Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
4Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Incremental Dynamic Analysis of Woodframe Buildings

Incremental Dynamic Analysis of Woodframe Buildings

Ratings: (0)|Views: 108|Likes:
Published by aperezguerrero

More info:

Published by: aperezguerrero on Oct 06, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/22/2010

pdf

text

original

 
EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS
 Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn.
2009;
38
:477–496Published online 2 December 2008 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/eqe.864
Incremental dynamic analysis of woodframe buildings
Ioannis P. Christovasilis
1
,
, Andre Filiatrault
1
,
,
,
§
, Michael C. Constantinou
1
,
§
and Assawin Wanitkorkul
2
,
1
 Department of Civil
,
Structural and Environmental Engineering
,
State University of New York at Buffalo
,
 Buffalo
,
NY 14260
,
U.S.A.
2
Connell Wagner 
(
Thailand 
),
Bangkok 10110
,
Thailand 
SUMMARYThe collapse of wood buildings was one of the main contributors to the heavy death toll and economiclosses during the 1995 Hyogo-ken Nanbu (Kobe) earthquake in Japan. In California, half of the propertyloss from the 1994 Northridge earthquake was attributed to wood construction. Based on damage observedin recent earthquakes, the seismic vulnerability of existing wood buildings under maximum credibleseismic events is uncertain. The main objective of this study is to quantify the seismic collapse fragilitiesand collapse mechanisms of a two-story townhouse and three-story woodframe apartment building throughnumerical analyses. Three construction quality variants (poor, typical and superior) were considered foreach building in order to assess the effects of construction qualities on seismic collapse fragilities. Thebuildings were also re-designed according to the 2006 edition of the International Building Code toquantify the seismic fragilities of modern woodframe construction. The results obtained suggest that theconstruction quality, excitation direction and wall finish materials can influence significantly the collapsefragilities of woodframe buildings. Copyright
q
2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Received 6 November 2007; Revised 8 September 2008; Accepted 8 September 2008KEY WORDS
: collapse; incremental dynamic analysis; seismic; wood structure
1. INTRODUCTIONObservations from significant earthquakes in the last two decades, such at the 1989 Loma Prieta andthe 1994 Northridge earthquakes in California and the 1995 Hyogo-ken Nanbu (Kobe) earthquake
Correspondence to: Andre Filiatrault, Department of Civil, Structural and Environmental Engineering, State Universityof New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14260, U.S.A.
E-mail: af36@buffalo.edu, filiatrault@mceermail.buffalo.edu
Graduate Student Researcher.
§
Professor.
Senior Structural Engineer.Contract
/
grant sponsor: Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Management Agency (FEMA)Copyright
q
2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
 
478
I. P. CHRISTOVASILIS
ET AL.
in Japan, have demonstrated that seismic hazards pose a credible threat to residential woodframebuildings. The 1994 Northridge earthquake in California demonstrated that both existing and newwoodframe buildings are vulnerable to strong ground shaking. More than half of the $40 billionproperty loss that occurred in the Northridge earthquake was attributed to wood construction
[
1
]
.In Japan, the collapse of residential wood buildings was one of the main contributors to the heavydeath toll (more than 6400) and economic losses (more than $100 billion US) during the 1995Kobe earthquake
[
2
]
.While seismic provisions included in current building codes
[
3,4
]
govern the seismic designof new engineered wood construction in the US, the performance of traditionally ‘nonengineered’wall finish materials, such as gypsum wallboard or stucco, is not accounted for in the designprocess. Additionally, many older existing woodframe buildings were poorly designed to resistearthquake shaking. For example, thousands of woodframe, multi-unit residential buildings havebeen constructed in California with tuck-under parking at the ground level. This type of wood-frame construction usually includes a soft-story configuration that may lead to severe damage andeven collapse under strong earthquake shaking. Several buildings of this structural type, typicallyconstructed in the 1960s or 1970s, experienced ground story collapses during the 1994 Northridgein California.In order to develop consistent performance-based seismic design procedures for woodframebuildings, their global system-level seismic fragilities under the complete range of seismic hazardsmust be evaluated. This study attempts to shed some light on these issues by quantifying the seismiccollapse fragilities and collapse mechanisms of woodframe buildings using uni- and bi-directionalincremental inelastic time-history dynamic analyses.2. DESCRIPTION OF ORIGINAL BUILDING MODELSTwo different woodframe residential building models, a townhouse and an apartment building,are considered in this study. These buildings are part of a suite of prototype index buildingsdeveloped under the recently completed FEMA-funded CUREE-Caltech Woodframe Project inCalifornia for use in loss estimation and benefit-to-cost ratio analysis
[
5
]
. Detailed modeling onthese index buildings has been conducted by Isoda
et al.
[
6
]
. Two design alternatives of thesetwo index buildings are considered: (1) the original buildings designed according to earlier coderequirements and (2) the re-designed buildings according to the requirements of the 2006 editionof the International Building Code
[
3
]
. The construction details of the two original index buildingmodels are summarized in Table I. Figure 1 shows architectural rendering and plan views of the original index building models. The major structural components of the building models areidentified in Figure 1 and are described in detail in
[
7
]
.
2.1. Original townhouse building
This two-story townhouse contains three units, each having approximately 170m
2
of living spacewith an attached two-car garage, as shown in Figure 1. The building is assumed to be foundedon a level lot with a slab-on-grade and spread foundations. The original building is assumed tohave been built as a ‘production house’ in either the 1980s or 1990s, located in either Northern orSouthern California. The design is based on the 1988 edition of the Uniform Building Code
[
8
]
Copyright
q
2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn.
2009;
38
:477–496DOI: 10.1002/eqe
 
