×
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

Diaphragm Tributary

Diaphragm Tributary

Diaphragm Tributary

(OP)
Folks,
In designing diaphragms, ASCE 7 requires you to calculate the weight tributary to the diaphragm. Please see attached sketch. I am trying to determine which value is to be used in calculating the diaphragm force.

RE: Diaphragm Tributary

I would use the reaction based on a propped cantilever.

And I would not assume the base of the wall is fixed.

DaveAtkins

RE: Diaphragm Tributary

(OP)
Is there a specific reason for that? I guess the word "tributary" is kind of misleading.

In Breyer's textbooks, he uses tributary. However, he says that the wall only spans to the roof (He is not assuming a propped cantilever). What the tributary is probably depends on the kind of connection at the diaphragm? Simple spans or continuous across the diaphragm.

In other references, they use the reaction from a propped cantilever.

RE: Diaphragm Tributary

TA=24^2/2/20

Unless you're doing some kind of unique design, the wall reinforcing will make the wall act as a cantilevered beam. pinned at bottom and at roof.
Now if you're tying bars into the roof or in some other way making the roof a moment connection, then all bets are off.

RE: Diaphragm Tributary

I agree with Dave - use the cantilever reaction if the wall is continuous past the diaphragm.  Statics are statics.

If, on the other hand, the wall is discontinuous at the diaphragm (which you might have with interrupted studs which are kicked back down to the diaphragm), then I would use 1/2 story height + parapet.

RE: Diaphragm Tributary

Redeemed and Dave Atkins are right.  Also in the newer versions of ASCE 7 the parapet will have a different loading than the wall below the connection point.  If the parapet isn't too tall its not going to make much of a difference but it will if you are in a high wind zone and the parapet is tall.  

To be honest I've done my analysis both ways.  Often I'll use the tributary method just because its faster and usually pretty close.  The more off the cuff you are just remember to leave yourself a little bit more factor of safety to cover yourself.

 

John Southard, M.S., P.E.
http://www.pdhlibrary.com

RE: Diaphragm Tributary

If you run the calcs, the Tw will be 14.4 feet for the propped condition, which I always use.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
Motto:  KISS
Motivation:  Don't ask

RE: Diaphragm Tributary

Tributary areas should only be used for simply supported beams. If you take the tributary area of the cantilever, there is still the fixed-end moment that needs to be accounted for.

I am unfamiliar with the Breyer textbook.

RE: Diaphragm Tributary

While his diagram shows fixity at the bottom, both his equations imply pinned at the base. I don't believe his intent was to fix the base. How much good will a <=3' wide footing do in that situation.

RE: Diaphragm Tributary

I agree with grizzman.  Pinned at the base.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
Motto:  KISS
Motivation:  Don't ask

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