2018IBC SEAOC Structural Seismic Design Manual Vol.1, Code Application Examples, 2019 234pp PDF

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
2018 IBC®SEAOC
STRUCTURAL/SEISMIC
DESIGN MANUAL
VOLUME 1
CODE APPLICATION EXAMPLES
•
..,,~
•
0
. .• ~
t
! i
• •
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Copyright
Copyrtght 0 2020 Structuta1 Engtneers Assocaatton of California. All t1ghts reserved. This publication
or any partlhereof must not be reproduced in any form wtlhoutlhe writte.n permission of the Structw'al
Engineers Associatton of California.
Publisher
Sttucrurol Engineers As.c;ociatton of California (SEAOC)
921 lhhStre<~Su1te 1100
Sacrament~ California 95814
Telephone: (916)447- 1 198; Fax: (916)444-1 501
E-matl: seaoc@seaoc.org;. Web address: \\-'Ww.seaoc:.org
The Structuro.l Engineers Association ofCalifornia (SEAOC) is a professional a~atioo of fOur regional
membe,r organizuions (Southe.m Cahfomia, Nonhem California, San Diego, and Central caJitOrnia).
SEAOC represenlS lhe structutal englnetring communi[)' in Clllifornia. Thts docunlent is published in
keeping wath SEAOC,s stated mts:sion:
To ach•ance the structural engineering profession; to provide the public w1th Sltuctures of
depc.ndable perfOrmance through the application ofstate-of-lhe-an structural engineering
pnnc1ples~ to asslstthe public in obtaining professional st.rue:tural e:ng.iJ\etrmg servtces~ to
promote natural hazard maligation; to pl'OVide contlnumg educ:auon and encourage reseatch;
to provide suuctutal engineers with lhe most current infonnation and tools to impl'ove their
prac.uce~ and to maintain the honor and dignity of the profession.
Editor
lnremauonal Code Council
Disclaimer
While the i.nfonnation presented in thas document is believed to be correc.t, neither SEAOC nor its member
organizations, committee~ writers. editors, or individuals who have contributed to thi..~ pub1ication make
any Yiamuuy. expressed or 1mphed, or assume any legal liability or responsibility lOr the use. apphcauon
of. and/or reference to opmlon~ findings. conclusioos. or recommendations included in th1s publication.
The material presented in this publication should n01 be used fot any specific: application without competent
e;camination and vertfication of its accuracy, suitability. and applicabtlity. Users of information from this
pubhcauon assume all ltabiluy artstng from such use.
F "" Printing: May 2020
ISBN: 978- 1-60983-996-3
T025 169
ii 2018/BC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, \01. 1
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Suggestions for Improvement
Comments and suggesttons f« Improvements are welcome and should be se.ru to the followmg:
Structutal Engineers Association ofCaJitbmia (SEAOC)

Don SchirtSke, ExecutiVe DlrectOC'
921 lith Stteet, Suite 1100
Sactamento, Cali forma 95814
Telephone: (916)447- 1198; Fax: (916)444- 1501
E-mail: dschmske@seaoc.org
Errata Notification
SEAOC has made a substanual eDOn to ensure that the mfbtmauon 1n th1s document 1S accurate. In
the eventlhat correctjons or clarlfi.cations ate needed, these wiU be posted on the SEAOC website a1
www.seaoc.org and on the ICC webslle at 'n•w.iccMfe.atg.
SEAOC. attts sole discreuon. may issue \\T1nen errata.
2018 JBC SEAOC SmJcturai/Seismic Design Manual. \obl 1 iii
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
iv 20 t818C SEAOC StructuraJ/Seismk Des.gn Manual. \obi. 1
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Table of Contents
Preface to the 20 I 8/BC SEAOC SJructura~tSmic Desrgn Manual . . ... ...... . . .. ... . XI
Preface to Volume I . xi it
Acknowle<lgmeniS . XV
Refere-nces . ..... ..... ... .

I low to Use Ths Doc:wnent . . xix
Otsigu Examplt 1
Design Spec:ttal Response Acceleratton Parruneters . .... . .. ... ...... .... ...§ 11.4 . ..... .. I
Otsign E~amplt 2
D<sign Response Spectrum . . .... •..... ... ..•. . .. ... •..... .... • §11 .4.5 . •.... .. 3
Dtsiga Examplt 3
Site-Specific GrolUld Motion Procedures .... . • •••.......••• ••• .... . §11.4.7 . ...... . 6
Dtsiga Examplt 4
Importance Fac.tor and Risk Category ... ..• ••• .. • •••.......••• ••• .... .•• § 11.5
Seismic Design Category. . . .... ... . .. ... .... . .. ... ... . .. .... ...§ 11.6 . ...... II
Otsign E~amplt S
Continuous lood Path and lnteroonneclion.. . . ... . §12.1.3
Connectjon to Supports . . . . §12.1.4 . ..... . 13
Otsigu Exam pit 6

C.ombtnatton ofFram•ng Systems m Difttrent Direction~ . .. .. .... •.• . .. . . § 12.2.2 . •••... 15
Otsigu Exam pit 7

C.ombtnatton of Fram •ng Systems m the Same DirecltM: VertJcal...... . .. .§ 12.2.3.1 . ...... 17
Otsign E~amplt 8
Combinaiton of framing Systems ut the Same Direcuon: llori20ntal ... ....§12.2.3.3 . ...... 23
Otsign E~amplt 9
Combanation Framing Detailing. Requirements. . ... ............. ••• .... . § 12.2.4 . ...... 25
2018/SC SEAOC Structuraii.Seismic Design Manual. \lbl. 1 v
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Dulgn Eumpl< 10
Dual Systems .... ... ..... . . ... ...... .... .... . . ... ...... .... .... . §12.2.5.1 .. ..... 28
D<.'llgn Eumpl< II
Introduction to Horizontal Irregularlties . . .. ..... ..... . . .. . .. . . . . .... . § 12.3.2. I .. . . .. . 31
Otslgn Exampl< 12
llorizontallrregulaflly Typ< la andTyp< lb . . . ... •.••• . • .. • .. . . . . .... . §12.3.2.1 .. .. . .. 32
Otslgn Exampl< 13
llonzontallrr<gulantyTyp<2 .. .. ...... .. . . .... . .. .. ...... .. . . .... . §12.3.2.1 .. .. . .. 36
Ot!dgn Exampl< 14
l-lonzontallrregulal'1ty -rype 3 . . . .. .. . . . . . . . ... . .. . . .. .. . . . . . . . ... . §12.3.2.1 .. .. . .. 38
Dtslgn Exampl< IS
llonzontallrr<gularny Type 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . •• . . • . • • . . . . . . . . . . . §12.3.2. 1 .. ..... 40
Dtslgn Exampl< 16
llonzontallrr<gularny Type 5 .. .. .... .. . . . . ... •.•• .. • . ••.. . . . . .... . § 12.3.2. 1 .. ..... 42
D&gn Exampl< 17
Introduction to Vertical Irregularities .... . . . ...... .... ... .. §12.3.2.2 .. ..... 43
D&gn Exampl< 18
Vertical Irregularity Ty pe laandTy p< lb . .... ... •••• .. ........ . ..... . §12.3.2.2 . . ..... 44
D<slgn Exampl< 19
Vertical lrregularityTy p<2 . ..... ........ . .... •••• .. ........ . ..... . §12.3.2.2 . . ..... 48
D<slgn Exam pi< 20

VerticallrregularityTyp<3 . ..... ..... ..... .... ..... ..... ..... .... . §12.3.2.2 . ...... 50
Dtsign Exam pi< 21

VerticallrregularityTyp<4 . ..... ..... ..... .... ..... ..... ..... .... . §12.3.2.2 . ...... 52
Design Exam pit- 22

Wrtical lrregularity l)•p< 5a/5b-Concrete Wall ... . . . . . .. ... . . . . . .... . § 12.3.2.2 .. ..... 54
yi 20 18 JBC SEAOC Structufai/Seismic Design Manual. \tJI. 1
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Otsign Examplt 13
Vetticallrregularity Type Sa/51>---Steel Moment Frame . . . • . ..... ..... § 12.3.2 .2 . .... .. 56
Otsign Examplt 14
Elements Supporting Discontinuous Walls OC' Frames .. . . .. § 12.3.3.3 . ...... 60
Otsign Eumplt 2S
Elements Supporting Discontinuous Walls OC' Frames-Light-Frame ... § 12.3.3.3 . ...... 64
Otsign Eumplt 26
Redundancy Factor p. .. ... . •• .... .•• . .. . ..... . ••• ... .•• . .. .... . §12.3.4 . ...... 67
Otsig'n E1amplt 27
Seismic l oad Comb1.nations: Strength Design . . . ... . ••• ... .•• . .. . ... .. §2.3.6 . ...... 72
Otsign Exam pit 28

Minimum Upwatd Force for HonzontaJ Cantilevers fOr SOC 0 th(ough F ... . §1 2:4.4 . ...... 75
Otsign Exam pit 29

lnteroction EfletL~ .. . .. ... . . ..... ... . .. ... ... . .. .... ... . .. .... . §1 1.7.4 . ...... 78
Otsign Exam pit 30

Seism ic Base Shear . . .. . . .. • . . •• . ••• .•• . .. . . .. • . . ••• . •• .•• . .. . .. .. §12.8. 1 . ...... 80
Otsign Exam pit 31

Appmximate Fundamental Penod .. . . .. § 12.8.2. 1 . ...... 83
Otsign Exampit 32
Vertical Dtsttibutton ofSeismic Forces. . . .. §12.8.3 . ...... 87
Otsign Exampit JJ
lloozontal DISl!ibution ofForees .. . . . . .•... . .. ..•. •••• . • . .•... . .... . §12.8.4 . ...... 9 1
Otsign Exam pit 34

Am plification of AcctdentaJ Torsaon . . . . .•... . .. ..•. •••• . • . .•.... .... § I 2.8.4.3 . ...... 96
Otsign Exa mplt 35

Story Driti . ... .... . .. ... ... . . . .... ... . .. ... ... . . . . ... ... . .. .... . §12 .8.6 . ..... 100
2018/BC SEAOC SttucturaVSeismk Desig'J Manual, \01. 1 vii
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Dt:s.ign E..u mplt 36
P-delra Elfecrs . . . ..... . . ... ... . .. .... .... . . ... ...... .... .... .. § 12.8.7 . . .... 103
Dt:s.ign E..u mplt 37

Scahng Design Value< of Combined Response . .... •• . • . ......... . ..... . §12.9.4 .. 108
Dt:sign E.u.mplt 38
Diaphragm Design Force<, F"': One-srory Building .. .... ......... . ... § 12.10.1.1 . .. ... 112
Dt:sign E.u.mplt 39
Diaphragm Destgn Forces, F,..: Mulrisrory Building . .... ....... ... ... . §12.10.1.1 . .. ... 116
Dt-sign Eumplc 40
Coll ectorEi emenL~I exibleDiaphragm .... ..... .... ....... ... .... . §12. 10.2 . .. ... 119
Dt-sign Examplt 41
Ou1-of-plane Seismic Forces-One-srory Structural Wall . ....... . §12.11 and § 13.3 . .. .. . 123
Dt-sign Examplt 42
Ou1-of-plane Seismic Forces-T\\l>-SlOI')' SlrucliJrol Wall. ... .... § 12. II .I and § 12. 11.2 . .. ... 127
Design Examplt 43
Wall Anchorage 10 Flexible Diaphragms. . .... ..... .... ....... ... ....§12. 11.2.1 ... ... 131
Design Examplt 44
Srory Drift Ltmil . ... . . .. ... . ..... . .. . . . .. .. ... . ......... . . . ..... §12. 12.1 ... .. . 134
Design Eumplt 45
Slnlcmral Separation .... ... . ..... . .. . . . .. .. ... . ......... . . . ..... §12. 12.3 ... .. . 137
Design Eumplt 46
Oerormatton Compahbiltty for Seis:mtc Oestgn Categortes D through F .... . §12.12.5 .. ... . 140
Des:Jg·n Eumpk 47
Foundation Destg,n. .. ...... . .. ...... .. . . ...... ... ...... . . §12. 13 .. ... . 143
Dts:ign Eumplt 48
Founda1ion Ties . . . .•.. ••• . • . ... . .. § 12.13.7.2, § 12.13.8.2, and IBC §18 10.3. 13 ... ... 150
viii 2018 IBC SEAOC Strocturai!Seismic Design Manual, l.tll. 1
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 49
Sampltfied Altel'native Structural Design Criteria (or Simple Dearing Wall or Building Frame
Syste.ms .. .... ... . . . . ... ..... ..... ... . . .. .. §12.14 . .... . 154
Design Example SO
Seismic Demands on Non<ltUCIUr.liComponen!Son Rigid Suppons ... . § 13.3 and §1 3.4 . .... . 157
Design Example S 1
Se~smic Demands on Vlbt&ion-isolared Nonstructural Componen!S .... § 13.3 and §13.4 . ..... 16 1
Design Example 52
Seas.m te Re.lattve Dtsplacements. of Component AnachmenL(i .. .. .... .. .... . § 13.3.2 . ..... 164
Design Example 53
Extenor Nonstruc:wraJ Wall Element . .. .... .. . . . •.. ••.•• .. • ... .. . . .. ...§13.5 . ..... 167
Design Example 54
Extertor Nons.u uclUraJ Wall Element Connecuon.o; . ...... . .. .. ..... ... . . ...§ 13.5 . ..... 170
Desig·n Example 55
lateml Se1sm1c Force on NonbuiJdingStrucrllfe .. ...... . .. .. ..... ... . . ...§15.4 . ..... 177
Desig·n Example 56
Flexable Nonbtlilding S!tuc-!Ure ... .. •• . • ••... . . •• •• ••.••• . ••.. § 15.4 and § 15.5 . ..... 180
Design Example 57
Rigid Nonbtlilding S1ructure ..... ..... ...... ... ..... . . ... ...... .... . §15.4.2 . ..... 183
Design Example SS
Reminmg Wall wtth Seismic Late.ml Earth Pressure . ..... . . ... ...... .... . §15.6. 1 . ..... 185
Design Example 59
Setsmte O...~ands on Nonstrucaural Components with
Building. Accelerations . ... ..... ..... ... . . .... . . ....§ 13.3.1.4 . .... . 189
Design Example 60
Redundancy Factor p for Concrete COre Shear Wall Building ... ...... .... . §12.3.4 . .... . 194
Design Example 61
Combined Loading lOt SCBF Colwnn Supponjng Mezzanine .. ..... ..... . § 12.4.1 . ..... 200
2018 1BC SEAOC SlfiJCtlJraJ/Seismic Desjp1 ManuaL \obi. 1 ix
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
X 20181BC SCAOC StrocturaVSeismic DeS<9n ManuaJ. \bl. 1
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Preface to the 2018 IBC SEAOC StructuraUSeismic Design Manual
The IBC SEAOC Strueturall&tsmit: Design Manual.lhroughout its tUatl)' edujons, has served the putpose
of iiiUSIJ"atmg good seism.tc desag.n and lhe C-OI'fect appltcaLJon ofbutldjng-code prov1stons. The Mtuwnl has
bridged the gap beru-een the discursive tteatment of topics in the SEAOC Blue Book (R~t:ommended LilteTa/
Foru Req~ti~?menls and Conm~ntary) and real-world decisions that designers face in their practice.
The e.xamples illu.~mue code-compliant designs enginet.ted to achieve good perfonnance under severe
seismic loading. Ln some cases simply complying wuh butlding-code requireme-nts does not ensure good
seismic response. This Manual takes the apptoach ofexceeding the mtnimum oode requirement.~ in such
cases., wilh discusston oflhe reasons for doing. so.
This manual comprises four volumes:
Volume I: Code Appllcauon Examples

Volume 2: Examples for light-Frame, Tilt-Up, and Masonry Buildings
Volume 3: Examples tOr Concrete Buildings
Volume 4: E.'<amples fOJ' Steel-Framed Buildings
ln. g.enetal, the provlsion.s for developtng the design base shear. distnbu[U'Ig. the base-shear-fOrces venically
and horizontally~ checking for irregulatities, etc.• ate illustrated in Volume I. The other volumes contain
more e.'<tens•"e.des•g,n examples that addres.~ the reqUirements of the mater.al SJ.andards (for example. ACI
3 18 and AISC 341 ) !hal are adop1ed by !he IBC. Building design e.xamples do no1'""'""''e many of !he
items addressed ut Volume I in order to pe-nn1t lhe indusion of less-redundant content.
Each volume has been pn:)duced by a small group of authots under the ditect100 of a manager. The
managers have assembled reviewers to ensure coordination wuh olher SEAOC vtork and publication.s, most
notably the BlrN Bock. as well as numerical accutacy.
Thts manual can serve as a valuable tool for engineers seekmg to design bulfdmgs and bu1lding compooents
for good seismic response.
Rafael Sabel!• and Katy Briggs

Projec.t Managers
2C)t8 JBC SEAOC StructuraJ/SeM"tic Design Manual~. 1 xi

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
xii 20t8l8C SEAOC Struaura//Seismic Design Manual. \bl. 1
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Preface to Volume 1
Volume I of the 2018 IBC SEAOC Strutturai/Seumlc De.ttgn Manual addresses the appltcation. and
tnterpretation of the seismic prov1sions of the 20 18/ntemattonal Buildmg Cod~. More specificaJiy. Chapter
16 of the 2018 JDC requil'es c:omplaance with the pro\•is:ions ofASCEISEI 7- 16 ••Mi.ntmum Design loads
and Associated Criteria for Buildmgs and Other StruCiures.~
ASCE 7 generally prescribes lhe load1ng and methodology to be used u\ the analysis of a structure or an
element In «der to determine strength to resist to the load demands ftom ASCE 7, the me adopts nmjonal
tnaterial de.sign standal'ds (such as ACI, AISC. and NOS) to be used for the design of an element ofa
paruculat matenaJ. 11le Volwne I examples focus on the appllcatton oflhe provistons ofASCE 7, while
the examples in \blumes 2, 3, and 4 focus more on the application of the mate..-1al design Slandards. The
Manual is not mten.ded to serve as a budding code or to be an exhaustive catalogue of all valid approaches.
Volume I presents6 1 examplesoovenngmost of the key code provtstons wtthm ASCE 7 Chapc.ers2, 11,
12, 13. and 15. Of the 61 examples, 58 have been updated and re\'ised to reflect applicable changes to codes
and standards s1nce the 20 15 ediuon of the Manual, to provide additional clarification and commentary
for the more complex or nuanced provisions, and to incorporote tnput from lhe SEAOC Seismology
Comm1ltee and other pmcticing ettg.ineei'S regarding the latest SEAOC interpremtion.~ and recommended
pmcuces.. Three new examples have beert added to Volume I; these e.umples cover the determinauon of
seismic tbrees on nonstructumJ components using. butlding accelemtto~ the detenninalion of rho (or oore
oonerel'e shear \\"all building.. and tl\e design of a column that is part of the SFRS of a building and suppotts
a mezzanine.
Wl\enevet possib1~ the authoi'S have incorporated lesson.~ learned from actual projectoe; into the examples.
Readers are welc«ne to submtt other c.ondiuons or provi~10n.s not addressed an thi.~ editJon for consideration.
10 future editions.
Katy Briggs
Volume Manager
2018 IBC SEAOC StructuratiSei.smic Des;gtl Manual, \b'. 1 xiii
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
xiv 2018 IBC SEAOC Strocturai/S~ Design Manual, lkll. 1
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Acknowledgments
Volume I of the 2018/BC SEAOC &ismtc De.ngu l&1anual was written and teviewed by a gJ'Oup of highly
qualified struc:tuml en.g.ineets.. c.hosen lOt their knowledge and e.xperience with SlltlCtutal engineering
pcacuce and seLsmic destgn. The aulhots are:
Ryan A. Ktrsti.ng. S.E., Ass()datt Principal, Buthltr- 2012 & 20 IS Volume Managtr and Author/
Rtvltwtr orVario.us Prtvious Eum1dts
Ryan has over 20 years of expenence tn lhe analysis, destgn, and review of sttucrures spannmg the
spectrwn of oonven6onal syslems and materia1s. He is also frequently tm•olved in ptojec-lS that incorporate
tnnovative suuctural systems. nonlinear analysts. and perfonnance-based designs. Ryan •s tndUSU)'
uwolvement tncludes ASCE 7 Seismic Subcommittee member, fonner SEAOC Seismology Commiuee
Chair, NEHRP Advisory Committee member, 2014-15 SEAOC President, and current SEAOC legislative
Commtuee Chait. w'"w.buehlereng.iJ\t."'eJing.rom
Kt'1 n S. Moore,S.E.. Stnior Pri.ncip•l, Simpson Guntptrft & lltgtr- Aulhor/Rt\''i twtr of Various
E1amplts
Ke\' ln has ovec 25 ye.acs of expenence in the analysis. desJgn. and e..-atu:uton ofbuddmg suuctutes
spanning the spectrwn of con,tentional systems and mateciaJs. He is a recognized le.ader in the use of
structural steel systems. nonhnear analysis, and perfocmance-based designs. Kevtn has been very acuve in
SEAOC, including set"\•ingasChairofthe SEAOC Structural Standards Committee. Chair of the SEAOC
Setsmolog_y Commmee, and leading the productton of the modecn iteration of the Bhw Book tn 2009. www.
sgh.com
Mithatl Comarolo, S.E., Stnior StruC'Iun.l Enginttr, Nishkian Mta.ningtr- Aulbor or Extmplt 60
Michael Comatoto has 8 years of experience perfocming setsmk design, analysis, and rehabilitation ofa
\'atie[)' oflx.uldtng systems 111 caJitOmfa, mcludjng conventional and posl-tenstooed concrete shear wall
buildtngs~ steel BRB and moment frame systems, and OOrt\'entional 11mbe-r and ma.c;onry buildings.
Jtnniftr Gros~ S.E.~ A.S.\Mialt, Dtgtnkolb E-. ngi.nttrs-Autbor of Etamplt S9

Jennifer has more than 13 years of st(U('tul'al engineecing expeneoce. She has fcequernJy WOI'ked tn destg.n
and analysts, and her work spans accoss variou.<; sectots throughout Califomia. Nevada, \Ya.<iliington. and
I la\vai1. She has e.~pertise in structural analysis, seismic evaluation. and suucrural design, and she onen
reviews the Y.'Otk ofyounger e.ngineei"S-which she uses as an opponunity to mentor and uain.
www.degenkolb.com/
Mtlliisa Vicktry, S.E., Ass()datt, Otgtuk()lb Engi.nttrS-Author ()f Etamplt S9

Melissa bring.<; nearly 12 years of struCtural engineering e.-xperience. specializing in seismic evaluation
of eXISting suuctures. and new des1gn. Her projectS are in mulople sec:tOI'S, namely healthcare-, htg.her
educaLion, and the pubhc sector. She IS actave. tn SEAONC (Nonhem Cahfol'ma's SEAOC chapte-r) and
currently serves as lhe Secl'etary fol' the ACEC Bay Btidge Chapte-r. Other past ro1es lnclude the YMF
Co-Chair and YMF Treasurer with SEAONC and serving on !he committees for !he 2020 and 20 16 SEAOC
Conventions. v.•ww.degenkolb.com/
2018/BC SEAOC StructuraVSeismic Desig'J Manual. \01. 1 XV
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
The additions and revisions iocOfpomt'ed in the 20 IS edition of Volume I are lhe result of thoughtful te\•iew
from and dose collaboration with the SEAOC Seismology Committee. The review, input, and assistance
from lhe following tndivaduafs is g.ratefuJJy acknowledged and appreclated.
2018-2019 SEAOC S<ismology Commilt« 2019-2020 SEAOC Seismology Committee

Meaghan Halligan (Chair) SEAONC Benjamin Mohr SEAONC
Ben Mnhr SEAONC Meaghan lialligan SEAONC
David Palmer SEAOCC David Palmer (ChaJt) SEAOCC
Fred Turner SEAOCC FredTumer SEAOCC
Cairo Briceno SEAOSC Josh Gebelein SEAOSC
Gabriel Acero SEAOSC Cairo Briceno SEAOSC
Josh Gebeletn SEAOSC Jesse Kams SEAOSC
Victor Garc1a SEAOSD Gabtiel Acero SEAOSC
Jeremy Callister SEAOSD Victor Garcia SEAOSD
Jeremy Callister SEAOSD
SEAOC "'Ou1d hke to thank the following people for thear work authonng and revle\lting design examples
in this book that were included in past editions and have been updated foe the 20 18/nte:maJtona/ Buildmg
Ct)(k: April Buchberger. Timothy S. Lucido. Kevin Morton. Nicolas Rodrigues. and Ali Sumer. This
versaoa\ ofthe StnJCturall&ismic De.t tgn .".lanual would not be possible withoUl their tune and eftbns.
Productaon and art was provaded by the International Code Council.
XVi 2018 IBC SEAOC Stroct.ura~ Design Manual, l.tll. 1
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
References
Standards
Ame.rican Concrete Institute. ACI 318: Building Codt RegulaHonsfor R~inforad Concrete,
Farnungton Hills. Michigan. 2014.
Anle.rkan Society of Civil Engtneers. ASCE 7-16: Mimmum /ksign Leads and Associat'd Crit~ria
ftJr 81dldings tmd Other Stru~hutS. Reston.. Virginia, 2017.
AmericM Soctety or Civil Engu')eets. ASCE 4 I-17: !kumlc Et·abiOiitm and Retrofit ofE:cistmg
Buildings. Reston, Virginia. 2017.
International Code Counctl. 2018 /numrationa/ Building Code (lBC). Washington, D.C., 2018.
Other References
Butldmg Seismic Safety Council. NEHRP &comm~nded Seismtc Prtrdsionsfor N'nv Buildmgs
and OthuStructures: FEMA P-1050-1/1015 Edition.. Federal Emergency Management Agency,
Washington, DC, 2015.
SEAOC Seismology Conuntnee. Recommended Lateral Forr:e Require11~nt.s and Comnumtary

(Blue Book), Sln.ll!tural EngineersA~iahon ofCalifomia (SEAOC). Seventh EdittOn.
Sactame-nto. Califotnia, 1999.
SEAOC Seismology Conuntnee. SEAOC Blue Book ~ismic De.ttgtt Recomm~ndalitms, Suucrutal
Engulters Association ofCalifomia (SEAOC). First Printing, Sacramento. Cahfotnia, 2009.
'WVt'w.seaoc.org/bluebook
2018/SC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual. \tiL 1 xvii
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
xviii 2018/BC SEAOC Strvc:turaJ/Seismic Desipl Manual. \tJI. 1
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
How to Use This Document
The examples in Volwne I are wrinen to illusttate lhe applicauon of a specific section or provision within
ASCE 7. Each example. L~ a separate problem (or group of proble..ns) for a unique condttion c.hosen to best
address lhe patucular referenced code provtsion. E.--camples are stand-alone and do not rely on results from
another example.
Each example eontau\S a problem statement with a detailed lislu\g of ..g.tven"' t.nfocmation and a dear li.~t of
items to be determmed in order to arrive at the solution. The problem is solved through a logical seque.nce
of steps. and appropriate code references are provided m the rtght·hand matgin of the page. Most examples
include an introductory overview to the pantcular code provision and/or additional commentary followmg
the solution. Readers are referred to applicable SEAOC Blue Book anicles for additionaJ antOrmalion when
appropriate.
For all e.:<a~npl es, ASCE 7 is lhe default sautee docume-nt f()( the referenc4!S., unless another document is
specifically included ln the reference. The foiiO\vang abbreviatjoos ate used within the refe-rences:
§-Secticm T- Table
F- Figure &]- Equation
2018 IBC SEAOC StrocturaiiSeismk Design Manual, \til. 1 xix
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
XX 2018/BC SEAOC Slructurai/Seismic Design Manual. \,bL 1
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Des.gn &ample 1 • Design Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters §11.4
Design Example 1
Design Spectral Response Acceleration
Parameters §11.4
OVERVIEW
For a gaven building sue-. the risk-targeted maximum constdered earthquake spectral response ac-eelemtioi'IS
Ss, at shan pertods, and S1, 31 a !-second period. are g1ven by the accelerauon contour maps 1n Chapter22
in Fagures 22-1 through 22-8. Thts example illustrates the general procedure for detenruning the des1gn
spec:ual response acceleratton parameters Sus and Sm from the mapped vaJues of Ss and S1• The parameters
SD.Sand SD1 are used to calculate the design response spectrum tn Section 11.4.6 and the destgn base shear
in Secuon 12.8.
The easiest and most acc-urate way to obman the spectral values is to use the ..SEAOC/OSHPO Seismic
Design Maps·• website (se.lsmicrnaps.org). values ofs.~ and 5 1 are provided based on the address or the
longitude at1d latitude of the site being emered.
NOle that per Secuon 11 .4.8. a site-specafic ground motion hazard anai)'Sis shall be performed tOr structures
located on Sue Class F sites and for the tOIIowang cases:
Se1smtcally ISOlated strucrures and struCtures W1th danlping systems on sates wtth S1 greater
!han or equal to 0.6.
Suuctures on Sne Class E sites wnh s.~ greater than or equal to 1.0.
Structures on Sne Class D and E sares with S1 greater lhan or equal to 0.2.
A ground mouon hazard ana1)•sis is nm reqUJred for struc.tures other than seismically ISOlated structures and
struCtures with damping systems whe.re:
Structures on Sue Class E sites with Ss greater than or equal to 1.0. provtded that the Site
coefficient Ftf is taken as equal to that ofStte Class C.
Structures on Sue Class D sites \VIlh S1 greater than or equal to 0.2. prov1ded that the value of
the seismic response coefficiMt C, is de:tenntned by Equation 12.8-2 for values ofT less than
or equal to 1.5 Ts and taken as 1.5 umes the \'alue computed in accordance with either Equation
12.8-3 or Equation 12.8-4.
Structures on Sne Class E sites with S1 greater lhan or equal to 0.2,. provided that Tis less than
T:~and the equivalent static force procedure is used for design.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A budding sue an California is located at 38.123° Nonh (Lamude 38. 113°) and 12 1 123° We.st {Longuude
- 121. I23'). The soil profile is Site Class D.
It l~ assumed that Exception 2 ofSec11on 11.4.8 of ASCE 7-1 6 will be uulized to de.term1ne the base shear
in otder to avoid the requirement tor a site-specific.ground motton hazard analysis.
2018 IBC SEAOC Strocturai/Seismic Design Manual. \lbl. 1 1

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 1 • Design Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters §11. 4
DETERMINE THE FOLLOWING:
I. Mapped risk-targeted ma'<m\um considered eanhquake-(MCEa) spectral response accelernlion

paramete.rs ~\$ and S 1•
2. Sue coeffictents F11 and F~ and MCEa. specttal rtspanse acceleration parameters ~us and S.u1
adJUSted for Stte Class effecL(i.
3. Destgn spectral re.<;<ponse acce!erauon parameters SM and 5 01 •
1. Mapped MCER Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters

s_!l and s, §11.4.2
For the 1wen stte at 38. 123" Nonh (laurude 38.123") and 12 1.123" West (Longitude - 12 1.1 23"), the
"'SEAOC/OSHPD Design Maps" website provules the values of
Ss=0.52g
s, =0.232g
2. Site Coefficients F. and F. and MCER Spectral Response Acceleration

Parameters SMS anil S111 Adjusted for Site Class Effects §11.4.3
For the given Site Class 0 and the \•alues of Ssand S1 determmOO abtwe. the site coefficie-nts are
F.= 1.384 Tl 1.4- 1

F,=2. 136 Tl 1.4-2
Nore that the value ofF, from Table I 1.4-2 can only be used to determine J: per Foomme a of this lable.
For a sne-specitic analysis, F, shall be determined tn accordance with SectiOil 21.3.
The MCE.,c. spectral response acceleration patameters adJUSted for Site Class ttfects are
S.,s = F, Ss = 1.384(0.52g) = 0. 720g Eq I 1.4- 1

S11n = F~ S 1 = 2.136(0.232g) = 0.496g Eq I 1.4-2
3. Design Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters S 0 s and S01 §11.4.4

S0 s=(213) S.,s= (213X0.720g)=0.480g Eq I 1.4-3
Sm =(213) s.,, = (2/JX0.496g)=0.330g Eq I 1.4-4
Commentary
The ..SEAOC/OSHPD Design Maps" website requtres the risk category to be spec1fied, even though that
categ.of)' is not necessary for determimng Sb$ and S0 , .
Per Exception 2 ofSecuon 1I.4.8. if the buildlng penod is greater than l .ST~.. the seismtc response
coefficient C, detemuned per Equation I2.8-3 or Equation 12.8-4 shall be multtplied by 1.5.
2 2018 IBC SEAOC StructuraJ/Sei smic Design Manual. \AJI. 1

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 2 • Design Response Spectrum §11.4.6
Design Example 2
Design Response Spectrum §11 .4.6
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A bull ding site in Cal1fornia has lhe following design spectral response acceleratJoo parameters determined
Jrt accordance Wllh Secuon 11 .4.5 and rnapped long-period transujon pe.riod evaluated from F1gure 22-14:
S~»= 0.55g
S01 =0.34g
Tt=8sec
Nme that for lhe purposes of detennlning Tso Ssz; can be c.ak:ulated using the value of FTdetermmed from
Table 11.4-2.
I. Des1g.n response specuwn.
1. Design Response Spectrum §11.4.6

Secuon 11.4.6 provides the tquanons for the 5 percent damped spectral response accelerauon. s41'. relauve
to pe.riod, T. 1n the following ranges:
where:
T0 = 0.2 s0 ,t s,.
Ts=S01 1Sa;
TL =long-period transitl<>n peruxJ from F1gures 22-14 through 22- 17
Given lhe values for thas example-~
T0 = 0.2 S01 1 SDS= 0.2(0.34g/ 0.55g)= 0.12 sec

Ts=S01 I S,.,=(0.34g/0.55g) =0.62 sec
Tt=8sec
2018 IBC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, W. 1 3

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
DesifTI Example 2 • Design Response Spectrum §11.4.6
Design Example 2
Design Response Spectrum §11.4.6
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A btuJdangsne tn Caltfornta has the followltlgdestgn spectral response accelerauon pammelers detenntned
in accordance walh Secuon 11.4.5 and mapped long-pertod transtuon pertod e'\1aluated from Fagure 22-14:
Sus= 0.55g
S 01 =0.34g
T1 =8sec
Nore thar for the purposes of de-termtning T., SJX; can be c.aJculated using the value of F., determined from
Table 11.4-2.
I . Design response spectrum.
1. Design Response Spectrum §11.4.6

Secuon 11.4.6 provtdes the equauons for the 5 percent damped spectral response accelerntton. S41, relative
T, in the foiiO\\•ing ranges:
10 pertod,
where:
T0 = 0.2 Sml SIJS

Ts = S01 ISM
T1 = Joat_g-period transitiOn period from Figures 22-14lhrough 22- 17
Given lhe vaJues for this example.
T0 = 0.2 s,,t Sus= 0.2(0.34g/ 0.55g)= 0.12 sec

Ts=S01 / SL<t=(0.34g/0.55g) =0.62 sec
T1 =8sec
@Seismicisolation
2018 ISC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual. W. 1
@Seismicisolation 3
Desig'J Example 2 • Design Response Spectrum §11.4.6
The specual response accelerotton, SIP ts c:akulrued as foJiows:
I. For the uuerval 0,; T < T0 (0 ,; T < 0.12 sec),
s. =Su;(0.4 + 0.6T/T0 ) Eq 11.4-5

s. = 0.55g(0.4 + 0.6TI0.12) = (0.22 + 2.757)g
2. For the uuerval T0 s Ts Ts(O.I2 sec s Ts 0.62 sec),
3. For the u\terval Ts < T S Tt. (0.62 sec: < T ~ 8 sec).
511 =50 /T Eq 11.4-6

s. = (0.34/l)g
4. For the uuerval TL < T(S sec< 1),
S.,=S01 TLrF Eq 11.4-7

s. = o.34g(s)lr= (2.ntr)s
From this tnformauon. the elastic design response spectrum for this stte can be drawn. as sl\0\~o'fl. tn Figure
2- 1, iJt accordance wtlh Ftgure 11 .4-1:
T s.
(sec) (g)
0.00 0.22
0.12 0.55
0.62 0.55
0.75 0.45
1.00 0.34
1.50 0.23
2.00 0.17
4.00 0.09
8.00 0.04
10.00 O.oJ
4 2018 IBC SEAOC StructutaJ/Seismic Design Manual. \tbl. 1

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
DesifTI Example 2 • Design Response Spectrum §11.4.6
0.6 - . -
.Sos=o.ssg
0.6
} -
f ---
0 .4 : - 1- f- -
Sot .. 0.34g
0.3
t· ..~·t-··· 1\ - t -- ~ction 11.4.0 Design
Response Spe~rum
'
~
§
(/)~ 0.2 :- -.
. r'-< -
/ (03</1)&
'' -!- l
0.1
.., y
1 /' I
2/r>)g
---'
0.0
0;' ;' ~
10 = 0.12~·,~=0,~;-z;T= Js
2 5
T (sec) ' 10
Figure 1-1.
Design respon.t-t spectrum ~r &ction 11.4.6
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
2018 ISC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual. W. 1 5
Desig'J Example 3 • Site-specific Ground Molion Procedures §11. 4.8
Design Example 3
Site-specific Ground Motion Procedures §11.4.8
Per Section I I.4.8. a sne-spedfic response.spectrwn may be denved f« any structure based on the
procedures set forth tn Chapter 21 . The site-specific ground motion procedures of Chapte-r 2 I are requited
for the following cases:
Structur~ on Sne Class F sues, unless the exceptiotJ to Section 20.3. I IS applicable.
Seismically 1solmed structures and for structures with damping systenls on sues wnh S1 grtater
man or equal to 0.6.
Structures on Stte Class E sjtes with Ss greater than or equal to I.0.
StruciUres on Sne Class 0 andEsites with S1 greater than or equal to 0.2.
Except for setsmtca11y tsolated StruCtures and structUl't'S with damptng systems., a ground mouon hazard
analysis is not required for:
Structures on Site Class E sites with s. greater than or equal to 1.0. pro\•ided that the site
coeffictent F11 IS taken as equal to that of Stte Class C.
Structures on Site Class 0 sttes With S1 greater than or equal to 0.2. pro\•tded that the value of
the sets.ntc response coefficient C1 IS de-te.rmtned by Equauon 12.8-2 for values ofT< I .ST. and
taken as equal to 1.5 llmes the \•alue com pUled in accordance with either EquatiOn 12.8-3 for
Tt > T> 1.5T, or Equatton 12.8-4 forT> Tt.
Structures on Site Class E sites with S1 grearer than or equal to 0.2~ provided that Tis less than
or equal to T_. and the equivalent stauc force procedure is used for design.
Thts example dlusuates the general procedure for denvang the stte-specific desagn response spectrum based
on a given stte-specific response sp«mun analysis per Secuons 2 I. I and 2 I.2.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
The tbllowang Stte-specific response spectra have been provided by an official report trt accordance wath
Section 2 I. I or SectJon 21.2, and the mapped respottse acceleratioo parameters Ss and S1 have beea\
p.-ovided accordmg to USGS. The response acceleration parameters Ssand S1 may be denved using etlhe-r
Figures 22-l lhrougll22-8 or the ··sEAOC/OSHPD Seismic Design Maps" "~bsue (se•smicmaps.org).
Sue Class= D, T, = 12 sec

Ss= 1.500g. s, = 0.623g
F,.= I.O.F~=2. 5 *21.3
s," = F.Ss = I.SOOg( 1.0) = I.SOOg § 11.4.3, Eq 11.4-1
s,,. = F,S, = 0.623g(2.5) = 1.558g § 11.4.3, Eq 11.4-2
sL\, = (213)S," = (2/3) 1.soog = 1.oog § 11.4.4, Eq 11.4-3
SDI = (2/J)S..,, = (2/3) 1.558g = 1.039g § 11.4.4, Eq 11.4-4

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
DesignExample3 • Site-specific Ground Motion Procedures §11.4.8
Stte-specific response spectra from official report:
Stte·Speclfic
DBE Response
MCE• Response
Period Spectrum,
Spectrum,
(«!C) S11 =2f3S#JJ
sll.\, (g)
(g)
0.00 0.452 0.301
0.03 0.7 11 0.474
O.o7 1.083 o.n2
0. 10 1.301 0.867
0.20 1.402 0.935
0.30 1.390 0.927
0.50 1.210 0.807
1.00 0.554 0.369
1.50 0.322 0.215
2.00 0.2 12 0. 141
3.00 0.1 13 O.o75
4.00 0.085 0.057
I. Design response spectrum per Seclion 11.4.6 (us1ng map-based acceleration parameters).
2. ScaJed site.specific design response spectrum per Section 21.3.
3. Design specttaJ response acc.eleratjon parameters S/J!i'> 501, SAIS> and SJJ1 per Section 21.4.
1. Design Response Spectrum per Section 11.4.6 (Using Map-based

Acceleration Parameters)
S"'= I.OOg
To determine T0 and T., S0 s Will be determined utilizing Fl' from Table 11.4-2.
s, =0.623g
F"= 1.7
S,, =S,•F,=1.7<0.623g= 1.059g

S 01 = 2/J•sJ.t, =213• J.059g= 0.706g
70 = 0.2Sm1Sus
T0 = 0.2(0.706gY(I.OOg) = 0. 141 sec
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation 7
Ts=SmiSbS
= =
Ts (0.706g)/( I .OOg) 0.706 sec
TL = 12 sec (given in the pi'Oblem statemem)
ForT<Tfi.
S, = Sl)$(0.4 + 0.6TIT0 )
For periods T0 s T S T.~
For penods T1 < T:
Design response spectrum per Section 11 .4.6 (using map-based acceleration parameters):
Penod s,
(sec) (g)
0.00 0.400
0.03 0.544
O.o7 0.737
0.10 0.882
0.20 1.000
0.30 1.000
0.50 1.000
1.00 0.706
1.50 0.47 1
2.00 0.353
3.00 0.235
4.00 0.177
2. Scaled Site-specific Design Response Spectrum per Section 21.3
In accordance with Section 21.3, the design site-specific spectral response acceleration at any period shall
not be less than 80 percent oftheS11 determined tnaccordance wnh Section 11 .4.6.asdone tn Part I.
Govel'mng s. \•alue.s are shown in bold. Not all periods are shown in the fOllowing table. Therefore, the
govemmg pe-riOd(s) for the suucrul'e beutg designed shall be eva1uated tn the same way.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
DesignExample3 • Site-specific Ground Motion Procedures §11.4.8
Salt · Govem1ng
specific Site-specific Site-specific
Period Ma., DBE Response s, per 80'!. of s, per Design TxS"
(sec) Response Spectrum, §IL4.6 §IL4.6 Response (sec x g)
Spectrum, S., =- 213S.ut (g) Spectrum,
S...,(g) S,(g)
0.00 0.452 0.301 0.400 0.320 0.320 0 .00
0.03 0.7 11 0.474 0544 0.436 0.474 0.014
0.07 L083 0.722 0.737 0.590 0.722 0 .051
0. 10 1.301 0.867 0.882 0.705 0.867 0.087
020 L402 0.935 LOOO 0.800 0.935 0 .187
0.30 1.390 0.927 LOOO 0.800 0.927 0.278
0.50 L210 0.807 LOOO 0.800 0.807 0 .404
LOO 0.554 0.369 0.706 0.565 0565 0565
L50 0. 322 0.215 0.471 0.377 o.3n 0565
2.00 0.2 12 0.141 0.353 0282 0.282 0565
3.00 0. 11 3 O.o75 0235 0.188 0.188 0565
4.00 0.085 0.057 0. 177 0. 142 0.142 0568
1.2,---,.--~--.----,---~-------------,
!---·- - - Un;cac: sne·speciUc DBE R9SJ:OMeSpeelrum

