Engineering Structures 230 (2021) 111701

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

Experimental and numerical study of mortise-tenon joints reinforced with

innovative friction damper
Jianyang Xue a, b, Chenwei Wu a, *, Xicheng Zhang a, b, Zhendong Qi a
a
School of Civil Engineering, Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology, Xi’an, Shaanxi, PR China
b
Key Lab of Structural Engineering and Earthquake Resistance, Ministry of Education (XAUAT), Xi’an, Shaanxi, PR China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: A new friction damper is proposed for improving the cyclic response of mortise-tenon joints at multiple levels of
Traditional Chinese timber-frame structures seismic motion. In order to investigate the combined behavior of the proposed damper, quasi-static cyclic tests
Mortise-tenon joints are conducted on five reinforced joints and one contrast joint made by Pinus sylvestris in strict accordance with
Friction damper
the international test standard ISO-16670. Experimental results indicate that the smaller amount of tenon
Reinforcement
Seismic performance
pullout, larger bearing capacity and initial stiffness, lower strength and stiffness degradation, and higher energy
dissipation capacity simultaneously are exhibited in the reinforced joints. Increasing the friction coefficients of
friction pads and the values of the clamping force helps to effectively improve the seismic performance of the
mortise-tenon joints. The friction coefficient of 0.4 of the friction pads and the pre-tension strain of 0.03 in the
bolt are considered as the optimal parameters to achieve the better reinforcement effect. High deformation
capacities exist in the reinforced joints. A detailed finite element modeling approach is illustrated followed by the
validation studies to obtain further insight into the mechanical behaviors of the reinforced connections described
herein.

1. Introduction structures, thereby achieving the purpose of improving the structural

The connection between the beam and column of traditional Chinese
timber-frame structures is mainly divided into two types: dovetail tenon
joint and straight tenon joint. The dovetail tenon, also known as the big-
headed tenon, has a wide end and a narrow neck and is more commonly
used in palace buildings. The straight tenon joints can be divided into:
fully-penetrated tenon and partially-penetrated tenon joints. The fully-
penetrated tenon passes through the column. For the partially-
penetrated tenon joint, the length of the tenon is short and does not
penetrate the column [1]. The mortise-tenon joint has a certain flexural
capacity and is a typical semi-rigid joint. Since the mortise-tenon
connection undergoes large rotation and deformation under a large
external force, seismic energy is dissipated during the process.
However, the mortise-tenon connection is a flexible connection
method and is difficult to withstand large bending moments. When the
physical and mechanical properties of wood are degraded, the phe­
nomena that the tenon is pulled out of the mortise, the tenon breakage
and the looseness of the joints occur frequently. Therefore, it is neces­
sary to use new materials and new technologies to repair and strengthen
the beam-column joints of seriously damaged ancient timber-frame
performance and protecting the cultural heritage.
In order to ensure the safety of structures in high-intensity seismic
zones, dampers based on the principle of dry friction have become very
popular and are widely used. In the last decades, this new concept
became the key issue in numerous studies, and many new types of
friction dampers were developed and produced [2,3]. The cyclic
behavior of friction dampers was normally characterized by a rigid-
plastic hysteresis, which depends on two parameters: the clamping
force and the friction coefficients of the interfaces in contact. The first
parameter was usually controlled by tightening procedures, according to
Latour’s research [4], the pre-stress was applied through screwing bolts
so that the friction pads were in close contact and rubbed against each
other to achieve the purpose of energy dissipation. The initial value of
the forces of the bolts used to apply the pre-loading on the friction
interface was monitored by Cavallaro et al. during slip tests [5], and
torque was applied or the failure of a particular device was used to
determine the magnitude of the applied pre-tension. For the second
parameter, the coefficient of friction has been extensively studied, and
the attention has been focused on modeling and analysis of the micro­
scopic and complex phenomena. The most significant factors affecting

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: willionms_wu@xauat.edu.cn (C. Wu).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.111701
Received 6 September 2019; Received in revised form 7 September 2020; Accepted 4 December 2020
Available online 25 December 2020
0141-0296/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
J. Xue et al. Engineering Structures 230 (2021) 111701

