Bruno Dujic

Svojstva drvenih zgrada za gradnju u seizmički
aktivnim područjima – primjeri izgradnje
dr. Bruno Dujič, CBD d.o.o.

bruno.dujic@cbd.si
Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

– inovativna rješenja u drvetu, Banjak Luka, 19. novembar 2013
Content
• Timber construction systems
• CLT and seismic
• Building design codes
• Seismic design principles
• State of the art analysis procedures
• Seismic activity in Slovenia
• Case studies
• Innovations in CLT
CBD Contemporary Building Design d.o.o.
Who we are
• R&D performing SME

• Established in 2006
• 1 PhD
• 4 Masters of Engineering
• 1 Bachelor of Engineering

What we do
• Building design (over 300 projects since 2006)

• Building execution of CLT structures (over 20 projects since 2006)
• Research and development (5 R&D projects since 2009)

We are specialised in
• Seismic design of timber structures

F

t t
nateg tlak na
(t) (c) (t
Timber construction systems
Basic timber construction elements

Basic timber construction elements
7
Log system Timber frame system
Timber frame system Timber masiv system

CLT and seismic general behaviour
Light timber frame – 2005

CLT 1 storey – januar 2006

CLT 3 stories – july 2006

CLT 7 stories – nov. 2007

CLT seismic response
• Rocking
• Slip + Friction
Benefits
• Self-centering (minimal residual deformations)

• Low-cost no damage design

CLT and seismic - Multi-storey timber buildings
2009
2007 8 storey
STADHAUS, Waugh Thistleton
7 storey Arch., GB
SOFIE project,
Ivalsa, IT
2013
2006 9 storey
POLARIS project,
3 storey MAK Holz, IT
SOFIE project,
Ivalsa, IT

CLT and seismic - Multi-storey timber buildings
40 storey
30 storey
20 storey
12 storey

Building design codes - Eurocodes
Vertical loads;
•Self weight Even though crosslam is not
•Live load yet included in EC5, most of
•Snow load Eurocode 1 these load cases can be dealt
Eurocode 5 with using the current standard
Horizontal load; (with some sensible
•Wind interpretations)

Building design codes - Eurocodes
Eurocode 8 is in general
heavily lacking guidelines for
Earthquake Eurocode 8 the seismic analysis of timber
structures. Crosslam is of
course no exception.
Specific design rules in EC8 – number of pages:
Steel &
Concrete Masonry Timber
Composite
59 pg. 51 pg. 9 pg. 6 pg.

Seismic design principles
Hysteretic behaviour of shear connections

FF FF FF
c c c
  
t t t
  
M
t t t
nateg tlak nateg tlak

(t) (c) (t) (c)
Connection hysteretic behaviour

Load
Virgin curve  Governed by the
material
Connector moving properties of the wood
through gap
(reduced stiffness) and the fastener
Deformation
 Smooth lines with no
well defined yield point
Connector
regaining
contact
 Mildly to severely
(wood crushing) pinched loops
Strength
deterioration
Brittle and ductile connections

Timber rivets
200
160
120 19 mm Bolted Connections
Glulam - Test 1
80
Axial Load (KN)
40
0
-40 200
-80 160
Glulam - 65 mm Rivets
-120 120 Test 10
-160 80
-200 40
Load (kN)
-12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12
0
Displacement (mm)
-40
-80
-120
-160
-200
-30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Stocky bolts Displacement (mm)

Performance based design –

structure response due to intensity of seismic event
prečna
shear
sila
force
zelo
very redek dogodek
rare event
(2%
2% // 50
50years
let)
rare event
redek dogodek
10% / /50
(10% 50years
let)
possible dogodek
verjeten event
20% / /50
(20% 50years
let)
life
življensko construction
konstrukcijsko
very verjeten
zelo possible dogodek
event operational
obratovalno safety
varno safety
stabilno
50% //50
(50% 50years
let)
vzdolžne
lateral deformacije
deformation
Case C Case C
blocked
Case A
Case B
Wooden frame with both-side partical
board sheathing [ ts=15mm, b/h/t =
250/268/19 cm; sp-tf connection: glue
and threathed nails 2,8/60mm, k200mm,
vertical load 15kN/m’]
Case B Case C Case C

