2023 STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING SUMMIT

anaheim: disneyland hotel| November 7-10, 2023

EARLY BIRD PRICING ENDS 9/30!

Join the best and brightest SE thought leaders this
November! Engage in 14+ hours of high-quality education,
reconnect with colleagues, have fun with friends, and
network with suppliers showcasing the latest in technology
and services to help you be the best you can be.

ncseasummit.com
 STRUCTURE
NCSEA | CASE | SEI SEPTEMBER 2023

cONcRETE/
MASONRY

INSIDE: Concrete Art Exhibit 10

Perforated Brickwork in Anchored Veneer 13
Ferndale Earthquake Observations 22
Two Approaches to Slender Masonry Walls 44
ICC-ES provides total conformity assessment
solutions for building products
•Over 90 years of industry experience
•Experts in building product testing, inspection and certification
•Acceptance Criteria development for innovative products
•Trusted by code officials for ease in approvals and installation
23-22862

Look for the ICC

www.icc-es.org | 1-800-423-6587 ICC-ES Mark of
Confidence™
 MAPEI
STRENGTHENS.

MAPEI
RESTORES.

MAPEI
PROTECTS.

• Concrete Repair Mortars

• Corrosion Protection
• Construction Grouts
• Waterproofing
• Sealants and Joint Fillers
• Coatings and Sealers
• Epoxy Adhesives
• Cementitious Flooring Systems
• Cure and Seals
• Densifiers
• Structural Strengthening Products
• Precast
• Epoxy Adhesives

Your single-source provider for construction projects,

restoration, strengthening and corrosion protection
MAPEI offers a full range of products for concrete restoration, waterproofing and structural
strengthening. Globally, MAPEI’s system solutions have been utilized for such structures as
bridges, dams, tunnels, highways, parking garages, stadiums and high-rises.

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

 ADVERTISER index
CSI - Computers & Structures, Inc. NCSEA Summit
Please support these advertisers
STRUCTURE ®

CIRCULATION
CTS Cement PCA-Portland Cement Association
subscriptions@structuremag.org
DEWALT RISA
ENERCALC Schaefer EDITORIAL BOARD
ICC-ES Simpson Strong-Tie Chair John A. Dal Pino, S.E.
Claremont Engineers Inc., Oakland, CA
Holcim Tech Sales, LLC chair@STRUCTUREmag.org
MAPEI
Jeremy L. Achter, S.E., LEED AP
ARW Engineers, Ogden, UT

September Erin Conaway, P.E.

AISC, Littleton, CO

STRUCTURE
2023 Linda M. Kaplan, P.E.
Pennoni, Pittsburgh, PA

Digital Issue
NCSEA | CASE | SEI SEPTEMBER 2023

cONcRETE/ Charles “Chuck” F. King, P.E.

MASONRY
Urban Engineers of New York, New York, NY

Available Only at Nicholas Lang, P.E.

INSIDE: Concrete Art Exhibit 10
Perforated Brickwork in Anchored Veneer 13
Ferndale Earthquake Observations 22
Two Approaches to Slender Masonry Walls 44
STRUCTUREmag.org Vice President Engineering & Advocacy, Masonry
Concrete Masonry and Hardscapes Association (CMHA)

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

Gilsanz Murray Steficek, LLP, New York, NY

Jason McCool, P.E.

Robbins Engineering Consultants, Little Rock, AR

Brian W. Miller
Cast Connex Corporation, Davis, CA

Evans Mountzouris, P.E.

Retired, Milford, CT

Kenneth Ogorzalek, P.E., S.E.

KPFF Consulting Engineers, San Francisco, CA (WI)

John “Buddy” Showalter, P.E.

International Code Council, Washington, DC

Eytan Solomon, P.E., LEED AP

On the Cover: A 3D printed concrete sculpture Silman, New York, NY

from an exhibit at the National Museum of Jeannette M. Torrents, P.E., S.E., LEED AP
Industrial History, located in the former seat of Bethlehem JVA, Inc., Boulder, CO

Steel, Pennsylvania.
EDITORIAL STAFF
Photo Courtesy of Xingjian Wang. Executive Editor Alfred Spada
aspada@ncsea.com

Production
production@structuremag.org

MARKETING & ADVERTISING SALES

Director for Sales, Marketing
& Business Development
ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

Monica Shripka
Tel: 773-974-6561
monica.shripka@STRUCTUREmag.org

STRUCTURE magazine (ISSN 1536 4283) is published monthly

®

by The National Council of Structural Engineers Associations (a nonprofit

Association), 20 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 750, Chicago, IL 60606
312.649.4600. Periodical postage paid at Chicago, Il, and at additional
mailing offices. STRUCTURE magazine, Volume 30, Number 9, © 2023
by The National Council of Structural Engineers Associations, all rights
reserved. Subscription services, back issues and subscription information
tel: 312-649-4600, or write to STRUCTURE magazine Circulation, 20 N.
Wacker Drive, Suite 750, Chicago, IL 60606.The publication is distributed
to members of The National Council of Structural Engineers Associations
through a resolution to its bylaws, and to members of CASE and SEI paid
by each organization as nominal price subscription for its members as a
benefit of their membership. Yearly Subscription in USA $75; $40 For
Students; Canada $90; $60 for Canadian Students; Foreign $135, $90
for foreign students. Editorial Office: Send editorial mail to: STRUCTURE
magazine, Attn: Editorial, 20 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 750, Chicago, IL
60606. POSTMASTER: Send Address changes to STRUCTURE magazine,
20 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 750, Chicago, IL 60606.

STRUCTURE is a registered trademark of the National Council of Structural

Engineers Associations (NCSEA). Articles may not be reproduced in whole
or in part without the written permission of the publisher.

SEP T E M B ER 2023 3
 Specify more
applications with
one connector.

Now you can specify a single connector as a tension tie or holdown.

New from Simpson Strong-Tie, the code-listed LTTP2 light tension tie securely attaches wood joists,
studs, or posts to concrete or masonry walls and foundations. With allowable loads 25% higher than
previous models, it enables greater design flexibility. This versatile connector has two distinct nailing
patterns for horizontal installation as a tension tie with I-joist purlins or 2x solid sawn purlins, plus an
extruded anchor bolt hole that accommodates multiple bolt diameters. The LTTP2 also is suitable for
®
vertical installation as a holdown, and can be fastened with nails or Strong-Drive SD Connector screws.
®
Select the LTTP2 and Simpson Strong-Tie fasteners for your next project. To learn more, visit
go.strongtie.com/lttp2 or call (800) 999-5099.

Residential Solutions | Products, Software and Service for Smarter Building

© 2023 Simpson Strong-Tie Company Inc. LTTP23-S

 Contents Cover Feature
10 A MUSEUM EXHIBIT ABOUT
THE FUTURE OF CONCRETE
By Xingjian Wang, John T. Fox, Ph.D, P.E., Clay J. Naito, Ph.D., P.E., F.PCI, Nik Nikolov,
Registered Architect (R.A.), AIA, NCARB, LEED AP, Urinrin Otite, Paolo Bocchini, Ph.D. F.SEI

Additive manufacturing is a rapidly developing technology that is

already transforming many sectors and has the potential to usher in a
SEPTEM BER 2023 new paradigm.

Features
32 THE FUTURE IS LOOKING UP.
LITERALLY. THE EVOLUTION OF
PORTLAND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
By Christopher Pitt, P.E., S.E., LEED A.P., Associate, KPFF

The approximately $2 Billion Portland International Airport Terminal Core

Redevelopment Project, located in Portland, OR, is led by the Port of Portland
as owner, with a design team featuring ZGF Architects and KPFF as Structural
Engineer. It is currently being built by Hoffman-Skanska Joint Venture as CMGC.
The project is summarized in Part One, published in the June 2023 Structure,
and features many unique structural solutions.

Columns and Departments

7 Editorial 22 Infocus 44 Structural Methods
A New Path for SEI Observations from the Tall, Slender Masonry Walls
By Stephanie Slocum, P.E. December 20, 2022, By Edwin Huston, P.E., S.E.
Ferndale Earthquake
By John A. Dal Pino, with assistance from Claire Hu,
8 Structural Influencers 46 Structural Resilience
Elizabeth Bognar, and Hongxun Yang
Kate Stillwell Hollow Reinforced Clay Masonry
Enhances Resiliency
13 Masonry 38 Structural Forum By Steven Judd, S.E.
Understanding Developing
Sunlight and Shade
Issues in Access to Design Data
By Cortney Fried, P.E., 56 Insights
By Joan Malana Kennedy, BSc Architecture,
MSc Building Science, MSc Construction Law
The Future of Concrete BIM
16 Structural Maintenance and Dispute Resolution, UAP, FCIArb, FPIArb, AMAE By Dr. Will F. Ikerd, P.E., Ph.D.

Concrete Defects and

Preventive Maintenance 40 Structural Efficiency In Every Issue
By Ahmed Clayiff, P.E., CBSI Maximizing Masonry’s 3 Advertiser Index
Efficiency 21 Anchor Guide
18 Structural Flexibility By Philippe J. Ledent, P.E., S.E.
50 NCSEA News
Deflections of Concrete Structures
Using Bilinear Flexibility 52 SEI Update
By Neil Wexler, Ph.D., P.E., Hoonhee Jeoung, P.E., 54 CASE in Point
Nissim Elmann, P.E.

Publication of any article, image, or advertisement in STRUCTURE® magazine does not constitute endorsement by NCSEA, CASE, SEI, the Publisher, or the Editorial Board. Authors, contributors, and advertisers retain sole responsibility for the content of their submissions.
STRUCTURE magazine is not a peer-reviewed publication. Readers are encouraged to do their due diligence through personal research on topics.

SEP T E M B ER 2023 5
 EDITORIAL
A New Path for SEI
Building a bridge to a brighter future.
By Stephanie Slocum, P.E.
H ow will the structural engineering profes-
sion keep up in a rapidly evolving world?
This question has been on my mind for a long
time and was brought to the forefront with my
election to the SEI Board of Governors in the
fall of 2020 as our profession grappled with the
unknown long-term impacts of the pandemic.
How structural engineers work has changed.
Compared to when I started my career 20 years
ago, the industry is more connected, more col-
laborative, and less hierarchical. It also requires
professionals to lead themselves and their teams
earlier in their careers.
Organizations that support our profession
must also evolve. I’ve had the privilege of serv-
ing alongside structural engineering leaders on
SEI’s BOG and experienced the dedication of
volunteers serving our industry. That dedica-
tion has led the BOG to determine that an SEI
Reorganization is needed to best serve members
and the profession.
This article, written in collaboration with SEI
Board Members, will explain why it’s happen-
ing and what it means to you.
Why SEI is Reorganizing
SEI was founded in 1996 under parent organi-
zation ASCE. In 2008, the SEI vision statement
established four SEI priorities:
• A unique, fully engaged profession with a
strong identity
• Recognized for the contribution the pro-
fessional makes to public safety and risk
management, economic and sustainable use
of resources, the use of innovative technolo-
gies, and the creation of inspiring structures
• Stewards of the built environment
• Attractive to the best and brightest
In 2019, NCSEA, CASE, and SEI collabo-
rated on the Vision for the Future of Structural
Engineering, resulting in 10 key initiatives that
also align with SEI’s original vision statement.
This fundamental vision has not
changed and will be unaffected by the SEI
Reorganization. The challenge is that over
time, how SEI contributes to this vision has
morphed into a long list of activities that may
or may not have evolved in direct connection
to the original vision.
SEI’s original organizational structure has
STRUCTURE magazine
remained mostly unchanged since its initial
establishment 25+ years ago. As is typical with
growing organizations, organizational struc-
tures must evolve to keep pace with members
and industry needs or risk becoming stagnant.
SEI has experienced growing pains. They
include excess bureaucracy, communication
silos, struggles with resource allocation, slow
and unequal pathways to leadership for rising
stars depending on where you volunteered
within the organization, and a lack of strategic
focus due to an overwhelming list of “to-dos”
to keep the outdated structure functional.
SEI’s Reorganization is in response to inter-
nal and external challenges and opportunities
shaping the structural engineering profession.
What are SEI’S
Reorganization Goals?
SEI’s Reorganization started with internal
conversations and a study completed before
my time serving on the BOG. The process
also included consultative forums with SEI
leaders and gathering input and survey data
from members.
SEI’s BOG voted to move forward with
developing the transition plans for SEI’s
Reorganization in Fall 2022 and is grateful
for the leadership of countless volunteers in
developing the plans for a brighter future.
Reorganization goals include:
• Increase collaboration and knowledge-
sharing throughout SEI by moving from
the current five Division structure to a two
Community structure.
• Reorganize the SEI BOG from a representa-
tive structure to a strategic board structure
for long-term operation efficiency.
• Become a more nimble, responsive orga-
nization to meet industry and member
needs as the pace of change accelerates.
• Focus the efforts and resources of SEI to
establish and meet SEI priorities for the
profession’s advancement.
• Increase leadership opportunities and
pathways to leadership for rising stars.
The new SEI organizational structure
will be implemented following new bylaws
approval of parent organization ASCE,
estimated in October 2023.
New SEI Structure Highlights
Highlights of the new organizational struc-
ture include:
• The size of SEI’s BOG is reduced. Studies
show that large boards struggle with effective
decision-making, and this shift is intended to
refocus the BOG on being a strategic guiding
hand in supporting the vision. A strategic board
requires a more collaborative and communi-
cative governance approach which empowers
volunteers to execute the vision.
• The organizational structure shifts to a two-
community structure instead of the current
five-division structure. The new structure is
intended to break down communication and
collaboration silos and reduce the hierarchy and
bureaucracy inherent in a more complicated
organizational structure.
• A focus on collaboration, knowledge-sharing,
and leadership pathways for young profession-
als and rising stars
SEI’s Reorganization comes down to this: better
communication and collaboration so that SEI can
best address priorities as an organization and better
serve the structural engineering profession.
The SEI Reorganization Benefits
The Industry
The overarching goal of SEI’s Reorganization is to
better serve its members and the structural engineer-
ing profession.
The Reorganization allows SEI to be more streamlined
and agile, better responding to industry trends and
member needs. It enhances leadership opportunities
for rising stars and young professionals, contributing
to a more dynamic and inclusive profession.
Leading organizations embrace the need to evolve so
that they can best support the people that make up our
profession. SEI’s Reorganization is how we prepare for
a future in which knowledge-sharing, collaboration,
strategy, and growth are all prioritized.
You can read more details about the reorganiza-
tion structure on SEI’s website: https://go.asce.
org/3P2wBF7 ■
Stephanie Slocum, P.E. is the Founder
of Engineers Rising LLC, based in State
College, PA, and SEI President-Elect FY24.
(stephanie@engineersrising.com).
SEP T E M B ER 2023 7
 structural INFLUENCERS
Kate Stillwell
Kate Stillwell is a structural engineer and entrepreneur working at the
intersection of physical and financial resilience. As a structural engineer,
Kate has worked with Greg Luth & Associates, Degenkolb Engineers,
and Holmes Consulting. In catastrophe modeling, she has worked at
EQECAT (now CoreLogic) as the Product Manager of earthquake models
worldwide, and she was the founding Executive Director of the Global
Earthquake Model Foundation at the ROSE School in Pavia, Italy.
Kate founded and leads InsurTech startup Jumpstart, the first company
to bring parametric insurance to consumers, starting with earthquake
risk in California. Jumpstart was acquired in 2021 by Neptune Flood,
where, as President of Parametric Insurance, Kate is now responsible for
new product development and for continuing to lead sales of Jumpstart’s
parametric insurance.
As a side project, Kate co-founded FireBreak, a consumer app for
wildfire self-inspection, mitigation, and insurance eligibility.
Kate is a Past President and Fellow of SEAONC and a co-founder
of the Building Ratings Committee (BRC), which later became the
Resilience Committee. With other BRC members, Kate co-founded the
US Resiliency Council. Kate is also a longtime member and Housner
Fellow of EERI.
Kate holds an MS in Civil Engineering from Stanford University, an
MBA from the Haas School of Business at UC Berkeley, and a Bachelor
of Civil Engineering from the University of Minnesota.

Your working career started in a traditional engineering office.
Before we move on to the present, what did you learn then, or
better yet, who did you meet that proved useful later?
Mentors and muses come in all ages and experience levels. Some
of my fondest co-workers are the most unorthodox - like Greg
Luth, my first boss. Another person who influentially shaped my
career was former Degenkolb CEO, Chris Poland. We didn’t always
see eye to eye, but his involvement in real estate and public policy
circles inspired me to see the bigger “pond” in which structural
engineers work. Safe buildings are necessary for a resilient society,
but they’re not sufficient without equitable governance, social ties,
and economic stability. Another key player who shaped my journey
is Laurie Johnson, particularly her post-Katrina research in New
Orleans on social effects of mega-disasters.
After several years in the AEC industry, you shifted focus and went
off to business school at Berkeley. May we ask why?
Precisely to learn about and participate in those “wider circles”
that structural engineering touches – to apply the time and talents
of engineers to the social and economic dimensions of disaster
recovery. I’m pretty sure such a vague purpose statement would
not earn admission to business school today, but lucky for me, that
was the dark ages.
Were you planning on going back into structural engineering?
Yes! I was too proud to leave my credentials behind! Structural engineers
have pivotal gravitas in policy making, which mere business people can
only imitate. As it turns out, it has been many years since I have used my
SE license in practice, but I keep a toe in the door by participating in
SEAONC and staying in touch with my structural engineering friends.
There is a lot of talk these days about community resilience. But
more than talk about it, you actually did something. Would you
tell us a little more about your motivations and goals?
It goes back to Katrina, a major galvanizing force not just for me,
but for many resilience-minded professionals. As I watched real-time
footage of the levees breaking, I felt a visceral pit in my stomach,
seeing the social inequities and thinking, “after the next big earth-
quake, my hometown of Oakland will be the next New Orleans.”
I knew that the next big earthquake would be a triple-whammy to
society and the economy: 1) FEMA is the first to admit that public
aid is too little too late; 2) earthquakes are excluded from insurance;
and worst of all, 3) a majority of Americans have less than $1000
in liquid savings – not just the poor, but people in all walks of life.
Our personal finances have no buffer to face widespread disruption.
Flash-forward to the COVID-19 pandemic, which made this truth
all too evident.
When did you decide to start your own company? And what
compelled you to do this?
As far back as 2006. When Katrina struck, I had just started busi-
ness school. The following semester, in a real estate finance class
by late professor Dwight Jaffee, I learned about catastrophe (“cat”)
bonds, large-dollar-amount hedging instruments where companies
swap their natural hazard risk for financial risk. In one of the first cat
bonds, dating from 1997, Tokyo Disneyland arranged a deal where if
a M7.3+ earthquake occurred in a specified geographical box in the
next three years, they would receive $100M from the counterparty,
which would make up for some of their lost operational revenue. Of
course, they had to pay to offload their risk, by way of an “interest
rate” on the $100M, but it was a way of protecting their cash flow

8 STRUCTURE magazine
and avoiding debt. A financial buffer!
That’s when I made the connection. We needed “micro” catastrophe
bonds for earthquakes (and floods)! That’s how Jumpstart originated.
But it was ten years before the technology and data were sufficiently
mature to bring the idea to reality at scale.
How does Jumpstart work?
Jumpstart sells earthquake insurance that makes immediate $10,000
lump sum payments in areas that experience ground shaking greater
than a pre-specified amount. The payout does not require physi-
cal damage but rather is intended to pay unexpected expenses and
“jump-start” the recovery process.
Starting any business is challenging enough, but entering the
capital-intensive and highly regulated insurance industry is an
entirely different matter. What did you learn that our readers
would benefit from?
The importance of intention cannot be understated. When your
intention is clear, well-articulated, and authentically motivated to
make good in the world, doors will open that would otherwise stay
closed. As one example, we engaged with the insurance regulator early
and often, whereas a conventional insurance incumbent might take
the conservative view of not engaging - as a strategy to avoid the risk
that regulators might scrutinize unrelated profitable operations. As
a result, we were unblocked from proceeding with our unorthodox
approach, whereas the incumbent, in an abundance of prudence,
might conclude not to proceed at all.
Just as structural engineering attracts people whose intrinsic motiva-
tion is to “just build stuff,” people with an intrinsic motivation to “just
make money” are drawn to insurance and finance. Unfortunately,
this means the insurance industry is disproportionately populated
by people with intentions that conflict with the common good,
and this leads to widespread mistrust. More than once, I received
feedback from partners – long after a deal was sealed – that the
deciding factor to work with us was that our resilience motive was
“a breath of fresh air.”
Can you say a bit more about what it was like entering an industry
at a level where women are few and far between?
One of the best pieces of advice I’ve received in recent memory,
and which I continue to lean on today, was an offhand remark in
2014 by my dear friend and EERI member Charlie Huyck, “go
with your strengths.” Every person brings their uniqueness to a
situation or negotiation. The trick is to be aware of it and learn
how to leverage it. For example, I’m a believer that the advantage
of sharing information to help “lift all boats” far outweighs the risks
of a competitor stealing an idea. As a result, I’m not known as the
most aggressive “winner” from a sales perspective, but the phone
doesn’t stop ringing for potential partnerships and collaboration.
Getting Jumpstart up and running is memorable in itself. Would
you share a few other achievements that would inspire others?
You’re asking me to stroke my own ego … so it’s hard to know how
to respond. Make a joke to signal my humility? Pontificate on the
virtue of gratitude? Take the bait and regurgitate my CV? Since the
point of this question is to inspire readers, here’s what I’ll say: One
of the hardest things in life is to act with courage. Even to know
what the courageous response would be in a situation. Sometimes
acting or speaking with courage causes pain, even if it’s the right
thing to do. On a recent episode on the podcast Hidden Brain,
guest Todd Kashdan described our current culture as “addicted to
comfort.” But pain is temporary and often a necessary part of the
process leading to a just outcome. It’s natural to struggle when trying
to discern between necessary pain vs. pain that tells us something is
really wrong – and in either case, use that pain as a “helpful friend”
who guides us toward courage.
Successful firms plan for ownership transition and firm longevity.
But a start-up must be entirely different. What needs to be done
every day to keep the ship afloat, so to speak?
A close friend, also a startup founder, asked me yesterday for a
referral to a bookkeeper. The truth is, the founder of a startup is
simultaneously both CEO and custodian. Yes, I enjoy the benefits
of plum speaking engagements, but I also – quite literally – took out
the trash and did other chores, including, to my friend’s disappoint-
ment (but not surprise), balancing the books. On the question of
ownership transition, I liken the journey of a startup to a celebrity
maintaining a social media account: it’s a continuous investment in
perceived value. Startups are valued almost exclusively on intangibles.
What is the value of your vision? Your customer feedback? The
force of personality of the founders? The loyalty of the employees?
You cannot abandon sales and operations, but there’s an additional
responsibility (and privilege) of thinking long and hard about non-
monetary assets.
Concerning mentoring, we assume that you have had many, and
that you mentor others yourself. What is your approach, and what
have you found that works best?
Some of the most powerful questions, on either the giving or
receiving end, are “What haven’t I asked that I should be asking?”
and “How can I be most helpful?” The common thread is a lack of
presumption. We’re trained to be experts – to KNOW the ANSWER
to things, and I’m one of the worst offenders. But mentorship is
all about relationships, and relationships work best when we meet
people where they’re at, rather than presuming what they need, or
what they want to hear. I sometimes have to force myself – and I
don’t always succeed – to stop talking and ask the listener if they
actually want advice before I just dish it out.
Work-life balance has been a hot topic for several years. Recently
doing just enough to get by is a trend too. What advice would
you give to young entrepreneurs?
A repeated theme in my responses so far is the power of awareness:
knowing – authentically – your motivation. Your strengths. Your
emotions and the signals they’re sending you. The limitations of
your knowledge. So many of us, including myself, have poor aware-
ness of our boundaries, and this can lead to resentment and the
temptation to “quietly quit.” But there’s the flip side, too: knowing
the full extent of our capabilities. Nelson Mandela captured this
in his famous inaugural speech, “Our deepest fear is not that we
are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond
measure. It is our light, not our darkness, that most frightens us.”
The challenge, then, is to become more aware – even if it brings
(temporary) pain – of our capability to be the change we want to
see in the world.
Regarding your personal legacy, what do you think you will be
remembered for, and/or what are you most proud of?
Making something where nothing existed before. It’s what I love
about cooking with leftovers. It’s what makes it so gratifying to
start a venture. And it’s the fundamental pull of the engineering
profession: the creative force made manifest.■
SEP T E M B ER 2023 9

