FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY FEMA-1 72 / June 1992 NEHRP Handbook of

Techniques for the

Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings
Issued by FEMA in furtherance of the Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction.
Program on Improved Seismic Safety Provisions NEHRP HANDBOOK OF TECHNIQUES FOR THE
SEISMIC REHABILITATION OF
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:
Abatement of Seismic Hazards to Lifelines: Proceedings of the Building Seismic
Safety Council Workshop on Development of 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 Handbook for the Seismic Evaluation of Existing 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. Department 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 Writer-
Editor; 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., 4th Floor,
Washington, D.C. 20005.
Your cooperation is greatly appreciated.
1. 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? What technique
was selected? Was the rehabilitation completed? Were problems encountered in using
this handbook? If so, describe the problems and how they were solved.
2. Prior to your use of this handbook, were you familiar with the NEHRP Recommended
Provisions for the Development of Seismic Regulations for New Buildings.
3. Do you have recommendations for improving this handbook.
Name Title Organization Address Telephone and FAX Numbers vii

CONTENTS
FOREWORD iii
PREFACE v
USER COMMENT FORM vii
GLOSSARY xv
1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Development of This Handbook 2
1.3 Purpose of This Handbook 2
1.4 Scope and Limitations 3
1.5 Organization of This Handbook 3
2. SEISMIC VULNERABILITY OF BUILDINGS S 2.0 Introduction 5
2.1 General Attributes of Structures 5
2.1.1 Strength 5
2.1.2 Stiffness 5
2.1.3 Ductility 6
2.1.4 Damping 6
2.2 Adverse Design and Construction Features 6
2.2.1 Lack of Direct Load Path 6
2.2.2 Irregularities 7
2.2.3 Lack of Redundancy 13. 2.2.4 Lack of Toughness 13
2.2.5 Adjacent Buildings 14
23 Deteriorated Condition of Structural Materials 14
3. SEISMIC STRENGTHENING OF EXISTING BUILDINGS 17
3.0 Introduction 17
3.0.1 Cost Considerations 17
3.0.2 Functional Considerations 17
3.0.3 Aesthetic Considerations 18
3.0.4 Seismic Zonation 18
3.1 Vertical-resisting Elements--Moment Resisting Systems 18
3.1.1 Steel Moment Frames 18
3.1.2 Concrete Moment Frames 22
3.1.3 Moment Frames with Infills 26
3.1.4 Precast Concrete Moment Frames 28
3.2 Vertical-resisting Elements--Shear Walls 28
3.2.1 Reinforced Concrete or Reinforced Masonry Shear Walls 28
3.2.2 Precast Concrete Shear Walls 34
3.2.3 Unreinforced Masonry Shear Walls 34
3.2.4 Shear Walls in Wood Frame Buildings 37
ix
3.3 Vertical-resisting Elements--Braced Frames 38
3.3.1 Steel Concentric Braced Frames 38
3.3.2 Rod or Other Tension Bracing 41
3.3.3 Eccentric Bracing 42
3.4 Vertical-resisting Elements--Adding Supplemental Members 43
3.4.1 Relative Compatibility 44
3.4.2 Exterior Supplemental Elements 45
3.4.3 Interior Supplemental Elements 45
3.5 Diaphragms 46
3.5.1 Timber Diaphragms 47
3.5.2 Concrete Diaphragms 51
3.5.3 Poured Gypsum Diaphragms 56
3.5.4 Precast Concrete Diaphragms 56
3.5.5 Steel Deck Diaphragms 59
3.5.6 Horizontal Steel Bracing 64
3.6 Foundations 65
3.6.1 Continuous or Strip Wall Footings 66
3.6.2 Individual Pier or Column Footings 68
3.6.3 Piles or Drilled Piers 70
3.6.4 Mat Foundations 72
3.7 Diaphragm to Vertical Element Connections 72
3.7.1 Connections of Timber Diaphragms 72
3.7.2 Connections of Concrete Diaphragms 84
3.7.3 Connections of Poured Gypsum Diaphragms 86
3.7.4 Connections of Precast Concrete Diaphragms 86
3.7.5 Connections of Steel Deck Diaphragms Without Concrete Fill 87
3.7.6 Connections of Steel Deck Diaphragms with Concrete Fill 89
3.7.7 Connections of Horizontal Steel Bracing 90
3.8 Vertical Element to Foundation Connections 91
3.8.1 Connections of Wood Stud Shear Walls 91
3.8.2 Connections of Metal Stud Shear Walls 95
3.8.3 Connections of Precast Concrete Shear Walls 95
3.8.4 Connections of Braced Frames 97
3.8.5 Connections of Steel Moment Frames 98
3.9 Adding a New Supplemental System 98
3.9.1 Supplemental Braced Frame System 99
3.9.2 New Shear Wall System 99
3.9.3 Structural Additions 101
4. DECREASING DEMAND ON EXISTING SYSTEMS 103
4.0 Introduction 103
4.1 Reducing the Weight of the Building 103
4.2 Increasing the Fundamental Period and the Energy Dissipating Capacity of the
Structural System 104
4.3 Alternate Procedures 105
4.3.1 Seismic Isolation 105
4.3.2 Supplemental Damping 105
5. REHABILITATION OF NONSTRUCTURAL ARCHITECTURAL COMPONENTS 107
5.0 Introduction 107
5.1 Exterior Curtain Walls 107
5.2 Appendages 108
5.3 Veneers 109
x
5.4 Partitions 109
5.5 Ceilings 113
5.6 Lighting Fixtures 113
5.7 Glass Doors and Windows 114
5.8 Raised Computer Access Floors 115
6. REHABILITATION OF NONSTRUCTURAL MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS 117
6.0 Introduction 117 6,1 Mechanicai and Electrical Equipment 117 t Ductwork and
Piping 126
6.3 Elevators 133
6.4 Emergency Power Systems 133
6.5 Hazardous Material Storage Systems 135
6.6 Communication Systems 137
6.7 Computer Equipment 137
BIBLIOGRAPHY 143
APPENDICES
A Seismic-Force-Resisting Elements in Buildings 149
B Summary of Strengthening Techniques 165
C Rehabilitation Examples 185
MINORITY OPINION 193
BSSC BOARD OF DIRECTION AND MEMBER ORGANIZATIONS 195
FIGURES
LEGEND FOR FIGURES: (E) = Existing,(L) = Left, (N) = New. (R) -Right
2.2.2.1 Vertical irregularities--examples of in-plane and out-of-plane
discontinuities 8
2.2.2.4a Horizontal and plan irregularities--rehabilitating a structure to reduce
torsional loads 10
2.2.2.4b Horizontal and plan irregularities--examples of rehabilitating buildings
with re-entrant corners 11
2.2.2.4c Horizontal and plan irregularities--example of strengthening a split level
diaphragm 12
2.2.2.4d Horizontal and plan irregularities--example of rehabilitating building
with nonparallel systems 12
3.1.1.2a Modification of an existing simple beam to a moment connection 19
3.1.1.2b Strengthening an existing column 20
3.1.1.2c Strengthening an existing beam 21
3.1.2.2a Encasing an existing beam in concrete 23
3.1.2.2b Strengthening an existing concrete column 24-25
3.1.2.2c Strengthening an existing concrete frame building with a reinforced
concrete shear wall 26
3.2.1.2a Strengthening an existing shear wall by filling in existing openings 29
3.2.1.2b Example of details for enclosing. an existing opening in a reinforced
concrete or masonry wall 30
3.2.1.2c Strengthening an existing reinforced concrete or masonry wall ,31
3.2.1.4 Example of strengthening an existing coupling beam at an exterior wall 32
3.2.3.2 Example of center coring technique 35
3.3 Bracing types 38
3.3.1.2 Addition to or replacement of an existing X-brace 39
3.4 Examples of supplementary strengthening 44
3.4.2 Example of supplemental in-plane strengthening by the addition of an external
buttress 45
3.4.3 Connection of a supplemental interior shear wall 46 0 : xi
3.5.1.3 Exterior sheathing and top plate chord in a wood frame building 49
3.5.1.4a Reinforcement of an opening in an existing timber diaphragm 50
3.5.1.4b New drag strut in an existing wood diaphragm 51
3.5.2.2 Strengthening an existing concrete diaphragm with a new topping slab and
chord 52
3.5.2.3 Adding a new chord member to an existing concrete diaphragm (not
recommended for precast elements) 53
3.5.2.4a Reinforcement of an opening in an existing concrete diaphragm 54
3.5.2.4b Strengthening openings in overlaid diaphragms 55
3.5.4.2 Strengthening an existing precast concrete diaphragm with a concrete
overlay 57
3.5.4.3 Adding a new steel member to an existing precast concrete diaphragm 58
3.5.5.2a Strengthening an existing steel deck diaphragm 60
3.5.5.2b Strengthening an existing steel deck diaphragm 61
3.5.5.2c Strengthening an existing building with steel decking and concrete or
masonry walls 62
3.5.5.2d Strengthening an existing building with steel decking and concrete or
masonry walls 63
3.6.1.2a Underpinning an existing footing 66
3.6.1.2b Strengthening an existing wall footing by the addition of drilled piers 67
3.6.2.3 Upgrading an existing pile foundation 71
3.7.1.2a Strengthening the connection of a diaphragm to an interior shear wall
(wall parallel to floor joist) 73
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 an existing wood stud shear wall with a large opening 76
3.7.1.4a Strengthening out-of-plane connections of a wood diaphragm 77
3.7.1.4b Strengthening out-of-plane connections of a wood diaphragm 78
3.7.1.4c Strengthening out-of-plane connections of a wood diaphragm 79
3.7.1.4d Strengthening out-of-plane connections of a wood diaphragm 80
3.7.1.4e Strengthening tensile capacity of an existing glulam beam connection 80
3.7.1.5a Strengthening the connection between shear walls using a metal strap 81
3.7.1.5b Strengthening the connection between shear walls using a hold-down 82
3.7.1.5c Strengthening shear wall uplift capacity at a discontinuity 83
3.7.2.2 Use of a collector member to improve shear transfer from a concrete
diaphragm 85
3.7.5.2 Strengthening the connection of steel deck diaphragm to a concrete or
masonry wall 88
3.8.1.2a Providing wall to foundation anchors 92
3.8.1.2b Alternate detail for providing wall to foundation anchors 93
3.8.1.3 Strengthening a cripple stud wall 94
3.8.1.4 Strengthening the uplift capacity of a wall to foundation connection 95
3.8.3.2 Strengthening a precast concrete wall to foundation connection 96
3.9.1 Strengthening using a supplemental braced frame system 99
3.9.2 Strengthening by providing a new shear wall system 100
3.9.3 Strengthening with a new building addition 101
5.1a Flexible connection for precast concrete cladding 107
5.1b Detail for flexible connection for precast concrete cladding 108
5.2a Strengthening a masonry parapet with a new concrete overlay 109
5.2b Strengthening a masonry parapet with steel braces 109
5.4a Bracing an interior masonry partition 111
5.4b Bracing an interior masonry partition 112
5.5 Lateral bracing of a suspended ceiling 113
5.6 Providing safety wires for suspended lighting fixtures 114
5.8a Access floor pedestals 115
5.8b Strengthening of access floor pedestals 116
xii
6.1a
6.lb
6.1c Typical detail of equipment anchorage Alternate details for anchoring
equipment Prefabricated vibration isolation assembly with lateral seismic stops 118
119-120 121
6.1d
6.1e Seismic restraints added to existing equipment with vibration isolation
Multidirectional seismic restraint 122 123
6.1f
6.lg
6.2a
6.2b 6 2c
6.2d
6.2e
6.2f
6.2g
6.4a
6.4b
6.5a 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 124
125 127 128 129 130 131 132 132 133 134 135
6.5b
6.7a
6.7b
6.7c
6.7d 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 136 138 139 140
141 xdii

GLOSSARY
BOUNDARY ELEMENT: An element at the edge of an opening or at the perimeter of a
shear wall or diaphragm.
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: A structural system with an essentially complete
space frame providing support for vertical loads.
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: vertical-
resisting 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

1 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 1
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 Journal 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: 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.
2
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 Techniques for the Seismic Rehabilitation NEHRP Handbook for the
Seismic Evaluation of of Existing Buildings Ewisng Buildngs Chapter 2, Seismic
Vulnerability of Buildings Chapter 3, Building Systems Section 3.9, Adding a New
Supplemental System Chapter 4, Decreasing Demand on Existing System 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 Chapter 8, Connections.
Section 3.8, Vertical Element to Foundation Connections Section 3.6, Foundations
Chapter 9, Foundations and Geologic Site Hazards Chapter 5, Rehabilitation of
Nonstructural Architectural Com-Chapter 10, Elements Not a Part of the ponents
Lateral-Force-Resisting System Chapter 6, Rehabilitation of Nonstructural
Mechanical and Electrical Components 4

2 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 5
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; o 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.
6
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.
Vertical geometric irregularity results 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.
7
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 create a soft story condition in the stories
below), whether it will create significant torsional eccentricity (see Sec.
shear walls 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 plane (e.g., a
heavy boiler extending discontinuity through several stories of an industrial
building) or irregularities FIGURE 2.22.1 Vertical irregularities--examples of in-
plane and (e.g., building setbacks). If the -of-plane discontinuities. cannot be
reduced, eliminated or 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.
8
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 vertical resisting 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.
9
stiff resisting elements zJ) (E) center of rigidity (N) center of rigidity . +
existing eccentric building (stiff diaphragm) .
add new stiff element to reduce eccentricity (E) center of rigidity (N) center of
rigidity K existing eccentric building (stiff diaphragm) stiff resisting elements
FIGURE 22.2.4a Horizontal or plan irregularities--rehabilitating a structure to
reduce torsional loads.
10
(E) stiff resisting elements , (N) drag strut (N) seismic joint and C shear
resisting elements (N) drag strut -1 .I
A FIGURE 2.2.2.4b Horizontal or plan irregularities--rehabilitating buildings with
reentrant corners.
11
(E) floor joists (N) nailing and sheathing as required N, N (E) blocking (N) and
(N) (E) cripple stud wall (N) foundation bolts / (E) continuous in drilled and
grouted wall footing holes 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 building.
with nonparallel systems.
12
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 lateral-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.
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 due to excessive drying shrinkage during the curing of the concrete
or differential settlement of the foundations. Spalling can be caused by exposure
to extreme temperatures or the reactive aggregates used in some western states.
Disintegration or raveling of the concrete usually is caused by dirty or
contaminated aggregates, old or defective cement, or contaminated water (e.g.,
water with a high salt or mineral content).
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 FOR DETERIORATED CONDITION OF STRUCTURAL MATERIALS
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

3 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.
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.
3.1.1 2 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 disad-connection
vantage of requiring additions \ \l\ N to or modifications of the exis- cover plate
ting foundations. The addition \ N of eccentric bracing may be an efficient and
cost-effective tech- (N) stiffener plate nique to increase the lateral load
capacity of the deficient frame provided existing beam sizes are appropriate. In
addition to being compatible with
FIGURE 3.1.1.2a Modification of an existing simple beam to a moment the rigidity of
the moment connection.
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
(N) weld capacity of a deficient moment frame. The effects of the
(N) cover plate or knee braces will require a re-analysis of the frame and (E)
column the designer must investigate 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
FIGURE 3.1.1.2b Strengthening an existing column. composite action at the end of
the beam, it may be economically feasible to increase the moment capacity by
providing cover plates on the lower flanges at each end of the beam. Cover plates
should be tapered as shown in Figure 3.1.1.2c to avoid an abrupt change in section
modulus 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.
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. 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 cost-
effectiveness.
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-(N) reinforcement
frames by jacketing 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
percentage of the lateral load to be (E) concrete beam resisted by the walls,
(i.e., later- . longitudinal al forces will be attracted away (Nfore nt.
from the relatively flexible reinforcement moment frames and into the (N) tie more
rigid walls). This is reinforcement true for buildings with / rigid diaphragms.
These alter- (N) concrete natives also typically will re-(E) concrete slab quire
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 continued.
(N) footing tied to I 11 -F! existing footings -1 H 1 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 infill walls 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 o 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 of this alternative would be close existing when adequate
additional ca-opening with could be obtained by a reinforced concrete or reinforced
concrete overlay on reinforced masonry 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 historical significance). In 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 is more disruptive and, thus, \
s wall more costly than restricting the (N) shearwall work to the exterior of the
foundation to be building. However, if the strengthened as activities within the
build- required are to be temporarily relocated because of other interior
alterations, the cost difference between the concrete overlay to (E) reinforced the
inside face and the outside face of the building walls is concrete or reduced. In
some cases, for reinforced example, when deficiencies exist masonry wall in the
capacity of the diaphragm chords or in the shear FIGURE 3.2.1.2a Strengthening an
existing shear wall by filling in existing 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.
(N) dowel, epoxy SECTION grouted in drilled 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 given to acceptance of some (E) minor damage in the form of
stirrup ties cracking or spalling by repeating the structural evaluation reinforced
with the deficient beams mod-I, concrete coupling
as pin-ended links between the piers. If this condition is SECTION j, tied to
existing and wall 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 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 FIGURE 3.2.1.4 Example of strengthening an
existing coupling beam at an SHEAR WALLS exterior wall.
322.1 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, o 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 infilling 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 concrete. As a result, when (E)
unreinforced there is a significant deficiency masonry wall in the in-plane shear
capacity of ( unreinforced masonry walls, / (N) 4 inch (�) diameter some structural
engineers core drilled and grouted prefer to ignore the with a polyester-sand of
the existing masonry, to mixture with steel
provide out-of-plane support reinforcement for the masonry, and to design / the
concrete overlay to resist / the total in-plane shear. / However, reinforced
concrete ,\ shear walls may be provided in / 4 to 5 ft. core an existing building
to reduce spacing the in-plane shear stresses in the unreinforced masonry walls by
redistributing the seismic forces by relative rigidities. It should be noted that
this is most effective when the walls are in the same line of force and connected
by a competent spandrel beam or drag strut. When the new concrete walls are not in
the 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 self-
threading 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
concentric bracing consisting of diagonals, chevrons, K-bracing, or
are two principal types of braced frames: tension rods and eccentric bracing
(Figure 3.3).
K-bracing has undesirable performance characteristics for seismic loads diagonal in
that buckling of the compression bracing brace results in an unbalanced horizontal
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 chevron seismic zones,
these braces should be D\ D removed and the system modified to one
bracing of the other bracing configurations; ___________ -_further, 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 K-bracing from remaining brace. With chevron bracing, the
unbalanced force occurs on the beam rather than the column.
Nonetheless. the unbalanced tensile Concentric Bracing brace reaction Should be
considered in link beam the. particularly in the case of the inverted V
configuration in which the unbalanced force is additive to the gravity loads by the
beam.
Braced frames are typically of steel construction, however, concrete braced frames
are occasionally constricted.
Eccentric 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
o 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 be the
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 Merits. 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 supplemental elements is that (N)
collector 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, inherent problems in constructing (E) reinforced supplemental
exterior shear concrete or walls, braced frames, and unreinforced frames. Many
buildings masonry wall do not have the necessary space N) tension tie to
accommodate exterior building each side due to the location of ' I of buttress
adjacent buildings or property lines. New exterior elements (N) concrete, masonry
also may significantly affect the L or1()steel buttress wall architectural
aesthetics of the I (N) piles or caissons exterior of the building. if required
Supplemental elements generally will require a FIGURE 3.4.2 Example of supplemental
in-plane strengthening by the cant capacity to resist overturn- addition of an
external buttress.
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 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, holes
access hole in existing slab for placing concrete roughen surface of existing slab
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. The principal 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.
3.5.12 Strengthening Techniques
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.
Deficient diaphragm chord capacity can be improved by
1. 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 out-of-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) dragstrut (N) additional nailing to develop (E) header tension in the header
provide tension splice similar to figure 3.5.1.4b (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 causes moment that induces
tension or compression in parallel horizontal beams and the shear in each beam 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
(N) drag strut to reduce diaphragm shear stress shear wall to resist 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 over
(E) wall lay. This will require removal and replace, (N) concrete chord
reinforcement of the existing partitions and floor finishes and will be (N)
concrete topping disruptive to ongoing operations even though the work can be
limit< (E) concrete slab clean and ed to one floor or a F roughen portion of a
floor at a surface time. Adding the concrete overlay also 3. will increase the dead
weight 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.
