Structural Journal, V. 105, No. 4, July-August 2008.
MS No. S-2007-074.R1 received February 19, 2007, and reviewed under Institute
publication policies. Copyright 2008, American Concrete Institute. All rights reserved,
including the making of copies unless permission is obtained from the copyright proprietors.
Pertinent discussion including authors closure, if any, will be published in the May-
June 2009 ACI Structural Journal if the discussion is received by January 1, 2009.
ACI Structural Journal/July-August 2008
 concrete compressive strengths varied from 1991 to 7395 psi
ACI member Cevdet K. Gulec is a Graduate Student Researcher at the State University of
New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY. He received his BS from Istanbul Technical University, (13.7 to 51 MPa); the horizontal web reinforcement ratios ranged
Istanbul, Turkey, in 2002 and his MS from the State University of New York at Buffalo in between 0.00 and 0.0161; and the vertical web reinforcement
2005. His research interests include the seismic design of reinforced concrete structures.
ratios ranged between 0.00 and 0.0287. Boundary
ACI member Andrew S. Whittaker is a Professor of structural engineering at the element reinforcement was provided in 99 of the 120 walls
State University of New York at Buffalo. He received his BS from the University of in addition to the conventional vertical web reinforcement
Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia, in 1977 and his MS and PhD from the University of
California-Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, in 1985 and 1988, respectively. He is a member of with boundary element reinforcement ratios up to 0.128.
ACI Committee 349, Reinforced Concrete Nuclear Structures. His research interests Fourteen of the 120 walls in the dataset did not have horizontal
include earthquake and blast engineering, performance-based design, and seismic web reinforcement, 12 did not have vertical web reinforcement,
protective systems.
and seven had neither horizontal nor vertical web reinforcement
Bozidar Stojadinovic, FACI, is an Associate Professor of structural engineering at and included only boundary element reinforcement at wall
the University of California-Berkeley. He received his Dipl.Ing. in civil engineering
from the University of Belgrade, Serbia, in 1988; his MS from Carnegie Mellon
ends. The reported yield stress of the wall vertical web
University, Pittsburgh, PA, in 1990; and his PhD in civil engineering from University reinforcement ranged between 43.5 and 88.5 ksi (300 and
of California-Berkeley in 1995. He is a member of ACI Committees 335, Composite 610 MPa), and that of the horizontal web reinforcement
and Hybrid Structures; 341, Earthquake-Resistant Concrete Bridges; 349, Concrete
Nuclear Structures; 374, Performance-Based Seismic Design of Concrete Structures; ranged between 47.3 and 108.1 ksi (326 and 745 MPa). The
E803, Faculty Network Coordinating Committee; and Joint ACI-ASCE Committee reported yield stress for the boundary element reinforcement
445, Shear and Torsion. His research interests include probabilistic performance-
based seismic design of nuclear structures and bridges.
ranged between 43.5 and 84.8 ksi (300 and 585 MPa). Figure 3
summarizes the 120 walls studied herein with respect to
aspect ratio (presented in terms of height-to-length and
EXPERIMENTAL DATA moment-to-shear) and horizontal web reinforcement ratio:
A significant number of tests of squat reinforced concrete these are two principal parameters used to predict the
walls were conducted from 1950 to date in countries strength of squat walls. The wide range of values of the
including the U.S., Canada, Chile, England, France,
Germany, Japan, New Zealand, Switzerland, Portugal,
Mexico, and Taiwan. Most of these studies have focused on
the peak shear strength of squat walls and included tests on
three types of cross sections, namely rectangular, barbell
(rectangular section with columns at wall ends), and flanged
(I-shaped cross section). Gulec (2005) reviewed and
catalogued the results of tests of 352 reinforced concrete
squat walls (192 walls with barbells, 49 walls with flanges,
111 rectangular walls). The authors expanded the database in
2006 to include additional 37 rectangular wall tests. The data
from the 148 rectangular wall tests were assembled from
Alexander et al. (1973), Hirosawa (1975), Cardenas et al.
(1980), Hernandez (1980), Synge (1980), Endebrock et al.
(1985), Maier and Thrlimann (1985), Wiradinata (1985),
Pilette (1987), Wasiewicz (1988), Huang and Sheu (1988,
1994), Lefas et al. (1990), Lefas and Kotsovos (1990), Rothe
(1992), Maier (1992), Cheng (1992), Cheng et al. (1994),
Cheng and Yang (1996), Mohammadi-Doostdar (1994),
Pilakoutas and Elnashai (1995a,b), Hidalgo et al. (1998,
2002), Salonikios et al. (1999), Xie and Xiao (2000), Lopes
(2001a,b), and Greifenhagen and Lestuzzi (2005).
This study addresses the responses of rectangular walls
only. Test specimens were selected based on the following
criteria: 1) a minimum web thickness of 2 in. (51 mm); 2)
symmetric reinforcement layout; 3) no diagonal reinforcement
or additional wall-to-foundation reinforcement to control
sliding shear; and 4) aspect ratios (hw /lw) less than or equal
to 2.0, corresponding to a maximum moment-shear ratio*
(M/Vlw) of 2.13. The data for the 28 walls of the 148 that did
not meet all of the aforementioned criteria were excluded
from the analysis that is presented herein.
Figure 2 presents summary information on the 120 rectangular
walls considered in this study. The web thicknesses ranged
from 2.36 to 6.30 in. (60 to 160 mm); the wall lengths varied
between 23.6 and 118.1 in. (600 and 3000 mm); and the wall Fig. 2Histograms of geometric, material, and loading
heights varied between 19.7 and 78.7 in. (500 and 2000 mm). properties of 120 walls. (Note: 1 in. = 25.4 mm; 1 ksi =
Thirty-four walls were tested with coexisting axial loads that 6.895 MPa.)
ranged between 0.022Aw fc and 0.182Aw fc; the reported

Some authors used cube strength rather than cylinder strength to report compressive

*Moment-shear
strength of concrete: cube strengths were converted to cylinder strengths per Mindess
ratios are normalized by actual wall length herein. et al. (2003).

ACI Structural Journal/July-August 2008 489

horizontal web reinforcement ratio in the aspect ratio V n2 = V c + V s 10 f c t w d 1 (2)
interval of 0.5 and 2.0 is notable.
The selected walls were tested using one of these three
types of loading: monotonic (static), cyclic (quasi-static), Nu d1
V c = 3.3 f c t w d 1 + -----------
- (3)
and dynamic. Monotonically-loaded specimens (26 of 120) 4l w
were subjected to incrementally increasing loads in one
direction until failure. Cyclically-loaded specimens (91 of
0.2N
l w 1.25 f c + -------------u-
120) were loaded in the plane of the wall with incremented
forces or displacements until failure. Dynamic tests (three of lw tw
120) were conducted using earthquake simulators. V c = 0.6 f c + ---------------------------------------------------
- tw d1 (4)
Mu lw
------- ----
Vu 2
PUBLISHED EQUATIONS FOR PREDICTING
PEAK SHEAR STRENGTH OF SQUAT
REINFORCED CONCRETE WALLS
A v f yh d 1
Five sets of equations based on the procedures provided in V s = ----------------- (5)
Chapter 21 of ACI 318-05 (ACI Committee 318 2005), s
Chapter 11 of ACI 318-05 (ACI Committee 318 2005),
Barda et al. (1977), ASCE/SEI 43-05 (ASCE 2005), and Per Section 11.10.6 of ACI 318-05, the shear strength
Wood (1990) are used to predict the peak shear resistance of provided by concrete is taken as the lesser of the values
the 120 rectangular walls. provided by Eq. (3) and (4), Eq. (4) does not apply if Mu/Vu
ACI 318-05 provides two semi-empirical equations, both lw/2 0, and the peak shear stress is limited to 10 f c psi
based on the modified truss analogy approach, to predict the (0.83 f c MPa). The minimum horizontal web reinforcement
peak shear strength of squat reinforced concrete walls. One ratio is 0.25%. The minimum vertical web reinforcement ratio
equation is provided in ACI 318-05, Section 21.7 is given by
(Special reinforced concrete structural walls and coupling
beams) for seismic design. The equation in Section 11.10 h
v = 0.0025 + 0.5 2.5 -----w- ( h 0.0025 ) (6)
(Special provisions for walls) is used for general design. lw
Equation Set I (Eq. (1)) is from Section 21.7 of ACI 318-05
Equation Set III (Eq. (7)) was proposed by Barda et al.
V n1 = ( c f c + h f yh)A w 10 f c A w (1) (1977) to predict the peak shear strength of squat walls

Chapter 21 of ACI 318-05 imposes an upper limit of
10 f c psi (0.83 f c MPa) on peak shear stress; the limit is
intended to prevent diagonal compression failure. A lower
limit of 0.25% is imposed on the horizontal and vertical web
reinforcement ratios. For walls with aspect ratios less than or
equal to 2.0, ACI 318-05, Chapter 21, requires that the vertical
web reinforcement ratio be no less than the horizontal
web reinforcement ratio.
The procedure to predict the peak shear strength in Section
11.10 of ACI 318-05 is given by Eq. (2) through (5)
(Equation Set II).
h Nu
V n3 = 8 f c 2.5 f c -----w- + ------------
- + v f yv t w d 2
(7)
l w 4l w t w
Equation Set IV is those of Eq. 4.2-4 and 4.2-3 of ASCE/
SEI 43-05 (Eq. (8) through (10)) to predict the peak shear
strength of squat walls with barbells or flanges. This equation set
can also be used for near-rectangular walls with small
barbells or flanges when the total plan area of the wall is only
slightly greater than that of the web alone. This equation set is
applicable for walls with aspect ratios hw/lw 2 and vertical
and horizontal web reinforcement ratios less than or equal
to 1%. If the reinforcement ratios exceed 1%, the combined
reinforcement ratio se (calculated using Eq. (10)) is limited to
1%. ASCE/SEI 43-05 (ASCE 2005) imposes an upper limit
of 20 f c psi (1.66 f c MPa) on the peak shear stress.

