STRUCTURE A Joint Publication of NCSEA | CASE | SEI

June 2017 Tall Buildings

Inside:
MoMA Tower,
New York City
 Construction Documents &
Shop Drawings from One Solution
DESIGN TAIL STEE IL CONCR O CUMEN
O N STRU
C
E A D
BAR BND
QTY SIZE WGT MARK TYP LENGTH A B C D E F G H H2 J K K2 O TD
95 #4 716 4T001 T2 11'-9" 0'-4 1/2" 2'-9" 2'-9" 2'-9" 2'-9" 0'-4 1/2" 0'-2"

C
32 #8 902 8R025 2 10'-9" 9'-3" 1'-6" 0'-3"
16 #8 537 8R031 2 12'-9" 11'-3" 1'-6" 0'-3"
16 #8 494 8R032 2 11'-9" 10'-3" 1'-6" 0'-3"
TOTAL WGT 2649

2 T2

1 2 3 4

T
90'-0"

SUBM. DATE
T
30'-0" 30'-0" 30'-0"
D

ET

T
(4) #8 VERTS

( 5 ) #4
TIES @ 1'-0" O.C.
(4) #8 VERTS

DE

SUBMITTAL NAME
(4) #8 VERTS
( 5 ) #4
TIES @ 1'-0" O.C.
(4) #8 VERTS
(4) #8 VERTS ( 10 ) #8 BOT E.W.
( 7 ) #4 ( 6 ) #4
TIES @ 1'-0" O.C. TIES @ 1'-0" O.C.
(4) #8 VERTS
( 10 ) #8 BOT E.W.

C (4) #8 VERTS (4) #8 VERTS ( 5 ) #4

TIES @ 1'-0" O.C.
( 7 ) #4 ( 6 ) #4 ( 5 ) #4
( 10 ) #8 BOT E.W. TIES @ 1'-0" O.C.
TIES @ 1'-0" O.C. TIES @ 1'-0" O.C.

SUB. NO.
( 10 ) #8 BOT

( 10 ) #8 BOT E.W.

REV. DATE
30'-0"

REVISION DESCRIPTION
( 5 ) #4
TIES @ 1'-0" O.C.

(4) #8 VERTS
(4) #8 VERTS (4) #8 VERTS
( 5 ) #4
TIES @ 1'-0" O.C. (4) #8 VERTS
4
( 10 ) #8 BOT E.W.
1112/ " 1112/ "
B

60'-0"
AB AB

REV. NO.
( 10 ) #8 BOT E.W.
( 7 ) #4
TIES @ 1'-0" O.C. +0
( 6 ) #4 ( 10 ) #8 BOT E.W.
TIES @ 1'-0" O.C.

2'-0"
2 x 4T001
2@3"
( 10 ) #8 BOT E.W.

/ "
612

PAD FOOTING REBAR PLAN

112/ "CLR

5'-0"
3@1'-0"
(4) #8 VERTS

PROJ-ADDRESS
PROJ-BUILDER
-7'-0"

/ "
30'-0"

612

PROJ-NAME

DRAWING NAME
PROJECT NAME
( 10 ) #8 BOT E.W.

3"CLR
( 6 ) #4 ( 5 ) #4 ( 10 ) #8 BOT E.W.
( 5 ) #4

CUSTOMER
TIES @ 1'-0" O.C. TIES @ 1'-0" O.C.

LOCATION
(4) #8 VERTS TIES @ 1'-0" O.C.

A DETAIL
(4) #8 VERTS 1:24
( 7 ) #4 (4) #8 VERTS (4) #8 VERTS
TIES @ 1'-0" O.C. ( 10 ) #8 BOT E.W.
PROJ. NO.
( 10 ) #8 BOT E.W.
( 10 ) #8 BOT E.W. PROJ-NUM
A A CHKD BY:

DRWN BY:

09/12/2016

Tekla Structures
PLAN AT EL. +0
1 SHEET NO.

R1

Tekla Software: Truly Constructible.

Creating a truly constructible model enables the Engineers, Detailers, and
correct level of detail at every stage of a project. Fabricators are using Truly
From Construction Documents to Shop Drawings, Constructible models to improve
any deliverable is possible with a Tekla model. their efficiency and profitability
Produce construction documents Learn more at:
Link analysis & design
tek.la/trulyconstructible
Produce shop drawings
Pass information downstream

TRANSFORMING THE WAY THE WORLD WORKS

 CONTENTS
Features 44 Salesforce Tower
By Ron Klemencic, P.E., S.E., Hon. AIA,
33 A Unique Opportunity for a Michael T. Valley, P.E., S.E., and
John D. Hooper, P.E., S.E.
Conventional Tall Building Frame
By Mark Sarkisian, S.E., Neville Mathias, S.E.,
and David Shook, P.E. 50 Brock Commons
By Paul Fast, P.E., P.Eng., Struct.Eng. and

36 New Clearwater Beach Hotel Robert Jackson, P.Eng.

By E. Michael McCarthy, P.E.

54 Flat Plate
40 53W53 MoMA Tower Concrete Construction
By Silvian Marcus, P.E., Gustavo J. Oliveira, P.E., By Mark Sarkisian, S.E., Eric Long, S.E.,
Fatih Yalniz, P.E, and Nicholas Chack, P.E. David Shook, P.E., and Eric Peterson

59 SPECIAL SECTION: Tall Building Construction By Larry Kahaner

Columns and STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS

20 Stiffness Versus Strength
SPOTLIGHT
79 Madison Square Park Tower
Departments By Paul A. Gossen, P.E. and By Joseph Savalli, P.E., Matthieu
Keith M. MacBain, Ph.D., P.E. Peuler, P.E., and Leslie Morris, P.E.
EDITORIAL
7 SEIs Vision for the Future of PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS BUSINESS PRACTICES
Structural Engineering 24 Wood Shear Wall Design 86 Techniques to Successfully
By Andrew W. Herrmann, P.E., SECB Examples for Wind Navigate Networking
By John Buddy Showalter, P.E. By Jennifer Anderson
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
STRUCTURAL FAILURES
8 Seismic Design of
29 Failure of Imagination IN EVERY ISSUE
Nonbuilding Structures and
By Stan R. Caldwell, P.E., SECB. 6 Advertiser Index
Nonstructural Components
67 Resource Guide
Part 2 INSIGHTS Tall Buildings
By J. G. (Greg) Soules, P.E., S.E., 70 Punching of Slabs 80 NCSEA News
P.Eng., SECB By Aurelio Muttoni, Ph.D., 82 SEI Structural Columns
Miguel Fernndez Ruiz, Ph.D. 84 CASE in Point
STRUCTURAL PRACTICES
and Joo T. Simes
12 Development Along
Old Party Walls HISTORIC STRUCTURES
Publication of any article, image, or
By Dan Eschenasy, P.E., SECB 72 Sciotoville Bridge advertisement in STRUCTURE
By Frank Griggs, Jr., D.Eng., P.E. magazine does not constitute
STRUCTURAL TESTING endorsement by NCSEA, CASE,
SEI, C 3 Ink, or the Editorial
17 Temporary Testing Facility LEGAL PERSPECTIVES
Board. Authors, contributors, and
By Giulio Leon Flores, P.E., 75 An Overview of Consent to advertisers retain sole responsibility
Hussien Abdel-Baky, Ph.D., P.E., Assignment Agreements for the content of their submissions.

and James C. Hays, P.E. By Gail S. Kelley, P.E., Esq.

The 1,070-foot-tall Salesforce
Tower advances the state-of-
On the cover With a slenderness ration of 1:12, MoMa Tower will rise to a total height of 1,050 feet on the New York skyline. the-art of high-rise seismic
Read about the many challenges facing the projects Structural Engineers on page 40. design. See page 44.

STRUCTURE magazine 5 June 2017

 STRUCTURE

ADVERTISER INDEX PLEASE SUPPORT THESE ADVERTISERS

Bluebeam Software .................................. 4 Legacy Building Solutions ..................... 15 ADVERTISING ACCOUNT MANAGER
CASE .................................................... 77 Lindapter ................................................ 9 INTERACTIVE SALES ASSOCIATES
Cast Connex ........................................... 2 LNA Solutions ...................................... 75 sales@STRUCTUREmag.org
Clark Dietrich Building Systems ........... 71 MAPEI Corp ........................................ 53 Eastern Sales Chuck Minor 847-854-1666
Western Sales Jerry Preston 480-396-9585
Decon USA Inc ..................................... 74 MMFX Steel Corporation of America ... 64
DEICON.............................................. 27 NCEES ................................................. 35 EDITORIAL STAFF
DeSimone Consulting Engineers ........... 78 New Millennium Building Systems ....... 11
Executive Editor Alfred Spada
Dlubal Software, Inc ............................. 61 PPI (Professional Publications, Inc) ....... 87 aspada@ncsea.com
Fyfe ....................................................... 23 Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute .... 28
Editor Christine M. Sloat, P.E.
Geopier Foundation Company.............. 62 RISA ..................................................... 88 publisher@STRUCTUREmag.org
Hayward Baker Inc................................ 60 Simpson Strong-Tie......................... 19, 39
Associate Editor Nikki Alger
Hoover Treated Wood Products ............. 13 Steel Joist Institute................................. 31 publisher@STRUCTUREmag.org
ICC - Evaluation Service ....................... 63 Strongwell ............................................. 57 Creative Director Tara Smith
Independence Tube Corporation ........... 16 StructurePoint ....................................... 58 graphics@STRUCTUREmag.org
Integrated Engineering Software, Inc..... 69 Trimble ................................................... 3
Integrity Software, Inc ............................. 6 USG Corporation ................................. 32 EDITORIAL BOARD
ITT Enidine Inc .................................... 49 Vulcraft/Verco Group ............................ 66 Chair Barry K. Arnold, P.E., S.E., SECB
KPFF .................................................... 76 Weyerhaeuser ........................................ 43 ARW Engineers, Ogden, UT
chair@structuremag.org
Erratum Jeremy L. Achter, S.E., LEED AP
Historic Structures Lachine Rapids Bridge (April 2017) ARW Engineers, Ogden, UT
In this Historic Structures article, the explanation of Longs use of continuous bridge segments Erin Conaway, P.E.
across supports (page 42) contained an error: In other words, he made his truss continuous SidePlate Systems, Phoenix, AZ
over the intermediate supports so that the maximum positive moment (should read negative John A. Dal Pino, S.E.
moment) over the support is equal, or nearly so, to the maximum negative moment (should FTF Engineering, Inc., San Francisco, CA
read positive moment) located between the supports. Linda M. Kaplan, P.E.
STRUCTURE magazine and the author apologize for the error. The online version of this TRC, Pittsburgh, PA

article has been corrected. Thank you to H. Starzer, P.E. for pointing out the error. Dilip Khatri, Ph.D., S.E.
Khatri International Inc., Pasadena, CA

Jessica Mandrick, P.E., S.E., LEED AP

Gilsanz Murray Steficek, LLP, New York, NY

Important Brian W. Miller

Davis, CA

news for
Mike Mota, Ph.D., P.E.
CRSI, Williamstown, NJ

Evans Mountzouris, P.E.

The DiSalvo Engineering Group, Ridgefield, CT

Bentley Users Greg Schindler, P.E., S.E.

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

KPFF Consulting Engineers, Seattle, WA

SofTrack controls
Bentley usage by
Prevent Quarterly and Monthly Overages Product ID code and
Control all Bentley usage, even licenses counts (pipe, inlet,
you do not own pond, and all others)
and can actively
Give users visibility of who is using licenses now
block unwanted
Warn and Terminate Idle usage product usage
CONTACT US NOW:
SofTrack reports and
(866) 372 8991 (USA & Canada) optionally controls
(512) 372 8991 (Worldwide) usage of all Autodesk
www.softwaremetering.com products by Version,
Feature Code, and
Serial Number!
SofTrack reports and
Additionally, SofTrack provides software license control for all your applications including
full workstation auditing of files accessed and websites visited. Many customers also controls ESRI ArcMap
benefit from SofTracks workstation specific logon activity reporting. concurrent and single
use license activity
2017 Integrity Software, Inc. Bentley is a registered trademark of Bentley Systems, Incorporated
Stephen P. Schneider, Ph.D., P.E., S.E.
BergerABAM, Vancouver, WA
John Buddy Showalter, P.E.
American Wood Council, Leesburg, VA
C3 Ink, Publishers
A Division of Copper Creek Companies, Inc.
148 Vine St., Reedsburg WI 53959
Phone 608-524-1397 Fax 608-524-4432
publisher@structuremag.org
June 2017, Volume 24, Number 6
ISSN 1536-4283. Publications Agreement No. 40675118. Owned
by the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations and
published in cooperation with CASE and SEI monthly by C3 Ink. The
publication is distributed free of charge to members of NCSEA, CASE
and SEI; the non-member subscription rate is $75/yr domestic; $40/
yr student; $90/yr Canada; $60/yr Canadian student; $135/yr
foreign; $90/yr foreign student. For change of address or duplicate
copies, contact your member organization(s) or email subscriptions@
STRUCTUREmag.org. Note that if you do not notify your member
organization, your address will revert back with their next database
submittal. Any opinions expressed in STRUCTURE magazine are those
of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of NCSEA,
CASE, SEI, C3 Ink, or the STRUCTURE Editorial Board.
STRUCTURE is a registered trademark of National Council of
Structural Engineers Associations (NCSEA). Articles may not be
reproduced in whole or in part without the written permission of
the publisher.

STRUCTURE magazine 6 June 2017

 SEIs Vision for the Future of
Editorial new trends, new techniques and current industry issues
Structural Engineering
Where Do We Stand ? by-line
Author
By Andrew W. Herrmann, P.E., SECB, F.SEI, Pres.12.ASCE
S
EI just finished its successful 2017 Structures Congress in
Denver where we celebrated collaboration, innovation, and
the Vision for the Future of Structural Engineering: A Case for
Change. Reflecting on the program, sessions covered areas such
as communications, mentoring, ethics, codes and standards, history,
performance, multi-hazards, training, professional practice, health
monitoring, sustainability, resiliency, construction, loads, rehabilita-
tion, and solutions. All areas are meant to contribute towards the
future of structural engineering.
SEIs A Vision for the Future of Structural Engineering and Structural
Engineers: A Case for Change was released on October 16, 2013, and
serves as SEIs blueprint for the future. For the full version of the
report, refer to www.asce.org/SEI. The executive summary, dated
September 2015, is also available there.
As part of the Congress, the SEI Board of Governors met to assess
our progress and identify areas where we need to increase attention.
This primarily includes progress on the seven key initiatives that will
enable SEI to achieve the Vision for the Future of Structural Engineering.
The following is our status towards fulfilling our key initiatives to
advance our vision:
Reform Structural Engineering Education
The Committee on the Reform of Structural Engineering Education
(CROSEE) has been formed to study new educational models to
equip students with the broad technical, communications, and critical
thinking skills necessary to compete in the global economy.
Improve Mentoring and
Continuing Education
The Committee on Professional Mentoring has been rebranded as the
Leadership Development Committee within the SEI Business Practice
Activities Division (BPAD). The committee is developing a national,
standardized framework to launch the careers of young professionals
and create a meaningful platform for lifelong learning and constant
professional growth. See the March 2017 STRUCTURE magazine
Editorial for more information highlighting this committee. The
Continuing Education Task Committee received a grant this year
from the SEIs Futures Fund and is scheduling a workshop in June to
explore the direction of continuing education for Structural Engineers.
Create a New SEI Global Activities Division
A business plan and budget have been approved by the SEI Board
of Governors for the newly formed Global Activities Division. This
new division will address the needs of a worldwide membership,
and position our members as global leaders in structural engineer-
ing research and practice. Meetings have also been initiated with
Structural Engineering organizations outside the United States to
seek ways to collaborate.
STRUCTURE magazine
Promote Performance-Based
Codes and Standards
A Task Committee on Performance-Based Design is reviewing the
final drafts of white papers that will define the path required to give
structural engineers new tools to liberate them from the limitations
of prescriptive code-checking, encourage innovation in their designs,
and increase the value of their services.
Lead Multi-Disciplinary Summits on
Technical Matters of Broad Interest
The Committee on Biennial Interdisciplinary Technology Summits
has been formed to think outside of the traditional boundaries of
structural engineering to identify and apply the most advanced new
technologies and science to the practice.
Promote the Structural Engineer
as a Leader and Innovator
Each of the preceding responses to key initiatives contributes to pro-
moting the structural engineer as a leader and innovator by supporting
and encouraging the expansion of members roles to recognized posi-
tions of leadership in society by equipping them with the tools they
need to succeed and be recognized by the public. SEI is also initiating
new digital branding to communicate our vision.
Advocate for Structural
Engineering Licensure
We have joined with our peers, NCSEA, CASE, and SECB, to form
the Structural Engineering Licensure Coalition (SELC) to advance
implementation of the SE license as a post-PE credential.
This fall, five years since the publication of the origi-
nal vision, SEI will formally evaluate where we stand,
what we have accomplished to date, and what we
need to do to continue to achieve the Visions goals.
You can help advance the Vision for the Future of Structural
Engineering in two ways. Take the first step of influencing our
structural engineering profession by joining an SEI committee
at www.asce.org/structural-engineering/sei-committees and,
secondly, support the vision with a gift to the SEI Futures Fund
which provides critical funding support to many of our initiatives.
If you would like to learn more about the SEI Vision for the
Future of Structural Engineering or SEI, please contact SEI Director
Laura Champion at lchampion@asce.org or SEI President Andy
Herrmann at aherrmann@hardesty-hanover.com.
7 June 2017
Structural
DeSign
design issues for
structural engineers
Seismic Design of
Nonbuilding Structures
and Nonstructural
Components
Part 2: Advanced Topics
related to ASCE 7-16
By J. G. (Greg) Soules, P.E., S.E.,
P.Eng., SECB, F.SEI, F.ASCE
J. G. (Greg) Soules is a Principal
Engineer with CB&I LLC
in Houston, Texas. He is the
Vice Chair of the ASCE 7-16
Main Committee, Vice Chair
of the ASCE 7-16 Seismic
Subcommittee, and Chair of the
ASCE 7-16 Task Committee on
Nonbuilding Structures. He can be
reached at Greg.Soules@cbi.com.
T
his article is the conclusion of a two-
part series which discusses the seismic
design provisions for nonbuilding
structures found in Chapter 15 of
ASCE 7-16, Minimum Design Loads and Associated
Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures. The
previous article (Part 1, STRUCTURE, April
2017) provided an introduction to the seismic
design of nonbuilding structures.
Several seismic related issues are unique to
nonbuilding structures. This article covers the
following advanced topics in the seismic design
of nonbuilding structures:
The determination of seismic forces on
nonbuilding structures supported by
other structures.
The determination of seismic forces on
common nonstructural components
attached to nonbuilding structures.
The interrelation
and overlap between
Chapter 13, Seismic
Design Requirements
for Nonstructural
Components, and
Chapter 15 of
ASCE 7-16.
Special considerations
for the seismic design of
tanks and vessels.
Nonbuilding Structures
Supported by Other Structures
Section 15.3 of ASCE 7-16 provides require-
ments for the design of nonbuilding structures
supported by other structures for seismic forces,
and presents three possible scenarios:
The nonbuilding structure weight is less
than 25 percent of the combined weight
of the nonbuilding structure and the
supporting structure (15.3.1).
The nonbuilding structure weight is
greater than or equal to 25 percent of
the combined weight of the nonbuilding
structure and the supporting structure
(15.3.2(1)) rigid nonbuilding structure
(T < 0.06 seconds).
The nonbuilding structure weight is
greater than or equal to 25 percent of
the combined weight of the nonbuilding
structure and the supporting structure
(15.3.2(2)) flexible nonbuilding structure
(T 0.06 seconds).
Nonbuilding structures supported by other
structures see amplified seismic forces in a similar
manner as nonstructural components. To dis-
cuss the seismic design of nonbuilding structures
supported by other structures, a review of the
determination of seismic forces on nonstructural
components is important.
8 June 2017
Nonstructural Components
Section 13.3.1 of ASCE 7-16 specifies the use of
Equation 13.3-1 (shown below) to determine the
seismic design force on a nonstructural component.
Fp =
0.4apSDSWp
( 1+2 z ) Eqn. 13.3-1
( )Rp
Ip
h
Fp shall not to be taken as less than:
Fp = 0.3SDSIpWp
Fp is not required to be taken as greater than:
Fp = 1.6SDSIpWp
where:
Fp = seismic design force
ap = component amplification factor that varies
from 1.0 (rigid component Tp < 0.06 seconds) to
2.5 (flexible component). Tp is the fundamental
period of the component.
Rp = component response modification factor
(same concept as R for structures)
Ip = component importance factor (1.0 or 1.5).
Ip is not necessarily the same as the value of IE for
the supporting structure.
SDS = short period spectral acceleration
Wp = component operating weight
z = height in structure of point of attachment of
component with respect to the base.
h = average roof height of structure with respect
to the base
The values of ap and Rp are taken from Table
13.5-1 for architectural components or Table
13.6-1 for mechanical and electrical components.
Various terms in Equation 13.3-1 have sig-
nificant physical meanings. The term 0.4apSDS
represents the peak ground acceleration when ap
equals 1.0 and the constant acceleration region of
the response spectrum (plateau) when ap equals
2.5. The term (1 + 2z /h) represents an additional
amplification of the ground motion acceleration
due to the elevation of the point of attachment
of the supporting structure.
25 Percent Limitation
Where the weight of the supported nonbuilding
structure is less than 25 percent of the combined
effective seismic weights of the nonbuilding
structure and supporting structure, the design
seismic forces of the supported nonbuilding
structure are determined according to Chapter
13 where the values of Rp and ap are determined
per Section 13.1.5. Equation 13.3-1 is used
to calculate the seismic force, Fp, on the sup-
ported nonbuilding structure. The supporting
structure is designed to the requirements of
Chapter 12, Seismic Design Requirements for
Building Structures, or Section 15.5, Nonbuilding
Structures Similar to Buildings, as appropriate,
with the weight of the supported nonbuilding
structure considered in the determination of the
effective seismic weight, W. Section 15.3 rep-
resents a clear dividing line between Chapter
13 and Chapter 15 where the nonbuilding
structure is supported by another structure.
More than 25 Percent with
Rigid Nonbuilding Structure
Where the fundamental period of the sup-
ported nonbuilding structure, T, is less
than 0.06 seconds, the supported non-
building structure is considered to be a
rigid element. In this case, the supporting
structure is designed to the requirements of
Chapter 12 or Section 15.5 as appropriate,
and the R-value of the combined system
is permitted to be taken as the R-value
of the supporting structural system. The
supported nonbuilding structure is simply
taken as another mass in the design of the
supporting structure. This procedure is
similar to that used for the case where the
supported nonbuilding structure is less than
25 percent of the combined mass.
The supported nonbuilding structure and
its attachments are designed for the forces
determined using the procedures of Chapter
13, where the value of Rp is taken as equal
to the R-value of the nonbuilding structure
Faster Steel Connections
Lindapters high strength Girder Clamps are used to connect steel beams together
and provide an adjustable, cost-effective alternative to bolted or welded joints.
4 No drilling or welding required
4 Adjustable for easy alignment
4 High tensile capacity up to 56 kips*
Beam-to-beam
(tensile loading)
As used on American Copper Buildings (NYC), get the catalog at www.LindapterUSA.com to find out more!
STRUCTURE magazine
as outlined in Table 15.4-2, and ap shall be
taken as 1.0.
It is important to note that very few sup-
ported nonbuilding structures qualify as
rigid elements. There is a great temptation
to assume that the supported nonbuilding
structure is rigid due to the resulting ease of
calculation and lower loads. The period of
the supported nonbuilding structure must
be honestly evaluated, taking into account
such items as fluid-structure interaction
and the flexibility of the supporting floor
beams. Procedures for taking fluid-structure
interaction into account can be found in
TID-7024 (1963).
More than 25 Percent with
Flexible Nonbuilding Structure
Where the fundamental period of the sup-
ported nonbuilding structure, T, is greater
than or equal to 0.06 seconds, the sup-
ported nonbuilding structure is considered
to be a flexible element. In this case, the
nonbuilding structure and supporting
structure are modeled together in a com-
bined model with appropriate stiffness and
effective seismic weight distributions. The
combined structure is designed to Section
ADVERTISEMENTFor Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org
4 Reduced installation time and labor costs
4 Permanent or temporary connections
4 Independently approved Safe Working Loads
Beam-to-column
(slip resistance)
9 June 2017
15.5, with the R-value of the combined
system taken as the lesser R-value of the
nonbuilding structure or the supporting
structure.
The supported nonbuilding structure and
its attachments are designed for the forces
determined for the supported nonbuild-
ing structure in the combined analysis. A
flexible nonbuilding structure supported
by another structure is by far the most
common situation. Because the combined
structure is designed using the lesser R-value
of the supported nonbuilding structure
or the supporting structure, the use of a
high R-value structural system (e.g. special
concentrically braced frame) offers no eco-
nomic advantage. Of course, a high R-value
structural system may always be used to
provide better performance.
The use of a combined model requires
that the structural engineer designing the
supporting structure work in close col-
laboration with the manufacturer of the
supported nonbuilding structure. The com-
bined model does not have to be complex.
An example of this type of combined model
can be found in Appendix 4.G of ASCE
Guidelines for Seismic Evaluation and Design
of Petrochemical Facilities (2011).
continued on next page
www.LindapterUSA.com
*Type AF Girder Clamp with four 1 A490 bolts
Inclined beam-to-beam
(combined loading)

Common Nonstructural
Components Attached to
Nonbuilding Structures
Table 13.6-1 (Mechanical and Electrical
Components) and Table 13.5-1 (Architectural
Components) contain the basic seismic
parameters (ap and Rp) for many common
nonstructural components. Occasionally, the
engineer will run into cases where specific
values for the components are not listed. In
this case, it is best to use other mechanical or
electrical components from Table 13.6-1 or,
in the case of an architectural component,
use values from other rigid components or
other flexible components from Table 13.5-1.
For mechanical or electrical components not
listed in Table 13.6-1, the category of other
mechanical or electrical components provides
a simple, although conservative, solution
by using ap of 1.0 and Rp of 1.5. Engineers
often try to use values for components in
Table 13.6-1 that they feel are similar to their
component. The engineer takes on some risk
in using this approach because the descrip-
tions of the components in Table 13.6-1 are
not very detailed. An example can be seen in
trying to choose values for a fin fan. A fin fan
is a type of air cooler with integral support
legs that is often supported on pipe racks. The
values listed for fans in Table 13.6-1 (ap = 2.5
and Rp = 6) are not intended for fin fans with
integral support legs (these values do apply
where fin fans are not supported on integral
support legs). Fin fans with integral support
legs have been added to Table 13.6-1 (ap = 2.5
and Rp = 3) in ASCE 7-16. It was necessary
to specifically add an entry, with significantly
reduced values, for fin fans with integral sup-
port legs to ASCE 7-16 due to the fans poor
performance in seismic events, such as the
February 27, 2010, Chile earthquake (Soules,
Bachman, and Silva, 2016). When in doubt,
and when you cannot match your component
to an exact description in Table 13.6-1, you
should select the other mechanical or electrical
components category.
For architectural components not listed in
Table 13.5-1, the multiple choices provided
under other rigid components or other flexi-
ble components require engineering judgment.
The engineer must first decide if the compo-
nent is rigid or flexible. This decision should
be based on an approximate natural period,
Tp, for the component. The engineer must
then decide if the elements and attachments
of the component are high-deformability,
limited-deformability, or low-deformability.
Section 11.2 provides definitions of high-,
limited-, and low-deformability regarding
STRUCTURE magazine
the ratio of the ultimate deformation to the
limit deformation. These definitions, while
precise, are not straightforward to apply.
Fortunately, the commentary to Chapter 13
provides some guidance. For example, the
commentary notes that high-deformability
materials are materials such as steel or copper
that can accommodate relative displacements
inelastically if the connections also provide
high-deformability. Therefore, the types of
connections used are critical in the classifica-
tion process. As an example, steel walkways
and steel platforms are commonly attached to
nonbuilding structures in industrial facilities.
While the steel walkways and platforms are
constructed of a high-deformability mate-
rial, the connections often are not seismically
detailed and frequently include short attach-
ment columns with limited ability to absorb
inelastic deformations. Most configurations
would also qualify as flexible. Therefore, a rea-
sonable recommendation for values of ap and
Rp for steel walkways and platforms are ap =
2.5 and Rp = 2.5, which corresponds to other
flexible components and limited-deformability
elements and attachments.
Chapter 13 or Chapter 15?
As described earlier, ASCE 7-16 Section 15.3
provides a clear delineation between Chapter
13 and Chapter 15 for nonstructural compo-
nents and nonbuilding structures supported
by other structures, based on the weight of
the supported nonstructural component or
nonbuilding structure. Unfortunately, the
same cannot be said of certain nonstructural
components and nonbuilding structures
supported at grade and common to both
chapters. The following recommendations
attempt to address this lack of clear delinea-
tion between Chapter 13 and Chapter 15.
The most informative reference for deciding
whether to use Chapter 13 or Chapter 15
is Nonstructural Component or Nonbuilding
Structure? (Bachman and Dowty, 2008). This
resource identifies the common components
covered by both Chapter 13 and Chapter
15 as:
Billboards and Signs
Bins the requirements of Section 15.4.9, whereby
Chimneys
Conveyors
Cooling Towers
Stacks
Tanks
Towers
Vessels
Bachman and Dowty also suggest three ways
to differentiate between nonstructural com-
ponents and nonbuilding structures:
10 June 2017
Size nonstructural components are
small, usually less than 10 feet
in height
Construction nonstructural
components are typically shop
fabricated
Function nonstructural components
are primarily designed for functionality
while nonbuilding structures are
primarily designed to maintain
structural stability
Tanks and Vessels
Tanks and vessels are nonbuilding structures
not similar to buildings. As such, they exhibit a
very different dynamic response than building
structures. There are four special consider-
ations for tanks and vessels:
1) The importance of anchor rod stretch.
2) The importance of providing seismic
freeboard.
3) The importance of providing piping
flexibility.
4) Special design requirements for vessel
support skirts.
Anchor Rod Stretch
Many nonbuilding structures rely on the
ductile behavior of anchor bolts to justify
the R-value assigned to the structure. Anchor
bolts used for tanks and vessels must stretch
under seismic loads to provide the required
ductility. Section 15.4.9 provides a consis-
tent treatment of anchorage on nonbuilding
structures. Anchors must be designed to be
governed by the tensile strength of a ductile
steel element. Post-installed anchors in con-
crete or masonry must be pre-qualified for
seismic applications.
Section 15.7.3 is intended to ensure that
anchor attachments are designed such that
the anchor will yield (stretch) before the
anchor attachment to the structure fails.
Under Section 15.7.3, connections, excluding
anchors (bolts or rods) embedded in concrete,
must be designed to develop 0 times the
calculated connection design force.
Section 15.7.5 requires anchorage to meet
the anchor embedment into the concrete must
be designed to develop the tensile strength of
the anchor. The anchor must have a minimum
gauge length (stretch) of eight diameters.
The load combinations with overstrength
of Section 12.4.3 are not to be used to size
the anchor bolts for tanks, or horizontal and
vertical vessels. Oversized anchors are not able
to stretch and, therefore, do not provide the
required ductility.

