KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering pISSN 1226-7988, eISSN 1976-3808

DOI 10.1007/s12205-020-0519-y www.springer.com/12205

Structural Engineering

Experimental Research on the Shear Performance of the Two-Storey

Composite Cold-Formed Thin-Walled Steel Wall

Yunpeng Chua, Xiangrong Hea, Yong Yaoa, and Hongjie Houa

a
School of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Southwest University of Science and Technology, Mianyang 621010, China

ARTICLE HISTORY ABSTRACT

Received 3 April 2019 The composite wall made of the cold-formed thin-walled steel has good shear performance.
Revised 7 August 2019 When it is used in buildings, its weak part is located at the joint of floors and becomes the first
Accepted 13 November 2019 broken part under the action of the earthquake. The shear test of five Two-storey Composite
Published Online 25 December 2019 Cold-formed Thin-walled Steel Walls (TCS) under cyclic loading has been carried out. The
influences of axial pressures, types of anti-pulling bolts and panel materials on shear
KEYWORDS performances are examined. The results show that under the same working condition, the
energy dissipation capacity of calcium silicate panel specimens is significantly lager than that of
Cold-formed steel wall the gypsum panel specimens, and the ultimate bearing capacity is also greater. The axial
Cyclic loading pressure has a great influence on the ultimate bearing capacity and energy dissipation capacity
Experimental research of the specimens. Compared with the specimens designed according to the Ref. (JGJ227-
Theoretical derivation 2011, 2011), the energy dissipation capacity of all specimens is increased by 3.25 times. The
Shear capacity
extrusion between the self-tapping screw and the wall panel causes the screw to fall off,
resulting in a sharp decrease in the rigidity of the specimens at the initial loading stage. After
the failure of the wall panel, the bottom and top beam are restricted by double nuts of the
anti-pulling bolt at the joint of floors, so the bearing capacity of specimens decreases slowly at
the later loading stage. The tilt angle of anti-pulling bolt increases when the TCS wall is loaded
to the later stage. The force state of the self-tapping screw on the hold-down is changed from
bearing shear force to bearing tension and shear force, resulting in fast failure of the anti-
pulling bolt suit. The load borne by the anti-pulling bolt suit is transferred to floor beams and
their supporting stiffeners, causing them to collapse rapidly.

1. Introduction reconstruction and extension. It is in line with the demand of

The TCS wall consists of two storeys of upper and lower walls
which are connected by anti-pulling bolt suit at the joint of
floors. The anti-pulling bolt suit consists of an anti-pulling bolt,
two hold-downs and two matching nuts. The joint of floors is
made of the top beam, bottom beam, boundary beam, anti-pulling
bolt suit and the panel. At present, the construction method is to
transfer the wall frames of upper and lower floors to the site after
the processing is finished in the factory and then assemble the
joint of floors, forming the recommended connection (Ref,
JGJ227-2011, 2011) as shown in Fig. 1(a). The wall frame and
the panel are connected by self-tapping screws. The structural
system of the TCS wall has the advantages of rapid construction
speed, convenient disassembly and installation, and easy
sustainable development, is easy to realize the industrialization
of architecture (Ye and Zhou, 2016; Chen et al., 2017) and is
suitable for the extensive application in the field of housing
construction. At present, a large number of such houses have
been built in the world.
In order to improve the shear performance of the composite
cold-formed thin-walled steel wall, many researchers have
conducted experimental work and theoretical analysis on the
shear performance of the single-storey wall. For example,
Serrette (Serrette and Nolan, 2009) and Girard (Girard and
Tarpy, 1982) found that decreasing the spacing of wall studs
could reduce the failure load of the shear wall with gypsum
panel. The reason is that the spacing of self-tapping screws on
the panel is reduced when the wall studs is encrypted, which

CORRESPONDENCE Xiangrong He hxr_18030924540@163.com School of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Southwest University of Science and Technology,
Mianyang 621010, China
ⓒ 2020 Korean Society of Civil Engineers
2 Y. Chu et al.

causes the panel damage and reduces the bearing capacity of the
shear wall. Peck (Peck et al., 2012) and Lin (Lin et al., 2014)
studied the influence of the height-width ratio on the bearing
capacity of walls. It was reported that when the height-width
ratio varied from 0.3 to 2.0, the shear capacity of oriented strand
board (OSB) wall and gypsum board wall was insensitive to the
change of the height-width ratio (Tian et al., 2004; Xu and Joel,
2006; Ye et al., 2015; Lin et al., 2014). McCreless and Girard
(McCreless and Tarpy, 1978; Girard and Tarpy, 1982; Serrette et
Fig. 2. Force Diagram of the Lower Wall
al., 1997; Gad et al., 1999) found that the shear capacity of the
wall increased with increasing of the size and the thickness of the
wall frame, however, the ductility and energy dissipation capacity of
the wall reduced. In 2017, Chen and Ye (Ye et al., 2015; Wang
and Ye, 2015) proposed a new cold-formed thin-walled steel
load-bearing composite wall system suitable for multi-storey
light-steel houses, which took into account the structural seismic,
fire prevention and construction techniques. The square section
Fig. 3. Size of the Material Properties Specimen
thin-walled steel column filled with fine stone concrete was used
as the side column of the wall. The side column and guide rail of
the composite wall were connected with the floor system by the structural earthquake resistance, should be set at the bottom of
thickened hold-down for strengthening the integrity of the each storey of the TCS wall to coordinate the deformation of
structure. The joint of floors is the weak part of the TCS wall, in upper and lower walls. According to the Ref. (JGJ227-2011,
which case the type and arrangement of anti-pulling bolt suit 2011), Eq. (1) can be used to calculate the tensile or compressive
used to coordinate the deformation of the upper and lower walls force of the anti-pulling bolt (Fig. 2). The anti-pulling bolt suit
are very important. Shaking table test of low-rise buildings have transfers the force to the wall studs of the TCS wall through the
been carried out to demonstrate that the buildings have good self-tapping screws. Under cyclic loading, the self-tapping
seismic performance under the action of 7 to 9 grades earthquake screws are prone to shear failure and an extrusion failure of the
(Li et al., 2013b). hole wall may occur (Li et al., 2013b). In SAP2000, the joint of
The mode of the joint of floors (Fig. 1) makes the transmission floors is simplified to hinged joint, and then the TCS wall is
force discontinuous and becomes the weak part of the TCS wall simulated using the skeleton curve and the Pivot connection unit.
under the action of earthquake. When it is used in multi-storey The simplified nonlinear analysis of the whole structure is
buildings, the horizontal seismic force will increase with the carried out by referring to the method of equivalent brace. The
increase of the storeys. When the horizontal force is loaded on results obtained from this simplified analysis are in good
the top of the TCS wall, the bending moment and shear force are agreement with the results obtained from the shaking table test of
generated at the bottom of both storey of the TCS wall. Therefore, the whole structure (Li et al., 2013a), indicating that the
the anti-pulling bolt suit, which is the key to the success of simplified analysis method is rational.

