2013 - 06 Tall Buildings High Rise

June 2013 Tall Buildings/High Rise
A Joint Publication of NCSEA | CASE | SEI
STRUCTURE
SPECIFICATION
BEST
PRACTICE
Ensure That Your

Project Documents
Match Your Design
SCAN THIS QR CODE
TO LINK TO A DIGITAL
SPECIFICATION FOR
ANCHORS WRITTEN
AND PROVIDED BY
POWERS FASTENERS WITH GOVERNING
STANDARDS REFERENCED.
Today in virtually every jurisdiction in the U.S.

the Code Basis for Building Construction is in
some edition of the International Building Code
(IBC). By default, the General Notes, Structural
and MEP Specifications require compliance
to the IBC. For the purpose of post-installed
concrete anchor design, the IBC requires that
the Strength Design method be used.
The reality is far too often these specifications
are obsolete with respect to anchors in concrete.
When that happens, the project documents are
in conflict with one another and in conflict with
the IBC.
CSI Section for Mechanical & Adhesive

Anchors 03 16 00 and 05 05 19
Dont put your project at risk. Powers understands the
importance of code approved anchoring options. Thats
why weve dedicated ourselves to engineering a range
of products that meet the new building code, and to
developing ways to support those products.
Real-Time Anchor Design Software V2.0
PDAS LIVE UPDATE FEATURE

ENSURES THAT SOFTWARE IS ALWAYS
LOADED WITH UP-TO-DATE PRODUCTS,
FEATURES AND CODE REFERENCES.
For a full listing of code approved products, and a demo

on the latest version of PDA go to www.powers.com or
call (800) 524-3244 for a free demo.
Powers Fasteners, Inc. www.powers.com

2 Powers Lane
P: (914) 235-6300
Brewster, NY 10509
F: (914) 576-6483
For over three decades engineers have relied on ENERCALCs industry leading
software to perform structural design and analysis for low to mid-rise buildings.
Software for rapid creation of calculations for
components of low to mid-rise buildings
Did you know?
Covers virtually all design & analysis tasks in

steel, wood, concrete, masonry, load generation
and frame analysis
Latest IBC, ACI, ASCE, AISC, NDS and CBC code
provisions incorporated
Flexible licensing, automatic web updates, superb
support, created by experienced engineers
Celebrating 30 years and 8,000+ users
Our software is the only SE tool

that creates sets of structural
engineering calculations.
Improved continuously to suit users needs
Add your own Excel spreadsheets, PDF & Word files, and
also directly scan documents right into your Project File.
Its simple to collect your work from different sources
into one central location.
ENERCALC
ENERCALC
The Project Manager enables

you to build calculation sets
using our 40+ applications.
Organized, easy to edit and even print directly to a PDF.
Plus import & export makes it easy to use prior

calculation/sets for your next project!
800.424.2252 | www.enercalc.com | info@enercalc.com

Evaluation Software: www.enercalc.com/demo
FEATURES
San Diego Central Library
30
CONTENTS
June 2013
By Sean Fleming, Jean Libby, P.E. and Paul Endres, S.E.
The San Diego Central Library encloses 504,000 square

feet on its nine above-ground floors. The project presents
multiple unique challenges in its many unique structural
frame components. Prevalent among them are the cast-inplace architectural concrete frame beams and columns,
exposed concrete waffle slabs, and the iconic steel and
aluminum dome structure.
Diagrid on Display
34
By Daniel Riemann, P.E. and Jason Black, P.E., S.E.
The recently completed Federal Center South Building

1202 is a state-of-the-art office building resulting from
architectural, structural, and construction innovation and
collaboration. One of the key features that makes Building
1202 so innovative is the use of a diagrid system at the
exterior wall of the structure.
John Jay College Expansion
40
By Jason Stone, P.E.
The CUNY John Jay College School of Criminal Justice

Expansion Project is a new 625,000-square foot academic
building in Midtown Manhattan. The project presented
numerous and significant site challenges. In response to
one such challenge, a shallow Amtrak tunnel that cuts
through a corner of the site, the John Jay structural system is
distinguished by a grid of rooftop trusses which hang the
perimeter of eight floors below.
COLUMNS
7 Editorial
On the Importance
of Collaboration
By Edward M. DePaola, P.E., SECB
10 Guest Column
The Proper Role of the
Geotechnical Engineer
By Victor R. Donald, P.E.
12 Structural Testing
Investigating Masonry Structures
Andrew E. Geister, P.E.
16 Building Blocks
Height and Area Considerations
for Commercial Wood Buildings
By Paul D. Coats, P.E. and
Dennis Richardson, P.E.
21 Engineers Notebook
Wood Design
By Jerod G. Johnson, Ph.D., S.E.
23 Structural Performance
Seismic Modeling of an Irregular
Water Treatment Structure
By Louis Scatena, P.E.
26 Historic Structures
Newburyport Bridge
STRUCTURE
By Frank Griggs, Jr., D. Eng., P.E.
ON
THE
COVER
A Joint Publication of NCSEA | CASE | SEI
The newly built

San Diego Central
Library presents
multiple distinctive
challenges in its
many unique
structural frame
components. The
project encloses 504,000 square feet on its
nine above-ground floors and includes reader
seating for 1,200 persons, 407 computer
stations, 22 wifi-enabled study rooms, and
more. The project is featured on page 30.
June 2013 Tall Buildings/High Rise
IN EVERY ISSUE
8 Advertiser Index
8 Letter to the Editor
48 Resource Guide
(Tall Buildings)
50 Noteworthy
52 NCSEA News
54 SEI Structural Columns
56 CASE in Point
44 CASE Business Practices

Tools for Protecting the
Bottom Line
By Mark Erdman, P.E.
46 Great Achievements
William LeMessurier
By Robert Hossli and

Ronald Flucker, P.E.
51 Spotlight
The Twisting Regent Emirates
Pearl Hotel
By Ahmed Osman, P.E., M.Eng

and Whitney Morris
Publication of any article, image, or advertisement in STRUCTURE magazine does not constitute endorsement
by NCSEA, CASE, SEI, C 3 Ink, or the Editorial Board. Authors, contributors, and advertisers retain sole
responsibility for the content of their submissions.
STRUCTURE magazine
DEPARTMENTS
June 2013
58 Structural Forum
Black, White, and Gray
By Greg Cuetara, P.E., S.E.
Remember This Ad?

ITCOursAd.qxd
9/5/06
9:04 PM
Page 1
When We Built Our Plant In

e
Decatur, Alabama We Used Th
y.
Finest Materials In The Industr
Ours.
Decatur facility
the same. Our

We believe our customers deserve
d from
100% of tube products supplie
is constructed with virtually

plants. Now, with three locations
our Chicago and Marseilles, Illinois
e
of production capacity, we welcom
and over 1,000,000 square feet
needs.
tube
the opportunity to secure all your
industrys most popular size
Independence Tube features the
tubing (plus corresponding
range2 square to 10 square
to .625. Our rolling schedule,
.125
from
walls
with
les)
rectang
that your order will be
unsurpassed in the industry, assures
ng
ndence Tubes customer shoppi
delivered when promised. Indepe
to a host of services. You have
you
links
M
BE.CO
network, ITCTU
les.
schedu
rolling
and
ry,
access to bundle charts, tube invento
open orders and test

You can release loads, download
customer secure portal.
resultsall from your personal,
t sell our customers
At Independence Tube, we wouldn
es. Come and experience
ourselv
use
t
wouldn
we
g
anythin
a world of possibilities.
us at 800-376-6000
For further information please call
dependencetube.com.
and visit our website at www.in
Well, we did it again

CH ICAG O, I L
MARSEI LLES, I L
DECAT U R , A L
because our customers continue to deserve the best in tube quality, service and delivery.
In rebuilding the Decatur facility and mills, we figured now was the time to take our product
line to the next levelbigger and better than ever before.
Our state-of-the-art facility can now produce Rounds to 14" OD and 16" OD with walls up
to .625". This gives us a total Rounds range of 1.66" OD to 16" OD. In addition we will offer
A500 ITC50 Pipe Sizes and A252 Pipe Piling sizes as well. Remember, Independence Tube
offers the Industrys most popular size ranges in square, rectangle, and round tube sizes.
We did it again, in no small way, with our employees, customers and suppliers mutual
respect and dedication.
1-800-376-6000 www.independencetube.com
Celebrating 40 Years of Quality Tube Products
Editorial
On the Importance of Collaboration
new
trends,M.new
techniques
and current
By
Edward
DePaola,
P.E., SECB,
F.SEI industry issues
A member of the SEI Board of Governors, representing SEIs Codes and Standards Division
eople often say that the whole is greater than sum of its parts,
and that is the case when professional organizations collaborate
to accomplish more than the sum of their individual efforts.
As youve read in these pages (and elsewhere) for many
years, there are multiple organizations that represent engineers in one
form or another. Specifically, for structural engineers, the Structural
Engineering Institute (SEI) of the American Society of Civil Engineers
(ASCE), the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations
(NCSEA), the Council of American Structural Engineers (CASE)
and the Structural Engineering Certification Board (SECB), each
represent structural engineers. These organizations have always shared
the following goals:
To advance and serve the structural engineering profession;
To promote the profession to the public and within the
profession itself.
Now they have embraced the idea of collaboration to improve the level
of practice by speaking with one, strong voice to promote structural
engineering licensing throughout the United States.
Protecting the publics right to safe, sustainable and cost effective
buildings, bridges and other structures is the primary responsibility of
the structural engineering profession. Licensure of structural engineers
to document their competency is crucial to ensuring that structures
are properly designed. At this time, however, only 11 states (IL, HI,
CA, NV, OR, UT, WA, AZ, ID, NE, NM) have structural engineer
licensing acts. In the other 39 states, SECB Certification is the only
option for recognition as a structural engineer.
SEI and SECB firmly believe that SECB certification of structural
engineers is an excellent interim step on the path towards structural licensure in all jurisdictions. Similarly, the Model Law Structural Engineer
(MLSE) designation recently instituted through the National Council
of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES) can provide an
intermediary step, but it is not an adequate substitute for structural
licensure. SEI and SECB, in conjunction with NCSEA and CASE, are
the voice of structural engineers and are providing guidance to state
legislatures and licensing boards on matters related to SE licensure.
The Structural Engineering Certification Board (SECB) is an independent, autonomous professional organization created to ensure
that structural engineers have the credentials and experience they
need to protect the public health and safety, and to work safely and
productively in their profession. The criteria for certification by SECB
include rigorous requirements for primary structural engineering
education, continued structural practice, and ongoing professional
development. In order to maintain certification, structural engineers
must participate in extensive continuing education. SECB continues
to hone these requirements with the goal of developing an effective
model that can be used to make continuing education mandatory
and uniform in all states. The SECB criteria parallel those of the
Model Law Structural Engineer designation offered by NCEES, but
establish more rigorous standards for education, practice, and professional development. SECBs criteria for certification can serve as the
qualifications required for SE licensure throughout the United States.
The mission of the Structural Engineering Institute (SEI) is to
advance and serve the structural engineering profession, which
includes state licensure. In October 1999, the SEI Board of Governors
passed the following resolution:
STRUCTURE magazine
Coming together is a beginning, staying together

is progress, and working together is success.
Henry Ford
The Structural Engineering Institute (SEI) supports separate licensing of structural engineers. SEI will support and encourage activities
to achieve this goal in each state and other jurisdictions.
In January 2010, the SEI Board of Governors adopted SEI Policy
Statement 101 on Structural Engineering Licensure:
The Structural Engineering Institute (SEI) of the American Society of
Civil Engineers (ASCE) supports Structural Engineering licensure.
It encourages Professional Engineers practicing structural engineering
to further obtain a Structural Engineer license in jurisdictions that
have any form of Structural Engineering license by complying with
the jurisdictions specified requirements for education, experience
and examination, and by meeting continuing education requisites
to maintain this license. SEI also encourages jurisdictions to license
Structural Engineers as a post-PE (Professional Engineer) credential,
and to include in their new legislation an equitable transitioning
clause for engineers currently practicing structural engineering.
In most states, SECB Certification is the only credential available, it
is currently the only de facto standard, and it is a way to distinguish
structural engineers from the other engineering professions.
Recent changes to the NCEES examination process have triggered
some changes in the Certification Application. For this reason, SECB
has enacted an open enrollment period for licensed professional engineers practicing structural engineering to attain certification based
upon experience and education. The license and/or registration must
have been awarded on or before July 1, 2005 and must remain valid
continuously through the time of application. The open enrollment
period began January 1, 2013. In addition, SECB application fees have
been temporarily reduced for SEI members and NCSEA members
to encourage morepracticing structural engineers to obtain SECB
certification. For more information, see the SECB website.
As professional engineers, we have a responsibility to set demanding
requirements for our peers to ensure that our industry operates with
the highest quality standards possible. We are confident that SECBs
rigorous core curriculum and continuing education requirements will
raise the bar for our profession. And, we are confident that the ultimate goal of this collaboration to transform the SECB certification
program into the basis for structural engineering licensure will be
accomplished. Both SEI and NCSEA have active licensing committees
that will work together to more effectively pursue structural engineering
licensing. Once a mandatory, uniform SE licensure program is adopted
throughout the country, state legislatures and state licensing boards will
look to our organizations for guidance and advice on licensing issues.
Together we will raise the bar for structural engineers to improve education requirements, licensure and continuing education. Structural
engineers will be reenergized to promote and support structural
engineering licensure. It is clear that the result of our
collaboration will be greater than the sum of any individual efforts, and we are excited about enhancing and
improving our profession.
June 2013
Advertiser index
PleAse suPPort these Advertisers
Canadian Wood Council ....................... 20

Computers & Structures, Inc. ............... 60
CSC, Inc. .............................................. 27
CTS Cement Manufacturing Corp........ 37
DBM Contractors, Inc. ......................... 36
Enercalc, Inc. .......................................... 3
Engineering International, Inc............... 18
ESAB Welding and Cutting Products ...... 9
Foundation Performance Association..... 17
Fyfe ....................................................... 19
Gerdau .................................................. 29
GT Strudl ............................................. 22
ICC....................................................... 43
Independence Tube Corporation ............. 6
Integrated Engineering Software, Inc..... 45
ITW TrusSteel & BCG Hardware ... 25, 33
ITW Red Head ..................................... 39
KPFF Consulting Engineers .................. 38
editorial Board
Chair
Burns & McDonnell, Kansas City, MO

chair@structuremag.org
Brian W. Miller
CBI Consulting, Inc., Boston, MA
Mark W. Holmberg, P.E.
Evans Mountzouris, P.E.
The DiSalvo Ericson Group, Ridgefield, CT
Dilip Khatri, Ph.D., S.E.
Greg Schindler, P.E., S.E.
Khatri International Inc., Pasadena, CA
KPFF Consulting Engineers, Seattle, WA
Roger A. LaBoube, Ph.D., P.E.
Stephen P. Schneider, Ph.D., P.E., S.E.

BergerABAM, Vancouver, WA
Brian J. Leshko, P.E.
John Buddy Showalter, P.E.
John A. Mercer, P.E.
Amy Trygestad, P.E.
HDR Engineering, Inc., Pittsburgh, PA
Mercer Engineering, PC, Minot, ND
Chuck Minor
Dick Railton
Eastern Sales
847-854-1666
Western Sales
951-587-2982
sales@STRUCTUREmag.org
Davis, CA
Heath & Lineback Engineers, Inc., Marietta, GA
CCFSS, Rolla, MO
Advertising Account MAnAger

Interactive Sales Associates
Jon A. Schmidt, P.E., SECB
Craig E. Barnes, P.E., SECB
NCEES ................................................. 47
New Millennium Building Systems ....... 11
Powers Fasteners, Inc. .............................. 2
RISA Technologies ................................ 59
S-Frame Software, Inc. ............................ 4
Simpson Strong-Tie......................... 15, 35
Soilstructure.com .................................. 49
Strand 7/Beaufort Analysis, Inc. ............ 50
Struware, Inc. ........................................ 42
American Wood Council, Leesburg, VA
Chase Engineering, LLC, New Prague, MN
Letter to the Editor
editoriAL stAFF
Executive Editor Jeanne Vogelzang, JD, CAE
execdir@ncsea.com
Editor
Christine M. Sloat, P.E.
publisher@STRUCTUREmag.org
Associate Editor
Graphic Designer
Web Developer
After reading Lara K. Schuberts series of articles on the role of gender in structural engineering in
the February and April issues of STRUCTURE magazine, I find myself in complete disagreement
with the author. Neither earthquakes nor hurricanes nor gravity care about gender and, regardless
of the sex of the engineer, clocks stubbornly refuse to tick more slowly as deadlines approach.
There is an old axiom that correlation does not imply causation. A proclivity towards analytical
thinking and the use of logic are common traits among engineers not because the majority are
males, but because these traits are critical to success in engineering. The use of logic to solve
problems is what draws many, both male and female, to the profession in the first place. If a
larger percentage of men than women either naturally possess these traits or wish to further
cultivate them through their career, it should be irrelevant. Women greatly outnumber men
in both nursing and elementary education, but this does not provide evidence of discrimination against male nurses or elementary school teachers. Qualities that lead to enjoyment and
success in these fields, such as being nurturing, are found more often in women, and in a free
society people will naturally be drawn towards careers that match their interests and skill sets.
It is the nature of the profession not the gender of the professionals that shape the culture.
The key for a well functioning society should be that analytical women and nurturing men
can and often do find success in engineering and nursing, respectively.
I also found the two anecdotes of gender discrimination from the sciences (physics and neurobiology) as evidence against structural engineers to be misleading. Besides coming from professions
not in the field of engineering, both examples came from an academic setting, whereas the vast
majority of structural engineers work in industry. An old boys club is more likely to be found
in academia, where tenure exists, than in a highly competitive industry made even more so
by the last economic downturn. Discriminating for any superfluous reason will cost structural
engineering firms both talent and business. In this way, the free market is able to punish bad
actors and help suppress discrimination in a way not possible in academia.
James Lintz P.E., LEED AP
STRUCTURE magazine
June 2013
Nikki Alger
Rob Fullmer
graphics@STRUCTUREmag.org
William Radig
webmaster@STRUCTUREmag.org
STRUCTURE (Volume 20, Number 6). ISSN 1536-4283.

Publications Agreement No. 40675118. Owned by the
National Council of Structural Engineers Associations and
published in cooperation with CASE and SEI monthly by C3
Ink. The publication is distributed free of charge to members
of NCSEA, CASE and SEI; the non-member subscription rate
is $65/yr domestic; $35/yr student; $90/yr Canada; $125/yr
foreign. For change of address or duplicate copies, contact your
member organization(s). Any opinions expressed in STRUCTURE
magazine are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily
reflect the views of NCSEA, CASE, SEI, C3 Ink, or the STRUCTURE
Editorial Board.
STRUCTURE is a registered trademark of National Council of
Structural Engineers Associations (NCSEA). Articles may not be
reproduced in whole or in part without the written permission

of the publisher.
Celebrating
years
1993-2013
C3 Ink, Publishers
A Division of Copper Creek Companies, Inc.

148 Vine St., Reedsburg WI 53959
P-608-524-1397 F-608-524-4432
Visit STRUCTURE magazine
on-line at
Visit STRUCTURE
magazine on-line at
www.structuremag.org
Visit
STRUCTURE magazine online at
For demand critical

welds,the right
product is crucial.
ESAB Seismic Certified filler metals deliver the strength you need for structural fabrication.
With products such as Atom Arc, Dual Shield, Coreshield, and Spoolarc, ESAB Seismic Certified filler
metals meet AWS D designator requirements, and are excellent options for when FEMA 353, D1.1,
or D1.8 is utilized. Plus, our experts will help you determine the best solution for your application.
For more information, visit www.esabna.com/seismic or scan this QR code.
ESAB Welding & Cutting Products / esabna.com / 1.800.ESAB.123
Guest
Column
dedicated to the dissemination
of information from other
organizations
s a practicing geotechnical engineer

for over 30 years, I would like to
thank Mr. Gerd Hartung, P.E., S.E.
and Mr. Richard Anderson, P.E. for
their insightful article entitled The RFP for the
Geotechnical Report as presented in the March
2013 issue of STRUCTURE magazine. Their
specific and relevant advice regarding how to
procure the services of geotechnical engineers is
beneficial to us all.
The structural engineering community is wellknown as a strong advocate for the selection of
geotechnical services based upon quality and
understanding of the project and project area,
and that article is another example of their commitment to the use of geotechnical engineers as
significant contributors to the overall success of
every project. Structural and geotechnical engineers must forge a team to create a successful
design, as the article states.
When I encounter a prospective client who considers geotechnical engineers
to be a testing laboratory
and chooses to hire based
on the lowest price instead
of selecting a capable and
knowledgeable professional, I respond with a
three-word declaration: You deserve better. It is a
simple, yet significant statement.
The fees of the geotechnical consultant are
usually less than a fraction of one percent of
the construction costs, yet their test results
and opinions have an impact on the project
budget that is orders of magnitude greater.
Going with the cheapest provider for this critical investigation and design work ultimately
places undue burden on the structural engineer to interpret the geotechnical data, select
design parameters, consider site preparation
and foundation options, etc.
Along those lines, the structural engineer
should not dictate the scope of the field and
laboratory segments of the geotechnical engineers work, or exclude the geotechnical engineer
from the process of foundation system selection. Our profession has grown immensely in
the development of technologically enhanced
ways to conduct a site characterization program
using geophysical and/or in-situ test methods,
typically complementing the traditional soil
boring as a means of understanding the subsurface conditions. Geotechnical engineers also
develop, understand and promote innovations in
ground improvement, intermediate foundations
and advancements in deep foundations to save
owners millions of dollars.
Todays technology makes active collaboration
with the geotechnical engineer simple, which
minimizes the potential for miscommunication
The Proper Role of the

Geotechnical Engineer
By Victor R. Donald, P.E.
Victor R. Donald, P.E.

