You are on page 1of 27

# Chapter 13

Tilt-Up
Concrete Wall
Panels

By Gerry Weiler

April 2006

## Effect of Recent Code Changes

on Tilt-up Construction

## CSA A23.3-04 - Design of

Concrete Structures
• Includes changes affecting Tilt-up
Construction
• Minor revisions to Chapter 23, Tilt-up Wall
Panels
• Comprehensive changes to Chapter 21,
Special Provisions for Seismic Design
• Significant effect on seismic requirements
for tilt-up and other low rise buildings

1
CSA A23.3-04 - Chapter 23,
Tilt-up Wall Panels
e ∆
P
• Provides a Pe
simplified method
for analysis and
design of slender
concrete walls P∆
W + =
• Based on flexural
tension yielding of Deflected
Shape
the longitudinal
reinforcement Panel Primary Secondary Combined

## CSA A23.3-04 Chapter 23

Tilt-up Wall Panels
• Covers only the basic aspects of
tilt-up panel design
• Limited to vertical and out-of-plane
lateral forces
• Design for in-plane shear forces
not included in this chapter
• Chapter 13 of the handbook
the application of A23.3

## Moment Magnifier Method

Basic equations:
Mmax = Mb + Pf ∆max

## Mb = applied factored moment

5 l 2 Mmax
∆max = –– –––––––
48 Ec Icr
Mmax 48 Ec Icr
–––– = ––––––– = Kbf
∆max 5l2
Kbf = bending stiffness
6

2
Moment Magnifier Method
Pf Mmax
Mmax = Mb + ––––––
Kbf
Rearranging:
⎧ 1 ⎫
Mmax = Mb ⎨–––––––– ⎬ = Mb δb
⎩ 1- Pf / Kbf ⎭
1
δb = ––––––––
1 - Pf / Kbf
= moment magnification factor
Gives identical results to iteration method
7

Bending Stiffness
• Bending stiffness, Kb is the maximum
moment divided by maximum deflection
• It will vary, depending on support conditions,
section
• For pure axial load it is the same as the Euler
π2 E I 9.87 E I
Kbf = Pcr = –––––– = ––––––
l 2 l2
• For tilt-up panels the following is more
representative:
48 E I 9.6 E I
Kbf = –––––– = ––––––
5 l 2 l2
8

## Member Resistance Factor

• Member resistance factor, φm is used to
reduce the calculated bending stiffness:
⎧ 1 ⎫
Mmax = Mb ⎨ –––––––––– ⎬ = Mb δb
⎩ 1- P /φm Kbf ⎭
φm = 0.75
• φm has been increased from 0.65 to 0.75 and is
now consistent with CSA A23.3, Chapter 10
and ACI 318-2002
• P-delta deflections decreased
• Designs will be slightly less conservative
9

3
Area of Reinforcement
Modification (23.3.1.5)
φs As fy + Pf
As eff = ––––––––––– (23-4)
φs fy
• Simulates increased strength due to axial load
on the cross section
• Not specifically permitted for increasing
bending stiffness in CSA A23.3-04
• More conservative than ACI and UBC codes
where stiffness modification is permitted

10

Clause 23.3.1.2
Provides limit on axial compression
Pwf + Ptf
–––––––– < 0.09 φc f´c
Ag
• Assumptions for bending stiffness and P-delta
effects not valid with large axial loads
• Axial loads on most tilt-up panels are small
• Sometimes affects panels with large openings
and narrow legs

11

## Panel Height to Thickness

Limitations (23.2.3)
Max l / t
Single mat of reinforcement 50
(centered in panel)
2 mats of reinforcement 65
(25mm clear to each face)
• Primarily intended as practical limits
• Panel thickness my be controlled by
• Reduce the above limits by half for
cantilevers
12

4
Maximum Unsupported
Panel Height
Panel Reinforcement
Thickness Single mat Double mat
140 mm 7.0 m 9.1 m
160 mm 8.0 m 10.4 m
190 mm 9.5 m 12.4 m
260 mm 13.0 m 16.9 m

