Vahik Enjily BSc, PhD, CEng, FIStructE, MIMechE, FIWSc
Director of Timber Engineering & Construction
Centre for Timber Technology and Construction (CTTC)
Building Research Establishment (BRE)
UK
This paper is a research paper and its contents must not be used in design. For design, the readers should refer to the publication "Multi-storey timber frame buildings - a design guide."
The publication can be obtained from www.bre.co.uk
SUMMARY
The well documented Timber Frame 2000 project provided a six-storey experimental
timber frame building (Figure 1), the first of its kind in the world, for
the sole purpose of investigating the performance and economic prospects of
medium-rise timber frame buildings in the UK. The majority of associated research
projects conducted on this building have been completed and the results presented
on an international forum. This paper summarises the TF2000 project to date
and provides salient results from research conducted on the experimental building.
![]() |
![]() |
Figure 1: The Six-storey TF2000 Building
INTRODUCTION
Until a few years ago, the number of storeys in timber frame buildings in
the UK was limited by fire regulations; to build with more than three storeys
required special waivers. This restriction was lifted in 1991[1] allowing,
for the first time, the number of storeys potentially to reach eight (in England
and Wales) without any additional fire resistance requirements other than
those existing for many three-storey buildings. Timber frame buildings of
up to four storeys are being used quite extensively in the UK, however no
comprehensive design rules exist for five storeys or more. As a result BRE
and TTL carried out a joint feasibility study [2] on such buildings and subsequently
built a six storey experimental building in partnership with the UK industry
and DETR. The feasibility study, construction of the experimental building
and later testing of the building were all conducted as part of the Timber
Frame 2000 project (TF2000) with the objective of providing the technical
tools and commercial drivers for the safe and economic construction of medium-rise
timber frame buildings in the UK.
The feasibility study
The aim of this feasibility study [2] was to review the design issues relating
to safety, and to examine the construction requirements for such buildings.
Case studies involving a few real projects were investigated during 1994 -
1995. The feasibility report reviewed and summarised design and construction
requirements affecting medium-rise timber frame buildings. Much emphasis was
placed upon the economical and technical issues and potential of medium-rise
(4-8 storeys) timber frames, as a desirable method of construction. The research
requirements and design options for full-scale tests on at least a five-storey
test building were highlighted. The lack of research data for design and construction
was identified and a primary research programme (TF2000) to overcome the significant
aspects within a full-scale test building was proposed2. Consequently, a co-operative
project entitled Timber Frame 2000 (TF2000) by Department of the Environment,
Transport and the Region (DETR), UK timber frame industry, TTL and BRE was
set up in October 1995. More detailed information is given in the references2.
|
The TF2000 project |
TEST PROGRAMMES |
Table 1: Test Programmes |
BENCHMARKING AND PROCESS ENGINEERING
Benchmarking began with the acknowledgement of the need for change and the
decision to use an analytical methodology to achieve greater competitiveness
and improvements in the whole product supply chain. Used successfully within
other industries such as automotive and aerospace, benchmarking has now found
a new lease of life in construction. In essence, benchmarking can best be
described as "the continuous process of measuring products, services
and practices against the toughest competitors, or those companies recognised
as industry leaders". Typically, it takes one of three forms:
Internal - comparison of the same thing within different branches
of the same organisation.
External - comparison of the same product or process provided by direct
market competitors.
Functional - comparison of the processes with worldwide best practice.
These can provide both the means to evaluate and compare alternate building solutions (steel, concrete, masonry or timber frame for example) and perhaps more importantly, provide the opportunity for firms to set new targets to bring themselves up to world-wide best-practice.
The next step was to identify client requirements, place them in a measurable context and then to use the information to target improvements clients will seek in the future. These customer-focused requirements are defined as critical success factors (csf's). For TF2000, the key csf's for competitive benchmarking were identified as:
Lead time - calculated in weeks with the start point as customer contract
agreement with full information and the end, the manufacturing completion
of the timber frame package.
Construction value - calculated in £ per square metre.
Speed of construction - calculated in m2 per week with the start point
being arrival of the structural frame on site and the end being a water tight
timber frame.
|
Work commenced on site in September 1997 and it took just 17 days to erect a six-storey building of 24 flats with a team of just six erectors (Figure 2). The results are summarised in Table 2 and comparison made with other materials in Table 3. In comparison with steel and concrete framing, the benchmark
costs have proved extremely competitive. The TF2000 figure is a total
cost of £66 per square metre, including erection and labour, to
give a watertight shell ready for the fitting of internal services and
external cladding. This compares favourably with the target benchmark
of £70 per square metre and a current industry figure of £85 |
Figure 2: Completed construction stage after 17 days |
|
Current |
Target |
Actual |
|
|
Structural frame Cost |
£70 m2 |
£60 m2 |
£58 m2 |
|
Erection cost |
£15 m2 |
£10 m2 |
£8 m2 |
|
Lead time |
6 weeks |
5 weeks |
5 weeks |
|
Site production |
225 |
750 |
656 |
|
Steel |
Concrete |
TF2000 |
|
|
Structural frame Cost |
£79 m2 |
£61 m2 |
£58 m2 |
|
Erection cost |
N.A. |
N.A. |
£8 m2 |
|
Lead time |
N.A. |
N.A. |
5 weeks |
|
Site production |
909 |
333 |
656 |
The comparative benchmark figures for the framing alone of steel and concrete structures are £79 and £61 per square metre respectively. The non-load bearing cladding walls and infill-walls still have to be built. Not only does this add to the eventual cost per square metre but also other work cannot proceed until these walls are in position, extending the overall building period.
Clearly, benchmarks can provide the team with the tools to dramatically improve construction performance. More details are given in4.
COMMERCIAL FINDINGS
Market - The UK construction market, in common with most construction markets
world-wide, has come under increasing pressure to reduce costs and enhance
client value, whilst maintaining or improving existing quality and performance
standards. Maximising land usage, particularly on brown (inner city) sites,
is also dictating increased storey heights for residential buildings from
low rise (2-3 storey), to medium rise (4-8 storey). In the 5 - 8 storey markets,
recent research demonstrated that a significant market existed for 5 and 6
storeys (Figure 3), but there is a much reduced demand for 7 and 8 storeys.
Figure 5 was produced to gain some insight into the potential markets for
medium rise buildings. It is based on a survey to evaluate the market for
existing medium-rise residential stock. The methodology used was:
· Sample selection: 10 Towns were selected (Southampton, Portsmouth,
Bournemouth, Reading, Oxford, Birmingham, London, Manchester, Liverpool and
Aberdeen).
· Target sample identified as 100 recently erected residential buildings
three storeys and above from each location.
![]() |
Figure 3: Market potential for timber frame buildings - (Number of storeys and relative share of potential market
There are strong indications that three- and four-storey timber frame buildings
are becoming more readily accepted, demonstrated by the increasing number
of buildings actually built. Despite the advances made in three and four-storey
buildings there remain barriers to the acceptance of five and six-storey buildings
(or higher) such as:
· Regulatory: Current regulations in Scotland inhibit timber frame
medium-rise building because of non-combustibility clauses, particularly for
protected shafts. The 11 m height restriction for floors constructed with
combustible materials makes five-storey buildings the practical maximum at
the moment.
· Build costs: The requirement to make specific design provisions for
disproportionate collapse above four storeys and the market demand for lifts
(beyond four storeys) adds significant costs, and can reduce the builders
profit to the point that the extra storey is not considered economical.
· Market: Clearly (Figure 3), the viable market is in the 3-6 storey
range at present, with 7-8 storey buildings representing only a very small
percentage of present markets.
· Awareness: The majority of designers, quantity surveyors, contractors
and fabricators in the UK are not aware of the capabilities, the potential
benefits and many advantages that timber frame buildings offer, such as:
- Fast construction times.
- Reduced loading on foundations.
- Off-site manufacture/less on site storage areas required.
- Reduced direct cost savings on labour, material waste, plant hire, etc.
- Minimum disruption to neighbouring buildings.
