buildings
Review
Seismic Vulnerability Assessment and Strengthening of
Heritage Timber Buildings: A Review
Amirhosein Shabani 1, * , Ali Alinejad 2 , Mohammad Teymouri 3 , André Nascimento Costa 4 , Mahgol Shabani 5
and Mahdi Kioumarsi 1






Citation: Shabani, A.; Alinejad, A.;
Teymouri, M.; Costa, A.N.; Shabani,
M.; Kioumarsi, M. Seismic
Vulnerability Assessment and
Strengthening of Heritage Timber
Buildings: A Review. Buildings 2021,
11, 661. https://doi.org/10.3390/
buildings11120661
Academic Editors: Ivan Duvnjak,
Tomislav Kišiček, Ivan Lukačević and
Mislav Stepinac
Received: 6 November 2021
Accepted: 10 December 2021
Published: 18 December 2021
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Buildings 2021, 11, 661. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11120661
1 Department of Civil Engineering and Energy Technology, Oslo Metropolitan University, Pilestredet 35,
0166 Oslo, Norway; mahdik@oslomet.no
2 Department of Civil and Resource Engineering, Dalhousie University, 5217 Morris St.,
Halifax, NS B3J 1B6, Canada; ali.alinejad@dal.ca
3 Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA;
Teymouri@colostate.edu
4 Department of Civil Engineering, University of the Valley of Itajaí, 458 Uruguai St.,
Itajaí 88302-901, SC, Brazil; andre.costa@edu.univali.br
5 Department of Civil Engineering, Shomal University, Amol 4616184596, Mazandaran, Iran;
Mahgolshabani143@gmail.com
* Correspondence: amirhose@oslomet.no
Abstract: Recent studies highlight the potential impact of earthquakes on cultural heritage sites and
monuments, which in turn yield significant adverse impacts on economies, politics, and societies.
Several aspects such as building materials, structural responses, and restoration strategies must
be considered in the conservation of heritage structures. Timber is an old organic construction
material. Most of the historic timber structures were not designed to withstand seismic forces;
therefore, the seismic vulnerability assessment of heritage timber structures in areas with high
seismic hazard is essential for their conservation. For this purpose, different strategies for the
numerical modeling of heritage timber buildings have been developed and validated against tests
results. After performing seismic analysis using detailed analytical methods and predicting the
susceptible structural components, strengthening techniques should be utilized to mitigate the risk
level. To this aim, various methods using wooden components, composite material, steel components,
SMA etc., have been utilized and tested and are reviewed in this study. There are still some gaps,
such as full-scale numerical modeling of strengthened buildings and investigating the soil–structure
interaction effects on the seismic behavior of buildings that should be investigated.
Keywords: heritage timber buildings; nonlinear numerical modeling; vulnerability assessment;
strengthening techniques; seismic analysis; literature review
1. Introduction
Not only from a spiritual or a historical point of view but also because of their
technological value, conservation of heritage structures is important for our generation
and the future ones. Technological knowledge about their construction can help us find the
best way for their conservation and learn from them as a pattern for our new structural
systems. Moreover, losing cultural heritage sites can have irreplaceable detriments because
of monumental artifacts inside the building and the structure itself.
Timber, as the oldest organic construction material, has been utilized with less global
emissions to help to reduce the global warming impact [1]. As depicted in Figure 1, the
number of timber buildings in the northern European countries is more compared to the
southern countries. The structural vulnerability assessment of timber structures is complex
because of the material diversity and high susceptibility to different environmental risks
because of its organic nature compared to other materials, such as brick [2–4].
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/buildings
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 2 of 25
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 2 of 25

Figure1.1. Total
Figure Total number
numberofofbuildings
buildingsinin
thethe
European countries
European (in millions)
countries and the
(in millions) andexposure distri-
the exposure
bution of timber
distribution buildings
of timber [5]. [5].
buildings

Sincemost
Since mostofof thethe heritage
heritage structures
structures werewere not designed
not designed basedbased on reliable
on reliable seismicseismic
codes,
ancodes, an earthquake
earthquake can be acan be afor
threat threat
them,forparticularly
them, particularly
in zones in of
zones
highofseismic
high seismic
hazardhazard
[6,7].
A[6,7]. A combination
combination of experimental
of experimental and numerical
and numerical studies hasstudies
beenhas usedbeen used
in the in for
past the seismic
past for
analysis
seismic of heritage
analysis oftimber
heritage buildings
timber so that experimental
buildings tests at the structural
so that experimental tests at the component
structural
scale were performed,
component scale wereand a simplified,
performed, and aefficient
simplified,numerical
efficientsimulation method validated
numerical simulation method
by the experimental results was developed for the simulation
validated by the experimental results was developed for the simulation of the whole of the whole building. The
simulation can be based on nonlinear rotational springs where all
building. The simulation can be based on nonlinear rotational springs where all the non- the nonlinear behavior
of the building
linear behaviorelements is concentrated.
of the building elements isAfter the simulation
concentrated. After theof the building,ofnonlinear
simulation the build-
static pushoverstatic
ing, nonlinear analysis or incremental
pushover analysis ordynamic analysis
incremental are conducted
dynamic analysis are forconducted
the seismic for
vulnerability assessment ofassessment
the seismic vulnerability a case study of[8]. In order
a case studyto[8].investigate
In order to theinvestigate
seismic vulnerability
the seismic
assessment
vulnerability methodologies of heritage timber
assessment methodologies buildings,
of heritage they buildings,
timber can be categorized
they can into three
be catego-
main groups based on their structure: (1) timber frame buildings,
rized into three main groups based on their structure: (1) timber frame buildings, (2) log (2) log house systems,
and
house(3) systems,
post and and beam (3)systems
post and [9].
beam systems [9].
Timber
Timber frame buildings areone
frame buildings are oneofofthe
thewell-known
well-knownheritage
heritagetimber
timberstructural
structuralsystems
systems
and
andconsist
consistof oftimber
timberframe
frameelements
elementswith withmasonry
masonryinfills
infills[10].
[10].InInthis
thisstructural
structuralsystem,
system,
which
which can be considered as the most efficient one, timber is utilized to compensatefor
can be considered as the most efficient one, timber is utilized to compensate forthe
the
low strength of masonry materials in tension and confine the masonry
low strength of masonry materials in tension and confine the masonry infills to work bet- infills to work better
intershear [11,12].
in shear In Figure
[11,12]. 2, the2,
In Figure seismic hazardhazard
the seismic map ofmap Europe is depicted
of Europe [13], and[13],
is depicted timber
and
frame building typologies with various configurations of timber elements
timber frame building typologies with various configurations of timber elements are high- are highlighted.
Itlighted.
can be pointed
It can beout that some
pointed typessome
out that of timber
typesframe typologies
of timber frame are located in
typologies areareas within
located
high seismicity zones. Indeed, traditional timber frame constructions
areas with high seismicity zones. Indeed, traditional timber frame constructions with infill with infill exhibited a
remarkable
exhibited abehavior
remarkable during large earthquakes
behavior during large[14]. This system
earthquakes [14].was widely
This systemusedwasnotwidely
only
in European countries but also for example in Haiti and India, in different categories based
used not only in European countries but also for example in Haiti and India, in different
on the timber elements typologies [11].
categories based on the timber elements typologies [11].
 Buildings 2021, 11, 661 3 of 25
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 3 of 25
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 3 of 25

Figure 2. Hazard map of the

2. Hazard European countries based on on
PGA [15] andand
various types of of
timber
Figure
Figure 2. Hazard mapmap of European
of the the European countries
countries based
based on PGA PGA
[15] [15] various
and various typestypes timber
of timber
frame buildings in different European countries, adapted and updated from [16,17].
frameframe buildings
buildings in different
in different European
European countries,
countries, adapted
adapted and and updated
updated fromfrom [16,17].
[16,17].

The logloghouse system, as the second structural system type of heritage timber build-
The The
log house house
system,system, as second
as the the second structural
structural system
system typetype of heritage
of heritage timbertimber build-
build-
ings, consists of timber logs that are connected in the horizontal direction [18]. This ancient
ings,ings, consists
consists of timber
of timber logslogs
thatthat are connected
are connected in horizontal
in the the horizontal direction
direction [18].[18].
ThisThis ancient
ancient
structural
structural system
system isisfamous
famous because
because of its good
good insulating
insulatingvalues
valuesandand has been widely
structural system is famous because ofofitsitsgood insulating values and has
hasbeen
beenwidely
widelyused
used in cold European countries [9,19]. An example of a log house is shown in Figure 3a.
usedinincold
coldEuropean
Europeancountries
countries[9,19].
[9,19].AnAnexample
exampleofofaalog loghouse
houseisisshown
shownininFigure
Figure3a.
3a.The
The corner joint, which is particularly effective on the lateral load-bearing behavior of this
The corner
cornerjoint,
joint,which
whichisisparticularly
particularlyeffective
effectiveon onthe
thelateral
lateralload-bearing
load-bearingbehavior
behaviorofofthis
thistype
type
of of structural
structural system,
system, is is shown
shown in in Figure
Figure 3b. 3b.
type of structural system, is shown in Figure 3b.

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 3. (a) A heritage log house building in Tønsberg, Norway. (b) Carpentry corner joint of the
Figure 3. (a)3.A(a)
Figure heritage log log
A heritage house building
house in in
building Tønsberg,
Tønsberg,Norway.
Norway.(b)
(b)Carpentry
Carpentry corner jointof
corner joint ofthe
thelogs.
logs.
logs.
Last but not least, the post and beam system is another heritage timber structural
Last but not least, the post and beam system is another heritage timber structural
Last butshown
system, not least, the post
in Figure and and
4. Post beambeam
system is another
structures are heritage timber
widely seen structural
in eastern Asian
system, shown in Figure 4. Post and beam structures are widely seen in eastern Asian
system,
countries, where timber beams and posts are connected by complex joints [20]. Asian
shown in Figure 4. Post and beam structures are widely seen in eastern
countries, where timber beams and posts are connected by complex joints [20].
countries, where timber beams and posts are connected by complex joints [20].
1 Buildings 2021, 11, 661 4 of 25 4 of 25

