Abstract
AbstractTwo roof structures representing vintage unreinforced masonry (URM) building components were subjected to longitudinal pseudo‐static cyclic loading. The overall roof dimensions were 8.94 m (span) by 3.1 m (length), with each roof incorporating a pair of as‐built timber trusses that were retrieved from two demolished URM buildings. Both roofs were tested first with nailed connections representing original construction and then again with connections that included proprietary metal brackets and straps representing a remediation of the original construction. The loading was applied perpendicular to the trusses, hence parallel to the diaphragm purlins. Damage patterns and deformation profiles were used to interpret the mechanics governing the roof behaviour utilizing existing modelling techniques for timber floors. It was found that the roof behaviour was shear‐dominated, akin to the in‐plane response of timber floors. For the direction of applied loading, both roof stiffness and roof strength were governed by the strength of the connections between the trusses and the diaphragm purlin members and the purlin spacing. Consistent with these findings, a method was suggested to estimate the stiffness and strength of similar roof structures that may have different aspect ratios using the results from the tests. A comparison between the various test results showed that implementing upgrades that were focused on the connections significantly improved the roof stiffness and roof strength.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.