§1629.5.

3 Introduction to Vertical Irregularities

. 
/ .# $%&-'0'(
Vertical irregularities are identified in Table 16-L. These can be divided into two
categories. The first are dynamic force distribution irregularities. These are
irregularity Types 1, 2, and 3. The second category is irregularities in load path or
force transfer, and these are Types 4 and 5. The five vertical irregularities are as
follows:
1. Stiffness irregularity-soft story
2. Weight (mass) irregularity
3. Vertical geometric irregularity
4. In-plane discontinuity in vertical lateral-force resisting element
5. Discontinuity in capacity-weak story

The first category, dynamic force distribution irregularities, requires that the
distribution of lateral forces be determined by combined dynamic modes of vibration.
For regular structures without abrupt changes in stiffness or mass (i.e., structures
without “vertical structural irregularities”), this shape can be assumed to be linearly-
varying or a triangular shape as represented by the code force distribution pattern.
However, for irregular structures, the pattern can be significantly different and must
be determined by the combined mode shapes from the dynamic analysis procedure of
§1631. The designer may opt to go directly to the dynamic analysis procedure and
thereby bypass the checks for vertical irregularity Types 1, 2, and 3.

Regular structures are assumed to have a reasonably uniform distribution of inelastic

behavior in elements throughout the lateral force resisting system. When vertical
irregularity Types 4 and 5 exist, there is the possibility of having localized
concentrations of excessive inelastic deformations due to the irregular load path or
weak story. In this case, the code prescribes additional strengthening to correct the
deficiencies.

 SEAOC Seismic Design Manual

Example 4
Vertical Irregularity Type 1 §1629.5.3

 *
/ .#1 1  $%&-'0'(
A five-story concrete special moment-resisting frame is shown below. The specified
lateral forces F x from Equations (30-14) and (30-15) have been applied and the
corresponding floor level displacements ∆ x at the floor center of mass have been
found and are shown below.

Ft + F5
∆S5 = 2.02"
10'
F4
∆S4 = 1.75"
10' Triangular
shape
F3
∆S3 = 1.45"
10'
F2
∆S2 = 1.08"
10'
F1
∆S1 = 0.71"
12'

 Determine if a Type 1 vertical irregularity—stiffness irregularity-soft story—

exists in the first story.

Calculations and Discussion Code Reference

 To determine if this is a Type 1 vertical irregularity—stiffness irregularity-soft

story—here are two tests:

1. The story stiffness is less than 70 percent of that of the story above.
2. The story stiffness is less than 80 percent of the average stiffness of the three
stories above.

If the stiffness of the story meets at least one of the above two criteria, the structure is
considered to have a soft story, and a dynamic analysis is generally required under
§1629.8.4 Item 2, unless the irregular structure is not more than five stories or 65-feet
in height (see §1629.8.3 Item 3).

The definition of soft story in the code compares values of the lateral stiffness of
individual stories. Generally, it is not practical to use stiffness properties unless these
can be easily determined. There are many structural configurations where the
evaluation of story stiffness is complex and is often not an available output from

SEAOC Seismic Design Manual 

§1629.5.3 Example 4
Vertical Irregularity Type 1

computer programs. Recognizing that the basic intent of this irregularity check is to
determine if the lateral force distribution will differ significantly from the linear
pattern prescribed by Equation (30-15), which assumes a triangular shape for the first
dynamic mode of response, this type of irregularity can also be determined by
comparing values of lateral story displacements or drift ratios due to the prescribed
lateral forces. This deformation comparison may even be more effective than the
stiffness comparison because the shape of the first mode shape is often closely
approximated by the structure displacements due to the specified triangular load
pattern. Floor level displacements and corresponding story drift ratios are directly
available from computer programs. To compare displacements rather than stiffness, it
is necessary to use the reciprocal of the limiting percentage ratios of 70 and 80
percent as they apply to story stiffness, or reverse their applicability to the story or
stories above. The following example shows this equivalent use of the displacement
properties.

