Advertisement

European Journal of Wood and Wood Products

, Volume 77, Issue 2, pp 173–194 | Cite as

Seismic protection technologies for timber structures: a review

  • David Ugalde
  • José Luis Almazán
  • Hernán Santa María
  • Pablo GuindosEmail author
Original
  • 34 Downloads

Abstract

Timber structures traditionally provided satisfactory seismic performance due to multiple known features. However, the consequences of the last major earthquakes have clearly proofed that seismic timber design must further improve. In addition, nowadays timber structures target taller heights and so they face much larger seismic demands. All this together has made seismic protection technologies (SPTs) to emerge as a hotspot in timber engineering research, devoting more than 80 publications only in the last decade. All types of SPTs share the common principle that, rather than increase the lateral resistance of a structure, they are focused on reducing the seismic demands and such reduction has been reported as large as 90% and above. Although many distinct devices and techniques are intended to this end, SPTs applied to timber structures may be grouped into supplemental damping, seismic isolation, and rocking systems. Apart from the copious scientific production in the field, knowledge has been published in very distinct niches, which makes a linkage of state-of-the-art very difficult, as well as an analysis of current challenges and limitations. This review attempts to provide so after explaining first the basic principles of these technologies so that they are comprehensible for a timber engineer or researcher not necessarily familiar with all structural dynamics’ underlying concepts. An outlook for future research trends is expected towards cost-effectiveness, rate-effects, engagement of devices, and design guidelines which may expand these technologies bringing timber structures into higher levels of seismic performance.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research has been supported by the research grant project CONICYT FONDECYT 11.170.863.

References

  1. Akbas T, Sause R, Ricles JM et al (2017) Analytical and experimental lateral-load response of self-centering posttensioned CLT walls. J Struct Eng 143:04017019.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001733 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. ANSI/AWC (2015) Special design provisions for wind and seismic. American Wood Council, LeesburgGoogle Scholar
  3. ASCE 7–10 (2010) Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. American Society of Civil Engineers, RestonGoogle Scholar
  4. Awaludin A, Sasaki Y, Oikawa A et al (2007) Friction damping of pre-stressed timber joints. Grad Sch Agric Hokkaido Univ Sapporo, SapporoGoogle Scholar
  5. Bahmani P, van de Lindt JW, Gershfeld M et al (2014) Experimental seismic behavior of a full-scale four-story soft-story wood-frame building with retrofits. I: building design, retrofit methodology, and numerical validation. J Struct Eng 142:14.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001207 Google Scholar
  6. Baquero JS, Almazán JL, Tapia NF (2016) Amplification system for concentrated and distributed energy dissipation devices. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 45:935–956.  https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2692 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blomgren H-E, Pei S, Powers J et al (2018) Cross-laminated timber rocking wall with replaceable fuses: validation through full-scale shake table testing. In: World conference on timber engineering 2018. Seoul, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  8. Bolvardi V, Pei S, van de Lindt JW, Dolan JD (2018) Direct displacement design of tall cross laminated timber platform buildings with inter-story isolation. Eng Struct 167:740–749.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.09.054 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brandner R et al (2018) Properties, testing and design of cross laminated timber: a state-of-the-art report by COST action FP1402 / WG 2. Schaker Verlag, AachenGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown A, Lester J, Pampanin S, Pietra D (2012) Pres-Lam in practice—a damage-limiting rebuild project. In: SESOC ConferenceGoogle Scholar
  11. Casagrande D, Grossi P, Tomasi R (2016) Shake table tests on a full-scale timber-frame building with gypsum fibre boards. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 74:425–442.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00107-016-1013-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ceccotti A, Sandhaas C, Okabe M et al (2013) SOFIE project—3D shaking table test on a seven-storey full-scale cross-laminated timber building. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 42:2003–2021.  https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2309 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chopra AK (2016) Dynamics of structures: theory and applications to earthquake engineering, 5th edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  14. Christopoulos C, Filiatrault A, Bertero VV (2006) Principles of passive supplemental damping and seismic isolation. IUSS Press, PaviaGoogle Scholar
  15. Christovasilis IP, Filiatrault A, Wanitkorkul A (2009) Seismic testing of a full-scale two-story light-frame wood building: NEESWood benchmark test. Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering ResearchGoogle Scholar
  16. Davies M, Fragiacomo M (2011) Long-term behavior of prestressed LVL members. I: experimental tests. J Struct Eng 137:1553–1561.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000405 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Delfosse GC (1982) Wood framed individual houses on seismic isolators. In: International Conf. on natural rubber for earthquake protection of buildings and vibration isolation. pp 104–111Google Scholar
  18. Devereux CP, Holden TJ, Buchanan AH, Pampanin S (2011) NMIT Arts and media building—damage mitigation using post-tensioned timber walls. In: Pacific conference on earthquake engineering. Auckland, New Zealand, p 8Google Scholar
  19. Dinehart DW, Lewicki DE (2001) Viscoelastic material as a seismic protection system for wood-framed buildings. In: 2001 Structures congress and exposition. Washington, D.C., USA, p 6Google Scholar
  20. Dinehart DW, Shenton HW (1998) Comparison of the response of timber shear walls with and without passive dampers. In: Structural engineering worldwide. San Francisco, USAGoogle Scholar
  21. Dinehart DW, Shenton HW, Elliott TE (1999) The dynamic response of wood-frame shear walls with viscoelastic dampers. Earthq Spectra 15:67–86.  https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1586029 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Du Y (2003) The development and use of a novel finite element for the evaluation of embedded fluid dampers within light-frame timber structures with seismic loading. Washington State University, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  23. Dunbar A, Pampanin S, Palermo A, Buchanan AH (2013) Seismic design of core-walls for multi-storey timber buildings. In: New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering Conference. Wellington, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  24. Dunbar A, Moroder D, Pampanin S, Buchanan AH (2014) Timber core-walls for lateral load resistance of multi-storey timber buildings. In: World Conference on Timber Engineering. Quebec, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  25. Dutil DA, Symans MD (2004) Experimental investigation of seismic behavior of light-framed wood shear walls with supplemental energy dissipation. In: 13th World Conference on earthquake engineering. Vancouver, Canada, p 15Google Scholar
  26. Filiatrault A (1990) Analytical predictions of the seismic response of friction damped timber shear walls. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 19:259–273.  https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290190209 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Filiatrault A, Fischer D, Folz B, Uang C-M (2002) Seismic testing of two-story woodframe house: influence of wall finish materials. J Struct Eng 128:1337–1345.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2002)128:10(1337) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Filiatrault A, Wanitkorkul A, Christovasilis IP et al (2007) Experimental seismic performance evaluation of a full-scale woodframe building. In: 2007 structures congress, ASCE. Long Beach, USA, p 8Google Scholar
  29. Filiatrault A, Christovasilis IP, Wanitkorkul A, van de Lindt JW (2010) Experimental seismic response of a full-scale light-frame wood building. J Struct Eng 136:246–254.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000112 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Flatscher G, Schickhofer G (2015) Shaking-table test of a cross-laminated timber structure. Proc Inst Civ Eng Struct Build 168:878–888.  https://doi.org/10.1680/stbu.13.00086 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Fragiacomo M, Davies M (2011) Long-term behavior of prestressed LVL members. II: analytical approach. J Struct Eng 137:1562–1572.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000410 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ganey R (2015) Seismic design and testing of rocking cross laminated timber walls. University of Washington, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  33. Gavric I, Fragiacomo M, Ceccotti A (2015a) Cyclic behaviour of typical metal connectors for cross-laminated (CLT) structures. Mater Struct Constr 48:1841–1857.  https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-014-0278-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gavric I, Fragiacomo M, Ceccotti A (2015b) Cyclic behavior of typical screwed connections for cross-laminated (CLT) structures. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 73:179–191.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00107-014-0877-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Granello G, Giorgini S, Palermo A et al (2017) Long-term behavior of LVL posttensioned timber beams. J Struct Eng 143:9.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001907 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Granello G, Leyder C, Palermo A et al (2018) Design approach to predict post-tensioning losses in post-tensioned timber frames. J Struct Eng 144:04018115.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0002101 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Grossi P, Sartori T, Tomasi R (2015) Tests on timber frame walls under in-plane forces: part 2. Proc Inst Civ Eng Struct Build 168:840–852CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hashemi A, Masoudnia R, Quenneville P (2016) Seismic performance of hybrid self-centring steel-timber rocking core walls with slip friction connections. J Constr Steel Res 126:201–213.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2016.07.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hashemi A, Zarnani P, Masoudnia R, Quenneville P (2017) Seismic resistant rocking coupled walls with innovative Resilient Slip Friction (RSF) joints. J Constr Steel Res 129:215–226.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2016.11.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hashemi A, Masoudnia R, Zarnani P, Quenneville P (2018a) Seismic resilient Cross Laminated Timber (CLT) platform structures using resilient Slip Friction Joints (RSFJs). In: World conference on timber engineering 2018. Seoul, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  41. Hashemi A, Zarnani P, Quenneville P (2018b) Development of resilient seismic solutions for timber structures using the Resilient Slip Friction Joint (RSFJ) technology. In: World conference on timber engineering 2018. Seoul, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  42. Higgins C (2001) Hysteretic dampers for wood frame shear walls. In: 2001 Structures congress and exposition, ASCE. D.C., USAGoogle Scholar
