Introduction to

ASCE 41 and
FEMA P-2006
Bret Lizundia, SE
Rutherford + Chekene
San Francisco

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 1

Outline of the Presentation
• Introduction to ASCE 41
• Purpose and target audience of FEMA P-2006 (the “Guide”)
• Development of the Guide and presentation approach
• Topics and examples in the Guide
• Highlights of major design examples in the Guide
• Underlying force-displacement relationships and terminology in
ASCE 7 vs. ASCE 41
• Shear wall comparison between ASCE 7 and ASCE 41
• Key updates in ASCE 41-17
• Selected general advice and tips
Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 2
Learning Objectives
1. General understanding of ASCE 41 purpose, scope, and
potential uses
2. Understanding what is contained in the FEMA P-2006
Example Application Guide and how it is organized
3. General understanding of some of the basic differences
between ASCE 7 and ASCE 41
4. Appreciation of some selected tips from experienced users on
effective use ASCE 41

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 3

(Very) Brief Introduction to ASCE 41

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 4

What is ASCE 41?
• The national consensus standard for seismic evaluation and
retrofit of buildings
• Adopted by various jurisdictions
• Referenced by the codes, such as the California Existing
Building Code
• Referenced in ASCE 7-16 Chapter 16: Nonlinear Response
History Analysis
• Performance-based
• More comprehensive and quite different than the International
Existing Building Code
Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 5
 Key Features of ASCE 41
• Provides flexibility in level of effort and
required fee
• Tier 1: Low
Light damage
• Tier 2: Medium
• Tier 3: Substantial

• Gives owner and engineer choice to set

performance
• What level of performance do we want?
• What does it take to get it? Images from
FEMA 306
Heavy damage
Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 6
Key Features of ASCE 41
• Material and component based
• Chapters and provisions are organized by
material.
• Elements are examined individually, with specific
modeling and acceptance criteria.
• Aim to be able to characterize the level of
deformation capacity of both archaic and new
materials, so they can be judged fairly using their
material properties and detailing.

• Thus, it can lack a holistic view.

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 7

Development of ASCE 41

FEMA P‐2006

ASCE 41‐17

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 8

Examples of What You Can Do With ASCE 41
• Evaluate large portfolios of buildings using Tier 1
• Evaluate a specific building in more detail and design a retrofit
solution
• Evaluate the performance of a new building

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 9

 Evaluate Large Portfolios of Buildings

Focus: Checklist of deficiencies, simple quick check calculations of key components.

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 10

 Evaluate an Existing Building in More Detail
and Design a Retrofit Solution

Focus: Analysis, with different Linear Evaluation Nonlinear Evaluation

types possible—linear static, D/C ratios, Expected element
linear dynamic, pushover, non- similar to ASCE 7, deformations vs.
linear response history analysis force-based approach acceptance levels

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 11

 Evaluate the Performance of a New Building

Axial force (kips)

Focus: Analysis. Typically used when

higher than code performance is desired.
Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 12
(More Detailed) Introduction to FEMA P-2006

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 13

Purpose of the Example Application Guide
• The purpose of the Guide is to provide helpful guidance on
the interpretation and the use of ASCE 41-13 through a set
of examples that cover key selected topics.
• The Guide covers topics that commonly occur where
guidance is believed to be beneficial, with topics effectively
organized and presented such that information is easy to find.
• Commentary provides context, rationale, and advice.
• ASCE 41-17 has been released (though not yet adopted by
any jurisdictions). The Guide highlights key changes that
have occurred in ASCE 41-17.

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 14

Target Audience for the Example Application Guide

“It is assumed that the

Um, excuse me, user has seismic
but what is a design experience and
“collector”? a working knowledge
of seismic design
concepts.”

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 15

Target Audience for the Example Application Guide

• The target audience for the Example Application

Guide is both practicing engineers and building
officials who have limited or no experience with
ASCE 41 and those engineers and building officials
who have used these documents in the past, but
have specific questions.
• The document includes guidance for lower and
higher seismic hazard levels.

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 16

Project Team

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 17

Sample Design Example Document Review
• FEMA P-2006 replaces 1999
FEMA 276.
• We reviewed many structural
design example guides.
• New building and existing
buildings
• Recent and older documents
• Different organizations and
audiences
• Summarized in detail in 2015
SEAOC Convention paper

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 18

Sample Design Example Document Review - Conclusions

• Length: Detailed examples are worth the length.