It may be possible to avoid strengthening a concrete diaphragm FIGURE 3.5.2.2
Strengthening an existing concrete diaphragm with a new topping by providing
additional slab and chord. 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 vertical-bracing 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 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 cost-
effective means of providing sufficient diaphragm chord (N) concrete chord is to
ensure adequate shear transfer of the diaphragm (E) concrete slab to the perimeter
steel beam by adding drilled and grouted bolts and to ensure adequate 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 (N) dowel to wall--may
done very carefully to ensure need (N) dowel in slab also that the strands are not
cut. after proper Figure 3.5.2.3 shows the shoring, remove provision of a new
diaphragm existing concrete chord and/or collector member slab, expose as well as
new dowels for wall reinforcement and anchorage or shear transfer cast new concrete
from the existing concrete diaphragm.
Because of the potential risk of gravity load failure (E) wall at the interface
with the existing FIGURE 3.5.23 Adding a new chord member to an existing concrete
slab, this detail is recommended diaphragm (not recommended for precast elements)
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
elements 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 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 Merits. 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 Merits. 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 (N) reinforcement with an existing reinforced
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 (N) concrete
fill, existing members, connections, 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. The above alternatives provide positive, direct
methods (E) steel beam for strengthening an existing steel deck diaphragm. Both
FIGURE 3.5.5.2a Strengthening an existing steel deck diaphragm alternatives require
complete 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.
I FIGURE 3.5.5.2b Strengthening an existing steel deck diaphragm.
61
FIGURE (N) angle to stiffen 3.5.S.2c deck edge between I (E) steel decking (N) wall
anchor
Strengthening
joists and/or transfer shear an
to wail t existing building with masonry wall steel decking and concrete
(N) connection plate (N) angle connected or
and anchor bolts -deck and wall Section a-a Section b-b FIGURE 3.5.5.c
Strengthening an existing building with steel decking and concrete or masonry
walls.
62
(N) continuous chord or collector member .. a (N) horizontal II I _| b L
bracing system J Roof Framing Plan Retrofitted Building (N) continuous chord or
collector bolted to existing wall a[ I W(N) bracing welded to steel joists and
continuous member i at wall Section a-a Section b-b 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 lateral-load-
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
o 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).
f Excavate under footing and underpinning in spaced increments Drypack between
Provide pocket in (E) and (N) footings new footing for .;
I after jacking {jacking FIGURE 3.6.1.2a Underpinning an existing footing.
66
(E) wall and strip footing (N) reinforced concrete needle Item (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 Techniques.
Deficient capacity of existing foundations to resist 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 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.
Relative Merits. 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 vertical-
resisting 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.
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, o 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 Merits. 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
may have on the ongoing cost-effective depending upon accessibility as well as the
impact each alternative functional use of the building.
3.6.4 MAT FOUNDATIONS 3.6.4.1
Deficiencies Seismic deficiencies in mat foundations are not common; however, the
following two deficiencies can occur: 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.
(N) framing anchor l as an alternate, (E) floor joist (N) deep joist nailed I
to floor sheathing and top plate of existing shear wall (extend beyond wall as
collector if V required) (N) additional deep I joist if required I (E) plywood I
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 The new collected in
the drag strut and transferred to the shear wall with more effective nailing or
bolting 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 (N) deep blocking nailed to floor nailed to floor sheathing and
drag sheathing and top strut plate of existing shear wall (N) blocking and framing
anchor as alternate extend blocking and to deep blocking drag strut beyond end of
shear wall required to distribute the force to the diaphragm W
(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 Merits. 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 hold-down 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 sheathing (E) header beam r (E) stud wall Elevation (E) joists and roof
sheathing (E) double joists -if not lap-spliced, (E) wood provide (N) collector
sheathing 'N. member as shown at left 4 (E) (N) continuous collector member (splice
by nailing to header beam) Normal to Joists Parallel to Joists Section a-a FIGURE
3.7.13 Strengthening an existing wood stud shear wall with a large opening.
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 3.7.1.4a-d).
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
(E) wall N) blocking, (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. Increasing the tensile capacity of the connections at the edge of the shear
walls by providing metal connectors.
2. 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-down bolted to steel angle and anchor plate v . I B 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 Plywood shear walls
should be adequately or cut in the diaphragm or wall plates, and the connectors
installed.
For light timber structures, the metal edge nailed to the double studs that are
connected with the metal straps.
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 Figures 3.7.1.5a and b present two connection development of double top plates
as chord or collector members 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. Relative Merits. Inadequate
in-plane shear capacity of connections between concrete diaphragms and vertical-
resisting 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 vertical-resisting 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.
84
(E) reinforced Ad (N) steel collector concrete shearwalls member (E) reinforced _
concrete slab (N) collector member with (E) reinforced / = through bolts in drilled
concrete slabs holes; also could use A concrete member
/reinforced /with grouted dowels Note: Bolts to slab are designed in (E) reinforced
accordance with shear capacity concrete shear slab and to wall in accordance with
wall shear capacity. Consider possible unequal loading of bolts.
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 e Inadequate
anchorage capacity for out-of-plane forces in the connecting walls.
3.73.2 Strengthening 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.
3.7.4.2 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 vertical-resisting 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 vertical-resisting 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 cost-effective 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, (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 and new angle (E) concrete or masonry wall (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) bolts grouted (N) steel
angle as required in drilled holes o welded to (E) ledger angle (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 out-of-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 vertical-resisting 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 vertical-resisting 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 Merits. 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
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
I 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 existing sill is
wider than stud
4 blocking
21 1, (N) nailed j existing sill = I I T I 1=<= to I 1(I hr{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 by
1. 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.
Relative Merits. Early precast (E) precast concrete wall construction frequently
had minimal lateral concrete wall connection capacity at the steel. These
connections usually can be strengthened (N) anchor most economically by attaching a
steel member to the wall and the floor slab or foundation (E) foundation slab 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 3, concrete edges to
prevent spalling under load. A more costly alternative involves thickening the
precast wall with a minimum of 4 inches of new rein-I.
forced concrete, either cast-in-place or shotcrete. The new concrete must be
anchored to the precast wall and must ex tend above the base of the wall high
enough to develop new In_ dowels drilled into the foundation. The existing
foundation FIGURE 3.83.2 Strengthening of a precast concrete wall to foundation
then must be checked for the connection. additional load.
3.833 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., and 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 insufficient lateral 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

4
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 CAPACITY OF THE
STRUCTURAL SYSTEM 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 Merits. 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 Similarly, lead and
cantilevers in flexure have been developed, tested, and installed in buildings and
bridges shear and lead extrusion devices also have been developed.
Relative Merits. The application of supplemental damping in the seismic
rehabilitation of existing buildings is in its infancy; hence, the benefits and
problems of the various alternatives have not been thoroughly investigated.
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 Practical supplemental depending on the ground motion demand and
the elastic strength of the damper 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.
106

5
REHABILITATION OF
NONSTRUCTURALARCIUTECTURALCOMPONENTS
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 :
capacity. The panel is rigidly attached at the base and held ; beam with a flexible
rod at the top usually is desirable to provide a Insert 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 feasible remedy may be to remove the 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,
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 Cornice anchorages can be
strengthened be retrofitted to prevent damage and, most important, falling debris
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 Typical details for approved anchorage
of masonry typically must be removed and replaced for this process 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
Partitions that do longitudinal displacement of the floor or ceiling without
imposing any loads to the partition.