Figure 1 3D printed products for the exhibit.
A dditive manufacturing (AM) is a rapidly developing technology that
is already transforming many sectors and has the potential to usher
in a new paradigm. The automated production of structures is one of the
potentially most impactful applications of AM, also called “3D printing.”
A group of engineers and architects at Lehigh University investigated a
technique called “Particle bed 3D printing by selective binder activation” to
manufacture objects made of concrete. Their interests started with structural
engineering and progressively expanded to include environmental impact,
architecture, and topology optimization. The team also partnered with
Buzzi Unicem USA Inc., an international cement producer headquartered
in the Lehigh Valley (PA). Together, they are collaborating with the National
Museum of Industrial History, located in the former seat of Bethlehem Steel,
Pennsylvania, to showcase this technique and its potential through an exhibit.
The exhibit is an opportunity to reflect on the past, present, and future of
cement in Eastern Pennsylvania. This area historically has had a high density
of companies in the cement sector. The PA Department of Community and
Economic Development supported part of this research. Figure 1 shows a
10 STRUCTURE magazine
A Museum
Exhibit About
The Future of
Concrete
By Xingjian Wang, John T. Fox, Ph.D, P.E.,
Clay J. Naito, Ph.D., P.E., F.PCI, Nik Nikolov,
Registered Architect (R.A.), AIA, NCARB, LEED
AP, Urinrin Otite, Paolo Bocchini, Ph.D. F.SEI
3D printed totem, two freestanding columns and one portal frame, which
are part of the exhibit.
Manufacturing Process
The first applications of additive manufacturing to concrete consisted of
3D printing disposable formwork made of polymers. This approach enables
some interesting shapes that would be difficult to achieve with traditional
formwork, but it does not 3D print concrete directly, nor does it funda-
mentally change the manufacturing process. Two types of 3D printing
techniques exist for automated and direct concrete fabrication, with differ-
ent technology readiness levels and market penetration. The first one is the
material extrusion method which adopts the same 3D printing approach
of household 3D printers for plastics. With this method, the operators
mix cement, water, and aggregates to form plastic concrete which is then
pumped and deposited through a nozzle connected to a computer- controlled
arm. This approach has been used for several demonstrations, including
the construction of small houses and some military structures. The nozzle
extrudes the plastic concrete to form layers of the structure, one on top of
the other, which means that the structure can only grow vertically, with
limited overhangs and challenges when windows or doors are installed. In
contrast, with the particle bed printing technique developed at Lehigh, a
machine uses a roller to distribute uniformly onto a platform a thin layer
of a specifically engineered dry powder, including cement, fine sand, and
in some cases, additives. Then, an aqueous liquid is jetted onto the layer
at selected locations to activate cement hydration. The process is repeated,
layer after layer, until the structure is complete. Notably, the powder that
is not activated by the liquid stays in place and supports the subsequent
layers, enabling the creation of cavities, overhangs, and any possible shape,
even those that could never be created with formwork or with extrusion (see
Figure 2). After printing, the object remains in the powder bed for 24 hours
to have sufficient early strength to undergo postprocessing. After a day, the
scientists at Lehigh take the printed structure out of the powder bed, clean
and remove all the powder that was not activated, and perform heat treat-
ment if needed. Then, they immerse the object in water to complete curing,
usually for 14 to 28 days. This technique can reach a resolution of 300 ×
450 dpi, so that precise details can be rendered in the manufactured objects.

Challenges and Solutions

Figure 2 3D printed objects with many cavities and thin members.
A critical step of the process is cleaning the object after printing. With only
24 hours of curing in the powder bed, the structure is far from having its full
strength. In these conditions, there is a risk of breaking the object and com- set as a design domain and studied as a reference. By applying topology
promising its integrity, especially for designs with thin elements (Figure 2). optimization, an optimized design could be obtained with the objective
Therefore, it is essential to design a powder mix that can achieve fast curing, of maximizing the stiffness of the beam and the constraint of reducing
and the Lehigh team accomplished that by using calcium sulfoaluminate by 30% the material. A numerical simulation to predict the maximum
cement (CSA), which leads to an early compressive strength of up to 0.9 capacity and breaking pattern of the optimized beam clearly shows that
MPa (130 psi) and can be safely manipulated after only 24 hours. Another the failure occurs at the external diagonals of the structure, where the
benefit of having a dry powder based on CSA is its fast water absorption. tensile stress is concentrated. The experimental results are in good agree-
Other mixes lead to very considerable “bleeding,” which means that water ment with the numerical simulation, especially in terms of determining
spreads far beyond the point where it is jetted, and the resulting object is the failure mechanism.
just a blob. Instead, mixes based on CSA absorb water very quickly, almost Figure 4 shows the test results for the conventional plain concrete beam
entirely prevent bleeding, and enable very high accuracy and small details. (reference) and the optimized beams. The optimized beams have stiffness
similar to the conventional beam (plain beam stiffness: 4.89 × 104 lb/in,
optimized beam stiffness: 4.40 × 104 lb/in) while reducing the material
A New Design
Approach Based on
Topology Optimization
Traditional design approaches
only leverage some of the free-
dom of shape offered by particle
bed printing. For this reason, the
team at Lehigh combines this
new manufacturing technique
with a design approach based on
topology optimization (TO). This
computational approach identi-
fies an optimized shape for the
structure in the design domain
based on the desired objectives
and constraints. Figure 3 shows
a simple example application on
a four-point bending beam. A
conventional rectangular cross-
section beam with unit width was Figure 3 Workflow of the case study.

SEP T E M B ER 2023 11
 aims at going even beyond that by opening completely new horizons for
concrete. The complete and unprecedented freedom of shape makes concrete
behave like a new material requiring new structural and architectural design
approaches. This technique is still in the early stages of its development, but
the scientific results obtained so far and the interest of a national museum to
create an exhibit on this as a form of art, technology, and creative expression
are a testament to its potential. This approach enables innovative shapes,
and even more importantly, it allows designers to use material only where
it is most effective. The resulting reduction of the needed material can also
have a considerable impact on carbon emissions. The current exhibit at the
National Museum of Industrial History in Bethlehem (PA) is a wonderful
opportunity for students, scientists, practitioners, and the general public to
learn more about this revolutionary technique.■
Xingjian Wang is a doctoral student in Structural Engineering at Lehigh University
(xiwa17@lehigh.edu).

John T. Fox, Ph.D., P.E., is Associate Professor of Environmental Engineering at

Lehigh University (jtf211@lehigh.edu).

Figure 4 Experimental results of two types of beams: (a) conventional plain concrete Clay J. Naito, Ph.D, P.E., F.PCI, is a Professor of Structural Engineering at Lehigh
beam (triangular markers) and (b) optimized concrete beams (circular markers). University (cjn3@lehigh.edu).

by 30%, which leads to benefits in terms of weight, cost, and environ- Nik Nikolov, Registered Architect (R.A.), AIA, NCARB, LEED AP, is an Associate
mental impact. Professor of Architecture at Lehigh University (nik@lehigh.edu).

Urinrin Otite is a doctoral student in Structural Engineering at Lehigh University

Conclusions
All concrete 3D printing approaches endeavor to automate traditional con-
crete manufacturing. Particle bed 3D printing by selective binder activation
(ubo221@lehigh.edu).
Paolo Bocchini, Ph.D., F.SEI, is a Professor of Civil Engineering, Director of
Graduate Programs in Civil and Environmental Engineering, and Director of the
Catastrophe Modeling Center at Lehigh University (paolo.bocchini@lehigh.edu).

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

We’re a nimble team with offices,

projects + people across the country.
We’re looking to partner with clients and
hire individuals that bring their best every
day. Our flexible work policy empowers
our team members to both design cool
structures + make it to that dance recital.

byald yyyy ayaay

fyllyw yyyy aaaayaa
lead the field schaefer-inc.com/human-resources

12 STRUCTURE magazine
MASONRY
Sunlight and Shade
Incorporating Perforated Brickwork into Anchored Brick Veneer.
By Cortney Fried, P.E.

P erforated brickwork or brick masonry screen walls have a long

history of use worldwide. The earliest known examples are found
in Persia and the Middle East. More contemporary examples can
be found in India. In hot climates like these, perforated brickwork
helped screen the sun while allowing light and air to filter into the
space beyond. Other names include pierced walls, lattice walls, hit-
and-miss brickwork, and jali. For consistency in this article, the term
“perforated brickwork” will be used.
Perforated brickwork in the United States has typically been used in
landscape applications such as garden walls or small utility enclosures,
where their design and construction were empirical. More recently,
the Brick Industry Association (BIA) has received inquiries request-
ing guidance for incorporating perforated brickwork into building
facades at a larger scale. Inquiries generally include an inspirational
photo without detailed information about the source project, which
is typically located outside the United States.
The industry does not have a formal guide or comprehensive resource
for the design and analysis of perforated brick walls/screen walls at this
time. Still, it has compiled several resources and recommendations that
are provided in response to the inquiries.
This article intends to present these resources to a broader
audience while the industry is working to develop guides and
references to catch up to the increased popularity and expanded
use of perforated brick masonry.

Design
Methodology. The desired screen pattern dictates the design approach.
Some screen patterns, such as that shown in Figure 1, utilize a clay
solar screen tile, sometimes referred to as a “breeze block,” which is
a hollow-fired clay unit with decorative perforations through the
exposed face. These units typically maintain a solid rectangular or
square perimeter. This solid perimeter and unit format allow them
to be laid like traditional masonry, in accordance with the prescrip-
tive code requirements for veneer, because there are full head joints
between units and continuous bed joints. Per the prescriptive code
requirements, if units are laid in a configuration other than running
bond, such as that shown in Figure 1, veneer wire reinforcing with a
minimum size of one W1.7 wire is required to be placed in the bed
joint mortar at a maximum of 18 inches on center vertically.
Other screen patterns incorporate solid clay brick units laid such that
there are gaps in place of head joints to create the perforations (Figure
2). The lack of head joints change the veneer's behavior, so the masonry
code's prescriptive provisions, TMS 402 - Building Code Requirements
for Masonry Structures (TMS 402), no longer apply. In such a case,
the alternative design provisions in the veneer chapter of TMS 402 are
used as a substitute compliance path. These alternative design provi-
sions consist of an engineered rational design method that applies the
following four requirements or guidelines:
Figure 1 Clay "Breeze Block"
• Loads shall be distributed through the veneer to anchors (as
applicable), and the backing through the principles of engineer-
ing mechanics
• Veneer stability must be maintained through limits to out-of-
plane deflection
• The veneer need not be subject to the flexural tensile strength
provisions of the Allowable Stress Design and Strength Design
chapters in TMS 402.
• The general requirements for veneer must be met, along with
the criteria for veneer not laid in running bond and the seismic
prescriptive provisions.
Note that the 2022 version of TMS 402 includes a new engineered
design method referred to as the “Tributary Area Method.” This
method should not be applied to the design and analysis of perforated

SEP T E M B ER 2023 13

Figure 2 Screen pattern with solid clay units
brickwork, as the analyses performed to develop the method assumed
masonry with head joints.
Wind Load. While calculating components and cladding wind loads
is relatively straightforward, applying these loads to the perforated
brickwork is less so. The presence of the perforations suggests that
the loads should be reduced to reflect the proportion of the solid
area. However, each unit within the screen pattern will have exposed
top and side surfaces that experience drag and suction, resulting in a
net wind load that is larger than expected by the proportion of solid
area alone. Using unmodified components and cladding wind loads
calculated for non-perforated claddings is recommended.
Existing Resources. The obsolete BIA Technical Notes on Brick and
Tile Construction publication “Clay Masonry Shading Devices,”
dated March 1957, includes some relevant information on the design
of perforated masonry, including a formula to estimate the allowable
unreinforced span length of a wall in feet.
Where:
L = the allowable distance between lateral support in feet
t = the specified wall thickness in inches
Ab = ratio of actual bed joint length in a horizontal plane to the total
wall length
k = ratio of solid wall area to total wall area in a vertical plane
w = design wind pressure in pounds per square foot
This formula is based on a standard allowable flexural stress equation (σ =
M/S) with coefficients to reduce the section modulus of the wall. It includes
an assumption for allowable flexural tension stress of 20psi. Note that the
formula includes the old 1/3 stress increase that is no longer permitted.
There has been limited research on the structural behavior and capacity
of perforated brickwork, but two relatively recent studies provide insight.
Ortlepp and Schmidt tested small-scale specimens in compression
14 STRUCTURE magazine
and a larger specimen in shear to evaluate their
load-bearing capacity. They found the compres-
sive strength of a single wythe solid wall to be
approximately 10 percent greater than a single
wythe perforated wall. The perforated wall
could only carry half of the in-plane lateral
force compared to the solid wall. Finite ele-
ment models demonstrated that the individual
units are subjected to bending stresses due to
the combination of compressive loading at
adjacent units' bearing points and the unit's
unloaded center. In-plane loads are managed
by struts and ties formed through the unit
intersections. Out-of-plane loads are managed
through shear rotation within each segment of
bed joint mortar.
Masia et al. conducted experimental testing of
unreinforced perforated brick panels loaded out-
of-plane to evaluate both vertical and horizontal
bending capacity and to compare with predicted
capacities based on tested material strengths and
current code equations per Australian Standard
AS3700: Masonry Structures. Failures in both
bending directions were non-ductile, but the
specimens in horizontal bending exhibited larger
capacities than predicted. Capacities in the horizontal bending direction
were greater than the capacities in the vertical bending direction due to
the differences in the loading of the mortar joints. In vertical bending, the
out-of-plane load is resisted by the flexural strength of the mortar bed joints,
whereas in horizontal bending, the out-of-plane load is resisted by the shear
strength of the mortar bed joints and the flexural strength of the units.
Detailing
Reinforcing. Because the unreinforced capacity of perforated brickwork
is limited, reinforcing must be integrated into the system. In some
cases, this reinforcing is not readily apparent.
Visible support framing is an obvious solution, typically used where the
exposed framing would not be aesthetically objectionable. Where having vis-
ible support framing is objectionable, such as where the perforated brickwork
spans across window openings, the support framing can be camouflaged.
For instance, the London School of Economics Student Center used steel
framing members fabricated to match both the size of the vertical window
mullions and the overlap distance of the brick. Placed at each vertical mullion
in the window system, this steel framing created intermediate locations to
anchor veneer ties, reducing the unreinforced span length of the perforated
brickwork while maintaining the desired appearance from the interior.
Internal reinforcement is necessary in cases where external support fram-
ing is not an option. If there are areas of solid brickwork directly adjacent
to the perforated sections, these are ideal locations for placing reinforce-
ment, which can consist of a bar or wire. Bed joint reinforcing may also
be an option if the solid brickwork is oriented horizontally. Within the
perforated brickwork, vertical reinforcing can only be placed within the
overlap zones. For some designs, the geometry permits the brick cores
to be used for reinforcing. Still, in others, the overlap zone needs to be
narrower, and holes must be drilled into units without cores or frogs to
incorporate reinforcing. Some of these configurations may not match the
assumptions of the reinforced masonry requirements in TMS 402 and will
need to be evaluated rationally. Load testing of a full-size mock-up panel
would be prudent to help evaluate the design for structural performance.
Durability. Unlike traditional brick masonry veneer, the perfo- As the masonry industry continues to develop formal guidance on
rated brickwork openings expose the brick units' multiple sides the design of perforated brick veneer, the alternative design provi-
to the environment and allow water to accumulate on horizontal sions in the code allow engineers the latitude to achieve the design
surfaces. Because of this increased exposure inherent to the system, intent. The information presented here can provide some guidance
the performance of the perforated veneer walls will be different to engineers in the meantime.■
from that of traditional brick masonry veneers. The risk of general
deterioration and freeze-thaw damage is higher. Full references are included in the online version of the article
It is recommended to use solid brick without cores or frogs. Standard at STRUCTUREmag.org.
solid brick units conforming to ASTM C216 – Standard Specification
for Facing Brick (Solid Masonry Units Made from Clay or Shale) are
permitted to have up to 25% cores, so units without cores or frogs Cortney Fried is a Managing Senior Engineer at the Brick Industry
must be explicitly specified. Use of cored units in perforated brick- Association (BIA) (cfried@bia.org)
work has been successful, but generally in more southern climates,
where the risk of freeze-thaw is low.
ASTM C902 – Standard Specification
for Pedestrian and Light Traffic Paving
Brick has minimum requirements for PROVEN

SUSTAINABLE
strength and cold water absorption
that exceed those required for units
meeting ASTM C216 Grade SW due

SOLUTION
to their use in horizontal applications.
Selecting bricks that meet these more FOR REDUCED
stringent requirements can provide GLOBAL WARMING
additional durability in the more severe POTENTIAL
exposure of perforated brickwork.
If special-shaped units are feasible
on the project, consider units with PRODUCING LOW EMBODIED CARBON CEMENT
sloped top surfaces and drip grooves
at the underside to reduce the potential SINCE THE 1960s
for ponding water on the horizontal  Reduce GWP of concrete mix designs using CSA cements
surfaces. Some manufacturers sell spe-
cial-shaped units with oversized cores  Lower CO2-eq per metric ton

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

at the unit ends for reinforcing but  Reduced emissions from raw materials
uncored in the center. Special-shaped
 Fewer natural resources consumed
units can also be used in the adjacent
solid sections to create internal space  Reduce energy consumption
for reinforcing and grout while main-  Meets GSA’s definition of top 20%
taining the appearance of the exterior. of low embodied carbon
With respect to other considerations Global Warming Potential
to increase durability, polymer-mod- (LEC) cement (kg CO e/mertric ton)
2

ified mortar is an option to improve  EPDs available 1000

922
the durability of the mortar, but be 900
27%
Less
aware that its use requires more care 800
50%
because of the difficulty of remov- Learn more about Rapid 700
Less
673
ing polymer-modified mortar smears Set Cement’s role in low- 600
from brick faces. Consider specify-
embodied-carbon concrete. 500
ing stainless steel for veneer ties and 461
400
horizontal joint reinforcement instead
of galvanized steel. If desired, a post- 300

applied breathable water repellent can 200

be considered. 100

Komponent® Rapid Set® Industry Average

Closing Cement Portland Cement

Perforated brickwork has a long

history of successful use in many
countries worldwide; however, the by CTS Cement Manufacturing Corp .
incorporation of perforated brickwork
into anchored brick veneer is a rela- CTScement.com  800.929.3030
tively new variation of this concept.