Seismic Freeboard
The impact of a sloshing wave on the tank
roof or forcing the floating roof into a
fixed roof is a continuing source of seis-
mic damage to ground supported storage
tanks. Occasionally, external floating roofs
are forced outside of the tank shell by the
sloshing wave and end up landing on the
shell or having the seal catch the shell.
Loss of a floating roof in any of these cases
often results in a fire. This damage can be
eliminated by providing sufficient seismic
freeboard.
Piping Flexibility
The lack of flexibility in piping connections
to tanks is a continuing source of seismic
damage to ground supported storage tanks.
Therefore, ASCE 7 requires piping systems
connected to tanks and vessels to be flexible
enough to take specified displacements as
noted in Table 15.7-1. The piping must be
able to accommodate these movements at
allowable stress levels.
The piping must also be able to accom-
modate the amplified movements (Cd times
STEEL BUILDING SYSTEMS
MAKE THEIR GRAND ENTRANCE
ROOFING & FLOORING SYSTEMS | CEILING & CLADDING SYSTEMS | LONG-SPAN COMPOSITE SYSTEMS | STEEL & CONCRETE BRIDGE SYSTEMS
17-NMBS-2_structure-halfpage.indd 1
STRUCTURE magazine
the values in the tables) without ruptur- components. Key takeaways from this article
ing. Experience shows that systems with include:
little or no flexibility fail in large seismic Seismic forces on nonbuilding
events and systems with flexibility built-in structures supported by other structures
perform well. are determined by the size and
stiffness of the supported nonbuilding
structure.
Vessel Support Skirts The choice of design coefficients for
Skirt supported vessels fail in buckling, which nonstructural components is a function
is not a ductile failure mode. Therefore, a more of the deformability of the element and
conservative design approach is required. To its connection.
prevent collapse, ASCE 7 Section 15.7.10 and The applicability of Chapter 13 or
Table 15.4-2 require skirt supported vessels to Chapter 15 can be determined based
be checked for seismic loads based on R/I = on the size, construction, and function
1.0 if the structure falls in Risk Category IV of the component or nonbuilding
or if an R-value of 3.0 is used in the design structure.
of the vessel. The R/I = 1.0 check will typi- The performance of tanks and vessels
cally govern the design of the skirt over using in a seismic event depends heavily on
loads determined with an R-factor of 3 in a the anchorage details used, the use of
moderate to high area of seismic activity. The seismic freeboard, the use of flexible
foundation and anchorage are not required to piping connections, and the proper
be designed for the R/I = 1.0 load. design of skirt supports.
Conclusion
This article provides an overview of some The online version of this article
advanced topics encountered in the design contains detailed references. Please visit
of nonbuilding structures and nonstructural www.STRUCTUREmag.org.
ADVERTISEMENTFor Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org
Optimize your building
design and construction
Reduce total-project costs. We are your
nationwide resource for a broad range of
custom-engineered structural steel building
systems. We can help you determine the
best solution for your application.
FREE New white paper: Beyond the 5th Wall
DOWNLOAD
www.newmill.com/systems
4/28/17 9:21 AM
11 June 2017
Structural
PracticeS
practical knowledge beyond
the textbook
Development Along Old Party Walls
By Dan Eschenasy, P.E., SECB, F.SEI
Dan Eschenasy is the New York
City Buildings Department Chief
Structural Engineer. He is an
Honorary Member of SEAoNY
and a member of the ASCE
Structural Assessment of Buildings
Committee.
P
arty walls are frequently used in low-rise
developments due to their capacity to
provide economical structural support
in denser areas. They were more preva-
lent and taller in earlier times when American
cities developed. One can find many old party
walls in cities along the Atlantic seaboard from
Portland, Maine, to Charleston, South Carolina.
In the older areas of New York City, there are
over 15,000 existing brick masonry party walls,
many in four- or five-story buildings. The shared
use by adjoining owners resulted in real property
law developments which have added constraints
that FEMA 547 Techniques for the Seismic
Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings considers over-
riding. FEMA 547 justifies its lack of guidance:
For conditions along property lines or involving
party walls, the two buildings likely have different
ownership, and practical and legal issues may be
more significant than technical ones. This article
introduces the reader to historical party walls and
presents construction and engineering challenges
encountered on construction sites that border
old masonry party walls. New York City Building
Code (NYCBC) regulations are discussed, but
nothing in this article should be interpreted as
real property law advice.
A Short History of Regulations
We know from the Roman engineer, Vitruvius,
in his famous treaty De Architectura, that party
walls already existed in Rome around 30 B.C.
They were used as bearing walls set along
property lines to support floors of adjoining
structures. Roman legal statutes from that
period established the rights and obligations
of owners of party walls. The first regulation
involving party walls as fire barriers was issued
in the aftermath of the Great Fire of London
(1666). To combat the mischief of fire, laws
were promulgated requiring the use of masonry
in perimeter walls, including party walls. Thus,
the structural bearing function became inter-
twined with the fire containment function.
Party wall legal theories that developed sepa-
rately in the different states in colonial America
are the source of differences from state to state
in legal practices that exist today. In 1791,
George Washington promulgated a party wall
regulation for the District of Columbia. The
wood frame construction of the original New
York City (NYC) buildings allowed several
major fire conflagrations to occur. As a con-
sequence, use of brick or stone in perimeter
12 June 2017
walls was mandated by fire ordinances dating
as far back as 1830. By 1900, row houses using
party walls covered block after block. Even
when building heights had reached six or seven
stories, as long as the construction occurred on
narrow lots, masonry party walls remained the
choice of builders.
Since the 1870s, successive NYC building
regulations have included specific instructions
for party walls. There were 20 entries in the
1901 NYCBC that were mostly prescriptions
for the construction of party walls. Around
the turn of the 20th century, fire science had
developed as a separate field, and the 1905
National Building Code developed by the
National Board of Fire Underwriters (NBFU)
and the American Insurance Association had 9
entries similar to those in the 1901 NYCBC.
Up to the 1916 NYCBC, the mandated party
wall thickness was the result of empirical struc-
tural considerations related to applied weight.
Following the lead of the NBFU, the 1916
NYCBC introduced the concept that firewalls
be specified according to mandated fire tests.
Several technical developments led to the near
elimination of specific party wall structural
provisions in building codes, such as when the
empirical design of masonry was replaced by
an engineered design of masonry, and when
steel and concrete frames replaced masonry as
bearing systems for tall structures. The 2014
NYCBC uses the IBC definition: Any wall
located on a lot line between adjacent build-
ings, which is used or adapted for joint service
between the two buildings, shall be constructed
as a fire wall (sic).
Although not always explicitly stated in codes,
a party wall needs to meet both firewall and
material specific structural design requirements;
in the case of a fire in one building, the wall
is expected to maintain its structural stability
and stop the fire from spreading to the adjoin-
ing building.
The usual problems of demolition and
excavation along buildings on lot lines are
amplified when a party wall lies on that line.
The structural function of the wall needs to
be preserved. Also, weatherproofing needs to
be added. Almost all of the references in the
2014 NYCBC are prescriptions for the protec-
tion of existing party walls during construction
or demolition. Several other jurisdictions
(Philadelphia, Washington D.C., and more)
have similar regulations for the protection of
party walls.
Existing Party Walls
Attached unreinforced masonry buildings sharing a
party wall constitute a more stable unit than sepa-
rated buildings. The larger footprint of the attached

PARTY
WALL
BOWED
FAADE
WALL
Figure 1. Crack in party wall.
structure leads to much longer shear walls. In
addition, whatever the direction of the out-of-
plane load on the party wall, these loads can
be transferred by compression to the floor dia-
phragms on the opposing side.
An incident involving an underpinning
operation provided proof of the higher
reliability of party walls. An improper con-
struction procedure led to the partial collapse
of a rubble foundation that was supporting a
party wall separating two historic buildings.
A bottom section of approximately 25 feet
collapsed, leaving about 15 feet of rubble
foundation standing at each end. The soil
underlying this remaining foundation was
competent and the three-story unreinforced
masonry wall was able to turn into an arch
spanning 25 feet above the collapsed area.
Most independent walls would have failed,
but the wood floors on both sides of this
wall maintained its geometric stability and
the restraint provided by the floors allowed
the wall to sustain the significant increase in
compressive stresses.
Many owners may not be aware of the obli-
gation to maintain, in common, the
structural as well as the fire separation
functions of party walls. An interesting
incident occurred in 2009 when the
inspectors determined, while responding
to a complaint about a facade bowing,
TALLER BUILDING
INCORPORATING
THE PARTY WALL
ANCHORAGE
SYSTEM TO ORIGINAL PARTY
FLOOR WALL (in white)
DIAPHRAGM
Figure 2. Building incorporating old party wall.
STRUCTURE magazine
that the facade was common to two attached
buildings. The interior inspection revealed a
5-inch crack (Figure 1) that had developed
along the line where the party wall used to
be keyed into the facade. Each building was
owned separately, and the owners could not
reach an agreement to repair the crack. The
fire separation was compromised and the
collapse of the facade onto the street was
imminent. As the engineers could not find a
solution to arrest the evolution of the bowing,
the facade was ordered demolished.
Locating Existing Party Walls
In addition to legal constraints, old party
walls might constitute spatial constraints
as their presence limits buildable area or
influences the location of columns or shear
walls. The discovery of a party wall in the
construction phase results in complicated
changes and significant delays. It is essential
to recognize the presence of such walls at
the preliminary stage of a project.
When one plans to develop a new building
on a lot that is still occupied, an exterior
topographical survey may not reliably
determine the presence or even the exact
thickness of a party wall. Even more, such
a wall might not lie exactly centered on the
property line. Rarely do original construc-
tion drawings exist, and current owners
may be unaware and may only infer the
presence of a party wall. Since the thickness
of two abutting but independent walls can
be larger than that of a party wall, a simple
probe may be sufficient to elucidate the
situation. In many cases, adjoining owners
13 June 2017
ORIGINAL
PARTY WALL
EXISTING
UNDERPIN
COLLAPSED
OLD PIN
Figure 3. Old pin collapsed.
may not accept acquiring additional data,
especially when the measurement requires
destructive probes.
In older New York City neighborhoods, as
a result of successive development on the
same site, it is not uncommon to find party
walls extending or incorporating older party
walls (Figure 2). Depending on the shape of
the original building, these remnant walls
may not be continuous or may not span
the entire length of the more recent wall,
and may be missed by probes.
A serious accident that took place during
the underpinning of the foundation of a
fifteen-story loft in midtown Manhattan
exemplifies the danger of not exploring the
layered history of party walls adjoining a
construction site. The steel frame loft had
been erected around 1926 on a site previ-
ously occupied by a masonry building that
belonged to a group of attached 1880s ten-
ements. When originally constructed, the
lofts masonry incorporated the party wall of
the attached remaining tenement building.
Also, this 1880s wall was underpinned to
ADVERTISEMENTFor Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org
1-800-531-5558 Ext. 189

Figure 4. Wall collapsed due to lack of anchorage to
the diaphragm.
accommodate the deeper basement of the
loft. In 2014, the remaining tenement was
demolished and excavation for a new build-
ing commenced. The basement of this new
development ran even deeper than the lofts
basement, and an underpinning installa-
tion started. It appeared that the contractor
was not fully aware that he was, in fact,
undermining an older underpinning job.
While he was digging, an old unattached
pin overturned and collapsed with tragic
consequences (Figure 3).
When the existence of a party wall is
confirmed, the proper course of action is
to obtain acceptance from the adjoining
owner for any construction involving this
wall. The acceptance of the proposed work
is formalized in a legal document called
the Party Wall Agreement. Recently, the
NYCDOB issued a standardized form.
Such agreement is necessary when owners
of adjoining lots decide to build a lot line
wall to be used in common. In many cases,
Figure 5. Noggin wall.
STRUCTURE magazine
older attached buildings were erected by
the same developer and each building was
subsequently sold to different individuals.
Although no Party Wall Agreement was
signed, the owners legal rights and obliga-
tions are implied by the mere existence of
the wall and its common use.
Adjoining Demolition
Demolition along a party wall results in new
structural conditions and exposure to poten-
tial adverse weather conditions. As a result,
the party performing demolition is required
to utilize a series of proactive measures.
Since 1968, the NYCBC required: where
the floor beams of the adjacent building bear
on the party wall, the person causing the
demolition shall ascertain that such beams
are anchored into the wall and, where such
anchorage is lacking, shall provide anchorage
or otherwise brace the standing wall. The
validity of this requirement was confirmed
by several recent wall collapse investigations
that determined that these party walls were
not anchored when the adjoining building
was demolished (Figure 4). As explained in
the Collapse of Masonry Structures under Non-
Extreme Loads [Eschenasy, Second Applied
Technology Councils (ATC) & the Structural
Engineering Institutes (SEI) Conference
on Improving the Seismic Performance of
Existing Buildings and Other Structures],
forensic investigations determined that the
collapses were not due to over-stress but to
loss of stability.
An engineering investigation is required
before placing any special load on a party wall,
for instance when the basement of a demol-
ished building is filled with soil. Additional
bracing of a wall may become necessary when
the wall is not plumb or starts to lean follow-
ing demolition or excavation.
Demolition adjoining nogging party walls
poses special difficulties. The noggin (or nog-
ging) wall is an assembly where the space
between wood studs is filled with random
bricks (Figure 5). Building regulations up to
1916 allowed this type of construction to be
used as a building separation. Today, there are
still a good number of such walls that exist.
Vinyl siding has been, and still is today, the
owners primary choice for weather proof-
ing noggin walls. Investigations of several
nogging wall collapses blamed significant rot
of the studs resulting from rainwater that
had penetrated behind the vinyl cladding.
In contrast to regular wood stud walls where
the air around the studs allows evaporation of
the water, the bricks that are set tight against
the studs preclude evaporation. Even worse,
14 June 2017
LOT LINE
ANCHOR
FILL GAP MATERIAL
25 PSI COMPRESS
WOOD FLOOR
CONCRETE
SHEAR WALL
RUBBLE WALL
EXISTING
STONE SHELF
CUT TOE
UNDERPIN NEW
NEW SOIL BASEMENT
ANCHOR
Figure 6. Typical lot line condition.
the deteriorating conditions are not usually
observed in time due to the mask provided
by the vinyl siding. In addition to improving
weather proofing, a proper solution to stabiliz-
ing these noggin walls is to brace them with
properly nailed wood boards.
Developing an
Adjoining Structure
As long as masonry was the main structural
bearing material, the vertical extension of
party walls was permitted under the condi-
tion that the existing wall was lined with
additional brick to meet the total required
thickness for the new height. When, at the
turn of the 20th century, masonry bearing
walls for high-rise buildings were aban-
doned in favor of steel frames, engineers
faced different challenges when working in
the vicinity of masonry party walls.
As early as 1912, the Kidder Parker
Handbook observed that when buildings
of skeleton construction are erected without
a party wall agreement, it is usually impos-
sible to obtain a symmetrical foundation
directly under the columns supporting the
side or party wall. The Handbook recom-
mended cantilever foundations. The 1915
National Building Code indicated: Where
an existing party wall is to be incorporated
in a new building of skeleton or curtain
wall construction, the vertical extension of
the existing party wall shall be supported
entirely by columns and girders.
Many incidents and delays occur during
excavations when the configuration of the
party wall foundation is unknown. It is
essential to use an exploratory pit to under-
stand the shape of the existing footing.
Typically, unreinforced masonry walls were well. At the time of their erection, these walls Given the ubiquity of attached masonry
supported by a continuous rubble stone wall saved space. However, today, when the same structures in older U.S. cities, it is sur-
that was approximately six inches wider than lots are used for redevelopment, the presence of prising that recent standards and model
the wall above. Some weaker soils required party walls reduces the buildable area, especially codes that cover existing buildings, i.e.
this rubble wall be placed on an enlarged at the basement level. The presence of such old the International Existing Building Code
base on a stepped masonry, stone, or con- party walls places additional obligations on the (IEBC) and the American Society of Civil
crete shelf at least six inches wider than developer and increases the risk of foundation Engineers ASCE 41-13, Seismic Evaluation
the wall above. Obviously, such enlargement excavation accidents. When a project occurs in and Retrofit Rehabilitation of Existing
encroaches on the intended location of the an area occupied by old masonry buildings, the Buildings, do not devote specific prescrip-
new foundation wall (Figure 6). presence of a party wall along a lot line needs to tions for party walls. Hopefully, this will
If the toe needs to be removed, this be probed as early as possible. be addressed in the future.
must be indicated in the Party Wall
Agreement. Sawing off the toe needs
to be preceded by an underpinning
solution that prevents the tendency of
the foundation to rotate as a result of
the eccentric application of the walls
gravity force resultant. In a recent case,
where the underpinning and removal
of the toe were not properly engi-
neered, a substantial increase of the
existing buildings lean occurred. It
required extensive shoring.
Concerns about buildings pounding
against each other during a seismic
event have led to the introduction of
structural separation requirements in
engineering standards. Structural sepa-
ration is not necessarily the opposite
of party wall construction since, from

ADVERTISEMENTFor Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

a structural engineering point of view,
a group of attached buildings forms a
single structure.
Following the 1995 introduction of
the building separation requirement in
NYCBC, it was observed that when a
new building was built, separated by
the code required gap from an existing SUPERIOR
unreinforced bearing masonry struc-
ENVIRONMENT
RAPID
ture, the latter could start to lean and
close the gap. To prevent this lean,
THE
INSTALLATION
the code now requires the structural
separation along unreinforced masonry
structures to be filled with a material LEGACY CUSTOM-DESIGNED
that has a minimum compressive
strength of 25 psi. ADVANTAGE FABRIC BUILDINGS
Commonly, in new tall buildings, Fast Construction
concrete shear walls are built along
lot lines and function as firewalls and as Concept to Installation
an envelope enclosure. When adjoining In-house Engineering
existing party walls, these shear walls Patented Attachment System
need to be placed further away from
the lot line by a distance equal to the
Relocatable
protruding wall dimension. Owners
perceive this as a loss of rentable space.

877.259.1528
Conclusions LegacyBuildingSolutions.com
In their millennial existence, party walls
have saved material and have performed

STRUCTURE magazine 15 June 2017

 When We Build Our Facilities,
Our Engineers Specify The Finest
Structural Materials.

HSS HOLLOW STRUCTURAL SECTIONS

Aesthetically Pleasing, Structurally Sound. As an Architect or Engineer, you are always HSS Sizes
looking for that perfect building material. At Independence Tube we feel we have SQUARES
achieved that balance of looks and strength in our Hollow Structural Sections (HSS) " SQ12" SQ

Cost Effective. Cost Competitive. But it gets better. Over 90% of the HSS products RECTANGLES
1" x 1"16" x 8"
manufactured by Independence Tube meets or exceeds Grade C mechanical properties.
Get the additional strength at no additional cost. ROUNDS
" OD16" OD
Plentiful Inventory. Renowned Rolling Schedule. We stock the inventory for your next WALLS
project, and with our frequent Rolling Schedule, on-time delivery is a given. 0.065" through 0.688"
You now have a choice: HSS looks great, meets all your quality requirements, LENGTH
and the price is right. Up to 80' in length

800-543-9024 800-376-6000
www.southlandtube.com www.independencetube.com
S Structural
eismic assessment of earthquake-damaged
buildings typically involves damage surveys
and structural analyses. In this unique proj-
ect, the evaluations also included the seismic
testing of nine full-scale beam-column connections
and two portions of shear wall slab connections,
extracted from reinforced concrete buildings with
minor damage. The concrete specimens had to be
tested in less than a year. As the number of specimens
and limited time exceeded the capacity of available
testing facilities, a local warehouse was turned into a
temporary testing facility. With the lack of a strong
floor and strong wall, the project team designed a
self-equilibrating steel test frame so that the reaction
forces transferred to the warehouse slab were mini-
mized. The innovative test frame accommodated
all the different specimens in earthquake-type cyclic
tests while simulating the boundary conditions of
the specimens inside the buildings.
Innovative Test Frame
The test frame, shown in Figure 1, consisted of
two 20-foot-high steel towers separated by 20 feet
and supported by 3-foot-thick steel-concrete (SC)
composite footings resting on top of the warehouse
slab. Horizontal steel diaphragms connected the two
towers at the top and bottom. The top diaphragm
was made removable to facilitate installation of the
heavy specimens inside the frame. The bottom
diaphragm was elevated from the floor so that the
specimen reactions were transferred to the end towers
without damaging the warehouse slab. Removable
V-braces connected the bottom diaphragm to the
two towers.
The test frame was designed under strict deflection
requirements so as not to influence the accuracy of
the test results. The maximum lateral and vertical
deflection were limited to 18 inch and 116 inch (down-
wards), respectively, while no uplift was allowed. The
efficient structural system of the frame provided
the necessary lateral and vertical stiffness. The two
end towers were comprised of Universal Column
(UC) sections UC310 and UC200, which were
braced at different levels and stiffened by 38-inch-
thick steel plates. The middle tower columns, which
Figure 1. Self-reacting test frame.
STRUCTURE magazine
teSting
issues and advances related
Figure 2. Test frame deflected shape under maximum to structural testing
actuator load.
Figure 3. Contact pressure distribution under
maximum actuator load.
supported the actuators,
were welded-column (WC)
sections WC400 and were Temporary Testing Facility
perforated at various levels
to enable adjustment of the
actuator to match the different specimen heights. All Evaluating the Seismic
tower columns were bolted to the SC footings, which
consisted of steel boxes filled with 52 yards of high
Performance of Concrete
early-strength concrete, each, and reinforced with Elements
internal steel diaphragm plates. The SC footings sat
By Giulio Leon Flores, P.E.,
on top of the warehouse slab and provided stability
Hussien Abdel-Baky, Ph.D., P.E.,
and limited vibration during testing.
and James C. Hays, P.E.
The biggest challenge during the frame design
was the low bearing capacity of the warehouse slab,
estimated at 14.7 pounds per square inch (psi).
Giulio Leon Flores (giulio.leon@
The frame was designed to internally equilibrate
rizzoassoc.com), is a Engineering
the applied and reaction forces to overcome this
Manager with RIZZO Associates,
limitation, as shown schematically in Figure 2. The
a consulting company in
actuator, at its maximum capacity, imposes up to
Pittsburgh, PA. He was the lead
3,688 kip-feet applied moment at the base of the
engineer for the seismic tests.
frame. This moment generates a force couple (shown
in red in Figure 2) that applies a high bearing pressure Hussien Abdel-Baky
underneath one tower and large uplift forces on the (habdelbaky@shockeyprecast.com),
other tower. On the other hand, the specimen reac- is a Senior Structural Engineer
tion forces (in green in Figure 2) generate a reaction with the Shockey Precast Company
moment which equilibrates the applied moment. in Winchester, VA. Previously, he
This equilibrium of forces requires the middle plat- worked for RIZZO Associates and
form to behave in flexure, similar to a strap footing. served as structural engineer for the
The middle platform was raised 2 inches from the design of the test frame.
warehouse slab to function as required. As the reac-
James C. Hays (james.hays@
tion forces along the middle platform act in the
rizzoassoc.com), is a Chief
opposite direction to the applied vertical forces, the
Structural Design Engineer with
bearing pressure applied to the warehouse slab was
RIZZO Associates. He supervised
gradually reduced, as shown in Figure 3 for the case
the design, fabrication, and
of maximum applied actuator force of 450 kips. The
erection of the test frame.
SC footings uniformly spread the applied pressure on
the warehouse slab, eliminating any localized stress
concentration underneath the towers and ensured
contact to the slab at all times (i.e., no uplift). The
SC footings were connected by the 20-inch-thick
17
Figure 4. FE model of test frame with the largest
specimen inside.
middle platform which consisted of steel beams
partially encased by a 16-inch concrete slab that
reduced deflection and vibration during the seis-
mic testing. The middle platform beam along
the same axis of the actuator column was drilled
with anchor points to enable the adjustment of
the struts supporting the specimen beam ends.
Each anchor point location was designed for an
allowable vertical load of 340 kips in tension
or compression, and for a maximum vertical
deflection of 116 inch. The finite element analysis
of the frame was carried out using STAAD Pro
software (Figure 4).
Because of the warehouse limitations in height
and access, the test frame was designed and
fabricated as four separate modules which were
assembled at the site (Figure 5): the bottom
platform including foundation boxes, the two
towers, and the top platform. This design allows
future transportation and reassembly at a dif-
ferent location.
Testing Process
Two 20-ton-capacity Franna cranes lifted and
installed all the concrete specimens inside the
test frame. Accurate synchronization of the crane
movements was essential for proper lifting and
movement of the heavy specimens, which were
carefully braced before installation. Two 450-kip
double-acting MTS hydraulic actuators applied
the lateral forces at the top of the specimens,
simulating the earthquake action (Figure 6).
For the beam-column connections, the load-
ing represented seismic forces acting on the
specimens as if they were inside the buildings.
Figure 7. Slab-wall specimen in test frame.
STRUCTURE magazine
Figure 5. Assemblage of test frame in the warehouse.
Secondary supports consisting of heavy steel
caps at the bottom and top of the column, and
double-pinned struts at the beam ends, forced
the specimen to deflect as during a seismic event.
In other words, a zero moment at the beam and
column ends (pin connections) and free transla-
tion except at the column bottom, which is the
reference point for relative displacement (Figure
6). The double-pinned struts consisted of 10- x
10-inch-square hollow sections with 80-milli-
meter-diameter pins attached at both ends. The
bottom pin was bolted to a load cell used to
measure the specimen reactions. Pretension rods
attached the steel caps to the column, and the
double-pinned struts to the beam ends. The axial
forces in the pretension rods in the columns rep-
resented the gravity load carried by the column
inside the building.
The slab-wall specimens consisted of portions
of a concrete shear wall with its tributary slab
and were intended to test the shear transference
at the slab-wall interface during a seismic event
(i.e., shear friction). In this test configuration, the
walls of the specimen were placed flat on the test
frame floor while the slab stood upright (i.e., in
the vertical position). A secondary frame consist-
ing of UC310 sections with lateral bracing was
designed to transfer the actuator force from the
top to the lower part of the steel columns and then
to the slab-wall interface via grout pads (Figure 7).
The beam-column joint regions and slab-wall
interfaces were externally instrumented with high
accuracy string potentiometers to record beam
and column flexural rotations and shear deforma-
tions. The specimens were subjected to quasi-static
reversed cyclic loading in accordance with the
Figure 8a. Moment vs. rotation results.
18 June 2017
Figure 6. Specimen layout under cyclic testing.
American Concrete Institute (ACI) Committee
374.1. The loading consisted of the application
of incremental displacements at the top of the
specimens, up to a drift of 3% or failure of the
specimen. After each cyclic loading, the test was
stopped to identify and measure cracks and also
take photographic records. The test results con-
sisted of force versus deformation plots at critical
sections of one of the specimens. Figure 8a shows
the moment versus rotation plot at the beam-to-
column section of the specimen, shown at different
cycles. Figure 8b shows the damaged suffered at the
beam-column joint after the last cycle. During the
tests, the deformations at critical locations of the
test frame were also recorded, being the maximum
displacement around 116 inch at the top of the
frame, which was only 1% percent of the maxi-
mum applied displacement (+/-5 inches) and thus
considered negligible.
Conclusions
The temporary testing facility, equipped
with a self-reacting steel test frame, proved
to be a successful alternative to performing
seismic testing of large concrete elements
on time and within budget. The innovative
self-reacting frame, which can be transported
and re-assembled at a different location,
eliminates the need for strong-floor and
strong-wall, thus dramatically reducing
costs. The test results pro-
vided valuable information to
evaluate the buildings seismic
performances.
Figure 8b. Specimen damage after cyclic testing.
 More robust software
for CFS projects.

With CFS Designer V2.0 software, you can now easily design
multi-story, load-bearing wall systems up to eight stories high.
This new, more robust version also automates complicated
AISI design provisions, complex loading scenarios and common
cold-formed steel systems. With an intuitive user interface for
faster input and simplified file management, CFS Designer can
trim your design time from hours to minutes.
NEW! Version 2.0 To learn more, visit go.strongtie.com/cfsdesigner.

2017 Simpson Strong-Tie Company Inc. CFSDESIGN17

Structural
SyStemS
discussion and advances
related to structural and
component systems
Stiffness Versus Strength
By Paul A. Gossen, P.E., F.ASCE,
and Keith M. MacBain, Ph.D., P.E.
Paul A. Gossen is Principal
Emeritus at Geiger Engineers.
He is a member of ASCE
Committee 19 Structural
Application of Steel Cables for
Buildings, as well as Committee
55 Tensile Membrane
Structures. Paul can be reached
at pag@geigerengineers.com.
Keith M. MacBain is a
Principal of Geiger Engineers
and can be reached at
kmm@geigerengineers.com.
W
hat does stiffness have to do
with strength? Well, engineers
may remember learning about
composite beam design, column
design, or beams with compression reinforcing.
Courses that included these topics introduced the
n Factor. That is the factor that defines the ratio
of the moduli of elasticity between materials. It
is used in calculations to convert the stiffness of
different materials to a common one. This was the
foundation for understanding that stiffness plays
a role in the distribution of forces in a section.
However, material stiffness, the modulus of elas-
ticity, and cross-sectional area are not the only
components that influence the distribution of
force flow. Geometric constraints, such as length
of members, support conditions, and sectional
properties all influence the force flow in a system.
In fact, all of structural engineering is dictated one
way or another by the ratio of stiffness between
components in a structure. Force flow is defined
here as the distribution of all
internal systems forces, such
as axial force, moment, shear,
and torsion.
This article discusses two
systems in order to explore
the influence of stiffness and strength: 1) struc-
tural static systems and 2) connections.
Why is this important? Compatibility of
deformations of structural components is the
foundation of a safe structure. If there is no com-
patibility between components, they can easily be
overstressed and can fail progressively as a result.
Structural Systems
Often, members are connected to carry the same
load, although sometimes it may not appear to be
Figure 2a. Impact of top beam size increase.
20 June 2017
W BEAM
LINK
500
PLF
ANALYSIS MODEL
PICTURE 1
ANALYSIS MODEL 500
PLF
PICTURE 1
Figure 1. Analytical model connected beams.
the case. In these instances, the load is distributed
to the members in proportion to the ratio of
their stiffnesses.
A simple model can demonstrate the interac-
tive effect of members with different stiffnesses
(Figure 1). The beams were first sized as inde-
pendent, unconnected beams based on a linear
load of 500 pounds per linear foot (plf ). From
the resultant moment, a W 10 x 15 was selected
for the 20-foot long top beam and a W 10 x 30
was selected for the 30-foot long bottom beam.
When connected, the top beam moment
increased by 155% and the bottom beam
moment decreased by 33.5%. This disparity
is the result of the top beam being signifi-
cantly stiffer, due to its shorter length, than
the bottom beam. It essentially robbed the
load from the bottom beam. The top beams
size had to be increased to eliminate the over-
stress while the bottom beam size remained
unchanged. It was necessary for the top beam
to be increased to a W 10 x 30 to obtain the
strength to carry the increased load that was
shed from the bottom beam. Increasing its
section results in a larger section modulus and,
more so, a larger moment of inertia. Looking
at the terms of both, the section modulus and
the moment of inertia, one can
see that the moment of inertia,
and thus the stiffness, increased
by a factor of 2.5 while the sec-
tion modulus increased by 2.3,
which is the opposite of what
was desired. (Section Modulus
S = bd2/6; Moment of Inertia I
= bd3/12; b = width, d = depth)
(See Figure 2a).
Another solution would be
to increase the stiffness of the
bottom beam. In this scenario,
the bottom beam is increased
to a W 14 x 38 to obtain the
stiffness that eliminates the shed-
ding of load to the top beam,
while the top beam size remained
unchanged. Figure 2b shows the
interaction of the two beams.
Note that the second solution
is more economical. In the first

Figure 2b. Impact of bottom beam size increase.
scenario, 300 pounds was added to the struc-
ture while the steel weight was increased by
only 240 pounds in the second scenario.
However, the beam depth increased from 10
inches to 14 inches. The 14-inch deep beam
was chosen because the moment of inertia
and stiffness increases significantly without
a large increase in weight. If the depth could
not be more than 10 inches, then the beam
size would have had to become a W10 x 68.
A third solution would have been to change
the boundary condition of the lower beam,
i.e. restrain the rotation at the support.
So, where do these conditions occur in
practice? They are more widespread than
one may realize.
A simple example is a wooden roof struc-
ture to form dormers, frequently used in
residential buildings (Figure 3). The ridge
beam is linked to the valley rafters by the
sloped rafters. The roof sheathing is 2 x 6
tongue and groove decking which provides
RIDGE BEAM
SLOPED RAFTER
WOOD ROOF
PICTURE 3
Figure 3. An example of load sharing members in a wood roof.
STRUCTURE magazine
very limited diaphragm
action. Often members in
these structures are designed
based on the contribut-
ing load and spans without
regard to the fact that they are
interconnected. Thus, load
sharing is ignored. However,
if the structure is analyzed
three-dimensionally, which
reflects load sharing among
the members, it is evident
that the assumed load allo-
cation is incorrect and that
the ridge member, which
was properly sized for the
assumed contributing load,
is overloaded. The behavior is
similar to that demonstrated
in the example above.
Again, the reason is that the ridge member
is stiffer compared to the valley rafter and
attracts a greater share of the total load.
Most engineers would increase the ridge
member size, usually its depth, because
this is more effective in resisting moments.
However, what is needed is to modify its
stiffness as well as its strength. As shown
in the example above (Figures 2a and 2b),
the increase in size, specifically the depth,
increases the section modulus. At the
same time, the moment of inertia is also
increased by a larger factor. Increased stiff-
ness attracts even more load, resulting in
larger moments.
Investigating the compatibility of stress
and strain, an indicator of material stiffness
and cross section, is essential when com-
bining sections of different stress capacities
and or stress/strain behavior. An example
is a cable roof clad with prefabricated
roof panels (Figure 4). The roof panels are
VALLEY RAFTER
Figure 4. Floating roof panels in a cable roof.
21 June 2017
composed of joists that support metal roof
deck. Edge members around the panels
form borders that support the deck on the
long sides and the joists on the short sides.
The panels were prefabricated and lifted
onto the cable net. The members along the
cables are clamped to the cable to prevent
the panel from sliding and to resist uplift
from wind. The modulus of elasticity (E)
of the cable is 20 x 106 kips per square inch
(ksi), and its working strength is 90 ksi, with
a factor of safety of 2.2. The edge member
that is clamped to the cable is a structural
section with a modulus of elasticity of 29
x 106 ksi and a working stress 21.7 ksi. If
the cable and the edge member are rigidly
bolted together, the strain compatibility
must be checked. The cables are pre-ten-
sioned to 50% of their allowable capacity
before placing the panels. The differential
strain between preload and maximum load
for the cable is (0.5 x 90)/(20 x 10 6) = 2.25
x 10-6 and for the edge member it is 21.7/
(29 x 106) = .75x10-6. This means that the
strain in the cable under full load is 3 times
greater than the allowable strain in the edge
member, which would cause failure of the
edge member. The solution was to rigidly
clamp the edge member of a panel to the
cable at only one location and allow the
other connections to slide. These additional
connections were required to resist wind
uplift. The detail for the sliding connection
consisted of a split pipe with a neoprene
liner between the surface of the cable on
the inside face of the pipe. The split pipe
was bolted on the cable using U bolts.
There are a few structural systems where defor-
mations increase their capacity. In catenary
systems, elastic deformations amplify the sag
and, thus, its load carrying capacity. Membrane
and cable structures often incorporate catenaries.
continued on next page

