METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE

ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

METAL BUILDING FRAMING

METAL BUILDING
ROOF SYSTEMS
Presented by
Thomas M. Murray, Ph.D., P.E.
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia
thmurray@vt.edu

X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

06 March 2008

1 2

METAL BUILDING FRAMING ROOF PANELS

Sheet to sheet fastener
Purlin Sheet to structural fastener
Eave
strut
Z - purlin
Roof
panel
Girt
(a) Through-fastened panel

Wall Ridge
panel Anti-roll Clip fastener Standing seam clip
clip
Rigid Z - purlin
frame
3 4
(b) Standing seam panel

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD1, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 1
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

ROOF PANELS STANDING SEAM CLIPS

Pan Type Panel Profile

Rib Type Panel Profile

(a) Fixed Clip (b) Sliding or Two-Piece Clip

5 6

ANTI-ROLL CLIPS LECTURE OUTLINE

• Structural Behavior of C - and Z - Purlins

• Specific AISI Design Methods for Purlins
• Continuous Purlin Design
• System Anchorage Requirements

7 8

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD2, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 2
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

C – Purlins
STRUCTURAL BEHAVIOR
OF
C – and Z – PURLINS Building
rafter

An Overview

9 10

C – Purlins C – Purlins

Resultant Applied Force

Resultant Applied Force
Anchorage Force

+ Shear Center + Shear Center

e
Resulting Torque = Force x e
C-purlins tend to twist because applied force An anchorage system must be provided to
does not act through the shear center. resist this torque.
11 12

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD3, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 3
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

Z - Purlins Z - Purlins
y
Resultant Applied Force

b
x2

Building
rafter Principal
θp
θp

x d
Axes
S.C. y2

13 14

Z - Purlins Z - Purlins
y

e
Torque is induced Unless restrained,
b
x2 because load does b
x2 the Z – Purlin
not pass through the deflects in the
search center. principal axes
θp
θp
θp

x x directions, e.g.
d
Location of resultant d

S.C.
y2 y2 x2 and y2 -directions.
force, e, is not easily
t
determined. t

15 16

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD4, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 4
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS
Z - Purlins
The combined effects of
W
applied force eccentricity
and non-principal axes
bending cause
y y
W(Ixy/Ix) (1) twisting of the Z-purlin
x x
(2) need for an anchorage
system
17
Z - Purlins
W Ixy = product of inertia
= Σ Ixy + Σ Adxdy
y Ix = moment of inertia
about x-axis
x About the X-axis using fb = Mx y / Ix
W(Ixy/Ix)
19
Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD5, P.E.
Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009
X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER
Z - Purlins
W For constrained bending and
the load acting through the
shear center, there is a force
W(Ixy/Ix) which must be
resisted.
W(Ixy/Ix)
Attachment to roof panels
causes partially constrained
bending and a system effect.
18
C- and Z – Purlins
Industry Practice
•Constrained Bending is Assumed for
Calculation of Stresses.
• Stresses are Calculated for Bending
• AISI Specification Provisions are used to
Determine LRFD Strength or ASD
Capacity
20
5
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

Definitions Definitions

Negative Moment
w
Moment which causes compression in M
the bottom flange of a purlin.
Positive Moment M
Moment which causes tension in the
bottom flange of a purlin. M(+) M(-)
Note: Moment diagram is drawn on the tension side.
21 22

AISI Specification and Commentary

SPECIFIC AISI DESIGN
METHODS FOR
C – and Z – PURLINS

A Brief Overview

23 24

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD6, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 6
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

Combined LRFD and ASD Sheathing and Purlin Provisions

LRFD Design Flexural Strength:

• Through Fastened Panels
φbRn = 0.9 Rn
ASD Allowable Flexural Strength • Standing Seam Panels
Ra = Rn/Ω
Ω = Rn/1.67 • Gravity Loading
where Rn = Nominal Strength • Uplift Loading

25 26

Through Fastened Panels Through Fastened Panels

Gravity Loading
Sheet to sheet fastener
• Constrained Bending
Sheet to structural fastener
• AISI Provisions for
Yielding,
Z - purlin
Local Buckling, and
Lateral-Torsional Buckling.