  43. Holden T, Devereux C, Haydon S et al (2016) NMIT arts and media building—innovative structural design of a three storey post-tensioned timber building. Case Stud Struct Eng 6:76–83.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csse.2016.06.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hossain A, Danzig I, Tannert T (2016) Cross-laminated timber shear connections with double-angled self-tapping screw assemblies. J Struct Eng 142:04016099.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001572 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hummel J (2017) Displacement-based seismic design for multi-storey cross laminated timber buildings (Vol. 8). PhD Dissertation. Kassel University Press GmbH, Kassel, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  46. Iiba M, Midorikawa M, Yamanouchi H et al (2000) Shaking table tests on performance of isolators for houses subjected to three-dimensional earthquake motions. In: 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Auckland, New Zealand, p 8Google Scholar
  47. Iiba M, Midorikawa M, Yamanouchi Y et al (2001) Construction of a base-isolated house for observation of isolation effects during earthquake and wind. In: Joint meeting of the US-Japan cooperative program in natural resources panel on wind and seismic effects. D.C., USA, pp 203–211Google Scholar
  48. Iiba M, Midorikawa M, Hamada H et al (2004) Seismic safety evaluation of base-isolated houses with rubber bearing. In: 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Vancouver, Canada, p 12Google Scholar
  49. Iqbal A (2011) Seismic response and design of subassemblies for multi-storey prestressed timber buildings. University of CanterburyGoogle Scholar
  50. Iqbal A, Pampanin S, Buchanan AH, Palermo A (2007) Improved seismic performance of LVL post-tensioned walls coupled with UFP devices. In: 8th Pacific Conference on Earthquake engineering. SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  51. Iqbal A, Pampanin S, Buchanan AH (2008) Seismic behaviour of prestressed timber columns under bi-directional loading. In: 10th World Conference on Timber Engineering. Miyazaki, Japan, pp 1810–1817Google Scholar
  52. Iqbal A, Pampanin S, Palermo A, Buchanan AH (2010) Seismic Performance of Full-scale Posttensioned Timber Beam-column Joints. In: World Conference on Timber Engineering. Riva del Garda, Italy, pp 383–405Google Scholar
  53. Iqbal A, Pampanin S, Fragiacomo M et al (2012) Seismic response of post-tensioned LVL walls coupled with plywood sheets. In: World conference on timber engineering. Auckland, New Zealand, p 6Google Scholar
  54. Izzi M, Casagrande D, Bezzi S et al (2018a) Seismic behaviour of Cross-Laminated Timber structures: a state-of-the-art review. Eng Struct 170:42–52.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.05.060 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Izzi M, Polastri A, Fragiacomo M (2018b) Investigating the hysteretic behavior of cross-laminated timber wall systems due to connections. J Struct Eng 144:04018035.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0002022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Jahnel L, Cole E (2017) Design approach for friction spring dampers in steel framed buildings. Experiences from Christchurch/NZ. In: 16th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Santiago, ChileGoogle Scholar
  57. Jampole EA, Swensen S, Fell B et al (2014) Dynamic testing of a low-cost sliding isolation system for light-frame residential structures. In: Tenth US National Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Anchorage, USA, pp 21–25Google Scholar
  58. Jampole EA, Deierlein GG, Miranda E et al (2016) Full-scale dynamic testing of a sliding seismically isolated unibody house. Earthq Spectra 32:2245–2270.  https://doi.org/10.1193/010616EQS003M CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Jampole E, Deierlein GG, Miranda E et al (2017) An economic sliding isolation system for light frame. In: 16th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Santiago, Chile, p 12Google Scholar
  60. Jayamon JR, Line P, Charney FA (2018) State-of-the-art review on damping in wood-frame shear wall structures. J Struct Eng 144:03118003.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0002212 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Jorissen A, Fragiacomo M (2011) General notes on ductility in timber structures. Eng Struct 33(11):2987–2997CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Jünemann R, de la Llera JC, Besa J, Almazán JL (2009) Three-dimensional behavior of a spherical self-centering precast prestressed pile isolator. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 38:541–564.  https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.901 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Karacabeyli E, Lum C (2014) Technical guide for the design and construction of tall wood buildings in Canada. FPInnovations Pointe-Claire, QCGoogle Scholar
