170835928-MIT

Seismic Design of a Current Woodframe Structure and Study of
Innovative Products and Damping Systems in Wood Construction

by
Nina A. MAHJOUB
Bachelors of Science in Civil and Environmental Engineering

University of California, Los Angeles, 2006
SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL

ENGINEERING IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ENGINEERING IN CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING

AT THE
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
JUNE 2007
@ 2007 Nina A. Mahjoub. All rights reserved.
The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper
and electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part in any medium now
known or hereafter created.
Signature of Author:
/Department of land Environmental Engineering
May 14, 2007
Certified by:
Jerome J. Connor
Professor of Civi and Environmental Engineering
Theis Supervisor
Accepted by:
Daniele Veneziano
Chairman, Departmental Committee for Graduate Students
MASSACHUSETTS INSTfJTE
OF TECHNOLOGY
JUN 0 7 2007
LIBRARIES
Seismic Design of a Current Woodframe Structure and
Study of Innovative Products and Damping Systems in
Wood Construction
by
Nina A. MAHJOUB
Submitted to the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering on May 14, 2007 in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Masters of Engineering in Civil &
Environmental Engineering
Abstract
Wood structures have seen resurgence in popularity over the past several decades,
especially in Western States of America, such as California. The industry keeps creating
new structural wood products of exceptional strength, versatility, and reliability. Wood-
frame structures offer a more sustainable answer, but need to be carefully detailed in
high seismic zone.
The objective of this work is to describe the seismic design of a current woodframe
structure. Moreover, this thesis aims to present the innovation occurring in the market of
wood construction. New engineered wood products are introduced as well as a review of
the new developments and researches that are being made to incorporate damping
systems such as viscoelastic and hysteretic dampers, in the ultimate goal of obtaining an
optimum earthquake-resistant wood structure.
Thesis Supervisor: Jerome J. Connor

Title: Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
My parents have always told me that knowledge will benefit your family, your society,
and most of all, yourself. I truly believe that my studies have proved to be the most
valuable tools in facing challenges that have come my way and are sure to greet me in
the coming years.
I would like to thank both of my parents for their continuous support and love.
Merci Maman for always supporting me and pushing me to do better.
Merci Sara Joon for being there and Baba for your help.
Thank You to my advisor, Professor Connor, for his kind support and patience.
Thank You to my fellow MEng classmates of 2007 for making this year one of the most
memorable years of my life. Special thanks to the Amber Team and French Team.
Thank You Pangolin for your presence.
-3-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................ 6
LIST OF TABLES.................................................................................... 8
LIST OF TABLES.................................................................................. 8
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................... 9
I. OVERVIEW OF CURRENT WOOD-FRAME CONSTRUCTION ................ 11

A. SEISMIC DESIGN REQUIREMENTS............................................ 11
1. Equivalent Static Lateral Procedure...................................................................................... 11
2. Simplified LateralProcedure.................................................................................................. 18
3. Diaphragm Forces...................................................................................................................... 18
B. LATERAL FORCE RESISTING SYSTEM (LRFS) ......................... 20
1. Introduction to Shear Wall....................................................................................................... 20
2. Shear Wall Design ...................................................................................................................... 22
3. Shear Wall Connectors........................................................................................................... 25
C. LATERAL ANALYSIS OF A TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL WOOD

CONSTRUCTION .............................................................................. 31
1. Loads and Factors ...................................................................................................................... 32
2. North-South and East-West Shear Walls ................................................................................. 36
3. Posts, Hold-down, and Strap Capacities................................................................................. 38
4. OverturningMoments for N-S andE-W walls ....................................................................... 40
5. Horizontal Diaphragms ........................................................................................................... 41
6. A nchorage to Concrete ........................................................................................................... 43
7. Shear Wall Deflection ................................................................................................................. 45
1. NEW TECHNOLOGY OF WOOD PRODUCTS .................................... 49
A. INTRODUCTION TO WOOD ....................................................... 49

B. NEW ENGINEERED WOOD PRODUCTS ...................................... 51
1. Glued Laminated Timber (Glulam)........................................................................................ 52
2. FiberReinforced Glued Laminated........................................................................................ 55
3. Structural Composite Lumber .................................................................................................. 57
-4-
4. Wood I-jo ists ............................................................................................................................... 60
5. Structural Wood Panels........................................................................................................... 62
6. Sum m ary ..................................................................................................................................... 64
1I1. LITERATURE REVIEW OF INNOVATIVE DAMPING SYSTEMS.............. 66
A. PASSIVE ENERGY DISSIPATION SYSTEM .................................... 67

SupplementalDamping in Wood-frame Structures (Dinehart,David)........................................... 67
B. FROM RESEARCH TO PRACTICE ............................................. 70

1. NEES Wood Project..................................................................................................................... 70
2. SA P Wood Softw are..................................................................................................................... 73
C. ADDITIONAL READINGS & IDEA ON SUPPLEMENTAL DAMPING

S YSTEM S ....................................................................................... 74
Improved viscoelastic dampingfor earthquake-resistantwood structures..................................... 74
Seismic Behavior of Wood-framed Structures with Viscous FluidDampers.................................. 74
Base Isolation & Supplemental DampingSystems for Seismic Protectionof Wood Structures .......... 74
Disposable Damping System ........................................................................................................... 75
CONCLUSION ...................................................................................... 76
APPENDICES ...................................................................................... 78
1. APPENDIX HAPTERI ............................................................ 79

2. APPENDIX HAPTER ............................................................ 94
REFERENCE ..................................................................................... 96
-5-
List of Figures
FIGURE 1: EQUIVALENT STATIC LATERAL FORCE SCHEMATIC......................................................... 12
FIGURE 2: SEISMIC ZONE MAP OF THE UNITED STATES .................................................................. 13
FIGURE 3: WOOD DIAPHRAGM CARRYING UNIFORMLY DISTRIBUTED LOAD ..................................... 19
FIGURE 4: LOAD TRANSFER FROM LATERAL WALL TO HORIZONTAL DIAPHRAGM .............................. 20
FIGURE 5: LOAD TRANSFER FROM DIAPHRAGM TO SHEAR WALL ..................................................... 20
FIGURE 6: LOAD TRANSFER FROM SHEAR WALL TO FOUNDATION .................................................. 21
FIGURE 7: TYPICAL WOODFRAME SHEAR WALL CONSTRUCTION ..................................................... 22
FIGURE 8: SEGMENTED SHEAR W ALLS ......................................................................................... 22
FIGURE 9: SSW DETERMINATION OF SHEAR CAPACITY SCHEMATIC ................................................... 23
FIGURE 10: PERFORATED SHEAR W ALLS....................................................................................... 24
FIGURE 11: TYPICAL HOLD-DOWN DETAIL USED IN RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE (ZONE 4) ................... 27
FIGURE 12: BLOCKINGS LOCATED ON EACH SIDE OF DOOR OPENINGS............................................ 28
FIGURE 13: METAL STRAPS USED AS HOLD-DOWNS FROM FLOOR TO FLOOR .................................. 29
FIGURE 14: TWO TIMBER APARTMENTS IN HIGH SEISMIC REGION (LEFT- UNDER CONSTRUCTION, RIGHT-
REA DY FO R U S E)..........................................................................................................-. ...... 3 1
FIGURE 15: PORTION OF TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN OF DESIGN STRUCTURE ......................................... 36
FIGURE 16: WWPA "WESTERN LUMBER GRADING RULES" GRADE STAMP...................................... 49
FIGURE 17: TYPICAL WOOD DOUGLAS-FIR LARCH TYPE ................................................................ 50
FIGURE 18: G LULAM B EAM ......................................................................................... ........ ...... 52
FIGURE 19: FLOOR G LULAM BEAMS............................................................................................... 53
FIGURE 20: DISTRIBUTION OF DIFFERENT LAMINATIONS IN GLULAM BEAMS...................................... 53
FIGURE 21: REINFORCED GLULAM CROSS SECTION ........................................................................ 55
FIGURE 22: SAMPLE OF LAMINATED VENEER LUMBERS (LVL)............................................................ 57
FIGURE 23: PARALLEL STRAND LUMBER SAMPLE ........................................................................... 58
FIGURE 24: O S L RIMBOARD...................................................................................... .. ..-------..... 59
FIGURE 25: 1-JOIST CONFIGURATION & SAMPLE PRODUCTS........................................................... 60
FIGURE 26:1-JOISTS IN BASEMENT FLOOR ASSEMBLY .................................................................... 61
FIGURE 27: SCHEMATIC STRUCTURAL PLYWOOD ............................................................................ 62
FIGURE 28: ORIENTED STRAND BOARD SAMPLES.......................................................................... 63
FIGURE 29: OSB SHEATHING OF RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION ...................................................... 63
FIGURE 30: FINAL PRODUCT YIELD FROM LOG FOR DIFFERENT EWP'S........................................... 64
FIGURE 31: ENGINEERED W OOD PRODUCTS LIFE CYCLE................................................................... 65
FIGURE 32: ENERGY DISSIPATION AT CONSTANT AMPLITUDE CYCLING AMPLITUDE ............................ 68
FIGURE 33: SCHEMATIC OF VE MATERIAL CONNECTION TEST SPECIMEN ....................................... 68
FIGURE 34: COMPARISON OF ENERGY DISSIPATION OF CONVENTIONAL AND VE-SHEET SHEAR WALLS 69
-6-
FIGURE 35: SEISMIC DAMPER INSTALLED INSIDE NEESWOOD BEDROOM WALL .............................. 71
FIGURE 36: FLUID-FILLED VISCOUS DAMPER CONFIGURATION ........................................................ 71

FIGURE 37: TAYLOR SEISMIC FLUID VISCOUS DAMPER .................................................................. 72
FIGURE 38: SAPWOOD SCREEN SHOT WITH SINGLE EARTHQUAKE EXCITATION RESULTS ................. 73
-7-
List of Tables
TABLE 1: EQUIVALENT STATIC LATERAL FORCES DESCRIPTION....................................................... 12
TABLE 2: DESCRIPTION OF TERMS FOUND IN BASE SHEAR CALCULATIONS ..................................... 14
TABLE 3: S O IL P RO FILES .................................................................................................................. 17

TABLE 4: SHEAR WALL SCHEDULE (TYPICAL ZONE 4 CONSTRUCTION) ........................................... 24
TABLE 5: EFFECT OF LUMBER TYPE ON A GIVEN HOLD-DOWN PRODUCT ......................................... 26
TABLE 6: ALLOWABLE TENSION LOADS FOR DIFFERENT HOLD-DOWNS MODELS.............................. 27
TABLE 7: DESIGN HOLD-DOWN CAPACITIES FOR OVERTURNING MOMENT ....................................... 38
TABLE 8: DESIGN ALLOWABLE STRAP AND HOLD-DOWN SEISMIC TENSION LOADS FOR FLOOR TO FLOOR
............................................................................................................................................... 38
TABLE 9: DESIGN ALLOWABLE STRAP AND HOLD-DOWN SEISMIC TENSION LOADS FOR DRAG STRUT... 39
TABLE 10: DESIGN ANCHOR BOLT DIAMETER WITH CORRESPONDING PLATE SIDE LENGTH USED........ 43
TABLE 11: DESIGN HOLD-DOWN HD & Z4-T2 TYPE WITH CORRESPONDING BOLT DIAMETER........... 43
TABLE 12: DESIGN ANCHORAGE CONCRETE CHECK CALCULATION FOR N-S & E-W SHEAR WALLS..... 44
TABLE 13: VARIOUS PROPRIETIES FOR DEFLECTION CALCULATIONS ............................................... 45
TABLE 14: HOLD-DOWNS ALLOWABLE FORCE & DEFLECTION CAPACITIES USED FOR DESIGN ............. 46
TABLE 15: SHEAR WALLS INFORMATION USED FOR DESIGN ............................................................ 46
TABLE 16: DESIGN TIE-DOWN DEVICE PROPERTIES ...................................................................... 47
TABLE 17: DESIGN DEVICE ELONGATION & ASSEMBLY DISPLACEMENT............................................ 47
TABLE 18: DESIGN SHEAR W ALL DEFLECTIONS.............................................................................. 48
TABLE 19: GLUED LAMINATED TIMBER CONVERSION TABLE ............................................................ 54
TABLE 20: COMPARISON OF TYPICAL MECHANICAL PROPERTIES..................................................... 55
TABLE 21: SIZE, WEIGHT, & COST COMPARISON OF FRP BEAMS WITH EQUIVALENT WOOD BEAM ...... 56
- 8-
- INTRODUCTION -
Introduction
Woodframe construction is the predominant method for building homes and multi-family
structures in the United States; in California, about ninety percent of residential
construction consists of wood structures. For centuries, wood has been favored as a
building material because of its strength, economy, workability, and is also
environmentally friendly. Finally, wooden buildings have a good reputation when
subjected to seismic events. They can resist catastrophic earthquakes while sustaining
only minimal damage.
Woodframe construction is being used, more widely now, in commercial and industrial
buildings. This market growth causes wood to be put off-limits to harvesting. Higher
quality trees are being used, ultimately restricting the availability of high-quality lumber.
Furthermore, sawn lumber limits the size and grade that can be used in construction.
Thus, when loads become large or the span becomes longer, the use of sawn lumber
becomes unfeasible. This is where engineered wood products become of critical and
practical use in the construction market. Through technology, smaller, faster growing,
lower quality trees are engineered to become excellent wood products. These products
have greatly expanded building options and methods in all forms of residential and
commercial construction.
Woodframe structures seem to be safer to live in, in seismic areas, compared to

traditional heavier buildings. However, while building codes and standards emphasize
life safety issues, structural and non structural damage can cause economical problems.
Furthermore, the height of woodframe construction is currently limited to approximately
four stories. This restriction is mainly due to uncertainties in understanding the dynamic
response of taller woodframe construction and the non-structural limitations. New
challenges are being faced in developing a new seismic design philosophy based on
performance-based design. In addition to this philosophy, supplemental innovative
damping systems are being studied to obtain optimum earthquake-resistant wood
structures.
-9-
- INTRODUCTION -
The objective of this work is to provide an overview of a current woodframe construction,

presenting the seismic design requirements, detailing the different structural components
of the lateral force resisting system, and designing the lateral framing of a typical four-
story apartment located in a high seismic zone. Moreover, the thesis provides
information on the recent engineered wood products. It also gives an overview of the
different techniques and researches that have been started in the area of providing
innovative damping systems to obtain an optimum earthquake-resistant wood structure.
Scope of Chapter I
Chapter 1 provides an overview of a current woodframe construction. The chapter
provides an introductory design process to the estimation of lateral seismic loads and
the associated structural behavior of low-rise wood buildings. These seismic design
requirements are based on the provisions of the 1997 Uniform Building Code (as well as
the 2001 California Building Code). The chapter ends with the seismic design of a
woodframe four-story apartment located in Los Angeles, California, region of high
seismic area.
Scope of Chapter I
Chapter 2 provides a detailed description of the new engineered wood products
available in the market. These products are able to enhance the structural performance
of the building, creating a greater market growth in the residential and commercial
construction. New technologies are discussed utilizing traditionally less desirable
species, smaller trees, and lower quality trees, but resulting in the production of excellent
wood products. This chapter also raises the issue of sustainability. Indeed, engineered
wood products (EWP) offer higher yields from a given log. This would permit the reach of
a more sustainable environment in a much polluted industry.
Scope of Chapter III

Chapter 3 provides a literature review of the different techniques and researches that
have been started in order to obtain an optimum earthquake resistant structure. The
chapter describes innovative damping systems that are being studied to understand the
improvement on a woodframe construction. Moreover, this part introduces the new
philosophy that engineers should start to learn when designing wood structures.
- 10-
Overview of Current Wood-frame Construction
1. Overview of Current Wood-frame Construction
A. Seismic Design Requirements
Earthquake activities result in various types of ground motion as seismic waves. When
passing through a structure, those waves subject the structure primarily to lateral forces
and to a lesser degree to vertical forces. The structure should be able to withstand
vertical and lateral movements without losing strength; it needs to resist deformations
without developing high stress concentrations.
The objective of this section is to give an introductory design process to the estimation of
lateral seismic loads and the associated structural behavior of low-rise wood buildings.
These seismic design requirements are based on the provisions of the 1997 Uniform
Building Code (similar to 2001 California Building Code).
This motion occurs at the base of the structure resulting in dynamic loads. Those loads
are then distributed throughout the structure based on the stiffness of each structural
elements and mass distribution (stiffness representing restoring forces and distribution of
mass being the inertial forces). In order to account for those seismic loading, the most
accurate way would be to run some dynamic analysis. However, for the design of low-
rise wood building, dynamic analysis can be replaced with simplified analytical
techniques, provided in the building codes such as equivalent static force or equivalent
lateral force procedures.
1. Equivalent Static Lateral Procedure
This procedure entails applying static loads on a structure with magnitudes and direction
approximating the effects of dynamic loading caused by earthquakes. Those forces are
concentrated lateral forces occurring at each floor and roof levels, where the mass
concentration is at its highest. Additionally, the higher the elevation, the larger the forces
are.
-11-
Figure 1: Equivalent Static Lateral Force Schematic

(CUREE Caltech Project, 2000)
Equivalent Static Lateral Force Description

Forces
Base Shear Force (associated
V with ground motion at base of
structure)
Lateral story force applied at
Fx
each story level
Additional lateral force applied
Ft at the top level of structure
(UBC)
Table 1: Equivalent Static Lateral Forces Description
The distribution of the lateral story forces Fx corresponds to the fundamental mode of
vibration of a cantilevered structure. Ft, the additional lateral force at the top level, is
here to represent the collection of the higher modes of vibration. It can also be noted that
the summation of Fx and Ft should be equivalent to the base shear force, V, applied to
the structure due to seismic ground motion.
UBC provisions (and CBC provisions) are developed on the concept of the base shear.
This force represents the horizontal reaction at the base of the building required to
balance the inertia force. This force is developed over the height of the building due to
the earthquake. It is the result of the maximum lateral force expected from a seismic
-12-
ground motion at the base of the structure. This force is calculated based on five criteria:
soil conditions at the site, proximity to geological faults, the level of ductility and
overstrength depending on the total weight of structure, the fundamental period of
vibration of the structure under dynamic loading, and the probability of major seismic
ground motion.
a) Probability of major seismic ground motion

This criterion can be assessed by the graph found below (Figure 2). The map is divided
into seismic zone ranging from Zone 0 (region with no seismic activity) to Zone 4 (region
with high seismic activity).
I TA
I
I
_
FIGURE 16*--SEISWC ZONE MAP OF THE UNITE STATE

For arean outsie of lb. ntied S1ts see Appendix Chapter I8t
Figure 2: Seismic Zone Map of the United States

(*UBC 1997, Vol. 2, CHAPTER 16, DIV. Ill, SESMIC DESIGN.FIGURE 16-2)
It is clear here that California is situated in a Zone 4, increasing the probability of

suffering from seismic ground motion.
A structure, designed in a Zone 4, will therefore need to follow certain formulas in
calculating the base shear:
V = Cv I W / R T (UBC Equation 30-4)
-13-
In addition to this, lower and upper bound values are calculated as follow. Lower bounds
tend to represent structures with relatively large fundamental periods, while the upper
bound tends to govern for structures with low fundamental periods.
V < 2.5CaI W / R Upper Bound - (UBC Equation 30-5)
V> 0.11Ca I W/R Lower Bound - (UBC Equation 30-6)
V > 0.8ZNv I W / R Lower Bound for Zone 4 -(UBC Equation 30-7)
Terms Description Criteria Correspondence
Seismic Coefficient (for velocity (1): soil conditions at the site

Cv
controlled region) (2): proximity to geological
faults
Importance Factor
W Total Seismic Dead Load
R Ductility & Over strength Factor (3): the level of ductility and
over strength depending on
the total weight of structure
Fundamental Period of Structure (4): the fundamental period of

T
vibration of the structure under
dynamic loading
Seismic Coefficient (for acceleration (1): soil conditions at the site

Ca
controlled region) (2): proximity to geological
faults
Z Zone Factor - Magnitude of Peak (2): proximity to geological

faults
Acceleration
(2): proximity to geological
Nv Near-Source Factors (for Zone 4) falts
faults
Table 2: Description of Terms found in Base Shear Calculations
-14-
I: Importance Factor
This factor is an additional safety factor used to increase the load based on the
occupancy of the structure. For example, hospitals, emergency buildings, hazardous
facilities have an importance factor of 1.25. This is a precaution to make sure those
buildings will remain operational during earthquake activities.
However, a residential or office wood structure usually corresponds to a standard

building and its resultant importance factor is 1.00. UBC Table 16-K (Appendix p.79)
summarizes the different importance factor depending on the occupancy of the structure
to be designed.
b) Fundamental period of vibration of the structure under dynamic loading

The fundamental period of the building can be estimated using the information given in
UBC Section 1630.2.2.
Indeed, UBC provides a simplified method for calculating T, which is based on the height
of the building, hn (in feet):
T = Ct (hn)3/4 (UBC Equation 30-8)

(Ct = 0.02 for wood structures)
In general: Low rise - short T

High rise - longer T
c) Level of ductility and overstrength depending on the total weight of

structure
In a general sense, R is the measure of the ability of the building to deform and dissipate
energy without collapsing. This factor also accounts for the inelastic structural behavior
of the structure. UBC Table 16-N (Appendix p.80) specifies the values of R for different
framing schemes. Those factors have mainly been derived from observed building
performance under earthquakes as well as from analytical and experimental research.
All R values are greater than unity and thus will reduce the base shear V. The more
ductile the structural system, the higher R it is.
-15-
Some typical values of R are presented below:

8.5 Steel Eccentrically Braced Frame
5.5 Concrete Shear Walls
For low-rise wood buildings, the typical values of R range from 2.8 (for heavy timber
braced frames) to 6.5 (for light frame wood buildings). A value of 5.5 is usually taken for
light woodframe of structure, with less than four stories and that have shear walls
supporting gravity and lateral loads.
d) Proximity to geological faults

Few factors are used in the estimation of the base shear such as Cv, Ca, Z, and Nv.
These factors take into account the proximity of the structure to geological faults.
Table 16-R and 16-Q (Appendix p.81) can be used to obtain the values of Cv and Ca,
seismic dynamic response spectrum values. Cv and Ca account for how the building and
soil can amplify the basic ground acceleration or velocity. It should be noted that in the
highest seismic regions (Zone 4), Cv and Ca depend on the seismic source type (Table
16-U, Appendix p.81). This seismic source type is a function of the earthquake
magnitude expected for a given fault and the slip rate of that fault.
Additionally, in Zone 4 region, the additional lower bound calculation for shear requires
two more factors: Z and Nv. Z, Zone Factor, is associated with the magnitude of peak
ground acceleration. It is 0.40 for a Zone 4 (San Francisco /Los Angeles for example).
Nv, referring to "Near-Source factor", accounts for the higher ground accelerations
expected in regions close to fault rupture zone. Values of Z and Nv can be found in UBC
Table 16-1 and 16-T (Appendix p.79, p.81).
e) Soil conditions at the site

The soil conditions of the site are also considered by the factors Cv and Ca, seismic
coefficient for velocity and acceleration controlled region. These values depend on the
soil profile type as defined in Table 16-J (Appendix p.79). Six different soil profiles are
defined in this table as well as in Table 3, from Sa to Sf:
- 16-
Description Type
Hard Rock SA
Rock SB
Very Dense Soil & Soft Rock Sc

Stiff Soil SD
Soft Soil SE
UBC 1629.3.1 SF
Table 3: Soil Profiles
The soil layers beneath a structure can affect the way the structure responds to a
seismic ground motion.
m ,-
building
ground level
Soil
bedrock level
earthquake
motion
If the period of vibration of the structure is close to that of the underlying soil, the
bedrock motion will be amplified and the building will experience larger motions than
predicted without Cv and Ca. If no geotechnical investigation has been done on the site,
a soil profile of SD is used.
Determination of Earthquake Forces

* First compute the seismic dead weight wi, for each floor and the roof. This weight
typically includes only the unfactored dead load. The story values can be added
to obtain the total seismic dead load of the building.
* Then, compute the base shear V as thoroughly described in sections above.
* Compute the additional lateral force Ft, acting at the top of the structure:
F= 0 for T < 0.7s
F= 0.07 T V for 0.7s < T < 3.57s (UBC Equation 30-14)
Ft 0.25 V for T > 3.57s
-17-
* Compute 1wihi where i goes from 1 to the number of stories. This value will be
constant for all Fx. hi corresponds to the height from the base of the building to
story i.
* Compute Fx, the story forces at story x, as shown below
_(V~ - F) wxhv
F,
2. Simplified Lateral Procedure

For low-rise standard occupancy, an alternate procedure is offered to calculate the base
shear V and story forces Fx. This method can be used for light frame wood structure of
no more than three-story high. This can be found in UBC Section 1629.8.2, and Section
1630.2.3.
In this simplified procedure, the fundamental period of vibration of the structure and the
height of each floor level are not considered anymore, as can be seen in the formulas
below:
V = 3 CaW / R (UBC Equation 30-11)
F. = 3 Cawx / R (UBC Equation 30-12)
It can also be noted that in this method, the additional force at the top of the structure,
Ft, has been omitted. The effects of other vibration modes are not taken into account.
3. Diaphragm Forces
Diaphragm forces correspond to the seismic lateral force applied to the perimeter of
each floor and roof diaphragm. In typical wood structures, the floors and roof systems
are designed to act as horizontal diaphragms. These will help transfer the applied lateral
forces into the shear walls (described in the next section) supporting the diaphragms on
each side. The figure below shows a wood diaphragm carrying a uniformly distributed
- 18-
load (applied lateral loads). The shear forces on each side represent the unit shear load
transferred to the shear walls, with
v = (wL) / (2b)
w= uniformly distributed lateral load
L= Diaphragm length perpendicular to lateral load
b = Diaphragm length parallel to lateral load
Figure 3: Wood Diaphragm Carrying Uniformly Distributed Load

UBC Section 1633.2.9 proposes the following equation to obtain an approximation of the
diaphragm forces:
F,+(' F,
F.F
F ,
(UBC Equation 33-1)
Lower and upper bounds are also specified in the Uniform Building Code as followed:
FPX > 0.5 Ca I wp~c (Upper Bound)
Fpx < Ca I wP~c (Lower Bound)
WPX= fraction of building weight lumped with diaphragm at level x
-19-
B. Lateral Force Resisting System (LRFS)
1. Introduction to Shear Wall

As discussed above in section A.3, diaphragms are the horizontal elements of the
building, namely the roof and floors. The forces generated from seismic or wind activities
will be transmitted through the diaphragm to shear walls or frames acting as the vertical
elements of the lateral-force-resisting system of the structure. Shear walls can be
designed as vertical deep cantilever beams supported by the foundation. In the same
manner, diaphragms can be designed as horizontal beams transferring lateral loads to
the shear walls.
In wood construction, along with the diaphragms, frames, and foundation, shear walls
belong to the load path. Those elements must be adequately interconnected in order to
provide a continuous load path. Indeed, one main concern in seismic design is to ensure
this continuous path to foundation. Figure 4, Figure 5, and Figure 6 represent the
different phases of load transfer.
Compression Chord
Diaphragm
Tension Chord
Uniformly Distributed
SW 4 Load from Lateral Wall
Reaction from
Shearwall (unit shear)
Figure 4: Load Transfer from Lateral Wall to Horizontal Diaphragm

Figure 5: Load Transfer from Diaphragm to Shear Wall

-20-
Shear walls serve two main functions: strength and stiffness. In terms of strength, shear
walls must provide necessary lateral strength to resist the horizontal diaphragm forces
resulting from seismic activities. Their strength also ensure the transfer of those
horizontal forces to the next element in the load path (other shear walls, foundation ...)
In terms of stiffness, shear walls should provide enough lateral stiffness to prevent the
roof or floor above from excessive side-sway. Stiff enough, the shear walls should
prevent the framing members from racking off their respective supports.
Unit Shear from Diaphragm
Trnsion
Chord
Conpression Anchorage
Force
t
Reaction Foundation Reaction
Figure 6: Load Transfer from Shear Wall to Foundation

Typical shear walls consist of woodframe stud walls, dimension lumber framework,
connected together with nails, and covered with a structural sheathing material like
plywood (see section ll.B.5 for material details), insulations panels or finishing panels
such as drywall. The figure below (Figure 1) shows a typical woodframe shear wall
construction, presenting the four main part of such system: framing members, sheathing,
nails, and hold-downs. The latter provide the connection to the foundation to resist uplift
forces resulting from applied moments. Hold-downs connectors are required at the
corners of each shear wall to prevent the walls from overturning. Additionally, the length
of the shear wall is determined by the location of those hold-downs. The top plate is
used to connect the studs by end nails. Nailing plays an important role in shear wall
construction. The performance of the plywood shear walls is highly based on the ductility
and energy dissipative properties of nailed joints between the sheathing and framework.
-21-
Sheathing Edge Nails Interior Nails

Top Plate - -
(2 - 2 x's)
End Studs
(2- 2's
Intewior Stucn
(I - 2 x's)
Bottom Plate
(I - 2 x's)
Foundation _ ) __i j _j _j _
Mownt Anchor atddeiAnchor
Figure 7: Typical Woodframe Shear Wall Construction

(Robert N. Emerson)
2. Shear Wall Design

In wood construction, there exists two ways of designing shear walls, both following very
straight forward procedures: Segmented design and Perforated design.
a) Segmented Shear Wall Design (SSW)

This traditional method starts by dividing the walls into segments of full-height sheathing.
That is, it does not take into account segments above or below openings in walls (such
as windows or doors). The lengths of all the full-height segments are added and used to
resist shear forces. This design provides a conservative estimate of the total length of
wall resisting the applied forces since it does not take into account sections of walls that
can provide lateral resistance (i.e. yellow walls on Figure 8)
Figure 8: Segmented Shear Walls

The design shear capacity, V, is calculated by the equation below:

V = v Ibi
- 22 -
where V represents the total allowable shear capacity of wall (Ib), v is the
allowable shear capacity per unit length (lb/ft), and Ibi is the sum of the total
length of full-height sheathing segments.
Figure 9: SSW Determination of Shear Capacity Schematic

The shear capacity per unit length is obtained depending on the sheathing grade and
thickness as well as the nail size and spacing. Such relation can be found in UBC Table
23-11-1-1, entitled "Allowable Shear for Wood Structural Panel Shear Walls" (Appendix
p.83).Table 4 represents a shear wall schedule used by designers at a local structural
company (Design Plus Inc.) as well as by contractors during the construction process of
a structure. This schedule determines the shear capacity of unit length for different
configurations proposed by the company.
-23-
SHEATHING PANEL NAILING BLK'G TO SILL DBL PL ANCHOR BOLT OPT. EMB. SH EAR
ARK MATERIALS PERIMETER FIELD CONN DEPTH plf
1/2" CDX 10 d @ 10 d @ A 35 @24"o.c. 5/8" 0 @ 48" o.c.

A PLYWOOD 6" o.C. 12" o.c. or 16 d @ 6" o.c. 3/4" 0 @ 6-0" o.c. 9" 255
ST R. 1
/2" CDX 10d @ 10d@ A 35 @ 16"o.c. 5/8" 0 @32" o.c.
/tLYWOOD 4"o.c. 12"o.c. or 16 d @ 4"o.c. 3/4"0@48" o.c. 9" 382
rT R I
A/2" CDX 10d @ lAd @ 5/8" 0 @32" o.c.
3 LYWOOD 3" o.c. 12" o.c. A5@8"o.. 3/4" 0 @32" o.c. 9" 49
ITR. I I
/2" CDX 10d@ 10 5/8" 0@ 24" o.c.
LYWOOD A 35 @ 8" o.c. 3/4" 0 @32" o.c. 9" 652
_ TR. I
8d @ 8 d@ A 35 @ 24"o.c. 5/8" 0 @ 48" o.c.

3/8" CDX 9" 198
6" o.c. 12" o.c. or 16 d @ 6" o.c. 3/4" 0 @ 6'-0"o.c.
PLYWOOD
1/2" 0 @ 48" o.c
/8"GYPBD. 6 d cooler 6 d cor 16 d @8"o.c. 5/8" 0 Q 6'-0"o.c. 9" 30
OTH SIDES @ 7" o.c. @ 7' o.c.
ORT LAND 1 1/2- #11 nails or#1t 5/8" 0 @32" o.c.
'EMENT PLAST. go.staples 16 d @ 6"o.c. S/4"@48"o.. 9" 180
30TH SIDE
1 1/2 - #11 nails @ 6" A35 @32"o.c. 1/2" 0@48"o.c.
7/8" PORTLAND 5/8' 0 @ 6'-0" o.c. 9" 90
7 EMENT PLAST. o.C. or 16 d Q8"o.c.
Table 4: Shear Wall Schedule (Typical Zone 4 Construction)

(Courtesy of Design Plus Inc., 2006)
b) Perforated Shear Wall Design (PSW)

In this procedure, all sheathed portions of the shear wall are used to resist overturning
and lateral loads (green areas shown in Figure 10). The entire wall section acts as a
brace which will take into account the weakening caused by openings in the wall.
Moreover, in this method, only two hold-downs are required for each wall, one at each
end.
Figure 10: Perforated Shear Walls

-24-
The design procedure is very similar to the segmented shear wall design. Indeed, the
same table (UBC Table 23-11-1-1, Appendix p.83), to obtain the unit shear capacity, v, of
a given wall. However, a shear capacity adjustment Co must be tabulated to account for
the openings in walls; this adjustment factor relates to the percentage of full-height
sheathing in the wall and is always less than unity. This percent of full-height sheathing
is calculated by the equation below:
%= Ibi / L
where L is the total length of the wall, bi is the length of the full-height sheathing
segment.
A table in appendix p.83 presents the complete tabulated factors.
Finally, the total shear force is calculated in a similar manner to SSW design with:
V = Cov Ybi
Comparing both methods, it can be noted that the SSW yields a higher design shear
capacity than the PSW method, sometimes being too conservative. Moreover, the SSW
method requires hold-downs at the bottom corners of each full-height shear wall
segment to resist overturning. More hold-downs mean more labor needed to install
them causing the project to cost more.
It should also be noted that building codes (International Building Code and Uniform
Building Code) have imposed limits on the dimensions of wood-frame shear walls,
requiring a minimum wall length for any given wall height. This restriction rises from the
poor performance of tall and narrow shear walls during previous earthquakes. For a wall
of constant height, it has been showed that the stiffness grows exponentially as the wall
length increases. UBC Table 23-11-G (Appendix p.82) provides the requirements
depending on the location of the structure and the type of shear wall construction used.
3. Shear Wall Connectors

Designing shear wall does not permit many mistakes to occur for the engineer. In fact, if
carefully followed, the design can be smoothly and accurately made. However, during a
seismic activity, the behavior of timber structures is fully dependent on the behavior of its
joints. Wood usually performs linearly and elastically, where failure is brittle. Wood has a
low capability of dissipating energy, except if in compression with loads perpendicular to
its grain. The joints should then be more ductile than the timber parts themselves. The
- 25 -
detailing of the joints is therefore very important in seismic design and additionally, in the
construction phase. The quality and workmanship of those connections are crucial in the
success of shear wall behavior during seismic activities. The following section describes
different connectors and also presents some problems occurring on the job site.
a) Foundation Connectors
Hold-Downs
As previously discussed, hold-downs are the connectors used at each end of the shear
wall to prevent the wall from overturning. They are connected to the end stud or post of
the shear wall. Indeed, seismic activities shake the shear wall back and forth and
engender uplift forces on both ends of the shear wall. Hold-downs should transmit the
tensile force from the chord (Figure 6) to the foundation of the structure.
The grade and size of the lumber help determine how much uplift the framing member
can take and help design the connection of a hold-down device to the framing member.
Table 5 reflects on this property. Many companies selling those products provide tables
with allowable tension loads (Table 6).
Tension, Compression, lbs
lbs
Holdown Stud Douglas Fir- Catalog Sill or Sole Plate
Product Size Larch Grade Value Net 8 Ft.
Section Stud Hem DF-L
fir
No. 1 12,078 7,695

No. 2 10,288 7.209
HD 8A 4x 4 Construction 7,460 7,753 6.840 4,961 7,656

Standard 4,473 6.327
Stud L 5,905 5.965
Table 5: Effect of Lumber Type on a Given Hold-down Product

(Association of Bay Area Governments Technical Manual)
-26-
Alowale Tension Leads Allowable Tension Loads

Model DFISP(133/160) SPFIHF (133/10)
No. Wood Member Ttdknens Wood Member1Ticknss
1* 2 2% 3 3* 41 5% 1A 2 2A 3 3A 4M 5A
B H02A 1555 2055 2565 2775 2775 2760 1320 1740 2165 2570 2565 2550
B HOSA 1870 2485 3095 3705 4010 3980 1585 2110 2625 3130 3645 11) 3680
HD6A 2275 2980 3685 4405 5105 46 5510 1870 2470 3065 3680 4280 5 5020
B HOBA 3220 4350 $415 8465 7460 6 7910 12710 3655 4530 5480 8350 ~40 7330
HD10A 3945 5540 6935 8310 9540 235 9900 3275 4600 5745 7045 8160 95 9195
HD14A - - 11080 3 13380 - - - 9495 *950 12485
HD15 - - - - - 15305 - - - 143513810
Table 6: Allowable Tension Loads for Different Hold-downs Models

(Simpson Strong-Tie Company Inc., 2007)
Figure 11 shows a structural detail of a typical hold-down used in residential building

with flat foundation.
r4 x POST
SIMP. HD. 2 - J" 0 THRU BOLTS
HOLD DO 4N W/ WASHERS
1" MIN EGE ANCHOR BOLT WI PLATE

WASHER PER CODE
-_SIMP. SST B 20
ANCHOR
FDN. FTG. PER1

PLANS
Figure 11: Typical Hold-Down Detail used in Residential Structure (Zone 4)

(Courtesy of Design Plus Inc., 2006)
The correct placement of hold-downs is also very important on the job site. In fact,
during the Northridge 1994 Earthquake, many wood-frame buildings suffered a great
deal of structural damage. Many of these damages were partly due to quality control
deficiencies. A study showed that misplaced hold-downs caused reductions in strength
-27-
and absorbed energy of wood shear walls when undergoing monotonic and cyclic
loadings: about 42% of loss (Lebeda, Gupta, Rosowsky, Dolan, 2004).
Anchor Bolts
Anchor Bolts (sill plate bolts) are the second type of foundation connectors. These bolts
are evenly spaced along the bottom length of the shear wall and primarily resist sliding
action from lateral loads. They are embedded at a calculated depth in the foundation
concrete slab as shown in Figure 11.
b) Blockings
For shear walls in seismic zones, it is important to keep all wood panels fastened to
framing members. This is why blockings must be provided when two panels are not
supported between framing members, i.e. wall heights exceed available panel lengths. It
is important to keep all sheathing panel edges correctly fastened because if not, the
shear wall can lose up to two third of the strength when all edges are fastened.
Moreover, blockings are also installed when shear walls are designed with openings.
Blocks are installed between the studs on each side of the opening. Metal straps,
described in the next section, are nailed to the blocks to reinforce the openings. The
picture below was taken on a residential job site located in Los Angeles.
Figure 12: Blockings Located on Each Side of Door Openings

(Courtesy of Nina Mahjoub, 2007)
-28-
c) Metal Strap
As explained above, one use of metal straps are to help reinforce the openings in a
shear wall. They can also be used as hold-downs to connect the end studs or posts
below a floor. Figure 13 is a picture of metal straps used in a residential project, where
they are used to connect the studs from the second floor to the first floor. There must be
long enough to pass through the floor framing all the way to the end studs. A required
number of nails (given by the manufacturer) must be provided between the strap and the
stud to ensure the strong connection.
Figure 13: Metal Straps used as Hold-downs from Floor to Floor

d) Fasteners
The strength of those wood sheathed shear walls mostly comes from the strength of the
fasteners. Here, nails are the preferred fasteners. In fact, compared to bolts or screws,
they cost less to install and are easier to install thanks to nail guns.
Nails are preferred because they are more ductile, which result in a better absorption of
seismic energy. In fact, screws might offer a better holding power in tension, but they are
less ductile; this property is necessary to prevent brittle fracture to occur during cyclic
loading.
-29-
When seismic activity strikes, nails tend to want to pull through the structural panel
sheathing. Therefore, many requirements need to be followed during the construction
process. In fact, nails should be driven flush with the surface of the sheathing, avoiding
any overdriven nails. The overdriven nails reduce the shear wall strength by reducing the
thickness of the sheathing. Moreover, nails should not be installed too close to the edge
of sheathing. This should prevent prematurely failure due to earthquake motions. Nails
that are improperly installed have no value to the good performance of the sheathing
connection.
Common nails are favored to fasten sheathing because they have higher strength and
stiffness compared to box, cooler, or sinker nails; they have larger nail shank diameters
decreasing splitting of wood.
- 30 -
C. Lateral Analysis of a typicalresidential wood construction
Figure 14: Two Timber Apartments in High Seismic Region (Left- under construction,
Right- ready for use)
In order to demonstrate some design methodologies in practice, a virtual four-story

apartment has been taken in Los Angeles, California, region of high seismic area.
The objective of this section is to describe the seismic design of this structure. The main
structural material used in this design is wood (lumber and engineered wood).
The structural design comprises the calculation of the following:

- Design loads
- Wind loads and factors
- Seismic loads and factors
- North-South and East-West shear walls
- Posts, Hold-down and Strap Capacities
- Overturning Moments for N-S & E-W Walls
- Horizontal Diaphragms
- Anchorage to Concrete
- Shear Wall Deflection
-31-
1. Loads and Factors
a) Design Loads
Those design loads were taken from the design of a regular residential construction. The
dead loads are approximate and can vary depending on the material used. However,
they remain quite precise in the domain of wood design.
A.1 provides reference to the UBC and CBC Chapter 16, where different formulas and
graphs help define the wind and seismic factors.
1) STRUCTURAL DESIGN DATA:
A.) ROOF LOADS:

Roofing: Allow = 2.2 psf
5/8" Plywood Sheathing = 1.8
11-7/8" TJS Joists @ 16" = 3.3
5/8" Gyp. Board = 2.8
Insulation: 8" = 2.4
Roof Slope: Rip Framing = 2.5
Sprinklers Allow = 1.5
Miscellaneous Allow = 0.5
SUM OF D.L. = 10 Df
B.) TYPICAL FLOOR LOADS:

Floor covering: allow = 1.5 psf
1-1/2" Elastizell = 13.0
3/4" Plywood Sheathing = 2.3
14" TJS Joists @ 16" = 3.9
5/8" Gyp. Board = 2.8
Sprinklers Allow = 1.5
Miscellaneous Allow = 1.0
SUM OF D.L. = 260 psf
C.) 3-1/2" NW CONC. TOPG.: 4. psf

D.) 12" NW CONC. FLOOR: = 145.0 psf
E.) EXT. WALL DEAD LOAD: 13.00 psf
F.) INT. WALL DEAD LOAD: = 10.00 psf
D.) STAIR/EXIT LOADS: 250 psf
- 32 -
b) Wind Loads and Factors
P = Ce * Cq * qs * 1w
a.) WIND LOAD FACTORS:
EXPOSURE = B
IMPORTANCE FACTOR, 1w = 1.0
BASIC WIND LOAD =_ 70 mph
cs: STAGNATION PRESSURE = 12.6 PSF
Ca: PRESSURE COEFFICIENT
1. Primary frame system (method 1):

Roof (Flat) = 0.7
wall (windward) = 0.8
2. Elements & Components:

Parapets = 1.3
3. Elements & Components:

Wall Corners = 1.5
Roof Eaves (Slope < 2:12) = 2.3
Ce: PRESSURE COEFFICIENT
HEIGHT, h ft.
0-15 0.62
20 = 0.67
25 = 0.72
30 = 0.76
40 = 08
b.) VERTICAL DISTRIBUTION OF WIND PRESSURE

WHERE: P = Ce * Cq * qs * lw
PRESSURE COEFFICIENT, Cq
0.7 0.8 1.3 1.5 2.3
ELEV., h ft. WIND PRESURE, P psf
0-15 5.47 6.25 10.16 11.72 17.97

20 5.91 6.75 10.97 12.66 19.42
25 6.35 7.26 11.79 13.61 20.87
30 6.70 7.66 12.45 1 14.36 22.02
40 7.41 8.47 13.76 1 15.88 24.34
-33-
c) Seismic Loads and Factors
SEISMIC FACTORS:
IMPORTANCE FACTOR I = 1.00

REDUCTION, R (T. 16-N) 4.5
ZONE, Z = 0.4
SEISMIC SOURCE TYPE = B
SOIL TYPE = So
Na = 1.00
Nv = 1.11
Ca = 0.44 X Na = 0.440
Cv = 0.64 X Na = 0.710
STRUCTURE PERIOD:
Ct = 0.020
h= 45 ft
T= Ct * (hn)34= 0.347 sec.
BASE SHEAR:
V =_W (Cv I)/ (RT) = 0.454 *W

Vmax= W (2.5 Ca I) / R = 0.244 *W
Vmin= W (0.11 Ca I) = 0.048 *W
Vmin(z4) = W (0.8ZNvl) / R = 0.079 * W
GOVERNING BASE SHEAR = 0.285 *
CALCULATE BUILDING WEIGHT, W:
Disc. Length (ft) Width (ft) DL

RF 80 80 0.027 =172.8 k
4TH 80 80 0.041 262.4 k
3RD 80 80 1 0.041 = 262.4 k
2ND 80 80 0.041 262.4 k
SW , , 960 , k
EARTHOUAKE LOADS:
RELIABILITY/REDUNDANCY FACTOR:
p = 2 - 20/[rmax(AB 2)] 1.0

-o 2.8
Eh = BASE SHEAR, V
Eh = V = 0.285 X 960.0 = 273.6 k
Ev = VERTICAL COMPONENT = 0.00 k
E= pEh + Ev
E= 274 + 0 = 273.6 k
Em = no Eh = 766.1 k
-34-
VERTICAL DISTRIBUTION OF FORCES
BUILDING PERIOD:
T (s) = 0.347 0.7

USE: Ft = 0
V= 273.6 k
Ft= 0 k
LATERAL SHEAR FORCES:
Fx = (V - Ft) Wx hx / {SUM OF (Wi hi)}
LEVEL Wx hx Wx hx Fx
RF 172.8 41 7084.8 82.08
4TH 262.4 31 8134.4 94.24
3RD 262.4 21 5510.4 63.84
2ND 262.4 11 2886.4 33.44
TTL: 960 23616 273.6
LATERAL DIAPHRAGM FORCES:
Fpx = Wpx (Ft + {SUM OF Fi}) / {SUM OF Wi)
Fpx (min) = 0.5 Ca I Wpx
Fpx (max) = 1.0 Ca I Wpx
LEVEL Wpx Fpx XFpx EWpx

RF 172.8 82.1 82 172.8
4TH 262.4 94.2 176 435.2
3RD 262.4 63.8 240 697.6
2ND 262.4 33.4 274 960
TTL: 960
LEVEL (mm Fpx Fpx (max) REQ'D
RF 38.016 82.1 76.032 76.03

4TH 57.728 106 115.456 106.3
3RD 57.728 90.3 115.456 90.34
2ND 57.728 74.8 115.456 74.78
-35-
2. North-South and East-West Shear Walls
SEISMIC LOAD:
H = (TA) X (SEISMIC LOAD PER S.F.1,2 3, ,4,s) + H FROM LEVEL ABOVE
v =H I L
Here, only the north-south shear walls calculations will be shown. For all detailed
calculations, please see appendix from p.87.
.- -or214!-014'" 20- 2GI-"
146 0, 1V j-0 C2
Figure 15: Portion of Typical Floor Plan of Design Structure

(See Appendix p.84 for detailed and entire floor plan)
Using the seismic loads and factors found above, we can obtain the type of shear wall
needed to sustain seismic ground activity. Table 4 presents the different types of shear
wall available in this seismic region and will be used to define which shear wall to use.
For example, line 1 needs shear wall of type 1. This means that a sheathing material of
'A" CDX Plywood Str. 1 is needed, with a panel nailing of 10d @ 6" on center in the
perimeter and 10d @ 12" on center in the field. Blockings (A35) to sill double plate
connections are required at 24" on center. Anchor bolts options are 5/8" diameter bolts
at 48" on center or %" diameter bolts at 6" on center, with an embedment depth of 9".
This type of shear wall can take up to 255 PLF of shear.
- 36 -
SHEAR WALLS SUPPORTING THE ROOF LEVEL:
Net Wall Tributary Seismic Trib Sels. SHEAR v Shear

Wall Length L Area TA Load Per Load, HTA HER PanelType
(ft) (SF) SF' lbs. per Table 4
SWI 52 ROOF: 80*17.5 = 1400 9.161 12825 247 1 - 255 pIf

SW2 66.75 ROOF: 80*22.5 = 1800 9.161 16489 247 1 - 255 plf
SW3 66.75 ROOF: 80*22.5 = 1800 9.161 16489 247 1 - 255 pIf
SW4 52 ROOF: 80*17.5 = 1400 9.161 12825 247 1 - 255 plf
1 - SEISMIC LOAD PER S.F.= 82,080 lb. / ( 6,400 ft2 * 1.4)
SHEAR WALLS SUPPORTING THE 4TH LEVEL:
Net Wall Tributary Seismic Trib. Sels. Shear

Wall Length L Area TA Load Load, HTA SHEAR, Panel Type
(ft) (SF) Per SF1 lbs. per Table 4
SWI 52 FLOOR 80*17.5 = 1400 10.518 27550 530 4 - 652 plf

SW2 66.75 FLOOR 80*22.5 = 1800 10.518 35421 531 4 - 652 plf
SW3 66.75 FLOOR 80*22.5 1800 10.518 35421 531 4 - 652 plf
SW4 52 FLOOR 80*17.5 = 1400 10.518 27550 530 4 - 652 pif
SHEAR WALLS SUPPORTING THE 3RD

LEVEL:
Net Wall Tributary Seismic Trib. Sels. SHEAR v Shear

Wall Length L Area TA Load Load, HTA 'E, Panel Type
(ft) (SF) Per SF 1 lbs. per Table 4
SWI 56 FLOOR 80*17.5 = 1400 7.125 37525 670 2#2 - 764 pIf
SW2 66.75 FLOOR 80*22.5 = 1800 7.125 48246 723 2#2 - 764 plf
SW3 66.75 FLOOR 80*22.5 - 1800 7.125 48246 723 2#2 - 764 plf
SW4 56 FLOOR 80*17.5 = 1400 7.125 37525 670 2#2 - 764 plf
SHEAR WALLS SUPPORTING THE 2ND LEVEL:
Trib.
Seismic Sels. SHEA Shear
Wall Net Wall Tributary Area Load Load, R, v Panel Type
Length L (ft) TA (SF) Per SF1 HTA7 pif per Table 4
1 lbs.
SWI 62 FLOOR: 80* 17.5 = 1400 3.732 42750 690 2#2 - 764 pIf
SW2 68.75 FLOOR: 80*22.5 = 1800 3.732 54964 799 2#3 - 996 plf
SW3 68.75 FLOOR: 80*22.5 = 1800 3.732 54964 799 2#3 - 996 pif
SW4 62 FLOOR: 80*17.5 = 1400 3.732 42750 690 2#2 - 764 pIf
4 - SEISMIC LOAD PER S.F.= 33,440 lb. / ( 6,400 ft2* 1.4 )
- 37 -
3. Posts, Hold-down, and Strap Capacities
The tables below represent different allowable strap and hold-down tension loads. Those
tables will be used when calculating the necessary anchorage of the structure to the
foundation and to connect floor to floor shear walls.
Studs
Strap or LARR & 0.75
Hold-Down Capacity Posts LARR
MST136 1270 2 - 2X
MST148 2355 2 - 2X
MST160 3445 2 - 2X
MST60 4830 2 - 2X
MST72 6420 2-2X
HD2A 2775 2 - 2X 2081.25
HD5A 3705 2 - 2X 2778.75
HD6A 4405 2 - 2X 3303.75

HD8A 6465 2 - 2X 4848.75
HD10A 8310 2 - 2X 6232.5
HD14A 11080 1 - 4X 8310
Z4-T2 (28-8) 13162 2 - 4X
Z4-T2 (46-8) 17535 2 - 4X
Z4-T2 (85-8) 24355 2 - 4X
Z4-T2 (48-
9x) 31174 2 - 6X
Z4-T2 (68-
1lx) 46761 2-6X
Table 7: Design Hold-Down Capacities for Overturning Moment
END Studs & NAILS UNIT REDUCED NAIL LARR

Strap GAGUE NAILING Posts CAPACITY lb. CAPACITY Ib. Capacity
MST136 12 7 2 - 2X 118 88.5 619.5

MST148 12 13 2 - 2X 118 88.5 1150.5
MST160 12 19 2 - 2X 118 88.5 1681.5
MSTI72 12 25 2 - 2X 118 88.5 2212.5
MST60 10 23 2 - 2X 141 105.75 2432.25
Table 8: Design Allowable Strap and Hold-down Seismic Tension Loads for Floor to Floor
- 38 -
END Studs & NAILS UNIT REDUCED NAIL LARR

Strap GAGUE NAILING Posts CAPACITY lb. CAPACITY lb. Capacity
ST6224 16 14-16d 2 - 2X 135 101.25 1417.5
ST6236 14 20-16d 2 - 2X 136 102 2040
MSTI 36 12 18-1Od 2 - 2X 120 90 1620
MSTI 60 12 30-1Od 2 - 2X 120 90 2700
MSTI 72 12 32-1Od 2-2X 120 90 2880
MST 37 12 21-16d 2 - 2X 141 105.75 2220.75
MST 48 12 23-16d 2 - 2X 141 105.75 2432.25
MST 60 10 28-16d 2 - 2X 149 111.75 3129
Table 9: Design Allowable Strap and Hold-down Seismic Tension Loads for Drag Strut
- 39 -
4. Overturning Moments for N-S and E-W walls

In this section as well, only the case of the North-South shear walls between roof and
fourth level as well as the walls between fourth floor and third floor level will be
presented. For entire calculation information, please see Appendix from p.88.
CHECK OVERTURNNG MOMENT IN THE N-S DIRECTION:

WITH UNIFORM RESISTIVE LOADS)
(1) (2) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) 011) (12) (13) (14) (15)
_r X~ ;a 0 X 0 0 f>
M
00 ~ 0 0 c
M--
0 - - = *~ r, CD
WAL
ET EES PROF
AND 3) H>gt(t 8.
WL BETWEAND (t ..
SW1 5 12825 52 0 10,309 5 L 13DL: 1648 4121 1,320 UPLIFT 9,072
_____ ______Li*13
______ *17_ _ _ ____
WALL DL:
SW2 5 16489 66.75 0 10,326 5 LiOOF DL 883 2209 1,668 UPLIFT 8,626
Li*4*1 8___
.- ~ WALL DL:
SW3 5 16489 66.75 0 10,326 5 Li h10DL 1147 2867 1,549 UPLIFT 8,784
Li*13*17
WALL DL:
SW4 5 12825 52 0 10,309 5 Li h*10DL 1778 4445 1,262 UPLIFT 9,149
_____
____ _ ___ _____ Li*16*17 __ _ _ _ _____ _ _ _____
-40-
WALLS BETWEEN 4TH AND 3RD

LEVELS:
WALL DL: LO
Li*(9.5+h)*
S13 ROOF 0
(D U.. co - T
o i DL: O 90 47 0C
SW1 5 27550 52 Li*13*17 9890 4,711 1
FLOOR co
DL:Li*13*2
6
WALL DL:
Li*(9.5+h)*
SWO 5 o 13 ROOF 4
SW2 5 5 DL: U0 CR
Cv (0 Cv) Li*4*17 D 7 Cn 4
FLOOR (0
DL:Li*4*26
WALL DL:
Li*(9.5+h)*
10 ROOF 00
04 0 DL: CD 0 0a)
SW3 5 4 N_ 5 D j IC
Li*13*17 C
FLOOR
DL:Li*13*2
6
WALL DL:
UO
Li*(9.5+h)*
10 ROOF co
SW4 5 O 1 d siLi*16*17 L:5

617 o 0Co
FLOOR 00
DL:Li*16*2
6 _
5. Horizontal Diaphragms
SEISMIC UNIFORM LOAD, w pif w = W x Fpx
SEISMIC LOAD, H Ibs. H= wxL
TOTAL DIAPH. SHEAR, V Ibs. V= 0.5H (IF CANTILEVERED, V = H)
SHEAR, v pif v=V/W
TRANSVERSE MOMENT, M ft.-Ibs. M = wL 2 /8 (IF CANTILEVERED, M = wL 2 /2)
CHORD T, C Ibs. T=C=M/W
CHORD STRESS, ft psi ft = T / A2 .2x
NOTES FOR ALL TABLES:

1 - ROOF UNIT SEISMIC LOAD, Fpx = 76000/(6400*1.4)=8.48 psf
2 - 4TH FLOOR UNIT SEISMIC LOAD, Fpx =106300/(6400*1.4)=11.50 psf
3 - 3RD FLOOR UNIT SEISMIC LOAD, Fpx = 90340/(6400*1.4)=10.1 psf
3 - 2ND FLOOR UNIT SEISMIC LOAD, Fpx = 74780/(6400*1.4)=8.34 psf
4 - CANTILEVERED DIAPHRAGM: V = H, M = w L2 /2
- 41 -
HORIZONTAL DIAPHRAGM AT THE ROOF:

As 2.2X4 = 10.5 in2
Net Net Unit Seismic Total Sheathi Transv. Chord, Chord Chord
Diaph. Seismic Uniform Seismic Dip.SHEAR, g Tas.Cod hr hr
Load Diaph.
Lod Dip.
iph eimc
Load',
nfom
Load, w
Load, H
Ibs.
Diaph. SHA,
Shear, v pif
ng
Remark
Moment,
M ft.-lbs.
T, C
lbs.
Stress,
f psi Rema
rks
Dir. Length, Width, s
L ft. W ft. Fpx psf plf V lbs.
E-W 35 52 8.480 440.9 15434 7717 148 NOTE 7 67522 1299 123.67 NOTE
N-S 20 68 8.480 576.64 11533 5766 85 NOTE 7 28832 424 40.38 NOTE
HORIZONTAL DIAPHRAGM AT THE 4TH

FLOOR:
AS 2-2X6 = 16.5 in 2
Net Net Unit Seismic Seismic Total Sheathi Transv. Chord, Chord Chord
Load Diaph. Diaph. Seismic Uniform Load, H Diaph. SHEAR, ng Moment, T, C Stress, Rema
Dir. Length, Width, Load', Load, w lbs. Shear, v plf Remark M ft.-lbs. lbs. ft psi rks
L ft. W ft. Fpx psf plf V lbs. s
E-W 35 52 11.500 598.00 20930 10465 201 NOTE 8 91569 1761 106.72 NOTE
NOTE
N-S 20 68 11.500 782.00 15640 7820 115 NOTE 8 39100 575 34.85 6
DIAPHRAGM HORIZONTAL AT THE 3RD

FLOOR:
AS 2-2-X6 = 16.5 in 2
Load Diaph. Diaph. Seismic Uniform Load, H Diaph. SHEAR, ng Moment, T, C Stress, Rema
Dir. Length, Width, Load1 , Load, w lbs. Shear, v plf Remark M ft.-lbs. lbs. ft psi rks
NOTE
E-W 35 52 10.080 524.16 18346 9173 176 NOTE 8 80262 1544 93.55 N
NOTE
N-S 20 68 10.080 685.44 13709 6854 101 NOTE 8 34272 504 30.55 6
HORIZONTAL DIAPHRAGM AT THE 2ND

FLOOR: As 2.2x 6 16.5 in2
Load Diaph. Diaph. Seismic Uniform Load H Diaph. SHEAR, ng Moment, T, C Stress, Rema
Dir. Length, Width, Loadl, Load, w lbs' Shear, v plf Remark M ft.-lbs. lbs. ft psi rks
NOTE
E-W 35 52 8.340 433.68 15179 7589 146 NOTE 8 66407 1277 77.40 N
NOTE
N-S 20 68 8.340 567.12 11342 5671 83 NOTE 8 28356 417 25.27 6
-42-
6. Anchorage to Concrete
1
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE AT HOLDOWNS :
Fut (A449) = 120 ksi (1/4 to 1")

105 ksi (1-1/8 to 1-1/2")
Fut(A307) = 60 ksi
F'c = 4,000 ksi
0.65
x= 1
NOTE: DEFAULT BOLT TYPE IS A449
Anch. Bolt Plate Side

Diam. Length (in)
0.500 2
0.625 2.5
0.750 2.75
0.875 3
1.000 3.5
1.125 4
1.250 4.5
Table 10: Design Anchor Bolt Diameter with Corresponding Plate Side Length Used
- 1t--- D0OLT DIAM. (on) Z4-T2 BOLT DIAM. (in)
HD2A 0.625 28-8 1

HD5A 0.75 46-8 1
HD6A 0.875 85-8 1
HD8A 0.875 48-9x 1.125
HD10A 0.875 68-1Ox 1.25
HD14A 1
Table 11: Design Hold-Down HD & Z4-T2 Type with Corresponding Bolt Diameter
Notes:
1- BASED ON LABC '02: DIV. II, SEC. 1923
2- THE VALUES ARE FROM OVERTURNING CALCULATIONS FACTORED PER 1923.2.
3- WHERE: 1" < BOLT DIA. < 1-1/2"
4- Pu NEED NOT EXCEED ULTIMATE STRANGTH OF THE ROD PER LABC '02: 1633.2.12.
5-AT EDGE CONDITIONS, ONLY HALF OR A QUARTER OF CONCRETE FAILURE PLANE AREA IS USED, ACCORDINGLY.
-43-
SWE SWD SWC SWB SWA SW4 SW3 SW2 SW1 WALL LOCATION
Z4-T2 Z4-T2 Z4-T2 Z4-T2 Z4-T2 Z4-T2 Z4-T2

j5 HD8A, (28-8), (28-8), (28-8), HD8A, (85-8), (46-8), (46-8), (85-8), Hold-down
4849 13162 13162 13162 4849 lbs. 24355 17535 17535 24355 Type
lbs.
lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs.
. 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 L. & W. (in) Plate Size
3 0.875 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.875 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 DIAM, D (in) Bolt Information
0
9
9 9 9 EMBED
@ 9 9 9 9 12 9 LENTH, le (in)
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 No. EA. SIDE
0.601 0.785 0.785 0.785 0.601 0.785 0.785 0.785 0.785 Ab =No.X 2
4 Ach sde Ab in
eaD )
0 = (2 le + Concrete Failure
2 Ap
441 462 462 462 729 462 462 462 462 A 2 Plane Area, Ap
L_____ (in2
0
65 85 85 85 65 85 85 85 85 Pss = 0.9 Ab 3(k)
CD
73 76 76 76 120 76 76 76 76 pc 4 Pc (k)
riW#s. r
IU~d Ultimate Normal
11.28 26.19 26.19 26.19 11.28 32.99 32.91 32.91 34.03 PUTM L )EI.4 Tension from
Cn - ____ x OTM., PU-OTM (k)
9" Ultimate Normal 0
0
m Pu-ss = Pss x Tension from Bolt
% 84.42 110.27 110.27 110.27 84.42 110.27 110.27 110.27 110.27 1.3 Capacitity4,, pU-ss
us
Ch (k)
CD
fu Pu = Design Ultimate 0
72.52 76.01 76.01 76.01 84.42 76.01 76.01 76.01 76.01 Normal Tension, 0
MIN(Pss, *Pc) Pu(k3
I >Pu, >Pu, >Pu, >Pu' >Pu OK! >Pu, >Pu, >Pu, >Pu, Anchorage
.41 OK! OK! OK! OK! '__ OK! OK! OK! OK! Concrete 0
7. Shear Wall Deflection

The calculations below represent the check for deflection of the north-south shear walls
between the roof and fourth floor level. The entire calculation can be found upon request
at ninazadeha.yahoo.com. This check is essential to control the story drift and relies on
two main reasons: serviceability and limitation on maximum inelastic response of the
wall. The first reason controls the cracking in wall coverings and the second reason is
important in seismic design of wood buildings.
UBC Standard 23-2 is used to obtain the following deflections. It accounts for bending,
shear, nail deformation, and anchorage slip.
Total shear wall deflection, As = Ab + A, + An + Aa
Ewood 1.7.E+06 PSI

G 9.0.E+04 PSI
F'c 625 PSI
Effective Thickness, t = 0.535 in.
Estee, 2.9E+07 PSI
F'c = 625 PSI

= 270,000 (5/8)" = 175370 lb./in.
= 270,000 (3/4)i" = 175370 Ib./in.
Y17/8 = 270,000 (7/8)"' = 220992 lb./in.
y(1') = 270,000 (1)''s= 220992 lb./in.
Maximum Allowable Drift:

AM = 0.025 hs = 2.85 in.
Table 13: Various Proprieties for Deflection Calculations
-45 -
DEVICE MAX ALLOW MAX DEFL. @ NO. OF DIA. OF BOLTS,

CAP., (lb.) CAP., (in.) BOLTS (in.)
HD2A 2775 0.058 2 0.625

HD5A 3705 0.067 2 0.750
HD6A 4405 0.041 2 0.875
3 0.875
HD8A 6465 0.111
4 0.875
HD10A 8310 0.269
HD14A 11080 0.282 4 1.000
DEVICE MAX ALLOW CAP., MAX DEFL. @ NO. OF DIA. OF BOLTS,

(lb.) CAP., (in.) BOLTS (in.)
Z4-T2 (28-8) 13162 0.025 2 1.000

Z4-T2 (46-8) 17535 0.027 4 0.750
Z4-T2 (85-8) 24355 0.027 8 0.625
Z4-T2 (48-9X) 31174 0.032 1.000
Z4-T2 (68-1 Ox) 46761 0.036 6 1.000
Table 14: Hold-Downs Allowable Force & Deflection Capacities used for Design
SHEAR WALL INFORMATION
Wall Boundary S of ASD Stg. ASD

Wall Length Wall Member Shear Shear Shear Nall Ui Stg.
Area A Nails Load, Load, /Nail, Vn Deform., en T/1.4 Uplift, T
Name L=b Height,
h (ft.) lper
ft a.d v (lb.) (in.) (lb.) (lb.)
(ft.) h((in., (lb.Ift) (b/t l.
From From From N-S v / (NO. From

OTM OTM OTM 2-2X4 From SHEAR OF en3.27 OTM N-
N-S N-S N-S Plans WALLS NAILS) (Vn/769) S walls
walls walls walls
WALLS BETWEEN ROOF AND 4TH FLOOR:

SWI 5 9.50 10.5 2 247 345 173 0.0075 1,320 1,848
SW2 5 9.50 10.5 2 247 346 173 0.0075 1,668 2,335
SW3 5 9.50 10.5 2 247 346 173 0.0075 1,549 2,169
SW4 5 9.50 10.5 2 247 345 173 0.0075 1,262 1,766
Table 15: Shear Walls Information used for Design
-46-
Wall Device Device Max Defl. # of Dia. Of

Name NO. Device Type Max. Allow. @ Cap. Bolts bolts, (in.)
Cap., (lb.) (in.)
From ONE
OTM SIDE
N-S ONLY
walls 2 HD2A,_2__1 277_ _ ._8 2 _ .62
SWI 2 HD2A, 2081 2775 0.058 2 0.625

lbs. 2
SW2 2 HD2A, 2081 2775 0.058 2 0.625

lbs.I
2 0.625
lbs.I2081
SW3 2 HD2A, 2775 0.058
SW4 2 HD2A, 2081 2775 0.058 2 0.625

lbs.
Table 16: Design Tie-Down Device Properties
Nae Device Elong. (in) Shrink Crush Slip da, (in.)
From Astraps TLO/AOE 0.02 IF Astraps = en OR

N-M OR Ahd = device*T* STJI > No fc<.73F'c 0.04 Ahd=No. of Y(DISPL.)
walls (Amax) /MAX LOAD WHERE fc = TIA device*T/Y+1/32
SWI 0.0386 0.000 0.020 0.0451 0.104
SW2 0.0488 0.000 0.020 0.0488 0.118
SW3 0.0453 0.000 0.020 0.0475 0.113
SW4 0.0369 0.000 0.020 0.0445 0.101
Table 17: Design Device Elongation & Assembly Displacement
-47-
Nall Sum of
Wall Cantilevered Sheathing Splitting Tiedown Deflection. Max. Inter-
Name Action Deformation or Assembly 25% Story Drift
Bending _INCR.)
From
OTM 8vh 3/EAb vh/Gt 0.75hen hda/b 1.25As AM = 0.7RAs
N-S
walls
SWI 0.0265 0.0681 0.0534 0.1971 0.4314 1.3590
SW2 0.0266 0.0682 0.0537 0.2233 0.4648 1.4640
SW3 0.0266 0.0682 0.0537 0.2144 0.4536 1.4288
SW4 0.0265 0.0681 0.0534 0.1927 0.4259 1.3416
Table 18: Design Shear Wall Deflections
This section resumes the sample of calculations needed to design for lateral loads on a
wooden four-story residential apartment located in a high seismic area.
Further calculations can be performed to design for gravity loads. For this phase of
design, new products have entered the market, enabling engineers and architects to
have more freedom and use stronger wood materials. Chapter I provides a description
of the new engineered wood products available.
-48 -
New Technology of Wood Products
11. New Technology of Wood Products
A. Introduction to Wood
Woodframe construction is the predominant method of building homes and apartments

in the United States. It is also being used, more and more often, in commercial and
industrial buildings. Indeed, woodframe buildings are economical and offer design
flexibility as well as strength. Pound for pound, wood is stronger than steel because it
has a more favorable strength to weight ratio. Choosing wood as a construction material
can also be recognized for its environmental attributes. Wood is more energy efficient
building product with an R-rating about four hundred times greater than steel and about
eight times greater than concrete. It is recyclable, biodegradable, and sustainable over
the long term. According to a 1987 study, wood products make up about forty-seven of
all industrial raw materials manufactured in the Unites States. Yet, it only consumes four
percent of the energy needed to manufacture the total industrial raw materials.
Douglas Fir Larch wood products are commonly used in residential and commercial
structures. These structural lumbers are not engineered, but are graded for their
performance in load bearing or load-carrying applications.
Figure 16: WWPA "Western Lumber Grading Rules" Grade Stamp

(Accredited Lumber Rules-writing &Grading Agency of the American Lumber Standard
Committee, Inc.)
Douglas Fir is dimensionally stable and recognized for its superior strength-to-ratio
weight ratio. Its high specific gravity provides excellent nail and plate holding ability. The
figure below (Figure 17) shows a typical shear wall using Douglas-Fir Larch wood.
These wood products are commonly found in home retail stores. A table can be found in
-49-
Appendix p.94, summarizing the different spans for floors and ceiling joist that can be
provided with this type of wood.
Figure 17: Typical Wood Douglas-Fir Larch Type

Wood is increasingly being put off-limits to harvesting. Higher quality trees are being
used, which ultimately restricts the availability of high-quality lumber. It can also be noted
that, even though sawn lumber is manufactured in a large number of sizes and grades,
the sectional dimensions and lengths of these members are limited by the size of the
trees available. Thus, when the loads become large or the span becomes longer, the
use of sawn lumber becomes unfeasible. This is where engineered wood products
become of critical and practical use in the construction market. Through technology,
smaller, faster growing, lower quality trees are engineered to become excellent wood
products. These products have greatly expanded building options and methods in all
forms of residential and commercial construction.
- 50 -
B. New Engineered Wood Products
Structural engineered wood products are manufactured by bonding together wood fibers,
such as wood strands or veneers, to produce larger composite materials. Through this
manufacturing process, the wood product ends up being much more consistently reliable
than lumber and can also be identified as stiffer and stronger. During the process of
making engineered wood, the product is homogenized, eliminating weak points. This
process also utilizes what would have been wood waste otherwise. In other words, those
products become more environmentally friendly, stronger, cost-effective and easy to
use. Thomas Williamson, executive vice president of Engineered Wood Systems, APA's
nonprofit corporation explained that these "engineered wood products have set new
performance standards by minimizing both resource and manufacturing defects while
enhancing structural integrity."
The bonding process is mainly done through the use of adhesives. Those resins are
used under heat and pressure to bind the wood materials (veneer, strands, and boards)
and form the final engineered product. The most common binder resin system contains
phenol-formaldehyde, urea-formaldehyde, melamine-formaldehyde, and isocyanate. The
different types of resins used depend on their suitability in binding their respective
products. For example, if cost is taken into account, urea-formaldehyde (UF) is used for
particleboard (mostly utilized for the manufacture of furniture or cabinets). If durability is
of importance, melamine-formaldehyde resins can be implemented, since they are
known for the excellent durability, but are quite expensive. Isocyanate is usually the
resin employed in the manufacture of OSB, Oriented Strand Boards (which will be
discussed later on in this chapter).
Research is being done to exploit other types of adhesives that could deliver better
products: lower costs, more stable, and reduction in formaldehyde's emissions. Those
emissions can become a problem, causing bad health effects. Difficulty in breathing can
happen if exposed to elevated levels (above 0.1 parts per million). In buildings with
significant amounts of new pressed wood products, levels can be greater than 0.3 parts
per million. These researches have been able to reveal that for example, soybean-based
adhesive could be an option.
-51-
1. Glued Laminated Timber (Glulam)
Glulam production in North America reached in 2000 more than 350 million board feet
(board feet being the basic unit of lumber measurement equaling 12 x 12 x 1 inches).
Glulam members are stress-rated engineered wood products fabricated from relatively
thin laminations (a nominal of one and two inches) of wood. Those laminations are
bonded together with strong, waterproof adhesives (described in the previous
paragraphs). These "lams" can be end-jointed and glued together to produce any size
and length members.
Figure 18: Glulam Beam
Glued Laminated Lumber offers architects and designers a very flexible wood product.
Indeed, it can be shaped into many different forms from straight beams to complex
curved members. Glulam products have increased design capabilities improving product
performance while maintaining a competitive cost.
The higher strength of Glulam also allows for longer clear spans than sawn lumber. They
also demonstrate minimal shrinkage and warping since they are fabricated from kiln-
dried lumber. Therefore, if we use Glulam beams for our floor system, we would end up
with minimal nail popping and a more leveled floor surface.
-52-
Figure 19: Floor Glulam Beams
Glulam offers many advantages in the construction phase of a project. Indeed, wood-to-
wood connections can be made with typical on-site construction equipment. Other wood
members can also be easily attached to the Glulam beams without nailing necessary.
Additionally, intermediate supports occur less in this system because of the higher
strength and stiffness of those beams.
Another beneficial aspect of Glulam wood products is the smart repartition of

laminations. Indeed, high quality laminations are located in parts of the cross section that
suffers the highest stresses. If we take the example of a typical Glulam, the location of
maximum bending stresses under classic loading is on the outer faces of the beam, near
the top and bottom of the beam (see Figure 20). Thus, wood of superior quality is placed
in those outer tension and compression zones while lower quality wood is placed near
the neutral axis where stresses are lower. Moreover, research has shown that even
though the maximum bending compressive and tensile stresses are equal, the tension
zone is more critical and thus additional strength requirements are used for those outer
laminations.
Glulam Beam Bending Beam

