Uplift capacity and impact resistance of roof tiles

LAUR Repository

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Abi Shdid, Caesar
dc.contributor.author Mirmiran, Amir
dc.contributor.author Wang, Ton-Lo
dc.contributor.author Jimenez, Diego
dc.contributor.author Huang, Peng
dc.date.accessioned 2016-10-20T08:47:32Z
dc.date.available 2016-10-20T08:47:32Z
dc.date.copyright 2011 en_US
dc.date.issued 2016-10-20
dc.identifier.issn 1084-0680 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10725/4641
dc.description.abstract Roof coverings, particularly barrel tiles, have experienced significant damage over the last few years from storms, even weaker storms such as Category 1 Hurricane Wilma in 2005. Efforts have been made to ban mortar-set attachments in southern Florida in favor of adhesive sets. Moreover, some homeowners have generalized the poor performance of clay or concrete tiles in favor of one or the other. This study aims to address whether there is a significant difference in the uplift capacity and impact resistance of field and ridge tiles of clay and concrete with either mortar-set or adhesive-set attachments. The detailed experimental study revealed the strongest system to be concrete tiles with mortar, both for uplift capacity and impact resistance. Although concrete tiles bond to mortar much better than clay tiles, clay tiles adhere better to the foam adhesive. Concrete tiles were also shown to perform better than clay tiles when impacted by a traveling projectile. Test results do not support the ban on the use of mortar for hip and ridge tiles. It is suggested that any such ban on mortar should be limited to clay tiles only. The study also showed cyclic testing to more accurately represent the uplift capacity of tiles for real hurricane conditions. In contrast, the monotonic testing used by tile manufacturers across the industry was found to overestimate the uplift capacity of tiles by as much as 40%. en_US
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.title Uplift capacity and impact resistance of roof tiles en_US
dc.type Article en_US
dc.description.version Published en_US
dc.author.school SOE en_US
dc.author.idnumber 199431340 en_US
dc.author.department Civil Engineering en_US
dc.description.embargo N/A en_US
dc.relation.journal Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction en_US
dc.journal.volume 16 en_US
dc.journal.issue 3 en_US
dc.article.pages 121-129 en_US
dc.keywords Adhesive en_US
dc.keywords Clay en_US
dc.keywords Concrete en_US
dc.keywords Hurricane en_US
dc.keywords Impact en_US
dc.keywords Mortars en_US
dc.keywords Projectiles en_US
dc.keywords Roofs en_US
dc.identifier.doi http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)SC.1943-5576.0000081 en_US
dc.identifier.ctation Shdid, C. A., Mirmiran, A., Wang, T. L., Jimenez, D., & Huang, P. (2010). Uplift capacity and impact resistance of roof tiles. Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, 16(3), 121-129. en_US
dc.author.email caesar.abishdid@lau.edu.lb en_US
dc.identifier.tou http://libraries.lau.edu.lb/research/laur/terms-of-use/articles.php en_US
dc.identifier.url http://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/(ASCE)SC.1943-5576.0000081 en_US
dc.orcid.id https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7114-4795

Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search LAUR

Advanced Search


My Account