Abstract

Since the introduction of seismic design provisions in U.S. building codes and standards, a single generally-accepted method has existed for determining seismic design forces on diaphragms. Recently, an alternate procedure was introduced in the Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE 7-16) (ASCE, 2016), and an additional alternate procedure is introduce in its next edition ASCE 7-22 (ASCE, 2022) for single-story rigid-wall flexible-diaphragm (RWFD) buildings. Suddenly the determination of seismic diaphragm forces has become a much more complex choice. The two newer alternate methods are based on better predictive modeling research; however, it is of general interest to the engineer and their client to evaluate these three available methods in terms of the resulting applied design force and the corresponding material and labor impact. This paper provides a brief background of these three diaphragm design force methods and evaluates them side-by-side for a typical large single- story rigid-walled building with a flexible roof diaphragm. It is revealed that the choice of the most cost-efficient method is not necessarily straight-forward, and is instead dependent upon the building size, shape, and the lateral force resisting system’s response modification factor R. Armed with this knowledge, the design engineer can evaluate the balance of cost efficiency and modeling appropriateness when selecting a seismic design diaphragm force method on a particular project.

Disciplines

Architectural Engineering

Number of Pages

14

Download

Share

COinS
 

URL: https://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/aen_fac/167