Engineering Structures 21 (1999) 770–785

Dynamic characteristics of a semi-rigid hanging roof structure

composed of glulams and steel plate
a,*
Shigeru Ban , Shohei Motohashi a, Arata Yoshida a, Haruji Tsubota b

a
Kajima Architectural and Engineering Design, 6-5-30, Akasaka, Minato-ku, Tokyo 107, Japan
b
Kajima Technical Research Institute, 2-19-1, Tobitakyu, Chofu-shi, Tokyo 182, Japan

Abstract

The Nagano Olympic Memorial Arena, located in Nagano City, Japan, is where the 18th winter Olympic games will be held in
1998. It is one of the world’s largest speed skating arenas, covering an 80 m ⫻ 216 m free space containing a 400 m speed skate
oval and seating for 10,000 spectators.
One of the main features of the structure is its semi-rigid hanging roof spanning 80 m. Each hanging member is composed of
two glulams sandwiching a steel plate.
Hanging structures generally incorporate bracing members to increase roof stability and to resist wind up-lift and lateral load.
This structure instead utilizes the bending stiffness of the glulams and the in-plane stiffness of plywood panels attached to roofing
members. However, few studies have been carried out to evaluate the dynamic structural characteristics of this kind of structure.
This paper describes experimental and analytical investigations conducted to verify this structure’s wind-resistant design and confirm
its structural safety against strong wind load.  1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Hanging roof; Composite beam; Glulam and steel plate; Dynamic behavior; Dynamic wind load

1. Introduction In general, one-way hanging roof structures are easy

A new type of hanging roof structure covering an
80 m ⫻ 216 m free space has been developed, designed
and constructed. This structure is called the Nagano
Olympic Memorial Arena, and the 18th winter Olympic
games were held in it in 1998. It is one of the world’s
largest indoor skating arenas, and is located in Nagano
City, Japan. As shown in Plate 1, it comprises a series
of suspended roof elements inspired by the peaks of the
Japan Alps. It creates a new and fresh impression, con-
trasting with the more traditional round dome configur-
ation.
One of the main features of the structure is its semi-
rigid hanging roof spanning 80 m. The structure consists
of 15 hanging roof panels, each composed of composite
hanging beams with plywood fixed to them. Each com-
posite hanging beam is composed of two glued lami-
nated timber (glulam) beams sandwiching a steel plate.
* Corresponding author. Fax: 00 81 3 3470 6207.
to deform under up-lift and lateral wind loads. Therefore,
these kinds of hanging structures are usually designed
with bracing and/or suppressing members to resist up-lift
and lateral movements. However, the semi-rigid hanging
roof structure here has no bracing and suppressing mem-
bers from the viewpoint of a design requirement. Instead,
it utilizes the bending stiffness of the composite beams
(glulams) resisting the up-lift load and the shearing stiff-
ness of the plywood panels resisting the lateral load.
Furthermore, from a wind-induced response analysis
on the design stage, though large deformations of the
roof occur under strong wind load, the unstable state is
restraint due to the bending stiffness, and the member
stresses are within the allowable stresses. However, con-
sidering sash joints between the neighboring roofs and
lighting equipment under the roof, oil-dampers were
planed to attach the roof to reduce the deformations.
Since few studies have been carried out to evaluate
the dynamic characteristics of such structures, experi-
mental and analytical investigations [1–5] have been
conducted to verify the structure’s wind-resistant design

