Interior Load Bearing Wall Sole Plate Anchorage

[NFExp]

I would like to generate a discussion on sole plate anchorage for interior load bearing wood frame walls that are not shearwalls and have no uplift.

IRC R403.1.6.1 requires anchor bolts @ 6'-0" o.c. for seismic C & D. Does anyone know why?

For residential project, we usually specify 16d Masonry cut nails at 16" o.c. Does this seem reasonable? What does everyone else specify?

Keep in-mind I'm refering to light frame residential projects.

Thanks

 

[hawkaz]

The 6' bolt spacing is for out-of-plane loading for seismic or 5 psf minimum lateral loading on interior walls.

I prefer the Hilti X-U shot pin (16" spacing or so) in lieu of cut nails. These are easier to install, and you get a better connection.

 

[msquared48]

I agree with Hokie. If the lateral values for the Hilti work, fine use them. But something is needed.

Also consider the fact that in a seismic event, the walls you describe can literally "walk" unless anchored somehow. And with time, and considering the actual method of construction in the field, some "non-bearing" walls become actual bearing walls over time.

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

 

[Ron]

Check the shear from the 5psf interior lateral load and set accordingly. I prefer shot pins over cut nails.

 

[NFExp]

Thanks for your responses.

I'm having some trouble with the building officals. They will only allow anchor bolts. I know that the IRC is perscriptive so I'll have to convince them that the cut nails or shot pins are acceptable.

 

[SLTA]

I've found that a quick analysis and a sealed letter stating that my version is equivalent or better to the capacity of the prescriptive is usually enough to calm down the building department.