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 4.A(a)
4. (a) Aand
post post and
beam beam[9].
structure structure
(b) A 3D [9]. (b) for
drawing A 3D drawing
a frame for and
from a post a frame from a with
beam structure postitsand beam
details [21].
structure with its details [21].
Several experimental studies have been conducted to assess the vulnerability of
these types of structures against lateral loadings at full-scale or structural component
Several experimental studies
scale [22–30]. have been
However, thereconducted
is a need toto assess the
investigate thevulnerability
modeling method of these
and their
types of structures against lateral loadings at full-scale or structural component
vulnerability against different loading protocols and perform several analyses instead of a scale [22–
30]. However, therelimited
is a need
number to investigate
of time-consuming the modeling
and expensive method andexperimental
full-scale their vulnerability
tests.
Various seismic analysis methodologies have
against different loading protocols and perform several analyses instead of a limited been developed, which cannum-be catego-
rized into three main groups: (1) empirical methods, (2) hybrid methods, and (3) analytical
ber of time-consuming and expensive full-scale experimental tests.
methods [31]. The main focus of this study is on the application of detailed analytical meth-
Various seismicodsanalysis
that can methodologies
be considered as the have
mostbeen
robust developed,
method withwhich a lowercan beofcatego-
level uncertainties
rized into three main groups:to(1)
compared empirical
other methods,
methodologies. (2) hybrid
However, methods, and
more computational (3) analytical
efforts, a higher level of
methods [31]. The input
maindata focusneeded for the
of this assessment,
study is on theand the need for a skilled
application interpreter
of detailed of the results
analytical
are the main limitations of detailed analytical methods [31].
methods that can be considered as the most robust method with a lower level of uncer-
After performing seismic analysis to investigate the vulnerability of buildings and
tainties compared todefine
othercritical
methodologies. However,strengthening
structural components, more computational is requiredefforts,
to mitigatea higher
the seismic
level of input data needed for The
risk [32,33]. the strengthening
assessment, technique
and the need can befor founda skilled
based oninterpreter
the Hyperion of the
method-
ology for structural vulnerability assessment
results are the main limitations of detailed analytical methods [31]. of heritage timber buildings. The analysis
is performed on the retrofitted building, and this loop
After performing seismic analysis to investigate the vulnerability of buildings and is repeated until the most efficient
strengthening technique is defined [7]. However, different criteria should be considered
define critical structural components, strengthening is required to mitigate the seismic
when planning for the restoration process [34]. Reversibility is a principle in the restoration
risk [32,33]. The strengthening
methodology technique
that should be canconsidered.
be foundFor based on the Hyperion
this purpose, the possibilitymethodol-
of eliminating
ogy for structural vulnerability
previous work and assessment
applying new of heritage
interventionstimber
in thebuildings.
future shouldThe analysisAll
be provided. is inter-
performed on the retrofitted building, and this loop is repeated until the most efficient or
ventions should be harmonized with the present structural context. Moreover, resins
concrete are widely used to repair damaged parts, which cause discontinuities in mechani-
strengthening technique is defined [7]. However, different criteria should be considered
cal properties and increase the possibility of brittle failure. For this reason, substitutions
when planning for andthe prostheses
restoration withprocess
materials[34].
otherReversibility
than wood should is a principle
be prohibited in[35].
the restora-
tion methodology that should
A comprehensive review of standards, guidelines, and procedures foreliminat-
be considered. For this purpose, the possibility of the assessment
ing previous work andof heritage
applying structures
new has been completed
interventions in [2].
in the Diverse
future technical
should be committees
provided. were All also
contributed to developing a generally accepted methodology
interventions should be harmonized with the present structural context. Moreover, resins for assessing and reinforcing
heritage structures [36–40]. However, there is still a need for performing an in-depth review
or concrete are widely
studyused to repair
focusing damaged
on the seismic parts, which
vulnerability assessmentcause anddiscontinuities in me-
strengthening methodologies.
chanical properties andAt increase
this point, thea review
possibility of brittle
is necessary failure.
to evaluate theFor this reason,
state-of-the-art substitu-meth-
of numerical
tions and prostheses with materials other than wood should be prohibited [35].
ods and strengthening methods used for the seismic vulnerability assessment of heritage
A comprehensivetimber buildings.
review In this study,
of standards, firstly a systematic
guidelines, and proceduresreview was performed
for to investigate
the assessment
the growth of research studies related to the seismic vulnerability assessment and strength-
of heritage structures has been completed in [2]. Diverse technical committees were also
ening of heritage timber buildings. Furthermore, the main topics in this area, as well as
contributed to developing a generally
the state-of-the-art accepted
topics, methodology
were investigated. Nonlinear fornumerical
assessing and reinforc-
modeling procedures of
ing heritage structures [36–40].
heritage timberHowever,
buildings arethere is still
reviewed a need
for each of thefor performing
three an in-depth
structural systems. Each section
review study focusing on the seismic vulnerability assessment and strengthening meth-
odologies.
At this point, a review is necessary to evaluate the state-of-the-art of numerical meth-
ods and strengthening methods used for the seismic vulnerability assessment of heritage
 needed to evaluate the seismic vulnerability of structures. Therefore,
strategies are introduced, and the relevant research studies are review
ular attention is given to the strengthening techniques by investiga
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 cons. 5 of 25

2. Systematic Literature Review

is related to a particular structural system, and previous related studies were collected and
ForAfter
presented. conducting
providing ana systematic literature
accurate numerical review
model, seismic about
analysis seismic
is needed to vulne
evaluate the seismic vulnerability of structures. Therefore, different
and retrofitting of heritage timber buildings, a set of keywords was se applicable strategies
are introduced, and the relevant research studies are reviewed. Finally, particular attention
lished
is given toarticles were searched
the strengthening techniques by ininvestigating
the Scopus theirdatabase.
pros and cons.In this step, 262
containing at least one of the following keywords in the title, keywo
2. Systematic Literature Review
(1) seismic timber historical, (2) retrofitting timber historical, (3) asses
For conducting a systematic literature review about seismic vulnerability assessment
berretrofitting
and building, of (4) seismic
heritage timbertimber heritage,
buildings, (5) retrofitting
a set of keywords timber
was selected, heritag
and all
published articles were searched in the Scopus database. In this step, 262 papers were
frame historical, (7) seismic timber log house, (8) traditional seismic tim
found containing at least one of the following keywords in the title, keywords, or the
(9) historic
abstract: seismic
(1) seismic timber timber post
historical, (2) and beam,
retrofitting (10)historical,
timber timber (3) Blockhaus
assessment buildi
heritage
timbertimberjointbuilding,
load, (12) (4) seismic timbertimber
historic heritage, joint
(5) retrofitting
load, (13)timbermortise
heritage, (6)
and ten
seismic timber frame historical, (7) seismic timber log house, (8) traditional seismic timber
thatand
post AND
beam,operator was used
(9) historic seismic between
timber post and beam,the(10)terms
timber of the keywords.
Blockhaus buildings,
Then,timber
(11) traditional two filters were
joint load, applied,
(12) historic timberincluding being
joint load, (13) mortiseindexed in journa
and tenon joint
load. Note that AND operator was used between the terms of the keywords.
English language, and then 253 articles were derived. Afterward, the
Then, two filters were applied, including being indexed in journals and written in
dexed
the Englishinlanguage,
Web ofandScience (WoS)were
then 253 articles were selected
derived. to filter
Afterward, the that
the journals papers,
are and
indexed in Web of Science (WoS) were selected to filter the papers, and finally, 239 papers
were found for performing a bibliometric analysis. The whole meth
were found for performing a bibliometric analysis. The whole methodology is summarized
rized
in Figurein5. Figure 5.

Figure
Figure 5. Methodology diagram of
5. Methodology selected articles.
diagram of selected articles.
Figure 6 displays the number of published articles since 1999 that shows how attention
shiftedFigure
toward the6 topic in the last
displays thedecade.
number Table of
1 shows the scientific
published journals
articles that had
since 1999 tha
at least seven published articles. Engineering Structures, International Journal of Architec-
tionHeritage,
tural shifted andtoward theandtopic
Construction in Materials
Building the lastaredecade. Table journals
three well-known 1 shows thatthe sci
had at least
published seven
the highest published
number of articles. articles. Engineering Structures, Internatio
tectural Heritage, and Construction and Building Materials are three well-
published the highest number of articles.
BuildingsBuildings
2021, 11, 661
2021, 11, 661 6 of 25

40

Number of papers
30

20

10

0
1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

2014

2016

2018

2020

2022
Year
Number
Figure 6.6.
Figure of published
Number articles since
of published 1999. since 1999.
articles
Table 1. Journals with the most relevant articles.
Table 1. Journals with the most relevant articles.
Publication Documents
Engineering StructuresPublication 28
International Journal of Architectural Heritage 24
Engineering Structures
Construction and Building Materials 15
International Journal of Architectural
Forest Products Journal Heritage7
Proceedings of The Institution of Civil Engineers: Structures and Buildings 7
Construction and Building Materials
Forest Products Journal
The VOSviewer software (Version 1.6.17) [41] was utilized to generate visualization
Proceedings
maps. of ThetheInstitution
Figure 7a shows of Civil Engineers:
frequency keywords Structures
clustering. The and Buildings
bigger a circle is, the
more frequently the keyword appears in the articles. Lines between keywords represent
links, and a thicker line indicates the more robust connectivity of the keywords across
The
different VOSviewer
articles. Moreover, software
keywords that(Version 1.6.17)connections
showed stronger [41] was are utilized
located to generate
closer
maps. Figure
to each other. The7a shows
results theanalysis
of this frequency keywords
show that clustering.
the networks connectionThe bigger
consists of a circ
four main research areas. The conceptual part includes (1) historic
frequently the keyword appears in the articles. Lines between keywords re timber structures and
timber connections, green color; (2) structural design and experimental studies, red cluster
and a thicker
(3) seismic line indicates
vulnerability assessment the
andmore
masonryrobust connectivity
construction, yellow of the keywords
cluster; and (4) ac
articles. Moreover,which
historic preservation, keywords that
is the blue showed
group. Figurestronger
7b depicts connections are located
the trending research
topics based on the time of the published article. The yellow circles
other. The results of this analysis show that the networks connection and connections meanconsist
more recent investigations.
research areas. The conceptual part includes (1) historic timber structures an
nections, green color; (2) structural design and experimental studies, red cl
mic vulnerability assessment and masonry construction, yellow cluster; an
preservation, which is the blue group. Figure 7b depicts the trending researc
on the time of the published article. The yellow circles and connections mea
investigations.
Buildings 2021, 11,
Buildings 2021, 11, 661
661 77 of
of 25
25

(a)

(b)
Figure 7.
7. (a)
(a)Frequency
Frequencykeywords
keywordsclustering. (b)(b)
clustering. Trending research
Trending topic
research from
topic blueblue
from (oldest) to yel-
(oldest) to
low (newest).
yellow (newest).

The visualizing bibliometric networks display that seismic vulnerability, structural

structural
design, and historic preservation are the three most used keywords and investigated areas
after historic timber structure. These
These four
four topics
topics have
have been
been investigated
investigated more
more than
than others.
others.
Moreover, the results show that research studies have recently shifted from analyzing
analyzing
timber connections
connections toward performing experimental studies and masonry material that
were often utilized in the construction of heritage timber buildings.
buildings. The graphs depict that
four main
there are no connections (lines) between some topics in four main clusters
clusters (research
(research areas)
areas)
that show the potential knowledge gap and opportunity to start a new investigation.
s 2021, 11, 661 8 of 25

Buildings 2021, 11, 661 8 of 25

In the following sections, different strategies for numerical modeling of heritage tim-
ber buildings are reviewed, different structural analysis methods have been discussed,
and finally, various In the following
retrofitting sections, different
and strengthening strategies
techniques for numerical
are presented modeling of heritage
and reviewed.
timber
For this aim, each buildings
section are reviewed,
is dedicated different
to a heritage structural
timber analysis
structural methods have been discussed,
system.
and finally, various retrofitting and strengthening techniques are presented and reviewed.
For this aim,
3. Numerical Modeling each section is dedicated to a heritage timber structural system.
Methods
3.1. Timber Frame Buildings Modeling Methods
3. Numerical
In the timber
3.1.frame
Timberstructural system, timber shear walls consisting of a timber frame
Frame Buildings
with masonry infill are considered as the load-bearing system. The monotonic and cyclic
In the timber frame structural system, timber shear walls consisting of a timber frame
tests, which are shown in Figure 8a on precise models of historic timber frame walls, were
with masonry infill are considered as the load-bearing system. The monotonic and cyclic
performed to investigate
tests, whichtheir nonlinear
are shown behavior,
in Figure 8a onincluding their near-collapse
precise models failure,
of historic timber frame walls, were
maximum horizontal displacement, and energy dissipation [16,42]. For investigating
performed to investigate their nonlinear behavior, including their near-collapse failure, the
effect of verticalmaximum
loads on the cyclic behavior
horizontal of the walls,
displacement, a few tests
and energy with different
dissipation [16,42].vertical
For investigating the
loadings are needed.
effect of vertical loads on the cyclic behavior of the walls, a fewwith
As a conservative approach, the execution of cyclic tests testsawith
lowerdifferent vertical
vertical load than in real buildings and calibration of the springs based
loadings are needed. As a conservative approach, the execution of cyclic tests on the results is with a lower
suggested. vertical load than in real buildings and calibration of the springs based on the results
After deriving the cyclic behavior of the shear walls against lateral loads, the shear
is suggested.
wall can be modeledAfter by means of nonlinear
deriving the cyclicrotational
behavior springs and rigid
of the shear wallslinks for connect-
against lateral loads, the shear
ing them, as illustrated in Figure 8b. The springs must be calibrated
wall can be modeled by means of nonlinear rotational springs and rigid to show the exact
links for connect-
behavior of theing wall. This calibration is done by repeating the analyses until the
them, as illustrated in Figure 8b. The springs must be calibrated to show the exact curves
are fitted together.
behavior of the wall. This calibration is done by repeating the analyses until the curves are
Finally, a fitted
building is modeled with the calibrated shear walls in a way that, for a
together.
different configuration, the alateral
Finally, buildingstiffness can be with
is modeled assumed to be changed
the calibrated shearlinearly
walls inwith
a way that, for a
the length of the wall. Moreover,
different configuration,because of the stiffness
the lateral low torsional
can beproblems
assumed due to betochanged
the sym- linearly with the
metry of the majority
length of ofthe
historical buildingsbecause
wall. Moreover, in height andlow
of the plan, the 2Dproblems
torsional simulation dueofto
the
the symmetry of
buildings is adequate to represent
the majority the seismic
of historical behavior.
buildings in heightAs and
an effective
plan, theparameter
2D simulationon theof the buildings
results, viscousisdamping values of 2–5% are recommended. However, 1% viscous
adequate to represent the seismic behavior. As an effective parameter on the results, damp-
ing is suggested to obtain
viscous results values
damping that areoflying
2–5% onaretherecommended.
safe side in [8]. However, 1% viscous damping is
The simulation of timber
suggested frame
to obtain wallsthat
results withare
rotational
lying onsprings
the safewassideperformed
in [8]. by em-
The simulation
ploying rotational springs in differentof timber frame walls
configurations with
[43–46]. rotational
Other types of springs was performed by
simplified
numerical models employing rotationalconfigurations
using different springs in different configurations
for nonlinear springs[43–46]. Other types
and timber ele- of simplified
ments are also numerical
presented models using different
and calibrated configurations
by experimental forIn
results. nonlinear springs and
these alternatives, di-timber elements
are also presented and calibrated by experimental results.
agonal timber elements were modeled as linear strut elements, as shown in Figure 8c [46– In these alternatives, diagonal
50]. timber elements were modeled as linear strut elements, as shown in Figure 8c [46–50].

