Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Building Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jobe

Global shear stability capacity of trapezoidally corrugated steel

plate shear walls with boundary elements
Chen-Bao Wen , Yan-Lin Guo *, Jia-Qi Zuo , Hao-Jun Sun
Department of Civil Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Engineering practice has demonstrated that a trapezoidally corrugated steel plate shear wall
Corrugated steel plate shear wall (TCSPSW) with vertical boundary elements (VBEs) offers an effective solution for resisting lateral
Global shear stability forces, particularly when connected solely with beams in pin-ended frames for the convenient
Vertical boundary elements installation of windows or doors. However, despite its practical benefits, currently there is a lack
Finite element analysis of research on the global shear stability capacity design of the TCSPSW with VBEs (TCSPSW-VBE).
Design method
This paper aims to investigate the global shear stability capacity of TCSPSW-VBE, considering
geometric nonlinearity and material elastoplasticity through finite element analyses (FEA).
Firstly, the global elastic shear buckling load of TCSPSW with two vertical boundaries simply
supported and two top and bottom boundaries fully clamped is determined and a concise formula
for predicting the global elastic buckling load is proposed. Then, the ultimate shear-bearing
strength factor of TCSPSWs is established by introducing the normalized height-to-thickness
ratio. Moreover, the interaction between the TCSPSW and the VBEs is analyzed theoretically
and numerically, involving the contribution of the VBEs to the shear-bearing capacity and
restraining action of the VBEs on the TCSPSW. It is found that the shear-bearing capacity of
TCSPSW-VBE could be superimposed by the contribution of the TCSPSW and VBEs alone. This
study also explores the lower limits of strength and stiffness of VBEs and investigates the
reduction caused by the fishplate connections with frame beams on the shear-bearing capacity of
TCSPSW-VBE. The reduction factor from the fishplate connections is related to the torsional
stiffness of the fishplate, reflecting the constraint provided by the fishplates. The design formulas
proposed in this paper agree well with the FEA results and can be utilized in the design of
TCSPSW-VBE.

Nomenclature

Symbol Description [Unit]

a corrugation depth [mm]
a0, a1, a2 intermediate variable [dimensionless]
Ac sectional area of each VBE [mm2]
b0, b1, b2 intermediate variable [dimensionless]
bc, dc, tcf, tcw dimensions of the VBE with hollow section or H-shaped steel [mm]
bs width of the corrugated plate [mm]

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (Y.-L. Guo).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2023.106553
Received 6 February 2023; Received in revised form 26 March 2023; Accepted 11 April 2023
Available online 24 April 2023
2352-7102/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

d1 , d2 subpanel widths of the corrugation [mm]

dp, hf, tf, tp dimensions of the fishplate [mm]
Dx, Dy, H rigidity constants of the corrugated plate [Nmm]
E modulus of elasticity [MPa]
fvy steel shear yield stress [MPa]
fy steel yield stress [MPa]
G steel shear modulus of elasticity [MPa]
hs height of the corrugated plate [mm]
Ix out-of-plane flexural stiffness of each VBE [mm4]
Iy in-plane flexural stiffness of each VBE [mm4]
It,p free torsion constant of the horizontal plate in the fishplate [mm4]
kg global shear buckling coefficient [dimensionless]
m corrugation number of the corrugated plate [dimensionless]
Nmax maximum axial force on the section of VBE [N]
q expansion length of one repeating corrugation section [mm]
ts thickness of the corrugated plate [mm]
V lateral shear load [N]
Va additional interface force between TCSPSW and VBE [N]
Vc shear force resisted by VBEs [N]
Vc1 shear force resisted by VBEs produced by the story drift angle [N]
Vc2 shear force resisted by VBEs produced by the additional interface force [N]
Vs shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE without considering the contribution of the VBEs [N]
Vu shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE considering the contribution of the VBEs [N]
Vu0 shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE with fully restraining the out-of-plane displacement of the intersection line
between TCSPSW and VBEs. [N]
Vu1 shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE with the VBE free [N]
Vy shear yielding load of the corrugated plate [N]
αp reduction factor caused by the fishplate connections [dimensionless]
β converted aspect ratio of the corrugated steel plate [dimensionless]
γ angle of the inclined segment in the corrugation [rad]
δ lateral displacement of the shear wall [mm]
ηb rigidity ratio of the VBE [dimensionless]
ηp rigidity ratio of the fishplate connections [dimensionless]
θ constant of equivalent orthotropic plate [dimensionless]
θs story drift angle at the peak load [dimensionless]
λ corrugation length [mm]
λn normalized height-to-thickness ratio of the corrugated plate [dimensionless]
ν Poisson’s ratio [dimensionless]
τcr elastic shear buckling stress [MPa]
φ ultimate strength factor [dimensionless]

1. Introduction
Steel plate shear walls (SPSWs) are commonly employed as lateral-load-resisting components in high seismic regions owing to their
remarkable strength and ductility [1–5]. Traditional SPSWs, comprised of thin flat steel plates and installed within the steel frame,
have proven to be a cost-effective and high-bearing efficient solution. Nevertheless, they possess inadequate out-of-plane stiffness,
resulting in early buckling and post-buckling diagonal tension field formation [2,3]. The diagonal tension field leads to severely
pinching of the hysteresis loops under cyclic loading, and may damage the frame column due to the additional force. To overcome
these concerns, several researchers have suggested alternative shear walls, including stiffened steel plate shear walls,
buckling-restrained steel plate shear walls, and steel-concrete composite shear walls, and have examined their shear-bearing capacity
and hysteretic behavior [6]. Additionally, trapezoidally corrugated steel plate shear walls (TCSPSWs) have been proposed due to their
high out-of-plane geometric stability, and various investigations have been conducted to develop their design methods.
The primary concern in strength design is the analysis of elastic buckling. Easley and McFarland [7] developed formulas to
calculate the global elastic shear buckling stress of corrugated metal shear diaphragms using the Rayleigh-Ritz method based on the
orthotropic-plate buckling theory. Easley [8] simplified these formulas, making them similar to the classic shear buckling stress
formulas of the orthotropic plate. The global shear buckling coefficient was proposed as 36 and 68.4 for corrugated shear plates with
simply supported and clamped edges, respectively. Tong and Guo [9] proposed an elastic buckling coefficient associated with the
converted aspect ratio and the stiffness constant of an equivalent orthotropic plate, utilizing the minimum potential energy theorem
and the Ritz method. During their derivation, they adopted the orthotropic plate theory, which assumes that the corrugated steel plate

