Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Roof cladding
Ridge cap
Purlin
Truss
Wall cladding
Doorway Pressure preservative treated post Pressure preservative treated splash board Concrete footing Wall girt
Figure 1.1. Simplified diagram of a post-frame building. Some components such as permanent roof truss bracing and interior finishes are not shown.
1-1
1.2 Evolution
1.2.1 The concept of pole-type structures is not new. Archeological evidence exists in abundance that pole buildings have been used for human housing for thousands of years. In America, pole buildings began appearing on farms in the 19th century (Norum, 1967). 1.2.2 Pole-type construction resurfaced in 1930 when Mr. H. Howard Doane introduced the "modern pole barn" as an economical alternative to conventional barns (Knight, 1989). Mr. Doane was the founder of Doane's Agricultural Service, a firm specializing in managing farms for absentee owners. These early pole barns were constructed with red cedar poles that were naturally resistant to decay, trusses spaced 2 ft oncenter, 1-inch nominal purlins and galvanized steel sheathing. In the 1940s, pole barn construction was refined by using creosote preservative-treated sawn posts, wider truss and purlin spacings, and improved steel sheathing. Mr. Bernon G. Perkins, an employee of Doane's, is credited for many of the refinements to Doane's original pole barn. In 1949, Mr. Perkins applied for the first patent on the pole building concept through Doane's Agricultural Service, and the patent was issued in 1953. Rather than protecting their patent, they publicized the concept and encouraged its use throughout the world. In 1995, the post-frame building concept was recognized as an Historic Agricultural Engineering Landmark by the American Society of Agricultural Engineers. 1.2.3 In the past two decades, post-frame construction has been further enhanced by the developments of metal-plate connected wood trusses, nail- and glue-laminated posts, highstrength steel sheathing, fasteners and diaphragm design methods. Composites such as laminated posts and structural composite lumber offer advantages of superior strength and stiffness, dimensional stability, and they can be obtained in a variety of sizes and pressure preservative treatments. Developments in metalplate connected wood truss technology allow clear spans of over 80 feet. Design procedures were introduced in the early 1980s to more accurately account for the effect of diaphragm ac-
tion on post and foundation design (Knight, 1990). New roof panel constructions using highstrength steel and customized screw fasteners have dramatically improved diaphragm stiffness and strength.
1.3 Advantages
1.3.1 Reliability. Outstanding structural performance of post-frame buildings under adverse conditions such as hurricanes is welldocumented. Professor Gurfinkel, in his wood engineering textbook, cites superior performance of post-frame buildings over conventional construction during hurricane Camille in 1969 (Gurfinkel, 1981). Harmon et. al (1992) reported that post-frame buildings constructed according to engineered plans generally withstood hurricane Hugo (wind gusts measured at 109 mph). Since post-frame buildings are relatively light weight, seismic forces do not control the design unless significant additional dead loads are applied to the structure (Faherty and Williamson, 1989; Taylor, 1996). 1.3.2 Economy. Significant savings can be obtained with post-frame construction in terms of materials, labor, construction time, equipment and building maintenance. For example, postframe buildings require less extensive foundations than other building types because the wall sections between the posts are non-load bearing. Embedded post foundations commonly used in post-frame require less concrete, heavy equipment, labor, and construction time than conventional perimeter foundations. Additionally, embedded post foundations are better-suited for wintertime construction. 1.3.3 Versatility. Post-frame construction facilitates design flexibility. Posts can be embedded into the ground or surface-mounted to a concrete foundation. Steel sheathing can be replaced with wood siding, brick veneer, and conventional roofing materials, to satisfy the appearance and service requirements of the customer. One-hour fire-rated wall and roof/ceiling constructions have been developed for wood framed assemblies. Exposed glued-laminated and solid-sawn timbers can be substituted for trusses made from dimension lumber to achieve desired architectural effects.
1-2
ASAE: The Society for engineering in agricultural, food, and biological systems (formerly American Society of Agricultural Engineers). Anchor Bolts: Bolts used to anchor structural members to a foundation. Commonly used in post-frame construction to anchor posts to the concrete foundation. ASCE: American Society of Civil Engineers. AWC: American Wood Council. The wood products division of the American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA). AWPB: American Wood Preservers Bureau. Bay: The area between adjacent primary frames in a building. In a post-frame building, a bay is the area between adjacent post-frames. Bearing Height: Vertical distance between a pre-defined baseline (generally the grade line) and the bearing point of a component. Bearing Point: The point at which a component is supported. Board: Wood member less than two (2) nominal inches in thickness and one (1) or more nominal inches in width. Board-Foot (BF): A measure of lumber volume based on nominal dimensions. To calculate the number of board-feet in a piece of lumber, multiply nominal width in inches by nominal thickness in inches times length in feet and divide by 12. BOCA: Building Officials & Code Administrators International, Inc. The organization responsible for maintaining and publishing the National Building Code. Bottom Chord: An inclined or horizontal member that establishes the bottom of a truss. Bottom Plank: See Splashboard.
1.5 Terminology
AF&PA: American Forest & Paper Association (formerly National Forest Products Association). AITC: American Institute of Timber Construction. ALSC: American Lumber Standard Committee. ANSI: American National Standards Institute APA: The Engineered Wood Association (formerly the American Plywood Association)
Butt Joint: The interface at which the ends of two members meet in a square cut joint.
1-3
Camber: A predetermined curvature designed into a structural member to offset the anticipated deflection when loads are applied. Check: Separation of the wood that usually extends across the annual growth rings (i.e., a split perpendicular-to-growth rings). Commonly results from stresses that build up in wood during seasoning. Cladding: The exterior and interior coverings fastened to the wood framing. Clear Height: Vertical distance between the finished floor and the lowest part of a truss, rafter, or girder. Collars: Components that increase the bearing area of portions of the post foundation, and thus increase lateral and vertical resistance. Components and Cladding: Elements of the building envelope that do not qualify as part of the main wind-force resisting system. In postframe buildings, this generally includes individual purlins and girts, and cladding. Diaphragm: A structural assembly comprised of structural sheathing (e.g., plywood, metal cladding) that is fastened to wood or metal framing in such a manner the entire assembly is capable of transferring in-plane shear forces. Diaphragm Action: The transfer of load by a diaphragm. Diaphragm Design: Design of roof and ceiling diaphragm(s), wall diaphragms (shearwalls), primary and secondary framing members, component connections, and foundation anchorages for the purpose of transferring lateral (e.g., wind) loads to the foundation structure. Dimension Lumber: Wood members from two (2) nominal inches to but not including five (5) nominal inches in thickness, and 2 or more nominal inches in width. Eave: The part of a roof that projects over the sidewalls. In the absence of an overhang, the eave is the line along the sidewall formed by the intersection of the wall and roof planes.
Fascia: Flat surface (or covering) located at the outer end of a roof overhang or cantilever end. Flashing: Sheet metal or plastic components used at major breaks and/or openings in walls and roofs to insure weather-tightness in a structure. Footing: Support base for a post or foundation wall that distributes load over a greater soil area. Frame Spacing: Horizontal distance between post-frames (see post-frame and post-frame building). In the absence of posts, the frame spacing is generally equated to the distance between adjacent trusses (or rafters). Frame spacing may vary within a building. Gable: Triangular portion of the endwall of a building directly under the sloping roof and above the eave line. Gable Roof: Roof with one slope on each side. Each slope is of equal pitch. Gambrel Roof: Roof with two slopes on each side. The pitch of the lower slope is greater than that of the upper slope. Girder: A large, generally horizontal, beam. Commonly used in post-frame buildings to support trusses whose bearing points do not coincide with a post. Girt: A secondary framing member that is attached (generally at a right angle) to posts. Girts laterally support posts and transfer load between wall cladding and posts. Glued-Laminated Timber: Any member comprising an assembly of laminations of lumber in which the grain of all laminations is approximately parallel longitudinally, in which the laminations are bonded with adhesives. Grade Girt: See Splashboard. Grade Line (grade level): The line of intersection between the building exterior and the top of the soil, gravel, and/or pavement in contact with the building exterior. For post-frame building
1-4
design, the grade line is generally assumed to be no lower than the lower edge of the splashboard. Header: A structural framing member that supports the ends of structural framing members that have been cut short by a floor, wall, ceiling, or roof opening. Hip Roof: Roof which rises by inclined planes from all four sides of a building. IBC: International Building Code. ICBO: International Conference of Building Officials. The organization responsible for maintaining and publishing the Uniform Building Code. Knee Brace: Inclined structural framing member connected on one end to a post/column and on the other end to a truss/rafter. Laminated Assembly: A structural member comprised of dimension lumber fastened together with mechanical fasteners and/or adhesive. Horizontally- and vertically-laminated assemblies are primarily designed to resist bending loads applied perpendicular and parallel to the wide face of the lumber, respectively. Laminated Veneer Lumber (LVL) A structural composite lumber assembly manufactured by gluing together wood veneer sheets. Each veneer is orientated with its wood fibers parallel to the length of the member. Individual veneer thickness does not exceed 0.25 inches. Loads: Forces or other actions that arise on structural systems from the weight of all permanent construction, occupants and their possessions, environmental effects, differential settlement, and restrained dimensional changes. Dead Loads: Gravity loads due to the weight of permanent structural and nonstructural components of the building, such as wood framing, cladding, and fixed service equipment. Live Loads: Loads superimposed by the construction, use and occupancy of the building, not including wind, snow, seismic or dead loads.
Seismic Load: Lateral load acting in the horizontal direction on a structure due to the action of earthquakes. Snow Load: A load imposed on a structure due to accumulated snow. Wind Loads: Loads caused by the wind blowing from any direction. Lumber Grade: The classification of lumber in regard to strength and utility in accordance with the grading rules of an approved (ALSC accredited) lumber grading agency. LVL: see Laminated Veneer Lumber. Main Wind-Force Resisting System: An assemblage of structural elements assigned to provide support and stability for the overall structure. Main wind-force resisting systems in post-frame buildings include the individual postframes, diaphragms and shearwall Manufactured Component. A component that is assembled in a manufacturing facility. The wood trusses and laminated columns used in post-frame buildings are generally manufactured components. MBMA: Metal Building Manufacturers Association. NDS: National Design Specification for Wood Construction. Published by AF&PA. Mechanically Laminated Assembly: A laminated assembly in which wood laminations have been joined together with nails, bolts and/or other mechanical fasteners. Metal Cladding: Metal exterior and interior coverings, usually cold-formed aluminum or steel sheet, fastened to the structural framing. NFBA: National Frame Builders Association. NFPA: National Fire Protection Association Nominal size: The named size of a member, usually different than actual size (as with lumber).
1-5
Orientated Strand Board (OSB): Structural wood panels manufactured from reconstituted, mechanically oriented wood strands bonded with resins under heat and pressure. Orientated Strand Lumber (OSL): Structural composite lumber (SCL) manufactured from mechanically oriented wood strands bonded with resins under heat and pressure. Also known as laminated strand lumber (LSL) OSB: See Orientated Strand Board. Parallel Strand Lumber (PSL): Structural composite lumber (SCL) manufactured by cutting 1/8-1/10 inch thick wood veneers into narrow wood strands, and then gluing and pressing the strands together. Individual strands are up to 8 feet in length. Prior to pressing, strands are oriented so that they are parallel to the length of the member. Pennyweight: A measure of nail length, abbreviated by the letter d. Plywood: A built-up panel of laminated wood veneers. The grain orientation of adjacent veneers are typically 90 degrees to each other. Pole: A round, unsawn, naturally tapered post. Post: A rectangular member generally uniform in cross section along its length. Post may be sawn or laminated dimension lumber. Commonly used in post-frame construction to transfer loads from main roof beams, trusses or rafters to the foundation. Post Embedment Depth: Vertical distance between the bottom of a post and the lower edge of the splashboard. Post Foundation: The embedded portion of a structural post and any footing and/or attached collar. Post Foundation Depth: Vertical distance between the bottom of a post foundation and the lower edge of the splashboard. Post-Frame: A structural building frame consisting of a wood roof truss or rafters connected to vertical timber columns or sidewall posts.
Post-Frame Building: A building system whose primary framing system is principally comprised of post-frames. Post Height: The length of the non-embedded portion of a post. Pressure Preservative Treated (PPT) Wood: Wood pressure-impregnated with an approved preservative chemical under approved treatment and quality control procedures. Primary Framing: The main structural framing members in a building. The primary framing members in a post-frame building include the columns, trusses/rafters, and any girders that transfer load between trusses/rafters and columns. PSL: See Parallel Strand Lumber. Purlin: A secondary framing member that is attached (generally at a right angle) to rafters/ trusses. Purlins laterally support rafters and trusses and transfer load between exterior cladding and rafters/trusses. Rafter: A sloping roof framing member. Rake: The part of a roof that projects over the endwalls. In the absence of an overhang, the rake is the line along the endwall formed by the intersection of the wall and roof planes. Ridge: Highest point on the roof of a building which describes a horizontal line running the length of the building. Ring Shank Nail: See threaded nail. Roof Overhang: Roof extension beyond the endwall/sidewall of a building. Roof Slope: The angle that a roof surface makes with the horizontal. Usually expressed in units of vertical rise to 12 units of horizontal run. SBC: Standard Building Code (see SBCCI). SBCCI: Southern Building Code Congress International, Inc. The organization responsible for maintaining and publishing the Standard Building Code.
1-6
Secondary Framing: Structural framing members that are used to (1) transfer load between exterior cladding and primary framing members, and/or (2) laterally brace primary framing members. The secondary framing members in a post-frame building include the girts, purlins and any structural wood bracing. Self-Drilling Screw: A screw fastener that combines the functions of drilling and tapping (thread forming). Generally used when one or more of the components to be fastened is metal with a thickness greater than 0.03 inches Self-Piercing Screw: A self-tapping (thread forming) screw fastener that does not require a pre-drilled hole. Differs from a self-drilling screw in that no material is removed during screw installation. Used to connect light-gage metal, wood, gypsum wallboard and other "soft" materials. SFPA: Southern Forest Products Association Shake: Separation of annual growth rings in wood (splitting parallel-to-growth rings). Usually considered to have occurred in the standing tree or during felling. Shearwall: A vertical diaphragm in a structural framing system. A shearwall is any endwall, sidewall, or intermediate wall capable of transferring in-plane shear forces. Siphon Break: A small groove to arrest the capillary action of two adjacent surfaces. Soffit: The underside covering of roof overhangs. Soil Pressure: Load per unit area that the foundation of a structure exerts on the soil. Span: Horizontal distance between two points. Clear Span: Clear distance between adjacent supports of a horizontal or inclined member. Horizontal distance between the facing surfaces of adjacent supports. Effective Span: Horizontal distance from center-of-required-bearing-width to centerof-required-bearing-width, or the "clear
span" for rafters and joists in conventional construction. Out-To-Out Span: Horizontal distance between the outer faces of supports. Commonly used in specifying metal-plateconnected wood trusses. Overall Span: Total horizontal length of an installed horizontal or inclined member. SPIB: Southern Pine Inspection Bureau. Skirtboard: See Splashboard. Splashboard: A preservative treated member located at grade that functions as the bottom girt. Also referred to as a skirtboard, splash plank, bottom plank, and grade girt. Splash Plank: See Splashboard. Stitch (or Seam) Fasteners: Fasteners used to connect two adjacent pieces of metal cladding, and thereby adding shear continuity between sheets. Structural Composite Lumber (SCL): Reconstituted wood products comprised of several laminations or wood strands held together with an adhesive, with fibers primarily oriented along the length of the member. Examples include LVL and PSL. Threaded Nail: A type of nail with either annual or helical threads in the shank. Threaded nails generally are made from hardened steel and have smaller diameters than common nails of similar length. Timber: Wood members five or more nominal inches in the least dimension. Top Chord: An inclined or horizontal member that establishes the top of a truss. TPI: Truss Plate Institute. Truss: An engineered structural component, assembled from wood members, metal connector plates and/or other mechanical fasteners, designed to carry its own weight and superimposed design loads. The truss members form a
1-7
semi-rigid structural framework and are assembled such that the members form triangles. UBC: Uniform Building Code (see ICBO). Wane: Bark, or lack of wood from any cause, on the edge or corner of a piece. Warp: Any variation from a true plane surface. Warp includes bow, crook, cup, and twist, or any combination thereof. Bow: Deviation, in a direction perpendicular to the wide face, from a straight line drawn between the ends of a piece of lumber. Crook: Deviation, in a direction perpendicular to the narrow edge, from a straight line drawn between the ends of a piece of lumber. Cup: Deviation, in the wide face of a piece of lumber, from a straight line drawn from edge to edge of the piece. Twist: A curl or spiral of a piece of lumber along its length. Measured by laying lumber on a flat surface such that three corners contact the surface. The amount of twist is equal to the distance between the flat surface and the corner not contacting the surface. WCLIB: West Coast Lumber Inspection Bureau Web: Structural member that joins the top and bottom chords of a truss. Web members form the triangular patterns typical of most trusses. WTCA: Wood Truss Council of America. WWPA: Western Wood Products Association.
Harmon, J.D., G.R. Grandle and C.L. Barth. 1992. Effects of hurricane Hugo on agricultural structures. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 8(1):93-96. Knight, J.T. 1989. A brief look back. Frame Building Professional 1(1):38-43. Knight, J.T. 1990. Diaphragm design - technology driven by necessity. Frame Building Professional 1(5):16,44-46. Norum, W.A. 1967. Pole buildings go modern. Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 93, No.ST2, Proc. Paper 5169, April, pp.47-56. Taylor, S.E. 1996. Earthquake considerations in post-frame building design. Frame Building News 8(3):42-49.
1.6 References
Faherty, K.F. and T.G. Williamson. 1989. Wood Engineering and Construction Handbook. McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, New York, NY. Gurfinkel, G. 1981. Wood Engineering (2nd Ed.). Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, Iowa.
