SIP Engineering Design Guide July2019

Structural Insulated Panel (SIP)
Engineering Design Guide
FIRST EDITION 2019

SIP-EDG01-19
SIP-EDG01-19 FINAL DRAFT
Approval Date: 03-20-2019 FINAL DRAFT
Structural Insulated Panel (SIP)

Engineering Design Guide
FINAL DRAFT FIRST EDITION 2019
SIP-EDG01-19
Structural Insulated Panel Association

P.O. Box 39848
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33339
Copyright © 2019
by
Structural Insulated Panel Association (SIPA)

P.O. Box 39848
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33339
All rights reserved. This document or any part thereof

must not be reproduced in any form without the
express written permission of the of Structural Insulated Panel Association.
The SIPA logo is a trademark of SIPA.
ISBN XXXXXXXXXX
The information presented in this publication has been prepared in accordance with recognized
engineering principles and is for general information only. While it is believed to be accurate,
this information should not be used or relied upon for any specific application without competent
professional examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability, and applicability by a
licensed professional engineering, designer, or architect. The publication of the material
contained herein is not intended as a representation of warranty on the part of the Structural
Insulated Panel Association (SIPA) or of any other person named herein, that this information is
suitable for any general or particular use or of freedom from infringement of any patent or
patents. Anyone making use of this information assumes all liability arising from such use.
Updates and Errata

While every precaution has been taken to ensure the accuracy of this document, errors may have
occurred during development. Updates and/or Errata are posted to the SIPA website at
www.sips.org.
Technical inquiries may be addressed to [email protected].

FOREWORD
Welcome to a new tool built with you, the design professional, in mind! Whether you are already
familiar with panelized construction design or exploring this system for the first time, this
Structural Insulated Panel (SIP) Engineering Design Guide will be of great value. Decades of the
industry’s collective technical wisdom and experience from scores of expert builders, designers,
engineers, and wood and structural associations have gone into its compilation.
Providing clear and easily accessible engineering basics to design with structural insulated panels
(SIPs) is the goal of this new resource. It goes well beyond the basic prescriptive uses for SIPs
that were introduced in the International Residential Code in 2007.
The Guide allows design professionals to access the innovative strength, span, and loading
characteristics inherent to SIPs while taking advantage of the system’s simple and fast
installation in even complicated, multistory light commercial structures.
SIPs’ continuous, low air leakage, energy-efficient insulating construction eases compliance with
the latest energy codes. Hundreds of school, multifamily, office/agricultural, and custom
residential example case studies across North America can be found online via the project maps
at www.SIPs.org.
The Structural Insulated Panel Association (SIPA), publisher of the SIP Engineering Design
Guide, is a non-profit trade association representing manufacturers, suppliers, dealer/distributors,
design professionals, and builders committed to providing quality structural insulated panels
(SIPs) for all segments of the construction industry.
SIPA’s mission is to provide an industry forum to increase the acceptance and use of SIPs.
Founded in 1990, SIPA has made tremendous progress advancing the vision of SIPs as the
preferred building system. Respected members of SIPA collectively produce over 80% of North
America’s SIP panels and serve as the thought leaders of the industry.
Acknowledgments
The SIP industry appreciates the extensive analysis and work by the SIP Engineering Design
Guide’s primary developer, Eric Tompos of NTA, Inc.
Eric J. Tompos, P.E., S.E., P.Eng., C.B.O., M.C.P.

Eric Tompos is Executive Vice President of NTA, Inc. He is a licensed civil and/or
structural engineer in all 50 states and the provinces of Alberta and Ontario. Eric has
Bachelor of Science and Master of Science degrees in Civil Engineering from Purdue
University and is recognized as a Certified Building Official and Master Code
Professional by the International Code Council. He has extensive experience in the
design and construction of factory built structures, building components, materials
testing, and quality assurance. Eric’s current focus is on structural design, code
compliance of factory built structures, development of policies related to NTA’s building
product certification activities and solving code compliance issues related to new and
innovative building products.
A special thank you to SIPA Manufacturing and Supplier Members who funded this four-year
project to create the SIP Engineering Design Guide First Edition and support its ongoing
maintenance. Additionally, much appreciation for hundreds of hours of commitment, donated
time/resources and dedication goes to:
NTA, Inc.
Corey Nigh – Project Coordinator
David A. Tompos, LEED BD+C – Project Software Lead
Eric J. Tompos, P.E., S.E., P.Eng., C.B.O., M.C.P. – Project Technical Lead
SIPA Technical Review Committee

(Chair) Tom Williamson, P.E., M.S.C.E. – Timber Engineering, LLC
Todd Bergstrom, Ph.D. – AFM Corporation/R-Control
Paul Malko – Foard Panel, Inc.
Dave Mensing, P.E. – Energy Panel Structures, Inc.
Tom Moore, P.E. – Pinnacle Engineering, Inc.
Alison Moynihan, M.S., CPHC – Foard Panel, Inc.
Joe Pasma, P.E. – Nederveld
Brian Sielaff, P.E., S.E., P.Eng. – Tamarack Grove Engineering
Brian von Allworden, B.S.D., B.S.E. – Wright Engineers
Jim Whalen, P.Eng. – Plasti-Fab Ltd./Insulspan
How to Use This Guide (Intended Use)
Design Specification, Commentary, and Examples

The SIP Engineering Design Guide has three sections – Design Specification, Commentary and
Design Examples. The Structural Insulated Panel Design Specification (SIP-EDG01-19S) is
intended to be used in conjunction with competent engineering design, accurate fabrication, and
adequate supervision of construction. It shall be the final responsibility of the designer to relate
design assumptions, reference design values, and make design adjustments appropriate to the end
use. This Specification is not intended as a substitute for the experience and expertise of a
licensed design professional, such as a licensed architect or engineer, nor shall the provisions of
this design guide supersede or limit the professional judgment of a licensed design professional
in the use of SIP panels in any specific application. This Specification is intended to supplement
the SIP Manufacturer’s literature. Where conflicts exist between this Specification and the
Manufacturer’s literature, the Manufacturer’s literature shall govern.
The Commentary on Structural Insulated Panel Design Specification (SIP-EDG01-19C)

furnishes background information and references for the benefit of the design professional
seeking further understanding of the basis, derivations and limits of the Design Specification.
The Design Specification is intended to be complete for normal design usage, and its provisions
are intended to be used together with the Commentary as needed.
A set of Design Examples Based on Structural Insulated Panel Design Specification (SIP-
EDG01-19E) is provided for reference along with relevant equations to illustrate the use of the
discussed material in typical, practical applications. For convenience, a companion online
software version can be accessed via the internet without the complication of downloading
software. The interactive format allows for customizing the data for a variety of needs and saving
multiple cases for future work. Baseline, conservative data for the various parameters are
provided as an initial launching point. Contact each SIP Manufacturer for their own specific data
which should be used for actual calculation design scenarios.
Interactive Online Design Examples

Email [email protected] for access to the FINAL DRAFT online interactive SIP design examples.
SIPA Members for Quality You Can Trust

Professionalism, experience, trust, and ethical behavior are primary reasons why users are
always encouraged to deal only with SIP Manufacturers that are members of SIPA. To ensure
panel performance, SIPA Manufacturer Members are required to have engineered load tables,
insurance, and third-party QC. Go to www.SIPs.org or contact SIPA (+1-253-858-7472,
[email protected]) for a current list of SIPA Member Manufacturers.
More Technical Resources for SIPs

Since their invention back in the 1940’s, Structural Insulated Panels have been well-tested and
proven reliable. APA--The Engineered Wood Association recently republished its 24-page SIP
Product Guide and the ANSI Standard for SIPs which can be found for free download on both
their and the www.SIPs.org websites. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Products Lab
has published numerous test reports. Global ISO Standards for SIP walls and roofs are available.
The Builder’s Guide to SIPs in all Climate Zones by Building Science Corporation was recently
reprinted and is available at www.SIPs.org. Numerous individual company code evaluation
reports are also available including seismic and fire performance.
SIP-EDG01-19S FINAL DRAFT, SIP Design Specification S-1
Structural Insulated Panel

Design Specification SIP-EDG01-19S Final Draft
Approval Date: 8/31/2018
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Scope .................................................................................................................................... S-3
2 Notation.............................................................................................................................. S-11
3 Use Considerations ............................................................................................................ S-15
4 Flexure ............................................................................................................................... S-19
5 Shear .................................................................................................................................. S-25
6 Compression ...................................................................................................................... S-27
7 Tension............................................................................................................................... S-31
8 Lateral Force-Resisting Systems........................................................................................ S-33
9 Combined Loads ................................................................................................................ S-45
10 Connections and Joints ...................................................................................................... S-49
11 Openings ............................................................................................................................ S-55
12 Reinforced Panels .............................................................................................................. S-61
13 Shells and Folded Plate Members ...................................................................................... S-65
Structural Insulated Panel (SIP) Engineering Design Guide

S-2 SIP-EDG01-19S FINAL DRAFT, SIP Design Specification

1 SCOPE
1.1 General
This document applies to structural insulated panels (SIPs), which for the purposes of this Specification
shall be defined as an expanded polystyrene (EPS) or polyurethane (PU) foam plastic insulation core
securely bonded between two structural facings made of wood structural panels. This document does
not provide guidelines for assessing the adequacy of reinforcement or other materials that may be
incorporated into or supplied with a SIP, such as sawn lumber or wood I-joists. These materials shall be
designed in accordance with the appropriate code adopted design standards.
It is intended that this document be used in conjunction with competent engineering design, accurate
fabrication, and adequate supervision of construction. It shall be the final responsibility of the designer
to relate design assumptions, reference design values and to make design adjustments appropriate to the
end use. This Specification is not intended as a substitute for the experience and expertise of a licensed
design professional, such as a licensed architect or engineer, nor shall the provisions of this design guide
supersede or limit the professional judgment of a licensed design professional in the use of SIP panels in
any specific application.
This Specification is intended to supplement the SIP manufacturer’s literature. Where conflicts exist
between this Specification and the manufacturer’s literature, the manufacturer’s literature shall govern.
1.2 Design Procedures

This document provides design provisions for Allowable Strength Design (ASD), Load and Resistance
Factor Design (LRFD), Limit States Design (LSD), and Average Divided-By-Three (ADT) design
philosophies. Designs shall be made according to one of these design methods, as appropriate.
This Specification is not intended to preclude the use of materials, assemblies, structures or designs not
meeting the criteria herein, where it is demonstrated by analysis based on recognized theory, full-scale or
prototype loading tests or extensive experience in use that the material assembly, structure or design will
perform satisfactorily in its intended use.
1.2.1 Loading Assumptions

SIP buildings and their components shall be designed and constructed to safely support all anticipated
loads. This Specification is predicated on the principle that the loading assumed in the design represents
actual conditions, except as permitted by the following approximations:
1. SIP panels utilizing Type S splines, continuously supported at each support location and having a
width greater than 12-inches may be designed on the basis of a one foot panel width (per foot basis)
unless otherwise specified by the SIP manufacturer.
2. Reaction forces from equally spaced and equally loaded repetitive members, such as trusses and
joists, may be considered an equivalent uniform line-load in design provided the individual
members are spaced 24-inches on center or less and fastened to a rim board or similar member
capable of distributing the load to the SIP.
1.2.2 Design Loads

Minimum design loads shall be in accordance with the building code under which the structure is
designed, or where applicable, other recognized minimum design load standards.

1.2.3 Load Combinations

Combinations of design load and forces, and load combinations factors, shall be in accordance with the
building code under which the structure is designed, or where applicable, other recognized minimum
design standards. Where load combinations consider loads of different durations, additional load
combinations should be considered, as necessary, to ensure that the worst-case combination of load
duration and time effect factor is considered. The ADT design method shall be used in conjunction with
the allowable stress design load combinations found in ASCE 7.
1.3 Terminology
Unless otherwise expressly stated, the following words and terms shall, for the purposes of this
Specification, have the meanings provided in this section. Terms not defined in this section shall be
assigned the ordinarily accepted meaning such as the context implies.
ADOPTED WOOD DESIGN SPECIFICATION. A design specification, such as the National

Design Specification for Wood Construction (NDS) or CSA Standard O86, Engineered Design in
Wood, that has been adopted by the local authority having jurisdiction.
BOUNDARY ELEMENTS. Diaphragm and shear wall boundary members to which the
diaphragm transfers forces. Boundary members include chords and drag struts at diaphragm and
shear wall perimeters, interior openings, discontinuities, and reentrant corners.
CHARACTERISTIC VALUE. The structural property estimate, typically determined as

population mean for properties related to serviceability design limits and determined as tolerance
limit (5th percentile with 75% confidence) for properties related to strength design limits, as
estimated from the test data that is representative of the population being sampled.
CONNECTION. A joining together of two or more separate materials across an interface by means
of mechanical interlock or chemical adhesion. Unless otherwise specified, connections described in
this Design Guide are limited to those connections made between the facing of a SIP panel and
another material, such as, but not limited to, a spline. For the purposes of this document, connections
are classified as follows:
CONNECTION, TYPE A (ADHESIVE/SEALANT). A connection formed by use of an adhesive

or adhesive sealant with or without the presence of mechanical fasteners. A mechanical connection
shall be classified as a Type A Connection when an adhesive or sealant is applied to the faying
surfaces joined by the mechanical fasteners regardless of whether the strength contribution of the
adhesive or adhesive sealant is considered.
CONNECTION, TYPE C (CONVENTIONAL). A mechanical connection composed of

conventional materials and assembled in a manner that permits the strength of the connection to be
determined in accordance with an accepted engineering design methodology or otherwise conforms
to prescriptive connection requirements. A Type C Connection is generally created when a
mechanical fastener is inserted through a SIP facing into a Type R Spline or Type RT Spline.
CONNECTION, TYPE S (SIP). A mechanical connection composed of conventional or non-

conventional materials and assembled in a manner that does not permit the strength of the
connection to be determined in accordance with an accepted engineering design methodology and
does not conform to prescriptive connection requirements. A Type S Connection is generally created
when a mechanical fastener is inserted through a SIP facing into a Type S Spline.

CONNECTION, TYPE SD (SIP-DUCTILE). A Type S Connection that has been shown by testing
or analysis to exhibit a ductile mode of failure. In Type SD Connections, except where thin mild-
carbon steel materials are joined, the fastener connecting the material must be shown to yield prior to
failure of the connected materials. Wood-to-wood connections analyzed using the National Design
Specification for Wood Construction (NDS) yield mode equations must exhibit a Mode III or Mode
IV yield modes to be classified as ductile, Type SD Connections. Where wood products are used, a
Type SD Connection is generally created when a ductile mechanical fastener, such as a nail, is
inserted through a SIP facing into a Type C or Type S Spline that provides a minimum dowel bearing
length of 6 times the fastener diameter.
CONVENTIONAL MATERIALS. Building materials conforming to standards recognized by the

adopted building code or as adopted by the authority having jurisdiction. Examples of conventional
materials include dimension lumber, engineered wood products and cold-formed steel.
CORE. The light-weight middle section of the SIP composed of foam plastic insulation, which
provides the link between the two structural panel facings and provides the required thermal
insulation for the wall, supplies buckling resistance to the two panel facings under axial loads, and
contributes to the shear and bending resistance of the panel under transverse and lateral loads.
CORE, EXPANDED POLYSTYRENE (EPS). The letter designation for the molded expanded
polystyrene thermal insulation classified by this standard and is defined as cellular plastic product
manufactured from pre-expanded polystyrene beads subsequently molded into blocks resulting in a
product which is rigid with closed cellular structure.
CORE, JOINT. A discontinuity created within the SIP core at the interface between individual core
pieces that results when more than one piece of preformed core material is used within a single
panel.
CORE, POLYURETHANE INSULATION (PU). A rigid cellular plastic material that is formed
by the catalyzed reaction of polyisocyanates and polyhydroxyl compounds, expanded with blowing
agents, resulting in a product that is a predominantly closed cell product. Polyurethane cores may be
expanded between the facers and self-adhered to the facing or may be performed and bonded with a
laminating adhesive.
CORE, VOID. A discontinuity within the SIP core that consists of an empty space/volume.
DIAPHRAGM. Roof, floor or other membrane or bracing system acting to transfer lateral forces to
the vertical resisting elements.
FACING. The material that forms both exterior layers of the SIP. The facings provide flexural
strength and stiffness to the SIP assemblage under transverse loading and provide axial strength
under in-plane compressive and tensile loading.
FOLDED PLATE. A class of shell structure formed by joining flat SIPs along their edges to create
a three-dimensional spatial structure.
LAMINATING ADHESIVE. The adhesive used to bond the facings to the core; exists as a thin-film
between the materials being joined.
LINTEL. A structural element acting as a header supporting gravity loads above an opening.

MANUFACTUER’S LITERATURE. Manufacturer specific specifications, details and/or designed

information. Such information shall be regarded as applying only to the panels produced by the
manufacturer supplying the literature and shall not be used in conjunction with SIPs supplied by
other manufacturers.
OPENING, DOOR/WINDOW OPENING. A discontinuity in a SIP assembly where one or both

facings are not present thereby creating a condition where a load path must be provided to transfer
the applied load(s) around the discontinuity.
PIER. A section of a wall, comprised of SIPs, between windows or other adjacent openings.
SEALANT. Material used for sealing SIPs at spline, plate, and other connections to reduce air
infiltration.
SEISMIC FORCE-RESISTING SYSTEM. That part of the structural system that has been
considered in the design to provide the required resistance to the code required seismic forces.
SHEAR WALL. A wall designed to resist lateral forces acting in the plane of the wall.
SHEAR WALL, PERFORATED. A shear wall with openings in the wall that has not been
specifically designed and detailed for force transfer around wall openings.
SHEAR WALL, SEGMENTED. A shear wall consisting of individual full-height wall segments
with no openings within an individual full-height segment.
SHELL. Three-dimensional spatial structure made up of one or more curved or folded plates. Shells
are characterized by their three-dimensional load-carrying behavior, which is determined by their
geometry, form, the manner in which they are supported, and by the nature of the applied load.
SPLINE. Elements installed, at the factory or at the jobsite, into recesses in the SIP core, to
interconnect adjacent SIP panels utilizing a tongue-and-groove arrangement. For the purposes of this
document, splines are classified as follows:
SPLINE, BLOCK. A spline consisting of the same material as the structural insulated panel facings
bonded with the same foam core to form a block with overall thickness equal to the core thickness of
the two structural insulated panels to be connected that fits into a recess at the vertical edges of the
two structural insulated panels to be connected (see Figure 1.3-1).
Figure 1.3-1: Block Spline

SPLINE, SURFACE. A pair of wood structural panels of the same material as the structural
insulated panel facings that fit into grooves cut into the foam core at the vertical edges of the two
structural insulated panels to be connected (see Figure 1.3-2).
Figure 1.3-2: Surface Spline
SPLINE, TYPE R (REINFORCING SPLINE). A Type R Spline is a discrete element, not integral
with the SIP, having accepted design properties established separately from the SIP panel. This type
of spline reinforces the SIP panel and provides significant axial and transverse (out-of-plane)
strength and stiffness. Examples of Type R Splines include, but are not limited to: solid sawn lumber,
engineered lumber, cold-formed steel studs or channels (see Figure 1.3-3).
Figure 1.3-3: Reinforcing Spline
SPLINE, TYPE RT (TRANSVERSE REINFORCING SPLINE). A Type R Spline that provides

only transverse (out-of-plane) reinforcement. Examples of Type RT Splines include, but are not
limited to, wood I-Joists.
SPLINE, TYPE S (SIP SPLINE). A spline comprised of an element or elements that do not
contribute significant additional strength or stiffness (axial or transverse) to the assembled SIPs.
Examples of Type S Splines include but are not limited to: surface splines and block splines.
STRENGTH, DESIGN. Nominal strength multiplied by a strength reduction factor (LRFD, LSD)
or divided by a factor of safety (ASD, ADT).
STRENGTH, NOMINAL. Strength of a member or cross-section calculated in accordance with the

requirements and assumptions of the strength design methods of this Specification (or the reference
documents) before application of any strength-reduction factors (LRFD, LSD) or factors of safety
(ASD, LSD).
STRENGTH, REQUIRED. Minimum loads, forces, internal moments and stresses must be resisted
by a member subjected to the combinations of loads required by the adopted building and applicable
to the design method used (i.e. ASD, ADT, LRFD, LSD).
STRENGTH AXES. The two possible directions of loading in the plane of the SIP panel that are
orthogonal to each other and have distinct mechanical properties.

STRENGTH AXIS, STRONG. The direction of loading in which the applied stress is applied
parallel to the strength axis having the greatest mechanical properties.
STRENGTH AXIS, WEAK. The direction of loading in which the applied stress is applied parallel
to the strength axis having the lesser mechanical properties.
STRINGER. Elements or components that are integral with the SIP (factory-installed within the
SIP) parallel to the panel span. Also referred to as intermediate stiffeners or structural splines.
STRUCTURAL INSULATED PANEL (SIP). A structural member composed of a light-weight

insulating core material, such as expanded polystyrene foam (EPS) or polyurethane foam (PU),
securely bonded to wood structural panel facings to form a composite assembly. SIP panels may be
used as walls, roofs, and floors in buildings.
SUPPORT CONDITION, END-SUPPORTED. Support condition where load is applied to the

supported face. Mode of failure changes from a shear failure to a tensile/peeling failure of the top
facing (Figure 1.3-6). The strength contribution of the bottom facing is dependent on the withdrawal
strength of the fasteners from the supporting member. This support condition is commonly seen in
wall panels.
Figure 1.3-6: End-Supported
SUPPORT CONDITION, BLOCKED FACE-BEARING. Support condition where load is

applied to the face opposite a bearing support (Figure 1.3-4). A solid block provided at the bearing
location prevents local crushing of the core. This support condition generally achieves the greatest
strength and produces a shear failure through the core.
Figure 1.3-4: Blocked Face-Bearing Support
SUPPORT CONDITION, UNBLOCKED FACE-BEARING. Support condition where load is

applied to the face opposite a bearing support (Figure 1.3-5). No solid block is provided at the
bearing location which permits crushing of the core. This support condition may produce either a
shear failure or a bearing failure. Additionally, the local deflection of the core becomes a design
consideration. This support condition is commonly seen in roof panels.

Figure 1.3-5: Unblocked Face-Bearing Support
WOOD STRUCTURAL PANEL. A panel product composed of oriented strand board (OSB) or
plywood in conformance with the performance requirements of DOC PS1 or DOC PS2 in the U.S. or
CSA O121, CSA O151, or CSA O325 in Canada.


2 NOTATION
Some definitions in the list below have been simplified in the interest of brevity. In all cases, the
definitions given in the body of the Specification govern. Except where otherwise noted, the
symbols used in this document have the following meanings:
Α = Area of diaphragm or shear wall chord cross-section (in.2)

Af = Total cross-sectional area of the facing material (in.2)
An = Net tensile area of panel facings (in.2)
Ao = Total area of openings in the shear wall where individual openings are calculated as the
opening width times the clear opening height. Where sheathing is not applied to the
framing above or below the opening, these areas shall be included in the total area of
openings. Where the opening height is less than h/3, an opening height of h/3 shall be
used (ft2)
Αv = Shear area (in.2)
b = Shear wall or shear wall segment length (ft)
b = Bearing width perpendicular to panel span (in.)
bc = Shear wall width at story c (ft)
C = Compression chord force in shear wall (lbf)
CAR = Aspect ratio adjustment factor from Section 8.5.6
CC = Connection correction factor from Section 8.5.5
Ce = Eccentric load factor, Equation 6.3.1-4.
CFv = Depth factor for shear, Section 5.3.1
Ci = Crushing-buckling interaction factor from Section 6.3.1
CO = Perforated shear wall adjustment factor from Section 8.5.7
Cp = Facing-peeling factor, as provided by the SIP manufacturer, or may be taken as 0.4, but
in no case shall be greater than 1.0.
CSG = Specific gravity correction factor from Equation 8.5.5-4
c = Crushing-buckling interaction calibration factor
c = Story at which chord forces are to be determined
c = Core thickness (in.)
dh = Header depth (in.)
E = Average modulus of elasticity of SIP (psi), or modulus of elasticity of diaphragm chords
(psi)
Ec = Compressive modulus of elasticity of the core (psi)
Ef = Flexural modulus of elasticity of the facing (psi)
Emin = Minimum bending modulus (in.)
Et = Modulus of elasticity adjusted for load duration (psi)
e = Net load eccentricity or t/6, whichever is greater (in.)
ep = Effective eccentricity at the top of the pier from Equation 11.5.1.2 (in.)
Fc = Facing compressive strength (psi)
Fcc = Compressive strength of core (psi)
Fcr = Elastic buckling stress from Equation 6.3.1-5 (psi)
Fe = Elastic buckling stress without consideration of shear stiffness, from Equation 6.3.1-6
(psi)
Ft = Facing tensile strength (psi)
Fv = Core shear strength (psi)
G = Shear modulus under short term loads (psi)
Ga = Apparent diaphragm or shear wall shear stiffness from nail slip and panel shear
deformation (kips/in.)

Gmin = Minimum shear modulus (psi)

Gt = Shear modulus adjusted for load duration (psi)
h = Shear wall height, height of wall or total height of pier (ft)
hh = Height from the bottom of the pier to the bottom of the header opening (in.)
hi = Height from base of shear wall at level c to top of shear wall at level i (ft)
I = Moment of inertia (in.4)
If = Facing moment of inertia (in.4)
k = Buckling length coefficient from Table 6.2-1
k = Angle of dispersion, if unknown may be taken as zero
L = Design span or distance between supports (in.), diaphragm length (ft)
Li = Length of individual perforated shear wall segments having aspect ratios conforming to
Section 8.5.6 (ft)
Ltot = Total wall length including the lengths of the shear wall segments and the lengths of the
segments containing openings (ft)
lb = Bearing length (in.)
M = Required moment (in.-lbf)
Mc = Nominal flexural strength limited by facing compressive strength (in.-lbf)
Mhc = Nominal flexural strength limited by facing compressive strength (in.-lbf)
Mht = Nominal flexural strength limited by facing tensile strength (in.-lbf)
Mip = Required in-plane moment (ASD-level load) (in.-lbf)
Mop = Required out-of-plane moment (ASD-level load) (in.-lbf)
Mt = Nominal flexural strength limited by facing tensile strength (in.-lbf)
m = Depth adjustment factor exponent for shear
Nf = Ratio of Type S connection strength to Type C connection strength considering a specific
gravity of 0.50 for all wood-based materials.
n = Total number of stories in building
Pn = Nominal compression strength (lbf)
Pp = Compressive force applied at the top of the wall above the pier (lbf)
R = Required strength determined from the building code ASD load combinations
R = Required compressive force (service-level load) (lbf)
Rf = Permissible strength contribution of the fasteners in tension from Equation 10.4.4-2 (plf)
Rh = Header reaction force applied to the pier (lbf)
Rn = Nominal strength determined from the limit state equations in the Specification
Rn = Nominal bearing strength (lbf)
Ru = Required strength determined from the building code LRFD or LSD load combinations
(factored loads, LRFD and LSD)
r = Radius of gyration (in.)
rsa = Sheathing area ratio from Equation 8.5.7.2-2
Sc = SIP section modulus corresponding to facing in flexural compression (in.3)
SG = Minimum specific gravity of connected materials (i.e. plates, chords or splines) from the
adopted wood design specification
Sh = SIP header section modulus (in.3)
St = SIP section modulus corresponding to facing in flexural tension (in.3)
s = Fastener spacing (inches on-center)
T = Required tensile strength (lbf)
Τ = Tension chord force in shear wall (lbf)
Tn = Nominal tensile strength of panel facing (lbf)
t = Design panel thickness (in.)
to = Reference panel thickness for shear strength (in.)
V = Total required unit shear in diaphragm or shearwall (service-level load) (lbf/ft)

Vd = Nominal diaphragm strength (lbf)

Vi = Required shear force at level i (lbf)
Vn = Nominal shear strength of panel core (lbf)
Vs = Nominal shear wall strength (lbf)
yc = Distance from neutral axis to extreme compression fiber (in.)
vd = Nominal diaphragm unit shear capacity from Table 8.4.2-2
vmax = Maximum required unit shear (plf)
vs = Nominal shear wall unit shear capacity from Table 8.5.2-2
W = Diaphragm width (ft)
W = Permissible withdrawal or pull-through strength, whichever is less, of an individual
fastener determined in accordance with the adopted wood design specification (lbf)
w = Uniform load (pli)
wSb = Portion of uniform load carried by the SIP for flexural design (pli)
wRb = Portion of uniform load carried by the reinforcement for flexural design (pli)
wSv = Portion of uniform load carried by the SIP for shear design (pli)
wRv = Portion of uniform load carried by the reinforcement for shear design (pli)
(EtI)S = Bending stiffness of the SIP adjusted to the load duration corresponding to wS in
accordance with 4.2.2 (lbf-in.2)
(EI)R = Bending stiffness of the reinforcement adjusted to the load duration corresponding to wR
in accordance with 4.2.2 (lbf-in.2)
(GtAv)S = Shear stiffness of the SIP adjusted to the load duration corresponding to wS in
accordance with 4.2.3 (lbf)
(κGA)R = Shear stiffness of the reinforcement adjusted to the load duration corresponding to wR in
x = Distance from chord splice to nearest support (ft)
α = Buckling stress-to-crushing stress ratio, Equation 6.3.1-2 and Equation 6.3.1-3
αm = Moment application factor from Equation 9.3.1-2
β = Relative stiffness parameter (in.-6)
∆a = Total vertical elongation of wall anchorage system (including fastener slip, device
elongation, rod elongation, etc.) at the induced unit shear in the shear wall (in.)
∆b = Deflection due to bending effects (in.)
∆c = Diaphragm chord splice slip at the induced unit shear in diaphragm (in.)
∆cc = Local deflection at point of loading (in.)
∆N = Portion of deflection attributed to normal duration loads (in.)
∆P = Portion of deflection attributed to permanent loads (in.)
∆S = Portion of deflection attributed to short duration loads (in.)
∆T = Total deflection due to combination of loads (in.)
∆t = Total deflection attributed to loads of a single duration (in.)
∆v = Deflection due to shear effects (in.)
δdia = Diaphragm deflection (in.)
δsw = Shear wall deflection (in.)
λ = Time effect factor
λc = Time effect factor from Table 4.1.4-2
λcc = Time effect factor from Table 10.4.4-2
λd = Time effect factor from Table 8.4.2-2
λE = Time effect factor from Table 4.2.2-1
λG = Time effect factor from Table 4.2.3-1
λs = Time effect factor from Table 8.5.2-2

λt = Time effect factor from Table 4.1.3-2

λv = Time effect factor from Table 5.3-2
φ = Resistance factor for LRFD or LSD design
φmt = Resistance factor applicable to flexure limited by facing tensile strength from Section
4.1.3
φs = Resistance factor applicable to in-plane shear from Section 8.4.2
φt = Resistance factor applicable to tensile strength from Section 7.2
Ω = Safety factor for ADT or ASD design
Ωmt = Safety factor applicable to flexure limited by facing tensile strength from Section 4.1.3
Ωs = Safety factor applicable to in-plane shear from Section 8.4.2
Ωt = Safety factor applicable to tensile strength from Section 7.2

3 USE CONSIDERATIONS
3.1 Required Strength

The required strength of structural members and connections shall be determined by structural analysis
using the load and load combinations stipulated in Section 1.2.2 and 1.2.3, respectively. Computation of
forces, moments, and deflections shall be by elastic analysis and shall consider the effect of eccentricities
as required.
3.2 Design Strength

Calculated values represent nominal strength delivered by the component and must be adjusted to
either strength level (LRFD, LSD) or stress level loads (ADT, ASD).
3.2.1 Load Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) Requirements

A design satisfies the requirements of this Specification when the design strength of each structural
component equals or exceeds the required strength, determined on the basis of the nominal loads,
multiplied by the applicable load factors, for all applicable load combinations.
The design shall be performed in accordance with Equation 3.2.1-1.
Ru ≤ φRn (Eqn. 3.2.1-1)

where:
Ru = Required strength from building code LRFD load combinations
Rn = Nominal strength, from equations in this design guide
φ = Resistance factor for LRFD design
φRn = Design strength
3.2.2 Allowable Stress Design (ASD) Requirements

A design satisfies the requirements of this Specification when the allowable strength of each
structural component equals or exceeds the required strength, determined on the basis of the nominal
loads, for all applicable load combinations.
R ≤ Rn Ω (Eqn. 3.2.2-1)
where:
R = Required strength from building code ASD load combinations
Ω = Safety factor for ASD design
R n /Ω = Design strength

3.2.3 Average Divided-by-Three Design (ADT) Requirements

Allowable strengths established from test data where the average test result is divided by a factor of
safety of three shall be designed using the ADT methodology. A design satisfies the requirements of
this Specification when the allowable strength of each structural component equals or exceeds the
required strength, determined on the basis of the nominal loads, for all applicable load combinations.
𝑅𝑅 ≤ 𝑅𝑅𝑛𝑛 ⁄Ω (Eqn. 3.2.3-1)
where:
R = Required strength from building code using ASD load combinations
Rn = Allowable strength, from equations in this design guide
Ω = Safety factor for ADT design, equal 1.0 for all limits states.
R n /Ω = Design strength
3.2.4 Limits States Design (LSD) Requirements

A design satisfies the requirements of this Specification when the factored resistance of each
structural component equals or exceeds the effect of the factored loads for all applicable load
combinations.
Ru ≤ φRn (Eqn. 3.2.4-1)

where:
Ru = Required strength from building code using LSD load combinations
φ = Resistance factor for LSD design
φRn = Design strength
3.3 Serviceability Requirements

Structural systems and members thereof shall be designed to have adequate stiffness to limit deflection,
lateral drift, vibration or any other deformations that adversely affect the intended use and performance
of the building. The deflections of structural members shall not exceed the limitations of the building
code under which the structure is designed, or where applicable, other recognized minimum design load
standards.
3.4 Additional Considerations

The design strength determined in accordance with Section 3.2 shall be adjusted to account for strength
reducing effects, such as but not limited to, the effects described in this section. The manufacturer’s
literature shall be reviewed to identify additional effects that require consideration.
3.5 Time Effect Factor

The reference design value shall be multiplied by the time effect factor, λ, based on the load
combination considered. For ADT and ASD design the load effect factor for the shortest duration
load in a given combination of loads shall apply for that combination. For LRFD and LSD design the
load effect factor corresponding to the load having the greatest load factor in a combination of loads

shall apply for that combination. All applicable load combinations shall be evaluated to determine
the critical load combination. Loads shall be assigned the load duration provided in Table 3.5-1.
Table 3.5-1: Load Duration Classes

Load Duration Typical Design Loads
Test loads, wind, earthquake,
Short impact live load,
roof live load (construction)
Snow load, live load
Normal
(occupancy)
Dead load, lateral soil
Permanent
pressure, live load (storage)
3.6 Temperature Limits

This Specification applies to SIP panels used as structural members where sustained temperatures do
not exceed 100º F. See Commentary for more information on roofs and other assemblies subject to
diurnal or short duration temperature excursions in excess of 100º F.
3.7 Moisture and Weather Protection

This Specification applies to SIP panels used under dry service conditions where the panels are
protected from moisture and direct exposure to weather by an approved water resistive barrier and a
weather resistive covering. SIPs shall not be used where the in-use moisture content will exceed
16%.
3.8 Termite Damage

In areas subject to infestation by termites SIP panels shall be protected as required by the applicable
building code.


4 FLEXURE
4.1 Flexural Strength

4.1.1 General
Each SIP panel subjected to flexural loads shall be of sufficient size and capacity to resist the applied
loads without exceeding the permissible design values specified herein. The flexural strength, Mn, shall
be the smallest value considering the limit states of facing tension and facing compression calculated in
accordance with Sections 4.1.3 and 4.1.4, respectively.
4.1.2 Design Span

The design span used for determining critical moments shall be taken as the clear span between the faces
of the supports (see Figure 4.1.2-1). At locations of continuity over intermediate bearings, the design
span is measured from the centerline of the intermediate support to the face of the bearing at the end
support. For interior spans of continuous panels, the design span extends from centerline to centerline of
the intermediate supports. Cantilever spans shall be taken from the end of the cantilever to the center of
the support.
Figure 4.1.2-1: Design Spans for Flexure
4.1.3 Flexural Strength Limited by Facing Tension

The applicable safety factors and the resistance factors given in this section shall be used to determine
the allowable strength or design strength in accordance with the applicable design method in Section 3.2.
Panel flexural strength limited by facing tension, Mt, shall be calculated using Equation 4.1.3-1.
Table 4.1.3-1: Reduction Factors for Flexural Tension

Safety Factor, Ωmt Resistance Factor, φmt
ADT ASD LRFD LSD
1.0 1.68 0.80 0.95

M t = λt Ft S t (Eqn. 4.1.3-1)
where:
Mt = Nominal flexural strength limited by facing tensile strength (in.-lbf)
St = SIP section modulus corresponding to facing in flexural tension (in.3)
Table 4.1.3-2: Time-Effect Factors for Flexural Tension, λt

Load ADT ASD LRFD LSD
Duration λt λt λt λt
Short 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9
Normal 1.0 0.6 0.8 0.8
Permanent 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.5
4.1.4 Flexural Strength Limited by Facing Compression

The applicable safety factors and the resistance factors given in Table 4.1.4-1 shall be used to determine
Panel nominal flexural strength limited by facing compression, Mc, shall be calculated using Equation
4.1.4-1.
Table 4.1.4-1: Reduction Factors for Flexural Compression

Safety Factor, Ωmc Resistance Factor, φmc
ADT ASD LRFD LSD
1.0 1.50 0.90 0.80
M c = λc Fc S c (Eqn. 4.1.4-1)
where:
Mc = Nominal flexural strength limited by facing compressive strength (in.-lbf)
Sc = SIP section modulus corresponding to facing in flexural compression (in.3)
Table 4.1.4-2: Time-Effect Factors for Flexural Compression, λc

Duration λc λc λc λc
Short 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9
Normal 1.0 0.6 0.8 0.8
Permanent 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.5
4.2 Flexural (Transverse) Stiffness

4.2.1 General
The overall flexural stiffness of a SIP panel must consider both bending and shear stiffness. These
components of the overall flexural stiffness shall be established in accordance with this section.

4.2.2 Bending Modulus

The bending modulus of elasticity shall be adjusted to the appropriate duration based on the loads to be
resisted. For loads of a given duration, the bending stiffness, Et, shall be determined using Equations
4.2.2-1.
Et = λ E E (Eqn. 4.2.2-1)
where:
Et = Modulus of elasticity adjusted for load duration (psi)
λE = Time-effect factor from Table 4.2.2-1.
E = Average modulus of elasticity (psi)
Table 4.2.2-1: Time-Effect Factors for Elastic Modulus, λE

Core Load
Material Duration λΕ
Short 1.00
Expanded
Normal 0.40
Polystyrene (EPS)
Permanent 0.30
Short 1.00
Polyurethane Normal 0.20
Permanent 0.15
4.2.3 Shear Modulus

The shear modulus shall be adjusted to the appropriate duration based on the loads to be resisted. For
loads of a given duration, the shear stiffness, Gt, shall be determined using Equations 4.2.3-1.
Gt = λ G G (Eqn. 4.2.3-1)
where:
Gt = Shear modulus adjusted for load duration (psi)
λG = Time-effect factor from Table 4.2.3-1.
G = Shear modulus under short term loads (psi)
Table 4.2.3-1: Time-Effect Factors for Shear Stiffness, λG

Core Load
Material Duration λG
Short 1.00
EPS Normal 0.40
Permanent 0.30
Short 1.00
Polyurethane Normal 0.20
Permanent 0.15

4.3 Flexural (Transverse) Deflection

4.3.1 General
Transverse deflection estimates shall be calculated using accepted engineering mechanics
considering both bending and shear deflections.
4.3.2 Design Span

The design span to be used in the determination of deflections under transverse loading shall be as
specified in 4.1.2.
4.3.3 Deflection Estimate

Deflections due to transverse loading of a simply supported panel, under general loading conditions
may be estimated using Equation 4.3.3-1.
M
∆t = ∆b + ∆v = ∆b + (Eqn. 4.3.3-1)
Gt Av
where:
∆b = Deflection due to bending effects determined using tabulated bending deflection formula
(in.)
Μ = Flexural moment at location where deflections are considered (in.-lbf)
Gt = Shear modulus adjusted to the load duration corresponding to w in accordance with 4.2.3
(psi)
4.3.3.1 Simply Supported, Uniform Load

Deflections due to transverse loading of a simply supported panel, subjected to a uniform load along
its full length, may be determined using Equation 4.3.3.1-1.
5wL4 wL2
∆t = ∆b + ∆v = + (Eqn. 4.3.3.1-1)
384 Et I 8Gt Av
where:
∆b = Deflection due to bending effects (in.)
Et = Modulus of elasticity adjusted to the load duration corresponding to w in accordance with
4.2.2 (psi)
(psi)
L = Design span in accordance with 4.3.2 (in.)
w = Uniform load (pli)

4.3.4 Total Deflection

Where loads of varying duration are applied simultaneously, the combined effect of the loads shall
be determined using Equation 4.3.4-1.
∆T = ∆ S + ∆ N + ∆ P (Eqn. 4.3.4-1)
where:
∆T = Total deflection due to combination of loads (in.)
∆S = Portion of deflection attributed to short duration loads (in.)
∆N = Portion of deflection attributed to normal duration loads (in.)
∆P = Portion of deflection attributed to permanent loads (in.)
4.3.5 Deflection Limits

The total deflection of structural or non-structural bending members, including consideration for long-
term loading, shall not exceed this limitations of the adopted building code under which the structure is
designed; or, other recognized minimum design load standards.


5 SHEAR
5.1 General
Each SIP panel subjected to out-of-plane loads shall be of sufficient size and capacity to resist the
applied loads without exceeding the permissible design values specified herein. The shear strength,
Vn, shall be the value calculated in accordance with Section 5.3.
5.2 Design Shear Force

The design span used for determining critical shear force shall be as defined shown in Figure 5.2-1, with
the critical shear determined at the face of the supports.
Exception: The critical shear may be calculated at distance t from the support if all the following
conditions are satisfied (Figure 5.2-1):
1) The support reaction, in the direction of the applied shear, introduces compression into the end
region of the SIP.
2) Loads are applied to the facing opposite a face-bearing support.
3) The SIP is not continuous over a support.
4) No concentrated load occurs between the face of support and location of the critical section.
Figure 5.2-1: Design Spans for Shear and Location of Critical Section
5.3 Core Shear Strength

The applicable safety factors and the resistance factors given in this section shall be used to
determine the allowable strength or design strength in accordance with the applicable design method
in Section 3.2. The panel core shear strength, Vn, shall be calculated using Equation 5.3-1.
Table 5.3-1: Reduction Factors for Core Shear

Safety Factor, Ωv Resistance Factor, φv
ADT ASD LRFD LSD
1.0 -- -- --

𝑉𝑉𝑛𝑛 = ͜𝜆𝜆𝑣𝑣 ͜𝐶𝐶𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 𝐹𝐹𝑣𝑣 𝐴𝐴𝑣𝑣 (Eqn. 5.3-1)

where:
Vn = Nominal shear strength of panel core (lbf)
λv = Time effect factor from Table 5.3-2
CFv = Depth factor for shear, Section 5.3.1
Av = Shear area (in.2)
Table 5.3-2: Time-Effect Factors for Core Shear, λv

ASD, LRFD,
ADT LSD
Time Effect Time Effect
Core Material Load Duration Factor, λv Factor, λv
Short 1.0 --
EPS Normal 1.0 --
Permanent 0.5 --
Short 1.0 --
Polyurethane Normal 1.0 --
Permanent 0.5 --
5.3.1 Depth Factor, CFv

The permissible shear strength shall be multiplied by an adjustment factor to account for the depth of
the panel. The size adjustment factor for core shear shall be calculated using Equation 5.3.1-1.
m
t 
C Fv =  o  ≤ 1.0 (Eqn. 5.3.1-1)
t 
where:
CFv = Shear strength depth adjustment factor
to = Reference panel thickness for shear strength (in.)
m = Depth adjustment factor exponent for shear
5.3.2 Core Voids and Discontinuities

Voids or discontinuities in the core shall be within the limits permitted by the panel manufacturer.

6 COMPRESSION
6.1 General
Each SIP panel subjected to in-plane compression loads shall be of sufficient size and capacity to resist
the applied loads without exceeding the permissible design values specified herein. The compressive
strength, Pn, shall be the value calculated in accordance with Sections 6.3.
6.2 Design Span

The column length in Equation 6.3.1-6 shall be taken as the distance between points of end-bearing
and/or lateral restraint. When end-fixity conditions are known, the length may be modified by the
coefficient, k, as provided in Table 6.2-1, otherwise k may be taken as 1.0.
Table 6.2-1: Buckling Length Coefficients, k
Buckling Mode
Theoretical k Value 0.5 0.7 1.0

Design k Value 0.65 0.80 1.0
Rotation fixed, translation
fixed
End Conditions
Rotation free, translation
fixed
6.3 Compression Strength

The applicable safety factors and the resistance factors given in this section shall be used to determine
Panel compression strength limited by crushing-buckling interaction, Pn, shall be calculated using
Equation 6.3-1.
Table 6.3-1: Reduction Factors for Compression

Safety Factor, Ωc Resistance Factor, φc
ADT ASD LRFD LSD
1.0 1.67 0.80 0.70
Pn = λc Ce Ci Fc A f (Eqn. 6.3-1)
where:
Pn = Nominal compression strength (lbf)
Ce = Eccentric load factor, Equation 6.3.1-4.
Ci = Crushing-buckling interaction factor from Section 6.3.1
Af = Total cross-sectional area of the facing material (in.2)
λc = Time effect factor from Table 6.3-2

Table 6.3-2: Time-Effect Factors for Compression, λc

Duration λc λc λc λc
Short 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9
Normal 1.0 0.6 0.8 0.8
Permanent 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.5
6.3.1 Crushing-Buckling Interaction Factor, Ci

The crushing-buckling interaction factor, Ci, shall be determined using Equation 6.3.1-1.
2
1+α 1+ α  α
Ci = −   − ≤ 1.0 (Eqn. 6.3.1-1)
2c  2c  c
where:
Ci = Crushing-buckling interaction factor
α = Buckling stress-to-crushing stress ratio, Equation 6.3.1-2 and Equation 6.3.1-3
c = Crushing-buckling interaction calibration factor
For ASD, LRFD and LSD design methods:

Ce Fcr
α= (Eqn. 6.3.1-2)
λc Fc
For ADT design method:
Ce Fcr
α= (Eqn. 6.3.1-3)
2.5λc Fc
where:
α = Buckling stress-to-crushing stress ratio
Ce = Load eccentricity factor from Equation 6.3.1-4
Fcr = Elastic buckling stress from Equation 6.3.1-5 (psi)
λc = Time effect factor from Table 6.3-2
r2
Ce = ≤ 1.0 (Eqn. 6.3.1-4)
r 2 + eyc
where:
Ce = Load eccentricity factor from Equation 6.3.1-4
e = Net load eccentricity or t/6, whichever is greater (in.)
Fe
Fcr = (Eqn. 6.3.1-5)
Fe
1+
Gmin Av
where:
Fcr = Elastic buckling stress (psi)
Fe = Elastic buckling stress without consideration of shear stiffness, from Equation 6.3.1-6 (psi)
Gmin = Minimum shear modulus (psi)

π 2 Emin
Fe = (Eqn. 6.3.1-6)
(kL r )2
where:
Fe = Elastic buckling stress (psi)
Emin = Minimum bending modulus (in.)
k = Buckling length coefficient from Table 6.2
L = Distance between points of lateral restraint (in.)
6.3.2 Core Voids and Discontinuities

Voids or discontinuities in the core shall be within the limits permitted by the panel manufacturer.


7 TENSION
7.1 General
Each SIP panel subjected to in-plane tensile loads shall be of sufficient size and capacity to resist the
applied loads without exceeding the permissible design values specified herein. The tensile strength,
Tn, shall be the value calculated in accordance with Section 7.2.
7.2 Facing Tensile Strength

in Section 3.2. The panel core shear strength, Tn, shall be calculated using Equation 7.2-1.
Table 7.2-1: Reduction Factors for Facing Tensile Strength

Safety Factor, Ωt Resistance Factor, φt
ADT ASD LRFD LSD
1.0 1.68 0.80 0.95
𝑉𝑉𝑛𝑛 = 𝜆𝜆𝑡𝑡 𝐹𝐹𝑡𝑡 𝐴𝐴𝑛𝑛 (Eqn. 7.2-1)

where:
Tn = Nominal tensile strength of panel facing (lbf)
An = Net tensile area of panel facings (in.2)
λt = Time effect factor from Table 7.2-2
Table 7.2-2: Time-Effect Factors for Facing Tension, λt

Duration λt λt λt λt
Short 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9
Normal 1.0 0.6 0.8 0.8
Permanent 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.5


8 LATERAL FORCE-RESISTING SYSTEMS
8.1 General
The proportioning, design, and detailing of engineered SIP systems, members, and connections in
lateral force-resisting systems shall be in accordance with the provisions in this section.
8.2 Deformation Requirements

Deformation of connections within and between structural elements shall be considered in design
such that the deformation of each element and connections comprising the lateral force-resisting
system are compatible with the deformations of the other lateral force-resisting elements and
connections and with the overall system.
8.3 Boundary Elements

Shear wall and diaphragm boundary elements shall be provided to transfer the design tension and
compression forces. The boundary elements shall be comprised of discrete elements, separate from
the SIP panel elements, designed to carry the boundary forces independent from the SIP panel. The
facing of SIP panels acting as diaphragm and shear wall elements shall not be used to splice
boundary elements. Diaphragm chords and collectors shall be placed in, or in contact with, the plane
of the diaphragm unless it can be demonstrated that the moments, shears, and deflections,
considering eccentricities resulting from other configurations, can be tolerated without exceeding the
framing capacity and drift limits.
8.4 Diaphragms
8.4.1 General
SIP diaphragms shall be permitted to be used to resist lateral forces provided the deflection in the
plane of the diaphragm, as determined by calculation, tests, or analogies drawn therefore, does not
exceed the maximum permissible deflection limit of the attached load distributing or resisting
elements. The permissible deflection shall be taken as the deflection that will permit the diaphragm
and any attached elements to maintain their structural integrity and continue to support their
prescribed loads as determined by the applicable building code or standard. Framing members and
connections shall extend into the diaphragm a sufficient distance to develop the force transferred into
the diaphragm.
8.4.2 Diaphragm Strength

in Section 3.2. The nominal diaphragm strength shall be calculated in accordance with Equation
8.4.2-1.
Table 8.4.2-1: Reduction Factors for Diaphragm Strength

Safety Factor, Ωd Resistance Factor, φd
Load Type ADT ASD LRFD LSD
Wind 1.0 2.1 0.75 0.43
Seismic 1.0 3.0 0.52 0.43

𝑉𝑉𝑑𝑑 = 𝜆𝜆𝑑𝑑 𝑣𝑣𝑑𝑑 𝑊𝑊 (Eqn. 8.4.2-1)
where:
Vd = Nominal diaphragm strength (lbf)
λd = Time effect factor from Table 8.4.2-2
vd = Nominal diaphragm unit shear capacity from Table 8.4.4-1 (lbf/ft)
Table 8.4.2-2: Time-Effect Factors for Diaphragm Shear Strength, λd

Duration λd λd λd λd
Short 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9
Normal 1.0 0.6 0.6 0.8
Permanent 0.5 0.56 0.56 0.5
8.4.3 Diaphragm Deflection

Calculations of diaphragm deflection shall account for bending and shear deflections, fastener
deformation, chord splice slip, and other contributing sources of deflection. The diaphragm
deflection, δdia, shall be permitted to be calculated using Equation 8.4.3-1.
5VL3 0.25VL ∑ ( x∆ c )
δ dia = + + (Eqn. 8.4.3-1)
8 EAW 1000Ga 2W
where:
δdia = Diaphragm deflection (in.)
V = Induced unit shear in diaphragm (service-level load) (lbf/ft)
L = Diaphragm length (ft)
Ε = Modulus of elasticity of diaphragm chords (psi)
Α = Area of chord cross-section (in.2)
Ga = Apparent diaphragm shear stiffness from nail slip and panel shear deformation determined
in accordance with Section 8.4.5 (kips/in.)
x = Distance from chord splice to nearest support (ft)
∆c = Diaphragm chord splice slip at the induced unit shear in diaphragm (in.)
Alternatively, for diaphragms, deflection shall be permitted to be calculated using a rational analysis
that accurately predicts the panel shear deformation and slip in the SIP-to-spline connection.
8.4.4 Diaphragm Unit Shear Capacities

The nominal diaphragm unit shear capacity, vd, for use in Equation 8.4.2-1, may be taken from Table
8.4.4-1 for ASD, LRFD and LSD design. Capacities for the ADT design methodology shall be
obtained from manufacturer’s literature. Alternately, the nominal diaphragm unit shear capacity,
shall be based on test data generated in accordance with ASTM E455.

Table 8.4.4-1: Nominal Unit Shear Capacities for

Wood Structural Panel (Sheathing Grade OSB) Faced SIP Panel Diaphragms1,2,3,4
Minimum Nail spacing (in.) at diaphragm boundaries
Nominal and at all panel edges (all cases)
Facing 6 4 2
Thickness vd Ga vd Ga vd Ga
Fastener (in.) (plf) (kips/in.) (plf) (kips/in.) (plf) (kips/in.)
0.131”x 2.5” Nail 7/16 800 13 990 21 1730 34
1
Diaphragm loads may be applied to panels oriented as shown in Case 5 and Case 6, as shown in
Figure 8.4.4-1.
2
Interior spline shall be a 3-inch wide, minimum, Type S Spline and have a thickness and grade
equal or greater than the SIP facing. Specified spline fasteners are required through one facing only.
See Figure 8.4.4-2.
3
Boundary spline shall be a 1.5-inch wide, minimum, Type R Spline and have a specific gravity
of 0.42 or greater. Specified boundary fasteners are required through both facings. See Figure
8.4.4-2.
4
All materials shall have a moisture content of 19% or less at the time of construction.
Figure 8.4.4-1: Diaphragm Loading Cases
Figure 8.4.4-2: Diaphragm Connections
8.4.5 Diaphragm Aspect Ratios

Diaphragms designed using the information in Table 8.4.4 shall be limited to a maximum aspect
ratio (L/W) of 3:1. Where design capacities are based on testing in accordance with ASTM E455,
the maximum aspect ratio shall not exceed the aspect ratio (L/W) of the test assembly on which the
strength and stiffness values are based.

8.4.6 Horizontal Distribution of Shear

Diaphragms shall be defined as rigid or flexible for the purposes of distributing shear loads and
designing for torsional moments. When a diaphragm is defined as flexible, the diaphragm shear
forces shall be distributed to the vertical resisting elements based on the tributary area. When a
diaphragm is defined as rigid, the diaphragm shear forces shall be distributed based on the relative
lateral stiffness of the vertical-resisting elements of the story below.
8.4.7 Diaphragm Construction Requirements

8.4.7.1 Boundary Elements
The boundary elements shall be comprised of discrete elements, separate from the SIP panel
elements, designed to carry the boundary forces independent from the SIP panel.
8.4.7.2 Fasteners
SIP diaphragm element shall be interconnected using nails or other approved fasteners alone, or in
combination with adhesives or adhesive sealants. Nails shall be driven with the head of the nail flush
with the surface of the sheathing. Other approved fasteners shall be driven as required for proper
installation of that fastener.
8.5 Shear Walls

8.5.1 General
SIP shear walls shall be permitted to be used to resist lateral forces provided the deflection of the
shear wall, as determined by calculation, tests, or analogies drawn therefore, does not exceed the
maximum permissible deflection limit of the attached load distributing or resisting elements.
Permissible deflection shall be that deflection that will permit the shear wall and any attached
elements to maintain their structural integrity and continue to support their prescribed loads as
determined by the applicable building code or standard. Framing members and connections shall
extend into the shear wall a sufficient distance to develop the force transferred into the shear wall.
8.5.2 Shear Wall Strength

in Section 3.2. The nominal shear wall strength shall be calculated using Equation 8.5.2-1.
Table 8.5.2-1: Reduction Factors for Shear Wall Strength

Safety Factor, Ωsw Resistance Factor, φsw
Load Type ADT ASD LRFD LSD
Wind 1.0 2.1 0.75 0.43
Seismic/Other 1.0 3.0 0.52 0.43

𝑉𝑉𝑠𝑠 = 𝜆𝜆𝑠𝑠 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝐶𝐶𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝐶𝐶𝑂𝑂 𝑣𝑣𝑠𝑠 𝑏𝑏 (Eqn. 8.5.2-1)
where:
Vs = Nominal shear wall strength (lbf)
λs = Time effect factor from Table 8.5.2-2
CC = Connection correction factor from Section 8.5.5
CAR = Aspect ratio adjustment factor from Section 8.5.6
CO = Perforated shear wall adjustment factor from Section 8.5.7
vs = Nominal shear wall unit shear capacity from Table 8.5.4-1 (lbf/ft)
b = Shear wall or shear wall segment length (ft)
Table 8.5.2-2: Time-Effect Factors for Shear Wall Strength, λs

Duration λs λs λs λs
Short 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9
Normal 1.0 0.6 0.6 0.8
Permanent 0.5 0.56 0.56 0.5
8.5.3 Shear Wall Deflection

Calculations of shear wall deflection shall account for bending and shear deflections, fastener
deformation, anchorage slip, and other contributing sources of deflection. The shear wall deflection,
δsw, shall be permitted to be calculated using Equation 8.5.3-1.
8Vh3 Vh h∆
δ sw = + + a (Eqn. 8.5.3-1)
EAb 1000Ga b
where:
δsw = Shear wall deflection (in.)
V = Required unit shear in shear wall (service-level loads) (lbf/ft)
h = Shear wall height (ft)
b = Shear wall width (ft)
Ε = Modulus of elasticity of shear wall chords (psi)
Α = Area of chord cross-section (in.2)
Ga = Apparent shear wall stiffness from nail slip and panel shear deformation determined in
accordance with Section 8.5.5 (kips/in.)
∆a = Total vertical elongation of wall anchorage system (including fastener slip, device
elongation, rod elongation, etc.) at the induced unit shear in the shear wall (in.)
Alternatively, for shear walls, deflection shall be permitted to be calculated using a rational analysis
that accurately predicts the panel shear deformation and slip in the SIP-to-spline connection.
8.5.4 Shear Wall Unit Shear Capacities

The nominal diaphragm unit shear capacity, vs, for use in Equation 8.5.2-1, may be taken from Table
8.5.4-1 for ASD, LRFD and LSD design. Capacities for the ADT design methodology shall be
obtained from manufacturer’s literature. Alternately, the nominal diaphragm unit shear capacity,
shall be based on test data generated in accordance with ASTM E72.

Table 8.5.4-1: Nominal Unit Shear Capacities for

Wood Structural Panel (Sheathing Grade OSB) Faced SIP Panel Shear Walls1,2,3
Minimum Nail spacing at shear wall boundaries and at all panel edges
Nominal 6-in oc 4-in. oc 3-in. oc
Facing
Thickness vs Ga vs Ga vs Ga
Fastener (in.) (plf) (kips/in.) (plf) (kips/in.) (plf) (kips/in.)
0.113” x 2.5” Nail 7/16 1000 31 1460 43 1870 57
0.131” x 2.5” Nail 7/16 1340 34 1960 49 2520 62
1
Interior splines shall be a 3-inch wide, minimum, Type S and have a thickness and grade equal or
greater than the SIP facing or 1.5-inch wide, minimum Type R or Type RT Splines. Specified spline
fasteners are required through both facings.
2
Boundary elements (chords and plates) shall be 1.5-inch wide, minimum, Type R Splines.
3
All materials shall have a moisture content of 19% or less at the time of construction.
8.5.5 Connection Correction Factor

The connection correction factor, CC, shall be determined in accordance with this section.
1. For nominal strengths established using the ADT method and all spline connection types, the
connection correction factor shall be:
C C = 1. 0 (Eqn. 8.5.5-1)
2. For all other design methods in assemblies using Type C or Type SD spline connections the
connection correction factor shall be determined as:
CC = C SG (Eqn. 8.5.5-2)
where:
3. For all other design methods in assemblies using Type S spline connections the connection
correction factor shall be determined as:
CC = N f ≤ CSG (Eqn. 8.5.5-3)
where:
Nf = Ratio of Type S connection strength to Type C connection strength considering a specific
gravity of 0.50 for all wood based materials.
= 0.76 for 0.113” x 2.5” nails
= 0.68 for 0.131” x 2.5” nails
CSG = 1 − (0.5 − SG ) ≤ 1.0 (Eqn. 8.5.5-4)

where:
CSG = Specific gravity correction factor
SG = Minimum specific gravity of connected materials (i.e. plates, chords or splines) from the
adopted wood design specification

8.5.6 Shear Wall Aspect Ratio Factor

The aspect ratio adjustment factor, CAR, shall be determined in accordance with Table 8.5.6-1. Shear
walls exceeding the aspect ratio limit for a given load type shall not be considered as part of the
lateral force resisting system.
Table 8.5.6-1: Shear Wall
Aspect Ratio Adjustment Factor, CAR
Load Limit Factor
Type (h/b) CAR
Wind 3.5 1.0
2.0 1.0
Seismic
3.5 2b/h
8.5.7 Shear Wall Types

Where individual full-height wall segments are designed as shear walls, the provisions of 8.5.7.1
shall apply. For shear walls with openings where framing members and connections around
openings are not designed for force transfer around the opening (perforated shear wall) the
provisions of 8.5.7.2 shall apply.
8.5.7.1 Segmented Shear Walls

Where individual full-height wall segments are designed as shear walls without openings, the aspect
ratio adjustment factor of 8.5.6 shall apply to each full-height wall segment. The perforated shear
wall adjustment factor, CO, shall be taken as 1.0. The following limitations shall apply:
1. Openings shall be permitted to occur beyond the ends of a shear wall. The length of
such openings shall not be included in the length of the shear wall.
2. Where out-of-plane offsets occur, portions of the wall on each side of the offset shall be
considered as separate shear wall lines.
3. Collectors for shear transfer shall be provided through the full length of the shear wall
line.
4. A holdown device is required at each end of each shear wall segment.
8.5.7.2 Perforated Shear Walls

In the design of perforated shear walls the aspect ratio adjustment factor, CAR, shall be determined
based on the aspect ratio of the narrowest perforated shear wall segment. The perforated shear wall
adjustment factor, CO, shall be determined using the equations below. A holdown device is required
and each end of each perforated shear wall.
 r  L
C O =  sa  tot (Eqn. 8.5.7.2-1)
 3 − 2rsa  ∑ Li
1
rsa = (Eqn. 8.5.7.2-2)
Ao
1+
h∑ Li
where:
CΟ = Perforated shear wall adjustment factor
rsa = Sheathing area ratio from Equation 8.5.7.2-2
Ltot = Total wall length including the lengths of the shear wall segments and the lengths of the
segments containing openings (ft)

Ao = Total area of openings in the shear wall where individual openings are calculated as the
opening width times the clear opening height. Where the opening height is less than h/3,
an opening height of h/3 shall be used (ft2)
Section 8.5.5 (ft)
8.5.8 Shear Wall Construction Requirements

8.5.8.1 Boundary Elements
The boundary elements shall be comprised of discrete elements, separate from the SIP panel
elements, designed to carry the shear wall forces independent from the SIP panel. The facing of SIP
panels acting as shear wall elements shall not be used to splice boundary elements. Shear wall
boundary elements, such as end posts, shall be provided to transmit the design tension and
compression forces (Type R Spline). End posts (studs or columns) shall be framed to provide full
end bearing.
8.5.8.2 Tension and Compression Chords

For segmented shear walls, the SIP tension and compression chords shall be designed for the tension
force, T, and compression force, C, resulting from shear wall overturning forces at each story level
calculated using Equation 8.5.8.2-1.
1 n
T =C =
bc
∑V hi =c
i i (Eqn. 8.5.8.2-1)
where:
Τ = Tension chord force (lbf)
C = Compression chord force (lbf)
bc = Shear wall width at story c (ft)
For perforated shear walls, the SIP tension and compression chords shall be designed for the tension
force, T, and compression force, C, resulting from shear wall overturning forces at each story level
calculated using Equation 8.5.8.2-2:
n
∑V h i i
T =C = i =c
(Eqn. 8.5.8.2-2)
C ∑L O ic
where:
Τ = Tension chord force (lbf)
C = Compression chord force (lbf)
CO = Perforated shear wall adjustment factor from Section 8.5.7.2
Li = Length of individual perforated shear wall segments, at level c, having aspect ratios
conforming to Section 8.5.6 (ft)

8.5.8.3 Fasteners
Individual SIP elements shall be interconnected using nails or other approved fasteners alone, or in
combination with adhesives or adhesive sealants, as permitted in Section 8.6. Nails shall be driven
with the head of the nail flush with the surface of the sheathing. Other approved fasteners shall be
driven as required for proper installation of that fastener.
8.5.8.4 Shear Wall Anchorage and Load Path

Design of shear wall anchorage and load path shall conform to the requirements of this section, or
shall be calculated using principles of mechanics.
8.5.8.4.1 Anchorage for In-Plane Shear

Connections shall be provided to transfer the required shear force, V, into and out of each shear wall.
For perforated shear walls, the maximum induced unit shear force, vmax, transmitted into the top of a
perforated shear wall, out of the base of the perforated shear wall at full-height sheathing, and into
collectors connecting shear wall segments, shall be calculated using Equation 8.5.8.4.1-1.
V
vmax = (Eqn. 8.5.8.4.1-1)
CO ∑ Li
where:
vmax = Maximum required unit shear (plf)
V = Total required shear force in perforated shear wall (lbf)
CO = Perforated shear wall adjustment factor from Section 8.5.6.2
Section 8.5.5 (ft)
8.5.8.4.2 Uplift Anchorage at Shear Wall Ends

Where the dead load stabilizing moment is not sufficient to prevent uplift due to the overturning moment
on the wall (from 8.5.7.2), an anchoring device shall be provided at the end of each shear wall.
8.5.8.4.3 Uplift Anchorage Along Perforated Shear Walls

In addition to the requirements of 8.5.8.4.2, perforated shear wall bottom plates at locations of full height
sheathing shall be anchored for a uniform uplift force equal to the unit shear force, vmax, determined in
8.5.8.4.1, or calculated by rational analysis.
8.5.8.4.4 Anchor Bolts

Wood walls supported directly on continuous foundation shall be anchored to the foundation with
minimum ½-inch-diameter anchor bolts or approved anchors or anchor straps spaced as required to
transfer the lateral forces into the supporting foundation element.
8.5.8.4.5 Load Path

A load path to the foundation shall be provided for uplift, shear, and compression forces. Elements
resisting shear wall forces contributed by multiple stories shall be design for the sum of forces
contributed by each story.
8.6 Seismic Design Requirements

SIP structural elements shall conform to the material design and detailing requirements set forth in
this section. Non-SIP materials and systems shall be design and detailed in accordance with
applicable requirements. Seismic forces, deformation limits and other design information not
provided herein shall be in accordance with ASCE 7 or other applicable standards.

8.6.1 System Selection and Limitations

The basic lateral and vertical seismic force-resisting system shall conform to one of the types
indicated in Table 8.6.1-1, or a combination of systems, as permitted in ASCE 7. The structural
system used shall be in accordance with the structural system limitations and the limits on structural
height, hn, contained in Table 8.6.1-1. The appropriate response modification coefficient, R,
overstrength factor, Ω0, and the deflection amplification factor, Cd, indicated in Table 8.6.1-2 shall
be used in determining the base shear, element design forces, and design story drift in accordance
with applicable sections of ASCE 7.
Table 8.6.1-1: Design Coefficients and Factor for

Wood Structural Sheathing Faced SIP Seismic Force-Resisting Systems
Structural System Limitations Including
Structural Height, hn (ft) Limits1
Seismic Force-Resisting System B C D E F
1. Shear walls with Type A
NL NL NP NP NP
Connections
2. Shear walls with Type C, Type S
or Type SD connections but not
NL NL 35 NP NP
specifically detailed for seismic
resistance
3. Shear walls with Type C or Type
SD connections detailed for NL NL 65 65 65
seismic resistance
1
NL = Not Limited and NP = Not Permitted.
Table 8.6.1-2: Design Coefficients and Factor for

Wood Structural Sheathing Faced SIP Seismic Force-Resisting Systems1
Design and Response Deflection
Detailing Modification Overstrength Amplification
Requirements Coefficient, Factor, Factor,
Seismic Force-Resisting System Section 2
R Ω0 3
Cd
1. Shear walls with Type A
8.6.2.1 1.5 2.5 1.5
Connections
2. Shear walls with Type C, Type S
or Type SD connections but not
8.6.2.2 2.0 2.5 2.0
specifically detailed for seismic
resistance
3. Shear walls with Type C or Type
SD connections detailed for 8.6.2.3 6.5 3.0 4.0
seismic resistance
1
Coefficients for use with seismic design provisions of ASCE 7 Standard.
2
See referenced design and detailing sections for detailed descriptions of seismic force resisting
systems.
3
Where the tabulated value of the overstrength factor, Ω0, is greater than or equal to 2.5, Ω0 is
permitted to be reduced by subtracting the value of 0.5 for structures with flexible diaphragms.

8.6.2 Detailing Requirements

SIP panel seismic force-resisting systems shall be detailed in accordance with the requirements of
this section.
8.6.2.1 Shear Walls with Type A Connections

SIP panel shear walls containing any Type A (adhesive) connections, regardless of whether the
adhesive strength is considered in the strength of the shear wall or connection, shall be limited to
Seismic Design Categories A, B and C.
8.6.2.2 Shear Walls with Type C, Type S or Type SD Connection Not Detailed for
Seismic Resistance
Shear Walls containing any Type C, Type S or Type SD connections that do not conform to the
requirements of Section 8.6.2.3 shall be classified as systems under this section.
Adhesive sealants shall not be applied to wood-to-wood faying surfaces. Adhesive sealants may be
applied to core-to-facing and/or core-to-core faying surfaces.
8.6.2.3 Shear Walls with Type C or Type SD Connections Detailed for Seismic
Resistance
SIP shear wall systems recognized under this section must have Type C or Type SD connections and
must be constructed to the requirements of this section.
Panels shall be detailed to provide spline joints at intervals not to exceed 4-ft on-center along the
length of the wall. Where larger panels are split solely for the purposes of providing the additional
spline joints, such splines may be factory installed. Adhesive sealants shall not be applied to wood-
to-wood faying surfaces. Adhesive sealants may be applied to core-to-facing and/or core-to-core
faying surfaces.


9 COMBINED LOADS
9.1 General
Each SIP panel subjected to a combination of bending, compression, tension and/or in-plane loads
shall be of sufficient size and capacity to satisfy the interaction equations specified herein.
9.2 Combined Tensile Axial Load, Bending and In-Plane Shear

Load combinations that result in a net required tensile load, T, on the SIP panel, in combination with
bending and/or in-plane shear shall satisfy the interaction equations in this section.
In cases where Type R Splines are installed at all SIP panel joints, the required in-plane shear load,
V, may be taken as zero for the purposes of considering the interaction equations in this section.
9.2.1 ADT and ASD Methods

The required ADT and ASD strengths, T, M and V shall satisfy Equation 9.2.1-1.
ΩtT Ω mt M Ω swV
+ + ≤ 1.0 (Eqn. 9.2.1-1)
Tn Mt Vs
where:
Ωt = Safety factor applicable to tensile strength from Section 7.2
T = Required tensile strength (ASD-level load) (lbf)
Tn = Nominal tensile strength of panel facing from Section 7.2 (lbf)
M = Required moment (ASD-level load) (in.-lbf)
Mt = Nominal flexural strength limited by facing tension from Section 4.1.3 (in.-lbf)
V = Required in-plane shear force (ASD-level load) (lbf)
Vs = Nominal in-plane shear strength from Section 8.4.2 (lbf)
9.2.2 LRFD and LSD Methods

The required LRFD and LSD strengths, T, M and V shall satisfy Equation 9.2.2-1.
T M V
+ + ≤ 1.0 (Eqn. 9.2.2-1)
φtTn φmt M t φsV s
where:
φt = Resistance factor applicable to tensile strength from Section 7.2
T = Required tensile force (LRFD/LSD-level load) (lbf)
Tn = Nominal tensile strength of panel facing from Section 7.2 (lbf)
φmt = Resistance factor applicable to flexure limited by facing tensile strength from Section 4.1.3
M = Required moment (LRFD/LSD-level load) (in.-lbf)
Mt = Nominal flexural strength limited by facing tension from Section 4.1.3 (in.-lbf)
V = Required in-plane shear force (LRFD/LSD-level load) (lbf)

9.3 Combined Compressive Axial Load, Bending and In-Plane Shear

Load combinations that result in a net required compressive load, P, on the SIP panel, in
combination with bending and or in-plane shear shall satisfy the interaction equations in this section.
9.3.1 ADT and ASD Methods

The required ADT and ASD strengths, P, M and V shall satisfy Equation 9.3.1-1.
Ωc P Ωmc M Ω sV
+ + ≤ 1. 0 (Eqn. 9.3.1-1)
Pn M cα m V s
where:
Ωc = Safety factor applicable to compression strength from Section 6.3
P = Required compressive force (ASD-level load) (lbf)
Pn = Nominal compression strength of panel facing from Section 6.3 (lbf)
Ωmc = Safety factor applicable to flexure limited by facing compressive strength from Section 4.1.4
M = Required moment (ASD-level load) (in.-lbf)
Mc = Nominal flexural strength limited by facing compression from Section 4.1.4 (in.-lbf)
V = Required in-plane shear force (ASD-level load) (lbf)
Ωc P
αm = 1− >0 (Eqn. 9.3.1-2)
C e Pn
where:
Ωc = Safety factor applicable to compression strength from Section 6.3
P = Required compressive force (ASD-level load) (lbf)
Ce = Load eccentricity factor from Section 6.3.1
9.3.2 LRFD and LSD Methods

The required LRFD and LSD strengths, P, M and V shall satisfy Equation 9.3.2-1.
P M V
+ + ≤ 1.0 (Eqn. 9.3.2-1)
φc Pn φmc M cα m φsV s
where:
φc = Resistance factor applicable to compression strength from Section 6.3
P = Required compressive force (LRFD/LSD-level load) (lbf)
φmc = Resistance factor applicable to flexure limited by facing compressive strength from Section
4.1.4
M = Required moment (LRFD/LSD-level load) (in.-lbf)
Mc = Nominal flexural strength limited by facing compression from Section 4.1.4 (in.-lbf)
V = Required in-plane shear force (LRFD/LSD-level load) (lbf)

P
αm = 1− >0 (Eqn. 9.3.1-2)
φ c C e Pn
where:
φc = Reduction factor applicable to compression strength from Section 6.3
P = Required compressive force (LRFD/LSD-level load) (lbf)
Ce = Load eccentricity factor from Section 6.3.1


10 CONNECTIONS AND JOINTS
10.1 General
Connections and joints between SIP elements and between SIP and non-SIP elements shall be
adequately connected to transfer all forces acting parallel and perpendicular to the surface of the SIP.
10.2 Connectors and Connector Strength

SIP connections shall utilize the connectors specified in this section, unless otherwise specified by the
designer.
10.2.1 SIP Screws

SIP Screws used for the erection of SIPs shall be fabricated from steel, shall be provided by the SIPs
manufacturer and shall be of sufficient length to penetrate the side-member not less than 1-inch. SIP
screws shall have a minimum shank diameter of 0.188-inches and a minimum head diameter of 0.620-
inches. The lateral strength, Z, and withdrawal strength, W, of an individual fastener shall be determined
in accordance with the adopted wood design standard.
10.2.2 Nails
Nails used in SIP joints and connections shall be common or box nails conforming to ASTM F1667. The
lateral strength, Z, and withdrawal strength, W, of an individual fastener shall be determined in
accordance with the adopted wood design standard.
10.2.3 Adhesives
Adhesives and adhesive sealants shall be applied in accordance with the adhesive manufacturer’s
instructions. Field-applied adhesives shall not be used as a substitute for mechanical fasteners in resisting
applied loads.
10.3 Connections Resisting Parallel (In-Plane) Forces

Connections resisting forces acting parallel to the surface of the SIP shall be designed and detailed in
accordance with this section.
10.3.1 Panel-to-Panel
Adequate connections between roof, ceiling, wall and floor assemblies shall be provided to transfer
forces acting parallel to the surface of the SIP. The fastening shall not be less than 0.131” x 2.5” or
0.113” x 2.5” nails spaced at 6-inches on-center.
10.3.2 Panel-to-Plate
Adequate connections between roof, ceiling, wall and floor assemblies shall be provided to transfer
forces acting parallel to the surface of the SIP. The fastening shall not be less than 0.131” x 2.5” or
0.113” x 2.5” nails spaced at 6-inches on-center.
10.4 Connections Resisting Perpendicular (Out-Of-Plane) Forces

Connections resisting forces acting perpendicular (out-of-plane) to the surface of the SIP shall be
designed and detailed in accordance with this section.
10.4.1 Face-Bearing Connections

A minimum support width of 1.5-inches shall be provided at all supports where the SIP is designed
for bearing. The bearing support shall be continuous along the end of the panel. The nominal
strength of the bearing connection shall be determined in accordance with this section.

10.4.1.1 Blocked Connections

The strength of blocked face-bearing connections shall be taken as the lowest bearing strength
considering the individual bearing strengths of each wood component in compression. The bearing
strength of each individual wood component shall be determined in accordance with the adopted wood
design specification.
10.4.1.2 Unblocked Connections

The strength of unblocked face-bearing connections shall consider the strength limit state of core
compression strength in accordance with Section 10.4.2 and the serviceability limit state of local
deformation in accordance with Section 10.4.3.
10.4.2 Core Compression Strength

in Section 3.2. The panel core compression strength, Rn, shall be calculated in accordance with
Section 10.4.2.1 or Section 10.4.2.2 based on the distance of the applied load to the end of the panel,
as shown in Figure 10.4.2-1.
Figure 10.4.2-1: End and Interior Bearing Conditions
Table 10.4.2-1: Reduction Factors for

Core Compression Strength
Safety Factor, Ωcc Resistance Factor, φcc
ADT ASD LRFD LSD
1.0 -- -- --

Table 10.4.2-2: Time-Effect Factors for Core Compression Strength, λv

ASD, LRFD,
ADT LSD
Time Effect Time Effect
Core Material Load Duration Factor, λcc Factor, λcc
Short 1.0 --
EPS Normal 1.0 --
Permanent 0.5 --
Short 1.0 --
Polyurethane Normal 1.0 --
Permanent 0.5 --
10.4.2.1 End Condition

Where a concentrated load or reaction is applied within a distance of 2h or less from the panel end or a
panel joint parallel to the concentrated load or reaction (see Figure 10.4.2-1), the nominal core
compression strength shall be calculated using Equation 10.4.2.1-1.
  t + c  (Eqn. 10.4.2.1-1)
Rn = λcc bFcc lb + k  
  4 
where:
Rn = Nominal bearing strength (lbf)
b = Bearing width perpendicular to direction of span (in.)
lb = Bearing length parallel to direction of span (in.)
t = Overall panel thickness (in.)
10.4.2.2 Interior Condition

Where a concentrated load or reaction is applied within a distance greater than 2h from the panel end or
a panel joint parallel to the concentrated load or reaction (see Figure 10.4.2-1), the nominal core
compression strength shall be calculated using Equation 10.4.2.2-1.
  t + c  (Eqn. 10.4.2.2-1)
Rn = λcc bFcc lb + k  
  2 
where:
Rn = Nominal bearing strength (plf)
b = Bearing width perpendicular to direction of span (in.)
lb = Bearing length (in.)
t = Overall panel thickness (in.)

10.4.3 Local Deformation

Where a full-depth Type R or Type RT spline is not provided at a point of bearing, the local deflection of
the core under the load shall be determined in accordance with this section. Unless the connection is
otherwise detailed, the allowable bearing strength shall be limited to prevent damage to finish materials
as a result of the local deformation.
10.4.3.1 End Condition

Where a concentrated load or reaction is applied within a distance of 2h or less from the panel end or a
panel joint parallel to the concentrated load or reaction (see Figure 10.4.4), the local deformation shall be
R
∆ cc = (Eqn. 10.4.3.1-1)
4E f I f β 3
3 Ec
β =4 (Eqn. 10.4.3.1-2)
Ef I f c
where:
10.4.3.2 Interior Condition

Where a concentrated load or reaction is applied at a distance greater than 2h from the panel end or a
panel joint parallel to the concentrated load or reaction (see Figure 10.4.4), the local deformation shall be
R
∆ cc = (Eqn. 10.4.3.2-1)
8E f I f β 3
where:

10.4.4 End-Supported Connections

The applicable safety factors and the resistance factors shall be in accordance with Section 5.3, when
determining the permissible core shear strength, V, and in accordance with the adopted wood design
specification when determining the permissible fastener tensile strength, W. The resulting
permissible strength shall be evaluated in accordance with the applicable design method in Section
3.2. The permissible strength of end-supported SIP connections shall be determined using Equation
10.4.4-1.
R = C pV + R f (Eqn. 10.4.4-1)
where:
R = Permissible connection strength (plf)
Cp = Facing-peeling factor, as provided by the SIP manufacturer, or may be taken as 0.4, but in
no case shall be greater than 1.0.
V = Permissible shear strength of SIP core from Section 5.3 (plf)
Rf = Permissible strength contribution of the fasteners in tension from Equation 10.4.4-2 (plf)
5.28 (Eqn. 10.4.4-2)

Rf = W
s
where:
Rf = Permissible strength contribution of the fasteners in tension (plf)
s = Fastener spacing (inches on-center)
W = Permissible withdrawal or pull-through strength, whichever is less, of an individual fastener
determined in accordance with the adopted wood design specification (lbf)


11 OPENINGS
11.1 General
Holes in facings, whether through one or both facings, shall be in accordance with this Section.
11.2 Small Openings

Holes meeting the limits of this section do not require analysis in accordance with Sections 11.3 and
11.4.
Holes shall be limited to 4-in. by 4-in. square or 4-in. diameter round. The minimum distance between
holes shall not be less than 4-ft on-center measured perpendicular to the panel span and 2-in. on-center
measured parallel to the panel span. Not more than three holes shall be permitted in a single line parallel
to the panel span.
11.3 SIP Headers

Headers that rely solely on the strength of the SIP panel, without consideration of additional structural
elements, shall be designed in accordance with this section. Unless otherwise permitted by the
fenestration manufacturer’s installation instructions, 2-inch nominal thickness framing members shall be
installed around the perimeter of all openings to provide an attachment substrate for the fenestration.
11.3.1 In-Plane Flexure

The header shall be of sufficient size and capacity to resist the applied loads without exceeding
permissible flexural strength in this section. The header flexural strength, Mh, shall be the smallest value
considering the limit states of facing tension and facing compression calculated in accordance with
Sections 11.3.1.2 and 11.3.1.3, respectively.
11.3.1.1 In-Plane Design Span

of the supports (see Figure 11.4.1.1-1). The maximum design moment(s) shall be determined from a
structural analysis that considers the fixity present at the ends of the header. In lieu of a rigorous analysis
of the header end fixity, it shall be permissible to assume full-fixity (fixed-support) at the ends of
headers where the facing material is continuous across the header-pier joint. No-fixity (pinned-support)
may be assumed at the ends of all headers where a joint in the facings is present.
Figure 11.4.1.1-1: Design Spans for Header In-Plane Flexure

11.3.1.2 Header In-Plane Flexural Strength Limited by Facing Tension

The applicable safety factors and the resistance factors given in Table Section 4.1.3 shall be used to
determine the allowable strength or design strength in accordance with the applicable design method in
Section 3.2. Header flexural strength limited by facing tension, Mht, shall be calculated using Equation
11.3.1.2-1.
M ht = λt Ft S h (Eqn. 11.3.1.2-1)
where:
Mht = Nominal flexural strength limited by facing tensile strength (in.-lbf)
Sh = SIP header section modulus (in.3)
11.3.1.3 Header In-Plane Flexural Strength Limited by Facing Compression

The applicable safety factors and the resistance factors given in Table 4.1.4-1 shall be used to determine
Header nominal flexural strength limited by facing compression, Mhc, shall be calculated using Equation
11.3.1.3-1.
M hc = λc Fc Sh (Eqn. 11.3.1.3-1)
where:
Mhc = Nominal flexural strength limited by facing compressive strength (in.-lbf)
Sh = SIP header section (in.3)
11.3.2 Out-of-Plane Flexure

The header shall be of sufficient size and capacity to resist the applied loads without exceeding
permissible flexural strength in this section. The header flexural strength, Mn, shall be the smallest value
considering the limit states of facing tension and facing compression calculated in accordance with
Sections 11.3.2.2 and 11.3.2.3, respectively.
Exception:
The out-of-plane stress in the SIP may be neglected where:
1. The header is continuously laterally supported along both edges by a structural element
capable of resisting the out-of-plane loads; or,
2. The header is continuously laterally supported along one edge by a structural element
capable of resisting the out-of-plane loads and the ratio of header depth to SIP thickness
does not exceed 3 to 1.
The continuously lateral support may be provided by elements such as a floor, ceiling or roof
diaphragm, or non-SIP elements inserted around the perimeter of the opening.

11.3.2.1 Out-of-Plane Design Span

of the vertical supports (see Figure 11.4.1.1-1). The maximum design moment(s) shall be determined
from a structural analysis considering the fixity present at the ends of the header. In lieu of a rigorous
analysis of the header end fixity, it shall be permissible to assume full-fixity (fixed-support) at the ends
of headers where the facing material is continuous across the header-pier joint. No-fixity (pinned-
support) may be assumed at the ends of all headers where a joint in the facings is present.
Where the header is continuously laterally supported along one edge by a structural element capable of
resisting the out-of-plane load, such as a floor, ceiling or roof diaphragm, the effective depth of the
header need not exceed one-half the distance between the laterally supported edge and the unsupported
edge.
11.3.2.2 Header Out-of-Plane Flexural Strength Limited by Facing Tension

The out-of-plane flexural strength of a header limited by facing tension shall be calculated in accordance
with Section 4.1.3.
11.3.2.3 Header Out-of-Plane Flexural Strength Limited by Facing Compression

The out-of-plane flexural strength of a header limited by facing compression shall be calculated in
accordance with Section 4.1.4.
11.3.2.4 Header Out-of-Plane Shear Strength

The out-of-plane shear strength of a header shall be calculated in accordance with Section 5.
11.3.3 Header Combined Loads

SIP headers subjected to the simultaneous action of in-plane and out-of-plane loads shall be of sufficient
size and capacity to satisfy the interaction equations specified herein.
Where non-SIP components are incorporated into SIP assemblies it shall be permissible to design an
individual component, either the SIP or non-SIP component, to independently resist the load applied in
each orthogonal direction without consideration of combined loads in either element.
11.3.3.1 ADT and ASD Methods

The required ADT and ASD strengths, Mip and Mop, shall satisfy Equation 11.3.3.1-1 and Equation
11.3.3.1-2.
Ω mt M ip Ω mt M op
+ ≤ 1.0 (Eqn. 11.3.3.1-1)
M ht Mt
Ω mc M ip Ω mc M op
+ ≤ 1.0 (Eqn. 11.3.3.1-2)
M hc Mc
where:
Ωmc = Safety factor applicable to flexure limited by facing compressive strength from Section 4.1.4
Mip = Required in-plane moment (ASD-level load)
Mop = Required out-of-plane moment (ASD-level load)
Mht = Nominal in-plane flexural strength limited by facing tension from Section 11.3.1.2 (in.-lbf)

Mhc = Nominal in-plane flexural strength limited by facing compression from Section 11.3.1.3 (in.-
lbf)
Mt = Nominal out-of-plane flexural strength limited by facing tension from Section 4.1.3 (in.-lbf)
Mc = Nominal out-of-plane flexural strength limited by facing compression from Section 4.1.4 (in.-
lbf)
11.3.3.2 LRFD and LSD Methods

The required LRFD and LSD strengths, Mip and Mop, shall satisfy Equation 11.3.3.2-1 and Equation
11.3.3.2-2.
M ip M op
+ ≤ 1.0 (Eqn. 11.3.3.2-1)
φmt M ht φmt M t
M ip M
+ op ≤ 1.0 (Eqn. 11.3.3.2-2)
φmc M hc φmc M c
where:
φmt = Resistance factor applicable to flexure limited by facing tensile strength from Section 4.1.3
φmt = Resistance factor applicable to flexure limited by facing compression strength from Section
4.1.4
Mip =
Required in-plane moment (LRFD/LSD-level load)
Mop =
Required out-of-plane moment (LRFD/LSD-level load)
Mht =
Nominal in-plane flexural strength limited by facing tension from Section 11.4.1.2 (in.-lbf)
Mhc =
Nominal in-plane flexural strength limited by facing compression from Section 11.4.1.3 (in.-
lbf)
Mt = Nominal out-of-plane flexural strength limited by facing tension from Section 4.1.3 (in.-lbf)
Mc = Nominal out-of-plane flexural strength limited by facing compression from Section 4.1.4 (in.-
lbf)
11.4 Non-SIP Headers

Where non-SIP structural elements, such as dimensional lumber or engineered wood products, are
incorporated into the SIP panel or otherwise used as a header, they shall be designed in accordance with
this section.
11.4.1 Header Strength and Stiffness

Non-SIP headers shall be designed in accordance with the adopted wood design standard.
11.5 Piers & Columns

Each header shall be supported by an adequately sized SIP pier or non-SIP column on each side of the
opening. The pier and/or column shall be designed in accordance with this section.
11.5.1 SIP Piers

The portion of a SIP panel adjacent to an opening that is effective in resisting the axial and transverse
loads imposed by a header shall be designed in accordance with this Section.

