(Page couverture)

UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Table of contents
ABSTRACT................................................................................................................................ 1
INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................... 2
13.1.1 Geotechnical Data........................................................................................ 3
13.1.2 Gravity Load Resisting System..................................................................... 3
13.1.3 Lateral Load Resisting System ..................................................................... 3
13.1.4 Acoustic Performance .................................................................................. 3
13.1.5 Fire Performance.......................................................................................... 4
REFERENCE CODES AND STANDARDS .................................................................. 5
MATERIALS................................................................................................................. 5
LOADS......................................................................................................................... 6
13.4.1 Gravity Loads ............................................................................................... 6
13.4.2 Wind Loads .................................................................................................. 8
13.4.3 Earthquake Load and Effects ......................................................................12
LOAD COMBINATIONS ..............................................................................................19
13.5.1 Ultimate Limit State .....................................................................................19
13.5.2 Serviceability Limit State – Gravity ..............................................................19
13.5.3 Serviceability Limit State – Wind..................................................................19
13.5.4 Ultimate Limit State – Fire ...........................................................................19
GRAVITY DESIGN......................................................................................................20
13.6.1 Roof CLT Panel – Simply Supported, Single Span ......................................20
13.6.2 Roof CLT Panel – Two-Span Continuous ....................................................22
13.6.3 Floor CLT Panel – Simply Supported, Single Span .....................................25
13.6.4 Floor CLT Panel – Two-Span Continuous ...................................................27
13.6.5 Glulam Roof Beam – Two-Span Continuous ...............................................30
13.6.6 Glulam Floor Beam – Two-Span Continuous...............................................32
13.6.7 Glulam Column............................................................................................34
13.6.8 CLT Wall .....................................................................................................36

Design Example – Chapter 13

i
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

DESIGN FOR FIRE RESISTANCE .............................................................................39

13.7.1 Introduction .................................................................................................39
13.7.2 Fire Design – Glulam Beam.........................................................................39
13.7.3 Fire Design – Glulam Column......................................................................42
13.7.4 Fire Design – CLT Floor ..............................................................................43
13.7.5 Fire Design – CLT Wall ...............................................................................46
13.7.6 Fire Design – Discussion.............................................................................48
LATERAL DESIGN......................................................................................................49
13.8.1 Introduction .................................................................................................49
13.8.2 State-of-the-Art Earthquake Design Considerations ....................................50
13.8.3 Structural Modelling.....................................................................................51
13.8.4 Linear Dynamic Analysis (Seismic)..............................................................52
13.8.5 Shear Wall Lateral Design ...........................................................................56
WIND-INDUCED VIBRATION .....................................................................................59
CONNECTIONS..........................................................................................................59
13.10.1 CLT Floor-Panel-to-Beam Connection.........................................................60
13.10.2 Glulam-Beam-to-Column and Column-to-Column Connection.....................61
13.10.3 Glulam-Column-to-Concrete Connection .....................................................61
13.10.4 Shear Wall Hold-Down and Shear Connectors ............................................63
13.10.5 Floor-Panel-to Shear-Wall Panel below Connection ....................................65
13.10.6 Floor-Panel-to-Shear-Wall Panel Above Connection ...................................66
13.10.7 Shear-Wall-Panel-to-Panel Vertical Connection ..........................................66
13.10.8 Floor-Panel-to-Panel Connection.................................................................66
SYMBOLS...................................................................................................................69
ANNEX A ..................................................................................................................................75

Chapter 13 – Design Example

ii
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

List of figures
Figure 1 A five-storey, wood-frame building under construction ........................................ 2
Figure 2 Diagram of panel orientation in the strong axis vertically ....................................36
Figure 3 Reduced cross-section due to charring ..............................................................40
Figure 4 Structure first mode shape .................................................................................54
Figure 5 Structure second mode shape............................................................................55
Figure 6 Structure third mode shape ................................................................................55
Figure 7 Example shear wall location ...............................................................................56

List of tables
Table 1 Examples of building size relative to occupancy group,
as per Division B of NBCC .................................................................................. 9
Table 2 Wind loading distribution per floor – North-South (N-S) ......................................11
Table 3 Wind loading distribution per floor – East-West (E-W) ........................................11
Table 4 5% damped spectral response ...........................................................................12
Table 5 Calculation of seismic weight .............................................................................14
Table 6 Earthquake loading distribution per floor from ESFP ..........................................15
Table 7 Torsional sensitivity in North-South direction ......................................................17
Table 8 Torsional sensitivity in East-West direction.........................................................18
Table 9 Factored column load with live load reduction ....................................................34
Table 10 Wall loads ..........................................................................................................38
Table 11 Lateral deflection (North-South direction) at centre of gravity
due to seismic load.............................................................................................53
Table 12 First ten modes in East-West and North-South directions...................................54
Table 13 Shear wall displacement due to seismic loading (load case 1.0E) ......................56
Table 14 Shear wall forces due to seismic loading (load combination 1.0D + 1.0E) ..........57
Table 15 Shear wall displacement due to wind (load case 0.75W) ....................................57
Table 16 Shear wall forces from wind loading (load combination 0.9D + 1.4W) ................58

Design Example – Chapter 13

iii
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

ABSTRACT
The use of cross-laminated timber (CLT) alongside glulam products are demonstrated with a
design example for an eight-storey platform-framed mass timber building located in Ottawa,
Ontario. The example illustrates the key components of gravity, fire, and lateral design, and
provides example calculations and design guidance for CLT roof and floor panels, CLT
loadbearing and shear walls, and glulam post and beam framing. In addition, example
connections are given for the transfer of gravity and lateral forces, as well as a consideration of
wind-induced vibration. An Annex is included containing plans and elevations of the example
building along with examples of connection details.

The design examples provided are in line with the specifications in CSA O86-14 Update 2 (CSA,
2017) and the National Building Code (NRC, 2015), as well as incorporating the latest research
findings that have been implemented in the 2019 Edition of CSA O86-19 (CSA, 2019).

Design Example – Chapter 13

1
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

INTRODUCTION
An eight-storey residential mass timber building is presented in this Chapter to illustrate key
components of gravity, fire, and lateral design. The first storey of the building is concrete and the
upper seven storeys are mass timber (i.e. CLT roof panels, CLT floor panels, CLT elevator and
stair cores, and a glulam post-and-beam frame).

The elevator and stair cores, as well as the additional shear walls are platform-type – per the
method for CLT described in CSA O86-14 Update 2 (CSA, 2017) to resist seismic and wind loads.
Where indicated, the CLT lateral design went beyond this standard by making use of the latest
research findings that have been implemented in the 2019 Edition of the CSA Standard O86-19
(CSA, 2019).

The layout is shown on plans and elevations in Annex A to Chapter 13. A typical floor plan is
shown below in Figure 1. This floor plan is repeated on all levels and is 15.2 m x 50 m, with nine
regular structural grids spaced at 6.1 m on-centre. There are two stair cores and a single elevator
core. The storey height is 3.6 m for the first storey (the concrete storey) and 3 m floor-to-floor for
the upper seven storeys (mass timber storeys). The total height is 24.6 m.

The building is oriented north-south along the building short-axis direction and east-west along
the building long-axis direction.

The building is located in Ottawa, Ontario.

Figure 1 A typical floor plan

Chapter 13 – Design Example

2
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

13.1.1 Geotechnical Data

Soil conditions are assumed to be bedrock with a bearing capacity of 500 kPa SLS and 1000 kPa
ULS. Site Class C is assumed.

13.1.2 Gravity Load Resisting System

The vertical load resisting system comprises the following elements:

a) CLT floor and roof panels, spanned one-way between beam lines.
b) Post-and-beam glulam with columns on a 6.1-m x 7.0-m grid, and double continuous glulam
beams in the North-South direction.
c) Elevator and stair core CLT walls support beam point loads, and the CLT floor and roof
panels.
d) Three CLT walls outside of the core, of which two are in the East-West direction and one is
in the North-South direction.

13.1.3 Lateral Load Resisting System

The lateral load resisting system comprises the following elements:

a) Elevator and stair core CLT platform-type CLT walls designed to resist lateral forces through
rocking.
b) CLT shear walls in each orthogonal direction, in addition to the elevator and stair cores: two
in the long direction and one in the short direction, designed to dissipate lateral forces
through rocking.
c) CLT floor and roof panels connected with diaphragms modelled as semi-rigid elements
(actual in-plane stiffness considered).
d) Continuous steel rod tie-down system or discrete hold-downs.
e) Concrete podium with conventionally constructed concrete shear walls.

13.1.4 Acoustic Performance

This example building is designed for student residence occupancy. The targeted sound
insulation performance per code is an ASTC of 47 or a STC of 50, and an IIC ≥ 55, as
recommended in the NBC (NRC, 2015). The floor assembly is assumed to be:

▪ 5-mm carpet or 3-mm luxury vinyl tile

▪ 2.3-mm INSONO AF-3 membrane or similar
▪ 38-mm normal weight concrete
▪ 25-mm SonusWave underlayment or similar
▪ 175-mm five-ply CLT
▪ Exposed ceiling

Design Example – Chapter 13

3
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

The Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating describes the performance of the separating wall or
floor/ceiling assembly, whereas the Apparent Sound Transmission Class (ASTC) takes into
consideration the performance of the separating element as well as the flanking transmission
paths. Building professionals should also ensure that floors are designed to minimize impact
transmission. Selecting an appropriate separating assembly is only one part of the solution for
reducing airborne sound transmission between adjoining spaces: to fully address the sound
performance of the whole system, flanking assemblies must be connected to the separating
assembly. For more details, see Note A-5.8. in NBC (NRC, 2015).

It is important to note that the acoustic design of CLT floor systems is likely to control the dead
weight of mass timber floors. It is advisable to consult with the architect and an acoustical engineer
prior to deriving the dead weight of mass timber floors.

Refer to Chapter 9 of this Handbook for an in-depth explanation of the acoustic performance of
CLT assemblies.

13.1.5 Fire Performance

The eight-storey building’s major occupancy is residential. The NBC (NRC, 2015) requires that
buildings with residential occupancy exceeding six storeys have:

a) floor assemblies that behave as fire separations with a minimum fire resistance rating of
2 hours;
b) load bearing walls and columns that have a fire resistance rating at least equal to the
supported floor assemblies; and
c) exit stair cores that have a minimum fire resistance rating of 2 hours and which prevent the
ingress of contaminated air over this same timeframe
For this example, therefore, exposed wood elements will be required to have a fire resistance
rating of 2 hours.

Chapter 13 – Design Example

4
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

REFERENCE CODES AND STANDARDS

ANSI/APA, 2018. PRG 320. Standard for Performance-Rated Cross-Laminated Timber; APA,
The Engineered Wood Association, Tacoma, WA. USA.

CSA, 2016. CSA O86-14 Update No. 1 (2016) and No. 2 (2017), “Engineering design in wood”,
CSA Group, Mississauga, ON, Canada.

CSA, 2019. CSA O86-19 “Engineering design in wood”, CSA Group, Mississauga, ON, Canada.

CWC, 2017. Wood Design Manual. Canadian Wood Council, Ottawa, ON, Canada.

Gagnon, S., and Pirvu, C. 2011. Canadian CLT Handbook. First Edition. FPInnovations Special
Publication SP-528E. QC, Canada.

Karacabeyli, E., Lum, Conroy. 2014. Technical Guide for the Design and Construction of Tall
Wood Buildings in Canada. FPInnovations. Pointe-Claire, QC, Canada.

NRC (2015) National Building Code of Canada (NBC). National Research Council Canada,
Ottawa, ON, Canada.

MNRF, 2017. Ontario’s Tall Wood Building Reference. A Technical Resource for Developing
Alternative Solutions under Ontario’s Building Code. Ministry of Natural Resources and
Forestry, Sault Ste Marie, ON., Canada

Veilleux, L., Gagnon, S., & Dagenais, C. 2015. Mass timber buildings of up to 12 storeys.
Québec: Gouvernement du Québec.

MATERIALS
Cross-laminated timber (CLT): Grade E1 per ANSI/APA PRG 320 (2018) and CSA O86-14
Update 2 (2017)

Glulam beams: D. Fir-L 24f-EX per CSA O86-14

Glulam columns: D. Fir-L 16c-E per CSA O86-14

Note that other proprietary glulam products are available and approved for use in Canada through
the Canadian Construction Materials Centre (CCMC) and APA – The Engineered Wood
Association.

Design Example – Chapter 13

5
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

LOADS
Climatic loads are for Ottawa City Hall, Ontario in accordance with the NBC (NRC, 2015) data.

Ss = 2.4 kPa
Sr = 0.4 kPa
One day rainfall (1 in 50 years) = 86 mm
q50 = 0.41 kPa

Sa(0.2) 0.439 Sa(2.0) 0.056

Sa(0.5) 0.237 Sa(5.0) 0.015

Sa(1.0) 0.118 Sa(10.0) 0.0055

PGA 0.281 PGV 0.196

13.4.1 Gravity Loads

Floor 1 – Ground floor

DEAD LOAD
Finishes 0.20 kPa
Partition load 1.00 kPa
150-mm concrete slab-on-grade 3.60 kPa
TOTAL 4.80 kPa

LIVE LOAD
Retail and wholesale areas 4.8 kPa [NBC Table [Link]]

LIVE LOAD
Exits and fire escapes 4.8 kPa [NBC Table [Link]]

Floor 2

DEAD LOAD
Finishes 0.20 kPa
Partition load 1.00 kPa
350-mm concrete suspended slab 8.40 kPa
Mechanical/electrical allowance 0.25 kPa
TOTAL 9.85 kPa

LIVE LOAD
Residential areas 1.9 kPa [NBC Table [Link]]

LIVE LOAD
Exits and fire escapes 4.8 kPa [NBC Table [Link]]

Chapter 13 – Design Example

6
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Floors 3 to 8

DEAD LOAD
Finishes incl. sound insulation 0.20 kPa
Partition load 1.00 kPa
38-mm concrete topping 0.91 kPa
175-mm CLT floor slab (515 kg/m3) 0.88 kPa
GL post-and-beam 0.20 kPa (not included for floor panel design)
Mechanical/electrical allowance 0.25 kPa
TOTAL 3.44 kPa

LIVE LOAD
Residential areas 1.9 kPa [NBC Table [Link]]

LIVE LOAD
Exits and fire escapes 4.8 kPa [NBC Table [Link]]

Roof

DEAD LOAD
Roofing, insulation and finishes 0.43 kPa
175-mm CLT roof slab (515 kg/m3) 0.88 kPa
GL post-and-beam 0.20 kPa (not included for roof panel design)
Mechanical/electrical allowance 0.25 kPa
TOTAL 1.76 kPa

SNOW LOAD
Ss = 2.4 kPa
Sr = 0.4 kPa
Cs = 1.0 slope less than 15° [NBC [Link](5)]
IS = Importance factor: normal = 1.0 [NBC Table [Link].-A]
S = Is [ Ss (Cb x Cw x Cs x Ca) + Sr] = 1.0 [ 2.4 (0.8 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.0) + 0.4] = 2.32 kPa
Note: Loads due to snow drifting have been ignored in this example.

RAIN PONDING LOAD

Rain ponding has been ignored in this example.

LIVE LOAD
Roof minimum 1.0 kPa [NBC Table [Link]] – snow load governs
1.3 kN concentrated load applied over 200- x 200-mm area

Design Example – Chapter 13

7
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

13.4.2 Wind Loads

There are three procedures outlined in NBC (NRC, 2015) [Link] for determining wind load on
structures. Typically, the static approach for deriving wind loads can be used for structures with a
natural frequency higher than 1 Hz. For structures with a natural frequency between 0.25 to 1 Hz,
the dynamic procedure is to be used, and where the natural frequency is less than 0.25 Hz, the
wind tunnel procedure should be used.

To determine whether the dynamic procedure is required or not, the lowest natural frequency of
the example building can be determined using Rayleigh’s Method, or from the finite element
model created for the linear dynamic analysis described in Section 13.8.3.

As in NBC Structural Commentary I, the lowest natural frequency, f, can be estimated using
Rayleigh’s method, with the following equation:

1
𝑓=
∑ 𝑊𝑋
2𝜋
𝑔∑ 𝐹𝑋

where:

f = frequency (Hz)

Wj = weight at each floor (kN)

Fj = static lateral load applied at each floor to produce static deformation (kN)

Xj = static deformation produced by static loading on structure determined by linear elastic

analysis model (mm)

N = number of vertical levels

g = gravitational acceleration (m/s2)

Table 1 shows the input values for the North-South direction, for the equation above.

Chapter 13 – Design Example

8
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Table 1 Examples of building size relative to occupancy group, as per Division B of NBCC

Level Drift Inter-Storey

Drift
Xj xj Fj Xj Wj Wj X j 2
(mm) (mm) ([Link]) (kN) (kN.mm2)
Roof 14.20 1.90 1380 1427 287740

8 12.30 2.00 2299 3119 471874

7 10.30 2.20 1841 3119 330895

6 8.10 2.40 1373 3119 204638

5 5.70 2.30 906 3119 101336

4 3.40 1.90 533 3119 36056

3 1.50 1.30 235 3119 7018

2 0.2 0.20 31 7916 317

Total 8599 28057 1439872

Therefore, the natural frequency in the N-S direction is:

1
𝑓= = 1.22 𝐻𝑧
1439872
2𝜋
9.81 × 1000 × 8599

Similarly, it can be shown that the natural frequency in the E-W direction using the same
method is:

1
𝑓= = 1.29 𝐻𝑧
69952
2𝜋
9.81 × 1000 × 465

From these calculations, it can be concluded that the lowest natural frequency is greater than
1 Hz in both directions; thus, per NBC, the building need only be analyzed using the static wind
procedure, i.e. the dynamic procedure is not required. Note that the finite element model
developed for this building was found to have lowest natural frequencies of 1.13 Hz and 1.25 Hz
in the North-South and East-West directions, respectively.

Design Example – Chapter 13

9
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Static base shear due to wind load is as follows:

Rough terrain

Building height = 24.6 m

Exposure factor Ce = 0.7 (h/12)0.3, with minimum Ce = 0.7 [NBC [Link].(5)(b)]

Ce varies with height.

Gust effect factor Cg = 2.0 for the building as a whole and for main structural members
[NBC [Link](8)].

Cp calculated per NBC [Link](2) for the main structural system considering external pressure
coefficients on the windward and leeward faces of the building.

In the North-South direction, H/D = 24.6/15.2 = 1.62 ≥ 1.0, therefore Cp = 0.8 on the windward
face, and Cp = -0.5 on the leeward face.

In the East-West direction, H/D = 24.6/50 = 0.49, therefore Cp = 0.27 x (0.49 + 2) = 0.67 on the
windward face, and Cp = -0.27 x (0.49 + 0.88) = -0.37 on the leeward face.

Topographic factor, Ct =1.0 [NBC [Link].(1)]

Importance category, IW = normal = 1.0 (0.75 for SLS) [NBC Table [Link]]

Reference velocity pressure, q1/50 = 0.41 kPa [NBC climatic data for Ottawa, Ontario]

Specified external pressures calculated for the windward and leeward faces:

p = IWqCeCtCgCp = 1.0 x 0.41 x Ce x 1.0 x 2.0 x Cp = 0.82CeCp kPa

Net wind load calculated as absolute sum of the windward and leeward external pressures, as
shown in Tables 2 and 3.

Chapter 13 – Design Example

10
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Table 2 Wind loading distribution per floor – North-South (N-S)

Distribution of base shear to floors N-S

Level Storey Accum. Bldg Ce Cg Cp, Cp, lee P Factored
Height Height Weight wind Wind Load
(m) (m) (m) (kPa) (kN)

Roof 3.00 24.6 50.0 0.87 2 0.80 -0.50 0.87 97

8 3.00 21.6 50.0 0.83 2 0.80 -0.50 0.82 187

7 3.00 18.6 50.0 0.80 2 0.80 -0.50 0.76 179

6 3.00 15.6 50.0 0.76 2 0.80 -0.50 0.69 170

5 3.00 12.6 50.0 0.71 2 0.80 -0.50 0.63 159

4 3.00 9.6 50.0 0.70 2 0.80 -0.50 0.63 157

3 3.00 6.6 50.0 0.70 2 0.80 -0.50 0.63 157

2 3.00 3.6 50.0 0.70 2 0.80 -0.50 0.63 157

Ground 3.60 0 50.0 0.70 2 0.80 -0.50 0.63 0

TOTAL base shear WIND N-S 1261

Table 3 Wind loading distribution per floor – East-West (E-W)

Distribution of base shear to floors E-W

Level Storey Accum Bldg Ce Cg Cp, Cp, lee P Factored
Height Height Weight wind Wind Load
(m) (m) (m) (kPa) (kN)

Roof 3.00 24.6 15.2 15.2 2 0.67 -0.37 0.74 24

8 3.00 21.6 15.2 15.2 2 0.67 -0.37 0.71 46

7 3.00 18.6 15.2 15.2 2 0.67 -0.37 0.68 44

6 3.00 15.6 15.2 15.2 2 0.67 -0.37 0.65 41

5 3.00 12.6 15.2 15.2 2 0.67 -0.37 0.61 39

4 3.00 9.6 15.2 15.2 2 0.67 -0.37 0.60 38

3 3.00 6.6 15.2 15.2 2 0.67 -0.37 0.60 38

2 3.00 3.6 15.2 15.2 2 0.67 -0.37 0.60 38

Ground 3.60 0 15.2 15.2 2 0.67 -0.37 0.60 0

TOTAL base shear WIND E-W 308

Design Example – Chapter 13

11
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

13.4.3 Earthquake Load and Effects

Site Class C is assumed, as noted above in Section 13.1.2.

Site specific earthquake parameters for Ottawa, Ontario:

Table 4 5% damped spectral response

Sa(0.2) Sa(0.5) Sa(1.0) Sa(2.0) Sa(5.0) Sa(10.0) PGA PGV

0.439 0.237 0.118 0.056 0.015 0.0055 0.281 0.196

Per NBC [Link].(2):

IEFsSa(0.2) = 1.0 x 1.0 x 0.439 = 0.439 > 0.16
IEFsSa(2.0) = 1.0 x 1.0 x 0.056 = 0.056 > 0.03
Thus, the provisions of NBC [Link] to NBC [Link] apply. [NBC [Link].(2)]

NBC [Link]. – Site Properties

Sa(0.2) / PGA = 0.439 / 0.281 = 1.56 < 2.0 thus PGAref = 0.8 x PGA = 0.8 x 0.281 = 0.225
[NBC [Link].(4)]

For site class C, the Site Coefficients, F, determined from NBC Tables [Link].-B to [Link].-I, are:

F(0.2) F(0.5) F(1.0) F(2.0) F(5.0) F(10.0) F(PGA) F(PGV)

1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Fa = F(0.2) = 1.00 [NBC [Link].(7)]

Fv = F(1.0) = 1.00 [NBC [Link].(7)]

The design spectral acceleration values are [NBC [Link].(9)]:

S(T  0.2 s) = max [F(0.2)Sa(0.2) , F(0.5)Sa(0.5)] = max [1.00x0.439, 1.00x0.237] = 0.439
S(T = 0.5 s) = F(0.5)Sa(0.5) = 1.00 x 0.237 = 0.237
S(T = 1.0 s) = F(1.0)Sa(1.0) = 1.00 x 0.118 = 0.118
S(T = 2.0 s) = F(2.0)Sa(2.0) = 1.00 x 0.056 = 0.056
S(T = 5.0 s) = F(5.0)Sa(5.0) = 1.00 x 0.015 = 0.015
S(T  10.0 s) = F(10.0)Sa(10.0) = 1.00 x 0.0055 = 0.0055

Importance Factor [NBC [Link].]:

Normal
ULS IE = 1.0
IEFaSa(0.2) = 1.0 x 1.00 x 0.439 = 0.439 > 0.35

Chapter 13 – Design Example

12
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Method of Analysis [NBC [Link]]

The Equivalent Static Force Procedure (ESFP) may be used when any of the following three
criteria is satisfied:

a) IEFaSa(0.2) = 1.0 x 1.00 x 0.439 = 0.439 > 0.35 [NBC [Link].(a)]

NOT SATISFIED.
b) Regular structures (i.e. no structural irregularities) less than 60-m tall and the period is
less than 2.0 s [NBC [Link].(b)]
NOT SATISFIED. Structure has mass and torsional irregularities.
c) Building is less than 20-m tall, period less than 0.5 s and Irregularities 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 or 8
[NBC [Link].(c)]
NOT SATISFIED. Structure is taller than 20 m and period is greater than 0.5 s.
Since none of these conditions are met, the Dynamic Analysis Procedure of NBC [Link]. must
be used.

Prior to carrying out the dynamic analysis procedure (see Section 13.8 in this Chapter), the
following can be determined from NBC:

hn = 24.6 m
Ta = 0.05 (hn)3/4 = 0.05 (24.6)3/4 = 0.55 s, in both directions

Design spectral response acceleration:

Interpolating between S(0.5) = 0.237 and S(1.0) = 0.118:
S(0.552) = 0.237 + (0.55 – 0.5) x (0.118 – 0.237) / (1.0 – 0.5) = 0.225

Seismic Force Resisting System (SFRS)

Platform type cross-laminated timber (CLT) shear walls

Ductility modification factor: Rd = 2.0
Over-strength modification factor: Ro = 1.5

Minimum lateral earthquake force [NBC [Link].(2)]:

Using Rd = 2.0 and Ro = 1.5 for CLT shear walls and RD = 1.5 and RO = 1.3 for conventional
concrete shear walls for podium-type structure.

V = S(Ta)MvIEW/(RdRo) = 0.225 x 1.0 x 1.0 x W / (2.0 x 1.5) = 0.076 W

Note Mv calculation below.

For walls, V shall not be less than:

Vmin = S(4.0)MvIEW/(RdRo) [NBC [Link].(2)(a)]

Design Example – Chapter 13

13
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Interpolating between S(2.0) = 0.056 and S(5.0) = 0.015:

S(4.0) = 0.056 + (4.0 – 2.0) x (0.015 – 0.056) / (5.0 – 2.0) = 0.029

Vmin = 0.029 x 1.0 x 1.0 x W / (2.0 x 1.5) = 0.01 W

The lateral earthquake force need not be greater than [NBC [Link].(2)(c)]:

V = max [2/3 S(0.2)IEW/(RdRo), S(0.5)IEW/(RdRo)] = max [2/3 x 0.439 x 1.0 x W / (2.0 x 1.5),
0.237 x 1.0 x W / (2.0 x 1.5)] = max [0.098, 0.079] W

Direction of Loading:

since the components of the seismic force resisting system are orientated along orthogonal axes,
independent analyses about each of these axes will be performed, i.e. in each direction
[NBC [Link].(a)].

Thus, for design, the controlling base shear V = 0.076 W, in each orthogonal direction.

NBC Table [Link]. for Higher Mode Factor, Mv, and Base Overturning Reduction Factor, J:
S(0.2) / S(5.0) = 0.439 / 0.015 = 29.3
Since Ta = 0.552 s, from NBC Table [Link] and interpolating:
Mv = 1.01
Interpolating between S(0.2)/S(5.0) = 20 and S(0.2)/S(5.0) = 40, and J for Ta <= 0.5 s and J for
Ta = 1.0 for Ta = 0.552 s:
J = 0.97

Per NBC [Link].(7), since Ta = 0.552 s < 0.7 s, Ft = 0.

Table 5 Calculation of seismic weight

Level Area DL LL SL Weight Weight

(m2) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa)

Roof 760 1.76 1.00 2.40 2.36 1794

8 760 3.44 1.90 3.44 2614

7 760 3.44 1.90 3.44 2614

6 760 3.44 1.90 3.44 2614

5 760 3.44 1.90 3.44 2614

4 760 3.44 1.90 3.44 2614

3 760 3.44 1.90 3.44 2614

TOTAL 17478

Chapter 13 – Design Example

14
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Table 6 Earthquake loading distribution per floor from ESFP

Level Floor Area Storey Storey Accum. Weight x Lateral

Weight Height Height Height Force
(m2) (kPa) (m) (m) (kNm) (kN)

Roof 760 1794 3.00 21.0 37674 247

8 760 2614 3.00 18.0 47052 309

7 760 2614 3.00 15.0 39210 257

6 760 2614 3.00 12.0 31368 206

5 760 2614 3.00 9.0 23526 154

4 760 2614 3.00 6.0 15684 103

3 760 2614 3.00 3.0 7842 51

TOTALS 17478 202356 1327

Summary:

Earthquake load control in both directions (not wind) as per calculation of base shears.

From NBC Table [Link], structural irregularities are as follows:

Type 1 Vertical Stiffness Irregularity

“Vertical stiffness irregularity shall be considered to exist when the lateral stiffness of the SFRS
in a storey is less than 70% of the stiffness of any adjacent storey, or less than 80% of the average
stiffness of the three storeys above or below.”

For this design example, the second-floor concrete structure has a higher lateral stiffness than
the storey above. From the analytical model, the ratio of stiffness is: 10% between the concrete
podium and timber storey above.

Conclusion: Present (podium versus mass timber above).

Design Example – Chapter 13

15
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Type 2 Weight (Mass) Irregularity

“Weight irregularity shall be considered to exist where the weight, W, of any storey is more than
150% of the weight of an adjacent storey. A roof that is lighter than the floor below need not be
considered.”

For this design example, the second-floor concrete structure has a higher weight than the storey
above. From the dead loads, the weight of the second floor compared to the third floor is
274% > 150%.

Conclusion: Present (podium versus mass timber above).

Type 3 Vertical Geometric Irregularity

“Vertical geometric irregularity shall be considered to exist where the horizontal dimension of the
SFRS in any storey is more than 130% of that in an adjacent storey.”

For this design example, the CLT shear walls and CLT cores have a constant horizontal
dimension at each storey, throughout the height of the building.

Conclusion: Not present.

Type 4 In-Plane Discontinuity in Vertical Lateral-Force-Resisting Element

“Except for braced frames and moment-resisting frames, an in-plane discontinuity shall be
considered to exist where there is an offset of a lateral-force-resisting element of the SFRS or a
reduction in lateral stiffness of the resisting element in the storey below.”

For this design example, there is no in-plane discontinuity in the vertical concrete and CLT walls.

Conclusion: Not present.