SEP T E M B ER 2023 15
 structural MAINTENANCE
Concrete Defects and Preventive Maintenance
How preventative maintenance can prolong the concrete structure life, preserve integrity, and reduce repair cost.
By Ahmed Clayiff, P.E., CBSI
C oncrete construction offers inherent benefits, such as resilience, durabil-
ity, and strength. However, those benefits are dependent on the quality
control of placing concrete during construction and the maintenance during
its service life. During construction, concrete’s quality depends on the care
taken during mixing the ingredients, handling, and curing the fresh concrete.
What is Concrete?
Concrete consists of a mixture of cement, sand, aggregate, and water; addi-
tional chemical substances, called admixtures, can be added to accommodate a
specific need for a design application. The primary functionality of admixture
is to change the properties of concrete to make it more workable, inhibit
corrosion, and achieve higher strength or other improvements.
After all the ingredients are mixed, the concrete will be poured (placed) into
forms with properly positioned conventional or prestressed steel reinforce-
ment. Conventional reinforced concrete is constructed with non-prestressed
steel reinforcement (i.e., reinforcing bars or welded wire fabric). Prestressed
concrete contains high-strength reinforcement (i.e., bars, wires, or strands),
which can be either pre-tensioned or post-tensioned. The pre-tensioning
process consists of pre-tensioning the reinforcement to a desired stress level
before pouring the fresh concrete. The post-tensioning process consists of
placing the concrete before the reinforcement is tensioned. The reinforce-
ment is placed inside a conduit or coated with a lubricant to prevent it from
bonding with concrete. After the concrete is poured and reaches optimum
strength, the reinforcement is post-tensioned to the desired stresses.
During the process of concrete mixing, handling, and curing, the following
precautions should be taken to achieve the desired concrete quality,
A- Mixing and Handling
• Accurate mix ingredients proportions.
• Adequate mixing.
• Appropriate delivery time to avoid segregation.
• Vibrating to reduce excess entrapped air to avoid poor consolidation.
• Sampling and testing
B- Reinforcement details.
• Maintain a proper clear cover of reinforcement.
• Maintain adequate reinforcement spacing.
• Adhere to design documents and specifications.
What Is Concrete Curing?
The process begins after the fresh concrete is placed into the forms and
hydration begins at the appropriate temperature. The hydration process should
be controlled to retain moisture within the concrete and avoid rapid tem-
perature changes. As the hydration process continues, the concrete properties
will change, and the concrete strength will increase over time (see Figure 1).
Other improvements during the hydration process are the property changes
(i.e., increase resistance to abrasion resistance, improved water tightness, etc.).
A defective curing process may impair the concrete quality significantly. For
16 STRUCTURE magazine
Figure 1 Compressive strength of concrete at different ages and curing levels by
Michaels Mamlouk – John P. Zaniewski
example, placing the concrete in an environment with high temperature
and low humidity may cause rapid water loss or fast evaporation. The rapid
water loss will result in quick concrete volume changes at an early age and
may lead to cracks. Cracks are unfavorable results that can immediately be a
significant issue for structures that store liquids and chemicals. Other prob-
lems that increase over the structure’s lifetime are discussed in the following
concrete defects section.
The concrete quality depends on the concrete ingredients’ mix propor-
tions and the means and methods of mixing and handling. Better quality
can be achieved by implementing an effective plan for quality assurance
and quality control (QA/QC), including workmanship, inspection,
sampling, and laboratory testing.
Concrete Defects
During or after the concrete placement.
• Cracking: This may result during the curing process or at other times
during the structure’s lifetime. During the structure’s lifetime, the gradi-
ent changes between low and high temperatures may result in cracking.
For example, an expansion typically occurs during the summer, and a
contraction typically occurs during the winter. These phenomena are the
main causes of cracks in concrete. Other cracks may result from loading
that exceeds the structural capacity, resulting in overstresses such as shear,
flexure, or torsion.
• Honeycombs: This results from poor consolidation, such as a lack of
vibration while placing the concrete. Proper vibration is needed to reduce
excessive entrapped air. Excessive air leads to voids that increases perme-
ability, exposes the reinforcement, and reduces the strength of the concrete.
• Spalling: This may result from excessive loading and poor bonding,
resulting in a member separating a shell or a section. Other causes
during the service life may include deterioration (weathering) and
corrosion of reinforcing steel.
During the service life - deterioration.
• Efflorescence: Crystalline, white material that appears on the surface of
the concrete (see Figure 2). It results from water penetrating the cracks
over time, and a chemical reaction occurs with the cement paste leaching
out to the surface.
• Freeze-thaw failure occurs when the water penetrates the voids, pores, or
cracks and freezes at low temperatures. As water freezes within the con-
crete voids it increases in volume and induces forces inside the concrete,
propagating the crack size, and may lead to spalling.
• Scaling occurs when a concrete surface breaks down, or erodes, exposing
the aggregates.
• Delamination occurs where cracks and splits are generated parallel to the
surface, caused by overloading and/or corrosion of steel reinforcement.
These defects are aesthetically unpleasant and in many cases jeopardize
the structural integrity of the reinforced concrete member. For example,
corroded reinforcement can reduce the cross-sectional area of the member,
expose the steel reinforcement to corrosive element and break off the
Figure 3 Concrete surface spalling with corroded reinforcement.
concrete cover (see Figure 3). The cross-sectional area reduction of rein-
forcement can be visually seen when it expands or becomes smaller. Not
all defects can be visually seen; in many cases, specific testing with a
thorough inspection program is required to detect those defects.
Other defects not discussed in this article that result from utilization
include tears and chemical attacks such as chloride and sulfate. How do
we avoid those defects and reduce their impact? Those can be avoided
by implementing the program below.

Preventative Maintenance
All those defects are structural and safety concerns, and it should be the priority
of the structure’s owner to implement an effective process to ensure those are
addressed and avoided. The process should consist of routine inspection and
maintenance to prolong the structure’s life. The routine inspection is an evalu-
ation process of the entire structure to identify potential and existing defects.
Defect findings should be presented with a condition rating system such as
(good, fair, and poor) and maintenance priority (immediate or routine).
Preventive maintenance offers several critical benefits to the property owner,
not limited to structures in poor condition; it also applies to structures in
good condition (Figure 4).
The most crucial benefit is maintaining safety and structural integrity;
this is achieved by preserving functionality, strength, and stability. An
alternate advantage is that less effort is required to address an issue or
Figure 4 Preventative maintenance benefits.
defects early in the process and prevent it from worsening its condition.
For example, cracks are an issue but can be prevented by sealing them prior
to the water penetrating and corroding the reinforcement that propagates
to a spall. Other minor efforts that will help avoid a significant structural
issue are cleaning and ensuring the drainage system is functional. This will
also prevent water ponding (water accumulation). Ponding clearly leads
to water intrusion; it may also induce loads that exceed the structural
capacity and lead to structural instability and failure.
Major repairs are not only a structural concern and higher cost but also
interrupt functionality and inconvenience the occupants. Interruption occurs
when a portion of the structure needs to be vacant during the repair process,
such as temporary shoring. Temporary shoring is a structural support or
frame designed to support the structure (partial/entire) and prevent it from
collapsing until the repair is finished.
Therefore, preventative maintenance substantially benefits the property
owner by maintaining safety and the structure’s expected life cycle. It will
also be cost-effective as significantly high-cost repairs will be avoided, as
well as offers better budget planning, maintains the structure’s aesthetic, and
provides a reliable environment for the occupants.■

Full references are included in the online version of the article

at STRUCTUREmag.org.

Ahmed Clayiff, P.E., CBSI, owns Clayiff Engineering, LLC. He has

experience in various structural engineering areas. Mr. Clayiff is also an
adjunct faculty and has taught various engineering courses. He can be
reached at (aclayiff@clayiff.com)
Figure 2 Concrete surface with Efflorescence.

SEP T E M B ER 2023 17
 structural FLEXIBILITY
Deflections of Concrete Structures
Using Bilinear Flexibility
By Neil Wexler, Ph.D., P.E., Hoonhee Jeoung, P.E., Nissim Elmann, P.E.

D eflection of concrete members follows a bilinear curvature, and

it can be affected by many different variables. Concrete members
are often internally reinforced and/or tensioned, come in different
shapes, and vary with regards to the ingredients and additives in
the concrete. Despite these variations, engineers generalized con-
crete behavior and the ACI Code adopted these general procedures,
though difficulties remain. Some research reported discrepancies
between actual results and code predicted deflections. The Branson
and Bischoff equations are currently in use for calculating Ie, but in
reality, they also require calculations of y- and Icr, making the calcula-
tions of deflections lengthy and time consuming. In addition, the
most recent ACI Code procedure is still dependent on curve fitting
rather than a scientific basis.
A new proposed method for calculating concrete deflections is
presented herein; this method is based on the general bilinear flex-
ibility of concrete under flexural stress. An earlier paper related to
the specific deflections of high-rise concrete shear walls and using the
bilinear flexibility method was authored by the two senior authors.
In this work, the method is extended in a general way to concrete
beams, plates, and to other structural materials. Figure 1 Flexural load/deflection curvature for different geometric sections
Ie = effective moment of inertia, in4
Icr = moment of inertia of cracked section transformed to concrete, in4 1. The load ratio - Mcr/Ma
y- = distance from extreme compression fiber to neutral axis, in 2. The area of longitudinal flexural reinforcement.

Concrete deflections follow general accepted formats, but walls are

Background stiffer than beams and stiffer than slabs, as shown in Figure 1.

Concrete cracks when subjected to tensile stresses that exceed the

modulus of rupture. Since stresses along the beam span are not uni- Flexibilities
form, the degree of cracking is also non-uniform; more and larger
flexural cracks occur at locations of higher flexural stresses. Therefore, Considering the modulus of elasticity E, the product EI is an indica-
a concrete beam even if initially prismatic, becomes non-prismatic tion of flexural flexibility. In a cracked beam the value of I varies along
when cracked. the span of the beam: it is Ig where un-cracked and Icr where cracked.
The stress magnitude relative to the modulus of rupture is one indi- For a simply supported beam we focus our analysis on the section at
cator of flexibility; the larger the ratio, the more cracks cause more the center of the beam where flexural stresses are the largest. Ie from
flexibility. The amount of longitudinal steel reinforcement is another Branson and Bischoff are shown below; in which they depend on
indicator of flexibility; less rebar causes more flexibility. y- and Icr, also shown below.
Figure 1 shows a typical load deflection curvature for concrete
M 3 M 3
reproduced from Reference 7; the flexibility is bilinear. Below crack- Branson Ie = Ig a Mcr k + Icr ;1 - a Mcr k E (1)
a a
ing (Point C), gross section properties predict deflections reasonably.
However, above cracking, gross properties no longer predict deflec-
I cr
tions accurately. The larger the spread between the applied load Bischoff Ie = (2)
^ 23 h M cr 2 I
and the load at which cracks initiate, the larger the error. Point A is 1 - c M m c 1 - Icr m
arbitrary, where the moment Ma is larger than the cracking moment a g

Mcr . Figure 1 also shows the general impact of section geometry on As can be seen, to obtain Ie we must first calculate y- then Icr .
flexural flexibility. Thus, for a given section, the most significant E = modulus of elasticity, psi
variables affecting flexibility are: Ec = modulus of elasticity of concrete, psi

18 STRUCTURE magazine
 Ig = moment of inertia of gross concrete section, in4

Figure 2 shows a bilinear stress-strain graph but includes a linear

equivalent line as if the beam is prismatic, for both before and after
cracking (in reality, a cracked beam is non-prismatic, as indicated
earlier). The objective is to obtain the equivalent prismatic properties
that can be used to predict accurate deflections. Note that concrete
cracks at Point C, where stress is equal to vcr. But the goal is to obtain
deflections at Point A and we do this directly by using Line 3.
In Figure 2, Line 1 shows the beam flexibility before cracking, Line
2 shows the beam flexibility after cracking, and Line 3 shows the
equivalent prismatic flexibility.
Let’s define Ee = λEc, where λ is a coefficient to be calculated. va is
the stress at Point A due to flexural loads and εa is the corresponding
strain. The objective is to obtain λ as a function of other variables
in triangle OAC.

Derivation Figure 2 Bilinear stress and strain diagram for beam deflection

Working with triangle OAC in Figure 2, we obtain (see Ref. 3 for simple and save time. They show the correct flexibility when loads
derivation): exceed cracking without the need to evaluate three equations each time.
va
λ= (3)
nv a - ^n - 1h v cr

1
Determination of Flexibility Coefficient, n
λ = Fy (4)
n - ^n - 1h Fa Deflections of concrete structures are impacted by, among other things
geometry, loads, and the quantity of reinforcement, as mentioned earlier.
As a result, the value of n, is particular to each design case. This coef-
1
λ = M (5) ficient n may be determined using several possible methods, as follows:
n - ^n - 1h Mcra 1. Use an approximate n value.
2. Use an n value from tests and experiments.
3. Use n values from calibration with available tools, such as
Where 1/n represents the slope of the upper part of the bilinear Branson or Bischoff.
graph as Line 2 in Figure 2; vcr is the cracking stress (for concrete); va
represents flexural stress. Fy represents yield stress (for steel).
8” THICK SLAB
Equations (3), (4) and (5) are the Equations of Bilinear Flexibility and
can be evaluated at any point along the beam span and the beam depth. Calculation of Icr for Different Reinforcement Configurations
The ACI Code suggests specific values of n to calculate deflections ρ nAs (in2) yˉ (in.) Icr (in4)
but for lateral loads only. If Code values are to be used for gravity
loads then n values need to be evaluated. ACI Code values at service .2% 1.3 1.1 48.2
loads are n = 3 for slabs, n = 2 for beams and cracked walls, but these .3% 2.0 1.3 68.7
values are to be used with lateral loads only. .4% 2.6 1.5 87.7
It is instructional to note that λ =1 represents the case of uncracked
concrete which occurs when n = 1 or, when va ≤ vcr or when Mcr/Ma .5% 3.3 1.7 105.6
> 1.0. When concrete is cracked Mcr /Ma < 1.0, n is greater than 1 .6% 3.9 1.8 122.4
and λ is less than 1. .7% 4.6 1.9 138.5
.8% 5.3 2.0 153.8
Advantage of Bilinear Flexibility .9% 5.9 2.1 168.4
1.0% 6.6 2.2 182.4
The Equations of Bilinear Flexibility were developed herein using a
method of substitution of bilinear properties with a single equivalent 1.2% 7.9 2.4 208.9
linear property. The variables needed are loads (moments or stresses) 1.4% 9.2 2.6 233.6
and the flexibility coefficient, n. These equations can be used for vari-
1.6% 10.5 2.7 256.6
ous concrete structures and materials. It is interesting to note that they
are applicable not only for concrete but for all materials with dual 1.8% 11.8 2.8 278.3
flexibilities, including structural steel. They also have implications for 2.0% 13.2 2.9 298.8
seismic analyses, such as when demand exceeds the elastic strength of
members and when structural loads get redistributed. Table 1 8” Slab – Coefficients to be used for determining effective
For an engineering office the new equations of bilinear flexibility are moment of inertia (Ie)

SEP T E M B ER 2023 19
 Mcr/Ma = .50 Mcr/Ma = .75 Mcr/Ma = .85 Mcr/Ma = .95
ρ Icr Ie (in4) λ n Ie (in4) λ n Ie (in4) λ n Ie (in4) λ n
.2% 48.2 106.2 0.21 8.6 243.9 0.48 5.4 333.0 0.65 4.6 445.9 0.87 4.0
.3% 68.7 124.1 0.24 7.3 255.7 0.50 5.0 340.9 0.67 4.3 448.8 0.88 3.8
.4% 87.7 140.7 0.27 6.3 266.7 0.52 4.7 348.3 0.68 4.1 451.5 0.88 3.7
.5% 105.6 156.4 0.31 5.5 277.0 0.54 4.4 355.2 0.69 3.9 454.0 0.89 3.6
.6% 122.4 171.1 0.33 5.0 286.8 0.56 4.1 361.7 0.71 3.8 456.4 0.89 3.4
.7% 138.5 185.2 0.36 4.5 296.0 0.58 3.9 367.9 0.72 3.6 458.7 0.90 3.3
.8% 153.8 198.5 0.39 4.2 304.9 0.60 3.7 373.8 0.73 3.5 460.9 0.90 3.2
.9% 168.4 211.3 0.41 3.8 313.3 0.61 3.5 379.4 0.74 3.3 463.0 0.90 3.1
1.0% 182.4 223.6 0.44 3.6 321.5 0.63 3.4 384.8 0.75 3.2 465.0 0.91 3.0
1.2% 208.9 246.8 0.48 3.1 336.8 0.66 3.1 395.0 0.77 3.0 468.8 0.92 2.8
1.4% 233.6 268.4 0.52 2.8 351.0 0.69 2.8 404.6 0.79 2.8 472.3 0.92 2.7
1.6% 256.6 288.5 0.56 2.5 364.4 0.71 2.6 413.5 0.81 2.6 475.6 0.93 2.5
1.8% 278.3 307.5 0.60 2.3 376.9 0.74 2.4 421.8 0.82 2.4 478.7 0.93 2.4
2.0% 298.8 325.5 0.64 2.1 388.7 0.76 2.3 429.7 0.84 2.3 481.6 0.94 2.3

Table 2 8Ó Slab Ð Calculated n values to be used for bilinear flexibility in Equation 5.

Table 1 and Table 2 are used to obtain Figure 3 for an 8-inch-thick 1. Design one-way concrete slab and select steel reinforcement
one-way flat concrete slab (f ’c = 4,000 psi), and calibrated to Bischoff. ρ = As /bd
Mcr /Ma were selected arbitrarily and Ie was calculated for different rein- 2. Enter Figure 3 graph and write down values of n for Mcr /
forcement ratios, from Bischoff. The value of n is calculated as below: Ma equaling 0.50 thru 0.95. This will establish the slope for
Line 2 in the bilinear graph (Figure 2).
1 Mcr 3. Obtain values of λ and Ie using Equations 3 thru 5 or Figure 3 graph.
-a M k
n= m a
(6)
Mcr
1 -a M k Example
a

Determine Ie for an 8-inch one-way concrete slab with bottom steel

reinforcement of #5 bars at 12ʺ o.c. The slab spans 18 feet and sup-
I
m = Ie (7) port 160 psf of total residential loads.
g

Solution:
Proposed Procedure Mcr = 5.0ft − k
18 2
Ma = 160 × 8 = 6.48ft − k

M cr 5
M a = 6.48 = 0.77

From Figure 3:
.31
ρ = 8 # 12 × 100 = 0.32%

Mcr
Ma = 0.77
n = 4.8
1 1
λ=
Mcr = 4.8 - 3.8 # .77 = 0.53
n - ^ n - 1 h Ma

Ie = 0.53 × 512 = 271.4 in4

Figure 3 8” Slab - n values as a function of reinforcement ratio

20 STRUCTURE magazine

Figure 4 Example flexural load/deflection curvature
Conclusions
The method of Bilinear Flexibility is presented herein. In this proce-
dure, Bilinear Flexibility is replaced with an equivalent single flexibility.
A calibration method was used to obtain flexibility coefficients n.
ASDIP Structural Software
Phone: 407-284-9202
Email: support@asdipsoft.com
Web: www.asdipsoft.com
Product: ASDIP STEEL
Description: Intuitive software for the design
of steel members and connections, such as
composite/non-composite beams, steel columns,
base plates, anchoring to concrete, shear
connections, and moment connections, per the
latest design codes. ASDIP STEEL includes 5
modules that substantially simplify the time-
consuming calculations of structural designs.
ENERCALC, LLC
Phone: 949-614-0689
Email: info@enercalc.com
Web: https://enercalc.com
Product: ENERCALC SEL / ENERCALC 3D
Description: Design of anchors and anchor
bolts typically requires a thorough development of
applied loads and possible analysis of full structures/
connected components. ENERCALC can help
determine those loads & perform those analyses
through its Loads & Forces module and its analysis
and design modules. Clear, succinct reports represent
your work well.
Not listed?
The equivalent single flexibility is obtained with the use of the
equation of Bilinear Flexibility which converts n to λ. For accurate
results, use appropriate n values, then calculate Ie using the general
Equation of Bilinear Flexibility. This simple method is based on
the first principles and, therefore, may be appropriate for adop-
tion by building codes.
Future research may focus on the development of n-values con-
sidering different, concrete cross- sections, podiums, two-way slabs,
etc. Additionally, this method can be used with other materials,
and is applicable for post-elastic analyses.■
Full references are included in the online version of the
article at STRUCTUREmag.org.
Neil Wexler is the founder of Wexler Associates, a 39-year-old, New
York City-based firm specializing in the design of high-rise concrete
buildings. He received his BS from McGill University, Montreal, QC,
Canada; his MS from City University of New York, NY; and his PhD
from New York University, New York, NY, all in civil engineering.
Hoonhee Jeoung is a principal at Wexler Associates and a concrete
design expert with more than 16 year of structural design experience
in the fields of structural steel and concrete. He received his BS in civil
engineering from the City University of New York and his MS also in
civil engineering from New York University.
Nissim Elmann is an Associate at Wexler Associates and he has
been with the firm for 8 years. Nissim currently lives in Miami where
he manages Wexler’s Miami office. He received his Bachelor’s and
Master’s degrees from NYU Tandon School of Engineering.
ANCHOR guide
The Masonry Society Trimble Inc
Phone: 303-939-9700 Phone: 770-426-5105
Email: info@masonrysociety.org Email: tekla.us.marketing@gmail.com
Web: masonrysociety.org Web: https://www.tekla.com/us
Product: TMS 402/602 - 2022 Product: Tekla Structural Designer
Description: Building Code Requirements and Description: Tekla Structural Designer allows
Specification for Masonry Structures. Contains TMS you to seamlessly combine analysis and design
402-22 (Building Code Requirements for Masonry into one easy and efficient single model-based
Structures and TMS 602-22 Specification for process. For engineers working with concrete,
Masonry Structures. Available in print, downloadable the software offers unique interactive design
formats. Coming soon - subscription based capabilities for concrete beams, columns and
convenience with additional enhanced features. Watch walls, as well as reinforcement optimization for
the TMS website for announcements. concrete slabs.
RISA Technologies Williams Form Engineering Corp.
Phone: 616-866-0815
Phone: 949-951-5815
Email: williams@williamsform.com
Email: info@risa.com
Web: www.williamsform.com
Web: risa.com
Product: Anchor Systems
Product: RISAConnection
Description: Williams Form Engineering
Description: RISAConnection is at the
Corporation has been providing threaded
cutting edge of next-generation connection
steel bars and accessories for rock anchors,
design software and features full 3D
soil anchors, high capacity concrete anchors,
visualization as well as expandable reports
micropiles, tie rods, tiebacks, strand anchors,
for every limit state. RISAConnection
hollow bar anchors, post tensioning systems,
includes complete integration with RISA-3D
and concrete forming hardware systems in the
and RISAFloor, as well as partner software
construction industry for over 100 years.
packages such as Tekla Structures and Hilti
Profis for anchorage design.
Monthly 2023 Resource Guide forms are now available on our website.
STRUCTUREmag.org
SEP T E M B ER 2023 21
 INFOCUS
Observations from the December 20, 2022,
Ferndale Earthquake
By John A. Dal Pino, with assistance from Claire Hu, Elizabeth Bognar, and Hongxun Yang

B etween Christmas and New Year’s, I led a small group from FTF
Engineering on a long day trip to the California North Coast to
learn from the December 20, 2022, 6.4 magnitude (Modified Mercalli
Intensity VIII, Severe) Ferndale earthquake. Our goal was to visit Scotia,
Rio Dell, Ferndale, Eureka, and anything else that caught our eye.
For me, the goal was three-fold: first, to take the opportunity to
personally learn something new from a “local” earthquake; secondly,
to provide the FTF staff who joined me with their first opportunity
to go on what is commonly called an “earthquake chase,” and thirdly,
to share our experiences with the broader community in the hope that
seismic hazard mitigation will be once again placed in prominent view.
Based on the first press reports, my expectations for learning about
building types we design today were low. Still, I have come to under-
stand that in any situation there are always a few nuggets to be found
if you look or think hard enough. If you can do what we did after a
future earthquake, or any similar natural hazard event, I strongly recom-
mend it. Seeing something up close in the context of the local building
inventory and how buildings are or have been generally constructed
informs the observer in a way that photographs from recent or long
past earthquakes cannot. I assume that engineers in other parts of the
country do their own “chasing” after damaging windstorms, floods, fires,
or snowfalls. Their experiences do not seem to be as well documented
or widely published as for earthquakes, but I wish it were otherwise.
Figure 1 Courtesy of Tectonic setting of western North America (simplified from
Drummond (1981) and Simkin et al. (2006)). SAF, San Andreas Fault; MTJ,
Background Mendocino Triple Junction; CSZ, Cascadia Subduction Zone.