  64. Kasai K, Sakata H, Wada A, Miyashita T (2005) Dynamic behavior of a wood frame with shear link passive control mechanism involving K-brace. J Struct Constr Eng 70:51–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Kasal B, Guindos P, Polocoser T et al (2014) Heavy laminated timber frames with rigid three-dimensional beam-to-column connections. J Perform Constr Facil 28:A4014014.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000594 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Kasal B, Polocoser T, Guindos P et al (2015) High-Performance Composite-Reinforced Earthquake Resistant Buildings with Self-Aligning Capabilities. In: Taucer F, Apostolska R (eds) Experimental Research in Earthquake Engineering. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 359–372Google Scholar
  67. Kawai N, Araki Y, Koshihara M, Isoda H (2006) Seismic dampers for rehabilitating vulnerable Japanese wood houses. In: World Conference on timber engineering. Portland, USAGoogle Scholar
  68. Kelly JM (2002) Seismic isolation systems for developing countries. Earthq Spectra 18:385–406.  https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1503339 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Kovacs MA, Wiebe L (2017) Controlled rocking CLT walls for buildings in regions of moderate seismicity: design procedure and numerical collapse assessment. J Earthq Eng 00:1–21.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2017.1326421 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Kurama YC (2000) Seismic design of unbonded post-tensioned precast concrete walls with supplemental viscous damping. ACI Struct J 97:648–658Google Scholar
  71. Kurama YC, Pessiki S, Sause R, Lu L-W (1999) Seismic behavior and design of unbonded post-tensioned precast concrete walls. PCI J 44:72–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Leyder C, Chatzi E, Frangi A (2015a) Structural health monitoring of an innovative timber building. In: International conference on performance-based and life-cycle structural engineering. Queensland, Australia, pp 1383–1392Google Scholar
  73. Leyder C, Wanninger F, Frangi A, Chatzi E (2015b) Dynamic response of an innovative hybrid structure in hardwood. In: Proceedings of the institution of civil engineers—construction materials. pp 132–143Google Scholar
  74. Li Z, Dong H, Wang X, He M (2017) Experimental and numerical investigations into seismic performance of timber-steel hybrid structure with supplemental dampers. Eng Struct 151:33–43.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.08.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Liu H, Van De Lindt JW, Symans MD (2009) Performance-based evaluation of base isolated light-frame wood structures. NEES Res 8Google Scholar
  76. Loo WY, Quenneville P, Chouw N (2012a) A numerical study of the seismic behaviour of timber shear walls with slip-friction connectors. Eng Struct 34:233–243.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.09.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Loo WY, Quenneville P, Chouw N (2012b) Design and numerical verification of a multi-storey timber shear wall with slip-friction conectors. In: World conference on timber engineering. Auckland, New Zealand, p 9Google Scholar
  78. Loo WY, Kun C, Quenneville P, Chouw N (2014) Experimental testing of a rocking timber shear wall with slip-friction connectors. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 43:1621–1639.  https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2413 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Loo WY, Quenneville P, Chouw N (2016) Rocking timber structure with slip-friction connectors conceptualized as a plastically deformable hinge within a multistory shear wall. J Struct Eng 142:E4015010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. López-Almansa F, Segués E, Cantalapiedra IR (2015) A new steel framing system for seismic protection of timber platform frame buildings. Implementation with hysteretic energy dissipators. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 44:1181–1202.  https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2507 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Ma S (2016) Numerical study of pin-supported cross-laminated timber (CLT) shear wall system equipped with low-yield steel dampers. University of British Columbia, ColumbiaGoogle Scholar
  82. Matsuda K, Sakata H, Kasai K, Ooki Y (2008a) Experimental study on dynamic response of wooden frames with passive control. J Struct Eng 54B:149–156 (In Japanese)Google Scholar
  83. Matsuda K, Sakata H, Kasai K, Ooki Y (2008b) Experimental study on dynamic behavior of wooden frames with passive control system and inner-and-outer walls using shaking table. In: 14th World conference on earthquake engineering. Beijing, China, p 7Google Scholar
  84. Matsuda K, Sakata H, Kasai K (2010) Seismic response controlled effect of wooden houses by framed analysis. In: World Conference on Timber Engineering. Riva del Garda, Italy, p 7Google Scholar
  85. Matsuda K, Kasai K, Sakata H (2012) Analytical study on passively controlled 2-story wooden frame by detailed frame model. In: 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Lisbon, PortugalGoogle Scholar
  86. McMullin KM, Merrick D (2002) Seismic performance of gypsum walls: Experimental test program. California Institute of Technology and the Consortium of Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering, RichmondGoogle Scholar
  87. Moroder D, Buchanan AH, Pampanin S (2013) Preventing seismic damage to floors in post-tensioned timber frame buildings. New Zeal Timber Des J 21:9–15Google Scholar
  88. Moroder D, Sarti F, Palermo A et al (2014) Experimental investigation of wall-to-floor connections in post-tensioned timber buildings. In: New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering Conference. Auckland, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  89. Morrell I, Phillips A, Dolan JD, Blomgren H-E (2018) Development of an inter-panel connector for cross-laminated timber rocking walls. In: World Conference on Timber Engineering 2018. Seoul, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  90. Mualla I, Belev B (2017) Overview of Recent Projects Implementing Rotational Friction Dampers. In: 16th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Santiago, Chile, pp 1–12Google Scholar