(a)
Figure 8. Cont.
 Buildings 2021, 11, 661 9 of 25
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 9 of 25

Buildings 2021, 11, 661 9 of 25

(b) (c)
Figure 8. (a)
Figure In-plane
8. (a) testtest
In-plane setup on on
setup a timber frame
a timber wall
frame [47].
wall (b) (b)
[47]. A timber frame
A timber wall
frame modeled
wall using
modeled using
concentrated nonlinear springs. (c) An alternative approach for numerical modeling of the
concentrated nonlinear springs. (c) An alternative approach for numerical modeling of the wall wall [46].
[46].
(b) (c)
3.2. Log 8.Houses
Figure (a) In-plane test setup on a timber frame wall [47]. (b) A timber frame wall modeled using
3.2. Log Houses
concentrated nonlinear springs. (c) An alternative approach for numerical modeling of the wall [46].
For the log house system, shear walls are the lateral load-bearing system, and the
For the log house system, shear walls are the lateral load-bearing system, and the
procedure for the simulation of this structural system is the same as in the case of timber
3.2. Log Houses
procedure for the simulation of this structural system is the same as in the case of timber
frame system,
For the
frame system, which
log house
whichissystem,
employed shear in
is employed [51–53].
walls theAs
inare[51–53]. illustrated
lateralAs in Figure
load-bearing
illustrated system, 9a,and
in Figure thethefriction
9a, pen-
the friction
dulum link
procedure element
for was
the simulation used to
of this model
structuralfriction
system between
is the samethe contact
as in
pendulum link element was used to model friction between the contact surfaces of the
the casesurfaces
of timberof the logs,
andframe system, which
an inclined is employed
equivalent springin [51–53].
was As illustrated
modeled in Figurethe
to simulate 9a, interlocking
the friction pen- between the
logs,
dulum and
link an inclined
element equivalent
was used to model spring
frictionwas modeled
between to simulate
the contact surfacestheof interlocking
the logs, between
logs [51]
the an .
logs [51]. equivalent spring was modeled to simulate the interlocking between the
and inclined
As an
As
logs [51].
alternative
an alternative forforsimplified
simplified numerical
numerical simulation
simulationof log
of loghouses
houses at building
at buildingscale,
scale,
logs were
As an modeled
alternative separately,
for simplified the corner
numerical joints
simulationwere
of represented
log houses
logs were modeled separately, the corner joints were represented by a series of elastic at by
buildinga series
scale, of elastic
spring
logs
spring with
were withequivalent
modeled
equivalent stiffness,
separately, thethe
the corner
stiffness, presence
joints ofrepresented
were
presence n tolerance
of by gaps
n tolerance a series
gaps wasof
was considered,
elastic
considered, andand
spring
static with equivalent
friction was stiffness,by
simulated themeans
presence
of of n tolerance
Coulomb gaps was
forces, as considered,
shown in and 9b,c. For
Figure
static friction was simulated by means of Coulomb forces, as shown in Figure 9b,c. For
static
this friction was
alternative simulatedthe
approach, bymaximum
means of Coulomb forces, as
displacement shown in
between theFigure
logs 9b,c.
and For
thethe
maximum
this alternative approach, the maximum displacement between
this alternative approach, the maximum displacement between the logs and the maximum
the logs and maximum
displacement
displacement of the wall
of the wallcancan
be beconsidered
considered as as
damage
damage indices
indicesin in
thetheanalyses
analyses [54–57].
[54–57].
displacement of the wall can be considered as damage indices in the analyses [54–57].

(a)

(a)

(b) (c)
Figure 9. (a) A simplified numerical model for simulation of log house buildings based on the non-
Figure 9. (a) A simplified numerical model for simulation of log house buildings based on the
linear spring approach [51]. (b) Full-scale assembly of a log house shear wall. (c) A simplified ana-
nonlinear
lytical modelspring approach
including [51]. (b)
different springs Full-scale
[55] assembly
(F: lateral load, of aload,
p: vertical log H:
house shear
height, wall.keq(c)
L: length, : A simplified
analytical model including(b) different springs [55] (F: lateral load, p: vertical(c)load, H: height, L: length,
keq : equivalent
Figure stiffnessnumerical
9. (a) A simplified of the corner
modeljoints, kel : equivalent
for simulation of logstiffness, fi : Coulomb
house buildings basedforces,
on theh: non-
timber
log’s
linear height).
spring approach [51]. (b) Full-scale assembly of a log house shear wall. (c) A simplified ana-
lytical model including different springs [55] (F: lateral load, p: vertical load, H: height, L: length, keq:
11, 661 10 of 25

equivalent stiffness of the corner joints, kel: equivalent stiffness, fi: Coulomb forces, h: timber log’s
height).
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 10 of 25

3.3. Post and Beam

The numerical modeling
3.3. of the post and beam structural system is different from the
Post and Beam
other two systems because of the lack
The numerical of timber
modeling of theshear walls.
post and beamFor this system,
structural systemthe cyclic from the
is different
behavior of the connections between
other two systems post of
because andthebeams
lack of plays
timberashear
key role
walls.[58].
For Figure 10a the cyclic
this system,
shows the test setup for deriving
behavior the cyclic behavior
of the connections between of theand
post connections.
beams plays a key role [58]. Figure 10a
shows the test
Instead of performing setup for deriving
experimental tests ontheshear
cyclic walls,
behaviortheoftests
the connections.
were conducted
on the connections, and the building was simulated by linear timber postthe
Instead of performing experimental tests on shear walls, tests
and wereele-
beam conducted on
ments with nonlinear rotational springs, which were calibrated with experimental results, elements
the connections, and the building was simulated by linear timber post and beam
with nonlinear rotational springs, which were calibrated with experimental results, as
as shown in Figure 10b as an example [59–64].
shown in Figure 10b as an example [59–64].

(a) (b)
FigureFigure 10. (a) Schematic
10. (a) Schematic diagram
diagram of of setup
the testing the testing setup
of a timber of a timber
connection connection
[65]. (b) Numerical[65].
model(b)ofNumerical
a sample post and
beam model
buildingofwith
a sample postsprings
nonlinear and beam
[58]. building with nonlinear springs [58].

4. Seismic Analysis Methods

4. Seismic Analysis Methods
After providing
After providing numerical models,numerical
seismicmodels,
analyses seismic analyses
methods methods
should should be
be utilized to utilized to
investigate the structural behavior against the seismic loads. Nonlinear static pushover pushover
investigate the structural behavior against the seismic loads. Nonlinear static
analysis (POA) is widely used for seismic analysis of buildings, and the well-known capac-
analysis (POA) is widely used for seismic analysis of buildings, and the well-known ca-
ity curve is the ultimate result of this analysis method to investigate the stiffness, strength,
pacity curve is the ultimate result of this analysis method to investigate the stiffness,
and ductility subjected to seismic loads [66]. The POA method has two disadvantages;
strength, and ductility
firstly,subjected
the resultstoareseismic
dependent loadson [66]. Thepatterns,
the load POA method has for
particularly twostructures
disad- in which
vantages; firstly, the results are dependent on the load patterns, particularly for
higher mode effects are dominant. Moreover, seismic records’ characteristics such asstructures
in which higher mode effects
near-field are pulse
velocity dominant.
effects,Moreover, seismicbyrecords’
cannot be reflected characteristics
performing monotonic POA [31].
such as near-field velocity
Capacitypulse effects, cannot
spectrum-based methodsbe reflected by performing
can be utilized monotonic
in order to derive the performance
POA [31]. point of structures based on the results from the POA, which are presented in FEMA
273 [67] and the
Capacity spectrum-based N2 method
methods can [68] introduced
be utilized recently
in order in Eurocode
to derive 8 Part 3 [69]. Moreover,
the performance
different modifications have been made to decrease the uncertainty level of the seismic
point of structures based on the results from the POA, which are presented in FEMA 273
demand derived from this efficient seismic analysis method.
[67] and the N2 method [68] introduced recently in Eurocode 8 Part 3 [69]. Moreover, dif-
Nonlinear time history analysis (NTHA) is considered the most robust seismic anal-
ferent modificationsysishave beenSeismic
method. made records
to decrease the uncertainty
are applied to the model,level ofnonlinear
and the seismic de- analysis
dynamic
mand derived from this efficient
is performed seismic
during analysisGround
the NTHA. method. motion selection and scaling are two effective
Nonlinear time history
parts on theanalysis (NTHA)
NTHA results, andisvarious
considered the most robust
methodologies have beenseismic anal-[70–72]. Re-
proposed
ysis method. Seismic records are applied to the model, and nonlinear dynamic analysis isand scaling
sults of the analyses to investigate the effect of the ground motion selection
performed duringprocedure
the NTHA. show their inevitable
Ground sensitivity
motion selection [73].
and The NTHA
scaling are twomethod compensates
effective parts for the
aforementioned limitations of the POA and earthquake
on the NTHA results, and various methodologies have been proposed [70–72]. Results of records specification, i.e., their
duration, the sequence of peaks, and the frequency content that may influence the struc-
the analyses to investigate the effect of the ground motion selection and scaling procedure
tural response [31]. However, due to the need for specialized practitioners, a high level of
show their inevitable sensitivity [73]. The NTHA method compensates for the aforemen-
computational effort, and a high level of input data, the NTHA is less frequently used than
tioned limitationstheof POA
the POA[66]. and earthquake records specification, i.e., their duration,
the sequence of peaks, and the frequency content that may influence the structural re-
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 11 of 25

In order to have a more exact understanding of the seismic behavior of buildings,

incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) can be utilized in which various accelerograms are
applied to building models, and the intensities are increased until the predefined limit
states occur [74]. The IDA results can be illustrated by plotting an engineering demand
parameter (EDP) against an intensity measure (IM). Fragility curves can also be derived to
depict the risk of the earthquake and predict the damage possibilities [75].
The numerical modeling and analyses method of various research studies are sum-
marized in Table 2. It can be concluded that ABAQUS [76] and SAP2000 [77] are two
well-known numerical modeling software that are widely utilized for this purpose. Fur-
thermore, the scale of the modeling is prenoted as well as the analysis types. The cyclic and
monotonic analyses are applicable for the validation of the test’s specimens at structural
component levels, and the POA and nonlinear dynamic analyses were utilized for the
seismic analysis at a full-scale building. More research is required to investigate the effect
of soil–structure interaction on the seismic behavior of heritage timber buildings with
specific structural performance [78].

Table 2. Numerical modeling and analyses method of various research studies.

Type of the
Software Model Scale Analysis Type Analysis Purpose Reference
Structure
ABAQUS Structural component Cyclic Validation [54]
SAP2000 Structural component Cyclic and Monotonic Validation [51]
Structural component and Cyclic, Monotonic, and Validation and a
SAP2000 [52]
full-scale simplified methods case study
Validation and
ABAQUS Structural component Monotonic [55]
parametric study
Log house
Validation and
ABAQUS Structural component Monotonic [79]
parametric study
ABAQUS Full-scale Pushover Case study [53]
Validation and
ABAQUS Full-scale Nonlinear Dynamic [57]
parametric study
SAP2000 Full-scale Linear Dynamic Validation [27]
Structural component and Validation and
ALGOR Pushover [58]
full-scale case study
Unmentioned Structural component Cyclic Validation [63]
ABAQUS Structural component Cyclic Validation [59]
ANSYS Full-scale Nonlinear Dynamic Case study [60]
Pushover and Nonlinear
ALGOR Full-scale Case study [62]
Dynamic
ABAQUS Full-scale Nonlinear Dynamic Case study [80]
ANSYS Full-scale Nonlinear Dynamic Case study [64]
Post and
Linear Static, Nonlinear
beam
ABAQUS Full-scale Static and Nonlinear Case study [81]
Dynamic
OpenSees Structural component Cyclic Validation [82]
Nonlinear Dynamic and
DIANA FEA Full-scale Case study [83]
Pushover
OpenSees Full-scale Nonlinear Dynamic Case study [84]
Validation and
ABAQUS Structural component Monotonic [85]
parametric study
Validation and a
SAP2000 Structural component Cyclic [23]
case study
ABAQUS Structural component Cyclic Validation [86]
ATLAS Full-scale Nonlinear Dynamic Case study [43]
Timber Validation and
OpenSees Structural component Cyclic and pushover [47]
frame parametric study
SAP2000 Structural component Monotonic Validation [44]
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 12 of 25

Table 2. Cont.