27 28

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD7, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 7
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

Through Fastened Panels Through Fastened Panels

Uplift Loading R-Factor Method
Uplift Loading
Nominal Strength:
• Constrained Bending
Mn = R Se Fy
• AISI Provisions for Yielding and
Local Buckling where Se = effective section modulus
• AISI R-Factor Method for flexural- Fy = material yield stress
torsional and nonlinear distortional
behavior. R = reduction factor
29 30

Through Fastened Panels Through Fastened Panels

Uplift Loading R-Factor Method Uplift Loading R-Factor Method
R = reduction factor TABLE C3.1.3-1
Simple Span C- or Z-Section R Values
= 0.6 for continuous C-purlins
Depth Range, in. (mm) Profile R
= 0.7 for continuous Z-purlins d < 6.5 (165) C or Z 0.70
6.5 (165) < d < 8.5 (216) C or Z 0.65
Values determined experimentally.
8.5 (216) < d < 11.5 (292) Z 0.50
8.5 (216) < d < 11.5 (292) C 0.40
31 32

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD8, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 8
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

Through Fastened Panels Through Fastened Panels

Uplift Loading R-Factor Method Uplift Loading R-Factor Method
• R-values were determined from LRFD Design Strength:
tests of purlin systems without
intermediate lateral restraints. φbMn = 0.9 Mn = 0.9 RSeFy

• Reduction factors apply only to ASD Allowable Strength

systems within limits of testing Ma = Mn/Ω
Ω = RSeFy/1.67
matrix, which is included in the
Specification. where Se = effective section modulus
33 34

Through Fastened Panels Standing Seam Panels

Uplift Loading R-Factor Method Clip fastener Standing seam clip

Limitations: Does NOT apply to Z - purlin

(1) to a negative moment region between
an inflection point and a support

Applies Does not apply

(2) to cantilevers.
(a) Fixed clamp (b) Sliding or two piece clip
35 36

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD9, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 9
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

Standing Seam Panels Standing Seam Panels

• Panel drape and clip friction provide

some lateral restraint.
• Degree of restraint depends on details of
standing seam system.
• Restraint varies from ~40% to near Sheathing
100% of through-fastened systems.
• Mathematical procedures are not available
for determining degree of restraint.
37 38

Standing Seam Panels Standing Seam Panels

AISI Permitted Design Procedures:
A. Design purlins as unbraced between
lateral restraints using lateral-torsional
and distortional buckling provisions.
Method ignores clip friction and hugging
or drape effects of the standing seam panel.
This approach is very conservative for
systems without intermediate lateral
restraints. 39
AISI Permitted Design Procedures:
B. AISI TS-8-02
Base Test Method for Purlins Supporting
a Standing Seam Roof System
The Base Test Method uses the
results from two purlin line, simple span
tests to determine the gravity loading
positive moment strength or the uplift
loading negative moment strength of
continuous systems. 40

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD10, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 10
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

The Base Test Method The Base Test Method

AISI Base Test Procedure AISI Base Test Procedure
a) Conduct six single span, two purlin line A set of six tests is required for each
tests. combination of panel profile, purlin depth,
and clip type.
b) Three tests are to use the thinnest purlin
and three tests to use the thickest purlin in A procedure is available to significantly
the inventory. reduce the number of tests when several
clip heights or types are used by the
c) Develop the R-factor relationship from the
manufacturer.
test results.
The tests are conducted in a vacuum chamber.
41 42

The Base Test Method The Base Test Method

Standing seam
panels

Support
beam
Eave angle
Ridge angle

Purlins

Vacuum
Chamber
43 44

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD11, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 11
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

The Base Test Method The Base Test Method

AISI Test Procedure Procedure AISI Procedure Procedure
100
The Reduction Factor for each test is 90

Moment reduction factor R (%)

80 Thinnest Thickest
M ts 70
Rt = ≤ 1.0
Mnt 60
50 R-Factor Relationship
where Mts = maximum moment from test 40
30
Mnt = fully constrained flexural 20
strength using measured 10
dimensions and yield stress 0
50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210 230 250
45 46
Nominal moment strength (K - in)