- Dimensional accuracy.
- Thermal and acoustic efficiency.
- Good environmental credentials.
- Design flexibility.
The considerable savings that can be gained from off- or on-site prefabrication
(Figure 4) and the use of specialist erection teams make medium rise timber
frame very attractive. The professional designers and surveyors, and large
sections of the contracting and building industry still have to be made aware
of timber frame's potential and be convinced of its advantages. This has and
continues to be achieved through Timber Frame 2000, which has brought enormous
publicity for timber frame buildings.
![]() |
![]() |
Figure 4: Prefabrication (roof segment on site & wall panels off-site)
ENGINEERING DESIGN & SPECIFICATION
The following sets out the basis for the preliminary calculations and the
principles, which were agreed by the Technical Committee.
Raft concrete foundation was used for the building. The preliminary structural
calculations were based on BS5268: Part 2: 19965. BS5268: Part 6: Section
6.1: 19966 was used as a basis for judgements concerning the timber frame
wall designs. BS5268: Part 3: 19857 was used to indicate the roof structure.
Parallel design checks to applicable sections of DD ENV 1995-1-1: 19948 and
its National Application Document (NAD) was carried out. The following were
used for the preliminary calculations:
- BS6399: Part 1: 19849 - Code of practice for dead and imposed loads.
- BS6399: Part 2: 199510 - Code of practice for wind loads.
- BS6399: Part 3: 198811 - Code of practice for imposed roof loads.
- CP3: Chapter V: 197212 - Basic wind data for the design of buildings.
Strength Class C16 to BS EN33813 was used throughout the calculations, in
order to ensure that the tests on the structure will demonstrate the performance
of such a building when using softwood from any suitable supply source (including
the UK.). In consideration of the desirability of minimising differential
movement, a decision was taken to designate special target moisture content
at the time of erection. This was 12% ± 2% for floors and 18% ±
2 for walls.
The following general specifications for key elements were proposed and agreed (Figure 5): Image here
|
Figure 5: Brick Cladding Under Construction More information is given in reference 14. |
|
DIFFERENTIAL MOVEMENT Over 93 instruments installed on the TF2000 building
have provided data on the movement of wall and floor panels with detailed
measurements of the joist, top rail, stud, bottom rail and sole plate
throughout the construction and use of the building. Instruments also
provided data on the timber moisture content, supported stud loads,
humidity and temperature. Analysis of this data in combination with
the results of laboratory tests, used to determine the cross grain shrinkage
and compression, have enabled predictions to be made for movement of
the timber frame had the TF2000 building been fully occupied. This prediction,
shown in figure 6, assumes that any bedding-in displacements of timber
members taking place in the uptake of load has already occurred during
construction. |
Figure 6: Predicted movement of the TF2000 timber frame due to occupancy |
The use of super dried timber for the joists installed with moisture contents of about 12% ensures that the downward movement of the timber frame with time is reduced to less than 20mm. This in combination with brickwork cladding of a low moisture movement can result in a design value for differential movement of less than 30mm for the six-storey TF2000 building. Assuming this amount of total movement at eaves level would enable flexible wall ties to be used for the construction of cladding on a similar building. These results will be used to provide generic guidance on differential movement in medium-rise timber frame buildings for a variety of claddings and counter measures such as the use of engineered wood products in the floor construction. More information is given in reference 15.
WHOLE BUILDING RACKING STIFFNESS
This part of the test programme has been completed. One of the many items
of interest in the construction of the TF2000 is the contribution of the various
building elements (e.g. plasterboard, brick cladding, etc.) to the overall
stiffness of the structure. However, measuring the overall stiffness of a
six-storey building is not a simple task, and dynamic testing was selected
as an indirect way of determining the required information.
Measurements of the frequencies of the building were made using a laser system (Figure 7) to monitor the ambient response of the structure, i.e. its natural vibration caused by air movement within the BRE Cardington Hangar. These measurements are processed to produce an autospectrum, which is used to identify the frequencies of the modes of vibration. The laser has the advantage that the measurements can be made remotely from the building.