0141-0296/99/$ - see front matter  1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 1 4 1 - 0 2 9 6 ( 9 8 ) 0 0 0 3 0 - 3
 S. Ban et al. / Engineering Structures 21 (1999) 770–785
Plate 1.
and confirm its structural safety against strong wind
load.
First, dynamic loading tests were conducted on a 1/4-
scale hanging roof panel model to determine its funda-
mental dynamic characteristics. Next, dynamic loading
tests were conducted on an actual hanging roof panel to
confirm its dynamic characteristics. In these tests, the
effects of oil-dampers attached to the hanging roof
panels to increase damping and reduce its response were
also investigated. Three-dimensional wind-induced
response analyses considering geometrical nonlinearity
were carried out to confirm its structural safety against
fluctuating wind force.
This paper summarizes these experimental and ana-
lytical investigations.
2. Outline of structural system
The structural system of this speed skate oval is out-
lined in Fig. 1. As shown, the overall structure consists
Fig. 1. Outline of structure.
771
General view of Nagano Arena.
of 15 structural units. Each unit has two reinforced con-
crete counterweights, two leaning walls, and a hanging
roof panel pin connected to the top edges of the leaning
walls. The center roof unit is the highest, and roof unit
height reduces in 3-m gaps toward the outside units. The
configuration of the hanging roof portion is the same for
all units, and is as follows: span, 80 m; sag, 5 m; and
width, 18 m. The basic load bearing mechanism of the
roof unit is shown in Fig. 2. The details of each structural
portion are summarized in follows.
2.1. Hanging roof
A section of the roof panel is shown in Fig. 3. Each
main beam is a composite member composed of glulams
and a steel plate. Two glulam beams (300 mm ⫻
125 mm ⫻ 2) sandwich a steel plate (200 mm ⫻ 12 mm)
and they are connected to each other with steel bolts at
2 m pitch. The beams are arranged at 600 mm intervals.
Thus, one roof panel consists of 30 main beams pin sup-
ported at the ends of the steel plate, and connected to
each other at 10-m intervals by steel tie plates.
Plywood panels 12 mm thick are nailed to the top sur-
Fig. 2. Basic load bearing mechanism.
772 S. Ban et al. / Engineering Structures 21 (1999) 770–785
Fig. 3. Section of hanging roof.
faces of the glulams. The panels work not only as sheet-
ing roof boards, but also as structural members to
increase the in-plane stiffness of the roof panels.
2.2. Leaning wall
The leaning walls transmit loads from the hanging
roofs to the foundation. Their upper portions are com-
posed of steel posts and stays, forming a triangle. The
posts resist compression and the stays resist tension. The
lower portions of the walls are made of reinforced con-
crete. Pre-stress steel rods are added to the outer portion
of the wall to resist the tensile force from the steel stays.
The center triangle is the highest, and the height reduces
in 3 m gaps toward the outer units.
2.3. Foundation
Reinforced concrete counterweights, which resist ten-
sile forces from the hanging roofs, are located under the
leaning walls. All of these structures are supported by
pre-stressed concrete piles, 600 mm in diameter and 10–
12 m long, founded on a sand gravel layer.
3. Dynamic tests on a 1/4-scale hanging roof panel
model
To establish the wind-resistant design method for this
semi-rigid hanging roof structure, it is necessary to
evaluate the fundamental dynamic characteristics of the
hanging roof panel. Therefore, dynamic loading tests
were carried out on a 1/4-scale roof panel model to
determine its vibration modes, natural frequencies and
damping factors. Furthermore, oil-dampers were
attached to the model to reduce the dynamic response
of the roof panel. Another object of the tests was to con-
firm the effects of the oil-dampers.
3.1. Test specimen
The test specimen was a 1/4-scale hanging roof panel
model, with 20 m span, 4.5 m width and 1.25 m sag, as
shown in Plate 2 and Fig. 4. The similarity law employed
in the scale model test is shown in Table 1. This simi-
larity law is derived for the Replica Model in which the
same material for both model and prototype is assumed.
Therefore, material properties are the same. Further-
more, the acceleration which is most important para-
meter in dynamic problems is also assumed to be the
same for both model and prototype. The members of the
roof panel i.e., the steel plates, glulams, tie plates, etc.,
were modeled as close to 1/4 scale as possible. However,
straight timber pieces were used for the composite beam
in place of the curved glulams.
Fig. 5 shows a section of the roof panel model. Each
composite beam was composed of two timber beams
(75 mm ⫻ 31 mm) and a steel plate (50 mm ⫻ 3 mm)
connected by bolts at 50 cm intervals. The pieces of tim-
ber and steel plate were approx. 2.5 m long, and the tim-
ber-to-timber joint and the steel-to-steel joint were
arranged at the central portions of each piece. Tie plates
between the composite beams were also arranged at
2.5 m intervals. The plywood (600 mm ⫻ 300 mm ⫻
3 mm) was nailed to the composite beams, and 960
additional weights (7.3 kg each) were set on the roof
according to the similarity law.
Material constants of the steel (SS400) and the timber
(pine) were as follows:
Steel: Young’s Modulus: E ⫽ 2190 tf/cm2
yield stress: ␴y ⫽ 2900 kgf/cm2
Timber: Young’s Modulus: E ⫽ 128 tf/cm2
3.2. Test method
Three types of dynamic tests were conducted; a free
vibration test, a forced vibration test and a microtremor
measurement test. These three tests were conducted
because the natural frequencies and damping factors of
such a hanging structure were considered to depend on
the vibration amplitudes.
In the free vibration test, the roof was made to vibrate
by releasing local deformation caused by cutting a ten-
sion wire. Four test cases—releasing points of 1/4-mid,
1/4-edge, 1/2-mid and 1/2-edge—were conducted, as
shown in Fig. 4.
The forced vibration test was conducted using an
eccentric mass type vibrator fixed to the laboratory floor.
The maximum force of the vibrator was 3 tonf, and the
vibrating frequency ranged from 1 to 4 Hz.
The microtremor measurement test was conducted by
measuring micro vibration waves in the roof induced by
normal microscopic ground noise such as a traffic noise,
etc., and transfer functions were analyzed in the fre-
quency domain from the measured time histories.
Fig. 6 shows the measuring point arrangement.
 S. Ban et al. / Engineering Structures 21 (1999) 770–785 773

Plate 2. 1/4-scale roof panel model.