The Base Test Method The Base Test Method

AISI Procedure Procedure AISI Base Test Procedure
100
90 The R-Factor relationship is a straight line,
Moment reduction factor R (%)

80 one standard deviation below the mean of

70
the test results.
60
50
Possible Slope R t ,max − R t ,min
40 R=( )( M n − M nt ,min ) + R t ,min
30 M nt ,max - M nt ,min
20
10
0
50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210 230 250
47 48
Nominal moment strength (K - in)

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD12, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 12
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

The Base Test Method The Base Test Method

AISI Base Test Procedure AISI Base Test Procedure
R t ,max − R t ,min The gravity loading positive moment region
R=( )(M n − M nt ,min ) + R t ,min or uplift loading negative moment region
M nt ,max - M nt ,min nominal strength is then
Rt,max and Rt,min = mean minus one standard deviation of
the three test results Mn =RSeFy
Mn = SeFy= for the section for which R is being For LRFD φ = 0.90
determined
For ASD Ω = 1.67
Mnt,min and Mnt,max = average tested flexural strengths
49 50

The Base Test Method The Base Test Method

Note: R can be greater for uplift loading. Example Results
100
90

Moment reduction factor R (%)

80
Sheathing Sheathing 70
60
50
(a) Gravity loading (b) U plift loading 40
30
Gravity loading tends to increase rotation. Uplift Nominal Strength Range
20
loading tends to decrease rotation. Also, for 10
uplift, torsional restraint is provided by the clip. 0
50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210 230 250
51 Nominal moment strength (K - in) 52

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD13, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 13
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

Continuous Purlin Line Design

CONTINUOUS PURLIN ww
LINE DESIGN
M(+) M(-)
Lapped Purlins
B u ild in g
ra fte r

53 54

Continuous Purlin Line Design Continuous Purlin Line Design

Typical Design and Analysis Assumptions
• Constrained Bending
• Full Lateral Support Provided by
Through Fastened Panels
• Partial Lateral Restraint Provided by
Standing Seam Roof Panels
• Continuous Purlin Line is Considered
Prismatic or Non-Prismatic
55
Typical Design and Analysis Assumptions
• An Inflection Point is a Brace Location
• Use of Vertical Slotted Holes in Laps does
not Effect Strength
• Critical Location for Checking Combined
Bending and Shear is Immediately
Outside the Lap
Are these assumptions valid?
56

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD14, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 14
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS
Continuous Purlin Line Design
• Constrained Bending
Constrained bending implies that the
purlin will deflect only in the plane parallel to
the web.
Obviously, not true, but universally used.
Even implied in the AISI Specification
Section C3.1.2 “Z-section bent about the
centroidal axis perpendicular to the web …”
57
Continuous Purlin Line Design
• Partial Lateral Support Provided by Standing
Seam Panels
This assumption implies that there will be
some lateral movement of the purlin.
Lateral restraint comes from clip friction
or panel drape/hugging.
AISI Specification allows use of lateral-
torsional/distorsional buckling equations or the
Base Test Method
59
Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD15, P.E.
Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009
X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER
Continuous Purlin Line Design
• Full Lateral Support Provided by Through
Fastened Panels
This assumption implies that there will be
no lateral movement of the purlin.
Again, obviously not true, but universally
accepted.
Sheathing
58
Continuous Purlin Line Design
• Partial Lateral Support Provided by
Standing Seam Panels Cont.
Use of lateral-torsional/distortional
buckling equations is very conservative for roof
systems without intermediate braces.
R-values are 0.12 - 0.20 from L-T-B
analyses, whereas the Base Test Method gives
R-values of 0.40 - 0.95.
60
15
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

Continuous Purlin Line Design Continuous Purlin Line Design

• Continuous Purlin Line is Considered • Continuous Purlin Line is Considered
Prismatic or Non-Prismatic Prismatic or Non-Prismatic Cont.
One of two assumptions are commonly For Gravity Loading:
used for design:
The Prismatic assumption results in
1) The purlin line is prismatic, that is, a larger positive moments and smaller negative
constant moment of inertia is assumed. moments.
w
2) The purlin line is non-prismatic, that
is, the moment of inertia within the lap is taken
as the sum of the moments of inertia of the two
61 62
purlins. M(+) M(-)

