Shear Wall Report Format: What to Include for Permit Review

A good shear wall report follows one path a reviewer can trace without help. It starts with project data and code basis, then runs through loads, diaphragm distribution, wall lines, segments, hardware and foundation anchorage, and ends with a pass/fail summary and a wall schedule. This guide gives you that order for 1- and 2-story wood-framed projects in California, Oregon and Nevada, with an example of what each section should show.

TL;DR

• Put the project data, governing code editions and lateral-system assumptions on page one. Verify the adopted code with the local building department.
• For every wall line and load case, show unit shear demand, capacity, adjustment factors, total shear, overturning and the demand-to-capacity ratio.
• State whether each wall line is segmented or perforated, and carry the opening effects through to hold-down forces.
• Make the wall schedule match the calculations exactly, and match the wall IDs on the plans.
• Close with a short summary table so a plan checker sees pass/fail at a glance.

Table of Contents

• Why the format matters as much as the numbers
• Recommended order of a shear wall report
• Page one: project data and code basis
• Loads and diaphragm assumptions
• Wall geometry, openings and method
• The core calculation table
• Nailing, sheathing and the wall schedule
• Overturning, hold-downs, straps and anchorage
• Story drift and the summary page
• Our perspective
• Try the format in a real report
• Pre-submittal checklist
• FAQ
• Sources

Why the format matters as much as the numbers

A shear wall report is a calculation document and a coordination document. Plan checkers and field crews need to follow the load from roof and diaphragm, to wall line, to wall segment, to hardware, to foundation. A correct wall check can still draw review comments when that path is not visible.

California plan-review guidance shows what reviewers expect. One county's single family plan submittal guidelines call for coordination of wall types, sheathing, nail size and spacing, hold-downs, straps, anchor bolts, collectors and connections. The same guidance expects wall identifiers and schedules to match the floor and foundation plans, with hardware shown at actual locations. It also notes that interior shear walls often need a dedicated shear plan sheet, because they cannot be identified clearly on an architectural floor plan.

So the report is not a replacement for coordinated drawings. It is the back-up that proves the drawings.

Recommended order of a shear wall report

There is no single national template. Jurisdictions differ, and published examples from AWC, WoodWorks, HUD and software vendors each organize things a little differently. The order below combines what those examples have in common with what California submittal guidance asks for.

Page one: project data and code basis

The first page should identify the project address, scope of work, occupancy and construction type, the design professional, the governing code, risk category, site parameters and lateral-system assumptions. A reviewer should know what you designed, under which rules, before reading a single equation.

Code-year control is one of the most common review issues in the West, so do not paste it from an old template. In California, Nevada County states that projects submitted on or after January 1, 2026 use the 2025 California codes, and its design criteria reference ASCE 7-22, NDS-2024 and SDPWS-2021. That is one county's criteria. Bakersfield, other California jurisdictions, and Oregon and Nevada jurisdictions may adopt different editions or amendments.

What to do: call or check the website of the building department that will review your plans, confirm the edition and any local amendments, and then write that exact basis on page one. Also confirm who must prepare the documents. California's construction documents section, CBC Section 107, covers the required project data and when a registered design professional must prepare them under jurisdictional law.

Loads and diaphragm assumptions

Wall checks should trace back to diaphragm load distribution. They should never appear as isolated calculations. State your wind and seismic parameters, show the resulting story shear, and say how the diaphragm distributes that shear to each wall line.

The analysis model changes the answer. HUD's one-story design example distributes the lateral load to shear walls by two methods, flexible and rigid diaphragm, and the demands are not the same. WoodWorks' current cantilever diaphragm example notes that rigid-diaphragm forces depend on wall stiffness. Because changing wall construction changes stiffness, the design can become iterative.

In the report, that means three lines of text:

1. The diaphragm assumption you used and why it is appropriate for this roof and floor system.
2. The tributary or distribution method, with the resulting force per wall line.
3. If you used a rigid assumption, a note that wall stiffness was updated after the final wall construction was selected.

If your assemblies also vary the wall thickness, for example when you compare insulation approaches, this comparison of closed-cell and open-cell insulation is a useful side reference. Keep that coordination outside the structural calculation, but make sure the wall thickness on the plans matches the one you checked.

Wall geometry, openings and method

Openings are a frequent report weakness. For each wall line, the report should say whether it is designed as segmented or perforated, show the opening geometry, identify the aspect-ratio or perforation adjustment that applies, and carry that effect into unit shear, overturning and hold-down calculations. A schedule that lists only sheathing and nails can hide the opening checks that actually govern.

AWC's wood shear wall design examples for wind compare a wall analyzed under the 2015 WFCM and the 2015 SDPWS, which makes them a useful reference for how method choice shows up on paper.

A clean wall geometry table per wall line includes:

• Wall line ID and story
• Total length and height
• Opening widths and heights
• Full-height segment lengths
• Height-to-width ratio of each segment
• Method used (segmented or perforated)

If you want a refresher on how aspect ratio limits and adjustments work, see our guide to shear wall aspect ratio and the explainer on shear wall ratio.

The core calculation table

This is the part a reviewer will check line by line. For every wall line and governing load case, show:

• Required unit shear (plf)
• Selected allowable or nominal capacity (plf)
• Adjustment factors, each named
• Total wall shear (lb)
• Overturning tension and compression (lb)
• Demand-to-capacity ratio

A published example shows the level of detail. The Tekla Tedds verification example for a segmented wall under wind compares 2:1 and 3:1 aspect ratios. It reports a nominal wood structural panel capacity of 1,065 lb/ft, a total shear of 6,575 lb and a required hold-down capacity of 4,968 lb for one wind case. It also compares results as a percentage against an independent AWC example. Treat those as example values for that problem, not as design values for your project.

