3 STRUCTURAL TIMBER

ENGINEERING BULLETIN

Timber frame structures –

platform frame construction (part 1)

Introduction
The platform frame method of building timber frame structures is suited to
both low-rise and medium-rise buildings. Many buildings up to six and
seven storeys in height have been constructed over recent years typically for
residential, institutional and hotel uses.

There are a number of diff erent conditions that need to be satisfied by the
structural engineer during the engineering of a multi-storey timber frame
building, including:

• The adequacy of vertical load paths

• The strength and stiff ness of the individual framing members
• Overall building stability and stability of the individual elements
• Robustness of the framing and connections
• Disproportionate collapse design

This article introduces the composition and terminology used for platform
timber frame building structures and describes the structural engineering
checks which are required to verify the adequacy of the vertical load paths
and the strength and stiffness of the individual framing members. There are
several parts to the Engineering Bulletin for platform timber frame structures.
Part 2 will cover horizontal stability, while part 3 will cover robustness and
disproportionate collapse design.

Structural form
The term ‘platform frame’ derives from the method of construction where floor
structures bear onto loadbearing wall panels, thereby creating a ‘platform’ for
construction of the next level of wall panels, as indicated in Figure 1.

Platform frame construction is particularly suited to buildings that have a

cellular plan form. Internal walls may be used to contribute to this cellular
layout and are used as loadbearing elements for resistance to both vertical
and horizontal loads. Vertical actions from walls, fl oors and roofs are
supported by timber wall panels comprised of vertical studs at regular centres
(typically 600mm centres or closer) that act as vertical columns. An example Figure 1
calculation can be found in the ‘Worked example’ section. Structural concept of platform timber frame construction

www.structuraltimber.co.uk

REV 0 - 23.10.14/EB003
 3 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN
Figure 2 Lintels in an open panel timber frame wall panel
Figure 3 Sheathed timber frame closed panel with service battens
Typically external wall studs are 140mm x 38mm (the 140mm dimension
often being required to accommodate the minimum building regulation
thermal insulation, although other means of achieving this with small depth
studs are available) and internal wall studs 89mm x 38mm. These studs may
be structurally connected to provide columns of wider sections or replaced by
larger timber sections such as glulam posts (or in some cases steel posts) to
resist high point loads.
Resistance to horizontal actions is provided by the in-plane shear resistance
(or racking resistance) of sheathed wall panels which are connected together
to act as contiguous wall diaphragms. Racking resistance is covered in
part 2.
Common terms
Timber frame constructions can utilise factory assembled wall panels
together with fl oor and roof panels often referred to as ‘cassettes’. Where
off-site manufacturing of panels and cassettes are used, STA quality
approval (leading to CE marking where appropriate) is required. The off-site
assembled panels and cassettes may be made with joists or studs partially
or fully clad, with solid panels such as cross laminated timber or composite
insulation/timber structurally insulated panels.
www.structuraltimber.co.uk
Figure 4 Erection of a prefabricated flame retardant floor cassette
Figure 5 CLT wall panel construction
Open panels are timber frame wall panels comprising studs, rails,
sheathing on one face and breather membrane (Figure 2).
Closed panels are timber frame wall panels comprising studs, rails and
insulation with sheathings and/or linings on the faces of the panel; a vapour
barrier is provided on the warm side of the insulation and a breather
membrane on the outer face of the panel (Figure 3). Closed panels may also
include fitted windows and internal service zone battens.
Floor cassettes are fully assembled groups of joists, rimboards or
rimjoists with structural subdeck fitted to enable lifting as a completed
assembly (Figure 4). Treatments to the timbers are often coloured for
differentiation. Floor cassettes may also include fitted insulation and lining
materials.
Cross laminated timber (CLT) is a solid panel product made by
laminating small lengths of timber, usually kiln-dried spruce, with adjacent
layers having their grain direction at right angles to one another. These large
solid panels can be used to form beams, columns, walls, roofs, floors and
even lift shafts and stairs. CLT is a solid panel, capable of resisting
comparatively high racking and vertical loads (Figure 5).
Structural insulated panels (SIPs) are factory-produced, prefabricated
building products that can be used as load bearing or infill wall panels, floor
REV 0 - 23.10.14/EB003 2
 3 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN

and roof components in platform frametype construction. The benefit of the

system is that the structural support and the insulation are incorporated into a
single system during manufacture. This results in material efficiency but care
is need for concentrated loading on the panels.

Timber frame wall panels and floor cassettes are usually obtained from
a specialist manufacturer such as a member of the STA
(www.structuraltimber.co.uk)

Elements of a timber frame

Components of timber floors
Floor joists in platform timber frame structures (Figure 6a and b) can be Figure 6a Floor joists perpendicular to external wall panel
Figure 6b Floor joists parallel to external wall panel
either softwood joists or a range of engineered wood products. More detail
on EWPs can be found in Engineering Bulletin No. 2. Examples of typical
floor zone details are shown in Fig 6.

Components of timber frame wall panels

The loadbearing elements of a timber frame wall panel (Figure 7) typically
comprise the following components:

• Wall studs which are vertical timber members carrying axial loads
and lateral loads from wind pressures
• Top and bottom wall panel rails (usually of the same section size
as the studs) which connect the studs together as a ‘panel’
• Soleplates or ‘starter plates’ which are fixed to the foundation or
subdeck to provide a locating position for the wall panel
• Headbinders or ‘header plates’ which connect together
adjacent wall panels to enable them to function as a continuous
wall diaphragm and, in combination with the top wall panel rails, act
as ‘spreader’ beams to distribute floor joist loads to the wall studs
where the joists are not aligned (noded) with the studs. Headbinders Figure 7 Typical timber frame wall panels showing component notation

are usually site-fitted

• Lintels, cripple studs and opening studs which transfer vertical
and horizontal loads around openings in the wall panels. The studs are
typically arranged so that their stronger axis (y-y) is parallel to the face
of the wall (Figure 8).

Principle design code references

The limit state codes for timber engineering are BS EN 1995-1-1 Eurocode 5:
Design of Timber Structures – Part 1-1, together with the UK National Annex
to Eurocode 5: BS EN 1995-1-1: Design of Timber Structures – Part 1-1 and
PD6693-1:2012 UK Non-Contradictory Complementary Information (NCCI)
to Eurocode 5.

BS 5268-2:2002 and both BS 5268-6.1 (wall panels up to 2.7 m height)

and BS 5268-6.2 (wall panels up to 4.8m height) have been used to design
timber structures in the UK on a permissible stress basis, though they are
limited to seven and four storeys respectively.
Figure 8 Wall stud plan view and nomenclature

www.structuraltimber.co.uk

REV 0 - 23.10.14/EB003 3
 3 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN

This Bulletin concentrates only on the use of Eurocode 5 for the design
of platform frame constructions, as the British Standard has now been
superseded by the Eurocode.

The height limit of seven storeys has, in the past, been determined by the
structural robustness relating to the vertical movement and racking stiff
ness and serviceability design, using working stress designs. Applying
the principles of Eurocode 5 and using high strength materials such as
cross laminated timber (CLT) it is possible to build higher than seven
storeys provided particular attention is given to connections and bearing
pressures beneath wall panels. In-service fi re resistance of frames
increases with building height and the engineer should always consider
fire resistance of the frame in the design approach. Other Bulletins will
address fire and timber construction.

When designing timber structures and carrying out code checks, care is
needed to ensure that the factors used in equations are consistent with
the code of practice being used. Using a combination of Eurocodes and
British Standards on a structure can lead to an unsafe assessment as the
two codes are based on fundamentally different principles.

Materials
Timber platform frame construction typically uses softwood wall studs
and rails together with a wood-based sheathing board (in accordance
with BS EN 13986:2004 – see Engineering Bulletin No. 2 for further
information) to form a structural frame which transmits all vertical and
horizontal loads acting on the structure, safely to the building’s
foundations.

Table 1: Typical platform frame materials

Figure 9 Vertical structural load paths in platform timber frame construction

www.structuraltimber.co.uk

REV 0 - 23.10.14/EB003 4
 3 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN
The contribution of plasterboard to racking resistance may also be
considered within the limits allowed by PD6693-1:2012.
Typical platform frame materials and the loadbearing elements of a timber
frame wall panel are indicated in Table 1 and Fig. 7.
Non-combustible sheathing boards are used to provide fire resistance to a
timber frame structure during construction. This topic is addressed in other
Engineering Bulletins.
The exterior cladding (typically masonry or supported claddings such as
boarding and rendering) is non-loadbearing (although in the case of
masonry, it may contribute to wind resistance by providing shielding)
thereby reducing the racking forces which the timber frame structure is
required to resist.
Engineering principles
Vertical load paths
The vertical load paths that require checking by the engineer are indicated in
Figure 9.
Design of timber frame wall panels
The lateral stability of the studs against buckling is provided by either a
sheathing material or from the provision of timber blockings i.e. noggins or
dwangs at intermediate positions in the stud height, to allow fixing of
sheathings or to provide lateral restraint about the minor axis of the studs.
A wood-based board sheathing material which is directly fixed to a timber
frame wall panel will provide adequate lateral resistance to stud buckling.
However, if no sheathing material is present, the effective length of the stud
about the minor (z-z) axis will be the distance between the plate and the
noggin. A row of noggins in a wall panel must also be restrained in some
way, such as back to a return wall panel. Otherwise the whole batch could
buckle sideways.
Factors kc,y and kc,z are adopted in EC5 to take account of reduced axial
compression strength due to lateral buckling about the principal axes. If
the studs are adequately laterally restrained against both permanent and
construction stage loads, then the risk of stud buckling about the minor (z-z)
axis can be ignored:
EC5 (6.21)
Where:
ly is the slenderness ratio corresponding to bending about the
y-y axis = 0.85L
Fc,o,k is the characteristic compressive strength parallel to the grain
E0.05 is the fifth percentile modulus of elasticity parallel to grain
The instability factor about the y-y axis Kc,y is given by:
EC5 (6.25)
Where:
EC5 (6.27)
and
0,2 for solid timber and 0,1 for glued laminated timber and LVL
www.structuraltimber.co.uk
Studs subjected to axial compression only
For wall panel studs fully restrained in the minor (z-z) axis, the strength
condition to be satisfied for wall studs subjected to axial loading only, with
no bending stresses, becomes:
EC5 (6.23)
Where:
is the design compressive stress parallel to the grain
is the design compressive strength parallel to the grain
Compression perpendicular to grain
The governing failure mode for timber wall studs is often bearing of the stud
onto the horizontal rails of the panel (compression perpendicular to grain).
The following expression is to be satisfied:
EC5 (6.3)
With
EC5 (6.4)
Where:
is the compressive stress in the effective contact area perpendicular to the grain
is the design compressive load perpendicular to the grain
is the effective contact area in compression perpendicular to the grain
is the design compressive strength perpendicular to the grain
is a factor taking into account the load configuration, the possibility of splitting and the
degree of compressive deformation
The effective contact area perpendicular to the grain Aef should be
determined by taking an eff ective contact length parallel to grain 30mm
greater than the actual contact length when the contact length is at the end of
a member – or 60mm greater than the contact length when all of the contact
length is more than 30mm from the end of a member.
The values of kc,90 are taken as 1.25 for solid timber and LVL and 1.5
for glued laminated timber.
Studs subjected to bending about the strong axis y-y
External wall studs also carry wind loads, transmitted to them by the cladding
via wall ties or battens. These studs are therefore subjected to combined axial
and bending stresses.
For wall panel studs fully restrained in the minor (z-z) axis and subject to
bending about the strong (y-y) axis, the following expression should be
satisfied:
Where:
is the design bending stress about the y-y axis
is the corresponding design bending strength
is a factor which takes into account reduced bending strength due to lateral buckling and
may be taken as 1.0 for a beam where lateral displacement of its compressive edge is
prevented throughout its length and where torsional rotation is prevented at its supports
(as is the case for wall studs with directly fixed sheathing and linings)
REV 0 - 23.10.14/EB003 5
 3 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN

Studs subjected to combined axial compression and bending

about the strong axis y-y
In addition, the strength condition to be satisfi ed for wall studs subjected to
combined axial and bending stresses becomes:

EC5 (6.23)

is the design compressive stress parallel to the grain

is the design compressive strength parallel to the grain

Unless it can be demonstrated that the shielding effect of the cladding

adequately prevents excessive stud deflection, deflection due to wind loads
may be the governing load case for the design of shallow (dimension h in
Fig. 8) or tall external wall studs and should be checked.

Although no specific deflection limit is given in EC5 for wall studs subjected
to horizontal loads, a maximum defl ection limit of l/300 might be considered
appropriate, as given in EC5 section 10.2 (1) for the maximum permitted
deviation from straightness of a column section, to avoid lateral instability.

WORKED EXAMPLE
The loadbearing studs within the wall panel shown below have a height of
2.75m and the studs are spaced at 600mm centre to centre with a mid-height
noggin. 38mm x 89mm section CLS timber of grade C16 to BS EN 338:2009
is used for the studs, rails, header and soleplates. The wall functions in
service class 1 conditions and supports a characteristic permanent action of
1.0 kN/m (inclusive of the panel self-weight) and a characteristic variable
medium term action of 9.0 kN/m. For simplicity, the wall stud is not
subjected to wind actions or roof actions. There is wall sheathing on one face
and plasterboard on the other face which provide lateral restraint to the studs
about the z-z axis. Check that the wall will meet the ULS requirements of EC5:

www.structuraltimber.co.uk

REV 0 - 23.10.14/EB003 6
 3 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN
Design of timber floor joists
The design of a softwood timber floor joist to Eurocode 5 is covered in The
Institution of Structural Engineers’ Technical Guidance Note 18 (Level 1).
Engineered timber fl oor joists are designed in a similar manner using the
characteristic material strengths taken from the relevant material standard
(see Engineering Bulletin No. 2).
The engineering design of proprietary I-joists and open-web joists are
typically undertaken using proprietary software provided by the specific
joist manufacturers.
RELEVANT CODES OF PRACTISE
BS EN 1995-1-1 Eurocode 5: Design of Timber Structures – Part 1-1:
General – Common rules and rules for buildings
UK National Annex to Eurocode 5: BS EN 1995-1-1: Design of Timber
Structures – Part 1-1: General – Common rules and rules for buildings
www.structuraltimber.co.uk
PD 6693-1:2012 UK Non-Contradictory Complementary Information
(NCCI) to Eurocode 5: Design of timber structures
Working stress codes BS 5268-2:2002: Structural use of timber – Part
2: Code of practice for permissible stress design, materials and workmanship
BS 5268-6.1-1996 Part 6: Code of practice for timber frame walls –
Section 6.1 Dwellings not exceeding seven storeys
BS 5268-6.2-2001 Part 6: Code of practice for timber frame walls –
Section 6.2 Buildings other than dwellings not exceeding four storeys.
DEFINITIONS
Rimboards/rimjoists – timber edge members used to connect a series of
timber joists into prefabricated ‘cassettes’ or installed loose onto wall panels
to provide both vertical and horizontal load transfer through fl oor joist zones.
Structural subdeck – a timber-based board material fixed to the uppermost
surface of joists, rimbeams and rimboards to provide a horizontal diaphragm
and a surface for the application of floor finishes.
REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING
Porteus J. and Kermani A. (2008) Structural Timber Design to Eurocode 5
Chichester: John Wiley & Sons
British Standards Institution (2012) Concise Eurocodes: Design of Timber
Structures BS EN 1995-1-1: Eurocode 5 London: BSI
Engineered Wood Products Code of Practice [Online]
Available at: www.structuraltimber.co.uk/information-centre
Structural Guidance for Platform Timber Frame [Online]
Available at: www.structuraltimber.co.uk/information-centre/information-
centre/technical-library/structural-documents/
The Institution of Structural Engineers/TRADA (2007) Manual for the design
of timber building structures to Eurocode 5 London: ISE/TRADA
The Institution of Structural Engineers (2012) Technical Guidance Note 18
(Level 1): ‘Design of timber fl oor joists’, The Structural Engineer, 90 (11), pp.
36-39
The Institution of Structural Engineers (2013) Timber Engineering Notebook
No. 2: ‘Engineered wood products and an introduction to timber structural
systems’ The Structural Engineer, 91 (4), pp. 42-48
The Institution of Structural Engineers (2010) Practical guide to structural
robustness and disproportionate collapse in buildings London: The Institution
of Structural Engineers
Lewis G. (2005) ‘Multi-storey timber frame construction’ The Structural
Engineer, 83 (17), pp. 26-31
Design guide to separating distances during construction (Version 2) [Online]
Available at: www.structuraltimber.co.uk/information-centre/information-
centre/technical-library/design-documents/ (Accessed: April 2013)
REV 0 - 23.10.14/EB003 7
4 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN

Timber frame structures –

platform frame construction (part 2)

Introduction Horizontal diaphragms and bracing

In Timber Engineering Bulletin No. 3 (part 1 in this sub-series on platform
frame construction), the composition and terminology used for platform
timber frame building structures, and the structural engineering checks which
are required to verify the adequacy of the vertical load paths and the strength
and stiff ness of the individual framing members, was introduced.
This Timber Engineering Bulletin introduces the engineering checks for
overall building stability and the stability checks required for the wall
diaphragms which provide shear (or racking) resistance to a platform timber
frame structure.
Horizontal diaphragms in platform frame buildings are provided by the
intermediate floors (with a wood-based subdeck material fixed directly to the
joists) and the roof structure (with either a wood-based ‘sarking’ board or
discrete diagonal bracing members) (Figure 3). These horizontal structural
diaphragms transfer horizontal loads acting on the building to the foundations
by means of their connections to the wall panels (or vertical diaphragms).

Robustness and disproportionate collapse design considerations for platform

timber frame buildings are addressed in part 3 of this sub-series.

Overall stability
To achieve its stability, platform timber frame construction relies on the
diaphragm action of floor structures to transfer horizontal forces to a
distributed arrangement of loadbearing walls. The load bearing walls provide
both vertical support and horizontal racking and shear resistance.

Due to the presence of open-plan or asymmetric layouts or the occurrence

of large openings in loadbearing walls, it may be necessary to provide other
means of providing stability to the building, for example by the use of
‘portalised’ or ‘rigid’ frames or discrete braced bays as indicated in Figure 1.

In these situations particular care needs to be taken by the engineer to ensure

that the connections between elements are designed adequately, so that the
loads can be distributed to the points of stiffness in the structure, e.g. floor
diaphragm to braced bay connections, racking wall to rigid frame connections
etc.

Engineering principles Figure 1

Examples of building layouts and their influence on overall stability
The horizontal load paths that require checking by the engineer are shown in
Figure 2.

www.structuraltimber.co.uk

REV 0 - 10.11.14/EB004
 4 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN

Figure 2 Horizontal structural load paths in platform timber frame

Figure 2d Braced frame – Mechanical fixings are required to provide resistance to uplift
and sliding

Figure 2a Wall studs subject to lateral actions – effective length of studs

Figure 2e Rigid frame or ‘sway’ frame – sway must be limited to H/500 to be

compatible with timber racking walls

Figure 2b Transfer of lateral loads from a floor diaphragm into racking walls

Figure 2c Racking wall – holding down fixings or connections to adjacent

wall panels are required to provide overturning resistance. Fixings to
underlying construction are necessary to prevent sliding.

Vertical diaphragms - racking walls

Vertical diaphragms or shear walls are commonly described as racking panels
or walls in timber frame construction. They resist horizontal actions and are
essential elements in the overall stability of the building.

The racking wall gains its strength from a wood-based board sheathing
material or plasterboard lining material fixed to the wall studs which provides
racking stability and sliding resistance by its connection to the horizontal
diaphragms and foundations.

Figure 3 Platform timber frame under construction

www.structuraltimber.co.uk

REV 0 - 10.11.14/EB004 2
 4 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN
Figure 4 Racking loads on timber frame roof,
ceiling and wall diaphragms from wind loads on
gable walls
Where different methods are used in a building to provide overall resistance
to horizontal loads such as braced frames or sway frames, care must be taken
to ensure that the stiffness of individual vertical diaphragms is comparable. In
these situations, the deflection limit of frames should be at least height/500
to ensure that they have a similar stiff ness as the timber frame sheathed
wall panels. Fig. 2 indicates the different stiffness characteristics of various
vertical diaphragms.
Figure 4 shows the racking load on the front first floor wall of a house
resulting from wind on the gable wall and the corresponding actions which
must be resisted by the roof and ceiling diaphragms.
Simplified analysis of wall diaphragms
A method for the simplified analysis of wall diaphragms, consisting of timber
framing connected on one or both faces to a woodbased sheathing material
which, in turn, are connected to the underlying timber construction or
foundations, is provided in PD 6693-1:2012 UK Non-Contradictory
Complementary Information (NCCI) to Eurocode 5: Design of timber
structures.
Plasterboard may also be considered to contribute to the racking resistance
of a wall diaphragm within the limits set in PD 6693-1, but its contribution
cannot be used in conjunction with woodbased sheathing boards on the
same wall diaphragm.
www.structuraltimber.co.uk
Requirements for timber framing to wall diaphragms
The timber framing should consist of timber studs not exceeding 610mm
centre to centre, between horizontal top and bottom rails. The timber framing
members should be a minimum depth of 72mm and of minimum strength
class C16.
The end nailing of the wall studs to the horizontal rails should comprise
a minimum of two ringed-shank nails of diameter greater than or equal to
3.1mm and having a penetration into the studs greater than 45mm.
Shear buckling of the sheathing material can be disregarded provided that the
following condition is met:
When:
is the clear distance between studs
is the thickness of the sheathing
The diameter of fasteners connecting the sheathing to the timber framing
should be no greater than 0.09 x the stud thickness. Additionally where two
sheathing sheets meet at a stud, the fastener edge distance for both the stud
and the sheathing sheet should be a minimum of 3 x the fastener diameter.
The fasteners fixing the sheathing to the framing should be equally spaced
around the perimeter of each sheathing sheet at a maximum of 150mm.
Fasteners fixing the sheathing to the framing on the internal studs should be
equally spaced at not more than twice the perimeter fastener spacing.
General arrangement of wall diaphragms
A racking wall may comprise a single wall diaphragm or, if it contains
discontinuities such as door openings, may comprise more than one wall
diaphragm (Figure 5). Limits are set out in PD 6693-1:2012.
Figure 5 Division of a racking wall into wall diaphragms
REV 0 - 10.11.14/EB004 3
 4 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN

Distribution of horizontal wind loads between wall
diaphragms
Transfer of loads through ceiling and floors into wall diaphragms must be
taken through the building storey levels so that there is a mechanical transfer
of horizontal forces at the interface of floor/ ceiling to wall diaphragm.
Typically the wall diaphragms though the height of the building line up so
that loads are accumulatively transferred down through the building.
The approach for platform frame engineering has been that a floor or ceiling
diaphragm with standard construction detailing can be assumed to be
acceptable to transfer loads without further design calculation, providing the
This torsional moment is equal to the wind load multiplied by the distance
between the geometrical centre of the building and the building’s centre of
rotation (CR) measured perpendicular to the wind direction (Figure 6).
Torsional moment =
The resulting torsional moment, is resisted by all the walls, with each wall
contributing to the total moment in proportion to its (stiffness) x (lateral
displacement) x (perpendicular distance to the centre of rotation), i.e.:
Where:

aspect ratio of the diaphragm span being considered is no greater than 2 x is the design racking load on building (sum of wind force on
the depth of the diaphragm. Eurocode 1995-1-1 takes this further in clause windward and leeward walls)
9.2.3 where standard design approach is called simplified analysis for spans is the distance of the building’s centre of rotation from the origin,
that lie between 2b and 6b where b is the diaphragm depth. If the diaphragm measured along the x-axis
dimensions fall outside of these general rules then specific engineering is the distance of geometrical centre of building from the origin,
calculations to prove the diaphragm are needed. measured along x-axis

A building should have a regularly distributed arrangement of racking walls is a ‘torsional’ constant

in at least two orthogonal directions, such that there is not a significant is the perpendicular distance of any racking wall i from CR, i.e.:

eccentricity between the centroids of the wind action and the aggregated wall
racking resistance.
or
If a significant eccentricity does exist (such as a three sided box with an open
elevation e.g. a garage) then, where a suffi ciently rigid horizontal diaphragm
is provided, it is sufficient to assume that the structure acts as a rigid box, but as appropriate
the racking resistance of the orthogonal racking walls needs to be verified for
The additional load which each wall perpendicular to the x-axis takes to resist
the increased loads due to the sum of the direct and torsional forces acting
the torsional moment is then:
on them.