Fig. 1. Connection Diagram of the TCS Wall: (a) Recommended Connection in Ref. (JGJ227-2011, 2011), (b) The Component Diagram
 KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 3

N t = ηPS h / b (1)
where Nt represents the upward tensile force or the downward
compressive force caused by the overturning moment, η represents
the correction factor of axial pressure, Ps represents the
horizontal shearing force borne by the wall section at the position
of one anti-pulling bolt suit, h represents the height of the lower
wall, and b represents the width of the lower wall.
In order to meet the requirement of strong connection and
weak parts in seismic design, it is better to increase the number
of anti-pulling bolts and change the mechanical performance of
them. Based on this, the shear resistance test of the TCS wall was
carried out to discuss the influence of different axial pressures
and plate types on the shear resistance under the condition of
adding the number of anti-pulling bolt and using the double-nut
anti-pulling bolt. And obtain the skeleton curve characteristic
values which provides the basic data for the seismic performance
analysis of structures based on the simplified mechanical
model.
2. Experimental Work
2.1 Material Test
The material used is Q235B grade galvanized steel plate with
nominal thickness of 1.0 mm. The specimen is produced according
to the Ref. (GB/T 228.1-2010, 2010), with the size of b = 15 mm,
S0 = b × t = 15 mm2, L0 = 11.3 × S0 = 44 mm, Lc = L0 + 20 = 64
mm, which is shown in Fig. 3.
It was found from the tensile test of specimens that the elastic
modulus is 160.19 GPa, the yield stress is 311.16 MPa, the
yielding strain is 0.0019, the ultimate strength is 379.07 MPa,
and the elongation is 22.44%. The specimen is loaded to failure.
The failure strain is 0.22 and the failure stress is 292.45 MPa.
of the upper wall are type U89 × 44.5 × 1. The stiffeners of the
floor beam and wall supports are type C200 × 40 × 10 × 1. The
stiffener of boundary beam is type U200 × 40 × 1. The inclined
flat strap is type 40 × 1. All connections between the members of
the wall frame are made with round-head self-tapping screws
ST4.2 × 13 and the spacing of self-tapping screws is shown in
Fig. 4(a). The spacing of the self-tapping screws on boundary
beams is 100 mm. The length of floor beams is 200 mm and the
floor beams’ extension parts are flush with the support’s stiffener.
The specific size and structure of the specimens are shown in Fig.
4(a). The keel of a side wall stud is an I-shaped section made of
two C-shaped sections of C89 and the keel of middle wall stud is a
single-limb section of C89, as shown in Fig. 4(b).
Designed according to the Ref. (JGJ227-2011, 2011), the
first type of anti-pulling bolt suit consists of an anti-pulling bolt
with the diameter of 12 mm, a nut and matching gaskets at each
end of the anti-pulling bolt. The bolt is made with Q235B
structural steel (Fig. 5(a)). The second type of anti-pulling bolt
suit is designed on the basis of the first one but there are two
nuts at each end (Fig. 5(b)). The hold-down’s bottom plate is
placed between two nuts, and the bottom plate attaches to the
top beam or the bottom beam. The hold-down is connected to
the wall stud by self-tapping screws. The anti-pulling bolt is
close to the wall stud in the same position as recommended in
Ref. (JGJ227-2011, 2011). The schematic of the structure is
shown in Fig. 1(b). Table 1 lists the numbers and compositions
of the specimens.

2.2 Design and Manufacture of Specimens

Three groups of five TCS wall specimens were designed according
to different types and thicknesses of plates, types of anti-pulling
bolts and axial pressures. The height of the section size of wall
frame keel of the specimens is 89 mm and the double-sided
cladding panels are adopted on the specimens. According to the
requirements of Ref. (JGJ227-2011, 2011), the production of
specimens should meet the requirements of actual engineering
materials, consistent connection mode and full-scale model. The
main body of the specimen is composed of five vertical wall
studs with the spacing of 600 mm and five floor beams with the
spacing of 600 mm, two top beams, two bottom beams, two
boundary beams and five anti-pulling bolt suits. The height of
the TCS wall specimen is 1,500 × 2 = 3,000 mm. The height of
the joint of floors is 200 mm. The overall width of the specimen
is 2,400 mm. The cross-section size of wall studs is C89 ×
44.512 × 1, where “C” represents the cross section shape, 89 is
the height of the web, 44.5 is the flange width, 12 is the height of Fig. 4. The Section Form of Steel Members of the TCS Wall: (a) The
the crimping, and 1 is the nominal thickness which is actually Configuration of the Wall Frame, (b) Section Size of Wall Frame
0.92 mm. The top beam of the lower wall and the bottom beam Keel
4 Y. Chu et al.

Fig. 5. The Anti-pulling Bolt Suits: (a) First Type of Anti-pulling Bolt Suit, (b) Second Type of Anti-pulling Bolt Suit, (c) The Hold-Down

Table 1. Numbers and Compositions of the Specimens

Specimen Cross-section size of Vertical force Number and type of anti-pulling bolt
Group Type of panel
number column of the TCS wall (kN) connecting the upper and lower walls
A WT-8-89 C89×44.5×12×1 30.2 2 (a) + 3 (b) Plaster board (8 mm)
WT-9-89 C89×44.5×12×1 40.3 2 (a) + 3 (b)
B WT-11-89 C89×44.5×12×1 30.2 2 (a) + 3 (b) Calcium silicate board
WT-12-89 C89×44.5×12×1 40.3 2 (a) + 3 (b) (8 mm)
C WT-16-89 C89×44.5×12×1 30.2 2 (a) (The quantity specified in Ref.[1]) Plaster board (8 mm)

Fig. 6. Schematic Diagram and Site Layout of Test Equipment: (a) Loading Device, (b) Site Layout of the Specimen
 KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 5

