## 2 Experimental Setup for Cyclic Loading Test  
In this work, two non-ductile RC frame specimens that are retrofitted by installing a shear wall (RCW1 and RCW2) are tested under cyclic loading. A non-ductile RC frame was constructed first and then rebar connections were post-installed and wall rebar cage were installed, as depicted in Figure 1. Concrete was finally cast to form an RC shear wall, as presented in Figure 2. Figure 3 shows the dimensions and wall panel reinforcements of RCW1 and RCW 2; the thickness of the wall panel is 15 cm. To improve ductility, the reinforcements in the wall panels of both RCW1 and RCW2 are set to 45 degrees from horizontal. The reinforcements in the wall panels are arranged identically in both specimens. These two specimens include the boundary columns with a cross-sectional area of \(30\times 50\text{ cm}^{2}\). Each column is designed with main bars of 4-D22 and 8-D19 and a transverse reinforcement of D10@20 cm at both ends. The web reinforcement of the shear wall is connected to the existing RC frame using adhesive rebars. The embedded length of the adhesive reinforcement is 12 cm and the lap length of the reinforcements is 30 cm. Figure 4 displays the arrangement of reinforcements of the boundary columns and beams. Table 1 presents the yielding strength and ultimate strength of the reinforcement in the specimens. Table 2 presents the mean concrete strengths in the wall panel, boundary column and foundation. The loading system in this work includes actuators, lateral support frames and a steel rigid beam of loading distribution as shown in Figure 5. The loading system includes horizontal and vertical actuators to apply horizontal and vertical loading to the tested specimen. Horizontal loading simulates seismic force. Vertical loading simulates a gravitational load. It was applied to 90 tf for vertical of each column using the two vertical hydraulic actuators equipped on the two sides of the wall specimen during the test. Based on the loading-distribution steel rigid beam and steel anchor bolts, horizontal and vertical loadings could be assumed to be uniformly distributed into the beam of the specimen. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline
**Specimen** & **Foundation** & **Frame** & **RC Panel** \\ \hline RCW1 & 11.6 & 13.7 & 25.9 \\ RCW2 & 24.3 & 19.6 & 21.8 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Concrete compressive strength of the specimens (unit: MPa). Figure 4: Dimensions and reinforcements of the column and beam. (unit: cm). Figure 3: Dimensions of the specimens of RCW1 and RCW2. (unit: cm). Figure 2: The front view of the specimen RCW1. The load cell on the beam end was used to measure the horizontal loads that were applied by the actuators. Linear variation displacement transducers (LVDT) were used to measure the top and bottom horizontal displacements of the wall panel and a dial gauge was used to monitor the deformation of the foundation. Figure 5 shows a configuration drawing and photograph of the setup for the reversed cyclic loading test. Steel bracing frames were installed on both sides of the tested specimen to prevent unexpected torsional motion of the wall specimen. A reversed cyclic loading test was carried out with a predetermined increment in drift ratio in each step until the specimen completely failed. Figure 5: Experimental set-up of the cyclic loading test, (**a**) lateral view, (**b**) top view and (**c**) the photo. The loading system in this work includes the actuators and a rigid beam of loading distribution, as shown in Figure 5. The applied loading system in this work includes the horizontal and vertical actuators and could apply the horizontal and vertical loading on a specimen, separately. The horizontal loading could be used to simulate the seismic force. The vertical loading could be used to simulate the gravity load applied into specimens. It was applied 90 tf for vertical of each column using the two vertical hydraulic actuators equipped on the two sides of the wall specimen during the test.