the friction coefficients are dependent on the surface topography [6], performance is also discussed.
the material hardness [5] and the mechanical properties [7].
The main proposals of application of friction dampers in engineering 2. Concept of the proposed connection
structures are referred to beam-to-column connections and bracing
systems. In order to study the nonlinear mechanical properties of the 2.1. Conceptual configurations
asymmetrical friction connection (AFC) and the sliding hinge joint
(SHJ), the impact of shim material and corrosion coating on resistive The conceptual configuration of the mortise-tenon joints reinforced
force and velocity dependence were quantified through numerical with the friction damper is shown in Fig. 2. The friction damper is
simulation by Rodgers et al. [8]. Latour et al. [9] proposed a beam-to- positioned between the timber column and beam, and steel hoops are
column connection using the new connection structural detail and the adopted to ensure that the damper is firmly fixed to the column and
friction pad material, the beam was connected to the column with a beam. Since both ends of the friction damper are restrained, resistance
classical fixed T-stub fastening the upper flange, and a friction damper bending moment is generated in the damping system, and the friction
was located at the beam lower flange. More recently, the removable pads are mutually pressed and rubbed, which enhances the bending
friction dampers were designed by means of bolted connections, and capacity and rigidity of the mortise-tenon joints.
finite element (FE) analysis was conducted to confirm the effectiveness
and the local response of the removable dampers [10]. For the bracing
systems using the friction dampers, theoretical models of bracing sys­ 2.2. Proposed solution
tems with inserted friction damper devices were presented and experi­
mentally verified by subjecting to seismic excitation and different The proposed connection consists of five friction pads, and steel
harmonic loads [11]. The influence of the connections on the behavior hoops that fix the dampers to the beam and column, respectively, and
of MRFs under a loss-of-column scenario was analyzed considering an other intermediate parts (shown in Fig. 3). In particular, the damper
accurate modeling of the joints by Francavilla et al. [12]. works well in both positive and negative loading procedures. The
Friction dampers are mainly used in beam-column joints in steel damper converts the horizontal excitation energy into the internal en­
structures at present, and the connection methods proposed by scholars ergy generated by friction, thereby reducing the seismic damage of the
provide a reference for engineering applications. However, the current joints. In the proposed friction damper, five friction pads are embedded
researches on the timber mortise-tenon joints reinforced with friction in a pair of intermediate connectors and three end connectors, respec­
dampers are not deep enough, and the evaluation of the seismic per­ tively. Therefore, frictional contacts exist in four contacting surfaces.
formance of the joints after reinforcement is urgently needed. Nagase
et al. [13,14] proposed different methods for reinforcing the mortise-
tenon connections using viscoelastic materials, superplastic alloys and
friction dampers (see Fig. 1). The experimental results indicated that
these reinforcement methods not only provide damping but also in­
crease the stiffness of the joints. However, the reinforcement methods
require pre-drilling of the wooden members, which does not correspond
to the reinforcement principle of maintaining the original cultural relics.
Therefore, it is necessary to propose a new type of friction damper,
which not only dissipates energy and mitigates earthquake damage, but
also avoids artificially weakening structural members.
This paper investigates the seismic performance of the mortise-tenon
joints reinforced with the friction damper. The concept of the
strengthening connection is presented for the first time. In addition, the
special structural characteristics and semi-rigid mechanical character­
istics of mortise-tenon joints are taken into account in the presented
reinforcement method. For experimental verification, six specimens
were tested cyclically. The comparison of failure patterns and seismic
performance between the reinforced and unreinforced joints are
analyzed and discussed. Then the influence of increasing friction co­
efficients of friction pads and the values of clamping force on the cyclic Fig. 2. Conceptual configuration of the reinforced mortise-tenon joint.

Fig. 1. Friction dampers installed in mortise-tenon joints studied by Nagase [14].

2
J. Xue et al. Engineering Structures 230 (2021) 111701

(a) Front view (b) Side view

Fig. 3. Front and side view of the friction damper.

The friction pad and the connector are engaged with each other without
relative rotation. The clamping force is provided by the high-strength
bolt [15], and several disc spring washers are applied to minimize the
loss of clamping force in the bolt. The overall features of the friction pads
are shown in Fig. 4.
The basic requirements for the innovative friction damper to exhibit
the intended seismic performances, such as damping characteristics and
energy dissipation can be summarized as follows: (a) as the mortise-
tenon joint rotates, the damper can provide sufficient rigidity, and can
rely on the friction pads to rub against each other, thereby absorbing
seismic energy and mitigating earthquake damage; (b) in order to ensure
that the damper can work reliably, the block, the connecting rods, the
intermediate and the end connectors must be strong and rigid, and the
bolt is firmly connected in the assembly; (c) the loss of pre-tension in the
high-strength bolt must remain at a relatively low level to avoid exces­
sive changes in friction between the pads, thereby affecting the energy
dissipation capacity of the friction damper.
3. Experimental program
3.1. General
The target of this study is to evaluate the seismic behavior of mortise-
tenon joints reinforced with the innovative friction damper. The di­
mensions of the components of the mortise-tenon joint and the friction
damper were introduced separately. Test setup and loading protocol of
the horizontal quasi-static test of reinforcement joints were presented
later. Material tests of wood and bolts were performed lastly, and a
rational selection of materials to be tested in the innovative friction
damper was conducted with reference to the current specification.
3.2. Test specimens
According to the requirements of the Eighth Class of the Hall of the
Building Standards in the Song Dynasty (A.D. 960–1279), six full-scale
straight-tenon joints were fabricated. The detailed dimensions of the
specimens are shown in Table 1 and Fig. 5. The joints were named T-M1,
T-M2, T-M3, T-M4, T-M5, and T-M6, respectively. T-M1 was unrein­
forced joints, and the other five specimens were strengthened with
friction dampers.
The components of friction damper used to strengthen the mortise-
tenon joints are shown in Fig. 6. The main test parameters for the
mortise-tenon joints reinforced with friction dampers were the friction
coefficients of the friction pads and the normal stress applied to the pads.
It should be noted that the materials of friction pads mainly suggested by
technical literature are normally metals [16], rubbers, or carbide alloys.
Past studies [7,17] have revealed that different values of friction co­
efficients can be developed by the interfaces constituted by steel plates
sliding on mild, abrasion-resistant, and high strength steel. In this study,
to cater for different values of friction coefficients, the proportion of the
material used to make the iron-based alloy of the friction pads was
changed. On the other hand, to derive different normal stresses on the
friction pads, the clamping force was changed in the bolt before the test.
Frictional capacity can be reduced due to a loss of clamping force, for
this reason, several disc spring washers were designed to constrain the
loss of prestress. The reinforcement scheme for joints is shown in
Table 2. The friction coefficients of pads and pre-tension strain in the
bolt were changed to study the influence of the surface roughness and
the clamping force on the seismic performance and energy dissipation
capacity of the reinforced joints. Furthermore, the friction coefficient

Table 1
Detailed dimensions of the specimen.
Category Unit: fen (Chinese Song unit) Unit: mm

DC 35 350
LC 235 2350
LB 150 1500
WB 20 200
HB 30 300
LMT 35 350
WMT 10 100
HMT 30 300

Fig. 4. Details of the friction pads.
Note: 1) The subscript “C”, “B” and “MT” denote the abbreviation of “column”,
“beam”, and “mortise-tenon”, respectively; the “L”, “W”, and “H” respectively
represent the dimensions of member in “length”, “width” and “height” direction;
“Dc” represents the diameter of the column; 2) In the Eighth Class of the Hall of
the Building Standards: 1 fen = 10 mm.