From the given displacements, story drifts and the story drift ratio values are
determined. The story drift ratio is the story drift divided by the story height. These
will be used for the required comparisons, since these better represent the changes in
the slope of the mode shape when there are significant differences in interstory
heights. (Note: story displacements can be used if the story heights are nearly equal.)

In terms of the calculated story drift ratios, the soft story occurs when one of the
following conditions exists:

∆ S1 ∆ S 2 − ∆ S1
1. When 70 percent of exceeds
h1 h2
or
∆ S1
2. When 80 percent of exceeds
h1
1  ( ∆ S 2 − ∆ S1 ) ( ∆ S 3 − ∆ S 2 ) ( ∆ S 4 − ∆ S 3 ) 
+ +
3  h2 h3 h4



The story drift ratios are determined as follows:

∆ S1
=
(0.71 − 0) = 0.00493
h1 144

∆ S 2 − ∆ S1
=
(1 .08 − 0 .71 ) = 0 .00308
h2 120

∆ S3 − ∆ S2 (1 . 45− 1 . 08 )
= = 0 . 00308
h3 120

 SEAOC Seismic Design Manual

Example 4
Vertical Irregularity Type 1 §1629.5.3

∆ S4 − ∆ S3
=
(1 .75 − 1 .45 ) = 0 .00250
h4 120

1
(0.00308 + 0.00308 + 0.00250 ) = 0.00289
3

Checking the 70 percent requirement:

∆ 
0 .70  S 1  = 0 .70 (0.00493 ) = 0 .00345 > 0 .00308
 h1 

∴Soft story exists

Checking the 80 percent requirement:

∆ 
0 .80  S 1  = 0 .80 (0 .00493 ) = 0 .00394 > 0 .00289
 h1 

∴Soft story exists

Commentary
Section 1630.10.1 requires that story drifts be computed using the maximum inelastic
response displacements ∆ M . However, for the purpose of the story drift, or story drift
ratio, comparisons needed for soft story determination, the displacement ∆ S due to
the design seismic forces can be used as done in this example. In the example above,
only the first story was checked for possible soft story vertical irregularity. In
practice, all stories must be checked, unless a dynamic analysis is performed. It is
often convenient to create a table as shown below to facilitate this exercise.

Story Story Drift .7x (Story .8x (Story Avg. of Story Drift Ratio Soft Story
Level Displacement Story Drift Ratio Drift Ratio) Drift Ratio) of Next 3 Stories Status
5 2.02 in. 0.27 in. 0.00225 0.00158 0.00180 — No
4 1.75 0.30 0.00250 0.00175 0.00200 — No
3 1.45 0.37 0.00308 0.00216 0.00246 — No
2 1.08 0.37 0.00308 0.00216 0.00246 0.00261 No
1 0.71 0.71 0.00493 0.00345 0.00394 0.00289 Yes

SEAOC Seismic Design Manual 

§1629.5.3 Example 5
Vertical Irregularity Type 2

 0
/ .#1 1 & $%&-'0'(
The five-story special moment frame office building has a heavy utility equipment
installation at Level 2. This results in the floor weight distribution shown below:

Level 5 W5 = 90 k

4 W4 = 110 k

3 W3 = 110 k

2 W2 = 170 k

1 W1 = 100 k

 Determine if there is a Type 2 vertical weight (mass) irregularity.

Calculations and Discussion Code Reference

A weight, or mass, vertical irregularity is considered to exist when the effective mass
of any story is more than 150 percent of the effective mass of an adjacent story.
However, this requirement does not apply to the roof if the roof is lighter than the
floor below.