1-8
2-1
Figure 2.1. Approximate areas of model building code influence. Wisconsin and New York building codes are developed by their respective state code agencies and are not necessarily influenced by current model codes.
protection and exiting, depending on the specific classification and building code. 2.3.2 Types of Construction. Classification by type of construction is primarily based on the fire resistance ratings of the walls, partitions, structural elements, floors, ceilings, roofs and exits. Specific requirements vary somewhat between model building codes. There are two primary source documents for determining the fire resistance of assemblies: the Fire Resistance Design Manual, published by the Gypsum Association, and the Fire Resistance Directory, published by Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. The fire resistance of wood framed assemblies can generally be increased by using fire retardant treated (FRT) wood or larger wood members. Codes allow FRT wood to be used in cer-
tain areas of noncombustible construction. The superior fire resistance of large timber members is recognized by the codes with the inclusion of a "heavy timber" classification. To qualify for heavy timber construction, nominal dimensions of timber columns must be at least 6- by 8inches and primary beams shall have nominal width and depth of at least 6- by 10-inches. 2.3.2.1 NFBA Sponsored Fire Test. In January of 1990, the National Frame Builders Association had Warnick Hersey International, Inc., conduct a one-hour fire endurance test on the exterior wall shown in figure 2.2. The wall met all requirements for a one-hour rating as prescribed in ASTM E119-88. The wall sustained an applied load of 10,400 lbf per column throughout the test. Copies of the fire test report can be obtained from NFBA.
2-2
Attach metal cladding 12 in. o.c. with 1.5 in. hex head screws with neoprene washers
Section A-A
Gold Bond 5/8 in. Fireshield G Type X, attached with 1-7/8 in. cement coated nails (0.0195 in. shank, 1/4 head, 7 in. o.c.)
Nominal 2- by 4-inch nailers, 24 in. o.c. Fire side nailers, nominal 2- by 4-inches 24 in. o.c.
A
10 ft
A FIRE SIDE
4-1/16- by 5-1/4-inch glue-laminated column
3- by 24- by 48-inch mineral wool, attach with 3 in. square cap nails (3 per 48 in. width)
Nominal 2- by 2-inch blocking between nailers (nailed to nominal 2- by 6-inch edge blocks) Nail-laminated column fabricated from 3 nominal 2- by 6-inch No. 2 KD19 SP members Nominal 2- by 4-inch blocking attached to column
Section B-B
B
1 ft 8 ft 1 ft
Figure 2.2. Construction details for exterior wall that obtained a one-hour fire endurance rating during a January 1990 test conducted for the National Frame Builders Association by Warnock Hersey International, Inc. Details of the test are available from NFBA upon request.
nical literature for wood design and construction is somewhat fragmented. New design specifications and standards are continually under development, and existing documents are periodically revised. Keeping abreast of this literature requires a determined effort on the part of the design professional. To assist in this effort, Table 2.1 gives a partial list of engineering design specifications, standards and other technical references specifically related to post-frame construction. The reader is encouraged to maintain communication with the organizations isted in Table 2.1 concerning new and revised publications.
2-3
Of the documents listed in Table 2.1, the primary engineering design specification cited by the model building codes for wood construction is the National Design Specification for Wood Construction (NDS), published by the American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA). The NDS was first issued in 1944 and in 1992 it became a consensus standard through the American National Standards Institute (ANSI).
height, and density of population and activity. Zoning laws may also dictate building appearance and location on property, parking signs, drainage, handicap accessibility, flood control and landscaping. Typically land is zoned for residential, commercial, industrial or agricultural uses. 2.5.2 Development and Enforcement. Zoning laws are developed by municipalities. They (and building codes) are principally enforced by the granting of building permits and inspection of construction work in progress. Certificates of occupancy are issued when completed buildings satisfy all regulations.
Table 2.1. Partial list of technical references related to post-frame building design and construction Organization & Address Publications Allowable stress design (ASD) manual for engineered wood construction National design specification (NDS) for wood construction NDS commentary Design values for wood construction (NDS supplement) Load and resistance factor design (LRFD) manual for engineered wood construction Wood frame construction manual (WFCM) for one-and twofamily dwellings Span tables for joists and rafters
AF&PA American Forest & Paper Association 1111 19th Street, N.W., Suite 800 Washington, D.C. 20036 http://www.awc.org/
AITC American Inst. of Timber Construction 7012 S. Revere Parkway, Suite 140 Englewood, CO 80112
ANSI American National Standards Institute 11 West 42nd Street New York, NY 10036 http://www.ansi.org/
ANSI/AF&PA National design specification for wood construction (see AF&PA) ANSI Standard A190 structural glued laminated
2-4
Table 2.1. Partial list of technical references related to post-frame building design and construction Organization & Address Publications APA The Engineered Wood Association P.O. Box 11700 7011 South 19th Street Tacoma, WA 98411 http://www.apawood.org/ APA design/construction guide; residential and commercial Plywood design specification (PDS) Diaphragms and shear walls Performance standard for APA EWS I-joists Panel handbook & grade glossary
ASAE EP288 Agricultural building snow and wind loads ASAE EP484.2 Diaphragm design of metal-clad, wood-frame rectangular buildings ASAE EP486 Post and pole foundation design ASAE EP558 Load tests for metal-clad, wood-frame diaphragms ANSI/ASAE EP559 Design requirements and bending properties for mechanically laminated columns
ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers 1801 Alexander Bell Drive Reston, Virginia 20191-4400 http://www.asce.org/
ASCE Standard 7 Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures Standard for load and resistance factor design (LRFD) for engineered wood construction Guide to the use of the wind load provisions of ASCE 7-95
AWPA American Wood Preservers Assoc. P.O. Box 5690 Granbury, TX 76049
Standard C2 lumber, timbers, bridge ties and mine ties - preservative treatment by pressure processes Standard C15 wood for commercial-residential construction preservative treatment by pressure processes Standard C16 wood used on farms - preservative treatment by pressure processes Standard C23 round poles and posts used in building construction - preservative treatment by pressure processes Standard M4 standard for the care of preservative-treated wood products
AWPI American Wood Preservers Institute 2750 Prosperity Avenue, Suite 550 Fairfax, Virginia 22031-4312 http://www.awpi.org/
Answers to often-asked questions about treated wood Management of used treated wood products booklet
Gypsum Association 810 First St., NE, #510 Washington DC, 20002 http://www.gypsum.org/
Fire resistance design manual GA-600 Design data - gypsum board GA-530
2-5
Table 2.1. Partial list of technical references related to post-frame building design and construction Organization & Address Publications ICC International Code Council http://www.intlcode.org/ BOCA International, Inc. 4051 West Flossmoor Road Country Club Hills, IL 50478-5794 http://www.bocai.org/ ICBO 5360 Workman Mill Road Whittier, CA 90601-2298 http://www.icbo.org/ SBCCI, Inc. 900 Montclair Road Birmingham, AL 35213-1206 http://www.sbcci.org/
International building code International energy conservation code International zoning code International property maintenance code commentary International property maintenance code International fuel gas code International mechanical code commentary International mechanical code International mechanical code supplement International private sewage disposal code International one and two family dwelling code International plumbing code commentary International plumbing code
MBMA Metal Building Manufacturers Assoc. 1300 Sumner Ave Cleveland, OH 44115-2851 http://www.mbma.com/
NFBA National Frame Builders Association 4840 W. 15th St., Suite 1000 Lawrence, KS 66049-3876 http://www.postframe.org/
NFPA National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park Quincy, MA 02269-9101 http://www.nfpa.org/
NFPA 1: Fire prevention code NFPA 13: Installation of sprinkler NFPA 70: National electrical code NFPA 72: National fire alarm code NFPA 101: Life safety code
SPIB Southern Pine Inspection Bureau 4709 Scenic Highway Pensacola, Fl. 32504-9094 http://www.SPIB.org/
Grading rules Standard for mechanically graded lumber Kiln drying southern pine
2-6
Table 2.1. Partial list of technical references related to post-frame building design and construction Organization & Address Publications SFPA & Southern Pine Council Southern Forest Products Association P. O. Box 641700 Kenner, LA 70064-1700 http://www.southernpine.com/ http://www.SFPA.org/ Southern pine use guide Southern pine joists & rafters: construction guide Southern pine joists & rafters: maximum spans Post-frame construction guide Southern pine headers and beams Pressure-treated southern pine Permanent wood foundations: design & construction guide
TPI Truss Plate Institute 583 D'Onofrio Drive, Suite 200 Madison, WI 53719
ANSI/TPI 1-1995 National design standard for metal plate connected wood truss construction HIB-91 Summary sheet: handling, installing & bracing metal plate connected wood trusses HIB-98 Post frame summary sheet: recommendations for handling, installing & temporary bracing metal plate connected wood trusses used in post-frame construction HET-80 Handling & erecting wood trusses: commentary and recommendations DSB-89 Recommended design specifications for temporary bracing of metal plate connected wood trusses
WTCA Wood Truss Council of America One WTCA Center 6425 Normandy Lane Madison, WI 53711 http://www.woodtruss.com/
Metal plate connected wood truss handbook Commentary for permanent bracing of metal plate connected wood trusses Standard responsibilities in the design process involving metal plate connected wood trusses
WWPA Western Wood Products Association 522 SW Fifth Ave., Suite 500 Portland, Oregon 97204-2122 http://www.wwpa.org/
Western woods use book Western lumber span tables Western lumber grading rules
2-7
2-8
3-1
Table 3.1. Approximate Weights of Construction Materials (from Hoyle and Woeste, 1989) Weight Material Material (lb/ft2) Ceilings Acoustical fiber tile Gypsum board (see Walls) Mechanical duct allowance Suspended steel channel system Wood purlins (see Wood, Seasoned) Light gauge steel (see Roofs) Floors Hardwood, 1-in. nominal Plywood (see Roofs) Linoleum, 1/4-in. Vinyl tile, 1/8-in. Roofs Corrugated Aluminum 14 gauge 16 gauge 18 gauge 20 gauge Built-Up 3-ply 3-ply with gravel 5-ply 5-ply with gravel Corrugated Galvanized steel 16 gauge 18 gauge 20 gauge 22 gauge 24 gauge 26 gauge 29 gauge Insulation, per inch thickness Rigid fiberboard, wood base Rigid fiberboard, mineral base Expanded polystyrene Fiberglass, rigid Fiberglass, batt Lumber (see Wood, Seasoned) Roofs (continued) Plywood (per inch thickness) Roll roofing Shingles Asphalt Clay tile Book tile, 2-in. Book tile, 3-in Ludowici Roman Slate, in. Wood Walls Wood paneling, 1-in. Glass, plate, 1/4-in. Gypsum board (per 1/8-in. thickMasonry, per 4-in. thickness Brick Concrete block Cinder concrete block Stone Porcelain-enameled steel Stucco, 7/8-in. Windows, glass, frame, and sash Wood, Seasoned Cedar Douglas-fir Hemlock Maple, red Oak Poplar, yellow Pine, lodgepole Pine, ponderosa Pine, Southern Pine, white Redwood Spruce
Weight (lb/ft2)
3.0 1.0 2.0 9.0-14.0 12.0 20.0 10.0 12.0 10.0 3.0
1.1 0.9 0.7 0.6 1.5 5.5 2.5 6.5 2.9 2.4 1.8 1.5 1.3 1.0 0.8 1.5 2.1 0.2 1.5 0.1
2.5 3.3 0.55 38.0 20.0 20.0 55.0 3.0 10.0 8.0 Density lb/ft3 32.0 34.0 31.0 37.0 45.0 29.0 29.0 28.0 35.0 27.0 28.0 29.0
3-2
Sections 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, and 3.8 give general load requirements, sources of load data and references for making detailed load calculations. Detailed calculation procedures are not provided due to differences between the model codes and the frequency of code revisions.
Horizontal Uniform Dead Load Calculation Many structural analysis programs (e.g. Purdue Plane Structures Analyzer) require that the dead load associated with a sloping surface be represented as a uniform load, wDL, acting on a horizontal plane as shown in figure 3.1. For a given horizontal distance, bH, a sloping roof surface contains more material and is heavier than a flat one. Thus, wDL increases as roof slope increases. Load wDL is obtained by multiplying the unit weight of the roof assembly, wR, by the slope length, bS, and dividing the resulting product by the horizontal length, bH. Numerically, this is equivalent to dividing wR by the cosine of the roof slope. Example: For a roof at a 4:12 slope, with materials weighing 4 lbm for each square foot of roof surface area, the equivalent load, wDL, to apply to the horizontal plane would be: wDL = (4 lbm/ft2)/(cos 18.4) = 4.21 lbm/ft2
wDL
Roof assembly with weight wR per unit area Rafter or truss top chord
bH
bS
Figure 3.1. Roof dead load represented by an equivalent uniform load acting on a horizontal plane. 3.5.2 Code Application. Design live loads shall be determined so as to provide for the service requirements of the building, but should never be lower than the minimum live load specified in
3-3
the governing building code. In the absence of a governing building code, the minimum live loads found in ASCE 7-93 are recommended. The minimum roof live load recommended for agricultural buildings in ASAE Standard EP288.5 is 12 psf. Some agricultural buildings do not necessarily pose a "low risk", and the ASAE higher minimum live load reflects the possibility of highvalue agricultural constructions now common in the United States 3.5.3 Reductions. In some cases, reductions are allowed for uniform loads to account for the low likelihood of the loads simultaneously occurring over the entire tributary area.
pf R Ce Ct I Cs Pg
= = = = = = =
roof snow load in psf, roof snow factor that relates roof load to ground snowpack, snow exposure factor, roof temperature factor, importance factor, roof slope factor, and ground snow load in psf (50-yr mean recurrence).
The roof snow factor, R, varies from 0.6 for Alaska to 0.7 for the contiguous United States. The snow exposure factor in the model codes accounts for the combined effects of R and Ce given in Equation 3-1. The thermal factor defined in ASCE 7-93 varies from 1.0 for heated structures to 1.2 for unheated structures. The thermal factor is not included in the model building codes. The importance factors range from 0.8 to 1.2 depending on the specific building code. Roof slope factors vary linearly from 0 to 1 as roof slope increases from 15 to 70 degrees. 3.6.5 Special Considerations. Several factors, such as multiple gables, roof discontinuities, and drifting can cause snow to accumulate unevenly on roofs. These factors must be considered in the design. Specific recommendations and calculation procedures are given in the model codes and ASCE 7-93.
3-4
ords should be used in regions that have unusual wind events. Detailed procedures and illustrations for calculating wind loads on low-rise buildings are given in MBMA-86.
Technical Note
Wind Speed Wind speeds are derived from data which reflect both magnitude and duration. Wind speeds can be reported as peak gusts, or can be averaged over some time interval. The time interval may be fixed, as with mean hourly speeds, or variable, as with fastest-mile wind speeds. Fastest-mile wind speeds are used in ANSI/ASCE 793 to calculate design loads, and are defined on the basis of the period of time that one mile of wind takes to pass an anemometer at a standard elevation of 10 meters. The U.S. National Weather Service no longer collects fastest-mile wind speed data; instead, they record 3-second gust speeds. The 1995 and later revisions of ASCE-7 base wind loads on 3-second gust wind speeds.
model codes publish fewer exposure categories. Importance factors vary from 0.95 for agricultural buildings (25-year recurrence interval) to 1.07 for buildings that represent a high hazard to property and people in the event of failure (100year recurrence interval). Wind pressure is related to the square of its speed, therefore the terms V and I are squared in equation 3-2. The model building codes simplify the calculation in equation 3-2 by publishing tables of effective wind velocity pressures, Pb, for a base wind speed and various heights. 3.7.5 Pressure Coefficients. Wind loads are calculated for each part of the building by multiplying the effective wind pressure by a pressure coefficient. The pressure coefficient, which may be different for each planar portion of the building, accounts for building orientation, geometry and load sharing. It also accounts for localized pressures at eaves, overhangs, corners, etc. Wind pressures, qi, for the ith building surface are calculated by: qi = Cpi qz where: (3-3)
3.7.4 Effective Wind Velocity Pressure. The first step in determining wind loads is to calculate the effective wind velocity pressure. The most severe exposure factors that will apply during the service life of the structure should be used. Wind velocity pressure is a function of the wind speed, exposure and importance. The equation for calculating wind velocity pressure, qz , is given by: qz = where: 0.00256 Kz (I V)2 (3-2)
Cpi = qz =
The wind velocity pressure is based on the wall height for the windward wall and on the mean roof height for the leeward wall and roof. Wind pressures act normal to the building surfaces. Inward pressures are denoted with positive signs, while outward pressures (suction) are denoted with negative signs.
Technical Note
Kz = I V = =
velocity pressure exposure coefficient, importance factor, and basic wind speed in mph (50-year mean recurrence interval).
Components of Wind Load Many structural analysis programs require uniform loads to be entered in terms of their horizontal and vertical components. Wind loads act normal to building surfaces, so an adjustment is needed for sloping members such as roof trusses. The roof wind load, w, shown in figure 3.2a is equivalent to the horizontal and vertical components shown in figure 3.2b. The relationship depicted in figure 3.2 can be proven as follows:
The velocity pressure exposure coefficient is a function of height above ground and exposure category. Exposure categories account for the effects of ground surface irregularities caused by natural topography, vegetation, location and building construction features. ASCE 7-93 lists four wind exposure categories, whereas the
3-5
1. Convert the uniform wind load, w, to its resultant vector force. R = w (span)/(cos ) 2. Multiply resultant force, R, by cos to obtain its vertical component. Fy = R (cos ) = w (span) 3. Divide the vertical component, Fy, by the span to obtain the horizontally projected uplift pressure, whoriz. whoriz = Fy /(span) = w (span)/(span) = w The vertically projected uniform load can be proven similarly. A common mistake is to multiply the normal pressure by sine and cosine of the roof slope to obtain the two components.
these members have relatively large tributary areas, localized wind effects tend to be averaged out over the tributary areas. Pressure coefficients for main members reflect this averaging effect. 3.7.7 Components and Cladding. Wind pressures are higher on small areas due to localized gust effects. This observation has been verified by wind tunnel studies (MBMA, 1986), as well as site inspections of wind-induced building failures (Harmon, et al., 1992). For this reason, components and cladding have higher pressure coefficients than main frames. Components and cladding include members such as purlins, girts, curtain walls, sheathing, roofing and siding. 3.7.8 Openings. Wind loads are significantly affected by openings in the structure. ASCE 793 and the model building codes specify internal wind pressure coefficients (or adjustments to external pressure coefficients) for structures with different amounts and types of openings. Each model code has slightly different definitions and wind load coefficients for open, closed and partially open buildings. In general, "openings" refer to permanent or other openings that are likely to be breached during high winds. For example, if window glazings are likely to be broken during a windstorm, the windows are considered openings. However, if doors and windows and their supports are designed to resist design wind loads, they need not be considered openings. It should be noted that internal wind pressures act against all interior surfaces and therefore do not contribute to sidesway loads on a building.
