2,238
Views
1
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

Lateral stiffening systems for tall timber buildings – tube-in-tube systems

, &
Pages 309-316 | Received 31 Mar 2022, Accepted 01 Jun 2022, Published online: 13 Jun 2022

Figures & data

Figure 1. Schematic representation of the investigated structure typologies, based on Fazlur Kahn (Ali and Moon Citation2007) (left) and schematic representation of the tube-in-tube system with its structural behaviour (right).

Figure 1. Schematic representation of the investigated structure typologies, based on Fazlur Kahn (Ali and Moon Citation2007) (left) and schematic representation of the tube-in-tube system with its structural behaviour (right).

Figure 2. Tube-in-tube system.

Figure 2. Tube-in-tube system.

Figure 3. Structural system (left) and the statically equivalent model for determining the rotational stiffness of the beam-column joint (right).

Figure 3. Structural system (left) and the statically equivalent model for determining the rotational stiffness of the beam-column joint (right).

Figure 4. Statically equivalent member dimensions representing the approach of the joint stiffness Krot in comparison to the member dimensions.

Figure 4. Statically equivalent member dimensions representing the approach of the joint stiffness Krot in comparison to the member dimensions.

Table 1. Overview of the simulation-parameters for the different systems.

Figure 5. Illustration of the parameters.

Figure 5. Illustration of the parameters.

Figure 6. Comparison of the peak accelerations and the natural frequency fn (left) for the analysed tube-in-tube systems (right).

Figure 6. Comparison of the peak accelerations and the natural frequency fn (left) for the analysed tube-in-tube systems (right).

Figure 7. A single-degree-of-freedom system (a) is used to represent the building stiffness in the first mode. The equivalent spring-mass system (b) is denoted by the stiffness K (c).

Figure 7. A single-degree-of-freedom system (a) is used to represent the building stiffness in the first mode. The equivalent spring-mass system (b) is denoted by the stiffness K (c).

Figure 8. Comparison of parameters with constant reference values. The reference values are: nc = 33, vb,0 =  25.0 m/s, pfloor = 7.5 kN/m2, δs = 0.05.

Figure 8. Comparison of parameters with constant reference values. The reference values are: nc = 33, vb,0 =  25.0 m/s, pfloor = 7.5 kN/m2, δs = 0.05.

Figure 9. Natural frequencies for different building heights and widths.

Figure 9. Natural frequencies for different building heights and widths.

Figure 10. Peak accelerations for different building heights and widths.

Figure 10. Peak accelerations for different building heights and widths.