Experimental Analysis of a Shake Table

Test of Timber-Framed Structures with

Stone and Earth Infill
F. Vieux-Champagne,a),b),c) Y. Sieffert,b),c) S. Grange,b),c)
C. Belinga Nko’ol,a) E. Bertrand,d) J. C. Duccini,e) C. Faye,e) and
L. Daudevilleb),c)

The seismic performance of timber-framed structures filled with stones and

earth mortar has been analyzed by introducing the structural subscales (cell, wall,
house) at which monotonic and cyclic loadings were considered. This article aims
to present the dynamic behavior of a house as determined through shaking table
tests. Based on this experimental multiscale analysis, this paper confirms that
timbered masonry structures offer effective seismic resistance; moreover, such
a comprehensive analysis helps enhance understanding of the seismic-resistant
behavior of timber-framed structures with infill. This paper also aids ongoing
development of a numerical tool intended to predict the seismic-resistant
behavior of this type of structure. [DOI: 10.1193/010516EQS002M]

INTRODUCTION
According to Gurpinar et al. (1981), the existence of timber-framed structures with infill
dates back several millennia, having originated in the Neo-Hittite states (northern Syria and
southern Turkey), where timber-framed structures filled with adobe were already widespread.
In Italy, an archaeological excavation campaign in Herculaneum revealed a building during
Roman times featuring two levels of wood-framed structure with infill. This type of structure
was listed under the name of Craticii or Opus Craticium by Vitruvius (Langenbach 2007).
Moreover, such buildings are found throughout the world (Vieux-Champagne et al. 2014)
and are still being built in most countries.
Timbered masonry structures are popular worldwide mainly for their reduced construc-
tion cost, thanks to the use of local resources and know-how, as well as for their aesthetics
and/or ability to achieve greater resistance to seismic forces (see Dutu et al. 2012). Traditional
timbered-framed structures with infill have indeed exhibited remarkable behavior during
recent major earthquakes (Turkey in 1999, Greece in 2003, Kashmir in 2005, Haiti in
2010, or China in 2013), often sustaining very little damage. In contrast, the seismic-resistant
behavior of new construction made of masonry blocks or concrete has generally been subpar
or even disastrous (Haiti in 2010). Haiti’s problems stemmed from the lack of a building code

a)
CRAterre, AE&CC Research Unit, National School of Architecture of Grenoble, France
b)
Univ. Grenoble Alpes, 3SR, F-38000 Grenoble, France
c)
CNRS, 3SR, F-38000 Grenoble, France
d)
CEREMA, Laboratoire de Nice, F-06300 Nice, France
e)
FCBA, French Technological Institute for Forestry, Cellulose, Timber Construction and Furniture

1075
Earthquake Spectra, Volume 33, No. 3, pages 1075–1100, August 2017; © 2017, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
SHAKE TABLE TEST OF TIMBER-FRAMED STRUCTURES WITH STONE AND EARTH INFILL 1077

Figure 2. Rural Haitian houses.

This dynamic structural behavior will be studied at scale 4 (building) in order to complete
the first part of the quasi-static experimental campaign, which encompasses the connection
(scale 1) and the elementary cell (scale 2) and extends to the shear wall (scale 3, Vieux-
Champagne et al. 2014). This multiscale approach is illustrated in Figure 1.
Such an approach provides an understanding of the behavior of the various wall
components. At the first scale, type-1 connections will be studied to determine the
local influence of the nail number under two loading directions. The elementary cell
scale then serves to analyze the influence of the type and presence of infill. Scale 3
(wall) will be examined as a means of emphasizing the structure’s overall behavior.
Lastly, scale 4 (house) provides a complete understanding of the structure, as regards
the dynamic behavior of the transverse walls, the in-plane wall, the roof, and the con-
nections at the wall–roof interface.
For purposes of this study:
• A representative ground motion of Haiti’s 2010 earthquake has been designed
(100% deterministic), based on both the local seismic context and typical Port-
au-Prince soil;
• A seismic signal calibrated on acceleration spectra, representative of Guadeloupe’s
high seismic hazard zone (Bertil et al. 2010), has been introduced.
These signals yield an analysis of the structure under the actual Haitian ground motion, a
ground motion that complies with current regulations, and a high-frequency range capable of
optimizing shake table capacity.
This article is divided into three parts: The first section will present the test building and
materials used in its construction. Next, the second section will describe the shake table test
program (experimental set-up, instrumentation, and the simulated ground motion), while the
last section will report and discuss the results of this campaign.
SHAKE TABLE TEST OF TIMBER-FRAMED STRUCTURES WITH STONE AND EARTH INFILL 1079