- - Sca!eG SM·~pecll!c OE<$10n Respome Speccrum
- - 100~ Sedlon 11.4.6 P.esocnse Ste:#1.1(1l
- - 8~SWJon 11.4.6Res~nse sceCW~T~
0.8
§
"'. 0.6
0.4
"
0.2 --- --I-
I --
0.0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Figunt J-1.
Scaling ofdtslgn site-.ttpecific IY!Sponst spectrum
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation 9
3. Design Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters S 05 , S01 , S..s, and

s.,
per Section 21.4
Sos =greater of90 percent of ma>amwn specuaJ acceleration obtalned from the site-spec1fic
spectrum.s,. at any period withtn lhe rangeof0.2 to 5 seconds, aoo 80 percent ofSos(per
§ I 1.4.5)
S"' =greater of !0.842g, (0.90)0.935g, (0.80) 1.0)
Sos=0.842g
Sm =greate-r of maximum value ofrxs. for periods from I lO 2 seconds. and 80 percent ofSDI
(per§ I 1.4.5) for sites with V.,JO > 1200 tiisec
Sm =greate-r of maximum value ofrxs. for periods from I lO 5 seconds and 80 percent ofSDI
(per§ I 1.4.5) for sites with V.,JO s: 1200 tiisec
Sm =greater of !0.565, (0.80) x0.706gj
S 01 = 0.565g
s.,_. =greater of 1.5~A.(per §2 1.4) and 80 percent of S,...(per § I 1.4.4)
s.,.= greater of {( 1.5)0.935g = 1.403g, (0.80)1.50g = 1.20gf
s,"'= J.40Jg
s,,. =greater of 1.5Sm (per §21.4) and 80 percent of S., (per §I 1.4.4)
s,,. =greater of {( 1.5)0.565g = 0.848g, (0.80)1.558g = 1246g)
s,,. = 1246g
Commentary
According to Soct.ion 21.4, for u.o;e wtth the equwalenllmeral force procedure. the site-specific acceleration_.
Sil. at Tsha11be permined to replaceS0 ,JTut Equadon 12.8-3 and Sb,TL/r in Equation 12.8--4. Similarly,
the pacameter SIJS> calculated in accordan<:e wnh Secuon 21.4 (governing s. at T = 0.20 seconds from Pan
3), may be used tn Equations 12.8-2, I2.8-5, 15.4- I, and I 5.4-3. However, the mapped value of S1 shall be
used tn Equations 12.~. 15.4-2, and 15.4-4.
Nore that Exception 2 of Section 11.4.8 may be used to de.termme c, by using Equation 12.8-3 or 12.8-4
and muluplying Cs by 1.5. lJttltZtng thiS excepuon would 3\'0 id the requJre..nent for a sJte-spectfic ground
motion hazard ana1ysis for thts S~te aass 0 site.
10 2018/SC SEAOC StructuraVSejsmic Design Manual, \bl. r

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design&ample4 • lmportanceFar:JorandRiskCategoty §11.5
Seismic Design Categoly §11.6
Design Example 4
Importance Factor and Risk Category §11.5
Seismic Design Category §11.6
PROBLEM STATEMENT
Two private high school build1ngs each have a.n occupant load greater than 250 and the-folfowmg design
spectral acceleration parame.ters:
s,. = 1.17
5 01 = 0.75
s,= 0.15
One budding IS a t.radtuonaJ classroom wutg.. The other bUIIdiJtg IS a gymnasrwn des1gnated as an
emergency shelter.
I . Risk c-31egory and sessm1c imponaJlCe factor for each btuJdmg_
2. Se1smic design category (SOC) for each butlding.
1. Risk Category and Seismic Importance Factor §11.5

From JDC Table 1604.5, ..Rtsk Category of Bu1klings and Other Structures,'" the risk category for a private
h1gh school classroom buddlng (Group E Occupancy) wnh an occupant load greater than 250 lS Risk
Categor)' Ill. The nsk category is use.d to determme the "'seismtc destgn category;· in accordance wuh
Section 11.6. For a gymnasium that is designated as an emergency shelter, the rtsk cattgOI)' IS IV.
The 1mponance factors for seismic loads are from Table 1.5-2.
Setsmic
Risk Imporu!nce
Occupancy C3legory Factor 1,
Classroom Ul L25
Gymnasium!Emergency Shelter IV 1.5
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
2018 IBC SEAOC SlructiXai/Seismic Design Manual, \All 1 11
Desig'J Example 4 • lmpor1IJna! Factot and RW< Category §11.5
Seismic Design Categoty §11.6
2. Seismic Design Category §11.6

All struCtures ate a~signed to a setsmic design category (SOC) based on thetr rtsk ca[egory and the spectral
response acceleradon coeffictents Sosand SDI.urespective of the fundamental period ofvtbcauon of the
srruc.ture T. Each building and structure shaJI be assigned to the most severe SOC tn accordance with Table
11.6- 1 or 11.6-2 as follows.
Risk Table 11.6-1 Table 11.6-2 soc

Occupancy CMegol)' Sos soc Sm soc use•
Classroom Ill 1.17 o• 0.75 o• E
Gymnasium/ IV 1.17 o• 0.75 o• F
Emergency
Shelter
'Note !hal for Risk Categories I, II, and Ill havmgS1 ~ 0 .75 (recall S1 = 0. 75), lhe building shall be
asstgned to SOC E. Also, for Risk Category IV havtng. S1 ~ 0.75, the butlding. shall be assigned to SOC F.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 5 • Continuous Load Path and lntetCOnnection §12. 1.3
Connection to Supports §12.1.4
Design Example 5
Continuous Load Path and Interconnection §12.1.3
Connection to Supports §12.1.4
OVERVIEW
Thrs example iUusltates use of the beam tntet'con.nectJon requlreme.u ot'SectJon 12.1.3. 1ne requtremem i.~
to ensure that il'tlponant part.~ of a Slfl.l(:ture are '"lied together."
PROBLEM STATEMENT
For the two sunple beams shown below~ the follow1ng Information is give,n:
Seismic Design Category D
S"' = 1.0
Dead Load D = 6 k1p/ft
live lood L = 4 kiplft
Figurt 5-1.
DETERMINE THE FOLLOWING :
I . Honzontal connect1on force between lhe two beams.
2. Horizontal connection fOrce between the beam and suppon "P."
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 5 • Continuous Load Path and lnteroonnection §12.1.3
ConnocVontoS- §12.1.4
1. Horizontal Connection Force between the Two Beams §12.1.3
Requ1remems for ues and conununy are spec1fied 1n Secuon 12.1.3. For this panicular example. 11 is
reqUired to determ1.ne lhe ••ue force- tbr des1gn of the honzontal ne Lnterconrlecting the two Stmply
supported beam.~. This force is de:s1gnated as FP. gwen by the greater value of
F, = 0.133 Sm.~'P
where w, is the we1glu of the smaller (shorter) beam
Nme that for all values ofSO$ greater than 0.376. the first equauon wi11 go\'ern.
w, = 40 fl (D) =40(6) = 240 laps

For SM = 1.0. the conuo11ing rje fbrce is
F, = 0.133( I.OX240) = 31.9 kips
2. Horizontal Connection Force between the Beam and Support "P" §12.1.4
Section I2. I.4 requires a horizontal support Force for each beam equal to 5 percent of the dead load plus
live load rt."aetjon. The required design Force at the pin support up•· LS
H=0.05{6klf+~ kin(~)= IOk1ps

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design &ample 6 • Combination of Framing Systems in Different Directions §12.2.2
Design Example 6
Combination of Framing Systems in Different
Directions §12.2.2
OVERVIEW
Thrs example iUusltates the determmatton of response mod1ficauon coeffic:iMt, R; system ovetstrength
ractor, Oo; and deflection amplification fac.tor~ Ctto yafues Cor a budding that has dHferent seis:mic-force-
resisung systems along t\\'0 onhogonal axes (a. e.• darectiOilS) of the butldmg.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A three-story buildtng has c:ooc-rete shear walls tn one dir~tion and concrete moment frames 1n the other.
Floors are concre-te slab. The buildtng IS SOC 0 and Risk Category II.
L10es A and D (north-south direction) are special remforced ooocreteshear walls (bearing wall S)'stetn).
R = 5, 0,= 2.5, C,= 5, Table 12.2-1 (A I)
Lanes I and 3 (east-west dtrection) are speciaJ retnforced concrete anomem frames.
R= 8.0, 0.= 3.0, C,= 5.5 Table 12.2-1 (C5)
? ? ? )-==--
········· ·-··--·-'-'---·····- - 0
- - - - - - - She-arwatl
:::::::::n:::::::::o:::::::::: - 0
r-------·n··-·····-n-······-· o - ( )
Typical Floor 1•1no
Figure 6- I.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 6 • Combination d Haming Systems In Differed Directions §12.2.2
I. Value for R, C~~> and Co for each dlrecnon.
1. Value for R, c.., and 0 0 for Each Direction §12.2.2

The prov1s10ns ofSecuon 12.2.2 requtre lhat wlte.re ditltrent seisrnic-force-res1sting syste-ms are used
along the two orthogonal axes of the strucn.~re., the appropriate re.sponse modificatiOn c:oefficiet\l, R~ system
oversuength factor, 0,~ and deflecuon anlpliticatton factor, C,~o for e.ach system shaJI be used.
Therefore, use
R= 5.0, Uo= 2.5, and C4 = 5 for lhe nonh-soulh direcuon

R= 8.0, no=3.0. and C4= 5.5 for theea<;tA\o'est dtrection
Commentary
Stnce lh1s 1s SOC D, ordinary reinforced concrete s-hear walls and ordinacy or tntermediate retnforced
concrete moment frames are-not permitted.
In thts e.xample-. the comer columns are common 10 l\\'0 inrersecting seismtc-force-resisung systems
and thus are subject 10 the provisions of Secuon I2.2.4 for detatl ~ng requlfements and Section I2.5 tOr
direcuon of loachng require.merns ("on.hogonal efttcL-Il"). For addiuonal informauon regardtng the detaJ.hng
requtrements, refer toSEAOC Blue Book article 4.02.04 I ..StruCtural Detailing for Combined Structutal
Systenls" available at; seaoc.org/store-.
16 2018/SC SEAOC StructuraVSejsmic Design Marwal, \bl. r

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 7 • ComlKnation of Framing Systems in the Same Ditecfion: tmrocal §12.2.3. 1
Design Example 7
Combination of Framing Systems in the Same Direction:
Vertical §12.2.3.1
OVERVIEW
It is some-times necessary to destgn bujldings: that have a \1Mical combination of dJfferem seismic-force-
resis6ng systems. For example. the bonom pan of lhe structure may be a ng.id frame and the top pan
may be a braced frame or shear wall. This example tllu:strates use of the requirement<; of Section 12.2.3.1
to detennlne lhe appltcable response modtficatton coefllctent,/?'. sySlem overs:trength factor,~ and
de-flection amplificauon tactor, C4> values for combined vertical systems.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
11t.ree structures wtlh dtffec-en.t venJcal oombtnattons of systems tn lhe same direcuon are shown trt Figures
7. 1, 7.2. and 7.3. The seismic destgn category for each structure and the applicable destgn coefficiems and
factots from Table 12.2- 1 fOr each system are p(()vided.
I. Values for R, flo, and C4 and for e:1eh story in the d1teetion shown tbr a steel special
concentrically braced frame (SCBF) over steel special moment li"ame (SMF).
2. VaJues for R. !lo. and C4 for each stoty ln the directioo shown fOr a special reinforced eonctete
shear \\'all (SRCS W) over spec tal remforced cooc.rete nlomem frames (SRCMF).
3. Values for R. Oo. and C4 fbr each story tn tlte direc.tiat:l shown for a concrete SRCMF 0\'er a
concrete bulldtng ftatne shear Y.'illl syslem.
1. Steel Special Concentrically Braced Frame (SCBF)

over Steel Special Moment Frame (SMF) §12.2.3.1
Destgn Parametets:
Seismic Design Category C
Stee.l special concentrically braced frame

R=6.0
0,=2.0
C11 = 5.0
p = 1.0
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 7 • Combination d Haming Systems In the Same Direction: \IVrt.Cal §12.2.3 . 1
Steel spec1al moment frame

R=S.O
0, = 3.0
C~=5.5
p= 1.0
Figurt' 7- 1.
Thts c:ombmed system falls under lhe ,·emcal combiJ'sations of Sec110n 12.2.3.1. Because rhe ng.~d fram.tng
system IS above the ftex1ble fram1ng syste.m, lhe exception for a two-stage analysis tn Secuon 12.2.3.2
cannot be used. Therefore, 1.n accordance with S«tioo 122.3.1. the values of R. flo. and CJ fbr lhe upper
(braced frame) sys<em muSI be used for <he design of b01h systems.
2. Special Reinforced Concrete Shear wan (SRCSW) over Special

Reinforced Concrete Moment Frames (SRCMF) §12.2.3.1
Design Parame.ters:
Seismic Design Category C
Specla1 remfb(ced concrele shear waH (nonbearing)
R=6.0
0,= 2.5
C,=S.O
p= 1.0

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Des.gn Example 7 • Combination of Framing S)"srl"ms In the Same Ditecfion: tmrocal §12.2.3.1
Special reinforced concrete momenr frame
R=8.0
0.=3.0
C4 =5.5
p = 1.0
'' ''
________ j__ ~_j _________
' '
'':~:''
•••••••• _J.. -~---······
DOD
// / / / . / / / / / /
Figu" 7-1.
11us oombtoed system faJis under the vetuea1 oombanations of Sec.tion 122.3.1. Because the rtg1d framtng
system is above the. flextble frrurung syslent, the excepuon for a two-stage analysis tn Section 12.2.3.2
cannot be used. TherefOre. m accordance wtlh Section 12.2.3.1 ,the values of R, flo. and C4 for the upper
(shear wall)system must be used forlhe design of both systems.
3. Concrete SRCMF OVer a Concrete Building Frame Shear Wall

System §12.2.3.2
Destgn Parameters:
Seismic Design Category 0
Spec tal retnforced concrete momem frame
R=8.0
0.=3.0
C4 ;5.5
p = 1.3
Sutlhess upper pon1on; 175 ki~tn
f~;0.55sec
Tcnmt.n.:d; 0.56 sec
Modal response spectrum analysis
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
DD
DD
DD ~w·~
~DDL-j-,
/7i77?
I
I
------: :JJ~:Jj--: :--~--
:---D
I
~m
II
I I
It
I I
I I
I t
II
It
I I
-, ~·, ., ,,/ -,
-:
I
I
I
Figurr 7-3.
Spedal retnforced c.oncrele shear waH (nonbeanng)
R=6.0
!1,=2.5
Cd=5.0
p= 1.0
Stiffness= 10,000 ktplin
T-=0.03sec
EquivaJeot lateral force procedure
llus struc-ture has a venical combinatioo of a flexible system over a more rtg.id system. A two-stage
static analysis may be used. provided that lhe structure confoons lOthe requtreme.nls specified in Secuon
12.2.3.2. R is difltrent fOr bearing Y.'all systems \'etsus butld1ng frame systems for spec1al reinfotced
concrete shearwaJI~ see Table 12.2-1.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Des.gn Example 7 • Combination of Framing S)"srl"ms In the Same Ditecfion: tmrocal §12.2.3.1
Check requarements of Section 12.2.3.2 for a m~stage analysis:
a) The sttftiless of the lower portion is at least 10 umes lhe stttfness of the upper pottion.
For mulupde-story upper or lower potuons. the staffnes:s should be lhe shear in the lowest level of
the portton divtded by the total drtft of the portton.
10,000 kaplin > 10( 175) = 1750 kaplin .. . OK
b) The pertod of the enttre SliUCtute IS not grt.ater than 1.1 tunes the-pe.nod of the upper structure
considered as a se.parate structure supponed at the uansitton from the upper to lhe lower pomon.
0.56=< 1.1(0.55)=0.6 1 sec . .. OK
c) The upper portion shall be designed as a separate struCture ustng appropriate values of Rand p.
d) The ngad lower po111on shall be destgned as a separate structure usmg approprtate \'alues of R
and p. Re.acuons frotn the upper port ton shaH be determined trom anaJysis of lhe upper structure
amplified by lhe ratio of Rip of the upper structure O\•er Rip of the lower structure-. llus ratio shall
be not Jess than 1.0.
e) The upper portion as anaJyzed wath the eqmvalent Lateral-force or modal-response.spectrum

procedure. and the Jower ponton tS analyzed with the tqujvaJent lateral force procedure.
a. lnsign Prottdures for Uppu and Lowtr Structurts
Desagn !he upper SRCMF usang
R=S.O
0.=3.0
p = 1.3
DO
DO
DO
II II
Figure 7-4.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Oestgn the. lower ponton of the butldi..ng frame S)'Stem for the combined effect.~ of amplified reacuons from
the upper portion and lateral forces due 10 the base shear for the-lower pottion of the structure (usang R =
6.0, n, =2.5,and p = 1.0 f« tlte lower portion).
:.li-=(runplifie<l V.,_)+(I'--)=(8/1.3)1(6/I.O)x r...,,+ V,_= 1.031'..,.+ v,_
Figu,. 7-5.
The reactiotlS from the upper ponaon shall be de.ternuned from the analysis of the upper ponion ampltfied
by the ratio of (Rip) for the upper portion over (Rip) fat the I0\1er portion.
For the basic setsnuc load combu1:ations, the factor p must sull be applied 10 forces correspol\dutg to V~w.u"
Commentary
Such systems ate likely to OOJttajn venical trregularaues.
For addiuonal infonnalion, refer ro SEAOC Blue Book article 4.02.040 ..Combined Systems" a\•atlable at
seaoc:.orglstore.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design &ample 8 • Combination of Framing Systems in rhe Same Directioo: Horizontal §12.2.3.3
Design Example 8
Combination of Framing Systems in the Same
Direction: Horizontal §12.2.3.3
OVERVIEW
A combi.natJoo of d1fttreru seism.ic:-forc.e-resl.~ing systems may be used in the same directJOO along
d1fferenL hnes of resistane:e. Thts example shows how the response modification ooetlicie.nL R-vafue is
de.termmed tn such a situauon.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A one-stor)' steel-frame structure has the roof plan shown 111 F1gure 8- 1 The struCture is a'iSigne<l to Risk
Category II and Se.smic Desogn category C.
Lanes 1 and 4 are ordanary steel moment frames: R =- 3.5
Lu-.es 2 and 3 are special stee.l concentr.cally broced frames: R =- 6.0
North
Roof Plan
Figunt8-l.
I . Value for R for desagn 1n lhe east-weSL dacection assumang lhe roof dJaphmgm is detennaned to
be rigid.
2. VaJue for R for des1gn in lhe east-west direction assunung lhe roof diaphragm is determined to
be flexible.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 8 • Combination d Haming Systems in the Same Direction: HorizDntal §12.2.3.3
1. Value for R In the East-West Direction for a Rigid Diaphragm §12.2.3.3
Where a combinauon of structural systems is used m the same direction (except tbr those combi.nauons that
oomply with the requtrements for dual systems). Secuon 12.2.3.3 requtres that the va1ue of R used shall be
not greater than the least value of any system utilized in that direcuon. lllerefore, useR= 3.5 in the east-
west dtteeuon for alllt.nes of the seismic.fo.-ce.resisting system. Sectton 12.2.3.3 also requires that the
\•alues of Cd and !'lobe consistent wuh the R of the governing system in that diree.tion.
2. Value for R In the East-West Direction for a Flexible Diaphragm §12.2.3.3

Where a oombtnauon of structural systems ts used along different ltnes of resistance m the same dtrecuon,
Section I2.2.3.3 contams an exception that permas the least value of R for the dtfttrent systems found m
each i.ndepe.ndentltne of resistance to be used 1f all of the followutg conditions are met
I. Risk Cruege<y I or II bu1lding.
2. Two stories or less atxwe grade plane.
3. Use of hght· frnme construcuon or flexible dtaphragms.
Section 12.2.3.3 also requires lhe use oflhe least value of R tOr any of the systems tn lhe same d1tecuon for
1he design of diaphmgms.
Stnce this is a one-story, Risk Category II build tog. and st.nce itts grven that the roof dtaphragm is
determined to be flexible, all condiuons of the exceplion have been met. llterefore, it is permitted 10 useR
;- 3.5 tn the easl· West dtrecuon along hnes I and 4 and R = 6 .0 ut the east. west directiOn along lines 2 and
3. Tite design of the diaphragm in the easlA\"est dtrection shall use tlte lea-u \•alue of R = 3.5.
Commentary
For addiuonal infonnalion, refer ro SEAOC Blue Book article 4.02.040 ..Combined Systems." 3\'atlable at
seaoc.orglstore.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 9 • Combination Framing Detailing Requirements §12.2.4
Design Example 9
Combination Framing Detailing Requirements §12.2.4
OVERVIEW
11us example iUusuates the apphcauon oflhe requlrements ofSecuon 12.2.4 for members lhat are common
to dift'e-rent framing systems used 10 resist se1smi!C forces. Th1s topic ts also the subject of the SEAOC
Blue Book an1cle 4.02.041 ..Suucrutal Oetailmg for Combtned SLructural Systems." SLruCtural members
can be common to dltTe-rem frammg systems where systenls are c:ombtned ln \'anous mannets (ventcally~
horizontally, or orthogonally). This example consideJS a c:ommon member watbin a \'enu~al combulat.ion of
syste.ms. The Bl~« Book anicle dtscus:ses other configurauons.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A two- story~ steel special moment-resisung frame structure sits oo to1>of a speciaJ c:oocrete remforced shear
wall. The sa:rucrure 1s a~tgned to R1sk Caxegory II and SOC D. Beams are W30x 108 wnh reduced beam
sections(RBS). and columns are Wl4 x 283. Steel i.o;ASTM Am. Colwnns are assumed ptnned at the
base.
1 W1Dll1 06
R=8
0.=3
Column/Pilasters are.
"Common·• 10 b<>lh
concrete shear wall
R=5 and momenJ frame.
n. = 2Yt
1
Figure 9-1.
The upper t\1.'0 stories are special stecl moment-reslsttng frames: R = 8, ilo = 3
The lower story is a speclal concrete reinfOrced shear wall: R = 5~ flo= 2.5
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
I. Seismic a:<tal tbl'ce for the design of the concrete colwnnfpilaster supponing the-steel co1umn
above.
2. Locauons 3Jld types of splices for the vertical reU'lforcing wathin the concrete palasters.
3. Amount and spacing of req_ulred confinemeau reinforcing Within lhe conc:re-te ptlasters.
4. Seismic force for the des1_gn of the connection betwee.n the two syste-Jns.
1. Seismic Axial Force for the Design of the Concrete Column/Pilaster
Per Secuon 12.2.4~ strue:turoJ members common to different ti'anung systems muSt be destgned us1ng the
deta.il.ng require.ment~ of the-system With the highest R fac-tor. In thi.~ e.xample-~ structural members that are
..comn1oo" to both systems shown in the figure tnclude the COI'Icre-te oolumnlpilaster members arld their
supponing foundauons.. llle system with the higher R·value is the steel spec tal moment-resistiatg frame
(SMRF).
To comply with tlte require.menlS ofSecuoat 12.2.4. tl'le dessgn axial sels:m1c load on the concrete columns
must comply wnh the same loodlng reqUJre.ments tOr the colwnns of the steel SMRF. Per AISC 341,
oolumns of a steel SMRF must be designed for amplified sei~mtc loads (cocnbiOatiOJ'IS induding ilo per
ASCE 7·16 Secuon 12.4.3).
111erefore, the C-oncre.te column ele.ments must be designed by using (lo = 3.0 (per the steel SMRF, since it
IS tl1e system with the higher R-value) in the Joo.d combinations of ASCE Section 12.4.3.
In the Blue Book anicle, the SEAOC Seismology Committee recommends perfomung a capacity-based
design of the upper structure to detemune the maximwn loads that can be delivered to the "all below,
rather tJtan simply uslng the load oombinatioo'i with ove:rstrength. Al!suming pla~tlc hingmg occurs tn the
cemer of the RBS cut at each end of each beam ln lhe g.iven SMRF system, the resulting capacity-based
destgn setsmtc ax tal load c-an be de.termined:
ForW30 x 108: Z= 346 on'
At RDS with a= 7 inches, b =20 inches and c=2.25 inc-hes, Zc=247 in1,
For ASTM A992, R1 = 1.1 and ~=50 kso
C"'=(F, + F,)/(1F1 )s 1.2; lherefore, C,.= 1.15 For ASTM A992
M,..= C;,.R,F,Zt=(I.IS)( LI)(SO ksi)(247 in')= 15,623 kiJ>-on
L• (diStance between center ofRBS cut<)= 28 tl- (2)(7 on+ 7 on+ 20 u\12)/12 = 24 tl
P"" = 1M,IL' = (2)(15,623)1[(12)(24.0)) = 108.5 kips
Wtth two stories. the seism1c axlal force, P£-for de.'iign of the concrete pilaster ts (2)( 108.5 ktps) = 217
kips.
This is to be used as the Pcreplacmgthe o./J£term m the load combin.auocts ofASCESection 12.4.3.1 .

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
2. locations and Types of Splices for the Vertical Reinforcing
Ptr ACI318 requirt.merns for spec1al reinfoJ'Ced concre-te she-ar walls.
3. Amount and Spacing of Required Confinement Reinforcing

Per ACI318 requirements for special reinforced concre.te shear v.oalls.
4. Seismic Force for the Design of the Connection between the 1INo Systems
The weld~ base plate-. and anchor rods should be able ro develop the maximum lood lhatlhe colum1\ can
dd1ver to lhe oonc.rete p1laster below. llus will be the.same ax1al se-1smic load, P£> determiJled earl1er for
the pilaster des1gn of217 k1ps.
Commentary
For add1tional1nformauon. re-fer to SEAOC Blue Book anicle 4.02.041 ..Structural Detailing for Combilted
Suuctuml Systems•· available at se.aoc.otglstore.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 10 • Dual S)'siems §12.2.5. 1
Design Example 10
Dual Systems §12.2.5.1
OVERVIEW
llus example Illustrates the determinatjoo of des.g.n lateral forces for the two basic elements of a dual
system. Section 12.2.5.1 prescribes lhe following features for a dual system~
I. Resistance to lateral load is provided by lhe combtnation of mome.nt frames and shear walls or
brae<!d frames.
2. llle mome1U-res1.Sttng frames prov1ded must be able to resist at least 25 percent of the design
forces.
3. llle two systems are desjgned to reslst the totaJ desjgn. base shear tn proponion to their relauve
ngidnies.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
In th1s example. the equwalent lateral force procedure of Section I 2.8 has bee1l used to determine
the seismic demand QA at point A 1n the dual system oflhe seismic-fOrce-resisting hne shO\vn in Figure
10-1. Th1s IS the beam moment MQ£·
The followtng mtbrmatlon is given:
Seism1c Des1gn Category 0
p= 1.0
I,= 1.0
Design Dase Shear

Along this seismic-force-reslstmg hne, V = 400 k1ps

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 10 • Dual Systems §12.2.5.1
~ V • 400~
Figur< 10-1.
From lhe results of the computer analysis oflh1s seismic~force-resisu.ng l1ne,
r v shear walls ;: 355 kaps

r v moment frame columns :: _::_4>:c"_ _
TOlal design base shear = 400 kops
I. Design crite'rta for lhe moment fmme system.
2. Seismtc design mome1u at point A
1. Design Criteria for the Moment Frame System

According to the two listed tequlrements. the moment frame must be designed for lhe greater value of
enher the Q£ value due to the design base shear V loadmg oo the combined moment frame-shear wall
system, or the Q~ \•alue result1ng froan at least 25 percent of the design forces. This 25 percent requ1rement
may be interpreted in two v.>ays.
a. Q~ nl3)' be found by an equivalen1 lateral-force analys1s of the independent moment frame using
25 percent oflhe design base shear V.
b. Q~ mOl)' be found by factormg the oombmed moment frame-shear \\'311 system Q~ value such that
Q~ coJTesponds to the moment that would occur tf the portion of the ba.~ shear reststed by lhe
moment frame V,:- were w be equal to at lea~ 25 percent of the design base shear V.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 10 • Dual S)'siems §12.2.5. 1
2. Seismic Design Moment at Point A
It lS elected to detemune Q£ per optton b descrtbed Oil page 29, beeause thts procedure tndudes the
mteraction eftects between the moment frame and the shear wall.
From the combt.ned moment frame-she.ar wall analysis with fOrces due to the design base shear r·-= 400
kips, the ponion , ~r oflhe base shear reststed by the mome-nt frame 1sequaJ to the sum of the first-stOI')'
tiame co1wnn shears tn the direction oflooding. For thiS example, it has been determined that
IF= rvro~= 45 ktps < 0.25 x r• 100 kips

ll1e required \'aJues QE corresponding to a frame base shear reststance equal to 25 percent of V lS gtven by
and the seismic design momem a t A ls
M(.c= 2.22(53.0) = 11 7.8 kap-ft
Commentary
The use of a dual system has the advantage of pfOviding the structure with an lndependent ven.tcalload-
carrying system capable of resis6ng 25 percent of tJ'Ie des1gn bac;e shear~ while m the same tune tJte prtmary
system. e1lher shear waJI or braced frame. carries us propomol'lal share of the design base shear. For this
oonfiguration. lhe code permits use of a larger R-value for the pnmary system than \lw"Ould be pennined
wtthout the 25 percent frame system. Per Table 12.2-1 , R = 7 for spec tal retnforced concrete shear walls
wnh spec-ial moment frames capable of resisung at Jeast 25 petcent of the prescribed seismic fOI"Ces. Per
Table 12.2-1. the R-value for special reinforced concrete shear walls alone would be 5 or6.
Design criteria in[e.rpretanon Ia uwolvtng the design of the momeru frame independent from the shear wall
or bracing system for 25 percent of the design base shear should be COtlsidered for high-rise buildmgs. The
slender configuration of lhe shear waJLs or brncsng systems can acruaJiy load tJ:.e moment frame at lhe upper
levels of the combtned model, and excesssve.ly large moment frame design ac.tions would resul! from the
use of destg.n criteria Interpre-tation Ib. whe.re these large actions would be multiplied by 0·25 " .
v,
Dual systems are often used in structutes with tJte primaJ)• lateml-force-resjsungsyste.m located 10 a
structural core. The moment frames are placed at the perimetl!r of the btulding to cowuerac.t torsional
eftkts. Where lht.s configuration tS present, destgn criteria lnterpretatJon lb shoukl be ullhzed tn order to
envelope potential torsional eftkts. For addnional mformation. refer to SEAOC Blu1! Book article 4.02.020
..Dual Systems'" a\'atlable at seaoc.orglstore.
30 2018 /SC SEAOC StructuraVSejsmic Design Manual, \bl. r

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Des;gn Example 11 • Introduction Jo Horizontal Irregularities §12.3.2.1
Design Example 11
Introduction to Horizontal Irregularities §12.3.2.1
Hortzontal structural 1rreguJartties are ide-nttfied 10 Table 12.3-1 . There are five types of horizontal
itregularities:
I a. Torsional Irregularity-to be considered where diaphragms are rigid or semi·rtgid (diaphragms

not deemed flexible per Sectt<>lt 12.3. 1. 1 or calculated as flexible per Secnon 12.3. 1.3).
I b. E.~treme tors tonal trregulamy- to be constdered where dtaphmgms are rigid or sema-rtg1d
(diaphragms not deemed He:tible per Section 12.3.1. 1 or calc-ulated as ftexable per Secuon
12.3.1.3).
2. Re..e.ntrant comer trregulamy.
3. Diaphragm discontinuity arregularuy.
4. Out-of-plane offsets ii'J'eg.ularity.
5. Nonparallel systents 1rreguJamy.
These arregulartties can be categom:ed as bemg eitJ'ler speciaJ.response co.nditioos or cases of t.rregular load
path. Types Ia, I b, 2, 3, and 5 are special-response condttions.
Types Ia tmd I b. Where the ratio of ma.x1mum. stOI)' dnft 10 avemge stOI)' drift exceeds the given limtt.
there IS the-potentjaJ tOr an unbalance in the tneJastic deformation demands at the 1\\'0 ex'treme sides of a
SUM)'. As a conseque:nc~ the equivalent stiffness oftJ'le side havtng maximum deformation wlll be reduced.
Md the eccentricny betw~n the cenrers of ma~ and ngidity will be utcrea.sed along with the COITtsponding
torsions. An amplificauon factor A_. ts to be applied 10 lhe acctde-ntal tors1on ."1111 to represent the effectS of
thtsunbalanced st1ffness. as requ1red in Section 12.8.4.3.
Type 1. The response of plan projeettons adjocent 10 re-e-ntrant comers ("flapping.. behavior acung 10 open
and clo.o:oe the angle ofthe re-e-ntrant comer) can resuh 1n concentrated forces at the oorner point. Elements
must be provaded to uansfer lhese forces 1010 the djaphragm.s.
Type 3. Excessive ope.nings in a diaphragm can result in a flexible dJaphragm response along_ wtth force
concentrations and load path deficiencies at the boundartes of the openings. EJeme.nt~ must be provided 10
transfer the forces 1nto the diaphragm and the structural system.
7j~ 4. The out~f.plane offSet trr~ulamy represents a d1sconnnuity in the lood path. Shears and
overrumtng moments must be tranSferred from the level above the ofl'!iet 10 the level below, wttJ\ a
horizontal offset in the load path fOr the she.ars.
7jpe 5. Systents wath nonparallel lateml-force.resisung elements require speciaJ consideratiOn to determine
appropriate design forces for elements.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 12 • Horizontal Irregularity Type 1a and Type 1b §12.3.2. 1
Design Example 12
Horizontal Irregularity Type 1a and Type 1 b §12.3.2.1
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A lhree-story spec tal moment-resisung frame buildlng has ngid floor diaphragms. Unde-r code-prescrtbed
seismtc tOrcest including lhe eftb:-ts of accidenml lotSton. it has the followtng elastic: displacemetus 8~ at
LeveJs I and 2:
81..2 = 1.20 in s.., = 1.90 in

8t,t = 1.00 in 8R. 1 = 1.20 in
--------------)>6.v
------> ~~
2
Figure J]. J.
I. If a Type Ia or Type lb torstonaltrregulanty e.'<lsts at lhe second story.
If 11 does:
2. llle torsional amplificmton tactor A. for Le\•el2.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 12 • Horizontal Irregularly Type f a and Type 1b §12.3.2.1
1. Determine If a Type 1a or Type 1b Torsional

Irregularity Exists at the Second Story §12.3.2.1
A Type Ia torsional trregulamy is considered 10 exist \\hen the maxlmum stocy drift. including accidentaJ
torsion effects. at one e.nd of the structure uans,•erse to an axis is more than 1.2 ttmes the avemge oflhe
story dnfts oflhe two ends of the suucture (see Sectton 12.8.6 for story drtft detenninauoo).
Refe.mng to F1gure I2- 1 showtng the displacements OM' due to the-prescnbed Lateral forces, tJus lff'egulanty
chock is defined tn tenus of story drift J1, = (o,- o,_1) at ends R (right) and L (left) of the structure. Torsional
lrregulartty e.xist~ at Le\•el x \'ltten T 12.3· I
1.2(t., + t., )
t. >12(!1 )= , •
- . .., 2
where
am.,= 4 9 + L\ •.z
2
Determaning story drtfts at Levell
t...,=1.20 - =
1.00 0.20 Ill
t.., =1.90 - 1.20 =0.70 '"
·'
u..-,= 0.20+0.70 - 0. 4)10
"
2
t._ = 0.70 ... (t._,)
Checklng 1.2 c.meria
a_= 0·7 = 1.56> 1.2 .. . thus, torsional trregulartty exast~Type Ia

t.... 0.45
Checktng fOr e.xtreme torsional irregularity
A_,_ = 0 ·70 =- 1.56 . . . th~ extreme torsion irregulattty exists-Type 1b

t..., 0.45
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 12 • Horizontal Irregularity Type 1a and Type 1b §12.3.2. 1
2. Compute Amplification Factor Ax for Level 2 §12.8.4.3

Where torsional irregularity exists at a Level.t. lhe acctdental torstonaJ moment ,\ /,.must be tncreas:ed b)•
an amplification factor A,.. Thts must be done for each level. and each levei may h:we a different A_. value.
In thts example, A.~~ IS computed for Level2.
Nore that A.~~ is a funcuon of the displacements. not the story drafts.
A -
.. - (s_ J
1.26'"'
Eq 12.8- 14
• S., +S,, 1.20+ 1.90 I •• .

o_,'¥- .... ·· - - .)) In
2 2
A,= (
-
1.
1.2(1.55)
90
J = 1.04 > 1.0 ... Note illat A, shall be not less than 1.0.
Therefore,useA:%== 1.04.
Commentary
In Sec.tion 12.8.4.3, there is the provision that the more severe loading shall be considered. The
L01erpretatJon of this f« the case of the.story drift and displacementS to be used f« the average ' ·aJues
.6...,.8 and Sm8 is as fOllows. The mOSt severe condnion is when both SN.,.t'and 8~\'are compured for the same
accidental center-of-mass displaceme:JU that causes the maxtmum displaceme.nt s_. For lhe c.olldt1ion
shown in thtsexample whete SR,X==8_.lhec.enters of mass ar all levels should be displac.ed by the
accidenta1 eccerllticny to the right side R. and both s.-,x and 84-f should be evaluated for this load coodition.
Table 12.3- 1 triggers a number of special design requirements for torstonally trregular structures. In fact, if
irregulamy Type Ib (extreme torsional trregulanty) ls present. Section 12.3.3.1 is U"igge.red, which prohtbits
such structures f"Of SOC E or F. It i.s i.m.pon.ant to recogmze that torsional irregularity as defined in tenns of
sroty drift .d.r• while the evaJuatiott of Ax by Equation 12.8-14 is, in terms of dtsplacements. (\,.There can
be instances where the .story-dnft values tndtcate torstonalt.rregulamy and where the related dt.splaceme.m
\'3.lues produce an Ax value less lhan 1.0. llus result is not the intent of the provision. and the ''alue ofA_.
used to de.temu.ne acc.idemal totsion should not be less lhan 1.0.
The displacement and story-d.nft values should be obtained by the equivalent lateral-force method with the
oode-prescnbed late.ral forces. Theore.tically. 1f the dynam te analysis ptoced ure \\'ere 10 be used, lhe \1al ues
of a_ and a;M8 would ha''e to be fOund for each dynamtc mode. then combined by the appropriate SRSS or
CQC procedures, and then scaled to the code-prescribed base she.ar. Howt\•er. an vtew of the conlplexuy of
thts derennuwion and the judgmental ruuure of the 1.2 factot, u is reasoned that the equivalent static. force
t'l'k!lhod IS sufficJently accurate 10 detect torstOnal trregularity and a •aluar.e the Ax factOI'".

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 12 • Horizontal Irregularly Type f a and Type 1b §12.3.2.1
Section 12.7.3 reqmres lhe use of a three-dimensional mode-l ifirr~ularuy Type laorl)rpe lb ls present
For eases of large eccemricity and low lorsiooaJ ngidity,lhe stauc fotce procedure can resuh in a negative
dJspfacement on one stde and a posatrveon the olhe-r. For example,lhJS occurs if841 = - 0.40 inches and
8R.1 = 1.80 inches. The ''aJue of8'"" an Equation 12.8- 14 should be calculated a~ the aJgebmic average.
8 - ~'-l+8.a:J -0.40+1 .80 1.40 _ 070 '

mg- 2 - 2 - 2 - · In
Where modal analysis is used, the algebraic average value 8.._ should be found for each mode, and
the andividuaJ modal results must be properly combined to detennine the total response \1alue for
8"',. Alternatively, static analysis may be used to compute lhe effects of acC-identaJ torsion., ancluding
amplification. The results may be added to those from modalrutalysis.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 13 • Horizontal Irregularity Type 2 §12.3.2. 1
Design Example 13
Horizontal Irregularity Type 2 §12.3.2.1
PROBLEM STATEMENT
The plan configumtion of a 10-story speciaJ moment frame butldmg is as shown in Ftgure 13- I.
ce2S' .-100'
I<
0-- -r
".
~
"
~
"'
~
0-
0- -'-
Figure /J-1.
I. If 3 Type 2 re-enuant corner irregularny exists.
1. Determine If a Type 2 Re-entrant Comer Irregularity Exists §12.3.2.1
A Type 2 re-entrant comer l!regul3nt)' exists when lhe plan COilfiguraUOil of 3 suucture and its lateral-
force-resisting system contain re-e.ntrant corners. where both projection.~ of the sm.tcture beyond a
re-enuant cor-ner are greater lhan I5 percent of the plan dtmens.on of the suucrure 1n the dtreclion
considered(seeTable 12 . 3-1~
The plan configumtion of this bwlding and tl'i lateral-force-rtsisung system has re-entra.Jn corner
dimensions as shown. For the sadeson line 1. the proJeCtion beyond the re-e.ntrant corner as
100ft - 75 ti=2S ft

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 13 • HorizontalltregU/arity Type 2 §12.3.2.1
25
llus is or 25 petcent of the 100-foot plan dimension .. . More than 15 percent
100
For the stdes on line E. the ptojeclion tS
60ft - 40ft=20ft
20
ThiS 1S or 33.3 perc.em oflhe 60-foot plan dime-nston ... More lhan IS pe-rcenL
60
Since both projecttons e.xeeed 15 percem,lhere is a re-entrant c<~mer trregularity.
11\el'efbte, a re.-e-mrant cornet irregulamy exists.
Commentary
Whene\'e.r the Type 2 re-entrant corner Irregularity ex1sts, see: addJttonaJ de:Stg.n requlrements ln Secuon
12.3.3.4 and Table 12.6-1 for SOC D, E, and F.
If only one of the projec.uons exceeds lhe I 5 percem threshold. then lhe ttregularity would not e:ust.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 14
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A th•e-story cottc:rele butlding has 3 beattng wall system located around the penme-ter of the building.
lateral forces are-resisted by the beartng walls acung as shear walls. The ftoor plan of the second floor of
the butlding 1S shown 1n Figure 14- 1. The symmemcaUy placed open area 1n the dtaphtagm tS for an atnum
and has dimenstons of 40 feel by 75 feet. All diaphragms abcwe the second ftoor are wtlhout significant
cpenmgs.
r,. r 125'
f f
0)----..,..--
75'
'I
®-
1 1:?<1
Figure 14- 1.
I. lf 3 Type 3 dtaphragm disconttnu'l)' ttregulartty e.xlstS at the second-floor level.
1. Determine If a Type 3 Diaphragm Dlacontlnulty Irregularity

Exists at the Second-Floor Level §12.3.2.1
A Type 3 diaphragm djsconrinuity irregulamy e.xtStS whe1l d1aphragms have abn.ipt dtsoontinuittes or
\'3riatl0ns tn stiffness, including cutout or open areas eotnprising more than 50 percent of the gross enclosed
area of the dtaphragm. or changes tn effecuve dtaphragm sttffness of more than 50 pe-rcent from one story
to the next
ll1e first check is for gross area.
Gross enclosed area oflhe diophragm is 80 fix 125 t\ = 10,000 ft'

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 14 • HorizontalltregU/arity Type 3 §12.3.2. 1
A.rea of opening is 40 ft x 75 ft = 3000 I~
50 percel\t of gross area= 0.5( 10,000) = 5000 II'
3000 < 5000 II'
Therefore. l'lO diaphragm disconttnutty trregularity exists based on open area versus gross area
The second check is for suHhess.
ll\e sttffness of the second-floor dtaphragm with ns opening must be compared wnh the stifroes.s of the
solid diaphragm atlhe thtrd floor. If the change in suffness exceeds 50 percem. a diaphragm disconttnwty
irregularity extsts for the structure.
ThtS comparison can be performed as follow'S.
Ftnd the stmple beam mid-sp:ul deflec.tJons A! and~ for the dJaphragms at Levels 2 and 3. respecuvely.
due to a common distrtbuted load w such as I kl(
.... u.
I><J
w • 1 kif
l l l l l l l l l l l
t.e.el3
-------------------·········~
Figun 14-1.
I f~ > 1.5t.l. there.ts dtaphragm dtsconunutty trregulanty.
See Section 12.3.3.4 and Table 12.6-1 for additional design requirements for SOC D, E, and F.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 15 • Horizontal Irregularity Type 4 §12.3.2.1
Design Example 15
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A four-story bu11dlng has a concrete shear waJJlate.ral-tOrce-resisting sys[em tn a buddmg frame syste-m
oonfigurauon. The plan oonfigurauon of the shear v.-alls is shown ul Figure 15-1.
---~-----
--------
----
Typical floor plan
4@ 25'-= 100'
F.leVDtion line E
3
•
Si
0-" [q
@
0 D :C
N
1 r
Ground (first) noor plan
Flgun/5-1.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 15 • HorizontalltregU/arity Type 4 §12.3.2. 1
I. If a Type 4 out-of-plane oflSet 1rregularny existS between the first and sero1td stories.
1. Determine If a Type 4 Out-of-plane Offset Irregularity

Exists between the First and Second Stories §12.3.2.1
An out-of-plane oti.o;et plan 1rregulartty ex1sts v..-ben there ate d1sconunujties in a lateral-force-reslsaance
path. An example would be out-of-plane offse.ts of venical lateraJ-force-reslsnng elements such as shear
ualls. The first-story shear wall on line 0 has a 25-foot out-of-p1ane ottc;e-t to the shear waJI on hne E al the
second S[oty and above. This constitutes an out-of-plane offset Irregularity. See Secuon 12.3.3.3, Section
12.3.3.4, Section 12.7.3, and Table 12.6-1 for addittanal design requ.remems for SOC D. E, and F.
Therefore. an offSet ureguJamy exists.
Commentsry
Per Secuon 12.10.1.1, transfer fOC'ces trocn the vertiC<.lJ setSmtc-force-re-S:ISttng system above lhe diaphragm
shall be 1ttcreased by the overstre-ngth factor betbre be1ng added to the dtaphrag.m U\erual tbrces.
Per Sec11on 12.7.3, a 30 analysis of the bu.ilding IS reqwted unless the bu1kling has fte.x1ble djaphragms.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 16
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A 10-stOI)' buildtng has the floor plan shown in Ftgure 16-1 at all levels. Spec.laJ momem-resisttng frames
are located on the pe,rime-ter oflhe building on lines I, 4,A, and F.
0-~
0--
Typical floor pllua
Figure J(,.J.
1. If a Type 5 nonparallel system 1rregutamy ex.tsts.
1. Determine If a Type 5 Nonparallel System Irregularity Exists §12.3.2.1
A Type 5 nonparallel sys[ern trregularity is constdered to e.xtst when the ve.rucaJ lateral-tbrce-resisltng
elements are nO£ parallel to or symmemc about the maJOr onhogonal a.xes of the building's lateraJ-force-
resisting sys[em.
The verticallateral-force-resjsttng frame e-lements located on hne Fate not parallel to the major onhogonal
a.xes of the buddmg (i.e. ~ lines 4 and A). Therefore, a nonparallel system irregulanty extSIS, and tJle
referenced section in Table 12.3-1 applies to the design. See Section 12.5.4. Section 12.7.3, and Table
12.6- 1 for addittonaJ destgn requtrements for SOC 0, ~and F. A lhree-dunenstonal dynamic analysts is
requtred per Secuon 12.7.3.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 17 • Introduction to \4tl1icaltrregularities §12.3.2.2
Design Example 17
Introduction to Vertical Irregularities §12.3.2.2
Table 12.3-2 defines \Yertical struc:rural irregularities and assigns analysis and design procedures to each
type and se-ismic design category. These trregulariues can be divided Uno l\\'0 ca£egories. The first, dynamtc
force-distnbuuon ttregulanues. whtch are Types Ia, Ib, 2. and 3. The second. trreglliariues tn load path or
force transfer. which are Types 4, Sa. and Sb. The vertical irregulanties are:
Ia. Stifthess--solt story irregulamy.
Ib. Sutrness-e,'treme soft slory arreguJartty.
2. Weigh< (mass) 1rregulamy.
3. Ve.,·ucal geomemc trregularity.
4. In-plane di'iConunuHy 1n vertical Lateral-force-reslSltng element.
5a. DisconLinuity in lateral stength-vteak story 1treg.ularuy.
Sb. Disconnnuity 1n latetal strength-extreme weak story irregulartty.
Structures in Setsmtc Destgn Categor1es D. E, and F possesssng dynamic force distrtbutton trregulamies
may be required to be aJlalyud u.:;tng the Modal Response Spectrum Analysas proc-edure m Secuon
12.9 (refe..-to Table 12.6- 1). Tilt- verucal fOrce distribution provided by Sectioo 12.8.3 may be assumed
to be adequate for structures ladang vertical irregularity Types Ia. I b. 2, and 3. Stifthess and mass
discontmuities may stgnific:andy affect the venical distnbution of forces. and for lhis reason, lhe tnodal
analysis pt'OCedure. which can account for these dtscontinuities, is necessary where they are presem.
Altl100gh desi!ll'ers may opt to use the dynam1c analysiS procedure and bypass checks for 1rregulamy Types
Ia. lb, 2, and 3, the refetence sections listed in Table 12.3-2 should st.ill be checked for limitatioos and
design requireme.fiiS. Note that Secuon 12.3.3.1 prohibit.:; structures with venical irregularity Types lb, Sa,
or Sb for SOC E and F as well a~ strucrures with ventcal 1rregua1my Type Sb tn SOC D.
Regular strucwres are a.:;sumed to ha\'e a reasonably uniform dlstrtbution ofinela.<itic behavaor in elements
throughout the lateraJ.foree-resisting syste-m. Whete vertical irreguJanty Types 4, sa. or Sb exist. theJe is
tlle possibiltty ofhavmg loc:afized concentrottons of excessive inelastic deform:.uions due to the irregular
1ood path or weak story. In lhis case. the code prescribes addllJOnal streng.themng to correct the defic1enctes
for structures in cenatn seismic design categories. In the case of venic.aJ lrregularity Type Sb, lt.mns are
placed on the bo.ulding he1ght for all SOCs except SOC A.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 18 • veJticallfT891J/an1y Type 1a and Type 1b §12.3.2.2
Design Example 18
Vertical Irregularity Type 1a and Type 1b §12.3.2.2
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A Seismtc Destgn Category 0 five-story concrete spec1al moment·reststmg frame ts shown tn Ftgure IS-
I. The equtvalent lareral force proce.dure (Secuon 12.8) was used to determtne the lateral forces F. from
Equation 12.8- 11. The forces have bet.n applied and the corresponding floor level displacements sllil' atlhe
floors' cente.rs-of-mass have been determined as shO\'In here.
r.
- ,,!f Ss.t-2.02
F, DO i'
.'
F,_ DO .,· ' o1 Tllang...,
&hape
..... I
I
,'
'
/
'
F,
F,-- DO , s..••...
D O -;---!' :' '
I
.:i ''
'
'
i ''' &,,.. 0.71

'
l/
•/
. ' "-. ktual Slla ..
.' " '
Figure 18- 1.
I. If a Type Ia or Type lb vertical irregularity exists in the fio;l story.
1. Determine If a Type 1a or Type 1b Vertical Irregularity Exists

In the First Story §12.3.2.2
There are. two tests for each kind of soft-story lrregulariry (values 1n parentheses are tOr Type Ib):
I. llle Lateral stacy stiftbes:s is less than 70 percent of that of the st:oty above for Type Ia (less than
60 percent for Type Ib).
2. The Lateral stol)' st:iftOess is less than SO pe,rcent of the average suffness of the three stories
above for Type Ia (less ll1an 70 pe.rccnl for Type I b).

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 18 • \+!ttic al Irregularly Type f a and Type 1b §12.3.2.2
If the suffness of the story meets at le.ast one of the t\1,'0 ctiteria hsted.. the structure ls deemed to have a soft
story, and modal respom;e spectrum analysts is requtred by Table 12.6-1.
The definauon of soft story 1n the code compares values of the lateral st1tfness of tndividuaJ stor1es.
Generally, it is not practical to use stttlhess ptopenies unless these can be easily determined. lnere are
many structuml configurations where the evaluatton of story suffness lS complex a.'ld tS often not an
available output from computer programs. Recognizmg that the basic tntent of this irregularity check is to
determme d' the lateral-force dtstnbuuon wtll d1ffer significantly From the panem prescribed by Section
12.8.3, whoch assumes a prescribed shape for ll1e first dynamtc mode of response, !his type of irregularny
can also be determined by c.omparmg values of drtft ratios due to the prescnbed lateral forces. This
deformation companson may eve1l be more effectwe than the sttffuess comparison be(-ause the shape of
the first mode is often closely approxamated by lhe structure displacements due to the specified Section
12.8.3 force panem. Floor level d1splacemems and corresponding saory-dnft ratios are dtrectly a\•ailable
from computer pmgrams. To compare displacemems rather than stiffness. n is necessary to use the
reetprocal of the limiung percentage ratlos of70 and SO percent as they apply to story Stiffness, or reverse
tl'teir appltcabilny to the story or stories above. The foii<Wo<tng example shows lhls equrvalent use of the
displacement properues.
From the given djsplacements, story drifts and stOJ)'-dnft ratios are de:tc.rmtned. The story-dnft ratio is the
Slot)' drift djv1ded b)' the story height. These story-drift ratios wlll be used for the required comparisoo.'i
because they better rep!ese.m the changes i.n the slope of the mode .shape when lhere are s1gnificant
d1ffec-ences in tnterstory he1ghrs. (Note: story displacements can be used lf the story heights are neatly
equal.)
In terms of the calculated story-drtft ratios. the soft story occurs when one of the follow1ng condiuons
exists:
when 70 percent of b,,. exceeds B~ .. - &,..

hi h2
or
the stoty-dflft rauos are de-te.rmined as
~= ~ - (0.71 - 0) -0.00193
/rl h, 144
" ' = ~,. -~ •• - (1.08 - 0.71) -0.00308

lt2 lt2 120
"' = ~,. - ~,. - (1.45 - !.OS) - 0.00308

/rj h, 120
" • = ~•• - ~,. - (1.75 - 1.45 ) -0.00250

''~ ,,J 120
~0.00308 + 0.00308 + 0.00250) = 0.00289

3
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 18 • veJticallfT891J/an1y Type 1a and Type 1b §12.3.2.2
Checktng the 70 percent reqmrement:
•a J
0.70l ~: = 0.70(0.00493) = 0.00345> 0.00308 ... nm OK
Therefore, a soft story extst~.
Note that 70 percent ofthe first-story drift is greater than the second story dnft. Alternately:
0.00493 > (0.0030810.7 =0.0044)
Also note that structurnJ trregularttles of Type Ia, lb. or2 in Table 12.3-2 do not apply where no
story-draft rauo under des1gn lateral fOrce IS greater than 130 pe-rcent of the story-drift rauo of the
next story above. See Secuon 12.3.2.2, Excepuon I .
0.00493 = 1.60 .. . not OK

0.00308
Checkang the 80 percent requlrement:
0.80 l•a-f,) = 0.80(0.00493) = 0.00394 > 0.00289 . .. not OK

Therefore, a soft story exist~ with condition Ia.
Alternately: 0.00493 > (0.00289/0.8 = 0.0036 1). Therefore, a soft story ex1sts.
Check fore.•tremesofl story (Vertical Strueturallrregularny, Type Ib):
Checktng the 60 percent requ~teme.nt:
0.60(0.00493)=0.002958 <0.00308 ... OK
Alternately: 0.00493 < (0.00308/0.6 = 0.005 13) . .. OK
Checking the 70 percent requlfemettt:
0.70(0.00493) =0.003451 > 0.00289 ... not OK
Alternately: 0.00493 > (0.00289/0.7 = 0.00413) . .. not OK
11\US, due to stLtliless, an extreme soft story e.xtsts with condttion I b.
Recall from Table 12.3-2 for Type I b, e.1treme soft story, reference Section 12.3.3.1. This bu1lding is SOC
D and is permiued. Structures havtng SOC E or F and also havmg venicaJ irregulanty Type I b sbal.l..nSl1
be permitted.
For this srructure, Table 12.6-1 must be checked to determine the pe.rmnted analytical procedures.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 18 • \+!ttical Irregularly Type f a and Type 1b §12.3.2.2
Commentary
Structures WJth Type Ia or Type 1b veruc.al irregulaflty 1nay requ1re modal response spectn.Jm anaJys1s per
Table 12.6-1. Addotionally. structures with Type Ibare n01 permined in SOC E and F. If a mndal analysis
is to be perfonned and 1fthe structure is notln SOC E or F~ the structure does n01 need to be checked
for either the Type Ia or T)•pe lb trregulamy. llte lim nation regard1ng tJ1e Type Ib irregularity not being
allo\\'ed tn SDC E and F IS the prunary difference between the impact of a Type Ia trregularity versus a
l)ope I b orregularity.
Section I2.8.6 requlres lhat story drifts be computed usmg the max1mum tne-la<;tic response displaceme.ms
8.P Whic-h include the defleCtion 3JnplifiC3lt00 fi}C(()f' CJ•
& = c,&~ Eq 12.8- 15

• I
However~ fOC' the purpose of the story-drtft comparisoJts, or story-drift ratios. needed for soft-story
de-termination. tJ1e diSplacement &r-. due to the design se1smic forces can be used as 1n thiS example. In lhls
example, only the first story v.-as checked for poss1ble soft-stor)' vemcal 1tregularity. In prncuce, a11 stortes
must be checked, unless a modal analysjs is performed. It is often convenient to create tables to facilitate
thos e.xen:ise; see Tables 18-1 and 18-2.
Using the story-drift rattos (draft based) to determine y.."flether a soft story exists 1nay result tn the discovery
of soft stones 1n the upper stories of multjstory butldtngs that may not be correct. In this case.. it may be
more .approprtate to use the lateral story suffnesses (sutlhess based) to determine whether a soft story
does ex1st at that level. This may be accomplished by findutg the displacement of that level relam·e to the
level below and then dividing the stooy shear by that displacement to find the stooy stolfness (K = VIII). The
apparent story stifthess or dnft depends on the lateJaJ load pattern, so the most realistic Lateral load panern
should be u<ed forthis purpose.
Tabltl8-l. Soft-story sta/1/S Ia
Soft-
Story Soory Story~nA 0.8x (Soory- 0.7x (Soory- Avg. of'Story~riA Ratio SIDI)'
Lcvd Oasptocemcnt Drift Raho dnft RatKl) drift Ratio) of Ne.xl 3 Stories Stntusla
5 2.02 In 0.27m 0.00225 0.00 t80 0.00t58 - No
4 1.75 0.30 0.00250 0.00200 0.00175 - No
3 1.45 0.37 0.00308 0.00247 0.002 t6 - No
2 1.08 0.37 0.00308 0.00247 0.002 t6 0.0026 t No
t 0.7t 0.71 0.00493 0.0039-1 0.00345 0.00289 Yes
Tab/~ 18-1. Soft-story JtUtlu· Jb
Soft-
Story Soory Story-dnf\ 0.7x (Story- 0.6.x (Story- Avg. of'StOf)'~n ft Rallo Slory
Lcvd D~Splacemmt Drift Ratio dnft RatKl) drift Rut1o) of Nc:.xt 3 Stories Status lb
5 2.02 sn 0.27m 0.00225 0.00 t58 0.00135 - No
4 1.75 0.30 0.00250 0.00 t75 O.OOtSO - No
3 1.45 0.37 0.00308 0.002t6 0.00185 - No
2 1.08 0.37 0.00308 0.002 t6 0.00185 0.00261 No
t 0.7t 0.71 0.00493 0.00345 0.00296 0.00289 v..
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 19 • veJticallfT891Jian1y Type 2 §12.3.2.2
Design Example 19
Vertical Irregularity Type 2 §12.3.2.2
PROBLEM STATEMENT
The five-story special nlornent frame office budding has a heary uttlity equtpmenr tnstallation at Level 2.
This results ln lhe floor weight distributiOn shoY..n in Figure 19-1.
s Ws • 90 kips
• DOD w.•110kfps
DOD
6::n::u:::J
3 w,.,,o~
1 ODD Wt• 1001Ups
r // , '/
Figure 19- 1.
I. lf a Type 2 vemcal v.-eight (mass) irregutamy exists.
1. Determine If a Type 2 Vertical Irregularity Exists §12.3.2.2

A weight. or mass. venjcaf irregulattty ts c-onsidered [0 extst where the eff"bcnve mass of any story is more
than I50 percent of the efti!ctive mass of an adjacem story. HO\\•ever. thts requirement doe.s not apply to
the roof tfthe roof is ltghter than the floor below. Note that 11 does apply tflhe roof is lteavter than the floor
below.
Checking the effec.tive ma'IS of Level 2 against the effec.tive ma'IS of Levels I arld 3:
At le\·el I
1.5JY, = 1.5(100 k1p<)= 150 kips

W1 =I 70 kops > 150 kips
Therefore, a weaght trregularity exists.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design&amplo 19 • 11o1Dcat/ITOgVJarityType 2 §12.3.2.2
A t Level3
1.5W, = 1.5(110 kips)= 165 kips

w, = 170 kips> 165 ktps
Therefore, a weight trregulamy e:<tsts.
In thJs example, the v.-eaght uregulartty extst.~ twice: once between the first and secottd levels, and again
bet\\"eeO the second and tlurd levels. Either one of these alone would have been enough to trigg-er lhe l)•pe 2
irregularny.
Commentary
As in the case of \'e.rtical trregularity Type Ia or I b, thlS Type 2 lrregularlty also results 10 a pnmary nlode
shape that can be substruttla11y different from the triangular shape and lareralload distribution given by
Secuon 12.8.3. Consequemly, the appropnate load d.istrlbutton must be determmed by the Modal Response
Speetrum Analysis procedure ofSecuon 12.9 , when reqUired by Table 12.6- 1.
Another common pote1lllal occurrence of this irregularity would be a multtstory building where the plan
area dec·reases in an adjacent stcxy due to large floor openings or a building setback. In such a cao;e, a Type
2 tnegularity l'nay ex1sl even tfthe floor use is the same. Exce.puons I andlo(2 1n Sectton 12.3.2.2 may
apply tn this ca~ and should be considered.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 20
PROBLEM STATEMENT
The lateral-force-resisting system oflhe five-story special mome.nt frame building shomt an Ftgure 20-1 ha-.
a 25-foot setback at the th1rd, tOunh, and fiftJ1 storaes.
4 0'25' . 100'
Lewl 5
•
ODD -
O DD
DOD
3
I
DODD
,, , '/ //' / / / / /
,,
Figure 20-/,
I. If a Type 3 vertical trregulafl(y (vemcal geometrtc irregularity) exist<r~.

A vert.ic.a1 geometric irregulatny is consideJ'ed to exisl where the honzonlal dtmension of the lilleral- force-
resisung sysle.m tn any story as more than 130 percenl oflhat in the adJ3cent story.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desigl &Mnple 20 • 1loiDcal IITOgVJarity Type 3 §12.3.2.2
In thJs example. the setbac.k ofle\•el 3 mu.o;t be checked. The ruttosofthe two levels are
Widlh of Leve.l 2 _ (100 ft) = 1.3

3
Wldlh of Level 3 (75ft)
133pe:rcent> 130pe«ent
Thetefore, a vertical geometric irregulanty exists.
Commentary
More than a 30 percent change 1n width of the lateral-force-reslsttng system between adjacent stones could
result 1n a pnmary mode shape thattS substarnullly differe.m from the shape assumed for proper appl icauons
ofEquauon 12.8-1 1. If !he change is a decrease tn wtdth of !he upper adjacent story (as is typical, and the
case here), the mode shape ditlerence can be miugated by designing for an utereased stJftbess tn the stoty
·with a reduced widlh or by performing a modal respon.:oe spectrum analysis lO determine f«ces.
Similarly~ tfthe Width decrease is in the low-er adjacent story (the unusualsituation), the Type Ia soft-story
irregulamy can be avoided by a propont<>nal tncrease an the stiffness of the lower story. However, when the
width decrease is 1n tlte lov.-er story. there could be an overturning moment-load-transfer dtsconunuHy that
v.'Ould rtquire a dynamic analysis in accordance with Table 12.6- 1.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 21
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A conc.rNe buddmg ha~ the budding frame system sh<.,Nn an Fagure 2 I- I "fhe shear wall bet\~t-een Iines A
the shear wall between lines C and D.
and B has an tn-plrule otlSet from
34112~" .. 75"
5
IT
•
DO
v
- Sfleoarwal
12'
3 D k:"
12'
12'
2
DO 25'
50'
Sl'leat wal
1Z
// '/ / '/ // / //
Figurt!l J. J.
I. If a Type 4 ve.n.acal uregulanty (in-plane disconunutty) existS.

A Type 4 ven.teal u-regula.rity e:<1stS \\taere there ts an tn-plane otfse.t of the Lateral-force-reststing elemenLc;;
resulting in ovenuming demands on a supporung beam, column, lnJSS, or slab. In this example, the left
side of the upper shear wall (between lines A and B) is ofto;et from. the left side oftlte lower shear wall
(between lt.nes C and D). Overturning demands are tmposed on the supporting colwnns. The,refOre. tn-plane
dtscontinutt)' exlstS.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Examplo 21 • 11o1Dcat/ITOgVJarityType 4 §12.3.2.2
Commentary
The 1ntem of this irregulamy check 1s to provide correctiotJ of force transfer or load-path defictenc1es.
Arry in-plane ofl'Stt can result tn an ovenurning mom.ent·load-uansfer discontmuny tl'lat requires the
apphcatlon ofSectjon 12.3.3.3. When the offset exceeds the Jenglh oflhe reststtng element., lhere is also
a shear transfer disconunuity lhm req01res the application ofSecuon 12.3.3.4 for the strength of collector
elements along the ollSeL In lhis example~ the columns under wall A-8 are subjecl to the provtstans of
Section 12.3.3.3. and the collector element be-1\\'een lines A and D at level 2 is subject to the-provision.-;
ofSecuon 12.3..1.4.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig1Example22 • veJticallfT891Jian1yType~te~ §12.3.2.2
Design Example 22
Vertical Irregularity Type Sa/Sb-Concrete Wall §12.3.2.2
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A conc~"e"te beanng-\'w'all building has lhe shear \\'all conliguratiott sho\\n in Figure 22-1. All walls tn lhis
direction are idenucal~ and the tndividual pters have the shear conttlbution given beiO\\~ V,. is the nomu\al
shear strength calculated 1n accordance with ACI 3 I8.
...... 3
-
2
-
PIER
I
"·
20 kipS
0 0 2 30
3 10
/
01
'/
0l0 // '/
4
5
80
10
Flgure 11- 1.
I. If a Type Sa or Type 5b venical trregularity (discotUmuny m lateral strength-weak-story)

exists.
1. Determine If a Type Sa or Type Sb Vertical Irregularity Exists §12.3.2.2

A Type Sa weak-story djsconunuity in capacity existS where lhe story strength lS less than 80 percent of
th.at in the story abo,•e. The story suength is lhe total strength of all se:tsmic-force-resisung ele..nents shanng
the story shear for the direction under consideration. Since all the walls in this direction are ide.ntical~ it is
adequate to perlbrm this 3.1\alysas on JUSt one of the VI'ails.
Using lhe values of v. given fO! each pier~ lhe story strengths are
Forst-slOI)' strength= 20 + 30 + 10 = 60 k1ps
Second. story strength =80 + I0 =90 lips

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 22 • lmrlicallrregularity Type ~oncn!'te WciN §12.3.2.2
Check If first-story strength IS Jess than SO percent oftl'lat oflhe second S[Qty.
60 ktps < 0.8(90 kips)= 72 ktps
Therefore. a we.al:: story oonditton. e:<IStS.
Check iffirst-stoty strength is less than 65 percent of that of the second story (irregularity Type 5b).
0.65(90 ktps) = 58.5 ktps
60 ktps > 58.5 ktps
Therefore, the IO\\~J story tS not an extreme weak st.ory, trregu1amy Type Sb. but is a verttcal
irregulamy Type 5a weak stOI)'.
Commentary
llus irregulanty check is to detect any concentration of inelastic behav1or 1rt one supponing story that can
lead to the loss ofvertiC<.lJ load capacity. Elemems subject to this check are lhe shear wall pieJ'S (where
the shear conmbuuon. tS the lower of eather the shear at de\relopment of the f1exural stroogth, ot the shear
strength), bracmg me.mbers and their conn.ecttons, and frame columns.
Frame c,olumns with weak column-strong beam COilditions have a shear contrtbuuon equaJ to that
de\•eloped when the top and bonom ofthe column are at flexural capacny. Where there t~ a strottg column-
weak beam condttt<>l\ the column shear resJstance conmbuuon shou1d be the she.ar corresponding to the
development of the adjoming beam yield htnges and the column base COJ1J'leCUon capacuy. In any case-. the
column shear contribuuon shall n01 exceed the column shear capacity.
An extreme weak story ts prohlbned (undc.r Secuon 12.3.3.2) for structures more than tY.'O stories or 30
no
feet In height unless the weak story is capable of resisting a total setsmtc force equal (0 times the destgn
force prescrtbed in Section 12.8. Per Section 12.3.3. 1, either weak-story c<>ndlliOtlt.S prohibited in SOC E
and F. Venical irregularity Type 5b is not permmed tn structures assigned to SOC D.
It IS a..sumed tn this example that shear govems the Sltengtlt of the \\-all and the system. If the walls had
a taller aspect ratio and the walls became flexuraiJy g01.·emed, then lhe walls" moment sttcngths should
be used for checktng this irregularity. In this case. both the 1.20 and 0.90 axial load cases should be
considered.
In this example, the \l.>tak struy could be mttigated by provtd1ng addittonal shear re1ntorcing tn the first
floor \wlls so long a~ tl'le upper bound Slte:nglh linuts in ACI are not reached.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 23 • veJticallfT891Jian1y Type 5a15b-Steel Momeri Frame §12.3.2.2
Design Example 23
Vertical Irregularity Type Sa/Sb-
Steel Moment Frame §12.3.2.2
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A fi,.•e-story bualdmg has a steel spec:tal moment-res1sttng frame (SMRF). The frame conststs ofW24
beams and W 14 columns wnh the foUow1.ng member sttength propentes.
Beam and column nomtnal capaciues at levels I and 2:
M, = 200 ktp-ft
Column base connections aE grade (OOsed on grade-beam suength):
M.a• = 100 Jap-ft
Assume. tor the purpo~ of Illustration only. that the columns have been designed such that a strong beam-
,,~ak column condJtton 1s permitted.
~.2J
A 0
•
3
2
1
14'
"
Figure 13- 1.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design &ample 23 • Vfntkallrregularity Type 5al5b-Steel Moment Frame §12.3.2.2
I. Ftrst-story lateral strength.
2. Second-story Lateral strength.
3. If a Type 5a « li'Jle 5b vertiCal irregularity ('"'ilk story) e.<ists ill tl>e first story.
Discussion
A Type 5 \'teak-story dtsc:ontinujty in capacity exasts where the story strength is less than 80 percent of thai
of the story above (where IllS less than 65 percettt, an extre-me weak story eXIstS). The story suength IS
considered to be the tom! strength of all seismic-force-reststing elemertl'i that sha!e the stOJ)' shear for the
dt.reclion under consjderation.
To determtne if a weak stocy exasts an the first story. the sums of the oolumn shears an the first and second
stories- where the member moment capactltes ate deve-loped by lateralloading~ust be detenruned and
compared.
In this example, Il lS assutned that the beam moments at a beam-column jotnt ate dtstribl.ued equally to the
secuons of the columfls direclly above and below the JOtnt. The tbllowtng calculattons are for the first and
second stones.
1. Determine First-story Lateral Strength
Columns A and 0 must be checked for strong column-weak beam constderattons.
2M, =400> M,= 250
Therefore. a sttong column-weak beam condh.on exists.
Next, the shear an each column must be determtned.

"'
~
r-)
._
250
FOR MOMENT
Because the beam y1elds first. the moment capacity
of beam (250n) go"erns ove,r moment c.apacny of t2S ..-....
column (200) to determine shear.
Clear heaglu =14 ft - 2 ft =L2 ft

.,j-) ~
"A-- r{)-_ 125+100
12 - IS7"I(
. => •PS
v FOR SHEAR
M..r;e = 100 kip-ft
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 23 • veJticallfT891Jian1y Type 5a15b-Steel Momeri Frame §12.3.2.2
Check colunHIS Band C tbr mong c.olumn.weak

beam considerations.
200 ........
250(+ )250
Therefore, a sttong beam· weak column rondhion exists. 200'-
FORMOMENT
v----C::\ . (':I_) 200

Me =200 ki~ft
zoo
200 l
Next,lhe shear m each column mUSt be determaned.
Because the column yields first, the moment capacuy
of column governs over morne.nt capac it)' of beam
to derermine shear.
Clear height= 14ft - 21\ = 121\

:I
I'Jf -- v.c - 200+100 - 2 ).
12
" 0'··
..Jps
V
-v Mtt011 =100 ki~ft FOR SHEAR
FtrSt-StOry strength= I~+ V8 + Vc+ I'D = 2( 18.75) + 2(25.0) = 87.5 krps
2. Determine Second-story Lateral Strength

Colwnns A and 0 musl be checked for strong column-weal:: beam at Level2.
200
2M,=400 > M,=250 .......
Therefore, a sttong column-weak be-am rondhion exists. r-) zso FOR MOMENT
Clear herght =12ft - 21\ = 10 fi "'

r-
FOR SHEAR
,.·,.. ; v:J) = 125+125
10 -
2.).
" 0k' IpS
1
,,.
-../
J4 I 2= 125 q,.ft t2S

v

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design &ample 23 • Vfntkallrregularity Type 5al5b-Steel Moment Frame §12.3.2.2
Check columns Band C for strong column-\\'e.ak beam c.ons·iderattons. ,.,......

1M~ = 400 <2M~=- 500 2!0(+)2so
Therefore, a strong beam-weak column condHion e.xists. 200'-'
FOR MOMENT
v
Mr.: = 200~ft
Clear height= 12ft - 2ft= 10 H
200+200 .
v. =Vc = 10
-40.0 kips
FOR SHEAR
Mc = 200•ft
v
Seoond-SlOI)' strength
= I~+ V8 + Vc + V0 + 2(25.0) + 2(40.0) = JJO.O kips
3. Determine If a Type 5a or Type 5b Vertical Irregularity

Exists at the First Story
Ftrst-story suenglh =- 87.5 kips
Second-slory strength= 130.0 kips
87.51130.0= 0.67 < 0.8 Tl2.3-2,1lem Sa
Therefore. a weak story oondiuon in the first story extsts and a Type 5a weak story veruc.aJ
trreg.ularity ex.tsts. The ratio IS nm below 0.65 ~ lherefore, a Type Sb extreme weak smry trregulamy
does not exist.
Per Sec-Lion 12.3.3. 1,tbis irreguJartty is prohibited in SOC Eand SOC F. and measures mu.~ be
mketlto mittga[e the issue.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 24 • Elements Supporting Discontinuou.s Wals or Frames §12.3.3 .3
Design Example 24
Elements Supporting Discontinuous
Walls or Frames §12.3.3.3
OVERVIEW
Thts example demonstrates the loadJng c:ritena and de.ta.ahng required for elements suppomng dtsconunued
« ofiSet elemems of a setsmtc-force-restshng system.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A reinfocced concrete butldmg has the l:.ueral-force-reststtng system shown 1n Ftgure 24-1. Shear walls at
the first-floor level are d1scomittuous between lines A and Band lutes C and D.
The followlng Information is giVen:
Setsmtc Destgn Calegoty D
SDs= 1.1 0
Specla1 remfbrced concrete shear waH (SRCSW) building frame system:
R=6andllc,=2.5 T 12.2-1
Oflice buildtng live load: use factor ofO.S on L §2.3.6
Axial loads on column C
D=40 ktps
L=20 ktps
Q, = :!: 100 ktps

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 24 • Elements Supportjng Discontinuous Wclls or Frames §12.3.3.3
u~f<:.::.,••
4 ::.c:-
f f r ••::_,._,_.:1
••::.c:-.::._;:_,_.::.c:-.::._,.:_,_.::.c:-
•r
3 ----------------------------
Sl'leatwal
1r
2 ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
1r ,...,..,c
24~ )1.' 24'"
-------··::::::::::r:·-~--~--~--,-1 rc•4000psi
•r
Figw? 14-1.
I. Applicable load combinattons and required strength for column C.
1. Applicable Load Combinations and Required Strength for Column C
Beeau.o;e of the d1stonunuous configuration of the she.ar wall at the first story. the first-stOI)' columns
on lines A and 0 must suppon the waJJ elementS above this level. Column Con Ime 0 IS trealed iJt thts
example. Because of symmetty. the column on line A would have Identical requirements.
Section 12.3.3.3 reqtilres that the colwnn shall have a design suength to resist the spec.tal seism1c load
combutauons of Section 12.4.3.
P. =(l.2 + 0.2SDS)D+ !l,Q,+ 0.5L §2.3.6 (Comb. 6)

p. = (0.9 - 0.2SI)$)D + O.Q. §2.3.6 (Comb. 7)
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 24 • Elements Supporting Discontinuou.s Wals or Frames §12.3.3 .3
where.
D=40
L=20
Q,= :!:100
S"'= 1.1 0
n. = 2.5
Thus,
P. =[1.2 + 0.2( J.JO)J(40) + 2.5( 100) + 0.5(20) =3 I7 kips (compress•on)
and
P. =[0.9 - 0.2( I. 10))(40) + 2.5(- 100) =-223 kips (tension)
Commentary
In addttion to the requ.tre.ments for the destgn of elements supporung the disc:onLiJ\UOus sysretn, tt 1S \\'Orth
noung that for thiS configuration and others shown m Ftgures 24-2, 24-3, and 24-4, special attention should
be gwen at the level of the disoonnnutt}' to the design of collec::-tots tn accordance \\1lh Section 12.10.2.
The load requtrements ofSectton 12.3.3.3 and re-lattd sectiOJ'IS of the relevant materials chapters apply to
the tbllowtng Vt-ntcalttregu.lanttes and ele.merns:
I. Discontinuous shur wall. The ·wall shown has a Type 4 vertical stN(:tUtal trregularity. Note
that only the noted column needs to tesist the special load combinations since it supports the
shear wall.
________ 0
________ 0
"""""'
, , ,
Flgun 24-1.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 24 • Elements Supportjng Discontinuous Wclls or Frames §12.3.3.3
2. Di.stontinuous totumn. Thts frame has a Type 4 ventcal structurol trregulattty. The transfer
girder reqwres the special load combinattons as it supportS a discontinuous system and also
serves as a collec.tor. Funhennore,lhe portiOn of the load from the t.ransfer girder beingapphed
10 the supporting ooluntns would also requtre the spedal load combi.nauon..~.
DOD
DOD 'L
-
Figw? 14-3.
3. Oul-of-plant off.stt. The wall on line A 31 the fits~ story is discontinuous. TI1is struetw·e has
3 Type 4 plan suuctutal trregularity, and Sectton 12.3.3.3 applies to lhe suppotttng c.olumns.
The portion of the diaphragm rmnsferring shear ( t.e., rtansfer diaphragm) 10 the offset wall
must be destgned m accordance wtlh the requirements of Section 12.3.3.4. Note that accordmg
to curre.nt code language, the transfer diaphragm and lhe off.<;et shear wall are subject to the p
factor, but not 10 the spec1al load oombtnattons. 1-fowever.the SEAOC Seasmology Commntee
suggest~ the engineer apply lhe special load combi.naLions to the. transfer diaphragm where
lhe performance of the diaphragm lS crit.icaJ to the perfomlaoce of the pnmary seismic-force-
resisr,ng system.
Figw? 14-1.
For any of the supporting columns shown tn Ftgw-es 24-1 through 24-4,1he lnad demand O,Q,ofSec!ion
12.4.3. 1 and Secuon 2.3.6 Equations 6 and 7 need no1 e.xceed the 1naximwn tbrcelhar can deve-lop tn lhe
element from a capacny-based analysis of the lateral-force-reslsttng S)'stem (see the exception to Section
12.4.3. 1).
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 25 • Elements Supporting Discontinuou.s Wals or Frames--Ught..frame §12.3. 3. 3
Design Example 25
Elements Supporting Discontinuous
Walls or Frames-Light-frame §12.3.3.3
OVERVIEW
Thts example Illustrates the applicauon of the requtremems ofSecuon 12.3.3.3 for the design ofllght-frame
elements that suppon a dtscommuous setsnlic-tbrce-restst!Og syste-m.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A light-framed beanng-wall buddlng W1th plywood shear panels has a Type 4 vertical sLnJcturaltrregulamy
U1 one ofns shear walls. as shown 10 Ftgure25-l .
------------
Flgure 25- 1.
The followtng InfOrmation is given:
Seismtc Des1gn Category 0
S"'= 1.10
R=6.5
0,=3.0
c,= 4
Ax1alloads on the umber column under the discontinuous portton of the she-at wall are
D=6.0kips
L= 3.0 kips
Q,=±7.0kips

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 25 • Elements Supporling Discontinuotls watl.s or Frame.s-Ught-frame §12.3.3.3
I. Applicable load combm::lttons and reqUired strength for column.
1. Applicable Load Combinations and Required Strength for Column
For vertical irreguJarny Type 4~ Section 12.3.3.3 requ1res that the umber oolwnn have the design strength
10 resistthe s:pec1al .seismic load comb1nat.iofiS ofSecwm 12.4.3. This is reqwred for bolh allowable stress
design and S[(('.(l.gth design. For strength design, the applicable load combinauol'tS from Sections 2.3.6 and
12.4.3. 1 are
5. (1.2 +0.2SJJ<lDHl,Q,+ L
7. (0.9 - 0.2SJJS)D + ll,E
Applicable load comb1nauons for allowable stress des1gn from Sectioi'L~ 2.4.5 a11d 12.4.3. 1 are
61> (1.0 + 0.105S,..,)D + 0.525!"1,(1£ + 0.15L
8. (0.6 - 0. 14S,.)D+ 0.7!"l,Q,
Jn this shear waJI. the timber column carries only axial loads. The awopnate dead, live. and seismic loads
were given as
0:6.0 kipS
L= 3.0 k1ps
with !"l, = 3.0
For the required strength des1gn check, both load combinations must be checked.
P. =(l.2 + 0.2SDS)D+ !"l,Q,+ O.SL
P = (1.2 + 0.2( 1.10)](6.0) + 3.0(7.0) + 0.5(3.0) = 3 1.0 kips (compression)
P =(0.9 - 0.2SIJS)D +!loQ,,
P = [0.9 - 0.2( 1.10)](6.0) + 3.0(- 7.0) = -16.9 kips (<ension)
Per Secuon 2.3.6, the load faclOr on L 1n combmation 6 IS permmed 10 equal 0.5 for aU occupan.c1es m
which L~ l~ less than or equal to 100 ps1: wnh the exception of garages or areas occup1ed as places of publ1c
assembly.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 25 • Elements Supporting Discontinuou.s Wals or Frames--Ught..frame §12.3. 3. 3
Commentary
For suength design. the umbe.r column must be checked for a compression load of31 .0 ktps and a tenston
load of 16 .9 ktps.
The purpose: of the destgn-strength c.heck is to confirm the ab1ltty of the c.olwnn lO carry high.er and more
realisttc loads required by the discontinuuy tn the shear \\all atlhe first floor. nus ts done by increasing the
normal seismic load in the column Q£ by the factor no= 3.0 (0 calculate the maximum seismic load etfect
£.(see Section 12.4.3).

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 26 • RedundancyFactorp §12.3.4
Design Example 26
Redundancy Factor p §12.3.4
OVERVIEW
Redut~dan.t seismic systems. wtth muluple foree-resisung load paths. perfoi'M better in earthquakes than
Jess-tedundant stru::tures. The redundancy factor is tnte.nded to quanufy the imponance of redundancy;
thlS is dtscussed m the eomme.ntary section of ASCE 7 as well as tJ1e NEHRP Rtcommtnded Stismtc
Pronsu>ns.
ASCE 7-16 permits lhe redw'ldancy fact« to be taken as 1.0 in the tOIIowmgc:ircwnstances (see Secuon
12.3.4.1):
I . Structures ass1gned to Seism1c Design Category B or C. (Note that the lood combmauons that
1nclude the redundancy factor are not used for Seismtc Design Category A.)
2. Dnft calculation and P-deha effects.
3. Oestgn of nonstrucmral components.
4. Design of nonbuilding structures that are nm similar to buildmg.'i.

5. Design of oollectot element~. splices, and their connections for which lhe load combt.nauons
walh overstrength factor of Section 12.4.3 ate used.
6. Design of members or connec.tions where the load eombtnations \Vtth 0\'erstrength of SectiOil
I2.4.3 are required for desJgn.
7. Dtaphrag.m loads determined using Equation 12.10- 1, including the limtts tmpo.<;ed by
Equauons 12.10-2 and 12.10-3 (note that !his does not apply to forces transferred lhroog)l a
diaphtagm.. suc.h as due to an out-of-plane offset in the seismic load-resisting system~
8. Structures wuh damptng systems destg.ned tn accordance wtth Chapttr I8.
9. Des:t gn of struc.tural waJ Is for out-of-plane fOrces. inc1U(hng the tr anchorage.
Additionally. Sectton 12.3.4.2 identifies two other oondUJOOS in whtch p may be taken as I.0. Note Lhat the
cruena for these condtllons need only be met at floor levels in which mote than 35 percent of the. base shear
JS being resisted; for the top level or levels of taller structures, the conditions need not be met The factor
may be taken as 1.0 when tither of the followtng coJ'!dlttons ts met. In all Olher conditions. p ts taken as I.3.
Arry other value of p ts not permitted.
Condiuonl
12.3.4.2{3) Config.utauons tn which the retno\•aJ of one ele.menr (as described tn the fo11owing
summary of Table 12.3-3) will nm result 1n more than a 33 percent redocuon 1n Slory shear strength or 1n an
extreme torsionaJ im~g.ularuy (as defined in Table I2.3- 1).
Summary ofTable 12.3-3
Removal of one eleme.u is defined as:
I. Theremm•aJ ofan 1rtdiv1duaJ brace (braced frames).
2. Loss or mocnem resistanoe at the berun.to-colunm connections at bolh ends of a smgle beam
(moment frames).
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 26 • RedundancyFactorp §12.3.4
3. Removal of a shear wall or wall pier With a helgh.Ho-length ralJo greater than 1.0 (shear wall
systems).
4. Loss of moment teSIStanee at the base C-01\l'M."CUOns of MY smgJe canulever column (canuJever
colwnn syste-ms).
5. For oilier systems. such as stiSmJcally damped struc1ures, no prescripuve requirements are
gwen, allowing p lObe taken as 1.0.
Cond•tton II
12.3.4.1(b) Configurauons WJth no Jtregularittes at any level and wuh suflic1ent pertme-ter braced
frames. mome:IU frames, or shear walls. Sufficient penmete-r bracing 1s defined as at least two bays of
seismic-force-resistlng perimeter frrumng on each side of the structure ln each orthogonal direction. For
shear waJI systems. the number of bays is calculaied as the length of shear Y..'a.ll di\'ided b)• the story heighl
(two umes the length of shear wall divided by the story height for hght-framed oonstrueuon).
PROBLEM STATEMENT
To Illustrate the application of the method for establishing the redundancy factor, the structure shown 1n
F1gure 26-1 wtiJ be analyzed.
Wall E Waii F
Stiffness Ke Stiffness K,
Wali A
StiffoossK,
J Wall C
[ Stiffness Kc
Wall S
S1iffness K 11
]
t WallO
Stiffness Ke
WaiiG Waii H
Stiffness K 0 Stiffness K,
Figure 26- I.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 26 • RedundancyFactorp §12.3.4
Given mformanon:
SOCD
One story. concrete shear wall building.
All walls have the same nominal shear sueng,~ R•.
The story height is I8 feet.
The length of each shear wall i.s 15 fee-t.
For purposes of the requ1red suenglh oflhe v.'alls, the redundancy factor must be de1etm1ned a11.d used in
Equation 12.4-3 10 determine the hortzontal seismic load effect None of the conditions Iisted in Secuon
12.3.4. 1 apply, and thus Sec.tion 12.3.4.2 must be used to determine whether p is 1.0 or 1.3.
Because there are two bays of shear wall on each of the perimeter Jmes of ressstanee and the budding IS
completely regular. Section 12.3.4.2(b) m1ght allow a factor of 1.0. However, the. length of each shear wall
bay is le.<S than the story hetgllt, tlte numher of bays as defined by Section 12.3.4.2(b) IS less than mo, and
thus the configuration does oot automatically qualify for a redoodancy fuctot of I.0. The coofiguration
will therefore be analyzed usang the method outlined in Section 12.3.4.2(a). namely, by removmg a wall
and aW!ssutg the etrect on story shear suength and on bwlding l()(SJOn. In th1s example. Wall C wtll be
te:ffiO\'ed. Because of the symmetry of the system. the removal of one wall covers the cases of the rtmovaJ
of each of the other walls. In a more typical system, a sepamte check would need to be performed for
se:veral (or e\'en all) of the walls.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 26 • RedundancyFactorp §12.3.4
One method ofestabhsfung sto.y shear capac:.ty ts to ulJhze a pla~tic mechantsm analys1s. Th•s 1s the
method envisioned by lhe committee that authored lhe redundancy provisio~ and it is more consistent wuh
the pnnciples of se1smic design (Le.• eonsidenng strength and limn states, rather than elastic des1gn). In this
me-thod of anai)'SIS, the stOJ)' shear capacity before removal ofa \WII is the sum of the capacmes of the four
walls res1sttng the se1sm1e force in the dtrec.tJon under coosideration (provided that the onhogon.a.l walls
ha\'e sufficiem strength to resist the torston, which ln this case ts only the accidental tors1on). This is sl'l<m'J\
ut Figure 26-2(a). where R. denotes the capac tty of the waJI. If OJte wall is removed, the story shear capacity
tSthe sum of the capacities of the three remaining ·walls resisting the seismic force 10 the direcuon under
oonsidemtion; again, the orthogonaJ wa11s must be checked for the forces resultjng from building torsion,
wh1ch tn thiS ease IS substanual. Th1s ts shown tn Figure 26-2(b). Thus. the reduction 1rt capaC![)' ts only 25
pe-rcent. l1le resuhmg budding torsional forces must be resisted by Lhe frames ut the onhog_onal dtrecuon.
This tnterpretation of the story shear capacity has been endorsed by the SEAOC Seismology Committee.
R.,= 10%R. R.,= IO%R,, R. • 32.5% R., R.. • ~5% R.,
R,
~~ ~
~ R,.
~. ~ ~ t
R,.: 10%R, R..= l0%R., R,. =32.5%R. R,. =~.S% R..
(a) (b)
Figure 26-1.
To quahty for a faclor of I.0, the system wtth one wall removed must aJso be checked for an extreme
torsional irregularity as defined an Table 12.3- I. For the example, using the plastiC mechantsm at~alysts.,
the deflec11on in the direcuon of loading is R.,.IK11• The addiuonal deflection at each penmeter line due to
rot3Lion is 0.325R,.}K11• Th.is is Jess than tlte 40 percent max1mum thatlS aJiowed by Table 12.3-1 before an
extreme torsional1rreg.uJaril)• is deemed to e·ust. Titus, the configuration qualifies for a p fuctor of 1.0.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
DesignE•ample 26 • RedundancyFactorp §12.3.4
An alternauve method of determining the redundancy factor tn\•olves the use of an analyucal model. For
thlS method, one of the walls as remO\'ed, and the resulttng SlfUCture is checked ustng the modified elaslic
distriblluon of fOrces. For the given c.onfiguratton, the remo\13.1 ofone wall results 1n a 60 percent increase
in force on the rel'natning wall (see Figure 26-3; 41 percent/26.25 percent=- 1.6). The reduced fOrce Jevel
causing yaeldJng of the remaining wall is then 1/1.6, or 62.5 percent of the ortgmal force. The e-ffect on the
Slot)' strength is then COI\Sldered to be a reducuon of 100 percenr - 62.5 percent =- 37.5 perce.m. whtch ts
greater than the 33 percent reducuon in story strength allowed. Accordtng to thts alremative method, this
configurattOn. would nm quality for a redundancy factor of 1.0. HO\\"tver,lhts method tS less conststent wtth
the prtnciples of se-ismic design because n considers onl)' elastic behav.or rather than strength and I1m it
states.
-
1.25% 1.25% 6.5% 6.5%
~
2).75% ~
~ 2625% 29%
~
\9
•
23.75% ~ t I ~ 26.25% 29%
~ t ~ 42%
~ ~
1.25% 1.25% 6.5% 6.5%
(a) (b)
Figur<16-3.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
2018 IBC SEAOC SlructiXai/Seismic Desigl Manual, \All 1 11
Desig'J Example 27 • Seismic Load Combinations: streng/1 Design §2.3 .6
Design Example 27
Seismic Load Combinations: Strength Design §2.3.6
PROBLEM STATEMENT
For the mome-nt-resisung frame struCture sho\'m in Figure 27-1. the tOIIowtng information is given:
S0 s= 1. 10
1, = 1.0
p= 1.3
fo =0.5
Snow lood S = 0
D
~ ~ ];
A 8
,,. '/ / / / // '/ _.,

0
'
Figure 27- /,
Beam A-B and column C-D are elements of the special mome-nt-resisting frame. Structural analysis has
provided the tbllowtng beam momentS at A. and the c~l umn ax1al loads and moments at C due to dead load~
office bt.uldmg live load ~ and left-to-nght (~)and ngi\Ho-left (.-) d1recuons oflateral se.is:mic loading.
Dead L1ve Left-to-Rtght RtghHo-left

Load,D Lood, L Seismic Load Sels:mic load
(-Q,) (-Q,)
Beam Moment at A - 100 ktp-ft -50 kip- !I +120 ktp-fl - 120 kip-ft
Column C-D A.xial Load +90 kips +40 ktpS +I 10 laps - 110 kips
Column Moment at C +40 ktp-fi +20 ktp-ft +160 ktp-ft - 160 ktp-ft

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design &ample 27 • Seismic l.Dad Combinations: Strength Desgn §2.3.6
Sign conve1\Uon: Posttive moment mduces flexura1tension on lhe bottom. side of a beam and at the right
side of a column. Pos-itive axial load u'lduces compression. Note that for the pantcular locauon of column
C- D. the seismtc: axial load a.'ld moment at Care both posiU\'e for the left-to-right (-+)loading and are both
negattve tOr the nght-to-left ( if-) loodtng. Thas ts not necessarily uue for the other elemenlS of the structure.

