1 of 3

1997 UBC Earthquake Design

Wall Forces

1. Shear walls (in-plane lateral forces):

The shear walls support the diaphragm by receiving the diaphragm
reaction, R, through proper connections at the diaphragm boundary.
See lateral load path for a review of the basic building's behavior.
If you have a masonry or concrete building supported by a flexible
diaphragm, the shear wall load (e.g. the diaphragm reaction) could
be recalculated to reflect the lower design requirement.
This comes from the R = 4.5 for vertical LFRS elements vs. R
= 4.0 for the horizontal LFRS.
In addition, the wall itself develops inertial forces that also act parallel to
the wall and must be accounted for.
This additional seismic force is assumed to be generated from the
weight of the top half of the wall
The shear wall is then usually evaluated for shear stress capacity at
mid-height.

According to '97 UBC 2107.1.7 if in seismic zones 3 or 4, the shear

wall must be designed to resist 1.5 times v.
2. Out-of-plane bending of walls (lateral forces perpendicular to wall):
Refer to '97 UBC 1632 - Lateral forces on elements of structures.
Applied forces on elements, (vs. the LFRS), may be larger in
magnitude because these elements respond dynamically to the
motion of the structure instead of the ground.
The strength-level design equation for elements and components has
changed considerably from earlier (pre-1997) versions of the code. It now
is:

Where:
the subscript "p" refers to elements or components (e.g. parts) of the
structure.

9/16/2010 12:13 PM

2 of 3

ap = in-structure component amplification factor found in '97 UBC

Table 16-O
ap 2.5
Ca = seismic response spectrum value found in '97 UBC Table 16-Q.
Rp = component response modification factor form '97 UBC Table
16-O
hx = the location (elevation) of the attachment point of the part
taken with respect to grade
hr = the structure's roof elevation with respect to grade
wp = the weight of the element or component under consideration
Fp is at strength-level and must be adjusted by 1.4 to reduce it to
ASD level.
r = 1.0 for elements and components.
A common calculation that makes use of this element's provision is to
determine the seismic force normal to a wall as shown in the following
figure. A sample calcualtion is given in Example 2.
Please note that there appears to be a height mistake and a code
interpretation problem in Breyer's Example 2.17

3. Diaphragm anchorage:
Lateral forces acting perpendicular to the wall will tend to separate the
wall from the horizontal diaphragm.
Must provide a positive anchorage system connecting masonry walls
to diaphragms, shown above as the "specially designed anchor".
This anchorage must resist:
Wind forces on wall element.
Seismic force normal to the wall using UBC '97 Eqn 32-2.
According to '97 UBC 1633.2.81:

9/16/2010 12:13 PM

3 of 3

In seismic zones 3 and 4 with a flexible diaphragm, Rp = 3.0

and ap = 1.5. This ap factor essentially increases the design
forces at the wall to diaphragm by 50%.
In seismic zone 4, the Fp for wall anchorage 420 lb/ft.
Regardless of governing lateral force (wind vs. seismic) the code
specifies a minimum, strength-level, anchorage force of 280 lb/ft for
concrete and masonry walls ('97 UBC 1605.2.3 and 1611.4)
Requirements about anchorage detailing for concrete or masonry walls:
In seismic zones 3 and 4 ('97 UBC 1605.2.3)
Use embedded straps that attach or hook around reinforcing
steel or ensure effective transfer of forces to steel.
Limit anchor spacing to 4' unless wass are designed to resist
bending between anchors.
In seismic zones 2, 3, and 4('97 UBC 1633.2.9.5)
Anchorage shall not use nails in withdrawal or toe nails.
Ledgers or framing shall not be used in cross-grain
bending/tension, which is shown in the following figure.

To avoid these problems, use specially designed seismic ties

that are known as purlin anchors by Simpson Strong-Tie, a
manufacturer of prefabricated, light-gauge, steel connectors
for wood construction.

9/16/2010 12:13 PM

1 of 5

1997 UBC Earthquake Design

Example 2

Continue with the previous example, Example 1, and examine

the following:
6. Shear wall design force.
7. Lateral forces normal to the wall.
8. Shear wall overturning.
9. Shear wall drift.
6. Shear wall forces
a. Consider seismic loading in the transverse direction.
From example 1, step 5, the diaphragm force (at
ASD level) supported by one of the 50' endwall
was determined to be 17000 lbs.
Recall, however, that this was developed from Fpx
based upon a R = 4.0, and not Fx with a R = 4.5.
Since the shear wall is a vertical element of the
LFRS, it is permissible to reduce this reaction
force by 89%; accounting for this difference
between 4.0 and 4.5.

Calculate the top half of the wall's inertia force

assuming no openings in the wall:

Total unit shear, applied at midheight:

v` = (15111 + 5582) / 50 = 414 lb/ft.
Since this building is located in seismic zone 4,

9/16/2010 12:13 PM

2 of 5

increase v by 50 %:
v` = 414 (1.5) = 621 lb/ft

b. Similarly, for seismic movement in the longitudinal

direction:

c. The above unit shear shear wall forces were developed

for the 50' end wall that had no openings. What happens
when the wall has openings, like th 15' on on the other
end wall?
The lateral load must be carried by the effective
wall segments known as shear panels if wood
walls or piers if concrete or masonry walls.
Different procedures are used to distribute the
horizontal diaphragm reaction to the effective wall
segments, depending if wood or masonry walls.
In shear panels, the unit shear is the same in
every panel due to the assumption that the
panel force is inversely proportional to the
panel length.
In piers, the pier force in inversely
proportional to pier rigidity. The unit shear
in wider pier will be greater than the unit
shear in a narrow pier.
In this example, however, the endwall piers are
the same with the same rigidities. The unit shear in
each 17.5' pier will be:

7. Lateral forces normal to walls:

It is assumed that the walls perpendicular to the ground
motion span vertically between the roof diaphragm and
foundation.

9/16/2010 12:13 PM

3 of 5

a. Force on main wall using '97 UBC Eqn 32-2:

Also note: Fp = .587Wp is greater than .7(.44) (1.0)Wp =

.308Wp and less than 4.0(.44)(1.0)Wp = 1.76 Wp
according to '97 UBC 1632.2
b. Force on cantilvered parapet:

c. Anchorage design force at diaphragm:

Recall that if in seismic zones 3 or 4, ap for the
main wall is increased to 1.5. This increases the
main wall force by 50% for use in anchorage force
calculation.

9/16/2010 12:13 PM

4 of 5

This exceeds the code minimum requirement of

420/1.4 = 300 lb/ft (at ASD level).
Therefore, provide an anchorage system capable
of resisting 520.8 lb/ft.
8. Overturning check on shearwalls:
A lower factor of safety is permitted in seismic design
vs. that used in wind because of the transient and
reversing nature of the seismic forces.
The factor of safety is accounted for by reducing
the resisting moment to dead load by .9.
Consider overturning of the short walls due to seismic
forces acting in the transverse building direction.

9. Story drift, D:
According to '97 UBC 1630.10.2, the maximum in
elastic displacement DM, should not exceed .025h for
structures with T < .7 seconds.
A serviceability consideration.
DM is a strength level inelastic displacement due
to a design earthquake.
DM = .7RDS where R is from Tabe 16-N
and DS is static story drift due to
strength-level forces.
Consider the following calculation for the 50' shear wall:

9/16/2010 12:13 PM

5 of 5

9/16/2010 12:13 PM