Continuous Purlin Line Design Continuous Purlin Line Design

• Continuous Purlin Line is Considered • Continuous Purlin Line is Considered
Prismatic or Non-Prismatic Cont. Prismatic or Non-Prismatic Cont.
For Gravity Loading: For Gravity Loading:
The Non- Prismatic assumption results in The Prismatic assumption is more
larger negative moments and smaller positive conservative if the positive moment region
moments. controls
w
The Non-Prismatic assumption is more
conservative if the negative moment region
controls
63 64
M(+) M(-)

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD16, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 16
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS
Continuous Purlin Line Design
• Continuous Purlin Line is Considered
Prismatic or Non-Prismatic Cont.
For Uplift Loading:
The reverse of gravity loading occurs.
Fact: Purlins are not continuously connected in
the lap and full continuity is not achieved.
Therefore, which assumption is correct???????
65
Continuous Purlin Line Design
• Continuous Purlin Line is Considered
Prismatic or Non-Prismatic Cont.
R = experimental / predicted
Combined Bending and Shear Failures
Avg. R = 0.93 Range 0.81 – 1.06
Positive Moment Failures
R = 0.93 and 0.94
Note: R < 1.0 is unconservative
67
Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD17, P.E.
Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009
X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER
Continuous Purlin Line Design
• Continuous Purlin Line is Considered
Prismatic or Non-Prismatic Cont.
Two studies have shown that the Non-Prismatic
assumption is more correct.
Study 1:
24 Through-Fastened Tests
(3 two-span and 21 three-span; 10 organizations)
Analyzed using the non-prismatic assumption.
66
Continuous Purlin Line Design
• Continuous Purlin Line is Considered
Prismatic or Non-Prismatic Cont.
Conclusion from Study 1:
Prismatic assumption decreases calculated
moment for combined bending & shear, thus
results become more unconservative.
⇓ R = experimental/predicted ⇑)
(⇓
For positive moment failures, the R-values
become closer to 1.0. 68
17
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

Continuous Purlin Line Design Continuous Purlin Line Design

• Continuous Purlin Line is Considered • Continuous Purlin Line is Considered
Prismatic or Non-Prismatic Cont. Prismatic or Non-Prismatic Cont.
I. P.
Study 2: 6" 6"
Inflection Point
6" 6"

7 Two- and Three-Span Tests FAR PURLIN

3 Through-Fastened 4 Standing Seam 6 7 8 9 10

STRAIN GAGE
POSITIONS
STRAIN GAGE
1 2 3 4 5
Analyzed using the non-prismatic assumption. NEAR PURLIN
POSITIONS

Strain gages installed on the tension flange at and 6" 6"

INTERIOR SUPPORT
6" 6" EXTERIOR SUPPORT

near the theoretical inflection point of an exterior

TEST BAY
span. 69 70

Continuous Purlin Line Design Continuous Purlin Line Design

Theoretical inflection point
300
6 7 8 9 10 • Continuous Purlin Line is Considered
250
Position Prismatic or Non-Prismatic Cont.
200
Load (lb/ft)

150 CONCLUSION
100
Continuous purlin lines should be analyzed
50 using the non-prismatic assumption.
0
-300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500
Strain (µε)
71 72

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD18, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 18
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS
Continuous Purlin Line Design
• An Inflection Point is a Brace Point Location
I.P. Lb End of Lap
73
Continuous Purlin Line Design
• An Inflection Point is a Brace Location
AISI Design Guide says I.P. is not a brace
point. Design examples assume a cantilever from
the end of the lap to the I.P. with Cb= 1.0.
Which is correct???????
75
Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD19, P.E.
Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009
X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER
Continuous Purlin Line Design
• An Inflection Point is a Brace Location
Traditionally considered a brace point.
AISC says not so for H-Shapes (both lateral
and torsional braces may be required at an I.P.)
2007 AISI Specification is silent but uses Cb
from AISC Specification which follows AISC.
Center for Cold-Formed Steel Structures,
Bulletin, Vol. 1, No. 2, August 1992, says I.P. is a
brace point and Cb =1.75. 74
Continuous Purlin Line Design
• An Inflection Point is a Brace Location
Purlin movement at an I.P. was measured at
Virginia Tech:
Three span setup with
instrumentation in I.P.
exterior bay.
76
19
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

