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


Large lateral loads in PEMB without frame ties in Seismic Category D

Large lateral loads in PEMB without frame ties in Seismic Category D

Large lateral loads in PEMB without frame ties in Seismic Category D

Throwing this out there to see if anyone has any other ideas or suggestions. We have a pre-engineered rigid frame metal building that has a 200' clear span, which results in some pretty high thrust forces at the base of the columns (90k). The building will be on large (11'x11') spread footings with grade beams on the perimeter. Column spacings are roughly 30' and building length is over 500'. Typically I would do frame ties to withstand thrust forces this large, but in this situation we have deep trenches and pits over 12' below the slab through most of the building. The building will be constructed in two phases, the first being the building and its foundations (footing/grade beams), and after the building is constructed the slab and pits will be built and would occur most likely over the winter here in Illinois. I feel initial restraint is needed beyond the slab due to this lag. The loads are too high for hair pins and due to the presence of pits, frame ties are not an option on some of the columns. We are also in Soil Site Class E, which puts us in Seismic Category D. This adds the IBC 1809.13 requirement for footing ties.

Our initial thoughts were to deepen and strengthen the perimeter grade beams to act as wings for the footing, as well as utilizing a concrete beam parallel with the perimeter grade beams on the interior side of the building, connected with frame ties. This additional grade beam would act as a deadman anchor. Sheetpile deadman could also be used, but adds more equipment to drive them to refusal. The concerns are relying solely on passive pressure for loads this high. I'm leaning towards this option in conjunction with hair pins to meet the IBC seismic requirement.

The other thought was to use battered micropiles under the footing, but battered piles are typically frowned upon in seismic zones.

Drilled shafts would likely get large to obtain a relatively shallow fixity, plus the Contractor is hoping to avoid shafts.

Any suggestions or other thoughts?

RE: Large lateral loads in PEMB without frame ties in Seismic Category D

See if your PEMB engineer is being overly conservative and dumping all of the lateral load into exterior columns and assuming any interior columns are "leaning" columns that just go along for the ride. I ran into a similar situation and that was the case. The PEMB engineer revised his frame analysis such that the interior columns also resisted some of the lateral load. Made a big difference.

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!


Ebook - Mastering Tolerances for Machined Parts
When making CNC machined parts, mastering tolerances can be challenging. Are general tolerances good enough? When does it make sense to call out for tighter tolerances? Do you need a better understanding of fits, datums, or GD&T? Learn about these topics and more in Xometry's new e-book. Download Now
eBook – How to Choose the Correct Corrosion Testing Method
When designing a metal component, engineers have to consider how susceptible certain alloys are to corrosion in the final product’s operating environment. In a recent study by NACE (National Association of Corrosion Engineers), it was estimated that the direct and indirect costs of corrosion in the United States is approximately 6.2% of the GDP. In 2016, that cost exceeded $1 trillion dollars for the first time. Download Now

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close