Project Report

Point Reyes, CA Commercial Building
Structural Design
Basis of Desi gn, Design Alternatives, Fi nal Design, and Specifications

Prepared For: Dr. Curt Haselton
Department Head
Civil Engineering Department
California State University, Chico

Prepared By: Campbell, Hanson & Bischoff Engineering

David Bischoff, E.I.T. License #152460
Undergraduate Student

Clayton Campbell, E.I.T. License #152489

Michael Hanson, E.I.T. License #150763

May 9
th
, 2014

The undersigned certify that each individual whose signature is presented below was
an equal participant in this design project

_______________________ ________________________ ______________________
David Bischoff Clayton Campbell Michael Hanson
Point Reyes, CA Commercial Building Structural Design ii

5/10/2014 Campbell, Hanson & Bischoff Engineering Project ID: 000001
Table of Contents
1 BASIS OF DESIGN 1
1.1 PROJECT REQUIREMENTS 1
1.2 LOAD COMBINATIONS 1
1.3 DEAD LOADS 1
1.4 LIVE LOADS 2
1.5 EARTHQUAKE LOADS 2
1.5.1 SITE DESIGN SPECTRUM 3
1.5.2 BUILDING CLASSIFICATIONS 3
1.6 STRUCTURAL SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES 4
2 GRAVITY LOAD DESIGN 4
2.1 REQUIRED CAPACITIES 4
2.2 INITIAL DESIGN 4
2.2.1 ASSUMPTIONS 5
2.3 FINAL GRAVITY LOAD DESIGN 5
3 EARTHQUAKE ANALYSIS 5
3.1 EARTHQUAKE ANALYSIS METHOD 5
3.2 REQUIRED CAPACITIES 5
3.3 INITIAL DESIGN 6
3.3.1 ASSUMPTIONS 6
3.4 CONSECUTIVE DESIGN ITERATIONS 6
3.5 SEISMIC WEIGHT 6
3.6 BASE SHEAR AND FLOOR FORCES 6
3.7 MODAL ANALYSIS 7
4 CHANGE ORDERS 7
4.1 CHANGE ORDER #1 SPA TUB 7
5 FINAL DESIGN AND SPECIFICATIONS 8
5.1 STRUCTURAL SYSTEM TYPE 8
5.2 FINAL DESIGN 8
5.3 CONNECTIONS 9
5.3.1 FOUNDATION-COLUMN 9
5.3.2 GUSSET PLATE 10
5.3.3 COLUMN-GIRDER 11
5.3.4 GIRDER-BEAM 12
5.3.5 ELEVATOR AND STAIRWELL CONNECTIONS 13

Point Reyes, CA Commercial Building Structural Design iii

List of Figures

Figure 1 - Seismic Design Category .................................................................................................. 4
Figure 2 - Final Design Frame with Member Sections N-S ..................................................... 9
Figure 3 - Final Design Frame with Member Sections E-W .................................................... 9
Figure 4 - Column to Foundation Isometric .............................................................................. 10
Figure 5 - Foundation Detail ............................................................................................................ 10
Figure 6 - Gusset Plate Detail .......................................................................................................... 11
Figure 7 - Column Girder Connection to Web ........................................................................... 12
Figure 8 - Column Girder Connection to Flange....................................................................... 12
Figure 9 - Elevator and Stairwell Connection Detail .............................................................. 13

List of Tables

Table 1 - Dead Load Material Specifications ................................................................................ 1
Table 2 - Live Load Material Specifications .................................................................................. 2
Table 3 - USGS Spectral Values .......................................................................................................... 2
Table 4 - Derived Spectral Values ..................................................................................................... 2
Table 5 - Gravity Load Design ............................................................................................................ 5
Table 6 - Seismic Weights For All Frames ..................................................................................... 6
Table 7 - ELF Floor Forces ................................................................................................................... 7
Table 8 - Modal Floor Forces .............................................................................................................. 7
Point Reyes, CA Commercial Building Structural Design iv

List of Abbreviations and Symbols

AISC American Institute of Steel Construction
ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers
CBC California Building Code
CHB Campbell, Hanson & Bischoff Engineering
ELF Equivalent Lateral Force
HVAC Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning
PLF Pounds per Linear Foot
USGS United States Geological Survey
Point Reyes, CA Commercial Building Structural Design v

Executive Summary

CHB was hired by Curt Haselton, Ph.D., P.E. and John Schwartz, Esq. to design a
commercial office building in Point Reyes, CA. The building was to be five (5) stories
tall and have a useable space of 100,000 square feet. After much consideration, CHB
engineers decided that a Buckling Resistant Braced Frame would be the most
appropriate structural system to use for this unique project.

The building is located in an area of high seismic activity so the structural system
would have to be designed to withstand high seismic forces and show good
performance under conditions where resonance was possible. To accomplish these
tasks, the building was designed by ASCE 7-10 and AISC standards. Modal analysis
and design tasks were accomplished using SAP2000 software package and hand
calculations.

Once calculations and analysis were completed on the final design, it was
determined that the structure would be designed to withstand a base shear of 601.2
kips. The modal response analysis also showed that the building reacted well to
earthquake loads when resonance conditions were a possibility.

The project was requested to be expedited to allow for construction to begin soon,
and for that reason, many members were not optimized to their full potential and
copied across multiple locations with similar load patterns. Although this will
create a slightly higher upfront cost for the building, it also provides higher
capacities and a more redundant building, making the system much safer during any
high loading scenarios.

Point Reyes, CA Commercial Building Structural Design 1

1 Basis of Design
1.1 Project Requirements
The building site is located in the San Francisco bay area and is governed by
the CBC. The CBC references the 2010 ASCE 7-10 document directly with no
modifications. The building is located near Point Reyes, CA at a longitude
and latitude of N38001.68 W1225955.62. The geotechnical engineer has
classified this site as soil class A (hard rock). CHB has been given the
responsibility to determine the appropriate structural system, and develop
an appropriate structural design. CHBs expertise of structural systems is
based on their background and knowledge of steel and composite design.

The building requires a minimum of one service core that is large enough to
contain an elevator shaft and a stairwell. The owner has requested that this
service core be placed towards the exterior of the building. The enclosure
around the service core must meet the needs of fire/egress and to confine the
noise of the elevator. The owner has also requested that no structural
members be placed in the interior of the building to allow for greater
usability once construction is completed.

Interior walls will be composed of movable partitions and exterior walls are
composed of light-weight cladding. The stair system will be attached to the
structural system and the structure must support the load of the stairs.
HVAC is to be placed at the ground floor level. The floors will be composed of
reinforced concrete slabs, which will be constructed of normal weight
concrete that is five-inch (5) thick at the roof level and eight-inch (8) thick
for all other floors.
1.2 Load Combinations
All load combinations and load definitions found in this section and sections
1.3 - Dead Loads and 1.4 - Live Loads are based off of the 2011 ASCE 7-10.

The load cases to be used from the ASCE 7-10 are Load Case 2 (1.2D + 1.6L)
and Load Case 5 (1.2D + 1.0L + QE).
1.3 Dead Loads
Dead loads will be approximated using material specifications and material
takeoffs. Specifications for each material type can be found below in Table 1
- Dead Load Material Specifications.

Table 1 - Dead Load Material Specifications
Material Uniform Load Unit

Normal Weight Concrete 150 pcf
Steel Beams Varies
Paritions 20 psf
Exterior Walls 30 psf

1.4 Live Loads
Live loads will be approximated using material specifications and material
takeoffs. Specifications for each material type can be found below in Table 2
- Live Load Material Specifications.