Continuous Purlin Line Design Continuous Purlin Line Design

•An Inflection Point is a Brace Location •An Inflection Point is a Brace Location
350

Through Fastened Panel 300

250
Potentiometers

Load (plf)
200

150

100

50
Positive Spread Outward
0
-0.100 -0.050 0.000 0.050
Spread (in.)
77 78

Continuous Purlin Line Design Continuous Purlin Line Design

• An Inflection Point is a Brace Location • An Inflection Point is a Brace Location
Results from Testing at VT: Strength Comparisons of 7 test results
a) Lateral movement occurs at an I.P. assuming:

b) I.P. movement is much less than other a) I.P. is not a brace point.
locations. b) I.P. is a brace point.
c) Movement on both sides in same direction. c) Fully braced between end of lap
d) Double curvature did not occur. and I.P.

e) C-purlins move more than Z-purlins. 79 80

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD20, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 20
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS
Continuous Purlin Line Design
• An Inflection Point is a Brace Location
a) I.P. is not a brace point.
Avg. Exp./Predicted = 1.056 Conservative
(b) I.P. is a brace point.
Avg. Exp./Predicted = 1.037 Conservative
(c)Fully braced between end of lap and I.P.
Avg. Exp./Predicted = 1.033 Conservative
81
Continuous Purlin Line Design
• Use of Vertical Slotted Holes in Laps does
not Effect Strength
Vertical slotted holes in purlin webs at the ends
of lap splices are used to facilitate erection.
83
Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD21, P.E.
Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009
X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER
Continuous Purlin Line Design
• An Inflection Point is a Brace Location
Can fully braced between end of lap and I.P. be
justified within the AISI Specification?
Probably “yes”, since Specification is silent on
the issue.
Note: Section 3.1.3 Beams Having One Flange
Through-Fastened to Deck or Sheathing does
not apply to “a continuous beam for the
region between inflection points adjacent to a
82
support”.
Continuous Purlin Line Design
• Use of Vertical Slotted Holes in Laps does
not Effect Strength
The data from over 50 multiple span
continuous purlin line test results does not
show any effect.
Vertical slotted holes are permitted in
Specification with some limitations.
84
21
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

Continuous Purlin Line Design Continuous Purlin Line Design

• Critical Location for Checking Combined • Critical Location for Checking Combined
Bending and Shear is Immediately Bending and Shear is Immediately
Outside the Lap Outside the Lap
Where should combined bending and shear be
checked in a lapped purlin line?
Within the lap?
At the bolt line?
Outside the lap?
85 86

System Anchorage
SYSTEM ANCHORAGE • Z - Purlins
PL

REQUIREMENTS

• Roof deck
PL
provides full or
partial lateral
restraint.
• An anchorage device removes
force, PL, from the diaphragm.

87 88

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD22, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 22
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

System Anchorage System Anchorage

Gravity Loading on Z-Purlins Z-Purlins

y yp W W
y
w
θp Initial
x position
x
xp
θ (a) Axes (b) Unrestrained movement

89 90

System Anchorage Providing Anchorage

Z-Purlins • Lateral Restraint at Discrete Points

Wcosθ

Wsinθ
PL
θ

Lateral Discrete Braces Sheathing Supports Purlin

Remove Force from System
(c) Movement because of large (d) Panel and anchorage
downslope component restraints

91 92

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD23, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 23
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

Providing Anchorage Providing Anchorage

• External Restraints • Bracing Details that are not Recommended
– Must Anchor Interior Restraints Externally