• Graphics: Substantial use of graphics
is worth the increase in length.
• Consistency in Example Presentations: Use a
standard format with an outline at start.
• Topics vs. Full Design Examples: Include both shorter
topic examples together with longer full-building examples.
• Commentary: Some level of commentary without an excessive amount
of text or overly opinionated discussion is the target.
• Promising Building Candidates: Several full-building examples were
selected from the sample design example documents.

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 19

ASCE 41 User Survey
• More than 100 recommendations
• The majority were already planned for inclusion, such as:
• Advice on navigating through ASCE 41
• Comprehensive list of topics and detailed examples
• Force-controlled and deformation-controlled actions
• Primary and secondary components
• Overturning
• Commentary
• Some suggestions were added:
• Pre-Northridge steel moment frame detailed example
• Detailed examples of diaphragm evaluation and retrofit

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 20

Presentation Approach
• Lots of graphics
• 3-D picture of deficiencies
• Flow charts that would be
nice to have in ASCE 41-13
• Primary vs. secondary
elements
• Force-controlled vs.
deformation-controlled
actions
• Matrix relating ASCE 41-13
sections to the Guide
Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 21
Presentation Approach

Sidebars in the margin cover:

• Detailed example summary
• Definition of key terms
• Tips
• Commentary
• Decision points, alternatives, issues to
consider
• Warnings on tricky issues, easy-to-miss
provisions, and ASCE 41-17 changes

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 22

Focus Group Review
• Focus Group: Engineers with seismic experience, but with limited
or no ASCE 41 experience
• Their Charge: Evaluation of document organization and user aids,
writing clarity and style, and design example presentation
• Recommendations:
• Reorganization and clarification of long sections
• Reduction in the extent of commentary already found in ASCE 41-13
• Adding example calculations to accompany certain result tabulations
• More figures and additional clarifying text in figures
• Refinements in the margin boxes
• Detailed suggestions on specific text

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 23

Issues Arising During Development of Guide
• Differences of opinion
• There are some cases where the authors and peer
reviewers did not initially agree.
• Generally, this was resolved by detailed discussion
and revision.
• Substantial effort was made to reach consensus.
• In a few cases, differences of opinion remain.
• Reasonable alternative approaches are possible with
ASCE 41-13, and proper engineering judgment should
be used.

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 24

Issues Arising During Development of Guide
• Ambiguous or incomplete ASCE 41-13 provisions
• A reasonable set of assumptions is summarized.
• Dialogue between the project team and ASCE 41
committee led to some revisions in the ASCE 41-17.
• FEMA initiated a new project in part to address
unresolved issues or make improvements.

• Provisions that change in ASCE 41-17

• When ASCE 41-17 provides information missing in
ASCE 41-13, the update is used in the design example.
• When the ASCE 41-17 update represents a change, the
change (if noteworthy) is flagged, but the ASCE 41-13
provisions are used.

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 25

 Topics in the Example Application Guide
• Introduction
• Purpose and target audience
• Development of ASCE 41
• Scope/organization of the document
• Guidance on use of ASCE 41
• Comparison of ASCE 41-13 and ASCE 7-10
• What is coming in ASCE 41-17
• Tips on using ASCE 41
• Performance objectives/seismic hazard
• Performance Levels
• Seismic hazard and Levels of Seismicity
• Data collection, material testing, knowledge
factors
Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006
• Analysis Procedures
• Forces and target displacement
• Primary vs. secondary elements
• Force- vs. deformation-controlled actions
• Overturning and out-of-plane strength
• Nonstructural
• Foundations
• Expected foundation capacities
• Shallow/deep foundation evaluation
methods
• Soil-structure interaction
• FEMA P-2006 vs. ASCE 41 index
• Detailed full-building examples
26
Detailed Examples in the Application Guide

Note: ASCE 41 terms like Performance Objective, BPOE, LSP, LDP, NSP, and Tier will be
introduced ahead.
Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 27
Some Key Terms and Concepts
• Seismic Hazard Levels
• BSE-1E (20% in 50 years) BSE-2E (5% in 50 years)
• BSE-1N (2/3 of BSE-2N) BSE-2N (MCER from ASCE 7)
• Target Structural Performance Levels
• Collapse Prevention
• Life Safety
• Immediate Occupancy
• Performance Objective = Seismic Hazard Level + Performance
Level
• Basic Performance Objective for Existing Buildings (BPOE)

