Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

FEMA 356 URM Piers/spandrels

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I am working on a nonlinear static analysis of an URM building, and I am
questioning some values given in FEMA 356.  In Table 7-4, the residual
strength ratio (c) for the two failure modes is listed as 0.6%.  For
reinforced concrete and reinforced masonry, this value is more along the
lines of 60%.  Does anyone know if this is a typo?  I have tried to contact
the FEMA order hotline to see if there is an errata, but they don't know of
any.

Another question I have is about the modeling of spandrels.  Based on the
four failure modes for URM, two of them are dependent on axial load.  Since
a spandrel does not have gravity loads (and possibly tension loads due to
collector forces), does this mean it has no shear capacity?  In my
particular case, there is a steel beam with half of each flange embedded in
the spandrel, with no reliable shear transfer between it and the spandrel.
The beam has concrete fireproofing, only nominally tied into the structure.
My thoughts are that this spandrel has shear capacity at least from the
steel beam, and stiffness from the fireproofing and masonry, but I'm just
not sure how to model it.

If anyone can give me some guidance, I would very much appreciate it.

Lucas Jolly

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********