  91. Myslimaj B, Midorikawa M, Iiba M, Ikenaga M (2002) Seismic behavior of a newly developed base isolation system for houses. J Asian Archit Build Eng 1:17–24.  https://doi.org/10.3130/jaabe.1.2_17 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Naeim F, Kelly JM (1999) Design of seismic isolated structures: from theory to practice, 1st edn. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  93. Newcombe MP (2011) Seismic design of post-tensioned timber frame and wall buildings. University of CanterburyGoogle Scholar
  94. Newcombe MP, Pampanin S, Buchanan AH, Palermo A (2008) Section analysis and cyclic behavior of post-tensioned jointed ductile connections for multi-story timber buildings. J Earthq Eng 12:83–110.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460801925632 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Newcombe MP, Cusiel MR, Pampanin S et al (2010a) Simplified design of post-tensioned timber frames. In: CIB - W18 Workshop on Timber Structures. Nelson, New Zealand, p 10Google Scholar
  96. Newcombe MP, Pampanin S, Buchanan AH (2010b) Design, fabrication and assembly of a two-storey post-tensioned timber building. In: World Conference on Timber Engineering. Riva del Garda, Italy, pp 3092–3100Google Scholar
  97. Newcombe MP, Pampanin S, Buchanan AH (2010c) Global response of a two storey Pres-Lam timber building. In: New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering Conference. Wellington, New Zealand, p 8Google Scholar
  98. Newcombe MP, Pampanin S, Buchanan AH (2012) Governing criteria for the lateral force design of post-tensioned timber buildings. In: World Conference on Timber Engineering. Auckland, New Zealand, p 7Google Scholar
  99. Ottenhaus LM, Li M, Smith T, Quenneville P (2018) Overstrength of dowelled CLT connections under monotonic and cyclic loading. B Earthq Eng 16(2):753–773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Palermo A, Pampanin S, Buchanan AH, Newcombe MP (2005) Seismic design of multi-storey buildings using laminated veneer lumber (LVL). In: New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering Conference. University of Canterbury. Civil Engineering, Wairakei, New Zealand, p 8Google Scholar
  101. Palermo A, Pampanin S, Buchanan AH (2006a) Experimental investigations on LVL seismic resistant wall and frame subassemblies. In: 1st European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology. Geneva, Switzerland, p 10Google Scholar
  102. Palermo A, Pampanin S, Fragiacomo M et al (2006b) Quasi-static cyclic tests on seismic-resistant beam-to-column and column-to-foundation subassemblies using Laminated Veneer Lumber (LVL). In: 19th Australasian Conference on Mechanics and Materials. Christchurch, New Zealand, pp 1043–1049Google Scholar
  103. Palermo A, Pampanin S, Fragiacomo M et al (2006c) Innovative Seismic Solutions for Multi-Storey LVL Timber Buildings Overview of the research program. In: World Conference on Timber Engineering. Portland, USA, p 8Google Scholar
  104. Palermo A, Sarti F, Baird A et al (2012) From theory to practice: Design, analysis and construction of dissipative timber rocking post-tensioning wall system for Carterton Events Centre, New Zealand. In: 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Lisbon, Portugal, p 10Google Scholar
  105. Pall AS, Pall R (1991) Seismic response of a friction-base-isolated house in Montreal. In: 6th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Toronto, Canada, pp 375–382Google Scholar
  106. Pampanin S, Palermo A, Buchanan AH et al (2006) Code provisions for seismic design of multi-storey post-tensioned timber buildings. In: CIB - W18 Workshop on Timber Structures. Florence, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  107. Pei S, van de Lindt JW, Popovski M et al (2016) Cross-Laminated Timber for Seismic Regions: Progress and Challenges for Research and Implementation. J Struct Eng 142:E2514001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Pei S, van de Lindt J, Barbosa A et al (2018) Full-scale shake table test of mass-timber building with resilient post-tensioned rocking walls. In: World Conference on Timber Engineering 2018. Seoul, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  109. Pino DA (2011) Dynamic response of post-tensioned timber frame buildings. University of CanterburyGoogle Scholar
  110. Pino DA, Pampanin S, Carradine D et al (2010) Dynamic response of a multi-storey post-tensioned timber building. In: World Conference on Timber Engineering. Riva del Garda, Italy, p 8Google Scholar
  111. Poh’Sie GH, Chisari C, Rinaldin G et al (2016) Optimal design of tuned mass dampers for a multi-storey cross laminated timber building against seismic loads. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 45:1977–1995.  https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2736 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Polastri A, Giongo I, Angeli A, Brandner R (2018) Mechanical characterization of a pre-fabricated connection system for cross laminated timber structures in seismic regions. Eng Struct 167:705–715.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.12.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Polocoșer T, Leimcke J, Kasal B (2018) Report on the seismic performance of three-dimensional moment-resisting timber frames with frictional damping in beam-to-column connections. Adv Struct Eng 21:1652–1663.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1369433217753695 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Ponzo FC, Smith TJ, Di Cesare A et al (2012) Shaking table test of a multistorey post-tensioned glulam building: design and construction. In: World Conference on Timber Engineering. Auckland, New Zealand, p 9Google Scholar
