3.

6 Diaphragm Design Page 1 of 1

3.6 Diaphragm Design

Floor and roof framing systems can be designed as horizontal diaphragms, to help in resisting lateral loads
from wind or earthquake. The reactions from the diaphragm are transmitted to shear walls or other lateral
load resisting systems as described in Sect. 3.2.3.

3.6.1 Method of Analysis

3.6.2 Shear Transfer Between Members

3.6.3 Chord Forces

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.6.1 Method of Analysis Page 1 of 1

3.6.1 Method of Analysis

The diaphragm is analyzed by considering the roof or floor as a deep horizontal beam, analogous to a plate
girder or I-beam. The shear walls or other lateral load resisting systems are the supports for this beam. As in
a beam, tension and compression are induced in the chords or "flanges" of the analogous beam. The shear in
the diaphragm is resisted by the "web" of the analogous beam. A diaphragm model using the analogous
beam is shown in Figure 3.6.1.

Figure 3.6.1 Analogous beam design of a diaphragm

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_06_01.htm 3/1/2007
3.6.2 Shear Transfer Between Members Page 1 of 2

3.6.2 Shear Transfer Between Members

In precast floors and roofs without composite topping, the individual components comprising a floor or roof
diaphragm must be connected together to act as a single diaphragm. Joints between precast components
which are parallel to the lateral load resisting system must be connected together to resist the diaphragm
shear forces as well as chord tension/compression forces at the boundary edges of the diaphragm. Joints
between the precast components which are perpendicular to the lateral load resisting system must be
connected together to resist horizontal shear (VQ/I).

The types of connections used to connect precast components together to form diaphragms vary depending
on the magnitude of the required connection capacity and the preference of the precast supplier
manufacturing and erecting the product. Two commonly used welded connections are shown in Figure 3.6.2.
Connections between members often serve functions in addition to the transfer of shear for lateral loads. For
example, weld plates in flanged members are often used to adjust differential camber. Grout keys may be
utilized to distribute concentrated loads.

Figure 3.6.2 Typical flange weld plate details

Precast components may be fabricated with grout keys and connected by grouting the joint. For members
connected by grout keys, a conservative value of 80 psi can be used for the design strength of the grouted
key. If necessary, reinforcement placed as shown in Figure 3.6.3 can be used to transfer the shear. This steel
is designed by the shear-friction principles discussed in Chapter 4.

Figure 3.6.3 Use of perimeter reinforcement as shear-friction steel

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_06_02.htm 3/1/2007
3.6.2 Shear Transfer Between Members Page 2 of 2

In floors and roofs with composite topping, the topping itself, or in conjunction with the precast components,
can act as the diaphragm, if adequately reinforced. Shear reinforcement, if required, can be determined by
shear-friction analysis and continuous reinforcement at the diaphragm boundaries may be provided to resist
chord tension forces.

Connections which transfer shear from the diaphragm to the shear walls or other lateral load resisting
systems are analyzed in the same manner as the connections between members.

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_06_02.htm 3/1/2007
3.6.3 Chord Forces Page 1 of 1

3.6.3 Chord Forces

Chord forces are calculated as shown in Figure 3.6.1. For roofs with intermediate supports as shown, the
shear stress is carried across the beam with weld plates or bars in grout keys as shown in Section A-A. Bars
are designed by shear-friction.

In flanged deck members, the chord tension at the perimeter of the building is usually transferred between
members by reinforced topping or tension connections.

In all buildings, a minimum amount of perimeter reinforcement is required to satisfy structural integrity (see
Sect. 3.10) [7]. These minimum requirements may be more than enough to resist the chord tension.

Figure 3.6.1 Analogous beam design of a diaphragm

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_06_03.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.1 General Page 1 of 1

3.7.1 General

In most cases, precast concrete shear walls will be the most economical lateral load resisting system for
precast concrete buildings. Precast shear walls are structurally efficient and relatively easy to manufacture.
They can be erected using a precaster's standard connections, which do not require production and erection
tolerances as exacting as those required by most other types of lateral load resisting systems. Splice sleeve
type connections are more demanding and require tighter tolerances. Shear walls are also economical
because they can be designed using structural walls already required by the building layout, such as exterior
walls, interior walls, and walls that enclose stairways, elevator and mechanical shafts.