Stress X-Section
Figure 20: Distribution of Different Laminations in Glulam beams
-53-
Despite being considered a composite member (the Glulam comprises different modulus
of elasticity throughout its section), a designer can treat the member as a homogeneous
material with a rectangular cross section. Transformed sections have been determined
and design values have been established accordingly. Therefore, a Glulam design is
being carried out the same way as the design of a regular sawn lumber. Table 19
(Reference #) shows a conversion between typical sawn lumber members to their
appropriate Glulam members. The complete table with detailed specifications can be
found in Appendix p.95)
DOUGLAS FIR - LARCH GLUED LAMINATED TIMBER CONVERSION TABLES

Ory Service Condtons Glulam Design Values: Ft, psi E,, psi
Simple Spam Uniformly Loaded I 400 1800,000
DOUGLAS FIR - LARCH LUMBER & TIMBER CONVERSIONS
1997 NDS Lumber & Timber Design Values: Fh, psi E, psi
Dkiensicn Lumber. 2 to 4 inches thick and Select Structura 1,500 1,900,000
5 inches and ider No. 1: 1000 1,700,000
Timbers -Beams & Stwigers, haVing a least Select Siructural: 1,600 1,600,000
dimension of 5 inches or greatwr No. 1: 1,350 1,00,000
DOUGLAS FIR - LARCH GLULAM SECTIONS, wdth (in) x depth (in.)
LUMBER & TIMBER ROOF BEAMS FLOOR BEAMS
SECTIONS SNOW LOAD Load airaboi FU.ora .16 Lead OatMi, Fa*6*r =lee
NOMINAL SIZE SELECT SELECT
mianees x depwt STRUCTURAL No. 1 STRUCTURAL No. 1
DIMENSION LUMBER
3x8 3 118x 6 31INx0 31/8 x 7 112 3 N x 7112
3x 10 3 118 x 7 112 3 N x86 318 X9 3tx9
3x 12 3 118 x 9 3 118 x 7 12 3 118 x 12 3 118 x 10 112
3x 14 3 118 x 9 3118 x 7 112 3 18 x 13 112 3 118 x 13 112
4x6 3 US x 6 3 118 X6 3 118 x 6 3 118 x 6
4x8 3 118 x 7 112 3 /8 x 6 3 18 x 9 3118 x 7 12
4x 10 3 118 x 9 3 18 x 7 112 3 18 x 10112 3 118 x 10 112
4 x 12 3 118 x 10 112 3 18x 9 3 118 x 12 3 118 x 12
4 x 14 3 118 x 12 3 IN x 10 1/2 3118 x 15 3 Ifx 15
4 x 16 3 18 x 13112 3 18 x 10 112 3 1N x 16 112 3 118 x 16 112
MULTIPLE PIECE LUMBER
[212 x 6 3118 x 6 3 V8 x 6 3118 x 6 3118 x6
212x8 3 118 7112 31/0 x 31I8x71W 3 118 x 7112
[ 2 x 10 3 118 x 9 3118 x7 112 31N x 10 112 3118 x9
[2x2x12 3118 x 9 3118 x 712 3118 x12 3 I8x 12
[312x8 5118 x 7112 5118 x 7 2 518 x 7112 5 IN x 7 112
(3 2 x 10 5118 x 7 1r2 5 118 x 7 112 5118 x 10 112 5118 X9
2 x 12 5
6118x9 5118 x712 5118 x12 5 1M x 12
4 1111
X12 518
Il 2 1/8 X9 51/1 I1 2
[412 x 10 5 I8 X9 5118 x 7 12 511 x10 12 5118 x10112
(412x12 5 118 x 10112 5 118 X9 5 1N x 13 112 5118x12
TIMBERS
6X8 5118x7112 5118 x 712 5118 X 71W 5 18 x 7112
6* 10 518 X9 518 x 7 112 5 IN x 10 112 5118 x 10 112
6 X 12 5118 x 10 112 518X9 5118 x12 5118x12
6x 14 51/8 x 12 5 Us110112
x 51N x 13 I2 5 18 x 13112
6 X 16 5118 x 13112 51 x 12 518 x 16112 5118 x16112
6* 18 5118 X 15 5118 x 13112 5118 x 18 5 1N x 18
6 x 20 5118 x 18 5 I x 16112 518 X 1912 5118 x 19112
8 X 10 6 314 x 9 6 314 x9 6 3/4 x 10 2 6 314 x 10 112
8x 12 6 314 x 10 112 6314 x 10 112 6 314 x12 6314x12
8 x 14 6 34 x 12 6 314 x 12 6 314 x 13 1/2 6 314 x 13112
8* 16 6 34 x 13112 6 314 x 13112 6 314 x 16 V2 6 314 x 16112
8 X 18 63/4 x 16112 6 314 x 15 6 314 x 18 634 x 18
8 x 20 6 34x 18 6 314 x 16112 6 314 x 1912 6 314 x 1112
8 x 22 634 x 19 112 6 3/4 x 18 6 314 x 2212 6 314 x 22112
Table 19: Glued Laminated Timber Conversion Table

(American Institute of Timber Construction)
- 54-
2. Fiber Reinforced Glued Laminated
Fiber Reinforced Polymers (FRP's) are integrated into conventional Glulam beams to
enhance the structural performance of those products to ultimately create greater market
growth. High-strength fiber reinforced polymers are adhesively bonded to Glulam beams
increasing the stiffness and bending strength of the final product (see Table 20). Those
panels or layers of FRP's are positioned in the zone where tensile stresses occur (see
Figure 21). Indeed, those layers have high tensile strength and stiffness compared to
the regular wood in the member. Therefore, higher stresses can develop in the tension
of the beam before failure occurs. The bending strength is increased because the FRP
panels do not contain strength-reducing characteristics, such as knots and slope of
grains along with end joints. A small percentage of FRP (about one percent) added to a
Glulam beam is only needed to obtain stronger member.
Typical FRP Glulam Beam Typical Douglas Fir Beam
Tensile Strength 143,000 psi 22,400 psi
Modulus of Elasticity 10,500,000 psi 1,950,000 psi
Table 20: Comparison of Typical Mechanical Properties
Thin layer of FRP

reinforcement
Figure 21: Reinforced Glulam Cross Section
-55-
Several advantages make the usage of this product reliable. For example, the FRP
Glulam beam is smaller than an equivalent conventional member, with about one width
narrower and several laminations shallower than the conventional beam carrying the
same load. This detail introduces two advantages: lower cost and sustainability.
Focusing on the latter, FRP Glulam can be considered a "green" material even though
they have not yet being recognized by sustainable organization such as LEED
(Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design). The amount of wood resource
needed for a given project is significantly reduced when FRP beams are used. Table 21
shows a comparison of a FRP beam and equivalent conventional beam based on their
size, weight, and cost (Gilham, Williamson, 2007).
Beam Size Weight Cost
Conventional Beam #1 14" 4 x 90 33,040 lb $15,430
FRP Beam #1 103 4 x 75 20,770 lb $12,665
Conventional Beam #2 12 1 4x 701/2 16,475 lb $7,835
31 11,690 lb $7,130
FRP Beam #2 10 4x 57
Table 21: Size, Weight, & Cost Comparison of FRP Beams with Equivalent Wood Beam
Finally, it can be noted that the design of such beam relates to the design of a reinforced
concrete beam. Indeed, the amount of FRP reinforcement in a Glulam beam can be
increased or decreased depending on the strength and stiffness requirements for the
beam. This is analogue to the design of a reinforced concrete beam where we use steel
rebars to reinforce the capacity of a concrete beam.
- 56 -
3. Structural Composite Lumber
Structural Composite Lumber (SCL) is a family of reconstituted lumber products, offering

particularly uniform strength and stiffness properties as well as being almost warp and
split free. SCL is fabricated by layering dried wood veneers or strands with adhesives
into blocks of material, each layer oriented in the same direction. Because different
species can be used interchangeably, the veneering and gluing process of large timbers
can therefore be made from a combination of fast-growing species and from relatively
small trees. The three types of commercially available structural composite lumber are
laminated veneer lumber (LVL), parallel-strand lumber (PSL), and oriented-strand
lumber (OSL).
a) Laminated Veneer Lumber (LVL)

LVL is fabricated from layers of veneers with their grains all parallel to the long axis of
the stock for maximum strength. LVL is commonly used for header, beam, hip, and
valley rafter elements. The figure below (Figure 22) shows a sample of Laminated
Veneer Lumber.
Figure 22: Sample of Laminated Veneer Lumbers (LVL)

(Selkirk Truss Limited, 2001)
One advantage of this product is its higher strength compared to lumber. Indeed, LVL
has about twice the bending strength of an equivalent lumber beam. It can also be noted
- 57 -
that the strength of this wood product is very predictable. LVL is also used to make I-joist
flanges as will be described in the next section.
b) Parallel Strand Lumber (PSL)

Similar to LVL, Parallel Strand Lumber starts as a pile of veneers. One difference is that
PSL uses lower grade trees infused with defects. PSL has the same usage as LVL, such
as beam or header, but is also utilized as load bearing columns.
Figure 23: Parallel Strand Lumber Sample

(TRADA, 2006)
Another factor favoring the use of this product is its resistance to moisture-induced
warpage, much better than with LVL. If the structural elements will be exposed to
elevated moisture conditions during construction, PSL can be safely used. In fact, its
composition allows a preservative treatment to penetrate the core of the product to
provide protection from termites and other wet weather defects.
c) Oriented Strand Lumber (OSL)

In the case of Oriented Strand Lumber, the strands used in its fabrication are oriented,
formed into large mat, and finally pressed. Their usage is primarily oriented towards
studs' components.
Many companies offer their own OSL products. For example, a Canadian company,
Ainsworth introduces a new application for its 0.8E Durastrand OSL Rimboard (Figure
24), which can sustain more flexural loads than conventional lumber products of the
-58-
same size. They advertise their product as a good structural decision for spanning
openings, eliminating the need to install a separate structural component. They believe
that their product makes a viable and cost-effective alternative for short-span beams and
headers. This information can be verified on their website: http://www.ainsworth.ca/
Figure 24: OSL Rimboard

(Ainsworth Company, 2007)
-59-
4. Wood I-joists
I-Joists are engineered wood products principally designed for long span applications in
floor systems as well as for long roof rafters. They are composed of two horizontal
components called flanges and vertical components called a web. Figure 25 provides a
figurative description of the different components of a typical I-joist as well as some
sample products of different sizes.
Figure 25: I-Joist Configuration & Sample Products

(American Forest &Paper Association, 2006)
The I-shape offers advantages such as a better engineering configuration. In fact, this
shape allows the most efficient usage of wood necessary to carry design loads. Most of
a beam's stress is along the top and bottom edges. Therefore, the center of the beam
can be removed since it is redundant. This produces large weight and material savings
without reducing the overall strength of the beam. It is said that I-joists require up to fifty
percent less wood material to make than a conventional timber beam of same strength.
Flanges are made from end-joined, solid sawn lumber or structural composite lumber.
Strong fiber are concentrated in those flanges where the stress in maximum. Webs
typically are made of Oriented Strand Board or Plywood. This section is considered
strong and thin, but enough to be able to transfer loads to the flanges.
-60-
As previously mentioned, I-joists allows long span to be served. Indeed, these products
can extent up to sixty feet, distances that regular sawn lumber cannot span. Because of
this characteristic, a single continuous joist can be used to span the entire width of a
house, which is very efficient during construction. Figure 14 presents a basement floor
assembly using I-joists of long spans.
Figure 26: I-Joists in Basement Floor Assembly

(American Forest & Paper Association, 2006)
The manufacture of those products goes through many quality control procedures,
making sure that the web-to-flange joint is properly shaped and fixed. I-Joists endure
many physical and mechanical property tests to ensure that the products remain within
specifications. Examples of such tests are shear and tensile strength tests. Other tests
are made to ensure serviceability. Performance requirements are thus carried out for
code acceptance.
-61-
5. Structural Wood Panels
Structural wood panels are among the engineered wood products mostly used in today's
construction market. Two main types of panels are plywood and Oriented Strand Board
(OSB).
a) Structural Plywood
Plywood consists of thin layers of veneer, with the grain of adjacent layers at right angles
to maximize strength and stability. Indeed, considerable dimensional stability across the
width of the plywood is generated from the alternation of the grain direction in adjacent
plies. Figure 27 presents a schematic cross section of structural plywood, with the
veneer plies.
Figure 27: Schematic Structural Plywood

(Eco-Link, 2001)
Plywood must have a minimum number of plies and layers for a specific thickness range.
For example, a 15/32 inch Structural 1 Plywood must have at least four plies and three
layers.
The laminated construction provides the almost uniform distribution of defects ultimately
reducing splitting, especially when compared to regular solid wood. However, plywood is
produced from high quality veneer and could be expensive compared to the Oriented
Strand Board, briefly described below. Structural plywood is mainly used in siding and
sheathing for shear wall construction.
b) Oriented Strand Board (OSB)

Oriented Strand Board is believed to become the most common structural sheathing in
North America. The key difference with the structural plywood is the composition of the
- 62 -
layers. In fact, OSB is manufactured from waterproof heat-cured resins and with layers
of thin, rectangular strands arranged in cross-oriented layers. It is produced in huge,
continuous mats, providing a solid panel product with consistent quality with no laps.
Additionally, each layer of strands is alternately placed perpendicular to the prior layer
providing bending supports in two directions.
OSB can use lower quality fiber than structural plywood and can therefore become much
cheaper and is winning over the market of plywood. However, it should be noted that
OSB expands more than plywood when it is exposed to moisture. Fasteners can start
fracturing the surface of the sheathing because of wetting and expansion. Figure 28
shows typical OSB samples while Figure 29 presents the sheathing of a residential
building with OSB.
Figure 28: Oriented Strand Board Samples

(Holz Bongartz)
Figure 29: OSB Sheathing of Residential Construction

(APA, 2001)
- 63 -
6. Summary
The graph and figure in this section present information reinforcing the growth of
engineered wood products in the residential and commercial construction. New
technologies have emerged utilizing traditionally less desirable species, smaller trees,
and lower quality trees. However, they have been able to produce excellent wood
products. Engineered wood products (EWP) offer higher yields from the log. A more
sustainable environment can be reached in this much polluted industry. In fact, with
EWP, less waste of material is achieved and lower manufacturing cost is obtained.
Figure 30: Final Product Yield from Log for Different EWP's
(TJ Weyco, 2002)
-64-
1100 %
Development Expansion Rapid Growth Maturity Decline
Time Horizon
Figure 31: Engineered Wood Products Life Cycle

(Schuler ,2000)
As shown in Figure 31, EWPs continue to evolve and capture market share from
conventional wood materials. Those EWPs are also being developed more rapidly in
response to changing needs in the market. For example, lumber is losing appeal
because its quality and performance decreases as younger and smaller trees are utilized.
The costs are increasing and the consumers are becoming more demanding.
Comparing these products to steel and concrete, it is evident that engineered wood
products help reduce the energy consumption of the structure. Indeed, wood is known to
be the best insulator of all structural building materials; millions of small air cells are
trapped within its cellular structure. Taking the example of steel, the material provides
about ten times less thermal conductivity than timber, often requiring additional
insulation to compensate.
Engineered wood products enhance nature's product, by building on the inherent cellular
structure and engineering out natural flaws and weaknesses from the raw material.
- 65 -
Literature Review of Innovative Damping Systems
III.Literature Review of Innovative Damping Systems
This chapter summarizes the different techniques and researches that have been started
in the area of providing supplemental damping in wood structures. It also suggests
different topics for future research.
In fact, low-rise woodframe structures experience many structural and non-structural

damages during an earthquake. For example, in Los Angeles County, about 60,000
woodframe residences were significantly damaged by the 1994 Northridge earthquake
(Holmes and Somers, 1995). The different building codes available for wood structure
design carefully address life safety issues. However, new design technologies must be
adopted to account for these structural damages (the cost of the damage to woodframe
structures was estimated at over twenty billion dollars after the Northridge earthquake;
this amount corresponds to about half the total estimated loss from the earthquake
(CUREE, 1999)).
The major trend of all those papers is the true need for additional and more precise
research on innovative systems and materials for earthquake-resistant wood structures.
Many researches and development have been made in improving mainly the damping
systems of steel, concrete, and masonry structures. Those innovative applications
should now be applied to the wood framework.
During the past few years, analytical investigations have been made on the effect of
applying new sorts of damping in wood structures. Those experiments have proven that
these new damping systems absorbed an important quantity of the seismic input energy.
Additionally, there is an ongoing project where a full-scale townhouse, filled with visco-
elastic and hysteretic dampers in walls, has just been tested a few months ago. The
results of this experiment are still being analyzed.
-66-
A. Passive energy dissipationsystem

Supplemental Damping in Wood-frame Structures (Dinehart, David)
Several researches have concluded that the stiffness of a shear wall decreases linearly
with continuous cycling of same amplitude. This stiffness is not stabilized entailing that
the durability of the wall continues to decrease. Moreover, it was found that the energy
dissipation capacity of the shear wall decreases by approximately twenty percent
between the first and second cyclic loading.
Thus, the paper aims toward the urgent need for new and emerging technologies
focusing on passive energy dissipation devices in addition to the usage of new materials
to obtain an optimum earthquake-resistant wood structure. According to the author,
those systems will provide a constant source of energy dissipation that will remain
steady during the different cyclic loadings.
There has been mostly analytical research on the application of passive energy
dissipation devices in wood-frame walls: slotted friction devices in the corners of panels
and fluid damper on one diagonal brace. Nevertheless, those investigations have only
been analytical; and although they show an effective increase in dissipation of a large
seismic input energy, the result should be confirmed with some experimental research to
demonstrate the effects of construction tolerances, wall materials, and other
technicalities.
Additionally, the author describes some experimental analysis, such as the testing of a
hysteretic damper and viscoelastic dampers installed in walls. These experiments have
shown that these dampers provide a constant source of energy dissipation, without
impacting the design construction or dimensions of a conventional wall. Finally, the
paper presents alternatives applications of viscoelastic material, where viscoelastic
polymers could be directly applied to wood, or with VE material introduced between the
sheathing and the stud wall. The results show that like similar previous damped wall
tests, these materials provide a constant source of energy dissipation. The figure below
(Figure 32) presents the comparison between a conventional shear wall and two shear
walls with viscoelastic dampers installed via a diagonal bracing and on sheathing-to-stud
- 67 -
connections. It is clear that those dampers allow the shear wall less displacement after
seismic activities, dissipating more energy than a conventional shear wall.
4000
(a) Cyv.k Nunbcr (@b = 0-1 ME)
E Ctventia nil D
Diagonal 0 Showthing-io-mud
Figure 32: Energy dissipation at constant amplitude cycling amplitude

(Dinehart and Shenton, 1998)
The author also describes the implementation of viscoelasticity polymers directly to

wood (Figure 33). Again, results show that this layer of VE polymers improves the
energy dissipation capacity of conventional connection by more than thirty percent
(Figure 34).
Figure 33: Schematic of VE Material Connection Test Specimen