Figure 3. Nail connections of the timber structure.

depicted in Figure 3c. The remaining connections (horizontal diaphragm and roof struc-
ture, Figure 3d) are nailed joints.
The timber strength class is C18, with a density ρmean;C18 ¼ 390 kg=m3 according to
European Standard EN 338 (see EN 338 2003). The strip is an FP30/1.5/50 from
Simpson Strong-Tie®, 30 mm wide and 1.5 mm thick. 3  70 mm plain shank nails
were used (see EN 10230-1 2000) to fasten the strip.
The roof was made with 28 2.5  0.9 m2 metal sheets 0.5 mm wide (6 kg) fastened to the
timber structure by means of nails.

SHAKE TABLE TEST PROGRAM

A dynamic test has been conducted on an entire timber-framed house with walls filled by
both earth and stones and whose design has been adapted from the Haitian building culture
specifically for purposes of this study (see the “Acknowledgements” section). This test was
intended to analyze the behavior of such a structure under seismic loading.

EXPERIMENTAL SETUP

Shake Table
These dynamic tests were performed at the uniaxial earthquake simulation facility in the
Mechanical Laboratory of the French Institute FCBA. The shake table is composed of a
6  6 m2 aluminum platform moved by a 250 kN servo-hydraulic actuator (Figure 4).

Shaking Table–Structure Interface

Since the house contains infill panels, it had to be built directly on the table in order to
prevent cracks in the earth. A steel frame was designed to anchor the structure onto the table,
as depicted in Figure 5. The mudsill was locked into the steel frame by means of a wooden
wedge (Figure 5c) and then bolted to it. This study is focused on seismic response of the
timber frame structure with infill and doesn’t take into account the foundation and its con-
nection to the wooden structure. It is assumed that the structure is perfectly connected to the
foundation that is considered as rigid body. Obviously, the failure location depends on the
nature of the structure and of the soil–structure interactions, but in terms of design, the objec-
tive is to make it happen into the steel fasteners of the mudsill to post connections.
SHAKE TABLE TEST OF TIMBER-FRAMED STRUCTURES WITH STONE AND EARTH INFILL 1081

Table 1. Seismic test sequence

Ground Seismic hazard Amplitude scaling

Seismic test level motion level factor Scaled PGA (g)

1 HTI — 1 0.27
2 0.54
3 0.77
Reparation operation
4 GUA 10%/50Y 1 0.32
Reparation operation
5 GUA — 3.9 1.26

displacement sensor (DWDS) and linear variable differential transformer (LVDT) measure-
ments were compared to results of the digital image correlation (DIC) produced through
high-speed camera pictures, with a subsequent comparison to numerical modeling results.
To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this constitutes the first time a DIC has been
used to analyze this kind of structure at this scale. As such, let us now focus on the set-
up introduced to perform the DIC.
The Phantom v641 high-speed camera (with a 28 mm lens, 4 megapixels) was used to
capture the eastern shear wall, at a speed of 150 frames per second (fps), in order to obtain the
absolute displacement field of the panel by DIC. The acquisition rate was set to be higher than
the frequencies contained in the seismic signal (<30 Hz, i.e., for a minimum of 30 fps). The
speckled pattern was generated by projecting black, gray, and white paints. The average
speckle dot diameter was approximately 1 cm. The lighting (4,000 W, 4 K alpha version)

Figure 6. Measurement device position and sign convention.

SHAKE TABLE TEST OF TIMBER-FRAMED STRUCTURES WITH STONE AND EARTH INFILL 1083

a hypothetical future earthquake using the actual recordings of a smaller one that contains
rich information on path and site effects. The stochastic approach proposed by Kohrs-
Sansorny et al. (2005) was implemented. This method is based on a two-step summation
scheme. The SIMULSTOC code offers the advantage of requiring only a few input para-
meters while rapidly generating a large number of possible accelerograms. This method
is also based on the works of Boore (1983), Wennerberg (1990), and Ordaz et al.
(1995). In practice, 500 equivalent source time functions (ESTFs) were generated represent-
ing the time histories of the energy release over the fault at frequencies less than the corner
frequency of the small event set as the EGF. A random, two-step process proposed by Ordaz
et al. (1995), using two probability density functions, was adopted to generate these ESTFs,
whose differences can indirectly account for the different types of ruptures and produce a
large variability in ground motions (Beauval et al. 2009). Next, each ESTF was convolved
with the EGF at the station corresponding to each component. The higher frequency part of
the spectrum (>fc) was then directly modeled by the small event’s spectrum. This method
yields synthetic time histories that, on average, are in agreement with the ω2 model (Aki
1967 and Brune 1970) and moreover respect a nonconstant stress-drop condition (Beeler
et al. 2003 and Kanamori and Rivera 2004). All method details can be found in Kohrs-
Sansorny et al. (2005). Among the requisite input parameters, the ratio between the
static-stress drop of the target event C is the only one without an associated constraint.
For a practical application in the present simulation, considering a C value of 1 is proposed.
The selected aftershock (taken as an empirical Green’s function) occurred on 3 May 2010
(7:21 pm). Its moment magnitude was measured to be 4.4, and the epicenter was located close
to Logne (18.538 N, 72.643 W). Since the north–south component of the EGF was strongest
at the HVPR station, it was used in the Mw 6.8 ground motion simulation. From the 500 simu-
lations, the one with the largest loading between 0.1 and 0.5 seconds of period length was
selected. For low-rise structures, this simulation involves taking the worst-case scenario pos-
sible among our set of synthetics. The result, in terms of elastic response spectrum, is shown
in Figure 7b; Figure 7a displays the corresponding time history in acceleration.

Guadeloupe Ground Motion

Another seismic signal was introduced in order to subject the structure to:
• A signal calibrated on an acceleration spectrum representative of high seismic
hazard zones in the Antilles.
• A different frequency range.
• Optimized shake table capacities.
The generation of this modified natural accelerogram has been adapted from the Miyagi
earthquake (Japan 2003), as measured at the K-Net station and calibrated on an earthquake
spectrum by the relationship developed by Youngs et al. (1997; Guadeloupe scenario,
far-field subduction ground motion), so as to improve spectrum representativeness. This
finding is correlated with a scenario of “strong hazard,” soil B from Eurocode 8 (EN
1998-1 2005), and a probabilistic computational basis with a 475 year return period.
This corresponding seismic hazard level has a 10% probability of exceedance in
50 years (10%/50Y), which satisfies the probability associated with the non-collapse require-
ment in Eurocode 8.
SHAKE TABLE TEST OF TIMBER-FRAMED STRUCTURES WITH STONE AND EARTH INFILL 1085

Figure 8. Fundamental modal shapes of the structures, as obtained through the modal analysis
performed before the seismic tests.

differences in the workmanship of the two walls (weight, geometric dimensions, etc.). The
second primary mode is the shear wall vibration (Figure 8c).
At the initial state and after seismic tests, a modal structure was excited by a low-level
white noise base acceleration input with a uniform spectrum (0.5–25 Hz frequency band), a
RMS amplitude of 0.03 g and 0.5 mm for the purpose of evaluating both the frequency drop
in the structure and the destructiveness of previous input signals. An analysis of the structural
modification resulting from successive seismic tests was performed by computing:
• the frequency response function (FRF, Figure 9) between the output acceleration
at node 7 (ACC7) and the input table acceleration (ACC10) obtained during each
low-level white noise input test (Figure 6). As a reminder, the FRF is a representa-
tion in the frequency domain of the ratio between an output and input acceleration
signals;
• the deterioration of the normalized equivalent lateral stiffness (NELS) in the N–S
direction after each seismic test (Figure 10a), in assuming a single-degree-of-
freedom response of the test building. Since the initial fundamental period T 0 is
known, as is the fundamental period T i measured after each seismic test, the
NELS k i as a percentage of initial lateral stiffness k 0 can be calculated after
each seismic test as
 2
ki T0
¼ . (1)
k0 Ti
EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e1;62;236

Table 2. Natural frequencies and the equivalent viscous damping ratio

Pole Element Frequency (Hz) Damping ratio (%)

1a Transverse wall 5.2 5.2

1b Transverse wall 5.9 5.7
2 Shear wall 10.9 5.3
SHAKE TABLE TEST OF TIMBER-FRAMED STRUCTURES WITH STONE AND EARTH INFILL 1087

