CODE PROVISIONS FOR ETABS INPUTS

AND OUTPUTS
Dec. 18, 2017 / UBC 1997 & ASCE 7 – 16
Table of Contents
• Mass Source • Building Separation
• P – Delta Analysis • Orthogonal Effects
• Property / Stiffness Modifiers • Rigid / Semi-Rigid Diaphragm
• Modal Cases
• Accidental Torsion
• Seismic Base Shear / Scaling of
Response Spectrum
• Story Drifts

© Arcadis 2015
Mass Source
UBC 1997 / ASCE 7 – 16

07 May 2023
3
Mass Source
UBC 1997 Section 1630.1.1
Seismic dead load, W, is the total dead load and applicable portions of other loads listed below:

1. In storage and warehouse occupancies, a minimum of 25 percent of the floor live load shall be
applicable.

2. Where a partition load is used in the floor design, a load of not less than 10 psf (0.48 kN/m2) shall be
included.

3. Design snow loads of 30 psf (1.44 kN/m2) or less need not be included. Where design snow loads
exceed 30 psf (1.44 kN/m2), the design snow load shall be included, but may be reduced up to 75
percent where consideration of siting, configuration and load duration warrant when approved by the
building official.

4. Total weight of permanent equipment shall be included.

© Arcadis 2015
Mass Source
ASCE 7 – 16 Section 12.7.2

1. In areas used for storage, a minimum of 25 percent of the floor live load shall be included.

Exceptions:
a) Where the inclusion of storage loads adds no more than 5% to the effective seismic weight at that level, it need
not be included in the effective seismic weight.
b) Floor live load in public garages and open parking structures need not be included.

5. Weight of landscaping and other materials at roof gardens and similar areas.

Standard Practice: Consider 25% of Live Load as Mass Source

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 5
Mass Source
ETABS Input

© Arcadis 2015
P – Delta Effects
ACI 318 - 2014 / UBC 1997 / ASCE 7 – 16

07 May 2023
7
P – Delta Effects
UBC 1997 Section 2211.3 (Glossary of Seismic Provision for Structural Steel Buildings):

Secondary effect of column axial loads and lateral deflection on the shears and moments in members.

ACI 318 – 2014:

Section 6.6 First Order Analysis

Section 6.7 Elastic Second Order Analysis

Section 6.8 Inelastic Second Order Analysis

© Arcadis 2015
P – Delta Effects
First Order Analysis ACI 318 – 2014 Section 6.2:

ACI 318 – 2014 Section 6.6.1.1:

Slenderness Effects shall be considered in
accordance with 6.6.4, unless they are allowed to
be neglected by 6.2.5.

Note:

Section 6.6.4 Slenderness Effects (Moment

Magnification Approach)

UBC 1997 Section 1630.1.3: PΔ need not be considered when the ratio of secondary moment to primary moment does not exceed 0.10

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 9

P – Delta Effects
First Order Analysis

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 10

P – Delta Effects
Elastic Second Order Analysis

ACI 314 – 2014 Section 6.7.1.1:

An elastic second-order analysis shall consider the influence of axial loads, presence of cracked regions
along the length of the member and effects of load durations. These considerations are satisfied using the
cross-sectional properties defined in 6.7.2.

ACI 314 – 2014 Section 6.7.2.1.1:

It shall be permitted to use section properties calculated in accordance with 6.6.3.1

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 11

P – Delta Effects
Inelastic Second Order Analysis (Nonlinear Analysis)

ACI 314 – 2014 Section 6.8.1.1:

An inelastic second-order analysis shall consider material nonlinearity, member curvature and lateral drift,
duration of loads, shrinkage and creep, and interaction with the supporting foundation.

