STRUCTURE

NCSEA | CASE | SEI JANUARY 2019

Concrete
INSIDE: SR 99 Tunnel, Seattle 22
Coupling Beam Types 8
Improving School Buildings 14
Northridge: 25 Years Later 18
 The only clip
proven to perform
in full-scale testing.

The new SCS seismic clip doubles the

in-plane capacity of other bypass clips.
The innovative SCS seismic bypass framing connector from
Simpson Strong-Tie is engineered for either slide-clip or fixed-clip
applications in high-seismic areas. Backed by our real-world,
full-scale cyclic testing, the SCS seismic clip delivers the
highest seismic loads in the industry.
Trust the value-engineered SCS seismic connector for your next
project. Visit go.strongtie.com/scs or call (800) 999-5099.

© 2019 Simpson Strong-Tie Company Inc. SCS18-E

 LeMessurier Calls on Tekla Structural
Designer for Complex Projects
For over 55 years,
LeMessurier has
provided struc-
tural engineering
services to architects, owners, contractors, developers
and artists. Led by the example of legendary structural
engineer and founder William LeMessurier, LeMessuri-
er provides the expertise for some of the world’s most
elegant and sophisticated designs while remaining
true to the enduring laws of science and engineering.
Known for pushing the envelope of the latest tech-
nologies and even inventing new ones, LeMessurier
engineers solutions responsive to their clients’ visions
and reflective of their experience.
An early adopter of technology to improve their de-
signs and workflow, LeMessurier put its own talent to
work in the eighties to develop a software solution that
did not exist commercially at the time. Their early appli-
cation adopted the concept of Building Information
Modeling (BIM) long before it emerged decades later.
While LeMessurier’s proprietary tool had evolved over
three decades into a powerhouse of capability, the
decision to evaluate commercial structural design
tools was predicated on the looming effort required to
modernize its software to leverage emerging
platforms, support normalized data structure integra-
tion and keep up with code changes.
After a lengthy and thorough comparison of commer-
cial tools that would “fill the shoes” and stack up to the
company’s proprietary tool, LeMessurier chose Tekla
Structural Designer for its rich capabilities that ad-
dressed all of their workflow needs. According to Derek
Barnes, Associate at LeMessurier, ” Tekla Structural
Designer offered the most features and the best inte-
gration of all the products we tested. They also offered
us the ability to work closely with their development
group to ensure we were getting the most out of the
software.”
One Model for Structural Analysis & Design
From Schematic Design through Construction Docu-
ments, Tekla Structural Designer allows LeMessurier
engineers to work from one single model for structural
analysis and design, improving efficiency, workflow,
and ultimately saving time. “Our engineers are working
more efficiently because they don’t need to switch
between multiple software packages for concrete and
steel design. Tekla Structural Designer offers better
integration of multiple materials than we have seen in
any other product,” said Barnes.
LeMessurier engineers use Tekla Structural
Designer to create physical, information-rich models
that contain the intelligence they need to automate the
design of significant portions of their structures and
efficiently manage project changes.
TRANSFORMING THE WAY THE WORLD WORKS
“Tekla Structural Designer has streamlined our
design process,” said Craig Blanchet, P.E., Vice Presi-
dent of LeMessurier. “Because some of our engineers
are no longer doubling as software developers, it allows
us to focus their talents on leveraging the features of
the software to our advantage. Had we not chosen
to adopt Tekla Structural Designer, we would have
needed to bring on new staff to update and maintain
our in-house software. So Tekla Structural Designer is
not just saving us time on projects, it is also saving us
overhead.
Efficient, Accurate Loading and Analysis
Tekla Structural Designer automatically generates an
underlying and highly sophisticated analytical model
from the physical model, allowing LeMessurier engi-
neers to focus more on design than on analytical model
management. Regardless of a model’s size or com-
plexity, Tekla Structural Designer’s analytical engine
accurately computes forces and displacements for use
in design and the assessment of building performance.
“Tekla Structural Designer offers better
integration of multiple materials than
we have seen in any other product.”
“Tekla Structural Designer gives us multiple analysis
sets to pull from, which gives us lots of control. Most
programs don’t have the capability to do FE and
grillage chase-down. For the design of beam supported
concrete slabs, Tekla Structural Designer allows us to
separate the slab stiffness from the beam stiffness, so
if we choose to we can design the beams without con-
sidering the influence of the slab. In the same model
we can use a separate analysis set to review the floor
system with the beams and slab engaged,” said Barnes.
Barnes also shared similar benefits with concrete
column design. “Tekla Structural Designer does
grillage take-downs floor-by-floor, finds the reactions
and applies them to the next floor. This allows us
to view column results both for the 3-dimensional
effects of the structure as a whole and from the more
traditional floor-by-floor load take-down point of view.
Doing both has always required significant manual
intervention, but Tekla Structural Designer puts it all in
one place.” “We reduce the possibility for human error
because with Tekla Structural Designer less user input
is required,” said Barnes. “Tekla Structural Designer
automatically computes many of the design parame-
ters, such as column unbraced lengths. The assump-
tions made by the software are typically correct, but we
can easily review and override them when necessary.”
Interoperability and Time Saving Tools
Tekla Structural Designer was developed specifically
to maximize collaboration with other project parties,
including technicians, fabricators and architects. Its
unique functionality enables engineers to integrate the
physical design model seamlessly with Tekla Structures
or Autodesk Revit, and to round-trip without compro-
mising vital design data.
“We’re able to import geometry from Revit, design in
Tekla Structural Designer and export that information
for import back into Revit. If an architect makes
geometry updates or changes a slab edge, we’ll send
those changes back into Tekla Structural Designer, re-
run the analysis and design, and push updated design
information back into Revit.”
Tekla Structural Design at Work:
The Hub on Causeway
Positioning a large scale mixed-use development next
to an active arena, a below grade parking garage, and
an interstate highway, and bridging it over two active
subway tunnels makes planning, phasing and
engineering paramount. Currently under construction,
The Hub on Causeway Project will be the final piece in
the puzzle that is the site of the original Boston Garden.
Despite being new to the software, LeMessurier
decided to use Tekla Structural Designer for significant
portions of the project. “Relying on a new program for
such a big project was obviously a risk for us, but with
the potential for time savings and other efficiencies, we
jumped right in with Tekla Structural Designer. It forced
us to get familiar the software very quickly.”
“Tekla Structural Designer allowed us to design the
bulk of Phase 1 in a single model,” said Barnes. The proj-
ect incorporates both concrete flat slabs and compos-
ite concrete and steel floor framing. “Tekla Structural
Designer has the ability to calculate effective widths
based on the physical model which is a big time saver,”
said Barnes. “On this project, the integration with Revit,
along with the composite steel design features enabled
us to work more efficiently. Adding the ability to do con-
crete design in the same model was a bonus because
we had both construction types in the same building.”
“Tekla Structural Designer helped this project run more
efficiently, and in the end it was a positive experience,”
said Blanchet.
“Tekla Structural Designer provided the best fit
for our workflow compared to other commercially
available software.”
Want to Evaluate
Tekla Structural Designer?
tekla.com/TryTekla
 ADVERTISER INDEX Please support these advertisers
STRUCTURE ®

American Concrete Institute ........................ 34 New Millennium Building Systems ............... 21 MARKETING & ADVERTISING SALES
Cortec Corporation .................................. 17 Nucor Vulcraft Group - Redicor ................... 10 sales@STRUCTUREmag.org

GeoDesign, Inc........................................ 29 Nucor Vulcraft Group - Ecospan .................. 13 Joe Murphy

Geopier Foundation Company.................... 27 RISA ...................................................... 44 jmurphy@STRUCTUREmag.org; Tel: 203-254-9595

Hohmann & Barnard, Inc. ......................30-31
Integrated Engineering Software, Inc. ........... 43
Integrity Software Inc ................................... 4
KPFF ........................................................ 9
Larsen Products Corp................................. 11
NCEES .................................................. 15
Simpson Strong-Tie ............................... 2, 25 Denis O’Malley
domalley@STRUCTUREmag.org; Tel: 203-356-9694, ext. 13
Structural Engineering Institute ..................... 33
StructurePoint ............................................. 6 EDITORIAL STAFF
Struware ................................................... 4
Executive Editor Alfred Spada
Trimble ..................................................... 3 aspada@ncsea.com
Publisher Christine M. Sloat, P.E.
csloat@STRUCTUREmag.org

Associate Publisher Nikki Alger

nalger@STRUCTUREmag.org

Creative Director Tara Smith

ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

graphics@STRUCTUREmag.org
Demos at www.struware.com
Not listed? EDITORIAL BOARD
Wind, Seismic, Snow, etc. Struware’s Code Search program calculates these and
other loadings for all codes based on the IBC or ASCE7 in just minutes (see online Visit our website to Chair John A. Dal Pino, S.E.
FTF Engineering, Inc., San Francisco, CA
video). Also calculates wind loads on rooftop equipment, signs, walls, chimneys,
trussed towers, tanks and more. ($250.00). see what advertising chair@STRUCTUREmag.org

Jeremy L. Achter, S.E., LEED AP

CMU or Tilt-up Concrete Walls Analyze solid walls for out of plane loading and
panel legs next to or between openings by automatically calculating loads to the wall opportunities are ARW Engineers, Ogden, UT

leg from vertical and horizontal loads at the opening. ($75.00 ea) Erin Conaway, P.E.

Floor Vibration Program to analyze floors with steel beams and/or steel joist.
right for you! AISC, Littleton, CO

Compare up to 4 systems side by side ($75.00). Timothy M. Gilbert, P.E., S.E., SECB

Concrete beam/slab Program to provide bending, shear and/or torsional reinforcing. STRUCTUREmag.org TimkenSteel, Canton, OH

Quick and easy to use ($45.00). Linda M. Kaplan, P.E.

Pennoni, Pittsburgh, PA

Charles “Chuck” F. King, P.E.

Urban Engineers of New York, New York, NY

Emily B. Lorenz, P.E.

Bentley spending ® Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute, Chicago, IL

Jessica Mandrick, P.E., S.E., LEED AP

Gilsanz Murray Steficek, LLP, New York, NY

out of control? Jason McCool, P.E.

Robbins Engineering Consultants, Little Rock, AR

Brian W. Miller
Davis, CA
• Prevent Quarterly and Monthly Overages
Evans Mountzouris, P.E.
ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

• Whitelist allowed applications, block all others „ SofTrack controls
• Control all Bentley® usage, prevent overages
• Block use of all un-owned Bentley® applications
• Automatically queue users when access is
blocked, notify when license ready
• Give users visibility of who is using licenses now
• Warn and optionally terminate idle usage
• Historical Usage Reporting of all applications
• Introducing: Bentley® CONNECTIONS Visa
(desktop) per-user control
CALL US TODAY:
(866) 372 8991 (USA/Canada)
(512) 372 8991 (Worldwide)
The DiSalvo Engineering Group, Ridgefield, CT
Bentley® usage by
Product ID code and
John “Buddy” Showalter, P.E.
American Wood Council, Leesburg, VA
counts (pipe, inlet,
Eytan Solomon, P.E.
pond, and all others)
Silman, New York, NY
and can actively
block unwanted STRUCTURE® magazine (ISSN 1536 4283) is published monthly by
product usage The National Council of Structural Engineers Associations (a nonprofit
Association), 645 N. Michigan Ave, Suite 540, Chicago, IL 60611
312.649.4600. Application to Mail at Periodicals Postage Prices is
Pending at Chicago, IL and additional mailing offices. STRUCTURE
„ SofTrack reports and magazine, Volume 26, Number 1, C 2019 by The National Council
of Structural Engineers Associations, all rights reserved. Subscription
optionally controls
usage of all Autodesk®
services, back issues and subscription information tel: 312-649-4600,
or write to STRUCTURE magazine Circulation, 645 N. Michigan
products by Version,
Avenue, Suite 540, Chicago, IL 60611. The publication is distributed
to members of The National Council of Structural Engineers Associations
Feature Code, and through a resolution to its bylaws, and to members of CASE and SEI
paid by each organization as nominal price subscription for its members
Serial Number!
as a benefit of their membership. Yearly Subscription in USA $75;
$40 For Students; Canada $90; $60 for Canadian Students; Foreign
$135, $90 for foreign students. Editorial Office: Send editorial mail
to: STRUCTURE magazine, Attn: Editorial, 645 N. Michigan Avenue,
„ SofTrack reports and
©
controls ESRI® ArcMap
Suite 540, Chicago, IL 60611. POSTMASTER: Send Address changes
to STRUCTURE magazine, 645 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 540,

www.softwaremetering.com concurrent and single

Chicago, IL 60611.

STRUCTURE is a registered trademark of the National Council of Structural

use license activity Engineers Associations (NCSEA). Articles may not be reproduced in whole
© 2018 Integrity Software, Inc. Bentley is a registered trademark of Bentley Systems, Incorporated
or in part without the written permission of the publisher.

4 STRUCTURE magazine
 Contents JANUARY 2019

Cover Feature
SR 99 TUNNEL
IN SEATTLE
By Yang Jiang, Ph.D., P.E., S.E.,
22
and Andrew Herten, P.E.

The SR 99 Tunnel in Seattle is part

of the Alaskan Way Viaduct. The
9,300-foot-long bored tunnel was
excavated by a Tunnel Boring Machine,
named Bertha, with a 57½-foot-
diameter cutterhead. The tunnel’s
interior structure is comprised of two
continuous corbels supporting a series
of 650-foot-long moment frame systems
of walls and slabs, detailed to expand
and contract longitudinally.

Columns and Departments 18

7 Editorial Okage Sama De: I am What I am Because of You
By Corey M. Matsuoka, P.E.

8 Structural Design Coupling Beam Types

By Songtao Liao, Ph.D., P.E., and Benjamin Pimentel, P.E.

Structural Failures Improving School Buildings in Indonesia

14
By Lizzie Blaisdell Collins, P.E., S.E., James Mwangi, Ph.D., P.E., S.E., and Mediatrich Triani N.
35
18 Northridge – 25 Years Later Caltrans Highway Structures
By Mark Yashinsky

26 In the News Changes on STRUCTURE’s Editorial Board

28 Structural Sustainability Thermal Breaks in Building Envelopes

By Scott Hamel, P.E., Ph.D., and Kara Peterman, Ph.D. In Every Issue
4 Advertiser Index
35 Spotlight Intuit’s Marine Way Building 32 Resource Guide – Anchor Updates
By Megan Stringer, S.E.
36 NCSEA News
42 Structural Forum Scope Creep 38 SEI Update
By Stan R. Caldwell, P.E., SECB 40 CASE in Point

Publication of any article, image, or advertisement in STRUCTURE® magazine does not constitute endorsement by NCSEA, CASE, SEI, the Publisher, or the Editorial Board, Authors, contributors, and advertisers retain sole responsibility for the content of their submissions.

