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


Wood shear wall question

Wood shear wall question

Wood shear wall question


Anybody familiar with CSA 086 regarding shear wall framing requirements for double bottom sill plate at base of shear wall and foundation connection? What would be the reason for this?


RE: Wood shear wall question

If you point me to the code clause, I'll go check it out.

HELP! I'd like your help with a thread that I was forced to move to the business issues section where it will surely be seen by next to nobody that matters to me: http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=456235

RE: Wood shear wall question

Hi kootk,

No clause specifically that I know of its just something an EOR stated in his drawings,

I am wondering if it is code related and the reason behind it,

RE: Wood shear wall question

Sounds like the EOR may be the guy to ask. I can't think of a hard reason for this but, perhaps, some soft ones:

1) Maybe forces are so high that you need anchor bolts acting over 3" of wood. Seems unlikely.

2) Maybe they want to be able to bolt the first plate and then nail another plate on top with recesses so the bolts don't show.

3) Maybe something to suit wall prefabrication if the walls are being prefabricated.

5) Perhaps trying to raise the wall above an envelope condition.

6) Maybe framing condition is such that the bottom plates need to be drag members and therefore spliced....?

Honestly, I'm just grasping at straws.

HELP! I'd like your help with a thread that I was forced to move to the business issues section where it will surely be seen by next to nobody that matters to me: http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=456235

RE: Wood shear wall question

Thanks kootk

I am reading through csa 086 and nowhere does it mention this too, the base shear loads are not high, (it’s a straight forward 4storey wood frame with excessively long shear walls)

I will ask the eor, I suspect it is just something of a copy and paste, this note was in their general wood framing notes section

RE: Wood shear wall question

said the noob,

Would you post exactly what the eor put in their notes?


RE: Wood shear wall question

Is this a high seismic application?

There is a deformation compatibility issue with sill plates connected to concrete foundations. There was a post northridge requirement for 3x sill plates hear in the US because of this. Though I believe that requirement was only invoked for higher shear forces. Regardless, the point was that as the wall wants to lift up off the foundation, the sill plate will bend too much which became problematic. Numerous sill plate issues were observed post Northridge.

Now, the US requirement softened that stance since then. Perhaps in favor of having more rigid square washers on the anchors....

But, it seems to me that an engineer with this old provision in the back of his mind might still want some extra rigidity at the sill.

RE: Wood shear wall question

I have done some multi family buildings and have specified double sill plates due to architectural requirements of 1 1/2'' concrete flooring at upper level floors. The idea is to avoid the conflict between concrete and the sill plate shear wall edge nailing. But not sure if your EOR thinks the same.

As JoshPlum said, the IBC used to have the 3x sill plate requirements and was mainly for the sill plate cross grain bending under shear wall uplift. NDS simultaneously had a requirement of plate washer at each anchor bolt to eliminate cross grain bending. I believe IBC took out the requirement in 2012 or so and simply refered the cross bending issue to NDS which is the plate washer solution. So now the 3x sill plate requirement is no more enforced by IBC.

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! Already a Member? Login


eBook - Rethink Your PLM
A lot has changed since the 90s. You don't surf the Web using dial-up anymore, so why are you still using a legacy PLM solution that's blocking your ability to innovate? To develop and launch products today, you need a flexible, cloud-based PLM, not a solution that's stuck in the past. Download Now
White Paper - Using Virtualization for IVI and AUTOSAR Consolidation on an ECU
Current approaches used to tackle the complexities of a vehicle’s electrical and electronics (E/E) architecture are both cost prohibitive and lacking in performance. Utilizing virtualization in automotive software architecture provides a better approach. This can be achieved by encapsulating different heterogeneous automotive platforms inside virtual machines running on the same hardware. 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