2.3 Test Device
As shown in Fig. 6(a), the test device is mainly composed of the
MTS electro-hydraulic servo program control testing machine,
fixed frame, reaction wall, distributive girder, ground beam and
reaction floor. The photo of the test device with a specimen to be
tested is shown in Fig. 6(b). The distributive girder is a type 20a
joist steel. The upper end of the TCS wall and the jack with load
capacity of 1,000 kN are fixed during the test. The roller that can
move horizontally with the specimen is set between the joist steel
and the top beam. The distributive girder is strengthened by
horizontal support that can move in lateral direction, so as to
avoid the left and right eccentricity instability during the loading
process. The lower end of the TCS wall is connected to the
ground beam by bolts and a 20a channel steel. The ground beam
is fixed to the reaction floor. The axial load is applied to the
upper end of the TCS wall and the horizontal thrust is applied by
a 1,000 kN actuator.
2.4 Loading System
The floor plan is shown in Fig. 7. The structural prototype is a 4-
storey cold-formed thin-walled steel structure house with a
length of 12.8 m, width of 10.8 m, height of 3 m, and a total
height of 12 m. The floor of the structure is loaded with a dead
load of 1.42 kN/m2 and a live load of 2.0 kN/m2. The average
live load of roof is 0.5 kN/m2. The self-weight of the exterior and
interior wall of the structure is 1.0 kN/m2 and 0.4 kN/m2,
respectively, which include the weights of doors and windows.
The total weight of the structure is 1,418,450.0 kN. The structure
weight borne by the bottom wall of unit length is 16,464.0 kN/m.
For the third and fourth storeys of the structure, the corresponding
axial loads on the top of the TCS wall are 30.2 kN and 40.3 kN,
respectively. During the test, the axial load is applied to the top of
the TCS wall and remains unchanged after application. The
initial readings of displacement meters of D9 and D10 are
recorded afterwards. In the horizontal direction, the low cyclic
load is applied to the TCS wall by displacement control. The
loading cycle of each displacement step is 3 times until the
specimen is damaged. The details of loading The displacement
value of each step differs by 5 mm. are shown in Table 2.
2.5 Measuring Point Arrangement
The strain data are collected by DH3815N system, which are
obtained from 10 strain gauges placed on each specimen (Fig. 8).
No. 1 to 5 strain gauges are used to measure the strain of anti-
pulling bolts. No. 6, 8 and 10 strain gauges are used to measure
the strain of columns. No. 7 and 9 strain gauges are used to
measure the strain of diagonal bracing. The YHD100 displacement
sensor is used in the experiment. A total of 15 displacement
meters are used. The D1 displacement meter is used to measure
the horizontal displacement of the bottom beam of the lower
wall. D2 to D8 and D11 displacement meters are used to
measure the in-plane horizontal displacements of the wall at
different heights. D9 and D10 displacement meters are used to
measure the out-of-plane displacements of the wall. D12 and

Fig. 7. Planar Layout of Multi-Storey Cold-Formed Thin-Walled Steel

Structure Fig. 8. Layout of Displacement Meters and Strain Gauges

Table 2. Loading Ways

Load level Displacement value (mm) Cycle index Load level Displacement value (mm) Cycle index
1 ± 5.0 3 2 ±10 3
3 ± 15 3 4 ±20 3
5 ± 25 3 6 ±30 3
7 ± 35 3 8 ±50 3
9 ± 55 3 10 ±60 3
11 ± 65 3 12 ±70 3
6 Y. Chu et al.
D13 displacement meters are used to measure the vertical
displacements at bottom edges of the TCS wall. D14 and D15
displacement meters are used to measure the vertical displacements
of left and right sides of the bottom beam of the lower wall. The
displacement sensor and force sensor fixed on the reaction wall
record the displacement value and load value on the top of the
TCS wall.
3. Test Phenomena and Failure Characteristic
In the initial loading stage of all specimens, the screws at the
joint of floors inclines and the stiffness decreases rapidly, but the
bearing capacity increases. After continued loading, the panels at
the connections between the floors crack. With the cracking of
the panels, the failure of the specimens is accelerated.
3.1 Specimens of WT-8 and WT-9
1) The panels of both specimens are gypsum boards. The
specimens made a slight sound during the process of applying
axial pressures on the top of the wall, but there was no obvious
damage in the joint of floors and on the panels. 2) The local
Fig. 9. Failure Phenomena of the WT-8 with Plaster Panels: (a) Local Buckling of the Floor Beam under Pressure, (b) Plaster Panels at the Joint
Cracked, (c) U-shaped Bottom Beam Deformed
Fig. 10. Failure Phenomena of the WT-9 with Plaster Panels: (a) Deformation of the Connection between Floors, (b) Edge of the Panel was Crushed,
(c) Buckling of Floor Beam Stiffener
buckling occurred on the floor beam of WT-8 when the horizontal
displacement was loaded to ± 15 mm (Fig. 9(a)). When the
horizontal displacement reached ± 25 mm, the panel’s edge next
to the joint of floors was damaged (Fig. 9(b)). When the specimen
was loaded to the failure stage, the U-shaped bottom beam of the
lower wall suffered local buckling (Fig. 9(c)). 3) The WT-9 made
a loud noise during the process of applying axial pressure, but no
visible damage was observed. When the horizontal displacement
reached ± 15 mm, each self-tapping screw next to the joint of
floors pressed against the panel obviously and there were signs
of extrusion damage around the hole wall. In addition, the local
buckling of the floor beam occurred obviously and cracks began to
appear on the edge of the panel next to the joint of floors (Fig.
10(a)). When the horizontal displacement was loaded to ± 25
mm, more cracks were generated between vertical plates at the
floor joint, and left and right edges of panels were seriously
damaged (Fig. 10(b)). In order to ensure the stressed skin action
of the panel, the self-tapping screw used to connect the side of
the wall frame keel and the panel should be encrypted. The self-
tapping screw and the panel crushed one another repeatedly,
causing the self-tapping screw to fall off. The local buckling of

