1 / 43

TASK 1.1.1 SHAKE TABLE TESTS OF A TWO-STORY HOUSE

This research project explores seismic response of woodframe houses, providing data on construction configurations and relationship between ground motion intensity and repair cost.

johnk
Download Presentation

TASK 1.1.1 SHAKE TABLE TESTS OF A TWO-STORY HOUSE

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 TASK 1.1.1SHAKE TABLE TESTS OF A TWO-STORY HOUSE Andre Filiatrault David Fischer Bryan Folz Chia-Ming Uang Frieder Seible

  2. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 OVERVIEW • TESTING OBJECTIVES • REVIEW OF TESTING PHASES • REVIEW OF TEST PROTOCOL • COMPARATIVE EXERIMENTAL RESULTS

  3. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 TESTING OBJECTIVES • Measure and quantify residential woodframe building overall seismic response for various construction configurations • Provide experimental data to establish relationship between ground motion intensity, structural system response, and repair cost • Provide experimental data for other Woodframe Project activities (e.g. Task 1.5.1)

  4. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 Phases 9-10 Phase 9: No Wall Finish Phase 10: With Wall Finish Phase 5 Phases 6-8 Phase 6: Engineered Phase 7: Perforated Phase 8: Conventional Phases 1-4 Quasi-Static Tests Seismic Tests REVIEW OF TESTING PHASES

  5. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 REVIEW OF TEST PROTOCOL • Low amplitude frequency and damping evaluation tests between shaking levels

  6. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001

  7. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 QUASI-STATIC TESTS • Quasi-static tests of only the first story of the test structure for different nailing and blocking configurations of the second floor: • Phase 1: 50% nailing (12/20 in), no adhesive, no blocking • Phase 2: 100% nailing (6/10 in), no adhesive, no blocking • Phase 3a: 100% nailing, no adhesive, 2x10 blocking • Phase 3b: 100% nailing, no adhesive, 3x4 blocking • Phase 4a: 50% nailing, PL400 adhesive, no blocking • Phase 4b: 100% nailing, PL400 adhesive, 3x4 blocking • Phase 4c: 100% nailing, PL400 adhesive, 2x10 blocking • Phase 4d: 100% nailing, PL400 adhesive, no blocking

  8. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 Blocking Configurations 2x10 Blocking 3x4 Blocking

  9. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 Phases 1-4: General View

  10. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 • Test protocol: • Quasi-static loading causing maximum drift level of 0.1% at east or west shear wall lines • Instrumentation: • In-plane shear and flexural deformations of floor diaphragm

  11. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 b F/2 F/2 d L/2 • Diaphragm analysis

  12. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 VARIATIONS OF NORTH-SOUTH FUNDAMENTAL FREQUENCIES

  13. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 VARIATIONS OF NORTH-SOUTH LATERAL STIFNESS

  14. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 VARIATIONS OF NORTH-SOUTH FIRST MODAL DAMPING RATIOS

  15. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 CAPACITY SPECTRA

  16. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 EFFECT OF SYMMETRICAL OPENINGS Phase 6 - Symmetrical Openings Phase 5 - Fully Sheathed f = 5.62 Hz f = 4.25 Hz • 43% decrease in initial lateral stiffness • Significant increase in drift • Large increase in overturning with narrow shearwall piers

  17. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 EFFECT OF SYMMETRICAL OPENINGS Test Level 4 Global Hysteretic Behavior

  18. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 EFFECT OF SYMMETRICAL OPENINGS Test Level 4 Peak Anchor Bolt Forces Phase 5 - Fully Sheathed Phase 6 - Symmetrical Openings

  19. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 EFFECT OF WASTE WALL SHEATHING Phase 6 – With Waste Wall Sheathing Phase 6A - Without Waste Wall Sheathing f = 3.71 Hz f = 3.27 Hz • 22% decrease in initial lateral stiffness • Significant increase in drift

  20. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 EFFECT OF WASTE WALL SHEATHING Test Level 4 Global Hysteretic Behavior

  21. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 PERFORMANCE OF PERFORATED SHEARWALL CONSTRUCTION Phase 6: Engineered Construction Phase 7: Perforated Shearwall Construction f = 3.91 Hz f = 4.25 Hz • 15% decrease in lateral stiffness • Significant increase in drift • Large increase in first story sill plate & holdown stud uplift