(a) w
(b)
Figure 3.2. Illustration of wind load acting normal to inclined surface and equivalent horizontal and vertical load components. A common mistake is to multiply the normal load by sin() and cos() for the vertical and horizontal components, respectively.
3.7.6 Main Frames. Different pressure coefficients are used to calculate wind loads on main frames as compared to components and cladding. Main frames include primary structural systems such as rigid and braced frames, braced trusses, posts, poles and girders. Since
3-6
1993 revision of ASCE 7 with respect to seismic loads. The seismic provisions in ASCE 7-93 were based on work by the Building Seismic Safety Council under sponsorship of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. 3.8.3 Lateral Force. Basic concept of seismic load determination for low-rise buildings is to calculate an equivalent lateral force at the ground line as follows: V = Cs W where: V = total lateral force, or shear, at the building base total dead load, plus other applicable loads specified in the code or ASCE 7-93. For most single-story post-frame buildings, the only other minimum applicable load is a portion (20% minimum) of the flat roof snow load. If the flat roof snow load is less than 30 psf, the applicable load to be included in W is permitted to be taken as zero. seismic design coefficient 1.2 Av S/(T2/3 R) coefficient representing effective peak velocity-related acceleration coefficient for the soil profile characteristics response modification factor fundamental period of the building (3-4)
3.9.2 Load Combinations. Except when applicable codes provide otherwise, the following load combinations shall be considered (as a minimum) and the combination which results in the most conservative design for each building element shall be used. Note that different load combinations may control the design of different components of the structure. Case 1: Snow) Case 2: Case 3: Case 4: Case 5: Dead + Floor Live + Roof Live (or Dead + Floor Live + Wind (or Seismic) Dead + Floor Live + Wind + Snow Dead + Floor Live + Wind + Snow Dead + Floor Live + Snow + Seismic
W =
3.9.3 Floor Live Loads. Most post-frame buildings are single story and therefore would not have floor live loads acting on the post-frames. When a concrete floor is used in a single story building, consideration must be given to anticipated live and equipment loading. 3.9.4 Reductions. Reductions in some of the load terms in Cases 1 through 5 are permitted, depending on governing building code or reference document. With some exceptions, the model building codes permit allowable stresses used in allowable stress design to be increased one-third when considering wind or seismic forces either acting alone or when combined with vertical loads. The allowable stress increase for wind loading can be traced back to the New York City Building Code of 1904 (Ellifritt, 1977), and appears to be based on judgment rather than engineering theory. It should be noted that ASCE 7-93 does not include the one-third increase factor, but instead specifies load combination factors that are intended to account for the low probability of maximum live, seismic, snow and wind loads occurring simultaneously. The commentary of ASCE 7-93 implies the stress increase for wind and seismic found in codes is not appropriate if the combined load effects are also reduced by the load combination factors published in ASCE 7-93. Finally, the National Design Specification (NDS) for Wood Construction (NF&PA, 199) addresses the issue of load combination versus load duration factors by stating, The load duration factors, CD, in Table 2.3.2 and Appendix B are independent of load combination factors, and both shall be permitted to be used in design calculations.
Cs = = Av = S R T = = =
3.8.4 Seismic loads rarely control post-frame building design because of the relatively low building dead weight as compared with other types of construction (Taylor, 1996; Faherty and Williamson, 1989). For post-frame buildings, lateral loads from wind usually are much greater than those from seismic forces.
3-7
flexibility of corrugated metal siding, girt deflections present no serviceability problems, and consequently, girt size is generally only stress dependent. 3.11.3 Time Dependent Deflection. In certain situations, it may be necessary to limit deflection under long term loading. Published modulus of elasticity, E, values for wood are intended for the calculation of immediate deflection under load. Under sustained loading, wood members exhibit additional time-dependent deformation (i.e. creep). It is customary practice to increase calculated deflection from long-term loading by a factor of 1.5 for glued-laminated timber and seasoned lumber, or 2 for unseasoned lumber (see Appendix F, AF&PA, 1997). Thus, total deflection is equal to the immediate deflection due to long-term loading times the creep deflection factor, plus the deflection due to the short-term or normal component of load. For applications where deflection is critical, the published value of E (which represents the average) may be reduced as deemed appropriate by the designer. The size of the reduction depends on the coefficient of variation of E. Typical values of E variability are available for different wood products (see Appendix F, AF&PA, 1997). 3.11.4 Shear Deflection. Shear deflection is usually negligible in the design of steel beams; however, shear deflection can be significant in wood beams. Approximately 3.4 percent of the total beam deflection is due to shear for wood beams of usual span-to-depth proportions (i.e. 15:1 to 25:1). For this reason, the published value of E in the Supplement to the National Design Specification is 3.4 percent less than the true flexural value (AF&PA, 1993). This correction compensates for the omission of the shear term in handbook beam deflection equations. For span-to-depth ratios over 25, the predicted deflection using the published E value will exceed the actual deflection. Similarly, for span-todepth ratios less than 15, predicted deflections will be significantly less than actual. This could lead to unconservative designs (with respect to serviceability) for post-frame members such as door headers. Practical information on the effects of shear deformation on beam design is given in Appendix D of Hoyle and Woeste (1989) for rectangular wood beams and Triche (1990) for wood I-beams.
3.11 Deflection
3.11.1 Code Application. Post-frame building components must meet deflection limits specified in the governing building code. 3.11.2 Exception to Code Requirements. Girts supporting corrugated metal siding are typically not subjected to deflection limitations unless their deflection compromises the integrity of an interior wall finish. Because of the inherent
3-8
3.12 References
American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA). 1997. ANSI/AF&PA NDS-1997 - National Design Specification for Wood Construction. AF&PA, Washington, D.C. American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA). 1993. Commentary to the National Design Specification for Wood Construction. AF&PA, Washington, D.C. ASAE. 1999. ASAE EP288.5: Agricultural building snow and wind loads. ASAE Standards 1999, 46th edition, ASAE, St. Joseph, MI. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). 1993. Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. ANSI/ASCE 7-93, ASCE, New York, NY. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). 1999. Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. ANSI/ASCE 7-99, ASCE, New York, NY. Ellifritt, D.S. 1977. The mysterious 1/3 stress increase. American Institute of Steel Construction Engineering Journal (4):138-140. Faherty, K.F. and T.G. Williamson. 1989. Wood Engineering and Construction Handbook. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Hoyle, R.J. and F.E. Woeste. 1989. Wood Technology in the Design of Structures. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press. Mehta, K.C., R.D. Marshall and D.C. Perry. 1991. Guide to the Use of the Wind Load Provisions of ASCE 7-88 (formerly ANSI A58.1). American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, NY. Metal Building Manufacturers Association (MBMA). 1986. Low rise building systems manual. MBMA, Cleveland, OH. Taylor, S.E. 1996. Earthquake considerations in post-frame building design. Frame Building News 8(3):42-49.
3-9
3-10
4.2 Posts
4.2.1 General. The function of the wood post is to carry axial and bending loads to the foundation. Posts are embedded in the ground or attached to either a conventional masonry or concrete wall or a concrete slab on grade. Posts can be solid sawn, mechanically laminated, glued-laminated or wood composite. Any portion of a post that is embedded or exposed to weather must be pressure-treated with preservative chemicals to resist decay and insect damage. 4.2.2 Controlling Load Combinations. The load combination that usually controls post design is dead plus wind plus one-half snow; however, local codes may stipulate different load combinations. It is possible for any one of the combinations to be critical; therefore, they all should be considered for a specific building design. For example, maximum gravity load will govern truss-to-post bearing and post foundation bearing; whereas wind minus dead load will govern the truss-to-post connection (for uplift). 4.2.3 Force Calculations. The diaphragm analysis method presented in Chapter 5 is the most accurate method to determine design
4-1
moments, and axial and shear forces in posts. Historically, some designers calculated the maximum post moment for embedded posts by using the simple structural analog of a propped cantilever (i.e. fixed reaction at the post bottom and pin reaction at the top). The implicit assumption of this analog is that the roof diaphragm and shearwalls are infinitely stiff. This model may be adequate for buildings with extremely stiff roof diaphragms and for conservatively estimating shear forces in the roof diaphragm; however, it may underestimate the maximum post moment for many post-frame buildings. The analysis procedures described in Chapter 5 are more reliable since they account for the flexible behavior of the roof diaphragm. If posts are embedded, generally two bending moments must be calculated - one at the groundline and the other above ground. Groundline bending moment and shear values are used in embedded post foundation design calculations. For surface-attached posts, the bottom reaction can be modeled as a pin, and generally only one bending moment is calculated. 4.2.4 Combined Stress Analysis. Forces involved in post design subject the posts to combined stress (bending and axial) and must be checked for adequacy using the appropriate interaction equation from the NDS (AF&PA, 1997). In theory, every post length increment must satisfy the interaction equation, but in practice, a minimum of two locations are checked: the point of maximum interaction near the ground level (column stability factor, Cp, equal to 1.0) and the upper section of the posts where the maximum moment occurs in conjunction with column action (Cp<1.0). 4.2.5 Shear Stress. The shear stress due to lateral loading (wind or seismic) rarely controls post design, but should always be checked as a matter of good practice. Other loads such as bulk loads from stored materials may influence final post design. 4.2.6 Deflection. A post deflection limit is not normally specified for post-frame buildings, but interior finishes may require it. Refer to the deflection criteria in Chapter 3.
4.2.7 Connections. Truss-to-post connection must be designed for bearing as well as uplift. Connection design procedures are given in the NDS (AF&PA, 1997). This connection should be modeled as a pin unless moment-carrying capacity can be justified. Direct end grain bearing is desirable and is often achieved by notching the post to receive the truss. When designing the truss-to-post connection for uplift, it is important to accurately estimate the weights of construction materials if any counteracting credit is to be taken. For surface-attached posts, the bottom connection needs to be checked for maximum shear and uplift forces. For embedded posts attached to collars or footings, the connections must be properly designed to withstand gravity and uplift loads, and corrosion-resistant fasteners must be used. 4.2.8 Construction Alternatives. The posts in post-frame buildings can be solid sawn, mechanically-laminated, glued-laminated or wood composite. Allowable design stresses are published in the NDS or are available from the manufacturers. Treated wood is used for the embedded part of the post, but no treatment is required on the parts that are not in contact with the ground and are protected by the building envelope. 4.2.9 Foundation. Post-frame building foundations include posts embedded in the ground or surface-attached on a concrete foundation. Embedded posts shall be designed to resist sidesway and overturning forces due to wind or seismic loads, as well as wind uplift, and gravity loads. Post foundation design is an important aspect of post-frame building design that is not well known in the structural engineering design community, and therefore Chapter 8 is dedicated to this subject. If a concrete slab is used, it only needs to be designed for interior loads since exterior building loads are transferred directly to the ground through the posts. Another option is to attach the posts to a concrete foundation. In this case, the concrete must be designed to carry the exterior building loads as well as interior. Connections must be designed to attach the posts to the concrete.
4-2
4.2.10 Pressure Preservative Treatment (PPT). Treated foundation systems have been accepted by the model codes and have a history of successful performance in residential wood construction. The most common pressure preservative treatment used in post-frame construction is chromated copper arsenate (CCA). CCA can increase the potential for metal-fastener corrosion, and may require hot-dipped galvanized or stainless steel fasteners. The minimum waterborne treatment retention for structural posts used in post-frame buildings is 0.6 lb/ft3 (pcf) as defined in AWPA Standard C15 (AWPA, 1995a).
copper arsenate (ACA), and ammoniacal copper zinc arsenate. CCA is available in three formulations: CCA-A, CCA-B, and CCA-C. CCA-C is the most popular of the three formulations due to its increased resistance to leaching. Penta is an oil-borne preservative, and creosote is a coal-tar based preservative that is its own carrier. While penta and creosote offer superior resistance in high salt environments, waterborne preservatives are typically more popular since the final product has a clean surface, is paintable, and is relatively odorless. Waterborne preservatives do provide a strong potential for corrosion of metal connectors and fasteners; follow the manufacturers recommendations for the use of stainless or hot-dipped galvanized fasteners. While the major building codes endorse the use of preservative-treated wood for foundation applications, it is imperative that the preservative retention guidelines be followed. The American Wood Preservers Association has published standards for the preservative treatment of wood for various applications (AWPA, 1991). Care must be taken that the appropriate standard is considered when specifying treatment for post foundation systems. For example, most waterborne preservative-treated lumber sold has a preservative retention level of 0.4 pcf (pounds of preservative per cubic foot of wood), which is the retention level specified by AWPA Standard C2 for lumber in contact with the ground. This differs, however, from the AWPA Standard C15 governing the treatment of structural posts used in foundations; the required preservative retention for waterborne preservatives under this standard is 0.6 pcf. The AWPA C15 required retention level for post foundations using penta as a preservative is 0.6 pcf, while the required retention level for creosote is 12.0 pcf. The rate at which treatments are absorbed into wood, and the depth of penetration of the treatment, varies from wood species to wood species. Whereas Southern Pine species take treatment quite well, most other species must be incised to comply with AWPA retention requirements. Incising can adversely affect lumber strength properties. Consult AF&PA for specifications regarding the use of incised wood in structural applications.
Technical Note
Wood Preservative Treatments When the moisture content of wood exceeds 20% on a dry weight basis in the presence of oxygen, it is vulnerable to attack by insects and decaying fungi. Although some species of wood (and the heartwood of other species) are naturally resistant to these types of attack, most structural woods used in North America are not. These structural wood species must be chemically treated to protect them from decay and maintain their strength throughout the structural design life. The chemicals used for preservative treatment of the wood are typically injected into the wood using pressure processes. Wood that has been chemically treated in this manner is accepted by all major building codes. The type of preservative treatment and the required amount of retention by the wood depends on the end use of the wood component. It is assumed that the designer is already familiar with the use of preservative treated wood for above-ground applications (such as wood decks); this section will concentrate specifically on preservative treatments and retention levels appropriate for use in post foundations. Preservative chemicals abate wood decay by altering the wood as a potential food source for insects and fungi. The preservatives typically used in North America are waterborne arsenicbased, pentachlorophenol (penta) and creosote. Waterborne arsenic-based preservatives include chromated copper arsenate (CCA), ammoniacal
4-3
Quality assurance is critical to the performance of treated wood. The treating industry has developed a quality control and treatment quality marking program accredited by the American Lumber Standards Committee. Any treated members specified for use in a post foundation should be stamped by an approved agency (e.g., AWPA, Southern Pine Inspection Bureau (SPIB), etc.) to assure that the members have been treated in accordance with AWPA Standard C15 and to the appropriate retention level. Treated wood suppliers provide Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) or Consumer Information Sheets with the product. These sheets contain special instructions about the care, handling and disposal of treated wood. Federal law dictates that these sheets must be provided to all employees exposed to the materials. Saw cuts or drilled holes made after treatment may expose untreated wood. This problem is especially critical if the newly exposed wood is in the splash zone or in contact with the ground. When using nail-laminated posts, the cut end of the treated lumber should be placed upward, above the ground level; otherwise, brushapplied, soaked, or dipped field treatments are recommended. AWPA Standard M4 outlines procedures for field treatment; some chemicals require a certified pesticide applicators license to apply. The chemical suppliers should be consulted for application restrictions.
Standard for Metal Plate Connected Wood Truss Construction. 4.3.2 Design Loads. The controlling load combination for truss design often is snow plus dead load. The unbalanced snow load case should be checked per the applicable building code, or for agricultural buildings, engineering practice ASAE EP288.5 (ASAE, 1999a) should be consulted. However, all other applicable load combinations must be checked. For example, a wind load combination may cause stress reversal in some truss elements as discussed later in this chapter. Truss loads are normally represented by listing the top-chord live and dead, and bottom-chord live and dead loads, respectively. Truss design loads are typically expressed in units of pounds per square foot (psf). An example of truss loading would be 20-4-0-1 (psf is implied). Both live and dead loads apply to the vertically projected tributary areas of the top and bottom chords. Often, a bottom-chord live load is not required, so the preceding nomenclature would be shortened to 20-4-1 psf. 4.3.3 Design. This design manual does not present specifics of roof truss design. Metalplate-connected wood trusses in the United States are designed according to the provisions of ANSI/TPI 1-1995. Other designs are based on proprietary test information, along with design criteria from the NDS (AF&PA, 1997). Model building codes recognize either of these approaches. ANSI-TPI 1-1995 mentions two types of structural analyses. The simplified method is a type of pin joint analysis that has been calibrated to account for partial joint fixity. This method uses tables of factors to determine chord moments and member buckling lengths. The simplified method has been the predominate method for a number of years; however, it will eventually be phased out by TPI. The other type of analysis which is sometimes referenced as the exact method, is a stiffness matrix method of analysis. Plane frame structures analyzers are becoming more commonly used and provide for more sophisticated and accurate analyses. Regardless of analysis methods, structural modeling assumptions are important and can dramatically influence the design (Brakeman, 1994).
