Evaluation and control of the in-plane stiffness of timber floors for the performance-based retrofit of URM buildings

  • Anna Brignola University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy
  • Stefano Pampanin University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2714-6697
  • Stefano Podestà University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy

Abstract

The seismic response of existing un-reinforced masonry (URM) buildings is strongly dependent on the characteristics of wooden floors and, in particular, on their in-plane stiffness and on the quality of connection between the floors and the URM elements. It is generally well-recognized that an adequate in-plane-stiffness and proper connections can significantly improve the three-dimensional response of these buildings, obtaining a better distribution and transfer of forces to the lateral load resisting walls. However, the extensive damage observed during past earthquakes on URM buildings of different types have highlighted serious shortcomings in typical retrofit interventions adopted in the past and based on stiffening the diaphragm. Recent numerical investigations have also confirmed that increasing the stiffness of the diaphragm is not necessarily going to lead to an improved response, but could actually result to detrimental effects. The evaluation of the in-plane stiffness of timber floors in their as-built and retrofitted configuration is still an open question and a delicate issue, with design guidelines and previous research results providing incomplete and sometimes controversial suggestions to practicing engineers involved in the assessment and/or retrofit of these type of structures. In this contribution, the role of the in-plane stiffness of timber floors in the seismic response of URM buildings is critically discussed, based on the relatively limited available experimental and numerical evidences. A framework for a performance-based assessment and retrofit strategy of URM buildings, capable of accounting for the effects of a flexible diaphragm on the response prior to and after the retrofit intervention, is then proposed. By controlling the in-plane stiffness of the diaphragm, adopting a specific strengthening (or weakening) intervention, the displacements, accelerations and internal force demands can be maintained within targeted levels. This will protect undesired local mechanisms and aim for a more appropriate hierarchy of strength within the whole system.

References

ABK, A Joint Venture, 1981. “Methodology for the mitigation of seismic hazard in existing un-reinforced masonry buildings: diaphragm testing”. ABK Tech. Rep. 03, El Segundo, California.

ABK, A Joint Venture, 1984. “Methodology for the mitigation of seismic hazard in existing un-reinforced masonry buildings: the methodology”. ABK Tech. Rep. 08, El Segundo, California.

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2000. “Pre-standard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings”. FEMA Publication 356, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 1998. “Handbook for the Seismic Evaluation of Buildings-A Pre-standard”. FEMA Publication 310, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2007. “Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings”. ASCE/SEI 41-06, ISBN: 9780784408841.

ANSYS User’s Manual for Revision 8.0, 2003. ANSYS Inc., Houston, USA.

Bothara, J.K., Hicyilmaz K.M.O., 2008. “General observations of buildings behaviour during the 8th October 2005 Pakistan earthquake”. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society of Earthquake Engineering. Vol 41, No 4, December 2008, pp209-233.

Bothara, J.K., 2004. “A shake table investigation on the seismic resistance of a brick masonry house”, Masters Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury.

Building Act 2004, No. 72, Public Act, Department of Building and Housing, New Zealand

Bruneau M., 2002. “Building damage from the Marmara, Turkey earthquake of August 17, 1999”, Journal of Seismology 6: 357–377. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020035425531

Cohen, G.L., Klingner, R.E., Hayes, Jr.J.R. & Sweeney, S.C. 2004a. “Seismic evaluation of low-rise reinforced masonry buildings with flexible roof diaphragms: I. Seismic and quasi-static testing”. Earthquake Spectra. 20 (3): 779-801. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1776558

Cohen, G.L., Klingner, R.E., Hayes, Jr.J.R. & Sweeney, S.C. 2004b. “Seismic evaluation of low-rise reinforced masonry buildings with flexible roof diaphragms: II. Analytical modelling”. Earthquake Spectra. 20 (3): 803-824. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1776559

Cohen, G.L., Klingner, R.E., Hayes, Jr.J.R. & Sweeney, S.C. 2006. “Seismic Evaluation of Low-Rise Reinforced Masonry Buildings with Flexible Diaphragms: III. Synthesis and Application”. Earthquake Spectra. 22 (2): 329-347. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2192791

Corradi, M., Speranzini, E., Borri, A., Vignoli, A., 2006. “In-plane shear reinforcement of wood beam floors with FRP”. Composites Part B, 37: 310-319. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2005.11.003

CNR, 2005. CNR-DT 201/2005, “Preliminary studies for the editing of Instructions for Design, Execution and Control of Static Retrofit of Timber Structures using cFRP”, Rome. (in Italian)

CNR, 2006. CNR-DT 206/2007, “Instructions for Design, Execution and Control of Timber Structures”, Rome. (in Italian)

De Benedictis, R., De Felice, G., Giuffrè, A., 1993. Anti-Seismic renewal of a building. In Giuffrè (ed), Safety and Preservation of historical city centre. Editrice Laterza, Bari. (In Italian).

