Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Structure Jan22 Digital
Structure Jan22 Digital
CONCRETE
THE WORLD’S
LARGEST HSS.
The world’s largest continuous ERW mill is now open, and it’s located right
here in the U.S. That means the biggest HSS available anywhere, made
right here in America with the high quality and fast delivery times you
expect from Atlas Tube. It’s time to start planning big things.
34"
up to up to
28" OD
x 10"
22"
— Stacy Bartoletti, SE
Principal and CEO
Degenkolb Engineers
© Rice Fergus Miller
WHAT WE DO
Structural Design
Construction Engineering
Earthquake Reconnaissance
Tsunami Evacuation Structures
Existing Building Evaluations
Seismic Retrofit Design
Forensics Engineering
EXPERTS IN
ASCE 41
Seismic Analysis
Performance Based Design
Multi-Hazard Mitigation
Code Development
www.degenkolb.com 415.392.6952
ADVERTISER INDEX Please support these advertisers
STRUCTURE ®
KLA&A ................................................50 Structural Engineers, Inc. .........................22 Publisher Christine M. Sloat, P.E.
[email protected]
Erratum
Associate Publisher Nikki Alger
It was brought to STRUCTURE’s attention by a reader that, in the Historic Structures [email protected]
article, Quebec Bridge, The First Failure, 1907 (November 2021), the inset should have read: Creative Director Tara Smith
Cooper loading E30 designates that each axle has a load of 30,000#. That equates to 15,000# [email protected]
per wheel. It also specifies a load on the leading truck and another load on the trailing axle,
EDITORIAL BOARD
plus a load for the following freight cars. At the time of the bridge’s design, a loading of E20 was
common, but Cooper specified a loading of E30. Chair John A. Dal Pino, S.E.
FTF Engineering, Inc., San Francisco, CA
[email protected]
And don’t forget – post questions or comments on the digital versions of articles on the Charles “Chuck” F. King, P.E.
STRUCTURE website. STRUCTURE looks forward to hearing from you! Urban Engineers of New York, New York, NY
Brian W. Miller
Davis, CA
TOGETHER WE BUILD SOLUTIONS
4 STRUCTURE magazine
Cover
Feature Contents JAN UARY 2022
The Center building consists of two main portions: the 19-story tower with a two-
story deep basement and a 5-story podium with a one-story basement. It was
determined that a mat foundation would save over $5 million. This decision had
consequences: limiting tower loads by optimizing the concrete core plan size
and wall thickness, and using lightweight concrete slabs on metal deck.
JANUARY 2022 5
EDITORIAL
Wanted: Public Service
By Brent L. White, P.E., S.E.
B y the time you are reading this, the 2021 election season is behind
us. Although the recent elections did not have national office
implications, offices for elected officials were likely held where the reader
Every community has school boards, planning commissions,
neighborhood/community councils, city councils, county/township
planning boards, various improvement/service districts, and more that
lives. Did you participate in any way? Did you take the opportunity to can benefit from dedicated, thoughtful, competent service. Engineers
vote? Have you ever considered running for elected office? participating in these settings can provide much-needed insight and
You may be wondering why I would be writing about this in an balance to almost any topic and discussion. Prior experience in public
“
engineering magazine directed primarily to structural engineers. It service at any level is not necessary. Engineers often have developed
definitely is not to stir partisan debate. Nor is skills beyond their engineering expertise to
it to advance any political agenda. Instead, it assist them in public service.
is primarily to ask the question – “What role An engineering colleague in the eastern U.S.
should engineers play in public service?” Is this is currently serving as the mayor of his city.
something you have considered personally as Here are some of his insights into why he
an engineer, no matter the stage or your career?
How well are engineers represented in the
What role decided to seek public office, why being an
engineer has been helpful, and advice for engi-
various areas of public service? Currently, nine
engineers are serving among the 535 members
should neers considering public service:
“As a small business owner, I was involved
of Congress. Six serving state governors have
degrees in engineering. Is this a representative engineers in local political races for years, and I saw the
benefit that the good elected officials brought
swath of engineers relative to the population
as a whole? Based on current estimates, there play in public to their communities. When the opportunity
presented itself to run for local office, I looked
are approximately 800,000 P.E. registrants
and 60,000 licensed surveyors in the country.
And some engineers do not have a profes-
service? at the other officials in office and realized that
my experiences were underrepresented. This
was an opportunity to bring my voice to the
sional license. In 2020, there were an estimated people of my town.
200,000 engineering degrees awarded. Over the past 25 years, over Serving in public office is very time-consuming and requires a flex-
3 million individuals have received engineering degrees. Engineers ible schedule and the ability to make decisions. Because of that, the
should be represented at levels at least proportionate to the corre- vast majority of elected officials are attorneys. However, engineers are
sponding percentage of the population as a whole. problem solvers, and consulting engineers work in teams more than
Without getting into a deep discussion regarding engineers partici- just about any other profession. That experience of working with
pating in national politics, do these trends represent engineers at a other disciplines and commonly working towards solving a project
local level? More importantly, why do I care, and why am I writing or a problem uniquely qualifies engineers for public office.
about this? I do not intend to suggest that the readers of this article The public is best served when their elected representatives can
should all have the interest or desire to enter politics on the national listen and improve their communities. The biggest fear people have
stage – although there may be some that do. I know that, personally, about running for office is the criticism they receive… it’s always
I do not have that desire. However, at a more local level, engineers there. However, engineers are always scrutinized for our designs and
and those with an engineering background have a lot to offer those ideas, but there is no greater satisfaction as an engineer than to say, ‘I
around them in the public sphere, not necessarily by holding an elected designed that.’ If you have that desire to fix things that need fixing and
office. Engineers that I know typically do not hesitate to become the confidence to know when you need to listen to others, running
involved with professional engineering societies. Many engineers for office is a very rewarding thing you can do for your community.
also participate with universities on advisory boards and student If you don’t want to run for office, every town needs more engineers
mentoring. Why not consider becoming more engaged in pursuits to sit on local boards and committees. Those are the places that have
not related directly to engineering? the greatest influence on your town’s future, and engineers can always
Engineers have specific characteristics that can be helpful in the see the big picture of a project better than any other profession.”
area of public service and have much to offer. Engineers are prob- I am not a politician. I am not a polished speaker. However, I appre-
lem solvers. It is undeniable that many problems need to be solved. ciate the vast opportunities I have been afforded and have personally
Problem-solving skills developed by engineers can considerably ben- felt compelled to become involved in my community. If anyone
efit the public at large beyond the civic value from the day-to-day reading this has felt or feels the same way, I encourage you to not
engineering activities of our jobs. Engineers are used to and skilled at only use your engineering skills to serve professionally but
working in teams and addressing challenging problems. Thoughtful, to use those same skills to serve the community (or state,
methodical problem solving beyond engineering is a trait that can be etc.) where you live.■
very beneficial to the public. The opportunities to be involved and
Brent L. White is President at ARW Engineers, Past President, Structural
share these skills are not limited to the elected office but extend to
Engineers Association of Utah, and Current Chair, CASE.
various opportunities for local involvement.
Project Testing failure, as assessed by ASCE 41-17, Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit
In a recent project at the University of California, San Francisco of Existing Buildings.
(UCSF), the retrofit of the seven-story Mount Zion Housing build- At most interior columns, fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) wrap
ing afforded an opportunity for full-scale laboratory testing of a could be applied around the entire column perimeter (i.e., all four
vulnerable concrete column. In addition to other seismic deficien- faces). This is a typical approach to increasing the shear strength of
cies typical of a concrete structure from the 1960s, the building existing concrete columns. However, interferences at nearly 30% of
has interior columns that lack a close spacing of ties over most of the interior columns prevented access to one column face, driving
the column height. The columns are governed by non-ductile shear the need for a three-sided option. UCSF, the structural engineer
of record (SEOR), and the peer reviewers sought input from FRP
designers about the potential for a three-sided solution. They agreed
that the designer of a three-sided FRP wrap would have to provide
testing validation of the structural effectiveness of the retrofit used.
The group envisioned FRP wrapping on three sides of the column
and FRP through-anchors instead of FRP on the fourth side. A detail
of this type had previously been designed and tested by Aegion/
Fyfe for pilasters.
The FRP subcontractor for the project selected Simpson Strong-Tie
to design and provide the FRP, and Simpson developed a proposed
detail and test program to meet the requirements established by the
SEOR. The testing program included a control column (i.e., with
no FRP) and columns wrapped using the three-sided FRP with FRP
through-anchors. This article discusses the results of the control
column test. The results of the FRP-strengthened column tests will
be discussed in a subsequent article.
8 STRUCTURE magazine
columns, discussed in a subsequent article. Figure 1 and Figure 2-online the column clear height. The bottom-of-column displacement mea-
show the column design and construction. surements are taken from the same independent reference frame using
a displacement transducer connected at the bottom of the column
Material Properties (Control Column)
clear height. Base slip of the concrete abutment relative to the strong
From the mill certificates of the reinforcement, the Grade 60 #10 floor is also measured with a displacement transducer. Test results
longitudinal bars had fy = 69.4 ksi and fu = 98.8 ksi. The Grade 40 #3 were corrected to remove the small amount of base lateral movement.
ties had fy = 55.0 ksi and fu = 82.5 ksi during field testing. The concrete All measurements are recorded with a central data acquisition system
strength at the time of testing was 2,568 psi, based on the average throughout the duration of each test.
results of six cylinder tests taken over three days (i.e., two cylinders
before, two after, and two on the day of the control column test).
Designing the Control Column
Test Setup and Procedures
For the test program to succeed, the control (i.e., un-retrofitted) column
The columns were tested under imposed lateral force and displace- needed to fail in shear; otherwise, it would not be possible to show that
ment, with fixed-fixed end conditions
(Figure 3-online and Figure 4 ). The fixed
base is achieved by clamping the lower
section of the specimen to a concrete
abutment with a steel plate and threaded
rods. The abutment is, in turn, anchored
to the laboratory’s strong floor.
The upper section of the specimen
is restrained from rotation by two fix- MAPEI
tures that each deliver the lateral load to
the specimen from a horizontal servo- STRENGTHENS.
hydraulic actuator and horizontal HSS
steel tube sections that act as loading
struts. The actuators are coordinated and
controlled to keep a fixed condition at the
top of the column, with the top block of MAPEI
the specimen translating but not rotating.
Each actuator is equipped with a
MAPEI RESTORES.
load cell and internal displacement
PROTECTS.
Displacement Measurement
The top-of-column displacement mea-
surements are taken from an independent
reference frame using a string potentiom-
eter connected one inch below the top of
JANUARY 2022 9
Figure 5. Comparison of shear strength predictions for the control (un-retrofitted) column using various models. Column end regions at top (3-inch tie spacing);
column center region at bottom (12.8-inch tie spacing).
the retrofit solution prevented shear failure. Accordingly, the authors columns with an axial load below the balance point, increasing the
were careful to look at the range of possible best estimates of shear maximum shear demand under induced displacement. (Maximum
strength and flexural strength to ensure that shear strength would shear demand in this configuration equals twice the flexural strength
govern for the control column. divided by the column clear height, 2M/L.)
Previous research on the shear strength and governing behavior
Effect of Axial Load
of concrete columns (Kowalsky and Priestley, 2000) concluded
Although many equations for shear strength (such as Equation 22.5.5.1 that axial compression increases shear strength to a similar extent
of ACI 318-14, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and as it increases flexural strength. Tests of columns having different
Commentary) have neglected the effect of axial loads, presumably for axial load levels have shown that changing only the axial load
simplicity, it is well recognized that axial compression increases shear does not change the governing behavior mode from shear to
strength. Similarly, axial compression increases flexural strength for flexure or vice-versa.
BOOTH: W3705
MAX developed the World’s First battery powered rebar tying tool in 1993 and has a
history of manufacturing durable and reliable industrial tools for 80 years. Since then,
MAX rebar tying tools have revolutionized rebar tying work in precast plants and a
variety of other jobsites all around the world.
All MAX products are engineered to perform on professional contractors jobsites
and with MAX’s 200 R&D engineers we have continued to improve upon MAX
proprietary technology, which led to the invention of the TWINTIER® rebar tying
tools. TWINTIER® technology allows the tools to tie 4,000 ties per charge while
delivering just the right amount of wire for greater productivity and cost
savings. These unique innovative features make the TWINTIER® the most
efficient rebar tiers in the industry. Today, MAX manufactures a full line of rebar
tying tools that can tie between mesh up to #9 x #10 rebar.
SCAN HERE TO
SCHEDULE A
DEMO
MAX USA Corp. • 205 Express St. Plainview, NY 11803 • U.S.A. - Phone: (800) 223-4293 • FAX: (516) 741-3272 • www.maxusacorp.com
10 STRUCTURE magazine
This observation helped justify testing of the column without the
additional variable of superimposed axial load, since the omission of
the axial load was unlikely to change the governing behavior mode.