3
J. Xue et al. Engineering Structures 230 (2021) 111701

An MTS magnetostrictive displacement sensor (Fig. 7a and b), an

inclinometer (Fig. 7c), and four YHD-100 displacement sensors (Fig. 7c
and d) were adopted to measure the horizontal displacement of the
loading point relative to the joint, the rotation angle, and the length of
tenon pullout, respectively. The force was measured by the MTS force
sensor, and all load and displacement data were automatically acquired
by a data acquisition instrument.

3.4. Loading protocol

The actuator was run under displacement control, and the loading
point was 1100 mm away from the joint on the surface of the beam. The
loading scheme is shown in Fig. 8. The horizontal low-cycle recipro­
cating loading was carried out in strict accordance with the international
test standard ISO-16670: timber structures—joints made with mechan­
ical fasteners—Quasi-static reversed-cyclic test method [19]. The
loading rate was set at 5 mm/min. According to the results of the
monotonic tests, severe plastic deformation occurred when the rotation
Fig. 5. Dimensions of the unreinforced mortise-tenon joint.
angle of the mortise-tenon joint reached 0.16 rad. Therefore 0.16 rad
was determined as the ultimate horizontal displacement of the actuator
(namely the estimated displacement amplitude is Δu = 176mm). The
and the pre-tension strain of the bolt were obtained when the bearing
displacement amplitude (a) increased in the order of 10%, 20%, 30%,
capacity and rigidity of the reinforced joints were optimal.

Table 2
3.3. Test setup
Reinforcement scheme with the friction damper.
Specimen number Friction coefficients Pre-tension strain in the bolt /ε
The test setup is shown in Fig. 7. In order to ensure loading safety, the
timber column is placed horizontally, the timber beam is erected, and T-M1 Unreinforced mortise-tenon joint
the horizontal load is acted on the beam end. According to He’s research T-M2 0.3 0.01
T-M3 0.4 0.01
[18], the axial force on a single column was about 35 kN, and was T-M4 0.5 0.01
applied by a hydraulic jack. The loading system was composed of a T-M5 0.3 0.02
horizontal actuator with the maximum velocity of 50 mm/s and a T-M6 0.3 0.03
spherical hinge, all of which were fixed on the reaction wall.

Fig. 6. Components of friction damper.

4
J. Xue et al. Engineering Structures 230 (2021) 111701

(a) Details (b) Photograph

(c) Frontview of detail A (d) Top view of detailA

Fig. 7. Test setup. Note: a = 800 mm, b = 30 mm, c = 120 mm, YHD is the displacement sensor.

content was 14.6%. The elastic modulus, tensile strength, and

compressive strength tests were conducted in accordance with the
Chinese National Standard GB 1927–1943–2009: Physical and me­
chanical tests of wood [20]. The mechanical properties are summarized
in Table 3, and the results show the averaged values of the specimens.
As shown in Fig. 4, there was always a normal pressure on the fric­
tion pads by applying the pre-tension to the bolt. Since tensile properties
affect the performance of the bolts, three M20 high-strength bolts with
an effective length of 50 mm were prepared in accordance with the
Chinese National Standard GB/T228.1–2010: Metallic materials: tensile
testing at ambient temperature [21], and tensile tests were conducted.
The physical and mechanical properties are shown in Table 4. The
friction pads and the connecting parts of the friction damper were made
of rubber-carbon composite materials and Q235B steel, respectively. A
tensile test was conducted to obtain the physical and mechanical prop­
erties. The average values of the physical and mechanical properties of
Fig. 8. Loading scheme. Q235B steel are listed in Table 5.

40%, and 50% of the ultimate displacement amplitude, and the number
of cycles for each a was one. As for 60%, 80%, 100%, 120%, 140% and
160% of the ultimate displacement, three cycles were repeated for each
a. Table 4
Physical and mechanical properties of bolts.
3.5. Material tests Effective Effective Elastic Yielding Tensile
diameter/ mm area/ mm2 modulus/ MPa stress/ MPa stress/ MPa

Pinus sylvestris was used to make the mortise-tenon joints. The 17.7 244.8 2.0 × 105 400.0 503.3
average density of the tested wood was 0.497 g/cm3, and the water

Table 3
Mechanical properties of Pinus sylvestris.
Elastic modulus/ MPa Poisson’s ratios CR/ MPa CT/ MPa TL/ MPa CL/ MPa SL/ MPa

EL ER ET μRT μLR μLT

8772.92 147.02 468.02 0.35 0.5 0.1 2.04 2.89 83.17 19.23 5.19

Note: The subscript “L”, “R” and “T” denote the longitudinal, radial and tangential directions of wood, respectively; the “E”, “μ”, “T”, “C” and “S”, respectively represent
Young’s modulus, Poisson’s ratios, tensile strength, compressive strength and shear strength of wood.