  115. Popovski M, Karacabeyli E (2012) Seismic behaviour of cross-laminated timber structures. In: World Conference on Timber Engineering. Auckland, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  116. Popovski M, Schneider J, Schweinsteiger M (2010) Lateral load resistance of cross-laminated wood panels. In: World Conference on Timber Engineering. pp 20–24Google Scholar
  117. Porcu MC (2017) Ductile behavior of timber structures under strong dynamic loads. In: Concu G (ed) Wood in Civil Engineering. InTech, pp 173–196Google Scholar
  118. Pozza L, Scotta R, Trutalli D et al (2016a) Concrete-plated wooden shear walls: structural details, testing, and seismic characterization. J Struct Eng 142:E4015003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Pozza L, Scotta R, Trutalli D et al (2016b) Experimentally based q -factor estimation of cross-laminated timber walls. Proc Inst Civ Eng - Struct Build 169:492–507.  https://doi.org/10.1680/jstbu.15.00009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Priestley MJN (1991) Overview of PRESSS research program. PCI J 36:50–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Priestley MJN, Calvi GM, Kowalsky MJ (2007) Displacement-Based Seismic Design of Structures, 1st edn. IUSS Press, PaviaGoogle Scholar
  122. Prion HGL, Filiatrault A (1996) Performance of timber structures during the Hyogo-ken Nanbu earthquake of 17 January 1995. Can J Civ Eng 23:652–664.  https://doi.org/10.1139/l96-881 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Pu W, Liu C, Zhang H, Kasai K (2016) Seismic control design for slip hysteretic timber structures based on tuning the equivalent stiffness. Eng Struct 128:199–214.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.09.041 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Pu W, Liu C, Dai F (2018) Optimum hysteretic damper design for multi-story timber structures represented by an improved pinching model. Bull Earthq Eng In press.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0437-2 Google Scholar
  125. Rainer JH, Karacabeyli E (1999) Performance of wood-frame building construction in earthquakes. Forintek Spec Publ Rep No SP-40Google Scholar
  126. Reed JW, Kircher CA (1986) Base isolation of a five-story wood-frame building. In: Seminar and Workshop on Base Isolation and Passive Energy Dissipation (ATC-17). San Francisco, USA, pp 133–142Google Scholar
  127. Sakamoto I, Ohashi Y, Fujii Y (1990) Seismic behavior of base isolated two-storied wooden building. In: 1990 International Timber Engineering Conference. Tokyo, Japan, pp 938–945Google Scholar
  128. Sakata H, Kasai K, Wada A et al (2007) Shaking table tests of wood frames with velocity-dependent dampers. J Struct Constr Eng (Transactions AIJ) 615:161–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Sakata H, Kasai K, Ooki Y, Matsuda K (2008) Experimental study on dynamic behavior of passive control system applied for conventional post-and-beam two-story wooden house using shaking table. J Struct Constr Eng (Transactions AIJ) 73:1607–1615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Sakata H, Kasai K, Matsuda K, Yamazaki Y (2017) Development of Passively Controlled Small Wooden. In: 16th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Santiago, Chile, p 12Google Scholar
  131. Sarti F (2015) Seismic Design of Low-Damage Post-Tensioned Timber Wall Systems. University of CanterburyGoogle Scholar
  132. Sarti F, Palermo A, Pampanin S (2012) Simplified design procedures for post-tensioned seismic resistant timber walls. In: 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Lisbon, PortugalGoogle Scholar
  133. Sarti F, Palermo A, Pampanin S (2016) Development and testing of an alternative dissipative posttensioned rocking timber wall with boundary columns. J Struct Eng 142:E4015011.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001390 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Schmidt T, Blaß HJ (2017) Dissipative Stahlblechverbindungen für aussteifende Wandscheiben aus Brettsperrholz. (Dissipative steel plate connection for CLT shear walls. Bautechnik 94:790–803.  https://doi.org/10.1002/bate.201700062 (in German)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Schneider J, Karacabeyli E, Popovski M et al (2014) Damage Assessment of Connections Used in Cross-Laminated Timber Subject to Cyclic Loads. J Perform Constr Facil 28:A4014008.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000528 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Seim W, Kramar M, Pazlar T, Vogt T (2016) OSB and GFB As Sheathing Materials for Timber-Framed Shear Walls: Comparative Study of Seismic Resistance. J Struct Eng 142:E4015004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Shao X, van de Lindt JW, Bahmani P et al (2014) Real-time hybrid simulation of a multi-story wood shear wall with first-story experimental substructure incorporating a rate-dependent seismic energy dissipation device. Smart Struct Syst 14:1031–1054.  https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2014.14.6.1031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Shinde JK, Symans MD (2010) Integration of seismic protection systems in performance-based seismic design of woodframed structures. Technical Report MCEER-10-0003. University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, USAGoogle Scholar
  139. Shinde JK, Symans MD, Filiatrault A, van de Lindt JW (2007) Application of seismic protection systems to woodframed buildings: Full-scale testing and field implementation. In: 5th Annual NEES Meeting. Snowbird, USAGoogle Scholar