Estimating Shear and Flexure
In designing the control column to ensure shear failure, it became
evident that, for this column, some methods predicted substantially
higher shear strength than the ASCE 41 equations (Sezen and Moehle,
2004) (Figure 5). The method that the authors evaluated that gave
the highest shear strength for the column was the modified UCSD
method (Priestley et al., 2007).
The most lightly reinforced columns in the building have 4-#7
longitudinal bars. Without axial load, the columns have a flexural
capacity corresponding to a shear demand of approximately 24 kips.
This just exceeds the ASCE 41 shear strength of 23 kips, making them
shear governed by ASCE 41. (The 23 kips includes the Vs contribution
of the ties at 12.8-inch spacing; by the letter of ASCE 41, the non-
conforming tie spacing means that Vs should be neglected, resulting Figure 7. Predictions of moment capacity based on flexural and shear strength used
in an ASCE 41 shear strength of 12 kips.) to evaluate test column behavior mode. Shear strength per the UCSD model.
However, to have a successful test, the authors wanted to ensure
shear failure for the highest predicted shear strength, 39 kips for the shows that with the high shear demand coming from the high flex-
UCSD model. To achieve this, and considering the testing uncer- ural strength, all the equations predict that shear failure in the center
tainties, the flexural strength was increased to ensure shear demand region of the column preempts any flexural yielding that would occur
well above 39 kips. in the end regions.
Increasing the reinforcement from 4-#7 to 4-#11 would create a
Final Column Specimen Design
demand (2M/L) of 41 kips, which was judged not high enough. This
led to a choice between 8-#9 or 8-#10 longitudinal reinforcement. The column specimen was the same as an actual column in the fol-
8-#10 were chosen to reliably ensure shear failure, creating an expected lowing respects:
shear demand of 56 kips (Figure 6 (online) and Figure 7). • Cross-sectional dimensions (14 inches square), concrete cover
While this heavy amount of longitudinal reinforcement did not to ties (1½ inches), and tie size, shape, and detailing (#3 square
occur in the Mount Zion Housing building, the authors have seen perimeter ties with 135-degree hooks)
similar designs with heavy column bars in concrete buildings in • Column clear height (105 inches)
California from the 1960s and 1970s, presumably the result of • Tie spacing at column ends (four spaces at 3 inches o.c.)
working stress gravity design of the columns coupled with a desire to The column specimen differed from an actual column in the fol-
limit the size of the column section. The lowing respects:
heavy amount of reinforcement in the • No axial load other than specimen
test column would lead to higher flexural self-weight
compression strain in the concrete and • Tested with fixed-fixed end condi-
earlier spalling of the cover concrete, but tions, eliminating the
this was expected at deformations suffi- flexibility of floor structures that
ciently larger than those at shear failure. exists for the column in
A concrete mix was chosen that was the actual structure
intended not to exceed f´c = 3,000 psi to fur- • Actual concrete compressive
ther avoid increased shear strength. Overall, strength for specimen, at time of
it was assumed that the column design with testing, equal to 2,568 psi com-
heavy longitudinal reinforcement, low con- pared to specified strength on the
crete strength, and the deficiency of ties existing drawings of 3,750 psi
would provide a more rigorous test of the • Tie spacing over the mid-height
effectiveness of the FRP. region of the column at 12.8
inches (adjusted from the speci-
Shear Strength Predictions
fied 12 inches to avoid adding
Figure 5 shows the predictions of three another tie)
shear strength equations compared to the • Longitudinal reinforcement
shear demand coming from the column of 8-#10 instead of 4-#7
design with 8-#10 longitudinal bars. • Continuous longitudinal bars
The UCSD and ASCE 41 models con- instead of lap splices
sider the degradation of shear strength Lap splices were eliminated to avoid
with displacement ductility, which complicating the objective of the test
applies to the test column only in the because the splices would cause sig-
end regions where the flexural yielding Figure 8. Shear failure in diagonal tension of the control nifi cant congestion with the heavy
occurs. The bottom graph of Figure 5 (un-retrofitted) column and subsequent spalling of cover concrete. bars used. Also, the assessment for the
JANUARY 2022 11
original building was that slip or failure of the lap splices would
not govern the column behavior. (The authors assessed the lap
splices of the building per ASCE 41 and the recommendations of
Priestley, Seible, and Calvi, 1996. The splices have ties at 3-inch
spacing over most of the splice length.)
12 STRUCTURE magazine
One
end-to-end
solution.
Twice the
expertise.
Simpson Strong-Tie has formed an alliance with Build a solid foundation for your concrete and masonry
Structural Technologies, a renowned provider of operation. To learn more about how Simpson Strong-Tie and
leading infrastructure strengthening solutions, engineering Structural Technologies can help solve your infrastructure
support and installation services. Together, we offer project challenges, visit strongtie.com/alliance or
a uniquely integrated and comprehensive range of call (800) 999-5099.
knowledge and solutions for concrete and masonry
strengthening and repair. Our singular focus will better Smarter
serve the needs of our customers and help ensure Strengthening
stronger, safer, longer-lasting structures. Solutions
CODES and STANDARDS
2021 IBC Significant Structural Changes
Part 3: Special Inspections (Chapter 17)
By Sandra Hyde, P.E., and John “Buddy” Showalter, P.E.
14 STRUCTURE magazine
Concrete and Commentary, has new provisions for designing precast 1705.20 Sealing of mass timber Periodic special inspections of
concrete diaphragms in Section 18.12.11. The new ACI 318 Section sealants or adhesives shall be conducted where sealant or adhe-
26.13.1.3 requires special inspection of panel placement and reinforce- sive required by Section 703.7 is applied to mass timber building
ment in precast concrete diaphragms assigned to SDC C, D, E, or F elements as designated in the approved construction documents.
using moderate or high-deformability connections. These diaphragms
Chapter 35
are also required to comply with the requirements of ACI 550.5-18,
Code Requirements for the Design of Precast Concrete Diaphragms for ASTM D 3498 Standard Specification for Adhesives for Field-Gluing
Earthquake Motions and Commentary. ACI 550.5 has special inspec- Plywood to Lumber Framing for Floor Systems
tion requirements for precast concrete diaphragm connections and Change Significance: Special inspection provisions are added to
reinforcement at joints classified as high deformability elements or Section 1705 for mass timber elements in Types IV-A, IV-B, and IV-C
moderate deformability elements. construction. The special inspections are similar to requirements for
A special inspector watches the installation of the embedded parts, other prefabricated systems such as precast concrete and structural steel.
checks the completion of the continuity of reinforcement across The specific elements requiring special inspection for construction
the joints, as well as completion of field-built connections when Types IV-A, IV-B, and IV-C include:
structures are assigned to Seismic Design Categories C, D, E, and F. 1) Connection of mass timber elements to timber deep founda-
ACI 318 Section 26.13.1.3 also requires that installation tolerances tion elements. These connections are critical to transferring
of precast concrete diaphragm connections be inspected periodically loads from the mass timber elements to timber piles, particu-
for compliance with ACI 550.5. larly lateral loading. Connections to concrete foundations
To match these new requirements, the 2021 IBC has added two are addressed in IBC Table 1705.3 for concrete special
requirements to Table 1705.3. Item 11 is added as a conservative inspections.
synthesis of the two requirements from ACI 318 and ACI 550.5. A 2) Erection of mass timber elements. Similar to precast concrete,
continuous special inspection is required onsite during the installation tall wood buildings utilizing prefabricated elements need
of precast concrete diaphragms for moderate and highly deform- verification that the correct elements are placed in the right
able joints with a focus on the reinforcement extension through the location in accordance with the design drawings.
joint, verification of embedded part location, and full connection of 3) Specialized connections between mass timber products that
the diaphragm elements to one another and the rest of the seismic utilize threaded, bolted, or concealed connections are similar
force-resisting system. Item 12 mirrors the ACI 318 requirement to to concrete connections. The strength of many connection
check diaphragm element and connection minimum and maximum designs is predicated on specific screw lengths and installation
distances against the tolerance requirements of ACI 550.5. angles. Bolted connections require specific diameters and, for
lag screws, specific lengths. Concealed connectors, many of
which are proprietary, must be installed correctly for struc-
Mass Timber tural performance.
Installation and connection of mass timber elements in Types IV-A, 4) Adhesive anchorage installed in horizontal or upwardly
IV-B, and IV-C construction requires special inspection. inclined positions resisting sustained tension loads requires
1705.5.3 Mass timber construction. Special inspections of a continuous special inspection. This is necessary because of
Mass Timber elements in Types IV-A, IV-B, and IV-C issues with creep in the adhesives under long-term tension
construction shall be in accordance with Table 1705.5.3. loading. All other adhesive anchors need only be inspected
periodically.
Table 1705.5.3 Excerpt If, in the judgment of the building official, there are other unusual
Required special inspections of mass timber construction. items not covered in Table 1705.5.3, the existing text in Section
Inspection Duration 1705.1.1, Special Cases, requires special inspection of these items as
well. The same section also says the building official can require special
1. Inspection of anchorage and connections of mass
inspections where a manufacturer’s installation instructions prescribe
timber construction to timber deep foundation systems. Periodic requirements not contained in the code. For example, field-glued mass
2. Inspect erection of mass timber construction. timber beam or panel splices, while currently rare in North America,
3. Inspection of connections where installation methods may become more prevalent in the future. Section 1705.1.1 would
are required to meet design loads. allow the building official to require special inspection for either
• Verify use of proper installation proprietary or non-proprietary field-glued splices. Additionally, many
equipment. design engineers specify the need for special inspections for unusual
• Verify use of pre-drilled holes Periodic
conditions in their structural notes in the construction documents
Threaded where required. and the statement of special inspections.
fasteners The new Section 1705.20 requires periodic special inspection of seal-
• Inspect screws, including
diameter, length, head type, ants or adhesives where sealant or adhesive required by IBC Section
spacing, installation angle and 703.7 is applied to mass timber building elements as designated in
depth. the approved construction documents. New Section 703.7 requires
Adhesive anchors installed in horizontal or upwardly
Continuous
sealing between mass timber elements in Type IV-A, IV-B, and IV-C
inclined orientation to resist sustained tension loads. construction to resist the passage of air at the following locations: 1)
Adhesive anchors not defined in preceding cell. at abutting edges and intersections of mass timber building elements
Bolted connections. Periodic required to be fire-resistance rated, and 2) at abutting intersections
of mass timber building elements and building elements of other
Concealed connections.
materials where both are required to be fire-resistance rated. Sealants
JANUARY 2022 15
soil conditions, or inadequacy of construction procedures, a deep
foundation element should be load-tested during installation to assure
that there are no material defects (Figure 2). The 2018 IBC already
addressed visual special inspection of deep foundations in Sections
1705.7, 1705.8, and 1705.9. In the 2021 IBC, tests are added to
the new Section 1705.10 to provide a means to assess portions of
deep foundation elements that cannot be visually inspected. Testing
may be done by impact, thermal imaging, or ultrasonic tests. The
applicable ASTM standard is used to define the procedures for the
appropriate test.
An engineering assessment must now be done when installed deep Change Significance: The design of the components that go into
foundation elements appear to be understrength due to quality, loca- a storage rack is based on a minimum steel thickness and minimum
tion, or alignment. yield strength. It is imperative that these minimum properties are
1705.10 Structural Integrity of Deep Foundation Elements. included within the design for fabrication of the components and
Whenever there is a reasonable doubt as to the structural integ- considered in storage rack installation. Storage rack systems may have
rity of a deep foundation element, an engineering assessment for complex load paths. Installation must comply with approved draw-
structural integrity shall be required. The engineering assessment ings to create the necessary load paths. Verification must be made
shall include tests for defects performed in accordance with of material minimum quality requirements during fabrication and
ASTM D 4945, ASTM D 5882, ASTM D 6760, or ASTM D proper anchorage during installation.
7949 or other approved method. Changes clarify that periodic special inspection is required for steel
Chapter 35 storage racks, regular or cantilevered, that are eight feet or more in
ASTM D 5882-16: Standard Test Method for Low Strain height in Seismic Design Category D, E, or F locations. In Chapter 2,
Impact Integrity Testing of Deep Foundations Definitions, a definition for cantilevered steel storage racks is added
ASTM D 6760-16: Standard Test Method for Integrity Testing for clarity.
of Concrete Deep Foundations by Ultrasonic Crosshole Testing
ASTM D 7949-14: Standard Test Methods for Thermal
Integrity Profiling of Concrete Deep Foundations
Conclusion
Change Significance: Most foundation failures are caused by inad- Structural engineers should be aware of significant structural changes
equate soil bearing or lateral capacity. Section 1705.10 addresses a less that have occurred in the 2021 IBC. Since structural engi-
common failure – lack of structural integrity in a deep foundation neers are often responsible for developing the statement of
element due to material defects. Significant defects may affect the special inspection, awareness of these changes is essential.■
structural strength of deep foundation elements; therefore, the defects
Sandra Hyde ([email protected]) is Managing Director, and John “Buddy”
must be detected and corrected prior to the construction above ground.