Table 2 - Live Load Material Specifications
Use Uniform Distributed
Load (psf)
Concentrated Load (lbs)
Office 50 2,000
Construction 20 n/a

1.5 Earthquake Loads
Earthquake loads are determined by a spectral acceleration chart which
consists of values determined by the USGS. For the location in which the
building is to be constructed, the USGS determined that the values seen
below in Table 3 - USGS Spectral Values are to be used in the spectral chart,
furthermore, the values found below in Table 4 - Derived Spectral Values are
derived from the spectral equations to be used as final design parameters for
earthquake loadings.
Table 3 - USGS Spectral Values
Spectral Value Acceleration [g]
Ss 1.169
S1 0.59

Table 4 - Derived Spectral Values
Spectral Value Acceleration [g]
SMs 0.935
SM1 0.472
SDs 0.62
SD1 0.31

1.5.1 Site Design Spectrum
1.5.1.1 Site Soil Class
The Owner specified that this office complex be constructed at given coordinates
specified in above section 1.1 Project Requirements. According to the geotechnical
engineer, hired by the owner, this site soil has been classified as type A: Hard Rock
1.5.1.2 Site Coefficients
According to the ASCE 7-10 (Table. 12.2-1, B. Building Frame Systems) a Steel
Buckling-Restrained Braced frame is applied a Response Modification Coefficient of
8 and a Deflection Amplification Factor of 5. ASCE 7-10 (Tables, 11.4-1 and 11.4-2)
and due to site class A the following site coefficients Fa and Fv are equal to 0.8 and
0.8.
1.5.1.3 Modified Maximum Considered Earthquake
The values for SS and S1 were found using the USGS (United States Geological
Survey) and equal 1.169g and 0.59g. SMS, SM1, SDS, and SD1 were calculated using
ASCE 7-10 (Equations. 11.4-1, 11.4-2, 11.4-3, and 11.4-4), their values and
calculations can all be located in Appendix C.1 CHB Design Parameters using ASCE
7-10 (Equations. 11.4-1, 11.4-2, 11.4-3, and 11.4-4) as well as tables 3 and 4 in
section 1.5 Earthquake Loads. The calculated period of the structure came to 0.67s,
with a TL of 12s. The calculations for the Equivalent Lateral Force can be found in
Appendix C.1 CHB Design Parameters.
1.5.2 Building Classifications
1.5.2.1 Occupancy and Risk Category
According to ASCE 7-10 (Table 1.5-1) the use or occupancy of this structure is under
Risk Category II, all buildings and other structures except those listed in Risk
Categories I, III, and IV.
1.5.2.2 Importance
According to ASCE 7-10 ( Table 1.5-2) the Seismic Importance Factor Ie is equal to
1.0.
1.5.2.3 Seismic Design Category
A classification assigned to a structure based on its Risk Category and the severity of
the design earthquake ground motion at the site defined in Sec. 11.4 of the ASCE 7-
10. According to ASCE 7-10 (Tables. 11.6-1 and 11.6-2) the Seismic Design Category
of this project is D as can be seen below in Figure 1.


Figure 1 - Seismic Design Category
1.6 Structural System Alternatives
During preliminary design, it was decided that a structural system with a
response coefficient (R-value) of eight (8) was to be used in order to limit the
base shear requirement of the building. This left many special design
systems and other extremely ductile systems. In order to save weight and
make use of the concrete slabs at each floor, composite construction would
be used in the system. In order to use composite construction, there must
either be shear connections or partial moment release connections, CHB has
much more experience in designing braced frames using shear connections
than partial moment frames and therefor decided that a braced frame would
be the most appropriate structural system to be used.
2 Gravity Load Design
The engineers at CHB first performed basic gravity load design and analysis
methods using ASCE and AISC design criteria.
2.1 Required Capacities
The required capacities of the gravity load design were all governed by Load
Case 2 (1.2D + 1.6L).
2.2 Initial Design
Once the initial design for gravity loading was completed, all members were
checked for proper loading (actual self-weights) and desired action. Drag
beams and column members of the exterior frame system were knowingly
designed without respect to the earthquake loads and would later go on to be
changed as their actions both become that of combination beam-columns
once the earthquake loads are included in Load Case 5. The act of not
accounting for the actions of the earthquake were deemed to be appropriate
at this time as it was a preliminary design and further analysis and design
iterations were anticipated.

2.2.1 Assumptions
During the first design iteration, the following assumptions were made:
1. All member self-weights would be 100 PLF.
2. The Y2 value of the composite sections was 6.5 inches.
3. The exterior frame would provide all lateral stiffness for the structure.
4. Beams provide mid-point lateral bracing for girders.
5. The plastic neutral axis of the composite sections is located at the top
of flange of the steel section.
6. All shear connectors used in the composite section will be strong-side
connectors.
7. The hot tub mentioned in Change Order #1 Spa Tub will act as a
point load.

2.3 Final Gravity Load Design
The gravity load design can be seen below in Table 5 - Gravity Load Design.
Table 5 - Gravity Load Design
Member Description Member Section (ASCE, A992 steel)
Beams (in order from
corners-inwards)
W21x44, W21x62, W21x62, W21x57,
W21x44
Girders W33x118
Drag Beams W33x118
Exterior Frame Columns (in
order from corners-inwards)
W12x45, W12x53, W12x50
Interior Gravity Columns W12x65 (top three floors), W12x140
(bottom two floors)
Web Bracing W16x26

3 Earthquake Analysis
3.1 Earthquake Analysis Method
SAP2000 modeling and analysis was used in conjunction with ELF methods
to analyze the structural system under earthquake loads. In addition to the
ELF method, Modal analysis was also performed on the structure to check for
resonance capacities and structural integrity.
3.2 Required Capacities
The required capacities for the structure with respect to earthquake loads
were governed by Load Case 5 (1.2D + 1.0L + QE). The value for earthquake
forces were initially found using ELF methods and a Cs value of 0.034. The
resulting floor forces can be seen below in Table 7 - ELF Floor Forces.

3.3 Initial Design
The initial design to be tested for earthquake loads is the same system that
can be found in section 2.3 - Final Gravity Load Design.
3.3.1 Assumptions
The assumptions which were made that are effected during the earthquake
loading analysis are:
1. The outside frames will act as the only lateral-force resistant
elements.
2. The inner frames will hold no lateral loads but will be designed the
same as the outside frames in order to provide redundancy in the
system.
3. All connections will act as perfect pinned connections.
4. Each column will act as a single, fixed member throughout its length
to the roof.
5. Gravity columns will provide no lateral stiffness.
3.4 Consecutive Design Iterations
Further design iterations continued to be completed until a design was found
that was stable and sufficient in both gravity load and earthquake load
situations based off of Load Case 2 and Load Case 5. SAP2000 Steel Member
Design applications were heavily used in choosing trial and final member
sections to be used in the structure to accelerate the design process and limit
human error.

3.5 Seismic Weight
The computed seismic weights for any frame can be found below in Table 6 -
Seismic Weights For All Frames.
Table 6 - Seismic Weights For All Frames
Floor Seismic Weight (kips)
Roof 8840.5
5
th
8840.5
4
th
8840.5
3
rd
8840.5
2
nd
8840.5

3.6 Base Shear and Floor Forces
Once the ELF forces were found, they were applied to the SAP2000 model as
node loadings at each floor. The floor forces created the expected inverse
triangle shape and when compiled, create a base shear of 601.2 kips on the
structure. All forces obtained by ELF analysis can be found below in Table 7 -
ELF Floor Forces.

Table 7 - ELF Floor Forces

3.7 Modal Analysis
Once the final model design from ELF forces had been determined, a modal analysis
was performed on SAP2000 to determine the eigen values, and resonance
frequencies for each mode. Forces were then determined and a summary can be
found in Table 8 along with more specific values in Appendix C.

