Practical Insights For Diaphragm Modeling in The Analysis of Building Structures

Practical Insights for Diaphragm
Modeling in the Analysis of

Building Structures
Allen Adams, P.E., S.E., M.ASCE
allen.adams@bentley.com
Distribution of the webinar materials outside of your site is prohibited. Reproduction of the materials and pictures without written permission of the
copyright holder is a violation of the U.S. law.
Allen Adams P.E., S.E., M.ASCE
 Chief Structural Engineer for the RAM group at Bentley Systems, Inc., and
Senior Product Manager of the RAM Structural System software.
 Co-founder of RAM International (now part of Bentley Systems, Inc.).
 Previously, project engineer for Culp & Tanner Structural Engineers for eleven
years: design of hotels, civic centers, medical and office buildings, and parking
garages.
 Currently a member of:
 ASCE Committee on Design of Steel Building Structures.
 AISC Committee on Specifications.
 AISC Committee on Specifications Task Committee 10: Stability.
 AISC Committee on Manuals Subcommittee M5: Seismic Design.
 Previously a member of:
 ASCE Technical Council on Forensic Engineering - Task
Committee on Avoiding Failures Caused by Computer Misuse.
 Bachelor and Master of Science in Civil Engineering from
Brigham Young University.
 P.E. and S.E., California.
2
1
Learning Outcomes:
 Understand the differences between rigid, semirigid, and flexible diaphragms
and their impacts on analytical results.
 Learn about building code requirements pertaining to diaphragms, particularly

the differences between the requirements of IBC 2012 and ASCE 7-10.
 Learn the relationship between the type of diaphragm in the analytical model
and the way lateral loads are determined and modeled.
 Learn about the sensitivity of analytical results to the type of diaphragm used in
the analytical model.
 Learn about the sensitivity of analytical results to the various components of

semirigid diaphragm model, including mesh size and material stiffness.
 Make appropriate decisions on diaphragm and load modeling, balancing the

needed level of accuracy with the business demands of speed and simplicity.
2
5
3
7
4
Types of Diaphragms
Types of Diaphragms
ASCE 7-10 Section 12.3.1 Diaphragm Flexibility
“The structural analysis shall consider the relative stiffnesses

of diaphragms and the vertical elements of the seismic
force-resisting system. Unless a diaphragm can be idealized
as either flexible or rigid in accordance with Sections
12.3.1.1, 12.3.1.2, or 12.3.1.3, the structural analysis shall
explicitly include consideration of the stiffness of the
diaphragm (i.e., semirigid modeling assumption).”
10
5
Types of Diaphragms
 Flexible
 Rigid
 Semirigid
11
Types of Diaphragms
Flexible:
No diaphragm stiffness.
No interaction between frames.
12
6
Types of Diaphragms
Rigid:
Infinitely Rigid in the plane of the floor.
No diaphragm deformation.
Frames are rigidly connected to each other
by the diaphragm.
Computationally Efficient.
13
Types of Diaphragms
Rigid:
14
7
Types of Diaphragms
Semirigid:
 Some diaphragm stiffness.
 Diaphragm deforms.
 Interaction between frames.
15
Types of Diaphragms
Semirigid:
16
8
Types of Diaphragms
 Flexible
 Rigid
 Semirigid
17
Types of Diaphragms
Distribution of Loads to Frames:

 Flexible
Dependent on drags, horizontal braces and ability of deck to
transfer shear. Tributary area or tributary exposure.
 Rigid
Function of relative stiffnesses of frames and of distance
from center of rigidity.
 Semirigid
Function of relative stiffnesses of frames and of stiffness of
diaphragm.
18
9
Classification of Diaphragms
Building Code requirements pertaining to the classification of
diaphragms
19
 ASCE 7-10 Minimum Design Loads for

Buildings and Other Structures
 International Building Code 2012
20
10
IBC Section 202 Definitions
21
21
IBC Section 202 Definitions
ASCE 7 Section 12.3.1.3

Calculated Flexible Diaphragm
Condition
“Diaphragms… are permitted to be

idealized as flexible where the
computed maximum in-plane
deflection of the diaphragm is more
than two times the average story
drift….”
22
22
11
ASCE 7-10
Chapter 12: Seismic Design Requirements for

Building Structures
Chapter 26: Wind Loads: General Requirements
23
12.3.1 Diaphragm Flexibility