Type 5 Out-of-Plane Offsets

“Discontinuities in a lateral force path, such as out-of-plane offsets of the vertical elements of the
SFRS.”

For this design example, there are no out-of-plane offsets of the concrete and CLT walls.

Conclusion: Not present.

Chapter 13 – Design Example

16
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Type 6 Discontinuity in Capacity - Weak Storey

“A weak storey is one in which the storey shear strength is less than that in the storey above. The
storey shear strength is the total strength of all seismic-resisting elements of the SFRS sharing
the storey shear for the direction under consideration.”

For this design example, all storeys have identical shear strength, except for the first storey
concrete structure, which has a higher shear strength than the mass timber storeys above.

Conclusion: Not present.

Type 7 Torsional Sensitivity (to be considered when diaphragms are not flexible)

“Torsional sensitivity shall be considered to exist when the ratio B calculated according to
Sentence [Link].(10) exceeds 1.7.”

For this design example, the torsional sensitivity was measured in the 3D finite element model;
the results are shown in Tables 7 and 8 below:

Table 7 Torsional sensitivity in North-South direction

Level Δ, max Δ, min Δ, avg B= Δ, max/

Δ, avg

(mm) (mm) (mm)

Roof 34.9 4.1 19.5 1.79

8 29.8 3.4 16.6 1.80

7 24.3 2.7 13.5 1.80

6 18.4 2.1 10.3 1.79

5 12.6 1.4 7 1.80

4 7.2 0.8 4 1.80

3 3.0 0.3 1.7 1.76

2 0.3 0 0.2 1.50

Ground

Design Example – Chapter 13

17
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Table 8 Torsional sensitivity in East-West direction

Level Δ, max Δ, min Δ, avg B= Δ, max/

Δ, avg
(mm) (mm) (mm)

Roof 18.8 15.2 17 1.11

8 16.4 13.2 14.8 1.11

7 13.6 11 12.3 1.11

6 10.5 8.5 9.5 1.11

5 7.4 6 6.7 1.10

4 4.3 3.5 3.9 1.10

3 1.9 1.6 1.8 1.06

2 0.2 0.2 0.2 1.00

Ground

Conclusion: Torsional sensitivity is present in the North-South direction but not in the East-West
direction.

Type 8 Non-Orthogonal Systems

“A non-orthogonal system irregularity shall be considered to exist when the SFRS is not oriented
along a set of orthogonal axes.”

For this design example, the concrete and CLT walls are orientated North-South and East-West.

Conclusion: Not present.

Type 9 Gravity-Induced Lateral Demand Irregularity

“Gravity-induced lateral demand irregularity on the SFRS shall be considered to exist where the
ratio, α, calculated in accordance with Sentence [Link].(5), exceeds 0.1 for an SFRS with self-
centering characteristics and 0.03 for other systems.”

For this design example there are no conditions, including inclined columns and cantilevered floor
plates, that would result in significant ratcheting behaviour and the amplification of drifts.

Conclusion: Not present.

Overall conclusion: Building is irregular.

Chapter 13 – Design Example

18
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

LOAD COMBINATIONS
13.5.1 Ultimate Limit State
The following load combinations are considered at the ultimate limit state for the design of
members and connections:

1.4D
1.25D + 1.5L + 1.0S
1.25D + 1.5S + 1.0L
1.25D + 1.5L + 0.4W
1.25D + 1.5S + 0.4W
1.25D + 1.4W + 0.5L
1.25D + 1.4W + 0.5S
1.0D + 1.0E + 0.25S

As per NBC (NRC, 2015) Clause [Link] (5), the counteracting factored dead load 0.9D shall be
used when the dead load acts to resist overturning, uplift, sliding, failure due to stress reversal,
and to determine anchorage requirements and the factored resistance of members.

13.5.2 Serviceability Limit State – Gravity

1.0D
1.0D + 1.0L + (0.9)0.5S
1.0D + (0.9)1.0S + 0.50L

13.5.3 Serviceability Limit State – Wind

1.0D + 1.0L + (0.75)0.4W
1.0D + (0.9)1.0S + (0.75)0.4W
1.0D + (0.75)1.0W + (0.75)0.5S
1.0D + (0.75)1.0W

13.5.4 Ultimate Limit State – Fire

According to CSA O86-14, Clause B.1.4, the actual specified gravity loads are to be used when
evaluating the structural fire resistance of timber elements, resulting in the following combinations:

1.0D + 1.0L
1.0D + (0.9)1.0S
1.0D + 1.0L + (0.9)0.5S
1.0D + (0.9)1.0S + 0.5L

Design Example – Chapter 13

19
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

GRAVITY DESIGN
The mechanical properties of CLT panels and glulam are typically published by manufacturers.
This design example uses the mechanical properties published in ANSI/APA PRG 320 (2018).
The designer must select the correct mechanical properties according to the manufacturer's
literature for the product being used.

The following assumptions are made:

KD (load duration factor) = 1.0 for standard duration

KH (system factor) = 1.0 for CLT per CSA O86

KSb (service condition factor for bending) = 1.0 for dry service conditions

KSv (service condition factor for shear) = 1.0 for dry service conditions

KT (treatment factor) = 1.0 for untreated

In the following gravity design examples, it is assumed that the members are protected from fire
by a method of encapsulation. Design for fire safety of exposed members is considered in
Section 13.7.

Refer to Chapter 3 of this Handbook for background information on the structural design of CLT
elements.

13.6.1 Roof CLT Panel – Simply Supported, Single Span

Design of a single span, simply supported CLT roof panel of a 6.1-m length, as shown on the roof
plan. Panel tributary width is 1 m.

Factored loads:

wf = 1.25 DL + 1.5 SL = 1.25 x 1.76 kPa + 1.5 x 2.32 kPa = 5.68 kPa x 1 m = 5.68 kN/m

Mf = 1/8 x wf x L2 = 1/8 x 5.68 x 6.12 = 26.42 kNm

Vf = 1/2 x wf x L = 1/2 x 5.68 x 6.1 = 17.32 kN

Considering 175-mm thick, Grade E1, five-layer CLT:

Chapter 13 – Design Example

20
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Bending resistance:

fb = 28.2 MPa

Fb = fb KD KH KSb KT = 28.2 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.0 = 28.2 MPa

E = 11,700 MPa

(EI)eff,y = 4166x109 Nmm2 (Table A4, PRG 320-2018)

Seff,y = (EI)eff,y/E x (2/h) = 4166x109/11700 x (2/175) = 4.07x106 mm3

Krb,y = 0.85 = adjustment factor for bending moment resistance of CLT panels

Mr,y = Φ Fb Seff,y Krb,y = 0.9 x 28.2 x 4.07x106 x 0.85 x 10-6 = 87.8 kNm > Mf = 25.58 kNm (29%)

Shear resistance:

2𝐴
𝑉 = ∅𝐹
3

Ag = 1000 x 175 x 175x103 mm2

Fs = fs (KD KH KSV KT), where fs is the specified strength in rolling shear

fs = 0.5 MPa (CSA O86-14 Table 8.2.4)

Vr = 0.9 x 0.5 x 2/3 x 175x103 x 10-3 = 52.5 kN > Vf = 16.78 kN (32%)

Deflections:

Uniformly distributed load, per A.8.5.2 of CSA O86-19

5 𝑤𝐿 1 𝑤𝐿 𝑘
∆ = +
384 (𝐸𝐼) 8 (𝐺𝐴)

EIeff = 4166 x 109 Nmm2/m (Table A4, PRG 320-2018)

GAeff = 15 x 106 N/m (Table A4, PRG 320-2018)

K (kappa) = form factor = 1.0 for rectangular cross-sections

Kcreep = creep factor = 2.0 for dry service conditions

Specified dead load = 1.76 kN/m

Specified snow load = 2.32 kN/m x 0.9 = 2.08 kN/m

L = 6100 mm

Design Example – Chapter 13

21
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

5 1.76 × (6100) 1 1.76 × (6.1) × 1.0 𝐿

∆ , = ⋅ + ⋅ × 10 = 7.6 + 0.55 = 8.15 mm =
384 4166(× 10) 8 15 × (10) 748
𝐿
<
360

5 2.08 × (6100) 1 2.08 × (6.1) × 1.0 𝐿 𝐿

∆ , = ⋅ + ⋅ × 10 = 9 + 0.64 = 9.64 mm = <
384 4166(× 10) 8 15 × (10) 632 240

𝐿 𝐿
∆ , =∆ , +∆ , ×𝐾 = 9.64 + (8.15 × 2) = 25.94 mm = <
235 180

Note: where the shear deformation component of the total deformation of the CLT panel under
out-of-plane standard term loading such as snow, and live loads is significant (i.e., in short spans,
short span cantilevers, etc.), as determined by the designer, the shear deformation under these
loads should be increased by 30%, to account for a time-dependent effect associated with rolling
shear.

13.6.2 Roof CLT Panel – Two-Span Continuous

Design of a two-span continuous CLT panel of a 12.2-m length, as shown on the roof plan. Panel
tributary width is 1 m.

Factored loads:

wf = 1.25 DL + 1.5 SL = 1.25 x 1.56 kPa + 1.5 x 2.32 kPa = 5.68 kPa x 1 m = 5.43 kN/m

Using pattern loading.

Considering 175-mm thick, Grade E1, two-span continuous, five-layer CLT:

Chapter 13 – Design Example

22
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Results from analysis:

Z -26.32 -26.32

-11.42

Y X

14.89
18.08

Moments:

Mf +ve = 18.1 KNm

Mf -ve = 26.3 kNm

Shear:

Z -21.64
-13.01
-9.39
-2.31
X

5.64 7.36
14.33
21.64

Vf – 21.6 kN

Deflections:

Analysed using EIeff.

Design Example – Chapter 13

23
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

1.0
X

-6.0
-8.3

Δs,perm = 2.6 mm = L/2346 < L/360 (15%)

Δs,snow = 5.7 mm = L/1070 < L/240 (22%)

Δs,total = 8.3 mm = L/735 < L/180 (24%)

Bending resistance:

fb = 28.2 MPa

Fb = fb KD KH KSb KT = 28.2 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.0 = 28.2 MPa

E = 11700 MPa

(EI)eff,y = 4166x109 Nmm2 (Table A4, PRG 320-2018)

Seff,y = (EI)eff,y/E x (2/h) = 4166x109/11700 x (2/175) = 4.07x106 mm3

Krb,y = 0.85 = adjustment factor for bending moment resistance of CLT panels

Mr,y = Φ Fb Seff,y Krb,y = 0.9 x 28.2 x 4.07x106 x 0.85 x 10-6 = 87.8 kNm > Mf = 24.4 kNm (28%)

Shear resistance:

2𝐴
𝑉 = ∅𝐹
3

Ag = 1000 x 175 x 175x103 mm2

Fs = fs (KD KH KSV KT), where fs is the specified strength in rolling shear.

fs = 0.5 MPa (CSA O86-14 Table 8.2.4)

Vr = 0.9 x 0.5 x 2/3 x 175x103 x 10-3 = 52.5 kN > Vf = 20 kN (38%)

Therefore, 175-mm thick, Grade E1, two-span continuous CLT can be used.

Chapter 13 – Design Example

24
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

13.6.3 Floor CLT Panel – Simply Supported, Single Span

Design of a single span, simply supported CLT floor panel of a 6.1-m length, as shown on the
roof plan. Panel tributary width is 1 m.

Factored loads:

wf = 1.25 DL + 1.5 SL = 1.25 x 3.24 kPa + 1.5 x 1.90 kPa = 6.9 kPa x 1 m = 6.9 kN/m

Mf = 1/8 x wf x L2 = 1/8 x 6.9 x 6.12 = 32.1 kNm

Vf = 1/2 x wf x L = 1/2 x 6.9 x 6.1 = 21.0 kN

Considering 175-mm thick, Grade E1 CLT:

Bending resistance:

fb = 28.2 MPa

Fb = fb KD KH KSb KT = 28.2 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.0 = 28.2 MPa

E = 11,700 MPa

(EI)eff,y = 4166x109 Nmm2 (Table A4, PRG 320-2018)

Seff,y = (EI)eff,y/E x (2/h) = 4166x109/11700 x (2/175) = 4.07x106 mm3

Krb,y = 0.85 = adjustment factor for bending moment resistance of the CLT panels

Mr,y = Φ Fb Seff,y Krb,y = 0.9 x 28.2 x 4.07x106 x 0.85 x 10-6 = 87.8 kNm > Mf = 32.1 kNm (37%)

Shear resistance:

2𝐴
𝑉 = ∅𝐹
3

Ag = 1000 x 175 x 175x103 mm2

Fs = fs (KD KH KSV KT), where fs is the specified strength in rolling shear

fs = 0.5 MPa (CSA O86-14 Table 8.2.4)

Vr = 0.9 x 0.5 x 2/3 x 175x103 x 10-3 = 52.5 kN > Vf = 21.0 kN (40%)

Design Example – Chapter 13

25
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Deflections:

Uniformly distributed load per A.8.5.2 of CSA O86-14

5 𝑤𝐿 1 𝑤𝐿 𝑘
∆= ⋅ + ⋅
384 (𝐸𝐼) 8 (𝐺𝐴)

EIeff,0 = 4166 x 109 Nmm2/m (Table A4, PRG 320-2018)

GAeff,0 = 15 x 106 N/m (Table A4, PRG 320-2018)

K (kappa) = form factor = 1.0 for rectangular cross-sections

Kcreep = creep factor = 2.0 for dry service conditions

Specified dead load = 3.24 kN/m

Specified live load = 1.9 kN/m

L = 6100 mm

5 3.24 × 6100 1 3.24 × 6.1 × 1.0 𝐿 𝐿

∆ , = ⋅ + ⋅ × 10 = 14.89 + 1.00 = 15.89 mm = <
384 4166 × 10 8 15 × 10 384 360

5 1.90 × 6100 1 1.90 × 6.1 × 1.0 𝐿 𝐿

∆ , = ⋅ + ⋅ × 10 = 8.22 + 0.59 = 8.81 mm = <
384 4166 × 10 8 15 × 10 692 240
𝐿 𝐿
∆ , =∆ , +∆ , ×𝐾 = 8.81 + (15.89 × 2) = 40.59 mm = > 𝑁𝐺
150 180

Note: where the shear deformation component of the total deformation of the CLT panel under
out-of-plane standard-term loading such as snow, and live loads is significant (i.e., in short spans,
short span cantilevers, etc.), as determined by the designer, the shear deformation under these
loads should be increased by 30%, to account for the time-dependent effect associated with
rolling shear.

Thus, the 175-mm thick, five-layer, E1, single span CLT panel is not sufficient, and a thicker panel
should be considered. It is recommended that if a 175-mm thick CLT is to be used, then all floors
should be two-span continuous.

The designer must check bearing perpendicular to grain from loads transferred from the wall(s)
above.

Refer to Section 13.6.4 for two-span continuous floor design including consideration of vibration.

Chapter 13 – Design Example

26
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

13.6.4 Floor CLT Panel – Two-Span Continuous

Design of a two-span continuous CLT panel of a 12.2-m length, as shown on the floor plan. Panel
tributary width is 1 m.

Factored loads:

wf = 1.25 DL + 1.5 LL = 1.25 x 3.24 kPa + 1.5 x 1.90 kPa = 6.9 kPa x 1 m = 6.9 kN/m

Using pattern loading.

