In my experience traveling across the country observing wood-framed construction, it was apparent that east of the Rocky Mountains, structural wood members in-line with supporting walls between roof framing cease to be installed. Some may call these wood members blocking and deem them as optional. And often in a humid environment, installation of these members may be ardently resisted in order to provide ample attic ventilation and prevent mold growth. It is important, however, to understand that this blocking creates the structural boundary members for the roof diaphragm and it is not optional.
I like to think I’m flexible, but I’ve been accused of being rigid at times. I guess that’s what therapy is for. If you were to ask a light-frame structure diaphragm that same question, you would likely get multiple conflicting answers. The 1988 UBC first introduced parameters to evaluate diaphragm rigidity. Earthquake Regulations Section 2312(e)6 stated:
Provision shall be made for the increased shears resulting from horizontal torsion where diaphragms are not flexible. Diaphragms shall be considered flexible for the purposes of this paragraph when the maximum lateral deformation of the diaphragm is more than two times the average story drift of the associated story. This may be determined by comparing the computed midpoint in-plane deflection of the diaphragm under lateral load with the story drift of adjoining vertical resisting elements under equivalent tributary lateral load.