Vn4 = vnd3tw (8)

h Nu
v n = 8.3 f c 3.4 f c -----w- 0.5 + -------------
- + se f y1 20 f c (9)
lw 4l w t w

se = Av + Bh (10)

Equation Set V (Eq. (11)) was proposed in Wood (1990)

to calculate the peak shear strength of squat walls

Fig. 3Summary of 120-wall database with respect to

A vf f y2
aspect ratio and horizontal web reinforcement ratio. (Note: 6 f c A w V n5 = ------------
- 10 f c A w (11)
1 psi = 6.895 kPa.) 4

490 ACI Structural Journal/July-August 2008

 COMPARISON OF PREDICTED
AND MEASURED RESULTS
The accuracy and reliability of the five predictive equations
outlined previously are evaluated using the measured peak
strengths (Vpeak) of the 120 squat rectangular walls. For the
cyclically loaded walls, the peak strength was taken from the
first quadrant of the shear force-lateral displacement relationship.
The 120 squat rectangular walls were divided into four
groups: Group 1: all 120 squat walls; Group 2: ACI 318-05-
compliant squat walls; Group 3: shear-critical squat walls;
and Group 4: ACI 318-05-compliant shear-critical squat walls.
For each wall in the database, the area centroid of the wall
vertical reinforcement in tension (to calculate d2 in Eq. (7))
and the location of the resultant tensile force in the vertical
reinforcement (to calculate d1 in Eq. (2) through (5) and d3
in Eq. (8)) were computed using a commercially available
cross section analysis program. Concrete was assumed
unconfined and a standard nonlinear stress-strain relationship
was used to model reinforcement. The reported values of
geometric (wall cross-sectional layout, reinforcement size,
and layout), material ( fc , yield, and fracture stresses for
reinforcement), and loading properties (axial force) were
used for the cross-section analysis. The concrete tensile
strength was set equal to zero, the compressive failure strain
was assumed to be 0.003, and the modulus of elasticity was
taken as 57,000 f c psi (4733 f c Pa . For reinforcement,
the strains at the onset of hardening and the fracture strain
were taken as 0.01 and 0.1, respectively.
et al. (1977) and ASCE/SEI 43-05 equations (Vn3 and Vn4,
respectively) overpredict the measured peak strength of 83%
and 89% of the 120 walls, respectively. Equation Set V
(Vn5), developed by Wood (1990), is accurate and reliable
because the mean and median values are close to 1.0 and the
standard deviation and COV are both relatively small.
ACI 318-05, Chapter 21Figure 5 presents the variation
of Vn1/Vpeak with wall horizontal web reinforcement ratio. The
dashed line in this figure (and in Fig. 6 and 8) represents the
limiting value of hfyh in Chapter 21.7 of ACI 318-05 for
Grade 60 reinforcement. Values of Vn1/Vpeak greater than 1.0
represent an unconservative estimate of the measured peak
shear strength. Equation Set I consistently overestimates the
peak shear strength of walls with hfyh greater than 350 psi
(2413 kPa). Figure 6 presents the variation of Vn1*/Vpeak
with wall horizontal web reinforcement ratio, where Vn1* is
calculated using Equation Set I without imposing the upper
shear stress limit of 10 f c psi (0.83 f c MPa). A comparison
of Fig. 5 and 6 indicates that the upper shear stress limit,
linked to the change of failure mode from diagonal tension to
diagonal compression, governs the peak shear strength of
walls with h fyh larger than approximately 500 psi (3447 kPa).
Figure 7 presents the variation of Vn1/Vpeak with moment-
shear ratio of the wall specimens. Equation Set I provides
conservative estimates of the peak shear strength for walls
with moment-shear ratios of 0.5 and less, although it must be

Group 1: All 120 squat walls

A statistical presentation of the ratios of the predicted to
measured peak shear strength for the 120 walls in Group 1
are presented in the rows of Table 1 for the five equation sets.
Values in columns two (arithmetic mean) or three (median or
50th percentile) in Table 1 greater than 1.0 indicate that the
corresponding strength equation is unconservative in a mean
or median sense, respectively, namely, the equation over-
estimates the measured peak shear strength. The last column
in the table reports the percentage of unconservative
predictions for the 120 specimens in the group. The standard
deviation (column four) and coefficient of variation (COV)
(column five) are also reported to provide supplemental
information on the dispersion in the ratios. Figure 4 presents the
distributions of the ratios of the predicted peak strength to Fig. 4Distribution of ratio of predicted shear strengths to
measured peak strength for the five procedures using box measured peak shear strengths for all walls.
and whisker plots, which present the lower quartile (Q1),
median (Q2), upper quartile (Q3), and extreme values. The Table 1Statistics of ratio of shear strength
maximum length of a whisker was limited to 1.5 times the predicted using Equation Sets I through V to
interquartile range (IQR) unless its length was governed by measured peak shear strength of all walls
minimum or maximum data points. The data points larger (Group 1)
than Q3 + 1.5 IQR or smaller than Q1 1.5 IQR and are
identified by + in the figure. Standard Percent over-
Mean Median deviation COV Minimum Maximum predictions
The mean and median values of the shear strength ratios Vn1/
presented in Table 1 and Fig. 4 for Equation Sets I (Vn1) and II Vpeak 1.19 1.08 0.53 0.44 0.40 3.51 60
(Vn2) indicate that Equation Set II (Chapter 11 of ACI 318-05) is
Vn2/
the more accurate of the two because the mean ratio for Vpeak
0.97 0.88 0.40 0.41 0.37 2.73 40
Equation Set II is closer to 1.0. The assumption about the
Vn3/
effective shear area of the wall is the principal reason why
Vpeak 1.39 1.30 0.45 0.33 0.59 2.61 83
Equation Set II is more conservative than Equation Set I. In
Equation Set I, the effective shear area is equal to the gross Vn4/
1.46 1.42 0.37 0.26 0.71 2.71 89
Vpeak
area of the wall, lwtw; in Equation Set II, the effective shear
area of the wall is equal to d1tw and smaller than that for Vn5/
Equation Set I. Furthermore, the scatter, as measured by Vpeak 1.01 0.91 0.34 0.34 0.48 2.23 40

standard deviation, is smaller for Equation Set II. The Barda Note: COV = coefficient of variation.

ACI Structural Journal/July-August 2008 491

Fig. 5Variation of ratio of nominal shear strength predicted
using Equation Set I to measured peak shear strength with
horizontal web reinforcement ratio. (Note: 1 psi = 6.895 kPa.)
Fig. 6Variation of ratio of nominal shear strength predicted
using Equation Set I (without upper stress limit of
10 f c ) to measured peak shear strength with horizontal
web reinforcement ratio). (Note: 1 psi = 6.895 kPa.)
noted that the sample size in this range of moment-shear
ratio values is extremely small.
ACI 318-05, Chapter 11Figure 8 presents the variation
of Vn2/Vpeak with wall horizontal web reinforcement ratio. Most
of the unconservative strength predictions correspond to
values of h fyh greater than 350 psi (2413 kPa). Most of the
predictions of peak shear strength are conservative for values of
h fyh less than 300 psi (2068 kPa). The upper stress limit of
Equation Set II governs the calculated strengths of walls with
h fyh larger than 500 psi (3447 kPa).
Barda et al. (1977)Equation Set III is based on the work
of Barda et al. (1977) who tested eight squat reinforced
concrete walls with flanges. Figure 9 presents the variation
of Vn3/Vpeak with wall vertical web reinforcement ratio.*
Equation Set III substantially overestimates the peak shear
strength of rectangular walls for v fyv greater than 200 psi
(1379 kPa).
ASCE/SEI 43-05 (ASCE 2005)Figure 10 presents the
variation of Vn4/Vpeak with the combined wall reinforcement
ratio (se fy1). Equation Set IV overestimates the peak shear
*Equation Set III uses the vertical web reinforcement ratio to calculate peak shear
strength and not the horizontal web reinforcement used in previous strength calculations.
492
Fig. 7Variation of ratio of nominal shear strength predicted
using Equation Set I to measured peak shear strength with
moment-to-shear ratio.
Fig. 8Variation of ratio of nominal shear strength predicted
using Equation Set II to measured peak shear strength with
horizontal web reinforcement ratio. (Note: 1 psi = 6.895 kPa.)
strength of squat rectangular walls. Figure 11, which
presents the variation of measured peak shear strength
normalized by the product of f c and (d3tw) with the
combined reinforcement ratio (se fy1), shows that the
20 f c psi (1.66 f c MPa) upper bound on peak shear
stress was not reached by any of the 120 walls. The utility of
this upper limit on shear stress is highly questionable.
Wood (1990)Figure 12 presents the variation of Vn5/
Vpeak with Avf fy2/Aw , where Avf is the total area of wall
vertical reinforcement. Woods (1990) equation (Equation
Set V) becomes more conservative as the vertical reinforcement
ratio increases. One hundred and ten of the 120 predictions
of peak shear strength were governed by the lower limit on
shear stress of 6 f c psi (0.5 f c MPa); none of the
predictions was governed by the upper limit of shear stress.
Of the five sets of predictive equations, Woods (1990)
equation provides the best estimates of peak shear strength
of rectangular squat walls, with the smallest coefficient of
variation and mean and median values of 1.01 and 0.91,
respectively. Ninety percent of the strength ratios determined
using this equation ranged between 0.50 and 1.50.
Group 2: ACI 318-05-compliant squat walls
Chapter 21 of ACI 318-05 requires that reinforcement in
structural walls be continuous and uniformly distributed
ACI Structural Journal/July-August 2008
across the shear plane; web reinforcement ratios v and h
be no less than 0.25%; and, if the aspect ratio hw /lw does not
exceed 2.0, that the vertical web reinforcement ratio v be no
less than the horizontal web reinforcement ratio h. Table 2
presents similar data to Table 1, but for only those 56 (of
120) squat walls in the database that comply with require-
ments of ACI 318-05.
A comparison of the mean, median, and percentage of
over-predictions in Tables 1 and 2 shows that Equation
Sets I through V are more unconservative if only ACI
318-05-compliant walls are considered. Woods (1990)
equation provides the best estimate of peak shear strength
with a median value of Vn5/Vpeak equal to 1.01 and a COV of
0.34. Equation Set II yields a median value of Vn2/Vpeak
equal to 1.00 but the COV associated with this equation set
(0.38) is greater than that of Equation Set V. The equations
of Chapter 11 of ACI 318-05 provide the most conservative
median predictions of peak shear strength for the ACI 318-05-
compliant walls.
Group 3: Shear-critical squat walls
A shear-critical wall was identified as a wall with
measured peak shear strength less than the shear force
associated with the development of expected flexural
Fig. 9Variation of ratio of nominal shear strength predicted
using Equation Set III to measured peak shear strength with
vertical reinforcement ratio. (Note: 1 psi = 6.895 kPa.)
Fig. 10Variation of ratio of nominal shear strength predicted
using Equation Set IV to measured peak shear strength
with combined reinforcement ratio (sefy1). (Note: 1 psi =
6.895 kPa.)
ACI Structural Journal/July-August 2008
strength as determined by cross section analysis. Seventy-three
of the 120 squat walls were judged shear-critical.
Figure 13 presents the variation of Vflex/Vpeak ratio with
moment-shear ratio, where Vflex is the shear force associated
with the development of wall flexural strength (hereafter
referred to as shear-flexural strength). The data points in the
shaded region correspond to the shear-critical walls that
form this group. Figure 13 reveals, as expected, that walls
with small moment-shear ratios are generally shear-critical
and that walls with moment-shear ratios of 1.5 and greater
are generally flexure-critical.
Table 3 summarizes results for the shear-critical walls.
Figure 14 presents box-and-whisker plots, similar to Fig. 4,
for the shear-critical walls. If the dataset is limited to these
walls, a comparison of results presented in Tables 1 and 3
shows a reduction in the percentage of unconservative
predictions for Equation Sets I through III. Woods (1990)
equation (Equation Set V) best estimates the shear strength
of shear-critical walls with a median value of the ratio Vn5/
Vpeak equal to 0.93 and a relatively small COV. The equations
of Chapter 11 of ACI 318-05 provide the most conservative
estimations as measured by median results. The procedures
of Barda et al. (1977) and ASCE/SEI 43-05 are substantially
unconservative for shear-critical walls.
Fig. 11Variation of measured peak shear strength normalized
by product of f c and d3tw with combined reinforcement ratio
(sefy1). (Note: 1 psi = 6.895 kPa.)
Fig. 12Variation of ratio of nominal shear strength predicted
using Equation Set V to measured peak shear strength with
Avffy2 normalized by total wall area. (Note: 1 psi = 6.895 kPa.)
493
 Figure 15 presents the variation of c (see Eq. (1)) with
moment-shear ratio, where c was back-calculated from the
measured peak shear strengths, assuming yielding of the
horizontal web reinforcement. The data of Fig. 15 attempt to
isolate the concrete contribution to shear strength per
Chapter 21.7 of ACI 318-05, assuming that the horizontal
web reinforcement yields. The piecewise linear representation
of c per Eq. (21.7) of ACI 318-05 is also shown in the
figure. The negative values of c in Fig. 15 show that some
Fig. 13Variation of ratio of shear-flexural strength to
measured peak shear strength with moment-to-shear ratio.
of the walls either did not fail in diagonal tension and/or the
horizontal reinforcement did not yield. Importantly, the
scatter in the prediction of the parameter is significant. No
conclusions related to appropriate values for c as a function
of M/Vlw can be drawn from this dataset aside from the use
of c = 3 across a range of moment-shear ratios of 0 < M/Vlw <
1.5 is likely inappropriate.
Group 4: ACI 318-05-compliant shear-critical
squat walls
The 24 squat walls in Group 4 are both ACI 318-05-
compliant and shear critical. Table 4 summarizes the results
for these walls. A comparison of the results presented in
Tables 3 and 4 shows an improvement in the predictions of
Equation Sets I, II, and V for the Group 4 walls in terms of
standard deviations. Woods (1990) equation once again
provides the best estimates of the peak shear strength of ACI
318-05-compliant shear-critical walls with a median value of
1.00 for Vn5 /Vpeak and a relatively small COV. The equations
of Chapter 11 of ACI 318-05 again provide the most
conservative estimates of peak shear strength as measured
by median results. The equations of Barda et al. (1977) and
ASCE/SEI 43-05 provide substantially unconservative
predictions of peak shear strength for ACI 318-05-compliant
shear-critical walls.
Table 2Statistics of ratio of shear strength
predicted using Equation Sets I through V to
measured peak shear strength of ACI 318-05-
compliant walls (Group 2)
Standard Percent over-
Mean Median deviation COV Minimum Maximum predictions
Vn1/
Vpeak 1.26 1.08 0.52 0.41 0.66 2.67 61

Vn2/
1.00 0.86 0.38 0.38 0.49 2.03 41
Vpeak
Vn3/
1.61 1.58 0.44 0.27 0.91 2.61 96
Vpeak
Vn4/
1.40 1.35 0.41 0.29 0.71 2.35 82
Vpeak
Vn5/
Fig. 14Distribution of ratio of the predicted shear 1.01 0.92 0.35 0.34 0.48 1.97 46
Vpeak
strengths to measured peak shear strength considering only Note: COV = coefficient of variation.
shear-critical walls.

Table 3Statistics of ratio of shear strength

predicted using Equation Sets I through V to
measured peak shear strength of shear-critical
walls (Group 3)
Standard Percent over-
Mean Median deviation COV Minimum Maximum predictions
Vn1/
Vpeak 1.09 1.00 0.54 0.49 0.40 3.51 49

Vn2/
0.92 0.86 0.42 0.45 0.37 2.73 30
Vpeak
Vn3/
1.24 1.23 0.40 0.32 0.59 2.51 73
Vpeak
Vn4/
1.48 1.41 0.36 0.24 0.71 2.71 92
Vpeak
Vn5/
1.03 0.93 0.33 0.32 0.57 2.23 44
Fig. 15Variation of c with moment-shear ratio for Vpeak
shear-critical walls. Note: COV = coefficient of variation.