Showalter ([email protected]) is Senior Staff Engineer, both with
When the integrity of a deep foundation element is in doubt, for
ICC’s Product Development Group.
example, due to issues in alignment during installation, problematic
16 STRUCTURE magazine
Figure 1. Stamford Media Village fronts on a barge canal.
STAMFORD MEDIA
VILLAGE A Rhinestone in the Rough
By Joe Gencarelli, P.E., and Jim DeStefano, P.E., AIA, F.SEI
JANUARY 2022 17
make for dull tenants. Office space needed to be adaptable to throw-
ing a party as well as a corporate board meeting.
After a long 12 months of planning, designing, more planning,
more designing, and another 28 months of construction, their vision
turned to reality, like a scene out of a Transformers movie. The newly
revamped 133,000 square foot complex has brought a fresh outlook
to businesses and the work-play environment. Tenants include TV
studios, a dog-friendly microbrewery/restaurant, and an organic
market. In addition, Wheelhouse properties reserved the top floor
for their own offices.
Brownfield Challenges
A site assessment revealed that the soils below the site were con-
taminated with a toxic stew of hazardous and corrosive compounds,
including polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), necessitating extensive
and costly remediation.
Stamford’s south end is underlain by a stratum of coarse-grained gla-
cial outwash deposits known as the Rippowam Aquifer. Consequently,
waterborne contaminants found on any site in the area are free to
migrate across the region and into the waters of Long Island Sound.
Foundations
As is typical with waterfront sites in the area, subsoil conditions
consist of uncompacted fill over a stratum of organic silt over
coarse-grained glacial deposits. Test pits revealed that the existing
building was supported on spread footings bearing on the fill layer Figure 3. Custom pile driving rig.
above the organic silt. Groundwater was near the bottom of footing
elevation at low tide. of the additional three stories would need to be underpinned with
Although the fill and organic silt are not suitable for supporting deep foundations.
foundations, it was determined that in the 100 years since the building Given the limited vertical clearance, trying to install deep foun-
was built, settlement due to primary and secondary consolidation of dations within the building would take some ingenuity. Drilled
the organic silt had run its course. Consequently, where foundations micro-piles extending to bedrock were first considered; however, the
were not being subject to additional loads, no remedial work was contaminated drill spoils would have required costly remediation
needed. However, the foundations that would be carrying the load and disposal. The underpinning solution settled on concrete-filled
steel pipe piles driven to bedrock. The
piles were spliced every five feet with
compression couplings that eliminated
the need for field welding. The foun-
dation contractor, Norwalk Marine
Contractors, fabricated a custom rig
with a pile hammer secured to the
ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org
Concrete Restoration
The derelict concrete structure, which is
a one-way concrete joist framing system,
was in rough shape. It was reinforced with
twisted square bars called “Ransome Bars”
after their inventor, Ernest Ransome.
Due to the proximity to the canal, the
crawl space below the building was fre-
quently inundated with tidal water. As
a result, most of the ground floor con-
crete structure was severely spalled and
deteriorated from immersion in seawater.
18 STRUCTURE magazine
This made it an easy decision to demolish the floor to facilitate
removing the contaminated soil under the building and install-
ing the driven pipe piles.
The existing structure was devoid of a lateral load resisting
system. Reinforced concrete shear walls were cast around the
stair and elevator shafts to resist wind and seismic loads.
The column bays were 20 by 20 feet which is somewhat close
for marketable office space. The column bays for the new upper
floors were made 20 by 40 feet to improve the rentability of this
space – consequently, only half of the existing concrete columns
needed to be fortified and underpinned.
The concrete restoration specialists from Structural Technologies
were brought in to perform the column fortification. These
columns, which are octagonal in shape, were jacketed with 3
inches of concrete and reinforced with vertical corner bars and
ties. The concrete floor was cored in the corners of each column
being fortified to install continuous vertical column bars. Self- Figure 4. Concrete columns were reinforced and jacketed to increase capacity.
consolidating concrete (SCC) was pumped into the column
jackets through the core holes (Figure 4).
Where the concrete was spalled and deteriorated, Culbertson
Company of New York, a concrete restoration firm, was brought
in to perform the restoration. High-pressure water blasting,
also known as hydro blasting, was used to remove old paint,
corroded reinforcing, and loose and flaky concrete. Bonding
agents and patching compounds were used to restore concrete
surfaces to their original shape.
Project Team
Owner: Wheelhouse Properties
Structural Engineer: DeStefano & Chamberlain, Inc.
Architect: CPG Architects
Figure 6. Architecturally exposed hybrid structure awaiting a tenant.
JANUARY 2022 19
MARION
UCLA’s ANDERSON HALL
By Daniel Tunick, S.E., and Nabih Youssef, S.E.
20 STRUCTURE magazine
the new MAH building contained adult education facilities with an
occupant load greater than 500, the building was assigned to Risk
Category III per CBC Table 1604.5. In addition, the existing parking
structure completely supported the new MAH building above, and
consequently, it was also treated as Risk Category III.
For existing buildings, the UCSSP generally refers to the CBC, which
in turn references the American Society of Civil Engineers’ ASCE 41,
Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings. The ASCE 41 per-
formance objectives for the existing building were “Damage Control”
@ BSE-1N and “Limited Safety” @ BSE-2N. BSE-1N/2N are ASCE
41 hazard levels that correlate to the Design Basis Earthquake (DBE)
and Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) from
ASCE 7, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures.
The UCSSP also required an independent seismic peer review which
was conducted for the overall project, reviewing both the new build- Figure 3. Deep built-up long-span transfer beam supporting steel moment frame
ing and the retrofit of the existing building. column above.
The overall project included a new structure upon an existing
structure, vertical and horizontal combinations of lateral systems Multiple long-span transfer beams were required within the new
of different types and eras, horizontal connections of new floors to building to accommodate the large column-free zones for auditorium/
existing floors, and gravity and seismic demands delivered from the event spaces. This included the transfer of Special Moment Frame
new structure above to the existing structure below. The seismic cri- Columns, resulting in large, deep transfer beams requiring installation
teria also spanned across both ASCE 7 and ASCE 41. A customized in multiple pieces and field-spliced once installed in place (Figure 3).
two-tier design/analysis procedure incorporating both ASCE 7 and The largest of these transfer beams spanned 54 feet while supporting
ASCE 41 was utilized to accurately capture the structures’ behavior an SMRF column at its midpoint and was a custom 60-inch-deep
to accommodate these unique circumstances while also satisfying the shape that weighed over 800 pounds per linear foot.
UCSSP requirements for both new and existing structures. The first The layout also required multiple bi-axial SMRF hollow box columns
tier consisted of a linear dynamic analysis for the new building design that received two or more beams in perpendicular directions. These
per ASCE 7, using the typical SMRF design coefficients of R = 8, box columns were fabricated using electroslag procedures to accom-
Ω = 3, Cd = 5.5. This analysis was used to design the lateral system of modate the typical continuity plates required for RBS connections
the new structure, but the model included the entire existing park- inside the boxes.
ing structure below to capture its impact on the global behavior and
demands adequately. The second tier of analysis was a full-building Retrofit of the Existing Parking Structure
nonlinear time-history response analysis per ASCE 41. This analysis
was utilized to evaluate and retrofit the existing parking structure The existing parking structure required a unique and extensive retrofit
to the ASCE 41 performance objectives to upgrade to current UCSSP require-
noted above. It also provided supplemental ments while supporting the gravity and
verification of the new building’s seismic seismic demands imparted from the new
design to these same objectives when building above. The existing structure
explicit nonlinear hysteretic behavior was consists of 9-inch-thick flat reinforced
included in both the new and existing concrete slabs with sloping drop caps at
buildings. circular columns, along with some inte-
rior and perimeter concrete shear walls.
Some of the shear walls had been seismi-
The New Building cally retrofitted over the years with Fiber
The structural system for the new MAH Reinforced Polymer (FRP) wrap or shot-
building consists of concrete-filled metal crete. However, these retrofits accounted
deck over steel framing, with a seis- only for the parking structure’s own seis-
mic system comprised of Steel Special mic demand and were based on different
Moment Resisting Frames (SMRF) performance objectives and a less strin-
with Reduced Beam Section (RBS) con- gent Risk Category. Additionally, walls
nections. Moment Frame beams were were unevenly distributed throughout the
typically W30x, with moment frame parking structure due to past renovations.
columns typically using heavy W24x or With the new MAH building constructed
built-up box columns. All columns of the above, the entire seismic base shear of the
new building were spaced at a 27-foot x new building above would be transferred
30-foot typical grid to match the existing into the existing parking structure before
parking structure grid and land directly reaching the foundation.
upon the existing concrete columns. In The existing concrete columns required
addition, to increase the floor area of the strengthening to support the demands
new structure beyond this grid, multiple delivered from the columns of the new
sides of the floorplate provided perimeter Figure 4. Steel jacketing of the existing concrete column at building above. Existing columns seeing
cantilevers typically 15 feet long. the parking structure level. compression-only loads from above were
JANUARY 2022 21
Figure 5. Foundation strengthening in the form of combining multiple existing Figure 6. The new Marion Anderson Hall.
spread footings.
strengthened with either FRP or concrete jacketing. Columns seeing existing slab rebar in place. During this process, the existing slab
compression/tension loads from above were strengthened with steel was supported with temporary shoring. Multiple existing concrete
jackets with customized top connection plates to receive the anchor shear walls were also retrofitted with either supplemental FRP wrap
bolts from the SMRF column above (Figure 4 , page 21). or shotcrete.
The existing slabs received significant diaphragm strengthening, The typical existing foundation consisted of square isolated spread
predominantly in the form of FRP on the top and/or bottom of concrete footings. The majority of footings below the new building
the slab. FRP application was chosen as the typical diaphragm and those below new/retrofitted shear walls required strengthening.
strengthening material to maintain head-height requirements of The foundation strengthening consisted of increasing individual foot-
the parking stories, which were already short in height. This FRP ing areas and/or increasing footing depth by adding supplemental
strengthening was predominantly seismic and was utilized for both anchors, rebar, and concrete to the perimeter and/or top of footings.
collectors and diaphragm shear strengthening. The slabs also received Where demands were largest, or new concrete shear walls were intro-
a significant connection at the new building’s second floor, essentially duced, multiple footings were connected together to create new large
“stitching” the new and existing diaphragms together at this eleva- combined footings (Figure 5).
tion. This was achieved by chipping out the concrete of the existing
slab while leaving the existing rebar in place and then re-pouring
a heavily reinforced connection zone with new rebar coupled onto
Conclusion
the existing rebar. The new Marion Anderson Hall (Figure 6) provided a sizeable expan-
The seismic demand was transferred from the parking structure sion to the Anderson School of Management. The location and
diaphragm to multiple existing and new reinforced concrete shear exterior façade provide a continuous extension of the original build-
walls. The new walls were constructed by chipping out a slot in the ings, resulting in the perfect blend of the desired function with a
existing slab to place the new rebar and concrete while leaving the matching aesthetic. The challenges of constructing an entirely new
building on an existing parking structure
were numerous – but close coordination
NEW
INTRODUCING between the design team, con-
FLOORVIBE v3.1
tractor, and client resulted in a
VERSION great success.■
FROM STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS, INC.
ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org
22 STRUCTURE magazine
T he 100 Stockton Street project reimagines
an eight-story former department store into
a multi-use office, dining, event space, and bou-
tique retail building. This reimagination of the
building required significant structural shoring
to facilitate the design.
The building in San Francisco’s historic Union
Square is a 1970s concrete building consisting
of 250 thousand square feet. Modifications to
the building required the demolition of the roof
level, demolition of over one-third of the building
floor plate, removal of half of the gravity columns,
shortening of the existing post-tensioned (PT)
girders, and demolition of the suspended first floor
and the existing perimeter shear walls (Figure 1).
These elements were reconstructed in new
locations, configurations, or to new extents to Figure 2. Completed shoring columns and beams prior to column demolition.
accommodate the design. Degenkolb Engineers
designed the extensive shoring required to meet the needs of the and Blatteis & Schnur. The shoring was closely coordinated with the
project and the vision of the architect Gensler, building Structural design team as well as the general contractor Plant Construction, the
Engineer of Record (SEoR) KPFF, and developers Morgan Stanley demolition subcontractor Silverado, the shoring steel subcontractor
Olson Steel, and the lifting contractor Sheedy Drayage.