First, I want to provide an overview description of the typical

construction, the regional seismicity, and what our team observed.
The North Coast is a large redwood forest stretching north-south
from a few hours north of San Francisco to the California-Oregon
border and east-west from the coast to the north-south center line
of California (roughly Interstate 5). The primary industry has always
been and will probably remain lumber. Most buildings are therefore
constructed from wood. The local population is largely employed
in some aspect of the lumber industry or commerce related to and
sustained by the redwood forest, mainly tourism. Except for insti-
tutional buildings (hospitals, police stations, telephone exchanges,
and so on) and a sprinkling of newer apartment buildings in Eureka
(the largest city and main population center), most of the build-
ings are one and two-story stick-framed or heavy timber structures.
Besides Eureka, the next largest city is Ferndale, followed by the
smaller towns of Scotia, Rio Dell, Fortuna, and Petrolia. Some of
the banking, commercial, and residential buildings in each city are
in the grand Victorian style, particularly in Ferndale, dating to the
late 1800s (considered old in California). The dairy industry is also
significant in the local economy.
According to the USGS, the area is the most seismically active in
California. There have been 40 or so earthquakes over Magnitude
6 in the last 100 years. Most of us know about the “ring of fire,”
that tectonic plate boundary circling the Pacific Ocean. The plate
boundary along most of coastal California is the famous strike-slip
San Andreas fault, see Figure 1. But the part of the ring starting
roughly at and running northward from the Oregon-California
border is the Cascadia Subduction Zone (thrust fault), where the
Pacific plate dips under the North American plate. The melting of
the Pacific plate is responsible for the string of volcanoes that start
with Mt. Shasta (roughly due east of the Mendocino area) and end
with Mt. Rainer near Seattle. Since I won’t pretend to be a seismolo-
gist, let’s just say that the location of the transition area, called the
Mendocino Triple Junction (where the San Andreas, Cascadia, and
the part caught in the middle called the Mendocino Fracture Zone
collide) is seismically complicated.
For a bit of recent history, on April 25, 1992, there was a 7.2
magnitude (maximum Modified Mercalli Intensity IX, Violent)
earthquake with an epicenter near the small town of Petrolia, located

22 STRUCTURE magazine
 structural engineers can gauge whether the building codes and standards
are targeted properly (too lax or too stringent) at the specific goal of
life-safety in all but the most vigorous possible earthquakes. Without
the earthquake data, engineers can learn from the observed damage,
but like in a car crash, one cannot learn much from the result if the
car’s speed is unknown.
The USGS has stated that the recent earthquake occurred in the
Mendocino Fracture Zone on a horizontal planar fault. The USGS
ShakeMap for the area is shown in Figure 3.

Scotia

We started the day in Scotia (population approximately 1,000). The

town’s residential buildings experienced significant damage in 1992,
and I wanted to see how they fared this time. Scotia was constructed as
a “company town” for the Pacific Lumber Company, with many modest
one-story wood homes for workers in the local mill. These buildings are
typically elevated above grade, with the first floor supported on wood
posts on small concrete footings. The crawl spaces are enclosed with
spaced vertical sheathing to allow for ventilation since it rains a lot on
the North Coast. The crawl spaces were not braced or minimally braced,
creating a soft/weak story condition, and in the 1992 earthquake, many
of these homes experienced a collapse in the crawl space. The Scotia
homes represent traditional California construction before the advent
of concrete slab-on-grade construction, which is predominately used
today in mass-produced tract homes.
During our recent visit, we can happily report that we saw no col-
lapses or significant damage. We observed that many buildings had
been retrofitted with diagonal wood bracing or are now supported
on continuous concrete footings with the plywood sheathing used to
Figure 2 Geologic Map. brace the crawl space. No doubt a success story for seismic retrofit.
Courtesy of State of California, Department of Conservation.
We could not find any ground motion data to judge the extent of the
success, but a win is a win.
south and west of Ferndale. The main event was followed the next
day by two large aftershocks measuring M6.5 and M6.6 on the
Richter scale. The total number of aftershocks that followed the main
event exceeded 2,000. I visited the area following the earthquake
and observed significant damage in Scotia, Petrolia, and Ferndale.
The geologic and site soil conditions always play an essential role
in the severity of the ground shaking and any resulting earthquake
damage. For non-engineers and earthquake-chasing engineers, it
is important to remember that buildings founded on rock gener-
ally perform better than those founded on softer and deeper softer
soils. This is because these soils magnify the ground motions that
buildings “feel.” The mouth of the Eel River, where this earth-
quake produced the most damage, is in a broad alluvial plain with
a deep soil profile (triangularly-shaped pale-yellow area in Figure
2). Ferndale is located on the south side of the alluvial plain, while
Rio Dell and Scotia are situated near the east end. Eureka, to the
north and southeast of Arcata Bay, has similar soil.

Our Earthquake Chase

Before the trip, we visited the California Strong Motion Instrumentation
Program (CSMIP) website and downloaded ground motion and instru-
mented building data to focus our attention so we could make the
most of our trip. CSMIP has placed accelerometers (free field and on
buildings) across California so researchers can link observed earth-
quake damage with the recorded local earthquake ground motions Figure 3 ShakeMap.
(accelerations, velocities, and displacements). With the recorded data, Courtesy of USGS.

SEP T E M B ER 2023 23

Figure 4 House on Painter Street with a retrofitted cripple wall crawl space.
Rio Dell
Just over the Eel River, one mile north of Scotia, is the town of
Rio Dell (population approximately 3,400). Rio Dell is a modest
community of small, mostly one-story homes, with a few com-
mercial buildings along the main street (Wildwood Avenue), an
elementary and middle school, and so on. Rio Dell experienced the
most damage we observed on our trip. CSMIP records indicated an
Figure 5A and B House on Painter Street without a retrofitted cripple wall
crawl space.
24 STRUCTURE magazine
Sa at the one second of 0.5g to 0.75g, which is roughly the design
force the California Building Code requires for structures in the San
Francisco Bay Area that are not located near very active faults. The
design requirements for new local buildings are higher, with 2.07g
in the 0.3-second period and 1.2g in the one second.
The damage consisted of the following:
i. Houses off foundations and failures of house foundations
ii. Collapse of residential porch covers
iii. Mobile homes off supports
iv. Fallen chimneys
v. Minor structural damage
The damage we observed could have been easily prevented with
modest retrofits like those we observed in Scotia. We spoke with a
few residents who told us they lacked earthquake insurance because
of the high cost (approximately $1,500 per year). It seemed clear that
many residents also probably lacked the financial means to make
significant home investments. According to the 2000 census, the
median household income in Rio Dell was roughly $30,000, with
approximately 25% of the population living below the poverty line.
On Painter Street, we observed two nearly identical adjacent
homes, one with a retrofitted cripple wall crawl space and one
without (see Figures 4, 5A, and 5B respectively). According to the
Zillow website, the asking price for similar homes was approxi-
mately $330,000.
Also, on Painter Street, we observed a home with no apparent
damage other than a badly cracked, unreinforced concrete founda-
tion. We are all too aware of the risk associated with unreinforced
brick masonry foundations, but low-strength concrete founda-
tions appear to be not much better (see Figures 6A and 6B). The
homeowner told us that a contractor had estimated the repair
cost at $35,000. Again, using Zillow data, the house value would
fall in the $200,000 to $250,000 range. With a 15% deductible
based on replacement value for a California Earthquake Authority
(CEA) insurance policy, the damage may not be covered or only
minimally covered by insurance.
We also spoke with the owner of the now famous home (because
of front-page newspaper coverage) on Wildwood Avenue with the
collapsed front porch cover (see Figures 7A before and 7B after).
He told us that in the 1992 earthquake, the chimney had collapsed
and crushed a nearby car. The firebox portion was retained and
suffered no damage in the recent earthquake.
The owner invited us inside to have a look around. We could
see that the house had been shaken vigorously, resulting in lots
of narrow cracks and joint separations. He told us that many
items had fallen from shelves. Upon close inspection of the exte-
rior, we could see that the porch cover had been only minimally
attached to the exterior wood sheathing. A nominal investment
in improving the attachment to the house would have eliminated
this significant life-safety hazard.
We observed two chimney collapses, one on an older residential
structure on Davis Street close to the Eel River (see Figures 8A, 8B,
and 8C) and one at a church on Belleview Avenue (see Figure 9).
The Davis Street chimney was very tall, apparently much newer
than the house itself, and maybe reinforced. It was minimally
attached to the structure and was destined to collapse in an earth-
quake since the house would not have had the lateral strength to
support the chimney.
At the Belleview Avenue location, the chimney was more modern,
shorter, and of reinforced CMU block construction. In the debris
pile, we saw the reinforcement and straps used to attach it to the
structure. But it fell too.

Figure 6A and B House on Painter Street with a badly cracked, unreinforced
concrete foundation.
I think it is safe to say that brick chimneys are generally a bad
idea for wood buildings. Unless they are designed to be self-sup-
porting, they ought to be removed and replaced with lightweight
construction (exterior wood box, triple insulated stainless steel
flue, and metal firebox).
In a testament to the superior performance of reasonably well-
designed wood construction, we observed very little damage of
a structural nature in Rio Dell. While observing the emergency
Figure 7A House on Wildwood Avenue before. Courtesy of Google Street View.
support services offered at the elementary/middle school on Center
Street, we stumbled upon a Napa Auto Parts store and an adja-
cent former commercial building that was currently part of the
school (see Figures 10A and 10B). Before the earthquake, the large
plate glass windows had been covered with thin wood panels (we
suspect to conceal the storage inside), which were nailed in place
with tiny, brad-type nails. During the earthquake, the plate glass
broke, the wood panels were loosened with the nails pulling out,
and finally, the narrow wall piers resisted the lateral load. The wall
piers sustained base rotation and cracked the stucco. We suspect
that there were no seismic holddown anchors.
Though obviously not of major significance in the grand scheme
of structural engineering, the sequential nature of the structural
response was instructive; namely that in smaller events, all of the
elements capable of resisting lateral forces (structural and non-
structural) will do so, but in increasingly larger events, eventually, it
is up to the engineered structural elements to do the heavy lifting.
Ferndale
Next up was Ferndale (population of approximately 1,400).
The highway bridge over the Eel River appeared damaged at
the abutments. Myers Construction, the specialty contractor
often used by Caltrans for the contractor’s ability to accomplish
significant tasks quickly, was on the scene. It would have taken
more time than we could afford that day to get access, so we
decided to skip it but continue to monitor the situation and
may report later.
Like Scotia, we can happily report that we saw no signs of
significant structural and non-structural damage in Ferndale,
except for a few broken windows on the main downtown street.
CSMIP records at the Ferndale Fire Station indicated a Sa of
0.73g at the 0.3-second period and 0.4g at the one-second
period, which is roughly 75% of the design force the California
Building Code requires for the design of new structures in the
San Francisco Bay Area not located near very active faults.
There was extensive damage in Ferndale in the 1992 event, but
the repaired residential buildings performed well. As mentioned
above, Ferndale has a large inventory of grand Victorian-style
construction dating to the late 1880s; see Figures 11A, 11B,
and 11C. The commercial buildings are mostly on Main Street,
and the residential buildings are located mostly in an adjacent
neighborhood to the south and east. Many of the businesses
Figure 7B House on Wildwood Avenue after, with the collapsed front porch cover.
SEP T E M B ER 2023 25
 Figure 8A Davis Street -- Before. Courtesy of Google Street View. Figure 9 Bellevue Avenue -- After.

Eureka

Our final stop was Eureka (a population of approximately 27,000).

Based on the press reports, we did not expect to observe much damage.
Still, we were intrigued by CSMIP records showing strong ground
motions at the instrumented four-story Providence St. Joseph Hospital
on Dolbeer Street, and the five-story Silvercrest Senior Housing building
on Tydd Street. Both are located on the bluff east of the downtown with
firmer soils than in the downtown below on the Eel River floodplain.

Figure 8B Davis Street -- After.

Figure 8C Davis Street -- After.

on Main Street were closed for the holidays, so we could not

determine the extent of strengthening. However, except for the
broken glass, it was difficult to detect signs that a major earth-
quake had recently occurred. We did not observe modern steel
frames and such commonly employed to stiffen the storefronts
of commercial buildings. We decided to further investigate the
local retrofit ordinances and past retrofit work. Figures 10A and B Damage to storage building.

26 STRUCTURE magazine
Figure 11A Main Street -- Ferndale.
Figure 11C Main Street -- Ferndale.
CSMIP records at the hospital show a Sa of 0.464g at the 0.3 second
period and 0.444g at the one second and the senior housing building
with a Sa of 0.859g at the 0.3 second period and 0.239g at the one second
period. The design ground motions are 2.27g at the 0.3-second period and
1.23g at one second. We did not observe any damage at either location.
The hospital has an older concrete building on the west and a newer
braced-frame steel building on the east, see Figure 12. For the recorded
Figure 12 Providence St. Joseph Hospital.
Figure 11B Main Street -- Ferndale.
ground motions, we would not have expected any structural damage to
the hospital. We also did not see the telltale signs of ongoing repairs to
non-structural elements, such as plumbing systems.
The senior housing was a concrete flat plate building with concrete
masonry unit (CMU) columns and flanged CMU shear walls, see
Figures 13A and 13B. We walked the entire perimeter and observed
no wall cracking.
SEP T E M B ER 2023 27
 Figure 13A Senior Housing Complex.

Conclusions
Given our objectives, we judged the day as a successful learn-
ing experience for everyone. As I mentioned at the beginning,
take the opportunity to go earthquake chasing if you can. You
will likely learn something new. You will also meet the people
directly affected by the natural disaster, observe how communi-
ties help displaced individuals, and gather your thoughts on
how disaster recovery public policy should be crafted.
Our engineering takeaways were:
i. Well-designed seismic retrofits targeting well-known vul-
nerabilities pay off handsomely. Financial assistance and
incentives for retrofits in advance will lessen the impact
on communities and improve resilience.
ii. Even moderately strong earthquakes have a way of point-
ing out to everyone seismic vulnerabilities that are in plain
view of people who should know. Communities should
encourage continuous mitigation, basically chipping away
at a very long list needing attention, rather than waiting
for a damaging event.
iii. Regarding protecting life safety, wood frame construction
performs well in almost all instances, excepting for the
commonly attached masonry chimneys which represent
the most significant hazard and should be demolished and
replaced in almost all situations.
iv. Admittedly, based on a small sample size in one earthquake,
funding from CEA-style 15% deductible insurance cover-
age may only be available for the largest earthquakes. The
more financially prudent approach will likely be proac-
tively retrofitting to address risks from moderately strong
and lesser earthquakes. For code-compliant recently con- Figure 13B Senior Housing Complex.
structed homes or well-retrofitted older homes, the repair
cost for even the largest earthquakes may be less than one John A. Dal Pino is a Principal with Claremont Engineers, Inc. in Oakland,
might assume (a good thing). Still, insurance might be California, formerly with FTF Engineering. He serves as the Chair of the
worthwhile if it helps to sleep at night. STRUCTURE Editorial Board (jdalpino@claremontengineers.com).
v. There is a need for seismic vulnerability education and out-
Claire Hu is a Project Engineer at FTF Engineering.
reach to all populations, but particularly in economically
challenged regions. Financial incentives or small investments Elizabeth Bognar is the SF office manager at FTF Engineering.
of public monies to address the most basic of known earth- Hongxun Yang was formerly at FTF Engineering.
quake hazards would yield great societal benefits.■

28 STRUCTURE magazine
THE TRIFECTA OF EFFICIENCY
Making Podium Design Look Easy
The need for a straightforward, fully integrated solution for podium building design has never
been greater. That's why engineers are excited about the benefits of using RISAFloor,
RISA-3D and ADAPT-Builder together to create a more efficient podium design workflow.
 EMBEDDED SE
CONCRETE MA
THERMAL MON
REAL-TIME,
IN-SITU
CONCRETE
STRENGTH

OPTIMIZE
SCHEDULE
BY STRIPPING
FORMWORK DEWALT SIGNAL
SOONER CONCRETE SENSOR

DEWALT SIGNAL
LIVE HUB THERMAL TAILS
AI STRENGTH
PREDICTIONS REAL TIME CONCRETE CURING DATA AND ACCURATE A
BASED ON PREDICTIONS VIEWABLE FROM ANY DEVICE
SITE LOCATION At the heart of the Signal System is the DEWALT Signal Concrete Sensor: our fully wireless,
embeddable sensor that measures in-situ concrete temperature and strength data, uploading to
cloud in real time via the DEWALT Signal Live Hub or periodically with the ConcreteDNA software a

APPLICATIONS
TEMPERATURE
Construction is a vast and diverse industry, with different
MONITORING sectors and project types requiring different applications of
FOR THERMAL the same technology. You'll find some of the main use cases
Cast-In-Place Post
of our technology and how it applies to you.
CONTROL PLANS Concrete Tensioning

GET MORE INFORMATION AT

https://anchors.DEWALT.com/
anchors/support-software/DEWALT_
concrete_sensors.php

Copyright © 2023 DEWALT The following are

ENSORS FOR
ATURITY AND
NITORING
KEY FEATURES AND BENEFITS

QUALITY ASSURANCE AI PREDICTION

By combining local weather forecast, historical curing
AND CONTROL data, and real-time sensor measurements, DeWalt
Temperature measured in real time and location, Signal Sensors enable your teams to plan like never
in conjunction with traditional quality methods, before. Thanks to +/- 5% prediction accuracy, sites
provides more accurate jobsite pour information. run smoothly and projects are delivered to plan.

THERMAL CONTROL PLANS NON COMPLIANCE RISK REDUCTION

Wireless technology automatically The ConcreteDNA software centralizes and organizes
collects temperature from signal sensors. strength data from all pours. Project managers
Temperature differentials are calculated and can then make informed decisions on time critical
thresholds monitored in real time. activities such as: tensioning, stripping, and loading.

FORM STRIPPING AND BLUETOOTH® AND 5G

POST TENSIONING DeWalt Signal Sensors are Bluetooth enabled and
Take action without delay and strip formwork up to
transmit data to the app on your smart device or the
30% faster. Real-time sensor data tells you precisely
cellular hub, all backed up on the cloud.
when concrete has reached critical strength.
No wires or external collection boxes to risk system
Set up notifications to alert your device when it's
damage or water ingress.
time to remove forms or pull tendons.

AI REAL TIME DATA OPTIMIZING MIX DESIGNS

Use your data to understand exactly how to create
Signal Live Hub allows for continuous data
collection from embedded sensors. your mix, without overdesigning. Reduce cement
The smartphone application gives visibility to field and admixtures to optimize pours thus reducing
teams for efficient decision making. cost and carbon.
o the
app.

CODES AND STANDARDS

Thermal Tunneling Infrastructure Precast

Differential
Monitoring

IS PROUD
TO BE AN
EXHIBITOR
AT THE:
ANAHEIM : NOVEMBER 8-9, 2023 BOOTH #611
e examples of trademarks for one or more DEWALT power tools and accessories: the yellow and black color scheme; the “D”-shaped air intake grill; the array of pyramids on the handgrip; the kit box configuration; and the array of lozenge-shaped humps on the surface of the tool.
 The Future is
Looking Up.
Literally. The
Evolution
of Portland
International
Airport
Part Two: Novel and Experimental Design
Approaches at the New PDX Terminal
By Christopher Pitt, P.E., S.E., LEED A.P., Associate, KPFF

T he approximately $2 Billion Portland International Airport

Terminal Core Redevelopment Project, located in Portland,
OR, is led by the Port of Portland as owner, with a design team
featuring ZGF Architects and KPFF as Structural Engineer. It
is currently being built by Hoffman-Skanska Joint Venture as
CMGC. The project is summarized in Part One, published in
the June 2023 Structure, and features many unique structural
solutions.. In this article, we will delve deeper into some of
the most interesting structural aspects of the project, including
design for fire exposure, physical load testing of connections,
and the herculean process of erecting the new roof.