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 28

Building Performance Levels Structural Performance Levels
S1: Immediate Occupancy
IO S2: Damage Control
LS
Normalized Force

P,S S3: Life Safety

P S CP
P S S4: Reduced Safety
C S5: Collapse Prevention
B

D E Nonstructural Performance
A
Deformation
Levels
N-A: Operational
For Example, a Life Safety Building
Performance Level is defined by 3C, N-B: Position Retention
where 3 is for structural performance N-C: Life Safety
and C is for nonstructural performance N-D: Not Considered
Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 29
BPOE Performance Objective Takeaways
• BPOE is the most common Performance
Pre-Defined Seismic Hazard Levels Objective, intended to replicate
BSE-1E: 20%/50 year hazard (capped at BSE-1N) traditional retrofit requirements.

BSE-2E: 5%/50 year hazard (capped at BSE-2N) • Nonstructural level must also be
considered for BPOE for Risk Categories
BSE-1N: matches ASCE 7 Design Earthquake III and IV
BSE-2N: matches ASCE 7 Risk Targeted
Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) Pre-Defined Performance Objectives
Structural Performance Basic Performance Objective for Existing
Levels Buildings (BPOE)
S1: Immediate Occupancy Enhanced Performance Objective
S2: Damage Control Basic Performance Objective Equivalent to
New Building Standards (BPON)
S3: Life Safety
Limited Performance Objectives
S4: Reduced Safety
S5: Collapse Prevention
Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 30
Some Additional Key Terms and Concepts
• Tier 1 Screening
• Tier 2 Deficiency-Based Evaluation and Retrofit
• Tier 3 Systematic Evaluation and Retrofit

• Analysis Procedures
• Linear Static Procedure (LSP)
• Linear Dynamic Procedure (LDP)
• Nonlinear Static Procedure (NSP)
• Nonlinear Dynamic Procedure (NDP)

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 31

Deformation-Controlled vs Force-Controlled Actions

Q 2 Q 2,3
1 1 1,2,3
Qy

3
a a b
b b
4 4 4
0 g d ef  0 g d,e f  0 g,d e f 
Type 1 Curve Type 2 Curve Type 3 Curve
Deformation Controlled Depends… Force Controlled

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 32

Deformation-Controlled vs Force-Controlled Actions

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 33

 Tilt-up Building (PC1)
The design example covers:
• Detailed Tier 1 screening with step-
through checklist for building type
• Tier 2 deficiency-based evaluation and
retrofit
• Roof-to-wall anchorage and glulams and
subpurlins
• Subdiaphragms
• Crossties
• Collector at reentrant corner and connections
to shear walls

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 34

 Tilt-up Building (PC1)

Source: ASCE 41‐13

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 35

Tilt-up Building (PC1)

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 36

Wood Tuck-Under (W1a)
The design example covers:
• Tier 1 screening & Tier 3 evaluation
• Full BPOE retrofit and partial retrofit
of the weak/soft ground story
• Walls and diaphragms

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 37

Pre-Northridge Steel Moment Frame (S1)

The design example covers:

• Tier 1 screening
• Tier 2 evaluation (LSP and LDP)
• Tier 3 evaluation (NSP)
• Modeling approaches and issues
for steel moment frames

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 38

Pre-Northridge Moment-Resisting Frames

• Welded unreinforced flange

(WUF) connections
• Brittle connection failures
• Modifications to codes for
welding and QA procedures
• Benchmark building code: 1994
UBC with emergency provisions
EERI, Earthquake Spectra: May 2003, Vol. 19, No. 2

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 39

Tier 1 Deficiencies
Strong column/weak
beam at 2nd floor and roof

Drift ratio at 2nd,

3rd and 4th stories

Panel zone at end

connections
Axial due to
overturning

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 40

LSP/LDP/NSP Comparison
LSP LDP

NSP

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 41

Steel Braced Frame (S2)

The design example covers:

• Moderate seismicity: Charlotte,
North Carolina
• Immediate Occupancy
Performance Level at BSE-1N
• Comprehensive data collection
requirements
• Tier 1, Tier 3 LSP and NSP

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 42

Linear Static Procedure (LSP)

13

LSP Component/Connection
Checks
Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 43
Linear Static Procedure (LSP)
Component Limit State Tension Comp.
Brace Expected brace capacity 227 kips 137 kips
Brace-to-gusset weld & base 1.30 0.79
metal yielding/rupture
Brace tensile rupture 1.14 NA
Brace Connection to Top Gusset plate block shear 0.38 NA
and Bottom Gusset Plates Gusset Whitmore section
tensile yielding 0.46 NA
Gusset Whitmore section NA 0.30
compression buckling
Gusset-to-beam weld 0.40
Gusset plate shear yielding 0.22
Top Gusset Plate
Connection to Beam Gusset tensile yielding 0.19
Beam web local yielding 0.24
Beam web local crippling 0.32
Gusset-to-beam/column weld 0.56 0.28
Gusset plate shear yielding 0.36 0.22
Bottom Gusset Plate Gusset tensile yielding 0.20 NA
Connection to Beam and Beam web local yielding 0.27 0.17
Column Beam web local crippling 0.31 0.19
Column web local yielding 0.16 0.10
Column web local crippling 0.13 0.08
Maximum Acceptance Ratio 1.30 0.79

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 44

NSP with Fixed Base

Pushover at final step

Pushover at target displacement

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 45
NSP with NL Springs

Pushover at final step

Pushover at target displacement

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 46
Concrete Shear Wall (C2)
The design example covers:
• Tier 1 checks
• Data collection requirements
• LSP: Force demands,
wall/column checks, procedure
limitations, fiber-reinforced
polymer (FRP) wall and
column retrofit
• NSP: Modeling, target
displacement, wall and column
checks, soil-structure
interaction

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 47

NSP: Shear Wall Modeling

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 48

NSP E-W Force-Displacement Curve

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 49

URM Bearing Wall Building – Special Procedure

Tier 1 Screening
Deficiencies

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 50

URM Bearing Wall Building – Special Procedure
Example covers:
• Tier 1 screening
• Condition assessment
• In-place shear tests
and masonry strength
• Diaphragms
• Retrofit of wall-to-
diaphragm ties
• Walls: In-plane and out-
of-plane

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 51

URM Bearing Wall Building – Tier 3
Example covers:
• Condition assessment
• In-place shear tests and masonry
strength
• Diaphragms
• Walls: In-plane and out-of-plane
• In-plane wall analysis compares
• Rectangular pier height, no flange
• Alternative pier height where
openings differ, no flange
• Alternative pier height, corner flange
• Special procedure results

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 52

ASCE 7 Underlying Force-Displacement Relationship
Elastic Response Level

Overstrength Level

Design Level

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 53

 ASCE 41 Underlying Force-Displacement Relationship

Evaluation Level
for linear
procedures

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 54

Comparison Between ASCE 7 and ASCE 41
• Older three-story concrete shear wall building in Seattle
• Taken from the Chapter 10 example of FEMA P-2006
• Goal: Compare shear demands and capacities on central wall line

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 55

Comparison Between ASCE 7 and ASCE 41
ASCE 7-10
• R = 5 (Ordinary concrete shear wall with a building frame)
• W = 2,880 kips
• V = CsW = SDS /(R / Ie) W
• V = 1.08 / (5 /1.0) W = 0.216W
• V = 0.216 (2,880 kips) = 622 kips

• Central wall takes 23% of total load = 0.23(622 kips) = 143 kips.

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 56

Comparison Between ASCE 7 and ASCE 41
ASCE 7-10
• Assume nominal material strengths of:
• f’c = 2,500 psi (concrete)
• fy = 40,000 psi (rebar)
• Vn = Acv (αc λ f’c + ρt fy)
• Vn = 1,920 in2 [2.0(1.0)(2,5001/2) + 0.0016(40,000 psi)]/(1000 lb/kip)
• Vn = 315 kips
• ΦVn = 0.75 (315 kips) = 236 kips (wall is flexure-controlled)

• Vu / ΦVn = (143 kips) / (236 kips) = 0.61 (wall is adequate)

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 57

Comparison Between ASCE 7 and ASCE 41
ASCE 41-13
• Linear Static Procedure
• Sa = 1.08g (same as ASCE/SEI 7-10)
• Life Safety Structural Performance Level
• V = C1C2CmSaW (ASCE 41-13 Eq. 7-21)
• V = 1.17(1.01)(0.8)(1.08)W (values from Chapter 10 of the Guide)
• V = 1.02(2,880 kips) = 2,940 kips

• Central wall takes 23% of total load = 0.23 (2,940 kips) = 672 kips.