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 12

P-Delta Effects
ETABS P-Delta Option
Non Iterative – Based on Mass

• Approximated method based on simplifies stick model (rigid

diaphragm as each level)

• Faster computation

• Local Buckling is not captured effectively

Iterative – Based on Loads

• Considers P-Delta on an element-by-element basis

• Local buckling is captured more effectively

Use load factors that are used in load combination with lateral loads.
© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 13
Property / Stiffness Modifiers
UBC 1997 / ASCE 7 – 16 / ACI 318 – 2014

07 May 2023
14
Property / Stiffness Modifiers
UBC 1997 Section 1630.1.2 Modeling Requirements

The mathematical model of the physical structure shall include all elements of the lateral-force-resisting
system. The model shall also include the stiffness and strength of elements, which are significant to the
distribution of forces, and shall represent the spatial distribution of the mass and stiffness of the structure.
In addition, the model shall comply with the following:

1. Stiffness properties of reinforced concrete and masonry elements shall consider the effects of
cracked sections.

2. For steel moment frame systems, the contribution of panel zone deformations to overall story drift shall
be included.

(Similar to ASCE 7 – 16 Section 12.7.3)

Normally, Table 6.6.3.1.1(a) of ACI 318 – 2014 is used.

© Arcadis 2015
Property / Stiffness Modifiers
Shearwalls and Corewalls

ACI 318 – 2014 Section R6.6.3.1.1:

If the factored moments and shear from analysis based on the moment of inertia of a wall, taken equal to
0.7Ig, indicate that wall will crack in flexure, based on the modulus of rupture, the analysis should be
repeated with I = 0.35Ig in those stories where cracking is predicted using factored loads.

© Arcadis 2015
Property / Stiffness Modifiers
ETABS Input
Elements ACI ETABS
Beams 0.35Ig I22 = I33 = 0.35
Columns 0.70Ig I22 = I33 = 0.70
Walls – Uncracked 0.70Ig Shell – f11, f22 = 0.70
Walls – Cracked 0.35Ig Shell – f11, f22 = 0.35
Flat Plates & Flat Slabs 0.25Ig Membrane – f11, f22, f12 = 0.25
Shell – f11, f22, f12, m11, m22, m12 = 0.25
(for both cases fxx is not important if rigid
diaphragm is assigned)

Walls are generally not designed for out-of-plane bending to avoid excessive longitudinal reinforcement. In
this case, use a small modifier say 0.1 for m11, m22 and m12 so numerical instabilities could be avoided.
However, use m11, m22, m12 = 0.70 (or 0.35) when considering the out-of-plane bending in wall.
© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 17
Property / Stiffness Modifiers
Beam / Column Slab / Wall

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 18

Modal Cases
CSI Reference Manual

07 May 2023
19
Modal Cases
Eigen Vectors Vs Ritz Vectors

An overview of Ritz and Eigen vectors, taken from the CSI Analysis Reference Manual is given as
follows:

• Eigenvector analysis determines the undamped free-vibration mode shapes and frequencies of the
system. These natural modes provide an excellent insight into the behavior of the structure.

• Ritz-vector analysis seeks to find modes that are excited by a particular loading. Ritz vectors can
provide a better basis than do Eigenvectors when used for response-spectrum or time-history analyses
that are based on modal superposition.

https://wiki.csiamerica.com/display/kb/Ritz+vs.+Eigen+vectors
© Arcadis 2015
Modal Cases
Why are Ritz vectors recommended for dynamic analysis?

For dynamic analysis, Ritz vectors are recommended over Eigen vectors because, for the same number
of modes, Ritz vectors provide a better participation factor, which enables the analysis to run faster with
the same level of accuracy. When analysis involves ground motion in the horizontal plane, the benefit is
not as pronounced. However, for vertical acceleration, localized machine vibration, and the nonlinear FNA
method, Ritz vectors are much more well-suited for analysis.

https://wiki.csiamerica.com/display/etabs/Ritz+vs.+Eigen+vectors
© Arcadis 2015
Modal Cases
Number of Modes

UBC 1997 Section 1631.5.2:

The requirement of Section 1631.4.1 (Response Spectrum Analysis) that all significant modes be included
may be satisfied by demonstrating that for the modes considered, at least 90 percent of the participating
mass of the structure is included in the calculation of response for each principal horizontal direction.

ASCE 7 – 16 Section 12.7.3:

…When modal response spectrum or response history analysis is performed, a minimum of three dynamic
degrees of freedom consisting of translation in two orthogonal plan directions and torsional rotation
about the vertical axis at each level of the structure shall be used.

