Fig. 5: Structural advantages of the RF configuration over traditional configurations under different shapes.
From: Reciprocal frame design for large-scale timber construction
a Under a central top displacement of 2.55 mm, the shell, hyperbolic paraboloid, and the free-form surface sustained concentrated loads of 26.2 N, 13.1 N, and 18.3 N, respectively. b The comparison between finite element simulations and load-bearing tests validates the accuracy of the finite element analysis. c The configuration of components in contemporary RF systems reveals limitations in accommodating large curvatures. d, e Comparison of structural performance among 3 types of timber frames. With the same maximum displacement, the structural performance of the RF prototype in the shell form is 1.41 times better than that of contemporary RF and 1.61 times that of the timber lattice frame. The RF prototype outperforms the other two contemporary systems by approximately twofold in the hyperbolic paraboloid. In the free-form surface, the RF prototype performs 1.05 and 1.26 times over the contemporary RF and timber lattice frame, respectively.
