Structure Magazine - March 20202 PDF

STRUCTURE
NCSEA | CASE | SEI MARCH 2020
WIND/SEISMIC
INSIDE: Napa County Courthouse 26

Pile Structural Capacity 14
Seismic Loading Protocols 19
High Capacity Timber Connection 30
2020 STRUCTURES CONGRESS • April 5-8
RESIST ECONOMICALLY Functional. Attractive. Economical.
Reimagined from a two-story building originally
built in 1969, the Algonquin College DARE District
library’s new design features soaring ceilings,
expansive spaces, and panoramic views. Located
within a seismic zone, the building uses
strategically placed Cast Connex® High Strength
Connectors™ to protect against earthquake
damage. The result: an attractive, uncompromising,
and economical AESS connection for
seismic applications.
Algonquin College - DARE District, ON

Designed by Diamond Schmitt Architects/ Edward J. Cuhaci &
Associates Architects Inc.
Structural Engineer Adjeleian Allen Rubeli Limited
Photography by doublespace photography
The CAST CONNEX® High Strength Connector™ Seismic Resistance Simplified

(HSC) is a patented, pre-engineered steel • Available to fit a range of HSS members
casting designed to connect to round hollow • Versatile: for use in both concealed
structural section (HSS)/Pipe elements for and architecturally exposed structural steel
use in seismic braced frames. (AESS) applications
• Cost-efficient enough for industrial use
Uncompromising • Faster erection enabled by field-bolted
Cast Connex HSCs are code-listed (ICC-ES ESR) connections
connectors for special and ordinary concentrically • Techtonic architectural expression
braced frames. of connection
Efficient
HSCs eliminate field welding and reduce erec-
tion and inspection costs.
HIGH STRENGTH CONNECTOR™

www.castconnex.com innova�ve components for inspired designs
ADVERTISER INDEX Please support these advertisers
STRUCTURE ®
Aegis Metal Framing ................................9 Keller - North America ............................18 MARKETING & ADVERTISING SALES
AIT Solutions .........................................40 KPFF .....................................................4 [email protected]
American Concrete Institute .....................51 Lindapter..............................................33 Joe Murphy

[email protected]; Tel: 203-254-9595
Canadian Wood Council .......................29 LNA Solutions .......................................37
Denis O’Malley
Cast Connex ..........................................2 MAPEI ...........................................11, 17
[email protected]; Tel: 203-356-9694, ext. 13
Commins Mfg .......................................23 New Millennium ...................................28
Jerry Preston
Dewalt ................................................41 Pieresearch ..........................................25 [email protected]; Tel: 602-369-3037
ENERCALC, INC ....................................3 RISA ...................................................52

EDITORIAL STAFF
GeoDesign ..........................................31 Simpson Strong-tie ............................ 12-13
Executive Editor Alfred Spada
Geopier Foundation Company.................36 StructurePoint ..........................................6 [email protected]
Hohmann & Barnard ..............................15 Struware ..............................................35 Publisher Christine M. Sloat, P.E.
Integrated Engineering Software ...............42 [email protected]
Associate Publisher Nikki Alger
Get YOUR name on this list!

[email protected]
Creative Director Tara Smith

[email protected]
Visit our website to for more info about print and
digital advertising opportunities. EDITORIAL BOARD
Chair John A. Dal Pino, S.E.
STRUCTUREmag.org FTF Engineering, Inc., San Francisco, CA
[email protected]
Jeremy L. Achter, S.E., LEED AP
YOUR OPINION MATTERS! ARW Engineers, Ogden, UT
Erin Conaway, P.E.

STRUCTURE magazine is always looking for Structural Forum (opinion) articles and Letters to the Editor.
AISC, Littleton, CO
We preserve a page at the end of the magazine to print these types of articles, as space permits. Please send
Linda M. Kaplan, P.E.
your pieces to [email protected]. And don’t forget – post questions or comments on the digital
Pennoni, Pittsburgh, PA
versions of articles on the STRUCTURE website. STRUCTURE looks forward to hearing from you!
Charles “Chuck” F. King, P.E.
Urban Engineers of New York, New York, NY
Emily B. Lorenz, P.E.

WASHINGTON STATE FERRIES TIMBER TRESTLE SEISMIC HAZARD
Chicago, IL
ANALYSIS AND VASHON TRESTLE SEISMIC REHABILITATION
Jessica Mandrick, P.E., S.E., LEED AP
Gilsanz Murray Steficek, LLP, New York, NY
Jason McCool, P.E.

TOGETHER WE BUILD SOLUTIONS
Robbins Engineering Consultants, Little Rock, AR
Brian W. Miller
Davis, CA
Evans Mountzouris, P.E.

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org
The DiSalvo Engineering Group, Danbury, CT
John “Buddy” Showalter, P.E.

International Code Council, Washington, DC
Eytan Solomon, P.E., LEED AP

Silman, New York, NY
Jeannette M. Torrents, P.E., S.E., LEED AP

JVA, Inc., Boulder, CO
STRUCTURE ® magazine (ISSN 1536 4283) is published monthly

by The National Council of Structural Engineers Associations (a nonprofit
Association), 20 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 750, Chicago, IL 60606
312.649.4600. Application to Mail at Periodicals Postage Prices is
Pending at Chicago, IL and additional mailing offices. STRUCTURE
magazine, Volume 27, Number 3, © 2020 by The National Council of
Excellence in Structural Engineers Associations, all rights reserved. Subscription services,

back issues and subscription information tel: 312-649-4600, or write to
Structural Engineering Photo: Steven Kingsley

STRUCTURE magazine Circulation, 20 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 750,
Chicago, IL 60606.The publication is distributed to members of The
National Council of Structural Engineers Associations through a resolution to
its bylaws, and to members of CASE and SEI paid by each organization as
Washington State Ferries Timber Trestle • Puget Sound • WA nominal price subscription for its members as a benefit of their membership.
Yearly Subscription in USA $75; $40 For Students; Canada $90; $60
Seattle Eugene Irvine St. Louis for Canadian Students; Foreign $135, $90 for foreign students. Editorial
Tacoma Sacramento San Diego Chicago Office: Send editorial mail to: STRUCTURE magazine, Attn: Editorial, 20
N. Wacker Drive, Suite 750, Chicago, IL 60606. POSTMASTER: Send
Lacey San Francisco Boise Louisville
Address changes to STRUCTURE magazine, 20 N. Wacker Drive, Suite
Spokane Los Angeles Salt Lake City Washington, DC KPFF is an Equal Opportunity Employer 750, Chicago, IL 60606.
Portland Long Beach Des Moines New York www.kpff.com
STRUCTURE is a registered trademark of the National Council of Structural
Engineers Associations (NCSEA). Articles may not be reproduced in whole
or in part without the written permission of the publisher.
4 STRUCTURE magazine
Contents M ARCH 2020
Cover Feature 26 NAPA COUNTY HISTORIC

COURTHOUSE – PART 3
By Brett Shields, P.E., Luke Wilson, S.E., and Kevin Zucco, S.E.
Part 3 discusses repairs and an overview of the applicability

of Fabric-Reinforced Cementitious Matrix (FRCM). FRCM
is more homogeneous with existing brick stiffness and
mechanical properties compared to epoxy-based overlays
and allows historic brick to breathe.
30 ANATOMY OF A HIGH
CAPACITY TIMBER CONNECTION
By D. Scott Nyseth, P.E., S.E.
An 18-x18-inch timber was designed as the bottom

chord of a pedestrian bridge truss. For the truss
tension splice connection, choosing the optimal
number of interior knife plates and a dowel diameter
that effectively utilized the entire width of the timber
allowed for higher capacity connections.
Columns and Departments

7 Editorial Going Global 34 Building Blocks Pre-Manufactured Wood Trusses
By Anne Ellis, P.E. By Kirk Grundahl, P.E.
8 Structural Rehabilitation 38 Historic Structures Albion Bridge Collapse

The IEBC’s Roof Diaphragm Evaluation Requirements By Frank Griggs, Jr., D.Eng., P.E.
By Dale Statler, P.E., and Jerry Maly, P.E.

43 Spotlight 181 Fremont
By Ibbi Almufti, S.E., and Nate Warner, P.E.
14 Structural Components Pile Structural Capacity
By H. Y. Ng, P.E., C.Eng
50 Structural Forum FEMA P-807 for Soft-Story Retrofits
By Bruce F. Maison, P.E., S.E.
19 Structural Testing Lab Test Confidential: Seismic
Loading Protocols In Every Issue
By Matthew S. Speicher, Ph.D., and Bruce F. Maison, P.E., S.E.
4 Advertiser Index
40 Resource Guide – Software Updates
22 Structural Systems Structure Design Considerations 44 NCSEA News
for Building Enclosures 46 SEI Update
By Matthew L. Wagner, S.E., and Patrick Olechno, P.E. 48 CASE in Point
Publication of any article, image, or advertisement in STRUCTURE® magazine does not constitute endorsement by NCSEA, CASE, SEI, the Publisher, or the Editorial Board. Authors, contributors, and advertisers retain sole responsibility for the content of their submissions.
MARCH 2020 5
A Powerful Software Suite for Detailed
Analysis & Design of Reinforced Concrete Structures
EDITORIAL
Going Global
Introducing the SEI/ASCE Global Practice Guide
By Anne Ellis, P.E., FACI, F.ASCE, NAC
D id you know in some countries the workweek is Saturday – and addresses culture, design and construction, and legal and financial
Thursday? That some countries use decimal commas where issues. The intent is to raise awareness of and seed inquiry into specific
others use decimal periods when writing numbers of 4 places or topics from those that can provide appropriate assistance. The Guide
more? That some countries have neither national, regional nor local will prove valuable whether you are contemplating global practice,
building codes nor standards? When working outside the U.S., local considering go-no-go decisions on specific opportunities, and/or for-
practices, different from our own, can wreak havoc on structural mulating project plans. An extensive list of topics is covered (see box).
engineering projects if not adequately anticipated and addressed. In The Guide also provides country-specific information and examples.
consideration of such, some may ask, why work outside of the U.S.? The Guide does not address considerations related to the establish-
Structural Engineering increasingly is becoming a profession that ment of an in-country office.
crosses national borders. Advances in technology, increasing interde- Structural Engineers thriving in global practice recognize there is
pendent economies, and emerging market investment in infrastructure no single way of doing things when working globally. They identify
and real estate enable structural engineering practice opportunities out- and plan for the local differences. They recognize that every client,
side of the U.S. These opportunities country, local society, and workforce
are significant and allow structural Topics Covered is unique. These differences are antici-
engineers to participate in projects pated, accommodated, and adequately
• Cultural intelligence • Team structure
of grand scale and challenge. These resourced. Legal, financial, and human
• Cultural dynamics • Standard of care and
ventures allow structural engineers resource professionals with global exper-
• Communication other legal regimes
to share and transfer their high-value tise are essential to informing and
• Multicultural teams and • Rule of law
knowledge. These global projects guiding the structural engineer’s success.
workforce • Registration
allow structural engineers to work Working outside your home country
• Business etiquette • Anticorruption
with different codes and standards can be a very attractive proposition.
• Codes and standards • Local tender rules
and be exposed to different materials, Many engineers are motivated to make
• Sustainability rating systems • Contracts
means, and methods. When consid- a difference where the need is greater.
• Resilience • Insurance
ering projects outside the U.S., the Some structural engineers may be
• Construction practice, • Professional liability
opportunities must be balanced by attracted by the idea of traveling to and
including means and methods • Intellectual property and
the multiplicity of risks, including even living somewhere different. The
• Labor: Skills and languages conﬁdential information
government instability, even regime idea of new technical challenges may
• Safety: Personal, liability, • Export controls
collapse, that may result in people attract others. And, for many, it may
and responsibility • Cybersecurity
and assets stranded for extensive peri- be something never considered but an
• Metric system • Employment
ods and with little recourse. opportunity offered by their employer,
• Project delivery types • Cost and pricing
Successful global practice requires an opportunity that may enhance the
• Expectation of deliverables • Currency considerations
structural engineers to embrace chance of promotion, even fuel a career.
• Infrastructure: Technology, • Taxation
skills, traits, know-how, and aware- Whatever the attraction or motivation,
phone, power, and • Local accounting rules
ness not only technically but also in opportunities are great for those who
transportation • Banking
areas outside their field of techni- are willing to go global. This Guide
cal training. The extension of skills, is intended to inform those structural
traits, and know-how varies greatly depending on the client whose engineers of the basic considerations imperative for success.
activities you are supporting. U.S.-based clients operating overseas and Are you interested in advancing structural engineering global practice?
utilizing the codes, standards, specifications, and contract constructs If so, consider joining an SEI GAD committee. GAD is responsible
common in the United States reduce many, but not all, of the risks of for increasing SEI members’ awareness of global issues that impact
working outside the country. Compare that to foreign-government our profession and facilitating the development of skills that will allow
clients who may lack legal and technical governance frameworks – SEI members to thrive in the world market. The Global Credential
including governing codes, standards, specifications, and contracts Committee is charged with enabling global structural engineering
– that those practicing in the U.S. take for granted. credentials; the Inter-organizational Collaboration Committee is
To aid structural engineers in successful global practice, the Structural charged with establishing partnerships with other organizations to
Engineering Institute (SEI) of ASCE developed the Global Practice mutually advance efforts of benefit to the profession. Learn more at
Guide (the Guide), available to SEI/ASCE members for free download. www.asce.org/SEIGlobal.
The Guide is a manifestation of the SEI Vision for the Future, a work Access and share your feedback on the Global Practice
product of the SEI Global Activities Division (GAD), written by SEI Guide at https://bit.ly/2RFwcuM (member login required).■
members and produced with funding from the SEI Futures Fund.
Anne Ellis is Executive Director of the Charles Pankow Foundation, advancing
This SEI-led Guide also will prove valuable to those practicing civil
better ways to design and build. She served as the American Concrete
as well as other engineering disciplines.
Institute President (2013-2014) and held enterprise positions at AECOM
The Guide highlights areas requisite for global practice that are
(2008-2016), advancing the global impact of both organizations.
beyond the U.S.-based structural engineer’s domestic field of training
STRUCTURE magazine M A R C H 2 02 0 7
structural REHABILITATION
The IEBC’s Roof Diaphragm Evaluation
Requirements
When Reroofing Requires a Lateral Analysis
By Dale Statler, P.E., and Jerry Maly, P.E.
S ince its inception in 2003, the International Existing Building

Code (IEBC) has contained a provision that triggers the evalua-
tion and possible retrofit of roof diaphragms when certain buildings
are reroofed. This provision has gradually evolved within the Work
Area Method, unnoticed by some practitioners and readily avoided by
others by reverting to the International Building Code (IBC) Chapter
34, Existing Buildings and Structures, or by using the Prescriptive or
Performance Methods within the IEBC. However, Chapter 34 was
eliminated from the 2015 IBC and the subject provision metastasized
Figure 1. Wood diaphragm connections and shear walls not visible from the
into the Prescriptive Method in the name of consistency. So today, top surface of the diaphragm.
engineers, architects, and owners are forced to contend with it (except
in the narrow instances where the Performance Method is applicable) that provide elaboration or documentation regarding these alleged
and, for those affected, the consequences can be unduly burdensome. failures, including 1) locations, 2) wind speeds, 3) types of storms, e.g.,
This article recounts the origin and evolution of the provision since its thunderstorm, tornado, hurricane, chinook, 4) diaphragm materials,
introduction in 2003, discusses fundamental flaws in its requirements, e.g., wood, steel, concrete, gypsum, etc., 5) connections of concern,
and argues for the limitation of its applicability to either: 1) repairs or 6) the extent to which diaphragms were actually affected.
that can be made to correct visible deterioration and/or deficiencies During their service lives, most buildings will be reroofed on multiple
that are readily observed and remedied in the normal course of a roof occasions, with the life of conventional roofing systems ranging from
replacement, or 2) specific geographic regions or building types known about 20 to 40 years. As elaborated in the IEBC Commentary since
to have extraordinary roof diaphragm vulnerabilities. 2003, the provision intends to take advantage of this opportunity to
observe and address potential problems that are otherwise obstructed
from view. The provision applied only to diaphragm deficiencies
Origin and Evolution from “insufficient and deteriorated connections,” which apparently
In the first edition of the IEBC (2003), a structural provision in were the original drafting committee’s focus. Any more extensive
Chapter 5, Alterations – Level 1, of the Work Area Method stated analytical evaluation would require an abundance of detailed infor-
the following: mation, including the locations and lengths of shear walls or frames
507.3 Roof Diaphragm. Where roofing materials are removed and numerous connection details that are not necessarily observable
from more than 50 percent of the roof diaphragm of a building from the top surface (Figure 1). As such, this provision appears to
or section of a building where the roof diaphragm is a part of have been originally intended to identify and address obviously
the main wind force-resisting system, the integrity of the roof deficient or deteriorated connections based on a visual evaluation of
diaphragm shall be evaluated and if found deficient because of a diaphragm’s top surface only; deficiencies or deterioration beyond
insufficient or deteriorated connections, such connections shall this could not be observed or easily remedied in the relatively short
be provided or replaced. period available between removal and replacement of a roofing system.
To the authors’ knowledge, nothing similar to this provision existed However, as outlined below, this intent has been lost in subsequent
in any of the three model codes or other documents that served as the revisions to the IEBC.
primary basis for the first edition of the IEBC. Furthermore, nowhere Several modifications were made to the provision in the 2009 IEBC
in the June 2001 Working Draft of the 2003 IEBC, prepared by the (606.3.2). One of these changes limited its applicability to “high-wind
2003 IEBC Drafting Committee, was there any mention of struc- regions,” defined as areas where the basic wind speed was greater than
tural evaluations and/or upgrades to roof diaphragms associated with 90 mph (the baseline design speed for non-coastal areas of the U.S.) or
reroofing. As such, it was surprising that this provision appeared in areas that were within special wind regions as defined in Section 1609
the August 2001 Final Draft of the 2003 IEBC, also prepared by the of the IBC. A second change mandated that the diaphragm evaluation
2003 IEBC Drafting Committee. It was subsequently learned from be performed using design wind loads required by the IBC for new
International Code Council (ICC) Technical Services that, based on buildings, and stated explicitly that wind uplift was to be included
recollections of certain ICC staff, the drafting committee reportedly in the analysis. Where diaphragms and/or their connections in their
had “concerns about the working draft and the lack of protection current condition were unable to resist these loads, strengthening or
for high wind, and the focus was on the connections because they replacement was required.
were often the cause of failures in high winds.” Unfortunately, it The 2012 IEBC (706.3.2) added clarification on the diaphragm
appears that there are no meeting minutes or other written records connections that were to be addressed in the required evaluation,
explicitly including connections of the roof diaphragm to roof See Figure 2 (page 16 ) for the reproduction of 2018 IBC Figure
framing and roof-to-wall connections. This edition also reduced 1609.3(1) with areas conforming to the IEBC definition of “high-
the design wind load criteria to 75 percent of that required for wind regions” highlighted.
new buildings.
Changes in the 2015 IEBC (707.3.2) consisted of updating the
design wind speed consistent with the transition to ultimate loads
Ramifications
in ASCE 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other A diaphragm evaluation strictly conforming to the current provision
Structures, i.e., 90 mph became 115 mph and adding a virtually and its stated intent would ostensibly involve the following: 1) removal
identical provision to the Prescriptive Method (403.8). Also in of all existing roofing down to the structural diaphragm for observa-
2015, Chapter 34, Existing Buildings and Structures, was removed tion and, except where drawings are available and sufficiently detailed,
from the IBC, leaving regulation of existing buildings solely up collection of data to support the structural analysis; 2) engineering
to the IEBC. calculations, which cannot be performed extemporaneously in the
These requirements were unchanged in both the Work Area Method field, evaluating the diaphragm and connection strengths to resist the
(706.3.2) and the Prescriptive Method (503.12) of the 2018 IEBC. prescribed design wind forces; 3) installation of temporary protection
The current provision in 706.3.2 reads as follows: for the roof in anticipation of the possibility of resulting structural
706.3.2 Roof diaphragms resisting wind loads in high-wind retrofit work; 4) both demobilization and subsequent remobilization of
regions. Where roofing materials are removed from more than the roofing crew; 5) design and permitting of any necessary structural
50 percent of the roof diaphragm or section of a building located retrofits, 6) potentially hiring a subcontractor capable of installing
where the ultimate design wind speed, Vult , determined in accor- the necessary structural retrofits, and 7) resuming installation of the
dance with Figure 1609.3(1) of the International Building Code, replacement roofing system.
is greater than 115 mph (51 m/s) or in a special wind region, as The authors suspect that such a sequence of events has rarely, if ever,
defined in Section 1609 of the International Building Code, roof occurred. More likely, the provision has been avoided by referencing
diaphragms, connections of the roof diaphragm to roof framing an alternate chapter in the adopted code(s), the design professional,
members, and roof-to-wall connections shall be evaluated for the contractor, and/or building official never knew that the provision
wind loads specified in the International Building Code, including applied, or it was ignored. However, for conscientious design profes-
wind uplift. If the diaphragms and connections in their current sionals working under the authority of attentive building officials, the
condition are not capable of resisting 75 percent of those wind only rational option has become to consult the construction drawings
loads, they shall be replaced or strengthened in accordance with for the critical details well in advance of the work. In the absence of
the loads specified in the International Building Code. comprehensive construction documents, which is frequently the case,
Aegis developed Ultra-Span trusses ®
with a proprietary shape that brings your