Shear walls act as vertical cantilever beams, which transfer lateral forces acting parallel to the face of the
wall, from the superstructure to the foundation. Shear walls should be oriented to resist lateral loads applied
to the building in both principal axes of the building. Ideally, there should be at least two shear walls oriented
to resist lateral loads in both principal axes of the building. If only one shear wall is oriented in one principal
axis of the building, two shear walls should be provided in the orthogonal axis to resist diaphragm torsion.
See Figure 3.7.3(A). Alternatively, it is acceptable to orient the three shear walls in any non-collinear position.
Some codes require that lateral loads be applied in the direction of both principal axes simultaneously.

It is desirable to design shear walls as load bearing panels, whenever possible. The increased dead load
acting on the panel is an advantage because it increases the panel's resistance to uplift and overturning.

The distribution of the total lateral force acting on a building to each individual shear wall is influenced by the
following factors:

1. The supporting soil and footings

2. The stiffness of the diaphragm

3. The relative flexural and shear stiffness of each shear wall

4. The eccentricity of the lateral loads to the center of rigidity of the shear walls

Generally, it is common practice to neglect the deformation of the soil and the footings when distributing
shears among shear walls.

If the depth-to-span ratio of a diaphragm is small, the diaphragm will be "flexible" and may deflect
significantly when subjected to lateral loads. Flexible diaphragms distribute shears to each shear wall relative
to the tributary width of diaphragm loading each shear wall. If the depth-to-span ratio of a diaphragm is
large, the diaphragm will be "rigid" and not deflect as significantly as a flexible diaphragm, when subjected to
lateral loads. Rigid diaphragms distribute shears to each shear wall in proportion to the shear wall's relative
stiffness. In precast concrete building design, it is common practice to assume that floor and roof diaphragms
act as rigid diaphragms.

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_01.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.1 General Page 1 of 1

3.7.1 General

In most cases, precast concrete shear walls will be the most economical lateral load resisting system for
precast concrete buildings. Precast shear walls are structurally efficient and relatively easy to manufacture.
They can be erected using a precaster's standard connections, which do not require production and erection
tolerances as exacting as those required by most other types of lateral load resisting systems. Splice sleeve
type connections are more demanding and require tighter tolerances. Shear walls are also economical
because they can be designed using structural walls already required by the building layout, such as exterior
walls, interior walls, and walls that enclose stairways, elevator and mechanical shafts.

Shear walls act as vertical cantilever beams, which transfer lateral forces acting parallel to the face of the
wall, from the superstructure to the foundation. Shear walls should be oriented to resist lateral loads applied
to the building in both principal axes of the building. Ideally, there should be at least two shear walls oriented
to resist lateral loads in both principal axes of the building. If only one shear wall is oriented in one principal
axis of the building, two shear walls should be provided in the orthogonal axis to resist diaphragm torsion.
See Figure 3.7.3(A). Alternatively, it is acceptable to orient the three shear walls in any non-collinear position.
Some codes require that lateral loads be applied in the direction of both principal axes simultaneously.

It is desirable to design shear walls as load bearing panels, whenever possible. The increased dead load
acting on the panel is an advantage because it increases the panel's resistance to uplift and overturning.

The distribution of the total lateral force acting on a building to each individual shear wall is influenced by the
following factors:

1. The supporting soil and footings

2. The stiffness of the diaphragm

3. The relative flexural and shear stiffness of each shear wall

4. The eccentricity of the lateral loads to the center of rigidity of the shear walls

Generally, it is common practice to neglect the deformation of the soil and the footings when distributing
shears among shear walls.

If the depth-to-span ratio of a diaphragm is small, the diaphragm will be "flexible" and may deflect
significantly when subjected to lateral loads. Flexible diaphragms distribute shears to each shear wall relative
to the tributary width of diaphragm loading each shear wall. If the depth-to-span ratio of a diaphragm is
large, the diaphragm will be "rigid" and not deflect as significantly as a flexible diaphragm, when subjected to
lateral loads. Rigid diaphragms distribute shears to each shear wall in proportion to the shear wall's relative
stiffness. In precast concrete building design, it is common practice to assume that floor and roof diaphragms
act as rigid diaphragms.

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_01.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.1.1 Relative Stiffness of Shear Walls Page 1 of 1

3.7.1.1 Relative Stiffness of Shear Walls

The relative stiffness of each shear wall is determined by comparing the rigidity of an individual shear wall
with the sum of the rigidities of all the shear walls. The rigidity of solid shear walls and distribution of lateral
loads are further discussed in Sects. 3.7.2 and 3.7.3, respectively.

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_01_01.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.1.2 Eccentricity of Lateral Loads Page 1 of 2

3.7.1.2 Eccentricity of Lateral Loads

A rigid diaphragm subjected to lateral load will translate in a direction parallel to the applied load. See Figure
3.7.1(A). The magnitude of the diaphragm translation is related to the sum of the rigidities of the resisting
shear walls. If the center of rigidity is not coincident with the line of action of the applied loads, the
diaphragm will tend to rotate about the center of rigidity. See Figure 3.7.1(B). The location of the center of
lateral load can be different for different load cases, such as wind loading and seismic loading. The dimension
between the center of rigidity and center of lateral load is the eccentricity of the lateral load resisting system.
Most codes have requirements for minimum eccentricity, to provide resistance for "accidental torsion."

Figure 3.7.1 Translation and rotation of rigid diaphragms

Shear walls in precast concrete buildings can be individual wall panels, or individual wall panels which are
connected together to function as a single shear wall. Connecting wall panels together to create a single
shear wall is done in a manner similar to that described for connecting floor and roof components together to
form diaphragms, as discussed in Sect. 3.6.2.

It is desirable to design the wall panels as single uncoupled units. This reduces the cost of connections and
the magnitude of volume change restraint forces that occur when many wall panels are connected together
to form one large shear wall.

If the overturning moment results in excessive uplift to an individual, uncoupled shear wall panel, multiple
wall panels can be connected together. Connecting individual wall panels together greatly increases the shear
resistance and reduces uplift of the shear wall. Locate the required panel-to-panel connections near mid-
length of the wall to minimize volume change restraint forces. As previously stated, it is desirable to minimize
the number of wall panels connected together to minimize volume change forces and number of connections
required.

The stiffness of a shear wall may be increased by connecting it to perpendicular walls, which act as flanges.
The effective flange width that can be assumed for such walls is illustrated in Figure 3.7.2. Generally, the use
of "flanges," increases the shear wall's flexural rigidity, but has little effect on its shear rigidity. In some
structures, such as Example 3.7.3, it may be desirable to connect perpendicular walls to a shear wall to
increase its dead load, which increases the shear wall's resistance to overturning moment caused by lateral
loads.

Figure 3.7.2 Effective width of wall perpendicular to shear walls [7]

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_01_02.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.1.2 Eccentricity of Lateral Loads Page 2 of 2

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_01_02.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.2 Rigidity of Solid Shear Walls Page 1 of 1

3.7.2 Rigidity of Solid Shear Walls

In order to determine the distribution of lateral loads, the relative rigidity of all shear walls must be
established. Rigidity is defined as:

r = 1/ (Eq. 3.7.1)

where:

 = sum of flexural and shear deflections.

For a structure with rectangular shear walls of the same material, with a wall height-to-length ratio of less
than about 0.3, the flexural stiffness can be neglected, and the distribution made in accordance with the
cross sectional area of the walls. If the height-to-length ratio is greater than about 3.0, the shear stiffness
can be neglected, and the distribution made in accordance with the moments of inertia, based on the walls'
plan dimensions.

When the height-to-length ratio is between 0.3 and 3.0, an equivalent moment of inertia, Ieq, can be derived
for simplifying the calculation of wall rigidity. Ieq is an approximation of the moment of inertia that would
result in a flexural deflection equal to the combined flexural and shear deflections of the wall. Figure 3.12.16
compares the deflections and Ieq for several load and restraint conditions.

Connecting or coupling of shear walls or walls with large openings will also affect stiffness, as discussed in
Sects. 3.7.5 and 3.7.6.

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_02.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.3 Distribution of Lateral Loads Page 1 of 1

3.7.3 Distribution of Lateral Loads

Lateral loads are distributed to each shear wall in proportion to its rigidity. It is usually considered sufficient to
design for lateral loads in only two orthogonal directions.

When the shear walls are symmetrical with respect to the center of load application, the force resisted by any
shear wall is:

Fi = (Eq. 3.7.2)

where:

Fi the force resisted by an

=
individual shear wall, i

ri = the rigidity of wall i

.r = sum of rigidities of all shear

walls

W = total lateral load

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_03.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.4 Unsymmetrical Shear Walls Page 1 of 3

3.7.4 Unsymmetrical Shear Walls

The analysis of structures which have shear walls placed unsymmetrically with respect to the center of the
lateral load, should consider the torsional effect in the analysis. Typical examples are shown in Figure 3.7.3.

Figure 3.7.3 Unsymmetrical shear walls

For complex structures such as multi-story buildings and buildings subjected to seismic loading, the
distribution of lateral loads to shear walls should be based on a rigorous analysis, which calculates relative
rigidities of shear walls in terms of their calculated

shear stiffness and flexural stiffness. This type of analysis is required in order to accurately determine the
load distribution to each story and the story drifts based on a separate calculation of the shear and bending
deflection of the shear walls in each story. Refer to Ref. 24 for more specific information regarding this
method of analysis.