(vrdonald@terracon.com), is
a senior principal, senior vice
president, and National Director of
Geotechnical Services for Terracon
in Olathe, Kansas.
10 June 2013
the structural
engineer has a
unique appreciation
of the benefit that a
capable geotechnical
engineer brings to
the design team.
that can result from a single point of delivery
report and overly conservative designs. There
are two types of foundation failures. The first is
obvious structures move, slopes fail, walls tilt,
floors distort, walls crack, etc. This failure type
gets significant attention. The second could be
more prevalent, but it goes completely undetected. It is the foundation that costs at least
twice and perhaps up to ten times more than
necessary, all because the design team lacked the
active participation of an innovative and capable
geotechnical engineer knowledgeable of recent
advancements in the profession.
The design-build (D-B) environment is a
good example of geotechnical engineers providing valuable participation on the design
team. D-B projects include the geotechnical
engineer in the design process in order to
render a proposal for the project that offers
the best value. In my experience, D-B projects
allow for vigorous and highly collaborative
interaction of all disciplines, with the winning
proposal often resulting in an innovative solution. If the need for active participation by the
geotechnical engineer is that obvious in D-B
projects where best overall value wins, why
do geotechnical engineers struggle to participate as design professionals in the traditional
design-bid-build environment?
As the referenced article implies, the structural engineer has a unique appreciation of the
benefit that a capable geotechnical engineer
brings to the design team. My request to the
structural engineering community is to help
us help you. By continuing to convey this
message to your clients, you can assist us in
becoming more influential in the design process and eliminating the burden of insufficient
geotechnical engineering that must be borne
by someone usually the structural engineer.
Stack the deck
Assure the success of your building projects

New Millennium is your source for reliable nationwide steel decking supply: 14 profiles of roof, floor
and composite floor deck plus steel joists and FreeSpan castellated and cellular beams.
FREE steel decking catalog: www.newmill.com/steeldeck
Structural
teSting
issues and advances related
to structural testing
n a STRUCTURE article published earlier

this year, the author discussed some of the
components of a nondestructive evaluation
(NDE) program for existing masonry structures, and what types of information could be
obtained through such methods. This article aims
to elaborate on the procedures and techniques
used to investigate existing masonry structures
and diagnose potential issues.
Flatjack Tests
From a structural design standpoint, some of the
most important properties of existing masonry
include strength, stiffness, and in situ stress.
Flatjack testing methods are some of the most
valuable tools available for measuring masonry
resistance to loads as well as the existing stress
that the masonry is currently experiencing.
First, its important to distinguish the type of
test to be specified, as the information provided by each
test method
is different.
ASTM C1196,
Standard Test
Method for In
Situ Compressive Stress Within Solid Unit Masonry
Estimated Using Flatjack Measurements, provides
a procedure for measuring the existing state of
vertical compressive stress within an unreinforced
solid masonry wall. This information is of particular use when supplemental supports are designed
for areas where plans call for portions of existing
masonry walls to be removed. The results of this
method have also been used to verify analytical models, complicated load paths, and flexural
bending moments across a wall section. In this
test, a single stress-relieving horizontal slot is cut
in a masonry bed joint in the area the information
is desired. A series of gauge points placed above
and below the slot help to precisely measure the
vertical distance that the masonry drops after
cutting. A single Flatjack is inserted into the slot
and pressurized at increasing increments while
the distance between gauge points is measured,
until the original distance between gage points is
Investigating Masonry Structures

Nondestructive and
Minimally Invasive
Techniques
Andrew E. Geister, P.E.
Andrew Geister, P.E., is an

engineer with Atkinson-Noland
& Associates, Inc., specializing
in masonry investigation through
nondestructive, in-situ, and
laboratory material testing. He
is also a member of multiple
committees in The Masonry
Society. Andrew can be reached
at ageister@ana-usa.com.
Figure 1: Single flatjack test used to determine masonry

in situ stress.
12 June 2013
Figure 2: Flatjack deformability testing to measure

masonry elastic modulus and estimate compressive strength.
restored (Figure 1). The Flatjack pressure required

to restore the original masonry position generally
corresponds to the in situ stress, after the necessary
calibration and area factors are applied.
ASTM C1197, Standard Test Method for In Situ
Measurement of Masonry Deformability Properties
Using the Flatjack Method, provides a means for
measuring masonry stiffness and estimating
masonry compressive strength, which are often
the most important masonry properties in design
and retrofit. In this test, two horizontal slots are
cut with five courses of masonry between them.
Both Flatjacks are pressurized together while
monitoring the surface strain of the masonry
between them (Figure 2); the result is a compressive strength test within the wall that produces a
stress-strain curve (Figure 3 ). In order for the test
to be effective, the Flatjacks must react against
masonry which is rigid enough that only the
masonry between the Flatjacks deforms during
the test. Generally, this is not a problem below
the test location as long as the test is not performed directly above an opening, since most
walls are supported by foundations that wont
deflect during the test. Ensuring that enough
dead load is present on the masonry above the
test location can be more difficult, especially for
single story buildings or test locations near the
roof. Without enough overburden pressure, the
upper Flatjack can actually lift the portion of
the wall above it, limiting the maximum applied
pressure to the test area.
Masonry shear strength is measured by ASTM
C1531, Standard Test Methods for In Situ
Measurement of Masonry Mortar Joint Shear
Strength Index. In this test, mortar is cleared from
Deformability Test #1
1000
Stress (psi)
800
600
400
Figure 4: Masonry shear strength testing using a

specially-sized flatjack.
200
0
0.0000
0.0001
0.0002
0.0003
0.0004
0.0005
0.0006
0.0007
0.0008
Strain (in/in)
Figure 3: Masonry stress-strain curve generated by flatjack deformability testing.
both head joints of a single unit. A single

Flatjack, specially sized to match the brick
end, is then inserted into one of the empty
head joints, while instrumentation such as a
dial gauge is used to measure displacement
across the other. The Flatjack pressure is slowly
increased until it causes the masonry unit to
move toward the empty head joint (Figure 4 ).
The pressure required to induce movement
is recorded and used to calculate the mortar
joint shear strength index. Unlike the Flatjack
deformability test, having a minimal amount
of dead load above the shear test is advantageous. Because normal stress contributes to
the bed joint shear resistance, this normal
stress must be estimated and then subtracted
from the measured joint shear strength using
the procedure described in the International
Existing Building Code. One way to reduce
the effect of normal stress on the shear test is
to perform the test below an opening or near
the top of the wall.
Surface Penetrating Radar

The use of Surface Penetrating Radar (SPR)
for masonry investigation does not follow a
standardized procedure, but rather depends
on the interpretation and experience of the
user. In the right hands, SPR can be most
useful in locating embedded objects such as
metal reinforcing or conduit, locating bond
courses, and assessing the extent of anomalies,
voids, or ungrouted cells. The equipment
often consists of a handheld or wheeled
antenna, processor, and output screen. The
antenna transmits microwave energy and then
collects the reflected signal as it bounces back.
What the user sees on the screen is the result

of this energy being reflected back at various times, which relate to depths of different
materials. Metals, for example, are highly
reflective to radar energy and thus SPR is very
effective at locating reinforcing bars and other
metal objects within masonry walls (Figure
5 ). Air, on the other hand, is not particularly
reflective to radar energy. Since almost none
of the transmitted energy is reflected back by
these empty spaces, an experienced user will
be able to differentiate between air and solid
material. Therefore SPR can be used to locate
cracks, voided areas, or hollow masonry cells.
SPR is most effective on walls that are dry
because wet areas are highly attenuative to
microwave energy, thus reducing its effective
penetration depth and limiting the information available to the user. Since the exterior
face of a masonry wall tends to dry out before
the internal portion does, significant moisture
can still be present inside the wall even if the
outer surface appears dry. It may be necessary
to wait for an extended amount of time for
masonry walls to dry after a severe weather
event before performing SPR observations,
depending on local climates. A moisture
meter should always be used to confirm conditions if moisture is suspected.
Infrared Thermography
Masonrys thermal mass and thermal transfer
properties make infrared thermography (IRT)
an ideal method for investigating potential
anomalies. The cost of infrared equipment
has decreased in recent years, while quality
has continued to improve. As it relates to
STRUCTURE magazine
13
June 2013
Figure 5: Surface Penetrating Radar output image

showing masonry wall thickness and reinforcing bars.
masonry investigation, IRT is most useful in

locating temperature differences at specific
areas, which can indicate the possibility of
internal anomalies. One such anomaly is the
potential for excess moisture and leaks. The
temperature difference between wet masonry
and dry masonry, due to evaporative and other
effects, will produce distinctive appearances
between the two when viewed using infrared
equipment. Larger air voids, such as those left
by unfilled cells, can also be detected using IRT
(Figure 6 , page 14). For IRT to work effectively
on masonry structures, however, there needs
to be a large enough temperature difference
between the building and the surrounding air.
This is usually best achieved in early morning or late evening, when the air temperature
is changing. In the morning, the sun begins
to warm the masonry while the grouted cells
stay cool. In the evening, the opposite occurs;
empty cells, voids, and wet areas become cool
while the stored heat from the day remains in
the wall. IRT also works well when there is
at least a 30 temperature difference between
interior and exterior wall surfaces.
Borescope
Images observed via fiber optic borescope are
a useful way to view concealed conditions
without removing or damaging large portions
of the wall. A small borehole, usually less
Figure 6: Infrared Thermography image used to

quickly distinguish between grouted and hollow
cells in concrete masonry construction.
Figure 7: Borescope view of a masonry wall cavity

and veneer anchors.
Figure 8: Borescope image of a crack forming on

the back face of a veneer panel.
than the thickness of a mortar joint, is the

only opening needed to insert the probe. A
borescope can be used to view the condition
of connectors (Figure 7 ), cracks or deterioration on the back faces of units (Figure 8), and
excess mortar within wall cavities.
may be adjusted based on local weather data.

Water loss into the wall surface is recorded
for a minimum of 4 hours, and any observed
water penetration to the opposite wall face
is reported.
Spray tests can also be performed to gain
understanding of wall leakage potential,
especially around windows, following AAMA
501.2, Quality Assurance and Diagnostic Water
Leakage Field Check of Installed Storefronts,
Curtain Walls, and Sloped Glazing Systems.
This test uses a specially sized nozzle and a prescribed pressure of 30-35 pounds per square
inch (psi). If leaks are discovered during the
test, specific components are then sealed off
to determine the moisture entry paths.
A direct evaluation of wall drainage and
water collection systems may be performed
using ASTM C 1715, Standard Test Method
for Evaluation of Water Leakage Performance
of Masonry Wall Drainage Systems. In this test,
a series of tubes deliver water directly to the
drainage cavity and the ability of the system
to collect and redirect water to the exterior
is observed.
direct electrical connection first needs to

be made with the reinforcing steel, which
is often accomplished by drilling or chipping the masonry to expose a small portion
of the bar and attaching a clamp. This also
requires that the reinforcing be located
prior to performing the corrosion potential
measurements. The electrical potential of
the reinforcing metal is measured against
a copper-copper sulfate reference electrode
with a voltmeter. Measurements are made
along the reinforcing by placing the electrode on the pre-wetted masonry surface
and recording the potential difference displayed by the voltmeter at regular intervals.
Corrosion potentials more negative than
-0.35 V indicate a high probability of active
corrosion at that location. Measurements
can only be made at reinforcing with an
electrical connection to the location that is
clamped to the voltmeter; so, in masonry,
this usually means along a bond beam or a
vertically reinforced cell.
Pachometer
The proper selection and use of NDE methods are a valuable, and in some cases necessary,
approach to determine properties required for
design or use of existing masonry structures.
In historic construction, destructive probes
may not be allowed or must be kept to a
minimum. In new construction, NDE has
been used as a form of quality control to
verify project requirements are met, especially
for placement of grout, reinforcing bars, and
veneer anchors.
The nondestructive and minimally invasive
diagnostic techniques described here allow
effective evaluation of existing masonry structures without excessive damage and expensive
sample removal. Finally, NDE methods provide the design engineer with confidence that
material properties and conditions are known,
and confident engineers provide the most
cost-effective solutions for repairs or retrofit.
Pulse Velocity
Pulse velocity testing following ASTM C597,
Standard Test Method for Pulse Velocity Through
Concrete, has been successfully used to evaluate
masonry structures for cracks, deterioration,
and construction quality. The equipment
operates by sending a pulse of mechanical
energy through the face of the masonry, and
measures the length of time to receive the
signal on the opposite face or on the other side
of a suspected discontinuity such as a crack.
Differences in velocity between known intact
areas and possible deterioration can confirm
these suspicions, and a decrease in velocity
at the same location over time could indicate
worsening conditions. Evaluation of energy
loss (attenuation) and frequency characteristics provides additional information on the
internal quality of the masonry.
Water Penetration
Identifying moisture paths and water
penetration through masonry walls, or evaluating water repellent surface treatments,
are accomplished through the use of a spray
chamber as described by ASTM C1601, Field
Determination of Water Penetration of Masonry
Wall Surfaces. The test method is performed
using a 12-square-foot chamber attached to
the wall, which allows the user to apply a
prescribed water flow and pressure to the wall
surface. The chamber has to be sealed to the
wall surface so that no leakage occurs from
the chamber during the test. Typical conditions of this test include a water flow of 3.4
gallons per square foot per hour at 10 pounds
per square foot (psf ) air pressure, but these
Location of metal objects such as veneer ties

and joint reinforcing within masonry walls
may also be facilitated through the use of an
eddy current pachometer. If reinforcement
size is known, the pachometer is also useful
for estimating the depth of masonry cover.
The pachometer is especially useful for locating smaller metal objects such as anchors and
veneer ties, which are difficult to locate using
SPR due to their smaller reflection surface.
Corrosion Potentials
Metal reinforcement corrosion potentials,
also referred to as half-cell potentials, are
evaluated using ASTM C876, Standard
Test Method for Corrosion Potentials of
Uncoated Reinforcing Steel in Concrete. A
STRUCTURE magazine
14
June 2013
Conclusion
2013 Simpson StrongTie Company Inc. ATXP13
Formulated
for success.
Simpson StrongTie ATXP acrylic anchoring adhesive is formulated to cure

fully at temperatures as low as 14F (10C) with little to no odor. The new 10 oz.
cartridge is dispensed easily using a standard caulking gun. ATXP adhesive has
the easiest hole cleaning procedure on the market. It's qualified under AC308
for static and seismic conditions in cracked and uncracked concrete and has the
largest codelisted range of insert sizes (3 8"1 1 4"; #3 #10 rebar). ATXP is
the first acrylic adhesive offering anchoring solutions at 1 3 4" edge distances.
Available in three sizes at dealers nationwide, ATXP is your new allweather adhesive.
For more information, call (800) 9995099 or visit www.strongtie.com/atxp.
Code Listed
IAPMO UES ER263
In the SpecS
On the JOb
At YOur ServIce
Building
Blocks
updates and information
on structural materials
The Union Square condominium project was able to achieve seven levels of residential use with a density
of 143 units per acre.
Wood buildings have

economic, aesthetic,
green, and structural
attributes that make
them a good choice
for commercial
buildings. However,
perceived barriers
have made designers reluctant to choose wood
for large buildings, like building code limitations and the challenge to meet structural
capacities. Fortunately, codes are shifting to
accommodate new technology that, in turn, is
permitting wood structures of sizes and heights
heretofore unthinkable.
Height and Area

Considerations for
Commercial Wood Buildings
By Paul D. Coats, P.E., C.B.O.
and Dennis Richardson, P.E.,
C.B.O.
Paul D. Coats, P.E., C.B.O.

(pcoats@awc.org), is Southeast
Regional Manager and Dennis
Richardson, P.E., C.B.O.
(drichardson@awc.org), is
Southwest Regional Manager for
the American Wood Councils
Codes and Standards group.
Fewer Size and Use Limits

Since the inception of the International Building
Code (IBC), wood frame commercial structures
have enjoyed larger building sizes inherited
from the upper limits of each of the legacy
building codes. Although certain uses and occupancies retain traditional size restrictions, limits
for many low-rise buildings are nearly gone,
given area increases permitted for sprinkler
systems and open space around the building
perimeter. In the IBC, one and two-story business and mercantile buildings can be unlimited
in area when sprinklered and at least 60 feet
of open space is provided on all sides of the
building. Currently, even single-story assembly
occupancies of Type IV (Heavy Timber) or Type
III construction (typically wood frame with
noncombustible or fire retardant treated wood
exterior walls) are permitted to be unlimited in
area under fairly standard conditions.
It has been suggested that building size limits are
unnecessary if compartmentalization is provided
16 June 2013
Case Study
Project: Union Square Condominiums
Location: San Diego, CA
Architect: Togawa Smith Martin, Inc.
Engineer: Edmond Babayan and Associates
Size: 263 condominium units
Completion Date: 2005
Architects for the Union Square condominium
project in San Diego made use of code provisions to increase the height of the project
by adding two levels for residential use. First,
utilizing IBC Section 505, designers added a
mezzanine, which increased the number of
wood-frame levels to six. Second, since the project was not located in a retail neighborhood, the
Type IA concrete level at grade was designed to
incorporate residential stoop units, each with
access to the street. The building was thus able
to achieve seven levels of residential use with a
density of 143 units per acre.
to address fire resistance. An appendix in the
NFPA 5000 Building Construction and Safety Code
provides an alternate approach to construction
types based on compartmentalization with fire
resistance rated construction rather than the traditional building size limits.
Height Considerations
The IBC has for some time permitted wood
buildings to be nearly as tall as structural design
considerations will allow them to be. The use
of fire retardant treated wood (FRTW) in exterior walls, permitted by the IBC in Type III and
Type IV Heavy Timber construction, enables
buildings entirely of wood to expand beyond

low-rise into the mid-rise market. Type IIIA
buildings (two hour exterior walls, either
noncombustible or FRTW, and one-hour
light frame interior structure) can go 85
feet above grade in a sprinklered building.
Business occupancies could be six stories;
mercantile, apartments, and condominiums
can be five stories of wood frame construction,
with one or more additional stories if they
take advantage of special occupancy provisions for pedestal buildings.
However, code height limits are often not
the determining factor in choice of materials there are engineering considerations
for taller structures such as structural performance and detailing for wood shrinkage.
In recent years, wood has taken a giant leap
toward becoming a preferred structural
choice for tall buildings with the introduction of Cross Laminated Timber (CLT). The
IBC and NFPA 5000 have already changed
to allow for the use of CLT.
Recent Code
Changes Accommodating
Greater Heights
Project: Promega GMP Facility

Location: Fitchburg, WI
Building design: Uihlein-Wilson Architects;
EwingCole; Archemy Consulting
CLT Engineer: Equilibrium Consulting Inc.
Size: 260,000 square feet
Completion Date: October 2012
Building codes are flexible enough to accommodate new materials, and it is common
for building projects to require and be
granted alternate methods approval for
designs not in the code that can be justified
on a case-by-case basis. Such was the case for
the new Promega biotechnology production
facility, which features an innovative mix of
glulam and CLT.
Building department approval was
achieved through use of the newly completed ANSI/APA PRG 320-2011 Standard
for Performance-Rated Cross-Laminated
Timber. The design team discussed the
standard with building officials early in the
process, says Kris Spickler of StructurLam
Products Ltd. Engineering information was
then submitted under the alternate designs
section of the code. IBC Section 104.11
states that An alternative material, design
or method of construction shall be approved
where the building official finds that the
proposed design is satisfactory and complies with the intent of the provisions of the
code. Local building officials accepted both
the ANSI/APA standard and the design.
Most of the new Promega facility will be
dedicated to manufacturing with committed (fixed) production lines and flexible
manufacturing areas. It will also feature a
customer experience center for employees
and guests that will include spaces for training, laboratory demonstrations, conferences,
an exercise and fitness center, and dining.
can be located in the podium itself.
This follows a change to the 2006
IBC (appeared in the 2009 IBC)
which had expanded the possibilities
for occupancies in the podium from
S-2 parking only to include B, M,
and R occupancies.
Minimum sizes for Structural
Composite Lumber (SCL) will be
included in descriptions for Type IV
Construction next to glulam, enabling
the incorporation of large dimension
SCL members in Type IV buildings
without special approval.
continued on next page
STRUCTURE magazine
17
June 2013
The 260,000-square-foot Promega biotechnology

production facility, completed in October
2012, is dedicated to manufacturing with
committed (fixed) production lines and flexible
manufacturing areas.
The Promega biotechnology production facility

features an innovative mix of glued laminated
timber and cross laminated timber.
Building codes are flexible enough to

accommodate new materials and it is common for
building projects to require and be granted
alternate methods approval for designs not in the
code that can be justified on a case-by-case basis.
Foundation Performance
Association
FPA hosts regular events, sponsors

the publication of technical papers and
research material. The presentations
are great for networking and low cost
CEUs. Membership is $96/yr; this can
equate to CEUs as little as $8/CEU.
www.foundationperformance.org
ADVERTISEMENTFor Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org
Sometimes referred to as plywood on steroids, CLT typically consists of three, five,

or seven layers of solid wood, kiln-dried
and layered as perpendicular laminations
bonded with adhesives to create full-depth
solid wood wall and floor panels up to 12
feet by 60 feet. In the most recent code
change cycle, CLT was given a place in IBC
Type IV construction provisions, and a new
product standard, ANSI/APA PRG 320-2011
Standard for Performance-Rated CrossLaminated Timber was referenced. Leading
wood organizations have collaborated to
publish a new CLT Handbook which can
be downloaded at www.masstimber.com.
A building constructed entirely of CLT is
intriguing, but other changes in the 2015
IBC may also affect the choice of wood in
tall hybrid buildings, including:
The 2015 code will permit wood to
top multi-story Type I concrete or
pedestal podiums. Currently, special
podium building provisions limit
Type I construction to a single story.
The code currently allows multiple
separate buildings over the top of a
Type I podium.
Occupancy restrictions for the lower
levels of special Type I podium
buildings are eliminated in the 2015
code so that any occupancy permitted
by the code except Hazardous (H)
Case Study
Structural Brainstorming with CLT

CLT is formed of laminated nominal 2x wood members with alternating layers in perpendicular directions. It forms a robust structural billet that can be well adapted for walls
(similar to tilt-ups) or prefab floor and roof slabs.
One published concept for a thirty-story high rise using CLT and other building materials in a hybrid framing system involves the use of the strong column (or wall), weak beam
approach. The Case for Tall Wood Buildings by Michael C Green and J. Eric Karsh can be
downloaded here: www.woodsolutions.com.au/Blog/the-case-for-tall-wood-buildings.
This system utilizes high aspect ratio CLT wall piers (or columns) connected to specially
detailed steel link beams for energy absorption and ductility. A similar system using ductile
connections to wood link beams may also be effective for energy absorption, and could
be a very robust system. The weak link in such wood frame systems has been crushing of
wood perpendicular-to-grain at the column/beam joints. However, CLT has the unique
advantage of providing parallel-to-grain bearing in two directions, thus the ability to
minimize this problem.
One of the many challenges facing the broad acceptance of CLT in the U.S. is the
lack of codified seismic design provisions. The International Building Code references
ASCE 7 Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, which provides
comprehensive requirements for seismic design. For example, Section 12.2.1 of ASCE 7
provides guidance on the selection of Response Modification Coefficients, R, for various
Seismic Force-Resisting Systems (SFRS). CLT is not a recognized system in ASCE 7
Table 12.2-1; therefore, designers must rely on other provisions of the standard. ASCE
7 Section 12.2.1 states SFRS not contained in Table 12.2-1 are permitted provided
analytical and test data are submitted to the authority having jurisdiction for approval
that establish their dynamic characteristics and demonstrates their lateral force resistance.
Until an R is recognized in ASCE 7, expected compliance pathways for CLT designs
include performance-based design procedures described in ASCE 7, or demonstrating
equivalence to an existing ASCE 7 system. Guidance for such evaluations can be derived
directly from ASCE 7-10, FEMA P695, and FEMA P795 Quantification of Building
Seismic Performance Factors: Component Equivalency Methodology.
Fire resistance rating requirements

for building elements and structural
members bracing exterior walls
will be simplified to preclude
code interpretations that currently
result in substantially increased
requirements for fire resistance
rating of interior elements.
Taken together, these code developments
will make it easier for design teams to take
225
Structural Design
Spreadsheets
Accurate
Just input in green highlighted cells;

the spreadsheet and VBA program do
the calculations.
Helpful
Each spreadsheet includes drawings

and code references; nice and easy on
Tablet/Pad; Quick-Link, see What Is
New? at top of website homepage.
Prompt
Technical Support, Software Updates

(emailed).
www.Engineering-International.com
Coupon for Package: $120 off Code: ASCE 7-2010
advantage of current building height limits.