J A N U A R Y 2 019 5
 EDITORIAL
Okage Sama De: I am What I am Because of You
By Corey M. Matsuoka, P.E., Chair CASE Executive Committee
I magine being named the President of the
Washington Bullets in 1991, a time when the fran-
chise had fallen on lean times. Everyone is looking at
you to turn things around. Then imagine you are a
29-year-old female trying to survive in a business (not
unlike our own) that has traditionally been dominated
by men. That is Susan O’Malley, the first female presi-
dent of a professional sports franchise. Not only did
she survive, but she also thrived. Susan oversaw the
largest ticket revenue increase in the history of NBA
franchises, and implemented innovative marketing
and customer service initiatives that led to the highest
renewal rate of season tickets ever by the franchise.
When she stepped down as president of the Wizards
(name changed) in 2007, owner Abe Pollin described
her as his “right hand through the past 20 years.”
At this year’s ACEC Fall Conference, Susan was a
keynote speaker and she shared her seven seminal
‘rules’ for leadership and life that guided her through
her journey. At the end of her speech, she challenged the audience
to think about what their ‘rules’ were.
For me, I do not think I have rules, as much as beliefs and values.
As a fourth generation Japanese American growing up in Hawaii, my
beliefs and values have been influenced by my Asian heritage and the
assimilation of the local Hawaiian culture. From Japan…
1) Okage Sama De. I am what I am because of you. Show respect
for those who came before you and helped you to get where
you are. On my desk, I have a copy of the handwritten notes
containing the basic concepts and organizational bases on
which our company was founded. It is dated 1959, the year
SSFM was incorporated and written by one of the company’s
co-founders. Our company is what it is today because of our
founders.
2) Gaman. Enduring the seemingly unbearable with patience and
dignity. Initially, I worked as a structural engineer and I wanted
to quit after only three months. With a tough boss, long hours,
and stress about my design skills (or lack thereof ), I was worried
that something I designed could collapse and hurt someone.
I confided in my father (who was also an engineer) that I was
thinking of quitting, hoping for an intellectual discussion about
my options. He gave me no sympathy and told me to toughen
up or “gaman.” Fortunately, I listened to him, and I am still
here today.
3) Ganbaru. To do one’s best. This Japanese term is closely related
to gaman, relating to persistence and tenacity. Where it differs
is that ganbaru also encapsulates the ideals of doggedness and
hard work. In practice, it can even mean doing more than one’s
best. Early in my career, we would stay at work until the job
was complete. Sometimes that meant staying overnight to meet
a deadline. The bosses would joke, “Tomorrow morning we
STRUCTURE magazine
better have this submittal complete, or there
should be dead bodies on the ground.”
From Hawaii…
1) Aloha. A value of unconditional love. With
Hawaii being a mixing pot of races from
east and west, I never thought of diversity
as being a big challenge. However, I now
realize that diversity goes beyond race and
includes age, gender, sexual orientation, reli-
gion, disabilities, etc. Aloha is the acceptance
and inclusion of all of these differences.
2) Ohana. Those who are family, and those you
choose to call family. My parent’s friends,
whom I have known since childhood, are
still Aunty and Uncle. If you are familiar
with Disney’s Lilo & Stitch, you know that
Ohana means family, and family means no
one is left behind. They are still taking care
of me today.
3) Kuleana. One’s personal sense of responsibility. As a young
principal, I shadowed my boss on a claim negotiation. We had
made a few mistakes, and we were going to pay a lot of money.
I remember my boss saying this was one of the hardest things
he had to do. I assumed it was because of the money, but that
was not it. It was because we made a mistake. The money was
the easy part. We were wrong, and we needed to fix it. That
was never a question. It was our responsibility, our kuleana.
4) Malama. The value of stewardship, to take care. Living on an
island, we take care of our home, as it is the only one we have.
As a family, we are often doing service projects such as cleaning
up our parks and beaches, removing invasive species from the
land and ocean, and educating the public about sustainability.
5) Pono. The value of integrity, of rightness and balance. At a recent
camp, my son’s Scout Master was telling us a story of his son
who was a good athlete but had not played baseball since inter-
mediate school. As a senior, the baseball coach was looking for
more talent and really wanted his son on the team. The son
declined and, when the Scout Master asked him why, he said it
would not be fair for him to take the place of a classmate who
worked all year to be on that team. It was the pono thing to do.
These values and beliefs that I hold dear are because of those
that came before me. They showed me what was important and
how to be a productive and valued member of society. I hope
that I’m doing the same for my children and my staff.
Thank you to my parents, my bosses, and my mentors.
Okage Sama De.■
Corey M. Matsuoka is the Executive Vice-President of SSFM International,
Inc. in Honolulu, Hawaii and the chair of the CASE Executive Committee.
(cmatsuoka@ssfm.com)
J A N U A R Y 2 019 7
 structural DESIGN
Coupling Beam Types
Practical Reinforced Concrete Building Design
By Songtao Liao, Ph.D., P.E., M.ASCE, and Benjamin Pimentel, P.E.
R einforced concrete (RC) shear walls are usually the
primary lateral force resisting system for reinforced
concrete buildings and adjacent shear wall piers are typically
connected with coupling beams above doors or corridors at
floor levels. The coupling beams reduce flexural moments in
the coupled shear wall piers, provide an energy dissipation
mechanism along the entire building height, and improve
shear wall system efficiency.
As one of the most critical members in RC buildings, coupling beams
should exhibit excellent energy dissipation capacity with only modest
stiffness and strength degradation under cyclic loading. Good ductile
hysteretic performance is usually achieved by providing sophisticated
detailing, which induces construction difficulties. By varying rebar
layout schemes and exploring different materials, various types of
coupling beams are considered in searching for a balance between
ductile hysteretic performance and construction practicality.
Currently there are five commonly-used types of coupling beams
which are adopted by building codes and the design industry:
• Conventional RC coupling beams
• Diagonally-Reinforced concrete coupling beams
• Steel coupling beams
• Encased steel composite coupling beams
• Embedded steel plate composite coupling beams
Conventional RC Coupling Beams
Conventional RC coupling beams refer to coupling beams reinforced
with horizontal rebars and closely-spaced stirrups. The design and
detailing requirements for conventional RC coupling beams are the
same as those for RC special moment frame members and are well
provisioned in building codes, such as ACI 318 (Figure 1). Due to its
relatively simple detailing and ease of construction, the conventional
RC coupling beam is the most extensively used coupling beam type in
Figure 1. Typical conventional concrete coupling beam.
8 STRUCTURE magazine
Figure 2. Typical diagonally-reinforced concrete coupling beam with full confinement.
building design. In low seismic risk areas, conventional RC coupling
beam are sometimes sized wider than the connecting shear wall piers
in flat-slab buildings.
However, the conventional RC coupling beam does not preserve
good energy dissipation capacities under high cyclic shear stresses and
significant pinching phenomena present in its hysteresis response.
Diagonal shear failure and sliding shear failure are not avoidable in
this type of coupling beam even with closely-spaced transverse rein-
forcing detailing. Research indicates that conventional RC coupling
beams only exhibit satisfactory performance when the nominal gross
—
section shear stress is below 3√ f´c (psi) and when the beam behavior is
flexure-controlled, although the nominal maximum allowable shear
—
stress limit is 10√ f´c (psi) in ACI 318.
Diagonally-Reinforced Concrete Coupling Beams
In the 1960s, a diagonal rebar layout in concrete coupling beams
was proposed to effectively arrest the coupling beam sliding shear
failure at the face of the coupled shear wall piers (Figure 2). To date,
the diagonally-reinforced concrete coupling beams are recognized
as the most effective type of reinforcing details to provide ductile
performance with excellent energy dissipation capacity, especially
when the span/depth ratio is less than 2. The well-established design
provisions and details for diagonally-reinforced coupling beams can
be found in the Section 18.10.7 of ACI 318-14, Building Code
Requirements for Structural Concrete.
In the design of a diagonally-reinforced concrete coupling beam, the
shear forces are resisted by the diagonal rebars only and the moment
capacities are automatically provided by the diagonal “truss” members.
—
The nominal maximum allowable beam shear stress limit, 10√ f´c (psi),
is capped to ensure the coupling beam ductility and deformability.
Although diagonally-reinforced coupling beams exhibit excellent
stiffness and highly-ductile energy dissipation capacities, there are
some constructionability issues that limit their application:
• The practical width of diagonally-reinforced concrete coupling
beams is at least 14 inches (16 inches or more is preferable) to
accommodate all reinforcement meeting the minimum code-
allowed spacing requirements.
Figure 3. Typical encased steel composite coupling beam. Figure 4. Typical embedded steel plate composite coupling beam.

• The on-site placement of diagonal reinforcement is difficult and
labor-intensive.
• The effectiveness of diagonal reinforcement decreases significantly
when the span-to-depth ratio is larger than 2 and the diagonal rebar
inclination angle becomes small, while most architecturally practical
coupling beam dimensions in high-rise buildings fall in this range.
Steel and Encased Steel
Composite Coupling Beams
Steel coupling beams and encased steel composite coupling beams
are used as viable alternatives to avoid the construction difficulties
inherent in diagonally-reinforced concrete coupling beams. The steel
members for the two coupling beam types are implicitly wide-flange
steel members, although steel tubes were
also used in early research (Figure 3).
Extensive experiments indicate that both
steel coupling beams and encased steel
composite coupling beams can provide
excellent ductility and energy dissipa- 2018
tion capacities, which are comparable to
those of diagonally-reinforced concrete ENR SW
BEST
coupling beams. ANSI/AISC 341-16,
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel
beam should be maintained to ensure the appropriate composite action
of the encased steel composite coupling beam. Similarly, a maximum
allowable nominal shear stress limit for the encased steel composite
coupling beam is desirable for concrete encasement cracking control,
while no value is yet available in the literature.
The most important item in the design of steel coupling beams
and encased steel composite coupling beams is the embedment of
the steel members. The embedment length design of these two types
of coupling beams is usually based on the rigid Mattock-Gaafar
embedment model by satisfying the expected coupling beam-shear
wall connection shear strength (Eq. H4.1 & H5.1 in AISC 341-16).
Appropriate detailing along the clear span and the embedment regions
of the coupling beams are important as well for ductile performance
and good energy dissipation capacity.
continued on next page

PROJECT
ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org.
Buildings, adopts both types of coupling
beams in composite shear wall systems
with design and detailing provisions.
For these two types of coupling beams, Higher Education/Research
both shear forces and flexural moments
are assumed to be entirely resisted by the
steel member. The benefits of the con-
crete encasement are currently ignored
due to a lack of data. The concrete Seattle Long Beach
Tacoma Irvine
encasement provides higher beam stiff- Lacey San Diego
ness and acts as a fire proofing layer for Portland Boise
the encased steel beams. Eugene St. Louis
Different from reinforced concrete Sacramento Chicago
San Francisco Louisville
coupling beams, the code-specified
Los Angeles New York
maximum allowable shear stress limit
—
for concrete beams (e.g. 10√ f´c (psi) in
ACI 318) can be relieved for the encased KPFF is an
Equal Opportunity Employer
steel composite coupling beam. Although
no research on the interaction between www.kpff.com
the steel member and the RC concrete
ASU Biodesign Institute C
encasement is carried out, a practical size Tempe, AZ
range of the steel beam to the coupling

J A N U A R Y 2 019 9
Redi.
Set.
Go.
REDICOR SIMPLIFIES AND ACCELERATES THE
CONSTRUCTION OF REINFORCED CONCRETE CORES.
Conventional methods of constructing reinforced concrete shear
cores can be a challenge. Unpredictable onsite construction
timelines frequently delay framing, and unacceptable concrete
tolerances or improperly located steel embed plates often bring
production schedules to a halt.

Now there’s a better way.

RediCor is a pre-fabricated, ready-to-set modular

steel form system that simplifies and accelerates
the construction of reinforced concrete stair and
elevator cores. Our steel modules are factory built-
to-spec with structurally true, load-bearing vertical TM

and horizontal structural connections pre-engineered to ensure

that framing fits perfectly – saving time, energy and money.
VISIT US AT REDICOR.COM FOR THE REDICOR STORY.

www.redicor.com
Table summary of the five types of coupling beams in RC buildings.
Code-Specified Suggested Energy
Practical Shear Force
Coupling Maximum Applicable Span- Effective Stiffness Construction Dissipation
Maximum Shear Vertical
Beam Type Allowable Nominal To-Depth Ratio in Structural Feasibility Capacity and
Stress (Psi) Distribution
Shear Stress (Psi) Analysis Model Ductility
Conventional 10√(f c´) 2.0 ≤ ln /h 4√(f c´) 0.35Ec Ig Easiest Poor No
Diagonally-
10√(f c´) ln /h ≤ 1.5~2.0 8.5√(f c´) 0.35Ec Ig Most Difficult High Yes
Reinforced
Steel N/A ln /h ≤ 4.0 N/A 0.6Es Isteel Difficult High Yes, max 20%
0.06 . ln /h . EsItrans
Encased Steel
N/A ln /h ≤ 4.0 N/A (0.35EcIg lower Difficult High Yes, max 20%
Composite
bound)
Embedded Steel
≈ 18√f c´ 1.0 ≤ ln /h ≤ 4.0 ≈ 18√f c´ 0.35EcIg Medium Moderate Yes
Plate Composite

Compared to the diagonally-reinforced concrete coupling beam,
the construction of the steel/encased steel composite coupling beam
is much more feasible and the disturbance of the construction
schedule can be negligible once the contractor becomes famil-
iar with the construction procedure. However, the wide flange
steel members tend to interfere with vertical and confinement
reinforcement in the coupled shear wall piers, especially those
in the boundary element zones of special shear wall systems. To
accommodate both the shear wall rebar detailing requirements
and steel beam embedment, wider or barbell-shaped wall piers
and special detailing must be used. The practice of coping the steel
beam flange is not recommended since reducing the flange width
will increase the steel beam embedment length and may result
in defects in the protected zone of the encased steel composite
coupling beam. Further, embedded steel members complicate any
sleeves that may run laterally through the coupling beam, often
required for sprinklers.
Embedded Steel Plate Composite Coupling Beam
To alleviate the conflict between steel members and shear wall
reinforcement, designers can consider the use of embedded steel
plate composite coupling beams. As shown in Figure 4 (page 9),
headed studs are welded to both vertical faces of the steel plate
in a typical embedded steel plate composite coupling beam and
pose much less disturbance to shear wall vertical reinforcement,

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org.

Weld-Crete®—The pale Simply brush, roll or spray Weld-Crete®

blue bonding agent with on to concrete or any structurally
sound surface. Then come back hours,
over 60 years of superior
days or a week later and finish with
performance in the field. new concrete, stucco, tile, terrazzo,
other cement mixes or portland cement
plaster. Plus Weld-Crete’s® low VOC
content significantly reduces airborne
pollutants that affect health and the
environment.