494 ACI Structural Journal/July-August 2008

 STRENGTH DEGRADATION IN SQUAT
REINFORCED CONCRETE WALLS
Figure 1 presents the first quadrant of a load-displacement
relationship for a squat reinforced concrete wall tested under
cyclic loading (Synge 1980). The peak shear strength of the
wall, Vpeak, was recorded at a horizontal displacement of
10 mm (0.39 in.), corresponding to a story drift of 0.67%.
The resistance of the wall diminished with repeated cycling
to displacements equal to or greater than 10 mm (0.39 in.).
To quantify the loss of shear strength with repeated
cycling for all walls in the database, shear strengths Vpeak2
and Vpeak3 were extracted at the displacement, peak,
corresponding to the peak strength, Vpeak, in the second and
third excursions at or beyond peak, respectively. Note that
the choice of loading protocol will influence the rate of
degradation, but that is not quantified herein. Figure 16
presents the mean and standard deviation (in parenthesis) of
Vpeak2/Vpeak and Vpeak3/Vpeak for three ranges of wall aspect
ratio. The greatest percentage loss of strength with repeated
cycling is observed in those walls with aspect ratios less than
1.0: the mean values of Vpeak2/Vpeak and Vpeak3/Vpeak were
73% and 43%, respectively. The values of Vpeak2/Vpeak and
Vpeak3/Vpeak increase with an increase in the wall aspect
ratio, which indicates that strength degradation is most
severe for walls with low aspect ratios. The dispersions are
greater in the third cycle than the second for all aspect ratios.
Figure 17 presents the ratios of the shear strength
predicted using Equation Set I to Vpeak2 and Vpeak3 as a
function of the horizontal web reinforcement ratio. As
expected, the equation substantially overestimates the
second- and third-excursion shear strengths.
Wood (1990). Results were presented using four groups of
squat walls: 1) all 120 walls; 2) ACI 318-05-compliant
walls; 3) shear-critical walls; and 4) ACI 318-05-compliant
shear-critical walls.
The key conclusions of this study are:
1. The scatter in the values of peak shear strength predicted
by all equations is substantial. Most of the conservative
predictions of shear strength were obtained for lightly
reinforced walls;
2. The best predictions of peak shear strength of rectangular
squat walls were obtained using Woods equation, which
gave median and mean values of the ratio of computed-
measured peak strength close to 1.0 and consistently
produced the smallest COV for all four groups of walls. Most
of Woods (1990) estimates of peak shear strength were
governed by the lower limit on wall shear stress.
3. The nominal strength equations of Chapter 11 of ACI
318-05 generally provided the most conservative (lowest)
estimates of peak shear strength;
4. The procedures of Barda (1977) and ASCE/SEI 43-05
consistently overestimated the peak shear strength of the
rectangular walls in the database and should not be used to
proportion shear walls with rectangular cross sections.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The experimentally measured peak shear strengths of
120 squat rectangular walls were compared with nominal
shear strengths predicted by five equations presented in
ACI 318-05, Barda et al. (1977), ASCE/SEI 43-05, and

Table 4Statistics of ratio of shear strength

predicted using Equation Sets I through V to
measured peak shear strength of ACI 318-05- Fig. 16Means and standard deviations (in parenthesis)
compliant shear-critical walls (Group 4) of ratios of second- and third-cycle shear strengths normalized
by measured peak shear strength as function of aspect
Standard Percent over- ratio for all walls.
Mean Median deviation COV Minimum Maximum predictions
Vn1/
Vpeak 1.11 0.99 0.43 0.39 0.66 2.06 46

Vn2/
0.91 0.85 0.33 0.37 0.49 1.60 29
Vpeak
Vn3/
Vpeak 1.42 1.31 0.40 0.28 0.91 2.51 92

Vn4/
1.43 1.35 0.36 0.25 0.71 2.11 88
Vpeak
Vn5/
1.00 0.89 0.30 0.30 0.57 1.67 46
Vpeak
Note: COV = coefficient of variation.

Table 5Variables used in ASCE 43 strength

equations (Equation Set IV)
hw /lw 0.5 A=1 B=0
0.5 hw /lw 1.5 A = hw /lw + 1.5 B = hw /lw 0.5 Fig. 17Variation of ratio of nominal shear strength predicted
hw /lw 1.5
using Equation Set I to Vpeak2 and Vpeak3 with horizontal web
A=0 B=1
reinforcement ratio. (Note: 1 psi = 6.895 kPa.)