Here are some potential design concepts that
previously may have been more difficult from
a code standpoint:
Heavy timber or Type IIIA light frame
apartment buildings over heavy timber
open parking garages has been allowed
by the IBC for years, but now SCL
and CLT will be permitted in Type IV
parking podiums. This would allow an
85 foot tall, six story structure with five
stories of apartment over one story of
open parking.
CLT will be a possible solution
for future fire wall construction; a
CLT wall assembly with gypsum
recently exceeded three-hours in a
fire resistance test (see NGC Testing
Services Test Report WP-1950
dated October 15, 2012). Currently,
buildings can be subdivided by fire
walls to create separate buildings for
code purposes, but fire walls built out
of combustible framing materials are
limited to type V construction. The
impressive three hour performance of
a CLT test wall may now allow code
STRUCTURE magazine
18
June 2013
officials to consider approval of CLT

as a fire wall in Type III and Type
IV Heavy Timber construction. This
means one CLT open parking garage
podium structure could potentially
support multiple wood frame residential
buildings, each remaining within
required area limits.
With removal of the one story limit
and expansion of use and occupancy
designations in buildings with a Type
I podium, a variety of uses, including
high occupancy assembly (with the
associated taller story configuration),
could be located in one area of the
podium with two or more lowerheight stories of parking adjacent in
the perimeter areas of the podium to
fill in the remainder of the site.
What about Concerns

for Fire?
Fire has always been a concern for combustible construction, and the use of wood
in taller buildings will need adequate protection. A key concept for codes is fire
resistance, which is not necessarily related
to the combustibility of a material. Fire
resistance is a performance metric and, for
wood structures, it is typically achieved
by protecting exposed wood with gypsum
board or over-sizing the exposed wood
structural elements to provide for sustained load-bearing capacity even while
the member chars. The methodology is
contained in the American Wood Councils
referenced design standard for wood construction, the National Design Specification
(NDS) for Wood Construction.
There is an acceptance by most fire
professionals that heavy timbers and largedimension engineered products provide a
known level of performance in fire conditions. This explains the larger building sizes
permitted for Type IV construction, even
over the unprotected Type IIB (noncombustible, unprotected) construction type. CLT
will undoubtedly prove to be an exceptional
performer for fire resistance (as the abovementioned test indicated).
As wood buildings become taller, there
will be higher expectations that finished
wood buildings perform under fire conditions like tall buildings of noncombustible
construction types. Occupant life safety is
first addressed through early fire detection
and notification, followed by active fire
suppression and adequate means of egress,
which are well covered in the IBC. Interior
wall and ceiling finish requirements are no
different for CLT buildings and are based

on the function of the particular space.
Concealed spaces, while not permitted in
a Type IV building, are permitted to be
constructed with FRTW in certain locations within Type I and II construction.
Concealed spaces in CLT construction,
where otherwise not permitted, will need to
be approved by the code official as an alternate method when adequately protected
with noncombustible materials or fire sprinkler systems. Studies have already begun to
determine if the current combination of
fire resistance, flamespread protection,
life safety systems, and fire suppression
systems required for high rise buildings
make the combustibility of the structural frame inconsequential in the big
picture. Fire protection during construction is critical for combustible-frame
structures and this is an area where codes

may likely need to be improved.
Conclusion
New technology is dramatically increasing
the potential for large commercial wood
structures, and building codes are shifting
to accommodate. In Europe, more so than
the U.S., environmental concerns and incentives have resulted in a shift to wood for tall
buildings that, until recently, would have
been of other materials. There are notable
high rise CLT buildings in other countries,

and interest has been high in North America
as a result. Although the 2015 IBC is not
yet available for purchase or adoption, it is
already influencing these trends.
The codes are paying less attention to
combustibility of the frame and more
attention to life safety and fire resistance,
which is appropriate. The negatives of
wood for large buildings are disappearing, as required levels of structural and fire
performance in all environmental conditions are being emphasized.
Exterior Walls in
Type III Construction
The historic definitions for Type III

and IV in the IBC require noncombustible exterior walls of 2-hour fire
resistive rating. Traditionally, Type
III construction described industrial
buildings of masonry exterior walls
and interior of heavy timber or wood
frame. Often located in crowded
urban sites, the protection afforded
by masonry walls was a valuable asset
in mitigating conflagration.
Since Type III buildings are now permitted to have fire retardant treated
wood (FRTW) exterior walls, there
are some disconnects in the code
in regard to the interface of exterior
walls with interior structure, and code
provisions which originally assumed
masonry exterior walls may be the
focus of varying interpretations in
typical platform construction, since
the floor assembly interrupts and
supports the exterior wall at each floor
level. Code officials handle this in a
variety of ways, but usually a practical approach is to require solid wood
blocking in all floor cavities that
extend within the plane of the exterior wall. The char rate of solid wood
substantiates such an approach, since
solid wood of three inches in thickness would provide approximately two
hours of fire resistance.
STRUCTURE magazine
19
June 2013
Design wood structures effectively,

economically and with ease!
Design Office
SIZER
Gravity Design
SHEARWALLS
Lateral Design
CONNECTIONS
Fasteners
O86
Engineering design in wood
2x4
DATABASE
EDITOR
PDF
Adobe
WOOD
STANDARDS
(US version)
PDF
Adobe
WOOD
STANDARD
(CDN version)
Download a Free Demo at woodworks-software.com
AMERICAN WOOD COUNCIL
US Design Office 10 - Coming this Spring

NDS 2012, IBC 2012 and ASCE 07-10 compliant
www.woodworks-software.com
Canadian Design Office 8

CSA O86-09 compliant
800-844-1275
f your office and its culture are consistent

with most structural design firms, you probably embraced the load and resistance factor
design (LRFD) approach for reinforced concrete years or even decades ago. For many, working
stress design for concrete is a totally foreign concept, while LRFD strength design is what you
probably learned in school and practice to this day.
In recent years, the push to LRFD has been
embraced by many for the design of steel and
masonry systems. While allowable stress design
(ASD) methods are still acceptable, the perception
is that the majority of engineers use LRFD for
concrete, masonry and steel systems. This brings us
to wood. ASD has been the basis for engineering
wood systems for decades. Textbooks, codes and
even the design values listed in technical catalogs of
proprietary fasteners and hardware reflect the ASD
approach. However, provisions for LRFD design in
wood have gradually become more predominant,
and it may be only a matter of time before ASD
methods are relegated to appendices while LRFD
becomes the primary basis of design.
The adoption of LRFD methods for wood has a
history not unlike its concrete, masonry and steel
counterparts. The 2005 version of the National
Design Specification (NDS) for Wood Construction
lists adjustment factors and other values enabling
the use of LRFD with the strength design load
combinations of ASCE 7. Interestingly enough, the
LRFD adjustment factors are listed as the last tables
in the last appendix of NDS 2005. Elsewhere, references to LRFD can be found in the Applicability
of Adjustment Factors within the main body of
the code (e.g., Table 4.3.1). Aside from this, NDS
2005 does little to embrace the LRFD methodology. On the other hand, NDS 2012 has made a
major LRFD leap by placing the LRFD adjustment
factors in Chapter 2 (page 12).
Times are changing, and little by little the
LRFD approach is becoming more mainstream for wood design. Breyers Design of
Wood Structures has been a premier text for
wood design for many years. The most current
(sixth) edition has been re-titled Design of Wood
Structures ASD/LRFD. At nearly double the size
of earlier editions, this text contains side-by-side
instruction, examples, and theory of both ASD
and LRFD methods for wood design.
NDS 2012 lists the LRFD adjustment factors
(KF), resistance factors () and time effect factors
(l) in both the body of the code and the appendices. However, NDS 2012 is still structured in
a manner reflecting ASD theory; the listed design
values (e.g., Fb, Fc, Fv, etc.) all reflect allowable
stresses. Even so, it should be noted that this
information is the product of decades of research
in the development of LRFD methods for wood.
As an example, consider a simple (single) 2x8
purlin. Once we agree that moisture, temperature,
flat use, incision, and repetitive use factors are
not applicable (each having a value of 1.0) and

that the beam is laterally supported (CL =1.0), the
adjusted design value for bending (following ASD
methods) is calculated as:
F 'b = FbCDCF
For this, the load duration factor (CD) is predicated
by the shortest duration load for a particular combination and the size factor (CF) is taken from
Table 4A of the NDS code (1.2 for this example).
Now consider the same scenario, but follow the
LRFD approach. In accordance with the NDS
provisions, the adjusted value for bending becomes:
EnginEErs
notEbook
aids for the structural
engineers toolbox
F 'b = FbCF K F b l
While the similarities are apparent, you may notice
that the CD factor has been removed and replaced
by the l factor, which accounts for the time effect
associated with each of the load combinations for
strength design. As you might expect, the value for l
is smaller for sustained loads and larger for transient
loads. The value ranges
from 0.6 to 1.25 depending
on the load combination
and the nature of load (e.g.,
impact live loads vs. storage
live loads). The b factor is
not unlike that used for steel and concrete, having a
value of 0.85, while the KF factor reflects a significant
adjustment having a value of 2.54 for the bending
design herein discussed. This is the primary variable for adapting the long-held ASD approach to
the LRFD approach. Size factor (CF) and primary
design value (Fb) remain unchanged between the
ASD and LRFD methods.
Now consider the same 2x8 member and assume
#2 DF-L. From NDS, this has Fb = 900 psi. If the
controlling load is D+L, the CD factor is 1.0 and the
adjusted design value for allowable stress becomes
F 'b = 1,080 psi quite simple. If we are using
LRFD, the value for l is 0.8 (assuming normal
occupancy) and the adjusted nominal design value
becomes F 'b = 1,865 psi. Comparison of design
values shows a general consistency to the comparison of the ASD (1.0D + 1.0L) and LRFD (1.2D +
1.6L) load combinations, depending on the ratio
of live load to dead load. Hence, LRFD yields
similar if not identical sizes of wood members as
ASD, at least for this example. However, there are
still challenges with making the LRFD leap, such
as determining how to adapt all of the allowable
design values listed in catalogs of fastening hardware, engineered wood products and software.
Admittedly, LRFD requires a few more variables,
a little more calculation and perhaps a bit more
effort, but it is a step toward a unified (and arguably more reliable) design approach for the four
primary materials of construction. Whether you
or your office should embrace LRFD for wood
is still a matter of choice, but may eventually
become only a matter of time.
STRUCTURE magazine
Wood Design
21
Making the LRFD Leap

By Jerod G. Johnson, Ph.D., S.E.
Jerod G. Johnson, Ph.D., S.E.

(jjohnson@reaveley.com),
is a principal with Reaveley
Engineers + Associates in Salt
Lake City, Utah.
A similar article was published

in the SEAU Newsletter
(March 2012). It is reprinted
with permission
GT STRUDL
Structural Analysis & Design Software
Engineers who Demand Quality and Performance

Choose GT STRUDL
Base Plate
Module
Georgia Tech - CASE Center

www.gtstrudl.gatech.edu
casec@ce.gatech.edu
404-894-2260
Structural
Performance
performance issues relative
to extreme events
Figure 1: Water treatment complex overall view.
his article summarizes the authors

experience in developing a structural
model to analyze and design a structure for the Victor Valley (California)
Wastewater Reclamation Authority that is approximately 50 feet wide by 300 feet long. Because
the structure has significant horizontal and vertical irregularities, and is in a high seismic area
of southern California, design codes specified
three methods of analysis: (A) Modal Response
Spectrum Analysis (MRSA) for structures with
horizontal irregularities; (B) Tank Hydrodynamics
for water basins; and (C) Equivalent Lateral Force
(ELF) for regular structures. The three processintegrated areas are separated from each other by
expansion joints and are shown in Figure 1, in
which some roof and wall segments are removed
to display internal components. Overall design of
the facility was completed by the office of Carollo
Engineers, Inc. in Phoenix, Arizona.
main roof diaphragm. Bearing

walls are 12-inch masonry units
that are integrally colored and
partially treated with a stucco
finish. For details of the authors
method of modeling composite diaphragms, foundation soil
springs, and cracked masonry,
as well as the ELF method of analysis, refer to
Modeling and Analysis of a Masonry Building on
Piling (March 2013, STRUCTURE magazine).
The first step was to create a computer model
and use it to determine the seismic base shear of
the structure in accordance with the ELF of ASCE
7 paragraph 12.8, with a response modification
factor R=5.0, importance factor I=1.25, and Site
Class D. The resulting value was 245 kips.
In accordance with ASCE 7 table 12.6-1 for
Seismic Design Category D with horizontal
Seismic Modeling of
an Irregular Water
Treatment Structure
Area A Main Building

The main floor of the building is at
grade, but the roof is divided into three
different levels in order to lower each
level as much as possible and minimize
the visual impact of the complex on
the surrounding residential neighborhood. One roof is approximately 20
feet above grade, a second is 18 feet-8
inches above, and the third is approximately 16 feet high. On each roof is
an elevated tile mansard that surrounds
several units of HVAC equipment. The
tile is supported by metal deck over
small steel trusses that are bolted to the
concrete topping of a 5-inch deep
composite steel deck, which forms the
Figure 2: Roof diaphragm in-plane shear stress.
STRUCTURE magazine
23
By Louis Scatena, P.E.
Louis Scatena, P.E., is a senior

structural engineer with Carollo
Engineers, Inc. He can be reached
at LScatena@carollo.com.
Figure 3: Wall in-plane shear stress at roofs separated 32-inch vertically.
Figure 4: Partial view of area B baffle walls

and walkways.
irregularities and paragraph 12.7.3, the

next step required performing MRSA in
the north-south and east-west directions.
Eighty modes produced more than 90%
mass participation in each of the principal
directions. The redundancy factor was 1.0
to check drift and torsional irregularities.
Dividing modal response parameters by R/I
(i.e., 4.0), multiplying calculated displacements by Cd/I (i.e., 2.8), and combining
the various modes using the Complete
Quadratic Combination (CQC) method
resulted in base shears of 124 kips in the
north-south direction and 156 kips in the
east-west direction.
The next MRSA included application
of a load factor to scale the design base
shear up to 100% of the ELF base shear.
Since California Building Code Section
1615A.1.8 only applies to schools and hospitals, the final design was based on 85% of
the calculated stresses. Displacing certain
concentrated load masses associated with
equipment in a direction orthogonal to that
of the earthquake satisfied the code requirement for accidental torsion. Although not
required by ASCE 7 paragraph 12.9.5, the
accidental torsion was amplified in both
directions. This conservative addition is
intended to help preserve the integrity of
the architectural wall finishes and stucco,
which also includes fiber reinforcement.
Combining the results of north-south
(Z-direction) and east-west (X-direction)
modeling using the relationship of 1.0X and
0.30Z (and vice versa) produced the critical design wall and diaphragm forces. The
redundancy factor in the second MRSA was
1.3, based on ASCE 7 paragraph 12.3.4.2
and the configuration of the masonry shear
walls. Design of collectors, such as the
beams and columns under discontinuous
shear walls at the ground floor, included an
overstrength factor of 2.5. Figure 2 (page 23)
methodology of ASCE 7-05. The estimated

wave sloshing height in the north-south
direction due to seismic hydrodynamic loading is 1 foot, and freeboard is approximately
3 feet. In the east-west direction, sloshing
height is 4 feet and an uplift resistance of
60 psf has been specified on the covers. The
consequences of the impulsive and sloshing
effects of the liquid, the impulsive effect
of the walls, and the static and dynamic
effects of the soil generated pressures for
four load cases that were incorporated into
the model: (1) backfilling operations during
construction with equipment surcharge; (2)
unbackfilled during construction and filled
for the leak test; (3) backfilled and empty
during a seismic event; and (4) unbackfilled
and full during a seismic event.
Figures 4, 5 and 6 suggests the benefits of
the model for accurately determining the
effects of walkways and interior baffle walls
on the overall design. The analysis model
included the basin mat, walls, and walkways
under the pre-determined pressures for the
four load cases. Figure 5 represents the vertical bending in the wall for Load Case 2,
confirming the influence of the walkways in
developing a large positive moment near the
center of the wall and reducing the negative
moment at the base (note sore spot at upper
represents the area A high roof diaphragm

shear stress, which the model shows concentrated at the center of elements, for the
roof on the right side of area A. However,
some modeling references (e.g., NEHRP
Seismic Design Tech Brief #5) recommend
distributing the concentration over a larger
deck cross-section based on the ductility
of the steel deck with reinforced concrete
topping. Modeling with smaller finite elements is another alternative to produce a
finer distribution of visible stresses. Figure
3 represents the shear stresses in the wall
supporting two roofs that are at moderately
different levels.
Area B Aeration Basins

The basins are approximately 20 feet deep and
the concrete walkways are a few feet above surrounding grade. Fiberglass deck panels span
the basins between the walkways. Interior
baffle walls are without walkways and serve
as process weirs. For a partial rendering of the
basins, see Figure 4.
An initial analysis using proprietary software summarized the trapezoidal static,
hydrostatic, and hydrodynamic pressures
of the soil and liquid on the basin walls,
in accordance with the linear distribution
Figure 5: Vertical bending on exterior basin wall in Figure 4 (walkway at top).
STRUCTURE magazine
24
June 2013
left due to interior wall). Figure 6 represents

the horizontal bending in the walkways for
the same load case, and suggests the influence
of the (hidden) interior baffle walls.
Area C Secondary Building

The main floor of the secondary building is
at grade, and its main roof is approximately
14 feet above grade. The basement houses a
series of process pumps, while the ground
floor supports an electrical equipment room.
The main roof supports HVAC equipment
surrounded by a mansard. The analysis model
included the foundation mat, bearing walls,
and composite steel deck diaphragm using the
same methodology as previously stated. The
ELF method for a regular structure produced
the base shear and seismic stresses.
Conclusion
The author is interested in learning how
other structural engineers are modeling
earthquake loads and stresses, and meeting
the ever-growing complexity of seismic code
requirements. Readers are encouraged to
contact the author to share alternate methods. The author also wishes to thank the
Figure 6: Horizontal bending on walkways.
Orange County, California, office of Carollo

Engineers for its thorough review of the seismic design of this project, which resulted in
numerous improvements. One important
example was the design of the knee brace
STRUCTURE magazine
25
June 2013
that interconnects each beam purlin (collector) at the vertical irregularity between two
adjacent roofs, thereby significantly reducing
out-of-plane stresses in the top wall panel
between those two roof levels.
Historic
structures
significant structures of the past
Newburyport Essex-Merrimack Bridge 1792, Newburyport on the right looking easterly.
his is the first in a series of articles

on the historic bridges of the United
States. It will include those bridges
the writer believes were the most
significant structures since 1793 built in wood,
iron and steel. Up to then, most bridges built
in the country were wooden pile and stringer
bridges built in much the same manner as Caesar
did when crossing the
Rhine centuries before.
It remained for Timothy
Palmer, a local architect
and house wright, to
build the first long span
truss bridge in the country across the Merrimack
River in Massachusetts.
In 1790, Newburyport was a major port city,
ranking 13th in population in the country, and was
homeport to a large number of ships, brigantines,
schooners and sloops. Several rope ferries crossed
the Merrimack River in the area. The tolls from
the ferries made them very attractive sources of
revenue for their operators. Even though tides,
seasons, and weather could make the journey
across the river dangerous at times, ferries had met
the needs of the traveling public. In 1791, a group
of local leaders proposed a bridge across the river
at a point just upstream from the town where an
island split the river into two channels. A formal
petition was submitted to the Massachusetts
legislature on June 1, 1791 asking for a charter
to build the bridge. The petition stated That
a bridge across Merrimack River from a place
called the Pines in Newbury in the county of
Essex to Deer Island, so called, and from the
said Island to Salisbury in said County would
in the opinion of your petitioners very greatly
subserve the public interest and convenience by
affording a safe, prompt and agreeable conveyance
to carriages, teams and travelers at all seasons of
the year, and at all times of tide, whereas great
dangers are incurred and great delays often suffered by the present mode of passing in Boats.
The act of incorporation was approved by the
legislature on February 24, 1792 and was signed
by Governor John Hancock with the signature
identical to his Declaration of Independence
signature 16 years earlier. The tolls were in part,
Newburyport Bridge
By Frank Griggs, Jr., Dist. M. ASCE,
D. Eng., P.E., P.L.S.
Dr. Griggs specializes in the

restoration of historic bridges,
having restored many 19th
Century cast and wrought iron
bridges. He was formerly Director
of Historic Bridge Programs for
Clough, Harbour & Associates
LLP in Albany, NY, and is now an
independent Consulting Engineer.
Dr. Griggs can be reached at
fgriggs@nycap.rr.com.
26 June 2013
For each foot passenger two thirds

of a penny.
For each horse and rider two pence.
For each horse and chaise chair and Sulkey
seven pence.
The bridge itself was described as follows:
And be it further enacted by the authority
aforesaid that the said bridge shall be at least
thirty feet wide; that between Newbury &
Deer Island there be an arch one hundred
and sixty feet wide; that between Deer Island
and Salisbury there be an arch one hundred &
forty feet wide, a convenient draw or passage
way for the passing and repassing of vessels at
all times fifty feet wide with well constructed
substantial and convenient piers on each side
of the bridge & adjoining said draw sufficient
for vessels to lie at securely; and also another
arch fifty feet in width; and that the crown of
the arch between Newbury and Deer Island
be at the least forty feet high, and that each
of the abutments thereof be twenty eight feet
six inches high in the clear above common
high water mark
By early April, the Directors evidently had many
proposals consisting of drawings, models, and
extensive descriptions of bridge styles. With a
new, or enhanced, plan in hand, they decided
that the original legislation was not acceptable
and submitted proposed changes to the legislature. The revised act was passed on June 22,
1792, modifying the restrictions and limitations
of the first act as regards height above high water
mark, braces, etc. The legislature required that
the bridge not impact negatively navigation on
the river, and therefore set minimum vertical
clearances and clear waterway distances between
abutments and piers. The change evidently
came about after Timothy Palmer was selected
as chief engineer of the bridge. For this bridge
and others, he has been called the Nestor of
American Bridge Builders.
The revised act stated in part,
Sect. 3 And be it further enacted by the
authority aforesaid, That the crown of the
arch to be erected between Newbury and
Deer Island may not be less than thirty-six
feet high, and that each of the abutments
averaged 34 feet deep? His bridge, most likely

based upon a 16th century Palladio design,
would have the longest span of any in the
country at the time.
A genius has been defined as someone who
sees what everyone has seen but thinks what
no one has thought. This phrase applies to
Timothy Palmer, who began his bridge building career with this bridge. Early illustrations
of the longest span show it with 10 panels
of approximately 16 feet with a panel height
equal to the panel length yielding compression
diagonals on approximately a 45-degree angle.
Palmer used what has been called by some
a trussed or braced arch as his supporting
system with the deck resting on the lower
chord. How the truss/arch worked depended
greatly on how the members were connected
Salisbury Truss then covered, post 1808, with lift span looking south at Deer Island.
at the upper and lower chord and the stiffness of the lower chord. If the lower chords
thereof may not be less than twenty-four
The Massachusetts Magazine, May 1793, were very stiff, the structure would act more
feet and a half high, above common high
reported, this bridge was built, under the like a braced arch if they were built into the
water mark; and that braces or shores
prospect of advantages much less encouraging, abutments that prevented longitudinal movemay be placed from the abutments of
than any which have been granted by the leg- ment of the ends of the members. If the lower
the said arch, at four feet and an half
islature to undertakings of a similar kind
chords were less stiff, and not anchored to
Tedan the abutment, the whole structure would act
from common high water mark, to pass
What made Palmer, who, although
No
d
w a s20
up to the said arch, at not more than
accomplished millwright and housepacwright,
like a highly cambered truss with radial
ked vailab 1more
3
le a
wi
d
w f th exc ntension
forty-eight feet distance, from the top
had never built a bridge, think that henecould
posts and compression diagonals. It is
eat
u iting
of the said abutments; any thing in the
design and build a bridge over 1,030 feet long,res believed
that the latter case was true.
said Act to the contrary notwithstanding.
with one span of 160 feet, over water that
Introducing Tedds 2013, the next

evolution in structural software
With Tedds 2013 you can now analyze frames, use a broad library of calculations,
create high quality, transparent documentation, and even write your own calculations.
You can:
Go online to request
your free Tedds trial
You will:
Use a broad library of calculations
Save time & increase profit
Write your own calculations
Reduce calculation errors
Work within Microsoft Word
Improve consistency
Analyze frames
Reduce overheads
Produce transparent output
Enhance QA processes
Archive documents electronically
877 710 2053 (Toll Free)

www.cscworld.com
#cscworldglobal
Structure - Half page.indd 1
STRUCTURE magazine
27
June 2013
5/8/2013 9:36:13 AM
The foundations for the superstructure were

probably stone filled wooden cribs that were
Palmers standard foundation, sometimes with
wooden piling and sometimes without. In the
language of the day, they were called huge log
piers which extended far below the water line
to a firm foundation of either stone, hardpan
or gravel.
To build the arched lower and upper
chords, he used what Theodore Cooper in
his fine 1889 paper on railroad bridges called
crooked pieces of timber, so that the fibre
might run in the direction of the curves.
Palmer ordered trees with a natural bend in
them to match the curvature of his chords.
Some of these timbers, in his later bridges,
were 16 x 18 inches in cross section and up to
50 feet long. As seen in the engraving of the
bridge, he used struts off the piers extending
out several panel points to help support his
trusses as permitted by the modified Act of
the Legislature.
His spans, piers, and abutment lengths working from the northerly shore (the Salisbury
shore) were 124 feet, 50 feet, 45 feet, 60 feet,
50 feet, a 40-foot draw structure, 50 feet, his
arch of 113 feet, and 60 feet to the northerly shore of the island. The bridge then ran
from the island 93 feet, his truss of 160 feet,
and 185 feet on piers and deck beams to the
Newburyport shore.
Shortly after the opening of the bridge in
1793, The Massachusetts Magazine wrote,
The two large arches, one of which is superior to anything on the continent, were both
invented by Mr. Timothy Palmer, an ingenious house wright of Newburyport, and
appear to unite elegance, strength and firmness beyond the sanguine expectation. In the
book Olde Newbury, the author states, The
principles upon which it was constructed
were novel and hitherto untested; but the
beauty and strength of the structure, when
completed, demonstrated their practical value
and utility.
The bridge opened in December 1793,
but the official opening ceremony was on
July 4, 1794. What we know about some
of the early wooden bridges in the country came from travelers who wrote about
what they had seen on their trips around
the country. Timothy Dwight, President
of Yale University, wrote about the EssexMerrimack Bridge (he also wrote that the
bridge was painted a brilliant white):
Between Salisbury and Newbury the
Merrimack is crossed on Essex BridgeIt
consists of two divisions, separated by an
island at a small distance from the southern shore. The division between the island
and this shore consists principally of an
Templeman Chain Bridge 1810-1909.
arch, whose chord is one hundred and

sixty feet, and whose vertex is forty feet
about the high water markthe whole
length of Essex Bridge is one thousand
and thirty feet, and its breadth thirtyfour. I have already mentioned that Mr.
Timothy Palmer, of Newburyport, was
the inventor of arched bridges in this
country. As Mr. Palmer was educated
to house building only and had never
seen a structure of this nature, he certainly deserves not a little credit for the
invention...The workmanship of the
Essex Bridge is a handsome exhibition
of neatness and strength.
Another description by John Drayton, who
saw the bridge shortly after it opened, gives
a little better description of the long span
as follows:
Two or three miles beyond Newburyport
is a beautiful wooden bridge of one arch,
thrown across the Merrimac River, whose
length is one hundred and sixty feet; and
whose height is forty feet above the level
of high water. For beauty and strength, it
has certainly no equal in America, and I
doubt whether as a wooden bridge there
be any to compare with it elsewhere. The
strength of the bridge is much encreased
above the common mode in use by pieces
of timber placed upon it and shouldered
into each other. They run upon the bridge
in three lines, parallel with the length
of the bridge and with each other, so
as to make two distinct passageways for
carriages. These braces are some feet in
height, and are connected on the top by
cross pieces affording sufficient room for
carriages to pass underneath without
STRUCTURE magazine
28
June 2013
inconvenience. It is said that the upper

work has as great a tendency to support
the weight of the bridge as the sleepers
upon which it is built
Palmer, in a letter to Richard Peters in
Philadelphia dated July 11, 1808, wrote, Last
summer, I rebuilt one of the Arches, the span
of which is 113 feet and is on the same principle with your Bridge. With much persuasion,
I obtained liberty to cover it. There were many
doubts in the minds of the Stockholders as
to its stability against strong winds. This
covered span survived until 1882. In the same
letter, Palmer informed Peters that on the
17th of June last there came on one of the
most tremendous gales of wind ever known
in this countryThe reason of my being thus
particular in this reason is Essex-Merrimack
bridge stands nearly in the centre of the direction of this tempest; and stood like Mount
Atlas amid the warring elements.
In 1810, John Templeman, using a variation of James Finleys chain suspension bridge
patent, built a chain suspension bridge to
replace Palmers 160-foot truss. This span had
been, in the words of the boatmen, a menace
to navigation. By going with a 244-foot suspension span as contrasted to a 160-foot truss
with abutments extending greatly into the
river, it was possible to widen the southerly
passage around Deer Island.
This bridge, even though suffering a partial
collapse in 1827, survived until 1909 when a
look alike bridge was built in the same location. This bridge, recently restored in 2003,
still serves local traffic across the Merrimack
River. It is the oldest continually occupied,
long span, bridge crossing (220 years) in the
country dating from 1793.
Building dreams that inspire future generations.

Gerdau is installing 6,650
tons of steel in San Diegos
New Central Library.
All across America, Gerdau helps build dreams.

San Diego dreamed of a library with 3.8 million books. Every day,
people will walk in curious and emerge inspired.
www.gerdau.com/longsteel
San Diego Central Library

A Composition of Dramatic Concrete and Steel Structures
By Sean Fleming, LEED AP BD+C,
Jean Libby, P.E. and
Paul Endres, FAIA, S.E.
Figure 1: The San Diego Central Library in March 2013.
hen the newly built San Diego Central Library opens

its doors in autumn 2013, it will be a landmark project for both the City of San Diego and the projects
design and construction teams alike. The project
presents multiple unique challenges in its many unique structural
frame components, most of which are architecturally expressed with
minimal treatment. Prevalent among the structural design elements
are the cast-in-place architectural concrete frame beams and columns,
exposed concrete waffle slabs, and the iconic steel and aluminum
dome structure that provides shade and acclimatizes the eighth floor
main reading room.
The project encloses 504,000 square feet on its nine above-ground
floors and includes reader seating for 1,200 persons, 407 computer
stations, 22 wifi-enabled study rooms, meeting rooms and gallery/
exhibition spaces. The site is also home to a new 350-seat community
auditorium building. Two subterranean levels provide parking for
250 autos. The project targets a LEED Silver certification. Figure 1.
Special Moment Resisting Frame

Selection of vertical and lateral load-resisting systems for the library is
dictated in good part by the buildings use. Programmatic requirements
for an open and versatile floor plan with natural daylighting, heavy
live loads, and the necessity for perimeter retaining walls below grade
lend to employment of a reinforced concrete special moment-resisting
frame (SMRF) above grade and reinforced concrete shear walls below
grade. Sizing and shapes of SMRF columns are dependent on their
location in the structure and on architectural considerations. Moment
frame columns occur at the perimeter of the ninth floor, trace down
through the structure, and continue below grade to retain ductile
detailing to the foundation level. Frame columns and frame beams
STRUCTURE magazine
are also introduced along different lines as the footprint of the floors
increases top-down. SMRF columns prevail at 75 inches (1.9 meters)
square, but grow to as large as 72 x 92 inches (1.8 x 2.3 meters) in
the reading room and east colonnade. Typical moment frame beams
are upturned 5 feet (1.5 meters) deep by 27 inches (0.7 meters) wide.
Locating the SMRF columns and beams along the perimeters of the
floor plates allows the interior of the floors to be supported by smaller
gravity columns, which supports the design intent of an open floor
plan. Gravity columns are minimized to 34 inches (0.9 meters) square
below grade and 30 inches (0.8 meters) square above grade. Figure 2.
Waffle Slabs
The building is designed for a minimum live load of 150 pounds
per square foot (psf ) at and above the ground level, with limited
areas to receive compact shelving designed for 300 psf. The nearly
350,000 square feet of typical floors employ a 23-inch (0.6 meter)
thick waffle slab with waffle voids spaced four feet (1.2 meters) on
center. The decision for waffle slabs also accommodates the 32-foot
(10-meter) wide column bays. The aesthetic of the waffles as viewed
from below, as an exposed ceiling, is architecturally appealing and
also possesses sound-attenuating properties. Strategic use of in-slab
beams, combined with upturned frame beams at the floor plates edges,
allows maximum daylighting of the interiors via clerestory glazing set
between the upturned beams and waffle ceiling soffits. Typical floor
to floor heights are 15 feet (4.6 meters).
Heat of Hydration Issues

Heat of hydration was a very real concern, since many concrete frame
elements are in excess of six feet square and the concrete gravity arch
30
June 2013
the vision of a quilted aesthetic, hundreds of concrete shop drawings

were translated from the BIM model (Figure 2) to account for every
plywood seam and tie-hole in all exposed columns, beams, edges of
slabs, and walls as well as in custom structures such as the concrete
gravity arch. Due to the complexity and non-repeating nature of
the plywood patterns, an unusual step was needed: the creation of
formwork fabrication and placing drawings. These drawings were
provided to field crews to assist with prefabrication and production in
placing formwork. For example, each column form incorporated the
deliberately located random patterns into the fascia sheeting, each with
wholly unique seam layouts, such that no two were alike. Since forms
had to be reused throughout the structure, placing drawings included
production notes to assist field crews with a pre-planned strategy to
mix-up the stock of forms, or rotate column forms from their prior
axial orientation, from one pour to the next to further give the allusion of random, non-repeating patterns in the concrete. The regular
pattern of the ties, juxtaposed with the scattered seams of plywood
sheeting, creates a unique craftsmen quality in the finish product.
Figure 2: All structural and architectural components were modeled,

coordinated, and 4-D scheduled thru Revit, Vico, and Synchro. Courtesy
of Turner Construction.
reaches dimensions of thirteen feet radially by six feet wide. Initial

mock-ups using the specified cement resulted in internal curing
temperatures exceeding 250 degrees F in the first 24 hours. This
exceeded the maximum allowable internal curing temperature of
180 degrees the upper threshold established for control of thermal
cracking and ensuring the long-term durability of the concrete.
Additional trial batches were ordered to test heat characteristics and
compressive strengths of mixes utilizing alternate architectural grade
cements. While the alternate trial batches continued, nine mockups
were performed to test non-technical heat mitigation strategies.
Non-technical controls included placing mass concrete elements as
early as possible in the morning to take advantage of low ambient
temperatures, batching concrete with chilled water or ice depending
on the season, and limiting concrete deliveries to five cubic yards
per truck for the largest components. The non-technical strategies
were found to effectively maintain concrete consistency between lifts
without the need to introduce water at the jobsite critical to achieving uniformity of color in the finish product. A single mix design of
6,000 psi concrete using locally available Colton, California Type-I
cement and a set-retarding admixture was selected, and is employed
for all architectural concrete applications within the building.
Architectural Concrete Aesthetic

The program calls for all above-grade concrete to be architectural ascast and fair-faced, utilizing a high albedo architectural grade cement
and incorporating an ACI Class A finish. Chief among the preferences
for the concrete aesthetic are a light colored matte finish, minimal
appearance of forming hardware, and a custom pattern that calls for
plywood to be cut to random sizes and oriented to create an organic
quilted effect. Slight imperfections and offsets are desirable to create
an aged appearance. The combined application of mass concreting
issues and architectural concrete program requirements resulted in
a series of fifteen mock-ups and other research and development
efforts to test cement options, concrete mix designs, plywood types,
tie design strategies, form releases, and rustication strips.
Structural concrete and non-structural concrete components employ
different treatments as a visual telling of their role in the building. Ties
are located in structural elements at wide spacings on a static series of
datums: 5-foot on center (o.c.) vertically and 4-foot o.c. horizontally.
A tighter tie spacing ranging from 2-foot o.c. to 4-foot o.c. is applied
to non-structural concrete depending on the application. To achieve
STRUCTURE magazine
Energy Efficiency
As-cast architectural concrete contributes to energy efficiency by
minimizing capital costs compared to other building finish systems
since surface treatments involve only minor touch-up. The reduced
expense for finish systems also translates to reduced maintenance and
life cycle costs for the Owner. End-user energy demand is reduced
significantly by way of the structures concrete envelope and its inherent thermal mass, which reduces day-time cooling needs and evening
warming of the interior spaces. Aluminum sunshades on south and
east facing clerestory windows further mitigate daytime heat gain.
Concrete Gravity Arch

An open feeling was desired at the library lobby, so a 64-foot (20meter) long by 46-foot (14-meter) tall concrete gravity arch (Figure
3) was designed from the ground level to the fourth floor, eliminating
a column from the center of the lobby. Congestion of reinforcing
steel at the two ends where the arch was to be supported by vertical
columns proved a challenge. Couplers and headed bars were utilized
here and in many other locations where congestion was problematic
to constructability.
Figure 3: A 64-foot long concrete gravity arch dominates the librarys main lobby.
31
June 2013
Figure 4: Interior of the 8 th floor reading room.
Dome
Reading Room
A concrete roof suspended sixty feet (18 meters) above the eighth
floor shelters the librarys 4,000 square foot reading room (Figure
3). Structural steel and clerestory glass supported by four 72-inch
square concrete columns complete the room. The concrete columns,
cruciform in plan, rise 62 feet to support intersecting concrete roof
beams spanning 58 feet in either direction and the diamond-shaped
concrete roof slab (Figure 4).
Special Events Room

The Special Events Room roof cantilevers 10 feet from the 9th floor
deck and is made up of a hybrid system of precast beams laced into
a 6-inch cast-in-place concrete slab. The roof is supported by a single
72-inch x 48-inch inclined concrete column, which begins its rake
nearly 90 feet below between the 4th & 5th floors (Figure 4). The flanks
of the roof structure are supported in part by tubular steel mullions
set prior to casting the roof slab (Figure 5).
Project Team
Owner: City of San Diego
Engineer of Record: Martin & Libby Structural Engineers
San Diego, CA
Dome Engineer: Endrestudio Architecture & Engineering
Emeryville, CA
Design Architect: Rob Wellington Quigley, FAIA San Diego,
CA
Architect of Record: Tucker Sadler Architects San Diego, CA
General Contractor: Turner Construction San Diego, CA
Concrete Contractor: Morley Construction San Diego, CA
Dome Contractor: SME Steel West Jordan, UT
STRUCTURE magazine
The dome, believed to be the largest steel post tensioned segmental

dome in the world, is 140 feet (43 meters) in diameter and rises 221
feet (67 meters) above ground level to provide shade and acclimatize
the reading room. It is constructed of more than 3,000 individual
members of steel, weighing 285 tons, and clad in 1,500 perforated
aluminum panels to shade the eighth floor reading room beneath it.
The dome is made up of eight unique truss ribs that rise from base
to apex in varying heights from 72 to 113 feet (22 to 34 meters) and
eight unique sail structures located between the ribs.
Sails are oriented in plan with a pinwheel configuration, an effect
created by offsetting each of the sails vertical leading edges to the
outside of the ribs while the sails trailing vertical edges are connected
to the inside rib surfaces. Each of the sails has an external pipe grid
that is spherical at the upper part of the dome; however, the spheres
are tipped vertically and horizontally so the center of each sail does
not coincide with the center of the dome. Unfurled, the largest sail
is 123 feet by 53 feet (38 by 16 meters) wide and comprised of 175
members of tubular steel and 60 cable segments.
Architecturally, the lower edges of the sails are desired to be as thin as
possible. This is achieved through the use of a three-dimensional truss
spanning diagonally from rib to rib, and appears visually as a six-inch
(15 centimeter) edge thickness. To further reduce the mass of the sails,
steel cables are introduced to minimize large members on the interior
surfaces close to the glass of the reading room. The penultimate concept, with cables covering the outer and inner surface, was deemed too
difficult to erect by the contractor. The final design, a saddle shaped
cable net, was chosen because the removal of cables on the outer surface
allowed the contractor to erect them by crane more easily. The sails
were constructed on-site, two at a time, on large temporary platforms
on the ground and lifted into place, one sail at a time.
Due to the discontinuous circular form and its peaked pinnacle, the
dome behaves as a series of intersecting three hinged arches, or ribs.
At the base, each rib is supported on a large fixed pin that allows the rib
structures to pivot or expand with changes in temperature or seismicity.
32
June 2013
Each of the eight large pins falls onto one corner of a fixed octagonal
plan. The octagonal plan causes unequal geometry from rib to rib. The
fixed pins of the rib supports fall onto varying elevations located atop
shear walls, freestanding columns and, in one case, supported by three
inclined converging columns. Two of the rib supports fall outside the
building envelope and are built on special composite braces made up
of concrete columns with tubular steel diagonals.
A Place of Inspiration and Learning

The San Diego Central Library is poised to serve its community as a center
of knowledge and learning through its planned 1.5 million volumes, internet access terminals, numerous literacy programs, staff, volunteers, and
other contributors. The design and construction team believe it will also
contribute to the citys character as an iconic structure and landmark. The
expressive and often dramatic applications of architectural
concrete and steel discussed here are intended to inspire the
minds of the librarys population, be they children or adults,
students or working class, rich or poor.
Sean Fleming, LEED AP BD+C, is a Senior Project Manager at
Morley Construction in San Diego, California. Sean may be reached
at sfleming@morleybuilders.com.
Jean M. Libby, P.E., is Principal and President of Martin & Libby
Structural Engineers in San Diego, California. Jean may be reached
at jlibby@libby-lei.com.
Paul Endres, FAIA, S.E., is Principal and President of Endrestudio
Architecture & Engineering in Emeryville, California. Paul may be
reached at paul@endrestudio.com.
Figure 5: A 90-foot tall inclined column supports a hybrid cast-in-place and

precast concrete roof deck at the 9 th floor.
STRUCTURE magazine
33
June 2013
Diagrid on Display
Federal Center South Building 1202, the

new headquarters for the United States Army
Corps of Engineers in Seattle, Washington.
Courtesy of Benjamin Benschneider.
Federal Center South Building 1202

By Daniel Riemann, P.E. and Jason Black, P.E., S.E.
This is the second article highlighting the innovative design features of Federal Center South
Building 1202. A Worthy Wager: The Innovative Use of Composite Concrete & Timber Floors
on Federal Center South was featured in the April 2013 edition of STRUCTURE.
he recently completed Federal

Center South Building 1202,
serving as the Seattle District
Headquarters for the United
States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE),
is a state-of-the-art office building resulting
from architectural, structural, and construction innovation and collaboration.
One of the key features that makes
Building 1202 so innovative is the use of
a diagrid system at the exterior wall of the
structure. While the diagrid is a system
used in many new buildings around the
world, its use in Building 1202 represents
a clever solution to meeting the specific
requirements of this design-build project.

Utilizing this unique structural system
strengthens the building while reducing
material costs and shortening the construction schedule. Building 1202 was planned,
designed, and constructed in less than two
and a half years, and stayed within the original $65 million construction budget.
In addition to being an effective solution
to progressive collapse requirements, the
diagrid played an important role during
the competition phase of the design-build
project and it was a significant part of
the architectural expression and story of
the building.
Canted building ends. Courtesy of Benjamin Benschneider.
STRUCTURE magazine
Diagrid Defined
A diagrid system consists of sloping columns
(diagonals) and spandrel beams (horizontals).
The diagrid system for Building 1202 utilizes
a 3-story module (full building height) with
bolted connections between spandrels and
diagonals. Effectively, the diagrid system is
a multi-story truss with pin connections.
This system creates an efficient and inherently redundant structure by carrying gravity
loads to the foundation through multiple
load paths.
Progressive Collapse
Requirements
As a U.S. General Services Administration
(GSA) project, one of the primary requirements for Federal Center South Building
1202 was that the structure be designed to
resist progressive collapse in the event of a
terrorist attack. Progressive collapse is the
uninhibited spread of an initial local failure
to other elements of the structure, eventually resulting in the collapse of the entire
structure or a disproportionately large part
of it. Examples of progressive collapse include
the collapse of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal
Building in Oklahoma City, when localized
structural damage caused by an explosion
spread throughout the gravity load carrying
system, eventually resulting in the collapse of
a large portion of the building.
Building 1202 is designed to the requirements outlined in UFC 4-023-03, Design of
Buildings to Resist Progressive Collapse. The
goal of this design document is to limit the
number of casualties by ensuring that buildings have adequate inherent redundancy to
continued on page 36
34
June 2013
What Gives?
The patented Yield-Link structural fuse, that's what.

As the latest innovation from Simpson Strong-Tie, the Strong Frame special moment
frame features four Yield-Link structural fuses that eliminate lateral-beam bracing and
are replaceable after a major seismic event. Whats the advantage? Its easier to specify
and it can save building owners significant cost. As with our other moment frames,
there is no welding, only bolted connections.
Learn more by calling (800) 999-5099 or visiting www.strongtie.com/smf.
Code Listed: ICC-ES ESR-2802
2013 Simpson
Strong-Tie Company Inc. SMF13
Method
Description
Tie Force
Structural elements are designed and detailed as catenary elements to transfer loads through tension to undamaged portions
of the structure.
Alternate Path
Structural elements are designed and detailed to bridge over

compromised portions of the structure.
Enhanced Resistance Shear and flexural capacity of exterior structural elements are
increased to minimize the extent of initial damage.
resist catastrophic damage due to unforeseeable events. The requirements for progressive
collapse design provided in UFC 4-023-03
apply only to buildings which are three stories or taller. This three story requirement
is based on a maximum casualty threshold
set by the UFC and not the mechanics of
progressive collapse.
The level of progressive collapse design is
based on the Occupancy Category (OC)
and building function. Similar to the OC
determined using the IBC, greater risk is
associated with loss of structures of higher
OC. This OC dictates which method of
progressive collapse resistance is to be
used in design. The three methods of progressive collapse resistance prescribed in
UFC 4-023-03 are the Tie Force Method,
Alternate Path Method, and Enhanced
Resistance Method (see Table).
Traditionally, requirements for progressive

collapse resistance have been met by utilizing
moment frames or tie beams at the exterior of
the building, or by increasing member sizes
to provide enhanced resistance. However, for
Building 1202, a diagrid was chosen as the primary collapse prevention system. The diagrid
is supplemented by moment frames at the
canted building ends.
The diagrid system is an optimal solution
for meeting collapse prevention requirements
because it is essentially a multi-level truss,
with the diagonal columns acting as the web
members and the horizontal spandrels at each
floor acting as the truss chords. The 3-story
diagrid module used for Building 1202 creates
a 3-story truss. Should any of the diagonal
columns become damaged during an attack,
the remaining portions of this truss can span
over areas of localized structural damage.
Design/Build
Earth Retention
Foundation Support
Slope Stabilization
Ground Improvement
Dewatering
800-562-8460 WWW.DBMCONTRACTORS.COM
Donald B. Murphy Contractors, Inc.
STRUCTURE magazine
36
June 2013
Typical bolted connection.
Diagrid Use as Potential Lateral

Force Resistance System
The sloped columns of the diagrid are representative of braces in a braced frame. For this
reason, the diagrid system was initially explored
for use as the lateral system of the building.
However, there are drawbacks when utilizing
the diagrid as the lateral system. A braced frame
is designed to yield and dissipate energy during
a seismic event. As the primary gravity load
carrying system for the exterior of the building, the sloped columns could not be allowed
to yield during a seismic event. Accordingly,
the building code requires that systems acting
as both the primary gravity and lateral force
resisting systems be designed to remain elastic during a seismic event. Therefore, the
response modification factor, R, is required
to be in the range of 1.0 to 1.5 to achieve
essentially elastic behavior.
At the schematic stage, the diagrid
for Building 1202 was analyzed and
designed for seismic forces associated
with this level of elasticity. For an R
of 1.0, member sizes were reasonable,
only slightly larger than those required
for collapse prevention, and maximum
drifts were within the code requirements.
However, the number of bolts required
for connections increased significantly
when design overstrength factors were
considered. Using bolted connections
as much as possible was preferred by the
contractor in order to maintain a rapid
fabrication schedule and save costs associated with full penetration welds. The
labor costs associated with the increased
number of bolts that were required to
allow the diagrid system to also meet the
lateral system requirements effectively
mitigated the cost advantage of having a
dual system. Ultimately the decision was
made to rely on concrete shearwalls at the
stair cores as the lateral system for the
building, thereby allowing both the lateral and gravity systems to be optimized
both in terms of performance and cost.
DIAGRID APEX
SPANDREL BEAM
SLOPED COLUMN
ROOF LEVEL
LEVEL 3
LEVEL 2
LEVEL 1 (GRADE)
FA S T ER
STRONGER
MORE DURABLE
3000 PSI IN 1 HOUR
PILE FOUNDATION
Diagrid system.
CONSTRUCTION CEMENT
Diagrid erection.
Construction Savings
Material Savings
At the onset of the project, the team developed a progressive collapse resistance scheme
utilizing moment frames, to compare to the
diagrid scheme. This moment frame option
consisted of 3-story moment frames at the
building perimeter on a 22-foot bay module.
From early studies, it was clear that the diagrid
scheme provided the greater savings potential for the project in terms of foundations,
materials, and fabrication.
Foundations
Building 1202 is located adjacent to the
Duwamish River on extremely poor soils, requiring that the building be supported on driven
steel pipe piles. These piles typically extend 150
to 170 feet below grade to reach a competent
bearing layer. In the moment frame scheme, a
single pile is required at each moment frame
column, or every 22 feet. In contrast, the diagrid
system utilizes a 44-foot bay module, meaning
that pairs of sloped diagonal columns meet grade
every 44-feet. Therefore, the moment frame
scheme would have required twice as many piles
at the perimeter of the building.
The diagrid system results in approximately

30% savings in steel tonnage as compared to
a moment frame system. This savings is manifested largely in the spandrels, which become
primarily tension/compression members
when the diagonal columns become compromised. The spandrel beams in a traditional
moment frame system need to resist much
larger flexural demands in order to span over
damaged columns, requiring larger, heavier
spandrel sections.
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
Erection and Fabrication
Great freeze thaw durability
Recognizing the old time is money axiom,

KPFF worked with Sellen Construction to
propose a simple tilt-up method for erecting
the diagrids. In this sequence, pairs of sloped
columns were fitted up while on the ground
and welded together at the apex to form a
triangular assembly, which was then tilted
in to place. The horizontal spandrels were
then flown in and bolted in to place. This
sequence allowed the diagrids, and therefore
the entire steel skeleton, to be erected in a
relatively short amount of time.
Long life expectancy
STRUCTURE magazine
37
June 2013
High bond strength

Low shrinkage
High sulfate resistance
65% lower carbon footprint
Available in
Bags and Bulk
800-929-3030
ctscement.com
Specified
Worldwide
Project Team
Owner: General Services Administration
(GSA)
Tenant: United States Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) Seattle District
Structural&CivilEngineer: KPFF
Consulting Engineers
Contractor: Sellen Construction
Architect: ZGF Architects, LLP
Funding: American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act (ARRA)
When compared to a moment frame, a
diagrid system requires far fewer welded connections. For Building 1202, there are 19 apex
connections where field welding is needed.
Bolted connections are used at all other
spandrel to diagonal column connections. By
comparison, the moment frame scheme studied by the team would have required a total of
108 full penetration welds at all connections
between spandrels and columns more than
five times as required for the diagrid system.
Architectural Expression
river-facing view as much as possible, to reiterate the Corps mission statement of Building
Strong. The diagrid, by its very nature as a
strong diagonal element that contrasts with
the orthogonal lines of floors, walls, and windows, is a key element of this expression. The
design team moduled the building so that
the diagrid naturally ended with a backslope
on the southwest corner and an outslope
on the northwest corner as a counterpoint.
These canted ends of the buildings create
light filled office and conference room spaces
with sweeping views of the Duwamish River.
The diagrid is painted white throughout in
USACE FEDERAL CENTER SOUTH BUILDING 1202 / PHOTO BY BENJAMIN BENSCHNEIDER
One of the key early design decisions by

the project team was to have the structure
of the building exposed to the western
Conference room at canted end. Courtesy of Benjamin Benschneider.
Seattle Tacoma Lacey Portland Eugene

Sacramento San Francisco Walnut Creek
Los Angeles Long Beach Pasadena Irvine
San Diego Boise Phoenix St. Louis
Chicago New York
STRUCTURE magazine
38
June 2013
order to assist in diffusing both natural and

artificial light inside the building, but also to
be prominently visible through the exterior
glazing. The stainless steel skin of the building
is peeled back at the main entry to fully expose
the diagrid, creating a formal entry portal.
The diagrid scheme also allowed the buildings unique Oxbow form to be achieved,
which drew inspiration from the historic
meandering path of the Duwamish River adjacent to the site. Smooth transitions through
the curved portions of the building are facilitated with the diagrid by utilizing a tangential
variation at each floor line. This allows the
exterior skin to easily transition through
the corners of the U-shape, resulting in a
smoother appearance. Although the use
of sloping columns results in a small loss
of floor area directly under the column,
the diagrid creates unique and dynamic
interior spaces.
Summary
The diagrid represents an effective solution to progressive collapse requirements
and helps create an iconic identity for
Building 1202. The success of this designbuild project is a tribute to
the early-on collaboration
between the architect, engineer, and contractor.
Daniel Riemann, P.E., is a project
engineer with KPFF Consulting
Engineers in Seattle, W.A and was the
lead designer for the diagrid system for
Building 1202. Dan can be reached at
Dan.Riemann@kpff.com.
Jason P. Black, P.E., S.E., is a Structural
Principal with KPFF Consulting
Engineers in Seattle, W.A. Jason can be
reached at Jason.Black@kpff.com.
John Jay College Expansion

st
Transforming a 21 Century Urban College Campus

New York, NY
By Jason Stone, P.E.
he CUNY John Jay College School of Criminal Justice

Expansion Project is a new 625,000-square foot academic
building in Midtown Manhattan. The facility consists of
a 15-story tower on 11th Avenue and a four-story podium
with a garden roof that connects to the Colleges existing Haaren
Hall on 10th Avenue. Following significant growth in criminal justice interest over the last decade (partially in response to the attacks
of September 11th) the new building was planned to accomplish a
doubling of the existing facilities and unification of the campus into
one city block creating an academic city within a city.
In explaining the design concept, Abadan Mustafa of SOM said,
Criminal justice is not something that should be hidden away. Glass
makes the relationship to inside and outside clearer. It relates to our
ideals of transparency and justice, the way justice is applied to everyone
equally and openly. The new facilities offer traditional college campus
amenities including classrooms, offices, research laboratories, theaters,
lounges, and flexible collaboration spaces. In addition, unique features
specific for future investigators and law enforcement officers include
a ballistics room, areas for chemical storage and analysis, mock trials,
and an emergency control center simulation lab.
Site Challenges
In response to a shallow Amtrak tunnel that cuts through a corner of
the site, the John Jay structural system is distinguished by a grid of
rooftop trusses which hang the perimeter of eight floors below. This
Construction over the tunnel was done at night and coordinated around the
train schedule. Noise and vibration were controlled by isolating the tunnel
enclosure from the tower structure.
STRUCTURE magazine
The 65,000-square-foot podium garden roof, known as Jay Walk by the

students, links the Colleges existing Haaren Hall to the new tower on
11th Avenue and provides an oasis from the city below. Courtesy of SOM.
creates a dramatic column-free cafeteria space on the 5th floor, with

views of the Hudson River for the full 195-foot width of the building.
Two layers of structure were provided to effectively isolate the building from the train vibration and noise. The main building structure
spanned over and behind the train tunnel, which was enclosed with
a hollow core precast plank ceiling and concrete crash walls.
At points of convergence, creative detailing was required to maintain
the load path and necessary separation.
Another challenge was accommodating the almost two-story change
in grade between 10th and 11th Avenue. A second main entrance to
the building occurs along 59th Street and negotiates this steep slope.
To design for this condition, the perimeter columns in an area that
support heavy loads from the rooftop garden were eliminated, and
the entrance was pulled back to allow room for the necessary steps
and ramps. Story-deep trusses were fit inside the walls of the 4th floor
classrooms to efficiently accomplish the 40-foot cantilever out to the
tip of a V-shaped tapering canopy.
The interior architecture also responded to the sloped grade with
a series of cascading staircases and escalators that complicated
the structure, but allowed for fluid circulation to all parts of the
campus. The cascade replicates a miniature Manhattan, with
the travelers passing through different building functions and
academic departments rather like the squares Madison, Herald,
and Times, among others that bisect Broadway and function as
independent nodes within the city, Mustafa said. A large skylight
40
June 2013
With the temporary columns removed, the load path for the hanging structure
is clear. The column-free fifth floor cafeteria offers great views of the Hudson
River to the west.
Main entrance on 11th Avenue. Setbacks in the faade were an important

aesthetic feature that also reduced the impact of the load on the shallow train
tunnel below.
supported by architecturally-exposed narrow tube sections provides

natural light into these main circulation areas and offers views into
the space from the garden roof.
curtain wall at the transition floor between the conventionally framed

and hung structure. To simplify the steel frame erection, the design
accounted for temporary columns at the 5th floor around the tower
perimeter and temporary angles bolted to the plate hangers above
the 6th floor, to stiffen these elements during erection. This allowed
the construction process to proceed similar to conventional construction, and maintain the project schedule. Once the truss assembly was
finished, jacks at the temporary columns slowly lowered the building
and engaged the trusses. At this point, the temporary columns and
angles could be removed and concreting of the tower could begin.
Calculating the required amount of vertical cambering for the perimeter steelwork in order to super-elevate each of the 26 hanger/column
locations for the anticipated deflection during construction proved to
be a challenge as well. Design estimates were based on the assumed
construction schedule, estimated construction loads, and realistic
modeling of the structural behavior. During construction, continuous
surveying verified whether the perimeter was behaving as anticipated.
Hanging System
Accommodating the necessary two layers of structure around the
train tunnel mandated a practical limit to the weight that could be
supported. After exploring numerous options, the hanging solution was favored by SOM and DASNY and adopted for numerous
reasons, including assistance in achieving the series of distinguishing setbacks that frame the west faades main entrance along 11th
Avenue. The hanging system was continued around the full perimeter
to balance the weight, complete the column-free aesthetic, and take
advantage of the thin plate hangers which could fit inside a standard
partition wall instead of traditional column enclosures. To maintain
efficiency, the hanging system was stopped where the structure over
the tunnel could accommodate conventionally-framed floor weight.
In coordination with the architect, the 5th floor was chosen for this
transition, allowing the transparent column-free floor to align with
the podium roof garden.
The primary construction challenge involved achieving approximately
level floors when the building opened, and a 2-inch stack joint in the
STRUCTURE magazine
Truss construction supports the 26 perimeter hangers.
41
June 2013
Project Team
Owner: Dormitory Authority of the State of New York
Client Team: City University of New York
John Jay College of Criminal Justice
Design Consultants: LERA Structural Engineers
Skidmore Owings & Merrill Design Architect
Turner Construction Cost Estimator & Construction Manager
Jaros Baum & Bolles MEP Engineers
Langan Engineering Civil/Geotechnical Consultant
Shen Milsom & Wilke Acoustic Consultant
Scott Blackwell Page ArchitectHigher Education Planning
Contractors: Owen Steel Structural Steel Fabrication
Cornell & Company Structural Steel Erector
Enclos Corporation Curtain Wall Designer
Once shop drawings were available for the
nonstructural elements, and there was a better
understanding of the schedule, a full reanalysis was done incorporating what was being
learned from the surveying. This reanalysis
revealed that it was likely the perimeter would
not come down as much as originally thought
(one reason for this being the curtain wall was
actually 30% lighter than assumed in design)
and field adjustments were made to lower the
steel frame prior to starting the truss erection.
Based on the last survey data received, this
adjustment proved effective as the perimeter
settling and final stack joint were tracking
closely with the predicted behavior and targeted final thickness.
Future Expansion
While considered and subsequently ruled out

during design, the College revisited the idea
of future expansion during construction and
decided this flexibility was important. The
design team was asked to consider a design
that allowed for an additional ten floors over
the podium to raise this section to match the
height of the new tower. At the time the decision was made, the podium structural steel
The easiest to use software for calculating

wind, seismic, snow and other loadings for
IBC, ASCE7, and all state codes based on
these codes ($195.00).
Tilt-up Concrete Wall Panels ($95.00).
Floor Vibration for Steel Beams and Joists
($100.00).
Concrete beams with torsion ($45.00).
Demos at: www.struware.com
Careful detailing at the train tunnel was required to isolate

members supporting the precast tunnel enclosure from the main
building structure.
was already mostly fabricated

and the caisson foundations were
actively being drilled in some of
the affected areas.
After quick discussions focused on limiting
the financial, schedule, and design changes,
the College chose to reinforce only the
below grade areas and take advantage of a
hanging structural system similar to the one
used in the tower to limit the affected area
to the interior core. Additional elevator pits
with knock-out slabs were provided along
with significantly reinforced foundations
based on the anticipated future circulation and structural weight needs. Instead of
increasing the column and vertical bracing
member sizes for the expected future loads,
the additional capacity is intended to come
from a high strength composite concrete
encasement, allowing the already fabricated
vertical members to still be used.
than those that could be tolerated in the ceiling package. The alternative solution, which
saved both material and depth, was to separate
the problematic excitation from the sensitive
equipment, adding an isolation joint in the
floor between the labs and the adjacent main
circulation corridor.
In addition to efficient uses of material,
the project specifications were written to be
environmentally sensitive. The building did
not officially submit to USGBC, but LEED
certification requirements were pursued wherever feasible. Fly ash and silica fume were
substituted for up to 30% of the cement in
the concrete. The reinforcing and structural
steel were also sourced from mills regionally
close to NYC and produced from over 90%
recycled content.
Other Features
Conclusion
The 65,000-square-foot terrace atop the

podium serves as a new, outdoor gathering
place for students and faculty. The planted
green roof is landscaped with large grassy
zones, full-sized trees, and decked outdoor dining areas which the students
immediately embraced and nicknamed
Jay Walk.
To preserve the dramatic views from the
large collaboration areas in the tower of
the Hudson River and this garden roof,
the hanger spacing was increased to nearly
50-feet at the middle of both the east
and west faces for the hung tower floors.
These long span conditions created a
problem in the laboratories on the 6th,
7th, and 8th floors, where strict vibration
criteria needed to be met. Stiffening the
floor to control the expected excitations
resulted in deeper and heavier members
The John Jay College Expansion project

exceeded the expectations of owner and client,
giving the students and faculty a new stateof-the-art home to be proud of, along with
providing the College flexibility to adapt to
whatever the future holds. The project success
was due primarily to the collaborative efforts
and superior skill of the design and construction team in particular SOM, Turner, Owen
Steel, and Cornell & Company
who also exceeded every expectation in realizing this special
structural system.
STRUCTURE magazine
42
June 2013
Jason B. Stone, P.E., is a Senior Associate

at Leslie E. Robertson Associates (LERA)
and an Associate Adjunct Professor of
Architecture at Columbia University. Jason
can be reached at Jason.Stone@lera.com.
Design with
When facing new or unfamiliar materials, how do you know if they comply with
building codes and standards?
ICC-ES Evaluation Reports are the most widely accepted and trusted technical reports for code
compliance. When you specify products or materials with an ICC-ES report, you avoid delays on
project and improve your bottom line.
ICC-ES is a subsidiary of ICC, the publisher of the codes used throughout the U.S. and many global
markets, so you can be confident in their code expertise.
ICC-ES provides you with a free online directory of code compliant products at:
www.icc-es.org/Evaluation_Reports and CEU courses that help you design with confidence.
www.icc-es.org | 800-423-6587
Subsidiary of
13-07859
CASE BuSinESS PrACtiCES
business issues
Tools for Protecting the Bottom Line

By Mark Erdman, P.E.
any engineering companies

are experiencing financial
challenges that place an
even greater emphasis on
the bottom line than normal. Even when
times are good, business is brisk, and
projects seem to be coming through the
door with little effort, it can become easy
to lose focus on best business practices,
even those that directly affect the bottom
line. Two of the latest tools released by the
Council of American Structural Engineers
(CASE) Toolkit Committee address aspects
of firm management that have a significant
impact on every engineering firms financial
position, specifically professional liability
premiums and the development of appropriate fees for engineering services.
Tool No. 2-5

An article recently published by the Insurance
Journal (March 19, 2013) shows that, for
the second consecutive year, the insurance market for architects and engineers
continued its firming trendas a number
of leading insurance companies providing
specialized coverage again achieved moderate price increases. The article also states
that the majority of insurers expect to seek
premium increases in the range of 4% to
8% this year, despite the overall number of
claims remaining flat.
The focus of Risk Management Foundation
#2 is to employ preventative techniques to
assist design professional firms with maintaining sound risk prevention processes within
the company. The committee has recently
issued Tool #2-5: Insurance Management:
Minimize your Professional Liability Premium.
One of the primary strategic goals of the
CASE Toolkit committee is to bring tangible
value to member firms through increased
recognition by the insurance industry, in
particular professional liability insurance.
This recognition can be used to decrease
liability insurance costs, overall number of
claims, and the severity of the claims filed.
Professional liability insurance premiums
are one of the largest overhead expenses for
structural engineering firms. The pricing for
the insurance varies significantly depending
on the insurance company, so it is hard to
argue against making every effort to obtain

the best combination of coverage, premium,
and value. Ironically, the insurance applications themselves leave very little space to
provide details of the firms practice that
could positively impact the premium; it is
as though the lack of space to fully describe
the firms practice is out of proportion to the
importance and expense of the coverage that
is provided. The application is the best and
arguably only opportunity to demonstrate
to the insurance company the details of
your company and what differentiates it
from others.
Tool #2-5 was designed as a guide to help
the design consultant provide the information needed to get the best insurance
premium. The tool was developed primarily with feedback provided by brokers and
underwriters serving in the A/E community.
They were asked: What supplemental information would you like to see incorporated
into the typical application? What would
you need to see in order to justify a reduction in premium?
Structural engineers are often times called
upon to make decisions with incomplete information. SEs make reasonable
assumptions, and call upon experience
and expertise, and incorporate conservatism in order to compensate for a lack of
information. Insurance underwriters are no
STRUCTURE magazine
44
June 2013
different. You have to actively demonstrate

that your firm is serious about avoiding
claims, and is a good risk. Like many aspects
of managing a business, it is all about communication; they do not know unless you
tell them. The more they are able to remove
some of the layers of uncertainty and conservatism from their evaluation, the easier
it is to justify a reduced premium.
The implementation of Tool #2-5 may
not only reduce your companys liability
premium, it might also reduce the overall
number and severity of insurance claims for
the industry as a whole.
Tool No. 7-2

Risk Management Foundation #7 pertains
to Compensation, with a focus on preparing
and negotiating fees that promote quality
work resulting in successful projects that
are profitable for the firm. The Committees
latest tool #7-2 Fee Development provides an
outline for consultants to answer the question: How do we determine the fee for a
project? Determining an appropriate fee for
a project is a mixture of both art and science, and there is no better substitute for
experience when it comes to figuring out
the art component of a fee. The science component is easier to quantify and justify with
available information, and therefore is the
focus of the tool. This tool is currently under

review by American Council of Engineering
Companies (ACEC) and will be available
upon completion of the review.
Any attempt to determine the fee for a project
should begin with a thorough examination of
the scope of work. Itemizing the scope of work
is the simplest and most direct way to project
what resources will be required to perform the
work, and the costs of those resources relate
directly to the fee. Nailing down the scope
can be dicult on larger projects with lengthy
and complex schedules. One of the goals of
the tool is to take uncertainties and turn them
into quantifiable scope items by asking the
right questions, analyzing historical data, and
making reasonable assumptions. What are the
Clients expectations for meetings? What is
the Clients expectation for the firms involvement during the preliminary approval phases?
Are these variables effectively communicated
in the proposal and reflected in the fee?
Another crucial element of fee development, and potentially the most important
of all elements, is the assessment of risk.
This assessment should include both design
related and business related risks. No project is risk-free, and the list of potential risk
factors for a given project can seemingly

be endless. A central point of the tool is
to put the requisite thought into identifying potential risk factors so that the client
understands the value and benefit brought
to the project by the consulting engineer.
Incorporating the risk factors into the fee
development process reiterates to the owner
that acceptance of increased risk warrants
increased reward.
Historical data should be analyzed and
referred to as part of fee development,
both with respect to the Client, and also
within the design firm. With regards to
the Client its important to look back and
dig for trends in important factors such as
payment timeliness, scope creep, and the
overall experience of working together. That
information should be used in combination
with an analysis of the firms database of
past performance on similar projects. Fee
development should consider the fees on
past projects, a comparison of the scope of
work to the new project, and a review of
the performance on the past projects. Every
project is unique. However, past performance can be a valuable indicator of future
performance if applied appropriately.
Conclusion
Professional Liability Insurance premiums
are on the rise, putting additional strain on
bottom lines that may already be stretched
thin. At the same time, fee development
remains a challenging yet essential part of
the structural engineering practice. Both
situations can be effectively managed by
understanding the perspective of the audience,
understanding the risks involved, effectively
communicating your firms qualifications.
Mark Erdman, P.E., is an Associate
Principal at the Baltimore, MD oce of
Structura, Inc. Mark has been serving as a
member on the CASE Toolkit Committee
since 2011. He can be reached at
merdman@structura-inc.com.
The goal of The Council of American
Structural Engineers (CASE) is to promote
excellence in structural engineering business
practices and risk management. The tools
presented in this article were developed by
CASE members who volunteer their time
and expertise to advance the structural
engineering profession.
Structural Software Designed for Your Success

Easy to Learn and Use
Analyze Just about Anything!
Design: Steel, Wood, Concrete,
Aluminum, and Cold-Formed
www.iesweb.com
Free 30-Day Trial
IES, Inc. | 519 E Babcock St. Bozeman MT 59715

800-707-0816 | info@iesweb.com
STRUCTURE magazine
45
June 2013
Great achievements
notable structural engineers
William LeMessurier
Educator and Innovative Engineer
By Robert Hossli, RA, NCARB and Ronald Flucker, P.E.
he story of William LeMessuriers

engineering accomplishments was
featured in the September 2012
issue of STRUCTURE magazine.
The author, Richard G. Weingardt, quoted
William Theon, a long-time personal friend
and professional partner: Bill loved teaching
as much as engineering and was always at
his best with an audience. This is a chapter in Bills productive life not covered in
Mr. Weingardts article a time when he
was working with students on collaborative
projects, often sponsored by industry.
During the early 1960s, Bill lectured at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
and was a key member of project teams that
involved graduate students from the architectural and engineering departments. He
wanted to give those students a chance to
try out their theoretical training on real-life
architectural and engineering problems, and
let them receive financial benefits from corporate grants. Bill played a major role in one
particular project sponsored by the Applied
Research Laboratory (ARL) of The United
States Steel Corporation (USS).
By 1960, the flat-slab concrete structural
system had, for several reasons, virtually
eliminated structural steel as a competitive
material in high-rise residential construction. Concerned with this, USS charged the
ARL with developing innovative ideas that
might help regain a share of that market. Bob
Hossli, an ARL research consultant and recent
graduate of MIT, had been impressed with the
team headed by architect Marvin Goody and
engineer Albert Dietz that designed and tested
Figure 1: Early schematic of the staggered truss

framing system.
Figure 2: Embassy Suites (now Conrad) Hotel in New York City.
the glass fiber reinforced polyester shells of the

Monsanto-sponsored House of the Future.
With this in mind, he suggested that MIT
submit a proposal for an interdisciplinary
research project to develop an economically
competitive structural steel frame solution for
high-rise residential buildings. This proposal
was accepted, with Bill LeMessurier as the
engineer and Marvin Goody as the architect
on the team.
Several meetings took place without much
progress. Then, as LeMessurier told it, one
night, when he could not fall asleep, he had
a eureka moment. Quoting from the USS
Technical Report, Staggered Truss Framing
Systems for High-Rise Buildings, he envisioned a
system of story-high trusses spanning transversely between columns at the
exterior of the building and arranged in a
staggered pattern. The floor system acts as
a diaphragm, transferring lateral loads in
the short direction to the trusses. Lateral
loads are thereby resisted by truss diagonals
and are transferred into direct loads in the
columns. Therefore, the columns receive no
bending moments in the transverse direction. Columns can thus be oriented so that
the strong axis is available to help resist
bending due to longitudinal wind forces.
The interior of the building is column
free, and clear spaces are defined and
STRUCTURE magazine
46
June 2013
limited only by intersecting floor and truss

planes. Trusses are typically penetrated by
one rectangular opening to provide a corridor space. However, other openings can
be provided in the truss to allow for door
opening if required by the architectural
room arrangement. (Figure 1)
Bill presented the idea to the MIT team,
which accepted it heartily as the answer to
the sponsors charge. In January 1967, the
MIT team developed and presented to USS
a thorough report about the system, how
to design the structure, how to lay out various configurations for occupancy, and how
to construct it. Upon review by ARL and
USSs Construction Marketing Department,
in which Ron Flucker worked, it was judged
to be immensely successful. The system would
be extremely cost-competitive and adaptable
to many floor layouts, could be built to the
same height limitations as flat-slab concrete,
and utilized rolled steel shapes as the principal
structural elements. USS also recognized that
the idea was patentable, but decided that it
would be more in its best interests, and those
of its structural steel fabricator customers, to
keep the concept in the public domain.
The American Institute of Steel Construction
(AISC) got wind of the concept through
its Boston Regional Engineer and invited
LeMessurier to present a paper describing the
system at its June 1966 annual Engineering

Convention in Boston. As a result of this early
exposure, the firm of Bakke & Kopp, Inc. of
Minneapolis decided to use the system for the
frame of a local housing authoritys seventeenstory high-rise apartment building for the
elderly, which was constructed in 1968.
U. S. Steel then began promoting the system
and it caught on. Although no accurate count
exists, it is estimated that some one hundred
buildings (or more) have been constructed
using the system, including one designed
by LeMessuriers firm, the Lafayette Place
Hotel in Boston. While most buildings have
been modest in size, typically 10 to 20 stories (Figures 2 and 3 ), some have bordered
on monumental like the 30-story Resorts
International Hotel in Atlantic City, which
has withstood several hurricanes.
Bill LeMessuriers eureka moment has
resulted in a successful concept for high-rise
steel framing. Perhaps more important to him
was the learning experience provided for five
graduate student assistants in the MIT Civil
Engineering and Architectural Departments.
The authors wish to recognize the assistance
of Tabitha Stine of AISC in researching this
article and providing the accompanying
images. All graphics courtesy of AISC.
Figure 3: Boston Convention Center Hotel.
Robert Hossli, RA, NCARB (bhossli@providencepoint.org), is a retired architectural

development engineer who worked for US Steel, Westinghouse, Reynolds Metals, Armarlite
Division of Anaconda Aluminum, H. H. Robertson, and Centria and was a member of
ASTM and AAMA Standards Committees.
Ronald Flucker, P.E. (rlflucker@verizon.net), is a retired structural engineer who worked
for ALCOA, US Steel, AISC, and J&M Turner in areas of structural research, product and
engineering development, and promotion for structural steel.
STRUCTURE magazine
47
June 2013
Tall Buildings guide

Software
AceCad Software
Phone: 610-280-9840
Email: sales@acecadsoftware.us
Web: www.acecadsoftware.com
Product: StruM.I.S
Description: An all encompassing steel fabrication
management solution that harnesses information
flow and work processes through the steelwork
contract between departments, suppliers and clients;
from estimate/tendering, through procurement and
production into construction. StruM.I.S extends
integration to ensure workflow with your current
systems for maximum organizational success.
Computers & Structures, Inc.

Phone: 510-649-2200
Email: info@csiberkeley.com
Web: www.csiberkeley.com
Product: ETABS 2013
Description: The most technologically-advanced
software available to structural engineers today.
ETABS 2013 defines the future of building design,
setting the stage for unsurpassed capability and
eciency. Featuring versatile modeling technology,
stunning graphics, ecient numerical methods and
powerful optimization algorithms, ETABS 2013 offers
unprecedented integration and productivity.
CSC
Phone: 877-710-2053
Email: sales@cscworld.com
Web: www.cscworld.com
Product: Tedds
Description: Tedds gives you access to a large
library of automated structural calculations, all
to US codes, for tall multi-storey structures.
Use a single software solution for all common
elements and materials, and then create and export
transparent report documentation.
Product: Fastrak
Description: Model, analyze and design complex,
multi-storey steel buildings to US codes with speed
and ease. Work in 2D or 3D views to create any
building structure and export to BIM platforms such
as Autodesk Revit.
Devco Software, Inc.

Phone: 541-426-5713
Email: rob@devcosoftware.com
Web: www.devcosoftware.com
Product: LGBEAMER v8
Description: Analyze and design cold-formed cee,
channel and zee sections. Uniform, concentrated,
partial span and axial loads. Single and multi-member
designs. 2007 NASPEC (2009 IBC) compliant. ProTools include shearwalls, framed openings, X-braces,
joists and rafters.
expertise in tall building design and construction
Digital Canal
RISA Technologies
Phone: 800-449-5033
Email: clint@digitalcanal.com
Web: www.digitalcanal.com
Product: VersaFrame
Description: VersaFrame has the key features needed
to get the job done without becoming overly
complex. Includes steel design (AISC 13th) and
concrete design (ACI 2011). Try it free at the website.
Phone: 949-951-5815
Email: info@risatech.com
Web: www.risa.com
Product: RISAFloor
Description: RISAFloor and RISA-3D form an
unrivaled building analysis and design package.
Modeling has never been easier whether youre doing
a graphical layout, importing a BIM model (from
Autodesk Revit Structure), or prefer spreadsheets. Full
code checks and optimization for six different material
types makes RISA your first choice in buildings.
GT STRUDL
Phone: 404-894-2260
Email: casec@ce.gatech.edu
Web: www.gtstrudl.gatech.edu
Product: GT STRUDL
Description: Offers linear and nonlinear static
and dynamic analysis features including response
spectrum, transient and pushover analyses, plastic
hinges, discrete dampers, base isolation, and nonlinear
connections. Auxiliary GT STRUDL features available
for the Base Plate Module and GT64M MultiProcessor Solver.
Integrated Engineering Software

Phone: 406-586-8988
Email: info@iesweb.com
Web: www.iesweb.com
Product: VisualAnalysis
Description: A great tool for tall building design
including area loads, streamlined design features, and
a stay out of your way attitude. Tall buildings are
more than just a total model and VisualAnalysis is
excellent for all kinds of investigations and analysis.
S-FRAME Software Inc.

Phone: 203-421-4800
Email: info@s-frame.com
Web: www.s-frame.com
Product: S-FRAME Analysis and Design
Description: An easy-to-use structural modeling,
analysis and design environment for tall buildings,
bridges, frames, trusses, industrial buildings, plate/shell
structures, and cable structures for seismic analysis, staged
construction, slab design, Direct Analysis Method, linear
and nonlinear static and time history analyses, moving
load analysis, buckling load evaluation and more.
Product: S-CONCRETE Design
Description: Use S-CONCRETE to analyze and
design reinforced concrete columns, beams and
wall sections in an interactive design environment.
The powerful analysis capabilities are coupled with
an intuitive, interface with optional auto-design
capabilities and comprehensive international
standards. Auto-design single sections or batch
process thousands of designs in one run.
Nemetschek Scia
Phone: 877-808-7242
Email: info@scia-online.com
Web: www.nemetschek-scia.com
Product: Scia Engineer
Description: Looking to migrate to, or improve your
3D design workflows? Scia Engineer links structural
modeling, analysis, design, drawings, and reports
in ONE program. Design to multiple codes. Tackle
larger projects with advanced non-linear and dynamic
analysis. Plug into BIM with IFC support, and bidirectional links to Revit, Tekla, and others.
POSTEN Engineering Systems

Phone: 510-275-4750
Email: sales@postensoft.com
Web: www.postensoft.com
Product: POSTEN Multistory
Description: The most ecient & comprehensive
post-tensioned concrete software in the world that
not only automatically designs the tendons, drapes,
as well as columns, but also produces highly ecient,
cost saving, sustainable designs with automatic
documentation of material savings for LEED. No
guessing, no fiddling, no time wasting.
All Resource Guides and Updates for the 2013 Editorial Calendar are now available on the website,
www.STRUCTUREmag.org. Listings are provided as a courtesy. STRUCTURE magazine is not
responsible for errors.
STRUCTURE magazine
48
June 2013
Firms
Leslie E. Robertson Associates, R.L.L.P.
Phone: 212-750-9000
Email: sawteen.see@lera.com
Web: www.lera.com
Product: Structural Engineering
Description: A120-person M/WBE firm providing
structural engineering services to architects, owners,
contractors, and developers. Established in 1923, we
have designed numerous landmark projects, both
nationally and internationally. Our long tradition
of innovative design together with our advances in
technology has brought LERA to the forefront of the
engineering profession.
The Masonry Society

Phone: 303-939-9700
Email: info@masonrysociety.org
Web: www.masonrysociety.org
Product: Publications
Description: A non-profit professional organization of
volunteers, dedicated to the advancement of masonry
knowledge. Through our Members, information &
opinions about all aspects of masonry are discussed &
debated. The resulting information is disseminated to
provide guidance to the masonry industry on aspects
of design, construction, & repair.
Walter P Moore and Associates
Decon USA Inc.
Powers Fasteners
Phone: 404-898-9620
Email: tsanti@walterpmoore.com
Web: www.walterpmoore.com
Product: Innovative Engineering
Description: WPM provides innovative engineering
solutions to buildings of all types, all over the world.
Phone: 866-332-6687
Email: frank@decon.ca
Web: www.deconusa.com
Product: Studrails
Description: The North American standard for punching
shear enhancement at slab-column connections. Studrails
are produced to the specifications of ASTM A1044, ACI
318-08, and ICC ES 2494. Decon Studrails are also being
increasingly used to reinforce against bursting stresses in
banded post-tension anchor zones.
Phone: 985-807-6666
Email: jack.zenor@sbdinc.com
Web: www.powers.com
Product: Concrete Anchoring
Description: FREE Anchor Design Software
Powers Design Assist. Helps tall Building designers
deal with the complexity of ACI 318 Appendix
D. Powers Fasteners now has 23 Product Code
Compliance ICC ES Reports! Visit our website to
download the software.
WSP USA
Phone: 212-687-9888
Email: contact.structures@wspgroup.com/us
Web: www.wspgroup.com/usa
Product: Structural Engineering
Description: The High Rise Center of Excellence
within WSPs global consultancy. Services include
high and low rise building design, peer review and
value engineering, forensic engineering structural
investigations, building renovations and alterations,
blast resistant design, construction inspection, 3D
visualization, building information modeling (BIM)
and steel detailing.
Suppliers
Construction Specialties, Inc.
Phone: 800-526-6930
Email: sgaskill@c-sgroup.com
Web: www.c-sgroup.com
Product: Blast Louvers
Description: Blast protection, air movement and
rain defense rolled into one. Government buildings,
VA hospitals, computer centers and power plants
are particularly vulnerable to explosive threats. C/S
has developed six Blast Resistant models designed to
withstand blasts up to 8 PSI and capable of meeting
government requirements.
Product: Expansion Joint Covers
Description: Provides a covered transition across the
expansion or movement joint openings of a building,
which remains unaffected by the relative movement
of the two surfaces on either side of the joint. These
covers can be extremely large and complex on base
isolated-buildings in seismic hotbeds.
CTS Cement Manufacturing
Product: Rapid Set Cement Products

Description: Use Rapid Set cement products for
concrete repairs, restoration and new construction,
and achieve high durability, fast strength gain and
structural or drive-on strength in one-hour.
Ecospan Composite Floor System

Phone: 770-296-4097
Email: rbullens@vulcraft-al.com
Web: www.ecospan-usa.com
Product: Composite Floor System
Description: An innovative, simple, effective and
economical method of providing open web structural
components for elevated floor construction while
incorporating benefits of lightweight composite
design. UL fire rating, G561, for 1, 2 and 3 hours
and a STC sound rating of 57.
New Millennium Building Systems

Phone: 260-868-6000
Email: kevin.disinger@newmill.com
Web: www.newmill.com
Product: Steel joists, metal decking, castellated beams,
BIM design, Flex-Joist
Description: New Millennium engineers and
manufactures standard steel joists, architecturally
unique steel joists, steel decking, and FreeSpan
castellated beams for wide-span bay designs. A leader
in BIM-based steel joist design; recently introduced
the Flex-Joist Gravity Overload Safety System, for
early warning in the event of roof overloads.
Pile Dynamics, Inc.

Phone: 216-831-6131
Email: www.info@pile.com
Web: www.pile.com/pdi
Product: QC systems for foundations
of Tall Bulidings
Description: World leader in Deep Foundations
QA/QC system brands: Pile Driving Analyzer
and CAPWAP (Dynamic Load Testing/Pile
Driving Monitoring), Pile Integrity Tester, Thermal
Integrity Profiler, PIR (Automated Monitoring
Equipment for augercast/CFA piles), Cross-Hole
Analyzer (CSL), GRLWEAP (wave equation
analysis of piles), SPT Analyzer, E-Saximeter
(driving logs), more.
STRUCTURE magazine
49
June 2013
Simpson Strong-Tie
Phone: 925-560-9000
Email: web@strongtie.com
Web: www.strongtie.com
Product: Strong Frame Special Moment Frame
Description: The new code-listed Strong Frame special
moment frame is a unique lateral system solution
for new construction and soft-story retrofit. With
patented Yield-Link structural fuse technology, the
links bear the brunt of lateral forces during a seismic
event, keeping the structural integrity of the beams and
columns intact.
Vulcraft/Verco Group
Phone: 402-844-2570
Email: mike.klug@nucor.com
Web: www.vulcraft.com
Product: Steel Decking
Description: Used in many applications, but is
particularly well suited to roofing and flooring. Vulcraft/
Verco group manufactures many different types of deck,
including roof deck, floor deck, composite floor deck
and cellular deck. A full line of deck accessories, such as
end closure and pour stop, is also available.
Product: Steel Joist and Joist Girders
Description: Open web-steel joists and joist girders
are an engineered, truss-like construction component
used to support loads over short and long spans. Steel
joists and joist girders provide an economical system
for supporting floors and roofs. Vulcraft joists and joist
girders are designed/manufactored in accordance with
the Steel Joist Institute.
SOILSTRUCTURE.COM
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Substructural Software
Soldier Pile/Wood Lagging
Multi-Level Tieback Walls
Laterally Loaded Drilled Pier
Anchored or Cant. Sheetpile
Cantilever Retaining Wall
Only $280 to $450. Nothing to ship.

Same Day Email Activation
Free Downloads at:

http://www.SoilStructure.com
Phone: 800-929-3030
Email: jong@ctscement.com
Web: www.ctscement.com
Product: Type K Shrinkage Compensating Cement
Description: Install concrete structures and industrialsize floors using Type-K shrinkage-compensating
cement products with no curling, no drying shrinkage
cracking and no intermediate saw cut joints.
Product: Anchor Channels

Description: Decon USA is the exclusive representative
of Jordahl in North America. Hot rolled Anchor
Channels are embedded in concrete and used to securely
transfer high loads. Their main application is for flexible
connections of glazing panels to high-rise buildings.
Anchor Channels with welded-on rebar or corner pieces
are available.
Noteworthy
news and information
Susan M. Frey
An Engineers Engineer
usan (Sue) M. Frey, P.E., S.E., passed away on Sunday, May

12, 2013 at her home. Sue received her B.S. and M.S. from
Purdue University, graduating in 1977. Later that year, she was
hired as a structural engineer at CH2M HILL in Corvallis,
OR, where she spent her entire career designing everything from
concrete water storage reservoirs and wastewater treatment plants to
performing arts centers. Sue was known as a tremendous mentor, both
for junior staff and for advanced technical excellence across the firm,
through her role as Structural Engineering Global Technology Leader.
Sue served on the Civil Engineering Advisory Council at Purdue for
many years. Purdue University awarded her the Civil Engineering
Alumni Achievement Award in 2005. In 2010, she won the CH2M
HILL CEO Excellence Award in the category of respect.
She also contributed her time to many national and international
professional societies, helping to advance the improvement and
refinement of building codes and design practices through The
Masonry Society, The Masonry Standards Joint Committee, The
Structural Engineers Association of Oregon (President 1997
1998), the American Concrete Institute, The American Waterworks
Association, and the National Council of Structural Engineers
Associations (NCSEA). She was an adjunct professor for Design of
Masonry Structures at Oregon State University, and was a masonry
seminar and webinar instructor for the Northwest Concrete Masonry
Association. Recently, she was appointed by

the Governor to the Oregon State Board
of Examiners of Engineering and Land
Surveying as a board member. Sue was also
honored with a Special Merit for Lifetime
Achievement Award from the Structural Engineers Association of
Oregon (SEAO). She was the SEAO delegate to NCSEA, was very
active on the NCSEA Licensure Committee and taught the Masonry
portion of the NCSEA Structural Examination Review Course.
Sue is survived by her husband of 33 years, Rich, and her two
children, Jamie and Patrick. Sue served her profession as few do and
made countless friends in the process. She was an inspiration to all
that she met, constantly being upbeat and courageous during her 10
year battle with cancer. She was an engineers engineer. She will be
sorely missed by her family, her countless friends and the structural
engineering profession to which she gave so much.
Donations in Sues memory may be made to the Good Samaritan
Hospital Foundation Survivorship Fund, 3600 NW Samaritan
Drive, Corvallis, OR 97330, or the Susan M. Frey Civil Engineering
Scholarship Fund, Purdue University, 403 West Wood Street, West
Lafayette, IN 47907-2007 (check should include note for the Susan
M. Frey Civil Engineering Scholarship Fund.). Online condolences
may be sent to: www.mchenryfuneralhome.com.
Linear and nonlinear solutions to extend your structural analysis capability

Strand7 combines Windows native pre and post processors with a suite of powerful
solvers giving you unparalleled functionality in a single application. Construct
models, run analyses and investigate results simultaneoustly using a seamless
interface.
Some of Strand7 Features:
Submodeling
Data Libraries
User-dened beam sections
Import from Staad, SAP2000,
Nastran and Ansys models
Automatic mesh generation
Concrete Analysis - Creep and
Shrinkage
Construction Sequence
Simulation
Isotropic, orthotropic,
anisotropic, soil, rubber
materials
Extensive range of Solvers:
Strand7 includes static, dynamic,

transient and heat transfer solvers.
These all have linear and powerful non
linear capabilities. Material, geometric
and contact non linearity can be
analyzed simultaneously.
Beaufort Analysis, Inc.
A Condential Unbuilt Project - Image and Model courtesy Halvorson and Partners
www.strand7.com
STRUCTURE magazine
info@beaufort-analysis.com
252-504-2282
50
June 2013
award winners and outstanding projects
Spotlight
The Twisting Regent Emirates Pearl Hotel

By Ahmed Osman, P.E., M.Eng and Whitney Morris, LEED AP
UAE DeSimone Consulting Engineers was an Outstanding Award Winner for the Regent
Emirate Pearl Hotel project in the 2012 NCSEA Annual Excellence in Structural Engineering
awards program (Category International Structures over $100M).
he iconic Regent Emirates Pearl

development will rise and twist
255 meters (840 feet) above its
calm turquoise ocean front, claiming its spot in the Abu Dhabi skyline. The
mixed-use AED 1.0B ($287M) complex
is located amidst palaces and high profile
skyscrapers on the Corniche Street of Abu
Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates. The vast
plot area of 13,600 square meters (146,500
square feet) provides top rate views of Capital
City, private islands and yachts along with the
luxurious Emirates Palace.
The Pearls signature feature is the 45-story
twisting elliptical floor plan, and columns
which contains 60 luxury serviced apartments
occupying levels 1 thru 10 and a 5-star hotel
with 437 keys including presidential and royal
suites occupying levels 11 thru Roof. The
expansive podium area includes five levels
of restaurants, retail areas, spas, swimming
pools, a gym and more, with another 5 levels
of underground parking. The total project
build up area includes 55 stories and 130,600
square meters (1.4 million square feet).
The main structural challenge was to
appropriately model, analyze and design
the complicated twisting shape of the tower.
The perimeter tower columns are inclined 7
degrees vertically and shift 48 centimeters
(19 inches) each level in the circumferential
direction, with a total of 21.60 meters (70.8
feet) from bottom to top. In plan, each floor
rotates 0.56 degrees each level with a total
of 25 degrees of total rotation from Level
1 to the Roof.
The sloping columns cause the building to
rotate at each level, therefore inducing a torsional force in the elliptical concrete core wall,
with the force accumulating over the height
of the building. DeSimone carefully studied
and analyzed the effects of the torsional force,
and formulated a structurally innovative solution to relieve the torsion from the core. The
perimeter tower columns were strategically
located to transfer at Level 27 and Level 1
in order the help relieve the torsion from the
core. The inclined concrete tower column
transfers were designed to reverse the twist
by transferring the column gravity loading

directly into the core wall in the opposite
direction of the torsional force, and therefore
reversing the force in the core wall.
The tower columns and transfers played a
two part structural role in the stability of the
building. The first role, as described above,
is to help alleviate the twist on the core wall;
the second is to act as part of the lateral force
resisting system as an outrigger to help the
core wall resist the lateral loads. The perimeter tower columns range from 400 x 1600
millimeters (16 x 63 inches) at the top to
600 x 1600 millimeters (24 x 63 inches) at
Level 1. From Podium Roof to the raft, the
tower columns transfer to 1325-millimeter
(53-inch) diameter, circular.
The structural gravity framing system of
the typical tower floors is composed of
Post Tensioned slabs supported by concrete
perimeter columns and a central elliptical
core wall. The 27 centimeter (10.5 inch)
PT-concrete C50 (7,200 psi) flat plate slabs
span more than 10.5 meters (35.0 feet) from
the core wall to the perimeter tower columns.
The flat plate design reduced the construction time significantly. This structural system
concentrated the gravity loads into the core
wall, to help reduce the reinforcing of the
core wall due to wind and seismic forces.
Also, this system helps minimize the load to
the 16 perimeter tower columns that transfers at Level 1 to 1325-millimeter (53-inch)
diameter, circular.
Since the slab and core wall are elliptical in
plan, a slip form was key to the success of the
speed of construction and the project as a whole.
This factor, and many other strategic components, helped with the delivery of the project
below budget and construction schedule.
The Podium Levels consists of a cast-in-place
concrete slab and beam gravity system. The
Architects faade requirements at the Lobby
Level prevented the Podium Level North and
South perimeter columns to continue past
Podium 1. In order to facilitate the Architects
needs, another unique and innovative structural solution was provided. Steel hangers
from Podium 1 to 3 were designed and
STRUCTURE magazine
51
June 2013
installed as an attractive structural solution.

The hangers are supported by a deep Post
Tension beam at the Podium Roof where
clear height was not a major issue.
The project also has 5 underground parking levels to accommodate the 679 parking
spaces required by Abu Dhabis DOT. The
20.0-meter (66-foot) deep excavation was
unearthed and sealed off using a temporary
reinforced concrete diaphragm wall with
tie-backs. Since Abu Dhabi is an island
with the average water level at ground level,
excavating that deep below the surface creates extremely high hydrostatic forces. The
diaphragm system provided a water-free
environment to apply extensive water proofing and to build the permanent foundation
walls. The foundations walls have an average
thickness of 375 millimeters (15 inches)
and were designed to resist soil and tremendous water pressure.
Ahmed Osman, P.E., M.Eng, is a
Managing Principal with DeSimone
Consulting Engineers, Abu Dhabi, UAE.
Whitney Morris, LEED AP, has been
working for DeSimone for the past 6 years
in both the San Francisco and Abu Dhabi
offices. Last year Whitney was awarded the
Young Engineer of the Year for 2012 from
Big Project-Middle East.
EN
GINEERS
O NS
STRUCTU
OCIATI
RAL
ASS
NATIONAL
COUNCI L
years
1993-2013
NCSEA News
News form the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations
Celebrating
Professionalism and Structural Licensing

Barry Arnolds presentation at the Ohio SEA (SEAoO) Annual
Conference, Ethics: A Practical Guide for the Practicing Engineer,
reminded us that a profession carries several distinguishing characteristics and it is more than an occupation. Although there is
some variation in the exact definitions, most generally agree a
professions characteristics include the following:
A core body of knowledge;
Academic programs which teach the body of knowledge;
Practitioners with autonomy in the application of the
body of knowledge;
Ethical rules of conduct that constrain practitioners; and
Licensing laws or rules limiting who may practice.
Structural engineering meets the first four of these criteria and,
with licensing of engineers, it partially meets the last.
Divinity, law and medicine represent the earliest professions.
Pharmacy, accounting, teaching, engineering and others entered
the professional ranks over time. Establishment of structural
licensure in all jurisdictions would provide structural engineering
with official stature due to both the public and its practitioners.
A typical structural engineer invests many years in training and
education. Frequently, this starts before college with advanced
high school classes as preparation for the rigors of university.
Exams are commonly used to establish whether a student meets
the necessary standards to begin college. The rigors of college
entrance are evidence of the body of knowledge.
The study of engineering at the college level presents prospective engineers with a challenging curriculum. It includes the
core arts, as well as history and communication courses which
all students tackle, and adds intensive mathematics and science
courses. Colleges structured environment provides the framework to teach how basic problems are solved with the application
of scientific principles. All of a students earlier coursework
culminates in the last academic semesters, which focus efforts
into a specialized field of engineering. These focused courses
are where structural engineers learn the principles of analysis,
building materials and building systems from the building
blocks of earlier work.
University engineering programs convey the professions core
body of knowledge. Several engineering societies recognized
the significance of the college curriculum and founded what is
now the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology
(ABET) to help ensure the quality of the programs. This body
accredits college engineering programs. ABET accreditation
is widely recognized as the standard necessary to establish an
academic programs qualification and provides verification of
the institutions qualification to convey the material.
The wide array of problems faced by structural engineers makes
predefined solutions impractical, and it fosters the growth of
new technologies and innovations of existing methods. A direct
result of the wide array of possible solutions is that a large degree
of autonomy is necessary to serve our clients. Upon entering
the workforce, engineers learn various methods of applying the
core body of knowledge under the guidance of more seasoned
professionals. This guidance provides training in the application
of knowledge and develops the independent thought process
crucial to successfully using the autonomy available to engineers.
Structural engineers use this autonomy regularly. An engineer
might decide whether a building should be built from concrete
masonry block or framed by cold formed steel, whether a
STRUCTURE magazine
52
It is clear that engineering meets the criteria

of a profession. Establishment of structural
licensure would provide the last step for
structural engineering to take its place among
the great professions of our society.
concrete frame or structural steel frame is more economical or,
on a smaller scale, whether to use 10 penny or 8 penny nails in a
joint. Independence in the application of engineering principles
is evident in daily activities and necessary to effectively address
the various factors influencing design. Our codes and standards
are rarely so prescriptive that the engineer has no options.
Engineering autonomy is balanced by ethical obligations. The
special knowledge held by engineers, combined with a wide
degree of freedom in how it is applied, give structural engineers
a great responsibility. In Ohio, and most jurisdictions, engineers are bound by the states rules of ethical conduct. Further,
members of societies such as ASCE or NSPE have ethical codes
of conduct. These ethical frameworks have common features:
to consider public safety as the highest priority, to be truthful,
to perform only in areas of expertise, to be faithful agents for
clients and to continue development throughout our career.
Structural engineers face these ethical obligations daily.
Without a second thought, thousands of people regularly depend
on the fact that a structural engineers work will perform, that
the bridge will carry them home to their family, that their
office will be there to host a critical sales meeting, that the high
school stadium bleachers will let them cheer on their children,
and much more. Structural engineers truly have to have high
ethical standards.
Each jurisdictions regulatory body limits who may practice
engineering through a rigorous licensing process. The process
includes consideration of education, training, experience, referrals and no less than two examinations. Ohio, like many other
jurisdictions, offers examinations in 24 disciplines or variations
of engineering discipline. Structural disciplines are considered
in two distinct exams: the single day CivilStructural exam and
the 16 hour Structural exam.
SEAoO joins ASCE-SEI, NCSEA, SECB and CASE in advocating the establishment of structural licensure.
Timothy M. Gilbert, P.E., S.E., SECB (TGIlbert.PE@gmail.com)
is a Principal Quality Engineer with Louis Perry & Associates, Inc. in
Wadsworth, Ohio. He is also a Director and Licensure Committee
chair for the Structural Engineers Association of Ohio (SEAoO).
This article was previously published in the
March 2013 issue of the SEAoO newsletter.
In Memoriam: Sue Frey

NCSEA mourns the passing of Sue Frey, P.E., S.E., principal
structural engineer, CH2M HILL, and adjunct professor/
instructor at Oregon State University. Sue was an active
member of NCSEA and SEAO, and served on NCSEAs
Licensing and Continuing Education Committees. She was
also an instructor for the SE Review Course, and a past presenter of NCSEA webinars and NCSEA Annual Conferences.
She will be sorely missed.
June 2013
News from the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations
Keynote: The Philosophy of Design: The Structural

Engineers Role in Creating New Architecture by Bill
Baker, P.E., SECB, F.ASCE, FIStructE, Structural &
Civil Engineering Partner, Skidmore, Owings & Merrill
Serviceability presentation based on NCSEA
publication Guide to the Design for Serviceability: In
Accordance with IBC 2012 and ASCE/SEI 7-10 by
author Kurt Swensson, Ph.D., P.E., LEEDAP, Principal,
KSI Engineers
ACI 550 session by Harry Gleisch, Vice President of
Engineering, Metromont Corporation, and Chairman of
Joint ACI-ASCE 550, Precast Concrete Structures
Connections: The Last Bastion of Rational Design by
Bill Thornton, Corporate Consultant, Cives Corporation
ASCE 41 session
Practical Design of Complex Stability Bracing
Configurations by Donald White, Ph.D., School of
Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Tech
DoD Minimum Antiterrorism Standards for
Buildings by Jon Schmidt, P.E., SECB, M.ASCE,
Associate Structural Engineer, Burns & McDonnell
The Analysis of Offset Diaphragms and Shear Walls by

R. Terry Malone, P.E., S.E., Senior Technical Director,
WoodWorksArchitectural & Engineering solutions
Load Generators: What Exactly is My Software Doing
by Kim Olson, FORSE Consulting
University of Minnesota Northrop Auditorium
Renovation: Underpinning & Micropile Foundation
Case Study by Greg Greenlee, Principal, Engineering
Partners International
The Structural Curtainwall by John Tawresey, S.E.,
KPFF Consulting Engineers
NCSEA News
Technical and management

sessions on structural engineering:
The Annual Conference will also include:

Social events that facilitate networking with fellow
structural engineers;
[New] reception for Young Member attendees;
SECB reception and information on changes to
application requirements;
A trade show featuring the best in structural engineering
products and services.
Check www.ncsea.com for continually updated information
on Annual Conference educational sessions, events, and registration information.
Current NCSEA Annual Conference Sponsors:

Bronze
Silver
June NCSEA Webinars
Rebuilding the World Trade Center required

the use of several hundred thousand yards
of concrete. This course will explain what
field tests should be performed on delivered
concrete to have some assurance that the
high-strength will be achieved.
June 27, 2013

Building Design for Tornadoes
Bill Coulbourne, P.E.
June 14, 2013

Training for Post-Disaster Assessment
Jim Barnes
This webinar provides information

gathered in investigations into the
Tuscaloosa, AL and Joplin, MO 2011
tornadoes, which are leading the ASCE
7 Wind Load Task Committee to
include new commentary in ASCE on
designing buildings to resist the effects
of tornado winds.
This California Emergency Management

Agency (CalEMA) Safety Assessment
Program (SAP) is one of only two postdisaster assessment programs that will
be compliant with the requirements
of the forthcoming Federal Resource
Typing Standards for engineer emergency responders.
EN
June 2013
O NS
53
OCIATI
NATIONAL
Celebrating
STRUCTURE magazine
GINEERS
ASS
These courses will award 1.5 hours of continuing education. Approved for CE credit in all 50 States
through the NCSEA Diamond Review Program. Time: 10:00 AM Pacific, 11:00 AM Mountain,
12:00 PM Central, 1:00 PM Eastern.
The program consists of three webinar segments available over one days time. Cost: $500
Per Connection. Several people may attend for
one connection fee.
RAL
June 11, 2013

Lessons Learned: Rebuilding the
World Trade Center with HighStrength Concrete up to 14,000 psi
Casimir Bognacki, P.E., FACI
Register at www.ncsea.com
STRUCTU
Platinum
COUNCI L
years
1993-2013
2013 Emerging Leaders

Alliance Conference
Structural Columns
The Newsletter of the Structural Engineering Institute of ASCE
Interested in improving your leadership skills?

Sponsorships available for ASCE members to attend
2013 Emerging Leaders Alliance conference
ASCE, as a partner in the Emerging Leaders Alliance (ELA),
will sponsor eight members to attend the 2013 ELA leadership conference. The conference provides rising leaders with
tools to more effectively lead their organizations and serve
our professional community. This program also allows you to
network with engineers and scientists from other disciplines
and earn PDHs. The workshop will take place on November
11-13, 2013 at the Hyatt Regency Reston in Reston, Virginia,
USA. Interested ASCE members must apply for sponsorship
online at http://tinyurl.com/cplhatd by July 1, 2013. For
more information, visit www.emergingleadersalliance.org or
contact professional@asce.org.
Errata
SEI posts up-to-date errata information for our publications at
www.asce.org/SEI. Click on Publications on our menu, and
select Errata. If you have any errata that you would like to
submit, please email it to Paul Sgambati at psgambati@asce.org.
Structures Congress 2014

Call for Proposals
Be part of the cutting-edge technical program of the Structures
Congress 2014 in Boston, April 3-5, 2014. The Structural
Engineering Institute is now accepting session and presentation
proposals for the Structures Congress 2014.
Key Dates
All Abstract and Session Proposals due June 12, 2013
Notification of Acceptance September 18, 2013
All Final Papers due December 18, 2013
(extensions not possible)
Session proposals can take two forms: a traditional session
with 4 papers presented, or a panel session with no papers and
perhaps more audience interaction. In addition, you can submit
individual abstracts that may be combined with others to form
cohesive sessions. Topics will include but are not limited to:
Bridges
Buildings
Seismic
Wind and Flood Loads
Sustainability
Business and Professional Practice
Blast and Impact Loading
Nonbuilding and Special Structures
Nonstructural Systems and Components
Visit the Structures Congress 2014 website for more information
and submission instructions at http://tinyurl.com/dxlgyr9.
Local Activities
SEI East Central Florida
One Day Seminar
New Student Chapter at WVU

Welcome to the new SEI Graduate Student Chapter (GSC) at
West Virginia University (WVU), chaired by Daniel Estep and
Faculty Advisor Dr. Udaya Halabe. The SEI GSC at WVU is
within the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
(CEE). The mission of SEI-WVU is to promote graduate education in structural engineering, develop leadership skills, create
professional development opportunities for current graduate
students, and enhance networking with structural engineering
professionals. By encouraging interaction between SEI student
members and professional members, and providing opportunities
for professional and educational development, SEI-WVU will
facilitate a successful college-to-career transition, and encourage
its members to engage in SEI activities both at WVU and at the
national level throughout their professional career.
STRUCTURE magazine
54
The SEI East Central Florida Branch of ASCE is pleased to

invite you to participate in their Annual Structural Group
One-Day Seminar, Friday, June 28, 2013 at the University
of Central Florida. The seminar consists of a morning session
from 8:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. and an afternoon session from
1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Keynote Speakers
Composite Design Provisions and Applications:
William P. Jacobs V, P.E., S.E.
Floor Vibrations A Critical Serviceability Issue:
Thomas Murray, Ph.D., P.E.
Throughout the years, participation in the seminar has provided
valuable exposure to both seminar sponsors and exhibitors,
while providing a professional benefit to community and raising funds for engineering student scholarships. Contact Sameer
Ambare, P.E. at sambare@hntb.com for more information
and to register.
To get involved with the events and activities of your local
SEI Chapter or Structural Technical Group (STG), visit
www.asce.org/SEI. Local groups offer a variety of opportunities
for professional development, student and community outreach,
mentoring, scholarships, networking, and technical tours.
June 2013
Register now. This eleven-part, live webinar course references codes specified by NCEES for the exam, including effects of
wind loads and seismic loads for both building and bridge structures. This course will refine your skills for the comprehensive,
essay-like design questions. Or consider taking ASCEs Live P.E. Review Courses and learn from experienced instructors during
live webinars. You will benefit from immediate feedback and assistance from your instructors during the live webinars, and
supplement your learning with free on-demand recordings of the sessions. With our guarantee, if you register as an individual
and you do not pass your exam, provide us with proof of your exam results, and we will enroll you in the next course for free.
To save $100, register at: www.asce.org/pereviewlive/ by July 1 using Promo Code EHPE13 this savings applies to group
and individual registrations.
myLearning
ASCE Library Features Free
Collection of Six Papers from Your New PDH Tracker and Personalized Hub
for Continuing Education
Past Structures Congresses
Manage your professional development and license renewal through

ASCEs new learning management system myLearning. Track
all your PDHs/CEUs, including those from other providers;
obtain certificates of completion; take program-related exams;
print or save transcripts of your professional development
all in one place! Make myLearning your personalized hub for
continuing education and explore the comprehensive program
catalog and track your PDHs. Visit the myLearning website at
www.asce.org/mylearning/ and get started today.
New ASCE Structural Webinars Available

SEI partners with ASCE Continuing Education to present quality live interactive webinars on useful topics in structural
engineering. Several new webinars are available:
Designing for Flood Loads Using ASCE 7 and ASCE 24
June 3, 2013
William L. Coulbourne
Structural Thermal Bridging in the Building Envelope
June 5, 2013
James A. DAloisio
Damping and Motion Control in Buildings and Bridges
June 7, 2013
Brian Breukelman
Movable Bridge Series Details of Bascule Bridges
June 14, 2013
Andrew Herrmann
Philosophy of Structural Building Codes
June 17, 2013
Dave Adams
Introduction to the Seismic Design of Nonbuilding Structures to ASCE 7-10
June 26, 2013
Greg Soules
Vibration of Concrete Floors Evaluation, Acceptance and Control
June 28, 2013
Bijan Aalami
The Five Pieces of Equipment Every Bridge Inspector Should Have
July 10, 2013
Lance Andrews
A General Overview of ASCE 7-10 Changes to Wind Load Provisions
July 15, 2013
Bill Coulbourne
Pier and Beam Foundation Design for Wind and Flood Loads
July 29, 2013
Bill Coulbourne
Significant Changes to the General Requirements for Determining

Wind Loads of ASCE 7-10
July 31, 2013
Eric Stafford
Webinars are live interactive learning experiences. All you need is

a computer with high-speed internet access and a phone. These
events feature an expert speaker on practice-oriented technical
and management topics relevant to civil engineers.
Pay a single site fee and provide training for an unlimited
number of engineers at that site for one low fee, and no cost or
lost time for travel and lodging. ASCEs experienced instructors
STRUCTURE magazine
deliver the training to your location, with minimal disruption

in workflow ideal for brown-bag lunch training.
ASCE Webinars are completed in a short amount of time
generally 60 to 90 minutes and staff can earn one or more
PDHs for each Webinar.
Visit the ASCE Continuing Education website for more details
and to register: www.asce.org/conted.
55
June 2013
The Newsletter of the Structural Engineering Institute of ASCE
The ASCE Library has provided free access to a diverse collection

of six papers presented at past Structures Congresses. The papers
were selected by the National Technical Program Committee to
provide examples of the type of topics presented and discussed
at this annual event. Download the papers as a warm up to
attending the 2013 congress or to help you formulate your 2014
session or abstract proposal. Free access to these papers will be
available through July 31, 2013 at http://ascelibrary.org/page/
jsendh/structuresfeaturedproceedingspapers.
Structural Columns
Save $100 and Pass the S.E. Exam with ASCE-Guaranteed
Become a Confident
Engineering Expert Witness
SAVE THE DATE
June 20 -21, 2013
The CASE Summer Planning Meeting is scheduled for August

6-7 in Chicago, IL. A new feature to this meeting will have
CASE leaders facilitate a roundtable of discussion topics in the
structural engineering field. If you are interested in attending
the meeting or have any suggested topics for the roundtable,
please contact CASE Executive Director Heather Talbert at
htalbert@acec.org.
CASE in Point
The Newsletter of the Council of American Structural Engineers
If asked for your expert testimony today...

Would you feel ready to take on these potentially lucrative
assignments with a sense of purpose AND confidence? You
could, can and will when youve had the proper preparation
from professionals whove walked this walk before!
Become a Confident Engineering Expert Witness will show
you how to prepare and successfully provide expert testimony for
discovery, depositions, courtroom, and related legal proceedings.
Earn new firm services revenue
Enhance your professional credentials
Expand personal and professional opportunities
Qualify for recognition as an Engineering Expert Witness
Earn 11 PDHs and a Certificate of Completion
Since 2009, this popular introductory program has been the
top choice for professional engineers, architects, and surveyors.
Take the training and watch how quickly you become the goto resource for your clients and their representatives.
Theres never been a better time than now to begin!
For more information, visit http://witness2013.acec.org or
contact Ed Bajer, ebajer@acec.org.
CASE Summer Planning Meeting
CASE Announces the 2013

CASE Scholarship Winner
Since 2009, the CASE Scholarship has helped engineering students make positive steps towards a bright future in structural
engineering The CASE scholarship, administered by the ACEC
College of Fellows, is awarded to a student pursuing a Masters
degree in Structural Engineering. CASE strives to attract the
best and brightest to the structural engineering profession, and
educational support is the best way we can ensure the future
of our profession.
The 2013 winner, Samantha Dupaquier, will graduate
May 2014 with a Masters Degree in Civil Engineering with a
Structural Emphasis from Auburn University.
ACEC Business Insights

ACECs 2013 Annual Convention and Legislative Summit
On April 21-24, a record 1,400 ACEC members attended the
ACEC Annual Convention in Washington, D.C., meeting
with 300 Senators, Congressmen, and Capitol Hill staffers to
urge passage of long-term transportation, water/wastewater
infrastructure, and energy legislation.
600-plus attended the black-tie Engineering Excellence Awards
Gala, which recognized 147 preeminent engineering achievements from throughout the world. The Kauffman Center for
the Performing Arts in Kansas City, MO was honored with the
2013 Grand Conceptor Award on April 23rd. The engineering
work for the Kauffman Center, which features an 1,800-seat
opera hall and a 1,600-seat symphony hall enclosed in twin
shells towering 16 stories, was done by New York-based Arup.
The complex was designed by Moshe Safdie and built by J.E.
Dunn Construction Co.
The award citation referred to the facility as a gleaming
architecturally intricate entertainment complex that features two
acoustically tuned performance halls; a four-story, wide-angled
glass wall front facade topped by slightly concave sloping roofs;
and a pioneering tensile structural support system of encompassing high-strength interior rods. The result is an exciting new
focal point for the regions art and entertainment community,
and a dazzling addition to the downtown Kansas City skyline.
ACECs Annual Convention also marks the induction of a new
ACEC Executive Committee. Gregs Thomopulos, Chairman/
CEO of Stanley Consultants, Inc in Muscatine, IA., succeeded
STRUCTURE magazine
56
Ted Williams as ACEC Chairman for 2013-2014 at the spring

meeting of the ACEC Board of Directors.
New members of the 2013-2014 Executive Committee are:
Chairman-elect Richard Wells, Vice-President of Kleinfelder;
Manish Kothari, President and CEO, Sheladia Associates; Chris
Poland, Chairman and Senior Principal, Degenkolb Engineers;
Clinton Robinson, Associate Vice President, Black and Veatch
Corporation; ACEC/Michigan Executive Director Ronald
Brenke is the new NAECE representative.
June 2013
Fee Development
Being adequately compensated for the effort and value added
to a project by the structural engineer is an essential element
of the consulting structural engineering practice. Developing
fair, yet adequate, fees is always a challenge.
Tool 7-2: Fee Development is intended to be used within
a consulting firm to stimulate thought and consideration in
the development of fees. Engineers in firms that may be experiencing new responsibilities as project engineers and project
managers often ask the question How do we decide on fees?
This tool may be a useful primer for these employees, and lead
You can follow ACEC Coalitions

on Twitter @ACECCoalitions.
to further discussion with firm management on the firms fee

development strategies.
CASE has developed previous tools in the toolkit, as well as
other documents, that can aid in the development of fees and
compensation. Several of these tools will be referenced herein.
The user of this tool is encouraged to become familiar with the
other tools and documents available. Please see the following
documents for more information:
CASE Document 504, Proposal Preparation Spreadsheet
CASE Document 976-A, Commentary on Value-Based
Compensation for Structural Engineers
CASE Tool 2-1, Risk Evaluation Checklist
CASE Tool 5-4, Negotiation Talking Points
CASE Tool 7-1, Client Evaluation
You can purchase all CASE products at
www.booksforengineers.com.
If you would like more information on the items below, please contact Ed Bajer, ebajer@acec.org.
A recent case in New Jersey, Nicholas v. Mynster, barred the

testimony of a doctor who was hospital-credentialed to treat the
condition suffered by the plaintiff, finding that was not enough.
Cases in the health care industry are even to the point of requiring a similar board-certified specialist in some instances. Can
engineers be far behind? It has been argued that having equal
credentials is not enough; the expertise must be in the same
area. The list of experts on ACECs contractscentral.net does
list the area of expertise of all its credentialed experts. The next
expert witness program is June 20-21 in Chicago.
Patent Trolling
These involve the use of scanner/copiers that scan a hard copy
document into an electronic file and then transmit that file to
someone else. Some firms have received letters saying that, if
they are using this technology, they are infringing on someones
STRUCTURE magazine
patent and must pay a license fee. Some believe the patents are
not valid but no court decisions have as yet determined that. The
situation is not settled on how to handle these circumstances.
Other industries are involved as well. It is best keep up to speed
on this issue and look for any cases that have been resolved.
The Shield Act has been introduced in Congress. Author Rep.
DeFazio says that his legislation would force patent trolls to
take financial responsibility for their frivolous lawsuits.
What Do You Seal?

The Practice Act or rules in most jurisdictions govern whether
a seal is required and when it must be applied to professional
documents. Some states will also define what they are. In some
states, as-builts must be sealed, in others no. The term as built
is not encouraged in favor of something like record drawings or
marked up set of prints. Some follow the general rule of sealing only documents that the government requires to be sealed.
NCARB (the National Council of Architectural Registration
Boards) has a Model Handbook for Building Officials that offers
answers to this question.
57
June 2013
CASE is a part of the American Council of Engineering Companies
CASE Business Practice Corner

Experts Must Actually
Be Experts
CASE in Point
New CASE Tool Now Available
Structural Forum
opinions on topics of current importance to structural engineers
Black, White, and Gray

Ethics in Engineering
By Greg Cuetara, P.E., S.E.
s engineers, we have a great deal

of black and white in our world.
We have been trained to define
a problem and come up with a
solution. Does a structure have the capacity we need, or not? How do the capacities
compare to the imposed loads? We use
engineering judgment grounded in our
knowledge and experience to determine
whether a structure is safe; but, even with
this information, we are using defined
skills. It can be difficult to see that there
is also a lot of gray area in engineering.
One such area is ethics. Essentially, ethics
is doing what is right. To be ethical as
engineers, we need to practice within our
discipline, field of competence, and area of
examination, which is why we are licensed
in the first place. As our licensing rules state,
we also have an ethical duty not only to
ourselves, the engineering community, and
the work that we produce, but also to protect
the safety, health, and welfare of the public.
In most jurisdictions, there is no differentiation between disciplines; each
engineer has the obligation to practice
only in the areas in which he or she is
genuinely competent (structural, electrical,
etc.). However, this arrangement is now
being questioned by many in our industry.
For example, NCSEA, CASE, and SEI all
advocate specifically licensing structural
engineers (SE) as distinct from other disciplines, either separately or as an additional
credential beyond the professional engineer
(PE) license. Building codes are changing
so frequently that it is difficult for anyone
not practicing solely in that discipline to
keep up with them.
In addition, the National Council of
Examiners for Engineering and Surveying
(NCEES) has determined that engineers
should be tested specifically in their area
of competence, which they have organized
into 25 different exams. Some of these are
generic in the morning and specific in the
afternoon. NCEES has also determined
that a single 8-hour exam is not sufficient

to test structural engineers and instead now
offers a 16-hour structural exam. These
exams do not cover every situation, but
they are a means to evaluate engineers to
verify that they have achieved a minimal
level of competence.
Some states and municipalities require
peer reviews of an engineers work. As a
result, I have had the opportunity to review
other engineers drawings and projects, and
at times this has tested my ethics. Recently,
a set of documents from another engineer
raised a number of red flags as I was looking through the drawings, calculations,
and field notes. The existing conditions
as noted did not make sense and did not
match what was shown on the drawings,
and my own initial calculations suggested
problems with the design. I discussed my
concerns with the engineer, and he simply
blew them off. I was now in a position in
which I had to defend what was right and
the safety of the buildings occupants. I
was fortunate enough to be able to take
my concerns to the next level; fortunately,
that person paid attention to my concerns,
and everything was resolved.
This situation, to me, was black and white
we did not have the option to disregard
inconsistencies. When it comes to ethics,
however, many people often assume that
it is a gray area with no right or wrong
answers. The other engineer was trying
to please his client by taking shortcuts,
putting his duty and responsibility aside.
There are times when we as engineers
push our limits and that is okay, as long
as we are practicing within our area of
legitimate competence as demonstrated
by having been tested. Still, we have a duty
as professionals to act in an ethical manner.
Unfortunately, we sometimes lose sight
of the big picture and get caught up in
the weeds when we are working for our
clients. They ask for the impossible and we
believe that, in order to keep them happy,
we have to provide any design that they

request. However, we are the trained professionals and need to make well-reasoned
recommendations to our clients on what
is required and appropriate.
Ultimately, we need to remember that our
clients are not only the people paying
our immediate fees, but also the end
users of our buildings, bridges, and other
structures. We must always keep them in
mind, especially in the (hopefully rare)
circumstances in which we are forced to
question what is right and what is wrong.
We have a duty to the public, due to our
education and experience, to protect our
friends, family, and neighbors as best we
can. While it is impossible to find and
catch everything, when we see something
that is not right, it is our responsibility to
question and challenge why and determine
what should be done to address it. In short,
when it comes to engineering, we need to
defend what is right.
If you are ever put in a position that tests
your ethics, you do have options. Many
large companies have an ethics hotline that
you can call to report the situation. If that
is not an option, take it to your industry
peers by notifying professional engineering
licensing boards or building code officials.
It is up to us as engineers to police ourselves
and uphold the ethical responsibility that
we have to the public, and it is a part of the
job that we should take just as seriously as
the designs that we produce.
Greg Cuetara, P.E., S.E.
(greg.cuetara@stantec.com), is a senior
structural engineer with the power group
of Stantec Consulting Inc. in Scarborough,
Maine. He is the current president of the
Structural Engineers Association of Maine
(SEAM), serves as the SEAM Delegate to
NCSEA, and is a member of the NCSEA
Licensing Committee.
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, C 3 Ink, or the STRUCTURE magazine Editorial Board.
STRUCTURE magazine
58
June 2013

2013 - 06 Tall Buildings High Rise

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2013 - 06 Tall Buildings High Rise

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

June 2013 Tall Buildings/High Rise

A Joint Publication of NCSEA | CASE | SEI

Ensure That Your

Today in virtually every jurisdiction in the U.S.

CSI Section for Mechanical & Adhesive

Real-Time Anchor Design Software V2.0

PDAS LIVE UPDATE FEATURE

For a full listing of code approved products, and a demo

Powers Fasteners, Inc. www.powers.com

Did you know?

Covers virtually all design & analysis tasks in

Our software is the only SE tool

Improved continuously to suit users needs

The Project Manager enables

Plus import & export makes it easy to use prior

800.424.2252 | www.enercalc.com | info@enercalc.com

By Sean Fleming, Jean Libby, P.E. and Paul Endres, S.E.

The San Diego Central Library encloses 504,000 square

By Daniel Riemann, P.E. and Jason Black, P.E., S.E.

The recently completed Federal Center South Building

John Jay College Expansion

By Jason Stone, P.E.

The CUNY John Jay College School of Criminal Justice

By Edward M. DePaola, P.E., SECB

By Victor R. Donald, P.E.

By Jerod G. Johnson, Ph.D., S.E.

By Frank Griggs, Jr., D. Eng., P.E.

A Joint Publication of NCSEA | CASE | SEI

The newly built

June 2013 Tall Buildings/High Rise

44 CASE Business Practices

By Robert Hossli and

By Ahmed Osman, P.E., M.Eng

By Greg Cuetara, P.E., S.E.

Remember This Ad?

When We Built Our Plant In

the same. Our

is constructed with virtually

open orders and test

Well, we did it again

On the Importance of Collaboration

Coming together is a beginning, staying together

PleAse suPPort these Advertisers

Canadian Wood Council ....................... 20

Burns & McDonnell, Kansas City, MO

CBI Consulting, Inc., Boston, MA

Mark W. Holmberg, P.E.

Evans Mountzouris, P.E.

The DiSalvo Ericson Group, Ridgefield, CT

Dilip Khatri, Ph.D., S.E.

Greg Schindler, P.E., S.E.

Khatri International Inc., Pasadena, CA

KPFF Consulting Engineers, Seattle, WA

Roger A. LaBoube, Ph.D., P.E.

Stephen P. Schneider, Ph.D., P.E., S.E.

Brian J. Leshko, P.E.

John Buddy Showalter, P.E.

John A. Mercer, P.E.

Amy Trygestad, P.E.

HDR Engineering, Inc., Pittsburgh, PA

Mercer Engineering, PC, Minot, ND

Heath & Lineback Engineers, Inc., Marietta, GA

Advertising Account MAnAger