Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering

, Volume 17, Issue 2, pp 1009–1028 | Cite as

Seismic analysis of multi-storey timber buildings braced with a CLT core and perimeter shear-walls

  • Andrea PolastriEmail author
  • Matteo Izzi
  • Luca Pozza
  • Cristiano Loss
  • Ian Smith
Original Research


The seismic behaviour of multi-storey heavy-frame timber building superstructures braced by Cross-Laminated-Timber (CLT) shear-walls is investigated based on numerical linear dynamic simulations. All systems analysed have the same rectangular plan footprint dimensions, type of framework and shear-walls arrangement at each storey. For structural efficiency, the layout of lateral load-resisting systems combines a central building core with partial length perimeter shear-walls. What differs between cases is the number of storeys (3, 5, or 7), components specifications, and shear-walls anchoring methods. Special attention is paid to examining how the vertical joints between CLT shear-walls affect the seismic response. The properties of connections used in the analyses are obtained from testing of hold-down anchors and angle-bracket shear connectors. Results of the simulations demonstrate that mid-rise buildings are prone to effects of the lateral flexibility and transfer high uplift loads to the foundations during design level seismic events. By implication, special design measures may be necessary to limit the lateral drifts to the levels prescribed by the standards. Simplified representations of connection properties may yield to inappropriate predictions of lateral drifts of superstructures during seismic events, and to an improper design of connections. In future, the efficient realisation of multi-storey heavy-frame timber building superstructures braced by CLT shear-walls depends on the use of proper connection devices. Suitable devices may include metal tie-downs capable of reducing the inter-storey drift, while transferring forces to foundations in a manner that does not locally damage frameworks, shear-walls, or floor and roof diaphragms.


Cross-Laminated Timber Heavy-frame structure Linear dynamic analysis Mechanical connection Numerical modelling Seismic design Shear-wall 


