®

STRUCTURE A Joint Publication of NCSEA | CASE | SEI

13th Annual NCSEA
Excellence in Structural
Engineering Awards

December
2010
Soils &
Foundations
With the changes to The Building Codes in 48 states, you need someone
in your corner you can count on to support and validate your specifying
decisions. Powers Fasteners has committed the necessary resources
to offer a comprehensive lineup of the most ICC-ES Code Listed
Products available. Call today (888) 745-CODE (2633) for an
appointment to learn more about
code compliance solutions,
or visit our website at
www.powers.com for
INVESTMENT IN TESTING
more information. WITH STATE-OF-THE-ART
ON SITE FACILITY

OUR COMMITMENT TO
QUALITY WITH ISO 9001
CERTIFICATION

PDA ANCHOR DESIGN INTERFACE DELIVERS

REAL TIME ANCHOR DESIGN SOLUTIONS

THE MOST ICC-ES

CODE LISTED
PRODUCTS
CONTINUING AVAILABLE
EDUCATION PROGRAM
FOR CREDITS WITH
LUNCH AND LEARN

ASK OUR
EXPERTS ABOUT
CODE COMPLIANT
ANCHORS

INSTALLATION TRAINING VIDEOS

AVAILABLE ONLINE

Congratulation
JOBSITE
PULL POWERS TRAINING to the 2010
TESTS VEHICLES PROVIDE ON
SITE DEMONSTRATIONS
Best Firm
AND TRAINING Winners!

Powers Fasteners, Inc. www.powers.com

2 Powers Lane P: (914) 235-6300
Brewster, NY 10509 F: (914) 576-6483
 Metal Wood Framer for Revit
Metal-Wood-Framing Software Now Available for
Autodesk Revit Architecture and Structure 2011

StrucSoft Solutions’ light gauge metal and wood framing

solution automates stud design and manufacturing in
Revit BIM environment

This program is suitable for

architects, engineers, estimators and builders

Highlights:
• Template/rules driven
• Auto-detect Revit walls, doors,
windows and openings
• Stud arrangement and panelizing
• Bearing beams and bracing
• Panel joints and kickers
• Curtain wall supports
• Sheathing and panel numbering
• Shop drawings and cut lists
• MEP clash detection and opening framing
• Simpson Strong-Tie connectors
• Link to Sizer WoodWorks interface
 SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS
National Council of Structural
Engineers Associations
Jeanne M. Vogelzang, JD, CAE
Executive Director
312-649-4600
ADVERTISEMENT – For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

execdir@ncsea.com

Council of American Structural Engineers

Heather Talbert
Coalitions Director
202-682-4377
htalbert@acec.org

Structural Engineering Institute

James A. Rossberg, P.E.
STRUCTURAL
Manager
ENGINEERING
INSTITUTE ASCE Engineering Programs
703-295-6195
sei@STRUCTUREmag.org

ADVERTISING ACCOUNT MANAGER

Interactive Sales Associates
Chuck Minor Dick Railton
Eastern Sales Western Sales
847-854-1666 951-587-2982
sales@STRUCTUREmag.org

EDITORIAL STAFF
Executive Editor Jeanne Vogelzang, JD, CAE
Faculty Positions in Structural Engineering execdir@ncsea.com

The Department of Civil Engineering and Geological Sciences at the Editor Christine M. Sloat, P.E.
publisher@STRUCTUREmag.org
University of Notre Dame (www.nd.edu/~cegeos/) invites applications
ADVERTISEMENT – For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

for faculty positions to complement the existing Structural Engineering Associate Editor Nikki Alger
group. Qualified candidates at all levels will be considered with hiring publisher@STRUCTUREmag.org
rank and tenure status commensurate with academic accomplishments. Graphic Designer Rob Fullmer
Successful candidates must hold a doctoral degree in an appropriate field graphics@STRUCTUREmag.org
and must demonstrate potential for high quality research and teaching. The department is seeking Web Developer William Radig
outstanding faculty members with a research focus on, but not limited to: bridge engineering and webmaster@STRUCTUREmag.org
infrastructure systems, high-performance and sustainable civil structures, reliability and performance
of structures under extreme loading, and foundation-structure interaction. Candidates for the STRUCTURE® (Volume 17, Number 12). ISSN 1536-
positions should be qualified to teach civil engineering courses, with a strong commitment to teaching 4283. Publications Agreement No. 40675118. Owned by
excellence at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. Each successful faculty candidate is expected the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations and
published in cooperation with CASE and SEI monthly by C3
to develop and sustain an externally funded research program and publish in leading scholarly Ink. The publication is distributed free of charge to members
journals. Applications should be submitted online at www.nd.edu/~struct as a single PDF with cover of NCSEA, CASE and SEI; the non-member subscription rate is
letter, detailed CV, statements of research and teaching, and names and contact information for three $65/yr domestic; $35/yr student; $125/yr foreign (including
references. Review of applications will start immediately and continue until the positions are filled. Canada). For change of address or duplicate copies, contact
your member organization(s). Any opinions expressed in
The University of Notre Dame is committed to diversity in education and employment, and women
STRUCTURE magazine are those of the author(s) and do not
and members of underrepresented minority groups are strongly encouraged to apply. necessarily reflect the views of NCSEA, CASE, SEI, C3 Ink, or the
Inquiries related to this search can be directed to struct@nd.edu. STRUCTURE Editorial Board.
STRUCTURE® is a registered trademark of National Council of
Structural Engineers Associations (NCSEA). Articles may not be
Advertiser Index Please support these advertisers reproduced in whole or in part without the written permission
of the publisher.
Anderson Drilling ............................................................ 4 NCEES .......................................................................... 39
AZZ ............................................................................... 19 NCSEA/Kaplan Engineering Education ......................... 11
Bentley Systems, Inc. ................................................. 20-21 Nicholson Construction Company................................. 25 Published By:
Computers & Structures, Inc. ........................................ 52 Pile Dynamics, Inc. ........................................................ 37
C3 Ink
CTS Cement Manufacturing Corp................................. 13
Foresight Products, LLC................................................. 42
Powers Fasteners, Inc. ....................................................... 2
RISA Technologies ......................................................... 51
C3 Ink A Division of Copper Creek Companies, Inc.
Fyfe Co. LLC ................................................................... 9 Simpson Strong-Tie........................................................ 15 148 Vine St., Reedsburg WI 53959
Geopier Foundation Company....................................... 22 StrucSoft Solutions, Ltd. .................................................. 3 P-608-524-1397 F-608-524-4432
Hayward Baker, Inc ........................................................ 35 Structural Engineers Assoc. of Illinois ............................. 17 publisher@STRUCTUREmag.org
Integrated Engineering Software, Inc.............................. 10 StructurePoint ................................................................ 40
Irvine Institute of Technology........................................... 5 Struware, Inc. ................................................................. 41 Visit STRUCTURE magazine on-line at
KPFF Consulting Engineers ........................................... 14 Subsurface Constructors, Inc. ........................................... 6
Visit
Visit
STRUCTURE
STRUCTURE
magazine
magazine
on-line
online
www.structuremag.org at at
Moretrench .................................................................... 43 University of Notre Dame ................................................ 4 www.structuremag.org
www.STRUCTUREmag.org

STRUCTURE magazine 4 December 2010

 CONTENTS
Features
23 Augercast Piles in Hawaii
By James W. Niehoff, P.E.
The Hokua Tower is a high rise condominium located west of the Waikiki area
of Honolulu, Hawaii. Subsurface conditions at the site were typical for the area,
8
with about 25 feet of poor quality soil overburden, followed by an upper coral
formation about 25 feet in thickness. This was underlain by about 30 feet of
loose to medium dense gravel, then by another layer of coral. For this project,
the geotechnical engineer judged that conditions were ideally suited for the use
of augercast pile foundations.
26 NCSEA Excellence in Structural Engineering Awards
At their annual meeting in Jersey City, NJ in October, the National Council of Structural
Engineers Associations (NCSEA) announced the winners of the 2010 Excellence in
Structural Engineering Awards. This awards program annually highlights some of the
best examples of structural ingenuity throughout the world. Please join STRUCTURE ®
magazine and NCSEA in congratulating all of the winners.

Columns Departments 16

7 Editorial 38 Great Achievements

Update on ASCE/SEI 7-10 and the Leffert Lefferts Buck
2012 IBC By Frank Griggs, Jr., Ph.D., P.E.
By Robert Bachman, P.E., S.E., and
James Harris, P.E., S.E., Ph.D.
41 Risk Management
Duty to Defend
8 Structural Design By Dave Collings
Post-Tensioned Slabs on Ground
Part 4
By Bryan Allred, S.E.
12 Lessons Learned In every Issue
Structural Collapses 23
During Construction 4 Advertiser Index
By Mohammad Ayub, P.E., S.E. 42 Resource Guide
16 Codes and Standards (Earth Retention Structures)
®

STRUCTURE

Changes in Codes, Standards and 44 NCSEA News

Practices Following Structural Failures on the Cover
Part 1 46 SEI Structural Columns
By Robert T. Ratay, Ph.D., P.E. The Burj Khalifa is the
48 CASE in Point world’s tallest building. At
36 InSights
A Joint Publication of NCSEA | CASE | SEI

828 meters (2,717 feet;

Sustainable Design for over ½ mile!) in height,
Structural Engineers it surpasses the previous
By Michael Teller, A.I.A., LEED AP
13th Annual
December

world’s tallest building by a

NCSEA Excellence
2010 in Structural
Soils & Engineering

Irvine Institute
and Jillian Of Technology
Bergman
Foundations Awards

C.V. Chelapati, Ph.D., P.E., F. ASCE staggering 319 meters (1,047

50 Structural Forum feet). A new structural system, called the
SE/PE License Seminars-Webcast-Nationwide/ “buttressed core”, was developed to support
Excellence
Worldwide-
in Structural Engineering –
Are YouGuaranteed
a Winner? the tower’s extreme height. (The Burj Khalifa
Pass or 1 year of free
By Thomas F. Heausler, P.E., S.E., SECB
archives
project was one of the NCSEA Excellence in
SE Vertical, SE Lateral - 16 hour IRVINE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Structural Engineering award winners. See
Also – PE (Civil), PEME, PEEE (Power), PEEE (Computer), PEEE (Electr), PE C.V. Chelapati, Ph.D., P.E., F.ASCE page 29)
(Env), Surveying (FS, PS) PMP, Contracts and Legal, CA Seismic and CA Survey PE/SE License Seminars – Webcast – Nationwide/Worldwide
Publication of any article, image, or advertisement in
www.irvine-institute.org Guaranteed Pass or 1 year of free archives
STRUCTURE ®
magazine does
Ph: 949-585-9137 fornot
moreconstitute endorsement
information. SE Vertical, SE Lateral – 16 hour
by NCSEA, CASE, SEI, C 3 Ink, or the Editorial Board. Also – PE (Civil), PEME, PEEE (Power), PEEE (Computer), PEEE (Electr), PE (Env),
Surveying (FS, PS), PMP, Contracts and Legal, CA Seismic and CA Survey
Authors, contributors, and advertisers retain sole
responsibility for the content of their submissions. Ph: (949) 585-9137 www.irvine-institute.org

STRUCTURE magazine 5 December 2010

 Editorial
Update on ASCE/SEI 7-10 and the 2012 IBC
By Robert Bachman, P.E., S.E., Vice Chair ASCE/SEI 7 Main Committee
and James Harris, P.E., S.E., Ph.D., Past Chair ASCE/SEI 7 Main Committee

Most building departments in the United States utilize either the
2006 or 2009 editions of the International Building Code (IBC) as
the source of their building code. For structural design criteria and
loadings, these editions of the IBC in turn reference ASCE/SEI 7-05
Minimum Design Loads for Building and Other Structures for much of
the criteria for loads rather than transcribing these provisions into the
code. Therefore, ASCE/SEI 7 has become extremely important to the
structural engineering profession in the U.S.
The IBC currently is updated every 3 years, with the next edition being
the 2012 IBC. All are welcome to propose changes and to speak in code
development hearings. Final decisions on IBC code provisions are made
by the building department members of the International Code Council
(ICC). The community of individuals and organizations involved in the
code development process currently support the approach of referring
to recognized standards, such as ASCE/SEI 7, rather than transcribing
detailed structural provisions into the model code as had been done
previously. Thus, the development of ASCE/SEI 7 and other national
consensus structural standards are integrally linked with the code
development schedule of the IBC since the documents must be published
in advance of a specific point in the IBC approval cycle.
ASCE/SEI 7 is developed by a large and dedicated volunteer group of
experts representing the structural engineering profession, regulatory
bodies, researchers and material interests. Major changes in provisions
have occurred over the past three decades. The pace of change has
resulted in the request by many in the structural engineering profession
to slow down the change process to allow the profession time to
understand and implement the changes. To address this concern, the
ASCE/SEI 7 committee decided to publish new editions of ASCE/
SEI 7 every 6 years to coincide with alternate editions of the IBC.
Therefore, after completing the 2005 edition of ASCE/SEI 7, it was
expected that the next version of ASCE/SEI 7 would be published in
2011. However, an unexpected decision by the ICC advanced the 2012
IBC code hearing adoption schedule by 18 months. In a highly focused
effort, the 2010 edition of ASCE/SEI 7 successfully made it through
the consensus process and was published in April, just meeting the new
ICC deadline. This edition was adopted by reference into the 2012 IBC
during IBC final action hearings in May 2010.
ASCE’s consensus process is an open process and, in that spirit,
the ASCE/SEI 7 Standards Committee solicited proposed changes
to ASCE/SEI 7-05 from anyone wishing to do so. Several hundred
proposed changes of this type were received. All were considered, with
several resulting in changes to the standard. Changes were also initiated
by the committee members and, in the seismic area, changes suggested
in the 2009 NEHRP Recommended Provisions were also considered.
The new ASCE/SEI 7 has about 40% more pages but there are not 40%
more requirements; the font is simply larger. Because of the compressed
schedule for publication, the ASCE Publications Department elected
to use the same larger font size and style that it uses for other ASCE
standards. For all future editions of ASCE/SEI 7, it has been agreed that
the font size and styling will revert back to that found in ASCE/SEI 7-05.
The compressed schedule also resulted in a number of errata. Please
check the SEI website (www.seinstitute.org) for the current list of errata
to ASCE/SEI 7-10. This errata list gets updated periodically, so it’s a good
idea to check every few months and watch SEI Update for notices. While
there, you should also get the most up-to-date errata for ASCE/SEI 7-05.
Four of the significant changes in ASCE/SEI 7-10 include:
1) In Chapter 1, the concept of Performance Based Design
Engineering is introduced, and the terminology of Occupancy
Category has been replaced by Risk Category.
2) Chapter 6, Wind Loads, has been replaced by new Chapters
26-31. It is hoped that the new organization of the wind load
provisions, combined with new tables detailing the steps, will
be more transparent and easier to follow.
3) The wind speed map and the importance factor for wind loads
have been replaced with three wind load maps of different return
periods to be applied to structures with different Risk Categories.
The new wind loads are specified at the strength design level,
rather than the allowable stress design level.
4) The Maximum Considered Earthquake terminology and maps
titles have been replaced by Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered
Earthquake. While these mapped ground motions were developed
on the basis of the risk of collapse, the mapped values themselves
have only changed slightly. There is no change for the average user
of the standard in the determination or use of the mapped values.
Your involvement in the ASCE/SEI 7 development process is highly
encouraged. Please be certain to take advantage of conferences, seminars
and webinars that will provide you with more detailed discussions on
the new requirements. If you find errata, have suggested changes or
would like to be involved in its development process, please contact SEI
at sei@asce.org.▪

Editorial Board
Chair Craig E. Barnes, P.E., SECB Brian J. Leshko, P.E. Mike C. Mota, P.E. Greg Schindler, P.E., S.E.
Jon A. Schmidt, P.E., SECB CBI Consulting, Inc. HDR Engineering, Inc. CRSI KPFF Consulting Engineers
Burns & McDonnell Boston, MA Pittsburgh, PA Williamstown, NJ Seattle, WA
Kansas City, MO
chair@structuremag.org Richard Hess, S.E., SECB John A. Mercer, P.E. Evans Mountzouris, P.E. Stephen P. Schneider, Ph.D., P.E., S.E.
Hess Engineering Inc. Mercer Engineering, PC The DiSalvo Ericson Group BergerABAM
Executive Editor Los Alamitos, CA Minot, ND Ridgefield, CT Vancouver, WA
Jeanne M. Vogelzang, JD, CAE Brian W. Miller Matthew Salveson, Ph.D., P.E. John “Buddy” Showalter, P.E.
NCSEA
Mark W. Holmberg, P.E.
Heath & Lineback Engineers, Inc. Davis, CA Dokken Engineering American Wood Council
Chicago, IL
Marietta, GA Folsom, CA Leesburg, VA
execdir@ncsea.com