building the strongest Cold-Formed Steel
on the market.
• 100% non-combustible Prime Steel
COLD-FORMED STEEL - ROOF • WALL • FLOOR • Does not warp, shrink, split or twist
with age
• Aegis
Resistant
hastoa insects, mold shape
proprietary and rotthat
• brings
Wide variety of sizes and configurations
your building the strongest
• Cold-Formed
Industry leading estimating
Steel on theand design
market.
software
• 100% non-combustible Prime Steel
• Does not warp, shrink, split or twist
with age
• Resistant to insects, mold and rot
• Wide variety of sizes and
configurations
• Industry leading estimating and design
software
314-851-2200
www.aegismetalframing.com
M A R C H 2 02 0 9
Figure 2. Reproduction of Figure 1609.3(1) annotated from the 2019 International Building Code; Copyright 2017.
the evaluators are compelled to document the structure themselves, hurricane regions may be in this category, but the authors are not aware
making pre-construction destructive openings in the roofing, inspect- of any rigorous study that substantiates the existence or extent of any
ing below-deck conditions from the interior, and then analyzing and such extraordinary hazard associated with roof diaphragm performance.
designing any necessary structural retrofits to be bid and permitted However, anecdotal evidence does suggest that buildings do collapse with
in conjunction with the roofing contract. This work can result in some frequency in hurricane winds after roof diaphragm integrity is lost.
significant increases in costs for the routine exercise of reroofing. The authors reside and practice structural engineering along
Colorado’s Front Range in a special wind region where basic wind
speeds range from 115 to 225 mph. Based upon their knowledge and
Flawed Foundation experience investigating structural failures in this extraordinary wind
Wind can and does cause structural damage to buildings due to climate, they are unaware of any remarkable incidence of diaphragm
shortcomings in the original codes, problems with the design, con- failures from high winds. Similarly, the results of an informal survey
struction defects, accumulated deterioration, or some combination conducted among professional members of the Structural Engineers
of these factors. However, while model codes, as well as design and Association of Colorado in 2017 indicated no prevailing evidence of
construction practices, have generally improved over time, the safety diaphragm vulnerabilities in Colorado’s special wind region.
and sufficiency of existing structures are only rarely revisited unless
significant damage has occurred or if a proposed structural alteration
or occupancy change triggers compliance with the provisions for
2021 IEBC and Beyond
new structures. One such instance is presented next to the subject ICC has approved modifications to the 2018 diaphragm provisions
diaphragm reroofing passages in the IEBC: the requirement that for inclusion in the 2021 IEBC. The revised provision in 706.3.2
unreinforced masonry (URM) bearing wall parapets be braced when will read as follows:
reroofing buildings in high seismic regions. This provision addresses 706.3.2 Roof diaphragms resisting wind loads in high-wind
an exceptional hazard demonstrated by repeated poor performance regions. Where roofing materials are removed from more than 50
(in many cases, even in events much less severe than design), argu- percent of the roof diaphragm or section of a building located where
ably justifying the imposition of costs on a building owner to abate the ultimate design wind speed, Vult, determined in accordance
a significant latent danger to the public. with Figure 1609.3(1) of the International Building Code, is greater
To justify the high costs of retroactive diaphragm evaluations and than 130 mph (58 m/s), roof diaphragms, connections of the roof
upgrades, the authors believe there should be a commensurate diaphragm to roof framing members, and roof-to-wall connections
extraordinary risk from wind-related diaphragm vulnerabilities. Such shall be evaluated for the wind loads specified in the International
vulnerabilities may be regional, such as the URM parapet provision Building Code, including wind uplift. If the diaphragms and con-
that only applies in Seismic Design Categories D through F. Likewise, nections in their current condition are not capable of resisting 75
diaphragm wind upgrades should be limited to regions or building percent of those wind loads, they shall be replaced or strengthened in
types where extraordinary vulnerabilities have been observed. Coastal accordance with the loads specified in the International Building Code.
Exception: Buildings that have been designed to comply with to only hurricane-prone regions would limit the provision’s
the wind load provisions in ASCE 7-88 or later editions. scope to suspected areas of vulnerability that are threatened
The changes include: 1) an increase in the threshold wind speed from by extraordinary winds.■
115 to 130 mph (the wind speed above which glazed openings must
be protected from impact in hurricane-prone regions), 2) elimination Dale Statler is a Senior Associate in the Denver, Colorado office of Wiss,
of any reference to special wind regions, and 3) an exception to the Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. Mr. Statler is an active member of the Existing
provision when the building under consideration has been designed Structures Committee of the Structural Engineers Association of Colorado.
to comply with what are judged to be comprehensive modern wind
INFO Jerry Maly is a Principal in the Denver, Colorado SPECSoffice of Wiss, Janney,
load requirements.
FileElstner
Name: Associates,
20-1246 Structure Inc. Mr. Maly is aSolutions
Mag_March_System past presidentFlat Size:of the Structural
The authors worked to develop and promote the acceptance of these
XXXX MKT:
PR:Engineers 20-1246 of Colorado (SEAC), a member
Association Finished Size: of the5” ×Existing
7.5”
changes; however, in our opinion, they do not go far enough. If all the Designer: Georgina Morra Email: [email protected] Bleed: Yes Amount: .125”
114 4 E. Newpor t Center Dr. Buildings Subcommittee of NCSEA’s Code Advisory Committee, and a
proposed changes had been adopted, diaphragm D e e r f i e l d evaluations
B e a c h , F L 3 3in 4 4 the
2 Date: February 6, 2020 12:20 PM Colors: 4/0
member of the Existing Structures Committee of SEAC.
2021 IEBC would be triggered only for buildings
N O T E : C O L located
O R S V I E W Ein
D Ohurricane-
N - S C R E E N A R E I N T E N D E D F O R V I S U A L R E F E R E N C E O N L Y A N D M A Y N O T M A T C H T H E F I N A L P R I N T E D P R O D U C T.
prone regions where the ultimate design

wind speed exceeds 130 mph. The authors
believe this is important because, to their
knowledge, there is no historical evi-
dence substantiating the existence of any
extraordinary diaphragm vulnerabilities MAPEI: Your single-source provider
to wind outside of hurricane-prone areas.
Coastal wind regions differ significantly
from restoration to protection
from those farther inland in the relation- System solutions for bridge restoration
ship between frequency and severity of
high winds. Design for coastal regions is
driven predominantly by extreme random
events in an otherwise unexceptional wind Overhead Repair Solutions
climate. Compare this to downslope chi-
nook winds along the Colorado Front
Range driven by the weather phenom-
enon of air rising and falling over the
Rocky Mountains, in which foothills Column Repair Solutions
communities experience high winds on

a regular basis. Such winds are neither
unusual nor unexpected, and local design
and construction practices have neces-
sarily evolved to keep buildings upright
with their roofs intact. The relatively high
inland frequency of such winds leaves a
substantially smaller margin for deficien-
cies to remain undetected, as may have
happened historically on the coasts.
The requirement that a building under- Bridge Deck Solutions
goes a diaphragm evaluation, involving

a significant investigative and analytical
effort by an engineer with the possibil-
ity of costly structural upgrades, is an
extraordinary burden that should only
MAPEI offers a full spectrum of products for concrete
be justifiable based on a commensurately
restoration, below-grade waterproofing and structural
extraordinary hazard. Otherwise, it is
strengthening. Globally, MAPEI’s system solutions have been
logical, appropriate, and consistent with utilized for bridges, highways, parking garages, stadiums,
longstanding engineering practice to let buildings and other structures.
grandfathered structures stand unaffected
by the increasingly complex regulations Visit www.mapei.us for details on all MAPEI products.
governing new structures. It is unreason-
able to attempt to keep the entire building
stock up to date with model codes as they
continue to evolve. Retroactive upgrades
are an appropriate tool when the costs of
inaction definitively outweigh the costs of MAPEI USA
action. But that burden should be limited

to where there is sufficient evidence of
major structural concern. Tying the trigger
20-1246 Structure Mag_March_System Solutions.indd 1 2/6/20 12:20 PM
M A R C H 2 02 0 11
Bringing
unmatched
products and
service to
mass timber.
With over 60 years of leadership in structural
engineering, Simpson Strong-Tie is now
proud to offer smart solutions for mass
timber. As the first North American–based
company to embrace the challenge, we’re
leveraging our dual passions of service
and innovation to meet this industry’s
unique demands.
From our rigorously tested connectors and fasteners that

provide design flexibility, to a nationwide supply network
that delivers exactly what you need, when you need it —
our products and expertise ensure that your mass timber
projects are built faster, easier and stronger than ever.
To learn more about how we can improve your next job, visit
go.strongtie.com/masstimber or call (800) 999-5099.
©2020 Simpson Strong-Tie Company Inc. MASSTIMB20

structural COMPONENTS
Pile Structural Capacity
A Comparison of Three Design Codes
By H.Y. Ng, MSc, P.E. , C.Eng, MIStructE
F oundations for a building are required to support the structure

so that it remains safe and functional, and so that they meet
serviceability limits. Buildings with excessive cracking and movement
Table 1. Codes and design method.
Code Type of Design

ACI-318 LRFD (ASD is also allowed)
(e.g. total settlement, differential settlement, tilt, etc.) are alarming
and not acceptable. EC2 Limit state design
When column loads are heavy, as in high-rise buildings for example, CP4 Allowable stress design
large piles or groups of piles are usually required to carry the loads
down to a competent stratum. Bored piles, also referred to as auger- designers may want to exercise extra caution when selecting end
cast piles, are large-diameter, cast-in-place concrete piles, usually bearing values in design. Codes typically impose a higher factor of
lightly reinforced by steel reinforcing bars (0.5%) under gravity loads. safety for end-bearing as compared to shaft friction.
Circular boreholes are drilled in the ground before placing concrete The different partial safety factors applied to the calculated shaft friction
into the borehole. The reinforcing steel can be set in the holes before and end bearing may also depend on conditions such as whether load
the concrete is placed or “wet-set” before the concrete is allowed to tests were carried out and the type of loading (compression or tension).
set. Common bored-pile sizes range from 30 inches to 60 inches (750 To illustrate, Table 4 shows the different factors used in the dif-
mm to 1,500mm) in increments of 4 inches (100mm). ferent codes.
This article compares the structural capacity calculation of bored Designers need to be mindful of the different factors that are required
piles in compression using three design codes: ACI-318, Building Code on shaft friction and end bearing, and the appropriate corresponding
Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary; the Eurocode factors to be applied to the loadings, depending on the code and type
(EC2); and CP4:2003 (Singapore CP4). of design adopted.
Due to the uncertainties of pile design and construction, load tests
are desirable to verify that piles can meet settlement criteria under
Design Codes the design loads. For example, the governing code may specify that,
There are generally two types of design methods: allowable stress when a test pile is loaded to 1.5 times the unfactored column load,
design (ASD) and load and resistance factor design (LRFD). In many the pile settlement should not exceed 0.6 inches (15 mm) (from CP4).
parts of the world, ASD and LRFD are known as working stress
(permissible stress) design and limit-state design, respectively. ASD
compares capacities derived from the allowable stress (factored down
Structural Design
from ultimate) against the service loads without any load factors, Bored piles are usually designed to carry compression loads, similar to
while limit-state design has factors for loadings and partial factors columns in a building. The main difference is that columns are cast
for materials (Table 1). above the ground while piles are cast underground. Other differences
In the design of piles, both the geotechnical (soil strength) capacity are summarized in Table 5, page 16. Because of these differences, the
and structural (material strength) capacity must be checked. For an structural capacity of a pile determined from code equations usually
economical design, the structural capacity and geotechnical capacity is lower than column capacity of a similar size and reinforcement.
should be as close as possible.
Table 2. Unit shaft friction and end bearing.

Geotechnical Design
Total Stress (Clay) Effective Stress (Sand)
The geotechnical capacity of piles can be calculated based on site
Unit shaft friction αcu βσv'
investigation data. For piles founded in soil, unit shaft friction and
end-bearing are summarized in Table 2. Unit end bearing 9cu Nqσv'
In some parts of the world, where there is prior pile design experi- cu = undrained shear strength
ence in similar ground conditions, it is possible to correlate the shaft σv' = average vertical effective stress
friction and end-bearing to standard penetration test (SPT) N values. α = coefficient to reduce shear strength (usually 0.5 to 1.0, depending on
the strength of clay)
For example, bored piles in a specific locality may have the values β = coefficient related to interface friction between pile and soil and Ks
shown in Table 3. (Example: A soil with SPT value of 100 may have which is the ratio of horizontal stress to vertical stress
unit shaft friction of 3x100 = 300 kPa = 44 psi) Nq = bearing capacity factor based on soil friction angle
In design, it is often prudent to impose an upper bound on shaft
friction and end-bearing as a safety precaution to avoid using values Table 3. Example of shaft friction and end bearing based on SPT.
that are not achievable or come with excessive settlement. Coefficient Maximum (kPa)
Designers need to recognize that end-bearing requires much more Unit shaft friction 1.5 – 3 150 – 300
pile settlement to mobilize as compared to shaft friction. The con-
dition of the pile toe is difficult to ascertain. For these reasons, Unit end bearing 40 – 120 10,000
Under gravity loads, bored piles in compression can be nominally Table 4. Partial factors on shaft friction and end bearing.
reinforced (using minimum reinforcement). Usually, it is more eco- Shaft Friction Safety End Bearing Safety
nomical to use a larger pile with nominal reinforcements compared to Factor Factor
a smaller pile that is heavily reinforced. However, smaller diameter piles
with heavier reinforcements may be adopted in certain situations such ACI-336^ 1.5 to 5 1.5 to 5
as space constraints or low headroom. For comparison in this article, EC2* 1.68 2.04
only nominally reinforced bored piles founded in soil are discussed. CP4 1.5 to 2 3
^ LRFD is denoted as strength design method, ASD is denoted as alternate design method
Structural Capacity Based on ACI-318 * The 1.68 and 2.04 factors for EC2 were calculated based on Design Approach 1 –
Combination 2 (usually governing for pile design) where there is a 1.3 factor on live
In the U.S., ACI-318 is a commonly used standard for the design of loads and 1.2 model factor applied to 1.4 and 1.7 for shaft and base, respectively.
reinforced concrete structures. ACI-318 is primarily an LRFD code, These factors assume that appropriate load tests were carried out.
but ASD is also allowed. Bored piles are known as drilled shafts, drilled
piers, or auger-cast piles. The structural design of drilled piers is similar A strength reduction factor, φ, of 0.75 is used for spirally reinforced
to a beam-column. However, in most practical cases, the design can columns and 0.65 for tied columns. There is a further reduction factor
be simplified to a short column by assuming the bending moment of 0.85 and 0.8 for spiral and tied columns, respectively, to account
is negligible (gravity loads only) and the pier is laterally restrained, for eccentricities.
unless in the case of very soft soil (for example, less than 1.5 psi (10 Ignoring the contribution of steel (for a nominally reinforced pile),
kPa) shear strength). U.S. practice also includes seismic considerations the ultimate capacity for a tied column is:
in certain areas, which may require special detailing requirements, φPn = (0.65)(0.8)(0.85)fckAc = 0.442 fckAc = 0.35 fcuAc
such as spiral hoops (for added shear strength) and more stringent This gives a working load of 0.25fcuAc after dividing by a combined
reinforcement spacing and limits. For column design, ACI-318 pro- load factor of 1.4.
vides the following well-established equation for column capacity: Note that ACI-336.3R for drilled piers specifies load factors of 1.4
and 1.7 for dead load and live load, respectively, whereas ACI-318
φPn = φ(0.85f´c Ac + fyAst)
specifies load factors of 1.2 and 1.6. The difference in load factors for
ACI’s strength reduction factor, φ, is an overall factor to reduce drilled piers and columns suggest that underground concrete is more
nominal strength, similar to the partial safety factor for materials in uncertain and requires a higher factor of safety compared to concrete
the Eurocodes (e.g., 1.5 for concrete). columns in a superstructure.
continued on next page
Reduce Thermal Transfer

with Hohmann & Barnard
TBS THERMAL BRICK
SUPPORT SYSTEM BENEFITS
+ Our Thermal Brick Support System is a
groundbreaking brick veneer support system that
reduces thermal bridging in shelf angles.
+ It allows for the installation of continuous insulation

behind the support angle.
+ Each job is designed and engineered in-house to meet

your specific project needs.
+ A recent study shows that attached shelf angles

will create an effective reduction of the R-Value by
between 46% and 63%. The same study shows that
offset angles minimize that reduction to between 15%
and 16.5%.
800-645-0616 | www.h-b.com
M A R C H 2 02 0 15
Table 5. Difference between a column and a bored pile.
Columns Bored Piles