I. Strength design seismic: load combinations.
2. Strength design moments at beam end A fOr seismic load combinations.
3. Strength design uuernc:uon. pall's ofa.xial lood and moment for the design of column sectjon at C
for seismk load combU'Ia.Uons.
1. Strength Design Seismic Load Combinations
(I .2 + 0.2So.,)D + pQ, + L (recallS= 0 was given) §2.3.6 (Comb. 6)

(0.9 - 0.2S0 _.)D + PQr §2.3.6 (Comb. 7)
Note: a factorofO.S applies 10 L tf L s 100 psf(e.xcept at garages and publiC assembl)').
For the given values of p = I.3 and SD!i = 1.10. the load combtnations are
1.420+ 1.3Q,+0.5L §2.3.6 (Con> b. 6)

0.68D + UQ, §2.3.6 (Comb. 7)
2. Strength Design Moments at Beam End A for Seismic Load Combinations

a. For S2.J.6 load tonabinatiou 6, lbt critical n~ otturs " htu tht sig·ns of Q£ and D
art lht SIUUf
1.42D+ 1.3Q,+0.5L
wuh D=M"= - 100, Qr=Mee= - 120,and L =AIL = - 50
M• = 1.42(- 100) + 1.3(- 120) + 0.5(- 50) = - 323 k>p.ft
b. For S2.J.6 load tonabinatiou 7, tbt critical n~ otturs " htn tht sig·ns ofQ£ and D
art oppositt-
0.68D + J.JQ,
wuh D=M"= - IOOand Q,= 120
M• =0.68(-100) + 1.3(120) = 88 ktp.ft
Therefore, the beam section at A must be designed for
.~~. = - 323 kip.ft §2.3.6 (Comb. 6)
M• = +88 kip-ft §2.3.6 (Comb. 7)
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 27 • Seismic Load Combinations: streng/1 Design §2.3 .6
3. Strength Design Interaction Pairs of Axial Load and Moment for the
Design of Column Section at C for Seismic Load Combinations
Coupled act1ons., such as the-axtaJ load and nloment at the colwnn sectJon c. occur simultaneously because
of a common load combination. For example. both the rudalload and the mome-nt must be due to a common
djrecuon of the lateral setsmic Joodtng.
When constdenng the alg_e.bmtc stgns of coupled actions and the djrecuonal nature of the late.rat seismic
load effect Qc. the appropriate set of load combination is
( 1.2 + 0.2S..,)D + p(-t{l£) + L

( 1.2 + 0.2S..,)D + p(-{/c) + L
(0.9 - 02S..,)D + p(+Q,)
(0. 9 - 02S"")D + PH?t.l
Note: a tactorof0.5 applies to L if L s 100 psf(ex....,pt at garages aod public assembly areas).
For the spedfic values of p = 1.3 and StJS= 1.10. the load conlbinauons provide the following \'alues for
the coupled pair Pc and Me- Note that the coupled pair Pc and .tfc muSL occur stmultanoousJy at a spectfic
load combinatjon of gravity load. and lateral and vertical seismtc load effects. The mteraclton destgn of the
column section must sausf)' aJI of the coupled pairs of Pc and Me from the setsmic load combinations aJoog
with the pairs from the gravtty load combinations and wind load combirt.atJOns.
Pc Me
1.42D + 1.3£ + O.SL 290.8 274.8
1.420 - 1.3£ + O.SL 4.8 - 141.2
0.68D+ 1.3£ 204.2 235.2
0.68D - 1.3E -81.8 -180.8
Commentary
When the Modal Response Spectrum Analysis procedure of Section 12.9 is used, the algebraic signs of
seismic load aclions are lost because of the process of c.ombm1ng the tnchvtduaJ modal respon.~s. The signs
to be: used for coupled actions due to a gwen direcuon of lateral loadtng CilJl be obtatned from the response
of the mode having the largest parucipation factor tbr the gwen direction oflateml seismic loading..
Alternative-ly, the signs can be obuuned from the equjvaJent lateral force procedure of Section I2.8.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 28 • Minimum Upward Force for Horizontal CantHtwets for SDC D through F §12.4.4
Design Example 28
Minimum Upward Force for Horizontal Cantilevers
for SOC D through F §12.4.4
PROBLEM STATEMENT
For the nonprestressed cantilever beam shown in Figure 28· 1. the followang tnformation is given:
Interior resuJential balcony with
D= 200 pl f
L=300pl f
Q,=O
S e &snl&C Design Category D
SO$= 1.0
( . fO'
Figtu~ 28-1.
I. Applicable strength desjgn load combinations and resulung design forc-es on beam.
2. Beam end re-actions for govemutg Jood combinauon(s).
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 28 • Minimum Upward Force for Horizontal CantiJevets for SOC D thtoug/1 F § 12.4.4
1. Applicable Strength Design Load Combinations

and Resulting Design Forces on Beam §12.4.4
For SOC 0, tlte destgn of honzonro.l cannle"\•er beams must eonstder
I. The govemt.ng load combi.n.auon. not tllcluding E from Sectton 2.3. 1.
q. = 1.20 + l.6L (governs by tnspecuon) §2.3.1 (Comb. 2)
= 1.2(200 pi I)+ 1.6(300 pit)= 720 plf(downward)
2. The governing load comb1nanon. t.ncluding the downward seismic effect from Secuon 2.3.6 and
Sectt<lrl 12.4.2. 1.
q. = ( 1.2 + 0.2~os)D + pQ, + 0.5L

(ustng 0.5L per §2.3.6 n01e I) §2.3.6 (Comb. 6)
= [1.2 + 0.2( 1.0)](200 pi f)+ 0 + 0.5(300 pll)
= ( 1.4)(200 pll) + 0.5(300 pit)
= 430 plf(dov.nward)
3. The govermng lood combinauon, ineludtng lhe UJ)\Yatd se1smtc effect from Se-cuon 2.3.6 and
Section 12.4.2. 1.
q. = (0.9 - 0.2S,..)D + pQ, §2.3.6 (Comb. 7)
= [0.9 - 0.2( 1.0)](200 pit)+ 0
= 0.7(200 pi f)
= 140 plf(dO\\TlW:ltd)
4. ln accordance wnh Section 12.4.4, cantilevers 1n SOC 0 through F shall be designed for a
mimmum net upward force of 0.2D in addiuon to the other appl icable load combinations ln
Sections 2.3 and 12.4. The terminology of ..net upward se1smic force" is ime.1tded to spectfy
that gravity load effectS canoot be constdered to reduce the efti!clS of the \'eJ1tcal se1sm1c forces
and thmlhe beam must have the strength to res 1st the acuons caused by this net upward forre
'mhout considerauon of any dead loads. Thts force is computed as 0.2 umes the dead lood.
q. =~.2D = - 0.2(200) = - 40 plf(upward) §12.4.4

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 28 • Minimum Upward Force for Horizontal CantHtwets for SDC D through F §12.4.4
2. Beam End Reactions for Governing Load Comblnatlon(s)
Thebe.anl must have des1gn strengths qv. aod 4'.<t1. excee<hng lhe de.mands resuJung from the govem1.ng
upwatd and downward load combination.(i.
Govemmg upward load: q.,=~O plffrom Sect.tOn 12.4.4
Reactions:
V~ = q.e= -40 plf ( LO It)= -400 Lb (downward)
f -40(10)'
M~ =q, 2 - - - 2000 ft-Lb (clockwise)
2
Govermng downward Load: q. = ?20 plf from Secuon 2.3.2 (Comb. 2)
v~ =q.t =no plf (to tl) =7200 Lb (upward)
M4-1 =q, t' =no p lf(LO')Il = 36,000 ft-Lb(counterclockwise)

2
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 29 • Interac.tion Elfects §12. 7.4
Design Example 29
Interaction Effects §12.7.4
PROBLEM STATEMENT
The special reinforced concrete monlent.teslsting frame (SRCM F) shown tn Figure 29- 1 is restrained by
the partial hetght infill wallthatls not conside-red to be a part of the setsmic-forc:e-resisung syste-m. The
U'l.fillts sohd masonry and has no provisioo for an expanston JOinl m the colwnn fuces_ The design story
dnft ~was oomputed according to the procedure gwen in Sectton 12.8.6, constdering onJy the stiffness of
the SRCMF pnmary setsmie-force-resistlng system and neglecung lhe stifthes.o; of the masat:uy mfill .
.,,_
Typical efe,•ation
Flgun 29-1.
Seismic Design Categof)' 0
~=2.5ln
Column propernes
r:=3000 psi
£,=3122ksl
At =Ag = 144 tn2
1" =0.71 1 = 1210 1n'
I. Deforrnatton compatibiht)' crneria.
2. Approxunate column shear.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 29 • Interaction Effects §12.7.4
1. Defonnatlon Compatibility Criteria §12.7.4

The 1nfill wall, whkh lS not requ1rtd by lhe des1gn to be pan of the lateral-fotce-rest.<iung system. is an
adjoining ng.id eleme-nL Under S«tion 12.7.4, it must be shown that the adjoming rigid e.teme.u.. tn this
cao;e.the masonry infill wa11, must not impair the venical- or lateraJ-Ioad-resis1ing ability of the SRCMF
columns. Thus. me columns must be checked for abahty 10 withstand the displacement of 2.5 inches while
betng simulmneousJy restmmed by the 5-foot-high anfill walls.
2. Approximate Column Shear

Column shear Will be determined from the frame desagn story dr1ft, 6.. For purposes of the example, a
conservative approximation of the column shear wall be. used. based on I) a clear (unrestrained) colwnn
hetght of7 feet from the top of onfill wall to the bottom of the beam and 2) fixed-fixed boondary con<lttoons.
v...= 12£,/,t., _ 12(3122X 1210X2.5) = 1. ki

19 2
·- h' (84)' ps
v
The tnduced column shear suess IS ...!1!1.. = 1328. This is 242Jl and \\'Otdd res-ult in
A,
column shear fatlure. Therefore. a gap must be provided be1ween the co1wnn t3ces and the infill walls.
Altemare-ly. it would be necessary to either design the colwnn for the induced shears and moments caused
by the tnfill 'vall or demonsuate that the wall will fail before the colwnn is damaged. Generally. it is fur
easier (and more re-liable) 10 provide a gap sufficiently wide to acco1nmodare A.
For this example, with lhe resuaming wall he1ght equal to 5/12 of the column he-ight, lhe gap should be
greater than or equal to(S/12~ = 1.05 inc-hes. If this were provided, the column clear height would be
X :oxl.S) _38.0 kips.

v.;. = 12(3122( 144)
12
144 inche!;, with r=lting column shear
Thrs is about one-fifth of the restrained column shear of 19 1.2 kips and corresponds to a column shear
streSS of 4.s.Jj;.
Commentary
It 1S also poss1ble that the restraint of the inflll \vaJis could cause 3J\ irregularity, such as a building torsional
irregulanty. Th1s should be e''alu.ued Ul accordance wnh Secuon 12.3.2 1fsuch resuainLc;; are presem.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 30 • Seismic Base Shear §12.8.1
Design Example 30
Seismic Base Shear §12.8.1
PROBLEM STATEMENT
For the five-stOI)' steel special nloment-resisting frame buddmg shO\\on m Figure 30-1, the followlng
information is g.ive!'l.:
Seismtc De:stg.n Ca[egory D
So.-.=0.45g
S01 =0.28g
1,= 1.0
R=8
W: 1626kips
h. =60 feet
TL=Ssec
T,= 0.622
-- - '--- '--- L... - -

Figure 10-1.
I. Pertod of the-structure.
2. Seismic response coeffic.tent Cr
3. Seismtc base shear.
80 2018/SC SEAOC StructuraVSeismic Design Manual, \bl. r

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desgn Example 30 • Seismic Ba~ Shear §12.8.1
1. Period ofthe Structure §12.8.2.1

The appropmue fundamernal penod r;, is to be used. C, for stee1 moment-res:isllng frames IS 0.028, and .t IS
0.8.
r. = CJ!r.)' = 0.028(60)._, = 0.74 sec Eq 12.8-7
2. Seismic Response Coefficient c. §12.8.1

The des1gn value of C.~ ts the smaller value of
5 45
C = "' = (0. ) = 0.0562 Eq 12.8-2
' •R) • 8 )
l1. lw
c =..!m._= <0·28> -0.047forrsr, Eq 12.8-3

' Tll,
•R) l•jJ)8 ) (0.74)
C = So,TL = (0.28X8) - 0.511 forT> TL Eq 12.8-4
• r'tf.) (0.74J'lr8o)
bu1 shall 001 be less !han
C, = 0.044 Sosl, = (0.044)(0.45)( 1.0) = 0.0198 "'0.0 I Eq 12.8-5
In addition. for structures located where 5 1 is equal 10 or greater thaJl 0.6g. C.- shall not be less than
C,= (~) Eq 12.8-6
1,
Per Sect1on 11 .4.8, a she-specific ground mouon hazard analysis lS: requlrtd for a Site Class 0 sne with S1
greater than 0 .2 . E.xcepuon 2 ofthlS section ·wtll be ut1h2ed to avoid this requtremenL Becau.o;e T < 1.5•~.
C, determined per Equauon 12.8-2 will be uulized.
TherefOre, lhe des1gn \'alue of C, = 0.0562.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 30 • Seismic Base Shear §12.8.1
3. Seismic Base Shear §12.8.1

1l1e seismic base shear ts g1ven b)•
Eq 12.8·1
= 0.0562( 1626 ktps)
=9 1.4 kips
Commentary
The S01 va1ueof0.28g given in thise.xample i.~ based on an S1 value of0.21g. If the 5 1 \ 1aJue were to have
been equal to or greater than 0.6g, then the lower bowld on Cs is
c = 0.5/"'()' Eq 12.8-6
• R
Section 12.8.1 .3 has been added toASCE 7- 16. This section limns the value ofS/lSused to calculate c. and
E"" The value of Sb!i can be taken as the greater of 1.0 and 0. 7 x SJJS as calculated per Section 11 .4.5 tflhe
following crueria are met:
1. The struCture has oo irregulamies.
2. Tile struc1ure does om exceed five slOfies. Mezzanine levels shall be considered stories tor lhe
purpose of this Iimi1.
3. The struCture has a fundamental period, T, les:s t.han or equal to 0.5 seconds.
4. The redundancy factor for the st.ru(:rure is 1.0.
5. The sttue:Iure is 001 locmed on a Site Cla..s E sne, 1\()( is it located on a Stte Class F sue.
6. llle strucmre is classified as Risk Categoty J or Risk C-ategory II.
82 2018/SC SEAOC StructuraVSeismic Design Manual, \bl. r

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 31 • Apprarimate Fundamental Period §12.8.2.1
Design Example 31
Approximate Fundamental Period §12.8.2.1
PROBLEM STATEMENT
As an altemalive to analyztng a srrucrure to determine tts fundamental penod. the appro.~tmate fundamental
period may be calcolated pe,r Sertion 12.8.2. I:
Eq 12.8-7
The c.oeffic1ent C, and lhe expo!X'ont x are dependent on the ()'pe of structural system used.
The approximate fundrunental pe:nod fOr the following structures depicted 1n Figw·es 3 I- I through 31 -5
using lhe appropra.ue \1alues of C,. h,. andx.
I. Steel speeial moment frame (SMF) struclure.
2. Concrete special moment frame (SMF) srrucmre.
3. Steel eccentncally bmced frame (EBF) structure.
4. Masonry sbeM wall buildmg.
5. Concrete shear wall budding (ult-up construction).
1. Steel Special Moment Frame (SMF) Structure

ll\e height of the suuc.ture above it~ base is 96 feet. The additioJ'tal 22-foot depth of the basement ts not
considered ln determining h11 for period calculation (see the following note).
c, = O.Q28; X= 0.8
r; = CJir.)' = 0.028(96).., = 1.08 sec

(Values of C, and x are tabulated tn Table 12.8-2.)
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 31 • Approximate FIJIJdamental Period §12.8.2.1
-,
...
'\
22' Basemenl
(Sr.ear walls)
-'-
Flgurd/-1.
Nme: Per Sec.tion 11.2, base is defined as the level at which horizomal eanJ'Iquake mmjons ate
considered to be impaned. For this particular structure, the ngidny oflhe basement shear \~t-ails and
surroundmg soli compared to the supersLnJcrure momem frame is judged to be sufficient to consider
the base 31 grade level. The engineer of record is ultimately respons1ble for estabhshtng the appropriate
level oflhe OOse for use m the seismic analysJs. Refer also toASCE 7- 16 Commenttlr)tC 11.2 for funhet
discussion.
2. Concrete Special Moment Frame (SMF) Structure
The he1ght of the tallest part of the budd1ng ts 33 feet. Th1s IS used to detennine per1od. Roof penthouses
are generally not considered m determining h,., but he1g.hts of setbacks are mcluded. Hoo'e\fer, if the setback
represents more than a 30 percent change in the lateral force system dimension. there is a vemcal geomemc
1tregulat11y (see Table 12.3-2) and dynamic analysis ts requ1red for thJs type of trregularny tn accordance
with Table 12.6-1.
h. =33 feet
C,=O.OI6; .r=0.9
T.= CAh.)' =0.016(33)0' 9 =0.37 sec
"'"'"''"
~
·- '- - - '-- '-