  1. Blaß HJ, Uibel T (2007) Tragfähigkeit von stiftförmigen Verbindungsmitteln in Brettsperrholz. 8, Karlsruher Berichte zum Ingenieurholzbau, Karlsruhe, Germany.
  2. Casagrande D, Doudak G, Polastri A (2018) A proposal for the capacity-design at wall- and building-level in light-frame and cross-laminated timber buildings. Submitted to Bulletin of Earthquake EngineeringGoogle Scholar
  3. Ceccotti A, Sandhaas C, Okabe M, Yasumura M, Minowa C, Kawai N (2013) SOFIE project—3D shaking table test on a seven-storey full-scale cross-laminated building. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 42(13):2003–2021. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chopra AK (2007) Dynamics of structures—theory and applications to earthquake engineering. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  5. Dujic B, Aicher S, Zarnic R (2005) Investigation on in-plane loaded wooden elements—influence of loading on boundary conditions. Otto-Graf-Journal 16:259–272Google Scholar
  6. Dujic B, Strus K, Zarnic R, Ceccotti A (2010) Prediction of dynamic response of a a 7-storey massive XLam wooden building tested on a shaking table. In: World conference on timber engineering (WCTE), Riva del Garda, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  7. Ehlbeck J, Larsen HJ (1993) Eurocode 5—design of timber structures: joints. In: International workshop on wood connectors, Madison, Wisconsin, USAGoogle Scholar
  8. EN 12512:2001/A1 (2005) Timber structures. Test methods. Cyclic testing of joints made with mechanical fasteners. Comité Européen de Normalisation, Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  9. EN 14080 (2013) Timber structures. Glued laminated timber and glued solid timber. Requirements. Comité Européen de Normalisation, Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  10. EN 1998-1:2004/A1 (2013) Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance. Part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. Comité Européen de Normalisation, Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  11. EN 1993-1-1:2005/A1 (2014) Eurocode 3: design of steel structures. Part 1-1: general rules and rules for buildings. Comité Européen de Normalisation, Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  12. EN 1995-1-1:2004/A2 (2014) Eurocode 5: design of timber structures. Part 1-1: general. Common rules and rules for buildings. Comité Européen de Normalisation, Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  13. EN 26891 (1991) Timber structures. Joints made with mechanical fasteners. General principles for the determination of strength and deformation characteristics Comité Européen de Normalisation, Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  14. ETA-13/0523 (2013) European technical assessment. Annular ring shank nails and connector screws. ETA, Nordhavn, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  15. ETA-11/0496 (2014) European technical assessment. Three-dimensional nailing plate (Angle bracket for timber-to-timber or timber-to-concrete or steel connections). ETA, Nordhavn, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  16. ETA-11/0086 (2015) European technical assessment. Three-dimensional nailing plate (Angle brackets and hold-downs for timber-to-timber or timber-to-concrete or steel connections). ETA, Nordhavn, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  17. ETA-11/0030 (2016) European technical assessment. Screws for use in timber constructions. ETA, Nordhavn, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  18. Flatscher G (2017) Evaluation and approximation of timber connection properties for displacement-based analysis of CLT wall systems. Graz University of Technology, Graz, Austria.
  19. Flatscher G, Schickhofer G (2016) Displacement-based determination of laterally loaded cross laminated timber (CLT) wall systems. In: International network on timber engineering research 2016 meeting, Graz, Austria, Paper 49-12-1Google Scholar
  20. Flatscher G, Bratulic K, Schickhofer G (2015) Experimental tests on cross-laminated timber joints and walls. Proc ICE Struct Build 168(11):868–877. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Follesa M, Fragiacomo M, Casagrande D, Tomasi R, Piazza M, Vassallo D, Canetti D, Rossi S (2018) The new provisions for the seismic design of timber buildings in Europe. Eng Struct 168:736–747. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gavric I, Fragiacomo M, Ceccotti A (2013) Capacity seismic design of X-LAM wall systems based on connection mechanical properties. In: 46th Conseil International dû Batiment-Working Group 18 Meeting, Vancouver, Canada, Paper 46-15-2Google Scholar
  23. Gavric I, Fragiacomo M, Ceccotti A (2015a) Cyclic behaviour of typical metal connectors for cross laminated (CLT) structures. Mater Struct 48(6):1841–1857. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gavric I, Fragiacomo M, Ceccotti A (2015b) Cyclic behavior of CLT wall systems: experimental tests and analytical prediction models. J Struct Eng 141(11):04015034. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hashemi A, Zarnani P, Masoudnia R, Quenneville P (2017) Seismic resistant rocking coupled walls with innovative Resilient Slip Friction (RSF) joints. J Constr Steel Res 129:215–226. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hilson BO (1995) Joints with dowel-type fasteners—theory. Timber Engineering STEP 1: Basis of design, material properties, structural components and joints, pp C3/1-11, Centrum Hout, Almere, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  27. Hummel J, Flatscher G, Seim W, Schickhofer G (2013) CLT wall elements under cyclic loading—details for anchorage and connection. In: COST action FP1004, focus solid timber solutions—European conference on cross laminated timber (CLT), pp: 152-165, Graz, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  28. Izzi M, Flatscher G, Fragiacomo M, Schickhofer G (2016) Experimental investigations and design provisions of steel-to-timber joints with annular-ringed shank nails for Cross-Laminated Timber structures. Constr Build Mater 122:446–457. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Izzi M, Casagrande D, Bezzi S, Pasca D, Follesa M, Tomasi R (2018a) Seismic behaviour of Cross-Laminated Timber structures: a state-of-the-art review. Eng Struct 170:42–52. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Izzi M, Polastri A, Fragiacomo M (2018b) Investigating the hysteretic behavior of Cross-Laminated Timber wall systems due to connections. J Struct Eng 144(5):04018035. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Izzi M, Polastri A, Fragiacomo M (2018c) Modelling the mechanical behaviour of typical wall-to-floor connection systems for Cross-Laminated Timber structures. Eng Struct 162:270–282. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kramer A, Barbosa AR, Sinha A (2015) Performance of steel energy dissipators connected to Cross-Laminated Timber wall panels subjected to tension and cyclic loading. J Struct Eng 142(4):E4015013. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Loo WY, Quenneville P, Chouw N (2014) A new type of symmetric slip-friction connector. J Constr Steel Res 94:11–22. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Loss C, Piazza M, Zandonini R (2016) Connections for steel-timber hybrid prefabricated buildings. Part I: experimental tests. Constr Build Mater 122:781–795. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Moroder D, Smith T, Dunbar A, Pampanin S, Buchanan A (2018) Seismic testing of post-tensioned Pres-Lam core walls using cross laminated timber. Eng Struct 167:639–654. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Muñoz W, Mohammad M, Salenikovich A, Quenneville P (2008) Determination of yield point and ductility of timber assemblies: in search for a harmonised approach. In: World conference on timber engineering (WCTE), Miyazaki, JapanGoogle Scholar
  37. Norme Tecniche per le Costruzioni, NTC (Italian code for structural design) (2008) Decreto Ministeriale del 14 Gennaio 2008, Supplemento Ordinario alla G.U. n. 29 del 4 Febbraio 2008. Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  38. ÖNORM B 1995-1-1 (2014) Eurocode 5. Bemessung und Konstruktion von Holzbauten. Teil 1-1: Allgemeines. Allgemeine Regeln und Regeln für den Hochbau. Nationale Festlegungen zur Umsetzung der ÖNORM EN 1995-1-1 nationale Erläuterungen und nationale Ergänzungen. ÖN, Wien, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  39. Polastri A, Pozza L (2016) Proposal for a standardized design and modeling procedure of tall CLT buildings. Int J Qual Res 10(3):607–624. Google Scholar
  40. Polastri A, Pozza L, Loss C, Smith I (2016) Numerical analyses of high- and medium-rise CLT buildings braced with cores and additional shear walls. In: Structures and architecture: concepts, applications and challenges, pp. 128–136,
  41. Polastri A, Giongo I, Piazza M (2017) An innovative connection system for CLT structures. Struct Eng Int 27(4):502–511. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Polastri A, Giongo I, Angeli A, Brandner R (2018) Mechanical characterization of a pre-fabricated connection system for Cross Laminated Timber structures in seismic regions. Eng Struct 167:705–715. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Popovski M, Pei S, Van de Lindt JW, Karacabeyli E (2014) Force modification factors for CLT structures for NBCC. In: Aicher S, Reinhardt HW, Garrecht H (eds) Materials and joints in timber structures, vol 9. Springer, New York, pp 543–553. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pozza L, Scotta R, Trutalli D, Polastri A, Smith I (2016) Experimentally based q-factor estimation of cross-laminated timber walls. Proc ICE Struct Build 169(7):492–507. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pozza L, Saetta A, Savoia M, Talledo D (2017a) Coupled axial-shear numerical model for CLT connections. Constr Build Mater 150:568–582. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pozza L, Savoia M, Franco L, Saetta A, Talledo D (2017b) Effect of different modelling approaches on the prediction of the seismic response of multi-storey CLT buildings. Int J Comput Methods Exp Meas 5(6):953–965. Google Scholar
  47. Pozza L, Ferracuti B, Massari M, Savoia M (2018) Axial-shear interaction on CLT hold-down connections—experimental investigation. Eng Struct 160:95–110. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Reynolds T, Casagrande D, Tomasi R (2016) Comparison of multi-storey cross-laminated timber and timber frame buildings by in situ modal analysis. Constr Build Mater 102:1009–1017. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Rinaldin G, Amadio C, Fragiacomo M (2013) A component approach for the hysteretic behaviour of connections in cross-laminated wooden structures. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 42(13):2023–2042. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sandhaas C, Mergny E (2016) Yield moment of nails. In: INTER 2016 Meeting, Graz, Austria, Note 1Google Scholar
  51. Sandhaas C, Boukes J, Van de Kuilen J-WG, Ceccotti A (2009) Analysis of X-lam panel-to-panel connections under monotonic and cyclic loading. In: 42nd CIB-W18 meeting, Dübendorf, Zürich, Swizerland, Paper 42-12-2Google Scholar
  52. Sarti F, Palermo A, Pampanin S (2016) Fuse-type external replaceable dissipaters: experimental program and numerical modeling. J Struct Eng 142(12):04016134. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Scotta R, Marchi L, Trutalli D, Pozza L (2016) A dissipative connector for CLT buildings: concept, design and testing. Materials (Basel) 9:9030139. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Smith I, Frangi A (2014) Use of Timber in Tall Multi-Storey Buildings. Structural Design Document 13 (SED13), International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering, Zurich, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  55. Strand7 (2010) Theoretical manual. Sydney, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  56. Tomasi R, Smith I (2015) Experimental characterization of monotonic and cyclic loading responses of CLT panel-to-foundation angle bracket connections. J Mater Civ Eng 27(6):04014189. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Trutalli D, Pozza L (2018) Seismic design of floor-wall joints of multi-storey CLT buildings to comply with regularity in elevation. Bull Earthq Eng 16(1):183–201. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Trutalli D, Marchi L, Scotta R, Pozza L (2018) Capacity design of traditional and innovative connections for earthquake-resistant CLT structures. Submitted to Bulletin of Earthquake EngineeringGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Research Council of Italy - Trees and Timber Institute (CNR IVALSA)San Michele all’adigeItaly
  2. 2.Department of Civil, Chemical, Environmental and Materials EngineeringUniversity of BolognaBolognaItaly
  3. 3.Department of Civil, Environmental and Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of TrentoTrentoItaly
  4. 4.Faculty of Forestry and Environmental ManagementUniversity of New BrunswickFrederictonCanada

Personalised recommendations