Fig. 11. Failure Phenomena of the WT-11 with Calcium Silicate Panels:
(a) Local Buckling of the Floor Beam under Pressure, (b) Vertical
Cracks Appeared on Panels, (c) Local Buckling of the Bottom
Beam, (d) The Panels at the Position of Fixing Bolt Were
Damaged
the floor beam’s stiffener occurred (Fig. 10(c)), and then the
ultimate bearing capacity of specimens was reduced. 4) The
characteristics of the cold-formed thin-walled beams with wide
limbs lead to local instability easily when there is no restraint of
outer skin covering plate, and it is of high nonlinear characteristics.
With the increase of the beam’s depth-span ratio and initial
defect, the failure resistance of the beam decreases greatly
(Ascione et al., 2015). Therefore, it is necessary to thicken the
thickness of stiffeners set at the joint of floors to strengthen the
local bearing capacity of beams. In addition, the initial out-of-
plane deformation of the beam web caused during assembly
should be avoided as for as possible, which accelerates the
buckling of the beam under external load. Similarly, under the
concentrated force generated by the anti-pulling bolt, the plate
with a thickness of only 1 mm of U-shaped bottom beam will
suffer local buckling. Therefore, thick gaskets with a large
diameter should be added at the concentrated force in engineering
application to disperse the concentrated force.
3.2 Specimens of WT-11 and WT-12
1) When the horizontal displacement of the WT-11 was loaded to
±15 mm, the local buckling of the floor beam occurred (Fig. 11(a)).
When the horizontal displacement reached to ± 20 mm, vertical
splicing cracks appeared in the wall plates at the joint of floors
(Fig. 11(b)). The reason is that the main function of the joint of
floors is to coordinate the stress of the upper and lower walls,
KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 7
Fig. 12. Failure Phenomena of the WT-12 Specimen Produced by the
Method in Ref. (JGJ227-2011, 2011): (a) Local Buckling of the
Floor Beam under Pressure, (b) Horizontal Seam Appeared on
the Panel, (c) The Panel Corner was Separated from the Keel, (d)
The Front of the Specimen after Removing Panels
which leads to its complex stress. In addition, compared with the
joint of floors, the stiffness of the upper and lower walls was
higher, which leaded to the deformation occurring mostly at the
joint of floors, and caused the skin diaphragm with strong
brittleness to crack. When the horizontal displacement reached
± 25 mm, the local buckling of bottom beam occurred (Fig. 11(c)).
When the horizontal displacement reached ± 40 mm, the cracks
widened. When the horizontal displacement reached ± 45 mm,
the cracks propagated to the edge of the plate in the inclined
direction and the self-tapping screws at the bottom of panels fell
off (Fig. 11(d)). When the horizontal displacement reached ± 50
mm, the cracks propagated to the edge of panels to form a
continuous seam, leading to the failure of the specimen. 2) The
panel of the WT-12 is the calcium silicate board. When the
horizontal displacement reached ± 15 mm, the floor beam of the
WT-12 suffered the local buckling (Fig. 12(a)). When the
horizontal displacement reached ± 20 mm, the panel cracked
from the butt seam and formed a horizontal continuous seam
(Fig. 12(b)). When the horizontal displacement reached ± 45
mm, the self-tapping screws at the fixed end of the bottom of the
specimen extruded the hole wall obviously and then fell off
(Fig. 12(c)). After loading to the limit state, the wall frame was
not found to have much damage (Fig. 12(d)). The main damage
occurred at the joint of floors, demonstrating that the main weak
part of the TCS wall was the joint of floors, which was also the
8 Y. Chu et al.
weak part of the whole building structure.
3.3 Specimen of WT-16
WT-16 was a contrastive specimen designed in accordance with
the Ref. (JGJ227-2011, 2011). Its panels were the gypsum board.
The specimen made a loud noise during the application of the
axial pressure but the gypsum board didn't crack. The failure
process of WT-16 was similar to that of other specimens, except
that the bearing capacity was lower and the panels were damaged
more seriously. The difference of the displacement readings
between D6 and D4 at different loading stages was observed. It
was found that the reading of D6 was much larger than that of
D4 when loading to the failure stage. The lower wall had a strong
restraint due to the anti-pulling bolt at the bottom, while the
upper wall had an extremely weak constraint because of the
failure of the panel at the joint of floors, leading to almost
translational motion of the upper wall around the joint of floors.
Fig. 13. Load-Displacement Curves of the Specimens: (a) WT-8-89, (b) WT-9-89, (c) WT-11-89, (d) WT-12-89, (e) WT-16-89
4. Test Results and Analysis
4.1 Hysteretic Curve
The load-displacement curves were plotted in Fig. 13, which
were drawn from data collected by the force sensor of MTS
actuator. The following conclusions could be drawn from the
curves. 1) The axial pressure has a great influence on the energy
dissipation capacity of the specimens. The hysteretic curves of
WT-9 and WT-12 under the compression load of 40.3 kN were
not as full and stable as those of WT-8 and WT-11 under the
compression load of 30.2 kN, respectively. 2) The energy
dissipation capacity of WT-11 and WT-12 with calcium silicate
panels was apparently better than that of WT-8 and WT-9 with
gypsum panels under the same axial pressure. 3) The energy
dissipation capacity of WT-16 proposed in Ref. (JGJ227-2011,
2011) was less than that of the specimens with type “b” strut. The
reason is that the floor beams and their supporting stiffeners at
 KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 9

Therefore, it is difficult to meet the load bearing requirements only

by adding stiffeners when applied to multi-storey buildings and
the joint of floors should be strengthened.

4.3 Confirmation of Yield Point and Failure Load of

Fig. 14. Skeleton Curves of the Specimens
the joint of floors are easy to buckling under compression,
causing the premature failure of WT-16, thus reducing its energy
dissipation capacity.
4.2 Skeleton Curve
The skeleton curve is shown in Fig. 14. There was no obvious
descent segment of the bearing capacity of all specimens except
WT-11. The main reason is that the overlaid panels of WT-11 are
calcium silicate boards, which are mixed with flexible fibers and
have better crack resistance than gypsum boards. The calcium
silicate board cracked at the joint of the floors with complex
forces, but it will not form the through joint failure quickly.
Therefore, the loading cycle of the specimen is long, the deformation
is sufficient, and the failure of specimens is the result of gradual
accumulation of damage. In addition, the axial pressure also has
a strong effect on the failure of the joint of floors. And the failure
of the joint of floors will quickly lead to the failure of the
specimen. Therefore, the WT-11 has a better bearing capacity
than the WT-12. For other specimens, the bearing capacity of
floor beams suddenly decreased after local buckling under
compression. Most of the self-tapping screws on the outer cover
panels of the boundary beam at the joint of floors were loose.
Although the specimens could continue to be loaded, the bearing
capacity was greatly reduced and its panels were seriously broken.
Specimens
The floor beams’ deformations were obvious when specimens
were loaded, the self-tapping screws at the corner of the joint of
floors were obviously loose, and 0.4Pmax was taken as the yield
load of the specimen according to Eurocode (ECCS-TW1.3,
1986). After loading to the ultimate load Pmax, the panels of the
boundary beam at the joint of floors failed. The out-of-plane
instability occurred suddenly and the specimens could not
continue to be loaded. Thus, the value of the damaged load Pu
was equal to that of Pmax. The values of Py, Δy, Pmax, Δmax, Pu and
Δu of specimens calculated according to the test data are provided
in Table 3.
The following conclusions can be drawn from the data shown
in Table 3. 1) The bearing capacity of the TCS wall is greatly
affected by the axial compressive load. The ultimate bearing
capacity of WT-9 is 14.11% lower than that of WT-8, and that of
WT-12 is 37.76% lower than that of WT-11, indicating that the
axial pressure should be strictly limited in the design of the TCS
wall. 2) In the same axial pressure and support condition, different
materials of panels have influence on the ultimate bearing
capacity of the specimen. The ultimate bearing capacity of WT-
11 is 43.56% higher than that of WT-8, and that of WT-12 is
21.26% higher than that of WT-9, which shows that the ultimate
bearing capacity of specimens with calcium silicate panels is
apparently higher than that with gypsum panels. 3) Under the
same axial compressive load but with 3 additional b-type anti-
pulling bolt suits, the ultimate bearing capacity of WT-16 is
14.65% lower than that of WT-8.
4.4 Energy Dissipation Capacity and Ductility
Performance of Specimens
The accumulated energy dissipation is the sum of the areas of all
hysteresis loops. The ductility coefficient μ is the ratio of the