Str
ace

a
Br

pB
ap

rac
Str

e
C10x15.3
Horizontal
93 94

System Effect 2007 AISI Provisions

• A System of Purlins has Inherent Stiffness 2007 AISI Specification

• Which is Called the “System Effect”
”
• The System Effect Complicates Analysis of Roof D6 Metal Roof and Wall Systems
Systems D6.3 Roof System Bracing and Anchorage
• D6.3.1 Anchorage of Bracing
• D6.3.2 Alternate Lateral and Stability Bracing
– Torsional Braces

95 96

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD24, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 24
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

Experimental Verification AISI Analysis Methods

Testing Conducted at Virginia Tech
• Stiffness Models
– Shell Finite Element Model
– Frame Element Stiffness Model
• Computational Solutions
– Component Stiffness Method
– Matrix Solution Method
– Manual Specification Method
– Simplified Solution Method

97 98

AISI Analysis Methods AISI Manual Calculation Method

Stiffness Models Four Computational Steps Required:

Shell Finite Element Model
– Determine Stiffness of the System
– Determine Force Introduced into System by
Each Purlin, Pi
– Distribute Forces According to Stiffness
– Evaluate Anchor Effectiveness

Frame Element
Model

99 100

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD25, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 25
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

AISI Manual Calculation Method AISI Manual Calculation Method

• Stiffness Model used to determine anchorage Step 1 – Stiffness of the System

forces
– Anchor Stiffness, Ka
– Inherent Stiffness of System
• Connection of Purlin to Frame Line
• Connection of Purlin to Sheathing
∆
∆
C5 ELt 2
K sys = ⋅ Np
Pi Pi 1000 d2
Na
K total (i ) = ∑ (K
j =1
eff i , j )+ K sys

101 102

AISI Manual Calculation Method AISI Manual Calculation Method

Step 2 - Force Introduced to System, Pi Step 3 – Distribute Forces According to

– Combined Effects Stiffness
• Down Slope Force – Portion of Force Absorbed by System
• Eccentrically Applied Load – Forces Distributed to Anchors
(normal component)
Purlin “i”
• Load Oblique to Principal Axes Inverse
Anchor “j”
 C 2 I xy L (m + 0.25 b )t   −1 Yields
wLcosθ Pi = C1 ⋅ W pi ⋅  ⋅ + C3 ⋅ α ⋅ cos θ − C 4 ⋅ sin θ 

 d pi, j 
e
1 Stiffness
K eff (i , j ) =  
 1000 I x d d2  
+
wLsinθ Pi  K a C 6 ⋅ LAp E 
x2  
d

y
2
Anchor Panel
103 Flexibility Flexibility 104

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD26, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 26
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

AISI Manual Calculation Method AISI Simplified Method

Step 4 – Evaluate Anchor Effectiveness • Simplified Solution Procedure

– Stiffness of System for Stability – Simplified Form of Main Specification
• Stiffness (displacement) at Line of Anchorage Procedure
• Diaphragm Displacement Between Lines of – Conservatively Neglects System Effect
Anchorage
– Conservative Stiffness Check
Np
– Assumes Forces Evenly Distributed
20 ⋅ ∑P i
1 i=1
K req = ≤ K total
φ d

105 106

AISI Simplified Method AISI Simplified Method

• Simplified Solution Procedure • Simplified Solution Procedure

– Find Anchorage Force – Check Minimum Stiffness
– Compare to Ka
 C 2 I xy L (m + 0.25b)t  W
PL − s = C1 ⋅  ⋅ + C3 ⋅  cosθ − C 4 ⋅ sinθ  s

 1000 I x d d2   N a 20 ⋅ C6 ⋅ LA pEPL − s
K a _ req=
φC6 ⋅ LA pEd − 20PL − s S(Np − Na )

107 108

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD27, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 27
METAL BUILDING ROOF SYSTEMS X SIMPOSIO-INTERNACIONAL DE
ESTRUCTURASDE ACER

New AISI Design Guide

Table of Contents
• Introduction
• Design Methods for Purlins
• Continuous Purlin Line Design
• System Anchorage Requirements Thank You!!
• References

To be Published by AISI
Late 2009.

109 110

Presented by Thomas M. Murray, PhD28, P.E.

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 06 March 2009 28