5
J. Xue et al.
4. Test results and discussion
4.1. Experimental phenomena and failure patterns
As shown in Fig. 3b, the friction damper consisted of five friction
pads, which is divided into two groups named set-A and set-B. Set-A
included three friction pads embedded in the end connectors, and set-B
included two additional pads embedded in the intermediate connectors.
Since the end connectors were fixed to the timber column and unable to
rotate, the friction pads of set-A remained stationary. When the timber
beam rotated under the action of the actuator, the blocks rotated
accordingly, which in turn drove the connecting rods and the interme­
diate connectors to rotate together. Finally, the friction pads of set-B
rotated relative to the friction pads of set-A. Under the action of the
clamping force, the protrusions on the friction pads had a plowing effect
on the sliding surfaces [22], resulting in relative friction between the
pads and energy dissipation. The rotation behavior of the friction
damper under large displacement is shown in Fig. 9.
In the horizontal quasi-static cyclic tests, rotational behavior and
failure patterns were distinct after reinforcement. When the rotation
angle of the unreinforced joint reached about 0.08 rad, the plastic
extrusion deformation in the contact parts was large, the side of tenon
was compressed perpendicular to the grain direction, and wood fiber on
the surface of tenon was cracked and peeled off, as shown in Fig. 10(b).
When the rotation angle of the unreinforced joint continued to increase
to the ultimate amplitude, the mortise and tenon were severely plasti­
cally deformed, and a vertical crack gradually developed from the root
of tenon along the surface of the beam, as shown in Fig. 10(c). For
reinforced joints, after the rotation angle reached 0.12 rad, several
vertical fine cracks were observed (Fig. 11(b)), and the tenons of the T-
M2 and T-M4 joints broke (Fig. 11(d) and (e)). The fiber at the mortise
was compressed, and obvious dents appeared on the column, as shown
in Fig. 10(d) and (c). After the loading was completed, it was observed
that the surfaces of the friction pads were smoothed during the sliding
process (Fig. 11(f)).
At the beginning of loading, the plastic deformation of mortise and
tenon was not serious, and there was almost no pullout of the tenon. The
length of tenon pullout increased with increased rotation angles. The
phenomena of tenon pullout are shown in Fig. 10(a) and 11(a). The
influence of the friction coefficients of the friction pads and the values of
clamping force on the length of tenon being pull-out is shown in Fig. 12
(a) and (b), respectively. In general, the friction damper could effec­
tively reduce the length of tenon pullout, and the length was signifi­
cantly reduced with the increasing friction coefficients of the friction
pads and the values of the clamping force. The friction damper with the
friction coefficient of 0.3 and the bolt with the pre-tension strain of 0.03
could minimize the amount of tenon pullout and provide a stronger
constraint for the joints.
4.2. Moment-rotation response
The bending moment M and rotation angle of the joints θ are
calculated as:
M = P⋅H + Ma (1)
Table 5
Physical and mechanical properties of Q235B steel.
fy/ MPa εy /10− 6
fu/ MPa E/ MPa δ/%
5
295.4 1441 418.5 2.05 × 10 35.2
Note: The subscript “y” and “u” denote yielding and ultimate state, respectively;
“E”, “f”, and “δ” respectively represent the elastic modulus, tensile strength, and
elongation percentage after fracture.
6
Engineering Structures 230 (2021) 111701
Δ
θ= (2)
H
where P represents the horizontal load, H represents the distance from
the loading point to the upper surface of the column, Ma represents the
extra-moment generated by the weight of actuator, Δ represents the
horizontal displacement of the loading point.
Fig. 13 shows the hysteretic curves of the unreinforced joint and
reinforced joints with the friction damper. In Fig. 13, for the conve­
nience of analysis, the first loop and the third loop were drawn sepa­
rately in each graph. As described in Section 3.4, three cycles of loading
were performed in the order of 60%, 80%, 100%, 120%, 140%, and
160% of the ultimate displacement amplitude. In general, all six
mortise-tenon joints show recognizable hysteretic responses and
different friction coefficients, and the values of clamping force result in
varying hysteretic loop shapes. The hysteretic curve of the unreinforced
joint T-M1 has an anti-“Z” shape, and the curve is pinched seriously.
However, the areas enclosed by the hysteresis curves of the joints
reinforced by the friction damper are much larger, indicating that the
total energy dissipation capacity of the joint is highly improved.
The significant slippage occurs in the hysteretic curves regardless of
reinforcement, due to the semi-rigid connection characteristics of the
mortise-tenon joints. For the mortise-tenon joint reinforced with the
friction damper, the slope of the curve is small at the beginning of
loading due to the initial gap between mortise and tenon. The occur­
rence of initial gap between mortise and tenon is because of the con­
struction error and wood knots in the connections. As the rotation angle
of joints increases, the friction area between tenon and mortise becomes
larger, the curve becomes steeper, and the bending moment increases
rapidly. From the 0.04 rad rotation angle cycle onwards, a more
recognizable hysteresis with a gentle rise starts to show, and the hys­
teretic response continues until the occurrence of fracture tenon (first
observed at 0.14 rad for specimen T-M2 and 0.10 rad for specimen T-
M4). The hysteretic curves of different loading cycles under the same
displacement amplitude are compared, and it is found that increasing
the number of loadings will cause the unrecoverable plastic deforma­
tion, and the total bending moments of the joints decrease.
The moment-rotation angle skeleton curves are shown in Fig. 14, the
effects of the different friction coefficients of the friction pads and the
clamping forces of the bolt on the hysteresis characteristics of the
reinforcement joints are shown in Fig. 14(a) and (b), respectively. In
general, the skeleton curves of reinforced joints have three stages: elastic
stage, yielding stage, and hardening stage. T-M1 joint is taken as an
example, and the elastic limit is named point A, the yielding point is
named point B, and there are three stages in the skeleton curve, namely
elastic stage (OA stage), yielding stage (AB stage) and strain hardening
stage (BC stage).
After using the friction pads with larger friction coefficients and the
bolt to which the larger values of the clamping force are applied, the
bearing capacity and initial stiffness of the joints are significantly
increased. However, it is also noted that when the friction coefficient of
the pads reaches a large value (i.e., 0.4 rad), as the friction coefficient
continues to increase, the skeleton curves of the reinforced joints tend to
coincide. It is indicated that the friction pads with the friction coefficient
greater than 0.4 have little effect on reinforcement. Moreover, with the
pre-tension strain of 0.03 in the bolt, the joint has the highest flexural
capacity. Due to the initial defects such as wood knots and local defects,
the bending capacities of the joints during negative loading are greater
than those in the positive loading process. The descending stage appears
in the T-M2 and T-M4 curves of the reinforced joints because of the
fracture of the tenons during the positive loading. At this time, the joint
is considered to be broken, and the bending moment is considered as the
ultimate bearing capacity.
The results of strength, stiffness, and ductility are listed in Table 6,
The yielding moment, Myield, is given according to the equivalent energy
J. Xue et al. Engineering Structures 230 (2021) 111701

(a) Positive loading process (b) Negative loading process

Fig. 9. Rotation behavior under large displacement.