24
12
12.3.1.1 Flexible Diaphragm Condition
“Diaphragms constructed of untopped steel decking or

wood structural panels are permitted to be idealized as
flexible if any of the following conditions exist:”
a. Steel or concrete braced frames or concrete, masonry,

or steel shear walls.
b. One- and two-family dwellings
c. Light-frame construction (see code for qualifying

conditions).
25
12.3.1.2 Rigid Diaphragm Condition
“Diaphragms of concrete slab or concrete filled metal deck

with span-to-depth ratios of 3 or less in structures that
have no horizontal irregularities are permitted to be
idealized as rigid.”
26
13
12.3.1.2: “…span-to-depth ratios of 3 or less…”

Span is measured between adjacent frames.
27
12.3.1.2: “… no horizontal irregularities…”
12.3.2.1 Horizontal Irregularity
“Structures having one or more of the irregularity types listed in

Table 12.3-1 shall be designated as having a horizontal structural
irregularity.”
1. Torsional Irregularity
2. Reentrant Corner
3. Diaphragm Discontinuity
4. Out-of-Plane Offset
5. Nonparallel System
28
14
Table 12.3-1 Torsional Irregularity
“… where the maximum story drift… at

one end of the structure… is more than
1.2 times the average of the story drift at
the two ends….”
29
Table 12.3-1 Reentrant Corner

“… where both plan projections of the structure beyond a reentrant corner
are greater than 15% of the plan dimension of the structure in the given
direction.”
30
15
Table 12.3-1 Diaphragm Discontinuity

“… where there is a diaphragm with an abrupt discontinuity or variation in
stiffness…
31

“… including one having a cutout or open area greater than 50% of the
gross diaphragm area…”
32
16

“… or a change in effective diaphragm stiffness of more than 50% from
one story to the next.”
33

“… or a change in effective diaphragm stiffness of more than 50% from
one story to the next.”
34
17
Table 12.3-1 Out-of-Plane Offset

“… where there is a discontinuity in a lateral force-resistance path….”
35
Table 12.3-1 Nonparallel System

“… where vertical lateral force-resisting elements are not parallel to the
major orthogonal axes of the seismic force resisting system.”
36
18
12.3.1.2: “… no horizontal irregularities…”
12.3.2.1 Horizontal Irregularity
“Structures having one or more of the irregularity types listed in

Table 12.3-1 shall be designated as having a horizontal structural
irregularity.”
1. Torsional Irregularity
2. Reentrant Corner
3. Diaphragm Discontinuity
4. Out-of-Plane Offset
5. Nonparallel System
37
12.3.1.2 Rigid Diaphragm Condition
“Diaphragms of concrete slab or concrete filled metal deck

with span-to-depth ratios of 3 or less in structures that
have no horizontal irregularities are permitted to be
idealized as rigid.”
38
19
12.3.1.3 Calculated Flexible Diaphragm Condition

“Diaphragms not satisfying the condition of Sections 12.3.1.1 [Flexible] or
12.3.1.2 [Rigid] are permitted to be idealized as flexible where the … in-
plane deflection of the diaphragm … is more than two times the
average story drift of adjoining vertical elements of the seismic force-
resisting system….”
39
12.3.1 Diaphragm Flexibility

40
20
Chapter 26 Wind Loads: General Requirements
26.2 Definitions
“Diaphragm: … For analysis under wind loads, diaphragms constructed
of untopped steel decks, concrete filled steel decks, and concrete slabs,
each having a span-to-depth ratio of two or less, shall be permitted to be
idealized as rigid.
Diaphragms constructed of wood structural panels are permitted to be

idealized as flexible.”
41
Semirigid Diaphragm
Modeling
42
21
Semirigid Diaphragm Modeling
12.7.3 Structural Modeling
“A mathematical model of the structure shall be constructed for the

purpose of determining member forces and structure displacements….
Where the diaphragms have not been classified as rigid or flexible in

accordance with Section 12.3.1, the model shall include representation
of the diaphragm’s stiffness characteristics….”
43
Diaphragm Mesh
44
22
Deck and Slab Properties

 Material Properties (e.g., f’c, E, poisson’s ratio)
 Deck Manufacturer Technical Data
 Steel Deck Institute, Diaphragm Design Manual
45
Concrete Slabs
Thickness: Slab thickness.
Poisson’s ratio: 0.2.
Elastic Modulus, E: Use the calculated value as for concrete.
Cracked Factor: Consider using 0.35 for cracked or 0.7 for uncracked.
46
23
Composite Slabs
Thickness: Average concrete thickness (or concrete above ribs).
Poisson’s ratio: 0.2 (assume stiffness comes from concrete).
Elastic Modulus, E: Use the calculated value as for concrete.
Cracked Factor: Consider using 0.35 for cracked or 0.7 for uncracked.
47
Metal Roof Deck (un-topped)