• HTI 100%: After the “HTI 100%” seismic test, acceleration remained constant
while the natural frequency (and hence the normalized stiffness) decreased by
4.8% (Figures 9 and 10a). This outcome is due to a slight rearrangement of the
wood–earth interface, involving the removal of some friction interfaces between
the two materials, which would also explain the decrease in NELS shown in
Figure 10a.
• HTI 200%: After this signal, a significant reduction in both the natural frequency
(5 Hz to 4 Hz, i.e., equivalent to a decrease in NELS of approximately 30%) and
amplitude (15.4 to 7.8) are recorded, while the EVDR rises by around 6 points.
These results stem from damage to the steel connections (buckling of steel strips,
nails pulled out, loosening of the ligature wires, and degradation of the wood–earth
interface, Figure 20).
• HTI 300%: In this case, the natural frequency, acceleration amplitude, and NELS all
followed the same trend as in HTI 200%, whereas the EVDR increased very
slightly. This finding can be explained by the fact that the same deterioration pro-
cesses occurred during “HTI 200%” and “HTI 300%” (Figures 20b and 20e); there-
fore, the EVDR and energy dissipation were not much higher than during the “HTI
200%” test.
• Repairing: After this process, the structure returned to the level of natural frequency
obtained during the HTI 200% test; in contrast and as logically expected, the accel-
eration amplitude increased and the EVDR dropped.
• GUA 100%: After this test, it is worthwhile to note that despite the relative harmful-
ness of the seismic signal (in comparison with the two previous ones and the next
one), the energy dissipation shown in Figure 10b reached a maximum value due to
damage to the repaired connections, which is correlated to a decrease in both the
NELS and acceleration amplitude.
• GUA 390%: After this seismic level, a portion of the filling collapsed (Figure 20h),
which significantly reduced the weight of the transverse walls. Despite the increase
in overall structural damage, the NELS therefore remained constant while the accel-
eration amplitude and EVDR decreased.

GLOBAL BUILDING RESPONSE

This section aims to detail the analyses conducted relative to the global deformation and
global hysteretic response.

Global Deformation
In order to obtain the absolute displacement in the structure, DWDS, LVDT sensors, and
a high-speed camera were all employed. As explained above, this effort represents the first
time that a high-speed camera has been used at this structural scale. It was therefore necessary
to validate the results obtained by DIC; Figure 11 depicts the points tracked through the DIC.
Figures 12 and 13 show the comparison of the displacement obtained on the shaking table by
LVDT, DWDS, and by DIC for the various tests performed. The correlation between results
from both measurement methods is quite good, thus validating the use of DIC.
SHAKE TABLE TEST OF TIMBER-FRAMED STRUCTURES WITH STONE AND EARTH INFILL 1089

4 10 15
8
Relative displacement (mm)

Relative displacement (mm)

Relative displacement (mm)

3 10
6
2 4 5
2
1 0
0
0 −2 −5
−4
−1 −10
DWDS −6 DWDS DWDS
DIC DIC DIC
−2 −8 −15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Time (sec) Time (sec) Time (sec)
(a) HTI 100% (b) HTI 200% (c) HTI 300%
8 40
Relative displacement (mm)

Relative displacement (mm)

6 30

4 20
10
2
0
0
−10
−2
−20
−4 −30
DWDS DWDS
DIC DIC
−6 −40
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Time (sec) Time (sec)
(d) GUA 100% (e) GUA 390%

Figure 13. Comparison of the top relative wall displacements obtained by DIC and DWDS1.

Figure 15 indicates the maximum global deformation obtained during each seismic test.
This depiction was obtained by adopting the following assumptions:
• The deformation shape of the structure is symmetrical about both the N–S and E–W
axes (as illustrated in Figure 14).
• The deformation shape of the transverse beams of the transverse walls can be inter-
polated from the measures of the six DWDS.
Figure 15 highlights various phenomena, namely:
• Shear walls reach their maximum displacement almost always at the same time as
the transverse walls. The deformation of both are indeed correlated.
• Structural damage affects the time when shear walls reach their maximum deforma-
tions as well as the underlying nonlinear evolution in these deformations. After each
signal, the natural period of the building is in fact modified due to the damage sus-
tained, thereby varying the structural response of the subsequent signal. For
instance, during the HTI 100% signal, shear walls reached their maximum displa-
cement 3.33 mm at 18.12 sec, while for HTI 200% this displacement equaled
8.49 mm (i.e., a factor of 2.55) at 20.91 sec. This finding reveals a distinct response
of the building relative to the damage sustained; the present example is also true for
other signals and transverse walls.
• The transverse wall deformation is much greater than that of the shear wall. This
outcome can easily be explained by the absence of a stiff horizontal bracing struc-
ture to prevent this strong deformation and moreover by the fact that the connections
SHAKE TABLE TEST OF TIMBER-FRAMED STRUCTURES WITH STONE AND EARTH INFILL 1091

16
lvdt 1 (mm)

Vertical displacement (mm)

14
lvdt 2 (mm)
12 dmax of the connection
10
8
6
4
2
0

Seismic level

Figure 16. Maximum vertical deformations (mm) experienced by type-1 joints.