Considering 175-mm thick, Grade E1, two-span continuous, five-layer CLT:

Results from analysis:

Z -33.14
-20.95

21.31 18.75

Moments:

Mf +ve = 21.3 kNm

Mf -ve = 33.1 kNm

Shear:

Z -27.24
-18.35 -16.37
-6.01
X

12.88
17.46
27.24

Vf = 27.2 kN

Design Example – Chapter 13

27
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Deflections:

Analysed using EIeff.

0.4
X

-7.9
-9.7

Δs,perm = 5.1 mm = L/1196 < L/360 (30%)

Δs,live = 4.7 mm = L/1298 < L/240 (18%)

Δs,total = 9.8 mm = L/622 < L/180 (29%)

Bending resistance:

fb = 28.2 MPa

Fb = fb KD KH KSb KT = 28.2 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.0 = 28.2 MPa

E = 11,700 MPa

(EI)eff,y = 4166x109 Nmm2 (Table A4, PRG 320-2018)

Seff,y = (EI)eff,y/E x (2/h) = 4166x109/11700 x (2/175) = 4.07x106 mm3

Krb,y = 0.85 = adjustment factor for bending moment resistance of the CLT panels

Mr,y = Φ Fb Seff,y Krb,y = 0.9 x 28.2 x 4.07x106 x 0.85 x 10-6 = 87.8 kNm > Mf = 32.8 kNm (37%)

Shear resistance:

2𝐴
𝑉 = ∅𝐹
3

Ag = 1000 x 175 x 175x103 mm2

Fs = fs (KD KH KSV KT), where fs is the specified strength in rolling shear

fs = 0.5 MPa (CSA O86-14 Table 8.2.4)

Chapter 13 – Design Example

28
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Vr = 0.9 x 0.5 x 2/3 x 175x103 x 10-3 = 52.5 kN > Vf = 27 kN (51%)

Therefore, 175-mm thick, Grade E1, two-span continuous CLT can be used.

The designer must check bearing perpendicular to grain from loads transferred from the wall(s)
above.

Vibration:

The Wood Design Manual (CWC, 2017) Panel Selection Table (Serviceability – Floor Vibration)
for CLT gives a maximum vibration-controlled span of 5.46 m for 175-mm thick, Grade E1, CLT
panels. The required span for the building is 6.1 m, which is greater than allowed for vibration
performance; thus, 175-mm thick CLT is not sufficient when considering a single span with both
ends simply supported.

However, 245-mm thick, Grade E1, seven-layer CLT panels have a maximum vibration-controlled
span of 6.82 m.

Clause A.8.5.3 allows for a 20% increase in vibration-controlled spans for multi-span floors where
non-structural elements are considered to provide enhanced vibration performance, provided the
span is not greater than 8 m. This example floor is two-span continuous, with partitions providing
enhanced vibration performance.

Thus, 5.46 m x 1.2 = 6.55 m > 6.1 m (93%), or alternatively 6.1 m / 5.46 m = 12% increase in
allowable span over the code value.

The area density of the concrete topping should be verified to ensure it does not exceed twice the
area density of the CLT panels. As per CSA O86, there is a 10% reduction in allowable span for
floors with a concrete topping that has less than twice the CLT area density.

24 kN/m3 x 0.038 = 0.91 kPa = less than 2 x 5.15 kN/m3 x 0.175 = 1.80 kPa.

Thus, the 175-mm thick CLT two-span continuous panel is satisfactory for vibration control.

For further guidance on vibration performance, refer to Chapter 7 of this Handbook.

Design Example – Chapter 13

29
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

13.6.5 Glulam Roof Beam – Two-Span Continuous

Design of a two-span continuous glulam beam, 15.2 m in length, as shown on the roof plan. Beam
tributary width is 6.1 m.

wf = 44 kN/m (from mid-span support reaction of two-span continuous CLT roof panels and the
self-weight of glulam).

Using pattern loading.

Trying a double 175-mm x 418-mm, two-span continuous, D. Fir-L 24f-EX glulam.

Analysing a single beam with wf = 44 / 2 = 22 kN/m and pattern loading.

Results from analysis:

Moment:

Mf +ve = 75.8 kNm

Mf -ve = 134.8 kNm

Shear:

Vf = 96.3 kN

Deflection:

Interior

Δs,perm = 3.5 mm = L/2000 < L/360 (31%)

Δs,live = 3.6 mm = L/1944 < L/360 (52%)

Δs,total = 7.1 mm = L/986 < L/180 (42%)

Cantilever

Δs,perm = 0.9 mm = L/666 < L/180 (60%)

Δs,live = 0.9 mm = L/666 < L/180 (93%)

Δs,total = 1.8 mm = L/333 < L/90 (75%)

Bending resistance:

Mr = lesser of M’r KL or M’r KZbg

M’r = Φ Fb S

Chapter 13 – Design Example

30
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Fb = 30.6 MPa (Table 7.3, CSA O86-14)

S = (175 x 4182) / 6 = 5096166.7 mm2

M’r = 0.9 x 30.6 x 5096166.7 x 10-6 = 140.3 kNm

KL = 1.0 [beam restrained against rotation and lateral displacement at ends, and compressive
edge supported throughout length by CLT decking]

KD = 1.0

130 610 9100 130 610 9100

𝐾 = = = 1.03 ≤ 1.3
𝑏 𝑑 𝐿 175 418 7000
KL governs.

Mr = 140.3 kNm x 1.0 x 1.0 = 140.3 kNm > Mf = 134.8 kNm (93%)

Shear resistance:

[Link] (b)

2A
𝑉 = 𝜙𝐹
3
Fv = fv(KDKHKSvKT) = 2.0 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.0 = 2 MPa

Ag = 175 x 418 = 73150 mm2

Vr = 0.9 x 2 x (2 x 73150 / 3) x 10-3 = 87.8 kN < Vf = 96.3 kN (110%)

Considering 175-mm x 494-mm D. Fir-L 24f-EX glulam:

Ag = 175 mm x 494 mm = 86450 mm2

Vr = 0.9 x 2 x (2 x 86450 / 3) x 10-3 = 103.7 kN > Vf = 96.3 kN (93%)

[Link] (a)

𝑊 = ∅𝐹 0.48𝐴 𝐶 𝑍 . ≥𝑊

Cv = using 6.66 from Table 7.5.7.5D for two-span continuous beam for this example

Z = total beam volume = 175 x 494 x 15200 x 10-9 = 1.31 m3 < 2 m3 OK

Wr = 0.9 x 2 x 0.48 x 86450 x 6.66 x 1.11-0.18 x 10-3 = 488 kN > Wf = 22 x 15.2 = 334 kN (68%)

Therefore, 175-mm x 494-mm D. Fir-L 24f-EX glulam is selected.

The designer must also consider shear resistance requirements applicable to members when
notched.

Design Example – Chapter 13

31
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

13.6.6 Glulam Floor Beam – Two-Span Continuous

Design of a two-span continuous glulam beam of a 15.2-m length, as shown on the floor plan.
Beam tributary width is 6.1 m.

wf = 54.5 kN/m (from mid-span support reaction of two-span continuous CLT roof panels and the
self-weight of glulam).

Using pattern loading.

Considering double 175-mm x 570-mm, two-span continuous D. Fir-L 24f-EX glulam.

Analysing single beam with wf = 54.5 / 2 = 27.25 kN/m and pattern loading.

Results from analysis:

Moment:

Mf +ve = 93.9 kNm

Mf -ve = 167.0 kNm

Shear:

Vf = 119.2 kN

Deflections:

Interior

Δs,perm = 5.1 mm = L/1372 < L/360 (26%)

Δs,live = 4.8 mm = L/1458 < L/360 (25%)

Δs,total = 9.8 mm = L/714 < L/180 (25%)

Cantilever

Δs,perm = 1.6 mm = L/375 < L/180 (48%)

Δs,live = 1.4 mm = L/429 < L/180 (42%)

Δs,total = 3.0 mm = L/200 < L/90 (45%)

Bending resistance:

Mr = lesser of M’r KL or M’r KZbg

M’r = Φ Fb S

Chapter 13 – Design Example

32
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Fb = 30.6 MPa (Table 7.3, CSA O86-14)

Le = 1.92 x 7000 mm = 13440 mm

𝐿 𝑑 13440 × 570
𝐶 = = = 15.8
𝑏 175

KL = 0.872, interpolating from Table 2.9 of Wood Design Manual (CWC, 2017)

KL = 1.0 (beam restrained against rotation and lateral displacement at ends, and compressive
edge supported throughout length by CLT decking)

Where dead load exceeds live load, applicability of CSA O86-14 Clause [Link] for calculation of
the load duration factor must be verified.

KD = 1.0 – 0.50 log (PL/Ps) ≥ 0.65 = 1.0 – 0.50 log (3.44/1.9) = 0.871

130 610 9100 130 610 9100

𝐾 = = = 1.00 ≤ 1.3
𝑏 𝑑 𝐿 175 570 7000

KL governs.

Mr = 261 kNm x 0.872 x 0.871 = 198 kNm > Mf = 167.0 kNm (84%)

Shear resistance:

[Link] (b)

2𝐴
𝑉 = 𝜙𝐹
3

Fv = fv(KDKHKSvKT) = 2.0 x 0.874 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.0 = 1.73 MPa

Ag = 175 mm x 570 mm = 99750 mm2

Vr = 0.9 x 1.73 x (2 x 99750 / 3) x 10-3 = 103 kN > Vf = 82.3 kN (80%)

[Link] (a)

𝑊 = ∅𝐹 0.48𝐴 𝐶 𝑍 . ≥𝑊

Cv = using 6.66, from Table 7.5.7.5D for two-span continuous beam for this example

Z = total beam volume = 175 x 570 x 15200 x 10-9 = 1.516 m3 < 2.0 m3 OK

Wr = 0.9 x 1.73 x 0.48 x 99750 x 6.66 x 1.516-0.18 x 10-3 = 456 kN > Wf = 27.25 x 15.2 = 414 kN
(91%)

Design Example – Chapter 13

33
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Therefore, 175-mm x 570-mm, D. Fir-L 24f-EX glulam is selected.

The designer must also consider shear resistance requirements applicable to members when
notched and whether a vibration verification is required.

13.6.7 Glulam Column

Design of a second storey column at grid location D/2.

Tributary area at each floor/roof = 6.1 x 7 = 42.7 m2

Live load reduction factor can be applied to floor live load per NBC (NRC, 2015) Clause [Link](3),
where a column supports a tributary area greater than 20 m2 per the following equation:

9.8 9.8
0.3 + = 0.3 + = 0.78
𝐵 42.7

Table 9 Factored column load with live load reduction

Level B Dead Live Live Load Snow Pf

Reduction
Factor
(m2) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kN)

Roof 42.70 1.76 2.32 242.5

8 42.70 3.44 1.90 0.78 278.5

7 42.70 3.44 1.90 0.78 278.5

6 42.70 3.44 1.90 0.78 278.5

5 42.70 3.44 1.90 0.78 278.5

4 42.70 3.44 1.90 0.78 278.5

3 42.70 3.44 1.90 0.78 278.5

Ground

TOTAL 1913.5

Chapter 13 – Design Example

34
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Unbraced length = 3.0 m

Column effectively pinned at both ends, Ke = 1.0 [CSA O86-14 Table A.[Link].]

Concentrically loaded.

Considering a 365-mm x 342-mm, [Link]-L 16c-E glulam column:

Cc = (3000 x 1.0) / 342 = 8.77 < 50

Φ = 0.8

fc = 30.2 MPa

Fc = fc(KDKHKScKT) = 30.2 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.0 = 30.2 MPa

A = 365 mm x 342 mm = 124830 mm2

Z = 365 x 342 x 3000 = 374.5x106 mm3 = 0.374 m3

KZbg = 0.68 x Z-0.13 ≤ 1.0 = 0.68 x (0.374)-0.13 = 0.77 ≤ 1.0

E05 = 0.87E = 0.87 x 12400 = 10788 MPa

𝐹𝐾 𝐶 30.2 × 0.77 × 8.77

𝐾 = 1.0 + = 1.0 + = 0.96
35𝐸 𝐾 𝐾 35 × 10788 × 1.0 × 1.0

Pr = Φ x Fc x A x KZbg x KC = 0.8 x 30.2 x 0.77 x 0.96 x 10-3 = 2237 kN > 1914 kN (86%)

From Wood Design Manual (CWC, 2017) Column Selection Table, a 365-mm x 342-mm [Link]-L
16c-E glulam column has factored compressive resistance parallel to grain:

Prx = 2240 kN

Pry = 2250 kN

Thus, a 365-mm x 342-mm, [Link]-L 16c-E glulam column is sufficient for strength. Design
verifications for fire safety are shown in Section 13.7 of this Chapter, which may affect the required
column size.

Design Example – Chapter 13

35
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

13.6.8 CLT Wall

Design of CLT wall on grid G+ (part of stair core) at first CLT storey, for accumulated loads.

The major axis of the CLT wall panel is oriented vertically.

Figure 2 Diagram of panel orientation in the strong axis vertically

(source: Nordic)

The unsupported length is taken as the distance between the concrete podium and the first CLT
floor, equalling 3.0 m.

The simply supported CLT floor slab spans 3100 mm between grid line G and the CLT wall.

Eccentricity equal to half the wall thickness is used to calculate the moment at the top of the wall,
due to the CLT.

Checking the 245-mm thick (seven-layer) Grade E1 CLT wall panel:

Ke = 1.0

Le = L = 3000 mm

Ø = 0.8

fc = 19.3 MPa (transverse layers)

KD = 1.0

KH = 1.0

KSc = 1.0

Chapter 13 – Design Example

36
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

KT = 1.0

Ieff = 872x106 mm4

Aeff = 140x103 mm2

𝐼
𝑟 = = 78.9 𝑚𝑚 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑜𝑟 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑠 (Table 3.10, Wood Design Manual 2017)
𝐴

. .
𝐾 = 6.3 √12𝑟 𝐿 = 6.3 √12 ⋅ 78.9 ⋅ 3000 = 1.07 ≤ 1.3

Fc = fc(KDKHKScKT) = 19.3 MPa

E05 = 11700 x 0.82 = 9594 MPa for 1950 Fb-1.7E SPF MSR (Table 6.3.2, CSA O86-14)

𝐿 3000
𝐶 = = = 10.98 ≤ 43
√12𝑟 √12 ⋅ 78.9

𝐹𝐾 𝐶 19.3 ⋅ 1.07 ⋅ 10.98

𝐾 = 1.0 + = 1.0 + = 0.92
35𝐸 (𝐾 𝐾 ) 35 ⋅ 9594(1.0 ⋅ 1.0)

Pr = Ø x Fc x Aeff x KZc x KC = 0.8 x 19.3 x 140x103 x 1.07 x 0.92 x 10-3 = 2128 kN

From the Wood Design Manual (CWC, 2017) CLT Wall Panel Selection Tables, Grade E1, seven-
ply (245 mm), the major axis factored compressive resistance for L = 3000 mm is equal to 2140
kN (all units are per 1-m width of wall).

The interaction equation for combined loads, where moment is applied at the top of the wall is:

𝑃 1 ⎡ 𝑃 Δ ⎤
+ ⎢𝑀 + ⎥≤1
𝑃 𝑀 ⎢ 𝑃 ⎥
1−
⎣ 𝑃, ⎦

Mr = 155 kNm in minor axis (CLT Panel Strength Selection Table, Wood Design Manual
(CWC, 2017)

Eccentricity = 245/2 = 123 mm

Mf = 0 kNm (no side load)

PE = = 𝜋² x 9594 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 872x106 / 3000^2 x 10-3 = 9174 kN

PE,𝜈 = = 9174 / (1 + 9174/22.2x103) = 6491 kN

( ) ,

Design Example – Chapter 13

37
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Table 10 Wall loads

Level Dead Live Snow Tributary Dead Live Snow

Width
(kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (m) (kN/m) (kN/m) (kN/m)

Roof 1.76 2.32 1.55 2.73 3.60

7 3.44 1.9 1.55 5.33 2.95

6 3.44 1.9 1.55 5.33 2.95

5 3.44 1.9 1.55 5.33 2.95

4 3.44 1.9 1.55 5.33 2.95

3 3.44 1.9 1.55 5.33 2.95

2 3.44 1.9 1.55 5.33 2.95

37.44 17.7 3.6

Pf = (37.44 x 1.25) + (17.7 x 1.5) + 3.6 = 77 kN

77 1 77 × 0.123
+ (0 + ) = 0.04 + 0.06 = 0.10
2140 155 77
1 − 6491

Therefore, a Grade E1, 245-mm thick (seven-layer) CLT wall is acceptable.

Note: a 105-mm thick (three-ply) grade V2 CLT wall has a major axis factored compressive
resistance Cr = 423 kN for L = 3000 mm and a major axis moment resistance M r = 16 kNm and
would be acceptable for gravity design only.

Chapter 13 – Design Example

38
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

DESIGN FOR FIRE RESISTANCE

13.7.1 Introduction
The fire resistance of exposed wood members can be calculated per the method in CSA O86-14
Annex B, based on the charring rate. Wood members can also be protected from fire using
encapsulation materials, such as Type X gypsum board, to achieve higher fire-resistance ratings.

CSA O86-14 Annex B is used to calculate the structural fire resistance for wood elements with a
large cross-section. This annex is considered an alternative solution and is not yet directly
referenced in the NBC (NRC, 2015). The method is valid for large cross-section wood elements
including solid sawn timber, SCL, CLT, and glulam members. The method is based on the
reduced cross-section approach, and accounts for section loss due to charring as well as a portion
of the heated zone beyond the char layer. The Wood Design Manual (CWC, 2017) has selection
tables for solid sawn and glulam beams and columns, and CLT floor, roof and wall assemblies.

For glulam wood members, another alternative fire design methodology is available in
Appendix D-2.11. of the NBC (NRC, 2015).

The following fire safety design examples are based on the required 2-hour fire resistance for
buildings having more than six storeys; they assume no protective membrane (such as Type X
gypsum board) is present on the fire side(s) of the member and that fire resistance is achieved
only through charring.

Refer to Chapter 8 of this Handbook for a detailed explanation of fire performance of CLT
assemblies.

13.7.2 Fire Design – Glulam Beam

Consider the two-span continuous glulam floor beam designed previously (13.6.6) for this fire-
resistance beam design example.

The following conditions are considered:

Species and grade: [Link]-L, 24f-EX

Beam dimensions: 175 mm x 570 mm

Pattern loading

Exposed to fire on three sides (top side protected by CLT floor deck designed to provide at least
two hours of fire resistance)

Load combination: 1.0D + 1.0L

Lateral support: top continuous, bottom at all supports

E = 12800 MPa

Design Example – Chapter 13

39
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

fb = 30.6 MPa

From analysis:

Mf +ve = 80.09 kNm

Mf -ve = 127.46 kNm

Vf = 72.39 kN

Wf = 310.69 kN

Figure 3 Reduced cross-section due to charring

(source: CWC Wood Design Manual (CWC, 2017), p. 776)

Char depth after 120 minutes (2 hours) of standard fire exposure:

Xc,n = βnt = (0.70) (120) = 84 mm

Zero-strength zone depth:

xt = 7 mm where t ≥ 20 minutes

Therefore, the resulting loss of cross-section on each side of exposure is:

xr = 84 + 7 = 91 mm

bf = 175 – [(2) (91)] = -7 mm

Therefore, 175-mm wide glulam beam fully exposed to fire is not capable of providing a 2-hour
fire resistance.

Chapter 13 – Design Example

40
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

From the Beam Selection Tables for Fire Resistance in the Wood Design Manual (CWC, 2017),
the minimum glulam beam width to resist a 2-hour fire exposure is 265 mm.

315 mm x 646 mm:

bf = 315 – [(2) (91)] = 133 mm

df = 646 – [(1) (91)] = 555 mm

Size factor based on original beam size:

130 610 9100 130 610 9100

𝐾 = = = 0.93 𝐺𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑠 𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟 𝐾 = 1.0
𝑏 𝑑 𝐿 315 646 7000

KL = 1.0 for calculating moment resistance to positive bending moment in beam (compressive
edge fully supported along length by CLT floor decking designed to provide at least a 2-hour fire
resistance). The stability factor KL should be calculated using the reduced cross-section if the
compressive edges are not fully restrained for the entire fire exposure.

KL = 0.42 for calculating moment resistance to negative bending moment in beam (calculated per
CSA O86-14 Clause [Link] using net cross-section).

Section modulus based on reduced cross-section = Sf = (133 x 5552) / 6 = 6827888 mm3

Fb = 30.6 MPa x KD x Kfi = 30.6 x 1.15 x 1.35 = 47.51 MPa

Mr = Φ x Fb x Sf x Kx x Kzbg = 1.0 x 47.51 x 6827888 x 1.0 x 0.93 x 10-6 = 301 kNm > 80.09 kNm
(27%)

Mr = Φ x Fb x Sf x Kx x KL = 1.0 x 47.51 x 6827888 x 1.0 x 0.42 x 10-6 = 135 kNm > 127.46 kNm
(94%)

Beam volume = 315 x 646 x 15200 x 10-9 = 3.1 m3

Using the Selection Tables for Fire Resistance, Wr = (WrL0.18) x L-0.18 = 649 x (7) -0.18 = 457 kN >
Wf = 310.69 kN

Design Example – Chapter 13

41
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

13.7.3 Fire Design – Glulam Column

Consider the glulam column designed previously (13.6.7) for this fire resistance column design
example.

The following conditions are considered:

Species and grade: [Link]-L, 16c-E

Column dimensions: 365 mm x 342 mm

Column height is 3.0 m

Exposed to fire on four sides

Load combination: 1.0D + 1.0L + 1.0S

Effectively pinned at both ends (Ke = 1.0)

Total specified load = 1467.23 kN

Char depth after 120 minutes of standard fire exposure:

Xc,n = βnt = (0.70) (120) = 84 mm

Zero-strength zone depth:

xt = 7 mm where t ≥ 20 minutes

Therefore, the resulting loss of cross-section on each side of exposure is:

xr = 84 + 7 = 91 mm

bf = 342 – [(2) (91)] = 160 mm

df = 365 – [(2) (91)] = 183 mm

The modified compressive strength parallel to grain is:

Fc = 30.2 MPa

Kfi = 1.35 (specified strength adjustment factor for fire design)

KD = 1.15 for short-term loading

Fc = Kfi x fc x KD x KH x KSC x KT = 1.35 x 30.2 x 1.15 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.0 = 46.9 MPa

Slenderness ratios calculated using reduced cross-section are:

Ccb = 3000 / 160 = 18.75

Chapter 13 – Design Example

42
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Ccd = 3000 / 183 = 16.39

Size factors, based on original beam size are:

KZcb = 6.3 x (342 x 3000)-0.13 = 1.04 ≤ 1.3

KZcd = 6.3 x (365 x 3000)-0.13 = 1.03 ≤ 1.3

Modulus of elasticity, E = 12,400 MPa

46.9 × 1.04 × 18.75

𝐾 = 1.0 + = 0.57
35 × 12400 × 1.0 × 1.0

46.9 × 1.03 × 16.39

𝐾 = 1.0 + = 0.67
35 × 12400 × 1.0 × 1.0

Prb = Φ x Fc x A x KZcb x Kc = 1.0 x 46.9 x 160 x 183 x 1.04 x 0.57 x 10-3 = 814 kN < 1467.23 kN

Prd = Φ x Fc x A x KZcd x Kc = 1.0 x 46.9 x 160 x 183 x 1.03 x 0.67 x 10-3 = 847 kN < 1467.23 kN

Previously designed column size fails fire resistance check under 2-hour fire exposure.

Using the Column Selection Tables for Fire Resistance, a 365-mm x 456-mm, 16c-E [Link]-L
glulam section with 3.0 m effective length has:

Prx = 1580 kN > 1467.23 kN

Pry = 1290 kN < 1467.23 kN NG

The largest standard glulam column size provided in the Wood Design Manual (CWC, 2017) does
not meet the requirements for a 2-hour fire exposure. A custom column size may be designed to
meet the 2-hour fire exposure but is not shown here in detail. For example, a 365-mm x 532-mm,
16c-E [Link]-L glulam section would meet the requirements for a 2-hour standard fire exposure. In
addition, the designer must refer to the product manufacturers’ section sizes, which may differ
from the standard sizes in CSA O86-14.

13.7.4 Fire Design – CLT Floor

Consider the simply supported span floor CLT panel designed previously (13.6.3) for this fire
resistance floor panel design example.

The following conditions are considered:

Stress grade: E1

Five-layer CLT panels, 35-mm thick plies (175-mm total thickness)

Simply supported span of 6100 mm

Design Example – Chapter 13

43
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Exposed to fire on underside

Load combination: 1.0D + 1.0L

Specified dead load = 3.24 kPa

Specified live load = 1.9 kPa

Total specified load = 3.24 + 1.9 = 5.14 kPa x 1 m = 5.14 kN/m

Specified bending moment:

Mf = 1/8 x wf x L2 = 1/8 x 5.14 x 6.12 = 23.9 kNm/m

Reduced cross-section dimensions based on notional charring rate:

Xc,n = βnt = (0.80) (120) = 96 mm

Zero-strength zone depth:

xt = 7 mm where t ≥ 20 minutes

Therefore, the resulting loss of cross-section on each side of exposure is:

xr = 96 + 7 = 103 mm

Neutral axis after a 2-hour standard fire exposure:

35
(35) + 35 + 35 + 2 2 (2)
𝑦= 2 = 20.4 𝑚𝑚
35 + 2

Moment of inertia for a 1-m width of panel:

( )( ) ( )( )
𝐼= + + (1000)(35) 20.4 − 35 2 + (1000)(2) 35 + 35 + 2 2 − 20.4 = 9×
10 𝑚𝑚

𝐼 9 × 10
𝑆 = = = 0.17 × 10 𝑚𝑚
𝑐 (35 + 35 + 2) − 20.4

Fb = fb x KD x KH x Ksb x KT x Kfi = 28.2 x 1.15 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.25 = 40.54 MPa

Krb = adjustment factor for bending = 0.85

Mr = Φ x Fb x Seff x Krb = 1.0 x 40.54 x 0.17x106 x 0.85 x 10-6 = 5.9 kNm/m < 24.61 kNm/m

Therefore, a five-layer, 175-mm thick CLT panel requires a protective membrane on the underside
to resist a 2-hour standard fire exposure.

Chapter 13 – Design Example

44
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Considering a 175-mm thick, five-layer CLT floor panel with one layer of 15.9-mm Type X gypsum
board directly applied on the underside of the panel:

One layer of 15.9-mm Type X gypsum board provides a 30-min fire-resistance duration (per
Clause B.8.1 of CSA O86-14); therefore, the CLT panel must have a 90-minute fire resistance
rating on its own.

Xc,n = βnt = (0.80) (90) = 72 mm

Zero-strength zone depth:

xt = 7 mm, where t ≥ 20 minutes

Therefore, the resulting loss of cross-section on each side of exposure is:

xr = 72 + 7 = 79 mm

Neutral axis after a 90-min standard fire exposure:

35
(35) + 35 + 35 + 26 2 (26)
𝑦= 2 = 45.4 𝑚𝑚
35 + 26

Moment of inertia for a 1-m width of panel:

( )( ) ( )( )
𝐼= + + (1000)(35) 45.4 − 35 2 + (1000)(2) 35 + 35 + 26 2 − 45.4 =
69.0 × 10 𝑚𝑚

𝐼 69 × 10
𝑆 = = = 1.36 × 10 𝑚𝑚
𝑐 (35 + 35 + 26) − 45.4

Fb = fb x KD x KH x Ksb x KT x Kfi = 28.2 x 1.15 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.25 = 40.54 MPa

Krb = adjustment factor for bending = 0.85

Mr = Φ x Fb x Seff x Krb = 1.0 x 40.54 x 1.36x106 x 0.85 x 10-6 = 46.9 kNm/m > 24.61 kNm/m

Therefore, a five-layer, 175 mm-thick CLT panel with one layer of Type X gypsum board directly
applied to the underside of the panel can resist a 2-hour standard fire exposure.

From the Solid Floor and Roof Panel Selection Tables for Fire Resistance in the Wood Design
Manual (CWC, 2017), a seven-ply (245-mm thick), Grade E1 CLT panel with a 2-hour exposure
has Mr = 42.8 kNm/m > 24.61 kNm/m.

Thus, a seven-layer, 245-mm thick CLT panel would be required for an exposed CLT ceiling.

Design Example – Chapter 13

45
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

13.7.5 Fire Design – CLT Wall

Consider the CLT wall previously designed (Section 13.6.8) for this fire safety wall panel design
example.

This example assumes that the vertical loads on the wall panel are concentric; its transient
eccentricity due to charring is not considered, i.e. the designer is to consider whether the fire design
of the CLT wall panels is to include combined compression and bending from eccentric loads and/or
P-Δ effects. Refer to Chapter 8 of this Handbook for further details and explanations for applicable
charring rates and considerations for combined axial compression and bending due to charring.

The following conditions are considered:

Stress grade: E1

Seven-layer CLT panels, 35-mm thick plies (245-mm total thickness)

Effective height of 3000 mm

Wall is effectively pinned at both ends (Ke = 1.0)

Exposed to fire on one side without gypsum wall board encapsulation

Load combination: 1.0D + 1.0L

Specified dead load = 37.4 kN/m

Specified live load = 17.7 kN/m

Specified snow load = 3.6 kN/m

Total specified load = 37.4 + 17.7 + 3.6 = 58.7 kN/m

Reduced cross-section dimensions based on notional charring rate:

Xc,n = βnt = (0.80) (120) = 96 mm

Zero-strength zone depth:

xt = 7 mm where t ≥ 20 minutes

Therefore, the resulting loss of cross-section on each side of exposure is:

xr = 96 + 7 = 103 mm

Neutral axis after a 2-hour standard fire exposure:

35 35 2
(35) + 35 + 35 + (35) + 35 + 35 + 35 + 35 + (2)
𝑦= 2 2 2 = 55 𝑚𝑚
35 + 35 + 2

Chapter 13 – Design Example

46
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Moment of inertia for 1-meter width of panel:

( )( ) ( )( ) ( )( )
𝐼= + + + (1000)(35) 55 − 35 2 + (1000)(35) 35 + 35 + −

55 + (1000)(2) 35 + 35 + 35 + 35 + − 55 = 108.1 × 10 𝑚𝑚

𝐴 = (1000)(35) + (1000)(35) + (1000)(2) = 72000 𝑚𝑚 ⁄𝑚

𝐿 3000
𝐶 = = = 22.4
√12 𝐼 ⁄𝐴 √12 108.1 × 10 ⁄72000

KD = duration of load factor = 1.15 (per B.3.3 of CSA O86-14)

KH = system factor = 1.0

KSc = service condition factor in bending = 1.0

KT = treatment factor = 1.0

Kfi = strength adjustment factor for fire design = 1.25 (per B.6.3 of CSA O86-14)

fc = 19.3 MPa (Table 8.2.4 in CSA O86-14)

Fc = 19.3 x 1.15 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.25 = 27.7 MPa

Size factor is based on the original CLT panel dimensions using only the longitudinal plies.

