{"id":74436,"date":"2024-10-17T16:51:16","date_gmt":"2024-10-17T16:51:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/product\/uncategorized\/fema-p795-2011\/"},"modified":"2024-10-24T19:15:30","modified_gmt":"2024-10-24T19:15:30","slug":"fema-p795-2011","status":"publish","type":"product","link":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/product\/publishers\/fema\/fema-p795-2011\/","title":{"rendered":"FEMA P795 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"

0<\/p>\n

PDF Catalog<\/h4>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
PDF Pages<\/th>\nPDF Title<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n
1<\/td>\nFEMA P-795 Cover <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
3<\/td>\n01-Titlepage <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
5<\/td>\n02a-Foreword <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
7<\/td>\n02-Preface <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
9<\/td>\n03-Table of Contents <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
17<\/td>\n04-List of Figures <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
25<\/td>\n05-List of Tables <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
29<\/td>\n06-Chapter_1
1.1 Background and Purpose <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
31<\/td>\n1.2 Objectives and Scope <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
32<\/td>\n1.3 Assumptions and Limitations
1.3.1 Equivalency Approach
1.3.2 Suitability of Proposed Components <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
33<\/td>\n1.3.3 Suitability of the Reference Seismic-Force-Resisting System <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
34<\/td>\n1.3.4 Limitations on Test Data and Design Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
35<\/td>\n1.4 Anticipated Use and Implementation
1.5 Technical Approach <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
36<\/td>\n1.5.1 Identification of Key Component Performance Parameters
1.5.2 Development of Component Testing Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
37<\/td>\n1.5.3 Development of Probabilistic Acceptance Criteria <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
38<\/td>\n1.6 Content and Organization <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
41<\/td>\n07-Chapter_2
2.1 Introduction
2.1.1 Scope <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
42<\/td>\n2.1.2 General Approach
2.1.3 Description of Process <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
44<\/td>\n2.1.4 Terminology <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
46<\/td>\n2.1.5 Notation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
47<\/td>\n2.1.6 Statistical Notation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
48<\/td>\n2.2 Component Testing Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
49<\/td>\n2.2.1 General Requirements for Component Testing <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
50<\/td>\n2.2.2 Cyclic-Load Testing
Cyclic-Load Testing Protocol <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
51<\/td>\nNumber of Cyclic Test Specimens <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
52<\/td>\nCyclic-Load Test Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
53<\/td>\nConstruction of the Cyclic Envelope Curve
2.2.3 Monotonic-Load Testing <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
54<\/td>\nMonotonic-Load Testing Protocol
Number of Monotonic-Load Test Specimens
Monotonic-Load Test Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
55<\/td>\n2.3 Applicability Criteria <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
56<\/td>\n2.3.1 Required Information and Data
2.3.2 Reference Seismic-Force-Resisting System: Collapse Performance Criteria
2.3.3 Quality Rating Criteria
2.3.4 General Criteria <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
57<\/td>\n2.4 Reference Component Test Data Requirements
2.4.1 Define Reference Component Design Space <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
58<\/td>\n2.4.2 Compile or Generate Reference Component Test Data
2.4.3 Interpret Reference Component Test Results
2.4.4 Define Reference Component Performance Groups <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
59<\/td>\n2.4.5 Compute Summary Statistics
2.5 Proposed Component Design Requirements
2.5.1 Component Design Strength and Stiffness <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
60<\/td>\n2.5.2 Component Detailing Requirements
2.5.3 Component Connection Requirements
2.5.4 Limitations on Component Applicability and Use
2.5.5 Component Construction, Inspection, and Maintenance Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
61<\/td>\n2.6 Proposed Component Test Data Requirements
2.6.1 Define Proposed Component Design Space
2.6.2 Select Proposed Component Configurations for Testing
2.6.3 Perform Cyclic-Load and Monotonic-Load Tests
2.6.4 Interpret Proposed Component Test Results <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
62<\/td>\n2.6.5 Define Proposed Component Performance Groups
2.6.6 Compute Summary Statistics
2.7 Quality Rating Criteria
2.7.1 Quality Rating of Test Data
Completeness and Robustness of Tests <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
63<\/td>\nConfidence in Test Results <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
64<\/td>\n2.7.2 Quality Rating of Design Requirements
Completeness and Robustness of Design Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
65<\/td>\nConfidence in Design Requirements
2.8 Component Equivalency Acceptance Criteria
2.8.1 Overall Approach to Establishing Equivalency
