2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.01.047
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Joints and wood shear walls modelling I: Constitutive law, experimental tests and FE model under quasi-static loading

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
8
0
6

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
1
8
0
6
Order By: Relevance
“…The shear walls underwent only limited deformation (at the top of the walls) and adequately braced the structure. For instance, the maximum displacement was 45 mm for GUA 390%, whereas a modern timber-framed wall [OSB12 panels with 1.5 tons at the top of the wall (Humbert et al 2014 andBoudaud et al 2014)] reaches 44 mm for GUA 320% (and in similar experimental configurations: ground motion, shake table, etc.). The global hysteretic response has been analyzed through the base shear versus the top displacement of both the transverse wall and shear wall.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The shear walls underwent only limited deformation (at the top of the walls) and adequately braced the structure. For instance, the maximum displacement was 45 mm for GUA 390%, whereas a modern timber-framed wall [OSB12 panels with 1.5 tons at the top of the wall (Humbert et al 2014 andBoudaud et al 2014)] reaches 44 mm for GUA 320% (and in similar experimental configurations: ground motion, shake table, etc.). The global hysteretic response has been analyzed through the base shear versus the top displacement of both the transverse wall and shear wall.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Concentrating non linear phenomena in joints for studying the response of modern timber-framed structures under quasi-static or dynamical load is very classical (see Dolan 1989, White and Dolan 1995, Kasal, Leichti, and Itani 1994, Humbert et al 2014, Boudaud et al 2015 since dowel-type joints are generally used. In the present study, dissipative phenomena are due to yielding in joints but also to complex phenomena (cracking, friction) occurring in the earth infill.…”
Section: Modeling Of the Structurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such a modeling approach is classical for timber-framed structures (Andreasson, Yasumura, and Daudeville 2002, Yasumura et al 2006, Richard et al 2002, Xu and Dolan 2009. Both the nonlinearity in the diagonals and in the steel strip are described by a non linear constitutive law (Humbert et al 2014). This model allows to describe the metallic timber-timber connection taking into account the damage under reverse loading, which means a strength reduction.…”
Section: Finite Elements and Constitutive Behaviormentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As a result, the hysteretic behavior of timber frame constructions is governed by the local behavior of sheathing-to-frame connections, angle bracket and hold-down connections, which are responsible for the structure's dissipative capacity. Among these joints, the behavior of the local joint between the timber frame and sheathing panel http is one of the most relevant as confirmed by the expressions of main standards [1][2][3][4], by analytical models [5][6][7] and by numerical Finite Element Modelling of wood-frame walls [8,9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%