Superstructure – above ground (better quality control) Sub-structure – below ground (harder to control quality)
Unrestrained between adjacent story levels Supported by soil along the shaft (unless soil is very soft)
Can be easily inspected after construction Cannot be easily inspected after construction
Usually rectangular with heavy reinforcements Circular with light reinforcements
Higher concrete strength, e.g., fcu = 5,800 psi (40 MPa) Lower concrete strength, e.g., fcu = 4,350 psi (30 MPa)
Less concrete cover Greater concrete cover
(fck = 0.8fcu, where fck = fc´ = cylinder strength and fcu = cube strength)
The U.S. model building code is the International Building Code to bring it down to working load capacity). Because bored piles are
(IBC). In IBC (allowable stress design), the allowable stress in concrete lightly reinforced, the contribution from steel can be ignored. This
is 0.33fc´ (0.26fcu). This is in line with a general rule of thumb that means the ultimate pile structural capacity reduces to:
design stress is a third of material strength for piling. N = 0.45fcuAc
The coefficient 0.45 is further reduced by 10% to 0.4 to account
for eccentricity and tolerances in construction. To bring the ultimate
Structural Capacity Based on CP4 capacity to working load capacity, 0.4 is divided by 1.5 (equivalent
For rock-socketed piles with full-length reinforcement, using a short to a combined load factor) to obtain a coefficient of 0.267 (note:
column formula, CP4 states that the ultimate structural capacity is 1.4 and 1.6 were load factors for dead and live load, respectively,
given by the sum of stress multiplied by area for both concrete and based on British Standards). Therefore, CP4 recommended the pile
steel components: structural capacity (working stress) to be 0.25fcu. This capacity is to
Pu = 0.4fcuAc + 0.75fyAs be compared to column loads (serviceability limit state) acting on
where fcu and fy are concrete and steel strength, respectively, and A is the pile, without any load factors.
area. To derive the working load, using a minimum safety factor of When CP4 was in use, the common concrete strength for bored piles
two, the equation becomes: was C30 (fcu = 4,350 psi or 30MPa), which means that the allowable
Pu = 0.2fcuAc + 0.375fyAs stress was 1,088 psi (7.5 MPa). Also, CP4 limits concrete strength
In CP4, structural capacity (working stress) of nominally reinforced to 1,088 psi (7.5 MPa) to account for quality control issues when
bored piles is calculated using 0.25fcu (ultimate cube strength) but pouring concrete into a hole underground. Even with higher concrete
limited to a maximum of 1,088 psi (7.5 MPa). Some engineers are strengths, there is a need to be mindful that such a high strength of
tempted to view 0.25 as a “safety factor” for structural capacity using concrete may not be adequately compacted and subjected to issues
a permissible stress perspective, giving a false sense of safety. However, associated with bored pile construction, such as mixing with water
this is not strictly correct because the 0.25 is a value obtained after and soil, necking, etc. For this reason, 1,088 psi (7.5 MPa) was the
accounting for several aspects of cube strength which are different maximum working stress allowed in concrete, even if much higher
compared to actual concrete cast-in piles. strength of concrete was used.
The derivation of 0.25 was strongly influenced by BS8110 (or local
Singapore CP65), which was the corresponding reinforced concrete
design code used in conjunction with CP4. When a column is loaded
Structural Capacity Based on EC2
to failure in compression, the ultimate capacity is the sum of concrete Using Eurocodes, the structural design of reinforced concrete is in
and steel components, and it is given by an empirical formula: accordance with EC2. EC2 provides the following equation for pre-
N = 0.67fcuAc + fyAs (Note that 0.67fcu = 0.85fck, using fck = 0.8fcu) dicting the ultimate capacity of reinforced concrete piles:
where fck = fć = cylinder strength and fcu = cube strength. NRd,p = Acfcd,p where fcd,p = αcc,p fck/γc,f
This is the maximum load, independent of creep and shrinkage According to EC2, αcc “is the coefficient taking account of long-
effects. The 0.67 factor applied to cube compression strength of term effects on the compressive strength and of unfavorable effects
concrete is to account for differences such as size (actual structural resulting from the way the load is applied” and 0.85. γc,f is the partial
element is much larger than cube), boundary conditions (actual safety factor for concrete (1.5 x 1.1; 1.1 being required for casting
building load on column versus loading using compression testing piles without a permanent casing).
machine), rate of loading (much faster rate in cube test), and quality With all these factors, the ultimate stress in concrete becomes:
of compaction (cube test is properly compacted). fcd,p = αcc,pfck/γc,f = 0.85 x (0.8fcu)/(1.5x1.1) = 0.412fcu
An additional “partial safety factor” of 1.5 needs to be applied for Under Eurocodes, the load factors for permanent (dead load) and
design against ultimate collapse (note that this factor is not meant variable action (live load) are 1.35 and 1.5, respectively. Because
Table 6. Construction tolerances for bored piles. permanent loads are much higher than variable
loads for most structures, a combined load factor
Code Tolerance can be assumed to be approximately 1.4.
ACI-336 4% of the diameter or 3 inches (75mm), whichever is less The working stress of concrete then becomes
EN1536 (execution 4 inches (100 mm) (≤40 inches diameter) 0.29fcu (higher than 0.25fcu using ACI-318 or
standard for bored piles) 0.1D (40<D≤60 inches diameter) 0.25fcu using CP4).
6 inches (150mm) (>60inches diameter) By comparing the working stress allowed for
concrete, it appears that EC2 allowed a 16%
CP4 3 inches (75mm) higher value as compared to ACI-318 and CP4.
Table 7. Allowable concrete stress in bored piles in compression. and specify higher strength concrete for bored piles. However, design-
Code Allowable Concrete Stress (psi or MPa) ers should be cautioned on the need to ensure stringent
quality control measures during pile construction and verify
ACI-318 0.25fcu that concrete strength can be achieved on-site.■
EC2 0.26fcu
CP4 0.25fcu and not greater than 1088 psi (7.5 MPa) The online version of this article contains references.
INFO
Please visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org.
SPECS
However, in EC2, it is necessary to reduce the design diameter of a
bored pile by 2 inches (50mm) for diameters greater than or equal FileName:19-1670_Ad_1/2IslandStructure_July_BridgeRepairSolutions Page Size: 5w" x 7.5h" bleed
to 40 inches (1,000mm) when there is no permanent casing. Job#: This 19-1670 H. Y. Ng isPR#: N/A
a Principal Engineer with a localNumber authorityofinvolved
Pages: 1in reviewing
design diameter reduction is on 1 1 4top
4 E of. Nthe
e w p1.1o r t factor
C e n t e applied
r Dr.
Artist:
to the Georgina Morra Email: [email protected]
and granting approval for structural and geotechnical design. Bleed: Yes Amount: .125"
Deerfield Beach, FL 33442
concrete partial factor of 1.5. Such a reduction in capacity using Date: June 7, 2019 10:29
([email protected]) AM Colors: CMYK Process, 4/0
EC2 equations is to allow for greater uncertainties in casting con-
N O T E : C O L O R S V I E W E D O N - S C R E E N A R E I N T E N D E D F O R V I S U A L R E F E R E N C E O N L Y A N D M A Y N O T M A T C H T H E F I N A L P R I N T E D P R O D U C T.
crete underground without a permanent

casing. With these two explicit provisions
addressing uncertainties in the construc-
tion process, EC2 uses a slightly higher
allowable concrete stress of 0.29fcu. If the MAPEI bridges the
gap with concrete
2-inch (50mm) reduction in design diam-
eter is accounted for, the concrete stress
in EC2 reduces by another 10% (using
382/402 = 0.9) to 0.26fcu.
repair solutions
Construction Tolerances
Column loads are usually transferred to
bored piles through a pile cap. Pile caps
help to distribute loads to piles in a group
and minimize the effects of eccentricity,
that is, variation in the individual pile posi-
tions. Pile caps may need to be redesigned
if there are piles constructed exceeding the

allowable tolerances. Construction toler-
ances allowed by the codes are summarized
in Table 6.
Conclusion Carroll Avenue Bridge

Takoma Park, MD Corrosion protection
Although there is no upper limit on con-
crete stress in ACI-318 and EC2, designers Bear Cut Bridge
Key Biscayne, FL
may not want to use the maximum stress
allowed. For example, a concrete with fcu
= 5,800 psi (40 MPa) has allowable stress
of 1,711 psi (11.8 MPa) designed with
EC2. In practice, the designer may choose
I-80 Verdi Bridge
to limit the stress to 1,450 psi (10 MPa) as
an additional safety precaution. Concrete repair mortars Verdi, NV
Allowable compressive stress in concrete

for bored piles appears to be consistent
across the three different codes (Table 7).
Most codes recognize that concrete cast
underground is more uncertain compared
to a column cast in a superstructure and,
therefore, a safety factor that accounts for
this is required. CP4 uses a 1,088 psi (7.5
MPa) stress limit to guard against quality JEA Northside Generating Station
Jackonville, FL Products for structural strengthening
issues and therefore places a disincentive
for using higher strength concrete, while
the other codes do not prescribe concrete
strength limits. Designers can take full
advantage of the higher concrete stress
M A R C H 2 02 0 17
structural TESTING
Lab Test Confidential: Seismic
Loading Protocols
By Matthew S. Speicher, Ph.D., and Bruce F. Maison, P.E., S.E.
T he rise in performance-based engineering, in which a structure is

proportioned to meet certain predictable performance requirements,
necessitates reasonable estimates of component behavior during earth-
quakes. It is customary to determine component properties via physical
lab tests. For components such as concrete anchors, verification of the
ultimate strength is required and quasi-static pull tests are sufficient. The
situation is more involved for other components, such as beam-to-column
assemblies, since an earthquake produces dynamic back-and-forth cyclic
Figure 1. Illustration for a lab test of beam-to-column
actions and the component is often expected to deform inelastically. assembly and various quasi-static loading protocols.
Although earthquake loadings are dynamic, quasi-static com- • Illustrate differences in test results from using standard
ponent tests are routinely performed due to the complexity and protocols and actual earthquake loading patterns.
expense of dynamic testing (Figure 1). The most widely used • Point out that lab test data based solely on standard
loading patterns (protocols) consist of fully-reversed cyclic loading protocols can lead to unduly conservative component
having progressively increasing displacement amplitudes. These acceptance criteria as well as computer models that over-
are often referred to as simply “cyclic” tests and are termed here estimate building response in performance-based engineering.
as “standard” protocols. • Encourage future experimental projects to use protocols
Figure 2 contrasts a standard protocol to that of a simulated earth- reflecting actual earthquake response patterns to better
quake response from a building undergoing inelastic actions. Notice estimate component seismic behaviors.
the standard protocol has many cycles as opposed to the earthquake
response having relatively few cycles with a one-direction bias. The
Applied Technology Council project ATC-62 was one of the first
Realistic Protocols
extensive studies that found standard protocols too demanding With the advancement and gaining popularity of nonlinear structural
compared with actual earthquake loadings, and the use of standard analysis, a better understanding of actual seismic response has led
protocols can lead to the overly-conservative representation of com- researchers to propose different protocols that may more appropriately
ponent seismic performance (FEMA, 2009). reflect earthquake inelastic building response (Figure 3, page 20). Such
Reports on lab tests often do not discuss how a component response protocols are termed here as “realistic.” Realistic protocols are different
is influenced by the loading protocol, so engineers are left to accept from standard protocols by having fewer cycles and a one-direction bias.
the results as intrinsic “seismic” properties. This behind-the-scenes Tests using realistic protocols have been relatively infrequent, but they
aspect is the subject of this article. The purposes are to: do show that components generally have more ductility compared to
results using standard protocols. For
example, Figure 4 ( page 20) shows
the drifts describing various damage
states of steel columns from tests
conducted by Elkady et al (2018).
Use of a realistic collapse-consistent
protocol indicates the columns have
about twice the inelastic deformation
capacity than those from using stan-
dard protocols. Accordingly, column
acceptance criteria would be very con-
servative should they be based entirely
Figure 2. Typical standard protocol compared to simulated building inter-story drift earthquake response (Maison et al., 2016) on the standard protocol test results.
continued on next page
M A R C H 2 02 0 19
Backbone Curves
In performance-based engineering,
the backbone curve is the custom-
ary way of describing component
behaviors over a range of deforma-
tions. It is formulated as an envelope
of hysteresis loops from component
lab tests and is the chief factor for
displacement-controlled component
Figure 3. Realistic protocols reflecting earthquake inelastic building response.
modeling and acceptance criteria.
Figure 5 illustrates the strong influ-
ence the protocol can have on envelopes (backbones) of test results
from identical reinforced concrete bridge piers (FEMA, 2009). The
Additional Studies
backbones were essentially the same out to about 2% drift, but they The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) per-
differed significantly for larger drifts depending on the protocol. formed comprehensive analytical investigations into the correlation
Notice how the standard protocols produced backbones with the between the seismic performance of steel buildings designed to current
smallest drift capacities. standards and their performance as quantified using performance-
The trend is also evident in other materials. Figure 6 shows results based engineering (Harris and Speicher, 2015). It was found that
from identical plywood shear walls subjected to different protocols performance-based engineering often rejects “new” buildings as being
from a test conducted by Gatto and Uang (2003). There was little unsafe even though they meet current building codes. One likely
difference between the cyclic envelope and the monotonic test out reason is conservatism in performance-based engineering acceptance
to about a 3% drift. However, at about 4% drift, the cyclic envelope and modeling criteria since the vast majority of existing lab test data
strength was less than one-half that of the monotonic test strength. used standard protocols having the shortcomings discussed above
Figure 7 shows more test results from identical plywood shear (Speicher et. al, 2018).
walls but, in this case, a more realistic protocol is compared to the Likewise, the ongoing Applied Technology Council project ATC-116
monotonic. The envelope from the realistic test is similar to the investigates the paradox of the better-than-expected performance of
monotonic test suggesting that earthquake inelastic behavior is short period buildings. One principal finding is the important effect
better represented by the monotonic as opposed to the standard of the component post-peak residual strength (Kircher et al., 2018).
protocol. In fact, Professor Helmut Krawinkler, who was responsible To arrive at performance observed in actual earthquakes and to be
for the development of several popular loading protocols, advocated consistent with the judgment of earthquake engineers, the ATC-
complementing standard tests with other tests, including monotonic, 116-improved analytical models have significant residual strength
whose loading histories better represent response close to collapse beyond 10% drift (30% to 60% of component ultimate strength).
(Krawinkler, 2009). Lab tests using realistic protocols generally have much greater residual
Therefore, key points about backbone curves derived from standard strength than those using standard protocols (Figures 6 and 7 ). This
lab tests are as follows: gives support to the notion that lab tests using standard protocols lead
• Standard protocols do not mimic actual earthquake demands. to conservative seismic performance criteria (Speicher et al, 2018).
Lab tests using such protocols generally result in backbones
having progressively decreasing deformation capacities accord-
ing to increasing numbers of fully-reversed loading cycles.
ASCE 41 Performance-Based Engineering
• For moderate drifts, say up to about 2%, backbone curves are ASCE 41, Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings, is
generally independent of the loading protocol. an industry standard incorporating performance-based engineering
• For large drifts, say greater than about 2%, backbone curves methods (ASCE, 2017). Figure 8 depicts the ASCE 41 construction
can be strongly influenced by the loading protocol. of a backbone curve as an envelope of data from a component lab
test using a standard protocol. The peak displacement
reversal points in the hysteresis loops govern where the
abrupt decline in strength occurs in the backbone, giving
the impression that the component has zero strength
beyond deformation E. However, this is misleading since
the use of a protocol having different displacement reversal
points would shift the deformation to E´ as indicated.
Hence, the backbone curve is dependent on the loading
protocol, and standard protocols do not reflect building
seismic inelastic response.
The latest edition of ASCE 41, ASCE 41-17, recognizes
the importance of loading protocols and provides additional
freedom in protocol selection to better represent actual
seismic loading patterns. It does not prescribe a specific
“one-size-fits-all” loading protocol due to the variety of
Figure 4. Drifts defining column damage states from lab tests using different loading protocols factors involved with a particular component, e.g., per-
(Elkady et al., 2018). formance objective, type of structure, and seismic setting.
Figure 5. Envelopes of cyclic test results (backbones) from six identical reinforced Figure 6. Lab test results from tests of two identical plywood shear walls using
concrete bridge piers subjected to various loading protocols (adapted from Figure different loading protocols. (Adapted from Figure 6g in Gatto et al., 2003)
2-20 of the ATC-62 project; FEMA P-440A).
Since most previous component tests were performed using standard 2) Derived backbone curves used in analysis models for seis-
protocols, ASCE 41-17 allows such test data to be supplemented to mic evaluation can lead to over-estimation of peak inelastic
better define behavior at near-collapse displacements (Section 7.6). To displacements.
ensure reasonable protocols are selected for a particular component The above shortcomings have a compounding effect, causing rejection
and project, concurrence is required by independent peer reviewers. of buildings that would otherwise be considered acceptable should
The rationale for the current ASCE 41 provisions is in a paper by component behaviors be based on tests using realistic earthquake
Maison and Speicher (2016). loading patterns.
When using lab test data, it is important to be aware of the load-
ing protocol used. The test results must be scrutinized within the
Conclusion context of the loading protocol. If a standard protocol is used, then
With the emergence of performance-based engineering, it is essential to have it is likely the data represents a very conservative description of
reasonable estimates of component behaviors during actual earthquakes. component inelastic behavior under earthquake loadings. In this
Standard lab test loading protocols case, it may be appropriate to modify
typically consist of fully-reversed cyclic the data for use in performance-based
loading with progressively increasing dis- engineering. The current ASCE 41-17
placement amplitudes. However, realistic outlines one way this can be done.
earthquake loading patterns are not like It is encouraged that future lab tests
standard protocols and can lead to dif- include realistic earthquake loading
ferent conclusions about component protocols so that the results
performance. are best suited for perfor-
There are two underlying shortcom- mance-based engineering.■
ings when using component lab test
data derived from standard protocols.
1) Ductility can be underesti- The online version of this article
mated, which, in turn, can lead Figure 7. Lab test results from two identical plywood shear walls contains references. Please visit
to overly conservative accep- using different loading protocols. (Adapted from Figure 6h; www.STRUCTUREmag.org.
tance criteria. Gatto et al., 2003)
Matthew S. Speicher is a Research Structural Engineer at

the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in
Gaithersburg, MD. Matthew is an active member of the ASCE 41
Analysis Subcommittee and conducts research to advance the use
of performance-based seismic design. This article is an extension of
his presentation at the 12 th Canadian Conference on Earthquake
Engineering titled “The blind side: using 'canned' loading protocols
in seismic testing" (Speicher and Maison, 2019).
([email protected])
Bruce F. Maison is a Consulting Engineer practicing in El