Table 8 - Modal Floor Forces

4 Change Orders
4.1 Change Order #1 Spa Tub
On Monday, April 14, 2014, the client notified CHB that they would like an
additional design aspect to be added into the buildings capacity. A large spa
tub is to be placed on the west side of the top floor of the building with
dimensions of three-feet (3) deep, eight-feet (8) wide, and 12 feet long.

The spa tub is to be designed using the necessary provisions of ASCE 7-10
Chapter 13 (Seismic Design Requirements for Nonstructural Components).

Floor Force (kips) N-S/E-W
Roof 194.7 / 229.0
5
th
157.4 / 185.2
4
th
120.2 / 141.4
3
rd
83.0 / 97.7
2
nd
45.8 / 53.9
Base
Shear
601.2 / 707.2
Floor Force (kips) N-S/E-W
Roof 87.6 / 87.4
5
th
74.6 / 74.6
4
th
55.5 / 55.8
3
rd
38.4 / 38.5
2
nd
26.5 / 26.9
Base
Shear
277.2 / 277.5

Reference Appendix C.2 CHB Change Order #1 Calculations determined
using Chapter 13 of the ASCE 7-10, 13.1 Seismic Demands on
Nonstructural Components.
5 Final Design and Specifications
5.1 Structural System Type
The structural system used in this building is a buckling resistant braced
frame using K bracing in two interior bay columns and using drag beams
for the outer bays. This system was chosen for its many advantages which
include:
1. Response Coefficient (R-value) of eight (8).
2. Buckling Resistant Braces allow for long spans to be covered by a
single beam in compression without the possibility of the section
buckling.
3. CHB engineers familiarity with the structural system.
5.2 Final Design
The sections used in the exterior and interior frames for the final design can
be seen below in Figure 2 - Final Design Frame with Member Sections.


Figure 2 - Final Design Frame with Member Sections N-S

Figure 3 - Final Design Frame with Member Sections E-W
5.3 Connections
5.3.1 Foundation-Column


Figure 4 - Column to Foundation Isometric

Figure 5 - Foundation Detail

Figure 4 displays the foundation type of a Concrete Spread Footing with the column
welded to a base plate and stiffeners. Figure 5 displays a cross section of the footing,
which is secured to the plate using six J-anchor bolts and steel reinforcing.
5.3.2 Gusset Plate
The gusset plate was over designed so that neither the plate, the pin, or the weld
would fracture or yield when an earthquake hit in turn causing the buckle resistant
bracing to yield in tension and compression. It was found that a inch thick by 15-
inch long weld on both sides of the gusset plate was needed. The pin connection to
attach the BRB to the gusset plate was also found to be four inches in diameter. A
detail of the gusset plate design can be found below in Figure 6 - Gusset Plate Detail.


Figure 6 - Gusset Plate Detail
5.3.3 Column-Girder
The column-girder connection was designed to only withstand the shear in the
building. This connection will be two-inch angle irons welded to the column with
three one-inch holes for blots to be connected to the beam. Depending on the
orientation of the column the angle iron will be welded to the flange or the web of
the column.


Figure 7 - Column Girder Connection to Web

Figure 8 - Column Girder Connection to Flange
5.3.4 Girder-Beam
The girder-beam connection will be the same as the column- girder connection
except the angle iron will be welded to the web of the girder 90 degrees to the
layout of that on the column.

5.3.5 Elevator and Stairwell Connections

Figure 9 - Elevator and Stairwell Connection Detail
The elevators and stairwells are nonstructural components of the main
structural system of the building. The system is attached using 7/8 bolts, four
per column and eight per floor, Group A, Thread Cond. N and Single Shear. A
silicone-setting block is separating the flange from the secured section of the
structure. This allows for movement without applying force to the
windowpane.



References

ASCE 7-10 Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures. Vol.
3. Reston: American Society of Civil Engineers, 2013. Print.

"Fire Rated Glass." Fire-rated Glass Can Help Keep Flames and Smoke from Spreading
from One Room to Another. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 May 2014.