Type of the
Software Model Scale Analysis Type Analysis Purpose Reference
Structure
Structural component and Monotonic and Nonlinear Validation and a
ANSYS [48]
full-scale static case study
Autodesk
Structural component and Validation and a
Simulation Cyclic and Pushover [10]
full-scale case study
Multiphysics
SAP2000 Structural component Monotonic Validation [49]
Nonlinear static and Validation and a
SAP2000 Structural component [50]
dynamic case study
OpenSees Structural component Cyclic Validation [16]
FINAL v11 Structural component Monotonic and Cyclic Validation [87]

5. Seismic Strengthening Methods

In the following sections, different seismic strengthening methods of heritage build-
ings are reviewed by dedicating each section to a specific technique.

5.1. Wooden Components

Wooden components are among the most important materials used for the seismic
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 strengthening of timber frames. Using wooden members is a common practice today 13 ofin25
historic building conservation in many countries. Chang et al. examined 18 full-scale
specimens under reversed cyclic loading [88]. Shear walls used as shown in Figure 11
gained
gained their moment-resistance from:
their moment-resistance from:(1)(1)embedment
embedment between
between planks
planks andand beams,
beams, (2)
(2) fric-
friction between planks and beams, and (3) the shear strength of bamboo
tion between planks and beams, and (3) the shear strength of bamboo nails. To improve nails. To im-
prove
these these factors,
factors, teak (Tectona
teak (Tectona grandis)
grandis) and padauk
and padauk (Pterocarpus
(Pterocarpus spp.)spp.)
werewere
usedused as
as rein-
reinforcement materials.
forcement materials. Specimens
Specimens werewere classified
classified in sixin six groups:
groups: (A) and (A)(B)and (B) without
without any re-
any reinforcement;
inforcement; (C) and(C)(D)
and (D)reinforced
were were reinforced by inserting
by inserting teak into
teak strips strips
theinto
topthe
andtop and
bottom
bottom grooves between planks and beams; (E) and (F) specimens were reinforced
grooves between planks and beams; (E) and (F) specimens were reinforced by using pa- by using
padauk. Specimensiningroups
dauk. Specimens groups(A),
(A),(C),
(C),and
and (E)
(E) contained
contained three
three planks;
planks; however,
however, those
thoseinin
series (B), (D), and (F) contained four planks
series (B), (D), and (F) contained four planks [88].[88].

Figure 11. TheThe

Figure structural system
structural of Taiwanese
system wooden wooden
of Taiwanese shear walls and the
shear proposed
walls reinforcement
and the proposed
method [88]. method [88].
reinforcement

Theresults
The resultsrevealed
revealedthat
thatinserting
insertingteak
teakand
andpadauk
padaukstrips
stripsinto
intothe
thegrooves
groovesbetween
between
planks
planksand
andbeams
beamsincrease
increasethethe
strength of aofwooden
strength shear
a wooden wallwall
shear 1.6 and
1.6 2.1
andtimes, compared
2.1 times, com-
to that value
pared ofvalue
to that an unreinforced frame. Moreover,
of an unreinforced when teak when
frame. Moreover, and padauk
teak andstrips were used,
padauk strips
dissipated
were used,energy increased
dissipated 1.57increased
energy and 2.15 times, compared
1.57 and to unreinforced
2.15 times, compared to specimens [88].
unreinforced
Another type
specimens [88]. of strengthening by wooden components was used by Tu et al. [89].
Two different
Another methods were used for by
type of strengthening reinforcing
wooden the timber frames,
components and specimens
was used by Tu et al.were[89].
named K1 (without
Two different reinforcement),
methods were used forK2reinforcing
(with horizontal reinforcement),
the timber frames, andK3 (with vertical
specimens were
reinforcement), and K4
named K1 (without (vertical reinforcement
reinforcement), + two horizontal
K2 (with horizontal reinforcement),
reinforcement), K3 (withas shown
vertical
in Figure 12. All and
reinforcement), specimens werereinforcement
K4 (vertical loaded in five+single cycles according
two horizontal to the amplitude
reinforcement), as shown
in Figure 12. All specimens were loaded in five single cycles according to the amplitude
displacement of 1.25%, 2.5%, 5%, 7.5%, and 10% of the maximum displacement in the early
stage and then loaded in three cycles in the later stage, until the horizontal displacement
reached 375 mm, or severe damage occurred [89].
 were used, dissipated energy increased 1.57 and 2.15 times, compared to unreinforced
specimens [88].
Another type of strengthening by wooden components was used by Tu et al. [89].
Two different methods were used for reinforcing the timber frames, and specimens were
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 named K1 (without reinforcement), K2 (with horizontal reinforcement), K3 (with vertical 13 of 25
reinforcement), and K4 (vertical reinforcement + two horizontal reinforcement), as shown
in Figure 12. All specimens were loaded in five single cycles according to the amplitude
displacement of 1.25%,
displacement 2.5%,2.5%,
of 1.25%, 5%, 5%,
7.5%, andand
7.5%, 10% of of
10% thethe
maximum
maximumdisplacement inthe
displacement in theearly
early
stage and then
stage andloaded in three
then loaded cycles
in three in the
cycles later
in the stage,
later stage,until
untilthe
thehorizontal displacement
horizontal displacement
reached 375 mm,
reached 375 or severe
mm, damage
or severe occurred
damage [89].
occurred [89].

Figure 12. Specimens’ configuration in Tu et al. study [89].

The results reveal that K2 showed a lower performance compared to K3 and K4.
However, the panels in K2 presented more significant out-of-plane behavior than the others.
Furthermore, the bearing capacity of K2, K3, and K4 in comparison with K1 increased 3.33,
6.9, and 4.69 times, respectively, which shows that using extra panels may not improve the
carrying capacity effectively. In addition, the use of reinforcement increased the dissipated
energy in a manner that K4 showed the most dissipated energy; moreover, the dissipated
energy of K2 is more than K3, which shows that the use of horizontal reinforcement
contributed to energy dissipation more than vertical one [89].
Three 1:2 scaled Chinese traditional mortise–tenon-jointed beam–column frames
(one as bare frame (Frame 1), one with partial panel infill accommodating a wide win-
dow opening (Frame 2), and the third with full panel infill (Frame 3)) were tested by
Crayssac et al. [90]. The configuration and dimension of the frames are shown in Figure 13.
Cyclic loadings were applied by use of a hydraulic actuator with a displacement range
of ±250 mm and a capacity of 650 KN. Based on material properties as per Luo et al. [91],
the concentrated vertical loads were taken at 120 KN and represented 5% of the estimated
compressive strength of the columns. The results showed that the maximum load was
74.5 KN (−72.27 KN), 100 KN (−106 KN), and 97.4 KN (−109 KN) for Frames 1, 2, and 3,
respectively. All three frames also exhibited a high ductility ratio (Frame 1 (the bare frame)
seems to be the most ductile). This may be caused by the rather rigid and brittle behavior
of the infill panels. Furthermore, the cumulative dissipated energy of Frames 2 and 3 are
1.54 and 1.15 times compared to that value of Frame 1 (after 40 cycles), respectively.
 wall participation for ancient timber frame buildings has also been proposed to address
the lack of ignoring the presence of the wall in ancient structures [94]. Moreover, the in-
fluence of wood infill walls on the seismic performance of Chinese traditional timber
structures by shaking table tests was assessed in [95].
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 Timber-to-timber interventions on wooden floors can be considered as another 14 of 25
method of strengthening using wooden materials, and several studies have been per-
formed in this context [96–100].

Figure
Figure 13.
13. Layout
Layout of
of frames
frames tested
tested in
in [90].
[90].

Comprehensive studies about the use of traditional timber shear walls in Taiwan have
been conducted by Chang et al. [92,93]. The seismic analysis method considering wall
participation for ancient timber frame buildings has also been proposed to address the lack
of ignoring the presence of the wall in ancient structures [94]. Moreover, the influence of
wood infill walls on the seismic performance of Chinese traditional timber structures by
shaking table tests was assessed in [95].
Timber-to-timber interventions on wooden floors can be considered as another method
of strengthening using wooden materials, and several studies have been performed in
this context [96–100].

5.2. Steel Components

Steel components in different forms are widely used for strengthening timber frame
structures [101–104]. Using steel plates will increase the stiffness and dissipated energy of
the frame wall during a cyclic test. Reusing the steel components in the post-earthquake
strengthening of buildings is one of the advantages of this strengthening strategy compared
to other methods such as composite materials. Some of the steel elements utilized for the
strengthening of heritage buildings are presented in this section.
Tests were performed on timber frame walls by retrofitting the connections using steel
plates, as shown in Figure 14a [105]. Based on the test results, this retrofitting technique
increased 2.24 times the load-bearing capacity of the wall and improved the nonlinear
behavior of it. Based on the test conducted by Poletti and Vasconcelos [106], the failure of
the wall occurs due to the damage of the bottom connection, which was at the corner of
the walls. The failure occurred due to the presence of the steel plate, which did not allow
the column to rise. Based on the study done by Poletti et al. [107], it is concluded that
using steel plates with holes increases the maximum in-plane load-bearing capacity 1.4
and 1.21 times, compared to the values of the unreinforced walls when initial compression
loads of 25 KN and 50 KN are applied, respectively.
 the wall without the infill, commercial rectangular steel plates are utilized to strengthen
the timber connections, as shown in Figure 14b, and the walls with infill are strengthened
by installing the custom steel plates on two sides of the timber connections in such a way
that the plates do not confine infill, as shown in Figure 14c. The load-bearing capacity of
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 15 of 25
the wall with masonry infill and without infill increased 1.86 and 3.1 times compared to
the values for unreinforced specimens, respectively.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure
Figure 14.14. Strengthened
Strengthened timber
timber frame frame wall
wall with (a) with (a) steel
steel plates plates
[105], [105],
(b) steel (b)
plate steel plate
without without
masonry masonry
infill, and (c) with
masonry infill(c)
infill, and [108].
with masonry infill [108].
A study was done on timber frame walls with and without masonry infill [108]. For
Steel flat bar is athe
steel
wallcomponent that commercial
without the infill, is utilized for retrofitting
rectangular the timber
steel plates frame
are utilized to wall
strengthen
connections. A study thewas
timberdone to investigate
connections, as shownthe effect14b,
in Figure of this
and thetechnique
walls within such
infill are astrengthened
way
that two models were bydeveloped
installing the[106].
custom The first
steel model
plates on twowas retrofitted
sides of the timberusing the steelinplate
connections such a way
in all connections. However, the second model was retrofitted using steel plates forcapacity
that the plates do not confine infill, as shown in Figure 14c. The load-bearing the of
the wall with masonry infill and without infill increased 1.86 and 3.1 times compared to
bottom connections,the and other connections were retrofitted using the steel flat bars. Re-
values for unreinforced specimens, respectively.
sults show that the load-bearing capacity
Steel flat bar of the firstthat
is a steel component model andfor
is utilized second model
retrofitting increased
the timber frame wall
2.31 and 2.09 times. connections. A study was done to investigate the effect of this technique in such a way
An investigation that
ontwo models
the were developed
retrofitting [106]. and
of the post The first
beammodel was retrofitted
connections using the steel
conducted by plate
in all connections. However, the second model was retrofitted using steel plates for the
Zhou and Yan [109], as shown in Figure 15a, reveals that using Q235 steel bands with
bottom connections, and other connections were retrofitted using the steel flat bars. Results
tensile and compressive showstrength of 200 MPacapacity
that the load-bearing does not increase
of the the initial
first model in-plane
and second modelstiffness
increased 2.31
of the wall but does and increase the load-bearing capacity of the wall up to 2 times.
2.09 times.
Using steel strips and An investigation
stirrups areonalso the retrofitting of the postfor
other techniques andretrofitting
beam connections
timber conducted
con- by
nections, as illustrated Zhouin and
FigureYan15b,c,
[109], asandshown
more indetail
Figure about
15a, reveals
thesethat using Q235
techniques can steel
be bands
seen with
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 tensile and compressive strength of 200 MPa does not increase the initial in-plane stiffness 16 of 25
in [110]. Moreover, of steel nailsbutare
the wall doesalso utilized
increase to strengthen
the load-bearing halved
capacity of thedovetail
wall up to carpentry
2 times.
timber joints [111].