Thickness: Gauge of deck.
Poisson’s ratio: 0.3.
Elastic Modulus, E: Use effective elastic modulus, E’.
48
24
Derivation of Effective Elastic Modulus, E’

The deflection at the centerline of the deck due to flexure and
shear is given by:

5 4 2
+ (1)
384 ′ 8

where:
3

12

2

3

′

2 1

Gauge thickness of deck
Poisson’s ratio

The Vulcraft Steel Roof & Floor Deck publication indicates that, as
a function of G’ defined above the deflection may also be
calculated as follows:

2
(2)
8 ′

Solving equations (1) and (2) for ′ gives:

′
′
49
50
50
25
Loads on Diaphragms
51
Loads on Diaphragms
Wind Loads
52
26
Loads on Diaphragms
Seismic Loads
53
Loads on Diaphragms
Application of Seismic and Wind Loads on Rigid Diaphragm
54
27
Loads on Diaphragms
Application of Seismic and Wind Loads on Flexible Diaphragm
55
Loads on Diaphragms
Application of Seismic and Wind Loads on Flexible Diaphragm
56
28
Loads on Diaphragms
Application of Wind Loads Loads on Semirigid Diaphragm
57
Loads on Diaphragms
Application of Seismic Loads on Semirigid Diaphragm
58
29
Loads on Diaphragms
Application of Seismic Loads on Semirigid Diaphragm
59
Loads on Diaphragms
12.8.4 Horizontal Distribution of Forces
“The seismic design story shear … shall be distributed to the various

vertical elements of the seismic force-resisting system… based on the
relative lateral stiffness of the vertical resisting elements and the
diaphragm.”
60
30
Loads on Diaphragms
12.8.4.1 Inherent Torsion

“For diaphragms that are not flexible, the distribution of lateral forces at
each level shall consider the effect of the inherent torsion moment,
Mt, resulting from eccentricity between the location of the center of
mass and the center of rigidity.”
Note: this is automatically

accounted for in a 3D analysis.
61
Loads on Diaphragms
12.8.4.1 Inherent Torsion

“For flexible diaphragms, the distribution of forces to the vertical
elements shall account for the position and distribution of the masses
supported.”
Note: this needs to be considered when determining the nodal loads

applied to the frames.
62
31
Loads on Diaphragms
12.8.4.1 Accidental Torsion

“Where diaphragms are not flexible, the design shall include … the
accidental torsional moments caused by assumed displacement of
the center of mass each way from its actual location by a distance
equal to 5% of the dimension of the structure perpendicular to the
direction of the applied forces.”
63
Loads on Diaphragms
12.8.4.1 Accidental Torsion – Rigid Diaphragm
64
32
Loads on Diaphragms
12.8.4.1 Accidental Torsion – Semirigid Diaphragm
65
Loads on Diaphragms
Figure 27.4-8 Design Wind Load Cases – Rigid Diaphragm
66
33
Loads on Diaphragms
Figure 27.4-8 Design Wind Load Cases – Semirigid Diaphragm
67
Loads on Diaphragms
12.10 Diaphragms, Chords and Collectors

“Diaphragms shall be designed for both the shear and bending stresses
resulting from design forces.”
68
34
Loads on Diaphragms
69
Loads on Diaphragms
70
35
Loads on Diaphragms
71
Loads on Diaphragms
72
36
Loads on Diaphragms
12.10.1.1 Diaphragm Design Forces

“Floor and roof diaphragms shall be designed to resist
design seismic forces from the structural analysis, but
shall not be less than that determined in accordance with
Eq. 12.10-1…”
“The force determined from Eq. 12.10-1 shall not be less

than
Fpx = 0.2SDSIewpx (12.10-2)”
“The force determined from Eq. 12.10-1 need not exceed

Fpx = 0.4SDSIewpx (12.10-3)”
73
Loads on Diaphragms

“Where the diaphragm is required to transfer design
seismic force from the vertical resisting elements above
the diaphragm to other vertical resisting elements below
the diaphragm due to offsets in the placement of the
elements or to changes in relative lateral stiffness in the
vertical elements, these forces shall be added to those
determined from Eq. 12.10-1.”
74
37
Loads on Diaphragms
“The redundancy factor, , applies to the design of

diaphragms in structures assigned to Seismic Design
Categories D, E, or F.”
“For inertial forces calculated in accordance with Eq.