𝐴 = (1000)(35) + (1000)(35) + (1000)(35) + (1000)(35) = 140000 𝑚𝑚 ⁄𝑚

( )( )
𝐼 =4× + 2 × (1000)(35) 122.5 − + (1000)(35) 122.5 − 35 − 35 − =

443.1 × 10 𝑚𝑚
.

443.1 × 10
𝐾 = 6.3 √12 (3000) = 1.12 ≤ 1.3
140000

KSE = service condition factor for modulus of elasticity = 1.0

E = 11,700 MPa

𝐹 𝐾 𝐶 27.7 × 1.12 × 22.4

𝐾 = 1.0 + = 1.0 + = 0.54
35 𝐸 𝐾 𝐾 35 × 11700 × 1.0 × 1.0

Design Example – Chapter 13

47
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Note that for fire design, Ø is taken as 1.0 (per B.3.2 of CSA O86-14).

𝑃 = ∅ 𝐹 𝐴 𝐾 𝐾 = 1.0 × 27.7 × 72000 × 1.12 × 0.54 = 1206.2 kN⁄m of panel width

From the Solid Wall Panel Selection Tables for Fire Resistance in the Wood Design Manual
(CWC, 2017), seven-ply (245-mm thick) Grade E1 CLT panel with a 2-hour fire exposure has
Pr = 1180 kN. Using the same tables, it can be shown that neither a three-ply (105-mm thick) or
five-ply (175-mm thick) Grade E1 CLT wall panel can resist any compression force for a 3000-mm
effective height.

Thus, a seven-layer, 245-mm thick CLT panel is required for an exposed CLT wall with fire
damage on one side.

13.7.6 Fire Design – Discussion

The fire resistance design examples above demonstrate the significant impact charring has on
the section size required to resist a 2-hour standard fire exposure for a tall wood building, namely
where no further fire protection measures are undertaken.

Also, as per the NBC (NRC, 2015), support elements must be provided with the same fire-
resistance rating as the element being considered.

Connections that are critical for the support of gravity loads acting on the structure must be
designed to have at least the same fire-resistance rating as the elements they support.
Connections where the steel is located within the reduced cross-section of the wood element are
considered appropriately protected (see CSA B.9 of O86-14). It is strongly recommended to
consult with the engineered wood product manufacturer for proper design and detailing of
connections in mass timber buildings.

Furthermore, it is important to note that CSA O86-14 Clause B.2.2 describes modifications to the
glulam layup required for the Annex B calculation method to be valid. Fundamentally, core
lamination(s) are removed, the tension zone moves inward, and outer tension lamination(s) are
added. It is recommended practice to note this clause on drawings and/or specifications, to ensure
that the glulam manufacturer is aware of the correct layup to use; the designer may wish to review
layup shop drawings prior to manufacture, to ensure conformity.

The economical design of mass timber elements with practical tributary widths and areas will likely
result in the need for a protective membrane, such as Type X gypsum board, to help achieve the
required fire resistance without the requirement for a significant increase in the cross-sectional
area of the members. Moreover, encapsulation materials are most likely to be required, as per
NBC (NRC, 2015), to limit ignition and contribution of mass timber to fire growth, intensity, and
duration. Ultimately, these encapsulation materials enhance the inherent fire resistance of mass
timber elements. A good building design could include some exposed wood elements, but only in
controlled locations.

Chapter 13 – Design Example

48
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

LATERAL DESIGN
13.8.1 Introduction
The design of CLT shear walls and diaphragms is defined in Clause 11.9 of CSA O86-14 Update 2
(CSA, 2017), in combination with the CWC Commentary on CSA O86-14. Refer to Chapter 4 of
this Handbook for a detailed explanation of lateral design for CLT structures.

All CLT structures should be designed using capacity design principles with, at minimum,
moderately ductile connections at specified locations, and all other connections protected using
an over-strength factor. CSA O86-14 Update 2 (CSA, 2017) states that the appropriate force
modification factors for CLT structures are Rd ≤ 2.0 and Ro = 1.5 for platform-type construction.

The designer must check bearing perpendicular to grain, elastic shortening, and shrinkage for
platform construction.

The type of lateral analysis for earthquake loads depends on the level of seismic hazard. For
structures where IE Fa Sa(0.2) ≤ 0.35 or those meeting either of the other criteria in Clause [Link]
of the NBC (NRC, 2015), the equivalent static force procedure (ESFP) may be used. Where these
criteria do not apply, a dynamic analysis is the default approach. The dynamic analysis may be
linear, using the modal response spectrum method, the time history method, or a non-linear
dynamic analysis. Refer to Clause [Link] of NBC 2015 and the structural commentaries for
guidance on the dynamic analysis procedure.

Podium structures, where mass timber is used above one or two storeys of above-grade
reinforced concrete construction, typically have many of the following irregularities:

▪ Type 1 – Vertical stiffness

▪ Type 2 – Weight
▪ Type 3 – Vertical Geometry
▪ Type 4 – In-plane
▪ Type 5 – Out-of-plane
Type 4 and 5 irregularities can still exist between the concrete and mass timber portions of the
structure, where the lateral systems for each are typically independent, while neither of these
irregularities are allowed within the mass timber portion only.

This eight-storey example has irregularity types 1 and 2, where the concrete podium is much
stiffer and heavier at the first storey compared to the timber storey above.

Where irregularities are present in a structure, a dynamic analysis should be the default procedure
for earthquake design.

Design Example – Chapter 13

49
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Alternatively, a two-stage approach may be considered by the designer for podium structures.
This enables the wood and concrete portions of the structure to be analysed independently using
the appropriate ductility and over-strength factors for each material, where forces are transferred
from the mass timber above to the podium below. Current design provisions for using a two-stage
approach can be found in the 2015 NBC and Commentary J, and in ASCE 7-16. The advantage
of the two-stage approach is that it may allow the simplified elastic static force procedure to be
used for both the concrete podium and the mass timber structure above.

From Clause [Link] in ASCE 7-16, it can be determined that a two-stage analysis procedure is
applicable to the example building. It has been shown in Section 13.4.3 that the stiffness of the
concrete podium is at least ten times the stiffness of the upper wood portion.

The period of the entire building per ASCE 7-16 is:

𝑇 = (0.05 × 21 . ) + (0.05 × 3.6 . ) = 0.51 𝑠

The period of the upper wood portion is:

.
𝑇 = 0.05 × 21 = 0.49 𝑠

The ratio of periods between the entire building and the upper wood portion is 0.51 / 0.49 =
1.04 < 1.10, and thus complies with the clause.

Therefore, it is appropriate to analyse the upper wood portion using the modal response spectrum
procedure; the single storey concrete podium can be analysed with the equivalent static force
procedure.

The upper wood portion will be designed as a separate structure using the higher Rd and Ro for
CLT shear walls. The lower concrete podium can be designed as a separate structure using R d
and Ro for conventional concrete shear walls, plus the forces related to the lateral capacity of the
upper part of the structure. The design forces need not exceed those calculated using an RdRo
value of 1.3.

13.8.2 State-of-the-Art Earthquake Design Considerations

The following guidance is based on the latest research on CLT lateral design and goes beyond
the requirements and guidance currently provided in CSA O86-14 Update 2 (CSA, 2017) and the
CWC Commentary (CWC, 2017), which applies primarily to platform-type construction. The
following recommendations have been implemented in the 2019 Edition of the CSA Standard
O86-19 (CSA, 2019).

CSA O86-14 Update 2 (CSA, 2017) allows seismic energy to be dissipated by wall panels acting
in rocking, to allow RdRo = 3.0. It is assumed that rocking behaviour is the desired energy
dissipation method and that sliding is to be avoided, where the designer wishes to use RdRo = 3.0.

Chapter 13 – Design Example

50
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

To ensure rocking behaviour, test results indicate that the aspect ratio of each shear wall or shear
wall segment (where a segment refers to a wall made from one or more adjacent CLT panels)
should be between 2:1 and 4:1. Therefore, connections between shear wall segments and shear
wall panels to the floor below need to be designed to yield, thereby allowing the segments to
rotate. Structures with wall segments with an aspect ratio less than 2:1 must be designed with
forces calculated using RdRo = 1.3 (refer to Chapter 4).

It is recommended that CLT shear wall panels have a thickness of no less than 87 mm. CLT
panels can be of any size or aspect ratio. A shear wall segment constructed from one or more
CLT panels, if rigidly connected, will behave as one segment when determining the aspect ratio
of shear wall segments, in accordance with the limits discussed above.

CSA O86-14 Update 2 (CSA, 2017) states that Type 4 or 5 irregularities, as defined in the NBC
(NRC, 2015), shall not be allowed. It is also recommended that Type 6, 8 or 9 irregularities, in
addition to Type 4 or 5 irregularities, shall not be allowed. Type 1, 2, 3 or 7 irregularities are
permissible, but structures with these irregularities must be analysed using dynamic analysis. This
has implications for the design approach to CLT structures on concrete podiums, where a two-
step design process cannot be justified.

CSA O86-14 Update 2 (CSA, 2017) does not consider the compressive resistance at the ends of
CLT shear walls due to overturning forces. The compressive resistance should be greater than
or equal to the overturning forces.

CLT diaphragms are to be capacity-protected with non-dissipative connections to walls beneath

the diaphragm level and between adjacent CLT diaphragm panels. Compressive resistance
perpendicular to the face of the diaphragm where overturning forces are transferred from the walls
is to be greater than or equal to the overturning forces. Diaphragm chords, struts, and collectors,
including those around openings, are to be capacity-protected, where the seismic design force
need not exceed the force determined using RdRo = 1.3.

Where IEFaSa(0.2) is greater than 0.35, gravity-resisting elements that are not part of the seismic-
force-resisting system are to have satisfactory resistance and displacement capability, to support
their loads while undergoing seismically induced deformations.

13.8.3 Structural Modelling

This Section gives a general description of the structural finite element model developed as part
of the first iteration for the lateral design of the example structure, as well as additional
recommendations.

Glulam beams and columns are modelled as ‘beam’ elements with material properties given in
Section 13.3. Beams are continuous and columns are hinged from floor to floor.

Design Example – Chapter 13

51
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Shear walls and floors/roof are modelled as ‘surface’ elements with multi-ply CLT panel
properties, per Section 13.3. The structural model developed is a first iteration and does not
include connection stiffnesses. Note that the model will underestimate displacements and further
iterations would be necessary to complete the design.

The diaphragms are modelled as semi-rigid elements using the in-plane stiffness properties of
the CLT panels, for each direction. CLT floor and roof panels are defined individually, with moment
releases at the joints between them.

The structural model should account for P-Δ effects and any effects that influence the lateral
stiffness of the building, per Sentence 8 of Clause [Link]. of NBC 2015, such as the connection
stiffness between elements in a CLT structure (the latter has not been included for the example
in this Chapter).

13.8.4 Linear Dynamic Analysis (Seismic)

The design example of the eight-storey building was analysed using a three-dimensional finite
element model. The model was used to determine the fundamental natural period of the structure
and then analysed using linear dynamic analysis, per Clause [Link] of NBC 2015. The modal
response spectrum method was used per the NBC and the guidance provided in Commentary J
of NBC 2015.

The modal response spectrum analysis was performed for the wood portion of the building only,
using RdRo equal to 3.0 for the two-stage approach discussed in Section 13.8.1. This analysis
was conducted to confirm the behaviour of the building while accounting for torsional sensitivity
(a structural irregularity) in one direction (see Section 13.4.3).

The linear dynamic analysis uses the spectral acceleration values, S(T), based on the site-specific
accelerations and site class (see Section 13.4.3 of this Chapter). Accidental torsional moments
are accounted for in accordance with NBC (NRC, 2015). Separate design cases are calculated
to determine the elastic base shear, Ve, and design base shear, Vd. The design base shear is
calculated by multiplying the elastic base shear by the Importance Factor and then dividing by
RdRo. Since the example building is irregular according to Article [Link]. of the NBC, the design
base shear is to be taken as the maximum of the calculated Vd and 100% of V, as determined
using the ESFP. To determine V, the fundamental natural period, Ta, may be based on the
frequency analysis output of the structural model.

The fundamental natural period of the building, Ta, was previously estimated as 0.55 seconds in
Section 13.4.3, using the NBC (NRC, 2015) equations. Using frequency analysis, the period of
the finite element model was calculated, as noted in Table 13.11, to be 0.88 s and 0.80 s in the
North-South and East-West directions, respectively. NBC Article [Link] states that the
fundamental natural period determined from the model shall not be greater than twice that
determined by the code equation for shear walls. The discrepancy in natural fundamental
frequencies likely results from the NBC equation being based on measurements taken from
concrete structures rather than wood structures, which are lighter and typically more flexible.

Chapter 13 – Design Example

52
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Therefore, V =1039 kN, where Ta = 0.8 seconds (compared to 1327 kN where Ta = 0.55 seconds)
(refer to Section 13.4.3).

From the structural model, Ve = 15529 kN in the North-South direction, Ve = 13406 kN in the East-
West direction, Vd = 5177 kN in the North-South direction, and Vd = 4469 kN in the East-West
direction.

In the example, Vd is the larger of Vd and V and therefore Vd governs, in accordance with NBC
[Link].(9).

Elastic storey shears, storey forces, member forces, and deflections from the linear dynamic
analysis are multiplied by the ratio of Vd/Ve to determine design values per NBC [Link].(10).

For the example building, the ratio of Vd/Ve in both directions is 0.33, the inverse of which is 3, the
same as the value for RdRo.

The lateral deflection of each storey derived by modal response spectrum analysis for the North-
South direction (perpendicular to long face) is shown in Table 11. Since deflection is obtained
from the linear dynamic analysis, deflections are multiplied by Vd/Ve. The inter-storey drift, xi, is
less than 2.5%hs = 0.025 x 3000 mm = 75 mm. Therefore, the seismic design of this building is
adequate. Lateral deflections determined from the model for the East-West direction due to
seismic load are less than those for the North-South direction.

Table 11 Lateral deflection (North-South direction) at centre of gravity due to seismic load

Storey Xi, Xi(Vd/Ve), xi ,

mm mm mm

8 40.3 13.4 1.8

7 34.7 11.6 2.0

6 28.7 9.6 2.1

5 22.4 7.5 2.1

4 16.1 5.4 2.0

3 10.1 3.4 1.8

2 4.9 1.6 1.6

The periods of the example design finite element model were derived by running a frequency
analysis using the Lanczos method of eigenvalue extraction. The results are shown in Table 12
for the first 10 modes and also indicate significant modal participation. See Figures 4 to 6 for
mode shapes.