  140. Shinde JK, Symans MD, Liu H, van de Lindt JW (2008) Seismic performance assessment of woodframed structures with energy dissipation systems. In: 18th Conference on Analysis and Computation held in Conjunction with ASCE/SEI Structures Congress. Vancouver, Canada, pp 1–9Google Scholar
  141. Shu Z, Li Z, He M et al (2018) Seismic design and performance evaluation of self-centering timber moment resisting frames. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng In press.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.08.038 Google Scholar
  142. Simonetti M, Ponzo FC, Di Cesare A et al (2014) Non-linear numerical modelling of a post-tensioned timber frame building with dissipative steel angle devices. In: 2nd European Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Istanbul, Turkey, p 12Google Scholar
  143. Smith TJ (2008) Feasibility of Multi Storey Post-Tensioned Timber Buildings: Detailing, Cost and Construction. University of CanterburyGoogle Scholar
  144. Smith TJ, Ludwig F, Pampanin S et al (2007) Seismic response of hybrid-LVL coupled walls under quasi-static and pseudo-dynamic testing. In: New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering Conference. Palmerston North, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  145. Smith TJ, Fragiacomo M, Pampanin S, Buchanan AH (2009) Construction time and cost for post-tensioned timber buildings. Proc Inst Civ Eng Mater 162:141–149Google Scholar
  146. Smith TJ, Pampanin S, Carradine D et al (2012a) Dynamic Testing of Multi-storey Post-tensioned Glulam Building: Planning, Design and Numerical Analysis. In: 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Lisbon, PortugalGoogle Scholar
  147. Smith TJ, Ponzo FC, Di Cesare A et al (2012b) Seismic performance of a post-tensioned glue laminated beam to column joint: experimental and numerical results. In: World Conference on Timber Engineering. Auckland, New Zealand, p 9Google Scholar
  148. Smith TJ, Pampanin S, Cesare AD et al (2014a) Shaking table testing of a multi-storey post-tensioned timber building. In: New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering Conference. Auckland, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  149. Smith TJ, Ponzo FC, Di Cesare A et al (2014b) Post-tensioned glulam beam-column joints with advanced damping systems: testing and numerical analysis. J Earthq Eng 18:147–167.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2013.835291 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. Smith TJ, Watson C, Moroder D et al (2016) Lateral performance of a Pres-Lam frame designed for gravity loads. Eng Struct 122:33–41.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.05.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Swensen S, Acevedo C, Jampole EA et al (2014) Toward damage free residential houses through unibody light-frame construction with seismic isolation. In: SEAOC 2014 83rd Annual Convention. Indian Wells, USA, p 15Google Scholar
  152. Symans MD, Cofer WF, Du Y, Fridley KJ (2002a) Evaluation of fluid dampers for seismic energy dissipation of woodframe structures. California Institute of Technology and the Consortium of Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering, RichmondGoogle Scholar
  153. Symans MD, Cofer WF, Fridley KJ (2002b) Base isolation and supplemental damping systems for seismic protection of wood structures: Literature review. Earthq Spectra 18:549–572.  https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1503342 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. Symans MD, Cofer WF, Fridley KJ, Du Y (2002c) Effects of supplemental energy dissipation systems on the seismic response of light-framed wood buildings. In: 7th National Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Boston, USAGoogle Scholar
  155. Symans MD, Cofer WF, Du Y, Fridley KJ (2004) Seismic Behavior of Wood-framed Structures with Viscous Fluid Dampers. Earthq Spectra 20:451–482.  https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1731616 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  156. Symans MD, Yang S, Mosqueda G et al (2017) Development of Compact Damper Framing Systems for Seismic Protection of Structures. In: 16th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Santiago, ChileGoogle Scholar
  157. Tamagnone G, Fragiacomo M (2018) On the rocking behavior of CLT wall assembiles. In: World Conference on Timber Engineering 2018. Seoul, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  158. Tannert T, Follesa M, Fragiacomo M et al (2018) Seismic design of cross-laminated timber buildings. Wood Fiber Sci 50:3–26Google Scholar
  159. Tian J (2014) Performance-Based Seismic Retrofit of Soft-Story Woodframe Buildings Using Energy-Dissipation Systems. Rensselaer Polytechnic InstituteGoogle Scholar
  160. Tian J, Symans MD, Gershfeld M et al (2014) Seismic performance of a full-scale soft-story woodframed building with energy dissipation retrofit. In: Tenth U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Anchorage, USA, p 11Google Scholar
