×
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

Rigid diaphragm?

Rigid diaphragm?

Rigid diaphragm?

(OP)
I'm having trouble determining which of the two options represent a rigid diaphragm (pdf file attached), it is for a two storey house, using confined CMU walls, to me figure #2 is correct but i've seen both types of construction so i'm confused. For a brief explanation on Confined Masonry check www.world-housing.net, i now this system is mostly common in third world countries.

RE: Rigid diaphragm?

Vote for figure #2.

RE: Rigid diaphragm?

both are rigid.  They are both concrete floor.

Never, but never question engineer's judgement

RE: Rigid diaphragm?

I would say neither are rigid diaphragms, as each will be somewhat flexible.  Though option #2 would seem to me to be more rigid.

Why do you need rigid diaphragm?  Why not analyse as semi-rigid?

RE: Rigid diaphragm?

(OP)
Thank you all for the help, i realize they are both a little flexible, but what i really wanted to know is if they are rigid enough to transmit the lateral loads to the vertical elements, construction wise i believe figure #1 is easier to build, but i like option #2 because i thought it was more rigid.

RE: Rigid diaphragm?

I would say either would be stiff enough to transfer lateral loads to the shear walls.  The problem with option #1 is that you lateral load would transfer through the slab, then down through the joists into the wall below.  This will cause a roll-over load on the light gage joists.  With a box section (front-to-front C channels), you might be ok, but you will need to check the roll-over capacity of both the box section and the connection.  You may find you need to provide shear blocking between the joists.

With option #2, you can provide a pour stop angle just for the slab depth which is directly bolted to teh wall (or welded to embed plates).  This then directly transfers the shear without putting any roll-over load into the joists.

RE: Rigid diaphragm?

Check your building code to see if it has any definitions for what will be considered rigid or flexible, or in between.

RE: Rigid diaphragm?

# 1 is semi rigid, mainly due to the questionable connection over the CMU wall.

#2 I can live with as rigid.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

RE: Rigid diaphragm?

In a situation like this, it may be prudent to analyze as both and design worst case.

RE: Rigid diaphragm?

My vote is for #2 and I would consider it rigid.

Do you not have cmu walls above in #1 as you do in #2? It seems #2 would be easier to continue up.  

RE: Rigid diaphragm?

(OP)
Structureguy, thanks for the observation, i had thought about it before.

UcfSE, the building code used in Nicaragua is practically a copy of the Mexican code, the rigid diaphragm definition that appears on the Nicaraguan code, i'm almost 100%  sure it's taken from the IBC.

tngolfer, there are CMU above in #1, i will try to take pictures and post them.

 

RE: Rigid diaphragm?

NONE
as per diagram, not enough lateral fixity between the concrete deck and the cold rolled box beam.
 

RE: Rigid diaphragm?

provide another beams along the wall in option#1 to prevent rollover or provide a downturn edge. Check fire resistance.

RE: Rigid diaphragm?

How can you judge rigidity from a schematic figure?

Check your code, you will find the correct dimensions and detailing to define a diaphragm as rigid.

For example, if you give a look at Eurocode 4 - Design of composite steel and concrete structures, you'll find minimum requirements in order to have a rigid diaphragm.
So, if you have the right dimensions for slab elements, both solutions can be considered rigid. But this isn't the only problem, because even if they are rigid, you have to check if the walls can support the actions received; looking at the figure 2 solution, seems you can have roll-over problems. You have to check it.

RE: Rigid diaphragm?

I would check it as a flexible and rigid diaphragm and use the worst case loading for the resisting elements.  I had a mezzanine level concrete floor at a movie theater that was between 20-50 wide and about 200 feet long.  I checked it as rigid and flexible and found that some walls were controlled under the flexible condition, and some the rigid.  I designed for the worst case and did not have to worry how rigid or how flexible the diaphragm really was.

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