ACI Structural Journal/July-August 2008 495

 5. The 20 f c psi (1.66 f c MPa) shear stress limit in REFERENCES
ASCE/SEI 43-05 was not achieved by any wall in the ACI Committee 315, 2005, Building Code Requirements for Structural
Concrete (ACI 318-05) and Commentary (318R-05), American Concrete
database and should be revised; Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 430 pp.
6. Squat reinforced concrete shear walls undergo a significant Alexander, C. M.; Heidebrecht, A. C.; and Tso, W. K., 1973, Cyclic
loss of shear strength with repeated cycling to or beyond the Load Tests on Shear Wall Panels, Proceedings, Fifth World Conference on
displacement corresponding to peak shear strength. Strength Earthquake Engineering, Rome, pp. 1116-1119.
loss is more rapid in walls with low aspect ratios; and ASCE, 2005, Seismic Design Criteria for Structures, Systems, and
Components in Nuclear Facilities (ASCE/SEI 43-05), American Society
7. Better equations are required for squat reinforced of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, 96 pp.
concrete walls to assess both peak strength and loss of strength Barda, F.; Hanson, J. M.; and Corley, W. G., 1977, Shear Strength of
and stiffness with repeated cycling. The equation(s) for peak Low-Rise Walls with Boundary Elements, Reinforced Concrete Structures
shear strength must accommodate alternate failure modes and in Seismic Zones, SP-53, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills,
include variables for those parameters that influence shear MI, pp. 149-202.
Cardenas, A. E.; Russell, H. G.; and Corley, W. G., 1980, Strength of
strength. The equations(s) should provide median estimates of Low Rise Structural Walls, Reinforced Concrete Structures Subjected to
peak shear strength with only a small dispersion. Wind and Earthquake Forces, SP-63, American Concrete Institute, Farmington
Hills, MI, pp. 221-241.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Cheng, F. Y., 1992, Coupling Bending and Shear Hysteretic Models of
The authors thank S. Wood, J. Moehle, M. Sozen, and D. Rothe for Low-Rise R. C. Walls, Concrete Shear in Earthquake, University of
providing information on tests of squat walls and assistance in populating Houston, Houston, TX, pp. 276-288.
the squat wall database. Cheng, F. Y.; Lou, K. Y.; and Yang, J. S., 1994, Analytical and Experimental
Studies of RC Structures with Low-Rise Shear Walls, Proceedings, Fifth U.S.
National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Chicago, IL, pp. 45-54.
NOTATION Cheng, F. Y., and Yang, J. S., 1996, Hysteresis Rules and Design Parameter
Av = area of horizontal reinforcement within distance of s, in.2 Assessment of RC Low-Rise Shear Walls and Buildings with Openings,
Avf = area of total reinforcement (sum of areas of vertical web and Department of Civil Engineering, University of Missouri-Rolla, Rolla,
boundary element reinforcement) crossing shear plane, in.2 MO, 344 pp.
Aw = area of the wall, in.2 Endebrock, E.; Dove, R.; and Dunwoody, W. E., 1985, Analysis and Tests
COV = coefficient of variation on Small-Scale Shear Walls FY-82 Final Report, Report No. NUREG/CR-
d1 = distance from extreme compression fiber to location of resultant 4274, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, 53 pp.
of forces in vertical reinforcement in tension and assumed Greifenhagen, C., and Lestuzzi, P., 2005, Static Cyclic Tests on
equal to 0.8lw unless larger value is determined by strain Lightly Reinforced Concrete Shear Walls, Engineering Structures,
compatibility analysis, in. V. 27, pp. 1703-1712.
d2 = distance from extreme compression fiber to area centroid of Gulec, C. K., 2005, Ultimate Shear Strength of Squat Rectangular
wall vertical reinforcement in tension, in. Reinforced Concrete Walls, MS thesis, Department of Civil, Structural
d3 = distance from extreme compression fiber to location of resultant and Environmental Engineering, State University of New York at Buffalo,
of forces in vertical reinforcement in tension, which may be Buffalo, NY, 222 pp.
determined from strain compatibility analysis and is assumed Hernandez, B. O., 1980, Diseno de Muros de Concreto con Falla por
equal to 0.6lw if no analysis is performed, in. Cortante, Instituto de Ingenieria, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de
fc = compressive strength of concrete, psi Mexico, Mexico, 165 pp. (in Spanish)
fy1 = reinforcement yield stress used with se Hidalgo, P. A.; Jordan, R.; and Ledezma, C. A., 1998, Experimental
fy2 = reinforcement yield stress for combination of vertical web and Study of Reinforced Concrete Walls under Shear Failure, Proceedings,
boundary element reinforcement, psi Sixth U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Seattle, WA.
fyh = yield stress of horizontal web reinforcement, psi Hidalgo, P. A.; Ledezma, C. A.; and Jordan, R. M., 2002, Seismic
fyv = yield stress of vertical web reinforcement, psi Behavior of Squat Reinforced Concrete Shear Walls, Earthquake Spectra,
hw = height of wall, in. Paper No. 297, EERI, V. 18, No. 2, pp. 287-308.
lw = length of wall, in. Hirosawa, M., 1975, Past Experimental Results on Reinforced Concrete
Mu = moment at section, lb-in. Shear Walls and Analysis on Them, Kenchiku Kenkyu Shiryo, No. 6,
Nu = axial load that is negative in tension, lb Building Research Institute, Ministry of Construction, Tokyo, Japan,
s = spacing of horizontal reinforcement in wall, in. 277 pp. (in Japanese)
tw = thickness of wall, in. Huang, C. C., and Sheu, M. S., 1988, Experimental and Theoretical Study
Vc = nominal shear strength provided by concrete, lb on Aseismic Behaviors of Low-Rise RC Shear Walls, Proceedings, Ninth World
Vflex = shear force associated with development of flexural strength, lb Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Tokyo-Kyoto, Japan, pp. 6/35-6/40.
Vn1 = nominal shear strength, lb, per Chapter 21.7 of ACI 318-05 Huang, C. C., and Sheu, M. S., 1994, Experimental and Theoretical
Vn1* = nominal shear strength, lb, per Chapter 21.7 of ACI 318-05 with- Studies of R. C. Shear Walls under Varying Axial and Lateral Loads,
out imposing upper stress limit of 10 f c psi (0.83 f c MPa) Proceedings, Fifth U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering,
Vn2 = nominal shear strength, lb, per Chapter 11.10 of ACI 318-05 Chicago, IL, pp. 15-24.
Vn3 = nominal shear strength, lb, per Barda (1977) Lefas, I. D.; Kotsovos, M. D.; and Ambraseys, N. N., 1990, Behavior of
Vn4 = nominal shear strength, lb, per ASCE/SEI 43-05 Reinforced Concrete Structural Walls: Strength, Deformation Characteristics,
Vn5 = nominal shear strength, lb, per Wood (1990) and Failure Mechanism, ACI Structural Journal, V. 87, No. 1, Jan.-Feb.,
Vpeak = measured peak shear strength, lb pp. 23-31.
Vpeak2 = shear force, lb, extracted at displacement in second excursion Lefas, I. D., and Kotsovos, M. D., 1990, Strength and Deformation
to peak Characteristics of Reinforced Concrete Walls under Load Reversals, ACI
Vpeak3 = shear force, lb, extracted at the displacement in third excursion to Structural Journal, V. 87, No. 6, Nov.-Dec., pp. 716-726.
peak Lopes, M. S., 2001a, Experimental Shear-Dominated Response of RC
Vs = nominal shear strength provided by horizontal reinforcement, lb Walls: Part IObjectives, Methodology and Results, Engineering
Vu = shear force at section, lb Structures, V. 23, pp. 229-239.
vn = nominal peak shear stress, psi Lopes, M. S., 2001b, Experimental Shear-Dominated Response of RC
c = aspect-ratio coefficient, which per ACI 318-05, equal to 3.0 Walls: Part IIDiscussion of Results and Design Implications, Engineering
for hw/lw 1.5, 2.0 for hw /lw 2, and varies linearly for 1.5 Structures, V. 23, pp. 564-574.
hw/lw 2 Maier, J., and Thrlimann, B., 1985, Bruchversuche an Stahlbeton-
peak = displacement corresponding to experimentally-determined scheiben, Institut fr Baustatik und Konstruktion, Eidgenssische
shear strength Technische Hochschule (ETH) Zrich, Zrich, Switzerland, 130 pp.
h = horizontal web reinforcement ratio (in German)
se = combined reinforcement ratio that is equal to Av + Bh (A Maier, J., 1992, Shear Wall Tests, Concrete Shear in Earthquake,
and B are defined in Table 5 as function of aspect ratio) University of Houston, Houston, TX, pp. 85-94.
v = vertical web reinforcement ratio Mohammadi-Doostdar, H., 1994, Behavior and Design of Earthquake

