Simplified Direct Displacement Design of Six-Story Woodframe Building and Pretest Seismic Performance Assessment

Pang, Weichiang; Rosowsky, David V.; Pei, Shiling; Lindt, John W. van de

doi:10.1061/(asce)st.1943-541x.0000181

Cited by 79 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is attributed to the fact that the rigid diaphragm model overestimated the load sharing between the shear walls. Underpredictions of drift response in the second storey were also reported in a separate study in which a rigid diaphragm assumption was utilised to model a two-storey timber building (van de Lindt et al, 2010). In contrast, the beam-spring model predicted drifts for all four wall lines are in good agreement with the test results.…”

Section: Comparison Between Semi-rigid and Rigid Diaphragm Modelssupporting

confidence: 50%

“…01 (1% of critical damping) and were associated to the first and third vibration modes. Similar damping ratios have been used in other numerical studies Filiatrault, 2001b, Pang et al, 2010;van de Lindt et al, 2010). …”

Section: Dynamic Time-history Analysesmentioning

confidence: 69%

“…To construct the phase 3 model, the GWB springs were superimposed on the phase 1 numerical model and the unit-width GWB parameters K 0 , F 0 and F i were adjusted for the length of the full-height wall piers while other parameters (r 1 , r 2 , r 3 , r 4 ,˜, AE and â) were unchanged. This modelling approach has been used in other studies (Folz and Filiatrault, 2001b;Pang et al, 2010;van de Lindt et al, 2010). The in-plane behaviour of the floor and roof ceiling diaphragms is very similar to that of shear walls.…”

Section: Shear Wall Model (Non-linear Spring)mentioning

confidence: 78%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Beam–spring model for timber diaphragm and shear walls

Pang

Rosowsky

2010

Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A roof or floor diaphragm in a wood building generally spans across multiple lateral force-resisting elements (shear walls). The diaphragm serves as a horizontal beam that distributes forces to the shear walls. For design purposes, it is common to assume the wood diaphragm is either completely flexible or completely rigid. In North American low-rise light-frame wood construction, wood diaphragms are almost always designed as flexible diaphragms and are modelled as simple beams spanning across two adjacent shear walls. Strictly speaking, neither the flexible nor the rigid assumption is accurate for modelling the behaviour of a wood diaphragm. Full-scale shake table tests of a two-storey wood-frame structure, conducted as part of the NEESWood project, have confirmed that roof and floor diaphragms are semi-rigid. This paper examines the effect of diaphragm flexibility on shear wall deflections by considering the in-plane stiffness of the diaphragm to be semi-rigid. A beam–spring analogue model is used to represent the diaphragm–shear wall system where the shear walls are modelled as springs and the diaphragm is modelled as an analogue beam that acts as a load distribution mechanism. The resulting load sharing among the shear walls is examined and possible application of the beam–spring model to seismic design of wood-frame structures is discussed.

show abstract

Section: Comparison Between Semi-rigid and Rigid Diaphragm Modelssupporting

confidence: 50%

Section: Dynamic Time-history Analysesmentioning

confidence: 69%

Section: Shear Wall Model (Non-linear Spring)mentioning

confidence: 78%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Beam–spring model for timber diaphragm and shear walls

Pang

Rosowsky

2010

Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3. During the direct displacement design [Pang and Rosowsky, 2010] of the Capstone structure, the parameters of the standard shear wall configurations used in the building were developed through sub-assembly modeling technique with a program called M-CASHEW which was based on the formulation of Folz and Filiatrault [2001]. In this study, these as-design parameters were adopted in the numerical model development.…”

Section: Capstone Modeling Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic Numerical Modeling of a Six-Story Light-Frame Wood Building: Comparison with Experiments

Pei

Lindt

2011

Journal of Earthquake Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The experimental seismic responses of a full-scale, six-story, light-frame wood apartment building were compared against the predictions from a numerical model developed for performance based seismic design applications. The accuracy of the as-design model was evaluated. A comparison was conducted for the overall building displacement profile, inter-story drifts, global hysteretic responses, and anchor tie-down system behavior for three seismic excitation test levels. While the numerical model was shown to be able to predict the seismic response of the test specimen with reasonable accuracy, this study specifically highlights challenges in the prediction of mid-rise wood frame buildings seismic response.

show abstract

“…The wood frame portions of the building were designed using the Direct Displacement Design (DDD) procedure [7] with a specific performance target: the peak inter-story drift in the building should not exceed 4% when subjected to a maximum credible earthquake (MCE) 80% of the time, i.e. a 20% probability of exceeding 4% inter-story drift.…”

Section: Description Of Test Specimenmentioning

confidence: 99%