4.3 Trusses
4.3.1 General. Together with posts, wood trusses are primary structural elements of postframe buildings. Two excellent sources of technical information on trusses are the Truss Plate Institute (TPI) and the Wood Truss Council of America (WTCA). Trusses must be properly designed, handled and installed. These responsibilities are shared by the building owner, contractor and designer, and the truss designer and manufacturer. The importance of a clear understanding of responsibilities among these parties cannot be overstated, and is covered in WTCA 1-1995 Standard Responsibilities in the Design Process Involving Metal Plate Connected Wood Trusses and ANSI/TPI-1-1995 National Design
4-4
For example, partial fixity at truss plate joints as well as eccentricity at heel joints, can be modeled a variety of ways. The heel joint usually gets the most attention since heel joint modeling decisions can greatly influence truss design. The size, and in some cases the orientation, of truss plates is dependent on proprietary design values. These values are available from the manufacturers or from research reports prepared by the model code agencies, Such as ICBO, SBCCI and BOCA. Trusses can be obtained pre-engineered from the manufacturer. It is important to consider wind loading on trusses as stress reversals can occur and overstress some members. This design is complicated by the fact that wind loads are influenced by building geometry, so this information must be communicated to the truss designer. Any structural bracing (e.g. knee braces) or redundant supports must be included in the truss design. 4.3.4. Truss-to-Post Connection. The connection between the truss and post is critical. Designers must consider both gravity forces and uplift forces. With some truss-to-post connection designs, it might be necessary to examine the impact of the connection on the forces induced in the truss chords, heel joints, and post. Observations from several building investigations revealed that the individual trusses and posts were designed properly, but the connection between the two units was not. Many different methods and hardware have been used to design the connection, such as bolts, nails, truss anchors, and combinations of the same. Unless otherwise governed by a specific code, the design of this connection should meet NDS (AF&PA, 1997) requirements. 4.3.5 Stress Reversal. The trusses used in post-frame buildings are typically long span and, consequently, have long webs. When the truss becomes part of a post-frame building, it is possible, under certain loading conditions, for a tension web in the truss design to become a compression web. Stress reversal can also occur in truss chords due to a wind uplift loading combined with dead
load. This load case may not frequently control the size of the truss chord lumber, but it makes compression in the bottom chord possible. This situation is one reason that lateral bracing of the bottom chord is required (TPI, 1989; 1991a; 1991b). 4.3.6 Temporary Bracing. Temporary bracing is required to ensure stability of trusses during their installation and until permanent bracing for trusses and the building are in place. This area is the most difficult to manage in the field. According to WTCA 1-1995 and ANSI/TPI 11995, determination and installation of temporary bracing is the responsibility of the building contractor. Truss Plate Institute (TPI) publication HIB-98 is a summary sheet that contains recommendations for handling, installing and temporary bracing metal plate connected wood trusses used in post-frame construction. Another TPI summary sheet (i.e., HIB-91) contains similar recommendation for trusses with on center spacings two feet or less and spans less than 60 feet. Both HIB-98 and HIB-91 are formatted as accident-prevention brochures for use by builders, building contractors, licensed contractors, erectors, and erection contractors. 4.3.7 Permanent Bracing. Permanent truss bracing is critical to the performance of the roof system. Roof trusses are designed with the assumption that their elements are held sufficiently in-plane (ANSI/TPI, 1995). The primary function of permanent roof-truss bracing is to hold all trusses of the roof in the intended vertical plane. HIB-98, provides guidance for the placement of temporary truss bracing, which, if left in place, may function as part of the permanent bracing system. Building designers are responsible for designing permanent bracing. For trusses spaced 4 ft or less, DSB-89 (TPI, 1989) provides a calculation method for temporary and permanent bracing designs. For trusses spaced greater than 4 ft (1.22 m) on-center, similar principles can be used, but designers must consider that the longer lengths involved may cause the bracing members to buckle. A commentary covering permanent bracing of metal plate connected wood trusses is available from WTCA (1999).
4-5
4.4 Girders
4.4.1 General. Girders are heavy beams used to span large openings (e.g., doors) and to support trusses located between posts. For example, when roof truss spacing is less than the post spacing, girders (sometimes called headers) are needed to carry the intermediate trusses. This is a common occurrence over large door openings. These beams are considered main wind-force resisting members. Vertically nail-laminated lumber, structural composite lumber, glued-laminated beams and steel Ibeams are all commonly used as girders. There is an abundant supply of structural-composite lumber products from manufacturers who publish their own allowable stresses. Often, the critical load combination is dead plus snow load, although all applicable load combinations must be checked. 4.4.2 Design Criteria. Girders are designed as bending members. Any one of the four criteria used for the design of bending members can control design (i.e. bending, shear, compression perpendicular to grain, and deflection). Shear can often control girder design. Also note that formulae found in most handbooks account for bending but not shear deflection. Designers should consider the impact of shear deflection on the total deflection of a girder. Hoyle and Woeste (1989) provide formulae for calculating shear deflection of wood beams. 4.4.3 Vertically Laminated Lumber. The design of girders for a post-frame building is routine structural design except when a girder is fabricated by vertically laminating three or more pieces of dimension lumber. In this case, the allowable bending stress can be increased using the repetitive member factors published in ANSI/ASAE EP559 (ASAE, 1999b). These values are given in table 7.3. 4.4.4 Connections. Girder attachment to posts and individual roof trusses is a fundamental part of girder design. When designing girder-to-post connections, both uplift and gravity must be considered. When designing truss-to-girder connections, special consideration must be given to situations in which trusses are hung off the side of the girder. In such cases truss-togirder connections should be designed to prevent rotation between the trusses and girder, or
4-6
and cladding, which is recognized by all three model building codes. Components and cladding collect the loads and distribute them to the primary structural elements, identified as the main wind-force resisting system. Wind loads are much greater at eaves, ridges, edges, corners and other discontinuities. Purlin spacing and fasteners are critical in these areas. If these areas fail under extreme wind loading, the building envelope will be breached, and internal wind pressures will change dramatically. 4.6.3 Orientation. Purlins are installed on-edge or flat. When they are used on-edge, they may be either placed on top of the truss or recessed between the trusses. Purlins placed on-edge are frequently overlapped and fastened together at the overlap. When used flat, purlins are installed on top of the trusses. 4.6.4 Truss Chord Bracing. Purlin spacing is a factor in truss design since purlins provide lateral support to the truss top chord. In some cases, the slenderness ratio for weak-axis truss chord buckling between purlins can be greater than that for strong-axis buckling. Therefore, when specifying trusses, the building designer should inform the truss-design engineer of the planned purlin spacing. 4.6.5 Design Loads. Purlin design often is controlled by the dead plus snow load combination, or dead plus wind load (especially in the edge zones of the roof). Dead loads used for design may exceed actual weights for gravity load calculations; however, inflated dead loads cannot be used to offset wind uplift or wind overturn moments. In these cases, offsetting loads cannot exceed actual weights of materials. 4.6.6 Design Criteria. Purlins members should be checked for bending strength, shear capacity, and deflection. If the roof assembly is functioning as a structural diaphragm, purlins will also be subjected to axial forces. Purlins shall be designed to carry bending about both axes. Weak axis bending may be omitted if it can be demonstrated by test or analysis that the roof sheathing provides support. The connections between the purlins and rafters should be designed for both gravity loads and wind uplift forces. Purlin hangers are often used when pur-
lins are recessed, and their capacity should be verified for the various loading cases. In general, the provisions of the NDS (AF&PA, 1997) apply for the connections and stress analysis.
4-7
taken to assure that the capacity of wall panels, fasteners and girts are not exceeded by these forces. 4.7.6 Design Criteria. Girts are designed as bending members for which the usual bendingmember design criteria apply. The critical connections between the girts and the post should be checked for both wind pressure and suction. The top wall girt may be constructed to carry chord forces from the roof diaphragm and, if so, must be checked for the appropriate axial loads. The NDS (AF&PA, 1997) provisions apply for the connections and stress analysis.
4.9.2 Design Properties. Diaphragm performance depends on factors such as the steel, steel sheet-to-sheet fasteners, steel-to-wood fasteners, and the wood frame. There is no standard steel panel construction, so diaphragm strength and stiffness depend on the specific construction used. Strength and stiffness data on laboratory test panels are generally required to derive design values. Most post-frame buildings have much greater spans than laboratory test panels; therefore, test data must be extrapolated to prac-tical building sizes as explained in Chapter 6.
4-8
endwall that has a large door installed, the alternative is to install a structural partition in the center of the building. The structural partition must meet the shear requirements delivered by the roof diaphragm. Buttresses, inside or outside the walls, can be used to reduce the effective length of the building with respect to maximum roof and end-wall shears.
metal plate connected wood trusses. DSB-89. TPI, Madison, WI. Truss Plate Institute (TPI). 1998. HIB-98 summary sheet. TPI, Madison, WI. Truss Plate Institute (TPI). 1995. ANSI/TPI 11995 National design standard for metal plate connected wood truss construction. TPI, Madison, WI. Wirt, D.L., F.E. Woeste, D.E. Kline and T.E. McLain. 1992. Design procedures for post-frame end walls. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 8(1):97-105. Wood Truss Council of America (WTCA). 1995. Standard responsibilities in the design process involving metal plate connected wood trusses. WTCA 1-1995. WTCA, Madison, WI. Wood Truss Council of America (WTCA). 1999. Commentary for permanent bracing of metal plate connected wood trusses. WTCA, Madison, WI.
4.11
References
ASAE. 1999a. ASAE EP 288.5: Agricultural building snow and wind loads. ASAE Standards, 46th edition. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI. ASAE. 1999b. ANSI/ASAE EP 559: Design requirements and bending properties for mechanically-laminated posts. ASAE Standards, 46th edition. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI. American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA). 1997. National design specification for wood construction. AF&PA, Washington, D.C. American Wood-Preservers' Assc. (AWPA). 1995a. Wood for commercial-residential construction. Preservative treatment by pressure process, C-15. In Book of Standards. AWPA, Stevensville, MD. American Wood-Preservers Assc. (AWPA). 1995b. Lumber, timbers, bridge ties, and mine ties, pressure treatment, C2-90. In Book of Standards. AWPA, Stevensville, MD. American Wood-Preservers' Assc. (AWPA). 1995c. Care of pressure treated wood products, M4-90. In Book of Standards. AWPA, Stevensville, MD. Brakeman, D.B. 1994. Which truss design method is the correct one? Peaks 16(1):1-3. Gebremedhin, K.G., and F.E. Woeste. 1986. Diaphragm design with knee brace slip for postframe buildings. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 23(2):538-542. Hoyle, R.J. and F.E. Woeste. 1989. Wood technology in the design of structures. Fifth edition. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA. Truss Plate Institute (TPI). 1989. Recommended design specifications for temporary bracing of
4-9
4-10
5.1 Introduction
5.1.1 2-D Frame Analysis. Prior to the 1980s, the common method of analysis for post-frame structures in agricultural, commercial and light industrial applications was to consider the structure as a system of independently-acting, twodimensional (2-D) post-frames. Although a 2-D frame analysis method works well for designing frames under vertical loadings; it is often too conservative for designing buildings against sidesway. In addition, many 2-D frames offer little or no resistance to loads acting normal to the frames (e.g., wind acting normal to the endwalls). 5.1.2 Diaphragm Action. A considerable portion of the horizontal load applied to many postframe structures is actually resisted by roof and ceiling diaphragms and shearwalls. As previously stated (section 4.9), roof and ceiling diaphragms are large plates that are formed when cladding is attached to roof and ceiling framing, respectively. These large plates help redistribute load throughout the structure. This redistribution of load by the diaphragms is called diaphragm action. A shearwall is any wall interior or exterior with a measurable amount of racking resistance. Most of the load to which a diaphragm is subjected, is transferred to the foundation by shearwalls orientated parallel to the direction of applied load. Figure 5.1 illustrates a situation in which wind load directed at a sidewall, is transferred via the roof diaphragm to the endwalls and one interior wall. Under this loading, the two endwalls and the one interior wall function as shearwalls. When the same wind load is directed toward the endwall, the sidewalls function as shearwalls in transferring the load from the roof diaphragm to the foundation system. 5.1.3 Post-Frame Contributions. Whenever load is applied normal to the sidewall of a structure, any post-frame with measurable racking resistance functions like the interior shearwall in figure 5.1. The amount of load that an individual post-frame will transfer to the foundation is dependent on (1) the in-plane shear stiffness of the diaphragm, and (2) the racking stiffness of the
post-frame relative to that of other post-frames and shearwalls. If a diaphragm is constructed in such a way that it is quite stiff in shear, diaphragm action will be enhanced and the diaphragm will transfer load from post-frames with low racking stiffness to shearwalls and postframes with high racking stiffness. However, if the shear stiffness of the diaphragm is relatively low, load transfer will be minimal and the behavior of the structure will be much more in accordance with the assumption of independently acting post-frames.
Eave displacement
Wind load
Intermediate shearwall Roof diaphragm End shearwall Deformed structure Undeformed structure
Figure 5.1. Example of diaphragm action in which the roof diaphragm transfers load to three shearwalls one interior and two exterior walls. 5.1.4 Endwall Loadings. Virtually all postframe buildings are longer than they are wide. It follows, that diaphragms in such buildings, when viewed from the endwall, appear as narrow, deep plates. For endwall loadings, these narrow, deep diaphragms are generally assumed to have an infinite shear stiffness, which means that every structural element attached to the diaphragm, shifts the same amount when the diaphragm shifts without rotating. For example, under an endwall loading, the roof diaphragm would ensure equal displacement of the top of endwall posts and the top of each sidewall.
5-1
5.1.5 Diaphragm Design. When diaphragm action is accounted for in overall building design, the design process is referred to as diaphragm design. Diaphragm design is a relatively straight forward process when a diaphragm is (1) assumed to have infinite shear stiffness, and/or (2) only attached to two shearwalls/post-frames (as is generally the case with endwall loadings). When neither of these conditions applies (generally true with loads normal to the sidewall) diaphragm design is more complex.
(a)
5.1.6 ASAE EP484.2. The current diaphragm design procedure is outlined in ANSI/ASAE EP484.2: Diaphragm Design of Metal-Clad, Wood-Frame Rectangular Buildings (ASAE, 1999a). This procedure, which is outlined in the following sections, can be broken into five steps: Step 1. Construct a finite element model of the building by breaking the structure into frame, shearwall, and diaphragm elements (Section 5.2) Step 2. Assign stiffness values to frames and shearwall elements (Section 5.3) and diaphragm elements (Section 5.4). Step 3. Calculate structural loads (i.e., eave loads) for the model (Section 5.5). Step 4. Determine the distribution of load to individual elements (Section 5.6). Step 5. Check to make sure that loads do not exceed allowable values (Section 5.7).
Diaphragm "c"
(b)
1a
2a
3a
4a
1b
2b
3b
4b
1c
2c
3c
4c
(d)
Figure 5.2. (a) Perspective view of a four-bay post-frame building with (b) roof and ceiling diaphragms. Sectioning of (c) roof diaphragms, and (d) ceiling diaphragm.
5-2
Figures 5.2a shows a post-frame building with three interior post-frames. Drawing a line along each interior frame and the ridge results in the eight (8) roof diaphragm sections shown in figure 5.2c, and the four ceiling diaphragm sections shown in figure 5.2d. To avoid confusion when assigning properties to diaphragm sections, it is helpful to identify each diaphragm section with a two-digit identifier. The first digit identifies the bay associated with the section. Bays are generally numbered from leftto-right, as shown in figures 5.2c and 5.2d. The second digit identifies the specific roof or ceiling slope. In figure 5.2, letters have been used to identify these slopes, with letters a and b representing different roof slopes, and letter c used to identify ceiling sections. 5.2.3 Discretization. The process of breaking a structure into elements for analysis is referred to as discretization. For diaphragm design, a structure is broken into frame elements and diaphragm elements. Each post-frame is considered a separate frame element, as is each shearwall orientated in the same direction as the post-frames. The example building shown in figure 5.2 would be modeled with five (5) frame elements. These frame elements have been identified in figures 5.2c and 5.2d with the encircled numbers (as with individual bays, numbering is generally from left-to-right). Each diaphragm element models the diaphragm sections within a single bay. For example, diaphragm sections 1a, 1b, and 1c in figure 5.2 would be represented with a single diaphragm element. It follows that the number of diaphragm elements is equal to the number of building bays, which in turn, is one less than the number of frame elements. Discretization of a four-bay building is shown in figure 5.3a. 5.2.4 Spring Model. To determine the distribution of horizontally applied loads to individual diaphragm and frame elements requires only a single stiffness property for each element. For this reason, diaphragm and frame elements are generally represented with simple springs. As shown in figure 5.3b, frame elements are represented with springs of stiffness, k, and diaphragm elements are represented as springs with stiffness Ch. The element (or spring) connection points (a.k.a. nodes) are taken to repre-
at
the
eave
of
each
Horizontal components of applied building loads are typically uniformly distributed along the length of the building as shown in figure 5.3a. For modeling purposes, this uniform load is converted into a set of equivalent concentrated loads that are applied at the nodes as shown in figure 5.3b. Because of the location of their application, these forces are referred to as eave loads.
(a)
k1
k2
k3
k4
k5
Ch1 r1 r2
Ch2 r3
(b)
Ch3 r4
Ch4 r5
Figure 5.3. (a) Top view of a four-bay building showing individual elements and applied horizontal loads. Encircled numbers identify frame elements, other numbers identify diaphragm elements. (b) Corresponding spring model.
