Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 725737

www.elsevier.com/locate/apm

Mathematical modelling of timber-framed walls

strengthened with CFRP strips
Miroslav Premrov *, Peter Dobrila
University of Maribor, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Smetanova 17, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia
Received 1 November 2005; received in revised form 1 January 2007; accepted 16 February 2007
Available online 24 February 2007

Abstract
This paper provides mathematical modelling for prefabricated timber-framed walls composed of a timber frame and
bre-plaster boards. Because the tensile strength of the bre-plaster boards is approximately 10-times lower than the compressive one, it is convenient to strengthen the boards in their tensile diagonal direction with carbon bre-reinforced polymer (CFRP) strips, which are glued to the boards. Based on analysis of experimental research results [M. Premrov, P.
Dobrila, B.S. Bedenik, Analysis of timber-framed walls coated with CFRP strips strengthened bre-plaster boards, Int.
J. Solids Struct. 41 (24/25) (2004) 70357048] special approximate mathematical models have been developed. The models
enable simultaneously to consider the inuence of inserted CFRP strips, exibility of mechanical fasteners in the connecting areas and any appearing of tensile cracks in the coating boards.
 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Timber structures; Walls; CFRP strips; Mathematical modelling

1. Introduction
There is an increasing tendency worldwide to build multi-level (four and more) prefabricated timber structures with timber frame wall panels as the main bearing capacity elements. The treated wall is a composite
element consisting of framed panels made from sheets of board-material xed by mechanical fasteners to
one or both sides of the timber frame (Fig. 1). There are many types of panel products available which
may have some structural capacity such as wood-based materials (plywood, oriented strand board, hardboard,
particleboard, etc.) or plaster and bre-plaster boards (FPB), recently the most frequently used in Central Europe. One of the most important reasons for an increased application of these types of gypsum products is their
relatively good re protection. Additionally, gypsum is a healthy natural material and is consequently particularly desired for residential buildings. In the presented research we will limit our attention to FPB.

Corresponding author. Tel.: +386 2 22 94 347; fax: +386 2 25 24 179.

E-mail address: miroslav.premrov@uni-mb.si (M. Premrov).

0307-904X/$ - see front matter  2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.apm.2007.02.009

726

M. Premrov, P. Dobrila / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 725737

FH,tot

FH

x
h

CFRP strips

bd

nb
y

FH =

FH ,tot
n

zt

timber frame

coating board

Fig. 1. Static design and cross-section of the timber-framed wall.

In structural analysis panel walls for design purposes can be regarded separately as vertical cantilever
beams with the horizontal force (F H F H;tot =n acting at the top (Fig. 1), as can be found for example in Faherty and Williamson [1], Hoyle and Woeste [2] and Eurocode 5 [3].
Described walls can be treated as composite elements. Distribution of the horizontal force by a composite
treatment of the element depends on the proportion of the stiness. Because the tensile strength of FPB is
approximately 10-times lower than the compressive one, and evidently smaller than the wood strength of
all members in the timber frame, the FPB are usually a weaker part of the presented composite system. Thus,
especially in multi-level buildings located in seismic or windy areas, cracks in FPB usually appear. In these
cases the FPB lose their stiness and therefore their resistance should not be considered at all. Stresses in
the timber frame under a horizontal loads are usually not critical.
There are several possibilities to reinforce panel walls in order to avoid cracks in FPB:
by using additional boards. The boards are usually doubled:
symmetrically (on both sides of a timber frame),
non-symmetrically (on one side of a timber frame),
by reinforcing boards with steel diagonals,
by reinforcing boards with carbon or high-strength synthetic bres (FRP, CFRP, etc.).
In Dobrila and Premrov [4] experimental results using additional FPB are presented. The test samples demonstrated higher elasticity, whilst bearing capacity and especially ductility were not improved in the desired
range.
With the intention to improve the resistance and especially the ductility of the walls it is therefore more
convenient to insert classical diagonal steel strips, which have to be xed to the timber frame. In this case only
a part of the horizontal force is shifted from boards over the tensile steel diagonal to the timber frame after the
appearance of the rst crack in the tensile zone of FPB (Dobrila and Premrov [4]).
2. Reinforcing with diagonal CFRP strips
Literature provides few investigations on wood-based panels strengthened with high-strength bres (HSF).
The use of HSF sheathing material does not increase the bearing capacity much if mechanical fasteners are

M. Premrov, P. Dobrila / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 725737

727

applied to connect the wood-based sheets to the timber frame. Kent and Tingley [5] presented experimental
results for high-strength synthetic ber reinforced panels bonded to hollow beams. Test experiments performed in EMPA on wood-based panels reinforced with Sika CarboDur strips demonstrated an essential
increase in bending resistance by 43% (Zagar [6]).
Since the tensile strength of FPB is obviously lower than the compressive one and corresponding capacity
of timber frame, the treated wall elements tend to fail because the cracks are forming in the tensile area of the
FPB, therefore this tensile area could be reinforced with high-strength materials. This strengthening concept is
such that the composites would contribute to tensile capacity when the tensile strength of FPB is exceeded.
Experimental results obtained on timber-framed walls strengthened with diagonal CFRP strips (Premrov
and Dobrila [7]), which were glued on FPB, demonstrate some important facts, which should to be considered
by mathematical modelling of the wall elements:
(a) There was no essential inuence on the element stiness of any reinforcement before cracks appeared in
tensile area of un-strengthened FPB.
(b) The elastic resistance (force forming the rst crack) essentially increased for all kinds of CFRP strengthened test samples.
(c) After the rst cracks in un-strengthened FPB appeared, the test samples proved an important distinction
in behaviour in timber frame-breboard connecting area dependant on the boundary conditions between
inserted CFRP strips and timber frame. If the strips were additionally glued to the timber frame the fasteners produced substantially smaller slip in the connecting area, which never exceeded 1 mm when the
rst tensile cracks in FPB appeared. Therefore it can be assumed that the yield point of the fasteners was
not achieved before cracks appeared at all and the elements tend to fail because of cracks appearing in
FPB. On the other hand, in the case where the CFRP diagonals were unconnected to the timber frame,
the slip between the FPB and the timber frame was evidently higher and the walls tend to fail because of
fastener yielding.
(d) It has been shown that the inclusion of CFRP diagonal strip reinforcement on the load-carrying capacity
can be quite high and that it is maximized when the carbon strips were additionally glued to the timber
frame.

3. Mathematical modelling of diagonally reinforced wall elements

We will focus our research on numerical stress and deformation analysis of the prescribed wall element subjected to a horizontal force acting at the top of the cantilevered panel wall (Fig. 1). The wall element actually
behaves like a composite deep beam, however in engineering praxis a simplied mathematical shear model is
usually used. We will shortly describe the shear model, but more attention will be dedicated to the composite
model developed by ourselves.
3.1. Shear model
Many design models have been proposed in order to analyse and predict the behaviour of wall diaphragms
kerlund [9] proposed an agreeable approach to determine the
subjected to lateral loads. Kallsner [8] and A
load-carrying capacity of the wall unit, based on the following key assumptions:
behaviour of the joints between the sheet and the frame members is assumed to be linear-elastic until
failure,
the frame members and the sheets are assumed to be rigid and hinged to each other.
Two simplied computational methods are given in the nal draft of Eurocode 5 [3] in order to determine
the load-carrying capacity of the wall diaphragm.
The rst Method A, is identical to the Lower bound plastic method, presented by Kallsner and Lam
[10]. It should be provided that:

728

M. Premrov, P. Dobrila / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 725737

the spacing of fasteners (s) is constant along the perimeter of every coating board (sheet),
the width (b) of each sheet is at least h/4.
This method denes the walls shear resistance (Fv,Rd) as a sum of all the fasteners shear resistances (Ff,Rd)
along the loaded edges using an assumption that the timber frame members and the sheets are rigid and hinged
to each other:
X
b
1
F v;Rd
F f;Rd   c
s
8
< 1 for b P b0
b
c
where b0 h=2:
2
:
for b 6 b0
b0
The second simplied shear model, prescribed in Method B, is applicable to walls made from sheets of woodbased panel products only, fastened to a timber frame. The fastening of the sheets to the timber frame should
either be by nails or screws, and the fasteners should be equally spaced around the perimeter of the sheet.
According to Method A the sheathing material factor (kn), the fastener spacing factor (ks), the vertical load
factor (ki,q) and the dimension factor for the panel (kd) are included in the design procedure in the form of:
X
b
F v;Rd
F f;Rd   c  k d  k i;q  k s  k n
3
s0
9700  d
;
4
where s0
qk
d is fastener diameter and qk is characteristic density of the timber frame.
All the above mentioned methods are usually unsuitable for treated walls sheathed with bre-plaster boards
(FPB). The main assumptions do not exactly coincide with the real state of FPB, in which the tensile strength
is evidently lower than the compressive one. Consequently, cracks in a tensile zone in FPB usually appear
under heavy horizontal loads before stresses on the fasteners reach their yielding point, and the breboards
do not behave usually as rigid elements (Dobrila and Premrov [4]). Consequently, there is no need to reinforce
the coating boards and therefore there are no special expressions to consider the inuence of steel or CFRP
diagonal reinforcement.
3.2. Composite model
Described walls, consisting of timber frame and bre-plaster boards, should be treated as composite elements. By employing FPB as a coating material, a horizontal load shifts a part of the force over the mechanical fasteners to the breboard and the wall acts like a deep beam.
Our expressions will be based on a key assumption that the CFRP diagonals are glued to the FPB and additionally glued to the timber frame. It is the most important fact while in this case only a part of the horizontal
force is shifted from boards over the tensile CFRP diagonal to the timber frame after the appearance of the
rst crack in the tensile zone of FPB.
Distribution of the horizontal force by composite treatment of the element depends on the proportion of
stiness. The eective bending stiness EI y eff of mechanically jointed beams which empirically considers the
exibility of fasteners via coecient cy, taken from Eurocode 5 [3], can be written in the form of:
EI y eff

n
X
i1

nX
timber
board

 nX




Ei  I yi cyi  Ai  a2i
Ei  I yi Ei  cyi  Ai  a2i timber
Ei  I yi board ;
i1

j1

where n is the total number of elements in the considered cross-section and ai is a distance between global
y-axis of the whole cross-section and local yi-axis of the ith element with a cross-section Ai (see Fig. 1).
The second moment of area for timber about the local yi-axis Ei  I yi timber is in comparison with other values
very small and may be neglected. In this case the above equation results in an approximation:

EI y eff 

2
X


M. Premrov, P. Dobrila / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 725737

729

2
X


Ei  I yi board  cy  EI y timber EI y board :

Ei  cyi  Ai  a2i

timber

i1

j1

We can mention from Eq. (6) that the bending stiness strongly depends on the stiness coecient of the
fasteners (cy). Respecting Eurocode 5 [3] it can be dened via the fastener spacing (s) and the modied slip
modulus per shear plane per fastener (K*), taking into account the fasteners slip modulus (K) and the contribution of the CFRP diagonal strips (KCFRP):
K  K K CFRP :

The stiness coecient of the fasteners (cy) is then dened in the form of:
1
;
1 ky

cy

ky

p2  At1  Et  s
:
L2eff  K 

Experimental studies were conducted on the structural behaviour of wood-based diaphragms depending on
fasteners behaviour, for example Chou and Polensek [11], Polensek and Bastendor [12] and Van Wyk
[13]. An experimental analysis on the inuence of fastener spacing on behaviour of the treated walls with
FPB coating material can be found in Dobrila and Premrov [4].
Numerical analysis of CFRP diagonally reinforced wall panels is not easy at all. It is important to consider
simultaneously:
the inuence of inserted CFRP diagonals,
exibility of mechanical fasteners between the boards and the timber frame,
formation of cracks in a tensile area of bre-plaster boards.
In the following analysis we will generally use approximate analytical mathematical models derived in
Premrov and Dobrila [14]. However, some important modications will be done to consider specic remarks
in behaviour of CFRP strengthened FPB, taken from the experimental research [7] and described in Section 2,
substances (a)(d).
3.2.1. Inuence of inserted CFRP diagonals
The inuence of diagonally inserted CFRP elements is based on an approximate analytical assumption of
the compatibility of the horizontal deections between reinforced (ud) and ctitious unreinforced (ub) panels.
According to the computational scheme presented in Fig. 2 a shear deformation in one breboard is:
tgc  cyx

oub ovb
s
FH

;
Gb 2  v  DA1b  Gb
oy
ox

where Gb represents the shear modulus of a breboard and DA1b is a ctitiously enlarged cross-sectional area
of one breboard as an inuence of inserted CFRP diagonals. A non-dimensional coecient v is considered as
a shear cross-section coecient corresponding to the proportion between shear and actual cross-sectional area
of the breboard.
A shear deformation (c) of the breboard is:
ub
tan c ) ub tan c  hd :
10
hd
By inserting of Eq. (10) into Eq. (9) a horizontal deection of the board at the top of the element (ub) can be
written as:
ub