SHORING Demolition
The roof level and all penthouses were demolished. A new roof was
Facilitating
constructed using steel and concrete on metal deck. This rebuilt roof
level allowed for a perimeter outdoor terrace for a restaurant and bar
overlooking Union Square. Minimal shoring was needed for this
work, but the structure was evaluated for its ability to support the
DESIGN at
necessary demolition equipment, including excavators and skid steers.
The exterior shear walls and the perimeter of the original floor plate
were demolished. The floor plate was reconstructed, cantilevering out
to new extents at all levels. The newly defined edge of slab accom-
modated a façade consisting of glass
100 STOCKTON
and terracotta, a significant change
from the original nearly window-
less exterior. Within the remaining
seven stories of floor plate, there were
twenty existing 24-inch square col-
By Robert Graff, S.E. umns, of which ten columns and
their foundations were demolished.
The demolished columns each
carried 7 stories of floor plate con-
sisting of PT girder, PT joists, and a
4½-inch reinforced slab totaling over
100 psf. The columns carried 800
kips each, and the combined shoring
load for the ten columns approached
eight million pounds.
Shoring Requirements
Shores to support the loads from the
demolished columns were designed
for a maximum of 500 kips at the
base of the building using two
shoring posts for each building
column. Fabricated structural steel
Figure 1. Demo plan – The red shaded area is demolished. Blue columns were demolished; other black columns remain. was selected for the shoring at most
continued on next page
JANUARY 2022 23
levels due to the size of the loads. The shores were
designed as 18-inch pipes at the basement level but
tapered in size up the building height. At the upper
two levels, adjustable steel shores were used where
loads were low enough that off-the-shelf shoring
systems were adequate.
The PT girders on the four main column lines at
all levels were de-tensioned. This allowed the gird-
ers to be shortened by a bay at each end and was
accomplished by releasing the tendon stress, chipping
back the girder, cutting the existing tendons, casting
new PT tendon anchorages, and finally re-tensioning
the original tendons. This all was completed to allow
the perimeter of the building to be reconstructed to
new extents for the façade.
In their temporary de-stressed state, the PT gird-
ers could not support the joists and slab with only
the mild steel reinforcement they possessed. Shoring
beams placed on top of the column shores pro-
vided nearly continuous support during the girder’s Figure 3. Setting up for test lift.
extremely weakened state. Shoring beam deflections
were calculated while supporting the load of the slab, joists, and de-
stressed girders. Due to a temporary condition, the deflections would
System Deflections
become locked in when the new columns and walls supporting the slab With all the shoring elements determined, expected deflections of the
were cast. Detailed checks of the steel shoring beams were completed to system were calculated to be between ¾ inch to 1 inch. This resulted
control deflections within acceptable limits resulting in stiff W27×146 from a combination of column shortening, pile settlement, and
beams (Figure 2, page 23). beam deflections. If allowed to occur, this deflection would become
At the base of the shores, the total loads were beyond what could be permanent in the final building when columns and walls were cast.
supported by cribbing which would be a typical temporary shoring Due to the capacity of the existing floor framing, topping the slab to
foundation solution. The project also required the demolition of the correct such deflections was not possible. To compensate, a jacking
existing foundations and excavations for new foundations. This all operation to transfer the building load was developed. Most of these
occurred around the shoring system while it was supporting the build- deflections were eliminated or significantly reduced by transferring the
ing. To support the large loads and load to the shoring prior to column
allow for the necessary excavation, demolition.
12-inch cased micropiles were used. The jacking operation required
The micropiles could be installed in the use of hydraulic jacks at each
the basement and could support the shore to transfer the loads. However,
building load, while the top eleven placing upward loads on PT girders
feet of each pile were exposed due to which were stressed at this phase is
the foundation excavation. In addi- dangerous. The upward force com-
tion, the micropiles had a limited bined with the negative moment
impact on the permanent founda- induced by the PT stress can cause a
tions cast around them, making negative bending failure. Therefore,
them an ideal solution. the girders were evaluated under the
A steel frame or carriage (as the shoring loads and found to approach
contractor named it) was designed failure in the rebar on the top side of
to transfer loads from the shores to the girders. The evaluation included
the micropiles. The carriage con- several conservative assumptions
sisted of 1½-inch-thick triangular about the stresses remaining in the
gusset plates that were slotted into tendons after 50 plus years. The
the shoring column. These gusset original tendon stresses were known,
plates delivered the load of one shore but initial stress losses and losses
down to a rectangular frame of wide due to long-term creep had to be
flange beams. The frame, in turn, conservatively estimated. However,
delivered the load to two piles for the possibility of inducing failure of
each shoring column. The carriage the girders when jacking the build-
served a second purpose which was ing could not be easily disproven.
to link four piles together to provide A section of the building scheduled
additional stability. This stability for demolition was used to test the
was exceedingly important when proposed procedure to prove the
excavating around the piles for the jacking could be completed success-
foundations. Figure 4. Column demolition with bars buckling. fully. The shoring was designed for
24 STRUCTURE magazine
the new footings exposed around 11 feet of the
previously buried cased micropiles (Figure 5). The
casing provided buckling resistance to the micropile,
which the surrounding soil would typically provide.
The shoring carried all 8 million pounds of load at
this stage, and the shoring system was in its most
vulnerable state.
JANUARY 2022 25
Historic Alameda High
School Retrofit
Part 1: Too Valuable to Demolish,
Too Expensive to Retrofit
By Nik Blanchette, P.E., Steve Heyne, S.E.,
and Chris Warner, S.E.
The Structures
The original campus, standing three stories
tall, has an impressive presence spanning an
entire block of Central Avenue adjacent to the
downtown district of Alameda. The buildings
are of neoclassical style with grand concrete
entry columns, emulating the stone columns
of ancient Rome, and elaborate detail work
throughout the exterior.
The buildings consist of cast-in-place rein-
forced concrete exterior walls supported by
shallow foundations. All floors and roofs are
wood-framed, except the second-story corri-
dor floors, which were concrete (and removed
during the retrofit). Reviewing the build-
ings against either ASCE 7, Minimum Design
Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings
and Other Structures, or ASCE 41, Seismic
Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings,
showed that the major elements of the lat-
eral force-resisting system were significantly
deficient, lacking strength, stiffness, and
A school destroyed by the 1933 Long Beach earthquake. interconnection.
26 STRUCTURE magazine
Key plan of building retrofit history.
A Retrofit Unrealized
The 1933 Long Beach earthquake was a
“wake-up call,” resulting in the prepara-
tion of seismic rehabilitation drawings
for the HAHS campus. Reinforced
concrete shear walls were specified to Seattle | Tacoma | Portland | pcs-structural.com
supplement the overstressed diaphragms
JANUARY 2022 27
vacated and remained so until the retrofit was completed
in the 2010s. The other classroom wing and science build-
ing served various uses, such as adult school classrooms, a
public library, and district office space.
In 1977, the community failed to pass bonds to rehabili-
tate the remaining non-upgraded historic buildings, so the
school board voted to demolish the 50-year-old deficient
buildings. However, a group of community leaders rejected
the idea of losing the historic property and rallied to save
the buildings. Also in 1977, perhaps not so coincidentally,
the campus was recognized as a national historic monument
and was placed on the National Register of Historic Places.
Finally, in 1989, the group was able to pass a bond that
paid for rehabilitating the auditorium lobby and seismically
isolating it from the classroom wings. This allowed students
to use the lobby and auditorium, sandwiched between the
deficient classroom wings. Structural debris fence surrounding an abandoned building.
28 STRUCTURE magazine
Boston
University
Center for Computing
& Data Sciences Building
By Nathan Roy, P.E.,
Irfan Baig, P.E.,
Jamie Hamelin, P.Eng,
and Lucy Timbers
30 STRUCTURE magazine
sand layer that is a common layer for supporting the
timber piles of historic Boston buildings of the late 19th
and early 20th century. Below the sand layer is 150 to
165 feet of marine deposited clay with bedrock below.
Thus, the site represents one of the deepest locations
in Boston to bedrock.
The building consists of two main portions: the
19-story tower at the west side of the site with overall
plan dimensions of 140 by 140 feet with a two-story
deep basement, and a 5-story podium at the east
side with plan dimensions of 70 by 170 feet with a
one-story basement. Haley and Aldrich conducted
the geotechnical exploratory program and worked
with the design team and Suffolk construction to
select the appropriate foundation system. The analysis
focused on two primary foundation schemes: deep
load-bearing slurry wall elements (LBE) extending
to bedrock and a mat slab foundation. Working with
the construction manager Suffolk, it was determined
that a mat foundation would save over $5 million Figure 3. Tower mat slab construction.
compared to the LBE foundations.
The 19-story tower height was close to the limit acceptable for a mat north-south. The total core height is 338 feet above the top of the
foundation. Tower loads had to be limited by optimizing the concrete mat foundation, with a height-to-width ratio of approximately
core plan size and wall thickness and using lightweight concrete slabs 11 to 1. As noted, the soil conditions required the superstructure
on metal deck to realize the savings with a mat foundation. A 5-foot to be as light as possible to limit short and long-term settlements
mat slab bearing 40 feet below grade on the marine clay, and thicken- and keep the subgrade soil stresses below the allowable values.
ing to 6 to 9 feet under the core walls (Figure 3), was utilized at the Therefore, the core wall was limited to 14 inches thick to help
tower. The building weight was reduced achieve the weight reductions required
to limit bearing pressures under dead and to meet the soil pressure and settlement
live load to a maximum of 6 ksf under limits. High strength, self-consolidating
the core with an average of 4.5 ksf under concrete with a strength fć = 10,000 psi
the tower footprint. A 3.5-foot mat slab at the base transitioning to fć = 8,000 psi
bearing on the sand layer was provided at the top was used for the core.
below the podium. Approximately 1 to 1½ Contrary to conventional construction
inches of elastic settlement and an addi- of cast-in-place framed concrete slabs
tional ½ to 1 inch of long-term settlement within the core, 3¼-inch lightweight
is predicted at the tower mat slab, while ¼ concrete slabs supported by a 3-inch
to ½ inch of total elastic settlement and deep composite metal deck are employed
up to an additional ½ inch of long-term to reduce the total weight. The 5-story
settlement is calculated at the podium. podium has its own lateral force resis-
To address resiliency and the Boston tance system comprised of a structural
University Climate Action Plan, the steel elevator and stair “core” made up
ground floor was set 1 foot above of concentric braced frames.
the project design flood elevation, The lateral loads on the building are
5 feet above the Boston Planning & wind controlled, with Exposure C. The
Development Agency design flood 14-inch shear wall thicknesses necessi-
elevation. Building weight under the tated high-strength threaded #14 Grade
19-story tower was sufficient to resist 105 steel reinforcing at boundary ele-
hydrostatic pressures from the design ments. The large diameter reinforcement
flood elevation. 40-ton tension mini- helped eliminate rebar congestion in the
piles are provided below the 5-story core. In addition, staggered mechanical
podium to resist hydrostatic pressures splices were used for the boundary ele-
from the design flood elevation. ment steel along the height of the core
Responding to the building program- walls, further helping reduce congestion
ming requirements and compact floor and conflicts with various other building
plate, the lateral forces resistance system components, including embed plates.
in the tower consists of a slender con- The three slender north-south walls
crete shear wall core (Figure 4 ). The contained door and MEP penetrations,
core footprint is 52 by 30.5 feet with creating a challenging scenario for the
two 52-foot-long walls in the east-west design of these wall and link beams.
direction and three 30.5-foot-long walls Figure 4. Tower core. Typical link beams occur in the center
JANUARY 2022 31
a) b) c)
Figure 5. Cantilever framing; a)16 t h floor framing with overlay, b) staggered massing, c) steel cantilever framing.
of the wall and contained MEP penetrations to allow services out The tower has typical 115- by 115-foot floor plates of five 23-foot
of the core. This placed significant constraints on the placement of bay modules in the north-south and east-west directions. The floor
rebar within the link beams. In addition, the narrow thickness of plans have footprints that line up with each other vertically for no
the wall and link beams precluded embedded structural steel sec- more than three floors consecutively. The center four-bay by four-bay
tions in the link beams at the lower levels to help carry the shear/ portions of the tower supports all tower gravity loads and includes
flexure demands. Instead, 1¼- to 1½-inch-thick grade 50 steel plates a concrete core and columns that run continuous the full height of
are embedded in the link beams at lower levels to provide adequate the tower (Figure 5a).
strength and stiffness to the link beam sections. The plates are made The architectural massing of the building uses shifting, free-floating
to act compositely with the concrete with headed studs on each side volumes to create outdoor terraces associated with research “neighbor-
of the plate. Careful coordination with architectural, mechanical, hoods” that capitalize on the spectacular views from all sides of the
and electrical teams was required to place the penetrations through tower. The overall building footprint of 138- by 138-foot comprises
these plates. The effort and care of planning these link beams paid floor plates made up of six 23-foot bay modules in the north-south
off during the construction phase, with few conflicts resulting from and east-west directions (Figure 5a). Floor plates shift by one bay in
rebar placement and/or wall penetrations. a counter-clockwise arrangement around the core every two or three
stories. This creates an offset block layout of masses,
with different volumes cantilevering over the floors
below (Figure 5b). Columns in this area do not
extend to grade. Two-story deep trusses made of
wide flange steel and located along the perimeter
support these volumes. Typically, a single truss spans
the full length of the building, which is, in turn, sup-
ported by a truss in the perpendicular direction that
cantilevers a single bay (Figure 5c). This results in a
mixture of traditionally supported and hung floors.