Figure J/-1.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 31 • Apprarimate Fundamental Period §12.8.2.1
3. Steel Eccentrically Braced Frame (EBF) Structure
EBF struCtl.lfes use lhe C, = 0.03 and x = 0.75.
C,=0.030;x=0.75
T=CJh.f =0.030(44)0·"=0.51 sec
44'
Figw-. JJ.J.
4. Masonry Shear Wall Building
Roof ----------------- Roof- r --------------

~~~~ ,.. ~~~
"' C8J 12S!IZIIZI ~~~
IZIIZI ~ ~IZIIZI
I.
~ rw.
...
front wall tltvation
~ I.H'·. ~
Bark wall tltvation
Figw-. J/-4.
For this sttucrure, C, may be laken as 0.020 and x may be take-n as 0.75, the values for "aJI olher bualdtngs.'"
r; = C,(h.)' = 0.020(29)0 '" = 0.25 see
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 31 • Approximate FIJIJdamental Period §12.8.2.1
5. Concrete Shear Wall Building (Tilt-up ConstrucUon)
Consider a till-up btiildtng 150 feet by 200 feet tn plan that has a panelized \\ood roof and the typical wall
elevauon as shown in Figure 3 1-5.
R";!I _._t-~
r><J
.....;:.j,----+l!----..a.:;...-®~--ofll.l.f®-~-~~--~~I··~
I· ·~.. .. g~ "'~··I
Typicol w.U oler.ttioa
(p;meljoiats ..,t sltowu for cbrity)
Figure J/-5.
C,; 0.020; X= 0.75
T= cth.)' = 0.020(20)0 " =0.19 sec
Thts type of structural system has relatwe,ly ng.id walls and a flexible roof dtaphtag,m. The code formula
for period does not take i1110 consuieranon the fact lhm the real period of the bujldtng is highJy dependent
on the roof dtaphragm construction. Th~ the approxilnate penod computed here may not pro\'ide a
good estunate of the real fundamental period of this type ofbutlding. h is acceptable~ however. for u..:oe 1n
detemumng destgn base shear.
Commentary
The fi.mdamet\tal pettocl T of the bujlding may also be established by analytical procedures with lhe
limitation given tn Section 12.8.2~ subject to a ma'Xtmum based on a fuctor tunes lhe approx:itnate period
(Table 12.8- 1).

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 32 • \Wticaf [);stribution of Seismic Forces §12.8.3
Design Example 32
Vertical Distribution of Seismic Forces §12.8.3
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A nane-slory budding has a sleel mornem-res1sung frame for a 1ateral-forc:e-resisljng system.
The followang mfonnruton as given:
w = 3762 kips
c. = 0.062
R =8.0
0. =3.0
1, = 1.0
T = 1.06 sec
?I ,.~I
i<E~:::_-;)+ 2T
· E-..::.:.~
fI
St«y
;: weif!ht
• 2
'"
• 405k
•
....
405k
• •
l • 22k
...
2 440k
I 4
" "
Total 3762 kips
Figur~ 31-1.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 32 • ~ DistribufiotJ of Seismic Forces §12.8.3
I. Seismic base shear~ V.
2. Venical dismbuuon exponent k.
3. Vertical dismbuuon faclor Cn and lateral setsmic force F11 at each level.
1. Seismic Base Shear, V §12.8.1.1

This is the lOUll design lmeral force or shear at the base of the structure. It 1s de-termined as foiiO\'<'S:
1·= C, IV:0.062(3762) = 233.2 kips Eq 12.8· 1
2. Vertical Distribution Exponent k §12.8.3

The dis[ribut.ion exponent k is equal to I.0 tor buildings l'la\'mg a period ofT$ 0.5 seconds. and is equal to
2.0 for buddmgs having ape-nod of T2: 2.5. For 1ntermed1ate value of the budding period, k is determined
by hnear mterpolatiOt:t
2.5
2.0
.. 1.5
=
~
1.28
&. 1.0
•
"'
0.5
0
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
1.06
Ptriod, T
Figure 31·1.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 32 • \Wticaf [);stribution of Seismic Forces §12.8.3
Now
for T = 1.06 sec

1
k=l.0+(1.06 - 0.5)( )
2.5 - 0.5
= 1.28
Use k = 1.28
3. Vertical Distribution Factor C"" and Lateral Seismic Force F. at Each Level
The \•ertical dismbution of selsmtc rorees is determined as
F::r=C,. V Eq 12.8-11
where
•
C=~
~ . Eq 12.8-1 2
,_, '"":
0
Equation 12.8- 12 tssol\'ed tn the ~abl e be-low for Y =233.2, k= 1.28, and ,=9.
Le\'e1 x h, (fl) h: (ft) "•

(klps)
.'
w h1
klp-fl
cn w h'
= .....L....L
qw h,6
1
F:~=C.:.Y
(kips)
9 116 439 214 94,000 0 .117 27.3

8 104 382 405 155.000 0 .192 44.8
7 92 326 405 132,000 0 .164 38.2
6 80 273 405 111,000 0 .137 32.0
5 68 222 584 130,000 0 .161 37.5
4 56 173 422 73,000 0 .090 21.0
3 44 127 422 53.600 0 .066 15.4
2 32 84 440 37,000 0 .046 10.7
I 20 46 465 21,400 0 .027 6.3
1:=3762 l:= 807,000 1.000 233.2
@Seismicisolation
2018 IBC SEAOC SlructiXai/Seismic Design Manual, \All 1
@Seismicisolation 89
Desig'J Example 32 • ~ DistribufiotJ o f Seismic Forces §12.8.3
Commentary
Cc.nain types of 1rregulat1t)' can result in a dynamic response ha\'ing a load distribution significantly
different fi'Om thm given m lhis sect1on. Table 12.6-l hsts the mlnlmum allowable analysis procedures
for seism1c design. Struc:rures that have a ven~e.al irregularity of Type Ia, lb. 2. or 3 1n Table 12.3-2 or
hoflzontal Irregularities ofType Ia or I b in Table 12.3-1 may have sig.nificruuly d1fferent force dismbtJt1ons
and requtre adynamic analysis ln accordance with Table 12.6-1 1n SetSmic Design Categories D. E. or F. In
addiuon, some other irregular structures require a dynamic analysis in accordance Wlth Table 12.6-1 . The
configuration and final destgn ofth1s structure must be checked for trregulafltles.
Redundancy requirements mu.o;t also be evaluated once the type of lateral-force-resisu.ng system to be
used is specified. because this may require modification of the building framing system and venical
dismbuuon ofhorfzont.al forces as a result of changes tn budding perl(xl T. Often. the horizontal forces
at each floor level are JrteJeased where p lS gtealer than I.0. Th•s ts done to Slntplif)' the analys1s of the
franung members. 1he horizontal forces need l'lOl be increased at each ftoor level where p IS greater than
1.0 ptovided that, whe-n designing the lnd1viduaJ members oflhe lareral-force-rcsishng syste1n.. the seismic
forces are foctored by p. When check1ng bu1lding dnt\, p = 1.0 (see Section 12.3.4.1 ) shall be used.
Most st.rocwtal anal)'Sis programs used today perform th1s calculation. and n is rarely necessary to
manually perform lhe calculations shown 1n this example. However. it is recommended that these
calculatiol'IS be performed to confirm lhe-c:omputer analysis and to gain 1nsiglu to structutal behavior.
90 2018 /SC SEAOC StructuraVSejsmic Design Manual, \bl. r

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 33 • Horizontal Distribution of Forces §12.8.4
Design Example 33
Horizontal Distribution of Forces §12.8.4
PROBLEM STATEMENT
11te single-story budding shown in F1gure 33-1 has a ngid roof d&aphtagm. Lateral forces tn both dtrecuons
are reststed by shear '"ails. The base shear and cenrer of mass pro,•ided here account for the mass and the
locauon. of all OOiuttbunngmass soutees(roofand v.'3.1Js).
The followutg tnformauon 1S gtven.:
Design ba10e shear: V = 100 ktps 111. oorth-south direction

Wall ng.adtues: R..., = 300 k1pl1n
R, = 100 k1plin
Rc = R0 = 200 k1plin
Center of mass (CM): x. = 40 t\,).. =20ft
Analyze for se1s:nuc forces in n.on.h-south direcljon.
r ..
.,
, ';
.,.
-~-
,
0
, ,,
-'--"- _..__ ... _ "'-"'- ".J
' /SM
I '
at wall t:leklw
• r: • (
'
'IE ·I •'
'(
8
... .,
' CR ""
"
'
•' Roar diap~~ragm
·''
Y• .r:
""'""'
V · 100k
Y• /
.t~
.-, - - ; -7- ; ·- -, - - , - -, - -, .. X
''
c
80'
Rotfplaa
·I t
N
Figun JJ.I.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 33 • Horizontal CMtribufion of Forces §12.8.4
I. Eccentricity and rtgidtty propenies.
2. Dlrec.t shear tn \valls A and B.
3. Plan trreguJarit)' requlrements.
4. Totsional shear tn walls A and B.
5. Total shear m waJLs A and B.
1. Eccentricity and Rigidity Properties
The rig.idity oflhe structure 1n the direction of applied fOrce is the sum oflhe rtgidnies of walls parallel to
this force.
The centers ofrigtdity (CR) along the x and y a.xes are
eccentndl)' ~ =x.,. -x~~. =40 - 20 =20ft.
Tors1on.al ng.idity about t11e ce.uer of rigidity is determined as
J = Rj_20)' + RJ.W)' + Rc(20)' + RJ20)'
=300(20)' + IOO(W)' + 200(20)' + 200(20)' =64 X Jo' {ktp/in) ft'

The setsmec force r apphed at the CM lS equivalent to havtng Vapphed at the CR together with a counte.r-
clockwise torsion T. Wuh the reqwre.ments for accidental eccentricity t~· the total shear on walls A and B
can be found by the addmon of the dlfect and torsional load cases.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
0
Vr~A~----~;;~D~~V;rp=-----uVrA
• "" lB
at
• - !- 1 8 "]
C R ) ToV(He..J
20" "" "'
v Vr.c c
c
Direct shear coniTibution
Figurr JJ-1.
2. Direct Shear In Walls A and B
I'0 •~Wl 300 (100)•75.0kops

"" R.t + R8 300+ 100
R 100
~~.. • --'-Wl- (IOOl • 25.0 ~IJlS
R"' + R• 300+ 100
3. Plan Irregularity Requirements

1lle dctemt~nataon of torSional uwgularny, Items Ia and lb U\ TabJe 12.3·1. requ•res 1he evaluatton of the
story dnf\.~ m walls A and B. Thts ewluatton must mclude acctdental torston cau$ed by nn eccen.tricny of 5
percent of the butlding d1mension.
·-~0.05(80 fi) =4.0 ft
For lh< cktemunall<lnof~ orregulorol),lh< uuualmostS<\ertt<JISl0<\31 sheots, I" andoorrespondtng

5101) dnfls(so as 10 prodlft lhe 10\\nt ,.,.,. oflh< '"'~ 5101) droll) r<>Wt from lh<~ "'II
eccen&neat) t + t.a. These an
I" I'(He~X80 - .:c•XR,) 100(20+4X60XIOO) k

,_.~~: J = 64xl0~ = 22·5 IJ>S
@Seismicisolation
2018 /SC SEAOC Stn.«to.rol&l$mi: Dosig'J Marual, \.bl. 1
Design Example 33 • Horizontal CMtribufion of Forces §12.8.4
The inttiaJ total shears are
J..~ = V0.,~ - v;.., = 75.0 - 22.5 = 52.5 k1ps

1; = Vv,B + VT.s =25.0+ 22.5 = 47.5 kips
(Nore: This is 001the design fotce for wall~ as acc.idenml ecce-ntrictty here is used to reduce the force.)
The resulting dt.splacements s· ~ whic.h for tJus s tng.Je-story building ate propontonal to the story dnft
\'alues.. are
r~ 47.5
s. = -R ! . ;100- =0.48 '"
8
• - 0. 18+0.48 03'
0 - - . .) t.n
<I'IJ 2
s.llaU" =8~ =0.48 tn
1) . 0.48 -
s... =-- =
-!!!2..
0.33
1.4) > 1.4
The-refore, Extreme TotStonaJ Irregularity l)•pe I b e:<.tstS. Assunung SOC D~ suuc.rural modeltng
must include three dime:nsions m accordance with Section 12.7.3, and dtaphragm shear tmnsfer
fbrces to collectors must be tncreased 25 percenttn accordance wath Sectlon 12.3.3.4 fOC' SOC 0, E~
and F.
Section 12.8.4.3 requtres the evaluation and applicauon of the torsl{mal amplification f'actor:
' s
) '-
0 0 0 48
' lus.,.
A = __.,_ = .
li.2(033))
= 1.47 < 3.0 § 12.8- 14
Note: The factor A.a is not calculated Iteratively (i.e.~ n is not recalculated \Vith amplified torston).
4. Torsional Shears In Walls A and B

To account for the efttCL(i oftorstonal trregulamy, Sectton 12.8.4.3 requtres that the acc:Jdernaltotsional
moment, I?""""~ be multiplied by the torsional amplaficauon factor Ar

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 33 • Horizontal Distribution of Forces §12.8.4
The most severe total shears result from the use of J·{e - A,e_.e) for Vr~ and V(~+A_.e.J for l'r..s:
IC = 100 kips(20- (1.47X4)J20(JOO kip/in)= 1324 ki s

'" 64x IO'(kiplin)ft' p
V _ 100 kips(20 +(1.47X4)]60(100 kipltn) _ , k

43
r.a- 64x 10'(kiplin)ft' - - · tps
Only accidentaltorsioo is ampltfied by Ar
5. Total Shear In Walls A and B
Total shear tn e.ach wall tS the algebraic sum of the direct and rorsional shear components:
~~ = J'IM - 1·,..,= 75.0 - 13.2 =61.8 ktps
Commentary
Secuon 12.8.4.2 requtres that the most severe load oombinauon fOr each eleme-nt shall be eonstdered for
design. This Jood combtnation involves the direct and torsional shears, and the "'most severe" condttton is as
follows:
I. Where the torsional shear has the same sense, and is therefore added to the direct shear, the
t01'S1onaJ shear shall be calculated using actual ec.cenmctry plus the acctde.ntal ecceru:rklly to
give the largest addtm·e torstonal shear.
2. Where the torsional shear has the opposite sense to that of the direct shear and 1s to be
subtracted, the torstonal shear must be based on lhe actual eccenmcity mmus the acctdental
eccentricity to gt\'e the smallest subtractive shear.
llte trregularny Type I ts triggered by a calculation using drift. while the amplification factor A, uses
displacements.
For multistory buildlngs., Equation 12.8-1 3 shall be used to determtne the setsmtc destgn story shear tn
any story. Where tlte diaphragm is t~gid at a given stOI)', the design story shear (not slory force) shall be
distributed to the \'entcal elemenLo~t oflhe lateral-force-resisttng system (LFRS) based on rigidity at1d
rel:.ujve stiffness of those ele-me-ms and the dtaphragm.
Where diaphrag!'ns cannot be idealized as either flexible or tigid in accordance v.1th Section 12.3. I. I or
12.3. I.2. the lateral diaphragm suffness shall be evaluated relative to the lateral stjffness of the venk·al
resisting elements per Secuon 12.3.1.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 34 • Amplfication of Al::cidental TOISion §12.8.4.3
Design Example 34
Amplification of Accidental Torsion §12.8.4.3
PROBLEM STATEMENT
The struc-ture shown in Ftgure 34-1 is a five-story reinforced conc.rete building frame S)'Stem. A three-
dimenstonaJ rigid diaphtagm model has been formulated tbr the evaluatioo of element actions and
deformauons due to presc.ribed loadlng eonduton.~. Shear walls resist lateral forces ln both direcuons.
A)--..,.
I II II I'
' :: !! I: $!)car woit.l)'p.

:--- ___ ,:: ~~-- --.... __ --J!:·----.-:
:1
--.x.. -, ...C,g'"""' ._ ........... r------
.:
11
I( :: 11
I' 01 'I
_____ ..::, F< __ ---· ; ,:______;, I
·------
.. ,
" .."..
-----1 r -
I'
o)--->L '
Figure 34-1.
The later.:d sei.srruc forces F:t m lhe non.~south direction, struCtUre dimenstons, and accidental eccentricuy
~~for each Levei.T are gwen here.
Leve-l x F. L, i~ ·~=0.05£..
'
5 I 10.0 kips 80.0 ft 24.2 ft ±4.0 ft
4 82.8 80.0 25.1 ±4.0
3 65.1 80.0 27.8 ±4.0
2 42.1 80.0 30.3 ±4.0
I 23.0 80.0 31.5 ±4.0

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 34 • Amplification ofAccidental Torsion §12.8.4.3
In addition, for the given lmeml setsmic forces Fx a oomputer analysts provides tlte tbllowang results for the
second story. Separate values are grve.n for the application of the forces Fx at the centers of mass and the
±0.05Lx dtspJace-ments as required by Secuon 12.8.4.2. In this example-~ it is asswned tOr simplicny that the
1ocauon of the cemer of mass CM:t tS congruent wnh the center of ng1dity at the level in question, resulting
ut zero 1nherent torsion.
Foree F1 Posnton
Xtl _itl - I!IIN itl +eo"""
Wall shear I~ 185.0 laps 196.0 ktps 174.0 laps
Wall shear l 6 115.0 kips 104.0 ktps 126.0 kips
Story drift a, 0.35 in 0.37 in 0.33 in
Story drift a, 0.62 0.56 0.68
Leve12 dasplacement 8, 0.80 0.85 0.75
Level2 dasplacement 88 1.31 1.18 1.44
I. Ma.xtmum force tn shear walls A 3Jld B for the second story.
2. If torstonal irregularity exists tOr the second story.
J. Amplification fOCtor Ax for the second story.
4. New accidental torsion eccentricity for the second stOI)'.
1. Maximum Force In Shear Walls A and B for the Second Story
ll'le maxitnwn fOrce in each shear willits a result of direct shear, tnherent torsion (center of mass not betng
congrue.nt \Vith center of rigidity). and the COtltrlbution due to accide-ntal torsion. As mentioned earlier, in
thlS example 1t IS assumed lhm accuJemal eccenmcny is the only source of torstonal moment at thiS floor
level. From the above table, it ts detenruned that
v,= 126.0 ktps
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 34 • Amplfication of Al::cidental TOISion §12.8.4.3
2. Check If Torsional Irregularity Exists for the Second Story
1l1e budding may have a torsionaJ trregulatiry Type I (see Table I2.3-1 ). llte fbllowang ts a check of the
Story drifts:
a...=0.68 tn
Q
•
~.
= o.6S+0.33
2 - 0 .)• 1 .Ul
a_=~= 1.33> 1.2

a~ o.s1
The:refon•, torsional 1tregulamy Type Ia e.xtStS. Nme-: 1fd../A,., is larger than 1.4~ then rorstonal
ttregulatlly Type I b exis1s.
3. Determine Amplification Factor Ax for the Second Story

Because a torsional uregulamy ex1sts, Secuon 12.8.4.3 requires that Ute secood·SlOJ)' tOI'SIOnal moment
be amplified by the fbllowmg factor. In this example, because the only source of 1orsion is the acctde11ta1
eccentncity, the amplification factor wall be used to calculate a new and tncreased accidental ecce.micity. as
shown here.
E<J 12.8- 14
where.
the average story displacement 1s computed as
• _ 1.44+0.75 I IO
0
<I'IJ
-
2 - . tn
1. 44 )' -I 19
--l(1.2XI.IO)
A, - .
- .
4. N- Accidental Torsion Eccentricity for the Second Story

Sance A 2 (1.e., A;t for the second story) is greater than un11y, a second analysts f« torsioo must be performed
using the new accidental eccentttcity.
·-=(1.19)(4.0 fi) =4.76 fl

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 34 • Amplification ofAccidental Torsion §12.8.4.3
Commentary
Example calculations were given for lhe second stocy. In pmctice. each story requtres an evaluatton of the
most severe element acuons and a check for the torstonaJ trreg:ularity condiuon.
If torsional lrregulamy exJstS and A_. IS greater than J.0 at MYlevel (or levels). a second torsional anal)rsts
mUSl be performed uslng: the.new accidemaJ eccentricities. Ho\vevet. it is not reqmred to find the resulung:
new A_. values and repeat the process a second or third ume (until the A_. converges to a COitstant or reaches
tl1e ltmu of 3.0). The result" of the first anaJys1s with the use of A_. arc sufficie.nt for desagn purposes.
While tlus e.xamplc involves w'3ll shear eva1uatton. the same proced:u.re applies to the dete:rminauon of lhe
most severe element acuons for any otllel' lateral-for~re.~lsnng system havtng rigid d1aphragms.
W'tlere the dynam.tc analysts method ofSectton 12.9 IS used. all the reqtureme-nts ofhonzonta1 shear
distnbunon (gtven tn Section 12.8.4). induchngt()(Sion calculauons.lhat tnay be accounted for by
dtsplacing the ca1culated centers of mass of each level (see Section 12.8.4.1 and Section 12.8.42) also
apply. Howe,'er. Seeuon 12.9.1.5 states that amplificatiort of accidental tors ton is not required wllel'e
aectdentaJ tors tonal etli!c.ts are tncluded ul the dynamic analysts model. Also nme that A_.1s not required to
exceed 3.0.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 35 • Story Drift §12.8.6
Design Example 35
Story Drift §12.8.6
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A four-story spec.ial nlornent-resisting frame (SMF) budding has the typtcal ftoor plan as shO\\on m Figure
35- 1. The typical elevation of lines A lhrough 0 IS shown in Figure 35-2, and the structure does not have
honzomaJ trregular1ty Types Ia or 1b.
Risk Category II
Sei.sm1c Destgn Category 0
I, = 1.0
c4 =5.5
T =0.60sec
'----- ~----- ~----- ~

,,
II
,,
II
'
II II
' =====~==
" "
::)11:::::~
'
I II I
' II / II -.......
I I I I 1 i- 5elstnie fOrce
I II II I
':::::~::::: ~: ====~
I II II I
II II
II II
' " " '

'-----W-----W-----.
Typltal o- plan
Figure 35- 1.
100 20181BC SEAOC Structu.raVSeismic Design Manual. \<bL 1

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
DesignExample35 • StotyDrilt §12.8.6
Figw~ 15-1.
ll\e followmg are the deflectjons Sxt (c-omputed from srarjc analysis-effects of P-de.lta ha\'e been checked)
at the center of mass of each floor level. These \'alues include both translational and torstonal (with
aectdental eccent.rtcuy) effecLo;;. As permitted by Secuon 12.8.6.2. S:w has been determuted tn accordance
with design forces based on the computed fundamental period wtt.hoUl the upper Itmit ( C.,J:_) of Section
12.8.2.
le\•el su
4 1.51 10
3 1.03
2 0.63
I 0.30

I. Maxtmum melastic response deftectjon S.., for the <.-enter of ma'IS ax each floor.
2. Oestgn story dnft L\ in story 3.
3. Design story dnft L\ 1n story 3 versus story drtft hmit
@Seismicisolation
2018/BC SEAOC StrocturaVSei.smic Design Manual. 1.01. 1
Desig'J Example 35 • Story Drift §12.8.6
1. Maximum Inelastic Response Deflection fix for the Center of Mass

at Each Floor §12.8.6
These are determtn.ed ustng tbe ()n \<alues and the cd facmr.
Eq 12.8-15
therefore
Level a~ a,
4 1.51 "' 8.31 •n
3 1.03 5.67
2 0.63 3.47
I IUO 1.65
2. Design Story Drift 1!. In Story 3 Due to lix

Story 3 is located between Le\'els 2 and 3.
lhus t., = 5.67 - 3.47 = 2.20 in
3. Check Story 3 for Story Drift Limit §12.12.1
For this tOur-story buddmg with Rtsk Category 11. Table 12.12- 1 requires tJ\atthe design story drift 6 shall
not e.xceed 0.025 tunes the story height.
For story 3:
Story dnll hmll = 0.025( 144)= 3.60 m > 2.20 •n
Tileretbre.lhe story dnft is withtn the hmit.
Commentary
Whenever lhe dynamic analy sts procedure of Section 12.9 is used. story drift should be detennaned as the
modal combU\alion ofthe story dr1ft \'alue for each mode-. l)'ptcally, computer software c.an provide thts
output d1rect1y. Detennanation of the story drift from the ditl'erence of the combtned mode deflections may
produce erroneous resul ts because ditltren.ces an the oombtned modal displacements can be less than the
oorrespocldmg oombi1led modal story draft.
102 2018 1BC SEAOC Structu.raVSeismic Design Manual. \<bl. 1

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 3$ • P-delta Effects §12.8.7
Design Example 36
P-delta Effects §12.8.7
PROBLEM STATEMENT
In htg.hnse butldlng destgn. lmportruu secondary moments and adchttonal stocy dnfts can be de-.•eloped iJt
the lateraJ-force-resLIOting system by P-delta effects. P-delta eftbcL~ are the result of the axial load P tn a
column being mO\·ed latern.Liy by honzontal displacement~ thereby causing additional secondary column
and g.ttder momerus. The purpose of this example is to illlJstrale the procedure that must be used to check
the overall stabaIity of the fl'ame system for such e.trecu.
A 15-stOI)' buildmg has a steel special moment frame (SMF).
The following tnJbrmauon is gave.n:
Setsmtc Design Category D
R=S
C4:S.S
I,= 1.0
1 h, =20"
' ' /
Figun 36-1.
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 36 • P-delta Effects §12.8.7
At Ute first Slory,

W = W= 8643 kips
!L =3850 ktps
v, r
= = 0.042W = 363.0 kips,~= 0.80 (the highest demand-t~apacity ratio)
h, =20ft
Deftectlon at Level x = I due to seismic base shear V (without P-delm eftkts)
8,, = 0.003h, = 0.72 '"
I. lniHaJ design story dnft tJ. m first stOI)'.
2. P-deha crueria for the buddtng.
3. P-deha effects tn the first story.
4. Ftnal design stocy droft and struy shear tn first struy.
5. Story drtft compliance in first story.
1. Initial Design Story Drift 6. In First Story §12.8.6

At story·"= I ~ the tnitiaJ design story drtfl is
where
•01 -- c.s,, -- 5.5(0.72) - 3 96

. U\ E<J 12.8-15
I~ 1.0
... ~=3.96
Thls value is te.nned miual ~use 11 may need to be mcreased by the incremental ractor aJ= 1.0/(1 - O)as
de.termu-.ed in Pan 4 oflhjs example.
2. P--detta Criteria for the Building §12.8.7

P-delta effects must be considered whetlever the ratto of secondary mome1\IS to primary mo!'nems exceeds
10 percenL Thts rotio 1s defined a<; stabaltry coefficten[ 8.
Eq 12.8-16
104 20181BC SEAOC Structu.raVSeismic Design Manual. \<bl. 1

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
where
8 ::stability coefficient tOr stOr)' x
P!l ::total destgn \•erucallood OJ\ all columns ln stOJ)' x

(Nore: no f3ctor above 1.0 is requjred~ service loads are used.)
tl :: tniual destgn story dnft tn stOJ)' x occurring sunuJtaneously w1th C11J ~
11 :: the importance factor dete.rmined tn accot'daJ.toCe wnh Sectton I 1.5.1
V!l :: seisrruc shear fotce m story x
cd:: deftectton amplificauon fac.tor In Table 12.2-1 (given:: 5.5)
P-delta effectS must be constdered when 9 > 0.10
3. Check P-delta Requirements for the First Story §12.8.7

Section I2..8.7 reqmres lhat the tolal ven.tcal load P 1 atlhe first story considers the total dead I..D plus
floor live r.L and snow load S above the first story. These loads are unfactored fordeterminatiOil of P-de.Jta
effect~.
Usutg S = 0 for !he build tog site,
P1 = 8643 + 3850 = I2,493 ktps
For stocy x :: I.
e, = P,lll = (12,493)(3.96)(1.0) -O.JOJ>o.Joo

J~h,.c, (363.0)(20 fi)(J2)(5.5)
Therefore. P-delta etlfcts must be considered.
Check for 8 :S e_ U~lng the g.JVell I}:: 0.80.
a _ 05 _ 0 ·5 -0.11 36 Eq 12.8- 17
- •c, (o.sox5.5l
0.103<0.1136 . . . 0K
lf9 > e_. the struc-ture ts potermaJiy unstable and shaJI be redestgned.
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 36 • P-delta Effects §12.8.7
4. Final Design Story Drift and Story Shear In First Story §12.8.7
Where 8 > 0.10. the tn.ual desagn stOI)' drift and design story shear mu.o;t be augmented by the tncremental
factor a4 related toP-delta effects unless the incremental factor related toP-delta effects on displacements
IS determined by rational anaJysjs.
a,----
_ 1.0 _ 1.0
1- 9 1- 0.103
- I.11.•)
The final design story dnft Ln the first story is
a , =ap=(I.I15X3.96)= 4.415on
ll1e fi nat design story shear is
r, =a, I·, = ( 1.11 5)(363.0) = 404.7 kops
5. Check for Story Drift Compliance In the First Story §12.12.1

AIIO\mble story dnft t., = 0.020 h 1 Tl2.12-l
a,= 0.020(20 ft)( 12) = 4.80 on
a , =4.415 <4.80 in . .. OK
Per Table 12. 12- 1. Footnme b, L\., shall be divtded by p, in accordance wtth Section 12. 12.1.1.
Commentary
_~--
In Section 12.8.7. the P-de-lta effects on the destgn SlOry drtft and the design story shear ate evaJuated by
the followlng procedure-:
I. Gi"\•en the mitial design story drlft L\Jo = 8Jo - s_._, at story x: compute for each story X the stability
coeffictent 9x g.ven by Equauon 12.8-1 6. For each story wl\ere 8x is equal to or greater than
0. 10. compute the corresponding incremental ractor relaung toP-de-lta effects aJ= 1/( I - 8J.
ThJs factor accounts for the muluplier effect due to the irutial story drtft ~ leadtng to another
increment of story dnft.. lead•ng to anolher story drift, which would lead to yet another
mcremen~ etc. Thus. both lhe drift and the shear •n lhe sloty would be increa~ by a factor
equal to the ser.es of I + 9 + ff + 9 3 + ·-.which converges to II( I - 9) = a11 • As a result the
inhial story drift~ and story shear V:. need to be rnuJtiplied by lhe factor a41 to represent the
101a1 final P-delta etTecL
2. The final resulrmg story dnft <~; =a41 ~ needs to comply with the dnft hmitauons ofSecuon
12.12.
3. In each story rt>qutnng coosideratioo of P-de1ta effects. the 1nhial story shears are tncteased to
v; =ad VJo. The SU\Jctural elements tnust be designed to resist the resulting final story shears.
overturning moments. and eleJnent acuons.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Some computer p!Ograms for frame anatys1s state that P-delta effects are tnc1ude<l directly in the analysis.
The engineer should verify thou the tmal graviry Jood employed and the me.thod used tn these programs will
provide resolt<>thaEare e~nually equivalet\t to the augmeO[ed story shear method described previously.
The value for 9 from lhecomputer analysJs may bedivtded by(l + 9) beforec-heckutgagainst Equatt<>n
12.8-17.
The provisions in Section 12.8.6 and Section 12.8.7 fbr lhe evaluation or the final story drifts state thm the
final story dttft ts pernuned to be detennmed as ad ttmes the anitta1 drift 6. Hcm•ever~ in a muluple~stocy
butldm.g havtng 9 > 0. 1 in more lhan one story, the 1niual story shears m these stones are t.ocre.ased by the
aJ factor. Thts is equivaleru to an added lateral load equal to (ad - I)f~ applied to each StOf)' ll!\•e-1havtng
9 > 0.1. Therefore~ tJ1e new sroty dnfts in the stortes below would be increased not only by their own aJ
but by the added lateral load eftect from the stories above; thus, the final drifts should be found by a new
analysts wnh the added Lateral loads equal to (a4 - I) I: along Wtth the tniual lateral loads on the fi'ame.
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 37 • Scaling Design Values of Combined Response §12.9.1.4
Design Example 37
Scaling Design Values of Combined Response §12.9.1.4
PRO BLEM STATEMENT
nus example dlusuates the ge.ne-ral procedure for scaling the l'esults of a modall'esponse spectrum analysis
tOr design in accordance wath Sectton 12.9.1.4.
The followang Information is gaven:
Destgn response spectrum below. derived fmm either Secuon 11.4.6 or Section 2 1 .3~ for a site
class B
Response modtfu:..atton coefficie:nL~ R = 8.0
Detlect10n amplili:calion factor~ C;~ = 5.0
Importance Factor,/, = 1.5
Bul1dtng pel'iod, T, tn both 011hogonaJ horizontaJ dil'ecuons 001\Stdered by the model

o 7_..=0.95 sec
o fy=0.70sec
ApproxJntate fundamental period, T.,, per Equa~ion 12.8-7 and c. per Table 12.8- 1
o 7;,=0.61sec
o C.,= 1.4
Butldtng weaght~ W = 86,050 kips
Combuled modal ba.~ shear~ V:wta..tv tn e.ach orthogonal darecuon based on a modal 3Jlalysts
usang the followmg DBE Response Spectrum. wuh 90 percent mass panicipatton~ R = 1.0 and
f r = 1.0
0 JI,W-tULl;J2,867ktps
0 , ..WI:ULy= 36,049 kips

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 37 • Scaling Design \f.J.Iues of Combined Response §12.9. 1.4
Table37- l
MCE
DBE Response
Response
Spectrum,
Spectrum.
Per~od s. (2/l)S,
(Secoods) (g) (g)
0.025 0.639 0.426

0.075 1.083 0.722
0.10 1.301 0.867
0.20 1.402 0.935
0.30 1.390 0.927
0.50 1.210 0.807
1.00 0.601 0.401
1.50 0.399 0.266
2.00 0.300 0.200
3.00 0.200 0.133
4.00 0.150 0.100
Note: S1 = 0.601 based on mapped accele:ralion parameters ln accordance with Sec.tion 11.4.2.
I. Combined modal response de.~ign base shear, I~ 1n each onhogonal d1.rection.
2. Sc:aJing of seiSmic forces from modal analysis.
3. Scaling of dnfls from modal analysis.
1. Combined Modal Response Design Base Shear, v,
Combu'led .nodal response design base shear shall be delermined by dividing the. combined modal base
shear, v....,.,_, by R/1,:
V0 = V,IQil<L)(RII,) = 32,867 klps/(8/1.5) = 6163 k1ps
J ~- = VAKJCUJ./(Rfl,) = 36,049 kips/(8/1.5) = 6759 kips
Note: v. may also be denved by tactor1ng the DBE respose spectrum by Rift• as ~ndicated in Section
12.9.L2, praor lO performing a combined modal response per Section 12.9.1.3.
@Seismicisolation
2018/BC SEAOC StrocturaVSeismic Design Manual. 1.01. 1
Desig'J Example 37 • Scaling Design Values of Combined Response §12.9. 1.4
2. Scaling of Seismic Forces from Modal Analysis
Determine the scale fuctor ror modal design seismic forces 1n each considered orthogonaJ du·eeuon for
the structure ln acoordanc:e w1th Sectton 12.9.4.1. If I~< I.OOV, where 1· is t11e equ1valen.t lateral f«ce
pt"ocedure base shear calculated 1.11. accordance wnh SecttOI\ 12.8 and Section 12.9, then. seismtc fOrces
derw«< from the modal analysis shall be mulupli«< by tbe factor: 1.00 J 1V, Otherwise, a f:lClor of 1.0 shall
be used.
X Dir«tion
T. = 0.95 sec> c. T, = (1.4)(0.61 sec)= 0.85 sec

ll1erefore, for the .t directiorl, the go"emtng peru'Xl T:l = 0.85 seconds.
Use Eqwuon 12.8-3 to dete-rm~ne c1 for thiS direcUOil, stnce T:r is less than TL:
C, = S 01 /[7{R//,)j, where S 01 = 0.401
C, = 0.4011{0.85(8/1.5)) = 0.088 > c, •• = 0.044S..,J, (Equation 12.8-5) = 0.044(0.935)(1.5) = 0.062
V. = C, W = (0.088)(86,050 ktps) = 7572 ktps

l.OOV, = ( 1.00)(7572 ktps) = 7572 kips> Va = 6163 ktps
Therefore, a scale factor of: 7572/6163; 1.23 shall be applied to aJI sei.~mic forces derived from the modal
analysis in this direction.
YDirtttlon
r,. = 0.70 sec< c. T, = ( 1.4)(0.61 sec)= 0.85 sec

Therefore, for they d1rec.tion, the go"em1ng pertod T,. = 0. 70 se-conds.
Use Equatton 12.8-3 to detennine c1 for this directioo. since~ is less than TL:
C, =S0 .f[7{Ril,)J, where S01 = 0.401
C, = 0.401/(0.70(8/1.5)) = 0. 107 > c, •• =0.044S0 sf, (Equation 12.8-5)= (0.044)(0.935)1.5 = 0.062
v, = C, W= (0.107)(86,050 ktps) = 9207 ktps

l.OOV,= (1.00)(9207 kips)= 9207 kips> v.,=6159 ktps
The-refore. a scale factor of: 920716759 = 1.36 shall be applied to all 5e-lS:mic forcesde,l'r\'ed ti'om the modal
analysts ln lh1s dtrect.ion.
3. Scaling of Drifts from Modal Analysts

Determine the scale t3ctor for modaJ design drifts 10 each considered onl'lOgonal direction for the structure
11'1: accordance wath Sections 12.9.1.2 and 12.9.1.4.2. The value for displaceme.nt and drift quanuues. based
on modal analysis using a ODE Respcmse Specttum already factored by Rllv> shall be multiplied by the
quanutyCi/~. Addinonally.1f V,< C,Wand whereC, lS per Equauon 12.8-6,lhen dnftsde,rived from the
modal analysis shaJI also be nluluplied by the factor: CJWIJ~.
C/1, = 5.011.5 = 3.33
C, = 0.5S11(Ril,) = (0.5)(0.601 Y(S/1.5) = 0.0563

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 37 • Scaling Design \f.J.Iues of Combined Response §12.9. 1.4
XDirttlion
c, !1'=(0.0563)86,050 kips =4845 kips< Va=6 163 kaps

llteretbre. a scale factor of 1.0, in addnion to the 3.3l(C/1,) factor~ shall be used for dnfts denved fi'om the
modal analysis in this dtrecuon.
Y Dirtclioa
c, !1'=4845 kaps < v.. = 6759 kaps

TherefOre, a scale factor of 1.0, ut addtt.ion to the l.ll(C/1,) factor~ shall be used for drafts derived from the
modal analysis in thts dtrecuon.
Commentary
11te tmen.uon of estabhshlng a floor for scahng drtfts ·where S 1 ts greate-r than or equaJ to 0.6g ts to capture
near-fauh ground motion etfe<:tS, where the acceleration respoose spec:U'Um tends 10 have a shallower
regressaon lhan indtcated by the 1/T and 1/r' curves spectfied tn Equations 11.-1-6 and 11.4-7.ln lhese
cases, dtsplacemellts and drafts would be underestimated. pantcularly at longer moda1 pertods.
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 38 • Diaphragm Des;gn Forces, F~One-story 8uiJding §12. 10. 1. 1
Design Example 38
Diaphragm Design Forces, Fpx: One-story Building §12.10.1.1
OVERVIEW
ThlS example tllusuates delermination of the diaphragm design force F14 of Equation 12.10-1 for the design
of the roof diaphragm of a single-story building.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A single-story tilt-up budding Wlth spectal retnforced concrete shear walls and a pa.ne-lized wood roof lS
shown in. Figure 38- 1. This [)'peofroofconsm~ction is permitted to be idealized as a flexible diaphragm per
Section 12.3.1.1.
NOIJ'Nil wal J
R<lofplaa
Figure 38-1.
The followlng Information is giVen:

Risl: Category II
Se-ismic Design Category 0
1, = 1.0
Sos = 1.0
R =5.0
p = 1.0
D1aphragm weight = 15 psf
Wall we1ght = 80 psf

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 38 • Diaphragm Design Forces. F,; One-.sloty Buiding §12.10. 1. 1
Elnatioa through bulldlag
Figm-. 38-Z.
I. Dtaphragm desjgn force at the roof.
1. Diaphragm Design Force at the Roof §12.10.1 .1
Secuon 12.10.1.1 requtres that the destgn seismic force for diaphragms be detetmtned by
•
F,
.
0
,.
F ; .!:!-.w ,. Eq 12.1 0- 1
0 w,
,_,
·with hmits of
Eq 12. 10-2 and Eq 12. 10-3
which for
SO$ = 1.0 and/, = 1.0
are
For a shon peflod stngle-sloty butldiJtg. Equ:.anon I2. 10- I becomes (see c:ommenuvy section for dem•ation)
Sa!il,
F,.; F,.=--w,.
R
@Seismicisolation
2018 /BC SEAOC StrocturaVSeismic Design Manual. 1.01. 1
Desig'J Example 38 • Diaphragm Des;gn Forces, F~One-story 8uiJding §12. 10. 1. 1
wnh the g1ven values ofSCIS'= 1 .0~ R = 5.0, and for a 1- foot-wide stnp~
wP 1 = \1/elght of diaphragm+ weight of one-halfhetght of normal walls
= ( 100 1\)(200 ft)( IS psi)+ 2(10 1\)(200 1\)(80 pst) = 620 k 1ps
( I.OXI.O) .
- ,,_ 0 "I" = 0.2w, , = 0.2(620) = 124 kipS
Check limits: 0.2w,_ S. 0.2w1 1 ~0.4w.- ... OK
Commentary
·~--
I. The we1g.ht ,.,px includes the we.gtu of the dtaphragm plus the ltlbutary we1ght of
walls normal to the-djaphl'agm that are one-half story height below and above the
diaphragm level. wans parallel to the direction. of the seismic forces are typic.ally
nm conside-red tn the determuliltjon of the ((ibuta.J)' roof weight because these walls
do not obmtn suppo~ m the dtrecuon of the force, from the roofdtaphragm.
2. Tile single-story building vel'ston of Equation 12.10- 1 is denved as follows:
• F,
0
F
,. = . w, w"'
1::!...._
0
Eq 12.10-1
,_
U' , .
F, =Cd r·· =-• '- "- V Eq 12.8- 11
o w~t:
...
\1' h" .
where C.,.=~ forshon penod of<0.5 sec (k= 1.0) Eq 12.8- 12
0
w1h14
,_,
For a single-story building.
l= l, .t= l,andn= I
I
0
w,=W
·-·
114 20181BC SEAOC Strucrutav.Se~tnk Design Manual. \<bl. 1

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
~sign Example 38 • Diaphragm O.slpn FofctJ, F,.: One-.sby Building §12.10. 1.1
and (qU3uon 12.8-11 ga"s
r.c W= S,J, w Eq 12.8- 1 and Eq 12.8-2

• R
F•nally. for the s•ngle.story btuJdmg. Equat1on 12.10-l 1.5
F: I' Ssf
F.,,.1 • .:..1.w.,
W ,..1
=-,,·.,
If' ,.
= ...l!L.L.w,,
1 R
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
2()18 IBC S E A O C - Design Manual. \bl. 1 115
Desig'J Example 39 • Diaphragm Des;gn Foices, F~ Mutistory Building §12. 10. 1. 1
Design Example 39
Diaphragm Design Forces, Fpx: Multistory Building §12.10.1.1
OVERVIEW
llus example !llusuates determination of the diaphragm design force F14 of Equation 12.10-1 for a
representi.Ur\'e floor of a muJtiple-story buildtng.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
The nine~sloty moment frame building sh<>vm in F1gure 39· 1 has the tabulated design seismtc forces ~ ·
These we:re detennined rrom Equations 12.&-11 and 12.8· 12.
The follow&ng Information is g1ven:
Se-ismic Design Category 0
W = 3, 762 kips
c.. =0.05
s"'' = 1.0
p = 1.3
1, = 1.0
T = 1.50 sec< c,.r., and< TL
r = C,W= 188.1 k1ps
k = 1.5 from Eq 12.8- 12 (Interpolated)
9
8 ......
7
•
5
......
422
'3
2
1
......
422
Figurt!l9-l.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 39 • Diaphragm Design Forces, F,.: Mul~tDry Buiding §12.10. 1. 1
Table 39-1
Height h'X wxh:

Levei.T w¥ (kaps) ll'xh: Cn= - - - F¥:C0 ,V
h, (ft) 0
w,h:
9 116 1250 21 4 267,000 0.127 23.9

8 104 1060 405 430,000 0.205 38.6
7 92 882 ~05 357,000 0.171 32.2
6 80 7 16 405 290,000 0.139 26.1
5 68 561 584 327,000 0.156 29.3
4 56 4 19 422 1n,ooo 0.085 16.0
3 -14 292 422 123,000 0.059 11.1
2 32 181 440 79,600 O.o38 7.1
I 20 89 465 4 1,600 0.020 __]J_
Totals: 3,762 2,092,200 1.000 188.1

I. Diaphtagm fotce at Le\•el 7.
1. Diaphragm Force at Level7

Seismic fo(ces on the floor and roof du:tphragm are specified in Equation 12. 10-1. The following equation IS
used to determine the diaphragm fo(ce F,. at Level :c
•
F,
. w, ,.,
0
,..
F _ = ~w Eq 12.1 0- 1
0
Secuon 12.10.1.1 also has the followmg hmns on F,.

0.2 S00 l"wf'X S: F,. s 0 .4SM/tn', u Eq 12. 10-2llJldEq 12.1 0-3
Assume that the eflecuve seis:rntc wetght of the diaphragm equals the given story weight at each level.
11\el\ W p;t = »'r
Fot Leve-l7.x = 7
F = (32.2 +38.6+23.9)(405) =(0.0925K405)=37.5ki

,, (405+405+2 14) ps
Check l 1mtts:
=0.2(405) = 8 1.0 ktps > 37.5 ktps . . . not OK
@Seismicisolation
2018 /BC SEAOC StrocturaVSei.smic Design Manual. 1.01. 1
Desig'J Example 39 • Diaphragm Des;gn Foices, F~ Mutistory Building §12. 10.1.1
0.4 SoJ,w16 = 0.4w,...
=0.4(405) =162.0 kips> 37.5 kips ... OK

The-refore, F17 = 81.0 k1ps . .. mmunum vatoe (0.2 S1J:l,,v1.J governs
The comp1e-le djaphtagm design forces are sh0\\1\ in Table 39-2.
Table39-'-·
Wx
Level F1l= F,.=~w:arr.''':a Ffllt.mltl = 0.2Sa;f~'f'x F16.- =0.4S~l,w_. F"'""'P =
(k)
9 214.0 23.9k 23.9 k 42.8 k 85.6 k 42.8 k
8 405.0 38.6 k 40.9k 81.0 k 162.0k 81.0 k
1 405.0 32.2 k 37.5 k 81.0 k 162.0k 8 1.0 k
6 405.0 26.1 k 34.2 k 81.0 k 162.0k 81.0 k
5 584.0 29.3k 43.5 k 116.8 k 233.6 k 11 6.8 k
4 422.0 16.0k 28.8 k 84.4 k 168.8 k 84.4 k
3 422.0 ll.lk 26.2 k 84.4k 168.8 k 84.4 k
2 440.0 7.1k 24.6k 88.0 k 176.0 k 88.0 k
I -165.0 3.8 k 23.3 k 93.0 k 186.0k 93.0 k

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 40 • Collector Elemeds-Fiexible Diaphragm §12.10.2
Design Example 40
Collector Elements-Flexible Diaphragm §12.10.2
OVERVIEW
Collect()f'S ...c-Ollect,.. forces from one element m the lateral-force-resisting system (often the diaphmgm)
and transfer the forces to another element of the LFRS (often a venical e-lement such as a frame or waJI).
Collectors are sometimes called drag SiroiS. The purpose oflhjs example IS to show the determination of
the maxunwn seismtc force for design of collec1or element-. with a ftex1ble diaphragm.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A ltJt-up bu1ldmg, with special remforced beanng concrece shear walls and a panel1zed wood roof, has a
pamaJ mterior shear waH on line 2. A collector is necessary to "collect" the diaphragm loads rributru')' to
hne 2 and transfer them to the shear wall.
The following infonnanon ts giyen:
Risk categol)' II
Se1sn11c Design Category D
p = 1.0
R :5.0
0. =2.5
1, = 1.0
s.,. = 1.20
Roof dead load = 15 psf
Wall heigh< = 30 ft, no parapet
Wall we~gh<= 113 psf
Venical dead load reactjon at collector connection to wall = 6 kips
Ut1hz.ing the equivalent fatero:d force procedure tn Section 12.8 for the one-story shear waJJ building.
Equation 12.8-2 will govern.
Base shear= J• = Sa; W = 0.24011' Eq 12.8-2

R
W =struCture weight above 15'-0"' ( Jil•h 1)
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 4IJ • CoNector Elements-Flexible Diaphragm §12.10.2
iFl==F==i===F==:i\.-.Tiibui\VY fQQf o~rc:a

kM' OOI!eeiOI
~-+----1t-Co<le<IO<
NoM: Roof hming. except

RoofJ)lan OOIIOCiol, not shown
Figure 40-1.
Elev;ttion S('clion A·A
Figure 40-1.
I. Diaphragm design torce tributary to collector connection to wall per Sectton 12. 10.1. I.
2. Collector design force at connection to wall per Section 12.10.2. 1.
1. Diaphragm Design Force Tributary to Collector

ConnectlontoWall §12.10.1.1 and§12.10.2
The seismtc diaphragm force tributa.J)' to this collector is made up of two p-an.<i: I) the force due to u-ibutary
roof weight, and 2) the force due to mbutary wall \vetgh[. The paneltZed wood roof has been determ t ~ to
be flexible; thus, the tributat)' roof area is [aken as the 100-foot by 50-foot area shown on lhe roof plan ln
F1g.ure 40- I. The trtbutaty wall area is taken as half oflhe 30-tbot wall hetght by the 100-fOOl length of wall
corresponding to the tributary width of' the roof.
For this one-story bullding. the dl-ilphragm destgn fotce equauons reduce to
..,
F/11 = !i n·1 1 E<i 12.10-1

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 40 • Collector Elemeds-Fiexible Diaphragm §12.10.2
Eq 12.10-2
F11 max =0.4Snsf,W,.1 =0.48n·,.1 Eq 12. 10-3
F 1 = design story fOrce at roof

u·1 = suucmre \vetght above one-haU'h1
w,.1 =weight tributary to the collector element
resulung in
v .
= -w w,...1 = 0.24w,...1 (governs for d1aphragm destgn versus F11 mtn and F,.1 max)
,.,pi = lfibutary roof and wall wetght
= 15 psf(IOOXSO)+ 113 psfl

3
2
°}100) = 75,000+ 169,500 = 244.5 k1ps
Therefore, F, 1 = 0.24(244.5) =58. 7 k1ps.
Note: These tbrces are compared to the diaphragm. shear strength. Including the shear strength of
roMecnon bew:een the diaphragm and collector. The design of the collector and its tonnecuons to the
ventcaJ element of the lateral-force-resisting system requires that the a.'Cial forces be amplified as sho-v.n
below.
2. Collector Design Force at Connection to Wall §12.10.2.1

Per s~uon 12.10.2.1. in smtctures assigrled to SOC C lhrough F. collectors and Lheircon.nectJons must be
designed to resist the larger of the tbllowingload effects:
I. From load combtnauons iJXIuding the 0\'erstrength factor per Sec.tton 12.4.3 apphed to sets:tntc
fOrces deterrruned from Section 12.8 or Section 12.9.
2. From load combu.auons including the ovetstreng.th fac.ror per Secnon 12.4.3 applied to setsmic
fOrces determined from Equaljon 12.10- 1.
3. From load combtnations of Section 2.3.6 with seismic forces determined from Equation
12.10-2.
For this one-story building. the seismic forces from the base shear caJculation per Sectton 12.8 and the
dtaphragm force ealc.ulatton of Equation 12.10-1 yteld the same result: V = 0.24 Wand F, = 0.24w,...
For c.ases I and 2., the go,•emtng load com.btoatton from Seclion 2.3.6 is
( 1.2 + 0.2SDS)D + O.Qt + L + 0.1S §2.3.6 (Com I> 6)
which for this buildll'lg simplifies lO
(1.2 + 0.2(1.2))D+ 2.SQ,= 1.44D + 2.SQ,
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 4IJ • CoNector Elements-Flexible Diaphragm §12.10.2
Here-.Q£ is the horizontal force from Equation 12.10-1 : F, 1 ::: 58.7 kips... and DIS theverttcal force from the
dead load react1on.
For case 3, the governing load combinmion from Section 2.3.6 is
(1.2 + 0.2Sos)D + pQ,+ L + 0.2S §2.3.6 (Comb. 6)
whic.h simpltfies to