13

## New Clause 23.2.10

“Where vertical reinforcement is placed
in two layers, the effect of compression
reinforcement shall be ignored”
Reasons:
• Assumptions for bending stiffness and
P-delta effects are not valid with
compression reinforcement
• Reinforcement on the compression side
of thin concrete cross sections in a tilt-
up panel will often be in tension at
14

## New Clause 23.3.2 Service

• Provisions expanded and now similar in
format to strength calculations
• Stiffness reduction factor, φm not included in
deflection calculations
span
• Service load limit of –––– is unchanged
100
• Panel deflections are rarely problematic
• Recent studies suggest that the CSA / ACI
methods for deflection of thin concrete
members may be non-conservative
15

5
Creep and Initial Deflections
• The design should allow for initial deflections
due to warping or uneven casting beds
• Differential shrinkage and thermal gradients
may also be a factor
• Long term creep has not been a significant
problem because axial loads are usually
small
• Clause 23.3.1.4 requires a minimum initial
deflection ∆0 = l / 400

16

Changes in NBCC 2005 for “Principal Loads”
1. φR 1.4D
2. φR 1.25D + 1.5L + 0.5S or 0.4W
3. φR 1.25D + 1.5S + 0.5L or 0.4W
4. φR 1.25D + 1.4W + 0.5L or 0.5S
5. φR + effect of 0.9D 1.4W or 1.5L or 1.5S
6. φR 1.0D + 1.0E + 0.5L or 0.25S
7. φR + effect of 1.0D 1.0E

## # 4 and 6 usually control for out-of-plane bending

# 5 and 7 apply to in-plane shear

17

## Lateral Wind Loads on Panels

(NBCC 2005, Clause 4.1.7)
p = Iw q Ce (Cp Cg - Cpi Cgi)
Iw = 1.0 for normal buildings (ULS)
= 0.75 for serviceability (SLS)
q = 1 in 50 reference velocity pressure
Cp Cg = typically + 1.3 or - 1.5 for tilt-up
Cpi = + 0.30 or - 0.45 for buildings with
only a few small openings
Cgi = internal gust factor fixed at 2.0 (?)
Ce = exposure factor ranges from 0.7 to
1.0 for most low rise buildings

18

6
• Effect of new wind load provisions are not a
significant change for tilt-up design
• NBCC 2005 load factor reduced to 1.4 for wind
• Design wind pressures are typically greater
compared to ASCE requirements
• Panels reinforcement for high, simply supported
panels is directly proportional to wind loads

19

Comparison
Panel Height 30 ft
Width 20 ft
Thickness 6.25"
Self Weight 80 psf
Reinf 2 layers
.

d = 4.75"
Roof DL = 500 plf
Roof LL = 1000 plf

20

Wall Panels
• 100 kph (62 mph) was selected for the 1:30
reference wind speed in NBCC 1995. The
reference pressure q would be 0.5 kPa (10.4 psf)
• Corresponding 1:50 wind speed for NBCC 2005
is 105 kph (65.2 mph), or q = 0.55 kPa (11.5 psf)
• Equivalent 1:50 wind speed for ASCE 7-02 is
85 mph (137 kph), q = 15.4 psf (0.74 kPa)

21

7
Design Wind Pressures:
NBCC 1995 NBCC 2005 ASCE 7-02
+ve W 21.2 psf 25.5 psf 13.6 psf
+ve Wf 31.8 psf 35.7 psf 21.8 psf
------ + 12% - 31 %
-ve W 23.0 psf 24.1 psf 15.1 psf
-ve Wf 34.5 psf 33.7 psf 24.2 psf
------ - 2% - 30%
Total Panel Reinforcement:
A23.3-94 A23.3- 04 ACI 318-02
1473 lbs 1536 lbs 1100 lbs
Difference ------ + 4% - 25%
22

## Lateral Seismic Loads on Panels

• Obtained from NBCC 2005, Clause 4.1.8.17
• Vp = 0.3 Fa Sa(0.2) IE Sp Wp
Cp Ar Ax
Sp = –––––––– where 0.7 ≤ Sp ≤ 4.0
Rp
and
hx
Ax = 1 + 2 ––
hn
• hx usually be taken as the center of mass of
the panel at each storey
• Rp is typically 2.5 for wall panels

23

## Lateral Seismic Loads on Panels

• Cp is the risk factor equal to 1.0
• Ar is usually 1.0, but could be as high as
2.5 for if the fundamental period of the
building is similar to that of the panel
component
• Large warehouse buildings with tall panels
may be affected
• Lateral seismic forces may be similar in
magnitude to wind loads and both should
be checked

24

8
.