Checking the effective mass of Level 2 against the effective mass of Levels 1 and 3

At Level 1

1.5 ×W1 = 1.5 (100 k ) = 150 k

At Level 3

1.5 × W3 = 1.5 (110 k ) = 165 k

W2 = 170 k > 150 k

∴ Weight irregulari ty exists

 SEAOC Seismic Design Manual

Example 5
ertical Irregularity Type 2 §1629.5.3

Commentary
As in the case of vertical irregularity Type 1, this type of irregularity also results in a
primary mode shape that can be substantially different from the triangular shape and
lateral load distribution given by Equation (30-15). Consequently, the appropriate
load distribution must be determined by the dynamic analysis procedure of §1631,
unless the irregular structure is not more than five stories or 65 feet in height (see
§1629.8.3 Item 3).

SEAOC Seismic Design Manual 

§1629.5.3 Example 6
Vertical Irregularity Type 3

 %
/ .#1 1 ( $%&-'0'(
The lateral force-resisting system of the five-story special moment frame building
shown below has a 25-foot setback at the third, fourth and fifth stories.

1 2 3 4 5

4 @ 25' = 100'

Level 5

 Determine if a Type 3 vertical irregularity, vertical geometric irregularity,

exists.

Calculations and Discussion Code Reference

A vertical geometric irregularity is considered to exist where the horizontal
dimension of the lateral force-resisting system in any story is more than 130 percent
of that in the adjacent story. One-story penthouses are not subject to this requirement.

In this example, the setback of Level 3 must be checked. The ratios of the two
levels is

Width of Level 2 (100')

= = 1.33
Width of Level 3 (75' )

133 percent > 130 percent

∴ Vertical geometric irregulari ty exists

 SEAOC Seismic Design Manual

Example 6
Vertical Irregularity Type 3 §1629.5.3

Commentary
The more than 130 percent change in width of the lateral force-resisting system
between adjacent stories could result in a primary mode shape that is substantially
different from the triangular shape assumed for Equation (30-15). If the change is a
decrease in width of the upper adjacent story (the usual situation), the mode shape
difference can be mitigated by designing for an increased stiffness in the story with a
reduced width.

Similarly, if the width decrease is in the lower adjacent story (the unusual situation),
the Type 1 soft story irregularity can be avoided by a proportional increase in the
stiffness of the lower story. However, when the width decrease is in the lower story,
there could be an overturning moment load transfer discontinuity that would require
the application of §1630.8.2.

When there is a large decrease in the width of the structure above the first story along
with a corresponding large change in story stiffness that creates a flexible tower, then
§1629.8.3, Item 4 and §1630.4.2, Item 2 may apply.

Note that if the frame elements in the bay between lines 4 and 5 were not included as
a part of the designated lateral force resisting system, then the vertical geometric
irregularity would not exist. However, the effects of this adjoining frame would have
to be considered under the adjoining rigid elements requirements of §1633.2.4.1.

SEAOC Seismic Design Manual 

§1629.5.3 Example 7
Vertical Irregularity Type 4

 2
/ .#1 1 * $%&-'0'(
A concrete building has the building frame system shown below. The shear wall between
Lines A and B has an in-plane offset from the shear wall between Lines C and D.

A B C D

3 @ 25' = 75’
Level

5
12'
Shear wall

4
12'

12' 25’

2
50' Shear wall
12'

12'

 Determine if there is a Type 4 vertical irregularity, in-plane discontinuity in

the vertical lateral force-resisting element.

Calculations and Discussion Code Reference

A Type 4 vertical irregularity exists when there is an in-plane offset of the lateral load
resisting elements greater than the length of those elements. In this example, the left
side of the upper shear wall (between lines A and B) is offset 50 feet from the left
side of the lower shear wall (between lines C and D). This 50-foot offset is greater
than the 25-foot length of the offset wall elements.