  161. Tian J, Symans MD, Pang W et al (2016) Application of Energy Dissipation Devices for Seismic Protection of Soft-Story Wood-Frame Buildings in Accordance with FEMA Guidelines. J Struct Eng 142:E4015009.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001269 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. Tomasi R, Casagrande D, Grossi P, Sartori T (2015a) Shaking table tests on a three-storey timber building. Proc Inst Civ Eng - Struct Build 168:853–867.  https://doi.org/10.1680/jstbu.14.00026 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. Tomasi R, Sartori T, Casagrande D, Piazza M (2015b) Shaking Table Testing of a Full-Scale Prefabricated Three-Story Timber-Frame Building. J Earthq Eng 19:505–534.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2014.974291 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. Valadbeigi A, Zarnani P, Quenneville P (2018) Out-Of-Plane Experimental Behaviour of a Timber Column with Resilient SlipFriction Joints. In: World Conference on Timber Engineering 2018. Seoul, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  165. van de Lindt JW, Jiang Y (2014) Empirical selection equation for friction pendulum seismic isolation bearings applied to multistory woodframe buildings. Pract Period Struct Des Constr 19:4014010.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)SC.1943-5576.0000198 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  166. van de Lindt JW, Pei S, Liu H, Filiatrault A (2010a) Experimental Seismic Response of a Full-Scale Light-Frame Wood Building. J Struct Eng 136:246–254.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000112 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. van de Lindt JW, Pei S, Pryor SE et al (2010b) Experimental Seismic Response of a Full-Scale Six-Story Light-Frame Wood Building. J Struct Eng 136:1262–1272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  168. van de Lindt JW, Liu H, Symans MD, Shinde JK (2011) Seismic performance and modeling of a half-scale base-isolated wood frame building. J Earthq Eng 15:469–490.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2010.498561 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. van de Lindt JW, Abell GT, Bahmani P et al (2013) Full-Scale Dynamic Testing of Soft-Story Retrofitted and Un-Retrofitted Woodframe Buildings. In: SEAOC 2013 Convention. San Diego, USA, pp 219–228Google Scholar
  170. van de Lindt JW, Bahmani P, Mochizuki G et al (2016) Experimental seismic behavior of a full-scale four-story soft-story wood-frame building with retrofits. II: shake table test results. J Struct Eng 142:E4014004.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001206 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  171. Ventura CE, Taylor GW, Prion HGL et al (2002) Full-scale shaking table studies of woodframe residential construction. In: 7th US National Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Boston, USAGoogle Scholar
  172. Wanninger F (2015) Post-tensioned timber frame structures. Zürich, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  173. Wanninger F, Frangi A (2014) Experimental and analytical analysis of a post-tensioned timber connection under gravity loads. Eng Struct 70:117–129.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.03.042 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  174. Wanninger F, Frangi A, Fragiacomo M (2015) Long-term behavior of posttensioned timber connections. J Struct Eng 141:4014155.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001121 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  175. Wiebe L, Christopoulos C, Tremblay R, Leclerc M (2013) Mechanisms to limit higher mode effects in a controlled rocking steel frame. 1: Concept, modelling, and low-amplitude shake table testing. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 42:1053–1068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  176. Xie W, Araki Y, Chang W-S (2018) Enhancing the seismic performance of historic timber buildings in Asia by applying super-elastic alloy to a Chinese complex bracket system. Int J Archit Herit 12:734–748.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15583058.2018.1442528 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  177. Yamazaki Y, Kasai K, Sakata H (2010) Torsional seismic response reduction by passive control devise for conventional post-and-beam one-story wooden house with stiffness eccentricity. In: World Conference on Timber Engineering. Riva del Garda, Italy, p 11Google Scholar
  178. Yancey CWC, Somes NF (1973) Structural tests of a wood framed housing module. Rep. No. NBSIR 73–121. National Bureau of Standards, Washington, DC. USAGoogle Scholar
  179. Yasumura M, Kobayashi K, Okabe M et al (2016) Full-Scale Tests and Numerical Analysis of Low-Rise CLT Structures under Lateral Loading. J Struct Eng 142:E4015007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  180. Yokel FY, Hsi G, Somes NF (1973) Full scale test on a two-story house subjected to lateral load. Build Sci Ser 44:56Google Scholar
  181. Yousef-beik SMM, Zarnani P, Mohammadi F et al (2018) New Seismic Damage Avoidant Timber Brace Using Innovative Resilient SlipFriction Joints for Multi-story Applications. In: World Conference on Timber Engineering 2018. Seoul, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  182. Zarnani P, Valadbeigi A, Hashemi A et al (2018) Rotational performance of Resilient Slip Friction Joint (RSFJ) as a new damage free seismic connection. In: World Conference on Timber Engineering 2018. Seoul, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  183. Zayas VA, Low SS (1997) Seismic Isolation of a Four-Story Wood Building. In: Earthquake performance and safety of timber structures. Forest Products Society, Madison, pp 83–91Google Scholar
  184. Zimmerman RB, Mcdonnell E (2017) Framework—A tall re-centering mass timber building in the United States. In: New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering Conference. Wellington, New Zealand, p 9Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Structural and Geotechnical EngineeringPontificia Universidad Católica de ChileSantiagoChile
  2. 2.Department of Construction Engineering and ManagementPontificia Universidad Católica de ChileSantiagoChile
  3. 3.Timber Innovation Center CIM-UCPontificia Universidad Católica de ChileSantiagoChile

Personalised recommendations