Fig. 4. Test specimen of 1/4-scale roof panel.

Table 1
Similarity law for scale model test

Parameter Dimension Full scale value Scale model value Typical quantity

Length L d sd Span length

Mass M m s2m Panel mass
Time T t √st Natural period
Acceleration LT−2 a a Response acceleration
Force MLT−2 f s2f Tensile force
Stress ML−1T2 ␴ ␴ Tensile stress
Strain - ⑀ ⑀ Elongation

s: Geometrical scale factor.

774 S. Ban et al. / Engineering Structures 21 (1999) 770–785
Fig. 5. Section of roof panel model.
3.3. Test result
3.3.1. Free vibration test
Fig. 7 shows an example of a measured time history
for the 1/4-mid point release case. From these time his-
tories, natural frequencies and damping factors were esti-
mated by dividing them into three amplitude ranges—
large amplitude (5.0 苲 1.0 mm), mid amplitude (1.0 苲
0.3 mm) and small amplitude (0.3 苲 0.1 mm). These esti-
mated values are shown in Table 2.
Fig. 8 shows free vibration modes. The mode shape
for the 1/4-mid case is anti-symmetric (vertical 1st), the
1/4-edge case is torsional (torsion 1st), the 1/2-edge case
is torsional (torsion 2nd), and the 1/2-mid case is sym-
metric (vertical 2nd).
Fig. 6. Measuring points for roof panel model.
3.3.2. Forced vibration test
Fig. 9 shows resonant amplitude curves for typical
measuring points normalized by a vibrating force of
1 tonf. Some peaks can be seen in the figure. Resonant
frequencies and damping factors were estimated from
these resonant curves, and the values are shown in
Table 2.
Fig. 10 shows resonant vibration modes at peak fre-
quencies for the resonant curves. The amplitudes of
these vibration modes were 0.05 苲 0.1 mm.
3.3.3. Microtremor measurement test
Fig. 11 shows transfer function curves for typical
measuring points from the supporting frame point. Peak
frequencies and damping factors were estimated from
these curves, and they are shown in Table 2. These
curves are very similar to the resonant curve of forced
vibration test in Fig. 9. The vibration modes were also
similar to the resonant modes shown in Fig. 10. The
amplitudes of the measured waves were approx.
0.01 mm.
3.3.4. Considerations
Table 2 compares the natural frequencies and the
damping factors obtained from the vibration tests. The
test results show that the natural frequencies and the
damping factors have a little amplitude-dependency. The
damping factors tend to increase with the vibration
amplitude, but these factors are relatively low (approx.
1% or less).
3.4. Vibration test of 1/4-scale model with oil
dampers
3.4.1. Test method
Since the above tests showed that the damping factors
were low, free vibration tests were conducted on the 1/4-
 S. Ban et al. / Engineering Structures 21 (1999) 770–785 775

Table 2
Comparison of frequencies and dampings

No. Mode shape Frq. (Hz) Free vibration Forced vibration Microtremor

Damping (%) Large Middle Small

1st Vertical 1st Frq. (Hz) 1.20 1.22 1.23 1.24 1.23
Damping (%) 1.22 1.29 1.18 0.56 0.58
2nd Torsional 1st Frq. (Hz) 1.79 1.80 1.81 1.82 1.82
Damping (%) 1.11 0.92 0.90 0.55 0.23
3rd Torsional 2nd Frq. (Hz) 1.96 1.97 2.00 2.03 2.02
Damping (%) 1.34 0.94 0.72 0.43 0.44
4th Vertical 2nd Frq. (Hz) 2.03 2.06 2.07 2.07 2.08
Damping (%) 1.06 1.00 1.11 0.50 0.42

Fig. 7. Example of measured time history.

scale roof panel model attached to oil dampers. Two oil

damper arrangements were tested, as shown in Fig. 12.
In one, four oil dampers were attached at each corner of
the roof panel. In the other, seven oil dampers were
attached to one side line of the roof panel. Two grades
of oil dampers (3 kgf/kine, 10 kgf/kine) were tested in
each case. The vibrating points were 1/4-mid and 1/2- Fig. 9. Resonant disp. curves (forced vibration).
mid.
that the oil dampers were effective for improving the
3.4.2. Test result damping characteristics of the roof panel.
Fig. 13 compares the measured time histories with and Table 3 compares the natural frequencies and damping
without oil-dampers for the ‘4-dampers, 3 kgf/kine and factors obtained from the tests. It is noted that the damp-
1/4-mid point vibrating’ case. These time histories show ing factors were increased to 2 苲 5% by the oil dampers.

