Monotonic and Cyclic Load Testing of Partially and Fully Anchored Wood-Frame Shear Walls
Keywords:Seismic performance, wood-frame, shear wall, cyclic testing, CUREE protocol, monotonic protocol, prescriptive design, code performance
AbstractThe objectives of this study were to evaluate the performance of wood-frame shear walls under monotonic and cyclic loads by: 1) determining variability of shear wall performance; 2) comparing performance of walls under each loading protocol; 3) evaluating effects of anchorage on wall performance; and 4) evaluating performance of walls qualitatively and quantitatively with respect to codedefined performance measures. Sets of tests consisting of eight partially and two fully anchored walls were conducted using both the ASTM E564 monotonic protocol and CUREE cyclic-test protocol for ordinary ground motions for a total of 20 walls. Statistical comparisons of parameter variance and mean values were made between partially anchored walls tested under different protocols and performance comparisons were made between partially and fully anchored walls. Cyclic tests on partially anchored walls generally exhibited a coefficient of variation that was lower than for monotonic tests. Failure mode of fully anchored walls was different than that for partially anchored walls because hold-downs changed the load path. Comparison of test results with ASCE 41 m-factors suggests that ductility of partially anchored walls is below the acceptance criteria for shear walls with structural panel sheathing.
ASCE (2007) Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings. ASCE/SEI 41-06. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA.nASTM (2000) Standard method of static load test for shear resistance of framed walls for buildings. ASTM E 564-00. American Society of Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA.nASTM (2003) Standard test methods for cyclic (reversed) load test for shear resistance of framed walls for buildings. ASTM E 2126-02a. American Society of Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA.nCobeen K, Russell J, Dolan DJ (2004) Recommendations for earthquake resistance in the design and construction of woodframe buildings. CUREE Publication No. W-30b. Stanford University, Stanford, CA.nDinehart DW, Shenton HW III (1998) Comparison of static and dynamic response of timber shear walls. J Struct Eng 124(6):686 - 695.nDolan JD (2000). Code development of seismic design of woodframe structures: Testing needs. Pages 9 - 14 in Proc Invitational Workshop on Seismic Testing, Analysis and Design of Woodframe Testing. CUREE Publication No. W-01. Richmond, CA.nFolz B, Filiatrault A (2001) Cyclic analysis of wood shear walls. J Struct Eng 127(4):433 - 441.nHe M, Lam F, Prion GL (1998) Influence of cyclic test protocols on performance of wood-based shear walls. Can J Civil Eng 25(3):539 - 550.nGatto K, Uang CM (2002) Cyclic response of woodframe shearwalls: Loading protocol and rate of loading rate effects. CUREE Publication No. 13. Richmond, CA.nICC (2006a) International building code. International Code Council, Whittier, CA.nICC (2006b) International residential code. International Code Council, Whittier, CA.nKaracabeyli E, Ceccotti A (1998) Nailed wood-frame shear walls for seismic loads: Test results and design considerations. Structural Engineering World Wide 1998, ISBN: 0-08-042845-2. Paper reference: T207-6.nKaracabeyli E, Dolan JD, Ceccotti A, Ni C (1999) Comparison of static and dynamic response of timber shear walls. Discussion. J Struct Eng-ASCE 125(7):796 - 797.nKrawinkler H, Parisi F, Ibarra L, Ayoub A, Medina R (2001) Development of a testing protocol for woodframe structures. CUREE Publication No. W-02. Richmond, CA.nLanglois JD, Gupta R, Miller T (2004) Effects of reference displacement and damage accumulation in wood shear walls. J Struct Eng 130(3):470 - 479.nPardoen GC, Kazanjy RP, Freund E, Hamilton CH, Larsen D, Shah N, Smith A (2000) Results from the City of Los Angeles-UC Irvine shear wall test program in Proc World Conference on Timber Engineering. Paper 1.1.1 on CD.nSeaders PJ (2004) Performance of partially and fully anchored wood frame shear walls under monotonic, cyclic & earthquake loads. MS Thesis, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR.nSeible F, Filiatrault A, Uang C-M (eds.) (1999) Proc Invitational Workshop on Seismic Testing, Analysis and Design of Woodframe Testing. CUREE Publication No. W-01. Richmond, CA.nWhite KBD (2005) Performance of wood frame shear walls under earthquake loads. MS Thesis, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR.nZacher EG (1999) Gaps in information for determination of performance capabilities of light woodframe construction. Pages 1 - 2 in F Seible, A Filiatrault, and C-M Uang, eds. Proc Invitational Workshop on Seismic Testing, Analysis and Design of Woodframe Construction. CUREE, Richmond, CA.n
The copyright of an article published in Wood and Fiber Science is transferred to the Society of Wood Science and Technology (for U. S. Government employees: to the extent transferable), effective if and when the article is accepted for publication. This transfer grants the Society of Wood Science and Technology permission to republish all or any part of the article in any form, e.g., reprints for sale, microfiche, proceedings, etc. However, the authors reserve the following as set forth in the Copyright Law:
1. All proprietary rights other than copyright, such as patent rights.
2. The right to grant or refuse permission to third parties to republish all or part of the article or translations thereof. In the case of whole articles, such third parties must obtain Society of Wood Science and Technology written permission as well. However, the Society may grant rights with respect to Journal issues as a whole.
3. The right to use all or part of this article in future works of their own, such as lectures, press releases, reviews, text books, or reprint books.