• The shear walls are efficient in bracing the structure in the direction of the seismic
loading and merely sustained little damage. The type 1 connections reached their
tensile strength only during the GUA 390% test (Figure 16), although no damage
was visible. The maximum displacement indicated in Figure 16 was obtained from
the tension tests presented in Vieux-Champagne et al. (2014).

Global Hysteretic Responses

Figure 18 exhibits the diagram of the base shear versus the top transverse wall displace-
ment. This base shear was computed by summing the inertia forces of the infill on the basis of
horizontal acceleration recordings. Since the mass is evenly distributed along the walls, the
distribution shown in Figure 17 has been considered herein. For each elementary cell with
infill, the weight of the cell (roughly 150 kg) was evenly divided at its four corners (i.e., at the
intersection of the wood structure where the accelerometers had been installed). The max-
imum base shear and displacement obtained are identified by a red circle on each graph.
Figure 18f shows the evolution in the effective lateral stiffness of the transverse wall
after each ground motion [called “global hysteresis response” (GHR) in the graph caption],
along with a comparison to the normalized lateral stiffness obtained from results of the
frequency response function (FRF). The effective stiffness values have been derived by
computing the slope connecting the positive and negative peak base shear forces and
the corresponding displacement from the graphs in Figure 18. To compare these results,
the following assumption was made: The effective stiffness obtained for HTI 100% of GHR
and FRF are equal.
The hysteretic responses of the structure recorded during the HTI and GUA series high-
light the trend in the case of a nonlinear overall behavior. For HTI 100%, the overall beha-
vior is linear, thus highlighting that the structure is highly resistant to a ground motion
equivalent to the January 12 Haiti earthquake. The slight decrease in natural frequency
SHAKE TABLE TEST OF TIMBER-FRAMED STRUCTURES WITH STONE AND EARTH INFILL 1093

behavior did not fully recover its linear behavior, and its effective stiffness has only risen
slightly relatively to HTI 300%. This finding can be explained by the irreparable damage
sustained by the wood–infill interface and infill degradation, as well as by the local defor-
mation of wood at the metal connectors. The overall behavior observed during GUA 390%
reflects a typical hysteresis curve with good seismic resistance (to the considerable seismic
ground motion).
From Figure 18f, it can be noted that the effective stiffness obtained with the results
of GHR and FRF yield similar results except for GUA 390%, whose GHR seems to
provide more plausible results since damage observed during this test was the most
significant.
Figure 19 also depicts the diagram of the base shear versus the top shear wall displace-
ment. The same observations as in Figure 18 are applicable here: The connection between
the behavior of the shear wall and the transverse wall can again be highlighted. Figure 19f
shows the evolution in the effective lateral stiffness of the shear wall and transverse wall
after each ground motion and moreover indicates the ratio between the effective stiffness
obtained for the shear wall and that for the transverse wall. This figure underscores the
similar evolution of both curves with the ratio between each pair of values varying between
4.5 and 7.3. It can also be inferred that the behavior of the shear wall benefits from less
damage than the transverse wall; hence, the reparation process exerts less influence on its
behavior.

100 100 100

80 80 80
49.0 kN
60 60 60 12.0 mm;
33.8 kN
Base Shear (kN)

Base Shear (kN)

Base Shear (kN)

40 40 7.7 mm; 40
14.2 kN
20 2.8 mm; 20 20
0 0 0
−20 −13.7 kN −20 −20
−1.6 mm;
−40 −40 −33.2 kN −40
−5.9 mm; −42.5 kN
−60 −60 −60 −11.7 mm;
−80 −80 −80
−100 −100 −100
−50 −25 0 25 50 −50 −25 0 25 50 −50 −25 0 25 50
Displacement (mm) Displacement (mm) Displacement (mm)