12.10-1, the redundancy factor shall equal 1.0.”
“For transfer forces the redundancy factor shall be the

same as that used for the structure [1.0 or 1.3].”
75
Loads on Diaphragms
“For structures having horizontal or vertical structural

irregularities of the types indicated in Section 12.3.3.4,
the requirements of that section shall also apply.”
12.3.3.4 Increase in Forces Due to Irregularities for

Seismic Design Categories D through F.
25% increase in design forces for some elements in some cases
76
38
Case Study
77
Case Study
78
39
Case Study
79
Case Study
80
40
Case Study
81
Case Study
Roof 4th
2nd and 3rd 82
41
Influence of Mesh Size
83
The model was analyzed with five different mesh

sizes:
1’, 2’, 4’, 8’, and 15’.
As a measure of the influence of the mesh size on

the distribution of the applied lateral story forces, the
total shear at each level was determined for each
frame.
84
42
1’ Mesh
85
15’ Mesh
86
43
1’ Mesh 15’ Mesh
87
Question:
How much influence does mesh size have on
the analysis results?
88
44
Frame Story Shear (kip):

Frame 1 Maximum Mesh Size
1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 32.1
4th 65.9
3rd 88.4
2nd 98.5
89

1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 32.1 32.1 32.1 32.1 31.9
4th 65.9 65.8 65.8 65.6 65.6
3rd 88.4 88.4 88.4 88.4 88.4
2nd 98.5 98.4 98.4 98.3 98.2
90
45

1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 32.1 32.1 32.1 32.1 31.9
4th 65.9 65.8 65.8 65.6 65.6
3rd 88.4 88.4 88.4 88.4 88.4
2nd 98.5 98.4 98.4 98.3 98.2
91

1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 32.1 32.1 32.1 32.1 31.9
4th 65.9 65.8 65.8 65.6 65.6
3rd 88.4 88.4 88.4 88.4 88.4
2nd 98.5 98.4 98.4 98.3 98.2
1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 25.1 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0
4th 50.3 50.3 50.2 50.1 49.9
3rd 72.1 72.1 72.1 72.1 71.7
2nd 82.7 82.7 82.7 82.7 82.5
1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 14.3 14.4 14.4 14.5 14.4
4th 32.2 32.3 32.3 32.3 32.6
3rd 43.3 43.3 43.3 43.4 43.8
2nd 47.8 47.8 47.8 47.9 48.2
92
46

1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 32.1 32.1 (‐0.03%) 32.1 (0.00%) 32.1 (0.16%) 31.9 (‐0.65%)
4th 65.9 65.8 (‐0.08%) 65.8 (‐0.15%) 65.6 (‐0.35%) 65.6 (‐0.35%)
3rd 88.4 88.4 (‐0.05%) 88.4 (‐0.09%) 88.4 (‐0.09%) 88.4 (‐0.07%)
2nd 98.5 98.4 (‐0.05%) 98.4 (‐0.09%) 98.3 (‐0.13%) 98.2 (‐0.21%)
1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 25.1 25.0 (‐0.04%) 25.0 (‐0.04%) 25.0 (‐0.36%) 25.0 (‐0.36%)
4th 50.3 50.3 (‐0.04%) 50.2 (‐0.14%) 50.1 (‐0.36%) 49.9 (‐0.70%)
3rd 72.1 72.1 (0.00%) 72.1 (‐0.01%) 72.1 (‐0.06%) 71.7 (‐0.50%)
2nd 82.7 82.7 (0.02%) 82.7 (0.06%) 82.7 (0.06%) 82.5 (‐0.19%)
1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 14.3 14.4 (0.21%) 14.4 (0.42%) 14.5 (0.91%) 14.4 (0.49%)
4th 32.2 32.3 (0.09%) 32.3 (0.16%) 32.3 (0.34%) 32.6 (1.09%)
3rd 43.3 43.3 (0.09%) 43.3 (0.16%) 43.4 (0.35%) 43.8 (1.25%)
2nd 47.8 47.8 (0.08%) 47.8 (0.13%) 47.9 (0.27%) 48.2 (0.98%)
93

1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 32.1 32.1 (‐0.03%) 32.1 (0.00%) 32.1 (0.16%) 31.9 (‐0.65%)
4th 65.9 65.8 (‐0.08%) 65.8 (‐0.15%) 65.6 (‐0.35%) 65.6 (‐0.35%)
3rd 88.4 88.4 (‐0.05%) 88.4 (‐0.09%) 88.4 (‐0.09%) 88.4 (‐0.07%)
2nd 98.5 98.4 (‐0.05%) 98.4 (‐0.09%) 98.3 (‐0.13%) 98.2 (‐0.21%)
1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 25.1 25.0 (‐0.04%) 25.0 (‐0.04%) 25.0 (‐0.36%) 25.0 (‐0.36%)
4th 50.3 50.3 (‐0.04%) 50.2 (‐0.14%) 50.1 (‐0.36%) 49.9 (‐0.70%)
3rd 72.1 72.1 (0.00%) 72.1 (‐0.01%) 72.1 (‐0.06%) 71.7 (‐0.50%)
2nd 82.7 82.7 (0.02%) 82.7 (0.06%) 82.7 (0.06%) 82.5 (‐0.19%)
1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 14.3 14.4 (0.21%) 14.4 (0.42%) 14.5 (0.91%) 14.4 (0.49%)
4th 32.2 32.3 (0.09%) 32.3 (0.16%) 32.3 (0.34%) 32.6 (1.09%)
3rd 43.3 43.3 (0.09%) 43.3 (0.16%) 43.4 (0.35%) 43.8 (1.25%)
2nd 47.8 47.8 (0.08%) 47.8 (0.13%) 47.9 (0.27%) 48.2 (0.98%)
94
47