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_04.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.4 Unsymmetrical Shear Walls Page 2 of 3

For most single-story buildings subjected to wind loads, a simplified, approximate analysis is commonly used
to determine torsion in unsymmetrically located shear walls. This type of analysis assumes a unit thickness for
all shear walls, similar to the method used to design welds as discussed in Sect. 6.5.6. The method is
described in the following example.

Example 3.7.1 Design of Unsymmetrical Shear Walls

Given:

The structure of Figure 3.7.3(C). All walls are 8 ft high and 8 in. thick.

Problem:

Determine the shear in each wall, assuming the floors and roof are rigid diaphragms. Walls D and E are not
connected to Wall B.

Solution:

Maximum height-to-length ratio of north-south walls = 8/30 < 0.3. Thus, for distribution of the direct wind
shear, neglect flexural stiffness. Since walls are the same thickness and material, distribute in proportion to
length.

Total lateral load, W = 0.20 x 200 = 40 kips

Determine center of rigidity:

x =

= 130.9 ft from left

center of building, since walls D and E are placed symmetrically

y =
about the center of the building in the north-south direction.

Torsional moment, MT=40(30.9)=1236 kip-ft

Determine the polar moment of inertia of the shear wall group about the center of rigidity:

Ip = Ixx + Iyy

Ixx = S"y2 of east-west walls

= 2(15)(15)2 = 6750 ft3

Iyy = S"x2 of north-south walls

40(130.9 - 75)2 + 30(140 - 130.9)2 + 40

=
(180 - 130.9)2

= 223,909 ft3

Ip = 6750 + 223,909 = 230,659 ft3

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_04.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.4 Unsymmetrical Shear Walls Page 3 of 3

Shear in north-south
walls =

Wall
=
A

= 14.5 + 12.0 = 26.5 kips

Wall
=
B

= 10.91 - 1.46 = 9.45 kips

Wall
=
C

= 14.5 - 10.5 = 4.0 kips

Shear in east-west
walls =

1236(15)(15)/230,659 =
=
1.21 kips

Note: Some building codes do not allow torsional effects to be subtracted (only added).

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_04.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.5 Coupled Shear Walls Page 1 of 2

3.7.5 Coupled Shear Walls

Two individual shear walls separated by large openings may be connected together with structural members
which can resist axial and/or flexural loads. The combined stiffness of the two coupled shear walls is greater
than the sum of their uncoupled stiffness. Coupling shear walls can reduce the lateral deflection (drift) in a
building and reduce the magnitude of the moments for which a shear wall must be designed.

Figure 3.7.4 shows two examples of coupled shear walls. The effect of coupling is to increase the stiffness by
transfer of shear and moment through the coupling beam. The wall curvatures are altered from that of a
cantilever because of the frame action developed. Figure 3.7.5 shows how the deflected shapes differ in
response to lateral loads.

Figure 3.7.4 Coupled shear walls

Figure 3.7.5 Response to lateral loads

Several approaches may be used to analyze the response of coupled shear walls. A simple approach is to
ignore the coupling effect by considering the walls as independent cantilevers. This method results in a
conservative wall design. However, if the coupling beam is rigidly connected, significant shears and moments
will occur in the beam that may cause unsightly and possibly dangerous cracking. To avoid the problem, the
beam-to-panel connection can be detailed for little or no rigidity, or the beam can be designed to resist the
actual shears and moments.

Finite element analysis may be used to determine the distribution of shears and moments within a coupled
shear wall. The accuracy (and cost) of such an analysis is a function of the element size used. This method is
usually reserved for very complex structures.

A "plane frame" computer analysis will be sufficiently accurate for the great majority of structures. In
modeling the coupled shear wall as a frame, the member dimensions must be considered, as a centerline
analysis may yield inaccurate results. A suggested model is shown in Figure 3.7.6(A).

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_05.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.5 Coupled Shear Walls Page 2 of 2

Either a finite element or frame analysis may be used to determine the deflection of a coupled shear wall, and
hence its equivalent moment of inertia. This may then be used to determine distribution of shears in a
building which contains both solid and coupled shear walls. Some frame analysis programs do not calculate
shear deformations; if significant, shear deformations may have to be calculated separately.

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_05.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 1 of 21

3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings

Window panels and other wall panels with large openings may also be analyzed with a plane frame computer
program. Figure 3.7.6(B) shows suggested models. Where length-to-depth ratios for vertical and horizontal
segments are similar, a frame model based on segment centerlines will be reasonably accurate.

Figure 3.7.6 Computer models

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 2 of 21

Otherwise, an analysis similar to that described for coupled shear walls may be used. Recent research on

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 3 of 21

shear walls with openings is available [25].

As with coupled shear walls, the deflections yielded by the computer analysis may be used to determine
equivalent stiffness for determining lateral load distribution. Shear deflections, if significant, may have to be
hand calculated and added to the flexural stiffnesses from the frame analysis.

In very tall structures, vertical shear and axial deformations influence the rigidity of panels with large
openings, so a more rigorous analysis may be required.

Example 3.7.2 One-Story Building

Given:

The wind load analysis and design of a typical one-story industrial building are illustrated by the structure
shown in Figure 3.7.7. 8-ft wide double tees are used for both the roof and walls. The local building code
specifies that a wind load of 25 psf be used for buildings of this height.

Figure 3.7.7 Example 3.7.2

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 4 of 21

Solution:

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 5 of 21

1. Calculate forces, reactions, shears and moments:

Total wind force to roof:

[25(160)(19/2 + 2.5)]/1000 =
W = 48 kips

VL = VR = 24 kips

Diaphragm moment:

= = 960 kip-ft

2. Check sliding resistance of the shear wall:

Determine dead load on the footing:

8DT12 wall = 37(23.5)(120) 12 104,340

=
in. x 18 in. footing lb

= 1(1.5)(150)(120) = 27,000 lb

Assume 2 ft backfill = 100(1.5)

= 36,000 lb
(120)(2)

____________

167,340
Total =
lb

Assume coefficient of friction against

granular soil, Es = 0.5

Sliding resistance =
EsN = 0.5(167.34)

= 83.67 kips

Factor of safety =
= 3.49 OK
83.67/24

(Note: A 1.5 factor of safety is specified by some building codes.)

3. Check overturning resistance:

Applied overturning
= 24(3 + 19)
moment

= 528 kip-ft

Resistance to overturning:

Assume axis of rotation at leeward edge of the building, and that all the panels are connected.

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 6 of 21

(Note: Some engineers prefer to use the more conservative assumption of an axis at b/5, b/4 or
b/3 from the leeward edge, depending on the foundation conditions.)

Resisting
= 167.34(120/2)
moment

= 10,040 kip-ft

Factor of
= 10,040/528
safety

= 19.0 > 1.5 OK

4. Analyze connections:

a. Shear ties in double tee roof joint:

(Maximum load at first tee to tee joint)

Applied
= [(80 - 8)/80](24)
shear

= 21.6 kips

Load factor by ACI 318-95 = 1.3

Connection load factor (see Sect. 6.3) choose 1.2

Vu 21.6(1.3)(1.2) = 33.7
=
kips

vu = 33.7/120 = 0.28 kips/ft

Use #4 ties as shown in Figure 3.6.2

>Vn = 15.3 kips

Required spacing = 15.3/0.28 = 54.6 ft

(Note: Most engineers and precasters prefer a maximum connection

spacing of about 8 to 15 ft for roof diaphragms.)

b. Shear ties at the shear walls:

Vu = 24(1.3)(1.2) = 37.4 kips

vu = 37.4/120 = 0.31 kips/ft

Figure 3.7.8 Connection of roof tee to wall

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 7 of 21

Wall tee connections as shown in Figure 3.6.2 are designed similarly to the shear tie between roof tees. This
would require a spacing of 15.3/0.31 = 49.3 ft. In order to distribute the load to the wall panels, at least one
connection per panel is required. From Figure 3.7.8 it is apparent that these connections should occur at the
tee stems. Thus a spacing of 4 ft or 8 ft would be used in this case.

Other types of connections using headed studs are commonly used for this application. Design of studs is
shown in Chapter 6.

In some cases, the designer may find it necessary to provide a connection that permits vertical movement of

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 8 of 21

the roof member. This is illustrated in Figure 3.7.8(B). As an alternative detail, a slotted insert may be cast in
the panel.

c. Chord force (see Figure 3.7.9)

T = C = M/b = 960/120

= 8.0 kips

Tu = 1.3(8.0) = 10.4 kips

Figure 3.7.9 Chord forces

Figure 3.7.10 Panels acting as individual units in a shear wall

The chord force can be transmitted between members by ties at the roof tees, wall panels or a combination,
as illustrated in Figure 3.7.9. The force through the member flanges can be transmitted by the flange welded
wire reinforcement. These ties and transmission of forces will typically provide the tie requirements given in
Sect. 3.10 for structural integrity.

d. Wall panel connections:

This shear wall may be designed to act as a series of independent units, without ties between
the panels. The shear force is assumed to be distributed equally among the wall panels (see

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 9 of 21

Figure 3.7.10).

n = 120/8 = 15 panels

V = VR/n = 24/15 = 1.6 kips

D = 37(8)(23.5) = 6956 lb = 6.96 kips

Design base connection for 1.3W - 0.9D

Tu = 1.3(1.53)(21) - 0.9(6.96)(2)

= 41.8 - 12.5

= 29.3 kips tension

As an alternative, the shear walls may be designed with two or more panels connected
together. Two analysis options are available. Example 3.11.7 illustrates an analysis where
tension and compression compensate one another with simple shear connections across the
vertical joints. In that system, tie-down connections may be required at the end panels of a
string of interconnected panels. The second method is to connect a number of panels with rigid
connections so as to have the connected panels act as a monolithic unit. By engaging more
weight, tie-down forces can be reduced or eliminated. Volume change restraint must be
considered when determining the number of panels to be interconnected.

Analysis of a rigidly connected panel group is dependent upon a number of factors. Connection
stiffness determines whether the group will act monolithically or act as analyzed in Example
3.11.7. The aspect ratio of the rigidly connected group will affect the stress distribution at the
base. While a panel group with a high height-to-length ratio may act nearly as a cantilever
beam, a group with a medium to low ratio of height to length will act as a deep beam and
exhibit non-linear stress distributions. Determination of tie-down forces, vertical joint forces, and
base shear distribution will be a function of the aspect ratio. The shear and flexural stiffness of
the individual panels will have a similar effect on force distribution.

A simplified analysis is presented for this problem. The analysis is fairly accurate for the aspect
ratio used, and assumes highly rigid panel-to-panel connections. However, extrapolation to
other aspect ratios is not recommended.

Factored
= 1.3(1.6) = 2.08 kips per panel
shear

Factored
= 0.9(6.96)
weight

= 6.26 kips per panel

Figure 3.7.11 Rigidly connected panel group

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 10 of 21

From Figure 3.7.11(A), try connecting two panel units:

Design base connection for:

Tu = 1.3W - 0.9 D

Tu [2(1.3)(1.6)(21) - 0.9(6.96)
=
(2+10)]/12

= 1.02 kips

From Figure 3.7.11(B), examine joint forces using individual free body diagrams. On the tension
side, assume the tie-down connection is concentrated at one stem. Locate a panel-to-panel
connection 17.5 ft from bottom of panel.

.Fy:
= 6.26 + 1.02 = 7.28 kips
Vu1

Cu1 [21(4.16) + 2(6.26) - 6

=
(7.28)]/17.5

Cu1 = 3.21 kips

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 11 of 21

.Fx:
= 4.16 - 3.21 = 0.95 kips
Vu2

On the compression side, from Figure 3.7.11(C):

.Fy = 0:

Cu = 7.28 + 6.26 = 13.54 kips

.Fx = 0:

Vu3 = 3.21 kips

Check if .Mcu = 0 OK

17.5(3.21) - 6(7.28) - 2(6.26) = 0

Therefore,.Mcu = 0 OK

Example 3.7.3 Four-Story Building

Figure 3.7.12 Example 3.7.3 - Four-story building design

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 12 of 21

Given:

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 13 of 21

The wind load analysis and design of a typical four-story residential building is illustrated by the
structure shown in Figure 3.7.12. 8-in. deep hollow-core units are used for the floors and roof,
and 8-in. thick precast concrete walls are used for all walls shown. Unfactored loads are given
as follows:

Gravity loads: L.L. D.L.

Roof 30

Roofing, mechanical,
10
etc.

Hollow-core slabs 64

________ ________

30 psf 74 psf

Typical floor

Living areas 40

Corridors 100

Partitions 10

Hollow-core slabs 64

_______

74 psf

Walls 100 psf

Stairs 100 130 psf

Wind loads:

0 to 30 ft above grade = 25 psf

30 to 34 ft 8 in. above grade = 30 psf

Solution:

Figure 3.7.13 Loads to transverse walls - four-story design example

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 14 of 21

1. For wind in the transverse (east-west) direction, common practice for this structure would be
to conservatively neglect the resistance provided by the stair, elevator and longitudinal walls.

