A Case for Rethinking ASCE 41 Performance-Based Assessment Criteria for Cold-Formed Steel

The objective of this paper is to evaluate the impact of applying the ASCE 41-17 performance-based design provisions on a 2-story building previously designed and tested during the CFS-NEES research project. The latest version of the American Society of Civil Engineers Standard 41 (ASCE 41-17) incorporates new provisions for the assessment of cold-formed steel (CFS) systems. These provisions include component acceptance criteria derived from a database of available experimental data. Though the new set of criteria was rigorously developed, how these criteria would score a newly-designed CFS building is not well understood. Given that the vast majority of CFS buildings are designed using linear procedures, particular interest is given to comparing the linear procedures for new design (i.e., using ASCE 7–16) versus the linear procedures for existing building assessment (i.e., using ASCE 41). Findings show that although the 2-story building withstood shake table tests with intensities greater than the maximum considered earthquake, the ASCE 41 assessment indicates the building’s shear walls are deficient. This highlights a disconnect between ASCE 41 and new building design per ASCE 7. To help resolve this disconnect, practical ways to account for system overstrength should be considered in future editions of ASCE 41.