(b) Side of tenon being compressed perpendicular to

(a) Tenon pullout
the grain direction

(c) Vertical cracks along the beam (d) Dents and wood debris
Fig. 10. Failure patterns of the unreinforced joint.

(b) Side of tenon being compressed

(a) Tenon pullout (c) Dents
perpendicular to the grain direction

(f) Surface of the friction pads

(d) Fracture tenon of T-M2 joint (e) Fracture tenon of T-M4 joint
being smoothed
Fig. 11. Failure patterns of the joints reinforced with the friction damper.

7
J. Xue et al. Engineering Structures 230 (2021) 111701

(a) Different friction coefficients (b) Different values of clamping force

Fig. 12. The length of tenon pullout versus rotation angle.

(a) T-M1 (b) T-M2

(c) T-M3 (d) T-M4

(e) T-M5 (f) T-M6

Fig. 13. Moment-rotation angle hysteretic curves.

8
J. Xue et al. Engineering Structures 230 (2021) 111701

(a) Different friction coefficients (b) Different values of clamping force

Fig. 14. Moment-rotation angle skeleton curves.

elastic–plastic (EEEP) method [23,24], and can be determined by

[ √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ ]
A Pi,1
Myield = ke θu − θ2u − 2
ke
where ke represents the initial stiffness of mortise-tenon joints, θu rep­
resents the ultimate rotation angle, and A represents equivalent energy
dissipation before the ultimate rotation angle, equal to the area under
envelope curves.
The ductility ratio D is calculated by
θu
D=
θyield
where θyield represents the yielding rotation angle corresponding to the
yielding moment Myield.
As shown in Table 6, after the values of the friction coefficients and
clamping force are increased, the ultimate moment Mu is improved
remarkably. For the mortise-tenon joint reinforced with the friction
damper with the friction coefficient of 0.3 and the bolt with the pre-
tension strain of 0.03, the ultimate moment is increased to 255% of
that of the unreinforced joint. The friction damper fails to improve the
ductility of the joints. It is worth noting that there are serious initial
defects (such as wood knots and looseness) in the T-M2 and T-M4 joints,
which leads to the greatly reduced ductility.
4.3. Strength and stiffness degradation
Pi,3
λi= (5)
(3)
where λi represents the strength degradation factor of the ith displace­
ment amplitude, Pi,1 represents the peak load of the primary cycle in the
ith displacement amplitude, Pi,3 represents the peak load of the 3rd cycle
in the ith displacement amplitude. The effects of the different friction
coefficients of the friction pads and the clamping forces of the bolt on the
strength degradation are shown in Fig. 15(a) and (b), respectively.
It is evident that all six mortise-tenon joints show the same principle
(4) of strength degradation: the values of the strength degradation co­
efficients are ranging from 0.9 to 1, which implies that the plastic
deformation of the mortise and tenon has little effect on the strength
degradation of the joints before the ultimate rotation angle. The strength
degradation factors of specimens T-M2 and T-M4 decrease greatly after
the fracture of tenons, which indicates that bearing capacities in these
joints are suddenly reduced in the trailing cycles under the same
displacement amplitude. It is worth noting that the strength degradation
coefficient of the joint after reinforcement by the friction damper is
generally greater than that of the unreinforced joint, and the rein­
forcement can effectively suppress the strength degradation.
To assess the rate of degradation of the lateral stiffness of the rein­
forced joints, the secant stiffness of the moment-rotation angle hyster­
etic curves for each primary cycle is calculated as:
| + Mi | + | − Mi |
Ki= (6)
| + θ i | + | − θi |

In the horizontal quasi-static loading test, three loading cycles were where Mi represents the peak bending moment of joints of the primary
performed at the same amplitude. The horizontal loads applied to the cycle in the ith displacement amplitude, θi represents the corresponding
joints decreases while the number of loading cycles is increasing. The rotation angle of Mi.
strength degradation factor λi can be calculated as follows: In general, the stiffness of each mortise-tenon joint decreases with
the increasing rotation angle, and the stiffness degradation is obvious.
Table 6 Due to the increasing length of the tenon pullout and the gaps, a rapid
Strength, stiffness and ductility of unreinforced and reinforced joints. downward section is observed in the stiffness-rotation angle curve until
the rotation angle achieves 0.08 rad. From the 0.10 rad rotation angle
Specimen Myield θyield Mu θu ke D
/(kN⋅m) /rad /(kN⋅m) /rad /(kN⋅m⋅rad− 1) onwards, a moderate degradation starts to show, which indicates that
the lateral stiffness of the joint is severely degraded, and irreversible
T-M1 14.65 0.08 15.86 0.16 333.59 2.0
T-M2 19.73 20.31 0.12 769.38 1.5
plastic damage occurs. In addition, the stiffness of joints reinforced with
T-M3 30.45 40.58 0.16 1634.89 2.0 the friction damper is larger than that without reinforcement, but the
T-M4 33.93 42.53 0.08 1663.52 1.0 degradation of the stiffness of the reinforced joint seems to be more
T-M5 23.81 30.19 0.16 524.77 2.0 serious.
T-M6 32.27 40.39 0.16 1676.90 2.0
As shown in Fig. 16(a), the initial stiffness of the reinforced joints
Note: 1) Due to the construction error, there will be differences in the corre­ increases with the increasing friction coefficients of friction pads,
sponding bending moments at the same rotation angle during positive and although the stiffness of specimen T-M3 and T-M4 is very close (1032.45
negative loading. Myield and Mu are the average of the absolute values of the kN/m, 1031.92 kN/m, respectively). This phenomenon shows that when
positive and negative bending moments; 2) ke of mortise-tenon joint is deter­ the friction coefficient is 0.4, the initial stiffness of the reinforced joints
mined based on the elastic stiffness, as illustrated in Fig. 14(a); 3) D represents
reaches a peak, and continuing to increase the friction coefficient is not
the ductility ratio of joint, and is calculated following Eq. (4).

