AMERICAN

TO THE CORE

The world’s largest HSS are manufactured right here

in America by local mill workers, using domestically
sourced, sustainably recycled steel.
Built by American workers
for those who build America.
With sizes up to 22" square and walls up to 1" thick,
our steel hollow structural sections support the
biggest buildings and one of the biggest economies.

Watch our announcement

video to learn more about our
Jumbo HSS sizes, and start
planning big things today.
STRUCTURE
NCSEA | CASE | SEI NOVEMBER 2021

CFS/
STEEL

INSIDE: Pima Transportation Center

Cantilevered Frame Design
West Berkeley Medical Office Building
95 State at City Creek
ACI 318 PLUS

Subscribe Today!

SUBSCRIBE TODAY: An annual subscription that provides users with digital

interactive access to ACI CODE-318-19, “Building Code Requirements for Structural
Concrete and Commentary,” along with in document access to related resources
and enhanced digital search features through all code provisions and commentary.
Includes full digital interactive access to the ACI Detailing Manual and the
ACI Reinforced Concrete Design Handbook, subscribers can make digital
notes alongside ACI CODE-318-19 provisions and commentary, and navigate
content by section, by chapter, and/or by provision.
For access and to subscribe, visit www.concrete.org/ACI318.
ADVERTISER INDEX
American Concrete Institute MAPEI Corp.
Please support these advertisers
STRUCTURE ®

Atlas Tube Max USA Corp MARKETING & ADVERTISING SALES

Blind Bolt Company NCSEA Director for Sales, Marketing
& Business Development
Champion Fiberglass New Millennium Building Systems
Monica Shripka
Clark Dietrich Building Systems Nucor Tubular Products Tel: 773-974-6561
DCI Engineers Nucor Vulcraft Group - Redicor [email protected]

Dewalt RISA Technologies

EDITORIAL STAFF
ENERCALC, INC Simpson Strong-Tie
Executive Editor  Alfred Spada
Hilti North America Somero
[email protected]
Integrated Engineering Software, Inc. Structural Engineering Institute of ASCE
Publisher  Christine M. Sloat, P.E.
KLA&A Structural Engineers, Inc [email protected]
KPFF | Profile Struware, Inc
Associate Publisher  Nikki Alger
LNA Solutions Trimble [email protected]
Magnusson Klemencic Associates Wood Products Council Creative Director  Tara Smith
Errata [email protected]

EDITORIAL BOARD
Based on feedback to the Integrating Shear Lug Design with Anchoring-to-
Concrete Provisions article in the September 2021 issue of STRUCTURE, Chair  John A. Dal Pino, S.E.
FTF Engineering, Inc., San Francisco, CA
the author offers the following correction. [email protected]
Figure 2(b) and Figure 3(b) in the article incorrectly show the bearing area
Jeremy L. Achter, S.E., LEED AP
(Aef,sl) as a T-shaped configuration. This configuration is only relevant when ARW Engineers, Ogden, UT
stiffeners are used. Erin Conaway, P.E.
Since the shear lug in these illustrations does not include stiffeners, the bear- AISC, Littleton, CO
ing area (Aef,sl) should be shown as a rectangular configuration. If stiffeners are installed, Linda M. Kaplan, P.E.
the leading edge of the stiffener and the area of the shear lug extending 2tsl on either side Pennoni, Pittsburgh, PA
of the stiffener would be included in Aef,sl. The author apologizes for any confusion this Charles “Chuck” F. King, P.E.
may have caused. (This Erratum and corrected figures have been added to the online version Urban Engineers of New York, New York, NY
of the article, STRUCTUREmag.org.) Nicholas Lang, P.E.
Masonry Industry Representative
Figure 1 of the Structural Systems article (Mladjov, October 2021 issue) Jessica Mandrick, P.E., S.E., LEED AP
inadvertently showed an incorrect water level. Please see the corrected figure Gilsanz Murray Steficek, LLP, New York, NY

in the online version at STRUCTUREmag.org. The author apologizes for Jason McCool, P.E.
missing this error. Robbins Engineering Consultants, Little Rock, AR

Brian W. Miller
Davis, CA

Evans Mountzouris, P.E.

Retired, Milford, CT

John “Buddy” Showalter, P.E.

NEW
International Code Council, Washington, DC
INTRODUCING

FLOORVIBE v3.1
Eytan Solomon, P.E., LEED AP

VERSION
Silman, New York, NY

Jeannette M. Torrents, P.E., S.E., LEED AP

FROM STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS, INC. JVA, Inc., Boulder, CO
ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

It’s like having an in-house floor vibration expert!

STRUCTURE ® magazine (ISSN 1536 4283) is published monthly
• Easier to use by The National Council of Structural Engineers Associations (a nonprofit
• Select connections graphically Association), 20 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 750, Chicago, IL 60606
312.649.4600. Periodical postage paid at Chicago, Il, and at additional
• New steel joist connections available mailing offices. STRUCTURE magazine, Volume 28, Number 11, © 2021
• Complete database of hot-rolled by The National Council of Structural Engineers Associations, all rights
reserved. Subscription services, back issues and subscription information
sections and steel joist profiles tel: 312-649-4600, or write to STRUCTURE magazine Circulation, 20 N.

• Same great vibrational analysis Wacker Drive, Suite 750, Chicago, IL 60606.The publication is distributed
to members of The National Council of Structural Engineers Associations
• Upgrade from v3.0 to v3.1 is free!! through a resolution to its bylaws, and to members of CASE and SEI paid

• And of course ... technical updates 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 more information or to order or upgrade, visit sponsored by for foreign students. Editorial Office: Send editorial mail to: STRUCTURE

www.FloorVibe.com 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.
Email [email protected] or call 540-239-6355.
STRUCTURE is a registered trademark of the National Council of Structural
FloorVibe v3.1 is $475 per copy. Price includes Based on AISC Steel Design Guide 11 and Engineers Associations (NCSEA). Articles may not be reproduced in whole
technical support. Steel Joist Institute (SJI) Technical Digest 5 or in part without the written permission of the publisher.

STRUCTURE magazine
Contents N OVEM BER 2021

Cover Feature
STRUCTURAL GYMNASTICS IN THE TRANSPORTATION CENTER By Thomas Kramer, P.E., S.E., et al.

Pima Community College’s new Transportation Center is 43,000 square feet with a total of 27 work bays. An angular geometry,
horizontal and vertical, involved intricate load transfers, combinations of transfer girders and custom drag connections, and more.

Features Columns and Departments

WEST BERKELEY MEDICAL 7 Editorial 48 Code Updates
We SEE Above & Beyond!™ States, Cities Adopting
OFFICE BUILDING By Ryan Kersting, P.E., S.E. Tall Mass Timber Provisions
By Nick Bucci, S.E., and Ryan Pintar, S.E. By Kenneth Bland, P.E.
The new Kaiser Permanente medical office building is a
8 Practical Solutions
66,000-square-foot structure with open floor plates. The
Cantilevered Frame Design 50 Historic Structures
chosen moment frame system allowed for conventional steel
Utilizing Joist Girders Quebec Bridge,
framing and a shallow foundation system.
By Brandon Phillips, P.E. The First Failure, 1907
By Frank Griggs, Jr., D.Eng, P.E.
THE WACHENHEIM
12 Structural Design
SCIENCE CENTER The Long Road – Part 2 54 Legal Perspectives
By Ron Blanchard, AIA, Michael A. Tecci, P.E., and Julia K. Hogroian, P.E. By Matthew Speicher, Ph.D., Waiver of Consequential
On a gradually sloping site, three and a half stories of this and John Harris, Ph.D. Damages
complex building rise above grade while two and a half By Gail S. Kelley, P.E., Esq.

levels sit below. Moment frames provide the building’s 16 Codes and Standards
lateral load resistance. 2021 IBC Significant Structural 56 InSights
Changes – Part 1 Who Selects Fireproofing?
ADAPTIVE REUSE OF THE By Sandra Hyde, P.E., and By Charles “Chuck” F. King, P.E., S.E.,

HISTORIC WITHERSPOON John “Buddy” Showalter, P.E. and Stephen M. Cohen, AIA

BUILDING – PART 3 59 Spotlight

20 Structural Systems
By D. Matthew Stuart, P.E., S.E., P.Eng, SECB A Face Lift for the Spruce Goose
Structured for Protection
Part 3 of this four-part series continues the discussion of the
By April M. Musser, P.E.
structural investigations conducted to better understand the 66 Structural Forum
existing structure – specifically the main roof and original Acceleration in the Pipeline
mechanical penthouse. 24 Structural Carbon
By John Gavan, S.E.
The SEI SE 2050 One-Year
95 STATE AT CITY CREEK Anniversary
In Every Issue
By Chris Jeseritz, P.E.
By Mark Sarkisian, S.E., et al.
Advertiser Index
The new 95 State facility consists of a 25-story Class A Resource Guide
tower with a 5-story podium. In a region of high seismicity 46 Engineer’s Notebook – Software Updates
and close to the active Wasatch Fault zone, the design L everaging Professional NCSEA News
utilized state-of-the-art performance-based seismic design Relationships SEI Update
methodologies and standards. By Samuel Harris CASE in Point
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.

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21
EDITORIAL
We SEE Above & Beyond!™
By Ryan Kersting, P.E., S.E.

A s a teenager, I had a dramatic introduction to the important

role that structural engineers play in our communities. I vividly
remember the moment the ground started shaking as I sat in Candlestick
Engineering Excellence (SEE) goes above and
beyond the calculations, details, and code require-
ments to thoughtfully and efficiently provide the spaces for our daily
Park with my mom and my brother awaiting the start of the third game experiences and improve the safety and resilience of our communities.
of the 1989 World Series. It wasn’t too long after the shaking stopped NCSEA has enlisted the expertise of an outside agency to develop
that images of the damage caused by the Loma Prieta Earthquake the content and strategy in close collaboration with a nimble Steering
started appearing on the hand-held Committee (members listed below)
TV being watched by the people in and the NCSEA Board. While the
front of us. I remember trying to pro- initial efforts target telling the
cess what just happened: feeling very story of the SE profession, raising
thankful that the stadium remained awareness, and strengthening part-
standing while thinking about the nerships within the AEC industry,
damaged structures and the lives that future efforts include outreach to
were affected. At the time, I did not the general public and students of
know if I wanted to become a struc- various ages. The current branding
tural engineer. However, I know that and marketing materials have been
experience ignited a curiosity about created for use in social media by
what it takes for engineers to design both NCSEA and state and local
the structures that give us the places in which we live, work, and play. structural engineering organizations in their local markets.
Months of disruption and recovery further demonstrated the impact A companion website, www.weseeaboveandbeyond.com, features
that structural engineers have on our daily lives and routines. some of the key campaign messages aligned with the “We SEE Above
Like many of you, I decided to pursue a career in engineering because & Beyond” brand, including:
I loved math and science, but it wasn’t a foregone conclusion that I • We SEE the “big picture” vision of a project, its desired
would become a structural engineer. My dad was a pastor, my mom was outcomes, and its intended impact.
a nurse, and professional engineers were not well known in the small • We SEE the structure above, below, in front, and behind
town where I grew up. In fact, one of my elementary school teachers the user’s experience.
wanted to expose me to some math-related careers and arranged for • We SEE the safest, most efficient path for loads so that
me to visit a local architect’s office (of all places!). In middle school structures are safe and economical.
and high school, I was introduced to careers in engineering. However, • We SEE construction solutions using proactive leadership,
I also remember wanting to make sure a career in engineering would communication, and creative problem-solving.
allow me to use math and science to connect with and impact my • We SEE our role in helping to form resilient communities.
community (the influences of my parents clearly shining through). The website also provides additional resources of interest to the AEC
In college, I was inspired by quotes from Herbert Hoover about the community and the general public.
responsibility and opportunity engineers have to improve the way of Ultimately, this campaign will demonstrate how structural engi-
life in our communities (https://bit.ly/3G8L6AW). neers’ vision, technical expertise, and leadership transcend the
In my career, the idea that structural engineering was more than just basics of code-minimum safety and provide the backbone for the
math and science culminated at the kick-off meeting for a design-build buildings, bridges, and other structures that support almost every
project for a new medical center when a doctor gave the welcoming daily experience in our communities. Having individual engineers
message to the entire project team. She simply, but passionately, told and firms like, share, and re-tweet the campaign messages will help
all of us that each time we picked up a pencil, turned on a computer, spread the word even further, enhancing the profession’s image and
or put on a hard hat, our job was not to perform calculations, draw raising awareness about what we do.
details, or even build the structure. Instead, our job was even bigger: Embracing opportunities to show and share how We SEE Above &
to help the medical center treat cancer and eventually find a cure. Beyond will make our profession more remarkable and our careers more
These memories about my path to becoming a structural engineer are meaningful and rewarding. Ideally, the campaign will inspire the next
a lead-in to an ambitious initiative NCSEA has recently embarked on: generation of structural engineers to join us. Along the way, I
branding and marketing the entire structural engineering profession. hope it inspires you, your colleagues, and our entire profession
By now, I hope you have seen some of the early announcements, posts, to continue to SEE Above & Beyond too!■
tweets, etc., as the campaign has been revealed with the brand tagline
Ryan Kersting is an Associate Principal with Buehler in Sacramento, CA
We SEE Above & Beyond. The campaign seeks to raise awareness of the
and is currently serving as Secretary on the NCSEA Board of Directors.
structural engineering profession’s vital role in society and how Structural

NCSEA Branding and Marketing Campaign Steering Committee:

Ed Quesenberry, NCSEA President (SEAO) • David Horos, NCSEA Vice President (SEAOI) • Sarah Appleton, NCSEA Board (SEAOG)
Al Spada, NCSEA Executive Director • Ken O’Dell, SEA Participant (SEAOC) • Yunlu Shen, SEA Participant (SEAoNY)
Angelina Stasulis, NCSEA External Communications Committee (SEAOG) • Leo Baran, NCSEA MO and Committee Services Director

STRUCTURE magazine N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 7
practical SOLUTIONS
Cantilevered Frame Design
Utilizing Joist Girders
Addressing Complexity in an Aircraft Hangar Lateral Load Resisting System
By Brandon Phillips, P.E.

I n answer to the growing demand for more commer-

cial and defense aircraft, larger-scale maintenance
hangar construction is on the rise. These projects
are characterized by unobstructed service bays that
span hundreds of feet, posing a structural challenge
for which architects often specify a cantilevered steel
frame.
As conceptually shown in Figure 1, the size and
complexity of a cantilevered hangar design can present
a unique set of engineering challenges. The integra-
tion of massive steel trusses and other structural
elements can increase project costs. However, steel
joist girders, along with steel joists and decks, can
offer a cost-effective solution. Steel joist companies Figure 1. In a conceptual cantilevered system, the cantilevered extension transfers loads
are ready to meet these complex challenges, offering to the vertical supports.
a combination of robust engineering knowledge and
3-D modeling tools. chord of a supporting steel joist girder. As the horizontal truss slopes
toward the back of the hangar, the joist girders that support the truss
must fit up with the horizontal truss at varying connection points.
Design, Detailing, and Fit-up This requires close collaboration between the structural steel engineer
As shown in Figure 2, a hangar project calls for three cantilevered and the steel joist engineer to address varying load/force calculations
truss towers. The towers rise at the back side of the building and with related bolting and bracing details.
cantilever over the roof to the front of the hangar. Emanating from
the truss towers is a load-resisting system consisting of joists and joist
girders. The design establishes the desired open bay space, but it also
Vertical and Lateral Loading
requires a carefully engineered system that details a range of possible Girder deflection on large, open, cantilevered hangar bay designs is
structural fit-up challenges. often subject to live load deflection limitations related to the move-
Figure 3 shows how, as the roof structure slopes to the back of the bay, ment of supported maintenance equipment and service personnel. The
the steel joists also slope. The joist girders must frame into the canti- structural engineer (SEOR) may require deflection limits approaching
lever frame to form the roof slope. In addition, as shown in Figure 4, L/700 to ensure the safe, smooth, and reliable operation of suspended
the slope of the hangar roof may require that a horizontal truss fit up cranes and overhead doors.
with each supporting steel joist girder at varying connection points. Accordingly, the joist manufacturer conducts loading analyses using
A horizontal truss along the front of the bay must be designed for the SEOR's requirements to calculate the precise point loads at each
lateral wind and seismic loading. This truss must be detailed to fit brace, crane, and joist location. Each load case must be organized
with the joist girders and may even be designed to rest on the top in tabular form and verified with the joist company's design soft-
ware. The manufacturer needs to
check the accuracy of each load-
ing calculation with a redundant
review process to assure that, for
each load case, the joist girder
and truss act as one structure to
deflect precisely under live load.
The manufacturer signs and
seals the calculations as the del-
egated engineer and submits
the calculation package to the
Figure 2. Cantilevered steel truss systems specified for aircraft maintenance hangars create massive, open-span bays. SEOR for project review and
Cantilevered trusses highlighted in red, joist girders in blue, horizontal trusses in green. approval to ensure overall design

8 STRUCTURE magazine
performance. The SEOR can also use this information
from the manufacturer to present to the building offi-
cial for code review. In addition to taking advantage
of the joist manufacturer's engineering expertise, the
SEOR can also employ a peer-review process to ensure
building performance and public safety.

Joist Girder Bearing

A joist girder with a depth of 10 feet and a span of
up to 140 feet with significant vertical and lateral
loads will have large end reactions (shear). Therefore,
establishing adequate joist girder bearing is essential Figure. 3. In a sloping cantilevered bay, the joist girders (blue) frame into the cantilever truss (red) to
for proper fit-up and management of these reactions form the roof slope. The supporting joists (orange) slope as well.
in a cantilevered frame system.
When fitting up the cantilever frame and a joist girder end panel, splice for a given joist girder may not work when considering the large
the joist engineer must give adequate seat clearance for the joist girder loads that are characteristic of a cantilevered hangar structure. When
connection at the cantilever frame. For example, 12-inch-deep girder designing the girder bottom chord splice for maximum gravity tension
seats allow clearance for 8-inch top chord angles and provide the joist and the top chord splice for maximum uplift tension, the capacity of
manufacturer the needed design flexibility. In addition, a minimum the splice may not be sufficient. Moving the splice locations to the
12-inch seat length allows adequate space to use four 1-inch structural third points reduces the required tension force. A further tactic may
bolts for erection. This provision also supplies acceptable welds to be to increase the tension capacity of the top chord splice by utilizing
resist high uplift reactions. a similar splice design generally used on the bottom chord. But these
The joist engineer may experiment with the end web slope to change splices typically have a plate on the top chord, affecting fit-up at the
the end web size. A steep slope reduces the force in the web, but the joist bearing locations.
bearing requirement must balance this. The joist engineer must check Experience dictates that while these tactics can address large splice
the eccentricity to minimize end moments while remaining aware of forces, they can also introduce complications due to changes in
any required clearances with other structural elements. The 12-inch- the steel joist girder geometry, affecting the horizontal truss, crane
deep seat helps with these considerations. The SEOR must be mindful brace, and overhead door brace clearance. The joist manufacturer,
of the potential for additional moments due to eccentricity as they along with the steel supplier, can check proper clearances by using
consider these connections. 3-D modeling. This solution may require adjustments to joist girder
The SEOR may also use the joist girders as part of the lateral load geometry, splice, and brace locations to assure that the splice locations
resisting system. As such, the joist engineer must check the girder do not foul with crane and brace load locations while maintaining
top chord and seats for these axial forces. The SEOR may also utilize an efficient girder design.
large horizontal trusses to manage large lateral loads, which may be Similarly, modeling the joist seat depths and splice locations can guide
present in high wind or seismic regions. These trusses may interact the adjustment of the joist seat depths to ensure sufficient clearance
with the girders creating challenges for detailing and field erection. for the attachment of the joists to the joist girders at the splice loca-
The steel and joist detailers can work together using 3-D modeling tions. The joist manufacturer and the structural steel detailer must
to tighten clearances to acceptable shop and field tolerances. coordinate joist seat depth to provide adequate bearing and clearance
for the joist seats. In addition, the joist manufacturer must ensure that
joist seats do not interfere with the field fit-up of the bolted splices.
Field-bolted Splices
Steel joist girders specified for hangars, along with cantilever frames,
can achieve hangar openings up to 450 feet or more. At these spans,
Project Coordination
joist girders typically require field-bolted splices depending upon For project success, the structural steel supplier must closely coordinate
shipping and site limitations. However, the location of a midpoint with the joist manufacturer, the SEOR, and the steel erector to ensure
ease of design and erection. Early in the project,
the structural steel supplier should choose a joist
manufacturer experienced with the complexities
associated with open bay construction. The joist
manufacturer's early involvement ensures enough
lead time to produce the required calculations and
a 3-D model for approval by the SEOR.
The SEOR must provide detailed load diagrams,
including all dead, roof live, crane, wind, and
seismic loads to the joist manufacturer. They also
need to supply serviceability requirements such
as maximum deflection under live loads, includ-
ing cranes and catwalks. In addition, they must
Figure 4. In a sloping, cantilevered hangar structure, horizontal trusses (green) may be supported by consider camber which can be excessive at longer
interweaving steel joist girders (blue) at different connection points. spans. See SJI technical digest #9 and 45th edition

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 9
Standard Specifications for more information regarding
camber.
The SEOR needs to review the joist manufacturer's
submittal to ensure building performance. On these com-
plicated projects, the SEOR may delegate the design of the
steel connections to another engineer. In many cases, the
steel supplier contracts with this delegated engineer and
coordinates the connection design between the SEOR, the
joist manufacturer, and the connections engineer.

Summary
Owners and architects can create massively open and
unobstructed aircraft hangar bays by leveraging the Figure 5. The HSS shown was used to drag a 50-kip axial force into two joists. The HSS was
unique advantages of the cantilevered frame system connected to the column.
paired with joists, joist girders, and deck supplied by an
experienced manufacturer. These projects will be high- Working the Angles
flying successes when the SEOR is supported early by
A recent cantilevered bay project called for the steel joists to have sloped baseplates
an experienced team of engineers representing both the
designed to support up to 50-kip seismic axial load (Figure 5). The SEOR deter-
structural steel supplier and the steel joist manufacturer.
mined that the most efficient approach was to create an HSS drag to transfer the
Early coordination utilizing 3-D modeling will
axial force through two joists back to the lateral resisting system. This HSS was
eliminate costly field errors, saving money and
not used for bearing, which created eccentricity, increasing the design moment
time for the owner.■
induced by the axial force plus eccentric bearing. Since the joist bears on the
W-section, not on the HSS, the joist seat was designed for eccentric bearing plus
Brandon Phillips currently works for New Millennium
a 25-kip axial transfer. The solution introduced complexities to fabrication but
Building Systems as an engineer and consultant. He has 25
allowed this rather large axial force to be transferred through the joist top chord.
years of design, manufacturing, and general management
As can be seen in this example, modern steel joist manufacturers can provide
experience in the steel joist, joist girder, and deck industry.
([email protected])
flexible and efficient solutions for complex projects.

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

STATE-OF-THE-ART
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
SOFTWARE

DESIGN COMPARE NOW INCLUDING

Code compliant Compare multiple ACI 318-19
anchor designs anchor types, sizes,
according to and brands at a glance
ACI 318-19, to efficiently evaluate
ACI 318-14 and design requirements
CSA A23.3-14

DOCUMENT ANCHOR
Comprehensive Strengthen your
design calculations design with a full
with numerous catalog of DEWALT
reporting options anchors

DOWNLOAD THE FULL SUITE FREE AT

DEWALT.COM/DDA

Copyright ©2021 D E WALT.