## roof or floor members

for multiple joists l/2
• Apply minimum
eccentricity of ½ panel .

thickness Design
l/2 Cross
• Effect of eccentricity Section
bd
• Do not use wind uplift to
25

sometimes be supported
on the panel l /2 2
• Restrictions on effective 1

## panel design width bd Design

l /2
• Check for axial stress in Cross
Section
the design width
bd bd
Pwf + Ptf
–––––––– < 0.09 φc f´c bd = Design Width
Ag

26

## Panel Self Weight

R1
2 Wc ∆
R1 = R2 = ––––––
3l 2∆ ∆
3 3
Mid-height moment:
l Wc Wc
R1 l Wc ∆ Wc ∆
M = –––– + –––– = ––––
2 2x3 2
Wc = panel self weight R2
∴ Panel weight above the Wc
critical section acts as an

27

9
Continuity and End Fixity
• Panels extending below
P
floor slab
• Effect of lateral soil
pressure below floor slab
• Consider the M1 M1δ
W
effectiveness of footing
restraint
M2 M2 δ
• Continuous multi storey
panels
Primary Secondary
• Moments may be affected Moment Moment
by lateral deflections at δ = Moment Magnifier

flexible supports
28

## Continuity and End Fixity

• Not specifically covered in CSA A23.3-04
• Simplified, but conservative methods are
often used
• Assume simple spans with a reduced
effective length k l
• k should not be less than 0.9

29

Openings in Panels
• Effect of openings b
approximated by using bt bt
vertical design strips bd b d =12 t bd =12 t bd =12 t
max max max
• Gives reasonable
accuracy and economy
for most designs
• Distribute entire axial
the tributary width to
the design strips each bt = Tributary Width Typical
side of the opening bd = Design Width Design Strip
t = Panel Thickness
• Limit design width to
12t
30

10
Isolated Footings and
Pier Foundations
• Panels support at each end
of panel
• Continuous lateral restraint Design
at top (roof) and bottom Strip
(floor)
• Design strip bd limited to Critical
Cross
12t 2
Section
1
including self weight into bd
the design strips.
• Lateral bending resisted by
entire panel width
31

Stiffening Pilasters
Beam supported
• Support large vertical on Pilaster
Roof
• Provide increased out-
of-plane bending
resistance at edges of
large openings Floor
• Provide ties at beam
bearing points Roof
• Compression ties Over Opening

## otherwise not required Pilaster

at edge
with axial stresses less of opening
than 0.10f´c
Floor
32

R1 R1
• End reactions from
header beams in wide a W/2
panels H
b W
• Lateral loads from l W/2

wind or seismic on x
H

intermediate floors c .

R2 R2
W W
cranes or other Load Moment Deflection
equipment Diagram Diagram

• Opposing lateral
suspended elements
such as canopies
33

11
Cantilever Panels
∆ max ∆1
• Free standing signs ∆ ∆1
and screen walls with 3 Wc1 2

cast-in-place concrete
W l1 W
footings lc Wc
Roof
• Parapets above the Fixed
base 2 ∆2
roof of a building M
3

l2 Wc2
• Moment magnifier Cantilever Panel
.

## method can be used

Floor
but Kb factor is
different ∆2
Panel with Parapet

34

Cantilever Panels
wf lc2 ∆ max
Mb = –––– ∆
2 3

Wc ∆ W Mf lc2
Mf = Mb + –––– = –––c –––– W
3 3 4 EI lc Wc
Mf lc2 4 EI
∆max = ––––; Kbc = –––– Fixed
base
4 EI lc2
M
Cantilever Panel
Moment magnifier equation:
1
–––––––––
Mf = Mf δc where δc = Wc
1 - ––––––
3 φm Kbc
35

## Panels Subjected to In-Plane Shear

• Lateral wind or seismic forces resisted by tilt-
up panels around the building perimeter
• Sometimes, interior shear walls are required
• Concrete shear stresses are usually very small
• No specific design guidelines in Chapter 23 of
CSA A23.3-04 for design of tilt-up shear walls
In- Plane Shear from
Roof or Floor Diaphragm

## Panel to Slab Panel to Panel

Connector Shear Connector
In-Plane Shear Forces 36

12
In-Plane Shear
Design Considerations:
In- Plane Shear from
• Panel overturning Roof or Floor Diaphragm
• Panel sliding
Panel Shear
• Concrete shear
stress
Panel
• Frame action
Panel to Panel Resisting Force
• Seismic ductility Shear Force at Foundations
In-Plane Shear Forces

37

## Resistance to Panel Overturning

• Panel overturning taken Roof

## • Point of rotation is usually

near the corner Vfloor 2nd Floor
• All applied forces are
l roof V C of G
factored panel

l floor W panel

## • Forces and weights resisting l panel Vr main Main Floor

overturning are modified in
accordance with NBCC l Main
Foundation
• Provide connections to
adjacent panels or tie down V r fdn R

## anchors to foundations for b

increased overturning Panel Overturning Resistance
resistance
38

## Panel Edge Connector

(For Seismic Shear Transfer)
• Embedded angle
with rebar anchor
ANGLE WITH
• Recess below REBAR ANCHOR
surface
• Good for seismic SOLID BAR
WELDED TO
ductility EMBED ANGLE

• Resists
overstress

39

13
Resistance to Sliding

## • Friction between the panel and the foundation

• Direct bearing of panel to notch in floor slab
• Connections to foundations or floor slab
• Minimum 2 connections at base of panel is
recommended
• Soils resistance to sliding should also be
checked

40

## Chapter 21, Special

Provisions for Seismic Design
• Past requirements originally intended for
monolithic concrete elements
• The unique aspects of tilt-up construction
• Seismic forces in tilt-up buildings often
resisted by a series of individual wall panel
elements
• Solid panels do not have a well defined
mechanism for seismic energy dissipation

41

## Section 21.7, Moderate Ductility

• Rd = 2.0 and Ro = 1.4 for moderately ductile
shear walls
• Rd = 2.5 and Ro = 1.4 for moderately ductile
frames
• Requires capacity design principles and a
well defined energy absorbing mechanism
• Does not recognize panel rocking as a
legitimate seismic energy absorbing system
• Dimensional limitations for solid shear walls
are severe and impractical for tilt-up

42

14
Seismic Design for Frame Panels

## New Clause 21.7.1.2

Tilt-up Wall Panels shall be designed to the
requirements of Clause 23 except that the
requirements of Clause 21.7.2 (Moderately
Ductile Moment Resisting Frames) shall apply to
wall panels with openings when the maximum
inelastic rotational demand on any part of the
panel exceeds 0.02 radians. However, the
inelastic rotational demand shall not exceed 0.04

43

## Seismic Design Requirements

for Solid Shear Panels

## New Clause 21.7.1.2

The requirements of Clause 21.7.4 (Squat
Shear Walls) shall apply to solid wall panels
when the maximum in plane shear stress
exceeds
–––
vf ≥ vc = 0.1 φc √ f ´c

44

## Clause 21.7.2 - Moderately Ductile

Moment Resisting Frames
• Rd = 2.5 and Ro = 1.4
• Applies to frame panels, where joint rotational
demand exceeds 0.02 radians ( 1.140 )
• Provides a joint rotational limit of 0.04 radians
• Difficult to check rotational demand except for
very simple and regular buildings
• Analysis of deflections and rotational demand for
buildings with a mixture of stiff and flexible panel
elements may be impractical
• Clause 21.8 Conventional Construction will be
easier to apply to tilt-up

45

15
Rotational Demand for
a Simple Panel
Vf

Rotational Demand
= ∆/ L

4-20M EF 4-20M EF

## 10M Ties 10M Ties

Left Leg Right Leg
46

Tilt-up Panels

## • Most tilt-up warehouses consist of solid panels

with high in-plane shear strength and stiffness
• Shear force capacity often limited by panel
overturning
47