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 22

Modal Cases
ETABS Input

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 23

Modal Cases

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 24

Accidental Torsion
UBC 1997 / ASCE 7 – 16

07 May 2023
25
Inherent Torsion
UBC 1997 Clause 1630.6:

• If diaphragm is not flexible, then the lateral

forces (seismic) are applied at an eccentricity of
0.05 times the length of the building
perpendicular to the direction of loads

• Diaphragms shall be considered flexible if the

maximum lateral deformation of the diaphragm
is more than two times the average story drift of
the associated story.

(ASCE 7 – 16 Section 12.8.4.2)

Flexible diaphragms: Untopped steel decking, wood structural panels

© Arcadis 2015
Torsional Irregularity
UBC 1997 (Table 16 – M) ASCE 7 – 10 (Table 12.3.1)
Torsional irregularity shall be considered to exist Torsional irregularity is defined to exist where the
when the maximum story drift, computed including maximum story drift, computed including accidental
accidental torsion, at one end of the structure torsion with Ax = 1.0, at one end of the structure
transverse to an axis is more than 1.2 times the transverse to an axis is more than 1.2 times the
average of the story drifts of the two ends of the average of the story drifts at the two ends of the
structure. structure.

Where torsional irregularity exists, the effects shall be accounted for by increasing the accidental torsion at
each level by an amplification factor, Ax.
© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 27
Accidental Torsion
Horizontal Torsional Moment

UBC 1997 Clause 1630.6:

=
1.2

Where:

= the maximum displacement at Level x.

= the average of the displacements at the

extreme points of the structure at Level x.

The value of Ax need not exceed 3.0.

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 28
Accidental Torsion
Example

Five-story Reinforced Concrete Shear Wall Building

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 29
Accidental Torsion
Example

Storey Drift,
∆= −

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 30

Accidental Torsion
Example

Amplification factor, Ax to
be multiplied to initial 5%
eccentricity

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 31

Accidental Torsion
Notes

• When determining torsional amplification, it is not necessary to iterate by analyzing the system with the
amplified accidental torsion, determining a new amplification factor, analyzing again, and so on.
Amplification factors are determined by a single analysis using the 5 percent accidental eccentricity.

• When assessing torsional regularity or torsional amplification, it is not necessary to apply the accidental
torsion simultaneously in the two orthogonal directions.

• If the computed amplification factors are less than 1.0, the minimum factor of 1.0 will be applied.

• Consider both orthogonal direction when performing the torsional irregularity check.

• Currently, ETABS can output Storey Max/Average Displacements and Drifts.

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 32

Accidental Torsion
ETABS Input

Static Case
© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 33
Accidental Torsion
ETABS Input

Response Spectrum Case

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 34
Seismic Base Shear
UBC 1997

07 May 2023
35
Seismic Base Shear

Seismic Zone Factor Z & Soil Profile Types

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 36
Seismic Base
Shear

Importance Factor
© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 37
Seismic Base Shear

Seismic Response Coefficient, R

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 38
Seismic Base Shear

Seismic Coefficient, Ca & Cv

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 39
Seismic Base Shear

Seismic Source Type

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 40
Seismic Base Shear

Near-Source Factor, Ca & Cv

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 41
Seismic Base Shear
UBC 1997 Section 1630.2.1
The total design base shear in a given direction shall be determined from the following formula:

= ( − )

The total design base shear need not exceed the following:
.
= ( − )

The total design base shear shall not be less than the following:
= . ( − )

In addition, for Seismic Zone 4, the total base shear shall also not be less than the following:
.
= ( − )

© Arcadis 2015
Seismic Base Shear
UBC 1997 Section 1630.2.2 Structure Period

Method A: For all buildings, the value T may be approximated from the following formula:

= ℎ /

WHERE:

• Ct = 0.035 (0.0853) for steel moment-resisting frames.

• Ct = 0.030 (0.0731) for reinforced concrete moment-resisting frames and eccentrically braced frames.

• Ct = 0.020 (0.0488) for all other buildings.

