×
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

ASCE 41-13 Evaluation of Unreinforced Masonry Building (URM)

ASCE 41-13 Evaluation of Unreinforced Masonry Building (URM)

ASCE 41-13 Evaluation of Unreinforced Masonry Building (URM)

(OP)
I'm currently doing some work for the owner of an Unreinforced Masonry (URM) building located in Portland, OR. Running through the Tier 1 checks (similar to the Tier 1 checks of the ASCE 31-03 previously), the building has several deficiencies as expected including In-Plane and Out-of-Plane actions. Moving on to Tier 2 to address these deficiencies, I'm stumped by two issues and don't have clear guidance as this is a very new code document.

1. Section 11.3.2.2.2 addresses the "In-Plane Bed-Joint Sliding Strength" and provides values for bond + friction and friction only. Section 11.3.2.3.1 then indicates that only friction can be used for Life-Safety Performance objectives. Is there any way to use tested values from the building to demonstrate that the joint doesn't shear and still has bond strength even after a seismic event? Or are you forced to rely on half the dead load sitting on the pier as your bed joint resistance?

2. Section 11.3.3 addresses Out-of-Plane actions and indicates that "URM walls shall not be analyzed for out-of-plane actions using the linear static procedure (LSP) or nonlinear static procedure (NSP) prescribed in Chapter 7." This is similar to section 7.3.3 of ASCE 41-06. My question is, what are people doing for a dynamic analysis of URM buildings with flexible diaphragms? RAM model? Most modal analyses don't deal with the inertial forces on the walls, but instead group mass/force at nodes. So if static procedures aren't permitted, what does a dynamic analysis look like for a building of this type? If I can show that the wall doesn't crack in a pinned-pinned, static loading condition (fb<fte) using expected tensile strength of the masonry, wouldn't a dynamic analysis only reduce the demands on the wall by "softening" the diaphragm reaction into a spring?

If anyone has any resources for how to apply this new code at all but ESPECIALLY for URMs, I would be very grateful.

RE: ASCE 41-13 Evaluation of Unreinforced Masonry Building (URM)

I was going to reply with a long response but, I then realized that I'm pretty sure you sit 20 feet from me...we can chat over a beer instead.

RE: ASCE 41-13 Evaluation of Unreinforced Masonry Building (URM)

Heh, I knew Eng-Tips makes the world a smaller place for engineers but that is ridiculous!!!

Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies

RE: ASCE 41-13 Evaluation of Unreinforced Masonry Building (URM)

Tin cans and string?

Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA)


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