(David W. Dinehart)
- 68 -
300
2500 -
1000
S500
0
2 3 4
Cycle Number ( D 0.71 in =FME)
0 COUvernIonal U VE-sheet
Figure 34: Comparison of Energy Dissipation of Conventional and VE-sheet Shear Walls
(David W. Dinehart)
It is true that those innovative systems improve the seismic performance of low-rise
wood buildings. Nevertheless, those supplemental damping seems to be costly,
especially if active systems are examined. Passive dampers remain more economical,
but still need to provide a system that can be implemented by low level labor and does
not require intensive operation. Therefore, it is recommended that future researches also
provide a life-cycle cost analysis of those supplemental damping system.
-69-
B. From Research to Practice
1. NEESWood Project
There exists an international project intended to design a better earthquake-resistant
woodframe building by installing seismic shock absorbers inside walls, NEESWood
project (Network Earthquake Engineering Simulation). The objective of this project is to
develop a performance based seismic design for mid-rise construction, offering an
economic and sustainable option to seismic region developments.
In fact, the height of woodframe construction is currently limited to approximately four

stories. This is due to many uncertainties in understanding the dynamic response of
taller woodframe construction, non-structural limitations, and potential damage
considerations for non-structural finishes. Another area of weakness is encountered
when designing wood structure: the elements are analyzed independently without
considering the influence of their stiffness and strength on other structural components.
The NEESWood project presented the test of a full-scale, 1800-square-foot townhouse

while undergoing seismic testing on a shake table in November 2006. The townhouse
was mounted with fluid-filled shock absorbers installed throughout certain walls of the
house. Figure 35 is a picture of Professor Michael Symans of Rensselaer University
(left) and Andre Filiatrault of the University of Buffalo next to one of the dampers
installed in the walls of the NEESWood townhouse. Those professors, along with other
universities affiliated professors, supervised the damping tests at the University of
Buffalo's Structural Engineering and Earthquake Simulation Laboratory. This project has
been funded by the National Science Foundation.
- 70 -
Figure 35: Seismic Damper Installed inside NEESWood Bedroom Wall

(University at Buffalo/Parisi, 2006)
The damper configuration is very similar to the one presented in Figure 36. This
configuration provides tremendous advantage on the overall performance of a
woodframe construction during seismic activity. Indeed, tests have proven that about
67% of the peak drift was reduced, 45% reduction of the peak base shear, comparing to
the behavior of a conventional shear wall (Symans, Fridley, Cofer, and Du, 2001).
P ned
Connection
Piston Rod
Viscous Fluid
Piston Head
P14,1 Ij /
Pinned Connection
Figure 36: Fluid-filled Viscous Damper Configuration

(Symans, Fridley, Cofer, and Du, 2001)
- 71 -
The dampers used in the experiment have been provided by Taylor Devices (Figure 37).
Those dampers have been primarily used in commercial buildings and bridges
worldwide, but if the testing ends up successful, Taylor Devices will be able to acquire a
brand new market (i.e. residential market).
Figure 37: Taylor Seismic Fluid Viscous Damper

(Taylor Devices, Inc., 2007)
The dampers will take the energy of the seismic loading and convert it into heat. This
heat will then dissipate into the atmosphere. Even though the temperature of the
dampers can rise up to 2000 Fahrenheit (930 Celsius), it will only take about fifteen
minutes for the temperature to go back to normal.
While these dampers guarantee a better performance of woodframe structure during an

earthquake, the cost remains an important obstacle. Taylor Devices Inc. affirms that it is
too early to predict the cost to purchase dampers for a home. One estimate of the coast
for this kind of damper is about $300 per damper. However, this does not entail the price
of installation. It could cost about $15,000 (quite a nominal approximation) to install
those dampers in an average house.
The NEESWood project has still many experiments to undergo before real changes can
take place in the world of wood construction. However, it seems that this project
represents the first step in moving toward performance-based design for woodframe
structures. In the near future (2009), a six story NEESWood type woodframe structure
will be tested on the world's largest shake table in Miki City, Japan. This experiment will
permit additional validation of those new design technologies.
-72-
2. SAPWood Software
In an effort to promote performance based wood design, NEESWood developed a new
analysis tool, SAPWood. This software can be downloaded, along with its user's manual,
at http://www.enqr.colostate.edu/NEESWood/SAPWood.htm.
SAPWood stands for Seismic Analysis Package for Woodframe. It is a user friendly
software providing researchers and engineers an analysis tool that can perform
nonlinear seismic analysis of woodframe structures. Thus, this software allows the user
to get a better understanding of the structure behavior, moving significantly beyond the
current simplified analysis. Many variables can be taken into consideration. Examples
are earthquake ground motion, properties of structure, properties of finish materials, and
many more. Designers are also allowed to build and analyze woodframe structures
beginning at the fastener level, using nonlinear nail elements. Moreover, the designer
can perform a time domain analysis (Figure 38) and/or an incremental dynamic analysis
of a wood structure model with an earthquake acceleration time series record and be
able to view the results of the analysis.
Figure 38: SAPWood Screen Shot with Single Earthquake Excitation Results
(SAPWood User's Manual)
- 73 -
C. Additional Readings & Idea on Supplemental Damping

Systems
This section provides reference to additional readings on the implementation of
supplemental damping systems.
Improved viscoelastic damping for earthquake-resistant wood

structures (Joye and Dinehart, 2007)
This paper studies the use of viscoelastic polymeric damping material placed between
the wood stud and the sheathing material. Testing has been done and the paper
describes the technical aspect of the dampers performance, such as their position in the
structure. The implementation of those new dampers have proven to damp out vibrations
in wood structures and could eventually be used in earthquake-resistant wood
structures.
Seismic Behavior of Wood-framed Structures with Viscous Fluid

Dampers (Symans, 2004)
This paper introduces the use of viscous fluid dampers within the wall cavities of wood
structures for their seismic protection. Extensive numerical analyses, such as nonlinear
finite element models, have been able to demonstrate that those dampers dissipate a
significant portion of seismic input energy.
Base Isolation & Supplemental Damping Systems for Seismic

Protection of Wood Structures (Symans, 2002)
This paper provides a literature review of the implementation of different types of
dampers in woodframe structures. The damping systems explained in this paper are
elastomeric and sliding bearings, friction, viscoelastic, hysteric, and fluid viscous
dampers. This review demonstrates the advanced seismic-resistant systems available
and the need for further investigation to ultimately being able to incorporate those
systems in the real construction of woodframe structures.
-74-
Disposable Damping System
Many researches seem to be devoted to the implementation of dampers inside the walls.
However, the cost remains an important aspect. A new possible technique could be the
implementation of a renewable, "sacrificial" damping device. This could possibly save
this dilemma if one can find a way to design low-priced dampers. Those dampers could
be described as being sacrificial damping device, in the sense that they can be used
only for one earthquake; that could explain their low cost. They could also be fairly
accessible in the house, much like a fuse box. There should also be located in clever
parts of the structural system so that they could be removed after an earthquake for
replacement without disturbing the original structural configurations. Japan seems to
have introduced a similar system: implementing steel hysteretic dampers - "unbounded
braces" in the walls (Samo L. Di and Einashai A. S., 2005). Those dampers can be
replaced after an earthquake. However, additional research and experimental tests
should be developed in applying those types of dampers in woodframe structure.
-75-
CONCLUSION
Conclusion
Wood structures have seen resurgence in popularity over the past several decades,
especially in Western States of America. In California, about ninety percent of residential
construction consists of wood structures. For centuries, wood has been favored as a
building material because it can provide strength, economy, and design flexibility.
Choosing wood can also be recognized for its environmental attributes. It is recyclable,
biodegradable, and sustainable over the long term, consuming only four percent of the
energy needed to manufacture the total industrial raw materials while accounting for
about half produced in the United States.
Woodframe construction has seen great expansion in the market of commercial and
industrial construction. This means that stronger and more flexible wood products are
necessary. However, the sectional dimensions and lengths of timber members are
limited by the size of the trees available. Moreover, wood is increasingly being put off-
limits to harvesting; higher quality trees are being used, ultimately restricting the
availability of high-quality lumber. In an effort to solve this problem, the industry keeps
creating new structural products, attaining a strong hand on the construction market.
Engineered wood products are superior in strength, stability, and uniformity to standard
lumber species. In fact, those products, manufactured by bonding together wood fibers,
become larger composite materials; the manufacture process permits the achievement
of homogenized products, with a decrease in defects and weak points. Those products
also help in the development of a more sustainable environment. In fact, they utilize
what would have been wood waste otherwise. These stronger and stiffer materials
ultimately allow for the design of taller walls resisting greater environmental conditions
(like high wind speed or seismic activity).
Nevertheless, restrictions still remain on woodframe construction, especially in region of

high seismic zone. Indeed, the height of wooden buildings is currently limited to
approximately four stories. This constraint is mainly due to uncertainties in
understanding the dynamic response of taller woodframe construction. Along with this
restriction rises the issue of the seismic performance of low-rise buildings. In fact, while
building codes and standards emphasize life safety issues, wooden structure can
experience great structural and nonstructural damage. Thus, research and new
-76-
CONCLUSION
techniques aim at developing supplemental damping systems for woodframe structure.

Those developments will benefit the society in a greater sense, by reducing damages,
human injury, and economic loss.
Several researches have concluded that the stiffness of a conventional shear wall
decreases linearly with continuous cyclic loading of same amplitude. Analytical
investigations have been made on the effect of incorporating viscoelastic and hysteretic
dampers in wood structures. Those dampers have been proven to absorb an important
quantity of the seismic input energy. They are able to provide a constant source of
energy dissipation that will remain steady during the different cyclic loadings.
Performance of such woodframe structures can see a reduction of about fourty percent
in peak base shear (compared to conventional shear wall). Overall, those innovative
technologies have the potential to deeply influence the design and construction of
woodframe structures. The potential improvements could result in a decrease of
structural and nonstructural damages. However, full-scale experiments should be more
abundant in order to achieve concrete and faster solutions. Finally, new techniques
could also be researched, such as renewable, "sacrificial" dampers that would permit the
development of lower cost systems, making them accessible to a greater market.
-77-
APPENDICES
Appendices
1. APPENDIX CHAPTER ............................................................ 79
a. Uniform Building Code 1997.......................................................................................... 79
i. Table 16-1.................................................................................................................................79
ii. Table 16-J................................................................................................................................79
iii. Ta ble 16-K ............................................................................................................................... 79
iv. Table 16-N ............................................................................................................................... 80
v. Table 16-Q ..................................................................................................................... ,.........81
vi. Ta ble 16-R ............................................................................................................................... 81
vii. Table 16-T ........................................................................................................................... 81
viii. Table 16-U ........................................................................................................................... 81
ix. Figure 16-2...............................................................................................................................82
X. UBC Table 23-1l-G ......................................................................................... ...... 82
xi. UBC Table 23-11-1-1 .................................................................................................................. 83
xii. Shear Capacity Adjustment Factor ................................................................................. 83
b. Seismic Design of Four-story Apartment - Calculation Output ................................. 84
i. Typical Floor Plan .................................................................................................................... 84
ii. East-West Shear Walls ........................................................................................................ 87
xiii. Overturning M om ents for N-S & E-W W alls.........................................................................88
iii. Structural Details of Typical Residential in High Seism ic Area............................................ 91
2. APPENDIX CHAPTER ............................................................ 94
a. Span Table for Douglas Fir Larch Lum ber ................................................................. 94
b. Glued Lam inated Tim ber Conversion Table............................................................... 95
- 78 -
APPENDICES
1. Appendix Chapter I
a. Uniform Building Code 1997
i. Table 16-1
TABLE 164-SEISMIC ZONE FACTORZ
mom IA 203 4
ZO075 01S 020 030 0aO
NOM The zone ill be datenmined from the seismic wone *ap Is Figure 16-2
ii. Table 16-J

TABL 164--01L PIPOFPL. TPES
SOS. P~OIE SOIl PRiLE MAWSNWUC S eoha 5m Sas ______________r____________
A Hard Rock 5,000

(1,500)
Rock 2,500to5,a0w
(76fai 1,500)_
c Vry Dnre Son ad Soft Rck 1,200 to 2,500 SO s 2,000
(360 760)
_O (100)
S0 Stiff SaiProfie 600 0 512W50 1,0005o2,lO
(180 IQ (30 to 100)
Soil So Froie c600 (15 'NO000
(180) (50
SF Sol Requiring Site-aspcdhc Evaluaton.See Sectios 16293,1.
t
Soil ProftType* also includes any aollprofilowith mar$hao loat(3041 mWa).!sol cinydeined smasoil witha astliciyindnr,Pln. 20.,w a 4porcun
and .,< S ps((24 kPa) The Plasticity d1.6c, P1, and the moisture cncnt,4 ahsll be detormined in accordance with apparoed natoesi standards,
iii. Table 16-K
TASLM 16-K-OCCUPANCY CATEGORY
. essential Group1, Division I Ocpancies having suqwy and emoiacy treatment 125 150 .15
ficilitiftal areas
Fie and police stations
Garages and shelters for emesgescy vehicles and emargency aircraft
Structures and shelters in emagency-prepaedness cento
Aviation co"txol towers
Structures and equipment in government commusicstion centers and other
faciuits required for emergescy response
Standby power-gScersting equipment for Category 1 facilities
itwaosor other stractures containing housing orsvpporting water or other
iine-auppreuulon mateel or equipment requied for the protection of Category
1. 2 or 3 structures
I Hazardous Group H. Divisions 1, 2,6 and 7ccupaacks and structuras thera housing or 125 150 1 15
fAclhile, sapporting toxic or explosive chemicals or subilances
oebusilding structures hosing,supporting or ntaining quantilies of toxic or
explosive substances that, if contained within a builiang, would cause that
building Iobe classifed as a Group H. Division 1, 2or7 Occupancy
3. Special Group A, Divisions 1,2 and 2..1Occupancias 00 1.00 00
suiltpbad housing Group 3, Divisions 1 od 3 Occupancies with a capacity
tmgaser than 300 studnrs
Buildings bousing Group B Occupancies used tot college or adult education
with acapacity gester thas S00students
Group !, Divisions land 2 0ecupsaclas with 50 or me seesidest Incapacitated
patients, but not included in Category 1
Group 1. Division 3 Occupancies
All strucauras with an occupancy greater than 5.000 peroms
Structures and equipeaent in power-generating stations, and other public utility
facilIties not included is Category I or Category 2 above, and required for
continued operation
4. Stadard Al starcuns. housing occupancies or having functions not listed in Category 1 00 1.00 100
occupsen 1,2 or 3 and Group U Occupancy lowes
5. Miscellaneous Group U Occupancies except for towers 1.00 100 101
The limitation of I for panel connmciians In Section ,133.2A shall be LO for the entire connector.
3%Srmucluslobserv fsa quirements ae given InSection 1702.
Foranchosge of aacltery and equipment required for lift-saty sytems, the valneof I, thal be taken as 1.5
- 79 -
APPENDICES
iv. Table 16-N

TABLE 18-N-STRUCTURAL SYSTEMSI
A .
MASIC STUCRALSST6M LA11UOA'#OI8-F5T1N sysIM oUSalmPfltm R 20U 0SIU
1, faang wallsystem 1 Light4oaned wafs with shear panels
a. Woodstaetuat panel web (oramrcoorus hraastodea or kas 5.5 28 65
b. Allthdrlight-tzamedwalls 4.5 28 65
2. Shear walls
a. Concsatl 4.5 218 160
b M aon 4,5 2.8 1W
3. LAght steel. mad bo webs with l tasion-only brcing 22 2.2 65
Braced ras where =a
4. careSs ravy lad
a. Slott 4.4 22 160
b CoacmtO 2. 2,2 -
c. Heavy daber .8 2.2 65
2 Boling hamiynto aSlew tWarcau bravea kam(MM 7.0 2.8 240
2. emfligned WaL Vwh ohma panals
a. Mod stluctural penal walk forastrctures three stodas or less 6. 28 65
b. All other Ughfiamed waIs 50 28 05
3. Shear wAes
a Coacrote 55 2.8 240
b. Mooey 5. 28 160
4. Ordinary braned haane
a. Stes 3 56 2,2 160
b Coaere 56 2.2 -
c. Heavy timbetr 56 22 6S
S, Special coaccouically booced fraom
S. Secl 6A 2.2 240
3 Mcnit-rslin frame 1 Special mnaa-malstig frame (SMRP)
systeo a Stea 4 2.8 K.L
b. Coacmae 1.5 2.8 L
1 Masoay enar-msting wall frane(MMRWF) 65 28 160
3 Concrmue loterardiatz meenst-rudag wae (IMF .5 28 -
4 Ordi mmc-ucasilan ftame (OMRIF)
a. Siaa 45 28 160
b. Conacae? 15 28 -
5. Specdtrs nmomeat frames of stad (STMF) 6.5 2.8 240
4 Dual symstss 1, Shear walls
a. CoCarAaWith SMRF 5 .8 tNL
b. Coarste wlb steel OMRF 42 i8 160
c. Covsete with coacaa IMRF 65 2 160
d, MasoorywilliSMIP 55 18 160
a. Masmy wth stal OMRF 2 2.8 160
f Masoary with conic elMRF3 4.1 2, -
g. Masoary with Masonry MMRWP 60 2.8 160
te al Ew'
a. With sel SMaF 85 2z8 N.L
b. Withste) 0MI1P 42 28 160
I Ordwr" bcd fraum
a- Swithiste ISMRF 65 2.8 N.L
b, S1"lacwth, sif etMRP 4.2 i8 160
c- Cowscae wth concrete S1RP 3 65 2.8 -
d. Coacrote wI4h connote 1M"1 42 2.2 -
4 Special ooneatrlcalls raced faints
a. Stal with stlI SMRF 75 28 N.L
b. Steal with steel OMRF 4.2 4 2.8 160
S.Ciaftleveredcohzun buildming 1 Candlavredcolaameeleuenw 2.2 2.0 35
systems
6. Shou -will-buam lacti-an I Cancwes 7.82 160
7.Uddeaed systeres See Sections 162.67and W629.9.2 -
NL-0 liamt
ISMc Sectiou 1630A for combiladon of structuual systesa
2
Base stuctuamt systems era defined in Section 1626.
3
pVoahbiled in SaismicZonas 3 and 4.
5
ichladcs precast concrete confoaming to Section 1921.2 7
SPlohibited Ia Seismic Zones 3 and 4, except as permihted in Sectiko 16342.e
6Ordinary moment-resistmg fuases In Satami Zooe I metngla the requamantsw of Section 2214.6 may ou a R value 048.
7 btal leighlt of the balding nrdIng cantileverod columns.
*PrOhiblted I Seismic Zones 2A, 2, 3 and 4. See Section 16312.7
- 80 -
APPENDICES
v. Table 16-Q
TABLIE 1"--EISMIC COEffKAENTC ,
DOOLPROWtLITYPS Z.&An 2.513 . Z.O. 2..4

0A6 0.12 0A6 0.24 032No
-- o00 - I5 0.20 0.30 0A(W
Sc 0.09 018 0.24 0.33 OA%
so 0.12 0:22 0.23 036 M4d01
st0.29 030 0L34 036 CO.3Q
Sr See Foo1tot 1
Stcice gooetechical investigation and dynamic sit response analysissfl be pedonmed to dterminesei sc coeffifeuis for ta PMile Type Sit
v L. Table 16-R
TABLE 16-R-SEIBMIC O0EFFICIENT C,
OS.MIOUUAETYPE Z=1t =0.15 02 2.0.3 Z.OA

A 006 0.2 0.16 024 0.324
SS 0.08 015 020 C030 0.40H,
_____ _ 0.13 0.25 0.32 CGAS .0556
0.18 0.32 OAO 0.54 .641
st 0.26 00 0.64 0.84 .ow
s t Set Footna l
Isie-speakn gedascbeicsi invest WIn ad dytomic shte reomw "nyshs $hall bo performaA to detemism meibmic cocfficiamts for Sonl proM~ Typs Sp.
vii. Table 16-T

TABLE 16-T-EAR-SOURCE FACTOR N
Ot.CLOC1T b KtOKOWN KW MC M 514 AC55
smsSIO SOURCE YPS SSW SK 10 k~m 03
A 2.0 1.6 1.2 10
B 1.6 12 LO 1.0
C 1.0 1.0 La 1.0
IThe Ws-Soure Facto ostay be based an the liscar lsteqpolatiou ofvulset for distancea ot r shun thea shown to the table.
2Thlocaationand typeofuelamasscescbewsed orisagaslibeobhdbasednapprovedgcotechnWcl data(e gms wec tmappgfoctslofraltusby
3
the United Staes Gesloglcal Survey or the Califoina Division of Maniesad Geology).
The closest disianceto slrlaomreahmlbetakens themialmuu d1a*betweeubasits aand thaueadsrbedby thevecticalpjectiofosostceon the
surface (.sufaceproJecdionoffultplan=) he surfacaprectlonused notinchado priomsof the sorcentdoptheoflrowgrerter.Thelrgeatvalueorthe
Near-Sotwco Factor coldeing all sources shell be used for desigp.
viii. Table 16-U

TABLE 16-U-SEISMIC SOURCE TYPEI
SW 1?tE sEIsMC fcE D.Ssepiltl Sidmum enant magttmku e 04 t a We Wr

A Faalts that are capsbe of poducling large nagnitude events and that a 7,0 SR a 5
hav ahigh rate of scismic activity
B All faults other than Types A and C Ma 7.0 SP < S
M<70 SR>2
M a "S JR <2
C faults thait are
no& capable of produelng larpe amgpitude earthquku U< .5 SR s.S
and that have a rdlafiely low ate of sismae activity
ISubd-cike somrmem sball be evalumted on a shte-specific basis
28oth roaxmsm monm "pgitude *ad slip nfte condtions mumtbe satisfied concurrently When demmrrining thte acismic Source ye
-81-
APPENDICES
ix. Figure 16-2
4- T
'IGURE 15-2-SESMC ZONE MAP OP ThE UNITED STATES

For sruas ouitelde ci the United States, see Appendix Chapter 16.
x. UBC Table 23-Il-G

Fragreas outside of the United tatev, see Apendix C 1. n
TABLE DIMENSION RATIOS
23-11.--MAXIMUM DIAPHRAZIO
HOWtZOWiA. 31APIMRCNI SEAR VJL
1. Diagonal sheathing, conveational 3.1 1:1

2. Diagonal sheathing, special 4:1 1
3.WFxd structmal panels and particleboard, nailed all edges 4:1 2:
4 "*od structural panes and paalideboard, blocking omItted at iltInediate 4*1
joints,
Ila Seismit Zonoe 0, 1, 2 and 3, the maximarm ratio may be 2:1.
1
21 Selsmic Zones 0.1, 2 and 3, the manimum ratio may be 3 h,
3
Ain SeismicZoon4,themaximum raiotioay be 311J1 for wals not excetling 10feet (3048mm)in height onoceside of the doortoa Ofetstory Otoap U OccupauCy.
"Not permitted.
-82-
APPENDICES
xi. UBC Table 23-Il-I-1

TABLE 23-11.14--AL.OWASLE SHEAR FOR WINED OR SEiSMIC FORCES IN POUNDS PER FOOT FOR WOOD STRUCTURAL
3 PANEL
SHEAR WALLS WITH FR AUINOFDUGAFRLACORSTHR lER.
PANE.5 APPUSD 0R8CKY 70FASJM 0____ TO ____P__
(
OWs"Na Spacing atPand Edyn) 014 Noaso " g at Pae Edges O.)
mIcA PEL PvEN sAM (CoMoft 254fr In ou ln X 2M lr man
909W. othea, 4 _si .2 G 4 1 1
PANoEL xAS 2A for momn x 0.2148 tIMwa- X " Sfor Wn
36 i14 6d 200 300 390 510 ad 200 300 390 5ii
Structural 1 3V 6 61
1
7136 1 1 84 2554 394 5w 1ii1 lOd 280 430 550 130
/iz 280 430 $50 730
U/i
5
*i 340 510 665 870 - - -
ba / 64 ISO 270 350 450 Rd 180 270 350 450
I; __ _ its__ 200 300 390 510 200 300 390 510
Shenthint plywood TI 2 3 -415-
pawleSI gand --- 16 17/ Bd 4 -O 3 ;W 3W 10d 260 380 490 640
in uC Standard /j- 260 380 490 640
23-2 or 23-3 13;3 1041 310 460 600 770 -
sub 340 510 1665 80

IQ'anje tcdvaingb
Plyood nel 5/10 1'4 61 Sd 140 j20 275 360
csiding i rs - I1 -
ctard 23-2 Ith 8d 160 240 310 410 10d 160 240 310 410
Alii.a k.l..aesb iJ.ked itb 51umnmnlew rfa P..restaine.th rhdantun o enrtasp, c na1at Siaseh IS(12eumloaent
7
Intermediate framing irm W-1/rinch(9.5 mm) and 1j-inch(11 e panels ilslled on owdsspmced 24Inchs(610 rm)oa ceater and 2inches
mm)on center for othesconditlons and pancithicknesses 'Tuese values eas for short-time )oset due to wind or certhquake and ust be redaced 25 percent
.f1or n"n loadirig.
Allowable shet values for nails in framiag members of otberspedles set faith in Division 11, Part 111. shall be calculated for all othes grades msl"iplyl
the shear capacities for nails in Sinidumrl I by the following factors 0 82 for specia withspecific gravity greater than or equal to0 42ut less %12:0 49, a
2 0.65 for specles wish mspecillc gravit less cus0.42,
Wherepaoclsareapplied oabotlfaccso awllnuanailapaclng kieasthan6 ladies (lS2riln)omcetieoneitheratde,pziel joinossbaitbedfasettorah on ilUeent
remlsineibeus or framing bshl be 3nadt (76 mm) nominal or shicker and nails na each sideshall be stagaed.
%nSelanle Znes 3 end 4, whore allowubie sheas vaues exceed 350 pounds per foot (5,11 N/mm) fvndation sill ts and all framing membersreceivingedge
nailingtrws ssabuting panelehall not be loan ilsan aasIogle 3-ch6 mm) mminal member and fondation sill plates shall not he less than msingle 3-iech (76
\
mm) nominal member seearwalmhevetota wail designsheadoes not exceed 600 poundsperfoot (8 76Nfntm). a single 2-inch(S) mm)nomInal sI1plate
m ssed, p ided anchor bols are desi fx abd capacity of0 Spereti orleas of the allowabl cpslly and tAls have a mininuino-inch-by-2-nch-
y r y 51 mm te lJ 3mm) seka plate washers Plywood joint and sill plate nailing sal be staggered in A cases,
''c.vd i ch11mm puoelsapplleddirect toframlngiay beIncreasedsovales shown for /n-tnch (12mm) panels provided
studs ore space a malisuc of 16 Inehes mm on center or panels ass spptied wilh long dlsersion acroas stds.
Itelv'nmled
aon-ippednails shall be or tas led.
xii. Shear Capacity Adjustment Factor

Maximum Unrestrained Opening Height
(Door or Window)
h/3 h/2 2h/3 5h/6 h
8 ft wall 2'-8" 4'-0" 5'-4"' 6'-8' 8'-0"
10 ft wall 3'-4" 5'-0" 6'-8" 8'-4" 10'-0"
Percent full-height Shear Capacity Adjustment Factor

sheathing (C)
0% 1 0.67 0.5 0.4 0.33
10% 1 0.69 0.53 0.43 0.36
20% 1 0.71 0.56 0.45 0.38
30% 1 0.74 0.59 0.49 0.42
40% 1 0.77 0.63 0.53 0.45
50% 1 0.8 0.67 0.57 0.5
60% 1 0.83 0.71 0.63 0.56
70% 1 0.87 0.77 0.69 0.63
80% 1 0.91 0.83 0.77 0.71
90% 1 0.95 0.91 0.87 0.83
100% 1 1 1 1 1
-83-
APPENDICES
b. Seismic Design of Four-story Apartment - Calculation Output

i. Typical Floor Plan
W-Q'
@0 B
_iaE
Ii
E4
11~ -0
j
tv-v V-v _________________________
'I b
-84 -
APPENDICES
Anot
0- Li
b
b
:4
I
.5
.D-rn
- 85 -
APPENDICES
,--I
.0-6
APPENDICES
ii. East-West Shear Walls

SHEAR WALL DESIGN IN SEISMIC E-W DIRECTION:
SEISMIC LOAD:
H = (TA) X (SEISMIC LOAD PER S.F.1'2,3,4, 5 ) + H FROM LEVEL ABOVE
v=H/L
SHEAR WALLS SUPPORTING THE ROOF LEVEL:
Trib. Shear
TrtWalibl. Panel
Net Wall Tributary Seismic Sels SHEAR, Typo
Wall Length L Area TA (SF) Load Per SF1 Load v pf per
lbs.) Table
4
SWA 59 ROOF: 80*10 = 800 9.161 7329 124 1 - 255 pIf
SWB 68 ROOF: 80*20 = 1600 9.161 14657 216 1 - 255 pIf
SWC 68 ROOF: 80*20 = 1600 9.161 14657 216 1 - 255 plf
SWD 68 ROOF: 80*20 = 1600 9.161 14657 216 1 - 255 plf
SWE 59 ROOF: 80*10 = 800 9.161 7329 124 1 - 255 pIf
ft2 *
1 - SEISMIC LOAD PER S.F.= 82,080 lb. / ( 6,400 1.4)
SHEAR WALLS SUPPORTING THE 4TH LEVEL:
Trib. Shear
Trib. Panel
Seismic esd SHEAR, Type
Wall e etha L Tributary
Area TA (SF) Load Per SF' Ha v pIf per
(f) HT7 Table
lbs. 4
SWA 59 FLOOR 80*10 = 800 10.518 15743 267 2 - 382 pif
SWB 68 FLOOR 80*20 = 1600 10.518 31486 463 3 - 498 pIf
SWC 68 FLOOR 80*20 = 1600 10.518 31486 463 3 - 498 pIf

SWD 68 FLOOR 80*20 = 1600 10.518 31486 463 3 - 498 plf
SWE 59 FLOOR 80*10 = 800 10.518 15743 267 2 - 382 plf

ft2 *
2 - SEISMIC LOAD PER S.F.= 94,240 lb. / ( 6,400 1.4)
SHEAR WALLS SUPPORTING THE 3RD LEVEL:
Shear
Tribal
el. Panel
Net Wall Tributary Seismic Seis. SHEAR, Type
Wall Length L Area TA (SF) Load Per SF Load v pIt per
(f) H Table
lb. 4
SWA 59 FLOOR 80*10 = 800 7.125 21443 363 2 - 382 pIf

SWB 68 FLOOR 80*20 = 1600 7.125 42886 631 4 - 652 plf
SWC 68 FLOOR 80*20 = 1600 7.125 42886 631 4 - 652 plf
SWD 68 FLOOR 80*20 = 1600 7.125 42886 631 4 - 652 pIf

SWE 59 FLOOR 80*10 = 800 7.125 21443 363 2 - 382 pIf
3 - SEISMIC LOAD PER S.F.= 63,840 lb. / ( 6,400 ft2*1.4)
- 87 -
APPENDICES
Shear
TrtTrib.
Walibl. Panel
Wall Le Tributary Seismic L SHEAR, Type
eth L Area TA (SF) Load Per SF' Hd v plf per
lbs. Table
4
SWA 59 FLOOR: 80*10 = 800 3.732 24429 414 3 - 498 plf
SWB 68 FLOOR: 80*20 = 1600 3.732 48857 718 2#2 - 764 pif
SWC 68 FLOOR: 80*20 = 1600 3.732 48857 718 2#2 - 764 pif
SWD 68 FLOOR: 80*20 = 1600 3.732 48857 718 2#2 - 764 plf
SWE 59 FLOOR: 80*10 = 800 3.732 24429 414 3 - 498 plf
4 - SEISMIC LOAD PER S.F.= 33,440 Ib./ ( 6,400 ft2 * 1.4)
xiii. Overturning Moments for N-S & E-W Walls

Overturning Moments for North-South Walls Continued
(1) - (2) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15)
W
AL0 B W0ED
EN A X CD 0R
P0- a: < r'-0
~~.F
z C
M-
<<
0 CD rC , ~ z. X~
0
LEES:() Hgt(f) 8.36 0 (

~
<~ ~ 0 >C
0 WALL DL:0 X
WALLS BETWEEN 3RD AND 2ND

LVL:(3): Height:(ft) 8.36
u*(19+h*13 156 51,1
WALL DL: f
U*(19+h)*13 1565 - 51,16
SWi 5 37525 56 32,455 60,465 5 ROOF DL: 6263 9,274 UPLIFT
Li*13*17 FLOOR C-
DL:Li13*26*2
N
WALL DL:
U*(10+h)*13 11,12 0 51,06
SW2 5 48246 66.75 32,507 62,720 5 ROOF DL: 3158 7896 UPLIFT C-4
Li*4*17 FLOOR N
DL:Li*4*26*2
WALL DL:
U*(19+h)*10 1463 52,68
SW3 5 48246 66.75 32,507 62,720 5 ROOF DL: 5853 9,910 UPLIFT c4
Li*13*17 FLOOR
DL:U*13*26*2
WALL DL:
Li*(19+h)*10 1722 51,53
SW4 5 37525 56 32,455 60,465 5 ROOF DL: 6888 8,993 UPLIFT
Li*16*17 FLOOR 0 7
DL:U*16*26*2
- 88 -
APPENDICES
WALLS BETWEEN 2ND AND PODIUM Height

LEVELS: : (ft) 10.77
(0
WALL DL: cq0 V 00
SWi 5 42750 62 60,465 97,595 5.00 2553 6381 UPLIFT -
Li*(28.5+h)*13 0 6
N
WALL DL: U
C?
105,77 (28.5+h) 10 2390 16,85 qT 88,66
SW2 5 54964 68.75 62,720 5.00 ROOF DL: Li *16 9564 UPLIFT
2* 17 FLOOR DL: 97
Li *16 *26*3 N
WALL DL: Li
105,77 *(28.5+h) 10 2390 16,85 u 88,66

SW3 5 54964 68.75 62,720 5.00 ROOF DL: U 9564 UPLIFT
*4.5 * 16 FLOOR
DL: Li *16*26*3 N
WALL DL: Li
*(28.5+h)* 10 1084 17,56 79,11
SW4 5 42750 62 60,465 97,595 5.00 ROOF DL: Li *5 4339 UPLIFT
17 FLOOR DL: - 8
Li * 5 * 26*3 N
Overturning Moments for East - West Walls
(1) (2) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15)
n 0 .-- 1 ; 0 O X
:EVE L)
0 . 0~-
W3 'L-4 0: 761 2P
WA0BEWE ROD AND 4TH-Wn U28 - n 0o

W1 .n 6126 x
- : >7-. I >
WALLS BETWEEN ROOF AND 4TH

LEVELS:
oo
WALL 028
SWA 7 8.36 7329 59 0 7,269 761 2663 696 UPLIFT , 4,527
SWB 34 8.36 14657 68 0 61,267 3695 139 UPLIFT 04 9,281

DL:Li*h*13 7
-
WALL 6281 0
SWC 34 8.36 14657 68 0 61,267 3695 139 UPLIFT 0 9,281
DL:Li*h*13 7
WALL 6281 04j

SWO 34 8.36 14657 68 0 61,267 DLL~*3 3695 7 139 UPLIFT 0 9,281
- 89 -
APPENDICES
WALLS BETWEEN 4TH AND 3RD

LEVELS:
WALL DL: Li f-
SWA 7 8.36 15743 59 7,269 22,884 1250 4376 2,707 UPLIFT
*(9.5+h)* 10 Lo
0
X
WALL DL: Li 1032

SWB 34 8.36 31486 68 61,267 192,877 6072 2,940 UPLIFT v2
*(9.5+h)* 10 31
04
WALL DL: Li 1032 e
SWC 34 8.36 31486 68 61,267 192,877 6072 2,940 UPLIFT c
*(9.5+h)* 10 31
00
WALL DL: Li 1032
SWD 34 8.36 31486 68 61,267 192,877 6072 2,940 UPLIFT c
*(9.5+h)* 13 31 cD
WALLS BETWEEN 2 ND AND PODIUM

LEVELS:
WALL DL: Li o04

*(28.5+h)* 13
ROOF DL: Li *1421 4974 G
SWA 7 10.77 24429 59 44,152 44,152 4,371 UPLIFT
16 * 17 FLOOR 4 7
DL: Li * 16 *o
26*3
372,13372,1ROOAL DL: LiLi

WALL DL: 1335
1421 2269
4294 12,67
,6
SWA
SWB 34
34 10.77
10.77 24295
48857 59
68 4415 24,1524,7
372,139 UPLIFT
UPLIFT pc' a
9 *(28.5+h)*10 2 81 5
N o
16(7 FLOOR 4 7 0
372,13 WALL DL: Li 1335 2269 12,67
SWB 34 10.77 48857 68 372,139 DL: Li 126 81 5 UPLIFT v
9 *(28.5+h)* 10 2
372,13 WALL DL: Li 1335 2269 12,67 w 0
SWD 34 10.77 48857 68 372,139 UPLIFT C- '

9 *(28.5+h)* 10 2 81 5
N oo
- 90 -
APPENDICES
iii. Structural Details of Typical Residential in High Seismic Area

4 x POST
SIMP. HD. 2- 0" THRU BOLTS

HOLD DO VN W/ WASHERS
1" MiN. EDGE ANCHOR BOLT W PLATE

DIST ANCE WASHER PER CODE
CID SIMP. SST B 20

ANCHOR
FDN. FTG. PER--10

PLANS
HOLD DOWN DETAIL
2xSTUDS
@1U' D. C.
F LR.
SHTG\
4< POST
Nc
H\ BOT. PL
ct
C,,
C,, I'
VER nql STRAP DBLTOPPL

PER I ANS
4- /
2x STUDS
O.C.
'@18"
4xPOST'
HOLD DOWN STRAP
-91 -
APPENDICES
DB L. TOP PL
ELZZi~Z~&IiiLZ,,
4x BL
2x S7UDS-.,
SIMP. SRAP
PER PLANS
I
SHEAR PANEL
DRAG STRAP
/ 20d
if
SIMP . A35 P E R
S.W.S. I I k
IIPA5E
*- BN
FJ.sPER J.'s PER
PLANS P LANS
2x BLOCKING
@ 48" O.C.
2x STUDS _
@ 16" . C.
PLYWOOD PER
PLA NS
SHEAR TRANSFER @ FLR.
-92-
APPENDICES
ROCF SqTG
RR'S PER PU.A
SfM. A36PER S.W. S.
7LYWD SEAR WALL