More comprehensive forced vibration tests (Figure 7) were also undertaken
at a number of key stages. These are used to determine all of the characteristics
of the fundamental modes of vibration, i.e. frequency, mode shape, stiffness
& damping. This provides detailed information but required the use of
a vibration generator attached to the building.
![]() |
![]() |
Figure 7: Stiffness measurements of the TF2000 building
The following stages show the overall tests carried out:
Stage I - Timber frame alone (blocks of flats, stairs, roof, roof tiles)
Stage II - Stiffness of timber frame plus all plasterboard wall and ceiling
linings
Stage III - Stiffness of completed building including masonry cladding
The following analyses were carried out:
· Lateral stiffness of timber frame only
· Lateral stiffness of timber frame and plasterboard linings
· Lateral stiffness of whole building (with brick cladding)
The results show that the addition of plasterboard linings increased the stiffness by a factor of 3.3, indicating that these items play an important role in the overall stiffness of the structure at that stage. The addition of the brick cladding introduced a further overall stiffness of the structure by a factor of 5.3 (to a total factor of 17.5 over the original timber frame). These results are being analysed for codes and standards and amendments will be made to the codes in due course. More detailed results are given in reference 16.
DISPROPORTIONATE COLLPASE
This part of the programme has been completed. England/Wales and Scotland/Northern Ireland Building Regulations and Standards all refer to the need for disproportionate collapse robustness for buildings above four storeys.
The objective of this part of the programme of tests is to enable an evaluation of the actual behaviour of the TF2000 building when selected vertical load bearing wall panels are removed. This evaluation is to verify that the inherent stiffness of cellular platform timber frame construction can provide the necessary robustness so that, in the event of an accident, the building will not suffer collapse to an extent disproportionate to the cause. This is best achieved by designing in such a way that a beam, column or section of wall can be removed without the structure above collapsing (although damage to the building is allowed). To achieve this, beams are incorporated within floor depths over external walls, or the walls themselves are made to act as beams.
|
The building was loaded using weighed sandbags positioned on each floor above the full flat area where the tests were carried out in similar manner to that set out in the other material codes for checking disproportionate collapse. The following rules were defined for the TF2000 building: · The horizontal length of any load-bearing wall
to be notionally removed in any given instance is the length between
intersecting internal/return walls or special vertical support system. |
Figure 8 : Disproportionate Collapse Test |
Table 4 shows a summary of the results and more information
can be found in reference 17.
FIRE SAFETY
One of the objectives of TF2000 project is to examine issues where there is
disharmony between the three sets of building regulations existing in the
UK with the objective, if possible, of achieving a closer degree of uniformity.
The main discrepancy is the use of combustible material for construction beyond
11m in height. In this respect the fire safety principles are similar for
low and medium-rise structures in that compartmentation must be assured for
the fire duration. This has been assessed on the TF2000 building by conducting
a fire test in a complete flat, detailed in the section below.
Another regulatory requirement for the whole of the UK is the use of non-combustible materials in stair and landing construction. This conflicts with the fast erection process for timber frame and the aim of providing stair access for the construction process itself. The combustibility and compartmentation of timber stairs in dry lined timber frame shafts has also been assessed as a part of the TF2000 project.
The compartment fire test
The primary objective of the TF2000 compartment fire test was to evaluate
the fire resistance of a medium rise six storey timber frame building subject
to a severe natural fire exposure. The test provided the opportunity to demonstrate
that this form of construction can meet the functional requirements of the
Building Regulations for England and Wales and the Building Standards for
Scotland for such buildings.
|
|
![]() |
Figure 9: The TF2000 building during the compartment fire test
In order to assess the performance of the structure in maintaining both the
safety of the occupants and the integrity of the compartmentation for the
required period of time the building was comprehensively instrumented. Instrumentation
included thermocouples to measure the temperatures in the compartment and
the heat rise in the cavities surrounding the compartment. Load cells were
used to yield data on the rate of heat release in the compartment and automatic
fire detection, gas analysis and heat flux meters were used to provide information
on the tenability criteria.