9
J. Xue et al. Engineering Structures 230 (2021) 111701

(a) Different friction coefficients (b) Different values of clamping force

Fig. 15. Strength degradation of joints.

(a) Different friction coefficients (b) Different values of clamping force

Fig. 16. Stiffness degradation of joints.

beneficial for suppressing the stiffness degradation. Changing the values
of the clamping force has a significant effect on the stiffness (Fig. 16(b)).
The larger pre-tension in the bolt contributes to promotion in the normal
pressure on the friction pads and helps to increase the initial stiffness
and slow down the stiffness degradation.
4.4. Energy dissipation capacity
The energy dissipation capacities of the mortise-tenon joints are
examined here via the energy dissipation ED of mortise-tenon joints in
each cycle, and the energy dissipation ED is equal to the area enclosed by
moment-rotation angle hysteretic loops, as shown in Fig. 17.
The energy dissipation of the six mortise-tenon joints in each loading
cycle is shown in Fig. 17. The comparison of T-M1 (the black line) and
other joints reinforced with the friction damper indicates that the energy
dissipation capacity of the joint is greatly improved after reinforcement.
The larger the rotation angle is, the better the energy dissipation ca­
pacity will be.
Fig. 17(a) shows the energy dissipation of joints in each loading cycle
with different friction coefficients. At the 21st cycle, the energy con­
sumption of joints reinforced with the friction pads with friction co­
efficients of 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 increases by 118%, 220%, and 276%,
respectively, compared to the unreinforced joint. This phenomenon
shows that energy consumption is improved by using the friction pads

(a) Different friction coefficients (b) Different values of clamping force

Fig. 17. Energy dissipation of joints in each loading cycle.

10
J. Xue et al.
with a higher friction coefficient. However, as friction coefficient in­
creases from 0.4 to 0.5, the energy consumption of the joint in each
loading cycle is not significantly improved, so 0.4 is considered as the
optimal friction coefficient. The difference of the energy dissipation of
joints in each loading cycle with different values of clamping force is
also observed in Fig. 17(b). When the value of the clamping force in­
creases from 0.01 to 0.03, the maximum relative difference in the energy
dissipation reaches 291%, which indicates that improving the pre-stress
in the bolt ensures that the friction pads convert the seismic energy into
internal energy and helps to increase the energy consumption.
4.5. Deformation capacity
The limiting story drift angle of timber-frame structures is 1/30 ac­
cording to Chinese National Standard GB/T 50165–2020: technical
standard for maintenance and strengthening of ancient timber buildings
[25]. In traditional Chinese timber-frame structures, mortise-tenon
joints are mainly used to resist horizontal loads, and the limiting rota­
tion angle of the mortise-tenon joint is approximately 0.033 rad. As
shown in Table 6, the ultimate rotation angles of the joints are greater
than 0.08, which is much larger than the specification limit, so the
reinforced joint is considered to have a good deformation capability.
5. Numerical assessments
The experimental results and failure patterns illustrated in the pre­
vious sections provide important information for the calibration of the
numerical models of the mortise-tenon joints reinforced with the friction
damper. The detailed continuum numerical models were established
using the commercial finite element (FE) software ABAQUS [26]. A
detailed modeling approach is given below followed by the validation
studies. The numerical method presented constitutes a tool that can be
adopted for further exploration of the seismic behaviors of the rein­
forced connection.
5.1. Modeling details
The three-dimensional FE models are constructed using the software
ABAQUS V6.11. The friction damper consists of five components: (i)
block, (ii) connecting rods, (iii) intermediate connectors, (iv) friction
pads, and (v) end connector (as illustrated in Fig. 18a). The FE model
adopts 8-node solid elements for type C3D8R (first-order reduced inte­
gration continuum elements). An axial force of 35 kN is applied at the
end of the timber column. A horizontal repeated load is applied at the
reference point, which is 150 mm distant from the top surface of the
column. The mortise and tenon joints adopt the meshes with a size of 55
mm, while the mesh size of the friction damper is 20 mm. The mesh and
boundary condition are shown in Fig. 18b. A strain-hardening rela­
tionship with an elastic modulus of 205 GPa and tensile yielding stress of
(a) Components of the friction damper
Fig. 18. Numerical model of the reinforced connection.
11
Engineering Structures 230 (2021) 111701
295.4 MPa is used to model the Q235B steel. Moreover, an orthotropic
Hill’s yielding criterion is employed for the timber components. Other
material properties of steel and wood have been introduced in
Tables 3–5.
The display body constraint is used for the steel parts of the friction
damper, and the solid feature is adopted for the friction pad. The
encastre constraint is applied in the end connector, and all degrees of
freedom of the block are coupled with those of the timber beam. Hinge
constraints are adopted in the connections among the end connector, the
intermediate connectors, the connecting rods, and the block. Contact
relationships between the friction pads are modeled by ‘Hard contact’
and ‘Penalty friction’ normally and tangentially, respectively. The con­
tact pressure that can be transferred between the surfaces is not limited.
The surfaces separate when the pressure is zero or negative. Different
friction coefficients of μ = 0.3, 0.4, and 0.5 are finally determined. The
uniform loads with different values of 53.5 MPa and 106.9 MPa on the
pads are used to simulate the pre-tension strain in the bolts.
5.2. Model validation
The FE models established are validated with the experimental re­
sults described in Section 4.2. The comparisons between the simulations
and the experimental moment-rotation curves for Specimens T-M2 ~ T-
M5 are illustrated in Fig. 19. Reasonable estimates of the capacities can
be obtained using the presented FE model. A good agreement is avail­
able in the ultimate bending moment with the maximum error of less
than 10% for all specimens. However, there are some differences in the
elastic stiffness between the FE results and the observed moment-
rotation relationships. The maximum errors of the stiffness of T-M2 ~
T-M5 specimens are 6%, 24%, 23%, and 25%, respectively. The phe­
nomena are attributed to the surface defects such as scars and cracks that
are observed in the experimental mortise-tenon connections whereas the
numerical model fails to consider the effect of initial damage on the
lateral resistance behavior. It is worth noting that large positive rota­
tions are associated with the tenon fracture in the Specimen T-M4 (see
Fig. 19c), which is not taken into consideration in the FE calculation.
Besides, the effects of the friction coefficients and the pre-tension strain
on increasing the ultimate capacity of the strengthened connections are
obvious.
Figs. 20 and 21 show the comparisons between experimental and
numerical deformation patterns and stress distribution in the mortise
and the tenon of Specimens T-M2 ~ T-M5. After the loading ends, the
tenon is pulled out of the mortise, and the typical deformation (observed
in Specimen T-M4) is obtained to confirm that the numerical predictions
are in good agreement with the experimental failure patterns. FE models
can capture the whole stress distribution in the loading process.
Fig. 20b–e and Fig. 21b–e show the maximum stress in the mortise and
the tenon when the displacement amplitude reaches 160% of the ulti­
mate displacement in the positive direction. The compressive stress of all
(b) Mesh and boundary condition
J. Xue et al. Engineering Structures 230 (2021) 111701