496 ACI Structural Journal/July-August 2008

Resistant Low-Rise Shear Walls, PhD thesis, Department of Civil
Engineering, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 234 pp.
Mindess, S.; Young, J. F.; and Darwin, D., 2003, Concrete, Prentice Hall,
NJ, 644 pp.
Pilakoutas, K., and Elnashai, A., 1995a, Cyclic Behavior of Reinforced
Concrete Cantilever Walls, Part I: Experimental Results, ACI Structural
Journal, V. 92, No. 3, May-June, pp. 271-281.
Pilakoutas, K., and Elnashai, A., 1995b, Cyclic Behavior of Reinforced
Concrete Cantilever Walls, Part II: Discussions and Theoretical Comparisons,
ACI Structural Journal, V. 92, No. 4, July-Aug., pp. 425-434.
Pilette, F. C., 1987, Behavior of Earthquake Resistant Squat Shear
Walls, MS thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Ottawa,
Ottawa, ON, Canada, 177 pp.
Rothe, D., 1992, Untersuchungen zum nichtlinearen Verhalten von
Stahlbeton wandschieben unter Erdbebenbeanspruchung, PhD Thesis,
Fachbereich Konstruktiver Ingenieurbau, der Technischen Hochschule
Darmstadt, Germany, 161 pp. (in German)
Salonikios, T. N.; Kappos, A. J.; Tegos, I. A.; and Penelis, G. G., 1999,
Cyclic Load Behavior of Low-Slenderness Reinforced Concrete Walls:
ACI Structural Journal/July-August 2008
View publication stats
Design Basis and Test Results, ACI Structural Journal, V. 96, No. 4, July-
Aug., pp. 649-660.
Synge, A. J., 1980, Ductility of Squat Shear Walls, Research Report
80-8, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury,
Christchurch, New Zealand, 142 pp.
Wasiewicz, Z. F., 1988, Sliding Shear in Low-Rise Shear Walls under
Lateral Load Reversals, MS thesis, Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 127 pp.
Wiradinata, S., 1985, Behavior of Squat Walls Subjected to Load
Reversals, MS thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of
Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada, 171 pp.
Wood, S. L., 1990, Shear Strength of Low-Rise Reinforced Concrete
Walls, ACI Structural Journal, V. 87, No. 1, Jan.-Feb., pp. 99-107.
Xie, L., and Xiao, Y., 2000, Study on Retrofit of Existing Squat Concrete
Shear Walls, Report No. USC-SERP 2000-5, Department of Civil Engi-
neering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, 111 pp.
497