11.5.1.1 Pier Width

The effective width of the support pier shall be measured from the edge of the opening. The effective
width of the pier shall be taken as the lesser of the following:
1) Distance to the nearest vertical joint in the facing;
2) The depth of the supported header; or,
3) 24-inches.
Where the effective widths of two adjacent headers overlap, the effective width shall be taken as the full
width between adjacent openings and the pier shall be designed for the total force imposed by both
headers.
11.5.1.2 Pier Compressive Strength

The compressive strength of each pier shall be calculated in accordance with Section 6 except as
modified in this section. The effective eccentricity, ep, determined using Equation 11.5.1.2-1, shall be
substituted for the net load eccentricity, e, when determining the load eccentricity factor using Equation
6.3.1-4.
hh Pp
ep = e × (Eqn. 11.5.1.2-1)
h(PP + Rh )
where:
ep = Effective eccentricity at the top of the pier (in.)
e = Net load eccentricity at the top of the wall or t/6, whichever is greater (in.)
h = Total height of the pier between points of transverse restraint (in.)
hh = Height from the bottom of the pier to the bottom of the header opening (in.)
Pp = Compressive force applied at the top of the wall above the pier (lbf)
Rh = Header reaction force applied to the pier (lbf)
11.5.1.3 Pier Flexural Strength

The pier shall be of sufficient size and capacity to resist the applied transverse loads without exceeding
the flexural limits with Section 4.
11.5.1.4 Pier Combined Loads

The pier shall be of sufficient size and capacity to satisfy the interaction equations in Section 9. Where
non-SIP components are incorporated into SIP assemblies it shall be permissible to design an individual
component, either the SIP or non-SIP component, to independently resist the load applied in each
orthogonal direction without consideration of combined loads in either element.
11.5.2 Columns
Where non-SIP structural elements, such as dimensional lumber or engineered wood products, are
incorporated into the SIP panel or otherwise used to support a header, they shall be designed in
accordance with this section.
11.5.2.1 Column Strength and Stiffness

Non-SIP columns shall be designed in accordance with the adopted wood design standard.


12 REINFORCED PANELS
12.1 General
SIP panels constructed with Type R or Type RT splines may be considered reinforced. The strength and
stiffness of SIP panels that include such materials may be determined in accordance with this section.
12.2 Scope
The provisions of this section are for use with symmetric SIP panels (identical facings) reinforced with
Type R or Type RT Splines where the reinforcement members are placed in the SIP so that the centroid of
the reinforcement coincides with the centroid of the SIP panel. For reinforcement methods where the SIP
and reinforcement centroids do not coincide other methods based on engineering mechanics may be
used.
12.3 Transverse (Out-of-Plane) Load

Reinforced SIP panels, constructed with Type R or Type RT splines, subjected to transverse (out-of-
plane) loads shall be designed in accordance with this section. Under the provisions of this section, the
total transverse load is proportioned between the SIP and the reinforcement based on the ratio of each
element’s individual stiffness to the total stiffness of the reinforced assembly.
The proportioning of the load shall be performed in such a manner that deflection compatibility is
maintained between each element at all points along the span using the method provided in Section
12.3.1 or Section 12.3.2. Once the load has been proportioned to each element, each element shall be
independently designed for its share of the load in accordance with Section 12.3.3 and Section 12.3.4.
Reinforcing elements shall not be spaced more than 48-inches on-center.
12.3.1 Simplified Analysis

The total load applied to reinforced SIP assemblies where the maximum deflection occurs at mid-span,
such as under uniform load or symmetrically placed point loads, may be proportioned to the individual
components as provided in this section.
The portion of the total applied load carried to each element in the reinforced assembly may be
calculated using Equation 12.3.1-1 through Equation 12.3.1-4.
The SIP panel shall be designed for the portion of the shear and moment provided in Equation 12.3.1-1
and Equation 12.3.1-2:
(Et I )S
wSb = w (Eqn. 12.3.1-1)
(Et I )S + (EI )R
(𝐺𝐺𝑡𝑡 𝐴𝐴𝑣𝑣 )𝑆𝑆

𝑤𝑤𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 = 𝑤𝑤 (Eqn. 12.3.1-2)
(𝐺𝐺𝑡𝑡 𝐴𝐴𝑣𝑣 )𝑆𝑆 + (𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅)𝑅𝑅

The reinforcement shall be designed for the portion of the shear and moment provided in Equation
12.3.1-3 and Equation 12.3.1-4:
wRb = w
(EI )S
(Eqn. 12.3.1-3)
(Et I )S + (EI )R
(𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅)𝑅𝑅
𝑤𝑤𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 = 𝑤𝑤 (Eqn. 12.3.1-4)
(𝐺𝐺𝑡𝑡 𝐴𝐴𝑣𝑣 )𝑆𝑆 + (𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅)𝑅𝑅
where:
w = Total applied uniform load (pli)
wSb = Portion of uniform load carried by the SIP for flexural design (pli)
wRb = Portion of uniform load carried by the reinforcement for flexural design (pli)
wSv = Portion of uniform load carried by the SIP for shear design (pli)
wRv = Portion of uniform load carried by the reinforcement for shear design (pli)
(EtI)S =Bending stiffness of the SIP adjusted to the load duration corresponding to wS in accordance
with 4.2.2 (lbf-in.2)
(EI)R = Bending stiffness of the reinforcement adjusted to the load duration corresponding to wR in
(GtAv)S = Shear stiffness of the SIP adjusted to the load duration corresponding to wS in accordance
with 4.2.3 (lbf)
(κGA)R = Shear stiffness of the reinforcement adjusted to the load duration corresponding to wR in
12.3.2 General Analysis

The total load applied to reinforced SIP assemblies continuous over multiple supports or subjected to
general loading conditions where the maximum deflection does not occur at mid-span shall be
proportioned to the individual components as provided in this section.
The portion of the total applied load carried to each element in the reinforced assembly may be
calculated using a finite element analysis of the reinforced SIP assembly. In the finite element model,
each component material shall be modeled using separate elements with their respective material
properties. These separate elements shall be joined at regularly spaced nodes, placed along the length of
the reinforced SIP assembly, to ensure deflection compatibility of the elements along the length of the
reinforced span.

12.3.3 SIP Strength and Stiffness

The SIP panel shall be of sufficient size and capacity to resist the portion of the applied load carried by
the SIP without exceeding the applicable design limits of the Specification. The size and capacity of the
SIP panel shall be assessed in two directions (as shown in Figure 12.3.3-1):
1) Spanning parallel to the reinforcement, considering the portion of the load carried by the SIP;
and,
2) Spanning perpendicular to the reinforcement, considering the portion of the load carried by the
reinforcement.
Figure 12.3.3-1: Reinforced Panel

Transverse Load Distribution
12.3.4 Reinforcement Strength and Stiffness

The reinforcement shall have sufficient size and capacity to resist the portion of the applied load carried
by the reinforcement without exceeding the design limits of the adopted wood design specification.
12.3.5 Connections
The connections at the end of each element shall be independently designed for the portion of the load
carried by the element in accordance with Section 10 or the adopted wood design specification, as
applicable.
12.4 Axial Load

Reinforced SIP panels, reinforced with Type R splines, subjected to axial tension or compression loads
shall be designed in accordance with this section. Under the provisions of this section, the total axial load
shall be carried by one element: either the SIP panel or the reinforcement as prescribed in this section.
12.4.1 Adequate Header Provided

Where a header, or other structural element, is supported by the reinforced SIP assembly the reinforcing
elements shall be independently designed to resist the full header reaction. The header element shall
have sufficient size and capacity to transfer all loads to the reinforcing elements without exceeding the
limits of Section 11. The reinforcement shall have sufficient size and capacity to resist the header
reaction force without exceeding the design limits of the adopted wood design specification.

The SIP panel may be designed in accordance with the Specification to resist only transverse (out-of-
plane) and/or racking loads.
12.4.2 No Header or Inadequate Header

Where no header, or other structural element, is provided, or where the header or structural element
provided does not have adequate size or capacity to carry the applied loads, the presence of reinforcing
elements shall be neglected, and the SIP panel alone shall have sufficient size and capacity to resist all
load without exceeding the limits of the Specification.
Exception: Where concentrated loads are applied directly above a reinforcing element a header shall not
be required and the reinforcing element shall be designed to independently resist the concentrated load
without exceeding the design limits of the adopted wood design specification.

13 SHELLS AND FOLDED PLATE MEMBERS
13.1 General
The provisions of this Section apply to shells and folded plate SIP members. All provisions of this
Specification not specifically excluded, and not in conflict with provisions of this Section shall apply to
shell and folded plate members.
13.2 Analysis and Design

Experimental or numerical analysis procedures shall be permitted where it can be shown that such
procedures provide a safe basis for design. Alternately, approximate methods of analysis shall be
permitted where it can be shown that such methods provide a safe basis for design.
13.3 In-Plane Strength

Folded plates and shells that contain joints and are constructed in accordance with the shear wall and/or
diaphragm provisions of Section 8 must consider the effects of normal and permanent duration loads as
required in Section 8.


SIP-EDG01-19C FINAL DRAFT, Commentary on SIP Design Specification C-1
Commentary on
Design Specification SIP-EDG01-19C Final Draft
TABLE OF CONTENTS
C1 Scope ..................................................................................................................................... C3
C2 Notation................................................................................................................................. C7
C3 Use Considerations ............................................................................................................... C9
C4 Flexure ................................................................................................................................ C21
C5 Shear ................................................................................................................................... C35
C6 Compression ....................................................................................................................... C41
C7 Tension................................................................................................................................ C45
C8 Lateral Force-Resisting System .......................................................................................... C47
C9 Combined Loads ................................................................................................................. C63
C10 Connections and Joints ..................................................................................................... C71
C11 Openings ........................................................................................................................... C75
C12 Reinforced Panels ............................................................................................................. C85
C13 Shells and Folded Plate Members .................................................................................... C91

C-2 SIP-EDG01-19C FINAL DRAFT, Commentary on SIP Design Specification

INTRODUCTION
Since their introduction in 1940, structural insulated panels (SIPs) have been used in many thousands of
buildings and have been exhaustively tested. Unlike other structural materials, SIPs are unique in that a
single component comprises the entire structural system. SIPs often take the place of conventional
structural assemblies comprised of discrete framing elements. These conventional framing elements are
typically proportioned to resist only certain loads, such as axial or racking, whereas SIP assemblies act
as a single element resisting all loads. The “one component does all” nature of SIPs poses challenges for
designers accustomed to designing conventional light frame structural systems with discrete framing
elements. The purpose of the Specification is to identify design limit states and design conditions
specific to SIP construction so that designers may optimize and justify SIP construction to a level of
rigor consistent with other engineered materials.
C1 SCOPE
C1.1 General
The commentary is not a part of SIP-EDG01-19C FINAL DRAFT, SIP Design Specification, but is
included for informational purposes only. The Commentary furnishes background information and
references for the benefit of the design professional seeking further understanding of the basis,
derivations and limits of the Specification. The Specification is intended to be complete for normal
design usage and the provisions of the Specification are intended to be used together. Unless otherwise
noted, pertinent provisions from each chapter apply to every other chapter.
The limitation of the Specification to “structural facing material with an adhered foam core,” is not
intended to prohibit or limit the use of additional materials in conjunction with SIPs. The Specification
acknowledges that the use of “other” materials excluded under this definition is required in the assembly
of SIPs into completed structures. Such materials are addressed within the Specification in terms of the
impact these materials have on the strength of the SIP panel itself and proportioning the applied load
between SIP and non-SIP elements; however, the Specification does not address the design or detailing
of these elements themselves. The design and detailing of any elements that are not part of the
“structural facing” or “foam core” must be in accordance with the national standards of practice and
specifications applicable to the material.
The Specification is based on behavior and characteristics generally observed in SIPs. In many cases
individual manufacturers provide literature and design information specific to their product. This
manufacturer specific information should not be interchanged or used with SIP’s from other
manufacturers. Additionally, where recommendations of the Specification disagree with any aspect of
the manufacturer’s literature, the recommendations of the manufacturer’s literature shall be followed.
C1.2 Design Procedures

The basic purpose of the provisions in the Specification is the determination of the design strengths of
SIP components used in building construction. This Specification provides four design methods:
1. Average Divided-by-Three (ADT): The input properties are provided on the basis of an
average tested ultimate value divided by a factor of safety of 3.0. The resulting allowable
strength is then required to equal or exceed the required strength determined by structural
analysis for the appropriate ASD load combinations specified by the applicable building code.
2. Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD): The nominal strength is multiplied by a
resistance factor, φ, and the resulting design strength is then required to equal or exceed the

required strength determined by structural analysis for the appropriate LRFD load combinations
specified by the applicable building code.
3. Allowable Strength Design (ASD): The nominal strength is divided by a safety factor, Ω, and
the resulting allowable strength is then required to equal or exceed the required strength
determined by structural analysis for the appropriate ASD load combinations specified by the
applicable building code.
4. Limit States Design (LSD): The nominal strength is multiplied by a resistance factor, φ, and
the resulting design strength is then required to equal or exceed the required strength
determined by structural analysis for the appropriate LRFD load combinations specified by the
applicable building code. The LSD and LRFD methods are the same, except that the load
factors, load combinations, assumed dead-to-live ratios, and target reliability indexes are
slightly different.
The Specification provides provisions for determining the values of the strengths according to the
applicable limits states. In most cases, the same equations are used for the ADT, LRFD, ASD and LSD
approaches. The selection of a design method is largely dictated by the context of the input properties
and the building code governing the overall design. For example, most SIP manufacturer’s published
values are suitable for use only with the ADT design method. It is important that the designer is aware
of the underlying context of the design information supplied in the SIP manufacturer’s specifications and
that the corresponding method is used. The suitability of mixing formats within a structure is the
responsibility of the designer. Where multiple procedures are available, the designer may choose to use
either allowable stress design (ASD) or load and resistance factor design (LRFD); however, an
indiscriminate mix of the LRFD and ASD methods may lead to unpredictable structural system
performance.
In terms of the building codes dictating the design method, structures designed in conformance with the
International Building Code and International Residential Code are typically designed using the ADT
method. While the International Codes are the most widely adopted building codes in the United States,
outside the United States most adopted codes require use of the LSD methodology. Regardless of the
design method used, the designer must ensure that the methodology is calibrated to the load factors, load
combinations and target reliability indexes corresponding to the adopted code.
The concept of the “ADT” design method is unique to this Specification. This design method is based
on the concept first introduced in 1977 by the ICBO Evaluation Service [1] whereby the allowable
strength of a SIP panel assembly is taken as the average ultimate capacity divided by 3.0. This method
has proven adequate over time and serves as the basis for establishing the prescriptive SIP requirements
first published in the 2007 Supplement to the 2006 International Residential Code [2] [3].
Historically, the ADT concept is applied to the resulting test pressures and/or forces to arrive at
allowable pressures/forces from test data without regard for mode of failure. The ADT method in the
Specification extends this established concept, through the application of engineering mechanics, to
determine allowable properties on a limit state basis. This approach offers various advantages over
historical practice, which include:
1. providing an inherent means for interpolating between test parameters;
2. the prediction of the mode of failure/behavior at ultimate in addition to predicting strength;
and,
3. ability to pool test data, thereby producing design properties having greatly improved
statistical significance.

Distinguishing historical practice from other design methodologies has precedence in the International
Codes which distinguish between ASD, LRFD and “conventional light-frame construction” as design
methods for wood. Unlike “conventional light-frame construction;” however, the differences between
ADT and ASD are subtler. The key difference between the methods is that the input material properties
for the ADT are adjusted to allowable stress level, whereas the ASD method relies on nominal material
strengths. Additional distinctions between the ADT and ASD/LRFD methods are detailed in specific
sections of the Specification and Commentary. Irrespective of these differences, the ADT method
represents a historically adequate method for proportioning SIP members and serves to calibrate and
benchmark the factors for the other design methods.
C1.2.1 Loading Assumptions

To a large extent, the provisions of the Specification provide a means to translate “benchmark”
laboratory conditions to actual in-use conditions. In the laboratory, a limited range of panel sizes are
subjected to idealized loading conditions for the purpose of establishing design properties.
Typical large-scale laboratory specimens consist of a 4-foot wide repetitive unit having a span ranging
from 4-feet to 24-feet (depending on the facing sizes available). For SIP panels utilizing Type S splines
(non-reinforcing), design loads are expressed on a per-foot and pounds-per-square foot basis for axial
and transverse loads, respectively. For design purposes, the SIP is assumed to act as a series of parallel,
independent 1-foot wide strips of SIP. This assumption must be limited to SIPs having a uniform
strength and stiffness perpendicular to the direction of span. SIPs utilizing reinforcing splines (Type R
and Type RT) do not have uniform strength/stiffness and require consideration of the spline spacing as
described in Chapter 11 of the Specification.
The support and loading conditions present in laboratory testing are idealized and do not reflect the
support and loading conditions faced by designers. This difference is exacerbated by the large size of
SIPs with respect to other construction materials, such as conventional wood framing, which results in
non-uniform loading on most SIP assemblies. The uniform load definition in this section provides
specific criteria for situations where SIPs are supporting discrete framing elements. Support conditions
not meeting this definition require additional consideration by the designer. Specific guidance on the
design of concentrated loads is provided elsewhere in the Specification and Commentary based on the
nature of the concentrated load to be resisted.
C1.2.2 Design Loads

The Specification does not establish the dead, live, snow, wind, seismic or other loading requirements for
which a structure would be designed. The loads are typically covered by the applicable building code.
When gravity and lateral loads produce counteracting forces in members, considerations should be given
to the minimum gravity loads acting in combinations with wind or seismic loads.
C1.2.3 Load Combinations

The reduced probability of the simultaneous occurrence of combinations of various loads on a structure,
such as dead, live, snow, wind, and seismic, is recognized in the model buildings codes. Because
individual jurisdictions and model codes may account for load combinations differently, the building
code governing the structural design must be consulted to determine the proper load combinations.
Based on historical acceptable use, the ADT design method may utilize the load combinations applicable
to ASD design.

The reduction of design loads to account for the probability of simultaneous occurrence of loads and the
adjustment of SIP strength to account for the effect of the load duration of the applied loads are
independent of each other and both adjustments are applicable in design calculations.
C1.3 Terminology
All terms having specific meaning in the Specification are listed alphabetically. The Specification often
uses terms that have a unique meaning in the Specification and the Specification meaning can differ
substantially from the ordinarily understood meaning of the term as used outside of the Specification.
The user of the Specification should be familiar with and consult this section because the definitions are
essential to the correct interpretation of the Specification.
References
[1] International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO), "Acceptance Criteria for Sandwich Panels,
AC04, Approved April 1977," International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO), Brea, CA,
1977.
[2] International Code Council, Inc. (ICC), "International Residential Code 2007 Suppliment to the
International Residential Code," International Code Council, Inc. (ICC), Brea, CA, 2007.
[3] APA - the Engineered Wood Association, "ANSI/APA PRS 610.1-2013 Standard for Performance-
Rated Structural Insulated Panels in Wall Applications," APA - the Engineered Wood Association,
Tacoma, WA, 2013.

C2 NOTATION
While many of the provisions in the Specification are non-dimensional and any compatible system of
units may be used, the Specification is written considering the use of U.S. customary units (force in
pounds and length in inches).
The notation used in the Commentary is consistent with that used in the Specification to the extent
possible. Notation and symbols introduced in the Commentary that do not appear in the
Specification are defined in the section where the notation is used.


C3 USE CONSIDERATIONS
C3.1 Required Strength

The required strength must be determined as stipulated by the applicable building code under which the
structure is designed or as dictated by the conditions involved. Recognized engineering procedures
should be employed to determine the effects of the loads on the structural elements. The loads and load
combinations used to determine the required strength must be compatible with the method selected for
determining the design strength in order to produce an acceptable design.
C3.2 Design Strength

This Specification provides provisions for determining the values of the nominal strengths according to
applicable limits states and lists the corresponding value of the resistance factor, φ, and safety factor, Ω.
The adequacy of each nominal strength must be assessed using one of four methods: LRFD, ASD, LSD,
and ADT. For each approach, a basic expression is provided to determine whether the requirements of
the Specification have been satisfied. These expressions are to be evaluated separately for each
applicable limit state identified elsewhere in the Specification.
A limit state is the condition at which the structural usefulness of a load-carrying element or member is
impaired to such an extent that it becomes unsafe for the occupants of the structure, or the element no
longer performs its intended function. These limit states have been established through experience in
practice or in the laboratory, and they have been investigated through analytical and experimental
research.
Limit states are separated into two categories: (1) strength limit states, which define safety against local
or overall failure under the extreme loads during the intended life of the structure, and (2) serviceability
limit states, which define the ability of the structure to perform its intended function during its life. The
provisions in Section 3.2 are intended to assess the strength limit state. This does not mean that
serviceability limit states are not important to the designer, who must provide for functional performance
and economy of design.
Strength limit states vary from element to element, and several limit states may apply to a given element.
The designer should be aware that due to the wide variety of materials and products available within the
SIP industry it is not possible to address all potential limit states; it is essential for the designer to consult
the manufacturer’s literature and detailing requirements.
Probabilistic Concepts
Safety factors or load factors are used to reduce the nominal capacity of a structural element to a level
that protects against the uncertainties and variability which are inherent in the design process. Structural
design consists of comparing nominal load effects, Q, to nominal resistances R, where both Q and R are
random parameters having a frequency of occurrence distributed about mean magnitudes Qm and Rm, as
shown in Figure C3.2-1 [1]. A limit state is violated if R<Q. While the possibility of this event ever
occurring is never zero, a successful design ensures an acceptably small probability of exceeding the
limit state.

Rm
Qm
Load Effect, Q
Resistance, R
Failure
R<Q
Figure C3.2-1: Nominal Load Effect, Q, and Resistance, R
In general, the exact distributions of Q and R are not known and only the means, Qm and Rm, and
standard deviations, σQ and σR, can be estimated. To quantify the probability that a limit state is violated
(R<Q) the distributions for Q and R may be combined into a single distribution curve given as ln(R/Q),
Figure C3.2-2. Considering this curve, a limit state is exceeded when ln(R/Q) ≤ 0 and the area under the
curve when ln(R/Q) ≤ 0 corresponds to the probability of violating the limit state.
βσln(R/Q)
ln(R/Q)m
σln(R/Q)
Probability of
Exceeding ln(R/Q)
Limit State
Figure C3.2-2: Definition of the Reliability Index, β
The size of the shaded area in Figure C3.2-2 is dependent on the distance between the origin and the
mean of ln(R/Q). This distance may be expressed as a multiple of the standard deviation, βσln(R/Q), where
the coefficient, β, is known as the “reliability index,” which controls the safety level. Assuming that the
load effect and resistance are independent random variables, the reliability index may be approximated
as:
ln (Rm / Qm )
β= (Eqn. C3.2-1)
VR2 + VQ2
where:
β = Reliability index
Rm = Mean material resistance
Qm = Mean load effect
VR = Material resistance coefficient of variation (COV)
VQ = Load effect coefficient of variation (COV)

Nominal Load Effect

Load statistics have been analyzed in numerous studies and the results of these studies have been
incorporated into loading specification, such as ASCE 7, in the form of load factors and target reliability
indices. The load factors and reliability indices may vary from one loading standard to another, as
shown in Table 3.2-1, and these differences must be accounted for in the material design specification.
It is for this reason that that the Specification distinguishes between the LRFD and LSD design
philosophies used in the United States and Canada, respectively. The actual reliability indices in most
material specific design specifications are generally less than those shown in Table 3.2-1.
Table C3.2-1: Target Reliability Indices for the

United States and Canada [2] [3]
Loading ASCE 7 NBCC
Type β β
Gravity 3.0 3.0
Connections 4.5 4.0
Wind 2.5 3.0
It is important to note that the loads and load factors account only for the variation in the applied loads
and do not account for the mode or consequence of failure. This concept is reflected in the increased
target reliability values for connections, β = 4.5, than members, β = 3.0 (Table 3.2-1). The increased
reliability index for connections is intended to assure failure of a structure is initiated in the member
rather than in the connections, which tend to fail in a brittle manner.
Material Resistance
SIPs are a composite assemblage of both conventional and non-conventional structural materials—
“conventional” structural materials being those that have established design specifications and “non-
conventional” structural materials being those that do not have established design specifications. The
strength of conventional materials may be determined in accordance with established design practice
provided the material is used within the limits of the design specification. In cases where the limits of the
design specification are exceeded, analytical or experimental investigation is required to extend the
limits of the specification or provide alternate guidelines. This Specification is not intended to replace
any design specifications applicable to conventional component materials.
With respect to non-conventional materials, which generally comprise the core of the SIP, resistance
values must be established in a manner that provides a level of safety consistent with conventional
structural materials. To achieve this, the resistance values must have two characteristics (1) they must
correspond to an acceptably low probability of an unfavorable test result; (2) they must correlate to a
benchmark test so that continued performance may be readily verified and monitored.
The basis for the resistance values of conventional structural materials is established statistically using a
lower exclusion limit, as summarized in Table 3.2-2. Resistance values for SIP panels are established in
two ways (1) empirically based on a small quantity of full-scale specimens (2) characteristic strength
using small-scale specimens (5% exclusion at 75% confidence) [4] [5]. For all materials, serviceability
related characteristics are established at a 50% lower exclusion limit (average value).

Table C3.2-2: Basis for Resistance Values for

Structural Material Strength [3] [5]
Material Qualification Method Lower Exclusion Limit
Steel Tension Coupon Yield 1%
Concrete Cylinder Tests ≈9%
Masonry Prism Tests ≈9%
Wood/Engineered Wood Full-size and small clear
5%
Products wood tests
Structural Insulated Full-scale tests Not applicable
Panels Small-scale tests 5%
The properties of each conventional structural material are monitored through regular destructive testing
of a suitable benchmark specimen. In general, the form and/or nature of loading of these benchmark
specimens bear little or no resemblance to the actual material or actual loading conditions. Instead, the
key characteristics of the benchmark are (1) correlates well with one or more characteristics to be
monitored; (2) can readily and routinely be assessed with minimal cost.
Because SIPs are a composite material, it is not possible to assess SIP strength based on a single test that
results in the failure of a single component. A test that produces failure in one component, such as the
core, provides no strength information with respect to the other components.
SIP component materials with established qualification methods, see Table 3.2-2, shall be evaluated
using the established method for the component material; however, additional benchmarks are required
to address characteristics associated with the SIP assemblage, such as core shear strength. The
suitability and use of various benchmarks are discussed in the various limit state specific sections of this
Commentary.
Design Context
Reference design properties must be established in a manner consistent with the design method used;
because multiple design methods exist, multiple resistance values exist. The relationship between the
various resistance values and the test data are shown schematically in Figure C3.2-3:
Rm/3
Rm(1-1.645VR)
φRn Rm(1-VR)
Rn/Ω
RADT RASD RLRFD Rn RQC Rm

Figure C3.2-3: Resistance Value Relationship (Lower-Tail of Strength Distribution)

C3.2.1 Load Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) Requirements

In the LRFD methodology, the nominal strength of the element or member is determined for a given
limit state according to the appropriate analytical model which defines the strength. This nominal
strength is reduced to a design level by a φ factor which accounts for the uncertainties and variability
inherent in the nominal strength. The design strength is compared with the effects of factored loads,
which consist of combinations of nominal loads multiplied by load factors, which account for the
uncertainties and variability in the loads. A design is acceptable when the design strength equals or
exceeds the factored load effects determined from structural analysis. The LRFD methodology differs
from the LSD methodology in that it is calibrated for use with the load factors found in ASCE 7.
Resistance factors that are consistent with the load factors found in ASCE 7 are well approximated for
most materials by Equation C3.2.1-1 [2].
Rm
φ= exp −α R βVR (Eqn. C3.2.1-1)
Rn
where:
αR = Sensitivity coefficient
Rm = Mean material resistance
Rn = Code-specified strength
For manufactured products, the level of conservatism required when defining the population statistics is
greatly reduced as the use of routine destructive testing as part of the quality control process results in
real-time calibration of the product against its established resistance and reliability. For example, current
practices for SIP panel certification limit (ADT established strength values) the population COV, VR, to
10-percent [4]. Furthermore, where resistance values are established at a 5% lower exclusion limit at
75% confidence Equation C3.2.1-1 may be rewritten as shown below [1] [6]:
Cφ − β VR2 +VQ2
φ= exp (Eqn. C3.2.1-2)
1 − 1.645VR
where:
Cφ = Calibration coefficient translating load intensities to load effects
VQ = Load effect coefficient of variation (COV)
C3.2.2 Allowable Stress Design (ASD) Requirements

ASD resistance values are established by dividing the nominal capacity by a factor of safety (FOS). The
factor of safety may be derived from the LRFD resistance by considering a specific LRFD load
combination in conjunction with a specific ratio of applied loads. Generally, the factor of safety is
determined considering the load combination of dead load (D) plus live load (L) or dead load (D) plus
snow load (S). The load ratios used for various conventional materials are summarized in Table 3.2.2-1.

Table C3.2.2-1: Assumed Live-to-Dead Load Ratios

Specification L-to-D Ratio
AISC 360-10 3.0
AISI S100-07 5.0
2012 NDS 3.0
NBCC 4.04
4
Snow-to-dead load ratio.
Considering the D + L load combination in ASCE 7, the corresponding factor of safety, Ω, for allowable
strength design can be computed as shown in Equation C3.2.2-1. Similar expressions may be developed
for other load combinations and/or other load standards.
1.2 D L + 1.6 (Eqn. C3.2.2-1)
Ω=
φ (D L + 1)
where:
Ω = Safety factor for allowable stress design
D/L = Dead-to-live load ratio
φ = LRFD reduction factor for limit state considered
C3.2.3 Average Divided-by-Three Design (ADT) Requirements

ADT resistance values reflect the widely used practice whereby the published strengths already
incorporate a factor of safety of 3.0 [4] [5]. Because an appropriate factor of safety has already been
applied, no additional reduction is required. As a result, the reduction factor for ADT design throughout
the Specification is unity (Ω = 1.0).
C3.2.4 Limits States Design (LSD) Requirements

The LSD methodology utilizes the same concepts as the LRFD methodology except that the load factors,
target reliability indices for members and connections (see Table 3.2-1) as well as the dead-to-live load
ratio differ (Table 3.2.2). These variations lead to differences in the resistance factors. In the
specification, the LSD method is calibrated to be used with CSA design standards in Canada.
C3.3 Serviceability
Serviceability limit states are conditions under which a structure can no longer perform its intended
functions. Safety and strength considerations are generally not affected by serviceability limit states.
However, serviceability criteria are essential to ensure functional performance.
Common conditions which may require serviceability limits are:

1. Excessive deflection or rotations which may affect the appearance or functional use of the structure.
2. Deflections which may cause damage to non-structural elements should be considered.
3. Excessive vibrations which may cause occupant discomfort or equipment malfunctions.
When checking serviceability, appropriate service-level loads must be considered. Additionally, the
effects of temperature and moisture related movements must also be considered. Serviceability limits
depends on the function of the structure and on the perceptions of the observer. As a result, it is not
possible to specify general explicit requirements. Guidance on serviceability limits is generally provided
by the applicable building code.

C3.4 Additional Considerations

Methods of structural analysis are required to account for both short- and long-term materials properties
[7]; however, the tests used to establish and monitor a materials reference design strength are typically
conducted on recently produced materials tested under standard laboratory conditions (typically 73.4° F
and 50% RH) and subjected to loads of relatively short-duration (10-minutes or less). In actual use,
structural elements seldom, if ever, experience the environmental and loading conditions present during
the laboratory assessment. In-use conditions may adversely impact short- and long-term material
properties and these adverse effects may be reversible, non-reversible and/or time-dependent.
Material Durability
All manmade materials exist in a metastable state and irreversible degradation in the absence of adverse
conditions is a matter of time and temperature [8]. Assessment of material durability is not an
assessment of whether a material will degrade, but instead it is an assessment of the rate of degradation
and whether the degradation rate results in a significant change in properties over the material’s design
life.
The building code provides little guidance on durability and requires developers of new products to
ensure durability “…not less than the equivalent of that prescribed in this code…” [7]. With respect to
SIP component materials, wood structural panels are conventional structural materials prescribed in the
code and expanded polystyrene (EPS) and polyurethane foam cores are recognized for use by the IRC
[9]. The durability limitations in the Specification are derived from the code limitations currently placed
on these recognized materials.
C3.5 Time Effect Factor

In the Specification, the effects of creep and creep-rupture are addressed using a “time-effect factor”
which adjusts nominal SIP properties to the corresponding in-use load duration. The Specification
classifies all loads into three load duration categories: short, normal, and permanent [10] [11], as further
described in Table C3.5-1. The time effect factors are assigned on a limit state-by-limit state basis
depending on the nature of the load and the SIP component(s) involved in resisting the load.
Table C3.5-1: Load Duration Categories
Category Description
Loading where the duration of the loads is not expected to last more
Short Duration Loads than 7 days continuously or cumulatively throughout the life of the
structure. Examples include wind, earthquake and impact loads
Loading where the duration of the specified load exceeds that of
Normal Duration short-duration loading but is less than permanent loading.
Loads Examples include snow, rain, construction and live loads due to
occupancy.
Loading under which a member is continuously subjected to the
specified load throughout the life of the structure. Examples include
Permanent Loads
dead loads, soil pressure, live loads due to storage and loads due to
fixed equipment.
Design Strength Load Duration Basis

The time effects factors provided by the Specification are established on the basis of input material
strengths corresponding to short duration/test duration loading for all design method except for the
ADT method. As a result, the time effective factor for short duration loads, for all limit states is
unity (λ = 1.0) and all time effect factors for loads of longer duration are equal to or less than unity.

The load duration basis for the ADT method differs in that the resulting allowable loads are considered
acceptable for use in wall, roof and floor assemblies and are “not subject to increase due to duration of
loading” [4]. This established practice, within the context of the Specification, corresponds to the
assumption that ADT strength values correspond to normal duration loads and with no load duration
increase permitted the time effect factors for normal and short duration loads is unity (λ = 1.0). With
respect to permanent loads and the ADT methodology, the fact that the long-term stiffness of wood
structural panels is one-half the stiffness under normal-term loads [11] is acknowledged in many load
tables. This limitation is generally found in a footnote which limits permanent loads to not exceed one-
half the tabulated load. While the NDS applies this reduction only to the panel stiffness—and not to the
strength—in the ADT method this limitation is generally applied to both strength and stiffness limit
states. This is because panel stiffness often limits the allowable transverse load; and, when loads are
presented in tabular form the governing limit state often is not identified. In the context of the
Specification, this practice corresponds to a time effect factor of 0.50 for ADT design strengths subjected
to permanent duration loads. The Specification applies the time effect factors in Table C3.5-2 to ADT
design strengths states involving the failure of SIP components.
Table C3.5-2: ADT Time Effect Factors
ADT Time Effect
Load Duration Factor, λ
Short Duration Loads 1.0
Normal Duration
1.0
Loads
Permanent Loads 0.5
Most Unfavorable Loading Effect

When loads of varying durations are applied simultaneously, the design shall be based on the critical
load combination considering the load duration factors and load combinations applicable to each limit
state. This concept is illustrated in Table C3.5-3 using the ASD load combinations in ASCE 7-10.
Table C3.5-3: ASCE 7-10 Basic Load Combinations for Allowable Stress Design [2]
Case Load Combination Design Duration
1 D Permanent
2 D+L Varies1
3 D + (Lr or S or R) Normal
4 D + 0.75L + 0.75(Lr or S or R) Normal
5 D + (0.6W or 0.7E) Short
D + 0.75(L + 0.6W + (Lr or S or Short
6a
R))
6b D + 0.75(L + 0.7E + S) Short
7 0.6D + 0.6W Short
8 0.6D + 0.7E Short
1
Normal when L is from occupancy, Permanent when L is from storage.
For each limit state the governing load combination may be determined as follows:
1. Determine the magnitude of each load and combine the loads according to the applicable load
combinations to find the total load. These load combinations may include load combination
factors to adjust for the probability of simultaneous occurrence of various loads the load
combinations shall be considered with one or more not acting where the transient loads have
varying load durations.

2. Divide the total load by the time effect factor, λ, corresponding to the load of shortest
duration considering the loads in each load combination separately.
3. The largest value obtained corresponds to the critical load combination to be used in the
design of the member.
C3.6 Temperature Limits

The recommended temperature limitations are based on the published limits for wood materials as found
in the National Design Specification for Wood Construction (NDS) [11]. Wood and engineered wood
products exhibit reversible and permanent strength reductions when subjected to temperatures more than
100° F. The NDS provides temperature adjustment factors for wood members subjected to prolonged
exposure to temperatures up to 150° F; however, the design values for wood structural panels are limited
to 100° F [11]. Core materials, such as EPS and polyurethane foam, have maximum working
temperatures of 165° F when used as an insulating material [12] [13]. The Specification temperature
limitation is taken as the minimum working temperature considering the various SIP components.
The cumulative permanent effects of temperature depend on the time-temperature history. Roof systems
or similar assemblies subject to diurnal temperature fluctuations from solar radiation are not applications
that normally require adjustment of wood design properties for temperature [14]. Temperatures in
ventilated attic spaces have been observed to reach 150° F for short durations. Roof surface
temperatures in the southern United States have been documented to reach temperatures of 170-180° F
on still, sunny days [15]. SIP panel roofs, which are typically unventilated and more directly exposed to
solar radiation than conventional framing, likely experience increased temperatures for longer durations
than conventional framing. Such temperature excursions; however, are short and seldom coincide with
design loading events.
Designers must be aware of installation conditions which may produce unfavorable temperature
conditions. Applications where SIP panels are used in roof assemblies having dark roof coverings,
photovoltaic arrays, or other coverings that absorb solar radiation, must be considered carefully. In cases
where temperature concerns exist, the designer may consider creating a ventilated space between the SIP
assembly and roof surface. This ventilated space may be created using 1x furring strips overlaid with
roof decking [16]. Radiant/hydronic heating systems installed on SIP floor assemblies require similar
consideration to prevent problems. Such systems are often operated with fluid temperatures of 160° F or
higher, which results in damage to wood-based products [17]. Where such systems are installed on SIP
floors, supply temperatures should be limited to 100° F.
C3.7 Moisture and Weather Protection

Exterior cladding materials are exposed to extreme heat, ultra-violet radiation and wetting-drying cycles.
The effects of such exposure results in the need to replace or maintain the exterior weather protection
throughout the life of a structure [8] [18]. The primary structural system is expected to last the lifetime
of the structure and cannot readily be replaced if degraded. For this reason, the Specification requires a
level of protection from weather and moisture consistent with that of conventional structural framing
materials as prescribed by the applicable code and in accordance with the SIP manufacturer’s literature.
The recommended moisture limitations are based on the published limits for wood structural sheathing
as found in APA D510, Panel Design Specification [19]. As indicated in the APA specification, the
mechanical properties of wood structural sheathing are reduced when the moisture content of the panel
exceeds 16%. Structural sheathing, without preservative treatment or a protective surface, cannot be
exposed to the elements for prolonged periods.

C3.8 Termite Damage

The building code limits the use of foam plastics in areas where the probability of termite infestation is
very heavy—prohibiting installation on walls below grade and requiring 6 inches of clearance between
form plastic and exposed earth [7].
References
[1] L. E. Hsiao, Reliability Based Criteria for Cold-Formed Steel Members, Rolla, Missouri:
University of Missouri-Rolla, 1989.
[2] American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), ASCE/SEI 7-10 Minimum Design Loads for
Buildings and Other Structures, Reston, Virginia: ASCE, 2010.
[3] NRC-CNRC, User's Guide-NBC 2005, Structural Commentaries (Part 4 of Division B), Ottawa,
Ontario: Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes, 2006.
[4] ICC Evaluation Service, LLC (ICC-ES), AC04 Sandwich Panels--Approved Feburary 2012,
editorially revised August 2013, Brea, California: ICC-ES, 2013.
[5] APA - the Engineered Wood Association, "ANSI/APA PRS 610.1-2013 Standard for
Performance-Rated Structural Insulated Panels in Wall Applications," APA - the Engineered Wood
Association, Tacoma, WA, 2013.
[6] American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI), "AISI S100-2007 North American Specification for the
Design of Cold-Formed Steel Structural Members, 2007 Edition," American Iron and Steel
Institute, Washington DC, 2007.
[7] International Code Council, Inc. (ICC), "2015 International Building Code," International Code
Council, Inc. (ICC), Brea, CA, 2015.
[8] J. Lstiburek, "Building Science Digest 144: Increasing the Durability of Building Constructions,"
Building Science Press, Westford, MA, 2006.
[9] International Code Council, Inc. (ICC), "International Residential Code 2007 Suppliment to the
International Residential Code," International Code Council, Inc. (ICC), Brea, CA, 2007.
[10] Canadian Standards Association (CSA), "CSA O86-09 Engineered Design in Wood," Canadian
Standards Association (CSA), Mississauga, Ontario, Canada, 2009.
[11] American Wood Council (AWC), "ANSI/AWC NDS-2015, National Design Specification for
Wood Construction 2015 Edition," American Wood Council (AWC), Leesburg, VA, 2014.
[12] ASTM International, "ASTM C578-12b Standard Specification for Rigid, Cellular Polystyrene
Thermal Insulation," ASTM International, Conshohocken, PA, 2012.
[13] ASTM International, "ASTM C591-09 Standard Specification for Unfaced Preformed Rigid
Cellular Polyisocyanurate Thermal Insulation," ASTM International, Conshohocken, PA, 2009.
Wood Construction Commentary 2005 Edition," American Wood Council (AWC), Washington,
DC, 2006.
[15] J. E. Winandy, H. M. Barnes and C. A. Hatfield, "FPL-RP-589 Roof Temperature Histories in
Matched Attics in Mississippi and Wisconsin," United States Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, WI, 2000.
[16] L. Joseph, Builder's Guide to Structural Insulated Panels (SIPs) for All Climates, Somerville, MA:
Building Science Press, 2008.

[17] APA - The Engineered Wood Association, "APA Form No. TT-113A, Special Consideration for
Designing Radiant Heat Systems over Wood I-Joist Floors," APA - The Engineered Wood
[18] National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), "Study of Life Expectancy of Home
Components," National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), Washington, DC, 2007.
[19] APA - the Engineered Wood Association, "APA Form No. D510C, Panel Design Specification
(Revised May 2012)," APA - the Engineered Wood Association, Tacoma, WA, 2012.
[20] American Society for Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), "2013
ASHRAE Handbook--Fundamentals," ASHRAE, Inc., Atlanta, GA, 2013.
[21] ASTM International, "ASTM D5516-09 Standard Test Method for Evaluating the Flexural
Properties of Fire-Retardant Treated Softwood Plywood Exposed to Elevated Temperatures,"
ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2009.
[22] ASTM International, "D7032-10a Standard Specification for Establishing Performance Ratings for
Wood-Plastic Composite Deck Boards and Guardrail Systems (Guards or Handrails)," ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2010.
[23] AFM Corporation, "Technical Bulletin No. 2026, Solar Effects and R-Control," AFM Corporation,
Lakeville, MN, 1991.
[24] Structural Insulated Panel Association (SIPA), "Technical Bulletin No. 9: Durability of SIPs
Exposed to Moisture," Structural Insulated Panel Association (SIPA), Fort Lauderdale, FL, 2012.


C4 FLEXURE
C4.1 Flexural Strength

The flexure limit states are applicable to panels subjected to a transverse load (as shown in Figure C4.1-
1) or otherwise loaded to create a flexural moment in the panel in the absence of an axial load (see
Section 8 for combined loads). A transverse load results in equal and opposite compression and tension
forces in the panel facings.
Figure C4.1-1: Flexural Loading
The Specification is limited to SIP panels comprised of three layers—two facings separated by a core, as
shown in Figure C4.1-2. More complicated composites, which incorporate more elements may be
analyzed using the principles of the Specification, but may require derivation of the mechanical
properties different from that shown herein.
Figure C4.1-2: General SIP Cross Section
Composite Mechanics
A SIP is a composite assemblage consisting of two relatively thin and rigid facings separated by a thick
core. Due to the disparity in material properties, the core generally resists the shear forces whereas the
facings resist the bending moment. The core and adhesive keep the upper facing from slipping relative
to the lower facing (i.e. maintains strain compatibility) and braces the facings against local
buckling/wrinkling when subjected to compressive stress.
Considering a general 3-layer composite system, the classical approach to composite analysis requires
each layer to be converted to an “equivalent” layer of a single material. This conversion is performed on
the basis of the modular ratio, n, of the layer under consideration and the reference material to which all
other material will be converted. For example, if the bottom facing and core are converted to a layer
“equivalent” to the top facing, the modular ratios for the bottom facing and core are calculated as
provided in Equations C4.1-1 and C4.1-2, respectively.

E2
n2 = (Eqn. C4.1-1)
E1
Ec
nc = (Eqn. C4.1-2)
E1
where:
E1 = Elastic modulus of facing 1 (top facing) (psi)
E2 = Elastic modulus of facing 2 (bottom facing) (psi)
Ec = Elastic modulus of core (psi)
n1 = Modular ratio of facing 2 to facing 1 (bottom facing)
nc = Modular ratio of core to facing 1
Using the modular ratios, the basic flexural properties of the composite, such as the centroid and moment
of inertia, may be calculated on the basis of the top facing, as provided in Equations C4.1-3 and C4.1-4.
�𝟏𝟏 + 𝒏𝒏𝟐𝟐 𝑨𝑨𝟐𝟐 𝒚𝒚

𝑨𝑨𝟏𝟏 𝒚𝒚 �𝟏𝟏 + 𝒏𝒏𝒄𝒄 𝑨𝑨𝒄𝒄 𝒚𝒚
�𝒄𝒄
�=
𝒚𝒚 (Eqn. C4.1-3)
𝑨𝑨𝟏𝟏 + 𝒏𝒏𝟐𝟐 𝑨𝑨𝟐𝟐 + 𝒏𝒏𝒄𝒄 𝑨𝑨𝒄𝒄
𝐼𝐼 = 𝐼𝐼1 + 𝐴𝐴1 (𝑦𝑦� − 𝑦𝑦�1 )2 + 𝑛𝑛2 [𝐼𝐼2 + 𝐴𝐴2 (𝑦𝑦� − 𝑦𝑦�2 )2 ] + 𝑛𝑛𝑐𝑐 [𝐼𝐼𝑐𝑐 + 𝐴𝐴𝑐𝑐 (𝑦𝑦� − 𝑦𝑦�𝑐𝑐 )2 ] (Eqn. C4.1-4)
where:
A1, A2, Ac = Cross sectional area of layer (in.2)
I1, I2, Ic = Moment of inertia of layer about centroid of layer (in.4)
𝑦𝑦�1 , 𝑦𝑦�2 , 𝑦𝑦�𝑐𝑐 = Distance from top of section to centroid of layer (in.)
𝑦𝑦� = Distance from top of section to centroid of composite section (in.)
I = Moment of inertia of composite section (in.4)
Simplifying Assumptions
For most SIP panel compositions Equations C4.1-3 and C4.1-4 may be simplified without significantly
reducing the accuracy of the overall design. These common assumptions are described in the following
sections.
Weak Core
Insulating core materials generally are much less stiff than the facings. This disparity in stiffness results
in reduced flexural stress in the core, as illustrated in Figure C4.1-3. This difference is generally
significant enough that the flexural contribution of the core is neglected. In terms of the equations
previously presented, this “weak core” assumption may be expressed as:
𝐸𝐸𝑐𝑐 𝐼𝐼𝑐𝑐 ≪ 𝐸𝐸1 𝐼𝐼1 and 𝐸𝐸𝑐𝑐 𝐼𝐼𝑐𝑐 ≪ 𝐸𝐸2 𝐼𝐼2
𝑛𝑛𝑐𝑐 ≈ 0
Figure C4.1-3: Flexural Stress within SIP
Thin Facings

SIP panel facings are generally thin and have limited stiffness about their own neutral axis. From a
mechanics standpoint, neglecting the local stiffness of the facings in the section properties results in a
uniform tension and compression in the facings under flexural loading, as shown in Figure C4.1-3
(Stress Case Ec = 0, If = 0). The error introduced by this assumption is quantified in the following
example.
Example:
Determine the error associated with neglecting the local stiffness of the facings for SIP panels utilizing
7/16-inch thick wood structural sheathing. The core is assumed to be “weak” and does not contribute to
the flexural stiffness.
Considering a 12-inch width of panel, the local stiffness of the facing is calculated as:
12 × (7 / 16 )
3
bt f 3
If = = = 0.0837 - in.4
12 12
Table C4.1-1: Panel Stiffness Calculation Error1

Core Overall Approximat
Thickness, Thickness, “Exact” e Error
tc t If + 2Afd2 2Afd2 %
3.5 4.375 40.9 40.7 0.41
5.5 6.375 92.7 92.5 0.18
7.25 8.125 155.3 155.1 0.11
11.25 12.125 358.7 358.6 0.05
1
The facing area, Af, of a 1-foot width of panel is 12-in. × 7/16-in. =
5.25-in.2. The distance between the facing centroids, d, is equal to (tc +
tf)/2.
As shown in Table C4.1-1, even for the thinnest panel considered, utilizing a relatively thick facing
(facings account for 20-percent of the overall panel thickness), the error introduced by neglecting the
local bending stiffness of the facing is only 0.41-percent and may be neglected.
Simplified Section Properties

Implementing the “weak” core assumption and neglecting the local stiffness of the facings results in the
following simplified expressions for SIP panel section properties for SIP panels having symmetric
rectangular facings, such as wood structural panels.
Figure C4.1-5: SIP Panel with Symmetric Rectangular Facings

𝒕𝒕
�=
𝒚𝒚 (Eqn. C4.1-5)
𝟐𝟐
A f (t + t c )
2
I= (Eqn. C4.1-6)
8
A f (t + t c )
2
I
Sc = St = = (Eqn. C4.1-7)
y 4t
where:
𝑦𝑦� = Distance from top of section to centroid of composite section (in.)
I = Moment of inertia of composite section (in.4)
Sc, St = Section modulus corresponding to facing in compression and tension, respectively (in.3)
tc = Core thickness (in.)
Af = Cross sectional area of single rectangular facings, equal to b × tf (in.2)
C4.1.1 General
Flexural strength is limited by the lower bound strength resulting from facing failure in tension and
facing failure in compression. The limit states of flexural tension and compression are addressed
separately to account for differences in facing strength based on the direction of loading and to
permit superposition of combined forces (see Section 8).
C4.1.2 Design Span

This section provides guidance on establishing appropriate engineering analogs from actual support
conditions when considering flexural design.
C4.1.3 Flexural Strength Limited by Facing Tension

The flexural facing tension limit state is characterized by tension yielding or tension fracture of the
tension facing, as depicted in Figure C4.1.3-1.
Figure C4.1.3-1: Facing Tension Limit State
The strength corresponding to this limit state is based on the engineering mechanics presented in
Section 4.1, using the “weak-core” assumption. Based on this assumption, this limit state is solely
dependent on the tensile strength of the facing. The designer should be aware that the mechanics
presented in this section do not account for stress raisers in the panel facings, such as holes, which
may result in tensile failures under loads less than predicted by this limit state (See Section 11) [1]
[2].
Design Value Sources

The design values for conventional materials may be derived from existing literature or by testing.
The flexural tension limit state is an upper bound limit state that is not generally observed in full-
scale panels subjected to transverse loading. As a result, the tensile strength of the facing must be
established through tensile tests on facing coupons rather than full-scale specimens. When tensile

testing is conducted on conventional materials, the tensile strength shall be taken as the lesser of the
strengths established by testing or as specified in the applicable material specification.
Design Strength
Capacities for wood structural panels are available from various sources and are established on a per-
foot-of-panel-width basis [3] [4] [5]. Wood structural panels are orthotropic materials, which means the
strength and stiffness properties differ in the two principal directions. The Specification refers to these
two directions as the “strong axis” direction and “weak axis” direction. The direction of the “strong
axis” is defined as the axis parallel to the orientation of the OSB face strands or plywood face veneer
grain.
Suitable ADT, ASD and LRFD values may be obtained from the National Design Specification for
Wood Construction (NDS) [3]. In the NDS, ASD and LRFD level stresses are given as:
𝐹𝐹𝑡𝑡 𝐴𝐴′ = 𝐹𝐹𝑡𝑡 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐷𝐷 𝐶𝐶𝑀𝑀 𝐶𝐶𝑡𝑡 𝐶𝐶𝑠𝑠 ASD (Eqn. C4.1.3-1)
𝐹𝐹𝑡𝑡 𝐴𝐴′ = 𝐹𝐹𝑡𝑡 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝑀𝑀 𝐶𝐶𝑡𝑡 𝐶𝐶𝑠𝑠 𝐾𝐾𝐹𝐹 𝜙𝜙𝑡𝑡 𝜆𝜆 LRFD (Eqn. C4.1.3-2)
where:
FtA = Tabulated panel tension strength from ASD/LRFD Manual for Engineered Wood Construction
[4], Table M9.2-2 (lbf/ft of panel width)
FtA’ = NDS Adjusted panel tension strength (lbf/ft of panel width)
CD = NDS load duration factor
CM = NDS wet service factor, equals 1.0 based on limits in Section 4 of the Specification
Ct = NDS temperature factor, equals 1.0 based on the limits in Section 4 of the Specification
Cs = NDS panel size factor as provided in the Table C4.1.3-1
KF = NDS format conversion factor, equals 2.70 for tension
φt = NDS resistance factor, equals 0.80 for tension
Table C4.1.3-1: Panel Size Factor [3]

Panel Strip Width, w Cs
w ≤ 8-in. 0.5
8-in.< w < 24-in. (8 + w)/32
w ≥ 24-in. 1.0
Equations C4.1.3-1 and C4.1.3-2 may be simplified to Equation C4.1.3-3 and C4.1.3-4, respectively, by
making the following substitutions:
1. considering the limits of use found in Section 4 of the Specification, CM = 1.0 and Ct = 1.0;
2. dividing by the panel area (A = 12tf) to convert from force to stress;
3. substituting the value for the format conversion factor, KF = 2.70;
4. taking φt = 1.0 since the reduction will be applied in accordance with the specification;
5. for the ADT and ASD stresses at normal duration loads CD = 1.0 in Equation C4.1.3-1; and,
6. for the LRFD design method, which is based on the nominal stress under short duration loads,
substitute λ = 1.0 in Equation C4.1.3.-2.
Making these substitutions yields Equations C4.1.3-3 and C4.1.3-4, which provide the ADT and nominal
design stresses, respectively, for use with the Specification, from the published NDS values.

FtNDS ACs
FtADT = (Eqn. C4.1.3-3)
12t f
FtNDS ACs
FtNominal = 2.70 (Eqn. C4.1.3-4)
12t f
Reduction Factors
With the exception of the ADT method, the input stress values are at nominal strength level with a
reduction factor applied in accordance with Section 3.2 of the Specification to obtain a design strength
consistent with the selected design methodology (e.g. ASD, LRFD or LSD). Because the flexural
tension limit state is a wood structural panel limit state and because the nominal stress provided by
Equation C4.1.3-4 is consistent with the nominal strength in the NDS, the LRFD resistance factor for
tension (φt = 0.80) is applied.
With respect to ASD design, it is not necessary to determine a distinct Ft, as is the case in the NDS,
instead it is only necessary determine an appropriate factor of safety to reduce the nominal strength value
to an ASD value. From the NDS, this factor of safety may be equated as shown in Equation C4.1.3-5.
Kf Kf
Ω mt = = (Eqn. C4.1.3-5)
CD 1.6
Substituting KF = 2.70 into the expression yields an ASD factor of safety of 1.68.
Wood Structural Panels—Design Value Example

Considering a 24/16 Rated, 7/16-inch thick OSB facing, having a minimum width of 24-inches, the ADT
design tensile stresses are calculated using Equation C4.1.3-3, as shown below.
Strong-Axis:
FtNDS ACs 2600 lbf/ft ×1.0
FtADT = = = 495 psi
12t f 12 × 7/16"
Weak-Axis:
FtNDS ACs 1300 lbf/ft × 1.0
FtADT = = = 248 psi
12t f 12 × 7/16"
The nominal tensile strength to be used with ASD and LRFD is simply the ADT value times the format
conversion factor, KF = 2.70, as shown below.
Strong-Axis:
Ft = = 2.70 × = 1337 psi
12t f 12 × 7/16"
Weak-Axis:
Ft = = 2.70 × = 669 psi
12t f 12 × 7/16"
Time Effect Factors

One characteristic of wood materials is that their strength and stiffness are influenced by the intensity
and duration of the applied load. This effect is accounted for by applying a load duration factor to the
design stress. In a wood-faced SIP panel under flexural loading, it has been shown that the duration of
load effects of OSB facings are similar to that observed for wood [6]. Accordingly, the duration of loads

effects from the applicable wood design specifications are applied to the design of wood structural
panels for the flexure limit states. As shown in Table C4.1.3-2, the load duration factors in the various
wood design specifications vary due to the applicable load combinations and normalization methods.
For use in the Specification, the load duration factors from the NDS and CSA O86 were adjusted to
correspond to short duration loading and then rounded down to the nearest multiple of 0.05. Table
C4.1.3-2 provides a comparison of the original values to the time-effect factors, λt, in the Specification.
The basis for the ADT time effect factors is provided in Section 4.1 of the Commentary.
Table C4.1.3-2: Wood Load Duration Factors Used In Design [3] [5]
NDS (ASD) NDS (LRFD) CSA O86 (LSD)
Load Duration CD λt λ λt KD λt
Short 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.15 0.90
Normal 1.00 0.60 0.80 0.80 1.00 0.80
Permanent 0.90 0.55 0.60 0.60 0.65 0.50
C4.1.4 Flexural Strength Limited by Facing Compression

The flexural compression limit state represents the strength of a slender element braced against out-of-
plane buckling by the core. This single limit state is actually the lower bound strength of two distinct
limit states: (1) the compressive strength of the facing material (Figure C4.1.4-1 top); (2) the
wrinkling/local buckling strength of the facing, as braced by the core (Figure C4.1.4-1 bottom). In cases
where the core material is thick and has sufficient stiffness about its own axis, such as with wood
structural panels, the facing will develop its full compressive strength without wrinkling or buckling.
Figure C4.1.4-1: Facing Compression Limit State

A SIP compression facing is braced in a manner that is unique and is not found in the design
references for conventional materials. In the design of conventional materials, compression bracing
is provided at discrete points along the compression element and the bracing elements must have
sufficient strength and stiffness to prevent buckling at the brace location. In contrast, a SIP
compression facing is continuously braced by adhesion to the SIP core. And, unlike a conventional
compression brace, the core may not have sufficient strength or stiffness to fully prevent buckling—
it may only act to increase the stress required to produce buckling. The force required to produce
buckling under this condition, illustrated in Figure C4.1.4-2, may be derived using engineering
mechanics [9], as presented in Equation C4.1.4-1.

Figure C4.1.4-2: Local Buckling of a SIP Facing
σ f = k 3 E f Ec Gc (Eqn. C4.1.4-1)
where:
σf = Buckling stress of compression facing (psi)
k = Empirical reduction factor ≤ 0.823
Ef = Elastic modulus of compression facing (psi)
Ec = Elastic modulus of core (psi)
Gc = Shear modulus of core (psi)
The empirical reduction factor in Equation C4.1.4-1 has an upper bound of approximately 0.823 for
a “perfect” panel [9]. Imperfections in actual facings, such as unevenness of the faces, lack of
homogeneity in the facing or core, or poor adhesion between the facing and core have resulted in
recommended design values for k in the range of 0.65 and 0.50, for foam cores [10] [11].
Design Strength
It has been established that facings comprised of wood structural panels adhered to EPS or polyurethane
foam cores are capable of developing their full compressive strength without exhibiting
wrinkling/buckling. As a result, compressive capacities for wood structural panels may be obtained
from various sources. Applying the concepts presented in Section C4.1.3, ADT and nominal design
stresses may be obtained using Equations C4.1.4-2 and C4.1.4-3.
Fc AC s
FcADT = (Eqn. C4.1.4-2)
12t f
Fc AC s
FcNominal = 2.40 (Eqn. C4.1.4-3)
12t f
Reduction Factors
With the exception of the ADT method, the input stress values are at nominal strength level with a
reduction factor applied in accordance with Section 3.2 of the Specification to obtain a design strength
consistent with the selected design methodology (e.g. ASD, LRFD or LSD). Because the flexural
compression limit state is a wood structural panel limit state and because the nominal stress provided by
Equation C4.1.4-3 is consistent with the nominal strength in the NDS, the LRFD resistance factor for
tension (φc = 0.90) is applied.
With respect to ASD design, it is not necessary to determine a distinct Fc, as is the case in the NDS,
instead it is only necessary to determine an appropriate factor of safety to reduce the nominal strength
value to an ASD value. From the NDS, this factor of safety may be equated as shown in Equation
C4.1.3-5. Substituting KF = 2.40 into the expression yields an ASD factor of safety of 1.50 in the
Specification.

Design Value Example

Considering a 24/16 Rated, 7/16-inch thick OSB facing, having a minimum width of 24-inches, the ADT
design compressive stresses are calculated using Equation C4.1.4-2, as shown below.
Strong-Axis:
Fc AC s 3250 lbf/ft × 1.0
FcADT = = = 619 psi
12t f 12 × 7/16"
Weak-Axis:
Fc AC s 2500 lbf/ft × 1.0
FcADT = = = 476 psi
12t f 12 × 7/16"
The nominal compressive strength to be used with ASD and LRFD is the ADT value times the format
conversion factor, KF = 2.40, as shown below.
Strong-Axis:
𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐 𝐴𝐴𝐶𝐶𝑠𝑠 3250 lbf/ft × 1.0
𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 𝐾𝐾𝐹𝐹 = 2.40 = 1486 psi
12𝑡𝑡𝑓𝑓 12 × 7/16"
Weak-Axis:
𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐 𝐴𝐴𝐶𝐶𝑠𝑠 2500 lbf/ft × 1.0
𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 𝐾𝐾𝐹𝐹 = 2.40 = 1143 psi
12𝑡𝑡𝑓𝑓 12 × 7/16"
Time Effect Factors

The time effect factors for wood structural panels under compression loading are the same as those used
for tension loading in Section C4.1.3. Under compression the wood structural facing is braced by the
viscoelastic core that is subjected to creep effects to a different extent that the facing. However, the
bracing stress in the core is small—generally not more than 2-percent of the stress in the braced
member—and the effects of creep-buckling may be ignored.
C4.2 Flexural (Transverse) Stiffness

C4.2.1 General
All materials exhibit both shear and bending deformations when subjected to “beam” loading. For
conventional materials; however, the magnitude of the shear deformations are sufficiently small and
they are generally neglected in design. In SIPs, the magnitude of shear deformations are of similar
magnitude as bending deformations and must be considered. This necessitates the use of both an
elastic bending modulus of elasticity, E, and a shear modulus, G.
The “weak core” assumption, presented in Section C4.1, is applied to the SIP stiffness whereby the
bending stiffness is influenced solely by the facings and the shear stiffness is influenced solely by
the core. These moduli are time-dependent and must be adjusted to account for duration of load
effects. Because the creep characteristics differ between the facings and core, distinct time-effect
factors are provided to independently adjust the moduli of the facing and core. The method of
adjustment utilizes the fractional deflection approach whereby the reciprocal of the fractional
deflection attributed to the facing and core is taken as the reduction in stiffness of the elastic and
shear modulus, respectively [10].

∆t
FDt = (Eqn. C4.2.1-1)
∆0
E0
Et = = λE E (Eqn. C4.2.1-2)
FDEt
G0
Gt = = λG G (Eqn. C4.2.1-3)
FDGt
where:
FDt = Fractional deflection at time t
∆t = Measured deflection at time t (in.)
∆0 = Measured deflection at reference time zero (in.)
Et = Modulus of elasticity adjusted to time t (psi)
E, E0 = Modulus of elasticity at reference time zero (psi)
FDEt = Fractional deflection attributed to the elastic modulus at time t
λE = Modulus of elasticity time-effect factor assigned to time t
Gt = Shear modulus adjusted to time t (psi)
G, G0 = Shear modulus at reference time zero (psi)
FDGt = Fractional deflection attributed to the shear modulus at time t
λG = Shear modulus time-effect factor assigned to time t
C4.2.2 Bending Modulus

The bending modulus is adjusted to the required load duration using the process described in Section
C4.2.1. Existing creep studies on SIPs with wood structural panel facings do not allow for the separation
of the fractional deflection into bending and shear components; as a result, the time-effect factors applied
to the elastic and shear moduli are identical. The fractional deflection data used as the basis for the
Specification is taken from the creep study performed by Taylor [13] which provides fractional
deflection models for OSB faced EPS and urethane core SIPs. Of the two models verified in the study,
the power model was used to calculate the time-effect factors in the Specification using Equations
C4.2.2-1 and C4.2.2-2. These expressions are plotted in Figure C4.2.2-1. The time effect factors for
normal and permanent duration loads were determined considering t = 10 years and t = 50 years,
respectively.
1
λtEPS = (Eqn. C4.2.2-1)
1 + 0.0143t 0.3015
1
λtUrethane = (Eqn. C4.2.2-2)
1 + 0.0197t 0.3299
where:
λtEPS = Time effect factor for OSB faced EPS core SIP at time t
λtUrethane = Time effect factor for OSB faced urethane core SIP at time t
t = Time from reference time zero (minutes)

Permanent
10 Years
50 Years
Normal
EPS Core
Urethane Core
Figure C4.2.2-1: Time-Effect Factor for OSB Faced SIPs [13]
C4.2.3 Shear Modulus

The shear modulus is adjusted to the required load duration using the process described in Section
C4.2.1 based on the core material. For the reasons described in Section C4.2.2, the time effect
factors applicable to the shear modulus are identical to those applied to the elastic modulus.
C4.3 Flexural (Transverse) Deflection

C4.3.1 General
With the exception of engineered wood products, such as wood I-joists and structural composite
lumber, shear deformations are generally neglected in the design of conventional materials. This
section of the Specification provides basic guidance for the assessment of deflection serviceability
limit states which require consideration of both shear and bending deformations.
C4.3.2 Design Span

The design span to be used when determining deflections is consistent with those used when
determining flexural moments.
C4.3.3 Simply Supported, Uniform Load

The Specification provides the expression for the calculation of the deflection of a simply supported
member subjected to a uniform load, which is a common support and loading condition. Unlike the
model building code(s) and the design specifications for conventional materials, which omit
deflection formula, an expression for deflection was provided in the Specification to emphasize the
need for designers to consider shear deformations.
Other common support and loading conditions that are tabulated in various design manuals may be
adapted for use with SIPs using Equation C4.3.3-1. It must be noted; however, that this expression
neglects the stiffening effects due to local bending of the facings.

M
∆t = ∆b + ∆v = ∆b + (Eqn. C4.3.3-1)
Av Gt
where:
∆b = Deflection due to bending effects determined using tabulated bending deflection formula
(in.)
Μ = Flexural moment at location where deflections are considered (in.-lbf)
(psi)
C4.3.4 Total Deflection

The expression for the total long-term deflection is the summation of the deflection due to each load
acting independently. This concept is based on the well-known Boltzmann superposition principle,
which has been verified for use with EPS and Urethane SIPs under service level loads [13].
C4.3.5 Deflection Limit

The transverse deflection of SIP panels is limited to the span divided by 120 or as required by the
adopted building code, whichever is more restrictive. This minimum deflection limit is based on
historical practice [14] and has been found to result in acceptable designs.

References
[1] APA - The Engineered Wood Association, "APA Report T2006P-33 Standardization Testing of
Structural Insulated Panels (SIPs) for The Structural Insulated Panel Association, Gig Harbor,
Washington," APA - The Engineered Wood Association, Tacoma, WA, 2006.
[2] APA - The Engineered Wood Association, "APA Report T2007P-05 Standardization Testing of
Structural Insulated Panels (SIP) - Extruded Polystyrene (XPS) for the Structural Insulated Panel
Association," APA - The Engineered Wood Association, Tacoma, WA, 2007.
[4] American Wood Council (AWC), ASD/LRFD Manual for Engineered Wood Construction, 2012
Edition, Washington, DC: American Wood Council (AWC), 2012.
[5] Canadian Standards Association (CSA), O86-09 Engineering Design in Wood, Mississauga,
Ontario, Canada: Canadian Standards Association (CSA), 2009.
[6] M. Y. M. Okabe, "Long-Term Bending Failure Tests of Structural Insulated Panel," Center for
Better Living, Shizuoka University, Department of Environment and Forest Resource Science,
Japan.
Design of Cold-Formed Steel Structural Members, 2007 Edition," American Iron and Steel
Institute, Washington DC, 2007.
[8] Aluminum Association, Aluminum Design Manual, Arlington, VA: Aluminum Association, 2010.
[9] CIB Working Commission, W056 Sandwich Panels (joint CIB-ECCS Commission), Lightweight
Sandwich Construction, J. Davies, Ed., London, England: Blackwell Science, 2001.
[10] European Convention for Construction Steelwork (ECCS), "ECCS/CIB No 62 TWG 7.9 European
Recommendations for Sandwich Panels," European Convention for Construction Steelwork
(ECCS), Brussels (Belgium), 2001.
[11] APA - The Engineered Wood Association, Plywood Design Specification, Supplement 4-12,
Design and Fabrication of Sandwich Panels (Form No. U814J/Revised December 2014), Tacoma,
WA: APA - The Engineered Wood Association, 2014.
[12] American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI), AISI S902-13 Sub-Column Test Method for Effective
Area of Cold-Formed Steel Columns (2013 Edition), Washington, DC: American Iron and Steel
Institute, 2013.
[13] S. B. Taylor, The Flexural Creep Behavior of Structural Insulated Panel (SIP) Sandwich Beams, A
Thesis in Wood Engineering in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of
Philosophy, University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University, 1996.


C5 SHEAR
C5.1 General
The shear limit state is applicable to panels subjected to a transverse load (as shown in Figure C5.1-1) or
otherwise loaded to create a shear force through the thickness of the panel. This limit state is
characterized by shear or diagonal tension rupture of the core adjacent to a support or applied load, as
depicted in Figure C5.1-1.
Figure C5.1-1: Shear Limit State
Shear Mechanics
In an isotropic material subject to shear loading, the shear stress may be calculated using Equation C5.1-
1, below.
VQ
fv = (Eqn. C5.1-1)
Ib
where:
fv = Shear stress on plane defined by Q (psi)
V = Transverse shear force in section (lbf)
Q = First moment about the centroidal axis of the part of the cross-sectional area lying farther from
the centroidal axis than the position where the shear stresses are being calculated (in.3)
I = Moment of inertia of the full cross-section (in.4)
b = Width of section at location where shear is to be computed (in.)
Using Equation C5.1-1 the shear stress distribution in a SIP panel is illustrated in Figure C5.1-1. Like
the stress under flexural loading, the shear stress distribution is dependent on the difference in stiffness
between the facing and the core. As the relative stiffness of the core decreases, the ratio of the maximum
to minimum core shear stress decreases. The “weak” core assumption (Ec = 0) results in a uniform shear
stress through the thickness of the core.
Figure C5.1-2: Shear Stress Distribution within a SIP
One of the assumptions in the development of the shear formula (Eqn. C5.1-1) is that the shear stress is
uniformly distributed across the width of the section. While this assumption is valid for narrow sections,

the error introduced by this assumption increases as the width to depth ratio increases. For solid
rectangular sections having a width to depth ratio of 2:1, the error in this assumption is about 40-percent
[1]. Installed SIP panels commonly have aspect ratios exceeding 10:1, whereas small-scale shear tests
typically use samples having aspect ratios of 1:1. This error contributes to observed differences in
ultimate shear stress when comparing large-scale to small-scale test data.
C5.2 Design Span

The design spans for shear design are identical to those used for flexural design, except that the shear
force calculated from the engineering analog may be determined at the face of the supports.
The Specification provides specific loading and support configurations that permit the shear design force
to be determined at a distance away from the support face equal to the thickness of the SIP. Under the
specified conditions, the applied shear force results in a reaction that introduces compression into the
region of the SIP near the reaction. This compression inhibits the formation of the diagonal tension
crack near the reaction. St. Venant’s principle suggests that a concentrated load or reaction will dissipate
within about one beam depth from the point at which the load is applied [1]. This behavior is directly
observed in transversely loaded laboratory specimens failing in shear by formation of a diagonal
shear/tensile rupture in the core at a location away from the support approximately equal to the thickness
of the SIP.
Specific conditions where the critical section must be taken at the support include:
a) End-supported SIPs. The end support condition introduces tension into the core near the
support.
b) SIPs continuous over a support. The absence of laboratory data demonstrating this condition
necessitates conservatism.
c) Concentrated loads near the support. Loads near a support are generally transferred directly to
the support through compression rather than beam-action which gives rise to horizontal shear
forces; however, the absence of laboratory data demonstrating this condition necessitates
conservatism.
C5.3 Core Shear Strength

The expression in the Specification is derived from solving Equation C5.1-1 for the transverse shear
force, V and substituting the term Av, which equals:
𝑉𝑉𝑛𝑛 = 𝐹𝐹𝑣𝑣 𝐴𝐴𝑣𝑣 (Eqn. C5.3-1)

Ib
Av = (Eqn. C5.3-2)
Q
where:

For a SIP panel with symmetric rectangular facing, Equation C5.3-2 may solved as follows:
A f (t + t c )
2
I= (Eqn. C5.3-3)
8
 t − tc 
A f  tc +
A f (tc + t f ) 

2  A f (t + tc )
Q= = = (Eqn. C5.3-4)
2 2 4
It A f (t + t c )
2
4b b
Av = = = (t + t c ) (Eqn. C5.3-5)
Q 8 A f (t + t c ) 2
The core shear strength, Fv, is determined experimentally from panels configured to fail in shear. It is
necessary to test panels over a range of thicknesses for the purposes of establishing the depth factor, CFv,
described in C5.3.1. The configuration of the panels during the qualification testing establish limits on
the in-use configurations, as described in C5.3.2.
Reduction Factors
Generalized core shear strength reduction factors have not been established for the ASD, LRFD and
LSD design methods. Manufacturer specific reduction factors shall be used with these methods.
Time-Effect Factors
In the Specification, the effects of creep and creep-rupture are addressed through the use of a “time-
effect factor” which adjusts nominal SIP properties to the corresponding in-use load duration. This
concept is described in detail in C4.1. Time-effect factors for the ADT design method are taken from
Table C3.5-2. Generalized time-effect factors have not been established for the ASD, LRFD and LSD
design methods. Manufacturer specific reduction factors shall be used with these methods.
C5.3.1 Depth Factor, CFv

The depth factor accounts for the non-uniformity in the shear stress distribution within the SIP. The
“weak” core assumption, described in C5.1, idealizes the shear stress distribution within the SIP core as
uniform through the SIP thickness (Figure C5.1-2). Shear stresses calculated using the “weak” core
assumption correspond to the shear stresses at the facing-core interface. The shear stress at this location
is the minimum shear stress within the core, whereas the maximum shear stress occurs at the neutral
axis. Furthermore, as the stiffness of the core increases with respect to the stiffness of the facings, the
difference between the minimum (at facing-core interface) and maximum (at neutral axis) shear stress
within the core increases. For a symmetric SIP having rectangular facings, the ratio of the maximum
core shear stress to the minimum core shear stress may be calculated using Equation C5.3.1-1 [2].
2
τ max 1 Ec tc
=1+ (Eqn. C5.3.1-1)
τ min 4 E f t f (tc + t f )
where:
τmax = Maximum core shear stress at neutral axis (mid-thickness) (psi)
τmin = Minimum core shear stress at core-to-facing interface (psi)
Εc = Elastic modulus of the core (psi)
Εf = Elastic modulus of the facing (psi)
tc = Core thickness (in.)
tf = Facing thickness (in.)

This relationship is observed experimentally in the fact that the true core shear strength, determined from
pure shear tests on the core material only, is generally greater than the in-situ core shear strength of a SIP
core. And, for a SIP of a given facing-core configuration, the in-situ shear strength of the core decreases
as the core thickness increases because of increased shear stress non-uniformity in the core, as expressed
in Equation C5.3.1-1.
In practice, the performance of a composite material is established from the completed assemblage rather
than based on the characteristics of the individual components. The CFv equation in the Specification
provides relationship equivalent to Equation C5.3.1-1, except in terms of panel depth. Figure C5.3.1
compares the results of the size factor equation to the theoretical limits of Equation C5.3.1-1. The plot
illustrates the effects of SIP thickness and the effects due to a change in facing orientation.

The values for use in the depth factor equation (Equation 5.3.1) are manufacturer specific and are
obtained through laboratory testing. Considering the range of laboratory data. The reference panel
thickness, t0, is taken as the thinnest panel tested and the shear strength, Fv, is taken as the shear strength
of the reference panels. The depth adjustment exponent, m, accounts for the non-linear nature of the
depth-to-strength relationship and is established from a best-fit analysis of shear strength data
considering panels thicker than the reference depth. Values for m must be between zero (no reduction as
depth increases) and unity (linear reduction as depth increases) with typical values between 0.80 to 0.90
for SIPs comprised of 7/16-inch OSB facings and EPS cores. Also, because the facing stiffness varies
with the direction of the applied stress, the depth adjustment exponent also varies with direction.
Ec = 0
Strong-Axis
Ec = Ef
Weak-Axis
Figure C5.3.1-1: Size Factor, CFv, vs. SIP Depth [3]

C5.3.2 Core Voids and Discontinuities

Core voids and discontinuities, such as joints in the foam core, must be limited based on the size and
location of the voids present in the test specimens used to establish the core shear strength, Fv. When
generalizing core voids from test specimens to panels in design, the following rules generally apply:
1. The size of voids and discontinuity not be greater than that tested;
2. The method of creating the void must be the same (hot-wire cut versus drilled);
3. The nature of the discontinuity must be the same as tested (adhesive must be applied if adhesive
was present in the test specimen); and,
4. The shear stress at discontinuity or void locations shall not exceed the shear stress at that
location in the test assembly, even when the failure was not initiated at the discontinuity or void.
For uniformly loaded simply support panels this means that discontinuities or voids aligned
parallel to a support must be located at a distance away from the supports equal to or greater
than that distance in the test specimen.
References
[1] F. Beer and E. J. Johnston, Mechanics of Materials, Second Edition, New York: McGraw-Hll, Inc.,
1992.
[2] H. Allen, Analysis and Design of Structural Sandwich Panels, London: Pergamon Press, 1969.
[3] NTA, Inc., NTA Listing Report SIPA120908-20, Structural Insulated Panel Association (SIPA)
Structural Insulated Panels. (Issued 11/26/2014), Nappanee, IN: NTA, Inc., 2014.
[4] American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice
No. 63: Structural Plastics Design Manual, Volume 1, New York: ASCE, 1984.


C6 COMPRESSION
C6.1 General
The compression limit states are applicable to panels subjected to in-plane axial load (as shown in Figure
C6.1-1). Compression strength failure in wood structural sheathing faced SIP panels is the result of the
interaction between the following modes of failure: global buckling, crushing, shear crimping (shown in
Figure C6.1-1).
Figure C6.1-1: Axial Compression Loading
Compression strength is limited by the interaction of crushing and buckling effects as calculated in
Section 6.3. The shear crimping failure mode is a combination of crushing and buckling effects that
sometimes occurs in panels experiencing large out-of-plane deformations. Other applicable limit
states, not addressed in this section include, axial compression in combination with other loads and
shear strength of the core under the shear resulting from eccentric loading.
C6.2 Design Span

conditions when considering compression design. Table 6.2-1 provides the standard buckling length
factors for engineered design. Where the Specification is used to calculate values comparable to
axial load tests conducted in accordance with ASTM E72 a k-value of 0.7 may be used.
C6.3 Compression Strength

The compression strength limit state represents the interaction of two failure modes, crushing and
buckling. The crushing limit state is described in Commentary Section C4 with regard to the
compression facing in panels subjected to transverse flexural load. Under axial compression loading, the
crushing stress is applied to the total area of both facings in different magnitudes depending on the
eccentricity of the applied load, which is represented in Equation 6.3-1 of the Specification. The time-
effect factors are unchanged from Section C4. The crushing-buckling interaction factor is introduced
into the equation to account for column slenderness and load eccentricity.

Reduction Factors
The reduction factors applicable to axial compression strength were derived from the reduction factors
applied to the flexural facing compression limit state in Specification Table 4.1.4-1 but were adjusted to
account for system effects that may degrade compressive strength. Imperfect bearing surfaces and initial
imperfections in the SIP panel itself introduce stress concentrations that diminish axial capacity. These
strength reductions are not accounted for in the reduction factors provided in Specification Table 4.1.4-1
(Flexural Compression). While these effects have not been studied in detail, an adjustment
corresponding to a strength reduction of 10-percent was applied to account for such effects. This
reduction is based on a limited comparison of large-scale scale compression strength data to small-scale
compression coupons.
C6.3.1 Compression-Buckling Interaction Factor, Ci

In tests of full-sized panels under axial compression, the observed failure mode is neither perfect
crushing of the facings or perfect elastic buckling—some degree of interaction occurs. This interaction is
modeled using the Ylinen equation (Specification Equation 6.3.1-1), which provides a nonlinear
interaction between crushing and buckling where the degree of the interaction is determined by an
empirically determined parameter, c. The parameter c is determined experimentally using Equation
C6.3.1-1. The upper bound limit for c is unity (c = 1.0). A value of c = 1.0 is indicative of non-
interaction between crushing and buckling, whereas values of c less than 1.0 indicate some degree of
interaction [1].
Fc Fcr Ce Fc Fcr
c= + − 2
≤ 1.0 (Eqn. C6.3.1-1)
Fult Fult Fult
where:
c = Calibration factor, less than unity
Fcr = Elastic buckling strength from Specification Equation 6.3.1-5 (psi)
Fult = Ultimate concentric compressive strength from test or known result (psi)
Ce = Load eccentricity factor from Specification Equation 6.3.1-4
Considering the axial load table provided in NTA Listing Report SIPA120908-10 (“SIPA Report”) [2], a
value of c equal to 0.70 is determined using Equation C6.3.1-1. Using this value, the interaction
equation in the Specification produces values within 2.5-percent of the values in the SIPA Report. The
tabulated axial strengths in the SIPA Report were calculated considering both crushing and buckling, but
both limit states are considered discretely with no interaction. While the calculation method in the SIPA
Report conservatively estimated axial loads, the mechanics of the calculation method belies the
laboratory evidence which indicates a mixed-mode failure and the fact that non-interaction can only
occur under ideal conditions, such as [1]:
1. The material is perfectly homogeneous;

2. The member is perfectly straight, and the load is perfectly concentric;
3. And, the stress-strain behavior of the material is linear elastic to the point of crushing and
perfectly plastic after crushing.
Considering the materials and qualification test methods, SIPs fail all criteria for the use of a non-
interacting compression limit states.

The Buckling-to-Crushing Strength Ratio, α

The crushing-bucking interaction curve (Specification Equation 6.3.1-1) is dependent on the buckling
stress-to-crushing stress ratio. The nominal crushing strength of the facing, Fc, is the same value used in
the flexural compression limit state, as described in Commentary Section C4. The buckling strength, Fcr,
is calculated using the standard Euler equation for elastic buckling (Specification Equation 6.3.1-6),
which is then modified to account for shear stiffness (Specification Equation 6.3.1-5) [3] [4].
A key consideration when selecting the input stresses to be used in the buckling-to-crushing strength
ratio is that the stresses must be of the same design basis. For example, the ratio of an average ultimate
buckling stress to an ADT crushing stress would result in a low stress ratio, thereby underestimating the
level of interaction between the failure modes. To address this issue, it is necessary to have two different
expressions for α to account for the two different input stress bases found in the Specification (i.e.
nominal and ADT stress levels). Specification Equation 6.3.1-2 is intended for use with an input stress at
the nominal strength level and is suitable for use with the ASD, LRFD and LSD design methods. To
produce a comparable buckling stress, the buckling equations utilize characteristic minimum bending
and shear stiffness values, Emin and Gmin, respectively [5]. These values may be found in the published
literature of individual SIP manufacturers or may be estimated using Equations C6.3.1-2 and C6.3.1-3.
The ratio resulting from Equation 6.3.1-2 is the ratio of a characteristic buckling stress to a nominal
crushing stress which introduces a factor of safety into the ratio equal to the reduction factor required for
LRFD or LSD design.
E min = E (1 − 1.645 × COV ) (Eqn. C6.3.1-2)
Gmin = G (1 − 1.645 × COV ) (Eqn. C6.3.1-3)
where:
E = Average modulus of elasticity (psi)
G = Average shear modulus (psi)
COV = Coefficient of variation in stiffness, COV = 0.10 for SIPs manufactured under a monitored QA
program
Emin = Characteristic minimum modulus of elasticity (psi)
Gmin = Characteristic minimum shear modulus (psi)
Specification Equation 6.3.1-3, includes an adjustment factor of 2.5 to effectively increase the input
ADT stress value to characteristic stress level assuming a 10-percent COV in material stiffness. This
factor was established using Equation C6.3.1-4.
K ADT = 3.0(1 − 1.645 × COV ) (Eqn. C6.3.1-4)
where:
KADT = Adjustment factor for use in denominator of Specification Equation 6.3.1-3. The Specification
assumes COV = 0.10, which yields KADT = 2.5.
COV = Coefficient of variation in stiffness, COV = 0.10 for SIPs manufactured under a monitored QA
program

The Eccentric Load Factor, Ce

The buckling-to-crushing strength ratio, α, is decreased by the load eccentricity factor, Ce, to account for
the stress gradient induced by eccentric loading. This factor, calculated using Specification Equation
6.3.1-4, is from basic mechanics considering a stub column not influenced by buckling, as shown below.
P Pe
Fmax = + (Eqn. C6.3.1-5)
Af Sc
2 I I r 2 Af
Realizing r = ⇒ I = r 2 A f and S c = then S c ⇒
Af yc yc
P Peyc P  eyc   eyc 
Substituting yields Fmax = + 2
Af r Af
=
Af 1 + r 2  = Favg 1 + r 2 
   
Favg 1 r2
Ce = = ⇒ 2
Fmax ey r + eyc
1 + 2c
r
where:
Fmax = Stress resulting from application of applied load, P, at eccentricity, e (psi)
Favg = Average stress from application of applied load, P (psi)
P = Applied axial load (lbf)
Af = Area of facings (in.2)
e = Load eccentricity, measured from centroid (in.)
Sc = Section modulus to compression fiber (in.3)
C6.3.2 Core Voids and Discontinuities

The shear crimping failure mode (described in C6.1) produces strengths that are dependent on the
presence and/or configuration of core voids and discontinuities. As a result, the limitations described in
C5.3.2 apply to compression strength.
References
[1] J. J. Zahn, "Re-examination of Ylinen and Other Column Equations," Journal of Structural
Engineering, vol. 118, no. 10, 1992.
[2] NTA, Inc., NTA Listing Report SIPA120908-20, Structural Insulated Panel Association (SIPA)
Structural Insulated Panels. (Issued 11/26/2014), Nappanee, IN: NTA, Inc., 2014.
[3] APA - The Engineered Wood Association, Plywood Design Specification, Supplement 4-12, Design
and Fabrication of Sandwich Panels (Form No. U814J/Revised December 2014), Tacoma, WA:
APA - The Engineered Wood Association, 2014.
[4] H. Allen, Analysis and Design of Structural Sandwich Panels, London: Pergamon Press, 1969.

C7 TENSION
C7.1 General
The tension limit state is applicable to panels subjected to in-plane tensile load, as shown in Figure C7.1-
1. This limit state is characterized by tension fracture of one or both facings on the net facing area, as
depicted in Figure C7.1-1.
Figure C7.1-1: Tension Limit State
C7.2 Facing Tensile Strength

The tensile strength expression in the Specification considers the ultimate strength of the facings only. In
this expression the nominal tensile strength of the facings is applied to the net cross-sectional area of the
facings in recognition that holes or opens may exist that reduce the gross area. The Specification does
not account for stress increases that may occur at sharp corners or notches.
Where eccentric axial tension loading is involved, it is necessary to include the moment associated with
the axial load or adjust the tensile strength to correspond to only the area of the facing subjected to
tension. For example, if the tension is applied to the outside facing only, the net facing area, An, should
be taken as one-half of the total facing area, Af.

The design values for the facing tension limit state correspond to those used for the flexural strength
limited by facing tension limit state (see Section C4.1.3).
Reduction Factors
The reduction factors for the facing tension limit state correspond to those used for the flexural strength
Time Effect Factors

The time effect factors for the facing tension limit state correspond to those used for the flexural strength

References
There are no sources in the current document.

C8 LATERAL FORCE-RESISTING SYSTEMS
C8.1 General
Design requirements for lateral force-resisting systems are provided in this section.
C8.2 Deformation Requirements

Consideration of deformations (such as deformation of the overall structure, elements, connections and
systems within the structure) that can occur is necessary to maintain load path and ensure proper
detailing. The overall building structure shall include complete lateral and vertical force-resisting
systems capable of providing adequate strength, stiffness and energy dissipation capacity to withstand
the design lateral forces within the prescribed limits of deformation and strength demand.
C8.3 Boundary Elements

Boundary elements must be sized to transfer design tension and compression forces. Good construction
practice and efficient design and detailing for boundary elements utilize framing members in the plane of
the diaphragm or shear wall.
C8.4 Diaphragms
A diaphragm consists of a roof, floor or other membrane bracing system acting to transmit lateral forces
to the vertical resisting elements. This section provides guidelines for the engineered design of such
bracing systems.
C8.4.1 General
General requirements for SIP diaphragms include consideration of diaphragm strength and stiffness.
C8.4.2 Diaphragm Strength

The qualification requirements for wood structural sheathing (DOC PS-2) include racking performance
requirements that establish a minimum average target “test” load and “ultimate” load to be resisted when
the panel is used as a component in a prescribed assembly [1]. In this qualification the “test” load to
“ultimate” load ratio is 2.8 under monotonic loading (ASTM E72). It has been established [2] that the
“test” load is adjusted for use with the seismic load combinations in ASCE 7. In these load
combinations, the seismic force, E, is multiplied by 0.7 to reduce the force to stress-level [3].
Considering this seismic load factor, racking strength applicable to wind loads are 1.4 times greater than
the “test” level racking strength (i.e. 1/0.7 ≈ 1.4). This increase in permissible strength results in a factor
of safety of 2.0 (i.e. 2.8/1.4 = 2.0) against wind loads.
Industry practice for SIP panels is to apply a factor of safety of 3.0 to the average ultimate test strength
to arrive at permissible design value for ADT design [4]. The Specification maintains the 3.0 factor of
safety across all design methodologies by proportioning the resistance factors for conventional wood
assemblies [2] by the ratio of 2.8/3.0 = 0.93. Additionally, in a manner consistent with conventional
design practice, the Specification provides separate factors applicable to wind resistance that have been
adjusted 0.7 to account for the ASCE 7 seismic load factor. The derivation of the ASD factor of safety
and LRFD resistance factors is provided below.
𝜙𝜙𝑑𝑑 = 3.0 × 0.7 = 2.1 ASD (Wind) (Eqn. C8.4.2-1)
2.8
𝜙𝜙𝑑𝑑 = 0.80 × = 0.75 LRFD (Wind) (Eqn. C8.4.2-2)
3.0

2.8
𝜙𝜙𝑑𝑑 = 0.80 × × 0.7 = 0.52 LRFD (Seismic) (Eqn. C8.4.2-3)
3.0
Nominal diaphragm capacities for use with conventional LSD design are based on historical ASD
capacities multiplied by a factor of 1.863 instead of the 2.8 factor used in SDPWS [5] [2]. Because the
nominal strengths in the Specification are consistent with the SDPWS factor of 2.8, equivalent resistance
factors for LSD are determined by multiplying the conventional LSD resistance factors by the ratio of
1.863/2.8 in addition to adjusting for SIP factor of safety of 3.0, as shown below.
1.863 2.8
𝜙𝜙𝑑𝑑 = 0.70 × × = 0.43 LSD (Wind/Seismic) (Eqn. C8.4.2-4)
2.8 3.0
Tabulated diaphragm strengths are based on short duration loading, such as wind or seismic. Where
diaphragms are used to resist loads of longer duration, the values must be adjusted using the time-
effective factors in Table 8.4.2-2. These factors are based on the load-duration factors found in the NDS
[6] and O86 [5] standards.
C8.4.3 Diaphragm Deflection

The expression for calculation of diaphragm deflection is taken from SDPWS [2]. In ASCE 7 the overall
stiffness of the lateral force resisting system is controlled by allowable story drift limits.
C8.4.4 Diaphragm Unit Shear Capacities

Diaphragm Strength
Diaphragm unit shear capacities are from testing in accordance with ASTM E455-10 [7] [8] [9]. The
diaphragm specimens were 8-ft wide and 24-ft long, providing a 3-to-1 aspect ratio. The specimens were
comprised of 4-ft x 8-ft x 8.25-in. thick SIP panels connected as shown in Specification Figure 8.4.4-2.
The specimens were tested as simple beam diaphragms with the arrangement of the individual SIP
elements consistent with Case 5 and Case 6, as defined in the SDPWS. In both arrangements (Case 5
and Case 6), continuous panel joints are parallel to the applied shear; however, the orientation of the SIP
panel strength-axis varied from perpendicular to the applied shear in Case 5 to parallel to the applied
shear in Case 6. Irrespective of the arrangement, the ultimate load results differed by less than 10-
percent, as a result, the data for both cases were averaged and presented as a single value in accordance
with the test standard [10].
Diaphragm Stiffness
The apparent diaphragm shear stiffness, Ga, for use in Equation 8.4.3, may be taken from Table 8.4.4.
Alternately, the apparent diaphragm shear stiffness, Ga, shall be based on test data generated in
accordance with ASTM E455. The apparent shear stiffness, Ga, shall be determined from the load-
deflection data at an induced shear equal to 1.4 times the allowable shear.
C8.4.5 Diaphragm Aspect Ratios

Maximum aspect ratio for floor and roof diaphragms are based on building code requirements and
limitations imposed by the test assemblies.
C8.4.6 Horizontal Distribution of Shear

General design requirements define conditions applicable for the assumption of flexible diaphragms [3].
For flexible diaphragms, loads are distributed to wall lines according to tributary area whereas for rigid
diaphragms, loads are distributed according to relative stiffness of the shear walls.

SIP diaphragms are permitted to be idealized as flexible if any of the following conditions exist [3]:
1. In structures where the vertical lateral-force resisting elements are steel braced frames, steel and
concrete composite braced frames or concrete, masonry, steel or steel and concrete composite
shear walls.
2. In one- and two-family dwellings.
3. In structures of SIP and/or light-frame construction where all the following conditions are met:
a. Topping of concrete or similar materials is not placed over SIP diaphragms except for
nonstructural toppings no greater than 1-1/2-inches thick.
b. Each line of vertical elements of the seismic force resisting system complies with the
allowable story drift limits of ASCE 7.
4. Where the computed maximum in-plane deflection of the diaphragm under lateral load is more
than two times the average story direct of adjoining vertical elements.
SIP diaphragms must be idealized as rigid if any of the following conditions:

1. The diaphragm does not meet the requirements to be idealized as flexible.
2. In structures, or portions of structures, where shear walls are provided on only three sides of a
diaphragm (open front structure).
3. In structures, or portions of structures, where the diaphragm cantilevers horizontally past the
outermost shear walls (or other vertical lateral force-resisting elements).
The actual distribution of seismic force to vertical elements (shear walls) of the lateral force-resisting
system is dependent on:
1. The stiffness of the vertical elements relative to the horizontal elements; and,
2. The relative stiffness of various vertical elements.
Where a series of vertical elements of the lateral force-resisting system are aligned in a row, lateral
forces will distribute to the different elements according to their relative stiffness.
C8.4.7 Diaphragm Construction Requirements

The transfer of forces into and out of diaphragms is required for a continuous load path.
C8.4.7.1 Boundary Elements

Boundary elements must be sized and connected to the diaphragm to ensure force transfer. Good
construction practice and efficient design and detailing for boundary elements utilizes framing members
in the plane of the diaphragm. Where splices occur in boundary elements, transfer of force between
boundary elements should be through additional framing members of metal connectors.
In SIP diaphragms, the boundary elements (chords) typically consists of a single dimensional lumber
spline around the diaphragm perimeter. This element should be detailed so that joints in the boundary
element do not coincide with joints in the SIP and tension splices should be detailed to specify a
connector element, such as a metal strap. It is not necessary for boundary element to coincide with the
location where the diaphragm is connected to the vertical lateral force-resisting elements.
C8.4.7.2 Fasteners
Details on the type, size and spacing of mechanical fasteners must be as provided in Section 8, or as
detailed in an assembly test report. Adhesive connections between diaphragm elements can only be used
in combination with mechanical fasteners. Because diaphragms are permitted to respond elastically to
seismic forces, the strength contribution of adhesive connections may be considered in all seismic design
categories.

C8.5 Shear Walls

A shear wall is a wall designed to function as part of the vertical lateral force-resisting system. This
section provides guidelines for the engineered design of such bracing systems.
C8.5.1 General
General requirements for SIP shear walls include consideration of shear wall strength and stiffness.
C8.5.2 Shear Wall Strength

The safety factors and resistance factors applicable to shear wall strength were derived as provided in
Section C8.4.2.
C8.5.3 Shear Wall Deflection

The expression for calculation of diaphragm deflection is taken from the provisions of SDPWS [2]. The
apparent shear wall stiffness, Ga, for use in Equation 8.5.3, may be taken from Table 8.5.4. Alternately,
the apparent diaphragm shear stiffness, Ga, shall be based on test data generated in accordance with
ASTM E455. The apparent shear stiffness, Ga, shall be determined from the load-deflection data at an
induced shear equal to 1.4 times the allowable shear.
C8.5.4 Shear Wall Unit Shear Capacities

Strength
The unit shear capacities provided in the Specification are based on published values for conventional
shear walls as detailed in Table C8.5.4-1. The nominal SIP capacities in Table 8.5.4-1 are taken as two
times the nominal capacity of a single-sided conventional shear wall having the same boundary and edge
fastener spacing. These capacities are then adjusted based on the spline configuration and boundary
element specific gravity.
The derivation of the nominal conventional strengths provided in the Specification is provided in Table
C8.5.4-1. As shown in the table, the SIP shear wall capacity is calculated as two times the nominal
strength of a conventional single-sided shear wall. The summation of shear strengths in this manner is
consistent with accepted practice for double-sided conventional shear walls, sheathed and fastened in the
same manner on each side [2].
Established nominal shear strengths were used in the Specification in lieu of SIP specific test data
because the established nominal values, when adjusted in accordance with the Specification, provide a
lower bound estimate of the currently available shear wall strength data, as shown in Table C8.5.4-2.
The range of the tested strength to adjusted nominal strength ratio is 0.97 to 1.83, which is comparable to
ratio observed in conventional walls, which ranges from 0.82 to 1.86 [11].
Table C8.5.4-2 shows the dependence of SIP shear wall strength on the boundary conditions present
during the test. Walls exhibiting the lowest strengths were tested in a configuration where the SIP
facings were free to rotate at the top and bottom of the panels, whereas the walls exhibiting the greatest
strength generally had the facings restrained (bearing) at the top or both the top and bottom of the panel.
It has been shown that the effect of restraining the facings can increase the ultimate shear capacity by
over 50-percent [12] when compared to the unrestrained condition. It has also been shown that the
presence of a compressive force on the SIP further increases the ultimate shear capacity. The condition
were the facings are restrained (bearing) is required for panels required subjected to axial loads and
reflects the typically as-built condition of the panel.

Table C8.5.4-1 Nominal Unit Shear Capacities for

Wood Structural Panel (7/16” Thick, Sheathing Grade OSB) Faced SIP Panel Shear Walls
Nail Spacing at shear wall boundaries and at all panel
edges
Reference Context 6-in. oc 4-in. oc 3-in. oc
0.113” Nails Tabulated
180 265 335
ICC-ES ESR-1539 (ASD/Seismic)
(Reissued 7/2015) Nominal (×2.8) 500 740 935
Table 8 [13] SIP (×2) 1000 1480 1870
0.131” Nails Tabulated
670 980 1260
2015 SDPWS (Nominal)
Table 4.3A [2] SIP (×2) 1340 1960 2520

Table C8.5.4-2 Summary of SIP Shear Wall Racking Data1

SIP Assembly Conventional SIP-to-
SIP Ultimate Wall Nominal Conventional
Test Program Strength Strength Strength
Reference Summary (plf) (plf) Ratio
4.5” and 6.5” thick
0.131” Nails 6” oc, Type S 943
APA Report 911
EPS Core, SPF Framing minimum 1.042,3
T2006P-33 [14] (1340 × 0.68)
1:1 and 1.25:1 average
(12 samples, monotonic)
0.131” Nails 6” oc, Type S 1220
APA Report 911
XPS Core, SPF Framing minimum 1.342,3
T2007P-05 [15] (1340 × 0.68)
0.131” Nails 6” oc, Type S 1132
APA Report 911
PU Core, SPF Framing minimum 1.242,3
T2004P-40 [16] (1340 × 0.68)
4.5” thick
0.131” Nails 6” oc, Type S
APA Report 1038 911
EPS Core, SPF Framing 1.132,3
T2009P-28 [17] average (1340 × 0.68)
1:1 aspect ratio
4.5” thick
APA Report 1582 911
EPS Core, SPF Framing 1.735
T2010P-17 [12] average (1340 × 0.68)
1:1
(2 samples, monotonic, cyclic)
4.5” thick
0.131” Nails 6” oc, Type S 1220
APA Report 911
EPS Core, SPF Framing minimum 1.342,3
T2011P-43 [18] (1340 × 0.68)
1:1 aspect ratio average
(6 samples, cyclic, dry, wet/redry)
4.625” and 8.375” thick
NTA Reports
PSC031208-40 [19] 1310
EPS Core, SPF Framing 760
PSC031708-2 [20] minimum 1.724
1:1 aspect ratio (1000 × 0.76)
PSC042308-13 [21] average
Strong & weak-axis
6.5” thick SIP
0.131” Nails 3” oc, Type SD
2442 SIP
APA Report EPS Core, DFL Framing 0.97 SIP3
2410 Conv. 2520
T2010P-55 [22] 1:1 aspect ratio 0.96 Conv.
Benchmark Conventional
(2 samples, cyclic)
6.5” thick
HIRL Report 0.113” Nails 4” oc, Type S
1394 760
3339_10012013 EPS Core, SPF Framing 1.835
minimum (1000 × 0.76)
[23] 0.4:1 to 4:1 aspect ratio
(8 samples, cyclic)
1 Considers test data meeting the following parameters: solid chords at each end of the wall, contains at least one block or
surface spline connection, no openings, no axial load applied. Degree of facing restraint is noted by footnotes 3 and 4.
2 SIPs manufactured to reflect industry-developed minimum properties. Design capacities were used in the development of the
IRC prescriptive provisions [24] [25].

3 Tested with SIP facings unrestrained by cap plate or sill plate.
4 Tested with cap plate restraining top of SIP facing.
5 Tested with cap plate and bearing on sill plate restraining top-and-bottom of SIP facing.

Stiffness
The evaluation of the nominal unit shear capacities in the Specification differs from other evaluation
methods [4] in that an arbitrary deflection limit is not imposed as a limit state. Instead, effective shear
stiffness values are provided so that the designer may calculate the story drift for assessment against
code limits. The availability of the stiffness values also permit the designer to properly distribute lateral
forces to the various elements of the lateral force resisting system.
Similar to the shear wall strengths, the tabulated shear wall stiffness values were determined in a manner
consistent with conventional shear walls. The expressions for apparent shear, Ga, and fastener slip, en,
are adapted from the SDPWS commentary for use with the nominal loads and load factors provided in
the Specification [2].
vs
Ga = (Eqn. C8.5.4-1)
vs Ω
+ sw 0.75en
2Gvtv 1.4
where:
Ga = Apparent shear stiffness (lbf/in.)
vs = Nominal shear wall capacity (plf)
Gvtv = Shear stiffness of facing (lbf/in. of panel depth)
en = Fastener slip (in.) see Table C8.5.4-3
Table C8.5.4-3: Fastener Slip, en

Wood Structural Panels, Fabricated with
Dry (≤ 19% MC) Lumber [2]
Fastener Slip, en
(in.)
Fastener Diameter Structural I1,2
0.113” (Z 456)3.144
0.131” (Z 616)
3.018
0.148” (Z
769)
3.276
1
For non-Structural I rated sheathing multiply
fastener slip by 1.2.
2
Z = strength-level load per fastener (lbf),
Z = 0.7vs Ω sw × s 12 , where s = the fastener
spacing in inches on-center.
A sample stiffness calculation is provided below considering a 7/16” sheathing grade OSB shear wall
with fasteners fastened with 0.113” x 2.5” nails spaced 6” on-center.
Determine Fastener Slip:

Using the equations from Table C8.5.4-3, the strength-level force on an individual fastener is calculated
using the equations provided in the table. The nominal shear capacity, vs, and the factor of safety against
seismic loads, Ωsw, are from Table 8.5.2-1 and Table 8.5.4-1, respectively. Note that the 1.2 increase in
the fastener slip is in accordance with footnote 1 of Table C8.5.4-3.
Z = 0.7vs Ω sw × s 12 =
(0.7 )(1000 plf ) × 6 in. oc = 116.6 lbf
3.0 12 in.
en = 1.2(Z 456) = 1.2(116.6 456)

3.144 3.144
= 0.0165 in.

Determine Apparent Shear Stiffness:

Using Equation C8.5.4-1, the apparent shear stiffness is calculated as shown below. The shear stiffness
of the facing panel, Gvtv, is from the SDPWS [2].
vs 1000 plf
Ga = = = 30763 lbf/in.
vs Ω sw 1000 plf 3.0
+ 0.75en + 0.75(0.0165 in.)
2Gvtv 1.4 (2.0)(83,500 lb/in.) 1.4
The resulting value matches the rounded value provided in the Specification of 31 kip/in.
C8.5.5 Connection Correction Factor

The nominal unit shear capacities in Table 8.5.4-1 are based on a conventional shear wall constructed
with framing having a minimum specific gravity of 0.50. In a SIP shear wall, two distinct connections
exist: 1) the boundary connections, which are conventional OSB-to-solid framing; and 2) the interior
connections, which are generally OSB-to-OSB. These two connection types introduce two distinct limit
states that are accounted for by the connection correction factor, CC.
ADT Method, All Connection Types:

Shear wall strengths established using the ADT method do not require this adjustment and, as a result,
the factor is taken as unity. ADT values from manufacturer’s literature are based on specific SIP
assembly tests, as a result, the ADT value accounts for the connection strength provided the assembly is
constructed in a manner consistent with the test.
Other Design Methods, Type C or Type SD Spline Connections:

The nominal values in Table 8.5.4-1 are based on a SIP shear wall assembly constructed so that the
strength and behavior of the interior connections matches that of the boundary connections. These
connections are defined as Type C (conventional) and Type SD (SIP-ductile) connections in the
Specification. The tabular values are also based on the SIP facing and the boundary framing having a
minimum specific gravity of not less than 0.50.
All grades of OSB have an equivalent specific gravity of 0.50 for the purposes of dowel bearing strength
determination [6]. As a result, Type SD connections joining OSB always meet the minimum specific
gravity requirement. It must be noted that the table is specific to OSB and that other wood structural
panels, such as plywood, which may have a specific gravity less than 0.50 have not been considered in
the Specification.
Considering the Type C (conventional) connections that are found around the boundary of the shear wall
and potentially at each interior connection where Type R or Type RT splines are used, the specific gravity
of these materials may be less than 0.50, which results in a reduction in the connection strength. This
reduction is accounted for by the specific gravity correction factor, CSG, quantified in Equation 8.5.5-4.
This expression is utilized in various wood design specifications, such as SDPWS, and approximates the
strength ratio of a fastener connecting materials having SG < 0.50 to the strength of the same fastener
connecting materials having SG = 0.50, as shown in the Table C8.5.5-1. For Type C or Type SD
connection types, as defined in the Specification, it is only necessary to adjust for specific gravity, as a
result, the connection correction factor, CC, is equal to the specific gravity adjustment factor, CSG.

Table C8.5.5-1: Allowable Calculated Connection Strength, Z (Normal Duration) (lbf) [6]
Connection Configuration
7/16” OSB-to- 7/16” OSB-to- CBSG
DFL Framing SPF Framing Ratio (SG =
Fastener (SG = 0.50) (SG = 0.42) Z0.42/Z0.50 0.42)
0.113” x 2.5” Nails 56 52 0.928
0.92
0.131” x 2.5” Nails 73 67 0.918
Other Design Methods, Type S Spline Connections:

Type S connections, exist where two plys of OSB are joined together and the thickness of the interior ply
is not sufficient (less than 6-times the fastener diameter) to result in a failure mode consistent with a
conventional connection. As defined by the yield limit model [6], the predicted failure mode of 7/16”
OSB attached to some substrate is either (1) yielding in the interior ply (main member) (Mode IIIS), or
(2) fastener tilting (Mode II), as shown in Figure C8.5.5-1. The thickness of the interior ply dictates the
resulting connection yield mode and Mode II (tilting) yields less strength than fastener bending (Mode
IIIS). Similar to the specific gravity adjustment factor, the overall effect of this strength reduction is
estimated as the strength ratio between yield modes Mode II and Mode IIIS. Because OSB has an
equivalent specific gravity of 0.50, this ratio is determined on the basis of materials having a specific
gravity of 0.50.
Figure C8.5.5-1: Fastener Yield Modes
The reduction in strength due to the change in yield mode is tabulated for 0.113” and 0.131” nails in
Table C8.5.4-3. Because a change in the boundary framing does not affect strength of a Type S Spline
connection, it is not necessary to concurrently apply both the Specific Gravity Adjustment Factor and the
spline adjustment factor because each factor corresponds to a different connection limit state. The
lower-bound strength, considering each factor separately, limits the overall strength of the wall.
It should be noted that this reduction conservatively neglects the strength contribution due to restraint
(bearing) of the SIP facings materials and the strength increase associated with the presence of axial
compressive loads. Typical installation detailing results in restraint of the SIP facings and the observed
strength increase, in the absence of an axial compressive load, is approximately 50-percent [12]. The
strength increase due to restraint offsets the strength reduction due to the change in fastener yield mode
and produces a SIP shear wall strength consistent with a correction factor of unity for the fasteners
considered (Nf = 1.0).

Table C8.5.4-3: Allowable Calculated Connection

Strength (Normal Duration) (lbf) [6]
Connection Configuration
7/16” OSB-to- 7/16” OSB-to- Nf
DFL Framing 7/16” OSB Mode II/
Fastener (YM Mode IIIS) (YM Mode II) Mode IIIS
0.113” x 2.5” Nails 56 43 0.76
0.131” x 2.5” Nails 73 50 0.68
C8.5.6 Shear Wall Aspect Ratios

The effect of shear wall aspect ratio on strength has been adapted from the provisions of SDPWS for
blocked wood structural panel shear walls [2]. The application of the SDPWS provisions was made more
explicit by defining the aspect ratio adjustment factor, CAR. Table 8.5.6, which defines this factor,
combines various provisions from SDPWS into a single table.
C8.5.7 Shear Wall Types

The Specification identifies shear walls as one of the following “types”:
1. Individual full-height wall segment shear walls with no opening within an individual full-height
segment.
2. Perforated shear walls with openings and not designed for force-transfer around openings. A
reduced shear strength is used based on the size of the openings.
In conventional construction a third wall “type” exists where openings exist, but the walls is designed to
transfer the forces around the openings. This type of wall is not applicable to SIP construction because it
is not practical to provide the required framing members, blocking and connections around the openings
to transfer the forces.
C8.5.7.1 Segmented Shear Walls

This section provides provisions for shear walls consisting of individual full-height wall segments
without openings within an individual full-height segment.
C8.5.7.2 Perforated Shear Walls

This section provides provisions for shear walls that contain openings where a method for force-transfer
around the openings is not provided. The provisions for perforated shear walls were taken from
SDPWS. The application of the SDPWS provisions to SIP shear walls was evaluated and it was found
that perforated SIP shear walls closely follow the overall perforated shear wall method trend for both
strength and stiffness [23].
C8.5.8 Shear Wall Construction Requirements

The transfer of forces into and out of shear walls is required for a continuous load path.
C8.5.8.1 Boundary Elements

Boundary elements must be sized and connected to the shear wall to ensure force transfer. Good
construction practice and efficient design and detailing for boundary elements utilizes framing members
in the plane of the shear wall. The overall design of an element must consider forces contributed from
multiple stories (i.e. shear and moment must be accumulated and accounted for in the design).

C8.5.8.2 Tension and Compression Chords

The shear walls chords must resist the accumulated overturning moment contributed from multiple
stories. This concept is reflected in Equation 8.5.8.2-1. This equation assumes that the shear walls are
stacked vertically so the chords on each story are aligned and interconnected. In multistory construction,
at any location where the chords do not align a load path to the foundation must be provided. Where the
chords do not align, and a separate load path is provided, it is not necessary to sum the chord forces as
provided in Equation 8.5.8.2-1.
C8.5.8.3 Fasteners
Details on the type, size and spacing of mechanical fasteners must be as provided in Section 8, or as
detailed in an assembly test report. Adhesive connections between shear wall elements can only be used
in combination with mechanical fasteners. Because shear walls must respond inelastically to seismic
forces, the strength contribution of adhesive connections is limited as provided in Section 8.6.1.
C8.5.8.4 Shear Wall Anchorage and Load Path

See Commentary Section C8.5.8.2.
C8.5.8.4.1 Anchorage for In-Plane Shear

The in-plane shear and moment in shear wall elements must have a continuous load path to the
foundation. This section provides guidelines on providing this load path.
C8.5.8.4.2 Uplift Anchorage at Shear Wall Ends

The anchorage at the ends of the shear wall shall be designed to resist the tensile and compressive chord
forces determined in Section 8.5.8.2. For perforated shear walls, the anchorage force is increased to
account for the non-uniform distribution of shear in a perforated shear wall.
C8.5.8.4.3 Uplift Anchorage Along Perforated Shear Walls

Uplift anchorage for perforated shear walls is required as provided in this section. The attachment of the
perforated shear wall bottom plate to elements below is intended to ensure that the wall capacity is
governed by the nailing between SIP panel elements rather than bottom plate attachment under
combined shear and uplift.
C8.5.8.4.4 Anchor Bolts

Shear walls must be anchored to the foundation to provide a complete load path. At the foundation level
the load is transferred to the foundation using anchor bolts or equivalent.
C8.5.8.4.5 Load Path

The shear walls accumulate shear and overturning moment from each braced story. A continuous load
path, or paths, with adequate strength and stiffness shall be provided to transfer all forces from the point
of application to the final point of resistance at the foundation. The foundation elements must be of
sufficient strength and size to resist these accumulated forces.
C8.6 Seismic Design Requirements

For the purposes of resisting seismic forces, the lateral force-resisting system shall be in accordance with
the system limitations of this section. This section classifies each SIP lateral force-resisting system
based on the energy dissipation capabilities of the connection system.

C8.6.1 System Selection and Limitations

The Specification delineates three SIP vertical seismic force resisting systems (SFRS) that are
differentiated by the type of connections used at the panel edges. For each system, limitations and design
coefficients are provided. These coefficients were determined by matching the response of the SIP
connections to existing SFRS, as explained in the following sections.
Shear Walls with Type A Connections:

Adhesives sealants are typically applied to SIP joints to limit air infiltration; however, improper
application of these sealants can significantly alter the dynamic characteristics and energy dissipation
capacity of SIP shear walls. This effect occurs when adhesives or adhesive sealants are applied to the
wood-to-wood faying surfaces otherwise connected using mechanical fasteners. The presence of
adhesives in these joints effectively “locks” the joint and significantly reduces the seismic forces
transmitted through the mechanical fasteners. As a result, ductile bending and yielding of the fasteners
does not occur (Mode IIIS in Figure C8.5.5) and the shear wall behaves as an elastic rigid body that fails
in a brittle manner [2]. The limitations and response factors for adhered shear walls found in the
Specification are from the SDPWS. It is important to note that the application of adhesives or adhesive
sealants to other faying surfaces, such as wood-to-foam or foam-to-foam, do not constitute a Type A
connection as the presence of the foam in the joint provides sufficient flexibility to allow the mechanical
fasteners to function as intended.
Shear Walls with Type C, Type S or Type SD Connection but Not Detailed for Seismic Resistance:
SIP SFRS in this category are limit due to the presence of features that are not consistent with
conventional wood shear walls. Considering systems containing Type S connections, the yield mode in
the connection is not consistent with a conventional wood framed wall. The fastener tilting mode of
failure exhibited by these connections has less energy dissipation capacity (see Commentary Section
C8.5.5 for more details) than the mode ductile fastener bending failure mode that is characteristic of
conventional shear walls.
Considering the other connection types in this system type, the fastener yield mode matches that of
conventional construction; however, these connection types are limited due to the fact that typical SIP
construction utilizes fewer SFRS elements that are larger in size—panels up to 8-ft x 24-ft are used in
SIP construction verses the typical 4-ft x 8-ft panel in conventional construction. Studies on conventional
walls utilizing large panels have shown that shear walls built with oversize (8-ft x 24-ft) panels exhibit a
substantial increase in strength and stiffness compared to shear walls of the same size constructed of an
increased number of smaller panels (4-ft x 8-ft). More importantly, it has been observed that shear walls
constructed with a greater number of smaller panels dissipate more energy under cyclic loading as
compared to walls built with oversized panels [26].
Due to the presence of one or both of these factors, which reduce the energy dissipation capacity of the
wall, the limitations and design coefficients in the Specification are consistent with those for “Light-
frame walls with shear panels of other materials” in ASCE 7. While this SFRS typically applies to a
wide range of non-wood structural panel materials, such as gypsum, fiberboard and/or Portland cement
plaster [3], the Specification conservatively applies the limitations and design coefficients of this system
to wood structural panels due to the potential for altered dynamic response.
Shear Walls with Type C or Type SD Connections Detailed for Seismic Resistance:
This SIP seismic force resisting system requires SIPs that are detailed for full emulation of conventional
wood shear walls. This detailing includes two key considerations (1) a joint configuration that ensures

fastener bending (yield Mode IIIS, see Commentary Section C8.5.5); (2) individual elements are sized
like those used in conventional wood shear walls (i.e. 4-ft x 8-ft elements).
C8.6.2 Detailing Requirements

The seismic force resisting systems identified in the Specification are classified based on their ability to
dissipate energy through inelastic deformation. The response of each system is highly dependent on the
configuration of the connections between individual SIP elements. To this end, this provides specific
detailing requirements for each defined connection system to ensure that each system responds as
intended.
C8.6.2.1 Shear Walls with Type A Connections

Type A Connections, which are connection with adhesive and/or adhesive sealants applied to wood-to-
wood faying surfaces respond elastically to seismic loading and are therefore limited to Seismic Design
Categories, of low severity, such as Seismic Design Categories A, B and C. See Section C8.6.1 for more
details on this system.
C8.6.2.2 Shear Walls with Type C, Type S or Type SD Connection Not Detailed for
Seismic Resistance
Type C, Type S or Type SD Connections, are connections made with mechanical fasteners (no adhesives
applied at wood-to-wood faying surfaces) but do not conform to all of the seismic detailing requirements
of Section 8.6.2.3. See Section C8.6.1 for more details on this system.
C8.6.2.3 Shear Walls with Type C or Type SD Connections Detailed for Seismic
Resistance
Type C or Type SD Connections, are connections made with mechanical fasteners (no adhesives applied
at wood-to-wood faying surfaces) and also constructed as required in this section to emulate the behavior
of conventional light-framed walls sheathed with wood structural panels.
In addition to prohibiting adhesive use at wood-to-wood faying surfaces, this section requires joints to be
placed in the SIP shear walls at intervals not to exceed 4-ft on-center. The requirement for a maximum
joint spacing is intended to prevent long shear walls containing few joints. It has been shown that long
shear walls without joints tend to behave as large elastic bodies and have significantly reduced ductility
[26]. See Section C8.6.1 for more details on this system.
References
[1] U.S. Department of Commerce, "Performance Standard for Wood-based Structural-Use

Panels (PS-2-10)," U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC, 2010.
[2] American Wood Council (AWC), ANSI/AWC SDPWS-2015 Special Design Provisions
for Wind & Seismic (2015 Edition), Washington, DC: American Wood Council (AWC),
2015.
[3] American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), ASCE/SEI 7-10 Minimum Design Loads
for Buildings and Other Structures, Reston, Virginia: ASCE, 2010.
[4] ICC Evaluation Service, LLC (ICC-ES), AC04 Sandwich Panels--Approved February
2012, editorially revised August 2013, Brea, California: ICC-ES, 2013.
[5] Canadian Standards Association (CSA), "CSA O86-09 Engineered Design in Wood,"
Canadian Standards Association (CSA), Mississauga, Ontario, Canada, 2009.

[6] American Wood Council (AWC), "ANSI/AWC NDS-2015, National Design Specification
for Wood Construction Commentary 2005 Edition," American Wood Council (AWC),
Washington, DC, 2006.
[7] NTA, Inc., "NTA Test Report EPS040611-26, ASTM E455-10, 8-ft x 24-ft x 8.25-in.
Diaphragm Tests (6-in. oc)," NTA, Inc., Nappanee, IN, 2011.
[10] ASTM International, "ASTM E455-10, Standard Test Method for Static Load Testing of
Framed Floor or Roof Diaphragm Constructions for Buildings," ASTM International,
Conshohocken, PA, 2010.
[11] APA - The Engineered Wood Association, "APA Research Report 154 Wood Structural
Panel Shear Walls (Revised May 1993)," APA - The Engineered Wood Association,
Tacoma, WA, 1993.
[12] APA - The Engineered Wood Assocation, "APA Report T2010P-17 Racking Test of
Structural Insulated Panels (SIPs) with Various Bearing Conditions for the Structural
Insulated Panel Association, Gig Harbor, Washington," APA - The Engineered Wood
Assocation, Tacoma, WA, 2010.
[13] ICC Evaluation Service, "ESR-1539 (Reissued 07/2015) Power-Driven Staples and
Nails," ICC Evaluation Service, Brea, California, 2015.
[14] APA - The Engineered Wood Association, "APA Report T2006P-33 Standardization
Testing of Structural Insulated Panels (SIPs) for The Structural Insulated Panel
Association, Gig Harbor, Washington," APA - The Engineered Wood Association,
Tacoma, WA, 2006.
Testing of Structural Insulated Panels (SIP) - Extruded Polystyrene (XPS) for the
Structural Insulated Panel Association," APA - The Engineered Wood Association,
Tacoma, WA, 2007.
Testing of Structural Insulated Panels (SIPs) - BASF Polyurethane," APA - The
Engineered Wood Association, Tacoma, WA, 2007.
[17] APA - The Engineered Wood Association, "APA Report T2009P-28 Testing of Structural
Insulated Panels (SIPs) with New Facer Design Properties for The Structural Insulated
Panel Association, Gig Harbor, Washington," APA - The Engineered Wood Association,
Tacoma, WA, 2009.
[18] APA - The Engineered Wood Assocation, "APA Report T2011P-43 Durability of
Structural Insulated Panels (SIPs) Cyclic Shear Wall Testing for The Structural Insulated
Panel Association, Gig Harbor, Washington," APA - The Engineered Wood Assocation,
Tacoma, WA, 2011.
[19] NTA, Inc., "PSC042308-13, ICC-ES AC04, Section 4.5, Wall Panel Racking Shear Test,"
NTA, Inc., Nappanee, IN, 2008.

[20] NTA, Inc., "PSC031708-2, ICC-ES AC04, Section 4.5, Wall Panel Racking Shear Tests,"
NTA, Inc., Nappanee, IN, 2008.
[21] NTA, Inc., "ICC-ES AC04, Section 4.5, Wall Panel Racking Shear Test," NTA, Inc.,
Nappanee, IN, 2008.
[22] APA - The Engineered Wood Assocation, "APA Report T2010P-55 Cyclic Shear Wall
Testing of Structural Insulated Panels (SIPs) Following Principles of ICC-ES AC04 for IB
Panels Jerome, Idaho," APA - The Engineered Wood Assocation, Tacoma, WA, 2010.
[23] Home Innovation Research Labs, "SIP Shear Walls: Cyclic Performance of High Aspect
Ratio Segments and Perforated Walls," Home Innovation Research Labs, Upper Marlboro,
MD, 2013.
[24] NAHB Research Center, "Prescriptive Method for Structural Insulated Panels (SIPs) Used
in Wall Systems in Residential Construction," NAHB Research Center, Upper Marlboro,
MD, 2007.
[25] International Code Council, Inc. (ICC), "2007 Supplement to the IRC," International Code
Council, Inc. (ICC), Club Hills, IL, 2007.
[26] F. Lam, H. G. L. Prion and M. He, "Lateral Resistance of Wood Shear Walls with Large
Sheathing Panels," Journal of Structural Engineering, vol. 123, no. 12, pp. 1666-1673,
1997.
[27] S. Terentiuk and A. M. Memari, "Parametric Study of Structural Insulated Panels Under
Monotonic and Cyclic Loading," Department of Architectural Engineering, The
Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, 2008.
[28] APA - The Engineered Wood Association, "APA Report 138 Plywood Diaphragms,"
APA - The Engineered Wood Association, Tacoma, WA, 2004.
[29] APA - The Engineered Wood Association, "APA Report T2010P-17 Racking Test of
Structural Insulated Panels (SIPs) with Various Bearing Conditions," APA - The
Engineered Wood Association, Tacoma, WA, 2010.


C9 COMBINED LOADS
C9.1 General
The provisions of Section 9 apply to SIP subject to concurrent axial, in-plane bending and in-plane shear
load. These provisions are divided based on the nature of the axial load—dividing axial compression
from axial tension. Where the axial load is zero, the equations for axial tension and axial compression
produce the same result.
C9.2 Combined Tensile Axial Load, Bending and In-Plane Shear

The provisions of this section apply to panels subjected to loads in combinations with in-plane tensile
loads. The combined load expressions correspond to a linear interaction for combined tension, in-plane
bending and in-plane shear. While experimental results do not exist to validate the use of this expression,
it can be shown that the effect of moment magnification, which is not included in the equations, serves to
reduce the effective bending ratio rather than increase it.
Where eccentric axial tension loading is involved, it is necessary to include the moment associated with
the axial load or adjust the tensile strength to correspond to only the area of the facing subjected to
tension. For example, if the tension is applied to the outside facing only, the net facing area, An, should
be taken as one-half of the total facing area, Af, should be used in the determination of the nominal
tensile strength, Tn.
The combination of axial and in-plane racking forces is discussed in C9.3.
C9.2.1 ADT and ASD Methods

The ADT and ASD combined loading expression corresponds to a linear interaction between in-plane
tension and out-of-plane bending stresses. Under combined loading, the expressions reflect the limiting
strength of the extreme tensile fiber in the facing where the direct tensile stress and the bending stress
superpose.
C9.2.2 LRFD and LSD Methods

The LRFD and the LSD methods use the same interaction equations as the ASD method, except that
factored resistances and factored required strengths are used.
C9.3 Combined Compressive Axial Load, Bending and In-Plane Shear

The provisions of this section apply to panels subjected to loads in combinations with in-plane
compressive loads. The combined load expressions correspond to a linear interaction for combined
compression, in-plane bending and in-plane shear. The approach used in the Specification employs an
interaction equation, which has been adopted in several specifications for the design of beam-columns
[1] [2]. This approach uses an amplification factor, αm, to account for the fact that the nominal flexural
capacity is reduced by the presence of a concurrent compressive stress.
Interaction of Axial Load and In-Plane Shear

Standardized testing procedures for shear walls, such as ASTM E72, require that the facings of light-
framed shear walls are not permitted to come in contact with the test frame. These requirements are
based on the fact that as the restraint in a structural system is increased the system’s stiffness and
capacity will also increase—provided that the increased restraint does not introduce additional modes of
failure. Testing a system with minimal restraint will produce lower bound stiffness and strength results.
This concept in shear walls is analogous to the difference between a simply supported beam and a beam

fixed at both ends—the fixed end beam is five times as stiff and has 50-percent more flexural capacity
than a simply supported beam of the same material and cross section (uniformly loaded).
To carry axial loads it is necessary for SIP shear walls to be installed with the facings bearing on some
supporting substrate. When such walls are subjected to racking loads, the bearing results in a
compressive stress in the facings and introduces the potential for compression failure of the panel. This
is especially true in axially loaded panels where the combined axial and racking loads are additive.
The mechanics of ‘bearing’ shear walls subjected to combined axial and racking loads has been
addressed for other structural systems such as precast concrete [3]. Determining the forces within the
shear wall system requires solving classic equations of equilibrium. By solving these equations an
equation for the interaction of axial compression and shear may be developed.
Considering a shear wall with holdowns at each end, the wall may be broken down into three cases:
interior, exterior compression side, and exterior tension side (Figure C9.3-1).
Figure C9.3-1: External Forces on Shear Wall Panels

Considering the internal forces within the shear wall, free-body diagrams of each panel condition are
provided in Figure C9.3-2, below. These diagrams assume the following:
1. The applied shear is assumed to be equally distributed to each of the individual panels.
2. The applied axial load is applied through a solid cap member that bears on both facings at the
top of the panel.
3. The only requirement for the connections is a transfer of vertical shear.
Considering an interior panel, the force system shown exists for all interior panels, as a result, the edge
shears, F, will balance to zero when all panels have the same dimensions.

Figure C9.3-2: Segmented Bearing Shear Wall Free-Body Diagram

Considering the “interior” panel free-body diagram in Figure C9.3-2, the following simplifying
assumptions may be applied:
1. The stiffness of the bearing interface is much greater than the stiffness of the panel-to-panel
mechanical connections. As a result, the overturning resistance of the fasteners is ignored and
the panel is stabilized against overturning by only the applied axial load.
2. The restraining force at the top and bottom of the panel is equal and opposite.
3. Considering an “interior” panel, if no axial load is applied, no additional compressive force can
be developed in the SIP facing.
4. For the purposes of assessing axial loads, the horizontal shear force may be omitted because it
is orthogonal to the forces under consideration. The effects of the applied shear are accounted
for in the total moment, Σm, applied to the panel.
Applying these assumptions, the “interior” free-body diagram simplifies to what is shown in Figure
C9.3-3. Using this free-body diagram, design for combined axial and racking loads may be accomplished
using the engineering principles of statics and superposition.
Figure C9.3-3: Free Body Diagram of Restrained SIP under Combined Loads

As shown in Figure C9.3-3 (right), at mid-height of the SIP, the forces are equivalent to a concentric
axial load with an overturning moment. Considering this condition, the maximum stress along the
bearing edges may be determined using the established formulas commonly used for the design of
eccentrically loaded shallow foundations. Unlike a shallow foundation, the applied moment is divided by
two because bearing occurs at the top and bottom. The formulas for this condition are provided in
Equations C9.3-1 through C9.3-3.
e=
∑m 2 (Eqn. C9.3-1)
P×b
6∑ m 2 b
pmax = P + 2
when e ≤ (Eqn. C9.3-2)
b 6
4P b
pmax = when e ≥ (Eqn. C9.3-3)
3(b − 2e ) 6
where:
e = Load eccentricity (ft)
Σm = Total moment applied to panel (ft-lbf)
p = Total uniform axial load applied to panel (plf)
b = Width of panel considered, or narrowest panel width (ft)
pmax= Maximum axial force on wall due to combined axial and shear (plf)
P = Applied axial force (plf)
Considering a single-story building, the overturning moment in each shear wall panel may be calculated
as provided in Equation C9.3-4.
∑ m = vbh (Eqn. C9.3-4)
where:
Σm = Total moment applied to panel (ft-lbf)
v = Shear on panel (plf)
b = Width of panel considered, or narrowest panel width (ft)
h = Wall height (ft)
Substituting Equation C9.3-4 into Equation C9.3-2 and Equation C9.3-3 and solving for the shear on the
panel, v, yields the equations provided below:
b Pb
v = ( pmax − P ) when v ≤ (Eqn. C9.3-5)
3h 3h
P 4 P  Pb
v=  b −  when v ≥ (Eqn. C9.3-6)
h 3 pmax  3h
Using Equation C9.3-5 and C9.3-6, an interaction curve may be constructed by plotting the axial load, P,
and the resulting in-plane shear values. This “curve” consists of two straight lines defined by three
points: 1) Maximum axial load; 2) minimum axial load; 3) axial load that results in the maximum shear.
Points 1 and 2 correspond to an applied axial load of P = pmax and P = 0, respectively. At both of these
points, the shear on the panel is zero. To determine point 3, it is necessary to set Equations C9.3-5 equal
to Equation C9.3-6 and solve for the applied load, P. The non-trivial solution to the resulting quadratic

equation is given below. Using the solution to this equation, the maximum shear, v, may be determined
by solving either Equation C9.3-5 or C9.3-6 using the axial load, P, from Equation C9.3-7. A plot of
these three points is provided in Figure C9.3-4.
 b − b2 − b 
P = pmax   (Eqn. C9.3-7)
 2 
 
Shear-Axial Interaction Envelope
Eqn. C9.3-5
Eqn. C9.3-8
Eqn. C9.3-7
vs
Eqn. C9.3-9
Eqn. C9.3-6
Figure C9.3-4: Shear-Axial Compression Interaction Diagram
As shown in Figure C9.3-4, the maximum possible shear exceeds the design shear strength, vs. The line
representing the shear strength “cap” may be established by substituting the nominal shear strength, vs,
into Equations C9.3-5 and C9.3-6, and solving for P, as provide below.
3hv Pb
P = pmax − when v ≤ (Eqn. C9.3-8)
b 3h
3 pmax  16hv 
 when v ≥ Pb
P= b − b2 − (Eqn. C9.3-9)
8   3 pmax  3h

The fact that the interaction curve is zero when no axial load is applied is the result of the assumption
that the overturning of the panel is resisted only by the applied axial load. In actual assemblies, fasteners
or holdowns would resist the overturning of the panel in this region of the interaction curve. Moreover, a
typical ASTM E72 assembly is tested with no externally applied axial load—but with holdowns—when
establishing the nominal shear capacity of the assembly. Accordingly, the nominal shear strength, vs, will
be achieved down to zero applied axial load when holdowns are present. Incorporating this fact into the
interaction diagram results in the bi-linear shear-axial envelope shown in Figure C9.3-5.

Comparing the theoretical shear-axial interaction curve to the straight-line interaction curve used in the
Specification (Figure C9.3-5), the straight-line interaction curve provides a conservative limit for
combined shear and axial loads.
Shear-Axial Interaction Envelope
Eqn. C9.3-5
Eqn. C9.3-8
Straight-line interaction
vs
Figure C9.3-5: Shear-Axial Compression Interaction Diagram with Holddown
C9.3.1 ADT and ASD Methods

The ASD and ADT combined load expression corresponds to a linear interaction between in-plane shear,
out-of-plane bending and axial compression. Moment magnification is used to account for the reduced
buckling capacity when lateral loads are present and the relationship between in-plane shear and axial
loads provides a conservative limit, as explained in Section C9.3.
C9.3.2 LRFD and LSD Methods


References
Design of Cold-Formed Steel Structural Members, 2007 Edition," American Iron and Steel Institute,
Washington DC, 2007.
[3] MNL 120-04 Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute (PCI), PCI Design Handbook, 6th Edition,
Chicago: PCI, 2004.
Wood Construction Commentary 2005 Edition," American Wood Council (AWC), Washington,
DC, 2006.


C10 CONNECTIONS AND JOINTS
C10.1 General
The interconnection of SIP panels is crucial for proper functioning and must be specified by the SIP
designer. This section provides provisions for the design of various SIP connections.
C10.2 Connectors and Connector Strength

The SIP designer must assess whether each connection specification is adequate to resist all forces that
must be transmitted across each joint. For certain connections under specific conditions; however,
connection forces may be negligible. Under these circumstances, the Specification provides minimum
prescriptive connections that have a history of successful performance.
C10.2.1 SIP Screws

The specification for SIP screws is taken from the prescriptive construction requirements in the IRC [1]
and is intended to provide typical dimensions for such fasteners. This definition is not intended to limit
the size or type of fasteners to be used in SIP construction.
C10.2.2 Nails
The specification for nails used with SIPs is taken from the International Codes [1] [2] and is intended to
provide typical dimensions for nails used in SIP construction. This definition is not intended to limit the
size or type of nails that may be used in SIP construction.
C10.2.3 Adhesives
In general, the specification of field-applied structural adhesives is not advised and should not be used to
resist long-term structural loads. Under the International Codes, structural adhesives for wood-to-wood
connections must conform to ASTM D3024 or D4689 for interior applications and ASTM D2559 for
exterior applications [3]. While these adhesives are successfully used in the manufacture of SIPs and
engineered wood products, their performance is highly dependent on the wood surface conditions, wood
moisture content and assembly conditions, including pressures, temperatures and curing conditions [4].
These conditions are difficult to maintain in the field and often necessitate special inspections under the
International Building Code.
C10.3 Connections Resisting Parallel (In-Plane) Forces

In-plane connection forces are negligible under many circumstances. For this reason, the Specification
provides minimum prescriptive connections that have a history of successful performance. Where SIPs
are used as shear walls and/or diaphragms designed in accordance with Section 8, the connection and
detailing requirements of Section 8 must be followed.
C10.3.1 Panel-to-Panel
The minimum prescriptive connection for panel-to-panel connections is taken from the prescriptive
requirements of the IRC [5]. An alternate fastener size and spacing may be used for this connection
provided the alternate connection has equal or greater strength.
C10.3.2 Panel-to-Plate
The minimum prescriptive connection for the panel-to-plate connection is taken from the prescriptive
requirements of the IRC [5]. An alternate fastener size and spacing may be used for this connection
provided the alternate connection has equal or greater strength.

C10.4 Connections Resisting Perpendicular (Out-of-Plane) Forces

The strength and stiffness of out-of-plane connections vary significantly depending on the end conditions
present. This section of the Specification identifies each end condition and provides a method for
estimating the resulting strength. The primary consideration in out-of-plane connection design is whether
the reaction is resisted by direct bearing on the exterior facing of the SIP or whether the SIP is end-
supported.
C10.4.1 Face-Bearing Connections

In face bearing connections, the connection force is resisted by direct bearing of an exterior SIP facing
on a supporting surface. The strength of face-bearing connections is limited by the strength and stiffness
of the SIP panel through its thickness and the presence of fasteners in face-bearing connections have
negligible impact on the connection strength.
C10.4.1.1 Blocked Connections

Blocked face-bearing connections include a non-SIP “block” generally comprised of solid dimensional
lumber or engineered wood. In these connections, the block resists the connection force and prevents
crushing of the SIP core. The bearing strength of these connections is limited by the crushing strength of
the non-SIP materials and the strength of these materials must be assessed using the appropriate adopted
wood design specification.
C10.4.1.2 Unblocked Connections

Unblocked face-bearing connections are dependent on the stiffness of the SIP facing and the
compression strength of the SIP core. In thick SIP panels, the deflection that occurs under the design
core compression strength may be excessive if not accounted for by the designer. As a result, the
unblocked face-bearing connection includes provisions for estimating both strength and stiffness.
C10.4.2 Core Compression Strength

The compression strength of the core is influenced by the ability of the facing to distribute a
concentrated reaction force into the core, the dispersion of the stress within the core and the strength of
the core itself. Because the facing stiffness influences the distribution of load in the core, the location of
the connection and the ability to engage the facing on one or both sides of the connection have a
significant impact on strength, as defined in Figure 10.4.2-1 and in the subsequent sections. Compression
strength values may be obtained from ASTM C578, ASTM C591, or ASTM C1289 test data, as
applicable to the foam being considered.
C10.4.2.1 End Condition

The “end” condition is characterized as a bearing condition that is only capable of mobilizing the facing
on one-side of the bearing. Equation 10.4.2.1 and 10.4.2.2 are an expression of the bearing area at mid-
thickness within the core after the stress at the surface has dispersed through the material. This
expression has been adapted from similar bearing expressions in other design specifications [6] [7].
Under the “end” condition, the bearing stress disperses in only one direction though the thickness of the
core.
Little data exists to establish a single value for the angle of dispersion, k, in foam plastics. In the
literature dispersion angles as high as 45-degrees (k = 0.5) have been recommended as default values for
foam plastics installed in metal faced SIPs [6]. However, anecdotal evidence for SIPs faced with wood
structural sheathing suggests that the strength and stiffness of the facing dictates bearing strength and
that dispersion may play little role. As a result, the recommended dispersion angle is zero (i.e. no
dispersion) which results in a bearing area equal to the contact area.

C10.4.2.2 Interior Condition

The “interior” condition is characterized as a bearing condition that is only capable of mobilizing the
facing on two-sides of the bearing. Under this condition the bearing stress may disperse in both
directions, which results in twice the stress reduction due to dispersion over Equation 10.4.2.2-1.
C10.4.3 Local Deformation

The published compression strengths of foam plastics, determined in accordance with ASTM C578, are
based on 10-percent deformation. In thick SIP panels subject to compression through the thickness, the
resulting deformations may be sufficient to damage interior finishes. The expressions provided in the
Specification are based on the Winkler foundation model, which estimates the deformation of a beam
placed on an elastic foundation [8]. An 1/8-inch deformation limit is commonly applied to wood
connectors, such as joist hangers, and deformation limits up to 1/4-inch may be appropriate under certain
conditions and must be situationally assessed.
Compression stiffness values may be obtained from ASTM C578, ASTM C591, or ASTM C1289 test
data, as applicable to the foam being considered. The stiffness of the foam may be estimated by dividing
the compression strength by the corresponding percent deformation.
C10.4.3.1 End Condition

The “end” condition is characterized as a bearing condition that is only capable of mobilizing the facing
on one-side of the bearing.
C10.4.3.2 Interior Condition

The “interior” condition is characterized as a bearing condition that is only capable of mobilizing the
facing on two-sides of the bearing. Under this condition, the continuity in the facing reduces the
deflection to one-half the amount in Equation 10.4.3.1-1.
C10.4.4 End-Supported Connections

End-supported connections are characterized by bearing on an interior facing surface in a manner that
attempts to peel one facing away from the other. The equation provided in the Specification recognizes
two contributors to strength in this type of connection: 1) the peeling strength of the SIP; 2) the
withdrawal strength of any mechanical fasteners connecting the non-peeling facing to the support.
The peeling strength is correlated to the shear strength of the core. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the
peeling strength of SIP with wood structural panel facings is approximately 40-percent of the shear
strength. The fastener contribution corresponds to the withdrawal/pull-through strength of the fastener,
determined in accordance with the adopted wood design specification, adjusted to account for the
fastener spacing and unequal load distribution between fasteners.
References
[1] International Code Council (ICC), 2009 International Residential Code, Country Club Hills, IL:
ICC, 2010.
[2] International Code Council, Inc. (ICC), "2015 International Building Code," International Code
Council, Inc. (ICC), Brea, CA, 2015.
[3] APA - The Engineered Wood Association, APA PDS Supplement 5-12, Design and Fabrication of
All-plywood Beams, Tacoma, WA: APA - The Engineered Wood Association, 2013.

[4] USDA Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory (FPL), Wood Handbook, 2010 Edition (FPL-
GTL-190), Madison, Wisconsin: USDA Forest Service, 2011.
[5] International Code Council, Inc. (ICC), "2007 Supplement to the IRC," International Code Council,
Inc. (ICC), Club Hills, IL, 2007.
[6] European Convention of Constructional Steelwork, ECCS TWG 7.9 Sandwich Panels and Related
Structures, Publication No 115 European Recommendations for Sandwich Panels, Part I: Design
(January 2001), Brussels, Belgium: ECCS, 2001.
[7] American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), ANSI/AISC 360-10, Specification for Structural
Steel Buildings, Chicago, IL: AISC, 2010.
[8] D. Zenkert, The Handbook of Sandwich Construction, Worcestershire, United Kingdom:
Engineering Materials Advisory Services LTD (EMAS), 1997.

C11 OPENINGS
C11.1 General
The configuration of openings in SIP panels varies considerably depending on the size of the opening
and the magnitude of the applied loads. For smaller openings (4-ft span and smaller), it is common for
the opening to be plunge cut into the panel resulting in an opening that is fully integral. As openings get
larger the header member becomes a separate element from the supporting piers. This separate element
may consist of a SIP box header or a SIP reinforced with dimensional or engineered lumber.
The configuration of the supports on each side of the header also vary. For smaller openings, the SIP
piers on each side of the opening are adequate to support the additional load from the header. As the
spans increase; however, dimensional lumber jack and jamb studs are added to support the header in a
manner consistent with conventional light-framed construction.
The purpose of this Section is to provide design guidelines for the SIP portion of the header and
supporting piers. Once the capacity of either the SIP header or supporting piers is exceeded, the
Specification defers to the adopted design specification for the added non-SIP materials.
C11.2 Small Openings

Small openings that are routinely made to accommodate the installation of electrical outlets are
permitted prescriptively without the need for engineering analysis. The prescriptive limits in the
Specification are based on industry limits that have an established history of acceptable performance [1],
[2].
C11.3 SIP Headers

SIP headers are distinguished from non-SIP headers in that a SIP header relies only on the strength of the
SIP panel as defined in the Specification. Based on this definition, a SIP header considers only the
strength contribution of the facings and the foam core and neglects the strength contribution of any non-
SIP materials that may be present, such as dimensional lumber plates installed around a SIP opening.
This approach is not only conservative, but it eliminates the complexities of a partially composite
section. The interconnection between SIP and non-SIP components is typically made using mechanical
fasteners only. This connection seldom has sufficient shear strength to fully develop the composite
action between the two elements and the load-slip behavior of the mechanical fasteners further reduces
the effectiveness of the composite.
C11.3.1 In-Plane Flexure

The in-plane flexure of a SIP panel is distinguished from the out-of-plane flexural strength developed in
Section 4 of the Specification, due to the change in the method of calculating the section properties. In
Section 4, the section properties are based on an idealized composite section where the facings are
subjected to pure axial tension and compression, whereas in-plane flexure results in a stress gradient in
the facings over the depth of the bending element.

The in-plane flexure limit states are applicable to panels subjected to a transverse load applied parallel to
the plane of the SIP panel facings (as shown in Figure C11.3.1.1-1). An in-plane transverse load
produces a stress gradient in the facings with equal and opposite compression and tension stress in the
facings.
Figure C11.3.1.1-1: SIP Header Subject to In-Plane Flexure
Simplified Section Properties

Subject to in-plane flexure, any strength contribution of the core may be neglected and just the facings
are considered (Figure C11.3.1.1-2). SIP panel section properties for SIP panels having symmetric
rectangular facings, such as wood structural panels, may be calculated using the equations below.
Figure C11.3.1.1-2: SIP Header Cross Section

3
t f dh
Ih = (Eqn. C11.3.1-1)
6
2
t f dh
Sh = (Eqn. C11.3.1-2)
3
where:
Ih = Moment of inertia of SIP subjected to in-plane bending (in.4)
Sh = Section modulus of SIP subject to in-plane bending (in.3)
tf = Thickness of individual facing (in.)
dh = Depth of header (in.)
C11.3.1.1 In-Plane Design Span

conditions when considering in-plane flexural design. Because the header may be integral with the
supporting piers, the designer must consider the moments that develop over the supports where end-
fixity is considered in the design.
C11.3.1.2 Header In-Plane Flexural Strength Limited by Facing Tension

The in-plane flexural facing tension limit state is characterized by tension yielding or tension fracture
initiating in the tensile fibers of the facing, as depicted in Figure C11.3.1.2-1.
Figure C11.3.1.2-1: Facing Tension Limit State
Design Value Sources, Strength and Reduction Factors

The sources, strengths and reductions factors for in-plane flexural strength limited by facing
tension are developed as described in Commentary Section C4.1.3.

C11.3.1.3 Header In-Plane Flexural Strength Limited by Facing Compression

The in-plane flexural facing tension limit state is characterized by tension yielding or tension fracture
initiating in the tensile fibers of the facing, as depicted in Figure C11.3.1.3-1.
Figure C11.3.1.3-1: Facing Compression Limit State
Design Value Sources, Strength and Reduction Factors

The sources, strengths and reductions factors for in-plane flexural strength limited by facing
compression are developed as described in Commentary Section C4.1.4.
C11.3.2 Out-of-Plane Flexure

The out-of-plane strength of SIP headers is determined in accordance with the provisions of
Specification Section 4.
Exceptions are provided to this limit state where other elements are provided that can resist the out-of-
plane load along at least one edge of the header. One such case exists where lateral displacement of a
header is prevented by the presence of a floor, ceiling or roof diaphragm connected to the top of a header
or at the bottom of a sill. As a result of this restraint, the header cannot develop appreciable stress due to
out-of-plane loading and the load is effectively resisted by the diaphragm rather than the SIP. The aspect
ratio limit of 3 to 1 establishes when a header is sufficiently deep that the out-of-plane stress must be
considered along the unrestrained edge of the header.
C11.3.2.1 Out-of-Plane Design Span

The design span for out-of-plane loading is the same as that used for in-plane loading, described in
Section 11.3.
Where other elements exist that are capable of resisting the out-of-plane loads, such as a floor, ceiling or
roof diaphragm at the top of a header and/or dimensional lumber framing inserted at the bottom of a
header, the effective width of the header may be reduced from the full depth of the header to a depth
equal one-half the distance between the laterally supported edge and the unsupported edge.
C11.3.2.2 Header Out-of-Plane Flexural Strength Limited by Facing Tension

The out-of-plane flexural strength of a header limited by facing tension shall be calculated in accordance
with Specification Section 4.1.3. See Commentary Section C4.1.3.
C11.3.2.3 Header Out-of-Plane Flexural Strength Limited by Facing Compression

The out-of-plane flexural strength of a header limited by facing compression shall be calculated in
accordance with Specification Section 4.1.4. See Commentary Section C4.1.4.

C11.3.2.4 Header Out-of-Plane Shear Strength

The out-of-plane flexural strength of a header limited by shear shall be calculated in accordance with
Specification Section 5. See Commentary Section C5.
C11.3.3 Header Combined Loads

SIP headers must be designed to resist a combination of in-plane, out-of-plane and axial loads. The
combined load provisions in Chapter 9 apply to members subjected to combinations of axial, out-of-
plane bending and/or in-plane shear. The provisions of Chapter 9 do not address the bi-axial
bending condition applicable to headers. Because this condition is specific to headers, the combined
load expressions are provided in Chapter 11 rather than Chapter 9. The bi-axial bending expressions
correspond to a linear interaction between in-plane and out-of-plane bending stresses.
Where non-SIP elements are incorporated into the SIP panel it is permissible to design the separate
components for only the applied load acting in a single orthogonal direction. While strain compatibility
between the elements results in the sharing of the applied loads, the purpose of this is to permit the
designer to neglect strain compatibility as long as static equilibrium is maintained by the independent
load path.
For example, a header subjected to both in- and out-of-plane loads may have the SIP box beam designed
to resist the in-plane applied loads independently from the dimensional lumber plates installed at the
bottom of the header which is designed to independently resist out-of-plane loads. Where these elements
are designed to independently resist orthogonal loads, combined load does not need to be considered on
either element.
C11.3.3.1 ADT and ASD Methods

The ADT and ASD bi-axial bending expression corresponds to a linear interaction between in-plane
and out-of-plane bending stresses. Under bi-axial bending, the expressions reflect the limiting
strength of the extreme tensile fiber in the quadrant of the cross section where the bending stresses
about both axes are tensile and superpose.
C11.3.3.2 LRFD and LSD Methods

C11.4 Non-SIP Headers

Non-SIP elements, such as dimensional lumber or engineered wood products, may be designed to
independently resist header loads in one or both orthogonal directions.
C11.4.1 Header Strength and Stiffness

When incorporated into the SIP panel, non-SIP elements shall be designed for strength and serviceability
without regard for composite effects and shall be designed in accordance with the adopted wood design
standard.

C11.5 Piers & Columns

Each side of each header must be supported by a SIP pier or non-SIP column element.
C11.5.1 SIP Piers

The portion of a SIP panel adjacent to an opening that is effective in resisting the axial and transverse
loads imposed by a header shall be designed in accordance with this Section.
C11.5.1.1 Pier Width

The width of the panel that may be considered effective in resisting the concentrated header reaction is
established in accordance with this section. Little experimental data exists to provide insight as to how
this reaction force disperses into the adjacent SIP piers. To prevent consideration of an excessive pier
width, the Specification limits the effective pier width that may be considered to resist a header reaction.
C11.5.1.2 Pier Compressive Strength

Unlike SIP wall panel subjected to a uniform axial load, a SIP pier must be designed to carry a
concentrate force applied eccentrically with respect to the width of the panel. While it is standard
practice to evaluate the uniform axial strength of a SIP under an eccentricity about its thickness, little
experimental data exists to establish the behavior of SIPs subjected to eccentric concentrated loads
applied in this manner.
Experimental results for headers integral with the adjacent pier, show that the critical section for a SIP
pier is located at the base of the header [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]. These results also indicate that an
apparent increase in the axial strength occurs at the critical section(s) where failure occurs (see Figure
C11.5.1.2-1).
Figure C11.5.1.2-1: Pier Compressive Strength

The magnitude of this strength increase is consistent with a reduction in the axial load eccentricity due to
two effects:
1. The maximum load eccentricity exists at the top of the wall, at the point of load application.
The minimum, eccentricity (zero) exists at the bottom of the wall where both facings are
bearing on the support. The eccentricity is assumed to vary linearly between the top and
bottom of the panel. The critical section, located between the two extreme eccentricity
values, has an eccentricity proportional to the maximum eccentricity based on the ratio of
the header height to the wall height.
2. The compliance of the header, coupled with the strain compatibility of the facings, have the
effect of centering the loads applied to the header, thereby resulting in a concentric header
reaction.
Figure C11.5.1.2-2: Eccentricity Variation over Panel Height
These two effects are accounted for at the critical section of the SIP pier by reducing the effective
eccentricity of the axial load as provided in Equation 11.5.1.2.

C11.5.1.3 Pier Flexural Strength

The flexural strength of SIP piers may be assessed using the provisions of the Specification Section 4.
See Commentary Section C4.
C11.5.1.4 Pier Combined Loads

Combined axial, out-of-plane flexural, and in-plane raking loads in SIP piers may be assessed using the
provisions of the Specification Section 9. See Commentary Section C4.
C11.5.2 Columns
Non-SIP column, such as dimensional lumber or engineered wood products, may be designed to
independently resist header loads in one or both orthogonal directions. In cases where the strength of the
SIP is shown to be inadequate, a column may be added to carry the header reaction in lieu of the SIP.
C11.5.2.1 Column Strength

When incorporated into the SIP panel, columns shall be designed for strength and serviceability without
regard for composite effects and shall be designed in accordance with the adopted wood design
standard.
References
[1] APA - the Engineered Wood Association, "ANSI/APA PRS 610.1-2013 Standard for
Performance-Rated Structural Insulated Panels in Wall Applications," APA - the Engineered Wood
[3] NTA, Inc., "NTA Test Report SIPA020216-31, ASTM E72-15 Section 9: Strong Axis Bending 48-
in. x 96-in. x 4-5/8-in. SIPA Structural Insulated Panels with 12-in. x 36-inch (DxW) Header,"
NTA, Inc., Nappanee, Indiana, 2016.
[7] NTA, Inc., "NTA Test Report SIPA030216-13, ASTM E72-15 Section 9: Weak Axis Bending 48-



C12 REINFORCED PANELS
C12.1 General
SIP panels constructed with Type R or Type RT Splines may be considered reinforced. The strength and
stiffness of SIP panels that include such materials may be determined in accordance with this section.
C12.2 Scope
The analysis procedures in this section address a specific reinforcement configuration where the
centroid of the reinforcement coincides with the centroid of the SIP panel being reinforced. This
condition eliminates the need for a rigorous composite section analysis as strain compatibility between
the elements is ensured by maintaining deflection compatibility. To emphasize this unique condition,
the Specification referred to these panels as “reinforced” panels rather than “composite” panels.
In a rigorous analysis of a composite section, strain compatibility between the composite elements as
maintained by providing a shear connection between the elements. The minimum required strength of
this interconnection may be estimated using basic mechanics using Equation C12.2-1.
Figure 12.2-1: Reinforced SIP Section
VQ
fv = (Eqn. C12.2-1)
Ib
where:
fv = Shear stress on plane defined by Q (psi)
V = Transverse shear force in section (lbf)
Q = First moment about the centroidal axis of the part of the cross-sectional area lying farther from
the centroidal axis than the position where the shear stresses are being calculated (in.3)
I = Moment of inertia of the full cross-section (in.4)
b = Width of section at location where shear is to be computed (in.)
Furthermore, the definition of the first moment of inertia, Q, is defined as provided in Equation C12.2-2,
below.
Q = dA (Eqn. C12.2-2)
where:
d = Distance from the centroid of the full composite section to the centroid of the area, A (in.)
A = Area of the part of the cross-sectional area where the shear stresses are being calculated (in.2)
Looking at Equation C12.2-2, when the centroid of the full composite section coincides with the centroid
of the reinforcement d = 0. As a result, the strength required to maintain strain compatibility between the
SIP and the reinforcement, fv, equals zero. In other words, the SIP and the reinforcement function as a
composite without the need for an interconnection between the two elements. This greatly simplifies the
analysis of the section as it eliminates the need to determine composite section properties. This special
case permits three important simplifications:

1. The composite assembly stiffness (expressed as EI, or κGA) is the summation of the individual
component stiffnesses—a transformed section analysis does not need to be performed.
2. The portion of the load carried by each component is proportional to the components stiffness
(EI, or κGA) expressed as a percent of the total assembly stiffness.
3. The shear stress that must be transferred across the interface between the two materials is zero
(first moment of inertia, Q, equals zero). Accordingly, the fastener spacing, capacity, and load-
slip relationship does not need to be known and does not affect the analysis.
Considering a reinforcement configuration where the centroid of the reinforcement does not coincide
with the centroid of the SIP (see Figure 12.2-2), the first moment of inertia, Q, is greater than zero and
interconnection between the elements is required to maintain strain compatibility. Under this condition,
determination of the composite section properties is required. While the analysis of a “perfect”
composite is not overly complex, field-assembled composites introduce difficult to quantify variables
such as interlayer slip.
Figure 12.2-2: Composite SIP Section
C12.3 Transverse Load

As explained in Section C12.2, the analysis of a reinforced SIP assembly is simplified by the fact that
only deflection compatibility must be maintained between the elements. The net effect of maintaining
compatibility is that the applied load is proportioned to each of the components based on its relative
stiffness. Once this is done, each component may be designed individually using its respective design
methodology. The manner in which the loads are shared must account for the duration of the applied
load and the difference in creep potential between the SIP panel and the reinforcement. This section
provides equations for addressing these design issues.
C12.3.1 Simplified Analysis Method

For simply supported reinforced SIP assemblies where the maximum deflection occurs at midspan, such
as under uniform load or symmetrically placed point loads, the distribution of load (deflection
compatibility) need only be considered at midspan. Under such conditions, the simplified method
described in the section may be used to distribute the load.
The mid-span deflection of a simply supported reinforced SIP panel subjected to a uniform load along its
full length may be determined using Equation C12.3.1-1, where the total stiffness of the reinforced
assembly is simply of the summation of the members bending together.
5wL4 wL2
∆t = ∆b + ∆v = + (Eqn. C12.3.1-1)
384[(Et I )S + (EI )R ] 8[( Av Gt )S + (κAG )R ]
where:
∆tS = Total deflection of SIP attributed to loads of a single duration (in.)
∆bS = Deflection of SIP due to bending effects (in.)
∆vS = Deflection of SIP due to shear effects (in.)
(EtI)S = Bending stiffness of the SIP adjusted to the load duration corresponding to wS in accordance
with 4.2.2 (lbf-in.2)

(EI)R = Bending stiffness of the reinforcement adjusted to the load duration corresponding to wR in
(GtAv)S = Shear stiffness of the SIP adjusted to the load duration corresponding to wS in accordance
with 4.2.3 (lbf)
(κGAv)R = Shear stiffness of the reinforcement adjusted to the load duration corresponding to wR in
L = Design span in accordance with 4.3.2 (in.)
w = Total applied uniform load (pli)
Similar expressions can be developed that independently describe the deflection of the SIP and
reinforcement subject to their respective portions of the total applied load.
5wS L4 wS L2
∆ t = ∆ bS + ∆ vS = + (Eqn. C12.3.1-2)
384(Et I )S 8( Av Gt )S
5wR L4 wR L2
∆ t = ∆ bR + ∆ vR = + (Eqn. C12.3.1-3)
384(EI )R 8(κAG )R
where:
wS = Portion of uniform load carried by the SIP (pli)
wR = Portion of uniform load carried by the reinforcement (pli)
Deflection compatibility at mid-span requires the bending and shear components of each element to be
equal to the deflection of the reinforced assembly, as provided below.
∆ b = ∆ bS
5wL 4
5wS L4
=
384[(Et I )S + (EI )R ] 384(Et I )S
Solving for the portion of the load carried by the SIP, ws, the resulting expression is given below.
(Et I )S
wS = w (Eqn. C12.3.1-4)
(Et I )S + (EI )R
Repeating this solution for the shear and moment in each component yields the following.
wR = w
(EI )R
(Eqn. C12.3.1-5)
(Et I )S + (EI )R
( Av Gt )S
wS = w (Eqn. C12.3.1-6)
( Av Gt )S + (κAG )R
wR = w
(κAG )R
(Eqn. C12.3.1-7)
( Av Gt )S + (κAG )R

From these expressions, it is shown that the shear and moment carried by each component is simply a
portion of the total load equal to the ratio of the component bending or shear stiffness to the total
bending or shear stiffness of all components in the reinforced assembly.
Because shear deformations must be considered in SIP design, the true bending modulus, Eb, and shear
modulus, G, are tabulated separately. However, for most commonly used materials, such as dimensional
lumber and engineered wood products, only an apparent bending modulus, Ea, is provided. And, in the
case of some engineered wood products, the shear stiffness is expressed as a shear deflection coefficient.
To consider these materials in a reinforced SIP assembly their bending and shear moduli must be
expressed in a consistent manner.
For solid sawn lumber or engineered wood products where only an apparent bending modulus is
provided the true bending modulus and shear modulus may be determined as follows [1]:
E (Eqn. C12.3.1-8)
Eb = a
0.95
where:
Eb = Component true bending modulus (psi)
Ea = Component apparent bending modulus (psi)
𝐸𝐸𝑎𝑎
𝐺𝐺 = (Eqn. C12.3.1-9)
16
where:
Ea = Component apparent bending modulus (psi)
G = Component approximate shear modulus (psi)
For solid rectangular wood products, the shear stiffness may be determined as follows:
6𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺
𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅 = (Eqn. C12.3.1-10)
5
where:
κGA = Component shear stiffness (lbf)
A = Cross-sectional area (in.2)
G = Shear modulus from Equation C12.3.1-9
For engineered wood products, such as I-joists, where the shear stiffness is expressed as a shear
deflection coefficient, the shear stiffness may be determined as follows:
𝐾𝐾
𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅 = (Eqn. C12.3.1-11)
8
where:
K = Published wood I-joist shear deflection coefficient (lbf), may be provided as Kd, where d is
the depth of the wood I-joist.
κGA = Component shear stiffness (lbf)

C12.3.2 General Analysis Method

For reinforced SIP assemblies continuous over multiple supports or subjected to general loading
conditions where the maximum deflection may not occur at midspan, a finite element analysis of the
reinforced SIP assembly shall be performed. In the finite element model, each component material shall
be modeled using separate elements with their respective material properties. These separate elements
shall be joined at regularly spaced nodes placed along the length of the reinforced SIP assembly.
C12.3.3 SIP Strength and Stiffness

The presence of the reinforcement results in a condition where the SIP is spanning in two directions:
1) parallel to the reinforcement; 2) perpendicular to the reinforcement. The portion of the load to be
carried by the SIP, determined in accordance with Section 12.3.1, is used to assess the adequacy of
the SIP in the direction parallel to the reinforcement. In the direction perpendicular to the
reinforcement, the SIP must be capable of spanning between reinforcing elements.
C12.3.4 Reinforcement Strength and Stiffness

The reinforcement elements, which are non-SIP elements, shall be independently designed to carry
the portion of the total load applied to the element without exceeding the limits of the adopted wood
design specification.
C12.3.5 Connections
In the design of reinforced SIP panels it is important to consider the connections at each end of the
reinforcement. Using the load sharing technique, the reinforcement has an end reaction determined using
the reinforcements “share” of the load. Unlike the distributed end reaction at each end of a SIP panel,
this reaction is a concentrated load and must be provided a load path to the supporting structure that does
not rely on the strength of the SIP panel. This concentrated reaction may be supported by direct bearing
or mechanical fasteners, but if the reaction cannot be transferred independently from the SIP, the
reinforcement should not be considered to add strength to the composite assembly.
One instance where the detailing of the reinforcement connection is most important occurs in wall
assemblies where the SIP is “end supported” (refer to Section 10.4.5). With this support configuration,
no bearing exists for the SIP or the reinforcement and the full end reaction of the reinforcement must be
transferred to the top and bottom plate through the end connection.
C12.4 Axial Load

The distribution of axial loads in reinforced SIP panels is quite different than that for transverse loads in
that it depends on the manner in which the load is applied to the panel rather than on the configuration of
the panel itself. With respect to the manner in which the load is applied, two distinct conditions exist:
1. Axial load applied through a header or member capable of spanning between the reinforcement.
This condition exists where the load is applied through a header, such as a rim joist, or through a
SIP panel above. Under this condition, the strength contribution of the SIP is ignored due to the
fact that the reinforcement is generally much stiffer than the SIP. The reinforcement is stiffer
because it is in direct bearing at the top and bottom of the wall whereas the SIP relies on
“flexible” mechanical fasteners to transfer load between the top and bottom plates. This
condition also exists where reinforcement members are provided within the panel at points
where concentrated loads are applied.
2. Axial load applied to the top of the panel (no header provided) or through a “weak” header
member that cannot span between the reinforcement. This condition generally exists where

individual point loads are applied directly to the top of a SIP through only a single or double top
plate. Under this condition, the load is simply applied to the element below the load, which may
be the SIP or the reinforcement. As a result, the SIP must be designed as if the reinforcement is
not present.
In actual design, conditions may exist where loads are applied to a reinforced SIP under both conditions.
This may occur in multi-story structures where the panels are discontinuous at each level and the load
from each level is applied through top flange joist hangers. In this situation, the axial load from the SIP
above is applied through a header whereas the load from the adjacent floor is applied to the SIP only.
Under such conditions it is recommended that each component is designed to independently carry the
applied load in each manner.
C12.4.1 Adequate Header Provided

Where a header is provided the presence of the SIP panel may be ignored and the axial strength of the
composite assembly may be taken as the axial strength of the reinforcement, determined using the design
provisions applicable to the reinforcement. The reinforcement members shall be designed assuming full
bracing about the strong and weak axes and the calculated capacity of the reinforcement shall be divided
by the spacing between the reinforcement to obtain the maximum load per linear foot of wall.
C12.4.2 No Header or Inadequate Header Provided

Where no header or a “weak” header is provided the axial strength of the composite assembly shall be
taken as the lesser axial strength considering the axial strength of the SIP panel and the reinforcement,
each designed separately using their respective design provisions. The reinforcement members shall be
designed assuming full bracing about the strong and weak axes and the calculated capacity of the
reinforcement shall be taken as the maximum load per linear foot of wall. Generally, under the “weak”
condition the axial strength of the SIP panel will govern the design.

C13 SHELLS AND FOLDED PLATE MEMBERS
C13.1 General
The design, analysis and construction of SIP panels in the Specification is predicated on SIP
configurations that are designed and analyzed in a manner similar to conventional light framed
construction. This approach belies the fact that SIP structures are capable of resisting loads in a manner
much different from conventional light framed construction. In SIP structures, it is possible for the
panels to function as shells and folded plates which are characterized by their three-dimensional load-
carrying behavior. This behavior is determined by the geometry of the panels, by the manner in which
the panels are supported and by the nature of the applied load.
Common types of shells include SIP panels that are curved to form barrel vaults. Folded plate structures
commonly take the form of planar SIP panels joined along their edges to form beam-like structure
spanning between supports where the panels function as deep beams. Other applications of folded plates
include faceted folded plates which are made up of triangular or polygonal planar SIPs joined along their
edges to form three-dimensional spatial structures.
Due to the wide variety of possible configurations and limited non-proprietary research on SIP shells and
folded plate members this Section does not provide specific guidance on the design and detailing of such
structures. Instead, the purpose of this Section is to permit experienced SIP designers to produce designs
that go beyond the conventional light-framed construction analogies utilized in the preceding sections of
the Specification.
C13.2 Analysis and Design

The choice of the method of analysis and the degree of accuracy required depends on certain critical
factors. These include: the size of the structure, the geometry of the shell or folded plate, the manner in
which the structure is supported, the nature of the applied load, and the extent of personal or documented
experience regarding the reliability of the given method of analysis in predicting the behavior of the
specific type of shell or folded plate.
Approximate solutions that satisfy statics but not the compatibility of strains may be used when
experience has proved that safe designs have resulted from their use. Such methods include beam-type
analysis for curved SIPs and folded plates having large ratios of span to either width or radius of
curvature. It must be emphasized that the overall performance of shells and folded plates requires
attention to detail and that a designer’s experience in building such structures is more impactful on a
successful outcome than rigorous analytical modeling of the structure.
C13.3 In-Plane Strength of Folded Plates

Folded plates may utilize the details provided in Section 8 for shear walls and diaphragms; however,
because these assemblies are commonly used to resist short-duration loads only, this Section serves to
emphasize the need for the use of appropriate time-effect factors in folded plate structures which resist
loads of longer duration.


SIP-EDG01-19E FINAL DRAFT, SIP Design Examples E-1
Design Examples Based on

Design Specification SIP-EDG01-19E Final Draft
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Maximum Transverse Short-Duration Uniform Load ......................................................... E-3
2 Wall Cladding Panel Under Transverse Wind Load............................................................ E-9
3 Roof Panel Under Transverse Load ................................................................................... E-15
4 Maximum Axial Compression Capacity............................................................................ E-23
5 Wall Panel Under Combined Axial and Transverse Load ................................................. E-27
6 Wall Panel Subject to Racking Loads ................................................................................ E-39
7 Wall Panel Under Combined Axial, Transverse, and Racking Load ................................ E-43
8 Roof Diaphragm Design .................................................................................................... E-57
9A Reinforced Roof Panel Under Transverse Load (I-Joist)................................................... E-61
9B Reinforced Roof Panel Under Transverse Load (I-Joist), SIP Strong-Axis Bending ........ E-67
9C Reinforced Roof Panel Under Transverse Load (I-Joist), SIP Weak-Axis Bending ......... E-74
9D Reinforced Roof Panel Under Transverse Load (I-Joist), I-Joist Reinforcement .............. E-81
10 Reinforced Roof Panel Under Transverse Load (Dimension Lumber) ............................. E-87
11 Reinforced Panel Under Axial Load .................................................................................. E-95
12 Panel with Opening .......................................................................................................... E-105

E-2 SIP-EDG01-19E FINAL DRAFT, SIP Design Examples
FOREWORD
The primary objective of these design examples is to provide illustrations of the use of the
Structural Insulated Panel Design Specification. In the design examples, all applicable limit
states are considered regardless of whether a limit state controls the design. The numerical
values shown in the examples maintain a high degree of internal precision but are rounded for
display purposes. As a result, manual hand calculations based on intermediate values may
produce different results. Design inputs throughout the examples are highlighted in light gray.
The information presented in this publication has been prepared in accordance with recognized
engineering principles and is for general information only. While it is believed to be accurate,
this information should not be used or relied upon for any specific application without
competent professional examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability, and
applicability by a licensed professional engineer, designer, or architect. The publication of the
material contained herein is not intended as a representation or warranty on the part of the
Structural Insulated Panel Association (SIPA) that this information is suitable for any general or
particular use. Anyone making use of this information assumes all liability arising from such
use.
Caution must be exercised when relying upon other specifications and codes developed by other
bodies and incorporated by reference herein since such material may be modified or amended
from time to time. SIPA bears no responsibility for such material other than to refer to it and
incorporate it by reference.

DESIGN EXAMPLE 1: MAXIMUM TRANSVERSE SHORT-DURATION UNIFORM LOAD
Considering the SIP section properties and material properties listed below, calculate the tabulated maximum short-duration
uniform load for a 6.5-in. thick (overall) SIP panel having a 120-in. span under test conditions with blocked face-bearing supports.
The ADT design method is used to consider applicable strength limits and deflection limits of L/180, L/240 and L/360.
Design Inputs:
Support Configuration: SIP Material Properties: (ADT Basis)
Support Spacing, L = 120.0 in. Facing Tensile Strength, F t = 495 psi
Bearing Length, l b = 1.5 in. Facing Compressive Strength, F c = 345 psi
SIP Bending Modulus, E = 560000 psi
SIP Geometry: SIP Shear Modulus, G = 350 psi
Overall Thickness, t = 6.50 in. Core Shear Strength, F v = 3.0 psi
Facing Thickness, t f = 0.4375 in. Shear Reference Depth, t o = 4.50 in.
Shear Depth Exponent, m = 1.00
Design Procedure:
The maximum uniform load is the smallest value obtained considering the following limit states:
1. Flexural Strength
2. Core Shear Strength
3. Core Compression Strength
4. Flexural (Transverse) Deflection
Design Calculations:
1. Flexural Strength (Specification Section 4.1)
As required in Specification Section 4.1.1, the applied flexural load must not exceed the smallest value considering the limit states
of facing tension and facing compression, as provided in Section 4.1.3 and Section 4.1.4, respectively.
Flexural Strength Limited by Facing Tension (Specification Section 4.1.3)

OK Specification Equation 4.1.3-1.
Time-Effect Factor
OK Test loading conditions are being considered. Test loads are
considered to be "short" duration as defined in Specification
Table 3.5-1. The "short" duration time-effect factor is from
Specification Table 4.1.3-2.
Facing Tensile Strength
OK The facing tensile strength is a design input.
Section Modulus
OK The section modulus is determined based on the
assumption that only the facings resist flexural stress. This
OK assumption and the related equations are provided in
Commentary Section C4.1. All section properties are
determined on a one-foot-wide section.
OK
OK The facing thickness is a design input.

OK
OK
OK The overall SIP thickness is a design input.
OK
OK
OK
Flexural Strength Limited by Facing Tension

OK
Flexural Strength Limited by Facing Compression (Specification Section 4.1.4)

Time-Effect Factor
OK From Specification Table 4.1.4-2.
Facing Compressive Strength

OK The facing compressive strength is a design input.
Section Modulus
OK The section moduli are equal for symmetric SIPs,
Flexural Strength Limited by Facing Compression

OK
Flexural Strength (Specification Section 4.1.1)

OK The flexural strength is the lesser value considering tensile
OK and compressive failure of the facing.
Required Flexural Strength

OK The moment due to the applied load may be determined
using published expressions for a uniform load applied to a
simply-supported beam and converting the units.
OK Specification Section 4.1.2 permits the flexural span to be

taken as the clear span between supports; however, under
test conditions, where the bearing surfaces are free to
rotate, the design span should be taken as the distance
between the points of rotation.
Design Requirement (Specification Section 3.2.3)
OK The SIP element must satisfy Specification Equation 3.2.3-1
for the ADT design method.
OK The reduction factor for flexural compression,  , is from

OK The expression for the maximum uniform load is obtained by

substituting and solving the inequality for uniform load.

2. Core Shear Strength (Specification Section 5.3)

As required in Specification Section 5.1, the applied shear load must not exceed the limit state of core shear strength, as provided
in Section 5.3.
OK Specification Equation 5.3-1.
Time-Effect Factor
OK The "short" duration time-effect factor from Specification
Table 5.3-2.
Depth Factor
OK The overall thickness, shear reference depth, and shear

OK depth exponent are design inputs.
OK
OK
Shear Area
OK The shear area is determined based on the assumption that
only the core resists shear stress. This assumption, and the
related equations are provided Commentary Section C5.3.
The shear area is determined on a one-foot-wide section.
OK The core thickness was determined in Part 1.
OK The overall thickness is a design input.

OK
Core Shear Strength

OK The core shear strength is a design input.
OK
Required Shear Strength

OK The shear due to the applied load may be determined using
published expressions for a uniform load applied to a simply-
supported beam and converting the units.
OK The design span is determined from Specification Section

5.2.
OK The support spacing, bearing length, and overall thickness

OK are design inputs.
OK
OK


OK The reduction factor for flexural compression,  , is from

Specification Table 5.3-1.

3. Core Compression Strength (Specification Section 10.4.1.1)

Specification Section 10.4.1.1 requires the strength of a blocked face-bearing connection to be determined based on the individual
bearing strength of each component in compression. Generally, this strength will greatly exceed the maximum reaction that SIP
can generate. Accordingly, these components are assumed to be adequate for the purposes of this design example.
4. Flexural (Transverse) Deflection (Specification Section 4.3)

As required in Specification Section 4.3.1, the transverse deflection estimate shall consider both bending and shear deformations,
as provided in Section 4.3.3.
OK Specification Equation 4.3.3.1-1.
Adjusted Bending Modulus

Time-Effect Factor
Table 4.2.2-1.
Bending Modulus
OK The SIP bending modulus is a design input.
OK
Adjusted Shear Modulus

Time-Effect Factor
Table 4.2.3-1.
Shear Modulus
OK The SIP shear modulus is a design input.
OK
Design Requirement (Specification Section 3.3)

OK Specification Section 3.3 requires the deflection of
structural members to not exceed building code limits.
These limits are expressed as a ratio of the total span.
OK The design span for deflection is taken as the same as that

for flexure in Part 1.


OK
Limit State Summary
Result
Limit State (psf)
Flexural Strength 68.3
Core Shear Strength 34.9
Core Compression Strength N/A
Flexural Deflection
 lim 180 240 360
w (psf) 66.3 49.7 33.1
Overall Result:
Allowable Uniform Transverse Load The allowable value corresponds to the smallest value
 lim 180 240 360 considering all limit states.
w (psf) 34.9 34.9 33.1
Discussion
The allowable uniform transverse loads assume that the load is of "short" duration. This assumption affects the time-effect factor,
 . Accordingly, the calculated loads are applicable only to combinations of loads that have a time-effect factor of 1.0. For
combinations of loads where the time-effect factor is less than 1.0, the strength for each limit state must be reduced by its
corresponding time-effect factor to determine the allowable loads applicable to the load combination being considered.
Time-Effect The time-effect factors are equal for all limit states under the
Factor ADT method. The time-effect factor for each ASCE 7-10
ASCE 7-10 , ASD Load Cases  t  c ASD load combination is tabulated in the table to the left. As
1. D 0.5 shown in the table, the time-effect factor for the ADT load
2. D +L 1.0 case is less than 1.0 only for load case 1, which is dead
3. D +(L r or S or R ) 1.0 load only. As a result, when only dead load is considered
4. D+0.75L+ 0.75(L r or S or R ) 1.0 the time-effect factor is 0.5, resulting in reduced allowable
5. D +(0.6W or 0.7E ) 1.0 strengths equal to one-half the calculated values. This
6a. D +0.75L+ 0.75(0.6W )+ 0.75(L r or S or R ) 1.0 reduction applies to the strength limit states and not the
deflection based capacities. The deflection based capacities
6b. D +0.75L+ 0.75(0.7E )+ 0.75S 1.0
are also affected by creep but in a different manner, which
7. 0.6D+0.6W 1.0
is shown in later examples.
8. 0.6D+0.7E 1.0


DESIGN EXAMPLE 2: WALL CLADDING PANEL UNDER TRANSVERSE WIND LOAD
Considering the SIP section properties and material properties listed below, verify the adequacy of a 6.5-in. thick (overall) SIP panel
having a 120-in. span, end supported, wall cladding panel subjected to a 20 psf wind load (ASD C&C pressure). The ADT design
method is used to consider applicable strength limits and a deflection limit of L/180.
Design Inputs:
Facing Compressive Strength, F c = 345 psi
SIP Geometry: SIP Bending Modulus, E = 560000 psi
Overall Thickness, t = 6.50 in. SIP Shear Modulus, G = 350 psi
Facing Thickness, t f = 0.4375 in. Core Shear Strength, F v = 3.0 psi
Shear Reference Depth, t o = 4.50 in.
Loading Conditions:
Transverse Wind Load, W C&C = 20.0 psf (absolute maximum ASD C&C pressure)
Deflection Limit, L / 180
Design Procedure:
Assessment of the SIP under transverse load must consider the following limit states:
3. Connection Strength


Time-Effect Factor
OK Wind loads are considered to be "short" duration as defined
in Specification Table 3.5-1. The "short" duration time-effect
factor is from Specification Table 4.1.3-2.
Section Modulus
OK The section modulus is determined based on the assumption
that only the facings resist flexural stress. This assumption
OK and the related equations are provided in Commentary
Section C4.1. All section properties are determined on a one-
OK foot-wide section.
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK

OK

Time-Effect Factor

Section Modulus
OK The section moduli are equal for symmetric SIPs.

OK



OK The wind pressure is a design input.
OK Pursuant to Specification Section 4.1.2 , the design span of

end supported SIPs equals the overall panel length.
OK

OK The reduction actor,  , is from Specification Table 4.1.4-2

for the ADT method,
OK The inequality is rewritten to express the applied load as a

fraction of the permissible load.
OK
OK therefore, OK

As required in Specification Section 5.1, the applied shear load must not exceed the limit state of core shear strength, as provided in
Section 5.3.
Time-Effect Factor
Table 5.3-2.
Depth Factor

OK
OK
Shear Area

OK

Core Shear Strength

OK

OK Pursuant to Specification Section 5.2, the design span for

end supported panels is equal to the overall panel length.
OK

OK For the ADT method, the reduction actor,  , is from


OK
OK therefore, OK
3. Connection Strength (Specification Section 10.4.4)

As required in Specification Section 10.1, out-of-plane forces applied to connections must not exceed the strength of the
appropriate limit state in Section 10.4.
OK The strength of an end-supported connection is determined

in accordance with Specification Section 10.4.4, using
Specification Equation 10.4.4-1.
OK Specification Section 10.4.4 provides a default value for C p .
OK The value for the shear strength of the SIP, V n , was

determined in Part 2.
Strength Contribution of Fasteners

OK The strength contribution of the fasteners is determined
using Specification Equation 10.4.4-2. The parameters in
this equation are dependent on the facing to plate fastener
Consider 0.131" x 2.5" (8d) nails at 6" oc specifications.
Facing-to-Plate, each side, top-and-bottom
Plate equivalent specific gravity, SG , of 0.42

OK The fastener withdrawal strength, per inch of embedment, is

determined using Equation 12.2-3 from the 2015 National
Design Specification for Wood Construction (NDS ).
OK The specific gravity of the plate and the nail diameter are
OK design inputs.
OK
OK The withdrawal strength per fastener, considering the

embedment length and short duration loading, is determined
using the provisions of the NDS .
OK The load duration factor is a design input from the NDS .
OK The fastener embedment length is based on the connection

geometry.
OK The facing thickness and fastener length are design inputs.

OK
OK
OK
OK Substituting the values for the specified connection, the

strength contribution of the fasteners and overall connection
is determined. The fastener strength is an ASD capacity
OK which may be combined with the ADT shear strength.
Required Connection Strength

OK The required connection strength is the same force as the
required shear strength, which was previously determined.
OK The reduction factor varies, since one factor is from the

Specification and the other is from the NDS . As a result, the
value for Rn/ will be used which includes both factors of
safety.
OK This inequality is rewritten to express the applied load as a

OK
OK therefore, OK

OK The applied load is a design input.

for flexure (Specification Section 4.3.2).


Time-Effect Factor
Table 4.2.2-1.
Bending Modulus
OK The SIP flexural modulus is a design input.
OK

Time-Effect Factor
Table 4.2.3-1.
Shear Modulus
OK The shear modulus is a design input.
OK
OK
OK The International Building Code , which establishes the

deflection limit, permits ASD C&C wind pressures to be
taken as 0.7 times the pressure for the purposes of
assessing deflection limits.
Deflection Limit (Specification Section 3.3)
OK Specification Section 3.3 requires the deflection of structural
members to not exceed building code limits. These limits are
expressed as a ratio of the total span.
Design Requirement (Adopted Building Code)
OK The calculated deflection must be less than the permissible
OK deflection. This inequality is rewritten to express the design
deflection as a fraction of the permissible deflection.
OK
OK therefore, OK
Overall Result
Limit State Ratio The design is adequate as long as all design checks
Flexural Strength 0.29 produce an applied-to-permissible ratio of 1.0 or less.
Core Shear Strength 0.66
Connection Strength 0.83
Deflection 0.21
Overall Design (Maximum) 0.83 therefore, OK

DESIGN EXAMPLE 3: ROOF PANEL UNDER TRANSVERSE LOAD
Considering the SIP section properties and material properties listed below, verify the adequacy of a 12.25-in. thick (overall) SIP
panel having a 120-in. span, unblocked bearing supports. The ADT design method is used to consider applicable strength limits, a
live load deflection limit of L/240, and a total load deflection limit of L/180.
Design Inputs:
Core Compressive Strength, F cc = 14.0 psi
Core Compression Modulus, E c = 360 psi
2
Facing Bending Stiffness, E f I f = 78000 lbf-in.
Loading Conditions:
Dead Load, D = 10.0 psf
Roof Live Load, L r = 20.0 psf
Snow Load, S = 30.0 psf
Deflection Limit, L / 240 (live load only)
Deflection Limit, L / 180 (total load)
Design Procedure:
Assessment of the SIP under transverse loading must consider the following limit states:
3. Core Compression Strength
5. Local Deformation

Time-Effect Factor
OK The time-effect factor from Specification Table 4.1.3-2 is
taken as 1.0, which corresponds to a "short" duration load as
defined in Specification Table 3.5-1. The loads will be
normalized to a time-effect factor of 1.0

Section Modulus
OK and the related equations are provided in Commentary
foot-wide section.
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK

OK

Time-Effect Factor

Section Modulus
OK The section moduli are equal for symmetric SIPs,

OK


Total Time-Effect Normalized Pursuant to Specification Section 1.2.3, the load

Load Factor Load combinations shall be in accordance with the adopted
Load Case (psf)  t  c (psf) building code. To determine the governing load, the loads
1. D 10.0 0.5 20.0 are normalized by dividing the load for each load
3a. D +L r 30.0 1.0 30.0 combination by the corresponding time-effect factor. The
3b. D +S 40.0 1.0 40.0 absolute value of the resulting value is taken to facilitate
Maximum, w = 40.0 psf comparison of the values. The maximum normalized load
governs the design. C&C Wind pressures are considered
only when acting alone or in conjunction with dead load only.
Not all possible load cases are shown; the designer is
responsible for selecting the proper load cases.

Design Span
OK Pursuant to Specification Section 4.1.2, assuming that the
panel represents an interior span, the design span is from
center-to-center of the supports.
OK

OK The reduction factor,  , is from Specification Table 4.1.4-1

for the ADT method

OK
OK therefore, OK

Section 5.3.
Time-Effect Factor
Table 5.3.-2.
Depth Factor

OK
OK
Shear Area
OK

Core Shear Strength

OK

OK Because the time-effect factors for flexure and core shear

are the same, the governing load is also the same and as
previously calculated for flexure.

5.2.
OK The support spacing, bearing length, and overall thickness

OK are design inputs.
OK
OK
OK

OK The ADT reduction factor,  , is from Specification Table 6.3-

1.

OK
OK therefore, OK
3. Core Compression Strength (Specification Section 10.4.2)

OK The strength of an unblocked bearing connection is

determined in accordance with the Specification, Section
10.4.2.1, using Equation 10.4.4.2-1.
Time-Effect Factor
OK The time-effect factor is taken from Specification Table
10.4.2-2. Because multiple load cases must be considered,
the loads will be normalized to a time-effect factor of 1.0.
Bearing Width
OK The width, b , is taken as 12-in. to provide an assessment on
a per foot basis.
OK The core compressive strength is a design input.

Bearing Length
OK The bearing length is a design input.
Angle of Dispersion
OK The default value (0) for the angle of dispersion, k , is used.
OK The core thickness was previously calculated in Step 1.
OK

OK The bearing force is determined using engineering
mechanics.
OK Because the time-effect factors for flexure and core

compression strength are the same, the governing load is
also the same and as previously calculated for flexure.
OK Pursuant to Specification Section 4.1.2, assuming that the

panel represents an interior span, the design span is from
center-to-center of the supports.
OK

OK The ADT reduction factor,  , is from Specification Table

10.4.2-1.

OK
OK therefore, OK

OK The total deflection is the summation of the short, normal

and permanent duration deflection components, as given in
OK The deflection contribution of each duration is determined

using Specification Equation 4.3.3.1-1.
OK Because we must consider multiple load cases with different

load durations, the deflection equation is solved for the
stiffness, k , under each of the three load durations.
OK OK
where

OK The design span is the same as that for flexure

OK (Specification Section 4.3.2). The moment of inertia and
shear area were previously calculated in Procedure Step 1
OK
and 2, respectively.
Short Duration
OK Substituting the moduli for each duration yields the stiffness
OK for each duration in Specification Table 4.2.2-1 and Table
OK 4.2.3-1; short, normal, and permanent load durations.
Normal Duration
OK
OK
OK
Permanent Duration
OK
OK
OK
Uniform Deflection
Load Stiffness 
Load Duration (psf) k (in.)
D Permanent 10.0 0.1648 0.137 Multiplying each component load by the stiffness of the
Lr Short 20.0 0.0494 0.082 corresponding duration yields the deflection of each load.
S Normal 30.0 0.1236 0.309
Deflection Deflection The component deflections are summed based on the ASD
 TL  LL load cases required by the adopted building code. These
Load Case (in.) (in.) cases are identical to the load combinations previously used
1. D 0.137 -- for strength analysis except for an additional 0.7 reduction
3a. D +L r 0.220 0.082 for deflections due to C&C wind loads. Because the adopted
3b. D +S 0.446 0.309 code provides separate criteria for total load deflection and
Maximum  TLmax = live load deflections, the deflection for each combination is
0.446 in.
tabulated without considering dead load.
Maximum  LLmax = 0.309 in.
Deflection Limits (Specification Section 3.3)

OK

live load deflection.
OK This inequality is rewritten to express the design deflection

as a fraction of the permissible deflection.
OK
OK therefore, OK


total load deflection.

OK
OK therefore, OK
5. Local Deformation (Specification Section 10.4.3)
As required in Specification Section 10.4.3, the local deflection at the panel ends may be estimated as provided in Section 10.4.3.1.
OK The local deflection at the ends of the panel is determined in

accordance with Specification Section 10.4.3.1, using
Specification Equation 10.4.3.1-1.
OK The reaction force, R , was previously calculated in Part 3.
OK The facing bending stiffness is a design input.
OK The relative stiffness parameter,  , is determined using

OK The core compressive modulus is a design input.
OK The core thickness was previously calculated in Step 1.
OK
Local deflections at joints are not explicitly limited by code

OK and consideration of such deflections is at the discretion of
the designer.
Overall Result
Flexural Strength 0.29 produce a applied-to-permissible ratio of 1.0 or less. Local
Core Shear Strength 0.99 deflection is reported for consideration at the discretion of
Core Compression Strength 0.79 the designer.
Total Load Deflection 0.62
Live Load Deflection 0.67
Local Deformation cc = 0.098 in.


DESIGN EXAMPLE 4: MAXIMUM AXIAL COMPRESSION CAPACITY
Considering the SIP section properties and material properties listed below, determine the maximum allowable axial load that may
be placed on a 6.5-in. thick (overall) SIP panel having a 144-in. span. The ADT design method is used to consider applicable
strength limits.
Design Inputs:
Support Spacing, L = 144.0 in. Facing Compressive Strength, F c = 345 psi
Design Eccentricity, e d = 0.00 in. SIP Bending Modulus, E = 560000 psi
SIP Shear Modulus, G = 350 psi
SIP Geometry: Crushing-Buckling Interaction Factor, c = 0.70
Overall Thickness, t = 6.50 in.
Facing Thickness, t f = 0.4375 in.
Design Procedure:
The maximum axial is the smallest value obtained considering the following limit states:
1. Compression Strength

1. Compression Strength (Specification Section 6.3)
As required in the Specification Section 6.1, the applied loads must not exceed the capacity established by the compression limit
state, as provided in Section 6.3.
Compression Strength (Specification Section 6.3)

Time-Effect Factor
OK The governing load case is assumed to include "normal"
duration loads as defined in Specification Table 3.5-1. The
corresponding time-effect factor is obtained from
Eccentricity Factor
OK The eccentricity factor is determined using Specification
Equation 6.3.1-4.
Radius of Gyration
OK The section properties are determined using the assumption
that only the facings resist axial stress. This assumption, and
OK the related equations, are provided in Commentary Section
C4.1. All section properties are determined on a one-foot-
wide section.
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
Load Eccentricity
OK As stated in Specification Section 6.3.1, the load
OK eccentricity shall not be taken as less than the design
eccentricity or 1/6 the panel thickness.
OK The design eccentricity is a design input.
OK
Distance to Extreme Fiber

OK The distance to the extreme fiber is one-half the overall
thickness for a SIPs with symmetric facings
OK
Crushing-Buckling Interaction Factor

OK The crushing-buckling interaction factor is determined using

Calibration Factor
OK The calibration factor is a design input and must be provided
by the SIP manufacturer.
Buckling Stress-to-Crushing Stress Ratio
OK The buckling stress-to-crushing stress ratio is determined
using Specification Equation 6.3.1-3.
OK The eccentricity factor was previously calculated.
Elastic Buckling Stress

OK The elastic buckling stress is determined using Specification
Equation 6.3.1-5.
Elastic Buckling Stress without Shear Stiffness

OK The elastic buckling stress without considering shear
stiffness is determined using Specification Equation 6.3.1-6.
Minimum Flexural Stiffness

OK Where minimum elastic and shear moduli are not provided
OK by the SIP manufacturer, the values may be estimated using
OK Commentary Equation C6.3.1-2 and Equation C6.3.1-3. The
OK 10% coefficient of variation (COV) is based on the
assumption that the SIP is manufactured under a monitored
OK quality control program. The bending and shear moduli, E &
G are design inputs.
OK
OK
OK
Shear Area
only the core resists shear stress. This assumptions, and the
OK related equations are provided Commentary Section C5.3.
OK The shear area is determined on a one-foot-wide section.
OK The core thickness, c , was previously determined and the
overall thickness, t , is a design input.
OK The buckling length coefficient, k , is from Specification

Table 6.2-1. Pinned-pinned supports are assumed.
OK The design span is a design input established in accordance

with Specification Section 6.2.
OK The radius of gyration was previously calculated.
OK
OK
Time-Effect Factor
OK The time-effect factor was previously established.

Compressive Strength
OK
OK
Overall Result:
OK
OK The reduction factor,  , is from Specification Table 6.3-1 for

the ADT method,
The specified SIP panel can resist a maximum compressive force of 2025 lbf/ft considering a loading condition were normal duration
loads govern. Since dead loads generally apply, the ratio of the dead load to live load is limited based on the time-effect factors
applicable to each load case, as shown below.
Consider the following two load cases.

Dead Load + Live Load Case: Dead Load Only Case:
OK OK
OK OK
If the maximum axial load is substituted for P n , the following inequalities result:
Dead Load + Live Load Case: Dead Load Only Case:
OK OK
As shown above, the dead load cannot exceed one-half the total applied load.

DESIGN EXAMPLE 5: WALL PANEL UNDER COMBINED AXIAL AND TRANSVERSE LOAD
having a 120-in. span, end supported, panel subjected to the combination of transverse and axial load below. The ADT design
method is used to consider applicable strength limits and a deflection limit of L/180. The axial loads are applied through a side-hung
joist hanger resulting in a design eccentricity equal to one-half the panel thickness.
Design Inputs:
Facing Compressive Strength, F c = 345 psi
SIP Geometry: SIP Bending Modulus, E = 560000 psi
Overall Thickness, t = 6.50 in. SIP Shear Modulus, G = 350 psi
Facing Thickness, t f = 0.4375 in. Core Shear Strength, F v = 3.0 psi
Shear Reference Depth, t o = 4.50 in.
Crushing-Buckling Interaction Factor, c = 0.70
Loading Conditions:
Transverse Wind Loads:
W C&C = 20.0 psf (absolute maximum ASD C&C pressure)
W MWFR S = 15.0 psf (absolute maximum ASD MWFRS pressure)
Axial Loads:
Dead Load, P DL = 225 plf Wind Downward Load, W DN = 250 plf (ASD MWFRS force)
Live Load, P LL = 1200 plf Wind Uplift Load, W UP = -700 plf (ASD MWFRS force)
Roof Live, P RL = 400 plf Design Eccentricity, e d = 3.25 in.
Snow Load, P S = 400 plf

Design Procedure:
Assessment of the SIP under combined loads must consider the following limit states:
2. Tensile Strength
7. Combined Loads
Uniaxial loading is considered first. As required in Specification Section 6.1, the applied loads must not exceed the capacity
established by the compression limit state, as provided in Section 6.3.

Time-Effect Factor
Load Eccentricity Factor

Equation 6.3.1-4.
Radius of Gyration
wide section.
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
Load Eccentricity
OK As stated in Specification Section 6.3.1, the load eccentricity
OK shall not be taken as less than the design eccentricity or 1/6
the panel thickness.

OK

thickness for a SIPs with symmetric facings.
OK

Calibration Factor

Equation 6.3.1-5.

OK The elastic buckling stress without consideration of shear
Minimum Flexural and Shear Moduli

Minimum Bending Modulus Where minimum elastic and shear moduli are not provided
OK assumption that the SIP is manufactured under a monitored
quality control program. The bending and shear moduli, E &
Minimum Shear Modulus G are design inputs.
OK
OK
OK
OK
Shear Area




OK
OK

OK
OK
OK
Required Axial Strength

Axial Time-Effect Normalized Pursuant to Specification Section 1.2.3, the load
Load Case (plf)  t  c (plf) building code. To determine the governing load, the loads
1. D 225 0.5 450 are normalized by dividing the load for each load
3a. D +L r 625 1.0 625 combination by the corresponding time-effect factor. The
3b. D +S 625 1.0 625 absolute value of the resulting value is taken to facilitate
5a. D +0.6W P 375 1.0 375 comparison of the values. The maximum normalized load
6aa. D +0.75x0.6W P +0.75L r 638 1.0 638 governs the design. C&C Wind pressures are considered
6ab. D +0.75x0.6W P +0.75S 638 1.0 638
Maximum, P = 638 plf


the ADT method,

OK
OK therefore, OK
2. Tensile Strength (Specification Section 7.1)

As required in Specification Section 7.1, the applied loads must not exceed the capacity established by the facing tensile limit state,
as provided in Section 7.2.
OK Specificaion Equation 7.2-1.
Time-Effect Factor
factor is from Specification Table 7.2-2 is 1.0.

Net Area of Facing

OK If the uplift load path utilizes only a single facing, such as
where straps are applied to the exterior of the wall only, the
net area must be adjusted to reflect only the area of facing
resisting the tensile force. In this case, it is assumed that
only exterior facing is effective.
OK
Required Tensile Strength

Load Case (plf)  t  c (plf) building code. Not all possible load cases are shown; the
7a. 0.6D+0.6W N -285 1.00 285 designer is responsible for selecting the proper load cases.
Maximum, T = 285 plf

OK The SIP element must satisfy Equation 3.2.3-1 for the ADT
design method.

the ADT method

OK
OK therefore, OK


Time-Effect Factor
Section Modulus
and the related equations are provided in Commentary
foot-wide section.
OK The moment of inertia was determined in Part 1.

OK

OK

Time-Effect Factor
Section Modulus
OK The section modulus for compressive stress equals the
section modulus for tensile stress.
OK


OK The design span is determined in accordance with

Specification Section 4.1.2, which requires the design span
for end supported panels to be taken as the overall length of
the panel.
OK

design method.
OK The reduction factor,  , is from Specification Table 4.1.4-1

for the ADT method.

OK
OK therefore, OK


Section 5.3.
Time-Effect Factor
Table 5.3-2.
Depth Factor
OK The overall thickness, shear reference depth, and the shear

OK
OK
Shear Area
OK The shear area was determined in Part 1.
Core Shear Strength

OK

OK The design span is determined from Section 5.2. Because it

is end supported, the design span for shear is the overall
length of the panel.
OK

design method.
OK For the ADT method, the reduction factor,  , is from


OK
OK therefore, OK




Plate equivalent specific gravity, SG, of 0.42

Design Specification for Wood Construction (NDS).
OK design inputs.
OK


geometry.

OK
OK
OK

is determined. The fastener strength is an ASD capacity
OK which may be combined with the ADT shear strength of the
SIP.



value for R n / will be used which includes both factors of
safety.

OK
OK therefore, OK


Time-Effect Factor
Table 4.2.2-1.
Bending Modulus
OK The bending modulus is a design input.
OK

Time-Effect Factor
Table 4.2.3-1.
Shear Modulus
OK
OK



deflection.
OK The inequality is rewritten to express the design deflection

OK
OK therefore, OK
7. Combined Loads (Specification Section 9.1)

As required in Specification Section 9.1, the applied loads must conform to the combined load limit states, as provided in Section
9.2.1 and Section 9.3.1.

OK MWFRS wind loads, rather than C&C loads, apply when
elements provide support and stability for the overall
structure and receive wind loads from more than once
surface, as defined in ASCE 7-10 , Section 26.2.
OK The design span is a design input.

OK
Combined Tension and Moment

OK The transverse wind load creates a bending moment
creating a tensile and compressive force in the facings. The
interaction of the tensile force is verified using Specification
Equation 9.2.1-1. The in-plane shear component of the
equation is omitted because no in-plane shear is applied.
OK The applied tensile force and the allowable tensile strength

OK were determined in Part 2.
OK
OK The applied moment and the allowable flexural strength were

OK determined in Part 3.
OK
OK
OK
OK therefore, OK

Combined Compression and Moment

OK The interaction of the compressive force created by the
transverse wind load is verified using Specification Equation
9.3.1-1. The in-plane shear component of the equation is
omitted because no in-plane shear is applied.
OK The applied compression force and the allowable

OK compression strength were determined in Part 1.
OK

OK
OK
OK
OK therefore, OK
Overall Result
Compressive Strength 0.51 produce an applied-to-permissible ratio of 1.0 or less.
Tensile Strength 0.11
Shear Strength 0.66
Deflection 0.21
Combined Tensile/Moment 0.26
Combined Comp./Moment 0.73

DESIGN EXAMPLE 6: WALL PANEL SUBJECT TO RACKING LOADS
Considering the SIP shearwall configuration and properties listed blow, verify the adequacy of a 6.5-in. thick (overall) SIP panel
shear wall that is 144-in. tall and 48-in. wide, subjected to the wind and seismic forces below. The ASD design method is used to
consider applicable strength and drift limits.
Design Inputs:
SIP Configuration: Racking Strength: (ASD Basis)
Wall Height, h = 144.0 in. Nominal Unit Shear Strength, v s = 1000 plf
Wall Width, b = 48.0 in. Shear Stiffness, G a = 31 kips/in.
Framing Specific Gravity, SG = 0.42
Loading Conditions:
Wind, V W = 700 lbf (ASD MWFRS force)
Seismic, V E = 400 lbf (ASD force)
Design Procedure:
Assessment of the SIP under racking loads must consider the following limit states:
1. Racking Strength
2. Shear Wall Deflection

1. Racking Strength (Specification Section 8.5)
As required in Specification Section 8.5.1, the applied racking loads must not exceed the racking capacity established by the
racking limit state, as provided in Section 8.5.2. The ASD method is used to establish the racking capacity of the panel.
Time-Effect Factor
OK Wind and seismic racking loads are considered short
duration loads, the time-effect factor from Specification
Table 8.5.2-2 is 1.0.
Connection Correction Factor
OK The connection correction factor is determined in
accordance with Specification Section 8.5.5, Equation 8.5.5-
3, assuming a Type S spline connection.
OK Specification Equation 8.5.5.-4
OK The framing specific gravity is a design input.
OK
OK
OK Assuming 0.113" x 2.5" nails are used in the construction,

the connection strength factor for a Type S connection is
OK 0.76.
Aspect Ratio Factor

OK The aspect ratio factor is determined in accordance with
OK Specification Section 8.5.6. The limits and values for the
factor differ for wind and seismic loading conditions. The
factors for each load type are determined. The MIN ()
OK function limits the seismic adjustment factor to less than 1.0
OK in accordance with Specification Table 8.5.6-1.
Perforation Factor
OK A segmented shear wall approach is used, as a result, the
perforated shear wall factor is 1.0, in accordance with
Specification Section 8.5.7.1.
Unit Shear Strength
OK Unit shear strengths are taken from Specification Table
OK 8.5.4-1 for the construction considered. In this case,
0.113"x2.5" nails, at 6" on-center is assumed.
Racking Strength
Wind Racking Strength Because the Aspect-Ratio Factor differs for wind and
OK seismic, the nominal strength for wind and seismic are
determined separately. The unit shear strength is divided by
12 to convert from pounds-per-linear-inch to pounds-per-
OK
linear-foot.
Seismic Racking Strength

OK
OK


Wind Resistance
for the ASD design method. Because the strengths and
reduction factors differ, wind and seismic forces must be
compared separately.
OK The ASD reduction factor for wind forces is from


OK
OK therefore, OK
Seismic Resistance
OK The comparison is repeated using the applied siesmic force
and seismic resistance.
OK The ASD reduction factor for seismic forces is from


OK
OK therefore, OK
2. Shear Wall Deflection (Specification Section 8.5.3)

Specification Section 8.5.3 provides an estimate of shear wall deflection (story drift). The limits on story drift are from ASCE 7-10 ,
Section 12.12, and may not be appropriate for all situations. The designer is responsible for assessing appropriate deflection limits.
OK Shear wall deflection is estimated using Specification

Equation 8.5.3-1.
Unit Shear Force

OK The equation input shear force is on a per-foot basis.
Chord Properties
OK The chords at each end of the shear wall are assumed to be
OK (2) 2x4 SPF No. 2. The elastic modulus and cross-section
area are obtained from the NDS Supplement .
Anchor Elongation
OK Typical shearwall holdowns are limited to 1/8" deflection
under allowable loads. This upper limit is used in this
calculation; however, the actual holdown deflection should
be obtained from the holdown manufacturer's literature.
Deflection Estimate
OK
OK Because the input applied unit shear is an ASD-level force

the resulting deflection is an ASD-level deflection and must
be increased to correspond to a strength-level deflection.

Inelastic Deflection Estimate

OK The inelastic deflection is estimated using ASCE 7-10 ,
Equation 12.8-15. The importance factor, from ASCE 7-10 ,
assumes Building Risk Category I (I e = 1.00). The
Deflection amplification factor, C d , is taken from
Specification Table 8.6.1-2, based on the construction and
detailing of the wall. In this example, the wall construction
and detailing satisfies Case 2 in Specification Table 8.6.1-2.
Allowable Story Drift

OK Allowable story drifts are found in ASCE 7-10 , Table 12.12-
1.
Design Requirement (ASCE 7-10, Section 12.12)
OK The ASCE 7-10 requirement is written as an inequality that
expresses the estimated drift as a fraction of the permissible
OK drift.
OK
OK therefore, OK
Overall Result The design is adequate as long as all design checks

Limit State Ratio produce an applied-to-permissible ratio of 1.0 or less. This
Racking Strength, Wind 0.48 example does not include the design of the chords or
Racking Strength, Seismic 0.59 holdowns. These elements must be considered in a
Racking Drift, Seismic 0.34 complete shear wall design.

DESIGN EXAMPLE 7: WALL PANEL UNDER COMBINED AXIAL, TRANSVERSE, AND RACKING LOAD
having a 120-in. span, end supported, wall panel subjected to the simultaneously applied loads specified below. The ADT design
method is used to consider applicable strength limits and a deflection limit of L/180.
Design Inputs:
Wall Configuration: SIP Material Properties: (ADT Basis)
Wall Height, h = 120 in. Facing Tensile Strength, F t = 495 psi
Wall Width, b = 48 in. Facing Compressive Strength, F c = 345 psi
Framing Specific Gravity, SG = 0.42 SIP Bending Modulus, E = 560000 psi
SIP Shear Modulus, G = 350 psi
SIP Geometry: Core Shear Strength, F v = 3.0 psi
Overall Thickness, t = 6.50 in. Shear Reference Depth, t o = 4.50 in.
Facing Thickness, t f = 0.4375 in. Shear Depth Exponent, m = 1.00
Crushing-Buckling Interaction Factor, c = 0.70
Racking Strength: (ASD Basis)
Nominal Unit Shear Strength, v s = 1000 plf
Shear Stiffness, G a = 31 kips/in.

Loading Conditions:
Transverse Wind Loads:
W C&C = 20.0 psf (absolute maximum ASD C&C pressure)
W MWFR S = 15.0 psf (absolute maximum ASD MWFRS pressure)
Axial Loads:
Dead Load, P DL = 225 plf Wind Downward Load, W DN = 100 psf (ASD MWFRS force)
Live Load, P LL = 900 plf Wind Uplift Load, W UP = -600 psf (ASD MWFRS force)
Roof Live, P RL = 200 plf Design Eccentricity, e d = 0.00 in.
Snow Load, P S = 200 plf
Racking Loads:
Wind, V W = 700 lbf (ASD MWFRS force)
Seismic, V E = 400 lbf (ASD MWFRS force)
Design Procedure:
Assessment of the SIP under combined loads must consider the following limit states:
1. Racking Strength
2. Shear Wall Deflection
4. Tensile Strength
9. Combined Loads
1. Racking Strength (Specification Section 8.5)
Uniaxial loading is considered first. As required in Specification Section 8.5.1, the applied racking loads must not exceed the racking
capacity established by the racking limit state, as provided in Section 8.5.2. The ASD method is used to establish the racking
capacity of the panel. While the panel properties are based on the ADT method, the ASD method is used to establish the racking
capacity of the panel.
Time-Effect Factor
OK Wind and seismic racking loads are considered. These loads
are short duration; therefore, the time-effect factor is 1.0,
from Specification Table 8.5.2-2.
Connection Factor
OK The connection correction factor is determined in
accordance with Specification Section 8.5.5, Equation 8.5.5-
3, assuming a Type S spline connection.
OK The framing specific gravity is a design input.
OK
OK
OK Assuming 0.113" x 2.5" nails are used in the construction,

the connection strength factor for a Type S connection is
OK 0.76.

Aspect Ratio Factor

OK The aspect ratio factor is determined in accordance with
OK Specification Section 8.5.6. The limits and values for the
factor differs for wind and seismic loading conditions. The
OK factors for each type of load is determined.
OK
Perforation Factor
OK A segmented shear wall approach is used, as a result, the
perforated shear wall factor is 1.0, in accordance with
Specification Section 8.5.7.1.
Unit Shear Strength
Racking Strength
Wind Racking Strength Because the Aspect-Ratio Factor differs for wind and
OK seismic, the nominal strength for wind and seismic are
determined separately. The unit shear strength is divided by
OK 12 to convert from pounds-per-linear-inch to pounds-per-
linear-foot.
Seismic Racking Strength

OK
OK

Wind Resistance The SIP element must satisfy Specification Equation 3.2.2-1
OK for the ASD design method. Because the strengths and
OK The ASD factor of safety for wind is from Specification Table

8.5.2-1.

OK
OK therefore, OK
Seismic Resistance
OK
OK The ASD factor of safety for seismic is from Specification

Table 8.5.2-1.

OK
OK therefore, OK

2. Shear Wall Deflection (Specification Section 8.5.3)

Specification Section 8.5.3 provides an estimate of shear wall deflection (story drift). The limits on story drift are from ASCE 7-10 ,
Section 12.12, and may not be appropriate for all situations. The designer is responsible for assessing appropriate deflection limits.
OK Shear wall deflection is estimated using Specification

Equation 8.5.3-1.
Unit Shear Force

Chord Properties
OK The chords at each end of the shear wall are assumed to be
OK (2) 2x4 SPF No. 2. The elastic modulus and cross-section
Anchor Elongation
OK Typical shear wall holdowns are limited to 1/8" deflection
under allowable loads. This upper limit is used in this
calculation; however, the actual holdown deflection should
be obtained from the holdown manufacturer's literature.
Deflection Estimate
OK

Inelastic Deflection Estimate
OK The inelastic deflection is estimated using ASCE 7-10 ,
Equation 12.8-15. The importance factor, from ASCE 7-10 ,
assumes Building Risk Category I (I e = 1.00). The
Deflection amplification factor, C d , is taken from
Specification Table 8.6.1-2, based on the construction and
detailing of the wall. In this example, the wall construction
and detailing satisfies Case 2 in Table 8.6.1-2.
Allowable Story Drift
OK Allowable story drifts are found in ASCE 7-10 , Table 12.12-
1.
Design Requirement (ASCE 7-10, Section 12.12)
OK The ASCE 7-10 requirement is written as an inequality that
OK expresses the estimated drift as a fraction of the permissible
drift.
OK
OK therefore, OK

As required in Specification Section 6.1, the applied loads must not exceed the capacity established by the compression limit state,


Time-Effect Factor
Eccentricity Factor
Equation 6.3.1-4.
Radius of Gyration
that only the facings resist flexural stress. This assumption,
OK and the related equations, are provided in Commentary
foot-wide section.
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
Load Eccentricity
shall not be taken as less than the design eccentricity or 1/6
OK

thickness for SIPs with symmetric facings.
OK

Specification Equation 6.3.1-1. The calibration factor, c ,
must be provided by the SIP manufacturer.
Calibration Factor




Flexural Modulus
Commentary Equation C6.3.1-2 and Equation C6.3.1-3. The
OK
10% coefficient of variation (COV) is based on the
Shear Modulus G are design inputs.
OK
OK
OK
OK
Shear Area


OK
OK

OK
OK
OK

Required Axial Strength

Load Case (plf)  t  c (plf) building code. To determine the governing load, the loads
1. D 225 0.5 450 are normalized by dividing the load for each load
3a. D +L r 425 1.0 425 combination by the corresponding time-effect factor. The
3b. D +S 425 1.0 425 absolute value of the resulting value is taken to facilitate
5a. D +0.6W P 285 1.0 285 comparison of the values. The maximum normalized load
6aa. D +0.75xW P +0.75L r 450 1.0 450 governs the design. C&C Wind pressures are considered
6ab. D +0.75xW P +0.75S 450 1.0 450
Maximum, P = 450 plf


the ADT method,

OK
OK therefore, OK
4 .Tensile Strength (Specification Section 7.1)

As required in Specification Section 7.1, the applied loads must not exceed the capacity established by the facing tensile limit state,
Time-Effect Factor
Net Area of Facing
OK If the uplift load path utilizes only a single facing, such as
where straps are applied to the exterior of the wall only, the
net area must be adjusted to reflect only the area of facing
resisting the tensile force. In this case, it is assumed that
only exterior facing is effective.
OK
Required Tensile Strength

Load Factor Load combinations are taken from ASCE 7-10 . Only one load
Load Case (plf)  t  c (plf) case results in tensile loads in the panel.
7a. 0.6D+W N -465 1.00 465
Maximum, T = 465 plf




OK
OK therefore, OK


Time-Effect Factor
Section Modulus
foot-wide section.
OK The moment of inertia was determined in Part 1.
OK

OK

Time-Effect Factor
Section Modulus
OK The section modulus for compressive stress equals the
section modulus for tensile stress.


OK


OK The design span is determined in accordance with

Specification Section 4.1.2, which requires the design span
for end supported panels to be taken as the overall length of
the panel.
OK



OK
OK therefore, OK

Section 5.3.
Time-Effect Factor
Table 5.3-2.
Depth Factor
OK The overall thickness, shear reference depth, and the shear

OK
OK
Shear Area
OK The shear area was determined in Part 3.

Core Shear Strength

OK

OK The design span is determined from Section 5.2. Because it

is end supported, the design span for shear is the overall
length of the panel.
OK


the ADT method.

OK
OK therefore, OK



Plate equivalent specific gravity, SG, of 0.42

Design Specification for Wood Construction (NDS).

OK design inputs.
OK


geometry.

OK
OK
OK

is determined.
OK


value for R n / will be used which includes both factors of
safety.

OK
OK therefore, OK



Time-Effect Factor
Table 4.2.2-1.
Bending Modulus
OK The bending modulus is a design input.
OK

Time-Effect Factor
Table 4.2.3-1.
Shear Modulus
OK
OK

deflection.
OK The inequality is rewritten to express the design deflection

OK
OK therefore, OK

9. Combined Loads (Specification Section 9.1)

As required in Specification Section 9.1, the applied loads must conform to the combined load limit states, as provided in Section
9.2.1 and Section 9.3.1.

OK MWFRS wind loads, rather than C&C loads, apply when
elements provide support and stability for the overall
structure and receive wind loads from more than once
surface, as defined in ASCE 7-10 , Section 26.2.
OK The design span is a design input.
OK
Combined Tension, Moment, and Racking

OK Specification Equation 9.2.1-1, except that the last term is
taken from Specification Equation 9.2.2-1 and corresponds
to the maximum ratio considering wind and seismic loads.
OK The applied tensile force and the allowable tensile strength

OK

OK
Wind
OK The applied racking force and the allowable racking strength
OK
Seismic
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK therefore, OK

Combined Compression, Moment, and Racking

OK Specification Equation 9.3.1-1, except that the last term is
taken from Equation 9.3.2-1 and corresponds to the
maximum ratio considering wind and seismic loads.
OK The applied compression force and the allowable

OK compressive strength were determined in Part 3.
OK

OK
Wind
OK The applied racking force and the allowable racking strength
OK
Seismic
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK therefore, OK
Overall Result
Racking Strength, Wind 0.48 produce a applied-to-permissible ratio of 1.0 or less. This
Racking Strength, Seismic 0.49 example does not include the design of the chords or
Racking Drift, Seismic 0.33 holdowns. These elements must be considered in a
Compressive Strength 0.20 complete shear wall design.
Tensile Strength 0.18
Shear Strength 0.66
Deflection 0.21
Combined Tensile/Moment/Racking 0.83
Combined Compression/Moment/Racking 0.92

DESIGN EXAMPLE 8: ROOF DIAPHRAGM DESIGN
Considering the SIP diaphragm configuration and properties listed blow, verify the adequacy of a SIP panel diaphragm that is 720-
in. long and 240-in. wide, subjected to the wind and seismic forces below. The ASD design method is used to consider applicable
strength limits and assess whether the diagram is rigid or flexible.
Design Inputs:
SIP Configuration: Diaphragm Strength: (ASD Basis)
Diaphragm Length, L = 720 in. Nominal Unit Shear Strength, v d = 800 plf
Diaphragm Width, W = 240 in. Shear Stiffness, G a = 13 kips/in.
Loading Conditions:
Wind, v W = 200 plf (ASD MWFRS force)
Seismic, v E = 175 plf (ASD MWFRS force)
Design Procedure:
Assessment of the SIP diaphragm must consider the following limit states:
1. Diaphragm Strength
2. Diaphragm Deflection
1. Diaphragm Strength (Specification Section 8.4.2)
As required in Specification Section 8.4.1, the applied diaphragm loads must not exceed the capacity established by the diaphragm
strength limit state, as provided in Section 8.4.2. The ASD method is used to establish the strength of the diaphragm.
Time-Effect Factor
OK Wind and seismic racking loads are considered short
duration loads, the time-effect factor from Specification
Table 8.4.2-2 is 1.0.
Unit Shear Strength

Diaphragm Strength
OK Reduction factors for ASD design are provided in
OK
Required Diaphragm Strength

Wind Load
OK Using engineering mechanics the required strength equals
the applied diaphragm load multiplied by one-half the
diaphragm length. The distance units (ft vs. in.) must be
converted.
OK The applied diaphragm load is a design input.
OK The diaphragm length is a design input.
OK
Seismic Load
OK The same equation is used to determine the seismic load.
OK The applied diaphragm load is a design input.
OK The diaphragm length is a design input.
OK

Wind Resistance
for the ASD design method. Because the strengths and


OK
OK therefore, OK
Seismic Resistance
OK The comparison is repeated using the applied seismic force
and seismic resistance.



OK
OK therefore, OK
2. Diaphragm Deflection (Specification Section 8.4.3)

The story drift limitations of ASCE 7-10 , Section 12.12, are not intended to apply to diaphragm deflections, but instead are intended
to apply to the acting lateral-resisting wall or frame systems. These limits may conservatively be applied to diaphragms; however,
the permissible deflection of diaphragms is left up to the engineer's own judgement pursuant to ASCE 7-10 , Section 12.12.2. One
reason for assessing diaphragm deflections is to classify the diaphragm as flexible or rigid in accordance with ASCE 7-10 , Section
12.3 This classification influences the manner in which the applied lateral forces are distributed to the vertical lateral force resisting
elements.
OK Diaphragm deflection is estimated using Specification

Equation 8.4.3-1.
Unit Shear Force

Diaphragm Dimensions
OK The diaphragm length and width are design inputs. These
OK values must be converted from inches to feet for use in the
deflection equation.
Chord Properties
OK The chords around the diaphragm boundary are assumed to
OK be 2x6 SPF No. 2. The elastic modulus and cross-section
Diaphragm Stiffness
OK The diaphragm stiffness is a design input.
Chord Splice Elongation

OK Typical straight straps are limited to 1/8" deflection under
allowable loads. This limit is conservatively assumed in this
Splice Support calculation; however, the actual system deflection should be
Location Distance determined, when known.
xo x x  c /2W
(in.) (in.) (in.) Assuming the chord members are available in 16-ft lengths
192 192 0.050 and inserted starting at one end, the splice locations along
384 336 0.088 the length of the diaphragm may be estimated and the
576 144 0.038 cumulative deflection may be estimated.
 = 0.175
Deflection Estimate
OK


Deflection Comparison
OK The diaphragm rigidity classification requires comparison to
the story drift in the vertical lateral force resisting elements.
OK Rigid Diaphragm Criterion For this example, the story drift from Example 7 is used. The
evaluation criterion is from ASCE 7-10 , Section 12.3.1.1.
OK therefore, Rigid
It must be noted that in many SIP structures, such as one- and two-family dwellings, the flexible diaphragm assumption may be
applied in all cases without regard for the comparison provided above. This exception, and others, to performing a rigid diaphragm
analysis are provided in ASCE 7-10 , Section 12.3.1.1.
Overall Result
Diaphragm Strength, Wind 0.79 produce an applied-to-permissible ratio of 1.0 or less. This
Diaphragm Strength, Seismic 0.98 example does not include the design of the chords or chord
Overall Design (Maximum) 0.98 splices. These elements must be considered in a complete
therefore, OK diaphragm design.

DESIGN EXAMPLE 9A: REINFORCED ROOF PANEL UNDER TRANSVERSE LOAD (I-JOIST)
Considering the reinforced SIP section properties and material properties listed below, verify the adequacy of a 12.25-in. thick
(overall) SIP panel having a 144-in. span. The SIP is reinforced with a wood I-joist spline having the properties listed below. The
ADT design method is used to consider applicable strength limits, a live load deflection limit of L/240, and a total load deflection limit
of L/180.
Design Inputs:
Support Spacing, L = 144.0 in. SAB WAB
Bearing Length, l b = 1.5 in. Facing Tensile Strength, F t = 495 240 psi
Facing Compressive Strength, F c = 345 300 psi
SIP Geometry: SIP Bending Modulus, E = 560000 460000 psi
Overall Thickness, t = 12.25 in. SIP Shear Modulus, G = 350 300 psi
Facing Thickness, t f = 0.4375 in. Core Shear Strength, F v = 3.00 2.75 psi
Shear Reference Depth, t o = 4.50 4.50 in.
Shear Depth Exponent, m = 1.00 1.00
Core Compressive Strength, F cc = 14.0 14.0 psi
Core Compression Modulus, E c = 360 360 psi
2
Facing Bending Stiffness, E f I f = 78000 16000 lbf-in.
Reinforcement Properties: (from I-Joist Manufacturer's Literature)

Reference design values for prefabricated wood I-joists shall be obtained from the prefabricated wood I-joist manufacturer's
literature or code evaluation reports.
2
Bending Stiffness, EI = 340000 kip-in. Bending Strength, M r = 52800 lbf-in.
Shear Constant, Kd , K = 5120 kip Shear Strength, V r = 1200 lbf
Spacing, s = 48 in. oc Bearing Strength, R r = 1200 lbf
QTY at Spacing, n = 1
Loading Conditions:
Dead Load, D = 10 psf
Roof Live Load, L r = 20 psf
Snow Load, S = 30 psf
Deflection Limit, L/ 240 (live load only)
Deflection Limit, L/ 180 (total load)

Design Procedure:
Assessment of the SIP under combined loads is broken down into four distinct calculations:
A. Proportion Applied Loads between SIP Element and Reinforcement Elements
A1. Time-Dependent Stiffness of SIP
A2. Time-Dependent Stiffness of Reinforcement
A3. Load-Distribution in Composite Assembly
B. SIP Panel Element Strength (Strong-Axis)
B1. Flexural Strength
B2. Core Shear Strength
B3. Core Compression Strength
B4. Flexural (Transverse) Deflection
B5. Local Deformation
C. SIP Panel Element Strength (Weak-Axis)
C1. Flexural Strength
C2. Core Shear Strength
C3. Connection Strength
C4. Flexural (Transverse) Deflection
D. Reinforcing Element Strength
D1. Flexural Strength
D2. Web Shear Strength
D3. Bearing Strength
D4. Flexural (Transverse) Deflection
A. Design Calculations:
Simplified Panel Load Distribution (Specification Section 12.3.1)
Specification Section 12.3.1 provides a simplified analysis method for proportioning the load between the components in the built-up
assembly.
Load Carried by SIP Panel

Load Carried by Reinforcement


The time-dependent bending stiffness (E t I )S and shear stiffness (G t A v )S of the SIP is provided in Specification Section 4.2.2 and
Section 4.2.3, respectively. The stiffness for each duration identified in Specification Table 3.5-1 (short, normal, and permanent) is
required. Strong-axis properties are used because the load is shared between the SIP and the reinforcement about the strong-axis
of the SIP.
Short Duration Moduli

Short Duration Bending Modulus
OK The short duration time-effect factor is from Specification

Table 4.2.2-1 for EPS core SIPs.

OK
Short Duration Shear Modulus


OK
Normal Duration Moduli

Normal Duration Bending Modulus
OK The normal duration time-effect factor is from Specification

OK
Normal Duration Shear Modulus


OK
The SIP shear modulus is a design input.
OK
Permanent Duration Moduli

Permanent Duration Bending Modulus
OK The permanent duration time-effect factor is from

Specification Table 4.2.2-1 for EPS core SIPs.
OK
The SIP bending modulus is a design input.
OK
Permanent Duration Shear Modulus


OK

Section Properties
Moment of Inertia The moment of inertia is determined based on the
OK assumption that only the facings resist flexural stress. This
assumption and the related equations are provided in
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
Shear Area The shear area is determined based on the assumption that
OK only the core resists shear stress. This assumption, and the
OK The core thickness was previously determined.
OK
Short Duration Stiffness Because the stiffnesses of the components vary with the
OK duration of the applied loads, the proportion of the load
carried by each element must be evaluated for each load
OK
case considering the appropriate stiffness adjustments.
Normal Duration Stiffness

OK
OK
Permanent Duration Stiffness

OK
OK

The time-dependent bending stiffness (EI' )R and shear stiffness ( GA )R of the reinforcement is determined using the
manufacturer's literature or evaluation report and the 2015 National Design Specification for Wood Construction (NDS ). The
stiffness for each duration identified in Specification Table 3.5-1 (short, normal, and permanent) is required.
Adjusted Design Bending Stiffness

OK From NDS Table 7.3.1.
OK Wet Service Factor from NDS Section 7.3.3, dry conditions

assumed.

OK Temperature Factor from NDS Section 7.3.4, dry conditions

with temperatures of 100-degrees F, or less.
OK
Adjusted Design Shear Stiffness


assumed.

OK
Short & Normal Duration Stiffness

The NDS does not provide expressions for the long-term stiffness of wood I-joists; however, it does provided creep factors in NDS
Section 3.5.2. These factors are used to adjust the bending and shear moduli in a manner similar to the SIP panel.
Short & Normal Duration Bending Stiffness

OK Expression for wood I-joist stiffness on a one-foot-wide basis-
-same basis as SIP stiffnesses.
OK The reinforcement quantity and spacing are design inputs.

OK
OK The creep factor is from NDS Section 3.5.2 and applies to

both short and normal duration loads.
OK The adjusted bending stiffness was previously calculated.
OK
Short & Normal Duration Shear Stiffness


OK

OK The adjusted shear stiffness was previously calculated.
OK


OK

permanent duration loads.



OK

OK
A3. Load Distribution in Composite Assembly

Pursuant to Specification Section 1.2.3, the load combinations are taken from ASCE 7-10 . To determine the governing load, the
loads are normalized by dividing the load for each load combination by the corresponding time-effect factor. The absolute value of
the resulting value is taken to facilitate comparison of the values. The maximum normalized load governs the design. C&C Wind
pressures are considered only when acting alone or in conjunction with dead load only.
Total Load Carried By SIP Load Carried By Reinforcement

Case Load w Sb w Sv w Rb w Rv
Load Case Duration (psf)  (psf)  (psf)  (psf)  (psf)
1. D Permanent 10 52% 5.2 12% 1.2 48% 4.8 88% 8.8
3a. D +L r Short 30 71% 21.2 24% 7.1 29% 8.8 76% 22.9
3b. D +S Normal 40 49% 19.6 11% 4.4 51% 20.4 89% 35.6
Overall Result
Limit State Ratio Pursuant to Specification Section 12.3, once the load has
Flexural Strength 0.22 been proportioned between the elements, each element
Strong Axis
Shear Strength 0.22 shall be independently designed for its share of the load. As
SIP Panel
Core Compression Strength 0.17 described in Specification Section 12.3.3, three independent
Total Load Deflection 0.20 designs are required.
Live Load Deflection 0.22 1) SIP spanning parallel to the reinforcement.
SIP SAB Design (Maximum) 0.22 2) SIP spanning perpendicular to the reinforcement.
Flexural Strength 0.03 3) The reinforcement.
Shear Strength 0.50
Weak Axis
SIP Panel
Connection Strength 0.61 These three sub-designs are provided on the following
Total Load Deflection 0.19 pages. The results of the sub-designs are summarized to the
Live Load Deflection 0.21 left. The design is adequate as long as all design checks
SIP WAB Design (Maximum) 0.61 produce an applied-to-permissible ratio of 1.0 or less.
Reinforcement
Shear Strength 0.62 Comparing the result to Example 1, which has the same SIP
Bearing Strength 0.62 configuration and loading conditions without the
Total Load Deflection 0.20 reinforcement, the presence of the reinforcement reduces
Live Load Deflection 0.22 the stress ratio from 1.00 (maximum stress) to 0.62.
Reinforcement Design (Maximum) 0.62

DESIGN EXAMPLE 9B: REINFORCED ROOF PANEL UNDER TRANSVERSE LOAD (I-JOIST)
SIP STRONG-AXIS BENDING
Pursuant to Specification Section 12.3, once the load has been proportioned between the elements, each element shall be
independently designed for its share of the load. In this sub-design, the SIP panel is designed for its share of the load considering
the span parallel to the reinforcement, as described in Specification Section 12.3.3.
Design Inputs:
Support Configuration: SIP Material Properties: (ADT Basis, Strong-Axis)
2
Facing Bending Stiffness, E f I f = 78000 lbf-in.
Loading Conditions:
Design Procedure:
Assessment of the SIP, in the strong-axis direction, under transverse loading must consider the following limit states:
B1. Flexural Strength (Specification Section 4.1)

Time-Effect Factor
taken as 1.0, which corresponds to a "short" duration load as
defined in Specification Table 3.5-1. The loads will be

Section Modulus
foot-wide section.
OK The moment of inertia ia determined in Part A1.
OK

OK

Time-Effect Factor

Section Modulus

OK


loads are normalized by dividing the load for each load combination by the corresponding time-effect factor. Additionally, the
distribution of shear and moment differs. As a result, the governing loads producing the shear and moment must be determined
separately. The maximum normalized load governs the design.
Bending Normalized Shear Normalized

Time-Effect Total Load Bending Bending Load Shear Shear
Factor Load Share Load Load Share Load Load
Load Case  t  c (psf) % (psf) (psf) % (psf) (psf)
1. D 0.5 10 52% 5.2 10.4 12% 1.2 2.4
3a. D +L r 1.0 30 71% 21.2 21.2 24% 7.1 7.1
3b. D +S 1.0 40 49% 19.6 19.6 11% 4.4 4.4
Governing Bending Load, w Sb = 21.2 psf
Governing Shear Load, w Sv = 7.1 psf

Design Span
OK Pursuant to Specification Section 4.1.2, the design span is
from center-to-center of the supports.
OK

OK The ADT method reduction factor,  , is from Specification

Table 4.1.4-1.

OK
OK therefore, OK
B2. Core Shear Strength (Specification Section 5.3)

Section 5.3.
Time-Effect Factor
Table 5.3.-2.
Depth Factor

OK
OK
Shear Area
OK The shear area was determined in Part A1.
Core Shear Strength

OK

OK The governing shear load was determined in Part B1.

Design Span
5.2.
OK

OK The ADT reduction factor,  , is from Specification Table 6.3-

1.

OK
OK therefore, OK
B3. Core Compression Strength (Specification Section 10.4.2)

OK The strength of an unblocked bearing connection is

determined in accordance with the Specification, Section
10.4.2.1, using Equation 10.4.4.2-1.
Time-Effect Factor
OK The time-effect factor is taken from Specification Table
10.4.2-2. Because multiple load cases must be considered,
the loads will be normalized to a time-effect factor of 1.0.
Bearing Width
OK The width, b , is taken as 12-in. to provide an assessment on
a per foot basis.
OK The core compressive strength is a design input.
Bearing Length
OK The bearing length is a design input.
Angle of Dispersion
OK From Specification Section 10.4.2.1, the angle of dispersion,
k , may be taken as zero if unknown.
OK The core thickness was previously calculated in Step A1.
OK

Required Compression Strength

OK The bearing force is determined using engineering
mechanics.
OK The governing shear load was determined in Part B1.
OK The reaction force is based on the full loaded length of the

SIP.
OK


10.4.2-1.

OK
OK therefore, OK
B4. Flexural (Transverse) Deflection (Specification Section 4.3)


OK The deflection of each component is determined using


OK OK
where

Substituting the moduli for each duration yields the stiffness for each duration in Specification Table 4.2.2-1 and Table 4.2.3-1;
short, normal, and permanent load durations.
Short Duration
OK Short duration bending and shear moduli were determined in
OK Part A1.
OK
OK

Normal Duration
OK Normal duration bending and shear moduli were determined
OK in Part A1.
OK
OK
Permanent Duration
OK Permanent duration bending and shear moduli were
OK determined in Part A1.
OK
OK
Multiplying each component load by the stiffness of the corresponding duration yields the deflection of each load. Because the shear
and moment distributions differ, the shear and moment must be determined separately for each load.
Bending Shear
Uniform Load Deflection Load Deflection
Load Share Stiffness b Share Stiffness v
Load Duration (psf) % kb (in.) % kv (in.)
D Permanent 10 52% 0.0910 0.039 12% 0.1741 0.018
Lr Short 20 71% 0.0273 0.032 24% 0.0522 0.021
S Normal 30 49% 0.0682 0.084 11% 0.1306 0.036
T  TLL load cases required by the adopted building code. Because
Load Case (in.) (in.) the adopted code provides separate criteria for total load
1. D 0.057 -- deflection and live load deflections, the deflection for each
3a. D +L r 0.110 0.053 combination is tabulated without considering dead load.
3b. D +S 0.177 0.120
Maximum  TL = 0.177 in.
Maximum  LL = 0.120 in.

OK


OK
OK therefore, OK


total load deflection.

OK
OK therefore, OK
B5. Local Deformation (Specification Section 10.4.3)
As required in Specification Section 10.4.3, the local deflection at the panel ends may be estimated as provided in Section 10.4.3.1.
OK The local deflection at the ends of the panel is determined in

accordance with Specification Section 10.4.3.1, using
OK The reaction force, R , was previously calculated in Part B3.
OK The facing bending stiffness is a design input.
OK The relative stiffness parameter,  , is determined using

OK Local deflections at joints are not explicitly limited by code

and consideration of such deflections is at the discretion of
the designer.
Overall Result
Limit State Ratio The sub-design is adequate as long as all design checks
Flexural Strength 0.22 produce an applied-to-permissible ratio of 1.0 or less. Local
Shear Strength 0.22 deflection is reported for consideration at the discretion of
Core Compression Strength 0.17 the designer.
Local Deformation cc = 0.021 in.

DESIGN EXAMPLE 9C: REINFORCED ROOF PANEL UNDER TRANSVERSE LOAD (I-JOIST)
SIP WEAK-AXIS BENDING
independently designed for its share of the load. In this sub-design, the SIP panel is designed for its share of the load considering
the span perpendicular to the reinforcement, as described in Specification Section 12.3.3.
Design Inputs:
Support Configuration: SIP Material Properties: (ADT Basis, Weak-Axis)
Overall Thickness, t = 12.3 in. SIP Shear Strength, F v = 2.75 psi
Facing Bending Stiffness, E f I f = 16000 lbf-in.2
Loading Conditions:
Design Procedure:
Assessment of the SIP, in the weak-axis direction, under transverse loading must consider the following limit states:
C1. Flexural Strength (Specification Section 4.1)

Time-Effect Factor
taken as 1.0, which corresponds to a "short" duration load
as defined in Specification Table 3.5-1. The loads will be
Section Modulus
OK The moment of inertia ia determined in Part B1.


OK

Time-Effect Factor

Section Modulus

OK


separately. The maximum normalized load governs the design.

1. D 0.5 10 48% 4.8 9.6 88% 8.8 17.6
3a. D +L r 1.0 30 29% 8.8 8.8 76% 22.9 22.9
3b. D +S 1.0 40 51% 20.4 20.4 89% 35.6 35.6
Governing Bending Load, w Rb = 20.4 psf
Governing Shear Load, w Rv = 35.6 psf
Design Span
OK Pursuant to Specification Section 4.1.2, the design span is
from center-to-center of the supports.
OK

OK The ADT method reduction factor,  , is from Specification

Table 4.1.4-1.


OK
OK therefore, OK
C2. Core Shear Strength (Specification Section 5.3)

As required in Specification Section 5.1, the applied shear load must not exceed the limit state of core shear strength, as provided
in Section 5.3.
Time-Effect Factor
Table 5.3.-2.
Depth Factor

OK
Shear Area
OK The shear area was determined in Part A1.
Core Shear Strength

OK

OK The governing shear load was determined in Part C1.
Design Span
5.2.
OK


6.3-1.

OK
OK therefore, OK

C3. Connection Strength (Specification Section 10.4.4)


OK Specification Section 10.4.4 provides a default value for

Cp.


Plate equivalent specific gravity, SG , of 0.42

Design Specification for Wood Construction (NDS ).
OK design inputs.
OK


geometry.

OK
OK
OK

is determined.
OK



design method.

Specification and the other is from the NDS . As a result,
the value for R n / will be used which includes both factors
of safety.

OK
OK therefore, OK
C4. Flexural (Transverse) Deflection (Specification Section 4.3)




OK OK
where

Substituting the moduli for each duration yields the stiffness for each duration in Specification Table 4.2.2-1 and Table 4.2.3-1;
short, normal, and permanent load durations.
Short Duration
OK Short duration bending and shear moduli were determined
OK in Part A1.
OK
OK
Normal Duration
OK Normal duration bending and shear moduli were determined
OK in Part A1.
OK
OK

Permanent Duration
OK Permanent duration bending and shear moduli were
OK determined in Part A1.
OK
OK
Multiplying each component load by the stiffness of the corresponding duration yields the deflection of each load. Because the
shear and moment distributions differ, the shear and moment must be determined separately for each load.
Bending Shear
Uniform Load Deflection Load Deflection
Load Share Stiffness b Share Stiffness v
Load Duration (psf) % kb (in.) % kv (in.)
D Permanent 10 48% 0.0014 0.001 88% 0.0226 0.0165
Lr Short 20 29% 0.0004 0.000 76% 0.0068 0.0086
S Normal 30 51% 0.0010 0.001 89% 0.0169 0.0377
3b. D +S 0.056 0.039

OK Specification Section 3.3 requires the deflection of
structural members to not exceed building code limits.
These limits are expressed as a ratio of the total span.
OK


OK
OK therefore, OK
The calculated deflection must be less than the permissible
OK total load deflection.

OK
OK therefore, OK

Overall Result
Limit State Ratio The sub-design is adequate as long as all design checks
Shear Strength 0.50

DESIGN EXAMPLE 9D: REINFORCED ROOF PANEL UNDER TRANSVERSE LOAD (I-JOIST)
I-JOIST REINFORCEMENT
independently designed for its share of the load. In this sub-design, the I-joist reinforcement is designed for its share of the load
considering the span parallel to the reinforcement. The design of non-SIP elements, such as I-joists, is not addressed in the
Specification. Instead, external design standards, such as the NDS or manufacturer's literature, must be referenced for the design of
the reinforcement, as required in Specification Section 12.3.4.
Design Inputs:
Support Configuration: Reinforcement Properties: (ASD Basis)
Support Spacing, L = 144.0 in. Bending Stiffness, EI = 340000 kip-in.2
Bearing Length, l b = 1.5 in. Shear Constant, K = 5120 kip
Spacing, s = 48 in. oc
SIP Geometry: Quantity at Spacing, n = 1
Overall Thickness, t = 12.3 in. Bending Strength, M r = 52800 lbf-in.
Facing Thickness, t f = 0.4375 in. Shear Strength, V r = 1200 lbf
Bearing Strength, R r = 1200 lbf
Loading Conditions:
Design Procedure:
Assessment of the reinforcement under transverse loading must consider the following limit states:
The I-joist reinforcement must be designed in accordance with the NDS and the manufacturer's literature to resist its share of the
total moment determined in accordance with Specification Section 12.3.1.
OK The number of joists, n, is a design input.
OK Load Duration Factor from NDS Section 7.3.2, loads will be

normalized to normal duration.

assumed.

OK Beam Stability Factor from NDS Section 7.3.5, compression

flange supported throughout its length.

OK Repetitive Member Factor from NDS Section 7.3.6.
OK A design input. Pursuant to NDS Section 7.2, the Reference

Bending Strength is from the wood I-joist manufacturer's
literature or code evaluation report.
OK

separately. For both the shear and moment, the absolute value of the resulting value is taken to facilitate comparison of the values.
The maximum normalized load governs the design.

1. D 0.90 10 48% 4.8 5.3 88% 8.8 9.8
3a. D +L r 1.25 30 29% 8.8 7.0 76% 22.9 18.3
3b. D +S 1.15 40 51% 20.4 17.7 89% 35.6 30.9
Governing Bending Load, w Rb = 17.7 psf
Governing Shear Load, w Rv = 30.9 psf
OK The design span is from NDS Section 3.2.1.
OK The reinforcement spacing is a design input.
OK
Design Requirement
OK From NDS Section 2.1.1.1.

OK
OK therefore, OK

total shear determined in accordance with Specification Section 12.3.1.



assumed.


Shear Strength is from the wood I-joist manufacturer's
OK

OK
Design Requirement

OK
OK therefore, OK
D3. Bearing Strength (NDS Chapter 7 & Manufacturer's Literature)

total bearing force determined in accordance with Specification Section 12.3.1.


assumed.


Bearing Strength is from the wood I-joist manufacturer's
OK


OK The reaction force is based on the full loaded length of the
SIP.
OK
Design Requirement

OK
OK therefore, OK
D4. Flexural Deflection (NDS Chapter 3.5)
as provided in NDS Section 7.4.5. It is important to note that the reinforcement deflections must match the SIP deflections parallel
to the reinforcement. If the deflections do not match, compatibility has not been properly enforced by the load distribution method.


OK OK
where
for flexure.
OK The number of joists, n , is a design input.


assumed.


Bending Stiffness is from the wood I-joist manufacturer's
OK


assumed.



Shear Stiffness is from the wood I-joist manufacturer's
OK

OK
OK
Permanent Duration Bending Stiffness

OK From NDS Section 3.5.2, the adjusted bending modulus is
reduced for permanent loads.
OK
Permanent Duration Shear Stiffness

OK From NDS Section 3.5.2, the adjusted shear modulus is
reduced for permanent loads.
OK
Multiplying each component load by the stiffness of the corresponding duration yields the deflection of each load. Because the shear
and moment distributions differ, the shear and moment must be determined separately for each load.
Bending Shear
Uniform Line Load Deflection Load Deflection
Load Load Share Stiffness b Share Stiffness v
Load Duration (psf) (plf) % kb (in.) % kv (in.)
D Permanent 10 40 48% 0.0247 0.039 88% 0.0061 0.018
Lr Short 20 80 29% 0.0165 0.032 76% 0.0041 0.021
S Normal 30 120 51% 0.0165 0.084 89% 0.0041 0.036
3b. D +S 0.177 0.120

OK



OK
OK therefore, OK


OK
OK therefore, OK
Overall Result
Limit State Ratio The design is adequate as long as all sub-design checks
Shear Strength 0.62
Bearing Strength 0.62

DESIGN EXAMPLE 10: REINFORCED ROOF PANEL UNDER TRANSVERSE LOAD

(DIMENSION LUMBER)
Considering the reinforced SIP section properties and material properties listed below, verify the adequacy of a 12.25-in. thick
(overall) SIP panel having a 144-in. span. The SIP is reinforced with dimension lumber splines having the properties listed below.
The ADT design method is used to consider applicable strength limits, a live load deflection limit of L/240, and a total load deflection
limit of L/180.
Design Inputs:
Support Spacing, L = 144.0 in. SAB WAB
Bearing Length, l b = 1.5 in. Facing Tensile Strength, F t = 495 240 psi
Facing Thickness, t f = 0.4375 in. Core Shear Strength, F v = 3.00 2.75 psi
Shear Reference Depth, t o = 4.50 4.50 in.
Shear Depth Exponent, m = 1.00 1.00
Core Compressive Strength, F cc = 14.0 14.0 psi
Core Compression Modulus, E c = 360 360 psi
2
Facing Bending Stiffness, E f I f = 78000 16000 lbf-in.
Reinforcement Properties: (from 2015 NDS Supplement )

Specification: 2x12 SPF, No. 2
Width, b = 1.5 in. Bending Strength, F b = 875 psi
Depth, d = 11.25 in. Shear Strength, F v = 135 psi
Spacing, s = 48 in. oc Bearing Strength, F c  = 425 psi
QTY at Spacing, n = 2 Bending Modulus, E = 1400000 psi
Loading Conditions:

Design Procedure:
Assessment of the SIP under combined loads is broken down into four distinct calculations:
A. Proportion Applied Loads between SIP Element and Reinforcement Elements
A3. Load-Distribution in Composite Assembly
B. SIP Panel Element Strength (Strong-Axis) [NOT SHOWN]
C. SIP Panel Element Strength (Weak-Axis) [NOT SHOWN]
D. Reinforcing Element Strength [NOT SHOWN]
D2. Shear Strength
A. Design Calculations:
Simplified Panel Load Distribution (Specification Section 12.3.1)
Specification Section 12.3.1 provides a simplified analysis method for proportioning the load between the components in the built-up
assembly.
Load Carried by SIP Panel

Load Carried by Reinforcement


The time-dependent bending stiffness (E t I )S and shear stiffness (G t A v )S of the SIP is provided in Specification Section 4.2.2 and
Section 4.2.3, respectively. The stiffness for each duration identified in Specification Table 3.5-1 (short, normal, and permanent) is
required. Strong-axis properties are used because the load is shared between the SIP and the reinforcement about the strong-axis
of the SIP.
Short Duration Moduli

Short Duration Bending Modulus


OK
Short Duration Shear Modulus


OK
Normal Duration Moduli

Normal Duration Bending Modulus

OK
Normal Duration Shear Modulus


OK
The SIP shear modulus is a design input.
OK
Permanent Duration Moduli

Permanent Duration Bending Modulus

OK
The SIP bending modulus is a design input.
OK
Permanent Duration Shear Modulus


OK

Section Properties
Moment of Inertia The moment of inertia is determined based on the
OK assumption that only the facings resist flexural stress. This
assumption and the related equations are provided in
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
Shear Area The shear area is determined based on the assumption that
OK only the core resists shear stress. This assumption, and the
OK The core thickness was previously determined.
OK
Short Duration Stiffness Because the stiffnesses of the components vary with the
OK duration of the applied loads, the proportion of the load
carried by each element must be evaluated for each load
OK
case considering the appropriate stiffness adjustments.
Normal Duration Stiffness

OK
OK

OK
OK

The time-dependent bending stiffness (EI' )R and shear stiffness ( GA )R of the reinforcement is determined using the
manufacturer's literature or evaluation report and the 2015 National Design Specification for Wood Construction (NDS ). The
stiffness for each duration identified in Specification Table 3.5-1 (short, normal, and permanent) is required.
Adjusted Design Bending Stiffness


assumed.


OK Incising Factor from NDS Section 4.3.8, lumber

reinforcement is not incised.
OK
OK From NDS Commentary Section C3.5.1. The shear -free

modulus of elasticity may be estimated as 1.03 times the
reference value.
OK From NDS Supplement Section 3.1.3. The width and depth

of the section are design inputs.
OK
Adjusted Design Shear Stiffness

OK From NDS Commentary Section C3.5.1, the shear modulus
may be estimated as 1/16 the elastic modulus.
OK From NDS Supplement Section 3.1.3. The width and depth

of the section are design inputs.
OK From engineering mechanics, the  term equals 6/5 for a

rectangular section.

The NDS does not provide expressions for the long-term stiffness of dimension lumber; however, it does provided creep factors in
NDS Section 3.5.2. These factors are used to adjust the bending and shear moduli in a manner similar to the SIP panel.
Short & Normal Duration Bending Stiffness

OK Expression for dimension lumber stiffness on a one-foot-
wide basis--same basis as SIP stiffnesses.

OK

OK The adjusted bending stiffness was previously calculated.
OK
Short & Normal Duration Shear Stiffness


OK


OK


OK



OK

OK
A3. Load Distribution in Composite Assembly

loads are normalized by dividing the load for each load combination by the corresponding time-effect factor. The absolute value of
the resulting value is taken to facilitate comparison of the values. The maximum normalized load governs the design. C&C Wind
pressures are considered only when acting alone or in conjunction with dead load only.
Total Load Carried By SIP Load Carried By Reinforcement

Case Load w Sb w Sv w Rb w Rv
Load Case Duration (psf)  (psf)  (psf)  (psf)  (psf)
1. D Permanent 10 42% 4.2 2% 0.2 58% 5.8 98% 9.8
3a. D +L r Short 30 62% 18.5 5% 1.6 38% 11.5 95% 28.4
3b. D +S Normal 40 39% 15.6 2% 0.9 61% 24.4 98% 39.1

Overall Result
Limit State Ratio Pursuant to Specification Section 12.3, once the load has
Flexural Strength 0.19 been proportioned between the elements, each element
Shear Strength 0.05 shall be independently designed for its share of the load. As
Strong Axis
SIP Panel
Core Compression Strength 0.04 described in Specification Section 12.3.3, three independent
Total Load Deflection 0.12 designs are required.
Live Load Deflection 0.14 1) SIP spanning parallel to the reinforcement.
Bearing Deflection 0.04 2) SIP spanning perpendicular to the reinforcement.
SIP SAB Design (Maximum) 0.19 3) The reinforcement.
Shear Strength 0.55 These three sub-designs are not shown for brevity, but are
Weak Axis
SIP Panel
Connection Strength 0.67 similar to the complete calculations provided in Example 9.

Total Load Deflection 0.21 The results of the sub-designs are summarized to the left.
Live Load Deflection 0.23 The design is adequate as long as all design checks
SIP WAB Design (Maximum) 0.67 produce an applied-to-permissible ratio of 1.0 or less.
Reinforcement
Shear Strength 0.27

Bearing Strength 0.43
Reinforcement Design (Maximum) 0.43


SIP-EDGO1-19E FINAL DRAFT, SIP Design Examples E-95
DESIGN EXAMPLE 11: REINFORCED PANEL UNDER AXIAL LOAD
A SIP wall panel is to be used to support axial loads in a two-story building as shown below. The supported floor members are
platform framed into a single 2x12 rim joist at each level. The floor framing is spaced at 16-inches on-center and the magnitude of
the applied axial load is the same at each level. Determine whether reinforcement is required to support the axial loads, and if so,
determine the spacing, size and quantity.
Design Inputs:
Panel Configuration: SIP Material Properties: (ADT Basis)
Wall Height, h = 120 in. SAB WAB
Design Eccentricity, e d = 0.00 in. Facing Tensile Strength, F t = 495 240 psi
Facing Thickness, t f = 0.4375 in. Crushing-Buckling Interaction Factor, c = 0.70 0.70
Reinforcement Properties: (from 2015 NDS Supplement )

Rim Joist:
Width, b = 1.5 in. Bending Strength, F b = 875 psi
Depth, d = 11.25 in. Shear Strength, F v = 135 psi
Quantity, n = 1 Bending Modulus, E = 1400000 psi
Reinforcement/Columns:
Width, b = 1.5 in. Bending Strength, F c = 1150 psi
Depth, d = 5.5 in. Bearing Strength, F c  = 425 psi
Spacing, s = 24 in. oc Bending Modulus, E = 1400000 psi
QTY at Spacing, n = 1
Loading Conditions:
Axial Load at each Level, P = 1582 plf

Design Procedure:
The design of the reinforced wall panels subject to axial load requires consideration of the following limit states and design
elements:
1. Compression Strength (Unreinforced SIP)
2. Header Design
3. Reinforcement/Column Design
First, determine whether the SIP has the capacity to carry the axial load without reinforcement. As required in Specification Section
6.3, the applied loads must not exceed the capacity established by the compression limit state. The applied loads meet the
requirements of Specification Section 1.2.1 to be considered a uniform load, as a result, the loads will be considered on a per-foot
basis.

Time-Effect Factor
Eccentricity Factor
Equation 6.3.1-4.
Radius of Gyration
wide section.
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
Load Eccentricity
OK shall not be taken as less than the design eccentricity or 1/6
OK


thickness for a SIPs with symmetric facings
OK

Calibration Factor

Equation 6.3.1-5.

OK The elastic buckling stress without considering shear

Flexural Modulus
assumption that the SIP is manufactured under a monitored
Shear Modulus quality control program. The bending and shear moduli, E &
OK G are design inputs.
OK
OK
OK
Shear Area
OK The buckling length coefficient, k , is from Specification Table

6.2-1. Pinned-pinned supports are assumed.


OK
OK
Time-Effect Factor
OK The time-effect factor was previously established.
Compressive Strength
OK
OK
Unreinforced SIP Compression Strength

OK
Required Axial Strength:

OK The applied axial load is of equal magnitude at each level.
OK As a result, the first-story SIP must resist twice the applied
load at the second-story SIP.

design method.


OK
OK therefore, OK The second-story SIP panel has adequate strength to resist

the applied load.
design method.



OK
OK therefore, NG The first-story SIP panel is overstressed. To maintain the

same panel thickness as the second-story, reinforcement will
be designed to supplement the strength of the 1st story
panels.
2. Header Design (Specification 12.4.1)
To reduce the load on the first-story panel, a header of adequate strength must exist to transfer load into the reinforcing elements.
Where a rim joist exists, this element may be used as a header. The dimension lumber header is designed in accordance with the
2015 National Design Specification for Wood Construction (NDS ).
Reinforcement Spacing Limited by Header Strength

The spacing of the reinforcement must be determined based on the type of header that is provided. To minimize waste,
reinforcement is typically spaced on a 2-ft increment. We first consider the second-story rim joist and whether it can act as a suitable
header.
Maximum spacing limited by flexure

OK The basic mechanics expressions for shear and moment are
combined with the strengths from the NDS and solved for
OK maximum spacing.
Header Flexural Strength

OK
OK The adjusted flexural strength of the dimension lumber

header is determined from NDS Table 4.3.1. The
reinforcement is assumed to be 2x12, No. 2 SPF lumber.


assumed.

OK Beam Stability Factor from NDS Section 4.3.5, compression

flange supported throughout its length.
OK Size Factor from NDS Section 4.3.6 and the NDS

Specification Table 4A.
OK Flat Use Factor from NDS Section 4.3.7, the members are
bending on-edge.
OK Incising Factor from NDS Section 4.3.8, the members not

incised.
OK Repetitive Member Factor from NDS Section 4.3.9, only two

members considered.

OK From NDS Supplement Table 4A.
OK
OK
OK The size of the dimension lumber is a design input.

OK
OK
OK
OK
Flexure limits the spacing of the reinforcement to 41-inches
on-center. The shear limit state is considered below.
Maximum spacing limited by shear

OK The shear force on the dimension lumber is determined
using he provisions of NDS Section 3.4.3(a). This
expression is solved for maximum span.
OK
OK The shear strength of the dimension lumber beam is

determined using NDS Equation 3.4-2.
OK The adjusted shear strength of the dimension lumber header

is determined from NDS Table 4.3.1.


assumed.


incised.
OK
OK The maximum spacing of the reinforcement considering

shear and flexure is 45.5-inches on-center. To avoid material
waste, the reinforcement would be placed at 24-inches on
center.

3. Reinforcement Design
The reinforcement is assumed to be 2x6, No. 2 SPF lumber. The capacity must be assessed using the provisions of the NDS . Axial
buckling and bearing on the top/bottom plate limit states are assessed.
Axial Strength
OK



assumed.

OK Size Factor from NDS Section 4.3.6 and the NDS

Specification Table 4A.

incised.
OK Column Stability Factor from NDS Section 4.3.10, is

determined using NDS Equation 3.7-1.
OK The maximum compressive strength is determined as

described in NDS Section 3.7.1 using the previously
established adjustment factors.
OK
OK The Euler buckling stress is determined as described in NDS

Section 3.7.1.

header is determined from NDS Table 4.3.1.

assumed.


incised.
OK Buckling Stiffness Factor from NDS Section 4.3.11, member

is larger than 2x4.

OK
OK The effective column height is equal to the wall height

pursuant to NDS Section 3.7.1.2.
OK The depth of the column is a design input.
OK
OK The calibration factor is from NDS Section 3.7.1.
OK
OK
OK
Bearing on Top/Bottom Plate:

OK


assumed.


incised.
OK Bearing Area Factor from NDS Section 4.3.12, no increase

considered.
OK
OK
Limiting Strength per Stud

OK The maximum load on the reinforcement is the lesser of the
axial strength and the bearing strength.
Required Column Capacity
OK

Design Requirement

OK
OK therefore, OK
Overall Result
The second story SIP panel has adequate strength to resist the applied axial load. The 2x12 No. 2 SPF rim joist header is adequate
for reinforcement spaced 24-inches on center. The reinforcement must be at least a single 2x6 No 2. SPF at 24-in. on-center.


DESIGN EXAMPLE 12: PANEL WITH OPENING
A hole is cut into a SIP panel as specified below. The hole is integral with the SIP panel (no joints at the edges of the opening).
Verify the adequacy of the header and supporting piers using the ADT method for the applied axial load specified below. The SIP is
oriented with the strong-axis in the vertical direction.
Design Inputs:
Panel Configuration: SIP Material Properties: (ADT Basis)
Wall Height, h = 108.0 in. SAB WAB
Wall Width, b = 96.0 in. Facing Tensile Strength, F t = 495 240 psi
Design Eccentricity, e d = 0.00 in. Facing Compressive Strength, F c = 345 300 psi
SIP Bending Modulus, E = 560000 460000 psi
SIP Geometry: SIP Shear Modulus, G = 350 300 psi
Overall Thickness, t = 6.50 in. Crushing-Buckling Interaction Factor, c = 0.70 0.70
Opening Geometry:
Opening Width, h b = 48.0 in.
Header Height, h h = 80.0 in.
Loading Conditions:
Applied Axial Load, w = 1300 plf
Design Procedure:
Assessment of the SIP under axial load with an opening must consider the following limits states:
1. Header Design
2. Wall Compressive Strength
3. Pier Compressive Strength

1. Header Design (Specification 11.3.1)
of facing tension and facing compression, as provided in Section 11.3.1.2 and Section 11.3.1.3, respectively.
Header Strength Limited by Facing Tension

Time-Effect Factor
OK The applied load is assumed to be "normal" duration as
defined in Specification Table 3.5-1. The "normal" duration
time-effect factor is from Specification Table 4.1.3-2.
OK The facing tensile strength is a design input. The header
flexure stress is parallel to the header span, as a result, the
weak-axis strength is used.
Header Section Modulus
OK The section modulus of the header may be determined using
Commentary Equation C11.3.1-2
OK The header depth is determined from other design inputs.
OK The panel height and opening height are design inputs.

OK
OK
OK
OK
Header Strength Limited by Facing Compression

OK Specification Equation 11.3.1.3-1
Time-Effect Factor
OK The facing compressive strength is a design input. The
header flexure stress is parallel to the header span, as a
result, the weak-axis strength is used.
Header Section Modulus
OK The header section modulus was previously determined.
OK
Header Flexural Strength (Specification Section 11.3.1)

OK The header flexural strength is the lesser of the strengths
OK limited by facing tension and facing compression.
Required Flexural Strength:

OK The maximum moment equation is from basic mechanics
and occurs at the edges of the opening.

OK The applied axial load and the opening width are design
OK inputs.
OK

OK The reduction factor for flexural tension,  , is from

OK

OK therefore, OK
2. Wall Compressive Strength (Specification Section 6.3)

The SIP panel must have sufficient strength to resist the load applied to the top of the wall, as if the opening is not present, this
assessment is performed in accordance with Specification Section 6.1.
Compression Strength
Time-Effect Factor
Eccentricity Factor
OK The eccentricity factor is determined using Equation 6.3.1-4.
Radius of Gyration
wide section.
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK

Load Eccentricity
shall not be taken as less than the design eccentricity or 1/6
OK the panel thickness.
OK

OK
OK

Calibration Factor

Equation 6.3.1-5.


Minimum Bending Modulus Where minimum elastic and shear moduli are not provided
G are design inputs.
Minimum Shear Modulus
OK
OK
OK
OK

Shear Area


OK
OK

OK The facing compressive strength is a design input. The axial
stress is parallel to the wall height, as a result, the strong-
axis strength is used.
OK
OK

OK

OK The required axial strength is a design input.



OK
OK therefore, OK
3. Pier Compressive Strength (Specification Section 11.5)

As required in Specification Section 11.5.1.2, the applied loads must not exceed the capacity of the piers on each side of the
opening.
OK The effective eccentricity at the top of the piers is

determined using Specification Section 6, except that the
net load eccentricity is determined using Specification
Equation 11.5.1.2-1.
OK The eccentricity at the top of the wall was previously

determined.
OK The header height and wall height are design inputs.

OK
Load on Pier
OK The applied force above the pier and the header reaction are
determined from statics.
OK The opening is centered in the panel. Accordingly, the width

of each pier equals one-half the width of the panel minus the
opening width.
OK The overall panel width, opening width, and applied load are
OK design inputs.
OK
OK
OK
Header Reaction
OK The header reaction is determined using equations from
engineering mechanics.
OK The opening width and applied load are design inputs.

OK

OK
OK The effective eccentricity is determined. This value will be

used in the axial load calculation provided in Specification
Section 6.3.
Eccentricity Factor
Equation 6.3.1-4 but using the equvalent eccentricity from
OK The radius of gyration, load eccentricity, and the distance to

OK the extreme fiber were previously determined.
OK
OK


OK The input values were previously determined, only the

OK eccentricity factor has changed from the calculations in Part
OK 2.
OK
OK
OK
OK

OK The uniform load applied to the pier is the sum of the header
reaction and the load applied directly to the pier.




OK
OK therefore, OK
Overall Result
Header Flexure 0.76 produce an applied-to-permissible ratio of 1.0 or less.
Overall Compressive Strength 0.56
Pier Compressive Strength 0.90
Overall Design 0.90 therefore, OK

SIP Engineering Design Guide July2019

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SIP Engineering Design Guide July2019

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SIP Engineering Design Guide July2019

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Structural Insulated Panel (SIP)

Engineering Design Guide

FIRST EDITION 2019

Structural Insulated Panel (SIP)

FINAL DRAFT FIRST EDITION 2019

Structural Insulated Panel Association

Structural Insulated Panel Association (SIPA)

All rights reserved. This document or any part thereof

Updates and Errata

Technical inquiries may be addressed to [email protected].

Eric J. Tompos, P.E., S.E., P.Eng., C.B.O., M.C.P.

SIPA Technical Review Committee

How to Use This Guide (Intended Use)

Design Specification, Commentary, and Examples

The Commentary on Structural Insulated Panel Design Specification (SIP-EDG01-19C)

Interactive Online Design Examples

SIPA Members for Quality You Can Trust

More Technical Resources for SIPs

Structural Insulated Panel

Structural Insulated Panel (SIP) Engineering Design Guide

Structural Insulated Panel (SIP) Engineering Design Guide

1.2 Design Procedures

1.2.1 Loading Assumptions

1.2.2 Design Loads

Structural Insulated Panel (SIP) Engineering Design Guide

1.2.3 Load Combinations

ADOPTED WOOD DESIGN SPECIFICATION. A design specification, such as the National

CHARACTERISTIC VALUE. The structural property estimate, typically determined as

CONNECTION, TYPE A (ADHESIVE/SEALANT). A connection formed by use of an adhesive

CONNECTION, TYPE C (CONVENTIONAL). A mechanical connection composed of

CONNECTION, TYPE S (SIP). A mechanical connection composed of conventional or non-

Structural Insulated Panel (SIP) Engineering Design Guide

CONVENTIONAL MATERIALS. Building materials conforming to standards recognized by the

Structural Insulated Panel (SIP) Engineering Design Guide

MANUFACTUER’S LITERATURE. Manufacturer specific specifications, details and/or designed

OPENING, DOOR/WINDOW OPENING. A discontinuity in a SIP assembly where one or both

Figure 1.3-1: Block Spline

Structural Insulated Panel (SIP) Engineering Design Guide

Figure 1.3-2: Surface Spline

Figure 1.3-3: Reinforcing Spline

SPLINE, TYPE RT (TRANSVERSE REINFORCING SPLINE). A Type R Spline that provides

STRENGTH, NOMINAL. Strength of a member or cross-section calculated in accordance with the

Structural Insulated Panel (SIP) Engineering Design Guide

STRUCTURAL INSULATED PANEL (SIP). A structural member composed of a light-weight

SUPPORT CONDITION, END-SUPPORTED. Support condition where load is applied to the

Figure 1.3-6: End-Supported

SUPPORT CONDITION, BLOCKED FACE-BEARING. Support condition where load is

Figure 1.3-4: Blocked Face-Bearing Support

SUPPORT CONDITION, UNBLOCKED FACE-BEARING. Support condition where load is

Structural Insulated Panel (SIP) Engineering Design Guide

Figure 1.3-5: Unblocked Face-Bearing Support

Structural Insulated Panel (SIP) Engineering Design Guide

Structural Insulated Panel (SIP) Engineering Design Guide

Α = Area of diaphragm or shear wall chord cross-section (in.2)

Structural Insulated Panel (SIP) Engineering Design Guide

Gmin = Minimum shear modulus (psi)

Structural Insulated Panel (SIP) Engineering Design Guide

Vd = Nominal diaphragm strength (lbf)

Structural Insulated Panel (SIP) Engineering Design Guide