Typical Elevation of
Frame Panels

## • Panel widths, thickness and opening

configurations may vary in a wall line
• Panels may also be interrupted or offset within
the wall line
• The provisions in Chapter 21 are difficult to
apply
48

16
Single Storey Office

49

50

## Panels with Openings

• Large openings are common in tilt-up
office buildings
• Panels designed as moment resisting
frames to resist in-plane shear
• Plastic hinges may develop at some
interior panel joints
• Panel overturning should be checked, but
may not control the design

51

17
Frame Panel
Roof VF

Plastic
VP Hinge
Floor VF
WP

## • Panel header beams are often deep compared to

width of supporting legs
• Plastic hinging is more likely to occur in the legs
52

## Joint in Frame Panel

Continuous Vertical
Reinforcement

Closed Hoop
Ties
Stirrups Spalling

Hooked
Longitudinal
Reinforcement

53

## Frame Panel Reinforcement

54

18
Clause 21.7.2 - Moderately Ductile
Moment Resisting Frames
• The provisions were modified to reflect
changes to NBCC
• Close spacing of ties required to prevent
buckling of longitudinal reinforcement
• Tie spacing of 8db or 6.25" (160mm) for 20M
longitudinal bars in beams
• Tie spacing in columns is more restrictive
6db or h/2 (4” or less)

55

Cross
Ties

Hoop Hoop
Ties Ties

## Section with Section without

Cross Ties Cross Ties
• Axial Stress in vertical legs is usually
small and typically less than 0.10 f ’c
• Panel legs can often be detailed without
cross ties
56

## Warehouse Panel Detailed for

In-Plane Shear Forces
Roof VF

2 7 10M @ 18"
Ea Face

Ties @ 4’ o/c
above Joint

VP
10M @ 10"Alt Face
WP

2 - 15M
Horizontal
Ties @ 6" o/c
Bars in
at Joint
20M Vertical Ties @ 12" o/c
Bars in Legs Below Joint

Floor VR
57

19
3 Storey Tilt-Up

58

Solid Panels
• Panel overturning should be checked and
often controls the panel design
• Edge connections added to resist
overturning
• Panel hold down ties to foundations are
rarely used
• Energy absorption achieved by
deformation of edge connectors and
panels rocking on foundations

59

## New Clause 21.7.4

Squat Shear Walls
• The wall is required to yield and
absorb seismic energy, but the
diaphragm must remain elastic
• Allows the designer to opt out by
designing the wall and diaphragm for
Rd = R0 = 1.0, or about 2.8 times the
prescribed earthquake force

60

20
Squat Shear Walls
• Can apply to solid tilt-up panels where shear
stresses
–––
vf ≥ 0.1 φc √ f ’c
• Equivalent to a threshold in-plane shear force
of 3400 plf for a 6” tilt-up panel for 4350 psi
(30MPa)
• Permits Rd = 2.0 and Ro =1.4
• Buildings with a mixture of stiff and flexible
panels may fall into this category
• Designers will likely try to avoid this clause by
using “Conventional Construction” with
Rd = 1.5 and Ro =1.3

61

## Connections for Tilt-up Panels

3 major categories:
• Cast-in-place concrete infill
sections
• Welded embedded metal
• Drilled-in anchors

62

## Cast-In-Place Concrete In-fill

Cast-in-place
infill section
Chamfer Extend rebar Chamfer
on outside Extend panel
into pilaster on outside
face rebar into
face connection

Cast-in-place
pilaster with ties
Cast-In-Place Panel Infill
Cast-In-Place Pilaster
Hooked
dowel
Floor slab infill
after panel
Exterior
installation

Rebar pins
or welded
connection

Strip Footing
Panel on Strip Footing 63

21
Cast-In-Place Concrete
In-fill Sections
• Usually very strong and can
emulate cast-in-place concrete
• Good seismic ductility
• Excessive restraint for concrete
shrinkage
• Post construction cracking

64

## • Good strength and low to moderate

ductility
• Adaptable to a variety of applications
• Edge distance is sometimes a problem
• Preferred by most designers and
builders due a relative cost advantage

