# Development of a System for Cyclic Shear Tests on Full-Scale Walls
## 6 Conclusions  
The designed system made it possible to safely carry out cyclic shear tests on 15 walls in full scale, for an average of 8 days per specimen, bypassing substantial space restrictions and using local resources. In addition to the scalability aspect, the system needs only one servo-actuator (contrasting to other setups, which generally need three or four), providing a more viable setup where this resource limitation is a concern. The proposed setup does not restrict rotations at the top, which is believed to better reflect the real operational conditions of the low-height buildings under seismic loads. Thus, the test reflects the shear behavior combined with bending and torsion (albeit partial) from applying the load on the axis that passes through the cross-section geometric center at the top of the wall. However, for the case of studying the wall's shear behavior in tall buildings, the proposed setup present design may not be the best choice as it does not provide the double-bending condition. Figure 22: Comparison between force \(\times\) displacement diagrams in in-plane (**a**) and out-of-plane (**b**) configurations. The main results of two representative specimens tested (in-plane and out-of-plane shear) were analyzed to illustrate the viability and peculiarities of the central test system's outputs. It is helpful to remember that the function of the counterweight is precisely to facilitate the movement of the main test beam, reducing the vertical actions of the system on the wall. Even so, for the in-plane configuration, where the rotations of the system are more significant and the rotations on the wall are small, in the pushing configuration, the tendency is for the wall to restrict the rotations of the system and pull it down, reducing the compression and shear strength at the wall. Conversely, in the pulling configuration, the system tends to compress the wall, increasing the shear resistance. In the out-of-plane configuration, where system rotations are smaller and wall rotations are more pronounced, in the pushing configuration, the system tends to restrict wall rotations and compress the wall, increasing shear resistance. Pulling results in the opposite, i.e., the normal force is reduced, and the shear resistance is lower. The dynamics described above contribute, in part, to the asymmetries observed in both diagrams, which are also enhanced by the asymmetric evolution of damage on different sides of the specimen. It should be noted, however, that this type of asymmetry is a known fact in cyclic shear tests and that the results obtained are within the expected range. However, it is understood that it is necessary to evaluate the system's performance for walls with a higher stiffness and obtain the system performance limits in terms of force and displacement. The future research plan also includes modeling and the study of uncertainties, as well as improving the setup design. The following supporting information can be downloaded at: [[https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app13137498/s1](https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app13137498/s1)]([https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app13137498/s1](https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app13137498/s1)), Video S1: SHS Test System (2022). Conceptualization, L.D.G., A.C., H.R. and J.F. ; methodology, L.D.G., A.C., H.R., J.F. and A.T.C. ; formal analysis, L.D.G., A.C. and H.R. ; investigation, L.D.G., A.C., H.R., J.F. and A.T.C. ; resources, L.D.G., A.C., H.R. and A.T.C. ; writing--original draft preparation, L.D.G. ; writing--review and editing, L.D.G., A.C., H.R., J.F. and A.T.C. ; supervision, L.D.G., A.C. and H.R. ; project administration, L.D.G. and A.C.; funding acquisition, L.D.G., A.C., H.R. and A.T.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. [PERSON] thanks the SHS Project's team and the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro/Polytechnic School for his postdoctoral work license.