Zx SIWS @ 16"0.
SAP. A 35 PER S.W.S.
A: STUDS @ 16O. C PLVWD SHEAR WALL
RAFTERS PERP. TO SHEAR WALL

SHEAR TRANSFER (- ROOF
POOF SH 7G.
0 ckSPAFT ER P ILANS
-dN.S
- -..-..m. - .--4..=.- -meme- --
SHEAR TRANSFER @ ROOF
-93-
APPENDICES
2. Appendix Chapter //
a. Span Table for Douglas Fir Larch Lumber
SPAN TABLES BASED ON DOUGLAS FIR-LARCH LUIMBER
S GRADED BY UBC SECTION 2303. OTHER SPECIES
MAY CALCULA.TE DIFFERENTLY.
UNIFORM BUILDING CODE-1997
TABLE 23-IV-J-1 - ALLOWABLE SPANS FOR FLOOR JOISTS 4O# PER SQ.FT. LIVE LOAD, NOT TO EXCEED A
DEFLECTION OF 1/360.
TREGH 4fCTMT T + iPnF DLT
SIZE SPACING GR. NO. 1 GR. NO. 2 DESIGN VALUE-BENDING Ft

E=1.7X 10 E=1.6X 10 GRADE NO.-1 NO.-2
2x6 12" 10'- 11" 10'- 9" 2x6 1170 1120
16" 9'- 11" 9'- 9"
19.2" 9'- 4" 9'- 2" 2x8 1080 1035
24" 8'- 8" 8'- 6"
14'- 5" 14' - 2" 2O 990 950
2x8 12"
16" 13'- 1" 12' - 10" 2x12 900 865
19.2" 12'- 4" 12' - 1"
24" Il'l- 5"4 11' - 3"
2x10 12" 18'- 5" 18' - 0"
16" 16'- 9" 16' - 5"
19.2" 15' - 9" 15' - 5"
24" 14'- 7" 14' - 4"
2 x 12 12" 22'- 5" 21' - 11"
16" 20' - 4" 19' -11"
19.2" 19'- 2" 18' - 9"
24" 17' - 9" 17' - 5"
TABLE 23-IV-J-3 - ALLOWABLE SPANS FOR CEILING JOISTS USING DOUGLAS FIR-LUMBER USING
SHEETROCK FINISH, NOT TO EXCEED A DEFLECTION OF 11240. 10 PSF L.L + 5 PSF DL.
ALSO USE FOR ACCESSORY AND AG. BLDGS. WITH METAL ROOFING.
SIZE SPACING GR. NO. 1 GR. NO. 2 DESIGN VALUE-BENDING Fb
E=1.7 X 106 E=1.6 X 10 GRADE NO.-1 NO.-2
2x 4 12" 12'- 8" 12'- 5" 2X4 1350 1295
16"4 il'l 6" 11' - 3"
24" 10'-0" 9'-10" 2x6 1170 1120
2x6 12" 19' -11" 19' - 6"
16" 18' - 1" 17' - 8 2x8 1080 1035
24" 15' - 9" 15' - 6" 2x10 990 950
2x8 12" - - 25'- 8"
16" 23'- 10" 23' - 4" 2x12 900 865
24" 20' - 10" 20' - 5"
'2x10 12" - - - -
16" - - - -
24" 26'- 0" 26'- 0"
-94 -
APPENDICES
b. Glued Laminated Timber Conversion Table

DOUGLAS FIR - LARCH GLUED LAMINATED TIMBER CONVERSION TABLES
Dry Service Conditions Glulam Design Values: Fw psi E , psi
Simple Span. Uniformly Loaded | 2.400 1.800.000
DOUGLAS FIR - LARCH LUMBER & TIMBER CONVERSIONS
1997 NDS Lunber & Timber Design Values: F,, psi E, psi
Dimension Lmiber, 2 to 4 inches thick and Select Siuctwal: 1,500 1,900,000
5 inches and wider No.1: 1,000 1,700,000
Timbers - Beams &Svingers. having a least
dimension of 5 inches or greater:
Select S
No. 1: 1,350
jchural
1,600
1,600,000
1,600,000
DOUGLAS FIR - LARCH GLULAM SECTIONS, width (in.) x depth (in.)

LUMBER & 1MBER ROOF BEAMS FLOOR BEAMS
SECTIONS #NOW LOAD Load warwuloa Fotor = 1.16 Load Doraui i Fesior = 1.00
NOMINAL SIZE SELECT SELECT
ffctness x depfli STRUCTURAL No. I STRUCTURAL No. 1
DIMENSION LUMBER
3x8 3/ 6 118 3 VSxB 3 118 x 7 112 3 118 x 7 112
3x 10 3 118 x 71I2 3 118x6 3 118 x 9 3 118 x 9
3 x 12 3118 x 9 3 118 x72 3 118 x 12 3 118 x 10 112
3x 14 3118 x 9 3118x 7112 3118 x 13 112 3 118 x 13112
4x6 3118 x 6 3 118 x6 3118 x 6 311 x6
4x8 3 118 x 7112 31ffix6 3118x9 3118 x 7 112
4x 10 3118 x 9 31l8 x 7 112 3 1/8 x 10 112 3 118 x 10 112
4x 12 3118 x 10 1/2 3 118 x 9 3 118 x 12 3118 x 12
4 x 14 3 18 x 12 3 111 x 10 112 3118 x 15 3 118 x15
4x 16 3118 x 13112 3 18 x 10 112 3118 x 16 112 3 118 x 16 112
MULTIPLE PIECE LUM1BER
[212 x 6 3 118x 6 3 15x6 3118K18 x6
[2] 2 x 8 3 118 x 7112 3 118 x 6 31 Sx 712 3 118 x 7 112
( 2 x 10 3118 x 9 3118 x 7 112 3 118 x 10 12 3 118 x 9
(2]2x 12 3118 x 9 31/8 x 7 2 3 1J8 x 12 3 W8 x 12
[3]2 x 8 5 18 x 712 5118 x 7 1I2 5 1/8 x 7 2 5 118 x 7 112
[3]2 x 10 5 118 x 7112 5118 x 7 112 5118 x 10 112 51/8 x9
(312x12 5118x9 518 x 7 V2 5 18 x12 5 8x 2
[4] 2 x 8 5 118 x 7 I2 5 18 x 5 im xK2W 51vu x712
[412 x 10 5118 x 9 51/8 x 7 112 5118 x 10 112 5 118 x 10 112
[4] 2 x 12 5118 x 10 1/2 5 Ila x 9 5118 x 13 112 518 x 12
TIMBERS
6xS 5 118 x 7112 51 8x 7 112 51I8 x 7 112 5118 x 7 112
6x 10 5118x9 5118 x 7 12 5 118 x 10 12 5 118 x 10 1/2
6x 12 5118 x 10 1/2 5 118 x 9 5 118 x12 5118x12
6x 14 5 118 x 12 5 V8 x 10 112 51/8 x 13 112 5 118 x 131/2
Sx 16 5118 x 131/2 5118 x 12 51i8 x 11I2 5 118 x 16 1 2
Sx IS 5 118 x 15 5 118 x 13 112 5118 x 18 5118 x 18
6 x 20 5 18 x 18 5 118 x 16112 5 118 x 19 112 5 118 x I9112
8x 10 6 314 x 9 6314x 9 6314 x 10 112 6 W4 x 10 12
8 x 12 6 314 x 10 1/2 6 3/4 x 10 12 6 34 x 12 6 314 x 12
8x 14 6 314 x 12 6 34 x 12 6 314 x 13 12 6 34 x 13 12
axis 6 314 x 13 112 6 314 x 1312 6 314 x 16 112 6 314 x 1B 112
8 x Is 6 34 i16/I2
x 6 314 x 15 6 314 x 18 6 314 x 18
8 x 20 6 31418 634 x 16 112 6 3/4 x 19 12 6 314 x 19 112
8 x 22 6 314 x 19 1/2 6 314 x 18 6314 x 22 12 6 34 x 22112
-95-
REFERENCE
Reference
Ainsworth Inc., (2007), "Durastrand Rimboard", Products,
www.ainsworth.ca/html/prod dura rss.html.
American Forest & Paper Association (AFPA) (2006), "Wood I-Joist Awareness Guide",
www.woodaware.info/
American Institute of Timber Construction, "Glued Laminated Timber Conversion Tables",

Filler King Company's Website, www.fillerkinq.com/Timber%20Conversions.pdf
Association of Bay Area Governments ABAG (2006), "Wood Structural Panel Shear
Walls", Seismic Retrofit Training Manual, PTO8 Chapter 3B,
www.aba-q.ca.qov/bayarea/egmaps/fixit/manual/PT08-Ch-3B.PDF
California Building Code (2001), International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO), CA.
Consortium of Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering CUREE Website
(2000) "Education and Outreach Timber Web Modules", Richmond, CA,
www.curee.org/proiects/woodframe/element5/modules/.
Consortium of Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering CUREE (1999),

"Proceedings of the Invitational Workshop on Seismic Testing, Analysis and
Design of Woodframe Construction", Division of Structural Engineering, University
of California, San Diego, Publication No. W-01 March 5-6.
Dinehart, D. W. and Shenton l1l, H. W. (1998) "Application of Passive Energy Dissipation

Devices to Timber Shear Walls," Proceedings of the SEWC Structural Engineers
World Congress, San Francisco, CA, Paper T207-5, pp. 1 - 8.
Dinehart, David W, "Supplemental Damping in Wood-frame Structures", Pathnet Website,

www.pathnet.org/si.asp?id=1074.
Emerson, R.N., "Moment Resistant Connections in Prefabricated Wood Frame

Construction", Pathnet Website, www.pathnet.orq/si.asp?id=1 078.
Gilham P., Williamson T. (2007), "New Opportunities for Fiber Reinforced Glued-
Laminated Beams", Structure Magazine, April 2007, p. 59.
Holmes W. T. and Somers, P. (1995), "Northridge Earthquake of January 17, 1994

Reconnaissance Report, Volume 2," Earthquake Spectra, Supplement C to
Volume 11,Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, publication 95-03/2.
HolzBongartz Inc., "Oriented Strand Board Samples", holz-bonqartz.de/cms/.
Joye, D. D. and Dinehart, D. W. (2007) "Improved Viscoelastic Damping for Earthquake

Resistant Wood Structures", International Journal of Polymeric Materials, Vol. 56,
No. 1, January
- 96 -
REFERENCE
Lebeda D., Gupta R., Rosowsky D, Daniel D. (2005) "Effect of Hold-Down Misplacement
on Strength and Stiffness of Wood Shear Walls" Periodical on Struct. Des. and
Constr., Volume 10, Issue 2, pp. 79-87
Pei S. and Van de Lindt J.W. (2006) "Seismic Analysis Package for Woodframe Structures
", www.enqr.colostate.edu/NEESWood/SAPWood.htm.
Samo D. Li and Elnashai A. S. (2005), "Innovative strategies for seismic retrofitting of

steel and composite structures", John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. , Progress in Structural
Engineering and Materials, Volume 7, Issue 3, p. 115-135.
Schuler A. (2000), "Engineered Wood Products Production, Trade, Consumption and

Outlook", ECE/FAO Forest Products Annual Market Review, Chapter 11.
Selkirk Truss Limited Inc. (2001), "Laminated Veneer Lumbers",

www3.telus.net/selkirk99/selkirk/
Simpson Strong-Tie Company Inc (2007) "HAD-HD Hold-downs", Website Catalogue

www.stronqtie.com/products/connectors/HDA-HD.html
Symans, Michael D., (2002), "Base Isolation & Supplemental Damping Systems for
Seismic Protection of Wood Structures", Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp.
549-572.
Symans M., Fridley K., Cofer W.and Du Y (2001) "Fluid Dampers for Seismic Energy
Dissipation of Woodframe Structures", Proceedings of the CUREe-Caltech
Woodframe Project, San Diego, Ca, www.curee.orq/proiects/woodframe/element1/.
Symans, Michael D., (2004), "Seismic Behavior of Wood-framed Structures with Viscous
Fluid Dampers", Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 451-482.
Taylor Devices, Inc (2007) www.taylordevices.com/SeismicDampers.htm
Temperate Forest Foundation (2001), "Engineered Wood Products" Eco Link, Volume 11,
Number 4
Timber Research and Development Association TRADA, (2006), "Engineered Timber",

www.trada.co.uk/topics/enqineeredwood/
Timber Research and Development Association TRADA, (2006), "Technical Information",

www.trada.co.uk/techinfo/
Toratti, T. (2001), "Seismic design of timber structures", VTT Tiedotteita - Valtion

Teknillinen Tutkimuskeskus, n 2101, p 7-53.
Uniform Building Code (1997), International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO),

Whittier, CA.
Weyco, T.J (2002), "Expenditures vs. Lumber Consumption" TJ Weyco, Norbord

Industries.U.S New Building Construction p. 53
- 97 -

170835928-MIT

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

170835928-MIT

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

170835928-MIT

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Seismic Design of a Current Woodframe Structure and Study of

Innovative Products and Damping Systems in Wood Construction

Bachelors of Science in Civil and Environmental Engineering

SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL

MASTER OF ENGINEERING IN CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING

@ 2007 Nina A. Mahjoub. All rights reserved.

Thesis Supervisor: Jerome J. Connor

Thank You Pangolin for your presence.

LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................ 6

I. OVERVIEW OF CURRENT WOOD-FRAME CONSTRUCTION ................ 11

C. LATERAL ANALYSIS OF A TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL WOOD

1. NEW TECHNOLOGY OF WOOD PRODUCTS .................................... 49

A. INTRODUCTION TO WOOD ....................................................... 49

1I1. LITERATURE REVIEW OF INNOVATIVE DAMPING SYSTEMS.............. 66

A. PASSIVE ENERGY DISSIPATION SYSTEM .................................... 67

B. FROM RESEARCH TO PRACTICE ............................................. 70

C. ADDITIONAL READINGS & IDEA ON SUPPLEMENTAL DAMPING

1. APPENDIX HAPTERI ............................................................ 79

FIGURE 2: SEISMIC ZONE MAP OF THE UNITED STATES .................................................................. 13

FIGURE 3: WOOD DIAPHRAGM CARRYING UNIFORMLY DISTRIBUTED LOAD ..................................... 19

FIGURE 4: LOAD TRANSFER FROM LATERAL WALL TO HORIZONTAL DIAPHRAGM .............................. 20

FIGURE 5: LOAD TRANSFER FROM DIAPHRAGM TO SHEAR WALL ..................................................... 20

FIGURE 6: LOAD TRANSFER FROM SHEAR WALL TO FOUNDATION .................................................. 21

FIGURE 7: TYPICAL WOODFRAME SHEAR WALL CONSTRUCTION ..................................................... 22

FIGURE 8: SEGMENTED SHEAR W ALLS ......................................................................................... 22

FIGURE 9: SSW DETERMINATION OF SHEAR CAPACITY SCHEMATIC ................................................... 23

FIGURE 10: PERFORATED SHEAR W ALLS....................................................................................... 24

FIGURE 12: BLOCKINGS LOCATED ON EACH SIDE OF DOOR OPENINGS............................................ 28

REA DY FO R U S E)..........................................................................................................-. ...... 3 1

FIGURE 15: PORTION OF TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN OF DESIGN STRUCTURE ......................................... 36

FIGURE 16: WWPA "WESTERN LUMBER GRADING RULES" GRADE STAMP...................................... 49

FIGURE 17: TYPICAL WOOD DOUGLAS-FIR LARCH TYPE ................................................................ 50

FIGURE 18: G LULAM B EAM ......................................................................................... ........ ...... 52

FIGURE 19: FLOOR G LULAM BEAMS............................................................................................... 53

FIGURE 20: DISTRIBUTION OF DIFFERENT LAMINATIONS IN GLULAM BEAMS...................................... 53

FIGURE 21: REINFORCED GLULAM CROSS SECTION ........................................................................ 55

FIGURE 22: SAMPLE OF LAMINATED VENEER LUMBERS (LVL)............................................................ 57

FIGURE 23: PARALLEL STRAND LUMBER SAMPLE ........................................................................... 58

FIGURE 24: O S L RIMBOARD...................................................................................... .. ..-------..... 59

FIGURE 25: 1-JOIST CONFIGURATION & SAMPLE PRODUCTS........................................................... 60

FIGURE 26:1-JOISTS IN BASEMENT FLOOR ASSEMBLY .................................................................... 61

FIGURE 27: SCHEMATIC STRUCTURAL PLYWOOD ............................................................................ 62

FIGURE 28: ORIENTED STRAND BOARD SAMPLES.......................................................................... 63

FIGURE 29: OSB SHEATHING OF RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION ...................................................... 63

FIGURE 31: ENGINEERED W OOD PRODUCTS LIFE CYCLE................................................................... 65

FIGURE 32: ENERGY DISSIPATION AT CONSTANT AMPLITUDE CYCLING AMPLITUDE ............................ 68

FIGURE 33: SCHEMATIC OF VE MATERIAL CONNECTION TEST SPECIMEN ....................................... 68

FIGURE 36: FLUID-FILLED VISCOUS DAMPER CONFIGURATION ........................................................ 71

TABLE 2: DESCRIPTION OF TERMS FOUND IN BASE SHEAR CALCULATIONS ..................................... 14

TABLE 3: S O IL P RO FILES .................................................................................................................. 17

TABLE 5: EFFECT OF LUMBER TYPE ON A GIVEN HOLD-DOWN PRODUCT ......................................... 26

TABLE 6: ALLOWABLE TENSION LOADS FOR DIFFERENT HOLD-DOWNS MODELS.............................. 27

TABLE 7: DESIGN HOLD-DOWN CAPACITIES FOR OVERTURNING MOMENT ....................................... 38

TABLE 13: VARIOUS PROPRIETIES FOR DEFLECTION CALCULATIONS ............................................... 45

TABLE 15: SHEAR WALLS INFORMATION USED FOR DESIGN ............................................................ 46

TABLE 16: DESIGN TIE-DOWN DEVICE PROPERTIES ...................................................................... 47

TABLE 17: DESIGN DEVICE ELONGATION & ASSEMBLY DISPLACEMENT............................................ 47

TABLE 18: DESIGN SHEAR W ALL DEFLECTIONS.............................................................................. 48

TABLE 19: GLUED LAMINATED TIMBER CONVERSION TABLE ............................................................ 54

TABLE 20: COMPARISON OF TYPICAL MECHANICAL PROPERTIES..................................................... 55