Performance-Based Fire Engineering

Performance-Based Fire Engineering was performed on the
grout-filled architecturally exposed structural steel (AESS)
Y-Columns, which feature a cruciform steel core with diagonal
steel face plates, forming diamond-shaped cross sections, which
taper from a kink point 8’ above the main floor level to the
top, roughly 26’ above. Fire scenario analyses were performed
by Code Unlimited, which identified a critical design fire for
the columns, with time-heat data developed and applied to a
thermal heat transfer model to determine the maximum tem-
peratures across the column cross-section at critical locations
to ensure that a central steel core within the column can safely

32 STRUCTURE magazine
support the roof during a fire event.
This is possible because the exterior
steel face plates are primarily needed
for seismic resistance and stability. The
grout fill provides an insulating effect
and stability for the interior plates,
which are adequate to support the roof
loads considering elevated tempera-
ture effects due to fire. This advanced
process allowed the painted AESS col-
umns to be exposed to view above the
enplaning level without exterior fire
protection materials.

Engineered Lumber and

Connections
The largest glued-laminted timber Roof glulam beam end connection. Photo courtesy of Dylan Evanston.
(glulam) beams on the project are a
prodigious 9’-3” deep occurring at clerestory locations. Wood for efficiency. The design tension forces in the glulam beam
trade partner, Swinerton Mass Timber (SMT), elected to top/bottom connections are significant, up to several hundred
increase the initially-planned 7’-4 ½” deep glulam beam with kips, requiring the development of project-specific connections,
curb above into a single massive beam serving as both beam and verified through extensive physical load testing in partnership
curb, requiring expanded APA approval, which was successfully with Portland State University’s structures lab.
achieved. The glulam beams are mostly 6’-4 ½” deep at their Numerous glulam end connection options were explored,
ends, where they frame into the steel girders with moment but in partnership with SMT, it was determined that steel side
connections for continuity, with a vertical shear and horizontal plates with rows of closely-spaced Simpson SDS screws were
tension/compression connection at the bottom and a horizontal the most cost-effective solution. Three sizes of connections were
tension/compression connection at the top of beam designed developed, a short connection, a long connection, and a double-
to accommodate significant vertical shrinkage movement in the long connection, with progressively more screws, to cover the
glulams. These moment connections allowed for glulam beam wide range of connection demands. The short connections,
cantilevers, provided lateral load transfer between the upper which have 108 screws distributed between the two sides of the
diaphragm level and isolators located below the bottom of the beam, performed well without vertical reinforcing, exhibiting
girders, and allowed for optimized continuous beam design ductile screw bending failures with ultimate tensile strengths
of up to 150 kips. The long connections, with 238
total screws, exhibited premature block-shear wood
failures when initially tested without perpendicu-
lar reinforcing screws, so reinforcing screws were
added to subsequent tests to develop ultimate tensile
strengths of up to 380 kips and incorporated into the
final design. The double-long connections include a
total of 476 screws with perpendicular reinforcing
screws and achieved ultimate tension test loading of
up to 780 kips, a massive load for a screwed con-
nection to wood.
LRFD design methods per NDS were utilized for the
roof, with nominal connection capacities developed
by ASTM D2915-17 based on the mean ultimate
test strength minus a set number of standard devia-
tions based on the sample size of each connection size.
Appropriate phi and lambda values were then applied
to the nominal capacity and compared to factored
design loads to confirm the adequacy of the connec-
tions. Load-displacement data from testing showed
that connection elongation at service level loading was
minimal at under 1/16”, contributing to less than ¼” of
roof edge deflection when installed snug tight, which
was considered in roof edge elevation cambering.
The large glulam beams posed several additional
Roof glulam beam end connection detail. challenges in this hybrid roof structure. The curved

SEP T E M B ER 2023 33
 plywood panel (MPP) deck
(which move with glulam
shrinkage) to the girder
metal deck utilized sloped
transition decks over 3’
long to minimize movement
demands on the roofing.
The roof structure gravity
design utilized nonlinear
staged construction analysis
using SAP2000 with over
36 construction stages to
capture the many steps in
the erection process, which
was critical in accurately
capturing the member and
connection demands through
the numerous construction
and service conditions.
Above the glulam beams
is a 2” thick MPP roof
Glulam beam top connection axial tension test setup. deck, technically a form of
cross-laminated timber con-
geometry of the beams causes cross-grain tension in the fiber structed out of wood veneer manufactured by Freres Lumber
due to flexural tension stresses as the curved wood laminations in Lyons, OR. This material had recently been developed and
attempt to straighten out and pull away from adjacent lamina- received APA product approval when the roof design was devel-
tions. In some locations of higher stress and tighter radius, this oping, and this represents the most prominent, and most publicly
necessitated using long perpendicular reinforcing threaded rods visible MPP project. To accommodate the curved and warped
manufactured by SFS run through the depth of the glulams. vault/dome surfaces, with the top of glulam radiuses as small as
Shrinkage movement is especially critical in those locations, 35’-0”, the MPP panels were bent from their flat manufactured
so physical temperature/moisture lab testing was performed geometry to conform with the top of glulam beams. This pro-
on glulam samples with reinforcing screws to confirm they cess required an extensive full-scale mock-up to confirm joint
can accommodate the expected moisture content changes, and locations, geometry, and faceting. SMT’s digital construction
accordingly, a tight yet achievable moisture content range was subcontractor CADMakers used advanced 3D modeling and
defined for those critical glulam beams, which was verified and detailing technology commonly used for aerospace industry
tested throughout the construction process. Critical consider- manufacturing to determine the correct cut geometry for the
ations in the design and detailing of the roof included allowing panels. At the end of this pre-construction process, the panels
for significant expected wood shrinkage of potentially over 1” successfully fit together with impressive precision on the roof
and differential thermal movements between the steel gird- structure. Additionally, the roof edge parapets and skylight
ers and wood structure during construction before enclosure curbs were constructed using MPP in place of cold-formed
and temperature control. Detailing transitions from the mass metal framing and sheathing, taking advantage of the in-line

Glulam connection specimen failure during tension testing. Mass plywood roof panels installed on curved glulam roof beams.

34 STRUCTURE magazine
CNC capabilities of Freres to ensure proper fit-up while saving custom pivoting slide support assembly with an integrated jack
cost and schedule. for elevation control and load monitoring and was propelled
by a strand jack setup with one end temporarily anchored to a
Y-column and the other fastened to the trailing end of the roof
Erection Concept girder. Using this approach, the modules were pulled into their
final position, temporarily cantilevering up to 70’ to reach the
The TCORE roof design was inextricably linked with the erec- next support. Through this methodology, the operational impacts
tion concept, driven by the need to minimize impacts on airport of each of the (5) modules erected over the terminal were limited
operations. The roof erection planning and engineering process to a few short-duration partial night closures, allowing the airport
involved the Port of Portland, KPFF, HSJV, WW/AFCO Steel to continue uninterrupted operation while being transformed
Trade Partners, Erectors Derr and Gruenewald, Mammoet into the terminal of the future.
Heavy Movers, and Walter P. Moore erection engineers forming In the 80’ wide gaps between any (2) super-modules, all-wood
a truly integrated team. Based on bridge launching techniques, a “drawer” modules, with each glulam beam end supported on roller
modular pre-fabrication approach was selected for the main roof. assemblies, were temporarily linked together by struts and slid
The 9-acre roof structure is separated into a total of (18) roof into place along the bottom flanges of the erected roof modules
modules, (14) and into final posi-
of which have tion, where they were
been erected in bolted into place on
Phase 1, with the module girders,
two each at the permanently tying
north and south the roof together into
ends of the roof a cohesive whole.
to be installed
in Phase 2 once Moving
the existing
security node Structures/
areas are closed. Temporary
Construction
over and in Bypasses
an occupied
transportation Routing passengers
hub is a major through the airport
challenge, as during construc-
activity contin- tion offered major
ues throughout challenges for the
the 24-hour project. To ensure
daily schedule. a quality passen-
However, the ger experience, the
Port worked team came up with
with HSJV and a creative solution
the key stake- to re-purpose the
holders at PDX existing Concourse
to identify short Corridor Connector
windows in the (CCC), a roughly
Nighttime launching of roof module from SPMT to Y-Columns and temporary shoring towers.
middle of the 700’ long existing
night when lim- structure built in
ited portions of the terminal could be de-occupied as required by 2003 to connect Concourses C and D, which was slated for
the City of Portland requirements below moving loads. The key demolition as part of TCORE. KPFF had initially designed
to success was limiting the overall operational impacts, which the CCC as a continuous bridge-like Vierendeel truss structure
was accomplished by minimizing the quantity and duration with a series of approximately 100’ long spans to allow for
of roof moves over occupied terminal areas. flexibility below. This structure was cut into two segments,
The roof includes (9) “super-modules,” which are up to 235’ long with approximately half relocated to the north and south ends
by 155’ wide and weigh up to 1400 kips, featuring a 20’ double of the terminal, where temporary supports were erected, with
steel girder section on each side of an 80’ wide timber section, tie-ins to the existing Concourses on each side of the TCORE
with timber cantilever beams extending off one side at some loca- construction area, allowing for passenger routing through a
tions. Each of the (5) Phase 1 roof modules that occur over the safe, pleasant facility during both Phases 1 and 2. This struc-
existing terminal were jacked up to elevation in the prefab yard, ture relocation also provided an opportunity for the project’s
transported on a Self-Propelled Modular Transport (SPMT), heavy mover, Mammoet, to showcase their capabilities, as they
then launched over Y-columns and temporary shoring towers used their SPMTs to lift and drive the 300’+ long segments
supported by existing columns that have been demolished to just around the existing terminal and concourses and set them on
above the main floor level. Each launching support featured a their temporary supports during a short overnight window.

SEP T E M B ER 2023 35
 Panoramic view of roof modules erected over the existing terminal.

Moving of bypass structures using SPMT's.

36 STRUCTURE magazine
 Sustainable Wood Sourcing
The use of local, sustainable wood was a high priority for the
Port, which worked with ZGF and partnered with Sustainable
Northwest Wood to develop a novel and detailed plan for sourc-
ing and tracking wood from a variety of sustainable sources,
including regional indigenous-owned lands and small family-
owned forests. The team worked tirelessly with every partner to
optimize the supply chain, trailblazing a new path for sustainable
wood sourcing through constant market inertial resistance and
allowing such detailed tracking that they could pinpoint the
origin of nearly 100% of the wood in the roof structure on an
element-by-element basis, ensuring it was all sustainably sourced.
Through touring numerous forests and meeting with sawmills,
lam stock processors, manufacturers, and fabricators, the team
heard “I don’t know if this is possible” and “this has never been
done before” countless times. Still, with the support of the Port,
the team chipped away at the reluctance and uncertainty. It
achieved the project goals of sustainable sourcing without paying
significant premiums for fully certified lumber, which also wasn’t
available in the volumes required for the project. Through this
process, the team showed the market what is possible and created a
new case study for flexible and achievable sustainable wood sourc-
ing, which can be replicated on many future projects. Through
Life-Cycle Analysis, the team was able to quantify a massive
overall reduction in project-wide embodied carbon through use
of sustainably-sourced wood.
Conclusion
Every significant project presents challenges, and it’s our job as
structural engineers to work with our project teams to find the
appropriate creative solutions and help implement them safely,
efficiently, and cost-effectively. The TCORE project, as both a
massive expansion and retrofit of an existing operating transporta-
tion hub, presented tremendous obstacles that called for unique
solutions. By pushing the state of the practice using cutting-edge
analytical tools, physical testing, and novel construction methods,
along with plenty of good-old-fashioned effort and teamwork,
the KPFF team has contributed significantly to the delivery of a
structure that the project team, Port of Portland, and the local
community can be proud of for generations to come. Book your
flights now to/from PDX for Summer 2024, when Phase 1 will be
open to the public, and enjoy this iconic transformed terminal;
trust us, you’ll want to celebrate with us by “raising the roof ”!■
Christopher Pitt is a Structural Engineer/Associate at KPFF in Portland, OR
(christopher.pitt@kpff.com)
SEP T E M B ER 2023 37
 structural FORUM
Understanding Developing Issues in
Access to Design Data
Implications for designers (Part 1 of 2).
By Joan Malana Kennedy, BSc Architecture, MSc Building Science, MSc Construction Law and Dispute Resolution, UAP, FCIArb, FPIArb, AMAE
T his is part 1 of a 2-part series about the developing issues
in access to design data concerning digital collaborative
working environments, particularly BIM. Part 1 discusses
the background and BIM development in the UK and the
first reported formal dispute involving BIM in the UK, Trant
Engineering Limited v Mott MacDonald Ltd [2017] EHWC
2061 (TCC). Part 2 will deal with the lessons learned about
Trant v Mott MacDonald [2017] and the implications and
applications for Designers.
Introduction
In recent years, the UK Government has pushed for Building
Information Modelling (BIM):
“BIM is a process for creating and managing information
on a construction project across the project lifecycle” (National Building
Specification).
BIM creates a data model that contains information assembled and
updated collaboratively to enable end-users to optimize their actions
and get greater whole-life value for their asset. The product of the BIM
process is a departure from that generated by earlier Computer-Aided
Design (CAD) software that uses standalone two-dimensional drawings
produced independently by each building professional and/or designer.
BIM is used in place of traditional 2D CAD drawings at the design stage
and throughout the building lifecycle.
Rapid and frequent changes in standards applied to BIM took place,
making it fertile ground for legal disputes. In July 2017, the UK reported
its first formal dispute involving BIM. In Trant Engineering Limited v Mott
MacDonald Ltd [2017] EHWC 2061 (TCC), the claimant applied for an
interim injunction until trial (or further order), requiring the defendant to
provide access to design data the claimant had prepared. The case raised
issues about the obligations of the party who has control over the access
to design data prepared by the rest of the team and the realities (and
complexities) of the inter-party nature of the use of BIM.
BIM Development (UK)
In support of the design profession and the construction industry’s increas-
ing use (and limited formal adoption) of BIM, the Construction Industry
Council (“CIC”) published the first edition of its CIC-BIM Protocol
(“CIC/BIM Pro”) in 2013. This protocol was issued with the intention
to be utilized on all UK construction contracts using BIM (CIC 2013
iv). The development of the protocol was a response to the publication
of the UK Government Construction Strategy in 2011, which aimed to
reduce the costs of construction projects by up to 20% (United Kingdom,
38 STRUCTURE magazine
Cabinet Office 3). In 2013, the UK Government also mandated using
BIM for all centrally procured Government contracts from 2016. This
forms part of the UK’s Construction 2025 Strategy (CIC 2013). One of
the goals stated in that strategy was a reduction of the initial construction
costs and the whole life cost of built assets by 33%.
Also, in 2013, PAS 1192-2:2013 came into effect, which is the “specifica-
tion for information management for the capital/delivery phase of construction
projects using building information modelling” (British Standard Institution).
The Second Edition of the CIC/BIM Pro was published in 2018 to reflect
the ongoing technical and practical development in BIM adoption and
use. This updated edition was intended to align closely with PAS 1192-
2:2013, the updated UK standard (CIC 2018 4). That same year, ISO
19650 was published, creating an international standard for managing
information over the whole life cycle of a built asset using BIM. The UK
implemented this standard in 2019 through its BS EN 19650 series, the
“Organization, and digitization of information about buildings and civil
engineering works, including building information modelling -- Information
management using building information modelling.”
BS EN ISO 19650-1:2018 sets out the concepts and principles for
information management, defining a common modelling environment
or a “Common Data Environment” (CDE), which allows information
to be shared between all project team members. A CDE is an “agreed
source of information for any given project or asset, for collecting, managing
and disseminating each information container through a managed process”
(BS EN ISO 19650-1:2018). Besides defining CDE, the standard also
addresses the topic of workflow, thereby providing guidance that may
help mitigate disputes related to a CDE.
In May 2020, to bridge the gap of an Information Protocol to support
contracts that use ISO 19650, the UK BIM Framework (in association
with the CIC) published the “Information protocol to support BS EN ISO
19650-2 the delivery phase of assets” (UK BIM Framework 2020).
 The Issue in the TEL/MML Case
Facts
Trant Engineering Limited (TEL) was employed by the Ministry of
Defence (MoD) to design and construct a £55 million Mid-Atlantic
Power Station Project at the Royal Air Force Mount Pleasant Complex
in the Falkland Islands. TEL then engaged Mott MacDonald Ltd (MML)
“to provide design consultancy services” (TEL v MML, 2018 par. 4), which
included “preliminary design, detailed design, design co-ordination, prepara-
tion and implementation of BIM and procurement support, principal designer
responsibilities and development of the DREAM assessment (an environment
assessment throughout the design stage)….” (TEL v MML, 2018 par. 4).
In implementing BIM, MML intended to use a project collaboration
software called ProjectWise, which created a CDE to enable “the design
teams to manage, share and distribute design data on a single platform” (TEL
v MML, 2018 par. 5). A draft consultancy agreement (DCA) was sent by
MML to TEL and incorporated MML’s standard terms and conditions.
The DCA included a clause on the limitation of liability and provisions
for payment, following provisions in the Construction Act, also known
as the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, for
interim payments and “contained a provision that the contractor … could
suspend works in the event of any failure on the part of the client” (TEL v
MML, 2018 par. 9).
The DCA provision addressing the intellectual property stated:
“Upon full payment of the fees due under the consultancy agreement,
the consultant shall grant to the client an irrevocable royalty-free non-
exclusive licence to use all rights, titles, and interest in any such intellectual
property in connection with the construction, completion, maintenance,
re-instatement, repair, promotion and/or advertisement whether by the
client or by a third party authorised by the client of the project.” (TEL
v MML, 2018 par. 9)
TEL received the DCA contract documents but failed to respond.
Subsequently, MML claimed no contract had been entered into since
TEL's outstanding invoices remained unpaid. MML subsequently sus-
pended all design efforts and blocked TEL’s access to the design data in
the CDE that MML had provided up to that point. TEL applied for an
interim injunction for MML to release the design data.
Judgment
The court applied the three-stage test in American Cyanamid Co (No 1)
v Ethicon Ltd & Ethicon [1975] UKHL AC 396 and found that the
claim satisfied the tests:
(1) Was there a serious question to be tried?
Both parties were clearly in dispute regarding the services to be
provided by MML, its value, and entitlement for payment, whether
a contract existed if either TEL and MML was in breach of any
such contract, and, if so, what were “the implications…on any
entitlement to retain access to and/or use of any design data” (TEL
v MML, 2018 par. 24).
(2) Adequacy of the damages
MML argued that damages would be an adequate remedy for
TEL since monetary damages could compensate for a delay to
the project because of the inability to use the design data that was
held on its platform ProjectWise. MML invoked its copyright and
intellectual property rights in respect of the design data (TEL v
MML, 2018 par. 13). TEL responded by arguing that the award
of monetary damages would likely be wholly insufficient if the
injunction was not granted, as the losses resulting from a year’s
delay would very probably exceed the DCA’s provision setting
the limitation of liability at £1 million. TEL cited AB v CD
[2014] EWCA Civ 229 and Bath v Mowlem [2004] EWCA Civ
115, stating:
“The primary obligation of a party is to perform a contract.
The requirement to pay damages in the event of a breach is a
secondary obligation, and an agreement to restrict the recover-
ability of damages in the event of a breach cannot be treated as
an agreement to excuse performance of that primary obligation …
The rule, if rule is the right word, that an injunction should
not be granted when damages would be an adequate remedy
should be applied in a way which reflects the substantial justice of
the situation: that is, after all, the basis of the jurisdiction under
section 37.” (TEL v MML, 2018 par. 29) [emphasis added]
The court found that damages would not be an adequate remedy
for TEL nor MML since the likely losses on the project would
exceed the limit on damages recoverable from MML. Conversely,
MML would suffer a loss of bargaining position. If there was a
finding that no contract existed, MML might be entitled to more
by way of restitution than if the design services that led to the
creation of the BIM model were provided under the DCA. In
sum, the court found that the financial damages the parties may
experience in the face of such a delay would be less difficult to
identify and value.
(3) Balance of convenience
TEL argued that without restoring access to the design data,
the project could not move forward, the project would require
a virtual restart, and a year’s progress would be lost. TEL also
argued that the court should allow TEL access to the design data
since MML had already performed the design services that led
to the creation of the data and would allow TEL to advance the
project. TEL further contended that there would be “very little”
harm to MML if the court required MML to provide access to
design data that it had already produced, particularly when TEL
had undertaken to pay for the outstanding fees or damages. The
court found that the balance of convenience was with TEL and
granted the injunction.
A subsequent case was heard in March 2021 involving the same parties,
TEL and MML (and RAF Mount Pleasant), arising from a Settlement
and Services Agreement (SSA) the parties entered into on 20 November
2017 (MML v TEL, 2021). MML and TEL entered into the SSA to
resolve the existing primary dispute and govern the parties’ future actions.
The 2021 case focused on the exclusion and limitation clauses in the
SSA that MML had against TEL in the event of a breach of the SSA.
The judge concluded that when properly construed, the exclusion and
limitation clauses in question applied to any breach by the Claimant
of the SSA. That meant that MML’s liability was limited to the terms
of the liability cap despite TEL’s claims that the losses resulting from
MML’s breach were considerably more (MML v TEL, 2021, par. 87).■
Full references are included in the online version of the article at
STRUCTUREmag.org.
Joan Malana Kennedy is a Senior Consultant in J.S. Held’s Global
Construction Advisory Services Practice based in the United Kingdom.
She is a designer with a diverse international portfolio who developed
her technical expertise working in Singapore, Kuala Lumpur, and the
Philippines. She has provided technical assistance with complex and high-
value claims in cases in the UK, Middle East, and Southeast Asia. Joan can
be reached at (joan.kennedy@jsheld.com) or +44(0)20 7438 1550
SEP T E M B ER 2023 39
 structural EFFICIENCY
Maximizing Masonry’s Efficiency
Let’s review TMS 402/602 for answers.
By Philippe J. Ledent, P.E., S.E.
W hat is the maximum spacing of vertical reinforcement in
masonry walls? Without additional information, the answer
is typically quite simple: The Building Code Requirements and
Specification for Masonry Structures (TMS 402/602) does not spe-
cifically include a maximum spacing for either horizontal or vertical
reinforcement in masonry walls other than what is required based
on structural demand or what is required to meet minimum seismic
design requirements.
As we work through the TMS 402/602, we find a maximum
effective compression width for each reinforcing bar in Chapter 5,
which deals with Structural Members, that will factor into the verti-
cal reinforcement spacing. In Chapter 7, which addresses Seismic
Design Requirements, we find that there are prescriptive reinforce-
ment requirements for participating elements that include limits
on the vertical and horizontal reinforcement spacing based on the
Seismic Design Category (SDC) of the structure. In Chapter 9,
which focuses on the Strength Design of Masonry, we also have
limits on material properties (including reinforcement strengths)
and deflection, as well as ductility requirements that affect the
required reinforcement spacing. The International Building Code
(IBC) does not include any more restrictive requirements than those
found in the TMS 402/602 as it relates to the maximum vertical
reinforcement spacing in masonry walls.
Especially for structures in low SDCs, our recommendation for
the most economical wall assembly is to utilize a moderately sized
reinforcement bar at the widest possible spacing. We have found
that this assembly has not only been the most economical in terms
of cost, but it has also significantly reduced construction schedules.
Effective Compression Width
The genesis of many of the questions relating to the maximum spac-
ing of reinforcement in masonry walls can be found in Section 5.1.2,
which addresses the Effective Compression Width. For simplicity,
this article will focus on masonry laid in running bond, which is
the placement of masonry units such that the head joints in succes-
sive courses are horizontally offset at least one-quarter of the unit
length1. For masonry laid in running bond, Section 5.1.2 states that
the width of the compression area used to
calculate member capacity shall not exceed
Shear Wall Designation Design Methods Reinforcement
the least of:
a. Center-to-center spacing of the
reinforcement. Ordinary Reinforced
b. Six multiplied by the nominal wall Masonry Shear Walls
thickness.
c. 72 in. Intermediate Reinforced Section 8.3 or
Based on this requirement, many engi- Masonry Shear Walls
neers often limit vertical reinforcement Table 1 Excerpt from CC-7.3.2-1: Requirements for Masonry Shear Walls Based on Shear Wall Designation.
40 STRUCTURE magazine
spacing in 8-inch CMU to 48 in. on center since this is equal to six
multiplied by the nominal wall thickness (e.g., 8-inch.). However,
limiting the vertical reinforcement spacing to the maximum width
of the compression area would ignore the fact that portions of the
wall can span horizontally between the reinforced sections and would
thus be an unnecessarily conservative assumption.
Prescriptive Seismic Requirements
The TMS 402 requires that masonry elements be classified in
accordance with Sections 7.3.1 and 7.3.2 as either participating or
nonparticipating elements of the seismic-force-resisting system. For
simplicity, this article will focus on participating elements, including
masonry walls that are part of the seismic-force-resisting-system, and
specifically on Ordinary Reinforced Masonry Shear Walls (ORMSW)
and Intermediate Reinforced Masonry Shear Walls (IRMSW).
Table CC-7.3.2-1 of the TMS 402 includes requirements for masonry
shear walls based on shear wall designation, and an abbreviated ver-
sion is included below in Table 1:
The Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures
(ASCE/SEI 7) includes design coefficients and factors for seismic-
force-resisting systems in Table 12.2-1. As shown in Table 12.2-1,
ORMSW construction is permitted in SDC A, B, and C with a maxi-
mum structural height of 160 ft. in SDC C. IRMSW construction is
permitted in SDC A, B, and C with no limitations on structural height.
Starting with ORMSW construction, the minimum reinforce-
ment requirements are provided in TMS 402 Section 7.3.2.2.1
and summarized below:
a. Vertical reinforcement of at least 0.2 in.2 in cross-sectional area
shall be provided at corners, within 16 in. of each side of openings,
within 8 in. of each side of movement joints, within 8 in. of the
ends of walls, and at a maximum spacing of 120 in. on center.
b. Horizontal reinforcement shall consist of at least two longitudinal
wires of W1.7 joint reinforcement spaced not more than 16 in.
on center, or at least 0.2 in.2 in cross-sectional area of bond beam
reinforcement spaced not more than 120 in. on center. Horizontal
reinforcement shall also be provided: at the bottom and top of
wall openings and extend at least 24 in. but not less than 40
Permitted In
Requirements
Section 8.3 or Section 7.3.2.2.1 SDC A, B, and C
Section 9.3
Section 7.3.2.4 SDC A, B, and C
Section 9.3
Figure 1 Minimum Reinforcement Requirements for Detailed Plain and Ordinary Reinforced Figure 2 Minimum Reinforcement Requirements for Intermediate Reinforced Masonry Shear
Masonry Shear Walls. Larger diagram included in the online version of the article. Walls. Larger diagram included in the online version of the article.

reinforcement bar diameters past the opening; continuously at

structurally connected roof and floor levels; and within 16 in. of
the top of walls.
Thus, for ORMSW construction, the maximum vertical reinforce-
ment spacing is limited to 120 in. on the center, which exceeds the
maximum width of the compression area specified in TMS 402 Section Step 2: Calculate the equivalent stress block (a) and verify that it is
5.1.2. The minimum prescriptive reinforcement requirements for located within the face shell of the unit.
ORMSW construction are shown in the 2015 Design of Reinforced
Masonry Structures, which has been copied above in Figure 1.
For IRMSW construction, the minimum prescriptive reinforcement
requirements are the same as that of ORMSW construction except
that vertical reinforcement spacing shall not exceed 48 in. as noted
in TMS 402 Section 7.3.2.4. The minimum prescriptive reinforce-
ment requirements for IRMSW construction are shown in the 2015
Design of Reinforced Masonry Structures, which has been copied above a=0.150 in
in Figure 2.
Based on this information, it is reasonable to assume a practical The minimum face shell thickness specified in ASTM C90 is 1.25 in.
maximum vertical reinforcement spacing of 120 in. on center. It for nominal widths greater than 8-in. Thus, since the equivalent stress
is also worth noting that for nonparticipating elements, which block is less than the face shell thickness, the unit can be designed
are not part of the seismic-force-resisting system, there are not as a rectangular section.
any prescriptive reinforcement requirements. However, the 120 Step 3: Solve for the required area of steel (As,req).
in. is a reasonable limit.

Structural Demand
Let's look at an example of a non-bearing 15 ft. 4 in. exterior masonry
wall constructed with 8-inch units. We can calculate the required ver-
tical reinforcement spacing to meet the structural demand assuming
a strength level design wind pressure of 27.50 psf.
As a first estimate, we can assume that the wall does not have any
axial load applied and, thus, is resisting a purely flexural load. We
will also assume the following:
• Effective Depth (d) = 7.625 in./2 = 3.8125 in. for a centered
reinforcement bar
• Strength Reduction Factor (𝜙) = 0.90 for reinforced masonry in
flexure and axial
• Effective Width (b) = 12 in.
• Specified Net Area Compressive Strength of Masonry (f ’m) =
2000 psi
As,req=0.048 in2/ft
Step 4: Select a reinforcement spacing.
The area of a #6 vertical reinforcement bar (As,bar) is 0.44 in2. Since
the required reinforcement area for flexure is 0.048 in2/ft, we can
solve for the nearest modular spacing.
Thus, the required spacing is 110 in. We will assume a spacing of
96 in. on center since this is greater than the effective compressive
width per bar and will affect the capacity. The actual reinforcement
provided can then be solved:

Step 1: Calculate design moment (Mu)

Using Strength Design, the controlling load combination for out-
of-plane design is typically 0.9D + 1.0W in low seismic areas. Step 5: Solve for the effective compression width per bar.
Thus, the design moment (Mu) can be calculated as follows: As stated in TMS 402 Section 5.2.1, the effective compression width

SEP T E M B ER 2023 41
 per bar is the minimum of the center-to-center bar spacing, six mul-
tiplied by the nominal wall thickness, and 72 in. Thus, for our case,
the effective compression width per bar would be the minimum of
96 in., 48 in. [(6)(8-in)], or 72 in., where 48 in. will control.

Step 6: Verify capacity. φMn=10,813 in‒lb/ft

Since the reinforcement spacing is greater than the effective compres-
sion width per bar, we must verify that we have sufficient capacity. Thus, since the factored moment capacity (10,813 in‒lb/ft) is greater
The simplest way to accomplish this is by factoring down the unit than the design moment (9,698 in‒lb/ft), the reinforced masonry
width (b) to account for the larger spacing. wall has sufficient capacity.

Step 7: Create an interaction diagram.

Solving flexural behavior is a good estimate of the required rein-
Now we can solve for the modified factored moment capacity (𝜙Mn) forcement. However, to verify that the wall has sufficient capacity, an
and compare it to the design moment (Mu). interaction diagram is required to verify that the wall can resist all com-
binations of axial and flexural loads. A sample interaction diagram is
provided below in Figure 3 for
this wall. It shows that for all
load combinations, including
second-order effects, the 15’-4”
wall has the sufficient capacity
with (1) #6 vertical reinforce-
ment bar at 96” on center. For
the purposes of this interaction
diagram, a 500 lb/ft dead load
and 500 lb/ft snow load were
added to the wall. The second-
order deflection was calculated
to be 0.09 in., which is less than
the deflection limit of 1.3 in.

Discussion
If we place movement joints
at 24 ft. 8 in. on center for
crack control and we evalu-
ate the impact on a wall
Figure 3 Interaction Diagram panel comparing a spacing

Figure 4 Comparison of Reinforcement Spacings

42 STRUCTURE magazine
 Maximum Reinforcement Spacing for Pure Flexure (Reinforcement Centered), in. permits joint reinforcement
2000 psi 2500 psi 3000 psi to be used as primary flexural
Wall Height reinforcement. The typical
#5 #6 #7 #5 #6 #7 #5 #6 #7 yield strength of joint rein-
10’ – 0” 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 forcement is 70,000 psi.
Strength Design of Masonry
12’ – 0” 112 120 120 112 120 120 112 120 120 discusses this procedure, and
14’ – 0” 88 120 120 88 120 120 88 120 120 an excerpt from this publica-
16’ – 0” 64 96 120 64 96 120 64 96 120 tion has been copied below in
Table 3 to present the design
18’ – 0” 56 72 104 56 80 104 56 80 104 moment capacity from joint
20’ – 0” 40 64 88 48 64 88 48 64 88 reinforcement:
For example, if we have a
Table 2 Required Reinforcement Spacing. wind pressure of 27.5 psf and
have a vertical reinforcement
db Factored Moment Capacity (ft–lb/ft) spacing of 120 in., we can
Wire Size As (in2) Spacing (in.) conservatively assume a simple
(in.) 6-inch CMU 8-inch CMU 12-inch CMU
span condition with the span
W1.6 (9 8 653 921 1456 length equal to the reinforce-
0.148 0.017
gage) 16 328 462 730 ment spacing. In some cases,
we may be able to consider a
Table 3 Design Moment Strength from Joint Reinforcement. continuous span depending
on support conditions. We
of 48 in. on center to our calculated spacing of 96 in. on center, can then calculate the design moment:
we will have reduced the spacing from six (6) equal spaces to
(3) equal spaces as shown in Figure 4 below. This reduction
equals a significant decrease in terms of required grout and
reinforcement: Mu=220 ft‒lb/ft
• A 53% reduction in grout volume. For a spacing of 48 in. on
center, 0.23 yd3 would be required per 100 ft2 of wall area With W1.7 (9 gages) horizontal joint reinforcement at 16 in.
versus 0.11 yd3 for a spacing of 96 in. on center. NCMA on center, we have a factored moment capacity of 462 ft-lb/ft,
TEK 09-04A was used to estimate grout volumes. which is greater than the design moment. Further addressing
• A 43% reduction in reinforcement weight. Assuming low lift horizontally spanning masonry, the National Concrete Masonry
grouting (limiting grout lifts to 5 ft. 4 in.) and lap lengths, Association (NCMA) Foundation funded research and a report
170 ft. 4 in. of reinforcement would be required for every by W. Mark McGinley, including testing at North Carolina A
wall panel with a spacing of 48 in. on center versus 97 ft. & T. The final report found that for masonry walls with rein-
4 in for a spacing of 96 in. on center. forcement at a wide spacing, a shallow arch formed which could
• Based on several Michigan contractors interviewed for this transfer significant loads between vertically reinforced sections.
article, the increased spacing will result in an approximately The final report is available through the NCMA.
7% reduction in the wall square foot cost. The reduction This article discussed approaches to design CMU walls for
in cost for other regions, states, and markets would need flexure based on the TMS 402 requirements rather than limit-
to be evaluated. ing reinforcement spacing to 48 in. or six multiplied by the
The specified net area compressive strength of the masonry nominal wall thickness. Especially for walls in low SDCs where
(f ’m) will typically not significantly impact on the spacing of ORMSW and IRMSW are permitted, the most economical
reinforcement for walls acting predominantly in flexure. If we masonry walls use moderately sized reinforcement bars at the
compare the factored moment capacity of the example wall widest possible spacing.■
in pure flexure (10,813 in‒lb/ft) versus the same wall with
an f ’m equal to 4000 psi, we find that we only realize a 2.3%
increase in factored moment capacity. Thus, although f ’m has
a major impact in other areas, it has a relatively minor impact Full references are included in the online version of the article
on flexure compared to reinforcement size and spacing for walls at STRUCTUREmag.org.
with low axial load. For various partially grouted wall heights
and a 30 psf wind load, the maximum reinforcement spacings
are shown below in Table 2. The wall was assumed to have no Philippe Ledent is the Executive Director of the Masonry Institute
axial load applied. of Michigan and an adjunct faculty member in the Construction
What about the horizontally spanning section of the wall Engineering Technology department at the University of Toledo. In
between the vertically reinforced sections? The simplest method addition, Philippe serves on the Board of Directors for The Masonry
is to use horizontal joint reinforcement already present for crack Society and is the secretary of the upcoming TMS 402/602-
control to distribute the lateral load horizontally into the verti- 28 Building Code Requirements and Specification for Masonry
cally reinforced strips. For flexural tension parallel to bed joints Structures. (phil@masonryinfo.org)
(horizontally spanning masonry), TMS 402 Section 9.1.9.3.2

SEP T E M B ER 2023 43
 structural METHODS
Tall, Slender Masonry Walls
Two Strength Design Approaches.
By Edwin Huston, P.E., S.E.

T he strength design procedure for tall, slender walls is found

in Section 9.3.4.4 of TMS 402-22 and in Section 9.3.5.4 of
TMS 402-16 and TMS 402-13. This procedure requires that the
The origin of this large step-function method dates back to 1979.
At that time, the maximum effective height to nominal thickness of a
masonry wall was limited to 25. The only masonry design provisions
engineer accounts for P-delta effects. This can be done in one of in the code at that time were based on allowable stress design. There
three ways. The first is a step-function analysis, which is iterative. The was a new procedure for the design of tilt-up concrete walls, but the
second allows the use of a second-order analysis, such as that used in City of Los Angeles wanted the theory behind this procedure validated.
some software. The third is a moment magnifier method that is less For these reasons, in 1979, the Structural Engineers Association of
cumbersome than the step-function method but can also be more Southern California (SEAOSC) and the American Concrete Institute,
conservative. This article reviews the step-function method and the Southern California Chapter (ACI-SC) formed the “Task Committee
moment magnification method. on Slender Walls.” The task committee tested 32 full-scale slender
The step-function method dates back to the 1985 Uniform Building walls constructed of concrete masonry, clay masonry, and concrete.
Code (UBC) and limits the axial capacity of a tall, slender wall to All of the test specimens were 4 feet wide and 24 feet, 8 inches tall.
20% of f'm, unless the effective height to nominal thickness, (h/t) Thicknesses ranged from 4.75 inches to 9.63 inches. The h/t ratios of
exceeds 30. If h/t exceeds 30, then the maximum axial capacity drops these walls ranged from 30 to 60.6, so all of them exceeded the then-
to 5% of f'm. Such a large step function is unusual and may puzzle current limiting h/t ratio of 25. The tests subjected all of the walls to
some engineers. small eccentric vertical loads of either 320 plf or 860 plf, to simulate
Using a nominal 8-inch-thick masonry wall and an h/t ratio of 30 lightweight panelized wood roof loads at a purlin or girder. An airbag
limits the wall height to 20 feet. Many masonry structures, such as was used to simulate static wind loads. Applied lateral loads ranged
big box stores, supermarkets, auditoriums, and gymnasiums, have from 40 psf to 162 psf, and deflections under those loads ranged from
8-inch masonry wall heights greater than 20 feet, triggering the 5% 7 to 19.6 inches. Figure 1 presents a graphical representation of the
of f'm limitation. test frame. Figure 2 shows a masonry wall being tested.
The original report was published by
ACI-SC and SEAOSC. The results
of this work were also reported as
“Design of Reinforced Masonry
Tall Slender Walls,” published by
the Western States Clay Products
Association in 1984. Finally, the
Masonry Institute of America
published the results in 1984 and
updated them after the 1994 UBC
was published.
These test reports resulted in the
adoption of tall, slender wall strength
design provisions, which first appeared
in the 1985 UBC. Based on the “Task
Committee on Slender Walls” test-
ing program, the maximum h/t ratio
was increased from 25 to 30 in the
1985 UBC, and the maximum axial
capacity was limited to 4% of f'm.
In subsequent editions of the UBC,
the 4% limit was raised to 5%. The
5% limit is in effect because the wall
tests used very light axial loads. This
procedure was introduced into the
2002 masonry standard and modi-
fied in the 2005 masonry standard.
It has remained relatively unchanged
Figure 1 Loading Frame Showing Drums of Water for Vertical Load and Air Bag for Lateral Load.
between 2005 and 2022.
Photo Courtesy of the Masonry Institute of America.

44 STRUCTURE magazine
 The step-function design procedure first presented in the
1985 UBC is itself a second-order analysis. When the design
moment is applied, the wall deflects. The axial load, acting
on the deflected wall produces secondary moments, which
increase the deflection. The secondary moment is added to the
design moment and the wall is reanalyzed. Since the sum of
the design moment and the secondary is larger, it produces a
larger deflection. The analysis is repeated again with this larger
deflection and increased secondary moment. The procedure is
iterative. The secondary moments and deflections are typically
smaller and smaller in each iteration. After several iterations,
the increase in secondary moments and deflections typically
are reduced to the point where the system can be considered
stable. The commentary of TMS 402 states that “The designer
should examine all moment and deflection conditions to locate
the critical section…” This includes roof and, if appropriate,
floor diaphragm deflections.
Structural engineers use second-order analysis to account for
P-Δ effects in frames with lateral loads. There is, however, a
way of avoiding the use of the step-function procedure, or
any other second-order analysis. This is the third method
mentioned at the beginning of this article. It uses a magnified
first-order analysis.
One way of magnifying the moments derived from a first-
order analysis is to apply increased column buckling effective
lengths. This methodology can be cumbersome. For masonry
and concrete structures, the more common approach is the
application of a moment magnifier. This method is used in
the strength design of both concrete and masonry elements.
TMS 402 has used a moment magnifier approach for P-Δ
strength design of unreinforced walls since the 2008 edition
of TMS 402. When the committee started looking for an
alternate approach for the design of tall, slender reinforced
masonry walls, the use of a moment magnifier was an obvi-
ous choice. In TMS 402/602-13, a new moment-magnifier
analysis method was added at Section 9.3.5.4.3. It is in Section
9.3.4.4.3 in TMS 402/602-22.
Because the moment magnifier analysis is not iterative, it reduces
design time substantially. The moment magnifier methodology elimi-
nates the step function, the 20% of f'm limitation on the maximum
strength design axial stress of the wall, the h/t limitation of the tall,
slender wall design and tends to be conservative.
While providing an actual design example is beyond the space Figure 2 Typical Test Panel. (This 10" CMU Wall Deflected 18".) Photo Courtesy of the Task
limitations of STRUCTURE Magazine, a design example from Committee on Slender Walls.
a 2018 seminar presented by the Northwest Concrete Masonry
Association demonstrates the difference in the amount of effort required by Conclusion
these two methods. The out-of-plane wall design example was for a 22-foot
tall, 8-inch nominal, concrete masonry wall. The wall was lightly loaded and This example highlights that moment magnifier method is con-
did not exceed the 5% f'm limitation. Seismic loads controlled the out-of-plane servative. In this case, conservatism did not result in additional
design. The tall, slender design procedure resulted in vertical reinforcement of reinforcement. There may well be cases where the moment magni-
#5 at 24 inches on center. The design procedure included two iterations for fier method may require additional reinforcement, or an increase in
service load deflections and four iterations for flexural capacity and strength masonry unit strength. Nonetheless, its savings in design time; and
level deflections. No iteration was required for the moment magnifier method the elimination of the 0.5 f'm step function, the 20% of f'm limitation
The strength level moment for the tall, slender wall procedure was 2.22 on the maximum strength design axial stress of the wall, and the h/t
kip-ft per foot. The moment magnifier method was more conservative and limitation of the tall, slender wall design should make it attractive to
had a strength level moment of 3.08 kip-ft per foot. However, both methods structural engineers designing tall, slender walls.■
resulted in #5 at 24 inches on center for the vertical reinforcement. The
service load deflection for the tall, slender wall procedure was 0.16 inches,
which was less than the 0.20 inch service load deflection using the moment Edwin Huston, P.E., S.E. is the principal of Huston Structural Engineering,
magnifier method. Both service load deflections were far less than the allow- PLLC. He served on TMS 402/602-22 and on ASCE 7-22.
able deflection of 1.85 inches for this 22-foot tall wall.