1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 32.1 32.1 (‐0.03%) 32.1 (0.00%) 32.1 (0.16%) 31.9 (‐0.65%)
4th 65.9 65.8 (‐0.08%) 65.8 (‐0.15%) 65.6 (‐0.35%) 65.6 (‐0.35%)
3rd 88.4 88.4 (‐0.05%) 88.4 (‐0.09%) 88.4 (‐0.09%) 88.4 (‐0.07%)
2nd 98.5 98.4 (‐0.05%) 98.4 (‐0.09%) 98.3 (‐0.13%) 98.2 (‐0.21%)
1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 25.1 25.0 (‐0.04%) 25.0 (‐0.04%) 25.0 (‐0.36%) 25.0 (‐0.36%)
4th 50.3 50.3 (‐0.04%) 50.2 (‐0.14%) 50.1 (‐0.36%) 49.9 (‐0.70%)
3rd 72.1 72.1 (0.00%) 72.1 (‐0.01%) 72.1 (‐0.06%) 71.7 (‐0.50%)
2nd 82.7 82.7 (0.02%) 82.7 (0.06%) 82.7 (0.06%) 82.5 (‐0.19%)
1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 14.3 14.4 (0.21%) 14.4 (0.42%) 14.5 (0.91%) 14.4 (0.49%)
4th 32.2 32.3 (0.09%) 32.3 (0.16%) 32.3 (0.34%) 32.6 (1.09%)
3rd 43.3 43.3 (0.09%) 43.3 (0.16%) 43.4 (0.35%) 43.8 (1.25%)
2nd 47.8 47.8 (0.08%) 47.8 (0.13%) 47.9 (0.27%) 48.2 (0.98%)
Time: 10:36 1:45 0:27 0:09 0:06 95

1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 32.1 32.1 (‐0.03%) 32.1 (0.00%) 32.1 (0.16%) 31.9 (‐0.65%)
4th 65.9 65.8 (‐0.08%) 65.8 (‐0.15%) 65.6 (‐0.35%) 65.6 (‐0.35%)
3rd 88.4 88.4 (‐0.05%) 88.4 (‐0.09%) 88.4 (‐0.09%) 88.4 (‐0.07%)
2nd 98.5 98.4 (‐0.05%) 98.4 (‐0.09%) 98.3 (‐0.13%) 98.2 (‐0.21%)
1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 25.1 25.0 (‐0.04%) 25.0 (‐0.04%) 25.0 (‐0.36%) 25.0 (‐0.36%)
4th 50.3 50.3 (‐0.04%) 50.2 (‐0.14%) 50.1 (‐0.36%) 49.9 (‐0.70%)
3rd 72.1 72.1 (0.00%) 72.1 (‐0.01%) 72.1 (‐0.06%) 71.7 (‐0.50%)
2nd 82.7 82.7 (0.02%) 82.7 (0.06%) 82.7 (0.06%) 82.5 (‐0.19%)
1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 14.3 14.4 (0.21%) 14.4 (0.42%) 14.5 (0.91%) 14.4 (0.49%)
4th 32.2 32.3 (0.09%) 32.3 (0.16%) 32.3 (0.34%) 32.6 (1.09%)
3rd 43.3 43.3 (0.09%) 43.3 (0.16%) 43.4 (0.35%) 43.8 (1.25%)
2nd 47.8 47.8 (0.08%) 47.8 (0.13%) 47.9 (0.27%) 48.2 (0.98%)
Time: 10:36 1:45 0:27 0:09 0:06 96
48
Frame Story Shear (kip) – X-Direction:

1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 17.0 17.0 (‐0.06%) 17.0 (‐0.06%) 17.0 (0.00%) 17.0 (‐0.12%)
4th 33.4 33.4 (‐0.09%) 33.4 (‐0.15%) 33.4 (‐0.12%) 33.2 (‐0.57%)
3rd 43.7 43.7 (‐0.02%) 43.6 (‐0.07%) 43.7 (0.02%) 43.6 (‐0.07%)
2nd 47.5 47.4 (‐0.04%) 47.4 (‐0.11%) 47.4 (‐0.08%) 47.3 (‐0.34%)
1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 15.3 15.3 (0.00%) 15.3 (0.07%) 15.3 (0.13%) 15.3 (0.07%)
4th 40.3 40.3 (‐0.02%) 40.3 (0.00%) 40.3 (0.02%) 40.4 (0.20%)
3rd 56.6 56.6 (0.00%) 56.7 (0.05%) 56.7 (0.18%) 56.9 (0.53%)
2nd 63.0 62.9 (‐0.02%) 63.0 (0.03%) 63.0 (0.13%) 63.2 (0.33%)
1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 18.5 18.5 (‐0.05%) 18.5 (‐0.11%) 18.5 (‐0.22%) 18.4 (‐0.65%)
4th 35.6 35.6 (‐0.06%) 35.5 (‐0.17%) 35.5 (‐0.22%) 35.3 (‐0.76%)
3rd 46.5 46.5 (‐0.02%) 46.5 (‐0.09%) 46.5 (‐0.04%) 46.4 (‐0.32%)
2nd 50.2 50.2 (‐0.04%) 50.2 (‐0.14%) 50.2 (‐0.14%) 49.9 (‐0.64%)
1' 2' 4' 8' 15'
Roof 17.1 17.1 (0.12%) 17.2 (0.23%) 17.1 (0.06%) 17.1 (0.00%)
4th 41.5 41.5 (0.10%) 41.6 (0.14%) 41.5 (0.05%) 41.8 (0.60%)
3rd 56.9 56.9 (0.09%) 57.0 (0.16%) 57.0 (0.11%) 57.2 (0.54%)
2nd 61.8 61.9 (0.05%) 61.9 (0.08%) 61.8 (‐0.08%) 61.9 (0.05%)
Time: 10:36 1:45 0:27 0:09 0:06 97
98
49
Influence of Material
Properties
99
Influence of Material Properties
The model was analyzed with four widely different values

of the diaphragm effective modulus of elasticity, E’:
600 psi, 1200 psi, 1800 psi, and 2400 psi.
Note that 1200 psi is the correct value for this diaphragm,
and that the other values are significantly less than or
greater than the correct value.
100
50
Question:
How much influence does inaccuracy in the
diaphragm properties (in particular E’) have on
the analysis results?
101

Frame 1 Diaphragm Material Properties
E' = 600 E' = 1200 E' = 1800 E' = 2400
Roof 32.1 (0.0%)
4th 65.6 (0.0%)
3rd 88.4 (0.0%)
2nd 98.5 (0.0%)
102
51

E' = 600 E' = 1200 E' = 1800 E' = 2400
Roof 33.6 (4.5%) 32.1 (0.0%) 31.3 (‐2.6%) 30.7 (‐4.4%)
4th 67.4 (2.7%) 65.6 (0.0%) 64.6 (‐1.6%) 63.8 (‐2.8%)
3rd 90.2 (2.1%) 88.4 (0.0%) 87.0 (‐1.5%) 86.0 (‐2.7%)
2nd 100.3 (2.0%) 98.5 (0.0%) 96.8 (‐1.6%) 95.5 (‐2.9%)
E' = 600 E' = 1200 E' = 1800 E' = 2400
Roof 24.9 (‐0.1%) 25.0 (0.0%) 25.2 (0.8%) 25.4 (1.6%)
4th 49.8 (‐0.6%) 50.1 (0.0%) 50.5 (0.8%) 50.9 (1.6%)
3rd 71.3 (‐1.1%) 72.1 (0.0%) 72.9 (1.1%) 73.5 (2.1%)
2nd 81.6 (‐1.4%) 82.7 (0.0%) 83.7 (1.3%) 84.6 (2.3%)
E' = 600 E' = 1200 E' = 1800 E' = 2400
Roof 14.3 (‐0.8%) 14.5 (0.0%) 14.6 (0.6%) 14.6 (1.0%)
4th 31.7 (‐1.9%) 32.3 (0.0%) 32.7 (1.1%) 33.0 (1.9%)
3rd 42.5 (‐2.1%) 43.4 (0.0%) 44.0 (1.3%) 44.4 (2.2%)
2nd 47.0 (‐1.9%) 47.9 (0.0%) 48.4 (1.0%) 48.8 (1.8%)
103
Frame Story Shear (kip): Frame 4 Diaphragm Material Properties

