Tips For Using Diaphragms With Analysis Software
Tips For Using Diaphragms With Analysis Software
cenews.com /article/9176/tips_for_using_diaphragms_with_analysis_software_
The previous two articles in this series began the discussion of the use of various diaphragms in analysis
software, including: 1) No diaphragm/flexible diaphragm; 2) Rigid diaphragm; 3) Semi-rigid diaphragm;
and, 4) Pseudo-flexible diaphragm with simplified methods. The discussion on rigid diaphragms continues
with this article, which will focus on the distribution of lateral force vertically from level to level as you move
down the building.
As you work your way down a structure modeled with rigid diaphragms, loads are redistributed at each
level based upon the relative stiffnesses of the members (or "frame/lateral" members) connected to the
diaphragm at each level. This can lead to some interesting results when changes in stiffness occur at
various levels. The idea is probably best presented using an example. In the building shown (Figures 1 and
2) as an example, the lateral system consists of two moment frames at the top level, and then at the lowest
level an additional bay of bracing has been introduced.
The braced frame at the lowest level introduces additional stiffness at that level and the braced frame has
more stiffness compared to the moment frames. Because of this, the lateral force at the lowest level of the
building, which was coming down from the levels above through the moment frames, is redistributed
through the diaphragm and most of this force will be transferred into the braced frame. A convenient way to
assess and understand how the load is going into each frame can be shown by looking at the shears in
each of the frame lines. Many programs provide a report that allows for this to be seen easily. In some
cases, the results will show the change in frame story shears that are negative at a level, such as in the
example, because load from above is being redistributed via the rigid diaphragm to other frames with
higher stiffness somewhere else in the structure. (Figure 3)
Figure 3: Change in frame shears.
(Note the reversal at second floor for two exterior moment frames.)
The last article addressed the need for being careful about how slab edges and openings are modeled
because this impacts which nodes are connected to the diaphragm or not. If we take the above example,
but introduce a slab opening at the moment frame on the left, you will notice a different result in how the
lateral load is distributed at the second level (Figures 4 and 5). Because the slab edge jogs inside the
building, the exterior moment frame is not connected to the diaphragm at the second level. Hence, the
shear from the roof continues down the frame and is not redistributed at the second floor diaphragm. Also
of note is that the additional shear distributed at the second level does not affect the exterior moment
frame because no nodes are connected to the diaphragm. The results would be different if even one of the
nodes in that frame was connected to the diaphragm.
Figure 4: Plan view, second floor. When the slab edge is modeled as shown, the moment frame will
not be connected to the diaphragm.
Figure 5: Change in frame shears with slab edge jogging inside building and exterior moment frame
disconnected from the diaphragm. (Note there is no change in shear at the second level.)
For the programs that separate "gravity" members from "lateral" members (including the RAM Structural
System used for this example), the "gravity" beams do NOT act as "drag" struts/beams to collect lateral
forces at the second floor and drag them into the moment frame that is not connected to the diaphragm.
However, additional members could be modeled as "lateral" members, with their ends pinned to allow for
them to act as drag struts, providing a link between the rigid diaphragm and the disconnected moment
frame. So, not only is it very important to understand the importance of how diaphragms behave, but also
to understand how the modeling of lateral versus gravity members impacts the analysis.
A convenient way to assess and understand how the load is going into each frame can be shown by
looking at the shears in each of the frame lines. Many programs provide a report that allows for this to be
seen easily.
Figure 6: When a slab edge and slab opening are modeled as shown above, the moment frame
remains connected to the diaphragm.
Now, let's take the same example and change how we model the opening by leaving the slab edge at the
perimeter and then creating a slab opening inside such that a "thin sliver" of slab along the frame line
remains (Figure 6). The result of modeling the system this way is the same as if the slab opening wasn't
there. The "thin sliver" of slab is still part of the rigid diaphragm and therefore the lateral force in this frame
from the upper level is redistributed to the braced frame at the lowest level. On one hand, that might not
seem valid because there really is no slab present. On the other hand, if the frame is connected to other
beams and columns that are connected to the diaphragm, those members could act as drags as the
diaphragm deflects, even though they were not modeled as "lateral" members.
Having a thorough understanding of how the impact of various modeling methods and techniques impacts
the results when using software is extremely important. There are multiple helpful reports available in each
software program that allow engineers to understand how lateral forces are distributed if rigid diaphragms
are used. These include frame story shears (some programs allow you to number your frames to make it
easier to view reports) and diaphragm loads at each level. You should always review the animated
deflected shapes to look for unusual behavior.
Having a thorough understanding of how the impact of various modeling methods and techniques impacts
the results when using software is extremely important.
The next article will discuss the use of semi-rigid diaphragms using the same example to further highlight
different results that can occur.