Performance evaluation of traditional timber joints under cyclic loading and their influence on the seismic response of timber frame structures

Published Date
Construction and Building Materials
30 November 2016, Vol.127:321–334, doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.09.122

• Author 

• Elisa Poletti ^a,,
• Graça Vasconcelos ^a
• Jorge M. Branco ^a
• Aikaterini M. Koukouviki ^b

• aISISE, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Minho, Campus de Azurém, 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal
• bCivil Engineer

Received 29 January 2016. Revised 20 August 2016. Accepted 28 September 2016. Available online 7 October 2016. 

Highlights

• •
  Joints govern the behaviour of a timber structures.
• •
  Joints constitute the dissipative mechanism of timber structures for seismic events.
• •
  The quality of the joint (presence of gaps) greatly alters the response of a joint.
• •
  Strengthened joints present significantly higher stiffness and dissipative capacity.

Abstract

Timber joints represent the governing part of a timber structure, particularly when assessing its seismic response. In order to better assess the seismic capacity of traditional timber frame structures, particularly timber-framed shear walls, pull-out and in-plane cyclic tests were carried out on their joints (half-lap joints). The aim is to better understand the influence of the joints on the walls and their influence on failure mechanisms and capacity.

Their seismic characterisation was obtained via the analysis of the hysteretic behaviour and dissipative capacity of both unreinforced and retrofitted joints (using self-tapping screws, steel plates and GFRP sheets).

Results show that all strengthening techniques were able to improve the dissipative and load-bearing capacity, but care should be taken into not over-stiffening the joints, as it would lead to an overly rigid structure.

Keywords

Half-lap joint

Seismic retrofitting

Self-tapping screws

GFRP

NSM

Steel plates

Dissipative capacity

---

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

 Table 1

Table 1.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 5.

Fig. 6.

Fig. 7.

Fig. 8.

Fig. 9.

Fig. 10.

Fig. 11.

Fig. 12.

Fig. 13.

Fig. 14.

Fig. 15.

Fig. 16.

• ⁎ 
  Corresponding author.

© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

For further details log on website :
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950061816315720