Here, Q," the honzonlal force from Eqwuion 12.10-2: F,, = 0.24(244.5) = 58.7 k1ps.
By 1nspec.tion, the load combmalion from c-ases I and 2 W1th 0\'ersuength factor per Secuon 12.4.3 g<werns.
Therefore, the strength destgn of the collector and itS coMecuons i.U the wall must res:1st the following load
COJnpone:ms:
Q,Q,= 2 .5(58.7)= 147 kipsru<lal tensiOn and compression lood
1.440 = 1.44(6) = 8.6 kips vertical downward load
Commentary
Section 12.4.3.2 specifies that the term fWc 1n Equation 2.3.6 (combination 6) need 001 exceed the
maxinwm force that can be dehvered by the lateral-iorce-resisnng system as determined by rauonaJ
.anatysas. For exanlple, the ovenurn1ng moment c-apacity of the shear wall can hm1t the requlfed strength of
the collector and 1ts connection to the shear wall.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Des.gn Example 41 • Out--of-plane Seismic Forces-OntHtory Structural WcWI §12.11 and §13.3
Design Example 41
Out-of-plane Seismic Forces-One-story
Structural Wall §12.11 and §13.3
PROBLEM STATEMENT
Thrs example iUusltates the determmatton of the OLU-of-plane seismic force on a Slructural wall panel
laterally cestmtned attts base and at the roof diaphragm level. Note that the panel is a beartng v.oall and
shear wall. Perpendicular waJLs are spaced 300 feet apart.
For the solid uh-up wall panel shown 1n Ftgure 41- 1, determtne t.he out-ot:plane seismic forces required
for the design of the wall secttan. This is usually done for a re-p..-ese:Juative l-foo1 width of the wall length.
asswning a unifonnly distrtbuted OUl-of-plane Joad1ng per Section 12.11.1. (full design of the wall panel
mlL~ OOtt...:;ider other latecaJ loads, applicable gta\'tty loadu\~ and appropnate secondary momenLS. llus
example determutes ooly the applicable out-of-plane sets:mtc load1ng. whtle the complele design tS covered
by lhe e.wnples in Volume 2.)
The following tnfbrmauon is gwe.n:
SetsnltCDesign Category D
I,= 1.0
Sos= 1.0
Panelthtckness = 8 1n
Normal we1ghtconcr<te ( ISO pet)
L1 = Joo n
••
Solld !Itt-up .panel

(1'10 openi(lgs)
20'
Ground
Figwv 4/-/_
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 41 • Out-of-pla ne Seismic Force~ne-story Stroctural Wc3H §12.11 and §13.3
I. Out-<>f-plane focce for wall-panel design.
2. Shear and moment diagrams fOr \vall·panel design.
3. Loading. shear, and moment diagrams for parapet destgn.
1. Out-of-plane Force tor wall-panel Design §12.11

Under § I 2. I I. I , the design lateral loadtng IS determined usutg
where w,. ts the wetght of the wall~ including finishes and attached nonstructuml compork!nts.
Out-of-plane wall anchorage fOrces are de-termined per Section 12.11 .2 and are typu:ally higher than the
forces uultzed ro destgn the \\oall. See lhe next example for calculauons and discuss ton.
The force F1 is the total force on the panel, acting on tlte centroid. For solid p3.1le-ls, F1 IS often eaJculated
as, or converted to~ a umform loadJ; distributed acre6S the height of the panel.
For the gwen SIJS= 1.0 and /, = 1.0. the wall panel setsmie force IS
F, = 0 .4{ I .OX I .O)w, = 0.40w,
The wetght of the panel between the base and the top oflhe parapet ts
w, = l1~ )(150)(24)= 2400 lb per toot ofwtdth

ll1e total out-of-plane force on the panel 1S
F, = 0 .40(2400) = 960 lb per foot of width
The out-of.plane force expressed as a dtstrtbuted load is
9601bffi •
r, =""'i4'ft =40.0 plfper foot ofwtdth

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Des.gn Example 41 • Out--of-plane Seismic Forces-OntHtory Structural WcWI §12.11 and §13.3
2. Shear and Moment Diagrams forWall-panei Design
Using the t.uuformly dasmbuted loodJ;,. the loading. shear, and monte-m d1agrams are determ~ned for a
unh width of panel and shown in Figure 41-2. The 40.0 plfun1f0rm. load11'1g is also applied to the parape-t
when needed to create the maximum eft'bct For this exa.nlple., the-eritic.aJ effect on tl'!e base reaction and the
moment in the \\'all occur ,v;thout the load applied to the parapet., while the c-r1tical eftect on the shear and
reacuon at the roof occur with the load applied to lhe parapet. See step 3 that follows for the pampet destg.n
load.
The reaction at the base IS

R6 =(40 plf)(20 fl)/2 =-100 Jb
The maximum moment in the Willi is

M_ = (40 pU)(20 ft}'/8 = 2000 Jb-ft
ll\C reaction at the roof is

R• = (40 pll)(24)'1(2 X 20 It)= 576 lb
The maximum shear tn the wall is

v- = 576 Jb - (40 pll)(4 ft) =416 Jb
The shears and moments ate the Q£ load actions for strength design. Note that the reactaon at the roof RR
is not necessanly the force used for wall-to-roof anchorage design~ see Secuon 12.11 .2 .1.
40.0plf
20'
Shr:ar(Lb) Momrat (lb-ft)
- eflect$ wilhoul load oo parape:t

- - erlect$ wih toad on parapet
Figun 41-Z.
3. Loading, Shear, and Moment Diagrams for Parapet Desi~

gn__ §13.3.1
The design force for parapets (parapet.(j are classified as architectural cornpone.•\t'!;) IS delermined by
&]uation 13.3- 1 withlheTable 13.5- 1 values of
aP = 2.5 and R, = 2.5 TI3.5- J
for the unbraced canuJe,-er parapet ponion of the wall panel.
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 41 • Out-of-plane Seismic Force~ne-story Stroctural WoJH §12.11 and §13.3
The parapet 1s constdered an element W1lh an anac,hment elevation at lhe roofle\·el:
==h
The wetght of the parapet ts
w, = lt~ }150X4)= 400 lb per foot of\\idth
The total out-of-plane force on the parapet {applied at cenuoad) per foot ofwidlh IS
04
F,= t~(l+2(*))rv, Eq 13.3- 1
I,
F = 0.4(2.5)(1.0)( 1+ 2 (2o))w
p 2.5 20 p
1.0
F, = 1.2W, = 1.2(400) = 480 lb per tlxn ofwtdth
<1.6S.,...J,W,=640 lb per foot of width . .. OK Eq 13.3-2
and >0.3S,.J,W,= 120 lb per foot of\\1dth ... OK Eq 13.3-3
The out-of-plane force expressed as a distrtbuted load is
r, = 44so = 120 pi f per fool 0 f \\1dlh

.
for pamper destgll
120$11f
.,
Shear (lb) Moment (lb·ft)

Loading
Figure 41-J.
Commentary
The forces for parapet design are three Limes as htgh as the fOrces for lhe patlel design. Although not shown
in Figure41-3~ the destgn moment and she.ar resulung ti'om the parapet forces propagate into the poruon of
the panel below the roof~ which m rum should be evaluated for such design forces as well.
Wu'td design fotces may be larger than the setsmtc out-of-plane desagn fOrces on the wall andlor paropel.
In such cases, aJI apphc,able seismic provisions sull must be met. lncludittg anchorage attd other detailittg
requtrements.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 42 • Out~f-plane Seismic Fotr:es- TWI>stoty Structural waN §12.11.1 and §12.11.2
Design Example 42
Out-of-plane Seismic Forces-Two-story
Structural Wall §12.11.1 and §12.11.2
PROBLEM STATEMENT
Thrs example iUusltates detemunanon of out-of-plane seismic fOrces for the design ofll'!e two-stOI')'
suuctural wall panel shown in Fagure 42-1. A typical solid patlel (no door« window opent:ngs) as asswned.
Walls are laterally resmuned at the ba<e, floor, and rooflt\..,ls. The typical wall panel'" tlus boildtng has
no pt1asters and each waH serves as a bearmg wall and a shear wall. The roof OOI'ISISlS of I ~- inch, 20-gage
metal deckang on open web steel jotsts and has been determined to be a ftextble dtaphrag,m. The second
flOOt' consists of l-inch, I 8-gage composate deck.Jng. Yl~th a 2!h-anch lightweight concrete topping. This is
considered a rig.~d diaphragm. (Full design of the wall panel must consider other Lateral loads. appltcable
gnwit)• loading. and appropriate secondary mometlt~ This example dete-rmines only the applicable out-of:.
p1aoe setsmic loadtng. wh1le the complete destgn. is covered by the examples m Volwne 2.)
The followln.g mfonnatton IS given:
Sos= 1.0
'~ = 1.0
Wall weiglu = W,., = 113 psf
L1= 300 =span ut teet measured belween vettacal lateral resisttng ele.ments. Use zero fbr rigid
diaphragms.
2'
WaB
panel
20'
38'
:t
s..
(assu
pinned)
16'
Wall section
Figw? -11-1.
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 42 • Out-of-plane Seismic Fota>~Two-stoty SlructiJI"ai wat/ §12.11.1 and §12.11.2

I. Out-ofCplane f«ces f« woll-panel design.
2. Out-{)f-plane f«ces f« wall-anchorage des1gn.
1. Out-of-plane Forces for Wall-panel Design §12.11.1

Requtremems for Otlt-{)f-plane seasm1c forces are specified 1.0 Secuon 12.11 I:
F, =- 0.40 SoJw.. 2:0. hv..,

= 0.40( 1.0)( J.O)w. = 0.40w, = 0.40( I 13)
= 45.2 psfas a uniform distributed arealood

For a representative 1-lbm-wide S[fip ofwall length.[p is applied as a un1fonn d1s1nbured hne load:
!,. = F,JI ft)=45.2 plf
For the purpose of wall panel design. the design momenls ate calculated based on simple span behavior
bem-een each Jevel ofJa[etal resuaint The s1mple .M=- wL2/8 calculation is not s:hown for clarity (see
previous example). WaJI panel deSign shears and reacuons are detenntned by envelopmg both simple span
and continuous span. be:ha\•ior. For sample span behavior. these results ate detennlned based on one-half
of the story height. For this example. the effects of continuous spa11 behavior at an intemaJ restraint are
approximated as the apphed Jood umes five-eighths of the story he1ght (rather than one-halt).
~=r:2·_. R,
.,.
+--~I tS'
+---lJ- R,
Figure ./2-2.
Simplt span (triburary) reactioos:: Approximatt ronrinuous span rttction tt inltroal

rutraint:
0
R0 = l16fi) -
T /,=8(4>2)=3621b R,= (5/8)( 16 + 20)(45.2) = 1017 lb(govems)
R, =[[ ~ h
2
~ )]t,= 18(45.2)=8 14 lb
2
R1 = [ [ ; ) + 2 ].r. = 12(45.2) = 542 lb
Note that the 2-foot-high parapet must be designed for tlte g;oismic fotee FP specified in Section 13.3.1 . with
he-igh• =••parape1 base 36 feet, a,=
2.5, and R, = 2.5.
See the previous example for parapet out-of-plane force c.alculat10n.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 42 • Out~f-plane Seismic Fotr:es- TWI>stoty Structural waN § 12.11.1 and §12.11.2
2. Out-of-plane Forces for Wall-anchorage Design §12.11.2.1
a.. Anthoragt rortt ror tht Ouiblt roor diaphragm
F, = 0.4 S.,k),W,~ 0.2kJ,W, Eq 12.11 · 1
where k,= 1.0 + L/(00~ 2.0 Eq 12.11 · 2
where '"P lS the wetght of the w.Ul tributary lO the anchor at lhe roof level
,.,= [( 2~ ft ) +2ft} 11 3 psf) = 1356 plf
where k,= 1.0 + 3001100 ~2.0. Therefore,k,=2.0.
F, = 0.4(1.0)(2.0)( 1.0)11', = 0.811', = 0.8( 1356 pit)= 1085 plf
The design force per anchor is F, umes the anchor spacmg.. For example~ if the spacing IS at 4 teet,
me anchor must be des1gned for (1085)(4 ft) = 4340 lb.
b. Anthoragt rorct for tbt rigid S«Ond-ftoor di.apbn.gm
F,=0.4 S.,J<.J.W,~ 0.2kJ,W, Eq 12. 11 - 1
where k, = 1.0 + LjiOO s 2.0 Eq 12.11 -2
Howe\•er, per Section 12.1 1.2.1. where-connection lS not to a fle:<ibfe diaphragm,k.. < 1.0.
The approximate trtbutary weight of wall based on continuous span behavior 1s

W,=(S/8)( 16 ft + 20 ft)( 11 3 psf) =2543 plf
The resulting anchorage force at the second floor lS

F,= 0.4( 1.0)( 1.0)( I.O)W, = 0.411', = 0.4(2543 pit)= 10 17 plf
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 42 • Out-of-plane Seismic Fota>~Two-stoty SlructiJI"ai wat/ §12.11.1 and §12.11.2
Commentary
For flexible or ngid diaphragrns tOr all se1smic destgn categories (SDCs),lhe setsmtc out-of-plane forces
for the destgn of the Yo'llll are not dependent on lhe he1ght oflhe wall tn relauon to the total height of the
build mg. See Section 12.11.
Because of t3ilure of waiVroof ties tn past eanhquakes and the hfe safety hazards that thls failure type
poses, Section 12.11.2 requires that the force used to design wallru\Chorage to flexible diaphragrns be
greate-r than lhm given. 10 Sect.ion 12.11.1 tbr waH-panel sectiOns. For flexiNe dtaphragms, the dtstance
beru-een the perpendicular lateral-force-resisting e-lements increases the accelerai10ns that the anchorage
resists. These assemblies are essenrjally intended to remain elasttc durtng the design seismic evenL

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 43 • war Anchorage to Flexible Diaphragms §12.11.2. 1
Design Example 43
Wall Anchorage to Flexible Diaphragms §12.11.2.1
OVERVIEW
11us example iUusuates use of the allowable stress desJgn procedure fOI' the destgn ofsteel and wood
elements of the '"all anc.horage system in a buildlng with a flexible roofdJaphragm.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
11te d.rawtng U\ Figure 43-1 shows a tilt-up wall panel that ts connected near tlS top to a flex1ble roof
dtaphragm. The anchorage force has been calculated m ace.ordance wilh Section 12. 11.2 .1 as FiNd= 1680
lblft. The v.oall anchorage connecuoats to the roof are to be provided at 4 feet on center. (Note: Per Sectton
12.1 1.2.1 , walls must be designed to resist bendlng between anchors that are spared more than 4 feet apart.)
wall panel
W.ll-roof tie detail
Figtrt 43-1.
I. Des:tgn force tbr pre.manufacrured steel anchorage element.
2. Design force fbr \\'00<.1 subpurltn lie element.
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 43 • war Anchorage to Flexible Diaphragms §12. 11. 2. 1
1. Design Force for Premanufactured Steel Anchorage Element

ll1e msk is to design the steel anchorage e-lements (i.e.• hold-dO\\onS) that oonnect the t1lt-up wall panel to
the wood subpurlms of the roof diaphragm. llte anchorage eonstst~ of two hold-down elementS, one on
each side of the subpurl1n.
The manufacturer·s catalog prov1des a11owable capacity \'alues for earthquake loading for a gwen type and
size of hold-down element.
The steel hold-down element'i oflhe anchorage system resist only the axial anchorage load and there are oo
dead or live load effects.
For the 4-foot spacmg. the strength des1gn axmlJoad IS
This example uses lhe allowable suess des1gn (ASD) load comhinaliOilS of Section 2.4, where the
applicable seisnuc load rombinauons permn 0. 7£ to be resisted w1th an tncrease U'l allowable Sttess ba.~
on duration (i.e.• the cl) durauon tactor fOC' wood).
The allowable stres:s design axial load reqUirement for each pair of hold-down element~ is
0.7£ =0.7(6720) =±47041b
For a steel element other lhan anchor bolts and reinforc-ing steel, lhis force is amplified by 1.4 in accordance
with Section 12.11.2.2.2.
1.4(4704)= 65861b
From the manufac.turer"s catalog. select a hold-dov.n element having a capacity of at least
6586
lb = 3293 lb
2
The hold-down detail must provide both tertsi1e and compressive reslstance for this load.
Wherever hold-downs are used 1n pairs., as shown 1n lhe willl-rooftie de.tail tn F1gure 43-1. the through-
bolts ln the subpurl in musl he cl\ecked for double shear beartng_ Also, the pa1red anchorage embedment m
the \1/3.11 is likely to involve an overlappmg pull-out cone cond1uon 1n the concrete: refer to ACI 318 Chapter
17 for design requirementS. Genemlly. double hold-downs are used to lunit effects of eccentricities in the
wall anchotag.e load path. Single hold-downs c.an be used only if all effects of ecce.ntricities in the load path
are fully cor1sidered and resolved, which is ofte.n difficult lO aocomphsh.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 43 • war Anchorage to Flexible Diaphragms §12.11.2. 1
2. Design Force for Wood Subpur11n Tie Element
The strength destgn axtalload on the wood element of the wall anchorage system is
P,= ( 1680X4l =±6720 lb
Usutg the setsmtc load oombtnauons ofSecuon 2.4, se.lect the wood element wch that the aJiowable
capacity of the e-lement, fOr Lhe combined bendmg and axtaJ stress mcludtng de.ad 3.00 hve load efttcts. can
support on axiallood of
±0.7P,=±0.7(6720) =±4704 1b applied a1lhe anchored end
Commentary
While most matenal standards use a load and reslstance factor design (LRFO) approoch,lhis example uses
an ASD approach because-some components used fOr \\o<lll anchorage suJI have ot\ly allowable capacitjes
defined. For ronpanson,lhe fOfces actjng on wood. concrete. and stee-l elements are shown in Table 43-1.
For wood,lhe load ts dwtded by lhe duration fOCtor Cd of 1.6 (from lhe NOS) to pe-nn it comparison. For
steel,lhe load ts tncreased by 1.4 in acc«danc:e wtth Sectton 12. 11 .2 .2.2.
Table 43. I
Matenal F,!Cb ASD
Wood
o.ss.,.I.JI' - O.SSml,.JV (0.35 S",J,l~)
1.6
Conc.rete 0.8 Sosi,W NIA
Steel 1.4(0.8 S"'I,IV) = 1.12 SDSI,W (0.78 s.,I,JV)
For addttional tnfotmation, refer to SEAOC Blue Book anic.le 9.02.0 10 '"Tilt-up Bulldtngs" available at
W\.,.w.seaoc.org/store.
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 44 • Story Drift Umit § 12. 12. 1
Design Example 44
Story Drift Limit §12.12.1
OVERVIEW
For the design of new buildings. the code places limns on the destgn story drifts. d . The hmits are
based on the destgn seismic diSplacement or deflection Sx and not the elastic response deflecuons
S~ corresponding to the destgn lateraJ forces of Secuon 12.8.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A tOur-stoty S[eel special momenHesJsting frame (SMRF) structure has lhe deflections S.-.. as shown in
F1gure 44- 1. These have been detenntned according to Sectton 12.8 usttlg a stauc. elasuc analysiS.
Rlsk Category II
Sei.smtc Destgn Category 0
I, = 1.0
p=I.J
1f ~ .....
0
""'""""
• 2.08 ft
3 1.82.,
2 1.13*'
0.6Sk't
/7 ,.., n n n ,.., /7 ,.., 0
Figure 44-1.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 44 • Stoty Drift Limit §12.12. 1
I. Design setsmic deflec.tions 0..-
2. Compare design srory dnfts WJth the Hm.tt value.
1. Design Seismic Deflections &x §12.8.6

The destgn sels:mic deftect1ons s. are determtned from tJ'Ie followang:
5 = c,sw Eq 12.8-1 5
X I
•
5.50~ - -
Therefore.()~ =- - = ) .)O.w.
1.0
2. Compare Design Story Drifts with the Limit Value §12.12.1

For this four-swry butlding in Risk Category II~ Table 12.12-1 requires that tl'le c.aJculated design StOI)' d.rrft
shall oot exceed 0.025 umes the story hetght (see.note on page 136).
For SMF an SOC 0, t; and F, thts hmit ts reduced by p tn accordance wtth Sec.uon 12. 12.1.1:
tJ.jp =0.025h/1.3 =0.0192h
Derennine dritt limn at each level.
Levels 4, 3, and 2:
!J. S0.0192h = 0.0192(12 ft X 12 1nlft)= 2.761n
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 44 • Story Drift Umit § 12. 12. 1
leveJ 1:
l!.S 0.0192h = 0.0 192(16 fix 12 inltl) =3.69 in
For C.= 8.r - 8..- 1• check ac:rual destgn story drifts against lunm;;
Table H -1
Levelx sw s, l!. Lunn Status
4 2.08 in I 1.44 in 2.53 in 2.76 OK
3 1.62 8.9 1 2.69 2.76 OK
2 L JJ 6.22 2.64 2.76 OK
I 0.65 3.58 3.58 3.69 OK
Therefore,lhestOI)' d.nft I1m its ofSeclion 12.12. 1 are satisfied.
Nme that use of the dnft hm n of0.025h requires tnterior walls. ceihngs. and exte-rior \\o'all systems to be
detailed to accommodate thts drift in accordance with Table 12.12- 1.
Commentary
Wherever lhe dynam1c analysts procedure ofSecuon 12.9 is used, story d.nft should be dete,nnaned as lhe
modal combination of the story-dritl value for each mode. Determination of story d.nft from the dtfference
of the combined mode deflections may produce e.rroneous results because d.1fferences 1n the combined
modal d1splacement'i can be less thai\ the correspooding combined. modal story drift.
136 20181BC SEAOC Structu.raVSeismic Design Manual. \lbl. 1

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
DesifTI Example 45 • SUuctUtal Sepatation §12.12.3
Design Example 45
Structural Separation §12.12.3
OVERVIEW
SLruClural separauons are necessary to prevent or reduce lhe posstballly of two adjacent Structures in1pacung
during an earthquake. Requtrements for SU\Ictural separation... are gJVen m Sect10n 12.12.3.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
Indus example, the stauc d1splacementoe; Su due to the prescrtbed lateral forces of Section 12.8 and
informauon about each structure are-gaven tn Ftgure 45-1 . Note that the dlsplacement.s g.J\'tn are at the plan
view edges of the bujJdtng. Torsional effects are tnc.luded.
3
Structure 1 St.ru&::ture 2
levelx a,. Level su
2 3 1.38 '"·
~ 2
I
1.00
0.47
2
I
0.75 in
0.35
~
0 0.00 0 0.00
R=8 R=6
0 -- - L... - '--- L... - '-- -- -- C11 =5.5 C11 =5
Structure 1 Structure 2
Figw? ./5-1.
I. Separat10n within the same building.
2. Separatton from an adjacent bu1lding on lhe satM property.
3. Separanon from. an adjacent building on anothu propeny.
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 45 • structvfal Separation §12.12.3
1. Separation within the Same Building
Jotnt~ are ofttn used to brtak al:uge building or an trregular build tog toto two or more SJatts above the
foundation level. llus etfecuvely creates separate SU\JCtures wnhullhe same bulldmg_ The code requtres
thal thesttucrures be separated by lhe amount 8Atr
where
s,, = J<s.v.r +(8..,>' Eq 12. 12-2

8.,1 =maximum trtela~tic dtsplacement of Structure I
8M2 = maximum 1rte-lastic displacement of Structure 2
where
8., = (8")- = C~8~.. Eq 12.12-1

•
If Structures I and 2 are independent ponions of a large building. the requ1red separation is determined in
the folloo'ing two steps:
a. Dtttrmint inelastic displlttmtuts or uch s tr-ucturt §12.8.6

To determine the mtnimum separauon between pans of the same buildtng that are separated by
an expansion jotnt, the ma.'<imum inelastic floor dtsplacementli 8x must be determtned for each
structure. These are atleve1 x = 2.
For Struc.ture I
• CJS,. 5.5(1.0) ••
oAtl =--=---=:).) tn Eq 12.8- 15
'· 1.0
For SutJc.rure 2
c,s, - 5.0(0.
<
OMz - -
-
,--
. JQ
.
75) J 75
- . . In Eq 12.8-15
b. Dtttrmint tht requirt-d stparation §12.12.3

The required separation JS determmed from the trtdivldtJal maximum inelastic dtsplacements of each
structure ao;
S.ur = J(5.5)1 +(3.75)2 =6.66 m

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
DesifTI Example 45 • SUuctUtal Sepatation §12.12.3
2. Separation from an Adjacent Building on the Same Property
IfStructures I and 2 ut Figure 45- 1 are adJaC:eru. lndJVtdual buiJd1ngs on the sa.ne property, the solutiOn
JS the same as lhat sho\1.1\ above in step 1. The code makes no djstanction between an ••tnte.r nar struCtural
separation 1n the same budding and the separnuon required be.rween two adjacent buildtngs on the same
propeny.
3. Separation from an Adjacent Building on Another Property

IfStructure I lS a building onder design and SUttcture 2 is an existing buddtng_ on an adjointng property,
tl1e design engtneer would generally not have mtbnnation about the seismic displacements of SU\lc.ture
2. Often even bas1c lnformatton abmn lhe structural system ofSuucture 2 may not be known. In thts
case, se-paration must be ba.'Oed only on informruion about Suucture 1. The largest elastic diSplac-ement of
Structure 1 ts ~ = 1.38 mches and occurs at the roof(leve-13). The maxmtum u1e-lasuc: displacement is
calettlated as
• _ c,&,, _ 5.5(1.38) _
0 At- - - 7.)9 IJ'I Eq 12.8- 15
'~ 1.0
SltliCture 1 mu.o;t be set back 7.59 IJ'I("heS from lhe property line unless a smaller separation is JUSufied by
a rational analysis based on tne-lastic response to design ground mouons. Such an analysls is difficult to
pertbtm and as generally not requtred e.xcept1n \'tl')' special ca..;;es.
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 46 • Defonnation Compatibility for Seismic Design Categories D through F §12.12.5
Design Example 46
Deformation Compatibility for Seismic
Design Categories D through F §12.12.5
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A tw~ l evel (one-stoty) concrete park01:g strucrure has the space frame shown 1rt F1gure ~I. The
des1gnmed Jateral-fbrce-reslsting systern cons1st(j of a two-bay spec1al reinforced concre-te nlomem ftame
(SRCMF) located on each Stde of the structure. The gr•vity-load-heanng system for the second level is a
post-tensioned Oat plate slab supported on ordmary reinforced concrete gravity columns.
0-
?Tfff
~ ·~ ·~ ·~
0--- •:. o::. o:;
0--- '
0:. 0:.
'" ''
''' ''
0-- ...:------ -----~
Plaa at -..ad ~el
Flgun: 46- 1.
The follow1ng Information is g1ven:
RJsl: Category II
8x... =0.57 in
R =8.0
C4 =5.5
Colutnn section= 12 Ln x 12 in
Column clear heoght = 12 ft
Concrete Et = 3 x 10.> ksi
I,. = 1.0

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design &ample 46 • DeformaUon Compatibility for Seismic DesigJ Categories D through F §12.12.5
Elevation line E
Figur< 46-1.
I. Momem Ln gravity column.
2. Detadmg requirement<; for gravity column.
1. Moment In Gravity Column §12.12.5

Sectton 18.14 of ACI 318 specifies requtreme.nts tor frame members that are nm pan of the designated
lateral-fOrce-resisting system. The gra\•ity coJwnns located tn lhe penmeter frames, and the interior ftat
plate/column system, fall under these requtrements and must be chec.ked for the momems tnduced by
the destgn story d.nft (~).(In the case ofa one-story butlding.lhe draft equals the displacemem.) For this
example, the columns on line E wlll be e\13-lurued.
•o,-- -
c.,s,.
-- - 5.5(0.57) -- 3. 14 .u\ Eq 12.8- 15
16 1.0
The momenttnduced in the gro.wity column due to the deflection at Jevelx (8.,) on hne E must be
determined.
For purpose.s of this example, a fixed-fixed condition is used fOr sm\plic.tty, and the moment in the
column due to gravtty loads is assumed to be oegltgtble.ln actual applicauons, column moment would be
determined from a frame analysis, inc.luchng the.e.tfects of gravity loads.
6£/8
Mt:OI = f + P,.
8
t
wttere P.. -= 1.2PD+ l .OP1 +0.2Ps ACI 18.14.2.1
h= 12 ftx 12tn= 144 in
1
I = bd' = 12(12) = ,
1728 111
' 12 12
P. ; 155 kips (from analysis not shown)
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
2018/BC SEAOC StrocturaVSeismic Design Manual. 1.01. 1 141
Desig'J Example 46 • Defonnation Compatibility for Seismic Design Categories D through F §12.12.5
The crac.ked sectton moment of merua leo can be approxtm&ed as 70 percent of the gross sectton 11 per ACt
6.6.3. 1.1.
I,=(0.7XIn8)= 12 10 in'
_ 6(3x iO'X 12 10X3. 14) (1 55X3. 14) .. k

JI{~- + - 3 _,.... 1 ap-m
(144)' 2
2. Detailing Requirements for Gravity Column

Section 18. 14.2.1 of ACI 3 18 requ1res thai members. such as the column~ beams. piers. and slabs lhm are
assumed not to be pan of the lateral-fotee-resisting. system, must be de-tailed acrordtng to ACI Section
18. 14.3, 18.1 4.4, 18.14.5, or 18.14.6, depending on the type.of member and magniiUde of1he momen!S
U'lduced by S..,.
Commentary
In actual applications. the tnl"etior columns and Oat-plate slab mUSt be checked for ftexure and punching
shear due to gravuy Joo~ and the frame analysis act tons induced by S_..
Note that thts example shoY..s only one way to configure this structw-e-that is, to combane a ductile
SRCMF Wtth interior and exte.rior nonductile gravtty columns. ACI requaremenLc; for this coofiguratton
stress that the nonducnle gravity columns must resist the lateral defonnauon by strength alone.
llowever. the code also permits an altemath·e way to configure this structure--by c:ornbinmg the ducule
SRCMF wtth ductde g.ravtty columns. In this oonfigurauon. afgravity columns are detatled accord1ng to
the requaremems ofACI 318 Secuon 18.14.3.3, then tnduced moments resultt.ng from lhe destgn story dnft
need not be c.onside.red for those columns at all.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 47 • FoundaHon Design §12.13
Design Example 47
Foundation Design §12.13
OVERVIEW
11te purpose ofthas example is to tllusuate fooung design for the condttton whe-re soiJ beanng pressure
capacities are based on allowable stress destgn and the concrete fOOlmg destgn wtll be based on strength
design. The e.umple wtU demonsmue how to si1.e the fooung and check for stability ushtg the allowable
sot1 beanng pressures ru'ld how to determine the strength level soil beanng Pfessures to be used m the
conc.rele design. (Deuuled des1gn of the conc.rete footing ts oot included.) Appltcable code sections include
ASCE 7 Secuon 12. 13 and IBC Chapters 16 and 18.
Geotec-hmcal invesUgatton repons usually prov&de sod beanng pressures on an allowable stress design
(ASD) basis. Simtlarly,lhe presumptive load bearing values provided in IBC Secuon I 806 are based on
allow-able stress des1gn. Htstoncally. alloo>able bear1ng capacities have been permitte-d to be tncreased by
one-thlrd when e\•ah.uuing bear1ng pressures associated wtlh load cases tncluding witld or setsmic loads.
Under the 20 18 IBC pro\•tstons, the on.e-lhird ioc-rease is permmed only \\he:n ustng the alternative ASO
ba.~c load combtr"uions provided in IBC Secuon 1605.3.2.lft.he design is done using theASD basic load
combuw.ions provided in IBC Section 1605.3.1. no ioc.rea!iie in allowable beartng pressures is penmued.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A spread fooung support.~ a reinforced concrete column. The following tnformazjon ts given:
General Setsmtc lnformauon

Seismoc Desigo Category D
Risk Category II
Sos= 1.0
'~ = 1.0
p = 1.0 for stroctura1 system
The seismic loads g.~ven here are from an equwalentlaleral rorce analysis.
Geotechnical informauon from a sue-specific geotechnical invesugauon:

Soil classjfication at the stte ls sand (SW)
Sue Class D
Allowable beanng capacny:

For Jood cases usiJtg smtic loads only. q., = 3.0 ksf
For load cases tncludU1.g wind or setsmic loads, a one-thtrd lncrease ts pernuned when using Lhe
alternauve ASD basic load combinatiOn.~ from IBC Secuon 1605.32. No u'IC:rease is permmed when
using theASD baoe:;ic load comb&nation.~ from IBC Secuon 1605.3.1.
Sl idjng restStance:
CoefficieJU of fnclion be[\vetl\ concrt[e fooung and subgrade: f.1 = 0.35
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
2018/BC SEAOC StrocturaVSei.smic Design Manual. 1.01. 1 143
Desig'J Example 47 • Foundation Design §12.13
Passive pressure: p, = 300 pcfx deplh

(Assume no reduction requited when combining frictton and passtve pressure-.)
Loads
P0 = 80 Jcops (oncludes !he footing an<lomposed soil weoght)
P, =30 kops
P£tt =% 40 kips (Ventcal load associated with £A)
P& =: 16 kips (Vertical load associated """' E, = 0.2S0 ;D)
I~~=: 20 kops (Horizontallood from E, = pQ,)
M£Jt = ± 100 kip-ft (Mome.\t assoctated wtth £~~> including V.o x fooung thickness)
Snow loadS= 0
For this exam~e. it is assumed that seismic loading govems the lateral system design. Addtltott.ally. tl is
assumed that the moment and shear at the base of the column due to dead, live. and vemcaJ seismic loads
are nt.!g_ligtble, and therefore not considered. Whe-n lhese forces are not negligtble, they wi11need to be
u'lcluded in the analyses.
The given loads tOIIow Lhe sign convention shown m Ftgure 47-1.
Glade
••
I
>>
Figure 47- 1.
I. Required footing stze usang all owa~e bearutg pressures and ASD baste load cases in IBC
Secuon 1605.3.1.
2. Requited footing stze using allowab1e beariJ'Ig pressures and alternatt\'e ASD baste load cases an
IBC Secuon 1605.3.2. (In lhis example, thts Slep will be don..! u.:oang both oflhe ASD load case
provlsaons to allusuate the dtfferences between lhe two.)
3. Sod pressure reac.tioos for strength design of the footing section.
1. Required Footing Size Using IBC ASD Basic Load Cases

§12.13.4 and IBC §1605.3.1
Applicable allowable stress destgn basic load combinations from IBC Section 1605.3.1:
D+L Eq 16-9
D+0.7E Eq 16-12
D+ 0.75{0.7£) + 0.75L Eq 16- 14
0.60+0.7£ Eq 16-16
144 2018 1BC SEAOC Structu.raVSeismic Design Manual. \<bL 1

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Note: W11en ush1.g the load oombtnattons from me Section 1605.3 .1~ASCE 7 Section 12.13.4 permtlS
reduction of overtum1ng etrec.ts at lhe foundation-soil interlace by 25 percent if an equivalent lateral force
analysts ts used and the struclure is not an uwerted pendulum ot cantilevered column-type structure. (A
10 percent reducuon ts permitted if modal ru'lalysts ts used.) Therefore~ for the sod pressure~ lhe seistntc
ovemtmtttg effect is reduced and the following moddi.ed equations apply for lhe-determtnauon of P and .t1.
For detemuning v. the unmodtfied equauons must srm be used.
0+0.7(0.75£) modified Eq 16-12
0+ 0.75(0.7)(0.75£) +0.75L modified Eq 16-14
0.60 + 0.7(0.75£) modified Eq 16-1 6
The seismic load effect ts specified inASCE 7 Section 12.4.2 by

£=£.+£., Eq 12.4-1
£=£6 - E., Eq 12.4-2
(In this example, the se-ssmic load eftect.s including the overstrength factor are not constdered. Refer to
ASCE 7 Section 12.4.3 whe,re the overstrengtJ\ factor is appltcable.)
Nme: ASCE 7 Secuon I2.4.2.2 penntts the venical sessmtc load effect lObe taken as zero sn Equauon
12.4-2 when dete-nntning demands on the soil-structure tnterface of fouttdauons.
Load Combination p
-
For these load combinations, the resuhing allov.<lble stress desie.n forces are
v M
IJIIC ~ No.I ik;~\ (t;M\ lkm-A\
16-9 110 0 0
16-12 109• 14 53•
16-14 ns• II 39•
16-16 27• 14 53•
·• iOOtc.ates resuJt~ of modtfied load COil'lbinauons (reduct10n ofO\'erturnmg effe-cts per Secuon I2. I3.4)
To sausf}' the stability reqwremetUS for the fooung,lhe ma"tmum beanng press-ure must be Jess than the
allowable beartng pressure~ and the siKf1ng resismnce must be greater than the slidmg forces. Because
an UlCrease tn allowable beanng pressures is not pernuued when LL~ng the load combtnatt<>tts from IBC
Section 1605.3.1 , It can be see,n (by tnspection) that seismic: loading will conttol the design of the. footing.
The fooungstze wdlltkely be controlled by the loads ti'om Equatton 16-12 or Equauon 16-14 because they
produce the largest rombinauons ofvettical load and momenL However. sltdtng stabdtt)' will be COI\ttolled
by the loads from Equation 16-16 because lhey result tn the lowest aJiowable friction force~ additionally. tJte
footing is more like-ly to expenence uphfi: under these loads. l11.erefore, aJi three selsmic load combin.atioos
need to be checked.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
In the fOllowing caJculattons:

B = the widlh of lhe fooung (diJnenston perpendicular to the dtrection oflhe
base sheas)
L = the length of the footing (diJnenston parallel to the direcuon of the base shear)
A =BxL (fooLing area)
s =BxL'/6 (foonng section modulus)
=.Iff p (ettentttcity ofbeanng resultant relattve to
foon.ng eenttoid)
Ftncu.:rn = J.1P (allowable fricuon force for res1sttng slidtng)
Frw-<r = p, x depth a1 centtotd x thickness x 8 (allowable passtve force for res1St1ng sliding)
Design for Bearing and Ovenurning

For tlus e.xample. the footing w1ll be saed for bearing and ovenuming USlng the results frat:n
Equation 16-1 4, and then checked for !he loads from Equation 16- 12. For these""' load
comblnatiOJ'IS, the footing will be sized so the venkal resultant falls within the middle third of the
fooring. tJtus preventing upJtft in al'l)' pon:ton of the footing. The loads from Equauon 16-16 will
also be checked. but uplift m a ponion of the fboung will be permmed for this load combtnation
ptovided that overall stability is maintained.
Cottsidertng the venicaJ load only. the mintmwn required bearmg area is
A,w.< =pI q. = 125 kipS/ 3.0 ksf = 41.67 n'
Try a 6 ft x 9 ft footing:
B=6ft
L=9ft
A=54t\'
S=SI ft'
Check the fooung for the loads from Equation 16-14.
Ve.nf)t the resultam faHs witlun the mtddle lhlrd:
• = M I P = (39 kip-ft) I ( 125 k1p) = 0.3 1 ft < U6 = 1.5 ft ... OK
Ver1ty the ma'<imum beanng. pressure tS less than the aiiO\\o'able beattng pressure:
PJJAK= PIA+ M/S=( I25 kip/54ft') +(39 kip-t\/81 ft') =2.8 ksf < 3.0 ksL.OK
Check the footUtg for the loads from Equation 16- I 2..
Ve.rify the resultanr fans wn.hln the middle thtrd:
e=Mf P=(53 kip-ft)/(109 k1p)=0.491l < U6= 1.5 tl .. .OK
Venfy the ma:<tmum bearing pressure ts less than the allowable beartng pressure:
PJJAX= PIA+ MIS=( 109 kip/54 ft1 ) +(53 k1p-fi/8l fi') =2.7 ksf < 3.0 ksf...OK
Check the fooung for the loads from Equation 16-16.

Determtne whether the resultant f'illls ·within the middle thtrd:
e=Mf P=(53klp-fi)/(27k1p)= 1.96 fi>L/6= 1.51\
Because the resultanl ts outside the middle third of the footing. pan oftlte fooung will see uphfi. As
long as the max1mwn be.anng pressure IS not exceeded, thts is acc:ep~able.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Verify the maxlmum beanng pressure is Jess than the allowable beartng pressure:
When e > L/6, the equmion for lhe max1mwn be,aring pressure changes to
p,ux= 2PI[B x3 x (U2 - •)J = (2)(27 k1p)il(6 ft)(3)(9 ft/2 - 1.96 ft)J = 1.2 ksf <3.0 ksf. .OK
Check s1idtng.
Slidtng resistance fortes:
F,..._=!li'= (0.35)(27 k1p) = 9.5 k1p
Fpow~rv= p,xdepth to fomjngeenttoid x fOOung t.hJcknessx 8
= (0.3 kst)(3 11)(2 t\)(6 t\) = 10.8 kip
F,..._+ F_..=9.5 k1p+ 10.8 kip =20.3 kip~ V= 14 k1p ... OK
Use a 6 ft x 9 fl fOOlmg.
2. Required Footing Size Using IBC Alternative ASD Bas ic Load cases
§12.13.4 and IBC §1605.3.2
Appltcable ahernative allowable stress design basic load combinations from JBC Sectton 1605.3.2:
D+L Eq 16-17
D+ L + £11 .4 Eq 16-21
0.90+ f11.4 Eq 16-22
Nme: When ustng the load oombtnauons from IBC Sectton I605.3.2, the reducuon ofovenumtng effecL(j
(ASCE 7 Section 12. I3.4) ts not permmed. However, the venical seismic load.. Ev, may be taken equal to
zero.
For these load combinatto~ the resulling design forces are

Load Combination p v M
(IBC £q No.) (klps) (klps) (bp· in)
16-17 110 0 0
16-21 139 14 71
l6-22 43 14 71
11te fooung will be sized for beattng and O\•erturntng and checked for shdtng ustng the same approach as
before.
Because the load combinations frotn IDC Sec.uon 1605.3.2 have been used, an increase in allov.-nble beanng
pressures ts permitted. In this examp1e,lhe gootec.hnjcaJ recommendaLions pem1it an increase of one-third.
TherefOre,
Q0 = 3.0 k..~f for lhe static load cases
q. = 4.0 ksf f()( the se:ts:mic load cases
Based on the destgn forces shown utthe table above, 11 can be seen thou setsmic load c.ombinauons wlll
c.ontrol lhe SIZtng and design oflhe foottng.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Oes1gn for bearing aod overturnmg:

Constdering lhe \1t.rtkallood only,lhe mtnimum required bearmg area IS
A.w .v= PI q.= 139 ktps/4.0 ksf= 34.75 ft'
Try a 6 ft x 9ft fooLUtg:

B =6ft
L =9ft
A =54ft'
s = 81 n'
Check !he fooung for lhe loads from Equation 16-2 1.
Verti)r lhe resultant falls \VIthtn lhe mtddle thtrd:
e = M I P=(71 kip-ft)/ ( 139 ktps)=0.51 ft < U6 = 1.5 ft ... OK
Ve.n ty lhe maxinlum bearing pressure IS less than lhe allowable bea.nng pressure:
p,.a= PIA+ MIS= (139 kips/54ft') +(71 ktp-ft /81 fl' )= 3.5ksf <4.0 ksf...OK
Check the fooung for !he loads lrom Equation 16-22.

Oeternune whether the resultant falls within the middle third:
•= M I P = (71 ktp-ft)/(43ktps) = 1.65 ft > U6 = 1.5 ft
Stmilar to the upltft load case fro1n IBC S«uon 1605.3.1,lhe resultant is outside lhe tutddle
third of the fooung. and pan of the footu'lg wtll see upltft.
Verti)r lhe ma:<tmum beanng pressure L<t less than lhe allownble bea.rtng pressure:
P.• u.r= 2PI[B X 3 X (L/2 - e))= (2 X 43 ktps)/[(6 ft)(3)(9 ft/2 - 1.65 ft)) = 1.7 ksf < 4.0 ksf...OK
Check sliding..
Sliding resistance forces:
Ffr"..., =)11'=(0.35)(43 ktps)= 15.1 kips
F,_.,.. =Pp x depth to fooung cernrold x fooung thtckness x B
= (0.3 ksi)(J ft)(2 ft)(6 ft) = 10.8 kips
Ffr"""' + F-·• = 15. 1 kips+ 10.8 kips= 25.9 kips~ I"= 14 kips...OK
Use a 6 ft x 9 ft fooung..
Note: Although the increase in allov.·<lble beartng capacity is permitted for the ahemauve ASD baste
load combinations, the re.sulttng design fOrce.o; are higher, 3Jld for d1is example. the required f()(){ittg
sae ts essenllalJy the same as the fooung requtred for the baste ASD load combtnattons.
3. Soli Pressure Reactions for Strength Design of Footing

For the design of the concrete e1ements.lhe strength design load cases from IBC Section 1605.2 are used.
The reducuon in overturning fOrces does not apply. and the ventcal sets::mtc load effec11S tnduded in all
load combinalioos indudtng seismic loads:
P. = 1.2D + 1.0£ + foL (for L,; 100 pst;J, = 0.5) Eq 16-5
= 1.2(80)+ 1.0(40+ 16)+0.5(30)
= 167kips

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
M, = 1.2D + 1.0£ + f,L

= 1.2(0) + UJ( 100) + 0.5(0)
= 100 kip-11
Footing stability (bear1ng. 0\'erturning. and sliding) does nm need to be checked using the su-ength level
fOC"CeS. Therefore, only the strength level beanng pressures are de-te.muoed here-. which would be used 1n the
design of the concrete footing_
The eccemraciry of the resultant is
• = M,l P, =( 100 k1p-ft) 1( 161 kips) =0.62 ft < U6 = 1.5 ft
The resultant falls \vithtn the mtddle thtrd oflhe fooung~ therefore
q., J.UX ;P,I A+ AI,J S
= (167 k1ps) I (54 ft1) + (100 k1p-ft) I (81 ft')
= 4.33 ksf
q.,JJs.v ;P,I A - M,.J S
= ( 167 kips) I (54 ft1) - ( 100 k1p-ft) I (81 ft')
= 1.86 ksf
The foottng would be designed for a linearly varying load along the le.ngth of the fooung. with the
determined maximum and tninimwn pressures.
The other seismic load c.ombination l~

P, =0.90+1.0£ Eq l6-7
=0.9(80)+ 1.0(--40 -1 6)
= 16 kips
M., = 100 kip-fl. as determined e.arlier
If the fooung ts c-hecked for these loads, the ecc:entr•city of the resultant 1s
e = M,l P, = (100 kip-ft) I ( 16 k1ps) = 6.25 ft
This Indicates that the resultant falls outstde the limit~ of the tboung. which ampl ies that the fooung
overturns. However,IBC and ASCE 7 do not require that foundation smbihty be rnaiJttained using
strength-level se1smic forces. lnerefore, thas comb.oauon ts only used 10 detenntne tnternal forces
of concrete elements of the. foundation. In some struations, this load combtnalion results 1n upl aft
and there is no beanng pressure on the fooung. In these situauons, tlte fooung would be designed
for the uplift case 10 suppon only its CM•n weight and any surcharge (like soil or coocre.te above).
Commentary
Not·e that the use of shallow footings is permitted only where the foundations ate located on not\- liquefiable
sites. ASCE 7- 16 Section 12.13.91imits the use of shallow footings based on the expected lateral spread
and differe.mial sen1eme.nt: it also provides additional reqUJre-ment<r~ for the desag.n of shaliM\' tbottngs in
liquefiable sites, where permined.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 48 • Foundation Ttes §12.13.7.2. §12. 13.8 .2, and IBC §1810.3.13
Design Example 48
Foundation Ties §12.13.7.2, §12.13.8.2,
and IBC §181 0.3.13
PRO BLEM STATEMENT
A two-story masonry bearing wall SU\JCture ha~ a ptle foundation. Piles are k>cated around lhe penmeter of
the butlding. The foundation plan of tlte butldmg IS shown in Figure 48- I. A very dense granular soil layer
occurs within the depth of the pale cap.
A
o( ""'"'
"•
~
0
111
0
2
0
t.JA
0
•
r0
5
®-- "" .JJ • 0 7

0
N
c 0 0 0 0 0
• • 10 11 12
Foundation plan
Figure 48-1.
The followtng Information is g1ven:
Seismic Design Categof)' 0
I, = 1.0
Sw = 1.0
Pile cap size: 3 teet square by 2 feel deep

Grade beam: I fo016 U1Ches by 2 feel
Allowable lateral beartng = 200 psf per foot of depth below natutal grade, for the ''<lY dense granular soli at
the site
Dead live load (kips) Set<moc £• (kops) Setsmtc £~(kips)

Pile Load
Cap (kips) Floor Roof NIS £/IV NIS E/IV
J 46 12 4 14 0 9 9
10 58 12 4 14 0 12 12
150 201818C SEAOC Structu.raVSeismic Design Manual. \<bl. 1

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 48 • Foundation T~es §12.13.7.2. §12. 13.8.2, and IBC §1810.3.13
Grade D&am 7
I'-" :
.
Seccion A..A: Typical pile t.ap
Figm-. 48-Z.

I. Jmerconnectjon requtrenle.nts.
2. lnterronnec:tton f«ce belween pile caps 3 and 10.
3. Required ..tie"' restramt between pile caps 3 and 10.
1. Interconnection Requirements
The code requtres that indJYidual p1le caps of strucrures in Seismic Design Categories C, 0, E, and F
subject to seismic forces be Interc-onnected with ues. This requirementts specified ut ASCE 7 Sections
12. 13.7.2 and 12. 13.8.2 as "~lias IBC Section 18103.1 3.
To meet the IBC reqmrement, lhe ties must be capable of resisting in tension and compression a nuntmum
hortzontal tie force equal to the lesser of 10 perceru ofSns umes lhe larger oolumn design gravity load or 25
petcenl of lhe smaUer column design gravity load The ASCE 7 provto;;ions do not permtt use of lhe lesser
force of25 percent of the smaller column destgn gravny load. ll'!erefore, to sattsfy lhe requtremenlo; from both
!he IBCan<l ASCE 7, !he design <ie force used fonhisexample is P- ·SosfiO.
