Coupled thermo-mechanical simulation for the performance-based fire design of CFS drywall systems

Seismic response assessment of architectural non-structural LWS drywall components through experimental tests

“…Crack in joints (ii) 4. Detachment between partitions or façades and surrounding elements (i), (a) 5. Crack in boards (i) 6.…”

“…1 Partition or façade-to-surrounding connections B (1) E (1) Test typology QS (2) D (2) QS (2) D (2) Prototypes/minimum IDRs [%] #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #1* E / W (3) #2* E / W (3) #6 #7 #8 #3* E / W (5)…”

“…In particular, the knowledge and prediction of the seismic performance represents a complex issue that could be investigated through experimental activities. Indeed, over the last few years, along with several studies on architectural non-structural LWS drywall components, which were mainly focused on fire behaviour [4][5], effect on the structural response [6][7][8][9][10][11], joining technologies [12][13], diaphragm action [14][15] and behaviour under axial and lateral loads [16][17], a large number of research studies were also undertaken on investigating the seismic behaviour. Generally, these researches included the study of the local and global behaviour: seismic behaviour of board-to-frame fixings adopted for realizing partitions and façades [18][19][20][21]; seismic behaviour under monotonic, quasi-static cyclic and dynamic loadings in the in-plane [22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34] and outof-plane [35][36] directions of partitions and façades; study of the interaction between partitions and façades and/or ceilings and surrounding elements by means of shake table tests on full-scale one or multi-storeys buildings completed with architectural non-structural components [37][38][39][40][41][42]…”

Residual shear capacity of cold-formed steel-to-sheathing screwed connections at elevated temperatures

“…Cold-formed steel (CFS) load-bearing walls assembled by CFS framing and sheathing board using self-drilling screws are increasingly used in low-rise and mid-rise buildings (Yu and LaBoube, 2010). Many experimental and numerical investigations have been conducted on the fire performance of these walls (Chen et al , 2013; Chen et al , 2012; Chen et al , 2014; Sakumoto et al , 2003; Gunalan and Mahendran, 2014; Gunalan and Mahendran, 2013; Thanasoulas et al , 2018; Thanasoulas et al , 2016; Nassif et al , 2014). Typically, in the numerical modeling of CFS load-bearing walls, both the CFS framing and the sheathing board are simulated by quadrangle shell elements; moreover, the screwed connections between the CFS framing and the sheathing board are modeled using coupling constraints in the Ansys software package, tie constraints in the Abaqus software package or the Euler–Bernoulli beam element (Gunalan and Mahendran, 2013; Thanasoulas et al , 2018; Thanasoulas et al , 2016; Nassif et al , 2014).…”

“…Many experimental and numerical investigations have been conducted on the fire performance of these walls (Chen et al , 2013; Chen et al , 2012; Chen et al , 2014; Sakumoto et al , 2003; Gunalan and Mahendran, 2014; Gunalan and Mahendran, 2013; Thanasoulas et al , 2018; Thanasoulas et al , 2016; Nassif et al , 2014). Typically, in the numerical modeling of CFS load-bearing walls, both the CFS framing and the sheathing board are simulated by quadrangle shell elements; moreover, the screwed connections between the CFS framing and the sheathing board are modeled using coupling constraints in the Ansys software package, tie constraints in the Abaqus software package or the Euler–Bernoulli beam element (Gunalan and Mahendran, 2013; Thanasoulas et al , 2018; Thanasoulas et al , 2016; Nassif et al , 2014). Sometimes, a more simplified numerical model is also used in the structural model of CFS load-bearing walls in which the numerical modeling of the sheathing boards and screwed connections are omitted by replacing them with lateral restraints to the stud flanges at the screw positions (Chen et al , 2014).…”