(a) T-M2 (b) T-M3

(c) T-M4 (d) T-M5

Fig. 19. Comparison of moment-rotation curves.

(b) T-M2 (c) T-M3

(a) Typical
(d) T-M4 (e) T-M5
deformation
Fig. 20. Comparison of deformation patterns and stress distribution in mortise.

embedded areas between the tenon and mortise is approximately the failure patterns of the reinforced connections, the maximum stress in the
same and exceeds the compressive strength in the perpendicular grain compressed mortise areas is significantly reduced with the increasing
direction. Moreover, although the different friction coefficients between friction coefficients from 0.3 to 0.5. The phenomena indicate that the
the friction pads and the pre-tension strain in the bolts do not alter the increased friction coefficients in the friction pads will result in the

12
J. Xue et al.
(b) T-M2
(a) Typical
(d) T-M4
deformation
Fig. 21. Comparison of deformation patterns and stress distribution in tenon.
slighter compressive damage in the mortise and less post-earthquake
failure in the connections. The FE calculated results and comparisons
provide confidence in the FE modeling method for assessing the seismic
performance of the reinforced connections, and validate the reliability of
the models for further studies on the effectiveness of using the reinforced
connections described herein in the actual timber buildings.
6. Conclusions
This paper presented the result of cyclic loading tests of the full-scale
Chinese traditional mortise-tenon joints reinforced with the friction
damper. Failure patterns, moment-rotation response, strength and
stiffness degradation, energy dissipation capacity, and deformation ca­
pacity were analyzed. The adoption of the friction damper was quanti­
fied. A detailed finite element modeling approach is also illustrated
followed by validation studies. More specific observations and impor­
tant conclusions are summarized as follows:
(1) The reinforced joints exhibit a smaller amount of tenon pullout,
larger bearing capacity and initial stiffness, lower strength and
stiffness degradation, and higher energy dissipation capacity
simultaneously compared with the unreinforced joint.
(2) Increasing the friction coefficients of friction pads and the values
of clamping force helps to effectively reduce the damage accu­
mulation, enhance the bearing capacity and the initial stiffness of
the joint, reduce strength and stiffness degradation, and increase
energy consumption.
(3) The friction coefficient of 0.4 of the friction pads and the pre-
tension strain of 0.03 in the bolt are considered as the optimal
parameters to achieve a better reinforcement effect.
(4) The rotation angle of joints can reach 0.16 rad, and high defor­
mation capacities exist in the reinforced joints.
(5) The agreement between the FE and the experimental results in­
dicates that the proposed FE modeling method can obtain the
seismic behaviors of the reinforced joints described herein.
13
Engineering Structures 230 (2021) 111701
(c) T-M3
(e) T-M5
Owing to the reason that the invented friction damper is attributed to
the promoted hysteretic behaviors of straight-tenon connections in this
paper, other column-beam connections such as dovetail-tenon joints
reinforced with the presented friction damper should be further studied.
To augment the findings of this research, the effect of mechanical pa­
rameters such as the friction coefficients of friction pads and the
clamping force on the reinforced mortise-tenon connections should be
studied. Further experimental testing is also planned to investigate the
seismic performance of the timber-frame structure with enclosure walls
strengthened with such friction damper.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Jianyang Xue: Conceptualization, Methodology. Chenwei Wu:
Data curation, Writing - original draft, Visualization. Xicheng Zhang:
Supervision, Validation, Writing - review & editing. Zhendong Qi:
Investigation, Software.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
The research described in this paper was financially supported by
National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51978568),
National Key Research and Development Plan of the 13th Five-Year
(Grant No. 2017YFC0703505), Shaanxi Key Scientific and Technolog­
ical Innovation Team (Grant No. 2019TD-029), Natural Science Foun­
dation of Shaanxi Province (Grant No. 2019JM-078), Key Program of
Basic Research on Natural Science of Shaanxi Province (Grant No.
2020JZ-50).
J. Xue et al. Engineering Structures 230 (2021) 111701