This careful placement of the trusses creates a load
path that guides the gravity loads back towards the
columns that run continuous through the height of
the building. The architecturally exposed steel truss
framing and connections are expressed visually and
are fireproofed with intumescent paint (Figure 6 ).
The cantilever steel framing was superelevated for
80% of the predicted dead load deflections (Figure 7 ).
Suffolk Construction, Prime Steel Erecting, and
their erection engineer, Simon Design Engineering,
worked closely with the design team on the tem-
porary shoring and jacking systems. Full height
Figure 6. Truss framing at floor level. shoring was provided to allow for erection of the
32 STRUCTURE magazine
steel. Jacking boxes as part of the shoring system were included to
allow for superelevation. Hydraulic jacks were utilized to unload the
shoring and uniformly load the cantilever framing.
Opening in late 2022, the Boston University Center for Computing
& Data Sciences building will foster innovation and collaboration as
a leader in Computing & Data Sciences. The building is set to dem-
onstrate Boston University’s commitment to sustainability, resiliency,
and social responsibility.
Part 2 will focus on sustainability, life cycle assessment, and
opportunities realized to reduce the embodied carbon of the
building structure.■
Project Team
Structural Engineers: LeMessurier, Entuitive
Architect: KPMB Architects
Contractor: Suffolk Construction
Steel Fabricator: Canatal Industries
Steel Erector: Prime Steel Erecting Inc
Concrete Contractor: S&F Concrete Contractors
Figure 7. Steel framing. Courtesy of John Cannon.
CCU+™
HEAVY DUTY
UNDERCUT ANCHORS
AND
INSTALLATION SYSTEM
IC REGI
SM
ON
I
SE
QU
A
N
LI O
FIC ATI Copyright © 2022 DEWALT. 2609777
JANUARY 2022 33
just the FAQs
FAQs on ASCE Standards
What You Always Wanted to Ask
By Laura Champion, P.E., F.SEI, F.ASCE, and Jennifer Goupil, P.E., F.SEI, M.ASCE
34 STRUCTURE magazine
to be interconnected by ties, regardless of the strictly for C&C, the load being designed
effects of liquefaction.” for is not directional, so it is unclear if this
comes into effect for “the provisions for
When are “Openings” Open?
MWFRS” design.
Q: Can a building with large overhead A: Section 30.2.3 describes the situation
doors on one side be designed as enclosed where the component or cladding element
instead of partially enclosed. Their assertion has a large tributary area instead of the
is that the overhead doors are not openings small, typical effective wind area. For an
because they are designed to be closed during element with such a large tributary area,
a design wind event. the high localized wind pressures associ-
A: In ASCE 7-10, Chapter 26, Wind Loads: ated with the loading of a component and
General Requirements, defines enclosed, open, cladding element are not present. Thus,
and partially enclosed. Overhead doors can the smaller design pressures used for the
provide the degree of enclosure required to design of the MWFRS may be used in
meet the definition of an enclosed building, the design of this component or cladding
provided that these doors are designed for element. Further, C&C loading may be
the design wind pressures without excessive bi-directional; consider a corner window
deflection. However, there are exceptions to system, for example. Wind pressures in both
this general situation. For example, door- directions should be applied to the corner
ways must be considered openings for a fire window simultaneously.
station because of the requirement that the doors be opened during
the wind event to respond to emergencies. The same situation would ASCE 41: Seismic Evaluation and
be for ambulance garages or emergency room entrances. The open
area around the doors should be considered when determining the Retrofit of Existing Buildings
enclosure classification of the building. In ASCE 7-16, the definition
Clarification for Tier 1
of enclosed was clarified by specifying the total area of the openings,
Ao, permitted, and the definition of partially open was also added. Q: Neither ASCE 41-13 nor ASCE 41-17 has a Tier 1 Immediate
Occupancy checklist or evaluation requirements for Building Type C1:
Wind Loads on Solar Arrays
Concrete Moment Frames for High Seismicity Level. I am referring
Q: In ASCE 7-16 Section 29.4.4, Rooftop Solar Panels Parallel to to the following sections in ASCE 41-13 and ASCE 41-17:
the Roof Surface on Buildings of All Heights and Roof Slopes, there • ASCE 41-13: Section 16.9IO Immediate Occupancy Structural
are two factors, γE and γa, that are confusing. The Array Edge Factor, Checklist For Building Type C1: Concrete Moment Frames
γE, definition describes the location of the array on the roof and in • ASCE 41-17: section 17.11 Structural Checklist For Building
relation to other arrays. When does the γE = 1.5 factor not apply? Type C1: Concrete Moment Frames
Also, Figure 29.4-8 includes the Solar Panel Pressure Equalization Why does ASCE 41 not specify an Immediate Occupancy checklist
factor, γa, which is based on the effective wind area. Is this Effective for Concrete Moment Frames for High Seismicity Level?
Wind Area based on each connection, as determined in Chapter 30, A: There is no separate Tier I checklist for Building Type C1
Wind Loads: Components and Cladding, or does it refer to the total for High Seismicity Level because the checklist for moderate
area of the solar array? level is also applicable for high level.■
A: The Array Edge Factor, γE, is used to determine how “exposed”
the panel is and, thus, how susceptible the panel is to wind uplift. If you have a question to be considered for a future issue,
Therefore, if the panel is greater than 0.5 × the mean roof height, send it to [email protected] with FAQ in the subject line.
h, away from the edge of the roof, but the distance to the building Visit asce.org/sei to learn more about ASCE/SEI Standards.
edge (or to adjacent array), d1, is greater than 4 feet or the distance
between the rows, d2, is greater than 4 feet, then the γE = 1.5 factor This article’s information is provided for general informational pur-
applies. However, if the distances are not greater than 4 feet, a value poses only and is not intended in any fashion to be a substitute for
of γE = 1.0 can be used instead of γE = 1.5. professional consultation. Information provided does not constitute a
To determine the Effective Wind Area, A, refer to the definition formal interpretation of the standard. Under no circumstances does
contained in Chapter 26, Section 26.2: “For rooftop solar arrays, ASCE/SEI, its affiliates, officers, directors, employees, or volunteers
the effective wind area in Fig. 29.4-7 is equal to the tributary area warrant the completeness, accuracy, or relevancy of any information
for the structural element being considered, except that the width of or advice provided herein, or its usefulness for any particular purpose.
the effective wind area need not be Less Than One-Third Its Length.” ASCE/SEI, its affiliates, officers, directors, employees, and volunteers
expressly disclaim any and all responsibility for any liability, loss, or
Wind Tributary Area for Components and Cladding damage that you may cause or incur in reliance on any information or
advice provided herein.
Q: Regarding components and cladding uplift, Section 30.2.3
Tributary Areas Greater than 700 ft 2(65 m 2), of ASCE 7-16 states, Laura Champion is a Managing Director of the Structural Engineering
“C&C elements with tributary areas greater than 700 ft2 (65 m2) Institute and Global Partnerships at the American Society of Civil Engineers.
shall be permitted to be designed using the provisions for main wind
Jennifer Goupil is Senior Manager of Codes and Standards and Technical
force resisting systems (MWFRS).” When using “the provisions for
Activities at the Structural Engineering Institute and Global Partnerships at
MWFRS,” does this also mean that the member should be designed
the American Society of Civil Engineers.
for the interaction of two directions of wind load? When designing
JANUARY 2022 35
structural LOADS
Snow and Rain Loads in ASCE 7-22
Part 1
By Michael O’Rourke, Ph.D., P.E., and John F. Duntemann, P.E., S.E.
36 STRUCTURE magazine
strength given by ASD procedure is
1.5. For some other materials, the
ratio varies depending on the limit
state being checked. The inverse
of 1.5 was rounded to 0.7 for this
purpose.
The same database and map-
ping scheme was used to prepare a
20-year mean-recurrence interval
map and values for use when evalu-
ating serviceability. The new value,
100 percent of the 20-year MRI
load, is based upon the judgment
of the ASCE 7 Snow and Rain Load
Subcommittee and represents an
increase for ASCE 7, but is less than
the load specified in the International
Building Code (IBC) 2021 (100 per- Figure 3. Map of winter wind parameter W 2.
cent of the 50-year MRI load).
locations with a low W2 of 0.25, the new drift heights are typically
50% to 70% of the old ASCE 7-16 drift heights, on average about
Winter Wind Parameter a 40% decrease. For locations with a high W2 of 0.65, the new drift
Since the late 1980s, snow drift loads in ASCE 7 have been a function height is typically 100% to 150% of the old ASCE 7-16 height, on
of the size of the snow source area as characterized by the ground average about a 25% increase. For locations with an average W2 of
snow load, Pg, and the upwind fetch length of the snow source area, 0.45, the new drift height is typically 75% to 110% of the ASCE
lu. Recent research has shown that the drift load is also a function of 7-16 height, on average about a 10% decrease. As such, one could
the winter wind speeds. The addition of a winter wind parameter is argue that the snow drifts from ASCE 7-22 are, on average, a bit less
intuitively appealing since one expects, with all other things being conservative than those in ASCE 7-16.
equal, that locations with relatively calm wind in winter would have
smaller drifts than locations with strong winter winds.
The new relation for the drift height, hd, in ASCE 7-22 is
Summary
This article summarizes some of the more substantive changes to the
Pg. lu. W2
74 70 1.7
hd = 1.5 √ γ
Equation 7.6-1 snow provisions of ASCE 7-22. The changes to the ASCE 7-22 ground
snow loads are based upon 30 years of additional data, represent a shift
where γ, as before, is the snow density. The new parameter W2 is away from uniform hazard to uniform risk, and significantly reduce
defined as the percentage of time during the winter (October through the Case Study regions. The addition of a winter wind parameter
April) when the wind speed is greater than or equal to 10 mph, the accounts for the variability in winter wind speeds on drift loads.
nominal threshold for wind-induced snow drifting. Figure 3 presents Part 2, in an upcoming STRUCTURE issue, will review other revi-
the winter wind parameter for the lower 48 states. sions to the snow loads, including a more accurate estimation of the
Note that West of the Rockies and in the Southeast, W2 is com- horizontal extent of windward drifts, revised thermal factors Ct to
paratively small (typically 0.25 to 0.45), while in the Midwest and account for the current trends in roof insulation and venting, and
Northeast, W2 is comparatively large (typically 0.45 to 0.65). As guidance on the design loads for snow capture walls. Part 2 will also
such, the new winter wind parameter has about as strong an influ- discuss a significant change to Chapter 8, including adding
ence on drift surcharge load (proportional to the square of the drift an explicit ponding head to the rain load and a simple rela-
height) as the ground snow and upwind fetch parameters. That is, tion for calculation of the ponding head.■
the new ground snow load, Pg, for the lower 48 states varies from
nominally 12 psf to 120 psf. Hence, its influence is nominally a Full references, Figure 1, and additional information are included
factor of (120⁄12).74 or about 5.5. The upwind fetch typically varies in the PDF version of the online article at STRUCTUREmag.org.
from 100 to 1000 feet, and its influence is nominally a factor
of (1000⁄100).70 or about 5. The winter wind parameter, W2, varies
from 0.25 to 0.65 and hence is nominally a factor of (0.65⁄0.25)1.7 Michael O’Rourke has been a Professor in the Civil Engineering Department
or about 5.1. at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute since 1974. He served as the Chair of
An advantage of the functional form of the relation is that there the ASCE 7 Snow and Rain Subcommittee from 1997-2017 and currently
is no need for a “lower bound” drift size. That is, with the old drift serves as the Vice-Chair and a Fellow of the Structural Engineering Institute
relation, hd = 0.43 (lu)33 (Pg + 10).25 – 1.5, one calculates a negative (SEI) ([email protected]).
drift height for low values of Pg and lu. With the new functional
John F. Duntemann is a Senior Principal at Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates
form, the drift height is positive for all possible combinations of the
in Northbrook, Illinois. He is the current Chair of the ASCE 7 Snow and
input parameters.