∴ In - plane discontinu ity exists

 SEAOC Seismic Design Manual

Example 7
Vertical Irregularity Type 4 §1629.5.3

Commentary
The intent of this irregularity check is to provide correction of force transfer or load
path deficiencies. It should be noted that any in-plane offset, even those less or equal
to the length or bay width of the resisting element, can result in an overturning
moment load transfer discontinuity that requires the application of §1630.8.2. When
the offset exceeds the length of the resisting element, there is also a shear transfer
discontinuity that requires application of §1633.2.6 for the strength of collector
elements along the offset. In this example, the columns under wall A-B are subject to
the provisions of §1630.8.2 and §1921.4.4.5, and the collector element between Lines
B and C at Level 2 is subject to the provisions of §1633.2.6.

SEAOC Seismic Design Manual 

§1629.5.3 Example 8
Vertical Irregularity Type 5

 3
/ .#1 1 0 $%&-'0'(
A concrete bearing wall building has the typical transverse shear wall configuration
shown below. All walls in this direction are identical, and the individual piers have
the shear contribution given below. Vn is the nominal shear strength calculated in
accordance with §1921.6.5, and Vm is the shear corresponding to the development of
the nominal flexure strength calculated in accordance with §1921.6.6.

Level 3

2
Pier Vn Vm

4
1 20 k 30 k
5
2 30 40
1
3 15 10
4 80 120
1 2 3
5 15 10

 Determine if a Type 5 vertical irregularity, discontinuity in capacity – weak

story, condition exists.

Calculations and Discussion Code Reference

A Type 5 weak story discontinuity in capacity exists when the story strength is less
than 80 percent of that in the story above. The story strength is considered to be the
total strength of all seismic force-resisting elements sharing the story shear for the
direction under consideration.

Using the smaller values of Vn and Vm given for each pier, the story strengths are

First story strength = 20 + 30 + 10 = 60 k

Second story strength = 80 + 10 = 90 k

Check if first story strength is less than 80 percent of that of the second story:

60k < 0.8 (90) = 72 k

∴ Weak story condition exists

 SEAOC Seismic Design Manual

Example 8
Vertical Irregularity Type 5 §1629.5.3

Commentary
This irregularity check is to detect any concentration of inelastic behavior in one
supporting story that can lead to the loss of vertical load capacity. Elements subject to
this check are the shear wall piers (where the shear contribution is the lower of either
the shear at development of the flexural strength, or the shear strength), bracing
members and their connections, and frame columns. Frame columns with weak
column-strong beam conditions have a shear contribution equal to that developed
when the top and bottom of the column are at flexural capacity. Where there is a
strong column-weak beam condition, the column shear resistance contribution should
be the shear corresponding to the development of the adjoining beam yield hinges
and the column base connection capacity. In any case, the column shear contribution
shall not exceed the column shear capacity.

Because a weak story is prohibited (under §1629.9.1) for structures greater than two
stories or 30 feet in height, the first story piers in this example must either be
strengthened by a factor of 72/60 = 1.2, or designed for Ω o times the forces
prescribed in §1630.

SEAOC Seismic Design Manual 

§1629.5.3 Example 9
Vertical Irregularity Type 5

 -
/ .#1 1 0 $%&-'0'(
A four-story building has a steel special moment resisting frame (SMRF). The frame
consists of W24 beams and W14 columns with the following member strength
properties (determined under 2213.4.2 and 2213.7.5):
A B C D

Beams at Levels 1 and 2:

3 @ 25'
M b =ZF y = 250 kip-ft Level
5
Columns on lines A, B, C, and D at
12'
both levels:
( )
M c = Z Fy − f a = 200 kip-ft at 4
12'
axial loading of 1.2 PD + 0.5 PL .
3
Column base connections at grade:
M f = 100 kip-ft
12'

2
In addition, the columns meet the
12'
exception of §2213.7.5 such that a
strong beam-weak column 1

condition is permitted. 14’

Determine if a Type 5 vertical irregularity—discontinuity in capacity-weak story—

condition exists in the first story:

 Determine first story strength.

 Determine second story strength.

 Determine if weak story exists at first story.

Calculations and Discussion Code Reference

A Type 5 weak story discontinuity in capacity exists when the story strength is less
than 80 percent of that of the story above. The story strength is considered to be the
total strength of all seismic force-resisting elements that share the story shear for the
direction under consideration.

To determine if a weak story exists in the first story, the sums of the column shears in
the first and second stories—when the member moment capacities are developed by
lateral loading—must be determined and compared.

In this example, it is assumed that the beam moments at a beam-column joint are
distributed equally to the sections of the columns directly above and below the joint.
Given below is the calculations for first and second stories.

 SEAOC Seismic Design Manual

Example 9
Vertical Irregularity Type 5 §1629.5.3

 Determine first story strength.

Columns A and D must be checked for strong column-weak beam considerations.

2M c = 400 > M b = 250

∴ strong column-weak beam condition exists.

Next, the shear in each column must be determined.

V
M b 2 = 125 k - ft

Clear height = 14 ft − 2 ft = 12 ft

125 + 100
V A = VD = = 18.75 k
12

V
M f = 100 k - ft

Checking columns B and C for strong column-weak beam considerations.

2 M c = 400 < 2 M b = 500

∴ Strong beam-weak column condition exists.

Next, the shear in each column must be determined.

V Mc = 200 k-ft

Clear height = 14 ft − 2 ft = 12 ft

200 + 100
V B = VC = = 25.0 k V
12 Mf = 100 k-ft

First story strength = V A + V B + VC + V D = 2(18.75) + 2(25.0) = 87.5 k

SEAOC Seismic Design Manual 

§1629.5.3 Example 9
Vertical Irregularity Type 5

 Determine second story strength.

Columns A and D must be checked for strong column-weak beam at Level 2.

2M c = 400 > M b = 250

∴ strong column-weak beam condition exists.

V
M b 2 = 125 k - ft

Clear height = 12 ft − 2 ft = 10 ft

125 + 125
VA = VD = = 25.0 k
10
V
M b 2 = 125 k - ft

Checking columns B and C for strong column-weak beam considerations.

2M c = 400 < 2 M b = 500

∴ Strong beam-weak column condition exists.

V Mc = 200 k-ft

Clear height = 12 ft − 2 ft = 10 ft
10’

200 + 200
V B = VC = = 40.0 k
10

V
Mc = 200 k-ft

Second story strength = V A + V B + VC + V D = 2( 25.0) + 2(40.0) = 130.0 k

 SEAOC Seismic Design Manual

Example 9
Vertical Irregularity Type 5 §1629.5.3

 Determine if weak story exists at first story.

First story strength = 87.5 k

Second story strength = 130.0 k

87.5 < 0.80 (130) = 104 Table 16-L Item 5

∴ Weak story condition in first story exists

SEAOC Seismic Design Manual 

§1629.5.3 Introduction to Plan Irregularities

. 

 .# $%&-'0'(
Plan structural irregularities are identified in Table 16-M. There are five types of plan
irregularities:

1. Torsional irregularity—to be considered when diaphragms are not flexible

2. Re-entrant corners
3. Diaphragm discontinuity
4. Out-of-plane offsets
5. Nonparallel systems

These irregularities can be categorized as being either special response conditions or

cases of irregular load path. Types 1, 2, 3, and 5 are special response conditions:

Type 1. When the ratio of maximum drift to average drift exceeds the given limit,
there is the potential for an unbalance in the inelastic deformation demands at the two
extreme sides of a story. As a consequence, the equivalent stiffness of the side having
maximum deformation will be reduced, and the eccentricity between the centers of
mass and rigidity will be increased along with the corresponding torsions. An
amplification factor Ax is to be applied to the accidental eccentricity to represent the
effects of this unbalanced stiffness.

Type 2. The opening and closing deformation response or flapping action of the
projecting legs of the building plan adjacent to re-entrant corners can result in
concentrated forces at the corner point. Elements must be provided to transfer these
forces into the diaphragms.