3/4" THICK COVER
PLATE
TOP FLANGE OF W 30 x 132
END
FigureDETAIL OFofCOVERPLATE
5. End detail a cover plate.
Connections
The importance of exploring compatibil-
ity in connections cannot be overstated.
However, detailed free-body analyses of
load transfers in connections are often
ignored.
An example of connection compatibil-
ity is the connection of a cover plate that
reinforces a girder. The end connection of
a cover plate to the flange of a girder is the
critical area because the cover plate strain
has to catch up with the strain in the
girder flange.
The load is transferred from the top flange
to the cover plate through welds. The welds
provide a shear connection between the two
components. Thus, the shear capacity of
the weld is critical for the integrity of the
connection. Using a free body diagram and
looking at the strain compatibility between
the connected area of the cover plate and
the flange, the weld, as well as the shape
of the end of the cover plate, can be deter-
mined. The flange is under load and, thus,
has deformations. The cover plate needs to
adapt to this deformation for a safe load
transfer. The limit of how much load can be
transferred is defined by the capacity of the
welds that connect the plate to the flange.
The local stiffness of the cover plate section
dictates how much load is attracted. In the
design, one can tailor the shape of the end
of the cover plate, thereby manipulating
SIDE VIEW
TYPICAL
Figure 7. SteelBEAM SPLICE
beam splice.
PICTURE 7
STRUCTURE magazine
3/8"
3/8"
1"
Figure 6. Wooden scarf joint connections.
the magnitude of load transfer to match the Scarf splices in wood connections (Figure 6)
capacity of the welds or match the welds use the same principal. By tapering the con-
to the stiffness of the cover plate. Here is nected section against each other, a smooth
an example: load transfer is achieved without overstress-
A W30 x 132 beam has a moment of 665 ing the glue line. They are usually used to
kip-feet resulting in a bending stress (fb) of
extend the length of a member. Failure in
21 ksi. A -inch-thick cover plate is to be these connections usually originates at the
welded to the flange of the beam. The strain apex of the tapered joint. If the glue line
resulting from the stress in the beam flange fails at this location, the joint peels apart.
must become the same in the cover plate. The cause is an increase of stress in the
The plate is welded to the flange with a remaining glue line.
3
8-inch fillet weld. The capacity of the weldAnother example of how the stiffness of a
is 5.6 kips per inch. For welds on both sidescomponent in a connection affects its per-
of the plate, the load that can be transferred
formance can be shown at a simply-bolted
is F = 2 x 5.8 = 11.6 kips per inch. The splice of a wide flange beam. The force in
locally increased area of the cover plate at one beam is transferred to another beam
this location should not exceed A = F/fb; by splice plates.
A = 11. 6/ 21 = .552 square inches. The Plates on each side of the web, on the
stress of the flange is used here because theoutside of the flanges, and on the under-
strain in the cover plate must match the side of the flanges are bolted together to
one in the flange. The modulus of elastic- form the connection (Figure 7). The con-
ity (E) is the same for the flange and the necting bolts are loaded in double shear.
cover plate. Thus, the differential increase The plates on the outside of the flanges
of the -inch plate width over 1 inch is differ from those on the underside of the
.552/ 0.75 = .736. Both sides of the plate flange. The width of the outside plates can
edges are tapered in plan. Thus, the taper isbe the full width of the flanges. The plates
2/.736 or 1: 0.368 or 1 inch: 38-inch (Figure
on the underside of each flange are placed
5). The magnitude of the total load that is on each side of the web to clear the web
transferred depends on the width of the plate in
and fillet; thus, the combined width of these
this example. As more and more load is trans-plates is less than that of the top plate. The
ferred to the plate, the stress level in the beam
full capacity of a bolt in double shear can
flange is reduced and, theoretically, the slope
only be realized if both bolt shear planes
of the taper could be increased. A more practi-
are stressed to their maximum allowable
cal solution would be to reduce the weld size.
shear stress. This can only happen when
the strain of top flange plate is
A equal to that of the underside.
Consequently, the area of the top
plate must equal the sum of areas
of the under-the-flange plates.
The total width of the under-
the-flange plates is less than that
0.5A of the top plate due to the inter-
ference of the web and fillet. By
increasing the thickness of the
under-the-flange plates, the same
area of that of the top plate can
SECTION
be obtained resulting in an equal
strain in the connection plates.
22 June 2017

GLASS & CERAMICS
The Final Word
The stiffness distribution in a structural
system affects its force flow. By manipu-
lating its stiffness, the force and moment
STRESS
more economical and safer design. There
are computer programs that analyze these
relationships and more that can incorpo-
rate the non-linear behavior of materials.
However, finite element analyses of connec-

HIGH STRENTH WIRE distribution can be rearranged. Components
in structures are rarely isolated, even though
it is often assumed that they are. Looking
MILD STEEL at the deformations and strain compat-
PLASTIC RANGE
ibility between components, one may get
a better understanding of the force and
moment distributions that may result in a
STRAIN
tions often still lead to unrealistic results,
because these analyses do not reflect the
plasticity of the materials.
The evaluation of strain compatibility
in the design of pure elastic materials is
essential. Without that, the possibility of
sequential or progressive failure is high.

Figure 8. Stress-strain curves for different materials.

Materials
All the above examples are based on materials
with pure elastic behavior. Elastic behavior
means that the stress/strain relationship is
linear. Most designs assume that the mate-
rials behave linearly, which allows one to
readily extrapolate the forces and stresses
of a structure or connection. It allows the
superposition of load effects. However, most
materials exhibit non-linear behavior in
higher stress ranges. Figure 8 shows the stress-
strain curve for steel, high strength wires, and
glass and ceramic materials. Note that mild
steel in the plastic range (yield range) deforms

ADVERTISEMENTFor Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

but gains very little strength. This results in
a loss of stiffness. Consequently, in the yield
range, a member can shed load to other stiffer
members in a structure that are less stressed
and whose material have not yet reached the
yield stress. The change in geometry in the
system may cause instability in compression
members that must be examined. Yielding of
the steel, however, is limited by the breaking
strength of the material as well as strain hard-
ening. Strain hardening occurs with cycled
stresses in the yield range and reduces the
ductility of the material.
Fillet welds would not work without
yielding since strain compatibility is rarely
observed between connected sections. Only
in bridge work and when fatigue issues are
a concern is strain compatibility addressed.
The pure elastic behavior of a material
(without any plasticity at any stress level) is
brittle behavior. These materials are unfor-
giving to overloading, and their failure is
without warning. It is for this reason that
factors of safety in the order of 4 to 6 are
applied in the design of glass and stone, and a
factor of safety of 2.2 is applied in the design
of high strength cables with a limited inelastic
range at high stress. These are all in contrast
to mild steel, with a sizable yield range and
a factor of safety of only 1.6.

STRUCTURE magazine 23 June 2017


Practical
SolutionS
solutions for the practicing
structural engineer
Wood Shear Wall Design Examples for Wind
Per 2015 WFCM and
2015 SDPWS
By John Buddy Showalter, P.E.
John Buddy Showalter is Vice
President of Technology Transfer
for the American Wood Council
and serves as a member of the
STRUCTURE magazine Editorial
Board. He may be reached at
bshowalter@awc.org.
I
n this article, a wood frame shear wall is
analyzed and compared per American Wood
Councils 2015 Wood Frame Construction
Manual (WFCM) and 2015 Special Design
Provisions for Wind and Seismic (SDPWS). The
difference between the segmented and perforated
shear wall design approach and an overview of
various hold-down design methods is discussed.
Designers will likely find that the 2015 WFCM
contains time-saving features for calculation of
loads and design of shear walls and other build-
ing systems and components within the scope of
the document.
2015 WFCM
The 2015 WFCM is referenced in both the 2015
International Residential Code (IRC) and the 2015
International Building Code (IBC). The WFCM
includes prescriptive and engineered design provi-
sions for wood wall, floor, and roof systems and
their connections. A range of structural elements
is covered, including sawn lumber, structural
glued laminated timber, wood structural sheath-
ing, I-joists, and trusses. While the WFCM is
geared primarily to one- and two-family dwell-
ings, IBC 2309 also allows the WFCM to be used
for small commercial applications assigned to
Risk Categories I and II. As an example, a single-
story, slab-on-grade, light commercial structure
with building length and width less than 80 feet
(i.e., restaurants, office buildings, etc.) could be
designed for lateral (wind or seismic) and gravity
loads per the WFCM.
ASCE 7-10 Load Provisions
Tabulated engineered and prescriptive design pro-
visions in WFCM Chapters 2 and 3, respectively,
are based on the following loads from ASCE 7-10
Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other
Structures:
0 to 70 psf ground snow loads
110 to 195 mph 700-year return period
3-second gust basic wind speeds
Seismic Design Categories A D
Additional information concerning changes to
2015 WFCM appeared in STRUCTURE maga-
zines February 2015 issue.
2015 SDPWS
The 2015 SDPWS contains provisions for design
of wood members, fasteners, and assemblies to
resist wind and seismic forces and is referenced in
the 2015 IBC Chapter 23 on wood for the design
of lateral force resisting systems. It contains many
24 June 2017
updated provisions to provide consistency with
ASCE 7-10 and is also referenced in ASCE 7-16.
Additional information concerning changes to
2015 SDPWS appeared in STRUCTURE maga-
zines July 2015 issue.
To facilitate the following design example, a free
non-printable PDF version of the 2015 SDPWS
and 2015 WFCM is available from the AWC
website for those who do not already have a copy
of the standards.
Wood Shear Wall
Design Example
The following design assumptions are used for
development of a comparison of shear wall designs
using the 2015 WFCM and 2015 SDPWS.
Gypsum is assumed as interior shear wall sheath-
ing, but the approach will show the difference
when not including its capacity. Both the seg-
mented shear wall (SSW) approach and perforated
shear wall (PSW) approach are
utilized and compared. Note
this is not a comprehensive
shear wall design. Issues such
as deflection, wind uplift, base
shear, and summing hold-downs from upper floors
are not addressed.
Summary of Design Assumptions
130 mph (700-yr, 3-second gust) Exposure B
L=36 feet
W=30 feet
5/12 roof pitch
Top plate to ridge height = 6.25 feet
2-story
8-foot wall height
6.75-foot door height
4-foot window height
Wood Structural Panel (WSP) Exterior
Sheathing
Vary interior walls with and without
-inch gypsum
Figure 1 provides an elevation view showing
window and door openings. Only first-floor shear
walls and hold-downs will be analyzed in this
example.
2015 WFCM Prescriptive Segmented
Shear Wall
The 2015 WFCM Table 3.17A gives length
requirements for an SSW resisting wind loads. For
a 30-foot building wall length, W, the interpolated
value is 12.3 feet. Table 3.17A, Footnote 4, pro-
vides required sheathing length adjustments based
on wall heights and top plate-to-ridge heights
other than what is assumed in the table which
is 10 feet for each. For this example, the adjust-
ment is 0.68. Therefore, an SSW would require
8.4 feet of full-height wall segments. Figure 1

Figure 1. Elevation view of the structure used in a wind load design example
comparing shear wall design procedures.
shows 4 feet of shear wall at each corner and
2.5 feet between the windows for a total of
13 feet, which is sufficient. Hold-downs are
required at the ends of each segment and will
be designed later (Figure 2).
WFCM Table 3.17D facilitates variation
of exterior and interior sheathing materials,
nail diameter and spacing, panel thickness,
and stud spacing. WFCM shear wall baseline
assumptions are 716 wood structural panels
on studs at 16 inches on-center, 8d common
nails, 6-inch panel edge nail spacing, and
12-inch panel field nail spacing (6 and 12).
Shear wall tables for wind also assume con-
tribution of half-inch unblocked interior
gypsum. Note the allowable stress design
(ASD) unit shear capacity of 436 plf for wind
and a maximum shear-wall-segment aspect
ratio of 3.5:1. All shear wall capacities in Table
3.17D are derived from the 2015 SDPWS.
Table 3.17D, Footnote 2, requires block-
ing of gypsum wallboard edges where the
aspect ratio exceeds 1.5:1. SDPWS does not
contain aspect ratio limits for the case where
exterior and interior sheathing materials are
combined for wind resistance. SDPWS does
state that unit shears can be combined. Prior
practice within WFCM for aspect ratios has
been to limit use of the combined materi-
als to the higher aspect ratio material. For
example, WSP alone has a maximum aspect
ratio of 3.5:1. Blocked gypsum wallboard
has a maximum aspect ratio of 2:1. WFCM
has permitted the use of combined resistance
resulting from WSP exterior sheathing and
blocked GWB interior sheathing on walls
with an aspect ratio up to 3.5:1.
What if interior gypsum capacity is
excluded from wind design? There may be
cases, such as unfinished garages, where there
is no interior gypsum. Note also, if con-
tractors dont install gypsum with assumed
nail spacings, it doesnt provide additional
STRUCTURE magazine
Segmented Shear Wall
Perforated Shear Wall
Figure 2. Comparison of shear wall requirements for a segmented vs. a
perforated shear wall using 2015 WFCM prescriptive design provisions and
assuming contribution of gypsum capacity.
shear capacity for which it is designed. The
capacity shown in Table 3.17D is 336 plf
(gypsum is assumed to have 100 plf capacity
for wind), and an adjustment factor of 1.3 is
tabulated which can be used to adjust sheath-
ing length requirements that were calculated
from Table 3.17A earlier. That would then
require 10.9 feet of sheathing length rather
than 8.4 feet. In this particular example, if
interior gypsum is excluded, the 13 feet of
full-height segments determined earlier is
sufficient. As noted, hold-downs are required
at the ends of each segment (Figure 2).
2015 WFCM Prescriptive Perforated
Shear Wall
For the PSW approach, the entire wall is
sheathed on one or both sides with wood
structural panels. For wind design, interior
gypsum can also be used additively with exte-
rior wood structural panels. The contribution
of sheathing above and below window open-
ings, and above the door opening, can also be
included. Nail spacing requirements for WSPs
may be decreased (e.g. from 6 and 12 to 4 and
12). By increasing wall capacity, hold-downs
can be eliminated around window and door
openings. This is a major benefit of the PSW
method.
WFCM Table 3.17E is used to determine
the PSW full height sheathing adjustment.
There is a 6.8-foot door opening in the
middle of the wall, which will be used as the
maximum, unrestrained opening height.
The full-height sheathing length required
for the SSW was 8.4 feet when includ-
ing gypsum. The PSW length adjustment
is based on the tabulated length of SSW
required. So, 8.4 feet divided by the full
wall length is 23% of full-height sheath-
ing. Interpolation gives a factor of 1.86.
Multiplying by the length required for the
segmented method results in 15.6 feet.
25 June 2017
Without interior gypsum, the segmented
method required 10.9 feet which is 30% of
full-height wall sheathing. So, the 1.72 factor
from WFCM Table 3.17E results in 18.7 feet
required for the PSW. Either one of these
results is sufficient because there are 21 feet
of full height wall sheathing. The 21 feet of
full-height sheathing is based on wall portions
that meet maximum aspect ratio limits.
As noted, a major benefit of the PSW
method is that, for examples such as this,
hold-downs are only required at the corners.
By simply accounting for the benefit of a
wall fully-sheathed with WSPs, which is fairly
common in most parts of the country, hold-
downs can typically be eliminated around
window and door openings (Figure 2).
2015 WFCM Prescriptive Hold-Down
Capacities
In the WFCM, overturning loads are dif-
ferentiated from uplift loads. Overturning
moments result from lateral loads which are
resisted by shear walls. Uplift forces arise
solely from wind uplift on the roof and are
transferred directly into walls supporting
roof framing. A conservative assumption of
WFCM tabulated hold-down capacities is
that ASD unit shear capacities for the refer-
ence shear wall are multiplied by wall height
to determine maximum hold-down capacity.
Therefore, the same hold-down capacity can
be calculated for both the SSW and PSW.
Calculating the wind hold-down capacity in
WFCM Table 3.17F is based on both wood
structural panels and gypsum, resulting in
3,488 pounds for this example. If gypsum
is excluded, then the capacity is lower. Table
3.17F, Footnote 1, states that the tabulated
hold-down capacity is divided by the sheath-
ing type adjustment factor from Table 3.17D,
which is 1.3 as determined earlier, so a 2,683-
pound hold-down is required if excluding
 Reference SDPWS Capacities and Adjustments
V = 2,985 lbs
v = 436 plf (w/ blocked gypsum)
v = 336 plf (w/o gypsum)
%FHS = Li / Ltot
Li = 16 + 2[2(2.5)/8]2.5 = 19.1
Perforated Shear Wall Ltot = 36
%FHS = 19.1 / 36 = 53%
Interpolated Co Factor = 0.59

436(0.59) = 257 plf

2,985/257 = 11.6 < 21 (w/ blocked
gypsum)
336(0.59) = 198 plf
2,985/198 = 15.1 (w/o gypsum)
Segmented Shear Wall
Note: Li per SDPWS 4.3.4.3 adjustment = 2bs/h
Figure 3. Comparison of shear wall requirements for a segmented vs. a
perforated shear wall using 2015 WFCM engineered design provisions and Figure 4. Summary of perforated shear wall calculations per 2015 SDPWS
assuming contribution of gypsum capacity. Table 4.3.3.5.

gypsum. Note also that hold-down capacities Floor diaphragm load is 105 plf (after a wall comparison of shear wall requirements
are tabulated per story. Required hold-down height adjustment per Footnote 2). Add those for SSW versus PSW assuming gypsum
capacities need to be summed from the story up for 199 plf, multiply by building width, contribution.
above, but are not shown in this example for and divide by two because half the load goes
2015 WFCM Engineered Hold-Down
simplicity. to each shear wall. The result is 2,985 pounds
Capacities
Another conservative assumption in at the top of the first-floor shear wall.
WFCM Prescriptive Design provisions The 2015 WFCM references 2015 SDPWS WFCM section 2.2.4 allows for offsetting
(Chapter 3) is that design dead load is only for shear wall capacities. However, as discussed hold-down capacity with up to 60% of design
used to offset uplift loads and not overturn- earlier, WFCM Table 3.17D tabulates 436 dead load. The same approach for determin-
ing loads. However, WFCM Engineered plf and 336 plf shear wall capacities for this ing hold-down capacities based on ASD unit
Design provisions (Chapter 2) allow for up example, with and without gypsum, respec- shear wall capacity is used for this example.
to 60% of design dead load to offset over- tively. Therefore, length requirements are: Therefore, hold-down capacities are as shown
turning. Of course, engineering judgment 2,985/436 = 6.8 feet (with blocked earlier for the prescriptive design approach.
is required to determine what portion of gypsum)
2015 SDPWS Segmented Shear Wall
design dead load is tributary to the hold- 2,985/336 = 8.9 feet (without gypsum)
down, which is a major reason for the Based on these results, the 4-foot segments at SSW design per the SDPWS is identi-
conservative approach. each building corner are sufficient if blocked cal to what was shown earlier under the
gypsum is included in the shear wall capacity WFCM Engineered approach. As noted, the
2015 WFCM Engineered Segmented
(Figure 3). This also shows that the WFCM WFCM references the SDPWS for shear wall
Shear Wall
engineering provisions provide more efficiency capacities.
Engineered requirements in WFCM Chapter in the design process than the prescriptive
2015 SDPWS Perforated Shear Wall
2 allow calculation of loads that are assumed design provisions.
in the prescriptive requirements of WFCM Figure 5 summarizes PSW calculations per
2015 WFCM Engineered Perforated
Chapter 3. WFCM Table 2.5B shows lateral SDPWS Equations 4.3-5 and 4.3-6. These
Shear Wall
loads on the roof and floor diaphragm. With equations provide more accuracy by allow-
a 5/12 roof pitch, a roof span of 30 feet and Figure 4 summarizes PSW calculations per ing the total sheathed area to be included
loads parallel to the ridge, interpolate 94 plf. SDPWS Table 4.3.3.5. Figure 3 shows the in capacity calculations. Note that SDPWS
V = 2,985 lbs (blocked gyp)
Shear Capacity Adjustment Factor
hV== 2,985
=1
V8'
lbs (blocked gyp)
2,985Vlbs (blocked gyp) gyp)
h = 8 Capacity Adjustment Factor
Shear
h=
V =
8'
2,985 =lbs (blocked
2,985 gyp)
lbs (blocked
L = 8
hi = 16 + 2[2(2.5)/8]2.5 = 19.1 Co = h= 1
0.77
8' h = 8'
C h == 8'
0.77 Co = 0.77
i ==
Ltot 36+ 2[2(2.5)/8]2.5 = 19.1
16 = 0.77
Li o=Co16 + 2[2(2.5)/8]2.5
Li = = 0.77
Co16 + 2[2(2.5)/8]2.5
Li = 16 + 2[2(2.5)/8]2.5
Ao =
Ltot =4(4)(2.5)
36 + (5)(6.67) = 73.4 ft2 Li =LLi19.1'
= 16 + 2[2(2.5)/8]2.5
= 16 + L = 2[2(2.5)/8]2.5
19.1'
rAo==0.68
4(4)(2.5) + (5)(6.67) = 73.4 ft2 Li =
iL i 19.1'
= 19.1' i

T =L1,624
=1,624lbs
T = 1,624 lbs
19.1'
C
r o==0.68
0.77 (based on total sheathed area) T=T i1,624
= lbs
lbs
Co = 0.77 (based
Comparison: SDPWS/WFCM Engineered
on total sheathed T=
1,624
(tabulated) Co = 0.59
area) V =lbs
1,840 lbs (w/o gyp) 4.3.4.3In the design of perforated shear walls, the length of each
Comparison: SDPWS/WFCM Engineered (tabulated) CV
oV=
= = 1,840
1,840
0.59
V = lbs
lbs
1,840T lbs
= (w/o
(w/o gyp)
gyp)
(w/olbs
1,001 gyp)
perforated shear wall segment with an aspect ratio greater than 2:1
4.3.4.3In
shallthe design by
be multiplied of 2b
perforated
4.3.4.3In
shearofwalls,
/h for the purposes
4.3.4.3Inthe
thedesign
the length
determining L and Lof each
designofofperforated
perforated
s
shear walls,
walls, the
thelength
lengthofofeach
i
each i

perforated shear wall segment with an aspect ratio greater than 2:1
Note: Li per SDPWS 4.3.4.3 adjustment = 2bs/h TT==T
V1,001
=
=1,001
1,001 lbs
lbs
lbs
1,840 lbs (w/o gyp)
perforatedshear
perforated
shall
shall
shall be
shearwall
bebemultiplied
multiplied
wallsegment
multiplied
by2b
by
segment with
by/h/h2b
2b for/h
for
with an aspect
the
aspect ratio
forpurposes
the
ratiogreater
the purposes
purposes
ss
of
greaterthan
than2:1
of determining
of determining
s determining LLand
2:1
L and L
and L L i i i ii i
4.3.4.3In the design of perforated shear walls, the length of each
Note: Li per SDPWS 4.3.4.3 adjustment = 2bs/h perforated shear wall segment with an aspect ratio greater than 2:1
T=
Figure 5. Calculation summary of PSW shear capacity adjustment factor per 1,001 lbs
Figure 6. Summary of perforatedshall
shear wall calculations
be multiplied of hold-down
by 2bs/h for the capacity Li and Li
purposes of determining
2015 SDPWS Equations 4.3-5 and 4.3-6. per 2015 SDPWS.

STRUCTURE magazine 26 June 2017

Table 4.3.3.5 and WFCM Table 3.17E
both use maximum opening height and, for
example, do not account for sheathing below
window openings. Adjusting the shear wall
capacity of 436 plf (with blocked gypsum)
and 336 plf (without gypsum) by Co = 0.77
results in shear wall lengths of 8.9 feet and
11.6 feet, respectively.
2015 SDPWS Hold-Down Capacities
There is a difference in how hold-down
capacities are calculated in SDPWS versus
WFCM. Per SDPWS Equation 4.3-7 for
SSW, hold-down capacity is based on induced
unit shear. The 2,985-pound load and 8-foot
shear wall length result in 347 plf. The shear
wall height of 8 feet results in a hold-down
capacity of 2,985 pounds. Excluding gypsum,
a hold-down of 1,840 pounds is calculated.
For the PSW, SDPWS Equation 4.3-8 can
be used, which accounts for the shear capacity
adjustment factor determined earlier and the
2bs/h adjustment per SDPWS 4.3.4.3. Figure
6 summarizes PSW hold-down calculations.
Summary and Conclusion
Table 1 provides a summary comparison of
various methods used for this wood shear
AWC Standard
2015 WFCM Prescriptive
2015 WFCM Engineered
2015 SDPWS
(Parenthetical values assume NO interior gypsum capacity)
Table 1. 2015 WFCM/SDPWS Shear Wall Length Comparison 1st of 2-story; 30-foot roof span with
5/12 pitch; 130 mph Exposure B wind load.
wall design example. WFCM prescriptive
design provisions have an engineering basis
in SDPWS and ASCE 7, even though simplify-
ing assumptions are made which lead to more
conservative results. WFCM engineered and
SDPWS results are nearly identical, which is
expected, except for the PSW design. The dif-
ference in the PSW results is due to SDPWS
equations being used to calculate the shear
capacity adjustment factor, rather than using
tabulated values. The segmented approach
results in less shear wall length in all cases;
however, hold-downs are only required in the
corners for the PSW. By simply accounting
for the benefit of a wall fully-sheathed with
WSPs, which is fairly common in most con-
struction today, hold-downs can typically be
Segmented Perforated Hold-Downs, lbs
8.4 (10.9) 15.6 (18.7) 3,488 (2,683)
6.8 (8.9) 11.6 (15.1) 3,488 (2,688)
2,985 (1,840) [SSW]
6.8 (8.9) 8.9 (11.6)
1,624 (1,001) [PSW]
eliminated around window and door openings.
Not surprisingly, where the most efficiency is
gained is with the pure SDPWS engineering
approach. Shorter shear walls and smaller hold-
downs result. However, designers might find
the WFCM tables to be a time-saving feature,
especially for calculating ASCE 7 wind loads.
This article is based on an NCSEA
Diamond Reviewed program titled
DES413-2 Wind Shear Wall Design
Examples per 2015 WFCM and 2015
SDPWS available for free on the AWC
website. Earn continuing education credits
or find more details about this shear wall
example at www.awc.org.

ADVERTISEMENTFor Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

STRUCTURAL
VIBRATION CONTROL
TUNED MASS DAMPERS
DEICON provides the most effective
passive and active tuned damping
solutions for vibration abatement in:
Floor Systems Industrial Structures
Pedestrian Bridges Monumental Staircases
Towers And more

CONTACT US: +1 937 885 4134 | CONTACT@DEICON.COM DEICON.COM

STRUCTURE magazine 27 June 2017
 Coming This Summer
PCI Design Handbook
8th Edition
The eighth edition of the PCI Design Handbook: Precast and
Prestressed Concrete (MNL-120-17) on precast and prestressed
concrete provides easy-to-follow design procedures, numerical
examples, and both new and updated design aids using ACI 318-
14, ASCE 7-10, IBC 2015, and other current industry standards.
This indispensable publication provides the designer with
comprehensive and efficient procedures for the safe design of
both architectural and structural precast and prestressed concrete
products. The design information and recommendations contained
in the eighth edition of the PCI Design Handbook are based not
only on the latest research but also on a consensus of engineers
in practice. Every designer needs to have this indispensable
publication at their fingertips for quick reference.

Photos provided by R.R. Simmons Construction

The eighth edition also includes new and

updated information on dapped-end bearing
design, beam ledge design, impacts of
ACI 318-14, new disproportionate collapse
appendix, new diaphragm seismic design
methodology appendix, new blast design
Project name: Peak 10 Data Center-Tampa Florida appendix, and so much more!

PCI
DESIGN

Order your copy today!

HANDBOOK
PRECAST and PRESTRESSED CONCRETE

www.pci.org/bookstore 200 West Adams Street I Suite 2100 I Chicago, IL 60606-5230

Phone: 312-786-0300 I Fax: 312-621-1114 I www.pci.org
W W W . P C I . O R G

E i g h t h Editio n

Failure caused by compacted snow pile, Secaucus, NJ.
S
tructural engineering always has been a
conservative profession. This is particu-
larly evident in the structural building
codes and standards. These regulations
are intended to protect the public from defi-
ciencies in design and construction. For the
most part, they are effective. Why then do so
many parking garages collapse?
In 2015, at least six parking garages partially
collapsed in the United States. More collapsed
in 2016. Some failures might be due to deficient
design or construction, or to inadequate main-
tenance, but most are due to excessive loading.
For decades, the codes and standards have
stipulated that parking garages be designed for
a minimum live load of 50 psf. This is more
than adequate for sedans, SUVs, and half-ton
pickup trucks. The average vehicle in the United
States today weighs 4,009 pounds and can safely
be parked in any code-compliant garage. With
the margin of safety inherent in the codes and
standards, failure becomes imminent only when
actual live loads approach twice the minimum.
Some parking garages post maximum vehicle
weights at their entrances. More commonly, the
entrances limit vehicle height (thus, vehicle size/
weight) with clearance bars typically set at 7 feet
or less. Here are four examples where parking
garages collapsed due to excessive loading.
Garage collapse, Washington, D.C.
STRUCTURE magazine
Structural
FailureS
investigating failures, along
with their consequences
and resolutions
Saturday, 01/24/15, Secaucus, NJ
A 3-level garage with 600 parking spaces serves the
Harmon Plaza office tower, the Clarion Empire
Meadowlands Hotel, and the Osprey Cove apart-
ments. A Bobcat utility vehicle was plowing the
top deck of the garage following a snowfall of 4
inches or less. The weight of the Bobcat was not
a problem, nor was the weight of
the accumulated snow. However,
compacted snow weighs about 20
pcf, and 30 pcf or more if wet.
Failure of Imagination
The snow had been pushed into
a compacted pile. At 7:00 am, with the pile more
than 4 feet high, the top deck of the garage col-
lapsed under the combined weight of the snow
pile and the Bobcat. The resulting opening swal- By Stan Caldwell, P.E., SECB
lowed the Bobcat and one vehicle parked below
was crushed. No one was injured except the
Bobcat driver, who had a mild concussion. On
weekdays, the garage would have been filled with
vehicles and people.
Friday, 05/01/15, Washington, D.C.
A 3-level garage serves the iconic Watergate
mixed-use complex. Now more than 50 years
old, the complex was undergoing a comprehen- Stan R. Caldwell
sive restoration. A landscaping contractor placed (www.StanCaldwellPE.com) is
soil and debris on the top deck of the parking a consulting structural engineer in
Plano, Texas. He can be reached at
StanCaldwellPE@gmail.com.
29

Pancake failure, Dallas, TX.
garage. Soil weighs about 75 pcf if dry, and
up to 125 pcf if wet. Thus, only one foot of
soil might cause failure.
At 10:00 am, the top deck of the garage col-
lapsed beneath the soil and debris. Everything
on the two levels below was crushed in a pan-
cake failure. Two people were injured, one
critically, and about 35 vehicles were destroyed.
Friday, 10/23/15, Dallas, TX
A 7-level garage with 800 parking spaces serves
the upscale Renaissance on Turtle Creek con-
dominiums. The pool and amenities deck at
the top of the garage were being renovated,
and the contractor piled soil and miscellaneous
debris at the toe of a ramp near one corner of
the top deck of the garage. A video taken just
a few hours before the collapse shows that the
pile was about 3 feet high and was covered
with plastic sheeting.
During a rainstorm, water flowed down
the ramp and partially saturated the pile.
At 5:00 pm, the top deck of the garage col-
lapsed beneath the pile. Everything on the six
levels below was crushed in a pancake failure.
Amazingly, no one was injured. Numerous
vehicles were destroyed, and about 250
vehicles and their contents remained inac-
cessible to their owners for 58 days. The
garage remained closed for several months
until reconstruction was completed.
Friday, 04/22/16, Houston, TX
An underground garage with an at-grade top
deck serves adjacent office buildings on Town
& Country Boulevard in Houston. The garage
had been flooded during a period of record
rainfall. A tanker truck was summoned to the
site to pump out the water. The entrance to
the top deck was blocked by a clearance bar
proclaiming MAXIMUM WEIGHT 4,000
LBS, so the truck driver backed his tanker
over the curb and onto the deck a few feet to
the right of the entrance.
The tanker has a capacity of 5,800 gallons.
That amounts to 48,400 pounds of water,
not including the weight of the truck. As
the tanker filled with water, the top deck
STRUCTURE magazine
eventually failed under the weight of the
rear wheels. Fortunately, no one was injured.
Failure of Imagination
In the wake of the terrorism that jolted the
United States on the morning of September
11, 2001, some smart person declared that
the attacks succeeded in part because of a
failure of imagination by multiple American
security agencies. No one imagined that a
zealous group of young men would simulta-
neously hijack four airliners full of fuel and
fly them into predetermined targets using
nothing more than box cutters, which were
entirely legal to carry on flights at that time.
The parking garage collapses described in this
article are not directly related to any known
design, construction, or maintenance defi-
ciencies. Nevertheless, with hindsight, all
were preventable. In each instance, it could
be argued that there was a failure of imagi-
nation. That is, a failure by parking garage
designers and owners to imagine the utter
lack of common sense among some of those
working in and around the garages.
In Secaucus, the garage probably did not need
to be plowed. The light snow likely would have
melted within a day or two. If snow removal
was necessary, it should have been done in a
manner that avoided creating compacted piles.
In Washington and Dallas, the owners and
the landscaping contractors should have
Deck failure, Houston, TX.
30 June 2017
contacted structural engineers for approval
before the placement of any soil or debris,
even temporarily, on the top decks of the
garages. In Houston, an above-grade security
fence or rail at the perimeter of the under-
ground garage footprint would have kept
heavy trucks off of the top deck.
Imagination is a difficult thing. The build-
ing codes and standards will never adequately
address that which is unforeseen. This shifts
the burden to structural engineers, and
simply designing for large imaginary loads
is clearly not the answer. Perhaps structural
engineers should consider changing their
approach to future parking garage projects.
In conclusion, the following describes two
imaginative suggestions.
First, to reduce the likelihood of overload,
structural engineers should seek buy-in
from the owners of parking garages regard-
ing loading limitations. Most manufactured
products come with a manual that clearly
defines intended use and a statement that the
manufacturer is not liable when their product
is used in other ways. Parking garage designers
should consider a similar approach.
There is a precedent for this. In areas with
expansive clay soils, prudent structural engi-
neers require building owners to sign off on
the acceptable differential movement of slabs
on grade. A structural engineer could write a
project-specific loading statement for a park-
ing garage and require the owner to sign a
brief document indicating that he or she has
read, understands, and accepts the loading
limitations for that garage.
Second, to limit the damage of a collapse,
structural engineers should design parking
garages to avoid progressive collapse or pan-
cake failure. This is particularly important
at the level immediately below the top deck.
While not easily or inexpensively accom-
plished, this is doable and would substantially
limit any damage caused by an overload at
the top level.
 Were all about
superior support.

Its well known that steel joists, with their impressive Upcoming Webinars

strength-to-weight ratio, provide greater support.

What might be surprising is all the ways the Steel June
Joist Institute provides outstanding support to Diaphragm Design That Makes
engineers, architects and other industry partners. Sense: How To Design and Specify
Steel Deck by Representatives
of the SDI

July & August

Composite Joist New 2nd

Through publications, webinars and design tools, our goal is
Edition Specications, New
to provide information on how to build with steel joists and Technical Digest No. 13
Joist Girders.

To take advantage of all the education tools created to help

you design with steel joists, visit:

steeljoist.org September

Bridging How It Works and

What to Work Around
 USG
Structural
Solutions

THERES A LOT OF EXTRA

WEIGHT HIDING IN YOUR FLOORS.
Choose a lighter, noncombustible alternative
to poured concrete. Learn more about
USG Structural Panels at usg.com/structuralpanels.

2017 USG Corporation and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.

The trademarks USG, ITS YOUR WORLD. BUILD IT., the USG logo, the design elements and colors,
and related marks are trademarks of USG Corporation or its affiliates.
 A Unique Opportunity
for a Conventional
Tall Building Frame
By Mark Sarkisian, S.E., Neville Mathias, S.E.,
and David Shook, P.E.

T
he Sichuan Airlines Center (SAC) Tower occupies
a prominent site in the city center of Chengdu and
has become a glittering symbol of the citys urban
transformation. The distinctive 650-foot tall (200
meter) tower is a recognizable city landmark, occupying a
pivotal location on the Chengdu skyline. The Tower form
is a natural reconciliation of geometry, structure, and space
made possible through a systematic approach to its construc-
tion. The towers design is focused on the creation of flexible,
high-quality office spaces and a thoughtful engagement of the
public realm, inviting the life of the street into the site. The
unique form of the tower folds open vertically, responding
to the local climate, capturing light and views for occupants.
As the tower rises, its shape is organically transformed in
response to the changing relationship of the interior spaces to
their elevation; each floor slab changes slightly in shape from
the one below at a consistent rate. The perimeter columns
follow the buildings changing shape, shifting slightly from
one level to the next. To achieve this unique building form,
surfaces of the tower skin gently twist as the building rises.
This subtle movement is achieved by precisely bending each
glazing panel onto the building using adjustable exterior wall
anchors. Overall, the result is a single, continuous form that
accommodates both the required footprint and setbacks,
while extending the southeast corner of the building as a
large gentle arc, visually unifying the buildings relationship
with the corner of the site and the surrounding civic space.
continued on next page

The distinctive 200-meter-tall tower form is a recognizable city landmark,

occupying a pivotal location on the Chengdu skyline.
STRUCTURE magazine 33 June 2017

As the tower rises, its shape is organically transformed in response to the
changing relationship of the interior spaces to their elevation.
Sustainability
The Sichuan Airlines Centre has achieved LEED Gold Pre-certification
for its commitment to energy efficiency, water conservation, increased
ventilation, and improved indoor air quality. The project incorporates
a number of sustainability measures which are integral to the build-
ings overall design intent. Energy use is extensively metered for actual
energy consumption monitoring and verification efforts.
The project additionally integrates a water efficient landscaping
concept where storm water and air conditioning condensation are
collected and treated for landscape and irrigation uses. SAC has
achieved the highest standard of stormwater design within the project
as the landscape irrigation does not utilize any potable water on site.
Similar to the design of the structure itself, the development of the
site maximizes open space and access to nearby public spaces. The
sites connectivity is positioned near a number of existing public transit
opportunities including metro train and bus networks; it is situated
just one block from a subway interchange station. This contributes
to the buildings high Walk Score rating of 94 where daily errands
do not require a car. A new, extensive public transit system has also
been proposed for the Central Chengdu region, which will further
increase alternative transportation options for building occupants.
interior partition walls to meet the exterior wall. Buildings with
complex and varying perimeter geometries often lose this organi-
zation of the column and exterior wall mullions. Thus, when an
interior partition meets the exterior wall, it often ends up being
located between mullions and columns. This greatly diminishes
the usability and quality of the interior spaces. For the SAC tower,
this condition was minimized by shifting the columns slightly on
each floor and following the mullions. Thus, an innovative and
integrated building form was achieved without compromising the
quality of the interior spaces.
The shift in column location from floor to floor was small enough
that conventional reinforcement detailing could be used and signifi-
cant eccentricities were avoided. Since the frame column spacing was
tighter towards the top of the building, it could be designed more
efficiently and could have higher participation in seismic events,
alleviating some of the demands on the central core. At the corners
of the floor plans, much longer spans, up to 42 feet (13 meters),
were introduced to provide expansive, uninterrupted views.
Safety in Seismic Zones
The city of Chengdu is the capital of Sichuan province in China
and was tragically struck by a magnitude 8.0 earthquake in 2008,
only three years before the start of the SAC Tower design. With
nearly 70,000 deaths, 15,000 missing, and 375,000 injuries, safety
was of paramount importance to both the developer and the city
of Chengdu. In recent decades, the Chinese building codes have
significantly evolved and have been shown to yield safe buildings
in seismic zones. The issues encountered in the Sichuan earthquake
of 2008 were due to much older buildings which pre-dated many
of the current Chinese code provisions pertaining to seismic safety
and poor construction.
The seismic force resisting system of the SAC tower is a dual system
composed of a centrally reinforced concrete floor supplemented
by a perimeter reinforced concrete moment frame. The combined
behavior of the two systems results in a building period of 5.3
seconds with satisfactory inter-story drift behavior.

Form and Structure Creating Quality Spaces Y1 Z10

13575
Y2
6000
Y3
6000
Y4
6000
Y5
13575
Z9 Y6

Building forms which are highly responsive to energy perfor- 1000

15256
4308
39987 855
4420

mance, quality views, and aesthetics often create complex geometric

interior spaces. This frequently results in poor office layouts and
irrational relationships of building structure and exterior wall. Even X1

Z11
21410

in cases where the structural geometry is responsive to the exterior Z8

12706

wall, the quality of the interior office space is often left lacking. DN

UP
UP

DN

The exterior wall of SAC is highly respectful of solar exposure X2 P1 P2 P3 P4

/
TEL / ELEC

and expansive views. A traditional moment frame would have

6000

WC
WC

approximately 30-foot (9-meter) bays with columns extruded

X3 P8 P7 P6 P5
Z7
6000

vertically through the space. Since the exterior wall changes dra-

SERVICE
VESTIBULE
UP

X4
FS2 FS1

matically from the base of the building to the roof, the column
P9 P10 P11 P12

Z6
6000

RS1

relationship to the exterior wall would result in varying and often X5

P16 P15 P14 P13

very poor office space conditions, dramatically diminishing views

6000

Z5

PS1 PS2

X6

and adversely affecting energy performance by blocking too much Z4

sun in the cold winters prevalent in Chengdu.

12676

DN

A simple, but novel change to traditional frame geometry was

Z12
Z3

incorporated which gradually reduced the spacing of columns

X7

Z2

from 30 feet at the buildings base to 20 feet (6 meters) at the top, Z1

and shifted in their plan location slightly at each floor. Buildings

with extruded rectangular geometries typically have the columns
and exterior wall mullions aligned. This creates a natural place for Typical floor plan.

STRUCTURE magazine 34 June 2017

 a general review of all aspects of the lateral force resisting system.
Under the provisions of the Chinese building code, in addition to
other special design checks, a nonlinear time-history analysis was
conducted by China Southwest Architectural Design and Research
Institute and presented to the EPR panel. Although different than
the performance-based design process established in select cities
of the West Coast of the United States, the EPR process serves as
a highly valuable component of the Chinese building code review
process in producing buildings of high seismic safety.

Conclusion
The Sichuan Airlines Center tower is an example of transforma-
tive urban architecture, quality office space, integrated
design, and seismic safety. Its construction in a rapidly
evolving Chengdu city skyline will provide a quality
precedent for future construction in Sichuan Province.
The site unifies the buildings relationship with the corner of the site and the
surrounding civic space. Mark Sarkisian, S.E., is the Structural and Seismic Engineering
Partner of the San Francisco office of SOM. He can be reached
The Chinese regulations require buildings that exceed code pro- at mark.sarkisian@som.com.
visions to undergo expert panel reviews (EPR). The level of
review depends on a buildings code-exceeding characteristics such Neville Mathias, S.E., is an Associate Director at the San Francisco
as structural height, the uniqueness of the lateral force resisting office of SOM and can be reached at neville.mathias@som.com.
system, building complexity, inherent torsion, etc. Due particularly David Shook, P.E., is an Associate Director and Structural
to the height of the building, which exceeded code limits for the Engineer at the San Francisco office of SOM. He can be reached
structure type, a regional level EPR was required, as opposed to at david.shook@som.com.
a more stringent national level EPR. The regional EPR process is

ADVERTISEMENTFor Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

RECORDS
An NCEES Record makes it
fast, easy, and convenient to
apply for additional P.E.
licenses in other states.
Alexander Zuendt, P.E.
Zuendt Engineering
Record holder since 2011

National Council of Examiners

for Engineering and Surveying Build your NCEES Record today.
P.O. Box 1686, Clemson, S.C. 29633 ncees.org/records
864.654.6824

STRUCTURE magazine 35 June 2017

New Clearwater
Opal Sands Resort on South Clearwater Beach, Florida.
A Challenging Wind and Flood Design
O
pal Sands Resort is a new 17-story plus, 380,000-square-
foot premier hotel located directly on the Gulf of Mexico
in Clearwater Beach, Florida. The recipient of the 2016
ENR Southeast Regional Best Project Award, the Opal
Sands Resort was born from the vision of the owner/developer,
Ocean Properties, LTD (OPL). The owner desired a new flag-
ship hotel to add to their portfolio of international resort hotels.
Soon enough, that vision became a reality because of the innova-
tive work by project architect, Nichols Brosch Wurst Wolfe &
Associates, Inc. of Coral Gables, Florida, and their team of con-
sulting engineers, including the structural engineers, McCarthy
and Associates, a Division of Pennoni, and the general contractor,
Moss & Associates LLC.
The Challenges
From the beginning, the apparent structural design challenges were
numerous:
1) Design a 17-story curvilinear building, with a coastal exposure,
to resist Floridas high hurricane wind loads.
2) Design a building located in multiple flood zones includ-
ing two different FEMA V-zones, the Pinellas Gulf Beaches
Coastal Construction Zone, and the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (DEP) Coastal Construction Control
Line (CCCL).
STRUCTURE magazine 36
3) Design a heavy concrete building on a site overlaid with loose
beach sands.
4) Eliminate a critical transfer beam over the lobby during construc-
tion and after many of the upper floors had been constructed.
The Building
The Opal Sands Resort consists of 12 floors of hotel rooms, each
of which has a magnificent view of the Gulf of Mexico. The hotel
rooms sit above a spacious lobby, restaurant, numerous meeting
room floors, and two levels of parking. At the lobby level, on the
west waterfront side of the main tower, is a plaza deck with swim-
ming pools, volleyball courts, and tiki hut bars. A large portion
of that deck is cantilevered out over the water. A sand ramp was
constructed, in cooperation with the City of Clearwater, to allow
for visitors to easily access the beach from the deck above. On
the east side of the main tower is another expansive space that
contains a large ballroom, meeting rooms, and escalators from
the main entrance up to the lobby level. Valet parking for guests
is required because the hotel takes up the entire site and access to
the parking levels is only available from a ramp on the street side
and two large vehicle elevators. Considering the sheer size of the
building, along with its ideal location and innovative design, it
comes as no surprise that the hotel was an instant success upon
opening in February 2016.
June 2017

The General Design Approach
The entire building superstructure and foundations were modeled
in 3D using RAM Structural Systems. The output from that model
was then sent directly to the 3D Revit model and refined to make
the structural drawings more readable and consistent with industry
standards. Due to the unusual shape of the floor plans and column
bay spacing provided by the architects, unbonded mono strand post-
tensioned concrete slabs supported by concrete columns and shear
walls was an obvious choice for the superstructure. Post-tension
design also helped to minimize floor heights and has been a popular
system for multi-story residential buildings in the state of Florida
for a long time. The delegated engineer for the post-tension system
was Structural Technologies/VSL. Although the architects were very
accommodating in locating columns to best support the structure,
there were instances where it was necessary to introduce transfer beams
to support discontinued columns from above. For example, a large
transfer beam (3 feet x 4 feet), reinforced with a combined mild steel
and bundled post-tension cables, was required over the lobby where
the engineers were directed to provide a column-free space.
A very large cooling tower is located on the roof of the main tower
and surrounded by hot dipped galvanized steel framed walls that are
elliptical in plan. The walls are 19 feet 6 inches high and self-braced
against wind tunnel test-wind pressures, reaching 125 pounds per
square foot (psf ), with a grid system of steel beams at the top of the
walls. The steel framing is designed and detailed to be removable for
a load test was conducted on a sample shaft to confirm the foundation
design recommendations. A pilot hole was then drilled at each shaft
location to confirm there was no variance in the subgrade.
Wind Design
The governing code for the design of the Opal Sands Resort was the
2010 Florida Building Code (FBC) which, by reference, incorporated
much of the ASCE 7-10 Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and
Other Structures for wind design. According to a Pinellas County local
technical amendment, the minimum design wind velocity for this site
is 145 mph with an ultimate 3-second gust, Risk Category II, and
Exposure Category D as defined by the FBC. In addition to wind
forces, the exterior glazing must also meet wind-borne debris or missile
impact criteria and be certified by the manufacturer with a Florida
Product Approval Number or Miami/Dade Notice of Acceptance.
Due to the curved shape of the main tower and in anticipation of cost
savings, OPL agreed to McCarthys recommendations to complete a
wind tunnel test. CPP, Inc. of Fort Collins, CO, was retained to build
a model of South Clearwater Beach and the proposed Opal Sands
building, and then subject that model to hurricane force winds in a
wind tunnel. The resulting pressures were less than what would have
been required by code and were used by McCarthy in the design of
the building for both the main wind force resisting system and com-
ponents and cladding. Additionally, the wind tunnel testing provided
the architects with accurate feedback on locations around the base of

Beach Hotel
the main tower where wind accelera-
tions are likely to affect pedestrians
adversely. Screen walls, landscaping,
and other types of buffers were then
incorporated into the building design
to mitigate this concern.
The initial building design included
multiple shear walls to resist power-
By E. Michael McCarthy, P.E., M.ASCE ful coastal winds but, as the design
progressed, many of those walls were
future replacement of the equipment. The exterior walls of the build- reduced or eliminated to accommodate interior space planning. It
ing are a combination of glazing, in-fill masonry, and concrete shear soon became apparent that the remaining shear walls were no longer
walls. The size and configuration of the building dictated the need adequate. The 3D RAM analysis/design model was changed to supple-
for expansion joints. The most logical location was between the main ment the shear walls with the natural stiffness of the columns and slab
tower and lower building components on both the east and west sides. framing to develop shear wall/frame interaction. While this solution
The building foundations were designed in accordance with a geotech- solved the lateral bracing problem, the reinforcing steel and shear head
nical report prepared by the project geotechnical engineers, Driggers reinforcing in the slabs and columns had to be increased to account
Engineering Services, Inc. (DESI). DESI conducted a series of deep for the additional bending moment transfer at each column-to-slab
borings and discovered that the site is underlaid with mostly sandy intersection. The model did not indicate excessive diaphragm shear
soils of varying densities down to lime rock deep underground. Based force transfer at the upper level(s) of the building at the interaction
on those findings and point of the flexural deflection of the shear walls as they tried to
the column and wall exceed the lateral shear distortion of the frame. All wind pressures
loads provided by were input into the RAM 3D model as load cases in the overall design
McCarthy, DESI rec- of the building.
ommended reinforced
concrete drilled shafts
or caissons for build-
Flood Design
ing support. The The 2010 FBC incorporates by reference ASCE 24-05 Flood Resistant
drilled shafts varied Design and Construction which was used in conjunction with the
in diameter from 2 national, state, and local flood regulations in the design of the Opal
feet to 5 feet and were Sands Resort. These included two different FEMA V-zones, Pinellas
drilled into the rock Gulf Beaches Coastal Construction Code, and the Florida DEP
about 70 feet below CCCL. The lowest horizontal beam supporting the first elevated and
the ground surface. occupied floor of the building was required to be either at or above
Opal Sands with Sand Key Bridge in the background. Before construction, the design flood elevation (DFE), derived from the FEMA maps

STRUCTURE magazine 37 June 2017

 and the appropriate free-
board, to comply with
these complex flood
regulations. Also, all
construction below the
DFE must allow storm
water to flow through
the building unimpeded.
Specifically, any wall that
is not a shear wall, stair, or
elevator wall was designed
to withstand wind forces
but must fail or break-
away under storm-driven
wave action. In this case,
the lower floors of the
building are primarily
open parking, making it
easy to comply with the
Flow-through require-
ments. Additionally, the
mechanical and electrical
equipment that is nor-
Post-tension slab construction. mally placed on lower
levels of buildings had to
be located on platforms above the DFE.
The most stringent flood code at the Opal Sands site is governed by
the DEP and affects all construction located seaward of the CCCL.
Fortunately, the CCCL wrapped around the west and north property
lines of the site so that most of the building was not affected. However,
the portion of the pool deck and tiki hut deck that was designed to
cantilever out over the water was subject to CCCL requirements. Those
decks had to be elevated above the cresting wave elevation established
by the DEP to minimize the potential for damage from wave forces.
Because this building has direct coastal exposure, the open plaza
deck and two levels of parking below on the west side are reinforced
with a special two-layer zinc coated rebar, and the concrete included
a corrosion inhibitor admixture. Additionally, all hydrostatic and
hydrodynamic forces were input into the RAM 3D model as a load
case, in addition to waterborne debris impact forces, in order to
account for these flood zone forces in the overall design of the building.
This array of complex flood design codes required the use of unique
and creative solutions in the design of Opal Sands.
Construction
At McCarthys recommendation, OPL agreed to have a full-time repre-
sentative from McCarthy on site during construction of the structural
building components. That representative worked with the contractor on
a daily basis in responding to RFIs, reviewing shop drawing submittals,
and reviewing the ongoing construction for conformance to the draw-
ings and specifications. In addition to facilitating a smooth construction
flow, this level of service at the job site allowed McCarthy to meet the
requirements of the Florida Threshold Law as the Special Inspector.
Also during construction, a particularly interesting development
occurred. OPL noticed the large transfer beam above the lobby and
its impact on the ceiling height. For the better of the building, they
decided to remove the beam and insert the lobby column, which the
transfer beam initially replaced, back into the floorplan. That column
was originally designed to extend from the foundation to the ballroom
roof above the 6th level but was discontinued at the 3rd-floor lobby as
STRUCTURE magazine
RAM structural systems model.
an interior design decision. At the time it was decided to eliminate the
transfer beam, all the upper slabs had already been poured, complicating
the change. It was an all hands on deck moment with McCarthys
engineering staff to develop a solution that could be completed quickly
and without affecting ongoing construction. The biggest challenge was
to support the upper slab levels from the time the transfer beam was
demolished until the new column was in place and ready to carry the
load. Other difficulties included de-tensioning post-tension cables in
the beam and strengthening the drilled shaft foundation to handle
the additional loads. Fortunately, the column stack below the lobby
floor was found to have enough excess capacity and did not need to be
reinforced. The final solution involved the following steps, all of which
were completed successfully:
1) Install temporary shoring from the foundation up to the 5th floor.
2) De-tension the post-tension cables in the transfer beam.
3) Install new steel micropiles under the direction of the geotechnical
engineer and expand the pile cap.
4) Demolish the transfer beam using a Tru-line hydraulic chipping
hammer operated by remote control on the lobby floor.
5) Form, reinforce, and pour back the new column.
After all this, the interior designers could work the column into the
lobby space design after all.
Summary
Construction of the Opal Sands Resort was completed in February 2016
and the building was an immediate success, opening with over 15,000
reservations. It has become the centerpiece of South Clearwater Beach,
Florida, and one of OPLs finest hotels. Looking back, the decision to
have a wind tunnel test done was of the utmost importance as it resulted
in overall reduced costs as well as a more accurate design. Additionally,
having a full-time representative on-site during construction allowed
McCarthy to assist the contractor and ensure the building was built
in accordance with the structural drawings and specifications. Most
importantly, the use of a 3D RAM analysis/design model synchronized
with the Revit model allowed McCarthys engineers to
design an accurate and economical structural system on
a challenging site that is subject to high hurricane force
winds and complex flood zone regulations.
E. Michael McCarthy, P.E., M.ASCE, is an Associate Vice President
of McCarthy and Associates, a Division of Pennoni in Clearwater,
FL. He is active in the design of buildings throughout Florida and
the Caribbean and is currently a member of the ASCE-24 Flood
Resistant Design and Construction Committee. He may be reached
at mmccarthy@pennoni.com.
38 June 2017
 NEW
Stainless-steel
Titen HD

heavy-duty
screw anchor

The new Simpson Strong-Tie stainless-steel Titen HD screw anchor

delivers all the benefits of our high-strength Titen HD anchor and can now
be installed in exterior and corrosive environments. Its innovative carbon
Cracked helical-coil thread effectively cuts the concrete while significantly
Concrete reducing the carbon steel in the anchor to maximize corrosion resistance.
CODE LISTED

To learn more about the Type 316 stainless-steel Titen HD screw anchor,
visit go.strongtie.com/titenhdss or call (800) 999-5099.

2017 Simpson Strong-Tie Company Inc. THDSS17

 By Silvian Marcus, P.E., F.ASCE, Gustavo J. Oliveira, P.E.,
Fatih Yalniz, P.E, and Nicholas Chack, P.E.

A
slender, high-rise pyramid is the architectural principle behind the
53W53 project, also known as the MoMA Tower or Torre Verre.
The 1,050-foot tall high-rise is now under construction and, upon
topping out in 2018, it will house 728,000 square feet of ultra-luxury
residential condominium apartments. The complex includes amenities such as
a 65-foot long lap pool, wellness center, wine vaults, and a private lounge with
Manhattan skyline views, as well as 65,000 square feet of additional gallery space
for the Museum of Modern Art.
The 53W53 project was conceived by Developer Hines and designed by Jean
Nouvel. WSP USA serves as both the structural engineer of record and the
provider of engineering of building services. The construction manager of this
expansive project is Lend Lease. The 53W53 tower is located in the heart of
Midtown Manhattan, occupying a 17,000-square-foot midblock lot between
Fifth Avenue and Sixth Avenue, with access from both 53rd Street and 54th Street.

Project Description
The 53W53 site neighbors the New York City Museum of Modern Art to the
west and the 1330 Avenue of the Americas building to the east. The project
comprises two levels below grade and 82 floors above street level. The 53W53
tower will rise to a total height of 1,050 feet when complete, including addi-
tional architectural elements. The site is approximately a rectangle, measuring
195 feet between 53rd and 54th streets and 87 feet in the East-West direction,
which results in a tower with a slenderness ratio of 1:12.
Early in 2007, developers Hines, Goldman Sachs, and Pontiac Land Group
carried out a comprehensive floor-area ratio analysis which showed that only
by combining the air rights of its three neighbors was the 53W53 project
able to reach the intended height envisioned by Pritzker Prize-winner, French
architect Jean Nouvel, who is the head of Atelier Jean Nouvel and serves as the
Design Architect. Also participating in the project are Adamson Associates
Architects of Toronto as the Architect of Record, SLCE Architects, and The
Office of Thierry W. Despont serving as the architects for interior design.
Panoramic 3D rendering of the 53W53 Project.
Courtesy of Hines.
STRUCTURE magazine
 Architect Jean Nouvels concept for 53W53 a super-slender tower of
pyramidal form with northern and southern faades gradually sloping
away at two distinct angles from 54th and 53rd streets, respectively is
founded on the aesthetics of exposed elements arranged in an asym-
metric, almost random pattern on all faades of the building. Given
the number of inclined members forming an unorthodox lattice, these
patterns have been termed diagrids. The structural solution envisioned
by WSP USA smoothly merged with the architectural intent by using
the elements of the diagrid as a continuous system, providing sup-
port not only for the building envelope but also adequate in terms
of stability and strength for the entire structure.
Foundation System
The geotechnical composition of the site presented an interesting engi-
neering challenge. While the Midtown area of Manhattan is typically
associated with good quality substrate, with bearing capacity up to 60
tons-per-square-foot, the geotechnical surveys and studies performed
for the 53W53 tower showed evidence of an old stream towards the
west side of the site. The continuous presence of water linked to the
stream was attributed to the gradual deterioration of the mechanical
properties of the rock, which were evalu-
ated to be only eight tons-per-square-foot.
To prevent excessive settlements to the
neighboring buildings, and in consid-
eration of the adjacency of the South
perimeter of the site to existing facilities
of the New York City Metropolitan Transit
Authority (MTA) along 53rd Street, the
foundation system required the implemen-
tation of measures aimed at preventing
adverse effects to neighboring underground
structures. More than thirty reinforced
concrete drilled caissons, each 3 feet in
diameter, were required to extend a mini-
mum of 30 feet below the subcellars. In
selected locations near the MTA tunnels,
the caissons reached 70 feet deep, matching
the elevation of the subway track.
Superstructure
The superstructure of the 53W53 tower
is based on a unique dual-purpose
system. In traditional high-rise projects,
focus on efficiency and typical construc-
tion sequence results in the provision
for two separate systems to carry gravity
loads and lateral loads. However, the
architectural intent of 53W53 required
a uniquely different approach. A single,
exterior structural system matching the
geometry of the diagrid was developed
having the ability to carry both vertical
loads and those associated with wind
and seismic demands. This approach,
while efficient from a structural stand-
point, presented numerous engineering
challenges which were solved with a
combination of rigorous analysis and
innovative solutions. 53W53 Project 3D Rendering. Courtesy of Hines.
STRUCTURE magazine
Installation of Node 4R-6.
The original structural concept considered forming the diagrid
with steel members only. A value engineering study resulted in
both financial and constructability advantages to using a reinforced
concrete diagrid system consisting of vertical columns, inclined
elements or braces, and horizontal spandrel beams. This structural
solution allowed for the maximization of unobstructed interior
spaces in the majority of floors.
Perhaps the most challenging aspect of
creating a reliable and resilient structural
diagrid system was the conception, testing,
and implementation of highly specialized
nodal connections at almost every intersec-
tion of the diagrid. At least three dozen
nodes required the interconnection of four
structural members or more. On a given
node, not only are there multiple diagrid
members intersecting, but these elements
might also be located on multiple planes
and oriented at different angles. Take, for
example, the first node installed on site,
located on the North face of the sixth floor
and the largest in the tower. Node 4R-6,
as it was referred to in reference to grid
lines and elevation, is the intersection of
six major structural elements at various
angles, all of which support a significant
portion of the tower above.
The most efficient solution to address the
congestion of reinforcement and realign-
ment of forces at the nodes was to develop a
steel core assembly with special connectors
to which the high-strength reinforcement,
consisting of No. 20 (2.5 inches in diam-
eter) bars, was anchored. The steel core
served as the ideal transition element
between various layouts and directions of
steel reinforcement present throughout the
building. The contractor was required to
create a full-scale mock-up prior to the
actual construction to validate the feasibil-
ity of this innovative solution. The outcome
of the mock-up was satisfactory in terms
of both quality control and reliability for
on-site execution.
Considering the clients request for the
lower floors of the tower to be used for
additional gallery space for the Museum
41 June 2017
Installation of Node 3A-10 showing a K-frame geometry. Detail of top (left) and bottom (right) of Node 3P-31 before concrete casting operation.
of Modern Art, shear walls and interior columns were relocated to
the periphery, allowing for a highly flexible floor layout. Steel trusses
over these large, unsupported spans were used to pick up the loads
delivered by the few interior columns and to transfer them to the
east shear wall core.
Another structural engineering challenge was the need to span over
the existing ConEdison emergency generator servicing the Museum
of Modern Art, which required a 24-foot long overhang cantilevered
from the towers northeast corner. The overhang was integrally con-
nected to the exposed members of the diagrid.
The required lateral stiffness and strength of the tower was accom-
plished by placing outrigger walls, effectively connecting the central
shear wall core to the exterior diagrid system at Levels 35, 36, and 37,
which created the effect of a belt floor approximately at mid-height
of the structure. These outrigger walls were added to the structure
with negligible impact to the marketing plan, as these floors housed
the mechanical rooms required to handle the distribution of the
building services at that elevation.
As the many faade planes converge at different locations and elevations
of the building, small pyramids or apexes were created. To minimize
the impact of these volumes on interior spaces and to facilitate their
construction, it was determined that the five clearly delineated vertices
of the building be constructed of steel framing. This solution allowed
for the possibility of prefabricating portions of the frames to be erected
after the surrounding concrete structure had been cast.
Wind Tunnel Testing and
Structural Analytical Modeling
This intricate structure required complex analyses including full
three-dimensional sequential construction analysis, with con-
sideration to time-dependent changes in material properties
and loading demands, which were used to estimate the required
elevation and position compensations to be implemented during
construction.
In addition to analytical models, a series of comprehensive aero-
dynamic tests to accurately determine the wind pressures and
wind-induced vibrations were performed by RWDI Consulting
Engineers. A two-prong approach was necessary to achieve the
industry-recommended comfort level for human occupancy in
terms of vibration and acceleration due to wind. First, the structural
STRUCTURE magazine 42
mass was increased towards the top of the building by using a slab
thickness of 20 inches at the 73rd, 74th, and 76th floors. Second,
a 650-ton Tuned Mass Damper was placed at the double-height
space between the 74th and 76th floors.
Integrated Buildings SMEP Design
WSP USA provided not only the services for structural design, but was also
responsible for the engineering of building services including mechanical,
electrical, plumbing, fire protection, telecommunications, and others. This
allowed for a very close and effective collaboration among the design and
construction teams and good interaction between engineering disciplines.
Construction Progress
Foundation construction was completed at the end of 2015. At the
time of this publication, the superstructure work has reached the
40th floor, which is approximately 500 feet above street level. As the
tower tapers and reduces its footprint towards the top, construction
progress is expected to be a 4- or 5-day cycle per floor, standard in
New York Citys construction environment. The project
is scheduled to top out in the summer of 2018. The
installation of curtain wall began in 2016 and will be
completed by the beginning of 2019.
Silvian Marcus, P.E, F.ASCE, is Director of Building Structures
at WSP USA, Principal in Charge of the project.
Gustavo J. Oliveira, P.E., is Vice President of Building Structures
at WSP USA, Project Director.
Fatih Yalniz, P.E., is Structural Analysis Manager and Vice
President of Building Structures at WSP USA.
Nicholas Chack, P.E., is Project Manager of Building Structures
at WSP USA.
Additional Credits
Ahmad Rahimian, Ph.D., P.E, S.E, F.ASCE, is Director of
Building Structures at WSP USA.
Gerardo Aguilar, Ph.D., is Technical Manager of Building
Structures at WSP USA.
June 2017
PARALLAM PSL
Bring wide open spaces into your next build. Parallam PSL
beams let you open up great rooms, ceilings and oor plans with
the trusted strength and stability of engineered wood. Open up
a world of design options to reliably support your best work.

Call 888.453.8358 or go to Weyerhaeuser.com/woodproducts

to nd your Territory Manager and closest Trus Joist dealer.

, Trus Joist and Parallam PSL are registered trademarks of Weyerhaeuser NR. 2016 Weyerhaeuser NR Company. All rights reserved.
Salesforce Tower
NEW BENCHMARKS IN HIGH-RISE SEISMIC SAFETY

W
hen completed in 2017, Salesforce By Ron Klemencic, P.E., S.E., Hon. AIA,
Tower will be the tallest building in Michael T. Valley, P.E., S.E., and
San Francisco at a height of 1,070 feet John D. Hooper, P.E., S.E.
(901 feet to the top occupied floor).
This super-tall building advances the state-of-the-art
of high-rise seismic design through implementation
of a number of first-ever design and analysis methods
that push limits and set new industry benchmarks. The
structural innovations required to create this record-set-
ting, city-defining tower address enhanced performance
objectives, foundation challenges, and interactions with
adjacent buildings issues applicable both to this build-
ing and future tall buildings in areas of high seismicity.

Reshaping the Skyline

Redefining the Future
In the 1980s, the City of San Francisco enacted policies
restricting high-rise development, ultimately creat-
ing a skyline that plateaus at 500 to 600 feet the
historical maximum zoned heights (Figure 1). The
restrictions also limited the citys annual allotment of
space for new office development. These limitations
were implemented during an anti-growth era sweeping
the nation in the 1980s, fueled by fears of overcrowding
and inadequate city infrastructure.

STRUCTURE magazine 44 June 2017

Figure 1. San Francisco Skyline Pre-Transbay District.

When studies confirmed that job centralization in a sustainable,

transit-oriented downtown core was critical to San Franciscos con-
New Benchmarks in Seismic Safety
tinued economic success, a new Transit Center District Plan was Given the scale of Salesforce Tower, the calculated number of building
developed for a 16-block area referred to as the Transbay District. occupants will far exceed the building code threshold of 5,000 people, trig-
The plan called for a new Transbay Transit Center to co-locate eleven gering the buildings consideration under Occupancy [or Risk] Category
Bay Area transit systems and related surrounding development. The III. Category III buildings require additional safety for wind and seismic
plan also designated a new zoning district around the Transbay Transit demands, thus prompting new challenges for the engineering team.
Center, reclassifying parcels to allow buildings from 600 to 850 feet tall Traditional structural design methods adopt an enhanced strength
versus the existing 500-foot cap. Through this plan, the City sought approach when attempting to improve seismic safety and performance.
the development of office and residential buildings that were taller This approach, while easy to implement by applying code-defined
and more densely occupied to spur job and population centralization. seismic forces that have been amplified by an Importance Factor
The plan also targeted the creation of a new, sculpted skyline formed (1.25 for Category III buildings), fails to ensure enhanced building
by height increased immediately around the Transit Center to mark performance when subjected to extreme seismic ground shaking.
the importance of the location and provide a new, vibrant image for In fact, in the context of the historical seismic design philosophy of
San Francisco. To that end, the 50,515-square-foot site bounded by ductility and energy absorption, enhanced strength may, in fact, be
First and Fremont Streets, fronting Mission Street to the north and detrimental to building performance. Stronger buildings resist more
directly adjacent to the new Transit Center, was designated as the force rather than absorbing the energy of the grounds shaking. In
location for the areas tallest building. At the new 1,070-foot height resisting these higher forces, shear stresses and foundation demands
limit, the record-making building would serve as a beacon for the increase to undesirable levels and building performance can be com-
revitalized area (Figure 2). promised. Instead, a rigorous Performance-Based Seismic Design
To help fund the new Transit Center, the rights to entitle and pur- (PBSD) approach was implemented to allow for, quantify, and control
chase the highly desirable tallest building site were awarded through desired building performance at an enhanced level compared to other
a 2007 global invitation-only design competition sponsored by the commercial office buildings.
Transbay Joint Powers Authority, a public entity created to develop continued on next page
the Center. The winning proposal was submitted by Hines, an inter-
national development firm, teamed with Pelli Clarke Pelli Architects.
(Developer Boston Properties subsequently acquired 95% of Hines
stake in 2013.)
The team envisioned an iconic 61-story, high-density, sustainable
office tower totaling 1.5 million square feet (and ultimately named
Salesforce Tower for its primary tenant). Above the 26th floor, each
elevation of Salesforce Tower curves and tapers away from the street,
creating a narrow, slender top finished with a sculptural crown. The
crown, designed as an unenclosed latticework of structure, continues
the expression of metal wrapping the occupied floors of the tower
below and contributes to the slender proportions and total height of
the building form. The buildings curvature also reduces the appar-
ent height and massing of the building when viewed by pedestrians
immediately below.
Within the larger context of San Franciscos future skyline created
by the increased building heights in the TCDP area, Salesforce Tower
will be the tallest point, marking the significance of the adjacent
Transit Center. Construction started in 2013, with completion
expected in 2017. Figure 2. San Francisco Transbay District. Courtesy of Foster + Partners.

STRUCTURE magazine 45 June 2017


Figure 3. Typical low-rise structural floor plan.
Figure 4. Confirmation of Salesforce Towers enhanced performance.
STRUCTURE magazine
The projects structural engineer, Magnusson Klemencic Associates (MKA),
brought to the project decades of leadership in seismic design in San Francisco,
including multiple high-rise towers. The firm also led the development and U.S.
adoption of PBSD for high-rise buildings, a methodology that produces buildings
that are safer and perform more predictably and reliably than buildings designed
following a prescriptive code-based approach.
PBSD uses sophisticated nonlinear seismic time-history computer modeling
practical only in recent years thanks to advancements in computing capacity
and user-friendly analysis programs to examine building performance during
multiple predicted seismic events. With PBSD, engineers can analyze complex
and unique building geometries then precisely allocate appropriate strength and
stiffness to achieve an efficient design that meets the desired performance objec-
tives. PBSD methodology not only meets the intent of the building code but
explicitly considers and quantifies predicted building performance under mul-
tiple ground-shaking scenarios. This explicit examination of building behavior
provided through nonlinear time-history analysis, coupled with the application
of enhanced performance standards, produces a safer, more reliable building.
MKA had already designed five PBSD high-rise buildings in San Francisco,
but none that targeted the more stringent Occupancy Category III performance
objective. Because PBSD is a relatively new and complex approach, building
departments require that such designs be peer reviewed by a second engineering
team to verify that building performance meets code
intent. This peer review process has been instrumental
in the understanding, advancement, and acceptance
of PBSD methodologies throughout the industry, as
code-prescriptive intent becomes successfully trans-
lated into approved performance-based designs. After
assessing the more stringent Category III code-defined
performance objective, and evaluating that intent and
application relative to PBSD methodology, the design
team targeted a reduction to 6% (from 10%) of the
probability of collapse under a Maximum Considered
Earthquake (MCE) ground shaking. This is consis-
tent with ASCE 7 Commentary related to Occupancy
Category III buildings.
As stated in the ASCE 7 Commentary, the perfor-
mance objective for Occupancy Category III structures
is to reduce the hazard to human life in the event of
failure, which relates most closely to a code-defined
performance of Collapse Prevention with MCE shak-
ing. The structural design of Salesforce Tower includes
more stringent Acceptance Criteria for MCE shak-
ing as explicit performance objectives, including the
following:
Reduced story drift
Reduced coupling beam rotations
Reduced tensile/compressive strains in shear walls
Reduced shear demands on shear walls
Risk Category II acceptance criterion was
typically modified to be more stringent by
applying a factor of 0.8
The detailed Acceptance Criteria used for the design
of Salesforce Tower is shown in Table 1.
The structural system features a gravity load-resisting
system with structural steel columns and floor framing
supporting steel composite deck. The buildings seis-
mic force-resisting system comprises special reinforced
concrete shear walls, 24 to 48 inches thick, at the cen-
tral elevator and stair core. Since the vertical elements
of the towers seismic force-resisting system include
46 June 2017
 only shear walls Elastic performance targeted for service-level shaking (with a
(Figure 3), the City mean recurrence interval of 43 years)
of San Franciscos Moderate structural damage expected for design-level shaking
Administrative (taken as two-thirds of code-defined MCE shaking)
Bulletin 083 (AB- Collapse prevention, with a reduced probability of collapse
083), Requirements consistent with Occupancy Category III, targeted for
and Guidelines MCE shaking
for the Seismic The nonlinear time-history analyses used to confirm the structural
Design of New Tall response to MCE shaking employed two suites of 11 pairs of accelera-
Figure 5. Typical LBE rebar detailing.
Buildings using tion history. Two suites of ground motions were developed considering
Non-Prescriptive a Conditional Mean Spectra approach, targeting the first and second
Seismic-Design Procedures, applied. In addition to technical provisions, modes of vibration of the tower. This approach was deemed to more
AB-083 called for a structural design review by a panel of independent rigorously and appropriately test the buildings design, given the
experts. The four-member panel assembled for the detailed review of importance of the towers second-mode-of-vibration response. The
the analysis and design of Salesforce Tower included two practicing suites were developed by performing three-dimensional, nonlinear site
engineers, a research professor, and a geotechnical/seismic ground response analyses using input rock motions that were selected, scaled,
motion expert. and matched for Conditional Mean Spectra spanning the period range
Although wind-loading conditions for the building are not trivial, of interest from approximately 0.5 seconds to 9.0 seconds. One suite
wind tunnel testing confirmed that demand levels fell below seismic was conditioned to represent long-period motions, for which 8 of
demands, and that occupant comfort standards would be met as 11 motions include pulse effects. The other suite was conditioned to
judged against international standards. The lateral design of Salesforce represent shorter period motions, for which 2 of 11 motions include
Tower was driven by seismic loading conditions for three levels of pulse effects. Pulse effects were considered particularly important for
ground shaking: this building given the proximity to the San Andreas Fault. The result-
ing acceleration histories, taken at the foundation level
Item Value instead of the more traditional ground surface level,
include kinematic soil-structure interaction effects
Story Drift 3.0x0.8 = 2.4 percent taken as the average of 11 analyses; due to base-slab averaging and embedment. A scale
4.5x0.8 = 3.6 percent maximum from any single analysis. factor for each suite of motions was applied so that
the corresponding linear response spectra satisfy the
Residual Story Drift 1x0.8 = 0.8 percent taken as the average of 11 analyses; requirements of the building code.
1.5x0.8 = 1.2 percent maximum from any single analysis. The results of these 22 earthquake simulations
were evaluated and compared against the targeted
Coupling Beam Rotation 0.06x0.8 0.05 radian rotation limit, taken as the average Acceptance Criteria. Where predicted demand levels
(diagonally reinforced of 11 analyses. exceeded Acceptance Criteria, design modifications
concrete or steel composite) were implemented. In particular, core wall thicknesses
were tuned to reduce and control shear demands
Shear Wall Reinforcement Rebar tensile strain is 0.05x0.8 = 0.04 in tension and within acceptable limits at the towers base and the
Axial Strain 0.02x0.8 = 0.016 in compression, taken as the average of location of a core setback at Level 50. Ultimately, it
11 analyses. was demonstrated that all Acceptance Criteria had
been achieved, and the buildings enhanced perfor-
Shear Wall Concrete Fully confined concrete compression strain is 0.015x0.8 = mance was confirmed. As shown in Figure 4, story
Axial Strain 0.012, taken as the average of 11 analyses. drifts and coupling beam rotations typically fall well
within acceptable limits, wall shear demands remain
Shear Wall Shear DCR limited to 1.0. Capacity calculated using expected elastic, and vertical wall strains are quite modest with
material properties and a phi factor of 1.0, where ductility only limited yielding predicted.
demands are modest (ec 0.005; es 0.010) or a phi factor
of 0.75, where ductility demands are greater. Demand San Franciscos Deepest Foundations
taken as 1.5 times the average demand from each set of 11
analyses. The Salesforce Tower site is underlain with a complex
soil strata including fill, sand, San Franciscos old bay
Level P1, P2, and DCR limited to 1.0. Capacity calculated using expected clay, and weak bedrock. These geotechnical conditions
Level 1 Diaphragms material properties and code-specified phi-factors ( = are subject to potential liquefaction, lateral spread-
0.75). Demand taken as 1.5 times the average demand ing, excessive settlement, and inadequate foundation
from each set of 11 analyses. support. Given the poor soils and the sheer weight of
Salesforce Tower, supporting the building on anything
Basement Walls DCR limited to 1.0. Capacity calculated using expected but bedrock was not feasible. Gravity loading and
material properties and code-specified phi-factors ( = overturning demands at the foundation level from
0.75). Demand taken as 1.5 times the average demand MCE shaking dictated a piled-mat solution.
from each set of 11 analyses. Two foundation systems were considered during the
design process: 8-foot-diameter drilled shafts and 5.0-
Table 1. MCE-Level Acceptance Criteria for Salesforce Tower. x 10.5-foot Load-Bearing Elements (LBEs). As the

STRUCTURE magazine 47 June 2017

 depth to rock from
existing grade was
approximately 250
feet, and socket-
ing into the rock
would require drill-
ing even deeper, the
limits of available
drilling equipment
would be tested
for a drilled shaft
foundation. The
alternate LBE, or
barrette foun-
Figure 6. LBE foundation system.
dations, were not
subject to the
same depth limitations as the equipment used to excavate the shafts
was a combination of a line-supported clam shell and hydrofraise.
Ultimately, the LBE foundation system was selected as the most
appropriate for the project.
An extensive analysis of the LBEs, considering extreme seismic
demands, was performed. Reinforcing detailing was incorporated
to resist the high tensile, flexural, and shear stresses imposed on the
LBEs by MCE ground shaking. Confinement reinforcement was also
specified in the upper zones of the LBEs where compressive demands
were the highest (Figure 5, page 47). As this was the first time LBEs
would be used to support a tall building in San Francisco, an extensive
review was conducted by the independent peer review panel. Also,
two full-scale Osterberg Load Cells tests were conducted to confirm
that the design parameters for the skin friction on the LBEs were
appropriate. Through this test program, it was confirmed that the skin
friction values were time sensitive (as expected) due to the build-up
of filter caking of the bentonite on the side walls of the shafts, requir-
ing time limits to be placed on the overall installation of each shaft.
Installation of the foundation system included first the construction
of guide walls to control the location and excavation of the LBEs.
Excavation then proceeded using a combination of a line-mounted
clam shell in the sands and clay, switching to a hydrofraise when
denser rock material was
encountered. Excavation
stability was maintained
throughout the process
using a recycling ben-
tonite slurry system.
After the excavation was
completed, full-length,
pre-tied reinforcing steel
cages were lowered into
the bentonite-filled holes,
and concrete was placed
using dual tremie pipes.
All 42 LBEs were con-
structed from existing
grade, rather than the
bottom of the 60-foot
excavation. A temporary
internal bracing system
would be required to sup-
Figure 7. Salesforce Tower recent topping out. port the open excavation
Courtesy of Magnusson Klemencic Associates/ given the limitation of the
Michael Dickter. adjacent Transbay Transit
STRUCTURE magazine 48
Centers simultaneously open excavation, limiting the ability for
heavy equipment to work at the bottom of the hole. As such, concrete
placement in the LBEs continued through elevation of the future mat
foundation, and the remainder of the shaft was filled with a lean mix
for ease of later excavation.
The final foundation configuration for Salesforce Tower includes 42
LBEs interconnected by a thick mat foundation to enforce compatibility
(Figure 6). The mat varies in thickness from 14 feet at the core to 5 feet at
the perimeter. LBEs extend into the underlying Franciscan bedrock, some
reaching more than 310 feet below existing grade with rock-sockets of
up to 70 feet. The design and construction of this foundation system set
new standards for the support of tall buildings in San Franciscos unique
geotechnical and seismic conditions.
Unprecedented Structure-Soil-Structure
Interaction (SSSI) Analysis
As a condition of the Salesforce Tower site purchase agreement,
the Transbay Joint Powers Authority required proof that the tower
developed for the site, as well as its interactions with surrounding
buildings, would not negatively impact the new Transit Center,
especially during the strong ground shaking of an MCE event.
An unprecedented Structure-Soil-Structure Interaction (SSSI)
analysis was conducted to investigate and confirm the performance
of Salesforce Tower and its impacts on the adjacent Transbay Transit
Center. MKAs structural engineering team and the geotechnical
engineering team at Arup performed three-dimensional, nonlinear
SSSI analyses to assess the interactive performance of Salesforce
Tower, the Transbay Transit Center, and another immediately adja-
cent high-rise tower. This extremely complex assessment involved
extensive nonlinear computer models developed in CSI-Perform
and LS-DYNA and considered multiple seismic ground motions.
The results of these analyses confirmed the satisfactory performance
of both Salesforce Tower and the Transbay Transit Center. The
details and conclusions of this analysis were ultimately reviewed
and approved by the Engineer of Record for the Transbay Transit
Center. This was the first time that potential impacts of one
building on a neighboring building during strong seismic ground
shaking had been considered.
The Road Ahead
In addition to its height, the design and construction of Salesforce
Tower set new benchmarks for seismic safety, foundation con-
struction, and structure-soil-structure interaction. With many new
towers planned in San Francisco and other seismically active cities,
the details of Salesforce Towers design will help guide
and inform future improvements in the safety and
performance of high-rise buildings and change the
San Francisco skyline forever (Figure 7).
Ron Klemencic, P.E., S.E., Hon. AIA, is Chairman and Chief
Executive Officer at Magnusson Klemencic Associates. Ron can be
reached at rklemencic@mka.com.
Michael T. Valley, P.E, S.E., is a Principal at Magnusson Klemencic
Associates. Michael can be reached at mvalley@mka.com.
John D. Hooper, P.E., S.E., is Director of Earthquake Engineering
at Magnusson Klemencic Associates. John can be reached at
jhooper@mka.com.
June 2017
 Brock By Paul Fast, P.E., P.Eng.,
Struct.Eng., FIStructE and
Robert Jackson, P.Eng.
Commons
T
he tallest contemporary wood building in the world was
recently constructed at the University of British Columbia
(UBC) in Vancouver, Canada. Brock Commons is an
18-story student residence that is a mass timber hybrid and
measures a record 174 feet (53 meters). Fast + Epp are the structural
engineers, working in conjunction with Acton Ostry Architects and
Hermann Kaufmann Architekten. (The Sakyamuni Pagoda of Fogong
Temple built in China in 1056 stands 220.83 feet (67.31 meters) and
is the tallest wood building in the world.)
Project Background
UBC is experiencing an increase in demand for student housing and
has a sustainability commitment to a campus that acts as a Living
Laboratory where innovation is encouraged, not only in academia
but also in building and infrastructure. By pairing this drive with
the potential for external funding related to mass timber research,
the project was born.
STRUCTURE magazine 50
A Case
Study
in Tall
Timber
The key goals of the project were to create a safe, functional, sustain-
able, and cost-effective residence for UBC students. Delivering a mass
timber building with a construction cost that aligned with the unit
cost of a comparable traditional concrete tower in Vancouver was an
important goal, demonstrating the viability of wood as a practical
material for tall building applications.
An integrated design team was assembled by the University to facili-
tate this effort. The construction manager was appointed, and the
timber installer and concrete trades joined the team in a design-assist
role, providing real-time feedback on the evolving structural design
and offering valuable constructability advice.
The structure is comprised of 17 stories of five-ply cross-laminated
timber (CLT) floor panels, a concrete transfer slab on the second
floor, and a steel framed roof. The CLT panels are point supported on
glulam columns on a 9.35- x 13.1-foot (2.85m x 4.0m) grid. Beams
were eliminated from the design by utilizing CLTs two-way span-
ning capabilities. Two full-height concrete cores provide the lateral
stability for the structure.
June 2017
Figure 1. Timber erection Summer 2016. Courtesy of Seagate Structures
and Pollux Chung.
Structural System
The design intent was to keep the structure simple and sensible:
develop a prefabricated kit-of-parts that could be installed quickly
and easily, with minimal labor on site.
CLT is often used as a one-way decking system, ignoring the two-
way spanning capability afforded by its cross laminations. By utilizing
CLT to span in both directions, the design team was able to eliminate
beams, significantly reducing the overall structural depth (Figure
2). This created a clean, flat, point-supported surface, allowing for
unobstructed service distribution as is commonly found in flat-plate
concrete construction. Further, by adjusting the column grid and
architectural program to suit the maximum available panel size, the
team was able to both minimize the overall number of panels and
maximize the efficiency of the system.
The primary lateral support for earthquake and wind loading is
provided by two concrete cores. Although timber-based lateral force-
resisting systems such as CLT walls/cores, timber braced frames, or
post-tensioned/self-centering systems were feasible design options for
this project, the testing, time, and costs required to obtain regulatory
approvals would have negatively impacted the clients budget and
completion date.
Design Challenges
Codes and Standards
The current British Columbia Building Code (BCBC 2012) limits the
height of wood buildings to six stories. As such, a special approval
process was required for this project. The design is based on a Site
Specific Regulation (SSR), administered by the Building Safety and
Standards Branch of the BC Provincial Government, and is applicable
solely to this project and site.
Due to the complexity of the project, two independent structural
peer reviews were completed. The first independent review was timber-
focused and was completed by Merz Kley Partner ZT GmbH in
Dornbirn, Austria. The second was seismic-focused and was completed
by Read Jones Christoffersen Consulting Engineers in Vancouver.
Prefabrication
Prefabrication is an essential consideration when designing large-scale
wood structures. Well-planned erection and shop drawings are vital
to ensuring smooth production and installation of timber elements.
This results in fewer errors on the site, less remedial work, and a
shorter overall construction schedule. All CLT and glulam elements
STRUCTURE magazine
Figure 2. Point supported CLT system. Courtesy of Seagate Structures and
Pollux Chung.
were CNC machined with quality control protocols to better ensure
a seamless erection of the timber superstructure.
To help achieve a high level of prefabrication for all design disciplines,
CadMakers, a third-party consultant, modeled the building and
helped coordinate design documents before and during construction.
This 3D model, created with CATIA software, includes fully-detailed
structural elements and connections, as well as mechanical/electrical
systems, architectural fit-outs, formwork panels, and safety guards.
The model allowed all CLT penetrations for mechanical and electri-
cal sleeves to be fully coordinated during the design process and
successfully converted into fabrication files (CAD/CAM) needed
for CNC machining.
Point Supported CLT
In addition to stiffness and bending requirements, rolling shear
stresses at the column supports are typically a controlling factor in
two-way, point-supported CLT floor plates. A rolling shear failure
is one in which the fibers roll over each other, due to shear forces
perpendicular to the grain. After designing the custom lamination
layup to suit the rolling shear and flexural demands, the design team
completed 18 full-scale load tests, at the FPInnovations laboratory in
Vancouver, on panels from three prospective CLT suppliers to validate
the analysis. There appeared to be some capability for the CLT to
redistribute forces, as internal shear cracks propagated through the
panel before the critical failure mode occurred. Multiple types of
shear/bending failures were observed near the supports (Figure 3).
Column Shortening and Shrinkage
In tall wood buildings, axial column shortening needs to be con-
sidered during design. When properly accounted for, the shortening
should not negatively affect the construction, use, or long-term
performance of the building.
continued on next page
Figure 3. Point supported CLT panel testing apparatus (left); Failure (right).
51 June 2017

Figure 4. Proof of concept mock-up.
Several factors affect glulam column shortening:
Dead load elastic axial shortening ( = PL/AE)
Live load elastic axial shortening ( = PL/AE)
Shrinkage parallel to grain
Joint settlement
Column length tolerances
Wood creep
The main concerns surrounding these shortening effects are the
impact of the deformations on the vertical mechanical services, as well
as the differential movement between the wood superstructure and
the stiff concrete cores. The effects of these factors culminate at the
roof level, where all columns below contribute to the shortening. A
series of 116-inch thick steel shim plates were added during construc-
tion at the column-to-column connections on three strategic levels
to mitigate a portion of these effects.
Monitoring
To better understand the unique behaviors of the building, the
structure will be fitted with accelerometers, moisture meters, and
vertical shortening string pots. Research teams at the University of
British Columbia are undertaking this work as a part of the Living
Laboratory initiative.
The data collected from the accelerometers and inclination gauges
will help to verify the buildings performance in a significant seismic
event. The string pots will measure the floor-to-floor axial column
shortening at strategic levels, which will provide more insight into axial
column shortening in highly loaded glulam columns. Lastly, moisture
meters and data loggers will be installed in the CLT panels, collecting
data from the manufacturing plant to the final installed condition.
The meters will continue to measure moisture content throughout
the service life of the building which, in a few years time, will give a
moisture content timeline from fabrication to moisture equilibrium.
Figure 5. Braced columns. Courtesy of Seagate Figure 6. CLT panel installation. Courtesy of
Structures and Pollux Chung. Seagate Structures and Pollux Chung.
STRUCTURE magazine
Construction
Proof of Concept Mock-Up
The construction team built a full-scale mock-up of a portion of the
building to validate the constructability of the proposed design, 26
feet x 39 feet (8m x 12m) in plan and two stories tall. The mock-up
included several connection types to help determine and optimize
the details used in the final design (Figure 4). Also, the mock-up was
used for the development and evaluation of various building envelope
systems considered for the project.
Construction Sequencing
The construction team erected the concrete cores to full height and
installed the L2 transfer slab throughout the winter of 2015/16 to
facilitate the use of one crane and provide sufficient time for manu-
facturing and shipping of the heavy timber elements.
In June 2016, the timber and envelope installation began. This was
completed in four phases. The first involved erecting all columns on
one level, diagonally bracing them, and using horizontal spreader
bars at the column caps to set the grid (Figure 5). The columns were
installed by hand from bundles on the active deck, freeing up the crane
for envelope panel installation. The second phase was the installation
of the CLT panels, stitching adjacent panels as the active deck moved
away from the cores (Figure 6). The third phase was the installation
of the steel drag plates at the concrete cores and perimeter angles to
support the curtain wall system. The fourth was the installation of
the envelope elements on the floor below the active deck (Figure 7).
Erection of the timber and envelope panels was completed in just
nine weeks, with the four-step installation sequence repeating itself.
Conclusion
A mass timber building of this scale carries a unique set of engineer-
ing challenges, many of which can be mitigated through the use of
innovative design strategies and strong quality control protocols. To
date, the project has proven cost-competitive with concrete towers in
the local marketplace, largely achieved by an integrated
design team, real-time input from trades, and structural
discipline. This large scale prefabricated project is a testa-
ment to fresh thinking and holistic design.
Paul Fast, P.E., P.Eng., Struct.Eng., FIStructE, is the Founding
Partner of Fast + Epp. He is the structural engineer of record for the
innovative 18-story Brock Commons student residence.
Robert Jackson, P.Eng., was heavily involved the design and
construction of the Brock Commons student residence project.
Figure 7. Perimeter envelope installation. Courtesy of
Naturally: Wood and Steven Errico.
52 June 2017
 MAPEI: Your single-source Overhead Repair Solutions

provider from restoration

to protection
System solutions for bridge restoration

Column Repair Solutions

Bridge Deck Solutions

Overhead Repair Solutions Column Repair Solutions Bridge Deck Solutions

1. Reinforcing steel 1. Planibond 3C (corrosion inhibitor) 1. Mapefer 1K (anticorrosion coating)

2. Mapeshield I (anticorrosion galvanic anode)
3. Planitop XS (hand-applied repair mortar)
or Planitop 12 SR (low-pressure spray mortar)
4. Elastocolor Coat (protective and decorative
coating)
2. Planitop 11 SCC (self-consolidating concrete mix with 2. Planitop 18 ES (rapid-hardening repair mortar)
silica fume and corrosion inhibitor) or Planitop 18 (very rapid-hardening repair mortar)
or Planitop XS (hand-applied repair mortar) 3. Planiseal LVB (crack healer/sealer)
or Planitop 12 SR (low-pressure spray mortar) 4. Planiseal Traffic Coat FS (fast-setting epoxy
3. MapeWrap Primer 1 (saturant) overlay for bridge decks)
4. MapeWrap 11 or MapeWrap 12 (epoxy smoothing putty)
5. MapeWrap 31 or MapeWrap 21 (epoxy saturant)
6. MapeWrap C Uni Ax 300 or 600 (carbon fiber fabric)
7. MapeWrap 31 (epoxy saturant)
8. Sand broadcast
9. Elastocolor Coat (protective and decorative coating)

MAPEI offers a full spectrum of products for concrete restoration, below-grade

waterproofing and structural strengthening. Globally, MAPEIs system solutions
have been utilized for bridges, highways, parking garages, stadiums, buildings
and other structures.

Visit www.mapei.com for details on all MAPEI products.

By Mark Sarkisian, S.E., Eric Long, S.E., David Shook, P.E., and Eric Peterson
B
y re-examining standards long taken for granted by develop-
ers, 350 Mission received LEED Platinum certification and
is reinventing a ubiquitous building type. The form, struc-
ture, and systems of this Class-A office tower are generated
by rigorous goals of environmental performance, social engagement,
and material efficiency.
The 30-story volume embodies the higher workforce densities and
flexible space planning of 21st-century offices, thanks to floor plates
that span nearly 45 feet between core and perimeter. 350 Mission
achieves a new paradigm for office tower structures by utilizing
post-tensioned long-span flat concrete slabs, a method traditionally
reserved for residential construction. The innovative structure lifts
the first office floor to create a transparent 50-foot-tall by 43-foot
-deep lobby, dubbed the urban living room. Energized by a 70- by
40-foot LED screen, the generous public space has 90 linear feet of
glass panels that slide open to the sidewalk and blur the threshold
between public and private realms.
Performance-Based Seismic Design
Dual seismic force resisting systems are required by ASCE 7 for
buildings over 240 feet unless appropriate justification is provided.
Administration Bulletin 82 and 83 of the San Francisco Building Code
prescribe the design and peer review process needed to demonstrate
code-equivalence of the core-only seismic force resisting system. This
performance-based seismic design approach permits the core-only
seismic force resisting system and avoids traditional dual systems
which often include costly moment frames.
The latest advances in nonlinear time history analysis, seismic design
methods, and reinforcement detailing were incorporated into this
project, drawing upon the knowledge and experience of the city-
appointed seismic design review panel. All gravity framing members
and their associated effects on building performance, including P-delta
effects and nonlinear behavior, were modeled. Due to the potential
interaction of the slabs on the gravity columns and their cumulative
effect on the tall lobby condition, this was vital. Additionally, ground
STRUCTURE magazine 54
floor and all basement diaphragms were modeled with shell elements,
as the ramp and basement levels are sloped in a corkscrew basement.
Long-Span Flat Plate Slab Design
A flat plate solution using conventional practices would need to be
at least 14 inches thick, with very high quantities of post-tension-
ing and reinforcement. To reduce the slab thickness to 11 inches
and post-tensioning quantities to levels commonly associated with
30-foot residential spans, a cambered solution was proposed in
tandem with the post-tensioning system. The primary purpose of
the post-tensioning system is to counteract a large portion of the
slab self-weight while mitigating flexural cracking. Due to the mag-
nitude of the span and modest post-tensioning, elastic and inelastic
creep deflection of the slab, up to 2.5 inches, was anticipated. This
would not be acceptable for non-structural components such as
partitions and could be visually perceivable in an exposed ceiling
condition. Thus, a digitally mapped camber plan and camber values
for individual shoring posts were developed with the collaboration of
the concrete contractor. Changes in camber slope were also coordi-
nated with the concrete contractor, Webcor Concrete, to ensure the
specified geometry could be achieved without significant changes
in labor. The direct collaboration of the structural design team with
all concrete field superintendents, including those responsible for
shoring, forming, placement, and finishing, were vital.
Conventional 5,000 psi concrete was utilized along with A615
Gr. 60 reinforcement for both the post-tensioned floor slabs and in
non-cambered, mild-reinforced below-grade slabs. Average compres-
sive strength determined in cylinder testing from the below-grade
slabs was to be 7,200 psi. The high strength was due to contractor
requirements for early strength to tension tendons to keep the project
on schedule. Thus, the camber of above-grade decks was adjusted
using this more accurate concrete strength.
Two comprehensive analytical investigations were conducted in
parallel using separate software packages to ensure both strength
and serviceability were satisfied. The primary software used for
June 2017
 A B C D E

7
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.0 0.75 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.75 0.0

0.0 0.75 1.5 1.75 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.25 0.0

0.0 0.75 1.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.75 1.5 1.5 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.0 0.0

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.0 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.0

6
0.0 0.5 0.75 1.25 1.25 0.75 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
5

0.0 0.5 0.75 1.0 0.75 0.5 0.0 0.75 0.75 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.0 0.5 0.75 1.0 0.75 0.5 0.0 1.25 1.25 0.0 0.0 0.0

4
0.0 0.5 0.75 1.0 0.75 0.5 0.0 1.25 1.25 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.0 0.5 0.75 1.0 0.75 0.5 0.0 0.25 0.25 0.0 0.0 0.0

3 0.0 0.5 0.75 1.0 0.75 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.5 0.75 1.25 1.5 1.25 1.0 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.5 0.0
0.0

2
0.25 0.75 1.25 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.0 1.0 0.0
0.0

0.25 0.75 1.0 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.0 1.0 0.0
0.0

0.25 0.25 0.25 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.5 0.0
0.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Chamber overlay diagram. Exterior at night.

analysis was SAFE by Computers and Structures, Inc., while a 60, and 90 days afterward. The tracking of deflections was determined
checking analysis model was built in ADAPT Floor by ADAPT to be very close to analysis model predictions, which incorporated a
Inc. Both analysis tools calculated cracked section properties novel iterative cracked section analysis procedure recommended by
based on actual rebar placement for increased accuracy. With the ACI 435 committee and creep and shrinkage methods recom-
the incorporation of camber, post-tensioning material quantities mended by the ACI 209 committee. This design, with contractor
were competitive with shorted 30-foot spans often encountered collaboration, has set a new standard in office buildings and created
in high-rise residential towers. a new efficient architecture which gives further enhancement to
For calculation of long-term deflection, methods recommended core-only tall buildings.
by ACI Committee 435 in ACI 435R-95, Control of Deflection in An important feature of the concrete framing design is a dramatic
Concrete Structures, were utilized. As noted in the ACI 435 docu- 30-foot corner cantilever achieved with a 25-inch deep post-tensioned
ment, methods recommended by Graham and Scanion (1986) are upturned beam. The upturn is concealed in a raised floor system which
appropriate where stiff lateral systems such as shear walls are utilized. permitted underfloor mechanical air circulation, electrical conduits,
The concrete modulus of rupture is lowered from 7.5fc to 4fc and plumbing lines. Thus, the underside of the slab is kept free of
for calculation of cracked section properties. Also, the computed these visual hindrances. The corner post-tensioned beam has a unique
deflections using cracked section properties are amplified by a factor tendon profile that differs from conventional post-tensioned layouts.
of 3.5 to determine the total long-term deflection. Instead of starting high at the support and draping linearly to mid-
While both analysis models could amplify ACI 435 recommend depth at the cantilever tip, it has a slight parabolic drape between the
values of cracked section deflections, SAFE was found to be more two ends. This was incorporated to avoid sagging at the cantilever
accurate with its age-adjusted modulus of elasticity method which mid-span which can occur in very long cantilever conditions.
accounts for long-term creep and shrinkage based on methods sug- In elevation, the tower superstructure appears as 11-inch plates. The
gested by ACI 209. depth of similarly performing steel or waffle-slab construction would
Although recommendations of ACI 318 for the modulus of rupture measure nearly 3 feet. If the concrete slabs remain exposed overhead,
(7.5fc) and long-term deflection multipliers (3.0) are appropriate then the typical office floor will reach over 11 feet high, a dramatic
when compared to laboratory testing, they do not account for critical increase from the 9-foot heights traditionally associated with Class-A
construction effects such as early shrinkage cracking due to restraint office buildings. Using ultra-thin concrete instead of steel maximizes
and early loading of the concrete when shoring is removed. It is highly perimeter glass, achieves more daylight, and supports energy efficient
recommended that appropriate provisions be made in ACI 318 to give HVAC systems.
guidance to structural engineers designing concrete gravity framing
which more appropriately addresses these important issues, and that
practicing engineers consider this during design.
Innovative Multi-Story Construction Methods
Slabs are engineered to be flat and to deflect no more than inch Construction methodologies were coordinated among the concrete,
between the core and perimeter 90 days after casting when raised rebar, post-tensioning crews, and the place and finish crews. Handset
flooring is to be installed. The -inch deflection limit is important Pro-Shore formwork was used to achieve non-traditional camber
as that is the maximum deflection a standard partition slip track can profiles and reduce the floor-to-floor cycle from 7 to 5 days. The
accommodate. Slab elevations were surveyed at casting, as well as 30, design team met with the crew superintendents to ensure a full

STRUCTURE magazine 55 June 2017

Lobby.
understanding of the design intent was conveyed and to receive
feedback on improving the specified camber profiles and post-tension
layout. The steps required to achieve the soffit profile, before concrete
placement, included:
1) Measure deflection of lowest reshored level during placement;
2) Measure shortening of formwork system during placement;
3) Interpolate values based upon shore location relative to
supports;
4) Agree upon method of strike-off (screeding) during concrete
placement;
5) Add deflection plus formwork shortening to specified camber
values; and
6) Survey and record deck soffit formwork elevations before
placement.
There were preliminary and follow-up discussions regarding what
placement methods would be best for providing the indicated camber
at the tops of the slabs. Since concrete placement strike-off is done with
straight edges, the resulting camber is initially corded. Ordinarily, on
flat building slabs, strike-off is done with screeds measuring up to 20
feet long. After consideration of both production requirements and the
required surface geometry, it was decided by the contractor and engineer
that the maximum screed length would be 10 feet. The direction of
screeding was also discussed and agreement made on a standard direc-
tion. During the first placement, an additional observation was that
ride-on trowel machines, using float pans, had the effect of planing or
leveling the surface, which reduces camber. From this point forward,
neither ride-on machines nor float pans were used. The camber profile
was finished by using walk-behind trowel machines with combination
blades. In addition to setting top profiles with a laser level, both 10-foot
screeds and the use of walk-behind machines contributed in producing
the required camber tolerances at the tops of the slabs.
The ongoing process of taking measurements before and after each
placement provided necessary feedback to the formwork and placing
crews of where the processes needed fine-tuning and helped to keep
the quality consistent. Top-of-slab elevation surveys were made at spe-
cific locations, relative to Project control, so that they could be exactly
repeated for future monitoring.
The result was a design and construction methodology that could be
applied to other multi-story buildings. Understanding long-term slab
deflection characteristics, monitoring as-built tolerances, and incor-
porating predicted slab performance characteristics into the design of
architectural finishes and work scopes after concrete placement and
finishing, aligns expectations through both the design and construc-
tion processes.
STRUCTURE magazine 56
Lobby at night.
Field Verified Embodied Carbon
The Environmental Analysis Tool is an embodied carbon account-
ing methodology and software published as a free download by
SOM at www.som.com. The EA Tool considers embodied carbon
from materials, construction activities, and probable seismic
damage. Embodied carbon accounting metrics were used in all
design decisions and led to an efficient design employing the
use of recycled materials. During construction, engineers made
weekly site visits, creating detailed reports of all construction
activity and equipment used. This information, as well as actual
material information, was used to adjust and validate embod-
ied carbon accounting associated with structural materials and
construction activity from the beginning of excavation through
topping out. Results reveal the EA Tool methodologies are quite
accurate, especially for above-grade work. Results also indicate
that below-grade work is very carbon intensive, more than twice
that of above-grade work.
Performance
Performance is often quantified, but not often proven. For 350 Mission,
seismic performance has been validated through nonlinear time history
analysis, cambered slab deflection analyses have been proven through
numerous surveys, and embodied carbon associated with materials
and construction activity has been verified through field
observations. This assurance in performance is important
to advance design techniques towards a new standard in
building construction and design methodologies.
Mark P. Sarkisian, S.E., is the Structural and Seismic Engineering
Partner of the San Francisco office of SOM. He can be reached at
mark.sarkisian@som.com.
Eric Long, S.E., is a Director and Senior Structural Engineer of the
San Francisco Office of SOM. He can be reached at
eric.long@som.com.
David Shook, P.E., is an Associate Director and Structural
Engineer at the San Francisco office of SOM. He can be reached
at david.shook@som.com.
Eric Peterson is the Construction Manager at Webcor Concrete
and can be reached at ericp@webcor.com.
June 2017
FIBER REINFORCED POLYMER COMPOSITE STRUCTURAL SHAPES & PLATE

FIBERGLASS...
THE STRUCTURAL ALTERNATIVE

Corrosion Lightweight Transparent to High Strength- Low Electrical Maintenance

Resistant EMI & RFI to-Weight Ratio & Thermal Free
Conductivity

VISIT STRONGWELL.COM/STRUCTURE TO LEARN MORE

STRONGWELL PRODUCTS PROUDLY

The World Leader in Pultrusion and Pultruded

FRP Structures & Shapes
ISO-9001 Quality Certified Manufacturing Plants 276-645-8000 info@strongwell.com www.strongwell.com
 Work quickly.
Work simply.
Work accurately.

StructurePoints 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

Get New Solver for

speed & capacity with
Finite element analysis & design of reinforced concrete
Version 8.0 Upgrade!
foundations, combined footings or slabs on grade

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

STR_9-14
 TALL BUILDING
CONSTRUCTION
New Products and Services Keep Pace with Construction Changes for Tall Buildings
By Larry Kahaner
C
ompanies involved in tall building construction are seeing
increased growth thanks to advances in ground improve-
ment, software, and materials.
At Hayward Baker (www.haywardbaker.com), Director
Jeff Hill has seen two significant changes in the specialty geotechnical
construction industry. The first would be the wide-spread acceptance
of ground improvement as a foundation solution. The second is an
increased use of geotechnical instrumentation to streamline design
and allow for real-time subsurface risk mitigation for the owner and
project team alike.
Hill adds a warning, though: From coast to coast in North America,
ground improvement has allowed the use of economic spread footing
foundation solutions. Industry experience and satisfactory building
performance have increased the willingness of engineers and owners
to consider its use further. Perhaps to a fault, however, the acceptance
of these techniques has become so widespread that one might argue
many ground improvement projects would be better suited as tra-
ditional pile supported projects. More bluntly stated, inexperienced
contractors are installing ground improvement on projects that should
be supported on deep foundations. Of course, deep foundations have
been around for centuries and are required where certain unsuitable
soils, larger structure design loads, and allowable settlement criteria
dictate a structural solution instead of ground improvement. Ground
improvement is a terrific tool for SEs to use; however, we must all
understand the limitations. Each projects soil and loading conditions
dictate the use of the correct technique.
Hayward Baker has recently acquired Geo-Instruments of
Narragansett, Rhode Island, which allows HB to add robust geo-
technical instrumentation and real-time monitoring services to their
offerings. Says Hill: Over the past decade, geotechnical instrumen-
tation and monitoring systems have advanced to the point where
STRUCTURE magazine 59
everyone on the project team can now be fully aware of project
performance. In some cases, data can be obtained and plotted within
minutes or even seconds of collection. Although there is an added cost
to provide these cutting edge services, the added value outweighs its
cost through the use of more efficient designs and quicker evaluation
of the projects geotechnical risk. Real-time monitoring can be so
effective at mitigating or managing risks that projects once deemed
un-constructible, or too risky for the owner, may now become viable.
(See ad on page 58.)
StructurePoint (www.structurepoint.org), formerly the Engineering
Software Group of the Portland Cement Association (PCA), continues
to develop and enhance the full range of advanced PCA software and
engineering services to model, analyze, and design reinforced con-
crete structures, according to Tim Schulz, the companys Marketing
Coordinator. Our newly released spColumn v5.50 program features a
dynamic spSection module to create and modify irregular sections, and
a 3D failure surface viewer to investigate biaxial runs more thoroughly.
Additionally, our spMats program now utilizes a sophisticated FEM
solver to expedite solution of large-scale, complex models. Equipped
with the latest American (ACI 318-14) and Canadian (CSA A23.3-
14) concrete codes, StructurePoint software assists engineers to work
quickly, simply, and accurately.
He says that now, more than ever, engineers are asked to meet the
rising demand for new construction as infrastructure spending trends
positively. Clients not only use our continuously developing soft-
ware, but they benefit from our engineers experience in the concrete
industry to relieve heavy workloads, augment their staff, and advise
on all of their concrete project needs, says Schulz, who encourages
engineers to visit their website. Our websites improved layout show-
cases design examples which aim to expedite the learning process for
engineers who are new to reinforced concrete design. For experienced
June 2017
engineers, the design examples are packed with time-saving design
aides, detailed code references, estimating guidelines and in-depth
solutions for deflection calculations.
Schulz says that StructurePoint continues to grow as they gain the
acceptance and confidence of new users worldwide and retain the
trust of established clients. In a competitive engineering marketplace
with tightening budgets and global competition, our focus remains
on the improvement of our suite of concrete design software as well
as the support and resources we provide. North American engineers
are challenged to compete for global projects and to complete them
more rapidly than ever before. In these situations, StructurePoint
software is employed effectively to design quickly without compro-
mising quality or exceeding costs.
Amy Heilig, CEO, U.S. Office of Dlubal (www.dlubal.com/en-US),
would like SEs to know about a recent addition to their software
line. Design per the Aluminum Design Manual 2015 (ADM) was
recently added to our nonlinear FEA software. RFEM is now com-
plete with a wide array of multi-material design capabilities per
U.S. and Canadian standards, including steel, reinforced concrete,
timber, and aluminum. Also, we have designs for specialized niche
markets such as glass, cross-laminated timber (CLT), and tensile
fabric structures. She notes: RFEM continues to be the favorable
choice for engineering projects which are not exactly in the simple
and easy classification. The CAD-like features allow complex ele-
ment geometries to be modeled, loaded, and analyzed in a matter of
minutes. For example, an ASCE 7 Response Spectra Analysis with
ADVERTISEMENTFor Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org
RFEM 5 Powerful, Intuitive & Easy
Structural Analysis
& Design Software
Steel
Aluminum
Glass
Kauffman Center for
DOWNLOAD JOIN US
the Performing Arts
Kansas City, MI, USA
www.novumstructures.com
FREE TRIAL June 1-2, 2017
SEAoA Conference
Tucson, AZ
June 7, 2017
www.dlubal.com SEAoP Conference
Villanova, PA
STRUCTURE magazine 61
seismic equivalent loads is generated on each FE element independent
of a structures size or shape. Material and geometric nonlinearities
also give users the advantage over other software to narrow in on a
structures complicated behavior.
Heilig says that, since establishing their Philadelphia office in 2015,
they see an upward trend for business. Our customer database has
increased with new U.S. and Canadian engineering companies eager
to utilize our design software. Our current customers also have
continued to add to their existing licenses with additional seats and
more design modules, indicating their satisfaction with RFEM and
the technical support we have provided them.
She understands that engineers are growing tired of using structural
software that does not meet their demand or is too expensive to con-
sider. We pride ourselves on a product that was created by engineers
for engineers, says Heilig. We can guarantee its one of the most
user-friendly analysis and design program you will ever use. And
considering the powerful capabilities RFEM has for contact surfaces,
fabric form-finding ability, and material nonlinearities, to name a
few, the software is still affordable. RFEM is the global solution for
structural analysis, and we intend to continue development to keep
up with new structural engineering demands.
To some in the industry for a long time, the idea of what consti-
tutes a tall building has evolved. Geopier Foundation Companys
(www.geopier.com) Director of Business Development, Matt Caskey,
says that the company was challenged and excited to work on a
16-story hospital tower in Atlanta in 1992. Those of us in the ground
Concrete Timber
Tanks CLT
Piping Cables
LACKNER + RAML Ziviltechniker GmbH
www.lackner-raml.at
Dlubal Software, Inc.
Philadelphia, PA
(267) 702-2815
info-us@dlubal.com
www.dlubal.com
June 2017
 improvement design-build industry may have a different definition of
Now the company finds that, after years of demonstrated success with
tall building than most structural engineers, but, back in 1992, 16
their ground improvement systems as well as consistent advancements
stories seemed really tall. Before the mid-1990s, ground improvement
to their technologies, it is supporting more tall buildings even those
systems were primarily used for small buildings on the worst-of-the-
on very poor sites. Says Caskey: Geopier Rammed Aggregate Piers
worst sites or where the building design was severely impacted by
were installed to support the twin 18-story towers of the Marquee
seismic concerns. Structural engineers began to notice the successful
at Park Place condominiums in Irvine, California in 2004, where
performance of buildings supported on Geopier ground improvementtypical PGA values can range from 0.3 to 0.7g. The Geopier Impact
systems and slowly developed confidence that Geopier systems could
technology was used for foundation support and liquefaction miti-
support the heavy loads associated with taller buildings. Our idea of
gation for the 20-story Edificio Parque Manuel Rodriguez building
a tall building began to change. in Concepcin, Chile, one of the most seismically active regions
in the world. The soil conditions at this
site consisted of layered deposits of loose
sandy soil.
He notes: A more recent Geopier
rigid inclusion system, the Geopier
GeoConcrete Column (GCC), has
GEOPIER GROUND IMPROVEMENT been used to support tall buildings on
sites with deep deposits of very soft clay
CONTROLS STRUCTURE SETTLEMENT and peat. GCCs were used to support
the 12-story Grand Condominiums in
Cambridge, Ontario. The condominiums
have column loads as high as 1,500 kips
and mat pressures as high as 8,000 psf
and were built on top of soft and organic
soils to depths of 27 feet. Deep deposits
of soft and organic soil also led struc-
tural designers to choose GeoConcrete
Columns to support the 14-story College
Avenue Office Building in New Haven,
ADVERTISEMENTFor Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

Connecticut. For this tall building, the

GCC system eliminated the need for
dewatering and spoils removal from the
job site, and supported the foundation
bearing pressure of 9,500 psf.
Concludes Caskey: Developing efficient
Geopier design solutions for taller build-
ings is always an exciting and challenging
task for our engineers. The design process
works best when the structural design-
ers share load reactions and, sometimes,
even help with finite element models
to better understand pressure distribu-
tions on larger mat foundations. We are
honored that the structural design com-
munity has confidence designing with
GIVE YOUR STRUCTURE STABILIT Y
Geopier ground improvement systems for
their high-profile, tall buildings, and we
Work with Geopiers geotechnical engineers to solve your ground intend always to validate that confidence.
improvement challenges. Submit your project specifications to When it comes to assessments, ICC
Evaluation Service, LLC (ICC-ES)
receive a customized feasibility assessment and preliminary cost
(www.icc-es.org), is the nations most rec-
estimate at geopier.com/feasibilityrequest. ognized and accepted product evaluation
agency, says William Gould, Vice-
800-371-7470 President, External Relations and Client
geopier.com Services. Were an ANSI accredited, a
info@geopier.com non-profit subsidiary of the International
Code Council (ICC) (www.iccsafe.org),
the parent organization that develops the
I-codes.
continued on page 64

STRUCTURE magazine 62 June 2017

 We certify the following
CLT Related Products:
Metal Connectors and Shear Connectors
Wood Screws, Nails and Tapping Screws
Adhesives and Tapes
Gypsum Boards and Sheathings
Thermal and Moisture Protection Materials
Fire-resistant Coatings and Fire Stops
Sound Proofing Materials

Certify Your Cross Laminated Timber

(CLT) Products with ICC-ES!
ICC Evaluation Service (ICC-ES) certifies Cross-Laminated Timber products for compliance
with ANSI/APA PRG 320 Standard for Performance-Rated Cross-Laminated Timber

ICC-ES Evaluation Reports are the most widely accepted and trusted technical reports for code
compliance. When you specify products or materials with an ICC-ES report, you avoid delays on
project and improve your bottom line.

ICC-ES provides a one-stop shop for the evaluation, listing and now testing of innovative building
products through our newly formed cooperation with Innovation Research Labs, a highly respected
ISO 17025 accredited testing lab with over 50 years of experience.

ICC-ES is a subsidiary of ICC, the publisher of the codes used throughout the U.S.
and many global markets, so you can be confident in their code expertise.

WWW.ICC-ES.ORG | 800-423-6587 x3877

17-13998
15-11191
 Over the past few months, we have issued many evaluation reports
to manufacturers of innovative products for compliance with the
requirements of the International Building Code (IBC), says Gould.
We work with both domestic and international building product
manufacturers and our service culminates in the publication of an
evaluation report. This offers a huge benefit to product manufacturers
seeking to grow their business since the ICC-ES Mark of Conformity
is so well recognized by Building Officials and inspectors. ICC-ES
evaluation reports are also a means of differentiation for manufac-
turers. Those who obtain them are typically the best manufacturers
with the highest quality products. Our evaluation services remain the
same, but the scope of products that we evaluate has continued to
grow each year. Many new products with ICC-ES evaluation reports
are used by SEs in the design of todays complex structures and tall
buildings. Knowing that they have ICC-ES evaluation reports provides
peace of mind and assurance that the products meet stringent code
requirements. Our product evaluations include examining product
quality, strength, effectiveness, fire resistance, durability, and safety
according to IBC Section 104.11.
ICC-ES recently issued an evaluation report to a Cross-Laminated
Timber (CLT) manufacturer (Structurlam ESR-3631) for compli-
ance of their mass timber product with ICC-ES AC455 Acceptance
ADVERTISEMENTFor Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org
Ready to Make the Change?
Epoxy Coated
Specify ChrmX 4100 Rebar ASTM A1035 CM
TODAYS STEEL STANDARD
Call us 866.466.7878 Lower Installed Cost | Faster Construction Schedule
Visit us www.mmfx.com Improved Performance and Site Safety | Uncoated
STRUCTURE magazine 64
Criteria for Cross-Laminated Timber Panels for Use as Components
in Roof and Floor Decks. Says Gould: CLT is being used for floor
systems in a number of signature building projects throughout the
U.S. and Europe. Although the IBC currently allows CLT for use in
buildings up to six stories, it holds great promise for use in taller wood
buildings. The ICC Ad Hoc Committee on Tall Wood Buildings is
studying this topic and may propose future code changes pertaining to
CLT. We have also issued many evaluation reports for wood fasteners
and hangers under ICC-ES AC233 Acceptance Criteria for Alternate
Dowel-Type Threaded Fasteners and ICC-ES AC13 Acceptance Criteria
for Joist Hangers and Similar Devices that are used for attachments to
and connections of wood members. Fastener and connector product
development continue to be very dynamic as a result of cutting-edge
technology, and manufacturers of these types of products are key
players in the industry.
Hows business? Business is strong and indicative of the construc-
tion market in general. More product manufacturers need evaluation
reports and are applying to ICC-ES for them because they trust us.
Thats a good thing for the industry, says Gould.
Business is picking up especially in high-rise buildings and
infrastructure, according to MMFX Technologies Corporations
(www.mmfx.com) President and CEO, Michael Pompay. The
4100
June 2017
construction trend of building higher with a narrow footprint to
make the most of the space is driving demand for high-strength steel
products. MMFX is on the forefront of this trend and has been pushing
the advantages of using high-strength for years. We are now feeling
a market pull due to the demand for high-strength applications and
realization of the benefits derived from designing at 100 ksi. We also
see a trend toward corrosion resistance. Designers are focused on the
longevity of the structures more than ever. Owners, developers and
departments of transportation are demanding better quality, longer
lasting structures with reduced maintenance.
Pompay explains: MMFX Steel Corporation offers a Grade 100
concrete reinforcing steel for use in high-rise buildings. ChrmX 2100,
sold under the specification ASTM A1035 CL, can be used at its 100
ksi yield strength to reduce congestion and improve design efficiencies
of piles, columns, beams, slabs, mat foundations, and shear walls.
High-strength designs can improve constructability. As real estate
becomes more precious and pricey, especially in densely populated
cities, multi-use, high-rise buildings are being built taller and nar-
rower than ever before. The resulting rebar congestion limits the
constructability and height of these structures when applying lower-
grade designs. Designs at 100 ksi, now available through the ACI and
ICC design standards, reduce rebar congestion, allowing buildings
to reach new heights, he says.
High-strength, 100 ksi designs also generate construction efficien-
cies that save money and time. When properly utilized, high-strength
designs result in substantial savings in materials, labor, and logistics.
For instance, mat foundations are thinned, saving on excavation.
Efficiencies are applied to add value to a building. For example, col-
umns are narrowed, increasing usable office or living space.
ChrmX 2100 is the latest addition to the MMFX high-strength
concrete reinforcing product lines that provide over 100 ksi yield
strength with varying corrosion resistant properties. This allows
designers to utilize the high-strength efficiencies and select the cor-
rosion resistance that matches the environment and targeted service
life of the structure, Pompay says. ChrmX 2100 (ASTM A1035
CL) joins ChrmX 9100 (ASTM A1035 CS) and ChrmX 4100
(ASTM A1035 CM) to round out our product offering. ChrmX
2100 is the lower corrosion-resistant of our products and provides
the high-strength properties at the lowest cost, perfect for high-rise
construction where corrosion is less of a concern.
John Cooper, District Manager, Complex Composite Group at
Vulcraft/Verco Group (www.vulcraft.com), says that business con-
tinues to be strong. Like everyone in the structural steel business,
we will always face challenges. However, Vulcrafts superior product
offerings, coupled with a tireless desire to provide unmatched customer
experience through every phase of a project, results in greater success
for our clients, which means more jobs, more money, and a greater
level of assurance for our customers.
The company has introduced the Vulcraft PunchLok II system, which
utilizes the PunchLok II tool to achieve higher shear values at less cost
through high-quality, side-seam attachments, says Cooper. Used in
conjunction with Vulcrafts interlocking deck products, the pneu-
matic PunchLok II tool is a fast, effective, high-volume tool. It is
STRUCTURE magazine
manufactured by Verco Decking, Inc., a Nucor Company, exclusively
for use with Vulcrafts 1.5PLB and 3.0PLN, 1.5 PLVLI, 2.0PLVLI, and
3.0PLVLI steel deck. He adds: Although the PunchLok II system is new
to the Eastern and Midwest states, it has been widely used and proven
on the West Coast by Verco Decking, Inc., since 2002. This system
was created from Vercos culture of innovation and a relentless drive to
develop a solution with enough diaphragm shear capacity for the high
seismic forces in the region. Los Angeles requires about 1500plf dia-
phragm shear for a typical big box retail store. The result, says Cooper,
was the highest possible shear with the lowest possible cost using the
PunchLok II system. The revolutionary high-performance steel deck
diaphragm system is recognized by FM, UL, ICC-ES, and IAPMO.
According to Cooper, some advantages of the Vulcraft PunchLok
II system are:
Requires no touch-up from either the top side or the bottom
side of the deck;
Provides a completely weld-free system when used in
conjunction with mechanical fasteners at supports;
100% effective from the first attachment of the day to the last
attachment of the day;
100% accuracy of inspection of the attachment from the
topside of the deck;
Stronger and more effective than conventional button
punches; and
Stronger, more effective, and more economical than screwed
side laps.
As for trends, Cooper says that mechanical fasteners continue to be
the deck installers method of choice to provide a required attach-
ment pattern of the metal deck to meet project design loads. The
PunchLok II system works hand-in-hand with these fasteners; their
allowable diaphragm shear strength values are published in our Design
Guide. (See ad on page 66.)
We are very excited about the latest S-FOUNDATION 2017
release that improves on the ability of structural engineers to easily
generate foundations of any kind and shape (including piles), with
any number of holes, pedestals, and walls, says Marinos Stylianou,
CEO of S-Frame Software (www.s-frame.com). When engineers
realize the simplicity and power of the modern user interface of
S-FOUNDATION, they immediately understand the direct benefits
to their organization. Also, recent release updates for S-FRAME
Analysis, S-CONCRETE, S-STEEL, and S-CALC added improved
functionality and integration.
As far as industry trends, Stylianou sees movement toward design
solutions with strong visibility into the analytical solution. Engineers
want the solution quickly and easily, but they also want the ability to
verify how the software arrived at the results. That is why S-Frame
Software has long incorporated open-solution strategies in its products.
Now engineers are looking for something that is one step beyond,
a software solution that allows users to customize how the software
behaves if the out-of-the-box solution doesnt meet their needs. That is
another major industry trend: customization. Our new generation of
products incorporates the ability for users to customize and automate
design processes. S-FRAME Softwares implementation of automation
65 June 2017
Leveraging technology
and forward thinking.
At Vulcraft, we believe its crucial to constantly
push the boundaries of product innovation.
To give our customers the tools to get the job
done better than ever before. Our pioneering
efforts in product development make satisfying
your needs effective and affordable.

With Vulcraft, you can expect success from start

to finish. We provide peace of mind by being
better partners, offering better products and
ensuring better outcomes. Every time.

Learn how Vulcraft delivers better outcomes.

www.vulcraft.com

The
PunchLok II System
is the result of our unwavering
commitment to product innovation.
It was created because we saw a
need for a deck system that enabled
faster installation, yeilding higher
shear values, and ultimately
saved our customers
more money.

Better Partners. Better Products.

Better Outcomes.
is a first of its kind in this industry. It has taken our users a while to
understand the power they now have at their fingertips. When they
UPCOMING
realize it, however, they immediately understand the direct benefits
to their organization. They can customize the software so it follows ADVERTORIALS
their own workflow and then deploy it throughout their organization
with the built-in library feature.
Stylianou adds: We have noticed a definite increase in demand for JULY - Seismic/Wind
structural engineering analysis and design software since the fourth
quarter of 2016, and the trend has continued through the first AUGUST - Software
quarter of 2017. This has been helped, in part, by increased demand
from the oil and gas industry which is benefiting from higher oil NOVEMBER - Concrete
prices. Weve seen strong growth in the U.S. and Asia especially from
companies that chose to use our advanced structural
analysis and design platform for newer trend-setting For interview opportunities on these topics,
tall buildings. Having software tools that are versatile contact advert@STRUCTUREmag.org.
enough to work for any industry type or region has
been a key differentiator for us.

Tall Buildings guide expertise in tall building design and construction

American Wood Council CAST CONNEX CTS Cement Manufacturing Corporation

Phone: 202-463-2766
Email: info@awc.org
Web: www.awc.org/tallwood
Product: Tall Wood
Description: Tall wood defines mass timber
buildings that exceed the height limit for wood
buildings set by the current International Building
Code. Mass timber includes any product currently
permitted for use in Type IV construction such
as cross laminated timber, structural composite
lumber, glued-laminated timber, and large section
sawn lumber.
Phone: 416-806-3521
Email: info@castconnex.com
Web: www.castconnex.com
Product: High Integrity Blocks
Description: Ultra-heavy, weldable, solid steel
sections which exhibit up to 65 ksi yield strength in
all three directions of loading and through the full
cross-section. Ideal for use within the center of multi-
axis loaded connections or where the lamination of
multiple steel plates is not advisable.
Phone: 800-929-3030
Email: jong@ctscement.com
Web: www.ctscement.com
Product: Rapid Set Cement Products and Komponent
Type-K Shrinkage-Compensating Cement
Description: Use Rapid Set cement products for
concrete repairs, restoration, and new construction.
Achieve high durability, fast strength gain, and
structural or drive-on strength in one-hour. Install
concrete structures and industrial-size floors using
Type-K shrinkage-compensating cement products
with no curling, no drying shrinkage cracking, and no
intermediate saw cut joints.

Applied Science International, LLC
Phone: 919-645-4090
Email: support@appliedscienceint.com
Web: www.appliedscienceint.com
Product: Extreme Loading for Structures
Description: A new advanced level of nonlinear
dynamic structural analysis; allows users to
efficiently study structural failure from any
number of actual or possible extreme events.
Unlike traditional FEM software, users can easily
model high-rise structures composed of reinforced
concrete, steel composite, and other structures with
as-built and as-damaged details.
Concrete Masonry Association
of California & Nevada
Phone: 916-722-1700
Email: info@cmacn.org
Web: CMACN.org
Product: CMD15 Design Tool for Masonry
Description: Structural design of reinforced
concrete and clay hollow unit masonry elements
for design of masonry elements in accordance with
provisions of Ch. 21 2010 through 2016 CBC or
2009 through 2015 IBC and 2008 through 2013
Building Code Requirements for Masonry Structures
(TMS 402/ACI 530/ASCE 5).
Dlubal Software, Inc.
Phone: 267-702-2815
Email: info-us@dlubal.com
Web: www.dlubal.com
Product: RFEM
Description: Complete with USA/International
Standards for steel, concrete, timber, CLT, glass,
and aluminum, the user-friendly software allows for
efficient modeling, a powerful non-linear analysis
and highly detailed design results for all multi-
material tall buildings. Direct interfaces with BIM
and CAD software incorporate seamless and bi-
directional data exchange.

continued on next page

Information on Advertising Opportunities can be found in STRUCTUREs Media Kit. For a digital copy, visit
www.STRUCTUREmag.org under the For Advertisers tab. Or, email sales@STRUCTUREmag.org for assistance.

