FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

03

0
CD
2H

NEHRP Handbook of
Techniques for the
Seismic Rehabilitation
of Existing Buildings

CD

C/)
-o

CD

CD
-CO
m

-h

C',

co
CD

cn,

CD
CD

CD
,
I

Issued by FEMA in furtherance of the

Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction.

FEMA-1 72 / June 1992

Program
on
Improved
Seismic
Safety
Provisions

NEHRP HANDBOOK OF TECHNIQUES

FOR THE SEISMIC REHABILITATIONOF

EXISTING BUILDINGS

THE BUILDING SEISMIC SAFETY COUNCIL AND ITS PURPOSE

The Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC) was established in 1979 under the auspices of the National Institute
of Building Sciences (NIBS) as an entirely new type of instrument for dealing with the complex regulatory,
technical, social, and economic issues involved in developing and promulgating building earthquake hazard
mitigation regulatory provisions that are national in scope. By bringing together in the BSSC all of the needed
expertise and all relevant public and private interests, it was believed that issues related to the seismic safety of
the built environment could be resolved and jurisdictional problems overcome through authoritative guidance
and assistance backed by a broad consensus.
The BSSC is an independent, voluntary membership body representing a wide variety of building community interests. Its fundamental purpose is to enhance public safety by providing a national forum that fosters
improved seismic safety provisions for use by the building community in the planning, design, construction,
regulation, and utilization of buildings. To fulfill its purpose, the BSSC:
*

Promotes the development of seismic safety provisions suitable for use throughout the United States;

Recommends, encourages, and promotes the adoption of appropriate seismic safety provisions in voluntary
standards and model codes;

Assesses progress in the implementation of such provisions by federal, state, and local regulatory and
construction agencies;

Identifies opportunities for improving seismic safety regulations and practices and encourages public and
private organizations to effect such improvements;

Promotes the development of training and educational courses and materials for use by design
professionals, builders, building regulatory officials, elected officials, industry representatives, other
members of the building community, and the public;

Advises government bodies on their programs of research, development, and implementation; and

Periodically reviews and evaluates research findings, practices, and experience and makes recommendations for incorporation into seismic design practices.

The BSSC's area of interest encompasses all building types, structures, and related facilities and includes
explicit consideration and assessment of the social, technical, administrative, political, legal, and economic implications of its deliberations and recommendations. The BSSC believes that the achievement of its purpose is a
concern shared by all in the public and private sectors; therefore, its activities are structured to provide all
interested entities (i.e., government bodies at all levels, voluntary organizations, business, industry, the design
profession, the construction industry, the research community, and the general public) with the opportunity to
participate. The BSSC also believes that the regional and local differences in the nature and magnitude of potentially hazardous earthquake events require a flexible approach to seismic safety that allows for consideration of
the relative risk, resources, and capabilities of each community.
The BSSC is committed to continued technical improvement of seismic design provisions, assessment of
advances in engineering knowledge and design experience, and evaluation of earthquake impacts. It recognizes
that appropriate earthquake hazard reduction measures and initiatives should be adopted by existing
organizations and institutions and incorporated, whenever possible, into their legislation, regulations, practices,
rules, codes, relief procedures, and loan requirements so that these measures and initiatives become an integral
part of established activities, not additional burdens. The BSSC itself assumes no standards-making and -promulgating role; rather, it advocates that code- and standards-formulation organizations consider BSSC recommendations for inclusion into their documents and standards.

BSSC Program on Improved Seismic Safety Provisions

NEHRP HANDBOOKOF TECHNIQUES

FOR THE SEISMIC REHABILITATIONOF
EXISTING BUILDINGS

Developed by the
Building Seismic Safety Council

for the
Federal Emergency Management Agency

Based on a Preliminary Version Prepared for FEMA by

the URS/John A. Blume and Associates, Engineers

BUILDING SEISMIC SAFETY COUNCIL

Washington, D.C.
1992

NOTICE: Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not
necessarily reflect the views of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Additionally, neither FEMA nor
any of its employees make any warranty, expressed or implied, nor assume any legal liability or responsibility for
the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, product, or process included in this publication.
This report was prepared under Contract EMW-88-C-2924 between the Federal Emergency Management Agency
and the National Institute of Building Sciences.
Building Seismic Safety Council reports include the documents listed below-,unless otherwise noted, single copies
are available at no charge from the Council:
AbatementofSeismicHazardsto Lifelines:ProceedingsoftheBuilding SeismicSafetyCouncilWorkshopon Developmentof an Action
Plan, 6 volumes, 1987
Action Plan for the Abatement of Seismic Hazards to New and Existing Lifelines, 1987
Guide to Use of the NEHRP Recommended Provisions in Earthquake-Resistant Design of Buildings, 1990
NEHRP (National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program) Recommended Provisions for the Development of Seismic Regulations
for New Buildings, 1988 and 1991 Editions, 2 volumes and maps, 1988 and 1991

NEHRP Handbookfor the SeismicEvaluation of Edsting Buildings,1992

NEHRP Handbook of Techniques for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, 1992
Non-Technical Explanation of the NEHRP Recommended Provisions, Revised Edition, 1990
Seismic Considerations for Communities at Risk, 1990'
Seismic Considerations: Elementary and Secondary Schools, Revised Edition, 1990
Seismic Considerations: Health Care Facilities, Revised Edition, 1990
Seismic Considerations: Hotels and Motels, Revised Edition, 1990
Seismic Considerations: Apartment Buildings, 1988
Seismic Considerations: Office Buildings, 1988
Societal Implications: Selected Readings, 1986.
Strategies and Approaches for Implementing a Comprehensive Program to Mitigate the Risk to Lifelines from Earthquakes and Other
Natural Hazards, 1989 (available from the National Institute of Building Sciences for Sil)

For further information concerning any of these documents or the activities of the BSSC, contact the Executive
Director, Building Seismic Safety Council, 1201 L St., N.W., Suite 400, Washington, D.C. 20005.

An earlier version of this publication was entitled Societal Implications: A Community Handbook.
ii

FOREWORD

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is pleased to have sponsored the preparation of this
publication on seismic strengthening of existing buildings. The publication is one of a series that FEMA is
sponsoring to encourage local decision makers, design professionals, and other interested groups to undertake
a program of mitigating the risks posed by existing hazardous buildings in the event of an earthquake.
Publications in this series are being prepared under the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program
(NEHRP) and examine both the engineering/architectural aspects and societal impacts of seismic rehabilitation.
FEMA's existing buildings activities are structured to result in a coherent, cohesive, carefully selected and
planned reinforcing set of documents designed for national applicability. The resulting publications (descriptive
reports, handbooks, and supporting documentation) provide guidance primarily to local elected and appointed
officials and design professionals on how to deal not only with earthquake engineering problems but also with
the public policy issues and societal dislocations associated with major seismic events. It is a truly interdisciplinary set of documents that includes this handbook of techniques as Well as a companion volume presenting a
methodology for conducting an evaluation of the seismic safety of existing buildings.
With respect to this handbook, FEMA gratefully acknowledges the expertise and efforts of the Building
Seismic Safety Council's Retrofit of Existing Buildings Committee, Board of Direction, member organizations,
and staff and of the members of the Technical Advisory Panel and URS/John A. Blume and Associates
management and staff.
Federal Emergency Management Agency

iii

PREFACE

This handbook of techniques for solving a variety of seismic rehabilitation problems and its companion
publication on the seismic evaluation of existing buildings reflect basic input provided by two organizations
recognized for their retrofit evaluation and design experience as well as the results of a consensus development
activity carried out by the Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC). The preliminary version of this document,
the NEHRP Handbook of Techniques for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, was developed for
FEMA by URS/John A. Blume and Associates, Engineers (URS/Blume). A companion volume, the NEHRP
Handbook for the Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings, for which a preliminary version was developed for
FEMA by the Applied Technology Council (ATC), provides a method for evaluating existing buildings to identify
those that are likely to be seismically hazardous. The BSSC project, initiated at the request of FEMA in October
1988, has focused on identification and resolution of technical issues in and appropriate revision of the two
handbooks by a 22-member Retrofit of Existing Buildings (REB) Committee composed of individuals possessing
expertise in the various subjects needed to address seismic rehabilitation.
The balloting of the two handbooks was conducted on a chapter-by-chapter basis in September and
October 1991. Although all parts of both handbooks passed the ballot by the required two-thirds majority, the
Board, after reviewing the ballot results in November 1991, concluded that many of the comments were
sufficiently serious to warrant further consideration and that the REB Committee should have the opportunity
to review the ballot comments and propose changes for reballoting in response to those considered persuasive.
The REB Committee members then were asked to review the ballot comments and forward the results of their
review to a member of the REB Executive Committee. In turn, the Executive Committee met in early January
1992 to consider committee member suggestions and prepare responses to the ballot comments and proposals
for revision of the handbooks. The Executive Committee recommendations for reballoting were presented to
and accepted by the BSSC Board. The reballot proposals were developed and submitted to the BSSC member
organizations for balloting in late January 1992. All the reballot proposals passed but several issues raised in
comments were considered and resolved at a special meeting of the Council in February 1992.
The BSSC REB Committee and Board of Direction believe that these two handbooks will prove to be
beneficial to those who are involved in or who need to begin exploring the seismic evaluation and rehabilitation
of existing buildings, a topic of growing importance especially in the eastern and midwestern parts of the nation
where little such work has been done. It is hoped that experience with the application of these handbooks will
generate feedback that can serve as the foundation for the enhancement of future documents dealing with the
seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings. To this end, a User Comment Form is included in the handbooks
to stimulate those who work with the handbooks to report their experiences. In addition, since some of the
issues raised by BSSC member organizations during the balloting of the handbooks bear on the need for future
enhancement of the information presented, a summary of the results of the BSSC balloting including all
comments received and committee decisions/responses to those comments is available to interested readers upon
request to the BSSC.
The Board wishes to emphasize that these documents are intended to serve as informational "points of
departure" for the professional involved in seismic evaluation and rehabilitation. They cannot yet be considered
all inclusive nor are they intended to serve as the basis for regulation. Rather, it is hoped that both will prove
to be of sufficient value to warrant expansion and refinement.
Considerable effort has gone into the development of this handbook. On behalf of the BSSC Board, I
wish to acknowledge the organizations and individuals who have participated. The Board is particularly grateful
for the extensive contribution of time and expertise from those serving on its Retrofit of Existing Buildings
Committee of volunteer experts:
Daniel Shapiro, SOH and Associates, San Francisco, California (Committee Chairman)
M. Agbabian, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
Christopher Arnold, Building Systems Development, San Mateo, California
Mohammad Ayub, U.S. Departmene of Labor, Washington, D.C.
John R. Battles, Southern Building Code Congress, International, Birmingham, Alabama
v

Pamalee Brady, U.S. Army Construction Engineering, Champaign, Illinois

Vincent R. Bush, Consulting Structural Engineer, Walnut, California
John Canestro, City of Orinda, Pleasanton, California
Arnaldo T. Derecho, Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Incorporated, Northbrook, Illinois
Edward Diekmann, GFDS Structural Engineers, San Francisco, California
Ronald P. Gallagher, R. P. Gallagher Associates, Incorporated, San Francisco, California
James R. Harris, J. R. Harris and Company, Denver, Colorado
John Kariotis, Kariotis and Associates, South Pasadena, California
Franklin Lew, Contra Costa County, Martinez, California
Frank E. McClure, Consulting Structural Engineer, Orinda, California
Allan R. Porush, Dames and Moore, Los Angeles, California
Norton S. Remmer, Consulting Engineer, Worcester, Massachusetts
Ralph Rowland, Architectural Research, Cheshire, Connecticut
Earl Schwartz, Los Angeles City Department of Building and Safety, Los Angeles, California
William W. Stewart, William Stewart and Associates, Clayton, Missouri
Robert Voelz, Bentley Engineering Company, San Francisco, California
Loring A. Wyllie, H. J. Degenkolb Associates, San Francisco, California
Needless to say, the Council's project would not have been successful without the developmental work and
cooperation of the URS/Blume project staff: R. Martin Czarnecki, Principal-in-Charge; John F. Silva, Project
Manager; David M. Bergman, Project Engineer; Joseph P. Nicoletti, Consultant; Walter N. Mestrovich; and Kit
Wong.
Further, the BSSC Board wishes to acknowledge the contribution of URS/Blume's Technical Advisory Panel:
Vitelmo V. Bertero, Robert D. Hanson, James 0 Jirsa, James M. Kelley, Stephen A. Mahin, Roger E. Scholl,
and James K. Wight.
Finally, I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the effort of the BSSC staff: James R. Smith, Executive
Director; 0. Allen Israelsen, Professional Engineer and Project Manager; Claret M. Heider, Technical WriterEditor; and Karen E, Smith, Administrative Assistant.
Gerald Jones
Chairman, BSSC Board of Direction

*Corresponding

member.
vi

USER COMMENT FORM

Please fill out and return this form to the BSSC at 1201 L Street, N.W.,
Your cooperation is greatly appreciated.
1.

th

Hor, Washington, D.C. 20005.

Describe your experience in using this handbook.

What type of building was evaluated and proposed for rehabilitation?

How was the evaluation performed? Was the NEHRP Handbook for the Seismic Evaluation of Existing
Buildings used?

Which techniques in this handbook were considered?

rehabilitation completed?

Were problems encountered in using this handbook?

solved.

2.

What technique was selected?

If so, describe the problems and how they were

Prior to your use of this handbook, were you familiar with the NEHRP Recommended Provisions for the

Developmentof Seismic Regulationsfor New Buildings.

3.

Was the

Do you have recommendations for improving this handbook.

Title

Name
Organization
Address
Telephone and FAX Numbers

vii

CONTENTS

iii

FOREWORD

PREFACE
USER COMMENT FORM

vii

GLOSSARY

xv

INTRODUCTION

1.1

Background

1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5

Development of This Handbook

Purpose of This Handbook
Scope and Limitations
Organization of This Handbook

2
2
3
3

2. SEISMIC VULNERABILITY OF BUILDINGS

1.

2.0 Introduction
2.1 General Attributes of Structures
2.1.1 Strength
2.1.2 Stiffness
2.1.3 Ductility
2.1.4 Damping
2.2 Adverse Design and Construction Features
2.2.1 Lack of Direct Load Path
2.2.2 Irregularities
2.2.3 Lack of Redundancy
2.2.4 Lack of Toughness
2.2.5 Adjacent Buildings
23 Deteriorated Condition of Structural Materials
3. SEISMIC STRENGTHENING OF EXISTING BUILDINGS
3.0

5
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
7
13.
13
14
14
17
17

Introduction

3.0.1 Cost Considerations

3.0.2 Functional Considerations
3.0.3 Aesthetic Considerations
3.0.4 Seismic Zonation
3.1 Vertical-resisting Elements--Moment Resisting Systems
3.1.1 Steel Moment Frames
3.1.2 Concrete Moment Frames
3.1.3 Moment Frames with Infil&s
3.1.4 Precast Concrete Moment Frames
3.2 Vertical-resisting Elements--Shear Walls
3.2.1 Reinforced Concrete or Reinforced Masonry Shear Walls
3.2.2 Precast Concrete Shear Walls
3.2.3 Unreinforced Masonry Shear Walls
3.2.4 Shear Walls in Wood Frame Buildings
ix

17
17
18
18
18
18
22
26
28
28
28
34
34
37

3.3 Vertical-resisting Elements--Braced Frames

3.3.1 Steel Concentric Braced Frames
3.3.2 Rod or Other Tension Bracing
3.3.3 Eccentric Bracing
3.4 Vertical-resisting Elements--Adding Supplemental Members
3.4.1 Relative Compatibility
3.4.2 Exterior Supplemental Elements
3.4.3 Interior Supplemental Elements
3.5

3.6

4.

46

Diaphragms

3.5.1
3.5.2
3.5.3
3.5.4
3.5.5
3.5.6

47
51
56
56
59
64

Timber Diaphragms
Concrete Diaphragms
Poured Gypsum Diaphragms
Precast Concrete Diaphragms
Steel Deck Diaphragms
Horizontal Steel Bracing

65

Foundations

3.6.1 Continuous or Strip Wall Footings

3.6.2 Individual Pier or Column Footings
3.6.3 Piles or Drilled Piers
3.6.4 Mat Foundations
3.7 Diaphragm to Vertical Element Connections
3.7.1 Connections of Timber Diaphragms
3.7.2 Connections of Concrete Diaphragms
3.7.3 Connections of Poured Gypsum Diaphragms
3.7.4 Connections of Precast Concrete Diaphragms
3.7.5 Connections of Steel Deck Diaphragms Without Concrete Fill
3.7.6 Connections of Steel Deck Diaphragms with Concrete Fill
3.7.7 Connections of Horizontal Steel Bracing
3.8 Vertical Element to Foundation Connections
3.8.1 Connections of Wood Stud Shear Walls
3.8.2 Connections of Metal Stud Shear Walls
3.8.3 Connections of Precast Concrete Shear Walls
3.8.4 Connections of Braced Frames
3.8.5 Connections of Steel Moment Frames
3.9 Adding a New Supplemental System
3.9.1 Supplemental Braced Frame System
3.9.2 New Shear Wall System
3.9.3 Structural Additions

66
68
70
72
72
72
84
86
86
87
89
90
91
91
95
95
97
98
98
99
99
101

DECREASING DEMAND ON EXISTING SYSTEMS

103

4.0

103

Introduction

Reducing the Weight of the Building

Increasing the Fundamental Period and the Energy Dissipating Capacity
of the Structural System
4.3 Alternate Procedures
4.1
4.2

5.

38
38
41
42
43
44
45
45

Seismic Isolation

105

4.3.2

Supplemental Damping

105
107
107

Introduction

107

5.1 Exterior Curtain Walls

5.2
5.3

104
105

4.3.1

REHABILITATION OF NONSTRUCTURAL ARCHITECTURAL COMPONENTS

5.0

103

108
109

Appendages
Veneers

5.4
5.5
5.6
5.7
5.8
6.

109
113
113
114
115

Partitions
Ceilings
Lighting Fixtures
Glass Doors and Windows
Raised Computer Access Floors

REHABILITATION OF NONSTRUCTURAL MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS 117

6.0

117

Introduction

117
126

6,1 Mechanicai and Electrical Equipment

Ductwork and Piping
t
6.3

133

Elevators

133
135
137
137

6.4 Emergency Power Systems

6.5 Hazardous Material Storage Systems
6.6 Communication Systems
6.7 Computer Equipment

143

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDICES
A
B
C

Seismic-Force-Resisting Elements in Buildings

Summary of Strengthening Techniques
Rehabilitation Examples

149
165
185

MINORITY OPINION

193

BSSC BOARD OF DIRECTION AND MEMBER ORGANIZATIONS

195

FIGURES
(E) = Existing,(L) = Left, (N) = New. (R) - Right

LE(iFNf) FOR FIGURES:

2.2.2.1
2.2.2.4a
2.2.2.4b
2.2.2.4c
2.2.2.4d

Vertical irregularities--examples of in-plane and out-of-plane discontinuities

Horizontal and plan irregularities--rehabilitating a structure to reduce torsional loads
Horizontal and plan irregularities--examples of rehabilitating buildings with re-entrant corners
Horizontal and plan irregularities--example of strengthening a split level diaphragm
Horizontal and plan irregularities--example of rehabilitating building with nonparallel systems

3.1.1.2a
3.1.1.2b
3.1.1.2c
3.1.2.2a
3.1.2.2b
3.1.2.2c
3.2.1.2a
3.2.1.2b
3.2.1.2c
3.2.1.4
3.2.3.2
3.3
3.3.1.2
3.4
3.4.2
3.4.3