65

## Welded Embedded Metal

Edge angle
Steel decking Edge angle
EM3 EM2 Steel decking
embed embed
plate plate Angle tie
struts
Steel
joist
Angle seat
field welded to
embed plate
Steel Joist on Edge Angle
Angle Seat Connection

66

22
Welded Embedded Metal
EM2 EM4
embed embed
plate plate
Steel
Edge angle beam

Bolts with
slotted holes
Shear plate field
welded to embed
plate
Shear Plate Steel Beam
Connection Connection

67

## Welded Embedded Metal

Embed angle
Solid bar with studs Solid Bar
welded to Welded to EM5 Angle with
embed angle Potential
crack Embed Angle Rebar Anchor

## Panel Edge Connector Panel Edge Connector

(not recommended) (for seismic shear transfer)

## Weld to filler bar

and EM2 in panel
Exterior EM5 in floor slab

Strip footing

68

Vf
Tf

## EM1 Joist Seat

L89 x 89 x 6 x 300mm
2 - 15M Gr 400 Rebar Anchors

d = 100mm 150mm
d = 100 Vr = 110 kN 110 kN
or 150m m Tr = 45 kN 70 kN

## Standardized EM2 Shear Plate

PL 150 x 9.5 x 200
2 - 16mm studs

Connections Vf

Tf
100mm 150mm
Studs
Vr = 65 kN
Studs
65 kN
Tr = 50 kN 95 kN

## EM3 Shear Plate

PL 200 x 9.5 x 200
Vf 4 - 16mm studs
100mm 150mm
Tf Studs Studs
Vr = 110 kN 130 kN
Tr = 65 kN 130 kN

## EM4 Shear Plate

PL 225 x 9.5 x 460
8 - 16mm Studs
Vf
100mm 150mm
Tf Studs Studs
Vr = 170 kN 265 kN
Tr = 90 kN 200 kN
4
6
0

## EM5 Edge Connector

38m m Vf L 38 x 38 x 6 x 200mm
200

## 20M Gr 400 Rebar Anchor

Tf
1
1 Vr = 125 kN, Tr = 100 kN

## Standard Tilt-up Connectors

69

23
Standardized Connections
• Developed by an SECBC Committee in
Vancouver
• Testing Carried out at UBC by Kevin
Lemieux
• Included monotonic and cyclic testing
• Includes 5 basic connector types
• Decreases cost of fabrication
• Provides load capacities for design

70

Panel Edge
Connector
in form

71

## Panel Edge Connector

after Welding

72

24
Drilled-in Anchors
anchors and coil inserts
• Limited strength and ductility
• May be used where other connections
are incorrectly installed
• Suitable for light architectural
components

73

## Connections for Seismic Forces

• Vp = 0.3 Fa Sa(0.2) IE Sp Wp
Cp Ar Ax
Sp = ––––––– where 0.7 ≤ Sp ≤ 4.0
Rp
and
hx
Ax = 1 + 2 ––
hn
• hx usually be taken as the center of mass
of the component being connected

74

## • Cp = 1.0 for ductile connections

= 2.0 for non ductile connections
• Ar = 1.0 for rigid elements
= 2.5 for flexible elements
• Rp = 1.0 for non ductile connections
= 2.5 for ductile connections
• Connection forces are less than previous
code due to the limit of 4.0 on the Sp

75

25
Construction Requirements

## • Includes recommended panel forming

tolerances
• Concrete cover for reinforcement
• Concrete strength and mix
recommendations
• Reinforcing Steel

76

## Design for Lifting and

Bracing of Panels
• The handbook provides only basic
guidelines for lift design
• Refers to TCA Guide and British
Columbia WCB regulations for panel
bracing

77

Acknowledgements
The following provided assistance in reviewing and
checking this document:
• Kevin Lemieux, Ben Benjamin, Brent Weerts; WSB
Consultants
• Andy Metten; Bush Bohlman
• John Wallace, Pomeroy Engineering
• Perry Adebar, Ken Elwood; UBC
• Ron DuVall; RJC
• Jim Mutrie; JKK
• Walid Salmon, Sal Tabot, Calvin Schmitke; Krahn
Engineering
• Bill McKevitt; McKevitt Engineering
And of course Rick McGrath and Andy Viser of CPCA

78

26
End of
Presentation

79

27