Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Credit:APA
SeismicDesignofLargeWood
PanelizedRoofDiaphragms
InHeavyWallBuildings
Copyright Materials
This presentation has been produced by John Lawson for the exclusive use of the
American Wood Council, yet ownership remains with John Lawson. Some photos and
diagrams credited to others have different ownerships and may have copyrights in
place and have been provided here for educational purposes only. All presentation
material produced and owned by John Lawson is protected by US and International
Copyright laws. Reproduction, distribution, display and use of the presentation
without written permission of John Lawson is prohibited.
6/9/2015
TheAmericanWoodCouncilisa
RegisteredProviderwithTheAmerican
InstituteofArchitectsContinuing
EducationSystems(AIA/CES),Provider
#50111237.
Credit(s)earnedoncompletionofthis
coursewillbereportedtoAIACESfor
AIAmembers.Certificatesof
CompletionforbothAIAmembersand
nonAIAmembersareavailableupon
request.
ThiscourseisregisteredwithAIACESfor
continuingprofessionaleducation.As
such,itdoesnotincludecontentthat
maybedeemedorconstruedtobean
approvalorendorsementbytheAIAof
anymaterialofconstructionorany
methodormannerof
handling,using,distributing,ordealing
inanymaterialorproduct.
Questionsrelatedtospecificmaterials,
methods,andserviceswillbeaddressed
attheconclusionofthispresentation.
CourseDescription
Thispresentationwillfocusontheengineereddesignoflarge
woodpanelizedroofdiaphragmsintiltupconcreteandmasonry
wallbuildings,withfocusondesignrequirementsforstrength,
stiffness,andproperdevelopmentandresistanceofwall
anchorageforces.Ahistoricalperspectiveofhowpastseismic
experiencewiththisbuildingtypehasinfluencedtoday'sbuilding
codeprovidesagoodperspectivefortheparticipanttoapplythe
currentprovisionsofASCE710,2012NDSand2008SDPWS.
Variousdesignillustrationsandexamplesofhighloadwood
structuralpaneldiaphragms,wallanchorage,subdiaphragms,
continuitycrossties,chordsandcollectorswillbeshown.
6/9/2015
Objectives
Uponcompletion,participantswillbebetterableto:
1. Identifythecharacteristicsofapanelizedwoodroof
diaphragm.
2. Applyrequirementsforwallanchorageforcesincluding
properdetailingfordistributionoftheseforcesintothe
diaphragm.
3. Utilizesubdiaphragms asatooltocreateanefficientloadpath
forwallanchorageforces.
4. Designwooddiaphragmsandtheirchordsandcollectorsfor
seismicforces.
Polling Question
1. Whatisyourprofession?
a) Architect
b) Engineer
c) CodeOfficial
d) BuildingDesigner
e) Other
6/9/2015
7
Source: APA The Engineered Wood Association
6/9/2015
APanelizedRoofStructure
Subpurlin
Purlin
Girder
9
15/32thickStructuralI
panelsaretypicalforbasic
roofloads(nosnow).
Plywood/OSB
35psfLive,45psfTotal
allowableloadcapacity
perIBCT.2304.7(5)
Hanger
Subpurlin
Bracing straps
Column Cap
Hanger
Hinge
AllWoodSystem
10
6/9/2015
11
Hangersalreadyattachedtoends
12
6/9/2015
13
2006 APA The Engineered Wood Association
14
2006 APA The Engineered Wood Association
6/9/2015
15
Source: APA The Engineered Wood Association
16
Source: APA The Engineered Wood Association
6/9/2015
17
Source: APA The Engineered Wood Association
18
Source: APA The Engineered Wood Association
6/9/2015
WoodNailers on
SteelJoistand
JoistGirders
HybridSystem
Source: Simpson Strong-Tie
19
Field-Ground
o Full length purlins, subpurlins, and sheathing
assembled on the ground
Erection
o Purlin and sub-purlins lifted
to roof as a panel
PhotocourtesyofWoodLamStructures,Inc.