References [13] Nielsen LO, Mualla IH, Iwai Y, Nagase T. Seismic isolation systems based on
friction-fractional viscoelastic dampers. In: The 14th World Conference on
Earthquake Enginering, Beijing, China; 2008.
[1] Xue JY, Guo R, Qi LJ, Xu D. Experimental study on the seismic behavior of
[14] Nagase T. Study on seismic design method of traditional wooden buildings. Ph.D.
traditional timber mortise-tenon joints with different looseness under low-cyclic
Dissertation. Japan: Setsunan University; 2014 [in Japanese].
reversed loading. Adv Struct Eng 2018;22(6):1312–28.
[15] Lee CH, Kim J, Kim DH, Ryu J, Ju YK. Numerical and experimental analysis of
[2] Di Lauro F, Montuori R, Nastri E, Piluso V. Partial safety factors and overstrength
combined behavior of shear-type friction damper and non-uniform strip damper for
coefficient evaluation for the design of connections equipped with friction
multi-level seismic protection. Eng Struct 2016;114:75–92.
dampers. Eng Struct 2019;178:645–55.
[16] Ramhormozian S, Clifton GC, MacRae GA, Davet GP, Khoo HH. Experimental
[3] Cavallaro GF, Francavilla AB, Latour M, Piluso V, Rizzano G. Cyclic response of low
studies on Belleville springs use in the sliding hinge joint connection. J Constr Steel
yielding connections using different friction materials. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2018;
Res 2019;159:81–94.
114:404–23.
[17] Cavallaro GF, Latour M, Francavilla AB, Piluso V, Rizzano G. Standardised friction
[4] Latour M, Rizzano G, Santiago A, da Silva LS. Experimental response of a low-
damper bolt assemblies time-related relaxation and installed tension variability.
yielding, self-centering, rocking column base joint with friction dampers. Soil Dyn
J Constr Steel Res 2018;141:145–55.
Earthq Eng 2019;116:580–92.
[18] He JX, Wang J, Yang QS. Mechanical property of column footing joint in
[5] Cavallaro GF, Francavilla A, Latour M, Piluso V, Rizzano G. Experimental
traditional wooden structure by quasi-static test. Jianzhu Jiegou Xuebao 2017;38
behaviour of innovative thermal spray coating materials for FREEDAM joints.
(8):141–9 [in Chinese].
Compos Part B: Eng 2017;115:289–99.
[19] ISO 16670: 2003 (E). Timber structures—Joints made with mechanical
[6] Loo W, Quenneville P, Chouw N. Steel friction connectors–the dangers of excess
fasteners—Quasi-static reversed-cyclic test method. Ottawa, Canada: Technical
smoothing. In: New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering (NZSEE) Annual
Committee ISO/TC 165, Timber structure; 2003.
Technical Conference, New Dimensions in Earthquake Resilience2015, Rotorua,
[20] GB 1927-1943~2009. Physical and mechanical tests of wood. Beijing, China:
New Zealand; 2015.
China Technical Committee for Standardization of Timber; 2009 [in Chinese].
[7] Latour M, Piluso V, Rizzano G. Experimental analysis on friction materials for
[21] GB/T 228.1-2010. Metallic materials—Tensile testing—Part 1: Method of test at
supplemental damping devices. Constr Build Mater 2014;65:159–76.
room temperature. Beijing, China: Standardization Administration; 2010 [in
[8] Rodgers GW, Chase JG, Causse R, Chanchi J, MacRae GA. Performance and
Chinese].
degradation of sliding steel friction connections: impact of velocity, corrosion
[22] Kragelsky IV, Dobychin MN, Kombalov VS. Friction and wear: calculation methods.
coating and shim material. Eng Struct 2017;141:292–302.
New York, USA: Elsevier; 2013.
[9] Latour M, Piluso V, Rizzano G. Experimental analysis of beam-to-column joints
[23] ASTM E 2126-05. Standard test method for cyclic (reversed) load test for shear
equipped with sprayed aluminium friction dampers. J Constr Steel Res 2018;146:
resistance of walls for buildings. West Conshohocken, PA, USA: Annual book of
33–48.
ASTM standards; 2005.
[10] Latour M, D’Aniello M, Zimbru M, Rizzano G, Piluso V, Landolfo R. Removable
[24] Song XB, Li K, Crayssac E, Wu YJ. Lateral performance of traditional heavy timber
friction dampers for low-damage steel beam-to-column joints. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng
frames with mortise-tenon joints retrofitted using self-tapping screws. J Struct Eng
2018;115:66–81.
2018;144(10):04018187.
[11] Downey A, Cao L, Laflamme S, Taylor D, Ricles J. High capacity variable friction
[25] GB/T 50165-2020. Technical standard for maintenance and strengthening of
damper based on band brake technology. Eng Struct 2016;113:287–98.
ancient timber buildings. Beijing, China: Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural
[12] Francavilla AB, Latour M, Rizzano G, Jaspart JP, Demonceau JF. On the robustness
Development of the People’s Republic of China; 2020 [in Chinese].
of earthquake-resistant moment-resistant frames: influence of innovative beam-to-
[26] Hibbitt K. Sorensen Inc. Abaqus theory manual. Version 6.11; 2006.
column joints. Open Constr Build Technol J 2018;12(1):101–11.

14