Rain Subcommittee and a Fellow of the Structural Engineering Institute (SEI)
The most frequently asked question about the new drift approach
([email protected]).
is whether the drift loads, in general, will increase or decrease. For
JANUARY 2022 37
structural DESIGN
The Long Road
Advancing First-Generation Performance-Based Seismic Design for Steel Buildings
Part 3: Future Efforts for All Structure Types
By Matthew Speicher, Ph.D., and John Harris, Ph.D.
C apabilities to conduct a
performance-based seismic
design (PBSD) of retrofitted exist-
ing buildings and new buildings
have advanced exponentially over
the past 25 years. This progress has
augmented our knowledge of build-
ing behavior given an earthquake
intensity. Still, we must be cautious Figure 1a. Theoretical range of building performance and relative placement of safety-based and recovery-based goals.
of considering a PBSD as an exact Figure taken from NIST (2021a).
answer; instead, a PBSD gives us
information to support decision-making. There is still much work As an example, assume that an assessment is being conducted for the
needed to support PBSD capabilities, and this depends on the type collapse prevention (CP) structural performance level (SPL) at the
of assessment being conducted. At the same time, a vision for the risk-targeted maximum considered earthquake (MCER) prescribed
not-so-distant future must also be established. in ASCE 7, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures
The previous two parts of this series on advancing first-generation (2010 edition and later). Furthermore, suppose the collapse risk is
PBSD principles and provisions for steel buildings (STRUCTURE, taken according to ASCE 7. In this case, the question becomes what
October and November 2021) discussed the history of PBSD. They percentage of components needs to fail the CP SPL to achieve a 10
also outlined a project initiated at the National Institute of Standards percent probability of collapse given MCER shaking? Since there is
and Technology (NIST) that evaluated what advancements could be no mechanism to assess risk based on the analysis results, exposure
made. That project started by benchmarking ASCE 41 to ASCE 7 to risk cannot be communicated to shareholders and stakeholders.
to develop a baseline. A mechanism is needed to relate failure (for any performance level)
This third and final article highlights several concepts that could of components based on consequences posed to the building owner,
advance current PBSD capabilities. This article goes beyond steel occupants, service users, etc. An example of such an approach could
buildings and takes a heuristic view of needs for all types of building be that a building poses more than a 10 % probability of not satisfying
construction, non-building structures, and lifeline infrastructure a performance target (based on collapse, economics, loss of function,
(generically referred to here as a system). These concepts can apply etc.) if either of the following occurs:
to both first- and next-generation PBSD and include the following: • more than some percentage of the total structural components in
• intrinsic risk assessment; one direction do not satisfy the target performance level; and
• procedures and metrics to evaluate functional recovery time; • more than some percentage of the structural components
• multi-system coordination; and resisting seismic force or deformation in one story in one direc-
• resilience-based seismic design. tion do not satisfy a target performance level.
These concepts may be initiated by NIST or by any partner agency The challenge would be defining the percentages in a codifiable
in the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP). manner for policymakers and easily understood by the public. NIST
Realization of these concepts will be dependent upon available GCR 12-917-20: Tentative Framework for Development of Advanced
resources. Seismic Design Criteria for New Buildings (NIST 2012) started evaluat-
ing risk targets for new buildings for adoption by ASCE 7. The same
process can advance ASCE 41 using the methodology given in the
Intrinsically Evaluating Risk Exposure Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) P-58: Seismic
First-generation PBSD principles contained in the latest edition Performance Assessment of Buildings (FEMA 2015), which can explicitly
of ASCE 41: Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings evaluate seismic risk in a probabilistic sense.
(ASCE 2017) fundamentally result in a component-level binary pass
or fail evaluation. A consequence of this process is that component
performance and the potential need to retrofit or replace is based
Functional Recovery Time
upon an analysis output rather than the effect that the component A common consequence of an earthquake is interruption of building
performance has on the system's overall performance. Therefore, an functions and operations and community support services (e.g., power
engineer cannot effectively use the assessment results to explicitly or water distribution). These downtimes can range from a few hours
evaluate risk, which is highly dependent upon the degree of redun- to years. Recovery time for a building is impacted by the following,
dancy built into the building. to list a few factors:
38 STRUCTURE magazine
• the extent of damage to building systems (structural or non-
structural) and the operative contents used for services;
• availability of financial and damage assessment resources;
• demolition and repair processes, including mobilization time;
• construction material availability; and
There is a need to enhance
• recovery of lifelines supporting building function and PBSD to support integration
operation.
Recovery time may also be tied to community-level indirect losses across systems and sectors
such as loss of employment, displacement, and interruptions to edu-
cation, childcare, and community services. This is discussed later in beyond prioritization by risk
this article. Anecdotally, after the M7.1 Anchorage, AK, earthquake
in November 2018, a building housing a notable coffee service sus-
categories.
tained ceiling damage (non-structural). The business continued the
next day by removing the ceiling to avoid such losses.
There is a need to develop and implement enhanced performance
levels and PBSD guidance that address post-earthquake re-occu-
pancy and functional recovery time. Figure 1-a shows an example
of what the performance continuum may look like within this
performance objective. Comparing Figure 1-a to Figure 1-b (also In the latest reauthorization of NEHRP (Public Law 115-307,
included in Part 1 of this series, October 2021) indicates that there December 2018), NIST and FEMA were tasked to report on rec-
may be cases when functional recovery governs performance and ommendations for improving the built environment and critical
other cases when collapse prevention governs, but in no instance infrastructure to reflect performance goals stated in terms of post-
shall collapse prevention be overlooked. Within this effort, a set of earthquake re-occupancy and functional recovery time. Their report,
distinguishable terminologies must be developed as well as a clear FEMA P-2090 / NIST SP-1254: Recommended Options for Improving
understanding of the result. For example, function and operation the Built Environment for Post-Earthquake Reoccupancy and Functional
may be interpreted differently within the same organization. Is Recovery Time (NIST 2021a), identified seven recommendations for
continuity of operations by providing services elsewhere (or in their design or retrofit of buildings and lifeline infrastructure that would
parking lot) deemed to satisfy recovery requirements? Does the culminate in a framework to address re-occupancy and functional
case satisfy re-occupancy requirements when the only elevator in recovery time.
a building is down, and one stair system is operational when the
building may serve users who cannot use stairs? These are just a few
of the multitude of inquires that need to be addressed by architects
Multi-System Coordination
and engineers to define the needed metrics. Additional topics can be The results from a current PBSD, either using ASCE 41 or FEMA P-58,
found in NIST SP 1269: NIST-FEMA Post-Earthquake Functional tend to focus on assessing the design or retrofit of a single building. This
Recovery Workshop Report (NIST 2021b), which summarizes the approach caters to a single isolated building or even an organization
feedback received by workshop participants on functional recovery where operations within multiple buildings are mutually exclusive.
concepts and options. However, it does not address interactions among multiple associated
buildings, among multiple lifeline infrastructure sectors,
or between a combination of the two. For example, how
does the performance of one school across town affect
another school with regards to consequences to the school
district? Assume that a school is closed due to earthquake
damage (Figure 2, page 40). In this example, the students
are required to go to another school; however, that school
is too small to handle the increased student population.
Consequently, the school splits classes and holds some on
Saturdays. Further, how does the school district coordinate
with the local Department of Transportation to address
adjusting school operations based on changes in traffic
pattern demands?
There is a need to enhance PBSD to support integration
across systems and sectors beyond prioritization by risk
categories. For example, allowing multiple systems to
provide feedback to other potentially impacted systems
during the design or assessment process enhances risk
assessments and associated decision metrics.
JANUARY 2022 39
evaluates the performance of a system
with regards to its impact on the per-
formance of a more extensive network
of building and lifeline infrastructure
systems and sectors. RBSD is thus a
potential mechanism to evaluate impacts
on community resilience. With that said,
there may be conditions when the per-
formance of a system does not impact
community resilience, and the prioritiza-
tion of network systems must be made
at the community level. For example,
should a building housing a large con-
struction material retailer be designed Figure 2. Example depiction of consequence decision-making based on PBSD interaction between multiple
as an ordinary building if downtime can associated buildings within an organization.
hinder the recovery progress of the resi-
dential market it serves? economic impacts, to list a few. However, an aspect of resilience that
PBSD can be used to estimate whether a design is highly likely to be is more challenging to quantify is its impact on society.
functional after an earthquake (e.g., sustains less damage). In so doing, The engineering community must be able to communicate risk expo-
the system will contribute to the community’s resilience. PBSD can sure to shareholders and stakeholders. The performance of a building
be augmented to include the impact of utilities and services needed must be able to address the welfare of its occupants or the public that
for the system to regain function and operations, but it is still focused use the services provided to progress. It is straightforward with PBSD
on a system. RBSD can employ PBSD and incorporate prioritized to address physical damage and downtime of the physical structure as
community resilience concepts such as addressing impacts to the a primary indicator of performance. The losses from consequences on
transportation network and, in turn, how that system may impact society such as mental and physiological health, displacement, inter-
other systems and services. Essentially, RBSD can be envisioned as a ruptions to education, work, childcare, and community services play
series of nodal enhanced PBSDs within a network communicating a key factor in estimating the holistic performance needed in RBSD.
with each other.
RBSD must also address compounding consequences from coinci-
dental hazards and/or sequential hazards and the societal responses to
Conclusion
them. In this context, coincidental hazards are one or more hazards This article discussed several future concepts to advance PBSD. These
unrelated to the earthquake hazard that may occur within the same concepts can be somewhat aspirational but nonetheless outline the
response and recovery period. Sequential hazards are one or more needs for progress that, when integrated, build upon each other.
secondary hazards that directly result from the earthquake that may PBSD is not a tool strictly used to circumvent prescriptive building
occur within the same response and recovery period. code provisions or save upfront construction costs, though this has
A metric for earthquake resilience is challenging to define, beyond been a result. Instead, PBSD provides a rational estimate of design
qualitative characteristics – having the ability to withstand, respond performance in a future earthquake. It must also be used to understand
to, and recover from an earthquake and its consequences, and not the associated risks that such a design may pose to the community it
just one earthquake. Moreover, quantitative assessment of resilience serves. Unfortunately, decision-makers generally only see part of the
can only be measured after the impact on a network of systems from picture. Absent appropriate financial incentives, public and private
an earthquake is known because response and recovery are time- organizations tend to invest in measures that they believe protect
dependent functions without pre-defined timelines. Therefore, the their economic welfare, not necessarily those that augment the com-
subsequent resilience score (for the next earthquake) is a function munity’s wellbeing.
of the measurable change in resilience based on mitigation efforts, With the current trend towards defining and implement-
repair or improvements, availability of construction resources, and ing resilience measures and guidance, it is difficult to continue
along the path where new and existing buildings can be
treated differently. In the eyes of the public, there is no dif-
ference in the function and operations of either. It could be
ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org
EN
ER
?
40 STRUCTURE magazine
structural ANALYSIS
Two-Stage Analysis Loophole
By Steven Shepherd, S.E., and James McDonald, S.E.
JANUARY 2022 41
Changes to the two-stage analysis procedure proposed for ASCE applies limitations, penalties, and other requirements to structures
7-22 clarify the application of the ASCE 7-16 provisions but do with torsional and extreme torsional irregularities, but the two-stage
not result in significant changes to the procedure or the criteria to analysis allows the upper portion of a building to potentially avoid
qualify for its use. these requirements even if it is significantly affected by an extreme
While it is necessary to stipulate quantification of the relative stiff- torsional irregularity in the base. The code requirements associated
ness and period, leaving these as the only criteria to qualify for the with a torsional irregularity include the following:
simplifying procedure expands eligibility beyond the original intent • A 25% increase in demands for collectors, collector connections,
to simplify the design of podium construction. In this case, the engi- and connections of diaphragms to vertical elements of the seis-
neering quest to quantify the dynamic nature of the podium obscures mic force-resisting system for buildings in SDC D through F
the requirement rather than clarifying it. • The structure must be analyzed using a 3-D model
The loosely defined relative stiffness requirement between the upper • The effects of accidental torsion must be amplified per
and lower portions and the absence of a requirement specifying the Section 12.8.4.3
lower portion to provide a fixed base to the upper portion throw open • Structures in SDC D through F exceeding 2 stories must
the gates for misapplication of the two-stage provisions. The following be analyzed using a dynamic analysis
sections demonstrate some examples of potential misapplications. • In addition to the above requirements, an extreme torsional
Although this article elucidates a flaw in the provisions, a call to irregularity also requires a 30% increase in the horizontal seis-
action requires the specter of significant consequences – remedied mic forces through a redundancy factor, ρ, of 1.3 for buildings
with the analysis of an example building. in SDC D through F
42 STRUCTURE magazine
However, the procedure was written in a way that can be applied to
almost any building type if the building is tall enough.