2.8.2 Requirements Based on Cyclic-Load Test Data: Strength and Ultimate Deformation Capacity
Requirements for Component Performance Groups <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
67<\/td>\nRequirements for Individual Component Configurations
2.8.3 Requirements Based on Cyclic-Load Test Data: Effective Initial Stiffness <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
68<\/td>\n2.8.4 Requirements Based on Cyclic-Load Test Data: Effective Ductility Capacity
2.8.5 Requirements Based on Monotonic-Load Test Data: Ultimate Deformation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
69<\/td>\n2.9 Documentation and Peer Review Requirements
2.9.1 Documentation
2.9.2 Documentation of Test Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
70<\/td>\n2.9.3 Peer Review Panel Requirements
2.9.4 Peer Review Panel Selection <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
71<\/td>\n2.9.5 Peer Review Panel Responsibilities <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
73<\/td>\n08-Chapter_3.pdf
3.1 Introduction <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
74<\/td>\n3.2 Component Testing Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
75<\/td>\n3.2.1 General Requirements for Component Testing <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
76<\/td>\nLoad Application (Vertical Loads)
Testing of Materials
Testing of the Connection between the Proposed Component and the Balance of the Seismic-Force-Resisting System
3.2.2 Cyclic-Load Testing
Cyclic-Load Testing Protocol <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
78<\/td>\nNumber of Cyclic Test Specimens <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
79<\/td>\nCyclic-Load Test Data
Construction of the Cyclic Envelope Curve <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
84<\/td>\n3.2.3 Monotonic-Load Testing
3.3 Applicability Criteria
3.3.1 Required Information and Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
85<\/td>\n3.3.2 Reference Seismic-Force-Resisting System: Collapse Performance Criteria
3.3.3 Quality Rating Criteria
3.3.4 General Criteria <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
92<\/td>\n3.4 Reference Component Test Data Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
93<\/td>\n3.4.1 Define Reference Component Design Space <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
94<\/td>\n3.4.2 Compile or Generate Reference Component Test Data
3.4.3 Interpret Reference Component Test Results
3.4.4 Define Reference Component Performance Groups <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
97<\/td>\n3.4.5 Compute Summary Statistics
3.5 Proposed Component Design Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
98<\/td>\n3.5.1 Component Design Strength and Stiffness
3.5.2 Component Detailing Requirements
3.5.3 Component Connection Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
99<\/td>\n3.5.4 Limitations on Component Applicability and Use
3.5.5 Component Construction, Inspection, and Maintenance Requirements
3.6 Proposed Component Test Data Requirements
3.6.1 Define Proposed Component Design Space <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
100<\/td>\n3.6.2 Select Proposed Component Configurations for Testing
3.6.3 Perform Cyclic-Load and Monotonic-Load Tests
3.6.4 Interpret Proposed Component Test Results
3.6.5 Define Proposed Component Performance Groups <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
101<\/td>\n3.6.6 Compute Summary Statistics
3.7 Quality Rating Criteria
3.7.1 Quality Rating of Test Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
102<\/td>\nCompleteness and Robustness of Tests <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
103<\/td>\nConfidence in Test Results
3.7.2 Quality Rating of Design Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
104<\/td>\nCompleteness and Robustness of Design Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
105<\/td>\nConfidence in Design Requirements
3.8 Component Equivalency Acceptance Criteria
3.8.1 Overall Approach to Establishing Equivalency <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
106<\/td>\n3.8.2 Requirements Based on Cyclic-Load Test Data: Strength and Ultimate Deformation
Requirements for Component Performance Groups <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
108<\/td>\nRequirements for Individual Component Configurations
3.8.3 Requirements Based on Cyclic-Load Test Data: Effective Initial Stiffness <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
109<\/td>\n3.8.4 Requirements Based on Cyclic-Load Test Data: Effective Ductility Capacity
3.8.5 Requirements Based on Monotonic-Load Test Data: Ultimate Deformation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
110<\/td>\n3.9 Documentation and Peer Review Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
113<\/td>\n09-Chapter_4.pdf
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Component Testing Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
114<\/td>\n4.3 Evaluation of Applicability Criteria
4.4 Reference Component Test Data
4.4.1 Define Reference Component Design Space
4.4.2 Compile or Generate Reference Component Test Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
115<\/td>\n4.4.3 Interpret the Reference Component Test Results <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
121<\/td>\n4.4.4 Define Reference Component Performance Groups
4.4.5 Compute Summary Statistics <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
122<\/td>\n4.5 Proposed Component Design Requirements
4.5.1 Component Design Strength and Stiffness <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
123<\/td>\n4.5.2 Component Detailing Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
124<\/td>\n4.5.3 Component Connection Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
125<\/td>\n4.5.4 Limitations on Component Applicability and Use
4.5.5 Component Construction, Inspection, and Maintenance Requirements
4.6 Proposed Component Test Data
4.6.1 Define Proposed Component Design Space <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
126<\/td>\n4.6.2 Select Proposed Component Configurations for Testing <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
127<\/td>\n4.6.3 Perform Cyclic-Load and Monotonic-Load Tests <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
128<\/td>\n4.6.4 Interpret Proposed Component Test Results <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
129<\/td>\n4.6.5 Define Proposed Component Performance Groups
Performance Parameters based on Cyclic-Load Testing: <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
130<\/td>\nPerformance Parameters based on Monotonic-Load Testing:
4.6.6 Compute Summary Statistics
4.7 Evaluate Quality Ratings
4.7.1 Quality Rating of Test Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
131<\/td>\n4.7.2 Quality Rating of Design Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
132<\/td>\n4.8 Evaluate Component Equivalency
4.8.1 Overview
4.8.2 Requirements Based on Cyclic-Load Test Data: Strength and Ultimate Deformation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
134<\/td>\n4.8.3 Requirements Based on Cyclic-Load Test Data: Effective Initial Stiffness <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
135<\/td>\n4.8.4 Requirements Based on Cyclic-Load Test Data: Effective Ductility Capacity
4.8.5 Requirements Based on Monotonic-Load Test Data: Ultimate Deformation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
136<\/td>\n4.9 Summary of Example Component Equivalency Evaluation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
137<\/td>\n10-Chapter_5.pdf
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Findings from Supporting Studies
5.2.1 Key Performance Parameters <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
138<\/td>\nDeformation Capacity <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
139<\/td>\nStrength <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
140<\/td>\n5.2.2 Cyclic-Load and Monotonic-Load Test Data Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
141<\/td>\n5.2.3 Probabilistic Acceptance Criteria <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
142<\/td>\n5.3 Findings of Test Applications
5.3.1 General Findings
Performance Groups <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
143<\/td>\nAvailable Test Data
Cyclic-Load Testing Protocol
Iterative Process for Component Equivalency <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
144<\/td>\n5.3.2 Specific Findings: Stapled-Wood Shear Wall Components
5.3.3 Specific Findings: Buckling-Restrained Brace Components <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
145<\/td>\n5.3.4 Specific Findings: Pre-Fabricated Wall Components
5.3.5 Specific Findings: Nailed Wood Shear Wall Reference Component Data Set <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
146<\/td>\n5.4 Recommendations for Further Study
5.4.1 Compilation of Available Reference System Benchmark Data
5.4.2 Development of Additional Reference System Benchmark Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
147<\/td>\n5.4.3 Development of Standard Cyclic-Load Testing Methods
5.4.4 Implications for Design Requirements Related to Overstrength <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
149<\/td>\n11-Appendix_A.pdf
A.1 Introduction
A.2 Representative Component Behavior <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
152<\/td>\nA.3 Literature Review
A.3.1 Collapse Studies <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
154<\/td>\nA.3.2 Non-Collapse Studies <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
157<\/td>\nA.4 Wood Light-Frame Building Collapse Sensitivity Studies
A.4.1 Building Models and Baseline Component Parameter Values <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
160<\/td>\nA.4.2 Sensitivity Study Results for Three-Story Building: Full Replacement <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
163<\/td>\nA.4.3 Sensitivity Study Results for Three-Story Planar Model: Mixing-and-Matching Over the Height of Building <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
169<\/td>\nA.4.4 Sensitivity Study Results for Three-Story Three-Dimensional Model: Mixing-and-Matching of Walls in Plan and Over Height <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
172<\/td>\nA.4.5 Summary of Parameter Importance for Wood Light-Frame Buildings <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
174<\/td>\nA.5 Reinforced Concrete Special Moment Frame Collapse Sensitivity Study <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
177<\/td>\nA.6 Summary of Key Component Parameters <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
181<\/td>\n12-Appendix_B.pdf
B.1 Introduction
B.2 Cyclic-Load Test Data Considerations <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
182<\/td>\nB.2.1 Importance of Cyclic-Loading History <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
183<\/td>\nB.2.2 Overview of Commonly Used Loading Protocols <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
185<\/td>\nB.2.3 Selection of Acceptable Loading Histories and Protocols <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
187<\/td>\nLimits of Normalized Cumulative Deformation Demand <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
188<\/td>\nSelection Criteria for Proposed Component Loading History <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
190<\/td>\nB.2.4 Special Case: Same Loading Protocol Used to Generate Proposed and Reference Component Data
B.2.5 Illustration: Comparison of Loading Histories
Computation of Normalized Cumulative Deformation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
192<\/td>\nComparison of Loading Histories for Proposed and Reference Component Tests <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
193<\/td>\nB.2.6 Additional Considerations for Cyclic-Load Testing
B.3 Monotonic-Load Test Data Considerations <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
194<\/td>\nB.3.1 Importance of Monotonic-Load Test Data in Component Methodology <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
196<\/td>\nB.3.2 Illustration: Limitations of Using Only Cyclic-Load Test Data for Component Equivalency <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
199<\/td>\nB.3.3 Monotonic-Load Test Data Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
201<\/td>\n13-Appendix_C.pdf
C.1 Introduction
C.2 Collapse Capacity Fragilities and the Effects of Uncertainty <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
204<\/td>\nC.3 Effect of Changes in Deformation Capacity on the Collapse Fragility <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
207<\/td>\nC.4 Effect of Changes in Strength on the Collapse Fragility <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
210<\/td>\nC.5 Probabilistic Acceptance Criterion Used in Component Equivalency Methodology
C.5.1 Overall Approach
C.5.2 Development of the Penalty Factor for Differences in Uncertainty <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
212<\/td>\nC.5.3 Development of the Penalty Factor for Differences in Strength <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
215<\/td>\n14-Appendix_D.pdf
D.1 Introduction
D.2 Description of Stapled Wood Shear Walls <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
217<\/td>\nD.3 Evaluation of Applicability Criteria <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
218<\/td>\nD.4 Reference Component Test Data
D.4.1 Define the Reference Component Design Space
D.4.2 Compile or Generate Reference Component Test Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
219<\/td>\nD.4.3 Interpret Reference Component Test Results <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
223<\/td>\nD.4.4 Define Reference Component Performance Groups
D.4.5 Compute Summary Statistics
D.5 Proposed Component Design Requirements
D.5.1 Component Design Strength and Stiffness <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
224<\/td>\nD.5.2 Component Detailing Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
226<\/td>\nD.5.3 Component Connection Requirements
D.5.4 Limitations on Component Applicability and Use
D.5.5 Component Construction, Inspection, and Maintenance Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
227<\/td>\nD.6 Proposed Component Test Data
D.6.1 Define Proposed Component Design Space
D.6.2 Select Component Configurations for Testing
D.6.3 Perform Cyclic-Load and Monotonic-Load Tests <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
228<\/td>\nD.6.4 Interpret Proposed Component Test Results <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
229<\/td>\nD.6.5 Define Proposed Component Performance Groups and Compute Summary Statistics <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
230<\/td>\nD.7 Evaluate Quality Ratings
D.7.1 Quality Rating of Test Data
D.7.2 Quality Rating of Design Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
231<\/td>\nD.8 Evaluate Component Equivalency
D.8.1 Overview
D.8.2 Requirements Based on Cyclic-Load Test Data: Strength and Ultimate Deformation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
233<\/td>\nD.8.3 Requirements Based on Cyclic-Load Test Data: Effective Initial Stiffness <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
234<\/td>\nD.8.4 Requirements Based on Cyclic-Load Test Data: Effective Ductility Capacity
D.8.5 Requirements Based on Monotonic-Load Test Data: Ultimate Deformation
D.8.6 Summary of Component Equivalency Evaluation
D.9 Iteration: Evaluate Component Equivalency with Modifications <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
235<\/td>\nD.10 Summary of Component Equivalency Evaluation of Stapled Wood Shear Walls <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
237<\/td>\n15-Appendix_E.pdf
E.1 Introduction <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
238<\/td>\nE.2 Description of Buckling-Restrained Braces <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
239<\/td>\nE.3 Evaluation of Applicability Criteria <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
241<\/td>\nE.4 Reference Component Test Data
E.4.1 Define Reference Component Design Space <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
242<\/td>\nE.4.2 Define Reference Component Performance Groups
E.4.3 Compile or Generate Reference Component Test Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
245<\/td>\nE.4.4 Interpret Reference Component Test Results <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
249<\/td>\nE.4.5 Compute Summary Statistics <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
250<\/td>\nE.5 Proposed Component Design Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
251<\/td>\nE.5.1 Component Design Strength and Stiffness <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
252<\/td>\nE.5.2 Component Detailing Requirements
E.5.3 Component Connection Requirements
E.5.4 Limitations on Component Applicability and Use
E.5.5 Component Construction, Inspection, and Maintenance Requirements
Construction, inspection, and maintenance requirements for BRBs follow AISC 341-10 provisions for quality assurance which include requirements for written description of qualifications, procedures, quality inspections, resources, and records to be use… <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
253<\/td>\nE.6 Proposed Component Test Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
255<\/td>\nE.6.1 Define Proposed Component Design Space
E.6.2 Select Component Configurations for Testing <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
256<\/td>\nE.6.3 Perform Cyclic-Load and Monotonic-Load Tests <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
257<\/td>\nE.6.4 Interpret Proposed Component Test Results <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
259<\/td>\nE.6.5 Compute Summary Statistics
E.7 Evaluate Quality Ratings
E.7.1 Quality Rating of Test Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
260<\/td>\nE.7.2 Quality Rating of Design Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
261<\/td>\nE.8 Evaluate Component Equivalency
E.8.1 Overview
E.8.2 Requirements Based on Cyclic-Load Test Data: Strength and Ultimate Deformation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
262<\/td>\nE.8.3 Requirements Based on Cyclic-Load Test Data: Effective Initial Stiffness
E.8.4 Requirements Based on Cyclic-Load Test Data: Effective Ductility Capacity <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
263<\/td>\nE.8.5 Requirements Based on Monotonic Load Test Data: Ultimate Deformation
E.8.6 Summary of Component Equivalency Evaluation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
264<\/td>\nE.9 Loading Protocol Suitability <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
266<\/td>\nE.10 Summary of Component Equivalency Evaluation of Buckling-Restrained Braces
E.11 Limitations of Test Application
E.11.1 Reference Component Test Data Do Not Fully Represent the Design Space
E.11.2 The Equivalency Evaluation May Not Adequately Account for System Differences <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
267<\/td>\nE.11.3 Component Parameters are Approximate <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
269<\/td>\n17-Appendix_F.pdf
F.1 Introduction
F.2 Description of Pre-Fabricated Wall Component <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
270<\/td>\nF.3 Evaluation of Applicability Criteria <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
271<\/td>\nF.4 Reference Component Test Data
F.5 Proposed Component Design Requirements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
272<\/td>\nF.6 Proposed Component Test Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
274<\/td>\nF.7 Evaluate Quality Ratings
F.7.1 Quality Rating of Test Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
275<\/td>\nF.7.2 Quality Rating of Design Requirements
F.8 Evaluate Component Equivalency
F.8.1 Overview <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
276<\/td>\nF.8.2 Requirements Based on Cyclic-Load Test Data: Strength and Ultimate Deformation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
277<\/td>\nF.8.3 Requirements Based on Cyclic-Load Test Data: Effective Initial Stiffness
F.8.4 Requirements Based on Cyclic Test Data: Effective Ductility Capacity <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
278<\/td>\nF.8.5 Requirements Based on Monotonic Load Test Data: Ultimate Deformation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
279<\/td>\nF.9 Summary of Component Equivalency Evaluation of Pre-Fabricated Wall Components <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
281<\/td>\n18-References.pdf
\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
291<\/td>\n19-ProjectParticipants.pdf
ATC Management and Oversight
FEMA Project Officer
FEMA Technical Monitor
Project Management Committee
Stanford, California 94305 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
292<\/td>\nWorking Groups
Project Review Panel <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

FEMA P-795 – Quantification of Building Seismic Performance Factors: Component Equivalency Methodology<\/b><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
Published By<\/td>\nPublication Date<\/td>\nNumber of Pages<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
FEMA<\/b><\/a><\/td>\n2011<\/td>\n292<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":74437,"template":"","meta":{"rank_math_lock_modified_date":false,"ep_exclude_from_search":false},"product_cat":[2743],"product_tag":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-74436","1":"product","2":"type-product","3":"status-publish","4":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"product_cat-fema","8":"first","9":"instock","10":"sold-individually","11":"shipping-taxable","12":"purchasable","13":"product-type-simple"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/product\/74436","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/product"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/product"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/74437"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=74436"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"product_cat","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/product_cat?post=74436"},{"taxonomy":"product_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/product_tag?post=74436"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}