(a) (b) (c)

Figure15.
Figure 15.Strengthening
Strengtheningtimber
timber connections
connections using
using (a) steel
(a) steel plates
plates [109],[109], (b) strip,
(b) strip, and (c)and (c) stirrup
stirrup [110].
[110].
Using steel strips and stirrups are also other techniques for retrofitting timber connec-
tions,Aasfew studies focus
illustrated on the
in Figure application
15b,c, and more of stainless steelthese
detail about as a reinforcement
techniques can of be
heritage
seen
timber
in [110].buildings.
Moreover, High
steeldurability,
nails are long-term effectiveness,
also utilized andhalved
to strengthen compatibility
dovetailwith timber,
carpentry
with minor
timber joints safety
[111]. precaution measures are the advantages of the stainless steel compo-
nentsA [112]. In contrast,
few studies focus onthethe
high cost of the
application alloy andsteel
of stainless limited availability areoftwo
as a reinforcement main
heritage
limitations
timber of thisHigh
buildings. material as a strengthening
durability, technique [113].
long-term effectiveness, and Stainless steel with
compatibility components
timber,
with minor
can be safety
utilized precaution
in the measures rods,
form of fasteners, are the
andadvantages of the stainless steel compo-
plates [113].
nents [112]. In contrast, the high cost of the alloy and limited availability are two main
5.3. Composite Materials
Fiber-reinforced plastic or fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) is a composite material
made of a polymer matrix reinforced with fibers. The main advantages of FRP are their
high stiffness and tensile strength, low weight, relatively rapid installation, and a variety
of available sizes and shapes. However, bonding to substrates may be critical and affected
 Figure 15. Strengthening timber connections using (a) steel plates [109], (b) strip, and (c) stirrup
[110].

A few studies focus on the application of stainless steel as a reinforcement of heritage

Buildings 2021, 11, 661 16 of 25
timber buildings. High durability, long-term effectiveness, and compatibility with timber,
with minor safety precaution measures are the advantages of the stainless steel compo-
nents [112]. In contrast, the high cost of the alloy and limited availability are two main
limitations
limitationsofofthis
thismaterial
materialasasaastrengthening
strengtheningtechnique
technique[113].
[113].Stainless
Stainlesssteel
steelcomponents
components
can
canbe
beutilized
utilizedininthe
theform
formofoffasteners,
fasteners,rods,
rods,and
andplates
plates[113].
[113].

5.3.Composite
5.3. CompositeMaterials
Materials
Fiber-reinforced
Fiber-reinforced plastic plasticororfiber-reinforced
fiber-reinforcedpolymer
polymer(FRP)
(FRP)isisaacomposite
compositematerial
material
madeofofaapolymer
made polymermatrixmatrixreinforced
reinforcedwithwithfibers.
fibers.The
Themain
mainadvantages
advantagesofofFRP FRPare
aretheir
their
highstiffness
high stiffnessand
andtensile
tensilestrength,
strength,low lowweight,
weight,relatively
relativelyrapid
rapidinstallation,
installation,and
andaavariety
variety
ofofavailable
availablesizes
sizesandandshapes.
shapes.However,
However,bonding
bondingtotosubstrates
substratesmay maybe becritical
criticaland
andaffected
affected
by durability problems. Utilizing composite materials for retrofitting
by durability problems. Utilizing composite materials for retrofitting the structures has the structures has
gained much attention recently [114]. Strengthening timber frame walls
gained much attention recently [114]. Strengthening timber frame walls using glass fiber- using glass fiber-
reinforcedpolymer
reinforced polymer(GFRP) (GFRP)barsbarsandandstrips
stripswas
wascarried
carriedout
outby byCruz
Cruz[115].
[115]. GFRPs
GFRPshavehave
high densities and medium weights and are relativity inexpensive. Two
high densities and medium weights and are relativity inexpensive. Two groups of models groups of models
wereprepared;
were prepared;firstfirstgroup,
group,thethespecimens
specimenswerewereretrofitted
retrofittedusing
usingGFRP
GFRPbars.
bars.Figure
Figure16a16a
shows the second group retrofitted with GFRP strips after retrofitting
shows the second group retrofitted with GFRP strips after retrofitting with the bars. The with the bars. The
increasingrate
increasing rateofofthe
theload-bearing
load-bearingcapacity
capacityand
andductility
ductilityofofthe
thetwo
twomodels
modelswerewereclose
closetoto
each other. It can be concluded that using GFRP strips and GFRP bars
each other. It can be concluded that using GFRP strips and GFRP bars does not signifi-does not significantly
increase
cantly the load-bearing
increase capacity.
the load-bearing capacity.

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure16.
16.(a)(a)
Retrofitted timber
Retrofitted frame
timber walls
frame withwith
walls GFRP strips
GFRP [115],[115],
strips and (b)
anda (b)
posta and
postbeam con-
and beam
nection strengthened by CFRP strips [109].
connection strengthened by CFRP strips [109].

Another
Anotherapproach
approachusing
usingcomposite
compositematerials
materialsfor
forthe
theretrofitting
retrofittingofofpost
postand
andbeam
beam
connections was investigated by Zhou and Yan [109]. Carbon fiber-reinforced
connections was investigated by Zhou and Yan [109]. Carbon fiber-reinforced plastic plastic
(CFRP)
(CFRP)sheets
sheetswith
withaathickness
thicknessofof0.11
0.11mm
mmandandwith
withhigh
hightensile
tensilestrength
strengthwere
wereutilized
utilizedtoto
completely
completelycover
coveraa timber andbeam
timber post and beamconnection,
connection,asasillustrated
illustratedinin Figure
Figure 16b.
16b. CFRPs
CFRPs are
are lightweight,
lightweight, have
have lowlow densities,
densities, and
and are
are thermosetting
thermosetting resins
resins suchasasepoxy,
such epoxy,polyester,
polyester,or
vinyl ester. It was investigated that the ultimate load-bearing capacity of the connection was
increased 2.7 times. The influence of the GFRP wraps and the CFRP strips for strengthening
the timber frame walls is evaluated in an experimental program. In the first phase, the
specimens were strengthened using the bamboo bracing or the steel gusset plates. In the
second phase, FRP components were utilized. The beneficial effects of the FRP retrofitting
were highlighted [116].
Extensive research studies have been conducted for retrofitting the timber beam
elements with the FRP layers by improving their flexural behavior [114,117–121]. The ex-
perimental program for the four-point bending tests shows a 46% increase in load-carrying
capacity compared with unreinforced beams [122]. Moreover, an analytical investigation
was also carried out for the timber beams strengthened with composite materials based
on the test results [123]. U-shaped steel and CFRP components were also utilized for
the strengthening of timber beams, and results of the three-point bending tests show a
dramatic increase of load-bearing capacity and a combination of CFRP and steel U-shaped
reinforcement provided a promising lightweight structural element against bending [124].
 imental program for the four-point bending tests shows a 46% increase in load-carrying
capacity compared with unreinforced beams [122]. Moreover, an analytical investigation
was also carried out for the timber beams strengthened with composite materials based
on the test results [123]. U-shaped steel and CFRP components were also utilized for the
strengthening of timber beams, and results of the three-point bending tests show a dra-
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 17 of 25
matic increase of load-bearing capacity and a combination of CFRP and steel U-shaped
reinforcement provided a promising lightweight structural element against bending [124].

5.4. Damper
5.4. Damper
Using damper
Using damperelements
elements for strengthening
for strengthening the timber
the timber structures subjected
structures to earth-
subjected to earth-
quakes is an expensive method compared to other strategies,
quakes is an expensive method compared to other strategies, and skilled workers and skilled workers are are
needed for the
needed installation.
for the installation.Experimental
Experimental tests, as as
tests, shown
shown in in
Figure
Figure 17a,
17a,were
wereperformed
performed by
by Branco
Brancoetetal.al.[125]
[125]totoinvestigate
investigate thethe
effect of this
effect retrofitting
of this retrofittingstrategy. TestTest
strategy. results reveal
results reveal
that that
this method
this method increases the dissipated
increases the dissipatedenergy and and
energy load-bearing
load-bearing capacity up to
capacity up1.3totimes
1.3 times
that that
of anofunreinforced
an unreinforced wall. wall.
In contrast, the force-displacement
In contrast, the force-displacement diagram from the
diagram fromtests
thebytests
Goncalves et al. [55] shows the asymmetric in-plane behavior of the
by Goncalves et al. [55] shows the asymmetric in-plane behavior of the retrofitted wall retrofitted wall intro-
duced by the damper
introduced by the thatdampercan bethatconsidered one of the
can be considered one disadvantages of this strategy.
of the disadvantages of this strategy.
Friction dampers
Friction damperswere were
also utilized to reinforce
also utilized straightstraight
to reinforce tenon joints
tenon to joints
improve seis-
to improve
mic seismic
behavior, behavior, as illustrated
as illustrated in Figurein Figure 17b [126,127].
17b [126,127]. ThreeThreemodels models
werewere developed,
developed, and and
failure
failure modes modesandandthe the cyclic
cyclic behaviors
behaviors of of
thethe joint
joint andand thethedampers
damperswere wereinvestigated
investigatedin in the
performed quasistatic
the performed quasistatic test.test. Parametric
Parametricstudies
studieson onthe
thenumerical
numerical models
models and thethe
and testtest
results
reveal
results thatthat
reveal the the
main failure
main modes
failure of the
modes of reinforced
the reinforced joints include
joints the compressing
include the compressing dents on
dentstheoncolumn, the tenon
the column, theextraction, and the surface
tenon extraction, and theofsurface
the friction plate
of the being plate
friction smoothed being[127].
Moreover,
smoothed [127].0.4 is considered
Moreover, 0.4 is as the optimal
considered friction
as the optimalcoefficient
friction in terms of in
coefficient the reinforced
terms of
straight tenon
the reinforced joints’
straight cyclic
tenon behavior
joints’ cyclicand energyand
behavior dissipation [126].
energy dissipation [126].

(a) (b)
Figure 17. Retrofitting
Figure 17. a timber aframe
Retrofitting wallframe
timber using wall
(a) super-elastic
using (a) damper [125] or
super-elastic (b) friction
damper [125] or
damper [127].
(b) friction damper [127].

5.5. Bolt and Screw

5.5. Bolt and Screw
Bolt Bolt
and and
screw are also
screw considered
are also oneone
considered of the common
of the strategies
common forfor
strategies retrofitting tim-
retrofitting timber
ber joints
joints [128–131].
[128–131]. However,
However, based
based on
on the tests done
the tests done by
by Vasconcelos
Vasconcelos [132],
[132], using
using bolt
bolt and
screw did not increase the in-plane load-bearing capacity (just 1.1 times), and dissipated
energy of timber frame walls did not increase too. However, the out-of-plane behavior of
the wall was improved. The slight increase of in-plane load-bearing capacity using bolt and
screws has been confirmed by performing tests [133] on timber frame walls with simple
diagonal connections and half-lap connections for main members. It was concluded that
the in-plane load-bearing capacity was increased 1.14 times.
Using internal bolts (steel rods) for strengthening the timber frame walls connections
is another technique that has been investigated by Branco et al. [110]. The effect of the
angle of the rods on the in-plane load-bearing capacity has been investigated, and it was
concluded that by increasing the angle from 30 to 60 degrees, the load-bearing capacity,
stiffness, and dissipated energy have decreased.

5.6. Shape Memory Alloys (SMA)

Several studies have been performed to strengthen post and beam connections using
SMA wires to tie the beam and column [134]. Xie et al. [135,136] performed tests on timber
connections of traditional Chinese timber frame buildings. Firstly, three models (GJ1, GJ2,
GJ3) were developed without strengthening, and loading was applied to define the ultimate
 the vertical load was applied on the beam element. It was investigated that the load-bear-
ing capacity of the connection without SMA was more than the model with strengthening
for the rotation less than 0.875 rad. However, for rotation of more than 0.875 rad, the
strengthened model had more load-bearing capacity. Moreover, it was investigated that 18 of 25
Buildings 2021, 11, 661
the principal damage mode was the pulling out of the tenon from the mortise and the
timber elements were intact.
Four specimens were developed by Xue et al. [137]. T-M1 was without strengthening,
displacement. Afterward, the damaged specimens were disassembled, strengthened with
but models T-M2, T-M3, and T-M4 were equipped with 12, 16, and 20 SMA wires, respec-
8, 8, and 16 SMA wires, and named GJ4, GJ5, and GJ6, respectively. Figure 18a shows how
tively, with a diameter of 1.5 mm.
the specimens were Due to the local
strengthened defects
by SMA. in timber
After applying elements of the
vertical load, T-M2,
it was concluded
its bending capacity
that using 8 SMA wires is not sufficient to eliminate the initial damage effects.and
was less than model T-M1, while the bending capacities of T-M3 Using SMA
T-M4 were 1.2 and also1.5 times
limits theas large as
pulling outthe load-bearing
of tenons from thecapacity
mortise. of the T-M1,
Moreover, therespectively.
load-bearing capacity
Figure 18b shows of how the specimens
GJ4, GJ5, were
and GJ6 models wasretrofitted; Figure
increased 1.1, 18c 2.1
1.4, and demonstrates the exper-
times corresponding to GJ1, GJ2,
and GJ3, respectively.
imental test setup.