The fire was ignited in the living area of the flat and progressed to flashover after approximately 24 minutes (Figure 9). Initial burning was concentrated in the front of the living area closest to the ventilation opening. To accelerate the time to flashover the Fire Brigade was asked to intervene by breaking a single windowpane in the kitchen area. This took place 21 minutes and 30 seconds from ignition. Following flashover the Fireline boards over the windows to the floor above were subject to a heat flux of approximately 30kW/m² (peak plume temperature in excess of 500°C). The timber frame of the window would, if exposed, have ignited. Peak temperatures in the living area of the fire flat reached approximately 1000°C and remained at this level until the test was stopped at 64 minutes having reached one of the planned termination criteria.
Maximum temperatures in the structural voids forming the boundaries of the compartment generally remained below 100°C with the exception of the localised areas where the timber members were exposed to fire for a period of time. The test data indicated that the TF2000 fire was approximately 10% more severe than a 60-minute fire resistance test exposure. In spite of this, there was little charring of the joists observed after completion of the test
The staircase fire test
One of the main advantages of Timber Frame in the construction market is the
speed at which buildings can be erected and commissioned. If a significant
part of the construction involved the construction or casting of masonry elements
then such benefits would be largely lost at cost to both the developer and
client. This gave rise to a research proposal, supported by DETR and the timber
construction industry, to carry out an experimental programme investigating
the actual fire performance of timber stairs in a timber frame building.
|
It was necessary to define at an early stage the fire performance objectives for a stair in such a residential building during a fire situation. In meeting the fire safety requirements of the Building Regulations the fundamental consideration for the stair is as follows: The stair has to remain usable for firefighting after initial evacuation of occupants immediately at risk and for subsequent evacuation by the other occupants of the flats who are initially advised to remain in their dwellings. To prove this criteria initial trial tests established suitable methodology and specifications for the fire compartment, stair construction and fire characteristics; these were: · Stairs would be treated using Dricon by Hickson
Timber Products |
Figure 10: |
Fire development was very rapid following ignition. Flames could be seen licking around the newel post and handrail approximately 1 minute from ignition. The fibre strips soaked in paraffin ignited some 3 minutes into the test and continued to burn for approximately 12 minutes. At no stage was there any spread of fire from this source. The mattress burned extremely intensely and had been largely consumed by about 4.5 minutes into the test.
Despite the areas of inlet and exhaust ventilation being similar to those used in the trial an appreciably faster flow of air was established in the test in the TF2000 stair shaft. The velocity of smoke exhausting from the 5th floor (level 6) stair shaft window was noted as being significant and was estimated at approximately 5 metres per second. This through draught very evidently dictated the path of flames at the seat of the fire.
The fire lasted for approximately 31 minutes. At this stage the fire load had reduced to a few smouldering embers. The Fire Brigade attended the test but did not have to intervene to suppress the fire. Following combustion of the fire load the integrity of the stair was confirmed by asking Fire Brigade personnel in full equipment to use the stairs to access the first and second floors as recorded in figure 10. More detailed information is given in reference 19.
ACCOUSTICS
The main objective was to identify and develop enhanced performance solutions
for Timber Frame buildings (using a whole-building approach) to address current
client and occupier concerns regarding noise transmission between and within
existing (masonry and timber frame) housing stock.
Acoustic tests have been carried out on 19 different types of wall and floor
construction designed to meet the current building regulations and enhanced
sound insulation targets. The research team set Enhanced targets in view of
the Governments Business Plan for Safety and Health in Buildings. This seeks
to "significantly improve the standards of sound insulation for both
new and established dwellings and to reduce the estimated 20% or more households
affected by noise nuisance".
To achieve a superior level of acoustic performance the wall and floor construction
would need to be significantly better than the current building regulations.
An enhancement of 3dB to the sound insulation is generally accepted as significantly
noticeable and was included in the following sound insulation target values
for wall and floor constructions:
· Airborne sound insulation for walls - 55dB (min)
· Airborne sound insulation for floors - 54dB (min)
· Impact sound transmission for floors - 59dB (max)
Most of the floors tested to-date met the target values of 54 dB (minimum
airborne value) and 59 dB (maximum impact value). Wall test results are outstanding
and they all meet the target value of 55 dB. More detailed information of
the types of floating floors tested and their performance can be found in
reference 20.