The two-stage analysis approach is unnecessary for most structures
without light framing as part of the primary lateral load path. This
is predicated on the fact that full-building finite-element modeling
of these building types is already common practice and is not made
significantly more difficult by the presence of a podium. However, this
procedure can be used for such buildings to reduce seismic demands
from what the code intends.
Buildings with extreme torsional irregularities at their base induce
a torsional response in the upper portion of the structure, even if the
upper portion of the structure does not have an extreme torsional
irregularity. As currently presented in ASCE 7-16 and proposed for
ASCE 7-22, the two-stage analysis allows the designer to ignore
torsional effects from the base when designing the upper portion of
Figure 3. Example building's base.
the structure. It also allows the designer to bypass the limitations,
scaled per ASCE 7-16, Section 12.9.1.4, to match the base shear penalties, and other requirements associated with this irregularity
obtained from an ELF analysis. Effects of accidental torsion are captured when designing the upper portion of the structure.
per Section 12.9.1.5 by modeling a center of mass eccentricity in the One of the proposed changes to the two-stage analysis procedure
dynamic analysis equal to 5% of the diaphragm length. for ASCE 7-22 clarifies how height limits are to be interpreted for
The shear force in one of the second story core shear walls is exam- the procedure but also opens the door for misuse of the procedure
ined to compare the response of the upper portion using a two-stage to increase height limits for certain building types.
analysis to the response from a combined building model, with the The authors recommend modifying the provisions for the two-stage
following observations: analysis procedure to accomplish the following:
• The upper portion building response computed using the two- • Limit the procedure so that it can only be applied to light-
stage analysis is not affected by horizontal directional coupling frame structures over concrete or masonry bases.
(HDC) and has a redundancy factor, ρ, of 1.0. • Impose a maximum period on the base model with the mass of
• The response from the coupled analysis, omitting effects of HDC the upper portion lumped at the top of the lower portion. The
and ρ, is 23% greater than that obtained from the two-stage period should be short enough to approximate a rigid dynamic
analysis. This increases to 34% when adding in HDC effects using response and should not be a relative requirement based on the
the 100-30 combination rule and increases to 74% when also period of the upper portion.
including the ρ of 1.3 required for the coupled analysis. • Require the designer to account for the effects of torsional
• Drifts and displacements throughout the structure increased response in the base when designing the upper portion of
similarly to the shear wall shear demand. the structure, including rotational accelerations, horizontal
• For this example, ASCE 7-16, Table 12.6-1 requires an response coupling, and other code requirements associated
RSA for the upper portion due to the torsional irregularity. with torsional and extreme torsional irregularities.
Performing a two-stage analysis for this building does not sig- • If the recommendation to limit the procedure to light frame
nificantly affect the effort required to analyze the building. upper portions is not implemented, require the height limits
of Table 12.2-1 to be measured to the base of the full structure
rather than the base of the upper portion.
Discussion • Revise the code commentary to express the intent of a two-
The coupled analysis produced significantly greater responses than the stage analysis.
two-stage analysis for this building. Prima facie, the authors accept
the coupled analysis as being more reflective of the code intent. If
such a building were designed using the two-stage analysis and the
Closing
framing designed near the code limit states, the limit states would The building code is a minimum standard for safety and should not
be exceeded based on an analysis of the same building subjected to leave room for interpretations that fail to achieve the code-intended
the coupled analysis. Hence, the building, possibly code-compliant level of safety. Hoping that conventional interpretations, or what
with the two-stage analysis, would not provide the level of safety some would consider reasonable judgment, covers engineering flaws
intended by the code. in the code is professional abdication. Or, returning to the
Rorschach analogy, why would we create an inkblot that
one person could interpret vastly different than another?■
Conclusions and Recommendations
The two-stage analysis procedure was developed to simplify the design References are included in the PDF version of
of light-frame residential buildings on top of one or two-story con- the online article at STRUCTUREmag.org
crete or masonry podiums. This simplification was needed because a
coupled dynamic analysis of this building type has historically been Steven Shepherd is a Senior Consulting Engineer at Simpson Gumpertz &
impractical and, due to the significantly heavier base level, a coupled Heger Inc. in Newport Beach ([email protected]).
ELF analysis can significantly overestimate the story shears in the
James McDonald in a Principal at Simpson Gumpertz & Heger Inc. in
upper levels. In most cases, the two-stage analysis procedure produces
Newport Beach ([email protected]).
reasonable, potentially conservative results for this building type.
JANUARY 2022 43
BUILD CONCRETE CORES
FASTER, STRAIGHTER,
AND WITH LESS LABOR
Cast-in-place concrete stair and elevator cores are
ideal for strength, fire safety and economy. But
formwork, tolerance and labor issues often add
time and costs to construction projects.
Engineered to receive
concrete quickly and easily.
engineer's NOTEBOOK
The Hidden Cost of Copy and Paste
Part 2
By Jason McCool, P.E.
46 STRUCTURE magazine
However, the fates were on his side this time, and he straightened
the bent struts immediately and replaced them in the spring. He
wrote, “in order to guard against similar trouble in the future, heavy
concrete walls were built around the abutments, extending as far out
in front as possible, and the first two panels of laterals in the plane of
the lower chord on each side of the river were changed from latticed
struts to plate-webbed struts.”
The bridge was not threatened again until January 25, 1938, forty
years later, when a 5-day January thaw and major windstorm off Lake
Erie again jammed the river gorge below the falls with ice. The ice rose
to over 50 feet above the river’s mean water level and started to move
at glacial speed down the river. Despite Buck’s 1899 reinforcement, the
ice crumpled the main arch members of the bridge near the skewbacks
resulting in the bridge being closed at 9:15 on the 28th. The bridge,
surprisingly, held together for another day, and, at 4:20 PM on the
29th, the bridge collapsed into the Niagara River. A reporter for the
Evening Review wrote of the failure in the following way,
“Belch may seem a strange term to attach to the death of the long,
slim span, yet that was the sound that thundered up to my ears. It
was as though the great spidery giant was ridding itself of the terrible
pain which had crept up into its bowels, bowels that were struts, spars,
rivets, and all those structural bits that went into its creation. The
sound was too robust for a sigh, more startling than a cry. And death
flicked his grim harp in the echo which fled frantically up and down
the cliffs, finally smothered in the spume of flying snow that jerked
into the air as the shaking sections crashed into the ice.
Those two sections at the ends slowly sloped downward in a shower
of powdery snow, dirt, and tumbling rock. Then the two sections
inside these began to rise as though in a frantic effort to escape that
mangling death below, attempting to soar skyward. It was a last futile
gesture. Slowly – it seemed minutes though it was but split seconds Bridge after the collapse.
– the giant folded into the masses of ice. The result was a giant “W”
for Winter resting on the river ice.” Pieces of the wooden deck were shot into the air from the center of the
Fortunately, the early warning kept people off the bridge, and there wreck as the end came. Loud cracking noises were heard as the bridge
were no fatalities. Since there was no loss of life, there was no Coroner’s twisted and turned with the ice breaking up beneath it. Soon there
Inquest to look into the failure. With that, was nothing left but floating fragments of
over forty years after its opening and thirty the flooring, which were carried down the
years after Buck died, the longest arch span river. It was a spectacular funeral, in keeping
in the world at the time of its construction with the dramatic way in which the bridge
disappeared. The bridge had served its func- In short, he, like the engineers came to its end.”
tion well but had fallen prey to the severe of today, designed for what he The bridge was replaced in 1941 with
weather typical around the Great Lakes. another steel arch bridge designed by
The owners of the bridge immediately considered a worst-case scenario. Waddell and Hardesty. It is located about
blasted it into three parts as it lay on the Unfortunately, however, a unique set 400 feet downstream from Buck’s Bridge
ice. After attempts to salvage the steel, of weather events created an even and is a hingeless steel box arch with a span
they found that they could not remove of 950 feet. It, like its predecessor, is called
any portion of it. So it sat there until, on worst-case scenario, and the bridge the Honeymoon or Rainbow Bridge.
April 12 at 7:10 AM, the ice let loose and failed after a life of 40 years. It may be suggested that Buck should have
the end span dropped into the water to be known the ice could rise this high in the
followed by the sinking of half of the arch area of his arch abutments. He, however,
on the American side. On the following relied upon historical information to place
day, at 3:25 PM, the remaining section them above any danger of the ice taking
of the bridge began to move down the out the bridge. In short, he, like the engi-
river on the ice. As it moved, the “huge ice floe turned pointing the neers of today, designed for what he considered a worst-case scenario.
bridge section like the prow of a freighter as it sailed down the river Unfortunately, however, a unique set of weather events cre-
with the current.” It was described as follows: ated an even worst-case scenario, and the bridge failed after
“It was a most unusual funeral procession. The spectators followed a life of 40 years.■
the progress of the bridge, running along the River Road to keep up
with the floating wreck. It continued down river on its icy bier for what Dr. Frank Griggs, Jr. specializes in the restoration of historic bridges, having
seemed an impossible distance for such a heavy weight until it reached restored many 19 t h Century cast and wrought iron bridges. He is now an
a point just opposite the foot of Otter Street, almost a mile from the Independent Consulting Engineer ([email protected]).
starting point. Here it sank at 4:05 PM.
JANUARY 2022 47
ANCHOR updates
Adhesives Technologies Corporation Hohmann & Barnard, Inc. The Masonry Society
Phone: 754-399-1057 Phone: 800-645-0616 Phone: 303-939-9700
Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]
Web: www.atcepoxy.com Web: h-b.com Web: masonrysociety.org
Product: ULTRABOND® Anchoring and Product: 2-SEAL Thermal Wing Nut Anchor Product: Webinars and Publications
Doweling Adhesives Description: An innovative, single screw veneer tie for Description: The Masonry Society is a not-for-
Description: America’s #1 structural adhesive metal stud construction. It features a dual-diameter profit, professional organization, dedicated to the
specialist offers four IBC compliant adhesives. barrel with factory-installed EPDM washers to seal both advancement of masonry knowledge. The Society
HS-1CC, the world’s strongest anchoring epoxy. the face of the insulation and the air/vapor barrier, and develops standards, guides, seminars, webinars, and
EPX-3CC high-performance epoxy for high-volume unique Thermal Wings designed to decrease thermal other design resources.
applications. HYB-2CC hybrid, cures fast in hot and transfer through rigid insulation.
cold temperatures. ACRYL-8CC cures fast with a
very broad application temperature range. ATC is a
Meridian Adhesives Group Company.
IES, Inc. Trimble
Phone: 800-707-0816 Phone: 678-737-7379
Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]
Web: www.iesweb.com Web: www.tekla.com/us
ASDIP Structural Software Product: VAConnect Product: Tekla Tedds
Phone: 407-284-9202 Description: Design base plates by AISC Design Description: Automating your every day structural
Email: [email protected] Guide #1 and anchorage calculations for ACI 318. designs, the Tekla Tedds’ library includes anchor bolt
Web: www.asdipsoft.com Both, independently, are difficult by hand! With design per ACI 318 Appendix D. The calculation
Product: ASDIP STEEL VAConnect you will get the job done quickly and includes comprehensive checks for tensile and shear
Description: An advanced software for the accurately. Works alone or with IES VisualAnalysis. failure of anchors and is available as part of a free trial
design of steel members and connections, by visiting the website.
such as composite/non-composite beams, steel
columns, base plates, anchoring to concrete, Product: Tekla Structures
LNA Solutions, Inc.
shear connections, and moment connections, per Description: An Open BIM modeling software that
Phone: 888-724-2323
the latest design codes. ASDIP STEEL comes can model all types of anchors required to create a
Email: [email protected]
with 5 intuitive modules that will substantially 100% constructible 3-D model. Anchors can be created
Web: www.LNAsolutions.com
simplify time-consuming calculations for your inside the software or imported directly from vendors
Product: Box Bolt®
structural designs. that provide 3-D CAD files of their products.
Description: A blind bolt fastener that is ICC
ESR-3217 approved for seismic design. It connects
tube steel or where access is restricted to one side of
structural steel and is used with rectangular, square, or
circular sections. Provides fast, easy installation. IAS Williams Form Engineering Corp.
DEWALT™ Anchors and Fasteners certification guarantees load value.
Phone: 800-524-3244 Phone: 616-866-0815
Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]
Web: http://anchors.dewalt.com/anchors Web: www.williamsform.com
Product: CCU+ Critical Connection Undercut™ Product: Anchor Systems
Description: DEWALT Anchors and Fasteners Description: Williams Form Engineering Corporation
launches a new heavy-duty concrete anchor for
Simpson Strong-Tie® has been providing threaded steel bars and accessories
Phone: 800-999-5099 for rock anchors, soil anchors, high capacity concrete
use in critical applications where a robust anchor
Email: [email protected] anchors, micropiles, tie rods, tiebacks, strand anchors,
with low displacement is necessary. The CCU+
Web: www.strongtie.com hollow bar anchors, post tensioning systems, and
Critical Connection Undercut is ICC-ES qualified
Product: High Wind-Resistant Construction concrete forming hardware systems in the construction
under ESR-4810 for use in cracked and uncracked
Application Guide industry for over 95 years.
concrete. The anchors are Made in the USA.