2
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

has numerous repeating corrugations and is relatively small in corrugation dimensions compared to the overall dimensions of the plate
[7–9]. In the above studies, corrugated steel plates are regarded as orthotropic plates. However, the global shear buckling load ob­
tained through the orthotropic plate theory is inconsistent with the FEA numerical results considering detailed models. Especially
when the overall dimensions of the shear wall is not large enough compared to the corrugation dimensions, the discrepancies can not
be ignored. Therefore, Dou et al. [10] studied the shear buckling behaviors of sinusoidally corrugated steel shear walls and proposed
fitting formulas for estimating the global elastic shear buckling stress based on numerical results. Wang et al. [11] fitted the formulas
for predicting the elastic shear buckling stress of large-scale corrugated steel webs in bridge girders, considering the effects of detailed
geometric parameters. Dou et al. [10] and Wang et al. [11] have taken into full consideration the effect of corrugation dimensions
when determining the buckling load. However, given that the corrugation shape and dimensions of TCSPSWs are significantly different
from those used by Dou [10] and Wang [11], further study is required to obtain the global shear buckling load of TCSPSWs, as
presented in this paper.
Furthermore, the shear-bearing capacity and hysteretic behavior are also major concerns in the strength design of TCSPSWs.
Existing studies show that TCSPSWs have good bearing capacity. Berman and Bruneau et al. [12,13] conducted experimental studies
on braced frames, SPSWs, and TCSPSWs. They found that the specimen utilizing a corrugated infill plate could achieve significant
ductility, increase energy dissipation and minimize the demands for the surrounding frames. Shimizu et al. [14] conducted cyclic
loading tests of corrugated shear diaphragms with pure shear loading to verify the improved seismic performance of the walls. Emami
and Mofid et al. [15,16] investigated the hysteretic behavior of horizontal and vertical corrugation TCSPSWs and, using the cyclic
loading results, calculated the elastic and ultimate strength of each steel shear wall system under monotonic loading. Furthermore,
Kalai [17], Bahrebar [18], and Dou [19] et al. explored the influence of the geometric parameters such as angle, depth, wavelength,
and thickness on the lateral-resistant performance. Dou et al. [10,20] focused on the shear resistance and post-buckling behavior of
sinusoidally corrugated steel plate shear walls and established a quantitative design method. While Tong and Guo [9,21–24] con­
ducted experimental and numerical studies on the shear-resistant behavior of stiffened TCSPSWs and double TCSPSWs connected face
to face by high-strength bolts. Numerous studies have demonstrated that the TCSPSWs are excellent lateral force resistant components,
which is worth studying and popularizing.
Shear walls featuring rectangular openings to accommodate windows or doors are commonplace in modern building design.
Bahrebar [18] et al. investigated the cyclic behavior and energy absorption capabilities of the centrally-perforated TCSPSWs. Far­
zampour et al. [25,26] studied the impact of the opening location and the opening size on the behavior of TCSPSWs and proposed a
reduction coefficient for ultimate shear strength that is independent of the opening location. To mitigate local buckling due to
openings, Ding and Deng et al. [27] adopted constructional columns around the opening to enhance the shear-bearing capacity of
TCSPSWs. It can be seen that the window and door openings in the shear walls are inevitable, especially in residential buildings.
Therefore, more solutions are needs to be proposed and investigated.
In recent years, the TCSPSW has gained popularity as a preferred choice for light gauge prefabricated SPSW systems in multi-story
residential buildings. In such systems, the TCSPSW functions as the major lateral resistant component while the pin-ended frames
primarily support the vertical loads induced by gravity, as illustrated in Fig. 1. Notably, the TCSPSW system offers several advantages
over diagonal bracing frames, such as enabling flexible installation of windows and doors according to architectural requirements, and
simplifying the beam-column connections through the use of pin-ended joints in structural design. These benefits translate into more
cost-effective design solutions.

Fig. 1. Practical application of TCSPSWs embedded within multi-story pin-ended frames.

3
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

The previous experimental study [28] conducted by the authors on sinusoidal corrugated steel plate shear walls with vertical
boundary elements (VBEs) demonstrated high shear-bearing capacity, plump hysteresis curve, and excellent ductility. However, there
is a lack of shear-bearing capacity prediction and strength design methods for actual engineering applications. This paper focuses on
the global bucking behaviors and shear-bearing capacity design of TCSPSWs with VBEs denoted by TCSPSW-VBE, as shown in Fig. 2.
Compared to the traditional TCSPSW connected to its surrounding frame beams (FBs) and columns, the most significant advantage of
TCSPSW-VBE is its flexibility in placement within the frame to meet a required space where possible windows and doors are installed
conveniently. The corrugated steel plate can be directly welded to FBs or connected through fishplates, which can also adopt bolts or
welds, as shown in Fig. 2 (b)~(d). This study aims to develop a practical design method for predicting the shear-bearing capacity of
TCSPSW-VBE, focusing on the effect of the stiffness of the VBEs as well as the top and bottom fishplates. Firstly, a global elastic shear
buckling coefficient of TCSPSW-VBE with pins of VBEs at their ends is obtained, particularly considering the number of corrugations.
The ultimate shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE is then predicted by superimposing the contribution of the TCSPSW-VBE with
pins of VBEs at their ends and the moment-resistant frame formed by VBEs and infinitely stiffness beams as well. The interaction
between the corrugated steel plate and the VBEs is analyzed theoretically, and the results are verified by finite element analyses (FEA).
Then the strength reduction factor caused by the fishplate connections is established by introducing the rigidity ratio of the fishplate to
the corrugated steel plate. The rigidity ratio of the fishplate can reflect the weak restraint provided by the fishplates. Finally, the lower
limits of strength and stiffness requirements of VBEs in the TCSPSW-VBE design are recommended for practical designs.

2. Elastic buckling behaviors of TCSPSW-VBE

2.1. Finite element model and parameter scope
As shown in Fig. 3, a FEM for elastic buckling analysis is established using the software ABAQUS (version 6.14–4) and is denoted by
FEM-el. The model includes the corrugated steel plate, VBEs, and FBs, which are modeled with the general four-node reduced inte­
gration shell element (S4R). It has been proven by previous studies [26,29,30] that the S4R element can be applied to simulate the
buckling and load-bearing behavior of structures with corrugated plates. The steel material is defined with the elastic modulus of E =
206 GPa, Poisson’s ratio of ν = 0.3. The FBs and VBEs are assumed to be infinitely rigid flat plates with a thickness of 200 mm and a
width of 200 mm and their joints are assumed to be hinged in-plane to avoid their possible contribution to resisting lateral shear forces.
The “hinge connector” in ABAQUS is adopted to achieve the hinged connection. The corrugated steel plate is directly connected to FBs
and VBEs by “merge”, and all nodes of each FB are coupled to its central reference point for ease of applying boundary conditions and
loads. Three translational degrees of freedom along x, y, and z and two rotational degrees of freedom around y and z are completely
constrained for the reference point in the bottom FB. Similarly, for the reference point in the top FB, only one translational degree of
freedom along y and two rotational degrees of freedom around y and z are completely constrained. The left and right VBEs are
connected the TCSPSW and unconstrained. A concentrated horizontal force with the value of 1.0 is applied to the reference point in the
top FB. To determine the elastic buckling loads, the linear buckling analyses are adopted. Convergence and mesh sensitivity analyses
are undertaken to ensure that no significant error is produced due to the inappropriate mesh division. The numerical results of four
levels of the mesh size are tabulated in Table 1. It indicates that when the mesh size is reduced to 20 mm, the corresponding difference
of the buckling loads is less than 1.0%, compared to that of the mesh size being 30 mm. Therefore, a mesh size of approximately 20 mm
is adopted in this study, indicating to be sufficient for acceptable computation time and accuracy.
It is well known that when subjected to shear loads, corrugated steel shear walls demonstrate global buckling, local buckling, and

Fig. 2. TCSPSW-VBE studied in this paper.

4
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

Fig. 3. FEM for elastic buckling analysis of TCSPSW-VBE (FEM-el).

Table 1
Buckling load with different mesh size.

Mesh size (mm) 50 40 30 20

Buckling load (kN) 2128 2120 2263 2258

Run time (s) 22 26 54 106

Table 2
Numerical examples in FEM-el.

Group d1 (mm) d2 (mm) a (mm) λ (mm) ts (mm) bs (mm) hs (mm)

L150 50 25 30 150 4–8 1050–6300 2100–3600

L210 75 30 30 210 4–8 1050–6300 2100–3780
L270 100 35 35 270 4–8 1080–6480 2160–3780
L340 120 50 45 340 4–8 1360–6460 2380–3740
L400 140 60 50 400 4–8 1600–6400 2400–4000

5
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

interaction buckling [11,31]. However, for the purposes of this study, only global buckling is considered, and local and interaction
buckling can be avoided by selecting numerical examples that meet the required size range of corrugation shape. Fortunately,
GB50017 [32] specifies a shear buckling and interaction buckling prevention design by utilizing a rational size range of subpanels in
the corrugation shape, achieved by ensuring that the width-to-thickness ratio of shear-resistant plate elements is less than approxi­
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
mately 80 235/fy . This means that the local and interaction buckling of subpanels may be eliminated automatically in the strength

Fig. 4. Buckling modes of TCSPSW-VBE obtained by using FEM-el.

6
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

design of steel corrugated shear walls. Following this size range requirement and other research applications and recommendations [9,
18,20,27,33], five groups of examples with different dimensions in TCSPSW-VBE are selected and listed in Table 2. In the example
dimensions, bs, hs, and ts refer to the width, height, and thickness of the corrugated plate, respectively, while d1 and d2 represent the
subpanel widths, γ is the inclined angle, and a and λ are the corrugation depth and length respectively. The examples are conveniently
named L followed by the corrugation length (unit: mm). It is apparent from Table 2 that the maximum subpanel width-to-thickness
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
ratio of 35 is significantly less than the limit value of 80 235/fy specified in GB50017 [32].

2.2. Global elastic shear buckling load

Global elastic shear buckling load in TCSPSWs is a major concern and may serve as a key determinant in establishing the
normalized height-to-thickness ratio during the strength design process. The buckling modes obtained, as depicted in Fig. 4, represent
typical examples of the TCSPSW-VBE with varying aspect ratios. This study has revealed that the global elastic shear buckling stress is
predominantly dependent on the height of the TCSPSW-VBE, while the increase in wall width has only a negligible impact on the shear
buckling stress. This finding is consistent with the orthotropic plate theory.
When the corrugated steel plate is recognized as a thin orthotropic plate of uniform thickness [34,35], its equivalent rigidity
constants can be expressed by Eq. (1). Fig. 3 (a) depicts the geometric parameters, namely a, d1, d2, q, γ, and λ, for a single repeating
corrugation section.
( )
Ets a2 d2 λ Ets 3 q Ets 3
Dx = d1 + , Dy = ,H= (1)
2λ 3 cos γ q 12(1 − ν2 ) λ 12(1 + ν)
Easley et al. [7,8] provided the shear elastic buckling stress expressed by Eq. (2) with the global shear buckling coefficient kg of 36
for simply supported corrugated metal shear diaphragms and 68.4 for clamped supported diaphragms. Some researchers [31,36,37]
also suggested similar values for trapezoidally corrugated steel webs under actual boundary conditions.
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
4
Dx 3 Dy
τcr = kg (2)
ts hs 2
Tong and Guo [9] also derived the formula with the same form as Eq. (2) by considering the corrugated plates as orthotropic flat
plates. However, the coefficient kg is not constant and is determined as follows:

kg = (7 + 20θ)β2 + 8β + 61.2 + 29.5θ (3)

√̅̅̅̅̅̅
hs 4 Dy H
β= , θ = √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ (4)
bs Dx Dx Dy

Dou [10] proposed a revision of the coefficient kg of sinusoidally corrugated plates (Eq. (5)), considering the corrugation number.
The parameters a1, a2, b1, and b2 are the functions of the geometric parameters of the corrugation. Additionally, the coefficient of the
large-scale trapezoidally corrugated plates modified by Wang [11] is expressed by Eq. (6).

kg = a0 + b0 (hs /bs ) − a0 (hs /bs )0.5

a0 = a1 + a2 (bs /λ) (5)
b0 = b1 + b2 (bs /λ)

Fig. 5. Comparison of kg values between FEA and proposed Eq. (8).

7
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

/ /
kg = 75.62 + 1.31a ts − 5.44hs λ (6)

This paper presents the global shear buckling coefficient by introducing the number of repeating corrugation sections m (Eq. (7))
based on the research results from Tong and Guo [9]. Through extensive numerical examples using FEM-el, the value of kg is obtained
and expressed by Eq. (8).
m = bs /λ (7)

207β 102
kg = 50 + + + 161θβ3 (8)
m βm
Fig. 5 compares the kg values obtained from FEA with those calculated using Eq. (8) for the different groups of TCSPSW-VBE. The
discrepancies of all models are within 10%, with most of them being within 5%. The discrepancies of more than 5% only correspond to
cases with a small number of corrugation sections or large plate thickness, which are not common in engineering practice. Therefore,
the formula predictions agree well with the FEA results, and Eq. (8) can be effectively utilized for calculating the global shear buckling
coefficient of TCSPSWs. The corrugation number m can also be interpreted as the ratio between the width of the shear wall and the
corrugation length, reflecting the relative size of the overall dimensions of the wall and the dimensions of the corrugation. After being
modified by the corrugation number m, the global shear buckling coefficient formula exhibits a significant improvement in accuracy
compared to that obtained using the orthotropic-plate buckling theory.

3. Shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE

This Section aims to establish the shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE Vu, which comprises of the contributions of the TCSPSW
and VBEs, as defined by Eq. (9):
Vu = V s + V c (9)

Fig. 6. Comparison of FEA and tests conducted by Zuo et al. [28].

8
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

Here Vs is the shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE without considering the contribution of the VBEs, while Vc is the contribution
induced by two VBEs behaving as a moment-resistant frame.

3.1. Finite element model

In order to ensure the accuracy of the numerical analyses employed in the elastic-plastic analysis of TCSPSWs, it is generally
advisable to validate the FEM against test results. Consequently, this study has chosen to verify the FEM utilized herein through
comparison with three prior tests: those conducted by Zuo et al. [28], Tong et al. [24] and Emami et al. [15]. The simulation results,
presented in Figs. 6–8, reveal a high level of consistency between the numerical and test results in terms of load-carrying capacity, with
discrepancies of less than 5.0%. The initial stiffness obtained from the FEM is larger than those obtained from the experimental work.
This is mainly caused by the simplification of boundary conditions in FEM, while the actual boundary conditions of the experiments are
more complicated. For example, the bottom-left corner of the specimen tested by Tong et al. [24] (see Fig. 7 (a)) the bottom sides of the
specimen tested by Emami et al. [15] (see Fig. 8 (a)) are assumed to be fixed completely in the FEM, leading to a larger stiffness.
However, the deformation and the ultimate load-bearing capacity are in a good agreement. Although it should be noted that the
corrugation and dimensions in those previous tests differ from those of this study, the comparisons of their respective results with the
present numerical results serves to validate the FEM and solving technique employed in this study.
Two elastoplastic analysis models, namely FEM-ep1 and FEM-ep0, have been developed for the purpose of computing the shear-
bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE with and without considering the contribution of VBEs, respectively. Additionally, an exclusive FEM,
denoted as FEM-vbe, has been employed to evaluate the contribution of VBEs. The details of these models and their distinctions can be
observed in Fig. 9.
Fig. 9 (b) illustrates that FEM-ep0 is obtained by modifying FEM-el (see Fig. 3). In FEM-ep0, the steel material is also defined with
the elastic modulus of E = 206 GPa, Poisson’s ratio of ν = 0.3. And the steel material is assumed to be ideally elastoplastic, with the
yield stress (fy) of 235 MPa and 355 MPa specified in GB50017 [32]. No hardening of the steel material plasticity spreading is
considered. VBEs still adopt flat plates with dimensions ranging from 150 mm to 200 mm in width and 15 mm–40 mm in thickness,
which are commonly used in practical applications. The initial imperfection shape is consistent with the first-order global buckling

Fig. 7. Comparison of FEA and tests conducted by Tong et al. [24].

9
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

Fig. 8. Comparison of FEA and tests conducted by Emami et al. [15].

shape with a magnitude of hs/500 [21,22]. The connections of FBs and VBEs are still treated as hinged in order to eliminate the
contribution of VBEs [19,21,22]. The analysis considers elastoplastic nonlinear behavior with geometric large deformation, while
applying displacement-controlled lateral loading at the top reference point. Apart from the aforementioned details, all other pa­
rameters, such as the boundary conditions, mesh division, and example dimensions, remain identical to those in FEM-el. The mesh size
sensitivity investigation for FEM-ep0 also indicates that the mesh size of 20 mm is dense enough for acceptable computation time and
accuracy, as shown in Table 3.
In addition to the flat plates, hollow section or H-shaped steel can be employed to construct VBEs (see Fig. 10). While the
contribution of flat plate VBEs (Vc) is insignificant compared to Vs, it is significant for VBEs made of hollow section or H-shaped steel.
Consequently, FEM-ep1 is formed by altering the hinged to fixed connections between FBs and VBEs in FEM-ep0, as depicted in Fig. 9
(c). FEM-vbe (Fig. 9 (d)) is obtained by removing the corrugated steel plate from FEM-ep1, behaving as a moment-resistant frame. The
dimensions of VBEs in FEM-ep1 and FEM-vbe are listed in Table 4, and the FEM is illustrated in Fig. 11.

3.2. The shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE without considering the contribution of VBEs
This Section primarily focuses on examining the shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE, without considering the contribution of
VBEs, through the utilization of FEM-ep0. A major parameter, the height-to-width ratio of TCSPSW-VBE, is involved in the numerical
analyses.

3.2.1. Typical finite element results

Fig. 12 displays the load-displacement curves of TCSPSW-VBE with varying height-to-width ratios. It can be observed that TCSPSW-
VBE provides sufficient shear-bearing capacity and adequate ductility. It is noteworthy that the shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE
is primarily influenced by the height of the structure, rather than its width. Furthermore, as shown in Fig. 13, the walls demonstrate
full-sectional yielding of the corrugated plates, thus achieving better material utilization efficiency. The out-of-plane displacement
distribution is consistent with the elastic buckling mode, as illustrated in Fig. 14.

3.2.2. Ultimate strength factor φ

An ultimate strength factor φ is defined by Eq. (10) to assess the shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE.

10
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

Fig. 9. Finite element models of TCSPSW-VBE adopted in this study.

Table 3
Shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSWs with different mesh size.

Mesh size (mm) 50 40 30 20

Shear-bearing capacity (kN) 1430 1427 1465 1465

Run time (s) 77 106 235 503

/
φ = Vs Vy , Vy = bs ts fvy (10)

where Vs represents the ultimate shear force of TCSPSW-VBE without considering the contribution of the VBEs; Vy refers to the shear-
yielding load of the corrugated steel plate; fvy denotes the shear yield stress of the steel material.
Similar to the case of flat steel plate walls subjected to shear, the normalized height-to-thickness ratio is utilized to predict the
shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE, expressed as follows:
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
/ ̅
λn = fvy τcr (11)

where τcr is the elastic shear buckling stress, which is calculated based on the proposed formulas Eq. (2) and Eq. (8).

11
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

Fig. 10. The cross-section types of VBEs, including hollow section or H-shaped steel.

Table 4
Example dimensions of VBEs with hollow section and H-shaped steel.

Group bc (mm) dc (mm) tcw (mm) tcf (mm)

Hollow section 100–200 150–200 8–20 8–20

H-shaped steel 100–200 150–200 10–15 10–15

Fig. 11. Finite element models for considering the contribution of VBEs.

Fig. 12. Load-displacement curves for different height-to-width ratios (hs = 2160 mm, ts = 4 mm).

Numerous FEA results concerning the ultimate strength factor φ and the normalized height-to-thickness ratio λn are depicted in
Fig. 15, where the yield stress fy is set to 235 MPa, and other parameters are itemized in Table 2. It can be seen that the FEA results
manifest a roughly uniform dispersion and can be estimated by Eq. (12) as follows:

12
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

Fig. 13. Von Mises stress distribution at the peak load.

1
φ=( )1.61 (12)
1 + 0.8λn 3.2

For the corrugation length λ ranging from 150 mm to 400 mm, Eq. (12) is capable of predicting the shear-bearing capacity of
TCSPSW-VBE without considering the contribution of VBEs accurately (see Fig. 15). Further comparison details, concerning varying
yield stress and thickness are depicted in Fig. 16, where the corrugation length λ is taken to be 270 mm.
It is well known that the shear-bearing capacity is dependent upon various factors, such as the height-to-thickness ratio, the aspect
ratio, the wavelength, and the corrugation number. The normalized height-to-thickness ratio λn, however, provides an effective
measure for comprehensively reflecting the influences of these diverse parameters. Therefore, Eq. (12) can furnish precise predictions
with remarkable accuracy.

3.3. Contribution of VBEs in predicting the shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE

3.3.1. Theoretical analysis of the interaction between TCSPSW and VBEs
VBEs in TCSPSW-VBEs are designed to provide boundary constraints on TCSPSW. Therefore, a proper design is that VBEs have not
yielded when the peak load of TCSPSW-VBE is attained.
As illustrated in Fig. 17, the entire shear force carried by TCSPSW-VBE can be segregated into two components: Vs resisted by
TCSPSW and Vc resisted by VBEs. Owing to the accordion effect of corrugated plates, it can be assumed that only shear force Va exists at
the interface of TCSPSW and VBEs, which can be expressed through Eq. (13).
Va = Vs hs /bs (13)
Fig. 17 (b) can be converted to Fig. 17 (d), namely the FEM-ep0 used in Section 3.2 to calculate the shear-bearing capacity of
TCSPSW-VBE without considering the contribution of VBEs. According to Eq. (10), the ultimate shear force Vs in Fig. 17 (d) can be

13
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

Fig. 14. Out-of-plane displacement distribution at the peak load.

Fig. 15. The ultimate strength factor φ of TCSPSW-VBE without considering the contribution of VBEs.

14
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

Fig. 16. Detailed comparisons of the ultimate strength factor φ of TCSPSW-VBE without considering the contribution of VBEs.

Fig. 17. Total shear force component division for TCSPSW-VBE.

determined as follows:
Vs = φbs ts fvy (14)

As depicted in Fig. 18, the shear force resisted by VBEs (Vc) is comprised of two components, namely Vc1 generated by the story drift
angle and Vc2 generated by the interface force. Consequently, the parameter θs is defined as the story drift angle at the peak point of the
shear load of TCSPSW-VBE, which can approximately correspond to the shear yield story drift angle [20], calculated by Eq. (15). The
formula predictions of Eq. (15) are consistent with the test results of Emami et al. [15] (see Fig. 8).
/
θs = fvy G (15)

Consequently, Vc1 and Vc2 can be obtained by Eq. (16) and Eq. (17), respectively, where bc is the width of VBEs, as illustrated in
Fig. 17 (a). And then Vc is expressed by Eq. (18).
24EIy
Vc1 = θs (16)
hs 2

15
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

Fig. 18. Component of the shear force Vc.

Vc2 = Va bc /hs (17)

24EIy bc
Vc = θ s + Vs (18)
hs 2 bs
The shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE with considering the contribution of VBEs can be obtained by substituting Eq. (14) and
Eq. (18) into Eq. (9), as shown below:
( )
bc
Vu = 1 + Vs + Vc1 (19)
bs
( )
bc 24EIy
Vu = 1 + φbs ts fvy + θs (20)
bs hs 2
This correlation coefficient (1+bc/bs) is quite intriguing, and the finite element model can verify its accuracy described later in the
text. From the assumptions above and analysis, it can be observed that when the width of VBEs is not significantly large, which means
that VBEs undergo primarily bending deformation, Eq. (19) and Eq. (20) is applicable. However, when the width of VBEs is substantial
and the shear deformation cannot be ignored, the formulas are no longer valid and requires further research and analysis.

3.3.2. Verification of the interaction contribution

Fig. 19 illustrates the typical load-displacement curves, depicting the FEA results from FEM-ep1, FEM-ep0, and FEM-vbe, denoted
as Vu-FEM, Vs-FEM, and Vc1-FEM, respectively. By applying Eq. (19), Vu obtained from FEM-ep1 is shown to be consistent with that
obtained from Eq. (19), thus validating the accuracy of Eq. (19). However, when the stiffness of VBEs is considerably large and the
width of the wall is sufficiently small, the story drift angle corresponding to the peak value Vu-FEM does not match that corresponding to

Fig. 19. Typical load-displacement curves in verifying Eq. (19).

16
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

the peak value Vs-FEM, which is not commonly observed in practical scenarios (see Fig. 19 (a)). Notably, the shear yield story drift angle
of VBEs exceeds that of TCSPSWs by a significant margin, as depicted in Fig. 19. Therefore, the VBEs remain in the elastic stage, which
corroborates the previous assumption.
Additional FEA results of the peak load are plotted in Fig. 20 in order to validate the accuracy of Eq. (19). The results of Eq. (19) are
nearly equivalent to FEA results, demonstrating disparities of less than 5.0%. This indicates that the theoretical analysis of the
interaction between TCSPSW and VBEs is indeed accurate. Furthermore, in Eq. (19) Vs and Vc1 are replaced by Eq. (14) and Eq. (16),
ultimately resulting in the design formula as exhibited in Eq. (20). Finally, a comparative analysis between FEA results and design
formulas is presented in Fig. 21, where the discrepancies range from 0% to 15%. This explicitly confirms that the design formulas are
precise and conservative, thereby affirming that Eq. (20) can be effectively implemented in order to predict the shear-bearing capacity
of TCSPSW-VBE with considering the contribution of VBEs in practical engineering applications.

4. Shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE with considering torsional stiffness of fishplate connections

It is widely acknowledged that TCSPSWs may be connected to the FBs through fishplates as depicted in Fig. 2 (b)~(d). Nevertheless,
it must be noted that the fishplate connections can merely provide weaker restrictions in comparison to the direct connections without
the fishplates, as presented in Fig. 2 (a). Accordingly, the fishplates may have a detrimental effect on the shear-bearing capacity of
TCSPSW-VBE, which is a principal concern in this Section.

4.1. Finite element model (FEM-fp)

Figs. 22 and 23 illustrate the FEM that takes into account the influence of fishplate connections (FEM-fp). To model the fishplates,
the shell elements S4R are employed and merged with the corrugated steel plate and vertical boundary plates. The nodes located at the
top and the bottom of FEM-fp are respectively coupled to their central reference points for the purpose of applying boundary conditions
and loads. The material properties, boundary condition, and mesh division employed in FEM-fp are consistent with those used in FEM-
ep1. It should be noted that the VBEs are flat plates of dimensions 200mm × 30 mm, and therefore their in-plane shear-resistant force
may be disregarded. Table 5 provides the dimensions of the fishplates used in the example, while Group L270 in Table 2 presents the
scope of corrugated steel plates.
The initial imperfection shape has a particular impact on the shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE. Fig. 24 displays the initial
imperfection that corresponds with the global buckling shape obtained through FEM-ep1 without the fishplates, and such initial
imperfection is directly used in FEM-fp, since it leads to a lower shear-bearing load. The magnitude of the imperfections is hs/500.

4.2. The reduction factor αp of shear-bearing capacity from fishplate connections

Fig. 25 displays the FEA results of TCSPSW-VBE utilizing fishplate connections. When compared to direct connections, the fishplate
connections inadequately constrain the torsion at the top and bottom of TCSPSWs completely, leading to a decrease in shear-bearing
capacity.
The reduction factor αp is defined as the ratio of the shear-bearing capacity between the fishplate connection model (FEM-fp) and
the direct connection model (FEM-ep1). It is observed that the reduction factor αp is predominantly dependent on the geometric
parameters dp and tp of the fishplate. Hence, the rigidity ratio ηp is introduced to estimate the reduction factor αp, as expressed in Eq
(21). The rigidity ratio ηp signifies the level of torsional restraint provided by the fishplate. The numerical results reveal that the effect
of hf and tf may be negligible because the torsional deformation primarily occurs on the horizontal plate of the fishplate. The constraint
of the corrugated steel plate is mainly provided by the horizontally placed plates in the fishplate. When the rigidity ratio ηp attains a
sufficient level, the reduction factor αp reaches 1.0, indicating that the torsional deformation of the top and bottom sections can be
adequately constrained. Moreover, when sufficient stiffeners are arranged on the fishplate, the reduction factor αp can also be taken as
1.0, which needs more detailed investigation in the future.
GIt,p hs
ηp = (21)
Dx bs 2

1
It,p = dp tp 3 (22)
3

Here It,p is the free torsion constant of the horizontal plate in the fishplate.
Fig. 26 displays numerous FEA results. The reduction factor depicted in the plot varies between 0.8 and 1.0. As a result, Eq. (23) is
employed to determine the reduction factor αp through fitting.
αp = 1 + 0.012 ln ηp ≤ 1.0 (23)

Vs = αp φbs ts fvy (24)

Fig. 27 provides a comparison between the shear-bearing capacity using FEA and Eq. (24). The differences between the two
methods range from 0% to 15%, indicating a conservative and acceptable level of accuracy for engineering design and application.

17
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

Fig. 20. Comparison and verification of Eq. (19) between FEA results and proposed formulas.

Fig. 21. Comparison and verification of Eq. (20).

5. The lower limits of strength and stiffness of VBEs

This Section focuses on the lower limits of strength and stiffness of VBEs in the TCSPSW-VBE design. Accordingly, the lower limits
of the sectional area and the out-of-plane flexural stiffness of VBEs are determined, maintaining the necessary restraining on TCSPSWs.
In order to ensure that the VBEs yield no earlier than the corrugated steel plate, the lower limit of the sectional area is proposed. As
shown in Eq. (25), Vy is the yield shear force of TCSPSWs.
Vy = bs ts fvy (25)

According to the force component division in Fig. 17, the maximum axial force induced on the cross-section of VBEs is expressed as
/ /
Nmax = Vy hs 2bs = ts hs fvy 2 (26)

Thus, the following inequality is obtained:

18
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

Fig. 22. FEM of TCSPSW-VBE with fishplate connections (FEM-fp).

Fig. 23. FEMs of TCSPSW-VBE with fishplate connections in ABAQUS.

Table 5
Dimensions of fishplates of the examples.

Dimension dp (mm) hf (mm) tp (mm) tf (mm)

Fishplate 150–200 100–200 10–25 10–20

Fig. 24. Initial Imperfection shape employed in FEM.

Nmax ≤ Ac fy (27)

19
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

Fig. 25. Distributions of stress and deformation.

Fig. 26. Reduction factor Eq. (23) and FEA results of FEM-fp.

where Ac is the sectional area of each VBE. As a result, the lower limit of the sectional area is derived as follows:
ts hs
Ac ≥ √̅̅̅ (28)
2 3
It is observed that when Eq. (28) is satisfied by the numerical examples selected in Section 3, there is little to no noticeable out-of-
plane displacement in VBEs. However, in order to apply the practical lower limit of the VBE stiffness in engineering design, the initial
out-of-plane imperfection of VBEs needs to be taken into account and further investigated.
To investigate the lower limit of the stiffness of VBEs, FEM-ep1 introduced in Section 3 is modified. Numerical examples are

20
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

Fig. 27. Comparison of the results between FEA and Eq. (24).

selected with flat plate VBEs ranging from 80 mm to 220 mm in width, and the minimum thickness required to satisfy Eq. (28). The
only difference is that the initial imperfection of VBEs should be considered, corresponding to the cosine trigonometric function with a
magnitude of hs/500, as shown in Fig. 28. Accordingly, the shear-bearing capacity Vu1 is obtained using the modified FEM-ep1 and
then it is divided by Vu0 in Fig. 29, where Vu0 is obtained by fully restraining the out-of-plane displacement of the intersection line
between TCSPSW and VBEs.
The stiffness ratio ηb, a dimensionless parameter, is defined in Eq. (29), where Ix is the out-of-plane flexural stiffness of each VBE.
EIx bs
ηb = (29)
Dx hs 2
Fig. 29 displays numerous results of numerical examples. In most examples meeting the sectional area requirement, there exists no
significant discrepancy in shear-bearing capacity between Vu1 and Vu0. Nevertheless, for a typical example characterized by the largest
aspect ratio and the minimum out-of-plane flexural stiffness, Fig. 30 reveals the out-of-plane displacement. Despite this observation,
the shear-bearing capacity experiences only a 6.4% reduction. Therefore, the lower limit of flexural stiffness of VBEs can be conser­
vatively determined as follows:
EIx bs
ηb = ≥ 0.6 (30)
Dx hs 2
From Fig. 29, it is evident that Eq. (30) is easily satisfied. Eq. (30) suggests that the shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE exhibits
low sensitivity to the stiffness of VBEs very much. This phenomenon arises because the TCSPSW with ridges arranged vertically induces
the accordion effect in the horizontal direction. The TCSPSW behaves as a simplifying of multiple isolated columns that are connected
rigidly with the beams, thereby resulting in the lateral resistance from multiple resistant moment frames. Consequently, the shear
resistance of TCSPSW-VBE in this study is relatively less affected by the stiffness of VBEs, thus leading to a lower demand for stiffness

Fig. 28. Finite element model considering the out-of-plane initial imperfection of VBEs.

21
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

Fig. 29. The lower limit of the out-of-plane flexural stiffness of VEBs.

Fig. 30. Results of a typical example considering the initial imperfection of VBEs in FEM-ep1.

values of VBEs. However, as for TCSPSW-VBE with the ridges installed horizontally, the shear-bearing capacity is more closely related
to the stiffness of VBEs [38]. From Section 4 and Section 5, it is easily discernible that the boundary constraints of trapezoidal edges in
the corrugated steel plates have a more critical role in their shear-bearing capacity than those of straight edges.

6. Design recommendations
The strength design recommendations for TCSPSW-VBE are summarized in Fig. 31. Initially, the dimensions and the material
properties of TCSPSW-VBE are inputted according to engineering requirements. Subsequently, the lower limits of strength and stiffness
of VBEs are checked. Then the ultimate strength factor and the reduction factor are obtained based on the inputted and obtained
parameters. For safety design purposes, the reduction factor αp is conservatively determined according to the lower envelope in Fig. 26.
The expression of the reduction factor αp is shown in Fig. 31. Finally, the shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE under a monotonic
lateral shear force is calculated, considering the contribution of the VBEs.
To facilitate a comparison and intuitive understanding of the shear-bearing capacity design, a typical example of TCSPSW-VBE in
Table 6 is taken, revealing good consistency between formula results employed from Fig. 31 and FEA results, as listed in Table 7. The
shear-bearing capacity from Fig. 31 is 1261 kN, while that obtained from FEA is 1383 kN, both in good agreement with an acceptable
engineering discrepancy of 8.9%.

7. Summary and conclusion

This paper proposes a prefabricated TCSPSW-VBE and presents studies on the global shear stability capacity design of TCSPSW-VBE

22
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

Fig. 31. Design recommends and diagram of the shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE.

Table 6
Dimensions and material properties of a typical example.

Parameters bs (mm) hs (mm) ts (mm) λ (mm) dc (mm) tc (mm) dp (mm) tp (mm) hf (mm) tf (mm) fy (MPa)

Values 3240 2700 4 270 150 30 150 16 100 16 235

Table 7
Obtained results from the typical example from related design formulas.

Parameters kg λn φ ηb ηp αp Vu-formula (kN) Vu-FEM (kN)

Values 92.3 0.86 0.78 3.55 0.019 0.91 1261 1383

23
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

subjected to monotonic shear loads. The main conclusions are drawn as follows.
(1) In the common size range of engineering application, some discrepancies are observed between elastic buckling solutions
obtained from FE analyses and orthotropic plate theory in the corrugated plate, which cannot be ignored. The dimensions of the
corrugation significantly influence buckling behavior. The shear elastic buckling analysis demonstrates that the corrugation
number has a significant effect on the global elastic shear buckling load. The proposed formulas, which consider such an effect,
provide highly accuracy predictions for the elastic buckling stress of corrugated steel plates with two sides simply supported and
two sides clamped supported.
(2) The proposed elastic buckling load is adopted to determine the normalized height-to-thickness ratio λn, which is a compre­
hensive design parameter reflecting all size impacts in predicting the stability behavior of TCSPSW under in-plane shear load.
The ultimate shear strength factor φ is established in the curve of φ~λn by using a larger number of FEA numerical results, and
its accuracy is acceptable in the shear strength design.
(3) The shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE is improved by the interaction between TCSPSW and VBEs. Therefore, its strength
prediction can be conservatively superposed by the contribution of the TCSPSW and VBEs alone. The interactive relationship is
verified by FEA results.
(4) Although fishplate connections provide the advantage of prefabrication and rapid installation on site, they result in weaker
constraints to the corrugated steel plates, leading to a reduction in the shear-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE. This paper
proposed formulas for the reduction factor αp, which agree well with the FEA results, indicating an acceptable level of engi­
neering design accuracy. Besides, the stiffeners on the fishplates have the potential to enhance the reduction factor, which may
be further investigated to improve the design of connecting joints.
(5) This paper proposes a complete design method for the shear-bearing capacity of the TCSPSW-VBE is proposed by additionally
establishing the lower limits of strength and stiffness of VBEs. It recommends both strength and stiffness design (ηb ≥ 0.6) in
VBEs, indicating that the shear-bearing capacity is not sensitive to the stiffness ratios. However, this study has omitted the
effects of frame beams by assumping their infinite stiffness. The finite stiffness of frame beams may cause a reduction in both the
lateral stiffness and load-bearing capacity of TCSPSW-VBE. Furthermore, further investigations will be conducted on the shear-
bearing capacity, considering the interaction between the frame (including beams and columns) and TCSPSW-VBE, with a focus
on the influence of the beam stiffness.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Chen-Bao Wen: Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft. Yan-
Lin Guo: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Project administration, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. Jia-
Qi Zuo: Investigation, Methodology. Hao-Jun Sun: Investigation.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.

Data availability

Data will be made available on request.

Acknowledgments
This study has been supported by research grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51878376). The
authors wish to express their gratitude to the sponsor.

References
[1] E.W. Tromposch, G.L. Kulak, Cyclic and static behaviour of thin panel steel plate shear walls, Structural engineering report no. 145, Department of Civil
Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, 1987.
[2] M. Elgaaly, V. Caccese, C. Du, Postbuckling behavior of steel-plate shear walls under cyclic loads, J. Struct. Eng. 119 (1993) 588–605, https://doi.org/10.1061/
(ASCE)0733-9445(1993)119:2(588).
[3] J.W. Berman, Seismic behavior of code designed steel plate shear walls, Eng. Struct. 33 (2011) 230–244, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.10.015.
[4] R. A, M. F. R, Analysis of Steel Plate Shear Walls, 2012, pp. 549–554, https://doi.org/10.3850/978-981-08-6218-3_ss-we025.
[5] R. Purba, M. Bruneau, Experimental investigation of steel plate shear walls with in-span plastification along horizontal boundary elements, Eng. Struct. 97
(2015) 68–79, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.04.008.
[6] Y.L. Guo, J.S. Zhu, Research progress of shear walls: types and design methods, Gongcheng Lixue/Engineering Mech. 37 (2020) 19–33, https://doi.org/
10.6052/j.issn.1000-4750.2019.08.0432.
[7] J.T. Easley, D.E. McFarland, Buckling of light-gage corrugated metal shear diaphragms, J. Struct. Div. 95 (1969) 1497–1516, https://doi.org/10.1061/
JSDEAG.0002313.
[8] J.T. Easley, Buckling formulas for corrugated metal shear diaphragms, J. Struct. Div. 101 (1975) 1403–1417, https://doi.org/10.1061/JSDEAG.0004095.
[9] J.Z. Tong, Y.L. Guo, Elastic buckling behavior of steel trapezoidal corrugated shear walls with vertical stiffeners, Thin-Walled Struct. 95 (2015) 31–39, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2015.06.005.
[10] C. Dou, Z.Q. Jiang, Y.L. Pi, Y.L. Guo, Elastic shear buckling of sinusoidally corrugated steel plate shear wall, Eng. Struct. 121 (2016) 136–146, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.04.047.

24
C.-B. Wen et al. Journal of Building Engineering 72 (2023) 106553

[11] S. Wang, Y. Zhang, T. Luo, Y. Liu, Elastic critical shear buckling stress of large-scale corrugated steel web used in bridge girders, Eng. Struct. 244 (2021),
112757, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112757.
[12] J.W. Berman, O.C. Celik, M. Bruneau, Comparing hysteretic behavior of light-gauge steel plate shear walls and braced frames, Eng. Struct. 27 (2005) 475–485,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2004.11.007.
[13] J.W. Berman, M. Bruneau, Experimental investigation of light-gauge steel plate shear walls, J. Struct. Eng. 131 (2005) 259–267, https://doi.org/10.1061/
(ASCE)0733-9445(2005)131:2(259).
[14] N. Shimizu, R. Kanno, K. Ikarashi, K. Sato, K. Hanya, Cyclic behavior of corrugated steel shear diaphragms with end failure, J. Struct. Eng. 139 (2013) 796–806,
https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)st.1943-541x.0000669.
[15] F. Emami, M. Mofid, A. Vafai, Experimental study on cyclic behavior of trapezoidally corrugated steel shear walls, Eng. Struct. 48 (2013) 750–762, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2012.11.028.
[16] F. Emami, M. Mofid, On the hysteretic behavior of trapezoidally corrugated steel shear walls, Struct. Des. Tall Special Build. 23 (2014) 94–104, https://doi.org/
10.1002/tal.1025.
[17] H. Kalali, M. Hajsadeghi, T. Zirakian, F.J. Alaee, Hysteretic performance of SPSWs with trapezoidally horizontal corrugated web-plates, Steel Compos. Struct. 19
(2015) 277–292, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2015.19.2.277.
[18] M. Bahrebar, M.Z. Kabir, T. Zirakian, M. Hajsadeghi, J.B.P. Lim, Structural performance assessment of trapezoidally-corrugated and centrally-perforated steel
plate shear walls, J. Constr. Steel Res. 122 (2016) 584–594, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2016.03.030.
[19] C. Dou, X. Cheng, Y.-Y. Zhao, N. Yang, Shear resistance and design of infill panels in corrugated-plate shear walls, J. Struct. Eng. 147 (2021), 04021179, https://
doi.org/10.1061/(asce)st.1943-541x.0003162.
[20] C. Dou, Y.L. Pi, W. Gao, Shear resistance and post-buckling behavior of corrugated panels in steel plate shear walls, Thin-Walled Struct. 131 (2018) 816–826,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2018.07.039.
[21] J.Z. Tong, Y.L. Guo, Shear resistance of stiffened steel corrugated shear walls, Thin-Walled Struct. 127 (2018) 76–89, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
tws.2018.01.036.
[22] J.Z. Tong, Y.L. Guo, W.H. Pan, Ultimate shear resistance and post-ultimate behavior of double-corrugated-plate shear walls, J. Constr. Steel Res. 165 (2020),
105895, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2019.105895.
[23] J.Z. Tong, Y.L. Guo, J.Q. Zuo, Elastic buckling and load-resistant behaviors of double-corrugated-plate shear walls under pure in-plane shear loads, Thin-Walled
Struct. 130 (2018) 593–612, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2018.06.021.
[24] J.Z. Tong, Y.L. Guo, J.Q. Zuo, J.K. Gao, Experimental and numerical study on shear resistant behavior of double-corrugated-plate shear walls, Thin-Walled
Struct. 147 (2020), 106485, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2019.106485.
[25] A. Farzampour, J.A. Laman, Behavior prediction of corrugated steel plate shear walls with openings, J. Constr. Steel Res. 114 (2015) 258–268, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jcsr.2015.07.018.
[26] A. Farzampour, I. Mansouri, J.W. Hu, Seismic behavior investigation of the corrugated steel shear walls considering variations of corrugation geometrical
characteristics, Int. J. Steel Struct. 18 (2018) 1297–1305, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13296-018-0121-z.
[27] Y. Ding, E.F. Deng, L. Zong, X.M. Dai, N. Lou, Y. Chen, Cyclic tests on corrugated steel plate shear walls with openings in modularized-constructions, J. Constr.
Steel Res. 138 (2017) 675–691, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2017.08.019.
[28] J.Q. Zuo, B.L. Zhu, Y.L. Guo, C.B. Wen, J.Z. Tong, Experimental and numerical study of Steel Corrugated-Plate Coupling Beam connecting shear walls, J. Build.
Eng. 54 (2022), 104662, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2022.104662.
[29] A. Farzampour, I. Mansouri, C.H. Lee, H.B. Sim, J.W. Hu, Analysis and design recommendations for corrugated steel plate shear walls with a reduced beam
section, Thin-Walled Struct. 132 (2018) 658–666, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2018.09.026.
[30] Q. Zhao, J. Sun, Y. Li, Z. Li, Cyclic analyses of corrugated steel plate shear walls, Struct. Des. Tall Special Build. 26 (2017) 1–17, https://doi.org/10.1002/
tal.1351.
[31] J. Yi, H. Gil, K. Youm, H. Lee, Interactive shear buckling behavior of trapezoidally corrugated steel webs, Eng. Struct. 30 (2008) 1659–1666, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.11.009.
[32] GB 50017-2017, Code for Design of Steel Structures, China Plan Publishing Company, Beijing, 2017.
[33] E.F. Deng, L. Zong, H.P. Wang, F.W. Shi, Y. Ding, High efficiency analysis model for corrugated steel plate shear walls in modular steel construction, Thin-
Walled Struct. 156 (2020), 106963, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2020.106963.
[34] S. Timoshenko, S. Woinowsky-Krieger, Theory of Plates and Shells, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1959.
[35] S. Timoshenko, Theory of Elastic Stability, second ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1961.
[36] M.F. Hassanein, O.F. Kharoob, Behavior of bridge girders with corrugated webs: (I) Real boundary condition at the juncture of the web and flanges, Eng. Struct.
57 (2013) 554–564, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.03.004.
[37] R. Sause, T.N. Braxtan, Shear strength of trapezoidal corrugated steel webs, J. Constr. Steel Res. 67 (2011) 223–236, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jcsr.2010.08.004.
[38] Y.L. Guo, J.Q. Zuo, C.B. Wen, H.J. Sun, Research on corrugated steel plate shear walls in prefabricated residential buildings, in: Chineses, Research Report:
202201), Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, 2022.

25