Table 3. Values of Load and Displacement

Specimen Loading Yield load Ultimate load Cumulative energy

µ
number direction Py(kN) Δy(mm) Pmax(kN) Δmax(mm) dissipation (J)

WT-8 Positive 6.09 18.45 15.24 53.47 2.90 27,060

Reverse -5.90 -21.56 -14.74 -56.57 2.62
WT-9 Positive 4.07 18.36 10.17 39.37 2.14 23,268
Reverse -4.07 -25.64 -10.17 -40.65 1.59
WT-11 Positive 10.03 13.46 25.08 43.46 3.23 40,541
Reverse -8.46 -21.79 -21.16 -56.56 2.60
WT-12 Positive 5.17 35.66 12.93 57.33 1.61 22,063
Reverse -5.38 -19.67 -13.45 -47.00 2.39
WT-16 Positive 4.93 17.07 12.33 32.81 1.92 3,713
Reverse -4.38 -12.05 -14.19 -27.21 2.26
10 Y. Chu et al.
ultimate displacement of the member to the yield displacement.
After loading to the limit state, the specimens quickly fail, so the
bearing capacity and displacement corresponding to the limit
state and the failure state have little difference. The following
conclusions can be drawn from the data shown in Table 3. 1)
Under the same structural conditions and different axial
compressive loads, the energy consumption of WT-9 is 14.0%
lower than that of WT-8, and that of WT-12 was 45.58% lower
than that of WT-11, indicating that the axial pressure has a great
impact on the energy dissipation capacity. 2) The energy
dissipation capacities of all specimens are at least 3.25 times
higher than that of WT-16. The reason for that is because the end
of the a-type anti-pulling bolt suit designed according to the Ref.
(JGJ227-2011, 2011) is not constrained enough under cyclic
loading and can’t coordinate the deformation of upper and lower
walls, resulting in rapid failure of the specimen. 3) All specimens
have good ductility, but those with low axial loads have better
ductility than those with high axial loads.
4.5 Stiffness Degeneration
The stiffness of the specimens will degrade under cyclic loading,
which can be expressed by the change of the loop stiffness “Ki”
(Ref. GB/T 228.1-2010, 2010). Fig. 15 shows the degradation
curves, for which the following conclusions can be drawn. 1)
The stiffness degenerates rapidly when the displacement is
between ± 10 mm to ± 20 mm. The reason for this phenomenon
is that the extrusion between the screw and the hole wall causes
the self-tapping screws to fall off, and the floor beams and the
supporting stiffeners subject local buckling under compression.
2) The WT-11 has a high initial stiffness, indicating that calcium
silicate panels have a stronger stressed skin action on the
boundary beam in weak parts and the wall frame. In addition, b-
type anti-pulling bolt suits are used for structural strengthening at
the joint of floors, which improves the compressive bearing
capacity of the TCS wall under the vertical load. 3) The initial
stiffness of WT-16 is low and its degradation is slow because the
constraint provided by anti-pulling bolts at the joint of floors is
weak. It can be concluded that the shear deformation of the joint
of floors is large by the change of the reading of displacement
meters No. 4 and 5. The upper wall moves horizontally around
Fig. 15. Stiffness Degradation Curves of the Specimens
Fig. 16. Degradation Curves of the Bearing Capacity
the joint of floors under cyclic loading after the gypsum panels of
the boundary beam rupture due to the shear action. The anti-
pulling bolts tilt back and forth around their medial axis.
Although the stiffness of the specimen changes little, the cracks
of panels expand rapidly due to the local buckling of floor
beams, causing the out-of-plane instability and the reduction of
the number of cycles of loading.
4.6 Degradation Curves of Bearing Capacity
The bearing capacity of specimens decreases with the increase of
loading times under the condition of the same displacement
amplitude. This property can be quantified by the decreasing
coefficient “λi” calculated by Eq. (2), that is, λi is equal to the
ratio of the value of load in the third cycle to the first cycle under
the same displacement amplitude. The degradation curves are
shown in Fig. 16. Except for WT-16, the bearing capacity of all
specimens degenerated slowly during the whole loading process
because b-type anti-pulling bolt suits are used at the joint of
floors. In the initial loading stage, the loosening of tapping screw,
the buckling of floor beams and the cracking of boundary beams
leaded to the slight reduction of the bearing capacity of specimens.
Afterwards, the destruction of the joint of floors did not
continuously increase due to the restraint provided by anti-
pulling bolts' double nuts and stiffeners’ bottom plates, so the
bearing capacity still decreased slowly in the later loading stage.
For WT-16, the rapid degradation of the bearing capacity during
the initial loading stage was due to the cracking of the panel at
the joint of floors after the rapid inclination of the anti-pulling
bolt.
Q3
λ = i
(2)
Q1
i
in which, Qi1 and Qi3 represents the load value in the first cycle
and the third cycle under the same displacement amplitude,
respectively.
5. Theoretical Analysis
According to the experimental phenomena, the bending-shear
failure did not occur on the anti-pulling bolts. The main failure
feature was the inclination of the anti-pulling bolts, which caused
 KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 11

the stress state of the screws on the hold-down to change from in which N represents the vertical bearing capacity of the
shear to tension-shear and then rapidly fail. The shear capacity of gypsum panel at the joint of floors, fc is the compressive strength
the wall at the joint of floors was mainly provided by the of the gypsum board, A denotes the cross-sectional area of the
wallboard and the screws of the shear connectors. When loading gypsum panel.
to the large horizontal displacement stage, only the wallboard It can be seen that even if gypsum boards with poor compressive
was left to resist the horizontal force after the screws of the shear capacity are adopted, the vertical bearing capacity of the joint of
connector failed. floors is far greater than the axial pressure applied to the top of
the TCS wall. Therefore, although the joint of floors make a loud
5.1 Shear Capacity of Single Self-tapping Screw noise during the application of axial pressure, the plate of the
When the self-tapping screw suffered shear failure, the design TCS wall is not suffer the crushing damage. Since the distributive
value of the shear capacity of the single self-tapping screw is girder is used to apply vertical uniform load to the top of TCS
3.11 kN calculated by Eq. (3). The design value of the tensile walls during the test, it is assumed that the anti-pulling bolts and
capacity of it is 0.98 kN calculated by Eq. (4). The results of wallboard of the joint of floors bear half of the axial compressive
material tests show that t = 1 mm, d = 4.2 mm and f = 311 MPa. load applied to the top of the TCS wall.
N = 2.4tdf
v
f
(3)
5.3 Calculation of Shear Capacity of Single-Storey Wall
The design value of the shear capacity of the single-storey wall
N = 0.75tdf
t
f
(4)
per unit length calculated according to the Ref. (JGJ227-2011,
2 2
2011) is used for analysis. The wall is 2.4 m wide, the keel of it is
⎛N ⎞ ⎛ N ⎞ made of Q235 steel and the panel of it is the gypsum board. The
⎜⎜ v
⎟⎟ + ⎜⎜ t
⎟⎟ ≤ 1 (5)
⎝N ⎠ ⎝N
f f

v t ⎠ design value of the shear capacity of the single-storey wall is 6

kN, which is calculated by Eq. (9).
where Nvf and Ntf represent the design values of shear capacity
and tensile capacity of a self-tapping screw, respectively. Nv and Psw = S b × B (9)
Nt are the shear force and tension force born by the single self-
in which Psw represents the design value of the shear capacity of
tapping screw, respectively. t denotes the depth at which the
the single-storey wall, Sb denotes the design value of the shear
cylindrical thread portion of a screw is drilled into the substrate.
capacity of the single-storey wall per unit length, B represents the
d represents the diameter of the self-tapping screw. f is the yield
width of the single-storey wall.
stress of specimen materials.
LaBoube (LaBoube and Sokol, 2002) demonstrated that
5.4 Determination of the Horizontal Bearing Capacity
when multiple self-tapping screws are used to connect the thin-
of the Anti-pulling Bolt Suit
wall plate, the average bearing capacity of self-tapping screws is
The anti-pulling bolt suit at the joint of floors connects the upper
lower than that of a single self-tapping screw, which was referred
and lower walls and coordinates the walls to work together. The
to as the “group effect”. The new equations were given to calculate
horizontal external load causes the self-tapping screws on the
the shear bearing capacity considering the “group effect”, as
hold-down to bear the combined action of tension and shear. The
shown in Eqs. (6) and (7).
loading of the specimen to the ultimate load stage represents the
⎛ 0.467 ⎞ elastic-plastic deformation stage of building structure under the
R = ⎜ 0.535 + ⎟ ≤ 1.0 (6)
⎝ n ⎠ action of rare earthquake. Based on the test phenomena, the
gypsum board at the joint of floors is in the critical failure state.
N v = nN v1 R (7) The wallboard and the anti-pulling bolts bear the load together,
each bearing 1/2 of the total vertical load. According to the force
in which R represents the reduction coefficient of group effect, n
analysis of the joint of floors, the screws on the hold-down bear
denotes the number of self-tapping screws, Nv1 is the shear
both tension and shear. The vertical reaction of the anti-pulling
capacity of a single self-tapping screw, and Nv represents the
bolts caused by horizontal load “P” is -0.625Ps and 0.625Ps.
shear capacity considering the “group effect”.
Under the loading, the horizontal tensile force “Nt” born by the
most unfavorable bolt is 0.5Ps and the shear force “Nv” born by it
5.2 Calculation of Vertical Bearing Capacity of TCS
is 0.625Ps + ql/2.
Walls
The bolt group is under the combined action of tension and
The compressive strength of the gypsum board is 8.04 N/mm2,
shear. Each anti-pulling bolt bears half of the vertical compressive
and that of the calcium silicate board is 15.01 N/mm2 (Guo et al.,
load when there are only two anti-pulling bolts. When the
2010). The thickness of the gypsum panel is 8 mm, and then the
vertical compressive load applied on the top of the wall is 30.20
vertical bearing capacity of the gypsum panel at the joint of
kN, the compressive load on each anti-pulling bolt is 15.10 kN.
floors can be calculated by Eq. (8).
The vertical reaction force of each anti-pulling bolt caused by
N = fc A = 8.04 × 2400 × 8 = 154368N = 154.37kN (8) horizontal load is 0.625Ps. Based on the reduction coefficient of
12 Y. Chu et al.

the shear capacity of bolt group, the relation Eq. (10) of shear
capacity of screws on the hold-down is obtained. At this time, the
screws on the hold-down only bears the shear force. By
substituting n = 8 into Eq. (6), R = 0.87 is obtained, and then Eq.
(10) is given.

2 2
⎛ 0.625Ps 30.2 ⎞ ⎛ Ps ⎞
⎜ + ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ (10)
⎝ 8 2 × 8× 2 ⎠ ⎝ 8× 2 ⎠
+ ≤1
(3.12 × 0.87)2
0.98 2