(a) HTI 100% (b) HTI 200% (c) HTI 300%

100 100
75.0 kN
80 80 37.8 mm;
60 60 7.0
Effective stiffness

Ratio
Base Shear (kN)

6.0
Base Shear (kN)

40 20.1 kN 40 GHR of shear wall

5.0
(kN/mm)

5.9 mm; GHR of the transverse wall

20 20 4.0
0 0 3.0
−20 −16.7 kN −20 2.0
−40 −4.4 mm; 1.0
−40 4.9 6.2 7.3 4.9 4.5
−60 −60 0.0
−66.1 kN
−80 −80 −36.9 mm;
−100 −100
−50 −25 0 25 50 −50 −25 0 25 50
Displacement (mm) Displacement (mm) Seismic level

(d) GUA 100% (e) GUA 390% (f) Effective stiffness

Figure 19. Global hysteretic responses of the shear wall.

SHAKE TABLE TEST OF TIMBER-FRAMED STRUCTURES WITH STONE AND EARTH INFILL 1095

(a) Damage location

(b) HTI 200%: (c) HTI 200%: (d) HTI 300%: (e) HTI 300%:
Connection– Roof bracing– Filling–Location 7: Connection–Location 7:
Location 6: Location 1: South South transv.wall South transv. wall
North transv.wall transv.wall

(f) GUA 390%: Bracing– (g) GUA 390%: (h) GUA 390%: Filling (i) GUA 390%:
Location 2: Connection– Location: South transv.wall Connection–
North transv.wall Location 7: Location 4: West shear
South transv.wall wall

(j) GUA 390%: Ligature (k) GUA 390%: (l) GUA 390%: Celling joist
wire–Location 8: West Infill–Location 5: –Location 3: Roof
shear wall East shear wall

Figure 20. Damage.

SHAKE TABLE TEST OF TIMBER-FRAMED STRUCTURES WITH STONE AND EARTH INFILL 1097

of the transverse walls and on the roof structure. The damaged infill panels confirm that a
substantial amount of energy was dissipated both in the panels and at their interface with the
wood structure. In the case of the shear wall, the infill damage was limited. The behavior of
infill during seismic ground motion therefore is particularly valuable since it enhances the
lightweight wood structure’s efficiency in resisting highly harmful ground motion while sus-
taining only minor overall damage due to fiber reinforcement of the earth. It must be pointed
out however that for the ground motion GUA 390% (Figure 20k), two infill panels were
pulled-out out-of-plane, which is a key issue in preventing injury to dwelling occupants,
even though this risk is technically easy to mitigate (e.g., a wire mesh nailed onto the
inner face of the wall).
This article has confirmed that timber-framed structures with infill exhibit relatively high
seismic resistance and, thanks to the shake table test, provide direct proof to the scientific
community as well as to those leading reconstruction efforts in Haiti and elsewhere that this
type of structure, in relying on local knowledge, can be used in new construction. Moreover,
this article enhances the state of knowledge of seismic-resistant behavior relative to tradi-
tional wood-framed structures with infill.
This experimental campaign at the 4-scale of the structure contributes relevant results to
completing not only the analysis performed at scales 1, 2, and 3 (Figure 1) but also the experi-
mental multi-approach that allows developing a model to predict the behavior and assess the
vulnerability of timber-framed structures with infill under seismic loading conditions.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to thank and acknowledge the support of the French National Research
Agency (ANR) for the ReparH project under reference code ANR-10-HAIT-003 (coordi-
nated by CRAterre in collaboration with UJF-3SR, and the AE&CC research Unit of
ENSAG and the Haitian NGO GADRU), the participating associations of the PADED plat-
form, and all local partners for their involvement and participation, contributing to this
research project. This work is supported by a public grant overseen by the French National
Agency as part of the “Investissements d’Avenir” program (reference: ANR-10-LABX-
0083). The laboratory 3SR is part of the LabEx Tec 21 (Investissements d’Avenir; reference:
ANR-11-LABX-0030). The authors wish to thank and acknowledge Sadrac St Fleur and
Franoise Courboulex, who participated to the simulation of the Haitian ground motion.
The authors also thank the technical staffs of the FCBA for the tests they conducted. Gra-
titude is extended to Simon Pla for his valuable assistance during the experimental program.

REFERENCES
Aki, K., 1967. Scaling law of seismic spectrum, Journal of Geophysical Research 72, 1217–1231.
Aktaş, Y. D., Akyüz, U., Türer, A., Erdil, B., and Güçhan, N. Ş, 2013. Seismic resistance evalua-
tion of traditional Ottoman timber-frame Himishouses: Frame loadings and material tests,
Earthquake Spectra 30, 1711–1732.
Ali, Q., Schacher, T., Ashraf, M., Alam, B., Naeem, A., Ahmad, N., and Umar, M., 2012. In-
plane behavior of full scale Dhajji walls (wooden braced with stone infill) under quasi static
loading, Earthquake Spectra 28, 835–858.
SHAKE TABLE TEST OF TIMBER-FRAMED STRUCTURES WITH STONE AND EARTH INFILL 1099

Ferreira, J., Teixeira, M., Duţu, A., Branco, F., and Gonçalves, A., 2012. Experimental evaluation
and numerical modelling of timber-framed walls, Experimental Techniques 38, 45–53.
Filiatrault, A., Christovasilis, I. P., Wanitkorkul, A., and van de Lindt, J. W., 2009. Experimental
seismic response of a full-scale light-frame wood building, Journal of Structural Engineering
136, 246–254.
Filiatrault, A., Fischer, D., Folz, B., and Uang, C.-M., 2002. Seismic testing of two-story woodframe
house: Influence of wall finish materials, Journal of Structural Engineering 128, 1337–1345.
Gurpinar, A., Erdik, M., and Ergunay, O., 1981. Siting and structural aspects of adobe buildings
in seismic areas, IN Proceedings, International Workshop, Earthen Buildings in Seismic
Areas, 24–28 May, 1981, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Hartzell, S. H., 1978. Earthquake aftershocks as Green’s functions, Geophysical Research Letters
5, 1–4.
Hough, S. E., Altidor, J. R., Anglade, D., Given, D., Janvier, M. G., Maharrey, J. Z., Meremonte,
M., Mildor, B. S.-L., Prepetit, C., and Yong, A., 2010. Localized damage caused by topo-
graphic amplification during the 2010 M7.0 Haiti earthquake, Nature Geoscience 3, 778–782.
Humbert, J., Boudaud, C., Baroth, J., Hameury, S., and Daudeville, L., 2014. Joints and wood
shear walls modelling I: Constitutive law, experimental tests and FE model under quasi-static
loading, Engineering Structures 65, 52–61.
Kanamori, H., and Rivera, L., 2004. Static and dynamic scaling relations for earthquakes and
their implications for rupture speed and stress drop, Bulletin of the Seismological Society
of America 94, 314–319.
Kohrs-Sansorny, C., Courboulex, F., Bour, M., and Deschamps, A., 2005. A two-stage method
for ground-motion simulation using stochastic summation of small earthquakes, Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America 95, 1387–1400.
Lambert, M., Gaudin, J., and Cohen, R., 1987. Carte Geologique D’Haiti, Feuille Sud-Est: Port-
au-Prince, 1: 250,000, CERCG IMAGEO, CNRS, Paris (Digital image and georeferencing:
John Walker, Matraco-Colorado Holding Ltd, 2003).
Langenbach, R., 2006. Preventing pancake collapses: Lessons from earthquake-resistant tradi-
tional construction for modern buildings of reinforced concrete, in International Disaster
Reduction Conference (IRDC), Davos, Switzerland.
Langenbach, R., 2007. From opus craticiumto the Chicago frame: Earthquake-resistant tradi-
tional construction, International Journal of Architectural Heritage 1, 29–59.
Langenbach, R., 2008. Learning from the past to protect the future: Armature crosswalls, Engi-
neering Structures 30, 2096–2100.
Makarios, T., and Demosthenous, M., 2006. Seismic response of traditional buildings of Lefkas
Island, Greece, Engineering Structures 28, 264–278.
Meireles, H., Bento, R., Cattari, S., and Lagomarsino, S., 2012. A hysteretic model for frontal
walls in Pombalino buildings, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 10, 1481–1502.
Ordaz, M., Arboleda, J., and Singh, S. K., 1995. A scheme of random summation of an empirical
Green’s function to estimate ground motions from future large earthquakes, Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America 85, 1635–1647.
Paultre, P., Calais, É., Proulx, J., Prépetit, C., and Ambroise, S., 2013. Damage to engineered
structures during the 12 January 2010, Haiti (Léogâne) earthquake 1, Canadian Journal of
Civil Engineering 40, 1–14.