F H  hd
:
2  v  DA1b  Gb

11

The axial force (S) in the tensile CFRP diagonal in one breboard is:
S

FH
;
sin a

a arctan

bd
;
hd

12

730

M. Premrov, P. Dobrila / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 725737

CFRP strips
ub=ud=u
FH

FH

FH

S
u/y

hd
y
S
x
v/x

bd
Fig. 2. Computational model.

where a represents the angle of inserted CFRP strips. A horizontal deection of the tensile diagonal (ud) is
achieved using the principle of virtual work in the form of:
Z
SS
F H  hd
hd
ud
;
13
dx
; ld
2
cos a
2  sin a  cos a  ECFRP  A1;d
ld E CFRP  2A1;d
where ECFRP is the modulus of elasticity of the CFRP strips and A1,d is the net area of one diagonal strip. As
we declared our main assumption is based on a compatibility condition between both horizontal deections
written from Eqs. (11) and (13):
F H  hd
F H  hd

:
14
ub ud )
2  v  DA1b  Gb 2  sin2 a  cos a  ECFRP  A1;d
A ctitious enlarged cross-sectional area of one board (DA1b is thus obtained as a contribution of the inserted
tensile CFRP diagonal:
1 ECFRP
DA1b 
 sin2 a  cos a  A1;d :
v Gb
The total surface of a cross-sectional area of one ctitious breboard is thus:
1 ECFRP
A1b A1b DA1b t  b 
 sin2 a  cos a  A1;d :
v Gb
Theoretically A1b could be used in two dierent forms; by using the ctitious thickness of the FPB:
A
1 ECFRP
1
t 1b t 
 sin2 a  cos a  A1;d 
v Gb
b
b

15

16

17

or with the ctitious width (b*) of the FPB. The both models are numerically presented in [14] by analyzing the
reinforcing with classical steel diagonals. However, in a case of CFRP reinforcing the model with b* seems to
be inapplicable.
For design purposes a simplied design method for mechanically jointed elements according to Annex B of
Eurocode 5 [3] is widely used. Expression of the so called c-method is based on the dierential equation for
the partial composite action with the following fundamental assumptions:
(a) Bernoullis hypothesis is valid for each sub-component,
(b) slip stiness is constant along the element,
(c) material behaviour of all sub-components is linear elastic.

M. Premrov, P. Dobrila / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 725737

731

To obtain a simple analytical solution a bending moment should vary sinusoidally along the element. However, because the dierences between the simplied method and an exact solution of the dierential equation
are not so relevant, the method can be used also for elements with bending moments varying parabolically or
linearly. Eurocode 5 [3] in Annex B allows using the expressions also for cantilevers, but with span (L) equal to
twice the cantilever length. By using Eurocode 5 [3] expressions (B.7), (B.8) and (B.9) from Annex B, maximal
normal (rt;max and shear (st;max stresses in timber can be computed in a form of:
M y  Et 
a
 cy  z t ;
rt;max 
18
2
EI y eff


V z  ES y
eff
;
19
st;max
EI y eff  2a
where zt is the distance from the global center of gravity to the center of gravity of the timber stud (Fig. 1) and
a is the width of the timber stud (Fig. 3a). The eective bending stiness EI y eff is dened using Eq. (5) or Eq.
(6). In a similar way the maximal stresses in FPB are dened as:
M y  Eb b
 ;
EI y eff 2
h

i
 2
V z  ES y
2t 8b  Eb

rb;max 
sb;max

eff

EI y eff  2t

20

21

yI

y II
x II

A b1, E b
t*
A t1 , E t

A t1 , E t

A t2 , E t

c
t*

d
ztII

a
zcII

b d = 2 zp
b

b
My

c ct
n yc

cb,max

cb

c tt
n yt
F cb F ct

F tt

Fig. 3. (a) Mathematical model for the cross-section with a tensile crack in FPB and (b) considered normal stress distribution.

732

M. Premrov, P. Dobrila / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 725737

3.2.2. Modelling of cracks in FPB

The tensile strength (fbt) of bre-plaster sheeting material is very low. Consequently, cracks in tensile area
of bre-plaster boards usually appear. The horizontal force forming the rst tensile crack (FH,cr) in FPB is
dened according to the stress criteria in Eq. (20):
M y;cr

2  fbt  EI y eff
2  fbt  EI y eff
) F H;cr
:
Eb  b
E b  b  hd

22

Four major assumptions will be considered in the presented modelling of the cracked cross-section:
The tensile area of the breboards is neglected after the rst crack formation.
The stiness coecient of the fasteners in the tensile connecting area (cyt) is assumed to be constant and
equal to the value by appearing the rst crack.
The stiness coecient of the fasteners in the compressed connecting area (cyc) is not constant and depends
on the lateral force acting on one fastener (Fig. 4).
The normal stress distribution is assumed to be linear (Fig. 3b). This simplication can be used only by
assumption that behaviour of timber frame in tension is almost elastic until failure and that the compressive
normal stress in timber and in FPB is under the belonging yield point.
Position (xII) of a new neutral axis (yII) is computed according to the presented computational scheme
(Fig. 3) by respecting the equilibrium criteria in x-direction:
F cb F ct  F tt 0
F tt rctt  At1
23

F ct rcct  At1
F cb

xII

rccb  xII  2t

rccb  xII  t
2

q
C 2 C 22  4C 1  C 3
2C 1

F1[N]

C 1 t ;
;

Et
C 2 At1  n  cyc cyt ; n
Eb
h

a
ai
C 3 n  At1  cyt  b 
cyc  :
2
2

b F1 [N]

Ku

F1* [N]

Kser
dF1/d = 0
Ff,Rk

Ff,Rd
Ku
constant

Nal
Kser

[mm]

K [N/mm]

KCFRP [N/mm]

Fig. 4. (a) F 1 D diagram, (b) three-linear interpol. diagram for K and (c) constant value for K CFRP .

M. Premrov, P. Dobrila / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 725737

733

Because of crack appearing the eective bending stiness EI y eff is now decreased according to Eq. (6):
 3



x3
2a  c d 3  c
II
EI y eff Eb I b Et I t Eb  2t  II Et 

At1  cyc  z2cII cyt  z2tII

12
12
3
24
a
a
zcII xII  ; ztII b   xII :
2
2
Maximal normal (rt;max and shear (st;max stresses in timber can be dened in a form of:
M y  Et h
ai

c

z

In tension:
rtt;max
:
tII
yt
2
EI y II
eff
M y  Et h
ai

c

z

:
In compression:
rct;max 
cII
yc
2
EI y II
eff

II
V z  ES y
II
eff
; ES y eff Et  cyc  At1  zcII :
Shear :
st;max
II
EI y eff  2a

25
26

27

Maximal stresses in FPB can be dened as:

In compression:

rcb;max 

M y  Eb
EI y II
eff

 xII :

28

II

Shear :

sb;max

V z  ES y eff
II

EI y eff  2t

29

If we declare as a characteristic crushing condition the case when the tensile normal stress in timber (rtt;max
achieves the characteristic tensile timber strength (ft,0,k), the characteristic horizontal crushing force (FH,u) is
computed in the following form:
II

F H;u

ft;0;k  EI y eff

 :
Et  cyt  ztII a2  h

30

To conrm the substance (a) in Section 2 it is interesting to dene the part of the acting horizontal force (FH)
which is taken over the CFRP diagonal strip (FH,CFRP):
F H;CFRP k 1  k 2  F H ;
k 1 2  sin2 a  cos a  ECFRP  A1;d ;

k2 

1

G  As eff

The value of the eective shear stiness GAs eff depends on cracks appearing in FPB:




G  As eff Gb  Ab Gt  At  v
uncracked cross-section: Ab 2  A1b 2  t  b
cross-section with a crack: Ab Abc 2  t  xII :

31

32
33a
33b

3.2.3. Modelling of fasteners exibility in the timber frame FPB connecting area
By the modelling of fasteners exibility in the timber frame FPB connecting area it is important to take
into account also the CFRP diagonal strip contribution (KCFRP) which substantiously decreases the slip in the
connecting area. Therefore, the total stiness can be dened as the sum of fasteners (K) and the CFRP (KCFRP)
contribution as it is dened in Eq. (7).
In the proposed mathematical model the value of the modulus (K) varies according to the lateral force (F1)
acting on one fastener. The modied total force (F 1 depends on the shear force in the element (Vz), the

spacing between fasteners (s), the eective shear stiness ES y eff in the shear plane and on the eective bending
stiness EI y eff of the cross-section in the following form:

734

M. Premrov, P. Dobrila / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 725737



F 1

ES y eff s
 Vz
EI y eff 2

34

For the un-cracked cross-section Eq. (5) for EI y eff is taken, but for the cross-section with a crack in FPB Eq.
(24) should be used. The real lateral force acting on one fastener is dened according to the relation of the both
stiness contributions:
F 1 F 1 

K
:
K

35

The value of K directly depends on the slip (D) in the timber frame FPB connecting area. As long as behaviour of fasteners is almost elastic (Fig. 4a) the value of K is maximal (K K ser and it is constant (Fig. 4b). The
value of Kser depends on national codes. With an increasing part of plasticity the value of K decreases. We
propose the three-linear interpolation diagram to simulate the behaviour of fasteners depending on the value
of F1 (Fig. 4b). It is important rst to determine three fundamental diagram points:
F 1 6 N al ) K K ser ;

36a

F 1 F f;Rd ) K K u

2
 K ser . . .
3

according to Eurocode 5 3;

F 1 F f;Rk ) K 0;

36b
36c

where Nal is allowable lateral load-bearing capacity per shear plane per fastener, F f;Rd is design lateral loadbearing capacity per shear plane per fastener and F f;Rk is characteristic lateral load-bearing capacity per shear
plane per fastener.
For intermediate values of F1 linear interpolation is used according to Fig. 4b.
CFRP diagonal strip is glued to the timber frame so that the strips axis coincides with the timber frame
corner (Fig. 5). Therefore, one half of the strips width is glued to the stud another half to the girder. Consequently, the value A1,d/2 is used in Eq. (37). The value of KCFRP is dened as a vertical projection of the axial
stiness of the strips divided with the number of the fasteners (n) in this connecting area:
K CFRP

ECFRP  A1;d
 cos a
2  LCFRP  n

37

Because behaviour of CFRP is linear-elastic until failure the value of the CFRP diagonal strip contribution
(KCFRP) is assumed to be constant for all values of FH (Fig. 4c).
The slip (D) in the timber frame FPB connecting area under the force FH is calculated in the form of:
D

F 1
:
K

38

Fig. 5. The static system of the experimental tested samples [7].

M. Premrov, P. Dobrila / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 725737

735

4. Numerical example
4.1. Geometrical and material properties
Numerical analysis is performed for the diagonally CFRP reinforced samples from our experimental work
[7], where the test samples were actually rotated by 90 according to Fig. 1 and they were therefore subjected to
vertical force acting at the end of the elements (Fig. 5).
The panel wall of actual dimensions h = 263.5 cm and b = 125 cm is composed of timber studs (2 9 9 cm
and 1 4.4 9 cm), timber girders (2 8 9 cm) and Knauf bre-plaster boards [15] of the thickness
t = 15 mm (Fig. 6). They are xed to the timber frame using staples of U1.53 mm at an average spacing of
s = 75 mm.
The FPB are reinforced in the tensile diagonal area using SikaWrap-230C strips (Sika [16]) made from carbon high-strength bre reinforced polymers of the thickness 1.2 mm. Strips with the width of 300 mm are
glued to the FPB and additionally glued to the timber frame with Sikadur-330 LVP glue [16].
Material properties for the timber of quality C22 are taken from EN338 [17], the characteristics of breplaster boards from Knauf [15] and for carbon strips Sika [16] data are used. The values are listed in Table 1.
4.2. Numerical results
(a) Since the computational model according to Fig. 1 is considered, we use hd = 254.5 cm, bd = 116 cm,
a arctan bd =hd = 24.50.
(b) According to Eurocode 5 [3] we compute F f;Rk = 659.69 N, F f;Rd = 456.71 N (k mod = 0.9). Allowable lateral load-bearing capacity per shear plane per fastener (Nal) is not declared in Eurocode 5 [3] thus we use
Bruningho [18]: N al = 203.03 N.
(c) Fasteners slip modulus (Kser) can be computed using Eurocode 5 [3]:
p p
qmean qb  qt 1050  410 656:12 kg=m3 ;
39
q1:5  d 0:8 656:121:5  1:530:8

295:215 N=mm:
K ser mean
80
80
At, Et

yi

yi

Ab, Eb

t =1.5
Vz
9.0

9.0

4.4

9.0

ai = 58
b =125 cm
Fig. 6. Cross-section of the composed wall element.

Table 1
Properties of used materials

Timber C22
FPB
SikaWrap-230C

E0,m (N/mm2)

Gm (N/mm2)

fm,k (N/mm2)

ft,0,k (N/mm2)

fc,0,k (N/mm2)

fv,k (N/mm2)

qm (kg/m3)

10 000
3000
231 000

630
1200

22
4.0

13
2.5
4100

20
20

2.4
5.0

410
1050
1920

736

M. Premrov, P. Dobrila / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 725737

CFRP stiness contribution is calculated using Eqs. (37) and (7), n = 36:
ECFRP  A1;d
231000  300  1:2
 cos 24:50 360:37 N=mm:
 cos a
2  2916:46  36
2  LCFRP  n
K  K ser K CFRP 295:215 360:37 655:579 N=mm:

K CFRP

40

The stiness coecient of the fasteners (cy is computed using Eq. (8):
k yi

p2  At1  Et  s
p2  92  1000  7:5
1:765;

L2eff  2  K 
2  254:5:52  2  6:556

cyi

1
1
0:362:

1 k yi 1 1:765

41

(d) Assuming v = 1/1.2 for a rectangular cross-section we obtain from Eq. (17) for the ctitious thickness
(t of the FPB:
t 1:5 1:2 

23100
1
 sin2 24:50  cos 24:50  30  0:12 
2:541 cm:
120
125

42

(e) The eective bending stiness (EIy)e of the un-cracked cross-section is calculated using Eq. (5):

2  2:541  1253
2  94 4:43  9
2  9  9  582  0:362
1000 

EI y eff 300 
12
12
12
4:464  108 kN cm2 :

43

(f) The horizontal force (F H;cr forming the rst tensile crack in FPB is calculated using Eq. (22):
F H;cr

2  0:25  4:468  108

23:386 kN;
300  125  254:5

measured 7 : F H;cr;meas 24:28 kN:

44

(g) It is interesting to compare the part of the acting horizontal force which is taken over the CFRP diagonal
strip (F H;CFRP before and after forming the rst crack. It is calculated according to Eqs. (31), (32), (33a)
and (33b).
for un-cracked cross-section (F H 6 F H;cr :
Ab 2  A1b 2  t  b 2  2:541  125 635:25 cm2


1
74 109 kN
G  As eff 120  635:25 63  201:6 
1:2
k 1 2  sin2 24:50  cos 24:50  23 100  30  0:12 26 026:83 kN;
F H;CFRP k 1  k 2  F H

k2

1
kN1
74 109

45

k2

1
kN1
37 593:84

46

26 026:83
 F H 0:351  F H
74 109

for cracked cross-section (F H > F H;cr :

Ab Abc 2  t  xII 2  2:541  40:819 207:442 cm2


1
37 593:84 kN
G  As eff 120  207:442 63  201:6 
1:2
k 1 2  sin2 24:50  cos 24:50  23 100  30  0:12 26 026:83 kN;
F H;CFRP k 1  k 2  F H

26 026:83
 F H 0:693  F H
37 593:84

5. Conclusions
A special approximate analytical model for composite timber-frame wall elements has been developed
based on fundamental assumptions that the element behaves like a composite beam and that the cracks in
FPB appear before the yield point of the fasteners is achieved. To assure the second assumption the CFRP

M. Premrov, P. Dobrila / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 725737

737

Table 2
Numerical results for stresses, force acting on one fastener, slip and neutral axis
FH
(kN)

Tension in
FPB rtb;max
(N/mm2)

Comp. in
FPB rcb;max
(N/mm2)

Tension in
timber rtt;max
(N/mm2)

Comp. in
timber rct;max
(N/mm2)

F 1 (N)

D (mm)

xII (cm)

10.0
20.0
23.39 = Fcr
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
42.68 = Fu