10 STRUCTURE magazine
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING FIRM
Profile
Moving the Industry Forward
How KPFF’s Entrepreneurial Culture is Responding to Change

Author’s Note: In this time of constant, accelerated change our firms

must work together to promote and support our profession. With this “I had a vision to create a highly
in mind, KPFF is proud to be the premiere firm to participate in this engaging, meaningful intern program.
new series from STRUCTURE magazine. It allows different firms A great internship experience promotes
to promote our noble profession, share current ideas and challenges, our profession and attracts talented
and celebrate the unique ways we operate and thrive. people to KPFF.”
- Caressa Bacon, Project Coordinator
“I am pursuing my passion and doing
Our unique structure encourages innovation. Ideas and experi-
this in collaboration with others that
mentation can happen at an intimate, local scale and then flourish
share my enthusiasm for a more
as the larger organization becomes involved. Recent contributions
sustainable and resilient infrastructure
to our profession include:
in Southern California.”
• Chairing ACI 318 Committee.
- Neha Yadav, PE, Principal
• Collaborating on the latest State of the Practice Book on
Structural Design for Physical Security.
• Leadership in performance-based design, including authoring
“I am building a business within our early building codes for seismic isolation, pioneering seismic
business. It is something I have always retrofit of hospitals, and initiating design methodology for mass
wanted to do and am both trusted and timber tall buildings.

ADVERTORIAL
supported in the process.”
Providing opportunities to others feeds a consistent evolving transi-
- Rodrigo Toro, SE, Associate
tion. Like a relay race, we get others up to speed while current leaders
are running strong, enabling them to strategically and unselfishly pass
the baton. This concept allows KPFF to remain privately-held by
Neha and Rodrigo, who are working together to build our trans-
Principals that are active, engaged and future forward.
portation and infrastructure practice in Southern California,
articulate why KPFF established and continues to be committed
to our unique company culture and structure. Their stories high-
light the value of combining freedom and support, allowing our
team of entrepreneurs to thrive. It illustrates how we successfully
leverage our size to provide robust resources and support without
being constrained by bureaucracy. KPFF is a supportive business
organization, flipping the traditional organizational structure
upside down. Our servant leaders focus on supporting our many
fully empowered client-facing professionals.
With this unique approach, we have organically grown and
expanded throughout our 61-year history.
Our team is empowered to “make things happen,” with their
contributions benefiting the entire KPFF culture. A great example
of this is the intern program in our Special Projects Group,
who focus primarily on prime contracts in public infrastructure. Excellence, Trust, Relationships, Stability, and Passion are our
Developed by Caressa Bacon, it was nominated for WayUps 2021 shared values, and foundational to our success. Living these values
Top Internship Programs, with some elements being adopted is essential to perpetuating the culture that continues to define
company wide. and differentiate KPFF.

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 11
structural DESIGN
The Long Road
Advancing First-Generation PBSD for Steel Buildings
Part 2: Case Studies
By Matthew Speicher, Ph.D., and John Harris, Ph.D.

I mplementing performance-based seismic design (PBSD) procedures

for assessing existing buildings has generated interest in using similar
approaches to design new buildings. The advantage of using these
procedures is that designers can go outside the more prescriptive
requirements of traditional design and have a more direct connec-
tion between expected performance and the design process (i.e.,
performance targets are explicitly defined upfront). This results in the
engineer easily communicating the anticipated performance to the
client and targeting a design that achieves beyond-code performance
if desired. However, as PBSD was gaining popularity in practice
approximately a decade ago, there had been limited published infor-
mation into the relationship between standards for seismic design
of new buildings and the seismic assessment of existing buildings.
As a result, some engineers were concerned that the existing building
standard was too conservative, potentially leading to unnecessarily
expensive retrofits for existing buildings or unnecessarily expensive
designs for new buildings when utilizing the existing building standard
Figure 1. Building schematic.
for new building design. The need to understand this relationship
was noted in the Research Required to Support Full Implementation of
Performance-Based Seismic Design (NIST 2009) and in the Perspectives braced frames (EBFs), and buckling-restrained brace frames (BRBFs).
on ASCE 41 or Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings (SEAONC 2010). Also, three different heights were investigated: 4-story, 8-story, and
Therefore, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) 16-story. The moment frames span three bays in the East-West
began a research initiative to help bridge the gap in understanding and direction, and the braced frames span two bays of the North-South
address the perceived challenges of adopting PBSD to assess existing direction. The designs were created using loads from ASCE/SEI 7-10.
buildings and designing new buildings. Each SFRS and height combination was designed twice, using loads
Part 1 of this series (STRUCTURE, October 2021) discusses the via the equivalent lateral force (ELF) procedure and using loads via
pertinent history of performance-based design procedures and draws the modal response spectrum analysis (RSA) procedure. A three-
comparisons between performance-based approaches and traditional dimensional schematic of the 8-story building is shown in Figure 1.
design approaches. The four-part NIST study, Assessment of First
Generation Performance-Based Seismic Design Methods for New Steel
Buildings, investigated four steel seismic force-resisting systems
Building Performance
(SFRSs) (Harris 2015a, 2015b, 2015c, and Speicher, 2020). Several Once the designs were completed, each building was assessed using
archetype buildings were designed using the American Society of Civil the following four levels of Tier 3 assessment procedures in ASCE
Engineers’ ASCE 7: Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other 41: linear static, linear dynamic (modal RSA), nonlinear static
Structures and then assessed using the provisions in ASCE 41: Seismic (pushover), and nonlinear dynamic (response history analysis). These
Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings. The results indicated that, four procedures were used to understand the range of assessment
in many cases, a building designed to meet the requirements of ASCE outcomes and see how the assessments related to each other. For the
7 did not pass the acceptance criteria in ASCE 41, thus suggesting linear and nonlinear procedures, models were created in Computer
there is a need for further refinement of PBSD provisions in ASCE and Structures, Inc’s (CSI) ETABS and Perform-3D, respectively;
41 to align with a more commonsense outcome. full details of modeling approaches are documented in the NIST
reports. Each assessment was done considering Life Safety (LS) at
the Basic Safety Earthquake Hazard Level 1 (BSE-1) (equivalent
Archetype Buildings to the design level earthquake) and Collapse Prevention (CP) at
Twenty-four different archetype buildings were designed as part of the the BSE-2 Hazard Level (equivalent to the maximum considered
NIST study. The buildings were simple in plan layout and framing earthquake). The assessment of the first three system typologies
details to focus on the relationship between new building design and (SMFs, SCBFs, and EBFs) was done using ASCE/SEI 41-06, and
existing building assessment without adding other complexities. Four the assessment of the BRBFs was done using ASCE/SEI 41-13;
different SFRS typologies were investigated: special moment frames different versions of ASCE 41 were used due to the timing of the
(SMFs), special concentrically braced frames (SCBFs), eccentrically different phases of the NIST study.

12 STRUCTURE magazine
Table of SMF component performance CP at the BSE-2.

Nonlinear Dynamic
Building Linear Static Linear Dynamic Nonlinear Static
Design (mean of 11 records)
Height
BC CM PZ BC CM PZ BC CM PZ BC CM PZ
ELF Fail Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass
4-story
RSA Fail Pass Pass Fail Pass Pass Fail Pass Pass Fail Pass Pass
ELF Pass Fail Pass Pass Fail Pass Pass Fail Pass Fail Fail Pass
8-story
RSA Fail Fail Pass Pass Fail Pass Pass Fail Pass Fail Fail Fail
ELF Pass Fail Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass
16-story
RSA Fail Fail Pass Fail Fail Pass Pass Pass Pass Fail Fail Pass
Sum of Failures 4 4 0 2 3 0 1 2 0 4 3 1
Note: BC = beam-to-column connection, CM = column member, PZ = panel zone

A summary of the SMF assessment outcome is given in the Table. generic archetype buildings, it was reasoned that the FEMA P695 far-
Failures were detected in every level of the assessments conducted, field set was an appropriate sampling bin. However, after the results
though there was not complete consistency between the linear and from the NIST study showed that nonlinear dynamic procedures
nonlinear approaches. For both the linear and nonlinear assessment yielded conservative results, this approach was re-examined. Uribe
procedures, deficiencies were detected in the beam-to-column con- et al. (2019) investigated the effects of using a more hazard-consistent
nections and column members. Interestingly, the nonlinear dynamic ground motion selection and scaling approach, such as the conditional
procedure indicates a few more connection deficiencies than both mean spectrum method. The conservatism was reduced using such
the linear dynamic and the nonlinear static procedures. This trend a method, but not significantly enough to enable all the building
counters the idea that the nonlinear dynamic procedure should be components to pass the nonlinear dynamic assessment.
the least conservative of the assessment procedures. Similar trends The next issue explored was related to ASCE 41 acceptance crite-
to what was described above were observed for the three different ria. These criteria are typically derived from available experimental
braced frames systems. data coupled with supplemental analytical data and engineering
judgment. Most experimental data come from steadily increasing
fully-reversed cyclic tests such as the standard protocol described in
Assessment Results Chapter K of the American Institute of Steel Construction’s (AISC)
Several trends were identified from the assessment results. In general, 341-16. These test protocols demonstrate a component’s behavior
assessment using ASCE 41 indicated that a new building design is under intensive seismic loading. However, it is well-known that a
deficient, especially when utilizing both linear static and nonlinear building component’s behavior is often significantly affected by the
dynamic procedures. The conservative results seen in the linear static loading history; the maximum deformations achieved under fully-
procedures may be considered reasonable given the relatively simplis- reversed cyclic loading protocol can be much less than those under
tic methodology utilized to account for what is, in reality, complex a monotonic loading protocol. Most ASCE 41 acceptance criteria
nonlinear behavior. In contrast, the nonlinear dynamic procedure found their origins when nonlinear static (pushover) analysis was
should arguably have less conservatism, given that the analysis directly the state of practice when advanced analysis was employed. At the
accounts for the nonlinear behavior. It is helpful to probe a few issues time, it was logical to have test data that implicitly capture cyclic
to understand the reasons why the nonlinear dynamic procedure gave effects in the backbone curve, which, in turn, is used to define
conservative results, including a) the methodology used to select and component acceptance criteria. However, the state of practice has
scale ground motion records, b) the methodology used to derive changed in the last few decades with the advances in computing
acceptance criteria (e.g., ASCE 41 permissible rotations of a beam power and the general use of nonlinear dynamic analysis becoming
hinge), and c) the potential that the designs did not actually meet
the performance intent of ASCE 7.
The effects of the methodology used for the selection and scaling
ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

of ground motion records was explored in Speicher and Harris

(2016) and Uribe et al. (2019). The ground motion selection
and scaling methodology followed the provisions of Chapter 16
of ASCE/SEI 7-10, with a few exceptions, including using only
www.dci-engineers.com

records selected from the far-field set (i.e., recorded at sites greater
than or equal to 10 km from fault rupture) in Federal Emergency
START WRITING YOUR DCI STORY
Management Agency’s (FEMA) P695: Quantification of Building We’re Hiring!
Seismic Performance Factors (FEMA 2009). This far-field set was
compiled for assessing the validity of ASCE 7 seismic performance
factors (i.e., response modification factor, R, deflection amplifica- Visit our website
tion factor, Cd, and overstrength factor, Ω0), which may result in a for more details
ground motion set that is overly demanding for use in an ASCE 41
WASHINGTON | OREGON | CALIFORNIA | TEXAS | ALASKA | COLORADO | MONTANA
assessment. Since the intent of the NIST study was to investigate

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 13
Figure 2. The 8-story ELF-designed SMF; a) incremental dynamic analysis curves; b) associated fragility curve.

more prevalent. Therefore, if the response of a building component motion records result in a collapse of the building. The spaghetti
does not experience fully-reversed cyclic demands to the degree curves are generated by incrementally scaling an individual ground
that capacities were derived, the results are often conservative, motion record and recording the associated maximum interstory
sometimes to a great degree. This observation is combined with drift from the building response. The fragility curve is the cumula-
the trend of benchmarking building performance to collapse likeli- tive distribution function of the collapse levels obtained from the
hood. However, several studies have highlighted the tendency for spaghetti curve results.
a building to have a one-side response with ratcheting behavior For the 8-story ELF-designed SMF, the collapse margin ratio
when subject to collapse level shaking (Ibarra and Krawinkler 2005, is approximately 2.0. This means the entire record set must be
Lignos and Krawinkler 2011, Maison and Speicher 2016, Speicher scaled by 2.0 before half the records cause collapse. The FEMA
and Harris 2016). Therefore, having acceptance criteria that adapt P695 methodology further requires the CMR to be adjusted
based on loading history would be logical and advantageous. Still, considering the spectral shape of the ground motions. Thus the
the implementation of such criteria is challenging given the com- adjusted collapse margin ratio turns out to be approximately 3.22
plex failure mechanisms of building components and the limited for this example. The acceptable collapse margin ratio consider-
availability of tests utilizing alternative loading protocols to validate ing a 10% probability of collapse and a total system uncertainty
such new criteria. of 0.53 is 1.96. Therefore, the 8-story ELF-designed SMF has a
Some ASCE 41 component criteria are used as surrogates to capture margin against collapse of approximately 1.64 (= 3.22/1.96) times
other phenomena not captured in typical nonlinear models. Therefore, greater than required to satisfy the 10% conditional goal. A full
the challenge remains on how to best address a component’s per- explanation of the results can be found in Collapse Risk of Steel
formance considering loading history. One possible approach is to Special Moment Frames per FEMA P695 (Speicher et al., 2020).
generate assessment criteria dependent upon loading history, such as Ultimately, the results indicate that the SMFs satisfy the 10%
energy-based acceptance criteria for certain components. objective, and therefore indicate that the ASCE 41 provisions
The third issue explored was the potential that the archetype build- utilized provide an overly conservative result. Work is ongoing
ing designs do not actually achieve the intent of ASCE 7, which is at NIST to investigate the collapse probability of the archetype
specified as less than or equal to a 10% probability of collapse given buildings with the other three SFRSs.
a risk-targeted maximum considered earthquake (MCER). If the PBSD research at NIST has also expanded to several other projects
designs do not meet this goal, then ASCE 41 would be justified in to support further advancement and implementation. For example,
flagging the buildings as deficient. Therefore, to validate the designs, given the results from volumes 1-3 published in 2015, NIST spon-
NIST conducted additional studies into the seismic performance sored related research to advance the state of practice for PBSD,
of the SMFs utilizing the methodology from FEMA P695. New which resulted in the report titled Recommended Modeling Parameters
two-dimensional models were generated using OpenSees (the Open and Acceptance Criteria for Nonlinear Analysis in Support of Seismic
System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation) and were compared Evaluation, Retrofit, and Design (NIST 2017). This report made
to the Perform-3D models to verify their consistency. OpenSees is an recommendations for broad improvements to seismic nonlinear
object-oriented software framework created at the National Science modeling and acceptance criteria requirements for various structural
Foundation-sponsored Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research systems. NIST also sponsored an extensive experimental investiga-
(PEER) Center. Incremental dynamic analysis “spaghetti” curves tion looking at the performance of deep wide-flange steel members,
were generated as shown in Figure 2a, and the associated fragility which are often used in special moment frames. The results of this
curve is shown in Figure 2b for the 8-story ELF-designed SMF. research are published in Seismic Behavior and Design of Deep, Slender
Value ST is the median spectral acceleration of the record set at the Wide-Flange Structural Steel Beam-Columns (NIST 2021). Several
fundamental period of the building, SMT is the value of the MCER recommendations from these reports were considered in the ASCE/
at the fundamental period of the building, and CMR is the collapse SEI 41-17 update cycle and are currently being considered for the
margin ratio defined as the ST /SMT value where 50% of the ground ASCE/SEI 41-23 update cycle.

14 STRUCTURE magazine
and acceptance criteria based on new experimental data and state-
Conclusions of-the-art research.
A set of steel buildings were designed with the loads specified in ASCE/ Part 3 will discuss the future of PBSD in practice, including its relation-
SEI 7-10 and then assessed with ASCE/SEI 41-06 or ASCE/SEI 41-13. ship to resilience-based design, which aims to quantitatively support
Four levels of analysis were conducted as part of an ASCE 41 Tier 3 community resilience.■
assessment. In general, the results indicated that the steel buildings
studied have deficiencies that would need to be retrofitted to satisfy Full references are included in the online PDF
ASCE 41. These results are contingent on the choices made during the version of the article at STRUCTUREmag.org.
design and assessment process, some of which were further critiqued to Matthew Speicher is a Research Structural Engineer in the Earthquake
shed light on how the ASCE 41 assessment can be improved so that a Engineering Group at NIST.
more logical outcome can be achieved. Of specific note was the seem-
John Harris is the Acting Deputy Director of NEHRP and a Research
ingly overly conservative results from the nonlinear dynamic procedure.
Structural Engineer in the Earthquake Engineering Group at NIST.
The methodology utilized for selecting and scaling ground motions
was shown to add to the conservative out-
come. However, even with changes to the
selection and scaling approach, building
designs still failed the ASCE 41 nonlinear
dynamic assessment.
Other issues related to the account-
ing of loading history in the acceptance
criteria were also explored in the NIST
study. ASCE 41 component acceptance
criteria are derived from a combination
www.BlindBolt.com
of fully-reversed cyclic tests and engineer-
ing judgment. However, it is well-known
that component behavior does not nec-
essarily follow a fully-reversed loading
A Simple Solution for Blind
pattern during an earthquake, especially
when subjected to near-fault collapse
Steel to Steel Connections
onnections ESR-3617

level shaking. Currently, the acceptance

criteria do not account for the differ- Quick and easy to install
ences based on loading history, which
from one side

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

can add a layer of conservatism to the
results. Suggestions have been proposed
on how this may be addressed, but the Designed for standard
complexities remain. For example, the clearance holes
intent of engineering judgment and how
a component may be a surrogate for A fully removable blind
other behavior is challenging to quantify.
fixing available for
The final issue discussed is the notion
that the archetype building design may structural connections
not meet the intended performance goal
of ASCE 7; thus, as a corollary, the ASCE ASD and LRFD design
41 assessment rightly flags the designs as resistances available on
deficient. An investigation using FEMA our website
P695 was conducted to test this idea (See Technical Data)
which showed that the designs were, in
fact, satisfactory. This confirms the con- Available in stainless
servatism in the ASCE 41 procedures,
steel and zinc coated
given all the choices and assumptions
made to arrive at these conclusions. It
is particularly interesting when using Also suitable for Lumber umber to
ASCE 41 as an alternative approach to Steel Blind connections
Scan to view
designing new buildings. The conser- installation videos
vatism seems to take some motivation
away from utilizing such PBSD pro- For questions or technical advice please contact
cedures for new designs. The results [email protected]
suggest several areas need improvement
in ASCE 41 if alignment with ASCE 7 1217 S Bridge St, Yorkville, IL 60560
is desired. Therefore, additional research
(630) 882-9010
funded by NIST has further expanded BLIND BOLT MASTER DISTRIBUTOR
the PBSD efforts to update modeling

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 15
CODES and STANDARDS
2021 IBC Significant Structural Changes
Part 1: Loads (Chapter 16)
By Sandra Hyde, P.E., and John “Buddy” Showalter, P.E.

T
IBC Table 1604.5 Risk Category of Buildings and Other Structures (excerpt).
his five-part series discusses significant structural
changes to the 2021 International Building Code
(IBC) by the International Code Council (ICC). Part 1
includes an overview of changes to Chapter 16 on loads.
Only a portion of the total number of code changes to
this chapter are discussed in this article. More informa-
tion on the code changes discussed here can be found
in the 2021 Significant Changes to the International
Building Code, available from ICC.
IBC Chapter 16 establishes minimum design require-
ments so that the structural components of buildings
are proportioned to resist the loads that are likely to be
encountered. In addition, this chapter assigns buildings
and structures to risk categories that are indicative of
their intended use. The following modifications were
approved for the 2021 IBC. Changes are shown in
strikethrough/underline format with a brief description
of the change’s significance. cumulative occupant load of over 300 that must be designed to the
higher Risk Category III requirements. However, the total occupant
load is much smaller when compared to a Group R-1 hotel.
Construction Document Wind Zones Table 1604.5 includes a new condition under Risk Category III for
Component and cladding wind zones must now be identified in the buildings with multiple occupancies, containing assembly spaces with
construction documents. an occupant load greater than 300 each, while also having a cumula-
1603.1.4 Wind design data. The following information related to tive occupant load for the 300-plus-occupant assembly spaces of more
wind loads shall be shown, regardless of whether wind loads govern than 2,500. Buildings that meet these criteria are now assigned to Risk
the design of the lateral force-resisting system of the structure: Category III rather than Risk Category II. The new threshold requires
No changes to items 1-4. the existence of the two conditions previously stated to establish a
5. Design wind pressures and their applicable zones with Risk Category III classification.
dimensions to be used for exterior component and cladding An additional revision addresses daycare facilities classified as Group
materials not specifically designed by the registered design I-4 occupancies. Consistent with the application for a Group E occu-
professional responsible for the design of the structure, psf. pancy in a mixed occupancy building, a building used for daycare
Change Significance: There has been some confusion about how purposes is considered Risk Category III when the total occupant
the 2016 edition of ASCE 7, Minimum Design Loads and Associated load for the Group I-4 occupancy, or combination of Group E and
Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures, component and cladding Group I-4 occupancies, exceeds 250.
(C&C) wind pressure zones are to be applied – specifically what
dimensions are prescribed for various building zones. A description of
C&C wind pressure zones in the construction documents is intended
Load Combinations
to show correctly applied requirements for roof and wall assemblies The strength design and allowable stress design load combinations
and their coverings. have been deleted, while direct reference to Chapter 2 of ASCE 7 has
been added to Section 1605.
1605.1 General. Buildings and other structures and portions
Risk Categories of Assembly Spaces thereof shall be designed to resist the Strength Load Combinations
Mixed occupancy buildings with assembly spaces are now designated specified in ASCE 7 Section 2.3, the Allowable Stress Design Load
as Risk Category III when the total public assembly occupant load Combinations specified in ASCE 7 Section 2.4, or the Alternative
exceeds 2,500 people. Allowable Stress Design Load Combinations of Section 1605.2.
Change Significance: Group R-1 hotels often have convention center Exceptions:
facilities with multiple large ballrooms and other assembly spaces, 1) The modifications to Load Combinations of ASCE 7 Section
but public assembly is not the primary occupancy of the building. 2.3, ASCE 7 Section 2.4, and Section 1605.2 specified in
These buildings have historically been classified as Risk Category ASCE 7 Chapter 18 and 19 shall apply.
II. Conversely, smaller buildings, such as theaters, consist of one or 2) When the Allowable Stress Design Load Combinations of
more spaces where the primary occupancy is public assembly with a ASCE 7 Section 2.4 are used, flat roof snow loads of 30 psf

16 STRUCTURE magazine
and roof live loads of 30 psf or less need not be combined
with seismic load. Where flat roof snow loads exceed 30 psf,
20 percent shall be combined with seismic loads.
3) Where the Allowable Stress Design Load Combinations of
ASCE 7 Section 2.4 are used, crane hook loads need not
be combined with roof live loads or with more than three-
fourths of the snow load or one-half of the wind loads.
1605.3.2 1605.2 Alternative basic allowable stress design load
combinations. In lieu of the Load Combinations in ASCE 7
Section 2.4, structures and portions thereof shall be permitted to
be designed for the most critical effects resulting from the following
combinations… [unchanged text omitted for brevity] Where required
by ASCE 7 Chapters 12, 13, and 15, the Load Combinations
including overstrength of ASCE 7 Sections 2.3.6 shall be used.
D + L + (Lr or S or R) (Equation 16-17 16-1)
D + L + 0.6ωW D + L + 0.6W (Equation 16-18 16-2)
D + L + 0.6ωW + S/2 D + L + 0.6W + S/2
(Equation 16-19 16-3)
D + L + S + 0.6ωW/2 D + L + S + 0.6W/2
(Equation 16-20 16-4)
D + L + S + E/1.4 (Equation 16-21 16-5)
0.9D + E/1.4 (Equation 16-22 16-6)
Unchanged exceptions and additional deleted text not shown for
brevity and clarity.
Change Significance: Strength load combinations and basic allow-
able stress design (ASD) load combinations are replicated directly
from ASCE 7. Deletion of the IBC load combinations removes
minor variations in the requirements between the IBC and ASCE 7
by eliminating duplication of the equations.
The third set of load combinations are from legacy codes that predate
the IBC. In previous editions, the alternative ASD load combinations
permitted the use of a 1/3 increase in allowable stresses when evaluat-
ing load combinations containing short-term transient loads caused
by winds. The basic allowable stress combinations did not permit
the reduction in loads but applied a factor of 0.75 to transient loads,
including live, snow, wind, and seismic loads, when more than one
of these loads was considered simultaneously.
The omega factor, ω, has been deleted from the alternative ASD load
combinations to limit misuse of the stress increase, thus increasing
the load due in part to wind forces.

Dead Loads
Dead loads at the roof level have been clarified, as well as fixed service
equipment concentrated loads.
1606.2 Design dead load. Weights of materials of construc- Figure 1. Examples of roof dead loads – HVAC equipment, solar panels, and
vegetative roofs.
tion. For purposes of design, the actual weights of materials of
construction and fixed service equipment shall be used. In the
absence of definite information, values used shall be subject to to counter those load effects. In such cases, the structure shall
the approval of the building official. be designed for force effects with the variable components
1606.3 Weight of fixed service equipment. In determining dead present and with them absent.
loads for purposes of design, the weight of fixed service equip- 2) For the calculation of seismic force effects, the components
ment, including the maximum weight of the contents of fixed of fixed service equipment that are variable, such as liquid
service equipment, shall be included. The components of fixed contents and movable trays, need not exceed those expected
service equipment that are variable, such as liquid contents and during normal operation.
movable trays, shall not be used to counteract forces causing over- 1606.3 Photovoltaic panel systems. The weight of photo-
turning, sliding, and uplift conditions in accordance with Section voltaic panel systems, their support system, and ballast shall
1.3.6 of ASCE 7. be considered as dead load.
Exceptions: 1606.3 Vegetative and landscaped roofs. The weight of all
1) Where force effects are the result of the presence of the vari- landscaping and hardscaping materials for vegetative and land-
able components, the components are permitted to be used scaped roofs shall be considered as dead load. The weight shall

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 17
be computed considering both fully saturated soil and drainage
layer materials and fully dry soil and drainage layer materials to
determine the most severe load effects on the structure.
Change Significance: The weights of vegetative roofs, solar panels,
and fixed service equipment have been clarified to provide consistency
between the IBC and ASCE 7 (Figure 1). The weight of fixed service
equipment includes both the equipment’s empty weight and the
maximum weight of the contents. For example, the weight of liquids
is to be included in the dead load of piping and tanks, and the weight
of conduit and wiring is to be included in the dead load of cable trays.
In addition, as content weight may be variable, it cannot be assumed
to counteract the effects of overturning, sliding, and uplift forces.
Exceptions in IBC Section 1606 specifically address the calculation
of variable loads for liquids and moveable equipment.

Snow Maps
The IBC ground snow load map has been updated to provide consis-
tency with ASCE 7-16 by referencing ASCE 7 snow load tables for
states with large case study areas (Figure 2 ).
Change Significance: Updating Section 1608 harmonizes snow load
provisions with ASCE 7-16. ASCE 7 has a ground snow map that refer-
ences new ground-snow load tables; these include tables for seven states:
Colorado (7.2-2), Idaho (7.2-3), Montana (7.2-4), Washington (7.2-5),
New Mexico (7.2-6), Oregon (7.2-7), and New Hampshire (7.2-8). The Figure 2. Updated IBC ground snow load map references state-specific snow
state tables list ground snow loads and maximum elevations for major load tables to provide consistency with ASCE 7-16 (New Hampshire not shown).
cities and towns in each region of a given state. IBC Figure 1608.2 indi-
cates which states have supplemental data within the ASCE 7 standard. required determination of loads based on measuring to the underside
of construction per ASCE 7 Section 3.2.2. While this is a straightfor-
ward provision of fluid mechanics, the new provisions are intended
Soil-Caused Uplift to prevent the use of common elevations shown on construction
Hydrostatic and expansive soil uplift pressures are now addressed in drawings, such as floor elevations or the top of foundation construc-
Section 1610 on soil loads. tion, as the elevation at which to apply hydrostatic forces. Instead,
1610.2 Uplift loads on floor and foundations. Basement the new language explicitly states that hydrostatic pressures should be
floors, slabs on ground, foundations, and similar approxi- applied to the underside of a foundations’ lowest horizontal element.
mately horizontal elements below grade shall be designed to A pointer has been added to Section 1808.6, Design for Expansive
resist uplift loads where applicable. The upward pressure of Soils, to help in determining the minimum required uplift due to
water shall be taken as the full hydrostatic pressure applied movement of soils below a building when expansive soils are present.
over the entire area. The hydrostatic load shall be measured
from the underside of the element being evaluated. The design
for upward loads caused by expansive soils shall comply with
Rain Loads
Section 1808.6. Secondary drainage system rain loads have been updated to be con-
Change Significance: Section 1610 has not previously addressed sistent with ASCE 7.
uplift loads from hydrostatic pressure or expansive soils. Requirements 1611.1 Design rain loads. Each portion of a roof shall be
addressing uplift forces are now to be applied when appropriate and designed to sustain the load of rainwater that will accumulate
included in the design. The hydrostatic pressure provisions include a on it if the primary drainage system for that portion is blocked
plus the uniform load caused by water that rises
above the inlet of the secondary drainage system at
its design flow as per the requirements of Chapter
8 of ASCE 7. The design rainfall shall be based
on the 100-year hourly rainfall rate indicated in
Figure 1611.1 15-minute duration event or on
other rainfall rates determined from approved local
weather data. Alternatively, a design rainfall of twice
the 100-year hourly rainfall rate indicated in Figure
1611.1 shall be permitted.
[Equation unchanged]
1611.2 Ponding instability. Susceptible bays of
roofs shall be evaluated for ponding instability in
accordance with Section 8.4 Chapters 7 and 8 of
Figure 3. Secondary drainage design assumptions. ASCE 7.

18 STRUCTURE magazine
Change Significance: Secondary (overflow) system design has pressures are now addressed. Secondary drainage system rain loads
been harmonized with roof rain load provisions to provide realistic have been updated to be consistent with ASCE 7.
expectations of the roof drainage system and potential roof load- To download published errata for the 2021 IBC, including
ing by rainfall (Figure 3). The IBC is now consistent with ASCE 7 Table 1604.5, go to iccsafe.org/errata-central.■
provisions. Calculations for the design mean recurrence interval
and duration for determining the hydraulic head are available in An upcoming issue will include an article specifically devoted
both ASCE 7 and the IBC. to rain load calculations with design examples comparing
Note that the use of twice the 60-minute duration is close to 2021 IBC to 2018 IBC provisions.
the 15-minute duration rainfall rate. Also, note that the 2021
Sandra Hyde ([email protected]) is Managing Director, and John “Buddy”
IBC rainfall map (Figure 1611.1) provides a 60-minute duration
Showalter ([email protected]) is Senior Staff Engineer, both with
rather than the 15-minute storm duration. However, the 2021
ICC’s Product Development Group.
IBC, by giving two options – the 15-minute duration or twice
the 60-minute duration – results in
values comparable to ASCE 7. Note
that the 2021 International Plumbing
Code has not yet been updated to reflect
the 100-year/15-minute (or twice the
100-year hourly) duration rainfall event
design requirement for secondary drain-
age systems; the structural engineer
would be advised to coordinate with MAPEI
the plumbing engineer to assure that the
secondary drainage systems are designed STRENGTHENS.
for the higher rainfall rate.
One source for rainfall data is the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) National
Weather Service Precipitation Frequency MAPEI
Data Server–Hydrometeorological Design
Studies Center (https://bit.ly/3lu1PpS)
MAPEI RESTORES.
for precipitation intensity (inches per
PROTECTS.

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

hour) based on the 100-year mean recur-
rence interval. HDSC’s data lists both
15-minute and 60-minute duration data. • Concrete Repair Mortars
• Corrosion Protection
• Construction Grouts
Conclusion • Waterproofing
Structural engineers should be aware of • Sealants and Joint Fillers
significant structural changes that have • Coatings and Sealers
• Epoxy Adhesives
occurred in the 2021 IBC. Many of the
• Decorative Toppings
new code provisions harmonize the IBC
• Cure and Seals
and ASCE 7. Component and cladding • Densifiers
wind zones must now be identified in the • Structural Strengthening Products
construction documents. Mixed occu-
pancy buildings with assembly spaces
are now designated as Risk Category III
when the cumulative occupant load for Your single-source provider for restoration,
the 300-plus-occupant assembly spaces
exceeds 2,500 people. The strength strengthening and corrosion protection
design and allowable stress design load
MAPEI offers a full range of products for concrete restoration, waterproofing
combinations have been deleted while and structural strengthening. Globally, MAPEI’s system solutions have been
direct reference to Chapter 2 of ASCE 7 utilized for such structures as bridges, highways, parking garages, stadiums
has been added. and high-rises.
Dead loads at the roof level have been
clarified, as well as fixed service equip- Visit www.mapei.us for details on all MAPEI products.
ment concentrated loads. The IBC
ground snow load map has been updated
to provide consistency with ASCE 7-16
by referencing ASCE 7 snow load tables
for states with large case study areas.
Hydrostatic and expansive soil uplift

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 19
structural SYSTEMS
Structured for Protection
The Role of Architectural and Structural Elements in Facility Fire-Protection Schemes
By April M. Musser, P.E.

W hen most people think of fire protec-

tion, their minds go straight to fire
alarm systems and sprinkler systems. In real-
including the International Fire Code (IFC),
may include additional structural fire resis-
tance requirements based on special hazards
ity, these two systems are just small pieces of or uses. Fire-resistance rating requirements for
a larger puzzle. Fire protection encompasses building elements prescribed in the IBC (as
a “system of systems” that work together to well as other model codes) also allow a reduc-
provide occupant and facility protection in a tion in the required fire-resistance ratings for
fire or other emergency. These systems often certain building elements under specific con-
include many other building systems that are ditions, such as the inclusion of fire sprinkler
generally not at the top of mind when consid- protection.
ering Fire Protection. For example, if a facility The method by which the required fire-
has duct smoke detection, HVAC controls resistance ratings for building elements can
may shut down air handling equipment to be achieved depends on the construction
prevent the spread of smoke. In low-light materials. Spray-applied fire-resistive material
environments, such as theaters and night- (SFRM) is one of the most common methods
clubs, lighting controls that automatically used to protect structural steel. In areas where
turn on lights may be part of the life safety steel might be exposed, intumescent coatings
systems to ensure occupants have adequate may be used instead. Enclosing or “boxing
light to evacuate. Fire-resistance-rated con- out” structural elements using a listed fire-
struction to provide compartmentation, exit resistive assembly is also a common approach.
separation, and protected egress paths are Concrete structural elements may achieve
also part of these systems, which make up the required fire-resistance rating depending
the facility’s fire-protection envelope. Other Intumescent coatings can be used to achieve required on the size and aggregate without additional
passive fire-protection systems include the fire resistance for structural members. materials to coat or box out the building ele-
facility’s structural aspects. ments. Structural assemblies are tested by a
While many other types of building systems contribute toward the laboratory as outlined in ASTM E119, Standard Test Methods for Fire
overall facility fire-protection scheme, this article focuses on facility Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or UL263, Standard
design and protection related to the facility structural system(s). for Safety Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, to deter-
Common sense tells us that the materials providing structural support mine the appropriate methods for fire-proofing structural elements.
for a building are subject to damage from the extreme temperatures The above describes the basics of structural fire-protection require-
of a fire. For example, concrete can spall (crack or delaminate from ments. What are the potential pitfalls and considerations often
substrates), and steel structural members are subject to yield and overlooked in facility design related to structural fire protection?
deformation from heat exposure during a fire. The goal of struc-
tural fire-protection requirements is to ensure that the facility can
withstand fire conditions long enough to allow for facility egress.
Existing Buildings
Still, it is also concerned with ensuring that firefighters can perform In existing buildings that may be undergoing renovation, addition, or
interior firefighting and search and rescue operations without risking changes in use or occupancy, there may not be enough data available
a structural failure. from the original construction to determine the fire-resistance rating of
the existing structural frame of the building. In cases where changes of
use or occupancy or significant renovations or additions require that the
The Basics entire building or portions within the area of work be upgraded to the
In a fire scenario, a facility is subject to extreme environmental con- current code, this can present a challenge in developing the fire-protection
ditions such as heat and water in a relatively short amount of time. envelope. In these cases, there are several options for compliance.
As a result, the goals of structural fire protection aim to ensure that 1) Presume that existing elements do not have an inherent
a building can withstand these conditions throughout the egress fire-resistance rating and provide fire-resistive assemblies
period and through the fire-fighting response and overhaul periods. or materials in accordance with a new assembly listed by a
Perhaps the most familiar aspect of structural fire protection is nationally recognized testing laboratory. While this option is
related to the fire-resistance requirements of the structural com- valid, it can unnecessarily drive up facility construction costs
ponents of the system. Model building codes, including the when the structural elements have some fire-resistive features.
International Building Code (IBC), specifically prescribe fire-resis- 2) Calculate the fire resistance. IBC Section 722, Calculated
tance rating requirements for facility structural elements based on Fire Resistance, provides a methodology for determining
the building occupancy, height, and area. Furthermore, fire codes, the fire resistance via a mathematical calculation based on

20 STRUCTURE magazine
the building materials and configuration. For
example, if an 8-inch-square concrete masonry
column is enclosed in 2 layers of ½-inch type X
gypsum wallboard, Section 722 can be used to
estimate the fire resistance. The masonry column
would be assigned a fire-resistance rating of
1-hour while each of the two layers of gypsum
would be assigned a fire resistance of 25 minutes
each, meaning that it can be assumed that the
column has a fire-resistance rating of 110 minutes
or 1.8 hours.
However, it is important to note that how the assembly
was constructed can impact the fire-resistance rating. For
example, if the gypsum wallboard in the above example
is not properly attached to and sealed where it joins other
building elements such as the floor slab or roof deck, that
weak spot could lower performance compared to the cal-
culated fire resistance. As a result, the design team must
Archaic building materials may present challenges in determining the fire resistance of
consider that such joints may require additional attention
structural elements.
and engineering to ensure the required fire resistance can
be maintained at the joints. can be complicated, especially when attic spaces below these roofs
are used for equipment, are heavily congested, or have limited access
or low clearances.
Archaic Building Materials
When dealing with historic structures, determining the fire-resistance
rating is even more difficult. However, there are guides available to assist
Fire-Resistance-Rated Building Elements
engineers with estimating the fire resistance of archaic building materi- One of the more common oversights made during facility design
als. In cases where the structure is part of the facility’s historic fabric, is failure to consider the requirements of IBC Section 704.1 (2018
the fire-resistance rating is of concern and whether archaic materials Edition). This section indicates that structural members must pro-
and age have reduced the load-carrying ability of such materials. It may vide the required fire-resistance rating as specified for the building
be necessary to spend extra time under-
standing archaic construction methods to
ensure that recommended structural pro-
tection approaches are not undermined by
construction methods unfamiliar in the
industry today. Special consideration and
close coordination between fire protection

TOGETHER WE BUILD SOLUTIONS

and structural teammates are necessary to
ensure that design approaches aimed at
improving structural fire resistance while
preserving historic fabric do not degrade

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

these materials further. Understanding
how archaic materials that are not in use
today may react with newer materials and
coatings may be difficult to determine.
There may be conditions where engineer-
ing judgments must be applied, as there
may not always be adequate data or viable
means to test assumptions. In such cases,
it may be necessary to involve historic
preservationists, material science experts,
or others who can offer expertise on the
best ways to preserve historical materials EXCELLENCE IN
while still meeting the required level of
fire resistance.
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING Photo is Courtesy of
Ben Benschneider

Many historic buildings still have wood S t. Michael Medical Center • Silverdale • Washington
roofs, and replacing these structures is Seattle Sacramento Boise Nashville
not always feasible or desirable. There Tacoma San Francisco Salt Lake City Birmingham
are intumescent products available for Lacey Los Angeles Des Moines Washington, DC
Spokane Long Beach St. Louis New York
application on the underside of roof Portland Orange County Chicago KPFF is an Equal Opportunity Employer
structures to increase the fire resistance Eugene San Diego Louisville www.kpff.com
of these roofs. However, the application

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 21
an industrial aesthetic even where a structural
frame requires fire resistance. It looks more like
paint, although it is required to be applied in
thicker coats. The required depth of the coating
depends on the required fire-resistance rating and
the specific product being applied. Once it dries,
most intumescent coatings are permitted to be
covered by a decorative surface finish such as paint.
However, when intumescent coatings are exposed
to high temperatures, such as those from a fire,
the intumescent product expands, sometimes to
more than 100 times the original thickness. This
then functions as an insulator, thus prolonging
the integrity of that element during a fire. Like
SFRM, intumescent coatings are also subject to
In an automated dry boat storage facility, the structural design must consider the additional weight of fire
suppression water, which may collect in the stored boats in the event of a fire.
degradation through mechanical damage over
the building lifecycle. While it is less brittle than
construction type and notes that the structure shall not be less than SFRM, chips, dings, or even sanding the surface to change the paint
the ratings required for the fire-resistance-rated assemblies supported color can reduce the fire-resistive performance, especially if sanding
by the structure. For example, a six-story Business Occupancy of reduces the depth of the intumescent coating.
Type IIA Construction requires only a 1-hour fire-resistance rating
for the primary structural frame. However, a six-story building is
also required to have 2-hour fire-resistance-rated exit stair and shaft
Weight of Sprinkler Water
enclosures. Therefore, to comply with Section 704.1 of the IBC, the When SEs think of structural fire protection, they usually consider
structural frame supporting the stair and shaft enclosures must have how to protect the structure from fire. However, the structure also
at least a 2-hour fire-resistance rating despite only a 1-hour rating needs to be protected from the effects of an activated fire sprinkler
required for the primary structural frame by Table 601 of the IBC. system. Consider, for example, a rack storage facility with open-top
This is also an important consideration where a facility may have hori- plastic bins or absorbent products. When a sprinkler activates, open
zontal shafts penetrating a wall assembly. This kind of rated horizontal storage containers and absorbent materials can absorb water or fill
shaft is often necessary where stair pressurization equipment cannot be with water, causing increased structural loads on the rack assembly.
co-located with the stair shaft and must be ducted into the stair shaft However, this issue is not reserved to just rack or shelf storage con-
from a mechanical room. For example, suppose that a horizontal shaft ditions. Consider, for example, automated dry boat storage. These
is required to have a 2-hour fire-resistance rating, and it is the intention facilities allow the boat owner to pull their watercraft into a slip
to use the wall assembly it penetrates to support the horizontal shaft. In and enter a code into an automatic storage and retrieval control
that case, that wall now requires a 2-hour fire-resistance rating as it is unit. A crane that looks like a boat forklift removes the boat from
the supporting element. If structural elements other than walls support the slip and places it in a vertical dry storage bay. The sprinkler
the shaft, they also would require an increased fire-resistance rating. protection systems for these indoor vertical boat storage facilities
are typically very robust. They are designed to deliver a large sprin-
kler density, as fiberglass boats with upholstery (floor covering and
Facility Lifecycle built-in benches/seats) stored in vertical arrangements constitute a
Lifecycle issues can significantly impact the integrity of structural fire- relatively high-challenge fire necessitating aggressive sprinkler design
protection components in a building. Take into consideration that discharge densities. However, even with drainage plugs open, the
SFRM (spray-applied fire-resistive material) can become brittle and can boats fill with water from a sprinkler system activation faster than
be degraded or completely removed by mechanical impact. Therefore, the drains can empty them. The increased weight of water sitting
installing SFRM in areas of the facility where electrical or mechanical in these boats could easily cause the collapse of the storage facility
equipment is housed could mean a higher likelihood of mechanical if the structure is not designed to anticipate the additional weight
impact by ladders or even intentional removal to route new equipment of water-filled boats. In addition, it can be a challenge to determine
connections. While most owners know and understand that their fire what design load to use for scenarios where additional structural
alarm system requires annual inspection and testing, it is rare to find an loads are caused by sprinkler activation. The additional load varies
owner checking the integrity of their SFRM regularly throughout the as the size and capacity of stored products vary, so a conservative
building lifecycle. However, damaged SFRM reduces the fire-resistance approach using the worst-case scenario is warranted.
rating of the structural elements it is intended to protect. For clients In closing, the structural design of a facility ties into the system
who require regular auditing for fire protection and life safety, damaged of systems that defines the full Fire-Protection envelope. Therefore,
SFRM is a frequent finding. Therefore, the design team should avoid understanding how structural design and protection tie into the
a blanket specification of SFRM throughout a facility without consid- facility’s fire-protection goals is vital to ensuring occupants,
ering areas where mechanical impact might be considered likely due first responders, and investments are acceptably protected
to operations or co-located equipment and consider using a different in a fire emergency.■
structural fire-protection material in those areas.
April Musser is a Certified Fire Protection Specialist (CFPS) and holds a CVI
Intumescent coatings may be more durable than SFRM, but they
certification from the US Department of Homeland Security. She also serves on
are still subject to potential lifecycle issues. For example, consider
the NFPA 30 Technical Committee for Flammable and Combustible Liquids and
a convention center with an exposed steel structure in an event
is an active member of both NFPA and SFPE. ([email protected])
hall. Intumescent coating is an excellent option for maintaining

22 STRUCTURE magazine
Bringing a legacy of
high performance
to mass timber.

Code-listed fasteners. Concrete-anchoring adhesives. Concealed connectors, brackets and

splines. Simpson Strong-Tie ® mass timber structural solutions give you maximum strength
and design flexibility. With our team of expert engineers, ongoing technical support and a
nationwide supply network that delivers exactly what you need, when you need it — you can
be sure that your mass timber projects are stronger, faster and easier than ever.
To learn more about our innovative solutions, see our Connectors & Fasteners for Mass Timber
Construction catalog at strongtie.com/masstimber.

© 2021 Simpson Strong-Tie Company Inc. MT21

structural CARBON
The SEI SE 2050 One-Year Anniversary
By Chris Jeseritz, P.E., LEED AP BD+C

O ne year since the launch of the Structural

Engineering Institute’s (SEI) Structural Engineers
(SE) 2050 Commitment Program, 53 structural engi-
neering firms have committed to embodied carbon
neutrality by 2050. The Program’s overarching goal
is to provide an accessible sustainability program for
structural engineers that includes a commitment of
active engagement in reducing the embodied carbon
on projects and information sharing. The driver of
these objectives is the collective objective of achieving
net-zero carbon structures by 2050.

History
In 2016, the Carbon Leadership Forum (CLF) at the
University of Washington created a working group to
develop a data-driven commitment program for struc-
tural engineering firms to measure and work towards
net-zero embodied carbon buildings. The CLF proposed
their idea and the Structural Engineers 2050 Challenge
framework to the American Society of Civil Engineers
(ASCE) SEI Sustainability Committee.
The ASCE SEI Sustainability Committee further devel-
oped the goals, requirements, and resources to make an
official commitment program feasible and realistic to
practicing structural engineers. After years of hard work
Figure 1. Distribution of SEI SE 2050 commitment firm’s embodied carbon
by the ASCE SEI Sustainability Committee volunteers, champion in North America (Map created with mapchart.net).
the SEI SE 2050 Commitment Program was endorsed by
SEI in late 2019 and launched to the public at Greenbuild
2020 as an SEI Program. The Program is run by volunteer members
Committed Firms Support the Program
of the SE 2050 Subcommittee of the SEI Sustainability Committee. Since the Program’s launch in October 2020, 53 firms have officially
signed on to the SEI SE 2050 Commitment Program. From data
submitted by committed firms, approximately 72 percent have no
more than 200 employees, with 20 committed firms having 50
or fewer employees. The distribution of firm sizes illustrates that
embodied carbon is a critical issue to firms of all sizes in the structural
engineering community. The Chart displays the distribution of firm
sizes committed to the SEI SE 2050 Commitment Program as of the
beginning of August 2021.

Championing Carbon Reduction within the Firm

When a firm commits to the Program, they assign an employee to
serve as an embodied carbon reduction champion and act as the
main point of contact for the Committee and Program. Additional
responsibilities of the champion include educating and advocating for
embodied carbon reductions and ensuring the firm meets the yearly
requirements of the Program. The state with the largest number of
embodied carbon reduction champions is California, with eleven.
Washington state follows with six and Massachusetts with four. In addi-
tion, two champions are located outside of North America. Figure 1
Distribution of the number of employees at committed firms. highlights in blue where the embodied carbon reduction champions

24 STRUCTURE magazine
are located in North America
and the number per state as of
the beginning of August 2021.

A Roadmap to
Reduce Carbon
Each committed firm must
develop and submit an
Embodied Carbon Action
Plan (ECAP). The purpose of
the ECAP is to articulate how
a firm educates its staff, reports,
documents reduction strate-
gies, and advocates within the Figure 2. Data collected for the SEI SE 2050 database.
industry for and on embodied
carbon. For companies wishing to simplify their ECAP submission, structural floor systems. Updates will add more framing
the SEI SE 2050 website contains an ECAP Google Form submission systems and bay layouts to those already available. Some of
option allowing firms to streamline the creation of their ECAP. All the upcoming embodied carbon intensity floor diagrams to
committed firms’ ECAPs are publicly available and updated yearly. be released include a reinforced concrete flat plate, concrete
Of the 53 firms committed to the Program, 13 have submitted their pan joist, light-framed wood, and a hybrid mass timber/steel
first-ever ECAP as of the beginning of August 2021. floor scheme.
The SEI SE 2050 website lists the committed companies, the name 3) Embodied Carbon Estimator (ECOM) for structural
of their internal embodied carbon reduction champion, the year the materials. Updates to the existing ECOM tool could include
company committed to the Program, and a link to their ECAP. The visual updates, report generation, and a user option to input
SE 2050 Committee continuously updates this table as new firms custom global warming potential data from a product-
commit and ECAPs are submitted. specific Environmental Product Declaration (EPD). The
Committee is also developing an ECOM guidance
document and examples.
Submitting Data to the Program 4) Case Studies. A list of project case studies discussing how
In addition to developing an ECAP, committed firms measure the embodied carbon was considered during design and con-
embodied carbon of multiple projects’ structural systems and submit struction has been added to the SE 2050 website for users
their findings to the SE 2050 database. Firms commit to at least two looking for guidance or ideas on their projects.
project submissions per North American structural office but need 5) Project specifications guidance. This document will provide
not exceed five total projects per year. After months of development guidance to structural engineers on incorporating different
and testing, the database was officially launched on the SEI SE 2050 embodied carbon reduction strategies into project specifica-
website in September 2021. A committed firm’s embodied carbon tions for multiple types of structural materials.
reduction champion can access the database from the website, add
company users, and begin submitting embodied carbon data. The SE
2050 Committee has published a user guide to aid users in navigating
In Closing
and reporting their projects to the database. Clients, government officials, and future engineers are interested and
The information collected by the database includes project descrip- actively discussing embodied carbon. The SEI SE 2050 website and
tors, structural system descriptors, and embodied carbon data. Figure 2 team are dedicated to helping structural engineers learn about and
illustrates the different parameters submitted for each project to the reduce embodied carbon.
SEI SE 2050 database. After a sufficient amount of data is collected, The structural engineering community has responded enthusiastically
embodied carbon benchmarking for different building types can to the SEI SE 2050 Commitment Program and, within the first year,
begin to be formed. the Program has picked up significant momentum. The Program pro-
vides engineers a platform to play an active role in embodied carbon
measurements and reduction strategies. The SE 2050 Committee is
Resources for the Structural Engineer continually working to provide additional embodied carbon resources
To help committed firms, the SE 2050 Subcommittee continues to and Program improvements to meet this demand and enthusiasm to
add and update embodied carbon guidance on its website. Highlights continue the impetus for the next year and beyond.
of some of the currently released and upcoming resources include: If your firm is interested in learning more or joining the move-
1) A guide to embodied carbon-related credits in green rating ment towards net-zero embodied carbon by 2050, please visit
systems (USGBC LEED, Green Globes, Envision, etc.). This the SEI SE 2050 Program’s website: se2050.org to learn more.■
resource helps structural engineers learn and advocate for
embodied carbon measuring and reduction credits depend- Chris Jeseritz is a Project Manager at PCS Structural Solutions in Seattle,
ing on the green rating system a project is pursuing. WA, and a member of ASCE’s Structural Engineering Institute’s (SEI)
2) Embodied Carbon Intensity Diagrams showing the range Sustainability Committee and the SE 2050 Commitment Program.
of embodied carbon intensities associated with common ([email protected])

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 25
UNLEASH YOUR
PRODUCTIVITY
Tackle your anchor design
projects with minimal effort
and maximum accuracy

Anchor Stiffener Base Plate

A Design
B Design
C Design

B
Scan the QR A E
code below for a C

free 30-day trial D

Multiple Load Multiple Base

D Combinations
E Materials

With automatic and advanced calculating, easy specifying and integrated BIM modeling - our cloud-based anchor design
software helps increase productivity and improve value.

PROFIS Engineering Suite gives you a new way to work:

• Easy-to-use excel interface for importing multiple load combinations
• Load transfer through interfaces utilizing structural analysis software such as STAAD,
Pro, RISA, Robot, SAP2000, and ETABS, featuring REVIT Plug-in export functionality
• Customizable report templates
• Productivity features such as favorites tab, responsive notifications, and undo button
• Cloud-based sharing platform

Hilti, Inc. | 1-800-879-8000 | en español 1-800-879-5000 Hilti.com/profisengineering

West Berkeley Medical Office Building
Kaiser Permanente Brings
Needed Medical Services
and Creative Architecture
to Its West Berkeley
Neighborhood
By Nick Bucci, S.E.,
and Ryan Pintar, S.E.

Figure 1. Aerial view of the building (looking southeast).

T he new Kaiser Permanente (KP) medical office building (MOB)

in West Berkeley will provide critical medical services to the local
community. The L-shaped 66,000-square-foot structure embraces the
shear walls was also considered but ruled out due to the shear wall’s
impact on the ground floor parking and the lack of flexibility for future
tenant revisions. An additional complexity, there was no specific tenant
challenging small infill site with an integrated design that allows for on board during the project’s design phase. Thus, the building was
open floor plates and a stunning architectural design. After studying designed on a specification for future medical office or light laboratory
different structural schemes, the ConXtech steel space moment frame use. Designing a future medical office building is challenging because
was chosen as the structural solution to maximize the flexibility of the these buildings have heavy mechanical and equipment demands that
ground floor parking and embrace the architectural expression. The frequently add significant loading to the structural framing, not to
steel moment frame scheme allowed for improved seismic performance mention tenant-specific MEP systems and floor plate requirements.
and allowed for shallow foundations. Based on the experience of the design team, it was determined that the
structure would be steel-framed and use the ConXtech moment con-
nections for the lateral system. The chosen system integrated with the
Unique Design for a Unique Site unique architecture, tuck-under parking, and allowed for flexibility with
The building is located in Berkeley, west of San Pablo Boulevard and the future tenant needs. The property was sold to Kaiser Permanente
bounded by Parker and Tenth Streets. The site, with an existing corner after the design was fully permitted, putting the design flexibility of the
property to remain, necessitated the new structure to be L-shaped in steel-framed structure to the test. Fortunately, the design team found
plan to maximize the building volume (Figure 1). The ground level that with careful planning and leveraging past experiences, the primary
predominantly consists of parking with some office space and a small structure was designed to accommodate much of the new tenant’s needs
retail space along San Pablo Ave. The second and third floors have without significant structural revisions.
an open floor plan for medical office
use and four exterior terraces. The roof
includes an enclosed penthouse and a
System Advantages
screened-in mechanical space. The ConXtech steel moment frame
Laboratory and medical office struc- system features a proprietary inter-
tures are typically steel-framed and often locking beam-column connector
use steel braced frames for seismic lateral prequalified for use within ANSI/AISC
resistance. For this project, steel braced 358, Prequalified Connections for Special
frames were deemed impractical: at the and Intermediate Steel Moment Frames
ground floor, the brace locations would for Seismic Applications. The moment
impact the ground floor parking and frame columns are concrete-filled HSS
drive aisles, while at the upper levels, the shapes, and the beams are wide flanges
skewed and twisting floor plan did not with reduced beam sections (RBS).
allow for the brace frames to stack verti- Fully restrained beam connections
cally. A concrete structure with concrete Figure 2. ConXtech collar. are achieved through the ConX collar

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 27
in the ConXtech system helped maximize the parking area and make
the project feasible.
The building site consists of up to three feet of compressible fill with
some potential for liquefaction settlement and moderate expansion
potential; these soil conditions played a major role in determining the
chosen structural system. The geotechnical recommendations allowed
for the use of shallow spread footings with an allowable bearing pres-
sure of 3,500 psf; however, the design team targeted an allowable
gravity bearing pressure of approximately 1,600 psf to reduce the
overall differential settlement. Combining the distributed ConXtech
moment frame system and the lighter steel-framed structure allowed
for the cost-effective use of conventional spread footings. A concrete
structure at this site would have incurred additional costs for either soil
improvements or a pile foundation system due to the heavier structure.

Specific Details
Figure 3. ConXtech bi-axial bolted moment frame connection. The design team collaborated with ConXtech throughout the design
and construction of the structure. Like a conventional structure,
assemblies. Nesting components of the collar are robotically shop Tipping Structural Engineers is SEOR for the structural design.
welded to the beams and columns, as shown in Figure 2 (page 27). ConXtech provides technical design support and serves as the steel sub-
Then, the beams are simply lowered and locked into position at the contractor for the fabrication and erection of the primary steel frame.
construction site, and pre-tensioned high-strength bolts are installed The building has a 14-foot floor-to-floor height, driven by the city’s
(Figure 3). The limited field welding with this system results in sub- zoning requirements for maximum building height. Frame beams are
stantial time savings in the construction schedule. Furthermore, the generally 21 inches deep at each level and, therefore, there is limited
ConXtech system allows for moment frame beams to skew in plan space below the framing for distributed MEP services. Thus, the
up to 15 degrees, facilitating the architectural expression along the SEOR coordinated with the architect and mechanical engineer to
west slab edge with minimal impacts to the lateral system design. limit beam depths to 18 inches deep along major distribution trunks
The distributed bi-axial moment frame layout used with the in the corridors to allow more room for mechanical services. The
ConXtech system integrated seamlessly into the typical framing, design team used ETABS to analyze the lateral force-resisting system
using 16-inch square-frame columns. Figure 3 shows a typical and used RAM Structural System for the gravity framing analysis and
beam-column connection at a bi-axial moment frame. A diagram design. Figure 5 shows the typical framing with the ConXtech system.
showing the distributed lateral system is shown in Figure 4. A Limiting the building’s torsion during a seismic event was another
conventional special moment frame with wide flange beams and significant design consideration. Since the building is located in
columns works only in the strong direction of the column. It relies Seismic Design Category E, having an Extreme Torsional Irregularity
upon fewer deeper columns that can have a major impact on the is not permitted by ASCE 7, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and
usable space and architecture. The 16-inch square columns utilized Other Structures, Chapter 12. Additionally, a design decision was made

Figure 4. Plan and extrusion of the lateral system. Figure 5. Framing at ConXtech corner column.

28 STRUCTURE magazine
to limit building torsion below the threshold for Torsional Irregularity
to improve the structure’s overall seismic performance. Consideration Project Team
of torsion also factored into the redundancy check. The structure is Owner: Kaiser Permanente | Oakland, CA
classified as an irregular structure, owing to the re-entrant corner. Structural Engineer: Tipping Structural Engineers | Berkeley, CA
Sufficient moment frames were provided to prevent excessive torsion Architect: Gould Evans | San Francisco, CA
and improve the structure’s overall seismic performance to keep the General Contractor: XL Construction | Milpitas, CA
redundancy factor at 1.0. The analysis showed that the seismic drift
was reasonably uniform and less than 2 percent at the corners owing
to the distributed lateral system shown in Figure 4. Nick Bucci is an Associate at Tipping Structural Engineers.
Base fixity is provided at the moment frame columns. With the distribu- ([email protected])
tion of loads facilitated by the space frame concept, it was possible to design
Ryan Pintar formerly with Tipping Structural Engineers. ([email protected])
fixed base columns using cast-in-place anchor rods with washer plates.
The fabricator provided steel templates for
aligning the anchor rods with the holes in
the base plates, and setting the columns
was quick and problem-free.
In place of grade beams, it was decided
to use the ground floor slab-on-grade to
tie together the footings; construction
cost and underground routing of utilities
both played into this decision. The ground
floor foundation and slab-on-grade design
required extensive cross-disciplinary col-
laboration to accommodate the varied
ground floor uses and finishes: office,
sloped-to-drain parking area, retail, lobby,
pavers, ADA access ramps, landscaping,
and bioretention planters.
A significant advantage of the ConXtech
system is the expedited construction
installation time and resulting construc-

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

tion schedule reduction. The primary steel
frame was installed in approximately a
week and a half, equating to about half
the time of a conventional steel braced
frame structure. The ConXtech system
primarily relies upon a field-bolted system
for gravity and moment frame connec-
tions to expedite the steel erection and
field labor. ConXtech leverages a BIM
Tekla model and a fully robotic fabrication
system to ensure the necessary precision
for the field-bolted system. The design
team collaborated closely with ConXtech
during the design and construction phases,
including sharing Revit models to confirm
dimensions and steel framing details.

Conclusion
The integrated structural design embraced
the architecture and non-standard-shaped
infill site to provide the West Berkeley
community much-needed medical access.
The ConXtech moment frame system
proved to be the perfect solution for this
project. It fits into the typical steel framing
without compromising the architecture
or usable space and allows for
conventional steel framing and
a shallow foundation system.■

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 29
The Wachenheim
Science Center
WILLIAMS COLLEGE SCIENCE RENEWAL PROJECT

By Ron Blanchard, AIA, LEED AP BD+C, Michael A. Tecci, P.E., LEED Green Associate, and Julia K. Hogroian, P.E., LEED Green Associate

Exterior rendering of the Wachenheim Science Center from the northwest.

W ith tremendous growth in the sciences and the need for new
research, teaching, and equipment space, Williams College in
Williamstown, Massachusetts, sought to expand its existing science
machine shops and an imaging facility. To the north, the Wachenheim
Science Center was constructed on the old Bronfman Science Center
site and provides research and teaching space for the Geosciences,
center to serve the educational demands of the science departments and Psychology, Mathematics, and Statistics departments. This article
their students. Nestled within the Berkshire mountains, the original focuses on the structural design of the Wachenheim Science Center,
campus buildings are modestly scaled pavilions set in the landscape completed in February 2021.
and define a network of courtyards and outdoor spaces. While recent
mega-building clusters were added to the campus, the college favored
adding two modestly scaled buildings more in keeping with the origi-
Design Overview
nal campus fabric over creating another singular megastructure. The One of the design goals for the project was the ability to view the
buildings could still physically connect to the existing science center mountains from within the science quad. The building notches
via bridge connections but would frame and shape the interconnected itself below grade into the bedrock to accomplish this goal. On this
landscape that forms the spirit of the campus. gradually sloping site, three and a half stories rise above grade while
Payette Associates Inc., the architect and planner, and Simpson two and a half levels sit below. The foundation walls extend about
Gumpertz & Heger Inc. (SGH), the structural engineer, designed two forty feet below grade on the sides of the building, where the grade
buildings to revitalize the science campus. To the south, the Hopper is the highest. The water table is approximately sixteen feet above the
Science Center, completed in 2018, provides new research space for bottom of the basement slab elevation. The 26-inch-thick founda-
the Biology, Chemistry, and Physics departments and houses new tion walls and 4-foot-thick structural mat slab constitute the shell
of the multi-story deep base-
ment. Shear reinforcement ties
in areas of high earth pressure
shears are central to optimizing
the volumes of wall concrete
and reinforcement.
The above-grade stories
include classrooms, research
laboratories, and office spaces.
There is a small mechanical
penthouse on a portion of the
roof. The superstructure con-
sists of structural steel framing
acting compositely with a
concrete slab on metal deck.
Section through math department atrium and light monitor looking east. A 4½-inch-thick reinforced

30 STRUCTURE magazine
normal weight concrete slab on a 3-inch-deep metal deck achieves
an uncoated two-hour fire rating for the laboratory chemical control
areas, improves vibration performance for microscopy work, and
increases flexibility for current and future floor penetrations typical
of laboratory occupancies. There are large areas of depressed slabs
within the floorplates to accommodate a variety of floor coverings,
including locally quarried stone tiles. Dropped steel beams, bolsters,
and supplemental deck support angles enabled the complex layout
and varying depths of the recesses.
The architectural layout and the column grid often do not align
from floor to floor because of the mixed-use of Wachenheim. Each
level has a number of column transfers; some occur at Architecturally
Exposed Structural Steel (AESS) round HSS columns. All connec-
tions and splices at these columns fit within the depth of the ceiling
cavity to maintain the clean HSS aesthetic.
Moment frames provide the building’s lateral load resistance with
minimal interference with the building’s complex program. Wind
interstory drift control governs the design of the frames. Many of
the moment frames have AESS round HSS columns. At the con-
nections, the round columns transition to wide flange column stubs
set within the ceiling depth to provide pre-qualified beam-column
moment connections and improved panel zone shear strength without
compromising the aesthetics of the exposed columns.

Below Grade Partial site plan of Williams College depicting the Wachenheim Science
Center to the north and the Hopper Science Center to the south.
Among the suite of below-grade classrooms is a 212-person audito-
rium that will be a valuable asset for the sciences. The auditorium
floor is a sloping, formed stepped slab that spans to sloping reinforced
Creating “Lightness”
concrete raker beams supported by concrete walls. Column transfers Some classrooms were forced below ground despite a desire for exte-
around the auditorium space allow unobstructed views. The design rior views and natural light in all occupiable spaces. The design team
team studied various framing options’ varying the location and level added an at-grade exterior glass walk system on the east and west sides
of column transfers for the four floors above the auditorium. The of the building to get daylight into these spaces. The glass walkway
adopted scheme has the roof and two stories frame to a column that bears on sloping steel plates that frame between the floor framing and
bears on a 50-foot-long transfer girder at Level 2. Other 50-foot-long the foundation wall. A combination of tapered bolsters and concrete
girders carry the loads of the roof of the auditorium and of Level 1 curbs support the sloped steel plates and glass structure.
to perimeter columns and the foundation wall. This hybrid solu- The building is organized by a main circulation spine, reinforced with
tion created an efficient compromise of steel tonnage, serviceability, a central staircase running alongside it, with hubs of departmental and
functionality, and constructability. student social spaces that pinwheel off. These hubs of collaboration

North-south section through the Wachenheim Science Center looking east.

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 31
space are what give the building its life force. In addition, each
department has a double-height volume to mark the heart of the
department, giving it an identity and a shared space for faculty and
students to congregate. To create these living rooms, spaces needed
to be open and column-free to be filled with tables, soft seating,
chalk and marker boards, and to produce a collaborative, collegial,
and academic environment. Two light monitors provide additional
natural lighting, one of which is above the building’s central stair.
The north light monitor aligns with the double-height atrium space
in the Math Department. The double-height space creates an open
atrium between Level 2 and the roof. The Level 3 floor framing
hangs from the roof framing, which also supports the light monitor
framing, to create additional column-free space on Level 2. For this
intertwined area, floor vibration and deflection control the govern-
ing design criteria, requiring stiffening of Level 3 and the ultimate
supports on the roof.
The Psychology double-height atrium is approximately 30 feet by
30 feet in plan and has a double-height curtain wall on the north
and east sides. Wide flange columns below Level 2 transition to a
series of ganged small hollow structural steel tubes fitting within the
backup framing for the brick piers. These eliminate the encroachment
Partial plan of typical cantilever framing above the southwest entry.
of a column cover in the corner of the space and minimize the visual
impact of structural columns. The HSS columns bear on the stiffened
slab edge at Level 2, run unbraced past Level 3, support the roof, and connection to the rest of the sciences. The bridge is clad in a curtain
provide lateral support for the facade systems. wall and is structurally independent from the existing Thompson
There is a column-free entry in the southwest corner of the building. Biology center with an expansion joint between the structures. Directly
The design team studied various framing options to determine the below the bridge, there is a utility tunnel between the two buildings.
most efficient system that could accomplish the design intent. Instead The bridge springs off the new Wachenheim Center to a new column
of a single massive column transfer girder at Level 1, the team opted that bears on a pre-existing grade beam over the tunnel’s roof. The
for cantilevered floor framing at each level. primary bridge gravity structure is on Level 3. Architecturally exposed
plate columns behind the bridge curtain wall mullions act as hangers
to support Level 2 and as columns to support the roof. The scheme
Connectivity to Campus minimizes the depth of structure and increases the transparency of the
While the Wachenheim is a standalone structure, it connects to bridge at Level 2 and the roof. For wind and seismic loads, the bridge
the existing science center via a pedestrian bridge to provide a shel- cantilevers horizontally off the Wachenheim center via diaphragm
tered pathway during the Berkshire winters and maintain a physical action of the floor and roof decks.
The Hopper and Wachenheim Science Centers’
construction, two modestly sized buildings inte-
grated into the existing science center complex via
pedestrian bridges and tunnels, provides Williams
College additional space and resources for various
science departments. By focusing the Wachenheim
Center on housing the Geosciences, Psychology,
Mathematics, and Statistics Departments, the
design team provided distinct educational and
collaborative spaces tailored to the needs of each
department. Close collaboration by the design
team integrated the two new buildings with the
campus by providing mixed program-
ming and future flexibility in open,
light-filled spaces.■

Ron Blanchard is a Senior Associate at Payette

Associates Inc. ([email protected])

Michael A. Tecci is a Senior Project Manager at

Simpson Gumpertz & Heger Inc. ([email protected])

Julia K. Hogroian is a Project Consultant at Simpson

Gumpertz & Heger Inc. ([email protected])
Detail of moment frame connection at round HSS columns that are part of the lateral load resisting system.

32 STRUCTURE magazine
Try ShapeBuilder
for section properties
and stress analysis

iesweb.com/sb
Quickly nd: A, I, S, r, J, Cw, Z, etc. Download your free trial today.
At an imposing 80-degree slope, the
complex and unique canted brace
highlights the slanted entry wall.

Structural
Gymnastics
By Thomas Kramer, P.E., S.E.,
Elizabeth Brack, P.E., S.E.,
Diana Gonzalez, EIT, and
Geoff Leewaye, EIT

IN THE TRANSPORTATION CENTER

T he Transportation Center at Pima Community College’s Center
of Excellence for Applied Technology is 43,000 square feet with
a total of 27 work bays, including spaces for testing and diagnosis of
Design Creativity
The structural system’s creative design focused on flexibility and visibil-
electric vehicles, faculty offices, classrooms, a dynamometer room, ity, revealed in the exposed steel. Allowing daylight into the building
equipment storage, and a large public entry. The unique utility of was identified as a critical characteristic of the project early in the
the building governed its placement, such as the clearance necessary design. In response, a spectacular 8.5-foot-wide skylight illuminates
for cars to drive around the lobby and into the work bays. In addi- the high-volume work bay. Creativity in structural design responded
tion, the structural design focuses on responding to flexibility and to maintaining continuity in load transfer, reflected by the unique
visibility, resulting in a state-of-the-art, hands-on learning environ- stitched-together design at the high bay roof where the diaphragm
ment reflected in the vast amount of exposed steel. A high degree of was made discontinuous by the skylight. Finite element analysis using
coordination and unique framing concepts, which the team termed RAM Structural System was performed using semi-rigid diaphragms
“structural gymnastics,” led to the project’s success. DLR Group and analyzing the “stitching” as a horizontal truss.
provided planning, architecture, structural engineering, electrical Transitioning from the ample auto bay space to the administration
engineering, interiors, and construction administration services for wing required transferring both the gravity and lateral loads through
the Transportation Center. a non-orthogonal structural grid. The transition was accomplished

34 STRUCTURE magazine
through a series of transfer girders and custom drag connections.
The lateral load transfer at the interface of the high-volume work
bay space and the adjacent two-story classroom building presented a
unique challenge. The two-story classroom box is essentially skewed
and overlapped into the high-volume work bay space. The lateral
force-resisting systems were reimagined to ensure the flexibility of
the rooms at the interface of these two different spaces. The solution
resulted in a custom transfer girder connection to migrate the load
from the classroom roof through a wide-flange girder rotated onto its
weak axis and dragged to the high-volume work bay braced frames.
Additionally, to create a light and airy shade structure, the large
entry canopy was designed to tie into the lateral system of the main
building, which eliminated the need for additional bracing. This was
achieved with custom drag connections in each direction between
the two structures.

Complex Criteria
Unique problems arose from the angular layout of the building, hori-
zontally and vertically, that created framing challenges and required
extensive detailing. The complex geometry involved a high degree of
modeling and coordination for stud soffit supports, exterior wall sup-
ports, skylight framing, and high/low roof framing. At an imposing
80-degree slope, the complex and unique canted brace highlights the
slanted entry wall. The brace required an intricate degree of analysis 8.5-foot-wide skylight illuminates the high-volume work bay.
due to the increased eccentricity. The 80-degree slope continues into
the glass conference room that overlooks the Autolab and lobby. The
large corner conference room with a floating effect is another design
Innovative Use of Materials
element that was crucial to the overall design of the building. The Innovation was seen in the application of the exterior panel façade
placement of columns and the addition of large transfer girders were system, resulting in a more cost-effective, lightweight, and easy to
crucial to delivering the intended visual impact. install solution. Integrating this system into the structural design
The tall exterior walls at the high-volume space exceeded 50 feet plus involved challenges such as providing custom gravity supports and
11-foot cantilevered parapets. These walls required a secondary fram- coordinating the lateral supports for the wall system with the main
ing system connected to the main steel frame system and increased lateral resisting system – all of which are coplanar. The perimeter
the in-plane loading into the roof diaphragm and lateral system. In structure required a secondary analysis for out-of-plane lateral forces
addition, the wide flange wind girts were orientated with the strong in conjunction with gravity and in-plane lateral forces to support the
axis horizontally to provide greater strength and deflection control exterior wall system.
to resist out-of-plane forces while also being in line with the primary The exterior translucent panel system was selected for its best-in-
structural framing. industry thermal performance and light transmission. The panels
reduce solar heat gain, which drastically reduces the
heating and cooling loads of the building. The diffused
light transmission through the panels reduced light-
ing needs and provided electrical savings. Because the
panels are prefabricated and lightweight, savings were

Corner conference room required strategic placement of columns and large transfer girders Preliminary detail of transfer girder connection using a
to deliver the floating effect. wide-flange girder rotated onto its weak axis.

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 35
Hose reels cantilever from the 50-foot high roof.

also provided on transportation and installation time, approximately systems worked within the angular layouts of the building. The
2/3 less than a standard wall system. Structural cold-formed metal fram- structural system had to allow for the movement of vehicles through
ing detailing at the exterior wall system allowed for elevated gravity the space, which meant coordination of column locations, providing
support, material changes between translucent and insulated panels, cantilevered floor systems, and providing moment frames to guarantee
and accommodated differential movement at the roof. open access. The atypical requirements of the automotive equipment
meant making sure these systems were accounted for early in design
to avoid conflicts during construction.
Design Efficiency The foundations in the Autolab were coordinated to prevent clashes
Ingenuity of design for efficiency was at the forefront of the design with under-slab exhaust systems and integrated mechanical systems.
process from the beginning. Developing specific detailing in the Moreover, most mechanical units were installed on the roof of the large
Schematic Design stage minimized late and costly design changes auto bay space, and ducts then serviced the lower volume classroom
later, which would have impeded the project’s success. Many design spaces. To access the classroom spaces, however, the ducts had to
complexities required custom solutions, resolved through a high level squeeze through the large transfer girders at the interface of the two
of coordination and modeling to ensure the structural system was spaces, leaving little to no room for error. The team used Navisworks
integrated with all other building systems. clash detection to identify structural and mechanical issues before
The transfer girder and steel framing plans were detailed early in the they happened in the field to aid in coordination and field challenges
process to ensure smooth coordination and best-in-class design. The when installing mechanical systems.
exterior façade and structural systems were selected and designed to Hose reels that hung from high bay roof structure required custom
provide long-term durability and speedy construction sequencing. The detailing and an understanding of construction sequencing. In a
CMU walls at the bottom of the exterior walls provided a durable base standard automotive service area, hose reels are hung from the
necessary for the automotive work environment. The structural steel and ceiling, typically only 12 feet in height. With a roof that went as
paneled wall system above enabled quick installation while providing the high as 50 feet, steel framing had to cantilever down while still
sought-after thermal and lighting benefits during the life of the building. meeting equipment deflection limits and providing adequate
clearance below.
The overall result of the Transportation Center is a bright, open space
Constructability that is highly functional to its occupants. The seamless transition
Challenges related to constructability were solved using a high degree into different spaces with geometric peculiarities is a true testa-
of coordination and validation in framing to ensure that the structural ment to the team’s early vision and high degree of coordination.■

Project Team
All authors are with DLR Group. Owner: Pima Community College
Thomas Kramer is a Project Manager. ([email protected]) Structural Engineer and Architect: DLR Group
Contractor: Chasse Building Team
Elizabeth Brack is a Project Engineer. ([email protected])
Structural Software: RAM Structural Systems,
Diana Gonzalez is a Project Engineer. ([email protected]) RAM Connection, RAM Elements, RAM SBeam,
Geoff Leewaye is a Project Engineer. ([email protected]) Enercalc, Navisworks

36 STRUCTURE magazine
The joist that redefined floor systems.
Vulcraft CJ-Series composite steel joists are causing designers to
rethink the way multi-story floor systems are designed. Our CJ-
Series floor system is engineered to support the longest spans
possible, reduce floor-to-floor height, and provide maximum
flexibility for MEP layout – all of which helps to reduce costs.

Our CJ-Series composite steel joists give you:

• More connection options to reduce floor-to-floor height and
mitigate vibration.
• Lighter weight and more efficient joist design for greater Flush Frame Connections help
cost savings. mitigate vibration.
• Greater joist spacing options for fewer joists to support the floor
floor.
• More flexibility with MEP layout with the open web design.

Simply put, Vulcraft’s CJ-Series joists have redefined multi-story

floor systems.

Vierendeel Openings
simplify MEP layout.
Powerful Partnerships. Powerful Results.

www.vulcraft.com
Adaptive Reuse
of the Historic
Witherspoon
Building
Part 3: Structural Investigations
By D. Matthew Stuart, P.E., S.E., P.Eng, F.ASCE, F.SEI, A.NAFE, SECB

T his four-part series discusses the adaptive reuse of the Witherspoon

Building in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Part 1, STRUCTURE,
September 2021, Part 2, October 2021). Part 3 continues the discus-
between the existing cast-iron
columns and below the high
roof beams. In addition, the
sion of the structural investigations – specifically the main roof and installation of the X-brace
original mechanical penthouse – conducted to understand the existing connections was designed to
structure better. Numbered photos are provided in the print version avoid welding to the cast-iron
of the articles; lettered photos are provided only within the online columns by only connecting
versions of the articles. to the existing beams.
During the project’s con-
struction phase, direct tension
Structural Investigations (continued) testing of the penthouse
Results of the main roof and original mechanical penthouse investi- X-brace rods was conducted.
gation indicated that the high penthouse roof had sufficient reserve This was to ensure correct
load-carrying capacity to support proposed new mechanical rooftop rod pre-tensioning via turn-
units (RTUs) that serve the residential units. However, it was necessary buckle rotation was performed
to design steel beam support dunnage that clear spanned between without yielding the ½-inch-
the penthouse columns to prevent imposing any load directly on the diameter rods. In addition,
book tiles and bulb tees (Figure K, online). The increased lateral load during the high roof dunnage
on the penthouse due to the raised RTUs also required additional construction, it was necessary
vertical X-bracing (Figure 11) to be installed inside the penthouse to remove some of the brick
masonry façade wall at the Figure 12. Northeast corner of passenger
northeast corner of the pas- elevator penthouse at southwest corner of
senger elevator machine room new RTU dunnage.
penthouse to access the exist-
ing column so that it could support the southwest corner of the
dunnage. After removal of the brick, it was discovered that the steel
wide flange column that supported the penthouse roof had been
spliced on top of an existing Gray column (Figure 12).
In addition, corrosion of both the wide flange column and Gray
column had occurred due to moisture infiltration from a failed pent-
house parapet coping above. The damage was corrected by cleaning
the steel of all corrosion by-products to determine the extent of sec-
tion loss, adding welded headed studs to the column sections, then
encasing the members in a reinforced concrete pilaster that recreated
the masonry corner of the penthouse. Encasing the steel columns in
concrete strengthened them to offset the loss of section and protected
the steel from further corrosion.
As a part of the investigation, it was also discovered that a few of
Figure 11. New vertical X-bracing at mechanical penthouse. the mechanical penthouse cast-iron columns were cracked at the

38 STRUCTURE magazine
beam web connection clip extensions that proposed new chillers indicated that, in
had been cast with the original pipe section general, the existing exposed framing could
(Figure 13). The source of the cracking was support the new equipment once the exist-
unclear; however, it was assumed that the ing cooling towers were removed and the
cracks occurred during the original handling existing steel was cleaned and repainted to
and erection of the columns due to the brittle prevent further corrosion. However, unsafe
nature of cast iron. It also appeared that the structural conditions were observed at the
clips were intended for lateral support of two easternmost column post supports,
the beams during erection only and served immediately adjacent to the building’s edge,
no actual structural function in the as-built due to excessive steel corrosion and almost
condition. Nevertheless, new bracing angles complete section loss (Figure 14).
were added between the affected beams and The building owner was immediately
adjacent orthogonally framed beams at the notified of the unsafe conditions; however,
same column. the conditions were not corrected until
Investigation results also made it necessary much later in the project when similar
to design and detail the exterior assembly corrosion was observed at all other dun-
space as steel dunnage framing that spanned nage column supports. In the interim,
between the existing main building columns. the existing cooling tower equipment was
However, reinforcing the lateral resisting removed from the dunnage. Damaged col-
system between the main roof and 11th floor umns were either replaced with new steel
was unnecessary because the increase in hori- HSS columns or, if the corrosion was not
zontal forces was determined to be less than Figure 13. Cracked beam-web connection clip at too severe, encased in a reinforced concrete
10% of the existing lateral loads at the roof a penthouse cast-iron column. plinth that included headed studs welded
level, as allowed by the International Existing to the original steel column.
Building Code (IEBC). After the equipment was removed, the steel dunnage was cleaned
To avoid imposing assembly space dunnage loads on the existing and assessed. This resulted in the discovery that section loss due to
clear span roof trusses, it was necessary to extend new columns up corrosion exceeded 5% of the original area; therefore, it was neces-
from the top of the 11th-floor main building columns to create rigid sary to weld reinforcing plates to the wide flange members to offset
frames that in turn provided a platform for additional columns, which cross-sectional area loss. It was also necessary to design new steel
straddled each side of a truss and supported the new rooftop dunnage grillage framing on top of the existing dunnage to marry the new
framing (Figure L, online). Also, a subsequent additional investiga- chiller equipment to the existing framing footprint. New open steel
tion was completed at the main roof, 11th floor, and ceiling framing grating catwalks were also provided, along with new support framing
impacted by the proposed new elevator and stair penthouses, which for the chiller piping between the existing dunnage and mechanical
confirmed the original roof investigation conclusions. Unfortunately, penthouse as required to avoid placing excessive pipe loads on the
the design associated with all of the above, except for the RTU main roof framing below. The completed chiller dunnage and pipe
dunnage, was excluded from the project due to the high cost of the support framing is shown in Figure M (online).
proposed renovations.
Mechanical Penthouse
Mechanical Penthouse and In general, the condition of the existing
penthouse structure was fair; however,
Cooling Tower Dunnage isolated cracking of the perimeter con-
Both the existing mechanical pent- crete base wall and moderate corrosion
house and cooling tower dunnage had of the interior floor and roof framing
been constructed well after the origi- were observed. Further, severe corro-
nal building existed. The purpose of sion at the exterior steel stair stringers
their structural investigations was to (Figure N, online) between the pent-
determine the ability of the same two house and main roof, which had
structures to support the proposed resulted in complete loss of section in
new mechanical equipment and chill- some areas, required that the damaged
ers, respectively. The investigation was area of the stringer be demolished and
required because there were no existing replaced. In addition, isolated spalling
drawings available for either structure. of the floor slab soffit was also observed.
Investigation findings are provided Although the existing 6-inch con-
below and were based on steel coupon crete floor slab capacity could not be
test results of a typical penthouse floor accurately determined due to a lack
beam and roof joist of approximately 40 of information concerning internal
ksi and 50 ksi, respectively. reinforcing, it was confirmed that the
existing steel floor beams had a super-
Cooling Tower Dunnage
imposed, service uniform load-carrying
Investigation results of the existing Figure 14. Corrosion and excessive section loss at an existing capacity of 100 psf. The open web steel
cooling tower steel dunnage for the cooling tower steel dunnage column support. roof joists were determined to have a

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 39
façade wall, a steel-framed roof, a solid concrete roof slab, and the
elevator hoist beams. The existing Otis elevator machinery before its
removal is shown in Figure O (online).
Penthouse framing analysis included determining the impact of the
new loading, provided by the elevator manufacturer, on the moment
and shear capacity of the existing framing described above. In addi-
tion, the deflection of the framing members was assessed based on the
criteria of American Society of Mechanical Engineers A17.1 (ASME
A17.1). Analysis results, which were based on a steel coupon test from
an existing penthouse roof hoist beam that revealed a yield strength of
approximately 47 ksi, indicated that the moment and shear capacities
of the 15-inch blocking beams, W14s, W16s, and W24 girders were
adequate to support the proposed new elevator loads. As a result, it
was also assumed that the existing beam end connections were likewise
adequate for the new loading.
Based on ASME A17.1 Section 2.9.5, allowable deflections of elevator
equipment support beams must be less than span/1666. While the
calculated deflections of the blocking beams and W14 beams were
less than this same amount due to the proposed new equipment,
deflection of the W16 beams and W24 girders would be more than
the same allowable deflection and were therefore not capable of safely
supporting the proposed new loads. As a result, structural reinforcing
was developed for the W16s and W24s.
Strengthening the W16 and W24 beams involved installing vertical
steel members diagonally between the floor beams and the roof beams
above to create story-high trusses (Figure 15). In addition, due to the
increase in the minimum-code roof snow load requirements since the
existing Otis elevator was installed, the roof truss that supported the
W24 penthouse floor girder had to be re-supported with an additional
column between the top of an interior 11th floor column and the
Figure 15. Partially erected strengthening of the existing freight elevator penthouse. bottom chord of the existing truss to reduce the span.
Shaft Vertical Rail Supports
load-carrying capacity of 16 psf in addition to all existing dead loads
associated with the roof structure, roofing, and minimum roof live This investigation did not include an analysis of the existing vertical cab
load of 20 psf. guide rails or counterweight system because they were considered part
The available capacity of the existing floor was considerably less of the operating equipment for which the elevator manufacturer was
than that imposed by the new mechanical equipment. As a result, it responsible. Unlike the vertical cab guide rails, it was also determined
was necessary to design an independent, steel beam dunnage frame that the counterweight system did not impose any additional load on
erected immediately above the existing penthouse floor slab to sup- the existing structural supports located within the shaft. Therefore,
port the new equipment. The new framing clear-spanned between neither the vertical guide rails nor the counterweight system was
existing perimeter penthouse columns, which could support the new included in the investigation and analysis of the existing internal shaft
loads, including the existing main building columns below. It was support framing and related floor framing supports.
also determined that the existing roof framing had adequate capacity The primary deficiency documented in the shaft as a result of the
to support the suspended mechanical piping associated with the new investigation was the existing connections between the vertical guide
penthouse equipment. rails and the existing horizontal support members at each floor level.
Further, it was determined that the existing horizontal support beams,
spanning north and south at the east and west guide rails, were also
Freight Elevator not capable of supporting the new imposed loads. As a result, new
rail support beams were designed and installed with the existing
Machine Room Penthouse
supports abandoned in place. However, the related floor support
The existing freight elevator penthouse floor framing consisted of three beams located around the perimeter of the shaft could support the
15-inch-deep steel wide flange blocking beams that directly supported new loads. The elevator manufacturer also provided new clamping
the elevator machine loads. The blocking beams were supported by bolt connections between the existing rails and the new supports and
W14 machine beams that were in turn supported by W16 beams that installed a properly-sized bearing plate at the base of the rails on top
spanned east and west between W24 girders. The W24 girders were of the existing concrete pit slab.
supported by two perimeter building columns at the north exterior Part 4 of this series continues the structural investigation
side of the penthouse. One framed into the northernmost roof truss discussion, including column capacities and connections,
at the south end of the W24 girders, while the other framed into an new floor openings, and other renovation-related issues.■
interior main building column. The penthouse floor, also supported
D. Matthew Stuart is Senior Structural Engineer at Pennoni Associates Inc.
by the beams described above, consisted of a solid concrete slab. The
in Philadelphia, PA. ([email protected])
floor beam framing also supported a perimeter, multi-wythe brick

40 STRUCTURE magazine
DOING BUSINESS JUST GOT EASIER

NEW APP FEATURES

NOW AVAILABLE

Authenticated NTP Portal users can now

log in using their credentials to:

• Access key documents (inquiries,

orders, etc.);

• Apply sorting-&-filter criteria to get

to key documents faster;

• Download PDF & authorize sharing

associated with key documents; and
• View the details of your orders and
inquiries directly from the NTP App.

WWW.NUCORTUBULAR.COM
state
95 at City Creek
Salt Lake City, UT
By Mark Sarkisian, S.E.,
Peter Lee, S.E., Rupa Garai, S.E.,
Jiejing Zhou, P.E., Alex Zha,
and Jaskanwal Chhabra, Ph.D.

T he new 95 State office and mixed-use facility consists of a 25-story Class A tower with a
5-story podium ecclesiastical meeting house totaling 640,740 square feet. The building
is located in the heart of downtown Salt Lake City, Utah. The project is being developed by
City Creek Reserve Inc. with Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, architect and structural engi-
neer, and Okland Construction as the general contractor. It is scheduled for completion in
late 2021. The integrated urban design of multiple project components includes a complete
rehab of the interconnecting pavilion and tunnel under State Street, connects 95 State to
Salt Lake’s City Creek Center, and provides connections to neighboring Harmons retail and
parking with a new solar canopy. With a client and owner team interested in the long-term
performance of the facility located in a region of high seismicity and close to an active segment
of Utah’s Wasatch Fault zone, SOM’s structural engineering design team responded to the
design challenges of the new 392-foot-tall tower constrained on a narrow corner site using
state-of-the-art performance-based seismic design methodologies and standards. Figure 1
shows 95 State from the south nearing completion.

Tower Structural Systems

Designed in conformance with the 2015 International Building Code (IBC) with State
of Utah 2016 Construction Code Amendments HB310, the 95 State tower and podium
structure is assigned a Risk Category III per the occupancy load limits of 2015 IBC Table
1604.5. The tower superstructure uses reinforced concrete core walls as the seismic-force-
resisting system extending to an overall building height of approximately 392 feet above
adjacent grade with a one-level below-grade basement on the south. The site slopes up
to the north approximately 15 feet along State Street, encompassing a second basement
below Level 2 on the north. The height exceeds the code-prescribed height limit of 240
feet for the core-wall-only system. Therefore, the design uses a “non-prescriptive” building
code design approach using an “alternate procedure” per 2015 IBC Section 104.11. The
superstructure is designed based on the acceptance criteria provisions of the 2015 IBC and
ASCE 7-16 standard, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, Section
12.2.1.1 using PEER TBI v.2.03 (2017), Guidelines for Performance-Based Seismic Design
of Tall Buildings. The ASCE 7-16 standard was adopted as a project-specific exception to
the building code as recommended by PEER TBI v.2.03 Section 1.3. An independent
structural design review was provided in conformance with ASCE 7-16 Sections 12.2.1.1
Figure 1. 95 State nearing completion in late 2021. and 16.5 as approved by the authority having jurisdiction, the Salt Lake City Corporation.

42 STRUCTURE magazine
The lateral seismic-force-resisting system consists of
special ductile reinforced concrete core shear walls and
coupling beam construction extending from a pile and
pile cap supported deep foundation system to the pent-
house roof at Level 26. The slender core wall depth in
the east-west direction is 33 feet, 4 inches, with an aspect
ratio of 11.8. Core shear walls range from 24 to 30 inches
thick with concrete compressive strength of 8,000 psi.
Shear wall thicknesses are constant over the full height
of core walls. The shear wall core is interconnected with
ductile reinforced coupling beams at openings required
for doorways and corridors. Additional openings with
coupling beams were introduced to increase seismic
inelastic energy dissipation. At Level 26 (El. +356.5
feet), the 2-story MEP penthouse roof lateral and gravity
systems consist of a steel-framed core, roof mechani-
cal penthouse, screen walls, and perimeter glazed wall
enclosure. The penthouse lateral system combines a steel
eccentric braced frame (EBF) and a moment frame struc-
ture. The EBF provides sufficient lateral stiffness while
accommodating differential vertical displacements com-
patible with shear wall coupling beams. The moment
frame provides a backup system and helps control residual
drift. Figure 2 shows the overall 3-D Revit BIM model
structural systems.
The office tower architectural geometry is defined by Figure 2. Overall 3-D Revit BIM model structural systems.
rounded glazed corner curtain wall panels with slightly
articulated radiused north-south and east-west walls extending from and the central core. Figure 3 shows a typical framed tower level.
Level 3 to 25 on the south and above Level 6 on the north. Levels The composite steel framing and slab system generally consist of
1 to 5 form a podium with larger floor areas encompassing meeting a 3¼-inch lightweight concrete fill over a 2-inch metal deck. At
house program facilities clad typically in stone, glazing, and areas with Level 2, Level 4 mechanical rooms, and the Roof Level, the com-
art glass. The overall footprint is typically 109 by 210 feet in plan posite steel framing system consists of a 4½-inch normal weight
at the upper tower levels and 109 by 250 feet at the lower podium concrete fill over a 3-inch metal deck. A 2½-inch normal weight
levels. The typical story height is 14 feet, with a story height of 12 concrete fill over a 3-inch metal deck is used at the Level 5 roof
feet 10 inches at B1, 18 feet 1 inch at Level 1, 16 feet at Level 4, and garden. At the tower’s north and south curved walls, steel framing
15 feet at Level 25. is cantilevered up to 18 feet to allow for column-free perimeter
The gravity system of the tower and podium superstructure floor tenant office areas.
plates consists of perimeter steel girders that span between W14 The deep foundation system consists of 24-inch-diameter auger
columns located typically at 30 feet, and W18-W21 composite cast-in-place displacement piles supported on pile caps that resist
beams typically spaced at 10 feet spanning between the W21 girders superstructure gravity and lateral load reactions at the base of the
building. A total of 363 piles extend into
primarily gravel and clay deposits to very
dense gravel layers at depths of 110 to
115 feet. In upper layers, liquefaction-
induced settlements up to 1½ to 2 inches
are expected. At the tower core, a single
11-foot-deep mat pile cap is provided,
interconnected by tapered grade beam
outriggers on primary transverse column
lines to perimeter pile caps in the east-
west direction, to resist lateral overturning
seismic forces. Grade beams typically inter-
connect the pile caps and a 10 to 12-inch
pile-supported suspended slab on grade.
Perimeter foundation walls are also sup-
ported by a continuous grade beam that
spans on perimeter piles.
Level 1 framing construction consists of
cast-in-place reinforced concrete with a typ-
ical 14-inch slab, beams, drop panels, and
Figure 3. Typical tower level framing plan. diaphragm collector elements to transfer

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 43
Figure 4. Plan of foundation model, outrigger grade beam moment diagram, and core wall mat foundation.

lateral loads from tower core walls to perimeter foundation walls. chosen for MCER using the 2014 Next Generation Attenuation
Figure 4 illustrates foundation modeling of core wall mat and grade (NGA-West2) model, in conformance with ASCE 7-16 and by
beam outriggers. following a non-ductile spectral matching approach that conserves
the correlation between horizontal components and results in time
histories that have peaks and valleys.
Site Seismicity and Ground Motions
The site in downtown Salt Lake City is located within the
Intermountain Seismic Belt, one of the most seismically active
Performance-Based Seismic Design
areas in the interior western U.S, with a repeated occurrence of The tower seismic design is based on the PEER TBI v.2.03 (2017)
earthquakes greater than a moment magnitude of M7 along the performance-based guideline procedures and the SDRP review.
Wasatch fault zone. The site is located approximately 1.18 miles Key unique design aspects of the project included, 1) design of an
from the Salt Lake City Segment of the Wasatch Fault Zone. Seismic efficient and well-proportioned lateral load resisting coupled-core
loads were developed utilizing site-specific horizontal acceleration wall system that could dissipate seismic energy by controlled yield-
response spectra to design the tower – service level earthquake (SLE) ing of the coupling beams and hinging at the base of the building
at a 43-year return period and risk-targeted maximum considered core, and 2) explicit modeling of the soil-structure interaction to
earthquake (MCER) at a 2,475-year return period by the project geo- capture the maximum Level 1 transfer diaphragm and basement
technical engineering seismic hazard consultant, Lettis Consultants wall backstay effects, and therefore, determine the upper-bound
International, Inc. (LCI), in coordination with site geotechnical demands on the transfer diaphragm. The core walls are modeled
investigations by Consolidated Engineering Laboratories (CEL). using nonlinear fiber elements, and the coupling beams are modeled
Peer-reviewed by the Structural Design Review Panel (SDRP), 11 using lumped plasticity flexural/shear hinges in Perform-3D (CSI).
sets of fault-normal and fault-parallel ground motion records were Figure 5 shows the core wall horizontal section highlighting the
wall fiber arrangement, coupling beams, and
core wall strain gauges which capture yielding
of longitudinal reinforcement. The coupling
beams are modeled according to recommen-
dations in Naish (2010), Galano and Vignoli
(2000), and Lim et al. (2016). The stiffness
modifiers for the component actions, where
nonlinear behavior is not explicitly modeled,
are used according to PEER TBI v2.03.
Nonlinear analyses are performed with a suite
of 11 ground motions for two separate cases to
bound the backstay stresses. The upper bound
lateral load in the Level 1 transfer diaphragm
and perimeter basement walls are modeled
using the higher stiffness modifiers per ATC
72-1, Table A-3. The foundation flexibility is
Figure 5. Modeling of reinforced concrete core wall nonlinear components (Perform-3D, CSI). accounted for by using soil springs to model

44 STRUCTURE magazine
Figure 6. Illustration of compliance to design criteria: a) Inter-story drift ratio; b) Fiber strain in the RC core wall.

the vertical pile stiffness. The upper bound lateral load remaining
in the shear wall core is captured using relatively lower stiffness
property modifiers per ATC 72-1, Table A-3. All the elements are
modeled as pinned at the top of the pile cap. The structural per-
formance is primarily evaluated by studying the inter-story drift
ratios, coupling beam rotations, strain in the core wall fibers, and
rotations at the end of the gravity beams in conformance with
limits imposed in the detailed structural design criteria. Figure 6
illustrates compliance to design criteria with respect to inter-
story drift ratios and strain in core wall fibers. The MCER mean
base shear force for the maximum backstay case is 15,250-kips
(0.145g) in both the transverse and longitudinal directions.
NLRHA ground motion analyses were typically completed in
3 to 4 days run-time. With the modeling of piles, run-times
extended up to 40 days. Figure 7 shows the in-progress con-
struction of reinforced concrete core walls and steel framing
up to Level 6.
The new 95 State office tower and mixed-use facility is a bold
and iconic addition to Salt Lake City’s downtown urban and liv- Figure 7. Construction of core walls and steel at Level 6.
able city center. The performance-based seismic design
approach achieves enhanced performance, reductions
Mark Sarkisian is Partner ([email protected]), Peter Lee is Senior Associate
in embodied carbon impact, and a LEED Gold rating.■
Director ([email protected]), Rupa Garai is Associate Director (rupa.garai@som.
The authors thank the client group at City Creek Reserve, Inc., com), Jiejing Zhou is Professional Engineer ([email protected]), and Alex Zha
for their support in achieving project goals, and the entire design is Design Engineer ([email protected]) with the San Francisco office of Skidmore,
and construction team for their contributions. Owings & Merrill (SOM). Jaskanwal Chhabra is a former Design Engineer with
SOM ([email protected]).
The online article contains information regarding the
whole-building life-cycle assessment that was performed
along with an additional graphic.
ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

Project Team Demos at www.struware.com

Owner/Developer: City Creek Reserve, Inc., Wind, Seismic, Snow, Rain, etc. Struware’s Code Search program calculates these
and other loadings for all codes based on the IBC or ASCE7 in just minutes (see online
Salt Lake City, UT video). Also calculates wind loads on rooftop equipment, signs, walls, chimneys,
Structural Engineer and Architect: Skidmore, Owings & trussed towers, tanks and more. ($295.00).
Merrill, San Francisco, CA CMU or Tilt-up Concrete Walls Analyze solid walls for out of plane loading and
General Contractor/Concrete: Okland Construction panel legs next to or between openings by automatically calculating loads to the wall
Company, Salt Lake City, UT leg from vertical and horizontal loads at the opening. ($75.00 ea)
Prime Steel Contractor: SME Steel Contractors, Floor Vibration Program to analyze floors with steel beams and/or steel joist.
West Jordan, UT Compare up to 4 systems side by side ($75.00).
Concrete Reinforcement Detailer: Harris Rebar Inc, Concrete beam/slab Program to provide bending, shear and/or torsional reinforcing.
Salt Lake City, UT Quick and easy to use ($45.00).

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 45
engineer's NOTEBOOK
Leveraging Professional Relationships
Staying Ahead of the Rapidly Changing Construction Industry
By Samuel Harris

T oday’s challenging and fast-paced construction environment

forces engineers to take on many responsibilities in the design
workflow. The continual evolution of the construction indus-
try makes it difficult for structural design professionals to stay
up-to-date on new construction materials, methods, codes, and
design technology.
Many manufacturers and vendors that regularly support struc-
tural engineering consultants offer assistance to help overcome the
information gap on many construction applications and technology.
These valuable services can help save time and allow design profes-
sionals to focus on schedule-critical tasks. There is a vast amount
of educational content and design tools that construction vendors
make available online via educational forums, webinars, and vari-
ous software applications. Despite having all of these tools at their
disposal, only a small fraction of structural engineering professionals
take full advantage of them.

The Dilemma Where to Start

Structural engineers must continually review new construction inno- One of the greatest challenges vendors and their engineering depart-
vations to meet a variety of design requirements. These requirements ments face is moving beyond being the classification of a vendor to
might include: that of a partner. Building material representatives/vendors want
• Load capacity to collaborate with engineers to make them more productive and
• Compliance with varying load types and serviceability cost-efficient.
requirements Start by identifying your local manufacturer representative. Many
• Compliance with national and local building code representatives have their P.E. license and come from a structural or
requirements Civil engineering background. Invite your field representative to meet
• Choosing the correct fastening solution for the application your design team face-to-face or online so that they can understand
• Cost of materials and cost of installation labor your processes and projects. Your field representative can provide
• Controlling design parameters such as fastener spacing, the following:
base material type, and thickness • Design assistance/guidance/quality review
• Jobsite considerations and challenges • Customized specification edits
º Incorrectly placed or missed • RFI assistance to facilitate better
fasteners design and communication of field
º Contractor installer training fixes
º Incorrect installations Everyone in the • On-site project support and
º Environmental considerations hands-on installation training
º Material availability construction industry for the installer
A designer often consumes large amounts is extremely busy these • Answers to challenging software and
of time conducting research, attending proj- code provision questions related to
ect meetings, and engaging in dialogue with
days trying to meet their products
the owner/architect/contractor to derive the deadlines and support Certain manufacturers have “preferred con-
safest and most economical solution. After sultant programs” that offer key structural
dedicating countless hours to a project,
their clients as design and engineering offices specific benefits such as
RFIs and re-design work can further con- construction roar back continuing education, specification modifi-
sume time and budget and possibly cause cation, design assistance, or job site support.
delays. By leveraging the support services
to 2019 levels. Inquire with your manufacturer’s representa-
of trusted manufactures and vendors, this tive if your office qualifies. Other (often free)
process can be significantly streamlined. services provided to engineers might include:

46 STRUCTURE magazine
• Jobsite quality reviews better avoid rework by ensuring products are more likely to be
• Inspector training installed correctly.
• Local jurisdiction training These benefits combine to build a stronger relationship amongst the
• Anchor installer training structural engineer, manufacturer, and contractor. So take
• Cost savings and value engineering recommendations the time to reach out to your preferred manufacturers and
start this valuable conversation today!■
Other Tools to Leverage
Sam Harris is a Lead Structural Field Engineer working for Hilti North
Manufacturer representatives provide valuable support tools to the
America and covering Colorado and Wyoming. ([email protected])
design community beyond their face-to-face interactions with struc-
tural engineers, including:
• Design software – Manufacturers
provide some of the best-in-
class software packages that can
instantly reduce design hours.
Many companies offer simplified
versions of their software packages
for free that can be useful for the
most common design problems.
• Seminars and webinars – STICK TO THE
Continuing education is offered M O S T I M P O R TA NT
online or in-person on vari-
ous topics; many programs are SCHEDULE.
certified by NCSEA to satisfy YO U R S .
state continuing education
requirements.
• Engineering-specific online land-
ing pages and websites – Online
forums such as Ask.Hilti.com

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

are set up expressly to address
engineers’ and architects’ technical
questions. These sites post various
technical content and provide
access to technical data, design
guides, and product approvals.
• Engineering call centers and
design offices – Most have a
central phone number or email
for direct access to an engineering
department. Many can respond
to technical questions within
24 hours.

Benefits/Conclusion
Everyone in the construction industry
is extremely busy these days trying to
meet deadlines and support their cli-
ents as design and construction roar
back to 2019 levels. Taking advantage
of these services brings value to all par- Extra steps. More parts and pieces. Skilled labor issues. They all
ties involved. Structural engineers can add up to one thing: less of doing what you really love. But with
confirm that their specification details ClarkDietrich, time and innovation work in your favor. Our framing
are up-to-date and communicated cor- and finishing systems speed up and simplify installation. Because
rectly to the contractors. Manufacturers you’ve got better plans waiting.
can provide design aids and services
that save time and prevent costly RFIs. © 2021 ClarkDietrich

Contractors can work directly with the

manufacturers to solve field issues and

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 47
code UPDATES
States, Cities Adopting Tall Mass
Timber Provisions
A Variety of Approaches
By Kenneth Bland, P.E.

S tates and municipalities eager to allow taller mass timber buildings

are considering adopting the mass timber provisions in the 2021
International Building Code (IBC). Many have recently finished the
adoption of the 2018 I-codes and would otherwise wait several more
years to incorporate construction types IV-A, IV-B, and IV-C into their
building codes to allow mass timber buildings up to 18 stories tall.
The American Wood Council’s (AWC) staff of engineers and former
building code officials has been approached by several of these states and
localities for technical support and, thus far, California, Georgia, Idaho,
Oregon, Utah, Virginia, Washington, and the city of Denver are either
in the process of enacting the provisions or are finalizing the process. ICC membership. The added section contains a note that sends the
code user to a state-issued supplement containing the consolidated
tall mass timber provisions. In many respects, it is similar to the
Approaches to Early Adoption approach used in Denver. However, in AWC’s experience assist-
There have been three main approaches to incorporating the 2021 ing Building Code Boards undertaking the early adoption process,
IBC tall mass timber provisions into state and local building codes. some states may find this approach attractive for its brevity but find
All have the same effect and have been chosen by the State or local it is inconsistent with the rest of the building code.
jurisdiction based on the most efficient approach to maintain con-
sistency with the rest of the building code. Amendments to the 2021 Provisions
• Incorporate directly into the code. Washington and California
are examples where the provisions were incorporated directly Most states that have incorporated the 2021 IBC tall mass timber provi-
into the state code, much like they appear in the 2021 IBC. The sions into their codes have done so through direct adoption. However,
International Code Council (ICC) has begun posting statewide there are a few that amended portions of the model building code.
amendments adopting the 2021 tall mass timber provisions to The Oregon Statewide Alternate Methods (SAM) approach was
its Digital Code website, providing an important resource for adopted in 2015 and updated in 2019, as the approval process for
other jurisdictions considering adoption. State codes, such as the tall mass timber provisions was underway at ICC and well before
Washington state building code based on the 2018 IBC, are avail- the 2021 IBC was finalized. To facilitate the approval of tall mass
able for free viewing on the site, where it seamlessly adds the 2021 timber buildings, Oregon added an amendment addressing seismic
tall mass timber provisions into the current edition of the code. design coefficients and factors that was eventually replaced with ref-
• Mandatory appendix. The city of Denver erence to the AWC/ANSI 2021 Special Design
added a mandatory appendix for incorpo- Provisions for Wind and Seismic (SDPWS). The
rating tall mass timber provisions into the 2021 SDPWS provisions apply to buildings less
city code. The appendix adds specific provi- than or equal to 65 feet in height in Seismic
sions to the current building code, allowing Design Category (SDC) A and B. AWC recom-
designers to use the 2021 IBC tall mass mends that states and municipalities that have
timber criteria. The appendix provisions are not adopted the 2021 IBC allow the use of 2021
identical to the mass timber provisions in SDPWS, which provides criteria for the design
the 2021 IBC but are consolidated in one of CLT diaphragms and shear walls.
place rather than scattered throughout the The State of Washington has approved a sub-
code based on the section number. While stantive but straightforward change to their
this example is from a city, a state could 2021 IBC mass timber provisions based on a
undertake the same approach. code change proposal introduced in the 2024
• Reference the 2021 IBC. Virginia elected Code Development Cycle. ICC proposal G150-
to amend the 2018 code by adding a simple 21 clarifies that noncombustible materials that
reference to the 2021 IBC for the types of line concealed spaces are not required to be
tall mass timber construction in Chapter 6. protected in Type IV-HT. AWC is the proponent
This approach offers a succinct alternative of the change, which clarifies existing provi-
and is consistent with how the state already sions and was recommended for approval by a
recognizes the latest changes approved by the unanimous vote of the committee.

48 STRUCTURE magazine
2024 Code Change Proposals
In addition to G150-21, several other code change proposals are
being considered in ICC’s 2024 Development Cycle, which are
important to tall mass timber code users. For example, a proposal,
G147-21, supported by AWC to increase the allowable area of
exposed mass timber ceilings from 20% to 100% in buildings up
to 12-stories in height, was recommended for approval by the ICC
code development committee and during the public comment hear-
ing. Testing conducted by the Research Institute of Sweden (RISE)
and sponsored by AWC through a USDA Wood Innovation Grant
provided compelling evidence for the committee’s recommendation.
An AWC change proposal, F174-21, to delay the installation of
the noncombustible topping on CLT floors during construction was
also recommended for approval. This proposal was also supported by
two mass timber builders that spoke to the challenges of sequencing
installation of the topping during construction and the cost savings
associated with providing the builder with greater flexibility. and inspected for compliance. Adopting the new construction types
G142-21 has been proposed to permit CLT in the exterior walls IV-A, IV-B, and IV-C will allow designers to use strong, low-carbon
of Type III construction but was recommended for disapproval. alternatives to engineer safe, efficient, and sustainable buildings.
Similarly, FS 34-21 proposes to allow CLT firewall construction in For additional information on tall mass timber, the 2021 code
certain combustible construction buildings but was recommended development process, and the rigorous fire testing performed
for disapproval, despite strong testimony in support. AWC sought at the ATF, please refer to www.awc.org/tallmasstimber.■
approval of both proposals through the ICC Online Governmental
Consensus Vote which closed November 1, 2021. All graphics are the Apex Clean Energy headquarters under
construction in Charlottesville, Virginia.
Conclusion Kenneth Bland is the Vice President, Codes & Regulations for the American
Wood Council. AWC is committed to ensuring a resilient, safe, and
Once a governmental entity takes action to enact ICC’s family of
sustainable built environment on behalf of the industry it represents.
model codes as law, all construction must be designed, constructed,

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

HELP YOUR CLIENTS

INCREASE
PRODUCTIVITY
SAFER THAN CONVENTIONAL CONCRETE PINNERS
The HN120 is a faster, safer and a more cost effective alternative to powder actuated
tools, and doesn’t require a license to operate. Unlike powder actuated tools, this tool
is faster, more efficient and doesn’t require powder loads to operate. Backed by the
power of a 500 PSI Powerlite® compressor the HN120 can easily drive pins, through
a multitude of materials including metal, steel, concrete and wood, with minimal recoil.
MAX is committed to manufacturing reliable tools that have been designed to deliver
enhanced performance while making sure that users can carry out safe operations.

HN120 Uses AccuEmbed CPC .157” Pins

PowerLite® High Pressure
Concrete Pinner up to 2-1/2” MAX manufactures fasteners for the PowerLite®
500PSI system. This enables contractors to work
more productively and extremely cost effectively
at every jobsite where you may have use Gas
operated or Powder Actuated Tools (P.A.T.).

VIEW OUR REPORT

Scan the QR Code to view the report.

The MAX PPE Shield means that you can trust that our tools are engineered with your health and
safety in mind. MAX high pressure tools are lightweight to reduce the stress on the body that
develops from working hard all day.

MAX USA Corp. • 205 Express St. Plainview, NY 11803 • U.S.A. - Phone: (800) 223-4293 • FAX: (516) 741-3272 • www.maxusacorp.com MAX USA CORP.

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 49
historic STRUCTURES
Quebec Bridge, The First Failure, 1907
By Frank Griggs, Jr., Dist. M.ASCE, D.Eng, P.E., P.L.S.

Winning design by Phoenix Bridge.

A bridge had been proposed across the St. Lawrence river for many
years when the Phoenix Bridge Company and Theodore Cooper
were selected to build an 1,800-foot-span cantilever bridge. The span
• A reduction in wind load. The Original specifications used
the Firth of Forth pressure of 56 pounds per square foot. This
pressure was adopted after the Firth of Tay Bridge had failed
would be the longest cantilever in the world, surpassing the Firth of under high wind loads. Cooper reduced the load to 30 pounds
Forth Bridge with its two spans of 1,710 feet. Cooper was initially per square foot.
selected as a consultant to the Quebec Bridge & Railway Co. to recom- • An increase in the allowable working stresses in the members
mend a design from the many submitted in a design competition. He to 21,000 pounds-per-square-inch under a Cooper E-30 load-
selected the Phoenix Bridge design as it was “an exceedingly creditable ing and 24,000 pounds-per-square-inch under a Cooper E-50
plan from the point of view of its general proportions, outlines, and loading over the entire length of the bridge. At the time, the
its constructive features” and was the “best and cheapest plan and usual value was 16,000 psi.
proposal of those submitted to me...”
At the time, Phoenix Bridge was one of the leading bridge companies Cooper loading E30 designates that each of the
in the world, and Cooper had an unblemished record as a bridge driving wheels has a load of 30,000#. It also specifies
engineer. The original proposal was for a 1,600-foot cantilever, but
Cooper recommended that the central span be increased to 1,800 a load on the leading truck and another load on the
feet to save the time to build and the cost of the piers. trailing axle, plus a load for the following freight cars.
On November 19, 1900, Cooper was retained as Consulting
Engineer, and, shortly after, the Bridge Company received financial
At the time of the bridge’s design, a loading of E20
support from the Government. Peter Szlapka, working under J. was common, but Cooper specified a loading of E30.
Sterling Deans, started the actual design in accordance with specifi-
cations prepared by Cooper. Cooper had significantly modified the All the plans prepared by Szlapka were forwarded to Cooper for
standard Canadian specification, placing his mark on the bridge. Two his review and approval. While the foundations were being placed
of the changes were, between 1899 and late 1903, the design of the superstructure

Plan of bridge showing failed member A9L and planned suspended truss to mid-span.

50 STRUCTURE magazine
proceeded, and the anchor spans were to time, it is only very recently that these
approved in October 1904. Construction have been in this condition, and their
started on the south anchor span in present shape is undoubtedly due to
July 1905, and the design of the south the stress they are now receiving. Only
cantilever arm followed. Szlapka then a little over a week ago, I measured one
determined that the fabricated weight of rib of the 9-L chord of the anchor arm
steel was coming in much greater than he here shown, and it was only ¾ inch out
had estimated. It so happened that he had of line. Now it is 2¼ inches.”
not increased the estimated dead weight McLure took the train to New York,
of his cantilever arm and suspended span arriving on the morning of August 29,
in going from the 1,600-foot span to the and reported in person to Cooper on his
1,800-foot span that he used to design concerns about the safety of the bridge.
his anchor arm. Cooper knew that, short Finally recognizing the critical nature
of taking the bridge apart, he could do of the problem, Cooper told McLure to
nothing about it and wrote, “I made an telegraph Phoenix Bridge, telling them to
estimate of the increased strains due to stop work immediately and sent him to
this increased weight and found it to be Phoenixville to discuss the matter more
about 7 percent...Realizing that there was Bottom chord cross-section A9L. fully with them. The telegram was sent
no remedy and that this 7 percent was at 12:16 PM and arrived at Phoenixville
not a fatal increase.” Szlapka then designed the cantilever arm and at 1:15 PM. McLure would not arrive at Phoenixville until 5:30
suspended span to the increased dead weight. PM. At that time, the bridge collapsed into the St. Lawrence River,
After the cantilever arm was finished, a smaller traveler was built killing 75 men.
to erect one-half of the suspended span. In early August, the splice Harper’s Weekly asked, “was it properly constructed? Was the iron
in the lower chord 7-8L of the anchor span showed increased signs of inferior quality? Is there no method of making iron bridges of
of distress. Cooper later stated that he began to get “uneasy” about assured safety? And who is responsible (so far as responsibility goes)
the lower chord members on August 8 when he got a report from for such an accident – the engineer who designed the bridge, or the
his man on the job, Norman McLure, on apparent bending of the contractor, or the builders, or the railroad corporation? Was the bridge
web plates on the lower compression chord near the southerly pier. when made the best of its kind, or the cheapest of its kind.” A massive
At the time of the collapse, the first three panels of the suspended study was made by a Royal Commission, including a report by C. C.
span were in place. Schneider. They concluded, in part:
The outside ribs on A9L were each built up of 3 plates – 54 inches × a) The collapse of the Quebec Bridge resulted from the failure of
15
⁄16 inch and one 37¾ inches × 15⁄16 inch combined with stich rivets. the lower chords in the anchor arm near the main pier. The
The interior ribs were built up with 2 plates – 54 inches × 15⁄16 inch failure of these chords was due to their defective design…
and two 46 inches × 15⁄16 inch also connected with stich rivets. The c) The design of the chords that failed was made by Mr. P. L.
ribs were separated by latticing top and bottom and diaphragms near Szlapka, the designing engineer of the Phoenix Bridge Co.
the top. The ends of the plates were milled, and the compressive load d) This design was examined and officially approved by Mr.
between the members of the lower chord was to be transferred from Theodore Cooper, consulting engineer of the Quebec Bridge
member to member by bearing. However, during erection, they & Railway. Co.
encountered many problems bringing the members into full bearing e) The failure cannot be attributed directly to any cause other
over the entire joint. than errors in judgment on the part of these two engineers.
Between August 7 and August 27, 1907, there were many let- f ) These errors of judgment cannot be attributed either to
ters, telegrams, and telephone calls between McLure, Cooper, lack of common professional knowledge, to neglect of
Szlapka, and Deans regarding the increased bending of the web duty, or to a desire to economize. The ability of the two
plates of the lower chord. At first, many of the players believed engineers was tried in one of the most difficult professional
the bend had been in the plates problems of the day and
from the beginning. McLure could proved to be insufficient for
not convince them that the bend the task…
was not there initially and was i) We do not believe that the
increasing over time as more load fall of the bridge could have
was added to the suspended span. been prevented by any action
Some of the Phoenix Bridge men And who is responsible (so far that might have been taken
on the job, including Yenser, the as responsibility goes) for such after August 27, 1907. Any
foreman, believed the situation was effort to brace or take down
critical. Birks, the Superintendent, an accident – the engineer the structure would have been
continued to believe the bend was impracticable owing to the
in the member from the begin- who designed the bridge, or the manifest risk of human life
ning. McLure wrote to Cooper, “… involved.
although a number of the chords contractor, or the builders, or j) The loss of life on August 29,
originally had ribs more or less wavy, 1907, might have been pre-
as I have reported to you from time
the railroad corporation? vented by the exercise of better

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 51
unquestionably be safe can be built, but, in the present state
of professional knowledge, a considerably larger amount of
material would have to be used than might be required if
our knowledge were more exact.
o) The professional record of Mr. Cooper was such that his
selection for the authoritative position that he occupied was
warranted, and the complete confidence that was placed in
his judgment by the officials of the Dominion Government,
the Quebec Bridge & Railway Company, and the Phoenix
Bridge Company was deserved.
C. C. Schneider, in his report, wrote of A9L, A9R, and some other
members,
“Since, however, the lower chord members of the Quebec bridge
are butt-jointed, they are neither continuous nor pin connected, and
it is impossible to make the whole section bear uniformly under the
various conditions of loading…
However, there is a deficiency in many of the compression members,
as their connections, such as the latticing, are not sufficient to make
the parts composing them act as a unit. The most pronounced defect
in this respect exists in the lower chord members of the cantilever
and anchor.”
While not emphasized in his report, in the opinion of many, these
were the cause of the buckling and failure of members A9L and A9R.
The blame was placed primarily on Cooper and Szlapka, and The
Engineering Record wrote on Cooper,
“It is seldom that the responsible engineer for any work, great or
small, has more authoritatively or more effectively impressed his
engineering judgment upon the work in his charge than in this
Bridge in the river. case...Perhaps the most painful part of the evidence is that in which
the Consulting Engineer makes the plea of impaired health for not
judgment on the part of those in responsible charge of the exacting from both the contractor and the Quebec Bridge Co. certain
work for the Quebec Bridge & Railway Co. and for the requirements of design and plans in the one case and the necessary
Phoenix Bridge Company… organization for the proper performance of the work on the other.
m) No one connected with the general designing fully appreci- Unfortunately, such pleas are admissions of official shortcoming:
ated the magnitude of the work nor the insufficiency of however much a man may feel the disability of ill health, they give
the data upon which they were depending. The special him no relief from official responsibility...The Consulting Engineer
experimental studies and investigations that were required to makes a further point in his evidence that the fee he received was quite
confirm the judgment of the designers were not made. insufficient to enable him to maintain a proper office workforce for
n) The professional knowledge of the present-day concerning the discharge of the duties imposed upon him in his official capac-
the action of steel columns under load is not sufficient to ity...When he accepted the fee, he accepted all of the responsibilities
enable engineers to economically design such structures as of the position. No engineer has any right whatever to consider his
the Quebec bridge. A bridge of the adopted span that will responsibilities lessened because his fee is not as large as it should be...”
One of the worst and most studied, this failure pointed to
the need for meaningful peer review and the need for qualified
inspectors, with authority, on major works. It is hard from the
BUILD YOUR
ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

perspective of the early 21st century to understand why it was

CAREER AT KL&A not clear that the lower chord compression members were fail-
ing in, and probably before, early August. Accepting that fact
We are currently looking for: would have required the entire design team to recognize that
they had made a serious design error, which was not correctable,
• Structural Engineers and that the bridge was doomed to fail. In the early afternoon
• Civil Engineers
of August 29, they could not have saved the bridge,
• BIM Technicians
but they could have saved the lives of the 75 men who
• Construction Managers
• Steel Detailer died in the collapse.■

Please visit klaa.com/open-careers Dr. Frank Griggs, Jr. specializes in the restoration of historic bridges,
for more information and to apply. having restored many 19 t h Century cast and wrought iron bridges.
G O L D E N | L O V E L A N D | C A R B O N D A L E | B U F FA L O He is now an Independent Consulting Engineer. ([email protected])

52 STRUCTURE magazine
legal PERSPECTIVES
Waiver of Consequential Damages
By Gail S. Kelley, P.E., Esq.

W hile a waiver of consequential dam-

ages clause is considered a contractual If the Client balks at a waiver, this might
risk management tool, how these provisions
manage risk is not always clear. One reason is
be a red flag for the Engineer.
that potential consequential damages for one
or both parties can vary from virtually nothing A.2d 364 (N.J. 1992). In this case, a New or other matters arising out of or relating
to many times the contract amount, depending Jersey court upheld an arbitration panel’s to the Contract or the services provided by
on the project. Engineers often ask whether decision that the construction management Engineer, regardless of whether such claim
they should agree to waive their consequential firm engaged to manage a casino restoration or dispute is based upon breach of contract,
damages, and likewise, whether they should project owed the owner $14,500,000 in lost willful misconduct, or negligent act or
require the other party to waive their conse- profits due to delays in the project. It is gen- omission of either of them or their employ-
quential damages. The answer, as is common erally believed that this case was the impetus ees, agents, subconsultants, or other legal
in contract negotiations, is “it depends.” for adding a mutual waiver of consequential theory, even if the affected party has knowl-
The concept of consequential damages damages clause to the AIA A201. This clause edge of the possibility of such damages. This
derives from the 1854 English case, Hadley (subparagraph 15.1.7 of the 2017 A201) mutual waiver shall survive termination or
v. Baxendale. (Because the United States was a includes a broad list of the consequential completion of this Contract.
British colony, we inherited many of Britain’s damages that the Owner waives, including
Subcontracts
legal principles.) The Hadleys were millers rental expenses, loss of use, income, profit,
who hired Baxendale to transport their broken financing, business and reputation, and loss Parties to a contract can only waive their own
mill shaft to London for repair. Unfortunately, of employee productivity and services. The rights – they cannot waive the rights of others.
the repaired shaft was not delivered to the Contractor waives the right to claim prin- This is a key issue for subconsultants – while the
Hadleys by the date the parties had agreed cipal office expenses, lost opportunities and Prime Consultant and the Subconsultant may
upon, and the mill was shut down for sev- profit, loss of bonding or increased bonding agree to waive consequential damages against
eral days. The Hadleys sued for their lost costs, and damages to reputation. each other, if the Owner has not waived its
profits but lost, with the court holding that There are two important take-away points from consequential damages and the Subconsultant
a party injured by a breach of contract can the AIA clause – the first is that there is no causes a delay, the Prime Consultant would
only recover “those injuries which the parties universally accepted definition of consequential likely be entitled to pass the Owner’s conse-
could reasonably have anticipated at the time damages. Therefore, the clause should list the quential damages down to the Subconsultant.
the contract was entered into.” Because the types of consequential damages being waived to
Conclusion
Hadleys had not told Baxendale that the mill avoid dispute. The second is that while nomi-
operation depended on the shaft, Baxendale nally mutual, the waiver really only impacts the Engineers generally do not have significant
could not be held liable for the lost profits. Owner because the most significant component potential consequential damages, so agreeing to
Over the years, a body of case law has grown of any consequential damages is lost profits. waive their own damages typically does not pose
around the concept. While many of the cases Whereas the damages that the Contractor is much risk. However, the Client’s consequential
address specific circumstances and wording, waiving, including lost profits, are limited and damages that the Engineer could be held liable
the holding has come to stand for the proposi- could be difficult to prove, the Owner’s lost for will depend on the client, the type of project,
tion that a breach of contract can cause two profits – for example, rental income of apart- and the Engineer’s role (prime or subconsultant).
types of damages: direct (or “general”) dam- ment or office space – could be substantial. The Engineers may want to include a mutual waiver
ages and consequential or “special” damages. same holds for an Engineer’s contract – although of consequential damages in their contracts as
Direct damages are those required to correct the waiver clause may be mutual, with both par- standard practice. Since there is no universally
the breach, for example, the cost to correct a ties giving up the right to claim lost profit and accepted definition of consequential damages,
design error. Consequential damages are other business opportunities, the Engineer’s potential the clause should include a comprehensive list
economic damages suffered by the non-breach- damages for an Owner breach will generally be of potential damages. When a contract includes
ing party that the breaching party knew (or limited. However, the mutual waiver appropri- a one-sided waiver (where only the Engineer
should have known) could occur at the time ately reflects the risk/reward ratio for the parties. waives damages), the Engineer should request
the contract was entered into. They almost that the waiver be mutual. If the
Mutual Waivers
always arise from delays in performance; in the Client balks at a waiver, this might
context of construction, this typically involves There are no required words that need to be be a red flag for the Engineer.■
a delay in project completion. included in a waiver clause, but the clause should
Gail S. Kelley is a LEED AP and a
be broadly worded to encompass all claims. An
Construction Contracts professional engineer and licensed attorney in
example of a commonly used clause is:
Massachusetts, Maryland, and the District of
One of the best-known cases involving Engineer and Client waive all consequen-
Columbia. She is the author of “Construction
consequential damages arising from con- tial damages, including, but not limited to,
Law: An Introduction for Engineers, Architects,
struction contracts is Perini Corp. v. Greate loss of use, profits, revenue, business oppor-
and Contractors.” ([email protected])
Bay Hotel & Casino, Inc., 129 N.J. 479, 610 tunity, or production, for claims, disputes,

54 STRUCTURE magazine N O V E M B E R 2 0 21
ASCE Continuing Education
Online Training Opportunities
NOVEMBER 2021

November 11 & 12, 2021 | 11:30 am - 1:30 pm ET each day

Structural-Condition Assessment of Existing
Save 20% Now!
Timber Structures Register for more than one
November 30, 2021 | 11:30 am - 1:00 pm ET
Seismic Screening of Buildings Using ASCE 41-1
November or December
2021 Live Online Training
DECEMBER 2021
program and get 20% off!
December 13, 2021 | 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm ET
Rain Loads in ASCE 7-22, What’s New and
Different
Use this code: SAVE2021
December 14, 2021 | 2:00 pm - 3:00 pm ET
Significant Changes to the Wind Load
Provisions of ASCE 7-22 –Part 1 OTHER TRAINING AVAILABLE:
December 15, 2021 | 11:30 am - 1:00 pm ET
Introduction to ASCE 7-22 Requirements for
Tornado Loads GUIDED ONLINE COURSE
December 16, 2021 | 11:30 am - 1:00 pm ET CERTIFICATE PROGRAM
Seismic Design Ground Motions as per ASCE
7-22 Structural Earthquake
December 17, 2021 | 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm ET
Snow Loads in ASCE 7-22, What’s New and Engineering for Buildings
Different
This series of career-focused courses
taught by practicing engineers and
JANUARY 2022 university professors and provides
professional engineers in-demand skills
January 19, 2022 | 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm ET
Significant Changes to the Wind Load used in the field of seismic engineering.
Provisions of ASCE 7-22 –Part 2 Learn the fundamental concepts of
earthquake engineering, seismic analysis
of buildings, and design and detailing of
FEBRUARY 2022
steel and concrete structures. Course
February 16, 2022 | 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm ET materials cover both new and existing
Significant Changes to the Wind Load buildings.
Provisions of ASCE 7-22 –Part 3
Certificate program enrollment saves you
up to 30% versus purchasing courses
individually.
go.asce.org/StructuralCertificate
go.asce.org/StructuralTraining
INSIGHTS
Who Selects Fireproofing?
By Charles “Chuck” F. King, P.E., S.E., and Stephen M. Cohen, AIA

F ire is the most common devastating event a building can experi-

ence. The structural integrity of a building is vulnerable to high
temperatures from a fire because steel melts, wood burns, and concrete
cracks! Yet, these are the materials structural engineers use to hold
up the building. The materials must maintain integrity during a fire
long enough to protect the building occupants and allow firefighters
to put out the fire.
Building codes provide guidance on protecting buildings and occu-
pants from the effects of fire. Architects and engineers apply the code
provisions to contain a fire so all occupants survive and safely escape
the premises. The codes specify how long a building
must resist fire to achieve this goal.
So, who drives the decision for the type of fireproofing
used to protect the building elements? Both the architect
and the engineer have a responsibility to provide these
It is a collaboration between knowledgeable
solutions. The structure must be protected, and occupants structural engineers and architects to consider the
allowed to escape. So, each professional plays a part in
specifying the fireproofing in accordance with the code. tradeoffs inherent to different approaches.
When the owner identifies the use of the building and
the occupancy load, the architect references the fire
codes to classify the building and identify where fire
containments (separations) are located. The architect plans the egress avoids the need for sprayed-on fire protection to the underside of the
routes (stairs, doors, windows, etc.), applying the fire-resistance rating slab. Of course, exposed beams need to be protected, but eliminating
for the walls, ceilings, and floor assemblies. The types of assemblies the need for fire protecting the slab greatly reduces cost. The impact
are selected and checked against research from fire prevention labora- of this decision is a slight reduction in the floor-to-ceiling height,
tory studies such as Underwriters Laboratory (UL). These reference possibly affecting the architectural design.
standards provide precise details for achieving fire ratings for walls, Residential buildings are often constructed with reinforced concrete.
floors, etc., that are required to comply with fire codes and, when This material provides built-in fire separation, as concrete has excel-
applied, must be constructed precisely as shown. The fire ratings are lent fire resistance, eliminating the need for additional applications or
based on lab tests conducted on the various assemblies to assess how assemblies. But the flexibility of the structure for future modifications
quickly temperatures reach unacceptable levels. is reduced. It is more difficult to cut a hole in a reinforced concrete
In some cases, precise assemblies are not practical for various reasons structure than a steel or wood structure.
and, still, the building element must be protected per the code. Faced Numerous options are available for protecting structures; each one
with this task, the architect and engineer must now collaborate in has advantages and disadvantages. The priorities of the owner drive
preparing, reviewing, and approving fire protection details. the choices. What is the dominant function of the building? Who uses
For instance, a popular theme in modern office interiors is an industrial it? What is the expected life cycle? These are questions that should
look with an exposed structure. The columns and beams supporting the be answered for all elements of a building design process. And, fire
building have an aesthetic appeal desired by the architect. These support protection is a significant consideration when decisions are reached.
members must be protected without compromising the aesthetics. A Who should specify? It is a collaboration between knowledgeable
popular alternative to sprayed-on cementitious fireproofing, in this case, architects and structural engineers to consider the tradeoffs inher-
is to employ intumescent paint or mastic coatings that are much thinner ent to different approaches. Sometimes a compromise but, in the
and allow the structural elements to be expressed. These coatings have end, protection of life and property drives the final decision. The
been developed to swell when heated to protect the structure. They wisdom of these decisions is not apparent immediately but instead
protect the steel while satisfying the fire rating requirement. years down the road. If a fire occurs, the owner, residents, and the
Sometimes the application of fireproofing impacts the gross square public will be relieved that their building protected the
footage calculation the developer wants to maximize. For example, occupants and preserved the property so firefighters could
enclosing the columns with a fire-rated assembly reduces the square safely extinguish any fire.■
footage and reduces the rental fee the developer can request from the Charles “Chuck” F. King is Vice President with Urban Engineers of New
tenants. With a multi-story building, the reduction in rentable space can York, D.P.C., and the Office Manager of the New York City office.
have a substantial negative impact on the cost-benefit to the investors. ([email protected])
Floor-to-ceiling heights can be affected by the choice of floor fire
protection. The structural engineer may choose to increase the slab Stephen M. Cohen is a Managing Director of United Building Sciences,
thickness to achieve a fire rating dictated by the code. This approach LLC, in New York City. ([email protected])

56 STRUCTURE magazine
PROJECT GALLERY DECK DETAILS LOAD TABLES
250 inspiring photos from a range of applications Access to over 3,400 DWG and PDF drawings Customizable steel deck and joist load tables
newmill.com/gallery newmill.com/dwg newmill.com/loadtables
Photo credit: Project Frog, Inc.

CONTROL ACOUSTICS
Manage acoustics with composite floor deck
newmill.com/nrc

Maximize storage spaces

MINIMIZE FLOOR DEPTH
Dovetail deck provides thin-floor advantages
newmill.com/multistory

STEEL BUILDING SYSTEMS SOLVE YOUR TOP 5 DESIGN

CHALLENGES IN WAREHOUSES AND DATA CENTERS
Go big with your next warehouse or data center project. Design spaces that optimize
storage capacity. Used together, steel joists and long-span floor and deck systems
enable you to create expansive interiors that maximize usable space while addressing
flexibility, speed to market, utility integration, performance and sustainability. Expand
the possibilities of your next warehouse or data center project.

GET THE TOP 5 GUIDE

newmill.com/warehouse

LIVE REMOTE LEARNING

Earn credit as you gain knowledge
newmill.com/courses
SOFTWARE updates
Adhesives Technology Corporation Hohmann & Barnard
RISA Tech, Inc.
Phone: 754-399-1057 Phone: 800-645-0616
Phone: 949-951-5815
Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]
Email: [email protected]
Web: www.atcepoxy.com Web: h-b.com
Web: risa.com
Product: Pro Anchor Design Software Product: ProWall Tools Featuring Thermal
Product: RISACalc
Description: This adhesive-anchor-focused design Brick Support
Description: Web-based software perfect when
tool aids in meeting design strength requirements Description: Free software for architects, mason
building a full 3-D model is not required.
of ACI 318. For use with any ATC IBC-compliant contractors, specifiers, and designers. Easily incorporate
Analyze single members (beams, columns) of hot
anchoring products. Minimized data input time. Thermal Brick Support (TBS) System design into
rolled steel, wood, concrete, cold formed steel,
Rapid 3-D modeling and real-time optimization of projects, allowing brick support design that moves
aluminum, and stainless steel. Intuitive interface
loading conditions, embedment depths, anchor sizes, the shelf angle away from the wall, reducing thermal
makes it easy to set up a model, apply loads, and
and more. Accommodates threaded rod, rebar, and transfer. The TBS module in ProWall Tools allows a fast
view results. Check out RISACalc today!
internal thread inserts. FREE download! analysis of a brick support design.

Adit Ltd IDEA StatiCa

Phone: 00-972-77-5020696 Phone: 856-642-4070 Struware, LLC
Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Phone: 904-302-6724
Web: www.adit.org.il Web: www.ideastatica.com Email: [email protected]
Product: Adit Anchor Software Product: IDEA StatiCa Web: www.struware.com
Description: This is a user-friendly software to design Description: Design any type of steel connection Product: Struware Software
post-installed anchors fit to the ENV 1992-4:2018 from scratch or import it from your analysis or Description: Updated version of Code Search adds
requirements or following the extended AAS method. detailing software. Apply simplified or complex support for the 2021 IBC, wind on solar panels,
It is a free software and available to download at loading. Visualize the connection behavior. Generate calculates wind forces at floors, seismic base shear
https://files.adit.org.il/setup.exe. connection sketches and bill of material in seconds. distribution at floors, seismic diaphragm force
IDEA StatiCa gets your connection design done for distribution at floors, and rain loads. Provides
every configuration of steel connections you need. pertinent wind, seismic, snow, live, and dead loads
in just minutes. Demos on website.
ASDIP Structural Software
Phone: 407-284-9204
IES, Inc.
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 800-707-0816
S-FRAME Software
Web: www.asdipsoft.com
Email: [email protected] Phone: 203-421-4800
Product: ASDIP SUITE
Web: www.iesweb.com Email: [email protected]
Description: Consists of 4 intuitive software
Product: IES ShapeBuilder Web: s-frame.com
packages with over 16 modules to help you with
Description: The fastest way to find section Product: S-FRAME Analysis
all your engineering design tasks. For the past 28
properties for any cross section. Calculates Description: An industry standard for over 36 years,
years, we have developed powerful yet simple-to-
shear and torsion properties as well as stress analyzes and designs structures regardless of geometric
use tools to easily analyze, design, optimize, and
distribution. Reasonable pricing and licensing complexity, material type, loading conditions,
check your structural members.
options. Try ShapeBuilder free today; it is a 2 nonlinear effects, or seismic loads. Integrated
minute download and setup. concrete, steel, timber, and foundation design ensures
your maximum productivity. Our continued R&D
investment gives users the latest advantages and
Bentley Systems, Inc dedicated technical expertise.
Phone: 800-BENTLEY INTEGRITY SOFTWARE, INC.
Email: [email protected] Phone: 512-372-8991
Web: www.bentley.com Email: [email protected] Trimble
Product: Structural WorkSuite Web: www.softwaremetering.com
Product: SOFTRACK Phone: 678-737-7379
Description: Use what you want, when you want
Description: Use SofTrack to control Bentley Email: [email protected]
it, with our most comprehensive bundled structural
Application usage by product code and feature (pipes, Web: www.tekla.com/us
software suite. Design in any infrastructure sector,
ponds, rails). Also control Bentley Passport/Visa Product: Tekla Structures
with multiple materials, using any analysis method
usage. Receive idle usage alerts. Seamless operation Description: Create and transfer constructible
that is appropriate for the job. Reduce upfront costs,
for local and remote usage including Citrix sessions. models throughout the design lifecycle, from
simplify business transactions, reuse data, and leverage
Additionally benefit from Automatic Autodesk concept to completion. With Tekla Structures,
the time saving power of interoperability.
named-user tracking and reporting. accurate and information-rich models reduce
RFIs, leverage models for drawing production,
material take-offs, and collaboration with
ENERCALC, Inc. ENERCALC architects, consultants, fabricators, and
Phone: 800-424-2252
Losch Software Ltd contractors.
Email: [email protected] Phone: 323-592-3299
Web: https://enercalc.com Email: [email protected] Product: Tekla Structural Designer
Product: ENERCALC / ENERCALC For Revit Web: loschsoft.com Description: Fully automated and packed
Description: ENERCALC has been the must- Product: LECWall 3 with unique features for optimized concrete
have software for structural and civil engineers for Description: The industry standard for concrete and steel design, Tekla Structural Designer
39 years. New ENERCALC for Revit simplifies insulated sandwich wall panel design handles multi- helps engineering businesses win more projects
structural design by bridging the gap between story columns as well. Analyze prestressed and/or and maximize profits. From quick comparison
calculation and documentation. It gives engineers mild reinforced wall panels with zero, partial, or full of alternative design schemes through cost-
access to the familiar power of ENERCALC as a composite action. Flat, hollow-core, and stemmed effective change management and seamless BIM
seamless, real-time extension of Autodesk Revit configurations are supported. Complete handling collaboration, Tekla Structural Designer can
with no import/export. analysis is also included. A free 15-day trial version transform your business.
is available.

STRUCTURE magazine
ATE
PD
U
NCSEA
National Council of Structural Engineers Associations

NEW YORK: FEBRUARY 14-17, 2022

VIRTUAL: JANUARY 31-FEBRUARY 24, 2022

Calling All Structural Engineers

for the NCSEA Summit
Reconnect with peers and learn from industry experts at
this year’s Summit – in both in-person and virtual formats.
Engage in educational sessions on wind loads, embod-
ied carbon, steel design, reinforced concrete, forensics,
and more. See the latest and greatest building product
and software innovations at the Trade Show. Network
with the best in the industry.

Keep up with Industry

Innovations at the Trade Show
Interact with exhibitors and enjoy lunches, breaks, and a
cocktail reception all on the trade show floor, as well as
virtual networking and educational opportunities.

KEYNOTE SESSIONS THANK YOU TO

20 Years After 9/11: Lessons Learned
OUR SPONSORS
& More to Research
Dan Eschenasy, P.E., SECB, F.SEI; James W. Feuerborn Jr., P.E.;
Therese McAllister, F.SEI; Moderated by Vicki Arbitrio, P.E., SECB, F.SE

Lighten Up & Lead: Leverage Levity to Boost

Client Confidence & Employee Engagement
Tami Evans, Employee Engagement & Levity Leadership Expert

Learn more and register at

www.ncsea.com/events/annualconference.
SPOTLIGHT
A Face Lift for the Spruce Goose
T he Spruce Goose Project consists of the
seismic retrofit of an aircraft hangar (250
feet x 740 feet) with two additional side build-
as the lateral system for the
existing building and the
new office building inside.
ings and the erection of new high-end office The new office building
space within the hangar. The hangar com- is a four-story steel frame
prises two 125-foot-wide portal frame arch structure comprised of
structures with a central spine running down BRBFs and sits within the
the middle. Arup worked in collaboration existing structure, offset
with the architecture firm, ZGF, to reha- from the walls and roof
bilitate and seismically upgrade the existing by a minimum of 20 feet
timber building to current code requirements to showcase the beautiful
and to create four new levels of office and film existing timber structure.
production spaces inside the hangars. The BRBF cores in the
The existing structure was designed and built spine provide lateral resis-
in the early 1940s using large glue-laminated tance to the existing and
arches, considered a new technology at the the new structure in the
The hangar, located in Los Angeles, once housed the famous Spruce Goose
time. The initial seismic design was based on North/South direction.
airplane and is now the LA headquarters for Google.
lateral loads equal to 10% of the self-weight However, the new and
of the existing structure. However, the adap- existing structures need additional braces glulam elements. Many of the existing glulam
tive reuse of the existing facility to a high-end at the perimeter in the longitudinal East/ arches showed signs of small to heavy delami-
office required the lateral system to be in full West direction. nation. Arup evaluated different retrofit and
compliance with current building standards. The team was able to get the Los Angeles repair strategies such as reinforcing steel plates
Any retrofit methods needed to be bench- Department of Building and Safety’s approval or plywood sheets, in situ timber gluing, and
marked against the added self-weight to the on the use of multi-tier braced frames dowelling options.
existing wooden structure. An increase of (MTBF), which were not codified in the Eventually, 17,000 fully threaded and self-
more than 5% of gravity load would man- Building Codes at that time. The 55-foot-tall tapping screws up to 52 inches in length were
date a code-required gravity system retrofit to and only 11-foot-wide MTBFs were designed chosen to retrofit the original glulam arches.
current building standards. Retrofitting the to provide strength and stiffness to work with The screws presented a cost-efficient and easy
exiting gravity foundation system consisting the flexible timber roof diaphragm. The four installation solution since pre-drilling was not
of pile caps with wood piles would be very MTBFs along each building side in the east- required due to the self-tapping tip of the
costly and avoided if possible. west direction purely serve the lateral stability screw. This was the most lightweight solution,
The structure is a registered national historic of the existing building and were located did not lead to any mandated gravity retrofit,
building. Any retrofit measures needed to directly in front of the existing sheathed and was the first time these screws were used
meet the Army Corps of Engineers require- shear walls to minimize visual impact and in Los Angeles.
ments of minimal interferences with the visual comply with any visual historic requirements. An overview of each of the delamination
appearance of the existing building. A merged ETABS model including the new locations per arch in elevation was used to
The retrofit consisted of two main processes: and existing building’s structure was created streamline the procurement and installa-
a) the addition of a code-compliant lateral to analyze the overall behavior of integrating tion of the screws. In addition, construction
system and b) the repair of any decay or the retrofit scheme with the new building. documents included retrofit details and
damage in the 70-year-old wood elements. Tension tie rods were designed as part of the schedules corresponding to various delami-
retrofit scheme and introduced at selected nation classifications. This allowed the
arches at an elevation of 53.5 feet above ground contractor to determine the applicable retro-
Integration of Lateral System to reduce localized bending overstress in the fit detail in the field by measuring
The design team used Grasshopper scripts existing glulam arches due to seismic drift com- the delamination depth and using
to define the curved and tapered geometry patibility checks in the N-S direction. Arup’s schedules.■
of the exiting arches in ETABS and evaluate An in-plane steel roof truss was introduced
the capacity and behavior of the arches under to increase roof diaphragm stiffness and tie Arup was an Outstanding Award
nonlinear staged loading and deformation the existing glulam arches and the BRBF
load envelopes. cores together. Winner for the Google Spruce Goose
Buckling restraint braced frames (BRBF) project in the 2020 Annual Excellence
were selected as the most efficient solution, Retrofit of the Glue in Structural Engineering Awards
and the design team decided to place four Program in the Category – Forensic/
BRBF cores spaced equally along the center Laminated Arches
Renovation/Retrofit/Rehabilitation
of the building and connect them to the roof The final and most critical part of the entire
diaphragm. These cores served a dual purpose retrofit scheme was repairing the existing Structures > $20M.

STRUCTURE magazine N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 59
NCSEANCSEA News
National Council of Structural Engineers Associations
SEE Campaign Seeks to Brand, Market Structural
Engineering Profession
NCSEA wants to raise awareness of the structural
engineering profession’s vital contribution to
society. That is why we launched a brand and
marketing initiative with the help of Agency
McKenna. The campaign’s tagline, We SEE
Above and Beyond™, describes the valuable
ways structural engineers contribute to the
design and construction of built structures and
resilient communities. Structural Engineering
Excellence (SEE) serves as a guiding principle
for the profession.
NCSEA President Ed Quesenberry, P.E., S.E.
shares, “This campaign is about telling the struc-
tural engineering story, from celebrating our role in
the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction
(AEC) industry to building awareness of the many
ways our profession advances and supports the safety and resilience in the built environment. Through telling our story, we hope to build con-
nections with people outside our profession so that we can work together to solve the problems of tomorrow. While the initial campaign will
target the AEC industry, future goals of the campaign include outreach and awareness-building with consumers, higher education, and grades
5-12 so the public and students can better understand what structural engineers do and how our work is woven into their lives.”
The brand and marketing initiative began its outreach in social media in October with a goal to expand to multiple communication
platforms in 2022.

Check out the campaign landing page at

www.weseeaboveandbeyond.com,
which provides easy access to the
campaign messages and key resources.

Help spread the word about the value structural engineers bring to the industry by following, liking,
commenting, and/or sharing posts on NCSEA social media channels – LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter.

Online Symposium
Resilience in a Structural Engineering Context
December 1, 8, and 15, 12-1:30 p.m. each day
Resilience depends on the ability of infrastructure to withstand anticipated hazards, the users to recover functionality within a specified time
frame, and the community to adapt to changing conditions. Built infrastructure plays a crucial role in community resilience. Buildings and
infrastructure need to be designed not just for minimum life safety but also for functional recovery. This symposium presents resilience as a
concept and summarizes each of the primary natural hazards. We explore what it means to contribute to community resilience as a structural
engineer and consider recovery and safety when designing buildings and infrastructure.
Pricing and registration at www.ncsea.com/education.

follow @NCSEA on social media for the latest news & events!
60 STRUCTURE magazine
News from the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations

Structural Engineering Summit –

Feel the Love this February
The NCSEA Structural Engineering Summit is heading to New York City February
14-17 and online January 31 to February 24 – and structural engineers everywhere will
be saying “I Love Structural Engineering” this Valentine’s Day season. Reconnecting
with your peers, learning from industry experts, networking with product experts at
the trade show – what’s not to love!
Register for the conference and learn more at www.ncsea.com/events. The top-notch
education slate, keynote sessions, exhibitor lists, and hotel reservation details are all
available online.

Special Webinar Series

The Excavation Shoring Design Guide: Temporary and Permanent Earth
Retention Design and Construction Aspects
November 11 and 18, 12-1:30 p.m. each day
A digital copy of the guide is included when you register for both days!
This webinar series addresses the design and construction aspects of temporary and permanent earth
retention systems. Attendees will review the different elements of each earth retention system and when
each method is appropriate. Besides sizing the shoring system’s principal members, the series provides
basic construction details necessary to round out complete designs.
Pricing and registration at www.ncsea.com/education.

NCSEA Webinars Pricing and registration at

www.ncsea.com/education
November 16, 2021
Retaining Wall Basics Bill Simpson, P.E.
This webinar provides insight on a variety of retaining wall types and discusses commonly overlooked site issues related to the wall
that must not be ignored as part of the retaining wall design.

December 7, 2021
MSE Retaining Walls and Global Stability Bill Simpson, P.E.
Mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls are one of the most cost-effective and widely used retaining wall systems in the U.S. today.
This webinar discusses all of the design conditions associated with an MSE wall and how to ensure they are properly accounted
for during the design process, including the important component of global stability.

NCSEA webinar subscribers receive access to these webinars and a full year’s worth of
live, high-quality continuing education webinars, along with a recorded library of past
webinars – all developed by leading experts; available whenever, wherever you need
them; and at an affordable price.

Courses award 1.5 hours of Diamond Review-approved

continuing education after the completion a quiz.

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 61
SEI Update
Learning / Networking

Fall 2021 Fazlur Rahman Khan Distinguished Lecture Series

Honoring a Legacy in Structural Engineering and Architecture
Wednesday, November 17, 2021 – 4:30 pm EST
A Research Perspective on Seismic Performance of Steel Building Structures
Presented by Richard Sause, Joseph T. Stuart Professor of Structural Engineering; Director, Advanced Technology for Large Structural
Systems (ATLSS) Center; Director, Institute for Cyber Physical Infrastructure & Energy, Lehigh University
The lecture is in-person at Lehigh University and live-streamed via Zoom. Register at www.lehigh.edu/~infrk and view past lectures. The
Structural Engineering Institute-Lehigh Valley Chapter will award 1 PDH credit for the lecture to eligible attendees.

Congratulations to the Recipients of the O. H. Ammann

Research Fellowship
Awarded to encourage creation of new knowledge in structural design and construction.
Nicole Buck, A.M.ASCE, California Polytechnic State University
Seyedomid Sajedi, S.M.ASCE, University at Buffalo: The State University of New York
Wanting (Lisa) Wang, Ph.D., A.M.ASCE, University of Colorado Denver
Shanglian Zhou, Ph.D., A.M.ASCE, The University of Alabama

Call for New Members – Nuclear Standards Committee

The ASCE/SEI Nuclear Standards Committee is seeking new members to oversee the development of the next editions of three standards:
• ASCE/SEI 1, Standard for Geotechnical Analysis, Design, Construction, Inspection and Monitoring of Nuclear Safety-Related Structures,
• ASCE/SEI 4, Seismic Analysis of Safety-Related Nuclear Structures, and
• ASCE/SEI 43, Seismic Design Criteria for Structures, Systems, and Components in Nuclear Facilities.
The chair for this next cycle is Andrew Whittaker, Ph.D., P.E., S.E., F.ASCE, F.SEI, F.ACI, SUNY Distinguished Professor, Department
of Civil, Structural, and Environmental Engineering, University at Buffalo.
Practicing engineers, researchers, building officials, contractors, and construction product representatives are all needed and wel-
come. If you are interested in applying for the committee, please submit an application by December 1, 2021, via the online form at
www.asce.org/publications-and-news/codes-and-standards/committee-application-form by selecting “SEI” from Institute drop down
and then “Nuclear Standards (ASCE/SEI 1, 4, 43).” Carefully indicate the Membership Category for which you are applying. Associate
members can be accepted until balloting begins. Eligible regulatory members can qualify for travel reimbursement per ASCE Travel Policy
if that occurs. Contact Jennifer Goupil with questions at [email protected].

Thank you to 2021 SEI Sustaining Organization Members

Elite Members
ALFRED BENESCH & COMPANY BOSWELL ENGINEERING
HARDESTY & HANOVER
SCHNABEL FOUNDATION COMPANY
SIMPSON STRONG-TIE
WALTER P MOORE
Join SEI as a Sustaining Organization Member to reach SEI members year-round, and show your support for SEI to advance and serve
the structural engineering profession. www.asce.org/SEI

Follow SEI on Social Media:

62 STRUCTURE magazine
News of the Structural Engineering Institute of ASCE
Advancing the Profession
Complete the Survey
Participate by November 30 in SEI Business Practices Survey on the Impact
of COVID-19 on the Profession Relative to Office Practices
Are you a structural engineer interested in learning about the state of the industry for working-from-home? Do
you have a strong opinion about the long-term viability of remote work? Are you wondering if your local or firm
experience mirrors the national one? The SEI Business Practices Committee is doing research to get the facts on
what’s working and what’s not in structural engineering offices right now in the virtual environment. Data will be
used for educational purposes. Share your experience, and get a FREE copy of the results: https://bit.ly/3kz8bUB.

Now Available
Tier 1 Checklists for Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings: Fillable Forms for
Standard ASCE/SEI 41-17
In Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings, Standard ASCE/SEI 41-17, a three-tiered process is established
for seismic evaluation according to a range of building performance levels. Tier 1 evaluation focuses on identifying
potential deficiencies in existing buildings based on the performance of similar buildings in past earthquakes. The
systematic procedure sets forth a methodology to evaluate the entire building in a rigorous manner.
Tier 1 Checklists for Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings: Fillable Forms for Standard ASCE/SEI 41-17 is a
complete collection of the screening checklists included in Chapter 17 and Appendix C of Standard 41-17.
The evaluation checklists, covering a variety of building types and seismicity levels, are offered as fillable PDF
forms that can be completed using Adobe Acrobat Reader, version 9.0 or later. www.ascelibrary.org

Join Us at SEI Events

www.asce.org/SEI
• View recent events on SEI YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/AmerSocCivilEng
• Structures Congress – April 20-23, 2022 in Atlanta
View the program and register at www.structurescongress.org. We look forward to seeing you there!
Students and Young Professionals: Apply by December 5 for an SEI Futures Fund scholarship to participate.
“I am extremely thankful for the opportunity to engage with industry leaders, practicing engineers, fellow
researchers, and other students from around the world at Structures Congress- the experience has been
inspiring and insightful.”
Jacob Choate, EI, S.M.ASCE; Scholarship recipient; Chair, SEI GSC at University of Oklahoma
• Electrical Transmission and Substation Structures Conference – October 2-6, 2022 in Orlando
Apply for SEI Futures Fund student scholarship to participate.

Get Involved in your Local SEI Chapter

Check out your local SEI professional or Graduate Student Chapter (U.S. and international) for networking, technical and professional
events, field visits, construction tours, scholarships, K-12 outreach, etc. SEI Grad Student Chapters (GSC) engage students, enhancing
education and transition to practicing professionals from undergraduate to their first job. www.asce.org/SEI

ASCE Free eLearning Webinars

Whether you are a member or looking to become one, check out free, live eLearning webinars to enhance your personal and professional
knowledge. www.asce.org/education-and-events/explore-education/elearning-webinars

Errata SEI Standards Supplements and Errata including ASCE 7. See www.asce.org/SEI.

N O V E M B E R 2 0 21 63
CASE in Point News of the Coalition of American Structural Engineers
CASE Tools and Resources
Did you know? CASE has tools and practice guidelines to help firms deal with a wide variety of business scenarios that structural
engineering firms face daily. Whether your firm needs to establish a new Quality Assurance Program, update its risk management program,
keep track of the skills engineers are learning at each level of experience, or need a sample contract document – CASE has the tools you need!

NEW CASE Publication Released!!

CASE Tool 3-6: Career Path Planning
Career Path Planning is an important exercise that all firms should employ
to better understand and document the strengths, weaknesses, and seniority
of individual staff members and the depth of talent within the firm on a
holistic level. This allows the firm to identify future recruiting needs as well
as strengths and weaknesses within the current staff.
CASE recommends firm leaders undertake the exercise in CASE Tool 3-6
in advance of performance reviews to generate talking points during staff
reviews (see CASE Tool 2-3: Employee Evaluations). The tool is designed
to help the reviewer provide meaningful feedback to staff members during
the review. It can also serve as a mechanism to share future growth plans
with staff members to encourage their career growth and serve as a retention
tool (see CASE Tool 1-4: Creating a Culture of Recruitment and Retention).
At a holistic level, this exercise can help a firm identify future retirements
and understand the level of recruitment needed to backfill these positions.

You can purchase these and the other Tools at www.acec.org/bookstore.

And the Scholarship Winner Is...

The CASE scholarship, administered by the ACEC College of Fellows, is awarded every year to a deserving student
seeking a master’s degree in an ABET-accredited engineering program. Since 2010, the CASE Scholarship program
has given over $37,000 to engineering students to help pave their way to a bright future in structural engineering.
CASE strives to attract the best and brightest to the structural engineering profession, and educational support is
the best way to ensure our profession’s future.
The 2021 winner, Celeste Carmignani, is working on a bachelor’s degree in structural engineering from the
Colorado School of Mines.

Follow ACEC Coalitions on Twitter – @ACECCoalitions.

64 STRUCTURE magazine
DRAIN WATER,
NOT BUDGETS.
Choose Champion Bridge Drain™ for your bridge environmental
filtering strategy. The Champion Fiberglass Bridge Drain system
is strong, durable and safely diverts accumulated rainwater and
contaminants from bridge decking.
Made from strong fiberglass using epoxy resins for further strength,
the Champion Fiberglass Bridge Drain system consists of straight lengths,
fittings, non-metallic accessories and hangers that withstand harsh,
corrosion-filled environmental elements including gas, oil and salt.
Highway bridge projects benefit from:
• Light Weight
• Low Installation Costs
• Durable – UV resistant
• Wide Temperature Range (-60 degrees F to +250 degrees F)
• High-Impact Resistance and Memory Retention

Learn more at
championfiberglass.com/
©2016 Champion Fiberglass, Inc.

product/champion-bridge-drain

BIM/Revit Models Available Now

Visit championfiberglass.com

CERTIFIED
ISO 9001:2015
ISO 14001:2015

020321
structural FORUM
Acceleration in the Pipeline
A Key Aspect of Changing the DEI Landscape in the AEC Professions
By John Gavan, S.E.

A s our industry looks for ways to change

its landscape of diversity, equity, and
inclusion (DEI), many are primarily focused
on the upstream end of “the pipeline” and
who enters it. While efforts to recruit
from and build AEC awareness within our
underrepresented communities are of criti-
cal importance, we cannot lose sight of the
diverse and talented people working alongside
us every day. Action is required to ensure they
are supported, sponsored, and included in an
authentic, meaningful way.
Many in our profession look to leaders who
do not look like them, leaders whose combined
identities, backgrounds, and life experiences do
not mirror their own. From the opposite direc-
tion, many of our leaders look at their teams
and recognize only the valuable qualities they
have seen before, overlooking the myriad of
leadership traits that have yet to be recognized
in our industry. Our profession will not be truly
representative and inclusive until many of these
talented people become influential decision-
makers and join the ranks of leadership. We The inaugural group included Matthew Trotter, Rachel Bascombe, Janiece Williams, Catherine Hernadez,
should focus on supporting talent while also Chris Locke, Duane Williams, Francesca Carney, David Harrop, Darnell Parker, Morgan Bell, Tunmi Da Silva,
re-evaluating how we define leadership in order (with John Gavan, KPFF) and Tremale Berger.
to shift the dynamic of who fills these roles.
KPFF offers two specific ideas to share with We also recently participated in the creation to helping diverse talent thrive in our industry
our industry partners: of a new Leadership Development Program and ignite this type of program nationally.
KPFF has created an Inclusive Culture in collaboration with the Southern California When thinking about our entire industry, it
Training Program which encourages vulner- Chapter of the National Organization for is critical that we share our new insights and
ability, open conversation, and education. Minority Architects (NOMA). Our initial improve our practices rather than forge these
The program promotes an inclusive culture cohort of twelve influential professionals from improvements as a competitive advantage
that is attractive to the talent we seek and the architecture, engineering, and construction against each other. This is especially crucial
existing workforce, and generates impact and have built their skillset, forged important as DE&I is about making holistic change for
change in our organization. A post-program friendships, and made meaningful connec- an improved future for the profession. Our
survey indicates that 95% of participants have tions with leaders in our local industry. We partners in the construction industry are view-
found the content valuable. hope this is the beginning of a sustained effort ing progress in this arena as akin to progress
in construction safety; this is truly a place
where a rising tide will lift all boats. We urge
others to share their best ideas and practices
so, together, we can create a diverse, equitable,
Our profession will not be truly representative and inclusive profession that thrives.
We encourage all firms to support industry
and inclusive until many of these talented organizations in their DEI efforts. Keep the
conversation at the forefront and con-
people become influential decision-makers and tact STRUCTURE magazine to share
your perspectives and successes.■
join the ranks of leadership.
John Gavan is the President and CEO at KPFF
Consulting Engineers.

66 STRUCTURE magazine N O V E M B E R 2 0 21
SkyScreed® 36 Laser Screed® Machine:
Labor Savings, Floor Quality and
Increased Productivity all come standard!

Introducing the Truly Revolutionary

SkyScreed ® 36 and SkyStrip Machines.
Elevate Your Business with the SkyLine Machines from Somero ®

SkyStrip Machine:
Reduce labor costs, reduce material
waste all while increasing safety!

YEARS

Watch These Machines in Action at Somero.com/SkyLine

WHERE VISION
BECOMES STRUCTURE ®

Mobile Stacker Reclaimer

RISA offers a comprehensive suite of design software that work together to simplify even the Steel Framing, Steel Plates,
most complex projects. As a result, engineers can work efficiently on a variety of structures Steel Connections
in a mix of materials including steel, concrete, wood, masonry and aluminum. risa.com Richmond Engineering Works