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
Bracing 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 Inadequate
Seismic rehabilitation of glass windows and doors to prevent breakage may be a
significant effort.
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

6
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
typical angle clips (N) weld (E) transformer FIGURE 6.1a Typical detail of
equipment anchorage.
118
Q FIGURE 6.Ib Alternate details for anchoring equipment.
119
FIGURE 6.1b continued.
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 existing
equipment with vibration Isolation.
122
(E) vibration isolation assembly (N) bar stock (N) channel with resilient pads f a
(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 DUCT WORK 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
I I (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 Longitudinal 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 Elevators and 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 ( foam spacers e A d G braced, and adequate anchorages 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 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 (transformers, switchgear, and control panels
should be anchored as shown in Figure 6.1b.
FIGURE 6Aa Bracing of existing battery racks.
133
(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 for Earthquake 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.
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 Tether and equipment.
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 Technology Council. 1986. Base Isolation and Passive Energy Dissipation:
Proceedings of 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 Usual 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. 1982. Building Configuration and
Seismic Design. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1982.
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 Proceedings of a Seminar and Workshop on Base
Isolation and Passive Energy Dissipation, 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." In Proceedings of the North American Masonry Conference.
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 Upgrading Existing 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, California.
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, California.
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 California Convention, 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 FIX 'EM: Identification and
Correction of Deficiencies 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 Mitigation for 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).
Kawamata, Shigeya, Mamoru Yoneda, and Yasuhiko Hangai. 1973. Development of a
Vibration Control System for Structures by Means of "Mass Pumps, " Bulletin No. 7
of the Earthquake Resistance Structure Research Center.
Kay, Donald R. 1982. "Correction of Deficiencies in Reinforced Concrete Buildings."
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.
Kelly, James M. and Douglas Way. 1982. "The Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing
Buildings Using Natural Rubber Bearings." In Proceeding of the 51st Annual
Convention of the Structural Engineers Association of California.
Kelly, James M. 1979. "Aseismic Base Isolation: A Review." In Proceedings of the
2nd U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering.
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 for Architects. 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 Building Equipment:
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 Prestressing
and Practical Construction in Prestressed and Reinforced Concrete.
Mullins, Peter J., and Colin O'Connor. 1987. "Reinforcement of Brick Walls Spanning
Vertically." Journal of Structural Engineering 113(2).
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. Oakland, California:
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.
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 International 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. California: Financial Insurance and Monetary Services Committee.
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. 1986. "Strengthening of
Unreinforced Masonry Buildings." Journal of Structural Engineering 112 (5).
Popov, E., and M. Engelhardt. 1987. "Seismic Eccentrically Braced Frames." Journal
of Constructional Steel Research (United Kingdom).
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 Correction of Deficiencies in Earthquake Resistance of Existing
Buildings, Earthquake Engineering Research 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 Furniture, 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 Alternate Design
Approach to the Reduction of Earthquake Hazards Seminar, Structural Engineers
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 Proceedings of the First Seminar of Repair and
Retrofit of Structures.
Warner, James. 1976. "Ventura City Hall Restoration." Journal of the Construction
Division 102(March).
Wong, Kit M. 1987. Seismic Strengthening of Unreinforced Masonry 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, Vienna, 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.
Wood Light Frame
2.
Wood, Commercial and Industrial
3.
Steel Moment Frame
4.
Steel Braced Frame
5.
Steel Light Frame
6.
Steel Frame with Concrete Shear Walls
7.
Steel with Infill Masonry Shear Walls
8.
Concrete Moment Frame
9.
Concrete Shear Walls
10.
Concrete Frame with Infill Walls
11.
Precast/Tilt-Up Concrete Walls with Lightweight Flexible Diaphragm
12.
Precast Concrete Frames with Concrete Shear Walls
13.
Reinforced Masonry Bearing Walls with Wood/Metal Deck Diaphragms 14.
Reinforced Masonry Bearing Walls with Precast Concrete Diaphragms 15.
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
Roof Vertical-Resisting Diaphragm Elements Foundations Connections Timber framing
with Wood stud walls with Spread footings, piles, Diagonal wire or strut plywood,
straight-laid, let-in or cut-in timber or drilled piers. bracing of ceilings from
or diagonal sheathing. bracing or plywood, floor roof diaphragms.
straight-laid, or diagonal sheathing. 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 Roof Vertical-Resisting Diaphragm Elements Foundations Connections
Timber framing with Wood stud walls with Spread footings, piles, Diagonal wire or
strut, straight-laid, let-in or cut-in timber or drilled piers. of ceilings from
floor diagonal sheathing. bracing or plywood, roof diaphragms.
(Floor roof deck- straight-laid, or may be 2-inch sheathing. Bracing or lateral
support of material). walls and partitions from Knee bracing or ceilings or
diaphragms.
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
Roof Vertical-Resisting Diaphragm Elements Foundations Connections Timber framing
with Moment resisting
* Spread footings, piles, Diagonal wire or strut, straight-laid, structural steel
frames. or drilled piers of ceilings from floor diagonal sheathing. roof
diaphragms.
Reinforced concrete Bracing or lateral support of slab supported on walls and
partitions from structural steel floor ceilings or diaphragms.
framing members.
Nailing and blocking for
Steel decking with or shear transfer from without concrete fill. horizontal
diaphragms to shear walls or vertical bracing.
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.
152
TABLE A4 STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF COMMON BUILDING TYPE 4--STEEL BRACED FRAME Floor
Roof Vertical-Resisting Diaphragm Elements Foundations Connections Timber framing
with Concentric steel Spread footings, piles, Diagonal wire or strut, straight-
laid, in diagonal, X, K, or drilled piers of ceilings from floor diagonal
sheathing. or chevron diaphragms.
Reinforced concrete Bracing or lateral support of slab supported on May also have
moment walls and partitions from structural steel floor resisting structural
ceilings or diaphragms.
framing members. steel frames.
Nailing and blocking for Steel decking with or shear transfer from without concrete
fill. horizontal diaphragms to shear walls or vertical bracing.
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
Roof Vertical-Resisting Diaphragm Timber framing with I Elements Moment resisting
Foundations Spread footings, piles, Connections Diagonal wire or strut
1 plywood, straight-laid, structural steel frames. or drilled piers of ceilings
from floor diagonal sheathing. roof diaphragms.
Concentric light steel Reinforced concrete bracing in diagonal or Bracing or
lateral support of slab supported on X configuration. walls and partitions from
structural steel floor ceilings or diaphragms.
framing members.
Nailing and blocking for Steel decking with or shear transfer from without concrete
fill. horizontal diaphragms to shear walls or vertical bracing.
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.
TABLE A6 STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF COMMON BUILDING TYPE 6--STEEL FRAME WITH CONCRETE
SHEAR WALLS Floor Roof Vertical-Resisting Diaphragm Elements Foundations
Reinforced concrete Non-moment-resisting Spread footings, piles, slab supported on
steel frames. or drilled piers.
structural steel floor framing members. Reinforced concrete shear walls.
Steel decking with or without concrete fill. May also have moment resisting
structural steel frames.
Connections Diagonal wire or strut bracing of ceilings from floor roof diaphragms.
Bracing or lateral support of walls and partitions from ceilings or diaphragms.
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 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 Roof Vertical-Resisting 1 Diaphragm Elements Foundations
Connections Timber framing with Nonmoment-resisting Spread footings, piles,
Diagonal wire or strut bracing plywood, straight-laid, steel frames. or drilled
piers of ceilings from floor diagonal sheathing. roof diaphragms.
Unreinforced masonry Reinforced concrete walls. Bracing or lateral support of slab
supported on walls and partitions from structural steel floor May also have moment
ceilings or diaphragms.
framing members. resisting structural steel frames. Nailing and blocking for
Steel decking with or direct shear transfer from without concrete fill. horizontal
diaphragms to shear walls or vertical bracing.
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.
Connection of masonry walls to steel framing.
TABLE A& STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF COMMON BUILDING TYPE 8--CONCRETE MOMENT FRAME
Floor Roof Vertical-Resisting Diaphragm Elements Foundations Connections Reinforced
concrete Reinforced concrete Spread footings, piles, Diagonal wire or strut bracing
monolithic with frames. or drilled piers. of ceilings from floor reinforced
concrete roof diaphragms.
beams and girders.
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 Roof Vertical-Resisting Diaphragm Elements Foundations Connections Reinforced
concrete Reinforced concrete Spread footings, piles, Diagonal wire or strut bracing
slab monolithic with shear walls. or drilled piers. of ceilings from floor
reinforced concrete roof diaphragms.
beams and girders.
Bracing or lateral support of walls and partitions from ceilings or diaphragms.
Connection of concrete shear walls to floor 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 Roof Vertical-Resisting Diaphragm Elements Foundations
Connections Timber framing with Reinforced concrete Spread footings, piles,
Diagonal wire or strut plywood, straight-laid, frames. or drilled piers. bracing of
ceilings from floor diagonal sheathing. roof diaphragms.
Unreinforced masonry Reinforced concrete walls. Bracing or lateral support of slab
monolithic with walls and partitions from reinforced concrete ceilings or
diaphragms beams and girders.
Connection of timber floor roof diaphragms to concrete frames.
Connection of concrete floor roof diaphragms to concrete frames.
Connection of masonry walls to concrete frames.
Beam/column joint details.
Column shear reinforcement and confinement.
159
TABLE All STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF COMMON BUILDING TYPE 11--PRECAST/TILT-UP CONCRETE
WALLS WITH LIGHTWEIGHT FLEXIBLE DIAPHRAGM Floor Roof Vertical-Resisting Diaphragm
Elements Foundations Connections ] Timber framing with Precast concrete walls.
Spread footings, piles, Diagonal wire or strut plywood, straight-laid, or drilled
piers. bracing of ceilings from floor diagonal sheathing. roof diaphragms.
Reinforced concrete Bracing or lateral. support of slab monolithic with walls and
partitions from reinforced concrete ceilings or diaphragms.
beams and girders.
Welding, shear studs, or Steel decking with or other connections of steel without
concrete fill. deck diaphragms to structural steel framing.
Connection of timber floor roof diaphragms and precast walls.
Connection of concrete floor roof diaphragms to precast walls.
Connection of steel deck floor 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 Roof Vertical-Resisting Diaphragm Elements
Foundations Connections Reinforced concrete Precast concrete Spread footings,
piles, Diagonal wire or strut slab monolithic with frames. or drilled piers.
bracing of ceilings from floor reinforced concrete roof diaphragms.
beams and girders. Reinforced concrete shear walls. Bracing or lateral support of
walls and partitions from ceilings or diaphragms.
Connection of concrete floor 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 Roof Vertical-Resisting Diaphragm Elements Foundations
Connections Timber framing with Unreinforced masonry Spread footings, piles,
Diagonal wire or strut plywood, straight-laid, bearing walls. or drilled piers.
bracing of ceilings from floor or diagonal sheathing. roof diaphragms.
Steel decking with or Bracing or lateral support of without concrete fill. walls
and partitions from ceilings or diaphragms.
Welding, shear studs, or other connections of steel deck diaphragms to structural
steel framing.
Connection of timber or steel decking floor 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 Roof Vertical-Resisting Diaphragm Elements
Foundations Connections Precast concrete units Reinforced masonry Spread footings,
piles, Diagonal wire or strut bracing
(planks, cored slabs, walls. or drilled piers. bracing of ceilings from floor tees,
etc.) roof diaphragms.
Bracing or lateral support of
walls and partitions from ceilings or diaphragms.
Connection of precast floor roof units to shear walls.
Connections between adjacent precast floor 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 Roof Vertical-Resisting Diaphragm Elements Foundations
Connections
Timber framing with Unreinforced masonry Spread footings, piles, Diagonal wire or
strut plywood, straight-laid, walls. or drilled piers. bracing of ceilings from
floor or diagonal sheathing. roof diaphragms.
Reinforced concrete Bracing or lateral support of slab supported on walls and
partitions from structural steel floor ceilings or diaphragms.
framing members.
Connection of timber or Reinforced concrete floor roof slab monolithic with
diaphragms to masonry walls.
reinforced concrete beams and girders. Development of diaphragm chords in timber or
concrete floor 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
Deficiency
Inadequate moment/shear capacity
of beams, columns, or their connections
Inadequate beam/column panel zone
capacity
Excessive drift
Strengthening Techniques
1. Increasing the moment capacity of the members and connections
by adding cover plates or other steel sections to the
flanges Or by boxing members.
2. Increasing the moment and 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.
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.
1. 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.
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 1. Eliminating the hazardous effects of the
infill by providing a
and lower corners due to the gap between the infill and the frame and providing
out-of- diagonal compression strut type action plane support.
of the infill wall 2. * Treating the frame as a shear wall and correcting the
deficiencies as described in Sec. 3.2.
Shear failure of the beam/column
connection in the steel frames or
direct shear transfer failure of the
beam or column in concrete frames
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
1. Removing existing concrete in the precast elements to expose
of the joints between the precast the existing reinforcing steel, providing
additional reinforcing
units 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.
167
REINFORCED
Deficiency
Inadequate shear capacity
Inadequate flexural capacity
TABLE B2
SHEAR WALLS
CONCRETE OR REINFORCED MASONRY SHEAR WALLS
Strengthening Techniques
1. Increasing the effectiveness of the existing walls by filling in
door or window openings with reinforced concrete or masonry.
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.
3. 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. Increasing the effectiveness of the existing walls by filling in
door or window openings with reinforced concrete or masonry.
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.
3. 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 1. Eliminating the coupling beams by filling
in openings with
in the coupling beams between shear reinforced concrete.
walls or piers
Inadequate shear
in the wall panels
2. Removing the existing beams and replacing with new stronger
reinforced beams.
3. Adding reinforced concrete to one or both faces of the wall
and providing an additional thickness to the existing wall.