5-3
Post stiffness, kp, is graphically defined in figure 5.5. For a post with a constant flexural rigidity (E x I) that is assumed to be fixed at the base, post stiffness is given as: kp = where: kp = E = stiffness of post that is fixed at the base and pinned at the top, lbf/in (N/mm) modulus of elasticity of post, lbf/in2 (N/mm2) moment of inertia of post, in4 (mm4) post height from fixed base to truss connection post (see figure 5.5), in (mm) 3 E I / Hp3 (5-3)
I = Hp =
P k=P/
P Post -to-truss connection point kp = P /
Hp
5.3.2 Calculation. Frame stiffness is generally obtained with a plane-frame structural analysis program, e.g., PPSA (Purdue Research Foundation, 1993), METCLAD (Gebremedhin, 1987b), and SOLVER (Gebremedhin, 1987a). For post-frames in which (1) all posts are assumed to be pin-connected to the truss (or rafters), and (2) there are no special members (e.g., knee braces) connecting posts to the truss, frame stiffness can be calculated as:
n
Figure 5.5. Definition of post stiffness, kp. 5.3.3 Shearwalls. End shearwalls and intermediate shearwalls, like post-frames, are modeled as frame elements (see Section 5.2.3). Consequently, their stiffness, like that for post-frames, is defined as the ratio of a horizontal force, P, applied at the eave of the wall, to the resulting horizontal eave displacement, . The stiffness of shearwalls can be obtained using validated structural models, or from tests of functionally equivalent assemblies. ASAE EP558 (1999b) gives laboratory test procedures that can be used to determine the stiffness of functionally equivalent walls. This topic is also discussed in Section 6.5.
k =
kp,i
i=1
(5-2)
where: kp,i = n = stiffness of post i, lbf/in (N/mm) number of posts in the post-frame
5-4
Technical Note Embedded Post Analogs When a post is embedded in the soil, calculated post stiffness (and consequently calculated frame stiffness) is highly dependent on how the embedded portion is modeled. Traditionally, engineers have ignored soil properties and have modeled embedded posts using the analogs shown in figures 5.6a and 5.6b. An inherent deficiency of these analogs is that the pin supports used to fix the post below grade do not allow the post to naturally displace. For this reason, post stiffness values predicted using the analogs should be applied with caution. It should also be noted that the analogs in figures 5.6a and 5.6b produce a reduced post stiffness when depth of embedment, d, is increased. In reality, anytime a post is embedded deeper into the ground, the stiffness associated with the post increases. To accurately model post movement below grade requires accounting for soil stiffness. Bohnhoff (1992) developed equations for predicting post stiffness assuming soil stiffness increased linearly with depth below grade and inversely with post width. Bohnhoff also assumed that the post had infinite flexural stiffness
below grade. Meador (1997) developed similar equations, but unlike Bohnhoff, Meador assumed that soil stiffness was not a function of post width. Meador also investigated the assumption of infinite post stiffness below grade, and established limits for applicability of the equations he developed. McGuire (1998) used the work of both Bohnhoff and Meador to propose an analog where soil is modeled as a series of linear springs whose stiffness increases linearly below grade (figure 5.6c). McGuire verified Bohnhoffs results and also showed that for the case of non-constrained posts, analogs like those shown in figure 5.6a may incorrectly predict the sense of base moment (see Chapter 8). Current impediments to the wide spread adoption of analogs that account for soil stiffness include: (1) complexity of equations, and (2) unrealistically low post stiffness values obtained using published soil stiffness data. It is important for the post-frame designer to realize that fixing the post at grade (figure 5.5) generally produces conservative values for post base moments, especially for the nonconstrained post case. Conversely, forces calculated in the diaphragm using this model might be non-conservative.
Hp Ground surface
Hp
Hp
Figure 5.6. Structural analog traditionally used for (a) non-constrained and (b) constrained posts. (c) A more realistic non-constrained post analog that accounts for soil stiffness.
5-5
Ch = ch,i = n =
total horizontal shear stiffness of diaphragm element, lbf/in (N/mm) horizontal shear stiffness of diaphragm section i (from Section 6.4.4), lbf/in (N/mm) number of diaphragm sections comprising the diaphragm element
s1
s2 (a) P P
s3
s4
s x qwr
s x qlr
i
s xq ww
C h,i = P /
si (b)
Figure 5.7. (a) Top view of a four-bay building. (b) Definition of diaphragm stiffness, Ch, for a single diaphragm element. 5.4.2 Calculation. The total horizontal shear stiffness of a diaphragm element is simply equal to the sum of the horizontal shear stiffness values of the diaphragm sections that comprise the element. In equation form:
n
Ch =
ch,i
i=1
(5-4)
5.5.2 Calculation by Plane-Frame Structural Analysis. A horizontal restraint (vertical roller) is placed at the eave line as shown in figure 5.8 and the structural analog is analyzed with all external loads in place. The horizontal reaction at the vertical roller support is numerically equal to the eave load, R. The vertical roller should always be placed at the same location that horizontal load P was placed when determine frame stiffness (see figure 5.4). The value of R is very dependent on the magnitude of forces with
where:
5-6
horizontal components (i.e., wind and stored materials). 5.5.3 Calculation Using Frame-Base Fixity Factors. When: (1) posts are assumed to be pin-connected to trusses/rafters, (2) the only applied loads with horizontal components are due to wind, and (3) wind pressure is uniformly distributed on each wall and roof surface, then eave load, R, can be estimated as: R = s (hwr qwr hlr qlr + hww fw qww hlw fl qlw)
For symmetrical base restraint and frame geometry, equation 5-5 reduces to: R = s [hr (qwr qlr) + hw f (qww qlw)] where: hr = hw = f = roof height, ft (m) wall height, ft (m) frame-base fixity factor for both leeward and windward posts (5-6)
(5-5)
where: R s = = = hwr hlr hww hlw qwr = = = = = eave load, lbf (N) frame spacing for interior postframes and shearwalls, ft (m) one-half the frame spacing for endwalls, ft (m) windward roof height, ft (m) leeward roof height, ft (m) windward wall height, ft (m) leeward wall height, ft (m) design windward roof pressure, lbf/ft2 (N/m2) design leeward roof pressure, lbf/ft2 (N/m2) design windward wall pressure, lbf/ft2 (N/m2) design leeward wall pressure lbf/ft2 (N/m2) frame-base fixity factor, windward post frame-base fixity factor, leeward post
Inward acting wind pressures have positive signs, outward acting pressures are negative (figure 5.8). In buildings with variable frame spacings, set s equal to the average of the frame spacings on each side of the eave load. Frame-base fixity factors, fw and fl, determine how much of the total wall load is transferred to the eave, and how much is transferred directly to the ground. The greater the resistance to rotation at the base of a wall, the more load will be attracted directly to the base of the wall. For substantial fixity against rotation at the groundline, set the frame-base fixity factor(s) equal to 3/8. For all other cases, set the frame-base fixity factor(s) equal to 1/2.
5-7
dont vary in overall design. When tables 5.1 and 5.2 are applicable, the analysis tools discussed in Section 5.6.2 are generally not needed. Input parameters required for tables 5.1 and 5.2 include: number of frame elements (i.e., the number of interior frames + 2); ratio of diaphragm element to interior frame element stiffness, Ch / k; and ratio of exterior to interior frame element stiffness, ke / k. The most highly loaded diaphragm element (in any building that meets the preceding five conditions) is the element located adjacent to the endwalls. The maximum shear force in this diaphragm element, Vh, is equal to the appropriate shear modifier value, mS, from table 5.1, multiplied by the eave load, R, for an interior frame. In equation form: Vh = where: Vh = mS = R = maximum diaphragm element shear force, lbf (N) shear force modifier from Table 5.1 eave load at interior frame, lbf (N) R mS (5-7)
Q = mD = R =
sidesway restraining force, lbf (N) sidesway restraining force factor from Table 5.2 eave load at interior frame, lbf (N)
5.6.4 In-Plane Shear Force in a Diaphragm Section, Vp. The analysis tools discussed in Section 5.6.2 (and equation 5-7) output diaphragm element forces. In most cases, each element is comprised of two or more diaphragm sections. The in-plane shear force in each of these diaphragm sections is calculated as: Vp,i = where: Vp,i = Vh = ch,i = in-plane shear force in diaphragm section i, lbf (N) horizontal shear force in the diaphragm element, lbf (N) horizontal shear stiffness of diaphragm section i, lbf/in. (N/mm) slope of diaphragm section i (ch,i / Ch) Vh / (cos i) (5-9)
i =
The value obtained from equation 5-7 is simply equal to one-half of the total horizontal eave load that is not carried by the interior frames. The most highly loaded interior frame element (in any building that meets the preceding five conditions) is the element located closest to the building midlength. Because of diaphragm action, the total horizontal load that this critical frame must resist is reduced from that which it would have to resist without diaphragm action. The magnitude of this reduction is referred to the horizontal restraining force because in reality, it is a restraining force applied to the frame by the roof (and/or ceiling) diaphragms. Numerically, the horizontal restraining force, Q, is equal to the product of the eave load R, and the appropriate sidesway restraining force factor, mD from table 5.2. In equation form: Q where: = R mD (5-8)
5.6.5 Forces Applied to Frames by Individual Diaphragms. The horizontal movement of most building frames is resisted by roof/ceiling diaphragms. The total horizontal resisting force applied to an individual frame by the roof/ceiling diaphragms was previously defined as the sidesway restraining force, Q. To accurately model a frame with the resisting forces applied by the roof and ceiling diaphragms, requires that the sidesway restraining force, Q, first be divided up between the individual diaphragms (e.g., diaphragms a, b, and c in figure 5.2b). This is accomplished using the following equation: Qi = where: Qi = Q = sidesway resisting force due to diaphragm i, lbf (N) total sidesway resisting force acting on the frame, lbf (N) horizontal shear stiffness for a width s of the roof/ceiling assembly, lbf/in. (N/mm) horizontal shear stiffness of diaphragm i with width s, lbf/in. (N/mm) Q (ch,i / Ch) (5-10)
Ch = ch,i =
5-8
5-9
5-10
5-11
5-12
FRAME FRAME APPLIED HORIZONTAL LOAD RESISTED FRACTION OF NUMBER STIFFNESS LOAD DISPLACEMENT BY FRAME APPLIED LOAD --------------------------------------------------------------------1 10000.00 500.0 .1946696 1946.7 3.8934 2 100.00 1000.0 .3393392 33.9 .0339 3 100.00 1000.0 .3874022 38.7 .0387 4 100.00 1000.0 .3393392 33.9 .0339 5 10000.00 500.0 .1946696 1946.7 3.8934 DIAPHRAGM DIAPHRAGM SHEAR SHEAR NUMBER STIFFNESS DISPLACEMENT LOAD -------------------------------------------1 10000.00 .1446696 1446.7 2 10000.00 .0480630 480.6 3 10000.00 .0480630 480.6 4 10000.00 .1446696 1446.7 Figure 5.9. Sample output from computer program DAFI. Q i / (cos i)
When requirements for use of tables 5.1 and 5.2 are met, equation 5-8 can be used to calculate the total sidesway resisting force, Q. In all other cases, analysis tools such as DAFI must be used to obtain Q. A copy of output from program DAFI for a 4-bay building with Ch fixed at 10000, ke at 10000, k at 100, and R at 1000 is shown in figure 5.9. Although the sidesway resisting force for each frame is not given in the DAFI output, it is numerically equal to the difference between the load applied to the frame, and the load resisted by the frame two values that are listed in the programs output. For example, Q for the critical middle frame (frame 3 in figure 5.9), would be equal to the difference between 1000.0 and 38.7 or 961.3. Since diaphragm construction typically doesnt change from one side of a frame to the other side of the frame, Ch and ch,i values associated with either of the two diaphragm elements (that are adjacent to the frame) can be used in equation 5-9. Horizontal restraining forces calculated for the three diaphragms in figure 5.2b, are graphically illustrated in figure 5.10a. For post-frame component stress analysis, these restraining forces should be applied as in-plane forces as shown in figure 10b. In-plane forces are calculated from the horizontal forces as follows:
Q i / (d i cos i)
(5-11)
i =
q p,i = di =
in-plane force applied to frame by diaphragm i, lbf (N) sidesway resisting force due to diaphragm i, lbf (N) slope of diaphragm i in-plane force applied to the frame per unit length of diaphragm i, lbf/ft (N/m) slope length of diaphragm i, ft (m)
5.6.6 Simple Beam Analogy Equations. McGuire (1998) presented the concept of modeling the diaphragm as a simple beam with an applied load inversely proportional to deflection. This analogy resulted in the following equations for calculating diaphragm shear forces and lateral displacements for the special case when: (1) all diaphragm elements have the same stiffness Ch, (2) all interior frame elements have the same stiffness, k, (3) both exterior frame elements (i.e., the two elements representing the endwalls) have the same stiffness, ke, and (4) eave load, R, is the same at each interior frame.
5-13
s y
= =
s x qwr Qa Qc
s x qlr Qb
ye = k =
ke = Ch =
s xqww
s xqlw
sinh = cosh =
(a) Roof Gravity Loads
frame spacing, in. (mm) lateral displacement of diaphragm at a distance x from the endwall, in. (mm) lateral displacement of the endwall, in. (mm) stiffness of interior frames, lbf/in. (N/mm) stiffness of endwall frames (or shearwalls), lbf/in. (N/mm) horizontal shear stiffness for a width s of the diaphragm, lbf/in. (N/mm) Distance between endwalls, in. (mm) hyperbolic sine hyperbolic cosine ( k / Ch )1/2 s ye R/k A ( 1 cosh( L)) sinh( L) ke sinh( L) Ch s (1 - cosh( L))
= = =
s x qwr
s x qlr
B
q p,a q p,c Ceiling Gravity Loads q p,b
D
s xqlw
s xqww
(b)
Figure 5.10 (a) Frame with diaphragm resisting forces. (b) Resisting forces applied as uniformly distributed in-plane loads for frame component stress analysis. Vh = Chs[A sinh( x) + B cosh( x)] y = A cosh( x) + B sinh( x) + R/k ye = R / [ k (1 D)] where: Vh = x = R = diaphragm shear force, lbf (N) distance from endwall, in. (mm) eave load, lbf (N)
(5-12) (5-13) (5-14) where: Vp,i = va,i = di = in-plane shear force in diaphragm section i from equation 5-9 lbf (N) allowable in-plane shear strength of diaphragm i (see Section 6.3.3), lbf/ft (N/m) slope length of diaphragm i, ft (m)
5-14
5.7.3 Diaphragm Chords. In addition to shear forces, a roof/ceiling diaphragm assembly must also resist bending moment. The magnitude of this bending moment is dependent on a number of factors. For design, this bending moment is assumed to be no greater than: Md = where: Md = Vh = L = diaphragm bending moment, lbf-ft (N m) maximum total shear in roof/ceiling diaphragm assembly, lbf (N) distance between shearwalls, ft (m) Vh L / 4 (5-16)
The bending moment applied to a roof/ceiling diaphragm assembly is resisted by axial forces (a.k.a. chord forces) in members orientated perpendicular to trusses/rafters. This includes roof purlins and analogous framing members in the ceiling diaphragm. For bending moment calculations, these members are referred to as diaphragm chords (figure 5.11a). Any connection in the chords, either between intermediate chord members or where they are connected to the endwalls, must be designed to resist the calculated axial force. If the roof/ceiling assembly behaves as a single beam in resisting bending moment, the maximum chord force (which is located in the edge chords) can be calculated as: Pe = where: Pe = Md = axial force in edge chord, lbf (N) diaphragm bending moment from equation 5-16, lbf-ft (N m) reduction factor dependent on chord force distribution horizontal distance between edge chords, ft (m) Md / b (5-17)
Equation 5-16 treats the roof/ceiling assembly as a uniformly loaded beam that is simple supported by two shearwalls spaced a distance L apart. Each shearwall is assumed to be subjected to a force that is equal to the maximum total shear in the roof/ceiling assembly, Vh. The maximum total shear in the roof/ceiling assembly, Vh, can be obtained from computer output (e.g. figure 5.9), or equation 5-7 or 5-12 if applicable. The uniform load on the roof/ceiling assembly (w in figure 5.11a) is set equal to 2Vh/L. This quantity is multiplied by L2/8 to obtain Md.
= =
Vh
Vh
Shearwall
Chords (a)
Figure 5.11. (a) Plan view of a diaphragm under a uniform load, w. Chord force distributions when (b) moment resisted by edge chords only, (b) chord force distribution is linear, and (c) chord force distribution is linear, but diaphragm halves assumed to act independently in resisting moment.
5-15
The axial force in an edge chord is dependent on chord force distribution as indicated by the presence of in equation 5-17. The current ASAE EP484 diaphragm design procedure (ASAE, 1999a) assumes that edge chords act alone in resisting bending moment (figure 5.11b). For this case, is numerically equal to one (1). This is a conservative approach. Alternatively, many engineers assume a linear distribution of chord forces as shown in figure 5.11c. When a linear distribution is assumed, the reduction factor is a function of chord location. If chords are evenly spaced, then is given as:
(n 1 )2
n/2
(n 2 i + 1)2
i =1
when n is even
(n 1 )2
(n-1)/2
(n 2 i + 1)2
i =1
when n is odd
where:
reduction factor when chords are evenly spaced and chord forces are linearly distributed number of chord rows, including the two rows of edge chords
Table 5.3. Reduction Factor, , for Axial Force in Edge Chords n* n* 2 1.000 22 0.249 3 1.000 23 0.239 4 0.900 24 0.230 5 0.800 25 0.222 6 0.714 26 0.214 7 0.643 27 0.206 8 0.583 28 0.200 9 0.533 29 0.193 10 0.491 30 0.187 11 0.455 31 0.181 12 0.423 32 0.176 13 0.396 33 0.171 14 0.371 34 0.166 15 0.350 35 0.162 16 0.335 36 0.158 17 0.314 37 0.154 18 0.298 38 0.150 19 0.284 39 0.146 20 0.271 40 0.143 21 0.260 41 0.139 * n is the number of chord rows, including the two rows of edge chords
Technical Note
The preceding equations were used to calculate the values given in table 5.3. If a linear distribution of chord force is assumed (figure 5.11c), and interior chords are evenly spaced, the load in an interior chord, Pi, is given as: Pi = where: Pi = Pe = b = axial force for chord in row i, lbf (N) axial force in edge chord from equation 5-17, lbf (N) horizontal distance between edge chords, ft (m) horizontal distance from center of diaphragm to chord row i. 2 Pe x i / b (5-18)
Chord Forces The axial force induced in an individual chord by applied building loads is a function of many complex, interacting design variables. For this reason, designers have had to rely on simplifying assumptions in order to approximate chord forces. One common assumption is that the roof/ceiling assembly acts as a large deep beam that is simply supported by two end shearwalls. This assumption is used to calculate the maximum inplane bending moment to which a diaphragm is subjected. This assumption is conservative in that it neglects the resistance to in-plane bending contributed by sidewalls. Sidewalls help resist (and thereby reduce) in-plane bending moments in two ways. First they brace endwalls
xi =
5-16
and other shearwalls, which limits rotation of the diaphragm at these shearwalls. Second, they resist a change in eave length (and hence changes in eave chord forces) by virtue of their own in-plane shear stiffness. Because of the influence of sidewalls, the distribution of in-plane bending moment will not follow that for a typical simple supported beam (i.e., zero moment at the supports, and maximum moment at midspan). For this reason, Pollock and others (1996) recommend modeling the roof/ceiling assembly as a deep beam with fixed supports. Because of uncertainty surrounding variation in in-plane bending moment with building length, some designers will assign the maximum calculated in-plane bending moment (Md from equation 5-16) to every location along the length of the building. This is obviously a conservative approach. Another major assumption that a designer must make involves the distribution of chord forces across a building. Three different chord force distributions are shown in figure 5.11b, 5.11c, and 5.11d. Whether or not edge chords resist virtually all of the in-plane bending moment (figure 5.11b), or a linear distribution of axial forces exists in chords between edge chords (figure 5.11c) is a question that is at the heart of ongoing research. In reality, the distribution of chord forces lies somewhere in between these two extremes, exactly where being dependent on specifics of the design and on the magnitude of the applied load (Note: at higher load levels, load distributions change due to geometric and material nonlinearities). Presently, there is very little research data to support one specific design procedure/assumption. The most extensive investigation of chord forces was by Niu and Gebremedhin (1997) who strain gauged purlins in a full-scale building and in a diaphragm test assembly. The data collected in this study does not strongly support any particular hypotheses regarding chord force distribution. The only other research of significance to chord force distribution was the comprehensive finite element analyses of diaphragm assemblies by Wright (1992) and Williams (1999). Both of these researchers found that in-plane bending
moment in their models was resisted almost entirely by the edge purlins. Bohnhoff and others (1999) showed that as the shear stiffness of cladding is increased, interior purlins get more involved in resisting in-plane bending moments. Chord force distribution has also been shown to depend on the degree of interaction between individual diaphragms. Figure 5.11d illustrates the distribution of chord forces when there is no interaction between individual diaphragms on both sides of a ridge. Note that interaction between individual diaphragms on opposites sides of a ridge is highly dependent on: (1) the spacing between ridge purlins, and (2) the rigidity of the ridge cap and other elements joining the two diaphragms.