Cerrito, CA. Bruce is an active member of the Existing Buildings
Committee of the Structural Engineers Association of Northern
Figure 8. Construction of ASCE 41 component backbone curves as envelopes of cyclic test California (SEAONC). He is also a member of the ASCE 41
data (adapted from Figure 7-5 in previous ASCE 41-13). The displacement reversal point is at Analysis Subcommittee. ([email protected])
E in one protocol, whereas it is at E´ in another protocol.
M A R C H 2 02 0 21
structural SYSTEMS
Structure Design Considerations for
Building Enclosures
By Matthew L. Wagner, S.E., and Patrick Olechno, P.E.
T he International Building Code (IBC) and design standards

used by structural engineers are developed with the intent to
provide minimum requirements for the design and construction of a
structure to help assure the public health, safety, and welfare. While
a particular structural design is required to satisfy the IBC, as well as
material design standards and public safety requirements, the IBC
does not directly address the effects of the vertical movement of the
building structure on the building enclosure. For example, what are
the deflection limits for spandrel beams or slab edges that support
the building enclosure?
The IBC provides deflection limitations based only on the span of the
structural member; however, more restrictive limitations may govern
based on properties of the building enclosure system or architectural
vertical movement joint details. Enclosure systems and framing systems
exhibit unique behaviors, and interaction and structural behavior
between them may not be adequately accommodated using customary Figure 1. Common building enclosure types; a) Infill wall;
b) Curtain wall; c) Column-supported wall; and d) Multi-span wall.
span-to-deflection ratios. The structural engineer will need to under-
stand how the enclosure is expected to behave during construction
IBC
and throughout the service life of the building to design a structural
frame that properly accommodates the movement limitations of the The serviceability requirements in the 2018 IBC limit the deflection of
building enclosure. This article is focused only on issues associated structural members to the more restrictive case of either the referenced
with vertical deflections. Lateral movement limitations, such as the material-specific standard or those deflection limit values provided
case of whole building drift limitations, are more clearly defined in the in Table 1604.3. The deflection limits in this table are based on the
IBC and ASCE/SEI 7, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other member span length and are meant to address serviceability and limit
Structures, and are not subject to creep, varying superimposed loads, or damage to architectural finishes. Advancements in framing systems
long-term deflection effects. and materials have led to longer spans and greater deflections. While
some modern architectural finishes have been able to accommodate
these larger deflections, many building enclosure systems may not
IBC and Material Standards be able to accommodate the larger deflections.
There are two types of deflection limits: the traditional limit prescribed
ASCE/SEI 7
in codes and standards based on the span of the structural member
and absolute dimensional limits based on the movement capabili- The Commentary Section CC.2.1 for Appendix C in ASCE/SEI 7-16
ties of joints designed to accommodate the deflections. Deflections states that, in certain conditions with long spans, it may be appropri-
based on ratios of span length consider the maximum rate of change ate to limit maximum deflections to prevent damage of nonstructural
between two points along a deflected shape and are useful for pre- elements, along with the suggestion to limit deflection to 3⁄8 inch for
venting damage of the nonstructural material or system that is being the case of non-load-bearing partitions.
supported by the structural member or even the member itself. With
ACI-318
the advancement of construction materials and the increase of member
spans, the traditional span ratio limit may be inadequate in some Deflection requirements for concrete are governed by ACI-318, Building
cases to prevent damage of nonstructural systems that are supported Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary, Chapter 24,
or attached to the structure. which specifies a serviceability deflection limit for concrete members
Structural engineers should consider several interacting effects when of L/480 in Table 24.2.2. A footnote to the table allows greater deflec-
designing structural members that support building enclosures to tion if the deflection does not damage supported or attached elements.
provide structural systems with deflection characteristics that are
AISC-360
compatible with the enclosure system. However, deflection require-
ments provided in the IBC do not address this situation. The summary For steel structures, AISC-360, Specification for Structural Steel Buildings,
below describes how the IBC and design standards approach structural does not explicitly state serviceability deflection limits for steel mem-
deflections, and how building enclosure considerations are addressed. bers supporting building enclosures but instead references AISC Steel
Design Guide 3, Serviceability Design at each floor level or designed to span
Considerations, and Design Guide 22, multiple levels (Figure 1d ).
Façade Attachments to Steel-Framed It is essential to understand the interac-
Buildings. These guides contain useful tion of the wall system support locations
information and guidance for developing and vertical movement joint details
spandrel member design criteria. and capabilities, considering the vari-
ous combinations of loads that may be
TMS 402
present in-service. This is particularly
Section 5.2.1.4.1 of the 2016 Edition of true when curtain walls accommodate
TMS-402, Building Code Requirements the accumulated movement of multiple
and Specification for Masonry Structures, structural levels.
prescribes a design deflection limit of
Column-Supported Walls
L/600 for serviceability. Earlier editions
of TMS-402, such as the 2005 Edition, In some cases, enclosure panels are
included an additional overall deflec- designed to be supported from columns.
tion limit of 0.3 inches. The 0.3-inch A common type is a precast spandrel
deflection limit has since been removed, panel installed in front of the floor slab,
starting with the 2008 Edition; many typically supporting an infill ribbon
structural designs still apply this crite- Figure 2. Relative spandrel member deflections (DB1 and DB2) window system (Figure 1c). Though the
rion on most applications. are similar, but the global deflection along B2 is additive to the floor does not support the enclosure,
Consideration should be given to limit- cantilevered end deflections. floor deflection relative to the column-
ing differential spandrel deflection to 3⁄8 supported panel should be considered.
inch based on ASCE commentary and historic masonry requirements
for infill wall systems, and 1⁄2 inch for unitized curtain wall systems Cantilevered Perimeter Framing
designed to accommodate vertical movements between floors within
a manufactured stack joint assembly. Increased vertical movements Traditional deflection limits based on individual member spans do
are possible and require additional effort and coordination among not adequately address cantilevered perimeter framing. The traditional
project team members to accommodate proper support and move- deflection limits apply only to relative member deflections, which
ments of the building enclosure. are measured as the difference between member ends and deflection
Building Enclosure Systems

When designing the structure for the building enclosure, under-
standing and accommodating for the structural behaviors of the
AutoTight®
enclosure system and materials to be used is critical. The enclosure TIGHTER CONNECTIONS
system must support itself and allow for predictable movements of
the structural building frame. BETTER PERFORMANCE
Infill Walls
The many varieties of infill walls, such as translucent window walls

and solid-framed walls, are commonly supported by each floor level,
extending and attaching to the floor above (Figure 1a). Masonry
veneers, for example, are often laterally supported by an infill wall
system and gravity supported at each level with a shelf angle.
Variations of floor elevation are adjusted using shims at the base of
the infill wall, allowing conformance with defined vertical installation

tolerances. A vertical movement joint at the top of the wall system
below the floor. or below the shelf angle in the case of masonry
veneer, accommodates the differential vertical displacement between
adjacent floors.
Curtain Walls
Curtain wall systems are typically thin-framed wall constructions
often including infills of glass, metal panels, or thin stone. The most
recognizable framing for curtain walls is aluminum. The curtain
wall framing is installed outboard of the structure, extending past
the outer face of the structural framing. As shown in Figure 1b,
the curtain wall framing is directly attached to the main building
structure and does not carry the floor or roof loads of the building.
Lateral and gravity loading imposed on the curtain wall are trans-
ZERO LOOSENESS
ferred to the structural building frame. Curtain walls are typically PH: (360) 378-9484 – WWW.COMMINSMFG.COM
laterally supported at each level. Gravity supports can be located
MARCH 2020 23
along its span (Figure 2). While individual Live Load Deflections
members of a cantilevered system can meet
Reduction of live loads when determin-
IBC deflection limitations, when relative
ing spandrel deflections is appropriate.
deflections are combined, the resultant
Reductions can be based on code-calculated
deflection can be significant and must be
values or a more realistic percentage depend-
accommodated by the building enclosure
ing on the application. ASCE/SEI 7-16
system (Figure 2).
Appendix C Commentary suggests using 50%
live load when combined with long-term
Sizing Vertical effects. In addition to a uniform reduction
of live loads for deflection calculations, one
Movement Joints Figure 3. Deflected member shape based on uniform
and pattern loading of a cantilevered member. should also consider pattern loads where the
The detailing of horizontal sealant and cur- floor plate is cantilevered. In this specific case,
tain wall joints to accommodate vertical movement is not typically a loaded back span could result in upward movement at the cantilever
in the structural engineer's scope of services. However, the structural edge, whereas loading just the cantilever portion may result in more
engineer must be knowledgeable of the structural behavior of the significant deflections when compared to uniform loadings (Figure 3).
project's building enclosure and assist the design team by providing
sizing criteria for items such as joints and defining movement require-
ments, including limitations for the building enclosure.
Long-Term Deflections
Variables that affect vertical movement within the horizontal joints In addition to initial elastic deflection, concrete also exhibits addi-
are broken into two categories – enclosure movement and structural tive long-term deflections due to creep and shrinkage. Long-term
frame deflections. flexural deflection of horizontal members and axial shortening
of columns due to both initial and long-term effects all need to
Dimensional Changes of Enclosure Materials
be carefully considered when dealing with taller buildings, as
Volumetric changes of materials need to be considered when deter- the building enclosure installation will likely begin before the
mining appropriate widths for enclosure vertical movement joints. structure is complete and before initial and long-term deflections
Temperature affects all materials differently. The rate of thermal expan- have taken place.
sion for aluminum is approximately twice the rate for concrete or steel
and four times that of clay masonry. Since the curtain wall and infill
window wall systems are typically built with aluminum extrusions and
Coordination
can experience extreme changes in temperature, the calculation of the There must be communication and design coordination between
thermal volumetric change is fundamental to determining appropriate all members of the project design team, including the building
joint widths. While manufacturers of fabricated enclosure systems, structural engineer, architect, and various design professionals.
such as curtain walls, will determine the expected volumetric changes There should be a clear understanding of how the structure will
within their system, the architect will be responsible for determining interact with the building enclosure, including the proposed
the volumetric change of most infill wall systems, such as concrete support locations, loads, and deflection limitations. The design
and clay masonry veneers which will experience some permanent parameters should be conveyed in the contract documents and
contraction or expansion, respectively, over time. then checked throughout the submittal process. Whatever deflec-
tion limitation or assumption is used during the design of the
Structural Frame Deflections
structural frame, it should be included in the building enclosure
When sizing enclosure vertical movement joints at locations where specification or defined preferably on the architectural drawings.
floor stiffness and loadings are similar between adjacent levels, the Well-coordinated building enclosure and structural support systems
differential deflection between the levels can be estimated using a will significantly reduce possible constructability and performance
portion of the calculated deflections. However, where stiffness and issues related to the interaction of the building structure and wall
loading vary (e.g., a 1st-floor wall with a stable and stiff foundation), enclosure systems.
the joint between the elevated framing and the foundation will need
to account for all of the elevated frame deflection.
Even when the structural floor framing is repetitive, changes in
Final Thought
curtain wall weight, floor finishes, and construction methods could The IBC and industry standards do not provide prescriptive require-
result in differential deflection between levels. The enclosure system ments with respect to resultant deflection limits of perimeter floor
weight can vary due to changes in materials or height of wall sections, framing members, which are attached to or support building enclo-
such as where lower or upper-level sections of a hung curtain wall may sures. As such, the design team must consider the behavioral
differ from the typical floor-to-floor section. Floor finishes or dead differences and provide an appropriate analysis that addresses
load may also vary between floors. In the case of an office tower, the the impact of wall enclosure systems on each project.■
flooring may not be selected or installed until a tenant has signed a
lease. In this case, some floors may have installed flooring while the
Matthew L. Wagner is a Senior Project Engineer at Raths, Raths & Johnson,
adjacent floor may remain unfinished for years. Though the structural
Inc. ([email protected])
design may account for heavy thickset tile flooring, a tenant may opt
for a lightweight floor, such as wood or carpet. Lastly, even though the Patrick Olechno is a Professional Engineer at Stantec.
design stiffness may be identical between floors, as-built irregularities ([email protected])
may cause the two floors to deflect differently.
QUICK-LOCK & ADJUSTABLE QUICK-LOCK
® ®
UNIBAR CENTRALIZERS
®
Don’t put your projects at risk, choose PIERESEARCH for all your
®
soil nailng and tendon/rebar alignment and support!
4-6/8UBC 6-6/8UBC
4-1.5IN-UBC 6-1.5IN-UBC
4-2.0IN-UBC Patent No. 10,151,113 6-2.0IN-UBC
4-2.5IN-UBC 6-2.5IN-UBC
DURABLE. ECONOMICAL. RELIABLE. PROVEN.

Made of noncorrosive plastic, two identical halves
THE ALL NEW snap together in seconds! Quick-Lock ® Unibar ®
PATENTED ADJUSTABLE Centralizers are your answer to uniform
QUICK-LOCK UNIBAR
® ®
reinforcement steel spacing requirements
CENTRALIZER in single-bar foundation/tieback elements.
Fits rebar sizes #6 thru #11 BY WIRE
pieresearch.com • 817 277 3738 • 817 275 2335 fax
[email protected]
NEW YORK: 516 376 9807 • [email protected]
BY LAND
501 E Main Street • Arlington, TX 76010
8-6/11UBC
Quality Concrete Accessories Proudly Made In The USA!
EST. 1986
Napa County
HISTORIC
Courthouse
PART 3
By Brett Shields, P.E., Luke Wilson, S.E.,
and Kevin Zucco, S.E.
Figure 1. Entry showing damage taken the morning of the earthquake.
O n August 24, 2014, the South Napa Earthquake left the Napa product requires surface preparation to receive a base coat for finished
County Historic Courthouse heavily damaged with partially plaster. The epoxy-based resin creates a sealed surface over the historic
collapsed walls, ceilings, and extensive wall cracking (Figure 1). The brick, restricting the brick’s natural ability to breathe. Maintaining
City of Napa red-tagged the courthouse as unoccupiable, which began this breathability was critical for the preservation of the historic brick.
the extensive damage documentation and repair effort. The overarch- During concept design, an overlay product used extensively in
ing goal throughout this process was to Europe, Fabric-Reinforced Cementitious
provide a solution to repair and preserve Matrix (FRCM), was being introduced to
as much of the historic building as practi- the California market by manufacturers
cal while providing improved detailing. including Simpson Strong-Tie. FRCM
The historic courthouse building is a consists of either uni-directional or bi-
140-year-old, two-story, unreinforced brick directional carbon fiber fabric (Figure 2)
bearing wall structure with wood-framed embedded between lifts of cementitious
floors and roof, located in downtown Napa. matrix installed in ¼- to ½-inch lifts. The
The building had a significant remodel and lifts can either be installed by hand similar
retrofit in 1977 which included concrete to plaster, or as a spray installation similar to
frames for new openings, concrete or con- shotcrete. The fabric, which comes in rolls
crete masonry unit (CMU) infill of existing up to 77 inches wide, is pressed into the
openings, and many other small renovations. Figure 2. FRCM uni-directional (left), bi-directional (right). base lift before having a cover lift of matrix
The observed earthquake damage in the brick walls varied from installed. The total thickness for one layer of FRCM is approximately
miscellaneous small cracks to significant cracking with permanent 1 inch plus ½ inch for each additional layer of FRCM. As a porous
in-plane and out-of-plane displacements in both principal directions, cementitious material, FRCM is more homogeneous with existing
to the partial collapse of wall sections. The repair approach needed to brick stiffness and mechanical properties compared to epoxy-based
provide a similarly diverse set of options to match observed condi- overlays and allows the historic brick to breathe. The FRCM surface
tions. Traditional brick repair methodologies, repointing, and grout preparation only requires a surface clear of loose debris, cleaned, and
injection were used in areas of minor damage where appropriate. saturated surface dry for cementitious matrix adhesion and curing. The
Complete wall reconstruction using specially detailed CMU was used FRCM can double as the base coat for plaster installation, removing
in areas with permanent deflections and partial collapse. However, an extra preparation step required for FRP.
a third repair approach was needed to address the majority of wall The FRCM, combined with grout injection of large cracks in the brick
areas exhibiting extensive cracking and minimal displacement. The substrate, was used to restore in-plane capacity to extensively cracked
damage documentation and general repair efforts were outlined in brick walls in place of typical traditional brick repair approaches. The
the December 2019 and January 2020 editions of STRUCTURE. matrix’s tolerance in lift thickness, and its ability to locally fill voids of
up to 2 inches, provided flexibility for the structure’s variable (brick,
concrete, and CMU) surface conditions and interfaces. Additionally,
Fabric Reinforced Cementitious Matrix the FRCM was used to provide nominal continuity through structural
Early in the repair design, the design team considered using tradi- elements such as floors and wall intersections using bundled splay
tional Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) overlay on brick walls that anchor ties, laps between different materials, and nominal tension
demonstrated extensive cracking. However, FRP presents challenges in ties at reentrant corners exhibiting spandrel joint damage.
a historic brick application. It requires significant surface preparation During design, Simpson Strong-Tie was in the process of gaining seis-
of the brick to provide a flat surface for fiber application. The finished mic approvals for FRCM in California. Therefore, the design process was
a collaborative performance-based specification design-build approach.
Simpson Strong-Tie acted as the engineer of record for the design of the
FRCM product using American Concrete Institute (ACI) 549.4R-13,
Guide to Design and Construction of Externally Bonded Fabric Reinforced
Cementitious Matrix Systems for Repair and Strengthening Concrete and
Masonry Structures, with direct input and oversight from ZFA. Per ACI
549.4R, there is no strengthening limit for earthquake and wind forces
as they are not considered likely to damage the unprotected FRCM
compared to a fire or blast loads. However, FRCM strengthening
should not exceed 50 percent of the capacity of the original structure to
limit force transfer to the brick. And, strengthening should be limited
to 12-inch-thick walls maximum. Additionally, the combined brick
and FRCM shear capacity should be compared to the limit state shear
capacity of substrate toe crushing.
Based on the reduction in capacity determined in the damage
documentation process, ZFA provided target minimum in-plane
strengthening loads, ranging from 10 to 25 percent of the undamaged Figure 3. Mockup prior to installation of FRCM.
brick wall capacity, for the design of the FRCM to repair the wall to
its undamaged capacity. ZFA also provided construction details for the
installation of FRCM to walls and their intersections with surrounding
Construction
structural elements. The design team coordinated the number of layers As one of the first installations of the FRCM product in California,
and directionality of FRCM on each wall face to minimize impact to there were challenges to overcome. FRCM requires the substrate to be
significant architectural areas. The result was that each wall to receive saturated surface dry (SSD). SSD is the condition at which the wall
FRCM had custom reinforcing layups, including at least one layer substrate is saturated, refuses to absorb additional water, and the sur-
of bi-directional fiber reinforcing for continuity and added ductility. face is dry to the touch. The building has been enclosed for 140 years
with central heat since the 1970s, which led the walls to be dry. The
walls were wetted every 30 to 60 minutes during the day and covered
Mockup overnight for approximately 48 hours before the walls reached SSD.
Due to the complexity of detailing and installing CMU, historic brick, This is critical to the installation of FRCM to prevent the wall substrate
wood framing, wall anchorage, and use of a new product in FRCM, from absorbing the moisture in the thin lift layers of cementitious
the design team recommended the construction of a mockup. The matrix, causing the material to flash or surface tear while the contrac-
mockup was intended to test installation techniques on similar condi- tor finishes the installation. This challenge was not identified in the
tions to the existing building and to identify potential issues before full mockup because the mockup was new construction and was exposed
mobilization during construction. The mockup served as a minimum to the outside elements before the installation of FRCM.
quality of work example and later served as a surface for mockup of FRCM was installed with a pump, hose, and nozzle, similar to
architectural finishes installed over the FRCM. shotcrete. Typical shotcrete lifts are three to four inches minimum,
The mockup consisted of approximately 19 linear feet of a six-foot- meaning there was a learning curve to install the ½-inch lifts required
tall wall in an ‘L’ configuration (plan view). It included the two typical for FRCM. The size of the walls complicated this. The typical wall
window head configurations, an exterior corner pilaster, multiple CMU height was 16 feet on the first floor and 18 to 20 feet on the second
to brick interfaces, control joints, and a wood ledger to install FRCM floor, requiring multiple levels of scaffolding to access (Figure 5).
splay anchors through. Once the structure was completed, FRCM was Matrix had to be installed around scaffolding, leading to shadowing
installed over each of the four sides on two separate days. and/or thin spots at the scaffolding planks and legs and thick spots at
The mockup was completed early
in the construction schedule and
observed by the Design Team,
Owner’s Representative, General
Contractor, multiple representa-
tives from Simpson Strong-Tie,
and Project Inspector of Record
(IOR). The group debriefed after
each installation and circulated les-
sons learned. Through this process,
multiple installation techniques
were tested to ensure ½-inch lift
heights. Ultimately, the most
effective process was determined
to be having preset feeler gauges,
spot-checking the material as it
was installed and using wires to
set the final depth (Figures 3 and
4 ) similar to traditional shotcrete
installation techniques. Figure 4. FRCM fabric being installed into matrix. Figure 5. FRCM installation.
MARCH 2020 27
the corners, floors, and ceilings. These variations
had to be trimmed to meet flatness require-
ments for future wall finishes. If the matrix was
too thin, the fabric could be unintentionally
moved or damaged while worked into the first
lift of matrix.
Additionally, scaffolding presented an obstacle
to the installation of the large rolls of fabric.
The fabric could not be sharply bent without
damaging the fiber bundles or disconnecting the
unidirectional grid from tie strands. Therefore, the
FRCM had to be installed from a rolled bundle
challenging to work around scaffolding. While
the mockup was an excellent proof of concept
and uncovered many installation hurdles, it had
size limitations that did not uncover challenges Figure 6. Finished FRCM installation on first floor (left), second floor (right).
of large-scale construction means and methods.
While FRCM had multiple benefits, using a new product to
California presented several challenges during design and construc-
Conclusions tion. These ranged from working with Simpson Strong-Tie as they
FRCMs were used to provide in-plane and out-of-plane repair/ developed design guidelines and material information, preparation of
strengthening throughout the building, maximizing the amount of 140-year-old brick walls, and translating installation techniques from
historic brick wall that was preserved. Its relatively thin application, the mockup to working within the building. A dynamic and
substrate tolerance, material compatibility with the existing brick, collaborative team approach was required by all involved to
and its allowance for the walls to naturally breathe were critical to overcome these challenges.■
providing a structural solution while minimizing the effect on the
All authors are with ZFA Structural Engineers in Santa Rosa, California.
historic character of the building (Figure 6 ). FRP would have required
Brett Shields is an Engineer. ([email protected])
significantly more surface preparation in comparison to FRCM, and
Luke Wilson is an Associate Principal. ([email protected])
discrete shotcrete walls would have affected room sizes and required
Kevin Zucco is an Executive Principal. ([email protected])
strengthening of collectors and foundations.
Get to spec faster
6 COMPREHENSIVE VOLUMES OF LOAD TABLES [ FREE DOWNLOAD:

newmill.com/loadtables
Expedite project specification. Cut down costly RFIs.

