Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Perforated Shearwalls

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
The 2000 IBC has a provision for perforated shear walls.  They don't
use that terminology, but if it looks like a duck.....  See Section
2305.3.7.2 No force transfer around openings. (2000 IBC)



Tarno Coleman, PE
Plan Check Engineer
503.566.3964
Marion County Building Inspection
PO Box 14500, Salem, Oregon  97309-5036
http://www.open.org/~mcbuild/
tcoleman(--nospam--at)mail.open.org

>>> "Structuralist" <dennis.wish(--nospam--at)gte.net> 12/03 10:10 PM >>>
It is my understanding the the State of Oregon is on the verge of
approving
the use of the Perforated Shearwall design criteria in their state
building
code. I reviewed the minutes from the State of Oregon Department of
Consumer
and Business Services - Building Codes Structures Board which I
believe was
from June or August of this year. The November minutes indicated that
the
perforated wall methodology had not yet been approved because of some
objections from SEA of Oregon that needed to be resolved. The minutes
I read
indicated that the State BCSB was leaning to accept adopt the
methodology
based on what they considered a tested and proven system backed by
AF&PA.

I am interested in the opinions of others as I have some personal
reservations on perforated walls. My greatest concern is that the
success of
the system lies in the adherence to detailing and quality of
construction.
In other words, a perforated wall in which the sill plate is broken to
accommodate plumbing or electrical may, in my opinion, compromise the
system. I do see it as an improvement to prescriptive methods if NAHB
and
other builder organizations are willing to adopt it in place of the
current
UBC 2320 in higher risk zones.

On the other hand, when we are under so much pressure in design to
accommodate wall stiffness to diaphragm torsion, I would think that
the
perforated wall system would be difficult to accommodate and work into
the
full-compliance design methodology.

Although Oregon has every right to adopt any code or methodology they
choose, I believe it would be in the best interest of the engineering
community to have some sort of solidarity in this issue. Don't
misunderstand, I am not against perforated walls - in my opinion, the
jury
is still out on the issue until I understand what information is
missing for
regions of higher risk.

I would be interested in opinions?

Regards,
Dennis S. Wish, PE
The Structuralist Administrator for:
http://www.structuralist.net 
AEC-Residential Listservice
admin(--nospam--at)structuralist.net 
(208) 361-5447 E-Fax
ICQ # 95561393