2011.05.11 - Design of Tilt-Up Wall Systems

Tilt-Up Construction
Part I - Planning
Greg Riley
Steven Schaefer Associates, Inc.
www.FindYourTechnology.com
Introduction
Two part presentation:

Part I Planning
Part II Design
Target audience:
General structural engineer that designs a wide variety of

structure types. Engineer may or may not have tilt-up
experience.
Introduction
Definition:
ACI 116R: Tilt-up construction is a technique for casting

concrete elements in a horizontal position at the jobsite and
tilting them to their final position in the structure
Introduction
Introduction to Tilt-up construction process:

1.
Concrete slab on grade and exterior wall foundations (for the

tilt-up walls) are placed.
2.
The tilt-up wall panels are laid out on the slab on grade
(exterior face down on the slab). The formwork and rustication
strips (architectural reveals) are connected to the slab on
grade.
Introduction
Formwork and reveals:
Introduction

3.
Bondbreaker is sprayed inside the forms on the slab on grade
4.
Chairs, reinforcement, and embedded items (lifting/bracing

inserts, embed plates for structural connections, etc.) are
placed.
5.
Concrete placed, finished, and cured.
6.
Forms removed
7.
Crane connects to lifting inserts cast into interior face of wall

panel and tilts panel up and places it on foundation
Introduction
Panels with reinforcing:
Introduction

8.
Temporary braces are installed to support the wall panel prior

to the crane releasing the panel
9.
Structural connections made at foundation
10.
Structural connections are made to diaphragm(s)
11.
Braces are removed once LFRS complete
12.
Non-structural work may occur at any time after erection
Introduction
Lifting sequence:
Introduction
Lifting sequence:
10
Introduction
Lifting sequence:
11
Introduction
Lifting sequence:
12
Introduction
Lifting sequence:
13
Introduction
History:
Tilt-up has been used in the United States since the early
1900s, but most of the development and momentum with using
tilt-up as a construction technique is post- World War II.
14
Introduction
History:
Traditionally, tilt-up is thought of for large, warehouse structures
The proper mindset:

Dont limit yourself and the owner based on traditional ways

to construct something. Consider tilt-up and other
alternatives!
Tilt-up can be economically and effectively used for a wide

variety of structures: office buildings, theaters, churches, retail,
etc. Also in non-building structures such as retaining walls,
screen walls, signs, tanks, etc.
15
Introduction
Industrial:
16
Introduction
Industrial/Warehouse:
17
Introduction
Office:
18
Introduction
Office:
19
Introduction
Office:
20
Introduction
Retail:
21
Introduction
The proper mindset (cont.):

You are part of a design team.
If at all possible, meet and discuss construction type possibilities

with the architect and an experienced contractor early in the
process so a sound decision is made.
Design-build obviously lends itself well to this or you need an

experienced team for design-bid-build.
22
Step 1 Is tilt-up a viable alternative?

Crane access: Will there be plenty of room for the crane

to move in and around the site? Truck crane costs can
be ~ $3000/day, so efficiently using the crane is
essential to the economy of a tilt-up building.
Building square footage: 5000-7000 sf is a decent rule

of thumb for a minimum square footage size to
economically consider tilt-up.
23

Building wall height-to-floor slab width ratio is key.

Ideally the panel height is less than the building depth.
Not a deal-breaker but definitely adds cost.
24

Building height:
Dont automatically disregard tilt-up if the building is multistory.

A multistory panel isnt any more difficult to design than a singlestory panel.
3-story buildings are reasonable without upsizing the crane that

would potentially be used. 4-stories would require a bigger
crane than usual. For above 4 stories you will potentially need to
stack the wall panels.
25

Exterior elevations
Will the exterior wall surface essentially be flat with some

rustication joints?
What percent of the wall is solid? As a rule of thumb, the walls

should be at least 60% solid for tilt-up to be economical.
26

Exterior elevations (cont.):

Will curved panels be required?
Can most of the panels be supported on foundations and not

hung off adjacent panels?
Modularity is important.
27
Tilt-up Comparisons
Precast
Is there a qualified precaster in the general area?

Transportation costs arent cheap (especially these days).
Transportation considerations also impact the precast panel

dimensions that can be supplied. Precast panels are typically 8
or 12 wide, which can limit the openings and opportunities for
architectural expression.
The narrow panel width of precast panels can be a disadvantage

compared to tilt-up if it is possible to use drilled piers and span
the tilt-up panels pier-to-pier (no grade beam).
28
Tilt-up Comparisons
Precast (cont.)
More panel joints = more caulk and maintenance. Caulk joint life
is ~ 5-7 years.
Lead times: Lead times on precast and steel can vary. In

precast, you want the steel erected first and waiting for the
precast. In tilt-up, the walls come first and the steel brought to
the walls.
29
Tilt-up Comparisons
Precast (cont.):
Dimensional stability: Precast panels are frequently insulated.