4. 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
or flexural capacity
1. Increasing the shear and flexural capacity of walls with significant
openings for doors or windows by infilling 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.
168
TABLE B2--continued
PRECAST CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS-continued
Inadequate interpanel shear or flex-1. Making each panel act as a cantilever to
resist in-plane capacity forces (by adding or strengthening tie-downs, edge
reinforcement, footings).
2. 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
1. Providing pilasters at and/or between the interpanel joints.
capacity
2. Adding horizontal beams between the columns or pilasters at
mid-height of the wall.
Inadequate shear or flexural capacity
1. Eliminating the coupling beams by filling in openings with
in coupling beams reinforced concrete.
2. Removing the existing beams and replacing with new stronger
reinforced beams.
3. Adding reinforced concrete to one or both faces of the wall
and providing an additional thickness to the existing wall.
4. 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 out-
1. Providing additional shear capacity by placing reinforcing
of-plane flexural capacity of the walls steel on the inside or outside face of the
wall and applying
new reinforced concrete.
2. Providing additional capacity for out-of-plane lateral forces
by adding reinforcing steel to the wall utilizing the center
coring technique.
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
faces of existing walls.
4. Filling in existing window or door openings with reinforced
concrete.
5. Providing additional shear walls at the interior or perimeter
of the building or providing external buttresses.
Inadequate shear capacity of the
1. Filling in openings with reinforced concrete.
coupling beam
2. Removing existing connecting beams and replacing them
with properly designed new reinforced concrete beams.
3. 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
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.
Inadequate uplift or hold-down ca-1. Increasing the tensile capacity of the
connections at the edge
of the shear walls by providing metal connectors.
pacity of the wall
2. 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 Strengthening Techniques
Inadequate lateral force capacity of
1. Increasing the capacity of the braces by adding new members
the bracing system governed by buck- thus increasing the area and reducing the
radius of gyration
ling of the compression brace of the braces.
2. Increasing the capacity of the member by reducing the unbraced
length of the existing member by providing secondary
braces.
3. Providing greater capacity by removing and replacing the
existing members with new members of greater capacity.
4. 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.
Inadequate capacity of the brace
1. Increasing the capacity of the connections by additional bolt-
connection ing 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, braces, or eccentric bracing) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.
Inadequate axial load capacity in the
1. Providing additional axial load capacity by adding cover
columns or beams of the bracing plates to the member flanges or by boxing the
flanges.
system
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,
braces, or eccentric bracing) as discussed in Sec. 3.4.
171
TABLE B3-continued
ROD OR OTHER TENSION BRACING
Inadequate tension capacity of the
1. Increasing the capacity by strengthening the existing tension
rod, tensile member, or its members.
connection
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.
Inadequate axial capacity of the
1. Increasing the axial capacity by adding cover plates to the
beams or columns in the bracing existing flanges or by boxing the existing flanges.

system
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.
ECCENTRIC BRACING
Nonconformance with current design
1. Ensuring that the system is balanced (i.e., there is a link
standards 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.
2. Providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements such as
additional eccentric braced frames.
172
Deficiency
Inadequate shear capacity of the
diaphragm
Inadequate chord capacity of the
diaphragm
Excessive shear stresses at diaphragm openings or at plan irregularities
Inadequate stiffness of the diaphragm resulting in excessive diaphragm
deformations
Inadequate
the concrete diaphragm
TABLE B4
DIAPHRAGMS
TIMBER DIAPHRAGMS
(straight-laid or diagonal sheathing or plywood)
Strengthening Techniques
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.
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.
1. Reducing the local stresses by distributing the forces along
the diaphragm by means of drag struts.
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.
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. 3.4.
CONCRETE DIAPHRAGMS
(monolithic concrete diaphragms--i.e., reinforced concrete or post-tensioned
concrete)
in-plane shear capacity of
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.
173
TABLE B4--continued
Inadequate diaphragm chord capacity
Excessive shear stresses at the diaphragm openings or plan irregularities
1. Increasing the flexural capacity by removing the edge of the
diaphragm slab and casting a new chord member integral
with the slab.
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.
1. 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.
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.
3. Removing the stress concentration by filling in the diaphragm
opening with reinforced concrete.
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.
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. Providing a new continuous steel member
above or below
the steel slab and connecting the new member to the existing
slab with bolts.
2.
3.
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
diaphragm openings or plan irregularities
Inadequate in-plane shear capacity
TABLE B4--continued
PRECAST CONCRETE DLAPHRAGMS--continued
Excessive in-plane shear stresses at 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.
3. Removing the stress concentration by filling in the diaphragm
opening with reinforced concrete.
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.
&
STEEL DECK DIAPHRAGMS
(steel decking on steel framing)
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
Excessive in-plane shear stresses at
diaphragm openings or plan irregularities
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 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.
4. Reducing the diaphragm shear stresses by providing supplemental
vertical-resisting elements to reduce the diaphragm
span as discussed in Sec. 3.4.
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.
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.
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.
176
TABLE B4-continued
HORIZONTAL STEEL BRACING
*1 Inadequate force capacity of the
1. Increasing the capacity of the existing bracing members or
members (i.e., bracing and floor or removing and replacing them with new members
and roof beams) and/or the connections connections of greater capacity.
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.
177
TABLE BS
FOUNDATIONS
CONTINUOUS OR STRIP WALL FOOTINGS
Deficiency
Excessive soil bearing pressure due
to overturning forces
Excessive uplift conditions due to
overturning forces
Strengthening Techniques
1. Increasing the bearing capacity of the footing by underpinning
the footing ends and providing additional footing area.
2. Increasing the vertical capacity of the footing by adding new
drilled piers adjacent and connected to the existing footing.
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)
as discussed in Sec. 3.4.
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 reduce soil pressures.
3. 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
Excessive uplift conditions due to
overturning forces
1. Increasing the bearing capacity of the footing by underpinning
the footing ends and providing additional footing area.
2. Increasing the vertical capacity of the footing by adding new
drilled piers adjacent and connected to the existing footing.
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).
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. 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).
178
TABLE BS--continued
INDIVIDUAL PIER OR COLUMN FOOTINGS--continued
Inadequate passive soil pressure to 1. Providing an increase in bearing area by
underpinning and
resist lateral loads
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
Inadequate moment capacity to resist
combined gravity plus seismic over-
turning forces
Inadequate passive soil pressure to
resist sliding
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.
PILES OR DRILLED PIERS
1. Increasing the capacity of the foundation by removing the
existing pile cap, driving additional piles and providing new
pile caps of larger size.
2. Reducing the loads on overstressed pile caps by adding tie
beams to adjacent pile caps and distributing the loads.
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 removing the
existing pile cap, driving additional piles, and providing new
pile caps of larger size.
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.
MAT
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.
2. Providing new shear walls above the mat to distribute the
overturning loads and also to locally increase the section
modulus of the mat.