Fig. 8. Free vibration mode.

776 S. Ban et al. / Engineering Structures 21 (1999) 770–785
Fig. 10.
Fig. 11. Transfer functions (microtremor).
4. Dynamic tests on an actual roof panel
Vibration tests were carried out on an actual hanging
roof panel to confirm its actual vibration characteristics,
and their results are compared with the 1/4-scale model
test results and analytical results which are described in
the next section.
4.1. Test method
One of the actual hanging roof panels (E3 panel)
shown in Fig. 14 was used for the experiment. This panel
was not yet attached to the oil dampers in the building
construction. Free vibration test and microtremor
measurement test were conducted.
In the free vibration test, several people on the roof
panel executed a rhythmical up-and-down movement to
Forced vibration mode.
excite the panel, and then stopped the movement to leave
the panel in a free vibration state. As shown in Fig. 15,
four excitation points were adopted: middle and edge
points on the 1/4 and the 1/2 portion of the panel.
Microtremors were measured at points on the panel
and supporting points (top of post and stay). Frequency
transfer functions and intrinsic vibration characteristics
of the roof panel were calculated by averaging the data
of multiple time frames.
Displacement time histories at portions of the roof and
supports were measured simultaneously by vibration
sensors deployed at points shown in Fig. 16.
4.2. Test result
4.2.1. Free vibration test
In the free vibration tests, man-power excitation was
provided at each excitation point based on the natural
frequency of each vibration mode estimated from the
previous model test results and the analytical results.
Typical free vibration time histories for each exci-
tation case are shown in Fig. 17. The waveforms of the
1/4-mid case and 1/2-mid case exhibit smooth forms.
However, those of the 1/4-edge case and 1/2-edge case
do not, owing to the presence of higher-order vibration
components. This may be because the excitation fre-
quency and the natural frequency did not coincide for
these cases, so that coupling with other vibration modes
occurred. These modes refer to microtremor measure-
ment results.
Fig. 18 shows free vibration modes obtained from the
measured time histories. Anti-symmetric vertical
vibration mode (vertical 1st) occurred for the 1/4-mid
case, anti-symmetric torsional vibration mode (torsional
1st) for the 1/4-edge case, symmetric torsional vibration
 S. Ban et al. / Engineering Structures 21 (1999) 770–785 777

Fig. 12. Test specimen with oil dampers.

Fig. 14. Tested actual hanging roof panel.

Fig. 13. Comparison of time histories with/without damper.

Table 3
Comparison of frequencies and dampings (damper case)

Damper position Damper case 1/4-mid case 1/2-mid case

Frq. (Hz) Damping (%) Frq. (Hz) Damping (%)

Without damper 1.20 苲 1.24 0.56 苲 1.29 2.03 苲 2.08 0.42 苲 1.11
4-dampers at corner 3 kgf/kine 1.18 3.40 2.01 2.73
10 kgf/kine 1.22 4.48 2.02 2.58
7-dampers at side 3 kgf/kine 1.31 5.53 1.94 1.51
10 kgf/kine 1.32 3.43 1.93 1.32

mode (torsional 2nd) for the 1/2-edge case and sym-
metric vertical vibration mode (vertical 2nd) for the 1/2-
mid case.
The average natural frequencies and damping factors
deduced from the waveforms measured in the free
vibration tests are listed in Table 4. However, the values
of the 1/4-edge and 1/2-edge cases have uncertainties
because of their waveforms.
4.2.2. Microtremor measurement test
Microtremors were measured when there was a gentle
wind and no construction noise. One measurement frame
lasted 200 s, and transfer functions were calculated by
averaging ten measurement frames.
Transfer functions at representative measurement
points (1/4-mid point, 1/2-mid point) to the supporting
point are shown in Fig. 19. In the transfer functions,
778 S. Ban et al. / Engineering Structures 21 (1999) 770–785

Fig. 15. Excitation points for free vibration test.

Fig. 17. Measured time histories of free vibration test.