Design quicker and more efficiently.
See us at
Newly updated catalogs with all the load tables, NASCC
standards and specifications you need for a Booth 1125
smooth, successful steel joist and deck project.
Design wood structures effectively, economically and with ease!
SIZER SHEARWALLS CONNECTIONS

Gravity Design Lateral Design Fasteners
For wood-to-wood,
For beam, joist, column, For wood and gypsum board
wood-to-concrete, and
wall stud and CLT design sheathed walls
wood-to-steel connections
Reaction 113 96 18
7.5
41 2
Shear 41
Bending
Deflection 11.2 7.0
S 93 S 93 S 62 S 62
woodworks-software.com
Step 1 ...
Free Download a Watch our Step 2 ...
Step-By-Step
Demo Free Trial Training Videos Step 3 ... Tutorials
AMERICAN
WOOD
COUNCIL
U.S. version conforms to Canadian version conforms to

IBC, ASCE 7, NDS and SDPWS CSA O86 and NBC
Anatomy
18-inch timber off the shelf is not customary. The author’s firm,
Stonewood Structural Engineers, worked directly with the contractor
and lumber broker to source the timber and a mill which has on-site
graders to get the right timber to meet the specifications.
The green milled size of this timber would be 17½ inches square
based on the manufacturing and grading rules. Minimizing move-
ment after the CNC processing of the timber is essential for proper
OF A HIGH CAPACITY
fit-up, so Kiln Dried (KD) timber was specified. The Moisture
Content (MC) can vary significantly throughout the depth of
the timber. At the time a DF-L tree is felled, the MC is about
Timber
37% for the heart-wood (center-of-tree) and about 115% for the
Sapwood (outer surface) although it dries out much faster than
the heart-wood. The KD process is an art form to get a dry timber
while minimizing checking and avoiding “killing” the timber
and making it brittle, so choosing an experienced kiln operator
Connection
is important. When specifying MC19 (19% moisture content)
KD timber, the moisture content is typically measured with a
standard prong moisture meter which may have prongs less than
3
⁄8-inch-long (Figure 1). With this approach, there is no guarantee
that the MC deeper below the surface is even close to MC19. The
measurement was specified to be taken 3 inches below the surface
(Figure 2) to have a better chance of having an average MC19
throughout the wood
By D. Scott Nyseth, P.E., S.E. When a timber is milled at MC19, versus green, the final dressed size
requirement is different. The MC19 minimum dressed size is 17x17
inches versus 17½ x 17½ inches when milled green. The mill started
to plane the timber at the smaller dry dimensions once the timber was
A new timber truss pedestrian bridge in Oregon is using high-capacity

timber connections. The span is 114 feet with a truss height and
width of 16 feet between centerlines of chords. Historically, timber
removed from the kiln. The moisture content was found to be closer
to 25% moisture content at 3 inches below the surface. Milling was
stopped at that point. The kiln operators felt that additional time in
truss bridges have light roof structures when compared to the timber the kiln to lower the moisture content further would create excessive
truss and deck structure. The roof for this bridge weighs more than the checking, yet the members did not meet the criteria for milling at the
truss and deck structure. This provided unique challenges in a high 17- x 17-inch criteria. A rule of thumb is a 1%-dimensional change
seismic region. Bottom chord seismic tension loads are approximately for every 4% change in moisture content to determine the acceptable
300 kips and typical knife plate connections could not develop the dressed size. Due to the higher moisture content, it was determined
strength required for the bottom chords. The recent introduction of that the final milled size needed to be 173⁄16 x 173⁄16 inches. For member
proprietary connections utilizing multiple internal steel plates and design, the full 17½-inch dimension is used (grade rules account for
screws provided a challenge for a much larger connection. this) and, for connection design, the 17-inch dimension is used. The
The initial bottom chord size from the architect was proposed as equilibrium moisture content (EMC) for the location of the bridge
14x18 visually graded sawn timber. When analyzing typical external ranges from about 12% to 17% throughout the year.
connection plates with bolts, the connection became so long that Right before fabrication of the timber was scheduled to begin, the
the group action factor, based on the National Design Specification® project was delayed. This allowed Stonewood to cut two sections of
(NDS®) for Wood Construction, became too large, even when
looking at various bolt diameters, spacing, and larger chords.
The author proposed a continuous glulam member to avoid
the tension connections, but that was not the aesthetic the
architect wanted for this bridge. Once there was an agreement
to use multiple internal knife plates, a design that almost met
the tensile capacity of the chord member itself was sought.
The upper design strength of the connection is the allowable
tensile capacity of the individual wood segments between
knife plates, so removal of wood for the knife plates would
never allow for the full allowable tensile capacity of the chord
away from the connection. After analysis, truss bottom chords
were required to be 18x18 Douglas Fir-Larch (DF-L) Select
Structural, with a non-incised pressure preservative treatment.
Physical Properties of Timbers

The following discussion explains some of the issues related
to the physical properties of timbers and how they impact Figure 1. Initial moisture content with Figure 2. Initial moisture content 3 inches
the design process. For a project such as this, buying an 18- x standard prong. below surface.
timber off the mock-up to determine the actual
moisture content of the timber, instead of a single
measured point 3 inches below the surface. Over
two months, the timber block, which initially
measured 17 x 17 x 12 inches and weighed 77.6
pounds (38.8 pcf ), went into the author’s oven
at home at 170 degrees Fahrenheit. It under-
went about 22 cycles of about 12-18 hours before
reaching an oven-dry weight of 62.0 pounds (31
pcf ). The initial moisture content is determined
by the formula MC = (initial weight – oven dry
weight)/oven dry weight. For our sample, this
equates to 25.2% moisture content. As a refer-
ence, the initial surface moisture content with a
standard prong was 11.4% (Figure 1) and at 3 Figure 3. Blue outline of smaller oven-dry timber Figure 4. Boxed heart manufacturing yields smaller
over initial timber. checks and allows for better utilization of the tree.
inches below the surface was 22.8% (Figure 2).
Our initial direction to measure moisture content
at 3 inches below the surface slightly underestimated the actual 6) Apply pressure preservative treatment so that it penetrates all
moisture content of the timber. end grain, cuts, and holes.
Additionally, from the initial moisture content of 25.2% to the oven-
dry condition, the timber shrank on average from 17 inches to 16¼
inches. The diagonal dimension shrank from 237⁄8 inches to 233⁄8 inches.
Multiple Internal Plate Connection Design Issues
The timber shrank relatively less across the diagonal when compared The NDS has a lower bound connection design approach in section
to the face dimensions. This created the slightly cupped faces that can 12.3.9. The method of checking the bolt-wood yield mode capacity
be seen in Figure 3. The actual face dimensions shrank down to 16¼ at each shear plane, as outlined in this article, rather than using NDS
inches, where the rule of thumb of 1%-dimensional change for each 12.3.9, is a rational method which is allowed in the code but can be
4% MC change predicts a 15.9-inch oven-dry face dimension. This is challenging to shepherd through the plan review process depending
likely due in part to a comment from the kiln drying representative, on the jurisdiction and its familiarity with wood design. Also note
made before the kiln drying started, that large square timbers similar that values for drift pins have a 25% reduction in the NDS due to
to what Stonewood was using will often shrink less than timbers that the lack of heads, nuts, and washers. The choice of connection plate
are more rectilinear, due to three-dimensional restraint that occurs. numbers and locations is critical to the design. Figure 5a (page 32)
Boxed heart timber was used because it allows for better utiliza- shows the standard internal knife plate. This is the typical approach
tion of the tree and requires a smaller (less expensive) tree. It can for a hidden connection. Based on a preliminary NDS yield limit
also yield smaller checks which are more evenly spread around the analysis, the 4-inch dimensions, noted as x(IIIs), at the exterior wood
perimeter, where Free of Heart Center (FOHC) will have one face of segments, represent the minimum width required to force yield
the timber that is cut close to the heart, which is where many larger mode IV and not allow a smaller mode IIIs capacity. The double
checks originate. For 18x18 Boxed Heart,
a 30-inch-diameter log may be required,
and for 18x18 FOHC, a 50-inch-diame-
ter log may be required (Figure 4).
Timber Specification and

Detailing Process

1) Order 50% more timber than
required to be able to choose the
correct grade, appearance, and check
locations at critical connection zones.
2) Mill oversized in its green state.
3) Kiln dry until MC19 measured at 3
inches below the surface.
4) Select timbers and mill rough sawn
section with true 17-x17-inch-
square dimensions, or larger size
based on actual moisture content
higher than MC19.
5) CNC all cuts and bolt holes per final
connection design (discussed in the
Multiple Internal Plate Connection
Design Issues Section).
MARCH 2020 31
(4) rows of (7) 7⁄8-inch-diame-
ter bolts (28 total). The author
chose to show bolt capacities in
this table instead of the reduced
drift pin capacities because the
higher bolt capacities create
more “net tension” and “tear-
out” controlled designs, where
the reduced drift pin capacities
controlled the design except
where the inner members'
thickness was 6 inches or less.
Figure 5. a) Standard internal steel knife plate; b) Multiple steel knife plates. Figure 6. Net section tension failure mode. The final connection shown
in Figure 7 utilized the 8-inch
crosshatch represents the region of excess wood not being utilized inner section and (4) rows of (8) 7⁄8-inch diameter drift pins. Table 2
for the dowel capacity. shows the final design capacity of this connection. Note that this drift
Figure 5b shows how the use of multiple knife plates doubles the pin connection has 10% less capacity even though it has (4) more
capacity of each dowel in the connection. The 2½-inch dimensions, dowels, because of the 25% reduction for drift pins.
noted as x(Is), represent the minimum width required to force yield
Connection Design Steps
mode IV and not allow a smaller mode Is capacity. The single cross
hatch represents the area not required to maximize the dowel capacity, 1) Determine dowel diameter and number of knife plates that maxi-
but which is required to preclude a net tension failure of the inner mize the wood section use for yield mode IV dowel capacity. 2)
section, as explained below. As noted above, each shear plane was Determine yield mode capacity at each bolt shear plane. 3) Determine
analyzed to determine bolt capacities. For a multiple interior knife load in each wood section based on the number of shear planes and
plate connection, the assumption is that Modes II, IIIs, and IIIm cannot capacities in step two above. 4) Check net tension, group tear-out,
occur at the inner sections, and Modes II and IIIm cannot occur in and row tear-out. 5) Modify variables to eliminate failure modes
the outer sections. The spacing between knife plates is important and/or optimize the connection. 6) Check steel plate capacities per
when determining the capacity of the dowel, but of more importance appropriate steel standards.
is the impact the spacing of the plates has on the net wood tension
failure mode and wood tear-out failure modes that must be checked
at all connections (NDS Appendix E provides an approach for this).
Technical Topics
The net tension failure mode is shown in Figure 6. The inner section Note that the lower bound approach in NDS 12.3.9 can be unconser-
between plates resists about twice the load as the outer sections, as vative for this specific type of connection design. When proportioning
can be seen at the bottom of Figure 5b. Therefore, as a first design the spacing of members and knife plates, group tear-out and net ten-
step, set the inner section as twice the width of the outer sections. sion failure of the members in the connection area is a critical factor.
Table 1 shows the comparison of adjusted bolt capacities and net If member size or knife plate spacing is based on a lower bound value
section capacities for a double 3⁄8-inch knife plate connection with per 12.3.9 when the more rigorous calculation anticipates a higher
Table 1. Comparison of adjusted bolt capacities and net section capacities for the double 3/8 - inch knife plate connection with (4) rows of (7) 7/8 - inch-diameter bolts (28 total).
Total Total Adjusted Bolt Capacity Net Section Tension Row Tear-out Group Tear-out
Inner Adjusted Adjusted nZ' Per Section (kips) ZNT' (kips) ZRT' (kips) ZGT' (kips)
member Connection Bolt
thickness capacity nZ’ Capacity Inner Each Outer Inner Each Outer Inner Each Outer Inner Each Outer
(in.) (kips) nZ' (kips) sections section section section section section section section
5 279.3 357.1 178.6 89.3 100.7 113.3 190.4 214.2 105.3 118.5
6 299.8 357.9 179 89.5 120.8 103.2 228.5 195.2 126.4 108.0
7 318.2 354.4 177.2 88.6 141.0 93.1 266.6 176.1 147.5 97.4
8 327.3 350.2 175.1 87.6 161.1 83.1 304.6 157.1 168.5 86.9
9 318.5 334.8 172.5 81.2 181.3 73.0 342.7 138.0 189.6 76.4
Table 2. Comparison of adjusted drift pin capacities and net section capacities for the double 3/8-inch knife plate connection with (4) rows of (8) 7/8 -inch-diameter drift pins
(32 total) used on bridge bottom chord splice.
Inner Total Adjusted Total Adjusted Adjusted Drift Pin Capacity Net Section Tension Row Tear-out Group Tear-out
member Connection Drift Pin nZ' Per Section (kips) ZNT' (kips) ZRT' (kips) ZGT' (kips)
thickness capacity nZ’ Capacity nZ' Inner Each Outer Inner Each Outer Inner Each Outer Inner Each Outer
(in.) (kips) (kips) sections section section section section section section section
8 292.8 292.8 146.4 73.2 161.1 83.1 348.2 179.5 179.4 92.5
capacity, a potential group tear-out or
net tension failure mechanism could be
forced in a connection.
One more lesson learned on this proj-
ect was that compressive member end
bearing requires a 20 gauge or thicker
bearing plate. Without this plate, the
NDS requires a 25% reduction in
bearing capacity. This affected the end-
to-end bearing capacity of truss top
chord members.
Fabrication Adjustments Figure 7. Final connection in progress at concrete abutment Figure 8. Mockup of the typical bottom chord
Figure 8 shows the mockup of the typical not yet placed. connection, which led to fabrication adjustments.
bottom chord connection with only 28
pins on each side. Four more pins were added to each side on the
structural detail to account for the drift pin reduction. The 7⁄8-inch
Summary
dowels were installed flush and proud of the chord face. As a result An 18-x18-inch timber was designed as the bottom chord of a bridge truss.
of the mockup, dowels were lengthened to extend 3⁄8 inches proud of For the truss tension splice connection, choosing the optimal number of
each face, knife plate slots were reduced to be 1⁄16 inch over steel plate interior knife plates, and determining a dowel diameter that
width, and sections of wood marked 1-4 were removed for oven-dry most effectively utilized the entire width of the timber, allowed
moisture testing and measurement of shrinkage. Because the mockup for higher capacity and more compact connections.■
moisture content was higher than specified, more vertical short slotted
D. Scott Nyseth is the President of Stonewood Structural Engineers, Inc.,
holes were used in the steel plates and the milled size was increased
in Portland, Oregon. Mr. Nyseth is an active participant in the American
from 17 inches square to 17 3⁄16 inches square. Note that, for the two
Wood Council's Wood Design Standards Committee. He is currently a
blocks of wood cut for drying, the 17-x17-x12-inch section fit into
member of the PRG-320 CLT Manufacturing Standard Committee.
the home oven with ¼ inch to spare, and the drying process made ([email protected])
the house smell great.
Seismic Approved
Girder Clamp
Lindapter’s Girder Clamp is the world’s first
and only ICC-ES approved structural steel
clamping system for all Seismic Design
Categories (A through F).
4 Quick to install with no field welding or drilling

4 Compliant with the International Building Code
4 Meets the requirements of AISC 360, 341 and ASCE/SEI 7
4 Design Strengths independently evaluated by ICC-ES
ESR-3976
4 True alternative to welding or bolting
Get the new catalog or request a Lunch & Learn: call 866-566-2658 | www.LindapterUSA.com
MARCH 2020 33
building BLOCKS
Pre-Manufactured Wood Trusses
The Impact of Deferred Submissions and Cost Silos
By Kirk Grundahl, P.E.
C omponent Manufacturers (CMs) are often a misunderstood

business in the construction industry, specifically by the structural
engineering community. CMs are a key supplier of load path resisting
structural elements. Premanufactured roof trusses are one such element.
Typically, the process of developing both the architectural and structural
plans for a building designates“trusses by others.”By definition, trusses
then become a deferred submittal. Given that trusses are the primary
structural framework that provide resistance to the load path as load
flows from the roof to the walls and floors to the walls and foundation,
the concept of trusses being a deferred submittal presents both engineering and communication challenges.
Given these challenges, why is this the preferred method in the Responsibilities in the Design and Application of Metal-Plate-Connected
market? Generally, cost; much of the root cause of the problems we Wood Trusses. This standard, as Brent Maxfield outlined in his
all face in the construction industry can be traced to a singular focus STRUCTURE magazine articles (March and April, 2019) regard-
on lowest cost. The engineer’s silo of work is bid out. This used to ing wood trusses, works incredibly well. There are, however, instances
be illegal, due to concerns over cutting corners given that structural where SOWs are exceeded due mainly to a breakdown in execution.
design should place life-safety above cost. Engineering service fees As the Structural Building Component Association’s (SBCA)
used to be one to two-and-a-half percent of the project value. From Executive Director since 1992 and a P.E., the author is in a unique
personal experience, fees can now be one-half percent or less. Each position to regularly see interactions between Building Designers and
silo of work has essentially become a commodity. That cost squeeze CMs. He has witnessed countless successful applications of trusses
has had a significant impact on the ability of the supply chain to inside a properly functioning supply chain. Just think about the
collaborate and communicate well. billions of dollars of structural framing that are installed each year
that utilize trusses. If truss use presented a systemic problem to the
construction industry, SBCA would hear about it daily.
ANSI/TPI 1 Scopes of Work In instances where the SOW breaks down, it is due primarily to a
CMs utilize engineering in their value proposition because they supply failure in some form of communication. Communication, specifically
the primary load path resisting elements. As mentioned above, the between Building Designers/Engineers and CMs, can be improved
building owner or the Building Designer/Structural Engineer does and can provide solutions to many of the problems that arise in the
not contract with the truss manufacturer to provide their engineering implementation of deferred submissions and review processes. For
and manufacturing expertise at the design development stage of the example, one solution that works well is Building Designers and
project. Thus, the designation “trusses by others.” General Contractors (GCs) who commit to work with a specific CM
To help navigate the potential for misunderstandings and misper- early in the project life cycle. Communication and collaboration at the
ceptions, and also for contract relationships, CMs rely on the scopes design development stage of any project solve many of the problems
of work (SOW) outlined in ANSI/TPI-1 (TPI) Chapter 2, Standard that typically present themselves during a deferred submission review
and revision process. Those problems typi-
cally result in costly rework by the Building
Designer and CM. When communication
starts early in a project, it is more likely to
continue throughout that project to every-
one’s benefit!
Scope of Work Creep