STRUCTURE magazine 67 June 2017

Tall Buildings guide
Intergraph
Phone: 281-890-4566
Email: query.icas@intergraph.com
Web: www.coade.com/products/gtstrudl
Product: GT STRUDL
Description: For more than 45 years, structural
engineers have trusted GT STRUDL for
their structural analysis. The software offers a
comprehensive frame and finite element analysis
solution for steel and concrete designs. Includes all
the tools necessary to analyze a variety of structural
engineering and finite element analysis problems.
PFS TECO
Phone: 608-839-1013
Email: steve.winistorfer@pfsteco.com
Web: www.pfsteco.com
Product: Certification, inspection and Testing Services
Description: Employee-owned, independent,
third-party certification and testing agency for
manufacturers of EWPs (including cross laminated
timber), panels products, building components, and
hearth products; and is an approved IPIA/DAPIA for
HUD-code manufactured housing.
RISA Technologies
Phone: 949-951-5815
Email: info@risa.com
Web: www.risa.com
Product: RISAFloor
Description: RISAFloor and RISA-3D form an
unrivaled building analysis and design package.
Modeling has never been easier whether youre
doing a graphical layout, importing a BIM
model (from Autodesk Revit Structure), or prefer
spreadsheets. Full code checks and optimization
for six different material types makes RISA your
first choice in buildings.
S-FRAME Software
Phone: 604-273-7737
Email: info@s-frame.com
Web: www.s-frame.com
Product: S-CONCRETE
Description: For designing and detailing reinforced-
concrete column, beam, and wall sections. Optimize
a single section or evaluate thousands of concrete
sections at once. S-CONCRETE generates
comprehensive reports that include clause references,
equations employed, intermediate results, and
diagrams. Latest release includes Eurocode 2 updates,
ADAPT Builder Wall Design integration.
Product: S-FOUNDATION
Description: S-FOUNDATION Pro 2017 released!
New pile features include soil definitions to calculate
deflections, axial forces, compression, and tension
along the depth of each pile. Quickly and easily
define and detail pile supported foundations.
Seamlessly transfer model data from S-FRAME
Analysis or easily import support data from 3rd
party analysis software.
STRUCTURE magazine
expertise in tall building design and construction
Simpson Strong-Tie
Phone: 800-925-5099
Email: web@strongtie.com
Web: www.strongtie.com
Product: SC Bypass Framing Slide-Clip Connector
Description: SC connectors are the optimal
solution for slide-clip bypass framing, especially
in high-seismic regions. They can be welded to
the structure or attached with concrete screws
or powder-actuated fasteners through anchorage
holes in the clip. The clips are manufactured using
heavy-duty steel to provide exceptional resistance to
in-plane seismic load.
Product: CFS Designer V2.0 Software
Description: With the CFS Designer, you can design
CFS beam-column members according to AISI
specifications and analyze complex beam loading
and span conditions. Intuitive design tools automate
common CFS systems such as wall openings,
shearwalls, floor joists, and, with the newest software
update, up to eight stories of load-bearing studs.
Standards Design Group, Inc
Phone: 800-366-5585
Email: info@standardsdesign.com
Web: www.standardsdesign.com
Product: Wind Loads on Structures 4
Description: Performs computations in ASCE 7-10,
Chapters 26-31 and ASCE 7-98, 02, 05, Section 6.
Computes wind loads by analytical method rather
than the simplified method, provides basic wind
speeds from a built-in version of the wind speed,
allows the user to enter wind speed. WLS4 has
numerous specialty calculators.
Product: Window Glass Design 5
Description: Performs all required calculations to
design window glass according to ASTM E 1300-09.
WGD5 also performs window glass design using
ASTM E 1300 02/03/04, ASTM E 1300-98/00 and
ASTM E 1300-94. GANA endorses WGD5 as best
tool available in designing window glass to resist
wind and long-term loadings.
Strand7 Pty Ltd
Phone: 252-504-2282
Email: anne@beaufort-analysis.com
Web: www.strand7.com
Product: Strand7
Description: A general-purpose FEA system
comprising integrated pre- and post-processing
and solvers. Used for linear and nonlinear analysis
of structures and components (static, dynamic
and heat transfer). Strand7 has gained worldwide
acceptance as a powerful tool for structural analysis,
particularly nonlinear analysis.
All Resource Guide forms for the 2017 Editorial Calendar are now available at www.STRUCTUREmag.org.
Listings are provided as a courtesy. STRUCTURE magazine is not responsible for errors.
68 June 2017
StructurePoint
Phone: 847-966-4357
Email: info@structurepoint.org
Web: www.structurepoint.org
Product: spBundle
Description: Recently upgraded to include
ACI 318-14 and CSA A23.3-14, the remaining
programs in our software bundle (spSlab, spBeam,
spWall, spMats, spFrame) compliment spColumn
for complete reinforced concrete building design
including floor systems, beams, cast-in-place walls,
tilt-up walls, commercial building foundations, pile
caps, and slabs on grade.
Product: spColumn
Description: Featuring a flexible graphical interface
in the new spSection module for creating and
modifying irregular sections, spColumn is used
for design and investigation of columns, shear
walls, bridge piers, and typical framing elements in
buildings and other structures subject to combined
axial and flexural loads.
Trimble
Phone: 770-426-5105
Email: kristine.plemmons@trimble.com
Web: www.tekla.com
Product: Tekla Structures
Description: Move from design-oriented to
construction-oriented engineering and enable
structural engineers improved additional services.
Through our open and collaborative software
environment, you can work with other disciplines
and reduce RFIs. From concept to completion, Tekla
software gives you collaboration and control.
Product: Tedds
Description: A powerful software that will speed
up daily structural and civil calculations, Tedds
automates repetitive structural calculations.
Perform 2D Frame analysis, utilize a large library of
automated calculations to US codes, or write your
own calculations while creating high quality and
transparent documentation.
WoodWorks Software
Phone: 800-844-1275
Email: sales@woodworks-software.com
Web: www.woodworks-software.com
Product: WoodWorks Design Office
Description: Conforms to IBC 2015, ASCE7-
10, NDS 2015, SDPWS 2015; SHEARWALLS:
designs perforated and segmented shearwalls;
generates loads; rigid and flexible diaphragm
distribution methods. SIZER: designs beams,
columns, studs, joists up to 6 stories; automatic load
patterning. CONNECTIONS: Wood to: wood,
steel, or concrete. Canadian version available.
 This new upgrade
is easier than ever,
which says a lot!

Structural Software
Easy. Versatile. Productive.

Get VisualAnalysis today: www.iesweb.com

Then get results!

800.707.0816
info@iesweb.com

InSIghtS
new trends, new techniques
and current industry issues
Punching of Slabs
A Discussion on
the Development of
the Delamination of
Concrete Cover in
the Soffit of the Slab
By Aurelio Muttoni, Ph.D.,
Miguel Fernndez Ruiz, Ph.D.,
and Joo T. Simes
Aurelio Muttoni is a Professor at
cole Polytechnique Fdrale de
Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
He can be reached at aurelio.
muttoni@epfl.ch.
Miguel Fernndez Ruiz is a Senior
Lecturer at cole Polytechnique
Fdrale de Lausanne, Lausanne,
Switzerland. He can be reached at
miguel.fernandezruiz@epfl.ch.
Joo T. Simes is a PhD student
at cole Polytechnique Fdrale
de Lausanne, Lausanne,
Switzerland. He can be reached
at Joao.simoes@epfl.ch.
P
unching shear behavior is a topic that has
attracted much attention from engineers
in the last decades because of several col-
lapses caused by punching shear failures.
Introducing transverse reinforcement is the most
common solution when the geometry of the slab-
column connection has to be maintained and
punching shear resistance has to be increased. To
that aim, several transverse reinforcement systems
may be used, not only to increase the punching
shear resistance but also to significantly increase
the deformation capacity and the residual strength
after a local failure. If usual detailing rules are ful-
filled, the design of slabs with shear reinforcement
is governed by one of the following three poten-
tial failure modes: 1) crushing of the concrete
struts in the column vicinity (maximum shear
strength, see Figure 1a); 2) punching within the
shear reinforcement (governing the dimensioning
of the transverse reinforcement, Figure 1b); and
3) punching outside the shear-reinforced region
(governing the dimensioning of the
size of the zone with shear reinforce-
ment), Figure 1c.
Several experimental investigations
of slabs with transverse reinforce-
ment available in the literature have
revealed the development of horizontal cracking
at the height of the compression reinforcement,
which can be seen as a delamination of the con-
crete cover in the soffit of the slab. Questions
might arise whether its potential occurrence influ-
ences or even governs the punching shear behavior
and whether this effect should be accounted for
in the design. To investigate the influence of this
phenomenon, the origin and the development of
such cracking should be understood. According
to the several test programs, the phenomena lead-
ing to cover delamination appear to be multiple.
Several authors of experimental studies have
mentioned that delamination of concrete cover in
the soffit of the slab could be observed before fail-
ure, even in cases where failures were shown to be
within the shear-reinforced region or by crushing
of concrete struts. This has also been observed in
(a)
(c)
Figure 1. Different failure modes of flat slabs with shear reinforcement: a) crushing of concrete struts; b) failure
within the shear-reinforced region; c) failure outside the shear-reinforced region; d) failure by delamination.
70 June 2017
slabs with shear reinforcement recently tested by
the authors and presenting a failure due to crush-
ing of concrete struts (Figure 2). The origin of this
delamination can be explained by the tangential
strains developing at the column vicinity as a
function of the rotation of the slab (Equation 1).
(Et=
c Equation 1
r
Where is the rotation of the slab, r the radial
distance from the center of the column, and c
the height of the compression zone. For large
rotations, tangential strains in the vicinity of the
column may largely exceed the peak uniaxial
strain of concrete (more than 0.5% in many
cases). The concrete cover, which is not confined
by any reinforcement, enters a softening stage and
a strain localization (horizontal cracking) occurs
at the level of the compression reinforcement.
This effect becomes more pronounced for large
rotations, which are normally observed in slender
slabs with shear reinforcement. The delamina-
tion of the concrete cover typically occurs in the
critical shear region and reduces the lever arm
in both radial and tangential directions. This
phenomenon may constitute a limitation of the
maximum punching shear strength. The impact of
this effect on the efficiency of different transverse
reinforcement systems deserves further research.
Another common situation where delamination
is observed occurs in a punching failure outside the
shear-reinforced region. In this case, an inclined
shear crack develops between the flexural rein-
forcement and the bottom of the last perimeter
of transverse reinforcement (Figure 1c), together
with horizontal cracking joining the bottom of
the inclined shear crack and the column face.
The Model Code for Concrete Structures 2010
(International Federation for Structural Concrete)
already accounts for this phenomenon in the
punching shear design for a failure outside the
shear-reinforced area (considers a reduced effec-
tive depth).
Delamination of the concrete cover under
transverse reinforcement can also occur when
(b)
(d)
 INTRODUCING DRIFT
Figure 2. Specimen tested by the authors with failure due to crushing of concrete struts near the column;
pronounced delamination observed in the soffit of the slab. FASTCLIP SLIDE CLIP.
a large tangential distance between rows of failure mode. In this case, the inclination of Need a deection solution that
transverse reinforcement is present in a radial the failure surface in the areas between the also accommodates horizontal
and particularly in a cruciform arrangement. transverse reinforcement rows is flatter than
drift? Drift FastClip allows 2-inch
In these cases, inclined shear cracks might that developing in the regions of transverse
start developing first in between the rows reinforcement (Figure 3b). vertical and lateral deection,
of transverse reinforcement, followed by a To deal with the development of non-uni- and works with FastClip screws
tangential propagation until reaching the form failure surface, codes normally limit for friction-free sliding. Get
transverse reinforcement elements. If the both 1) the tangential distance between more details and data at
amount of transverse reinforcement is low, rows of transverse reinforcement at the loca-

ADVERTISEMENTFor Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

a failure within the shear-reinforced area can
occur. On the other hand, if a large amount
of shear reinforcement is used, two situations
can follow:
If the last perimeter of shear reinforcement
is not sufficiently distant from the column to
avoid a punching failure outside the shear-
reinforced area, the inclined cracks already
formed in between the rows of transverse
reinforcement will tend to propagate tangen-
tially through the formation of a separation
crack (delamination) at the level of the com-
pression reinforcement (without crossing
the transverse reinforcement elements). This
will be completed by inclined shear cracks
around the rows of transverse of reinforce-
ment (Figure 3a).
If the last perimeter of shear reinforcement
is sufficiently distant from the column, crush-
ing of concrete struts will be the governing
clarkdietrich.com.
tion of the control perimeter, and 2) the
maximal distance of straight lines of the
outer control perimeter.
Finally, when some important detailing rules
are not respected, delamination may also
occur (Figure 1d). This is the case of transverse
reinforcement not embracing the flexural
compression and tension reinforcement,
which leads to a slab cover delamination and
premature failure, although usually associated
with large deformation capacities.
In conclusion, delamination of the compres-
sion zone is mostly a matter of poor detailing:
transverse reinforcement units too distant in
the transversal direction, and cover of trans-
verse reinforcement too large.
The online version of this article
contains detailed references. Please visit
www.STRUCTUREmag.org.
2017 ClarkDietrich Building Systems

Figure 3. Scheme of punching shear failures with non-uniform location of the failure surface: clarkdietrich.com
a) failure outside the shear-reinforced region; b) failure by concrete crushing.

STRUCTURE magazine 71 June 2017

CD17070_Clips_Structure_ThirdPg_VertAd_June17.indd 15/11/17 11:58 AM
Historic structures
Sciotoville Bridge
By Frank Griggs, Jr., Dist. M.ASCE, D.Eng., P.E., P.L.S.
T
he Sciotoville Bridge, designed by
Gustav Lindenthal (STRUCTURE,
August 2010) over the Ohio River,
is located about 90 miles upstream
from Cincinnati. The Chesapeake and Ohio
Railroad, in order to make Chicago accessible
for its coal-carrying trains out of Kentucky, built
a 30-mile line from its tracks in Edgington,
Kentucky northerly across the Ohio River
to Waverly where it connected with a line to
Columbus, Ohio and then on to Chicago. The
Ohio was about 1,500 feet across at the selected
site, with bedrock only 10 feet or so below low
water. The Ohio had been bridged for railroads
several times by Jacob Hays Linville and others,
starting with the Steubenville, Parkersburg, and
Benville Bridges upstream and downstream at
Cincinnati. The railroad was looking for a twin
track structure that would meet demands of
the War Department to provide for passage
of steamboats.
Lindenthal, as was his custom, looked at all
types of bridges that had been used to carry
heavy railroad loadings over long spans. He
determined that a continuous truss with two
spans of 775 feet best met the site conditions.
The fact that rock was accessible at a shallow
depth removed one of the factors that ruled
against continuous spans in the past settle-
ments of the central piers could be eliminated.
The other reason continuous spans were not
adopted, with notable exceptions of C. Shaler
Smiths Lachine Rapids Bridge (STRUCTURE,
April 2017) across the St. Lawrence and
Lindenthals two smaller, shorter span continu-
ous spans in the Pittsburgh area in 1883 and
1890, was the difficulty in making calculations
for an indeterminate structure. He indicated
that temperature effects were minimized in his
design with a fixed support at the river pier and
rollers at the abutments. With the help of O.
H. Ammann and D. B. Steinman, Lindenthal
designed the longest continuous span in the
United States. The main advantages of the
continuous structure were savings in material
and its ability to be constructed by cantilever
methods. He estimated savings in the mate-
rial of nearly 25%, with an increased rigidity
when compared to a cantilever bridge and an
equal rigidity when compared to the simple span
truss. He also stated, From the esthetic point of
view, the continuous bridge can well compete
with the simple span or cantilever, if properly
designed, but not with the more artistic arch or
suspension bridge.
STRUCTURE magazine
significant structures of the past
Lindenthal incorporated a unique inverted
two-hinged arch, building the floor beams into
the verticals, with the thrust at the upper ends
being taken by the upper lateral bracing This
design allowed for smaller floor beams to span
the distance between trusses, which were 38 feet
9 inches center-to-center.
First, he designed trusses with 16-inch eye
bars for all tension members that would not
see a reversal of stress under live load. He then
designed all members built up of riveted mem-
bers and fully riveted connections and requested
bids on both designs. The cost of steel came in
lower with the eye bars, but he chose the fully
riveted structure in view of its superior rigid-
ity, durability, and safety. Moreover, finally,
Lindenthal calculated the secondary stresses
that would occur under normal erection pro-
cedures and found them very high. He wrote,
on account of the rigid truss connections; it
was considered advisable to reduce the second-
ary stresses as far as possible, not only near the
center support but throughout the truss, in the
chords as well as in the web members. This was
done by cambering the trusses for full dead load
plus one-half the live load, covering both spans,
but assembling and erecting them so that the
angles between the members and the bevels of
the joints would correspond to the geometric
form of truss. In other words, under the load
(d+ l), the trusses are calculated to assume
their true geometric form and the members to
become straight and free of secondary stresses.
He determined his secondary stresses under
dead load only are equal, but of opposite sign,
to those under full live loads covering both
spans, and, in absolute value, equal to one-half
of those which would be produced by full live
load if the angles between the members would
correspond to the cambered form of truss. This
cambering of the trusses required that members
be preloaded to allow connections to be made
that resulted in the cambering he needed. This
was the first time that this expedient was uti-
lized in American bridge building. Building on
temporary falsework by cantilever methods also
resulted in many different loading conditions of
his members during erection and after comple-
tion. As would be expected, he used all of these
various loading conditions to determine the
maximum load that would fall on each member
and designed the member to resist that load.
For his erection process, he built the Ohio
side of the bridge on false work but could not
use as much falsework on the Kentucky side.
72 June 2017
He, in association
with McClintic
Marshall, the
contractor, built
the Ohio side on
falsework and
then cantilevered
out to the eighth
panel point from
the Kentucky side
and placed a steel
bent in the river.
He then jacked up Rigid frame tying floor
the span a desired beams into truss verticals.
(calculated) amount and continued canti-
levering out to the fourth panel point from
Kentucky and jacked up the span once again.
He completed the span by cantilevering out to
the Kentucky abutment. When the span reached
panel point, Lo, the truss was 16 inches low
at which time the end was jacked up and set
on the rocker bearings. The superstructure was
finished on August 17, 1917.
The Engineering Record published an article on
the bridge and in an editorial wrote:
In the final selection of type of structure, the
particular nature of the profile at the crossing, the
clear opening required during erection and the
nature of the foundations at possible locations
of piers or abutments are all determining factors.
The advantages in erection and the fact that solid
rock foundations were found at small depths
so that the settlement at the piers should be
practically negligible, were the most important
considerations in the selection of the continu-
ous [structure] type in this case. Economy for
this type can generally be easily shownThe
indeterminate character of the stress analysis is
also generally considered a disadvantage. The
experience with the Queensborough Bridge
may be cited in this connection. The continuous
span on many supports was shown by the report
of the investigation engineers to be designed
with astonishing errors in the distribution of
the metalIt is notable, however, that methods
of treating indeterminate structures are now
becoming well standardized and should soon
be simplified into such form as to make the
cost of designing low.
Lindenthal did not describe the bridge in the
Transactions of ASCE until 1922 when he wrote
a 43-page article entitled, The Continuous
Truss Bridge over the Ohio River, at Sciotoville,
Ohio of the Chesapeake and Ohio Northern
Railroad. Engineering and Contracting ran a

Sciotoville truss work and falsework supports.
long article based on the ASCE piece in its April
22, 1922, issue. After giving a brief history of
continuous bridges in Europe and the United
States, Lindenthal challenged the reluctance of
his fellow engineers to utilize the continuous
truss writing,
The continuous truss type has nowhere
met with more indiscriminate and unquali-
fied condemnation than by engineers in the
United States who have alleged three principal
objections against it, none of which is novel
or decisive:
1st That it is statically indeterminate, that is,
its reactions and stresses are dependent on the
elasticity of its members;
2nd That it is subject to stresses from unequal
settlements of its supports; and,
3rd That it is affected by temperature changes.
He then made his case as to why none of these
objections apply to his Sciotoville Bridge and
proceeded to describe his structure as follows.
General Proportions The steel superstructure,
as built, is a double-track, two-span, continuous
bridge, with a total length of 1,550 feet between
centers of end piers, or two equal spans of 775
feet and two clear openings of 750 feet at low-
water level.
To obtain ample lateral rigidity, the width
between centers of trusses was [a] somewhat
smaller width than was considered sufficient,
in view of the continuity of the lateral truss.
The height at the middle of each span is 103
feet 4 inches between centers of chords. To fix
this height, the portion of the span between
the end pier and the point of contra flexure
was considered as a simple span. This portion
varies from three-fourths of the span length for
uniform load on both spans to seven-eighths of
the span length for uniform load on one span
only and averages 630 feet in length. The height
Sciotoville Bridge (color postcard authors collection).
STRUCTURE magazine
of the truss was chosen approximately one-sixth
of this length.
The height over the center pier is 129 feet 2
inches or one-sixth of the span length; this is
the proper height for a simple span of the same
length, which has the same maximum moment
at the center as the two-span continuous bridge
over the middle support.
The height at the end was made 77 feet 6
inches, or equal to a double panel, in order to
give the end posts an inclination of not less than
45 degrees. These heights also secured a pleasing
outline for the top chord. The web system is of
the Warren type, with subdivided panels of a
uniform length of 38 feet 9 inches, which was
found to be the most economical.
The discussion of the article ran 21-pages.
C. A. P. Turner wrote a seven-page response
whose main point was that two simple spans
would have been cheaper and concluded
that Lindenthals preference for the continu-
ous bridge of moderate span differs from the
majority opinion of American bridge engineers,
because of lack of demonstrated economy on a
scientific, mathematical or design basis. J. E.
Greiner wrote praising Lindenthal, It may be
said also that, in every structure of importance
designed by Mr. Lindenthal, there is evidence
of this genius which originates. Each of his
structures is practically a new creation as com-
pared with the ordinary and stereotyped bridges
throughout the United States. The Sciotoville
Bridge is no exception. It is a daring and hand-
some structure, decidedly, Lindenthalic in
all its features Charles Fowler wrote, The
Sciotoville Bridge is a striking example as to
what may be accomplished in the use of the
continuous bridge. It is the longest of that type
ever constructed and now gives America the
proud distinction of having the longest spans
for every type of bridge construction.
Lindenthal responded to the individual com-
menters, taking exception to Turners claim that
two simple spans would have been less expen-
sive. As to J. E. Greiners discussion in which
he argued that Lindenthal had not designed
the bridge to Coopers E60 loading, Lindenthal
wrote that Greiner, was unjustified and made
73 June 2017
without examination of the requirements of the
writers specifications other than the basic unit
stress (20,000), which may mislead superficial
readers. He commended Steinmans contri-
bution but disagreed with Steinmans remark
that reducing the height of the trusses over the
middle pier and increasing the height at mid-
span would not be on the whole, advantageous
or economical. Steinman had written, The
Sciotoville Bridge is a striking example of scien-
tific design. It represents an unusually intensive
application of engineering theory and resource-
fulness to the determination of the most efficient
disposition of the materials of a structure, and
to the rigorous advance planning of every step
in the operations of fabrication and erection.
Steinman had also written an article for the
Engineering Record on August 28, 1915, entitled
The Elastic Curve Applied to the Design of the
Sciotoville Bridge.
It is evident from the record that most bridge
builders in the United States were still not ready
to adopt continuous bridges and preferred long
simple truss spans or cantilevers. Shortly after
the bridge was opened, the Bessemer and Lake
Erie Railroad built a continuous bridge over the
Allegheny River near Pittsburgh with spans of
272 to 520 feet. The Hudson Bay Railway built
a bridge over the Nelson River in 1918 with
spans of 300 to 400 feet.
When opened, the Sciotoville Bridges 775-
foot riveted spans were the longest continuous
truss spans in the world until the opening of the
Duisburg-Rheinhausen Bridge in Germany in
1945 with its 835-foot spans. With its rigid con-
struction, Lindenthals continuous truss bridge
serves the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad to
this day.
Dr. Frank Griggs, Jr. 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 at fgriggsjr@verizon.net.
We set standards!
There is nothing just like
or as good as genuine
DECON Studrails.

Since 1988 DECON Studrails have provided a superior engineered and economical solution to enhance punching
shear capacity in elevated flat plate slabs, post-tensioned slabs, foundations, and hold-down applications. Always at
the cutting edge of technology, it was punching shear research performed by DECON and its consultants that formed
the foundation of report ACI 421.1R by ACI Committee 421. This report has provided the basis for the design procedures
contained in the current ACI 318, IBC and CSA A23.3 design codes.

Replace stirrups, hairpins and column capitals Superior seismic performance

Significantly reduce reinforcement congestion ICC ES Evaluation report ESR-2494
Faster and easier to install Our state of the art software and engineering staff are

No anchor slip always available to assist you in your Studrail design!

DECON USA INC. DECON USA INC.

103 East Napa Street, Suite B 11 Professional Village Circle
Sonoma, CA 95476 Beaufort, SC 29907
Tel (866) 332-6687 Tel (800) 975-6990
www.deconusa.com www.deconusa.com
 discussion of legal issues of interest to structural engineers LegaL PersPectives
An Overview of Consent to Assignment Agreements
By Gail S. Kelley, P.E., Esq.

D
esign agreements often stipulate and _____ as agent for the Lenders occurred under the Assignment, it will per-
that neither the owner nor the (together with its successors in such capac- form all of its obligations under the Design
engineer can assign the agree- ity, the Agent). Agreement for the benefit of Lender.
ment without the consent of Alternatively, it may be structured as an Regardless of how the consent is struc-
the other party. As a result, the engi- agreement between the owner and the tured, the intent is to ensure that if the
neer may be asked to sign a Consent to engineer, with the lender as a third-party owner defaults on its loan and the lender
Assignment (sometimes referred to as an beneficiary. takes over, the engineer will continue to
Acknowledgement and Consent) from the This CONSENT TO ASSIGNMENT of provide the services called for under the
bank providing the construction loan. A Engineers Contract (this Agreement) is design agreement if requested to do so. The
typical consent form requires the engineer made as of _____ by and between _____ agreement typically also gives the lender
to agree that the design agreement can be (Borrower) and _____ (Engineer) for the right to use the engineers Instruments
assigned to the lender. The assignment will the benefit of _____ (Lender). of Services to complete the project with
actually occur at the time the loan is closed; It may also be structured as an agreement another engineer.
however, the assignment is conditional in between the engineer and the lender:
the sense that the lender can only assume This CONSENT TO ASSIGNMENT
the design agreement if the owner defaults (this Consent) is dated as of _____ by Payment of Outstanding
on the loan. _____ (Engineer) to _____ (Lender).
If the owner defaults and the lender takes Finally, although less commonly, it may
Obligations
over, the lenders chances of finding a buyer simply be written as what it is, which is a If the owner has defaulted on its loan, it is
for the project are significantly better if the one-sided agreement under which the engi- likely to be behind in its payments to the
buyer has the option of assuming all of the neer agrees to do, or not do, certain things: engineer. Thus, a key issue is the lenders
key contracts for the project. Thus the The undersigned, as Engineer under the obligation with respect to outstanding
lender may ask the contractor, the engineer, Design Agreement dated as of _____ (the amounts due to the engineer.
and the other key design consultants to Design Agreement) between _____ It is not uncommon to see consents with
consent to an assignment of their contracts. (Borrower) and the undersigned, which the following wording:
While Consent to Assignment requests is one of the contracts referred to in the Upon a Default under the Loan Agreement,
are common, particularly on large projects, Assignment of Agreements (Assignment) Engineer, at Lenders request, shall con-
there is no standard form. The consent between Borrower and _____(the tinue performance on Lenders behalf in
should be read carefully and preferably Lender), agrees that upon receipt of accordance with the terms of Engineers
reviewed by the engineers legal counsel. notice from Lender that a Default has Contract, and shall be reimbursed in
Although the lender cannot assume
the design agreement unless the owner
defaults, the forms used by many Connect Steel to Steel without
banks contain provisions completely
unrelated to the design agreement. Welding or Drilling
Engineers who are not careful may find Full line of high-strength, corrosion-resistant fasteners

ADVERTISEMENTFor Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

that they have given up valuable rights Ideal for secondary steel connections and in-plant equipment
or agreed to unreasonable obligations Easy to install or adjust on site
even if there is no default by the owner.
Will not weaken existing steel or harm protective coatings
Guaranteed Safe Working Loads
General Structure of a
Consent to Assignment
There are several different ways to struc-
ture a consent agreement. Sometimes it
BoxBolt for HSS blind FastFit universal kits
is structured as an agreement between connections. ICC-ES for faster, easier steel
the owner (the borrower), the engineer, certified. connections.
and the lender, with all three parties
signing. For example:
This CONSENT TO ASSIGNMENT
(this Agreement), dated as of
_____, by and among _____, (the For a catalog and pricing, call toll-free 1-888-724-2323
Borrower), _____ (the Engineer),
A K E E S A F E T Y C O M PA N Y
or visit www.LNAsolutions.com/BC-2

STRUCTURE magazine 75 June 2017

 accordance with the Contract for all
work, labor, and materials rendered
on Lenders behalf subsequent to
Lenders request.
Note that the words in bold print will
almost certainly not be in bold in the actual
consent. What they are saying is that if
the lender exercises its rights under the
Assignment and requires the engineer to
continue performance, the lender has no
obligation to pay outstanding amounts due
to the engineer. The lenders obligation is
limited to compensation for services pro-
vided after the lender notifies the engineer
that it wants the engineer to continue per-
formance. The engineer would have to file
a mechanics lien against the property for
the outstanding amounts. Depending on
the priority of its lien, it might receive only
a fraction of these amounts, if anything.
The engineer should disagree with these
terms and change the provision to read:
...provided that Engineer shall be reim-
bursed in accordance with the Contract
for all work, labor, and materials
including all outstanding amounts
due.
The lender may object to these terms on
the grounds that if it has already advanced
2016 AIA
funds to the owner for the engineers ser-
vices, it should not have to pay the engineer
for those same services. The lender may
propose the following as an alternate:
...provided that Engineer shall be reim-
bursed in accordance with the Contract
for all work, labor, and materials
including all outstanding amounts due
unless Lender has already advanced
such funds to the Borrower.
However, the engineer has no control over
the lenders disbursements; it is the lenders
obligation to monitor the loan.
If the lender does not agree to pay all
outstanding amounts due, the engineer
should, at a minimum, require the follow-
ing language:
...including all outstanding amounts due
unless Lender had already advanced such
funds to the Borrower prior to receipt
of Engineers notice of Borrowers
default under Engineers contract.
Lender shall not advance any funds
to Borrower for Engineers services
subsequent to receiving such notice.
This puts the burden on the engineer to
pay close attention to its payments. If a pay-
ment is late and the owner does not provide
adequate assurance that the payment will be
made, the engineer should advise the owner
that it will notify the lender of the default.
Conclusion
Typically, the request to sign a Consent
to Assignment comes when the owner is
arranging the construction financing, which
may be months after the design agreement
was executed. More often than not, it
will indicate that the consent needs to be
returned immediately because the owner
is trying to close on its loan. This can put
the engineer in a difficult position if there
is objectionable language, particularly if the
lender is not willing to negotiate. While
the engineer generally has no obligation
to sign a consent, refusing to do so can
affect its relationship with the owner and
jeopardize the prospect of future work. If
the owner is already behind on payments
to the engineer, it may say that it will not
be able to pay until it closes on the loan.
If the lender does not negotiate the terms,
the engineer must make a business decision
with respect to signing the consent. As a
practical matter, unless the project is fast-
track, if the owner runs into financial trouble
during construction and defaults on its loan,
the engineer will likely have finished the
plans and specifications and received
payment for them. If the engineer is
only doing limited construction admin-

PORTLAND
istration, it may not have a significant
risk with respect to payment. However,

MAYORS unless the consent indemnifies the engi-

neer for the lender or subsequent buyers

AWARD use of the plans and specifications, the

engineer may still be at risk for claims.
ADVERTISEMENTFor Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

Disclaimer: The information in this

article is for educational purposes only
and is not legal advice. Readers should
not act or refrain from acting based on
this article without seek-
Seattle Pasadena ing appropriate legal or
Tacoma Irvine other professional advice
Lacey San Diego
as to their particular
Portland Boise
Eugene St. Louis
circumstances.
Sacramento Chicago
San Francisco Louisville Gail S. Kelley is a LEED AP as well
Los Angeles New York
Long Beach
as a professional engineer and licensed
attorney in Maryland and the District
of Columbia. Her practice focuses
on reviewing and negotiating design
KPFF is an
Equal Opportunity agreements for architects and engineers.
Employer. She is the author of Construction
www.kpff.com Law: An Introduction for Engineers,
Architects, and Contractors, published
Park Avenue West
Portland, OR
by Wiley & Sons. Ms. Kelley can be
reached at Gail.Kelley.Esq@gmail.com.

STRUCTURE magazine 76 June 2017

 2017 CASE RISK MANAGEMENT SEMINAR
Time-Tested Techniques for Managing Your Firms Risk

Scheduled for August 3-4, 2017 in Chicago, Time-Tested Techniques for

Managing Your Firms Risk will help your firm reduce its rate of claims
against structural engineering projects, as well as raise the level of quality
services provided by all project participants.