E' = 600 E' = 1200 E' = 1800 E' = 2400
X-Direction Roof ‐1.8% 0.0% 1.6% 2.8%
4th ‐2.5% 0.0% 1.8% 3.1%
3rd ‐3.3% 0.0% 2.4% 4.1%
2nd ‐3.3% 0.0% 2.4% 4.2%
E' = 600 E' = 1200 E' = 1800 E' = 2400
Roof 2.2% 0.0% ‐1.2% ‐2.2%
4th 0.5% 0.0% ‐0.4% ‐0.7%
3rd 0.0% 0.0% ‐0.2% ‐0.4%
2nd 0.0% 0.0% ‐0.3% ‐0.6%
E' = 600 E' = 1200 E' = 1800 E' = 2400
Roof 1.5% 0.0% ‐0.9% ‐1.6%
4th ‐0.5% 0.0% 0.2% 0.2%
3rd ‐1.9% 0.0% 1.0% 1.7%
2nd ‐2.1% 0.0% 1.1% 1.8%
E' = 600 E' = 1200 E' = 1800 E' = 2400
Roof 4.7% 0.0% ‐2.3% ‐3.8%
4th 2.2% 0.0% ‐1.3% ‐2.1%
3rd 2.2% 0.0% ‐1.4% ‐2.4%
2nd 3.0% 0.0% ‐2.2% ‐3.9%
104
52
105
Flexible vs. Rigid:

The model was analyzed twice, once with the diaphragm
defined as Flexible and then with the diaphragm defined
as Rigid.
106
53
Question:
How different are the results if the diaphragm
is specified as Flexible versus Rigid?
107

Flexible Rigid
Roof 25.4 (‐8.0%) 27.6 (0.0%)
4th 62.9 (2.8%) 61.2 (0.0%)
3rd 85.1 (0.0%) 85.2 (0.0%)
2nd 94.7 (1.6%) 93.2 (0.0%)
Flexible Rigid
Roof 25.4 (14.5%) 22.2 (0.0%)
4th 55.9 (13.3%) 49.4 (0.0%)
3rd 78.7 (14.9%) 68.5 (0.0%)
2nd 88.5 (17.6%) 75.2 (0.0%)
Flexible Rigid
Roof 12.7 (‐36.5%) 20.0 (0.0%)
4th 31.9 (‐28.5%) 44.6 (0.0%)
3rd 42.5 (‐31.4%) 61.9 (0.0%)
2nd 47.0 (‐30.9%) 68.1 (0.0%)
108
54
Semirigid Composite Deck vs. Rigid:

The model was analyzed twice, once with the diaphragm
modeled with a Semirigid diaphragm consisting of 3-1/4”
of light-weight concrete on metal deck, and then with the
diaphragm defined as Rigid.
109
Question:
How different are the results if the diaphragm
is specified as Semirigid (concrete fill on metal
deck) versus Rigid?
110
55

Concrete Rigid
Roof 26.6 (‐3.6%) 27.6 (0.0%)
4th 58.4 (‐4.6%) 61.2 (0.0%)
3rd 79.8 (‐6.3%) 85.2 (0.0%)
2nd 88.3 (‐5.3%) 93.2 (0.0%)
Concrete Rigid
Roof 23.6 (6.3%) 22.2 (0.0%)
4th 50.5 (2.2%) 49.4 (0.0%)
3rd 66.7 (‐2.6%) 68.5 (0.0%)
2nd 74.1 (‐1.5%) 75.2 (0.0%)
Concrete Rigid
Roof 18.2 (‐8.7%) 20.0 (0.0%)
4th 39.3 (‐11.9%) 44.6 (0.0%)
3rd 58.3 (‐5.8%) 61.9 (0.0%)
2nd 64.3 (‐5.6%) 68.1 (0.0%)
111
For comparative purposes, the analysis results for five

different diaphragm designations – one Flexible, three
Semirigid, and one Rigid – are listed:
 Flexible
 Roof Deck with E’ = 1200 at every level

 Concrete fill on metal deck at every level except Roof
Deck at Roof
 Concrete fill on metal deck at every level
 Rigid
112
56
Question:
What is the impact of incorrectly categorizing
a structure as Flexible, Semirigid, or Rigid?
113