In recent years, commoditization of the
SBCA’s Construction Industry Work Flow Initiative looks to map the way information, products and construction supply chain has led to the
services flow throughout the construcution industry in a series of articles and graphical models. need to do more with a smaller budget. This
drives SOW creep down the supply they “shall be permitted to rely on the
chain. A good illustration is provided accuracy and completeness of infor-
through the many plans CMs receive mation furnished in the Construction
today that need to be fixed, whether Documents or otherwise furnished in
it be dimensions that do not close or writing by the Building Designer and/
load path details that do not work. or Contractor.”
To manufacture the trusses that will Mr. Maxfield’s suggestion of injecting
create the proper load path, CMs additional engineering services, outside
help by providing solutions (usually of the traditional SOW of the Building
under a very tight timeline) to keep Designer, is a serious transfer of load
the project moving. path responsibility. This also jeopar-
Unfortunately, the SOW creep starts dizes the role and value that Building
with the Architect, who often designs Designers/Engineers have within the
structures without full consideration supply chain. Several unintended
of the load resisting elements. From consequences may occur if the CM
there, in a cost-cutting effort, Building takes on additional SOW that should
Designers/Engineers are bid out and rightfully be performed by the Building
forced to abandon their traditional Designer/Engineer. If the CM hires or
SOWs in hopes of maintaining prof- employs a building design engineer to
itability through streamlining the design the roof system as Mr. Maxfield
engineering process. Digging into suggests, could they design the rest of
the dimensional weeds and provid- the structure, rendering the traditional
ing specific load path details is very Building Designer/Engineer obsolete?
time-consuming. Consequently, many Savvy Architects and GCs/Project
have created processes like “standard Owners will, in a cost-cutting effort,
details” to speed up project comple- quickly take advantage of this new load
tion. It is not out of the ordinary to path engineering service and look to
see a partially complete detail on a set replace the Building Designer and use
of “for construction” plans. the CM’s engineer instead. CMs will
As a result, CMs are forced to exceed be forced to solicit more of this work
their defined SOW in hopes of pleas- to cover the costs of Mr. Maxfield’s
ing their customer, typically the GC. suggestions.
Often, information is wrong or miss- The author has no problem with this
ing from the design documents as strategy as long as CMs are compen-
provided to the GC. The GC delegates problems to the CM to sated, at competitive engineering service rates, for any expansion of
interpret or, in many cases, fix. These “fixes” need to be done before the their SOW. However, serious consideration should be given to the
CMs can perform necessary tasks to model the project and ultimately unintended consequences of this suggestion for Building Designers
deliver their product. The goal is to fix what needs to be fixed, given and the structural engineering community.
that project time pressure generally does not allow a lengthy review
and approval process. This is exacerbated by the fact that the Architect
and Building Designer/Engineer generally are not in a position where
Serving Best Interests
their original fees will tolerate additional costs. What is the best path forward to address the engineering
and communication challenges outlined above? The Building
Designer/Engineer is in the best position to have a full under-
Why the Truss Industry Functions as it Does standing of the intent of the building design in the context of
CMs are compensated based on the volume of product delivered
and not the engineering value they provide to the structure. Many
Building Designers/Engineers know that CMs provide fixes “for
free.” Getting the party that needs to fix the plans to get truss Demos at www.struware.com
designs to work, so that they can be manufactured and out the
door, can leave more money in the building design/engineering Wind, Seismic, Snow, etc. Struware’s Code Search program calculates these and
budget. Hence, it is useful if the fix work can be done where it other loadings for all codes based on the IBC or ASCE7 in just minutes (see online
video). Also calculates wind loads on rooftop equipment, signs, walls, chimneys,
does not negatively affect the construction budget. trussed towers, tanks and more. ($250.00).
Behind the CM is the Truss Design Engineer (Truss Designer),
CMU or Tilt-up Concrete Walls Analyze solid walls for out of plane loading and
who designs and seals individual trusses based on input parameter panel legs next to or between openings by automatically calculating loads to the wall
files that are interpreted by the CM’s Truss Technician. Like the leg from vertical and horizontal loads at the opening. ($75.00 ea)
CM, the Truss Designer relies on a defined SOW to perform his Floor Vibration Program to analyze floors with steel beams and/or steel joist.
or her duties. The Truss Designer is a delegated engineer, removed Compare up to 4 systems side by side ($75.00).
from the specifics of the project and not as intimately knowledge- Concrete beam/slab Program to provide bending, shear and/or torsional reinforcing.
able about the project as the Building Designer/Engineer. The key to Quick and easy to use ($45.00).
a successful project for both the CM and the Truss Designer is that
MARCH 2020 35
expected load paths and to specify building conditions
such as snowdrift, HVAC units, load path to foot-
ings, etc. The SOW, as outlined in TPI Chapter 2,
should be followed regardless of who is performing the
various design duties. It is important to engage the CM
as early in the design development process as possible.
This will immediately improve communication. Design
reviews should be conducted and are necessary if the
process is to be successful. Mistakes are occasionally
going to be made. These are often due to communication
and execution breakdowns because the silos of work are
isolated and bid out to obtain the lowest cost.
Several opportunities exist to improve communication
between the engineering community and CMs, specifi-
cally with regard to using common specifications, contract
language, standard details, and so forth. SBCA has a long-
standing working relationship with NCSEA, most recently An excerpt from the collaborative work of NCSEA and SBCA to bring clarity to the IBC on
working together on IBC lateral restraint and diagonal best methods for installing permanent lateral restraint and diagonal bracing of individual
bracing related code change proposals. NCSEA’s point wood truss members.
of view was also instrumental in TPI 1 Chapter 2 and
Building Component Safety Information (BCSI). communication and execution, while also being adequately com-
Opportunities to collaborate remain. Successful construction projects pensated in the process, will lead to both excellent communication
certainly require that the SOW of the Building Designer/Engineer, and much better construction quality.■
GC, CM, Truss Designer, truss installer, and so forth to be appro- URL references for graphics and text are live in the digital
priately compensated in order to be successful. version of this article.
CMs are a key supplier of load path resisting structural elements.
The Building Designer/Engineer is in the best position to have a full Kirk Grundahl is the Executive Director of the Structural Building Components
understanding of the intent of the building design in the context of Association (SBCA). ([email protected])
expected load paths. How both groups work together to improve
GEOPIER GROUND
IMPROVEMENT CONTROLS
STRUCTURE SETTLEMENT
GIVE YOUR STRUCTURE
STABILITY
Work with Geopier’s geotechnical
engineers to solve your ground
improvement challenges. Submit
your project specifications to receive
a customized feasibility assessment
and preliminary cost estimate at
geopier.com/feasibilityrequest.
800-371-7470 • geopier.com
[email protected]
GEOPIER IS GROUND IMPROVEMENT®
historic STRUCTURES
Albion Bridge Collapse
By Frank Griggs, Jr., Dist. M.ASCE, D.Eng., P.E., P.L.S.
S quire Whipple (STRUCTURE, September 2005,

January 2015) built one of his early bowstring iron
trusses over the Enlarged Erie Canal in Albion, New York,
in 1848. He wrote of his early bridges: “About the same
period (1840), my own attention was directed to the
subject of iron bridges, and I designed the plan of my
Patent Iron Trussed Bridge, patented 1841, and built
an experimental bridge of 72 feet span, subsequently
erected and now in use on the Erie Canal at Newville
near Rome. I had, however, in the winter of 1841-42 pre- Whipple Bridge with sidewalks similar to that at Albion.
vious to the erection of the above bridge on the canal,
built a bridge of about 80 feet on First Street in Utica, which is the oldest iron bridge now in use on the canal; Trumbull’s
first bridge, built a few months sooner than mine, having failed and been rebuilt since, as before stated.”
“Soon after, this work of enlargement was suspended, but little the various bolts as circumstances required, the sad calamity would
progress was made in the introduction of iron bridges on the canal never have happened.”
for several years. In the meantime, I frequently urged on the Canal The Orleans County Fair had opened about a half-mile from the
Commissioners the policy of having a few iron bridges built, for bridge, and the village was filled with residents and visitors. A young
the purpose of more thoroughly testing their economy, that on the man from Brockport stretched a rope between two buildings, the
resumption of the enlargement, sufficient knowledge might be had Mansion House and the Pierpont Dryer’s, on opposite sides of the
for judging accurately as to the expediency of a more extensive adop- canal and on the west side of the bridge. He advertised that he would
tion of them for the use of the canal. But it was a subject that could walk the rope across the canal at 5:00 PM, so a large crowd gathered
bear putting off. at the bridge to witness the feat. The following newspaper account,
In the spring of 1848, commissioner Hinds, with a discriminating one of many, described the collapse:
liberality highly creditable, contracted with me for building an iron “The iron bridge near the rope was crowded with people on foot
bridge at the village of Albion and also one at Holley.” and in wagons, the place being one of the best that could be found
The cost for both bridges was $3,196. The Albion bridge served for a view of the rope, When the rope walker was just walking out,
well until 1859 when it and all eyes were fixed upon
was decided to replace it. It him, the bridge went down
had been raised and set on with a crash, carrying into
wood blocks on the west the water in a promiscuous
side. One of the men who mass hundreds of people,
built the bridge stated, “that including all ages and both
through the neglect of the sexes, and with them, of
state authorities it had been course, fell the horse and
in an unsafe condition for wagons, iron timbers and
over a year, and that within other materials of the
a few days he had noticed a bridge.
decided vertical inclination, It appears that the largest
and spoken of it. Had proper number of people were on
care been taken in underpin- the west side of the bridge,
ning the bridge when raised, that being nearest to the
and in examining the struc- rope, and that went down
ture, tightening or loosening Whipple Bridge at Holley, NY, built at the same time as the Albion Bridge. first, thus giving the falling
mass of human beings and materials a sidewise as well as a down- calling extraordinary numbers of people upon it, and by the neglect of
ward motion. The eastern section of the bridge falling last must have the officers and persons having charges thereof, had so been suffered
buried many beneath its ruins. As the bridge was of iron, partly cast to remain for a long space of time, to wit, for three months past.”
and partly wrought, it broke into sections They went on to condemn rope-walking,
and fragments and went to the bottom of stating,
the canal, burying, of course, everything “The jury are therefore of opinion that
that went before its weight. The excitement the calamity cannot be justly attributed to
which followed cannot be described – it may the neglect of the authorities of the village;
perhaps be imagined…There were three but that it is the legitimate fruit of toler-
teams upon the bridge, two carriages and a ating these pernicious exhibitions in the
lumber team. The number of persons on the country, and the jury takes this occasion
bridge is estimated at two to four hundred, to solemnly condemn the rope walking
most of whom went into the water…The exhibitions now and lately so prevalent
bridge was constructed about ten years ago, in the country, as injurious to the public
we think on the Whipple plan. It was about morals, dangerous to human life, and pro-
60 feet long but not the full width of the ductive of evil only.”
enlarged canal. It was shortly to be replaced Whipple did not testify and was not
by a larger and better one, the materials for found liable. Usually, juries such as this
which were already at Albion. It is safe to Plaque describing the collapse. They erroneously call it called in experts to testify as to why the
assume that there was a defect in this struc- a wooden bridge. bridge failed. Why they did not, in this
ture, or that it has been neglected. These case, is unknown. The bridge was rebuilt
iron bridges require attention, and at times the rods and bolts require and eventually replaced with a swing bridge that lasted until 1912.
to be adjusted so that the weight will be equally distributed. When The 1859 Annual Report of the State Engineer and Surveyor stated,
they are in order, they will sustain any number of human beings that “Said bridge was erected some ten years ago and was of the same style
can find a place to stand upon them.” and pattern as several, erected at other places at about the same time,
Another account stated, which are yet standing. The sectional area of its sustaining rods was
“At 5:15, the gymnast began his walk but had not advanced more sufficiently great, if sound, to have supported more than four times
than ten feet when an ominous creaking and groaning of the bridge was the load supposed to have been upon that part of the bridge which
heard, and immediately a man was seen to leap far out into the water. first gave way when it fell. This being the case, its failure can only be
The ropewalker threw him his balancing pole and then dropped down accounted for upon the ground that some of the rods were defective
into a sitting posture upon the rope, in which position he remained but had escaped previous observation.”
until the worst was over when he regained his starting place in safety. It is clear, therefore, that the bridge was poorly maintained, according
This passed in a moment. In the next, the foot walk gave way under to the locals, and poorly inspected, according to the State Engineer.
the pressure and was immediately followed by the remainder of the Why it was in the process of being replaced is not known.
structure, carrying with it into the water about 500 persons, of whom Whipple usually designed his bridges to carry 100 psf uniformly
a considerable number were forced under the remains.” spread across the sidewalks and roadway. In this case, the load was
And another, very unevenly distributed with the cantilevered sidewalk breaking first
“The rope was about two rods west of Main street bridge, an iron and west truss following. The same thing, unbalanced loading, had
arched structure like most of the new canal bridges, which of course happened on a wooden bridge he designed to cross the Mohawk River
offered an eligible standpoint from which to view the performance. at Cohoes to carry both carriage traffic and a cantilevered towpath for
It was accordingly crowded with people and teams. The rope walker the Champlain Canal. The bridge did not fail but was significantly
had got partway across the canal, when the bridge broke in two at criticized by the citizens of Cohoes and Waterford. It was destroyed
the centre, precipitating all who were upon it into the middle of the in a fire and replaced with an iron bridge.
canal. Men, women, children, horses and wagons, were all piled in an When the Enlargement was considered complete in 1862, a survey
indiscriminate mass. The west half of the bridge went down first, and of the bridges reported that, of the 158 iron bridges, 116 were of the
of course many of those who stood near the break were pitched off in Whipple Bowstring style indicating that the failure of the Albion
such a way that when the east half of the bridge came down, which it Bridge did not deter the Canal Commissioners from adopting the
did immediately, it fell upon and covered them up. Mr. Grant informs Bowstring as their standard iron bridge. Many bridges survived
us that a pair of horses and a carriage full of people were crushed in until the New York State Barge Canal replaced the Erie Canal in
this way so completely that nothing had been found of them…All the second decade of the 20th century and the old canal was filled
eyes were immediately turned from the dexterity of the ropewalker in. Many bridges were removed at the time and rebuilt elsewhere
to attend the call of suffering humanity. Very many were in a few in New York State. The author has restored bowstrings at Union
moments rescued from the canal, but the falling structure wounded College, Boonville, and Vischer’s Ferry, and is working on
many probably who never rose to the surface again.” a two-span Whipple Bridge at Claverack, all of which are
A total of 14 were killed and many injured. An eight-man coroner’s in New York State.■
inquest was held on the next day and determined,
“And the jurors aforesaid, upon their oaths aforesaid, do further Dr. Frank Griggs, Jr. specializes in the restoration of historic bridges, having
say that the aforesaid bridge, by reason of the raising thereof, and restored many 19 th Century cast and wrought iron bridges. He is now an
the placing of same upon blocks of wood, though sufficiently safe Independent Consulting Engineer. ([email protected])
for ordinary use, had become unsafe and dangerous upon occasions,
MARCH 2020 39
SOFTWARE updates
CADRE Analytic
Adhesives Technology Corp. Phone: 425-392-4309 ENERCALC, Inc. ENERCALC
Phone: 754-399-1057 Email: [email protected] Phone: 800-424-2252
Email: [email protected] Web: www.cadreanalytic.com Email: [email protected]
Web: atcepoxy.com/software Product: CADRE Pro 6 Web: http://enercalc.com
Product: Pro Anchor Design Software Description: Finite element structural analysis. Product: Structural Engineering Library/
Description: New Pro Anchor Design software Loading conditions include discrete, pressure, RetainPro/ENERCALC SE Cloud
from Adhesives Technology Corp. has an hydrostatic, seismic, and dynamic response. Features Description: ENERCALC’s 37th year includes
advanced single panel interface updated for all of for presenting displaying, plotting, and tabulating new structural engineering modules and interface
our IBC compliant products, including two new extreme loads and stresses across the structure and improvements plus significant performance
anchoring adhesives to be introduced in 2020. across multiple load cases simultaneously. Basic code gained, particularly for network-based project files.
No need to access the cloud or pay for premium checking for steel, wood, and aluminum. Free fully- RetainPro recently received substantial updates for
features. It’s free! functioning evaluation version available. segmental retaining walls and soldier piles with
tiebacks. NEW: Our software is now available in
American Wood Council budget-friendly monthly/annual subscriptions
Phone: 202-463-2766 Concrete Masonry Association including all updates/support.
Email: [email protected] of CA and NV
Web: www.awc.org Phone: 916-722-1700
Product: Special Design Provisions for Wind Email: [email protected] IES, Inc.
and Seismic Web: www.cmacn.org Phone: 406-586-8988
Description: ANSI/AWC SDPWS-2015 provides Product: CMD18 Design Tool for Masonry Email: [email protected]
criteria for proportioning, designing, and Description: Structural design of reinforced concrete Web: www.iesweb.com
detailing engineered wood systems, members, and clay hollow unit masonry elements in accordance Product: VisualFoundation 10.0
and connections in lateral force resisting systems. with provisions of Ch. 21 of 2010 through 2019 CBC Description: When engineers need to design
Design of wood structures to resist wind or or 2009 through 2018 IBC and 2008 through 2016 foundations, more and more are using IES
seismic forces either by ASD or LRFD. Nominal Building Code Requirements for Masonry Structures VisualFoundation. This tool simplifies your
shear capacities of diaphragms and shear walls are (TMS 402). use of nonlinear FEA to arrive at solid answers.
provided for reference assemblies. Create easy models with loading, and then
review the clear results. Stay in control of design
Gripple checks and complete your projects faster.
ASDIP Structural Software Phone: 630-406-0600
Phone: 407-284-9202 Email: [email protected]
Email: [email protected] Web: www.gripple.com Losch Software Ltd
Web: www.asdipsoft.com Product: Seismic Cable Braces for Non-Structural Phone: 323-592-3299
Product: ASDIP Suite Building Components Email: [email protected]
Description: An advanced software for quick and Description: Specifically-designed and engineered to Web: www.LoschSoft.com
efficient design of concrete and steel members, brace and secure suspended nonstructural equipment Product: LECPres
foundations, and retaining walls. See immediate and components requiring seismic design. Requiring Description: Analyze prestressed and/or mild
graphical results, and clean concise reports with no tools to install, they are up to 10 times faster than reinforced simple span or cantilevered concrete beams
exposed formulas and code references. Focus your other bracing methods and are suitable for new or and slabs. Handling analysis is also included. A 30-
attention on engineering and let ASDIP handle the retrofit installations. Color-coded by strength for day trial version is available.
math complexity. identification ease.
PROFESSIONAL MASTER DEGREE IN
Product: LECWall
STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF TALL BUILDINGS Description: The industry standard for precast
concrete sandwich wall design handles multi-
story columns as well. LECWall can analyze
prestressed and/or mild reinforced wall panels
with zero to 100 percent composite action. Flat,
Dreaming of getting a
PROFESSIONAL MASTER DEGREE IN
PROFESSIONAL MASTER IN
STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF TALL BUILDINGS
hollow-core, and stemmed configurations are
STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF TALL BUILDINGS professional master’s degree supported. Complete handling analysis is also
but can’t leave your job? included.
Earn a professional master’s

degree in structural design of tall Qnect LLC
Phone: 413-387-4375
buildings from an internationally
Email: [email protected]
recognized institution through
Web: www.qnect.com
blended learning Product: Qnect
[online + in-class] Description: An intelligent, cloud-based
approach connection service giving fabricators, detailers,
and engineers fast and flexible connections
with significant cost and schedule savings.
For more info
Connect steel buildings in minutes, with
[email protected]
Apply now! +(662) 524 6388
minimal training. Prevent schedule drift, utilize
one-station fabrication, and reduce connection
solutions.ait.ac.th/pmtb
material, time to fabricate, and erect.
Offered by
Civil and Infrastructure Engineering Department,
School of Engineering and Technology, Asian Institute of Technology (AIT), Thailand
Listings are provided as a courtesy,
STRUCTURE is not responsible for errors.
RedBuilt The Masonry Society
Phone: 866-859-6757 StructurePoint Phone: 303-939-9700
Email: [email protected] Phone: 847-966-4357 Email: [email protected]
Web: www.redbuilt.com Email: [email protected] Web: masonrysociety.org
Product: RedSpec Web: www.structurepoint.org Product: Publications and Webinars
Description: A convenient, user-friendly design Product: spLearn Description: The Masonry Society (TMS) is a
program that lets you quickly and efficiently create Description: StructurePoint, formerly the not-for-profit professional organization of volunteer
floor and roof design specifications using Red-I™ joists, engineering software group of the Portland members, dedicated to the advancement of masonry
RedBuilt™ open-web trusses, RedLam™ LVL, glulam Cement Association (PCA), is uniquely knowledge. Through our Members, all aspects of
beams and dimensional lumber. RedSpec™ is provided positioned at the heart of the cement and masonry are discussed, challenged, and debated.
free of charge to registered users. For support, contact concrete industry. Take advantage of numerous TMS develops and publishes standards and minimum
us by e-mail at [email protected]. resources for the structural engineer through uniform criteria for safety, materials, design, and
spLearn services. Schedule 2 hours of construction of masonry.
complimentary continuing education with PDH
certificates for your team.
RISA
Phone: 949-951-5815 Trimble Solutions USA Inc.
Email: [email protected] Phone: 678-737-7379
Web: risa.com Email: [email protected]
Product: RISAConnection SkyCiv Web: www.tekla.com/us
Description: The cutting edge of next- Phone: 800-838-0899 Product: Tekla Tedds
generation connection design software features Email: [email protected] Description: Automates repetitive and error prone
full 3-D visualization and expandable reports for Web: skyciv.com structural and civil calculations, allowing engineers
every limit state. The latest release, v11, includes Product: SkyCiv Software Suite to perform 2-D frame analysis, access a large range
integration with Hilti Profis for anchorage Description: Thanks to SkyCiv being cloud-based, of automated structural and civil calculations to U.S.
design, support for column cap plate moment software maintenance and downloads are GONE. codes, and speed up daily structural calculations.
connections, and updated HSS tube connection Updates are pushed to the suite automatically,
design according to the Canadian steel code. sometimes in as little as two weeks. Simply log into Product: Tekla Structural Designer
a browser from any device and go. Content and Description: Analyze and design multi-material
Product: RISA-3D feature updates are available immediately buildings efficiently and cost effectively. Fully
Description: v18 provides engineers with a after development. automated and packed with unique features
fresh new take on the most popular 3-D general for optimized concrete and steel design; helps
analysis and design software available. With a engineering businesses win more projects and
completely redesigned interface, robust graphical Standards Design Group, Inc maximize profits. Quick comparison of alternative
modeling tools, expanded detailed reports, and Phone: 806-792-5086 design schemes through cost-effective change
multi-core processing, RISA-3D v18 allows Email: [email protected] management and seamless BIM collaboration,
engineers to work more efficiently and get the Web: www.standarddesign.com transform your business.
most out of the software. Product: Wind Loads on Structures 2019
Description: Wind load computations in ASCE Product: Tekla Structures
7-05, Section 6 and ASCE 7-10, or 16, Chapters Description: Create and transfer constructible
26-31; "build" structures within the system, enter models throughout the design life, from concept
S-FRAME Software wind speed or choose basic wind speeds from to completion. With Tekla Structures, accurate and
Phone: 604-273-7737 the ATC Hazards by Location website, input information-rich models reduce RFIs, leverage models
Email: [email protected] topographic features, different exposures for for drawing production, material take offs, and
Web: s-frame.com different wind directions. Computes wind loads collaboration with architects, consultants, fabricators,
Product: S-TIMBER 2019 by analytical method. and contractors.
Description: The solution to mass timber, light-
frame, and hybrid structural design. Leverages over
38 years of structural engineering expertise into
a timber design solution that automates and
manages all aspects of the timber design process:
modeling, structural analysis, and timber design.
S-FRAME Software solutions are backed by best-
in-class customer support.

Product: S-FOUNDATION 2020
Description: Analyze and design any
foundation type with S-FOUNDATION, the
most customizable and automated foundation
solution available. Easily import superstructure
model data from S-FRAME, ETABS®, Excel,
or other 3rd party software. S-FOUNDATION
gives you complete control to implement your
custom workflow and deploy it throughout your
organization.
Not listed?
All 2020 Resource Guide forms
are now available on our website.
STRUCTUREmag.org.
M A R C H 2 02 0 41
Because You Start with a Model
model.iesweb.com
Easy-to-use structural software. Get a free trial in 2 minutes. Promo code: S3RC
SPOTLIGHT
181 Fremont
By Ibbi Almufti, S.E., and Nate Warner, P.E.
T here is a common misconception

among the general public that build-
ings designed according to modern building
the office and residential levels. Gravity loads
are resisted by steel columns in the core and at
the exterior as well as corner mega-columns.
codes will not be damaged in an earthquake. Transfer trusses wrapping around the building
Many building owners are similarly unaware at level 3 carry all perimeter gravity loads to
that the seismic performance objectives out- the mega-columns. Below ground, a 5-story
lined in the code are intended only to provide basement is supported on a concrete mat with
life safety for occupants; they do not prevent piles socketed into bedrock more than 200 feet
damage or ensure post-earthquake functional- below grade.
ity. Significant financial losses and downtime Arup determined that using an integrated
for repairs can occur after an earthquake, damping system would reduce seismic forces
which likely does not meet the expectations to facilitate enhanced performance and control Arup was an Outstanding Award Winner for the 181
owners have for their investments. wind vibrations in the tower. The mega-brace Fremont project in the 2019 Annual Excellence in Structural
Jay Paul Company, the owners of 181 Fremont, system provided an excellent opportunity to Engineering Awards Program in the Category – New
envisioned a high-performance building incorporate damping. Each mega-brace in Buildings over $100M. Courtesy of Jay Paul Company.
with innovative sustainability strategies. After the office levels consists of three parallel ele-
stiffness and increased its flexibility, leading to a
realizing that code-minimum earthquake per- ments – a built-up-box primary brace in the
cycle of material reduction. The increased flex-
formance did not align with their goals, they middle with solid steel secondary braces on
ibility decreased the seismic demands further,
also chose to pursue a design strategy presented either side. Viscous dampers are introduced at
and the process was iterated until the design
by Arup to achieve “beyond code” seismic resil- one end of each secondary brace. The mega-
was tuned to meet the seismic and wind criteria.
ience. This holistic “resilience-based” approach braces are restrained laterally at every floor to
Since the tower is slender and lightweight, wind
required identifying and attempting to mitigate prevent buckling but slide freely along their
accelerations posed a challenge due to stringent
all threats that could hinder re-occupancy and length against polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE)
criteria in the residential levels, but integrating
functionality. The building was designed to bearing pads. As the tower sways in wind or
viscous damping within the mega-frame also
exceed the California Building Code (CBC) seismic events, elastic strains develop in the
eliminated the need for a tuned mass damper
mandated seismic performance objectives and primary braces, causing them to lengthen
near the top of the building. This resulted in
achieve immediate re-occupancy with limited or shorten between mega-nodes. Since the
additional material savings and freed up valuable
disruption to functionality after a 475-year secondary braces are connected to the same
real estate at the penthouse level.
earthquake (the approximate recurrence inter- mega-nodes, this activates the dampers and dis-
181 Fremont was designed to avoid damage
val for the CBC design basis earthquake). This sipates energy. BRBs were also introduced as a
and achieve rapid recovery in the aftermath
is accomplished through enhanced design of fuse to prevent damage to the braces, dampers,
of a large earthquake, far exceeding code
both structural and non-structural components and mega-columns in the maximum consid-
requirements and earning a REDi Gold rating
along with pre-disaster contingency planning. ered earthquake (MCE). The system acts like
for seismic resilience. The design strategy,
181 Fremont is the third-tallest building in San a giant shock absorber to limit building drift
including enhanced performance criteria for
Francisco, with the spire of the 56-story tower and reduce floor accelerations.
structural and non-structural components, was
reaching a height of 802 feet. The lower 37 levels The structural design also features innova-
implemented with little cost premium, and will
of the building are commercial office space, tive uplifting corner mega-columns. As the
reduce the building’s overall life-cycle cost and
and the upper levels are condominiums. Arup building sways, significant tension demands
environmental footprint significantly. While
is the Structural and Geotechnical Engineer of develop in the mega-columns. To prevent
a resilience-based design approach extends
Record for 181 Fremont. The structure utilizes a damage, the columns are designed to uplift
beyond the typical purview of the structural
perimeter steel mega-frame system to resist wind slightly (approximately 1 inch) at their bases
engineer, 181 Fremont demonstrates how
and seismic forces because a traditional con- in the MCE, which limits demands in the
informed engineers are uniquely qualified to
crete or steel core lateral force-resisting system columns and foundation. The mega-columns
assist owners and stakeholders who
is too slender, given the tower’s small footprint. are anchored by pre-tensioned rods tuned so
desire better performing, “beyond
Over the lower two-thirds of the building, the that uplift does not occur in wind or smaller
code” buildings.■
structural system features mega-braces spanning earthquake events. A shear key transmits shear
between nodes near ground level and at levels from the columns into the foundation in the Ibbi Almufti is an Associate Principal in the
20 and 37. A secondary system of perimeter event of momentary uplift. Advanced Technology + Research Group in Arup’s
special moment frames transfers individual floor Arup’s structural design saved approximately San Francisco office and the Project Manager for
demands up or down to the mega-nodes. In the 2,700 tons of steel compared to a baseline 181 Fremont. ([email protected])
residential levels above, the perimeter braces design by another engineering firm – roughly
Nate Warner is an Engineer in the Structural
are made of large wide flange sections and a 25% of the building weight – while satisfying
Group in Arup’s San Francisco office and a
core of buckling-restrained braces (BRBs) acts the enhanced resilience objectives. Since the
Project Engineer for 181 Fremont.
as the secondary system. An inverted chevron damping reduced seismic forces, steel tonnage
([email protected])
braced frame provides lateral continuity between could be decreased, which reduced the building’s
STRUCTURE magazine MARCH 2020 43

NCSEA NCSEA News
NCSEA Corporate Members
National Council of Structural Engineers Associations
ASSOCIATE MEMBERS
Nationally recognized bodies that are associated with the practice of structural engineering, regardless of location and membership, who are approved
for this status by the Board of Directors.
American Wood Council International Code Council PROSOCO/CTP
Cantsink LNA Solutions Simpson Strong-Tie
Fabreeka International, Inc. Metal Building Manufacturers Association Steel Tube Institute
Insurance Institute for Business Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute USG Corporation ‒ Structural Solutions
& Home Safety
AFFILIATE MEMBERS
Companies who provide supplies or services to structural engineers, including vendors of structural engineering applications software, insurance,
and structural products used for construction.
ADAPT Corporation GIZA Steel Nucor
AISC Graitec Peikko
Atlas Tube GRM Custom Products Pieresearch
AZZ Galvanizing Services Haselton Baker Risk Group Post-Tensioning Institute
Bekaert Hayward Baker Qnect
Blind Bolt Headed Reinforcement Corporation (HRC) RISA
Cast Connex Corporation Hilti, Inc. SE Solutions, LLC
Chicago Clamp Company Hubbell Power Systems (CHANCE) SidePlate Systems, Inc.
Cold-Formed Steel Engineers Institute IAPMO Evaluation Service SkyCiv
Construction Tie Products, Inc. International Masonry Institute Steel Deck Institute
Copper Creek Companies, Inc. ITW Commercial Construction N. America Steel Joist Institute
CoreBrace Jordahl USA Inc. Strand7
DBM VirCon Kinemetrics Taylor Devices
DeWALT Lindapter USA Trimble
Dlubal Software, Inc. MeadowBurke Vector Corrosion Technologies
DuraFuse Frames Mitek Builder Products Vitruvius Project
Fox Rothschild LLP Myticon Timber Connectors Voss Engineering
Freyssinet, Inc. Nelson Stud Welding
Geopier New Millennium Building Systems
SUSTAINING MEMBERS
Structural engineering firms, firms that employ structural engineers, or individual professional engineers practicing structural engineering.
4x Engineering ECM O'Donnell & Naccarato, Inc.
Allan Klein PA Consulting Engineer Engineering Solutions, LLC Omega Structural Engineers, PLLC
ARW Engineers Gilsanz Murray Steficek Professional StruCIVIL Engineers, Inc.
ASC Engineers, Inc. Haskell Rimkus Consulting Group
Barter & Associates, Inc. Heyer Engineering Ruby & Associates, Inc.
Burns & McDonnell Holmes Culley Sanchez Civil Engineering
Collins Engineers, Inc. IBI Group Engineering Services (USA) Inc. Simpson, Gumpertz & Heger
Cowen Associates Consulting Engineers Joe DeReuil Associates Stability Engineering
Criser Troutman Tanner Consulting Engineers Katerra Structural Design Professionals, PLLC
CSA Engineering Krech Ojard & Associates Structural Engineers Group, Inc.
CSA Knoxville Lance Engineering LLC STV, Inc.
Davis Patrikios Criswell, Inc. LBYD, Inc. TEG Engineering, LLC
DCI Engineers Mainland Engineering Consultants TGRWA, LLC
Deems Structural Engineering Corporation The Harman Group, Inc.
Degenkolb Engineers Mainstay Engineering Group, Inc. Thornton Tomasetti
DiBlasi Associates, P.C. Mercer Engineering, PC Wallace Engineering
Dominick R. Pilla Associates Morabito Consultants, Inc. WDP & Associates
DrJ Engineering, LLC Mortier Ang Engineers
News from the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations
Prepare for the PE Structural Exam with NCSEA
The Best Instructors. The Best Material. Available to you immediately when you register.
NCSEA’s on-demand class provides the most economical PE Structural Exam Preparation Course available. The course includes 30 hours
of instruction, 9 Vertical Sessions and 11 Lateral, and will give you preparation tips and problem-solving skills to pass the exam. All lectures
are up-to-date on the most current codes with handouts and quizzes available.
PLUS…students have access to a virtual classroom exclusively for course attendees! Ask the instructors directly whenever questions arise.
This NCEES PE Structural Exam Preparation Course allows you to study at your pace but with instant access to the material and instructors.
Several registration options are available; visit www.ncsea.com to register yourself or to learn more about special group pricing!
Call for 2020 Structural Engineering Summit Abstracts

The 2020 NCSEA Structural Engineering Summit Committee is seeking presentations for the
2020 Summit in Las Vegas, NV, November 3-6, 2020. Ideal presentations are between 45 and
90 minutes, and deliver pertinent and useful information that is specific to the practicing struc-
tural engineer, in both technical and non-technical tracks. Submissions on best-design practices,
new codes and standards, recent projects, advanced analysis techniques, management, business
practices, the future of the profession, and other topics that would be of interest to practicing
structural engineers are desired.
Help make this year's Summit a sure bet! Submit your abstract March 20, 2020. Visit
bit.ly/2020SESabstracts for more details.
Secure Training to Become a Second Respsonder

Register for the next NCSEA CalOES Safety Assesment Program on April 29, 2020
The California Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) Safety Assessment Program (SAP), hosted by NCSEA, is highly regarded as a standard
throughout the country for engineer emergency responders. It is one of only two post-disaster assessment programs that will be compliant
with the requirements of the Federal Resource Typing Standards for engineer emergency responders and has been reviewed and approved
by FEMA's Office of Domestic Preparedness. Based on ATC-20/45 methodologies and forms, the SAP training course provides engineers,
architects, and code-enforcement professionals with the basic skills required to perform safety assessments of structures following disasters.
Register by visiting www.ncsea.com. This course is not included in the Live & Recorded Webinar Subscription.
Doug Fell, P.E., is a CalOES Assessor, Coordinator, and Instructor. He is a licensed professional engineer (structural) in
his home state of Minnesota as well as several other states. Doug is the managing principal of Structural Resource Center
LLC. His practice includes structural engineering design and analysis for new and existing structures, structural assessments,
forensic engineering, emergency response, development and review of safety programs, and project management services.
Doug has responded to all types of emergencies and performed assessments all over the U.S. He was the lead structural
engineer for the Minneapolis Metrodome roof collapse stabilization and return to service.
NCSEA Webinars Register by visiting www.ncsea.com