The IBC reqUJres \ha[ the column ve.rttca11oad used in determining lhe requtred ne destgtt force be the ..design
gravity load." ASCE 7 requires lha! ~I< column verttcal load be !he f.lc1ored dead load plu.< ~te fac.!OJ-ed live
Jood tn the column. ConsuJen.n_g that the intent ofthis tOUI'Idatton Lie requtreme.nl IS to prevent dttfe-renual
lateral dio;;placemeru of foundation element') durt.ng a seismic event. it would be prudent to also consider lhe
largest t3ctored oolumn vertical load, tncludingsetsmlC effect.<;.
In Iieu of pmvad~ng a ue bet\\'eel\ foundatton eleme.us, under certain condittons. IBC Secuon 1810.3.13
allows use of ..equtValem resuamr· to be pcO\•lded by conc-rete beam or slab elem.entS, or by confineme,nt
by compe-tent roc!.; hard cohesive SOils, or very den.~ granular SOilS. ln this e.xrunple, equtvalent restraint
provided by the c-onfinement of \1e.ry dense granular soi1 at the site tS used to shO\Ythe design teqUJrements
assoc-iated with this concept
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 48 • Foundation Ttes §12.13.7.2. §12. 13.8 .2, and IBC §1810.3.13
2. Interconnection Force between Pile Caps 3 and 10

For design of a concrete tte or ..equivalent resualnC by 001\Crete beams or reinforced concrete slab on
grade,lhe load combtnauons from lBC Secuon 1605.2 are used to find the maxtmurn column load.
By inspectioo. the loads from pale c-ap 10 will cot\trol.

ForP.= 1.20+ 1.6L+0.5L, Eq 16-2
P. = 1.2(58) + 1.6( 12) + 0.5(4) = 9 1 ktps
For P. = 1.2D + 1.0£ +[, L Eq 16-5
P. = 1.2(58) + 1.0( 14 + 12) + 0.5( 12) = 102 kips
Therefore, themtnimum hortzontal tie force P_s05 / JO is
P. =( 102)(l.OYIO = 10.2 ktps strength level force
For use of ..equivalent restmmt'" provided by the surroundtng soils, the load combinations from IBC Secnon
1605.3 are used to find lhe maxtmu.m column load. The ASD horizontal tte force IS calculated here to be
oonsistem wah lhe ASD passive soli resistance capaciues used.
ForP=D+L Eq 16-9
P=58+ 12=70ktps
For P = D + 0.15L + 0.15L., Eq 16-11
P= 58+ 0.75(12)+ 0.75(4)= 70 ktps
For P= D+ 0.7£ Eq 16-12
P=58+0.7(14+ 12)= 76kips
For P= D+ 0.75(0.7£) + 0.1SL Eq 16- 14
P=58+0.75(0.7)(14+ 12)+0. 75( 12)=8 1 ktps
Therefore, the mmtmum hori?.ontal ue force P_ 5/x; /10 is

P=(SI)(I.OYIO = 8.1 ktps ASD level force
3. Required "Tie" Restraint between Pile Caps 3 and 10
The choices are to add a grade beam (t.e .• ue beam) c:onnecung pile caps 3 and 10, to provide a reutforced
OOI'lcrete beam withtn lhe slab on grade-. or to try to use passive pressure restraint on lhe pile cap. The latter
IS considered an ..equi\•alent resuamt" (by sod confinement or bearing pressure) in accordance with IBC
Section 1810.3.13 and is de-monstrated here.
For the allowable latetal be.arhtg = 200 psf per foot of depth below natural grade, the pa~ive pressure-
resistance is
Passive pressure= 121200) + 4( 200)J (2 ft) = 1200 plf
2
. 8100 lb
Requtted lengtlt = plf = 6.8 ft
1200
This is grea~er tl\al\ 3- foot pile-cap \\1dlh, but the pile cap illld a lftbutary length of N/S grade beam on
etthe.r side of the pile cap may be designed to resist ue fotces ustng the passive pressure. This system IS
shown 1n Figures 48-3 and 48-4, and tfthis IS properly designed. no grade beam between p11e caps 3 and 10
(or s1mtlilt caps) is reqUJred.
152 201818C SEAOC Structu.raVSeismic Design Manual. \!bl. 1

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 48 • Foundation T~es §12.13.7.2. §12. 13.8.2, and IBC §1810.3.13
Figw~ ./8-3.
Figun 48-4.
Commentary
Nonn.a11y, bualdi1\gs on pile foundatioos art requtred to have intercoonecting ties be-tween pile caps. This
•s pan1cuJarly true in the case ofhtgh.nse buddings and buildings wtth heavy vernc.aJ loads on. u\davtdual
ptle caps. lies are essential in tall buildings. Ties are also necessary where the site soiJ con.(htions are
so poor that lateral moveme..t~ «geotechnical hazards suc-h as liquefaction or internal spreading., are
possible. ASCE 7-16 Section 12.13.9.3 pro\•KJes guidance on the design of deep foundations in such sne
conditions. Where ties are used, gutdance for their design is pmvided in ACI318 Sectioo 18. 13.3.
In addition to the code requirement (or pt"Oviding tJes between. caps associated wnh deep foundation
e.lemen~ ASCE 7 Sect10n 12.13.8.2 also requires that nes (or equivale.JU restraint) be provided between
tndrvidual spread footings tOr strucrures in Se-ismic Destgn Categories 0 through F that are founded on sod
defined in Chapter 20 as Stte Class E or F. ASCE 7- 16 Section 12.13.9 prov1des additional requtremenrs for
the destgn of ties between shallow footings in ltquefiable snes. \'lttere permmed.
In the design of re-lati'\•ely lightweight residen.ual buildtngs where deep foundation elements are not subject
to lateralloods, the exception to lhe interconnecting lie requirement of Section 1810.3.13 may pennu
a more econat:ntcal foundation desagn. Howeve-r. when uuerconnecung ues are omined, a gemechn.u!aJ
enganeer should confirm the appropriateness of this deciston.., and the proJect spectfications should call for
the backfill and compaction me.thods 1\ecessary to provide adequate soil Slifihess.
@Seismicisolation
DesigJ Example 49 • Simplified Alternative Structural Design Criteria for Simple &aring ~or
Btilding Frame ~terns §12. 14
Design Example 49
Simplified Alternative Structural Design Criteria for
Simple Bearing Wall or Building Frame Systems §12.14
PROBLEM STATEMENT
For the three-story wood structural panel shear wall butlding (beanng wall system) shown in Ftgurt 49- I.
the tbllowtng 1nformauon is giVen:
Risk Categoty II
Site Class D
Sas= 1.0 per Section I2. 14.8. I (see Secuon I 1.4.4 for adduionalmfonnauon)
Seismic Design Category D pe.rTable 11.6- 1 (using theSM\1alue from Sectton 12.14.8.1 )
R :6Y,perTable 12.14. 1
w = 750klps
Diaphragms are deemed ftextble.
The structure has been checked agatnst the lim nation.~ of Section 12. 14.1.1. and the use of the Stmplified
Alternative Design Procedure is p!tmtned.
'"""
3
?
IE
,.. r+ 20'
f)I EffedM>
Seismic
Weight...-~
ISO kips
2 -----------------------
·····-···-----~-·-···-~
0:~~=:::::::::::::::::::
Figure 49- 1.
L Seismic base shear per Secuon 12.14.8. L
2. Setsmtc lateral forces at each level pe-r Secuon 12.14.8.2.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 49 • Simplifted Alternative StnK.tuta/ Design Criteria for Simple Bearing Wal or
&N.Iding Ftame Systems §12.14
1. Seismic Base Shear §12.14.8.1

FSW
V= ~ where F = 1.2 for a lhree·Slt'll)' buildln_g Eq 12.14-12
Thus
r = 1.2(l.OX750 kips)
6 tl
= 138.5 kips
2. Seismic Lateral Forces at Each Level §12.14.8.2
F:-!.V
• II'
"' Eq 12.14-13
F, = ~~~ ( 138.5) = 55.4 klpS
F, = ~ (138.5) = 55.4 klps

3 0
• 7>0
Fj = ~~~ (138.5)=27.71aps
Commentary
The following is a comparison of stmphfied base shear with equivalem lateraJ force desagn base shear. The
equavale-m lateral force procedure for detemuning lhe seismtc base shear is
V=C,II' Eq 12.S.I
where
5
C = ""- I.O -0.154 Eq 12.8-2
' •R) (6.5/1.0)
l!
V=O.I54x750= 115.5klps
11te d1stribut10n of se1sm1c forces over the he1ght of the structure ts:
F,_=CnV Eq 12.8- 11
where
Eq 12.8- 12
Note: distribution eKpone.ru k= 1.0 tOr struc.tures: having a periOd ofO.S second or less. (See Sectjon 12.8.3.)
@Seismicisolation
DesigJ Example 49 • Simplified Alternative Structural Design Criteria for Simple &aring ~or
Btilding Frame ~terns §12. 14
Table 49-1
w.hx
Fi,.,/1
Level .t
3 36ft
"· w.!t
I50 kips
"')l~
5,400 kip-ft
Lw1h;
0.333
F.s
38.4 ktps 0.256

2 24 300 7.200 0.444 51.2 0.171
I 12 300 3,600 0.222 25.6 0.08
I••A 16,200 IF.,= 115.2
The seismtc ~e. shear V and lateral forces F}f at each level except the roofare aU tess than the sunplified
method; see Table 49-2. The principal advantage of the simphlled melhod is lhat penod T need not be
calculated and de.~ign story drift 4 may be taken as 1 pe-tcent oflhe story height; see Section 12. 14.8.5.
Table 49-1.
Compar/Jon of tmrpltfied l'l equnalem lateral force (ELF) proudurt
lateral Force F!l
Level.T Stmplafie<l ELF % Dltference
3 27.7 kips 38.4 kips 2810\'r'ef
2 55.4 51.2 8 htgller
I 55.4 25.6 I 16 higlle'
Total 138.5 115.2 20 higller

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design &ample 50 • Seismic Demands on Nonsttuctural Compomnts on Rigid Supports §13.3 and §13.4
Design Example 50
Seismic Demands on Nonstructural Components
on Rigid Supports §13.3 and §13.4
PROBLEM STATEMENT
The three-sloty building structure shown in Ftgure.50- I has ragid elecuical equtpmt:l'll on ngtd supports
anached ro the stru::ture wnh poSl-insmHed anchors. Identical equipmem is located at the bast and at the
roof of !he boildtng.
The foiiOWlng mform.at1on lS given:
Seismic Desig.n Category D
s, = 1.1
1, = 1.0
w, = 10 laps
wP
Rigid supports wilh post-Installed ancho< anaclvnents
/ / lnacce<dancewithASCE7-16Sedlon 13.4.2.3
Level
Roof
2
T2·
12'
12'
Figund0-1.
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 50 • Seismic Demands on Nonstructural Components on Rigid Supports §13. 3 and §13.4
I. Destgn crtteria.
2. Destgn lateral se1smtc force at base.
3. Design lateral seismtc force at roof.
1. Design Criteria §13.3.1

The total design latetal setsmic component force to be uansferred to the structure lS delermined from
Eq 13.3·1
values of a,. R,.

components" are
and {lo are gwen m Table 13.6- 1. The ' ·aJues specified for ''Other mechantcal or elecltlcal
a,= 1.0, R, =1.5, and 0,. =2.0 Tl3.6·1
2. Design Lateral Seismic Force at Base

= =0
F = 0.4(l.OXI.I)(IO kips)[ 1 + 2 (~] = 2 .93 1c,
p (1.5/1.0) 36 ps
Also, Section 13.3.1 has a reqwrement that F11 be not Jess than 0.3SO$I,w,
Check: F,<:0.3S.asi,W,=O.J(I.I)(I.O)IO = 3.3 kops Eq 13.3·3
Therefore, F,= 3.3 kops . . . Equation 13.3·3 governs
ASCE 7 Table 13 .~ I Footnote c Indicates 10 1nelude oversuenglh as 1rt Section 12.4.3 as requ1red tbr
anchorage to concrete: E.. = n.F, = 2.0(3.3) = 6.6 kops
3. Design Lateral Seismic Force at Roof

= =h=36 ft
F = 0.4(I.OXI.I)(IO kips)[ 1+ 2 ( 36] = 8 .8 ko
p (1.5/1.0) 36 ps
Section 13.3. I states that F, need nor exceed 1.6Sml,W,
Check: F, s. 1.6SnsJ,W, =1.6( 1.1 )( 1.0)10 =17.6 kops Eq 13.3· 2
Therefore, F, = 8.8 kips .. . Equauon 13.3·1 governs
ASCE 7 Table 13.6-1 Footoote c tndicates to include oversuength as m Secuon 12.4.3 as requtred tor
anchorage to concrete: E"' = n.F, = 2.0(8.8)= 17.6 kops

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design &ample 50 • Seismic Demands on Nonsttuctural Compomnts on Rigid Supports §13.3 and §13.4
Commentary
Secuon 13.2.1 reqUlres that ..Arch,tecrural. m.echanteal. and elecrm:·,al components, suppons, and
anachments shall comply with the secuons referenced 1n Table 13.2-1 ."
The definttion of a rigtd componoot (e.g... uem of equtpme.nt) is g1ven in Section 11.2 under "Components.....
Rig.td equtpment [includmg us s~ and anac:.hments (see Figure 50-2)J is equipment thai has ape-nod
less lhan or equal to 0.06 second.
/
~-----Component
-----Support
Figt.tn 50-1.
The fundamental period T, tbr mechant-cal and eleclfie.al equ1pmetu shall be determined by the formula
g.JVtn in Sectton 13.3.3:
Eq 13.3-11
where
g = ac.celeratton ofgravity 1n tnc.heslsec2

KP = stiffnessofrestl ie:nt suppon system
r, = com.ponem fundame-ntal penod
WP = component operaung '"-eight
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 50 • Seismic Demands on Nonstructural Components on Rigid Supports §13. 3 and §13.4
The component setsmtc destgn fotce F, (t.e., the fOrce in lhe suppoc1.~ and attachments) 1s a funcuon
of IIR,.
Generally, only component suppon and attachments need be des:tgned tor setsm.ic fotces. This is discussed
ut SectJon 13.4. Where equipment, whtc.h can be e1ther flextble or ngtd, comes moW'I:led on a supporttng
frame that 1s part oft.he manufactured unit, the suppon:tng frame must also meet the seismic design
requ1rements of Chapter I3.
Section I3.2.5 allows tesung as an alternative to the analytical methods of Chapler 13. Testulg should
oomplywuh ICC-ESACI56.
Section I3. J.3 requires a component Importance factor greater than 1.0 (1, = 1.5) for the followtng:
Life safety component required to funcuon after an earthquake.
Components containing hazardous 1natenaJs or lOXic substances.
Compoclent~ m or anached to R1sk C3tegory I V suuctures needed for continued operation of

the facdlty.
lllose architectural, mechanical. and electrtcal systems that are part of a designated seismic system as
defined in Section I 3.2. I shall be qualified by either test or calculatiotl. A certificate of compliance shall be
submitted to both the registered des1gn professional in responsible charge of the design of the designated
setsmic system and the bud dang official for revtew and approvaJ. ICC ES has published Acceplance Critena
(AC 156) that address the qualttication test to satiSfy lhe referenced code reqwremenxs.
For addittonal commentary. see Design Example 5 I.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design &ample 51 • Seismic Demands on Vlbra.tion-isolated Nonstructural Componenis §13.3 and §13.4
Design Example 51
Seismic Demands on Vibration-isolated
Nonstructural Components §13.3 and §13.4
PROBLEM STATEMENT
The three-stocy building structure shown in Ftgure.51 - I has air-ha.ndl ing equtpmel'll supponed on spring
isolators anaehed to the st:ruerure with post-tnstalle<l anchors. Identical equiprnent is located at the OOse and
at the roof of the building.
The foiiOWlng mformatton lS given:
Seismic Desig.n Category D
s,.= 1.1
1, = 1.0
w, = 10 kips
WP Spfil'lg isOialot supports Ytith post-inslaJied anehot

/ / attachments in aoool'dance wilhASCE 7-16
Level
I I / s..ct;on 13.4.2.3
Roof
2
T2·
1
I2·
/ / / / / /
/
/
Wp
I
/ / / / /
12'
Figun jf.f.
I . Design c::ritena.
2. Design lateral seismic fOrce at bao;e.
3. Design lateral seismic tbrce at roof.
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 51 • Seismic Demands on Vibration-isolated Nonstructvral Components §13.3 and §13.4
ll1e total design laternl setsmic component force 10 be uansferred to the structure is determtned from
F,= 0.4a,S"'W' [ 1+2 -: ] Eq 13.3-1

R,Il, h.
Values ofa, R,, ond O. ore g iven in Table I 3.6· I.
a,= 2.5, R, = 2.0, and 0. = 2.0 TI3.6-J
2. Design Lateral Seismic Force at Base
== 0
F,= 0.4(2.5)(1.1)(10kips) 1+2306] =5.Skips

(2.0 I 1.0)
Section 13.3. 1 has a requirement that F, be not less than O.JSDSJ,.W,o.
Cheek: F,;, 0.3s"",rv, = 0. 3( 1.1 )(LOX JO) = 3.3 kips Eq 13.3-3
lllerefore. F,= 5.5 kips.
ASCE 7 Table 13.6-1 Footoote c tndicates to include oversuength as m Sectton 12.4.3 as requtred for
an<borage to con<rete: £ .. = f>.F, = 2.0(5.5) = I I .0 kipS
3. Design Lateral Seismic Force at Roof
==h= 36ft
F = 0.4(2.5)(1.1)(10 kips)[l + 2 36] = 16.Ski

' (2.0 11.0) 36 ps
Section 13.3. 1 states that F, need not e.xceed 1.6SDS/pWr
Cheek: F1 S 1.6S.a<We = 1.6( I. I)( 10) = I7.6 k1ps Eq 13.3-2
Therefore, F,= 16.5 kips . .. Equauon 13.3- 1 governs
ASCE 7 Table 13 .~ I Footnote c tndicates to 1nelude oversuenglh as m Section 12.4.3 as required tbr
ancborage to concrete: £ .. = f>.F, = 2.0( 16.5) = 33.0 kips

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design &ample 51 • Seismic Demands on Vlbra.tion-isolated Nonstructural Componenis §13.3 and §13.4
Commentary
Secuon 13.2.1 reqUlres that ..Arch,tecrural. m.echanteal. and elecrm:·,al components, suppons and
anachments shall comply with the secuons referenced 1n Table 13.2-1 ."
The definition of a fle.x1ble component ts g1ve.n tn Section 11.2. Flexible equipment(ineluc:hng it" supports
and anachments (see Figure 50-2)J has a period greater than 0.06 second The oomponent systems wah
spring tsolaxors are typically considered as flexible regardless of the component it..e-1f.
Some types of spring isolators have a nom mal clearanc.e (alr gap) more than 0.25 inch. ln that ca~. the
design Coree shall be taken as 2F,, per Table 13.6-1, FoolnOte I>
For additional commentary. see Design E.xample 50.
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 52 • Seismic ReJatille Displacemenls of Comport'l!nt Attachments §13.3.2
Design Example 52
Seismic Relative Displacements
of Component Attachments §13.3.2
OVERVIEW
Section I3.3.2 requires that the des•gn of compone-nt auachment·s in butldiJtgs have the effect·s of the
relauve dlspJacement of ana.c.h.ment poin5 constdered 1n the Lateral force destgn. Thts example •llusumes
the appHcation of this requtre:ment.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A un1que control pane.l frame IS attached to the floor franung at Levels 2 and 3 of the steel specull moment
frame building shown 1n Figure 52- 1.
The followmg information is given:
Seismtc De:stgn Category D
Risl: Category II
8.._., = 1.08 Ul
a,., = o.n in
R =8.0
c~ = 5.5
to.., = 0.020/r,
I, = 1.0
Panel frame: El = 10 x 10' klp-~n'
'
Figure jl-1.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 52 • Seismic Relalhle Displacements of ComponentAttachments §13.3.2
I. Seismic relauve dtsplacement, Dpl> 10 be oonside.red.
2. Induced nlornenl and shear tn fi'alne.
1. Seismic Relative Displacement, o,.. to Be Considered

Section 13.3.2 requtres lhat equtpment anachment~ be de.~igned for effects induced by o,., (relatiVe seismic
displacement). This is de-lemuned as follows:
Eq 13.3- 7
where
8u = 8xMCil~ =- 5.94 trt

s...... = 1.0810
C41 = 5.50
and s.., =s,....c,ll, =3.% 10

81..,. =0.72tn
C41 = 5.50
Nme lha[ D1 IS not requtred to be taken as greater lhan
"
D, =(h -h ) ..!!.=(432 2 88
-288)-·-=2.88 Eq 13.3-8
x 1 hu 144
where
h); =- 36 ftx 12 =432tn

h1 =24 ftx 12 =288m
1>., =0.02114 =0.02(144) =2.88 lit
hD = 12 ftx 12=- 144ln
Thus: D,. =-1.98 in .. . governs
and Dpt =Dj,=(l.98m)(I.O)= 1.98 in Eq 13.3-6
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 52 • Seismic ReJatille Displacemenls of Comport'l!nt Attachments §13.3.2
2. Induced Moment and Shear In Frame §13.3.2

A liberal esumate of lhe moment and shear can be made using the following equations:
M- 6£/Df'/ - 6(10x 10')(1.98) - 57.29 ko~m

H' (144)' r
_ 2M _ 2(57.29) k
V --- - 0796
. aps
H 144
6 EID_, 2M
M• - -2- V• -
H H
Figure 51-1.
Commentary
The auachment detatls should also follow the apphcable reqUJreanems ofSectJOI1. 13.4.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 53 • Exterior NonSifUCIJ.Nal waN Element §13.5
Design Example 53
Exterior Nonstructural Wall Element §13.5
OVERVIEW
Thrs example iUusltates the determmatton of the design lare.mt seismic force F, on an e.xtettor wan panel.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A five-story moment frame bulld1ng is shown in Figure 53- I. T he claddtng on lhe exterior oflhe butldmg
consists of precaoe;t re1nl0rced ooncrete willl panels.
The foiiOWlng mformatton lS given:
'· = 1.0
Sos= 1.0
Panel size: II ft II on by 19ft ll1n
Panel "~ighc w, = 14.4lips
-..-•
>T
- r- •
---
ODD
>T
- r> oo~
>T
- r-• DG
>T
-r •
>T
z..
DO
/ / / / / / /
Figun H-1-
I . Design criteria.
2. Design lateral seismic tbrce on a panelm the founh story.
3. Design lateral seismic fOrce on a panel at the first story.

For design of exterior element-; such aoe; lhe cladding panels on a butldi.ng. destgn la[eral setsmtc forces are
determined from Equanon 13.3-1 or 13.3-4, wtlh upper and lower lunils given by Equattons 13.3-2 and
13.3-3, respec:uvely. The pa.nels are attached out-of-plane at the t\\'0 e.levatioos, =1 and =u- For lhe design of
clildding element flexure governed by out-of-plane loading. the intent oflhe code ts to determine a value of
F, that representS the average of the acceleration inputs from the 1\lfO attachment locauons. For rectangular
panel.s.,. this can be taken as lhe ilve:rage of the two F, values 31 =equal to =t. and =u-
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 53 • Exterior NonstructuraiiMIII Element §13.5
Assum1n_g that a modal response spectrum aoalys•s was not perfocmed fOr this struerure and therefore
Equation 13.3-4 was not used, use Equation I 3.3--1 to detennine F, as follows:
F, -
_ 0.4a,.SbS[1+2 =] >
- IV,-0.3So;I,W, Eq 13.3-1 and Eq 13.3-3
R,IIP h
aP =I .o. R, =2.5 for lhe waJI element Tl3.5-l
F, is oot reqwred 10 be taken greater than F/1 = I .6SN~,WP Eq 13.3-2
2. Design Lateral Seismic Force on a Panel at the Fourth Story

As:sum1ngconnections are I foot above and below the nominal 12-foot panel height as shown 1n F1gure 53-2:
=u =471\
=L =37ft
h =60ft
F. = 0.4(l.O)(I.O)[I+2l•47]rv. =0.41111'
,.., 2.5/1.0 60 , ,
F = OA(I.O)(I.O)[I+2l•J7]rv =0.357JV
pL 2.5/ 1.0 60 , ,
F,.. = Fe<J + F,_ _ (0.411 + 0.357) W = 0.3SII'

2 2 p p
F,.. = 0.38411',= (0.384)(14.4) = 5.53 kips
Check: F,.. 2: O.JSo;I,W, = 0.3( 1.0)( I.O)JV, = 0.3W,- . . OK Eq 13.3-3
Check: F,.. s l.6So;I,W, = 1.6( I.O)(I.O)JV, = l.6W, . .. OK Eq 13.3-2
• •
"--- ...
c
["
...
..
"""
Figure 51-1.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 53 • Exterior NonSifUCIJ.Nal waN Element §13.5
3. Design Lateral Seismic Force on a Panel at the First Story

The followtng are kJ\0\m:
=u = II fi
=, =On
h =60ft
F = 0·4(l.OXI.O)[I+2l•.!..!_)~w =0.2191V
pU 2.5/1.0 60 u • ,
Ci'eck !hat F,u IS a< least 0.3S,.f1 W,
Therefore, Fpu,.. governs.
Also Fp1. < F,u < 0.30W,
Therefore, use Fp1. = F,u=O.Jorv,.
F,.,- F,u+F" - O.Jow,

.
= (0.30X14.4) = 4.32 kops
2
Commentary
This example uses the elt\•ation oflhe anachment poims on the panel. =uand =L• to determine F11. When
lhe anachment mechan1sm translates ngidly wnh tlte oe.arest floor,lhe des1gner should constder lhe etfecl
of using =u and =1 of the nearest story level rather than the auachmem potnl on lhe panel. AcceleratJon
resullS from a modal analysis using R = 1.0 rnay be used wtlh Equatton I33-4 tn lieu of Equ<ujon 13.3- 1 lO
derermine seismic fOrce Flh including the upper and lower limns ofEquauon 13.3-2 and Equauon 13.3-3.
Adequate oons1derauon of seismic loadjng must also address seismtc relauve djsplacemen.ts as defined in
Section 13.3.2. Connections and panel jo1nts must be detailed to accommodate lhese displacemeniS without
binding.
The dessgn of the panel may be controlled by construcuon-Jood conchtions assoclated with the fabrtcanon
process, uansportanort. and installation 01" by other nonseismic design load combinations gi\roo m Section 2.3.2.
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 54 • Exterior NonstructuraiiMIII Element Connections §13.5
Design Example 54
Exterior Nonstructural Wall Element Connections §13.5
OVERVIEW
llus e.xampfe dlusuates the determinatjon of the combined fac-loted seismtc forces fOr use tn lhe design of
e.\1erior cladding panel connections.
PRO BLEM STAT EMENT
An extenor nonbearing pane-l is located at the founh story of a fhre-story momem frame bulldmg. The
panel is supported by a pajr of upper btackets lhal must pro\•ide resastance 10 out-of-plane \Vind and seismte
forces and tn-plane verttcal and honzontal forces. The lower palr of rod connections provides resistance 10
out-of-pJane forces only. The panells shown 1n Figure 54-I.
1l1e follow1ng mformation is g1ven:
Sos = 1.0
1, = 1.0
Average roofhetght, h =60ft
Panel weiglu = 14.4 kips
p = 1.0 anacoordance wnh Secuon 12.3.4.1(3)
Panel hve load, L = 0
Panel snow lo""' S = 0
20'
.. ..
J
5'
c
,.. 5'
•.
i'l
\_w., .. nel Rod
Figurt! 54-1.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 54 • Exterior Non.stroctural Wal Element Connections §13. 5
I. Strength design seismic lood combinations.
2 . Lateral sei:StiHC force m center of mass of panel (po1m C).
3. Combined dead and seismic forces on c.onnecuons.
4. Oes•gn forces forthe bracke-ts.
5. Design forces for the rods.
1. Strength Design Seismic Load Combinations §2.3.6

For design of the clackhng connection~ the apphcable strength design seismic food combinauons are
§2.3.6 (Comb. 6)
AsS()$= I.o. L = 0~ S = o. and p = 1.0, th1s equation reduces to: 1.4D + Qc
b. (0.9 - 0.2Sos)D+ pQ, §2.3.6 (Com!> 7)
As Sl>$= 1.0. L = O~S= 0. and p= 1.0, th1s equation reduces to: 0.7D + Qc
For nonsuuctl.ltal compone.nts, Q£ lS de-fined as lhe eftkts due to the lateral load FP applied etther
1n-plane or out-of-plane ru. the panel center of mass in accordance with SecLion 13.3. Note that F,
applied in one ditectjo•t can result m oonnecuon reactions ln any direction due to ecce.urtciues
between the accelerati11g panel ma(iS a..\d its attachment poi11ts on the sttucn.&re.
At first glance. the designer may be tempted to d1smiss combmauon 7 as not go,•eming b)' Inspection.
Howevc.r. factors U'IC-lud1ng ovenurning ntoments, dead load roH, and anchorage eccenuicnles may
lead to combination 7 governing pomons of the design. Once the destgnet considers posiuve aoo
negati,•e direcuons for each oflhe in-plane and out-of-plane horizontal seismic load cases coupled
wtth e1ther posuwe or nega.nve ventcal seismic loads, etght u.ruque load cases emerge fi'om the l\1/0
denved above.
2. Lateral Seismic Force at Center of Mass of Panel {Point C) §13.5.3

Sectton I3.5 . 3 ~ Item 4, requires that the selsmie eftects on connections be determtned by lhe force FP giVen
by Secuon 13.3.1 apphed to the center ofmassofthe Yo-all panel. The values of RPand apare gtve-n m Table
13.5- I for the body a.nd fasteners of the connecuon elements.
For des:ig.n of connections. FP shall be calculated ustng a minimum== the height of the connec.uon of
interest, as defined in Secuon 13.3.1.
@Seismicisolation
However, for desagn of wall element re.tnforcement, F, should be lhe average of the FJi \1a1ues for Ute upper
bracket e.levation, =tJ> and for the lov.'er rod e.levation, =1•• For rectangular panels located at htgher levels of
the buddJ~ this average F1 \VOuld be equal to lhe F11 value determtned us1ng= = =e-at the center of mass of
the pilnel. However. thJs use ofelevations== =(' may not be vaJ1d for the lo\-..-er levels because F,. ts I1m ned
by
Eq 13.3-3
Wilhlheg.JVenvaJuesorSos= I.Oandf,= 1.0:
F, = 0.4a,Scsl,( 1+2 - w, =) Eq 13.3-1

R, h
Eq 13.3-3
a,. =1.0 a11d R11 =2.5 for the wall element a1'1d lhe body of the connecuon TIJ.S-1
w, = weiglu panel= 1~ . 4 ktps
At the upper bracket conoecuon level:
: = =u=41tl
F,u = -0.4{1.0)[
,-
__,- -60 w, forthe body of the upper oonoocuon
I+ 2(47]
= 0.4 11 JV, > O.JS,.t,w, = O.JJV, . . . OK
At the lov.'ef rod connection level:
: : : L:J1ft
0 -~{1_·0>[1 +2( 37 )~ w, tor the body of !he lower connection

F,. =
__, 60 u
=0.35711',> O.JJV, . .. OK
Thts example uses lhe efevauon of the attachment poants on lhe panel, =uand=~.. to de~emune F,. When the
attachment mechan1sm translates rtgidly with the nearest floor, the destgner should constder the effect of
using =u and =L of the nearest story )e\'t l ralher than the attachment poi1tt on the panel.
The average acclerauon for wall ele-ment reinfOrcement design is
= Fr!1 +F,_ _ (0.4 11+0.357)11'

F, 2 2 '

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 54 • Exterior Non.stroctural Wal Element Connections §13. 5
llus force is applied m the panel centroid C and acts hortzontally m etthet the out-of-plane or the 1n-plane
horizontal direction. For tndeterminen.t panels. FP must be applied as a dtStnbuted load relative to the
paners mass d1strtbution.
3. Combined Dead and Seismic Forces on Connections §13.5.2

There are two seismic load conditions to be consJdered: out-of-plane and in-plan.e. These are shown tn
Figure 54-2 as concentrated force.~. Th1s e.umple tmplements load combination 6 of Secuoo 2.3.6.
1.4D+ Qc
However. as previously d iSCUSsed, lhis may not always be the governing load case for all components.
a. Dud load, Hismic out-of-plant, and \'trtical sdsmir fortts

Panel connecnon reacuons due to facrored dead load, out-of-plane setSmic fotees.., and venical
seismic forces are calculated as follows:
g• 9'
_
,._.,_ .. .. _1-..- .. - .. -· ·-1 ......
s·
@...
s·
.. - ··- ..-··- 1-··-··-··-··-<t----
- F,
t.4W,. = 1..C {t4.4J =20. 16kO>s
Figw? 54-1.
Each bmcket and rod connection reststo.; the fOIIow~ng body-force-level axial lood due to the out-of-
plane force F,applied at the center of mass:
At lhe upper bc'ackets, F11 = 0.411 W11 and lhe resultant fotce in each bracket 1S
p _ ~ _ (0.4 11)(14.4) _ I Jc'

g- 4 - 4 - .48 Ips
At lhe lower rods,. F11 =0.357WPand the resultant fOrce 1neach rod is
_
P- - -
f-, _(0.357X14.4) _ 1 29 ••.
- - • Klp5
4 4
'"'here P• is lhe bracket force and PN 1s the rod force.
@Seismicisolation
Each bmcket reslstS the fOllowing downward to-plane shear force due to ventcalloads:
" - 1.4W, - 20.16 -1 008 k.

rlt- 2 - 2 - . Ips
For simplicity, this example a~umes zero out-of-plane eccentrtcity from the CG of the panel to
the center of venical supports. In reaJity. most preca~ cladding patX'Is: l'la\'e be.aring eccentraciues
between 0 and about 7 tnches., but thts dJmenston couJd be much larger. The destgner should be
ay,rue that bearmg eccemrictties inmxluce pennanent out-of-plane dead load reactions 10 the
connections thai may be additive to or subtractive from the desig.n seismic loads. See Figure 54-3
for a diagram of these fotces.
~
I
w.
Figure 54-J.
h Dead load, stismic in-plant, and \'treiul stismk fortt:s:

Panel oorutection reacuons due to factored dead load, in-plane seismic forces, and ven.ic.a1 seismtc
forces are calculated ao; follows:
Each bracket resists the followtng 1n-plane honzonral shear force due to body-force-level lateral
seismic load:
H _~ ( 14.4X0.4 11) k
s-2- 2 - 2.96 tps
Each bracket resists the fbllowang upward ot downward shear force due to the same reve.rsible
lateral se1smic load:
F = 5 ft(fj.) _ (5 ft)(14.4 )(0.4 11)_ ± 1.64 1:i

• 18ft 18 fi ps
174 20181BC SEAOCStrucrutav.Se~mW: Design Manual. \<bL 1

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design &ample 54 • Exterior NonsttucturalwaN Element Connections §13.5
Each bracket resists the followtng downward force due to vertical loads:
1.411' 20 16
v. =------" = _ . - = 10.08 kip<
2 2
For simplicity. this example a~umes zefO out-of-plane eccemricny from the CG of the panel to the
cenr:er of the horizontaltn-plane-resistance. Ltke bearing eccentricities, m-plane eccentricities can
result m OUl-of-plane reac[ions that may be addttive to or subuac.Live from out-of-p1ane reac:tions
from olhe r sources.
4. Design Forces for the Brackets
a. Body or conn~ction
Per Section 13.3.1 and Table 13.5.1 . the body of the C-OOO«"tion must be designed for aP = 1.0
and R, = 2.5. These are the a, and RP \•alues used prevtously for the detemunauon ofF,- Therefore.,
there is no need to adjust the results of the p!evious calculations.
The bracket must be destgned 10 res1st the following selS of reactions:
For the out-of-plane setsmtc loadtng case:
PM=± 1.48 a'CiaJ ioad together wah
J ·, = I0.08 kips downYtatd shear and any resulung mome-nt due to bearing eccentricities
For the tn-plane setSJntc Joadtng case:
H8 = ± 2.96 kips honzontal shear together with

•·, + F•= 10.08 + 1.64 = 11.72 ktpsdownY.-a.rd shear or
''•- Fit= 10.08- 1.64 = 8.44 kips <km•ny,.-ard shear and any resulungmoment due to
beartng eccenrnciues
b. Futtntrs
Per Section 13.5.3.1tem 4.aod Table 13.5.1. fasteners must be designed tbr bP= 1.25 and R,= 1.0.
Thus, u is neces.wy to mulupty the pre\•iously calculated body· le\•el F, reactions by ( 1.25X2.5)
= 3.125 because those value.s were based onap = 1.0 and R,=2.5. For the out-of-plane seismic
loading case. fastenets must be designed 10 res1st:
(~ 3.125)P•="' 3. 125(1.48) =~4 .63 ktps a.<tal load together wllh
1'8 = 10.08 kip< downward shear
For t.n-plane setsmtc loadtrtg case:

:1:: 3.125H8 =:1:: 3.125(2.96) =:1:: 9.25 ktps horizontal shear together wnh
I'• + 3.125F• = 10.08 + 3.125( 1.64) = 15.211ctps do"mmrd shear

or v. - 3.125F•= 10.08 - 3. 125(1.64) =4.96 ktps doMtward shear
@Seismicisolation
c. Ancboragt to toncrttt design

lBC SecLion 1905. l .8 allows anch(l(s in concfete thar 3te designed per Equatton 12.11- 1 ((I( a
mimmum F, = 0.4SoskJ..W, to not comply wuh specific ductility requlrements of ACJ 318 Secuon
17.2.3.4.2 . It IS usually ea~ier to comply with the minimum load requirement than the ductility
requU'emen~ especu1Uy for shallow ecc:entnc anchorages loaded tn multiple darecuons. For lhis
example, a~urrung k11 = 2 .0 and 1.. = 1.0,
F,...,.(anchorage)=O.SJV, S F,.(fastener)= 3. 125(0.411 W,) = 1.2SW,
The.refore, f'3.'ilener loads govern for destgn of anchorage to concrete aithis elevauon, aod no special
anchorage duculity requlremMts need be met.
5. Design Forces for the Rods

a. Body of conntction
The body of the connection must be designed to ressst a force based on a,.= 1.0 and RP =2.5
(see result< from pan 3a):
PR. = ~ 1.29 ktps ax1aJ ioad
b. Fu-trntrs
Fasteners m lhe connectmg system must be designed ro resist a fOrce bao;ed on a11 = I .25 and RP = I.0:
("'3.125)P, = *3.125( 1.29) = %4.03 ktps axial load
Commentary
The rod aochomge to lhe structure needs a free hol'lzonml dlsplacement capacny (horizontally sloned
holes) to accommodate build1ng anterstory drift m accordance wnh Section 13.5.3, Ite-m. 1, so tha[ the rods
are not subject to bending Sltesses. ASCE 7- 16 has e.xpanded requtrement~ for lhe design and tnstaJiauon of
t.hreade<l rod anc.hors \\'here horizontally slotted holes are used. These requirements are provided in Section
13.5.3, Item 2b. lfweaded rods are designed to accommodate story dnft through bending, Se<uon 13.5.3,
Item 2c, must be satisfied.
176 20181BC SEAOCStrucrutav.Se~mW: Design Manual. \<bL 1

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 55 • Lateral Seismic Force on Nonbuilding Sltttclure § 15.4
Design Example 55
Lateral Seismic Force on Nonbuilding Structure §15.4
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A nonbuddang sttucture Wtth a special reinforced ooocrete moment frame (SRCMF) supports some ngtd
aggregate storage buts. We1ghts W1 and W2 tnclude the maximum normal operating weights of the storage
btns and contents as well as lhe trtbutary frame wetghL See Secuon 15.4.1.1 and Table 1.5-2.
The followutg tnformauon 1S gtven:
Risk Category U
'~ == 1.0
Stte Class 0
S.us·==2.0, S~ =2.0
5•11 = 1.5,S1 = 1.0
S"'= 1.33
S01 = 1.00
T =2.0 sec
w =300kips
T, =0.752
...,.,
2
"·- -
W , = 100 k.!PS
3<)'
Figtn 55-I.
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 55 • Lateral Sei.smic Force otJ Nonbvilding SiroctlXe §15.4
I. Destgn base shear.
2. Venical dismbuuon of se1smic forces.
1. Design Base Shear §15.4

Because lh1s IS a ftexible structure (1.e., the pertod T > 0.06 sec, see Secuon 15.4.2, and the strucrure is
simtlar lOa butldJng. see Section I5.4. 1). the gerle.ral expressions for design base shear giverl in Section
12.8 and Secuon I5.4 must be used. Note lhat an Intermediate rtlnforced concrete moment frame ORCMF)
buildtng srrucrure is not pennined for SOC D. E. or F 1n accordance with Table 15.4.1. Also nore that the
value for R IS 8 for normal destgll of an SRCMF.
The [OUlJ base shear 1n a g&Ve.\ dlrection tS detemuned from
r= c,w Eq 12.8-1
where
c = s,,, ( 1.3 3) -0.166 Eq 12.8-2

' (R/1,) (8.0)/(1.0)
The value of C, computed m accordance w•th Equauon 12.8-2 need not exceed
C I . s,, I . (I.OO) 0094f. TST Eq 12.8-3

,= ·\R II,)T - .>(8/1.0)2.0 = · or '
Per Section I 1.4.8, a site-spectfic ground motton hazard analysis is requtred for Stfe Class 0 wtth 5 1
greater than 0.2. Section 11.4.8, Excepuon 21s utilized to avoid this requirement. Because T1 > T> I. ST.,
C,. dete-rmtned per &juauon 12.8-3, has been multtplted by 1.5.
Check T s r, r, = 12.0 sec F 22- 12
For nonbuildtng Strucrures located where 5 1 > 0.6g. the mtntmum specified C, \'alue shall be
C = 0.8S, = (O.SXI.O) = O. l Eq 15.4-2

' (R/1,) f8l
ll.ii)
Thus. C,=O.I ... Equation 15.4-2 govems.
I'= C,W=(O.IX300) = 30 kops Eq 12.8-1

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 55 • Lateral Seismic Force on Nonbuilding Sltttclure § 15.4
2. Vertical Distribution of Seismic Forces §12.8-3

The des1gn base shear ntlL')l be distributed over the he1glu of the structl.lte ln the san1e manner as that for a
buildutg structure.
Eq 12.8- 11
where
Eq 12.8- 12
where
k= 1.0 forTS0.50sec
k = 2.0 forT~ 2.50 sec
k = inlerpolate between I and 2.5 sec
For T=2.0sec
k =1.0+ l.o( 22.>-0.>

~-o~) =1.75
Tab/~ 55-I S1ory[orres and SIOIJ' shrars (k =I 75)

Story Story
le\•e l
Height
h, ~.:
Weight
w, J~h: ctt
Force
F,
,.,
Shear
2 45 781.85 200 156,369.45 0.803 24.09 24.09

I 30 384.56 100 38,455.83 0.197 5.91 30
Sum 300 194,825.28 1.00 30
Nme: k = 1.75 Cn = Wxh: /194825.28

It~ m feet Fx in kips
Wxin k1ps Vx •n kips
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 56 • Flexible Nonbuilding Structure §15. 4 and §15.5
Design Example 56
Flexible Nonbuilding Structure §15.4 and §15.5
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A mil S[etl bin tower is suppotted by a conctete foundmjon. llle towe.r sits on symmetrtcally broced legs.
The tbllowtng 1nformauon 1s gwen:
Weight of ttm•er and max.tmum notmal operaung contents; 150 ktps
Stiffness of supponi1tg tO\\'er; 8.30 kiplan
Risk Caregory Ill

I, :c 1.25
Site Class 0
S, = 1.70,S, =0.65
S0 s = 1.20, Sm = 0.65
Seismic Design Category 0
Figu,.. 56-/.
I. Pt-nod of VJbtation.
2. Desogn base shear.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 56 • Flexible Nonbuilding Structure §15.4 and §15.5
1. Period of VIbration
But towers are i.nduded ut Table 15.4-1 as 001\buddang structUl't'S n01 stnular to buddtngs. The pe,riod
must be detemuned by Section 15.4.4. Most commooly used computer analysis p(()gtarnS can perform
the requtred calculatjons to compute the fundametltal period. For Illustrative purposes. the period wall
be calculated tn th1s example ussng lhe given stitrness data and assuming. the gtven weight (mass) ts
concenuated at the top of the tower.
150 kips I (386 k iplin!sec 1 ) _ 1.3 sec

6
8.30 klp/in
Beeau.o;e the period IS greater than 0.06 second~ the bin tower does nor qualify a.'i a ng1d nonbutldtng
SU\ICture and thus 1s considered flexible. See Section 15.4.2.
It should be noted that the vaJue of the penod. T, should not be calculated ustngany of the approximate
me-lhods tn See.uon 12.8.2.1 , nor is u intended to be subject to the ftmitations presemed in Section 11.8.2.
llus is ~use the approximate method presented is mtended for buildings and IS not applicable to
SU\ICtural systems that diffe-r signdicamly from typtcal buildtng configurations and characteristics.
2. Design Base Shear

Per s~uon 15.4, the design base shear for fle."\:tble nonbuilding struCtures 1s ca1culated from the same
exJ)(essions as for buildings. These are given tn Sect.on 12.8. 1. In addition. nonbullding structures not
similar 10 buildtngs,. such as thts bin towers must also satisfy the requireme.nts of Sections 15.6 and 15.7.
Table 15.4-21ists the setsnttc coeffictents applicable to nonbuilding SU\JCtures ttOl sinular to buildings. For
elevated tanks and bins, R =- 3.0, and the maxtmum height hmittS 160 feel for Seismic Design Category D.
V=C,W Eq 12.8-1
The setS:I'Ilte response coeffictent 1s computed ti'om
'
--- -- (3.0 uII .25) - o ·o
C - sat
R II,
.) Eq 12.8-2
The \•alue of c. computed in accordance with Equauon 12.8-2 need J'lO( exceed
501
c.- - 0. 199 s tnc:e T s TL Eq 12.8-J
(R II,)T
Per Sec11on 15.4.1~ Item 2, for nonbuilding systems that have an R-value provided an Table 15.4-2,the
minimum spe.:ified C, val"" shall be O.Q.l4 S/lS/,=0.066 (Equatioo 15.4- 1). and C, shall not be taken as Jess
thanO.OJ.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 56 • Flexible Nonbuilding Strocture §15. 4 and §15.5
For this Lower, because the 1-second spectral response S1 is equal to 0.65 (S1 ~ 0.60g). the \'alue of the
seisrnac response coefficient C, shaH not be taken as less man
C = O.&S, =0.217 Eq 15.4-2

' (R/ / ,)
Thus, CJ =0.217 ... governs
and V:C,W:0.217(150 k•ps) = 32.55 kips
Commentary
lfthas tower (Risk Category Ill) were Jocated on a site wath mapped max.a.mum COilSidered earthquake
spectral response acceleration at 1-secood pertod S1• equal to or greater than 0.75g. it would be a~~tgned to
SOC E (see Section 11.6). Thus, the height '"oold be limned to 100 feet an accordance wath Table 15.4-
2. For SOC D. Table 15.4-2 hm1lS lhe structW'al he1ghtto 160 feet. which is assumed to be met fbr this
e.xample. Ahhough tlUJd dynamic effects are not considered 1n this example, SectiOn IS.7.10 provides a
brief discussion on thts tOJ) IC and also preserrts the addtttonal requirements for e.levated tank..;;.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design ExampJe 57 • RigKJ Non-.g Sllucture §15.4.2
Design Example 57
Rigid Nonbuilding Structure §15.4.2
PROBLEM STATEMENT
Rig..d ore-crushang equtpment is supported by a very staff and masSive pedestal as shown m F1gure 57- 1.
The followang mfonnruton IS given:
s"' = 1.33
I, = 1.0
T =0.02 sec
WI.Qf./II'ML-vt': ) OQ ktpS
WSt/PMkT = 200 ktps
F,-'J>....,.-----
2<)'
Graoe
Figw? 57-I.
I. Design base shear.
2. Ve.nacal distribution of seismic fOrce.s.
1. Design Base Shear §15.4.2

For ngad nonbU1ld1ngstructures, Equation 15.4-5 is used to delermme destgn base shear.
V = O.JS,.J,W = 0 .3( 1.33X I .O)W = 0.3991V Eq 15.4-5
= 0.399( 100 + 200)= 119.7 kips
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 57 • Rigid NOI'Ibuilding Structure §15.4.2
2. Vertical Distribution of Seismic Forces
1l1e destgn base shear 1s distnbuted with height in accordance wuh Section 12.8.3. ll'!e lateral se-ismic force
at any level~ Fp ts oomputed from
Eq 12.8-11
where
c• = -•" ''-h*' - Eq 12.8-12

o w/t:
,_,
where
k = 1.0 forT,; 0.50 sec

T =0.02 sec
Thus, k = 1.0
Table57-l Sloryforees(k= I 0)
Story
Height We1ght Force
le\·el h, h' w, wx~ Cw F,
'
2 30 30 100 3000 0.429 51.35
I 20 20 200 4000 0.57 1 68.35
Sum 300 7000 1.00 11 9.7
Nme: hx tn feet
H~ lR klpS
F. tn kips
Commentary
llus e.xample assumes the equipment and support are nearly rigid. For e.-umpfe, for the support with a
weight of200 laps, a Late:raf stiffness of approxunately 5 I,000 kltn is required to limn the penod to 0.02
seconds.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Des;gn Example 58 • Retaining WaN with Seismic Late/a~ Earth Pressure §15.6. 1
Design Example 58
Retaining Wall with Seismic Lateral
Earth Pressure §15.6.1
OVERVIEW
Over the past several dec.ad~ code requtrements for the design of eanh-retaining SlfUCtures have
significantly incre.ased. Howe\'er, case history data and data from recent expenmental \'t'Ork show that
tl1e currently used methods can be conser\'attve and lead to excess1vely conservauve designs in regions
where des1gn PGA exceeds 0.4g_ Thts example iUusttates the determlnatton of the total destgn 1areral
seismic force on a cantjlever concrete retaining walltn Setsmic Design categOI)' D. The applicable load
combinations from ASCE 7 are also determtned. The v.'311 height fO! this exatnple is chosen to be greater
than 12 feet because \\o-alls less than 12 feet have htstorically perfooned well during seismic events.
The destgn e.xample is based on the SEAOC Blue Book anicle titled ""Seismically-Induced latera] Eanh
Pres:sures on Retainang Structures a11.d Basement Walls...
PROBLEM STATEMENT
For the cantilever concrete retaimng wall shown in Figure 58- I, determine the OUl-of-plane se1snuc forces
requtred tbr the design oflhe wall secuon. Thts wdl be done for a 1-fom-w)(Je sec.uon of \\'aiL
The follow1ng mfonnruton IS given:
Seasmac Design Category 0
I, = 1.0
s"' = I.Og
s, =0.7g
H._. = 12 fi6m
T_, = IOtn
Dh =2fi6in
Paw = 35 pcf(froan geolechnical engtneer}
P........,=50 psf(from ge01echmcal eng1neer)
For this example. the soil is properly d.ratned. and there is no surc.Jwge.

I. Design critf"na..
2. Reta.intng wall design forces.
3. Applicable load combanattons for concrete wall design.
4. Wall sltdtng and ovenurntng moment c.hecks (stabilily analysts).
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 58 • Retaining IMiU\oWth Seismic Lateral Earth Pressure §15.6. 1
1. Design Criteria
Secuon 1807.2.3 tn the 2018 me states: "Retaining walls shall be destgned to restst the lateral