1.069
2.138

1.069
2.138
2.560
2.793
3.351
3.922
4.504
4.811

1.452
2.905
7.110
7.600
9.118
10.646
12.180
13.0 = ft,0,k

1.452
2.905
3.763
4.020
4.826
5.616
6.389
6.810

64.271
128.541
146.397
156.474
187.769
221.377
245.299
259.918

0.218
0.435
0.496
0.530
0.636
0.769
0.889
0.952

62.500
62.500
40.819
40.819
40.819
40.882
40.988
41.011

Measured [7]: F u;meas 40:33 kN.

strips should be additionally glued to the timber frame. The recommended model with the ctive enlarged
thickness (t*) of the FPB simultaneously considers the inuence of the inserted CFRP diagonal strips, the exibility of the mechanical fasteners between the boards and the timber frame and the appearance of cracks in a
tensile area of the FPB (see Table 2).
The presented numerical results for the force forming the rst crack (F H;cr and for the crushing force (F H;u
show relatively good agreement with the measurement performed on the test samples [7]. The accuracy is
approximately at 3.7% for F H;cr and at about 5.5% for F H;u . The part of the acting horizontal force which is taken
over the CFRP diagonal strip strongly depends on cracks appearing in FPB. It is evident from the numerical
results that the CFRP contribution is almost two-times higher after the crack appearance. It is also presented
that compressive stresses in timber and in FPB are tolerably under the yield points, therefore our assumptions
of elastic behaviour of both materials after the appearance of the rst crack in FPB are quite acceptable.
References
[1] K.F. Faherty, T.G. Williamson, Wood Engineering and Construction Handbook, McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, 1989.
[2] R.J. Hoyle, F.E. Woeste, Wood Technology in the Design of Structures, Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa, 1989.
[3] CEN/TC 250/SC5 N173, Eurocode 5: Design of Timber Structures, Part 1-1. General rules and rules for buildings, Final draft prEN
1995-1-1, Brussels, 2003.
[4] P. Dobrila, M. Premrov, Reinforcing methods for composite timber frame-berboard wall panels, Eng. Struct. 25 (11) (2003) 1369
1376.
[5] S. Kent, D. Tingley, Structural Evaluation of Fiber Reinforced Hollow Wood Beams, in: Proc. of Innovative Wooden Structures and
Bridges, IABSE Conf., Lahti, 2001.
[6] Z. Zagar, Timber Structures Part II, Modelling of Timber Structures, Udzbenici Sveucilistva u Zagrebu, Zagreb, 1999.
[7] M. Premrov, P. Dobrila, B.S. Bedenik, Analysis of timber-framed walls coated with CFRP strips strengthened bre-plaster boards,
Int. J. Solids Struct. 41 (24/25) (2004) 70357048.
[8] B. Kallsner, Panels as wind-bracing elements in timber-framed walls, Swedish Institute for Wood Technology Research, Report 56,
Stockholm, 1984.
kerlund, Enkel berakningsmodell for skivor pa regelstomme (Simple calculation model for sheets on a timber frame), Bygg &
[9] S. A
Teknik, No. 1, 1984.
[10] B. Kallsner, F. Lam, Diaphragms and shear walls, Holzbauwerke: Grundlagen, Entwicklungen, Erganzungen nach Eurocode 5, Step
3 15/1-17, Fachverlag Holz, Dusseldorf, 1995.
[11] C. Chou, A. Polensek, Damping and stiness of nailed joints: response to drying, Wood Fiber Sci. 19 (1) (1987) 4858.
[12] A. Polensek, K.M. Bastendorf, Damping in nailed joints of light-frame wood building, Wood Fiber Sci. 19 (2) (1987) 110125.
[13] W.J. Van Wyk, The strength, stiness and durability of glued, nail-glued and screw-glued timber joints, South Afr. Forest. J. 138
(1986) 4144.
[14] M. Premrov, P. Dobrila Peter, B.S. Bedenik, Approximate analytical solutions for diagonal reinforced timber-framed walls with breplaster coating material, Construct. Build. Mater. 18 (10) (2004) 727735.
[15] Knauf Gipsfaserplatten Vidivall/Vidioor, 2002.
[16] Sika, Sicher bauen mit System. Technische Merkblatter. Ausgabe 5, 2003.
[17] European Committee for Standardization, EN 338:2003 E: Structural timber Strength classes, Brussels, 2003.
[18] H. Bruningho, et al., Eine Ausfuhrliche Erlauterung zu DIN 1052, Teil 1 bis Teil 3, Beuth Kommentare, Beuth Bauverlag, Berlin,
1988.