1. Constructing properly spaced shear keys at the mat perimeter.
179
TABLE B6
DIAPHRAGM TO VERTICAL ELEMENT CONNECTIONS
CONNECTIONS OF TIMBER DIAPHRAGMS
Deficiency
Inadequate capacity to transfer
in-plane shear at the connection of
the diaphragm to interior shear walls
or vertical bracing
Inadequate capacity to transfer
in-plane shear at the connection of
the diaphragm to exterior shear walls
or vertical bracing
Inadequate out-of-plane anchorage at
the connection of the diaphragm to
exterior concrete or masonry walls
Inadequate tensile capacity between
floors due to overturning moments
Strengthening Techniques
1. Increasing the shear transfer capacity of the diaphragm local
to the connection by providing additional nailing to existing
or new blocking.
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.
3. Reducing the shear transfer stress in the existing connection
by providing supplemental vertical-resisting elements as discussed
in Sec. 3.4.
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.
3. Reducing the shear stress in the existing connection by providing
supplemental vertical-resisting elements as discussed
in Sec. 3.4.
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.
2. Increasing the capacity of the connections by providing a
steel anchor to connect the roof or floor joists to the walls.
3. Increasing the redundancy of the connection by providing
continuity ties into the diaphragm.
1. Increasing the tensile capacity of the connections at the edge
of the shear walls by providing metal connectors.
2. 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 1. Reducing the local stresses at the diaphragm-
to-wall inter-
capacity face 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 anchorage capacity for
1. Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing out-of-plane forces in
the connecting additional dowels grouted into drilled holes. walls
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 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. Removing the gypsum diaphragm and replacing it with steel
decking.
Inadequate anchorage capacity for
3. Adding a new horizontal bracing system designed to resist all
out-of-plane forces in the connecting of the seismic forces.
walls
CONNECTIONS OF PRECAST CONCRETE DIAPHRAGMS
Inadequate in-plane shear transfer 1. Increasing the capacity of the connection by
providing capacity 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
Inadequate anchorage capacity at the units and anchored to the wall with additional
dowels placed
exterior walls for out-of-plane forces in drilled and grouted holes.
3. 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 1. Increasing the capacity of the connection
by providing anchorage
capacity for out-of-plane additional welding at the vertical element.
forces in walls 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 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.
CONNECTIONS OF STEEL DECK DIAPHRAGMS WITH CONCRETE FILL
Inadequate in-plane shear capacity or 1. Increasing the shear capacity by drilling
holes through the
anchorage capacity for out-of-plane concrete fill, and providing additional shear
studs welded to
forces in walls the vertical elements through the decking.
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.
CONNECTIONS OF HORIZONTAL STEEL BRACING
Inadequate in-plane shear transfer
1. Increasing the capacity by providing larger or more bolts or
capacity 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.
Inadequate anchorage capacity when
1. Increasing the capacity of the connection by providing supporting
concrete or masonry walls additional anchor bolts grouted in drilled holes and by
providing
for out-of-plane forces more bolts or welding to the bracing members.
182
TABLE B7
VERTICAL ELEMENT TO FOUNDATION CONNECTIONS
CONNECTIONS OF WOOD STUD SHEAR WALLS
Inadequate
anchorage
Inadequate
stud walls
Inadequate
Inadequate
anchorage
Inadequate
stud walls
Inadequate
Inadequate
Deficiency
shear capacity of the
shear capacity of cripple
uplift capacity
Strengthening Techniques
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.
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.
1. Increasing the capacity by providing steel hold-downs bolted
to the wall and anchored to the concrete.
2. Reducing the uplift requirement by providing supplemental
shear walls as discussed in Sec. 3.4.
CONNECTIONS OF METAL STUD SHEAR WALLS
shear capacity of the
shear capacity of cripple
uplift capacity
1. Provide anchor bolts, grouted in drilled holes, through sill
plate of wall.
2. Provide steel angles with anchor bolts to concrete and bolts
or screws to wall.
1. Provide plywood sheathing, nailing into cripple studs, sill
plate, and first floor framing; anchor sill plate to foundation.
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
capacity to resist in-plane 1. Increasing the capacity of the connection by
providing a new
or out-of-plane shear forces steel member connecting the wall to the foundation or
the
ground floor slab.
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.
183
TABLE B7-continued
CONNECTIONS OF PRECAST CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS--continued
Inadequate hold-down capacity to
1. Increase the hold-down capacity by removing concrete at the
resist seismic overturning forces 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.
CONNECTIONS OF BRACED FRAMES
Inadequate shear capacity
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.
Inadequate uplift resistance
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.
CONNECTIONS OF STEEL MOMENT FRAMES
Inadequate shear capacity
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
Inadequate flexural capacity additional anchor bolts into the foundation.
3. Increasing the shear capacity by embedding the column in a
Inadequate uplift capacity reinforced concrete pedestal that is bonded or embedded
into the existing slab or foundation.
184

APPENDIX C
REHABILITATION EXAMPLES
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 Handbook for the
Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings (which includes the evaluations as
Examples D1 and D6 in Appendix D). 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.
C12 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 =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 beam fill and steel decking 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 existing 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 L/ 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. Removal of the existing concrete fill and steel (E) column decking at second
floor VP and roof levels to permit welding of gusset plate to (E) beam shear beam
flange. Since the connection gusset is to be welded along the center of the (E)
floor beam flange, only a narrow section of decking needs to be removed.
Care must be taken that adequate bearing remains (N) gusset plate for the decking.
2. Welding of gusset plates to the beam/column joints and to the column/base plate
joints. (N) X-bracing 3. Welding of new diagonal braces to the gusset plates.
The design of the new plate A' w e n bracing system must include a e ()tension
structural investigation of the to base plate ad
of the existing provide
I additional
capacity of the existing co-' anchor bolts, as, beams, and foundations A required
to resist the additional forces associated with the new FIGURE C1.3.2 Providing new
diagonal bracing to an existing steel frame. 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 DESCRIPFTIONOF 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
13-inch masonry
exterior walls N I,
9-inch masonry : t-partition A._; FIRST LEVEL FIGURE C2.1 Existing 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 n
(N) wall anchorages second level wall would be a concrete overlay at second and
roof metal stud wall with window on (E) wall (E) wall levels levels > openings
similar to the existing ones and with brick veneer to F I [II fill I I1 I match the
other brick walls, desired.
I C2.3.2 Adjacent Building The proposed solution to the problem with the adjacent
(N) reinforced concrete building is to provide a new
frame with brick veneer>/ reinforced concrete shear wall on steel studs --in the
first level of the subject SECOND LEVEL building. The wall would be in line with
the west wall of the (N) plywood sheathed (N) reinforced adjacent building. In
addition crosswalls concrete frame 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 reinforced concrete may not completely solve shear wall the adjacent
building problem, but the new shear wall and the FIRST LEVEL cross walls will
significantly reduce the inertia forces transmitted
FIGURE C2.3 Proposed structural modifications to the adjacent building.
C233 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 parapet 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 are
orientation on seismic zonation. Thus, explicit reminders in the actual design
chapters 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
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
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
'Affiliate (non-voting) members.
* U.S.G.P.O. 1999 -722-072 / 94347
197