Fig. 16. Measuring points for actual roof panel test. 4.3. Comparison of test results

The experimental results of the actual hanging roof

prominent peaks are found at 0.57, 0.86, 0.88, and
0.96 Hz in the range of 0 苲 1 Hz (lower-order basic
vibration modes).
Vibration modes at the above frequency peaks are
shown in Fig. 20. Vibration modes at 0.57, 0.86, 0.88,
and 0.96 Hz correspond to the vertical 1st mode, tor-
sional 2nd mode, torsional 1st mode, and vertical 2nd
mode, respectively. The torsional 2nd and vertical 2nd
modes look like coupled modes of a torsional vibration
mode and a vertical vibration mode.
Natural frequencies and damping factors determined
from microtremors for each vibration mode are listed in
Table 5.
panel are compared with those of vibration tests on the
1/4-scale hanging roof panel model and the analytical
results of the hanging roof panel described in the next
section.
The natural vibration modes on the actual panel are
compared in Table 6 with those obtained from the 1/4-
scale model tests and the analyses. Data of the forced
vibration mode for the 1/4-scale model are representa-
tively listed in the table because free vibrations, forced
vibrations and microtremors all exhibit similar
vibration modes.
The vertical 1st and torsional 1st modes obtained from
the actual panel tests are in good agreement with those
obtained from the 1/4-scale model tests and the analyti-
 S. Ban et al. / Engineering Structures 21 (1999) 770–785
Fig. 18.
Table 4
Natural frequencies and damping factors (free vibration)
Exciting point Mode shape
1/4-Mid Vertical 1st
1/4-Edge Torsional 1st
1/2-Edge Torsional 2nd
1/2-Mid Vertical 2nd
(): Uncertain value.
cal approach. However, the torsional 2nd and vertical
2nd mode shapes are not so clear as those of the analyti-
cal results and show coupled vertical and torsional
modes. These tendencies also appear in the 1/4-scale
model test results. This is considered to be because of
possible variations in the stiffness and mass distributions
and the initial shape of the hung roof, for such non-uni-
form material as the timber.
The natural frequencies and damping factors are com-
pared in Table 7. Here, the natural frequencies for the
1/4-scale model are converted to actual-size values based
on the similarity law.
The natural frequencies of microtremors of the actual
panel exhibit slightly reversed values between the tor-
sional 1st and torsional 2nd modes. This is inferred to
be because of the imbalance of stiffness and mass among
actual hung members, and because the torsional 1st, tor-
sional 2nd, and vertical 2nd vibrations originally have
close natural frequencies. Meanwhile, the natural fre-
quency of the vertical 1st mode of the actual panel is in
good agreement with the previous results, and this is the
main vibration mode for wind-induced responses.
The damping factors in the actual panel tests are
greater than 1%, which is slightly larger than those of
the 1/4-scale model test results. This can be explained
by the following: (1) dissipation damping occurs in the
779
Free vibration modes.
Freq. (Hz) Damping F.(%)
0.56 1.06
(0.85) (4.37 苲 4.70)
(0.9) (2.32 苲 2.35)
0.92 1.07 苲 1.16
actual hanging roof panel, which is supported by less-
rigid posts and stays; and (2) greater material damping
of the glulam is expected in the actual panel, while single
timbers were used in the 1/4-scale model.
4.4. Considerations
Basic vibration modes of the actual hanging roof panel
were determined through the tests. The test results for
the actual panel generally agree with the previously
obtained scale-model test and analytical results. How-
ever, the second-order torsional and second-order verti-
cal vibration modes in the actual panel tests are not as
clear as those of the analytical results. The same trend
is also found in the 1/4-scale model test results.
The natural frequencies obtained from the actual panel
tests generally agree with the previous results. However,
those of the first-order and second-order torsional
vibrations are not in the same order of magnitude. This
can be explained by the following: the second-order tor-
sional and second-order vertical modes originally have
close natural frequencies, and their modes are coupled
due to the variations and imbalance in the mass and the
stiffness of the actual hung members.
The damping factors for the basic vibration modes
range between 1 and 2%, and are slightly greater than
780 S. Ban et al. / Engineering Structures 21 (1999) 770–785

those for the 1/4-scale model test. This can be explained

by the following: (1) while both ends of the roof panel in
the 1/4-scale model were supported by a rigid structure,
dissipation damping occurs in the actual hanging roof
panel, which is supported by less-rigid posts and stays;
and (2) while single timber members were used in the
1/4-scale model tests, greater material damping is
expected in the actual panel, in which glulam members
are used.

5. Wind-induced response analysis

Three-dimensional wind-induced response analysis

based on the direct integration method considering geo-
metrical nonlinearity was conducted to evaluate the
dynamic behavior of an actual hanging roof panel under
fluctuating strong wind force.

5.1. Modeling of hanging roof panel

5.1.1. Modeling of hanging beam

Fig. 21 shows the process for modeling the composite
hanging beam as a shell element composed of an ortho-
tropic linear elastic material. As the first step in the
modeling procedure, an equivalent steel hanging beam
model was established for the composite hanging beam.
In this roof system, the tensile stress is dominant for
the composite hanging beam in most loading cases. The
glulam members are jointed together every 10 m, so the
Fig. 19. Typical transfer functions (microtremors).
stiffness distribution is not homogeneous along the
beam. The tensile loading tests and bending loading tests

Fig. 20. Vibration modes from microtremors.

 S. Ban et al. / Engineering Structures 21 (1999) 770–785 781

Table 5
Natural frequencies and damping factors (microtremors)

Mode No. Mode shape Freq. (Hz) Damping F. (%)

1st Vertical 1st 0.57 1.06

2nd Torsional 2nd 0.86 1.12
3rd Torsional 1st 0.88 1.46
4th Vertical 2nd 0.96 0.70

Table 6
Comparison of vibration modes

Actual roof panel test 1/4-scale model test Analysis

Free vibration Micro-torologies (Forced vibration)

Vertical 1st

[0.62 Hz]
0.56 Hz 0.57 Hz

0.63 Hz
Torsional 1st

(0.85 Hz) [0.91 Hz]

0.88 Hz

0.77 Hz
Torsional 2nd

[1.02 Hz]
(0.90 Hz) 0.86 Hz

0.92 Hz
Vertical 2nd

[1.04 Hz]
0.92 Hz 0.96 Hz

0.95 Hz

Table 7
Comparison of natural frequencies and damping factors

Vibration mode Frequency Actual panel test 1/4-scale model test Analysis
damping factor

Free vibration Microtremor Free vibration Forced vib. Microtremor

Vertical 1st Frequency (Hz) 0.56 0.57 0.60 苲 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.63
Damping F. (%) 1.06 1.06 1.18 苲 1.29 0.56 0.58 -
Torsional 1st Frequency (Hz) (0.85) 0.88 0.90 苲 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.77
Damping F. (%) (4.37 苲 4.70) 1.46 0.90 苲 1.11 0.55 0.23 -
Torsional 2nd Frequency (Hz) (0.9) 0.86 0.98 苲 1.00 1.02 1.01 0.92
Damping F. (%) (2.32 苲 2.35) 1.12 0.72 苲 1.34 0.43 0.44 -
Vertical 2nd Frequency (Hz) 0.92 0.96 1.02 苲 1.04 1.04 1.04 0.95
Damping F. (%) 1.01 苲 1.16 1.70 1.00 苲 1.11 0.50 0.42 -
782 S. Ban et al. / Engineering Structures 21 (1999) 770–785

stiffness of the plywood panel only. Poisson’s ratio ␯ab

was set equal to that of the plywood panel. The shear
modulus Gab and Gbc are also assumed to be equal to
those of the plywood panel. The shear modulus of the
composite member including the plywood panel was
evaluated to be equal to the value Gac.

⑀a 1/Ea ⫺ ␯ba/Eb 0 0 0 ␴a

冦冧冤 冥冦 冧
⑀b ⫺ ␯ab/Ea 1/Ea 0 0 0 ␴b
Fig. 21. Modeling of shell with orthotropic material. ␥ab ⫽ 0 0 1/Gab 0 0 ␶ab (1)
␥bc 0 0 0 1/Gbc 0 ␶bc
for the full-size composite beams [1] were carried out ␥ac 0 0 0 0 1/Gca ␶ac
to evaluate the structural characteristics of the hanging
beam by the authors. In the test, a general part and a where the subscripts (a, b, c) indicate the principal
glulam joint part of them were tested. The test results material directions.
showed that the axial and bending stiffnesses of the glu- ⑀a, ⑀b and ␴a, ␴b Normal strains and
lam joint part of the beam were a little lower than those stresses in the a, b
of the general part. Furthermore, the test results showed directions, and
that the axial stiffness can be evaluated considering only ␥ab, ␥bc, ␥ca and ␶ab, ␶bc, Shear strains and stresses
the steel plate section of the composite hanging beam, ␶ca
and the bending stiffness can be evaluated as the effec- Ea: a-direction elastic
tive stiffness by averaging the values for the general and modulus, set equal to
the joint part. Fig. 22 shows the cross-section of the 25.41 (tf/cm2)
equivalent steel beam element employed in the analysis, Eb: b-direction elastic
whose axial tensile stiffness and out-of-plane bending modulus, set equal to 1.75
stiffness were equivalent to those of the composite beam. (tf/cm2)
␯ab: Poisson ratio, set equal to
5.1.2. Orthotropic material model 0.1 (Eb ␯ab ⫽ Ea␯ba),
As the second step in the modeling, the parameters Gab: Shear modulus, set equal
for an orthotropic linear elastic material representing the to 0.70 (tf/cm2)
hanging roof panel must be determined. The stress–strain Gbc: Shear modulus, set equal
relationship for the orthotropic linear elastic material is to 0.84 (tf/cm2)
defined by Eq. (1). Gca: Shear modulus, set equal
The additional bending moment owing to the plywood to 9.86 (tf/cm2)
panels attached to the top surface of the glulams was
neglected. This membrane member was assumed to be
located in the center of the equivalent steel hanging
beam, as shown in Fig. 21. The thickness of a shell 5.2. Free vibration analysis
element with the orthotropic material is equal to the
height (356.7 mm) of the equivalent steel hanging beam. A free vibration analysis is conducted for one of the
The a-direction elastic modulus Ea parallel to the hanging roof panels. The computer program ‘ADINA’
composite hanging beam is set equal to the axial stiff- [8] is employed. The analytical model is shown in Fig.
ness and the bending stiffness of the equivalent hanging 23, although the oil dampers are not considered in the
beam, including the plywood panel. Eb, the modulus at free vibration analysis. The steel tie beam is modeled as
right angles to the hanging beam, is equal to the axial the truss element. In the geometric nonlinearity problem,
the total tangential stiffness matrix [KT] is composed of
the large displacement matrix [KL], the initial stress
matrix [KS] and the ordinary stiffness matrix [K0].

[KT] ⫽ [KL] ⫹ [KS] ⫹ [K0] (2)

The natural frequency ␻ was also obtained by solving

the eigenvalue problem expressed by Eq. (3) using the
total matrix [KT] under gravity and diagonal mass
Fig. 22. Modeling to equivalent steel hanging beam. matrix [M].
 S. Ban et al. / Engineering Structures 21 (1999) 770–785
Fig. 23. Finite element model.
[KT]{f} ⫽ ␻2[M]{f}
where {f}: Eigen vector
The free vibration modes and natural frequencies are
shown in Fig. 24. The 1st mode is an anti-symmetric
vertical mode, the 4th mode is a symmetric vertical
mode. The 2nd and 3rd modes are the torsional modes.
5.3. Dynamic response analysis
5.3.1. Analytical method
A wind-induced response analysis was carried out to
investigate the structure’s behavior against fluctuating
wind forces. A Newmark integration scheme (␤ ⫽ 1/4)
with full Newton-Raphson iteration was employed to
solve the nonlinear dynamic equilibrium equation. Large
displacements and rotations, but only small strains, are
assumed in the kinematic relations. To introduce the
axial tensile force in the composite beam with dead load
Fig. 24. Free vibration mode with natural frequency.
783
acting owing to geometric nonlinearity into the govern-
ing dynamic equilibrium equations, the loading time his-
tory was determined according to the following pro-
cedure.
1. Dynamic response was determined under dead load:
the roof sagging freely. (The dead load was
incremented in 50 time steps of 2% of total load, in
1 s time steps ⌬t.)
2. Damped free vibration was determined under total
dead load: the roof vibrating freely according to the
reaction of free sagging. (Time step ⌬t ⫽ 1 s, 50
time steps).
3. Dynamic response under wind loading. (Time step ⌬t
⫽ 0.2 s, 1200 time steps).
(3) 5.3.2. Evaluation of damping
According to the free vibration test with large ampli-
tude using the 1/4-scale model, the damping factors were
1.22% and 1.11% in the 1st and 2nd modes. Therefore,
those in this analysis were assumed to be 1% and 1.25%
in the 1st and 2nd modes for the Rayleigh damping para-
meters.
5.3.3. Oil dampers
To increase the stability of the hanging roof under
fluctuating wind force, oil dampers (80 kgf/kine) were
set at four corners of roof panel, as shown in Fig. 23.
According to the scaling law, the damping capacity of
80 kgf/kine for the actual roof corresponds to that of
10 kgf/kine for the 1/4-scale test model. The damped
free vibration analyses were carried out for the 1/4-mid
point release (that is, in the 1st mode). Fig. 25 compares
the response time histories for the vertical displacement
at the 1/4-mid point with and without the oil-dampers.
784 S. Ban et al. / Engineering Structures 21 (1999) 770–785

Fig. 25. Free vibration with/without damper.

The plotting point is 1/4-mid. The damping effect with

this damper was found to be equivalent to the effect
when a 5% damping ratio is given to the roof structure.
This 5% damping ratio approximately coincides with
that in the test.

5.3.4. Dynamic wind force

The measured data obtained from wind tunnel model
tests [2] were adopted as dynamic wind forces for the
analysis. The wind direction is parallel to the roof span Fig. 27. Time histories of vertical displacement.
direction. The time histories of the fluctuating wind
forces were individually applied to all of the nodal points
(85 points) of the analytical model. These wind forces
correspond to a 100-year-return-period wind velocity
(32 m/s) [6,7].
Fig. 26 shows examples of wind force time histories
at the 1/4-mid, 1/2-mid and 3/4-mid points of the roof.
The wind force fluctuations at the 3/4-mid point is larger
than those of the 1/4-mid and 1/2-mid points.