5.7.4 Shearwalls. End and intermediate shearwalls must have sufficient strength to transmit forces from roof and ceiling diaphragms to the foundation system. In equation form: va > where: va = Vs = W = DT = allowable shear capacity of shearwall, lbf/ft (N/m) force induced in shearwall, lbf (N) building width, ft (m) total width of door and window openings in the shearwall, ft (m) Vs / (W DT) (5-19)
The allowable shear capacity of end and intermediate shearwalls, va, is obtained from validated structural models, or from tests as outlined in ASAE EP558 (see Section 6.5). The total force in the shear wall, Vs, is obtained from computer output (e.g. figure 5.8), or equation 57 or equation 5-12 if applicable. The total width of door and window openings, DT, generally varies with height as shown in figure 5.12. At locations where DT is the greatest (section b-b in figure 5.12) additional reinforcing may be required to ensure that the allowable shear stress is not exceeded. The structural framing over a door or window opening will act as a drag strut transferring
5-17
shear across the opening. The header over the opening shall be designed to carry the force in tension and/or compression across the opening.
5.7.6 Shearwall Overturning. Diaphragm loading produces overturning moment in shearwalls. This moment induces vertical forces in shearwall-to-foundation connections that must be added to vertical forces resulting from tributary loads. In the case of embedded posts, increases in uplift forces may require an increase in embedment depth, and increases in downward force may require an increase in footing size (see Chapter 8).
Figure 5.12. Shearwall showing variations in opening width, DT, with height. Shearwall strength can easily be increased when the applied load exceeds shearwall capacity. For example, the density of stitch screws can be increased and additional fasteners can be added in panel flats (on both sides of each major rib is the most effective). If only one side of the wall has been sheathed, add wood paneling or metal cladding to the other side. Metal diagonal braces can also be added beneath any wood paneling or corrugated metal siding. 5.7.5 Shearwall Connections. Connections that fasten (1) roof and ceiling diaphragms to a shearwall, and (2) shearwalls to the foundation system, must be designed to carry the appropriate amount of shear load. The design of these connections may be proved by tests of a typical connection detail or by an appropriate calculation method. At end shearwalls it is not uncommon to use the truss top chord to transfer load from roof cladding to endwall cladding. Sidewall steel is fastened directly to the truss chord, as is the roof steel when purlins are inset. In buildings with top-running purlins, roof cladding can not be fastened directly to the truss. In such cases, blocking equal in depth to the purlins is placed between the purlins and fastened to the truss. Roof cladding is then attached directly to this blocking.
5.8.1 General. When diaphragm stiffness is considerably greater than the stiffness of interior post frames, the designer may want to assume that the diaphragm and shearwalls are infinitely stiff. Under this assumption, 100% of the applied eave load, R, is transferred by the diaphragm to shearwalls, and none of the applied eave load is resisted by the frames. Because all eave load is assumed to be transferred to shearwalls, no special analysis tools or design tables are required to determine load distribution between diaphragms and post-frames. This simplifies the entire diaphragm design process. This simplified procedure is referred to as rigid roof design (Bender and others, 1991). 5.8.2 Calculation. When (1) the shearwalls and roof/ceiling diaphragm assembly are assumed to be infinitely rigid, (2) the only applied loads with horizontal components are due to wind, and (3) wind pressure is uniformly distributed on each wall and roof surface, then the maximum shear force in the diaphragm assembly is given as: Vh = where: Vh = L hwr hlr hww hlw = = = = = maximum diaphragm element shear force, lbf (N) building length, ft (m) windward roof height, ft (m) leeward roof height, ft (m) windward wall height, ft (m) leeward wall height, ft (m) L (hwr qwr hlr qlr + hww fw qww hlw fl qlw) / 2
(5-20)
5-18
design windward roof pressure, lbf/ft2 (N/m2) design leeward roof pressure, lbf/ft2 (N/m2) design windward wall pressure, lbf/ft2 (N/m2) design leeward wall pressure lbf/ft2 (N/m2) frame-base fixity factor, windward post frame-base fixity factor, leeward post
Output from a DAFI analysis of a building with relatively high diaphragm and shearwall stiffness values is presented in figure 5.9. This output shows less than 3% of the total horizontal eave load being resisted by the interior frames. Although rigid roof design expedites calculation of maximum diaphragm shear forces, the design procedure does not provide estimates of sidesway restraining force for interior post-frame design.
Inward acting wind pressures have positive signs, outward acting pressures are negative (figure 5.8). As previously noted, frame-base fixity factors, fw and fl, determine how much of the total wall load is transferred to the eave, and how much is transferred directly to the ground. The greater the resistance to rotation at the base of a wall, the more load will be attracted directly to the base of the wall. For substantial fixity against rotation at the groundline, set the frame-base fixity factor(s) equal to 3/8. For all other cases, set the frame-base fixity factor(s) equal to 1/2. For symmetrical base restraint and frame geometry, equation 5-20 reduces to: Vh = L [hr (qwr qlr) + hw f (qww qlw)] / 2 where: hr = hw = f = roof height, ft (m) wall height, ft (m) frame-base fixity factor for both leeward and windward posts (5-21)
5.9 References
Anderson, G.A., D.S. Bundy and N.F. Meador. 1989. The force distribution method: procedure and application to the analysis of buildings with diaphragm action. Transactions of the ASAE 32(5):1781-1786. ASAE. 1999a. EP484.2 Diaphragm design of metal-clad wood-frame rectangular buildings. ASAE Standards, 46th Ed., ASAE, St. Joseph, MI. ASAE. 1999b. EP558.1 Load tests for metalclad wood-frame diaphragms. ASAE Standards, 46th Ed., ASAE, St. Joseph, MI. Bender, D. A., T. D. Skaggs and F. E. Woeste. 1991. Rigid roof design for post-frame buildings. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 7(6):755-760. Bohnhoff, D. R., P. A. Boor, and G. A. Anderson. 1999. Thoughts on metal-clad wood-frame diaphragm action and a full-scale building test. ASAE Paper No. 994202, ASAE, St. Joseph, MI. Bohnhoff, D. R. 1992. Expanding diaphragm analysis for post-frame buildings. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 8(4):509-517. Gebremedhin, K.G. 1987a. SOLVER: An interactive structures analyzer for microcomputers. (Version 2). Northeast Regional Agricultural Engineering Service. Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. Gebremedhin, K.G. 1987b. METCLAD: Diaphragm design of metal-clad post-frame buildings using microcomputers. Northeast Regional Agricultural Engineering Service. Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
5.8.3 Application. The Vh value calculated using equation 5-20 (or 5-21) is always a conservative estimate of the actual maximum shear force (due to wind) in a diaphragm assembly. This estimate becomes increasingly conservative as the amount of load resisted by interior post-frames increases. It follows that equations 5-20 and 5-21 are most accurate when diaphragm stiffness is considerably greater than interior post-frame stiffness. This tends to be the case in buildings that are relatively wide and/or high, and in buildings where individual posts offer no resistance to rotation (i.e., the posts are more-or less pin-connected at both the floor and eave lines).
5-19
McGuire, P.M. 1998. One equation for compatible eave deflections. Frame Building News 10(4):39-44. Meader, N.F. 1997. Mathematical models for lateral resistance of post foundations. Trans of ASAE, 40(1):191-201. Niu, K.T. and K.G. Gebremedhin. 1997. Evaluation of interaction of wood framing and metalcladding in roof diaphragms. Transactions of the ASAE 40(2):465-476. Pollock, D. G., D. A. Bender and K. G. Gebremedhin. 1996. Designing for chord forces in post-frame roof diaphragms. Frame Building News 8(5):40-44. Purdue Research Foundation. 1986. Purdue plane structures analyzer. (Version 3.0). Department of Forestry and Natural Resources. Purdue University, West Layfette, IN. Williams, G. D. 1999. Modeling metal-clad wood-framed diaphragm assemblies. Ph.D. diss., University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI. Wright, B.W. 1992. Modeling timber-framed, metal-clad diaphragm performance. Ph.D. diss. The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.
5-20
6.1 Introduction
6.1.1 General. One of the first steps in diaphragm design is to establish in-plane shear strength and stiffness values for each identified diaphragm section. In most post-frame buildings, these diaphragm sections consist of corrugated metal panels that have been screwed or nailed to wood framing. Behavior of these metalclad wood-frame (MCWF) diaphragms is complex, and consequently, has been the subject of considerable research during the past 20 years. In addition to improving overall design, this research has led to improved methods for predicting metal-clad wood-frame diaphragm strength and stiffness. 6.1.2 Predicting Diaphragm Behavior. There are essentially three procedures for predicting the strength and stiffness of a building diaphragm. First, an exact replica of the building diaphragm (a.k.a. a full-size diaphragm) can be built and tested to failure. Second, a smaller, representative section of the building diaphragm can be built and laboratory tested. The strength and stiffness of this test assembly are then extrapolated to obtain strength and stiffness values for the building diaphragm. Lastly, diaphragm behavior can be predicted using finite element analysis software. The latter requires that the strength and stiffness properties of individual component (e.g., wood framing, mechanical connections, cladding) be known. Of the three procedures for predicting metal-clad wood-frame diaphragm properties, only the second one extrapolation of diaphragm test assembly data - is commonly used. This is because testing full-size diaphragms is simply not practical (a new test would have to be conducted every time overall dimensions changed), and finite element analysis of MCWF diaphragms is, for practical purposes, still in a developmental stage. The later can be attributed to the fact that the large number of variables affecting diaphragm structural properties, as well as the nonlinear behavior of some variables, has thus far precluded the development of a quick and reasonably accurate closed-form approxi-
mation of diaphragm strength and stiffness. 6.1.3 ASAE EP558 and EP484. Construction specifications and testing procedures for diaphragm test assemblies are given in ASAE EP558 Load Test for Metal-Clad Wood-Frame Diaphragms (ASAE, 1999b). EP558 also gives equations for calculating diaphragm test assembly strength and stiffness. These calculations along with construction specifications and testing procedures from EP558 are outlined in Section 6.3: Diaphragm Assembly Tests. For additional details and further explanation of testing procedures, readers are referred to the ASAE EP558 Commentary (ASAE, 1999b). ASAE EP484, which was introduced in detail in Chapter 5, contains the equations for extrapolating diaphragm test assembly properties for use in building design. These calculations are presented in Section 6.4: Building Diaphragm Properties.
6-1
aluminum), base metal thickness, panel profile, and individual sheet width and length. 6.2.4 Wood Framing. The species, moisture content and specific gravity of wood used in the framing system will not only affect the structural properties of the wood members, but also the shear stiffness and strength of mechanical connections between wood members and between wood members and cladding. 6.2.5 Mechanical Connections. Type (screw or nail), size, and relative location of mechanical fasteners used to join components significantly impact diaphragm properties. Fasteners are primarily defined by what they connect. Major categories include purlin-to-rafter, sheet-topurlin, and sheet-to-sheet (see figure 6.1). Sheet-to-sheet fasteners are more commonly referred to as stitch or seam fasteners. Removing stitch fasteners can dramatically reduce the
shear strength and stiffness of a diaphragm. Sheet-to-purlin fasteners are also defined by their location (i.e., end, edge, and field). A sheet-to-purlin fastener may be located in a rib or in the flat of a corrugated metal panel. Locating fasteners in the flat generally produces stronger and stiffer diaphragms. The nonlinear nature of fastener performance is one of the more complex variables affecting diaphragm stiffness. 6.2.6 Blocking. When secondary framing members are installed above primary framing (e.g. top running purlins) or below primary framing (e.g. bottom-running ceiling framing), cladding can only be fastened directly to the secondary framing (see figure 6.1). In such cases, blocking is often placed between the cladding and primary framing to increase shear transfer between the components. This is commonly done at locations where diaphragms and shearwalls intersect.
Rake Board
Purlin
6-2
Applied force, P F 2 Purlins b = Test assembly length Notes: 1. Force P may be alternately applied at point H 2. Locate gages 2 and 4 on the edge purlins 3. Locate gages 1 and 3 on the rafter / truss chord Rafter / Truss chord G
(a)
Applied force, P/2 F Rafter / Truss chord I Purlins b = Test assembly length K
E 2 1
Notes:
1. The applied forces may alternately be applied at points J and L 2. Locate gages 1, 2, 3 and 4 on the rafters/ truss chords
(b) Figure 6.2. (a) Cantilever test configuration, and (b) Simple beam test configuration for diaphragm test assemblies.
6-3
When this reduction is not applied (as would be the case when test assembly failure is not initiated by wood failure), the NDS load duration factor, CD, can not be used to increase the allowable design shear strength during building design. Completely separate of the load duration factor adjustment is the 30% increase in allowable strengths allowed by most codes for wind loadings (see Section 3.9.4). 6.3.4 Shear Stiffness. The procedure for determining the effective shear modulus of a test assembly begins with calculation of the adjusted load-point deflection, DT. This value takes into account rigid body rotation/translation during assembly test and is calculated as follows: Cantilever test: DT = D3 D1 (a/b) (D2 + D4) Simple beam test: DT = (D2 + D3 D1 D4) / 2 where: DT = adjusted load point deflection, in. (mm) D1, D2, D3, and D4 = deflection measurements, in. (mm) (see figure 6.2) a = assembly width, ft (m) b = assembly length, ft (m)
(6-3)
(6-4)
(6-1)
(6-2)
The effective in-plane shear stiffness, c, for a diaphragm test assembly is defined as the ratio of applied load to adjusted load point deflection at 40% of ultimate load. In equation form: Cantilever test: c = 0.4 Pu / DT,d Simple beam test: c = 0.2 Pu / DT,d where: c = effective in-plane shear stiffness, lbf/in. (N/mm) adjusted load-point deflection, DT, at 0.4 Pu, in. (mm)
(6-5)
(6-6)
If one or more of the test assembly failures were initiated by lumber breakage or by failure of the fastenings in the wood, then the allowable design shear stress must be adjusted to account for test duration. To adjust from a total elapsed testing time of 10 minutes to a normal load duration of ten years, divide va by a factor of 1.6.
DT,d =
The in-plane shear stiffness for the diaphragm test assembly, c, is converted to an effective shear modulus for the test assembly, G, as:
6-4
G = c (a/b) where: G =
(6-7)
6.4.4 Horizontal Shear Stiffness. The horizontal shear stiffness, ch, of a building diaphragm section is related to its in-plane shear stiffness as follows: ch = or ch = G bh cos() / s (6-11) cp cos2() (6-10)
bS = s =
bh =
Implicit in equation 6-8 is the assumption that the total shear stiffness of a building diaphragm is a linear function of length.
6-5
Screw 1.0 #10 In Flat In Flat 12 6 60d Threaded Hardened Nail 2140 71 1625 1220 Anderson, 1989
6-6
80 9 16 2 9 Top running On edge 2 2- by 4-inch No.2 SYP 1950f1.7E SYP Screw 1.5 #10 24 Screw 1.5 #10 In Flat In Flat 12 and 18 12 60d Threaded Hardened Nail 4884 122 3890 2190 Bohnhoff and others, 1991
Screw 1.0 #10 In Flat In Flat 12 6 1-60d Spike + 2-10d Toenails 3300 110 2920 2190 Lukens & Bundy, 1987
Screw 1.0 #10 In Flat In Flat 12 6 1-60d Spike + 2-10d Toenails 2775 93 2950 2210 Lukens & Bundy, 1987
6-7
Purlin Orientation Number of Internal Seams Wood Properties Purlin Size 2- by 6-inch Purlin Species and Grade No.2 DFL and 1650f DFL Rafter Species and Grade No. 2 DFL Stitch Fastener* Type None Screw* None Screw* Length, inches 1.5 1.5 Diameter #10 #10 On Center Spacing, inches 24 24 Sheet-to-Purlin Fasteners Type Screw Length, inches 1.5 Diameter #10 Location in Field In Flat Location on End In Flat Avg. On-Center Spacing in Field, in. 9 Avg. OnCenter Spacing on End, in. 9 Engineering Properties Ultimate Strength, Pu, lbf. 6950 7850 6400 6950 Allowable Shear Strength, va, lbf/ft 116 131 107 116 Effective In-Plane Stiffness, c ,lbf/in 4700 7500 3700 4400 Effective Shear Modulus, G, lbf/in 4700 7500 3700 4400 NFBA, 1996 Reference * Because of the extended leg, screws installed in the flat at overlapping seams function as stitch fasteners.
6-8
104 24 12 2.33 Pair of rafters every 12 feet (each pair spaced 6 in. apart) Top running On edge 8 2- by 6-inch 1650f 1.5E SPF 1650f 1.5E SPF Screw 0.625 #12 9 Screw 1.5 #10 In Flat In Flat 9 4.5
104 24 12 2.33 Pair of rafters every 12 feet (each pair spaced 6 in. apart) Top running On edge 8 2- by 6-inch 1650f 1.5E SPF 1650f 1.5E SPF None
Screw 1.0 #14 In Flat In Flat 18 (3 screws/sheet) 9 (4 screws/sheet) Two - #12 x 1.6 in. screws/joint 8645 144 10700 7130 Myers, 1994
6-9
6.8 References
Anderson, G.A. 1989. Effect of fasteners on the stiffness and strength of timber-framed metalclad roof sections. ASAE Paper No. MCR89501. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI. ASAE. 1999a. EP484.2: Diaphragm design of metal-clad, wood-frame rectangular buildings. ASAE Standards, 46th Edition. St. Joseph, MI. ASAE. 1999b. ASAE EP558: Load tests for metal-clad wood-frame diaphragms. ASAE Standards, 46th edition. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI. Anderson, and P.A. Boor. 1991. Influence of insulation on the behavior of steel-clad wood frame diaphragms. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 7(6):748-754.
Lukens, A.D., and D.S. Bundy. 1987. Strength and stiffnesses of post-frame building roof panels. ASAE Paper No. 874056. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI. Myers, N.C. 1994. McElroy Metal Post Frame Roof Diaphragm Test. Test Report 94-418. Progressive Engineering, Inc., Goshen, IN. NFBA. 1996. 1996 Diaphragm Test. National Frame Builders Association, Inc., Lawrence, KS. Townsend, M. 1992. Alumax test report: diaphragm loading on roofs and end wall sections. Alumax Building Products, Perris, CA. Wee, C.L. and G.A. Anderson. 1990. Strength and stiffness of metal clad roof section. ASAE Paper No. 904029. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI.
6-10
7-1
Table 7.1. Design Stresses for Selected Species and Grades of Solid-Sawn Posts * Design Values in Pounds per Square Inch (psi) Compression Shear Compression Tension Parallel to Parallel to Parallel to Perpendicular to Grain, Fc Grain, Fv Grain, Fc Grain, Ft
Bending, Fb
Modulus of Elasticity, E
Douglas Fir-Larch Sel Str No. 1 No. 2 Northern Pine Sel Str No. 1 No. 2 Ponderosa Pine Sel Str No. 1 No. 2 Southern Pine Sel Str No. 1 No. 2 *
85 85 85
65 65 65
65 65 65
From the National Design Specifications (NDS) for wood under wet-use conditions, AF&PA (1997b). Values are for lumber in the size category Posts and Timbers.
7.4.1 Advantages. For a given species and grade of lumber, glued-laminated posts have higher allowable design values than solid-sawn posts and most spliced mechanically-laminated posts (see Section 7.6). Glued-laminated posts exhibit complete composite action, that is, the glue interface is of sufficient integrity that it is assumed that there is no slip between laminates regardless of load level. With no slip between layers, glued-laminated posts behave much like solid-sawn posts, and are very effective in carrying biaxial bending loads. 7.4.2 Vertical Lamination. Glued-laminated posts that have a rather square cross-section are typically designed as vertically-laminated components; that is, they are designed to resist primary bending moments about an axis perpendicular to the wide faces of individual laminations (Axis V-V, figure 7.1b). This class of posts
H (a)
V (b)
Figure 7.1. (a) Vertically laminated, and (b) horizontally laminated post cross-sections.
7-2
(cross-sectional aspect ratios less than 1.5) are commonly used as posts in post-frame buildings. 7.4.3 Horizontal Lamination. In contrast to the glued-laminated posts commonly used in postframe construction, deep glulam beams (e.g. door headers) are generally designed as horizontally laminated components (figure 7.1a). Lumber is used more efficiently in these assemblies by placing higher grade lumber in outer laminates where bending stresses are higher, and using lower grade lumber near the center where bending stresses are low. In addition, horizontal lamination facilitates the manufacture
of curved members. 7.4.4 Design Properties. Design properties for both horizontally- and vertically-laminated glulams are published by American Institute of Timber Construction (AITC, 1985) and AF&PA (1997b). Values for selected vertically-laminated assemblies are listed in table 7.2. These values are for dry-use conditions and normal load duration. In actual application, glulam design values must be adjusted by applicable factors involving curvature, volume, beam stability and column stability. These factors (and direction regarding their application) can also be found in the two references cited in this paragraph.
Table 7.2. Design Values for Vertically Glued Laminated Posts a Extreme Fiber in Bending, psi Bending about Bending V-V Axis. about 4 or H-H Axis. 3 Lams More Lams Compression Parallel to Grain, psi 2 or 3 Lams 4 or More Lams
Lumber Grade
Douglas Fir- Larch 13 Dense Sel Str 12 Sel Str 11 No. 1 Dense 10 No. 1 9 No. 2 Dense 8 No. 2 Hem-Fir 21 Sel Str 20 No. 1 19 No. 2 Southern Pine 52 Dense Sel Str 51 Sel Str 50 No. 1 Dense 49 No. 1 48 No. 2 Dense 47 No. 2
0.833 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.73 0.73 Wet Service Factor, CM c a From the National Design Specifications (NDS), AF&PA (1997b). b Values reflect the removal of the more restrictive slope-of-grain requirements. c The tabulated values are applicable when in-service moisture content is less than 16%. To obtain wet-use values, multiply the tabulated values by the factors shown.
7-3
7.4.5 Manufacturing Requirements. For glulam design values apply, tight quality control must be maintained during the laminating process. The AITC has published standards for the design (AITC, 1985) and manufacturing (AITC, 1988) of glued-laminated members. Fabrication procedures for the members must conform to an additional standard (AITC, 1983), which covers physical construction issues as well as quality control, testing and marking procedures. The rigorous requirements for construction, as well as the planing that must be performed (individual laminates prior to lamination, and the finished member after lamination completion), combine to essentially eliminate the possibility of on-site fabrication. These factors also increase product price, however, for many applications, higher design properties justify the higher cost. 7.4.6 End Joints. Posts of any length can be created by end-joining individual laminates. The most common glued end joint is the finger joint. Although finger joining is a common manufacturing process, only a few manufacturing facilities have the capability of producing finger joints that meet AITC quality standards for structural joints (i.e., the type of joints required in glulams). Joints that do not meet criteria established for structural joints are likely to fail when subjected to design level stresses. 7.4.7 Glulams for Post-Frame Buildings. A handful of companies now manufacture and market glulams specifically for use in post-frame buildings. These posts are intended for soil embedment, with pressure preservative treated wood on one end, and non-treated wood on the other. Fabrication of such posts requires special resins and procedures for joining and laminating treated wood to non-treated wood.
which nails, screws, bolts, and/or shear transfer plates (STPs) have been used to join individual laminates. Nails are the most commonly used mechanical fastener and posts that only feature nails are often referred to as nail-laminated posts. STPs are medium-gage metal plates that are stamped such that teeth protrude from both surfaces. Mechanical fasteners that connect preservative treated lumber should be AISI type 304 or 316 stainless steel, silicon bronze, copper, hotdipped galvanized (zinc-coated) steel nails or hot-tumbled galvanized nails. 7.5.3 Advantages. Unspliced mechanicallylaminated posts generally cost less than solidsawn posts, and they are stronger than similarly sized solid-sawn posts when bent around axis V-V (figure 7.1a). As previously noted, this is due to the fact that strength reducing defects are spread out in laminated assemblies. Also, pressure preservative treatment retention is more uniform in the narrower laminates of a mechanically-laminated post than it is in wide solid-sawn posts. 7.5.4 Disadvantages. When mechanically-laminated posts are bent around axis H-H (figure 7.1b), there can be considerable slip between laminates. For this reason, the bending strength and stiffness of mechanically-laminated assemblies bent about axis H-H is relatively low. To compensate for this weakness, mechanicallylaminated posts are generally only used where: (1) there is adequate weak axis support (i.e., the posts are part of a sheathed wall), (2) cover plates can be added to increase bending strength and stiffness about axis H-H (figure 7.2), or (3) the bending moment about axis H-H is relatively low or non-existent.
Figure 7.2. Cover plates used to increase the bending capacity of a mechanically laminated post about axis H-H.
7-4
7.5.5 Bending About Axis V-V. Allowable design stresses for bending of unspliced mechanically-laminated posts about axis V-V are calculated in accordance with ANSI/ASAE EP559 Design Requirements and Bending Properties for Mechanically Laminated Columns (ASAE, 1999). The procedure outlined in ANSI/ASAE EP559 is identical to procedures outlined in the NDS (AF&PA, 1997a) with the exception of two adjustment factors: the repetitive member factor, Cr, and the beam stability factor, CL. 7.5.5.1 Repetitive Member Factor. ANSI/ ASAE EP559 allows the use of the repetitive member factors in Table 7.3 when: (1) each lamination is between 1.5 and 2.0 inches, (2) all laminations have the same depth (face width), (3) faces of adjacent laminations are in contact, (4) the centroid of each lamination is located on the centroidal axis of the post (axis V-V in figure 7.1a), that is, no laminations are offset, (5) all laminations are the same grade and species of lumber, (6) concentrated loads are distributed to the individual laminations by a load distributing element, and (7) the mechanical fasteners joining the individual layers meet the criteria in table 7.4. Note that if one or more of these criteria are not met, the NDS repetitive member factor of 1.15 should be used if it applies. 7.5.5.2 Beam Stability Factor. The beam stability factor, CL, is a function of the slenderness ratio, RB, which in turn, is a function of: beam thickness, b; depth, d; and effective span length, Le. ANSI/ASAE EP559 states that for mechanically-laminated posts being bent about axis V-V, thickness, b, shall be equated to 60% of the actual post thickness, and depth, d, to the actual face width of a lamination. The effective span length, Le, is a function of the unsupported length, Lu. The unsupported length shall be set equal to the on-center spacing of bracing that keeps the post from buckling laterally. 7.5.5.3 Design Values. Tables 7.5a and 7.5b contain design values for assemblies fabricated from visually graded and machine stress rated dimension lumber, respectively. The design bending stresses have been adjusted for repetitive member use. They must be further adjusted to account for stability,
wet use, load duration, temperature, and in certain cases, special preservative and fire treatments.
Table 7.3. Repetitive Member Factors* Number of laminations 3 Visually graded 1.35 4 1.40
Mechanically graded 1.25 1.30 * For mechanically-laminated dimension lumber assemblies with minimum interlayer shear capacities as specified in Table 7.4. From ANSI/ASAE EP559 (ASAE, 1999).
Table 7.4. Minimum Shear Capacities* Nominal face width of laminations, inches 6 8 10
Required
Interlayer
Minimum required interlayer shear capacity per interface per unit length of post, lb/in. 12 15 19
7.5.6 Bending About Axis H-H. When all laminates are the same size, species and grade of lumber, the allowable design bending strength about axis H-H is conservatively taken as the sum of the bending strengths of the individual layers. The bending strength of an individual layer is equated to the product of the flatwise section modulus of an individual laminate and the NDS adjusted design bending stress. For flatwise bending, the NDS adjusted design bending stress, Fb, is equal to tabulated design bending stress, Fb, multiplied by the appropriate flat use factor, a repetitive member factor of 1.15, and all other applicable factors. Note that the beam stability factor is equal to 1.0 for flatwise bending.
7-5
Table 7.5a Design Values for Unspliced Mechanically-Laminated Posts in Bending About Axis V-V. Extreme Fiber Bending Stress*, psi Modulus Nominal Width of Individual Layers, inches of 6 8 10 12 Elasticity, Number of laminations x 106 psi Grade 3. 4. 3. 4. 3. 4. 3. 4. Douglas Fir-Larch Sel Str 2540 2640 2350 2440 2150 2230 1960 2030 1.9 No. 1 & Better 2020 2090 1860 1930 1710 1770 1550 1610 1.8 No. 1 1760 1820 1620 1680 1490 1540 1350 1400 1.7 No. 2 1540 1590 1420 1470 1300 1350 1180 1230 1.6 Hem Fir Sel Str No. 1 & Better No. 1 No. 2
Southern Pine Dense Sel Str 3650 3780 3310 3430 2900 3010 2770 2870 1.9 Sel Str 3440 3570 3110 3220 2770 2870 2570 2660 1.8 Non-Dense SS 3170 3290 2840 2940 2500 2590 2360 2450 1.7 Dense No. 1 2360 2450 2230 2310 1960 2030 1820 1890 1.8 No. 1 2230 2310 2030 2100 1760 1820 1690 1750 1.7 Non-Den. No. 1 2030 2100 1820 1890 1620 1680 1550 1610 1.6 Dense No. 2 1960 2030 1790 1960 1620 1680 1550 1610 1.7 No. 2 1690 1750 1620 1690 1420 1470 1320 1370 1.6 Non-Den. No.2 1550 1610 1490 1540 1280 1330 1220 1260 1.4 * For dry posts under normal load duration. Size and repetitive member factors applied. For other applicable modification factors, see NDS (AF&PA, 1997a). Table 7.5b Design Values for Unspliced Mechanically-Laminated Posts in Bending About Axis V-V. Extreme Fiber Bending Stress*, psi Extreme Fiber Bending Stress*, psi Grade Grade 3 Laminates 4 Laminates 3 Laminates 4 Laminates 900f-1.0E 1130 1170 1950f-1.5E 2440 2540 900f-1.2E 1130 1170 1950f-1.7E 2440 2540 1200f-1.2E 1500 1560 2100f-1.8E 2630 2730 1200f-1.5E 1500 1560 2250f-1.6E 2810 2930 1350f-1.3E 1690 1760 2250f-1.9E 2810 2930 1350f-1.8E 1690 1760 2400f-1.7E 3000 3120 1450f-1.3E 1810 1890 2400f-2.0E 3000 3120 1500f-1.3E 1880 1950 2550f-2.1E 3190 3320 1500f-1.4E 1880 1950 2700f-2.2E 3380 3510 1500f-1.8E 1880 1950 2850f-2.3E 3560 3710 1650f-1.4E 2060 2150 3000f-2.4E 3750 3900 1650f-1.5E 2060 2150 3150f-2.5E 3940 4100 1800f-1.6E 2250 2340 3300f-2.6E 4130 4290 1800f-2.1E 2250 2340 * For dry posts under normal load duration. Repetitive member factors applied. For other applicable modification factors, see NDS (AF&PA, 1997a).
7-6
7.5.7 Flexural Rigidity. To calculate deflections due to bending requires that the flexural rigidity of the member be known. The flexural rigidity of a solid-sawn member is equal to its modulus of elasticity times its moment of inertia about the axis it is being bent. The flexural rigidity of an unspliced laminated post when bent around axis V-V is simply equal to the sum of the flexural rigidities of the individual laminates about axis VV. In other words, the flexural rigidity about axis V-V is not dependent on the properties of the mechanical fasteners. This is not the case with respect to bending about axis H-H. The bending stiffness about axis H-H axis is highly dependent on the shear stiffness of the mechanical connections between the individual laminates. A high bound for flexural rigidity about axis H-H is obtained by assuming complete composite action between layers (no interlayer slip). A lower bound is obtained by assuming no composite action (no interlayer connections). In the latter case, the total flexural rigidity is equal to the sum of the flexural rigidities of the individual laminates. Special analysis procedures, such as that developed by Bohnhoff (1992) are available for more accurate estimates of deformation due to bending about axis H-H. Use of these programs requires knowledge of the shear stiffness properties of the mechanical connections. 7.5.8 Compressive Properties. The allowable compressive load for an unspliced mechanically laminated post is typically calculated by treating the individual laminates as discrete columns. This method conservatively assumes no composite action between laminates. An allowable compressive stress is first calculated for each laminate for buckling about axis V-V. This allowable stress is then multiplied by the crosssectional area of the laminate to obtain an allowable load for buckling about axis V-V. This calculation is repeated for each layer, and the resulting individual laminate loads are summed to obtain a total allowable column load for buckling about axis V-V. The entire process is repeated to obtain a total allowable load for buckling about axis H-H. The NDS (AF&PA, 1997a) presents methods for calculating a compressive load capacity that accounts for some composite action; however, connectors used in fastening the laminations must meet criteria outlined in the NDS.
7.5.9 Field Fabrication. A distinct advantage of mechanically-laminated posts is that fabrication can be performed using tools and equipment readily available on the job site. With unspliced posts that will be embedded in the ground, it is common to construct the post so that an interior laminate is left shorter than the surrounding laminates. When the post is installed with this feature located on the top of the post, the truss can be set in the resulting pocket, enabling a double shear connection between the post and truss. The interior laminate is generally significantly shorter (approximately 1 foot) than needed to accommodate the truss. This is done to compensate for varying depths of embedment. After posts are installed, a spacer (or block) of the same cross-sectional size as the shortened laminate is placed in between the shortened laminate and the truss. A schematic of this procedure is shown in Figure 7.3.
Block Height
Block
2. Truss set on 1. Post set, bottom of truss marked, and block block and bolted into place. height measured
3. Block nailed into place and top of outer layers cut off.
7-7
(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 7.4. (a) Treated portions of 3-layer spliced posts are embedded in the soil. (b) Top of treated portions cut so that tops at same elevation. (c) Untreated post portions spliced to treated portions.