21, 11, 661 19 of 25

(a)

(b)

(c)
Figure 18. (a) Using SMA
Figure 18. as
(a) aUsing
strengthener
SMA as a[136]. (b) Retrofitting
strengthener both sides both
[136]. (b) Retrofitting of connections by SMA.by SMA.
sides of connections
(c) Schematic view of the testview
(c) Schematic setup
of [137].
the test setup [137].

Another study
In order to investigate the done
effectbyofXie et al. [136]on
pre-strain developed a model without
the load-bearing strengthening,
behavior of the and
mortise–tenon connections, experimental tests were performed by Xue et al. [138]. Itload-bearing
the vertical load was applied on the beam element. It was investigated that the was
capacity of the connection without SMA was more than the model with strengthening
concluded that 3% of pre-strain decreases 53% and 63% of tenon pulled out length in pos-
for the rotation less than 0.875 rad. However, for rotation of more than 0.875 rad, the
itive and negative directions.
Furthermore, SMA bars and tubes are utilized as dowels to provide the self-centering
effects for the dowel-type connection systems [139]. Double-shear connections with SMA
and mild steel dowels were tested under dynamic loadings at different displacement lev-
els. The results showed that SMA dowel-type connections have good self-centering be-
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 19 of 25

strengthened model had more load-bearing capacity. Moreover, it was investigated that the
principal damage mode was the pulling out of the tenon from the mortise and the timber
elements were intact.
Four specimens were developed by Xue et al. [137]. T-M1 was without strengthen-
ing, but models T-M2, T-M3, and T-M4 were equipped with 12, 16, and 20 SMA wires,
respectively, with a diameter of 1.5 mm. Due to the local defects in timber elements of the
T-M2, its bending capacity was less than model T-M1, while the bending capacities of T-M3
and T-M4 were 1.2 and 1.5 times as large as the load-bearing capacity of the T-M1, respec-
tively. Figure 18b shows how the specimens were retrofitted; Figure 18c demonstrates the
experimental test setup.
In order to investigate the effect of pre-strain on the load-bearing behavior of the
mortise–tenon connections, experimental tests were performed by Xue et al. [138]. It was
concluded that 3% of pre-strain decreases 53% and 63% of tenon pulled out length in
positive and negative directions.
Furthermore, SMA bars and tubes are utilized as dowels to provide the self-centering
effects for the dowel-type connection systems [139]. Double-shear connections with SMA
and mild steel dowels were tested under dynamic loadings at different displacement
levels. The results showed that SMA dowel-type connections have good self-centering
behaviors and can effectively mitigate residual deformation compared with steel dowel-
type connections after excessive deformation, although the steel dowel-type connections
present higher strength [139].

6. Conclusions
For the sake of reviewing the research studies about the seismic vulnerability assess-
ment and strengthening of heritage timber buildings, three building types were categorized
in this study. Timber frame buildings are one of the well-known heritage timber structural
systems, consisting of timber frame elements in different configurations with masonry
infills. Timber log houses that are usually in cold European countries, and post and beam
structures often exist in eastern Asian countries. The systematic review shows the growth
of the research studies about the seismic vulnerability assessment and strengthening of
heritage timber buildings. Moreover, it is observed that the topics are shifting recently
from analyzing timber connections toward performing experimental studies and inves-
tigating the masonry materials that were often utilized in the construction of heritage
timber buildings.
For numerical modeling of the three aforementioned groups of buildings, various
simplified and detailed strategies were reviewed. Due to the variety of the configurations
of timber elements in the timber frame buildings and the different connection types that
exist in post and beam structures, experimental tests are required for each typology to
validate the numerical models. Tests are required to be performed in order to investigate
the out-of-plane behavior of timber frame and log house shear walls. Moreover, corner
carpentry joints play a crucial role in the numerical modeling of log houses. Seismic
analyses, including POA and NTHA, were used to evaluate the vulnerability of the full-
scale heritage timber buildings. Soil–structure interaction effects should be evaluated on the
seismic behavior of heritage timber buildings with specific structural systems. Furthermore,
specific empirical equations should be defined for the prediction of the natural period of
each structural system.
Wooden and steel components in various shapes, except the stainless-steel material,
are widely used for the strengthening of heritage timber buildings due to their availability
and lower costs compared to the SMA or dampers. Extensive research studies have also
been performed to investigate the influence of using composite material for the retrofitting
of timber elements. The results show that composite material can improve the load-bearing
behavior of timber connections and timber beams. Moreover, composite materials are also
considered as a lightweight strengthening solution compared to the steel profiles. Although
different studies have been conducted on the dampers and SMA as a strengthening solution
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 20 of 25

of the timber components, more studies are required to investigate the efficiency of these
techniques compared to the traditional strengthening techniques. Much attention is needed
to study the strengthened full-scale buildings instead of just focusing on the structural
components to evaluate each strengthening method’s efficiency in real building scale.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, A.S. and M.K.; methodology, A.S.; software, M.T.; vali-
dation, A.S., M.K. and M.S.; formal analysis, A.S.; investigation, A.S., A.A., M.T., A.N.C. and M.S.;
resources, A.S. and A.A.; data curation, A.S., M.S. and A.A.; writing—original draft preparation, A.S.,
A.A. and M.T.; writing—review and editing, A.S., A.A., M.T. and A.N.C.; visualization, A.S., M.T.
and M.S.; supervision, A.S. and M.K.; project administration, M.K.; funding acquisition, M.K. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available on request from the
corresponding author.
Acknowledgments: This work is a part of the HYPERION project. HYPERION has received funding
from the European Union’s Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (Horizon 2020)
under grant agreement No 821054. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of Oslo
Metropolitan University (Work Package 5, Task 2) and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the
European Union.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Nowak, T.P.; Jasieńko, J.; Hamrol-Bielecka, K. In situ assessment of structural timber using the resistance drilling method—
Evaluation of usefulness. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 102, 403–415. [CrossRef]
2. Riggio, M.; D’Ayala, D.; Parisi, M.A.; Tardini, C. Assessment of heritage timber structures: Review of standards, guidelines and
procedures. J. Cult. Heritage 2018, 31, 220–235. [CrossRef]
3. Palma, P.; Steiger, R. Structural health monitoring of timber structures—Review of available methods and case studies. Constr.
Build. Mater. 2020, 248, 118528. [CrossRef]
4. Tannert, J.B.D. Reinforcement of Timber Elements in Existing Structures; (RILEM State-of-the-Art Reports); Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg,
Germany, 2021. [CrossRef]
5. Crowley, H.; Rodrigues, D.; Silva, V. The European seismic risk model 2020 (ESRM 2020). In Proceedings of the ICONHIC
2019—2nd International Conference on Natural Hazards & Infrastructure, Chania, Greece, 23–26 June 2019. Available online:
https://sigarra.up.pt/reitoria/en/pub_geral.pub_view?pi_pub_base_id=387873 (accessed on 10 November 2021).
6. Stepinac, M.; Šušteršič, I.; Gavrić, I.; Rajčić, V. Seismic Design of Timber Buildings: Highlighted Challenges and Future Trends.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1380. [CrossRef]
7. Shabani, A.; Kioumarsi, M.; Plevris, V.; Stamatopoulos, H. Structural Vulnerability Assessment of Heritage Timber Buildings: A
Methodological Proposal. Forests 2020, 11, 881. [CrossRef]
8. Ceccotti, A.; Sandhaas, C. A Proposal for a Procedure to Evaluate the Seismic Vulnerability of Historic Timber Frame Buildings.
In Historical Earthquake-Resistant Timber Frames in the Mediterranean Area; Ruggieri, N., Tampone, G., Zinno, R., Eds.; Springer
International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 105–118.
9. Larsen, K.E.; Marstein, N. Conservation of Historic Timber Structures. An Ecological Approach; Riksantikvaren: Oslo, Norway, 2016.
10. Quinn, N.; D’Ayala, D.; Descamps, T. Structural characterisation and Numerical Modelling of Historic Quincha Walls. Int. J. Arch.
Heritage 2016, 10, 300–331. [CrossRef]
11. Vasconcelos, G.; Lourenço, P.B.; Poletti, E. An overview on the seismic behaviour of timber frame structures. In Historical
Earthquake-Resistant Timber Frames in the Mediterranean Area; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; pp. 119–132.
12. Shabani, A.; Plevris, V.; Kioumarsi, M. A Comparative Study on the Initial In-plane Stiffness of Masonry Walls with Openings. In
Proceedings of the World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 17WCEE, Sendai, Japan, 1 October 2021.
13. Pagani, M.; Garcia-Pelaez, J.; Gee, R.; Johnson, K.; Poggi, V.; Silva, V.; Simionato, M.; Styron, R.; Viganò, D.; Danciu, L.; et al. The
2018 version of the Global Earthquake Model: Hazard component. Earthq. Spectra 2020, 36, 226–251. [CrossRef]
14. Vieux-Champagne, F.; Sieffert, Y.; Grange, S.; Polastri, A.; Ceccotti, A.; Daudeville, L. Experimental analysis of seismic resistance
of timber-framed structures with stones and earth infill. Eng. Struct. 2014, 69, 102–115. [CrossRef]
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 21 of 25