Similar to ASCE 7 – 16 Section 12.8.2.1 but diff Ct values

© Arcadis 2015
Seismic Base Shear
UBC 1997 Section 1630.2.2 Structure Period

Method B:

The fundamental period T may be calculated using the structural properties and deformational
characteristics of the resisting elements in a properly substantiated analysis. The analysis shall be in
accordance with the requirements of Section 1630.1.2. The value of T from Method B shall not exceed
a value 30 percent greater than the value of T obtained from Method A in Seismic Zone 4, and 40
percent in Seismic Zones 1, 2 and 3.

Rule of Thumb on Fundamental Period T: N/10

© Arcadis 2015
Seismic Base Shear
Example
Seismic Parameters Base Shear Calculation
• Seismic Zone = 2 = ℎ / = 0.0488 × 31.5 / = 0.649

• Importance Factor, I = 1 1.4 = 1.4 × 0.649 = 0.908 < 1.47

= 0.908
• Seismic Coefficient, Ca = 0.24
3.2 × 1
• Seismic Coefficient, Cv = 0.32 = = = 0.0783
4.5 × 0.908
2.5 2.5 × 0.24
• Seismic Response Coefficient, R = 4.5 (Bearing = = = 0.1333
Wall System) 4.5
= 0.11 = 0.11 × 0.24 × 1 = 0.0264
• Fundamental Period, T = 1.47s

• Building Height, h = 31.5m

Therefore, V = 0.0783W
© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 45
Seismic Base Shear
UBC 1997 Section 1631.5.4 Reduction of Elastic Response Parameters for
Design
Structure Ground Motion Scale Base Shear to
Regular Code-based 90%
Regular Site-specific 80%
Irregular Either Code-based or Site 100%
specific

UBC Section 1629.5.2 Regular Structures – No plan or vertical irregularities

UBC Section 1629.5.3 Irregular Structures – With plan or vertical irregularities

Check with ASCE 7 – 10 Section 12.9.4.1 vs ASCE 7 – 16 Section 12.9.1.4

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 46
Seismic Base Shear
Plan Irregularities

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 47

Seismic Base Shear
Vertical Irregularities

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 48

Seismic Base
Shear
ETABS Input

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 49

Story Drift
UBC 1997

07 May 2023
50
Story Drift
Maximum Inelastic Response Displacement, ΔM

UBC 1997 Section 1630.9.2:

The Maximum Inelastic Response Displacement, ΔM, shall be computed as follows:

Δ = 0.7 Δ

Where ΔS is Design Level Response Displacement.

UBC 1997 Section 1630.10.1:

Story drifts shall be computed using the Maximum Inelastic Response Displacement, ΔM.

© Arcadis 2015
Story Drift
Calculation

UBC 1997 Section 1630.10.2

Calculated story drift using ΔM shall not exceed 0.025 times the story height for structures having a
fundamental period of less than 0.7 second. For structures having a fundamental period of 0.7 second
or greater, the calculated story drift shall not exceed 0.020 times the story height.

Exceptions:

• These drift limits may be exceeded when it is demonstrated that greater drift can be tolerated by both
structural elements and nonstructural elements that could affect life safety. The drift used in this
assessment shall be based upon the Maximum Inelastic Response Displacement, ΔM.

Check ASCE 7 – 16 Section 12.8.6

© Arcadis 2015
Story Drift
Calculation
UBC 1997 Section 1630.10.2

Exceptions:

• There shall be no drift limit in single-story steel-framed structures classified as Groups B, F and S
Occupancies or Group H, Division 4 or 5 Occupancies.

• In Groups B, F and S Occupancies, the primary use shall be limited to storage, factories or workshops.

• Minor accessory uses shall be allowed in accordance with the provisions of Section 302.

• Structures on which this exception is used shall not have equipment attached to the structural frame or
shall have such equipment detailed to accommodate the additional drift. Walls that are laterally
supported by the steel frame shall be designed to accommodate the drift in accordance with Section
1633.2.4.

© Arcadis 2015
Story Drift
Limitations

UBC 1997 Section 1630.10.3

The design lateral forces used to determine the calculated drift may disregard the limitations of Formula
(30-6) and may be based on the period determined from Formula (30-10) neglecting the 30 or 40 percent
limitations of Section 1630.2.2, Item 2.

