A non-destructive method to determine the rotational stiffness of timber frame connections

Abstract

A method for non-destructive determination of the initial rotational stiffness of timber joints using the natural frequency of vibration of the beam is presented. The rotational stiffness of the joint is defined as “k”, and the bending stiffness of the member is defined as EI/L. The ratio of joint stiffness to the bending stiffness (k/EI/L or kL/EI) is defined as α. Previous researchers have found that for 1 < α < 100, the joint is semi-rigid, and the structural analysis should include joint rotational stiffness to limit stress calculation error to < 5%. The stiffness determined using the frequency of vibration was compared to stiffness determined using the measured deflection with a center-point loading. The relative deviation between the two, using the center point loading as a reference, was calculated. Twenty beams located in six buildings were tested, and 70% were found to have α > 1. The method accurately classified the joints as pinned or semi-rigid for 90% of the cases. The average percent relative deviation for the field-tested beams with α > 1 was 38%. Percent deviation for α > 1 could be reduced by almost half by taking a 5 mm diameter × 50 mm long sample for density testing. The probability distribution of the joint stiffnesses was characterized using a Weibull distribution. Errors due to assumptions about (1) equal stiffness of joints at each end, (2) existing stress in members, and (3) vibration damping were all studied. The relative impact of each on the results of the method is presented.

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

Fig. 1

Adapted from [24]

Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

References

  1. 1.

    Alexander A (2006) The Lhasa Jokhang—is the world’s oldest timber frame building in Tibet? Web J Cult Patrimony 1:123–154 (art 14)

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    O’Connor J (2004) Survey on actual service lives for North American buildings, Presented at woodframe housing durability and disaster Issues conference, Las Vegas, October 2004

  3. 3.

    Brungraber RL (1985) Traditional timber joinery: a modern analysis. PhD Dissertation, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA

  4. 4.

    Ross RJ, Pellerin RF (1994) Nondestructive testing for assessing wood members in structures: a review. USDA Forest Products Laboratory General Technical Report FPL-GTR-70

  5. 5.

    Kasal B, Tannert T (2010) In situ assessment of structural timber. Springer, New York. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0560-9

    Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Lanata F (2015) Monitoring the long-term behaviour of timber structures. J Civil Struct Health Monit 5:167. doi:10.1007/s13349-014-0095-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Anthony RW (2008) Maintenance and rehabilitation—assessing and extending the life of existing wood structures. In: proceedings of structural engineering institute pre-congress workshop “wood engineering challenges in the new millennium: critical research needs”. American Society of Civil Engineers, Vancouver, BC, Canada, pp 110–126

  8. 8.

    Kasal B (2011) State-of-the-art in in situ evaluation of structural timber—some critical observations. In: Saporiti J (ed) Proceedings international conference on structural health assessment of timber structures 2011, Lisbon, Portugal

  9. 9.

    Cavalli A, Togni M (2015) Monitoring of historical timber structures: state of the art and prospective. J Civil Struct Health Monit 5:107. doi:10.1007/s13349-014-0081-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Fischetti D (2009) Structural investigation of historic buildings: a case study guide to preservation technology for buildings, bridges, towers and mills. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Bulleit WM, Sandberg LB, Drewek MW, O’Bryant TL (1999) Behavior and modeling of wood-pegged timber frames. J Struct Eng 125(1):3–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Schmidt RJ, MacKay RB (1997) Timber frame tension joinery. Report on research sponsored by the Timber Frame Business Council. Washington, D.C.

  13. 13.

    Burnett D, Clouston P, Damery D, Fisette P (2003) Structural properties of pegged timber connections as affected by end distance. For Prod J 53(2):50–57

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Miller J, Schmidt R, Bulleit W (2010) New yield model for wood dowel connections. J Struct Eng 136(10):1255–1261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Anthony RW (2004) Condition assessment of timber using resistance drilling and digital radioscopy. APT Bull 35(4):21–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Morlier J, Bos F, Castéra P (2006) Diagnosis of a portal frame using advanced signal processing of laser vibrometer data. J Sound Vib 297(1–2):420–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Cai Z, Ross RJ, Hunt MO, Soltis LA (2002) Pilot study to examine use of transverse vibration nondestructive evaluation for assessing floor systems. For Prod J 52(I):89–93

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Soltis LA, Wang X, Ross RJ, Hunt MO (2000) Vibration testing of timber floor systems. For Prod J 52(10):75

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Wang X, Wacker J, Ross RJ, Brashaw BK, Vatalaro RJ (2005) Development of flexural vibration inspection techniques to rapidly assess the structural health of timber bridge systems. In: Proceedings of 14th international symposium on nondestructive testing of wood. University of Applied Sciences, Eberswalde, pp 113–121

  20. 20.

    Maille NJ (2008) Assessing the Roof Structure of the Breeding Barn Using Truss Member Resonant Frequencies, M.S. Thesis, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT

  21. 21.

    Laux S (2012) Estimation of axial load in timber beams using resonance frequency analysis. Masters Thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden

  22. 22.

    Irawan R, Priyosulistyo H, Suhendro B (2014) Evaluation of forces on a steel truss structure using modified resonance frequency. Proc Eng 95:196–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Blevins RD (2001) Formulas for natural frequency and mode shape. Krieger Pub Co., Malabar

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    McGuire J (1995) Notes on Semi-Rigid connections—finite element modeling continuous improvement. http://femci.gsfc.nasa.gov/semirigid/index.html. Accessed 10 Jan 2010

  25. 25.

    Pilkey WD (2005) Formulas for stress, strain, and structural matrices, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    American Forest and Paper Association (2015) National design specification for wood construction. American Wood Council, Madison

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Forest Products Laboratory (2010) Wood handbook—wood as an engineering material. General Technical Report FPL-GTR-190. Madison, WI

  28. 28.

    ANSYS® version 8.0 (2006) (computer software) ANSYS, Inc., Canonsburg

  29. 29.

    Crovella PL, Kyanka GH (2011). Use of vibration techniques to determine the rotational stiffness of timber joints. In: Proceedings of the structural health assessment for timber structures conference. Lisbon

  30. 30.

    Minitab 17 Statistical Software (2010) (Computer software) Minitab Inc. State College Pennsylvania

  31. 31.

    Lyu M, Zhu X, Yang Q (2017) Condition assessment of heritage timber buildings in operational environments. J Civil Struct Health Monit. doi:10.1007/s13349-017-0239-2

    Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    ASTM International (ASTM) (2006) Designation: D143-94 (Reapproved 2007) standard test method for small clear specimens of timber. ASTM, West Conshohocken

    Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    ASTM International (ASTM) (2006) Designation: D245-06 standard practice for establishing structural grades and related allowable properties for visually graded lumber. ASTM, West Conshohocken

    Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Gorman DJ (1975) Free vibrations analysis of beams and shafts. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Shaker FJ (1975) Effect of axial load on mode shapes and frequencies of beams. Lewis Research Center, NASA, Cleveland

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was funded in part by the US National Park Service (Grant no: P13AP00080).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul Crovella.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Crovella, P., Kyanka, G. A non-destructive method to determine the rotational stiffness of timber frame connections. J Civil Struct Health Monit 7, 627–635 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-017-0247-2

Download citation

Keywords

  • Non-destructive testing
  • Vibration and modal based techniques
  • Structural monitoring of heritage buildings
  • Structural analysis and modeling
  • Field applications