15. Pagani, M.; Garcia-Pelaez, J.; Gee, R.; Johnson, K.; Poggi, V.; Styron, R.; Weatherill, G.; Simionato, M.; Viganò, D.; Danciu, L.; et al.
Global Earthquake Model (GEM) Seismic Hazard Map (version 2018.1–December 2018). Technical Report. 2018. Available online:
https://www.globalquakemodel.org/gem-maps/global-earthquake-hazard-map (accessed on 8 November 2021). [CrossRef]
16. Parisse, F.; Poletti, E.; Dutu, A.; Rodrigues, H. Numerical modeling of the seismic performance of Romanian timber-framed
masonry walls. Eng. Struct. 2021, 239, 112272. [CrossRef]
17. Nevell, M. Newton Hall and the cruck buildings of Northwest England. Centre for Applied Archaeology; University of Salford: Salford,
UK, 2010.
18. Shabani, A.; Hosamo, H.; Plevris, V.; Kioumarsi, M. A Preliminary Structural Survey of Heritage Timber Log Houses in Tønsberg,
Norway. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Structural Analysis of Historical Constructions, SAHC 2021,
Barcelona, Spain, 30 September 2021.
19. Klein, A.; Grabner, M. Analysis of Construction Timber in Rural Austria: Wooden Log Walls. Int. J. Arch. Heritage 2014, 9, 553–563.
[CrossRef]
20. Liu, Y.; Cai, J.; Zhang, J. Research on the Characteristics of Timber Frames of Tingtang in Residences of Ming and Qing Dynasties
in Shanghai. Int. J. Arch. Heritage 2018, 14, 196–207. [CrossRef]
21. Wang, J.; He, J.; Yang, N.; Yang, Q. Study on Aseismic Characteristics of Tibetan Ancient Timber Structure. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng.
2017, 2017, 8186768. [CrossRef]
22. Chen, J.; Chen, Y.F.; Shi, X.; Zhao, Y.; Li, T. Hysteresis behavior of traditional timber structures by full-scale tests. Adv. Struct. Eng.
2017, 21, 287–299. [CrossRef]
23. Li, W.; Zhao, J.; Ma, G.; Chen, W. Experimental study on the seismic performance of a double-span traditional timber frame. Eng.
Struct. 2015, 98, 141–150. [CrossRef]
24. Çalik, I.; Bayraktar, A.; Türker, T.; Ashour, A. Experimental Dynamic Behaviors and Empirical Frequency Formulas for Historical
Timber Mosques. Struct. Eng. Int. 2019, 29, 404–411. [CrossRef]
25. Duţu, A.; Sakata, H.; Yamazaki, Y. Experimental study on timber-framed masonry structures. In Historical Earthquake-Resistant
Timber Frames in the Mediterranean Area; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; pp. 67–81.
26. Sieffert, Y.; Vieux-Champagne, F.; Grange, S.; Garnier, P.; Duccini, J.; Daudeville, L. Full-field measurement with a digital image
correlation analysis of a shake table test on a timber-framed structure filled with stones and earth. Eng. Struct. 2016, 123, 451–472.
[CrossRef]
27. Branco, J.M.; Lourenço, P.B.; Aranha, C.A. Seismic analysis of a 2-storey log house. Adv. Mater. Res. 2013, 778, 478–485. [CrossRef]
28. Xue, J.; Xu, D.; Qi, L. Experimental seismic response of a column-and-tie wooden structure. Adv. Struct. Eng. 2019, 22, 1909–1922.
[CrossRef]
29. Xue, J.; Xu, D. Shake table tests on the traditional column-and-tie timber structures. Eng. Struct. 2018, 175, 847–860. [CrossRef]
30. Wu, Y.J.; Bin Song, X.; Luo, L. Experimental Investigation on the Seismic Performance of a Chinese Traditional Wooden Pagoda.
Appl. Mech. Mater. 2016, 858, 119–124. [CrossRef]
31. Shabani, A.; Kioumarsi, M.; Zucconi, M. State of the art of simplified analytical methods for seismic vulnerability assessment of
unreinforced masonry buildings. Eng. Struct. 2021, 239, 112280. [CrossRef]
32. Bednarz, L.J.; Jasieńko, J.; Rutkowski, M.; Nowak, T. Strengthening and long-term monitoring of the structure of an historical
church presbytery. Eng. Struct. 2014, 81, 62–75. [CrossRef]
33. Stepinac, M.; Rajčić, V.; Barbalić, J. Inspection and condition assessment of existing timber structures. J. Croat. Assoc. Civ. Eng.
2017, 69, 861–873. [CrossRef]
34. Perković, N.; Stepinac, M.; Rajčić, V.; Barbalić, J. Assessment of Timber Roof Structures before and after Earthquakes. Buildings
2021, 11, 528. [CrossRef]
35. Parisi, M.A.; Piazza, M. Restoration and Strengthening of Timber Structures: Principles, Criteria, and Examples. Pr. Period. Struct.
Des. Constr. 2007, 12, 177–185. [CrossRef]
36. FP 1402, COST Action, Basis of Structural Timber Design. From Research to Standards. 2019. Available online: https://webarchiv.
typo3.tum.de/TUM/costfp1402/home/index.html (accessed on 12 December 2021).
37. D’Ayala, D.; Branco, J.M.; Riggio, M.; Harte, A.; Kurz, J.; Descamps, T. Assessment, reinforcement and monitoring of timber
structures: FPS Cost Action FP1101. In Proceedings of the 2014: World Conference on Timber Engineering (WCTE), Quebec, QC,
Canada, 10–14 August 2014.
38. Cruz, H.; Yeomans, D.; Tsakanika, E.; Macchioni, N.; Jorissen, A.; Touza, M.; Mannucci, M.; Lourenco, P. Guidelines for On-Site
Assessment of Historic Timber Structures. Int. J. Arch. Heritage 2014, 9, 277–289. [CrossRef]
39. Sørensen, J.D.; Dietsch, P.; Kirkegaard, P.H.; Andersen, D.; Neves, L.; Branco, J.; Branco, J.; Zhang, G.; Fink, G.; Steiger, R.; et al.
COST Action E55 Modelling of the Performance of Timber Structures; Shaker: Aachen, Belgium, 2010.
40. Harte, A.M.; Dietsch, P. Reinforcement of Timber Structures—A State-of-the-Art Report; Shaker: Düren, Germany, 2015; ISBN
978-3-8440-3751-7.
41. Van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 2010, 84,
523–538. [CrossRef]
42. Sandak, J.; Riggio, M.; Ruggieri, N.; Sandak, A. Damage progression analysis in a historical timber framed wall under cyclic loads
through an image-based tracking method. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 199, 483–491. [CrossRef]
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 22 of 25

43. Fritsch, E.; Sieffert, Y.; Algusab, H.; Grange, S.; Garnier, P.; Daudeville, L. Numerical analysis on seismic resistance of a two-story
timber-framed structure with stone and earth infill. Int. J. Arch. Heritage 2018, 13, 820–840. [CrossRef]
44. Dutu, A.; Yamazaki, Y.; Sakata, H. Shear spring model proposed for seismic evaluation of a timber framed masonry infilled wall.
Eng. Struct. 2018, 167, 671–682. [CrossRef]
45. Xie, Q.; Tong, Y.; Zhang, L.; Li, S.; Wang, L. Seismic Behavior of Chinese Traditional Timber Frames with Masonry Infill Wall:
Experimental Tests and Hysteretic Model. Int. J. Arch. Heritage 2019, 15, 1130–1144. [CrossRef]
46. Guerra, S. Numerical Modelling of the Seismic Behavior of Timber-Framed Structures Based on Macro-Rlements. 2017. Issued
Date: 2017. Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/1822/62324 (accessed on 1 November 2021).
47. Lukic, R.; Poletti, E.; Rodrigues, H.; Vasconcelos, G. Numerical modelling of the cyclic behavior of timber-framed structures. Eng.
Struct. 2018, 165, 210–221. [CrossRef]
48. Kouris, L.A.S.; Kappos, A. Detailed and simplified non-linear models for timber-framed masonry structures. J. Cult. Heritage
2012, 13, 47–58. [CrossRef]
49. Chand, B.; Kaushik, H.B.; Das, S. Lateral Load Behavior of Traditional Assam-Type Wooden House. J. Struct. Eng. 2019, 145,
04019072. [CrossRef]
50. Ahmad, N.; Ali, Q.; Umar, M. Simplified engineering tools for seismic analysis and design of traditional Dhajji-Dewari structures.
Bull. Earthq. Eng. 2012, 10, 1503–1534. [CrossRef]
51. Grossi, P.; Sartori, T.; Giongo, I.; Tomasi, R. Analysis of timber log-house construction system via experimental testing and
analytical modelling. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 102, 1127–1144. [CrossRef]
52. Branco, J.; Araújo, J.P. Structural behaviour of log timber walls under lateral in-plane loads. Eng. Struct. 2012, 40, 371–382.
[CrossRef]
53. Sciomenta, M.; Rinaldi, V.; Bedon, C.; Fragiacomo, M. Application of Modal-Displacement Based Design Method to Multi-Story
Timber Blockhaus Structures. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3889. [CrossRef]
54. Bedon, C.; Rinaldin, G.; Fragiacomo, M. Non-linear modelling of the in-plane seismic behaviour of timber Blockhaus log-walls.
Eng. Struct. 2015, 91, 112–124. [CrossRef]
55. Sciomenta, M.; Bedon, C.; Fragiacomo, M.; Luongo, A. Shear Performance Assessment of Timber Log-House Walls under In-Plane
Lateral Loads via Numerical and Analytical Modelling. Buildings 2018, 8, 99. [CrossRef]
56. Scott, R.J.; Leichti, R.J.; Miller, T.H. Finite-element modeling of log wall lateral force resistance. For. Prod. J. 2005, 55, 48–54.
57. Bedon, C.; Rinaldin, G.; Fragiacomo, M.; Noé, S. q-factor estimation for 3D log-house timber buildings via Finite Element analyses.
Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 2018, 116, 215–229. [CrossRef]
58. D’Ayala, D.; Tsai, P.H. Seismic vulnerability of historic Dieh–Dou timber structures in Taiwan. Eng. Struct. 2008, 30, 2101–2113.
[CrossRef]
59. Xie, Q.; Zhang, L.; Li, S.; Zhou, W.; Wang, L. Cyclic behavior of Chinese ancient wooden frame with mortise–tenon joints: Friction
constitutive model and finite element modelling. J. Wood Sci. 2017, 64, 40–51. [CrossRef]
60. Huan, J.; Ma, N.; Wang, W. Vulnerability Analysis of Ancient Timber Architecture by Considering the Correlation of Different
Failure Modes. Math. Probl. Eng. 2018, 2018, 5163472. [CrossRef]
61. Yeo, S.-Y.; Hsu, M.-F.; Komatsu, K.; Que, Z. Mechanical model for complex brackets system of the Taiwanese traditional Dieh-Dou
timber structures. Adv. Struct. Eng. 2016, 19, 65–85. [CrossRef]
62. Tsai, P.-H.; D’Ayala, D. Performance-based seismic assessment method for Taiwanese historic Dieh-Dou timber structures. Earthq.
Eng. Struct. Dyn. 2010, 40, 709–729. [CrossRef]
63. Chen, L.-K.; Li, S.-C.; Zhao, K.-P.; Chen, Z.-Y.; Song, T.; Zhang, L.; Jang, Z.-J. Experimental and Numerical Investigation on
Seismic Performance of One-Way Straight Mortise–Tenon Joints Based on a Novel Method to Simulate Damage of Deteriorated
Ancient Chinese Timber Buildings. J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 2020, 34, 04019119. [CrossRef]
64. Wu, C.; Xue, J.; Zhou, S.; Zhang, F. Seismic Performance Evaluation for a Traditional Chinese Timber-frame Structure. Int. J. Arch.
Heritage 2020, 15, 1842–1856. [CrossRef]
65. Zhou, J.; Huang, D.; Ni, C.; Shen, Y.; Zhao, L. Experiment on Behavior of a New Connector Used in Bamboo (Timber) Frame
Structure under Cyclic Loading. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2018, 2018, 9084279. [CrossRef]
66. D’Ayala, D.; Meslem, A.; Vamvatsikos, D.; Porter, K.; Rossetto, T. Guidelines for Analytical Vulnerability Assessment: Low/Mid-Rise,
GEM Vulnerability and Loss Modelling; Global Earthquake Model (GEM) Foundation: Pavia, Italy, 2015.
67. Seminar, C. NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings; FEMA Publication 273; Applied Technology Council:
Redwood City, CA, USA, 1997.
68. Fajfar, P. A Nonlinear Analysis Method for Performance-Based Seismic Design. Earthq. Spectra 2000, 16, 573–592. [CrossRef]
69. Eurocode 8: Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance—Part 3: Assessment and Retrofitting of Buildings; European Committee for
Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2005.
70. Watson-Lamprey, J.; Abrahamson, N. Selection of ground motion time series and limits on scaling. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 2006, 26,
477–482. [CrossRef]
71. Ay, B.; Akkar, S. A procedure on ground motion selection and scaling for nonlinear response of simple structural systems. Earthq.
Eng. Struct. Dyn. 2012, 41, 1693–1707. [CrossRef]
72. Bradley, B.A. A ground motion selection algorithm based on the generalized conditional intensity measure approach. Soil Dyn.
Earthq. Eng. 2012, 40, 48–61. [CrossRef]
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 23 of 25