© Arcadis 2015
Building Separation
UBC 1997

07 May 2023
55
Detail System Design Requirements
Building Separations

UBC 1997 Section 1633.2.11:

All structures shall be separated from adjoining structures. Separations shall allow for the displacement
ΔM. Adjacent buildings on the same property shall be separated by at least ΔMT where:
Δ = Δ + Δ

And ΔM1 and ΔM2 are the displacements of the adjacent building.

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 56

Orthogonal Effects
UBC 1997

07 May 2023
57
Detail System Design Requirements
Orthogonal Effects

UBC 1997 Section 1633.1:

The requirement that orthogonal effects be considered may be satisfied by designing such elements for
100 percent of the prescribed design seismic forces in one direction plus 30 percent of the
prescribed design seismic forces in the perpendicular direction. The combination requiring the
greater component strength shall be used for design. Alternatively, the effects of the two orthogonal
directions may be combined on a square root of the sum of the squares (SRSS) basis. When the
SRSS method of combining directional effects is used, each term computed shall be assigned the sign
that will result in the most conservative result.

ASCE 7 – 16 Section 12.5.3.1

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 58
Rigid / Semi-Rigid Diaphragm
ASCE 7 – 16

07 May 2023
59
Rigid / Semi – Rigid Diaphragm

UBC 1997 Section 1627

DIAPHRAGM is a horizontal or nearly horizontal system acting to transmit lateral forces to the
vertical-resisting elements. The term “diaphragm” includes horizontal bracing systems.

ASCE 7 – 16 Section 12.3.1.2

Rigid Diaphragm Condition. Diaphragms of concrete slabs or concrete-filled metal deck with
span-to-depth ratios of 3 or less in structures that have no horizontal irregularities are permitted
to be idealized as rigid.

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 60

Rigid / Semi – Rigid Diaphragm
Rigid Diaphragm Vs Semi-Rigid Diaphragm

• Rigid diaphragms have infinite in-plane stiffness properties, and therefore they neither
exhibit membrane deformation nor report the associated forces, whereas semi-rigid
diaphragms simulate actual in-plane stiffness properties and behaviour.
• For most reinforced-concrete slab systems, in which the slab is sufficiently thick and
membrane deformation due to lateral loading is negligible, rigid diaphragms produce results
nearly identical to those of semi-rigid diaphragms, while taking advantage of faster
computation. Semi-rigid diaphragms should be modelled when significant in-plane
deformation does occur, or when required by code.

https://wiki.csiamerica.com/display/etabs/Rigid+vs.+Semi-rigid+diaphragm
© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 61
Rigid / Semi – Rigid Diaphragm
Primary Differences
Formulation – The infinite in-plane stiffness components of a rigid diaphragm allows the
stiffness matrix to condense, decreasing computational time.
Eccentricity – For rigid diaphragms, the accidental eccentricity associated with seismic loading
is concentrated and applied at the center of mass, whereas for semi-rigid diaphragms,
accidental eccentricity is applied to every node for seismic loads. If no diaphragm is assigned
eccentricity will not be applied to any node. For wind cases and rigid diaphragm, load is
applied at geometric centroid, in case of semi-rigid diaphragm loads are distributed in 10 nodes,
so that the summation of these forces with respect to centroid will be equivalent to lateral and
torsional wind cases.
Reporting forces – In-plane chord, shear, and collector forces are only reported when using
semi-rigid diaphragm.

https://wiki.csiamerica.com/display/etabs/Rigid+vs.+Semi-rigid+diaphragm
© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 62
BONUS ROUND

07 May 2023
63
Structural Systems
UBC 1997
Structural Systems
UBC Section 1629.6.2 Bearing Wall Systems

A structural system without a complete vertical load-carrying space frame. Bearing walls or bracing
systems provide support for all or most gravity loads. Resistance to lateral load is provided by shear walls
or braced frames.

UBC Section 1629.6.3 Building Frame Systems

A structural system with an essentially complete space frame providing support for gravity loads.
Resistance to lateral load is provided by shear walls or braced frames.

UBC Section 1629.6.4 Moment Resisting Frame Systems

A structural system with an essentially complete space frame providing support for gravity loads. Moment-
resisting frames provide resistance to lateral load primarily by flexural action of members.

© Arcadis 2015
Structural Systems
UBC Section 1629.6.4 Dual System

A structural system with the following features:

• An essentially complete space frame that provides support for gravity loads.

• Resistance to lateral load is provided by shear walls or braced frames and moment-resisting
frames (SMRF, IMRF, MMRWF or steel OMRF). The moment-resisting frames shall be designed to
independently resist at least 25 percent of the design base shear.

• The two systems shall be designed to resist the total design base shear in proportion to their relative
rigidities considering the interaction of the dual system at all levels.

SPACE FRAME is a three-dimensional structural system, without bearing walls, composed of members
interconnected so as to function as a complete self-contained unit with or without the aid of horizontal
diaphragms or floor-bracing systems.

Refer to UBC 1997 Section 1634 For Nonbuilding Structure

© Arcadis 2015
Detail System Design Requirements
UBC 1997

07 May 2023
67
Detail System Design Requirements
Concrete Frames

UBC 1997 Section 1633.2.7:

Concrete frames required by design to be part of the lateral-force-resisting system shall conform to the
following:

1. In Seismic Zones 3 and 4, they shall be special moment-resisting frames.

2. In Seismic Zone 2, they shall, as a minimum, be intermediate moment-resisting frames.

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 68

Detail System Design Requirements
Deformation Compatibility
UBC 1997 Section 1633.2.4:

All structural framing elements and their connections, not required by design to be part of the lateral-force-
resisting system, shall be designed and/or detailed to be adequate to maintain support of design dead
plus live loads when subjected to the expected deformations caused by seismic forces. PΔ effects on such
elements shall be considered. Expected deformations shall be determined as the greater of the
Maximum Inelastic Response Displacement, ΔM, considering PΔ effects determined in accordance
with Section 1630.9.2 or the deformation induced by a story drift of 0.0025 times the story height.
When computing expected deformations, the stiffening effect of those elements not part of the
lateral-force-resisting system shall be neglected.

For elements not part of the lateral-force-resisting system, the forces induced by the expected deformation
may be considered as ultimate or factored forces.

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 69

Vertical Combination of Structural Systems
UBC 1997 / ASCE 7 – 16

07 May 2023
70
Vertical Combination of Structural Systems
UBC 1997 Section 1630.4.2 Vertical Combination
Structures may be designed using the procedures of this section under the following conditions:

1. The entire structure is designed using the lowest R of the lateral-force-resisting systems used, or

2. The following two-stage static analysis procedures may be used for structures conforming to Section
1629.8.3, Item 4 (Static Procedure).
a) The flexible upper portion shall be designed as a separate structure, supported laterally by the rigid
lower portion, using the appropriate values of R and ρ.
b) The rigid lower portion shall be designed as a separate structure using the appropriate values of R
and ρ. The reactions from the upper portion shall be those determined from the analysis of the
upper portion amplified by the ratio of the (R/ρ) of the upper portion over (R/ρ) of the lower portion.

This requirement need not be applied to a story where the dead weight above that
story is less than 10 percent of the total dead weight of the structure.
© Arcadis 2015
Vertical Combination of Structural Systems
ASCE 7 – 16 Section 12.2.3.2 Two Stage Analysis Procedure

A two-stage equivalent lateral force procedure is permitted to be used for structures that have a flexible
upper portion above a rigid lower portion, provided that the design of the structure complies with all of the
following:

• The stiffness of the lower portion shall be at least 10 times the stiffness of the upper portion.

• The period of the entire structure shall not be greater than 1.1 times the period of the upper portion
considered as a separate structure supported at the transition from the upper to the lower portion.

• The upper portion shall be designed as a separate structure using the appropriate values of R and ρ.

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 72

Vertical Combination of Structural Systems
ASCE 7 – 16 Section 12.2.3.2 Two Stage Analysis Procedure

• The lower portion shall be designed as a separate structure using the appropriate values of R and ρ.
The reactions from the upper portion shall be those determined from the analysis of the upper portion
amplified by the ratio of the R∕ρ of the upper portion over R∕ρ of the lower portion. This ratio shall not be
less than 1.0.

• The upper portion is analyzed with the equivalent lateral force or modal response spectrum procedure,
and the lower portion is analyzed with the equivalent lateral force procedure.

© Arcadis 2015 07 May 2023 73