×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Masonry Wall Design
2

Masonry Wall Design

Masonry Wall Design

(OP)
Folks,
ACI 530 1.13.5.2.2 says that masonry walls that are not designed to resist vertical or lateral loads other than those induced by their own mass shall be isolated from the structure so that vertical and lateral forces are not imparted to these elements.

My question is thus:
If I have a masonry wall that I intend to isolate from the structure so that its mass does not contribute to the lateral mass, then I provide an isolation joint to separate it from the structure. This joint will be able to accomodate the movement of the structure under seismic loads.

However, if I have wind loads also to be resisted by this wall (as part of a facade), how does one detail a connection? This connection would have to transfer the lateral forces to the diaphragm or the floor framing unless it is designed as a cantilever element.

Any suggestions is appreciated.

Thanks

RE: Masonry Wall Design

What is your diaphragm?   

RE: Masonry Wall Design

I've seen a couple of options:

Provide a long rod tieing the masonry wall back to the structure with a slotted angle and nut.  

Use a slotted insert.  Dayton Richmond has some that get used in precast systems.  Allowable lateral movement is minimal.  Vertical movement will need to be accounted for in another way (flexibility of the tie).

RE: Masonry Wall Design

(OP)
If I allow lateral movement, then the wall will have to carry all wind loads by itself, as a cantilevered element, right?

I have a concrete diaphragm.

RE: Masonry Wall Design

i think the intent of this section is to prevent the masonry wall acting as a shearwall taking lateral loads in the plane of the wall.    with the wall disconnected from the diaphragm, it doesnt act as a shearwall and does not contribute to the stiffness of the structure.
the wind load is acting perpendicular.  it would be appropriate to provide a steel angle on either side of the top of the wall, with a gap between the top of the wall and underside of deck for downward movement.   

RE: Masonry Wall Design

If the exterior masonry wall is laterally braced to the floor diaphragm, then the mass of the masonry contributes to the seismic mass.  While I agree that you can detail the exterior masonry to act as cladding and to not contribute to the lateral stiffness of the building, I would include the mass of the masonry in the seismic mass perpendicular to the length of the wall.

Is this wall supported on a footing or grade beam? If so, I would included the mass of at least half the height. If it is on an elevated floor, I would include the mass from the full height of the wall. I don't think there's a way to detail to exclude the mass of the wall if it is on an elevated floor.  

RE: Masonry Wall Design

I agree with lrhg 100%.  

RE: Masonry Wall Design

(OP)
lrhg, i agree with you.

RE: Masonry Wall Design

Wind loads are the very horizontal loads that are described as lateral loads in the original post.  Can not have isolation and transfer horizontal wind loads to foundations also.

RE: Masonry Wall Design

I agree with Irhg too.  

Moreover, as the wall is resisting wind load, then it is resisting more than it's own mass laterally.  Hence, the need for an isolation joint for the masonry wall is a mute point here and ACI 530 falls by the wayside.  Keep it simple and tie it to the structure.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

RE: Masonry Wall Design

i think we're missing the point here.  the intent is to keep the wall from acting as a shear wall during a seismic event, not to keep it from resisting seismic and wind forces acting perpendicular to the wall.  

i disagree with your statement, Mike.

the point is not mute [sic].

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources