Design Example 3 ◾ Two-story Light-frame Multi-family Building Design Using Cold-formed-steel Wall Framing and Wood

Floor and Roof Framing

Table 3-10. Applicability of horizontal structural irregularities to Building B

ASCE 7 Table 12.3-1 – Horizontal Structural
Design Check for Building B
Irregularities
1a Torsional Irregularity N.A. – Flexible Floor and Roof diaphragms
1b Extreme Torsional Irregularity N.A. - Flexible Floor and Roof diaphragms
2 Reentrant Corner Irregularity Detailed Check Required – See below
3 Diaphragm Discontinuity Irregularity O.K. – No large diaphragm openings
4 Out-of-Plane Offset Irregularity O.K. – Shear walls stack
O.K. – Shear walls oriented orthogonal to each
5 Non-Parallel System Irregularity
other and parallel to building axis

1. N.A.: Not Applicable – No check required (for reason stated).

2. O.K.: Building does not meet conditions of noted irregularities requiring a detailed evaluation (for
reason stated).

The only horizontal irregularity that requires a detailed check for Building B is “Type 2 – Reentrant Corner
Irregularity,” since Building B is “L” shaped and in SDC D. The reentrant corner is considered to be a
potential horizontal irregularity where the two legs of the building come together. The projection of the
reentrant corner in the direction being considered cannot be more than 15 percent of the overall building
length in that direction to avoid a horizontal irregularity.

Roofs: Floors:

B1: 5 ft / (134 ft+ 5 ft) = 3.6 % < 15% B2: (95 ft – 39 ft – 5 ft) / 95 ft = 53.7% > 15%
B1: 6ft / 39 ft= 15.4% ~ 15% (say OK) B1: 134 ft / (134 ft+5 ft+39 ft) = 75.3% > 15%

B2: 5 ft / (39 ft+ 5 ft) = 11.4% < 15% Floors: Have Type 2 irregularity
B2: 6 ft / 95 ft = 6.3% < 15%

Roof: Considered regular, since the roofs are essentially separate.

39 ft 5 ft 39 ft

Zone B2 Zone B2

Zone B1 Zone B1

134 ft 5 ft 39 ft 134 ft 39 ft

Schematic Roof Plan Schematic Floor Plan

Figure 3-9. Building B schematic plans for reentrant corner detail check

2012 IBC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, Vol. 2 157

Design Example 3 ◾ Two-story Light-frame Multi-family Building Design Using Cold-formed-steel Wall Framing and Wood
Floor and Roof Framing

When a Table 12.3.-1 Type 2 Horizontal Irregularity occurs , then the design forces for the framing
elements of the floor diaphragm (example: collectors and collector connections must be increased 25 percent
per ASCE 7, Section 12.3.3.4. In this case, Building B’s second and third floor diaphragm framing element
design forces would have to be increased 25 percent, but the diaphragm framing element design forces
would not have to be increased at the roof. This design force increase is in addition to any redundancy
design requirements.

Vertical Irregularity Check ASCE 7 §12.3.2.2

Vertical structural irregularities are defined in ASCE 7 Table 12.3-2. Table 3-11 indicates how these vertical
irregularities apply to Building B.

Table 3-11. Applicability of vertical structural irregularities to Building B

ASCE 7 Table 12.3-2 – Vertical Structural
Design Check for Building B
Irregularities
O.K. Shear walls stack; lateral stiffness of shear
1a Stiffness - Soft-story irregularity walls at each floor level is more than 70% of shear
walls at floor level above.
O.K. Shear walls stack; lateral stiffness of shear
1b Stiffness - Extreme soft-story irregularity walls at each floor level is more than 60% of shear
walls at floor level above.
O.K. Weight of any floor level is not more than
2 Weight (mass) irregularity
150% of floor level above or below.
O.K. Shear walls stack; individual shear walls
3 Vertical geometric irregularity lengths at a given floor level are not more than 130%
of that in the adjacent story.
O.K. Shear walls stack there are no in-plane offsets
In-plane discontinuity in vertical lateral- between shear walls of adjacent floor levels in the
4
force-resisting element irregularity same line that are more than the length of the shear
wall above.
Discontinuity in Lateral Strength – Weak- O.K. Shear walls stack; story lateral strength is more
5a
story irregularity than 80% of floor level above.
Discontinuity in lateral strength – Extreme O.K. Shear-wall strength exceeds 65% of the lateral
5b
weak-story irregularity strength at the adjacent floor above.

1. O.K.: Building does not meet conditions of noted irregularities requiring a detailed evaluation (for
reason stated).
2. Mass irregularity exception: When a roof is lighter than the floor below it need not be considered for
mass irregularity.

When a vertical irregularity occurs per Table 12.3-2, then the building design must satisfy the requirements
of the applicable referenced sections in Table 12.3-2. The design example for Building B illustrates
three different shear-wall configurations that could occur along a given wall line. In the case of shear-
wall configuration options 1 and 3, there is no vertical irregularity. Shear-wall configuration option 2 is
considered to have a Type 4 Vertical Irregularity since the shear wall is shorter at the first floor than at the
floor level above and would have to be further evaluated per the requirements of Table 12.3-2.

158 2012 IBC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, Vol. 2

 Design Example 3 ◾ Two-story Light-frame Multi-family Building Design Using Cold-formed-steel Wall Framing and Wood
Floor and Roof Framing

7. Redundancy Factor
The concept of redundancy in building seismic-force-resisting systems is to provide enough elements
resisting lateral forces so catastrophic failure of the building does not occur if one element is overloaded
or fails. The redundancy factor, ρ, imposes a penalty on the design of certain components of the lateral-
force-resisting system by requiring design for higher forces when adequate redundancy is not provided.
Redundancy is typically provided in buildings by the use of multiple lateral-force-resisting elements

ASCE 7 Section 12.3.4 requires that a redundancy factor be assigned to the building’s seismic-force-
resisting system in each of the two orthogonal directions relative to the building’s footprint. A value of ρ
equal to 1.3 is used unless the conditions of either Sections 12.3.4.1 or 12.3.4.2 are satisfied, whereon the
value of ρ = 1.0 may be used.

Section 12.3.4.1 is a general catch-all section that recognizes that it is not appropriate for the engineer to
automatically apply a redundancy factor greater than 1.0 to all seismic regions (seismic design categories)
or aspects of the seismic lateral-force-resisting system evaluation and component design. A value of ρ equal
to 1.0 may be used for the six design conditions related to light-frame construction listed below. The six
individual design conditions have been sorted according to application instead of listing them individually
as occurs in Section 12.3.4.1. There are three other conditions not included as they are not generally
applicable to light-frame building construction.

1. Seismic Design Category

a. Building structures assigned to Seismic Design Categories (SDC) B, C.

i. Structures assigned to SDC A do not require consideration of seismic forces, so the

redundancy factor, ρ, does not apply.

2. Building Displacements

a. Drift calculations and P-delta effects.

3. Building Component Design

a. Design of nonstructural components.

b. Design of collector elements, splices, and their connections when the overstrength factor,
Ωo, is included in the seismic load combination being used for design of the element.

c. Design of seismic-force-resisting system members or connections where the seismic load

combinations require the overstrength factor, Ωo, be included.

d. Diaphragm inertial loads derived from using Equation 12.10-1 for distribution of diaphragm
seismic forces to the various floor/roof levels of the building.
(Note:  = 1.3 is required for forces transferred through a diaphragm due to an offset of the
lateral resisting system between floor levels [example: out-of-plane offset of shear walls
between floor levels]).

ASCE 7 Section 12.3.4.2 specifically addresses seismic design categories (SDC) D, E and F and requires
ρ equal to 1.3 for the design of the seismic-force-resisting system unless the conditions in either Sections
12.3.4.2.a or 12.3.4.2b are satisfied, in which case a value of ρ equal to 1.0 may be used.

2012 IBC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, Vol. 2 159

Design Example 3 ◾ Two-story Light-frame Multi-family Building Design Using Cold-formed-steel Wall Framing and Wood
Floor and Roof Framing

ASCE 7 Section 12.3.4.2a

For each story level resisting more than 35 percent of the building base shear in the direction under
consideration, the seismic-force-resisting system complies with ASCE 7 Table 12.3-3 “Requirements for
Each Story Resisting More Than 35% of the Base Shear.”

Table 12.3-3 provides requirements for different types of Lateral Force-Resisting Elements. The
category of interest for most light-frame buildings is “Shear walls or wall pier with a height–to-length
ratio of greater than 1.0.” The requirements to be evaluated are

1. Removal of either a shear wall or wall pier with a height-to-length ratio greater than 1.0 within
any story level or collector connections thereto would not result in more than a 33 percent
reduction in story strength.

2. Removal of a shear wall or pier does not result in an extreme torsional irregularity (Horizontal
Irregularity Type 1b).

ASCE 7 Section 12.3.4.2b

Section 12.3.4.2b also applies to each story level resisting more than 35 percent of the building base shear,
and is summarized as follows:

1. Structure is “regular” in plan at all floor levels.

2. Seismic-force-resisting system requirements:

a. At least two bays, at the perimeter, on each side of the building.

b. Seismic-force-resisting systems are orthogonal to each other.

A single bay is commonly denoted as the distance between two adjacent columns of a moment frame or
braced frame. Since shear-wall behavior is different from a moment frame or braced frame, an equivalent
definition for shear-wall “bay” has been developed. The number of shear-wall bays is defined as follows for
the various wall construction materials:

Concrete, masonry, or steel shear-wall bay quantity: Wall length/story height.

Light-frame shear-wall bay quantity: (2) × (wall length/story height.

Therefore, a single long shear wall could be equivalent to one or more shear-wall bays, whereas a single
short shear wall could be equivalent to less than one bay. The total sum of all shear-wall bays along the
building’s perimeter, on each side of the building, must exceed two in order to use ρ = 1.0.

Author's Discussion—Equivalent Shear-wall Bays

Light-frame shear walls typically have openings such as doors, windows, and ducts. The decision of which
wall lengths should be used in calculating the number of equivalent shear wall bays is left to the engineer,
but two options are discussed below for consideration.

160 2012 IBC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, Vol. 2

 Design Example 3 ◾ Two-story Light-frame Multi-family Building Design Using Cold-formed-steel Wall Framing and Wood
Floor and Roof Framing

Option 1: Shear-wall length defined from vertical edge of opening to vertical edge of opening.

Conservatively, the engineer might use only the shear-wall lengths each side of the wall openings.
This would be appropriate where the opening is a door that interrupts the perimeter boundary edge
of the shear wall.

Option 2: Shear-wall elements designed to transfer design forces around the opening in the shear wall.

In the author’s opinion, a wall opening length (window, duct, etc.) can be ignored and the wall
considered as being one single longer wall that includes the length of the opening and the shear-wall
elements on each side of the wall opening, if the shear wall has been designed to transfer the wall
design forces around the opening.

Some engineering judgment should be applied when using this option, and the following criteria are
suggested.

1. The length of the wall opening shall not exceed 30 percent of the sum total of shear-wall
lengths on either side of the opening; otherwise, this condition should be treated as two
separate shear walls on each side of the opening.

2. The width of a wall pier in a shear wall on either side of an opening shall not be less than
24 inches (AISI S213 Section C2 “Type I Shear Walls”) or half the height of the opening,
whichever is more; otherwise, this condition should be treated as two separate shear walls on
each side of the opening.

8. Redundancy Check for Building B

Components of the seismic-resisting-system in this design example will be evaluated using a redundancy
factor, ρ, equal to 1.0 based on the conditions noted in ASCE 7 Section 12.3.4.2 and diaphragm Section
12.10.1.1

ASCE 7 Section 12.3.4.1 (applicable conditions where ρ = 1.0 in Building B)

1. Drift calculations: The shear-wall drifts and diaphragm drifts would be evaluated using ρ = 1.0
since ρ = 1.3 is not applicable to drift calculations and P-delta effects.

2. Diaphragms: The design of the floor and roof diaphragms shall use ρ = 1.0 as the diaphragm
forces were distributed to the various floors and roof per Equation 12.10-1.

a. In accordance with Section 12.10.1.1, diaphragm design, ρ applies to diaphragm design in

SDCs D, E, and F, and since the inertial forces were calculated in accordance with Equation
12.10-1, then the value of ρ = 1.0 is permissible for diaphragm design.

2012 IBC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, Vol. 2 161

Design Example 3 ◾ Two-story Light-frame Multi-family Building Design Using Cold-formed-steel Wall Framing and Wood
Floor and Roof Framing

b. In accordance with Section 12.3.3.4, if there is a horizontal or vertical offset irregularity

then the design forces shall be increased 25 percent for the following seismic-force-resisting
elements:

i. Diaphragm connection to collector (1.25 × diaphragm design force at collector)

ii. Collector member’s

iii. Collector member connections.

3. Collectors (collector elements, splices, and collector splices)

a. ASCE 7 Section 12.10.2.1 has an exemption for structures braced entirely by light-frame
shear walls. The collector elements and collector connections for buildings in SDCs C,
D, E, and F need to be designed only to resist forces for Section 12.4.2.3 seismic-load
combinations when diaphragm design forces are calculated per Section 12.10.1.1. Since
Section 12.4.3.2 load combinations with overstrength factor Ωo are not required to be
included, ρ used for the structure is required for collector design (equal to 1.0 in our
example).

b. ASCE 7 Section 12.10.1.1 requires the value of ρ for elements transferring forces between
vertical elements above and below the diaphragm (example: collectors at an in-plane
offset – Vertical Irregularity Type 4) be the same as for the overall building system. If the
requirements of either Sections 12.3.4.2a or 12.3.4.2b cannot be met, then ρ = 1.3 would be
required for the structure and therefore also for the collector design.

c. The value of ρ for collector design for this example is 1.0 in accordance with Section
12.3.4.2, and this determination is shown below.

ASCE 7 Section 12.3.4.2 (Building B redundancy factor)

Since the building in this design example is located in SDC D, the requirement of Section 12.3.4.2 has to
be evaluated. Either AISC 7 Sections 12.3.4.2a or 12.3.4.2b must be satisfied to allow for ρ = 1.0 for the
design of the seismic-force-resisting system components. For completeness of the design problem, both
sections shall be checked.

ASCE 7 Section 12.3.4.2a

Determination of where story level shear exceeds 35 percent of the base shear is based on calculations for
the complete building footprint.

Table 3-11. Building B story shear summation check

Zone B1 Zone B2 Building B Percent Story Summation
Floor Level Story Shear Story Shear Story Shears Shear per Floor Percent Story
(kips) (kips) (kips) level (V) Shear (V)
3rd 56.0 39.1 95.1 0.345 0.345 < 0.35
2nd 69.3 51.1 120.4 0.436 0.781 > 0.35
1st 34.7 27.0 61.7 0.223 1.000 > 0.35
160.0 116.2 276.2 1.004

162 2012 IBC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, Vol. 2

 Design Example 3 ◾ Two-story Light-frame Multi-family Building Design Using Cold-formed-steel Wall Framing and Wood
Floor and Roof Framing

At the first and second stories where the shear exceeds 35% percent of the building base shear, there are
sufficient numbers of shear walls in each orthogonal direction, so that

1. Removal of a shear wall or wall pier with a height-to-length ratio greater than 1.0 does not
result in a 33 percent reduction in story strength at each floor level. In the event all of the shear
walls have a height-to-length ratio less than 1.0, then the lateral-force-resisting element noted
as “Other” in ASCE 7 Table 12.3-3 would be used. In this case, there are no requirements, so
the building would be deemed to satisfy this section without further investigation.

2. Removal of a shear wall does not result in extreme torsional Horizontal Irregularity Type 1b,
which does not apply when the floor and roof diaphragm are idealized, as being flexible as is
the case for Building B.

Therefore ρ = 1.0 is permissible for the light-frame shear-wall seismic-force-resisting system in this design
example , because the condition in Section 12.3.4.2a is satisfied.

ASCE 7 Section 12.3.4.2b

This section would not normally be checked if the building successfully complied with Section 12.3.4.2a
for allowing ρ = 1.0. However, for completeness, the required checks are discussed. Also, in some cases
this may be a quicker check than can be performed visually, so Section 12.3.4.2b may be checked before
Section 12.3.4.2a.

The shear exceeds 35 peercent of the building base shear at the first and second stories. The redundancy
factor,ρ = 1.0 is allowed based on the following requirements:

1. Have the equivalent of at least two bays of light-frame shear walls at all perimeter sides of the
building at each floor level of the building.

2. Shear-wall seismic-force-resisting systems are orthogonal to each other.

However, the redundancy factor, ρ, would have to be increased to 1.3 since the building is not regular in
plan as it has a Horizontal Irregularity Type 2 and therefore does not satisfy the requirements of Section
12.3.4.2.b.

This section cannot be used to permit ρ = 1.0 since the building is not regular in plan. As noted previously,
the requirement of Section 12.3.4.2 is to satisfy either Section 12.3.4.2a or 12.3.4.2b, and they are
considered to be independent checks. Since Building B passed the requirements of Section 12.3.4.2a, ρ =
1.0 is permissible for the design of Building B.

Author’s Discussion

A redundancy factor of ρ = 1.0 is commonly used for many multi-story, light-frame, shear-wall structures
per Section 12.3.4.2a due to the large number of individual shear walls that occur in these buildings.
However, in the event a structure does not satisfy the requirements of Section 12.3.4.2a, it seems likely a
redundancy factor of ρ = 1.3 would be required for many multi-story, light-frame, shear-wall buildings per
Section 12.3.4.2b as these buildings often are not “regular” in plan and have irregularities noted in ASCE 7
Tables 12.3-1 and 12.3.-2.

One weakness of Section 12.3.4.2a is that it does not take into account the layout of the shear walls in
plan when the engineer encounters a flexible diaphragm, since the engineer does not have to consider
building torsion. Section 12.3.4.2b, on the other hand, specifically addresses the requirement of shear walls

2012 IBC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, Vol. 2 163

Design Example 3 ◾ Two-story Light-frame Multi-family Building Design Using Cold-formed-steel Wall Framing and Wood
Floor and Roof Framing

on the perimeter of the building. While some engineers have designed light-frame multi-story structures
just using the interior corridor walls for the shear resistance in one direction of the building without any
parallel building perimeter shear walls, the SEAOC Seismology Light-Frame Committee has stated “this
practice is not recommended without explicitly considering building performance, including the control
of localized horizontal diaphragm deflections that could lead to instability,” and “limitations on cantilever
spans, diaphragm deflections at building corners and the corresponding methods of structural analysis are
under investigation by the Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC) and the American Wood
Council (AWC).” The desired seismic performance of the building is expected to be achieved when there
are perimeter exterior shear walls. If perimeter light-frame shear walls are not included in the direction
under consideration in the building design, then consideration should be given to using ρ = 1.3.

Even if the engineer satisfies Section 12.3.4.2a and uses ρ = 1.0, it is common in light-frame multi-story
buildings to have vertical irregularities such as out-of-plane and in-plane offsets of shear walls from story
to story. It is left to the designer to determine the number of acceptable out-of-plane or in-plane offsets after
which the redundancy factor of ρ = 1.3 might be used for the light-frame shear-wall system. The in-plane
offsets and out-of-plane offsets of light-frame shear walls do result in design penalties for connecting and
supporting framing members, but the building’s overall stiffness is still less than when the light-frame
shear walls stack from floor to floor. The increase of ρ = 1.3 becomes a seismic brute strength approach to
address that the building has structural irregularities and is not considered to be regular in plan.

By the same token, just because an irregularity does occur once in a light-frame multi-story building, the
entire building shouldn’t necessarily be penalized by a strict interpretation of the building code. It would
be inappropriately penalizing a large multi-story light-frame building which has many shear walls to require
ρ = 1.3 just because only one or two shear walls do not stack or are offset at one floor level .

The suggested number of in-plane and out-of-plane shear wall offsets between floor levels should not
exceed the following when the engineer is using a flexible diaphragm and ρ =1.0, after which consideration
should be given to using a value of ρ = 1.3:

1. 15 percent of the total number of shear walls in that direction for that floor level.

2. 20 percent of the total number of shear walls in that direction for all floor levels of the building.

3. 20 percent of the total number of shear walls for both orthogonal directions for all floor levels
of the building.

It is also recommended that ρ = 1.3 if a minimum of two light-frame shear walls are not being provided
along or near each perimeter face of the building.

9. Selected Analytical Procedure

ASCE 7 Table 12.6-1 lists the permitted analytical procedures that can be used to evaluate the building. The
“Equivalent Lateral Force Procedure” per ASCE 7 Section 12.8 is permitted to be used since the structural
characteristic of the building superstructure is light-frame construction.