Doglioni, F., 2000. “Handbook (guidelines) for the design of adjustment interventions, seismic strengthening and renewal of architectonical treasures damaged during the Umbria-Marche earthquake in 1997”. Official Bulletin of Marche Region, Ancona. (in Italian).

ENV 1995-1-1, 2004. Eurocode 5. Design of Timber Structures. Part 1-1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings, CEN European Committee for Standardization, Bruxelles.

Galasco, A., Lagomarsino, S., Penna, A.. 2001, “TREMURI Program: Seismic Analyser of 3D masonry buildings”.

Gattesco, N., Macorini, L., 2006. “Strengthening and Stiffening Ancient Wooden Floors with Flat Steel Profiles”, in Lourenco, P.B., Roca P., Modena C., Agrawal S. (ed.), Structural Analysis of Historical Constructions; Proc. Int. Conf., New Delhi, 6-8 November 2006, New Delhi: Macmillan.

Gattesco, N., Macorini, L., Benussi, F. 2007. “Retrofit of wooden floors for the seismic adjustment of historical buildings with high reversible techniques. Seismic Engineering in Italy”; Proc. Of the XII National Conference, Pisa, 10-14 June 2007, full paper on CD (in Italian).

Giuriani, E., Marini, A. & Plizzari, G. 2002. “Shear behaviour of wooden floors strengthened by stud connected wooden planks”, Technical Report n. 7, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Brescia.

Lagomarsino, S. & Podestà, S. 1999. “Methodologies for the vulnerability analyses of churches. Seismic Engineering in Italy”; Proc. Of the IX National Conference, Turin, 20-23 September 1999, Turin (Medi@SOFT), (in Italian).

Lemme A., Martinelli A., Podestà S., 2008. ”2002 Molise Earthquake: from the emergency to the reconstruction. Masonry buildings”. Dei – Tipografia del genio civile, Roma (in Italian).

OPCM 3274, 2005. “Code for the seismic design, assessment and retrofitting of buildings (Appendix 2). Ordinance of the Prime Minister”, n. 3274 (20 March 2003) modified by n. 3431 (3 May 2005). (in Italian).

NZS 1170.5:2004 - Structural Design Actions - Part 5 : Earthquake actions – New Zealand.

Paquette, J. & Bruneau, M. 2006. “Pseudo-dynamic testing of un-reinforced masonry building with flexible diaphragm and comparison with existing procedures”. Constructions and Building Materials 20: 220-228. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2005.08.025

Peralta, D. F., Bracci, J. M. & Hueste, M. D. 2003. “Seismic performance of rehabilitated wood diaphragms, Mid-America Earthquake Centre”, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, CD Release 03-01.

Peralta, D. F., Bracci, J. M., & Hueste, M. B. D. 2004. “Seismic behaviour of wood diaphragms in pre-1950s un-reinforced masonry buildings”. Journal of Structural Engineering, 130(12): 2040-2050. Retrieved January 31, 2008, from Earthquake Engineering Abstracts database. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2004)130:12(2040)

Piazza M., Baldessari C., Tomasi R., Acler E., 2008. “Behaviour of refurbished timber floors characterized by different in-plane stiffness”. Private communication. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781439828229.ch95

Recommendations of a NZSEE Study Group, 2006. “Assessment and Improvement of the Structural Performance of Buildings in Earthquake”, NZSEE.

Tena-Colunga, A. 1992. “Seismic evaluation of un-reinforced masonry structures with flexible diaphragms”, Earthquake Spectra, 8(2): 305-318.

Tena-Colunga, A., Abrams, D.P. 1995. “Simplified 3-D Dynamic Analysis of Structures with Flexible Diaphragms”, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 24(2): 221-232.

Tena-Colunga, A., Abrams, D.P. 1996. “Seismic Behaviour of Structures with Flexible Diaphragms”, ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, 122(4): 439-445.

TREMA Project 2006. “Technologies for the Reduction of seismic Effects on Architectural Manufactures”, www.unibas.it/trerem/index.htm.

Published
2009-09-30
How to Cite
Brignola, A., Pampanin, S., & Podestà, S. (2009). Evaluation and control of the in-plane stiffness of timber floors for the performance-based retrofit of URM buildings. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 42(3), 204-221. https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.42.3.204-221
Section
Articles

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>