Originators of leading chemical bonding

agents… worldwide since 1952

800.633.6668
www.larsenproducts.com

J A N U A R Y 2 019 11
 although special detailing is still needed for the horizontal/confine-
ment rebars. The headed studs are necessary to provide appropriate
anchorage and transfer forces between the concrete portion and
the steel plate. Research indicates that the presence of the steel
plates can effectively hinder the development of diagonal cracks
and prevent brittle failures of concrete coupling beams, and the
embedded steel plate composite coupling beam exhibits much
better ductile performance and deformability than comparable
conventional RC coupling beams.
Similar to the encased steel composite coupling beam, proper
embedment design of the steel plate is critical to ensure good ductile
performance of this type of coupling beam. The rigid Mattock-Gaafar
embedment model can be used to determine the embedment length
of the embedded steel plate by assuming uniform bearing stress from
steel plate and headed studs.
In the capacity design of this composite coupling beam, contribu-
tions from both the concrete and steel plate need to be considered.
The steel plate is used to supplement the capacities of the reinforced
concrete section. Considering the different strain distributions in the
RC concrete portion and the steel plate due to their interaction, Su
& Lam (2009) proposed a unified design approach for this type of
coupling beam. The design rules of thumb are: (a) the ratio of the
steel plate depth over the composite coupling beam depth should be
limited to be 0.8~0.95; (b) the practical span-to-depth ratio range
is 1.0~4.0; (c) minimum shear reinforcement must be provided; (d)
minimum embedment length is dependent on coupling beam span/
depth ratio and can vary from 0.35~0.7 times of the beam clear span;
(e) The maximum nominal shear stress of the composite coupling
— —
beam is capped to be 1.5√ f cu Mpa (18 √ f´c psi), and the shear force
resisted by the steel plate should be less than 0.45Vu, which limits the
use of this coupling beam.
Beam Stiffness Reduction
Under the current strength-based design framework, building analy-
sis and design are predominantly carried out based on linear elastic
structural models. Considering the effect of beam cracking, rebar
slippage, and steel member fixity point location, reduced coupling
beam stiffnesses are suggested in elastic building models depending
on the coupling beam types:
• Conventional RC coupling beams and diagonally-reinforced
concrete coupling beams – ACI 318 specifies 0.35 beam stiffness
reduction factor for the ultimate design, which is a well-accepted
design industry practice.
• Steel coupling beam – Elastic effective bending stiffness for ulti-
mate design is reduced to be 60% of the original value due to
steel beam effective fixity point (AISC 341-16):
(EI )eff = 0.6EsIsteel
• Encased steel composite coupling beam – Elastic effective bending
stiffness for ultimate design was suggested as (Motter et. al, 2017):
(EI )eff = 0.06 . l n /h . EsItrans
In which l n /h is the beam span-to-depth ratio and Itrans is the
transformed moment of inertia of the encased steel composite
coupling beam. However, this formula will lead to small stiffness
values when the span-to-depth ratio is small. Following industry
practice, 0.35EcIg can be used as the lower bound for this kind of
coupling beam in building analysis.
• Embedded steel plate coupling beam – To date, no formula has
been explicitly proposed for the effective bending stiffness of the
embedded steel plate coupling beam. Experiments indicate that
12 STRUCTURE magazine
the stiffness difference between the embedded steel plate coupling
beam and the associated conventional RC coupling beam is not
significant (Su & Lam, 2009), therefore 0.35EcIg is a reasonable
reduced stiffness value for the embedded steel plate composite
coupling beam ultimate design.
For both steel coupling beams and the encased steel composite coupling
beams, the effective bending stiffness needs to be adjusted through
iteration since the steel member size is unknown until designed.
Beam Shear Force Vertical Distribution
In high-rise building design, engineers often apply controlling beam
design results to multiple floors, avoiding minor changes on a story-to-
story basis, i.e. the coupling beam design reinforcements are “grouped”
for multiple adjacent floors depending on the variation of beam design
shear forces over the building height. Designers may also justify a
redistribution of overstressed beams to understressed beams above
and below to alleviate rebar congestion. This practice is equivalent
to using smaller effective stiffness for coupling beams in analysis and
whether it is allowable depends on the ductility and deformability
of the coupling beam types.
For conventional RC coupling beams, the deformability and ductility
are poor when the beam is under high cyclic shear stress; therefore,
shear force vertical redistribution is not recommended. While the
other four types of coupling beams exhibit much better ductility
and deformability, the lower bound of coupling beam stiffness or
shear force vertical distribution can be reasonably applied in build-
ing design during the process of designing coupling beams in order
to alleviate rebar congestion. For steel coupling beams and encased
steel composite coupling beams, AISC 341-16 explicitly permits shear
force vertical distribution up to 20%.
Summary
Each of the five types of coupling beams adopted by the industry
has its own benefits and limitations, as summarized in the Table.
Still, not one single type of coupling beam is applicable to all cases
in building design. The conventional RC coupling beam is often
the most feasible and economical coupling beam whenever the
beam shear stress is low and the beam is flexure controlled. When
coupling beam span-to-depth ratios are small and high shear stresses
are expected, the other four types of coupling beams should be
explored. The limitations of these types of coupling beams and
the associated anchorage requirement should be kept in mind to
choose an appropriate coupling beam type for specific projects. As
always, the designer should consider the preferences of the
construction team whenever possible, as many contractors
will have varying opinions related to each methodology.■
The online version of this article contains references.
Please visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org.
Songtao Liao is a Senior Associate at Rosenwasser/Grossman Consulting
Engineers, P.C. He is a member of ASCE 7-22 Seismic Sub-committee.
(stevenl@rgce.com)
Benjamin Pimentel is the President at Rosenwasser/Grossman Consulting
Engineers, P.C., He also serves on the Board of Directors
of the Concrete Industry Board of New York. (bp@rgce.com)
Pack more into less with Ecospan ®

Get the most out of your space with the Ecospan Composite Floor System.
®

Thanks to Ecospan’s shallower floor depths, you can have as much usable
space in a shorter building as you would typically have in a taller building –
giving you more design freedom and saving time, money and manpower
in the process.

The Ecospan Composite Floor System

®

Vulcraft joist, decking and shearflex fastener

Build better
ecospan-usa.com
888.375.9787

UL 1, 2, 3 HOURS FIRE RATED

STC 57 Better Partners. Better Products.
IAPMO CERTIFIED Better Outcomes.
 structural FAILURES
Improving School Buildings in Indonesia
An International Collaboration
By Lizzie Blaisdell Collins, P.E., S.E.,
James Mwangi, Ph.D., P.E., S.E.,
and Mediatrich Triani N.

P ost-earthquake observations following recent

events in Indonesia point to the significant
vulnerability of school infrastructure in the coun-
try. Build Change is a Denver-based international
non-profit social enterprise that works with people
in emerging nations to design, build, finance, and
regulate disaster-resistant houses and schools. Build
Change has a program in Padang, Indonesia, and has
responded to eight large earthquakes there since the Typical classroom building – Note the lack of confining elements at door and window jambs, lack
of ring beam at the side wall, and very minimal length of wall pier in the longitudinal direction.
program’s inception after the 2004 Indian Ocean
earthquake and tsunami. By learning first, through activities like post-earthquake reconnaissance and sub-sector studies, Build Change
aims to provide technical assistance to post-earthquake reconstruction – from support in design and building standards through
training in construction and material quality. Evidence of damaged and vulnerable school construction was apparent after every visit
to the earthquake-affected areas in Indonesia following the Yogyakarta (2006), the Bengkulu (2007), the Padang (2009), the Central
Aceh (2013), the Pidie Jaya (2016), the Lombok (2018) and the Palu (2018) earthquakes. More than 1,000 schools were reported to
be damaged or destroyed in each of the 2006/2009 and both 2018 events alone.

effectively unconfined in these cases and have essentially no more

A Reoccurring Problem ductility than an unreinforced masonry wall. Often, lintel beams
Many school buildings in Indonesia are constructed as one-story, are not installed over window
partially-confined masonry structures with light-framed roofs. In and door openings, leaving
Padang, the capital city of West Sumatra, this building type makes the masonry panel above to
up approximately 60% of the public school buildings. Confined rest on the wood framing of
masonry is a commonly used structural system outside of the U.S. the opening. In some cases,
in which unreinforced or lightly reinforced masonry load-bearing the required ring beam, or
walls are constructed and surrounded on the sides, top, and bottom confining beam at the top of
by reinforced concrete elements, or “ties.” These ties help to “con- the wall, is also missing, leav-
fine” the masonry wall. Building codes in seismic regions, such as ing the masonry wall panel
Chile and Mexico, cover the requirements for this building type unbraced at the top and very
to resist earthquakes and, when built properly, low-rise confined susceptible to toppling under
masonry structures have resisted earthquakes well. Interestingly, out-of-plane loading.
Indonesia’s building code does not cover confined masonry, even In addition to missing key
though the Ministry of Education’s school construction guidelines confining elements, prob-
promote its use. lems with configuration
Unfortunately, for the observed school buildings of this type in and construction quality
Indonesia, some of the reinforced concrete elements are missing are frequently observed in
and they are better described as partially confined than fully con- these school buildings. The
fined. Confining elements are typically placed at wall intersections longitudinal walls along the
but are rarely installed at door and window jambs as would be front and back consist mostly Typical inadequate reinforcing in damaged
required for good performance. Wall piers between openings are of openings for doors and school buildings.

14 STRUCTURE magazine
windows, leaving very few short wall piers to resist
earthquake loads. The buildings also typically lack an
effective diaphragm, as the light-framed roof is not
detailed to act as a diaphragm and not well-connected
to the building walls. This is especially problematic
in cases where the building has a masonry gable end
wall, which remains poorly braced over a much taller
height than the rest of the building.
Most of the classroom buildings of this type are
built by local builders who may have more experience
in construction of smaller non-engineered build-
ings, like houses, and construction activities are not
typically observed by the designer or inspected by
local authorities in detail. It is common for smooth Collapse of gable end wall in a classroom building. Courtesy of Educational Department Aceh Tengah.
reinforcing bars to be used in the concrete elements,
for the brick strength to be low, for the concrete quality to be in the world. Seventy-five percent of Indonesia’s schools are in disas-
poor, and for construction details like adequate concrete cover, ter risk areas; the nearly 800,000-square mile country is exposed
reinforcing hooks and splices, or mortar quality and placement to large earthquakes, tsunamis, high winds, volcanoes, landslides,
to be overlooked. and floods. From these numbers, it is estimated that there could
Considering the incomplete confinement and the problems with be between 250,000 to 400,000 buildings of this type within the
configuration and construction quality, the performance of these country at risk from earthquakes.
buildings has been poor in recent earthquakes, characterized by
significant damage, partial collapse, and total collapse in some cases.
The problem is not localized; many more vulnerable buildings of
Finding a Solution
this type exist in earthquake-prone areas across Indonesia. Indonesia New school buildings are continuously added to the educational
is the fourth most populated country in the world, following the infrastructure in Indonesia in an attempt to keep up with demand.
United States, and with over 50 million students attending more However, it is not economically feasible to demolish and replace
than 300,000 schools, it also has the fourth largest education system all existing vulnerable buildings as a universal solution. Many of

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org.

RECORDS
“An NCEES Record makes it
fast, easy, and convenient to
apply for additional P.E.
licenses in other states.”
Alexander Zuendt, P.E.
Zuendt Engineering
Record holder since 2011

National Council of Examiners

for Engineering and Surveying® Build your NCEES Record today.
P.O. Box 1686, Clemson, S.C. 29633 ncees.org/records
864.654.6824

J A N U A R Y 2 019 15
 the existing buildings will remain indefinitely, so cost-effective
options for improving them are needed. At the same time,
improvements in new building construction methods are
urgently needed. This is something the authors are also work-
ing with the Ministry of Education to achieve.
To explore solutions for existing classrooms, Build Change
worked with the local Education Department in Padang to
select a representative school, of the one-story confined masonry
type, as an example for developing cost-effective retrofit options
using locally-available materials and labor. The authors and their
Indonesian colleagues gathered information relevant to the retrofit
design to consider various techniques. Information was derived
from the Indonesian building code, from existing national and
international guidelines, from research performed by others and
by Build Change, and from the authors’ own experiences. Due to
the common use of low-strength, single-wythe brick in Indonesia,
several researchers in Indonesia and Japan had already developed
and tested retrofit techniques to strengthen the slender masonry
for in-plane and out-of-plane loading successfully. Solutions
included using a cement-plaster overlay or banded steel wire mesh
combined with a cement-plaster overlay.
The authors selected a shear wall system for the retrofit, although
several other schemes were considered including a moment frame
system and a cantilevered column system. The resulting retrofit scheme
targeted life-safety performance for the code-prescribed design earth-
quake and was composed of several key components:
• Infilling select wall openings in the longitudinal walls to create
sufficient length of the wall and installing confining elements at
their boundaries.
• Overlaying walls with steel wire mesh and cement-plaster and,
in some cases, rebuilding the wall pier to be thicker masonry to
improve in-plane and out-of-plane strength.
• Adding reinforced concrete
strongbacks to the trans-
verse walls for out-of-plane
bracing.
• Installing a new continuous
ring beam at the top of the
wall.
• Installing a horizontal bracing
system just above ceiling level
connected to the ring beam to
act as a diaphragm.
• Eliminating any unreinforced
masonry above window and
door openings by extend-
ing the opening upwards to
the ring beam and filling
the space with light-weight
materials instead.
• Eliminating the masonry
gables and replacing them
with light-weight materials.
In addition to these structural
improvements, new braced
ceilings were proposed for
the classroom interiors, and
additional natural light and
Installation of the mesh plaster overlay ventilation were proposed for
during pilot construction. the transverse end walls.
16 STRUCTURE magazine
Plan view of the retrofit scheme.
Piloting the Retrofit
Two single-classroom buildings in the example school were selected
for piloting the retrofit construction project. One of these had been
lightly damaged by the 2009 earthquake and was no longer in use.
Construction quality supervision was provided throughout the
duration of the work to ensure that the contractor followed the
construction documents. Additionally, experienced builder trainers
frequently visited the site to provide pointers and support to the
workers to achieve a good quality construction. Bricks were purchased
from suppliers that offered tested and certified-strength bricks.
The construction started in January 2016 on one of the two buildings
and the second building was completed in May 2016. Most of the
retrofit techniques were familiar to the local builders, except installing
the mesh-plaster overlay; however, the required level of construction
quality was higher than the builders were accustomed to and this led
to some delays. For new techniques, like the wire mesh overlay, extra
care was taken in the detailing and on-site supervision of the mesh
installation, which the builders were able to master after an initial
period of familiarization.
In addition to the construction work, engagement of the school
community was a component of the pilot project. Early retrofit plan-
ning was accompanied by significant efforts to involve and increase
the disaster-risk awareness of the school community. Training materi-
als on the retrofit were developed, and a retrofit awareness workshop
was held for representatives of the school council, the Education
Department, and the Regional Disaster Management Agency. During
construction, Build Change Indonesian staff and members from the
school council jointly performed the construction supervision, with
discussions on good construction practice and review of construc-
tion quality checklist items. The pilot retrofit was also used as an
opportunity to raise the topic of disaster-risk and prevention with
students and teachers. Presentations on how earthquakes affect
buildings were given to the students and the materials were shared
with teachers for future use.
The construction of the retrofit improved these two buildings and
also permitted the validation of construction cost estimates and
constructability of retrofitting details. The total cost of the project,
including the construction costs, the design, the construction quality
One of the classroom buildings before and after retrofitting.

supervision and support, and the school community outreach was Lizzie Blaisdell Collins is the Director of Engineering at Build Change, a
approximately $32,000 total for both buildings or approximately non-profit social enterprise that works with people in emerging nations to
$27 per square foot. design, build, finance, and regulate disaster-resistant houses and schools.
(lizzie@buildchange.org)

Plans for Scale James Mwangi is the 2017-2018 Simpson Strong-Tie Fellow for Excellence
in Engineering with Build Change during his sabbatical year from California
After the completion of the pilot project, the authors and their Polytechnic University in San Luis Obispo where he is a professor of Architectural
Indonesian colleagues have completed the design and construc- Engineering. Through the fellowship, he spent two months in Padang focused on
tion of a retrofit for the other, larger classroom building at the improving school infrastructure in Indonesia. (jmwangi@calpoly.edu)
same school. The larger building has four classrooms and an
administrative office. The overall retrofit scheme is the same, with Mediatrich Triani N. is an Architect and the Program Manager for Build
small adaptations. By repeating the retrofit design process and Change in Indonesia. (triani@buildchange.org)
incorporating lessons from the pilot retrofit, the team refined the
retrofit design and detailing. The next
step is to develop simple guidelines
that could be used at a larger scale
for the application and adaptation
of the retrofit scheme to many more
buildings of the same type. This would
allow a more prescriptive approach
to retrofitting many of the vulnerable
classroom buildings in Indonesia, as
long as the characteristics of the build-

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org.

ings align with those of the applicable
type. In addition to coordinating with
the National Ministry of Education
and local Education Department in
Padang, Build Change is currently
seeking partners to sup-
port this scale-up of school
retrofitting.▪

Build Change has 100 technical staff in six

programs globally. For more information
on Build Change and a downloadable copy
of their post-earthquake reconnaissance
reports, please visit www.buildchange.org.
The authors would like to thank those that
made the work described possible: The
Education Department of Padang for their
partnership, and Simpson Strong-Tie, the
Thornton Tomasetti Foundation, and the
New Zealand Embassy in Indonesia for
their support.