Corning, Dow. "Silicone Structural Glazing Manual." Www.dowcorning.com. Dow
Corning, n.d. Web.

"Point Reyes Station, CA Natural Disasters and Weather Extremes." Point Reyes Station, CA Natural
Disasters and Weather Extremes. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 May 2014. <http://www.usa.com/point-reyes-
station-ca-natural-disasters-extremes.htm>.

Point Reyes, CA Commercial Building Structural Design i

Appendix A Conceptual Photos





Appendix B Detail Drawings


Spa Tub Connections


Foundation






Appendix C- Calculation



C.1

CHB Design Parameters (According to ASCE 7-10)
Site Class A Point Reyes
Seismic Design Category D (11.6-1, 11.6-2)
Risk Category II (1.5-1)

Seismic Force Restrainnig System: Steel Buckling- Restrained Braced Frames (12.2-1)
Reference ASCE 7-10 Section 7 (14.1) for detailing requirments

R= 8 (12.2-1)

C
d
= 5 (12.2-1)

I
e
= 1.0 (1.5-2)

MCE
R

S
s
= 1.169 g

S
1
= 0.59 g

S
DS
= 0.779 g Eq. (11.4-3)

S
D1
= 0.393 g Eq. (11.4-4)

F
A
= 0.8 (11.4-1)

F
V
= 0.8 (11.4-2)

S
MS
=F
A
S
S
= 0.9352

Eq. (11.4-1)

S
M1
=F
V
S
1
= 0.472

Eq. (11.4-2)

Seismic Base Shear:

V=C
S
W Eq. (12.8-1)

Calculate Period (T):

T=C
t
h
n
x
0.67 sec (12.8.2.1)

C
t
= 0.03

(12.8-2)

h
n
= 63 ft
x= 0.75

(12.8-2)

T
L
= 12 sec Fig. (22-12)

T
u
=C
U
T= 0.94 sec

C
u
= 1.4 (12.8-1)



Calculation of Seismic Response Coefficient:

C
S
=S
DS
/(R/I
e
)= 0.097 Eq. (12.8-2)

T<T
L

C
s
=S
D1
/T(R/I
e
)= 0.073 Eq. (12.8-3)

Use:

0.073


C.2

CHB Change Order #1 Calculations
Design of Non-Structural Spa Tub
Design for the following:

a) The required shear in the
connection
b) Develop connection details to carry this required shear

This is to be completed using the following requirements:

a) Complete connection design using the provisions of ASCE 7-10 Ch. 13
b) For Comparison, compute the required shear using modal analysis including
only the modes needed for 90% modal mass
c) For comparison, compute the required shear using modal analysis including
all modes.

Design:
Dimensions: 3' deep, 8' wide, 12' long

Volume: 288 CF

Weight: 17971.20 lb

17.97 kip
Mass: 0.0465

a) Seismic Design Force

F
p
=
{(0.4a
p
S
DS
W
p
)/(R
p
/I
p
)}(1+2(z/h))
Eq. (13.3-1)

a
p
= 1.0 rigid

S
DS
= 0.779 g

W
p
= 17971.20 lb

R
p
= 3.5 (Table 13.5-1 Coefficients for Architectural Components)

Other Rigid Components; High Deform elements
and

attachments

I
p
= 1.0 (13.1.3)

z= 51 ft
h= 63 ft

F
p
= 4190.35 lb

4.19 kip


b) 90%

S
DS
0.365 g

F
p
= 1963.38 lb

1.96 kips

c) All modes

S
DS
0.398 g

F
p
= 2140.90 lb

2.14 kips

Hot Tub Restraints
5/8"
Group A
Thread Cond. N
Max LRF 12.4 k

R
N
= 12.4 kips

Point Reyes, CA Commercial Building Structural Design vi

Modal Analysis N-S Frame

Point Reyes, CA Commercial Building Structural Design vii

Modal Analysis E-W Frame

Project Report

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

Project Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Point Reyes, CA Commercial Building

You might also like