According to the Eq. (10), Ps = 11.49 kN. Ps represents the

horizontal bearing capacity of the anti-pulling bolt suit.
When supported by 5 bolts, the hold-down is reliably connected
to the wall stud, providing a horizontal constraint, so the structure
is 4 times statically indeterminate. The force method equation is Fig. 17. Shear Deformation Diagram of the TCS Wall
adopted for calculation, and the listed equation is shown in Eq.
(11).
stage, the panel starts to crack and the bearing capacity of the
⎧ δ11 X 1 + δ12 X 2 + δ13 X 3 + δ14 X 4 + Δ1 p = 0 specimen is decreased to the minimum. According to the
⎪δ X + δ X + δ X + δ X + Δ = 0
⎪ 21 1 22 2 23 3 24 4 2p connection structure between the boundary beam and the panel
⎨ (11)
⎪ δ 31 X 1 + δ 32 X 2 + δ 33 X 3 + δ 34 X 4 + Δ 3 p =0 at the joint of floors, the shear deformation of the TCS wall is
⎪⎩δ 41 X 1 + δ 42 X 2 + δ 43 X 3 + δ 44 X 4 + Δ 4 p = 0 shown in Fig. 17. Based on the Hook's law for shear, the Eq. (14)
is obtained.
where X represents the reaction force of anti-pulling bolt at the
P △
joint of floors, along the axial direction. =G p (14)
Lt H
Under the horizontal load, the internal force of each bolt is
solved by the force method equation. When the load in the In the stage of elastic loading, the specimen is in the state of
horizontal direction is P = 1, the maximum axial pressure of the elastic deformation and the panel of the joint of floors has no
bolt is 0.74. The Eq. (12) is obtained when the upper load is 30.2 relative slip with the self-tapping screws. Both the panel and the
kN. boundary beam have shear resistance and thus the Eq. (15) is
obtained.
2 2
⎛ 0.74 Ps 30.2 ⎞ ⎛ Ps ⎞ PH PH
⎜ + ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ (12) △p = + (15)
⎝ 8 8× 5 ⎠ ⎝ 8× 5 ⎠
+ ≤1 Lt1GB Lt 2GS
(3.12 × 0.87 )2 0.982
where Δp represents the shear deformation of the wallboard. P
According to the equation, Ps = 17.93 kN. is the horizontal shear force loaded on the top of the
When the upper load is 40.3 kN, the Eq. (13) is obtained. specimen. H denotes the wall height. L represents the wall
width. t1 is the thickness of the panel. t2 is the thickness of the
2 2
⎛ 0.74 Ps 40.3 ⎞ ⎛ Ps ⎞ boundary beam. GB represents the shear elastic modulus of the
⎜ + ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝ 8 8× 5 ⎠ ⎝ 8× 5 ⎠
+ ≤1
(13) panel. GS represents the shear elastic modulus of the boundary
(3.12 × 0.87 )2 0.982 beam. And the values of the H, L, t1, t2, GB, GS, were 2,400
mm, 200 mm, 8 mm, 1 mm, 1,167.95 N/mm2, 79,230.77 N/
According to the equation, Ps = 15.97 kN. mm2, respectively.
When the horizontal displacement of the top of the specimen
5.5 Theoretical Derivation of Bearing Capacity of the is loaded to 5 mm, the shear deformation of the joint of floors Δp
Panel and the Boundary Beam is calculated to be 0.24 mm, which is substituted into Eq. (15) to
According to the structure of the joint of floors, the bearing obtain the shear capacity of the panel and the boundary beam.
capacity of the wallboard is provided by the boundary beam and When the specimen is loaded to the limit stage (i.e., the shear
the panel. In the initial loading stage, the external load is borne deformation of the top of the specimen reaches -27.21 mm), the
by the anti-pulling bolts and the wallboard. When loading to the shear deformation of the joint of floors Δp is calculated to be 1.67
later stage, the anti-pulling bolts lean and fail, and the self- mm. The calculation results show that the bearing capacity of the
tapping screws on the hold-down fall off, so that the external joint of floors Ps100 is much larger than that of the upper and
load is borne only by the wallboard, and the bearing capacity is lower walls because of the thin steel plate as the boundary beam
reduced. When the loading continues to the large displacement at the joint of the floors.