The result of the insulation between the exterior and interior
panel face is a thermal gradient between the faces. The
resulting gradient can cause a bow in the panel. This bow
results in problems where interior finishes are connected to the
panels.
Future flexibility: Tilt-up panels are typically somewhat easier to

modify in the future for new or enlarged windows, doors, louvers,
etc.
30
Tilt-up Comparisons
Precast thermal bow:
31
Tilt-up Comparisons
Precast thermal bow:
32
Tilt-up Comparisons
Masonry:
Dependent on local material costs and labor costs for masons.
Building footprint and wall square footage is a big determinant.

May need ~ 7,000-10,000 sf building footprint to make tilt-up a
more economical choice.
The taller the wall, the more economical tilt-up becomes relative
to CMU.
In general, a tilt-up building can be erected faster than a CMU

building.
33
Tilt-up Comparisons
Pre-engineered metal buildings (PEMB):

PEMBs are not really an apples-to-apples comparison with

conventional structures.
PEMB do not typically compare favorably to conventionally

framed structures in terms of durability (future maintenance),
future flexibility, and fire resistance.
PEMB a great selection for owners whose primary desire is to

have the lowest initial cost possible. Costs increase rapidly
when trying to build in the features above into a PEMB.
34
Tilt-up Comparisons
PEMB (cont.):
It is possible to clad a PEMB with tilt-up. Requires additional

coordination with PEMB manufacturer.
35
Tilt-up Comparisons
Wood structures:
Similar to PEMB, not really an apples-to-apples comparison.
If it can be done with traditional wood construction it is cheapest

to do with wood.
36
Tilt-up Considerations
Assume the design team has selected tilt-up for the

construction of the project. Now what needs to be
discussed and considered?
37
SEOR design vs. delegated design

Lifting and bracing insert design. Most commonly done by insert

manufacturer.
Bracing design. Most commonly done by same engineer who

designed bracing inserts. They will specify a brace reaction to
the slab on grade or potentially design the deadman/anchor if
the brace is to the exterior.
Is the slab on grade a structurally designed item or non-structural

specified/chosen item?
38
Foundations
Strip foundations (trench formed) are the easiest (as compared

to formed wall).
Deep foundations are fine no reason to disregard tilt-up as a

potential option if deep foundations are required
39
Slab on grade (SOG) construction

Where are the panels going to be cast? Building SOG, casting

bed, stack casting? Contractors call based on available slab
square footage and owners SOG desires.
Reference ACI publications for appropriate SOG design and
construction techniques.
6 minimum
40
Slab on grade (SOG) construction (cont.)

Construction loads on the SOG will typically far exceed the inuse loadings for the slab on grade. Options:
Keep tilt-up crane off slab
Design thickened strips for crane travel
Mandatory means/methods specifications for

dunnage/cribbing under outriggers, keep outriggers off
control joints (especially intersections), etc.
You break it you bought it strategy. Sometimes you just

have to repair or replace some slab.
41

SOG is cast prior to building being enclosed. Pay special

attention to slab and panel protection from the elements (wind,
temperature, humidity). Plastic shrinkage cracking is especially
problematic (hot and windy days with high evaporation rates).
42
Plastic shrinkage cracking on panels:
43

Bondbreaker is important between the panel and the SOG
Make sure the bond breaker is compatible with the curing

compound
Combination bond breakers/curing compounds are available.

Popular with contractors.
Both bond breakers and curing compounds come in 2 general

classes: Non-membrane forming vs. membrane forming.
44

Joints are important as all joints/slab imperfections are reflected

in the tilt-up panels
Can avoid joints for casting, fill them, or attempt to cover them
Lots of decent skim coats, etc. available on the market now.

This is preferable to grinding imperfections
Column locations: Covers with a thin layer of concrete on top,

plywood/plastic covers, place slab over footing and core a hole
for a column at a later date.
45

The bottom line is that the SEOR on a tilt-up building needs

to pay more attention to the SOG and its details on than
they would on most other structures.
46
Panels

How should the panel information be conveyed?

Elevation format with reinforcing keys is conventional structural
detailing
Tri-elevation format is closer to shop drawing level of detailing
47
Tri-Elevation format:
48
Panels (cont.)
Panel layout has many considerations - Set a maximum panel

weight by balancing crane considerations with architectural
considerations.
Truck crane: Common panel weight limit is ~ 20T.
Crawlers: Common panel weight limit is ~ 60T.
You can upsize the size of the truck crane to increase the
flexibility of the picks and minimize the number of set-ups.
49
Panels (cont.)
Quick panel thickness estimate in inches is vertical span in ft/4.

Ideally keep h/t <50.
Economy increases with modularity (e.g., window locations, joist

pocket locations, reveal strip locations, etc.)
Ideally joists (and especially girders) dont bear at panel joint

locations
Joist and girder bearing detail: Pockets vs. face mounted with
seat angle
50
Panels (cont.)
Attempt to maintain ~ 2 jamb widths (dimension from edge of

opening to edge of panel)
Avoid L- and T- shaped panels if practical as theyll likely require

strongbacks
If possible, limit the reveal depths to . Make sure the reveals

are chamfered to facilitate formwork removal and reduce
tendency for crack formation
Corner joint options: Lapped vs. mitered
51
Panels (cont.)

Chamfer corners of panels and openings for less spalls and

cleaner look
Joints between panels: pretty standard but can be used
for shorter panels.
Concrete slump ~ 4-5. Use non-AE.
Be extra careful with dimensions
52
Panels (cont.):
Many panel finish options

Paint
LGMF/Board with stucco
Form liners
Thinset brick/veneer
Exposed aggregate
53
LGMF/Foam board feature:
54
Masonry feature:
55
Panels (cont.)
Insulation
Industrial applications leave the lower 8 left uninsulated
Interior walls furred out and insulated in office/retail
applications
56
Panels (cont.)
Sandwich panels
Constructed with 2 wythes sandwiching an interior insulation

wythe
May increase in popularity with the trend for increased

energy efficiency
Most popular now in extremely cold climates
57
Panels (cont.)
Sandwich panels
Can be composite or non-composite
In non-composite, the inner wythe is structural
In composite, a thermal gradient concern is present (similar

to precast)
If you use composite, make sure you are specifying a reliable

connector product and have appropriate quality control
measures in the field because it is big money to retrofit a
failed system.
58
Questions prior to Part II?
59
Tilt-Up Construction
Part II - Design
John Ashbaugh
Steven Schaefer Associates, Inc.
www.FindYourTechnology.com
Tilt-Up Design Presentation Overview

Code Evolution
ACI 318, 14.8 - Alternative Design of Slender Walls
Design Examples
Misc. Design Topics
Design Tips
61
Code Evolution
Before Slender Wall Design Provisions

ACI h/t limits resulted in uneconomical designs

Example: Max h/t = 25 resulted in 14 thick panel for 30 tall bearing wall
1979 SEAOSC Recommended Tilt-Up Wall Design (Yellow Book)

Max h/t: 36 unstiffened bearing walls, 42 for stiffened bearing walls
Included second-order effects
1982 SEAOSC/ACI Test Report on Slender Walls (Green Book)

Full scale testing of tilt-up panels showed stability under large deflections
Report stated no validity for fixed h/t limits
Report stated need for deflection limits (h/100)
62
Code Evolution
1988 UBC - Alternate Design Slender Walls

Considered eccentric gravity load effects
Considered P-delta effects
Included service load deflection limit (h/150)
Basis of current ACI design procedure for slender walls
63
Code Evolution
ACI 318-99, 14.8 - Alternative Design for Slender Walls

ACIs first slender wall design procedure
Similar to UBC 97, but strength design
No h/t limits
ACI 318-08, 14.8 - Alternative Design for Slender Walls

Current slender wall design procedure
64
Code Evolution
ACI 551.2R-10 Design Guide for Tilt-Up Construction

Expands on slender wall provisions of ACI 318 Section 14.8
Provides a comprehensive procedure for the design of tilt-up

wall panels
Provides recommendations for various conditions not specifically

covered in ACI 318
65
ACI 318, 14.8 Alternative Design of Slender Walls
Assumptions / Requirements Section 14.8.2

Simply supported axially loaded member subjected to out-ofplane lateral load, with max. moment & deflections at midspan
Constant cross section over height of panel
Tension-controlled (c / d < 0.375 refer to ACI 318 R9.3.2.2)
Vertical stress Pu/Ag at midheight 0.06fc
66
Assumptions / Requirements Section 14.8.2 (contd)

Mn Mcr
Eq. (14-2)
where Mcr = fr S
where fr = 7.5 fc '
Concentrated gravity load distribution

Bearing width + 2 vert / 1 horiz slope down to design section
Not greater than spacing of concentrated loads
Not extending beyond edges of wall panel
67
Assumptions / Requirements Section 14.8.2 (contd)

Concentrated gravity load distribution: ACI 551.2R-11, Fig. 4.2
68
Design Moment Strength Section 14.8.3

Mn Mu
Mn is determined per ACI 318 Ch. 10
Eq. (14-3)
Mn = Ase fy (d a/2)
Effective area of steel (Ase) accounts for increased bending

moment resistance due to axial load
Ase = As + (Pu / fy) (h / 2d)
69
Design Moment Strength Section 14.8.3 (contd)

Mu includes moment due to applied loads & due to P
Fig. 3.1 from ACI 551.2R:
70

Mu can be determined using Iteration Method to account for P

Mu = Mua + Puu
Mua = max. factored M at midheight due to lateral loads &

eccentric vertical loads (does not include P)
2
5
M
l
u =
u c
(0.75)48Ec I cr
Eq.(14-4)
Eq. (14-5)
71

Or, Mu can be determined using Moment Magnification Method

M ua
=
Eq. (14-6)
u
5 Pu lc 2
1
(0.75) 48Ec I cr
where Icr = Es ( As +
Ec
3
Pu h
2 l wc
)(d c) +
f y 2d
3
Eq. (14-7)
and Es / Ec 6
72
Minimum Reinforcement - ACI 318, 14.3

14.3.2 - Min vertical reinforcement ratio

(a) 0.0012 for #5 bars or smaller, fy 60 ksi
(b) 0.0015 for other deformed bars
(c) 0.0012 for WWR not larger than W31 or D31
14.3.3 Min horizontal reinforcement ratio

(a) 0.0020 for #5 bars or smaller, fy 60 ksi
(b) 0.0025 for other deformed bars
(c) 0.0020 for WWR not larger than W31 or D31

73
Minimum Reinforcement - ACI 318, 14.3 (contd)

14.3.7 In addition to min reinforcement, bars are required

around windows, doors, and similar openings. Bars shall be
anchored to develop fy at corners of opening.
Panel with 2 layers of reinforcement: not less than (2) #5s
Panel with 1 layer of reinforcement: not less than (1) #5
74
Maximum Out-of-Plane Deflection Section 14.8.4

Max. out-of-plane deflection due to service loads (including P-D

effects), s, shall not exceed lc / 150
If Ma > 2/3 Mcr:

s = ( 2 / 3) cr +
If Ma 2/3 Mcr:
(M a )
cr
s =
( M cr )
( M a ( 2 / 3) M cr )
( n (2 / 3) cr )
( M n (2 / 3) M cr )
Eq. (14-8)
Eq. (14-9)
75
Max. Out-of-Plane Deflection Section 14.8.4 (contd)

Where
2
5
M
l
cr
c
cr =
48Ec I g
Eq. (14-10)
5M nlc 2
48 Ec I cr
Eq. (14-11)
n =
And Icr is per Eq. (14-7)
76
Max. Out-of-Plane Deflection Section 14.8.4 (contd)

Eq. (14-8) accounts for a rapid increase in out-of-plane

deflections when Ma > 2/3 Mcr
ACI 318 commentary recommends the following load

combinations for calculating service level deflections:
D + 0.5L + 0.7W
D + 0.5L + 0.7E
77
Reinforcing Steel Location
One layer
Vertical bars located at or near center of panel thickness
Typical for solid panels
78
Reinforcing Steel Location
Two layers
Vertical bars typically located minimum clear from each face
Typical for panels with openings, and economical for some solid panels
Provides significant increase in bending strength and stiffness vs. one layer
79
Design Example 1 Solid Panel
80
Concrete & reinforcing steel properties:

fc = 4000 psi
c = 150 pcf
fr = 7.5 fc ' = 474 psi
fy = 60,000 psi
Es = 29,000 ksi
Ec = 57 fc ' = 3605 ksi
Es / Ec = 8.044
81
Panel wt. above design section:

(7.25 in/12)(150 pcf)(14 ft)(16.0 ft) / 1000 = 20.3 k
For simplicity in this example well only consider wind

suction and only one design load case:
1.2D + 1.6W + 0.5 Lr
Factored applied axial load at top of wall

Pua = 1.2 (0.45 klf x 14 ft) + 0.5 (0.6 klf x 14 ft) = 11.8 k
82
Factored axial load at midheight of wall

Pum = 11.8 k + 1.2 (20.3 k) = 36.1 k
Check vert. stress at midheight < 0.06fc = 240 psi

Pum/Ag = 36,100 lb / (7.25in x 14ft x 12 in/ft) = 29.6 psi < 240
OK
Trial reinforcing: (18) #6 vertical bars, (1) layer centered

in panel
As = 7.92 in2 & d = 3.625 in
83
Check the design moment strength

Ase = As + (Pum / fy) (h / 2d)
Ase = 7.92 in2 + (36.1 k / 60 ksi)[7.25 in/(2 x 3.625 in)] = 8.52 in2
2
Ase f y
8
.
52
in
(60ksi )
a=
= 0.895 in
=
0.85 f c ' b 0.85(4ksi)(14 ft )(12in / ft )
c = a / 0.85 = 0.895 in/ 0.85 = 1.053 in
c / d = 1.053 / 3.625 = 0.291 < 0.375 OK (tension controlled)
84
Check the design moment strength (continued)

3
E
P
l
c
h
Icr = s ( As + um )(d c) 2 + w
3
Ec
f y 2d
Icr = 8.044(8.52 in2)(3.625 1.053)2

+ (14 ft x 12 in/ft)(1.053)3 / 3 = 519 in4
Mn = Ase fy (da/2) = 0.9(8.52 in2)(60 ksi)(3.625-0.895/2)
Mn = 1462 in-k = 122 ft-k
85
Check min. reinforcement per section 14.8.2.4

Mcr = fr S = 0.474 ksi [1/6 (14 ft x 12 in/ft)(7.25)2 = 698 in-k
Mn = 1462 in-k > Mcr OK
Check min. reinforcement per section 14.3.2

= As / (bh) = 7.92 in2 / [(14 ft x 12 in/ft)(7.25 in)] = 0.0065
= 0.0065 > 0.0015 OK
86
Check Mu using moment magnification (Eq. 14-6)

wu = 1.6 x 18 psf x 14 ft /1000 = 0.403 klf
Axial load applied to top of wall panel (previously calcd)
Pua = 11.8 k
Factored moment, excluding P effects:
2
Mua = wu lc + Pua ecc
8
2
Mua = 0.403 klf (32 ft)2 /8 + 11.8 k (0.33 ft) / 2 = 53.5 ft-k
87

Axial load at midheight of wall, Pum = 36.1k (previously calcd)
Factored moment, including P effects:
M ua
M =
u
5 Pumlc 2
1
(0.75) 48Ec I cr
53.5 ft k
Mu =
5(36.1k )(32 ft ) 2
0.75(48)(3605ksi )(519in 4 ) / 144
= 88.5 ft-k
< Mn =122 ft-k
OK
88
Check service load deflection with 1.0D + 0.5Lr + 0.7W

allowable = lc / 150 = (32 ft x 12 in/ft) / 150 = 2.56 in
Ig = (1/12) (14 ft x 12) ( 7.25 in)3 = 5335 in4
2
2
5
M
l
cr
c
5
(
698
in
k
)(
32
ftx
12
in
/
ft
)
cr =
=
= 0.558 in
48 Ec I g
48(3605ksi )(5335in 4 )
Initial iteration service load moment (without P):
Msa = wl2/8 + (Paxecc)/2
Pa = 0.45 klf x 14 ft + 0.5 (0.6 klf x 14 ft) = 10.5 k
89
Check service load deflection (continued)

0.7(0.018 x14 ft )(32 ft ) 2 10.5k (0.33 ft )
Msa =
+
8
2
Msa = 24.3 ft-k < 2/3 Mcr = 38.8 ft-k use Eq. (14-9)
s = (Msa / Mcr ) x cr = (24.3 / 58.2) x 0.558 in = 0.233 in
90

Now including P effects:
Ma = Msa + Psm s
Psm = 10.5 k + 20.3 k = 30.8 k
Ma = 24.3 ft-k + 30.8 k(0.233 in/12) = 24.9 ft-k < 2/3 Mcr
s =(Ma / Mcr ) x cr = (24.9 / 58.2) x 0.558 in = 0.239 in
Final s = 0.24 in < 2.56 in OK
91
Design Example 2 Panel with Opening
92

fc = 4000 psi
c = 150 pcf
fr = 7.5 fc ' = 474 psi
fy = 60,000 psi
Es = 29,000 ksi
Ec = 57 fc ' = 3605 ksi
Es / Ec = 8.044
93
Panel wt. above design section acting on design strip:

(7.25 in/12)(150 pcf)(7 ft)(16.0 ft) / 1000 = 10.2 k

1.2D + 1.6W + 0.5 Lr

Pua = 1.2 (0.45 klf x 7 ft) + 0.5 (0.6 klf x 7 ft) = 5.9 k
94

Pum = 5.9 k + 1.2 (10.2 k) = 18.1 k

Pum/Ag = 18,100 lb / (7.25in x 30 in) = 83 psi < 240 OK
Trial reinforcing: (5) #6 vertical bars each face, 1 clr.

As = 2.2 in2 & d = 7.25 in -1.5 in 0.75 in / 2 = 5.375 in
95

2
Ase f y
2
.
40
in
(60ksi ) = 1.41 in
a=
=
0.85 f c ' b 0.85(4ksi)(30in)
c = a / 0.85 = 1.41 in/ 0.85 = 1.66 in
96

3
E
P
l
c
h
Icr = s ( As + um )(d c) 2 + w
3
Ec
f y 2d
Icr = 8.044(2.4 in2)(5.375 1.66)2

+ (30 in)(1.66)3 / 3 = 312 in4
Mn = Ase fy (da/2) = 0.9(2.4 in2)(60 ksi)(5.375-1.41/2)
Mn = 605 in-k = 50.4 ft-k
97

Mcr = fr S = 0.474 ksi [1/6 (30 in)(7.25)2 = 125 in-k

= As / (bh) = 2.2 in2 / [(30 in)(7.25 in)] = 0.0101
= 0.0101 > 0.0015 OK
98

wu = 1.6 x 18 psf x 7 ft /1000 = 0.202 klf
Pua = 5.9 k
2
8
2
Mua = 0.202 klf (32 ft)2 /8 + 5.9 k (0.33 ft) / 2 = 26.8 ft-k
99

M ua
M =
u
5 Pumlc 2
1
(0.75) 48Ec I cr
26.8 ft k
Mu =
5(18.1k )(32 ft ) 2
0.75(48)(3605ksi )(312in 4 ) / 144
= 40.0 ft-k
< Mn =50.4 ft-k
OK
100
Check service load deflection with 1.0D + 0.5Lr + 0.7W

allowable = lc / 150 = (32 ft x 12 in/ft) / 150 = 2.56 in
Ig = (1/12) (30 in) ( 7.25 in)3 = 953 in4
2
2
5
M
l
cr
c
5
(
125
in
k
)(
32
ftx
12
in
/
ft
)
cr =
=
= 0.559 in
48 Ec I g
48(3605ksi)(953in 4 )
Initial iteration service load moment (without P):
Msa = wl2/8 + (Pa x ecc)/2
Pa = 0.45 klf x 7 ft + 0.5 (0.6 klf x 7 ft) = 5.3 k
101

Msa =
0.7(0.018 x7 ft )(32 ft ) 2 5.3k (0.33 ft )

+
8
2
Msa = 12.2 ft-k = 146 in-k > 2/3 Mcr = 83 in-k use Eq. (14-8)
s = ( 2 / 3) cr +
Where n =
( M sa (2 / 3) M cr )
( n (2 / 3) cr )
( M n ( 2 / 3) M cr )
5M nlc 2 5(672in k )(32 ftx12) 2

=
48 Ec I cr
48(3605ksi)(312in 4 )
= 9.18 in
102

s = ( 2 / 3)(0.559in) +
s = 1.31 in
(146 (2 / 3)125)
(9.18in (2 / 3)(0.559in)
(672 (2 / 3)125)
Now including P effects:

Ma = Msa + Psm s
Psm = 5.3 k + 10.2 k = 15.5 k
Ma = 12.2 ft-k + 15.5 k(1.31 in/12)
Ma = 13.9 ft-k = 167 in-k > 2/3 Mcr
103

s = ( 2 / 3)(0.559in) +
s = 1.62 in
(167 (2 / 3)125)
(9.18in (2 / 3)(0.559in)
(672 (2 / 3)125)
Continue to iterate using Eq. (14-8)

Final s = 1.7 in < 2.56 in OK
104
Design Example 3 Concentrated Gravity Load
105

fc = 4000 psi
c = 150 pcf
fr = 7.5 fc ' = 474 psi
fy = 60,000 psi
Es = 29,000 ksi
Ec = 57 fc ' = 3605 ksi
Es / Ec = 8.044
106
12 ft wide design strip for concentrated gravity load
Panel wt. above design section acting on design strip:

(7.25 in/12)(150 pcf)(12 ft)(16.0 ft) / 1000 = 17.4 k

1.2D + 0.8W + 1.6 Lr

Pua = 1.2 (16 k) + 1.6 (22 k) = 54.4 k
107

Pum = 54.4 k + 1.2 (17.4 k) = 75.3 k

Pum/Ag = 75,300 lb / (7.25in x 144 in) = 72 psi < 240 OK
Trial reinforcing: (12) #6 vertical bars each face, 1 clr.

As = 5.28 in2 & d = 7.25 in -1.5 in 0.75 in / 2 = 5.375 in
108

2
Ase f y
6
.
13
in
(60ksi) = 0.75 in
a=
=
0.85 f c ' b 0.85(4ksi )(144in)
c = a / 0.85 = 0.75 in/ 0.85 = 0.88 in
109

3
E
P
l
c
h
Icr = s ( As + um )(d c) 2 + w
3
Ec
f y 2d
Icr = 8.044(6.13in2)(5.375 0.88)2

+ (144 in)(0.88)3 / 3 = 1029 in4
Mn = Ase fy (da/2) = 0.9(6.13 in2)(60 ksi)(5.375-0.75/2)
Mn = 1655 in-k = 138 ft-k
110

Mcr = fr S = 0.474 ksi [1/6 (144 in)(7.25)2 = 598 in-k

= As / (bh) = 5.28 in2 / [(144 in)(7.25 in)] = 0.0051
= 0.0051 > 0.0015 OK
111

wu = 0.8 x 18 psf x 12 ft /1000 = 0.173 klf
Pua = 54.4 k
2
8
2
Mua = 0.173 klf (32 ft)2 /8 + 54.4 k (0.33 ft) / 2 = 31.1 ft-k
112

M ua
M =
u
5 Pumlc 2
1
(0.75) 48Ec I cr
31.1 ft k
Mu =
5(75.3k )(32 ft ) 2
= 53.2 ft-k
0.75(48)(3605ksi)(1029in 4 ) / 144 < Mn =138 ft-k
OK
113
Panel Base Connections
Code language
ACI 318, 14.2.8: Transfer of force to footing at base of wall

shall be in accordance with 15.8
ACI 318, 15.8: Forces at base of wall should be transferred

using reinforcement, dowels, or mechanical connectors.
ACI 318, Chapter 16 Precast Construction

R16.1.1: Tilt-up concrete construction is a form of precast

construction
16.5.1.3 Vertical Tension Ties: (b) Precast wall panels shall

have a minimum of two ties per panel, with a nominal tensile
strength not less than 10,000 lb per tie
114
Code language (continued):

16.5.1.3 Vertical Tension Ties: (c) When design forces result in

no tension at the base, the ties required by 16.5.1.3(b) shall be
permitted to be anchored into an appropriately reinforced concrete
floor slab-on-ground.
R16.5.1.3: Base connections at shear walls are designed to

transfer all design forces and moments. The minimum tie
requirements of 16.5.1.3 are not additive to these design
requirements.
16.5.1.4: Connection details that rely solely on friction caused by

gravity loads shall not be used
115
Code language (continued):

ACI 551.2R Section 8.2 - In-Plane Shear / Resistance to sliding:

Resistance to sliding forces can be obtained by a combination of
friction between the bottom of panel and the footing, and connections to
the floor slab or foundation (refer to ACI 318, Section 16.5.1.3)
Where panels are subjected to seismic forces, the contribution of
friction resistance may not be permitted by some buildings codes. In
addition, connections between the panel and floor slab or footing is a
compulsory requirement in many building codes, particularly for seismic
forces.
116
Conclusions
If calculated uplift, base connection shall be designed for uplift forces
If no calculated uplift, minimum vertical tension tie connections shall be

provided at panel base per ACI 318 Section 16.5.1.3
ACI 318 Section 16.5.1.3(c): If wall panels anchored to slab-on-ground,

is the slab-on-ground required to resist two 10,000 lb nominal tensile
forces per panel? What is an appropriately reinforced concrete slabon-ground?
In-plane shear forces at base of footing can be resisted by a

combination of friction and base connections, but not friction only
117
Sampling of details from ACI 551.1R:
118
119
Panel & Floor / Roof Connections
In addition to calculated gravity, uplift, in-plane lateral, and outof-plane lateral forces, check minimum seismic anchorage forces
(ASCE 7, Section 12.11 Structural Walls and Their Anchorage)
Design connections according to provisions of ACI 318, App. D
Ductility for seismic connections
120
121
122
Panel to Panel Connections
Connections restrain shrinkage and thermal

expansion/contraction try to avoid
ACI 551.1R recommendations:

Design with some degree of ductility to accommodate panel

shrinkage and thermal expansion and contraction
Reinforcing bar anchors preferred over short headed studs
Delay welding as long as possible to allow majority of panel

shrinkage to occur
123
Panel to Panel Connections
ACI 551.1R, Fig 7.14:
124
Design for Lifting & Bracing
Analysis is often by supplier of embedded lift & bracing inserts
EOR reviews submittal by embedded insert supplier
Additional reinforcement &/or stiffbacks are sometimes required by

embedded insert supplier
Multi-story, large openings with small jambs, and single layer

reinforcement
Review early in design to avoid costly measures later
ACI 551.2R-10 states that further development of design procedures

will be included in future editions
125
In-Plane Shear
Typically resisted by tilt-up shear walls
If high % of panel openings, may need to design as

frames rather than solid shear wall elements
Resistance to overturning (OT)

Resistance to OT typically provided by panel wt., roof loads,

and floor loads
126
In-Plane Shear
Resistance to OT (continued)
If panels alone do not provide OT capacity:

Increase panel width &/or thickness
Anchor panel to foundation with tension tie connections, or
Connect 2 or more panels together to create a larger shear wall
Resistance to Sliding
ACI 551.2R states that resistance can be through combination of

friction & connections to floor slab or foundation, but cautions
that friction may not be allowed to resist seismic forces
127
Dock Walls / Retained Soil
Lateral support is commonly provided by slab-on-ground,

creating continuity as depicted in Fig 7.5 from ACI
551.2R:
128
Dock Walls / Retained Soil
For large slab to roof span relative to slab to foundation span,

continuity has often been neglected and panel is designed as
simply supported from slab to roof.
More rigorous analysis that considers continuity is presented in

ACI 551.2R Example B.6
Large horizontal forces in slab and at foundation must be fully

developed
Consider larger span from roof to footing that may occur

temporarily during construction
129
Multi-Story Panels
Example problem is presented in ACI 551.2R Example B.5

Moment diagram for continuous span is determined without

considering P effects.
Moment magnifier is determined for each span per ACI 318

Section 14.8.3 and applied to both max. positive and max.
negative moments.
Consider lifting stresses for larger spans that may occur

temporarily during construction.
130
Large Concentrated Gravity Loads
What are options if wall is compression controlled?

Increase panel thickness
Move panel joints &/or openings to provide more b
Design & detail as column per ACI 318 Ch. 10
Add pilaster at concentrated load
Add steel column at concentrated load
131
Design Tips
Repetition/modularity is key to efficiency & economy
Look out for

Hanging/spandrel panels
Panel to panel connections
Panel hold-down connections at shear walls
L and T shaped panels
Small jambs adjacent to large openings
Heavy girder bearing on skinny jambs or panel joints
132
Design Tips
Look out for (continued)

Lifting stresses for multi-story panels
Dock wall & retained soil details & load path at slab & footing
Frequent openings may require moment frames (vs. shear walls)
Tall & narrow shear wall panels (check OT)
Reveal joints may affects bar location for exterior face bars
Out-of-plane deflection at small jambs adjacent to large

openings
Embedded plates near the ends of panels

133
Design Tips
Look out for (continued)

Restraint created by panel to foundation (or slab) connections
Corrosion projection may be required for panel to foundation

connections
Corner joint details at big box buildings (thermal

expansion/contraction in roof)
Too-small scupper size at parapets in big box buildings
QC dimensions!!!!
Site visit prior to first panel pour is recommended
134
Questions?
135

2011.05.11 - Design of Tilt-Up Wall Systems

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2011.05.11 - Design of Tilt-Up Wall Systems

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tilt-Up Construction

Two part presentation:

General structural engineer that designs a wide variety of

ACI 116R: Tilt-up construction is a technique for casting

Introduction to Tilt-up construction process:

Concrete slab on grade and exterior wall foundations (for the

Formwork and reveals:

Introduction to Tilt-up construction process:

Bondbreaker is sprayed inside the forms on the slab on grade

Chairs, reinforcement, and embedded items (lifting/bracing

Concrete placed, finished, and cured.

Crane connects to lifting inserts cast into interior face of wall

Panels with reinforcing:

Introduction to Tilt-up construction process:

Temporary braces are installed to support the wall panel prior

Structural connections made at foundation

Structural connections are made to diaphragm(s)

Braces are removed once LFRS complete

Non-structural work may occur at any time after erection

Traditionally, tilt-up is thought of for large, warehouse structures

The proper mindset:

Dont limit yourself and the owner based on traditional ways

Tilt-up can be economically and effectively used for a wide

The proper mindset (cont.):

You are part of a design team.

If at all possible, meet and discuss construction type possibilities

Design-build obviously lends itself well to this or you need an

Step 1 Is tilt-up a viable alternative?

Crane access: Will there be plenty of room for the crane

Building square footage: 5000-7000 sf is a decent rule

Step 1 Is tilt-up a viable alternative?

Building wall height-to-floor slab width ratio is key.

Step 1 Is tilt-up a viable alternative?

Dont automatically disregard tilt-up if the building is multistory.

3-story buildings are reasonable without upsizing the crane that

Step 1 Is tilt-up a viable alternative?

Will the exterior wall surface essentially be flat with some

What percent of the wall is solid? As a rule of thumb, the walls

Step 1 Is tilt-up a viable alternative?

Exterior elevations (cont.):

Will curved panels be required?

Can most of the panels be supported on foundations and not

Is there a qualified precaster in the general area?

Transportation considerations also impact the precast panel

The narrow panel width of precast panels can be a disadvantage

Lead times: Lead times on precast and steel can vary. In

Dimensional stability: Precast panels are frequently insulated.

Future flexibility: Tilt-up panels are typically somewhat easier to

Precast thermal bow:

Precast thermal bow:

Dependent on local material costs and labor costs for masons.

Building footprint and wall square footage is a big determinant.

In general, a tilt-up building can be erected faster than a CMU

Pre-engineered metal buildings (PEMB):

PEMBs are not really an apples-to-apples comparison with

PEMB do not typically compare favorably to conventionally

PEMB a great selection for owners whose primary desire is to

It is possible to clad a PEMB with tilt-up. Requires additional

Similar to PEMB, not really an apples-to-apples comparison.

If it can be done with traditional wood construction it is cheapest

Assume the design team has selected tilt-up for the

SEOR design vs. delegated design

Lifting and bracing insert design. Most commonly done by insert

Bracing design. Most commonly done by same engineer who