Design Example – Chapter 13

53
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Table 12 First ten modes in East-West and North-South directions

East-West Direction North-South Direction

Mode F T Mass F T Mass
Participation Participation
(Hz) (s) (%) (Hz) (s) (%)

1 1.252 0.799 76 0.957 1.045 0.2

2 2.695 0.371 0.1 1.130 0.885 75
3 4.437 0.225 19 3.962 0.252 0.4
4 7.936 0.126 4.0 4.317 0.232 18
5 10.552 0.095 1.0 7.449 0.134 0.5
6 11.160 0.090 0.0 8.102 0.123 4.0
7 12.498 0.080 0.3 9.832 0.102 0.1
8 13.670 0.073 0.1 10.719 0.093 1.0
9 14.650 0.068 0.4 11.655 0.086 0.1
10 21.142 0.047 0.0 12.562 0.080 0.1
TOTALS 100 99

Figure 4 Structure first mode shape

Chapter 13 – Design Example

54
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Figure 5 Structure second mode shape

Figure 6 Structure third mode shape

The stiffness of the floor and roof diaphragms are assessed by comparing the diaphragm
deflection between supports, to the average storey drift at the shear walls located at the supports
of the diaphragm span in the N-S direction, per C12.3.1.3 of ASCE 7-16. For this model, the ratio
was determined to be less than 2.0, therefore defining the diaphragms as rigid or semi-rigid rather
than flexible.

Design Example – Chapter 13

55
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

13.8.5 Shear Wall Lateral Design

Design of the CLT shear wall at the elevator core, as shown on plan in Figure 7.

Figure 7 Example shear wall location

This shear wall resists lateral loads in the East-West direction. Earthquake loads control the
strength design of this wall, but lateral drift must be verified for earthquake and wind loads.

The storey drifts and inter-storey drifts for this shear wall under seismic loading are listed in
Table 13; similarly, shear wall forces are listed in Table 14. As mentioned previously, the stiffness
of the connections has not been taken into account in the model. Consequently, the storey drifts
may be underestimated.

Table 13 Shear wall displacement due to seismic loading (load case 1.0E)

Storey Xi, XiRdRo/IE, xi , Xi/Hs0.025

(mm) (mm) (mm)
Penthouse 19.1 57.3 4.5 0.06

Roof 17.6 52.8 7.5 0.1

8 15.1 45.3 8.1 0.11

7 12.4 37.2 8.4 0.11

6 9.6 28.8 8.4 0.11

5 6.8 20.4 8.1 0.11

4 4.1 12.3 6.3 0.08

3 2 6 6 0.08

Chapter 13 – Design Example

56
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Table 14 Shear wall forces due to seismic loading (load combination 1.0D + 1.0E)

Level Storey Accumulated Overturning Pf from Dead Resisting Net Tf=Cf

Shear Shear Tf=Cf Load Tf=Cf
(kN) (kN) (kN) (kN) (kN) (kN)
(see S400)
Penthouse 22 22 7 10 5 2

Roof 70 92 52 36 18 34

8 79 171 137 114 57 80

7 36 207 238 187 94 145

6 20 227 350 251 126 225

5 24 251 473 304 152 321

4 34 285 614 336 168 446

3 35 320 771 343 172 599

Base shear 358

The storey drifts and inter-storey drifts for this shear wall resulting from wind loads are listed in
Table 15. Similarly, shear wall forces are listed in Table 16.

Table 15 Shear wall displacement due to wind (load case 0.75W)

Level Xi, xi, % h/500

(mm) (mm)
Penthouse 3.2 0.2 5

Roof 3 0.5 8.3

8 2.5 0.4 6.7

7 2.1 0.5 8.3

6 1.6 0.5 8.3

5 1.1 0.5 8.3

4 0.6 0.3 5

3 0.3 0.3 5

Design Example – Chapter 13

57
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Table 16 Shear wall forces from wind loading (load combination 0.9D + 1.4W)

Level Storey Accumulated Overturning Pf from Dead Resisting Net Tf=Cf

Shear Shear Tf=Cf Load Tf=Cf
(kN) (kN) (kN) (kN) (kN) (kN)
Penthouse 3 3 1 9 4 -3

Roof 6 8 5 32 16 -11

8 13 21 15 103 51 -36

7 13 34 32 168 84 -52

6 11 45 54 226 113 -59

5 10 55 81 274 137 -56

4 11 66 113 302 151 -38

3 10 76 150 309 154 -4

Base shear 80

Comparing values listed in Tables 13 through 16, shows that the seismic loads govern the lateral
design of the building. Under wind loading, the shear wall does not go into net tension at the hold-
down locations.

The panel design force need not exceed the force determined using RdRo = 1.3, where seismic
loads govern, thus:

Maximum Vf = (358 x 1.5 x 2)/1.3 = 826 kN

Wall length = 6.1 m

vf = 826 kN / 6.1 m = 135 kN/m

Using 175-mm thick, grade E1, five-layer CLT panel.

There are no current criteria for in-plane shear resistance for CLT in CSA O86-14. Based on
manufacturer guidelines, Vr = 190 kN/m > vf =135 kN/m

Note that to meet the aspect ratio limits in CSA O86-14 Update 2 (CSA, 2017) Clause [Link],
the wall will be divided into four sub-segments of 1.525 m in width, to achieve an aspect ratio of
2:1, within the code bounds.

To allow ductility to occur in connections, it is important that the CLT panels have a much higher
in-plane shear resistance than the connections.

The designer must also verify CLT floor and roof slabs for diaphragm in-plane shear resistance
and detail panel-to-panel connections as non-dissipative (capacity-protected).

Chapter 13 – Design Example

58
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

WIND-INDUCED VIBRATION
The determination of building vibration is based on the procedure found in Commentary I of the
NBC Commentary.

While the maximum lateral wind loading and deflection are generally in the direction parallel to
the wind (i.e. the along-wind direction), the maximum acceleration of a building leading to possible
human perception of motion or even discomfort may occur in the direction perpendicular to the
wind (i.e. the across-wind direction). Across-wind accelerations are likely to exceed along-wind
accelerations if the building is slender about both axes, that is if √𝑤𝑑/𝐻 is less than one-third,
where w and d are the across-wind effective width and along-wind effective depth, respectively,
and H is the height of the building. The across- and along-wind accelerations, aw and ad, in m/s2,
are calculated from the equations below:

𝑎
𝑎 = 𝑓 𝑤𝑔 √𝑤𝑑
𝜚 𝑔 𝛽

𝐾𝐹 ∆
𝑎 = 4𝜋 𝑓 𝑔
𝐸 𝛽 𝐶

.
where, ar = 78.5 × 10 𝑉 ⁄ 𝑓 √𝑤𝑑 , in N/m3, ρB is the average density of the building in
kg/m3, βw and βD are the fractions of critical damping in across- and along-wind directions and are
taken as 0.015, fnW and fnD are the fundamental natural frequencies in across- and along-wind
directions in Hz, ∆ is the maximum wind-induced lateral deflection at the top of the structure in
metres obtained from the finite element model, and g is the acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m/s2).

Substituting these values into the equations above, aW and aD are 0.3% and 0.5% of g,
respectively, in the North-South direction, and 0.1% and 0.3% of g respectively, in the East-West
direction. These values are outside the range of 0.5% to 1.5% of g, where movement of a building
becomes perceptible to most people (sentence 76 of Commentary I).

CONNECTIONS
Refer to Chapter 5 of this Handbook for an in-depth review of connections and connection design
in CLT structures.

The design of connections uses capacity-based design principles. Connections are divided
between those that allow non-linear deformations and energy dissipation (ductile) and those
which are non-dissipative with sufficient over-strength to remain linear elastic (non-ductile).

Design Example – Chapter 13

59
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

The following connection types should be energy dissipative, enabling the ductile behaviour of
the CLT structure:

a) Discrete hold-downs and tension ties for resisting overturning (applying an over-strength
such that vertical joints between shear wall segments yield before the hold-downs)
Please note that this requirement was modified in CSA O86-2019.
b) Vertical joints between shear wall segments enabling rotation.
c) Shear connectors between shear walls and foundations, and shear walls to floors
beneath, in uplift only.
Examples of non-dissipative (capacity-protected) connections are:

a) Connectors between floor or roof panels to resist horizontal diaphragm shears, or that are
acting as chords or collectors.
b) Connectors between perpendicular walls.
c) Connectors between floor or roof panels and walls below, to transfer diaphragm shears
into shear walls.
Examples of these are shown in elevation on drawing sheet S401, included in Annex A to this
Chapter.

To ensure sufficient over-strength, non-dissipative connectors should not yield when the
dissipative connectors are at their maximum resistance or should be designed to withstand the
predicted/selected displacement of the structure. The majority of displacement in a CLT structure
is predicted to be from the non-linear deformation of ductile connectors. An iterative process may
be required to achieve a connection design that provides compatibility of displacement demands
at different design force demands, while ensuring correct yielding behaviour.

As described in Chapter 5 of this Handbook, the maximum predicted resistance of a ductile

connector is to be taken as the 95th percentile of the ultimate resistance obtained statistically, if
the strength distribution is known, or via testing from reversible cyclic loading.

13.10.1 CLT Floor-Panel-to-Beam Connection

Design of the connection between a CLT floor panel and a glulam beam; refer to drawing S200
in Annex A for an example of this connection.

Connection to be capacity-protected, i.e. non-dissipative, with design force at RdRo=1.3.

Per metre: Nf = (4.8 x 2.0 x 1.5)/1.3 = 11.1 kN

Factored load per beam = 11.1/2 = 5.6 kN (double beam)

Considering 8 Φ x 330 self-tapping screws at 1000 mm o/c at 45° in alternating directions:

Note: screws must meet minimum penetration length of 5dF

Chapter 13 – Design Example

60
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

G = 0.42 SPF – EI CLT (Governs)

G = 0.49 [Link]-L - GL

According to the supplier’s fastener resistance table:

Nr’45° = 5912 N

Factored lateral strength resistance:

Nr = Nr’ nF nR J’ K’

J’ = J JE JG JPL = 0.9 x 1 x 1 x 1 = 0.9

K’ = KD KSF KT = 1.15 x 1 x 1 = 1.15

KD = 1.15 for short load duration

Nr = 5912 x 10.9 x 0.9 x 1.15 = 6.1 kN > 5.6 kN (92%)

Therefore, 8 Φ x 330 self-tapping screws @ 1000 mm o/c at 45° in alternating directions can be
used.

13.10.2 Glulam-Beam-to-Column and Column-to-Column

Connection
Refer to drawing S202 of Annex A for an example of a double glulam-beam-to-column connection,
along with a column-to-column connection.

13.10.3 Glulam-Column-to-Concrete Connection

Design of connection between concrete podium and glulam column; refer to drawing S201 of
Annex A for example of this connection type.

Checking HSS: 254 x 254 x 13, 180 LG

Cr = 3350 kN (from S016 Green Table) > Cf = 2624.6 kN

Checking bearing plate (top and bottom):
0.85 Φc f'c
Br =
Ab
Letting Cf = Br
Cf
Ab =
0.85 Φc f 'c
Cf Cf
qf = =
Ab lp wp

Design Example – Chapter 13

61
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Considering taking the plate cantilever along the length:

qf wp m2
Mf =
2

wp tp 2
Mr = Φs ZFy = Φs 4
Fy

Letting Mf = Mr
qf wp m2 wp tp 2
= ΦS Fy
2 4

qf x m2
4 2 qf m2 2 Cg m2
tp = 2
= =
ΦS Fy ΦS Fy lp wp ΦS Fy

Similarly, taking the plate cantilever along the width:

2 Cf n2
tp =
lp wp ΦS Fy

Therefore:

2 Cf m2 2 Cf n2
tp = max ,
lp wp ΦS Fy lp wp ΦS Fy

If lp = 355 mm
wp = 332 mm
ΦS = 0.9
Fy = 300 MPa
m = (355 – 254)/2 = 50.5 mm
n = (332 – 254)/2 = 39 mm

2 x 2624.6 x 50.52 2 x 2624.6 x 392

tp = max 3 , = max(20.5 , 15.8) = 20.5 mm→ 25.4 mm
355 x 382 x 0.9 x 300 / 10 355 x 382 x 0.9 x 300 / 103

Verifying deflection of plate: tp = 25.4 mm ≥ min (m/5, n/5) ≥ 10.1 mm

Therefore, a 355 mm x 332 mm x 25.4 mm baseplate can be used.

Chapter 13 – Design Example

62
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

13.10.4 Shear Wall Hold-Down and Shear Connectors

Hold-downs may be discrete or continuous. Discrete hold-downs are to remain moderately ductile
while continuous rod type hold-down systems are to remain linearly elastic. Moderately ductile
connections have a ductility ratio of 3.0 or more as determined by testing, or are connections
using steel brackets or steel side plates that fail in fastener yielding modes (d), (e), or (g), per
CSA O86 for nails or screws driven into the face of the CLT and loaded parallel- or perpendicular-
to-grain (refer to Chapters 4 and 5 of this Handbook).

Discrete Hold-Downs (moderately ductile)

Design forces for discrete hold-downs shall be multiplied by a 1.20 over-strength factor so that
their yield resistance is greater than the forces developed in them when the vertical CLT segment
connections reach their yielding resistance.

Refer to Chapters 4 and 5 of this Handbook for further information on yielding versus capacity-
protected connections in a structural system and when utilising 95% of connection resistance.

Maximum net uplift force is 599 kN (see Table 14 above and elevation on S400) from overturning
at the base of the shear wall. Connection to be moderately ductile.

The maximum capacity of a single 6.4-mm diameter lag screw in single shear with a mild steel
side plate in grade E1 CLT is 2.06 kN. Multiplying by K’ = 1.15 for short term loading = 2.06 x 1.15
= 2.37 kN/lag screw.

Therefore, (599 kN x 1.20)/ 2.37 = 304 screws are required. Hold-down at each end and each
side of the shear wall can be provided with 152 6.4-mm diameter lag screws with a minimum
penetration into the CLT of 71 mm. Design of the concrete anchors and steel plate are not shown
in this example.

Connector displacement is not considered in this example.

Deformation in the steel plate is not considered in this example.

Higher up the wall, at elevation = 15.6 m, the uplift force is 350 – 238 = 112 kN.

Tf = 112 kN x 1.2 = 134 kN

The maximum capacity of a single 6.4-mm diameter lag screw in single shear with a mild steel
side plate in grade E1 CLT is 2.06 kN. Multiplying by K’ = 1.15 for short term loading = 2.06 x 1.15
= 2.37 kN/lag screw.

Therefore, 134 / 2.37 = 56 6.4-mm diameter lag screws are required. A vertical tension tie plate
is provided at each end and on each side of the shear wall with 14 6.4-mm diameter lag screws
on each side of the joint, with a minimum penetration into the CLT of 71 mm. Design of the steel
hold-down is not shown in the example.

Design Example – Chapter 13

63
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Continuous Rod Hold-Down (linearly elastic)

For continuous rod type hold-downs, the factored design net tension force is 599 kN (from the
combination of earthquake plus dead loads); this is multiplied by RdRo=3 and then divided by 1.3
to give 1382 kN in the steel rod at RdRo=1.3. All floors should be tied to increase the efficiency of
the system and help limit deflections (drift).