19
Modification of an existing simple beam to a moment connection
20
Strengthening an existing column
21
Strengthening an existing beam
23
Encasing an existing beam in concrete
24-25
Strengthening an existing concrete column
26
Strengthening an existing concrete frame building with a reinforced concrete shear wall
29
Strengthening an existing shear wall by filling in existing openings
30
Example of details for enclosing. an existing opening in a reinforced concrete or masonry wall
,31
Strengthening an existing reinforced concrete or masonry wall
32
Example of strengthening an existing coupling beam at an exterior wall
35
Example of center coring technique
38
Bracing types
39
Addition to or replacement of an existing X-brace
44
Examples of supplementary strengthening
45
Example of supplemental in-plane strengthening by the addition of an external buttress
46
Connection of a supplemental interior shear wall
0

~~~~~~~~~~~xi

8
10
11

12
12

49
50
51
52

3.7.1.3
3.7.1.4a
3.7.1.4b
3.7.1.4c
3.7.1.4d
3.7.1.4e
3.7.1.5a
3.7.1.5b
3.7.1.5c
3.7.2.2
3.7.5.2
3.8.1.2a
3.8.1.2b
3.8.1.3
3.8.1.4
3.8.3.2
3.9.1
3.9.2
3.9.3

Exterior sheathing and top plate chord in a wood frame building

Reinforcement of an opening in an existing timber diaphragm
New drag strut in an existing wood diaphragm
Strengthening an existing concrete diaphragm with a new topping slab and chord
Adding a new chord member to an existing concrete diaphragm (not recommended
for precast elements)
Reinforcement of an opening in an existing concrete diaphragm
Strengthening openings in overlaid diaphragms
Strengthening an existing precast concrete diaphragm with a concrete overlay
Adding a new steel member to an existing precast concrete diaphragm
Strengthening an existing steel deck diaphragm
Strengthening an existing steel deck diaphragm
Strengthening an existing building with steel decking and concrete or masonry walls
Strengthening an existing building with steel decking and concrete or masonry walls
Underpinning an existing footing
Strengthening an existing wall footing by the addition of drilled piers
Upgrading an existing pile foundation
Strengthening the connection of a diaphragm to an interior shear wall
(wall parallel to floor joist)
Strengthening the connection of a diaphragm to an interior shear wall
(wall perpendicular to floor joist)
Strengthening an existing wood stud shear wall with a large opening
Strengthening out-of-plane connections of a wood diaphragm
Strengthening out-of-plane connections of a wood diaphragm
Strengthening out-of-plane connections of a wood diaphragm
Strengthening out-of-plane connections of a wood diaphragm
Strengthening tensile capacity of an existing glulam beam connection
Strengthening the connection between shear walls using a metal strap
Strengthening the connection between shear walls using a hold-down
Strengthening shear wall uplift capacity at a discontinuity
Use of a collector member to improve shear transfer from a concrete diaphragm
Strengthening the connection of steel deck diaphragm to a concrete or masonry wall
Providing wall to foundation anchors
Alternate detail for providing wall to foundation anchors
Strengthening a cripple stud wall
Strengthening the uplift capacity of a wall to foundation connection
Strengthening a precast concrete wall to foundation connection
Strengthening using a supplemental braced frame system
Strengthening by providing a new shear wall system
Strengthening with a new building addition

74
76
77
78
79
80
80
81
82
83
85
88
92
93
94
95
96
99
100
101

5.1a
5.1b
5.2a
5.2b
5.4a
5.4b
5.5
5.6
5.8a
5.8b

Flexible connection for precast concrete cladding

Detail for flexible connection for precast concrete cladding
Strengthening a masonry parapet with a new concrete overlay
Strengthening a masonry parapet with steel braces
Bracing an interior masonry partition
Bracing an interior masonry partition
Lateral bracing of a suspended ceiling
Providing safety wires for suspended lighting fixtures
Access floor pedestals
Strengthening of access floor pedestals

107
108
109
109
111
112
113
114
115
116

3.5.1.3
3.5.1.4a
3.5.1.4b
3.5.2.2
3.5.2.3
3.5.2.4a
3.5.2.4b
3.5.4.2
3.5.4.3
3.5.5.2a
3.5.5.2b
3.5.5.2c
3.5.5.2d
3.6.1.2a
3.6.1.2b
3.6.2.3
3.7.1.2a
3.7.1.2b

xii

53
54
55
57
58
60
61
62
63
66
67
71
73

6.1a
6.lb
6.1c
6.1d
6.1e
6.1f
6.lg
6.2a
6.2b
6 2c
6.2d
6.2e
6.2f
6.2g
6.4a
6.4b
6.5a
6.5b
6.7a
6.7b
6.7c
6.7d

Typical detail of equipment anchorage

Alternate details for anchoring equipment
Prefabricated vibration isolation assembly with lateral seismic stops
Seismic restraints added to existing equipment with vibration isolation
Multidirectional seismic restraint
Typical bracing for suspended equipment
Strapping of domestic water heater
Lateral and longitudinal braces for large diameter ducting
Lateral and longitudinal braces for small diameter ducting
Lateral and longitudinal braces for rectangular ducting
Lateral braces for piping
Longitudinal pipe brace
Lateral brace for multiple pipes
Longitudinal brace for multiple pipes
Bracing of existing battery racks
Bracing of horizontal tank
Protective measures for hazardous materials
Anchorage detail for pressurized tanks
Rigid anchorage of computer equipment
Flexible anchorage of computer equipment
Tether and opening guards for protection of computer equipment
Strapping of electronic data processing units

xdii

118
119-120
121
122
123
124
125
127
128
129
130
131
132
132
133
134
135
136
138
139
140
141

GLOSSARY

BOUNDARY ELEMENT:
diaphragm.

An element at the edge of an opening or at the perimeter of a shear wall or

BRACED FRAME: An essentially vertical truss, or its equivalent, of the concentric or eccentric type that is
provided in a building frame or dual system to resist lateral forces.
CHEVRON BRACING: Bracing where a pair of braces, located either both above or both below a beam,
terminates at a single point within the clear beam span.
CHORD: See DIAPHRAGM CHORD.
COLLECTOR: A member or element provided to transfer lateral forces from a portion of a structure to vertical
elements of the lateral-force-resisting system (also called a drag strut).
CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAME (CBF): A braced frame in which the members are subjected primarily
to axial forces.
CONTINUITY TIES: Structural members and connections that provide a load path between diaphragm chords
to distribute out-of-plane wall loads.
COUPLING BEAM: A structural element connecting adjacent shear walls.
DAMPING: The internal energy absorption characteristic of a structural system that acts to attenuate induced
free vibration.
DEMAND: The prescribed design forces required to be resisted by a structural element, subsystem, or system.
DIAPHRAGM: A horizontal, or nearly horizontal, system designed to transmit lateral forces to the vertical
elements of the lateral-force-resisting system. The term "diaphragm" includes horizontal bracing systems.
DIAPHRAGM CHORD: The boundary element of a diaphragm or shear wall that is assumed to take axial
tension or compression.
DIAPHRAGM STRUT: The element of a diaphragm parallel to the applied load that collects and transfers
diaphragm shear to vertical-resisting elements or distributes loads within the diaphragm. Such members may
take axial tension or compression. Also refers to drag strut, tie, collector.
DRAG STRUT: See COLLECTOR.
DRIFT: See STORY DRIFT.
DUCTILITY: The ability of a structure or element to dissipate energy inelastically when displaced beyond its
elastic limit without a significant loss in load carrying capacity.
ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAME (EBF): A diagonal braced frame in which at least one end of each brace
frames into a beam a short distance from a beam-column joint or from another diagonal brace.
FUNDAMENTAL PERIOD OF VIBRATION: The time it takes the predominant mode of a structure to move
back and forth when vibrating freely.
xv

HOLD-DOWN: A prefabricated steel element consisting of a tension rod, end brackets and bolts or lags used
to transfer tension across wood connections.
HORIZONTAL BRACING SYSTEM: A horizontal truss system that serves the same function as a diaphragm.
K-BRACING: Bracing where a pair of braces located on one side of a column terminates at a single point within
the clear column height.
LATERAL-FORCE-RESISTING SYSTEM: That part of the structural system assigned to resist lateral forces.
LINK BEAM: That part or segment of a beam in an eccentrically braced frame that is designed to yield in shear
and/or bending so that buckling or tension failure of the diagonal brace is prevented.
MOMENT RESISTING SPACE FRAME:
providing support for vertical loads.

A structural system with an essentially complete space frame

REDUNDANCY: A measure of the number of alternate load paths that exist for primary structural elements
and/or connections such that if one element or connection fails, the capacity of alternate elements or connections
are available to satisfactorily resist the demand loads.
RE-ENTRANT CORNER: A corner on the exterior of a building that is directed inward such as the inside
corner of an L-shaped building.
SHEAR WALL: A wall, bearing or nonbearing, designed to resist lateral forces acting in the plane of the wall.
SHOTCRETE: Concrete that is pneumatically placed on vertical or near vertical surfaces typically with a
minimum use of forms.
SOFT STORY: A story in which the lateral stiffness is less than 70 percent of the stiffness of the story above.
SOIL-STRUCTURE RESONANCE: The coincidence of the natural period of a structure with a dominant
frequency in the ground motion.
STORY DRIFT: The displacement of one level relative to the level above or below.
STRUCTURE: An assemblage of framing members designed to support gravity loads and resist lateral forces.
Structures may be categorized as building structures or nonbuilding structures.
SUBSYSTEMS: One of the following three principle lateral-force-resisting systems in a building: verticalresisting elements, diaphragms, and foundations.
SUPPLEMENTAL ELEMENT: A new member added to an existing lateral-force-resisting subsystem that shares
in resisting lateral loads with existing members of that subsystem.
V-BRACING: Chevron bracing that intersects a beam from above. Inverted V-bracing is that form of chevron
bracing that intersects a beam from below.
VERTICAL-RESISTING ELEMENTS: That part of the structural system located in a vertical or near vertical
plane that resists lateral loads (typically a moment frame, shear wall, or braced frame).
WEAK STORY: A story in which the lateral strength is less than 80 percent of that in the story above.
X-BRACING: Bracing where a pair of diagonal braces crosses near mid-length of the bracing members.

xvi

INTRODUCMION

The risks posed by buildings not designed for earthquake loads or by nonengineered buildings have been
recognized for nearly a century. Advances in earthquake-related science and technology during the past few
decades have led to a realization that earthquakes and the resulting risk to life are a national problem. Indeed,
damaging earthquakes in the eastern United States, although occurring less frequently than in California, may
pose an equal, if not greater, threat to the national economy and social fabric.
The benefits of applying earthquake-resistant design to reduce the hazards of new buildings were
acknowledged in California following the 1906 San Francisco earthquake but appropriate design practices were
not implemented to any degree until after the disastrous 1933 earthquake in Long Beach, California. Today,
earthquake-resistant design in new construction is accepted practice in California but has been only recently
achieved a significant degree of acceptance in other parts of the United States. Thus, a very large number of
existing buildings in the country can be presumed to have inadequate earthquake resistance and to pose a serious
risk.
Detailed post-earthquake investigations of building failures have provided engineers with considerable
information concerning the details of building design and construction that enhance earthquake resistance. The
1971 earthquake in San Fernando, California, was particularly revealing in this regard and engendered a new
wave of concern for seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings. Notable among the earthquake rehabilitation
projects begun in the 1970s was the systematic seismic vulnerability evaluation, and strengthening as needed, of
all Veterans Administration (VA) hospitals in the United States. Concurrently, other federal agencies such as
the Department of Defense (DOD) and the General Services Administration (GSA) initiated programs to
identify and mitigate seismic hazards in public buildings under their authority. These and similar projects have
generated a substantial body of knowledge regarding earthquake rehabilitation of buildings. The Loma Prieta
earthquake seems to have added impetus to seismic rehabilitation in the private sector. (Note that the greatest
experience in seismic rehabilitation has been gained in high seismic zones; see Sec. 3.0.4 for guidance concerning
the application of seismic rehabilitation techniques in areas of lower seismicity.)

1.1 BACKGROUND
One of the objectives of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (P.L. 95-124 as amended) is . . . the
development of methods for . . . rehabilitation and utilization of man-made works so as to effectively resist the
hazards imposed by earthquakes... ." The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program submitted to the
Congress by the President on June 22, 1978, stresses that absent a reliable capability to predict earthquakes, "it
is important that hazards be reduced from those (substandard) structures presenting the greatest risks in terms
of occupancy and potential secondary impact."
In Fiscal Year 1984, FEMA started an extensive program to encourage the reduction of seismic hazards
posed by existing buildings throughout the country. The first project in the program was the formulation of a
comprehensive 5-year plan on what needed to be done and what the required resources would be. The plan was
completed in Fiscal Year 1985. As resources have become available since that time, FEMA has used this plan
as a basis for developing a multi-volume, self-reinforcing, cohesive, coherent set of nationally applicable
publications on engineering measures and societal problems related to the seismic rehabilitation of existing
buildings. These publications include reports presenting a method for rapid visual screening of buildings, an
engineering methodology for a seismic safety evaluation of different types of buildings that is a companion to
this document, seismic strengthening techniques for various types of buildings (this handbook), typical costs of
seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings, an approach to establishing programs and priorities for seismic
rehabilitation of existing buildings, potential financial incentives for establishing such programs and instructions

on the conduct of workshops to encourage local initiatives in this field and conclusions from a number of applications workshops held in various states, and a model to derive direct economic costs and benefits to owners and
occupants of buildings in the private sector. Further, the preparation of a comprehensive set of guidelines for
seismic rehabilitation (with commentary) has been initiated.

1.2 DEVELOPMENT OF THIS HANDBOOK

Recognizing that a large number of techniques currently are being utilized to mitigate seismic hazards in existing
vulnerable buildings, the FEMA contracted with URS/John A. Blume and Associates, Engineers, (referred to
herein as URS/Blume) in 1987 to identify and describe generally accepted rehabilitation techniques. This
URS/Blume effort resulted in the preliminary version of this handbook published by FEMA in March 1989.
It was based primarily on a review of existing literature and input from a panel of project consultants. The
primary source documents and sources reviewed included The Abstract Joumal of Earthquake Engineering, the
Earthquake Engineering Research Center Library at the University of California at Berkeley, the proceedings
of the World, U.S. National, and European Conferences on Earthquake Engineering, the U.S./Japan Seminars
on Repair and Retrofit of Structures, the Dialogue Compendex, and the National Technical Information Service
(NTIS).
The Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC) project, initiated at the request of FEMA in October 1988, was
structured to focus on identification and resolution of technical issues in the preliminary version of the handbook
(as well as in a companion publication presenting a methodology for conducting an evaluation of the seismic
safety of existing buildings) and appropriate revision by a 22-member Retrofit of Existing Buildings (REB)
Committee composed of individuals possessing expertise in the various subjects needed to address seismic
rehabilitation. Conduct of the BSSC project is discussed in the Preface (see page v).

1.3 PURPOSE OF THIS HANDBOOK

There is a variety of approaches to seismic rehabilitation, each with specific merits and limitations. The
rehabilitation technique most appropriate for use with a particular building will depend on the unique
characteristics of the building. Thus, this handbook is to provide those interested or involved in seismic
rehabilitation with:
c

A general understanding of the common deficiencies in the structural and nonstructural components of
existing buildings that cause seismic performance problems,

Descriptions of some of the techniques that might be used to correct deficiencies for various construction
types, and

Information on the relative merits of alternative techniques.

In short, this handbook is intended to stimulate understanding such that, when assessing the rehabilitation
alternatives available, building owners and design professionals can make an informed decision concerning the
best solution for a specific building, location, and occupancy.
This handbook is designed to be compatible with the NEHRP Handbook for the Seismic Evaluation of
Existing Building (referred to herein as the NEHRP Evaluation Handbook), which provides a standard
methodology for evaluating buildings of different types and occupancies in areas of different seismicity throughout
the United States. Seismic deficiencies of buildings identified using the NEHRP Evaluation Handbook
methodology can be further analyzed to determine the seismic resistance. The deficiencies identified then can
be mitigated using accepted rehabilitation techniques described in this handbook or other sources of
rehabilitation information.

1.4 SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS

The rehabilitation techniques identified and described in this handbook are intended to be consistent with the
requirements for new construction prescribed in the 1988 Edition of the NEHRP Recommended Provisions for
the Development of Seismic Regulations for New Buildings (FEMA Publications 95, 96, and maps). The intent
of the rehabilitation is to provide life safety but not necessarily to upgrade the structure to meet modern
standards of life safety and property protection.
Given the great number of potential seismic strength problems and, solutions, it is not now possible to
prepare a compendium of all available techniques for all existing building types in all areas of the nation at risk
from earthquakes. In recognition of the broad variation in the details of design and construction used over the
years, the design professional will need to consider a wide array of possible techniques for rehabilitation, and
this handbook is intended to serve as an informational "point of departure."
This handbook is organized to permit a component-by-component consideration of deficiencies and
rehabilitation techniques. The reader, however, is cautioned against selecting specific rehabilitation techniques
without first identifying the overall deficiencies of the building and determining whether deficiencies are due to
a combination of component deficiencies, inherent adverse design and construction features, or a weak link.
Furthermore, a building's design and construction characteristics as well as the condition of materials of its
construction 'affect seismic performance. Therefore, in order to make an informed decision concerning
appropriate cost-effective techniques for seismic strengthening of an existing building, the engineer must
understand the structural system or combination of systems that resist the lateral loads; the advantages and
disadvantages associated with the physical attributes of the systems; and any constraints on the optimum
performance of the system due to adverse design or construction features or deteriorated materials.
It is hoped that experience with the application of this handbook and its companion document will generate
feedback that can serve as the foundation for the enhancement of future documents dealing with seismic
rehabilitation.

1.5 ORGANIZATION OF THIS HANDBOOK

Chapter 2 describes the physical attributes that affect the seismic performance of all structures. The general
characteristics of all structural materials and- systems (i.e., strength, stiffness, ductility, and damping) are
addressed as are design and construction features that may impair a building's seismic performance. Techniques
for strengthening vertical elements, diaphragms, foundations, and connections are addressed in Chapter 3.
Techniques for decreasing the demand on existing structures are addressed in Chapter 4. Chapters 5 and 6
present techniques to mitigate damage to nonstructural architectural and mechanical and electrical components,
respectively. Appendices include a listing of the seismic-force-resisting elements commonly found in 15 common
building types, a matrix summary of rehabilitation techniques, and examples of rehabilitation.
As indicated above, this handbook is structured to be used with the NEHRP Evaluation Handbook. Both
of these handbooks are organized to address the following building systems and components: vertical elements
resisting horizontal loads (i.e., moment-resisting frames, shear walls, and braced frames); horizontal elements
resisting lateral loads (i.e., diaphragms); foundations; and connections between subsystems. Table 1.5 shows the
relationship between the handbooks.

The American Iron and Steel Institute has written a minority opinion concerning this statement; see page
193.
3

TABLE 1i5

Correlation of Contents Between the Evaluation and Techniques Handbooks

NEHRP Handbook of Techniquesfor the SeismicRehabilitation
of ExistingBuildings

NEHRP Handbookfor the SeismicEvaluation of

Ewisng Buildngs

Chapter 2, Seismic Vulnerability of Buildings

Section 3.9, Adding a New Supplemental System
Chapter 4, Decreasing Demand on Existing System

Chapter 3, Building Systems

Section 3.1, Moment Resisting Systems

Chapter 4, Moment Resisting Systems

Section 3.2, Shear Walls

Chapter 5, Shear Walls

Section 3.3, Braced Frames

Chapter 6, Braced Frames

Section 3.5, Diaphragms

Chapter 7, Diaphragms

Section 3.7, Diaphragm to Vertical Element Connections

Section 3.8, Vertical Element to Foundation Connections

Chapter 8, Connections.

Section 3.6, Foundations

Chapter 9, Foundations and Geologic Site Hazards

Chapter 5, Rehabilitation of Nonstructural Architectural Components

Chapter 6, Rehabilitation of Nonstructural
Mechanical and Electrical Components

Chapter 10, Elements Not a Part of the

Lateral-Force-Resisting System

SEISMIC VULNERABILITY OF BUILDINGS

2.0 INTRODUCTION
This chapter describes the general characteristics of all structural materials and systems (i.e., strength, stiffness,
ductility, and damping) and the design and construction features that may adversely affect the seismic
performance of a structure. Since an informed decision regarding the most cost-effective techniques for
rehabilitating an existing structure to resist seismic forces requires an understanding of the structural system or
combination of systems that resist the lateral loads, the advantages or disadvantages associated with the physical
attributes of the systems and the constraints on system performance due to adverse design or construction
features, the emphasis here is on the complete structural system. Chapter 3 focuses on techniques to strengthen
the three principal lateral-force-resisting subsystems (vertical-resisting elements, diaphragms, and foundations)
and the connections between these subsystems. Chapter 4 identifies methods to rehabilitate structures by
reducing demand.

2.1 GENERAL AYIRIBUTES OF STRUCTURES

Strength, stiffness, ductility, and damping govern the dynamic response of a structure to ground motion. An ideal
structure would rate highly with respect to all of these attributes; however, this is seldom the case even in new
construction and may be impossible to achieve when strengthening an existing structure. Fortunately, these
attributes are interrelated, and it is usually possible to compensate for a deficiency in one by enhancing one or
more of the others (e.g., additional strength and stiffness may compensate for low ductility and damping, a
subject discussed in Chapter 4).

2.1.1 STRENGTH

The most obvious, although not necessarily the most important, consideration in seismic rehabilitation is strength.
A seismically weak structure can be rehabilitated by strengthening existing members or by adding new members
that increase the overall strength of the structure. Many of the rehabilitation techniques presented in this
handbook are aimed at increasing strength, and informed identification of the building elements that should be
strengthened can lead to significant cost savings in an upgrading scheme.

2.1.2 STIFFNESS

As indicated by the base shear formula in the 1988 NEHRP Recommended Provisions, structural stiffening that
reduces the fundamental period of the building may result in higher seismic forces to be resisted by the building.
Nonetheless, additional stiffening generally will reduce the potential for seismic damage. Drift limitations
specified by most building codes are intended to provide for minimum structural stiffness.
Transfer of loads among the elements of a structure depends on the relative stiffness of those elements. To
select the most appropriate technique for seismically rehabilitating a structure, it is important to evaluate the
stiffness of both the existing elements and those to be added to ensure that the seismic load path is not altered
in a way that creates new problems. To contribute effectively, an added element must be stiff enough relative
to the existing lateral-force-resisting elements to attract sufficient load away from the existing system. The
location of an added member and, therefore, the added stiffness it contributes also is important. The engineer

should attempt to locate new elements in such a way as to minimize eccentricities in the building and limit
torsional responses.

2.1.3 DUCTILITY
The ductility of a structure or element (i.e., the ability of the structure or element to dissipate energy inelastically
when displaced beyond its elastic limit without a significant loss in load carrying capacity) is an extremely
important consideration in seismic rehabilitation. The structural properties of some materials have a post-elastic
behavior that fits the classic definition of ductility (i.e., they have a near-plastic yield zone and this behavior is
reasonably maintained under cyclic loading). Other materials such as reinforced concrete and masonry, nailed
wood systems, braced frames, and floor diaphragms have stiffness degradation and may even exhibit a pinched
load-displacement relationship when subjected to cyclic loading. The hysteretic damping of these materials may
not increase as is common for the elastic-plastic behavior but the stiffness degradation has a beneficial influence
similar to an increase in damping in that the base shear of the system is reduced. However, the interstory and
total relative displacement of the stiffness degrading structure or element is significantly increased. Control of
relative displacement of this class of structure or element is of prime importance.

2.1A DAMPING
During an earthquake, a structure will amplify the base ground motion. The ground motion at the base includes
the amplification caused by soil profile type through the inclusion of a soil profile coefficient in the base shear
formula. The degree of structural amplification of the ground motion at the base of the building is limited by
structural damping or the ability of the structural system to dissipate the energy of the earthquake groundshaking. The differences in the response modification coefficient (R) and the deflection amplification factor (Cd)
of Table 3-2 of the 1988 NEHRP Recommended Provisions are partially due to an estimation of probable
structural damping of greater than 5 percent of critical.

2.2 ADVERSE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION FEATURES

A number of design and construction features have an adverse impact on structural response by precluding the
effective development of the capacity of the various structural components.

2.2.1 LACK OF DIRECT LOAD PATH

An adequate load path is the most essential requirement for seismic resistance in a building. There must be a
lateral-force-resisting system that forms a direct load path between the foundation, the vertical elements, and
all diaphragm levels and that ties all portions of the building together. The load path must be complete and
sufficiently strong. The general path is as follows:
*

Earthquake inertia forces, which originate in all elements of a building, are delivered through structural
connections to horizontal diaphragms;
The diaphragms distribute these forces to vertical components of the lateral-force-resisting system such as
shear walls and frames;

The vertical elements transfer the forces into the foundation; and

The foundation transfers the forces into the ground.

The load path therefore consists of elements within and between the following subsystems: vertical-resisting
elements, diaphragms, and foundations.

2.2.2 IRREGULARITIES
Most building codes prescribe seismic design forces that are only a fraction of the forces that would be imposed
on a linearly elastic structure by a severe earthquake. These codes therefore imply that the inelastic response
of the designed structures is required to fulfill the primary performance objective (i.e., preserve life safety by
precluding structural collapse). The equivalent static lateral loads and design coefficients prescribed by the codes
are necessarily imperfect approximations of the nonlinear dynamic response of code-designed regular structures.
Vertical and plan irregularities can result in loads and deformations significantly different from those assumed
by the equivalent static procedures. It is most important for the engineer to understand that severe irregularities
can create uncertainties in the ability of the structure to meet the stated performance objectives. Irregular
conditions exist, to some degree, in most buildings. Minor irregularities have little or no detrimental XffccLoa
structural response. Guidelines for the evaluation of the significance of the vertical and horizontal or plan
irregularities are provided in the NEHRP Evaluation Handbook). If a significant irregular condition cannot be
avoided or eliminated by design changes, the designer should both comply with any special provisions prescribed
by the code and consider the ability of the structure to avoid collapse when subjected to relative displacements
that may be several times greater than the anticipated nonlinear displacements.

2.2.2.1 Vertical Irregularities

The vertical irregularities that may adversely affect a building's seismic resistance are discussed briefly below.
Stiffness irregularity results when one or more stories are significantly softer (i.e., will be subject to larger
deformations) than the stories directly above.
Weight or mass irregularity occurs when the effective mass (i.e., weight divided by the acceleration due to
gravity) of any story is substantially greater than the effective mass of an adjacent story.
Verticalgeometric irregularityresults from building setbacks or elevational discontinuities (i.e., when the upper
portions of a building are reduced in plan area with respect to the lower portions).
Vertical discontinuity in capacity occurs when the story strength in a story is significantly less than that in the
story above. The story strength is defined as the total strength of all the seismic-resisting elements sharing the
story shear for the direction under consideration.
Vertical discontinuity in load path is a condition where the elements resisting lateral forces (i.e., moment
frames, shear walls, or braced frames) are not continuous from one floor to the next. Figure 2.2.2.1 shows two
common examples. The upper sketch shows an "out-of-plane" vertical discontinuity that causes the vertical load
path to be discontinuous. In the upper sketch, the shear walls of the second and third stories are exterior shear
walls while the shear walls in the first floor are interior walls. The seismic forces from the top two stories must
be transferred through the second floor diaphragm and then into the first floor shear wall. The discontinuity
results in very high forces on the diaphragm. The lower sketch in Figure 2.2.2.1 is an example of an in-plane
discontinuity with a potential for overturning forces in excess of the capacity of the column.
The usual deficiency in the diaphragm is inadequate shear capacity. Unlike typical floor diaphragms that
need only transfer tributary seismic floor shears, the diaphragm at the base of a discontinuous shear wall must
transfer the cumulative seismic shears in the shear wall from all of the levels above the discontinuity. A typical
cause of distress in concrete columns at the ends of discontinuous shear walls is inadequate capacity to resist the
overturning loads from the discontinuous wall above. For many years, seismic provisions in building codes have
prescribed factored design loads for shear walls that were in excess of those required for columns. Thus, in a
severe earthquake, the discontinuous shear wall was capable of generating overturning forces in excess of the
capacity of the supporting columns. During the 1979 Imperial County Earthquake in California, the 6-story
County Services Building was irreparably damaged when a number of the first story columns under discontinuous
shear walls collapsed due to excessive overturning forces. As a result of that earthquake, current code provisions
discourage vertical discontinuities and require special strengthening of columns if the discontinuities cannot be
avoided.

2.2.2.2 Rehabilitation Techniques for

Vertical Irregularities
The obvious remedial technique for any
irregularity is to modify the existing
structural elements or add new structural elements to eliminate or significantly
reduce the irregularity. The engineer
must take special care to avoid creating
greater or new problems in the existing
elements. For example, if vertical bracing is used to increase the strength of a
weak story, it is important to determine
the effect that this modification will have
on the story stiffness (i.e., whether it will
out-of-plane
discontinuity
shear walls

create a soft story condition in the

stories below), whether it will create
significant torsional eccentricity (see Sec.
2.2.2.3), and/or whether the load path in
the diaphragms above and below will be
adequate for the revised distribution and
transfer of the shear forces. If a new
shear

wall is added

in a shear

wall

building to increase story strength or

stiffness, the same concerns must be
investigated. Extending the new shear
wall to the foundation level is one way
to avoid the vertical discontinuity. Vertical supports below the wall also should
be investigated to determine their capacity to resist realistic overturning forces.
It may not be feasible to eliminate
or reduce some weight or mass irregularities (e.g., a heavy boiler extending
in-plane
through several stories of an industrial
discontinuity
building) or elevational irregularities
FIGURE 2.22.1 Vertical irregularities--examples of in-plane and (e.g., building setbacks). If the irregularity cannot be eliminated or sigout-of-plane discontinuities.
nificantly reduced, a dynamic analysis
that will better represent the structural response may be required to identify the appropriate location for needed
strengthening and its extent.
A common technique for improving the seismic performance of structures with vertical discontinuities in load
path is to strengthen the columns below the discontinuity (with methods such as those discussed in Chapter 3)
so that they can resist the vertical forces that can be imposed by overturning moments of the above walls. The
diaphragm spanning between the discontinuous vertical-resisting elements also may require strengthening.
Alternatively, the discontinuity can be eliminated of new vertical-resisting elements are built directly below the
existing vertical-resisting elements; however, the effect the new members will have on the functional space of the
building must be evaluated.

2.2.23 Horizontal or Plan Irregularities

Plan structural irregularities in buildings that may adversely affect a building's seismic resistance are discussed
briefly below.

Torsional irregularity occurs in buildings with rigid diaphragms when the center of mass in any story is
eccentric with respect to the center of rigidity of the vertical lateral-load-resisting elements. Nominal eccentricity,
or torsion, is common in most buildings and many building codes require that an accidental eccentricity (usually
prescribed as 5 percent of the maximum plan dimension) be added to the actual computed eccentricity to determine the torsional forces. An exception occurs when a floor or roof diaphragm is relatively flexible with respect
to the vertical lateral-load-resisting elements (e.g., a nailed wood diaphragm in a building with concrete or
masonry shear walls). In this case, the vertical elements are assumed to resist only tributary seismic loads. Note
that by making this assumption the effects of torsion may be neglected. In some cases (e.g., steel floor or roof
decking in a building with steel moment frames), the relative rigidity of the diaphragm may be difficult to assess
and the designer may elect to distribute the seismic loads on the basis of a rigid diaphragm and by tributary area
and then to use the more conservative results from the two methods.
Re-entrant corners in the plan configuration of an existing structure (and its lateral-force-resisting system)
create excessive shear stresses at the corner.
Diaphragm discontinuity occurs when a diaphragm has abrupt discontinuities or variations in stiffness. A
common diaphragm discontinuity is split level floors. Unless proper members exist either to transfer the
diaphragm forces between the split levels or to independently transfer the forces via vertical members to the
foundation, damage is likely to occur at the interface. This condition also exists when diaphragms have large
cutout or open areas or substantial changes in effective diaphragm stiffness from one story to the next.
Nonparallel systems is the condition that occurs when the vertical lateral-force-resisting elements are not
parallel to or symmetric about the major orthogonal axes of the lateral-force-resisting system.

2.2.2.4 Rehabilitation Techniques for Horizontal Irregularities

The seismic rehabilitation of a structure with a large eccentricity, due either to the distribution of the verticalresisting elements or the distribution of the mass in the building, is best accomplished by reducing the eccentricity. Locating stiff resisting elements that reduce the eccentricity (Figure 2.2.2.4a) reduces the forces and
stresses due to torsion and increases the lateral-force-resisting capacity of the entire structure. The seismic
deformations of the entire structure also are significantly reduced by strategically locating the new walls to
minimize torsion. The most direct rehabilitation technique for excessive shear stresses at a re-entrant corner
is to provide drag struts to distribute the local concentrated forces into the diaphragm (Figure 2.2.2.4b). Other
alternatives include strengthening the diaphragm with overlays and reducing the loads on the diaphragm by
providing additional vertical-resisting elements.
Diaphragm discontinuities due to abrupt changes in stiffness can be improved by developing a gradual
transition through selective stiffening of the diaphragm segments adjacent to the stiff elements. Stress
concentrations in the diaphragm at the corners of large openings can be reduced by providing collector members
or drag struts to distribute the forces into the diaphragm.
Improving deficient conditions caused by diaphragm discontinuities (such as may be present in split level
framing) can be accomplished by providing an adequate load path for the lateral forces. Figure 2.2.2.4c
illustrates strengthening techniques for a split level floor diaphragm in typical residential construction. The figure
shows two existing diaphragms at an interior cripple stud wall. The deficiency is the lack of a direct force path
for diaphragm shears normal to the plane of the figure. The new construction provides vertical sheathing, blocking, and appropriate nailing to transfer the shears from both diaphragms to the foundation. For additional
information and connection details for addressing split level conditions in wood frame construction see The Home
Builder's Guide for Earthquake Design by (Shapiro, Okino, Hom and Associates, 1980).
Structures with nonparallel systems can be strengthened by ensuring that there is an adequate load path for
the various force components resulting from the transfer of shears from the diaphragm to the vertical
lateral-load-resisting systems. A structure with a nonparallel system is shown in Figure 2.2.2.4d. Providing a drag
strut at the corner as indicated will distribute into the diaphragm the out-of-plane force component at the
intersection of the two shear walls.

stiff resisting
elements

(E) center of rigidity

(N) center of rigidity

zJ)

existing eccentric
building
(stiff diaphragm)

add new stiff

element to reduce
eccentricity

(E) center of rigidit y

(N) center of rigidity

existing eccentric
building
(stiff diaphragm)

stiff resisting
elements
FIGURE 22.2.4a Horizontal or plan irregularities--rehabilitating
structure to reduce torsional loads.

10

(E) stiff resisting

elements
, (N) drag strut

(N) seismic joint and

shear resisting elements

(N) drag strut

-1

A
.I

FIGURE 2.2.2.4b Horizontal or plan irregularities--rehabilitating

entrant corners.

11

buildings with re-

(E) floor joists

and sheathing

(N) nailing

as required
N, N

(E) blocking

(N)

and

(N)

cripple stud wall

(E)

(N) foundation bolts

in drilled and grouted
holes

(E) continuous
wall footing

FIGURE 2.2.2.4c Horizontal or plan irregularities-example of strengthening

a split level diaphragm.

wall motion

(N) drag strut

FIGURE 2.2.2.4d Horizontal or plan irregularities--rehabilitating

with nonparallel systems.

12

building.

222.5

Reduction of Irregularities and Re-Analysis

The irregularities discussed above will affect the dynamic response of a structure to seismic ground motion and
may invalidate the approximation made in the code-prescribed equivalent static lateral force analysis. The
NEHRP Evaluation Handbook presents thresholds at which these effects may be considered significant but they
are necessarily subjective and should be used with judgment, particularly when a structure has more than one
of the above irregularities. Although a linear elastic dynamic analysis will help to identify the location and extent
of the irregular responses, any analysis is subject to the validity of the model and, for an existing structure, there
may be many uncertainties in the modeling assumptions. Also, as indicated above, the uncertainties associated
with the extrapolation of results of linear elastic analyses to obtain estimates of nonlinear response increase
greatly when the structure is highly irregular or asymmetrical. For these reasons, structural modifications
associated with seismic upgrading of an irregular building should aim primarily to eliminate or significantly
reduce the irregularity. The illustration in the lower portion of Figure 2.2.2.4b is an example of an irregular
building divided into two separate, regular structures by providing a seismic separation joint. This concept
requires careful structural and architectural detailing at the separation joint and may not be cost-effective as a
retrofit measure except in cases where extensive alterations are planned for other reasons (e.g., an industrial
structure being converted to light commercial or residential use).
Although the structural modifications described above to eliminate or reduce irregularities are intended to
improve a structure's dynamic response and to increase its capacity to resist seismic forces, in some cases the
modifications may shorten the building's period thereby increasing the seismic demand on the structure. For
this reason, and also to evaluate the redistribution effects of any significant modifications, it is recommended a
re-analysis be performed to identify the need for any additional modifications.

2.23 LACK OF REDUNDANCY

223.1

The Problem

Structures that feature multiple load paths are said to be redundant. Loads producing temporary seismic
overstress of individual members or connections in a redundant structure may be redistributed to alternate load
paths with the capacity to resist these seismic loads. The seismic capacity of structures that lack redundancy is
dependent on adequate nonlinear behavior of the lateral-load-resisting elements. Engineering judgment should
be used to ascertain the need for redundancy.

22.232 Rehabilitation Techniques for Lack of Redundancy

Rehabilitation techniques that enhance redundancy generally involve the addition of new lateral-load-resisting
elements or new systems to supplement existing weak or brittle systems. For example, the addition of new steel
braced frames or reinforced concrete shear walls in an existing concrete frame building will provide redundancy
to the existing system. The relative rigidity of the new systems probably will dictate that little or none of the
design lateral loads be resisted by the existing concrete frame, but if the new braced frames or shear walls are
properly designed for ductile behavior as they yield in a severe earthquake, the lateral loads will be redistributed
to take advantage of the capacity of the existing concrete frames. This example illustrates that ductility and an
adequate load path are essential to the redistribution of loads in redundant systems.

2.2.4 LACK OF TOUGHNESS

2.2.4.1 The Problem

Toughness is defined here as the ability of a structure to maintain its integrity and preclude collapse during a
severe earthquake that may cause significant structural damage.

13

2.2.42 Rehabilitation Techniques for Lack of Toughness

Existing connection details and those for new structural modifications should be evaluated for toughness.
Although Chapter 3 identifies some techniques for strengthening connection deficiencies, the engineer must
further evaluate these connections in terms of their performance under extreme structural loads and
deformations. Codes may prescribe that some precautions be taken (e.g., oversizing connection requirements
to avoid premature failure of bracing members and evaluating the deformation compatibility of vertical loadresisting members that are not part of the tateral-load-resisting system); however, other considerations (e.g.,
avoiding weld configurations that could lead to prying action or other stress concentrations) require engineering
judgment. For some structural systems (e.g., steel moment frames), providing additional strength in the
connections will increase the toughness of the system; however, in other systems (e.g., concrete moment frames),
lack of toughness may require displacement control through the addition of stiffer elements or supplemental
damping to protect the existing system.

2.2.5 ADJACENT BUILDINGS

2.2.5.1 The Problem
When the gap between buildings is insufficient to accommodate the combined seismic deformations of the
buildings, both may be vulnerable to structural damage from the "pounding" action that results when the two
collide. This condition is particularly severe when the floor levels of the two buildings do not match and the stiff
floor framing of one building impacts on the more fragile walls or columns of the adjacent building.
2.2.5.2 Rehabilitation Techniques for Potential Impact from Adjacent Buildings
Since the gap between two buildings usually cannot be increased, increasing the stiffness of one or both buildings
may reduce the seismic deformations to the point where impact is precluded with the existing gap. This
technique, however, may not be feasible for stiff shear wall buildings of concrete or masonry and, for those cases,
consideration should be given to providing alternative load paths for the vertical load-resisting members (i.e.,
bearing walls or columns) that may be damaged or destroyed by the impact. These alternative load paths would
include supplementary columns or vertical shoring to support the floor or roof systems. These supplementary
supports would be installed at sufficient distance from the vulnerable exterior walls or columns to be protected
when the existing elements are damaged.

2.3 DETERIORATED CONDITION OF STRUCTURAL MATERIALS

23.1 THE PROBLEM
Structural materials that are damaged or seriously deteriorated may have an adverse effect on the seismic
performance of an existing building during a severe earthquake. The significance of the damage or deterioration
must be evaluated with respect to both the existing condition and the proposed seismic strengthening of the
building.

23.1.1 Timber
Common problems with timber members that require rehabilitation include termite attack, fungus ("dry rot" or
"damp rot"), warping, splitting, checking due to shrinkage, strength degradation of fire-retardant plywood in areas
where high temperatures exist, or other causes.

14

23.1.2 Unreinforced Masonry

The weakest element in older masonry usually is the mortar joint, particularly if significant amounts of lime were
used in the mortar and the lime was subsequently leached out by exposure to the weather. Thus, cracks in
masonry walls caused by differential settlement of the foundations or other causes generally will occur in the
joints; however, well-bonded masonry occasionally will crack through the masonry unit.

23.13

Unreinforced Concrete

Unreinforced concrete may be subject to cracking, spalling, and disintegration. Cracking may be
drying shrinkage during the curing of the concrete or differential settlement of the foundations.
caused by exposure to extreme temperatures or the reactive aggregates used in some
Disintegration or raveling of the concrete usually is caused by dirty or contaminated aggregates,
cement, or contaminated water (e.g., water with a high salt or mineral content).

due to excessive
Spalling can be
western states.
old or defective

23.1A Reinforced Concrete or Masonry

Reinforced concrete and masonry are subject to the same types of deterioration and damage as unreinforced
concrete and masonry. In addition, poor or cracked concrete or masonry may allow moisture and oxygen to
penetrate to the steel reinforcement and initiate corrosion. The expansive nature of the corrosion byproducts
can fracture the concrete or masonry and extend and accelerate the corrosion process.

23.1.5 Structural Steel

Poorly designed structural steel members may trap moisture from rainfall or condensation under conditions that
promote corrosion and subsequent loss of section for the steel member. Even well-designed steel members
exposed to a moist environment require periodic maintenance (i.e., painting or other corrosion protection) to
maintain their effective load-bearing capacity. Light structural steel members (e.g., small columns or bracing
members) in some installations may be subject to damage from heavy equipment or vehicles. While such
damage may have no apparent detrimental effect on the vertical-load-resisting capacity of the steel member, its
reserve capacity for resisting seismic forces may be seriously impaired.

23.2
REHABILITATION TECHNIQUES
MATERIALS

FOR DETERIORATED CONDITION OF STRUCTURAL

Structural materials that exhibit evidence of damage or deterioration require careful evaluation. Even if affected
structural elements are to be rehabilitated or replaced, it is important that the factors contributing to the damage
or deterioration be eliminated or minimized. For example, vulnerable steel framing can be protected from heavy
equipment or vehicles by concrete curbs or concrete encasement, poorly drained steel members and connections
can be modified or replaced so as to provide positive drainage, and steel framing in moist environments can be
painted or covered with other corrosion-resistant coatings.
If the deterioration is not severe and the apparent causes have been mitigated, the engineer may decide to
assign a reduced capacity to the structural member and to perform a revised evaluation of the need for
rehabilitation and/or strengthening.

15

SEISMIC STRENGTHENING
OF EXISTING BUILDINGS

3.0 INTRODUCTION
The life-safety hazard posed a building found to be vulnerable to earthquake ground motion can be mitigated
in several ways: the building can be condemned and demolished or strengthened or otherwise modified to
increase its capacity or the seismic demand on the building can be reduced. Structural rehabilitation or
strengthening of a building can be accomplished in a variety of ways, each with specific merits and limitations
related to the unique characteristics of the building.
This chapter focuses on the structural considerations of seismic strengthening or upgrading; however, it must
be remembered that other factors may influence or even dictate which technique is most appropriate for an
individual building. Recommendations for enhancing the seismic resistance of existing structures by eliminating
or reducing the adverse effects of design or construction features were presented in Chapter 2. Cost, function,
aesthetic, and seismic zone considerations that also influence the selection of a strengthening technique are
reviewed briefly below and are elaborated on in the remaining sections if this chapter. It should be noted,
however, that seismic strengthening may trigger application of other building rehabilitation requirements such
as those related to handicap access, asbestos, fire sprinklers, fire resistance, and egress.

3.0.1 COST CONSIDERATIONS

Cost is very important and often may be the only criterion applied when choosing among equivalent strengthening options. When using relative costs to evaluate two or more feasible strengthening or rehabilitation
alternatives, it is important to consider all applicable costs. For example, an existing steel frame building, with
steel floor and roof decking and vertical bracing in the exterior walls may have inadequate seismic shear capacity
in the diaphragms and vertical bracing. Although it may be feasible to increase the capacity of the existing
diaphragms and the bracing, it may be more cost-effective to add bracing to the interior frames to reduce the
diaphragm shears to an allowable level. If additional bracing can be installed without additional foundations and
without adverse effects on the functional use of the building, it may be significantly more economical than any
of the diaphragm strengthening techniques.

3.0.2 FUNCTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

Most buildings are intended to serve one or more functional purposes (e.g., to provide housing or to enclose a
commercial or industrial activity). Since the functional requirements are essential to the effective use of the
building, extreme care must be exercised in the planning and design of structural modifications, to ensure that
the modifications will not seriously impair the functional use. For example, if new shear walls or vertical
concentrically braced frames are required, they must be located to minimize any adverse effect on access, egress,
or functional circulation within the building. When considering alternative structural modifications for an existing
building with an ongoing function, the degree to which construction of the proposed alternative will disrupt that
function also must be considered in assessing cost-effectiveness.

17

3.0.3 AESTHETIC CONSIDERATIONS

In some cases, the preservation of aesthetic features can significantly influence the selection of a strengthening
technique. Historical buildings, for example, may require inconspicuous strengthening designed to preserve
historical structural or nonstructural features. Other buildings may have attractive or architecturally significant
facades, entrances, fenestration, or ornamentation that require preservation.
A decrease in natural light caused by the filling in of window or skylight openings or the installation of
bracing in front of these openings may have an adverse effect on the occupants of the building. Also, the need
for preservation of existing architectural features may dictate the location and configuration of the new bracing
system. In many such cases, the engineer may not be able to assign an appropriate value to these subjective
considerations; however, any additional costs involved in preserving aesthetic features can be identified so that
the building owner can make an informed decision.

3.0A SEISMIC RISK

The NEHRP Recommended Provisions contains seismic zonation maps that divide the United States into seven
seismic zones ranging from effective seismic accelerations of 0.05g to 0.40g. Seismic strengthening may be
required for older structures built before the advent of seismic codes or built under less stringent requirements
(i.e., seismic force levels in most codes have escalated and the seismic zoning in many areas has been revised
upward). However, since these structures were designed for and have been tested over time by vertical loads
and wind forces, it is safe to assume that they have some inherent capacity for resisting seismic forces.*
Obviously, older existing structures located in a lower seismic zone have a higher probability of requiring little
or no strengthening than do similar structures in a higher zone. Further, some strengthening techniques for
existing structures with moderate seismic deficiencies in the lower seismic zones are not appropriate for use in
higher zones.
In lower seismic zones it sometimes can be demonstrated that a building does not require seismic
strengthening because it can resist wind loads in excess of the code-prescribed seismic forces. For other
buildings in low seismicity zones, more detailed structural evaluations may be warranted if there is a probability
that the seismic adequacy of the structure can be demonstrated.

3.1 VERTICAL-RESISTING ELEMENTS--MOMENT RESISTING SYSTEMS*

Moment resisting systems are vertical elements that resist lateral loads primarily through flexure. There are four
principal types of moment resisting systems: steel moment frames, concrete moment frames, precast concrete
moment frames; and moment frames with infill walls.

3.1.1 STEEL MOMENT FRAMES

3.1.1.1

Deficiencies

The principal seismic deficiencies in steel moment frames are:

Inadequate moment/shear capacity of beams, columns, or their connections;

Inadequate beam/column panel zone capacity; and

Excessive drift.

The American Iron and Steel Institute has written a minority opinion concerning the footnoted sentence
in Sec. 3.0.4 and the organization of Sec. 3.1 and the American Institute of Steel Construction has written a
minority opinion concerning the first sentence in Sec. 3.1.1.1; see page 193.
18

3.1.12 Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Moment/Shear Capacity of Beams, Columns, or Their
Connections
Techniques. Deficient moment/shear capacity of the beams, columns, or the connections of steel moment frames
can be improved by:
1.

Increasing the moment capacity of the members and connections by adding cover plates or other steel
sections to the flanges (Figure 3.1.1.2a) or by boxing members (Figure 3.1.1.2b).

2.

Increasing the moment/shear capacity of the members and connections by providing steel gusset plates or
knee braces.

3.

Reducing the stresses in the existing frames by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e.,
additional moment frames, braces, or shear walls) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

4.

Providing lateral bracing of unsupported flanges to increase capacity limited by tendency for lateral/torsional
buckling.

5.

Encasing the columns in concrete.

Relative Merits. If the existing steel frame members are inaccessible (e.g., they are covered with architectural
cladding), Techniques 1 and 2 usually are not cost-effective. The majority of the columns, beams, and connections would need to be exposed; significant reinforcement of the connections and members would be required,
and the architectural cladding would have to be repaired. Reducing the moment stresses by providing
supplemental resisting elements
(Technique 3) usually will be
the most cost-effective approach. Providing additional
moment frames (e.g., in a
building with moment frames
//
only at the perimeter, selected
interior frames can be modified
to become moment frames as
indicated in Figure 3.1.1.2a)
reduces stresses on the existing
moment frames.
Providing
supplemental bracing or shear
walls also can reduce frame
stresses.
Concentric frames
and bracing may pose relative
rigidity problems where a rigid
diaphragm is present. Shear
(E) bolted
walls have the additional disadconnection

vantage of requiring additions

to or modifications of the existing foundations. The addition
of eccentric bracing may be an
efficient and cost-effective technique to increase the lateral
load capacity of the deficient
frame provided existing beam
sizes are appropriate. In addition to being compatible with
the rigidity of the moment

\l\

N
cover plate
\

N
(N) stiffener

plate

FIGURE 3.1.1.2a Modification of an existing simple beam to a moment

connection.

19

frames, eccentric bracing has the advantage of being more adaptable than concentric bracing or shear walls in
avoiding the obstruction of existing door and window openings.
If architectural cladding is not a concern, reinforcement of existing members (Technique 1) may be practical.
The addition of cover plates to beam flanges (Figure 3.1.1.2a) can increase the moment capacity of the existing
connection, and the capacity of columns can be increased by boxing (Figure 3.1.1.2b). Since the capacity of a
column is determined by the interaction of axial plus bending stresses, the addition of box plates increases the
axial capacity, thus permitting the column a greater bending capacity. Cover or box plates also may increase the
moment capacity of the columns at the base and thereby require that the foundation capacity also be increased.
Increasing the moment capacity
of columns with cover plates at
the beam/column connection
usually is not feasible because
of the interference of the connecting beams. The addition of
flanged gussets to form haunches below and/or above the
beam or the use of knee braces
(Technique 2) may be effective
for increasing the moment
capacity of a deficient moment
frame. The effects of the haunches or knee braces will require
(N) cover plate
a re-analysis of the frame and
the designer must investigate
(E) column
the stresses and the need for
lateral bracing at the interface
between the gusset or brace
and the beam or column.
In many cases, it may not
be feasible to increase the capacity of existing beams by
providing cover plates on the
top flange because of interference with the floor beams,
slabs, or metal decking. (Note
that for a bare steel beam, a
cover plate on only the lower
flange may not significantly
reduce the stress in the upper
flange.) However, if an existing
concrete slab is adequately
reinforced and detailed for
composite action at the end of
FIGURE 3.1.1.2b Strengthening an existing column.
the beam, it may be economiflanges at each end of the
on
the
lower
plates
cover
providing
by
capacity
cally feasible to increase the moment
in section modulus
change
an
abrupt
to
avoid
3.1.1.2c
Figure
in
as
shown
be
tapered
should
beam. Cover plates
beyond the point where the additional section modulus is required. Where composite action is not an alternative,
increasing the top flange thickness can be achieved by adding tapered plates to the sides of the top flange and
butt-welding these plates to the beam and column flanges.
In some cases the capacity of steel beams in rigid frames may be governed by lateral stability considerations.
Although the upper flange may be supported for positive moments by the floor or roof system, the lower flange
must be checked for compression stability in regions of negative moments. If required, the necessary lateral
support may be provided by diagonal braces to the floor system.
(N) weld

20

Encasing the columns in concrete (Technique 5) can increase column shear capacity in addition to increasing
stiffness. This alternative may be cost-effective when both excessive drift and inadequate column shear capacity
need to be addressed.

(E) continuous steel

reinforcement
across column

(N) cover plate,

welded to existing
beam above

FIGURE 3.1.1.2c Strengthening an existing beam.

3.1.1.3 Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Panel Zone Capacity

Techniques. Beam/column panel zones can be overstressed due to seismic forces if the tensile capacity in the
column web opposite the beam flange connection is inadequate (i.e., tearing of the column web), if the stiffness
of the column flange where beam flange or moment plate weld occurs is inadequate (i.e., lateral bowing of the
column flange), if the capacity for compressive forces in the column web is inadequate (i.e., web crippling or
buckling of the column web opposite the compression flange of the connecting beam), or if there is inadequate
shear capacity in the column flange (i.e., shear yielding or buckling of the column web). Deficient panel zones
can be improved by.
1.

Providing welded continuity plates between the column flanges.

2.

Providing stiffener plates welded to the column flanges and web.

3.

Providing web doubler plates at the column web.

4.

Reducing the stresses in the panel zone by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., additional
moment frames, braces, or shear walls) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

21

Relative Ments. Technique 2 (i.e., adding stiffener plates to the panel zone) usually is the most cost-effective
alternative. It should be noted that this technique corrects three of the four deficiencies identified above. Also,
by confining the column web in the panel zone, shear buckling is precluded and shear yielding in the confined
zone may be beneficial by providing supplemental damping. The cost for removal and replacement of existing
architectural cladding and fireproofing associated with these alternatives needs to be considered in assessing costeffectiveness.

3.1.1.4 Techniques for Reducing Drift

Techniques. Drift of steel moment frames can be reduced by1.

Increasing the capacity and, hence, the stiffness of the existing moment frame by cover plates or boxing.

2.

Increasing the stiffness of the beams and columns at their connections by providing steel gusset plates to
form haunches.

3.

Reducing the drift by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., additional moment frames,
braces, or shear walls) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

4.

Increasing the stiffness by encasing columns in reinforced concrete.

5.

Reducing the drift by adding supplemental damping as discussed in Sec. 4.

Relative Merits. Excessive drift generally is a concern in the control of seismic damage; however, for steel frames,
there also may be cause for concern regarding overall frame stability. If the concern is excessive drift and not
frame capacity, the most cost-effective alternative typically is increasing the rigidity of the frame by the addition
of bracing or shear walls. However, increasing the rigidity of the frame also may increase the demand load by
lowering the fundamental period of vibration of the structure, and this potential adverse effect must be assessed.
Providing steel gusset plates (Technique 2) to increase stiffness and reduce drift may be cost-effective in
some cases. This technique however, must be used with caution since new members may increase column
bending stresses and increase the chance for a nonductile failure. Thus, column and beam stresses must be
checked where beams and columns interface with gussets and column stability under a lateral displacement
associated with the design earthquake should be verified.
Increasing the stiffness of steel columns by encasement in concrete (Technique 4) may be an alternative for
reducing drift in certain cases. The principal contributing element to excessive story drift typically is beam
flexibility-,hence, column concrete encasement will be only partially effective and is therefore only cost-effective
when a building has relatively stiff beams and flexible columns.
Reducing drift by adding supplemental damping is an alternative that is now being considered in some
seismic rehabilitation projects. Typically, bracing elements need to be installed in the moment frame so that
discrete dampers can be located between the flexible moment frame elements and the stiff bracing elements.
This alternative is further discussed in Sec. 4.3.2.

3.1.2 CONCRETE MOMENT FRAMES

3.1.2.1

Deficiency

The principal deficiency in concrete moment frames is inadequate ductile bending or shear capacity in the beams
or columns and lack of confinement, frequently in the joints.

22

3.1.2.2 Strengthening Techniques for Deficiency in Concrete Moment Frames

Techniques. Deficient bending and shear capacity of concrete moment frames can be improved by.
1.

Increasing the ductility and capacity by jacketing the beam and column joints or increasing the beam or
column capacities (Figures 3.1.2.2a and 3.1.2.2b).

2.

Reducing the seismic stresses in the existing frames by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements
(i.e., additional moment frames, braces, or shear walls) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

3.

Changing the system to a shear wall system by infilling the reinforced concrete frames with reinforced
concrete (Figure 3.1.2.2c).

Relative Merits. Improving the

ductility and strength of con-

crete

frames by jacketing

(N) reinforcement
and concrete

(Technique 1) generally is not

cost-effective because of the
difficulty associated with providing the necessary confinement
and shear reinforcement in the
beams, columns, and beam-column connection zones. When
deficiencies are identified in
these frames, it will probably be
more cost-effective to consider

adding reinforced concrete

shear walls (Technique 2) or
filling in the frames with reinforced concrete (Technique 3).
Either of these alternatives will
tend to make the frames ineffective for lateral loads. This is
because the greater rigidity of
the walls will increase the per(E) concrete beam
centage of the lateral load to be
longitudinal
resisted by the walls, (i.e., later- .
nt.
(Nfore
al forces will be attracted away
reinforcement
from the relatively flexible
(N) tie
moment frames and into the
reinforcement
more rigid walls). This is especially true for buildings with /
(N) concrete
rigid diaphragms. These alter(E) concrete slab
natives also typically will require upgrading of the foundations, which may be costly. The FIGURE 3-122a Encasing an existing beam in concrete.
decision regarding whether the
new walls should be in the interior of the building or at its perimeter or exterior buttresses usually will depend
on nonstructural considerations such as aesthetics and disruption or obstruction of the functional use of the
building.

23

(N) concrete
(N) ties

(E) concrete cover

removed
(E) column
(N) longitudinal

reinforcements
Figure 3.12.2b Strengthening an existing concrete column.

24

FIGURE 3.1.22b contlnued.

25

IIf

'A-

reinforcementI~~
~~~~~(N)
(N) footing tied to

1_ (I141'

existing

footings

I 11

-F!

FIGURE 3.1.2.2c Strengthening an existing concrete frame building

with a reinforced concrete shear wall.

3.13 MOMENT FRAMES WITH INFILLS

3.13.1 Deficiencies
When reinforced concrete or steel moment frames are completely infilled, the frame action may be inhibited by
the rigidity of the infill wall. Rigid infill walls (e.g., reinforced concrete, reinforced masonry, or clay tile) will
resist lateral forces predominantly as shear walls and the frames will be relatively ineffective. Reinforced
concrete or steel frames completely infilled with less rigid walls (e.g., unreinforced masonry) will tend to resist
lateral forces as braced frames with a diagonal compression "strut" forming in the infill. The principal
deficiencies in moment frames with intfillwalls are:
*

Crushing of the infill at the upper and lower corners due to the diagonal compression strut type action of
the infill wall,

Shear failure of the beam/column connection in the steel frames or direct shear transfer failure of the beam
or column in concrete frames,
26

Tensile failure of the columns or their connections due to the uplift forces resulting from the braced frame
action induced by the infill,

Splitting of the infill due to the orthogonal tensile stresses developed in the diagonal compressive strut, and

Loss of infill by out-of-plane forces due to loss of anchorage or excessive slenderness of the infill wall.

If the infill walls have inadequate capacity to resist the prescribed forces, the deficiencies may be corrected
as described below for shear walls.
Partial height infills or infills with door or window openings also will tend to brace concrete or steel frames,
but the system will resist lateral forces in a manner similar to that of a knee-braced frame. The lateral stiffness
of the shortened columns is increased so that, for a given lateral displacement, a larger shear force is developed
in the shortened column compared to that in a full height column. If the column is not designed for this
condition, shear or flexural failure of the column could occur in addition to the other potential deficiencies
indicated above for completely infilled frames.
Falling debris resulting from the failure of an existing infill wall also poses a life-safety hazard. Frames may
be infilled with concrete or various types of masonry such as solid masonry, hollow clay tile, or gypsum masonry.
These infills may be reinforced, partially reinforced, or unreinforced. Infills (particularly brittle unreinforced
infills such as hollow clay tile or gypsum masonry) often become dislodged upon failure of the wall in shear.
Once dislodged, the broken infill may fall and become a life-safety hazard. Mitigation of this hazard can be
accomplished by removing the infill and replacing it with a nonstructural wall as described above. The infill can
also be "basketed" by adding a constraining member such as a wire mesh. Basketing will not prevent the infill
from failing but will prevent debris from falling.
In some cases, the exterior face of the infill may extend beyond the edge of the concrete or steel frame
columns or beams. For example, an unreinforced brick infill in a steel frame may have one wythe of brick
beyond the edge of the column or beam flange to form a uniform exterior surface. This exterior wythe is
particularly vulnerable to delamination or splitting at the collar joint (i.e., the vertical mortar joint between the
wythes of brick) as the infilled frame deforms in response to lateral loads. Because the in-plane deformation
of completely infilled frames is very small, the potential for delamination, is greater for partial infills or those with
significant openings. The potential life-safety hazard for this condition should be evaluated and may be mitigated
as described in the preceding paragraph.

3.13.2 Rehabilitation Techniques for the Infill Walls of Moment Frames

Techniques. Inadequate shear transfer of the infill walls of moment frames can be improved by:
1.

Eliminating the hazardous effects of the infill by providing a gap between the infill and the frame and
providing out-of-plane support.

2.

Treating the infill frame as a shear wall and correcting the deficiencies as described in Sec. 3.2.

Relative Merits. If the frame, without the infill wall, has adequate capacity for the prescribed forces, the most
expedient correction is to provide a resilient joint between the column, upper beam, and wall to allow the elastic
deformation of the column to take place without restraint (Technique 1). This may be accomplished by cutting
a gap between the wall and the column and the upper beam and filling it with resilient material (out-of-plane
restraint of the infill still must be provided) or by removing the infill wall and replacing it with a nonstructural
wall that will not restrain the column.
If the frame has insufficient capacity for the prescribed forces without the infill, then proper connection of
the infill to the frame may result in an adequate shear wall. The relative rigidities of the shear wall and moment
frames in other bays must be considered when distributing the lateral loads and evaluating the wall and frame
stresses.

27

3.1.4 PRECAST CONCRETE MOMENT FRAMES

3.1.4.1

Deficiency

The principal deficiency of precast concrete moment frames is inadequate capacity and/or ductility of the joints
between the precast units.

3.1.4.2 Strengthening Techniques for the Precast Concrete Moment Frames

Techniques. Deficient capacity and ductility of the precast concrete moment frame connections can be improved
by:

1.

Removing existing concrete in the precast elements to expose the existing reinforcing steel, providing
additional reinforcing steel welded to the existing steel (or drilled and grouted), and replacing the removed
concrete with cast-in-place concrete.

2.

Reducing the forces on the connections by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., additional
moment frames, braces, or shear walls) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. Reinforcing the existing connections as indicated in Technique 1 generally is not cost-effective
because of the difficulty associated with providing the necessary confinement and shear reinforcement in the
connections. Providing supplemental frames or shear walls (Technique 2) generally is more cost-effective;
however, the two alternatives may be utilized in combination.

3.2 VERTICAL-RESISTING ELEMENTS--SHEAR WALLS

Shear walls are structural walls designed to resist lateral forces parallel to the plane of the wall. There are four
principal types of shear walls: cast-in-place reinforced concrete or masonry shear walls; precast concrete shear
walls; unreinforced masonry shear walls; and shear walls in wood frame buildings.

3.2.1 REINFORCED CONCRETE OR REINFORCED MASONRY SHEAR WALLS

3.2.1.1

Deficiencies

The principal deficiencies of reinforced concrete or masonry shear walls are:

Inadequate shear capacity,

Inadequate flexural capacity, and

Inadequate shear or flexural capacity in the coupling beams between shear walls or piers.

32.12

Strengthening Techniques for Shear Capacity

Techniques. Deficient shear capacity of existing reinforced concrete or reinforced masonry shear walls can be
improved by:

1.

Increasing the effectiveness of the existing walls by filling in door or window openings with reinforced
concrete or masonry (Figures 3.2.1.2a and 3.2.1.2b).

28

2.

Providing additional thickness to the existing walls with a poured-in-place or pneumatically applied (i.e.,
shotcrete) reinforced concrete overlay anchored to the inside or outside face of the existing walls (Figure
3.2.1.2c).

3.

Reducing the shear or flexural stresses in the existing walls by providing supplemental vertical-resisting
elements (i.e., shear walls, bracing, or external buttresses) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. Techniques 1 and 2 generally will be more economical than Technique 3, particularly if they can

be accomplished without increasing existing foundations. If adequate additional capacity can be obtained by
filling in selected window or door openings without impairing the functional or aesthetic aspects of the building,
this alternative probably will the most economical. If this is not feasible, Technique 3 should be considered.
The optimum application
close existing
of this alternative would be
opening with
when adequate additional careinforced concrete or
pacity could be obtained by a
reinforced masonry
reinforced concrete overlay on
a selected portion of the outside face of the perimeter walls
without unduly impairing the
functional or aesthetic qualities
of the building and without the
need to increase the footing. In
some cases, restrictions may
preclude any change in the
exterior appearance of the
building (e.g., a building with
In
historical significance).
these cases, it will be necessary
to consider overlays to the
inside face of the exterior shear
walls or to either face of interior shear walls. Obviously this
wall
s
\
is more disruptive and, thus,
(N) shearwall
more costly than restricting the
foundation to be
work to the exterior of the
strengthened as
building. However, if the funcrequired
tional activities within the building are to be temporarily relocated because of other interior
alterations, the cost difference
(E) reinforced
between the concrete overlay to
the inside face and the outside
concrete or
face of the building walls is
reinforced
reduced. In some cases, for
masonry wall
example, when deficiencies exist
in the capacity of the diaphragm chords or in the shear tran- FIGURE 3.2.1.2a Strengthening an existing shear wall by filling in existing
sfer from the diaphragm to the openings.
shear walls, there may be compelling reasons to place the overlay on the inside face and concurrently solve other problems.
Technique 3 (i.e., providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements) usually involves construction of additional interior shear walls or exterior buttresses. This alternative generally is more expensive than the other two
because of the need for new foundations and for new drag struts or other connections to collect the diaphragm
shears for transfer to the new shear walls or buttresses. The foundation required to resist overturning forces

29

for an exterior buttress usually is significant because the dead weight of the building cannot be mobilized to resist
the overturning forces. Piles or drilled piers may be required to provide tensile hold-down capacity for the
footings. Buttresses located on both ends of the wall can be designed to take compression only, minimizing the
foundation problems. Buttresses frequently are not feasible due to adjacent buildings or property lines. The
advantages of the buttress over a new interior shear wall is that the work can be accomplished with minimal
interference to ongoing building functions.

-'

*.

\D

..-.

'N

(N) dowel, epoxy

grouted in drilled

\,\

'.

'

0'

N"

\X

N''

SECTION

holes
if steel lintel exist,
weld (N) dowels
to lintel
41

ELEVATION
FIGURE 3.2.112b Example of details for enclosing an existing opening in a
reinforced concrete or masonry wall.

30

FIGURE 3.2.m2c Strengthening an existing

concrete or masonry wall.
3.2.1.3 Strengthening Technique For Flexural Capacity
Deficient flexural capacity of existing reinforced concrete or masonry shear walls can be improved using the same
techniques identified to improve shear capacity, ensuring that flexural steel has adequate connection capacities
into existing walls and foundations. Shear walls that yield in flexure are more ductile than those that yield in
shear. Shear walls that are heavily reinforced (i.e., with a reinforcement ratio greater than about 0.005) also are
more susceptible to brittle failure; therefore, care must be taken not to overdesign the flexural capacity of
rehabilitated shear walls.

3.2.1.4 Rehabilitation Technique for Coupling Beams

Deficient shear or flexural capacity in coupling beams of reinforced concrete or reinforced masonry shear walls
can be improved by:
1.

Eliminating the coupling beams by filling in openings with reinforced concrete (Figure 3.2.1.2b).

2.

Removing the existing beams and replacing with new stronger reinforced beams (Figure 3.2.1.4).

3.

Adding reinforced concrete to one or both faces of the wall and providing an additional thickness to the
existing wall (Figure 3.2.1.2c).

4.

Reducing the shear or flexural stresses in the connecting beams by providing additional vertical-resisting
elements (i.e., shear walls, bracing, or external buttresses) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. If the deficiency is in both the piers and the connecting beams, the most economical solution
is likely to be the Technique 3 (i.e., adding reinforced concrete on one or both sides of the existing wall).
Shallow, highly stressed connecting beams may have to be replaced with properly reinforced concrete as part of

31

the additional wall section. The new concrete may be formed and poured in place or may be placed by the
pneumatic method.
If the identified deficiency
exists only in the connecting
concrete floor
beams, consideration should be
(E)
given to acceptance of some
minor damage in the form of
stirrup ties
cracking or spalling by repeating the structural evaluation
reinforced
with the deficient beams modcrete coupling
eled as pin-ended links between
rm,tied to existing
the piers. If this condition is
SECTION
j
b i and wall
sab
unacceptable, Technique 2 may
be the most economical and the
I
beams should be removed and
replaced with properly designed
(E) concrete wall FEN
reinforced concrete.
Depending on functional
(E) opening
and architectural as well as
structural considerations, Tech(E) concrete slab

I~ ~ , co
Ne

nique 1 (i.e., filling in selected

beyond

openings) may be practical. If

Techniques 1 through 3 are not
feasible or adequate to ensure
the proper performance of the
wall, reducing the stresses by
adding supplemental new structural elements (Technique 4)
should be considered.
This
alternative is likely to be the
most costly because of the need
for new foundations, vertical
members, and collectors.

ELEVATION
3.2.2 PRECAST CONCRETE
SHEAR WALLS
322.1

FIGURE 3.2.1.4 Example of strengthening an existing coupling beam at an

exterior wall.

Deficiencies

The principal deficiencies of precast concrete shear walls are:

*

Inadequate shear or flexural capacity in the wall panels,

Inadequate interpanel shear or flexural capacity,

Inadequate out-of-plane flexural capacity, and

Inadequate shear or flexural capacity in coupling beams.

32

3.2.22 Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Shear or Flexural Capacity

Techniques. Deficient in-plane shear or flexural capacity of precast concrete panel walls can be improved by:
1.

Increasing the shear and flexural capacity of walls with significant openings for doors or windows by infihling
the existing openings with reinforced concrete.

2.

Increasing the shear or flexural capacity by adding reinforced concrete (poured-in-place or shotcrete) at the
inside or outside face of the existing walls.

3.

Adding interior shear walls to reduce the flexural or shear stress in the existing precast panels.

Relative Merits. Precast concrete shear walls generally only have high in-plane shear or flexure stress when there
are large openings in the wall and the entire shear force tributary to the wall is carried by a few panels. The
most cost-effective solution generally is to infill some of the openings with reinforced concrete (Technique 1).
In the case of inadequate interpanel shear capacity, the panels will act independently and can have inadequate
flexural capacity. Improving the connection capacity between panels can improve the overall wall capacity.
Techniques 2 and 3 generally not cost-effective unless a significant overstress condition exists.

3.2.2.3 Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Interpanel Capacity

Techniques. Deficient interpanel shear connection capacity of precast concrete wall panels can be improved by:
1.

Making each panel act as a cantilever to resist in-plane forces (this may be accomplished by adding or
strengthening tie-downs, edge reinforcement, footings, etc.).

2.

Providing a continuous wall by exposing the reinforcing steel in the edges of adjacent units, adding ties, and
repairing with concrete.

Relative Merits. The two techniques can be equally effective. Where operational and aesthetic requirements for
the space can accommodate the installation of tie-downs and possibly surface-mounted wall edge reinforcement
that will make each panel act as a cantilever is a cost-effective way to compensate for inadequate interpanel
capacity. Where this is not acceptable, creating a continuous wall by exposing horizontal reinforcing steel and
weld-splicing them across panel joints is a viable, although more costly, option. A commonly used technique to
increase interpanel capacity is to bolt steel plates across panel joints; however, observations of earthquake
damage indicate this technique may not perform acceptably due to insufficient ductility and its use is not
recommended.

3.2.2.4 Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Out-of-Plane Flexural Capacity

Techniques. Deficient out-of-plane flexural capacity of precast concrete shear walls can be by:
1.

Providing pilasters at and/or in-between the interpanel joints.

2.

Adding horizontal beams between the columns or pilasters at mid-height of the wall.

Relative Merits. The reinforcing in some precast concrete wall panels may be placed to handle lifting stresses
without concern for seismic out-of-plane flexural stresses. A single layer of reinforcing steel, for example, may
be placed adjacent to one face of the wall. If this condition exists, new and/or additional pilasters can be
provided between the diaphragm and the foundation at a spacing such that the wall will adequately span
horizontally between pilasters. Also, horizontal beams can be provided between the pilasters at a vertical spacing
such that the wall spans vertically between the diaphragm and the horizontal beam or between the horizontal

33

beam and the foundation. It should be noted that the problem of inadequate out-of-plane flexural capacity often
is caused by wind design, particularly in the lower seismic zones.

32.2.S Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Shear or Flexural Capacity in Coupling Beams
Techniques. Deficient shear or flexural capacity in coupling beams in precast concrete walls can be improved
using the techniques identified for correcting the same condition in concrete shear walls.
Relative Merits. The relative merits of the alternatives for improving the shear or flexural capacity of connecting
beams in precast concrete coupling beams are similar to those discussed in Sec. 3.2.1.4 for concrete shear walls.

3.2.3 UNREINFORCED MASONRY SHEAR WALLS

3.2.3.1

Deficiencies

Masonry walls include those constructed of solid or hollow units of brick or concrete. Hollow clay tile also is
typically classified as masonry. The use of hollow tile generally has been limited to nonstructural partitions and
is discussed in Sec. 5.4. Unreinforced concrete, although not classified as masonry, may be strengthened by
techniques similar to those described below for masonry.
The principal deficiencies of unreinforced masonry shear walls are:
o

Inadequate in-plane shear and

Inadequate out-of-plane flexural capacity of the walls.

A secondary deficiency is inadequate shear or flexural capacity of the coupling beam.

3.23.2 Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate In-plane Shear and Out-of-Plane Flexural Capacity of the
Walls
Techniques. Deficient in-plane shear and out-of-plane flexural capacity of unreinforced masonry walls can be
improved by:

1.

Providing additional shear capacity by placing reinforcing steel on the inside or outside face of the wall and
applying new reinforced concrete (Figure 3.2.1.2c).

2.

Providing additional capacity for only out-of-plane lateral forces by adding reinforcing steel to the wall
utilizing the center coring technique (Figure 3.2.3.2).

3.

Providing additional capacity for out-of-plane lateral forces by adding thin surface treatments (e.g., plaster
with wire mesh and portland cement mortar) at the inside and outside face of existing walls.

4.

Filling in existing window or door openings with reinforced concrete or masonry (Figures 3.2.1.2a and
3.2.1.2b).

5.

Providing additional shear walls at the interior or perimeter of the building or providing external buttresses.

Relative Merits. Strengthening techniques for inadequate in-plane shear capacity are similar to those discussed
above for reinforced concrete or masonry walls, but there is an important difference because of the very low
allowable stresses normally permitted for unreinforced masonry. These stresses generally are based on the

34

ultimate strength of the masonry determined from core tests or in-situ testing. A very large safety factor
commonly is used in establishing allowable shear stress because of the potential variation in workmanship and
materials, particularly in masonry joints.
Research indicates that it is
difficult to maintain strain compatibility between uncracked
masonry and cracked reinforced
(E) unreinforced
concrete. As a result, when
masonry wall
there is a significant deficiency
(
in the in-plane shear capacity of

unreinforced masonry walls,

prefer to ignore the participation of the existing masonry, to

provide out-of-plane support
for the masonry, and to design
the concrete overlay to resist

the

total

in-plane

shear.

(N) 4 inch () diameter

core drilled and grouted

some structural engineers

/

with a polyester-sand
mixture with steel
reinforcement

/
/

,\
However, reinforced concrete
4 to 5 ft. core
/
shear walls may be provided in
spacing
an existing building to reduce
the in-plane shear stresses in
the unreinforced masonry walls
by redistributing the seismic
forces by relative rigidities. It
should be noted that this redis-I
tribution is most effective when
the walls are in the same line
of force and connected by a
competent spandrel beam or
When the new
drag strut.
are not in the
walls
concrete
same line of force and when
the diaphragm is relatively FIGURE 323.2 Example of center coring technique.
flexible with respect to the wall,
the redistribution may be by tributary area rather than by relative rigidity and the benefit of the additional shear
wall may not be entirely realized. Since new concrete shear walls can delaminate from the masonry substrate,
such walls should have adequate height to thickness ratios (h/t) independent of the masonry wall. Unreinforced masonry buildings often lack adequate wall anchorage and diaphragm chords. To correct these
deficiencies as well as inadequate in-plane shear capacity, it may be desirable to place the concrete overlay on
the inside face of the exterior walls (Figure 3.2.1.2c). Foundations, however, may be inadequate to carry the
additional weight of the concrete overlay; see the NEHRP Evaluation Handbook for further discussion of this
subject.
Because unreinforced masonry has minimal tensile strength, these walls are very susceptible to flexural
failure caused by out-of-plane forces. A common strengthening technique for this deficiency is to construct
reinforced concrete pilasters or steel columns anchored to the masonry wall and spanning between the floor
diaphragms. The spacing of the pilasters or columns is such that the masonry wall can resist the seismic inertia
forces by spanning as a horizontal beam between the pilasters or columns.
A recent innovation that has been used on several California projects is the seismic strengthening of
unreinforced masonry walls by the center coring technique (Technique 2). This technique consists of removing
4 inch () diameter vertical cores from the center of the wall at regular intervals (about 3 to 5 feet apart) and
placing reinforcing steel and grout in the cored holes. Polymer cement grout has been used because of its
workability, low shrinkage, and penetrating characteristics. The reinforcement has been used with and without
post-tensioning. This technique provides a reinforced vertical beam to resist flexural stresses, and the infusion

35

of the polymer grout strengthens the mortar joint in the existing masonry, particularly in the vertical collar joints
that generally have been found to be inadequate. This method is a developing technology and designers
contemplating its use should obtain the most current information on materials and installation techniques.
Technique 3 for strengthening the out-of-plane capacity of existing walls is to apply thin surface treatments
of plaster or portland cement over welded wire mesh. These treatments should be applied on both faces of
existing walls.

Filling in existing window and/or door openings (Technique 4) can be a cost-effective means of increasing
in-plane shear capacity if the architectural and functional aspects of the building can be accommodated. To
maintain strain compatibility around the perimeter of the opening, it is desirable. that the infill material have
physical properties similar to those of the masonry wall.

3.2.3.3 Alternative Methodology for Evaluation and Design of Unreinforced Masonry Bearing Wall Buildings
An alternative methodology has been developed for the evaluation and design of unreinforced masonry bearing
wall buildings with flexible wood diaphragms. Initially designated as the "ABK Methodology," it is based on
research funded by the National Science Foundation and performed by Agbabian Associates, S. B. Barnes and
Associates, and Kariotis and Associates. The ABK methodology was the basis for the City of Los Angeles' Rule
of General Application (RGA) that was developed in cooperation with the Hazardous Buildings Committee of
the Structural Engineers Association of Southern California and approved in 1987 as an alternate to the
conventional design method in Division 88 of the Los Angeles City Building Code. Code provisions for the "ABK
Methodology" now have been developed jointly by the Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC)
and the California Building Officials (CALBO) and are published in the 1991 Edition of the Uniform Code for
Building Conservation (available from the International Conference of Building Officials). The procedure for
evaluation of unreinforced masonry (URM) bearing wall buildings presented in Appendix C of the NEHRP
Evaluation Handbook is based on this methodology.
Some of the principal differences between the new methodology and conventional code provisions are as
follows:

1.

The in-plane masonry walls are assumed to be rigid (i.e., there is no dynamic amplification of the ground
motion in walls above ground level).

2.

The diaphragms and the tributary masses of the out-of-plane walls respond to ground motion through their
attachments to the in-plane walls.

3.

The maximum seismic force transmitted to the in-plane walls by the diaphragm is limited by the shear
strength of the diaphragms.

4.

The diaphragm response is controlled within prescribed limits by cross walls (i.e., existing or new wood
sheathed stud walls) or shear walls.

5.

Maximum height to thickness (hit) ratios are specified in lieu of flexural calculations for the out-of-plane
response of the walls.

The ABK Methodology and the more conventional evaluation and design methods, prescribed in building
codes such as the City of Los Angeles' Division 88 for unreinforced masonry have been prescribed in California
with the objective of preservation of life safety rather than prevention of damage. Several moderate earthquakes
in Southern California have provided limited testing of the methodology and, although the results are not
conclusive, very few of the retrofitted buildings suffered total or partial collapse and the degree of structural
damage was less than occurred in nonretrofitted buildings.

36

3.2.4 SHEAR WALLS IN WOOD FRAME BUILDINGS

3.2.4.1

Deficiencies

The principal deficiencies of wood or metal stud shear wall buildings are:
*

Inadequate shear capacity of the wall and

Inadequate uplift or hold-down capacity of the wall.

3.2.42 Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Shear Capacity

Techniques. Deficient shear capacity of the wood or metal stud walls can be improved by:
1.

Increasing the shear capacity by providing additional nailing to the existing finish material.

2.

Increasing the shear capacity by adding plywood sheathing to one or both sides of the wall.

3.

Reducing the loads on the wall by providing supplemental shear walls to the interior or perimeter of the
building.

Relative Merits. Seismic forces in existing wood frame buildings generally are moderate and, in many cases, the
existing walls may be adequate. Tabulated allowable shear values are available for existing finishes such as lath
and plaster and gypsum wallboard. In the latter case, existing nailing may dictate the allowable shear value and
higher allowable values may be obtained by additional nailing. Similarly, the allowable shear value for walls with
existing plywood sheathing may be increased within limits by additional nailing. New plywood sheathing may
be nailed onto existing gypsum wallboard. Longer nails are required and the allowable shear values are
comparable to plywood nailed directly to the studs, but the existing finish need not be removed.
Existing metal stud shear walls may be evaluated like wood stud walls. The fasteners generally are selfthreading sheet metal screws and corresponding allowable shear values are available for the finishes discussed
in the preceding paragraph.
Where the shear capacity of an existing wall is increased, the shear transfer capacity at the foundation and
the capacity of the foundation connection to resist overturning forces must be checked. Techniques for
increasing the foundation shear connection and overturning capacities are discussed in Sec. 3.8.1.
As with other shear wall strengthening techniques, the most economical scheme will be the one that
minimizes the total cost, including removal and replacement of finishes and other nonstructural items, disruption
of the functional use of the building, and any necessary strengthening of foundations or other structural supports.
Under normal circumstances, sheathing the exterior face of the perimeter walls should have the lowest cost, but
in some circumstances (e.g., if extensive interior alterations are planned) strengthening existing interior shear
walls or adding new interior shear walls will be more economical.
If the loads are so large that the above alternatives are not practical, it may be possible to reduce the forces
on the wall by strengthening other existing shear walls or by adding supplemental walls (Technique 3).
3.2.43 Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Uplift or Hold-Down Capacity
Techniques. Strengthening techniques for inadequate uplift or hold-down capacity are discussed in Sec. 3.7.1.5
and are illustrated in Figures 3.7.1.5 (a, b, c, and d).

37

3.3 VERTICAL-RESISTING ELEMENTS--BRACED FRAMES

Braced frames are vertical elements that resist lateral loads through tension and/or compression braces. There
are two principal types of braced frames: concentric bracing consisting of diagonals, chevrons, K-bracing, or
tension rods and eccentric bracing (Figure 3.3).
K-bracing has undesirable performance characteristics for seismic loads
in that buckling of the compression
diagonal
brace results in an unbalanced horizonbracing
tal force on the column from the remaining tension brace. Some building
_
codes permit K-bracing only in low
seismic zones where there is only a
small probability of exceedance for the
design seismic forces. In the higher
seismic zones, these braces should be
chevron
removed and the system modified to one
bracing

D\ D

___________

_further,

K-bracing

ConcentricBracing

link beam

of the other bracing configurations;

this should be done in all other
seismic zones if at all possible. Chevron
bracing has similar characteristics in that
buckling of one brace in compression
results in an unbalanced tensile force
from tMe remaining brace. With chevron bracing, the unbalanced force occurs
on the beam rather than the column.
Nonetheless. the unbalanced tensile
brace reaction Shouldbe considered in
the rehabilitatioi.. particularly in the
case of the inverted V configuration

in

which the unbalanced force is additive to

the gravity loads suppornad by the beam.
Braced frames are typically of steel
construction, however, conc.ete braced
frames are occasionally consti icted.

Eccntric Bracing
FIGURE 33 Bracing types.
3.3.1 STEEL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES
3.3.1.1 Deficiencies

The principal deficiencies of steel concentrically braced frames are:

*

Inadequate lateral force capacity of the bracing system governed by buckling of the compression brace,

Inadequate capacity of the brace connection,

*The American Institute of Steel Construction has written a minority opinion regarding this sentence; see
page 193.
38

Inadequate axial load capacity in the columns or beams of the bracing system, and

Brace configuration that results in unbalanced tensile forces, causing bending in the beam or column when
the compression brace buckles.

33.12

Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Brace Capacity

Techniques. Deficient brace compression capacity can be improved by:

1.

Increasing the capacity of the braces by adding new members thus increasing the area and reducing the
radius of gyration of the braces.

2.

Increasing the capacity of the member by reducing the unbraced length of the existing member by providing
secondary bracing.

3.

Providing greater capacity by removing and replacing the existing members with new members of greater
capacity (Figure 3.3.1.2).

4.

Reducing the loads on the braces by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls,
bracing, or eccentric bracing) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

(N) weld
A

(N) connection plate,-

b'

FIGURE 33.12

Addition to or replacement of an existing X-brace.

39

Relative Merits. A brace member is designed to resist both tension and compression forces, but its capacity for
compression stresses is limited by potential buckling and is therefore less than the capacity for tensile stresses.
Since the design of the system generally is based on the compression capacity of the brace, some additional
capacity may be obtained by simply reducing the unsupported length of the brace by means of secondary bracing
(Technique 3) provided the connections have adequate reserve capacity or can be strengthened for the additional
loads.
If significant additional bracing capacity is required, it will be necessary to consider strengthening (Technique
1) or replacement (Technique 3) of the brace. Single-angle bracing can be doubled; double-angle bracing can
be "starred"; channels can be doubled; and other rolled sections can be cover plated. New sections should be
designed to be compact if possible since they will perform with significantly more ductility than noncompact
sections. These modifications probably will require strengthening or redesign of the connections. The other
members of the bracing system (i.e., columns and beams) must be checked for adequacy with the new bracing
loads. Strengthening of existing K- or chevron bracing should be undertaken only after careful evaluation of the
additional bending forces following the buckling of the compression bracing. Where the existing bracing in these
systems is found to have inadequate capacity, the preferred solution is to replace it with a diagonal or cross-bracing configuration.
It usually is a good idea to limit the strengthening of the existing bracing to the capacity of the other
members of the bracing system and the foundations and to provide additional bracing if required. An alternative
would be to provide new shear walls or eccentric bracing. Construction of supplemental shear walls may be
disruptive and probably will require new foundations. The greater rigidity of the shear walls as compared with
that of the bracing also may tend to make the existing bracing relatively ineffective. The rigidity of eccentric
bracing, however, can be "tuned" to be compatible with that of the existing concentric bracing, but the advantages
of the eccentric bracing may be offset by its greater construction cost. Thus, strengthening the existing bracing
or providing additional concentric bracing are considered to be the most cost-effective alternatives.
3.3.1.3 Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Capacity of the Brace Connection
Techniques. Deficient brace connection capacity can be improved by:
1.

Increasing the capacity of the connections by additional bolting or welding.

2.

Increasing the capacity of the connections by removing and replacing the connection with members of
greater capacity.

3.

Reducing the loads on the braces and their connections by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements
(i.e., shear walls, bracing, or eccentric bracing) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. Adequate capacity of brace connections is essential to the proper performance of the brace.
The capacity of the brace is limited by its compression capacity and the connection may have been designed for
this load. When the brace is loaded in tension, however, the brace may transmit significantly higher forces to
the connection. If the existing connection members (e.g., gusset plates) have sufficient capacity, the most
economical alternative may be to increase the existing connection capacity by providing additional welding or
bolts. If the existing gusset plates have inadequate capacity, the existing configuration and accessibility need to
be assessed to determine whether adding supplemental connecting members or replacing the existing connecting
members with members of greater capacity (Technique 3) is more economical. If the existing brace members
require strengthening or replacement with members of greater capacity, it is probable that new connections
would bethe most cost-effective alternative.
Whether Technique 1 (reducing loads by adding supplemental members) is a cost-effective alternative is
most likely to be a consideration when assessing the capacities of the braces, not the brace connections. The
merits of this alternative are discussed above.

40

33.1A Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Axial Load Capacity In the Columns or Beams of the Bracing
System
Techniques. Deficient axial load capacity of existing bracing system columns and beams can be improved by.
1.

Providing additional axial load capacity by adding cover plates to the member flanges or by boxing the
flanges.

2.

Providing additional axial load capacity by jacketing the existing members with reinforced concrete.

3.

Reducing the loads on the beams and columns by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e.,
shear walls, bracing, or eccentric bracing) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. The most cost-effective alternative for increasing the capacity of the existing beams and columns
in a concentrically braced frame system is to add cover plates to or box the flanges (Technique 1). The effort
involved in adding cover and box plates includes removing the existing fireproofing and nonstructural obstructions. Jacketing of existing members with reinforced concrete (Technique 2) would seldom be cost-effective due
to the significant forming effort required. The relative merits of reducing the loads by providing supplemental
members is discussed in Sec. 3.3.1.2.

33.2 ROD OR OTHER TENSION BRACING

33.2.1 Deficiencies
The principal deficiencies of rod or other tension bracing systems are:
*

Inadequate tension capacity of the rod, tensile member, or its connection and

Inadequate axial capacity of the beams or columns in the bracing system.

33.2.2 Strengthening Techniques for Tension Capacity

Techniques. Deficient tension capacity of the rod or other tension member and its connection can be improved
by.

1.

Increasing the capacity by strengthening the existing tension members.

2.

Increasing the capacity by removing the existing tension members and replacing with new members of
greater capacity.

3.

Increasing the capacity by removing the existing tension member and replacing it with diagonal or X-bracing
capable of resisting compression as well as tension forces.

4.

Reducing the forces on the existing tension members by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements
(i.e., additional tension rods) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. Tension bracing is commonly found in light industrial steel frame buildings including some
designed for prefabrication. The most common deficiency is inadequate tensile capacity in the tension rods.
These rods generally are furnished with upset ends so that the effective area is in the body of the rod rather than
at the root of the threads in the connection. It therefore is rarely feasible to strengthen a deficient rod
(Technique 1); hence, correction of the deficiency likely will require removal and replacement with larger rods
(Technique 2), removal of existing tension bracing and replacement with new bracing capable of resisting tension

41

and compression (Technique 3), or installation of additional bracing (Technique 4). When replacing existing
tension braces with new braces capable of resisting tension and compression it is good practice to balance the
members (i.e., design the system such that approximately the same number of members act in tension as in
compression). Increasing the size of the bracing probably will require strengthening of the existing connection
details and also will be limited by the capacity of the other members of the bracing system or the foundations
as discussed above for ordinary concentric bracing. The effectiveness of replacing the tension bracing with
members capable of resisting compression forces depends on the length of the members and the need for
secondary members to reduce the unbraced lengths. Secondary members may interfere with existing window
or door openings. The most cost-effective technique for correction of the deficiency probably will be to provide
additional bracing (Technique 4) unless functional or other nonstructural considerations (e.g., obstruction of
existing window or door openings) preclude the addition of new bracing.

3.3.2.3 Strengthening Techniques for Beam or Column Capacity

Techniques. Deficient axial capacity of the beams or columns of the bracing systems can be improved by:
1.

Increasing the axial capacity by adding cover plates to or by boxing the existing flanges.

2.

Reducing the forces on the existing columns or beams by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements
(i.e., braced frames or shear walls) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. Reinforcing the existing beams or columns with cover plates or boxing the flanges generally is
the most cost-effective alternative. If supplemental braces or shear walls are required to reduce stresses in other
structural components such as the tension rods or the diaphragm, the addition of supplemental vertical-resisting
elements may be a viable alternative.

3.33 ECCENTRIC BRACING

333.1

Deficiency

The primary deficiency of an eccentrically braced frame system is likely to be nonconformance with current
design standards because design standards for such elements did not exist earlier than about 1980. Eccentric
bracing in older buildings may not have the desired degree of ductility.

33.3.2 Strengthening Techniques for Eccentric Braced Frames

Techniques. An existing eccentrically braced frame system can be brought into conformance with current design
standards by ensuring that the system is balanced (i.e., there is a link beam at one end of each brace), the brace
and the connections are designed to develop shear or flexural yielding in the link, the connection is a full moment
connection where the link beam has an end at a column, and lateral bracing is provided to prevent out-of-plane
beam displacements that would compromise the intended action. Alternatively, the loads on the existing
eccentrically braced frame can be reduced by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements such as
additional eccentrically braced frames.
Relative Mefits. The use of engineered eccentric bracing is a relatively recent innovation (within about 10 years)
that can provide the rigidity associated with concentric bracing as well as the ductility associated with moment
frames. The recommended design of these frames precludes compressive buckling of the brace members by
shear yielding of a short portion of the horizontal beam (the link beam). If the brace is in a diagonal
configuration, the yielding occurs in the horizontal beam between the brace connection and the adjacent column;
if it is in a chevron configuration, the yielding occurs in the beam between the two brace connections.

42

Because this system is relatively new, a deficiency in the lateral load capacity reflects either improper design
or upgraded design criteria. A properly designed eccentric bracing system balances the yield capacity of the
horizontal link beam against the buckling capacity of the brace beam. It usually is not cost-effective to strengthen
the members of this bracing system unless it is necessary to correct a design defect (e.g, if the brace has been
over designed, the shear capacity of the horizontal beam can be increased by adding doubler plates to the beam
web provided other members of the system have adequate additional capacity). Usually it will be necessary to
add additional bracing. It should be noted, however, that although eccentric bracing is a desirable supplement
to an existing concentric bracing system, concentric bracing is not desirable as a supplement to an existing
eccentric bracing system. The proper functioning of an eccentric bracing system requires inelastic deformations
that are not compatible with concentric bracing; the introduction of a ductile element (eccentric bracing) into
an existing "brittle" system (concentric bracing) is beneficial, but the reverse procedure is not the case. The
addition of shear walls to an existing eccentric bracing system also is usually not effective because of their greater
rigidity. Thus, the most cost-effective procedure for increasing the capacity of an existing eccentric bracing
system probably will be to provide additional eccentric bracing.

3A VERTICAL-RESISTING ELEMENTS--ADDING SUPPLEMENTAL MEMBERS

The lateral seismic inertial forces of an existing building are transferred from the floors and roofs through the
vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls, braced frames and moment frames) to the foundations and into the
ground. The forces in the individual shear walls, braced frames, and moment frames are a function of the weight
and height of the building plus the number, size, and location of the elements. By adding new vertical elements
to resist lateral forces, the forces in the existing elements will be modified and generally will be reduced. Thus,
the addition of supplemental vertical elements that will resist lateral loads can be a means to correct existing
elements that are overstressed. The purpose of this section is to discuss the benefits and the problems associated
with adding supplemental vertical-resisting elements to an existing building so that comparisons with other
rehabilitation techniques such as strengthening overstressed members or reducing demand can be placed in
perspective. The two general categories of supplemental vertical-resisting elements are in-plane supplemental
elements and new bay supplemental elements. The two categories are schematically portrayed in Figure 3.4.
The introduction of new in-plane supplemental elements into a building will primarily reduce the forces on
the existing vertical elements in the plane where the new element is added. Forces on other vertical-resisting
elements, diaphragms, and the connections between them will be modified to a lesser degree depending on the
relative rigidities of the vertical elements and the diaphragms. All wood and some steel deck diaphragms may
be considered "flexible"when used with masonry or concrete shear walls. Straight laid sheathing may be "flexible"
with any type of construction, but plywood sheathed diaphragms may be considered rigid with wood frame walls
or light steel frame construction. Where diaphragms are flexible, the addition of a supplemental vertical element
in the plane of existing vertical elements will have essentially no effect on the forces in vertical elements located
in other bays or on the diaphragms or the connections between the diaphragms and the vertical-resisting
elements.
On the other hand, the introduction of new vertical bay supplemental elements, will reduce the forces on
all the elements--existing vertical elements, diaphragms, foundations, and the connections between them. The
reduction in forces will be proportional to the relative rigidity of the vertical elements when the building has a
rigid diaphragm and will be proportional to the tributary areas associated with the vertical-resisting elements
when the building has a flexible diaphragm.
The effect of adding in-plane supplemental elements or new bay supplemental elements on the lateral-force
distribution of an existing building needs to be evaluated when considering whether to add new vertical elements
or to strengthen existing members to reduce demand on bracing elements.

43

in-plane
supplemental
strengthening

(N) diagonal braces

(E) diagonal braces

supplemental
strengthening of
new bay
FIGURE 3.4 Examples of supplementary strengthening.
3.4.1

RELATIVE COMPATIBILITY

The effectiveness of supplemental vertical-resisting elements in reducing forces on overstressed components is

dependent on the stiffness, strength, and ductility compatibility of the existing vertical-resisting elements relative
to the new vertical elements.
Stiffness compatibility is particularly important. A moment frame, for example, is relatively flexible in the
lateral direction. New supplemental moment frames, shear walls, or braced frames can be added to an existing
moment frame structure. The loads that will be transferred to the supplemental elements will be in proportion
to their relative stiffness (for a rigid diaphragm) and, therefore, a shear wall or braced frame added to a moment
frame structure will resist a significant portion of the lateral load. If the existing vertical-resisting elements are
concrete shear walls, supplemental moment frames generally would be ineffective because of the large degree
of wall stiffness.
Structures responding to large earthquakes will behave inelastically, hence the sequence in which different
elements yield and the ability of the elements to continue to function in the post yield condition (i.e., their
ductility) will affect the dynamic response of the structure. Weaker elements that yield become more flexible
resulting in a redistribution of forces. Ductile elements will continue to participate in absorbing energy and
resisting forces after yielding. Structures with elements having compatible strengths and ductility will behave
better and more predictably than structures with elements of different strength and ductility.

44

3A.X EXTERIOR SUPPLEMENTAL ELEMENTS

The construction of exterior supplemental moment frames, shear walls, or braced frames has many advantages.
Exterior elements can be as effective in reducing loads on other elements as interior elements; yet, construction
may be significantly less costly
and access for equipment and
materials will be significantly
easier than for interior construction. Perhaps the single
biggest advantage of exterior
(N) collector
supplemental elements is that
disruption of the functional use
of the interior of the building
will be minimized both during
and after construction. Figure
3.4.2 shows the addition of an
exterior supplemental concrete
shear wall to an existing concrete or masonry building.
Steel structures also can be
used as buttresses.
There are, however, inher(E) reinforced
ent problems in constructing
concrete or
supplemental exterior shear
unreinforced
walls, braced frames, and momasonry wall
ment frames. Many buildings
(N) tension tie to
/
,
do not have the necessary space
building each side
to accommodate exterior strucof buttress
'
I
tures due to the location of
adjacent buildings or property
(N) concrete, masonry
lines. New exterior elements
buttress wall
or1
()steel
L
also may significantly affect the
(N) piles or caissons
I
architectural aesthetics of the
if required
exterior of the building.

Supplemental

elements

generally will require a signifi- FIGURE 3.4.2 Example of supplemental in-plane strengthening by the
cant capacity to resist overturn- addition of an external buttress.
ing forces.
Elements away
from the building (e.g., the end of a buttress wall) will not be able to mobilize the dead weight of the building
to resist the overturning forces, and significant uplift capacity therefore may be required in the new foundation.
The construction of exterior elements also does not preclude the need for interior construction. A load path
must be provided to transfer forces from the existing building elements to the new external vertical-resisting
elements. This usually necessitates the construction of collectors on the interior of the building.

3.4.3 INTERIOR SUPPLEMENTAL ELEMENTS

The construction of interior supplemental moment frames, shear walls, or braced frames will involve significant
disruption of the functional operation of the building. Existing architectural coverings will need to be removed
and new foundations constructed along with the new frame or wall and necessary collectors. It usually is
desirable to locate new walls or frames along existing framing lines (i.e., framing into existing columns and
beams) in order to provide boundary members, collectors, and dead load to help resist overturning forces while
taking advantage of existing column foundations. Figure 3.4.3 shows the addition of a supplemental reinforced
concrete shear wall on the interior of an existing concrete building. It should be noted that all concrete pours
are subject to consolidation and shrinkage and, in this detail, the concrete may sag away from the underside of
45

the concrete slab. This condition may be improved with proper mix design for low shrinkage or, alternatively,
the lower wall can be made in two pours 48 hours apart. The initial pour would be up to about 18 inches from
the slab soffit to allow sufficient space to form shear keys and to clean and prepare the surface for the following
pour to the top of the slab.
Functional considerations likely will dictate the location of interior supplemental elements. This is
particularly the case with shear walls or braced frames that will significantly break up the interior space.

(N) reinforcement

through drilled
holes, drypack holes

* .'

'~

(N) access hole in

existing slab for

. .

.e .

I/ 'I/.

placing concrete

I!,'_r

lroughen

..

surface of
existing slab

4u'.
*.40

(N) shear wall

:,

'-

(N) optional pour

joint and shear

;-

key to reduce
shrinkage effects

*
*.'.

FIGURE 3A.3 Connection of a supplemental interior shear wall.

3.5 DIAPHRAGMS
Diaphragms are horizontal subsystems that transmit lateral forces to the vertical-resisting elements. Diaphragms
typically consist of the floors and roofs of a building. In this handbook, the term "diaphragm" also includes
horizontal bracing systems. There are five principal types of diaphragms: timber diaphragms, concrete
diaphragms, precast concrete diaphragms, steel decking diaphragms, and horizontal steel bracing.
Inadequate chord capacity is listed as a deficiency for most types of diaphragms. Theoretical studies, testing
of diaphragms, and observation of earthquake-caused building damage and failures provide evidence that the
commonly used method of determining diaphragm chord force (i.e., comparing the diaphragm to a flanged beam

46

and dividing the diaphragm moment by its depth) may lead to exaggerated chord forces and, thus, overemphasize
the need for providing an "adequate" boundary chord. Before embarking on the repair of existing chord
members or the addition of new ones, the need for such action should be considered carefully with particular
attention to whether the beam analogy is valid for calculating chord forces in the diaphragm under consideration.
Since few diaphragms have span-depth ratios such that bending theory is applicable, the capacity of the
diaphragm to resist the tensile component of shear stress could be compared with tensile stresses derived from
deep beam theory. In analyzing diaphragms by beam theory, chords provided by members outside of the
diaphragms but connected to their edges may be considered and may satisfy the chord requirement.

3.5.1 TIMBER DIAPHRAGMS

3.5.1.1

Deficiencies

Timber diaphragms can be composed of straight laid or diagonal sheathing or plywood.

deficiencies in the seismic capacities of timber diaphragms are:
*

Inadequate shear capacity of the diaphragm,

Inadequate chord capacity of the diaphragm,

Excessive shear stresses at diaphragm openings or at plan irregularities, and

Inadequate stiffness of the diaphragm resulting in excessive diaphragm deformations.

The principal

3.5.12 Strengthening Techniques ror Inadequate Shear Capacity

Techniques. Deficient shear capacity of existing timber diaphragms can be improved by:
1.

Increasing the capacity of the existing timber diaphragm by providing additional nails or staples with due
regard for wood splitting problems.

2.

Increasing the capacity of the existing timber diaphragm by means of a new plywood overlay.

3.

Reducing the diaphragm span through the addition of supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear
wall or braced frames) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. Adding nails and applying a plywood overlay (Techniques 1 and 2) require removal and
replacement of the existing floor or roof finishes as well as removal of existing partitioning, but they generally
are less expensive than adding new walls or vertical bracing (Technique 3). If the existing system consists of
straight laid or diagonal sheathing, the most effective alternative is to add a new layer of plywood since additional
nailing typically is not feasible because of limited spacing and edge distance. Additional nailing usually is the
least expensive alternative, but the additional capacity is still limited to the number and capacity of the additional
nails that can be driven (i.e., with minimum allowable end distance, edge distance, and spacing).
The additional capacity that can be developed by plywood overlays usually depends on the capacity of the
underlying boards or plywood sheets to develop the capacity of the nails from the new overlay. Higher shear
values are allowed for plywood overlay when adequate nailing and blocking (i.e., members with at least 2 inches
of nominal thickness) can be provided at all edges where the plywood sheets abut. Adequate additional capacity
for most timber diaphragms can be developed using this technique unless unusually large shears need to be
resisted. When nailing into existing boards, care must be taken to avoid splitting. If boards are prone to
splitting, pre-drilling may be necessary.
The addition of shear walls or vertical bracing in the interior of a building may be an economical alternative
to strengthening the diaphragms particularly if the additional elements can be added without the need to

47

strengthen the existing foundation. The alternative methodology described in Sec. 3.2.3.3 emphasizes control of
the existing diaphragm response by cross walls or shear walls rather than by strengthening and, in that
methodology, the shear transmitted to the in-plane walls is limited by the strength of the diaphragm. Although
the methodology was developed for buildings with unreinforced masonry walls and flexible timber diaphragms,
the above diaphragm provisions are considered to be generally applicable for timber diaphragms in buildings with
other relatively rigid wall systems. When additional bracing or interior shear walls are required, relative economy
depends on the degree to which ongoing operations can be isolated by dust .nd noise barriers and on the need
for additional foundations.
3.5.1.3 Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Chord Capacity
Techniques.

1.

Deficient diaphragm chord capacity can be improved by

Providing adequately nailed or bolted continuity splices along joists or fascia parallel to the chord (Figure
3.5.1.3).

2.

Providing a new continuous steel chord member along the top of the diaphragm.

3.

Reducing the stresses on the existing chords by reducing the diaphragm's span through the addition of new
shear walls or braced frames as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. Wood diaphragms typically are constructed with minimal capacity to resist chord forces. Bottom

wall plates nailed into the plywood are not spliced but butted; hence, the chord capacity provided at the bottom
plate joints will be minimal. If the nailing between the bottom plate and the plywood is sufficient to transfer
chord forces, splicing the top plate can be a means to provide this chord capacity. Steel straps can be nailed
across the butted joint to provide this splice capacity, but notching of the bottom of some of the wood studs may
be necessary to install the splice plates.
Another alternative is to utilize the double top plates on the wall below the diaphragm as the chord member.
The double top plates typically are lapped and nailed. With sufficient lap nailing, the chord capacity of one plate
can be developed if an adequate path for shear transfer is provided between the diaphragm and the top plates.
This load path can be provided by nailing such as that shown in Figure 3.5.1.3. New or existing nailing needs
to be verified or provided between the diaphragm sheathing, the edge blocking, the exterior sheathing, and the
top plates.
Simplified calculations to determine stresses in diaphragm chords conservatively consider the diaphragm as
a horizontal beam and ignore the flexural capacity of the web of the diaphragm as well as the effect of the outof-plane shear walls that reduce the chord stresses. However, even though the chord requirements in some
buildings may be overstated, in most buildings a continuous structural element is required at diaphragm
boundaries to collect the diaphragm shears and transfer them to the individual resisting shear walls along each
boundary (see Sec. 3.7.1).
A continuous steel member along the top of the diaphragm may be provided to function as a chord or
collector member. For existing timber diaphragms at masonry or concrete walls, the new steel members may
be used to provide wall anchorage as indicated in Figure 3.7.1.4b as wall as a chord or collector member for the
diaphragm shear forces.
The lack of adequate chord capacity is seldom the reason why new shear walls or braced frames (Technique
3) would be considered to reduce the diaphragm loads. Reducing the diaphragm span and loads through the
introduction of new vertical-resisting elements, however, may be considered to address other member deficiencies
and, if so, the chord inadequacy problem also may be resolved.

48

building.

3.5.1A Strengthening Techniques for Excessive Shear Stresses at Openings or Plan Irregularities
Techniques. Excessive shear stresses at diaphragm openings or other plan irregularities can be improved by:
1.

Reducing the local stresses by distributing the forces along the diaphragm by means of drag struts (Figures
3.5.1.4a and 3.5.1.4b).

2.

Increasing the capacity of the diaphragm by overlaying the existing diaphragm with plywood and nailing the
plywood through the sheathing at the perimeter of the sheets adjacent to the opening or irregularity.

3.

Reducing the diaphragm stresses by reducing the diaphragm spans through the addition of supplemental
shear walls or braced frames as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. The most cost-effective way to reduce large local stresses at diaphragm openings or plan
irregularities is to install drag struts (Figures 3.5.1.4a and 3.5.1.4b), to distribute the forces into the diaphragm

49

(Technique 1). Proper nailing of the diaphragm into the drag struts is required to ensure adequate distribution
of forces. Local removal of roof or floor covering will be required to provide access for nailing.

(N) additional
nailing to develop
tension in the header

(N) dragstrut
(E) header

000

I\ / \ j~
/

-provide

tension

splice similar to

igure 3.5.1.4b
jroij3st14
> ~~~~~(E)

; _ _

_ <

1,

(E) wood

sheathing

FIGURE 3.5.1.4a Reinforcement of an opening in an existing timber diaphragm.

The analysis for the design of the drag strut and the required additional nailing is similar to that for the
reinforcement of an opening in the web of a steel plate girder. The opening divides the diaphragm into two
parallel horizontal beams and the shear in each beam causes moment that induces tension or compression in
the outer fibers of each beam. For small openings or low diaphragm shears, these bending forces may be
adequately resisted as additional stresses in an existing diaphragm. For larger openings and/or larger
diaphragms, tension or compression "flanges"may have to be developed at the opening. In a timber diaphragm,
these "flanges" may be assumed to be the joists or headers that frame the opening, but to preclude distress due
to stress concentration at the corners, the joists or headers must be continuous beyond the edge of the opening
in order to transfer the flange forces back into the diaphragm by additional nailing.
Applying a plywood overlay (Technique 2) to increase the local diaphragm capacity or providing
supplemental vertical-resisting elements (Technique 3) to reduce the local stresses generally will be viable
alternatives only if they are being considered to correct other structural deficiencies.

50

shear wall to resist

(N) drag strut to

reduce diaphragm
shear stress

drag strut forces

(N) bolts as required

FIGURE 3.5.1.4b New drag strut in an existing wood diaphragm.

3.5.1.5 Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Stiffness
Techniques. Excessive seismic displacement of an existing timber diaphragm can be prevented by:
1.

Increasing the stiffness of the diaphragm by the addition of a new plywood overlay.

2.

Reducing the diaphragm span and, hence, reducing the displacements by providing new supplemental
vertical-resisting elements such as shear walls or braced frames as discussed in Sec. 3A.

Relative Merits. The addition of new shear walls or braced frames (Technique 2) may be the most cost-effective
alternative for reducing excessive displacements of plywood diaphragms (as is also the case for reducing excessive
shear stresses as discussed above) if the additional elements can be added without strengthening the existing
foundations and when the existing functional use of the building permits it.
The spacing of new vertical elements required to limit the deflection of straight or diagonal sheathing to
prescribed limits may be too close to be feasible. In these cases, overlaying with plywood (Technique 1) may
be the most cost-effective alternative. For timber diaphragms in buildings with rigid masonry or concrete walls,
the alternative methodology described in Sec. 3.2.3.3 permits the use of sheathed timber cross walls to control
the excessive displacements of an existing diaphragm as an alternative to strengthening.

3.5.2 CONCRETE DIAPHRAGMS

3.5.2.1

Deficiencies

The principal deficiencies of monolithic concrete diaphragms (i.e., reinforced concrete or post-tensioned concrete
diaphragms) are:

51

Inadequate in-plane shear capacity of the concrete diaphragm,

Inadequate diaphragm chord capacity, and

Excessive shear stresses at the diaphragm openings or plan irregularities.

3.5.2.2 Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Shear Capacity

Techniques. Deficient in-plane shear capacity of monolithic concrete diaphragms can be improved by:
1.

Increasing the shear capacity by overlaying the existing concrete diaphragm with a new reinforced concrete
topping slab (Figure 3.5.2.2).

2.

Reducing the shear in the existing concrete diaphragm by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements
(i.e., shear walls or braced frames) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. Concrete diaphragms usually are strengthened

with a concrete overlay. This will require

(E) wall
,

(N) concrete

chord

(N) concrete

topping

reinforcement

(E) concrete slab

<

clean and

., .
F
//~
roughen
,_______________________________________

surface

3.
.

removal and replacement of the existing

partitions and floor
finishes and will be
disruptive to ongoing
operations even though
the work can be limited to one floor or a

portion of a floor at a
time.
Adding the
concrete overlay also

.-

\weight

will increase the dead

of the structure;

therefore,

existing

members, connections,
and foundations must
be checked to ensure
(N) dowel

that they are capable

of resisting these added loads.

/ / a'/
~"'

It may be possible
to avoid strengthening

./.

a concrete diaphragm
by providing additional
shear walls or vertical
bracing that will reduce the diaphragm shears. This alternative generally is more costly than the overlay, but it may be competitive
when it can be restricted to the perimeter of the building and when minimal work is required on the foundations.
For shear transfer, new reinforced concrete or masonry shear walls will require dowels grouted in holes drilled
in the concrete diaphragms. When the concrete diaphragm is supported on steel framing, shear walls or verticalbracing may be located under a supporting beam. Dowels or other connections for shear walls or bracing may
be welded to the steel beam, but it also may be necessary to provide additional shear studs, welded to the steel
FIGURE 3.5.2.2 Strengthening an existing concrete diaphragm with a new topping
slab and chord.

52

beam, in holes drilled in the diaphragm slab to facilitate the shear transfer from the concrete slab to the steel
beam.

3.5.2.3 Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Flexural Capacity

Techniques. Deficient flexural capacity in monolithic concrete diaphragms can be improved by
1.

Increasing the flexural capacity by removing the edge of the diaphragm slab and casting a new chord
member integral with the slab (Figure 3.5.2.3).

2.

Adding a new chord member by providing a new reinforced concrete or steel member above or below the
slab and connecting the new member to the existing slab with drilled and grouted dowels or bolts as
discussed in Sec. 3.5.4.3.

3.

Reducing the existing flexural stresses by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls
or braced frames) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. If the existing

concrete slab is supported on
steel framing, the most costeffective means of providing
sufficient diaphragm chord capacity is to ensure adequate
shear transfer of the diaphragm
to the perimeter steel beam by
adding drilledand grouted bolts

and to ensure adequate

-,

(N) concrete

//

concrete slab

///(E)
/

chord

strength and stiffness capacity

of the perimeter beam connections. If a new chord is being

secured

with drilled

and

grouted anchors to an existing

diaphragm containing prestressing strands, drilling must be

done very carefully to ensure

that the strands are not cut.

/
/

(N) dowel to wall--may

need (N) dowel in slab also

after proper

Figure 3.5.2.3 shows the

provision of a new diaphragm

shoring, remove
existing concrete

chord and/or collectormember

slab, expose

reinforcement and
as well as new dowels for wall
cast new concrete
anchorage or shear transfer
from the existing concrete diaphragm. Because of the poten(E) wall
tial risk of gravity load failure
member to an existing concrete
new
chord
a
Adding
3.5.23
FIGURE
the
existing
with
at the interface
elements).
for
precast
recommended
(not
diaphragm
is
recommended
slab, this detail
only for one-way slabs in the
direction parallel to the slab span. For other conditions, a detail using new concrete above or below the slab
is recommended. Steel plates or shapes (as shown in Sec. 3.5.4.3) could be used with through bolts tightened
to transfer load by friction.
Providing new structural steel or reinforced concrete elements to reinforce the existing diaphragm at the
openings is similar to the analysis described in Sec. 3.5.1.4. The tensile or compressive stresses in the new
elements at the opening must be developed by shear forces in the connection to the existing slab. The new ele-

53

meats also must be extended beyond the opening a sufficient distance to transfer the tensile or compressive
chord forces back into the existing slab in the same manner. Removing the stress concentration by filling in the
opening (Technique 3) may be a feasible alternative provided that the functional requirements for the opening
(e.g., stair or elevator shaft or utility trunk) no longer exist or it has been relocated.

3.5.2A Strengthening Techniques for Excessive Shear Stresses at Openings

Techniques. Deficient shear stress at diaphragm openings or plan irregularities in monolithic concrete slabs can
be improved by:
1.

Reducing the local stresses by distributing the forces along the diaphragm by means of structural steel
(Figure 3.5.2.4a), or reinforced concrete elements cast beneath the slab and made integral through the use
of drilled and grouted dowels.

(N) steel trim member

Section a-a
FIGURE 3.S.2.4a Reinforcement of an opening In an existing concrete

diaphragm.
2.

Increasing the capacity of the concrete by providing a new concrete topping slab in the vicinity of the
opening and reinforcing with trim bars (Figure 3.5.2.4b).

54

3.

Removing the stress concentration by filling in the diaphragm opening with reinforced concrete as indicated
for shear walls in Figure 3.2.1.2b.

4.

Reducing the shear stresses at the location of the openings by adding supplemental vertical-resisting
elements (i.e., shear walls or braced frames) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Meits. In existing reinforced concrete diaphragms with small openings or low diaphragm shear stress,
the existing reinforcement may be adequate. If additional reinforcement is required, Technique 2 (i.e., new trim
bars) probably will be the most cost-effective if a new topping slab is required to increase the overall diaphragm
shear capacity.

55

3.5.3 POURED GYPSUM DIAPHRAGMS

3.53.1 Deficiencies

Poured gypsum diaphragms may be reinforced or unreinforced and may have the same deficiencies as monolithic
concrete diaphragms (see Sec. 3.5.2.1.).

3.532

Strengthening Techniques for Poured Gypsum Diaphragms

Techniques. Strengthening techniques for deficiencies in poured gypsum diaphragms are similar to those listed
for concrete diaphragms (see Sec. 3.5.2.2, 3.5.2.3, and 3.5.2.4); however, the addition of a new horizontal bracing
system may be the most effective strengthening alternative.
Relative Merits. Poured gypsum has physical properties similar to those of very weak concrete. Tables of
allowable structural properties (i.e., shear, bond, etc.) are published in various building codes and engineering
manuals. A typical installation is for roof construction using steel joists. Steel bulb tees, welded or clipped to
the joists, span over several joists and support rigid board insulation on the tee flanges. Reinforced or
unreinforced gypsum is poured on the insulation board to a depth of 2 or 3 inches, embedding the bulbed stems
of the tees. While use of the strengthening techniques discussed for reinforced concrete diaphragms (i.e.,
reinforced overlays, additional chord reinforcement, etc.) is technically possible, application of these techniques
generally is not practical because of the additional weight or low allowable stresses of gypsum. Since dead loads
normally constitute a significant portion of the design loads for roof framing members, the addition of several
inches of gypsum for a reinforced overlay probably will overstress the existing light steel framing. Similarly, the
low allowable stresses for dowels and bolts will allow strengthening of only marginally deficient diaphragms. For
these reasons, gypsum diaphragms found to have significant deficiencies may have to be removed and replaced
with steel decking or may be strengthened with a new horizontal bracing system (see Figure 3.5.5.2b).

3.S.4 PRECAST CONCRETE DIAPHRAGMS

3.5A.1

Deficiencies

The principal deficiencies of precast or post-tensioned concrete planks, tees, or cored slabs are:
o

Inadequate in-plane shear capacity of the connections between the adjacent units,

Inadequate diaphragm chord capacity, and

Excessive in-plane shear stresses at diaphragm openings or plan irregularities.

3.5A.2 Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Connection Shear Capacity

Techniques. Deficient in-plane shear capacity of connections between adjacent precast concrete planks, tees, or
cored slabs can be improved byr
1.

Replacing and increasing the capacity of the existing connections by overlaying the existing diaphragm with
a new reinforced concrete topping slab (Figure 3.5.4.2).

2.

Reducing the shear forces on the diaphragm by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear
walls or braced frames) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

56

Relative Merits. The capacity of an existing diaphragm composed of precast concrete elements (i.e., cored slabs,
tees, planks, etc.) generally is limited by the capacity of the field connections between the precast elements. It
may be possible to modify these connections for a moderate increase in diaphragm capacity-,however, it usually
is not feasible to develop the full shear capacity of the precast units except with an adequately doweled and
complete poured-in-place connection. This usually is very costly. Overlaying the existing precast system with
a new reinforced concrete topping (Technique 1) is an effective procedure for increasing the shear capacity of
the existing diaphragm. Because of the relatively low rigidity of the existing connections, the new topping should
be designed to resist the entire design shear. Existing floor diaphragms with precast concrete elements may have
a 2- or 3-inch poured-in-place topping with mesh reinforcement to compensate for the irregularities in precast
elements. Applying an additional topping slab over the existing slab may be prohibitive because of the additional
gravity and seismic loads that must be resisted by the structure. Where mechanical connections between units
exist along with a topping slab, the topping slab generally will resist the entire load (until it fails) because of the
relative rigidities; therefore, the addition of mechanical fasteners generally is ineffective. For the above reasons
the most cost-effective alternative may be reducing the diaphragm shear forces through the addition of
supplemental shear walls or braced frames.

a concrete overlay.

57

35.4.3 Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Chord Capacity

Techniques. Deficient diaphragm chord capacity of precast concrete planks, tees, or cored slabs can be improved
by.

1.

Providing a new continuous steel member above or below the steel slab and connecting the new member
to the existing slab with bolts (Figure 3.5.4.3).

2.

Removing the edge of the diaphragm and casting a new chord member integral with the slab (Figure
3.5.2.3).

3.

Reducing the diaphragm chord forces by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls
or braced frames) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

FIGURE 3.5A.3 Adding a new steel member to an existing precast concrete

diaphragm.
Relative Merits. Providing a new steel chord member (Technique 1) generally is the most cost-effective approach
to rehabilitating a deficient diaphragm chord for precast concrete elements. When this approach is used;
adequate shear transfer between the existing planks or slabs and the new chord member must be provided.
Grouting under the new steel chord member may be necessary to accommodate uneven surfaces. Although
typically more costly, casting a new chord into the diaphragm (Technique 2) may be considered a viable alternative where the projection caused by a new steel chord member is unacceptable for architectural reasons. If Technique 2 is considered, shoring of the planks or slabs will be necessary during construction. Technique 3 generally
would be viable only if it is being considered to improve other deficient conditions.

58

3.5.4.4 Strengthening Techniques for Excessive Shear Stresses at Openings

Deficient diaphragm shear capacity at diaphragm openings or plan irregularities can be improved by
1.

Reducing the local stresses by distributing the forces along the diaphragm by means of concrete drag struts
cast beneath the slab and made integral with the existing slab with drilled and grouted dowels.

2.

Increasing the capacity by overlaying the existing slab with a new reinforced concrete topping slab with
reinforcing trim bars in the vicinity of the opening (Figure 3.5.4.2).

3.

Removing the stress concentration by filling in the diaphragm opening with reinforced concrete (Figure
3.2.1.2b).

4.

Reducing the shear stresses at the location of the openings by providing supplemental vertical-resisting
elements (i.e., shear walls or braced frames) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. The relative merits for rehabilitating excessive shear stresses at openings in precast concrete
planks, tees, or core slabs are similar to those discussed in Sec. 3.5.2.4 for cast-in-place concrete diaphragms.

3.5.5 STEEL DECK DIAPHRAGMS

3.5.5.1

Deficiencies

The principal deficiencies in steel deck diaphragms are inadequate in-plane shear capacity which may be
governed by the capacity of the welding to the supports or the capacity of the seam welds between the deck units,
inadequate diaphragm chord capacity, and excessive in-plane shear stresses at diaphragm openings or plan
irregularities.
3.5.5.2 Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Shear Capacity
Deficient in-plane shear capacity of steel deck diaphragms can be improved by:
1.

Increasing the steel deck shear capacity by providing additional welding.

2.

Increasing the deck shear capacity of unfilled steel decks by adding a reinforced concrete fill (Figure
3.5.5.2a) or overlaying with concrete filled steel decks a new topping slab.

3.

Increasing the diaphragm shear capacity by providing a new horizontal steel bracing system under the
existing diaphragm (Figures 3.5.5.2b and 3.5.5.2d).

4.

Reducing the diaphragm shear stresses by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements to reduce the
diaphragm span as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Mefits. Steel decking, with or without an insulation fill (e.g., vermiculite or perlite), may be used as a
diaphragm whose capacity is limited by the welding to the supporting steel framing and crimping or seam welding
of the longitudinal joints of the deck units. The shear capacity of this type of diaphragm may be increased
modestly by additional welding (Technique 1) if the shear capacity of the existing welds is less than the allowable
shear of the steel deck itself. Significant increases in capacity may be obtained by adding a reinforced concrete
fill (Technique 2) and shear studs welded to the steel framing through the decking. This procedure will require
the removal of any insulation fill and the removal and replacement of any partitions and floor or roof finishes.
The shear capacity of steel deck diaphragms in open web joists often is limited by the lack of adequate connection from deck to shear wall or other vertical element. The lack of intermediate connectors between joists

59

is common. Frequently, the joist bearing ends themselves are not well connected to transfer diaphragm shear.
Addition of an edge support connected to wall and diaphragm often is feasible.
The capacity of steel decking with an existing reinforced
(N) reinforcement
concrete fill may be increased
by adding a reinforced concrete
overlay (Technique 2). Although this is an expedient
alternative for increasing the
shear capacity of an existing
composite steel deck, providing
adequate shear transfer to the
vertical-resisting members or
chord elements through the
existing composite decking may
require special details (e.g.,
additional shear studs). Since
the addition of a concrete overlay will increase the dead
weight of the structure, the
existing members, connections,
(N) concrete fill,

reinforce as required

and

foundation

must be

checked to determine whether

(N) shear studs, as
they are capable of resisting the
required, welded to
added loads.
beam
The above alternatives
provide positive, direct methods
(E) steel beam
for strengthening an existing
steel deck diaphragm. Both
alternatives require complete
FIGURE 3.5.5.2a Strengthening an existing steel deck diaphragm.
access to the top of the diaphragm and the removal and replacement of partitions and floor finishes. Technique 2 (i.e., topping over an
existing concrete fill) will change the finished floor elevation by several inches and will therefore require a
number of nonstructural adjustments to the new elevation (e.g., to stairs, elevators, floor electrical outlets, etc.).
An additional alternative for strengthening steel decking without concrete fill is to add new horizontal
bracing under the decking (Technique 3). Since steel decking generally is supported on structural steel framing,
the existing framing with new diagonal members forms the horizontal bracing system. The diaphragm shears
are shared with the existing decking in proportion to the relative rigidity of the two systems. This alternative
requires access to the underside of the floor or roof framing and may require relocation of piping, ducts, or
electrical conduit as well as difficult and awkward connections to the existing framing. These costs must be
weighed against the costs for a concrete overlay. It should be noted that this alternative may not be feasible for
steel decking with a composite concrete fill because of the much greater rigidity of the existing composite
diaphragm compared with that of the bracing system. For the bracing system to be effective in this case, the
diaphragm shears would be distributed on the basis of the bracing system and the steel decking without the
concrete fill (i.e., failure of the concrete fill in shear would be assumed to be acceptable). The new horizontal
bracing system will require continuous chord or collector members (Figure 3.5.5.2d) to receive the bracing forces
and transfer them to shear walls or other vertical-resisting elements. In Figure 3.5.5.2d, a tubular steel member
is a preferred section for the new bracing members as is the tee section in Section a-a for the chord or collector
members. Where existing construction does not permit the use of the tee section, an angle may be used as
shown in Section b-b. In the latter case, bending of the angle and prying action on the anchor bolts may need
to be investigated.
Reduction of the existing diaphragm stresses to acceptable levels by providing additional shear walls or
vertical bracing (Technique 4) also may be a feasible alternative. The choice between shear walls or bracing will
depend on compatibility with the existing vertical-resisting elements (i.e., additional shear walls should be
considered for an existing shear wall system and additional bracing for an existing bracing system). The
60

appropriateness of this technique (as discussed above) depends on the extent to which new foundations will be
required and potential interference with the functional use of the building.

FIGURE 3.5.5.2b Strengthening an existing steel deck diaphragm.

61

Eig uiild
FIGURE

(N)3.5.S.2c
angle to stiffen
deck edge between

I (E) steel decking

Strengthening
joists and/or
transfer shear

to wail

an

(N) wall anchor

existing
building
with

masonry wall

steel
decking
and
concrete

(N) connection plate

and anchor bolts -

(N) angle connected tU

deck and wall

Section a-a
FIGURE 3.5.5.c
masonry walls.

or

Section b-b

Strengthening an existing building with steel decking and concrete or

62

(N) continuous chord

or collector member

..

(N) horizontal
bracing system

II

Jb

_|

Roof Framing Plan

Retrofitted Building

(N) continuous chord

or collector bolted to
existing wall

a[

I
W(N)horionta
bracing\_.

welded to steel joists

and continuous member i
at wall
Section b-b
Section a-a
FIGURE 3S.5.2d Strengthening an existing building with steel decking and
concrete or masonry walls.

3.5.5.3 Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Chord Capacity

Techniques. Deficient chord capacity of steel deck diaphragms can be improved by:
1.

Increasing the chord capacity by providing welded or bolted continuity splices in the perimeter chord steel
framing members.

2.

Increasing the chord capacity by providing a new continuous steel member on top or bottom of the
diaphragm (Figure 3.5.4.3).

3.

Reducing the diaphragm chord stresses by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear
walls or braced frames) such that the diaphragm span is reduced as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. Steel decking generally is constructed on steel framing. The perimeter members of the steel
framing typically will have sufficient capacity to resist the diaphragm chord stresses provided the shear capacity
of the connections between the decking and the chord member and the tensile capacity of the steel framing
connections are adequate to transfer the prescribed loads. Increasing the capacity of these connections by

63

providing additional plug welds to the decking or adding steel shear studs in the case of concrete-filled metal
decking may be required. Technique 1 generally is the most cost-effective.
Increasing the chord capacity by providing a new steel chord member to the perimeter of the diaphragm
(Technique 2) would be appropriate only if it was impractical to use an existing member (Technique 1).
Reducing the diaphragm chord stresses by providing supplemental shear walls or braced frames (Technique
3) generally would not be cost-effective to correct a chord capacity problem unless it is being seriously considered
to improve other component deficiencies as well.

3.5.5.4 Strengthening Techniques for Excessive Shear Stresses at Openings

Techniques. Excessive shear stresses at diaphragm openings or plan irregularities can be improved by:
1.

Reducing the local stress concentrations by distributing the forces into the diaphragm by means of steel drag
struts.

2.

Increasing the capacity of the diaphragm by reinforcing the edge of the opening with a steel angle frame
welded to the decking.

3.

Reducing the diaphragm stresses by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls,
braced frames or new moment frames) such that the diaphragm span is reduced as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. Openings and plan irregularities in steel deck diaphragms generally are supported along the
perimeter by steel beams. If continuous past the corners of the openings or irregularities, these beams can
distribute the concentrated stresses into the diaphragm provided the capacity of the connections between the
decking and the steel beams is adequate to transfer the prescribed loads. If inadequate, the connections can be
reinforced by adding plug welds or shear studs.
If beams are not continuous beyond an opening or irregularity, new beams to act as drag struts can be
provided (Technique 1). Adequate connection of the beams to the diaphragm and to the existing beams will be
required to distribute loads.
Correcting the diaphragm deficiency by providing a steel frame around the perimeter of the opening or along
the sides of the irregularity (Technique 2) is similar to providing drag struts. The connection between the new
steel members and the diaphragm must be sufficient to adequately distribute the local stresses into the
diaphragm. The dimensions of the opening or irregularity will dictate whether this can be achieved solely with
the use of a perimeter steel frame.
Reducing the diaphragm stresses by providing supplemental shear walls or braced frames (Technique 3)
generally would not be cost-effective to correct a diaphragm opening deficiency unless it also was being
considered to improve other component deficiencies.

3.5.6 HORIZONTAL STEEL BRACING

3.5.6.1 Deficiency

The principal deficiency in horizontal steel bracing systems is inadequate force capacity of the members (i.e.,
bracing and floor or roof beams) and/or the connections.

3.5.6.2 Strengthening Techniques for Braces or Beams

Techniques. Deficient horizontal steel bracing system capacity can be improved by:
1.

Increasing the capacity of the existing bracing members or removing and replacing them with new members
and connections of greater capacity.

64

2.

Increasing the capacity of the existing members by reducing unbraced lengths.

3.

Increasing the capacity of the bracing system by adding new horizontal bracing members to previously
unbraced panels (if feasible).

4.

Increasing the capacity of the bracing system by adding a steel deck diaphragm to the floor system above
the steel bracing.

5.

Reducing the stresses in the horizontal bracing system by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements
(i.e., shear walls or braced frames) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. Horizontal bracing systems to resist wind or earthquake forces have been in common use for
many years in steel-framed industrial buildings. These bracing systems generally are integrated with the existing
floor or roof framing systems, and the capacity of the bracing system should be governed by the diagonal braces
and their connections. If the structural analysis indicates that the existing floor or roof framing members in the
bracing systems do not have adequate capacity for the seismic loads, providing additional bracing or other lateralload-resisting elements may be a cost-effective alternative to strengthening these members.
Simple strengthening techniques include increasing the capacity of the existing braces and their connections
(e.g., single-angle bracing could be doubled, double-angle bracing could be "starred") as well as removing existing
braces and replacing them with stronger braces and connections (Technique 1). If the compressive capacity of
the elements is the primary deficiency, providing a system of secondary braces that reduces the unbraced lengths
(Technique 2) of the members may be cost-effective. The existing connections must be investigated and, if found
to be inadequate, the connections will need to be strengthened. Technique 3 (providing horizontal braces in
adjacent unbraced panels if present) may be a very cost-effective approach to increasing the horizontal load
capacity.
Existing horizontal bracing systems often do not have an effective floor diaphragm and new floor or roof
diaphragm consisting of a reinforced concrete slab or steel decking with or without concrete fill can be provided
to augment or replace the horizontal bracing systems (Technique 4). A steel deck diaphragm may be designed
to augment the horizontal bracing, but a concrete slab probably would make the bracing ineffective because of
the large difference in rigidities. The concrete slab therefore would need to be designed to withstand the entire
lateral load.
As with other diaphragms, it may be possible to reduce diaphragm stresses to acceptable limits by providing
additional shear walls or vertical bracing (Technique 5). However, unlike true diaphragm systems, a horizontal
bracing system may not have the same shear capacity at any section (e.g., a simple bracing system between two
end walls may have increasing shear capacity from the center towards each end). In some cases, additional
vertical-resisting elements can increase the stresses in some of the elements of the existing bracing systems.

3.6 FOUNDATIONS
Deficient foundations occasionally are a cause for concern with respect to the seismic capacity of existing
buildings. Because the foundation loads associated with seismic forces are transitory and of very short duration,
allowable soil stresses for these loads, combined with the normal gravity loads, may be permitted to approach
ultimate stress levels. Where preliminary analysis indicates that there may be significant foundation problems,
recommendations from a qualified geotechnical engineer should be required to establish rational criteria for the
foundation analysis.

65

3.6.1 CONTINUOUS OR STRIP WALL FOOTINGS

3.6.1.1

Deficiencies

The principal deficiencies in the seismic capacity of existing continuous or strip wall footings are:
o

Excessive soil bearing pressure due to overturning forces and

Excessive uplift conditions due to overturning forces.

3.6.12 Strengthening Techniques for Excessive Soil Bearing Pressure

Techniques. The problem of excessive soil bearing pressure caused by seismic overturning forces can be
mitigated by:
1.

Increasing the bearing capacity of the footing by underpinning the footing ends and providing additional
footing area (Figure 3.6.1.2a).

2.

Increasing the vertical capacity of the footing by adding new drilled piers adjacent and connected to the
existing footing (Figure 3.6.1.2b).

3.

Increasing the soil bearing capacity by modifying the existing soil properties.

4.

Reducing the overturning forces by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls or
braced frames).

under
":=. fExcavate

=*
-'_:

*-

footing and underpin

\ig

Provide pocket in l

Drypack between

(E) and (N)footings

_ 1
after jacking

in spaced increments

new footingfor
jacking

FIGURE 3.6.1.2a Underpinning an existing footing.

66

li

.;

(E) wall and

strip footing
(N) reinforced
concrete needle

Iteam >>

(N) drilled concrete

piers
FIGURE 3.6.1.2b Strengthening an existing wall footing by the
addition of drilled piers.
Relative Merits. The most effective procedure for correcting excessive soil pressure due to seismic overturning
forces generally is to underpin the ends of the footing and to construct a larger footing under each end of the
existing footing (Technique 1). The new footing should be constructed in staggered increments, and each increment should be preloaded by jacking prior to transfer of the load from the existing footing. An alternative
procedure is to provide a drilled pier on each side and at each end of the wall (Technique 2). The reinforced
concrete piers should be cast-in-place in uncased holes so as to develop both tension and compression. Each
pier should extend above the bottom of the footing and be connected by a reinforced concrete beam through
the existing wall above the footing (Figure 3.6.1.2.b).
Techniques 1 and 2 are costly and disruptive. For this reason, when seismic upgrading results in increased
forces that require foundation strengthening, it may be cost-effective to consider other seismic upgrading
schemes. Soil conditions may be such that modifying the capacity of existing soils is the most viable alternative.
The soil beneath structures founded on clean sand can be strengthened through the injection of chemical grouts.
The bearing capacity of other types of soils can be strengthened by compaction grouting. With chemical grouting, chemical grout is injected into clean sand in a regular pattern beneath the foundation. The grout mixes with
the sand to form a composite material with a significantly higher bearing capacity. With compaction grouting,
grout also is injected in a regular pattern beneath the foundation but it displaces the soil away from the pockets
of injected grout rather than dispersing into the soil. The result of the soil displacement is a densification of the
soil and, hence, increased bearing capacity. Some disruption of existing floors adjacent to the subject foundations
may be required in order to cut holes needed for uniform grout injection. Alternatively, seismic forces on the
footing can be reduced by adding other vertical-resisting elements such as bracing, shear walls, or buttresses.

67

3.6.1.3 Strengthening Techniques for Excessive Uplift Conditions

Deficient capacity of existing foundations to resist prescribed uplift forces caused by seismic overturning moments can be improved by:
Techniques.

1.

Increasing the uplift capacity of the existing footing by adding drilled piers or soil anchors.

2.

Increasing the size of the existing footing by underpinning to mobilize additional foundation and soil weight.

3.

Reducing the uplift forces by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls or braced
frames) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Any seismic rehabilitation alternative that requires significant foundation work will be costly.
Access for heavy equipment (e.g., drilling rigs, backhoes, and pile drivers), ease of material handling, and the
need to minimize the disruption of the functional use of the building are a few of the reasons why exterior
foundation rehabilitation work will be significantly less costly than interior work.
Providing a significant increase in the uplift capacity of an existing foundation generally is most effectively
achieved by adding drilled piers or soil anchors (Technique 1). Reinforced concrete piers can be provided
adjacent to the footing and connected to the existing footing with steel or concrete beams (Figure 3.6.1.2b).
Locating the piers symmetrically on both sides of the footing will minimize connections that must transfer
eccentric loads. The details for eccentric connections may not always be feasible. However, providing concentric
drilled piers almost ensures that interior foundation work will be needed.
Soil anchors similar to those used to tie-back retaining walls also can be used instead of drilled piers.
Hollow core drill bits from 6 inches to 2 feet in diameter can be used to drill the needed deep holes. After
drilling, a deformed steel tension rod is placed into the hole through the center of the bit. As the bit is
withdrawn, cement grout is pumped through the stem of the bit bonding to the tension rod and the soil. These
types of soil anchors can provide a significant tensile capacity. Drilling rigs are available that can drill in the
interior of buildings even with low headroom; however, this is more costly.
Underpinning the ends of the footing to create a wider bearing area at each end has the beneficial effect
of reducing the uplift by increasing the area, the moment of inertia, and the dead load of the existing footing.
Although this may be a feasible alternative, it is usually less cost-effective than adding drilled piers or soil
anchors. The size of the necessary footing addition becomes prohibitive if substantial uplift forces need to be
resisted.
As with other rehabilitation techniques, reducing the overturning forces by providing additional verticalresisting elements (Technique 3) such as braced frames, shear walls, or buttresses may be viable. The addition
of buttresses may transfer loads to the exterior of the building where foundation work may not be so costly.
Some engineers believe that uplifting of the ends of rigid shear walls is not a deficiency and may actually
be beneficial in providing a limit to the seismic base shear. Others design the structure for the overturning forces
but ignore the tendency of the foundation to uplift. If the foundations are permitted to uplift, the engineer must
investigate the redistribution of forces in the wall and in the soil due to the shift in the resultant of the soil
pressure and also the potential distortion of structural and nonstructural elements framing into the wall.
Relative Merits.

3.6.2 INDIVIDUAL PIER OR COLUMN FOOTINGS

3.6.2.1

Deficiencies

The principal deficiencies in the seismic capacity of existing individual pier or column footings are:
*

Excessive soil bearing pressure due to overturning forces,

Excessive uplift conditions due to overturning forces, and

Inadequate passive soil pressure to resist lateral loads.

68

3.62.2 Strengthening Techniques for Excessive Soil Bearing Pressure

Techniques. The problem of excessive soil bearing pressure due to overturning forces can be mitigated by:
1.

Increasing the bearing capacity of the footing by underpinning the footing ends and/or providing additional
footing area (Figure 3.6.1.2a).

2.

Increasing the vertical capacity of the footing by adding new drilled piers adjacent and connected to the
existing footing (Figure 3.6.1.2b).

3.

Reducing the bearing pressure on the existing footings by connecting adjacent footings with deep reinforced
concrete tie beams.

4.

Increasing the soil bearing capacity by modifying the existing soil properties.

5.

Reducing the overturning forces by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls or
braced frames).

Relative Merits. The considerations in selecting alternatives to correcting excessive soil bearing pressure due to
overturning forces in individual pier or column footings are similar to those discussed above for continuous or
strip footings. There is, however, the additional alternative of tying adjacent footings together with a deep
reinforced concrete beam (Technique 3), which may be a feasible means of distributing the forces resulting from
the overturning moment to adjacent footings.

3.6.23 Strengthening Techniques for Excessive Uplift Conditions

Techniques. Deficient capacity of existing foundations to resist the prescribed uplift forces caused by seismic
overturning moments can be improved by:
1.

Increasing the uplift capacity of the existing footing by adding drilled piers or soil anchors.

2.

Increasing the size of the existing footing to mobilize additional foundation and soil weight.

3.

Increasing the uplift capacity by providing a new deep reinforced concrete beam to mobilize the dead load
on an adjacent footing.

4.

Reducing the uplift forces by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls or braced
frames).

Relative Merits. The considerations in selecting techniques to correct excessive uplift conditions due to
overturning forces in individual pier or column footings are similar to those discussed above for continuous or
strip footings. Technique 2 is appropriate only when, excessive uplift results from combined vertical loads and
moments on the footing. There is, however, the additional alternative of tying adjacent footings together with
a deep reinforced concrete beam (Technique 3), which may be a feasible means for mobilizing the existing mass
supported by an adjacent footing.

69

3.6.2A Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Passive Soil Pressure

Techniques. The problem of excessive passive soil pressure caused by seismic loads can be mitigated by:
1.

Providing an increase in bearing area by enlarging the footing.

2.

Providing an increase in bearing area by adding new tie beams between existing footings.

3.

Improving the existing soil conditions adjacent to the footing to increase the allowable passive pressure.

4.

Reducing the bearing pressure at overstressed locations by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements
such as shear walls or braced frames as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Mefits. As noted above, foundation rework generally is relatively costly. The foundation strengthening
technique that is the most cost-effective generally is the technique that can resolve more than one concern. The
addition of a new deep tie beam between adjacent footings if required to resist overturning forces will likely
address inadequate passive soil pressure concerns. As the above discussion indicates, the most cost-effective
alternative to the strengthening of an existing foundation usually is not readily apparent. Several alternative
schemes may have to be developed to the point where reasonable cost estimates can be made to evaluate the
tangible costs (i.e., the total actual work that needs to be accomplished) as well as the disruption or relocation
of an ongoing function and the architectural considerations.

3.6.3 PILES OR DRILLED PIERS

3.63.1 Deficiencies
The principal deficiencies in the seismic capacity of piles or drilled piers are:
*

Excessive tensile or compressive loads on the piles or piers due to the seismic forces combined with the
gravity loads and
Inadequate lateral force capacity to transfer the seismic shears from the pile caps and the piles to the soil.

3.63.2 Strengthening Techniques for Excessive Tensile or Compressive Loads

Techniques. Deficient tensile or compressive capacity of piles or piers can be improved by:
1.

Increasing the capacity of the foundation by driving additional piles and replacing or enlarging the existing
pile cap (Figure 3.6.3.2).

2.

Reducing the loads on overstressed pile caps by adding tie beams to adjacent pile caps and distributing the
loads.

Relative Merits. Although it may be possible to drive additional piles to correct the deficiency, it usually is very
difficult to utilize the existing pile cap to distribute the loads effectively to both old and new piles. It then may
be necessary to consider temporary shoring of the column or other structural members supported by the pile
caps so that the pile caps can be removed and replaced with a new pile cap that will include the new piles.
As discussed above for individual footings, it may be more cost-effective to provide deep tie beams to
distribute some of the pile load to adjacent pile caps that may have excess capacity than to drive new piles.

70

(E) pile cap to be

replaced or enlarged
3.63.2 Upgrading an existing pile foundation.
3.633

Strengthening Techniques for Excessive Lateral Forces

Techniques. Deficient lateral force capacity of piles or piers can be improved by:
1.

Reducing the loads on overstressed pile caps by adding tie beams to adjacent pile caps and distributing the
loads.

2.

Increasing the allowable passive pressure of the soil by improving the soil adjacent to the pile cap.

3.

Increasing the capacity of the foundation by driving additional piles and replacing or enlarging existing pile
cap.

4.

Reducing loads on the piles or piers by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., braced
frames or shear walls) and transferring forces to other foundation members with reserve capacity as
discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. The most cost-effective approach may be to provide tie beams between piers or pile caps
(Technique 1). The tie beams will distribute loads between foundation elements as well as provide additional
surface area to mobilize additional passive pressure. In specific situations, the other alternatives may be more

71

cost-effective depending upon accessibility as well as the impact each alternative may have on the ongoing
functional use of the building.

MAT FOUNDATIONS

3.6.4
3.6.4.1

Deficiencies

Seismic deficiencies in mat foundations are not common; however, the following two deficiencies can occur:
o

Inadequate moment capacity to resist combined gravity plus seismic overturning forces and

Inadequate passive soil pressure to resist sliding.

3.6.4.2 Strengthening Technique for Inadequate Moment Capacity

Deficient mat foundation moment capacity can be corrected by increasing the mat capacity locally by providing
additional reinforced concrete (i.e., an inverted column capital) doweled and bonded to the existing mat to act
as a monolithic section. If the inadequacy is due to concentrated seismic overturning loads, it may be possible
to provide new shear walls above the mat to distribute the overturning loads and also to locally increase the
section modulus of the mat.
3.6.43 Strengthening Technique for Inadequate Lateral Resistance
Deficient mat foundation lateral resistance (e.g., the possibility of a mat founded at shallow depth in the soil)
can be corrected by the construction of properly spaced shear keys at the mat perimeter. The shear keys would
be constructed by trenching under the mat, installing dowels on the underside of the mat, and placing reinforced
concrete in the trench.

3.7 DIAPHRAGM TO VERTICAL ELEMENT CONNECTIONS

Seismic inertial forces originate in all elements of buildings and are delivered through structural connections to
horizontal diaphragms. The diaphragms distribute these forces to vertical elements that transfer the forces to
the foundation.
An adequate connection between the diaphragm and the vertical elements is essential to the satisfactory
performance of any structure. The connections must be capable of transferring the in-plane shear stress from
the diaphragms to the vertical elements and of providing support for out-of-plane forces on the vertical elements.
The following types of diaphragms are discussed below: timber, concrete, precast concrete, steel deck
without concrete fill, steel deck with concrete fill, and horizontal steel bracing.

3.7.1 CONNECTIONS IN TIMBER DIAPHRAGMS

3.7.1.1

Deficiencies

The principal connection deficiencies in timber diaphragms are:

Inadequate capacity to transfer in-plane shear at the connection of the diaphragm to interior shear walls or
vertical bracing,

72

Inadequate capacity to transfer in-plane shear at the connection of the diaphragm to exterior shear walls
or vertical bracing, and

Inadequate out-of-plane anchorage at the connection of the diaphragm to exterior concrete or masonry walls.

3.7.1.2 Strengthening Techniques for Interior Shear Wall Connections

Deficient shear transfer capacity of a diaphragm at the connection to an interior shear wall or braced frame can
be improved by:
1.

Increasing the shear transfer capacity of the diaphragm local to the connection by providing additional
nailing to existing or new blocking (Figure 3.7.1.2a).

2.

Reducing the local shear transfer stresses by distributing the forces from the diaphragm by providing a
collector member to transfer the diaphragm forces to the shear wall (Figure 3.7.1.2b).

3.

Reducing the shear transfer stress in the existing connection by providing supplemental vertical-resisting
elements as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

(E) wood floor

diaphragm

-E

. rA

il

II

1i
!i ,i

l (N) framing anchor

l l as an alternate

,/1
/

(E) floor joist

-i

LX

(N) deep joist nailed

to floor sheathing
and top plate of

existing shear wall

(extend beyond wall

as collector if
required)

(N) additional deep

joist if required

I
I

(E) plywood

sheathing

III

FIGURE 3.7.1.2a Strengthening the connection of a diaphragm to an interior

shear wall (wall parallel to floor joist).

73

Relative Merits. If the shear transfer deficiency is governed by the existing nailing, the most cost-effective alternative most likely is to provide additional nailing (Technique 1); however, stripping of the flooring or roofing
surface is required. If it is not feasible to provide adequate additional nailing within the length of the shear wall,
the installation of a collector (Technique 2) probably will be the most cost-effective alternative. As indicated
in the detail on the left of Figure 3.7.1.2b, if the nailing of the diaphragm to the new blocking is inadequate to
transfer the desired shear force over the length of the shear wall, a drag strut or collector member should be
provided and the new blocking extended as required beyond the end of the shear wall. The shear force is
collected in the drag strut and transferred to the shear wall with more effective nailing or bolting. The new
lumber must be dimensionally stable and cut to size.
Technique 3 (i.e., providing additional vertical-resisting elements) usually involves construction of additional
interior shear walls or exterior buttresses. This alternative generally is more expensive than the other two
because of the need for new foundations and for drag struts or other connections to collect the diaphragm shears
for transfer to the new shear walls or buttresses.

(N) deep blocking

nailed to floor
sheathing and drag

(N) deep blocking

nailed to floor

sheathing and top

plate of existing
shear wall
(N) blocking and framing
anchor as alterna te
to deep blocking

strut

extend blocking an d
drag strut beyond
end of shear wall aIs
required to distrib' ute

the force to the diaiphragm

W

"

~~

-I--~_-

e5

-~~~~~~~~~~~~

h1i

T
:P

,0L.

(N)drag strut

nailed to top plate of

existing shear wall
1111

FIGURE 3.7.1.2b Strengthening the connection of a diaphragm to an interior shear wall

(wall perpendicular to floor joist).

74

3.7.1.3 Strengthening Techniques for In-Plane Shear Transfer Capacity to Exterior Walls
Techniques. Deficient in-plane shear transfer capacity of a diaphragm to exterior shear walls or braced frames
can be improved by.
1.

Increasing the capacity of existing connections by providing additional nailing and/or bolting.

2.

Reducing the local shear transfer stresses by distributing the forces from the diaphragm by providing chords
or collector members to collect and distribute shear from the diaphragm to the shear wall or bracing (Figure
3.7.1.3).

3.

Reducing the shear stress in the existing connection by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements
as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Metis. Inadequate in-plane shear transfer capacity at an exterior shear wall typically is a deficiency when
large openings along the line of the wall exist. In this case, the shear force to be resisted per unit length of wall
may be significantly greater than the shear force per unit length transferred from the diaphragm by the existing
nailing or bolting. If the diaphragm and the shear walls have adequate shear capacity (as described for interior
shear walls in Sec. 3.7.1.2), the solution requires transfer of the diaphragm shear to a collector member for
distribution to the discontinuous shear walls. For timber shear walls parallel to the joists, the exterior joist
usually is doubled up at the exterior wall and extended as a header over openings. This doubled joist can be
spliced for continuity and used as a drag strut with shear transfer to the wall by means of metal clip anchors and
nails or lag screws. Figure 3.7;1.3 shows an elevation of an existing wood stud shear wall with a large opening.
If the resulting unit shears in the walls on either side of the opening are larger than the existing shear transfer
capacity of the roof diaphragm (e.g., in this case, the capacity is governed by the existing nailing to the perimeter
blocking or double joists), a collector member is required to collect the diaphragm shears and transfer them, at
a higher shear stress, to the shear walls. In Figure 3.7.1.3, it is assumed that additional capacity is required for
the existing shear walls and provided by new sheathing on the inside face. The assumed force path is from the
roof sheathing to the blocking or double joists, from the blocking or joists to the exterior sheathing, from the
exterior sheathing to the double plates at the top of the stud wall, and from the double plates to the collector
members and the new sheathing. Adequate new or existing nailing must be provided at each of the above
interfaces. The shear walls also must be checked for shear transfer at the foundation and the need for holddown provisions to resist uplift from the additional forces. Note that, in the detail parallel to the joists, the
existing double joists, if adequately spliced, can be utilized as a collector member. Similarly, if the existing
double plates had been continuous over the opening, the collector member normal to the joists would not be
required.
For steel frame buildings with discontinuous braced panels, the spandrel supporting the floor or roof framing
may be used as a chord or collector member.
For discontinuous masonry, concrete or precast concrete shear walls parallel to the joists, the sheathing
typically is nailed to a joist or ledger bolted to the wall. The joist or ledger can be spliced for continuity and
supplementary bolting to the shear wall provided as required. For shear walls perpendicular to the joists, the
sheathing may be nailed to discontinuous blocking between the ends of the joists. In this case, the chord or
collector member may have to be provided on top of the diaphragm. This new member may be a continuous
steel member bolted to the wall and nailed or lag screwed, with proper edge distance, to the diaphragm and also
could be designed to provide out-of-plane anchorage as indicated in Figure 3.7.1.2b.
As discussed above with respect to interior wall connection deficiencies, providing additional vertical-resisting
elements (Technique 3) is likely to be the most costly alternative unless it is being considered to correct other
component deficiencies.

75

(E) wood

(E) header beam

sheathingv

(E) stud wall

Elevation

(E) joists and

roof sheathing

(E) double joists -if not lap-spliced,

provide (N) collector
member as shown at left 4

(E) wood

sheathing

'N.

(E)

(N) continous collector

member (splice by nailing
to header beam)

Parallel to Joists

Normal to Joists
Section a-a

opening.
FIGURE 3.7.13 Strengthening an existing wood stud shear wall with a large

76

3.7.1.4 Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Out-of-Plane Anchorage

Techniques. Deficient out-of-plane anchorage capacity of wood diaphragms connected to concrete or masonry
walls with wood ledgers can be improved by:
1.

Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing steel straps connected to the wall (using drilled and
grouted bolts or through bolts for masonry walls) and bolted or lagged to the diaphragm or roof or floor
joists (Figures 3.7.1.4a, b, and c).

2.

Increasing the capacity of the connections by providing a steel anchor to connect the roof or floor joists to
the walls (Figure 3.7.1.4d).

3.

Increasing the redundancy of the connection by providing continuity ties into the diaphragm (Figure 3.7.1.4ad).

Relative Merits. An important condition to be addressed in retrofitting any existing heavy walled structure with
a wood diaphragm is the anchorage of the walls for out-of-plane forces. Prior to the mid-1970s, it was common
construction practice to bolt a 3x ledger to a concrete or masonry wall, install metal joist hangers to the ledger,
drop in 2x joists, and sheath with plywood. The plywood that lapped the ledger would be nailed into the ledger
providing both in-plane and out-of-plane shear transfer. The 1971 San Fernando earthquake caused many of
these connections to fail. Out-of-plane forces stressed the ledgers in their weak cross-grain axis and caused many
of them to split, allowing the walls to fall out and the roof to fall in. When retrofitting a masonry or concrete
structure, this condition should be remedied by providing a positive connection between the concrete or masonry
wall and wood diaphragm. Techniques 1 and 2 are, in general, equally cost-effective. In addition to correcting
the ledger concerns, continuity ties need to be provided between diaphragm chords in order to distribute the
anchorage forces well into the diaphragm. Joist hangers and glulam connections frequently have no tensile
capacity, but this tensile capacity can be provided by installing tie rods bolted to adjacent joist or glulam framing
(Figure 3.7.1.4e). These continuity ties provide a necessary redundancy in the connection of heavy walled
structures to timber diaphragms.

(E) wall

-.

_-

.-

(E) floor or roof

(N) blocking
/(E) joist

(N) metal strap anchor lag

bolted to new blocking

FIGURE 3.7.1Aa Strengthening out-of-plane connections of a wood diaphragm.

77

out-of-plane connections of a wood diaphragm.

778

I--~

*-

(E) wall
(N) blocking

A-- e (E) floor or roof

(E) joist
(N) metal strap anchor
(N) through rod
FIGURE 3.7.1.4c

Strengthening out-of-plane connections of a wood

diaphragm.

79

(N) anchor
bolted to joist

(N) torque nut

FIGURE 3.7.1Ad Strengthening out-of-plane connections of a wood

diaphragm.
(E) flooring
(E) glulam

connection

(E) glulam beam

(N) tie rod
tension splice
FIGURE 3.7.1.4e Strengthening tensile capacity of an existing
glulam beam connection.

80

3.7.15 Strengthening Techniques for Interfloor Tensile Capacity

Techniques. Deficient tensile capacity of the connections of wood stud shear walls through diaphragms can be
improved by.
1.

2.

Increasing the tensile capacity of the connections at the edge of the shear walls by providing metal
connectors.
Reducing the overturning moments by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements as discussed in Sec.
3.4.

FIGURE 3.7.L5a Strengthening the connection between shear walls using a

metal strap.

81

(N) steel angle

(hold-down) thru
bolted into (E or N)
studs or 4X4 (N) steel rod
hold-donwn bolted to

steel angle and

anchor plate v

y 7 bolt

diameters
\I' (E) blocking
\~ (E) double top plate
FIGURE 3.7.1.5b Strengthening the connection between shear walls using a
hold-down.
Relative Merits. Typical wood stud framing has minimal capacity to transfer uplift forces from one shear wall
to the shear wall below. At exterior walls, plywood sheathing generally is provided with a horizontal joint below
the diaphragm to provide for "settling' shrinkage of the framing. Hence, minimal resistance to transfer uplift
forces is provided unless continuity in the sheathing is provided by nailing top and bottom pieces to a common
member (e.g., horizontal blocking or fascia as shown in Figure 3.5.1.3). The only resistance to uplift loads at
exterior or interior shear walls may be the withdrawal capacity of the nails.
Metal straps or tie rods that tie the shear wall edge framing between floors (Figure 3.7.1.5c) are an economical approach to providing the prescribed tensile capacity. The wall finishes would be removed, a hole drilled
or cut in the diaphragm or wall plates, and the connectors installed. Plywood shear walls should be adequately
edge nailed to the double studs that are connected with the metal straps. For light timber structures, the metal
straps may be of sheet metal and the sheathing can be nailed through the straps. When the straps are required
to be of greater thickness, they may be recessed and drilled for nailing of the sheathing or, alternatively, the
straps may be placed on the outside of the sheathing. See Figure 3.5.1.3 for typical splicing of sheathing and
development of double top plates as chord or collector members. Figures 3.7.1.5a and b present two connection
details where the shear wall on the upper floor does not align with the shear wall on a lower floor.
Technique 2 would be a viable alternative only if it is being considered to correct other component
deficiencies (e.g., inadequate shear capacity in the existing walls).

82

(E or N) double
stud or 4X4
(N) metal strap
hold-down
(can be placed on top
of existing sheathing)

(E) beam or header

(E) floor framing

(N) steel angle

(hold-down) thru
bolted into (E or N)

studs or 4X4

(N) steel rod

hold-down bolted to
steel angle and
anchor plate
(E) beam or header
FIGURE 3.7.1.Sc Strengthening shear wall uplift capacity at a discontinuity.
83

3.7.2 CONNECTIONS OF CONCRETE DIAPHRAGMS

3.7.2.1 Deficiencies

The principal deficiencies of the connections of concrete diaphragms to vertical-resisting elements such as shear
walls or braced frames are:
*

Inadequate in-plane shear transfer capacity and

Inadequate anchorage capacity for out-of-plane forces in the connecting walls.

3.7.2.2 Strengthening Techniques for In-Plane Shear Wall Connections

Techniques. Deficient in-plane shear transfer capacity of a diaphragm to an interior shear wall or braced frame
can be improved by:
1.

Reducing the local stresses at the diaphragm-to-wall interface by providing collector members or drag struts
under the diaphragm and connecting them to the diaphragm and the wall.

2.

Increasing the capacity of the existing diaphragm-to-wall connection by providing additional dowels grouted
into drilled holes.

3.

Reducing the shear stresses in the existing connection by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements
as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Inadequate in-plane shear capacity of connections between concrete diaphragms and verticalresisting elements usually occurs where large openings in the diaphragm exist adjacent to the shear wall (e.g.,
at stair wells) or where the shear force distributed to interior shear walls or braced frames exceeds the capacity
of the connection to the diaphragm. If the walls and the diaphragm have sufficient capacity to resist the
prescribed loads, the most cost-effective alternative to increase the connection capacity is likely to be providing
additional dowels grouted into drilled holes (Technique 2). If the required connection capacity cannot be
developed within the length of the shear wall, the addition of collector members (Technique 1) as indicated in
Figure 3.7.2.2 is likely to be the most cost-effective alternative.
As previously discussed, reducing the forces in the deficient connection by providing supplemental verticalresisting elements (Technique 3) is not likely to be the most cost-effective alternative (due to the probable need
for new foundations and drag struts) unless it is being considered to correct other component deficiencies.

Relative Merits.

84

(E) reinforced
concrete shearwalls

Ad (N) steel collector

member

(E) reinforced
concrete slab
(E) reinforced
concrete slabs

A~
/

7'

(N) collector member with

through bolts in drilled
holes; also could use

concretemember

/~reinforced

'

c tNote:

"'

with grouted dowels

Bolts to slab are designed in

(E) reinforced

accordance with shear capacity

concrete shear
wall

slab and to wall in accordance with

wall shear capacity. Consider
possible unequal loading of bolts.
"__vsan

FIGURE 3.7.2.2 Use of a collector member to improve shear transfer from a concrete

diaphragm.
3.723

Strengthening Techniques for Out-of-Plane Capacity

Techniques. Deficient out-of-plane anchorage capacity of connections of concrete diaphragms to concrete or

masonry walls can be improved using one or both of the following techniques:
1.

Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing additional dowels grouted into drilled holes.

2.

Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing a new member above or below the slab connected
to the slab with drilled and grouted bolts similar to that indicated in Figure 3.5.4.3 for providing a new
diaphragm chord.

Relative Merits. The most cost-effective alternative generally is to provide additional dowels grouted into drilled
holes (Technique 1). The holes are most efficiently drilled from the exterior through the wall and into the slab.
Access to the exterior face of the wall is obviously required. When the exterior face is not accessible (e.g., when
it abuts an adjacent building), providing a new member connected to the existing wall and slab (Technique 2)
is likely to be preferred.

85

3.7.3 CONNECTIONS OF POURED GYPSUM DIAPHRAGMS

3.7.3.1

Deficiencies

The principal deficiencies of poured gypsum diaphragms are similar to those for concrete diaphragms:

Inadequate in-plane shear transfer capacity and

Inadequate anchorage capacity for out-of-plane forces in the connecting walls.

3.73.2 Strengthening Techniques

Techniques. If the gypsum diaphragm is in direct contact with the shear wall, it will be possible to improve the
in-plane shear transfer by providing new dowels from the diaphragm into the shear wall similar to the details
indicated in Figures 3.5.2.2 and 3.5.2.3. Alternative strengthening techniques for the deficiencies also include
removal of the gypsum diaphragm and replacement with steel decking or the addition of a new horizontal bracing
system designed to resist all of the seismic forces.
Relative Merits. As indicated in Sec. 3.5.3.2, allowable structural stresses for gypsum are very low and the
additional strengthening that can be achieved is very limited. Further, the typical framing details (e.g., steel joist,
bulb tee, and insulation board) are such that it is difficult to make direct and effective connections to the gypsum
slab. For these reasons, the techniques involving removal and replacement or a new horizontal bracing system
are likely to be the most cost-effective solutions except when the existing diaphragm is only marginally deficient.

3.7A CONNECTIONS OF PRECAST CONCRETE DIAPHRAGMS

3.7.4.1

Deficiencies

The principal deficiencies of the connections of precast concrete diaphragms to the vertical-resisting elements
are:
*

Inadequate in-plane shear transfer capacity and

Inadequate anchorage capacity at the exterior walls for out-of-plane forces.

3.7.42 Strengthening Techniques for Precast Concrete Diaphragm Connections

Techniques. Deficient shear transfer or anchorage capacity of a connection of a precast concrete diaphragm to
a concrete or masonry wall or a steel frame can be improved by.
1.

Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing additional welded inserts or dowels placed in drilled
or grouted holes.

2.

Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing a reinforced concrete overlay that is bonded to the
precast units and anchored to the wall with additional dowels placed in drilled and grouted holes (Figure
3.5.2.2).

3.

Reducing the forces at the connection by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements as discussed in
Sec. 3.4.

86

Relative Merits. Precast concrete plank or tee floors that have inadequate connection capacity for transferring
in-plane shear to vertical elements such as shear walls or braced frames can be strengthened by drilling
intermittent holes in the precast units at the vertical element. When the floors are supported on steel framing,
welded inserts (or studs) can be added and the holes grouted (Technique 1). When the floors are supported
on concrete or masonry units, dowels can be inserted and grouted into the drilled holes. If the diaphragm
contains prestressing strands, extreme care must be taken prior to drilling to avoid cutting the strands. A more
costly alternative is to provide a reinforced concrete overlay that is bonded to the precast units and additional
dowels grouted into holes drilled into the wall (Technique 2). This will require the stripping of the existing floor
surface and raising the floor level by 2 to 3 inches, which will necessitate adjusting of nonstructural elements to
the new floor elevation (e.g., stairs, doors, electrical outlets, etc.).
As previously discussed, reducing the shear forces in the deficient connection by providing supplemental
vertical-resisting elements (Technique 3) is not likely to be the most cost-effective alternative (due to the
probable need of new foundations and drag struts) unless it is being considered to correct other component
deficiencies. This. alternative also is not effective in reducing the out-of-plane forces unless the new verticalresisting elements can be constructed so as to form effective buttresses for the existing walls.

3.7.5 CONNECTIONS OF STEEL DECK DIAPHRAGMS WITHOUT CONCRETE FILL

3.7.5.1

Deficiencies

For steel deck diaphragms without concrete fill, the principal deficiencies of their connections to the verticalresisting elements such as shear walls, braced frames, or moment frames are:
*

Inadequate in-plane shear capacity and

Inadequate anchorage capacity for out-of-plane forces in walls.

3.7.52 Strengthening Techniques for Steel Deck Connections

Techniques. Deficient shear transfer or anchorage capacity of a connection of a steel deck diaphragm to a shear
wall, braced frame, or moment frame can be improved by:
1.

Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing additional welding at the vertical element.

2.

Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing additional anchor bolts.

3.

Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing concrete fill over the deck with dowels grouted into
holes drilled into the wall.

4.

Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing new steel members (Figure 3.7.5.2a) to effect a direct
transfer of diaphragm shears to a shear wall.

5.

Reducing the local stresses by providing additional vertical-resisting elements such as shear walls, braced
frames, or moment frames as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. Steel decking typically is supported by metal framing, by steel angle, or by channel ledgers bolted
to concrete or masonry walls. If the deficiency is in the connection and not the diaphragm, the most costeffective alternative is to increase the welding of the decking to the steel member or ledger to at least the
capacity of the diaphragm. If supported by a ledger, the capacity of the ledger connections to the concrete or
masonry wall also may have to be improved; this is most effectively done by providing additional bolts in drilled
and grouted holes.

87

(E) steel deck

/ -

diaphragm
,'.-~-

(E) open web

steel joists

J'

(E) concrete or
masonry wall

(N) bent steel plates

between joists, weld
to steel deck

(N) continuous chord or

collector spliced by
bolts to bend plates and
anchored to masonry wall

(a)

(a (N) steel strap welded

to decking

(E) concrete
or masonry wall <

and new angle

(E) steel deck with

reinforced concrete

fill by

(E) ledger angle

and bolting
(N) provide additional
welding at deck to ledger
angle as required

(N) steel angle as required

welded to (E) ledger angle

(N) bolts grouted

in drilled holes o

(b)
FIGURE 3.7.5.2 Strengthening the connection of a steel deck diaphragm to a
concrete or masonry wall.

88

If the decking is being reinforced by filling with reinforced concrete, the most effective alternative will be
to drill and grout dowels into the adjacent concrete or masonry wall and lap with reinforcing steel in the new
slab. In some cases it may be feasible to use the existing steel support member at the wall as a collector as
shown in Figure 3.7.5.2b. In this figure the capacity of the existing decking has been increased by additional
welding to the ledger angle and the addition of a reinforced concrete fill. Reinforcement dowels are welded to
the angle that functions as a collector member and the shear forces are transferred to the wall by the existing
and new anchor bolts, as required.
Steel deck roof diaphragms may be supported on open web steel joists that rest on steel bearing plates at
the top of concrete or masonry walls. In existing buildings that have not been properly designed for resisting
lateral loads, there may not be a direct path for the transfer of diaphragm shears to the vertical walls, particularly
when the decking span is parallel to the wall. As shown in Figure 3.7.5.2a, new steel elements (i.e., bent plates)
can be provided between the joists for direct connection to the decking. A continuous member also can be
provided to function as a chord or collector member. As noted above, strengthening a steel deck diaphragm
connection to the vertical-resisting elements is effective only if the body of the diaphragm has adequate capacity
to resist the design lateral forces. If the diaphragm does not have adequate capacity it needs to be strengthened
as discussed in Sec. 3.5.5.
As previously discussed, reducing the shear transfer forces in the deficient connection by providing
supplemental vertical-resisting elements (Technique 4) is not likely to be the most cost-effective alternative (due
to the probable need of new foundations and drag struts) unless it is being considered to correct other
component deficiencies. Further, in order to reduce out-of-plane wall forces, the new vertical elements would
be required to act as buttresses to the existing walls.

3.7.6 CONNECTIONS OF STEEL DECK DIAPHRAGMS WITH CONCRETE FILL

3.7.6.1

Deficiency

The principal deficiency of a connection of a steel deck diaphragm with concrete fill to the vertical-resisting
elements such as shear walls, braced frames, or moment frames is the in-plane shear capacity or anchorage
capacity for out-of-plane forces in walls.

3.7.6.2 Strengthening Techniques for Steel Deck Connections

Techniques. Deficient shear capacity or anchorage of a connection of a steel deck diaphragm to a shear wall,
braced frame, or moment frame can be improved by:
1.

Increasing the shear capacity by drilling holes through the concrete fill, and providing additional shear studs
welded to the vertical elements through the decking (Figure 3.5.5.2a).

2.

Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing additional anchor bolts (drilled and grouted)
connecting the steel support to the wall.

3.

Increasing the capacity of the connection by placing dowels between the existing wall and diaphragm slab.

4.

Reducing the local stresses by providing additional vertical-resisting elements such as shear walls, braced
frames, or moment frames as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. If the deficiency is in both the connection of the diaphragm to the ledger and the ledger to the
shear wall, the most cost-effective alternative may be to provide a direct force transfer from the slab to the wall
by installing dowels (Technique 3). This is accomplished by removing the concrete to expose the diaphragm slab
reinforcement, drilling holes in the wall, laying in dowels, and grouting and reconstructing the diaphragm slab.
If the deficiency is in the slab-to-supporting steel member connection, Technique 1 is preferred. If the deficiency
is in the steel ledger to the wall connection, Technique 2 is preferred. Figure 3.7.5.2b illustrates a technique for

89

strengthening a steel deck diaphragm connection to a concrete or masonry wall. In this figure, it is assumed that
the existing decking with concrete fill has adequate capacity for the design loads, but the connection to the wall
is deficient for in-plane shear and out-of-plane anchorage forces. In the figure, the in-plane shear is assumed
to be transferred from the decking to the existing ledger angle with additional welding (if required). The new
angles, bolted to the wall and welded to the ledger angle, provide the necessary additional shear transfer capacity.
The new steel straps, welded to the new angles and to the underside of the decking, provide the additional outof-plane anchorage capacity. When the new dowels or anchor bolts are to be attached to existing thin concrete
walls (e.g., precast tees or other thin ribbed concrete sections), through bolts or threaded rods are required to
provide adequate anchorage or doweling to the diaphragm. If the vertical-resisting elements are steel braced
frames or steel moment frames, the increase in connection capacity obviously would be achieved through
additional welding and supplemental reinforcing members as required.
As previously discussed, reducing the forces in the deficient connection by providing supplemental verticalresisting elements (Technique 4) is unlikely to be the most cost-effective alternative (due to the probable need
of new foundations and drag struts) unless it is being considered to correct other component deficiencies.
Further, in order to reduce out-of-plane wall forces, the new vertical elements would be required to act as
buttresses to the existing walls.

3.7.7 CONNECTIONS OF HORIZONTAL STEEL BRACING

3.7.7.1 Deficiencies

The two primary deficiencies in the connection capacity of horizontal steel braces to vertical-resisting elements
such as shear walls or braced frames are:

Inadequate in-plane shear transfer capacity and

Inadequate anchorage capacity when supporting concrete or masonry wails for out-of-plane forces.

3.7.7.2 Strengthening Techniques for In-Plane Shear Transfer Capacity

Techniques. Deficient shear transfer capacity of connections of horizontal steel bracing systems to shear walls
or braced frames can be improved by.
1.

Increasing the capacity by providing larger or more bolts or by welding.

2.

Reducing the stresses by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements such as shear walls or braced
frames as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. The first alternative of providing larger or more bolts between the horizontal brace members
and the concrete or masonry shear wall or providing additional welding when connecting to a steel braced frame
generally will be the most cost-effective. Collectors along the wall may be required to distribute the concentrated
brace shear along the wall to allow for adequate bolt spacing.
As previously discussed, reducing the forces in the deficient connection by providing supplemental verticalresisting elements (Technique 2) is not likely to be the most cost-effective alternative unless it is being considered
to correct other component deficiencies.

90

3.7.7.3 Strengthening Technique for Out-Of-Plane Anchorage

Technique. Deficient out-of-plane anchorage capacity of connections between horizontal steel bracing systems
and concrete or masonry shear walls can be improved by increasing the capacity of the connection by providing
additional anchor bolts grouted in drilled holes and by providing more bolts or welding to the bracing members.

3.8 VERTICAL ELEMENT TO FOUNDATION CONNECTIONS

Seismic inertial forces originate in all elements of buildings and are delivered through structural connections to
horizontal diaphragms. The diaphragms distribute these forces to vertical elements that transfer the forces to
the foundation and the foundation transfers the forces into the ground.
An adequate connection between the vertical elements and the foundation is essential to the satisfactory
performance of a strengthened structure. The connections must be capable of transferring the in-plane lateral
inertia forces from the vertical elements to the foundations and of providing adequate capacity for resisting uplift
forces caused by overturning moments.
3.8.1 CONNECTIONS OF WOOD STUD SHEAR WALLS
3.8.1.1 Deficiencies
The principal deficiencies in the connection of wood stud shear walls to their foundations are:
*

Inadequate shear capacity of the anchorage,

Inadequate shear capacity of cripple stud walls, and

Inadequate uplift capacity.

3.8.1.2 Strengthening Techniques for Inadequate Anchorage Shear Capacity

Techniques. Deficient shear capacity of the connection of a wood stud wall to its foundation can be improved
using one or both of the following alternatives:
1.

Increasing the shear capacity by providing new or additional anchor bolts between the sill plate and the
foundation (Figure 3.8.1.2a).

2.

Increasing the shear capacity by providing steel angles or plates with anchor bolts connecting them to the
foundation and bolts or lag screws connecting them to the sill plate or wall (Figure 3.8.1.2b).

Relative Ments. Lack of adequate anchorage of the walls to the foundation can cause poor seismic performance
of wood frame structures. Although most older wood frame structures were not designed for seismic loads, they
have performed extremely well in past earthquakes provided they were bolted to their foundation. This good
performance may be attributed to their light weight, ductile connections, and redundant load paths provided they

are bolted to the foundations.

If the walls are not bolted to the foundation it is relatively simple to provide adequate anchorage. Providing
bolts through the sill plates in the foundation (Technique 1) is typically the best approach. If a crawl space
exists, the bolts can be installed easily at regular intervals. If the walls sit directly on the foundation without floor
joists (e.g., a slab on grade), access through the wall covering (e.g., gypsum board) is required and the wall
surface subsequently must be patched. If the crawl space is not deep enough for vertical holes to be drilled
through the sill plate, the addition of connection plates or angles (Technique 2) may be a more viable alternative.

91

.' I

'

*l
I

Providing wall to foundation anchors.

92

3.8.1.3 Strengthening Techniques for Cripple Stud Walls

Techniques.Weak cripple stud walls also are a significant reason for damage to wood frame structures. Cripple
stud perimeter walls are a frequent construction technique used to support the first floor of a wood structure
a short distance above the ground on sloping sites or to provide a crawl space under the floor framing. The
exterior face may be finished with wood or metal siding or plaster while the studs on the inside usually remain
exposed.
Strengthening of the cripple stud walls is relatively simple. Plywood sheathing is nailed to the cripple studs
(usually on the inside). The top edge of the plywood is nailed into the floor framing and the bottom edge is
nailed into the sill plate (Figure 3.8.1.3). The sill plate also must be anchored to the foundation.

93

floor sheathing
nailed to blocking
(N) blocking nailed
to top plate
(E) cripple wall stud
(N) plywood

sheathing
(N) vent holes

plywood nailed to
new blocking if

sill
F|* ~~~~~~(
existing sill is wider

than stud

(N) concrete sill

6 2 ~~~~ anchor

= I jI

lllT~hI

, X-L
(2_l1: 41,
I 1=<=
T

'1(I

(N)
blocking
nailed

existing sill
~~to

hr{-1-

FIGURE 3.8.1.3 Strengthening a cripple stud wall.

3.8.1A Strengthening Techniques for Uplift Capacity
Deficient uplift capacity of the connections of wood shear walls to their foundations can be improved by:
1.

Increasing the capacity by providing steel hold-downs bolted to the wall and anchored to the concrete
(Figure 3.8.1.4).

2.

Reducing the uplift requirement by providing supplemental shear walls (as discussed in Sec. 3.4.).

94

(E) stud
(E) plywood

sheathing
(N) metal

hold-down
(N) lag bolt or thru
bolt
(N) expansion

anchor to

foundation\
(E) mud sill

a\ j

(N) expansion sill

anchor
FIGURE 3.8.1.4 Strengthening the uplift capacity of wall to foundation
connection.
3.8.2 CONNECTIONS OF METAL STUD SHEAR WALLS
The connections of metal stud walls to the foundations can be strengthened in the same way as discussed above
for wood stud walls (e.g., by adding welding, bolting, and screws where appropriate).

3.8.3 CONNECTIONS OF PRECAST CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS

3.83.1 Deficiencies
The principal deficiencies of the connections of precast concrete shear walls to the foundation are:
*

Inadequate capacity to resist in-plane or out-of-plane shear forces and

Inadequate hold-down capacity to resist seismic overturning forces.

95

3..3.2

Strengthening Techniques for Shear Capacity

Techniques. Deficient shear capacity of the connections of precast concrete shear walls to the foundation can
be improved by1.

Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing a new steel member connecting the wall to the
foundation or the ground floor slab (Figure 3.8.3.2).

2.

Increasing the capacity of the connection by adding a new thickness of concrete (either cast-in-place or
shotcrete) placed against the precast wall doweling into the existing foundation or ground floor slab.

(E) precast

concrete wall

. 1

, . I

gl
.
11
(N)- steel
an gie

10__/

. I

(N) anchor
(E) foundal ion slab
f- --

-_

3,
0.e

--

I i

,'

.,,
1 sLA
6

I.

a
o3

C
| |I

, ,

s
*

.
.

j
..

I
.

I jff 1 ! 'F7-7_-i 151W I

}>

-I -:1-_ I
_~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~)

0'

.j .

I
Li I In_
rSI

[I

FIGURE 3.83.2
connection.
3.833

Relative Merits. Early precast

concrete wall construction frequently had minimal lateral
connection capacity at the foundation.
These connections
usually can be strengthened
most economically by attaching
a steel member to the wall and
the floor slab or foundation
with drilled and grouted anchors or expansion bolts (Technique 1). Care must be taken
to place bolts and/or dowels a
sufficient distance away from
concrete edges to prevent spalling under load. A more costly
alternative involves thickening
the precast wall with a minimum of 4 inches of new reinforced concrete, either cast-inplace or shotcrete. The new
concrete must be anchored to
the precast wall and must extend above the base of the wall
high enough to develop new
dowels drilled into the foundation. The existing foundation
then must be checked for the
additional load.

Strengthening of a precast concrete wall to foundation

Strengthening Techniques for Hold-down Capacity

Techniques. Deficient hold-down capacity of the connections of precast concrete shear walls to the foundation
can be improved by:
1.

Increase the hold-down capacity by removing concrete at the edge of the precast unit to expose the reinforcement, provide new drilled and grouted dowels into the foundation, and pour a new concrete pilaster.

2.

Reduce the uplift forces by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements such as shear walls or braced
frames as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

96

Relative Merits. Deficient hold-down capacity of precast units usually will occur when one unit or a part of one
unit is required to resist a significant share of the seismic load. If the wall has sufficient bending and shear
capacity, then increasing the hold-down capacity using Technique 1 is usually the most cost-effective. When a
wall is comprised of a number of solid (i.e., nd significant openings) precast panels, the overturning forces
generally will be minimal provided there is adequate vertical shear capacity in the connection between the edges
of adjacent panels. In this case, the connections must be checked and, if necessary, strengthened as described
in Sec. 3.2.2.
Technique 2 usually is a viable approach only if it is being considered to correct other component
deficiencies. When excessive uplift forces are due to inadequate vertical shear capacity in the vertical connections
between adjacent precast units, strengthening of those connections (see Sec. 3.2.2) will reduce the uplift forces.

3.8A CONNECTION OF BRACED FRAMES

3.8A.1

Deficiencies

The principal deficiencies of the connections of steel braced frames to the foundation are:
*

Inadequate shear capacity and

Inadequate uplift resistance.

3.8A.2 Strengthening Techniques for Shear Capacity

Techniques. Deficient shear capacity of the connections of steel braced frames to the foundations can be
improved by:

1.

Increasing the capacity by providing new steel members welded to the braced frame base plates and
anchored to the slab or foundation with drilled and grouted anchor bolts.

2.

Reducing the shear loads by providing supplemental steel braced frames as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. The first alternative generally will be the most cost-effective provided the existing slab or
foundation can adequately resist the prescribed shear. Steel collectors welded to the existing steel base plates
may be necessary to distribute the shear forces into the slab or foundation. If the existing foundation requires
strengthening to provide adequate shear capacity, determining the most cost-effective alternative requires
comparing the effort necessary to construct a reinforced concrete foundation to the effort and disruption of
functional space required to install supplementary shear walls and their associated foundations and collectors.

3.8.43 Strengthening Techniques for Uplift Resistance

Techniques. Deficient uplift resistance capacity of the connections of steel braced frames to the foundations can
be improved by:
1.

Increasing the capacity by providing new steel members welded to the base plate and anchored to the
existing foundation.

2.

Reducing the uplift loads by providing supplemental steel braced frames as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Relative Merits. Inadequate uplift resistance capacity of a steel braced frame seldom results just because of
deficient connection to the foundation but is typically a concern reflecting the uplift capacity of the foundation
itself. If the foundation is the concern, the techniques discussed in Sec. 3.6 can be considered to correct the

97

problem. If, in fact, the deficiency is the connection, Technique 1 (providing new connecting members) will be
the most economical.

3.8.5 CONNECTIONS OF STEEL MOMENT FRAMES

3.8.5.1 Deficiencies

The principal deficiencies of the connection of a moment frame column to the foundation are:
*

Inadequate shear capacity,

Inadequate flexural capacity, and

Inadequate uplift capacity.

3.8.5.2 Strengthening Techniques for Shear, Flexural, and Uplift Capacity

Techniques. The techniques for strengthening steel moment frame column base connections to improve shear
and flexural capacity also will likely improve the uplift capacity. For this reason a combination of the following
alternatives may be utilized to correct a deficient column base connection:
1.

Increasing the shear capacity by providing steel shear lugs welded to the base plate and embedded in the
foundation.

2.

Increasing the shear and tensile capacity by installing additional anchor bolts into the foundation.

3.

Increasing the shear capacity by embedding the column in a reinforced concrete pedestal that is bonded or
embedded into the existing slab or foundation.

Relative Merits. While it may be possible to strengthen the column and to stiffen the base plate against local
bending, it usually is not practical to increase the size of the base plate or the number of anchor bolts without
removal and replacement of the base plate. The horizontal column shears may be transferred to the column
footing by shear lugs between the base plate and the footing and/or shear in the anchor bolts (Technique 1) and
to the ground by passive pressure against the side of the footing. If the column base connection is embedded
in a monolithic concrete slab, the slab may be considered for distribution of the shear to the ground by means
of any additional existing footings that are connected to the slab. If the column is not embedded in the slab, the
same affect can be achieved by adding a concrete pedestal (Technique 3). The interference of this pedestal with
the function and operations of the area is an obvious drawback.

3.9 ADDING A NEW SUPPLEMENTAL SYSTEM

Consideration of a new lateral-force-resisting system may be a cost-effective alternative for some seismically
deficient structures. The extent of overstress of an existing structure may be such that strengthening the existing
elements is very costly and adding supplemental vertical-resisting elements (as discussed in Sec. 3.4) becomes
so extensive that an entirely new supplemental lateral-force-resisting system is the best way to resist the
prescribed forces.
Adding a new supplemental lateral-force-resisting system also may be the most cost-effective alternative
when preservation of architectural features is of utmost importance, (e.g., in a historical monument).

98

39.1 SUPPLEMENTAL BRACED FRAME SYSTEM

Moment frame buildings that have insufficientlateral resistance can be converted to a braced frame system. This
retrofit can add substantial lateral capacity with a minimum of additional weight. Changing a moment frame
to a braced frame also will significantly reduce drifts and, hence, architectural damage. Buildings with weak
shear walls (either wood or unreinforced masonry) also have been strengthened using steel braced frames.
Figure 3.9.1 shows the central storeroom at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory in Berkeley, California, in which an
X-braced steel frame was used to strengthen the structure. The principal disadvantages of adding braced frames
are the potential change in the architectural character and the potential obstruction of accessways and window
views. Additionally, the conversion of moment frames to braced frames may increase demand on and
consequently necessitate an upgrade of the existing foundation.

FIGURE 3.9.1 Seismic strengthening using a supplemental braced frame

system.

3.92 NEW SHEAR WALL SYSTEM

The addition of a new reinforced concrete shear wall system to an unreinforced masonry structure can meet the
requirements for a seismic upgrade in certain cases. Margaret Jacks Hall on the Stanford University campus
(Figure 3.923) is an example of a building for which preservation of the architectural character was a prime
consideration. The existing unreinforced masonry was determined through testing to provide little lateral
capacity. The exterior sandstone masonry was retained, and the interior was gutted. New concrete walls were
pneumatically applied to the old masonry, and new floors, columns, and a roof were constructed. Another
example of the need to preserve the historically significant architectural character of a building is the California
State Capitol (Figure 3.9.2b). In essence, the existing stone facade was retained while new lateral- and (in large
part) vertical-force-resisting systems were constructed.

99

FIGURE 3.92 Seismic strengthening by providing a new shear wall system.

100

3.93 STRUCTURAL ADDITIONS

A deficient building may be strengthened by a structural building addition that is designed to resist the seismic
forces generated within the addition as well as all or a portion of the forces from the existing building. This
alternative has the obvious advantage of generating additional useful space while upgrading the existing building.

IBM Building 12 in San Jose, California, is an example of an existing building bracketed by two new additions
designed to carry the entire load (Figure 3.9.3). Few modifications to the interior of the existing building were
required in this approach.

FIGURE 3.93 Seismic strengthening with a new building addition.

101

DECREASING DEMAND ON EXISTING SYSTEMS

4.0 INTRODUCTION
The design seismic forces (or demand forces) prescribed by most building codes generally are proportional to
building weight and inversely proportional to the two-thirds power of the fundamental period of vibration of the
building and to a response reduction factor that represents the capability of the structural system to absorb
energy in the inelastic range of the building response. Within this context, the earthquake demand of a building
may be reduced by reducing the weight of the building, increasing the fundamental period and the energy
dissipating capacity of the structural system, or using alternate procedures.

4.1 REDUCING THE WEIGHT OF THE BUILDING

In relatively low buildings (i.e., below 3 to 5 stories), reducing the weight of the building will result in a reduction
of the seismic forces on the structural elements. Although a reduction in weight will decrease the fundamental
period of vibration, the code-prescribed seismic force coefficient remains constant (i.e., is not affected by a
change in fundamental period) for these buildings, so the reduction in the seismic forces is directly proportional
to the weight reduction.
For taller buildings (i.e., 6 to 10 stories), the reduction in the fundamental period resulting from a reduction
in weight (i.e., the period is proportional to the square root of the weight) also will result in an increase in the
seismic force coefficient. This increase will tend to offset the decrease associated with the reduction in weight.
For very tall buildings (i.e., 20 stories or more), the effect of the fundamental period is minimal and the seismic
forces are essentially proportional to the reduced weight.
Techniques. Techniques that have been utilized to reduce weight include:
1.

Removing the upper stories of a building.

2.

Changing the use of the building (e.g., converting from heavy warehouse loading to office or residential use).

3.

Removing a heavy roof system and replacing it with a lighter assembly.

4.

Removing heavy appurtenances (i.e., parapets, balconies, water towers, or equipment).

Relative Merits. Removal of the upper stories is an effective technique for decreasing the earthquake demand
on a building. As indicated above, this technique may be less effective for buildings of moderate height than it
is for low or very tall buildings. An additional benefit associated with this technique is the reduction in gravity
loads. Use of this technique will result in reduced forces on the existing vertical-load-resisting elements in the
remaining stories and foundations thereby providing additional capacity for seismic forces. The primary
disadvantage of this technique is the loss of usable space and the associated loss of rental income and resale
value.

The American Iron and Steel Institute has written a minority opinion concerning this section; see
page 193.
103

Changing the use of the building in order to eliminate heavy floor loads that contribute to the seismic force
also is an effective technique to reduce the seismic demand. Since the ground floor and its tributary loads do
not contribute to the building seismic forces, reducing the floor loads in the upper floors of a multi story building
is most effective. This technique also reduces the forces on the vertical-load-resisting elements and, thus,
increases the capacity of these elements for seismic forces. The elimination of heavy floor loads that are
regarded as dead loads in seismic provisions will affect the fundamental period of the building in a manner
similar to that discussed above for the removal of upper stories. Also as discussed above, the advantage of
weight reduction may be partly offset for moderate height buildings by an increase in the seismic force level due
to the period changes. An additional factor to be considered for this technique is whether the change in use or
occupancy will trigger other building code requirements (e.g., fire protection, egress) that may be costly to meet.
Removal and replacement of a heavy roof system is particularly effective in reducing the seismic demands
on an existing one-story building. As the number of stories is increased, this technique becomes less effective
and it is also subject to the limitations for moderate height buildings discussed above.
Removal of heavy appurtenances has the same effects on seismic demand as discussed above for the removal
of stories or the elimination of heavy floor loads.

4.2 INCREASING THE FUNDAMENTAL PERIOD AND THE ENERGY DISSIPATING

L SYSTEM
CAPACITYOF THE STRUCT
By increasing the fundamental period of vibration of some structures, the seismic demand can be decreased.
The most effective method for increasing the fundamental period of the building system without modification
of the structural system of the building is by introduction of seismic isolators at the base of the building. The
seismic isolators can increase the effective fundamental period of the system, thus reducing the base shear of the
structural system of the building; energy dissipation also can be included within the isolator system.
In addition to seismic isolation, energy dissipation devices may be added to the structural system. The
energy dissipation system increases the system damping and modifies the building response and provides the
equivalent of increasing the value of the response modification factor, R.
Techniques. The response reduction factor (i.e., energy dissipating capacity) applicable to an existing building
can be increased by:

1.

Modifying the existing structural systems,

2.

Supplementing the existing structural systems, or

3.

Replacing the existing structural systems.

Relative Merits. Modification of an existing structural system to improve its energy absorbing capacity is seldom

feasible except in the case of an ordinary steel moment frame. In this case, it may be possible to upgrade the
frame to a special moment frame or to the minimum frame requirements for a dual system in conjunction with
existing shear walls. Similarly, removal and replacement of an existing structural system seldom will be
economically feasible unless dictated by other than engineering considerations (e.g., complete architectural
retrofit of the exterior of the building). A possible exception to this statement could occur in existing steel frame
buildings with concentric steel bracing or unreinforced masonry infill walls. In these cases, it may be feasible
to remove the bracing or the infill walls and install eccentric bracing or reinforced concrete shear walls.
Supplementing the existing structural system is, by far, the most common technique for seismic strengthening
and, in many cases, it is possible to reduce the seismic demand by improving the energy absorption characteristics
of the combined system.

104

4.3 ALTERNATE PROCEDURES

The NEHRP Recommended Provisions as well as model building codes provide for approval of alternative
procedures that can be demonstrated to be equivalent to code-prescribed procedures concerning strength,
durability, and seismic resistance. In recent years, several innovative alternative procedures for the reduction
of seismic demand have been subjected to analytical and experimental research and have seen limited application
in both new and existing buildings. These procedures include:
*

Seismic isolation techniques and

Supplemental damping techniques.

43.1 SEISMIC ISOLATION

Techniques. Base isolation is a generic term for procedures whereby the response characteristics of a building
are altered by the introduction of devices or special construction at the base of the building. The discussion here
is confined to the use of base isolation to reduce seismic demand by lengthening the fundamental period of
vibration of an existing building.
Relative Mefits. Most base isolation devices are capable of developing a fundamental period of about 2 seconds.
This can effectively reduce the seismic demand for buildings founded on rock or firm soils that have a natural
fundamental period of about 1 second or less ( i.e., buildings less than about 10 stories). Base isolation may be
detrimental to buildings founded on very soft soils where a 2 second period base-isolated building may be in
resonance with similar periods in the ground motion transmitted by the soft soils.
Implementation of base isolation for existing buildings usually will require that the building be underpinned
for the installation of base isolation pads. A competent diaphragm also is required above the isolation pads to
distribute the lateral forces and, for existing buildings, a new concrete slab generally has been provided to serve
this purpose. Finally, provision must be made to accommodate the large displacement of the isolation pad; this
usually is done by providing both adequate clearance around the building to accommodate this displacement and
sliding or flexible connections for all utilities and services to the building.

43.2 SUPPLEMENTAL DAMPING

Techniques. Structural damping may be defined as an internal energy absorption characteristic of a structural
system that acts to attenuate induced free vibration. Damping is commonly expressed as a percentage of critical
damping. A zero damped elastic system, when displaced, theoretically would vibrate continuously at its natural
period and at the same amplitude. A critically damped structure when displaced would return to its original
position without vibration. Damping also tends to reduce the dynamic amplification of vibration particularly
when the period of the building is in resonance with the ground motion. The seismic provisions in most building
codes are based on 5 percent of critical damping as being representative of most building structures. The upper
limit of the required seismic forces, before division by the response reduction factor, assumes dynamic
amplification of the ground motion by a factor of 2 to 2.5 depending on the soil conditions. If the structure can
develop 20 percent damping, the above amplification (and the displacements) would be reduced by one-half.
The various concepts that have been proposed for providing supplementary damping are:
*

Viscous damping,

Friction damping, and

Natural yield damping.

105

Viscous damping involves taking advantage of the high flow resistance of viscous fluids. A simple shock
absorber like that on an automobile is one example. Other devices such as a pair of flat plates with viscous fluid
between them have been proposed. Shock absorbers have been implemented in connection with nuclear power
plant piping systems but they have proved to be very high maintenance cost items.
Friction between dry surfaces produces a constant force, always opposed to the direction of motion, that is
proportional to the contact force between the surfaces and the coefficient of friction of the materials. A number
of friction damping devices usually associated with diagonal bracing in buildings, have been proposed. Major
concerns with friction dampers in connection with the long-term periods between earthquakes are ensuring that
the contact forces between the sliding surfaces do not change and ensuring that the coefficient of friction does
not change.
Natural yield damping of structural elements in buildings (e.g., beams) has long been recognized as providing
added damping to structures. Material yielding is very commonly used in earthquake engineering in conjunction
with the ductility, seismic isolation, and supplemental damping concepts of design. In recent years, a variety of
mechanical devices that incorporate the yielding deformation of mild steel to provide supplemental damping have
been implemented in earthquake-resistant designs of buildings and other structures. Mild steel bars in torsion
and cantilevers in flexure have been developed, tested, and installed in buildings and bridges. Similarly, lead
shear and lead extrusion devices also have been developed.
The application of supplemental damping in the seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings is
the benefits and problems of the various alternatives have not been thoroughly investigated.
hence,
in its infancy;
In general, devices that involve material yielding as the means for increasing energy dissipation or damping can
be regarded as being very reliable. Mild steel and lead are very stable materials with predictable yield
deformation characteristics.
Irrespective of the type of damping involved, the installation in buildings of devices commonly proposed thus
far in connection with supplemental damping involves distributing the devices throughout a structure. The
seismic response of a damped building would be similar to that of a conventional building. This is in contrast
to the seismic isolation concept where virtually all of the relative displacement occurs at the isolation level.
Change in period of vibration and stiffness associated with material yield damping can be significant
depending on the ground motion demand and the elastic strength of the damper. Practical supplemental
damping devices that involve material yielding generally result in a reduction of stiffness during earthquake
-response and, thus, periods lengthen. Although the change in period may be of little importance, the change
may result in decreased demand forces. The seismic analysis of buildings using supplemental dampers requires
sophisticated nonlinear time-history analytical tools because of the yielding (i.e., inelastic) response requirements.
Relative Merits.

106

REHABILITATION OF
NONSTRUCTURAL ARCIUTECTURALCOMPONENTS

5.0 INTRODUCTION
Nonstructural architectural elements can be damaged in an earthquake, and some of this damage may result in
life-threatening hazards. The two principal causes of architectural damage are differential motion and lack of
component capacity: For example, the differential seismic displacement between stories (i.e., drift) can cause
window breakage. Architectural cladding, such as a granite veneer, with insufficient anchorage capacity is an
example of a component with a lack of capacity.

5.1 EXTERIOR CURTAIN WALLS

Rigid nonductile curtain wall panels, (e.g., those constructed of precast concrete) attached to the exterior of a
flexible structure (e.g., a steel moment frame) may have insufficient flexibility in their connections to the frame
and insufficient spacing between panels to prevent damage due to racking. The connection details therefore may
have to be modified to allow
flexibility, and Figure 5.1a shows
a typical connection detail that
precast panel
provides ductility and rotational
:
flo
capacity. The panel is rigidly
attached at the base and held
;
beam
with a flexible rod at the top. It
,nse/t/
usually is desirable to provide a
Inser t
rigid support at one end of each
panel and to allow the other end
to translate to accommodate the
interstory deflection of the frame
without racking of the panels.

Another common deficiency

gap

weld (t p)

is that the existing connections

may not provide adequate freedom for accommodating the
calculated horizontal and vertical
story distortions.
A feasiblet
I
remedy may be to remove the
nser
ro
existing connections at one end
.r
of the panels and replace them
with flexible rods (as indicated in
Figure 5.1b) or with other connecting devices provided with
adequate oversized and slotted FIGURE 5.1a Flexible connection for precast concrete cladding.
holes. In implementing these
techniques, the capacity of the modified connection for gravity loads and for out-of-plane seismic loads must be
checked and strengthened if necessary.

107

Inserts or attachments secured

to panel reinforcing

,
Z-11X

fi

FIGURE 5.1b Detail for flexible connection for precast concrete cladding.

5.2 APPENDAGES
Cornices, parapets, spandrels, and other architectural appendages that have insufficient anchorage capacity must
be retrofitted to prevent damage and, most important, falling debris. Cornice anchorages can be strengthened
by removing the cornice material, adding anchorages, and reinstalling the material. A technique that has been
used in rehabilitating heavy and ornate cornice work is to remove the cornice and reconstruct it with adequate
anchorage and new lighter material such as lightweight concrete or plaster. Parapets can be reduced in height
so that the parapet dead load will resist uplift from out-of-plane seismic forces or they can be strengthened with
shotcrete (Figure 5.2a) or braced back to roof framing (Figure 5.2b). All elements must be checked for their
ability to sustain new forces imposed by the corrective measures.

108

(E) masonry
(N) shotcrete

(E) concrete floor

FIGURE 5.2a Strengthening a masonry parapet with a new concrete overlay.

(N) drilled and

grouted bolt
(E) masonry parapet
(N) channel
(N) brace
(E) roof

FIGURE 5.2b Strengthening a masonry parapet with steel braces.

109

5.3 VENEERS
Stone and masonry veneers with inadequate anchorage should be strengthened by adding new anchors. Veneers
typically must be removed and replaced for this process. Typical details for approved anchorage of masonry
veneers are published by the Brick Institute of America.

5A PARTITIONS
Heavy partitions such as those of concrete block may fail from excessive flexural stresses or excessive in-plane
shear stress caused by interstory drifts. Such partitions should be retrofitted with connections like those shown
in Figure 5.4a that restrain out-of-plane displacement and allow in-plane displacement. Alternatively,
unreinforced masonry partitions can be removed and replaced with drywall partitions. Partitions that cross
seismic joints should be reconstructed to allow for longitudinal and transverse movement at joints. Plaster or
drywall partitions in office buildings generally need lateral support from ceilings or from the floor or roof framing
above the partition. Steel channels are sometimes provided at the top of the partitions. The channels are
attached to the ceiling or floor framing, they provide lateral support to the partition but allow vertical and
longitudinal displacement of the floor or ceiling without imposing any loads to the partition. Partitions that do
not extend to the floor or roof framing and are not laterally supported by a braced ceiling should be braced to
the framing above (as indicated in Figure 5.4b) at a maximum of 12 foot spacing between braces.
Hollow clay tile partitions occur in many existing buildings as corridor walls or as nonstructural enclosures
for elevator shafts or stairwells. Hollow clay tile is a very strong but brittle material and it is very susceptible
to shattering into fragments that could be hazardous to building occupants. In many cases it is not possible to
isolate these partitions from the lateral displacements of the structural framing and, in those cases, it is advisable
to consider either removal of these partitions and replacement with drywall construction or "basketing" of the
potential clay tile fragments with wire mesh.

110

FIGURE 5.4a Bracing an Interior masonry partition.

111

.SAbBracing an interior masonry partition.

112

5.5 CEILINGS
Unbraced suspended ceilings can swing independently of the supporting floor and cause damage to the ceilings,
particularly at the perimeters. Providing four-way (12-gage wire) diagonals and a compression strut between the
ceiling grid and the supporting floor at no more than 12 feet on center and within 6 feet of partition walls will
significantly improve the seismic performance of the suspended ceiling. Figure 5.5 shows a typical detail of the
four-way diagonals and the compression strut. In addition to the braces, the connections between the main
runners and cross runners should be capable of transferring tension loads. Lay-in ceilings are particularly
vulnerable to the relative displacement of the supporting grid members. Splices and connections of the T-bar
sections that comprise the grid may have to be stiffened or strengthened with new metal clips and self-threading
screws.

(N) 12 gage wires

(N) adjustable

compression struts
to prevent vertical
movement
(E) main runner

FIGURE 5.5 Lateral bracing of a suspended ceiling.

5.6 LIGHTING FIXTURES

Suspended fluorescent fixtures are susceptible to several types of seismic damage. Fixtures that are supported
by suspended ceiling grids can lose their vertical support when the suspended ceiling sways and distorts under
seismic shaking. Independent wire ties connected directly from each of the fixture corners (or at least diagonally
opposite corners) to the structural floor above can be added to prevent the fixture from falling (Figure 5.6).
Pendant-mounted fixtures often are supported by electrical wires. Wire splices can pull apart and allow the
fixtures to fall. The fixtures also may swing and impact adjacent objects resulting in breakage and fallen fixtures.

113

Safety wires can be installed to prevent the fixtures from falling and diagonal wires can prevent them from
swaying. Some fixture manufacturers also provide threaded metal conduit to protect the wiring and to support
the fixture as well as wire straps or cages that can be added to prevent the fluorescent tubes from falling away
from the fixture if they become dislodged.

5.7 GLASS DOORS AND WINDOWS

Seismic rehabilitation of glass windows and doors to prevent breakage may be a significant effort. Inadequate
edge clearances around the glass to allow the building and, hence, the window frame to rack in an earthquake
without bearing on the glass is the principal cause of breakage. Redesign (along with close installation
inspection) of the frame and/or glazing to provide sufficient clearance is necessary to prevent seismic breakage.
A technique suggested by Reiterman (1985) to reduce life-safety hazards from falling glass is to apply adhesive
solar film to the windows. The film will hold together the glass fragments while also reducing heat and glare.
The application of solar film to insulating glass may cause heat build-up inside the glass and the possible adverse
effects of this build-up need to be considered since damage can result.

114

5.8 RAISED COMPUTER ACCESS FLOORS

Access floors typically are constructed of 2-foot by 2-foot wood, aluminum, or steel panels supported on
adjustable column pedestals. The column pedestals frequently are fastened to the subfloors with mastic. Some
assemblies have stringers that connect the top of the pedestals (Figure 5.8a) and others have lateral braces.
When subjected to lateral loads, access floors typically are very flexible unless they are specifically designed to
be rigid. This flexibility may amplify the ground motions such that equipment supported on the floor may
experience significantly high displacements and forces. The high displacements also may cause connection
failures that could precipitate a significant collapse of the floor. Existing floors can be rehabilitated by securing
the pedestals to the subfloor with expansion anchors or by adding diagonal bracing to pedestals in a regular
pattern (Figure 5.8b). Rehabilitated floors should be designed and tested to meet both a stiffness and a strength
criterion.

115

FIGURE 5.8b Strengthening of access floor

116

REHABILITATION OF NONSTRUCUURAL
MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS

6.0 INTRODUCTION
Nonstructural mechanical and electrical components are often vulnerable to seismic damage in moderate to large
earthquakes. Damage to mechanical and electrical components can impair building functions that may be
essential to life safety. This chapter presents common techniques for mitigating seismic damage of the following
typical mechanical and electrical components:
*

Mechanical and electrical equipment

Ductwork and piping

Elevators

Emergency power systems

Hazardous material storage systems

Communication systems

Computer equipment

6.1 MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT

Large equipment that is unanchored or inadequately anchored can slide during an earthquake and damage utility
connections. Tall, narrow units may also be vulnerable to overturning. Positive mechanical anchorages (Figure
6.1a) will prevent seismic damage.
Electrical equipment frequently is tall and narrow and may overturn and slide, causing damage to internal
instruments and utility connections. This type of equipment can be secured against sliding or rocking in many
ways depending on the location of the units relative to adjacent walls, ceilings, and floors (Figure 6.1b). In all
cases, the capacity of the wall to resist the seismic loads imposed by the connected equipment must be verified.
Mechanical or electrical equipment located on vibration isolators may be particularly vulnerable to being
shaken off the isolator supports. Rehabilitation to mitigate the potential for damage involves either replacing
the vibration isolation units or installing rigid stops. Vibration isolation units that also provide lateral seismic
resistance are available from isolator manufacturers and these units (Figure 6.1c) can be installed in place of the
existing isolators. Alternatively, rigid stops designed to prevent excessive lateral movement of the equipment can
be installed on the existing foundation (Figure 6.1d and e). A sufficient gap needs to be provided between the
stop and the equipment to prevent the transmission of vibrations through the stops. Where equipment is tall
relative to its width, stops in the vertical direction are required to prevent overturning. The equipment itself,
its attachments to the isolators or support rails, and the rails themselves can be points of weakness that need to
be assessed and strengthened where required.

117

\-.,

V(N)

typical angle

clips
(N) weld

(E) transformer
FIGURE 6.1a Typical detail of equipment anchorage.

118

FIGURE 6.Ib Alternate details for anchoring equipment.

119

FIGURE 6.1b continued.

120

FIGURE 6.1c

Prefabricated vibration isolation assembly with

lateral seismic stops.

121

(N) provide gap

as required
(E) vibration
isolation assembly

(N) angles with

resilient pads
(N) anchor bolt
FIGURE 6.1d Seismic restraints added to eidstng equipment with vibration
Isolation.

122

I
(E) vibration
isolation assembly
(N) bar stock
(N) channel with
resilient pads

~
.

(N) weld

<1

FIGURE 6.1e Multidirectional seismic restraint.

123

Suspended mechanical or electrical equipment may sway during an earthquake, damaging utility connections
and the vertical support components. This equipment should be braced to prevent swaying (Figure 6.10.

(N) diagonal bracing

(E) vertical support
FIGURE 6.1f Typical bracing for suspended equipment.

124

Water heaters are tall, heavy, narrow components that, if unanchored, are vulnerable to damage in an
earthquake. Sliding or overturning of water heaters may result in broken water and gas lines. Water heaters
should be anchored as shown in Figure 6.1g, and flexible gas lines should be installed with a sufficient loop to
allow the heater some movement without stressing the gas lines.

of domestic water heater.

125

6.2 DUC'IWORK AND PIPING

Seismic retrofit of ductwork and piping primarily consists of providing lateral sway braces. The Sheet Metal and
Air-Conditioning Contractors National Association (SMACNA) has published guidelines for the design of seismic
restraints of new mechanical systems and plumbing piping systems (September 1982) that can also be used for
rehabilitation of existing systems. These guidelines were developed for use in areas of relatively high seismicity
and engineering judgment should be utilized in their application elsewhere. The SMACNA guidelines for seismic
bracing of ductwork recommend that:
1.

All rectangular ducts 6 square feet in area and greater and round ducts 28 inches in diameter and larger
should be seismically braced.

2.

Transverse braces should be installed at a maximum of 30 feet on center, at each duct turn, and at each end
of a duct run.

3.

Longitudinal braces should be installed at a maximum of 60 feet on center.

4.

No bracing is required if the top of a duct is suspended 12 inches or less from the supporting structural
member and the suspension straps are attached to the top of the duct.

The SMACNA guidelines for seismic bracing of piping recommend that:

1.

Braces for all pipes 2-1/2 inches in diameter and larger (and also for smaller piping used for fuel gas, oil,
medical gas, and compressed air and smaller piping located in boiler rooms, mechanical equipment rooms,
and refrigeration machinery rooms).

2.

Transverse braces should be installed at a maximum of 40 feet on center.

3.

Longitudinal braces should be installed at a maximum of 80 feet on center.

4.

Thermal expansion and contraction forces, where present, must be considered in the layout of transverse
and longitudinal braces.

5.

Flexibility should be provided where pipes pass through seismic or expansion joints.

Figures 6.2a through 6.2c show typical seismic brace details for ducting. Duct diffusers also should be positively
attached with mechanical anchors to rigid ducts or secured with wires to the floor above when connected to
flexible ducts. Figures 6.2d through 6.2g show typical details for installing seismic braces for piping.

126

l~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(N) angle brace

.0(N) strap

around duct

FIGURE 6.2a Lateral and longitudinal braces for large-diameter ducting.

127

FIGURE 62b Lateral and longitudinal braces for small-diameter ducting.

128

(N) angle brace

(E) duct

FIGURE 6.2c Lateral and longitudinal braces for rectangular ducting.

129

(N) pipe clamp

(N) channel

(N) strap
around pipe

FIGURE 6.2d Lateral braces for piping.

130

(N) angle brace

(E) pipe

(N) pipe clamp

(N) angle brace

(E) pipe

FIGURE 6.2e Longitudinal pipe brace.

131

(N) angle brace

(E) pipe
(N) strap

around pipe

FIGURE 6.2f Lateral brace for multiple pipes.

(N) angle brace

(E) pipe
(N) strap

around pipe

FIGURE 6.2g Longitadinal brace for multiple pipes.

1132

6.3 ELEVATORS
Elevator machinery and controller units should be anchored like other mechanical and electrical equipment to
prevent the units from sliding or toppling. Rope retainer guards should be provided on sheaves to inhibit
displacement of wire ropes. Snag points created by rail brackets should be provided with guards so that
compensating ropes or chains, governor ropes, suspension ropes, and traveling cables will not snag. Retainer
plates should be added to the top and bottom of the cars and counterweights to prevent them from becoming
dislodged from the rails. Seismic switches should be installed to provide an electrical alert or command for the
safe automatic emergency operation of the elevator system and to detect lateral motion of the counterweight.
For more information on the requirements for elevator seismic safety refer to ANSI 17.1, Safety Codes for

Elevatorsand Escalators.

6.4 EMERGENCY POWER SYSTEMS

Although emergency power systems typically containing batteries, motor generators, fuel tanks, transformers,
switchgear, and control panels are designed to be activated in the event of an emergency, many are inadequately
protected from earthquake forces.
Batteries are frequently stored in racks as shown in Figure 6.4a, and structural members should be installed
to restrain the batteries to the
racks, the racks should be
(N) foam spacers
A
d
G
braced, and adequate anchorag(foam spacers
e
es should be provided to carry
(N) restraining
the lateral loads. Foam spacers
members
also should be fitted snugly
between the batteries to prevent them from impacting each
other.
Motor generators typically
are mounted on vibration isolators, and these units should
have seismic stops installed as
shown in Figures 6.1d or 6.1e.

Fuel tanks frequently are

oo

v\

(/

~transformers,

FIGURE 6Aa Bracing of existing battery racks.

133

mounted on legs to facilitate

gravity feed of the fuel, and
these tanks should be braced as
shown in Figure 6.4b and provided with adequate anchorage.
Flexible fuel piping with adequate loops also should be
installed both at the fuel tank
and at the motor generator,
switchgear, and
control panels should be anchored as shown in Figure 6.1b.

(N) brace
(E) leg

(N) anchor bolt

FIGURE 6Ab Bracing of horizontal tank.

134

6.5 HAZARDOUS MATERIAL STORAGE SYSTEMS

Seismic-activated shutoff valves should be installed on hazardous materials supply lines. These lines also should
be adequately braced as shown in Figures 6.2e and 6.2f and should be provided with flexible connections at
storage tanks. Bottles of laboratory chemicals should be prevented from falling by using elastic straps or shelf
lips as shown in Figure 6.5a. Liquid oxygen and similar pressurized tanks also should be restrained as indicated
in Figure 6.5b.

FIGURE 6.5a Protective measures for hazardous materials.

135

(E) gas cylinder

(N) chain restraint

FIGURE 6.5b Anchorage detail for pressurized tanks.

136

6.6 COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS

The operation of communication systems following an earthquake is of vital importance to individuals,
communities, federal agencies, and private businesses that depend on them to aid in assessing damage and
responding to problems.
Telephone communications equipment consists of input and output data processing units, disk drives, central
computers, and remote regional and central switching units, much of which is located on raised access floors;
this computer type equipment is discussed in Sec. 6.7. Remote switching units not located on raised floors should
be secured like other mechanical and electrical equipment as discussed in Sec. 6.1.
Essential facilities such as hospitals and fire and police stations that must have communication capabilities
in the event of an earthquake should have backup external and internal communication systems. Radio
equipment should be secured to prevent sliding or toppling. Desk top equipment also should be secured or
tethered to prevent falling.

6.7 COMPUTER EQUIPMENT

Computer equipment vulnerable to seismic damage includes electronic data processing equipment such as mainframes, peripherals, telecommunications cabinets, and tape and disk storage units. Seismic rehabilitation to
protect computer equipment is different from that required for other mechanical and electrical equipment for
several reasons: (1) computer equipment typically is located on raised access floors that complicate traditional
anchorage techniques and may amplify seismic loads, (2) computer equipment design is rapidly evolving and
advancing, units frequently are replaced or rearranged, and (3) some computer equipment may be sensitive to
high-frequency vibrations such as those that may be caused by ground shaking.
The remainder of this section briefly identifies rehabilitation techniques for data processing equipment and
tape and disk storage racks. For more information on the subject, refer to Data Processing Facilities: Guidelines
forEarthquake Hazard Mitigation (Olson, 1987), which provides detailed seismic design recommendations for new
computer facilities and the rehabilitation of existing facilities.
Electronic data processing (EDP) equipment typically is located on raised access floors; hence, the
traditional techniques of anchoring electrical equipment to the floor are complicated by the fact that the
anchorage needs to pass through the access floor to the subfloor. This reduces the access to the space beneath
the raised floor and greatly reduces the flexibility to rearrange and replace equipment. Some dynamic tests of
EDP equipment also have shown that certain vibration-sensitive equipment may be more prone to seismic
damage if it is rigidly anchored to the building and is subjected to high-frequency seismic ground motions than
if the equipment is free to slide on the access floor. However, if EDP units are unrestrained, they may slide into
structural walls or adjacent equipment or their support feet may slide into an access floor penetration, and the
unit will topple.
Two general solutions may be used to reduce the potential for seismic damage of EDP equipment: rigidly
restraining the equipment or allowing the equipment to slide. Rigid restraints (Figure 6.7a) may be appropriate
for equipment that is not vibration-sensitive, is not likely to be relocated, or is tall and narrow (and, hence,
susceptible to toppling). Air-handling units, modem cabinets, and power distribution units fall into this category.
Tall, flexible equipment such as modem cabinets may require stiffening or bracing near the top. If anchored only
at the base, the seismic motions at the top of the units may be significantly amplified and may result in
equipment damage. Figure 6.7b shows a detail that will prevent toppling but does not transmit high-frequency
ground shaking to the unit.
Equipment that is vibration sensitive or is likely to require frequent relocation can be isolated to reduce the
potential for seismic damage. Some of the considerations necessary for isolating equipment include protecting
the equipment from sliding to prevent a supporting foot or caster from falling into an opening in the access floor
(provided for cable penetrations). This can be prevented by tethering the equipment to the subfloor (Figure
6.7c) so that the equipment cannot slide far enough to impact other equipment or walls or to fall into a
penetration. Precautions should be considered for tall equipment restrained with a tether to prevent the
equipment from reaching the end of the tether, which may cause the equipment to overturn. Floor penetrations
also can be provided with guards (Figure 6.7c) that will prevent the equipment feet from entering. Adjacent

137

equipment either should be separated by about 1 foot to prevent potential pounding or should be strapped
together (Figure 6.7d) so that the separate pieces move as a unit.

(N) anchor

11
-b

'
: IaI

.
.

FIGURE 6.7a Rigid anchorage of computer equipment.

138

(E) computer
equipment
(E) leveling pads

(N) tension rods

(N) turnbuckle
(N) expansion

anchor

FIGURE 6.7b Flexible anchorage of computer equipment.

139

FIGURE 6.7c
equipment.

Tether and

140

FIGURE 6.7d Strapping of electronic data processing units.

141

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ABK. 1981. Methodology for Mitigation of Seismic Hazards in Existing Unreinforced Masonry Buildings:
Categorization of Buildings. Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation.
American National Standards Institute. 1987. Safety Code for Elevators, "Appendix F - Recommended Elevator
Safety Requirements for Seismic Risk Zone 3 or Greater," ANSI 17.1.

Applied TechnologyCouncil. 1986. Base Isolationand PassiveEnergyDissipation: Proceedingsof a Seminar

and Workshop, ATC-17. Redwood City, California: Applied Technology Council.
Applied Technology Council. 1987. Evaluating the Seismic Resistance of Existing Buildings, ATC-14. Redwood
City, California: ATC.
Applied Technology Council. 1988. Rapid Jsual Screening of Buildings for Potential Seismic Hazards, ATC-21.
Redwood City, California: ATC.
Applied Technology Council. 1989. Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings: (Preliminary), ATC-22, FEMA 178.
Washington, D.C.: FEMA.
Applied Technology Council. 1989. Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings: Supporting Documentation,
ATC-22-1, FEMA 175. Washington, D.C.: FEMA.
Arioclu, Ersin, K. Anadol, E. Gunol, E. Akar, and A. Candogan. 1978. "Aseismic Design and Construction of
a Precast Concrete Industrial Center with Some Test Results." In the Proceedings of the Sixth European
Conference on Earthquake Engineering.
Arnold, Christopher, and Robert Reitherman.
John Wiley and Sons, 1982.

1982. Building Configuration and Seismic Design. New York:

Ayres, J. Marx, and Tseng-Yao Sun. 1972. Earthquake Resistive Construction for Mechanical Systems, Light
Fixtures and Ceilings, Report of the Los Angeles Unified School District. Los Angeles, California, Los Angeles
Unified School District.
Battey, Jr., George E. 1982. "Materials Evaluation," in FIX'EM: Identification and Correction of Deficiencies
in Earthquake Resistance of Existing Buildings, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute Seminar. Oakland,
California: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.
Benedetti, D., and E. Vitiello. 1978. "Strengthening of Masonry Buildings." In Proceedings of the Seminar on
Constructions in Seismic Zones, Bergamo-Udine, Italy, International Association for Bridge and Structural
Engineering.
Boardman, P., B. Wood, and A. Carr. 1986. "Union House--A Cross Braced Structure with Energy Dissipators."

