4.3 Article

Flexural Behavior of Typical Chinese Traditional Timber Stitching Beams

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE
Volume 9, Issue 8, Pages 1050-1058

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/15583058.2014.923954

Keywords

Chinese traditional timber building; stitching beam; flexural capacity; plane hypothesis; maximum deflection

Funding

  1. Civil Engineering Department at Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51138002]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2242013R30001]
  4. Open Research Fund of State Key Laboratory of Subtropical Building Science [2014KB07]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In Chinese traditional timber buildings, stitching is very common. When the bearing capacity or the rigidity is inadequate, a timber beam is often strengthened with another beam using the stitching method. The timber stitching beams are mainly of two types-the small-top/big-bottom type and the big-top/small-bottom type. To study the bending behavior of these two types of timber stitching beams, including the failure mode, the flexural capacity, the strain distribution at mid-span section, and the maximum deflection, bending tests are carried out on 14 timber stitching beams with Chinese traditional conformation for seven pine beams and seven fir beams. The results show that the failure modes of the small-top/big-bottom type of stitching beams all show brittle fractures at the bottoms of the bottom beams. The failure modes of the big-top/small-bottom type of stitching beams all show brittle fractures at the bottoms of the top beams. The distribution of section strain along the height of each part of the beam basically obeys plane hypothesis. Based on the theoretical and experimental analysis, the calculation formulas of flexural capacity and maximum deflection of these two types of timber stitching beams made of pine and fir are presented.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available