Using high strength steel (Fy = 896 MPa = 130 ksi), a rod with a diameter of 57 mm (2.25”) is
required at the lowest wood storey, with a resistance of 1583 kN > 1382 kN in tension (calculated
from the lower of 13.2.(a)(i) and (iii) and [Link] of CSA S16-14). The rod diameter can be
reduced going up the wall between restraints at each floor, relative to the accumulated and
between-floor tension forces.

Compression is resisted by the CLT shear wall panels in direct bearing and must also be checked.
Shear wall lateral deflection is to be checked incorporating rod elongation displacement.

Rod elongation displacement is not considered in this example.

Elongation of a continuous rod hold-down connected to the concrete podium slab must also be
considered. Calculation not included here.

Where angle brackets are installed along the base of the CLT shear wall to resist shear (shear
keys may also be used to resist shear), they may be used in combination with hold-downs to resist
overturning. Experimental tests have shown that these brackets may contribute significantly in the
vertical (uplift) direction as well. Therefore, when assuming panel rocking and considering that
the angle brackets resist both shear and uplift forces, consideration of the shear-uplift interaction
may be required. Refer to Clause 11.9.3 in the Wood Design Manual (CWC, 2017) for a suggested
interaction equation. For this design example, it is assumed that there is no interaction.

The designer must ensure that screws fail in yielding modes (d), (e) or (g) per CSA O86, to
achieve the minimum moderate ductility ratio.

The deformation of the hold-down or rod design should be checked, since the hold-down
deflection or rod elongation should be designed to allow for the wall segments to rock while the
hold-down or rod remains in the elastic range. The example in this Handbook shows the first
iteration, for illustrative purposes. Additional iterations may be necessary to achieve this design
objective.

Shear Connection

The maximum capacity of a single 12-gauge screw in single shear with a mild steel side plate in
grade E1 CLT is 2.02 kN (see screw selection tables in Wood Design Manual (CWC, 2017)).
Multiplying by K’ = 1.15 for short term loading = 2.02 x 1.15 = 2.32 kN/screw.

Base shear of the shear wall is 358 kN (see Table 14) at the top of the concrete.

Chapter 13 – Design Example

64
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Vf = 358 kN x 1.20 over-strength factor = 430 kN

Number of screws = 430 kN / 2.32 kN = 186 screws required.

Two angle bracket shear connectors should be provided on each side of the CLT wall, each with
48 #12 screws with a minimum penetration into the CLT of 71 mm. Design of the concrete anchors
and angle brackets are not shown in this example.

From Table 14, the maximum shear force between the roof or floor and the shear wall is 79 kN.
Connection to be capacity-protected per Clause [Link] of CSA Standard O86-14 Update 2
(CSA, 2017).

Vf = (79 kN x 2.0 x 1.5) / 1.3 = 182 kN (29.9 kN/m) at RdRo = 1.3

The maximum capacity of a single 8-gauge screw in single shear with a mild steel side plate in
grade E1 CLT is 1.25 kN (see screw selection tables in Wood Design Manual (CWC, 2017)).
Multiplying by K’ = 1.15 for short term loading = 1.25 x 1.15 = 1.44 kN/screw.

Number of screws = 182 / 1.44 = 126 screws required.

Two angle bracket shear connectors each with 64 #8 screws into wall and floor with minimum
penetration into the CLT of 71 mm should be provided. Design of the steel angle bracket is not
shown in the example.

Displacement of shear connectors is not considered in this example.

13.10.5 Floor-Panel-to Shear-Wall Panel below Connection

Connection is designed for shear force at 5th floor = 251 kN (see Table 14). Steel angle brackets
at the bottom of the CLT floor panels are provided to transfer diaphragm shear plus accumulated
wall shear. Connection is non-dissipative and protected at RdRo design force.

Vf = (251 x 2.0 x 1.5)/1.3 = 579 kN

The maximum capacity of a single 12-gauge screw in single shear with a mild steel side plate in
grade E1 CLT is 2.02 kN (see screw selection tables in Wood Design Manual (CWC, 2017)).
Multiplying by K’ = 1.15 for short term loading = 2.02 x 1.15 = 2.32 kN/screw.

Therefore, 579 kN / 2.32 kN = 250 screws required.

Three angle bracket connectors are provided at the bottom of the floor panels with 250 / 3 =
83 #12 screws each, into the wall and the floor, with a minimum penetration into the CLT of
71 mm.

Design Example – Chapter 13

65
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

13.10.6 Floor-Panel-to-Shear-Wall Panel Above Connection

Connection is designed for shear force at 5th floor = 251 kN (see Table 14). Steel angle brackets
are provided at the top of the CLT floor panels to transfer accumulated wall shear. Connection is
dissipative.

Vf = 251 kN

The maximum capacity of a single 12-gauge screw in single shear with a mild steel side plate in
grade E1 CLT is 2.02 kN (see screw selection tables in Wood Design Manual (CWC, 2017)).
Multiplying by K’ = 1.15 for short term loading = 2.02 x 1.15 = 2.32 kN/screw.

Therefore, 251 kN / 2.32 kN = 108 screws required.

Three angle bracket connectors are provided at the top of the floor panels with 108 / 3 =
36 #12 screws each, into the wall and the floor, with a minimum penetration into the CLT of
71 mm.

13.10.7 Shear-Wall-Panel-to-Panel Vertical Connection

Two flat metal plate connectors are provided on each side of the shear wall to resist tension
forces. Connection should be moderately ductile. Design is for forces listed in Table 14.

At first CLT storey, tension force = 771 kN – 614 kN = 157 kN

The maximum capacity of a single 10-gauge screw in single shear with a mild steel side plate in
grade E1 CLT is 1.57 kN (see screw selection tables in Wood Design Manual (CWC, 2017)).
Multiplying by K’ = 1.15 for short term loading = 1.57 x 1.15 = 1.81 kN/screw.

Therefore, 157 kN / 1.81 kN = 87 screws required, or 87/ 4 = 22 screws on each side of the vertical
joint.

Two connectors are provided on each side of the panel at the first CLT storey with 22 #10 screws
on each side of the vertical joint, with minimum penetration into the CLT of 71 mm.

Displacement in panel-to-panel connectors is not considered in this example.

Deformation in the steel plate is not considered in this example.

13.10.8 Floor-Panel-to-Panel Connection

Design of the connection between floor panels parallel to the span to resist diaphragm forces;
refer to drawing S200 in the Annex for an example of this connection. Connection is non-
dissipative, and capacity-protected at RdRo=1.3 design force.

Nf = (4.8 kN x 2.0 x 1.5)/1.3 = 11.1 kN (per metre)

Considering ¼” Φ x 120 lag screws @ 150 mm o/c:

Chapter 13 – Design Example

66
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

df = 6.4 mm

KD = 1.15 for short load duration

KSF = 1.0

KT = 1.0

JE = 1.0 for installed side grain

K’ = KD KSF KT = 1.15 x 1 x 1 = 1.15

JX = 0.9 for CLT

G = 0.42 – SPF CLT & Ply

t1 = 38 mm

t2 = 82 mm

f1 = 50 G (1 – 0.01dF) JX = 17.7 MPa (perpendicular to the grain)

f2 = 17.7 MPa (perpendicular to the grain)

fy = 310 MPa for lag screws meeting SAE J429 Grade 1

nu, is the unit lateral yielding resistance and is taken as the minimum of the following:

a) f1 dF t1 = 4.3 kN
b) f1 dF t2 = 9.28 kN
c) N/A
1 f3 fy 1 t1
d) f 1 dF 2 ( x x + ) =1.76 kN
6 (f1 + f3 ) f1 5 dF

1 f3 fy 1 t2
e) f 1 dF 2 ( x x + ) =1.76 kN
6 (f1 + f ) f1 5 dF

1 t1 f2 t2
f) f 1 dF 2 x x + x =2.75 kN
5 dF f1 dF

2 f3 fy
g) f 1 dF 2 ( x x )=2.72 kN
3 (f1 + f3 ) f1

Using nu = 1.76 kN,

Nu = nu x K’ = 2.02 kN

nF = 1000/150 = 6.7 screws per metre

Design Example – Chapter 13

67
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

nS = 1

JA = 1

Nr = Φ Nn nF ns JA JE = 0.8 x 2.02 x 7.7 x 1 x 1 x 1 = 12.4 kN/m > NF = 11.1 kN/m (92%)

Therefore, ¼” Φ x 120 lag screws @ 150 mm o/c can be used.

Panel-to-panel connector displacement is not considered in this example.

Floor-panel-to-beam connection should also be designed for diaphragm shear force in the
perpendicular direction, with fasteners acting perpendicular to the grain in the CLT and parallel to
the grain in the beam (not included in this example).

Chapter 13 – Design Example

68
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

SYMBOLS
A = cross-sectional area of a member or the bearing area, mm2

Aeff = effective cross-sectional area, mm2

Ag = gross cross-sectional area, mm2

aD = along-wind peak acceleration, m/s2

aW = across-wind peak acceleration, m/s2

ASTC = apparent sound transmission class

Bx = ratio at level x used to determine torsional sensitivity

B = maximum value of Bx

b = width of a member or lamination, mm

bf = resultant member width after fire exposure, mm

Ca = accumulation factor for snow

Cb = basic roof snow load factor

CB = slenderness ratio for bending members

Cc = slenderness ratio for compression members

Ce = wind exposure coefficient

Cf = compression force

Cg = wind gust effect coefficient

Cp = wind external pressure coefficient

Cs = roof slope factor

Ct = wind topographic coefficient

Cv = shear load coefficient

Cw = wind exposure factor

CCMC = Canadian Construction Materials Centre

CLT = cross-laminated timber

Design Example – Chapter 13

69
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

d = depth of a member or lamination, mm

df = resultant member depth after fire exposure, mm

D = width of building parallel to wind direction

D = dead load

E = modulus of elasticity, MPa

E = earthquake load

E05 = 5th percentile of the modulus of elasticity, MPa

EIeff = effective bending stiffness of CLT panels, Nmm2

e = eccentricity, mm

ESFP = Equivalent Static Force Procedure

Fa = seismic site coefficient

Fc = modified compressive strength parallel to grain, MPa

F(PGA) = seismic site coefficient for PGA

F(PGV) = seismic site coefficient for PGV

Fj = static lateral load applied at nth floor to produce static deformation, N

Fs = seismic site coefficient

Fs = modified strength in rolling shear of laminations in the transverse layers, MPa

F(T) = seismic site coefficient for spectral acceleration

Ft = portion of V to be concentrated at top of the structure

Fv = seismic site coefficient

Fx = lateral force applied to level x

fb = specific bending strength, MPa

fc = specified compression strength parallel to grain, MPa

fcp = specified compression strength perpendicular to grain, MPa

fn = fundamental natural frequency, Hz

Chapter 13 – Design Example

70
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

fs = specified strength in rolling shear of laminations in the transverse layers, MPa

ft = specified tensile strength parallel to the grain, MPa

fv = specified shear strength, MPa

g = acceleration of gravity, 9.81 m/s2

G = shear modulus, MPa

GAeff = effective in-plane (planar) shear rigidity of CLT panels, N

GL = glued-laminated timber

hs = inter-storey height

H = height of the building

I = moment of inertia of a section, mm4

Ieff = effective out-of-plane moment of inertia of CLT panels, mm4

IE = earthquake importance factor of the structure

IS = snow importance factor of the structure

IW = wind importance factor of the structure

J = base overturning reduction factor

Jg = group action factor

K = form factor (Kappa)

K’ = load duration modification factor

KC = slenderness factor for compression members

Kcreep = creep adjustment factor

KD = modification factor for duration of load

Kfi = modification factor for fire

KH = system factor

KL = modification factor for lateral stability

Krb = adjustment factor for bending moment resistance of CLT panels

Design Example – Chapter 13

71
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

KSb = modification factor for service condition for bending

KSc = modification factor for service condition for compression parallel to the grain

KScp = modification factor for service condition for compression perpendicular to the
grain

KSE = modification factor for service condition for modulus of elasticity

KSF = modification factor for service condition for connections

KSt = modification factor for service condition for tension parallel to the grain

KStp = modification factor for service condition for tension perpendicular to the grain

KSv = modification factor for service condition for longitudinal shear

KT = modification factor for treatment

KZbg = modification factor for the size effect for flexure for glued-laminated timber

KZc = modification factor for the size effect for compression parallel to the grain

KZcp = modification factor for the length of bearing for compression perpendicular to
the grain

KZv = modification factor for the size effect for shear

L = length of a component, mm

L = span length, m

L = live load

Le = effective length, mm

Lu = laterally unsupported length of a component, mm

Lv = vibration-controlled span limit, mm

Mr = factored resistance of a member in flexure, kNm

Mv = factor to account for higher mode effect on base shear

Nu = unit lateral strength resistance, N

PGA = Peak Ground Acceleration expressed as a ratio to gravitational acceleration

PGAref = reference PGA for determining F(T), F(PGA) and F(PGV)

Chapter 13 – Design Example

72
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

PGV = Peak Ground Velocity, m/s

Pr = compression resistance of member, N

p = specified external wind pressure

q = hourly mean reference wind pressure for the design return period, kPa

Rd = ductility-related force modification factor reflecting the capability of a structure

to dissipate energy through cyclic inelastic behaviour

Ro = over-strength-related force modification factor accounting for the dependable

portion of reserve strength in a structure

reff = effective radius of gyration, mm

S(T) = design spectral response acceleration, expressed as a ratio to gravitational

acceleration, for a period of T

Sa(T) = 5% damped spectral response acceleration, expressed as ratio to gravitational

acceleration, for a period of T

SFRS = Seismic Force Resisting System(s) is that part of the structural system that has
been considered in the design to provide the required resistance to the
earthquake forces and effects

S = section modulus, mm

Seff = effective out-of-plane section modulus of CLT panels, mm3

Sf = section modulus based on reduced cross-section, mm3

Sr = associated rain load, kPa

Ss = ground snow load with 1/50-year probability of exceedance, kPa

SLS = Serviceability Limit State

STC = Sound Transmission Class

Ta = fundamental lateral period of vibration of the building or structure, in s, in the

direction under consideration

t = fire exposure duration, min

ULS = Ultimate Limit State

V = lateral earthquake design force at the base of the structure, kN

Design Example – Chapter 13

73
 UPDATED

Canadian CLT Handbook

2019 Edition

Vd = lateral earthquake design force at the base of the structure, kN

Vf = factored shear load on a member, kN

VH = mean wind speed at the top of the structure, m/s

Vr = factored shear resistance, N

W = seismic weight of structure, N

W = width of building perpendicular to wind direction

W = wind load

Wf = factored total load, N

Wj = dead weight at each floor for vibration check, N

Wr = total factored shear resistance, N

Xc,n = char depth for notional charring, mm

Xc,o = char depth for one-dimensional charring, mm

ȳ = distance to neutral axis, mm

Z = total beam volume, mm3

Βd = fraction of critical damping in along-wind direction

Βn = notional charring rate, mm/min

Βo = one-dimensional charring rate, mm/min

Βw = fraction of critical damping in across-wind direction

ρB = average density of building, kg/m3

Φ = resistance factor

Chapter 13 – Design Example

74