Who should attend? Principals, Owners, Project Managers, Risk Managers!

Session Topics
Strategies Forensic Engineers Use to Unravel
Construction Disputes
Information Security in Contracting
Case Studies for Professional Liability

A special dinner presentation on The Future of Structural

Engineering by Ashraf Habibullah, President and CEO of
Computers & Structures Inc. and structural engineering roundtable!

Register at: www.acec.org/coalitions/upcoming-coalition-events/

>> $399/Coalition Members
>> $499/ACEC Members
>> $599/Non Members
LOCATION
All sessions will take place right off Chicagos infamous
Magnificent Mile at the DoubleTree Magnificent Mile,
located at 300 East Ohio Street Chicago, Illinois.

Phone: 1-800-222-8733 and refer to group code: ACE

Special Rate - $194/night until July 11, 2017 or until block sells out!

Madison Square Park Tower
45 East 22nd Street
By Joseph Savalli, P.E., Matthieu Peuler, P.E., and Leslie Morris, P.E.
DeSimone Consulting Engineers was an Award Winner for its 45 East 22nd Street project
in the 2016 NCSEA Annual Excellence in Structural Engineering Awards Program in the
Category New Buildings $30M to $100M.
I
n one of the few Manhattan neigh-
borhoods not entirely punctuated
by mirror-clad high-rises, Madison
Square Park Tower blends turn of the
century design with modern composition
and accomplishes the tallest development
between Midtown, Manhattan, and the
Financial District.
Located at 45 East 22nd Street and designed
by architects Kohn Pedersen Fox, the tower
topped out at 777 feet comprised of 65 resi-
dential and amenity levels. However, unlike
any other development in the area, the towers
floor plate progressively expands as it rises to
maximize saleable area on the buildings most
premium levels. The design strategy introduced
complex geometric constraints that required
close collaboration among all design consultants
and construction team members.
Overall, the design and structural components
from ground-floor to pinnacle were impacted
by the historical significance of the Flatiron
neighborhood and tight constraints of the build
site. At ground level, the tower rises from a
75-foot wide site wedged between two historic
structures on each side. The design team opted
for a granite-clad podium, rather than a top-
to-bottom glass faade, to complement the
neighborhoods Chicago School architecture
dating back to the early 1900s.
The tower is sculpted so that the floor plate
is as small as 62 feet wide by 52 feet deep near
the base, producing a maximum slenderness
ratio of about 13 to 1. Above the 5th floor, the
structure transitions into a more modern, glass
faade and then cantilevers westward above its
low-rise neighbor as it rises to a maximum floor
plate of 94 feet wide by 52 feet deep. The canti-
lever allows the tower to expand to a maximum
width of 125 feet at the top creating a flared,
champagne flute silhouette. The cantilever also
ensures that every floor above the sixth level is
a unique shape.
The gravity system is comprised of flat slabs
spanning from the interior shear wall core to
perimeter columns with varying cantilevers, a
result of the towers complex geometry. Floor
plates vary from 10 to 12 inches thick at residen-
tial levels as the spans lengthen with increasing
STRUCTURE magazine
award winners and outstanding projects
height. Thicker slabs are used at mechanical
areas, including a 20-inch slab at the west side
of the roof to support a 1.2 million-pound tuned
mass damper system. The lateral system is com-
prised of one full-height shear wall core centered
on the south side of the building, with wall
thicknesses ranging from 42 inches at the base
to 24 inches at the roof. The core is connected to
perimeter columns at the 33rd floor mechanical
level with a 1-story outrigger/belt wall.
In addition to the unique shape of each plate
above the sixth floor, column-free interiors
were required. A two-way flat plate system was
implemented to accommodate these specifica-
tions. The system provides flexibility in locating
columns, including sloped and walked columns,
while providing maximum ceiling height for
floor-to-ceiling glass walls.
The design of the lateral system was the great-
est challenge of the development. The system
required a robust design to resist required forces,
including strict drift and acceleration limits and
the inherent gravity overturn resulting from the
top-heavy design.
The selected lateral system is comprised of
high-strength concrete shear walls, measuring
14,000 psi at the base down to 8,000 psi at the
roof, which are coupled to perimeter columns
at mid-height of the building with the belt wall.
The design of this system was accompanied by
wind tunnel shaping studies to determine the
optimum configurations. While the concrete
system alone meets the drift requirements, a
600-ton tuned mass damper at the roof level was
implemented to reduce building accelerations
to acceptable levels.
The building is supported on a 50-foot wide
by 80-foot long mat slab that is 8 feet thick.
The mat bears on 20 tsf bedrock and includes
32,270-ton rock anchor tie-downs to resist
overturning. The mat is reinforced with four
layers of rebar top and bottom and local shear
reinforcement as required.
Construction below the 11th floor included
numerous structural transfer elements as the
tower reduces to its minimum footprint at the
7th floor. From the 7th to 11th floor, the west
side of the tower cantilevers 16.5 feet out over
an adjacent building. The system is designed as
79 June 2017
Spotlight
a multi-story bracket braced to the core with
the base of the bracket (compression) reacting
through 8-foot wide by 2-foot deep bracing
beams, and the top of the bracket reacting
(tension) through groups of #14 GR97 SAS
threaded bars.
Above the 11th floor, the building was con-
structed on a fast-track, two-day pour cycle,
alternating the pour of the vertical concrete ele-
ments and the horizontal concrete elements. This
allowed for a shortened construction schedule
that wouldnt be possible with other structural
systems. Throughout the project, GR75 vertical
reinforcement was used in the shear core and
columns to reduce reinforcement congestion.
The belt wall at the 33rd-floor mechanical level
was constructed with 2-foot thick perimeter
walls that couple to the core of the perimeter
columns. Large openings for mechanical louvers
were accommodated with careful analysis and
added reinforcement. The tuned mass damper
is located on the west side of the roof level with
its weight bearing half on the core and half on
the slab. A system of a 20-inch slab with 48-inch
wide by 40-inch deep beams was utilized at the
slab support to provide adequate strength for
the 1.2 million-pound steel damper assembly.
Joseph Savalli is a Principal in DeSimones
New York office.
Matt Peuler is a Senior Project Manager at
DeSimones New York office.
Leslie Morris is a Senior Project Engineer
at DeSimones New York office.
 Committee Update
Basic Education Committee Works to Better Curriculum & Profession
The NCSEA Basic Education Committee (BEC) has pursued
activities which will help define the recommended curriculum
for the Structural Engineering profession; these activities exist
independently, but are intertwined in our mission to better
educate the future of the profession.
The committee is continually assessing the fundamental
education recommended for entry into the structural
News form the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations
engineering profession. In late 2016, the committee completed
the Structural Engineering Curriculum Practitioners Survey
of the NCSEA membership to determine which topics are
relevant to the profession. The survey asked respondents to rate
the importance of material design classes, analysis coursework,
plus allied professional skills such as: communication,
sustainability, architecture, and construction management.
The committee is interpreting the data and evaluating trends
related to wood and masonry design, computer software
use and its relationship to structural analysis, similarities or
differences between newly hired and experienced engineers,
regional hiring preferences, and office size. It is anticipated
that the findings, which will be distributed later this year, will
help inform the committee about the recommended NCSEA
basic education curriculum.
The Structural Engineering Curriculum Survey is conducted
to better understand the course requirements and class availability
within accredited civil engineering, architectural engineering,
engineering technology, and structural engineering programs.
The results are compiled triennially from universities around
the country and then published in STRUCTURE magazine.
The last survey results may be accessed following this link:
http://bit.ly/2rmPxkl.
In past years, the committee has observed trends when
identifying which institutions fulfilled the recommended
curriculum and those which only fulfilled part. Those that met
part of the curriculum typically lacked the timber or masonry
design component; the significance of this has been debated at
the committee level and led to NCSEA involvement in the Wood
Education Symposium sponsored by the American Wood Council
(AWC)/American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Structural
Engineering Institute Wood Education Committee. The next
education survey will be conducted in 2019 and will reflect results
of the practitioners survey as well as take into consideration the
NCSEA News
ASCE-SEI/AWC Wood Education Symposium when forming
the recommended curriculum and survey.
The Wood Education Symposium was held on April 5th, 2017
in Denver, CO. The event was held to discuss the importance of
wood education at the university level; what should educators,
Designed by Structural Engineers for Practicing Structural Engineers
NCSEA 2017 Structural Engineering Summit
October 11October 14, 2017
Washington Hilton, Washington, DC
Register now for NCSEAs early bird rate and
save $100 on your full conference registration!
Visit www.ncsea.com for more information, schedules and hotel reservations.
STRUCTURE magazine 80
design professionals, and industry manufacturers provide to
meet the needs of stakeholders, and how can wood education be
expanded to a wider audience. The symposium attendees included
practitioners from engineering and architecture, academics,
industry consultants, and grant advisors from government entities.
NCSEA and the Basic Education Committee sent five attendees
on their behalf: two representatives from SEAs and three BEC
members. The perspectives were broad, but the group identified
changes which are common across the industry, not just those
pertaining to designing and building with wood.
The key elements identified and which align with BEC objectives
are: teaching building systems in context versus component or
elemental design change the way in which wood or material
design is taught; exposure to connections and load path at the
detail level; use real world problems so students understand the
context; the need to produce thinkers and problem solvers, not
just graduates with analytical skills; and material behavior
wood is not isotropic, but teaching material behavior should be
a requirement for all design materials.
Interestingly, about 40 percent of the attendees in the design
professional subgroup had no formal timber education, yet, their
career paths and company interests required some wood design
knowledge so they were self-taught. Thus, the critical question arose,
should timber design be taught in the classroom? Additionally,
there was no clear consensus when the subgroup was asked about
the importance of wood design experience as a factor in hiring. It
was evident that wood education is not critical to companies that
do not design wood structures and, conversely, those that work with
wood structures consider wood design a requirement. So another
question was posed, is the demand for structural engineers with
wood design experience being met? And if the answer is yes,
then does it need to be taught at every university with a civil or
structural engineering program? Questions such as these and many
more will be evaluated over the next year.
As the BEC interprets the results from the practitioner survey
and assesses the implications of the Wood Education Symposium,
it will determine if the coursework recommendations should be
modified and proposed for the 2019 survey. This information
was presented during an NCSEA MO Communication webinar
on May 26, 2017 to showcase this material in more depth and to
engage the NCSEA community in additional dialog. A recording
of this webinar can be found in the NCSEA Member Portal on
the MO Communication Meeting Resources page.
Professor Kevin Dong, California State Polytechnic University,
NCSEA Basic Education Committee Co-Chair.
June 2017
 NCSEA News
Upcoming NCSEA Webinars
June 15, 2017
Seismic Design of Large Wood Roof
Diaphragms in Heavy Wall Buildings
John Lawson, S.E.
June 27, 2017
Special Inspections for Existing Buildings
Chris Kimball, S.E., P.E.
July 11, 2017
Repair of Construction Defects
David Flax
July 25, 2017
Nonstructural Components
Chris Kimball, SE, P.E.

Visit www.ncsea.com to register

and read the full description
of each webinar. 1.5 hours of

20 EXCELLENCE IN
STRUCTURAL
continuing education. Approved
for CE credit in all 50 states.

17 ENGINEERING

News from the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations

Two exclusive annual plans are
AWARDS available to NCSEA corporate
members & SEA members only.
The NCSEA Excellence in Structural Engineering Awards annually The Live & Recorded Webinar
highlights some of the best examples of structural engineering ingenuity Subscription Plan with access
throughout the world. Structural engineers and structural engineering to all live webinars and the entire
firms are encouraged to enter this years program. Projects will be recorded webinar library, hosting
judged on innovative design, engineering achievement and creativity. over 180 webinars, or the Live
Webinar Subscription Plan.
Visit www.ncsea.com to purchase
Awards can be entered in one of seven categories: your subscription today!
New Buildings under $20M
New Buildings $20 Million to $100M Start Studying Now
New Buildings over $100M
New Bridge & Transportation Structures for the Fall Exam!
Forensic/Renovation/Retrofit/Rehabilitation Structures up to $20M
Over 29 hours of recorded
Forensic/Renovation/Retrofit/Rehabilitation Structures over $20M
SE Review & Refresher
Other Structures
sessions are available
through NCSEAs online
Awards will be presented during an honorary banquet at the NCSEA store. Conveniently accessible
Structural Engineering Summit in Washington, D.C. on October 13th.
through the Recorded Webinar
This awards banquet is the premiere event of the Summit and illustrates
the importance of artistry and inspiration our structural engineers
Library, you can view these
and structural engineering firms provide to the association and recordings all day everyday,
to the world. 24/7 until the next exam!

Eligible projects must be substantially complete between January Visit www.ncsea.com

1, 2014 and June 30, 2017. Entries are due Tuesday, July 18, to get started now!
2017. For award program rules, project eligibility and entry forms,
visit www.ncsea.com. Dates for the next live course
will be announced shortly.

STRUCTURE magazine 81 June 2017

 Electrical Transmission Top 5 Reasons to Attend
& Substation Structures 1) Expand your knowledge at technical sessions
on transmission line and substation structures
Conference 2018 and foundations.
2) Earn professional development hours (PDHs)
The Newsletter of the Structural Engineering Institute of ASCE

Call for Abstracts and Sessions by attending technical sessions and workshops.
3) Network with global leaders and colleagues working
with high-voltage transmission structures around
The State-of-the-Industry Forum for the world.
Transmission and Substation Engineers: 4) Connect with exhibitors showcasing state-of-the-art
products, services, and solutions for your transmission
Discover Technical Knowledge
line and substation projects.
Hear Project Case Studies
5) Discover Southern hospitality and enjoy over 100+ live
Find Real-World Solutions
entertainment venues.
Visit Vendors and Learn about their Products
and Services
The SEI/ASCE Electrical Transmission & Substation Structures Exhibits & Sponsorships
Conference is recognized as the must-attend conference that
Increase your companys visibility and reach hundreds of indus-
focuses specifically on transmission line and substation structure
try professionals at this important specialty conference. Contact
and foundation construction issues. This event for utilities,
Bob Nickerson at renicker@flash.net or 817-319-8779, or Sean
suppliers, contractors, and consultants offers an ideal setting
Scully at sscully@asce.org or 703-295-6154, for exhibiting and
for learning and networking.
sponsorship opportunities.
Questions? Contact Debbie Smith dsmith@asce.org or
703-295-6095. Submit your sessions at www.etsconference.org.

ELECTRICAL TRANSMISSION
& SUBSTATION STRUCTURES Dedicated to Strengthening
CONFERENCE 2018
our Critical Infrastructure
Atlanta, Georgia
November 48 Abstracts & Session Proposals
Dedicated to Strengthening due September 12, 2017
our Critical Infrastructure
Structural Columns

2017 ASCE Annual Convention

The American Society of Civil Engineers invites you to attend the ASCE 2017
Convention, October 8 11, in New Orleans. Among the broad range of activi-
ties planned, the Societys flagship gathering will take advantage of the location
to explore how the city and its infrastructure have rebounded since 2005.
Three reasons to attend the ASCE 2017 Convention in New Orleans:
Learn how New Orleans and other major cities are using resiliency
and recovery to strengthen social justice and community life.
Hear first-hand accounts from experts on natural disaster response
and recovery.
Gumbo. Its fun to say and great to eat.
Check the Convention website at www.asceconvention.org frequently, as more
information is available. Dont miss your chance to make valuable connections
with civil engineering professionals globally. We look forward to seeing you there.

Structures Congress 2017 Best of the Best

Congratulations to the winner of the Best Presentation prize at the 2017 Structures Congress. Congress attendees selected Sharing
the Story of a Real Claim: The Condo, presented by Roger Heeringa, P.E., S.E., for this annual honor. The Best Presentation
winner will receive a complimentary full registration to Structures Congress 2018. Attendee Jon Stricker, S.M.ASCE, won the
door prize drawing of a Fitbit.

STRUCTURE magazine 82 June 2017

 Structural Columns
ASCE 7-16 Print and Online Products
ASCE 7 Online provides digital access to Standard ASCE 7-10 and 7-16. The interactive tools and
feature-rich functionality, such as side-by-side display of the Provisions and Commentary, redlin-
ing comparison, and annotation tools, is a must-have for any structural engineer. ASCE 7 Hazard
Tool easy mapping feature will simplify your workflow and save you time. Visit our website at
http://asce7.online to learn more.
Structures Congress attendees had the opportunity to see a demo of the new ASCE 7 Online. Daniel
Sack, Principal Engineer of The Babcock & Wilcox Company, won a free six-month subscription to
ASCE 7 Online at our Exhibit Hall drawing.
The print edition of ASCE 7-16 will be available in June and provides the most up-to-date and
coordinated loading standard for general structural design. ASCE 7-16 describes the means for deter-
mining design loads including dead, live, soil, flood, tsunami, snow, rain, atmospheric ice, earthquake,
wind, and fire, as well as how to assess load combinations. The 2016 edition of ASCE 7, which
supersedes ASCE/SEI 7-10, coordinates with the most recent material standards, including the ACI,
AISC, AISI, AWC, and TMS standards. Significant changes in ASCE 7-16 include the following:
New seismic maps reflecting the updated National Seismic Hazard Maps;
New wind speed maps, including new Hawaii maps, which result in reduced wind speeds for much of the United States,
clarified special wind study zones, and separate Risk Category IV from Category III;
New snow load maps incorporating regional snow data for areas that previously required site-specific case study zones;
Updated rain duration provisions that align design requirements with International Plumbing Code provisions for drainage;
Entirely new chapter covering tsunami design provisions, which are important to Alaska, Hawaii, California, Oregon, and
Washington; and
New appendix provisions for fire design.
Standard provisions are accompanied by a detailed commentary with explanatory and supplementary information developed to assist
users of the standard, including design practitioners, building code committees, and regulatory authorities.

The Newsletter of the Structural Engineering Institute of ASCE

Standard ASCE/SEI 7 is an integral part of building codes in the United States and is adopted by reference into the International
Building Code, the International Existing Building Code, the International Residential Code, and the NFPA 5000 Building Construction
and Safety Code. Structural engineers, architects, and those engaged in preparing and administering local building codes will find the
structural load requirements essential to their practice. Pre-order your copy today at www.asce.org/asce-7.

SEI Local Activities

New University of Notre Dame Get Involved in Local SEI Activities
Graduate Student Chapter Join your local SEI Chapter, Graduate Student Chapter
(GSC), or Structural Technical Groups (STG) to connect
Welcome to the newly established SEI Graduate Student
with colleagues, take advantage of local opportunities for
Chapter at the University of Notre Dame, chaired by
lifelong learning, and advance structural engineering in
Andrew Bartolini (contact him at sei.colorado.chapter@
your area. If there is not an SEI Chapter, GSC, or STG in
gmail.com) with Faculty Advisor Dr. Tracy Kijewksi-Correa.
your area, review the simple steps to form an SEI Chapter
The chapters goals are to:
at www.asce.org/structural-engineering/sei-local-groups.
Promote the mission and purpose of SEI/ASCE at the
Local Chapters serve member technical and professional
University of Notre Dame.
needs. SEI GSCs prepare students for a successful career
Enable professional development opportunities for
transition. SEI supports Chapters with opportunities to learn
graduate students within the Department of Civil &
about new initiatives and best practices, and network with
Environmental Engineering & Earth Sciences.
other leaders including annual funded SEI Local Leader
Facilitate social events for graduate students within the
Conference, technical tour, and training. SEI Chapters
Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering
receive Chapter logo/branding, complimentary webinar,
& Earth Sciences to build a community atmosphere
and more.
amongst graduate students.
Collaborate with the Earthquake Engineering Research
Institute Notre Dame Chapter (EERI@UND) in
planning outreach activities throughout the Michigan Errata
area and professional development events for graduate SEI posts up-to-date errata information for our publications at
students. www.asce.org/SEI. Click on Publications on our menu, and
Collaborate with the Notre Dame Student Chapter select Errata. If you have any errata that you would like to
of ASCE in planning outreach and professional submit, please email it to Jon Esslinger at jesslinger@asce.org.
development events.

STRUCTURE magazine 83 June 2017

 JUST RELEASED - Updated National Practice Guidelines for
Specialty Structural Engineers
This document was prepared to supplement CASEs National Practice Guidelines for the Structural Engineer of Record by
defining the concept of a specialty structural engineer and the interrelation between the specialty structural engineer
and the Structural Engineer of Record. CASE encourages the concept of one Structural Engineer of Record for an entire
project. However, for many, if not most projects, there may be portions of the project that will be designed by different
The Newsletter of the Council of American Structural Engineers

specialty structural engineers.

The primary purpose of this document is to better define the relationships between the SER and the SSE, and to
outline the usual duties and responsibilities related to specific trades. This is done for the benefit of the owners,
the PDP, the SER, the SSE, and the other members of the construction team. The goal is to help create positive
coordination and cooperation among the various parties.
The committee did an all-inclusive update to this document and brought it to current industry standards.
To view the updated practice guideline, go to www.acec.org/case/getting-involved/guidelines-committee.

CASE Risk Management Tools Available

Foundation 7: Compensation Prepare and
Negotiate Fees that Allow for Quality and Profit
Develop fees based on work effort (task hour) and value to be
delivered
Make allowances for unknown conditions
Share the backup for your fee with the client when
appropriate
Negotiate based on scope of work
Be willing to walk away
Dont continue to work for losing clients
Tool 7-1: Client Evaluation
Do you know who your best clients are? Do you know where
you should be focusing your marketing and sales efforts to
maximize the financial performance of your firm? You may
be surprised. This tool will help you answer those questions
by analyzing the amount of work and profit for each client.
Tool 7-2: Fee Development
This tool is intended to be used within a consulting firm to
stimulate thought and consideration in the development of fees.
Engineers in firms that may be experiencing new responsibilities
as project engineers and project managers often ask the question
How do we decide on fees? This tool may be a useful primer
for these employees and lead to a further discussion with firm
management on the firms fee development strategies.
Foundation 8: Contracts Identify Onerous
Contract Language
Negotiate Clear & Fair Agreements
Understand ever changing contract language
and demands
Use a CASE, AIA, or another accepted base contract
Modify the contract for each project, as needed
Use a contract that you can understand
Use the contract to reasonably share project risks
Get a signed contract
Utilized legal review when appropriate
Tool 8-1: Contract Review
Do you (or your legal counsel) review every contract to find
onerous clauses? Do you know what they are? Do you always
find them? This tool will help you find these clauses or words
throughout the document.
You can purchase these and the other Risk Management
Tools at www.acec.org/bookstore.

Looking for Innovative Ideas! CASE Summer Planning Meeting

CASE in Point

Does your firm have an innovative idea or method of prac-

tice? Looking to get more involved in short duration projects?
We are inviting you to share the wealth and submit a
proposal for a web seminar topic, publication, or education
session you would like to see CASE present at an upcoming
conference. Our forms are easy to use, and you may submit
your information via email. Go to www.acec.org/coalitions
and click on the icon for Idea Sharing to get started.
Questions? Contact us at 202-682-4332 or email Katie
Goodman at kgoodman@acec.org. We look forward to
helping you put your best ideas in front of eager new faces!
August 2 3, 2017; Chicago, IL
The CASE Summer Planning Meeting will again be scheduled
for August 2nd to the 3rd in Chicago, IL. A popular feature of the
planning meeting is a roundtable discussion on topics relating to
the business of Structural Engineering, facilitated by the CASE
Executive Committee members. Topics have included the Business
of BIM, using social media within your firm, Peer Review, and
Special Inspections. Attendees to this session will earn 2.0 PDHs.
Please contact CASE Executive Director Heather Talbert
(htalbert@acec.org) if you are interested in attending or have
any suggested topics for the roundtable.

Follow ACEC Coalitions on Twitter @ACECCoalitions.

STRUCTURE magazine 84 June 2017


Annual CASE Risk
Management Seminar
August 3 4, 2017; Chicago, IL
How important is Risk Management to your
firm? A proper program can reduce your chances
of being sued and allows you to take on more
risky projects which can generate a substantial
profit when handled right.
Developed by the Council of American Structural Engineers
(CASE), Time-Tested Techniques for Managing Your Firms
Risk will help your firm reduce its rate of claims against struc-
tural engineering projects, as well as raise the level of quality
services provided by all project participants.
Who should attend? Principals, Owners, Project
Managers, Risk Managers
SEMINAR AGENDA
Thursday, August 3
6:00 pm Dinner The Future of Structural Engineering
Speaker: Ashraf Habibullah, President, Computers
and Structures, Inc.
ACECs 2017 Annual Convention and Legislative Summit
On April 22 26, a record 1,500 ACEC members attended the
ACEC Annual Convention in Washington, D.C., meeting with
Senators, Congressmen, and Capitol Hill staffers to advocate for
major infrastructure legislation in 2017 that both incentivizes
private investment and includes substantially increased direct invest-
ment in core federal programs. Attendees highlighted the need to
address critical transportation, water/wastewater, and other infra-
structure needs. In addition, ACEC members engaged lawmakers
on key industry priorities for reforming the nations tax code.
600-plus celebrated the 50th Anniversary of the Engineering
Excellence Awards Gala, which recognized 162 preeminent
Pathways to Executive Leadership Class Two Registration
Now Open!
A practical, focused program for new leaders facing the challenges of a
continuously evolving business environment.
New practice-builders need specific and relevant training in
the intricacies of leading an A/E firm in ever-changing, always
uncertain economic times to be successful at taking on higher
levels of leadership responsibility and prepare for the demands of
being owners.
Pathways to Executive Leadership is an intensive leadership program
for early-career elites and promising mid-career professionals with
8-12 years of experience who are just beginning to lead and think
strategically about their practices and careers. The reality-based
curriculum focuses on the core skills necessary to think strategically
in their markets, build effective teams, and deliver great service for
their most valued clients.
TARGET AUDIENCE: Pathways to Executive Leadership fills a
vital gap and creates a strong connection between ACECs Business
of Design Consulting curriculum and the Senior Executives
STRUCTURE magazine
CASE in Point
Friday, August 4
7:30 am Welcome Corey Matsuoka, SSFM International
7:45 am Four Strategies Forensic Engineers Use to Unravel
Construction Disputes
Benjamin Cornelius, S.E., P.E., Leslie E. Robertson
Associates Consulting Structural Engineers
9:15 am Break
9:45 am Information Security in Contracting
Nicholas Merker, Ice Miller LLP
11:30 am Roundtable Lunch
Moderator Corey Matsuoka,
SSFM International
1:45 pm Professional Liability Case Study Marathon
Karen Erger, Lockton Companies
Eric Singer, Ice Miller LLP
Brian Stewart, Collins, Collins, Muir + Stewart
3:15 pm Wrap-up & Adjourn
Corey Matsuoka, SSFM International
To register for this event, go to www.acec.org/calendar/
calendar-seminar/case-risk-management-seminar.
For more information about this seminar, contact
Heather Talbert (htalbert@acec.org) or Katie Goodman
CASE is a part of the American Council of Engineering Companies
(kgoodman@acec.org).
engineering achievements from throughout the world.
Hosted by SNL-Alum, Kevin Nealon, SR 520 Floating
Bridge Replacement and HOV Program in Seattle, WA
was honored with the 2017 Grand Conceptor Award
on April 25th. The engineering work for the project was
done by HDR.
ACECs Annual Convention also marks the induction of a new
ACEC Executive Committee. Sergio Satch Pecori, Chairman
and CEO of Hanson Professional Services, succeeded Peter Strub
as ACEC Chairman for 2017-2018 at the spring meeting of
the ACEC Board of Directors.
Institute capstone program. It targets those who are making the
transition between managing one team (e.g., project managers)
to those managing managers and multiple teams. This program is
designed to establish habits for long-term high-performance and
to create a trusted, national network of colleagues with which to
make the journey.
FLOW OF LEARNING: New skills to manage people and the
uncertainty of a continuously evolving business environment are
required to confront that challenges that budding practice builders
face. Pathways to Executive Leadership will lead participants through
a practical curriculum focused on becoming more balanced in their
personal and professional life, more influential in team develop-
ment, coaching, and client relationships, and more strategic in their
business relationships to build a strong client portfolio.
For more information, visit http://programs.acec.org/
2017-pathways or contact Katie Goodman, 202-682-4332, or
kgoodman@acec.org.
85 June 2017
Business Practices
Techniques to Successfully Navigate Networking
By Jennifer Anderson
F
or some people, networking can feel
awkward, seemingly self-serving,
discouraging, and embarrassing.
Many people consider the term
networking a dirty word and dont like
the uncomfortable feelings that come from
attending a networking event. Uncomfortable
or not, if you are not networking it is going
to be much harder to grow and develop as
a professional. Networking has the power
to help you in very significant ways in your
professional and personal life.
Here are four techniques to help you navi-
gate the world of networking more effectively:
1) Know the difference between
types of networking.
Networking is not limited to attending
a luncheon to hear a guest speaker share
thoughts about an engineering-related
topic. Networking can look like many dif-
ferent things, such as volunteering for a cause
that youre interested in, participating in an
industry conference, taking additional college
courses and getting to know your classmates
through group projects, joining a running
club, etc. Networking should never just be
limited to a bunch of people in a room trying
to get other peoples business cards!
It can be valuable to attend luncheons and
learn from other professionals, but take some
time to evaluate how you want to make a dif-
ference in the world. For example, the author
has a colleague who is interested in STEM
initiatives (Science Technology Engineering
Math) to help adolescents learn about differ-
ent ways they can engage with the world of
science. She believes it is important to help
children and teens learn about how science
and math help better our world. As those
children come to realize the importance of
STEM, their eyes are open to more possibili-
ties and they find themselves more interested
in math and science courses. The ripple effect
is quite substantial in their education and
career. Along the way, the authors colleague
has met numerous individuals that have
helped her stay connected in her field.
As you find groups of people that are inter-
ested in similar hobbies, community causes,
professional development, and so on, you will
come to meet some interesting, passionate,
STRUCTURE magazine
business issues
and thoughtful people. That is when network-
ing becomes fun and worthwhile!
2) Make time for networking.
ing voice to someone else on the other side
This might seem like a very basic technique,
but if it is so easy to do, why is it that people
do not make time for networking? Typically,
people say that they are too busy with work
to network. Later, when they are ready to make
a job change, or ready to hire a new person for
the firm, they find themselves with weak con-
nections to people in their network.
It is imperative to invest in people within your
professional circles so that you have time to get
to know them, help them get to know you,
and build trust and respect. In the future, you
will be able to comfortably contact them when
youre looking to make a job change or add to
your team. If you find yourself feeling awkward
at networking events, its likely you are not par-
ticipating in something that is interesting and
thought provoking for you.
Action item: Look at your calendar and mark
out two lunch periods in the next month to
meet up with people from your network. These
networking lunches may well be some of the best
work time you will spend each month because
you are likely to connect on a deeper level, gain
valuable professional and technical insights, and
also make an impact in someones life.
3) Follow-up on social media.
After meeting new people, follow-up and
connect through social media. LinkedIn is a
good place for connecting with other profes-
sionals. LinkedIn is where most people think
to connect professionally.
However, just because you are connected
on LinkedIn or any social media platform,
does not mean you are instantly best friends.
You will still need to nurture and cultivate
relationships. Look for ways to stay in touch.
Find articles to share that you think will be
interesting to specific people, then copy the
URL and share it in a message. Periodically
check-in with your connections. Even a quick
hello message goes a long way.
One major benefit of being active on social
media is that you will be exposed to other
people who are likely outside your immediate
circles. Join groups on LinkedIn to interact
86 June 2017
with other interesting people who live and
work in different marketplaces. Gaining a
different perspective is a great way to grow
and develop and you may be an interest-
of the country.
4) So, what do you do?
Be ready to answer that all-too-common
question. In answering, you have a chance
to differentiate yourself from other people.
Stop and think about it. That question can
be a conversation killer. After you answer the
question, you typically ask them back, And
what do you do? Then where do you go with
the conversation? Its a dead-end question.
The best advice do not ask the dreaded So,
what do you do? Instead, ask other thought-
ful questions that will help you to engage in
better conversations. Some thought provoking
questions might include:
What brings you to this conference?
What have you learned at this trade show
that is the most intriguing to you so far?
What does your firm specialize in?
Conversations get much more interesting
and far less awkward when you are discussing
meaningful information beyond telling each
other your job titles.
In the end, networking can lead to great con-
versations and professional opportunities. Do
not hold yourself back. Plan to attend. Go. Bring
your business cards. Have a goal of meeting 2
to 3 people at the event. Then, wash, rinse, and
repeat. You will find, over time, that networking
is truly a wonderful way to meet and keep in
touch with other interesting and thought-pro-
voking professionals. This will, in turn, provide
you the opportunity to build your professional
network, enhance the probability
for future opportunities in your
career, and add interesting people
to your firm.
Born into a family of engineers but focusing
on the people side of engineering, Jennifer
Anderson (www.CareerCoachJen.com)
has nearly 20 years helping companies hire
and retain the right talent. She may be
reached at jen@careercoachjen.com.