×
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

Clarification on the Interpretation of the Exception on Appendix D

Clarification on the Interpretation of the Exception on Appendix D

Clarification on the Interpretation of the Exception on Appendix D

(OP)
IBC 2009 Section 1908.1.9 exception 2 waives the ductile design requirement for anchors that resist wall out of plane forces determined per ASCE 7 eqn. 12.11-1(Fp=0.8*SDS*Wp). My question is: does this wall have to be a non-load bearing only? Or, can it include load bearing (you know axially loaded walls)?

Thanks,

 

RE: Clarification on the Interpretation of the Exception on Appendix D

ASCE 7 applies to structural walls, ie load bearing.  Non-structural walls fall under ASCE 7 Ch. 13 for there Fp loading with a min. anchorage load per footnote b in table 13.5-1 of equ. 12.11-1. It applies to both structural and non-structural walls, anchorage Fp is increased based on experiences from the Northridge earthquake.   

RE: Clarification on the Interpretation of the Exception on Appendix D

(OP)
Thank you Sandman21.

My next question then is: How can one know if (Fp=0.8*SDS*Wp) is greater than the force we get if we multiply by the 2.5? Or should we not even go there? Just check the Fp from the wall and move on?

Thanks again,

RE: Clarification on the Interpretation of the Exception on Appendix D

The Fp equation was developed after Northridge to account for brittle failures of wall anchors.  When you design to it for anchorage Fp you are already taking into account brittle failure, so the provisions of ACI should not apply.  It should be noted that anchorage already has a factor of safety of; .8/.4 = 2.0, not the 2.5 in ACI but close.

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