164 2012 IBC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, Vol. 2

 Design Example 3 ◾ Two-story Light-frame Multi-family Building Design Using Cold-formed-steel Wall Framing and Wood
Floor and Roof Framing

10. Distribution of Seismic Forces to Shear Walls

Seismic design forces are distributed to the individual shear walls based on their tributary area since the
floor and roof diaphragms are considered to be flexible. In this design example, since ρ = 1.0, the calculated
seismic design forces do not have to be adjusted related to redundancy issues.

1. Redundancy factor, ρ = 1.0

2. Inherent torsion considerations are omitted per flexible diaphragm assumptions, so the designer
does not have to consider building torsion.

Table 3-12. Building B vertical seismic story forces

Seismic Seismic
Area (Fx/Area) Area (Fx/Area)
Level Zone Design Force Zone Design Force
(sq ft) (psf) (sq ft) (psf)
(Fx) (kips) (Fx) (kips)
Roof 5400 56.0 10.4 3840 39.1 10.2
3rd B1 6075 69.3 11.4 B2 4320 51.1 11.8
2nd 6075 34.7 5.7 4320 27.0 6.3
Σ 160.0 116.2

Discussion

The distribution of the seismic forces between the two zones of Building B are similar, and to further
simplify the lateral force design, it is suggested to use the larger design forces of the two building wings for
the entire building.

If the seismic design forces were significantly different between the two building wings (zones), then
the designer may want to use these design forces for the two different building zone designs. Since the
building is “L” shaped, it is suggested the shear-wall design forces for those walls located at the vertex zone
(intersection) of the two building wings should be the larger of the two zone design forces.

So for this design example, the vertex zone seismic design forces would be:

Zone B2

Vertex
Zone B1 Zone

Figure 3-10. Building B zones (plain view)

2012 IBC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, Vol. 2 165

Design Example 3 ◾ Two-story Light-frame Multi-family Building Design Using Cold-formed-steel Wall Framing and Wood
Floor and Roof Framing

Table 3-13. Vertex zone seismic design forces

Controlling Design Force
Level
Zone (psf)
Roof B2* 10.2
3rd B2 11.8
2nd B2 6.3

Zone B2 governs at the roof since the roof diaphragms are separate; if they were connected, then Zone B1
would have governed the vertex zone seismic design forces.

11. Sheathed CFS-Stud Shear Walls—Framing Materials

The following is a brief review of the framing materials utilized for CFS-framed sheathed shear walls, as
well as minimum building code design requirements. The gravity load of the building is supported by CFS
bearing studs, which are sheathed with a structural material to provide lateral stability for the building. The
primarily elements of the shear-wall construction include sheathing screws, CFS studs, CFS tracks, CFS
blocking/bridging, shear transfer fasteners at the top and bottom of walls, an overturning restraint (hold-
down) system , and structural sheathing.

The American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) publishes the North American Specification for the Design of
Cold-Formed Steel Structural Members (AISI S100), a series of standards for cold-formed steel framing
(AISI S200, S201, S210, S211, S212, S213, S214), as well as the Cold-Formed Steel Design Manual
(D100). These publications cover the design requirements for CFS member, connection, and system design.

11.1 SCREW DESIGN AISI S100, AISI S200, AISI S213

The design requirements for screws used in CFS steel materials are covered in

1. AISI S100 North American Specification for the Design of Cold-Formed Steel Structural
Members, Section E4 and Appendix A, Supplement No. 2 (S100-07/S2-10)

2. AISI S200 North American Standard for Cold-Formed Steel Framing – General Provisions,
Section D1 and Commentary

3. AISI S213 North American Standard for Cold-Formed Steel Framing – Lateral Design,
Sections C2.2.1 and C2.2.2.

Screw sizes

Some of the typical screw sizes used for attaching CFS studs to CFS studs or structural steel are shown in
Table 3-14 (AISI S200, Table D1-1 and Table D1-2).

Table 3-14. Screw sizes and properties

Screw size #6 #8 #10 #12 ¼ in
Screw Diameter (in)(1): 0.138 0.164 0.190 0.216 0.250
Tip Point Styles (2): 2 2, 3 2, 3 2, 3, 4, 5 1, 4, 5

1. Screw shank diameter is measured out-to-out (threads are cut into the screw shank).
2. The higher the point-style number, the thicker the steel material the screw can penetrate (AISI S200
Table D1-2).
166 2012 IBC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual, Vol. 2