Flexible E' = 1200 Concrete* Concrete Rigid *except Roof
Roof 25.4 32.1 26.2 26.6 27.6
4th 62.9 65.6 62.2 58.4 61.2
3rd 85.1 88.4 78.1 79.8 85.2
2nd 94.7 98.5 88.6 88.3 93.2
Flexible E' = 1200 Concrete* Concrete Rigid
Roof 25.4 25.0 23.2 23.6 22.2
4th 55.9 50.1 55.2 50.5 49.4
3rd 78.7 72.1 67.2 66.7 68.5
2nd 88.5 82.7 73.8 74.1 75.2
Flexible E' = 1200 Concrete* Concrete Rigid
Roof 12.7 14.5 13.0 18.2 20.0
4th 31.9 32.3 38.4 39.3 44.6
3rd 42.5 43.4 58.0 58.3 61.9
2nd 47.0 47.9 64.6 64.3 68.1
114
57
Conclusion and
Recommendations
115
Recommendations
 Correctly Categorize each diaphragm (Flexible, Semirigid, Rigid).
 Use Rigid Diaphragm designation whenever permitted (simpler, faster).
 Take advantage of IBC’s more liberal definition of Rigid.
 Semirigid Diaphragms can always be used for all diaphragms, even

those that qualify as Flexible or Rigid.
 Use as large a mesh as reasonable (8’ or so).
 For Semirigid Diaphragms, calculate stiffness values (e.g., E’) as

reasonably accurate as possible, but recognize that small errors in
these values will have virtually no impact on the results (even large
errors have little impact on the results).
 For simplicity, consider using the same type of diaphragm in Wind

analysis as for Seismic analysis. 116
58
Thank You!
Questions?
allen.adams@bentley.com
117
59

Practical Insights For Diaphragm Modeling in The Analysis of Building Structures

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Practical Insights For Diaphragm Modeling in The Analysis of Building Structures

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Practical Insights for Diaphragm

Modeling in the Analysis of

Allen Adams P.E., S.E., M.ASCE

 Learn about building code requirements pertaining to diaphragms, particularly

 Learn about the sensitivity of analytical results to the various components of

 Make appropriate decisions on diaphragm and load modeling, balancing the

ASCE 7-10 Section 12.3.1 Diaphragm Flexibility

“The structural analysis shall consider the relative stiffnesses

No interaction between frames.

Distribution of Loads to Frames:

 ASCE 7-10 Minimum Design Loads for

IBC Section 202 Definitions

IBC Section 202 Definitions

ASCE 7 Section 12.3.1.3

“Diaphragms… are permitted to be

Chapter 12: Seismic Design Requirements for

Chapter 26: Wind Loads: General Requirements

12.3.1 Diaphragm Flexibility

“The structural analysis shall consider the relative stiffnesses

12.3.1.1 Flexible Diaphragm Condition

“Diaphragms constructed of untopped steel decking or

a. Steel or concrete braced frames or concrete, masonry,

b. One- and two-family dwellings

c. Light-frame construction (see code for qualifying

12.3.1.2 Rigid Diaphragm Condition

“Diaphragms of concrete slab or concrete filled metal deck

12.3.1.2: “…span-to-depth ratios of 3 or less…”

12.3.1.2: “… no horizontal irregularities…”

12.3.2.1 Horizontal Irregularity

“Structures having one or more of the irregularity types listed in

Table 12.3-1 Torsional Irregularity

“… where the maximum story drift… at

Table 12.3-1 Reentrant Corner

Table 12.3-1 Diaphragm Discontinuity

Table 12.3-1 Diaphragm Discontinuity

Table 12.3-1 Diaphragm Discontinuity

Table 12.3-1 Diaphragm Discontinuity

Table 12.3-1 Out-of-Plane Offset

Table 12.3-1 Nonparallel System

12.3.1.2: “… no horizontal irregularities…”

12.3.2.1 Horizontal Irregularity

“Structures having one or more of the irregularity types listed in

12.3.1.2 Rigid Diaphragm Condition

“Diaphragms of concrete slab or concrete filled metal deck

12.3.1.3 Calculated Flexible Diaphragm Condition

12.3.1 Diaphragm Flexibility

“The structural analysis shall consider the relative stiffnesses

Chapter 26 Wind Loads: General Requirements

Diaphragms constructed of wood structural panels are permitted to be

12.7.3 Structural Modeling

“A mathematical model of the structure shall be constructed for the

Where the diaphragms have not been classified as rigid or flexible in

Semirigid Diaphragm Modeling

Deck and Slab Properties

 Deck Manufacturer Technical Data

 Steel Deck Institute, Diaphragm Design Manual

Semirigid Diaphragm Modeling

Poisson’s ratio: 0.2.

Elastic Modulus, E: Use the calculated value as for concrete.

Poisson’s ratio: 0.2 (assume stiffness comes from concrete).

Elastic Modulus, E: Use the calculated value as for concrete.

Semirigid Diaphragm Modeling

Metal Roof Deck (un-topped)