Hence the total load carried by each wall perpendicular to the x-axis is:

The positive value of should be used, for although will be

positive for some walls, it will be negative when the wind is in the reverse
direction

Check that for each wall parallel to the wind, then repeat the
exercise for wind at 90° where:

is the design load on racking wall

is the design racking resistance of wall

Design requirements for wall diaphragms under

wind load
For each wall diaphragm, it should be ensured that adequate racking,
Figure 6 Torsion induced racking forces:
overturning and sliding resistance is provided to resist the wind actions
Axis of rotation for wind perpendicular to the x-axis.
applied.

www.structuraltimber.co.uk

REV 0 - 10.11.14/EB004 4
 4 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN

This involves the following checks: Where:

• That adequate racking resistance exists to resist the applied
horizontal actions
• That compressive forces in the leeward end of wall diaphragms
do not cause either buckling of the wall studs or excessive bearing
stresses on the horizontal framing members
• That the panel holding down force at the windward end of the panel
used to calculate does not exceed either the permanent load
(uplift capacity) of either the underlying construction or the fixings used
to transfer the required holding down force between levels. The holding
down force can be provided by the nailed wall panel to wall panel
connections. For tall, narrow buildings or buildings with lightly-loaded
racking walls, this may require that the free ends of racking walls are
provided with some holding-down resistance - in the form of threaded
rods or proprietary mechanical ‘hold-downs’ to enable loads to be
transferred through floors or from racking walls to foundations.
By spanning floor structures onto racking walls, the resistance to
racking panel overturning is also increased
• That the sliding resistance of the wall panel to floor or foundation
connection is adequate. Friction may be considered to contribute and
the coefficient of friction may be taken as 0.4.
is the design shear capacity per unit length of perimeter sheathing
fasteners of the first or only sheathing layer (kN/m)
is the design shear capacity per unit length of perimeter sheathing
fasteners of the second sheathing layer (kN/m)
is the sheathing combination factor in the range 0–0.75
(PD 6693-1 Table 8)
In order to limit the racking deflection, the following condition
should be applied:
Where:
is the height of the sheathed area of the wall diaphragm (m).
The deign shear capacity per unit length of the perimeter fasteners to a
sheathing sheet should be calculated from:
Where:
is the design lateral capacity of an individual fastener (kN)
is the sheathing perimeter fastener spacing (m).
The modification factor should be calculated from:

These checks should be made at critical levels in the building e.g. at floor
Where:
levels and foundations, taking into account the worst combination of design
permanent and variable actions and both horizontal and vertical components is the net design stabilising moment acting on the wall diaphragm from
of wind actions. design permanent actions, reduced by any vertical component of
design wind actions due to roof uplift (a method for the calculation of
Calculation of design racking strength of a wall design stabilising moment is provided in PD 6693-1 Figure 3).
diaphragm
And
The design racking strength of a wall diaphragm (in kN) is calculated as:
Where
is the design withdrawal capacity of bottom rail to floor connections per
unit length (KN/m)

Where: Openings within wall diaphragms are accounted for by the factor .
the length of the wall diaphragm (m) For a wall diaphragm with small or no openings is taken as 1.0.
is a modifi cation factor taking into account wall length, For a wall diaphragm with fully framed openings is taken as:
vertical load and holding-down arrangements
is a modification factor taking into account the eff ect of
Where:
fully-framed window openings within prescribed limits give
by PD 6693-1 = aggregate area of window openings in a wall diaphragm/HL

The total design shear capacity per unit length of perimeter sheathing
fasteners is calculated as follows:

www.structuraltimber.co.uk

REV 0 - 10.11.14/EB004 5
 4 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN

Worked Example
The design of a vertical wall diaphragm (racking panel) subjected to wind
actions to PD6693-1:2012 covers the racking, sliding and overturning design
of the first fl oor level rear wall of a two storey house under wind action.

The overall height of the first floor wall is 2.438m between horizontal
diaphragms. The wall panel itself is 2.4m in height and has a 38mm thick
headbinder located on top. The wall functions in service class 2 conditions
and supports a characteristic permanent action of 4.3 kN/m and a
characteristic variable instantaneous (wind uplift) action of -1.1 kN/m.
The wall panel self-weight is 0.6 kN/m. From an assessment of the overall
wind actions acting on the structure, the characteristic wind action acting on
the wall panel is 3.6kN. For simplicity, the wind action is assumed to be the
same from both wind directions.

Fastener capacities for OSB sheathing to wall framing members, panel to

panel connections and panel to soleplate connections can be derived from
PD6693-1:2012 or can be taken from Tables 10.5, 6.5 and 6.8 of the Manual
for the design of timber building structures to Eurocode 5. It should be noted
when using these tables that for sheathing framing nails, the value is
taken as in accordance with EC5 clause 2.3.2.1(2).

The following design fastener capacities are assumed in the calculations:

• Design lateral load capacity for 50mm long, 2.65mm diameter smooth
nails at 150mm centres connecting sheathing to wall framing
• Design lateral load capacity for 75mm long, 3.10mm diameter ring
shanked nails at 150mm centres connecting wall panels to wall panels
and at 600mm centres connecting wall panels to soleplates
= 0.705 kN/nail
• Design withdrawal capacity for 90mm long, 3.10mm diameter ring
shanked nails connecting wall panels to soleplates
= 0.393 kN/nail

Check that the wall will meet the ULS & SLS requirements of PD 6693-1 for
resistance to horizontal (wind) actions:

www.structuraltimber.co.uk

REV 0 - 10.11.14/EB004 6
 4 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN

The design of the ground floor rear wall panel and the gable wall
panels would follow similar principles. In the case of the gable walls,
these would likely be subjected to variable floor actions rather than
variable roof actions. The ground floor wall diaphragms would be
checked for the sum of the total wind actions acting at first and ground
fl oor levels and the total design destabilising moments as described
in PD 6693-1:2012 Figure 3, together with any revised opening
modification factors which may be applicable.

www.structuraltimber.co.uk

REV 0 - 10.11.14/EB004 7
 4 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN

RELEVANT CODES OF PRACTISE
BS EN 1995-1-1 Eurocode 5: Design of Timber Structures – Part 1-1:
General – Common rules and rules for buildings
UK National Annex to Eurocode 5: BS EN 1995-1-1: Design of Timber
Structures – Part 1-1: General – Common rules and rules for buildings
PD 6693-1:2012: UK Non-Contradictory Complementary Information
(NCCI) to Eurocode 5: Design of timber structures
Lancashire R. and Taylor L. (2011) Timber Frame Construction (5th ed.)
High Wycombe: TRADA
STA (2012) Design guide to separating distances during construction
(Version 2) [Online] Available at: www.structuraltimber.co.uk/information-
centre/information-centre/technical-library/design-documents/
(Accessed: May 2013)

DEFINITIONS
Racking wall – a timber frame wall panel sheathed with a woodbased
board material or plasterboard located generally in a direction parallel to the
wind load.