MCI_5x3.5_02-18.indd 1 2/19/18 8:44 AM

J A N U A R Y 2 019 17
 NORTHRIDGE
Caltrans Highway
Structures
By Mark Yashinsky
E very damaging California earthquake has resulted in changes
to the California Department of Transportation’s (Caltrans’)
seismic practice. The most significant changes occurred after
the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake. Bridges at that time were
designed for a small seismic force, which resulted in extensive
damage to bridges and interchanges during the earthquake.
Immediately afterward, Caltrans wrote construction change orders
requiring more transverse reinforcement and continuous main rein-
forcement in bridge columns and eliminating a vulnerable lap splice
connecting the footing to the column. Also, the minimum seat length
at expansion joints, abutment seats, and hinges went from 12 inches
to 18 inches (and later to 24 inches). Other changes included the
development of a site-specific ground shaking hazard for designing
bridges and a capacity-based design method that relied on structural
column fuses to limit seismic forces. Caltrans also started a seismic
retrofit program to address the many existing bridges that had been
under-designed for earthquakes. The San Fernando Earthquake was
also the start of the practice of Caltrans sending out a reconnaissance
team of licensed engineers to study the damage and write a report with
lessons learned, a practice that has continued for every subsequent
large earthquake.
The 1987 Whittier Narrows Earthquake was another turning point
in Caltrans seismic design of bridges. The previous retrofit program
relied on cable restrainers to limit displacement and prevent column
damage, but shear damage to the short columns on the Route 605/5
Separation (53 1660) generated enough concern to begin a new
retrofit program to wrap bridge columns in steel (or fiber-reinforced
polymer) casings on older bridges.
Unfortunately, the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake occurred before many
bridges were retrofitted. The earthquake damaged the double-deck Cypress
Viaduct (33 0178), built in the 1950s, that had been designed with vulner-
able pinned connections to make it structurally determinant and easier to
analyze. The main reinforcement in these connections was not sufficiently
developed, and the shear reinforcement was inadequate. This resulted in
the collapse of a mile-long segment of the viaduct during the earthquake.
Several other double-deck viaducts around San Francisco sustained severe
damage to the superstructure-to-column connections that resulted in their
closure and removal after the earthquake. Also, a 50-foot span over Pier 9
on the East Crossing of the San Francisco Oakland Bay Bridge (33 0025),
built in the 1930s, collapsed due to inadequate 4-inch-wide seats, reiterat-
ing the lesson that seats have to be long enough to support the resulting
displaced bridge members during earthquakes. The Struve Slough Bridges
(36 0088L/R) in Watsonville were T-girder bridges on piles founded on
very soft soil. During the earthquake, the soil shook violently, dragging
the piles from their connection with the superstructure which resulted
in the pile extensions punching through the bridge deck.
18 STRUCTURE magazine
25 YEARS LATER
Figure 1. Gavin Canyon Bridges.
Concerns about the bridge damage prompted the California gover-
nor to create a Board of Inquiry that found that Caltrans was doing
a good job addressing seismic issues but needed to accelerate the
seismic retrofit program. The Board of Inquiry recommended that a
standing board of experts should be created to advise Caltrans on its
earthquake engineering practices. Thus, the Caltrans Seismic Advisory
Board was formed and continues to advise Caltrans on seismic issues.
The need to quickly complete the retrofit program was demonstrated
again when the 1994 Northridge Earthquake occurred before the
program was completed. Seven bridges, five of which were designed
before 1971, were severely damaged during the earthquake but all
60 bridges in the Los Angeles area that had been retrofitted after the
Loma Prieta Earthquake performed very well.
I-5: Gavin Canyon Bridge
These two parallel 741-foot-long bridges (53 1797L/R) built in 1955,
were designed with table-like center frames that supported the canti-
levered spans of the four end frames on highly skewed, 8-inch-long
hinge seats. A retrofit in 1974 added restrainers at the hinges. During
the earthquake, the outer frames rotated, failing the restrainers, fol-
lowed by unseating and collapse of the cantilevered spans. In Figure 1,
the demolition crew has already started removing the bridge before
the reconnaissance team could inspect the damage (the team started
in Sacramento and were escorted by the California Highway Patrol
down I-5 through various detours to a hotel in Pasadena). Among the
lessons learned was that the fundamental mode during an earthquake
for a bridge may be rotational, not translational; that long seats, not
restrainers were needed to prevent unseating; that high skews make it
easier for bridges to become unseated by moving normal to the skew;
and, that the anchorage for restrainers is often the location of failure.
However, most of these lessons had been learned during previous
earthquakes. After this earthquake, these bridges were replaced with
single frame structures.
Route 14/5 Separation and Overhead
This 1582-foot-long bridge (53 1960F) on single column piers was
under construction (and was still on falsework) during the 1971
San Fernando Earthquake, but it collapsed during the Northridge
Earthquake (Figure 2). There was considerable speculation as to the
cause of the failure, but it was eventually decided (and corroborated
by analysis) that it was due to the shear damage to short, stiff Pier 2.
Most long bridges have short bents near the ends and tall bents in
the middle. As this bridge moved back and forth during the earth-
quake, the stiffer elements could not displace as much as their taller
neighbors and broke. After Pier 2 broke, the superstructure sagged,
broke around Pier 3, and slid off Abutment 1 (Figure 2) and Pier 4.
After the earthquake, Caltrans instituted standards to ensure that the
columns within a bent, bents within a frame, and frames in a bridge
have similar stiffness or period.
Route 118: Mission Gothic Undercrossing
These parallel structures (53 2205L/R) included a 506-foot-long
3-span left bridge and a 566-foot-long 4-span right bridge on two-
column bents and abutments with 4-foot-long seats. The bridges
were 98 feet wide with prestressed bent caps (except for Bent 4 on the
right bridge). The bridges were designed in 1973 and built in 1976.
They crossed over an intersection and consequently had opposing
skews at the two ends. The columns were fixed at the top and pinned
at the base. A common detail used on these bridges was architec-
tural flares on the columns, which were assumed to spall off during
earthquakes. However, during the Northridge earthquake, the flares
did not spall off and reduced the effective column height, resulting
in a combination of shear and flexural damage. As can be seen in
Figure 3, the bridges displaced transversely during the earthquake. The
right bridge (the left side of Figure 3) collapsed while the left bridge
settled approximately two feet. Typically, a bridge is locked in by the
abutments, which act to limit the movement during earthquakes. It
was concluded that having abutments at opposite skews allowed the
bridges to move away from the abutments, which contributed to
the collapse. After the earthquake, Caltrans funded research at the
University of California San Diego, which confirmed the vulnerability
of flared columns and a new detail was developed to isolate the flare
from the superstructure on new bridges (existing bridges were retrofit
with casings around the column and the flare).
Route 118: Bull Creek Canyon Channel Bridge
These parallel 3-span structures (53 2206L/R) were 256 feet long with
a variable width (minimum of 200 feet) and a variable skew. Like
their neighbor (Mission Gothic Undercrossing), they were designed
in 1973 and built in 1976. The bridges were supported on 9 and 10
column bents and tall, end-diaphragm abutments. The columns had
a modern design with spirals at a 3-inch pitch at the top and bottom
Figure 3. Route 118 Mission Gothic Undercrossing.
Figure 2. Route 14/5 separation and overhead.
and a 12-inch pitch elsewhere. The bridges crossed over a channel,
and the concrete for the channel walls was placed against the columns
at Bent 3. The structure appeared to have rotated clockwise during
the earthquake. Similar to Mission Gothic, the channel wall had the
effect of shortening the columns and consequently attracted more
seismic force. Also, the top of the channel wall was where the trans-
verse column reinforcement was at a 12-inch pitch. All the columns
at Bent 3 failed in shear (Figure 4). The top of some of the columns
in Bent 2 formed plastic hinges, probably after the columns in Bent
3 were damaged.
I10: La Cienega-Venice Undercrossing
These parallel, three-frame (7-span) 871-foot-long bridges (53
1609L/R) on 2 and 3 column bents and bin-type abutments
were designed in 1962 and built in 1964. The frames were con-
nected with 6-inch-long hinge seats. There was also a connector
and an on-ramp on the right bridge. Columns had lapped hoop
reinforcement at a 12-inch spacing and were pinned or fixed to
pile caps without a top mat or any shear reinforcement. Most
of the columns on the right bridge formed plastic hinges at the
bottom, although a few columns had plastic hinges at the top
(Figure 5, page 20). The column damage was thought to have
caused Span 6 of the right bridge to become unseated. However,
the superstructures were caught by a storage facility that had been
built under the bridges. The foundations were excavated after the
earthquake, but no damage was found. It was thought that the
thick layer of asphalt and concrete pushed the column damage up
to where the columns were more vulnerable (although there was
a lap splice between the column reinforcement and the footing).
An observation after the earthquake was that the columns with
Figure 4. Route 118 Bull Creek Canyon Channel Bridge.
J A N U A R Y 2 019 19
 Table 1. Incentive/Disincentive Contracts used after the Northridge Earthquake.
Project Incentive/Disincentive
Santa Monica Freeway (I-10) $200,000/day
Gavin Canyon (I-5) $150,000/day
5/14 Interchange $100,000/day
State Route 118 $50,000/day
42- #11 bar main reinforcing experienced more damage than the
columns with less main reinforcement. This bridge was far to the
south of the epicenter (which ruptured to the north), but it was
felt that long period shaking was amplified by the soft soil (La
Cienega is Spanish for “The Swamp”).
Lessons Learned
Collectively, the bridge damage described in this article was just a
small part of all the damage that occurred during the Northridge
Earthquake. A lot of this damage was due to geometric and struc-
tural system issues (high bridge skews, unbalanced structures,
and non-prismatic members) that resulted in unexpectedly large
demands during the earthquake. This gave rise to the develop-
ment of rules and procedures to ensure that bridge members
are well-balanced and that shear-critical members are not used.
Large skews are still used on bridges but are mitigated either by
eliminating in-span hinges or by very large seats at hinges, abut-
ments, and expansion joints. However, abutments with opposing
skews should no longer be used since there is nothing to prevent
the bridge from moving away from the abutments, as was seen
at Mission Gothic UC.
Procedures, initiated after the Loma Prieta Earthquake, were
improved after the Northridge Earthquake. For instance, after Loma
Prieta, Caltrans initiated a practice of accelerating earthquake repairs
with A+B construction contracts. Caltrans determined the societal
cost per day that the bridge/highway segment was not available and
contractors bid on the cost + the number of days required to rebuild
the bridge. The first A+B contract was to rebuild the Struve Slough
Bridges after the Loma Prieta Earthquake. The contractor who was
awarded the project had aggressively bid to complete the two parallel
830-foot long slab bridges supported on 200 driven piles in just 90
days. He managed to complete the project in 55 days (by working
around the clock) and made a million dollars in incentives.
Figure 5. 1-10 La Cienega-Venice Undercrossing.
20 STRUCTURE magazine
Due to the success of A+B contracting after the Loma Prieta
Earthquake, this type of procurement was used to rebuild all the
bridges that collapsed during the Northridge Earthquake. Caltrans
economists determined the incentive/disincentive rates based on the
projected daily cost for each closed highway (Table 1). The Santa
Monica Freeway (I-10) was reopened in 3 months. All of the collapsed
bridges were reopened to traffic by November 4, 1994 (10 months
after the earthquake). While the highways were being repaired, many
frontage roads were cleared and converted to High Occupancy Vehicle
lanes to alleviate traffic congestion.
The most significant change to seismic design practice after Loma
Prieta was that the ‘R’ factor that had been used to estimate the
reduced seismic force in ductile columns was abandoned and a
moment-curvature analysis began to be used to determine the dis-
placement capacity of substructure members. The columns’ effective
stiffness was calculated to obtain the period, and the appropriate
design spectrum was used to get the displacement demand. Caltrans was
able to update its seismic design procedure after writing XSECTION
to obtain the displacement capacity of columns, PSSECTION to
obtain the displacement capacity of prestressed piles, and WFRAME
to obtain the displacement capacity of bridge frames. Caltrans is
continuing to develop the next generation of earthquake engineering
tools that will utilize Nonlinear Time History Analysis (NLTHA)
procedures for the seismic design of ordinary bridges.
The methods for generating design spectra have also undergone
several changes since the Loma Prieta and Northridge earthquakes.
Before Loma Prieta, the design spectrum was obtained based on
the deterministically-derived Maximum Credible Earthquake of
the controlling fault and the depth of alluvium at the bridge site.
After the Loma Prieta Earthquake, the shear wave velocity of the
soil began to be used for obtaining the design spectrum. After the
Northridge Earthquake, it was recognized that near-fault directivity
effects increased the demands on long period structures. Response
spectra were increased 20% in the long period range for bridges
within 10 miles (15 km) from the fault. Also, the envelope of
deterministic and probabilistic spectra began to be used to obtain
the design spectra for bridges (Figure 6).
The most significant change to seismic design practice after the
Northridge Earthquake was new rules requiring adjacent columns in
a bent and adjacent bents in a frame to have similar stiffness (ki/kj >
0.75). Moreover, any two bents in a frame and any two columns in
a bent were required to have comparable stiffness (ki/kj > 0.50). The
periods of adjacent frames were also required to be similar (Ti/Tj > 0.7)
Figure 6. Probabilistic and deterministic spectra with near fault effects and envelope
used for design.

Figure 7. Bridge with isolation casings to achieve a balanced design.
to prevent large out-of-phase movement between frames. All of these
rules were to prevent the severe damage that was observed after the
Northridge Earthquake. A popular technique that began to be used
over uneven terrain was isolation casings to give all the bents about
the same stiffness (Figure 7 ).
Other changes after the Northridge Earthquake included:
• Establishment of Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria (SDC)
Version 1.0 in 1999 (now completing Version 2.0).
• Ground shaking hazards were amplified due to near-fault
effects, basin effects, etc.
• Besides the ground shaking hazard, liquefaction hazards, lateral
spreading hazards, fault offset hazards, tsunami hazards, and
more began to be considered in the seismic design of bridges
• Memo to Designers (MTD) 20-9 provided rules for reinforce-
ment splices in ductile and capacity-protected members.
• New criteria allowed rocking as an earthquake resisting
system for existing bridges.
• New criteria were developed for the retrofit of arch, truss, and
other non-standard bridges.
• Caltrans began a robust seismic research program and has
invested over $100 million since 1989 to better understand
earthquake hazards and to develop resilient earthquake resis-
tant bridge systems and details.
• Research showed a smaller role played by vertical acceleration
in bridge damage.
• Caltrans required k-rail at the ends of damaged bridges after
police drove off several bridges.
Caltrans has not experienced a large, damaging earthquake since
Northridge. However, Caltrans engineers and managers are confident
that all of the efforts spent developing new seismic design
criteria and retrofitting existing bridges will yield less bridge
damage during the next design-level earthquake.■
A critical element was missing before Caltrans could move from a
force-based system to a displacement-based approach for the seismic
analysis of new and existing bridges. Three structural analysis programs
(XSEC, PSS and WFR) were written by Caltrans’ bridge engineers to
determine the displacement capacity of columns, piles and shafts, and
bridge frames. For more information, visit https://goo.gl/YLjuBh.
Mark Yashinsky has spent the last 34 years as a bridge engineer at Caltrans
and has worked in the Caltrans Office of Earthquake Engineering since
the Loma Prieta Earthquake. Among his many duties is leading the post-
earthquake inspection team, developing new seismic criteria, and managing
the seismic retrofit program. He has written a number of books, papers, and
articles on bridges and earthquakes. (mark.yashinsky@dot.ca.gov)

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org.