INCREMENTAL DYNAMIC ANALYSIS OF WOODFRAME BUILDINGS
479
Table I. Construction details for original index woodframe buildings.
Components Construction detailsExterior walls Stucco (22mm thick) over 11mm oriented strand board (OSB) on outsideGypsum wallboard 12mm thick on insideFurring nails (9mm head) spaced at 150mm on center along vertical studs used toattach wire mesh of stucco finish to wood framingEight-penny common nails
(
diameter
=
3
.
3mm
,
length
=
76
.
2mm
)
spaced at 150,100 or 75mm along edges and 300mm on field used to attach OSB panels toframingInterior walls Gypsum wallboard (12mm thick) on both sidesDrywall nails (38mm long) spaced at 175mm on center along vertical studs(spaced at 400mm on center) used to attach gypsum walls to framingGypsum wallboard panels positioned vertically
for engineered construction. The height of the townhouse building from the first floor slab to theroof eaves is 5.5m and its total dead weight is 980kN.Seismically relevant characteristics that were intentionally featured in this townhouse include theintegral garage and for the end units, the imbalance in plan stiffness between the solid longitudinalwall with gypsum wallboard at the common wall side versus the perforated walls with stucco ororiented strand boards (OSB) on the exterior wall side.
2.2. Original apartment building
This index building represents a three-story, rectangular apartment with ten units (each with 85m
2
of living space) and space for mechanical and common areas, as shown in Figure 1. All wallsand elevated floors are light woodframe. It has parking on the ground floor. Each unit has twobedrooms and one assigned parking stall. The building is assumed to have been constructed priorto 1970 in Northern or Southern California, designed according to the 1964 edition of the UniformBuilding Code
[
9
]
and ‘engineered’ to a minimal extent. The height of the apartment buildingfrom the first floor slab to the roof eaves is 8.2m and its total dead weight is 1550kN.
2.3. Construction variants
Three deterministic construction variants are considered for each index building in order to assessthe effects of construction qualities on the seismic fragilities and collapse mechanisms. The vari-ants are representative of poor-quality, typical-quality and superior-quality construction and weredeveloped as part of the CUREE-Caltech Woodframe Project
[
5
]
. The managers of the CUREE-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 3 (Building Codes and Standards), assisted by a group of structural engineers familiar with the seismic design of light-frame wood buildings in California,selected four key characteristics that contribute most strongly to repair cost, and defined, basedon their experience, these characteristics for a poor-quality, typical-quality and superior-qualityvariant. The characteristics of each construction variant are summarized in Table II.The superior quality construction variant has good nailing of shear walls good connectionsbetween structural elements, good quality stucco and good nailing of gypsum wallboard (allcomponents are assumed to exhibit strength and stiffness comparable with high-quality laboratorytest specimens). The typical quality variant has average nailing of shear walls and diaphragms
Copyright
q
2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn.
2009;
38
:477–496DOI: 10.1002/eqe

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->