SEP T E M B ER 2023 45
 structural RESILIENCE
Hollow Reinforced Clay Masonry
Enhances Resiliency
HCM can effectively reduce the impact of stressors and stressing events.
By Steven Judd, S.E.
W e’ll start with some definitions. “Resiliency” has become a
popular buzzword in design circles, but it often has various
meanings depending on the user and the target audience. For this
article, we will use “resiliency” to define the human characteristic of
the ability to return to normalcy after a significant stressful event,
or the ability to bounce back to normalcy from a significant stress-
ful event. Some stressors can permanently change the definition of
normalcy, such as loss of life that is not something from which one
can bounce back. Normalcy must be redefined in such instances.
A stressful event can be anything of sufficient magnitude, time, or
both, interrupting a person's normal daily routine, family, neighbor-
hood, community, country, or even broader humanitarian base. As
an example of a significant stressor, consider Covid-19. It impacted
individuals, families, neighborhoods, communities, and many entire
countries and is considered an example of a worldwide stressor. To
some extent, it remains as such. All aspects of everyone’s lives have
not returned to the pre-Covid-19 normal status. Some things will
remain permanently redefined regarding normalcy. In terms of the
audience, this article, focuses on building-related stressors and building
responses to those stressors in relation to human resiliency.
Some common events that are significant stressors that impact
individuals due to their consequential effects on structures are: high
winds; tornadoes; hurricanes; tidal surges; tsunamis; wildfires; ground
motion; earthquakes; explosions; civil unrest, and even terrorism.
There are others. Natural occurring stressors and even human-caused
stressors, impact individuals by impacting their ability to function
normally. If a significant stressor destroys one’s home, and food is
needed, but the grocery stores have all been destroyed, no food can
be acquired. That is a significant stressor, and the longer the lack of
food persists, the worse of a stressor the event becomes. If medical
attention is needed and the hospitals, emergency rooms, and urgent
care facilities are all destroyed, that is a significant stressor. If com-
munication necessary for survival is disrupted, that is a significant
stressor and worsens with time.
The impact of stressors and resiliency can be represented by a graph
that identifies the stressor disruption to normalcy, and the recovery
period, called the resiliency triangle, as in Figure 1.
The dashed red line represents a minor disruption or stressor, whereas
the solid red line is a significant disruption or stressor.
When a stressor or disruption occurs, that event reduces the ability to
function normally by some amount – the vertical drop in functional-
ity. After the stressful event, the return to normalcy can be quick or
prolonged. Suppose goods and materials need to be acquired, and there
is a disruption in the supply chain for needed supplies or materials.
In that case, the duration of the stressor can be extended, which may
actually amplify and/or acerbate the stressor. Initial injuries experi-
enced during the stressor can become infected due to lack of proper
46 STRUCTURE magazine
Figure 1 Resiliency Triangle
medical attention, which can reduce one’s ability to recover, so the
impact of the event (degree of reduction of normalcy and duration of
recovery) is increased. See Figure 2, which represents a large stressor
that takes an extended time to mobilize and restore normalcy. This
becomes a resiliency trapezoid (still referred to as a resiliency triangle).
Figure 3 represents a scenario where a return to normalcy is not
possible, and a new level of normalcy is defined, such as permanent
loss of functionality – loss of limb, loss of life, building collapse, etc.
Natural occurring stressors and even human-caused stressors, tend to
be random and often unpredictable. Some events broadcast themselves
days in advance – hurricanes, while others only make themselves known
minutes or hours in advance – tornadoes. Earthquakes, wildfires, civil
unrest, and terrorism are often spontaneous and unforeseen events
without much warning. How can one design for those, one might ask?
In most cases, designers generally have a performance history for
recurring events. Academic research can provide enlightenment.
Worst-case scenarios can be investigated. All of these scenarios are
used to inform codes that, in turn, require or prescribe minimum
requirements to be used to design facilities/buildings/structures
that are intended to preserve life. There is recognition in the model
building codes for what has been deemed performance design,
which describes the anticipated functionality of a facility after a
given design event (stressor). Functionally, model building codes
have always primarily focused on preserving the lives of the building
occupants, not the preservation of property; collapse avoidance and
preservation of building function were the goals. Model building
codes have recognized for some time that the functionality of some
buildings is extremely valuable in post-stressor periods. This design
concept crosses the threshold of designing for collapse prevention
to designing for sustained performance.
Preserving the functionality of a structure is of major importance
when talking about services that are needed after a significant stressor.
Figure 2 Resiliency with extended recovery period
Hospitals, police stations, telecommunications equipment, govern-
mental buildings, command and control centers, etc. The challenge
is defining the correct design event because naturally occurring events
do not have predictable repeatability; they have probabilities of recur-
rence for a given magnitude. Any given design event has at least some
probability of being exceeded in any given period. A ”100-year-storm”,
for instance, can occur several times in any given year, and data is
then used to redefine what is a “100-year-storm”. Historical data is
continually being analyzed to inform future design.
In many cases, the typical way to enhance performance or increase
durability – to give the nod to the likelihood that any given design
event can be exceeded - is to design for higher design loads, provide
continuity and connectivity to the load paths in the building via
special detailing, add redundancy (more load paths), add ductility,
and use higher strength materials. Making more robust force-resisting
systems and tying all the parts and pieces of the building together
to avoid partial or cascading collapse is the goal. These concepts
increase the durability of the building – the ability of the building to
withstand the assigned or prescribed design forces or even forces that
exceed those assigned or prescribed. One can easily equate increased
durability to enhanced resiliency. Suppose a structure has sufficient
capacity to withstand prescribed or assigned forces with little or no
damage. In that case, individuals needing to use those facilities can
more easily and quickly return to normalcy when the facilities remain
functional. The resiliency of those individuals has been enhanced.
Structural durability equates to enhanced resiliency.
So, how does all this relate to Hollow Clay Masonry (HCM)?
Those familiar with structural masonry probably deal primarily with
Concrete Masonry Units (CMU) and probably design for units that
comply with the minimum design strength required by ASTM C90
– Standard Specification for Loadbearing Concrete Masonry Units,
which requires a minimum net compressive strength of 2,000 psi
(13.8 MPa). This, in turn, equates to the masonry wall assembly
design strength (f ’m) of 2,000 psi (13.8 MPa) per TMS 602-16, or
TMS 602-22, assuming the use of either Type M or Type S mortar
and grout strength (f ’g) equal to the assembly strength of 2,000 psi
(13.8 MPa). Some CMU designers use f ’m of 2,500 psi (17.3 MPa),
as most CMU manufacturers can easily make units with a minimum
net compressive strength of 3,250 psi (22.4 MPa) that is needed to
achieve f ’m = 2,500 psi (17.3 MPa).
If one wants a more robust structure, one chooses higher-strength
materials. This is a well-known and historically proven axiom. HCM
is routinely made with gross compressive strength far in excess of the
ASTM C652 – Standard Specification for Hollow Brick (Hollow
Masonry Units Made From Clay or Shale) minimum requirements;
Figure 3. Resiliency Triangle showing recovery not able to reach full pre-stressor functionality
3,000 psi (20.7 MPa), which works out to around 6,000 psi (41.4 MPa)
for the net compressive strength. Typical net compressive strengths
for modern fired clay (and shale) structural masonry units range from
8,000 psi (55.2 MPa) upwards of 20,000 psi (138 MPa), depending
on the clay (and shale) materials, the material mix, and the firing
temperature(s), used by brick manufacturers. This high HCM unit
compressive strengths generally produce wall assembly design strengths
(f ’m) of 3,500 psi (24.2 MPa) to 4,000 psi (27.6 MPa) using Type
M or Type S mortar and using grout strength (f ’g) equal to the wall
assembly design strength (f ’m) as per TMS 602-16 or TMS 602-22.
Similar to the steel design concept of using ASTM A992 Gr 50 rather
than ASTM A36 steel to increase capacity, using HCM to provide
enhanced capacity, as compared to CMU, is as easy as using f ’m = 3,500
psi (24.2 MPa) or 4,000 psi (27.6 MPa) rather than 2,000 psi (13.8
MPa) or 2,500 psi (17.3 MPa). All the same masonry design philoso-
phies and masonry design equations are used for the two materials.
Stiffness (modulus of elasticity) of structural masonry, as prescribed
by TMS 402-16 and TMS 602-22, is a function of the wall assembly
design strength, f ’m. For CMU EmCMU = 900 x f ’m. For HCM, EmHCM
= 700 x f ’m. That would lead one to believe that HCM buildings are
more flexible than CMU. However, because the typical or common
wall assembly design strengths (f ’m) for HCM are around 40% to
60% higher than for typical CMU, the stiffness of the two systems is
very similar. With similar stiffness, similar seismic forces are delivered
to the structure, whether it be HCM or CMU.
For the following wall shear capacity and axial load capacity com-
parisons, common structural masonry wall assembly design strengths
(f ’m) of 4000 psi (27.6 MPa) for HCM and 2500 psi (17.3 MPa) for
CMU will be evaluated.
SHEAR CAPACITY
The TMS 402-16 (or TMS 402-22) shear capacity equations for
Allowable Stress Design (ASD) (for other than special reinforced shear
walls) and Strength Design (SD) are as follows:
ASD: Fvm = (1/2) x [(4.0-1.75(M/Vd))√f ’m] + axial load component
Eqn. 8-26; 8-23
SD: Vnm = [(4.0-1.75(Mu/Vudv))Anv√f ’m] + axial load component
Eqn. 9-20; 9-18
For a given wall geometry: (4.0-1.75(M/Vd)) and (4.0-1.75(Mu/Vudv))
are the same for CMU and HCM in ASD and SD, respectively; the
SEP T E M B ER 2023 47

Figure 4 Shear strength comparison
axial component is the same for CMU and HCM in ASD and SD,
respectively. The two equations simplify the comparison of √f ’mCMU
vs. √f ’mRHCM . In both ASD and SD, for a given shear wall geometry
(without reinforcing contribution), the HCM wall has 26.5 % higher
shear capacity/strength than the same wall configuration in CMU.
Reinforcing will add the same augmented strength to both wall types,
but the HCM wall will generate higher capacity/strength, and require
shorter lap lengths, saving some steel weight. HCM can, in many
instances, reduce the shear reinforcing required to attain the same
wall capacity/strength, which reduces cost.
The image below is a comparison of the unreinforced grouted wall capacity
contribution of HCM and CMU in ASD for reinforced masonry shear walls.
For higher shear demand, HCM walls may be able to avoid increas-
ing the wall thickness to attain the needed capacity, as compared to
CMU. Of course, reinforcing increases the strength/capacity, but less
reinforcing is possible using HCM to reach the same degree of capacity.
AXIAL CAPACITY:
The TMS 402-16 (or TMS 402-22) axial capacity equations for ASD
and SD, for h/r ≤ 99, are as follows:
ASD: Pa = (0.25†f ’mAn + 0.65AstFs)[slenderness reduction]
Eqn. 8-18/19; 8-16/17
SD: Pn = 0.80[0.80f ’m(An-Ast) + fyAst][slenderness reduction]
Eqn. 9-15/16; 9-9/10
†: The multiplier of 0.25 in TMS 402-16 changes to 0.30 in TMS
402-22
48 STRUCTURE magazine
For a given wall configuration: An, Ast,
F s, and f y are the same for CMU and
RHCM in ASD and SD, respectively;
the slenderness reduction is the same
for CMU and HCM in ASD and SD,
respectively; and the multipliers of
0.25 [0.30], 0.8 and 0.8 are the same
for CMU and HCM in ASD and SD,
respectively. The capacity/strength equa-
tions simplify down to the comparison of
l vs. fmRHCM
fmCMU l . In both ASD and SD,
for a given wall configuration (without
reinforcing contribution), the HCM wall
has 60% higher axial strength than the
same configuration in a CMU wall. This
higher capacity can, in many instances,
reduce the reinforcing required to get
the same wall performance. For a given
wall height, the HCM wall can carry
more load. The HCM wall can generally
span farther vertically for a given wall
load, or a thinner wall may be possible.
However, the slenderness reduction can
become more significant for those cases.
EleMasonry software, by Ensoltech, was
used to produce the above interaction
curves. Of note: the area enclosed by the
HCM curve for this wall is more than
twice the area enclosed by the CMU
curve. Also of note, for lightly loaded
walls (low demand: ≈ 25% of the CMU axial capacity), there
is little advantage of HCM over CMU as the curves are almost
coincidental. The great advantage of the higher strength achiev-
able with HCM is illustrated by the dual interaction diagram.
When axial loads exceed roughly half the axial capacity of
the CMU, then HCM has much more capacity available, up
to roughly 60% higher than the axial capacity of the CMU.
For any given design in CMU, swapping HCM for CMU
while maintaining the same wall thicknesses and reinforcing
generates an immediate increase in capacity and durability,
which increases the ability to resist induced forces, which
equates to the potential for less damage, less repair, and faster
recovery, culminating in improved resiliency.
In addition to the higher strength that can be provided by
common HCM for a given wall geometry, HCM, like CMU,
has proven fire-resistance ratings, up to 4-hour fire-resistive
ratings for 8-inch-thick filled walls. Grouted HCM walls,
6-inch-thick and 8-inch-thick, by one manufacturer have
passed the FEMA projectile test for tornado wind speeds up
to 250 mph. HCM has been used as the exterior reinforced
façade on a Federal Court Building in compliance with General
Services Administration blast resistant criteria. Lastly, special
profile HCM produced by one manufacturer has passed a
producer-specified 17-protocol ballistic resistance test includ-
ing .22 caliber, .223 caliber, 9mm, .308 caliber (including
armor piercing), .30-06 (including armor piercing), .357
caliber magnum, 44 caliber magnum, and .50 caliber shots,
including 12-ga shotgun - slugs and buckshot, all fired from
a distance of 15 feet.
When used in at least modest amounts in buildings, structural
masonry - HCM and CMU - routinely produce facilities that
 ALL
P RFORMANC .

30-90%
L SS
CARBON.
Learn more at
Holcim.us/ECOPact

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

Figure 5 Interaction diagram capacity comparison

embody high durability and increased redundancy. The masonry elements help
resist the spread of fire, with 8” walls able to achieve up to 4-hour fire-resistive
ratings that function 100% of the time at no extra cost. Less fire spread can
mean reduced property loss and reduced loss of life. Both reductions enhance
THE VERSATILE
resiliency. The structural masonry walls have high projectile and ballistic resis- LOW-CARBON
tance, with some HCM systems able to resist extremely high-energy munitions. CONCRETE
HCM has a highly durable surface that is color-fast, does not fade, and does
not need routine painting or touchup as maintenance, which reduces down-
time for repairs after certain stressing events, like flooding, projectile impact,
or abuse. Reduced downtime increases resiliency. In 2017, Hurricane Harvey
hit Houston in late August 2017, just before schools were to open in the fall.
Roughly 30 school campuses could not open on time due to flooding damage.
At least nine campuses were so badly damaged that new locations needed to be
found. Portions of interior gypsum board walls that were underwater had to be
removed, and mold mitigation methods were employed; gypsum board had to
be replaced and painted to match existing walls. If the interior walls had been
made of structural masonry, as in many schools, once the water was pumped out,
the walls could have been pressure washed and dried quickly and schools opened
without delay to the school year. Resilience of the school district employees and
students could have been enhanced by using structural masonry in those schools
for quicker recovery from the flooding.
HCM can provide higher capacity/strength using commonly available materials
for any given wall geometry. HCM can be used in common sizes to produce more
robust structures that are more durable than other common masonry building
materials. More durable facilities can withstand higher loads, incur less damage,
and reduce repair time and costs. In other words, HCM can effectively reduce
the impact of stressors and stressing events and shrink the resiliency triangle for
faster recovery, which equates to enhanced resiliency.■

Steven Judd, S.E., CBS Technical Director, Interstate Brick (steven.judd@interstatebrick.com).

SEP T E M B ER 2023 49
 NCSEA News

SEA Grant Program Open for Applications

The NCSEA Grant Program was developed to assist Member Organizations (SEAs) in growing their Association and promoting
the structural engineering field. The Grant Program is supported by the NCSEA Foundation, which was established to support
the non-profit activities of NCSEA and its Member Organizations. The purpose of the Foundation is to fund qualifying initia-
tives and activities that are intended to aid in the advancement of the science and practice of Structural Engineering as well as
promote technical development, education, outreach, and engagement within NCSEA’s Member Organizations.

SEAs have been previously awarded grants to:

• Start a new Young Member Group for college students, recent graduates, and young engineers to connect, network, and
learn.
• Enhance the Emerging Leaders event, providing an expanded mentorship program
• Create an outreach program to build STEM awareness and support a local Structural Engineering Engagement and
Equity (SE3) Symposium.
• Participate in a collaborative construction competition where 30+ teams of engineers, architects, and officials build
gingerbread structures in one day using tabletop shake tables, aiming to introduce students to the A/E/C industry through
hands-on activities.
• Establish an Engineers Alliance for the Arts and Student Impact Project at a local high school.

Applications must be submitted by September 30, 2023.

Visit http://www.ncsea.com/awards/grants/ for more information and to apply.

Recognizing Excellence: NCSEA’s Young Member Group

of the Year Award Finalists
Annually, NCSEA presents the Young Member Group of the Year award during the Structural Engineering Summit. This acco-
lade recognizes an exceptional Young Member Group (YMG) affiliated with one of the Structural Engineering Associations
(SEAs). The primary focus of this recognition is to acknowledge YMGs that contribute to the advancement of their young
members, SEAs, and communities. The chosen YMG will be unveiled at the Summit and will be granted an extra $2,500 to
support their future activities.

The finalists for this year’s Young Member Group of the Year award are:
• Structural Engineers Association of Colorado (SEAC)
• Structural Engineers Association of Northern California (SEAONC)
• Structural Engineers Association – Metro Washington (SEA-MW)

For more details regarding the Young Member Group of the Year Award, please visit www.ncsea.com/awards. NCSEA extends
its gratitude to Computers & Structures, Inc. (CSI) for their sponsorship of this year’s travel allowances for representatives
from the finalists of the Young Member Group of the Year. Their commitment to nurturing the engineering profession’s future
is highly commendable.

50 STRUCTURE magazine
 News from the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations

2023 Structural Engineering Summit: Thank You to Our

Where Magic Meets Engineering Excellence! Sponsors!
Prepare to be amazed by the brightest minds in the industry as we gather in the
happiest place on earth to network and learn from each other. Engage with leaders,
problem solvers, and expert speakers who will share their knowledge, experience, and
passion for the field. Get the latest insights and best practices in structural engineer-
ing with over 14 hours of expert-led education sessions and the biggest exhibit hall
dedicated to structural engineering.

Former NASA Engineer to

Help Launch the 2023 SE Summit!
It’s true! Maureen Zappala, former NASA engineer, is joining the Summit this fall. In her
inspirational keynote, Confidence is Not Rocket Science: How to Defeat the Self-Doubt of
Imposter Syndrome, she will teach us the powerful strategies of “The Fraud Free Framework”
to help recalibrate our thinking and begin believing that you really are as smart as everyone
thinks you are.
Visit ncseasummit.com for more information and to register.

NCSEA Webinars Visit www.ncsea.com/education for the latest news

on upcoming webinars and other virtual events.

September 12 What Happens in Vegas…

September 14 New Buildings < $30 Million: m.o.r.e. Cabin
September 19 Managing Risks in Adjacent Demolition, Excavation, and Construction
September 21 Understanding the “3-Es” Path to Licensure and Why SE Licensure Matters

Purchase an NCSEA webinar subscription and get access to all the educational
content you’ll ever need! Subscribers receive access to a full year’s worth of live
NCSEA education webinars (25+) and a recorded library of past
webinars (170+) – all developed by leading experts;
available whenever, wherever you need them!
Courses award 1.0 -1.5 hours of Diamond Review-approved
continuing education after completing a quiz.
Recommendations for Performing Structural Engineering
Quality Assurance Reviews

Recommendations for Performing Structural Engineering Quality Assurance Reviews

follow @NCSEA on social media for the latest news & events!
SEP T E M B ER 2023 51
 SEI Update
ASCE Pathways
to Resilient
Communities
Toolkit
“Civil engineers are trusted to protect the safety and health of the
public through the construction and maintenance of infrastructure
systems people rely on every day. This new toolkit will help deci-
sion makers understand why modern codes and standards matter
when improving current infrastructure and building for a more
resilient future.”
Ð Maria Lehman, ASCE President

ASCE’s new online toolkit, Pathways to Resilient Communities,

summarizes the difference between codes, standards, and manu-
als of practice and denotes where local leaders can take action
to ensure these resources are put into practice. It features our
hazard-specific standards including flooding, earthquakes, wind,
hurricanes, tornadoes, tsunamis, winter weather and more.

You can download this Toolkit for free and learn more by visit-
ing https://go.asce.org/ResilienceKitSM.

Education
Call for New Members: ASCE 11
Are you looking to get involved in the revision of an ASCE/SEI Standard? The ASCE/SEI 11 – Structural Condition Assessment of Existing
Buildings Committee is seeking new members to participate in updating this standard. Practicing engineers, researchers, building officials,
contractors, and construction product representatives are all needed and welcome. Young professionals (35 and younger) are encouraged to
apply to participate in this revision effort. If you’re interested in applying for the committee, please submit your application by October 31
via the online form at https://go.asce.org/ASCE11CallSM.