In Proceedingsof a Seminar and Workshopon Base Isolationand PassiveEnergyDissipation,ATC-17. Redwood

City, California: Applied Technology Council.
Bolong, Zhu, Jiang Zhixian, and Wu Mingshun. 1982. "A Study on Aseismic Capacity of Brick Masonry
Buildings Strengthened with Reinforced Concrete Columns and Tie Bars." In Proceedings of U.S. -- People's
Republic of China Bilateral Workshop on Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 1.

143

Breiholz, David C. 1987. "Centercore Strengthening System for Seismic Hazard Reduction of Unreinforced
Masonry Bearing Wall Buildings." Paper prepared for the Structural Engineering Association of California 56th
Annual Convention.
Building Seismic Safety Council. 1988 and 1991. NEHRP Recommended Provisions for the Development of
Seismic Regulations for New Buildings, 2 vols. and maps. Washington, D.C.: Federal Emergency Management
Agency.
Building Seismic Safety Council. 1992. NEHRP Handbook for the Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings.
Washington, D.C.: Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Cagley, James R. 1978. Seismic Hardening of Unreinforced Masonry Walls through a Surface Treatment.
Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation.
Clark, W. D., and 0. A. Glogau. 1979. "Suspended Ceilings: The Seismic Hazard and Damage Problem and
Some Practical Solutions." In Proceedings of the South Pacific Regional Conference on Earthquake Engineering,
Vol. 3.

Clough, R., and J. Penzien. 1975. Dynamics of Structures. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Davis, Harold A. 1978. "The Center for Educational Development, a Medium Scale Seismic Upgrading."
Proceedings of the North American Masonry Conference.

In

Departments of the Army, the Navy and the Air Force. 1982. Seismic Design for Buildings, Army TM 5-809-10,
Navy NAVFAC P-355, AFM 88-3, Chap. 13. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Departments of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force. 1988. Seismic Design Guidelines for UpgradingExisting
Buildings," Army TM 5-809-10-2, Navy NAVFAC P-355.2, AFM 88-3, Chap. 13, Sec. B. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office.
Departments of the Army, the Air Force, and the Navy. 1986. Seismic Design Guidelines for Essential Buildings,
Army TM 5-809-10.1, Navy NAVFAC P355.1, AFM 88-3, Chap. 13.1. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government
Printing Office.
Dynamic Isolation Systems. 1988. Seismic Isolation of Buildings, Workshop Proceedings. Berkeley, California:
Dynamic Isolation Systems, Inc.
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. 1984. Nonstructural Issues of Seismic Design and Construction,"
Technical Evaluation Based on a Workshop of the National Science Foundation. Oakland, California:
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.
ED2 International. 1985. Suspended Ceiling System Survey and Seismic Bracing Recommendations. Survey of
the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
Endo, T., A. Okifuji, S. Sugano, T. Hayashi, T. Shimizu, K. Takahara, H. Saito, and Y. Yoneyama. 1984.
"Practices of Seismic Retrofit of Existing Concrete Structures in Japan." In Proceedings of the Eighth World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering.
Forell, Nicholas F. 1983. "Structural Engineering Considerations." In Workshop Proceedings of the Earthquake
Damage Mitigation for Computer Systems for the Finance, Insurance and Monetary Services Committee, Califomia.
Gates, William E., and Charles Scawthorn. 1983. 'Mitigation of Earthquake Effects on Data Processing and
Telecommunications Equipment." In Workshop Proceedings of the Earthquake Damage Mitigation for Computer
Systems for the Finance, Insurance and Monetary Services Committee, Califomia.

144

Georgescu, Emil Saver. 1982. "Seismic Risk Mitigation of Rural Houses Using Performance Coefficients
Selections." In Proceedings of the Seventh European Conference on Earthquake Engineering Athens, Greece.
Giuliani, Hugo. 1980. "Supporting, Recovery, and Strengthening of Southeastern Block of School, "ENET No.
2" Affected by Caucete Earthquake of November 1977." Bulletin of the Intemational Institute of Seismology and
Earthquake Engineering 18.
Goodno, B. J., J. I. Craig, M. Mayyappa, and H. Palsson. 1983. Cladding-Structure Interaction in Highrise
Buildings, Report of the National Science Foundation Civil and Environmental Engineering Earthquake Hazards
Mitigation. Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation.
Graff, Edward D., and Edwin G. Zacher. 1979. "Sand to Sandstone: Foundation Strengthening with Chemical
Grout." Civil Engineering (January).
Hanson, R. 1988. "Energy Dissipation Systems." In Proceedings of the 1988 Structural Engineers Association

of CaliforniaConvention,Kona, Hawaii.
Hanson, Robert D. 1977. "Repair, Strengthening, and Rehabilitation of Buildings." In Workshop Proceedings,
National Science Foundation Report. Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation.
Hawkins, Neil M., and J. F. Stanton. 1982. "Building Rehabilitation Strategies in Seattle, Washington." In
Proceedings of U.S.-People's Republic of China Bilateral Workshop on Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 1.
Higashi, Yoichi, and Seiji Kokusho. 1975. "The Strengthening Methods of Existing Reinforced Concrete
Buildings." In Proceedings of the U.S.-Japan Cooperative Research Program.
Holmes, William T. 1979. "The Rehabilitation of History Corner of the Stanford University Main Quad." In
Proceedings of the 2nd U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering.
Holmes, William T. 1982. "Nonstructural Components." In FLX'EM:Identification and Correction of Deftciencies
in Earthquake Resistance of Existing Buildings, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute Seminar. Oakland,
California: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.
Hom, Stephen, Raymond Kincaid, and Peter I. Yanev. 1986. Practical Equipment Seismic Upgrade and
Strengthening Guidelines, Report of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
Hopkins, David C. 1987. "Recommendations for Strengthening Earthquake Risk Buildings in New Zealand."
In Proceedings of the Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering, New Zealand.
Iwan, Wilfred D. 1983. "Mitigating Seismic Losses to Computer Facilities." In Workshop Proceedings of the
Earthquake Damage Mitigationfor Computer Systems for the Finance, Insurance and Monetary Services Committee,
California.
Jacobsen, L. 1930. "Steady State Forced Vibration as Influenced by Damping." Transactions, ASME, Vol. 52,
Part 1, pp. APM 169-181.
Jordan, Carl H. 1977. "Seismic Restraint of Mechanical and Electrical Equipment in Buildings." In Report from
the American Society of Civil Engineers Meeting in San Francisco.
Kariotis, Kesler, and Allys. 1978. "Mitigation of Seismic Hazards in Existing Unreinforced Masonry Wall
Buildings: Performance of Undesigned and Modified Elements. Evaluation of Modification Method." Bulletin
of The New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering 11(4).

145

Kawamata, Shigeya, Mamoru Yoneda, and Yasuhiko Hangai. 1973. Development of a Vibration Control System
for Structures by Means of "MassPumps, " Bulletin No. 7 of the Earthquake Resistance Structure Research Center.
Kay, Donald R.

1982.

"Correction of Deficiencies in Reinforced Concrete Buildings."

In FIX'EM:

Identificationand Correctionof Deficienciesin EarthquakeResistanceof EtistingBuildings,EarthquakeEngineering

Research Institute Seminar. Oakland, California: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.
Kelly, James M. and Douglas Way. 1982. "The Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings Using Natural
Rubber Bearings." In Proceedi -k of the 51st Annual Convention of the Structural Engineers Association of
California.
Kelly, James M. 1979. "Aseismic Base Isolation:
Conference on Earthquake Engineering.

A Review." In Proceedings of the 2nd U.S. National

Knoll, Franz. 1983. "Upgrading Seismic Resistance of Buildings for Moderate Earthquake Risk." The Journal
of Earthquake Wind and Ocean Engineering, Eng. Struc. 5(2).
Korenev, B. G., and V. S. Poliakov. 1978. "Reduction of Seismic Structural Response Using the Vibration
Absorber." In Proceedings of the Sixth European Conference on Earthquake Engineering.
Lagorio, Henry J., Howard Friedman, and Kit M. Wong. 1986. Issues for Seismic Strengthening of Existing
Buildings: A Practical Guide forArchitects. Berkeley: University of California Center for Environmental Design
Research.
Lybas, J. M. 1978. Methods for Seismic Strengthening of Buildings," Report M249 of the Construction
Engineering Research Laboratory.
Marinakis, Kleon. 1978. "A Way to Increase the Resistance of Supporting Structures that are Already Built
Against Seismic Forces." Paper for the Hellenic Institute for the Application of Science, Athens, Greece,
Seminar on Constructions in Seismic Zones, Bergamo-Udine, Italy, International Association for Bridge and
Structural Engineering, May.
Martin, Ignacio. 1987. "Seismic Rehabilitation: Why, When, and How." In Mexico Earthquakes-1985,
Proceedings of the International Conference. New York: American Society of Civil Engineers.
McGavin, Gary L. 1981. Earthquake Protection of Essential BuildingEquipment: Design Engineering Installation.
New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Mihlailescu, M, I. Olariu, and N. Poienar. 1990. "Strengthen By Porestressing of a Multistory Frame Building."
In Proceedings of the Symposia on Partial Prestressingand Practical Construction in Prestressed and Reinforced
Concrete.
Mullins, Peter J., and Colin O'Connor.
Structural Engineering 113(2).

1987. "Reinforcement of Brick Walls Spanning Vertically." Journal of

New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering. 1985. Recommendations and Guidelines for
Classifying, Interim Securing and Strengthening Earthquake Risk Buildings.
Newmark, N., and W. Hall. 1982. Earthquake Spectra and Design.
Engineering Research Institute.

Oakland, California:

Earthquake

Niu, Zezhen. 1982. "Calculating Methods of Strengthened and Repaired Brick Masonry Structures for
Earthquake Resistance." In Proceedings of U.S.-People's Republic of China Bilateral Workshop on Earthquake
Engineering, Vol. 1.

146

Okada, T., M. Murakami, M. Seki, and A. Ando. 1983. "Repair and Strengthening of Reinforced Concrete
Buildings." In Proceedings of the Intemational Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering Symposium,
Vienna, Vol. 46.
Oliveira, Carlos S., and Artur Ravara. 1978. "Methodology for Strengthened Existing Structures Built without
the Required Earthquake Resistance." In Proceedings of the Sixth European Conference on Earthquake
Engineering.
Olson, RA. 1987. Data Processing Facilities: Guidelines for Earthquake Hazard Mitigation.
Financial Insurance and Monetary Services Committee.

California:

Ozmen, Gunay. 1982. "Redesign Considerations." In Proceedings of the Ninth Regional Seminar on Earthquake
Engineering, Vol. 1, Turkish National Committee for Earthquake Engineering Publication 2.
Plecnik, Joseph, Thomas Cousins, and Edward O'Conner.
Buildings." Journal of Structural Engineering 112 (5).
Popov, E., and M. Engelhardt.
Research (United Kingdom).

1986. "Strengthening of Unreinforced Masonry

1987. "Seismic Eccentrically Braced Frames." Journal of Constructional Steel

Prawal, S. P., and A. M. Reinhorn. 1985. "Seismic Retrofit of Structural Masonry Using a Ferrocement
Overlay." In Proceedings of the Third North American Masonry Conference.
Rea, D. 1968. Discussion on "Equivalent Viscous Damping for Yielding Structures." Journal of the Structural
Division 94(EM6).
Reitherman, R. 1985. Reducing the Risks of Nonstructural Earthquake Damage: A Practical Guide. Oakland,
California: Bay Area Regional Earthquake Preparedness Project.
San Bernadino County Department of Economic and Community Development. 1987. Seismic Strengthening,
Final Report and Handbooks. San Bernadino, California: County Department of Economic and Community
Development.
Scalzi, John B. 1983 "Strengthening of Masonry Buildings in the United States." In Proceedings of the ABSE
Symposium, Vienna, Vol. 46.
Schmid, Ben L. 1982. "Special Problems Related to Masonry Structures." In FIX'EM: Identification and
Correctionof Deficiencies in EarthquakeResistance of ExistingBuildings, Earthquake EngineeringResearch Institute
Seminar. Oakland, California: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.
Scholl, R. E. In press. Earthquake Resistant Design Using Added Damping and Stiffness Elements.
Shapiro, Okino, Hom and Associates for the Applied Technology Council. 1980. The Home Builder's Guide for
Earthquake Design. Prepared for the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy
Development and Research. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors National Association. 1982. Guidelines for Seismic Restraints of
Mechanical Systems and Plumbing Piping Systems. Place: Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors
National Association.
Stone, Marraccini and Patterson. 1976. Study to Establish Seismic Protection Provisions for Fumiture, Equipment
and Supplies for VA Hospitals. Washington, D.C.: Veterans Administration.

147

Structural Engineers Association of California. 1986. "Earthquake Hazard Mitigation of Unreinforced Pre-1933
Masonry Buildings." In Technical Manual Containing Papers on the Use of the Proposed Rule of General

Application and AlternateDesignApproach to the Reductionof EarthquakeHazardsSeminar,StructuralEngineers

Association of Southern California.
Sugano, Shunsuke. 1982. "An Overview of the State-of-the-Art In Seismic Strengthening of Existing Reinforced
Concrete Buildings in Japan." In Proceedings of the Third Seminar of Repair and Retrofit of Structures.
Sugano, S. 1981. "Guideline for Seismic Retrofitting (Strengthening, Toughening and/or Stiffening) Design of
Existing Reinforced Concrete Building." In Proceedings of the Second Seminar of Repair and Retrofit of
Structures.
Thomson, W. 1972. Theory of Vibration. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
United Nations Industrial Development Organization. 1983. Building Construction Under Seismic Conditions
in the Balkan Region, Vol. 5.
URS/John A. Blume and Associates. 1989. Techniques for Seismically Rehabilitating Existing Buildings
(Preliminary). Washington, D.C.: FEMA.
Warner, James. 1980. "Repair and Retrofit of Buildings Overview of U.S. Experiences -- Current Practice and

Weaknesses." In Proceedingsof the First Seminar of Repairand Retrofitof Structures.

Warner, James. 1976. "Ventura City Hall Restoration." Joumal of the Construction Division 102(March).
Wong, Kit M. 1987. Seismic Strengthening of UnreinforcedMasonry Buildings. Berkeley, California: Center for
Environmental Design Research.
Woodhead, Roger, and D. R. Morgan. 1983. "Block 15 Heritage Redevelopment Seismic Upgrading." In
Proceedings Fourth Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver.
Wyllie, Jr., Loring A. 1983. "Seismic Strengthening Procedures for Existing Structures." In Proceedings of the
International Association of Bridge and Structural Engineering Symposium, ienna, Vol. 46.
Wyllie, Jr., Loring A. 1981. "Strengthening Existing Concrete and Masonry Buildings for Seismic Resistance."
In Proceedings of-the Second Seminar of Repair and Retrofit of Structures, Structural Engineers Association of
Northern California.
Yanev, Peter I. 1983. "Earthquake Risk-Reduction and Control for Computer Systems." In Proceedings of the
Workshop on Earthquake Damage Mitigation for Computer Systems for the Finance, Insurance and Monetary
Services Committee.
Yongsong, Gong. 1982. "Aseismic Evaluation of Brick Structures." In Proceedings of U.S. - People's Republic
of China Bilateral Workshop on Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 1.
Zarnic, Roko, Miha Tomazevic, and Tomaz Velechovsky. 1986. "Experimental Study of Methods for Repair
and Strengthening of Masonry Infilled Reinforced Concrete Frames." In Proceedings of the 8th European
Conference on Earthquake Engineering.
Zarnic, Roko, and Miha Tomazevic. 1986. "Aseismic Strengthening of an Historical XVII-Century Urban
Building--A Case Study." In Proceedings of the 8th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering.

148

APPENDIX A
SEISMIC-FORCE-RESISTING

ELEMENTS

IN BUILDINGS

This handbook discusses techniques for rehabilitating the seismic resistance of the following 15 common building
types:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.

Wood Light Frame

Wood, Commercial and Industrial
Steel Moment Frame
Steel Braced Frame
Steel Light Frame
Steel Frame with Concrete Shear Walls
Steel with Infill Masonry Shear Walls
Concrete Moment Frame
Concrete Shear Walls
Concrete Frame with Infill Walls
Precast/Tilt-Up Concrete Walls with Lightweight Flexible Diaphragm
Precast Concrete Frames with Concrete Shear Walls
Reinforced Masonry Bearing Walls with Wood/Metal Deck Diaphragms
Reinforced Masonry Bearing Walls with Precast Concrete Diaphragms
Unreinforced Masonry Bearing Wall Buildings

The lateral-force-resisting elements of buildings can be categorized into the following subsystems: vertical
elements resisting lateral forces, diaphragms, foundations, and the connections between the subsystems. The 15
common building types considered in this report can be composed of various subsystem types. The construction
of each subsystem can vary. For example, diaphragms can be constructed of timber, steel or concrete. The
technique to rehabilitate a deficient subsystem and hence a deficient building depends upon the type of
construction of that subsystem. The following tables present common construction of the lateral-force-resisting
subsystems for the 15 common building types. These tables are provided to aid the reader in determining the
types of subsystems likely to be present in a building of a given type. With an understanding of the subsystem
construction and the subsystem deficiencies, the techniques presented in Chapter 3 can be investigated to
determine effective ways to rehabilitate the seismic resistance of a given existing building.

149

TABLE Al
STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF COMMON BUILDING TYPE 1--WOOD, LIGHT FRAME
Floor or Roof
Diaphragm
Timber framing with
plywood, straight-laid,
or diagonal sheathing.

Vertical-Resisting
Elements
Wood stud walls with
let-in or cut-in timber
bracing or plywood,
straight-laid, or diagonal sheathing.

Connections

Foundations
Spread footings, piles,
or drilled piers.

Diagonal wire or strut

bracing of ceilings from
floor or roof diaphragms.
Bracing or lateral support
of walls and partitions from
ceilings or diaphragms.
Nailing and blocking for direct shear transfer from
horizontal diaphragms to
shear walls or vertical bracing.

Drag struts to collect shear

from horizontal diaphragms
for transfer to shear walls
or vertical bracing.
Bolting of shear walls and
vertical bracing to concrete
slabs or foundation walls.
Tension ties or hold-downs
for shear walls and vertical
bracing.
Nailing or bolting of vertical bracing.

150

TABLE A2

STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF COMMON BUILDING TYPE 2--WOOD, COMMERCIAL AND

INDUSTRIAL
Floor or Roof
Diaphragm
Timber framing with
plywood, straight-laid,
or diagonal sheathing.
(Floor or roof decking may be 2-inch
material).

Vertical-Resisting
Elements
Wood stud walls with
let-in or cut-in timber
bracing or plywood,
straight-laid, or diagonal sheathing.

Foundations
Spread footings, piles,
or drilled piers.

Connections
Diagonal wire or strut bracing of ceilings from floor or
roof diaphragms.
Bracing or lateral support of
walls and partitions from
ceilings or diaphragms.

Knee bracing or diagonal bracing of timber

columns.

Nailing and blocking for direct shear transfer from

horizontal diaphragms to
shear walls or vertical bracing.

Drag struts to collect shear

from horizontal diaphragms
for transfer to shear walls or
vertical bracing.
Bolting of shear walls and
vertical bracing to concrete
slabs or foundation walls.
Tension ties or hold-downs
for shear walls and vertical
bracing.
Nailing or'bolting of vertical
bracing.

151

TABLE A3

STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF COMMON BUILDING TYPE 3--STEEL MOMENT FRAME

Floor or Roof
Diaphragm

Vertical-Resisting
Elements

Foundations

Connections

Timber framing with

plywood, straight-laid,
or diagonal sheathing.

Moment resisting*
structural steel frames.

Spread footings, piles,

or drilled piers.

Diagonal wire or strut bracing of ceilings from floor or

roof diaphragms.
Bracing or lateral support
walls and partitions from
ceilings or diaphragms.

Reinforced concrete
slab supported on
structural steel floor
framing members.

of

Nailing and blocking for direct shear transfer from

horizontal diaphragms to
shear walls or vertical brac-

Steel decking with or

without concrete fill.

ing.

Drag struts to collect shear

from horizontal diaphragms
for transfer to shear walls or
vertical bracing.
Shear studs or other connections of concrete diaphragm
to steel chord members.
Welding, shear studs, or
other connections of steel
deck diaphragms to structural steel framing.
Splice detail of steel chord
members.
Beam/column connections.
Beam/column panel joint
details.
Column splice details.
_____________

Column base details.

J.

152

TABLE A4

STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF COMMON BUILDING TYPE 4--STEEL BRACED FRAME

Floor or Roof
Diaphragm

Vertical-Resisting
Elements

Timber framing with

plywood, straight-laid,
or diagonal sheathing.

Concentric steel brac-

Reinforced concrete
slab supported on
structural steel floor
framing members.

ing in diagonal, X, K,

Foundations

Connections

Spread footings, piles,

or drilled piers.

Diagonal wire or strut bracing of ceilings from floor or

roof diaphragms.

or chevron configuration.

Bracing or lateral support of

walls and partitions from
ceilings or diaphragms.

May also have moment

resisting structural
steel frames.

Nailing and blocking for direct shear transfer from

horizontal diaphragms to
shear walls or vertical brac-

Steel decking with or

without concrete fill.

ing.

Drag struts to collect shear

from horizontal diaphragms
for transfer to shear walls or
vertical bracing.
Shear studs or other connections of concrete diaphragm
to steel chord members.
Welding, shear studs, or
other connections of steel
deck diaphragms to structural steel framing.
Splice detail of steel chord
members.
Beam/column connections.
Beam/column panel joint
details.
Column splice details.
Column base details.
Bolted or welded bracing
connections.

153

TABLE AS

STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF COMMON BUILDING TYPE 5--STEEL, LIGHT FRAME

Floor or Roof
Diaphragm

Vertical-Resisting
Elements

Foundations

Connections

Timber framing with

plywood, straight-laid,
or diagonal sheathing.

Moment resisting
structural steel frames.

Spread footings, piles,

or drilled piers.

Diagonal wire or strut bracing of ceilings from floor or

roof diaphragms.

Reinforced concrete
slab supported on
structural steel floor
framing members.

Concentric light steel

bracing in diagonal or
X configuration.

.1

Bracing or lateral support of

walls and partitions from
ceilings or diaphragms.
Nailing and blocking for direct shear transfer from
horizontal diaphragms to
shear walls or vertical brac-

Steel decking with or

without concrete fill.

ing.

Drag struts to collect shear

from horizontal diaphragms
for transfer to shear walls or
vertical bracing.
Shear studs or other connections of concrete diaphragm
to steel chord members.
Welding, shear studs, or
other connections of steel
deck diaphragms to structural steel framing.
Splice detail of steel chord
members.
Beam/column connections.
Beam/column panel joint
details.
Column splice details.
Column base details.
Bolted or welded bracing
connections.

154

TABLE A6

STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF COMMON BUILDING TYPE 6--STEEL FRAME WITH CONCRETE

SHEAR WALLS
Floor or Roof
Diaphragm
Reinforced concrete
slab supported on
structural steel floor
framing members.
Steel decking with or
without concrete fill.

Vertical-Resisting
Elements
Nomnoment-resisting
steel frames.

Foundations

Connections

Spread footings, piles,

or drilled piers.

Diagonal wire or strut bracing of ceilings from floor or

roof diaphragms.

Reinforced concrete
shear walls.

Bracing or lateral support of

walls and partitions from
ceilings or diaphragms.

May also have moment

resisting structural
steel frames.

Shear studs or other connections of concrete diaphragm

to steel chord members.
Welding, shear studs, or
other connections of steel
deck diaphragms to structural steel framing.
Splice detail of steel chord
members.
Beam/column connections.
Beam/column panel joint
details.
Column splice details.
Column base details.
Connection of concrete
shear walls to floor or roof
diaphragms.
Development of boundary
members for concrete shear
walls.

155

TABLE A7

STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF COMMON BUILDING TYPE 7--STEEL WITH INFILL MASONRY

SHEAR WALLS
Floor or Roof
Diaphragm
Timber framing with
plywood, straight-laid,
or diagonal sheathing.

Vertical-Resisting
Elements
Nonmoment-resisting
steel frames.

Foundations

Connections

Spread footings, piles,

or drilled piers.

Diagonal wire or strut bracing of ceilings from floor or

roof diaphragms.

Unreinforced masonry
Reinforced concrete
slab supported on
structural steel floor
framing members.

Bracing or lateral support of

walls and partitions from
ceilings or diaphragms.

walls.

May also have moment

resisting structural
steel frames.

Nailing and blocking for direct shear transfer from

horizontal diaphragms to
shear walls or vertical brac-

Steel decking with or

without concrete fill.

ing.

Drag struts to collect shear

from horizontal diaphragms
for transfer to shear walls or
vertical bracing.
Shear studs or other connections of concrete diaphragm
to steel chord members.
Welding, shear studs, or
other connections of steel
deck diaphragms to structural steel framing.
Splice detail of steel chord
members.
Beam/column connections.
Beam/column panel joint
details.
Column splice details.
Column base details.

_______________

A_______________

A.

156

Connection of masonry walls

to steel framing.

TABLE A&

STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF COMMON BUILDING TYPE 8--CONCRETE MOMENT FRAME

Floor or Roof
Diaphragm
Reinforced concrete
slab monolithic with
reinforced concrete
beams and girders.

Vertical-Resisting
Elements
Reinforced concrete
frames.

Foundations
Spread footings, piles,
or drilled piers.

Connections
Diagonal wire or strut bracing of ceilings from floor or
roof diaphragms.
Bracing or lateral support of
walls and partitions from
ceilings or diaphragms.
Beam/column panel joint
details.
Column shear reinforcement
and confinement.

157

TABLE A9

STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF COMMON BUILDING TYPE 9--CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS

Floor or Roof
Diaphragm
Reinforced concrete
slab monolithic with
reinforced concrete
beams and girders.

Vertical-Resisting
Elements
Reinforced concrete
shear walls.

Foundations

Connections

Spread footings, piles,

or drilled piers.

Diagonal wire or strut bracing of ceilings from floor or

roof diaphragms.
Bracing or lateral support of
walls and partitions from
ceilings or diaphragms.
Connection of concrete
shear walls to floor or roof
diaphragms.
Development of boundary
members for concrete shear
walls.

Concrete diaphragm chord

details.

158

TABLE A10

STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF COMMON BUILDING TYPE 10--CONCRETE FRAME

WITH INFILL WALLS
Floor or Roof
Diaphragm
Timber framing with
plywood, straight-laid,
or diagonal sheathing.
Reinforced concrete
slab monolithic with
reinforced concrete
beams and girders.

Vertical-Resisting
Elements
Reinforced concrete
frames.

Foundations
Spread footings, piles,
or drilled piers.

Unreinforced masonry
walls.

Connections
Diagonal wire or strut bracing of ceilings from floor or
roof diaphragms.
Bracing or lateral support of
walls and partitions from
ceilings or diaphragms.
Connection of timber floor
or roof diaphragms to concrete frames.
Connection of concrete floor
or roof diaphragms to concrete frames.
Connection of masonry walls
to concrete frames.
Beam/column joint details.
Column shear reinforcement
and confinement.

159

TABLEAll
STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF COMMON BUILDING TYPE 11--PRECAST/TILT-UP CONCRETE
WALLS WITH LIGHTWEIGHT FLEXIBLE DIAPHRAGM
Floor or Roof
Diaphragm

Vertical-Resisting
Elements

Timber framing with

plywood, straight-laid,
or diagonal sheathing.

Precast concrete walls.

Foundations

Connections

Spread footings, piles,

or drilled piers.

Diagonal wire or strut bracing of ceilings from floor or

roof diaphragms.

Reinforced concrete
slab monolithic with
reinforced concrete
beams and girders.

Bracing or lateral. support of

walls and partitions from
ceilings or diaphragms.

Steel decking with or

without concrete fill.

Welding, shear studs, or

other connections of steel
deck diaphragms to structural steel framing.
Connection of timber floor
or roof diaphragms and
precast walls.
Connection of concrete floor
or roof diaphragms to precast walls.
Connection of steel deck
floor or roof diaphragms to
precast walls.
Vertical precast panel connections.
Tension ties or hold-down
connections for precast panels.
Diaphragm chord details for
timber, steel decking, and
concrete diaphragm.
Base detail for precast panels.

160

TABLE A12

STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF COMMON BUILDING TYPE 12--PRECAST CONCRETE FRAMES

WITH CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS
Floor or Roof
Diaphragm
Reinforced concrete
slab monolithic with
reinforced concrete
beams and girders.

Vertical-Resisting
Elements
Precast concrete
frames.

Foundations

Connections

Spread footings, piles,

or drilled piers.

Diagonal wire or strut bracing of ceilings from floor or

roof diaphragms.

Reinforced concrete
shear walls.

Bracing or lateral support of

walls and partitions from
ceilings or diaphragms.
Connection of concrete floor
or roof diaphragms to precast frames or shear walls.
Development of boundary
members for concrete shear
walls.

Beam/column joint details.

Column shear reinforcement
and confinement.
Concrete frame splice details.

161

TABLE A13

STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF COMMON BUILDING TYPE 13--REINFORCED MASONRY WALLS

WITH WOOD/METAL DECK
Floor or Roof
Diaphragm

Vertical-Resisting
Elements

Foundations

Connections

Timber framing with

plywood, straight-laid,
or diagonal sheathing.

Unreinforced masonry
bearing walls.

Spread footings, piles,

or drilled piers.

Diagonal wire or strut bracing of ceilings from floor or

roof diaphragms.
Bracing or lateral support of
walls and partitions from
ceilings or diaphragms.

Steel decking with or

without concrete fill.

Welding, shear studs, or

other connections of steel
deck diaphragms to structural steel framing.
Connection of timber or
steel decking floor or roof
diaphragms to masonry
walls.

Tension ties or hold-downs

for masonry walls.

162

TABLE A14

STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF COMMON BUILDING TYPE 14--REINFORCED MASONRY WALLS

WITH PRECAST CONCRETE DECK
Floor or Roof
Diaphragm
Precast concrete units
(planks, cored slabs,
tees, etc.)

Vertical-Resisting
Elements
Reinforced masonry
walls.

Foundations
Spread footings, piles,
or drilled piers.

Connections
Diagonal wire or strut bracing of ceilings from floor or
roof diaphragms.
Bracing or lateral support of
walls and partitions from
ceilings or diaphragms.
Connection of precast floor
or roof units to shear walls.
Connections between adjacent precast floor or roof
units.
Tension ties or hold-downs
for masonry walls.

163

TABLE A15

STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF COMMON BUILDING TYPE 15-UNREINFORCED

MASONRY BEARING WALLS
Floor or Roof
Diaphragm

Vertical-Resisting
Elements

Foundations

Connections

Timber framing with

plywood, straight-laid,
or diagonal sheathing.

Unreinforced masonry
walls.

Spread footings, piles,

or drilled piers.

Diagonal wire or strut bracing of ceilings from floor or

roof diaphragms.

Reinforced concrete
slab supported on
structural steel floor
framing members.

Bracing or lateral support of

walls and partitions from
ceilings or diaphragms.
Connection of timber or
concrete floor or roof diaphragms to masonry walls.

Reinforced concrete
slab monolithic with
reinforced concrete
beams and girders.

Development of diaphragm
chords in timber or concrete
floor or roof diaphragms.
Tension ties or hold-downs
for masonry walls.

164

APPENDIX B
SUMMARY OF STRENGTHENING TECHNIQUES

The deficiencies and alternative strengthening techniques discussed in Chapter 3 are summarized here as follows:
Table Bi

Moment Resisting Systems

Steel Moment Frames
Concrete Moment Frames
Moment Frames with Infill Walls
Precast Concrete Moment Frames

Table B2

Shear Walls
Reinforced Concrete or Reinforced Masonry
Precast Concrete
Unreinforced Masonry
Shear Walls in Wood Frame Buildings

Table B3

Braced Frames

Table B4

Diaphragms

Table B5

Foundations

Table B6

Diaphragm to Vertical Element Connections

Table B7

Vertical Element to Foundation Connections

165

TABLE Bi
MOMENT RESISTING SYSTEMS
STEEL MOMENT FRAMES
Strengthening Techniques

Deficiency
I-

5.

Increasing the moment capacity of the members and connections by adding cover plates or other steel sections to the
flanges Or by boxing members.
Increasing the moment and shear capacity of the members
and connections by providing steel gusset plates or knee
braces.
Reducing the stresses in the existing frames by providing
supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., additional moment frames, braces, or shear walls) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.
Providing lateral bracing of unsupported flanges to increase
capacity limited by tendency for lateral/torsional buckling.
Encasing the columns in concrete.

1.

Providing welded continuity plates between the column flang-

1.

Inadequate moment/shear capacity

of beams, columns, or their connections

2.

3.

4.

Inadequate beam/column panel zone

es.

capacity

2.

Providing stiffener plates welded to the column flanges and

web.

Excessive drift

3.
4.

Providing web doubler plates at the column web.

Reducing the stresses in the panel zone by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., additional moment
frames, braces, or shear walls) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

1.

Increasing the capacity and, hence, the stiffness of the existing moment frame by cover plates or boxing.
Increasing the stiffness of the beams and columns at their
connections by providing steel gusset plates to form haunch-

2.

es.

3.

Reducing the drift by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., additional moment frames, braces, or
shear walls) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

4.
5.

Increasing the stiffness by encasing columns in reinforced

concrete.
Reducing the drift by adding supplemental damping as discussed in Sec. 4.

CONCRETE MOMENT FRAMES

Inadequate ductile bending or shear
capacity in the beams or columns
and lack of confinement, frequently
in the joints

1. Increasing the ductility and capacity by jacketing the beam

and column joints or increasing the beam or column capacities.
2. Reducing the seismic stresses in the existing frames by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., additional moment frames, braces, or shear walls) as discussed in
Sec. 3.4.

3.

Changing the system to a shear wall system by infilling the

reinforced concrete frames with reinforced concrete.

166

TABLE Bl--continued
MOMENT FRAMES WITH INFILL WALLS
Crushing of the infill at the upper
and lower corners due to the diagonal compression strut type action
of the infill wall
Shear failure of the beam/column
connection in the steel frames or
direct shear transfer failure of the
beam or column in concrete frames

1.

Eliminating the hazardous effects of the infill by providing a

gap between the infill and the frame and providing out-ofplane support.
2. * Treating the infihl frame as a shear wall and correcting the
deficiencies as described in Sec. 3.2.

Tensile failure of the columns or

their connections due to the uplift
forces resulting from the braced
frame action induced by the infill
Splitting of the infill due to the orthogonal tensile stresses developed in
the diagonal compressive strut
Loss of infill by out-of-plane forces
due to loss of anchorage or excessive
slenderness of the infill wall
PRECAST CONCRETE MOMENT FRAMES
Inadequate capacity and/or ductility
of the joints between the precast
units

1.

2.

Removing existing concrete in the precast elements to expose

the existing reinforcing steel, providing additional reinforcing
steel welded to the existing steel (or drilled and grouted),
and replacing the removed concrete with cast-in-place concrete.
Reducing the forces on the connections by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., additional moment
frames, braces, or shear walls) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

167

TABLE B2

SHEAR WALLS
REINFORCED CONCRETE OR REINFORCED MASONRY SHEAR WALLS
Strengthening Techniques

Deficiency
1.

Inadequate shear capacity

Increasing the effectiveness of the existing walls by filling in

door or window openings with reinforced concrete or masonry.

2.

3.

Providing additional thickness to the existing walls with a

poured-in-place or pneumatically applied (i.e., shotcrete)
reinforced concrete overlay anchored to the inside or outside
face of the existing walls.
Reducing the shear or flexural stresses in the existing walls
by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e.,
shear walls, braces, or external buttresses) as discussed in
Sec. 3.4.

1.

Inadequate flexural capacity

Increasing the effectiveness of the existing walls by filling in

door or window openings with reinforced concrete or masonry.

2.

3.

Providing additional thickness to the existing walls with a

poured-in-place or pneumatically applied (i.e., shotcrete)
reinforced concrete overlay anchored to the inside or outside
face of the existing walls.
Reducing the shear or flexural stresses in the existing walls
by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e.,
shear walls, braces, or external buttresses). as discussed in
Sec. 3.4.

Inadequate shear or flexural capacity

in the coupling beams between shear
walls or piers

1.
2.
3.
4.

Eliminating the coupling beams by filling in openings with

reinforced concrete.
Removing the existing beams and replacing with new stronger reinforced beams.
Adding reinforced concrete to one or both faces of the wall
and providing an additional thickness to the existing wall.
Reducing the shear or flexural stresses in the connecting
beams by providing additional vertical-resisting elements (i.e.,
shear walls, braces, or external buttresses) as discussed in
Sec. 3.4.

PRECAST CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS

Inadequate shear or flexural capacity
in the wall panels

1.

2.

3.

Increasing the shear and flexural capacity of walls with significant openings for doors or windows by infilling the existing
openings with reinforced concrete.
Increasing the shear or flexural capacity by adding reinforced
concrete (poured-in-place or shotcrete) at the inside or outside face of the existing walls.
Adding interior shear walls to reduce the flexural or shear
stress in the existing precast panels.

168

TABLE B2--continued
PRECAST CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS-continued
Inadequate interpanel shear or flexural capacity
)

1.

2.

Making each panel act as a cantilever to resist in-plane

forces (by adding or strengthening tie-downs, edge reinforcement, footings).
Providing a continuous wall by exposing the reinforcing steel
in the edges of adjacent units, adding ties, and repairing with
concrete.

Inadequate out-of-plane flexural

capacity

1. Providing pilasters at and/or between the interpanel joints.

2. Adding horizontal beams between the columns or pilasters at
mid-height of the wall.

Inadequate shear or flexural capacity

in coupling beams

1.
2.
3.
4.

Eliminating the coupling beams by filling in openings with

reinforced concrete.
Removing the existing beams and replacing with new stronger reinforced beams.
Adding reinforced concrete to one or both faces of the wall
and providing an additional thickness to the existing wall.
Reducing the shear or flexural stresses in the connecting
beams by providing additional vertical-resisting elements (i.e.,
shear walls, braces, or external buttresses) as discussed in
Sec. 3.4.2

UNREINFORCED MASONRY SHEAR WALLS

Inadequate in-plane shear and outof-plane flexural capacity of the walls

1.

2.

3.

Providing additional shear capacity by placing reinforcing

steel on the inside or outside face of the wall and applying
new reinforced concrete.
Providing additional capacity for out-of-plane lateral forces
by adding reinforcing steel to the wall utilizing the center
coring technique.
Providing additional capacity for out-of-plane lateral forces
by adding thin surface treatments (e.g., plaster with wire
mesh and portland cement mortar) at the inside and outside
faces of existing walls.

4.
5.
Inadequate shear capacity of the
coupling beam

1.
2.
3.

Filling in existing window or door openings with reinforced

concrete.
Providing additional shear walls at the interior or perimeter
of the building or providing external buttresses.
Filling in openings with reinforced concrete.
Removing existing connecting beams and replacing them
with properly designed new reinforced concrete beams.
Providing additional shear walls at interior or perimeter of
building or external buttresses.

169

TABLE B2--continued
SHEAR WALIS IN WOOD FRAME BUILDINGS
Inadequate shear capacity of the wall

Increasing the shear capacity by providing additional nailing

to the existing finish material.
2. Increasing the shear capacity by adding plywood sheathing to
* one or both sides of the wall.
3. Reducing the loads on the wall by providing supplemental
shear walls to the interior or perimeter of the building.

Inadequate uplift or hold-down capacity of the wall

1.

1.

2.

Increasing the tensile capacity of the connections at the edge

of the shear walls by providing metal connectors.
Reducing the overturning moments by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

'W

170

TABLE B3

BRACED FRAMES
STEEL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES
(including chevron or K-bracing)
Deficiency

Inadequate lateral force capacity of

the bracing system governed by buckling of the compression brace

Strengthening Techniques

1.

2.

3.
4.

Inadequate capacity of the brace

connection

1.
2.
3.

Inadequate axial load capacity in the

columns or beams of the bracing
system

1.
2.
3.