  22. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 PERFORMANCE OF PERFORATED SHEARWALL CONSTRUCTION Test Level 4 Global Hysteretic Behavior Phase 7: Holdowns & Inter-story Straps Only at Ends of Walls Phase 6: Holdowns & Inter-story Straps at all Openings

  23. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 PERFORMANCE OF PERFORATED SHEARWALL CONSTRUCTION Test Level 4 First Story Sill Plate & Holdown Stud Uplift Phase 6: Engineered Construction Phase 7: Perforated Shearwall Construction

  24. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 PERFORMANCE OF CONVENTIONAL CONSTRUCTION Phase 6: Engineered Construction Phase 8: Conventional Construction f = 4.25 Hz f = 4.15 Hz • Reduction in stiffness due to increased overturning • Significant increase in drift • Large increase in first story sill plate & holdown stud uplift

  25. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 PERFORMANCE OF CONVENTIONAL CONSTRUCTION Test Level 4 Global Hysteretic Behavior Phase 6: Holdowns & Inter-story Straps at All Openings Phase 8: Holdowns & Inter-story Straps Removed

  26. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 PERFORMANCE OF CONVENTIONAL CONSTRUCTION Test Level 4 First Story Sill Plate & Holdown Stud Uplift Phase 8: Conventional Construction Phase 6: Engineered Construction

  27. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 EFFECT OF NON-SYMMETRICAL OPENINGS Phase 6: Symmetrical Openings Phase 9: Non-Symmetrical Openings f = 4.25 Hz f = 3.96 Hz • Slight reduction in lateral stiffness with large garage door opening in east wall • Torsional behavior seen in acceleration & displacement responses • High overturning in shearwall piers adjacent to garage door opening

  28. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 EFFECT OF NON-SYMMETRICAL OPENINGS Test Level 4 Global Hysteretic Behavior

  29. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 EFFECT OF NON-SYMMETRICAL OPENINGS Test Level 4 First Story Relative Displacement Time-Histories

  30. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 EFFECT OF NON-SYMMETRICAL OPENINGS Test Level 4 Peak Anchor Bolt Forces Phase 6: Symmetrical Openings Phase 9: Non-Symmetrical Openings

  31. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 EFFECT OF WALL FINISH MATERIALS No Wall Finish Materials Wall Finish Materials f = 3.96 Hz f = 6.49 Hz • 170% increase in lateral stiffness with wall finish materials • Significant decrease in displacement response • Test structure behaved as a shell with wall finish materials

  32. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 DAMAGE – PHASE 9 Nail pull-out from shear wall

  33. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 DAMAGE – PHASE 9 Permanent deformation of shear wall

  34. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 DAMAGE – PHASE 9 Diagonal cracking of OSB at top corners of door openings

  35. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 DAMAGE – PHASE 10 Diagonal cracking of stucco at top corners of door openings

  36. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 DAMAGE – PHASE 10 Hairline cracking of stucco at corners of window openings

  37. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 DAMAGE – PHASE 10 Diagonal cracking of gypsum wall board at top corners of partition openings

  38. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 DAMAGE – PHASE 10 Cracking and spalling of gypsum wall board at face of 4x4 post of bearing wall

  39. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 EFFECT OF WALL FINISH MATERIALS Test Level 5 Global Hysteretic Behavior

  40. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 EFFECT OF WALL FINISH MATERIALS Test Level 5 Roof Relative Displacement Time-Histories

  41. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 EFFECT OF WALL FINISH MATERIALS Test Level 5 Peak Anchor Bolt Forces Phase 9: Without Wall Finish Materials Phase 10: With Wall Finish Materials

  42. CUREe-Caltech Woodframe Project, Element 1 - Research Meeting, January 12, 2001 CONCLUSIONS ON WALL FINISHES FROM SHAKE TABLE TESTS • Wall finishes improved the seismic performance of the test structure dramatically • Further research is needed to quantify structural contributions of stucco and gypsum wall boards • Long-term performance of stucco needs to be addressed • Other Element 1 Tasks modified based on these results

More Related