5.3.5. Results of analysis

Fig. 27 shows response time histories of the vertical
displacements at the 1/4-mid, 1/2-mid and 3/4-mid
points. When the response displacement at the 1/4-mid
point becomes large (small), that at the 3/4-mid become
small (large). This means that the anti-symmetric 1st
mode was mainly stimulated.
Fig. 28 compares the time histories of the vertical dis-
placement with and without oil dampers when the
responses were large. When dampers were set on the
Fig. 28. Comparison of vertical displacement with and without
damper.
roof structure, its maximum response vertical displace-
ment was more restrained by approximately 30% com-
pared with that of the structure without dampers, and the
overall response became small.
Fig. 29 shows the time histories of the difference

Fig. 29. Comparison of torsional displacement with and without

Fig. 26. Time histories of external wind force. damper.
 S. Ban et al. / Engineering Structures 21 (1999) 770–785
Fig. 30. Comparison of axial force with and without damper.
between two edges at the 1/2 span point for the vertical
displacements. Owing to the dampers, the maximum and
average response torsional deformation also decreased
by approximately 30%. The time histories of the axial
forces at the 1/2-mid point are shown in Fig. 30. The
axial forces of the roof in both cases of with and without
dampers were within the tensile range. Furthermore, the
bending moments of the hanging beams were very small
(maximum response moment was less than 1/10 of the
allowable moment of the beam).
From the above results, the stability of this roof was
confirmed against the 100-year-return-period wind load.
6. Conclusions
A new type of semi-rigid hanging roof structure has
been developed by the authors. Experimental and ana-
lytical investigations were carried out to evaluate its fun-
damental dynamic characteristics and to confirm its
structural safety against strong wind force. The follow-
ing conclusions were drawn.
1. The main vibration modes, the natural frequencies
and the damping factors were clarified from the
dynamic loading tests on a 1/4-scale hanging roof
panel model. It is recognized in particular that the
natural frequencies and damping factors have some
amplitude dependency and the damping factors are
relatively small (about 1.0%). However, the damping
factors can be increased to 2.0 苲 5.0% by attaching
oil dampers to the roof panel.
2. The fundamental vibration modes and natural fre-
quencies of the actual hanging roof panel were
785
determined from the dynamic tests on an actual hang-
ing roof panel. The test results for the actual panel
generally agree with the previously obtained scale-
model test results and analytical results. The damping
factors for the actual panel range between 1.0 and
2.0%, which are slightly greater than the scale-model
tests results.
3. Three-dimensional dynamic response analyses con-
sidering geometrical nonlinearity were carried out to
evaluate the dynamic behavior of the actual hanging
roof panel. In the analyses, the roof panel, composed
of composite hanging beams and plywood, was mod-
eled as an assemblage of shell elements of an ortho-
tropic linear elastic material. The results of the free
vibration analysis agreed well with the test results.
The dynamic response analysis shows that the
maximum response displacement can be reduced by
approximately 30% by attaching oil dampers. Fur-
thermore, the axial forces of the roof with and without
dampers were within the tensile range, thus con-
firming the stability of the roof panel against the 100-
year-return-period wind load.
References
[1] Ban S, et al. Development of a semi-rigid hanging roof structure
composed of glulams and a steel plate—Part 1. Outline of the
structure and structural tests on composite members. Proceedings
of IASS International Symposium, 1995.
[2] Suzuki M, et al. Development of a semi-rigid hanging roof struc-
ture composed of glulams and a steel plate—Part 2. Prediction of
wind induced response. Proceedings of IASS International Sym-
posium, 1995.
[3] Motohashi S, et al. A semi-rigid hanging roof structure composed
of glulams and a steel plate—Part 3. Dynamic and static model
test. Proceedings of IASS International Symposium, 1996.
[4] Hayami Y, et al. A semi-rigid hanging roof structure composed of
glulams and a steel plate—Part 4. Three-dimensional wind induced
response analysis. Proceedings of IASS International Sym-
posium, 1996.
[5] Tsubota H, et al. A semi-rigid hanging roof structure composed
of glulams and a steel plate—Part 5. Dynamic test on an actual
roof panel. Proceedings of IASS International Symposium, 1997.
[6] Recommendations for loads on building. Architectural Institute of
Japan, Tokyo, 1993.
[7] Tamura, et al. Design wind load for elastic beams supporting flat
roof. Proceedings of 12th National Symposium on Wind Engineer-
ing, December, 1992.
[8] ADINA Theory and Modeling Guide, ADINA R&D Inc., USA,
1995.