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 15 of 21

Thus, two 27 ft long interior bearing walls can be assumed to resist the wind on one 26 ft bay.
The wind and gravity loads on the wall are shown in Figure 3.7.13.

Concentrated loads from the corridor lintels can be assumed to be distributed as shown in
Figure 3.7.13. In this example, these loads are conservatively neglected to simplify the
calculations.

Check overturning of shear wall:

D.L. resisting moment about toe of wall

27(27/2)[1.92 + 3(2.72)
=
+ 0.8]

= 3966 kip-ft

Factor of
= 3966/205.1
safety

= 19.3 > 1.5 OK

Check for tension using factored loads:

Dead weight on wall

[1.92 + 3(2.72) +
P =
0.8](27)

= 293.8 kips

Maximum moment at foundation

fut =

= -7.60 klf (compression)

= 205.1 kip-ft

No tension connections are required between panels and the foundation. Thus, the building is
stable under wind loads in east-west direction. (Note: Structural integrity considerations may
dictate the use of minimum vertical ties. See Sect. 3.10.)

2. For wind in the longitudinal (north-south) direction, the shear walls will be
connected to the load bearing walls. The assumed resisting elements are shown in
Figure 3.7.14; a summary of the properties is shown in Table 3.7.1. Sample
calculations of these properties are given below for element A.

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 16 of 21

Effective width of perpendicular wall (see Figure 3.7.2) is the smaller of:

12t = 12 96
= or
(8) in.,

(1/6)
69.3
(34.67) = Use 5 ft 8 in.
in.
(12)

Area of 4.67
= = 3.11 ft2
web (0.67)

Area of 5.67
= = 3.78 ft2
flange (0.67)

______________

6.89 ft2

yb =

= 3.43 ft

yt = 4.67 - 3.43 = 1.24 ft

I = + 3.11(3.43 - 2.33)2 + 3.78

(1.24 - 0.33)2

= 12.58 ft4

Equivalent stiffness is calculated using the Case 1 multi-story formula from Table 3.12.16.

Ieq =

7.31
= =
ft4

Ieq is essentially a relative stiffness:

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 17 of 21

1/;
Kr =  =

Kr =

Since 3, E, P, and hs are all constants when comparing stiffnesses, Kr = Ieq.

Distribution of load to element A based on its relative stiffness is (see Table 3.7.1):

= = 1.98%

The shears and moments in the north-south direction are shown in Figure 3.7.15, and the
distributions are shown in Table 3.7.2.

Figure 3.7.15 Wind load in North-South direction

Table 3.7.2 Distribution of wind shears and moments (north-south direction)

4th floor 3rd floor 2nd floor 1st floor

Shear Moment Shear Moment Shear Moment Shear Moment
% 14.71 66.7 27.98 251.7 41.24 551.8 54.51 966.9
Element Dist. kips kip-ft kips kip-ft kips kip-ft kips kip-ft
A 1.98 0.29 1.32 0.55 4.98 0.82 10.9 1.08 19.1
B 3.98 0.59 2.65 1.11 10.0 1.64 22.0 2.17 38.5
C 7.33 1.08 4.89 2.05 18.4 3.02 40.4 4.00 70.9
D 7.63 1.12 5.09 2.13 19.2 3.15 42.1 4.16 73.8
E 4.01 0.59 2.67 1.12 10.1 1.65 22.1 2.19 38.8
F 6.88 1.01 4.59 1.93 17.3 2.84 38.0 3.75 66.5
G 7.43 1.09 4.96 2.08 18.7 3.06 41.0 4.05 71.8

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 18 of 21

To check overturning, consider element B at the first floor:

From Figure 3.7.13 the dead load on the 6 ft-4 in. portion of element B:

= 1.92 + 3(2.72) + 0.8 = 10.88 kip/ft

The dead load on the 8 ft-0 in. portion of element

B is the weight of the wall:

= 34.67(0.1) = 3.47 kip/ft

The resisting moment is then:

MR 10.88(5.67)(4) +
= 3.47(8)(4)

358 kip-ft x 11
= elements

= 3938 kip-ft

Factor of safety = 3938/966.9 = 4.1 > 1.5 OK

(Note: This conservatively neglects the contribution of the other elements.)

To check for tension, also consider element B:

Total dead weight on the wall

10.88(5.67) + 3.47(8) =
= 89.45 kips

Total wall area

= (8.0 + 5.67)0.67 = 9.16 ft2

M = 38.5 kip-ft (see Table 3.7.2)

fut =

= -1.81 ksf (compression)

No net uplift exists between the panels and the foundation. The building is stable under wind
loads in the north-south direction.