STRUCTURE magazine 7 December 2010

 Post-Tensioned Slabs on Ground
Part 4: Existing Foundations
By Bryan Allred, S.E.
This is the final of four articles on post-
tensioned slab-on-ground design and
construction. This article will focus on
engineering and construction issues in
regards to existing post-tensioned founda-
tions. Please see the January, April and July
2010 issues of STRUCTURE® magazine
for the previous articles.
As post-tensioned foundations have be-
come more common place in residential
construction, remodels and additions on
these foundations have also become more
frequent. Understanding a few simple
steps should help engineers and contractors
alike to produce buildable and economi-
cal designs that utilize the benefits of
post-tensioning while also protecting the
existing system. The first step is always to
determine what type of foundation you
are dealing with. Some of the larger tract
home builders will imprint a stamp in
the concrete or put a plaque on the ga-
rage identifying the foundation as being
post-tensioned. The note is primarily to
caution future contractors against drilling
into the concrete without accounting for
the existing tendons.
If a note or plaque isn’t available, the
governing building department may have
Structural DeSign
the existing structural drawings which
should contain the design or other indi-
cations of the foundation system. If a
design/build contractor was used (which
is fairly common in tract homes), the
actual foundation drawings may not be
available at the city, since they were most
likely a deferred submittal. Building de-
partments often view these documents as
more of a shop drawing than part of the
A&E package that they retain.
If no existing drawings are available, a
simple investigation of the perimeter of
design issues for structural engineers
Figure 2: Scanning Slab to Locate Existing Strands.
STRUCTURE magazine
Figure 1: Rust Marks of Burned off Anchor Nails.
the house may provide the answer. Typical
residential construction will only require
stressing of the tendons from one anchor.
The stressing anchor is typically connected
to the form boards by two 20d nails that
are approximately 4 inches apart. After
the concrete is placed and cured, the
form boards are removed with the 20d
nails sticking out of the slab. The nails are
subsequently burned off with the tendons
tails to the face of the concrete (Figure 1).
Over time, the exposed nail will rust and
leave two small reddish marks on the edge
of the foundation. If these rust marks are
noted approximately 3 to 4 feet on center,
it is a strong possibility the existing foun-
dation is post-tensioned. In addition, the
marks will indicate the anchor location
and the approximate cover to the strand as
it extends across the foundation. Since ten-
dons are placed at mid-depth of the slab,
the cover to the strand should provide a
reasonable estimate of the slab thickness.
Locating Tendons
Once the foundation has been established
as being post-tensioned, the tendons
should be located in the areas adjacent to
any future cores. This is especially critical
for kitchen and bathroom remodels due
to the size and number of penetrations.
When remodels are performed that do
not require structural engineering input,
the contractor alone is left to determine if
the foundation is post-tensioned. I have
received numerous phone calls from ex-
asperated home owners that have had a
strand broken and who are now experi-
encing delays, additional costs to repair
the foundation and in desperate search
to find someone that understands what
happened and can fix the tendon. Unfor-
tunately, lack of proper due diligence can
8 December 2010
give post-tensioning a poor reputation.
There are several methods for locating
strands that range from digital readouts of
a concrete surface scan (Figure 2) to using a
hand held metal detector and looking for
spikes on the dial (Figure 3). The tech-
nician in Figure 2 scanned a room with
rough dimensions of 20 feet by 20 feet in
about an hour and was able to mark the
strand and anchor locations on the slab.
With the tendons marked, the contractors
could easily adjust their drill location to
miss the existing reinforcing. Ground pen-
etrating radar (GPR) can also be used for
thicker foundations which will have a larger
cover than their ribbed counterparts.
For cores in the interior of the foundation,
the drill locations can be as close to the
strands as required without damaging the
sheathing. Since the foundations are con-
structed with unbounded strands, no bond
is required for strain compatibility and any
loss of concrete does not affect develop-
ment or strength of the tendon. Instead
of using expansion bolts or threaded rods
for attaching new sill plates, shot pins
have been successfully used and should
be evaluated. Shot pins typically don’t
require drilling, and their relatively small
embedment depth will usually stay within
the cover to the top of the tendons. While
shot pins may not work for shear walls,
their use in bracing the sill plate of other
non lateral walls may limit drilling and pos-
sible damage to the existing foundation.
If drilling is required on the perimeter
where the anchors are typically located,
the cores should be adjusted to miss the
anchor and the concrete directly in front
of the anchor. Even if the strand and an-
chor are not physically damaged by the
core, removing concrete that is actively
Figure 3: Pacometer (Metal Detector) used to
Locate Existing Strands.
resisting the loaded anchor can cause cracking
or blowouts. The force from the anchor is typi-
cally assumed to radiate in a 45 degree cone
away from the anchor surface. Locating the
penetrations out of the zone of influence for
roughly 24 to 36 inches from the anchor face
is recommended.
Strand Repair
If a strand is broken, there are several repair
methods available. The strand can be coupled
using a mechanical splicer as shown in Figure
4. The couplers are significantly larger than
the tendons, so the area around the broken
tendon will need to be chipped out to create
enough workable room. Care should be taken
during this procedure so as not to damage
additional strands. Depending on the size of
the opening, overlapping epoxy dowels may
be required to re-connect the concrete patch
to the existing foundation. Prior to placing
concrete, the vapor retarder should be repaired
(if required) to maintain the effectiveness of
the moisture intrusion system. With current
technology, it is possible to re-thread a new,
greased strand into the existing sheathing. The
jack is used in reverse to push the new strand
through the slab. This application does not
require any additional drilling or verification
by an engineer, since the full strength of the sys-
tem has been replaced. Re-threading a strand
STRUCTURE magazine
Figure 4: Coupler Used to Re-Connect Broken Strands.
is more realistic for newer construction where
the grease between the strand and sheathing
is still in reasonably good condition. For older
foundations, re-threading is still possible, but
a 3/8- or 7/16-inch diameter strand will most
likely be required. With a smaller diameter
strand, a reduced force will be applied to the
foundation. An engineer may be required to
determine what impact, if any, the reduced
precompression level will have on the per-
formance of the foundation.
For larger slabs, it is possible to attach new
anchors to each side of the broken strand and
re-stress them to their full value. The opening
in the slab will need to be large enough to
allow access of the stressing equipment (typi-
cally around 36 inches) and to install epoxy
ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org
9 December 2010
dowels to reinforce the concrete between the
anchors. In addition, each tendon will need to
be at least 15 feet long to avoid accidentally
overloading the strand. While the patched
area will not have a strand(s) in one direction,
the interior of the foundation is considered
to be effectively in the dormant zone for ex-
pansive soil movement and the epoxied rebar
should be designed to resist any superimposed
loads. For the possible retrofits described, it is
recommended to retain a contractor familiar
and experienced in this type of work.
New Conditions
A frequent remodel condition is the addition
of a heavily loaded post or column on the
foundation. If the existing slab cannot support
 the load, a spread footing will be required. The
typical construction procedure for convention-
ally reinforced slabs is to simply remove the
concrete under the new column, prepare the
soil as listed in the soils report, add the ap-
propriate rebar and replace the concrete. The
same general procedure can be used in a post-
tensioned system; however ,the demolition
process should not damage the tendons. Once
the tendons have been located, the majority
of the existing concrete can be removed with
standard methods. The concrete adjacent
to the strands should be chipped away in a
method that does not damage the strands.
This is often accomplished by a low velocity
hammer or hand held chisel. If the strand is
damaged, one of the previously mentioned
repair procedures should be used. This detail is
most effective in the interior of the foundation
where the opening will have a negligible impact
from the loaded anchors. Figure 5 shows a pad
footing being added to an existing foundation
where one strand was damaged and is be-
ing repaired. Holes for future epoxy dowels
have been drilled into the existing slab to
reinforce and connect the new concrete to
the existing foundation.
Creating a slab opening near live anchors
will typically require engineering analysis to
determine if the concrete is adequate for the
temporary condition. After the concrete is
IES-Dec-3rd-Pg-4C-Structure.pdf 1 10/28/2010 2:44:21 PM
ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org
C
M Model * Load * Analyze * Design * Report * Succeed!
Y
CM
MY
CY
CMY
K
Aluminum Design
IBC 2009, ASCE 7-10
Area Edge Results
STRUCTURE magazine
removed, a pseudo beam will be created that
would span across the opening while resisting
the force of the strands. The depth of the
section, compressive strength of the concrete
and the slab thickness are typically the key
factors in this calculation. If the concrete is inad-
equate, the tendons may need to be purposely
de-tensioned and re-stressed after the footing
has been constructed, to prevent cracking and
possible blow outs.
When a remodel occurs, the foundation sys-
tem needs to be re-analyzed with the revised
loading. In general, a higher perimeter load
will increase the stresses for the center lift
condition while having minimal impact on edge
lift. If the loading is large enough that the foun-
dation does not satisfy the code requirements, a
typical retrofit is to add a new perimeter footing
that extends further into the soil than the
existing foundation. Per section 3.7 of the Post-
Tensioning Institute (PTI) manual, a deeper
footing will act as a pseudo water barrier, reducing
the amount of moisture migration in and out of
the foundation. Essentially, if the barrier can pre-
vent any substantial change in water content,
the effects of expansive soils are reduced. The
new footing is placed on the exterior of the
perimeter footing and connected with epoxy
dowels. To minimize any affect on usable
space, the top of the new footing typically
begins several inches below the grade level to
10 December 2010
Figure 5: New Pad Footing in an Existing Post-
Tensioned Foundation.
allow for hardscaping or planting. In addition,
the new footing can be used in resisting large
post load or hold down forces.
If the remodel involves increasing the founda-
tion footprint, the analysis is typically performed
in two ways. The new foundation can be
modeled and designed as a standalone element.
The reinforcing in the expanded foundation will
be self contained and the existing perimeter
footing can be viewed as the edge for the new
slab. This assumes the new slab will be connected
to the existing concrete to create composite
action. If the dimensions of the expansion are
relatively small in comparison to a typical foun-
dation, the calculated deflections may exceed
the allowable limits even though the deflections
are small numerically. The deflection criteria are
a function of the plan dimensions and smaller
plates will often generate unrealistic deflections
limits. Engineering judgment should be used in
evaluating this condition. In addition, the stand-
alone design will not model the continuity
affect of the existing foundation which will
often reduce deflections.
The other option is to model the new and
existing foundation as a complete system.
Depending on how much information is avail-
able on the existing structure, interior footing
depth, concrete compressive strength, spacing
and tendon layout may have to be assumed or
defaulted to code minimums. The new and
existing foundation will need to be connected
to provide the continuity to match the mod-
eling assumptions. Larger foundations will
require more strands to maintain the desired
precompression level. Since the tendons in the
expanded foundation will be shorter and have
less subgrade friction than used in the design,
engineering judgment should be used in
specifying the number of tendons.▪
Bryan Allred is a license structural engineer
and Vice President of Seneca Structural
Engineering Inc. in Laguna Hills, CA. He can
be reached at Bryan@SenecaStructural.com
with any questions.
Pass Structural Exam
thE

with confidEncE!
Prepare for exam day success with this new course designed by the National
Council of Structural Engineers Associations (NCSEA), Kaplan Engineering
Education, and leading structural engineers from across the industry.

The exam will undergo significant changes in April 2011, making it even more
challenging. Be prepared with our online exam review course!

NCSEA Structural Engineering Exam Live Online Review Course

The targeted review includes:
- 24 hours of instructor-led review
- Key topics of structural code
- Efficient analytical methods
- New material in the 16 hour
Structural exam
- Typical exam questions
- Problem solving techniques
- Exam day skills
- 24/7 playback – study anytime

Every registered student will receive a Structural Engineering Learning

System – a $194.95 value – FREE with the course. This system includes
an updated Structural Engineering License Review Problems & Solutions
textbook containing the new material added to the 16-hour Structural exam.

Live Online Course Dates:

January 29-30 - Vertical Forces Review
February 12-13 - Lateral Forces Review
Course Fee: $1199 | Also Available Individually: $749

REgiStER tODAy! 1-800-420-1432

www.kaplanaecengineering.com/livereview
 Structural Collapses During Construction
Lessons Learned, 1990-2008
By Mohammad Ayub, P.E., S.E.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) investigated 96 structural collapses during construction involving
fatalities and injuries from 1990 to 2008. The most probable causes of these incidents are summarized in Table 1 (available in the
online version of this article; visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org). These incidents took the lives of 117 construction employees
and caused injuries to another 235. The incidents occurred in a wide range of structures – steel, concrete and timber, high-rises
and low-rises. The aggregate number of construction deaths due to all causes is staggering – approximately 1,000 in 2008 alone.
Figures 1 and 2 show the number of deaths and the rate of fatalities in the construction industry. As can be seen, the highest rate
of deaths and injuries occurs in construction activities.

Construction errors contributed to 80%

of the structural collapses investigated by
OSHA. The remaining 20% of the inci-
dents are attributed to structural design
flaws on the part of either the structural
engineer of record (SER) or a structural
engineer retained by a contractor to design
specific members. Steel structures, includ-
ing scaffolds and platforms, were involved
in 62% of these incidents.
Discussion
The largest group of structural collapses
involved 60 steel structures:
• 14 structural steel frames
• 14 scaffolds
• 18 special steel structures and cranes
• 5 television antenna towers
• 3 cofferdams
• 6 steel roof trusses and joists
The second largest group involved 29
Lessons Learned
3) In 9 cases, contractors did not
provide temporary bracing
during construction of steel
frames, and concrete or masonry
walls. As a result, wind pressures
caused their collapse.
4) In 7 cases, contractors began
to demolish existing structures
without regard to structural
stability and capacity of existing
structural members.
Structural Design Errors
Out of 96 incidents, 19 construction in-
cidents were related to structural design
errors. These occurred in 13 steel structures,
five concrete structures, and one masonry
structure. 17 of these incidents are briefly
Incident No. 8
Steel Stack
During the design of the steel stack, the
SER did not consider vortex shedding
under sustained wind speed.
Lessons learned: Uniform winds with little
turbulence are known to create vortex shed-
ding, which causes large vibrations in the
across-wind direction in tall stacks of circular
cross-sections under the condition of reso-
nance. Winds that are not in a steady state
do not create vortex shedding. The transverse
resonance occurs when the shedding frequency
becomes close to the natural frequency of the
steel stack. The SER must consider a suitable
abatement method.
Incident No. 15
Steel Sheeting Cofferdam

concrete and masonry structures: described below.

The engineer under-proportioned the
problems and solutions encountered by practicing structural engineers

• 3 concrete frames depth of embedment of the cofferdam

• 12 shorings supporting freshly
placed concrete
• 4 demolitions involving
concrete structures
• 5 precast concrete structures
• 5 masonry walls
The third group consisted of wood
structures:
• 7 wood frames and roof trusses
Construction Errors
1) In 47 cases, contractors did
not generally follow the
installation procedures prescribed
and recommended by the
manufacturers and designers, such
as providing temporary bracing,
lateral bracing, diagonal bracing,
bridging and anchoring, guy
cables, lateral supports, and proper
welded connections.
2) In 15 cases, contractors overloaded
certain structural members beyond
their ultimate capacities.
Incident No. 4
Precast Concrete Beams
Two critical bottom reinforcing bars of a
precast beam were not provided with the re-
quired development lengths. This resulted
in a significantly reduced flexural strength
of the beam, and hence the failure.
Lessons learned: The precast beam designer
and detailer must indicate in their detail
drawings the required rebar development
lengths, including the rebar splice lengths
per the ACI code.
Incident No. 6
Soldier Beam and Lagging Cofferdam
The installed outlookers between the
soldier beams and walers did not have
sufficient strength to resist the unbalanced
lateral earth pressure.
Lessons learned: Outlookers that transfer
forces from the waler to the soldier beam could
be subjected to flexural stresses due to unbal-
anced earth pressure. Such outlookers must be
designed to resist all anticipated forces.
steel sheet piles, resulting in a “quick
condition” and subsequent soil failure.
Lessons learned: Appropriate seepage forces
at the bottom of the excavation must be
considered in determining the depth of
sheet piles.
Incident No. 16
Concrete Building
The formwork design engineer under-
proportioned the support system for all
reasonably anticipated vertical and lateral
loads imposed on the formwork.
Lessons learned: The formwork design
engineer must consider all anticipated
vertical and lateral loads to be imposed on
the formwork and proper load transfer to
the base, and must provide detail drawings.
Incident No. 22
Steel Canopy Structure
The structural engineer did not properly
design the canopy structure for the loads
that were placed on it.

STRUCTURE magazine 12 December 2010

 Fatality Rates
Work Related Fatalities (Fatalities per 100,000 workers)
13.3
4675

4403

4428

4530

4516

4601

4552

4102
12.2 11.7 12
11 10.9 10.5
9.6

4.3 4.6 4.1

1234

1186

4
1225

1239 4 3.9

1204
1121

1131

3.8 3.6

969
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Construction Source: BLS CFOI Fatality Data

Construction
Source: BLS CFOI Data
Non Construction All Industries
Figure 1. Figure 2.

Lessons learned: Final design should not be
based on preliminary loads assumed during the
initial design. Final design should be based on
the anticipated final loads.
Incident No. 27
Masonry Foundation Wall
60-foot-high billboard and its walkway. It
resulted in three fatalities. The structure was
meant to display advertisements along an
interstate highway. The framing consisted
of a hollow tube section cantilevered from a
tall hollow tube column. At the end of the
cantilever member, another long cantilever

ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

The structural engineer did not design a
braced masonry foundation wall, and did not
provide vertical reinforcement to resist the
lateral loads.
Lessons learned: Unreinforced masonry walls
are highly susceptible to overturning, especially
during construction, unless they are braced. Bracing
must stay in place until floor or roof framing instal-
lation is completed.
Incident No. 33
Bridge
The structural engineer under-proportioned
the steel bracket supporting the steel beams
of the catching platform under the center
span of the bridge where the deck was being
demolished. Also, the epoxy anchors used to
support the brackets were improperly designed.
Lessons learned: Compression members must be
checked against buckling. Confirmation of the
strength of the existing concrete must be verified
in designing epoxy anchors.
Incident No. 36
Elevated Structural Steel Platform
The structural engineer arbitrarily selected
a single angle as a knee brace to support the
platform.
Lessons learned: AISC has a special provision
to determine the axial capacity of a single angle.
If not followed, it could result in buckling and
catastrophic failure.
Incident No. 56
Structural Steel Billboard
This incident occurred the day after the
ironworkers completed the framing of a
member was framed over a stub leg welded to
the cantilevered beam. The failure occurred
at the junction of the round stub leg and the
long cantilevered beam.
An investigation revealed that the structural
design was flawed in that it did not meet the
AISC design specifications for hollow structural
sections. The requirement to address chord wall
plastification at the junction of the stub pipe
and the cantilevered beam was not met. Also,
the weld between the stub column and the
cantilevered pipe was improperly performed.
Lessons learned: Differences between the design of
rolled W shapes and HSS must be recognized, and
the appropriate AISC provisions must be followed.
Field testing of critical welds must be specified.
Incident No. 60
Scaffold Tower inside a Boiler
The structural engineer under-proportioned
the steel beams supporting the 180-foot high
scaffold tower inside a boiler.
Lessons learned: Light structural beams, when
unbraced, are highly susceptible to lateral-torsional
buckling. Proper design must evaluate the un-
braced compression flange length.
Incident No. 61
Pedestrian Bridge
A long steel box girder spanning approxi-
mately 170 feet collapsed as the top concrete
deck was being poured. At the time of the
collapse, the concrete pour was almost halfway
complete. Under the weight of the concrete,
men and equipment, the girder twisted and
collapsed. Though cross frames were provided
between the girder top and bottom flanges,

STRUCTURE magazine 13 December 2010

 lateral bracing of the girder itself, when con-
sidered as a single longitudinal member, was
not provided. As a result, the entire girder
twisted in a torsional mode and fell.
Lessons learned: To prevent torsional buckling,
long-span steel girders for bridges must have
sufficient torsional rigidity in accordance with all
applicable codes.
Incident No. 64
Custom Cantilever Finishing Platform
Loads considered in the design of the plat-
form proved to be much lower than the actual
loads placed on the platform.
Lessons learned: The engineer must consider
realistic and verifiable loads while designing
structural framing systems.
Incident No. 66
Parking Garage
A concrete structure under construction col-
lapsed during placement of wet concrete on
the 8th level, killing four construction employees
and injuring scores of others. Five levels of
exterior bays of the structure collapsed, with
a complete separation from the exterior col-
umns, while still being connected to the first
row of interior columns. An investigation
revealed that the exterior beam-column joints
ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org
STRUCTURE magazine
were improperly designed. Lack of sufficient
reinforcement between the wide perimeter
beams and the slender exterior leg contributed
to the collapse.
Lessons learned: Exterior slender columns sup-
porting wider beams must be avoided; otherwise,
proper beam-column joint connections must be
designed and detailed.
Incident No. 68
Gantry Crane
The structural design of the gantry crane was
flawed in that it lacked a proper lateral-load-
resisting system in one direction. During sudden
braking of the crane, a large inertia force
developed, and that force toppled the crane.
Lessons learned: Lateral-load-resisting systems
must be provided in both directions. Lateral loads
could arise from wind, seismic or inertia forces.
Incident No. 81
Stripping Platform
The structural design of the stripping platform
was flawed. The temporary shoring frame of
the platform was not properly supported, and
the outer brace was incorrectly proportioned.
Lessons learned: Load paths and supports of
platforms must be evaluated properly. Long com-
pression members are highly susceptible to failure.
14 December 2010
Incident No. 90
Post-tensioned Concrete Parking Garage
The structural design undersized the columns
and under-proportioned the post-tensioned
beam. A number of construction defects
also existed.
Lessons learned: Exterior, as well as interior,
slender columns supporting wider beams must be
avoided; otherwise, proper beam-column joint
connections must be designed and detailed.
Conclusion
To prevent structural collapses during con-
struction due to design errors, the SER should:
• Design the entire structure, including
components, using the latest applicable
industry standards.
• Provide drawings with details or notes
such as:
▪ For concrete buildings, rebar
development and splice lengths
and placing details at congested
areas; e.g., beam-column and
beam-beam connections.
▪ For steel buildings, steel yield strengths
and welded connections, indicating
length, size and type of welds.
▪ For timber structures, lumber
material with sizes and connection
design requirements.
• Consider construction loads during design.
• Avoid exterior slender columns
supporting wider perimeter beams.
• Ask for field testing of critical welds.
• Provide stability checks against lateral-
torsional buckling.
• Evaluate vortex shedding for tall stacks.
• Check against seepage forces during sheet
piling embedment design.
• Verify loads during final design.
• Caution the contractor to provide
temporary bracing for unreinforced
masonry walls, joists and roof trusses.
• Verify existing concrete strength, rather
than making an assumption.
• Determine proper load paths during design.
• Follow AISC specification for single
angle design.
• Provide proper bracing or rigid
connections to resist lateral loads in
both directions.▪
Mohammad Ayub, P.E., S.E. is Director
of Office of Engineering in the Directorate
of Construction, Occupational Safety and
Health Administration, US Department of
Labor, Washington, DC.
The online version of this article
contains an additional table. Please visit
www.STRUCTUREmag.org.
 Who says screws and
connectors don’t mix?

A new twist on fastening connectors. Introducing Strong-Drive® (SD)

structural-connector screws. Our SD screws are specifically designed to perform
with some of our most popular connectors. Why screws instead of nails? In
tight spaces and overhead applications, screws are easier to install than nails
and in some cases, achieve higher load ratings than 10d and 16d common nails.
So we say, go ahead and mix our SD screws with our top-selling connectors.
Simpson Strong-Tie is expanding its line of fasteners. For a complete list
of approved Simpson Strong-Tie® connectors for use with SD screws, visit
www.strongtie.com/fasten or call (800) 999-5099.

© 2009 Simpson Strong-Tie Company Inc. SDSCREW10

 Changes in Codes, Standards and
Practices Following Structural Failures
Part 1: Bridges
By Robert T. Ratay, Ph.D., P.E.

To the credit of our profession, failures

• The 1986 publication by the
have been and continue to be used to
Federal Highway Administration
improve design and construction practices.
(FHWA) of a manual of inspection
We do not just pay up, rebuild and walk
of fracture-critical bridge members,
away – we delve, we learn, and we improve.
and widespread retrofitting of
Following a failure, engineers often carry
steel bridge girders with a fail-safe
forensic investigations to great details,
assembly below their pin-and-
so as to have reasonable engineering
hanger girder connections. This
certainty not only in the cause(s) of the
followed the June 28, 1983 cleavage
failures but also in the identification of
Figure 1: Silver Bridge at Point Pleasant, fracture failure of a pin-and-hanger
the responsible parties – needed for the
West Virginia. connection and catastrophic collapse
frequently inevitable dispute resolution.
of a highway bridge carrying
A valuable peripheral benefit of the labo-
Interstate 95 over the Mianus River
rious search is a clearer understanding of
in Connecticut. (Figure 2)
structural behavior and a better apprecia-
• The Surface Transportation and
tion of pitfalls in current practices. These
Uniform Relocation Assistance
can provide information and material to
Act of 1987 expanded bridge
affect changes in design and/or construction
inspection programs to include
practices, codes, standards, oversight and
special procedures for the inspection
regulatory procedures.
of underwater components, such as
The “lessons learned” from failures are
piers, of bridges. This followed the
interesting but worthless if not heeded and
Figure 2: I-95 Bridge over the Mianus River April 3, 1987 collapse of a bridge of
not acted upon to prevent their recurrence. in Connecticut. the New York State Thruway over
Codes and standards

Failures of bridges result in reviews and

the Schoharie River as a result of
changes in codes, standards and practices
river-bottom scour. (Figure 3)
much more frequently than those of build-
• Research and publication of
ings. One reason for this seems to be the
new design specifications and
more centralized approval and oversight
construction practices for temporary
processes of bridge construction and main-
works by the FHWA and changes
tenance by state and federal government
in the provisions for temporary
agencies, in comparison to the fragmented
works in the AASHTO Standard
involvement of local building departments
Specifications for Highway Bridges.
in the approval and oversight of building
This followed the 1989 collapse
construction and maintenance. A bridge
Figure 3: New York State Thruway Bridge over of shoring in the construction of
collapse, or even just a temporary closure,
the Schoharie River. a highway bridge built to carry
updates and discussions related to codes and standards

affects a large number of people and is

quickly picked up by the news media,
while the consequences of the collapse of a
building seldom reach beyond its occupants
and the local news.
Illustrative Cases
The following are just a few examples
of changes in design and/or construction
codes, standards, regulations and practices
that have been initiated in response to
structural failures of bridges.
• Introduction of the National
Bridge Inspection Standards
(NBIS) on May 1, 1979, applicable
to all structures defined as bridges
located on all public roads. This
standard directed that each highway
department shall include a bridge
inspection organization capable of
performing inspections, preparing
reports, and determining ratings,
in accordance with the provisions
of the American Association of
State Highway and Transportation
Officials (AASHTO) Manual for
Maintenance Inspection of Bridges at
regular intervals not to exceed two
years. This mandate followed the
December 15, 1967 collapse of the
U. S. 35 Highway Bridge connecting
Point Pleasant, West Virginia, with
Kanauga, Ohio (a.k.a. Silver Bridge),
caused by the cleavage fracture in
the lower limb of an eyebar in the
suspension chain. Forty-six persons
died, nine were injured, and thirty-
one vehicles fell with the bridge.
(Figure 1)
Maryland Route 198 over the
Baltimore-Washington Expressway,
injuring nine workers and five
motorists, and killing one. (This
case is discussed furthered below,
because of its role in fueling changes
in codes, standards and practices.)
• Review of New York State and
AASHTO design guides for
composite tub girders, review of
New York State Department of
Transportation (NYSDOT) bridge
construction approval and oversight
procedures, and changes in the New
York State and AASHTO bridge
design specifications. This followed
the October 10, 2002 collapse
during construction of the Marcy
Pedestrian Bridge in Utica, New York.
(Figure 4)

STRUCTURE magazine 16 December 2010


Figure 4: Marcy Pedestrian Bridge in Utica, NY.
• Revisions by the Colorado Department of
Transportation (CDOT) to its Standard
Specifications for Road and Bridge
Construction requiring that an erection
plan be developed at least 4 weeks prior
to erection of a structural steel member,
that a conference be held at least 2 weeks
before beginning an erection, and that
the contractor’s Professional Engineer
provide written approval of each phase
of the installation; and, subsequent
recommendations by the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)
to the FHWA, to the Office of Safety
and Health Administration (OSHA),
and to AASHTO “to make consistent
and compatible [their] organizations’
regulatory requirements for and guidance
STRUCTURE magazine
Figure 6: I-35W Bridge over the Mississippi River.
Figure 5: I-70 Overpass at Golden, CO.
to construction contractors concerning
the design and certification of falsework,
formwork, and bracing for the erection
of highway structures”. This followed the
May 15, 2004 lateral stability failure of a
fabricated steel girder installed a few hours
earlier for the overpass of Route C-470
over Interstate Highway I-70 in Golden,
Colorado, killing a family of three in a
vehicle. (Figure 5)
• As a result of its extensive investigation,
the NTSB made recommendations to
the FHWA and AASHTO regarding,
among other things, quality control
procedures for the design of bridges by
bridge design firms, and regarding safety
inspection procedures. This followed the
August 1, 2007 catastrophic collapse,
ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org
17 December 2010
of an eight-lane 1,900-foot long I-35W
highway bridge over the Mississippi
River in Minneapolis, Minnesota, caused
by inadequate load capacity, due to a
design error, of gusset plates at a node
of the main span of the deck truss that
was subjected to loads during roadway
work. Four-hundred fifty-six feet of the
main span fell 108 feet into the 15-foot
deep river carrying one hundred eleven
vehicles. Thirteen people died and one-
hundred forty five people were injured.
The NTSB also faulted inadequate
design review by Federal and State
transportation officials, and the generally
accepted practice at the time among
Federal and State transportation officials
of paying inadequate attention to gusset
plate distortions during inspections.
(Figure 6) continued on next page
Figure 7: Baltimore-Washington Parkway. Aerial
view of collapse. (From The New York Times,
September 1, 1989)
MD Route 198 Bridge
over the Baltimore –
Washington Expressway
A highway bridge, built to carry Maryland
Route 198 over the Baltimore-Washington
Expressway, collapsed during construction on
August 31, 1989, injuring nine workers and five
motorists and killing one. The superstructure
was designed as five parallel post-tensioned box
girders spanning 100 feet between simple-
support abutments. The bottom slab of the
box girders was cast in early July and the webs
were cast between July 21 and August 4. On
the day of the collapse, workers were pouring
the 8-inch deck slab. The collapse occurred
five hours into the pour, when 120 of the 160
cubic yards total was in place. The shoring col-
lapsed “in a flash” without warning, landing all
the formwork and 400 tons of steel and con-
crete on the roadway below. (Figures 7, 8 and 9)
The concrete was poured into timber form-
work supported on three simple spans of
parallel steel beams that, in turn, were sup-
ported on steel shoring towers placed so as to
create a 35-foot center span over the roadway
and two 28-foot outboard spans. The form-
work shoring (falsework) system was erected
with a number of changes from the original
drawings, including the steel beam locations,
the deck overhang supports, the concrete
foundation slabs below the shoring towers,
Figure 9: Baltimore-Washington Parkway. End view of
collapsed falsework. (From ENR, September 7, 1989)
STRUCTURE magazine
Figure 8: Baltimore-Washington Parkway. Side view of collapse. (From ENR, September 7, 1989)
and the use of hardwood blocking under the
beams. The formwork shoring had been used
earlier to cast the westbound structure.
A forensic investigation by the FHWA and
its consultant, T. Y. Lin International, was per-
formed, and their findings were presented in
their report (Report of the Investigation into the
Collapse of the Route 198 Baltimore-Washington
Parkway Bridge) on December, 1989. They
evaluated nine possible causes of the collapse,
and systematically eliminated all but one.
They concluded that the failure originated in
one of the shoring towers and the most likely
cause was the use of 5-ton screw jacks rather
than the 12.5-ton screw jacks, shown on the
approved drawings, on the tops of the shoring
towers supporting the bridge. They also noted
that “the top screw jacks were rusty”, that
much of the cross-bracing had “large amounts
of rust and heavy pitting” and that, in one sec-
tion, the cross-brace pieces were connected by
nails instead of the required bolts.
Based on the report of the investigators, an
FHWA review board concluded that the failure
occurred probably because the shoring tower
assemblies were not constructed in accordance
with the approved plans. The review board
found no evidence that the FHWA (the owner)
had not lived up to its contractual responsibil-
ities, and ruled that it was the responsibility of
the contractor to assemble the falsework sys-
tem in accordance with the approved design.
(It is to be noted that the FHWA did then,
and does now, require a contractor’s engineer
to certify that falsework has been assembled
according to approved drawings before it is
loaded.) As a result, a fine of over $900,000
was levied by the state against the contractor.
Additionally, of course, the injured individuals
filed lawsuits of their own.
The incident raised increased awareness of
deficiencies in the design-review-approval-
execution-inspection process of public roads
and bridges. Several other collapses of bridge
temporary works occurred following the 1989
Baltimore-Washington incident, which added
urgency to the need for better guidelines.
18 December 2010
Productive Actions after the Failure
The falsework collapse of the Maryland Route
198 bridge over the Baltimore/Washington
Parkway on August 31, 1989, prompted
Congress to direct the Secretary of the U.S.
Department of Transportation to develop
specifications and guidelines for use in con-
structing bridge temporary works.
This followed the FHWA review board’s
recommendation that, in order to prevent
similar occurrences in the future, falsework
specifications should be revised to define
more clearly the responsibilities of material
suppliers, contractors, and engineers. This
recommendation was signed into law by the
US Department of Transportation and Related
Agencies Appropriations Bill of Fiscal Year
1991, which states in part that “...the Com-
mittee on Appropriations directs the Federal
Highway Administration to undertake the
research project recommended in the 1991
report entitled Investigation of Construction
Failure Maryland Route No. 198 Bridge Over
the Baltimore-Washington Parkway.” The bill
goes on to specify that the research project
should produce approved guidelines, im-
proved specifications, and a falsework con-
struction handbook.
In March 1990, the FHWA established a
multidisciplinary Scaffolding, Shoring, and
Forming Task Group to develop and guide the
mandated falsework research program. (The
author was a member of that Task Group.)
The ensuing activities were described in a
September 1991 article (Bridge Temporary Works
Research Program) by the FHWA.
The FHWA also retained the engineering
firm of Wiss Janney Elstner Associates, Inc.
(WJE) to assist the Task Group and, in
essence, to prepare the Design Specifications
and the Construction Handbook. The end
products of the Task Group and WJE’s work
under the FHWA’s program were a series of
five documents: the Synthesis of Falsework,
Formwork, and Scaffolding for Highway Bridge
Structures, the Guide Standard Specification
for Bridge Temporary Works, the Guide Design
Specifications for Bridge Temporary Works, the
Certification Program for Bridge Temporary
Works, and the Construction Handbook for
Bridge Temporary Works.
Changes by the FHWA and AASHTO
as a Consequence of the Failure
On October 29, 1993, the FHWA issued
a Technical Advisory for Bridge Temporary
Works to the design-construction industry
encouraging the use of the four FHWA doc-
uments, with the stated purpose “To provide
State highway and transportation agencies
with guide standards and design specifications,
a construction handbook and a certification
program to assist owner agency and industry
performance in achieving the safe construction
of bridge temporary works. These documents
may by used in conjunction with Section 3,
“Temporary Works, of Division II of the latest
edition of the AASHTO Standard Specifica-
tions for Highway Bridges.”
In Paragraph 1 of its Background section, the
Technical Advisory notes that “Heretofore, there
were [no] national standard code or specifi-
cation available on bridge temporary works.
The only available national standard which
addressed this type of construction (ANSI
A10.9-1983) was applicable primarily for
building construction.”
There’s only one way to ensure it.
Galvanize.
There’s nothing greener than galvanized steel. 100% recyclable
zinc and steel help us protect the environment. Strengthen your
commitment to long-term sustainability. Visit us online to learn more.
azzgalvanizing.com
AZZ-36291 Structure Ad_Sustainable_V1.indd 1
STRUCTURE magazine
COLORS
Subsequent editions of the AASHTO LRFD
Bridge Design Specifications and the LRFD
Bridge Construction Specifications adopted
provisions for temporary works based on the
FHWA research program that grew out of the
1989 collapse and investigation of the Maryland
Route 198 Bridge over the Baltimore-Washington
Expressway. Highway bridge specifications of
several States followed suit. Review and up-
dating of the FHWA documents are presently
underway by the National Cooperative High-
way Research Program (NCHRP) as part of its
Bridge Construction Practices for Temporary
Works project.
For a detailed discussion of the Maryland Route
198 Bridge over the Baltimore-Washington
Expressway, including its design and construc-
tion, the collapse scenario, and the subsequent
investigations, the reader is referred to a recent
fourteen-page article in Public Roads. (See the list
of references included in the online version of
this article; www.STRUCTUREmag.org.)
Conclusion
Structural failures are the result of human
activities which, in the design-construction
industry, are prescribed in part by codes,
standards, regulations and industry practices.
Therefore, when a structural failure occurs,
investigators review the adherence of the failed
structure to the governing codes, standards,
ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org
19 December 2010
JOB# FILE NAME
regulations and industry practices. If it is
found that those governing documents and
practices contributed to or, indeed, created
the cause of the failure, then it makes “good
sense” to review those codes, standards, regula-
tions and industry practices and, if warranted,
to start a process to revise them. The “good
sense” is followed sometimes but not always.
The effort is undertaken usually by city, state
or federal agencies with the assistance and talents
of professional societies, trade organizations, and
volunteers from private engineering firms and
construction companies.▪
Robert T. Ratay, Ph.D., P.E., is a structural
engineer in private practice in Manhasset,
NY, and an Adjunct Professor at Columbia
University. He has been an expert consultant/
witness on some 200 cases of structural
problems, some of which resulted in changes
of codes, regulations and practices. Dr.
Ratay is a Fellow of ASCE, and the Editor
of the Handbook of Temporary Structures
in Construction and the Forensic Structural
Engineering Handbook, both published
by McGraw-Hill. He can be reached at
Structures@RobertRatay.com.
We Protect More Than Steel.
11/2/10 3:15 PM
 Intelligent
Structural Design
RAM Elements, analysis and design product

Documentation Center,
production-level drawings
RAM Concrete allows quick modeling
analysis and design optimization

STAAD.Pro, flexible general analysis and design software

RAM Concept, specialized reinforced and

post tensioned concrete slabs STAAD.foundation, for design of many types of foundations
Model, Analyze, Design,
Document and Deliver…
in an Integrated Workflow
Having all the applications you need for the tasks at
hand, along with the ability to easily synchronize your
work with the rest of the project information, helps you
get your job done right, fast and profitably. And when
the structural project workflow can be integrated, the RAM Structural System, a specialized modeling, analysis and component design tool
whole team benefits.

Bentley’s new Passport Subscriptions for structural

engineers provide access to the full range of structural
software (including upgrades) and training documents
and information that most projects require.

These options are available as an affordable alternative

to traditional licensing.

With RAM™, STAAD® and Documentation Center,

Bentley offers proven applications for:

l Steel/Steel Composite RAM Connection, a specialized shear, moment and brace connection design product
l Reinforced Concrete
l Wood and Wood Products
l Foundation Design
l Post-Tensioned Design Learn how to significantly
increase your productivity Attend ou
FREE sem r
l Steel Connections
l Structural Drawings and Details
with the latest leading
structural software.
in
… all easily coordinated with the Architect and other Join us for a 2 hour for PDH ar
team members and their design applications – such as
AutoCAD, Revit, MicroStation® and more.
seminar highlighting
improved work flows for
credit!
structural engineers!
Contact us to learn more.
12/01 Dallas, TX 12/14 Houston, TX
12/02 Indianapolis, IN 12/14 Chicago, IL
12/07 Denver, CO 12/15 Costa Mesa, CA
12/08 Seattle, WA 12/16 Baton Rouge, LA
12/09 St. Louis, MO 12/16 Minneapolis, MN
www.Bentley.com/
Visit us at:
StructuralSeminars2010 www.Bentley.com/StructuralSeminars2010
to register for a FREE seminar in your area!
© 2010 Bentley Systems, Incorporated. Bentley, the “B” Bentley logo, MicroStation, RAM, and STAAD
are either registered or unregistered trademarks or service marks of Bentley Systems, Incorporated or
one of its direct or indirect wholly-owned subsidiaries. Other brands and product names are trademarks
of their respective owners.
 Liquefaction?
The Impact ® system
treats to 45+ feet.

ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS FOR:

 soft compressible soil  liquefaction mitigation  unstable soils below groundwater  uplift/lateral loads  tanks  slope
stabilization  replace costly deep foundations  heavy loads  walls & embankments  power plants & towers  variable fill
By James W. Niehoff, P.E.
Augercast Piles
A in Hawaii
few days after initiating augercast pile installation for the
40-story Hokua Tower in Honolulu, the foundation contractor
was approached by a neighbor who asked when pile driving
would begin. Virtually all of the nearby high-rise structures were sup-
ported by precast piles driven to depths of 100 to 150 feet. The neighbor
was relieved to hear that nearly ¼ of the foundations had already been
installed, and that he would not be subjected to the noise or vibrations
associated with pile driving.

Project Description
The Hokua Tower is a high rise condominium completed in 2005,
located at the northeast corner of Ala Moana Boulevard and Queen
Street west of the Waikiki area of Honolulu, Hawaii. The development
includes a 40-story condominium tower and an adjacent 4-story parking
structure that also houses retail and commercial space (Figure 1). The
building incorporates a post-tensioned concrete structural system with
a central core, housing elevators and stair wells, which is designed to
resist wind and seismic shear loads.

Waikiki Area
The Waikiki area of Honolulu was not always the bustling tourist
mecca that it is today. Until the early part of the 1900s, most of the
area consisted of low-lying wetlands occupied by ponds and swamps. In
the late 1920s, the Ala Wai Canal was constructed through the swamp,
allowing it to drain and producing dry properties for the development
of hotels and resorts. However, as might be expected in a former
swamp, subsurface conditions are relatively poor, with peat deposits,
loose sands, silts and clays extending from the surface to depths of
about 20 to 30 feet. These near surface soils are underlain by a series
of coral reef deposits, each about 20 to 40 feet in thickness. Basaltic
bedrock, associated with the Koolau mountain range, typically lies
several hundred feet below grade.
For the past 50 years, foundations for mid to high rise structures
built in the Waikiki area were installed by predrilling through over-
burden soils and the upper coral formation, then driving precast piles
to end bearing in coral limestone at depths of 100 feet or greater. Pile
capacities were typically limited to 100 tons per pile. While these
foundations were relatively easy to install, they were not particularly
efficient or cost effective.

Hokua Foundation Design

Subsurface conditions at the site of the Hokua project were typical for
the area, with about 25 feet of poor quality soil overburden, followed by
an upper coral formation about 25 feet in thickness. This was underlain
by about 30 feet of loose to medium dense gravel, then by another
layer of coral. For this project, the geotechnical engineer judged that
conditions were ideally suited for the use of augercast pile foundations.
Augercast piles are installed by drilling a borehole with a continuous
Figure 1: The Hokua Tower.
flight, hollow-stem auger to a depth compatible with proper support,
and then pumping high strength grout through the auger tip as the
auger is withdrawn. A steel reinforcing cage is subsequently installed in
the pile from the top, through the fluid grout, to resist lateral loads and Project Team
to provide for connections to the pile cap (Figure 2, page 24). Support is Structural Engineer: Magnussen Klemencic Associates, Seattle, WA
derived by side shear resistance as well as end bearing. This pile type is Architect: Handel Architects LLP, San Francisco, CA
particularly well suited to sites underlain by dense granular soils or weak Construction Management: Brett Hill Management Group LLC,
bedrock materials, where high side friction can be developed between Honolulu, HI
the fluid grout and the irregular sides of the borehole. Augercast piles General Contractor: Albert C. Kobayashi, Inc., Honolulu, HI
typically range in diameter from 14 inches to 40 inches, and can support Augercast Pile Contractor: Morris-Shea Bridge Company,
compressive loads ranging from 100 to over 1000 tons per pile. Birmingham, AL
continued on next page

STRUCTURE magazine 23 December 2010


Figure 2: Pilot Hole Drilling. Figure 3: Installation of Reinforcing Cage.
There was only one problem with the selection of augercast piles
for this development. While this pile type had found wide use in the
continental United States, it had never been utilized in Hawaii for
foundation support. There were no local contractors with experience
in installing these piles, nor a history of satisfactory performance.
Local building officials were unfamiliar with the foundation and were
uncertain as to whether it could be approved.
Ultimately, following several months of work with building officials,
the design team, and the contractors, design and permitting issues
were resolved and 18-inch diameter augercast piles were selected for
support of the building. In the tower area, piles were designed to extend
through the upper coral formation, the underlying gravel and into the
second coral formation at a depth of 90 feet. These piles were designed
to support compressive loads of 200 tons each. In the more lightly
loaded 4-story parking deck section of the development, piles were
designed to support a 150-ton capacity exclusively from the upper coral
formation within 50 feet of the ground surface. This represented a 50
to 100 percent increase in capacity, at about ½ the depth of traditional
driven piles.
Construction
Prior to pile construction, a series of boreholes were drilled with the
crane mounted drill rig to confirm that the augers could penetrate the
weak coral formations (Figure 3). Then, two load tests were performed
on piles extending into both the shallow and deeper coral formations
to confirm design capacity. Since the coral is irregularly shaped and
contains numerous small voids and channels, grout formed an integral
bond with the foundation materials. Side shear capacities of up to
6,000 pounds per square foot were developed in the coral strata. Both
load tests demonstrated satisfactory support capacity and production
pile installation was begun.
STRUCTURE magazine
From a technical standpoint, pile
installation proceeded smoothly.
The only problem occurred at about
the midpoint in the project when a
concrete company labor strike cut
the supply of grout to the project
site for several weeks. Overall, the
construction manager for the project
estimated that the use of augercast
piles resulted in a net savings of over
$1 million when compared with
traditional driven piles, considering
the number and depth of piles and
the size of pile caps. Further, neigh-
boring property owners and the city
were pleased with the reduction in Figure 4: Pile with Settled Grout.
noise and vibration during installa-
tion. As a result of this project, nearly all high rise construction in the
Waikiki area has utilized either augercast piles or drilled pier founda-
tions since 2005.
Construction Considerations
While the voids in the coral formations in the Waikiki area are
beneficial to the development of side shear resistance for augercast pile
foundations, they can cause problems as well. Grout volumes for piles
installed in typical soil and rock profiles within mainland U.S. sites
generally range from 110 to 140 percent of the theoretical volume of
the pile. In porous coral formations, it is not unusual for grout volumes
to range from 180 to 200 percent of the theoretical volume of the pile.
A short time after completion of the Hokua project, augercast
piles were selected for use in the redevelopment of several city
blocks in Waikiki. The local geotechnical engineer selected standard
specifications for augercast pile installation that referenced a grout
take factor of 145 percent. The pile installation contractor followed
this specification and installed piles in a normal manner. Following
installation of the reinforcing cages, the pile tops were covered with
plywood sheeting to protect the fluid grout and to eliminate a hazard to
workers. However, upon removing the sheeting several days later, the
grout was observed to have dropped in some of the drilled boreholes
to a level several feet below the groundwater table. The reinforcing
cages had been pulled downward and distorted by the dropping grout
(Figure 4). Ultimately, all of the installed piles required assessment
by pile integrity testing and several required replacement at a cost of
several hundred thousand dollars.
Conclusion
The introduction of augercast piles on the Hokua Tower project
resulted not only in substantial cost savings for one project, but
changed decades-old established foundation design practices in the
most developed areas of Hawaii. As engineers, we must all look for
opportunities to transfer technologies and construction practices to
further the state of practice, and develop cost-effective and safe designs.
We must also know the limitations of the technology and construction
practices. Personal experience is critical in the application of structural
and foundation systems to new areas, particularly in the preparation of
specifications and the inspection of installation.▪
James W. Niehoff, P.E. is a Practice Leader with Golder Associates
Inc. and was the geotechnical engineer of record for the Hokua Tower
project. He may be reached at jniehoff@golder.com.
24 December 2010
 We build the foundation for security.

Anchor Installation
World Trade Center Vehicle Security Center
New York, NY

The support you need for your most critical structures.

Nicholson has been heavily involved in the remarkable redevelopment of the
World Trade Center site. We are a part of a team constructing the foundations for
the new underground World Trade Center Vehicle Security Center, the checkpoint
through which vehicles destined for the trade center’s underground roadways
will pass. At Nicholson Construction Company, we specialize in deep foundations,
1-800-388-2340 earth retention, ground treatment and ground improvement techniques that help
nicholsonconstruction.com you achieve your project goals. Nicholson...the support you need.

DEEP FOUNDATIONS  EARTH RETENTION  GROUND TREATMENT  GROUND IMPROVEMENT

ExcEllEncE in Structural EnginEEring
NCSEA 13 A A P th
NNuAl wArdS rogrAm
2010 Panel of Judges
At their annual meeting in Jersey City, NJ in October, NCSEA
announced the winners of the 2010 Excellence in Structural Engineering
Alex Abel Jerry Maly Awards. This awards program annually highlights some of the best ex-
City & County of Denver Wiss, Janney, Elstner amples of structural ingenuity throughout the world. Awards are divided
Jonathan Akins Brent Norris into eight categories: four building categories which are separated based
University of Colorado-Boulder J.R. Harris & Co. on construction cost, a bridge or transportation structure category,
Paul Doak David Poe international structures, forensic-renovation-retrofit-rehabilitation
Martin/Martin Anchor Engineering structures and an “other” category which encompasses all types of non-
building or bridge structures. All structures must have been completed,
Paul Hause David Renn or substantially completed, within the past three calendar years.
Structural Consultants, Inc. S.A. Miro The 2010 Awards Committee was chaired by Carrie Johnson (Wallace
Bob Hunnes JD Shafer Engineering, Tulsa, OK). The judges this year were provided by SEAC
JVA Stresscon and the judging took place in Denver on August 11th. Ms. Johnson
noted: “We had a record number of entries this year, and the quality and
Susie Jorganson Tom Skinner
complexity of projects entered into the competition continues to grow.
Leo Daly JVA
The judges said they had an interesting time seeing the creative ways
Andrew Kelsey Brian Tinkey structural engineers resolve unique and challenging problems. This year,
Ascent Group, Inc. Martin/Martin there were more projects than ever that I’d consider traveling to see.”
Brant Lanhert Bruce Wolfe Outstanding Project Awards were presented in eight categories. Please
KL & A Structural Consultants Inc. join STRUCTURE® magazine and NCSEA in congratulating all of
the winners. More in-depth articles on several of the 2010 winners will
Rob Leberer appear in the Spotlight Department of the magazine over the course of
Anderson the 2011 editorial year.

26
New BuildiNgs uNder $10 MillioN
Outstanding Project
Wild Beast Music Pavilion
California Institute of the Arts (CalArts); Valencia, CA
Thornton Tomasetti, Inc.
This unique 3,200-square-foot music pavilion, featuring a flowing
arched roofline, has 20-foot-tall, 30-foot-wide hangar-style doors
that open to transform the 100-seat indoor space into an outdoor
amphitheater. Thornton Tomasetti collaborated closely with the
architect to develop a special roof framing system that expresses the
structural steel members and details, and allows the floating acoustical
enclosure to be exceptionally thin. The pavilion’s slender form is clearly
seen in the structural steel members and their connections, which are
expressed both internally and externally.

Courtesy of Tom Bonner, 2009.

New BuildiNgs $10 MillioN to $30 MillioN

Outstanding Project
300 New Jersey Avenue
Washington, D.C. Smislova, Kehnemui & Associates, P.A.
300 New Jersey Avenue is a 10-story concrete office building with an adjacent atrium
and 6-story parking garage. It is the first commercial office building designed and built
in the United States by world renowned architectural firm, Rogers Stirk Harbour +
Partners. The project’s most notable feature, a full height atrium, is highlighted by a
complex bright yellow boomerang truss and tree structure that supports the skylight,
glass walkways and stair platforms extending from the center of the atrium. Two lattice
columns supporting the truss are constructed of HSS pipe sections and pre-tensioned
cables with roller pins at each outrigger.

STRUCTURE magazine 27 December 2010

New BuildiNgs $30 MillioN to $100 MillioN
Outstanding Project
San Joaquin County Administration Building
Stockton, CA Crosby Group
Designed and built within 27 months with a goal of
LEED Gold, the new 250,000-square-foot, six-story
San Joaquin County Administration Building, with its
striking glass atrium structure, creates a new landmark
for the city of Stockton, California.
Overcoming design challenges like the nearly 60-
foot cantilevered sixth-floor boardroom, high seismic

demands, intricate detailing for the spectacular glass atrium,

fluctuations in steel price and an aggressive schedule, the
Design-Build team delivered the project on time and budget.
With enhanced seismic performance, via Buckling Restrained
Braces, the building will ably serve the people of San Joaquin
County for the foreseeable future.

New BuildiNgs over $100 MillioN

Outstanding Project
Cowboys Stadium
Arlington, TX Walter P Moore
This exciting project established numerous world and industry “firsts”,
including: the world’s longest single-span roof structure at 1225 feet;
the world’s largest roof-hung HD video display board; the world’s larg-
est operable glass doors; operable roof panels that traverse the steepest
incline of any North American retractable stadium; a first-of-its-kind

rack-and-pinion roof drive system; and, one

of the world’s first installations of a Teflon®
(PTFE)-coated fiberglass tensile membrane
with a photo catalytic titanium dioxide coat-
ing that breaks down dirt through sunlight,
cleaning the roof automatically.
It is an enormous revenue generator,
pumping $7 to $16 billion into the city’s
economy over the course of the next 30 years.

STRUCTURE magazine 28 December 2010

New Bridge aNd traNsPortatioN structures
Outstanding Project
David Kreitzer Lake Hodges Bicycle
Pedestrian Bridge
San Diego, CA T.Y. Lin International
The David Kreitzer Lake Hodges Bicycle Pedestrian
Bridge is a unique structure and is the world’s longest
stress ribbon bridge. As the Engineer for the San
Dieguito River Park, T.Y. Lin International provided
services from initial design development though con-
struction. The 1000-foot crossing of Lake Hodges
provides a vital route by connecting separate trail seg-
ments within the San Dieguito River Park.
The innovative design was chosen to minimize impacts
to the sensitive habitat. At Lake Hodges, it provides a
unique, beautiful and dramatic crossing that “floats”
harmoniously within its natural setting, and provides
the region with a landmark structure.

iNterNatioNal structures
Outstanding Project
Burj Khalifa
Dubai, UAE Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP
The Burj Khalifa is the world’s tallest building, and the world’s tallest
structure. At 828 meters (2,717 feet; over ½ mile!) in height, it surpasses
the previous world’s tallest building by a staggering 319 meters (1,047
feet). A new structural system was developed to support the height of
this building – the “buttressed” core. Primarily a reinforced concrete
structure, this system is very efficient and also fosters constructability.
The building also utilized a wind tunnel to confirm and refine massing
and shaping, such that wind vortices are disorganized, thereby reducing
wind forces and motions on the Tower.

STRUCTURE magazine 29 December 2010

ForeNsic/reNovatioN/retroFit/rehaBilitatioN structures
Outstanding Project
UCSF Medical Sciences Buildings and
Moffitt Hospital Separation Project
San Francisco, CA Degenkolb Engineers
As prime consultant, Degenkolb Engineers employed state-of-the-art analysis and
designed a creative solution to retrofit UCSF Medical Center. The two buildings,
the Medical Sciences Building (MSB) and Moffitt Hospital, were structurally
separated while allowing the buildings to remain fully occupied and operational
during construction. The large application
of non-linear analysis and the torsional com-
ponent developed for the Modal Pushover
Analysis (MPA) procedure are breakthroughs
in structural engineering.
In an unconventional move, the two
structures were separated and a moving
seismic joint that runs the entire length of the
two fifteen-story buildings was devised. This
allowed the buildings to seismically perform as
two separate structures.

other structures
Outstanding Project
The Ledge at Skydeck Chicago
Chicago, IL Halcrow Yolles
The Ledge features four all-glass observation boxes, comprised of 1.5-inch
glass panels that extend 4.3 feet out from the edge of the existing tower
wall, providing an unobstructed view of up to 50 miles and four states…
and straight down the face of the tower.
The nearly invisible support was accomplished by hanging the boxes
from cantilevered steel frames and strategically hiding structural supports
behind ceilings.
The visible hint of support appears as small clips on the sides or floor of
the structures, which measure 12 feet high by 10 feet wide. The boxes are
retractable for maintenance.

Photos courtesy of Skydeck Chicago.

STRUCTURE magazine 30 December 2010

Award Winner – New Buildings $10 – $30M
Seton Women’s Center
Austin, TX Datum Engineers, Inc.
Courtesy of Kelly Thibodeaux.
Seton Women’s Center is a 5-story, 119,270-square-foot horizontal
and vertical expansion of the main Seton Medical Center campus in
Austin. This complicated project provided much needed space, while
squeezed into a tight site. The addition spans over an existing campus
roadway and emergency vehicle lane. A story-height truss system was
used to suspend three new floors of the expansion above the existing
2-story Emergency Department. An 85-foot truss spans across the
existing ED, and is supported by another truss cantilevering 20 feet to
support the corner. This solution enabled the Emergency Department
to function with zero interruptions throughout construction.
Award Winner – New Buildings $30 – $100M
The University of Louisville Clinical
and Translational Building
Louisville, KY Rangaswamy & Associates, Inc.
Courtesy of Prakash Patel.
The University of Louisville’s Clinical and Translational Building is a
building that became an evolving project during the course of its design
and construction. The bio-medical research facility was originally
planned for construction in two phases, but it was ultimately designed
and built in one phase. During construction, LEED practices were
utilized and it was decided to pursue LEED certification. By using
innovative structural design, sustainable materials and energy saving
and green building practices, the building was constructed requiring
less time and money than expected. This efficient approach resulted in
a Gold certification from the US Green Building Council (USGBC).
STRUCTURE magazine
Award Winner – New Buildings $10 – $30M
UIC Forum
University of Illinois at Chicago Thornton Tomasetti, Inc.
The jewel of the University of Illinois at Chicago’s new South
Campus is the $28.5 million, 75,000-square-foot Forum. Located in a
prominent area on UIC’s campus, the Forum serves as a venue for both
the University and the public, accommodating a variety of events within
its flexible floor plan. The building establishes a new identity and image
for both the campus and the surrounding neighborhood. The Forum
affords stunning views both to and from the campus. The venue’s over-
hanging, trellis-like metal roof visually connects the structure to the
modern architecture featured in the skyline of downtown Chicago.
Award Winner – New Buildings Over $100M
Sutardja Dai Hall
University of California, Berkeley Forell/Elsesser Engineers, Inc.
Sutardja Dai Hall, on the University of California, Berkeley campus,
is the new home of the CITRIS (Center for Information Technology
Research in the Interest of Society) Headquarters, the Banatao Institute@
CITRIS Berkeley, and the Marvell Nanofabrication Laboratory. The
141,000-square-foot facility houses faculty researchers and students
from four UC campuses (Berkeley, Davis, Merced and Santa Cruz),
providing wide-ranging disciplines, including engineering, energy,
health, law, public policy, political science and new media.
31 December 2010
Award Winner – New Buildings Over $100M
Curtis R. Priem Experimental Media
and Performing Arts Center
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; Troy, NY Buro Happold
Rensselaer’s new Experimental Media and Performing Arts Center
(EMPAC) offers an ambitious, international artistic program, providing
opportunities for interaction and exchange between artists and researchers
in science and technology.
The building incorporates a wide variety of venues, which accom-
modate both the traditional performing arts and new, experimental
media. Also provided are artist-in-residence studios, audiovisual pro-
duction and postproduction suites, audience amenities, and student
and support facilities.
All program areas, including the atrium, are designed to exceptional
performance standards. All venues throughout the building are wired
to the production and postproduction suites, which can receive sounds
and images from every part of the building and can transmit sounds
and images in turn.
Award Winner – New Bridge and Trans. Struct.
The Ron Venderly Family Bridge
Fort Wayne, IN Engineering Resources, Inc.
The Ron Venderly Family Bridge is a cable-stayed pedestrian structure
crossing the St. Joseph River at the campus of Indiana University –
Purdue University, Fort Wayne (IPFW). The bridge has a main span
of 385 feet and total length over 555 feet. The 115-foot pylons were
constructed of induction curved, 36 inch diameter pipe. As a result of
a sectional wind tunnel test conducted at RWDI of Ontario, stainless
steel wind fairings were required along each longitudinal girder to
mitigate wind dynamics. The $3,800,000 bridge was constructed by
cantilevering from each side of the river, which allowed the substructure
to be constructed on the river banks.
STRUCTURE magazine
Award Winner – New Buildings Over $100M
Escala
Seattle, WA Cary Kopczynski & Company, Inc.
The architectural goal for Escala, a 30-story luxury condominium tower
in Seattle, was to create open spaces unimpeded by walls and columns.
Cary Kopczynski & Co. developed a unique system for seismic resistance
that integrated exceedingly well with the architectural layout.
Seismic columns utilized an exceptionally high concrete strength of
14,000 psi, requiring heavy reinforcing and creating congestion. Working
with City officials, CKC gained approval to use reinforcing bar with an
ultra-high strength of 100 ksi, alleviating most rebar congestion.
Escala became the first building in North America, and perhaps the
world, to use 100-ksi steel for seismic reinforcing.
Award Winner – New Bridge and Trans. Struct.
Hillhouse Pedestrian Bridges
New Haven, CT Guy Nordenson and Associates
When the Hillhouse Avenue vehicular bridge was reconstructed, the
pedestrian passageways were separated as independent foot bridges
aligned with the axes of the avenue’s sidewalks. Spanning 60 feet
clear over a former canal and railway on Yale University’s campus, the
pedestrian bridges are made from high-performance, high-strength steel
(HPS70W) and supported on concrete abutments with granite coping.
Excluding their widths, 10 feet and 8 feet respectively, the east and west
bridges are identical, each with two 46-inch-deep steel plate girders that
comprise the primary structure as well as the handrails. The first of their
kind, the plate girders have ¼-inch-thick corrugated, perforated webs.
32 December 2010
Award Winner – International Structures
YAS Marina Link Bridge
YAS Island, Abu Dhabi, UAS Arup
The Yas Marina Hotel Link Bridge is more than the typical linkage
between buildings; it is a destination. Designed as a vantage point for
viewing the Formula 1 races on the course situated below the structure,
the Yas Marina Hotel Link Bridge was constructed in 17 months
through a fast-track construction process where all stakeholders were
involved from the design stage.
As part of the Yas Marina Hotel Project, the link bridge opened in
time for the 2009 Formula 1 Etihad Airways Abu Dhabi Grand Prix.
The iconic bridge connects the Hotel’s two primary towers. The hotel
structures are wedded together by a spectacular illuminated steel and
glass veil.
Award Winner – Forensic/Renovation/Rehab...
Fox Oakland Theater Seismic Retrofit
Oakland, CA The KPA Group
The historic Fox Oakland Theater operated from 1928 until closing in
1966. In 2005, the City of Oakland and a private developer raised $87
million for the retrofit and restoration of the theater, and construction of
two new school buildings. Construction was completed in 2009.
The retrofit presented many challenges, including bracing and preserv-
ing historic painted plaster ornaments and decorations, and developing
schemes to address many different existing systems and materials. None
of the retrofit work is visible today.
The restored Fox is back as a treasured part of Oakland’s heritage,
revitalizing a new “Uptown District” of restaurants and housing.
STRUCTURE magazine
Award Winner – International Structures
United Arab Emirates Pavilion
Shanghai World Expo, Shanghai, China Halvorson and Partners
Courtesy of Foster + Partners.
Rising to a height of 20 meters (66 feet) with a plan diameter of
roughly 60 meters (197 feet), the sand-dune inspired pavilion encloses
3900-square-meters of exhibition showcasing the UAE at the World’s
Fair. After the Expo, this pavilion will be disassembled and rebuilt
at a permanent site in its home country – on Saadiyat Island in Abu
Dhabi, UAE.
The roof structure was inspired by the sand dunes that dominate the
deserts of the UAE. The interior space under the “dunes” is column free
to provide flexibility in the main exhibition space. The most effective
way to form the roof structure was to treat each of the three dunes as a
shell structure.
Award Winner – Forensic/Renovation/Rehab...
Glendale Municipal Services Building – Seismic Retrofit
Glendale, CA Nabih Youssef Associates
The three-story steel moment frame building cantilevers 36 feet
to its outer corners and is supported by four Piloti. The building was
constructed in 1966 and was seismically retrofitted in 2008 using base
isolation in lieu of strengthening the welded moment connections.
Friction pendulum bearings were installed under the Pilotis and a new
Plaza level was constructed above the bearings to create an isolation
plane. This approach resulted in higher seismic performance and
limited construction to areas below the first occupied floor; and it
proved to be cost effective since the building remained fully occupied
and operational during construction.
33 December 2010
Award Winner – Forensic/Renovation/Rehab...
Bonner Pedestrian Bridge Rehabilitation
Bonner, MT HDR
Courtesy of Thomas Hanou.
The Bonner Pedestrian Bridge was at risk of falling into the Blackfoot
River due to pier scour from increased river velocity inherent with the
Milltown Dam removal. HDR designed a new three-span bridge consisting
of two new prefabricated steel approach spans and a much longer recon-
structed center span made from one of the old truss spans. This was made
possible, in part, by removing the old heavy concrete deck and installing
a lightweight timber deck. The resulting bridge is innovative, showcasing
a means by which old truss bridges may be preserved by forward-thinking
engineers to meet client and community interests.
Award Winner – Other Structures
Pomona Skyspace
Claremont, CA Gilsanz Murray Steficek
Artist James Turrell’s Pomona Skyspace is located at Pomona College in
Claremont, CA. It encompasses a garden courtyard, a shallow reflecting
pool, a seemingly floating canopy with an oculus, through which the
sky can be viewed, all bathed in changing, hidden LED lights, and
supported by twelve slender piloti.
GMS collaborated with architects Marmol Radziner to develop a
structure that appears to effortlessly support the steel canopy. This team
also worked closely with the contractor and steel-fabricator to ensure
constructability on the mostly enclosed site.
Skyspace was engineered to be unnoticed, although visitors stare at it
directly. Turrell’s Pomona Skyspace is elegant and impeccably designed.
STRUCTURE magazine
Award Winner – Forensic/Renovation/Rehab...
Historic DC Courthouse Modernization & Expansion
Washington, D.C. Robert Silman Associates
Courtesy of Stephanie Potter.
Originally designed by George Hadfield in 1820 to serve as the
District’s City Hall, the Historic DC Courthouse is a National Historic
Landmark and one of the oldest public buildings in Washington, DC.
In 2002, Robert Silman Associates was selected as part of a team to
design a restoration and expansion program with the goal of restoring
the architectural landmark to its previous grandeur while, at the same
time, transforming it into a fully-functioning, modern courthouse.
Now complete, the courthouse serves as the new home for the District’s
highest court, the DC Court of Appeals.
Award Winner – Other Structures
An ‘Oasis’ of Structural Art
Various Cruise Ships Martin/Martin, Inc.
In the past 15 years, Martin/Martin has provided structural engineering
for more than 20 major art pieces installed on 14 cruise ships, including
the Oasis of the Seas, the most recent and largest such ship ever launched,
and Allure, its sister due out this year. The structural engineering work
incorporated design of steel, stainless steel, aluminum, bronze, glass,
fiber-reinforced polycarbonate, cable and fabric and required special
considerations such as roll, pitch and heave movements (which exceeds
the highest seismic accelerations on buildings anywhere in the US).▪
34 December 2010
 Sustainable Design for Structural Engineers
By Michael Teller, A.I.A., NCARB, LEED AP and Jillian Bergman
Green building and sustainable design are no longer a fad. For
the first time in history, our society is taking energy conservation
seriously because it is no longer an option not to. In this country,
buildings account for over 65 percent of all energy consumption
and, according to the US Green Building Council (USGBC),
buildings consume over 60 percent of all the resources manufac-
tured in the world.
In 2007, the American Institute of Architects (AIA) adopted a
goal of 50 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from
buildings by the year 2030, and companies, organizations, local
and federal governments are following suit. It is not enough for
those needing new buildings simply to want a green building:
as design professionals, we should be ready and able to provide
them with the complementary design and recommendations for
sustainable solutions.
The United States, boasting only 4 percent of the world’s popu-
lation, consumes a staggering 25 percent of its resources. As
the population of the world increases rapidly, the strain on our
resources and increasing demand on our environment continue
to grow. These wasteful practices must be brought to a halt and,
as engineers, we can begin by bringing sustainable design into
everyday practice.
Design
The design of any building is a complex and involved process,
with the potential for the utilization of numerous materials and
systems. The design of a green building is no different. The
design itself may be no more complicated; the difference in
engineering a green building is in the design approach and the
collaborative design process with the other team members.
A core tenet of sustainable design involves assembling the entire
design team at the onset of the project, in order to set the goals
of the design not only from a programmatic standpoint, but also
from a green and energy consumption standpoint. In the green
world every decision made during the design process is based on
promoting energy efficiency, minimal site disturbance, healthier
environments, and reduction in the use of virgin material.
The structural engineer is a key member in the team of designers
for a successful green project. From the inception of design,
new trends, new techniques and current industry issues
structural engineers have a vital role to play in the world of sus-
tainability and high performance buildings. This includes defining
the basic structure and scope of a project, providing ways to
bring more natural light into the building, supporting energy
conservation measures such as double walls and green roofs, and
InSIghtS
selecting the structural materials to be used.
The core structural elements of every building are critical to the
green design concept and should not be overlooked. As with any
building, the structure supports the building physically, as well
as the design concepts on which it is based. Structural engineers
aid the design team by providing clear spans, increasing the
ability to bring in natural light, provide uninterrupted views
to the exterior, and make the exterior wall lighter. Adding
additional windows to a structure provides the same benefits.
Design elements, such as sunscreens, double walls and vegetated
green walls, all add sustainable benefits to a building and are
integrated into the building’s design by the structural engineer.
Moreover, the intent of the other design team members, includ-
ing architectural, plumbing, HVAC, fire protection and electrical,
STRUCTURE magazine 36 December 2010
must be coordinated with
the work of the structural
engineer. Other consider-
ations include the additional
weight of a green roof, the
entire design of under-
ground parking to reduce
impervious surfaces on site, Even structures not specifically designed to
the weight and size of rain- be green may be ‘greened’ at little expense.
water and grey water collection tanks, and uplift resistance of
photovoltaic panels. These elements all serve to reduce the carbon
footprint of a building but, if not properly incorporated into its
structure, will not be useful.
Materials
Every industry is touting sustainable products, and structural
engineering has its own set of green tools in its arsenal.
Material selection is an integral component of the proper
design process for a green building. The three most commonly
used structural materials are wood, steel and concrete, each
with their own green benefits and drawbacks. The best option
is determined when analyzing the scope and location of the
project. Often designers and design teams get tangled in a web
of Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®)
points, and materials selection is “prescribed”, according to
Douglas Sordyl of the American Concrete Institute (ACI). It is
therefore necessary for the structural engineers to take the lead
on a project to ensure that sustainable materials are chosen for
the proper usages, and not simply selected for a singular aspect
of their green properties or to “chase points.”
USGBC’s LEED point system is the most commonly used
way to evaluate just how green a building is. While none of the
points explicitly refer to the efficiency of the structure, many of
the categories pertain to the role of the structural engineer in
the design process. For instance, the LEED checklist will award
a point for reusing 50 percent of an existing building structure
on a project, with an additional point awarded if 75 percent of
the structure is reused, and a third point can be obtained if 100
percent of the structure and some of the interior partitions are
also reused.
When we consider that over 65 percent of all material that goes
into the landfills is from construction and demolition, reducing
the amount of waste created by our industry is critical for the
sustainable concept. Finally, during construction, the careful
separation of construction waste and recycling of construction
waste material also gains another two points for LEED certification.
Wood
Wood frame construction is easy and inexpensive, and a great
option for smaller projects as building codes and engineering
realities often limit the capacity of wood structures. Wood grown
from certified forests assures the consumer that the product
has been produced from sustainable forests that grow lumber
as a commodity or a crop using sustainable practices, rather
than clear cutting the forests or relying on old growth trees for
lumber production. Wood certified by the Forest Stewardship
Council (FSC) assures consumers that the wood that they are
using for their structure has been grown in responsible forests,
and harvested in ways that promote the welfare of the local community
and ecology as well.
FSC has laid out a set of principles and criteria about how forests are
certified, and in terms of how the ecological, social, and economic
needs of the forest and community are managed. They ensure that
FSC-certified forests are responsible with respect to protection of
wildlife and biodiversity, thereby promoting responsible forestry and
logging practices. Karen Steer, public relations representative for FSC,
notes that LEED points for new wood in a structure are only being
awarded for FSC-certified wood, but the process is under review by
USGBC; the use of new non-FSC wood will not garner any additional
LEED points.
Steel
Domestic structural steel is a tremendous option for green engineering,
being comprised of 95% recycled material. It is one of the most easily re-
cycled and reused construction materials. Old cars, refrigerators, washing
machines, rebar, and scrap metal are all collected and reconstituted into
new steel products every day.
Because steel is in such high demand for construction, mills and
recycling centers are scattered throughout the country. Within a 200-
300 mile radius of any location, there is sure to be a steel mill and/or a
scrap collection facility. Steel that is fabricated locally drastically reduces
the amount of energy needed to transport the material, thus adding
to its sustainability. Additionally, steel offers the flexibility of design
and speed of construction that few other materials can provide when
considering its size and weight.
Concrete
A significant advantage for the use of concrete is that it is the most
widely used building material in the world, which means that it
is often considered a local resource. With a drastic reduction in the
cost to transport the material, a great deal of money and strain on
the environment is saved. As the term “green” drives the markets, the
concrete industry remains at the forefront of incorporating sustainable
principles into their products.
More and more often, designers and builders desire to re-use materials
in construction. Concrete is an outstanding candidate for recycling
and combining with fly ash, with the potential of creating a material
comprised of 50-60% of recycled material, thereby reducing the carbon
footprint of a particular project. Douglas Sordyl of ACI recommends
that engineers explicitly specify these cementitious supplements in the
project manual.
Why should I go green?
Those dubious of green design tout the incremental increases in the
cost of design and construction of a building, ranging from 2% to nearly
20% depending on the level of LEED certification sought. They shudder
to imagine the forethought and collaboration required of the design team
and particularly of the structural design effort, which may be considerably
greater than with a traditionally over-consumptive building. Evidence
shows, however, that the benefits of building green are tremendous, and
far outweigh any of the negative aspects of the process.
In the total investment of a building development, 41% of the money
spent is devoted to the construction cost of the building itself. At first
glance, it may seem exorbitant to increase the cost of a building by
10% in order to have it be LEED certified Gold, but looking further,
the increase is dwarfed by the benefits. According to USGBC, when
considering the costs of constructing, operating and running a business
in a building over its 30-year lifespan, the construction cost is only 2%
of the total. That is almost negligible when compared to the salaries of
the occupants of an office building, which can add up to a whopping
STRUCTURE magazine
86.5%. Therefore, even a modest 1% increase in worker productivity
will provide an exponential payback when compared to the initial
investment in the physical plant.
Still, with the obvious decrease in operating energy costs, water
consumption, and environmentally friendly material selections, LEED
buildings have been proven to increase the value of a building by an
extraordinary 7.5%. LEED certified buildings have an overall higher rate
of employee satisfaction, a reduced number of employee sick days, and
a significantly higher property value than traditionally built, resource
wasteful buildings [Kats, Green Building Costs and Financial Benefits,
Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, 2003]. Some forward-thinking
employers and institutions are going green as an employee retention tool in
order to differentiate them from their competitors. When considering the
cost of hiring and training new employees, the payback on the premium
for green building is, also, immediate.
As a structural engineer, you should continue using the best practices
possible; take a proactive approach with the design team early on in the
process, and seek creative and alternative solutions to the challenges facing
the design of a green building. It is not only your responsibility, but it is
your duty to ensure that the buildings you design are as efficient as pos-
sible. Regardless of whether or not they are going to be LEED certified,
sustainable design should be incorporated into all of your projects.▪
Michael S. Teller, A.I.A., NCARB, LEED AP is a principal at CBI
Consulting Inc. and leads their architectural division. Mr. Teller can be
reached at mteller@cbiconsultinginc.com.
Jillian S. Bergman works closely with the architectural division of CBI
Consulting Inc. to produce sustainable design projects. Ms. Bergman
can be reached at jbergman@cbiconsultinginc.com.
Pile Integrity Tester
Assess
Foundation
Quality
Estimate
Unknown
ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org
Length
Offer
Answers
Fast
Introducing the wireless PIT-X
Complies with
ASTM D5882
Quality Assurance
for Deep
Foundations
Cleveland, OH USA
+1 216-831-6131
www.pile.com sales@pile.com
37 December 2010
 Great achievements
notable structural engineers
Leffert Lefferts Buck
By Frank Griggs, Jr., Ph.D., P.E., P.L.S.
Leffert L. Buck was born February 5, 1837
in Canton, NY into a family with a military
tradition and an appreciation of the value of
education. After attending the local academy,
however, he chose to spend the next several
years learning the machinist trade. At the end
of that period, he enrolled in the first class at
St. Lawrence University. After only two years
of study, the Civil War broke out and Buck left
college before receiving a degree.
Buck enlisted as a private in the Sixtieth
(60th) New York Infantry in October 1861,
six months after the war began. The 60th took
part in the Battle of Antietam, where Buck
was wounded in both legs. His regiment was
later one of the last regiments off the field in
the losing battle at Chancellorsville. He was
stationed at Culp’s Hill on the right flank
of the Federals at Gettysburg, and fought off
a major charge on the second day. The regimen-
tal history stated that in this four-hour period
“great coolness was displayed by both officers
and men.” They were then sent to help lift the
siege at Chattanooga, Tennessee, and were one
of the main regiments that assaulted Look-
out Mountain in the famous Battle Above the
Clouds on November 24, 1863. The Regimental
History stated that after the Color Sergeant
was killed, “Sergeant Buck sprang forward,
seized the flag, and, with a coolness and brav-
ery undisturbed by the whiz of bullets, which
came thick and fast, steadily bore it in advance
of the regiment, and planted it, at last, on that
point of the mountain where the rebels had
boasted that the stars and stripes should never
wave again. A brave and noble thing for you,
Leffert!” In the following spring, the 60th was
part of General William T. Sherman’s Army
that captured Atlanta after turning back
General John B. Hood’s attack at Peachtree
Creek. Later in the fall of 1864, Sherman
selected his very best men to make the march
to the sea and Savannah, taking it just before
Christmas of 1864. Sherman with Buck,
now a Captain, started north January 27 and
marched into South Carolina to the capitol of
Columbia and thence, after Lee surrendered,
to Washington. The 60th was mustered out
of service July 17, 1865 and Buck enrolled at
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, NY to
study civil engineering.
In June, the class of 1868 read their theses
and twenty-two men received degrees from
Rensselaer. After working several years on
STRUCTURE magazine
the Croton Aqueduct with his old 60th NY
Commander, George S. Greene, Buck took
an assignment in Peru working on the railroad
running from Calao to Orroya. In 1872, Buck
was placed in charge of building the Verrugas
Viaduct. He was asked to design a new erection
technique, to build the highest bridge in the
world in one of the most remote areas, and to
build it quickly with inexperienced help.
The Engineering Record reported that it was
on this bridge he “laid the foundation for the
reputation he ever since had of accomplishing
difficult tasks with so little flourish that their
difficulty was only recognized by fellow engi-
neers.” On March 23, 1889, the Viaduct was
swept away after an “unusually rainy” season.”
Buck was retained as engineer for a new
bridge. He designed a cantilever structure with
anchor spans of 140 feet and a central span of
235 feet, including a suspended span of 105
feet. Buck’s cantilever was removed in 1938,
as the loads placed on it over 47 years since
its construction were much heavier than those
used in its design.
In 1877, Buck was asked to look at John A.
Roebling’s famous railroad suspension bridge
over the Niagara River, in service since 1855.
As a result of increased traffic, the bridge was
showing signs of wear and the owners wanted
to maintain its serviceability. Buck cut defective
wires from the existing cable and replaced
them. The Great Western Railway, which was
using the structure, was not satisfied and insisted
“upon a regular commission of engineers to
examine every part, and to report upon it.” This
commission determined “the anchorages were
small to specification...they advised that ad-
ditional chain anchorage was necessary to the
extent of 50 square inches of section to make
this equal in strength of the cables.” They also
“suggested the removal of all the wooden truss
and floor beams, and the substitution of iron.”
Buck was appointed engineer in charge of car-
rying out these recommendations and arrived
at the site September 13, 1877. He finished
the anchorage rehabilitation project and later
replaced the wooden deck structure with iron,
in less than eight months.
Roebling’s stone towers deteriorated over
time, and it was necessary to either reinforce
or replace them to extend the useful life of
the structure. Buck decided to build new
wrought-iron towers around the existing stone
towers, and transfer the load to the new towers
38 December 2010
Leffert Lefferts Buck at age 50.
without stopping traffic on the bridge. Buck’s
feat was called by Engineering News “the most
delicate and daring piece of bridgework ever
undertaken.” The Engineering Record wrote “his
reconstruction of the towers of the bridge, in
1886, is probably one of the most remarkable
engineering achievements of our age, performed
so modestly that until it was completed and
the dangers of the work were explained by
other men, few people knew that such an
enterprise was even contemplated.”
Buck’s first opportunity to build an arch
bridge was in Rochester, New York over the
Genesee Gorge. He became chief engineer in
1888 and selected a three-hinged arch pattern
to simplify the calculations. He designed the
members so the bridge could be erected by the
cantilever method, the first braced-spandrel
bridge to be so designed. It was one of the
early examples of a completely riveted long
span bridge in the United States.
By the early 1890s, Roebling’s Niagara bridge,
as updated by Buck with its single track, outlived
its usefulness. Buck received a commission to
build a new two-level, steel arch on the same
site, with two tracks on the top, without inter-
rupting traffic.
When completed, his colleagues in the bridge
building field acknowledged Buck’s triumph.
Henry Tyrrell wrote in his History of Bridge
Engineering, “the opening of the Niagara Rail-
road Arch marked a new period in American
bridge design. The remarkable example of
modern engineering was completed in 1896
at a cost of $500,000.” The bridge still stands
after 100 years of serving railroad and vehicu-
lar traffic. It is the oldest structure spanning
the river, and has fully lived up to the claim
of Engineering News at its opening that it was
“capable of serving the purpose, barring injury
by corrosion, a hundred years from now as it
is today.”
 Buck also had a 13 year involvement with
the Niagara-Clifton Bridge at Niagara Falls,
much like he had with Roebling’s. The origi-
nal suspension bridge, with a span of 1,268,
feet was built at the site just below the falls by
Samuel Keefer in 1868. In 1886, it was decided
to widen the bridge and Buck was chosen as
chief engineer. The bridgework was completed
in the fall of 1888 while Buck was away on
the west coast. About 11:00 PM on January
9, 1889, however, one of the greatest storms
known to the Niagara region blew down the
gorge, and the deck ripped away from the
cables and crashed into the river below. Buck
returned and reported on the cause of the fail-
ure. His advice was taken, and he was retained
as chief engineer. The bridge was rebuilt by
Buck in the amazingly short time of less than
two (2) months and was opened for traffic on
May 7, 1889. By 1895, with the advent of the
electric trolley, there was pressure to create a
loop railway that would connect existing lines
on both sides of the gorge, with a bridge at the
falls and one at Lewiston-Queenstown. Buck’s
suspension bridge was not designed for trolley
traffic, so it was apparent the bridge would
either have to be strengthened or replaced.
He was retained as Chief Engineer of the new
bridge, which was to be an arched structure
with a span of 840 feet. It would be built
around the existing suspension bridge and
would not interfere with traffic throughout
STRUCTURE magazine
its construction. It would be the longest arch
bridge in the world, exceeding by 276 feet that
of the Duoro Bridge built in Portugal by
Gustave Eiffel in 1876. Work on the erection
of the superstructure began March 1, 1898 and
was completed by June 30 of the same year.
The bridge served well for almost forty years,
until January 25, 1938 when a major wind
storm off Lake Erie jammed the river gorge
below the falls with ice, and the ice crumpled
main members of the bridge near the skew-
backs resulting in the bridge collapsing on
January 29th.
Another bridge was needed to connect
Brooklyn with Manhattan was apparent shortly
after the Brooklyn Bridge opened in 1883.
Just before Christmas 1895, from the multi-
tude of engineers applying for the position,
the Bridge Commissioners selected Buck as
chief engineer for what was to be the longest
and most heavily loaded suspension bridge in
the world. On July 22, 1896 his plans were
approved. Contracts for the foundation, cais-
sons and stone work, the two towers and two
anchorages were let in 1897. Its opening in
December 1903 was a great success, featuring
a large parade in the afternoon. The bridge
still stands today, carrying traffic over the
East River.
Buck died suddenly in 1909, and much
was written about him by his colleagues. He
rarely, if ever, wrote about his own work other
ADVERTISEMENT – For Advertiser Information, visit www.structuremag.org
39 December 2010
than to discuss technical issues. He said, “As
to my work, I prefer to let the things I have
accomplished speak for me.” He was a man
who accomplished much, building the highest
bridge in the world at the time, the longest
arch bridge in the world, the first major span-
drel braced arch in the United States, four of
the sixteen longest arch bridges in the world,
and the longest and heaviest loaded suspension
bridge in the world. His work in replacing
most of the fabric of Roebling’s Suspension
Bridge while it was in service, and then building
a two level arch bridge under and around it
without stopping traffic, was exceptional en-
gineering. His work at rehabilitating Keefer’s
Suspension Bridge at Niagara and then building
another arch under and around it, while main-
taining traffic at all times, was of a similar
“heroic nature.” He was “one of the heroic
figures in the history of Engineering.”▪
Dr. Griggs specializes in the restoration of
historic bridges, having restored many 19 th
Century cast and wrought iron bridges.
He was formerly Director of Historic
Bridge Programs for Clough, Harbour
& Associates LLP in Albany, NY, and is
now an independent Consulting Engineer.
Dr. Griggs can be reached via email at
fgriggs@nycap.rr.com.
 Work quickly.
Work simply.
Work accurately.

StructurePoint’s Productivity Suite of powerful software tools

for reinforced concrete analysis & design

Finite element analysis & de- Analysis, design

sign of reinforced, precast & investigation of
ICF & tilt-up concrete walls reinforced concrete
beams & one-way
slab systems

Design & investigation Analysis, design

of rectangular, round & investigation of
& irregularly shaped reinforced concrete
concrete column sections beams & slab systems

Finite element analysis & design of reinforced concrete

foundations, combined footings or slabs on grade

StructurePoint’s suite of productivity tools are so easy
to learn and simple to use that you’ll be able to start saving
time and money almost immediately. And when you use
StructurePoint software, you’re also taking advantage
of the Portland Cement Association’s more than 90 years
of experience, expertise, and technical support in concrete
design and construction.
Visit StructurePoint.org to download your trial
copy of our software products.
For more information on licensing and pricing
options please call 847.966.4357 or e-mail
info@StructurePoint.org.

STR 6-09

Duty to Defend
Recent Court Cases Confirm the Dangers
By Dave Collings
Indemnity provisions in contracts allocate
responsibility for third-party claims, usually to
the party that caused the claim. If your firm
is not careful, these can include all of your
client’s defense costs. When your firm signs
a contract, it probably includes an indemnity
provision which can create responsibility for
defending your client even if you are not at
fault – a significant risk that is not insured.
That means your firm, not your insurer, is
picking up the tab.
California Appellate
Court Ruling
A recent 6th District California Appellate Court
ruling highlights the dangers of such indemnity
clauses. In UDC-Universal Development, L.
P. vs. CH2M Hill, 2010 DJDAR 794, the
Appellate Court upheld a ruling by the trial
court that CH2M Hill owed a duty to defend
its client, UDC-Universal Development, even
though there was no finding of negligence
against CH2M Hill, nor even an allegation
of negligence in the underlying homeowner
association (HOA) complaint.
In its contract with UDC, CH2M Hill agreed
to indemnify the owner and UDC from any
and all claims to the extent that they arose
out of or were in any way connected with
any negligent act or omission of CH2M Hill.
CH2M Hill also agreed “at its own expense and
upon written request by Developer or Owner
of Subject Property to defend any suit, action or
demand brought against Developer or Owner
on any claim or demand covered herein.”
A jury found CH2M Hill not to be negligent.
The trial court, however, found that CH2M
Hill still owed UDC defense. The court stated
that the duty to defend must occur before
the duty to indemnify arises. Otherwise, there
would be no need for a duty to defend.
Although courts in other states are certainly
not bound by this ruling in California, there
is always the risk that other states might give
serious consideration to California in ruling
on contractual indemnity clauses. Logically,
if you agree in a contract to defend a client
or any other party for claims arising from
negligence in the performance of your services,
that obligation would be worth very little if it
did not begin as soon as the claim is made.
STRUCTURE magazine
Risk ManageMent
risk management topics for structural engineers
Duty to Defend Uninsurable
Any obligation of the design professional to
provide a defense in an indemnity clause exposes
the design professional to an uninsurable loss.
Professional liability insurers will not agree
to honor a duty to defend another party. The
insurer agrees only to defend the insured design
professional, not any other party.
All professional liability insurance policies
are written to insure design professionals provide
coverage for liability arising out of negligence.
But they only cover all obligations assumed
in a contract if the liability would have ex-
isted in the absence of the contract language.
Since CH2M Hill was found not negligent,
the insurer did not pay. CH2M Hill was
forced to pay for UDC’s defense on its own:
around $500,000.
Could your firm afford to pay such costs
to defend a client without the benefit of any
insurance?
Points to Remember
When negotiating an indemnity clause in a
contract, the following are important points
to remember:
1) Do not agree to a duty to defend
and be sure that you specify in any
indemnity agreement that your firm
owes no duty to defend. Instead, agree
that you will reimburse, but only to
the extent that the claim was caused by
your negligence.
2) Only provide an indemnity for
matters “to the extent caused by”
your negligence or that of your
subconsultants or those over which you
have control. If you are not in control
of an action or responsibility that might
cause a loss, do not agree to accept
liability for it.
3) Never agree to accept more of the
responsibility for liability than is the
fault of your firm.
4) Indemnity agreements are written to
survive for some period of time after
completion of the work or termination
of the contract. Be sure that time
period is not longer than the applicable
state statute of repose.
41 December 2010
5) If all else fails and you still want the
contract, try to negotiate a cap on how
much your firm must spend to defend
the client.
6) Regardless of the state you are in,
always have legal counsel review all
indemnity clauses before agreeing
to them.
In negotiating with a client to remove a duty
to defend in an indemnification clause, point
out that the intent of what you are proposing is
to keep the clause insurable – particularly un-
der the professional liability insurance policy.
Also mention that the client is actually better
off providing its own defense and controlling
how that defense is conducted.
In Closing
The recent decisions in California point out
just how dangerous indemnity provisions in
design professional agreements can be. These
provisions should be reviewed by competent
legal counsel and by your insurance broker
prior to signing.▪
Dave Collings is an Executive Vice
President and equity partner of Ames
& Gough. Dave may be contacted at
DCollings@amesgough.com.
This is a shortened version of the original
article which was published in Ames &
Gough’s Information Alert, Summer 2010.
ADVERTISEMENT – For Advertiser Information, visit www.structuremag.org
The easiest to use software for calculating
wind, seismic, snow and other loadings for
IBC, ASCE7, and all state codes based on
these codes ($195.00).
Tilt-up Concrete Wall Panels ($95.00).
Floor Vibration for Steel Beams and Joists
($100.00).
Concrete beams with torsion ($45.00).
Demos at: www.struware.com
 EARTH RETENTION STRUCTURES GUIDE
a definitive listing of specialty construction firms and product manufacturers/distributors

Company Product Description

Deltalok Inc.
Phone: 877-335-8256 Deltalok System – Green Walls and Slopes – Engineered (MSE), sustainable green structures. An environmental solution.
Email: info@deltalok.com Green Walls Public and private sector soil retention – living structures. Available worldwide.
Web: www.deltalok.com

DYWIDAG Systems International, USA, Inc. DSI is a worldwide leader in the manufacture and supply of earth anchoring/post-tensioning systems.
Phone: 630-739-1100 Piling solutions include Micropiles/GEWi-Piles and Driven Ductile Iron Pipe Piles with the benefits
Earth Anchors
Email: dsiamerica@dsiamerica.com of a grouted system. Other DSI products include ground anchors and soil nails utilizing DYWIDAG
Web: www.dsiamerica.com Threadbar and DYWI Drill Hollow Bars.

Foresight Products, LLC Drive type, tipping plate soil anchors for tieback systems, shoring, bulkheads, retaining walls, SRWs,
Phone: 800-325-5360 Manta Ray® Earth and foundation augmentation/stabilization applications. Features include no excavation, no soil
Email: sales@earthanchor.com Anchors disturbance, and ease of installation with working capacities ranging up to 65 kips. No guesswork –
Web: www.earthanchor.com proof tested anchors.

ReCon Wall Systems, Inc.

Phone: 952-922-0027 ReCon provides the superior durability of wet cast air entrained concrete, the mass and engineering for
ReCon Retaining
tall unreinforced gravity walls 16 feet & beyond, the testing for even taller reinforced geogrid walls, and

Suppliers
Email: sales@reconwalls.com Wall Block
exceptional aesthetics. Remember ReCon for The Aesthetics You Want…The Performance You Need!
Web: www.reconwalls.com
Soil Retention Products, Inc.
Phone: 800-346-7995 VERDURA is a fully plantable segmental retaining wall (MSE). A positive mechanical connection between
VERDURA® the block and geogrid combined with high shear capacity of the block makes backfilling with scrapers
Email: sales@soilretention.com
unique to the system.
Web: www.soilretention.com
Stone Strong Systems
Phone: 877-501-5652
Stone Strong Precast Retaining Product
Email: info@stonestrong.com
Web: www.stonestrong.com

The Reinforced Earth Company
Phone: 800-446-5700
Email: mcurry@reinforcedearth.com
Web: www.reinforcedearth.com
Williams Form Engineering Corp.
Phone: 616-866-0815
Email: williams@williamsform.com
Web: www.williamsform.com
The Reinforced Earth Company offers mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) retaining walls, precast
Precast Mechanically concrete arches, precast noisewalls/protective barriers, and precast counterfort retaining walls that
Stabilized Earth are safe, predictable and cost-effective. Time after time, we deliver success due to our commitment to
Retaining Walls providing an innovative approach to the design and supply of quality-assured products in conjunction
with our dedication to customer service.
Williams Form Engineering Corporation has been providing threaded steel bars and accessories for rock
anchors, soil anchors, high capacity concrete anchors, micro piles, tie rods, tie backs, strand anchors,
Anchor Systems
hollow bar anchors, post tensioning systems, and concrete forming hardware systems in the construction
industry for over 85 years.

ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

What do you want to anchor?

Foundation Stabilization Air Structures Segmented Block Walls Sheet Piles Sea Walls Towers

Vis
WO it us at
CON C ‘11 #1
EXPO 11
‘11 # 11
S114
3 4

Load Tested!

Frame Structures Excavation Shoring

STRUCTURE magazine 42 December 2010

Not listed? Visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org/guides.aspx and opt-in to our email reminder list. All Resource Guides and Updates for the 2011 Editorial
Calendar, including the 2011 Trade Show in Print, are now available on the website, www.STRUCTUREmag.org under “Resource Guides.” Sign up for any
of the Guides today! Remember, your information is posted for an entire year on our website! Listings are provided as a courtesy. STRUCTURE® magazine is
not responsible for errors.

Company Product Description

IES, Inc.
Phone: 800-707-0816 Design retaining walls or basement walls quickly with this easy to use tool. This is not a black-box computer
IES QuickRWall 2.0

Software
Email: info@iesweb.com program, but a friendly tool for any engineer who wants to see the calculations that were performed.
Web: www.iesweb.com

RISA Technologies RISAFoundation designs two-way mat slabs, spread footings, combined footings, grade beams, and
Phone: 949-951-5815 pedestals all within an open modeling environment. With synchronized load transfer from RISA-3D and
RISAFoundation
Email: info@risatech.com RISAFloor models, foundation design has never been easier. Punching shear checks, rebar design, and
Web: www.risa.com international codes make it the smart choice for any engineer.

Anderson Drilling
Phone: 619-443-3891 Earth Retention Design and/or Install: Soldier Beam & Lagging Shoring, Tiebacks & Soil Nail Anchor systems, Tangent &
Email: dpoland@andersondrilling.com Systems Secant Wall structures, Large diam. Access Shaft structures.
Web: www.andersondrilling.com

Boulderscape
Boulderscape designs and builds geological and architectural finishes. We use lightweight structural

Speciality Contractors
Phone: 949-661-5087 Boulderscape Sculpted
shotcrete that is sculpted and stained by our skilled artisans to create beautiful retaining walls that mimic
Email: steve@boulderscapeinc.com Shotcrete
surrounding geology.
Web: www.boulderscape.com

Hayward Baker Inc. Retaining walls for temporary and permanent excavation support and slope stabilization, and remediation
Phone: 800-456-6548 Earth Retention of existing walls. Soil nails, soldier piles and lagging, anchors, sheet piling, micropile slide stabilization,
Email: info@HaywardBaker.com Systems soil mix walls, and gabion systems. Hayward Baker Inc. is ranked #1 Specialty Foundation Contractor by
Web: www.HaywardBaker.com Engineering News-Record.

Moretrench Specialty
Moretrench specializes in Dewatering and Groundwater Control; Ground Freezing; Earth Retention
Phone: 973-627-2100 and Excavation Support; Deep Foundations; Underpinning Systems; Grouting Systems; Environmental
Geotechnical
Email: info@mtac.com Remediation; Industrial Construction through full service offices in New Jersey, Florida, New York,
Contractor
Web: www.moretrench.com Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Delaware and Washington D.C.

Schnabel Foundation Company

Phone: 703-742-0020 Excavation Support Schnabel Foundation Company is a nationwide contractor that designs and constructs earth retention
and Specialized systems and specialized foundations. Since 1959, Schnabel has constructed more than 3,000 projects in
Email: rich@schnabel.com
Foundations over 700 cities. Hundreds of these projects were repeat contracts with owners and general contractors.
Web: www.schnabel.com

ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

STRUCTURE magazine 43 December 2010

 NaTioNal CoUNCil of STRUCTURal ENgiNEERS aSSoCiaTioNS
Deferred Submittals: What the EOR Needs to Know and Show
From Design to Construction
News form the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations

2011 WiNTER iNSTiTUTE fEbRUaRy 25 & 26, 2011

Friday, February 25 8.0 Professional Development Hours
7:00 a.m. – 8:00 a.m. REGISTRATION AND CONTINENTAL BREAKFAST
8:00 a.m. – 8:30 a.m. Deferred Submittals Gone Wrong
Introduction of topic: Ben Nelson, Martin/Martin, Inc.
Tom DiBlasi, DiBlasi Associates, P.C.
Tom Grogan, Haskell
8:30 a.m. – 9:45 a.m. Building Officials Have Their Say
The complexity of deferred submittals is not often appreciated by the Structural Engineer, nor fully
comprehended by the contractor. There will be a case study; and the pros and cons of deferred submissions, and
concerns Building Departments encounter during the permitting process when deferred submissions are used, will
be discussed.
Ron Lynn, President of the International Code Council, Nevada, is a Certified Building Official and has been
with the Clark County, Nevada, Department of Development Services-Building Division since February 1981.
Jim Schock, Deputy Building Official for Jacksonville, Florida, is a P. E. and Certified Building Official, an
appointed member of the Florida Building Commission, and Chairman of the Structural Technical Advisory
Committee to the Building Commission.

9:45 a.m. – 10:00 a.m. BREAK

10:00 a.m. – 11:15 a.m. Non-Standard Steel Joists
The communication between, and the responsibilities of, the project Registered Design Professional and the joist
manufacturer for non-standard steel joists will be reviewed. IBC section 2206 will be discussed, along with types
and formats for steel joist calculation submittals.
Tim Holtermann, based in Washington, MO, is the Corporate Engineering Manager for the Canam Steel Corporation.

11:15 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. Design Responsibility for Engineered Precast Systems
Discussion will include how best to convey necessary design information in the contract documents and how to
deal with issues related to precast concrete lateral load resisting systems, as well as approaches to avoid RFIs and
design omissions.
Tim Salmons is a precast designer engineer who worked 10 years for various precast concrete manufacturers before
co-founding Salmons P.C. in Albuquerque, New Mexico in 1997. He is a licensed P.E. or S.E. in 31 states.
12:30 p.m. – 1:00 p.m. LUNCH
1:00 p.m. – 1:30 p.m. Moderated Discussions Enroute to the Steel Joist and Concrete Products Facility Tours
1:30 p.m. – 2:30 p.m. Tour of Canam Steel Joist Facility
Tim Holtermann, Chief Engineer, Canam Steel Corporation
NCSEA News

See and learn about joist fabrication and metal decking, then view a film on standard load testing and BIM.
3:00 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. Tour of Gate Concrete Products Facility
Tom Newton, Vice President Operations, Gate Concrete Products
Tour the facility and lab to see pretest of design mixes, production of hollow core slabs, and load testing.
6:30 p.m. – 7:30 p.m. RECEPTION

Saturday, February 26 7.5 Professional Development Hours

7:00 a.m. – 8:00 a.m. REGISTRATION AND CONTINENTAL BREAKFAST
8:00 a.m. – 9:30 a.m. Specifying Wood & Cold-Formed Steel Trusses – Avoiding Pitfalls
and Unnecessary Liability
This session will explore some of the pitfalls of specifying pre-manufactured trusses, including the
very different expectations of “who is responsible for what” on the parts of the SER, the truss industry,
contractors, and the building department.
Ed Huston, principal in the firm of Smith and Huston, Inc., Seattle, Washington, is a licensed civil and
structural engineer in Washington, with nearly 40 years of experience in structural design, evaluation,
investigation, and code and standards development.

STRUCTURE magazine 44 December 2010

 NCSEA News
9:30 a.m. – 9:45 a.m. BREAK
9:45 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. Cold Formed Steel Submittals – Expectations and Performance of Structural
and Specialty Engineers
The responsibilities of all members of the construction team with respect to the use of cold formed steel products, and with
particular emphasis on the roles of the S.E.R. and the Specialty Structural Engineer, and the liability for design assumed with
each of these arrangements, will be discussed, along with recent case histories.
Steve Walker is the principal engineer of the Light Gauge Steel Engineering Group, Inc. (LGSEG), a firm that
practices in over 40 states. Mr. Walker, a P.E. from Central Florida with over thirty years experience in the design
of structural framing systems with emphasis on design of cold-formed steel structural systems, is also a member
of the subcommittee that developed and periodically updates the AISI Code of Standard Practice for the Cold-
Formed Steel Structural Framing Industry.
11:00 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. Current Trends in Professional Liability & Risk Management
This presentation will cover a wide range of professional liability loss prevention topics. The focus will be on duties
and limitations when providing construction phase services, important contract provisions that are frequently the
subject of difficult negotiations, and how poorly worded provisions may impact a design professional.
Brian Hader, Suncoast Insurance, has 19 years of experience as a specialist in professional liability insurance and
loss prevention education for architects and engineers.
Colleen Palmer, Beazley Insurance, has been an industry professional since 2002 and, before that, was a
practicing attorney, specializing in providing risk management services to design professionals, conducting risk
management seminars, and advising on contractual issues.
12:30 p.m. – 1:30 p.m. LUNCH

News from the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations

1:30 p.m. – 2:45 p.m. Deferred Submittal Documentation - What You Really Need to Show Regarding
Deferred Submittals
Why is it important to clearly identify, in the contract documents, what scope is covered by the EOR and what scope
requires design by a specialty engineer? IBC requirements for deferred submittal documentation will be reviewed,
along with common problems and the avoidance of unnecessary risks with various deferred submittal items.
C. Ben Nelson, Martin/Martin, Inc., has 27 years of structural engineering experience with a wide variety
of materials and building types, many of which include some aspect of deferred submittals, and has taught
continuing education seminars on deferred submittals.
2:45 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. BREAK
3:00 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. Deferred Submittals – Lessons Learned Register at
Panel Discussion: www.ncsea.com
• Prevention of problems • Foundations not correctly prescribed
• Pre-engineered metal buildings • An inordinate amount of changes

The Amelia Island Plantation, Amelia Island, FL

Reservations:
1-888-261-6165 Free hourly transportation to/from JAX airport.
Group number: 8BI97X or National Council of Structural Engineers Associations
Mention NCSEA Winter Institute for a special $149 room rate until February 9

December 2 + 9, 2010: Practical Design of Structures for Blast Effects – December 2: Design Methods 2,
Upcoming December 9: Progressive Collapse – Jon Schmidt
NCSEA January 25, 2011: Heavy Timber Connections: Mistakes and Lessons Learned – Ben Brungraber
webinars February 10, 2011: Detailing of Unbonded Post-Tensioned Structures to Minimize the Effects of
Restraint to Shortening – Bryan Allred

NCSEA/Kaplan Structural Engineering Exam Review Course

The courses are available in a LIVE Online format that allows stu-
dents to participate in classes in real time. Students can log on to
classes at assigned times anywhere they have access to the Internet.
In addition, lectures will be available OnDemand, so students can
watch the prerecorded sessions anytime it is convenient. Attendee
questions will be answered through the live video feed.
Students will also receive a copy of the textbook, Alan Williams’
Structural Engineering PE License Review Problems & Solutions.
Since the current version of the text is not yet updated for the
2011 exam, a manuscript of the revised material will be provided in
addition to the textbook. Live Online courses for the April 2011
exams will be held on the following dates:
January 29-30 – Vertical Forces Review
February 12-13 – Lateral Forces Review
$1199 for both parts; $749 for vertical or lateral forces only.
Register at www.kaplanaecengineering.com/LiveReview.
Additional course dates will be scheduled later in the year for
candidates preparing for the October 2011 exam. See the adver-
tisement on page 11.

STRUCTURE magazine 45 December 2010

 Four SEI Members Inducted as Distinguished Members
at ASCE 2010 Annual Conference
The formal Induction Ceremony for the ASCE Distinguished
The Newsletter of the Structural Engineering Institute of ASCE

Member class of 2010 was held during the Celebration of

Leaders Luncheon, Thursday, October 21, 2010 in Las Vegas,
Nevada during the 2010 ASCE Annual Conference. Four SEI
members were included in this year’s honorees. Distinguished
Membership is the highest recognition the Society may confer,
second only to the title of ASCE President. Distinguished Mem-
bers exemplify the industry’s most accomplished professionals
for their eminent contributions to advancing the field of civil
engineering. The Structural Engineering Institute proudly honors
the advancement of the following individuals:
Bruce R. Ellingwood, Ph.D., P.E., Dist.M.ASCE, NAE is
internationally recognized as an authority on structural load
modeling and load combination analysis, structural reliability Ahsan Kareem, Ph.D., Dist.M.ASCE, NAE is an internationally
and risk analysis of engineered facilities, and as a leader in the renowned scholar/engineer, who has made lifetime contribu-
technical development and implementation of probability-based tions to civil engineering theories and practices. He has made
codified design standards for building structures. the most profound civil engineering research contributions in
Dan M. Frangopol, Sc.D., P.E., Dist.M.ASCE is a world- subjects such as dynamic wind load effects, system identification
renowned expert in several areas of civil engineering, including and control, simulation and computational methods, uncertainty,
life-cycle civil engineering, bridge safety and maintenance- safety, and risk.
management, structural systems reliability, and integration of Paul F. Mlakar, Ph.D., P.E., Dist.M.ASCE has been an icon
lifetime monitoring-maintenance-management and life-cycle in forensic engineering. Going much beyond his high impact
cost through multi-criteria optimization. He is the first to hold research and development of new capabilities to deal with force
the Fazlur R. Khan Endowed Chair of Structural Engineering protection and terrorism, he has served as a key individual in a
and Architecture at Lehigh University, one of the most influential number of the largest and most intense forensic analyses of the
institutions in the development of code provisions for structural last half century.
design and maintenance.

Registration Now Open! Don’t Gamble on Your Future – Come to Las Vegas!
Register early to take advantage of reduced rates – www.SEInstitute.org
Structural Columns

Structural Engineers from around the country will be gathering
at the Green Valley Ranch Resort in Las Vegas from April 14
– 16 for the 2011 SEI Structures Congress to learn, share and
network among friends and colleagues. Opening bright and early
on Thursday, April 14th the Congress is packed with 2½ days of
technical sessions, committee meetings, fascinating keynote and
plenary speakers, concluding with a closing plenary technical
session after lunch on Saturday – an opportunity to earn more
than 16 PDHs during one mega-event!
For program details go to www.SEInstitute.org and see more
than 100 different technical sessions on such topics as:
• Seismic Strengthening of Buildings
• SEI/ASCE Chile Earthquake Assessment Team Report
• New Provisions of ASCE 7-10
• Lateral Systems of Buildings
• How the Future of Structural Engineering sees the Future
of Structural Engineering
• Lessons Learned from Arbitration, Mediations and Litigation
• Vulnerability Assessments of Bridges and Tunnels
• Masonry, Concrete, Steel, Wood, Blast, Wind and much,
much more!
Special events will include the opening plenary speaker, F. Dave
Zanetell, P.E., PMP, the Federal Highway Administration’s
project manager of the brand new $240 million Hoover Dam
Bypass Bridge. On Saturday, the plenary speaker will be Ron
Lynn, the Building Official for Clark County Department and
immediate Past-President of ICC, who will discuss some of the
unique challenges of building in Las Vegas.
You won’t want to miss the Grand Opening Reception on
Thursday and be certain to attend Friday’s special Evening at
the Hoover Dam with exclusive tours, savory and appetizing
hors’ d’oeuvres, and refreshments.
Make your plans now to attend the 2011 SEI Structures Congress
in fabulous Las Vegas and experience all that the Congress and
Vegas has to offer – visit SEI at www.SEInstitute.org for all of
the details!
Special thanks to all of our cooperating organizations whose
members may register at the special member discounted rates:

STRUCTURE magazine 46 December 2010

 Structural Columns
News from the Journal of Structural Engineering
After seven years as Editor-in-chief of the Journal of Structural Engineering, the preeminent journal
in its field, Sashi Kunnath will be stepping down. Dr. Kunnath is Professor and Chair of the
Civil & Environmental Engineering Department at the University of California at Davis, and
his association with the journal extends well over a decade. Prof. Kunnath was awarded the 2009
Richard Torrens Award for his dedication and outstanding service contributions to the Journal.
Sherif El-Tawil, Professor of Structural Engineering at the University of Michigan, took over as Editor
beginning with the October issue of the journal. Sherif brings considerable experience to his new role: he
served as Associate Editor for the technical committee on Metals from 1998 – 2004, as Guest Editor for Sashi Kunnath Sherif El-Tawil
the special issue on Composite and Hybrid Structures, and finally as managing editor since 2004. Prof. El-Tawil is a dedicated and highly-
regarded teacher (having received the Chi Epsilon “James M. Robins” Excellence in Teaching Award during his current tenure at Michigan
and the Excellence in Undergraduate Teaching Award while he served on the faculty at Central Florida) and an accomplished researcher.
The Journal of Structural Engineering (JSE) receives over 500 new submissions each year and has seen major changes since Professor
Kunnath’s joined the JSE editorial team. In the early 1990s, all reviews were processed by regular mail with hardcopies of manuscripts
shipped to reviewers around the globe. In the coming years, it is expected that the fully automated Editorial Manager (EM) system will,
among other benefits, facilitate the reduction of publication turnaround times. Readers are welcome to send comments and suggestions
directly to the Editor.

Committee News and Calls for New Members

BpAD public Relations Committee
The BPAD Public Relations Committee is looking for new ways
to promote our profession and recruit new engineers. We have
several ideas that are currently in development: 1) In these tough
economic times, we would like to be able to help identify areas
of the country where the job markets are searching for new engi-
Seismic Effects Committee
The mission of the Seismic Effects Committee is to foster re-
search and practice in the behavior of structures subjected to
earthquakes, and application of research results to problems in
analysis and design of structures, including buildings, offshore
structures, concrete dams, storage tanks, and bridges. Additional

The Newsletter of the Structural Engineering Institute of ASCE

neers, and/or provide job listings. 2) If you or your organization
has any tools such as videos, posters, flyers, webcasts or others that
you would like us to consider using as examples of reaching out,
or to add to the SEI website, please feel free to submit them to the
committee for consideration. 3) How can we use the social media
to reach to promote our profession? 4) Organization of an SEI
Speakers Bureau is underway and will likely be regionally based.
If you have any input related to these ideas, or any others, please
send an email to David Cocke at dcocke@structuralfocus.com
or to Suzanne Fisher at sfisher@asce.org.
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Committee
The Dynamic Effects TAC has established a new Multi-Hazard
Mitigation Subcommittee to advance the field of multi-hazard
engineering and risk mitigation for civil structures, with a par-
ticular emphasis on earthquake, wind, wave, and tsunami hazards,
by quantifying the effects of multiple hazards on structural
performance, identifying multi-hazard design and analysis
methods, and formulating approaches for multi-hazard risk
assessment and mitigation. This committee will help to foster
research and practice related to multiple hazard mitigation of
structures. End products include organized sessions at ASCE
Structures Congress and other related conferences, potential
special issues on multihazards, or future monographs on multi-
hazard mitigation for civil structures. To join, visit the SEI Website
at: www.seinstitute.org/committees/tadjoin.cfm.
Errata
SEI posts up-to-date errata information for our
publications at www.SEInstitute.org. Click on
“Publications” on our menu, and select “Errata.”
If you have any errata that you would like to submit,
please email it to Paul Sgambati at psgambati@asce.org.
information about the Seismic Effects Committee is available
at http://ceenve3.civeng.calpoly.edu/SEI-SEC/. The Seismic
Effects Committee recently launched two sub-committees: (1)
Emerging Analysis Methods in Earthquake Engineering; and
(2) Experimental Methods in Earthquake Engineering. The in-
tent of these two sub-committees is to provide a forum for more
focused discussion and professional advancement in these two
important areas of Earthquake Engineering. The Seismic Effects
Committee and its two subcommittees are looking for active
participation from practicing engineers. In addition, the sub-
committee on Experimental Methods in Earthquake Engineering
is looking for members with academic as well as practical back-
ground. Finally, the committee is looking for collaboration with
members of other SEI committees who may wish to share in
its mission. If you are interested in being part of or collaborate
with these exciting groups, please contact Rakesh Goel, Chair
of Seismic Effects Committee, by email at rgoel@calpoly.edu.
Blast protection of Buildings Standards Committee
The Blast Protection of Buildings Standards Committee is
pleased to report that it has completed committee balloting on its
new proposed standard, Blast Protection of Buildings. The com-
mittee of approximately 70 members has been at work for several
years developing what may well be the first standard of its kind for
private sector projects. Topics covered by the proposed standard
and its commentary include general requirements, design consider-
ations, performance criteria, blast loading, fragmentation, structural
systems, protection of spaces, exterior envelope, materials detail-
ing, and performance qualification. ASCE and SEI have approved
the manuscript for public comment, which the committee
anticipates will start later this fall or early winter. Once comments
are received and addressed, pending satisfaction of all procedural
requirements, the standard will be published by SEI and available
for use, perhaps early next year.

STRUCTURE magazine 47 December 2010

 SAVE THE DATE! CASE Winter Planning Meeting Scheduled for February
The CASE Winter Planning Meeting will take place on Wednes-
day and Thursday, February 23-24, 2011, at the Amelia Island
Plantation, Florida in conjunction with the NCSEA Winter Insti-
tute. On Wednesday afternoon, the CASE Executive Committee
will meet and set the agenda for the next day’s committee plan-
ning sessions. The committee breakout meetings will take place
on Thursday for the National Guidelines, Contracts, Programs
& Communications, and Toolkit Committees to continue work
The Newsletter of the Council of American Structural Engineers
on their respective assignments. More details will follow in future
CASE-in-Point’s so stay tuned.
Looking for a few good people!
CASE is looking for a few good engineers who would like to devote their time to improving
the business practice experience of engineering firms. A brief description of each committee is
below; if you are interested in learning more, contact Heather Talbert, htalbert@acec.org or
202-682-4377.
Programs and Communications Committee – Responsible
for the planning and organizing all CASE education sessions
at the SEI Structures Congress, ACEC Fall Conference, plus
CASE planning meeting locations. This committee also keeps
the editorial calendar of CASE articles for both STRUCTURE
magazine and Structural Design magazine.
ACEC EDUCATION INFORMATION
ACEC Online Seminars – December
7 – What is the Right Value for Your Firm?
th
By David Cohen, Matheson Financial Advisors
Firm internal/external sale in your future? Start building more
shareholder value now.
14th – If You Haven’t Planned It, You Can’t Control It
By Gary Bates, Roenker Bates Group
The alternative to “managing by crisis”.
For more information about these seminars, please go to:
www.acec.org/education
Nominate Vendors for
CASE in Point
Engineering Inc.’s New
Peer-to-Peer Resource Guide
If you have a vendor that provides exceptional service in the
accounting/financial; marketing/communications; or IT service
areas, recommend them to other ACEC members by submitting
their name to the new Peer-to-Peer Resource Guide, which will
be published in special 2011 issues of Engineering, Inc. magazine.
Go to http://listserv.acec.org/peers/ to access the Peer-to-
Peer Resource Guide Nomination Form. Fill out your contact
information, select a corresponding vendor category, and then
complete the vendor contact information.
You may recommend more than one vendor in any of the three
categories. For more information, contact Andrea Keeney at
akeeney@acec.org.
STRUCTURE magazine 48 December 2010
As part of the Committees’ ongoing activities, face-to-face
meetings and informal discussions are held twice a year to
explore current issues and work on projects like new and
revised Risk Management Tools, Guidelines and Contracts,
as well as Publications and Risk Management Convocations.
These meetings also allow the various CASE committees to
interact across all of CASE’s activities. For more information
on the CASE committees and CASE in general visit their
website at www.acec.org/CASE.
Contracts Committee – Responsible for developing and
maintaining all CASE contracts to assist practicing engineers
with risk management.
Guidelines Committee – Responsible for developing and main-
taining national guidelines of practice for structural engineers.
Toolkit Committee – Responsible for developing and main-
taining all risk management tools.
Portal for Education
& Career Recordkeeping
Gone are the days when professionals kept paper files. With
RCEP, everything needed to find courses from quality providers
and maintain PDH history is available online at www.rcep.net.
The Registered Continuing Education Program (RCEP) is a
nationwide portal for education and career recordkeeping. It is a
merger of quality education providers and engineers, surveyors,
and related AEC industry professionals into one comprehensive
education management system.
The first of its kind in the industry, RCEP is a one-stop solution
for keeping up-to-date with continuing education requirements,
finding courses from quality providers, and maintaining a complete
education record that simplifies the licensure renewal process. With
RCEP, it’s now possible to obtain and track all of your Professional
Development Hours (PDHs) and licensing requirements in one,
comprehensive, online system. Log onto www.rcep.net to get start-
ed. Search the Master Calendar of educational courses offered by
NCEES-approved Education Providers. Find state licensing and
continuing education requirements or be ready in the event you’re
audited with RCEP’s uniformly formatted, state-board-accepted
transcripts. Let Registered Education Providers report your PDHs
for you, or simply self-report PDHs you’ve earned through other
education providers to maintain a complete post-licensure record.
Professionals can register for a free, basic subscription at
www.rcep.net and start managing their continuing education
activities right away. For more information, contact Maria
Buscemi at 202-682-4323 or mbuscemi@acec.org.

CASE Risk Management Convocation
in Las Vegas Next Spring
The CASE Risk Management Convocation will be held in conjunction
with the Structures Congress at the Green Valley Ranch Resort in Las
Vegas, NV, April 14 – 16, 2011. For more information and updates
go to www.seinstitute.org.
The following CASE Convocation sessions are scheduled to
take place on Friday, April 15:
8:30 AM - 10:00 AM
How Structural Engineers Can Work Effectively
with Architects Who Use AIA C401
Speaker: William Geisen, Esq., Graydon Head & Ritchey LLP
If your firm works as a sub-consultant to architects, come
examine CASE’s Commentary on AIA Document C401,
the Standard Form of Agreement Between Architect and Con-
sultant. AIA Contract Document C401 incorporates by
reference AIA Contract Document B101, the Standard
Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect. The inter-
play between C401 and B101 cannot be over-emphasized.
Using C401 without understanding fully the interrelation-
ships with B101 is a recipe for disaster. This presentation
will cover how the engineer’s rights and obligations are
impacted by these two agreements, and CASE’s recommended
provisions to include in your contract with the architect.
Understanding and using B101 effectively can give you
more leverage in collecting fees, getting paid for Additional
Services and collecting more reimbursable expenses.
10:30 AM – 12 Noon
The Changing Face of Indemnity: Meaner and Uglier!
Speaker: Brian Stewart, Esq., Collins, Collins, Muir & Stewart
This program will present an overview of some recent cases
in California that have received national attention, which
could present potentially disastrous results for the engineering
community. The discussion will center on how and why
the cases were decided the way they were, and what is being
done as a result of the holdings in those cases. The program
will conclude with a description of some legislative and
practical efforts to defend against this unfortunate tide.
Follow ACEC on Facebook
The just-launched ACEC National Facebook page offers members and prospective members a new way to stay abreast of important
Council initiatives and events. Go to www.facebook.com/pages/ACEC-National/150339271657089?ref=ts to view ACEC’s new
Facebook page, or search “ACEC National” in your Facebook account. You must be registered with Facebook to view the ACEC
National page.
STRUCTURE magazine
CASE in Point
1:30 PM – 3:00 PM
New Tools for Managing Risk
and Project Implementation
Speakers:
Stacy Bartoletti, President and COO, Degenkolb Engineers
Nils V. Ericson III, Project Manager, The Di Salvo Ericson Group
John Aniol, Vice President, Thornton Tomasetti
Brent White, President, ARW Engineers
CASE is a part of the American Council of Engineering Companies
The CASE Tool Kit Committee has developed a number of
new tools that will be presented in this session. Developing
a Culture of Quality provides a white paper and PowerPoint
presentation used to engage firm leaders in a discussion
about their firm culture and key aspects that contribute
to quality. A new tool on staffing projections provides a
method for firms to project future revenues and staffing
demands based on contract values and potential work.
Project Work Plans set the stage early for project success
and a new work plan template will be presented. Finally, a
new tool titled Managing Computer Software Use will be
presented. This tool provides a white paper on key aspects
and responsibilities of the project manager and principal in
charge relative to software use on projects.
3:30 PM – 5:00 PM
Lessons Learned from Arbitration,
Mediation and Litigation
Speakers:
John O. Woods, Jr., P.E., President, WOODS PEACOCK
Engineering Consultants, Inc.,
Bruce E. Titus, Esq., Principal Rees Broome, PC
Charles Vonderheid, CBIZ
This panel discussion will focus on applying lessons learned
from the speakers’ involvement with arbitration, mediation
and litigation. The speakers, who are a practicing structural
engineer & arbitrator, an attorney specializing in construction
law, and a professional liability insurance agent, will share
some of their own lessons learned and anecdotes.
49 December 2010
 Excellence in Structural Engineering – Are You a Winner?
By Thomas F. Heausler, P.E., S.E., SECB
Do structural engineers (SE) play to win?
Certainly when SEs are awarded a new
project, they consider it a win. Achieving
an excellent reputation is a win. In school,
an “A” grade is a winner over a “B.” And
in addition to comparing their work to
that of colleagues, SEs compete against
themselves to reach their personal best.
Therefore, one who succeeds at achieving
excellence in structural engineering may
be categorized as “winning.” Conversely, a
performance that lacks excellence may be
considered “losing.” Clearly, a structural
design resulting in a tarnished reputation,
lawsuits, failure or catastrophe should be
considered a “loss.”
Legendary football coach Vince Lombardi
made a famous speech about winning. To
paraphrase, he advocated that “winning is
not a sometime thing; it’s an all the time
thing. You don’t win once in a while; you
don’t do things right once in a while; you
do them right all the time. Winning is a
habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. It is and
always has been an American zeal to be
first in anything we do, and to win, and to
win, and to win.”
It is a reality of life that humans are com-
petitive, and the most competitive games
draw the most competitive people. Achievers
Structural Forum
not only want to compete; they want to
compete against the best that there is.
Remember, an SE is one who purposely
chose one of the most demanding majors in
college, while many other students opted to
spend their “all-nighters” at the pubs.
opinions on topics of current importance to structural engineers
The object is to win – to beat the other
guy. Maybe that sounds hard or cruel, but
consider just who is “the other guy.” He
may be your colleague, but more often
your competitor is within yourself – you
are competing against procrastination,
distractions, discipline, desire. The objec-
tive is to exceed your personal best. You
assess where you are and where your goals
say that you should be. That gap is the
source of the “fire in your belly,” your mo-
tivation. But sometimes you do not realize
how high your personal best can be until
a colleague appears to be outperforming
you. That is when you realize that taking
action towards further excellence, and then
achieving that excellence, may be the most
appropriate definition of “winning.”
Structural Forum is intended to stimulate thoughtful dialogue and debate among structural engineers and other participants in the
design and construction process. Any opinions expressed in Structural Forum are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the
views of NCSEA, CASE, SEI, C 3 Ink, or the STRUCTURE magazine Editorial Board.
STRUCTURE magazine
But how do you measure your improve-
ment? How do you keep score? In sports
there are rules, boundaries, goals and
scoreboards. In business and life, you have
to set these for yourself. In the short term,
this is often known as your “To Do” list.
At work your list should be prepared in
concert with your personal goals and
those of your employer and clients. Proceed
as follows:
1) Define: Identify the tasks, making
them as detailed and particularized
as possible.
2) Hours: Assign time to each task based
on how long you expect it to take.
3) Prioritize: Arrange the tasks into
a sequence in relation to their
urgency and importance.
4) Schedule: Allow for pursuing your
other goals and activities such as
family, recreation etc.
5) Focus: Plan your work, and then
work your plan.
6) Measure: Look back and compare
what you recently completed to
your “To Do” list.
You will not know whether you have won
unless you keep score. For example, if on
Friday your weekly timesheet and produc-
tion looks exactly like the “To Do” list that
you prepared last Monday, then you can
declare your week a “winner.” If you can
apply the same strategy and procedure to
long-term and life goals, then you will be
a winner there, as well.
Of course, an SE also faces constant
competition with the ill effects of natural
hazards (e.g. gravity, snow, earthquakes
and hurricanes). People’s lives depend
upon SEs doing their work with diligence
and integrity. An SE cannot succumb to
®
50 December 2010
the pressure of proceeding without an
adequate fee to put in the appropriate
hours. Every time SEs ply their trade, they
have to play from the ground up, from the
soles of their feet to the top of their heads.
Some apply their intellect, which is fine –
an SE has to be smart – but they fall short
if they do not physically put their bodies
into the long hours, as well. As for those
who additionally put their hearts into it...
well, they are not going to leave the drawing
board with anything but a win.
To paraphrase and apply Vince Lombardi’s
treatise further: Successful SEs actually
appreciate the grind, the discipline and
toil; the study, the research, the creative
problem solving, the details, meticulous
creation of calculations and drawings, all
coupled with the harsh realities of dead-
lines, budgets and wavering clients. SEs
savor the collaborative team environment,
whether it is dropping what you are doing
to help a weaker teammate, or putting in
the extra effort to overcome a personal
weakness. In the long run, deep down in
their hearts, SEs yearn for this field of play
and the camaraderie that is found there.
In conclusion: As SEs, our finest hour,
the greatest fulfillment of all that we hold
dear, is that moment when we have worked
our hearts out on a worthy project and lie
exhausted at our workstations – project
completed – victorious – confident.
Enjoy the peace that comes with knowing
that you have done your very best, and
that you have done it right.▪
Thomas F. Heausler, P.E., S.E., SECB
(TFHSE@aol.com), is the president of
Heausler Structural Engineers in Kansas
City, Missouri.
 In
tr
od
uc
in
g
Take your design right down to the nuts and bolts with the all-new
RISAConnection. In addition to its interactive and intuitive
interface, RISAConnection features:

Quick & Easy Modeling

3600 Connection 3D Views

Shop Drawing-style Views
Comprehensive Engineering Calculations
Both ASD and LRFD Codes (13th Edition)

The Most Common Moment & Shear Connections

www.risa.com 800.332.RISA
© 2010 RISA Technologies, LLC