Table 4. Comparison Table of Bearing Capacity of the Specimens
Bearing capacity of The ratio of the calculated bearing
Ultimate bearing
Specimen the anti-pulling bolt capacity of the anti-pulling
capacity (kN)
suit (kN) bolt suit to the test value
WT-8 14.74 17.93 1.22
WT-9 10.17 15.97 1.57
WT-11 21.16 17.93 0.85
WT-12 12.93 15.97 1.24
WT-16 12.33 11.49 0.93
5.6 Comparison and Analysis of Ultimate Bearing
Capacity of the Specimens
According to the test phenomena, the main reason for the
failure of the specimens is that the joint of floors is the weak
part of the structure and the screws on the hold-down fail.
Therefore, the stressed skin action of the panel is not reflected
in the ultimate bearing capacity expression because its
derivation is based on the screw failure. 1) The ultimate
bearing capacity of the specimens with calcium silicate panels
is higher than those with gypsum panels under the same axial
pressure. The reason is that the failure of the panel will
accelerate the destruction of the anti-pulling bolt, while the
bearing capacity of the calcium silicate board is better than that
of the gypsum board. Therefore, compared with the specimen
using the gypsum board, the failure of the specimen using the
calcium silicate board is slower and its panels and anti-pulling
bolts bear the load together for a longer time, resulting in the
higher ultimate bearing capacity under the same axial pressure.
2) The comparison of bearing capacity of specimens is
summarized in Table 4. In the calculation of the bearing capacity
based on the failure of anti-pulling bolts, the reason for the big
difference of WT-9 data is that the gypsum board with strong
brittleness will be destroyed rapidly with the increase of vertical
axial pressure, thus accelerating the failure of the screws on the
hold-down. The bearing capacity of WT-11 is higher than the
theoretical value, because the ductility of the material used is
better and the panel without failure in the ultimate state
contributes greatly to the ultimate bearing capacity. 3) By
analyzing the equation of the ultimate bearing capacity, it can be
seen that the stress state of screws (pure shear or pull shear) and
the number of screws have a great influence on the ultimate
bearing capacity. Therefore, structural measures should be taken
in engineering application to improve the stress state of the
screws. The panel material has a great effect on the ultimate
bearing capacity of specimens, especially those with 2 anti-
pulling bolts. 4) The design value of shear bearing capacity of a
single-storey wall calculated according to Ref. (JGJ227-2011,
2011) is far lower than the test value, and the WT-9 specimen
with the lowest test value is 70% higher than the design value of
the single-storey wall. Therefore, the single-storey walls designed
according to Ref. (JGJ227-2011, 2011) have a higher bearing
capacity reserve.
KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 13
Design value of bearing The ratio of design
capacity of single layer value to experimental
wall (kN) value
6.0 2.46
6.0 1.70
6.0 3.53
6.0 2.16
6.0 2.06
6. Conclusions
The TCS wall is prone to the fracture of panels and the local
buckling of floor beams and supporting stiffeners at the joint of
floors according to the experimental research on the shear
performance. Therefore, it is necessary to strengthen the joint of
floors.
1. Under the same working condition, the energy dissipation
capacity of the specimens using calcium silicate panels is
obviously better than that of using gypsum panels, and the
ultimate bearing capacity of the former is also significantly
increased. When the axial compressive load is 40.3 kN, the
ultimate bearing capacity of the former is 43.56% higher
than of the latter. When the axial compressive load is 30.2
kN, the ultimate bearing capacity of the former is 21.26%
higher than of the latter.
2. The axial pressure has great influence on the bearing
capacity and energy dissipation capacity of the TCS wall.
Under the same structural condition and different axial
compressive loads, the ultimate bearing capacity of WT-9
is reduced by 14.11% compared with that of WT-8, that of
WT-12 is reduced by 37.76% compared with that of WT-
11, the energy dissipation capacity of WT-9 is reduced by
14.0% than that of WT-8, and the energy dissipation
capacity of WT-12 is reduced by 45.58% than that of WT-
11. The energy dissipation capacity of all specimens is at
least 3.25 times higher than that of WT-16 because the
anchor bolts designed according to the regulation lack of
the restraint capacity and the rapid failure of the TCS wall
easily occurs.
3. The initial stiffness of the specimen designed according to
Ref. (JGJ227-2011, 2011) is small, leading to large
deformation at the joint of floors. The panels of boundary
beam at the joint of floors are in a complex state of stress
under the combined action of the vertical eccentric load
and the horizontal load, resulting in the tear failure of them.
After the failure of the panels, the boundary beam loses the
stressed skin action and becomes unstable rapidly, which
accelerates the anti-pulling bolt failure and causes the
upper wall to translate around the joint of floors. Then the
stiffness of the specimen decreases rapidly until the
obvious local buckling of the floor beams occurs and the
specimen cannot continue to bear the load.
14 Y. Chu et al.
4. When the horizontal displacement values of the specimens
with double nuts are ± 10 mm to ± 20 mm, the stiffness of
the specimens degenerates rapidly because the self-tapping
screws fall off due to the repeated extrusion between the
self-tapping screw and the hole wall, and the local buckling
of the floor beams and their supporting stiffeners under
compression. After the failure of the panels of the boundary
beam at the joint of floors as a weak part, the internal force
is redistributed to the anti-pulling bolts which are restrained
by double nuts, so the damage will not continue to increase
and the bearing capacity reduces little.
5. The tilt Angle of the anti-pulling bolt increases when the
TCS wall is loaded to the ultimate stage. The self-tapping
screws on the hold-down change from bearing shear force
to bearing the combined action of tension and shear. The
self-tapping screws are rapidly damaged causing the anti-
pulling bolt suits to fail. The load borne by anti-pulling
bolts is transferred to the floor beams and their supporting
stiffeners. The section of the floor beams is super thin and
high, which is prone to the local buckling under compression,
resulting in the extremely poor bearing capacity of the joint
of floors.
Acknowledgements
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support
for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article:
This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation
of China (Grant No. 51508482) and the Key Technology R&D
Program of Sichuan Province (Grant No. 2019YJ0322).
ORCID
Not Applicable
References
Ascione L, Berardi VP, Giordano A, Spadea S (2015) Pre-buckling
imperfection sensitivity of pultruded FRP profiles. Composites Part
B: Engineering 72:206-212, DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesb. 2014.12.014
Chen W, Ye JH, Xu Y (2017) Shear experiments of load-bearing cold-
formed thin-walled steel wall system lined with sandwich panels.
Journal of Building Structures 38(7):85-92, DOI: 10.14006/
j.jzjgxb.2017.07.011
ECCS-TW1.3 (1986) Recommended testing procedure for assessing the
behavior of structural steel elements under cyclic loads. ECCS-
TW1.3, European Convention for Constructional Steelwork, Bruxelles,
Belgium
Gad EF, Duffield CF, Hutchinson GL, Mansell DS, Stark G (1999)
Lateral performance of cold-formed steel-framed domestic structures.
Engineering Structures 21(1):83-95, DOI: 10.1016/S0141-0296(97)
90129-2
GB/T 228.1-2010 (2010) Metallic materials-Tensile testing. GB/T
228.1-2010, Beijing: Standards Press of China, Beijing, China
Girard JD, Tarpy JTS (1982) Shear resistance of steel-stud wall panels.
6th international specialty conference on cold-formed steel structures,
November 16-17, St. Louis, MO, USA
Guo P, He BK, Zhou TH (2010) A study on method for calculating
lateral stiffness of cold-formed steel framing walls. Journal of
Building Structures 31(1):1-8, DOI: 10.14006/j.jzjgxb.2010.01.004
JGJ227-2011 (2011) Technical specification for low-rise cold-formed
thin-walled steel framing buildings. JGJ227-2011, Beijing: China
Architecture & Building Press, Beijing, China
LaBoube RA, Sokol MA (2002) Behavior of screw connections in
residential construction. Journal of Structural Engineering 128(1):
115-118, DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2002)128:1(115)
Li YQ, Liu F, Shen ZY, Shen L, Qin YF (2013a) Shaking table test on a
full-scale model of low-rise high-strength cold-formed thin-walled
steel framing buildings. Journal of Building Structures 34(1):36-43,
DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-374x.2013.01.003
Li YQ, Ma RK, Song YY, Pan SY (2013b) Experimental study on shear
behavior of screw connections for cold-formed thin-walled steel
structure. Journal of Tongji University 41(1):11-19
Lin SH, Pan CL, Hsu WT (2014) Monotonic and cyclic loading tests for
cold-formed steel wall frames sheathed with calcium silicate board.
Thin-Walled Structure 74:49-58, DOI: 10.1016/j.tws.2013.09.011
McCreless CS, Tarpy TS (1978) Experimental investigation of steel stud
shear wall diaphragms. Proceedings of the 4th international specialty
conference on cold-formed steel structures, June 1-2, St. Louis, MO,
USA
Peck Q, Rogers N, Serrette R (2012) Cold-formed steel framed gypsum
shear walls: In-plane response. Journal of Structural Engineering
138(7):932-941, DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000521
Serrette R, Encalada J, Matchen B (1997) Additional shear wall values
for light weight steel framing. RP97-2, American Iron and Steel
Institute, Washington, DC, USA
Serrette R, Nolan DP (2009) Reversed cyclic performance of shear
walls with wood panels attached to cold-formed steel with pins.
Journal of Structural Engineering 135(8):959-967, DOI: 10.1061/
(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000037
Tian YS, Wang J, Lu TJ (2004) Racking strength and stiffness of cold-
formed steel wall frames. Journal of Constructional Steel Research
60(7):1069-1093, DOI: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2003.10.002
Wang XX, Ye JH (2015) Reversed cyclic performance of cold-formed
steel shear walls with reinforced end studs. Journal of Constructional
Steel Research 113:28-42, DOI: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2015.05.012
Xu L, Joel M (2006) Strength and stiffness determination of shear wall
panels in cold-formed steel framing. Thin-Walled Structures 44:1084-
1095, DOI: 10.1016/j.tws.2006.10.002
Ye JH, Wang XX, Jia HY, Zhao MY (2015) Cyclic performance of cold-
formed steel shear walls sheathed with double-layer wallboards on
both sides. Thin-Walled Structures 44:146-159, DOI: 10.1016/j.tws.
2015.03.005
Ye JH, Zhou ZY (2016) An introduction of mid rise thin walled steel
structures:Research progress on cold formed steel framed composite
shear wall systems. Journal of Harbin Institute of Technology
48(6):1-9, DOI: 10.11918/j.issn.0367-6234.2016.06.001