u.s. pharmacopeia headquarters consolidation

U.S. Pharmacopeia Headquarters Consolidation Rockville, MD

Jeff Rothermel Structural Option

Advisor: Dr. Ali Memari Technical Report 3

Submitted: Nov. 21st, 2008

Table of Contents

Executive Summary……………………………………………………………………………………….1 Systems Description………………………………………………………………………….……………2 Loading and Load Cases

Load Combinations …………………………………………………………………………….4 Gravity Loads ……...………………………………………………………………….………….5 Wind Loads ……………………………………………………………………….……………6 Seismic Loads ……………………………………………………………………….…………....7

Lateral Frame Analysis ……………………………………………………….……………………8 Conclusions ……………………………………………………………………………………………37 Appendix A …………………………………………………………………………………………... 38 Appendix B …………………………………………………………………………………………... 43

Tech Report 3 U.S. Pharmacopeia Headquarters Dr. Memari Rockville, MD

1 | P a g e

Executive Summary This report is the final of the 3 part series summarizing the existing conditions of the U.S. Pharmacopeia Headquarters. This report takes a more in depth look into the lateral force resisting system for the building. Given loadings calculated in Technical Report 1 distribution through the building is worked out and looked at in depth. The lateral system was handled using both SAP to get drift values. Shear distributions and stiffnesses were calculated both using SAP and hand calculations. Drift values were found to fall well within the L/400 code limit and a column check shows that the forces aren’t even close to capacity. The design criteria for SAP are spelled out in the corresponding analysis sections. The SAP values for shear in each frame were found to be well within error of the hand calculation values. They seem to both be very precise. Torsion was neglected on the assumption that in a moment frame building where almost every column contributes that torsional effects are almost nonexistent. It can be concluded that overall the system is very heftily designed with most members not coming near capacity.


2 | P a g e

U.S. Pharmacopeia Headquarters Lateral System Analysis and Confirmation Design 12601 Twinbrook Parkway Rockville, Maryland The USP Headquarter building is a combined office and lab building for chemical and biological testing for the most influential drug standard designer in the world. Located in Rockville, MD just minutes outside Washington, DC it sits on prime real estate for the bustle and business of DC with lower costs and a more relaxed area. The entire site houses an existing office building with a new single story conference center with auditorium, and new office and lab building all encircling a new outdoor plaza space. All buildings sit atop 2-3 levels of below grade parking as well. Rising 90’ in height the main office and lab building contains 6 above grade stories including a mechanical penthouse on top. It is a concrete structure consisting of 8” thick two way flat slab with some columns having drop panels and some not. The plaza sits on a complex one way slab over parking levels and the conference center sits on one way slab as well with the walls and roof framed out in composite steel beams. The roof of the main building penthouse is steel noncomposite framing. The two way flat slab system is a very economical framing type and is very typical in the DC/VA region. Lateral System Resistance to wind and seismic loading in the USP building is provided in the office/lab building by the rigid concrete floor plates and columns. In the conference center one story steel moment frames are used as the main lateral system. In the office columns sit at a regular 22’ grid with the Northern bay being 25’ and the Western bay being 21’. It is unknown whether the placement of drop panels indicates the columns that are moment frames but for this study it is assumed that all column lines form moment frames with the exception of some of the smaller random columns around interior core openings and stairwells. Most columns are 24”x24” interior with 12”x24” used commonly along the exterior. These square columns provide a good member since they are uniform around both axes which is a big advantage when taking loading from any direction and for simplicity of construction. The conference center moment frames are comprised of stiffened seated connections and double angles with welded flange plates. Moment frames are employed on the East side of the conference center in the North-South direction with scattered East-West frames throughout the system. It is assumed that lateral support is provided through the conical concrete walls of the auditorium in the Southwest corner and the beams that frame into their embed plates.


3 | P a g e

Topics Covered in this Report

The material covered in this report begins with a description of the loading used, both gravity and lateral. Following is a short summary of the main load path through the building. The majority of this report will be presentation of manual calculations. There will be some member checks as well. The main focus is on member shears and overall building torsion and overturning.


4 | P a g e

Loading and Load Cases The following combinations are those required by ASCE 7-05. For the purposes of this report the main factors being looked at are 1.6Wind and 1.0Earthquake. Controlling load case will be the greater of these values using the unfactored loads calculated in Technical Report 1. 1. 1.4(D + F) 2. 1.2(D + F + T ) + 1.6(L + H) + 0.5(Lr or S or R) 3. 1.2D + 1.6(Lr or S or R) + (L or 0.8W) 4. 1.2D + 1.6W + L + 0.5(Lr or S or R) 5. 1.2D + 1.0E + L + 0.2S 6. 0.9D + 1.6W + 1.6H 7. 0.9D + 1.0E + 1.6H


5 | P a g e

Gravity Loads

Figure G-1 summarizes the gravity loads of USP, compared to design values required per ASCE 7.

Floor/Type Superimposed Dead Load Design Live Load ASCE Live Load

G2Parking 10 50 40G1Parking 10 50 40Stair & Elevator Core 10 100 100GroundParking 10 50 40Mechanical 10 150 (Not Specified)Stair & Elevator Core 10 100 100Corridor 10 100 100Fitness Center 10 100 100 (Assumed Assembly)Truck Loading 10 250 250Storage 10 150 1251st Lab Space 10 100 100Stair & Elevator Core 10 100 100Corridor 10 100 100Offices 10 80+20 50Lunch Room 10 100 100 (Assumed Assembly)Auditorium (Fixed Seats) 10 60 60Auditorium (Movable Seats) 10 100 100Meeting Rooms 10 100 100Plaza 10 100 100Freezer and Cold Rooms 10 125 250File Rooms 10 250 150 (Assumed Max Use)Lobby 10 100 1002ndLab Space 10 100 100Stair & Elevator Core 10 100 100Corridor 10 80 80Offices 10 80+20 50Conference Rooms 10 100 100File and Document Rooms 10 250 150 (Assumed Max Use)Chemical Storage 10 125 125 (Stor. Warehouse Lt.)Conference Center RoofGreen Roof 65 30 (Not Specified)Auditorium Roof 20 30 203rdLab Space 10 100 100Stair & Elevator Core 10 100 100Corridor 10 80 80Offices 10 80+20 50Terrace 10 100 100Server Room 10 80+20 150 (Assumed Office)File Room 10 250 150 (Assumed Max Use)4thStair & Elevator Core 10 100 100Corridor 10 80 80Offices 10 80+20 50Conference Rooms 10 100 100File Room 10 250 150 (Assumed Max Use)Lobby 10 100 100PenthouseRoof 20 30 20Mechanical Penthouse 150 150 (Not Specified) (Assumed DL)Penthouse RoofRoof 20 30 20


6 | P a g e

Wind Loads

Wind loads used are those calculated in Technical Report 1. For the wind analysis loading was calculated in accordance with ASCE 7-05, Chapter 6 and Appendix C6. The building was separated into two portions along the expansion joint between the office/lab portion and the conference center for easier and more accurate calculation. The office/lab building was analyzed using North-South, and East-West wind directions. The natural frequency of this portion is less than 1 Hertz which puts it in the category of a flexible building. Located in Rockville, MD it is given a basic wind speed of 90 mph, and since it is in an urban setting it is classified as Exposure category B. The building is rectangular with a small leg leading to the conference center coming off one end. For easier computation the building has been considered a simple rectangular building with a length of 244’-8” East and West, and 179’-7½” North and South at a height of 91’-2”. At the Third floor level the North-South length was taken as 155’ and at the penthouse level 86’ North-South and 184’ in the East-West direction for setbacks. Figures W-1 and W-2 show wind loads on the office building in the N-S, and E-W direction respectively. Wind loads are simplified by using only Case 1 of the 4. Pressures on the sidewalls are neglected and simple Windward and Leeward pressures are all that are being considered. N-S Wind Loading

Figure W-1

E-W Wind Loading

Figure W-2

N-S Windward N-S Leeward TotalP.H. Roof 91.2 10.85 6.49 17.34 32.1 32.1 641.7

P.H. 71.2 10.39 6.49 16.88 70.2 102.3 983.24th 57.2 9.58 6.49 16.07 55.1 157.4 770.83rd 43.2 8.89 6.49 15.38 52.7 210.1 737.72nd 29.2 7.85 6.49 14.34 49.1 259.2 687.91st 15.2 6.81 6.49 13.30 47.5 306.7 722.4

Ground 0 6.00 6.49 12.50 23.2 330.0 0.0Base Shear= 330.0 Moverturn= 4543.6

Floor hxPressure (psf) Force

(kips)Shear (kips)

Moment (ft-k)

E-W Windward E-W Leeward TotalP.H. Roof 91.2 11.06 5.30 16.36 14.1 14.1 281.4

P.H. 71.2 10.59 5.30 15.89 41.7 55.7 583.24th 57.2 9.77 5.30 15.07 32.5 88.3 455.53rd 43.2 9.06 5.30 14.36 33.5 121.8 469.22nd 29.2 8.00 5.30 13.30 33.4 155.1 467.11st 15.2 6.94 5.30 12.24 32.0 187.2 486.8

Ground 0 6.12 5.30 11.42 15.6 202.7 0.0Base Shear= 202.7 Moverturn= 2743.1

Moment (ft-k)

Shear (kips)

Force (kips)Floor hx

Pressure (psf)


7 | P a g e

Seismic Loads

Seismic loads used are also those calculated in Technical Report 1. Seismic loading for this exercise was done in accordance to ASCE 7-05 chapters 11, 12, 22 and Appendix C12. The building was divided up in the same manner as for wind loading, taking the office building as a separate entity from the conference center. Seismic forces are only being analyzed in the East-West direction since they will lead to the same story forces regardless of orientation. Figure S-1 shows the loading values for the office building. Office/Lab Loading

Figure S-1 *Design wind and seismic loads were unobtainable from structural engineer.

For this report seismic loading is considered to control because the base shear value of 644 kips is greater than 1.6 times either of the base shears for wind (528 kips and 324.3 kips). Therefore force values from the seismic table S-1 are used.

PH Roof 20 91.2 1472.3 0.121 78.0 78.0 1560.7PH 14 71.2 6167.8 0.377 242.9 320.9 3400.54th 14 57.2 4264.7 0.201 129.1 450.1 1808.03rd 14 43.2 4491.6 0.151 97.1 547.2 1359.62nd 14 29.2 4773.7 0.100 64.5 611.7 903.11st 15.2 15.2 5229.8 0.050 32.3 644.0 490.7

Total W= 26399.9 Base Shear= 644.0 Moverturn= 9522.8

Moment (ft-k)

Story Shear (kips)

Weight (kips)Floor

Height (ft) hx (ft) Cvx Fx


8 | P a g e

Lateral Frame Analysis

For the USP lateral analysis each assumed lateral frame was modeled using SAP. Each line of columns is considered to be lateral resisting as well as the columns around openings are stairwells where they fall within the column line. Figures P-1 to P-6 show the frames modeled with highlighting lines. Frames were modeled as multistory frames with rigid diaphragm constraints within each floor. Where concrete slabs are the “beam” section of the frame the column strip (CS) width is used and depth is the existing 8” to represent essentially wide shallow beams. Spans with drops are broken into sections so that drops may be modeled as slightly deeper members than the regular 8” slab. In all interior strips the CS width is taken as 11’ (2 x ¼ x 22’), and the exterior strips using 5’-6” (¼ x 22’). To simplify the problem this is used in all spans regardless of bay sizes (20’, 21’, and 25’). For modeling rigid end offsets of 4” are used in the columns where there is 8” slab and half the drop thickness where they exist. All drop panels are modeled as 3-½” and the 5-½” drops are ignored. The various frames are modeled side by side and constrained to obtain the drift at each story as well.

Figure P-1


9 | P a g e

Figure P-2

Figure P-3


10 | P a g e

Figure P-4

Figure P-5


11 | P a g e

Figure P-6


12 | P a g e

Lateral Distribution The load path for the building is a logical moment frame setup. Most columns are continuous the only large changes are size changes from top to bottom. For the manual method of analysis each set of moment frames was looked at as a multi story frame. Stiffnesses were calculated for each floor using Rayleigh’s Principle which states that the total floor stiffness of a moment frame is: k=� ��

��. Once

stiffness for each floor of each frame was calculated, total stiffness per floor was found. Then relative stiffness and the amount of shear taken by each frame from a 100 kip load on that floor were found. 100 kips were used because when returning shear values in each frame they actually represent percentages. Center of Mass (CM) and Center of Rigidity (CR) are also two important values. Center of Mass represents the equivalent point on which a floor loading can be condensed to a single point load. For the USP building it was found using a simple center of geometry calculation (�� ) and differences in floor thickness were ignored. Center of Rigidity was calculated by taking the distance of each frame from a zero point (Column intersection J-1) by the relative stiffness of the given frame then dividing the value by the total floor stiffness in the desired direction (x or y) x being East-West and y being North-South. Figures F-1 to F-6 show the hand shear calculation comparison to the SAP output. It can be seen that the SAP output for shears fall well within error for most values. The following sheets are the calculations used to find frame stiffnesses by hand.


13 | P a g e


14 | P a g e


15 | P a g e


16 | P a g e


17 | P a g e


18 | P a g e


19 | P a g e


20 | P a g e


21 | P a g e


22 | P a g e


23 | P a g e


24 | P a g e


25 | P a g e


26 | P a g e


27 | P a g e


28 | P a g e


29 | P a g e


30 | P a g e


31 | P a g e


32 | P a g e

Figure F-1 (Frame Stiffness in kips/inch)

Figure F-2

Figure F-3

Column Line Column Line1 2 3 4 Penthouse PH Roof 1 2 3 4 Penthouse PH Roof

1 2025 3023 2424 -- -- -- A 3417 5101 5101 -- -- --2 1044 1559 1559 1291 1291 184 B 1794 2678 2678 1385 1385 3893 1044 1559 1559 1291 1291 184 C 1794 2678 2678 2582 2582 --4 1044 1338 1338 1071 1071 194 D 1541 2300 2300 2204 2204 5625 1044 1338 1338 1071 1071 194 E 918 1370 1370 1354 1354 4546 875 1086 1086 819 819 108 F 1794 2678 2678 2582 2582 4007 875 1086 1086 819 819 97 G 2535 3139 3139 1669 1669 --8 538 803 803 535 535 -- Σ 13793 19944 19944 11776 11776 18059 369 551 551 374 374 --10 803 1198 1198 850 850 13011 950 1419 1419 1071 1071 --12 2013 3005 3005 567 567 --Σ 12624 17965 17366 9759 9759 1091

StoryStoryFrame Stiffnesses


1 16.04 16.83 13.96 -- -- -- A 24.77 25.58 25.58 -- -- --2 8.27 8.68 8.98 13.23 13.23 16.87 B 13.01 13.43 13.43 11.76 11.76 21.553 8.27 8.68 8.98 13.23 13.23 16.87 C 13.01 13.43 13.43 21.93 21.93 --4 8.27 7.45 7.70 10.97 10.97 17.78 D 11.17 11.53 11.53 18.72 18.72 31.145 8.27 7.45 7.70 10.97 10.97 17.78 E 6.66 6.87 6.87 11.50 11.50 25.156 6.93 6.05 6.25 8.39 8.39 9.90 F 13.01 13.43 13.43 21.93 21.93 22.167 6.93 6.05 6.25 8.39 8.39 8.89 G 18.38 15.74 15.74 14.17 14.17 --8 4.26 4.47 4.62 5.48 5.48 -- Σ 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.009 2.92 3.07 3.17 3.83 3.83 --10 6.36 6.67 6.90 8.71 8.71 11.9211 7.53 7.90 8.17 10.97 10.97 --12 15.95 16.73 17.30 5.81 5.81 --Σ 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

Story StoryRelative Frame Stiffnesses (%)


1 16.04 16.83 13.96 -- -- -- A 24.77 25.58 25.58 -- -- --2 8.27 8.68 8.98 13.23 13.23 16.87 B 13.01 13.43 13.43 11.76 11.76 21.553 8.27 8.68 8.98 13.23 13.23 16.87 C 13.01 13.43 13.43 21.93 21.93 --4 8.27 7.45 7.70 10.97 10.97 17.78 D 11.17 11.53 11.53 18.72 18.72 31.145 8.27 7.45 7.70 10.97 10.97 17.78 E 6.66 6.87 6.87 11.50 11.50 25.156 6.93 6.05 6.25 8.39 8.39 9.90 F 13.01 13.43 13.43 21.93 21.93 22.167 6.93 6.05 6.25 8.39 8.39 8.89 G 18.38 15.74 15.74 14.17 14.17 --8 4.26 4.47 4.62 5.48 5.48 -- Σ 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.009 2.92 3.07 3.17 3.83 3.83 --10 6.36 6.67 6.90 8.71 8.71 11.9211 7.53 7.90 8.17 10.97 10.97 --12 15.95 16.73 17.30 5.81 5.81 --Σ 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

Story StoryDirect Shear Forces (Based on 100 kip load)


33 | P a g e

Figure F-4 (Actual Story Shear Forces)

Figure F-5

Figure F-6

Actual LoadShear Forces

FloorPH Roof 78

Penthouse 320.94 450.13 547.22 611.71 644


1 103.30 102.93 76.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 A 159.54 156.45 139.96 0.00 0.00 0.002 53.26 53.08 49.12 59.54 42.45 13.15 B 83.76 82.14 73.48 52.94 37.74 16.813 53.26 53.08 49.12 59.54 42.45 13.15 C 83.76 82.14 73.48 98.69 70.36 0.004 53.26 45.56 42.16 49.40 35.22 13.87 D 71.95 70.54 63.10 84.24 60.06 24.295 53.26 45.56 42.16 49.40 35.22 13.87 E 42.86 42.02 37.59 51.75 36.90 19.626 44.64 36.98 34.22 37.77 26.93 7.72 F 83.76 82.14 73.48 98.69 70.36 17.297 44.64 36.98 34.22 37.77 26.93 6.93 G 118.36 96.28 86.12 63.79 45.48 0.008 27.45 27.34 25.30 24.68 17.59 0.00 Σ 644.00 611.70 547.20 450.10 320.90 78.009 18.82 18.76 17.36 17.25 12.30 0.0010 40.96 40.79 37.75 39.20 27.95 9.2911 48.46 48.32 44.71 49.40 35.22 0.0012 102.69 102.32 94.69 26.15 18.64 0.00Σ 644.00 611.70 547.20 450.10 320.90 78.00

Story StoryDirect Shear Forces (Actual Loading)


1 78.00 52.80 75.10 -- -- -- A 121.00 102.50 34.50 -- -- --2 64.00 67.40 42.50 53.50 36.00 8.00 B 94.50 100.40 94.00 63.20 44.50 10.303 64.00 67.40 42.50 53.50 36.00 8.00 C 95.30 90.50 106.10 108.30 100.00 --4 56.70 53.40 45.70 48.80 33.00 10.40 D 93.40 105.30 104.20 80.30 58.20 35.405 56.70 53.40 45.70 48.80 33.00 10.40 E 51.60 53.90 57.50 48.80 28.00 22.006 46.20 41.00 36.70 35.50 23.20 8.10 F 94.50 100.50 93.90 63.20 44.50 10.307 50.10 50.70 46.50 45.20 33.00 13.20 G 94.60 58.40 57.00 56.20 45.80 --8 31.00 36.00 33.50 27.80 18.40 -- Σ 644.90 611.50 547.20 420.00 321.00 78.009 19.40 20.00 20.60 10.10 7.50 --

10 45.90 54.60 50.50 46.40 30.90 11.4011 59.00 69.20 53.30 45.60 45.40 --12 73.00 45.90 54.40 34.80 24.40 --Σ 644.00 611.80 547.00 450.00 320.80 69.50

SAP Frame Shears (Actual Loading)Story Story


34 | P a g e

For torsional loading the Center of Mass and Center of Rigidity are calculated and compared. Figures F-6 to F-12 represent the results from manually calculating CM and CR. Though the torsional moments are solved it is assumed that a moment frame building with most columns acting in bending that the torsional effect is negligible.

Figure F-7 (CR in x direction) Figure F-8 (CR in y direction)

Figure F-9 Figure F-10

Figure F-11 Figure F-12

Ry (x)Frame\Floor 1 2 3 4 PH PH Roof

1 0 0 0 0 0 02 22968 34298 34298 28402 28402 40483 45936 68596 68596 56804 56804 80964 68904 88308 88308 70686 70686 128045 91872 117744 117744 94248 94248 170726 96250 119460 119460 90090 90090 118807 115500 143352 143352 108108 108108 128048 82852 123662 123662 82390 82390 09 64944 96976 96976 65824 65824 010 158994 237204 237204 168300 168300 2574011 209000 312180 312180 235620 235620 012 485133 724205 724205 136647 136647 0Σ 1442353 2065985 2065985 1137119 1137119 92444

Σ(Ry) 12624 17965 17366 9759 9759 1091Σ(Ry(x)/Σ(Ry) 114.25 115.00 118.97 116.52 116.52 84.73

Rx (y)Frame\Floor 1 2 3 4 PH PH Roof

A 615060 918180 918180 0 0 0B 278070 415090 415090 214675 214675 60295C 238602 356174 356174 343406 343406 0D 171051 255300 255300 244644 244644 62382E 83538 124670 124670 123214 123214 41314

Frame\Floor 123786 184782 184782 178158 178158 27600G 119145 147533 147533 78443 78443 0Σ 1629252 2401729 2401729 1182540 1182540 191591

Σ(Rx) 13793 19944 19944 11776 11776 1805Σ Rx(y)/Σ(Rx) 118.12 120.42 120.42 100.42 100.42 106.14

Floor x yPenthouse Roof 101.00 98.25

Penthouse 118.75 91.754th 119.25 90.753rd 114.00 103.752nd 114.00 103.751st 103.00 99.25

CM

Floor x yPenthouse Roof 84.73 106.14

Penthouse 116.52 100.424th 116.52 100.423rd 118.97 120.422nd 115.00 120.421st 114.25 118.12

CR

Floor x (+←) y (+↓)PH Roof 16.27 -7.89

Penthouse 2.23 -8.674 2.73 -9.673 -4.97 -16.672 -1.00 -16.671 -11.25 -18.87

Eccentricity (CM-CR) Torsional Moment+CCW +CCW

Floor x yPenthouse Roof 1268.805 -615.779

Penthouse 715.5965 -2782.044th 1228.758 -4352.243rd -2718.07 -9123.812nd -612.04 -10199.31st -7248.11 -12153.3


35 | P a g e

Drift

Figure F-13 (Drift values from SAP)

Figure F-14

Figures F-13 and 14 above show drift values taken from SAP. It shows that the drifts fall well within the L/400 limit set by the code.

X-direction Story drift (in) Total Drift (in) Height Story Drift Ratio L/#Story

PH Roof 0.551 0.832 20 0.02757 1328Penthouse 0.280 0.589 14 0.02001 1466

4 0.309 0.503 14 0.02209 13853 0.193 0.503 14 0.01380 10512 0.309 0.351 14 0.02209 10251 0.042 0.149 16 0.00261 1289

Y-direction Story drift (in) Total Drift (in) Height Story Drift Ratio L/#Story

PH Roof 0.934 1.410 20 0.04672 783Penthouse 0.476 1.071 14 0.03399 807

4 0.595 0.871 14 0.04252 7993 0.275 0.620 14 0.01967 8522 0.344 0.386 14 0.02459 9321 0.042 0.158 16 0.00261 1217


36 | P a g e

Member Check

Check one is Column G-2 taken at Level 1.

Figure 1 (Member forces (X) fall well within capacity)


37 | P a g e

Conclusions

There are many things to be discovered by this lateral analysis. Using the computer model backed by hand calculations gives some very interesting results. The SAP model’s shear distributions very closely match those by the hand approximation. They fall well within a 5% error which is very promising. The drift values from SAP are approximately half the allowable limit. This indicates a very good building performance laterally. USP appears to be a very robust building. It was assumed that almost all columns participate and this seems to be a very fair assumption. Torsion however was one mode that was ignored. It was neglected based on the assumption that moment frame buildings where most of the columns participate have negligible torsional effects. This is due to the wide distribution of members rather than a concentrated core that attracts all the lateral loads. Also a member check was taken on a typical column to the far extent of the short direction of the building. Its forces fell well below capacity on the 1st Floor level. It seems to be extremely oversized. Overall it is concluded that USP performs very well. It has little deflection and does not exhibit any particularly soft stories. Also forces have numerous solid paths down the building due to the long continuous columns up the building.


38 | P a g e

Appendix A: Wind Loading Appendix A breaks down wind loading variables used in the various calculations for both portions of the USP Headquarters building. Figures A-1 through A-6 deal with the office/lab portion of the building. This section has been classified as flexible structure requiring different Gust Effect Factor calculations.

Figure A-1 Figure A-2


Basic Wind Speed (V) 90Directionality Factor (Kd) 0.85

Occupancy Category IIImportance Factor 1.00Exposure Category B

Topographic Factor (Kzt) 1.00Natural Frequency (n1) 0.75

Velocity Pressure Coefficientsα 7 zg 1200â 1/7

b hat 0.84alpha bar 1/4

b bar 0.45c 0.3l 320

epsilon bar 1/3zmin 30

Terrain Exposure Constants

Factor N-S E-Wgq 3.40 3.40gv 3.40 3.40gr 4.12 4.12h 73.60 73.60z 44.16 44.16Iz 0.29 0.29Lz 352.63 352.63

B 244.66 179.20

L 179.20 244.66Q 0.79 0.81Vz 63.89 63.89N1 4.14 4.14Rn 0.06 0.06Rh 0.22 0.22η 3.97 3.97

RB 0.07 0.10η 13.21 9.68RL 0.03 0.02

η 32.40 44.23

R 0.16 0.18Gf 0.82 0.83

Gust Effect Factor (Gf)

N-S E-WWindward Leeward Side Walls Windward Leeward Side Walls

Cp 0.8 -0.5 -0.7 0.8 -0.4 -0.7


39 | P a g e

Figure A-5

Figure A-6 Conference center wind data is presented here in Figures A-7 to A-12. The conference center is classified as a rigid structure, simplifying the calculations for the loading it sees.


Figure A-9

N-S Windward N-S Leeward Total

P.H. Roof 20 91.2 10.85 6.49 17.34 32.1 32.1 641.7

P.H. 14 71.2 10.39 6.49 16.88 70.2 102.3 983.24th 14 57.2 9.58 6.49 16.07 55.1 157.4 770.83rd 14 43.2 8.89 6.49 15.38 52.7 210.1 737.72nd 14 29.2 7.85 6.49 14.34 49.1 259.2 687.9

1st 15.2 15.2 6.81 6.49 13.30 47.5 306.7 722.4

Ground 0 0 6.00 6.49 12.50 23.2 330.0 0.0

Base Shear= 330.0 Moverturn= 4543.6

Height (ft)Floor hx

Pressure (psf) Force (kips)

Shear (kips)

Moment (ft-k)

E-W Windward E-W Leeward TotalP.H. Roof 20 91.2 11.06 5.30 16.36 14.1 14.1 281.4

P.H. 14 71.2 10.59 5.30 15.89 41.7 55.7 583.24th 14 57.2 9.77 5.30 15.07 32.5 88.3 455.53rd 14 43.2 9.06 5.30 14.36 33.5 121.8 469.2

2nd 14 29.2 8.00 5.30 13.30 33.4 155.1 467.1

1st 15.2 15.2 6.94 5.30 12.24 32.0 187.2 486.8

Ground 0 0 6.12 5.30 11.42 15.6 202.7 0.0


Height (ft)Floor hx

Pressure (psf) Moment (ft-k)

Shear (kips)

Force (kips)

Basic Wind Speed (V) 90Directionality Factor (Kd) 0.85

Occupancy Category IIImportance Factor 1.00Exposure Category B

Topographic Factor (Kzt) 1.00Natural Frequency (n1) 1.07

Velocity Pressure Coefficients

Factor N-S E-Wgq 3.40 3.40gv 3.40 3.40h 41.00 41.00z 24.60 24.60Iz 0.32 0.32Lz 290.15 290.15B 160.00 220.00L 220.00 160.00G 0.82 0.79

Gust Effect Factor (G)

N-S E-WWindward Leeward Side Walls Windward Leeward Side Walls

Cp 0.8 -0.5 -0.7 0.8 -0.5 -0.7


40 | P a g e

Figure A-10

Figure A-11

Figure A-12 Figures A-13 through A-20 represent the wind loading on the building visually showing pressure diagrams and also diagrams showing the forces at each story. Wind Loading Diagrams

Figure A-13 (East-West Conference Center pressure diagram) (Facing North)

Floor Kz qz qh Kh

Grade 0.57 10.05 13.40 0.76

1st Floor 0.57 10.05 13.40Mezzanine 0.64 11.28 13.40Green Roof 0.7 12.34 13.40Aud Roof 0.78 13.75 13.40

E-W Windward E-W Leeward Total

Auditorium Roof 44 44 8.98 5.31 14.29 2.7 2.7 11.0

Green Roof 40 40 8.06 5.31 13.37 96.2 98.9 2597.01st 13 13 6.56 5.31 11.87 52.2 151.2 679.0

Ground 0 0 6.56 5.31 11.87 17.0 168.1 0.0Base Shear= 168.1 Moverturn= 3286.9

Floor hx


Shear (kips)

Moment (ft-k)

Height (ft)

N-S Windward N-S Leeward TotalAuditorium Roof 44 44 8.72 5.47 14.19 2.7 2.7 10.9

Green Roof 40 40 7.83 5.47 13.30 84.9 87.6 2292.51st 13 13 6.38 5.47 11.85 37.9 125.6 493.0

Ground 0 0 6.38 5.47 11.85 12.3 137.9 0.0


FloorHeight

(ft) hx


Shear (kips)

Moment (ft-k)


41 | P a g e

Figure A-14 (East-West Conference Center story shear diagram)

Figure A-15 (North-South Conference Center pressure diagram) (Facing East)

Figure A-16 (North-South Conference Center story shear diagram)

Figure A-17 (East-West Office/ Lab pressure diagram) (Facing South)


42 | P a g e

Figure A-18 (East-West Office/ Lab story shear diagram)

Figure A-19 (North-South Office/ Lab pressure diagram) (Facing East)

Figure A-20 (North-South Office/ Lab story shear diagram)


43 | P a g e

Appendix B: Seismic Loading

Appendix B shows the variables used to obtain seismic loads. Figure B-1 gives design values based on geotechnical report and given values by original design engineer. Figures B-2 through B-5 present values based on ASCE 7 method using chapters 11, 12, and 22. Figures B-3 and 4 show the weight of the office building. Figures B-5 to 7 provide data for the conference center. Figures B-8 and 9 are story shear diagrams for representative seismic data. Office/Lab seismic data

Figure B-1 Figure B-2

Site Class C

SS 0.18

S1 0.063

Fa 1.2

Fv 1.7

Per Geotech Report

Site Class C SD1 0.068

SS 0.15 Ct 0.016

S1 0.06 x 0.9

Fa 1.2 Hn 91.2

Fv 1.7 Ta 0.929

SDC B Cu 1.7

SMS 0.18 Cu*Ta 1.58

SM1 0.102 TL 8

SDS 0.12 R 3

Per ASCE 7


44 | P a g e

Figure B-3

Floor Load Type Area (sf)

PH Roof 11564

SDL 10.0 psf

Slab 76.7 psf

Decking 5.0 psf

Roofing 20.0 psf

Steel 67.4 kips

Columns 113.6 kips

DL 1472.3 kips

PH 15652 16348.0SDL 10.0 psfSlab 96.7 psf

Columns 325.7 kipsMech. 1894.4 kipsDrops 105.3 kips

Girders 105.6 kips

Beams 5.0 psfRoofing 20.0 psf

DL 6167.8 kips4th 32000

SDL 10.0 psfSlab 96.7 psf

Columns 424.3 kipsDrops 105.3 kips

Girders 103.4 kipsBeams 5.0 psfBridge 58.5 kips

DL 4264.7 kips3rd 33835


Columns 524.6 kipsDrops 27.0 kipsBeams 5.0 psfGirders 103.4 kipsBridge 58.5 kips

DL 4491.6 kips2nd 33835


Columns 574.7 kipsDrops 27.0 kipsBeams 5.0 psfGirders 181.7 kips

Hung Cols 8.1 kipsHung Slab 145.4 kips

Bridge 58.5 kipsDL 4773.7 kips

1st 39053SDL 10.0 psf

8" Slab 96.7 psf10" Slab 159.5 kips16" Slab 505.4 kips

Drops 72.9 kipsColumns 706.6 kips

DL 5229.8 kipsTotal Weight= 26399.9 kips

Building Weight


45 | P a g e

Figure B-4 Conference center seismic data

Figure B-5 Figure B-6

Figure B-7

PH Roof 20 91.2 1472.3 0.121 78.0 78.0 1560.7

PH 14 71.2 6167.8 0.377 242.9 320.9 3400.5

4th 14 57.2 4264.7 0.201 129.1 450.1 1808.0

3rd 14 43.2 4491.6 0.151 97.1 547.2 1359.6

2nd 14 29.2 4773.7 0.100 64.5 611.7 903.1

1st 15.2 15.2 5229.8 0.050 32.3 644.0 490.7

Total W= 26399.9 Base Shear= 644.0 Moverturn= 9522.8

Moment (ft-k)

Story Shear (kips)

Weight (kips)Floor

Height (ft) hx (ft) Cvx Fx

Ct 0.028

x 0.8Ta 1.036

R 3.5Cs 0.017

k 1.2

Conference Center

Floor Area (sf)

4072Steel 26.7 kips

Decking 5 psfconcrete 33.5 psf

SDL 20 psfDL 264.9 kips

8470Steel 30 psf

Decking 5 psfconcrete 33.5 psf

SDL 65 psfDL 1130.751st 21760

Beams 50 psfconcrete 120.8 psf

SDL 10 psfDL 3934.21

5329.8

Building weight

Total Weight

Auditorium Roof

Green Roof

Auditorium Roof 4 44 264.9 0.121 11.1 11.1 44.3Green Roof 27 40 1130.7 0.462 42.2 53.3 1438.2

1st 13 13 3934.2 0.417 38.1 91.4 1187.8Total W= 5329.8 Base Shear= 91.4 Moverturn= 2670.3

Story Shear (kips)

Moment (ft-k)Floor

Height (ft) hx (ft)

Weight (kips) Cvx Fx


46 | P a g e

Figure B-8 (East-West Office/Lab story shear diagram) (Facing South)

Figure B-9 (East-West Conference Center story shear diagram) (Facing North)

u.s. pharmacopeia headquarters consolidation

Documents