Public Proposals for ASCE 7-28

SEI is currently accepting proposals to modify the 2022 edition of ASCE/SEI 7 Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings
and Other Structures, as the committee prepares for the 2028 revision cycle.

The committee has extended the deadline and will accept public proposals until December 1, 2024. Email SEI Staff at sei@asce.org for
the form to submit a public proposal.

Follow SEI on Social Media:

52 STRUCTURE magazine
 News of the Structural Engineering Institute of ASCE

Advancing the Profession

Join Us for Standard Series

On September 14, 2023, mark your calendars from 1:00 – 2:30 pm, for ASCE/SEI 41 Seismic Retrofit. This updated standard introduces
cutting-edge performance-based seismic rehabilitation techniques to enhance building performance in future earthquakes. Discover the
latest generation of methodologies aimed at improving safety and resilience.

Then, on October 12, 2023, from 1:00 – 2:00 pm, don’t miss ASCE 7-22 & IBC 2024 Update. Gain valuable insights into ASCE 7-22
including understanding the difference between the document and the International Building Code 2024, especially for the seismic and
snow hazards.

Learn more and register at https://collaborate.asce.org/integratedstructures/sei-standards.

Peer-to-Peer Standards Exchange Forum

Come join the discussion about ASCE Standards! Our Peer-to-Peer Standards Exchange is an ASCE Collaborate forum to discuss technical
issues about ASCE standards. Ask questions and discuss with your community. ASCE/SEI Members can ask and answer questions (non-
members have view-only capability). Join the conversation today at https://collaborate.asce.org/standards-exchange/home.

SEI Futures Fund Donor Impact Event

Tuesday, September 26, 2023, 1-2 pm ET

Please join SEI Futures Fund Board Chair Jon Magnusson, fellow donors, and members to learn about funded efforts benefiting the future
of the structural engineering profession that you make possible through your generous giving. Participants will hear updates from and
interact with funded effort leads, including:

• SEI President Don Scott on Climate workshop effort

• SEI Managing Director Jennifer Goupil and Dr. Elaina Sutley on Scholarships to SEI Conferences and Codes & Standards Young
Professional program
• Dan Bergsagel on Building the Next Engineers

Register for this free event at https://go.asce.org/3KQEfQo

SEI Standards Supplements and Errata including ASCE 7.

Errata See www.asce.org/SEI. To submit errata, contact sei@asce.org.

SEP T E M B ER 2023 53
 CASE in Point
Tools To Help Your Business Grow...
CASE has committees that work together to produce specific resources available to members, from contract
documents to white papers, to help your business succeed.
If you are a member of CASE this tool and all publications are free to you. NCSEA and SEI members receive
a discount on publications. Use discount code - NCSEASEI2022 when you check out.
Check out some of the brand new CASE Publications developed by the Guidelines CommitteeÉ

CASE 976-C: A Review and Commentary on the American Institute of Steel Construction 2022 Code
of Standard Practice for Steel Buildings and Bridges

The importance of the AISC Code of Standard Practice (AISC 303-22), referred to herein as the Code or
COSP) to the construction community is manifested in its almost 100 years of use and development. This
Code establishes the trade practices for the steel industry. Generally, this involves the acceptable practices
and responsibilities of the Fabricator and Erector and the responsibilities of others such as the Owner’s
Designated Representative for Design (ODRD) – (usually the Structural Engineer of Record), the Owner
and the Owner’s Designated Representative for Construction (ODRC) – (usually the General Contractor or Construction Manager or
similar authority at the jobsite) as they relate to the work of the Fabricator and Erector. The 2022 COSP addresses many recent changes
in the practice of designing, purchasing, fabricating and erecting structural steel and is therefore a continuation of the trend of past
improvements and developments of this standard.

CASE White Paper

Beyond the Code: Shrinkage Cracking

CASE recognizes that the International

Building Code or other governing codes do not
address all aspects of structural engineering and
design. Often, the most common issues where
the owners, or the contractor or the design team
are not aligned deal with what is not clearly
addressed by the various codes or design guide-
lines. This is the second in a series of “Beyond
the Code” white papers that will attempt to
collate design considerations that need to be
discussed with the owners at the beginning of
a project to establish a clear Basis-of-Design
for the project. By proactively bringing up the
design consideration in front of the owners, the
Structural Engineer can set up realistic expecta-
tions and discuss the cost impact of alternative
designs.This white paper in the “Beyond the
Code” series discusses shrinkage cracking in
concrete with an explanation of why it occurs,
common locations they occur, and strategies to
mitigate them becoming a risk in your project.

You can purchase these and other Risk Management Tools at www.acec.org/bookstore.
You can also browse all of the CASE publications at www.acec.org/coalitions/coalition-publications/

Is there something missing for your business practice? CASE is committed to publishing the right tools for you.
Have an idea? We’d love to hear from you!

Follow ACEC Coalitions on LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/acec-coalitions

54 STRUCTURE magazine
 News of the Coalition of American Structural Engineers

Upcoming Events

ACEC Fall Conference

October 15 – 18, 2023
Austin, TX
The ACEC Fall Conference taking place October 15-18 in Austin, Texas is the engineering and design services industry's leading event focused
on the business of engineering. 900+ engineering professionals attend educational sessions, major networking events, forums, roundtables,
and ACEC/PAC fundraising events.

Registration is open now! Visit https://www.acec.org/education-events/events/fall-conference/

Managing Small Projects Successfully: How to Prevent

Small Projects from Becoming Big
October 31 – November 9, 2023
Online Course
For engineering firm project managers and firm principals, smaller projects can be a core revenue driver. But, smaller projects still have the
potential to carry big risk that can be a drag on resources, profitability, and client satisfaction. The good news is that, with the right set of
skills in your toolbox, you can ensure that even the smallest projects deliver maximum profits.
Register now for Managing Small Projects Successfully: How to Prevent Small Projects from Becoming Big Problems and learn the skills,
hacks, secrets, formulas, trouble-shooters and problem-solvers that make engineering firm executives and clients delighted with small project
progress and outcomes.
From planning, scheduling and budgeting to risk control and crisis management, this live online program packs everything you need into
just 8 hours of instruction, broken into two-hour sessions to work with your busy schedule. Even better, it is packed with proven insight
from the engineering project management experts at PSMJ Resources, Inc.

Earn up to 8 PDHs!

Now more than ever

we need to support the
upcoming generation of
the workforce.

Give to the CASE

Scholarship today!

SEP T E M B ER 2023 55
 INSIGHTS
The Future of Concrete BIM
Thoroughbreds, donkeys, & dead horses.
By Dr. Will F. Ikerd, P.E., Ph.D.

ÒT he Importance of Building
Information Modeling (BIM)
in Structural Engineering” was the
title of a 2008 October article in
this magazine that stated, ‘In vary-
ing ways, in less than ten years, BIM
will permanently change the structural
engineering profession and its univer-
sities, firms, clients, markets, design
codes, digital tools, contracts, insurance
policies, global recruitment of staff,
work process, and many other aspects.’
The readers may judge the merit
of that past 2008 article. Today,
this article in 2023 looks forward
with the belief that the Structural
Engineering (SE) profession, and
concrete BIM, specifically, will see
more changes over the next seven Figure 1 Laser scan by IKERD of the firm’s PT parking garage project with elevated retail above, circa 2013. The firm’s in-
years leading up to 2030 than seen in house SE team coordinated the PT with their in-house reality capture scan team to aid the owner in developing an as-built PT
the previous three decades. Fortune tendon mapping for future coring of the slab. Laser scanning was performed the day before the pours of each section of the
will favor Structural Engineers with deck and brought into the 3D BIM models to develop LOD 350+ concrete BIM content. Such laser scanning technology as
a vision to see the trends in concrete this has increased in efficiency and capability over the last decade since the data collected in the image above.
and technology.
pencil-whip a hand sketch they would then throw in the fax machine to
help the GC adjust the final rebar placing before that week’s concrete pour
Past Three Decades in some cases. The GCs had limited internet at the job trailers, and often
the SEs would visit the site when an issue arose. Following site visits, the
The ’90s saw the early concepts of low-resolution 3D modeling emerge in SEs might take a roll of film to be developed for the photos until digital
concrete even though much of the SE process was still analog. The field still cameras emerged at the end of the ’90s. Many of the reproduced draw-
used pencils to work out formwork on the structural drawings. SE firms ings were still blue line copies with the familiar aroma of ammonia from
produced the Contract Documents (CD) as a shaken but not stirred cock- the diazo printing when they were first unrolled. The concrete design was
tail of base Computer-Aided Design (CAD) work, sticky back details, and analog with engineers flipping through their paper copy of ACI 318-95 as
notes with a little hand lettering/linework sprinkled throughout for spice. they moved through different software applications to address the different
Simply printing a set of CDs could take a full day on the plotters. By the concrete elements for floor plans, beam schedules, column schedules, pier
end of the decade, most of the CDs were pure single malt CAD produced schedules, etc. Young SEs of the time will also remember the heated debates
for the initial Issued For Construction (IFC) set but quickly turned into among principals as to whether Engineers-In-Training (EITs) should be
the good ‘old fashion’ cocktail with hand sketches and notes in the record allowed company email addresses and access to web browsers at their work
set as Requests For Information (RFIs) and addendums were mixed in computers, given the firm’s limited bandwidth on 56k/s dial-up modems.
during construction. None of the ‘as-builts’ were ever served ‘neat’ to the Full 3D models of frames and 3D Finite Element Analysis (FEA) models
owner and often looked like they were on the rocks for a while and a little of complete two-way flat plates with irregular openings were emerging.
watered down in the information gathering between the field and office. By the mid-2000s, some SEs began issuing their first projects with commer-
Young engineers of the time will remember that concrete shop drawings cially available structural-focused BIM applications. They could immediately
sometimes had up to seven copies requiring manual hand transfer of red see the limitation in structural BIM applications: computer model size and
marks to all the sets with a wet submittal review stamp. These were then detail capabilities with concrete. Around the mid-2010s some SEs began
rolled up and rushed out to a courier or overnight shipping roll to get the seeing robust full 3D rebar models of irregular complex concrete shapes
submittal off the clock of the SE’s review logs. RFIs were often answered such as hydro-electric dams. These complex rebar models were developed
by intuition, wisdom, and experience by the SE initially over the phone by progressive detailers working at larger rebar fabricators. These advance-
with the GC’s field engineer. The SE would follow this up ‘formally’ with ments of the time were due to rapid growth in computer power, operating
confirming hand calculations that went late into the day. They had to systems, and BIM application capabilities to handle larger concrete models.

56 STRUCTURE magazine
Near the end of the 2010s, the use
of cloud-based team models began
to expand rapidly, and 4G and 5G
networks began taking concrete BIM
to the field. In the 2010s, the use of
laser scanning of concrete and rebar
began to be utilized for field valida-
tion and creating as-built PT tendon
locations for owners, for example
(Figure 1).
The 2010s also saw the emergence
of clearly defined areas of BIM in
design and construction litigation.
Since the early 2010s, the author Figure 2 Analogy of a dead horse, donkey, and thoroughbred (LOD 000, 100~200, & 300~300+ respectively) for Level of
has been requested by attorneys as Development (LOD) of Model Elements (ME) in BIM. The moral of the analogy is that you should not contractually promise that
an expert on the topic of BIM and someone is entitled to receive a thoroughbred from you and then only deliver a donkey or a dead horse.
Virtual Design & Construction
(VDC) in building design and construction litigation cases in the US and a purpose and are better than the dead horse in carrying a burden (BIM
Canada on a variety of project types. While this article cannot address process). The thoroughbred (LOD 300~300+) is the most useful in running
specific cases, it does share an SE’s perspective of common trends and les- a race (O/A/C BIM process) for a given schedule and duration, especially
sons learned from BIM litigation with emerging technology. Themes in if that is what the recipient was promised and entitled to. Finally, don’t
BIM disputes typically involve miscommunication of the scope, schedule, contractually promise thoroughbreds (LOD 300~300+) if you are not
fee, Level of Development (LOD), and firms’ marketing around BIM. going to deliver them and know the difference between a thoroughbred
Even with all the changes noted above, there remains one area of the SE and a donkey, etc. (Figure 2)
profession that has not consistently advanced with BIM over the last three At the risk of beating a dead horse, Figure 3 provides a more concrete example
decades. It is the sociology and attitudes of SE firms and the principals to illustrate the ME progression in BIM from LOD 100 to LOD 400 from
who own those firms that has lagged the technology changes with BIM. the BIMForum Global LOD Specification (bimforum.global). SE firms
Too often, SE firms begrudgingly admit that BIM helps them produce need to be very comfortable stating that their content is approximately
2D documents. At the same time, they see any further use or innovation at LOD 200 if that is the case and never state that a whole model is at
of BIM as someone else’s issue and none of their business. LOD 300 if they have not verified that all of their objects are in specific
locations and can be measured from the model without referring to 2D
documentation. LOD 300 is not a trivial loose definition for model elements
Level of Development (LOD) that means ‘kinda sorta close’ for the SE to wiggle around with. Instead, it
is a contractual commitment to an object being specific in terms of (1)
LOD has played such a central role in BIM disputes that it should be quantity, (2) size, (3) shape, (4) location, and (5) orientation within the
addressed first. The American Institute of Architects (AIA) has a well- element’s construction tolerance. If an SE firm does not intend to model
established set of definitions for LOD beginning in 2008 with the AIA an element at LOD 300 (specific), state it as such in the CDs and contract
E201 document. AIA updated their definitions in 2013 and, most recently, that the element is LOD 200 (approximate).
in 2022 with the AIA E202-22 ‘BIM Exhibit for Sharing Models with Regardless of the LOD SEs provide today, the evidence suggests they will
Project Participants’. be asked to provide higher LOD in the future.
It is understood that LOD may seem tedious, like the ‘excitement’ of
reading a dictionary. However, LOD provides the terminology needed in
contracts with BIM. LOD is how BIM scope is defined for claims against Present Emerging Concrete Technologies
SE firms for both errors and omissions as well as breach of contract when
SEs do not provide what they knowingly (or unknowingly) commit to Structures, in general, and concrete, specifically, are expanding their use of
with BIM in writing. Ignorance of BIM and LOD by SEs has not typi- many emerging and advancing technologies. Some of these include real-
cally been a good business model or defense when claims are made against ity capture laser scanning, drone imaging, thermal data collection during
them. Moving forward, SEs should consider an informed use of AIA 2022 curing, cloud-based multi-stakeholder models, digital 3D shop model
LOD definitions in their scopes and avoid any home-grown definitions of reviews of rebar, field data collection from trades and testing agencies on
LOD from their firm or the architects or builders they work with. When tablets, and the emergence of predictive analytics (PA). The author believes
considering the Level of Development (LOD) for Model Elements (ME) the emergence of predictive analytics, which includes the buzzword of arti-
in BIM, consider a promisor who committed to provide a thoroughbred ficial intelligence (AI), will be one of the most remarkable changes coming
horse (ME LOD @ 300~300+) to a recipient who placed a bet to complete to the structural engineering profession and concrete industry. For PA and
a race in a given time for a given effort (project bid) before the promisor let AI to flourish, large data sets are needed. It was only when BIM matured
them look at the beast. If the promisor then provides a donkey, mule, old as a relational database over the last decade that such structure for this data
crippled horse (ME LOD @ < 300), or even worse, a dead horse (LOD was organized. With cloud-based models, PA and AI engines now have
000) for the recipient to race instead of the recipient’s entitled thoroughbred the data sets they need for such statistical work. The technology exists for
(ME LOD @ >= 300), then the promisor may be in breach of contract owners, architects, and builders to begin benchmarking quantities and
to the recipient. The takeaway is that dead horses (ME LOD = 000) are comparative designs for pounds of rebar per cubic yard of concrete. SEs
good for making glue for those working with only 2D paper and are the with many simplifying assumptions that result in a little extra rebar will
correct type of horse for only 2D. The donkey, etc. (LOD 100~200) serve begin to see such solutions transparently illuminated and possibly deemed

SEP T E M B ER 2023 57
 Figure 3 Sample image of Concrete BIM Model Element Level of Development of Concrete. Courtesy of BIMForum Global (bimforum.global), Ascend Building Knowledge
Foundation (AscendBKF.org), and the author Ikerd, WF, copyright 2023.
by O/A/C as overly conservative.
Other emerging concrete innovations are ‘bendable’ ductile concrete,
or engineered cementitious composite (ECC) with polymers, Ultra-
High-Performance Concrete (UHPC) that adds fibers for greater tension
capacity, and many other material advances. These technologies are advanc-
ing 3D concrete printing with early structural concrete applications.
Research is being done in highly complex 3D voided slab system designs
for floors with minimal concrete per square foot of slab. Additionally, the
trends for lower carbon footprints on structures will add pressure for more
highly optimized concrete systems with more complex geometries. All this
effort will partly minimize the material used - not for cost savings but for
environmental carbon reduction considerations. Architectural and structural
precast will continue to blur as the industry combines them to reduce the
overall material, i.e., lower carbon footprint. Other trends in concrete are
‘intelligent equipment’ and the use of robotics in field and precasting opera-
tions. Off-site construction demand will increase with a desire for greater
use of modular formwork planning that can be automated with detailed
3D structural concrete models. Additionally, other market economic forces
may lead to larger concrete contractors with advanced BIM capabilities
absorbing smaller non-BIM regional concrete companies through mergers
and acquisitions. This consolidation of concrete companies with advanced
BIM departments will regionally increase the demand for more advanced
concrete BIM earlier in the project in many markets that have not used
concrete BIM. These advancements and many others in material and form-
ing technology, along with external environmental and economic forces,
will continue to fuel the O/A/C desire and pressure for more developed
concrete BIM earlier in projects. SE firms will be asked to do more with less
material, with new properties, in more complex, thinner concrete systems
requiring greater analysis with designs that are highly integrated with the
enclosure of the building than they ever have before by 2030.
In the coming years, a possible sleeping giant in BIM structures will be
when building codes, jurisdictions, sureties, bonding companies, insur-
ance carriers, and government agencies such as Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) begin considering if buildings designed
and constructed with higher LOD in BIM have lower risks. SEs will see
more BIM requirements with concrete when building permitting begins
using BIM with AI to automate code compliance reviews. Scheduling
and estimating concrete projects will also see notable advancement and
changes in BIM over the next few years, with the rapid emergence of AI
being applied to models with elements at higher LOD.
Now What Should SE Firms Consider
For CDs, SEs need to establish key BIM parameters in their general notes
and specification: (1) SE’s origin of the model that trade models will refer-
ence, (2) what is modeled, (3) what is not modeled, (4) what is the level of
58 STRUCTURE magazine
reliance on the elements that are modeled, (5) what is expected to be used
by the trades in BIM as part of a quality control process that the SE will
specify, and (6) what level of model testing for the trade’s concrete BIM
will the SE, owner and/or general contractor require before the model
is used to create formwork and rebar shop submittals (drawings and/or
models). Such testing could include but is not limited to coordination
testing and clash detection of concrete systems with other trades’ content
as well as phased modeling of pour sequencing, 4D scheduling, and 5D
cost estimating.
Several resources are available for SEs to learn more about concrete
BIM and what they should consider in their general notes and specifica-
tions. Since 2008, the SEI Digital Design (formerly BIM) Committee
(SEIbim.org) has maintained BIM resources. Since 2017, Ascend Building
Knowledge Foundation (AscendBKF.org/STRUCTURES), a 501c3
non-profit, began focusing on research and training that included work
in structures from design to construction. Resources for SE firms are pro-
vided at this site with sample general notes, BIM specification language,
and sample BIM Execution Plans. In early 2022, the American Concrete
Institute (ACI) published ACI PRC-131.3-22, TechNote “BIM Level of
Development for CIP Concrete” (ACI BIM LOD 22), which does have
some valuable information for SEs to consider, particularly the seven sub-
categories of concrete. These categories are (1) Concrete, (2) Reinforcing
bar, (3) Specialty reinforcements, (4) Prestressing, (5) Specialty systems,
(6) Embedments, and (7) Formwork. However, the ACI document ref-
erences older AIA LOD 2013 definitions. In late 2022, AIA published
its updated LOD definitions, which are the current definitions for new
projects that reference them. SE firms should address the ACI BIM LOD
TechNote-22’s seven categories of concrete BIM in their contracts, general
notes, and specifications and clearly state what LOD they will provide
using the AIA 2022 definitions. BIMForum Global (BIMForum.global)
has published the 2022 LOD Specification that provides the most current
and comprehensive documentation of structural LOD. The BIMForum
Global 2023 LOD Specification is scheduled to be published in the fall
of this year (BIMForum.Global/LOD).
SEs moving forward will need to be more informed on topics such as
reality capture, design automation, AI, and delivering BIM with higher
LOD elements as the contract deliverable to communicate design intent.
From this informed position, they can better decide what is best for their
SE firm’s business. Concrete BIM is a topic that is not going away with
the drivers presented in this article. Paraphrasing Heraclitus, “There is
nothing permanent except change.” Concrete BIM is not the same today
as it was a decade ago, and it will be very different for SEs by 2030.■
Dr. Will Ikerd, PE, Ph.D., is Director of Research and Education at
BIMForum Global (501c3 Nonprofit Foundation) and Principal at
IKERD Consulting, LLC; multi-discipline engineers. (wikerd@IKERD.com),
214-382-9811.
WE’RE CEMENTING OUR COMMITMENT
TO SUSTAINABILITY
cementprogress.com

PCA’S ROADMAP TO CARBON NEUTRALITY.

IT’S POSSIBLE. AND IT’S HAPPENING.
© Computers and Structures, Inc. 2023