73. Wang, Y.; Rosowsky, D.V. Effects of Earthquake Ground Motion Selection and Scaling Method on Performance-Based Engineering
of Wood-Frame Structures. J. Struct. Eng. 2014, 140, 04014086. [CrossRef]
74. Vamvatsikos, D.; Cornell, C.A. Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 2001, 31, 491–514. [CrossRef]
75. Vamvatsikos, D.; Cornell, C.A. Applied Incremental Dynamic Analysis. Earthq. Spectra 2004, 20, 523–553. [CrossRef]
76. Abaqus, G. Dassault Systemes Simulia Corporation; Simulia: Providence, RI, USA, 2021.
77. CSI. SAP2000. In Computers and Structures; Structural Engineering Company: Berkeley, CA, USA, 2021.
78. Anand, V.; Kumar, S.S. Seismic Soil-structure Interaction: A State-of-the-Art Review. Structures 2018, 16, 317–326. [CrossRef]
79. Bedon, C.; Fragiacomo, M. Numerical Investigation of Timber Log-Haus Walls with Steel Dovetail Reinforcements under In-Plane
Seismic Loads. Adv. Civ. Eng. 2018, 2018, 6929856. [CrossRef]
80. Zhang, X.; Wu, C.; Xue, J.; Ma, H. Fast Nonlinear Analysis of Traditional Chinese Timber-Frame Building with Dou-Gon. Int. J.
Arch. Heritage 2019, 14, 1252–1268. [CrossRef]
81. Pejatovic, M.; Sarhosis, V.; Milani, G. Multi-tiered Nepalese temples: Advanced numerical investigations for assessing perfor-
mance at failure under horizontal loads. Eng. Fail. Anal. 2019, 106, 104172. [CrossRef]
82. Sha, B.; Xie, L.; Yong, X.; Li, A. Hysteretic behavior of an ancient Chinese multi-layer timber substructure: A full-scale experimental
test and analytical model. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 43, 103163. [CrossRef]
83. Endo, Y.; Hanazato, T. Seismic Analysis of a Three-Tiered Pagoda Temple Affected by the 2015 Gorkha Earthquake. Int. J. Arch.
Heritage 2018, 14, 457–470. [CrossRef]
84. Wu, Y.; Song, X.; Ventura, C.; Lam, F. Rocking effect on seismic response of a multi-story traditional timber pagoda model. Eng.
Struct. 2019, 209, 110009. [CrossRef]
85. Xue, J.; Ren, G.; Zhang, J.; Xu, D. Seismic performance of semi-tenon joints reinforced by steel angle in traditional timber buildings.
Adv. Struct. Eng. 2020, 23, 2318–2332. [CrossRef]
86. Li, S.; Zhou, Z.; Luo, H.; Milani, G.; Abruzzese, D. Behavior of traditional Chinese mortise-tenon joints: Experimental and
numerical insight for coupled vertical and reversed cyclic horizontal loads. J. Build. Eng. 2020, 30, 101257. [CrossRef]
87. Dutu, A.; Sakata, H.; Yamazaki, Y.; Shindo, T. In-Plane Behavior of Timber Frames with Masonry Infills under Static Cyclic
Loading. J. Struct. Eng. 2016, 142, 04015140. [CrossRef]
88. Chang, W.-S.; Hsu, M.-F.; Komatsu, K. A new proposal to reinforce planked timber shear walls. J. Wood Sci. 2011, 57, 493–500.
[CrossRef]
89. Tu, L.; Cui, Z.; Xu, M.; Feng, Y.; Li, T. Experimental study of traditional Chuan-dou frames infilled with wood panels under
in-plane cyclic load. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 43, 102854. [CrossRef]
90. Crayssac, E.; Song, X.; Wu, Y.; Li, K. Lateral performance of mortise-tenon jointed traditional timber frames with wood panel
infill. Eng. Struct. 2018, 161, 223–230. [CrossRef]
91. Luo, L.; Song, X.; Wu, H.; Cai, J. Experimental study on mechanical performance of wood pegged semi mortise and tenon
connections. In Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on Timber Engineering, Vienna, Austria, 22–25 August 2016.
92. Chang, W.-S.; Komatsu, K.; Hsu, M.-F.; Chen, W.-J. On mechanical behavior of traditional timber shear wall in Taiwan I:
Background and theory derivation. J. Wood Sci. 2007, 53, 17–23. [CrossRef]
93. Chang, W.-S.; Hsu, M.-F.; Komatsu, K.; Chen, W.-J. On mechanical behavior of traditional timber shear wall in Taiwan II:
Simplified calculation and experimental verification. J. Wood Sci. 2007, 53, 24–30. [CrossRef]
94. Jianli, Y. Seismic analysis method considering wall participation for ancient timber frame buildings. J. Build. Struct. 2018, 39,
45–52.
95. Xie, Q.; Wang, L.; Li, S.; Zhang, L.; Hu, W. Influence of wood infill walls on the seismic performance of Chinese traditional timber
structure by shaking table tests. Bull. Earthq. Eng. 2020, 18, 5009–5029. [CrossRef]
96. Longarini, N.; Crespi, P.; Franchi, A.; Giordano, N.; Ronca, P.; Scamardo, M. Cross-lam roof diaphragm for the seismic retrofitting
of historical masonry churches. In Proceedings of the International Masonry Society Conferences, Milan, Italy, 9–11 July 2018.
97. Mirra, M.; Ravenshorst, G.; de Vries, P.; van de Kuilen, J.-W. An analytical model describing the in-plane behaviour of timber
diaphragms strengthened with plywood panels. Eng. Struct. 2021, 235, 112128. [CrossRef]
98. Gubana, A.; Melotto, M. Cyclic numerical analyses on wood-based in-plane retrofit solutions for existing timber floors. Structures
2021, 33, 1764–1774. [CrossRef]
99. Gubana, A.; Melotto, M. Experimental tests on wood-based in-plane strengthening solutions for the seismic retrofit of traditional
timber floors. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 191, 290–299. [CrossRef]
100. Gubana, A.; Melotto, M. In-Plane Strengthening of Traditional Timber Floors by Means of CLT Panels: Experimental Tests and Numerical
Analysis; Pisa University Press: Pisa, Italy, 2017; pp. 185–195.
101. Steiger, R.; Serrano, E.; Stepinac, M.; Rajčić, V.; O’Neill, C.; McPolin, D.; Widmann, R. Strengthening of timber structures with
glued-in rods. Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 97, 90–105. [CrossRef]
102. Jockwer, R.; Fink, G.; Köhler, J. Assessment of the failure behaviour and reliability of timber connections with multiple dowel-type
fasteners. Eng. Struct. 2018, 172, 76–84. [CrossRef]
103. Jasieńko, J.; Nowak, T.P. Solid timber beams strengthened with steel plates—Experimental studies. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 63,
81–88. [CrossRef]
104. Verbist, M.; Branco, J.M.; Poletti, E.; Descamps, T.; Lourenco, P.B. Experimentations on the retrofitting of damaged Single Step
Joints with Self-Tapping Screws. Mater. Struct. 2018, 51, 106. [CrossRef]
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 24 of 25

105. Gonçalves, A.M.; Gomes-Ferreira, J.; Guerreiro, L.; Branco, F. Seismic retrofitting of timber framed walls. Mater. De Construcción
2014, 64, e040. [CrossRef]
106. Poletti, E.; Vasconcelos, G. Seismic Behaviour and Retrofitting of Timber Frame Walls. Adv. Mater. Res. 2013, 778, 706–713.
[CrossRef]
107. Poletti, E.; Vasconcelos, G.; Branco, J.; Koukouviki, A.M. Performance evaluation of traditional timber joints under cyclic loading
and their influence on the seismic response of timber frame structures. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 127, 321–334. [CrossRef]
108. Poletti, E.; Vasconcelos, G.; Jorge, M. Application of near surface mounted (NSM) strengthening technique to traditional timber
frame walls. Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 76, 34–50. [CrossRef]
109. Zhou, Q.; Yan, W. Aseismic behaviors of ancient Chinese structures strengthened by different methods. Stud. Conserv. 2014, 60,
384–392. [CrossRef]
110. Branco, J.; Piazza, M.; Cruz, P. Experimental evaluation of different strengthening techniques of traditional timber connections.
Eng. Struct. 2011, 33, 2259–2270. [CrossRef]
111. Drdácký, M.; Urushadze, S. Retrofitting of Imperfect Halved Dovetail Carpentry Joints for Increased Seismic Resistance. Buildings
2019, 9, 48. [CrossRef]
112. Corradi, M.; DI Schino, A.; Borri, A.; Rufini, R. A review of the use of stainless steel for masonry repair and reinforcement. Constr.
Build. Mater. 2018, 181, 335–346. [CrossRef]
113. Corradi, M.; Osofero, A.I.; Borri, A. Repair and Reinforcement of Historic Timber Structures with Stainless Steel—A Review.
Metals 2019, 9, 106. [CrossRef]
114. Schober, K.-U.; Harte, A.; Kliger, R.; Jockwer, R.; Xu, Q.; Chen, J.-F. FRP reinforcement of timber structures. Constr. Build. Mater.
2015, 97, 106–118. [CrossRef]
115. Cruz, H.; Moura, J.P.; Machado, J.S. The Use of FRP in the Strengthening of Timber Reinforced Masonry Load-Bearing Walls; Historical
Constructions: Guimarães, Portugal, 2001; Volume 847.
116. Hassan, M.A.; Usman, M.; Hanif, A.; Farooq, H.; Ahmed, J. Improving structural performance of timber wall panels by
inexpensive FRP retrofitting techniques. J. Build. Eng. 2019, 27, 101004. [CrossRef]
117. Corradi, M.; Vemury, C.M.; Edmondson, V.; Poologanathan, K.; Nagaratnam, B. Local FRP reinforcement of existing timber
beams. Compos. Struct. 2020, 258, 113363. [CrossRef]
118. Corradi, M.; Vo, T.P.; Poologanathan, K.; Osofero, A.I. Flexural behaviour of hardwood and softwood beams with mechanically
connected GFRP plates. Compos. Struct. 2018, 206, 610–620. [CrossRef]
119. Brol, J.; Wdowiak-Postulak, A. Old Timber Reinforcement with FRPs. Materials 2019, 12, 4197. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
120. Liu, Q.; Ma, S.; Han, X. Study on the flexural behavior of poplar beams externally strengthened by BFRP strips. J. Wood Sci. 2020,
66, 1–13. [CrossRef]
121. Corradi, M.; Borri, A.; Righetti, L.; Speranzini, E. Uncertainty analysis of FRP reinforced timber beams. Compos. Part B Eng. 2017,
113, 174–184. [CrossRef]
122. Valluzzi, M.R.; Nardon, F.; Garbin, E.; Panizza, M. Multi-scale characterization of moisture and thermal cycle effects on composite-
to-timber strengthening. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 102, 1070–1083. [CrossRef]
123. Hoseinpour, H.; Valluzzi, M.R.; Garbin, E.; Panizza, M. Analytical investigation of timber beams strengthened with composite
materials. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 191, 1242–1251. [CrossRef]
124. Ghanbari Ghazijahani, T.; Jiao, H.; Holloway, D. Composite Timber Beams Strengthened by Steel and CFRP. J. Compos. Constr.
2017, 21, 04016059. [CrossRef]
125. Branco, M.; Gonçalves, A.; Guerreiro, L.; Ferreira, J. Cyclic behavior of composite timber-masonry wall in quasi-dynamic
conditions reinforced with superelastic damper. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 52, 166–176. [CrossRef]
126. Xue, J.; Wu, C.; Zhang, X.; Qi, Z. Experimental and numerical analysis on seismic performance of straight-tenon joints reinforced
with friction damper. Struct. Control. Health Monit. 2020, 27, e2613. [CrossRef]
127. Xue, J.; Wu, C.; Zhang, X.; Qi, Z. Experimental and numerical study of mortise-tenon joints reinforced with innovative friction
damper. Eng. Struct. 2020, 230, 111701. [CrossRef]
128. Izzi, M.; Polastri, A. Low cycle ductile performance of screws used in timber structures. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 217, 416–426.
[CrossRef]
129. Schiro, G.; Giongo, I.; Sebastian, W.; Riccadonna, D.; Piazza, M. Testing of timber-to-timber screw-connections in hybrid
configurations. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 171, 170–186. [CrossRef]
130. Zhang, C.; Guo, H.; Jung, K.; Harris, R.; Chang, W.-S. Screw reinforcement on dowel-type moment-resisting connections with
cracks. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 215, 59–72. [CrossRef]
131. Song, X.; Li, K.; Crayssac, E.; Wu, Y. Lateral Performance of Traditional Heavy Timber Frames with Mortise-Tenon Joints
Retrofitted Using Self-Tapping Screws. J. Struct. Eng. 2018, 144, 04018187. [CrossRef]
132. Vasconcelos, G. Seismic behaviour of traditional half-timbered walls: Cyclic tests and strengthening solutions. In Proceedings of
the Structural Analysis of Historical Constructions, Wroclaw, Poland, 15–17 October 2012.
133. Poletti, E.; Vasconcelos, G.; Jorge, M. Full-Scale Experimental Testing of Retrofitting Techniques in Portuguese “Pombalino”
Traditional Timber Frame Walls. J. Earthq. Eng. 2013, 18, 553–579. [CrossRef]
134. Xie, W.; Wang, T.-H.; Chang, W.-S. Static behaviour of a two-tiered Dou-Gong system reinforced by super-elastic alloy. Proc. Inst.
Civ. Eng. Eng. Hist. Heritage 2019, 172, 164–173. [CrossRef]
Buildings 2021, 11, 661 25 of 25

135. Xie, Q.; Zhang, L.; Miao, Z.; Zhou, W.; Li, S. Lateral Behavior of Traditional Chinese Timber-Frames Strengthened with Shape-
Memory Alloy: Experiments and Analytical Model. J. Struct. Eng. 2020, 146, 04020083. [CrossRef]
136. Xie, Q.; Zhang, L.; Zhou, W.; Wang, L.; Zhou, T. Cyclical behavior of timber mortise-tenon joints strengthened with shape memory
alloy: Experiments and moment-rotation model. Int. J. Arch. Heritage 2018, 13, 1209–1222. [CrossRef]
137. Xue, J.; Wu, C.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, Y. Experimental study on seismic behavior of mortise-tenon joints reinforced with shape
memory alloy. Eng. Struct. 2020, 218, 110839. [CrossRef]
138. Xue, J.; Wu, C.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, Y. Effect of pre-tension in superelastic shape memory alloy on cyclic behavior of reinforced
mortise-tenon joints. Constr. Build. Mater. 2020, 241, 118136. [CrossRef]
139. Huang, H.; Chang, W.-S. Seismic resilience timber connection-adoption of shape memory alloy tubes as dowels. Struct. Control.
Health Monit. 2017, 24, e1980. [CrossRef]