A compact layout for your own report might look like this, using placeholder values:

For worked numbers, see our two shear wall calculation examples.

Nailing, sheathing and the wall schedule

Treat the wall schedule as a design output, not a drafting note. Sheathing, nail patterns, aspect ratios, hold-down forces and wall-line demands interact. Simpson Strong-Tie's engineering blog shows that changing interior sheathing or the design method can materially change capacity and hold-down results. The schedule must therefore reflect the exact assumptions in your calculations.

Each schedule row should give:

• Wall type ID, matching the plans
• Sheathing type and panel thickness
• Nail size and edge, field and boundary spacing
• Blocking and edge distance notes
• Single or double-sided sheathing
• Allowable unit shear used in the calculation

We cover this in more detail in our nailing schedules guide and our shear wall schedule checklist.

Overturning, hold-downs, straps and anchorage

Hold-down values are not interchangeable between design methods or rod systems. Strong-Tie's example analyzes a full-height and a perforated shear wall for the same condition. It shows that the two methods use different hold-down calculations, and it distinguishes cumulative tension in traditional hold-downs from incremental tension in continuous rod systems.

Your report should therefore state:

• The method used (segmented or perforated)
• The force path from the wall to the foundation
• The hardware selected and its rated capacity
• Anchor bolt or foundation anchorage design
• Whether forces accumulate between stories on a 2-story building
• Collectors and transfer straps at openings and diaphragm changes

Then make sure every one of these items appears on the shear plan or foundation plan at its actual location, as plan checkers expect.

Story drift and the summary page

Include the drift or deflection check for each story where your code basis requires it, with the assumptions behind the deflection calculation. Then end with a one-page summary: a table of wall lines, governing load cases, D/C ratios, hold-down forces and pass/fail. A reviewer who only reads the summary should be able to see what controls the design and where to look for the backup.

Our perspective

We built ShearWise Pro around one idea: for 1- and 2-story wood buildings, the report is part of the deliverable, not a by-product of the calculation. Most review comments we hear about come from a missing link in the chain, not from a wrong number. The wall schedule says one thing, the calculation assumed another. Openings are in the plan but not in the check. The hold-down force is correct but the method is not stated.

That is why our workflow keeps wall lines, openings, full-height segments, hold-down forces, transfer straps, roof information and drift checks in one project. The PDF is produced from the same data you entered, so the report and the schedule cannot drift apart. A focused tool for residential wood buildings does less than general-purpose structural software, and that is the point: fewer screens between you and a reviewer-friendly report.

Always review the output as the engineer or designer of record. Software organizes the work. It does not replace your judgment or the local code basis.

— Evalin

Try the format in a real report

If you want to see this structure in practice, open the sample ShearWise report. You can also start with the three-report trial, which is free and produces watermarked reports, on the ShearWise Pro plans page. After the trial, access is $29 per month or $250 per year. You can also read about the shear wall software for residential wood buildings and browse our validation library.

Pre-submittal checklist

1. Page one lists project data, risk category and the code editions confirmed with the local department.
2. Loads and diaphragm assumptions are stated, with distribution to each wall line.
3. Every wall line is labeled segmented or perforated.
4. Opening geometry and aspect-ratio adjustments feed the unit shear and hold-down results.
5. The wall schedule matches the calculations and the wall IDs on the plans.
6. Hold-downs, straps, anchors and collectors appear on the plans at their actual locations.
7. Drift checks and a summary table are included.

FAQ

Is there an official shear wall report format?

No single national template exists. Each jurisdiction sets its own submittal requirements, and published examples from AWC, WoodWorks, HUD and others vary in layout. Use the order in this guide and check the checklist of the building department that will review the plans.

What does a shear wall report example usually show?

Published examples show loads, diaphragm distribution, wall geometry, capacity with adjustment factors, overturning and hold-down forces. The Tekla verification example reports values in lb/ft and pounds for one wind case. Our sample report on the ShearWise site shows a finished PDF.

Which code editions should I list for a California project?

List the editions the local jurisdiction has adopted for your submittal date, including local amendments. Nevada County, for example, uses the 2025 California codes for projects submitted on or after January 1, 2026. Confirm with your own building department, whether in Bakersfield or elsewhere, rather than assuming.

Do I need separate calculations for perforated and segmented walls?

Yes, the two methods use different hold-down and capacity calculations. State which method applies to each wall line and show the opening effects in the result. The schedule alone does not show this.

Sources

• CCBD Single Family Residence Plan Submittal Guidelines
• 2025 Building Codes and Design Criteria, Nevada County, CA
• 107 Construction Documents, 2025 California Building Code
• HUD Appendix E, Design Example
• WoodWorks, A Design Example of a Cantilever Wood Diaphragm
• AWC, Wood Shear Wall Design Examples for Wind
• Tekla Tedds Verification Example, Segmented Wind (ASD)
• Strong-Tie, Wood Shear Wall Design Example
• Strong-Tie, Wood Shear Wall Design Example (2014)

Recommended

• U.S. Permit Shear Calcs: 4 Reviewer Nonnegotiables and a Sample Report
• Shear Wall As-Built Changes: 3 Records Reviewers Expect
• 3 Moves to Clear Shear Wall Plan Check Comments for U.S. Permits
• Pass Permit Review: 3 Shear Wall Layout Checks Designers Must Do