Sie sind auf Seite 1von 34

SEISMIC BEHAVIOR OF STEEL

PLATE SHEAR WALL


GUIDENCE OF :- Prof.D.R.Nalawade

PRESENTED BY :- SWAPNIL S. PATIL(B3210030)


KUNAL M. PATIL (B3210029)
TUSHAR S. DEO (B3210010)

1
Contents-
 Introduction
 Details of SPSW
 Functional aspects
 Advantages & Disadvantages of SPSW
 Problem Statement
 Different positions of SPSW
 Analysis using STAAD-Pro
 Result
 Conclusion & Refrences

2
Introduction:-

 Shear wall is a wall constructed to resist shear in x & z direction and which is subjected to wind and

seismic forces.

 Types:- 1) Reinforced Cement Concrete Shear Wall 2) Steel Plate

Shear Wall (SPSW)

3) Composite Shear Wall

3
Steel Plate Shear Wall :-

4
Details Of SPSW:-

 Steel plate exhibits high initial stiffness.

 Steel plate behave in a ductile manner.

 It also dissipate significant amount of energy.

5
 Columns act as flange and steel plate act as web

 Together steel plate wall and two boundary columns act as

vertical plate girder

 Horizontal floor beam act as transverse stiffeners in the plate

girder

6
Functional Aspects:-

1) Efficient in carrying lateral load induced due

to wind load & seismic force.

2) Resist horizontal story shear .

3) Also resist overturning moment due to lateral

load.

7
Advantages:-

1) Very ductile & relatively large energy dissipating capacity.

2) Very efficient & economical lateral load resisting system.

3) High initial stiffness , thus very effective in limiting drift.

4) SPSW much lighter than RCC shear wall, so less weight to be carried by

column’s & foundation.

8
5) Using shop-welded, field bolted SPSW , we can speed-up
the erection process & reduce construction cost .

6) From architectural point of view , SPSW occupy less space


than the equivalent RCC shear wall.

7) Much easier & faster to construct , when they are used in


seismic retrofit of existing building.

9
Disadvantages:-

1) RCC shear wall monolithic in construction but steel plate shear wall is

not monolithic.

2) Steel plates are more tedious for travelling & handling.

3) Additional flexural stiffeners required in tall rise building

10
Problem Statement:-
1) Analysis of G+5 storied building using SPSW for different positions of shear wall in
the structure.

2) Different load cases including seismic forces are considered.

3) Analysis is to be done using STAAD-Pro.

4) Comparative study is to be done for structures having SPSW and without Shear wall.

11
Different Positions of SPSW:-

1) Structure without shear wall:-(case 1)

12
Structure With Shear wall:-(Case 2)

13
Structure With Shear wall:-(Case3)

14
Structure With Shear wall:-(Case4)

15
Structure With Shear wall:-(Case5)

16
Analysis Of SPSW Using STAAD –Pro

17
Results:-

 Plate Stress results


 Displacement results
 Moments results
 Time Period results(For X & Z Directions)

18
Stress Representation :-(Case 2)

19
Stress Representation :-(Case 3)

20
Stress Representation :-(Case 4)

21
Stress Representation :-(Case 5)

22
Graphical Interpretation:-

1) Displacements For Node 337:-

23
2) Displacements For Node 348:-

24
3) Displacements For Node 354:-

25
4) Displacements For Node 365:-

26
For Moments In Member 385:-

27
Time period

Case no. Along X(sec.) Along Z(sec.)

Case 1 0.90133 1.29578

Case 2 0.62532 1.02454

Case 3 0.76925 1.00720

Case 4 0.85729 1.50000

Case 5 0.85729 1.50000

28
Conclusion:-

1) Horizontal displacements are considerably reduced.


2) Max. bending moments are reduced upto great extent.
3) From all the above cases ,case 3 is proved to be the most efficient structurally.
4) Overall SPSW reduces the maximum nodal displacement upto 55-60%.
5) Overall SPSW reduces the maximum bending moment upto 50-55%.

29
References:-

 Astaneh-Asl, A., "Seismic Behavior and Design of Steel


plate shear walls”, Steel TIPS Report, Structural Steel
Educational Council, Moraga, CA, January, 2001.
 Ignasius F. Seilie, P.E. and John D. Hooper, P.E., “Steel
Plate Shear Walls: Practical Design and Construction”,
Modern Steel Construction, November, 2005.
 “U.S. - Japan Workshop on Seismic Fracture Issues in Steel
Structure, San Francisco.” – by Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl,
February 2000.

30
 Thorburn, L.J., Kulak, G.L., and Montgomery, C.J.
Analyses of steel plate shear walls, Structural Engineering
Report No. 107, Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of
Alberta, Canada, 1983.
 IS: 800- 1984, “Code of Practice for general construction in
steel”. Second revision.
 IS : 875 (Part 1)- 1987, “Code of practice for design loads
other than Earthquake for buildings and structures.”, Part 1
Dead loads – Unit Weights of building materials and stored
materials, Second revision.

31
 IS: 875 (Part 2) - 1987, “Code of practice for design loads (other than
Earthquake) for buildings and structures.” Part 2 Imposed loads,
Second revision.
 IS: 875 (Part 3) - 1987, “Code of practice for design loads (other than
Earthquake) for buildings and structures.” Part 3 Wind loads, Second
revision.
 IS: 1893 (Part 1) – 2002, “Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of
Structures”, Part 1 General Provisions and Buildings, Fifth revision.

32
Websites:-

1) http://www.pubs.asce.org/journals

2) http://www.wikipidia.com

3) http://www. Modern steel.com

33
34