This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1 of 9
SEAONNovember 18th, 2010Design of Multi-Story Light-Frame Shear Walls
Shane Vilasineekul, P.E.
Design Wood or CFS Shear Walls?
CODE
ASCE 7-05§ 1609 Wind§ 1613 Seismic
AISI S213-07§ 2210.6 CFS Lateral Design
AF&PA SDPWS-08§ 2305.1 Wood Lateral-Force-Resisting Systems
Solution:Tension, T3 = C3 =V3 x h / b + T2 =2,000 lbs x 10’ / 4’ + 6,250= 11,250 lbs
1,000
T1 C1500
T2 C2
Multi-Story Shear Walls
500
T3 C3
= 13,585 lbs when using Center-of-T to Center-of-C
Page 6 of 9
Shrinkage
§ 2304.3.3 Shrinkage.Wood walls and bearing partitions shall not support more than two floors and a roof unless an analysis satisfactory to the building official shows that shrinkage of the wood framing will not have adverse effects on the structure…
Shrinkage Amount DOC PS 20-05
§ 6.2.3.10.25% Shrinkage for each 1% change in moisture content of dry lumber
(11.25”)*(0.0025)*(19%-9%) = 0.28”
Shrinkage
1st
Story
2nd
Story
3rd
Story
4th
Story
Tie-Off at Every Floor
Page 7 of 9
Seismic Requirements
ASCE 7-05• Table 12.2-1: R=6.5 for light-framed bearing wall systems
sheathed with WSP or steel sheets• § 12.10.2.1: collectors, splices, and connections in structures
braced only with light-frame shear walls exempt from overstrength design
AISI S213-07• § C1.1: R≤3.0, no special requirements (SDC A-C only)• § C5 Special Seismic Requirements for R>3.0
– Connections - Available Strength shall exceed lower of:a) Amplified Seismic Load (Ω0 load) or, b) Nominal Tensile Strength of the member
– Vertical Boundary Members and Uplift Anchorage - Nominal Strength to resist lower of:
a) Amplified Seismic Load (Ω0 load) or, b) Loads the system can deliver
Shear Wall Deflection
Bending Shear
Nail Slip
Wall Anchor
Slip
Shear Wall Deflection
• IBC-09 Eqn. 23-2
• AF&PA SDPWS-08 Eqn. 4.3-1
• AISI S213-07 Eqn. C2.1-1
vsheathingcs b
hvGt
vhbAE
vhδ
βωωωω
ρωωδ +
++=
2
43245
121
38
bhdhe
Gtvh
EAbvh
an +++=∆ 75.08 3
bh
Gvh
EAbvh a
aSW
∆++=
10008 3
δ
Shear Distribution
Rigid Diaphragm• ΔD ≤ 2ΔS• Distributes forces based
on relative stiffness of shear walls below
• Can distribute torsional moment
Flexible Diaphragm• ΔD > 2ΔS• Distributes forces based
on tributary area of shear walls below
Page 8 of 9
• ASCE 7-05: Idealized as Flexible– § 12.3.1.1 WSP & untopped steel deck diaphragms in
1. Limited toppings2. Story drift limits3. WSP or steel sheet shear walls4. Cantilevered diaphragm design
Alternative to Shear Wall & Diaphragm Deflection Calcs.
NEESWood Capstone Test:World’s Largest Earthquake Test
NEESWood• Network for Earthquake
Engineering Simulation Wood
• 2005 NSF Funded Project
• 4-Year, 5-University Program
• Goal: Develop Performance-Based Seismic Design (PBSD) Philosophy for Mid-Rise Wood-Frame Construction
• Culminated in 2009 Capstone Test
NEESWood Capstone Test:World’s Largest Earthquake Test
Capstone Test Objectives1. Confirm NEESWood-developed PBSD philosophy
satisfies objectives2. Provide data set for verification/calibration of
nonlinear dynamic models3. Confirm PBSD philosophy for steel/wood-frame
NEESWood Capstone Test:World’s Largest Earthquake Test
Capstone Building• 4-months to construct• 6-stories of wood framing on 1-story steel frame• 14,000 ft2 wood building• 628-kip wood building (with steel plates added)• Largest building ever tested on a shake table• Worlds Largest Shake Table: Miki City, Japan
Page 9 of 9
NEESWood Capstone Test:World’s Largest Earthquake Test
Capstone Test3 Tests using the Canoga Park Record of Northridge Earthquake (6.7 magnitude)• Test 1: 53% of record, 0.22g, 72-yr return period• Test 2: 120% of record, 0.50g, 475-yr return period• Test 3: 180% of record, 0.76g, 2500-yr return period
-0.7-0.6-0.5-0.4-0.3-0.2-0.1
00.10.20.30.40.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (sec)
Acc
eler
atio
n (g
's)
-0.7-0.6-0.5-0.4-0.3-0.2-0.1
00.10.20.30.40.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (sec)
Acc
eler
atio
n (g
's)
NEESWood Capstone Test:World’s Largest Earthquake Test