DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Classification and Evaluation of Torsional Irregularity of Line-Type Hanok Based on Plan Shape and Spatial Layout

평면형상과 공간배치에 따른 일자형 한옥의 유형분류 및 비틀림비정형 평가

  • Received : 2022.07.01
  • Accepted : 2022.08.11
  • Published : 2022.08.30

Abstract

This study classified a detailed category of a line-type Hanok based on its plan type, spatial layout and evaluated the torsional irregularity of this line-type Hanok. The line-type Hanok was classified into seven categories: perfectly symmetry, partial asymmetry, partial protrusion, single open corner, complex, elongated rectangle, and multiple open corners. There were 22 cases of line-type Hanoks evaluated on torsional irregularity; the results revealed that 21 cases belonged to torsional irregular and only one case belonged to torsional regular. The X-directional average eccentricity ratio for all seven categories exceeded 100%. Among them, the perfectly symmetry type reflected the smallest value of 105% and the multiple open corners type showed the largest value of 484%. The Y-directional average eccentricity ratio of multiple open corners type was found to be 119%, which is larger than 100%; the remaining six types showed less than 100%. It is anticipated that the results of this study can be utilized on initial seismic design and seismic evaluation of existing and newly built Hanok.

Keywords

References

  1. Han, J.S., & Kim, C.J. (2005). An experimental study on mechanical performance of tenon for analysis of structural system and modernization of traditional wooden architecture, Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea Planning & Design Section, 21(4), 121-128.
  2. Hong, S.G., & Lee, P.S. (2000). Behavior of traditional wood frames under earthquake loading, Proceedings of the Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea Conference, 304-313.
  3. Hwang, J.K., Kwon, Y.H., & Bae, D.H. (2019). Shear resistance capacity length of traditional wooden frame's wall divided into small frame, Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea, Structure & Construction Section, 35(3), 11-18.
  4. Hwang, J.K., Kwon, Y.H., & Han, D.W. (2020). Resistant moment capacity of traditional wooden frame's wall using brick, Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea, 36(6), 185-192. https://doi.org/10.5659/JAIK.2020.36.6.185
  5. KDS 41 90 32 (2019). Korean design standard for small building -Traditional Timber Structure.
  6. KDS 41 17 00 (2019). Korean design standard for seismic design of building.
  7. Kim, Y.M., Lee, S.G., & Lee, S.H. (2015). Evaluation of effective lateral stiffness of a Korean-traditional wooden house with new joint types, Engineering Structures, 94, 113-121.
  8. Kim, Y.M. (2019). An evaluation scheme of torsional irregularity for seismic design of Hanok, Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea, Structure & Construction Section, 35(10), 191-198.
  9. Lee, J.M., Lee, M.K., Go, Y.H., & Goo, B.H. (2019). 2017 Hanok statistic report. Republic of Korea: Architecture & Urban Research Institute.
  10. Lee, M.W., & Kim, Y.M. (2020). Development of automated evaluation system for torsional irregularity of Hanok, Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea, 36(8), 173-180. https://doi.org/10.5659/JAIK.2020.36.8.173
  11. Lee, M.W., & Kim, Y.M. (2021). Comparative review on the horizontal strength of traditional timber structures according to frame types, Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea, 37(7), 183-194. https://doi.org/10.5659/JAIK.2021.37.7.183
  12. Lee, M.W. (2022a). Seismic Design and Retrofit of Hanok Considering Torsional Irregularity, Master's Thesis, Myongji University.
  13. Lee, M.W., & Kim, Y.M. (2022b). Evaluation of torsional irregularity of Korean traditional timber house according to plan type, Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea, 38(7), 247-254. https://doi.org/10.5659/JAIK.2022.38.7.247
  14. National Disaster Management Research Institute (NDMI). (2010). Performance Stiffness Reduction Test Wall and Joint in Wood Structure.
  15. Seoul Report. No. 3690 (July 1, 2021). Chapter 2, Article 6, Paragraph 4.