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 58

Comparison Between ASCE 7 and ASCE 41
ASCE 41-13
• In ASCE 41, shear in a shear wall is considered a “deformation-
controlled action.”
• ASCE 41 uses the expected material strengths of:
• f’ce = 2,500 psi (1.5) = 3,750 psi
• fye = 40,000 psi (1.25) = 50,000 psi
• QCE = Acv (αc λ f’ce + ρt fye)
• QCE = 1,920 in2 [2.0(1.0)(3,7501/2) + 0.0016(50,000 psi)]/(1000 lb/kip)
• QCE = 388 kips
• Φ = 1.0 in ASCE 41

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 59

Comparison Between ASCE 7 and ASCE 41
ASCE 41-13
• Because shear in a shear wall is a
deformation-controlled action,
it has an m-factor.
• Per Section 10.5.1 of the Guide,
an m-factor of 2.33 is calculated for
the Life Safety Performance Level.
• A “knowledge factor” of κ = 0.9 is calculated per ASCE 41-13 Table
10-21.
• mκQCE = 2.33(0.9)(388 kips) = 814 kips
• QUD / mκQCE = (672 kips)/(814 kips) = 0.83 (wall is adequate)
Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 60
Comparison Between ASCE 7
and ASCE 41

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 61

Key Revisions Made in ASCE 41-17
• For Tier 1/Tier 2 assessments, BSE-2E used rather than BSE-1E
• Harmonized ground motion selection and scaling with the major
rewrite in ASCE 7-16
• Refined data collection requirements
• More stringent requirements for force-controlled
actions in linear procedures
• Revised steel and concrete column provisions
• Significant changes to masonry requirements
• URM special procedure chapter harmonized
with the 2015 IEBC

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 62

Selected Tips for Using ASCE 41
• ASCE 41-13 is not always organized sequentially.
The Guide provides the required sequence.
• Understanding component behavior and whether an
element is force- or deformation-controlled is essential.
• Wood evaluation and retrofit design in ASCE 41
requires determination of various failure limit states
and can take more effort than ASCE 7.
• Boundary conditions can make a significant difference
in resulting behavior mechanisms and analysis results.
• Some seemingly straightforward equations actually require detailed iteration
and parallel calculations to complete. The determination of the target
displacement for the nonlinear static procedure is an example.

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 63

Selected Tips for Using ASCE 41
• The 41st Commandment: In order to
know if thou canst use a linear procedure,
thou must first perform a linear procedure. 41

• Similarly, in order to know if you can use

the NSP, you have to perform both an LDP
and an NSP!
• Ongoing FEMA-funded project is tackling
this issue.
• This project is also addressing
improvement to a variety of other issues
with ASCE 41.
Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 64
Final Points to Take Away
• ASCE 41 provides a flexible, rigorous, and thorough set of tools for
performance-based seismic evaluation and design.
• It offers options from rapid, economical Tier 1 screening to much
more involved Tier 3 methodologies.
• It is not easy to learn and to use.

• FEMA P-2006 provides a helpful, organized design guide that can

be used by both inexperienced users of ASCE 41 and those
needing advice in specific areas.
• It can be approached for advice on underlying theory, specific
tricky issues, or entire detailed analyses of different building types.
• It is an essential resource to practicing engineers.

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 65

Final Thoughts

Download:
https://www.fema.gov/
media-library/assets/
documents/167871

Free printed copies are

available from the FEMA
warehouse

3 lbs, 555 pages 5 lbs, 936 pages

2 hard copy volumes

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 66

Questions?
• Use the Questions/Chat pod to pose questions.

• All Q&A will be provided with your PDH certificate.

• PDH certificates will be distributed via email within the next 2

weeks.

Introduction to ASCE 41 and FEMA P-2006 67