Type 3. Excessive openings in a diaphragm can result in a flexible diaphragm

response along with force concentrations and load path deficiencies at the boundaries
of the openings. Elements must be provided to transfer the forces into the diaphragm
and the structural system.

Type 4. The Type 4 plan irregularity, out-of-plane offset, represents the irregular load
path category. In this case, shears and overturning moments must be transferred from
the level above the offset to the level below the offset, and there is a horizontal
“offset” in the load path for the shears.

Type 5. The response deformations and load patterns on a system with nonparallel
lateral force-resisting elements can have significant differences from that of a regular
system. Further analysis of deformation and load behavior may be necessary.

 SEAOC Seismic Design Manual

Example 10
Plan Irregularity Type 1 §1629.5.3

 4

 .#1 1  $%&-'0'(
A three-story special moment resisting frame building has rigid floor diaphragms.
Under specified seismic forces, including the effects of accidental torsion, it has the
following displacements at Levels 1 and 2:

δ L ,2 = 1.30" δ R , 2 = 1.90"

δ L ,1 = 1.00" δ R ,1 = 1.20"

δR,2
Level

3
δR,1

δL,2
2

Level 2

δL,1
1

Level 1

 Determine if a Type 1 torsional irregularity exists at the second story.

If it does:
 Compute the torsional amplification factor Ax for Level 2.

Calculations and Discussion Code Reference

A Type 1 torsional plan irregularity is considered to exist when the maximum story
drift, including accidental torsion effects, at one end of the structure transverse to an
axis is more than 1.2 times the average of the story drifts of the two ends of the
structure.

 Determine if a Type 1 torsional irregularity exists at the second story. Table 16-M
Referring to the above figure showing the displacements δ due to the prescribed
lateral forces, this irregularity check is defined in terms of story drift
∆δ X = (δ X − δ X −1 ) at ends R (right) and L (left) of the structure. Torsional
irregularity exists at level x when

SEAOC Seismic Design Manual 

§1629.5.3 Example 10
Plan Irregularity Type 1

1.2(∆ +∆ )
∆ max = ∆ R , X >
R,x L, x
(
= 1.2 ∆ avg )
2

where

∆δ L, 2 = δ L , 2 − δ L ,1

∆δ R ,2 = δ R ,2 − δ R ,1

∆δ L, X + ∆δ R , X
∆δ max = ∆δ R , X , ∆δ avg =
2

Determining story drifts at Level 2

∆ L, 2 = 1.30 − 1.00 = 0.30 in.

∆ R ,2 = 1.90 − 1.20 = 0.70 in.

0.30 + 0.70
∆ avg = = 0.50 in.
2

Checking 1.2 criteria

∆ max ∆ R ,2 0.7
= = = 1.4 > 1.2
∆ avg ∆ avg 0.5

∴Torsional irregulari ty exists

 Compute amplification factor A X for Level 2. §1630.7

When torsional irregularity exists at a level x , the accidental eccentricity, equal to 5
percent of the building dimension, must be increased by an amplification factor Ax .
This must be done for each level, and each level may have a different Ax value. In
this example, Ax is computed for Level 2.

2
 δ 
Ax =  max 

(30-16)
 1.2 avg 
δ max = δ R , 2 = 1.90 in.

δ L, 2 + δ R , 2 1.30 + 1.90
δ avg = = = 1.60 in.
2 2

 SEAOC Seismic Design Manual

Example 10
Plan Irregularity Type 1 §1629.5.3

2
 1.90 
A2 =   = 0.98 < 1.0
 1.2 (1.60) 

∴ use Ax = 1.0

Commentary
In §1630.7, there is the provision that “the most severe load combination must be
considered.” The interpretation of this for the case of the story drift and
displacements to be used for the average values ∆δ avg and δ avg is as follows. The
most severe condition is when both δ R, X and δ L, X are computed for the same
accidental center of mass displacement that causes the maximum displacement δ max .
For the condition shown in this example where δ R , X = δ max , the centers of mass at
all levels should be displaced by the accidental eccentricity to the right side R, and
both δ R, X and δ L, X should be evaluated for this load condition.

While Table 16-M calls only for §1633.2.9, Item 6 (regarding diaphragm
connections) to apply if this irregularity exists, there is also §1630.7, which requires
the accidental torsion amplification factor Ax given by Equation (30-16). It is
important to recognize that torsional irregularity is defined in terms of story drift
∆δ X while the evaluation of Ax by Equation (30-16) is in terms of displacements
δ X . There can be instances where the story drift values indicate torsional irregularity
and where the related displacement values produce an Ax value less than one. This
result is not the intent of the provision, and the value of Ax used to determine
accidental torsion should not be less than 1.0.

The displacement and story drift values should be obtained by the equivalent lateral
force method with the specified lateral forces. Theoretically, if the dynamic analysis
procedure were to be used, the values of ∆δ max and ∆δ avg would have to be found
for each dynamic mode, then combined by the appropriate SRSS or CQC procedures,
and then scaled to the specified base shear. However, in view of the complexity of
this determination and the judgmental nature of the 1.2 factor, it is reasoned that the
equivalent static force method is sufficiently accurate to detect torsional irregularity
and evaluate the Ax factor.

If the dynamic analysis procedure is either elected or required, then §1631.3 requires
the use of a three-dimensional model if there are any of the plan irregularities listed in
Table 16-M.

SEAOC Seismic Design Manual 

§1629.5.3 Example 10
Plan Irregularity Type 1

For cases of large eccentricity and low torsional rigidity, the static force procedure
can result in a negative displacement on one side and a positive on the other. For
example, this occurs if δ L ,3 = −0.40′′ and δ R ,3 = 1.80′′ . The value of δ avg in
Equation (30-16) should be calculated as the algebraic average:

δ avg =
δ L ,3 + δ R ,3
=
(− 0.40 ) + 1.80 = 1.40 = 0.70 in.
2 2 2

When dynamic analysis is used, the algebraic average value δ avg should be found for
each mode, and the individual modal results must be properly combined to determine
the total response value for δ avg .

 SEAOC Seismic Design Manual

Example 11
Plan Irregularity Type 2 §1629.5.3

 

 .#1 1 & $%&-'0'(
The plan configuration of a ten-story special moment frame building is as shown
below:

A B C D E

4 @ 25' = 100'

 Determine if there is a Type 2 re-entrant corner irregularity.

Calculations and Discussion Code Reference

A Type 2 re-entrant corner plan irregularity exists when the plan configuration of a
structure and its lateral force-resisting system contain re-entrant corners, where both
projections of the structure beyond a re-entrant corner are greater than 15 percent of
the plan dimension of the structure in the direction considered.

The plan configuration of this building, and its lateral force-resisting system, have
identical re-entrant corner dimensions. For the sides on Lines 1 and 4, the projection
beyond the re-entrant corner is

100 ft − 75 ft = 25 ft

25
This is or 25 percent of the 100 ft plan dimension.
100

For the sides on Lines A and E, the projection is

60 ft − 40 ft = 20 ft
20
This is or 33.3 percent of the 60 ft plan dimension.
60

SEAOC Seismic Design Manual 

§1629.5.3 Example 11
Plan Irregularity Type 2

Since both projections exceed 15 percent, there is a re-entrant corner irregularity.

∴ Re - entrant corner irregulari ty exists

Commentary
Whenever the Type 2 re-entrant corner plan irregularity exists, see the diaphragm
requirements of §1633.2.9 Items 6 and 7.

 SEAOC Seismic Design Manual

Example 12
Plan Irregularity Type 3 §1629.5.3

 &

 .#1 1 ( $%&-'0'(
A five-story concrete building has a bearing wall system located around the perimeter
of the building. Lateral forces are resisted by the bearing walls acting as shear walls.
The floor plan of the second floor of the building is shown below. The symmetrically
placed open area in the diaphragm is for an atrium, and has dimensions of 40 ft x 75
ft. All diaphragms above the second floor are without significant openings.

1 2 3 4

125'

75'

B
Atrium
80'

40'

Second floor pla

 Determine if a Type 3 diaphragm discontinuity exists at the second floor level.

Calculations and Discussion Code Reference

A Type 3 diaphragm discontinuity irregularity exists when diaphragms have abrupt
discontinuities or variations in stiffness, including cutout or open areas greater than
50 percent of the gross enclosed area of the diaphragm, or changes in effective
diaphragm stiffness of more than 50 percent from one story to the next.

Gross enclosed area of the diaphragm is 80 ft × 125 ft = 10,000 sq ft

Area of opening is 40'×75' = 3,000 sq ft

50 percent of gross area = 0.5 (10,000) = 5,000 sq ft

3,000 < 5,000 sq ft

∴ No diaphragm discontinu ity irregulari ty exists

SEAOC Seismic Design Manual 

§1629.5.3 Example 12
Plan Irregularity Type 2

Commentary
The stiffness of the second floor diaphragm with its opening must be compared with
the stiffness of the solid diaphragm at the third floor. If the change in stiffness
exceeds 50 percent, then a diaphragm discontinuity irregularity exists for the
structure.

This comparison can be performed as follows:

Find the simple beam mid-span deflections ∆ 2 and ∆ 3 for the diaphragms at Levels
2 and 3, respectively, due to a common distributed load w , such as 1 klf.

w = 1 klf

Level 2

∆2
Deflected shape

w = 1 klf

Level 3

∆3
Deflected shape

If ∆ 2 > 1.5∆ 3 , then there is diaphragm discontinuity.

 SEAOC Seismic Design Manual

Example 13
Plan Irregularity Type 4 §1629.5.3

 (

 .#1 1 * $%&-'0'(
A four-story building has a concrete shear wall lateral force-resisting system in a
building frame system configuration. The plan configuration of the shear walls is
shown below.
3

1 2 3

10'

1
10'
Typical Floor Plan
Typical floor plan

10'
A B C D E

10'
4 @ 25' = 100'

3
Elevation Line E
2 @ 25' = 50'

First Floor Plan

Ground (first) floor pla

 Determine if there is a Type 4 out-of-plane offset plan irregularity between

the first and second stories.

Calculations and Discussion Code Reference

An out-of-plane offset plan irregularity exists when there are discontinuities in a lateral force
path, for example: out-of-plane offsets of vertical resisting elements such as shear walls. The first
story shear wall on Line D has 25 ft out-of-plane offset to the shear wall on Line E at the second
story and above. This constitutes an out-of-plane offset irregularity, and the referenced sections
in Table 16-M apply to the design.

∴Offset irregulari ty exists

SEAOC Seismic Design Manual 

§1629.5.3 Example 14
Plan Irregularity Type 5

 *

 .#1 1 0 $%&-'0'(
A ten-story building has the floor plan shown below at all levels. Special moment
resisting-frames are located on the perimeter of the building on Lines 1, 4, A, and F.

A B C D E

F
4 @ 25' = 100'

4
3 @ 25' = 75'

Typical floor plan

 Determine if a Type 5 nonparallel system irregularity exists.

Calculations and Discussion Code Reference

A Type 5 nonparallel system irregularity is considered to exist when the vertical
lateral load resisting elements are not parallel to or symmetric about the major
orthogonal axes of the building’s lateral force-resisting system.

The vertical lateral force-resisting frame elements located on Line F are not parallel
to the major orthogonal axes of the building (i.e., Lines 4 and A). Therefore a
nonparallel system irregularity exists, and the referenced section in Table 16-M
applies to the design.

∴ A nonparalle l system irregulari ty exists

 SEAOC Seismic Design Manual