March 10, 2020 April 16, 2020
Masonry Movement Joints Structural Design and Embodied Carbon
Sam Rubenzer, P.E., S.E. Nicholas Miley, S.E.
This presentation addresses the movement characteristics of masonry Meeting the goals of the UN Paris Agreement requires reductions
wall systems, and compares the differences between architectural in carbon emissions of at least 50% by 2030. This webinar will
veneer and structural reinforced masonry. explain why structural engineers have an important and immedi-
ate role to play in meeting climate change targets.
March 24, 2020
Lintels for Masonry Walls
Sam Rubenzer, P.E., S.E.
This webinar will explain firsthand how different design problems
are being solved with masonry lintels.
Courses award 1.5 hours of continuing education after the completion of a quiz. Diamond Review approved in all 50 states.
M A R C H 2 02 0 45
SEI Update
Students and Young Professionals
Congrats and Welcome to the Next Generation
of Future Structural Engineering Leaders
Thanks to the SEI Futures Fund – www.asce.org/SEIFuturesFund – and generous donors in collaboration with the ASCE Foundation,
we welcome the following SEI Student & Young Professional Scholarship recipients to participate and get involved in SEI at Structures
Congress in St. Louis:
Students
Mahesh Acharya, S.M.ASCE, Idaho State University
Wael Aloqaily, S.M.ASCE, University of Delaware
Adrianna Bailey, S.M.ASCE, University of South Alabama
Sherlock Banks II, S.M.ASCE, Virginia Tech
Julie Bouwens, S.M.ASCE, Michigan Technological University
Richard Campos, S.M.ASCE, University of Oklahoma
Briana Clark, S.M.ASCE, Rochester Institute of Technology
Elizabeth DePaola, S.M.ASCE, University of Notre Dame
Merhad Dizaji, S.M.ASCE, University of Virginia
Emily Durcan, S.M.ASCE, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Ebenezer Fanijo, S.M.ASCE, Virginia Tech
Mahmoud Faytarouni, S.M.ASCE, Iowa State University
Yijie Gao, S.M.ASCE, Stanford University
Moheldeen Hejazi, S.M.ASCE, Istanbul Technical University, Turkey
Mary Juno, S.M.ASCE, University of Kansas
Farid Khosravikia, S.M.ASCE, University of Texas at Austin
Dayakar Naik Lavadiya, S.M.ASCE, North Dakota State University
Min Li, S.M.ASCE, Colorado State University
Jessica Lopez, S.M.ASCE, University of Illinois at Chicago
Maria Camila Lopez Ruiz, S.M.ASCE, University of California, Berkeley
Daniela Lugo Romero, S.M.ASCE, Princeton University
Nicholas Maloney, S.M.ASCE, Drexel University
Erin Mills, S.M.ASCE, Kansas State University
Jordan Nutter, S.M.ASCE, University of Kansas
Ryan Olsen, S.M.ASCE, Michigan Technological University
Hongrak Pak, S.M.ASCE, Texas A&M University
Sarah Puchner, S.M.ASCE, University of Alabama in Huntsville
Selene Renes, S.M.ASCE, South Dakota State University
Paul Ryan, S.M.ASCE, Florida Institute of Technology
Babak Salarieh, S.M.ASCE, University of Alabama in Huntsville
Stefanie Schulze, S.M.ASCE, Oregon State University
Niyam Shah, S.M.ASCE, New Jersey Institute of Technology
Jay Shah, S.M.ASCE, Texas A&M University Young Professionals
Missagh Shamshiri, S.M.ASCE, University of Texas at Arlington
Samuel Steiner, S.M.ASCE, Bradley University Stefanie Rae Arizabal, P.E., M.ASCE, San Francisco, CA
Muhammad Salman Tahir, S.M.ASCE, National University of Sciences Dan Bergsagel, C.Eng, M.ASCE, Brooklyn, NY
and Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan Christopher Bird, EIT, A.M.ASCE, Washington, DC
Luke Timber, S.M.ASCE, University of Delaware Jillian Cayer, EIT, A.M.ASCE, New York, NY
Shree Tripathi, S.M.ASCE, Southern Illinois University Carbondale Halle Doenitz, P.E., M.ASCE, Playa del Rey, CA
Xuguang Wang, S.M.ASCE, University of Toronto, Canada Megan Hanrahan, EIT, A.M.ASCE, Los Angeles, CA
Haifeng Wang, S.M.ASCE, University at Buffalo Nicholas Heim, EI, A.M.ASCE, Cleveland, OH
Hannah Hillegas, P.E., M.ASCE, Kansas City, MO
Jaynee Jhaveri, P.E., M.ASCE, Dallas, TX
Young Professional Teaching Faculty Bishal Khadka, EIT, A.M.ASCE, Washington, DC
Daniel Koothoor, EIT, A.M.ASCE, Sunnyvale, CA
Mohamad Alipour, Ph.D., A.M.ASCE, University of Virginia Maissoun Ksara, A.M.ASCE, Philadelphia, PA
Mohammad Omar Amini, Ph.D., EIT, A.M.ASCE, Colorado State University Katherine ONeill, EIT, A.M.ASCE, Sarasota, FL
William Collins, Ph.D., P.E., M.ASCE, University of Kansas Matthew Powell, S.E., Aff.M.ASCE, Leeds, UK
Mohamed Elhassan, Aff.M.ASCE, University of Khartoum, Sudan Rebecca Reifel, A.M.ASCE, St. Louis, MO
Laura Micheli, Ph.D., EIT, A.M.ASCE, Catholic University of America Matthew Shelden, EIT, A.M.ASCE, Petaluma, CA
Ravi Yellavajjala, Ph.D., P.E., M.ASCE, North Dakota State University Margaret Stambaugh, P.E., M.ASCE, St. Louis, MO
Tanmay Ramani, EIT, A.M.ASCE, Arlington Heights, IL Ashfaq Syed, P.E., A.M.ASCE, Dallas, TX
News of the Structural Engineering Institute of ASCE
Learning / Networking
STRUCTURAL STRUCTURES
CONGRESS 2020
ENGINEERING
INSTITUTE
St. Louis, Missouri I April 5-8
Search keywords in the technical program to plan which sessions to

attend – www.structurescongress.org.
Expert Special Sessions on:
• Millennium Tower
• FIU Bridge Collapse
• Conceptual Design of Bridges and Buildings
• Professional Liability Case Study Marathon
• Confidential Reporting on Structural Safety in the U.S.
Advancing the Profession

Embodied Carbon Reductions Endorsed by SEI Board of
Governors – the SE 2050 Movement
On December 16, 2019, the SEI Board of Governors (BOG) unanimously voted to endorse the SE 2050 Challenge issued by the Carbon
Leadership Forum stating:
“We, the Structural Engineering Institute (SEI) of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), support the vision and ambition of the
SE 2050 Challenge. We, as a leading structural engineering organization in the United States, recognize the need for coordinated action
across our profession to achieve the globally stated goal of net-zero carbon by 2050.”
Learn more at www.seisustainability.org or www.se2050.org. And attend Climate Change and our Structural Systems: SE 2050 Initiative
at Structures Congress in St. Louis.
SEI Online
ASCE 7-16 Errata
Update with Batch #3 (effective January 16, 2020) now available; Access Batches 1-3 from ascelibrary.org.
SEI News Read the latest at www.asce.org/SEINews

SEI Standards Visit www.asce.org/SEIStandards to View ASCE 7 development cycle
SEI on Twitter SEI on Facebook
Follow us: @ASCE_SEI Follow us: @SEIofASCE
Errata SEI Standards Supplements and Errata including ASCE 7. See www.asce.org/SEI-Errata.
If you would like to submit errata, contact Jon Esslinger at [email protected].
M A R C H 2 02 0 47
CASE in Point
Did you know?
CASE has tools and practice guidelines to help firms deal with a wide variety of business scenarios that structural engineering firms face
daily. Whether your firm needs to establish a new Quality Assurance Program, update its risk management program, keep track of the skills
young engineers are learning at each level of experience, or need a sample contract document – CASE has the tools you need!
CASE has several tools available for firms to use to enhance their internal policies and procedures – from office policy guides to employee reviews:
Tool 1-3 Sample Policy Guide
Tool 2-2 Interview Guide and Template
Tool 2-3 Employee Evaluation Templates
Tool 2-5 Insurance Management
Tool 4-3 Sample Correspondence Guidelines
Tool 5-3 Managing the Use of Computers/Software
Tool 5-5 Project Management Training
You can purchase these and the other Risk Management Tools at www.acec.org/bookstore.
Save on CASE Membership!

Can you ever really be too successful? Keep your business thriving – no matter what your competition or the economy is doing – and say
YES to membership in ACEC’s Coalition of American Structural Engineers (CASE).
An “Association within an Association” that complements your ACEC National benefits.
CASE, the oldest of ACEC’s four discipline-specific Coalitions, is a professional community for, of, and by structural engineers who want
relevant, useful information – on BIM, international building codes, risk management, and more – to run their businesses better.
Join CASE today, and you’ll qualify for:
• Education: CASE offers a track of 3 dedicated education sessions at both the ACEC Fall Conference and Annual Spring Convention
to keep members current with best practices and trends in structural engineering.
As a member, you will also receive a discounted rate to ACEC webinars focused on structural engineering issues. CASE also provides
education sessions at the AISC Steel Conference and the ASCE-SEI Structures Congress.
• Resources: Coalition members get free access to over 145 contracts, tools, and publications (a total value of over $5,000!). CASE
developed over 70 documents geared toward structural engineering firms.
• Advocacy: Your voice matters! Coalition members are often the first ones contacted to share their expertise with Congress and
government agencies in response to current legislation and relevant regulatory agendas.
Save $75 off your first year’s dues through June 30, 2021! Join CASE by March 31, 2020, and get 15 months for the price of 12!
Interested? Contact CASE’s Executive Director, Heather Talbert, at 202-682-4377 or email her at [email protected].
Manual for New Consulting Engineers

An HR Favorite for New Hires
ACEC’s best-seller, “Can I Borrow Your Watch” A Beginner’s Guide to Succeeding in a Professional Consulting
Organization, offers new engineers a head start in the business of professional consulting.
This essential guide is tailored to the unique needs of engineering firms, and the skills and experiences
rookie consultants need to be successful in a large organization, including:
• Proposal Preparation
• Financial Management
• Client Relationships
• Project Management
• Staff Management
With over 140 pages of consulting expertise, this resource is the perfect addition to any new staffer’s
welcome pack or in-house orientation. It can even be a useful resource for more seasoned engineers look-
ing to refine their skills. To order this book, go to www.acec.org/bookstore. Bulk ordering is available;
for more information, contact Maureen Brown ([email protected]).
News of the Coalition of American Structural Engineers
CASE Practice Guidelines Currently Available
CASE 962-H – National Practice Guideline on Project and CASE 504 – Proposal Preparation Spreadsheet
Business Risk Management
The CASE Proposal Preparation Spreadsheet was developed to assist
This guideline is intended to assist structural engineering com- project managers and administrators in developing cost proposals for
panies in the management of risk associated with projects and to a project. The spreadsheet may be easily customized for any organiza-
provide commentary regarding the management of risk associated tion or project type. It also may be used as a checklist to see that all
with business practices. The guideline is organized in two sections phases of a project are adequately staffed.
that correspond with these two areas of risk, namely Project Risk
Management and Business Practices Risk Management. The goal CASE 976-A – Commentary on Value-Based Compensation for
of the guideline is to educate and inform structural engineers Structural Engineers
about risk issues so that the risks they face in their practices can
Value-Based Compensation is a means to step out of the ordinary and
be effectively mitigated, thus making structural engineering firms
establish your value to the team. Value-Based Compensation is based on
more successful.
the concept that there are specific services, which may vary from project
to project, that provide valuable information to the client and whose
Structural Engineer’s Guide to Fire Protection
impact on the success of the project is far in excess of the prevailing
This publication is intended for structural engineers with no prior hourly rates. Value-Based Compensation is based on the increased value
experience or training in fire protection engineering. It is a compre- or savings that these innovative structural services will contribute to
hensive and concise treatment of prescriptive and performance-based the project. As a result, the primary beneficiary of an innovative design
methods for designing structural fire protection systems in an easy or a concept is the owner, but the innovative engineer is adequately
to understand format. compensated for his knowledge and expertise in lieu of his time.
You can purchase these and the other CASE Risk Management Tools at www.acec.org/bookstore.
Donate to the CASE Scholarship Fund!

The ACEC Coalition of American Structural Engineers (CASE) is currently seeking contributions to help make the structural engineer-
ing scholarship program a success. The CASE scholarship, administered by the ACEC College of Fellows, is awarded to a student seeking
a bachelor’s degree, at a minimum, in an ABET-accredited engineering program. Since 2009, the CASE Scholarship program has given
$31,000 to help engineering students pave their way to a bright future in structural engineering.
We have all witnessed the stiff competition from other disciplines and professions eager to obtain the best and brightest young talent from
a dwindling pool of engineering graduates. One way to enhance the ability of students to pursue their dreams to become professional
engineers is to offer incentives in educational support.
Your monetary support is vital in helping CASE and ACEC increase scholarships to those students who are the future of our industry.
All donations toward the program may be eligible for a tax deduction, and you do not have to be an ACEC member to donate! Contact
Heather Talbert at [email protected] to donate.
Follow ACEC Coalitions on Twitter – @ACECCoalitions.
MARCH 2020 49
structural FORUM
FEMA P-807 for Soft-Story Retrofits
Technical Considerations for Engineers
By Bruce F. Maison, P.E., S.E.
P rescriptive Performance-Based Design:

An Innovative Approach to Retrofitting
Soft/Weak-Story Buildings (STRUCTURE,
before proposing it as an alterna-
tive method in building codes.
The author, in conjunction with
September 2019) describes the approach con- several other San Francisco Bay
tained in the Federal Emergency Management Area practicing structural engi-
Agency (FEMA) P-807 guideline. P-807 is a neers, performed an independent
method to retrofit a weak first story of wood review of P-807. Below is a sum-
buildings to mitigate side-sway pancake- mary of the technical aspects
type collapse, as depicted in the Figure. The that engineers should be aware
hazard posed by such buildings was under- of before deciding on its use.
scored by their damage in the 1989 Loma • Component (e.g., wood
Prieta earthquake affecting the San Francisco structural panel) lateral
Bay area, as well as in the 1994 Northridge load-drift relationships (i.e.,
earthquake in the Los Angeles region. Some backbone curves) are not
cities in California have enacted ordinances indicative of those expected
mandating retrofit of soft-story buildings. for wood-frame buildings
Performance-based engineering (PBE) is an – most notably by having
evolving paradigm in earthquake engineering relatively limited ductility.
in which the goal is to proportion a build- • The drift acceptance criteria
ing to meet specific, predictable performance do not reflect a severe condi-
requirements. The benefits of PBE are gen- tion such as near-collapse and,
erally recognized, but predicting structural hence, do not signify damage
performance is challenging. This contrasts states of practical value.
with traditional building codes that are mostly • Using the default perfor- Depiction of a collapse mechanism for a San Francisco type
prescriptive and do not require explicit per- mance objective can result 1920s soft-story apartment building.
formance prediction. Prescriptive design is in first story retrofits having
simpler than PBE. lateral strength greater than those from questionable accuracy for predicting actual
The “prescriptive performance-based design” IBC building code for new construc- building performance within a PBE context.
advocated in the article could be appealing tion. The default is a 20% probability That is, it cannot reliably compute the probabil-
since it suggests the benefits of PBE are of exceeding the drift associated with ity that a particular seismic intensity will result
within the relative ease of prescriptive design. near-collapse under a maximum con- in a meaningful state of damage for a specific
However, P-807 is a novel approach that sidered earthquake (20% POE under building. Engineers are encouraged to read refer-
quantifies performance in probabilistic terms. 100% MCE). ences 6 and 7 in the online version of
Implicit is the notion that the probability • Using a relaxed performance objective this article that serves as the basis of
associated with actual building response can such as that in the San Francisco soft- the brief summary presented here.■
be estimated with reasonable accuracy. P-807 story building retrofit ordinance (30%
has not been thoroughly peer-reviewed and, as POE under 50% MCE) can result The online version of this article
such, caution must be exercised regarding its in first-story retrofits having lateral contains references. Please visit
use – especially on the efficacy of performance strength smaller than that from tradi- www.STRUCTUREmag.org.
prediction. The shake table experiments men- tional retrofit practice (e.g., 75% code
tioned in the article, in fact, do not validate per IEBC Appendix Chapter A4).
Bruce F. Maison is a Consulting Engineer
P-807. (Please see reference 2 in the online ver- • It used a single suite of earthquake
practicing in El Cerrito, California. He is
sion of this article for an explanation.) ground motions to account for all
an active member of the Existing Buildings
It is essential to recognize that P-807 has site classes (rock, soil, etc.), and, as a
Committee of the Structural Engineers
not been vetted through a rigorous ANSI consequence, P-807 is likely to over-
Association of Northern California (SEAONC).
type consensus process typically used in the estimate the ruggedness of buildings
He is also a member of the ASCE/SEI
development of codes and standards. It also located on soil sites (near-collapse
Committee responsible for the performance-
lacks a formal mechanism for revision as probability too low).
based engineering standard ASCE 41, Seismic
necessitated by emerging new information. It was concluded that P-807 might be an
Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings.
Hence, P-807 is not an industry consensus efficient methodology for relative ranking
([email protected])
method and due diligence must be performed and selection of retrofit designs, but it has
50 STRUCTURE magazine MARCH 2020

Learn about the changes in ACI 318-19
Attend one of 25 public seminars

titled “ACI 318-19: Changes to
the Concrete Design Standard”
being held throughout the
United States this spring.
With ACI 318-19 now 100 pages
FREE longer than the previous edition,
COPY OF two industry experts will walk
ACI 318-19 FOR seminar attendees through the
ALL SEMINAR
new provisions and present
ATTENDEES
major technical changes.
SEMINAR LOCATIONS
Albany, NY New Orleans, LA
Baltimore, MD Pittsburgh, PA
Chicago, IL (Rosemont) Portland, OR
Cleveland, OH Raleigh, NC
Dallas, TX Richmond, VA
Denver, CO San Diego, CA
Des Moines, IA Savannah, GA
Detroit, MI (Farmington Hills) St. Louis, MO
Emeryville, CA Tampa, FL
Houston, TX
Indianapolis, IN
Little Rock, AR
Miami, FL
Minneapolis, MN
Nashville, TN
New Brunswick, NJ
Visit concrete.org/ACI318 for a complete seminar

description and all registration information
THE NEW RISA-3D:
DELIVERING MORE
POWER AND A GREAT
NEW INTERFACE
JUST HOW DID WE IMPROVE

ON THE INDUSTRY’S BEST?
You know RISA-3D for its power as the
industry’s best design and structural
analysis solution. Now you can appreciate
it for its looks, too. And in addition to a
modern, new interface, the new RISA-3D
adds improved, high-speed processing,
expanded detail reports, and upgraded
printing options. Model changes are effortless,
so whether you’re working with steel, concrete,
aluminum, masonry, wood, or cold formed
steel, you now have more power and flexibility
than ever before. Learn more at risa.com.
Copyright © 2020 RISA Tech, Inc. All rights reserved. RISA is part
of the Nemetschek Group. RISA, the RISA logo and RISA-3D are
registered trademarks of RISA Tech, Inc.

Structure Magazine - March 20202 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Structure Magazine - March 20202 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

STRUCTURE

NCSEA | CASE | SEI MARCH 2020

INSIDE: Napa County Courthouse 26

Algonquin College - DARE District, ON

The CAST CONNEX® High Strength Connector™ Seismic Resistance Simplified

HIGH STRENGTH CONNECTOR™

American Concrete Institute .....................51 Lindapter..............................................33 Joe Murphy

ENERCALC, INC ....................................3 RISA ...................................................52

Associate Publisher Nikki Alger

Get YOUR name on this list!

Creative Director Tara Smith

Jeremy L. Achter, S.E., LEED AP

YOUR OPINION MATTERS! ARW Engineers, Ogden, UT

Erin Conaway, P.E.

Emily B. Lorenz, P.E.

Jason McCool, P.E.

Robbins Engineering Consultants, Little Rock, AR

Evans Mountzouris, P.E.

The DiSalvo Engineering Group, Danbury, CT

John “Buddy” Showalter, P.E.

Eytan Solomon, P.E., LEED AP

Jeannette M. Torrents, P.E., S.E., LEED AP

STRUCTURE ® magazine (ISSN 1536 4283) is published monthly

Excellence in Structural Engineers Associations, all rights reserved. Subscription services,

Structural Engineering Photo: Steven Kingsley

Cover Feature 26 NAPA COUNTY HISTORIC

Part 3 discusses repairs and an overview of the applicability

An 18-x18-inch timber was designed as the bottom

Columns and Departments

8 Structural Rehabilitation 38 Historic Structures Albion Bridge Collapse

By Dale Statler, P.E., and Jerry Maly, P.E.

S ince its inception in 2003, the International Existing Building

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

Aegis developed Ultra-Span trusses ®

with a proprietary shape that brings your

prone regions where the ultimate design

communities experience high winds on

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

goes a diaphragm evaluation, involving

action. But that burden should be limited

From our rigorously tested connectors and fasteners that

©2020 Simpson Strong-Tie Company Inc. MASSTIMB20

F oundations for a building are required to support the structure

Code Type of Design

Table 2. Unit shaft friction and end bearing.

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

Reduce Thermal Transfer

+ It allows for the installation of continuous insulation

+ Each job is designed and engineered in-house to meet

+ A recent study shows that attached shelf angles

Columns Bored Piles

crete underground without a permanent

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

Conclusion Carroll Avenue Bridge

Allowable compressive stress in concrete

T he rise in performance-based engineering, in which a structure is

Matthew S. Speicher is a Research Structural Engineer at

Bruce F. Maison is a Consulting Engineer practicing in El

T he International Building Code (IBC) and design standards

Building Enclosure Systems

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

soil nailng and tendon/rebar alignment and support!

DURABLE. ECONOMICAL. RELIABLE. PROVEN.