20
10
6/9/2015
PhotocourtesyofPanelizedStructures,Inc.
21
PhotocourtesyofPanelizedStructures,Inc.
22
11
6/9/2015
23
PhotocourtesyofPanelizedStructures,Inc.
24
12
6/9/2015
PhotocourtesyofWoodLamStructures,Inc.
25
WoodStructuralPanel
With2xand3xwood
subpurlins
PhotocourtesyofPanelizedStructures,Inc.
26
13
6/9/2015
27
PhotocourtesyofPanelizedStructures,Inc.
28
PhotocourtesyofPanelizedStructures,Inc.
14
6/9/2015
Development of
Wall-to-Roof Anchorage
Design Provisions
29
CrossgrainBendingIssues
WallAnchorageDesignForce
EccentricityIssues
PilasterIssues
ContinuityTies
Subdiaphragms
30
15
6/9/2015
Cross-grain Bending
Issues
31
32
16
6/9/2015
1971SanFernandoEarthquake
33
Photo Credit: Los Angeles City Dept of Building & Safety
1971SanFernandoEarthquake
34
17
6/9/2015
1992LandersEarthquake
WallAnchorage
Improper
35
Photo Source: California Seismic Safety Commission
1992LandersEarthquake
WallAnchorage
Failure
Steeldeckdiaphragms:
Steeldecking
MasonryBlock
36
Photo Source: California Seismic Safety Commission
18
6/9/2015
1994NorthridgeEarthquake
37
Photo Source: Doc Nghiem
1994NorthridgeEarthquake
Inadequate wall anchorage
38
Photo Source: Doc Nghiem
19
6/9/2015
1994NorthridgeEarthquake
39
Photo Source: Doc Nghiem
1994NorthridgeEarthquake
40
Photo Source: Doc Nghiem
20
6/9/2015
1994NorthridgeEarthquake
41
Photo Source: EQE
Past Performance
2001NisquallyEarthquake
42
Photo Credit: Cascade Crest Consulting Engineers
21
6/9/2015
1994NorthridgeEarthquake
43
Photo Credit: Cascade Crest Consulting Engineers
1994NorthridgeEarthquake
44
PhotoSource:EERI
22
6/9/2015
1994NorthridgeEarthquake
Ledgersfailin
crossgrainbending
Nailspulledthrough
plywoodedge
45
Photo Source: Doc Nghiem
Pre1973UBC
46
23
6/9/2015
47
See manufacturers
recommendations for
embedment depth
Member width
per manufacturers
recommendations
48
24
6/9/2015
49
50
25
6/9/2015
51
52
26
6/9/2015
53
Polling Question
2. Whichofthefollowingcanbeusedtoprovide
wallanchoragetoawooddiaphragm:
a) Woodmembersincrossgrainbending
b) Woodmembersincrossgraintension
c) Toenails
d) Subpurlins
e) Nailsloadedinwithdrawal
54
27
6/9/2015
Wall Anchorage
Design Force
55
Fp 0.4 S DS k a I eW p
Notlessthan
Sec. 12.11.2.1
Similarforcelevelssince1997UBC
forSDCD+.
NewforSDCBandCinASCE710.
Fp 0.2k a I eW p
where
k a 1.0
Lf
100
ka neednotbe
greaterthan2.0
28
6/9/2015
40
Ka =1.4
Fp =0.56SDSIeWp
Linesofshearresistance
57
Ka =1.8
80
Fp =0.72SDSIeWp
58
29
6/9/2015
59
SourceofIllustration:WoodWorks
33
30
8thick
concrete
Fp 0.8S DS I eW p
Given: SDC=D
SDS =1.0g
Ie =1.0
80anchorspacing
332
8"
14,520 lbs
W p 150 pcf 8'
12
230
60
30
6/9/2015
Eccentricity Issues
61
62
31
6/9/2015
Ledger
Purlinor
Subpurlin
Plan
View
63
Moment=TieForcexeccentricity
M
Plan
View
Purlinor
Subpurlin
CombinedAxialTensionandBendingMoment
64
32
6/9/2015
ConcentricLoadingDesired
65
Pilaster
Issues
66
33
6/9/2015
Anchorage to Pilasters
1994NorthridgeEarthquake
67
67
Photo Source: Doc Nghiem
Anchorage to Pilasters
1994NorthridgeEarthquake
Loadfocusedatpilasters
68
Photo Source: Doc Nghiem
34
6/9/2015
Anchorage to Pilasters
1994NorthridgeEarthquake
69
Photo Courtesy of EERI
Anchorage to Pilasters
2014 Napa Earthquake
Inadequate pilaster anchorage
70
Photos Courtesy of Maryann Phipps
35
6/9/2015
Anchorage to Pilasters
2014 Napa EQ
Pilaster anchorage
71
Photo Courtesy of Maryann Phipps
Anchorage to Pilasters
2014 Napa Earthquake
Pilastersupport
failure
72
Photo Source: Abe Lynn, Degenkolb
36
6/9/2015
Anchorage to Pilasters
2014 Napa Earthquake
73
Photo Source: Josh Marrow
Anchorage to Pilasters
2014 Napa Earthquake
74
74
Photos Source: Abe Lynn, Degenkolb
37
6/9/2015
Anchorage to Pilasters
ASCE 7-10
75
Anchorage to Pilasters
Pilasters tributary area for anchorage load
Repetitive
RoofAnchorage
Parapet
Roof
Reaction?
Howmuchloadtravels
topilaster?
Floor
Pilaster
76
38
6/9/2015
Anchorage to Pilasters
Yield Line Theory
(BorrowedfromTwowaySlabs)
77
Anchorage to Pilasters
Pilasters tributary area for anchorage load
Repetitive
RoofAnchorage
Equal
Parapet
Roof
Equal
Equal
Equal
Equal
Floor
Pilaster
78
39
6/9/2015
Anchorage to Pilasters
Pilasters tributary area for anchorage load
Repetitive
RoofAnchorage
Equal
Parapet
Roof
Equal
Equal
Equal
Equal
Floor
Pilaster
79
Anchorage to Pilasters
Wall anchorage force focused on Pilaster
Parapet
Roof
Fp
Fp 0.4k a S DS I eW p
Pilaster
Floor
80
40
6/9/2015
Polling Question
3. Wallanchorageatpilasters
a) resultsfromauniformwallload
b) attractsmoreloadfromthewall
c) causeseccentricloading
d) Isnotallowedpercode
e) hasnoeffect
81
Continuity Ties
82
41
6/9/2015
Continuity Ties
83
PhotoCredit: DocNghiem
Continuity Ties
1994 Northridge Earthquake
Inadequate wall anchorage
Thediaphragmsheathing
intensionisnotan
effectivecontinuitytie.
Crossgraintension
84
Photo Source: Doc Nghiem
42
6/9/2015
Continuity Ties
1994NorthridgeEarthquake
85
Photo Source: Doc Nghiem
Steel Element
Issues
86
43
6/9/2015
1994NorthridgeEarthquake
Netsectionrupture.
Limitedabilitytoyield
PhotoSource:DocNghiem
87
88
44
6/9/2015
Steel Elements
Steel elements need an additional 1.4 load factor
(Sec. 12.11.2.2.2)
Wood Elements
No additional load
factors needed for wood
elements, including
bolts, screws and nails.
89
Continuity Ties
90
45
6/9/2015
Continuity Ties
91
Continuity Ties
92
46
6/9/2015
Continuity Ties
93
94
Source: APA The Engineered Wood Association
47
6/9/2015
Continuity Ties
95
PhotoCredit: JohnLawsonSE
Continuity Ties
96
PhotoCredit: JohnLawsonSE
48
6/9/2015
Continuity Ties
SourceofIllustration:WoodWorks
97
Continuity Ties
Force same as wall anchorage
Fp 0.4 S DS k a I eW p
98
49
6/9/2015
Continuity Ties
99
Continuity Ties
purlin
100
50
6/9/2015
Continuity Ties
101
Subdiaphragm Design
102
51
6/9/2015
Subdiaphragm Design
Subdiaphragm isaportionofalargerwood
diaphragmdesignedtoanchorandtransfer
local[wall]forcestoprimarydiaphragm
strutsandthemaindiaphragm
Theiruseispermittedunder
ASCE710Sec.12.11.2.2.1
(SDCCF)
103
Subdiaphragm Design
104
52
6/9/2015
Subdiaphragm Design
Subdiaphragm Typ.
Continuity Ties
SourceofIllustration:WoodWorks
105
Subdiaphragm Design
A part of the Wall Anchorage System
Thus same force:
Fp 0.4 S DS k a I eW p
106
53
6/9/2015
Subdiaphragm Design
The maximum length-to-width ratio of the
structural subdiaphragm shall be 2 to 1.
(ASCE 7-10 12.11.2.2.1)
Fp
Subdiaphragm chords
ContinuityTie
107
SourceofIllustration:WoodWorks
Continuity Tie
Connections
108
SourceofIllustration:WoodWorks
54
6/9/2015
Fp 0.4 S DS k a I eW p
109
Continuity Tie
Connections
110
SourceofIllustration:WoodWorks
55
6/9/2015
111
HingeConnector
Notebolt
locationsin
verticalslots
SeismicContinuityTie
HingeConnectorwithtiecapacity
112
56
6/9/2015
113
1.1
SeismicCoefficient(Strength)
1
0.9
Wallties&
crosstiesreqd.
Nowoodcrossgrain
bending
0.8
0.7
Subdiaphragms
Concentricallyloaded&
Specialpilastersrules
Steelelements
Wood,Conc.,Masonry
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Zone4
SDS=1.0
SD1=0.6
114
UBC/IBCEdition
WallAnchorageForces(StrengthLevel)
JohnLawsonSE
57
6/9/2015
Polling Question
4. Whichoneofthefollowingisnot aspecial
considerationforwallanchorage?
a) 1.4xmoredesignforceatwoodelements
b) Momentsateccentricconnections
c) Tiescontinuousacrossbuilding
d) Higherloadsatpilasters
e) Subdiaphragms permitted
115
Questions?
116
58
6/9/2015
117
East/West
Seismic Loading
WoodStructuralPanelDiaphragm
200ft
9TiltupConcreteWalls
33topofwall
30topofroof
400ft
25
TYP.
118
59
6/9/2015
480
480
480
480
480
480
560
500
500
500
500
560
2x4DF#2subpurlins
at24o.c.
119
15/32StructuralI OSB
withstaggeredlayout
9ConcreteWallPanels,typ.
Purlinsat8fto.c.
Shear Nailing
Chords and Collectors
Irregularity Considerations
Diaphragm Deflections
Deformation Compatibility
Questions
120
60
6/9/2015
Shear Nailing
121
F px
F
ix
n
w
ix
North/South
Seismic Loading
w px
FROOF
Fpx
Fp max 0.4S DS I e w px
Fp min 0.2S DS I e w px
200ft
33topofwall
30topofroof
400ft
25
9TiltupConcreteWalls
TYP.
122
61
6/9/2015
400
200
1
wEW = 0.25wp
wNS = 0.25wp
R 4,
S DS 1.0
123
124
124
62
6/9/2015
125
15/32Struct I
w/10dnails
(0.148dia)
126
Source: SDPWS courtesy of AWC
6/6o.c.
320plf
4/6o.c.
425plf
(ASD)
(ASD)
2
1
2xframing 2xframing
2/4o.c.
640plf(ASD)
3
2xframing
2/3o.c.
820plf
(ASD)
4
3xframing
63
6/9/2015
ASDvaluesareNominal
dividedby2
15/32Struct I
w/10dnails(0.148)
with4xframing
2linesof
2/4o.c.
1005plf(ASD)
2linesof
2/3o.c.
1290plf (ASD)
5
4xframing
6
4xframing
127
Source: SDPWS courtesy of AWC
1157PLF
ASD
972
417
602
787
278
417
278
602
972
ASD
1157PLF
1
6
128
787
(Unfactored)
64
6/9/2015
129
North/South Loads
10dat6,6,12
10dat2,3,12w/3xframing
10dat4,6,12
2linesof10dat2,4,12w/4xframing
10dat2,4,12
2linesof10dat2,3,12w/4xframing
J
32
32
32
32
24
96
24
32
32
32
32
20
1
160
20
130
10dat6,6,12
10dat2,3,12w/3xframing
10dat4,6,12
2linesof10dat2,4,12w/4xframing
10dat2,4,12
2linesof10dat2,3,12w/4xframing
65
6/9/2015
Chord Design
131
CHORD COMPRESSION
CHORD TENSION
132
66
6/9/2015
Collector Design
133
Collector Design
480
560
134
67
6/9/2015
North/South Loads
Collector Design
Lineoflateralresistance
Diaphragmsunitsheardiagram(plf)
Collector
Lineoflateralresistance
Lineoflateralresistance
v2
v1
135
North/South Loads
Collector Design
v1
v2
Collector
FCollector=(v1+v2)L
v2
136
68
6/9/2015
Collector Design
East/West Loads
Lineoflateralresistance
Lineoflateralresistance
Collector
v2
v1
Diaphragmsunitsheardiagram(plf)
137
Lineoflateralresistance
Collector Design
East/West Loads
Collector
v1
v2
v2
FCollector=(v1+v2)L
138
69
6/9/2015
Irregularity Considerations
139
560
480
480
480
480
480
480
560
480
560
500
500
500
500
500
2x4DF#2subpurlins
at24o.c.
140
15/32StructuralI OSB
withstaggeredlayout
9ConcreteWallPanels,typ.
Purlinsat8fto.c.
70
6/9/2015
560
480
480
480
480
480
560
480
560
480
500
500
500
500
500
SeismicDesignCategoriesD,E,F
141
500
500
480
480
480
480
480
L=296>0.15L
L=400
500
500
500
L=250
PlanIrregularityExists
142
71
6/9/2015
143
560
480
480
480
480
480
560
560
480 Collector
500
500
500
Collector
500
500
480
North/SouthLoading
and
East/WestLoading
144
72
6/9/2015
AnchorBoltingofledger:
Designfor25%moreshear
145
Collector
146
73
6/9/2015
Boltingofnailer:
Designfor25%moreshear
Collector
147
Emh =oQE
Collectorforceslikely
complywithexception
perASCESec.12.10.2.1
148
74
6/9/2015
Diaphragm Deflection
149
Diaphragm Deflection
Calculation Methods
2008 SDPWS
Deflection limits
150
75
6/9/2015
Diaphragm Deflection
Bending
5vL3
0.25vL X C
8 EAb 1000Ga
2b
Shear/Nail Slip
L = Length (ft)
b = Width (ft)
A = Area of Chord (in2)
v = Max Shear (lbs/ft)
(unfactored E or W)
Chord Slip
151
Diaphragm Deflection
5wL4
384 EI
Beam Analogy:
Bending:
L
W(unfactored)
76
6/9/2015
Diaphragm Deflection
Derivation:
bending
384 EI
384 EI
2 EI
4
Reaction
wL
vb
2
Convert:
L in feet
w in lbs/ft
2vb
L
Now substituting:
bending
45 2vb L3 45vbL3
2 EI
EI
153
Diaphragm Deflection
L
v
45vbL3
EI
Replace I in terms of A & b:
bending
Achord
I Ad 2 A 12 72 Ab 2
2
bending
45vbL3
5vL3 Matches code equations
E 72 Ab 2 8 EAb
154
77
6/9/2015
Diaphragm Deflection
Bending
5vL3
0.25vL X C
8 EAb 1000Ga
2b
Shear/Nail Slip
L = Length (ft)
b = Width (ft)
A = Area of Chord (in2)
v = Max Shear (lbs/ft)
(unfactored E or W)
Chord Slip
155
Diaphragm Deflection
Shear/Nail Slip:
156
78
6/9/2015
Diaphragm Deflection
Shear/Nail Slip: 0.25vL
1000Ga
Ga = Apparent shear stiffness (kips/inch)
157
Diaphragm Deflection
5vL3
0.25vL X C
8 EAb 1000Ga
2b
Bending
Shear/Nail Slip
L = Length (ft)
b = Width (ft)
A = Area of Chord (in2)
v = Max Shear (lbs/ft)
(unfactored E or W)
Chord Slip
158
79
6/9/2015
Diaphragm Deflection
Chord Slip:
2b
Diaphragm Deflection
Chord Slip:
2b
160
80
6/9/2015
Diaphragm Deflection
For seismic only, the actual deflection is inelastic.
e = , and needs to be increased.
elastic
M = (Cd e)/Ie
Maximum inelastic
seismic response
161
Diaphragm Deflection
Purpose of Limits
Avoid Impact with Adjacent Structures
Setback from Property Lines
Maintain Structural Integrity
Permissible deflection shall be that deflection that will
permit the diaphragm and any attached elements to
maintain their structural integrity and continue to
support their prescribed loads as determined by the
applicable building code or standard.
2008 SDPWS Sec. 4.2.1
162
81
6/9/2015
Deformation Compatibility
AnExample:
ReentrantCorners
163
Deformation Compatibility
480
480
480
480
560
480
Withoutacollector,
roofstructurewill
tearfromwallhere
Collector
560
500
500
500
500
500
480
164
Deflectedshape
withacollector
Deflectedshape
withoutacollector
82
6/9/2015
Deformation Compatibility
WallAnchorage
Failure
1992LandersEarthquake
Steeldecking
MasonryBlock
165
Photo Source: California Seismic Safety Commission
480
480
480
480
480
560
480
Forshortreentrant
corners,astrutisstill
neededtoforcethe
shortwalltorockthis
distance.
Strut
560
500
500
500
500
500
Deformation Compatibility
166
83
6/9/2015
Deformation Compatibility
Strut
Controlledrocking
requirescomplete
freedomofwalltorotate.
Strutshouldbeconservatively
designedfortheforce
requiredtorockthewall
includinganyadditional
restraintforces.
167
Deformation Compatibility
AnotherExample:
Hingingofwallbaseoutofplane
168
84
6/9/2015
Deformation Compatibility
Pilaster restraint against rotation
169
Deformation is exaggerated for illustration purposes
Deformation Compatibility
2014 Napa Earthquake
Pilaster restraint against rotation
170
Photo Courtesy of David McCormick
85
6/9/2015
Deformation Compatibility
2014 Napa Earthquake
Pilaster restraint against rotation
171
Photo Courtesy of David McCormick
Deformation Compatibility
ASCE 7-10
172
86
6/9/2015
Polling Question
5. Diaphragmdeflectionshouldbeconsideredto:
a) Determineifthesystemwillcontinueto
supportitsloads
b) Avoidimpactwithadjacentstructures
c) Maintainstructuralintegrity
d) Avoidcrossingpropertylines
e) Alloftheabove
173
Closing Comments
174
87
6/9/2015
Closing Comments
Building Code Provisions:
A reaction to past events.
175
Closing Comments
2015 Special Design Provisions
For Wind and Seismic (SDPWS)
Available as a free download from AWC
176
88
6/9/2015
Questions?
ThisconcludesTheAmericanInstituteofArchitectsContinuingEducation
SystemsCourse.
Foradditionalinformationoneducationalprogramsavailablefromthe
AmericanWoodCouncil.
info@awc.org
www.awc.org
177
89