FORWARD LOOK
· The results of the racking stiffness are being converted to code
values.
· The following codes and standards are being updated:
- BS5268: Part 2
- BS5268: Part 3
- BS5268: Part 4
- BS5268: Part 5
- BS5268: Part 6
- EC5 and CEN standards where appropriate.
· Harmonisation of Building Regulations and their update are being
considered by relevant departments.
· Authoritative Guidance Document for design and construction of medium-rise
buildings is being drafted.
1. HMSO. 1990-1995. Building Regulations, Approved Documents & Building
Standards. London, UK.
2. Enjily V and Mettem C J. 1995. "Medium-rise timber frame buildings:
Disproportionate collapse and other design requirements". BRE, UK.
3. Enjily V and Palmer S. 1996. "Timber frame 2000. Phase I: Summary
of commercial and technical findings". BRE, UK.
4. Palmer S and Enjily V. 1998. Benchmarking and Construction Process of the
TF2000 building. COST-E5 Workshop proceedings, BRE, UK.
5. British Standard Institution (BSI). 1996. "BS5268: Part 2:- The structural
use of timber. Part 2: Code of practice for permissible stress design, materials
and workmanship". London, UK.
6. British Standard Institution (BSI). 1996. "BS5268: Part 6: Section
6.1:- The structural use of timber. Part 6: Code of practice for timber frame
walls. Section 6.1: Dwellings not exceeding four storeys". London, UK.
7. British Standard Institution (BSI). 1985. "BS5268: Part 3:- The structural
use of timber. Part 3: Code of practice for trussed rafter roofs". London,
UK.
8. British Standards Institution (BSI). 1994. "DD ENV 1995-1-1:- Eurocode
5:- Design of timber structures. Part 1.1: General rules and rules for buildings
(together with the UK National Application Document)". London, UK.
9. British Standard Institution (BSI). 1984. "BS6399: Part 1:- Loading
for buildings - Code of practice for dead and imposed loads". London,
UK.
10. British Standard Institution(BSI). 1995. "BS6399: Part 2:- Loading
for buildings - Code of practice for wind loads. BSI, London, UK.
11. British Standard Institution (BSI). 1988. "BS6399: Part 3:- Loading
for buildings - Code of practice for snow loads". London, UK.
12. British Standard Institution (BSI). 1972. "CP3: Chapter V: Part 2:-
Loading for buildings - Code of basic data for the design of buildings - Wind
loads". London, UK.
13. British Standard Institution (BSI). 1994. "BS EN 338:- Loading for
buildings - Structural Timber - Strength Classes". London, UK.
14. Steer P J. 1998. "Design of TF2000 Building". COST-E5 Workshop
proceedings, BRE, UK.
15. Grantham R and Enjily V. 2000. "Differential movement between the
brick cladding and timber frame of the TF2000 building". Proceedings
of the World Conference on Timber Engineering, Whistler, British Columbia,
UBC, Canada.
16. Ellis B R, Bougard A J, Enjily V and Palmer S. 1998. "Dynamic Testing
and stiffness evaluation of the TF2000 building". BRE, UK.
17. Milner M W, Edwards S, Turnbull D B and Enjily V. 1998. "Verification
of the robustness of a six-storey timber frame building". The structural
Engineer, Volume 76/No 16, London, UK.
18. Lennon T, Bullock M & Enjily V. 2000. "The fire resistance of
timber frame building". BRE Report No 79485-1, BRE, UK.
19. Lennon T, Bullock M & Enjily V. 2000. "Medium rise timber frame
2000 stair fire test". BRE Report No 200-711, BRE, UK.
20. Pitts G. 2000. "Acoustic performance of party floors and walls in
timber framed buildings". ISBN 1900510243, TRADA Technology Report 1/2000.
High Wycombe, UK.
![]() |
|