action of sod to produce sliding a11d overrum1ng with a mmtmwn safe-ty facmr of 1.5 ut each
ca~. The load COO'IbtnatK>ns of Section 1605 shall nm apply to this requirement. Instead.
design shall be based on 0.7 times nominal eanhquake loads. 1.0 limes other nominal loads and
tnvesrigat1on wtth one or more of the \'3ftable loads se.t to :ze.ro.'·
The exc.epuon tn Secuon 1807.2.3 tn the2018 IBC states: .. W11e-re eanhquake loads are
included, lhe mtnimum safe-ty of factor for retainutg wall sliding and ovenuming shall be I. I:•
Per IBC Sectton 1803.5. I2. Irem I. for struc-tures assigned to Setsmic Design categories D
through F. the geotechmcal repon shall mclude lhe '"dynamic setsmtc lateral earth pressures
on tOundauon wall.s and re-truning walls supporting more than 6 feet of bad.1ill heighL'"
Consequent!)'. for the design of foundatJon and retainmg walls supporung less than 6 feet of
back:fi.ll. n is interpreted th31 seismtc forces need not be constdered.
Accordtng to the SEAOC Blue Book arude. the k>cauon of the resultant of the acuve and
seismic earth pressures may both be taken at the one-t.htrd potnt from the base of the cantile\'et
wall~ refer to Figure 58- 1.
- -·---·- ~
-~ I
c·:
,...., ~
,.,.,....,..
""""- !
I
~ I
I f•
~
I
I
Figure 58- I.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Des;gn Example 58 • Retaining WaN with Seismic Late/a~ Earth Pressure §15.6. 1
2. Retaining Wall Design Forces

lateral forces due [0 sotl pressure effects.:
P...~=(35 pcf)(l5 fiX I ft) =525 plfmax at bonom offootmg

P...,.,=(50 psiX15 ftXI ft)= 750 lb applied at 12.5 t1J3 + 2.5 ft =6.67 fi above bouom of fooling
Seismic fbrc::es due to self-wetghl of waJI:
Per ASCE 7 Seeuons I5.4 and I5.6 and assummg R = I .25 for a nonbutld~ng strucrure (ASCE 7 Table
15.4-2 for all other structures not covered):
C, = SuJ(RII,) :< O.SS,I(Rl/,)

= J.ot( 1.25/J.O):.: co.8xo. 7)1( 1.25/J.O)
= 0.80 ;< 0.448
C, = 0.80 governs
Fora IO.•nch-thickcoocrete retatning wall with W= 125 psf. I"= 0.80(125 psf)(l2.5 ft) = 1250 lbapplied
at mid-height of wall= ( 12.5 ft/2 + 2.5 ft) = 8. 75 feet above bottom of fooling..
3. Applicable Load Combinations for Concrete Wall Design
ASCE 7 Secuon 2.3.1 and Secuon 2.3.6 prescnbe bas1c load combinauons for struCtures, componems,
and foundauons with the intenrion that their des1gn strength equals or exceeds the e-ffects of the factored
loads. With respect to the load from lateral earth pressure and groundYlater pressure. the prescribed load
cotnbutauons for strength design of the reinforced concrete wall are
I.l{D + F + 7) + 1.6(L +H)+ O.S(L, or S orR) §2.3. I (Comb. 2) (I)
(1.2 + 0.2So.,)D + 1.2F + pQ,+ L + 1.6H +0.2S §2.3 .6 (Comb. 6) (2)
(0.9 - 0 .2So.<)D+ 0.9F + pQ,+ 1.6H §2.3.6 (Comb. 7)(3)
Of these tlll'ee eqwttons. Equanon 3 will typically control the design of the concre.te rtturung v.'all. Based
on the SEAOC 8/u~ Book at1ic1e reoommendauons. the seismic lateral eanh pressure shall be considered an
earthquake force and lhus utihze a 1.0 factor. Per ASCE 7 Sectton 15.6, p = 1.0. The stattc portion of the
lateral eanh pressure shall be factored by I .6 per ASCE 7 Secuon 2.3.6 because the etfects or H add to the
princ1pal load et!"ects. If the effects of H resist the prtncipal load effects, H shall be factored by 0.9 d'the
load lS permanent and by 0 for other coodittons.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 58 • Retaining IMiU\oWth Seismic Lateral Earth Pressure §15.6. 1
4. wan Sliding and Overturning Moment Checks (Stability Analysis)
Retaintng walls shall be designed 10 resist the lateral action of soil 1o produce slid1ng and ovenurning wnh
a m1nunwn safety factor of 1.5 for the stattc load combut:ttton (I) and 1.1 for the [WO load combtnarjons
u>cluding E (2 and 3). The load combinauons ofASCE 7 Chapter 2 shall not apply to thts requtrement.
Instead. design shall be based on 0.7 umes nominal earthquake Joads and 1.0 urnes other nominal loads.
F.-.,. =0.7(750 lb)+ 0.7(1250 lb) + 1.0(!1,)(525 pll)(l5 ft) = 53381b

Mor= 0. 7(750 lb)(6.67) + 0.7( 1250 lb)(8.75 ft) + 1.0(!1,)(525 pll)( 151/3) = 30.85 kip-ft
Commentary
ASCE 7 Section 11.8.3 requtr~ that the proJecl georechntcal repon mcludes recommendations for
dynamic seismtc lateral eanh pressure~ and IBC Section 1803.5.11 funher statesthm geotechnical reportS
shall provtde dynamic seismic lateral eanh pressures on foundation waHs and retainmg walls supportutg
more lhan 6 feet of bad-fill. In order to provtde an efficte.nt yet code-compltam retatn.inglba.:;ement wall
desjgn. the structutal enginetoJ mu.<n engage the geOlechnical engineer 10 understand the desagn parame.ters
presented in the project geo£eehntcal report.
The destgn of retaming walls for seiSil'lic effects conunues to be a subject of research and code
development In tenns of the seismic forces due to sod pressure (sels:mtc tncremenl ofeanh pressure).
this e.xample folfov•."S recommendations: fro1n current research as summarized tn the SEAOC 8/u~ Boo/.;
ankle. utcluding the point of appl icauon bemg at H. ln te.rms of the setSJnte forc-es due to seH:.wetght of the
wall, this example includes thooe forc.es tn combiruujon with the actrve and seismic e.arth pres.<rures. Thts
approach 1s conststent with mterpretations of curreau code p-ovtstons from manyJUrisdiatons and other
Standards. Current research is also studymg the appropriate load factors and/or load oombinauons to be
used when cortsJdering tJ'tese ddferem setsmtc effects and clarification wtlll dce-ly occur in future editions of
ASCE 7 and/or the IBC.
For addiuonal infonnauon., refer 10 SE.40C Blue Book arttcle "Setsmtcally-lnduced Lateral Eanh Pressures
on Retainjng Structures and Basement walls.. available at: seaoc.orglstore.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design &ample 59 • Seismic Demands on Nonsttuctura/Compommts with BuildingAcce'eratim.s §13.3. 1.4
Design Example 59
Seismic Demands on Nonstructural
Components with Building Accelerations §13.3.1.4
OVERVIEW
llus example illustmtes detemunaiton of seismtc forces for nonstructurol components determined tn
accordance wtth Equauon 13.3-4.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
ll\e four-stocy special monle.nt franle butlding shoY.'n tn Figure 59- I has air-handling equtpment suppoaed
on sprtng isolators attached to lhe roof with post-installed atl('.hors. Electr1cal equipment on l'igid support.~ is
anac.hed to the second floor W1th post-msta11ed anchors.
The followlng lnfonnatton ts gtven:
Setsmtc Design Category D

s,.=1.1
'· = 1.0
w, = 10 kips
I. Design critena..
2. Seismic forces on a oonstruc.tural component at the roof.
3. Seismic forces on a oonstruc.tural component at the second le\1el.
/ "'•
·~• r- ____ _L__L_____,
-, ~
_j
· ~------------~
t
-,
~
3 ~------------~ I
/ .... ~
· ~----~-L----~
_j
t
~
•
J
e • £PiG e fY!TK'lN
Figtrt j9-/_
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 59 • Seismic Demands on Nonstructural Components with Building Accelerations §13.3. 1.4
Figure 59-1.
1. Design Criteria §13.3.1.4
The tOur-story special stee-l moment frame building IS modeled tn ETABS. ModaJ analysis of the btuldutg ts
requtred for use of Equation 13.3-4.
Oetermtne the maxamum accelerattons at each level from the ETABS Model:
u.~ a response spectrum with R = 1.0.

I. Per Section 13.3.1.4. determinatioo of acc.eleratioi'IS shall
In ETABS~ create a response spectrum lood case with scale tactor = I.O•gravuy.
2. Output story acceleratioos fOr the response spectrum load case.
3. Use the maxtmum acceleration UXor UY for each buildmg level. Note: tf response hi"ttory analysts
is used with at least seven ground motions, acceleratioo shall be the a\'erage of the maxtmums.
The max:t.tnum accelerauons at each buiJdtng level using response specuum are as follO\\o"S:
Level a,(mox),g
Roof 0.687
L.evel4 0.503
Levell 0.502
L.evel2 0.410
Ground Floor 0.0
Determine the totsionaJ amphficauon factor:
A -~
( J
.r- l .2S~
Eq 12.8- 14
F1g.ure 12.8-1 provides a graphjcaJ description oflhe torsjonaJ amplificatton factor.
The butfding ill thiS e.xampJe does f!Ol experience lOfSIOO~ therefore. 8_; 8mr
A,= ( 111.2)2 = 0 .69

Section 12.8.4.3 ha'i a requirement that A:t be not less lhan 1.0 and not exceed 3.0. Therefore-, A.. = I.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
2. Seismic Forces on a Nonstructural Component at the Roof §13.3.1 .4
Eq 13.3- 1
Values of a,. R,. and Oo are given in Table 13.~ I. The values specified for ..spru1g- isolated components.. are
a,= 2.5, R, = 2.0, and 0, = 2.0
F = (0.687X2.5)(10 ktps)(l) = k. s
86
' (2.0 I 1.0) . tP
Per Sec11on 13.3.1.4, the hmits ofSecuon. 13.3.1 apply. Therefore~ FPshaJI be not Jess than 0.3SDSI,.W,.and
not more than l.6S0:;f,.JI'~.
Check: F,'?. 0.3Sul,W,= 0.3(1.1)(1.0)(10)= 3.3 ktps Eq 13.3-3
Check: F,s 1.6Su,J,W,= 1.6(1.1)(1.0)(10)= 17.6 kips Eq 13.3-2
TI>erefore. F, = 8.6 ktps.
ASCE 7 Table 13.6- 1, Footnote c in<hcmes to tnclude ovel'Sl.l'en.gth as an Section 12.4.3 as reqwred for
anchorage 10 concre~e: £_.=OJ'",= 2.0(8.6 kips)= 17.2 ktps
3. Seismic Forces on a Nonstructural Component

at the Second Level §13.3.1 .4
a,a,w,
F = A Eq 13.3-1
' (R, IIp ) '
a.,.
Values of RP and llo are given 111. Table 13.6-1. The values specified for "'other meclwucal or electrical
components"' are
a,= 1.0, R,= L5,and 0,= 2.0

F = (0.410)(1.0)(10 k1ps) (I)= _ ki s
27
, (1.511.0) p
Per Se<:uon 13.3.1.4,lhe bmus ofSe<:uon 13.3. 1 apply. Therefore, F, shall be not less !han 0.3Su,J,JV,and
not more than 1.6S/l$J,W,_
Check: F,"?. 0.3Su,J,W,= 0.3(1.1)(1.0)(10)= 3.3 ktps Eq 13.3-3
Checlc F, S L6Su,J,fV,= 1.6(1.1)( 1.0)(10)= 17.6 ktps Eq 13.3-2
Therefore. F, = 3.3 kips.
ASCE 7 Table 13.6- 1, footJ\()te c in.dtcates to include O\'eJ'StJ'ength as in Section 12.4.3 as required for
anchorage 10 ooncre~e: £_.=OJ'",= 2.0(3.3 kips)= 6.6 kips.
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 59 • Seismic Demands on Nonstructural Components with Building Accelerations §13.3. 1.4
Commentary
Section 13.2.1 requires that "Architectural. mechantcal and elecuica1 components. supports and auachments
shaJI comply with the secuonsreferenced tn Table 13.2-1 ...,
The 0\'erstrength factor for components \\o'a.S iJUioduced 1n ASCE 7-10. The 2018 IBC adopted ASCE 7· 16.
U'!Ciudi.ng the provis1ons for the ovetstrength facror for compooe.nts.
The definllJOO of a ngtd component (e.g.• ttem of equtpmem) is giVen in Secuon 11 .2 under ..Component.
Rig1d." R1gld equipment[includtng 1ts supports and anachments (see Ftgure 59-3)J is equtpment that has a
period less than or equal to 0.06 ~ond.
The defimtJon of a flexible component is g1ven lO Secuon 11.2. Flex1ble eqUJpme-m l including tts suppons
and auac:hments (see Figure. 59· 3)] has a period greater than 0.06 second. Component systems with sprmg
oolawrs are typ1caJly cons1dered a(j flex1ble-. regardless of the propemes of the component ItSelf.
r· - - - - - - Component
~--Support
Figurt! 59-J.
The fundame.ntal peruxl T, for mechamcal and elect.ncal equ1pment shall be detenruned by lhe formula
given in Section 13.3.3:
T=2•Jw•
P K,g
Eq 13.3-11
where
g;; acce.letation of gravny in U'l/srec?

K1 = sufliless of res:il ient s:uppon system
r, =compone-nt fundamerual penod
w,.. =component operating_ wetght
The component setsmtc des1gn fotce F, (1.e., the fOrce unposed upon the supportS and auac.hme,ms) is a
funcuon of IIR,

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Generally. only componenl support and attachments need be designed for seismic fbtces. This is discu.li:Sed
in Sec.tion 13.4. Whete equipment. which can be eithel' tle:<ible or rigtd. comes mounted on a supporting
frame lhat is pan of lhe manufuctured un1t, the supponing frame musl also meet the seismic destgn
reqUiremenL~ ofChaptel' 13.
Section I3.2.5 allows testing as an altematt\'t' to lhe analyttcal methods ofChaprer 13. Testtng should
comply wnh ICC-ES AC 156.
Section I3.1.3 tequttes a component unponance factol' gteaxel' lhan 1.0(1,:; 1.5) for lhe foUowing:
Life safecy compone-nt tequlfed to fW'lC£JOO aftet an eanhquake.
Components contatnang hazatdous mmenals Ol' tOXIC substances.
Components in or attached to Risk CaLegory IV st:ructutes needed fOf cotUtnued operatiOn of

lhe facility.
Those archttectural. mec.hantcal, and elecmcal systerns lhat ace pan of a destgnated setsmic system as
defined in Sec.uon I32.1 shall be qualified by eithel' test or calculalton.. A c.enificate of compliance shall be
submitted to both the tegiste.red des1gn professionaltn respol'tsible charge of the design of the designated
seismic sysrem and lhe building offictaJ for review 3Jld approval. ICC ES has published Acceptance Cruena
(AC 156) lhat address the quaJili:calJOO test to sausty lhe referenced code requtrements.
Some types of spnng isolators have a nom anal clearance (ail' gap) that l~ more lhan 0.25 mches. In that case.
the des1gn force shall be taken as 2*F, per Table 13.6- I. FoolOOte b.
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 6IJ • Redundancy Factor p for Concrete Core Shear Wal BuilditJg § 12.3.4
Design Example 60
Redundancy Factor p for Concrete Core
Shear Wall Building §12.3.4
OVERVIEW
Thts example Illustrates the detetmlrt.atJon of the redundancy factor, p. fOI' a 1n1d-rise bualdjng with ooocrete
core s-hear walls.
Redundru\1 seismtc systems, with muluple fbrce-resjsung load paths, perform better an earthquakes than
les:s.-redundruu strucn..res. The redundancy factor is intended to quanuf}' the importance of redundancy~
thts 1S dtSc-ussed in the commentary section ofASCE 7 as well as tbe NEHRP Recommended S~isnuc
PrrP<i.tions.
ASCE 7-16 penntl(i the redundancy factor 10 be laken as 1.0 10 the tbiiO\\'ang cirournstances (see Sec.tion
12.3.4.1):
I. Structures assigned to Seism1c Desagn Category B or C. (Note that the load combtnations that
include lhe redundancy factor are nm used for Selsmic Design Category A.)
2. Drtft calcuJauon and P-deha etl"ects.
3. Destgn of nonstructural compork!nts.
4. Design of nonbuiJdmg structures lhat are not sinular to buildings.
5. Design of collector e.lements, splices, and lheir connect1ons for whtch the load c.omb1natl<>ns
\\1lh overstrength factor ofSecuon 12.4.3 are used.
6. Destgn of membe:rs or conrlecUons where lhe load comb1nauons wnh oversttength ot'Secuon
12.4.3 are reqwred fordesagn.
7. Oaaphragm loads determined uslrtg Equat10n 12.10-1. (Nme lhat th1s does not apply to forces
traJ'ISferred through a diaphragm.. such as due to an out-of.plane oft-;et in the seismic load
resisljng system.)
8. Structures with damping systems destgned tn accordance with Chapter 18.
9. Design of structural waJis for out-of-plane tbrces, incllKhng thelf anchorage.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design Example 60 • Redundancy Factor p for Concrete Core Shear waN Building §12.3.4
Addtlionally. Secuon 12.3.4.2 .identlf'ies two other conditions 1n which p may be taken as 1.0. Note that the
c-rnerta for these condttions need only be met at floor levels in whtch more lhan 35 percent of the base shear
is being resisted~ for lhe top level or levels of taller structures. the cot'ldjtions need not be met The factor
may be taken as 1.0 when either of the follow1ngcondiuons lS met. In all othe-rcondiuons. p ts taken as 1.3.
Arry other value of p is not permitted.
Condiuon I
12.3.4.2(a) Configurattons tn which the removaJ of one element (as described tn the summary of Table
12.3-3) will not result in more than a 33 percem reduction in story shear strength or tn 3.11 e.xueme torsional
irregularny (as defined tn Table 12.3- 1).
Summary ofTable 12.3-3
Removal of one elemem tS defined as:
I. The removal of a brace (braced frames).
2. Loss of moment re-ststance at lhe beam-t~c.ol umn connections at both et'lds of a single
beam (moment frames).
3. RetnO\'al of a shear \li1l.ll or wall pter Wllh a heigh.Ho-length rano greate.r than 1.0 (sl'k.--ar
wall systems).
4. Loss of moment reststanee at the base coonecuons of any single cantdever column
(cantilever column systems).
5. For other systems. such as seismicaJiy damped suuctures. no presc-ripuve requirements

g.l\'en. allowiJtg p lObe taken as 1.0.
Condition II
12.3.42(b) Configurations With no irTegulamies at any level and wnh sufficien1 pemuned braced
frames. moment fmmes. or shear walls. Sufficient pertmeler bracmg is defined as ar least two bays of
seismic-force-resisung pertme.ter framtng on each side of the strucrure in each orthog.onal directio1t For
shear waJI syslems, the num.ber of bays IS caJculated as lhe length of shear wall divided by the story he1ght
(two umes the length of shear wall divtded by the story hetght for ltglu-fi'amed construcuon).
PROBLEM STATEMENT
To lllusuate the applicatjon of the method for establishing lhe redundancy fattOI', the structure shO\vn 1n
Figure 60- 1 will be analyzed.
@Seismicisolation
1:1
<ALLE WAL F
0 WALL A WALL C
[(:
III6'.LI. B WALL O
0 IALLG WAL H
0
Figure 60- 1.
The followmg mformalton is gJVen:

Six-story. concrete shear wall butld1ng
S0 s = 1.0, R = 6 .0, I,= 1.0

K.=K11 =Kt-= KJ=K~= K1 =K1 = K1
Nominal shear strength of walls= R.
S1ory heigh!= 12 fl
Length of shear \vall = I0 ft
I. Redundancy factor.
1. Redundancy Factor p
For the purposes ofthe required strength of walls, the redundancy factor must be determined and used tn
Equauon 12.4- 3 to determine the horizontal seismic load effecL None oflhe condttiot:ts ltsred tn §12 .3.4.1
apply. and thus§ I2.3.4 .2 must be used to determtne whether pis 1.0 or 1.3.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Because there are no bays of shear wall on each of the perimete-r lines of resistance and the buddutg
IS completely regular, § 12.3.4 .2(b) does not apply. The configuration will therefore be analyzed using
the method outlined in § 12.3.4.2(a), nrune-ly. by remo\•1ng a wall and assessing the etrect on story shear
sueng_th aod on buddtng torston. ln thas example, WaH 0 will be removed for each story resistmg more
than 35 percent of base-shear. Because of the symmetry of the system., the removal of one wall covers the
cao;es of the removal ofeachofthe Olher walls. In a more typical system. a separarecheck would need to be
perfotmed for Se\'eral (or even all) of the walls.
The effect oo story shear strength can be considered 1n at least two ways. The most conventional way to
calrulate the modified story she.ar strength 1s based on the modified ela~tc dismbution of forces and lhe
capacity of the most heavily stressed wall. Such an analysis of the structure with all four bays prese.nt
shows that the seismic forces 1n the heav1er loaded line of resistance (ine.luding_ the effects of accidental
totsioo) ts 57.5 percent of the base shear, wnh each bay reststlng_ 28.75 percent; th1s dtstr1buuon is shown tn
Figure 60-2(a). If the stiffness ofone ltne of resiStance is reduce.d by half, the des1gn se-tsmic forces change
to 46 percent resisted on the weaker hne and 54 percent on the Sltonget hne~ thts distrtbution IS shown tn
Figure 60-2(b). Thus, the increase in the force on the most heavtly loaded bay is 46~ol28.75% = 1.6. and
the reduced force level caus1ng y1eldmg of that \\'all ts 1.11 .6 = 62.5o/o. Using. th1s method, the effect on story
sueng_th lS aW!ssed to be a decrease tn capacny of JOD-Ie - 62.5% = 37.5Yo. The.refore, the oonfigurotton
""uld not quality for a p factor of 1.0.
Elastic
9.5%
46.00%
Remove
(a) 3.75% (b) 9.5%
Flgur~ 60-1.
While thiS is an acceptable method of demot'IStrating. oompliance with the c.ooditions JUSut)•tng a factor p
of 1.0. this method ts not requtred. A more dtrect method of establishing story shear capacity is to uulize a
plaSltC mechantsm analysas. Thts ts the method envisioned by the commutee that aut.hoted the redundancy
provision, and 11 ts more consistent with the principles of selsmic design ( t.e., constdering strength and
hmit states, rather than elasuc design). In tlus method of analysis, the story shear capacuy before removal
of a wa11 ts the swn of the capacities of the four walls resisting the seismic force m the direction under
consideration (provided th.ar the on.hogonal walls have suffictent suength to resist tors1on, \llhich in this
case tS only acctdental torston). This IS shO\I;Tl in Figwe 60-J(a), where R. denotes the capacity of the wall.
If one wallls retn0\1ed, the story shear capacity is the swn of the capactties of the three remain1ng walls
resisting the seismic force resulttng from budding torsion. wluch m this ease is substantial Thts is shown
m Figure 60-J(b). Thu.~ the reduction m capacity ts 01\ly 25 percent. The resulting building torsion forces
must be res1sted by the walls 1n the orthogonal direction.
@Seismicisolation
Thts 1ntecpretanon of the story shear capacity has bee.n endorsed by the SEAOC Se1smole>e-Y Commmee. To
qualify for a factor of 1 .0~ the system wtth one wall rem.oved must also be checked for an extreme torsional
irregulamy a'i defined 1n Table 12.3-1. For the example buildmg using the plastic mechanism analysis.
the deflection in lhe direcuon of loading is RJKr The addttional deflection at each pertmere.r hne due to
rooujon tS 0.415RJK~r Th1s IS more than the 40 percent maxunum thattS allowed by Table 12.l-l before an
extreme torsional irregularity is deemed to exiSL Thus, the configurauon does not quaht)• for a p factor of
1.0.
Plastic
47.5% R.
-- / " /'
c~J
-' - /
' /
(a) (b) 47.5% R.
Figure 60-3.
The etlbct on build1ng torston can be determtned by performtng a hnear analysts wath Wall 0 removed at
each story res1sung more-than 35 percent base shear. Followtng the flowchart tn ASCE 7 Figure C 12.3-6,
the bulldtng torsional response for all walls present is
Levei.T A• Ll,. 6,,./A,..

6 0 .14 0.10 1.17
5 0 .16 0.1 I 1.19
4 0 .17 0.1 I 1.21
3 0 .17 0.11 1.23
2 0 .14 0.09 1.25
I 0.07 0.04 1.26
Therefore, the buddtng does not have an extreme torsion trregulanty with all \vaJis prese.nt.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
The effect oo buildtng torsion with WalJ 0 removed at the first level is
Levelx c.. c.. tl.,../C.,.

6 0. 14 0.1 0 1.18
5 0. 16 0. 11 1.20
4 0. 18 0.11 1.23
3 0. 18 0.11 1.26
2 0. 16 0.09 1.30
I 0.08 0.04 1.35
11\el'efbre. the building does 001have an extreme totSion trregulartty with Wall 0 removed.
It can be determined that for Levels 2 through S,the re.ntoval ofWaJI 0 wlll not result in an e~:tteme
torsional irregulamy. and .stnce the reductton in story stteng.th was deternuned to be 25 percen~ using the
plasuc mechanism approach above the configuration quahfies for a p factor of 1.0.
@Seismicisolation
Desig'J Example 61 • Combined Loading for SCBF Column Supporting Mezzanine §12.4. 1
Design Example 61
Combined Loading for SCBF Column
Supporting Mezzanine §12.4.1
OVERVIEW
Thts example Illustrates ho\\1 one should detc-rmme lhe seiSil'lic force assocu.ned with suppottutg a
mezzan1ne coMected to a column thl:u is part of the setsm•c:-force-reslsting system.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
The wade flange column htghhghte-d in Figure 61 - 1 1s pan of a steel spec tal concentrically braced frame
(SCBF) that compnses the butldmg·s seismacAorc:e-resistJng systern. The system ts desc:.rlbed graphtcally
ut Figures 61- 1 and 61-2 considering the desagn paratne[ef'S listed here. The. highlighted column suppons
a mezzaninesiuuued between the ground and second floors, as shown 1n Figure 61-1. Per Figure61 -l,thts
e.xample C:OI'ISide.rs a five-story building.
The followang Information is g1ven:
Se.ismic Design Category 0 (San Francisco, Cahromja. so snow and rain loads are neghgtble)
Sos= 1.0
1, = 1.0
p = 1.0
n. =2.0
DLRoof = 11.3 kips {15 psfself-weig.h" 10 psfsupenmposed)
URo>t = 9.0 kips (20 psf; UOJfotm flat)
DL,,_=29.3klps ( 50 psf S<lf-weig.ht. 15 psfsupenmposed)
LL, .... = 22.5 k1ps (50 psffor typical floor; office)
Dl,_= 33.8 k1ps {55 psf self-\ve1g.ht. 20 psfsupenmposed)
LLMen = 45.0 kips ( 100 psi; storage)

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Design &ample d1 • Combined Loadng tv SCSF COic.mn Supporting Meuanine §12.4.1
'!. PARN'I.I
.•'
"'
-;.q ·.
0
0
'
"'
<jl _,,, FLOOR Dl• 29.3;c
ll=22.51<
~
9
~ "
'II <tn rLOOR .. 0!.•29.31<
llc22.5k
0
'
"'
~ Jnll'lOOft
'
0
"''
$ 2nd F'LOOR Wl8:.;86 Dl=29.3k
ll=22.51<
$ MlUIWINl lllvon =JJ.6l<

llwm""45Jltt
/COLUt.tN Of
/ INIER(ST
"' ------ --~-- ------------------- l

~[ I I I
BRACED FRAME ELEVATION
- LINE 6
Figun 61-1.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
2()18 IBC S E A O C - Design Manual, \bl. 1 201
DesigJ Example 41 • Combined Loading for SCBF Column Supporting Mezzanine § 12.4. 1
0 ®
I. l
'
I
,-
::0 -
-
-
/ BF- 8 BF- 9 BF- 10 0
~EZZAN1NE BETWEEN GROUND Hllit: \\ TRIBUTAR¥ AAEA
FLOOR Alit> 2N0 FLOOR -
FRAMING & FLOOR Sll.lft.AR
ROOF •Eill!RAN( 1$ INSIMnON
OVER I.I"ETAL O£CK
~ = 4501~
TO TYPICAl FLOORS COLUIAN OF
INTEREST
FLOOR & ROOF FRAMING

PLAN 5-STORY BRBF
Flgun 61-1.
202 2018/BC S£40C Slroct....USeisrmc Design@Seismicisolation

@Seismicisolation
Manual. 1ib1. 1
Design Example 61 • Combined Loacfng for SCBF Column Supporting Mezzanine §12.4.1
I. Basic combtnations witJt seismic load effects.
2. Seismtc load efti!cts and combinations.
3. Column design (suength design fOfces acung on column).
4. Confirm design against other load combin.auons.
1lle example must be constdered ustng appropnale basic load combtnattons from Chapter 2, specifically
Secuon 2.3.6. This direction is tOuOO Ln AISC 341, SectiOJ\ F2.3, y,-flere the requited strength of colum.ns
must be based on load combin.atjoos that lnclude the amplllied seismic load. The excepljon ut this sec.tion
allov.--s lhat the required strength of colunu'IS need not exceed the least oflhree condujons. Under Excepuon
(2Xa), the assumed llmitiJtg condition can be forces ustng load combm.atJons stipulated by the applicable
butldtng code, whtch are descnbed m the next sectton.
1. Basic Combinations with Seismic Load Effects §2.3.6

L2D+£.+£"' §2.3.6 (Com I> 6)
0.90 - E,.+E,.. §2.3.6 (Com I> 7)
The column design will be governed by Combination 6.
2. Seismic Load Effects and Combinations §12.4

1lle setsmte load effect. E, W1Ll be cnuc.al for the contpresston (downward) condmon considenng
overstrength; therefore-, using equauon 12.4-5 is appmprtate.
£.=£..,.+£., Eq 12.4-5
Nme that£,... isdetermaned from Secuon 12.4.3.1, where p =- 1.0 and Qt lSdetenntned from J·as described
in Secuon 12.5.3 (Seclion 12.5.4 allows l2.5.3.a or 12.5.3.b to sansi)' the require,ments in 12.5.4, which
ts the most direct for this example). E., tS determined from Secuon 12.4.2.2 (£., = 0.2S',»D), whecre Dis the
cotnbioed dead loads reported in the axial load hst 1n the Problem Statement.
MCEtt ventcal response spectrum analysis (VRSA) could be used to develop the E., value, but VRSA 1S not
requjred for this design example and overcomplicmes the anthmeuc for no real benefit as it relates to this
example (refer to the exception in 12.4.2.2, Equation 12.4-4b.and Section 11.9).
To detenntne Q£ for equation 12.4-7:
D, L are the same for botl> dorections of applied earthquake loads (IV is negligible)
D= 162.3 kips
L =- 144 k:tps(can be tgnored for the conltoll1ng se1sm1c case)
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
20 18/BC SEAOC StrocturaVSeismic Design Manual, 1.bl. 1 203
Desigl Example 61 • Combined Loading for SCBF Coknnn Suppotting Mezzanine §12.4. 1
A stmple 30 mode I ts used to develop seismic force distnbution to membe.rs ustng the equtvalent lateral
force (Elf) analysis method. The mezzamne is added as a mass an the model. supported by grovny fratnmg
(beams and columns). bUl connected to extenor colwnns. which wllltmpose setsmic forces dtrectly 1.1'110
columns at the mezzani1le level. Because of the mezzanine condmon. columns are modeled as conunuous
members to capture shear and mome1u demands created by the mezzanine patt•cipation wnh the O\'e:rall
building response. The lateral force-reslsting syste-m uses pinned beams and brace~ with puVroller bao;e
reacuons under columns for s~mplified aJtalytical results. The resuJts from the analyses are shown fOI" both
the in-plane appltcauon of seismic loads (eanllquake loads applied parallel to the prtmaty sySlemlframe
dJrection. referred to as I00 percem) and the onhogonal direcuon (earthquake loads appl1ed onhogonally
to the primary system/frame direction. referred to as 30 percent). Both the 30 perce.nt values and the 100
percent values include forces delivered by the mezzanine to the column (axial~ shear. moment). whtch are
U\Ciuded utthe result.<:; provtded after Ftgure 61-3.
COLUMN G-6 ISOMETRIC
Figure 61-J.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
204 2018/SC SEAOC Structi.JI'ai!Seismic Design Manual. \tbl. 1
Design Example 61 • Combined Loadng for SCBF Column Supporting Meuanine §12.4. 1
For Q£ cons1dered in line with the braced fi"ame of i1ueresl ( I 00%):
V00, = 50.6 kips (from Elf) §12.8

Mc:ot = 771.7 kap-ft (from ELF. tncludJng mezzanine tnfluence)
PCOL= 382.7 kips (from Elf)
For Qcconstdered onhog.onally lO the braced frame of Interest (3001.):
V00, = 6.8 kips (from me=ine force determined by ElF) § 12.8

Mt.'Ot = 64.5 ktp-ft (moment caused by mezzanine force al 9'-6" above base)
P00,_ =0 kips(not applicable for this load d1recuon)
E, = 0.2Sosf> = (0.2)( I.0)( 162.3) = 32.5 ktps Eq 12.4-4a
£_.= n,o,= (2)(50.6)= 101.2 ktps (1·- 100%) Eq 12.4-7

£.,.= O,Q,= (2)(771.7) = 1543.4 ktp-1\ (M - 100"/o)
£.,. = O,Q, = (2)(382.7) = 765.4 ktps (P- 100%)
£.,. = n,o, = (2)(6.8) = 13.6 k•P• (V - 30%)
£_. = n,o, = (2)(64.5) = 129.o ktp-ft (M- 30%)
3. Column Design (Strength Design Forces Acting on Column) §12.4

11te seismic load effect,. E. will be crttical fOf the compression (down\\'afd) 001td11ion OOI'tsidertng
overstrength; therefore.• using Equation 12.4-Stsappropriate.
For design a.xta1 forces: J.2D+ E,+ E.. = (1.2)(162.3) + 32.5 + 765.4 =992.7 ktps
For des~gn shear forces (strong axisf. 101.2 ktps

For design moments (suong a.-xis): I543.4 kip-ft
For design shear forces (weak axis): 13.6 kips

For des~gn mornen<S (weak axis): 129.0 ktp-ft
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
20 18/SC SEAOC StrocturaVS~tismic Design Manual, !All. 1 205
DesigJ Example 41 • Combined Loading for SCBF Column Supporting Mezzanine § 12.4. 1
_____ -----
..,_::.:.<~ flOOR
'o
_,
~
COLUMN G-6 DETAI L
Figurt! 6/-4.
Column destgn shouJd follow from AISC 360-16 considenng bi-rudal bending in addition to compresston
forces (Chapter tl, Section tl I):
a. When -1', 2: 0.2, ...!. 8(M

I' +- -!!..+_.:.a:.
M ) s 1.0 (tii-Ja)
Pl" Pc 9 M0 Mq
P,
b. When - < 0.2, -P'- +-S(M .H.,)
~+ - SI.O ( J·J J- Ib)
P, 2/!. 9 /1112 Mq
206 2018/BC S£40C S/roct....USeis,;c Design@Seismicisolation

Manual. libl. 1
@Seismicisolation
Des;t;Jn &ample 61 • Combined Loading for SCBF Cdumn Supporting Meuanine §12.4. 1
For thes example, first derermute the colwnn stze usmg the destgn moment c.onsidenng tbrces fi'om
Equation 12.4-7 without cooside.reng the mezzarune influence-. which is a Wl4 x 311 (c.aJculanons follow
HI -la).
765.4 +! • 18,522 + _o_) = 0 _97 ,;J.o

3060.6 9l22.984 13,680
Wuh the addition of shear and moments caused by the mezzantne, determine that the column size increases
to W14 x 342 (calculations follow HI -la).
0
765.4 +! 18,522 + 1547 )=0.96$1.0
3382.0 9l25,523 15,210
All steel secuon capadues are determu'led ustngAISC 360 Chapter E for column compression capacities
and AISC 360 Chapter F tOr column flexural capacities.
4. Conflnn Design Against Other Load Combinations §2.3.6

1.4D §2.3.6 (Comb. I)
1.2D + 1.6L + 0.5(L, or S orR) §2.3.6 (Comb. 2)
1.2D + 1.6(L, or S orR)+ (Lor 0.5JJI) §2.3.6 (Comb. 3)
12D + I.OfV + L + 0.5(L, or S orR) §2.3.6 (Comb. 4)
0.9D + 1.011' §2.3.6 (Carob. 5)
Load combtnation 2 is the governing load combtnauon (from combmalions I through 5), constdenng onl)'
gtavity loads (apprro<tmately 4151:ips). The maximum gtavny loads are subSiantially lower !han !he 895.2
lctps associated with the load combination containing setsmic load effects. Therefore, the design is governed
by load combination 6 and the column design is adequate for the destgn conditions.
Commentary
ThiS example explores a condition assoc1ated wuh a mezzamne that cannot be considered ltHng the
seismic des1gn fOrce calcuJated U\ Secuoo 13.3. The mezzanu\e contttbutes a seismic mass that must be
induded in the analysis to determine the buddlng seismic response (ELF in th1s example.• 01' one 1night
consider response spectrum anaJysis (RSA) in other situations]. The result~ of an RSA may sho\v that
htghe-r mode responses may show greater excttauoo of the mezzarune when compared to ELF. These
should be considered and 1ncludOO in the column desagn. 1f appropriate. For example, 1fthe out-of-plane
forces resuJung from an RSA shoo' that the mezzansne fOrces 1ncrease by a factor of tY.'O, for the column
of interest, the column size-may need to tncrease to a Wl4 x 370. Destgning the mezzamne a.~ a seJf-
supporungstructure can "prote-cf' the pnmary latera1 force-restsung system tbr condittons where member
size tncreases are untenable.
20 t81BC SEAOC StrocturaVSeismic Design Manual, \obi. 1 207

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
DesigJ Example 41 • Combined Loading for SCBF Column Supporting Mezzanine §12.4. 1
The same methodology applies to condit:tons where exterior elemems (e.g.• daddmg) are connected to
SFRS colwnns at discrete locatioos. One could calculate an F11 force to apply to the colwnn weak axis or
perforltl a mote advanced analysis to dettrmme the seism1c force tnftue.nce on the frame coJwnn.
For other SFRS systt.nlS. foc example BRBF. one may consider destgmng the column considering the
a.\:laJ forces associated ·wnh system yielding utstead of using omega-JeveJ forces {tf govermng the design),
as allowed by butldtng codes and standards. In some cases. designing frame columns tOr yieldtng braces
co:mbtned with out-of-plane forces may requtre desag.n modifications to prevem adverse be-hav1or ofhtghly
ductile members tntended to rema.in elasuc throughout full system )'lt-ld.
208 @Seismicisolation
2018/BC S£40C Slroct....USeisrmc Design Manual, 1ib1. 1
@Seismicisolation
SEAOC Wind
Design Manual
Design Examples for Wind Forces on Buildings and
Solar Photovoltaic Systems
Based on the 2018 IBC and ACSE/SEI 7-16
The Wind Design Manual provides examples on wind force design

that ill ustrate the practical requirements of provisions in ASCEJ
SEI 7- 16: Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for
Buildings and Other Structures. Practicing structural engineers,
trained designers, building department engineers, other p lan
review agencies, professors and students, can all learn from these
examples of code-compliant designs engineered to achieve good
performance under wind loading.
Developed by the Wind Design Manual Task Group of the
Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOCJ, the
publication draws on the expertise of invited authors from various
parts of the United States. The Wind Design Manual is intended
for nationwide use, with example problems that apply to a variety
of geographic areas. All are presented in a format similar to the
SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manuals.
I wide range of topics is covered:

General topics (4 examples) • Buildings (3 examples)
· Specific topics (2 examples) • Solar Photovoltaic systems (7 examples)
)rder Now! https://www.seaoc.org/page/2018WDM

>EAOC Members are eligible for the ICC member discount when they log-in and order
hrough the SEAOC website.
ICC Members and non-members can order Item 9000518 at shop.iccsafe.org
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Welcome to the
g
..,,··~~
! 7 i 2019 Edition of the SEAOC

!>
"
~
..
CAIJFORNIA
~
-z
0 Blue Book: Seismic Design
Recommendations
This edition of the Blue Book, SEAOC's signature publications,

is the ninth since 1959. This edition represents a multi-year
volunteer effort by the SEAOC Seismology Committee, and it
builds on the work of generations of Seismology Committees
before them.
A lot has changed in 60years. In its first decades, this collection of
interpretations and recommendations from SEAOC's Seismology
Committee served as the basis for the seismic provisions of the
Uniform Building Code {UBC) used in the Western US.
Since the move in the 1990s to a nationa l code-development
process, the Blue Book's tenor has shifted from establishing the
code to interpreting the code for practicing structural engineers
and putting it context. Importantly, the 2019 edition captures
how that context is evolving - from a former focus on "life-safety"
to modern pursuits of performance-based design and resiliency.
while Blue Book tracks the history of an important discipline (as wel l as a proud professiona l
lnization), it is much more than just a piece of the past. You wi ll find the 2019 edition a useful
~renee for your current work and rich in hints about the future.
COVER I'.IOO&SI9
ll IS<J52DG001
lOTH A/10 SAVE!
COVER+ DIGITAl C!Xo!BO 1'.10068HI9
·der your copies today!

800-786-4452 I shop.iccsafe.org
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Z0-1171!
~
llllfR'IMIONAI
~ coor
• COUNCil PcoQie Helping People Btnld a Salcr World"
Top Tools for Structural Design

2018 International Build ing Code Illustrated Handbook
An easy-to-use visual guide to the 2018/BC
Thoroughly updated to address the p.tovisions of the 2018 IBC, this fully-Illustrated guide makes
it easy to undet'S-tand and apply the most critical code ptcwisions. Covering both fire- and life-
safety and structural provisions. this practical resource contains 500+ usef-fdendly diagrams
designed to clarify the application and intent of the rae-. The Handbook pfO\'ides all the
infonnation needed to get construction jobs done fight and achieve compliance. (1,008 pages)
HARD COVER 140011Sl8
POF Dl1ti'NLOAO 189S!M'844
2015 edition is also aV<tllabJ~.
Significant ChangH to the Minimum O..lgo of WOOd Slruetures ASD/

Oe:sign loads and Assoclattd LRFD. Eighth Edition
Cd ttria for Building'S a.nd Other f ully updated to !he 2018 1BC and
Structures (ASCEISEI 7·161 2018 NOS! Covenng the latest
Thi:s handy volume traf'rS!at~ the techruques and standards.. authcn
most noteworthy chaoges to the Donald Bn!)Or. Kelly Colleen and Zeno
ASCE 7-16 toad prov1sions into a Martin lead )'Ou through th& complete
form quie.kly acc.ess•b~ to structural deSign of a wood structure following
the same sequence used in the actual
---
e.ngmeers and other profMsloMIS.
de$ignleonstruction Pf~Xe$$.. Oetaded
In a user-friendly fotmat. this
volume describes 100+ ehanges
aa:ompanae:d by a detailed analysis,
...
c.-It'"-
equabOns. clear illustrations, and
practk:al des.gn examples are featured
and Includes photographs, diagrams, and othet visual aids. throughout the text.
(368 pag..) HARDCOVER 19017S8
SOFTCOVER 19002Sl61
2018 IBC Code and COmmentary, lnclutks Solutions Manual

Volumes 1 and 2 (Chapte« 1-35) Structural load Determi nation:
This hetpful publication cont-aiM the 20181BC and ASCEISEI 7-16
fullll!l<t ol the 20181BC. Including O.scoller how to c-alCulate structural
table:s and figufH. follOwed by loads within the context of
expert cotnmentary at the end of 20!81BC and ASCEISEI 7- 16
each section to help cOde userS tequirements. Thl$ practical guide
under$tand the intent of the code by David A. fanetla contains
provtSions and how to apply them Information engl.neers need to design
effecttvely. buildu'lgS that vttll wtthstand the
(orcM of f13Yity, occupancy, and
enviton.mentaa stress. ll melud:ts
SOFT COVER 13010SI8 deslgo '""'"'pies. lloweharts. and load diagrams that itluslla!t
POFDl1ti'NLOAD 1870Pl8 compl~ bad ptO\I•SiOI'l$. The book explains the proper
SOFT + PDFCOioiBO 13010SP18 J1)pllcatibn o1 ASD.lRFO. and selsmie_load eombmatlons.
ChaptetS cowr oc:ttJpanc.y, roof, rain_, snow. Ice.. 'Nind. seismic.,
Volumes are also sold "Separately. and tsut1amlloads. Th<oughout. emphasis fs placed on th&
2018 lEece Oxl• at1d cam~rtrary is itlstJ iMJJtabl~ pfopet a-ppticatiO!'I ol load pr011tslonswithin the scope of
everyday p.actico. (512pages)
SOFTC!MR
POF OOWN1.lWl
Order your structural tools today! @Seismicisolation

@Seismicisolation
1-800-786-4452 I www.iccsafe.org/books
:iet FREE access to hundreds of
CC resources and view the largest
:ollection of code titles
CC's Digital Codes Library (codes.iccsafe.org) conveniently
1rovides access to the latest code text while on the go, at home
1r in the office, in an easy-to-navigate format.
Available anywhere 24n
Use on any mobile or

digital device
- @Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Learn how to use th1s powerful tool at codes.iccsafe.org

2018IBC SEAOC Structural Seismic Design Manual Vol.1, Code Application Examples, 2019 234pp PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2018IBC SEAOC Structural Seismic Design Manual Vol.1, Code Application Examples, 2019 234pp PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

@Seismicisolation

F "" Printing: May 2020

ISBN: 978- 1-60983-996-3

ii 2018/BC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, \01. 1

Structutal Engineers Association ofCaJitbmia (SEAOC)

SEAOC. attts sole discreuon. may issue \\T1nen errata.

2018 JBC SEAOC SmJcturai/Seismic Design Manual. \obl 1 iii

Refere-nces . ..... ..... ... .

Otsigu Exam pit 6

Otsigu Exam pit 7

2018/SC SEAOC Structuraii.Seismic Design Manual. \lbl. 1 v

D<slgn Exam pi< 20

Dtsign Exam pi< 21

Design Exam pit- 22

yi 20 18 JBC SEAOC Structufai/Seismic Design Manual. \tJI. 1

Otsign Exam pit 28

Otsign Exam pit 29

Otsign Exam pit 30

Otsign Exam pit 31

Otsign Exam pit 34

Otsign Exa mplt 35

2018/BC SEAOC SttucturaVSeismk Desig'J Manual, \01. 1 vii

Dt:s.ign E..u mplt 37

viii 2018 IBC SEAOC Strocturai!Seismic Design Manual, l.tll. 1

2018 1BC SEAOC SlfiJCtlJraJ/Seismic Desjp1 ManuaL \obi. 1 ix

This manual comprises four volumes:

Volume I: Code Appllcauon Examples

Rafael Sabel!• and Katy Briggs

2C)t8 JBC SEAOC StructuraJ/SeM"tic Design Manual~. 1 xi

2018 IBC SEAOC StructuratiSei.smic Des;gtl Manual, \b'. 1 xiii

Jtnniftr Gros~ S.E.~ A.S.\Mialt, Dtgtnkolb E-. ngi.nttrs-Autbor of Etamplt S9

Mtlliisa Vicktry, S.E., Ass()datt, Otgtuk()lb Engi.nttrS-Author ()f Etamplt S9

2018/BC SEAOC StructuraVSeismic Desig'J Manual. \01. 1 XV

2018-2019 SEAOC S<ismology Commilt« 2019-2020 SEAOC Seismology Committee

Productaon and art was provaded by the International Code Council.

XVi 2018 IBC SEAOC Stroct.ura~ Design Manual, l.tll. 1

SEAOC Seismology Conuntnee. Recommended Lateral Forr:e Require11~nt.s and Comnumtary

2018/SC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual. \tiL 1 xvii

F- Figure &]- Equation

2018 IBC SEAOC StrocturaiiSeismk Design Manual, \til. 1 xix

2018 IBC SEAOC Strocturai/Seismic Design Manual. \lbl. 1 1

DETERMINE THE FOLLOWING:

I. Mapped risk-targeted ma'<m\um considered eanhquake-(MCEa) spectral response accelernlion

3. Destgn spectral re.<;<ponse acce!erauon parameters SM and 5 01 •

1. Mapped MCER Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters

2. Site Coefficients F. and F. and MCER Spectral Response Acceleration

F.= 1.384 Tl 1.4- 1

S.,s = F, Ss = 1.384(0.52g) = 0. 720g Eq I 1.4- 1

3. Design Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters S 0 s and S01 §11.4.4

2 2018 IBC SEAOC StructuraJ/Sei smic Design Manual. \AJI. 1

DETERMINE THE FOLLOWING:

I. Des1g.n response specuwn.

1. Design Response Spectrum §11.4.6

Given lhe values for thas example-~

T0 = 0.2 S01 1 SDS= 0.2(0.34g/ 0.55g)= 0.12 sec

2018 IBC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, W. 1 3

DETERMINE THE FOLLOWING:

I . Design response spectrum.

1. Design Response Spectrum §11.4.6

T0 = 0.2 Sml SIJS

Given lhe vaJues for this example.

T0 = 0.2 s,,t Sus= 0.2(0.34g/ 0.55g)= 0.12 sec

The specual response accelerotton, SIP ts c:akulrued as foJiows: