Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Low damage seismic solutions for non-structural drywall partitions

  • Original Research Paper
  • Published:
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Non-structural drywall partitions are the most common lightweight partition type used in buildings (especially in US and NZ). They are usually bounded by either a structural frame or by two floor slabs, which makes them damage prone due to imposed inter-storey deformations. The loss of serviceability occurs at very low drift levels, sometimes lower than the design limits set by the current international standards. As part of a research programme for the development of low damage seismic solutions for non-structural vertical elements, experimental and numerical studies have been carried out. This paper will initially report the inherent low seismic performance of drywalls constructed as per typical practice. Then, the developed low damage solutions, capable of reaching high levels of drift without loss of serviceability will be reported. These solutions have been developed based on refinements of existing drywall detailing. An overview of the connection details and of the results of the experimental campaign is herein reported for steel and timber framed drywall practices. The experimental results were integrated with numerical analyses based on a lumped plasticity approach model developed in Ruaumoko2D. A case study building representing a ten storey reinforced concrete building designed according to the NZ Concrete Standard NZS3101 (Part 1: the design of concrete structures. Concrete structures standard, vol 3101. New Zealand Standard 2006) was subjected to a set of ground motions recorded during the 4th September 2010 and the 22nd February 2011 earthquakes in Christchurch. The experimental and numerical campaign confirmed the enhanced performance of the proposed low damage solutions for drywall partitions, based on simple reconfiguration and detailing of the traditional solutions adopted in current practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21
Fig. 22
Fig. 23
Fig. 24
Fig. 25

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ACI374.1-05 (2005) Acceptance criteria for moment frames based on structural testing and commentary, vol 374.1-05. American Concrete Institute

  • Adham SA, Avanessian V, Hart C, Anderson RW, Elmlinger J, Gregory J (1990) Shear wall resistance of lightgage steel stud wall systems. Earthq Spectra 6(1):1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Araya-Letelier G, Miranda E (2012) Novel sliding/frictional connections for improved seismic performance of gypsum wallboard partitions. In: 15th world conference on earthquake engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, 24–28 September 2012

  • AS/NZS1170.0 (2002) Part 0: general principles. structural design actions, vol 1170. Australian/New Zealand Standard

  • AS/NZS2589 (2007) Gypsum linings-application and finishing, vol 2589. Australian/New Zealand Standard

  • ASCE (2010) ASCE/SEI 7–10: minimum design loads for buildings and other structures

  • Bradley BA (2013) https://sites.google.com/site/brendonabradley/home

  • Buchanan AH, Palermo A, Carradine D, Pampanin S (2011) Post-tensioned timber frame buildings. Struct Eng IStructE (Inst Struct Eng) 89(17):24–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Bull DK, Brunsdon D (2008) Examples of concrete structural design to New Zealand Standard 3101 (Red Book). NZCS: Cement & Concrete Association of New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand

  • Carr AJ (2013) Ruaumoko 2D-computer program for inelastic time history analysis of structures. University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

  • CEN ECfS (2004) EN 1992-1-1:2004 (Eurocode 2): design of concrete structures-part 1–1: general rules and rules for buildings

  • Christchurch Earthquake Special Issue (2011) Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering 44 (4)

  • Darfield Earthquake Special Issue (2010) Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering 43 (4)

  • Eatherton MR, Hajjar JF (2011) Residual drifts of self-centring systems including effects of ambient building resistance. Earthq Spectra 27(3):719–744

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EQC/GNS (2012) GeoNet-geological hazard information for New Zealand

  • Filiatrault A, Mosqueda G, Retamales R, Davies R, Tian Y, Fuchs J (2010) Experimental seismic fragility of steel studded gypsum partition walls and fire sprinkler piping subsystems. Paper presented at the ASCE structures congress, Orlando, Florida, 12–15 May 2010

  • Freeman SA (1971) Third progress report on racking tests of wall panels. University of California, Berkeley

  • GIB (2006) GIB noise control systems-specifications for drywalls

  • GIB (2010) GIB site guide for residential and commercial installations: CBI 5113. The manufacturer’s installation guidelines

  • Kanvinde AM, Deierlein GG (2006) Analytical models for the seismic performance of gypsum drywall partitions. Earthq Spectra 22(2):391–411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee TH, Kato M, Matsumiya T, Suita K, Nakashima M (2006) Seismic performance evaluation of non-structural components: drywall partitions. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. doi:10.1002/eqe.638

  • Macalloy (2007) Macalloy 1030 post tensioning kit, internal bonded or unbonded bar post-tensioning kit using high tensile plain bar 25 to 40 mm and ribbed bar 25 to 50 mm in accordance with European Technical Approval ETA-07/0046. ETA-07/0046. EOTA, Kent/United Kingdom

  • McMullin KM, Merrick DS (2007) Seismic damage thresholds for gypsum wallboard partition walls. J Archit Eng 13(1):22–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NZS1170.5 (2004) Part 5: earthquake actions-New Zealand. Structural design actions, vol 1170. New Zealand Standard

  • NZS3101.1 (2006) Part 1: the design of concrete structures. Concrete structures standard, vol 3101. New Zealand Standard

  • NZS3404.1 (1997) Steel structures standard, vol 3404. Standards New Zealand, New Zealand Standard

  • Pampanin S, Palermo A, Marriott D (2010) PRESSS design handbook. NZ Concrete Society Inc.

  • Priestley MJN, Sritharan S, Conley JR, Pampanin S (1999) Preliminary results and conclusions from the PRESSS five-story precast concrete test building. PCI J 44(6):42–67

  • Rawlinsons (2009) Rawlinsons New Zealand construction handbook, 24th edn. Rawlinsons Media Limited, Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch, Dunedin

  • Restrepo JI, Bersofsky AM (2011) Performance characteristics of light gage steel stud partition walls. Thin-Walled Struct 49(2):317–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Restrepo JI, Lang AF (2011) Study of loading protocols in light-gauge stud partition walls. Earthq Spectra 27(4):1169–1185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rihal SS (1980) Racking tests of non-structural building partitions. California Polytechnic State University

  • Taghavi S, Miranda E (2003) Response assessment of nonstructural building elements. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center

  • Wang ML (1987) Cladding performance on a full scale test frame. Earthq Spectra 3(1):119–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the Foundation for Research, Science and Technology (FRST) and the Ministry of Science and Innovation (MSI), through the Natural Hazard Research Platform (NHRP), for supporting this research as part of the projects “Non-Structural Elements in Building Seismic Performance” and “Improved Seismic Performance of Non-Structural Elements” respectively. The authors also wish to extend their acknowledgements to Hans Gerlich, Bruce Levey (Winstone Wallboards Ltd.) for providing the material, labor, practical advice during the preparation of the drywalls and to Gavin Keats (Technical Staff-University of Canterbury) for the technical help throughout the whole research project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UC Quake Centre, Civil and Natural Resources Engineering Department, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch, 8140, New Zealand

    Ali Sahin Tasligedik

  2. Civil and Natural Resources Engineering Department, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch, 8140, New Zealand

    Stefano Pampanin & Alessandro Palermo

Authors
  1. Ali Sahin Tasligedik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stefano Pampanin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alessandro Palermo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ali Sahin Tasligedik.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tasligedik, A.S., Pampanin, S. & Palermo, A. Low damage seismic solutions for non-structural drywall partitions. Bull Earthquake Eng 13, 1029–1050 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-014-9654-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-014-9654-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation