×
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 Diaphram Torsion

Rigid Diaphram Torsion

Rigid Diaphram Torsion

(OP)
I don't deal with seismic design in FL and trying to study up on some basics. ASCE7-05 12.5.3 talks about the combined seismic loading interaction for Category C and up.(ie 100% in one direction and 30% in the orthogonal. That said, section 12.8.4.2 states that the accidental torsion of 5% does not need to be considered simultaneously in the two orthogonal directions.

If I were to calculate the torsional moment for a regular building, would I need to calculate the combined affect of shear and actual eccentricity in both directions simultaneously plus the accidental eccentricity in one direction?

Essentially I'm thinking there would be 4 scenarios to consider. One of them being: Mt= (Vx)*(ey+ea) + 30%*(Vy)*(ex).

Thanks,
Steve, EI

RE: Rigid Diaphram Torsion

That's the way the code is written... or at least, that's how I interpret it.  

In practical use, I think most folks consider accidental eccentricity only for the single direction load cases and then use the 100% + 30% only with the centroidal applied loading.  And, that's probably okay when you know that you're not going to have a whole lot of interaction between the frames in the two lateral directions.  

However, when you elements that participate greatly in both directions (i.e. corner columns which are part of frames in both directions) I cannot see a way to justify ignoring the combination of 100% + 30% and the accidental torsion.

 

RE: Rigid Diaphram Torsion

(OP)
If I understand what your saying, for a case of independent frames/shearwalls in two orthogonal directions, the load on a particular wall has two cases to consider:

1. Torsional shear with accidental due to 100% load parallel to wall + 100% of the centroidal shear due to load parallel to wall.

2. Torsional shear with accidental due to 100% load perpendicular to wall + 30% of the centroidal load parallel to wall.

If this is correct, I'm not sure why the 30% load omits eccentric value.  

Thanks
 

RE: Rigid Diaphram Torsion

I suppose you're saying that you should do the following for the non-orthogonal cases.  

100%Vy(+e) + 30% Vx
100%Vy(+e) - 30% Vx
100%Vy(-e) + 30% Vx
100%Vy(-e) - 30% Vx

100%Vx(+e) + 30% Vy
100%Vx(+e) - 30% Vy
100%Vx(-e) + 30% Vy
100%Vx(-e) - 30% Vy

 
Then also the following:
100%Vy + 30% Vx(+e)
100%Vy - 30% Vx(+e)
100%Vy + 30% Vx(-e)
100%Vy - 30% Vx(-e)

100%Vx + 30% Vy(+e)
100%Vx - 30% Vy(+e)
100%Vx + 30% Vy(-e)
100%Vx - 30% Vy(-e)

Yeah, I suppose you could read it that way.  I cannot imagine the 30%Vx direction (with or without eccentricity) controlling over the load combinations which use 100%Vx.  It just doesn't seem logical to me....  Though it would be the most comprehensive way to interpret that code provision.  
 

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