Case A blocked
Evaluation of experimentally obtained racking response of wall panel

Load
KEN594 Fmax, dFmax

Ky // //
F1%h
Fu
F0.75%h
F0.5%h 0.9 Fmax
0.8 Fmax
Fy
0.4 Fmax
0.1 Fmax dr 0.75%h u

dy dr 0.5%h dr 1%h Displacement du
Rocking response
Influence of vertical load
Boundary Conditions - Case A

40
Combined shear–
Hor. load carring capacity [kN]
rocking response
30 Combined shear-
Shear
response rocking response
Rocking
response
20
10 Fy
Wooden frame with one-side OSB sheathing [ ts=12mm, Fmax
b/h/t = 244/244/16.4 cm; annulary nails 2,8/75mm, k100mm Shear response
verical studs are not anchored directly into foundation ]0 Fv,d_EC5
0
0 10 20 30 40
Vertical load per meter length of the wall [kN/m']
State of the art procedures
Linear modal response spectrum analysis
25 30
20
Ks 25
15
20
Kt
10
Uplift force [kN]

Shear force [kN]
5 15
0 10
-35 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
-5
5
-10
0
-15
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
-20 -5
-25
Slip [mm]
-10 Kc Uplift [mm]
Periods
0,7
0,6
0,5
0,4 i
(i)
[s]
0,3 ii
iii
(ii) (iii)
0,2
0,1
0
i) Rigid ii) Elastic top and bottom, iii) All elastic
T1 T2 T3 no perpendicular
Procedure
• Timber – in global seismic analysis (always) modelled elastically (E, G)
• Connections – linearised (substitute vertical stiffness of springs)
Nonlinear static (“pushover”) analysis
25
WALL B - EFFECT OF FRICTION
20 350
15
10 300
Shear force [kN]
0
250
-40 -35 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
-5
Base shear [kN]

200
-10
EXPERIMENT
-15
FEM 10 NAILS 1st CYCLE BACKBONE
150
-20
-25
Slip [mm] 100
25
20
50
15
0
10
0,00 0,01 0,02 0,03 0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09
Shear force [kN]
5 Top floor displacement [m]
0 1) 1 ST. CYCLE, NO FRICTION 1f) 1 ST. CYCLE, FRICTION

-40 -35 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
2) 3 RD. CYCLE, NO FRICTION 2f) 3 RD. CYCLE, FRICTION
-5
3) 3 RD. CYCLE, NO FRIC. NO GRAVITY 3f) 3 RD. CYCLE, FRICTION, NO GRAVITY
-10
EXPERIMENT
-15
FEM 10 NAILS 3rd CYCLE BACKBONE
-20
-25
Slip [mm]
Procedure
• Connection backbone response (1st / 3rd ?)
• Pushover curve
• N2 method (procedure in EC8)
Nonlinear dynamic analysis
2 x BMF 105 shear 2 x BMF 105 uplift
50
60
40
50
30
40
20
Uplift force [kN]

10 30
Shear force [kN]

0 20
0,03 0,02 0,01 0,00 -0,01 -0,02 -0,03
-10 10
-20
0
-30 -0,01 0,01 0,02 0,03
-10
-40
-20
-50 Displacement [m]
Slip [m]
EXPERIMENT FEM SIMULATION FEM BACKBONE EXPERIMENT FEM SIMULATION FEM BACKBONE
Exact finite element modelling of connections in timber
• (cylic) Stiffnes degradation • A pinching effect

• (cyclic) Strength degradatrion • Slip

Seismic activity in Slovenia
Seismic activity in Europe

1973-2002
Magnitude > 3


1895 Ljubljana

1976 Breginj

1998 Posočje

CLT Case studies - Family housing 1



CLT Case studies –
Family housing 4

CLT Case studies - Bivouac

CLT Case studies - Office areas

CLT Case studies - Kindergarten

CLT Case studies - Storage halls

CLT Case studies - Renovation

CLT Case studies - Upgrades 1



CLT Case studies – Exhibitions

Innovations in CLT - Seismic strengthening

4 weeks, 156 tests
• 14 upgrade setups
• 2 strengthening setups
• 8 glass-timber setups




Story drift comparison

UNSTRENGTHENED STRENGTHENED
2-1 0,88 % 0,68 % (-23%)
1-0 2,16 % 1,52 % (-30%)
Period changes
FREQUENCY (PERIOD)
Unstrengthened before 6,93 Hz (0,14 s)
Unstrengthened after 2,97 Hz (0,34 s)
Strengthened before 6,23 Hz (0,16 s)
Strengthened after 5,66 Hz (0,18 s)

Innovations in CLT - Ribbed CLT

Innovations in CLT - Ribbed CLT
120
100 100
100
79
80
70 70
66
56,5 55 Light frame wall
60
CLT wall
Ribbed CLT wall
40 35
30
23
20
10
0
Price [€/m2] Timber use Utilization ULS [%] Utilization FIRE [%]
[dm3/m2]

Innovations in CLT - PSILOS garage system
Concept
• 3 basic shapes
• 1 to 5 floors
• 46 to 488 parking spots
• 7000 €/parking space on
Facts
• 13.5 tons/CO2/parking spot

• 5 times lighter than in RC
• lower foundation cost
• deassembly – reassembly
• 1 week/floor



+ =



Conclusions
 Experiments proove that CLT is a perfect material for

buildings in seismic areas.
 Cases show that CLT can be used even for extreme
seismic demands (multi-stores construction, building
strengthening).
 Many cases of CLT constructions in seismically
unactive areas can be designed with the use of the
material’s technical approvals and sensible
interpretations of Eurocode 5 guidelines.

Conclusions
 The current state of the European seismic design code

(EC8) is far behind the demands of the market (investors,
architects) for timber structures.
 However for lower strucures designing a seismically
resistant CLT building is easier than a light timber frame
due to simpler details and a more desirable response of
the system.
 More research papers are being published on the topic
of seismic CLT design every year.

Conclusions
Thank you for your attention!

bruno.dujic@cbd.si


Bruno Dujic

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bruno Dujic

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Svojstva drvenih zgrada za gradnju u seizmički

aktivnim područjima – primjeri izgradnje

dr. Bruno Dujič, CBD d.o.o.

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

• R&D performing SME

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

• Building design (over 300 projects since 2006)

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

• Seismic design of timber structures

Basic timber construction elements

Basic timber construction elements

Timber frame system Timber masiv system

Light timber frame – 2005

CLT 1 storey – januar 2006

CLT 3 stories – july 2006

CLT 7 stories – nov. 2007

CLT seismic response

• Self-centering (minimal residual deformations)

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Specific design rules in EC8 – number of pages:

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Hysteretic behaviour of shear connections

nateg tlak nateg tlak

Connection hysteretic behaviour

Brittle and ductile connections

Stocky bolts Displacement (mm)

Performance based design –

Case B Case C Case C

Evaluation of experimentally obtained racking response of wall panel

KEN594 Fmax, dFmax

0.1 Fmax dr 0.75%h u

Boundary Conditions - Case A

Uplift force [kN]

Base shear [kN]

5 Top floor displacement [m]

0 1) 1 ST. CYCLE, NO FRICTION 1f) 1 ST. CYCLE, FRICTION

Uplift force [kN]

Shear force [kN]

Exact finite element modelling of connections in timber

• (cylic) Stiffnes degradation • A pinching effect

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Seismic activity in Europe

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima

Kongres “Bezbjedna i energetski efikasna gradnja na trusnim područjima