OPTIMIZE YOUR MULTI-STORY Advanced long-span

composite floor systems
DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION Create open spans up to 36 feet
with solutions that can be 40%
lighter than cast in place. Reduce
installation costs and improve field
safety. Achieve your vision with
architecturally exposed deck-ceiling
and acoustical options. Fire, sound
and vibration code compliant.

• Efficient Construction
• Aesthetics and Performance
• Two Distinct Profiles

YOUR N AT IO N WIDE RES O U RC E F O R C U STO M - E N GI N E E R E D ST RUC T UR AL ST E E L B UI L D I N G SYST E M S

www.newmill.com

18-NMBS-2_structure-MSR.indd 1 12/7/18 4:56 PM

J A N U A R Y 2 019 21
 SR 99
Tunnel
in Seattle
By Yang Jiang, Ph.D., P.E., S.E., and Andrew Herten, P.E.
T he recently completed SR 99 Tunnel was constructed as part
of the Washington State Department of Transportation’s
(WSDOT) Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Program.
The existing Alaskan Way Viaduct (AWV) is an aging double-deck
highway structure in Seattle, Washington, that was built in the 1950s.
The Viaduct has been deteriorating due to age as well as damage
resulting from the 2001 Nisqually earthquake. The SR 99 Tunnel
consists of three segments: the South Approach, the Bored Tunnel,
and the North Approach. The South and North Approaches include
cut-and-cover tunnels and U-sections.
The bored tunnel begins south of downtown Seattle in close prox-
imity to the seawall of Elliott Bay, tends north along the existing
Alaskan Way Viaduct, then crosses under the Viaduct, traverses
under downtown Seattle, and emerges north of downtown Seattle
just east of the Space Needle (Figure 1). The bored tunnel is 9,300
feet long with an outer diameter of 56 feet and was excavated by an
Earth Pressure Balance (EPB) Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM), named
Bertha, with a 57½-foot-diameter cutterhead. The bored tunnel was
the largest in diameter in the world at the time of design (Figure 2).
At its lowest point, the tunnel crown is at elevation -95 feet, and it is
215 feet deep at its greatest depth below grade. Development along
the alignment consists of on-grade and elevated roadways, buildings
ranging from single-story to high-rise structures, railroad and sewer
tunnels, and public and private utilities.
In December 2010, WSDOT awarded the SR 99 Bored Tunnel
Design-Build Project to Seattle Tunnel Partners (STP) based on best
technical solution and cost. STP is a joint venture between Dragados
USA and Tutor Perini Corp. The design team includes HNTB
Corporation, Intecsa of Spain, Hart Crowser, Inc., and EMI Inc.
HNTB was responsible for the design of the lining and approach
structures. After close to two years of design and preparations, TBM
Bertha was launched and began drilling in July 2013. Only five
months later, Bertha halted
drilling due to overheating
of some of her components.
After two years of repair and
preparation, Bertha resumed
mining in February 2016
and finally broke through
into the receiving pit in
April 2017. Although the
TBM work was put on hold Figure 1. SR 99 Bored Tunnel and Approaches.
22 STRUCTURE magazine
Courtesy of Pete Saloutos
during Bertha’s repair, construction of the approaches and some
interior structures continued during that time.
Geology
Seattle is located adjacent to Puget Sound in the Puget Lowland
between the Olympic Mountains to the west and the Cascade Range
to the east. The Puget Lowland has been subject to several glacial
advances, resulting in a complex stratigraphy of glacial and non-glacial
soil deposits. Along its alignment, the tunnel traverses through vari-
able glacially over-consolidated soil deposits with high groundwater
pressures of up to 5.2 bars (Figure 3). These deposits are often highly
variable within relatively short distances due to the inconsistency
in erosion and deposition during the multiple glacial events and
interglacial periods.
Design
Design geologic sections were selected to assess the geologic vari-
ability along the tunnel alignment, as well as topographic/geometric
variability and building structure locations. As shown in Figure 3,
15 geologic sections (shown in blue) were selected for static design
and 8 sections (shown in red) for seismic design. For consideration
of potential future development, the contract required an evaluation
of a 7,000 psf building surcharge applied at the height and width
limits of WSDOT’s right of way above the tunnel, which are 54 feet
above the crown and 84 feet wide. Existing building and structure
foundations vary from spread footings and mat foundations to deep
shafts and piles, ranging from 8 to 63 feet long and as close as 16
feet above the tunnel crown. Buildings along the tunnel alignment
range from 13 to 546 feet tall with basement excavations ranging
from approximately 0 to 87 feet deep.
Dual levels of design
earthquakes were consid-
ered for the design of the
tunnel liner. The Expected
Earthquake has a 108-year
return period and is asso-
ciated with Operational
Performance Objectives,
while the Rare Earthquake
has a 2,500-year return
Figure 2. SR 99 Bored Tunnel configuration. Figure 3. Geotechnical profile and design section locations.

period and is associated with Life Safety Performance Objectives.

Under the Expected Earthquake, minimal damage to the liner seg-
Construction
ments, joints, and water tightness is anticipated because the lining is There were significant challenges during the construction of the
designed to respond in an elastic manner. Concrete compression strain south and north settlement mitigation measures as well as with the
is limited to 0.003, and tensile strain in reinforcing steel is limited interior structures.
to 0.002. Under the Rare Earthquake, the objective is to prevent the At the tunnel’s south end, the beginning of the tunnel drive, the
collapse of the tunnel liner. Inelastic deformations are allowed under tunnel has very shallow ground cover above and is in close proximity
the Rare Earthquake but are limited to the acceptable levels; concrete to the Alaskan Way Viaduct’s pile foundations. The shallow depth
strain is allowed to exceed 0.003 but limited to 0.005 provided that of tunnel overburden, combined with a water table near the ground
the strain is predominantly due to flexure. The tensile strains in a surface, required jet grouting the soil and utilizing an encapsulating
mild reinforcing steel are limited to 0.06 for reinforcing bars up to box structure of a 5-foot-thick buoyancy slab with vertical tension
US #10 size and 0.045 for US #11 size and larger. piles (5 feet in diameter). This held down the structure’s buoyancy
The tunnel liner was analyzed and designed for two conditions. uplift and mitigated the risk of surface settlement during the tunnel
The first condition included only the tunnel ring, representing the boring machine’s mining. The tunnel profile is at 4% initially and,
scenario at the end of the tunneling operations. The second condition once the tunnel descends beneath an overburden depth able to resist
included the completed tunnel during in-service condition, includ- the tunnel’s uplift force, there is no need for a buoyancy slab. The
ing the tunnel lining, the interior structures, the systems, and any so-called box structure stops, however, and a wall of isolated concrete
associated loads. The strength design of the liner is in accordance piles, or drilled shafts, extend between the tunnel and the adjacent
with AASHTO Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) method, Alaskan Way Viaduct footings.
which takes the statistical variability of member strength and the Initially, the tunnel’s alignment and the AWV are parallel, but where
magnitude of the applied loads into account. The load factors in the AWV veers west, the tunnel crosses beneath. At this intersection,
AASHTO have been modified according to the Federal Highway the wall of concrete piles stops and adjacent footings are mitigated
Administration Manual. from potential settlement instead with rows of vertical and battered
Analysis of the bored tunnel included loading from seismic defor- micro-piles (Figure 4).
mations and ground accelerations considering three primary modes At the tunnel’s north end, the completion of the tunnel drive,
of deformation during seismic ground movement: (1) ovaling, the tunnel has sufficient overburden and a deeper water table so
(2) axial, and (3) curvature deformations. Deformations of the as not to require being held down by a box structure. The pri-
soil surrounding the liner due to the seismic mary concern is mitigating against surface
wave propagating from bedrock through soil settlement. Settlement risk to existing build-
media, without the liner, were computed with ings was mitigated with rows of protective
a continuum model, and the ground defor- micro-piles.
mations were imposed on the liner through The tunnel’s interior structure is comprised
supporting elements (non-linear springs) of two continuous corbels supporting a series
using beam-on-spring models by perform- of 650-foot-long moment frame systems of
ing non-linear dynamic time history analysis walls and slabs, detailed to expand and con-
on both transverse and longitudinal models. tract longitudinally. The lower roadway walls
The results from the time history analysis are primarily pin connected to the corbels
show that the maximum ovaling is about below and fixed to the upper roadway slab
1.5 inches or 0.2% of the ring diameter for and traffic barriers above. The upper walls
the Rare Earthquakes. It is observed that are pin connected on each end, detailed to
maximum ovaling is generally in a diagonal accommodate transverse seismic deformation
direction, which is consistent with the open of the frame or tunnel ring. The electrical
round cavity deformation caused by a free-field room and egress corridor slabs are cantile-
ground shear distortion. The liner segment vered from the interior walls; the cantilevered
gaskets were also evaluated for water tightness slabs and upper roadway walls are clear of
under this maximum ovaling, as well as the the tunnel ring sufficient to accommodate
maximum longitudinal curvature through the the anticipated ring ovaling due to seismic
use of a 3-D finite element model. Figure 4. AWV settlement mitigation. ground movement (Figure 5, page 24 ).
continued on next page

J A N U A R Y 2 019 23
 Figure 5. Section – Tunnel Interior Structure (TIS).
The tunnel ring and its interior structure were constructed in a
factory-line style system. The TBM erected the ten precast ring seg-
ments as part of its excavation/advancement. Segment arrangement
was dictated by the highway’s design alignment, as the ring’s profile
was designed so the rotation of it would incrementally change the
TBM’s heading. Workers on the tail of the TBM drilled corbel dowels
into the ring segments at locators blocked out prior to casting. Behind
the tail, workers installed a rail just inside each corbel face to support
the traveling form system gantry. Carpenters built end-forms for
each corbel in 50-foot intervals, the ring surface was prepped, corbel
reinforcement cages were trucked in and placed, embedded conduits
installed, and traveling forms were lowered into place and concrete
pumped in by ready-mix trucks. All the while, the invert of the tunnel
was kept free of obstructions for passage of the ring segment hauler
and shift changes of workers (Figure 6).
Construction of the walls was similar, with skip forming, pre-
assembled reinforcing cages, and cast-in-place with a rail supported
traveling formwork (Figure 7).
Project success would not have been possible without an ability to
design a permanent structure that could be built while not obstruct-
ing temporary work activity such as the TBM excavation removal,
the ventilation duct below the crown, or material delivery along the
invert (Figure 8).
Figure 7. Skip forming for upper slab of interior structure.
24 STRUCTURE magazine
Figure 6. Tunnel interior structure corbel construction.
Conclusion
The SR 99 Bored Tunnel will open to traffic in February 2019,
signifying the official completion of the project that began in 2011.
The STP team had encountered and overcome enormous challenges
in managing, designing, and constructing the project that included
one of the largest and recording-setting bored tunnels in the world,
and resulted in a significant and long-lasting infrastructure in Seattle
that will be enjoyed by generations to come. The SR 99 Tunnel
also opens areas that were occupied by AWV for improvement and
affords Seattle the opportunity to make it a world-class waterfront
city. Demolition and decommissioning of the Alaska Way
Viaduct and construction of the new Alaskan Way street
along the waterfront are scheduled to begin in early 2019.■
Yang Jiang is a Principal Engineer with HNTB Corporation in Bellevue,
WA. Yang is the Engineer of Record and lead engineer for the SR 99
Bored Tunnel. (yjiang@hntb.com)
Andrew Herten is a Senior Project Engineer with HNTB Corporation in
Bellevue, WA. Andrew managed the cut-and-cover tunnel structural design
as well as project-wide post-design services for the SR 99 Tunnel Project.
(aherten@hntb.com)
Figure 8. TBM delivery during TIS construction.
 One frame.
Countless possibilities.

Structural Steel
Connections.
Streamlined.

AISC 358-16

Introducing our Strong Frame special moment frame Yield-Link

® ®

connection — a time-saving and cost-effective solution for structural

steel construction. Our patented and code-listed Yield-Link is a
bolted steel moment connection, eliminating costly field welding
and inspection, and expediting fabrication and assembly. Because
the connection is easily replaceable after a seismic event, it can
reduce the time and expense in getting a building back in use.
Visit go.strongtie.com/yieldlink to learn more about our
Patented Yield-Link Structural Fuse
®
innovative Yield-Link solution.
© 2019 Simpson Strong-Tie Company Inc. SMFYLC18

Changes on STRUCTURE’s Editorial Board
A s is typical in many a new year, 2019 brings several changes to
the STRUCTURE Editorial Board. Barry Arnold, P.E., S.E.,
SECB, is stepping down as Chair of the Editorial Board. Barry has
served as Chair since 2016 and, unsurprisingly, has discovered that
his duties as Vice President of ARW Engineers (Ogden, UT) increas-
ingly require his attention. He is an untiring advocate of the structural
engineering profession, having served as President of the National
Council of Structural Engineers Associations (NCSEA), the Structural
Engineers Association of Utah, and continues to serve on NCSEA’s
Structural Licensure Committee.
Barry said of his departure, “Serving
as the Editorial Chair of STRUCTURE
magazine has been an experience without
equal. Beyond the daily barrage of emails,
the numerous calls to the publisher, and
what seemed like an endless queue of
small and large issues, I had the privi-
lege of working closely with some of the
structural engineering profession’s most
exceptional, committed, and unique indi-
viduals. The editorial board is not for the
Barry Arnold, P.E., S.E., SECB
faint of heart – it requires devotion to the
magazine’s mission, strict adherence to deadlines, and a deep passion
and love for the structural engineering profession. It has been my
privilege to serve with board members who possessed these qualities,
and I thank them for their tireless commitment and role in making
STRUCTURE magazine a success each month.
I have sincere gratitude for NCSEA’s past and current Executive
Directors, Jeanne Vogelzang and Al Spada, respectively, who trusted
me to Chair the editorial board. STRUCTURE magazine is an excel-
lent publication because of the efforts of the Management, Board,
Publisher, and volunteer authors; it is their efforts that make the
magazine admired and respected by the readers.
I am sure that the New Chair, John Dal
Pino, will continue in the long tradition
of offering the magazine’s readers inter-
esting and useful topics to strengthen
and educate the engineering profession. I
wish John and the entire Editorial Board
success in this endeavor.”
As Barry mentioned, John Dal Pino,
S.E., assumed the duties of Chair as of
January 1st and has been working closely
with Barry throughout the latter half of
John Dal Pino, S.E.
2018 to prepare for his role. John is a
Principal with FTF Engineering located in San Francisco, California,
and served as a CASE representative on the STRUCTURE Editorial
Board since May 2014. Currently, John is on the Professional Practices
Committee of SEAONC, past chair of the National Guidelines
Committee at CASE, and served as President of the Structural
Engineers Risk Management Council (SERMC).
Also retiring from the STRUCTURE Editorial Board is Greg
Schindler, S.E. Greg has been a member of the Editorial Board since
2004. He is a Life Member of the Structural Engineers Association
of Washington (SEAW), serving as Seattle Chapter President in
26 STRUCTURE magazine
in the NEWS
1992. Greg has also been involved with
NCSEA since its inception, serving as
the SEAW delegate for many years, as
chair of the NCSEA awards program,
and a member of the CAC subcommit-
tee on Special Inspections and Testing.
He represented NCSEA on the board
of directors of the Building Seismic
Safety Council and served as NCSEA
president in 2000-2001. Greg recently
retired after 38 years at the Seattle office
Greg Schindler, S.E.
of KPFF Consulting Engineers.
Barry Arnold had this to say about Greg’s departure: “Greg has served
loyally and diligently on the Editorial Board for 14 years. During his
time on the Board, Greg has taken on the role of Board Secretary and
Review Committee Chair. Greg worked with hundreds of authors
to develop article content that fit STRUCTURE magazine’s mission
statement and addressed the needs of a very diverse readership. The
profession has benefited greatly from Greg’s dedication and commit-
ment to the magazine and the structural engineering profession. His
efforts are praiseworthy, and he will be missed on the Editorial Board.”
Of his tenure, Greg noted: “I would like to thank the board of
directors of NCSEA for allowing me the opportunity to serve as one
of the editors of this renowned magazine. After fourteen years on the
editorial board, I believed it was time to step aside and allow for new
ideas and new energy on the board. Over the years, I have watched
this publication grow from a small quarterly newsletter to the highly
respected and well-read magazine that it is today. I have every issue,
except for a couple, including the very first volume printed in the
winter of 1994.
This magazine has become the premier publication for the structural
engineering profession in large part due to the dedicated efforts of
the totally volunteer Editorial Board comprised of practicing engi-
neers from throughout the industry. I want to thank the leaders of
the Editorial Board for their guidance in establishing the consistent
editorial quality of the magazine. There have been very few edito-
rial chairs in the 25-year history of the magazine, which speaks
to their dedication and commitment to our profession. They are:
Rawn Nelson, Craig Cartwright, Jim DeStefano, Jon Schmidt, Barry
Arnold, and the incoming chair John Dal Pino. I know that John
will continue that legacy.
Thanks also to the other editors and the many authors that I have
worked with over the years. Serving on
the editorial board has been my plea-
sure, and a very interesting and rewarding
experience.”
Also stepping down from the Editorial
Board is Stephen P. Schneider, Ph.D.,
P.E., S.E., after 13 years on the Board.
Steve received his Ph.D. at the University
of Washington in Seattle, became a fully
tenured faculty member at the University
of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and
has been a structural engineering consul- Stephen P. Schneider,
tant in the Portland, OR area since the Ph.D., P.E., S.E.
early 2000’s. He is currently a Senior Project Manager at
BergerABAM. Barry Arnold had this to say about Steve’s
departure: “Since 2005, Steve has served faithfully on
the Editorial Board. For thirteen years, the readers of
STRUCTURE have benefited from his dedication and
commitment to the magazine and the profession. Steve’s
service is commendable and greatly appreciated, and he
will be missed.” Of his tenure, Steve noted: “I am grate-
ful to have had the opportunity to work on the Editorial
Board since 2005, helping make STRUCTURE maga-
zine the premier source of information relevant to the Jason McCool, P.E. Eytan Solomon, P.E. Charles “Chuck” F. King, P.E.
structural engineering community today. It has been
highly rewarding to work with authors to publish timely We are also pleased to announce Charles King of Urban Engineers and
technical and project articles, and to shepherd articles that help Eytan Solomon from Robert Silman Associates as new members nomi-
the business operation of an engineering consulting office. After nated by CASE. Charles is responsible for operation and management
13 years, it is time to allow a different perspective on the Editorial of their New York City office and has more than 30 years of experience
Board, but I hope to stay active with the magazine by submitting on complex transportation projects. His organizational skills will be quite
worthwhile articles for future issues.” valuable in his new role. Eytan is an Associate in their New York City office
STRUCTURE magazine welcomes three new Board members in and brings well-rounded experience in new construction, adaptive re-use,
2019. The Board is pleased to announce that Jason McCool of Robbins historic preservation, and the use of unconventional building materials.
Engineering, Little Rock, AR, will join the Editorial Board as a Please join STRUCTURE magazine in sending Barry, Greg,
nominee by NCSEA. We know that he will contribute much to the and Steve best wishes in their future endeavors. And welcome to
content and quality of the magazine with special expertise in welding Jason, Charles, and Eytan; their experience, expertise, and
engineering. Jason brings with him experience in writing and editing, input will be wonderful additions to the STRUCTURE
and comes highly recommended by his peers. magazine team.■

Please watch for a message from John Dal Pino about his vision for STRUCTURE magazine
during his tenure. It is anticipated that this will run in the February 2019 issue.

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org.

GEOPIER GROUND
IMPROVEMENT CONTROLS
STRUCTURE SETTLEMENT
GIVE YOUR STRUCTURE
STABILITY
Work with Geopier’s geotechnical
engineers to solve your ground
improvement challenges. Submit
your project specifications to receive
a customized feasibility assessment
and preliminary cost estimate at
geopier.com/feasibilityrequest.

800-371-7470 • geopier.com
info@geopier.com
GEOPIER IS GROUND IMPROVEMENT®
J A N U A R Y 2 019 27

Thermal Breaks in Building Envelopes
Recent Research Findings
By Scott Hamel, P.E., Ph.D., and Kara Peterman, Ph.D.
T hermal bridges occur when a compo-
nent of high thermal conductivity causes
excessive heat flow through the building
insulation envelope. A large variety of con-
ditions can cause thermal bridging, including
cladding (shelf angles, grillage posts, canopy
beams), metal wall studs, window mullions,
and poor corner detailing. Thermal bridges
through the envelope by structural steel
frames are either linear penetrations, such as
shelf angles, or point penetrations, such as
cantilever beams or rooftop columns.
Bridging of structural steel penetrations can
be particularly significant due to the high
thermal conductivity of steel, which is roughly
1,500 times that of typical insulations, and
the relatively large cross-sections passing
through the envelope. Furthermore, many
structural steel details which form thermal
bridges are continuous around the building
perimeter. The physical phenomenon is exac-
erbated by the building design process itself
which involves a number of professionals with
differing roles and responsibilities. Engineers,
often mechanical engineers, responsible for
envelope design and the elimination of heat
loss and thermal bridging are not permitted
to touch the structural framing, while struc-
tural engineers are not generally educated or
consulted about thermal issues.
Thermal Breaks
One solution to bridging is to create a ther-
mal break, whereby the structural member
is “broken” by inserting a section of material
with low thermal conductivity that is aligned
with the insulation envelope. This solution is
complicated by the strength of the thermal
break materials which are generally inversely
proportional to thermal conductivity. Finding
the right balance between strength, stiffness,
thermal conductivity, constructability, and
economy is a challenge. In addition, the
“broken” steel must be integrally connected to
the building structural system, often requiring
additional steel fasteners which act as thermal
bridges themselves.
Design and installation of structural thermal
breaks are not currently addressed by code
provisions in the United States; structural
engineers have nonetheless begun applying
28 STRUCTURE magazine
structural SUSTAINABILITY
Example of a structural steel; a) thermal bridge and b) thermal break.
thermal-break strategies. Despite prohibi-
tion by the Research Council on Structural
Connection (RCSC), custom designed end-
plate moment connections have been used
that incorporate a low-conductivity pad/
shim material such as wood, fiberglass, or
fiber reinforced polymers (FRP) sandwiched
between steel plates connected with bolts pen-
etrating the assembly. Trends toward green
construction and LEED certification have
also prompted development and marketing
of proprietary materials and products called
Manufactured Structural Thermal Break
Assemblies (MSTBA). MSTBA manufac-
turers generally also offer engineering services
that provide capacities of the connections.
Covering Insulation
and Condensation
Excessive heat flow and energy loss are not
the only issues with thermal bridges. Localized
regions of low temperature on interior steel
surfaces can result in condensation from inte-
rior atmospheric humidity, leading to mold
growth, staining, and ice or water damage.
Meanwhile, the exterior surfaces may be
hot enough to cause
melting, resulting in
ice damming, pooling
water, and corrosion.
One method of
evaluating the poten-
tial for condensation
for a particular detail
is by calculating its
Temperature Index
(TI). The Temperature
Index is a European Effect of covering insulation and thermal break on the Temperature
standard that compares Index (TI) of a W-shape penetration.
the difference between the coldest inside sur-
face temperature (obtained from simulation)
and the outside air temperature with the
temperature differential across the envelope.
The temperature index is a dimensionless
ratio that is independent of the temperature
difference between the outside and inside air.
ASHRAE has not yet codified a TI limit, but
it has been suggested that 0.7 is an appro-
priate lower limit based on typical interior
temperature and humidity.
Depending on climate, the price of heating
fuel, the size and number of thermal-bridges,
and the cost of creating thermal breaks, heat
loss due to bridging may be an acceptable
outcome. However, the damaging effects of
condensation may not be. One method of
mitigating condensation is “covering insula-
tion,” insulation wrapped around the steel
member surface on one or both sides of the
bridge. While having only a minor effect on
heat flow, covering insulation can drastically
affect the condensation potential. The addi-
tion of covering insulation caused the TI of
a continuous beam to increase from 0.57 to
0.85, while the addition of a thermal bridge
only increased it to 0.70. However, little
Comparison of heat flow rate and thermal-break pad thickness. Results of heat flow tests in the calibrated hot box with various pad materials
and thicknesses.

research has been conducted on covering
insulation and more studies are necessary to
determine its required length, thickness, and
appropriate application situations.
Structural and Thermal
Testing and Modelling
Two recent studies at the University of
Alaska Anchorage (UAA) and Northeastern
University (NEU) in Boston, MA, highlight
the thermal and structural behavior of some
common thermal-break strategies. Various
thermal-break details were experimentally
tested in a “Calibrated Hot-Box” to deter-
mine heat-flow and surface temperature
characteristics, which were used to validate
an extensive series of 3-D Finite-element
thermal models. The models tested included
various configurations of pad materials,
thicknesses, and bolt materials.
Representative results for thermal breaks
with varying materials and thicknesses
indicate that, despite the low thermal
conductivity of the pads, the increased
cross-sectional area of the connection
and the penetrating bolts cause minor
reductions in heat flow. For neoprene
pad thicknesses of less than 25mm (1
Structural testing at UAA indicated that
neoprene pads, despite their prevalence in
some regions, are inappropriate for use in
structural connections. FRP pads, however,
central to the NEU work, demonstrated very
high strengths and stiffnesses as shims in snug-
tight bolted connections. This research led
to design recommendations for incorporat-
ing a range of shims in structural cladding
details. These may be accessed via a report
published by the Charles Pankow Foundation
(www.pankowfoundation.org).
When to Use a Thermal Break
Designers must carefully consider the ther-
mal conductivity and mechanical properties
of the break, the structural application, and
installation approach to adequately mitigate
energy loss at the building envelope while
maintaining the structural integrity of the
connection. Test results show only a minor
improvement for most common solutions.
Test results also demonstrate that some details,
while decreasing the potential for condensa-
tion, actually increases the overall heat flow
through the detail when compared
to the control condition with no
thermal break.▪
Scott Hamel is an Associate Professor of Civil
Engineering and the Director of the Trueblood Cold
Regions Engineering Laboratory at the University
of Alaska Anchorage. Scott is a member of the
SEI Thermal Bridging Task Force and is actively
involved in the Structural Engineers Association of
Alaska (SEAAK). (sehamel@alaska.edu)
Kara Peterman is an Assistant Professor in
the Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering at the University of Massachusetts
Amherst. Kara is a member of the Committee of
Framing Standards for the American Iron and
Steel Institute, the SEI Thermal Bridging Task
Group, and the Structural Stability Research
Council. (kdpeterman@umass.edu).

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org.

inch), heat flow increases compared
to a continuous penetrating member.
Reasonable reduction in the heat flow
does occur with relatively thick pads,
greater than 76mm (3 inches). FRP
shim pads reduce heat transfer through
the building envelope across the range
of pad materials considered, though the
magnitude of improvement can vary
significantly by type of thermal bridge
and their connections to the struc-
tural system (continuous or discrete).
Converting the bolts to stainless steel
further reduces heat flow by 5% to 20%,
with the bolt’s effectiveness increasing
with pad thickness.

J A N U A R Y 2 019 29
 We A nc h
REDUCE THERMAL
TRANSFER
With the TBS
Thermal Brick
Support System
» A groundbreaking brick veneer support system that
reduces thermal bridging in relief angles, to improve
the energy efficiency of your building!

» Saves man-hours and provides additional energy

savings by allowing for the installation of continuous
insulation behind the support angle.

» The system can be designed for use with standard concrete

inserts, or our serrated SHARKTOOTH
INSERT for maximum adjustments in multiple
directions to accommodate construction tolerances.

» Each job is designed and engineered in house to meet

your specific project needs!

» Available in Hot-Dip Galvanized or Stainless Steel

(Type 304 & 316) finishes

» MANUFACTURED IN THE USA!

CREATING A
HIGHER STANDARD
FOR THE MASONRY INDUSTRY
H O H M A N N & B A R N A R D, I N C.
hor Th e
WORLD
STEEL REINFORCED WING
MAINTAINS INTEGRITY
DURING NFPA 285
TESTING. THERMAL 2-SEAL TM
ANCHORS
CONCRETE THERMAL
2-SEAL™ WING NUT

THE BEST
Hohmann & Barnard’s line of Thermal 2-SEAL
anchors use a proprietary UL-94 coating to
create a thermal break at the insulation, and a
THERMAL
ANCHORS
stainless steel barrel that transfers one-seventh
the thermal energy of a standard zinc barrel.

In addition, the use of a dual-diameter barrel

with EPDM washers make our 2-Seal line the
only anchors on the market to seal both the
ON THE MARKET
insulation AND THE AIR BARRIER.*

THERMAL 2-SEAL™
with 2-Seal BynaTie

*Competitors’ single-barrel anchors only seal at insulation leaving the air &
vapor barrier vulnerable if not installed perfectly perpendicular to the wall.

v i sit www. h -b . c om
or ca ll 1-8 0 0 -6 4 5 -0 6 1 6 T O D AY!

Adhesives Technology Corporation
Phone: 800-892-1880
Email: atcinfo@atcepoxy.com
Web: www.atcepoxy.com
Product: ULTRABOND®
Anchoring and Doweling Products
Description: A leading manufacturer of
construction and industry related adhesives in
epoxies, urethanes, acrylics, ester blends and
polyureas. ULTRABOND®, CRACKBOND®,
and MIRACLE BOND® are some of the
most recognized products in North America.
ULTRABOND HS-1CC is currently the
industry’s highest performing anchoring epoxy.
Bluebeam, Inc.
Phone: 866-496-2140
Email: mwilliams@bluebeam.com
Web: www.bluebeam.com
Product: Bluebeam Revu
Description: Innovative, cloud-based PDF editing,
markup and collaboration solutions that set the
standard for workflow efficiency for +1 million design
and construction professionals worldwide. Revu
delivers enhanced PDF-based takeoff and workflow
automation tools that span the entire project life cycle
and give your organization the competitive edge.
Chicago Clamp Company
Phone: 708-343-8311
Email: info@chicagoclampcompany.com
Web: https://chicagoclampcompany.com
Product: Upper Deck Fall Protection Anchorage
Description: Using the corrugations in the standard
roof deck, these headers slide into place and clamp to
the top chord of the bar joist or wide flange supports.
Together, the headers and clamps easily form an
anchor point for fall protection systems.
Dlubal Software, Inc.
Phone: 267-702-2815
Email: info-us@dlubal.com
Web: www.dlubal.com
Product: RFEM
Description: Effectively analyze complex
connection layouts utilizing surface and solid
elements, automatic finite-element meshing,
mesh refinements, and surface intersection
capabilities. Perform required ultimate and
serviceability limit state designs of reinforced
concrete according to ACI and other
international standards. Accurately represent soil-
structure interaction with multiple soil layers.
ENERCALC, Inc.
Phone: 800-424-2252
Email: info@enercalc.com
Web: www.enercalc.com
Product: Structural Engineering Library
Description: Design of anchors and anchor bolts
typically requires a thorough development of applied
loads, and may require analysis of full structures or
connected components. The Structural Engineering
Library can assist in determining those loads and
performing those analyses.
32 STRUCTURE magazine
ANCHOR updates
Gripple Inc.
Phone: 630-406-0600
Email: grippleinc@gripple.com
Web: www.gripple.com
Product: New Spider Concrete Insert
Description: The next-generation Spider Concrete
Insert is available for wood or metal deck, and has a
versatile design that allows it to be used with either
Gripple Cable Hangers or various sizes of threaded
rod to suspend services. This allows one concrete
insert for all requirements.
Heckmann Building Products
Phone: 708-865-2403
Email: paul@heckmannanchors.com
Web: www.heckmannanchors.com
Product: Masonry Anchors and Ties
Description: Heckmann's has been manufacturing
masonry anchors for 96 years, since 1923.The Pos-I-
Tie® Brick Veneer Anchoring system was introduced
in the mid 1980s and was the first barrel screw veneer
anchor in the industry. Check out our website for a
full line of anchoring systems and stone anchors.
IES, Inc.
Phone: 800-707-0816
Email: info@iesweb.com
Web: www.iesweb.com
Product: VAConnect
Description: Design steel base plates and get
full anchorage calculations per ACI. With our
Transparent ReportingTM feature, see hand-
calculation reports that clearly document your
design. Free-trial is available in 2 minutes, with
no obligation.
The Masonry Society
Phone: 303-939-9700
Email: tmsmeetings@masonrysociety.org
Web: www.masonrysociety.org
Product: Masonry Publications
Description: A non-profit, professional organization
of volunteer Members, dedicated to the advancement
of masonry knowledge. Through our Members, all
aspects of masonry are discussed. The results are
disseminated to provide guidance to the masonry and
technical community on various aspects of masonry
design, construction, evaluation, and repair.
MKT Fastening, LLC
Phone: 800-336-1640
Email: charley@mktfastening.com
Web: mktfastening.com
Product: Sup-R-Stud V-TZ
Description: A wedge anchor designed for use in
cracked or uncracked concrete. Each wedge anchor is
marked with lines to denote minimum and maximum
embedment of the fasteners. The Sup-R-Stud V-TZ
holds ICC-ES report #ESR 4278.
Product: Sup-R-Bolt
Description: A large diameter concrete screw rated for
cracked or uncracked concrete. Its one piece finished
hex head design is stamped with identifying marks for
diameter and length of the bolt. The required hole
diameter equals the anchor diameter for ease of use.
No special drill bits are required.
Simpson Strong-Tie®
Phone: 800-925-5099
Email: web@strongtie.com
Web: www.strongtie.com
Product: SET-3G™ High-Strength
Anchoring Adhesive
Description: SET 3G is the latest innovation in
epoxy adhesives. The high-strength anchoring
adhesive can be installed in extreme concrete
temperatures from 40°F to 100°F, as well as in
dry or water-filled holes in concrete. Provides the
high bond strength values needed for a variety of
adhesive anchoring applications.
Product: Titen HD® Heavy-Duty Screw Anchor
Description: The Titen HD screw anchor is now
available in Type 304 and 316 stainless steel.
Type 316 is the optimal choice for applications
in corrosive environments such as near chemicals
or salt water. A cost-effective solution for less
extreme applications, including in wet, moist or
damp environments.
Trimble
Phone: 678-737-7379
Email: jodi.hendrixson@trimble.com
Web: www.tekla.com
Product: Tekla Tedds
Description: Automating everyday structural
designs, the Tekla Tedds’ library includes anchor
bolt design per ACI 318 Appendix D. The
calculation includes comprehensive checks
for tensile and shear failure of anchors, and is
available as part of a free trial.
Product: Tekla Structural Designer
Description: With Tekla Structural Designer,
engineers have the power to analyze and design
multi-material buildings efficiently and cost
effectively. Physical, information-rich models
contain all the intelligence needed to fully
automate design and document projects,
including end force reactions communicated with
two-way BIM integration, comprehensive reports,
and drawings.
Product: Tekla Structures
Description: An Open BIM modeling software
that can model all types of anchors required to
create a 100% constructible 3D model. Anchors
can be created inside the software or imported
directly from vendors that provide 3D CAD files
of their products.
Wej-It Fastening Systems
Phone: 203-857-2200
Email: info@wejit.com
Web: www.wejit.com
Product: Wej-It® High Performance Anchors
Description: Founded in 1952, Wej-it invented the
Original Wej-It Wedge and has continually expanded
product offerings to include a complete range of high-
quality and innovative light to heavy-duty mechanical
and adhesive anchoring products.
J A N U A R Y 2 019
 REGISTER TODAY! FESSIONA
RO
EARN UP TO

L
S
DEV
STRUCTURES

UR
LO

O
E
PMENT H

CONGRESS 2019
Orlando, Florida April 24–27

The Premier Event in Structural Engineering

JOIN US TO LEAD AND INNOVATE:

• Unique blend of academic and practice content to build
your career
• Learn from the experts, including those that develop
ASCE/SEI Standards
• Special Sessions: Grenfell Tower | Workshop,on
Conceptual Design | Improve Your Communication/
Presentation Skills
• More Innovative Executive Sessions – short presentations,
dynamic learning and interaction
• Keynotes: SE in Regenerative Medicine | Indispensable
Structural Engineering | Reimagining FantasyLand at
Magic Kingdom
• A fantastic evening Celebrating the Future of SE hosted
by CSI

• Meet the Leaders for Students and Young

Professionals
• Women in Structural Engineering (WiSE)
Reception
• Exhibit Hall and Vendor Sessions – engage
with industry
• Flex Registration for your company
• Sign up to take the M.IStructE Exam
• Fun in Orlando – Disney, golf, and more

HYATT REGENCY ORLANDO

www.structurescongress.org | #Structures19
To exhibit/sponsor, contact Sean Scully sscully@asce.org
 ACI University All-Access
Digital Subscription
ACI 212.3R-10

Report on Chemical
Admixtures for Concrete

Reported by ACI Committee 212

The American Concrete Institute

announces a new all-access subscription
to ACI University webinars and on-demand
courses. This 12-month subscription
includes all ACI monthly webinars and
ACI’s 200+ on-demand courses. Multi-user
options are also available. Visit
www.aciuniversity.com to subscribe

Prices as low as $99.00

200+ On Demand Courses | Live Webinars | Multi-User Options | 55+ Different Topics

www.ACIUniversity.com

Intuit’s Marine Way Building
A New Kind of Workplace
By Megan Stringer, S.E., LEED AP BD+C
I n the heart of Silicon Valley, Intuit’s Marine
Way Building (MWB) is a new kind of
workplace. Intuit has vitally influenced and
facilitated people’s financial lives for over three
decades with a mission to “power prosperity
around the world.” As part of the company’s
headquarters, the MWB provides a sus-
tainable, healthy, and interconnected work
environment. The four-story, LEED Platinum
commercial office building has an array of
amenities over its 185,400 square-feet, includ-
ing one story of below-grade parking, a vast
all-hands meeting space, conference rooms,
lounges, a café, bike facilities, numerous ter-
races, and a green roof. Holmes Structures
served as the Structural Engineer of Record for
this project and worked closely with the design
team to bring the owner’s vision to fruition.
After reviewing numerous structural design
options for materiality, a concrete post-ten-
sioned flat slab system was selected for its
spanning capabilities, ease and speed of con-
struction, high floor-to-ceiling heights, and
future floorplan flexibility. The gravity sup-
port of the concrete slabs consists of concrete
columns on a mat foundation while the lateral
system, designed to a Risk Category of III,
is comprised of concrete shear walls and a
concrete diaphragm.
Key design challenges were met and solved
along the way. One obstacle was realizing
the architect’s desire for a flat soffit with
large cantilevers on all sides of the building.
The perimeter columns were set-back from
the edge of the building, creating 12-foot
typical cantilevers and providing a main
STRUCTURE magazine
SPOTLIGHT
circulation path around
the building’s perimeter.
At the roof level, slab can-
tilevers range from 12 to
27 feet and were achieved
through post-tensioning
and long-term deflection
analyses that considered
cracked section proper-
ties. The flat soffit meant Holmes Structures was an Award Winner for its Intuit project in the 2018
that only upturned beams Annual Excellence in Structural Engineering Awards Program in the Category
(where required) were – New Buildings $20M to $100M. Photos courtesy of Jeremy Bittermann.
allowed in the building
and had to fit within the raised floor depth. concrete’s embodied carbon by 32% (from the
Another structural challenge was engineering NRMCA industry average) through concrete
an open and interconnected four-story-tall specifications and close collaboration with the
atrium and all-hands meeting space. This space contractor and concrete supplier. Maximum
provides a community hub for both the MWB savings were achieved in the mat founda-
and the Intuit campus at-large, accommodating tion with 50% cement replacement, while
500 people. Structurally, it required a 60-foot the walls and columns yielded 15% cement
by 90-foot column-free zone at the first level replacement. Conversations with local concrete
of the building. As the floor plate steps in at suppliers and contractors were paramount to
the higher levels, a 90-foot spanning truss sup- achieving a low embodied carbon concrete mix.
ports the upper floors and transfers the loads These discussions about concrete specifications
to the atrium’s perimeter columns. The truss are worth having as owners, architects, and
was designed with steel wide flanges encased rating systems increasingly ask for mixes with
in concrete. Holmes Structures had to consider reduced cement.
the constructability of the truss details as well as The LEED Platinum MWB building is just
construction sequencing to ensure its successful one part of Intuit’s master plan to update its
installation. Holmes Structures also engineered Mountain View headquarters. The MWB
a distinct blue feature stair that climbs across opened in 2016, and Intuit and its employees
the atrium to connect three levels, improving are ecstatic with their new space. Having met
the building’s circulation. Additionally, the the client’s objectives on the MWB, Holmes
firm accommodated discontinuous columns Structures and the rest of the design team
at the first floor with large (four-foot wide, are engaged for the next phase of campus
three-foot-deep) transfer beams; these allowed updates with increased sustainability goals.
space for the necessary drive The team is applying both positive feedback
aisles below at the basement and lessons learned from the MWB,
parking level. driving momentum forward for
Beyond general struc- Intuit’s next chapter.■
tural engineering, Holmes
Structures also took an
Project Team
active role in enhancing
Structural Engineer: Holmes Structures
the project’s sustainability.
Architects: WRNS Studio and
Since the client had high
Clive Wilkinson Architects
sustainability goals, the
Contractor: Hathaway Dinwiddie
firm used embodied carbon
Construction Company
as a metric for design deci-
sions. Once the design team
Megan Stringer is a Senior Engineer with Holmes
selected a concrete struc-
Structures and leads the firm’s sustainability
ture, Holmes Structures
efforts. (megan.stringer@holmesstructures.com)
successfully reduced the
J A N U A R Y 2 019 35
 NCSEA News
NCSEA Awards Firms for Structural Engineering Excellence
NCSEA is pleased to announce the winners of the 2018 Excellence in Structural Engineering Awards,
which annually highlights some of the best examples of structural engineering ingenuity throughout
the world. These awards are presented in seven categories, three to four project winners are chosen
per category, and one project from each category is honored as an Outstanding Project Winner.

The 2018 Outstanding Project Winners are:

New Buildings under $20 Million
Project: Ocosta Elementary School and Tsunami Evacuation Tower – Westport, WA
Engineering Firm: Degenkolb Engineers – San Francisco, CA
New Buildings $20 Million to $100 Million
Project: Bahá’í Temple of South America – Santiago, Chile
Engineering Firm: Simpson Gumpertz & Heger – Waltham, MA
New Buildings over $100 Million
Project: University of Texas Engineering Education and Research Center – Austin, TX
Engineering Firm: Datum Engineers/Datum Gojer Engineers – Austin, TX
New Bridge and Transportation Structures
Project: Nigliq Bridge – Colville River, AK
Engineering Firm: PND Engineers Inc. – Anchorage, AK
Forensic/Renovation/Retrofit/Rehabilitation Structures up to $20 Million
Project: Preservation and Seismic Strengthening of Congregation Sherith Israel –
San Francisco, CA
Engineering Firm: Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. – Emeryville, CA
Forensic/Renovation/Retrofit/Rehabilitation Structures over $20 Million
Project: University of Connecticut Downtown Hartford Campus – Hartford, CT
Engineering Firm: Silman – New York, NY
Other Structures
Project: Halo Board at Mercedes-Benz Stadium – Atlanta, GA
Engineering Firm: HOK – Atlanta, GA
The Outstanding Projects were announced at the Awards Banquet on October 26 at the 2018 NCSEA
Structural Engineering Summit in Chicago, IL. All 2018 Excellence in Structural Engineering Award
winners were published in detail in the December 2018 issue of STRUCTURE magazine (pages 22–27).

Call for 2019 Excellence Awards Entries

To be eligible for the 2019 Excellence in Structural Engineering Awards, projects must be substantially
complete between January 1, 2016 and June 30, 2019. Projects will be judged on innovative design,
engineering achievement and creativity. Structural engineers and structural engineering firms are
encouraged to enter this year’s program. Entries are due Tuesday, July 16, 2019. To learn more about
the projects and the entry process, visit www.ncsea.com.

36 STRUCTURE magazine
 News from the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations

Young Engineers Gather at NCSEA Summit

Structural engineers and NCSEA members from across the country joined at
the Sheraton Grand in Chicago, Illinois for the 2018 Structural Engineering
Summit. This year’s conference had a record number – 600 attendees; more
than 130 were young engineers, the highest young engineer attendance in the
history of the Summit. For the second year, the Summit's Young Engineer
Track held seminars designed specifically for professionals early in their
careers, focusing on topics they may not learn in school as well as soft skills
to help them ease into the professional world.
The Summit also hosted the Young Member Reception event on
Wednesday which not only provided a time for young engineers to network, but also celebrated NCSEA’s young members. The 2018
Summit Scholarship winners were honored at the reception along with the Young Member Group of the Year Finalists and the official
Young Member Group of the Year, the YMG of the Structural Engineers Association of Massachusetts. NCSEA thanks Computers &
Structures, Inc. for their sponsorship of this year’s Young Member Award recipients.
Thank you to all the young engineers that participated this year and thank you to the Young Member Group Support Committee who
continues to develop and support events for young engineers.

Subscribe Now and Don’t Miss a Webinar in 2019

NCSEA’s enhanced Yearly Webinar Subscription is the most user- and wallet-friendly plan to date! At $995 per year, each live webinar is less
than $40! This Live and Recorded Webinar Subscription offers all the same benefits as before, but now includes even more.
What do you receive as a Subscriber?
• 25+ live webinars a year featuring the highest-quality speakers available.
• All the webinars listed below + even more on www.ncsea.com.
• Unlimited 24/7/365 access to NCSEA’s Recorded Webinar Library – more than 120 relevant and high-quality webinars.
• Unlimited CE certificates for each webinar. For no additional cost, host multiple viewers at the same location and everyone can
receive credit for each live webinar.
• NCSEA’s Education Portal provides easy access to all of your education content, including purchase history and PDH tracking.
Set your education up for the year and sign up for your Yearly Live and Recorded Webinar Subscription now!
Visit www.ncsea.com to subscribe for instant access.

NCSEA Webinars Register by visiting www.ncsea.com.

January 22, 2019
Resilient Design & Risk Assessment Using the Quantitative & Building-Specific FEMA P-58 Analysis Method
Curt B. Haselton, Ph.D., P.E.
This course will cover how the FEMA P-58 analysis method is now being used in practice for both resilient design of new buildings
and risk assessment of existing buildings for earthquake hazards.

January 29, 2019

Ethics in the Practice of Engineering
Robert Kirkman, Ph.D.
This webinar will consider the function of engineers in their societal role as professionals, and the habits or dispositions of character
appropriate to that role.

February 12, 2019

Insurance and Indemnification: What You Don’t Know Can Cost You
Gail Kelley, P.E., Esq.
This webinar attempts to reduce the confusion that can arise when trying to decipher the sometimes very-creative wording
of an indemnification clause by taking a step back and looking at what it actually means to indemnify another party.

Courses award 1.5 hours of continuing education after the completion of a quiz. Diamond Review approved in all 50 states.

J A N U A R Y 2 019 37
 SEI Update
Best Wishes from SEI/ASCE for a Happy,
Healthy, and Prosperous New Year!
What’s on your to-do list for 2019?
We invite you to get involved to advance structural engineering and your career: Join an SEI Committee effort (technical, standard develop-
ment, business/professional and more), or an SEI Chapter or Grad Student Chapter to connect and learn in your local area. www.asce.org/SEI

Advancing the Profession

Call for participation – New Foundation Standard
Seeking volunteer committee members to work on developing new
standard ASCE/SEI XX – Criteria for the Design and Construction of
Foundations. Scott DiFiore, Principal, Simpson Gumpertz & Heger Inc.
will chair the cycle. Practicing engineers, researchers, building officials,
contractors, and construction product representatives are all needed
and welcome. Apply to join the committee by March 31, 2019, via
https://goo.gl/pMXLrK Select “SEI” from the Institute drop down and
then “Design and Construction of Foundations.” Carefully indicate the
Membership Category for which you are applying. Associate members
can be accepted until balloting begins. Eligible regulatory members can
qualify for travel reimbursement per ASCE Travel Policy. Questions?
Contact Jennifer Goupil at jgoupil@asce.org.

Membership
Join or Renew SEI/ASCE
For innovative solutions and learning, to connect with leaders and colleagues, and to enjoy member benefits such as SEI Member
Update monthly e-news opportunities and resources – visit www.asce.org/myprofile or call ASCE Customer Service at
800-548-ASCE (2723).

SEI Online

Structural Engineers – Saving Lives

Throughout my life, I have seen and been directly
impacted by various natural disasters where
the designs of structural engineers have saved
the lives of thousands of people. I have grown
up and continue to live in a hurricane-prone
area, and have stayed through direct hits from
Category 4 hurricanes which have washed away
entire neighborhoods. I remember, during one
of these events, an interstate bridge was washed out due to the
hurricane storm surge and intensity, traveling further inland than
ever expected. That event was survived without any casualties due
to structural failures, which is amazing after seeing the walls of
water that moved through the cities. Then, in the following days,
as people got back to their normal lives, there was a major impact
caused by the loss of the interstate bridge.
Read the full article and the latest news items including SEI
Colorado Chapter Survey, Goal-setting, and Long-term Planning
at www.asce.org/SEI.

Follow SEI SEI Standards

on Twitter Visit www.asce.org/SEIStandards to:
• View ASCE 7-22 Committee Meeting schedule and archive
@ASCE_SEI • Submit proposals to revise ASCE 7

Errata SEI Standards Supplements and Errata including ASCE 7. See www.asce.org/SEI-Errata.
If you would like to submit errata, contact Jon Esslinger at jesslinger@asce.org.

38 STRUCTURE magazine
 News of the Structural Engineering Institute of ASCE
Learning / Networking

View full program and register at

www.structurescongress.org.

Take the IStructE Exam to Practice Globally

IStructE will offer its Supplementary Examination for MIStructE (effectively Chartered Engineer status in the UK) again at Structures
Congress 2019. Registered Structural Engineers (U.S.) can apply for Chartered Membership of IStructE via a streamlined exam/interview
route. At the first exam at Structures Congress 2018, the quality of candidates was very high; 70% passed and were elected to membership.
To learn more, contact membership@istructe.org.

NEW SEI/ASCE Live Webinars – Learn from the Experts

January 11 Seismic Design of Steel Horizontal, Saddle-Supported Tanks
January 18 Seismic Assessment and Strengthening of Buildings and Structures in Areas of Low to Moderate Seismicity
February 11 Frost-Protected Shallow Foundations: Design and Construction
Register at Mylearning.asce.org for these and much more.

ASCE Week Panama

February 2019
New and popular seminars, and a technical tour of the Panama
Canal www.asceweekinternational.org.

Joint International Conference:

Iconic Global Structures:
Collaboration Efficiency Safety
what can we learn?
• •

Dubai, UAE | 29-30 September 2019

Join structural engineers and project stakeholders to explore
the successes and challenges of constructing nine complex
structures across the world. Participate in panel discussions
with industry experts to share best practice and promote the
highest standard of engineering globally.

Learn more at —
https://structuresdubai2019.cvent.com

J A N U A R Y 2 019 39
 CASE in Point
Did you know?
CASE has tools and practice guidelines to help firms deal with a wide variety of business scenarios that structural engineering firms face
daily. Whether your firm needs to establish a new Quality Assurance Program, update its risk management program, keep track of the skills
young engineers are learning at each level of experience, or need a sample contract document – CASE has the tools you need! CASE has
several tools available for firms to use for recruiting and retaining employees.
962 National Practice Guidelines for the Structural Tool 3-2 Staffing and Revenue Projection
Engineer of Record Tool 3-5 Staffing Schedule Suite
962-B National Practice Guidelines for Specialty Structural Engineers Tool 4-3 Sample Correspondence Guidelines
Tool 2-2 Interview Guide and Template Tool 5-1 A Guide to the Practice of Structural Engineering
Tool 2-3 Employee Evaluation Templates Tool 5-2 Milestone Checklist for Young Engineers

NEW!! CASE Tool 3-5: Staffing Schedule Suite

By effectively projecting and balancing workloads, firms can maximize employee productivity and profit by reducing employee burnout
and turnover.
This tool helps firms answer the following questions:
• What are our employees working on day-to-day and week-to-week?
• Do we have enough work to keep our people busy, productive, and profitable?
• Do we have enough staff members to complete current assignments on-time?
You can purchase these and the other Risk Management Tools at www.acec.org/bookstore.

CASE Practice Guidelines Currently Available

CASE 962-F: This document, A Guideline Addressing the
Bidding and Construction Administration Phases for the
Structural Engineer, was developed to assist all parties associated
with the bidding and construction administration phases of a
project, with the primary emphasis on those issues associated
with the structural engineer (SER). It is important that the design
team remains proactive in communicating with the contractor
and the owner after the construction documents have been
issued. This communication during the construction phase, as
well as during the pricing and bidding process, should have as its
primary goal the assistance, interpretation, and documentation
for the improvement of the constructed project. This is an outline
of the SER’s roles after the construction documents have been
issued for construction. It provides guidance on pre-bid and pre-
construction activities through the completion of the project. The
appendices contain tools and forms to assist the SER in applying
this guide to their practice.
CASE 962-G: Increasing complexity of structural design and
code requirements, compressed schedules, and financial pressures
are among many factors that have prompted the greater frequency
of peer review of structural engineering projects. The peer review
of a project by a qualified third party is intended to result in an
improved project with less risk to all parties involved, including
the engineer, owner, and contractor. Many aspects of the peer
review process are important to establish before the start of the
review, to ensure that the desired outcome is achieved. These
items include the specific goals, scope and effort, the required
documentation, the qualifications and independence of the
peer reviewer, the process for the resolution of differences, the
schedule, and the fee. The intention of CASE 962-G, Guidelines
for Performing Project Specific Peer Reviews on Structural
Projects, is to increase awareness of such issues, assist in
establishing a framework for the review and improve the process
for all interested parties
CASE 962-H: This document, National Practice Guideline
on Project and Business Risk Management, is intended to
assist structural engineering companies in the management
of risk associated with projects and to provide commentary
regarding the management of risk associated with business
practices. The guideline is organized in two sections that
correspond with these two areas of risk, namely Project Risk
Management and Business Practices Risk Management. The
goal of the guideline is to educate and inform structural
engineers about risk issues so that the risks they face in their
practices can be effectively mitigated, making structural
engineering firms more successful.

You can purchase these and the other Risk Management Tools at www.acec.org/bookstore.

40 STRUCTURE magazine
 News of the Council of American Structural Engineers
CASE Winter Planning Meeting
February 7-8, 2019
Friday – February 8
7:30 am – 8:30 am Shared Breakfast
8:00 am – 12:00 pm CASE General / Toolkit Committee
Meeting
CASE Contracts Committee Meeting
CASE Guidelines Committee Meeting
CASE Programs & Communications
Committee Meeting
The 2019 CASE Winter Planning Meeting is scheduled for 12:00 pm – 1:00 pm Lunch
February 7-8, 2019, in Tampa, FL. The agenda includes: 1:00 pm – 4:30 pm CASE General / Toolkit Committee
Meeting
Thursday – February 7 CASE Contracts Committee Meeting
1:00 pm – 5:30 pm CASE Executive Committee Meeting CASE Guidelines Committee Meeting
6:00 pm – 8:00 pm CASE Roundtable CASE Programs & Communications
Speakers: NCSEA SE3 Committee Committee Meeting
Members 4:30 pm – 5:00 pm Committee Wrap-up Session
If you are interested in attending the meeting or have any suggested topics/ideas from a firm perspective for the committees to pursue,
please contact Heather Talbert at htalbert@acec.org.

2019 Small Firm Council Winter Seminar

What You Need to Know When You Grow
February 7-9, 2019; Tampa, FL
The Small Firm Council’s 2019 Winter Seminar will teach the ins
and outs of how the structure, culture, and business of your firm will
change as you increase in size and project load. Mark Goodale, of
Morrisey Goodale, returns with a follow-up seminar, What You Need
to Know When You Grow, that will address the day-to-day changes you
make as you grow your firm, and answer the following:
• When is it time to hire administrative staff and human resources?
• How can I maintain my company’s culture as I grow?
• How do I retain employees if I want to stay the same?
This seminar will also feature an open roundtable discussion and a
special session on how to adequately protect your small firm against
new threats and liabilities.
About the Speaker:
Mark Goodale is a co-founder of Morrissey Goodale. His breadth of
experience includes organizational development, strategic planning,
mergers & acquisitions, marketing, and executive search. He is a
trusted advisor and coach to dozens of industry executives.
Before helping to establish Morrissey Goodale, Mark was the
Corporate Strategic Marketing Manager at PBS&J (now a part of
Atkins) where he was charged with improving and implementing
progressive corporate initiatives geared to position the firm for success-
ful, large-scale client pursuits. Before that, he worked at ZweigWhite
for over a decade and headed the firm’s strategic business planning
and marketing business units.
Mark has authored numerous articles for industry magazines such
as Civil Engineering Magazine, CE News, and Consulting Specifying
Engineer. He has been quoted many times in various industry pub-
lications and newspapers, and is featured in the Morrissey Goodale/
Axium video series, “Building High-Performance Organizations.”
Mark was also a frequent contributor to ZweigWhite’s publica-
tions and events, and authored The Healthcare Market for AEP and
Environmental Consulting Firms, the first of ZweigWhite’s market
intelligence reports.
Always a top-rated speaker, Mark delivers presentations around
the country on a wide variety of management topics at AIA, ACEC,
NSPE, CSE, and ZweigWhite events.
Mark received his MBA from the Sawyer School of Business at
Suffolk University where he now teaches Business.
Registration:
ACEC Coalition Members - $399
ACEC Members - $499
Non-members - $599
To register for the seminar: https://goo.gl/9ua2qs
Questions? Call 202-682-4377 or email at htalbert@acec.org.

Follow ACEC Coalitions on Twitter – @ACECCoalitions.

J A N U A R Y 2 019 41

Scope Creep
By Stan R. Caldwell, P.E., SECB
S tructural engineers frequently provide
special or extra services without receiving
appropriate additional compensation. Does
this phenomenon seem familiar? It can be
due to scope creep, which is a malady that
afflicts nearly all practitioners. If profits do
not meet expectations, scope creep is usually
part of the problem.
The project team may foresee special services
at the beginning of a project, but because
they are not related to the primary structural
system, they are not included in a structural
engineer’s basic scope of work. Special services
often include the review, analysis, or design of
“
nonstructural elements and their attach-
ment. For example, on building projects:
• Skylight framing, window and cur-
tain walls, cladding, and doors
• Window washing systems
• Non-load-bearing interior partitions
and ceilings
• Anchorages, pads, brackets, and
platforms for MEP equipment
• Guide systems for elevators, escalators,
and conveyors
• Handrails and guardrails
• Stage equipment, catwalks, and
acoustical fixtures
• Sculptures, screens, and decorative work
• Retaining walls not attached to buildings
• Fountains, culverts, tunnels, and other
site work
• Antennas, flagpoles, lighting, and signage
Special services also include certain tasks that
are traditionally excluded from a structural
engineer’s basic scope of work. For example,
special services may comprise the following
on building projects:
• Investigation or field verification
of existing conditions
• Coordination of special wind studies
and wind tunnel tests
• Coordination of special seismic studies
and shake table tests
• Preparation of additional documents
for phased construction
• Preparation of additional documents
for fast-track construction
• Preparation of estimated material
quantities
Structural Forum is intended to stimulate thoughtful dialogue and debate among structural engineers and other participants in the design and construction
process. Any opinions expressed in Structural Forum are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of NCSEA, CASE, SEI, the Publisher,
or the STRUCTURE® magazine Editorial Board.
42 STRUCTURE magazine
structural FORUM
• Preparation of estimated construction costs
• Preparation of shop drawings
and erection drawings
• Design for special energy and
sustainability requirements
• Design for special fire resistance
requirements
• Design or review of excavation
retention or trench bracing
• Design or review of construction shoring
• Design of future expansion and tenant
improvements
• Preparation of certifications and permit
applications
”
The key to controlling
scope creep is discipline.
Extra services are services that arise due
to unforeseen circumstances during the
design or construction of a project. For
example, extra services on building projects
may include:
• Evolving revisions to the size or
scope of a project
• Changes proposed by the owner,
architect, or consultants
• Changes or substitutions proposed
by the contractor
• Changes due to undiscovered or
unanticipated conditions
• Changes due to newly adopted codes
or other regulations
• Changes due to a value engineering
exercise
• Changes due to a construction
cost overrun
• Revisions that are inconsistent with
prior instructions
• Services necessitated by deficiencies
in the contractor’s work
• Services necessitated by delays
in the contractor’s work
• Additional representation required
at the construction site
• Services as an expert witness in a
project-related dispute
These examples of special and extra services
are narrowly focused on building projects,
but similar lists could be developed for other
types of projects such as bridges, other civil
structures, and industrial facilities. On many
projects, scope creep erodes the profits that
structural engineers were planning to achieve.
On some projects, scope creep leads to serious
financial losses. Why does scope creep occur?
There are two primary reasons.
First, structural engineers’ scopes of work are
not always clearly defined in written profes-
sional services agreements for all projects. Many
engineers continue to accept assignments based
on verbal agreements, or they work under
the terms of their proposals that were never
formally accepted in writing. Other engi-
neers routinely accept agreements that were
drafted entirely by their clients, often with-
out their review or input. When the scope
of work is not clearly defined before work
commences, an engineer is in a poor position
to request additional compensation later.
Second, many structural engineers are
reluctant to request additional compensa-
tion when they are asked to provide special
or extra services. They fear that such requests
might adversely affect their relationships with
their clients and impair their opportunities
for future projects. Sadly, these fears are not
entirely unfounded. However, additional
compensation is almost never offered except
in direct response to a clearly stated request
from an engineer.
The key to controlling scope creep is discipline.
Structural engineers must have the discipline
to secure a signed professional services agree-
ment that clearly defines their scope of work
and compensation before starting every new
project. Then, they must have the discipline to
secure an agreement for appropriate additional
compensation before providing any special or
extra services. Discipline can be dif-
ficult to maintain on every project,
but it is essential to profitability.▪
Stan R. Caldwell (StanCaldwellPE.com) is a
consulting structural engineer in Plano, Texas.
(StanCaldwellPE@gmail.com)
J A N U A R Y 2 019
“ Confidently Meet
Your Deadlines ”

Structural Software
Easy. Versatile. Productive.

Get the tools that will help you succeed:

Download your free trial today:

iesweb.com 800.707.0816