The connections required to assure that the elements will act in a composite manner as
assumed can be designed by considering element A. The unit stress at the interface is
determined using the classic equation for horizontal shear:

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 19 of 21

vh = VQ/I

5.67(0.67)(1.24-0.33)
Q =
= 3.46 ft3

vh 0.297
= =
kips/ft

Total shear = 0.297(8.0) = 2.37 kips

Connections similar to those shown in Figure 3.7.12 can be designed using the principles
outlined in Chapter 6.

Design of floor diaphragm:

Analysis procedures for the floor diaphragm are described in Sect. 3.6. For this example refer to
Figure 3.7.16.

Figure 3.7.16 Diaphragm analysis

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 20 of 21

The factored wind load for a typical floor is:

wu = 1.3(25)(8.67) = 282 plf

For wind from the east or west:

VRu = VLu = = 3.67 kips

Cu = Tu = =

= 0.42 kips

As Figure 3.7.16 shows the chord tension, Tu, is parallel to the span of the hollow-core slabs
and therefore will be resisted by the flexural reinforcement of the slabs.

The shear force to be resisted by the grout key adjacent to the chord tension, Tu, is
approximately equal to Tu. The ability of this grout key to transfer this force (0.42 kips) in shear
must therefore be checked.

The resisting shear strength of the grout key is assumed to be 80 psi, (See Sect. 3.6.2) along
the full length of the keyway.

The shear force that this grout key is capable of resisting is:

>Vn = A0.080 ksi

>Vn = 26(12)(3)(0.080)
= 74.9 kips

74.9 kips > 0.42

=
kips OK

For wind from the north or south:

VRu = VLu =

Cu = Tu = =

= 0.73 kips

Check the resisting shear force of the first grout key:

>Vn = A0.080 ksi

>Vn = 181.33(12)(3)
(0.080) = 522 kips

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.6 Shear Walls with Large Openings Page 21 of 21

522 kips > 8.65 kips

= OK

Chord reinforcement should be designed to resist the chord tension, Tu. This chord
reinforcement is usually embedded in pour strips at the ends of the hollow- core slabs.

Tension forces such as VRu and Tu for wind in both directions must also be transferred into
shearwalls through appropriate connections. By comparing the reinforcing and connections
required for structural integrity requirements (Sect. 3.10), it can be shown, usually by
inspection, that structural integrity details amply provide resistance for the transfer of these
tension forces.

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_06.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.7 Exterior Panels as Shear Walls Page 1 of 2

3.7.7 Exterior Panels as Shear Walls

In many structures it is economical to take advantage of the strength and rigidity of exterior panels, and
design them to serve as the lateral load resisting system. The effectiveness of such a system is largely
dependent on the panel-to-panel connections.

The relative stiffness and percent distribution for the elements in this table are assumed the same for all
stories. The exact values may be slightly different for each story because the values change due to reduced
flange width (see Figure 3.7.2).

Figure 3.7.17 illustrates that the method of interconnecting individual wall panels can be selected to maximize
the efficiency of the building's shear wall and foundation systems in resisting lateral loads applied to the
building. If all of the individual wall panels located on one wall of a building are connected together to
transfer shear forces across the panel joints, the entire wall of the building acts as one "plate shaped" shear
wall. See Figure 3.7.17(A). If panel-to- panel shear connections are provided at the building corners, the
shear wall will become "channel" or "tube" shaped in cross section. The channel or tube shaped shear walls
are structurally stiffer than the plate shaped shear wall and engage more of the building foundation to resist
the shear wall reactions. See Figure 3.7.17(B).

Because the components and the connections in a "tube" are not completely rigid, full tube behavior does not
develop. Figure 3.7.17(B) illustrates the difference. The peaking of the foundation reaction at the corner
results from shear lag, which limits the effective width of the "flange". Accurate evaluation of shear lag is
difficult, but analytical and research studies have indicated the following limitations on the effective flange are
sufficiently accurate for most structures:

1. One-half the length of the shear wall.

2. One-third length of windward or leeward wall.

3. One-tenth the height of the building.

4. Six times the thickness of the "flange" wall.

5. Distance to nearest major opening.

6. One-half the distance to the nearest shear wall.

Figure 3.7.17 Foundation reaction distributions resulting from lateral loads

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_07.htm 3/1/2007
3.7.7 Exterior Panels as Shear Walls Page 2 of 2

file://E:\html\Ch03\03_07_07.htm 3/1/2007