Increasing the capacity of the braces by adding new members

thus increasing the area and reducing the radius of gyration
of the braces.
Increasing the capacity of the member by reducing the unbraced length of the existing member by providing secondary
braces.
Providing greater capacity by removing and replacing the
existing members with new members of greater capacity.
Reducing the loads on the braces by providing supplemental
vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls, braces, or eccentric bracing) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.
Increasing the capacity of the connections by additional bolting or welding.
Increasing the capacity of the connections by removing and
replacing the connection with members of greater capacity.
Reducing the loads on the braces and their connections by
providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear
walls, braces, or eccentric bracing) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.
Providing additional axial load capacity by adding cover
plates to the member flanges or by boxing the flanges.
Providing additional axial load capacity by jacketing the existing members with reinforced concrete.
Reducing the loads on the beams and columns by providing
supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls,
braces, or eccentric bracing) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

171

TABLE B3-continued
ROD OR OTHER TENSION BRACING
Inadequate tension capacity of the
rod, tensile member, or its connection

1.
2.

Increasing the capacity by strengthening the existing tension

members.
Increasing the capacity by rumoving the existing tension
members and replacing with new members of greater capacity.

3.

4.

Inadequate axial capacity of the

beams or columns in the bracing
system

1.
2.

Increasing the capacity by removing the existing tension

member and replacing it with diagonal or X-bracing capable
of resisting compression as well as tension forces.
Reducing the forces on the existing tension members by
providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., additional tension rods) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.
Increasing the axial capacity by adding cover plates to the
existing flanges or by boxing the existing flanges.
Reducing the forces on the existing columns or beams by
providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e.,
braced frames or shear walls) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

ECCENTRIC BRACING
Nonconformance with current design
standards

1.

2.

Ensuring that the system is balanced (i.e., there is a link

beam at one end of each brace), the brace and the connections are designed to develop shear or flexural yielding in the
link, the connection is a full moment connection, where the
link beam has an end at a column, and lateral bracing is
provided to prevent out-of-plane beam displacements that
would compromise the intended action.
Providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements such as
additional eccentric braced frames.

172

TABLE B4

DIAPHRAGMS
TIMBER DIAPHRAGMS
(straight-laid or diagonal sheathing or plywood)
Deficiency
Inadequate shear capacity of the
diaphragm

Strengthening Techniques
1.

2.
3.

Increasing the capacity of the existing timber diaphragm by

providing additional nails or staples with due regard for
wood splitting problems.
Increasing the capacity of the existing timber diaphragm by
means of a new plywood overlay.
Reducing the diaphragm span through the addition of supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear wall or
braced frames) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Inadequate chord capacity of the

diaphragm

1.

Excessive shear stresses at diaphragm openings or at plan irregularities

1.

Providing adequate nailed or bolted continuity splices along

joists or fascia parallel to the chord.
2. Providing a new continuous steel chord member along the
top of the diaphragm.
3. Reducing the stresses on the existing chords by reducing the
diaphragms, span through the addition of new shear walls or
braced frames as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

2.

3.

Reducing the local stresses by distributing the forces along

the diaphragm by means of drag struts.
Increasing the capacity of the diaphragm by overlaying the
existing diaphragm with plywood and nailing the plywood
through the sheathing at the perimeter of the sheets adjacent
to the opening or irregularity.
Reducing the diaphragm stresses by reducing the diaphragm
spans through the addition of supplemental shear walls or
braced frames as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Inadequate stiffness of the diaphragm resulting in excessive diaphragm

deformations

1.
2.

Increasing the stiffness of the diaphragm by the addition of a

new plywood overlay.
Reducing the diaphragm span and hence reducing the displacements by providing new supplemental vertical-resisting
elements such as shear walls or braced frames as discussed
in Sec. 3.4.

CONCRETE DIAPHRAGMS
(monolithic concrete diaphragms--i.e., reinforced concrete or post-tensioned concrete)
Inadequate in-plane shear capacity of
the concrete diaphragm

1.
2.

Increasing the shear capacity by overlaying the existing concrete diaphragm with a new reinforced concrete topping slab.
Reducing the shear in the existing concrete diaphragm by
providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear
walls or braced frames) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

173

TABLE B4--continued
Inadequate diaphragm chord capacity

1.

2.

3.

Excessive shear stresses at the diaphragm openings or plan irregularities

1.

2.

3.
4.

Increasing the flexural capacity by removing the edge of the

diaphragm slab and casting a new chord member integral
with the slab.
Adding a new chord member by providing a new reinforced
concrete or steel member above or below the slab and connecting the new member to the existing slab with drilled and
grouted dowels or bolts as discussed in Sec. 3.5.4.3.
Reducing the existing flexural stresses by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls or braced
frames) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.
Reducing the local stresses by distributing the forces along
the diaphragm by means of structural steel or reinforced
concrete elements cast beneath the slab and made integral
through the use of drilled and grouted dowels.
Increasing the capacity of the concrete by providing a new
concrete topping slab in the vicinity of the opening and reinforcing with trim bars.
Removing the stress concentration by filling in the diaphragm opening with reinforced concrete.
Reducing the shear stresses at the location of the openings
by adding supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear
walls or braced frames) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

174

TABLE B4--continued
POURED GYPSUM DIAPHRAGMS
Inadequate in-plane shear capacity of
the concrete diaphragm

Inadequate diaphragm chord capacity

Excessive shear stresses at the diaphragm openings or plan irregularities

1.

Increasing the shear capacity by overlaying the existing concrete diaphragm with a new reinforced concrete topping slab.
2. Reducing the shear in the existing concrete diaphragm by
providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear
walls or braced frames) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.
3. Increasing the flexural capacity by removing the edge of the
diaphragm slab and casting a new chord member integral
with the slab.
4. Adding a new chord member by providing a new reinforced
concrete or steel member above or below the slab and connecting the new member to the existing slab with drilled and
grouted dowels or bolts as discussed in Sec. 3.5.4.3.
5. Reducing the existing flexural stresses by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls or braced
frames) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.
6. Reducing the local stresses by distributing the forces along
the diaphragm by means of structural steel or reinforced
concrete elements cast beneath the slab and made integral
through the use of drilled and grouted dowels.
7. Increasing the capacity of the concrete by providing a new
concrete topping slab in the vicinity of the opening and reinforcing with trim bars.
8. Removing the stress concentration by filling in the diaphragm opening with reinforced concrete.
9. Reducing the shear stresses at the location of the openings
by adding supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear
walls or braced frames) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.
10. Adding a new horizontal bracing system may be the most
effective strengthening alternative.

PRECAST CONCRETE DIAPHRAGMS

(precast or post-tensioned concrete planks, tees, or cored slabs)
Inadequate in-plane shear capacity of
the connections between the adjacent
units

1.

2.

Replacing and increasing the capacity of the existing connections by overlaying the existing diaphragm with a new reinforced concrete topping slab.
Reducing the shear forces on the diaphragm by providing
supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls or
braced frames) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Inadequate diaphragm chord capacity

1.

2.
3.

Providing a new continuous steel member above or below

the steel slab and connecting the new member to the existing
slab with bolts.
Removing the edge of the diaphragm and casting a new
chord member integral with the slab.
Reducing the diaphragm chord forces by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls or braced
frames) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

175

TABLE B4--continued
PRECAST CONCRETE DLAPHRAGMS--continued
1.

Excessive in-plane shear stresses at

diaphragm openings or plan irregularities

2.

3.
4.
&

______________________________________________

Reducing the local stresses by distributing the forces along

the diaphragm by means of concrete drag struts cast beneath
the slab and made integral with the existing slab with drilled
and grouted dowels.
Increasing the capacity by overlaying the existing slab with a
new reinforced concrete topping slab with reinforcing trim
bars in the vicinity of the opening.
Removing the stress concentration by filling in the diaphragm opening with reinforced concrete.
Reducing the shear stresses at the location of the openings
by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e.,
shear walls or braced frames) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

STEEL DECK DIAPHRAGMS

(steel decking on steel framing)
Inadequate in-plane shear capacity
which may be governed by the capacity of the welding to the supports or
the capacity of the seam welds between the deck units

1.
2.

3.
4.

Increasing the steel deck shear capacity by providing additional welding.

Increasing the deck shear capacity of unfilled steel decks by
adding a reinforced concrete fill or overlaying with concrete
filled steel decks a new topping slab.
Increasing the diaphragm shear capacity by providing a new
horizontal steel bracing system under the existing diaphragm.
Reducing the diaphragm shear stresses by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements to reduce the diaphragm
span as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Inadequate diaphragm chord capacity

1.

2.
3.

Increasing the chord capacity by providing welded or bolted

continuity splices in the perimeter chord steel framing members.
Increasing the chord capacity by providing a new continuous
steel member on top or bottom of the diaphragm.
Reducing the diaphragm chord stresses by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls or braced
frames) such that the diaphragm span is reduced as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Excessive in-plane shear stresses at

diaphragm openings or plan irregularities

1.
2.

3.

Reducing the local stress concentrations by distributing the

forces into the diaphragm by means of steel drag struts.
Increasing the capacity of the diaphragm by reinforcing the
edge of the opening with a steel angle frame welded to the
decking.
Reducing the diaphragm stresses by providing supplemental
vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls, braced frames or
new moment frames) such that the diaphragm span is reduced as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

176

TABLE B4-continued
HORIZONTAL STEEL BRACING
*1

Inadequate force capacity of the

members (i.e., bracing and floor or
roof beams) and/or the connections

1.

2.
3.

4.

5.

Increasing the capacity of the existing bracing members or

removing and replacing them with new members and connections of greater capacity.
Increasing the capacity of the existing members by reducing
unbraced lengths.
Increasing the capacity of the bracing system by adding new
horizontal bracing members to previously unbraced panels (if
feasible).
Increasing the capacity of the bracing system by adding a
steel deck diaphragm to the floor system above the steel
bracing.
Reducing the stresses in the horizontal bracing system by
providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear
walls or braced frames) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

177

TABLE BS

FOUNDATIONS
CONTINUOUS OR STRIP WALL FOOTINGS
Strengthening Techniques

Deficiency
Excessive soil bearing pressure due
to overturning forces

1.
2.
3.
4.

Excessive uplift conditions due to

overturning forces

1.
2.
3.

Increasing the bearing capacity of the footing by underpinning the footing ends and providing additional footing area.
Increasing the vertical capacity of the footing by adding new
drilled piers adjacent and connected to the existing footing.
Increasing the soil bearing capacity by modifying the existing
soil properties.
Reducing the overturning forces by providing supplemental
vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls or braced frames)
as discussed in Sec. 3.4.
Increasing the uplift capacity of the existing footing by adding drilled piers or soil anchors.
Increasing the size of the existing footing by underpinning to
mobilize additional foundation and reduce soil pressures.
Reducing the uplift forces by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls or braced frames) as
discussed in Sec. 3.4.

INDIVIDUAL PIER OR COLUMN FOOTINGS

Excessive soil bearing pressure due
to overturning forces

1.
2.
3.

4.
5.

Excessive uplift conditions due to

overturning forces

1.
2.
3.

4.

Increasing the bearing capacity of the footing by underpinning the footing ends and providing additional footing area.
Increasing the vertical capacity of the footing by adding new
drilled piers adjacent and connected to the existing footing.
Reducing the bearing pressure on the existing footings by
connecting adjacent footings with deep reinforced concrete
tie beams.
Increasing the soil bearing capacity by modifying the existing
soil properties.
Reducing the overturning forces by providing supplemental
vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls or braced
frames).
Increasing the uplift capacity of the existing footing by adding drilled piers or soil anchors.
Increasing the size of the existing footing by underpinning to
mobilize additional foundation and soil weight.
Increasing the uplift capacity by providing a new deep reinforced concrete beam to mobilize the dead load on an adjacent footing.
Reducing the uplift forces by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., shear walls or braced frames).

178

TABLE BS--continued
INDIVIDUAL PIER OR COLUMN FOOTINGS--continued
Inadequate passive soil pressure to
resist lateral loads

1.
2.
3.
4.

Providing an increase in bearing area by underpinning and

enlarging the footing.
Providing an increase in bearing area by adding new tie
beams between existing footings.
Improving the existing soil conditions adjacent to the footing
to increase the allowable passive pressure.
Reducing the bearing pressure at overstressed locations by
providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements such as
shear walls or braced frames as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

PILES OR DRILLED PIERS

Excessive tensile or compressive
loads on the piles or piers due to the
seismic forces combined with the
gravity loads
Inadequate lateral force capacity to
transfer the seismic shears from the
pile caps and the piles to the soil

1.

2.
1.
2.
3.

4.

Increasing the capacity of the foundation by removing the

existing pile cap, driving additional piles and providing new
pile caps of larger size.
Reducing the loads on overstressed pile caps by adding tie
beams to adjacent pile caps and distributing the loads.
Reducing the loads on overstressed pile caps by adding tie
beams to adjacent pile caps and distributing the loads.
Increasing the allowable passive pressure of the soil by improving the soil adjacent to the pile cap.
Increasing the capacity of the foundation by removing the
existing pile cap, driving additional piles, and providing new
pile caps of larger size.
Reducing loads on the piles or piers by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements (i.e., braced frames or shear
walls) and transferring forces to other foundation members
with reserve capacity as discussed in Sec. 3.4.
MAT

Inadequate moment capacity to resist

combined gravity plus seismic overturning forces

1.

2.

Inadequate passive soil pressure to

resist sliding

1.

Increasing the mat capacity locally by providing additional

reinforced concrete (i.e., an inverted column capital) doweled
and bonded to the existing mat to act as a monolithic section.
Providing new shear walls above the mat to distribute the
overturning loads and also to locally increase the section
modulus of the mat.
Constructing properly spaced shear keys at the mat perimeter.

179

TABLE B6

DIAPHRAGM TO VERTICAL ELEMENT CONNECTIONS

CONNECTIONS OF TIMBER DIAPHRAGMS
Strengthening Techniques

Deficiency
Inadequate capacity to transfer
in-plane shear at the connection of
the diaphragm to interior shear walls
or vertical bracing

1.

2.

3.

Increasing the shear transfer capacity of the diaphragm local

to the connection by providing additional nailing to existing
or new blocking.
Reducing the local shear transfer stresses by distributing the
forces from the diaphragm by providing a collector member
to transfer the diaphragm forces to the shear wall.
Reducing the shear transfer stress in the existing connection
by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Inadequate capacity to transfer

in-plane shear at the connection of
the diaphragm to exterior shear walls
or vertical bracing

1.
2.

3.

Increasing the capacity of existing connections by providing

additional nailing and/or bolting.
Reducing the local shear transfer stresses by distributing the
forces from the diaphragm by providing chords or collector
members to collect and distribute shear from the diaphragm
to the shear wall or bracing.
Reducing the shear stress in the existing connection by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements as discussed
in Sec. 3.4.

Inadequate out-of-plane anchorage at

the connection of the diaphragm to
exterior concrete or masonry walls

1.

2.
3.
Inadequate tensile capacity between
floors due to overturning moments

1.
2.

Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing steel

straps connected to the wall (using drilled and grouted bolts
or through bolts for masonry walls) and bolted or lagged to
the diaphragm or roof or floor joists.
Increasing the capacity of the connections by providing a
steel anchor to connect the roof or floor joists to the walls.
Increasing the redundancy of the connection by providing
continuity ties into the diaphragm.
Increasing the tensile capacity of the connections at the edge
of the shear walls by providing metal connectors.
Reducing the overturning moments by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements as discussed in Sec. 3A.

180

TABLE B6--continued
CONNECTIONS OF CONCRETE DIAPHRAGMS
Inadequate in-plane shear transfer
capacity

1.

Reducing the local stresses at the diaphragm-to-wall interface by providing collector members or drag struts under the
diaphragm and connecting them to the diaphragm and the
wall.

2.

3.

Inadequate anchorage capacity for

out-of-plane forces in the connecting
walls

1.
2.

Increasing the capacity of the existing diaphragm-to-wall

connection by providing additional dowels grouted into
drilled holes.
Reducing the shear stresses in the existing connection by
providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements as discussed in Sec. 3.4.
Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing additional dowels grouted into drilled holes.
Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing a new
member above or below the slab connected to the slab with
drilled and grouted bolts similar to that for providing a new
diaphragm chord.

CONNECTIONS OF POURED GYPSUM DIAPHRAGMS

Inadequate in-plane shear transfer

1.

Providing new dowels from the diaphragm into the shear

wall.

2.
Inadequate anchorage capacity for
out-of-plane forces in the connecting
walls

3.

Removing the gypsum diaphragm and replacing it with steel

decking.
Adding a new horizontal bracing system designed to resist all
of the seismic forces.

CONNECTIONS OF PRECAST CONCRETE DIAPHRAGMS

Inadequate in-plane shear transfer
capacity

1.

2.
Inadequate anchorage capacity at the
exterior walls for out-of-plane forces
3.

Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing additional welded inserts or dowels placed in drilled or grouted
holes.
Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing a
reinforced concrete overlay that is bonded to the precast
units and anchored to the wall with additional dowels placed
in drilled and grouted holes.
Reducing the forces at the connection by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

181

TABLE B6--continued

CONNECTIONS OF STEEL DECK DIAPHRAGMS WITHOUT CONCRETE FILL

Inadequate in-plane shear capacity or
anchorage capacity for out-of-plane

1.

forces in walls

2.
3.

4.

5.

Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing additional welding at the vertical element.
Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing additional anchor bolts.
Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing concrete fill over the deck with dowels grouted into holes drilled
into the wall.
Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing new
steel members to effect a direct transfer of diaphragm shears
to a shear wall.
Reducing the local stresses by providing additional verticalresisting elements such as shear walls, braced frames, or
moment frames as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

_____________________________________________________________________________________I

CONNECTIONS OF STEEL DECK DIAPHRAGMS WITH CONCRETE FILL

Inadequate in-plane shear capacity or
anchorage capacity for out-of-plane
forces in walls

1.

2.

3.
4.

Increasing the shear capacity by drilling holes through the

concrete fill, and providing additional shear studs welded to
the vertical elements through the decking.
Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing additional anchor bolts (drilled and grouted) connecting the steel
support to the wall.
Increasing the capacity of the connection by placing dowels
between the existing wall and diaphragm slab.
Reducing the local stresses by providing additional verticalresisting elements such as shear walls, braced frames, or
moment frames as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

CONNECTIONS OF HORIZONTAL STEEL BRACING

Inadequate in-plane shear transfer
capacity

1.
2.

Increasing the capacity by providing larger or more bolts or

by welding.
Reducing the stresses by providing supplemental verticalresisting elements such as shear walls or braced frames as
discussed in Sec. 3.4.

Inadequate anchorage capacity when

supporting concrete or masonry walls
for out-of-plane forces

1.

Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing additional anchor bolts grouted in drilled holes and by providing
more bolts or welding to the bracing members.

182

TABLE B7

VERTICAL ELEMENT TO FOUNDATION CONNECTIONS

CONNECTIONS OF WOOD STUD SHEAR WALLS
Deficiency

Strengthening Techniques

Inadequate shear capacity of the

anchorage

1. Increasing the shear capacity by providing new or additional

anchor bolts between the sill plate and the foundation.
2. Increasing the shear capacity by providing steel angles or
plates with anchor bolts connecting them to the foundation
and bolts or lag screws connecting them to the sill plate or
wall.

Inadequate shear capacity of cripple

stud walls

1. Adding plywood sheathing over the cripple studs (usually on

the inside) by nailing into the floor framing and the sill plate.
Anchorage of the sill plate to the foundation also must be
provided.

Inadequate uplift capacity

1.
2.

Increasing the capacity by providing steel hold-downs bolted

to the wall and anchored to the concrete.
Reducing the uplift requirement by providing supplemental
shear walls as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

CONNECTIONS OF METAL STUD SHEAR WALLS

Inadequate shear capacity of the
anchorage

1.
2.

Provide anchor bolts, grouted in drilled holes, through sill

plate of wall.
Provide steel angles with anchor bolts to concrete and bolts
or screws to wall.

Inadequate shear capacity of cripple

stud walls

1.

Provide plywood sheathing, nailing into cripple studs, sill

plate, and first floor framing; anchor sill plate to foundation.

Inadequate uplift capacity

1. Provide steel hold-down with bolts or screws to wall and

anchor bolts to concrete at ends of shear wall.
2. Provide additional shear walls or vertical bracing.

CONNECTIONS OF PRECAST CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS

Inadequate capacity to resist in-plane
or out-of-plane shear forces

1.

2.

Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing a new

steel member connecting the wall to the foundation or the
ground floor slab.
Increasing the capacity of the connection by adding a new
thickness of concrete (either cast-in-place or shotcrete)
placed against the precast wall doweling into the existing
foundation or ground floor slab.

183

TABLE B7-continued
CONNECTIONS OF PRECAST CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS--continued
Inadequate hold-down capacity to
resist seismic overturning forces

1.

2.

Increase the hold-down capacity by removing concrete at the

edge of the precast unit to expose the reinforcement provide,
new drilled and grouted dowels into the foundation, and
pour a new concrete pilaster.
Reduce the uplift forces by providing supplemental verticalresisting elements such as shear walls or braced frames as
discussed in Sec. 3.4.

CONNECTIONS OF BRACED FRAMES

1.

Inadequate shear capacity

2.

Increasing the capacity by providing new steel members

welded to the braced frame base plates and anchored to the
slab or foundation with drilled and grouted anchor bolts.
Reducing the shear loads by providing supplemental steel
braced frames as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

1.

Inadequate uplift resistance

2.

Increasing the capacity by providing new steel members

welded to the base plate and anchored to the existing foundation.
Reducing the uplift loads by providing supplemental steel
braced frames as discussed in Sec. 3.4.

CONNECTIONS OF STEEL MOMENT FRAMES

Inadequate shear capacity

1.
2.

Inadequate flexural capacity

3.
Inadequate uplift capacity

Increasing the shear capacity by providing steel shear lugs

welded to the base plate and embedded in the foundation.
Increasing the shear and tensile capacity by installing additional anchor bolts into the foundation.
Increasing the shear capacity by embedding the column in a
reinforced concrete pedestal that is bonded or embedded
into the existing slab or foundation.

184

APPENDIX C
REHABILITATIONEXAMPLES*

Two examples are included in this appendix to demonstrate the process of selecting appropriate seismic rehabilitation techniques: a two-story steel frame building and a two story unreinforced masonry building. Both
buildings were evaluated to determine their seismic deficiencies in accordance with the NEHRP Handbookfor
the Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings (which includes the evaluations as Examples D1 and D6 in Appendix
D).

C1 T'WO-STORY STEEL FRAME BUILDING EXAMPLE

C1.1 DESCRIPTION OF BUILDING
The building is 200 ft by 340 ft in plan with 20 ft by 20 ft bays. The girders in the transverse direction are
connected to the column flanges with top and bottom clip angles. The beams in the longitudinal direction are
connected to the column webs with beam web connections. The floor and roof diaphragms consists of steel
decking with concrete fill.

C1.2 DEFICIENCIES
Inadequate moment capacity in both directions.

C13 STRENGTHENING ALTERNATIVES

This building could be strengthened by providing adequate moment capacity to the existing frames, by providing
new diagonal bracing, and/or by providing new shear walls

C13.1 Providing Adequate Moment Capacity

Assuming that the first story shear of 2,970 kips can be equally distributed to all columns, it is calculated that
there is excess capacity for the columns in the transverse direction (i.e., the strong axis of the columns) but
grossly inadequate capacity for the columns in the longitudinal direction (i.e., the weak axis of the columns).
This indicates that it is not feasible to develop adequate frame action to resist the seismic forces in the
longitudinal direction, but it is feasible in the transverse direction. The structural modifications (Figure C1.3.1)
required to develop moment frame action will involve:
1.

Removal of the concrete fill and steel decking over the ends of the transverse girders at the columns. (It
is assumed that the steel decking is supported on secondary floor beams that frame into the transverse
frame girders so that there are no adverse effects associated with removal of the decking over top flanges
of these girders adjacent to the columns.)

The American Iron and Steel Institute has written a minority opinion concerning this appendix; see page
193.
185

2.

Addition of new vertical shear connections between the girder webs and the column flanges.

3.

Removal of existing clip angles at the top and bottom flanges of the girders.

4.

Addition of new moment plates welded at the top and bottom flanges of the girders.

(E) transverse
0 _

=girder

(N) web shear

connection
(E) clip angles, to be
removed.\

removed

(E) longitudinal
beam

SECTION a-a
(E) transverse girder

(N) moment plate

(E) longitudinal

Remove (E) concrete

fill and steel decking

beam
PLAN

FIGURE C1.3.1 Providing moment capacity to an existing steel frame.

The design of these modifications should provide moment plates that are sized so as to yield prior to
inducing yield stress in the columns. The new girder web shear connections should be sized for the gravity load
shears (i.e., dead and live load) plus the shears associated with the formation of yield hinges in the moment
plates. The column section of the new frame joint must be checked to determine the possible need for
horizontal stiffeners opposite the girder flanges. The column web also should be checked to determine the need
for doubler plates. Stiffeners probably can be fitted above or below the existing longitudinal beam-, at the
column, but if doubler plates are required, this alternative may not be feasible because of interference with the
exsting longitudinal beam connection.

C1.3.2 Providing New Diagonal Bracing

Assume that diagonal bracing is to be considered for the longitudinal direction of the building. If the existing
diaphragms have adequate capacity, the new bracing can be located in the exterior walls to avoid possible interference with the internal circulation within the building. If the diaphragm has inadequate capacity to transfer
186

the seismic shears to the exterior longitudinal walls, it probably would be more cost-effective to brace one or
more of the interior longitudinal frames rather than to strengthen the diaphragm.
In the design of the vertical bracing, X-bracing will be more effective than diagonal or chevron bracing for
most braced bays because the tension diagonal will provide lateral support for the compression diagonal. Many
designers assume that the effective length of the compression diagonal for X-bracing may be taken as one-half
of the diagonal length for the in-plane direction and two-thirds of the diagonal length for the out-of-plane
direction. Since the greater Lir will govern the capacity of the brace, this leads to the use of brace members
with different radii of gyration, r, about each axis.
The number of braced bays must be adequate to resist the story shears; however, in this building the story
shears are not severe and can easily be resisted with only a fraction of the number of bays available in the
exterior longitudinal frames. Next, the existing columns and foundations must be investigated for the overturning
loads in the bracing. If it is assumed that all braces are equally loaded, it should be noted that with multiple
contiguous bays of X-bracing there are no additional vertical forces in the columns and foundations except at
the extreme ends of the braced bays. Therefore, if the existing columns or foundations do not have adequate
capacity for the calculated overturning loads in the bracing, the engineer may be able to reduce these loads to
acceptable limits by using smaller brace members and increasing the number of braced bays. The required
structural modifications (Figure C1.3.2) involve:
1.

2.

3.

Removal of the existing

concrete fill and steel
decking at second floor
and roof levels to permit
welding of gusset plate to
beam flange. Since the
gusset is to be welded
along the center of the
beam flange, only a narrow section of decking
needs to be removed.
Care must be taken that
adequate bearing remains
for the decking.

(E) column
VP
(E) beam shear
connection
(E) floor beam

(N) gusset plate

Welding of gusset plates to

the beam/column joints
and to the column/base
plate joints.

ing
(N) X-bracing

Welding of new diagonal

braces to the gusset plates.

The design of the new

plate
bracing system must include a
platebw
structural investigation of the
ofI the existing
capacity of the existing co-

umns, beams, and foundations

A'

'
A

vJ'

e n
e ()te
nsion
to base plate ad
~~~~~~~~provide
additional
anchor bolts, as

required

to resist the additional forces

associated with the new brac- FIGURE C1.3.2 Providing new diagonal bracing to an existing steel frame.
ing. It should be noted that the
floor beams in the braced
frames are required to function as collector members to "collect" the diaphragm shears and distribute them to
the braced bays. The beam-to-column connection must therefore be capable of transferring tensile or
compressive forces as well as resisting the vertical reaction of the floor beams.

187

C133

Providing New Shear Walls

New shear walls of reinforced concrete or reinforced masonry may be provided in lieu of bracing or frame action
in either direction of the building. If shear walls are provided, they should be infilled bays on a column line and
preferably in a location where window or door openings are not required. With infill walls, the columns can
function as boundary members for overturning loads and the beams or girders as collector members for the shear
walls. The shear walls probably will require new foundations and also will add significantly to the building mass,
which will increase the seismic story shears.

CIA RELATIVE MERITS OF THE ALTERNATIVE STRENGTHENING TECHNIQUES

As indicated above, the frame columns have inadequate capacity to resist the seismic story shears in the
longitudinal direction; therefore, new vertical bracing or shear walls are the available options. It appears that
the bracing could be installed in the exterior longitudinal frames without strengthening the columns or the
foundations whereas the shear walls probably would need new foundations and be more disruptive as well as
requiring more time for construction.
In the transverse direction, providing moment capacity to the existing frames (Figure C1.3.1) appears to be
feasible. It appears that this would be required for about two-thirds of the frames in the transverse direction
at the second floor level and only about one-half of the frames at the roof level.
Preliminary design of the structural strengthening concepts should be performed to define the location and
extent of the modifications and to size the new structural members. Relative costs for the various alternatives
also should be developed and attention should be given to the other considerations described at the beginning
of Chapter 3. With this information, the most appropriate seismic strengthening technique for the building can
be selected.

C2 UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDING EXAMPLE

C2.1 DESCRIPFTION OF BUILDING
This building is a two-story structure, 30 ft by 100 ft in plan. The first level has an open front at the east end
and a longitudinal bearing wall on the centerline of the building. There are no crosswalls in the first level, but
the second level contains apartments with many crosswalls. The roof diaphragm is constructed of diagonal
timber sheathing. The floor contains finished wood flooring over timber diagonal sheathing. The existing
conditions are shown in Figure C2.1.

C22 DEFICIENCIES
The building's deficiencies involve:
1.

Torsion--The east end of the building has negligible resistance to lateral loads at the first level and constitutes a severe seismic hazard.

2.

Adjacent Building--The adjacent building on the south side is not separated from the south wall and would
act as a buttress for the diaphragms of the subject building. This could result in damage to both buildings.

3.

Wall Stability--The gabled east and west walls at the second level are too slender (i.e., 9 in.) for the
calculated out-of-plane seismic response imparted by the roof diaphragm.

4.

Wall Anchorage--There is a serious inadequacy in the anchorage of all walls to the floor and roof diaphragms.

188

5.

In-Plane Shear Strength of Walls--In addition to the obvious deficiency in the open east wall at the first
level, there also are potential deficiencies in the remaining east and west walls at both levels.

6.

Parapet--The 9-in. unreinforced masonry walls in the second level terminate in an unsupported 18-in. high
parapet above the roof level that may be a hazard to life safety in a severe earthquake.

'-.

SECOND LEVEL

U'.
: t-

13-inch masonry

exterior walls

9-inch masonry
partition

Ii.

I,

A._;

FIRST LEVEL
FIGURE C2.1 Exdsting two-story unreinforced masonry building.

C23 STRENGTHENING TECHNIQUES

The structural evaluation of this building was conducted using the ABK Methodology for unreinforced masonry
bracing wall buildings with wood diaphragms. The recommended strengthening techniques (Figure C2.3) also
follow that methodology.

C23.1 Torsion
The east wall of the building is deficient in both strength and stiffness. In addition, extensive wall anchors are
required at both the first and second levels. Although the open front condition at the first level could be
improved with either a concrete or steel moment frame, the extensive additional work required for this wall and
its foundation combine to make replacement an attractive alternative.
189

Replacement of the existing east wall with a two-story reinforced concrete frame is the recommended
strengthening alternative. Since the roof and second floor joists are supported on the longitudinal walls, shoring
will not be required as the east wall is removed. Temporary lateral bracing in the north-south direction should
-___________________
_
be utilized during the replacement of the east wall. The new
(N) 4-inchl reinforced

concrete overlay
on (E) wall

on
o-~. (E)
I[II

wall

(N) wall anchorages

second level wall would be a

at second and roof

metal stud wall with window

levels
e
levels

openings similar to the existing

ones and with brick veneer to
match the other brick walls, if

fill

@>

I I1

--JN-YNdesired.

F~~

]LILir

I iLL__

iLa

(N) reinforced concrete

I[
|

frame with brick veneer>/

on steel studs -SECOND LEVEL
(N) plywood sheathed

(N) reinforced

crosswalls

concrete frame .

,-*

reinforced concrete
shear wall
FIRST LEVEL
FIGURE C2.3 Proposed structural modifications.
C233

C2.3.2 Adjacent Building

The proposed solution to the
problem with the adjacent
building is to provide a new
reinforced concrete shear wall
in the first level of the subject
building. The wall would be in
line with the west wall of the
adjacent building. In addition
to the new shear wall, three
new timber cross walls will be
provided in the first level (Figure C2.3) to reduce the diaphragm deflection. The shear
wall, the cross walls, and their
connections to the floor diaphragm will be designed in
accordance with the ABK
Methodology. This strengthening may not completely solve
the adjacent building problem,
but the new shear wall and the
cross walls will significantly
reduce the inertia forces transmitted to the adjacent building.

Wall Stability

The height to thickness ratio, h/t, of an unreinforced masonry wall is used as an index of the stability of the wall
for the out-of-plane seismic response induced by the diaphragm. The east wall is to be replaced with a
reinforced concrete wall so that the west wall in the second level is the only remaining wall with an excessive h/t
ratio. The deficiency can be corrected by providing anchors at the ceiling level and bracing this anchorage up
to the wood diaphragm or by designing vertical wall braces that span from the floor to the roof anchorage level.

190

C23A Wall Anchorage

All anchorages of masonry walls to diaphragms were found to be inadequate at both levels of the building.
Supplementary anchors must be provided for the calculated anchorage. The anchors should be similar to those
indicated in Figure 3.7.1.4a or b. Significantly greater allowable loads are permitted for anchors that extend
through the masonry wall with a large metal washer on the outside of the wall. This type of anchor should be
used in all locations where access is available to the outside face of the wall.

C2.3.5 In-Plane Shear Stress

The new reinforced concrete frame at the east wall, the new shear wall, and the new concrete overlay for the
west wall at second level have eliminated the calculated in-plane overstress in the east and west walls.

C2.3.6 Parapet
The unreinforced and unbraced paraet is a life safety hazard because of its h/t ratio. It is recommended that
the parapet be reduced in height by the removal of several courses of brick (i.e., 8 to 10 in.). This should be
preceded by a horizontal saw cut at a mortar joint on both sides of the wall to avoid damage to the remaining
brickwork. The top of the reduced parapet then should be sealed with a mortar cap to prevent intrusions of
moisture into the wall.

191

MINORITY OPINIONS

The comments concerning this handbook presented below are included at the request of the representative of
the American Iron and Steel Institute.

Concerning

Chapter

1, Sec. 1.4:

It is questioned if rehabilitation techniques need to be fully consistent with the NEHRP

Recommended Provisions for new buildings. The NEHRP Recommended Provisions were
developed with modern buildings as the underlying basis. Force fitting detailing provisions
developed for modern structures onto older structures may overlook adequate details built
into many older buildings which can provide adequate toughness.
*

Concerning Chapter 3, Sec. 3.0.4:

In the 5th line of the first paragraph the word "tested" should be changed. A test implies
that a structural system has been subjected to known loading conditions which is typically not
the case with existing buildings.

Concerning Chapter 3, Sec. 3.1:

We strongly object to the organization of this section. Typically when several subjects are
presented the most significant is placed first. Since we are dealing with techniques of rehabilitating seismically deficient structures this section should be organized with the most
significant (deficient) structures first. The scope of the section should then explain the
reason for the organization of the section. For whatever reason this section has been
organized with steel moment frames placed first. Steel moment frames have been observed
to be one of the most reliable seismic resisting systems worldwide, the majority of which
were not designed to modern seismic detailing practices.

Concerning Chapter 4, Sec. 4.1:

Additional techniques such as reducing the weight by eliminating hollow clay tile partitions
and substituting with lightweight partitions should be included.

Concerning Appendix C:
Where a limited number of examples are to be presented they should be based upon the
highest risk structural systems. Certainly steel moment frames do not fall into that category.
The two most common types of seismically deficient structural systems observed in past
earthquakes are unreinforced masonry and poorly detailed concrete frames. The inclusion
of steel moment frames as one of two examples does not serve justice to the potential risk
of the various structural systems.

The comments concerning this handbook presented below are included at the request of the representative of
the American Institute of Steel Construction:
*

Concerning Chapter 3:
In Sec. 3.1.1.1, modify the first sentence to read: "The principal deficiencies of ordinary steel
moment frames in high seismic areas are:"
193

In Sec. 3.3.1.1, modify the first sentence to read: 'The principal deficiencies of steel
concentrically braced frames in high seismic areas are:"
Users of this document may not read the Introduction and/or Sec. 3.0.4 for a proper
orientation on seismic zonation.- Thus, explicit reminders in the actual design chapters are
needed.

194

BUILDING SEISMIC SAFETY COUNCIL

BOARD OF DIREMION -- 1992

Chairman

Gerald H. Jones, Director of Codes Administration, Kansas City, Missouri

Vice Chairman

Allan Porush, Dames and Moore, Los Angeles, California (representing Structural Engineers
Association of California)

Secretary

Harry W. Martin, American Iron and Steel Institute, Newcastle, California

Ex-Officio

Warner Howe, Gardner and Howe, Memphis, Tennessee

Members

John C. Canestro, PE, City of Orinda, Pleasanton, California (representing the National
Institute of Building Sciences)
S. K. Ghosh, Portland Cement Association, Skokie, Illinois
Mark B. Hogan, National Concrete Masonry Association, Herndon, Virginia
Nestor Iwankiw, American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, Illinois
H. S. "Pete" Kellam, Graham and Kellam, San Francisco, California (representing the
American Society of Civil Engineers)
Les Murphy, International Association of Fire Fighters, (representing AFL/CIO Building and
Construction Trades Department)
F. Robert Preece, Preece/Goudie & Associates, San Francisco, California, (representing
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
Blair Tulloch, Tulloch Construction, Inc., Oakland, California (representing the Associated
General Contractors of America)
David Tyree, National Forest Products Association, Georgetown, California
Martin Walsh, City of St. Louis, Missouri (representing the Building Officials and Code
Administrators International)
Richard Wright, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland
(representing the Interagency Committee for Seismic Safety in Construction)

Staff

James R. Smith, Executive Director

0. Allen Israelsen, Project Manager
Claret M. Heider, Technical Writer-Editor
Karen E. Smith, Administrative Assistant

195

BSSC MEMBER ORGANIZATIONS

AFL-CIO Building and Construction Trades

National Association of Home Builders

National Concrete Masonry Association
National Conference of States on Building Codes and
Standards
National Elevator Industry, Inc.
National Fire Sprinkler Association
National Forest Products Association
National Institute of Building Sciences
National Ready Mixed Concrete Association
Permanent Commission for Structural Safety of
Buildings'
Portland Cement Association
Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute
Rack Manufacturers Institute
Seismic Safety Commission (California)
Southern Building Code Congress International
Steel Deck Institute, Inc.
Steel Joist Institute*
Steven Winter Associates, Inc.
Structural Engineers Association of Arizona
Structural Engineers Association of California
Structural Engineers Association of Central
California
Structural Engineers Association of Illinois
Structural Engineers Association of Northern California
Structural Engineers Association of Oregon
Structural Engineers Association of San Diego
Structural Engineers Association of Southern California
Structural Engineers Association of Utah
Structural Engineers Association of Washington
The Masonry Society
Western States Clay Products Association
Western States Council Structural Engineers
Association
Westinghouse Electric Corporation

Department
AISC Marketing, Inc.
American Concrete Institute
American Consulting Engineers Council
American Institute of Architects
American Institute of Steel Construction
American Insurance Services Group, Inc.
American Iron and Steel Institute
American Plywood Association
American Society of Civil Engineers
Applied Technology Council
Associated General Contractors of America
Association of Engineering Geologists
Association of Major City Building Officials
Bay Area Structural, Inc.
Brick Institute of America
Building Officials and Code Administrators
International
Building Owners and Managers Association
International
Building Technology, Incorporated
California Geotechnical Engineers Association
Canadian National Committee on Earthquake
Engineering
Concrete Masonry Association of California and
Nevada
Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
General Reinsurance Corporation*
Interagency Committee on Seismic Safety in
Construction
International Conference of Building Officials
Masonry Institute of America
Metal Building Manufacturers Association

'Affiliate (non-voting) members.

197
*

U.S.G.P.O.

1999 -722-072

/ 94347