Soleplate – a timber section which is fi xed to the foundation or structural

subdeck to provide a locating position for the wall panel.

Headbinder– a timber section which connects together adjacent wall

panels to enable them to function as a continuous wall diaphragm and, in
combination with the top wall panel rails, act as ‘spreader’ beams to distribute
floor joist loads to the wall studs.

REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING

Porteus J. and Kermani A. (2008) Structural Timber Design to Eurocode 5
Chichester: John Wiley & Sons

British Standards Institution (2012) Concise Eurocodes: Design of Timber

Structures BS EN 1995-1-1: Eurocode 5 London: BSI

UKTFA (2007) Engineered Wood Products Code of Practice [Online]

Available at: www.uktfa.com/about-uktfa/uktfa-code-of-practice/ (Accessed:
March 2013)

UKTFA (2008) Structural Guidance for Platform Timber Frame [Online]

Available at: www.uktfa.com/download/uktfa_documents/ (Accessed: April
2013)

The Institution of Structural Engineers/TRADA (2007) Manual for the design

of timber building structures to Eurocode 5 London: ISE/TRADA

The Institution of Structural Engineers (2012) Technical Guidance Note 18

(Level 1): ‘Design of timber floor joists’, The Structural Engineer, 90 (11), pp.
36-39

STA Timber Engineering Bulletin No. 2: ‘Engineered wood products and an

introduction to timber structural systems’

The Institution of Structural Engineers (2010) Practical guide to structural

robustness and disproportionate collapse in buildings London: The Institution
of Structural Engineers

www.structuraltimber.co.uk

REV 0 - 10.11.14/EB004 8
 5 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN

Timber frame structures –

platform frame construction (part 3)

Introduction
This Engineering Bulletin provides guidance for engineers involved in the
design of timber frame building structures on the structural stability issues
commonly referred to as ‘design for structural robustness’ or ‘design to avoid
disproportionate collapse’ in buildings.

Structural stability guidance is supported by tests which were conducted by

BRE and TRADA on the TF2000 building (Figure 1).

Stability, robustness and disproportionate collapse

There are three different conditions that need to be satisfied by the structural
engineer in the design of a multi-storey timber frame building:

• Strength and stiffness design (see Engineering Notebook No.3 for more
information)
• Robustness design based on good practice but not case-specific
calculations
• Disproportionate collapse design based on case-specific calculations for
undefined accidental damage ‘events’
Robustness of timber frame construction is generally achieved by the
application of standard detailing that has become established over the last 30
years or more. STA member companies and information on the STA website
(www.structuraltimber.co.uk.) provide typical detailing to achieve proven
robust solutions.
Specific design checks for accidental damage should be carried out by the
engineer to determine whether the building form is unduly sensitive to
damage (caused accidentally or otherwise) such that collapse or partial
collapse is not disproportionate to the original cause. The accidental design
situation is an ultimate limit state and in general, serviceability criteria do not
need to be considered.
In addition, as with all construction materials, there is no defined period for a
building to survive when subject to accidental damage. The only requirement
being that safe escape of occupants and safe access for emergency repair
works should be possible.
Figure 1
Six storey timber frame test building ‘TF2000’, Cardington, Bedfordshire
Principle Code references
Actions and load combinations appropriate for the accidental load case are
provided in BS EN 1991-1-7:2006 and its supporting documents.
Partial factors for actions are given in BS EN 1990 Eurocode 0 and its
National Annexes. Partial factors for materials are given in BS EN 1995-1-1
and its National Annex and are reduced to 1.0 for the accidental load
situation.
Building Regulations requirements for robustness
Regulations exist for accidental damage design limitation based on the
principle that, in the event of damage occurring to a building, partial collapse
is acceptable providing it is proportionate to the cause. In the Approved
Document A to the Building Regulations 2010, the area of floor collapse at
any storey cannot exceed 15% of the floor area of that storey or 70m2,
whichever is smaller, and the collapse must not extend further than the
immediate adjacent storey. It should be noted that the permitted collapse
area differs from the 100m2 given in BS EN 1991-1-7 clause 3.3(2) which is
adopted in this Bulletin.

www.structuraltimber.co.uk

REV 0 - 10.11.14/EB005
 5 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN

In the Approved Document A, Section 5, buildings are classified into four Figure 2
building classes (called ‘Risk Groups’ in Scotland and ‘Consequence Classes’ Consequence Classes applicable to single occupancy houses up to five
in BS EN 1991-1-7) according to the perceived consequences of failure. storeys

Table 1: Definition of Consequence Classes

Figure 3
Consequence Classes applicable to single occupancy houses up to five
storeys built over basements

Table 2: Building classes based on building type, number of storeys

and occupancy Figure 4
Consequence Classes applicable to apartments up to six storeys

Determination of the Consequence Class

The purpose of the Consequence Class is to ensure that buildings are
designed and constructed to the appropriate requirements for robustness, as
discussed in this Bulletin.

Classes are derived on the basis of building type, building height (number
of storeys), floor plan area per storey (for retail) and occupancy. A structure
could be comprised of different Consequence Classes.

BS EN 1990 Table B1 gives guidelines for the choice of Consequence Class

as indicated in Table 1.

www.structuraltimber.co.uk

REV 0 - 10.11.14/EB005 2
 5 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN

Classification of structure
Table A.1 of BS EN 1991-1-7 categorises buildings into Consequence
Classes based on their occupancy and number of storeys. Note that
Consequence Class 2 in Table 1 covers a very broad spectrum of building
types and so is divided into Classes 2A and 2B (Table 2). Most timber frame
buildings will fall into Classes 1, 2A or 2B. Class 3 structures require a risk
assessment-based approach which is not considered here.
Number of storeys
With the exception of buildings to which the public are admitted, the number
of storeys is fundamental to a building’s classification.
Part storeys such as mezzanines and galleries or rooms-in-the-roof can
generally be discounted if their floor area is less than 25% for a building with
a large floor plan (≥800m2) or 50% of a building with a smaller floor plan
(≤300m2).
Many four storey timber frame structures are constructed off a reinforced
concrete or steel podium structure. If the podium structure is designed to
meet the Class 2B requirements and to withstand the collapse of the timber
frame structure above, by applying a static debris loading distributed over an
area 25% larger than the original footprint of the timber frame building, then
the podium structure may be deemed as a ‘strong floor’ and the four storey
timber frame structure above can be designed to meet Class 2A requirements.
Examples of the required building classes to be applied to single occupancy
dwellings and apartments are indicated in Figures 2-4 (where KE refers to a
structure designed as a key element or ‘strong floor’ meeting the requirements
of Consequence Class 2B).
Means of achieving compliance
A building’s structural form will significantly affect its robustness. Cellular
forms of construction such as those commonly seen in platform timber frame
buildings (Engineering Bulletin No. 3) with many loadbearing walls, assure
a sensible level of robustness and resistance to accidental damage, because
loss of any one wall will generally not lead to the collapse of a large
proportion of the structure.
In addition to the provision of horizontal ties to meet the criteria for
Consequence Class 2A, there are three methods of achieving the
requirements of Consequence Class 2B:
• Provision of both horizontal and vertical ties
• Notional removal of elements
• Provision of structurally adequate ‘Key Elements’.
Figure 5 is a flow chart, guiding the engineer through the various robustness
options to be applied to the diff erent building classes.

< Figure 5
Disproportionate collapse – flow chart for design

Floor joists
perpendicular to Floor joists
wall parallel to wall

1) Wall panel
2) Bottom rail
3) Sole plate
4) Structural subdeck
5) Rimbeam or rimboard Figure 6
6) Headbinder or wallplate Details of effective anchorage of floors to timber
7) Floor joist
8) Top rail frame walls in buildings of Consequence Class 2a

www.structuraltimber.co.uk

REV 0 - 10.11.14/EB005 3
 5 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN

Table 3: Required tying forces for internal ties for robust detailing of a timber frame building or a building with timber floors

Building types of Consequence Class 2A
For Class 2A buildings, robustness will be achieved by providing effective
horizontal ties, or ‘effective anchorage’ of suspended floors to walls. The
structural layout of platform timber frame is cellular in nature and effective
anchorage of each floor member to wall junction in accordance with Clause
A5.2 of EN 1991-1-7 and the UK National Annex (which is satisfied by
adopting the good building practice of providing lateral restraint to walls and
designed mechanical anchorage details for fl oors to wall connections) is the
preferred approach. For post and beam forms of construction, the provision of
distinct horizontal ties is more likely to be needed.
For conventional timber frame buildings of cellular plan form, the effective
anchorage of floors to walls will be achieved with a minimum density of
For platform timber frame structures with a regular arrangement of
loadbearing walls, the horizontal tie requirement is satisfied by adopting the
eff ective anchorage requirements for Consequence Class 2A together with
one of the following methods:
Method 2: By checking for notional removal of a loadbearing wall, one at a
time in each storey.
Method 3: By providing critical ‘key’ or ‘protected’ elements, which must be
able to resist an accidental pressure of 34kN/m2 in any direction (accidental
loadcase).
Where necessary, these methods may be used in combination.
Platform timber frame building structures which comprise loadbearing wall

nails in all horizontal interfaces equivalent of 3.1mm diameter at a maximum panels typically have a distributed arrangement of vertical walls. Notional

spacing of 300mm centres as shown in Figure 6 (taken from Annex B of PD removal of loadbearing elements (or notional panel removal), one at a time

6693-1:2012). in each storey of the building in accordance with EN 1991-1-7 Clause A7, is
therefore the preferred approach for platform frame construction.
The density of fi xings has been derived from test evidence backed by
calculations undertaken by the STA and submitted to the UK code In all cases the design process should involve checking the capacity of the

committee for approval and publication in PD 6693-1: 2012. The density of component interfaces (e.g. panel rail to soleplate, soleplate to floor deck,

fixings is such that it gives an appropriate uniform distributed lateral tie force.
For timber structures the requirements for horizontal tie forces can also be
achieved using Clause A5.1 of EN 1991-1-7 as amended by the UK National
Annex to Eurocode 1-7 clauses NA 2.43 and NA.3. These design tie forces are
given in Table 3.
Building types of Consequence Class 2B
For Class 2B structures, robustness can be achieved either by any of the
following:
floor joists to head binder and head binder to panel rail) against the variable
horizontal wind forces. The timber frame designer should therefore be
providing a robust connection at each and every junction as part of the
normal design process.
In calculating the strength of connections to resist the tying forces,
factors should be taken as the instantaneous values from Table 3.1 of EN 5 i.e.
= 1.1 and = 1.0 (accidental condition).

Method 1: By providing eff ective horizontal and vertical ties at all floor and
roof levels (Table 3). For beam and post type structures or for loadbearing
wall structures with an irregular or distributed arrangement of loadbearing
walls, this can be achieved by designing connections between members for
the required accidental tie forces.

www.structuraltimber.co.uk

REV 0 - 10.11.14/EB005 4
 5 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN

Figure 7
Diagrammatic descriptions of the ‘Notional removal method’ for preventing
disproportionate collapse in timber platform frame structures

External or party wall panel

The timber rimbeam is designed to
support the wall and the floor joists at
Continuous timber
thelevel above by bridging over the
floor joists
notionally removed wall panels.
Subsequent rimbeams provide support
to outer walls and floors, thereby
preventing propagation of the collapse

Removal of end support:

Following notional removal of a
wall panel providing joists end
support, unless the joists are
‘top-hung’ from the rimbeam, the
joists are assumed to collapse and
a check should be carried out
to ensure that the resulting collapse
area is within allowable limits

Timber rimbeam
Removal of internal support: within foor depth
Following notional removal of an
internal load bearing wall, the joists
act in double span at each level and
are checked for the accidental
floor loads and the self weight of a
single store wall supported off of
the joists allowable limits

Figure 8
Notional panel removal – end span support wall

www.structuraltimber.co.uk

REV 0 - 10.11.14/EB005 5
 5 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN

Notional removal of loadbearing element for
Consequence Class 2B - The ‘Rimbeam Method’
A separate engineered timber ‘rim beam’ is used to span between points of
vertical lateral restraint (intersecting return walls or key element posts) and
ensures that structural continuity is achieved in the event of notional removal
of a loadbearing wall panel, by providing vertical load transfer as a bridging
element over this panel (Figure 7).
Using rim beams also allows joisted floor structures to be factory assembled
as cassettes, with rimboards used to connect the joist ends together for
transportation. The rim beam can later function as a vertical load transfer
element in the completed structure.
The rim beams need to react onto wall intersections and the wall returns must
be of 1200mm minimum length excluding any framed openings. Such walls
can be non-loadbearing in the conventional sense, but must still be capable
of transferring loads down through the structure (see structural notes on
notional panel removal and Figures 8-10 which accompany them).
Key element post method for Consequence Class 2B
‘Key element posts’ are often provided in combination with rim beams, to
either reduce the length of wall panel that must be considered for notional
panel removal, or to support transfer beams within the timber frame structure.
Key element posts can be an engineered timber (e.g. LVL) post within a timber
frame wall panel with steel brackets connecting the key element post to the
rimbeams at each fl oor level, to transfer the accidental loads back into the
floor diaphragm.
Key element posts are designed for an accidental load of 34kN/m2 (see BS EN
1991-1-7 clause 3.3) applied over the width of the post in one direction
at a time. The additional reaction of adjacent wall panels, which are connected
to the key element posts with nails, is likely to be small but should be
considered (Figure 11).
Principles of the rim beam design methodology are indicated in Figs 7-10
and the worked example.

Figure 9 Figure 11
Height of wall or column between horizontal restraints Key element posts acting in conjunction with rimbeams
(taken from Fig. A3 of EN 1991-1-7:2006)

Figure 10
Notional panel removal – intermediate support wall

www.structuraltimber.co.uk

REV 0 - 10.11.14/EB005 6
 5 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN

Worked Example
Engineered timber rim beam design example to BS EN 1995-1-1
Eurocode 5 and BS EN 1991-1-7 Eurocode 1:

The rim beam within the fl oor zone shown, is located at the end of a 5.0m
span fl oor cassette. The fl oor structure has a self weight of 1.00kN/m2 and
a design imposed fl oor load of 1.50kN/m2. The rim beam is located within
an external wall panel which has a storey height of 2.75m and a self weight
(including supported cladding) of 0.50 kN/m2.

Following the notional removal of a 4.5m length of the external wall panel
between intersecting return walls, check that the rim beam will meet the
ULS requirements of EC0 and EC5 for the residual structure following an
accidental event. The rim beam is assumed to be prevented from lateral
buckling by the connections of the wall panels and soleplates above the
beam.

www.structuraltimber.co.uk

REV 0 - 10.11.14/EB005 7
 5 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN

Other methods of designing against disproportionate

collapse
There are other methods of achieving support for walls and floors following
the notional removal of wall panels. These include:

• The use of room-size floor cassettes with cassette edge boards acting as
rim beams, bridging over removed wall panels. This is possible where
small repeatable room sizes are present (e.g. hotel type accommodation)

• Loose floor construction with top-hung joists or joists supported in joist

hangers from loose rim beams which bridge over removed wall panels

• The use of wall panels designed as deep beams in lieu of rim

beams - applicable where there are no openings in wall panels such
as hotel bedroom dividing walls

• Where joist span lengths are repetitive, using alternate doublespanning

joists with selected walls designed as deep beams (a check should be
made that overall building instability does not occur due to a lack of
restraint at the back span of any cantilevered joists)

• Cantilevered joists supporting walls where the fl oor joists are

designed to support the point load reaction from a single storey of wall
panel plus any supported claddings following notional panel removal.

www.structuraltimber.co.uk

REV 0 - 10.11.14/EB005 8
 5 STRUCTURAL TIMBER
ENGINEERING BULLETIN

RELEVANT CODES OF PRACTISE The Institution of Structural Engineers (2010) Practical guide to structural
robustness and disproportionate collapse in buildings London: The Institution
The Building Regulations 2010, Approved Document A - Structure
of Structural Engineers Lancashire R. and Taylor L. (2011) Timber Frame
(2004 ed. incorporating 2010 amendments)
Construction (5th ed.) High Wycombe: TRADA
BS EN 1990:2002 Eurocode 0: Basis of structural design
BS EN 1991-1-7:2006 Eurocode 1: Actions on structures: STA Design guide to separating distances during construction
Generalactions – Accidental actions (Version 2) [Online] Available at www.structuraltimber.co.uk/information-
NA to BS EN 1991-1-7:2006 Eurocode 1: Actions on structures: centre/information-centre/technical-library/design-documents/
General actions – Accidental actions
BS EN 1995-1-1 Eurocode 5: Design of Timber Structures – Part 1-1:
General – Common rules and rules for buildings
BS EN 1995-1-1 UK National Annex to Eurocode 5: Design of Timber
Structures – Part 1-1: General – Common rules and rules for buildings
PD 6693-1:2012: UK Non-Contradictory Complementary Information
(NCCI) to Eurocode 5: Design of timber structuress
NHBC Technical Guidance Note 2004 The Building Regulations
(2004 ed. Requirement A3 – Disproportionate collapse)

DEFINITIONS
Accidental event – an event due to a specified or un-specified cause which
results in accidental damage being suffered to the structure of a building.

Key element posts – reinforced load bearing elements of structure which

are designed for combinations of permanent and variable actions and for
accidental actions applied in any direction, to satisfy robustness checks
during disproportionate collapse design.

REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING

Porteus J. and Kermani A. (2008) Structural Timber Design to Eurocode 5
Chichester: John Wiley & Sons

British Standards Institution (2012) Concise Eurocodes: Design of Timber

Structures BS EN 1995-1-1: Eurocode 5 London: BSI

STA Engineered Wood Products Code of Practice [Online] Available at:

www.structuraltimber.co.uk/

STA Structural Guidance for Platform Timber Frame [Online]

Available at: - www.structuraltimber.co.uk/information-centre/information-
centre/technical-library/structural-documents/

The Institution of Structural Engineers/TRADA (2007) Manual for the design

of timber building structures to Eurocode 5 London: The Institution of
Structural Engineers/TRADA

STA Engineering Bulletin No. 3: ‘Timber frame structures – platform frame

construction (part 1) (online) Available at www.structuraltimber.co.uk/infor-
mation-centre/information-centre/technical-library/engineering-bulletins/

www.structuraltimber.co.uk

REV 0 - 10.11.14/EB005 9