Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: Unblocked Plywood Diaphragm Deflection Calculation

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Just a question.  If the diaphragm is correctly engineered to begin with
(assuming loads not to exceed the allowables), why would one need to
worry about nail slippage past the elastic capacity.  I can understand
if analysis is being performed on an existing structure.

Also, I agree with the negligible nail slip and chord slippage in the
majority of all relatively small diaphragms.  But to every
generalization there are exceptions.  Some of the roofs that I have
designed in the industrial and warehousing areas were so large that nail
slippage did become a sizeable concern when looking at story drift.

-----Original Message-----
From: Niaz A. Nazir [mailto:NAN(--nospam--at)eqe.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 1:56 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: Re: Unblocked Plywood Diaphragm Deflection Calculation





---------------------- Forwarded by Niaz A. Nazir/EQE on 05/20/99 11:00
AM
---------------------------


Niaz A. Nazir
05/19/99 05:12 PM

To:   FEMCCLURE(--nospam--at)aol.com
cc:   seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org, David L. McCormick/EQE@EQE

Subject:  Re: Unblocked Plywood Diaphragm Deflection Calculation
(Document
      link not converted)

I agree to your argument.  I was looking thru ABK report and came across
the hysteresis behavior of the tested diaphragms.  The diaphragm
deflection
is certainly not linear as the load increases and follows a curve
defined
by:

F(e) = F(subscript: 2)e/(F(subscript: 2)/K(subscript: 1) +abs(e))

Definitions of various terms may be found in ABK report.

The slippage of nails increases as the force increases beyond initial
elastic capacity.

Furthermore, before the elastic capacity (defined by the Code allowable
capacity) is reached, the nail slippage will be very small, if any and
could be ignored for all practical computation purposes.  This will lead
to
a equation without the nail slippage and chord slippage contribution.

Regards





FEMCCLURE(--nospam--at)aol.com on 05/19/99 03:55:55 PM
                                                              
                                                              
                                                              
 To:      seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org                                   
                                                              
 cc:      FEMCCLURE(--nospam--at)aol.com, David L. McCormick/EQE, Niaz A.  
          Nazir/EQE                                           
                                                              
                                                              
                                                              
 Subject: Re: Unblocked Plywood Diaphragm Deflection          
          Calculation                                         
                                                              






Jefffery Seegert,

Thank you for your email posting on the SEAOSC List Server where you
presented the equation for calculating the deflection of a wood
structural
panel sheathed (plywood) diaphragm.

As I understand this equation  it is the same equation that appears in
the
1994 UBC Section 23.222, page 3-725 and in FEMA 273, Equation (8-6),
page
8-27.  The portion of  both the equations,  "0188 L*en", relates to the
nail
slip contribution to the diphragm deflection.

Let us examine the factor "en" in the 1994 UBC, which has values given
in
Table 23-2-K, page 3-739.  For "LOAD PER NAIL" of 180 lbs. for 8d nail,
the
value of en = .056 and for 200 lbs. for 10d nail,  the value of en =
.047,
where "Load per nail = maximum shear per foot divided by the number of
nails
per foot at interior panel edges.".

Now let us look at the values for "en" given  in FEMA 273 on page 8-27,
under
Equation (8-6):  "en = Nail deformation at yield load per nail based on
maximum shear per foot vy divided by the number of nails per foot.  For
8d
nails, en = .06.  For 10d nails, en = .04. " (Emphasis added.)

For the 1994 UBC, the "maximum shear per foot" would be calculated,
based
on
the diaphragm shears, resulting from the application of 1994 UBC,
Equation
(31-1),  which is based on Section 1628.2.1, " Design Base Shear",
Equation
(28-1),
 V = Z*I*C*W / Rw.  A typical value of  V  =  0.188 W is common for wood
frame shear wall buildings.

For FEMA 273, the "maximum shear per foot" would be calculated, based on
diaphragm shears, resulting from the application of  FEMA 273, Equation
(3-9), which is based on Section 3.3.1.3, "Pseudo Lateral Load",
Equation
(3-6),
V = C1*C2*C3*Sa*W.  A typical value for V =  greater than 1.0 W is
common
for
wood frame shear walls buildings, about five times greater than 1994
UBC,
V
= 0.188 W.

Do the values of "en" for FEMA 273,  at yield load per nail,  based on
"Pseudo Lateral Load" Base Shear look correct when compared to "en"
values
for 1994 UBC, at maximum shear per foot?  The two values of "en" are
about
the same value, "en" = .06 for 8d nails and .047 for 10d nails.

In other words, if "en" relates to "nail slip", should not the values of
"en"
be greater for FEMA 273 at yield load per nail, based on "Pseudo Lateral
Loads"  Base Shear than for the  1994 UBC "en" values of  based on "
Allowable Stress" Base Shear.   Is it not correct to assume that the
"nail
slip" will be greater at large forces per nail?

Bottom Line:  1. Is FEMA 273, Equation (8-6) correct?  2.  Should not
the
"nail slip" contribution to the diaphragm deflection be greater for FEMA
273
as compared to 1994 UBC?

The same concerns can be expressed concerning the correctness of  the
"en"
values for FEMA 273, Equation (8-2), page 8-19 as compared with the "en"
values for 1994 UBC, Equation  in Section 23.223, page 3-725  for
plywood
shear walls.

I came across this possible problem area of the values of "en" for FEMA
273
while conducting a "peer review" of one of  the Building Seismic Safety
Council (BSSC)
Case Studies Project for a wood frame building.

I would welcome any responses to this email message.


Frank E. McClure      FEMCCLURE(--nospam--at)aol.com   May 19, 1999

File: FEMA273diaphragmdeflections1.d0c