Description: This guide discusses the critical
elements of high wind-resistant construction and
helps you locate the connectors and fasteners
you need for designing in high-wind areas. It
also includes information on the effects of wind,
ENERCALC, Inc.
Phone: 800-424-2252
Email: [email protected]
ENERCALC
corrosion, and uplift to help ensure safe, strong
structures.
Not listed?
Web: https://enercalc.com Our monthly 2022
Product: ENERCALC Structural
Engineering Library
SkyCiv Resource Guide forms
Description: ENERCALC Structural Engineering
Phone: 800-838-0899
Library's new modules include Flitch Plated Wood
Email: [email protected]
are now available
Beam and Steel Base Plate by FEM. Both modules
Web: skyciv.com on our website.
help designers refine design loads on anchor
Product: Reinforced Concrete Design Software
rods, common bolts, and framing anchors. Our
subscriptions now provide both installed and cloud
Description: Member Design for ACI 318, AS 3600,
BS 8110, CSA A23, and EN 2. All with powerful,
STRUCTUREmag.org
use, plus 3-D FEM and earth retention modules.
clean reporting.
48 STRUCTURE magazine
INSIGHTS
Building Safety Assessments Following
the Sparta Earthquake
By Colby Baker, P.E.
50 STRUCTURE magazine
federal spending is proposed to be funded by increasing real estate Keep the focus
taxes, critics argue that the infrastructure plans will depress commercial
real estate. This snag will likely be ironed out. Much federal funding on higher return,
will trickle down as state and local government projects. This presents
excellent opportunities for minority, disabled, and woman-owned lower risk ventures.
businesses and companies who make meaningful actions toward
diversity, equity, and inclusion in staffing and teaming. Build from your
Sustainability and resiliency design will continue to rise due to
public policy, pressure from insurers, and severe weather events. For core strengths.
owners using institutional capital or those who are publicly traded,
the adoption of ESG policies – environment, social, and governance
standards – will increasingly demand that engineering companies
help owners reduce their carbon footprint, use less water and energy,
and avoid red-listed materials. Mary Corley of Rosen Consulting
Group underscored the increasing influence of ESG policies on the
real estate market.
As with retail, technology is accelerating significant changes across
market sectors. Corley noted that remote work has become a significant
force in the real estate strategies of many companies, causing them
to rethink how much physical space they really need. Now, a change • Invest in technologies that advance the disciplines you practice.
management outlook and approach comes before any real estate Think about what will be automated ten years from now, so
decision. Can a company thrive by relying on technology? Smart you can position yourself as a market leader. Be aware that
companies are focusing first on achieving the kinds of behaviors at these will be areas where nontraditional competitors may enter,
work that will reach their desired outcomes. For many, a physical yet this also presents partnership opportunities.
presence will be an option, not a given. • Likewise, get ahead of other industry trends like building
repurposing, net-zero energy and water, design/build, modular-
ization, and ESG/CSR policies. Set the standard, and you may
Questions to Ask be rewarded with better fees and less competition. Remember
The design and construction market will reach equilibrium as the that creativity never gets replaced.
pandemic subsides, but any disruptive event at this scale leaves lasting • If a service or market sector you have relied on will not return
marks, bringing new market demands and ways of working. Make to previous levels, scale back or eliminate it. As hard as it can
your business planning more resilient by taking advantage of the be, do not let sunk costs influence your decisions.
positive aspects of these disruptions. As you develop your plans and • Develop future leaders through mentoring and increasing
budgets, probe whether you are adequately assessing the inherent accountability for company performance.
risks and opportunities in the markets and regions you work in: • Always practice financial resilience. Create a strong safety net,
• What fundamental changes have occurred? streamline operations and expenses, forecast realisti-
• What are the new, positive changes that we should leverage? cally, and build a business development culture across
• How have these changes affected our clientele, and how can we your company.■
help them position to succeed?
• Who should be our new target clients moving forward?
Kacey Clagett ([email protected]) and Tiany
• How can we leverage technology not just to streamline opera-
Galaskas ([email protected]) are Principals of
tions but to advance the discipline of engineering and make us
Appleseed Strategy.
more desirable?
JANUARY 2022 51
NCSEANCSEA News
National Council of Structural Engineers Associations
Congratulations to the 2021 NCSEA Special Awards Honorees
The NCSEA Special Awards are bestowed on individuals who exemplify outstanding service and commitment to the association and to the
structural engineering field. These dedicated servants, committed volunteers, and industry leaders will be recognized and applauded at the
Awards Celebration on Wednesday, February 16, at the NCSEA Structural Engineering Summit. Join us in celebrating this year’s honorees!
52 STRUCTURE magazine
News from the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations
Susan Ann “Susie” Jorgensen Presidential Leadership Award – INAUGURAL YEAR
The Susan Ann “Susie” Jorgensen Presidential Leadership Award is presented to an individual who has demonstrated exceptional leadership potential
through their activities within NCSEA and/or their SEA (even if they did not serve in a formal leadership role). The award is to be bestowed on
candidates who embody Susan’s passion, vision, and legacy of leadership, and it is intended to celebrate increased participation of emerging leaders
and encourage recipients to engage (or continue to engage) in formal leadership.
Katharine (Katie) A. Courtright, P.E., is a project engineer for JVA, Inc. in Denver, Colorado. She joined the Colorado
SEA in 2012 as a student member when she was selected to receive a SEAC Scholarship. During college, Katie served as
the SEAC Young Member Group Collegiate Liaison for the Colorado School of Mines. Upon graduation in 2014, she
joined the Young Member Committee, becoming co-chair in 2016 and chair in 2017. Her service on the YMG Committee
has included coordination of the annual SE/PE Study Group Kick-offs and AASHTO Review Sessions, as well as techni-
cal presentations, mentoring, and outreach events. Katie has been instrumental in encouraging student involvement in
SEAC’s annual Gingerbread Bridge Competition. She is currently serving on the newly formed SEAC SE3 Committee.
THANK YOU TO
OUR SPONSORS
January 6, 13, 20 and 27; February 3 and 10 SEAOC and NCSEA Seismic Connections Design Series
January 11 Business Development Moving Forward
January 18 The Structural Engineer's Role in Getting to Net Zero
February 8 Significant Structural Changes to the 2021 International Building Code
February 22 Structural Engineering Considerations for Mid-Rise, Light Wood Frame Buildings
follow @NCSEA on social media for the latest news & events!
JANUARY 2022 53
SEI Update
Learning / Networking
Happy New Year from the SEI Board and Staff!
Looking forward to all that’s new in 2022
SEI launches a new quarterly “FAQ on ASCE Standards:
What you always wanted to ask” in this issue (see page
34). In addition, look for a new peer-to-peer forum on
standards starting soon on ASCE Collaborate and a
new virtual experience on ASCE’s Future World Vision
during Engineers Week in February.
Join us for a new virtual 5-part SEI Standards series
on ASCE 7-22 that kicks off with the first session (free)
February 10 on the Overview & Changes for ASCE 7-22. The SEI SE2050 database and commitment program continues to expand and
provide educational information to firms to achieve projects’ globally stated goal of net-zero carbon by 2050. Collaborative Reporting for
Safer Structures – CROSS-US – will be presented at three major conferences. We look forward to getting back to in-person conferences and
seeing many of you at Structures Congress April 20-23 in Atlanta and ETS October 2-6 in Orlando!
SEI Online
SEI Events
www.asce.org/SEIEvents
The 2022 SEI Standards Series will preview ASCE 7-22 as a 5-part series that reviews the changes from ASCE 7-16. This unique program
includes a dialogue between the leaders and experts who develop ASCE 7 and a detailed technical presentation on the specific changes and
three main hazards - Seismic, Wind & Tornado, and Snow/Rain. In addition, information will be provided on the ASCE 7 Digital Products/
Hazard Tool. Attendees are encouraged to join the discussion for the extensive live Q&A portion of the session.
• February 10, 2022: ASCE 7-22 Overview & Changes (FREE)
• May 12, 2022: ASCE 7-22 Seismic
• June 9, 2022: ASCE 7-22 Wind & Tornado
• July 14, 2022: ASCE 7-22 Snow/Rain
• September 8, 2022: How & Why to Use ASCE 7-22 in Your Practice
Learn more and register https://collaborate.asce.org/integratedstructures/sei-standards
Electrical Transmission and Substation Structures Conference – October 2-6, 2022, in Orlando
Apply for a student scholarship to participate at www.etsconference.org.
Membership
NEW – Access your SEI Member Certificate Online
At www.asce.org, log in at the upper right of the page and select Manage My Account. You can renew, update your contact info, professional
interests, preferences, bio, education/license details, and download your self-service SEI member certificate now available.
Errata SEI Standards Supplements and Errata including ASCE 7. See www.asce.org/SEI.
To submit errata, contact [email protected].
JANUARY 2022 55
CASE in Point
CASE Tools and Resources
What's New in CASE Publications
CASE has a variety of publications and tools to help firms deal with a wide variety of business scenarios. Whether your firm needs to establish
new procedures or simply update established programs, CASE has the tools you need!
This month, you can find updates to the following documents, including a Force Majeure clause developed due to the recent pandemic.
CASE Agreement #1 An Agreement for the Provision of Limited Professional Services ©
CASE Agreement #2 An Agreement Between Client and Structural Engineer of Record for Professional Services ©
CASE Agreement #3 An Agreement between Owner and Structural Engineer as Prime Design Professional ©
CASE Agreement #4 An Agreement between Client and Structural Engineer for Special Inspection Services ©
CASE Agreement #5 An Agreement Between Client and Specialty Structural Engineer for Professional Services ©
CASE Agreement #6 An Agreement Between Client and Structural Engineer for a Structural Condition Assessment ©
CASE Agreement #7 An Agreement for Structural Peer Review Services©
CASE Agreement #8 An Agreement Between Client and Structural Engineer for Forensic Engineering (Expert) Services©
CASE Agreement #9 An Agreement Between Structural Engineer of Record and Design Professional for Services©
CASE Agreement #10 An Agreement Between Structural Engineer of Record and Geotechnical Engineer of Record ©
CASE Agreement #11 An Agreement Between Structural Engineer of Record and Testing Laboratory©
56 STRUCTURE magazine
News of the Coalition of American Structural Engineers
UPCOMING EVENT
2022 ACEC Coalitions Winter Meeting – San Diego, CA, February 10-11, 2022
The Winter Meeting is open to all CASE members and is an excellent opportunity to
network with your peers and engage in meaningful dialog about the state of the industry.
Directly following the Coalitions Winter Meeting is the Small Firm Coalition (SFC)
Workshop, Small Firms and Human Resources – Developing the Workforce for the
Future; a workshop designed to address the HR Challenges of the small firm as we design
the workforce of tomorrow.
AGENDA
Thursday – February 10
1:30 pm – 3:00 pm CASE ExCom Meeting
3:30 pm – 5:00 pm CASE and CAMEE (Coalition of Mechanical and Electrical Engineers) Roundtable,
moderated by the Chairs of CASE and CAMEE
5:00 pm – 6:00 pm Coalitions Reception
Friday – February 11
8:30 am – 12:00 pm Educations Sessions – (PDH’s offered)
• Remote Monitoring using Today’s Technologies – How new remote sensing technologies are changing
the way civil engineers work.
• Navigating the Challenges of Distance Work – Managing legal, financial, and human resource activities
for out-of-state employees.
12:00 pm – 1:15 pm Lunch
1:30 pm – 5:00 pm CASE Committee Meetings
Contracts – develops and maintains contracts to assist practicing engineers with risk management.
Guidelines – develops and maintains national guidelines of practice for structural engineers.
Programs – develops program themes for conferences and sessions that enhance and highlight the structural
engineering profession.
Toolkit – develops and maintains the tools related to CASE’s Ten Foundations of Risk Management program.
1:30 pm – 5:00 pm Small Firm Coalition Workshop ($$ Paid Event) – (PDH’s offered)
• Small Firms and Human Resources – Developing the Workforce for the Future.
(This workshop continues Saturday morning, February 12, 2021.)
Registration is now open. To register, go to http://bit.do/coalition-winter-22.
Questions? Contact Michelle Kroeger at [email protected].
JANUARY 2022 57
SPOTLIGHT
Edmonton’s Stanley A. Milner Library
Creativity in Design and Execution
www.concrete.org