7.6.2 Use. Virtually all mechanically-laminated posts with overall lengths exceeding 20 foot are spliced posts. 7.6.3 Advantages. Splicing enables the fabrication of long posts from shorter, less expensive lengths of dimension lumber. Splicing also enables the construction of posts with preservative treated lumber on only one end. This reduces the quantity of treated lumber used in a building, which in turn reduces the number of special corrosion-resistant fasteners needed to join treated lumber. With simple butt joints, the attachment of nontreated lumber to treated lumber is sometimes done in the field. This attachment is done after the treated pieces have been laminated and embedded in the ground (figure 7.4a). Prior to attaching the untreated top-portion of each post, the embedded treated portions are all cut so that their tops are at the same elevations (note: because of differing depths-of-embedment, the top of each embedded section is generally at a different height above grade). With the embedded portions at the same elevation (figure 7.4b),
the upper portions will have the same overall length (figure 7.4c). This eliminates cutting and blocking like that associated with the special construction shown in figure 7.3. 7.6.4 Disadvantages. Spliced mechanicallylaminated posts have the same disadvantages as unspliced mechanically-laminated posts (see Section 7.5.4). In addition, a simple (nonreinforced) butt joint can significantly reduce bending strength and stiffness in the vicinity of the joint. If a post contains a simple butt joint in each laminate, and these joints are all located within 1 or 2 feet of each other, engineers will often model that portion of the post as a hinge connection. 7.6.5 Design Properties. Design properties for spliced mechanically-laminated posts are highly dependent on the type and relative location of end joints, and on the type and relative location of mechanical fasteners, especially those located in the vicinity of end joints. Procedures for designing and determining the bending strength and stiffness of spliced nail-laminated posts are outlined in ANSI/ASAE EP559 (ASAE, 1999).
7-8
The design portion of EP559 includes requirements for joint arrangement, overall splice length, nail strength, nail density, nail diameter, and nail location. If these design requirements are followed, the bending strength and stiffness of the nail-laminated post can be calculated using the equations in the EP. It is important to note that the intent of the EP559 design requirements is to maximize the bending strength of the splice region, while minimizing overall splice length. Overall splice length is defined as the distance between the two farthest removed end joints in a post that contains one end joint in each laminate. Reducing overall splice length generally reduces the amount of preservative treated lumber used in a post. 7.6.6 Laboratory Tests. Engineers must generally rely on laboratory tests to determine design properties for spliced posts that do not meet the design requirements of ANSI/ASAE EP559. In recognition of this, a laboratory test procedure specifically for spliced mechanically laminated posts is outlined in ANSI/ASAE EP559. 7.6.7 Computer Modeling. Discontinuities at butt joints result in a post with a varying bending stiffness along its length. If the overall splice length is rather short (i.e., all joints are located within a distance equal to 1/4th the post length), the post is generally sectioned into three elements for computer frame analysis: a middle element that contains all the joints, and two joint-free outer elements. The joint-free elements are treated like unspliced mechanicallylaminated posts with flexural rigidities calculated as described in Section 7.5.7. The element containing the joints is assigned an effective flexural rigidity that will cause it to deform like actual laboratory tested posts. A procedure for backing-out an effective flexural rigidity from bending test data is given in ANSI/ASAE EP559. The EP also contains an equation for calculating the flexural rigidity of the splice region of any nail-laminated post that meets the design requirements of the EP.
American Forest and Paper Association (AF&PA). 1997b. NDS Supplement - Design values for wood construction. American Forest and Paper Association, Washington, D.C. American Institute of Timber Construction (AITC). 1983. Structural glued laminated timber. ANSI/AITC A190.1-1983. Englewood, CO. American Institute of Timber Construction (AITC). 1985. Design standard specifications for structural glued laminated timber of softwood species. AITC 117.85. Englewood, CO. American Institute of Timber Construction (AITC). 1988. Manufacturing standard specifications for structural glued laminated timber of softwood species. AITC 117.88. Englewood, CO. ASAE. 1999. ANSI/ASAE EP559: Design requirements and bending properties for mechanically laminated columns. ASAE Standards, 46th edition. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI. Bohnhoff, D.R. 1992. Modeling horizontally naillaminated beams. ASCE Journal of Strucutral Engineering 118(5):1393-1406.
7.7 References
American Forest and Paper Association (AF&PA). 1997a. National Design Specifications for Wood Construction (NDS). American Forest and Paper Association, Washington, D.C.
7-9
7-10
B/2
B/2
0.5B 1.0B
0.7q 0.6q
1.5B
0.3q
0.2q
8-1
8.2.3 Varying Constraint. It is important to note that a single post can be both constrained or non-constrained, depending on the load case. Using the previous example of a slab floor, and assuming that the post is not attached to the slab, if the wind loading was such that the post
was pushing on the slab, the post would be considered constrained. However, if the wind were blowing in the opposite direction, the post would not be supported by the slab; hence, the post would be analyzed for that load case as nonconstrained.
Ground Level
Ma Va
Ground Level
Ma Va
do d
Post
do
Footing
Footing
LOAD CASE A
LOAD CASE B
Figure 8.2. Free body diagrams of non-constrained post foundations. Load Case A: groundline shear and moment both cause clockwise rotation of embedded portion of post. Load Case B: groundline shear and moment cause clockwise and counter clockwise rotation, respectively, of embedded portion of post.
Ma Ground Level Va R
Post
Soil Forces
Footing
8-2
contains soil properties as tabulated in ASAE are referred to as presumptive values and should only be used if there is no active building code in effect, and site-specific soil properties are unavailable. The vertical soil pressures given in table 8.1 are for the first foot (300 mm) of footing width and first foot below grade. A twenty percent increase in allowable soil pressure is allowed for each additional foot (300 mm) of foundation width or depth, up to a maximum of three times the original value. The lateral soil pressure values in table 8.1 are per unit depth. To obtain the allowable lateral pressure at a point below grade, SL, multiple the lateral soil pressure value, S, by the distance below grade of the point in question. For example, the lateral pressure per unit depth, S, for a firm sandy gravel is 300 lbm/ft2 per foot of depth. This equates to an allowable pressure of 1200 lbf/ft2 (4 ft x 300 lbm/ft2 per ft x 1lbf/lbm) for points four feet below grade. [Note: use of variable SL to represent S when adjusted for depth, is unique to this design manual, and is done to avoid confusion between values that have and have not been adjusted for depth. It is important to realize that SL and S have different units.] 8.3.6 Soil Tests. Site-specific soil test results are often used to determine allowable soil pressures. Such calculations generally result in higher allowable design values than would be obtained using table 8.1. This is because presumptive values are the lowest values associated with a broad classification of soils, each at their minimum strength conditions. 8.3.7 Soil Sampling. Soil samples should be gathered from the applicable location in the soil profile: one-third the foundation depth for lateral soil pressure calculations for non-constrained posts; and at footing depth for lateral soil pressure calculations for constrained posts and for vertical soil pressure calculations. From each soil sample, the cohesion, c, angle of internal friction , and bulk density, w, must be determined.
8-3
Table 8.1. Presumed Soil Properties for Post Foundation Design (ASAE, 1999). For use in absence of codes or test.
Class of Material Density or Consistency Lateral Pressure Per Unit Depth, S 2 kPa per lbf/ft per ft m 1200 400 300 200 200 150 130 100 180 60 45 30 30 22.5 20 15 Lateral Sliding Coefficient 0.79 0.35 0.35 0.25 Vertical Pressure, Sv lbf/ft
2
kPa
Density, w lbm/ft
2
kg/m
1. 2. 3.
Massive crystalline bedrock Sedimentary and foliated rock Sandy gravel and/or gravel (GW and GP) Sand, silty sand, clayey sand, silty gravel and clayey gravel (SW, SP, SM, SC, GM, and GC) Clay, sandy clay, silty clay and clayey silt (CL, ML, MH and CH)
38 32 30 26 15 10
4.
5.
Firm consistency of class 4 and the medium consistency of class 5 can be molded by strong finger pressure, and the firm consistency of class 3 is too compact to be excavated with a shovel. The hydrostatic increase in lateral pressure per unit depth has been included in the equations of this chapter. Source: Table 29B UBC modified with the addition of firm and medium values from Hough (1969). Sliding resistance source: Table 29-B UBC. Allowable foundation pressures are for footings at least 1 ft (300 mm) wide and 1 ft (300 mm) deep into natural grade. Pressure may be increased 20% for each additional 1 ft (300 mm) of width and/or depth to a maximum of three times the tabulated value. Source: Table 29-B UBC. Soil friction angle varies from soft to medium density for clay materials, and from loose to firm for sand and gravel materials. Source: Merritt (1976). Soil density varies from soft to medium density for clay materials, and from loose to firm for sand and gravel materials. Source: Hough(1969). 2 Multiply an assumed lateral sliding resistance of 130 lbf/ft (6 kPa) by the contact area. Use the lesser of the lateral sliding resistance and one-half the dead load.
8.3.8 Allowable Vertical Soil Pressure From Soil Test Data. The allowable vertical soil pressure for round or square footings, Sv, can be estimated from site-specific soil test as: Sv = SBC / FS where: (8-1)
c w g y b
= = = = = =
Sv = FS = SBC =
allowable vertical soil pressure, lbf/ft2 (kPa) factor of safety (2.3 to 3.0) ultimate soil bearing capacity, lbf/ft2 (kPa)
soil cohesion, lbf/ft2 (Pa) soil angle of internal friction, degrees soil bulk density, lbm/ft3 (kg/m3) gravitational constant, 1 lbf/lbm (0.00981 kPa m2/kg) depth where soil allowable pressure is calculated, ft (m) footing diameter or length of one side, ft (m)
SBC = 0.6 g w b (Nq + 1) tan + (Nq - 1+ Nq tan )(g w y + c/tan) Nq = e tan tan2(/2 + 45)
(8-2)
For shallow foundations, a factor of safety between 2.3 and 3.0 is typically applied to vertical soil pressure (Whitlow, 1995). Equation 8.2 is a modified Terzaghi-Meyerhoff equation taken from Whitlow (1995). Values compiled in table 8.2 can be used to facilitate calculation of the ultimate soil bearing capacity, SBC.
8-4
Table 8.2. Ultimate Bearing Capacity* SBC = 0.6 w b T1 + T2(w y + c T3) Nq deg. T1 T2 T3 10 2.471 0.612 1.907 5.671 12 2.974 0.845 2.606 4.705 14 3.586 1.143 3.480 4.011 16 4.335 1.530 4.578 3.487 18 5.258 2.033 5.966 3.078 20 6.399 2.693 7.729 2.747 22 7.821 3.564 9.981 2.475 24 9.603 4.721 12.879 2.246 26 11.854 6.269 16.636 2.050 28 14.720 8.358 21.547 1.881 30 18.401 11.201 28.025 1.732 32 23.177 15.107 36.659 1.600 34 29.440 20.532 48.297 1.483 36 37.752 28.155 64.181 1.376 38 48.933 39.012 86.164 1.280 40 64.195 54.705 117.061 1.192 42 85.374 77.771 161.244 1.111 44 115.308 112.317 225.659 1.036 46 158.502 165.169 321.635 0.966 50 319.057 381.429 698.295 0.839 * See Equation 8.2 for variable descriptions.
For lateral earth pressures in drained soils, a factor of safety between 1.5 and 2.0 is typical (Whitlow, 1995). Equation 8-2 assumes drained soils (i.e., the water table is located below the top of the footing). Equation 8-2 does not account for soil cohesion, therefore the equation is conservative for clays. Values for the Rankine passive pressure are given in table 8.3. Table 8.3. Rankine Passive Soil Pressures for Drained, Cohesiveless Soils SRP, lbf/ft2 per ft Soil Density, lbm/ft3 deg. 95 100 105 110 115 120 10 135 142 149 156 163 170 12 145 152 160 168 175 183 14 156 164 172 180 188 197 16 167 176 185 194 203 211 18 180 189 199 208 218 227 20 194 204 214 224 235 245 22 209 220 231 242 253 264 24 225 237 249 261 273 285 26 243 256 269 282 295 307 28 263 277 291 305 319 332 30 285 300 315 330 345 360 32 309 325 342 358 374 391 34 336 354 371 389 407 424 36 366 385 404 424 443 462 38 399 420 441 462 483 504 40 437 460 483 506 529 552 42 479 504 530 555 580 605 44 527 555 583 611 638 666 46 582 613 643 674 704 735 50 717 755 793 830 868 906
8.3.9 Allowable Lateral Soil Pressure From Soil Test Data. The allowable lateral pressure per foot of depth, S, can be estimated from sitespecific soil test data as: S = SRP / FS where: S = allowable lateral soil pressure, lbf/ft2 per ft, (kPa per m) factor of safety (1.5 to 2.0) Rankine passive pressure for drained, cohesiveless soils, lbf/ft2 per ft, (kPa per m). w g tan2(45 + /2) (8-4) (8-3)
FS = SRP =
SRP = w g = = =
soil bulk density, lbm/ft3 (kg/m3) soil angle of internal friction, degrees gravitational constant, 1 lbf/lbm (0.00981 kPa m2/kg)
8.3.10 Adjustment to Allowable Vertical Pressure. Most codes allow for a 33% increase in the allowable vertical pressure values, Sv, when post loads result from wind and seismic forces acting alone or in combination with vertical forces (see Section 3.9.4). This adjustment would apply directly to the Sv value from equation 8-1, and is cumulative with the adjustments described in Section 8.3.5 for the presumptive Sv values listed in table 8.1. In this manual, a prime () will be used to denote an allowable Sv value that has been adjusted (i.e., Sv Sv). 8.3.11 Adjustment to Allowable Lateral Pressure. In addition to the 33% increase generally allowed when post loads result from wind
8-5
and seismic forces (acting alone or in combination with vertical forces), the allowable lateral pressure, S, can be doubled when posts have a spacing at least six times their width. This increase is due to the multi-dimensional nature of pressure distribution in the soil around isolated posts as depicted in figure 8.1, and described in Section 8.1.3. In this manual, a prime () will be used to denote an allowable S value that has been adjusted (i.e., S S).
when assessing the post lateral load resistance capabilities. Also, the friction between the post (and/or collar) and the surrounding soil are assumed to be negligible when assessing the vertical load-carrying capability of a given post foundation design.
8.5 Collars
8.5.1 General. When lateral soil pressures exceed allowable values, additional lateral surface area can be obtained by increasing post depth, or by adding a structural element called a collar. A collar is typically either concrete cast around the base of the post (and considered to be attached to the post) or built-up wood attached to the post. These structural elements are represented in figure 8.4. 8.5.2 Location. The collar increases the lateral load resistance capability of the post foundation by increasing the bearing area in the region of the post where lateral soil capability is relatively high. Collars are typically not placed at the top of the post foundation (at the surface of the ground) due to the possibility of frost heave.
8.4 Footings
8.4.1 General. Typically, the soil is not able to resist applied vertical loads when those loads are transferred through the post alone. Therefore, the post is set on some type of footing, which is installed in the hole prior to post placement. Footings in post-frame construction are usually poured concrete. This type of footing is depicted in Figure 8.4. Generally there is no mechanical attachment of the footing to the post. 8.4.2 Friction. A footing is assumed to only resist vertical loads; the friction between the footing and the post is assumed to be negligible
Ground level Post Original excavated post hole and backfill region
(a)
(b)
Figure 8.4. Examples of common post foundation elements with (a) a poured concrete collar, and (b) a built-up wood collar.
8-6
8.5.3 Attachment. Whether poured concrete or wood, the collar must be attached to the post in a manner sufficient to carry the structural loads involved. As with any wood structural element exposed directly to the soil, appropriate preservatives and fastener systems must be employed to maintain structural integrity over the design life of the building.
effective post width, b, which in turn, is a function of post size and shape. For posts whose narrow face is pushing on the soil: b where: = 1.4 B (8-5)
8.6 Backfilling
8.6.1 General. The details of backfilling are often overlooked by the designer, and with potentially dire consequences. After the footing and post are installed (and the collar, if required), the hole that was dug or drilled is backfilled. Essentially, the material used for backfill is the medium through which some, if not all, transverse loads are passed from the post to the virgin soil. Backfill material is subjected to higher pressures than the surrounding virgin soil due to its proximity to the post. Therefore, material used for backfill and its installation are critically important for the successful performance of a post foundation design. 8.6.2 Materials. Typical materials for backfill include concrete, well-graded granular aggregate, gravel, sand, or soil initially excavated from the post hole. These alternatives are listed in the order of decreasing stiffness. 8.6.3 Concrete. While concrete is the stiffest backfill material, it is also the most expensive. Concrete backfill essentially increases post width, b. It must be installed with attention to the possibility of frost heave (discussed later). 8.6.4 Excavated Soil. The most common backfill material is the excavated soil. If used as backfill, it should be free of topsoil and organic matter. Silt- or clay-based soils should be moist (not wet) and well packed. 8.6.5 Compaction. Backfill materials should be tamped or vibrated upon backfill in maximum layers (a.k.a. lifts) of 8 inch (400 mm).
b B
= =
effective post width, ft (m) width of post face pushing on the soil, ft (m)
For posts whose wide face is pushing on the soil, b is equal to the diagonal dimension of the post. For poles, the effective post width, b, is equal to the pole diameter.
8-7
load case (a.k.a. Load Case A ) represents conditions where groundline shear and groundline bending moment both cause the embedded portion of the post to rotate in the same direction. Load Case B represents conditions where groundline bending moment causes the embedded portion of the post to rotate in an opposite direction than the rotation caused by groundline shear. Minimum post embedment depth, d, for both Load Case A & B is calculated using one of the following equations. From ASAE EP486 (1999a), AWPI (Patterson, 1969), and the UBC (ICBO, 1994): d 2= 7.02 Va + 7.65 Ma / d S b (8-6)
where: A b d P h = = = = = 2.34 P / (SL b) effective post width, ft (m) post embedment depth, ft (m) applied lateral force, lbf (N) distance from ground surface to point of application of force P, ft (m) adjusted allowable lateral soil pressure at one-third the embedment depth, lbf/ft2 (kPa)
SL =
From ASAE EP486.2 (1999b): d2= where: d = Va = Ma = S = b = minimum embedment depth, ft (m) shear force applied to foundation at ground surface, lbf (N) bending moment applied to foundation at ground surface, ft-lbf (N-m) adjusted allowable lateral soil pressure, lbf/ft per ft (kPa/m per m) effective post width, ft (m), see Section 8.7.1 6 Va + 8 Ma / d S b (8-7)
Equation T-1 was developed for point-loaded posts that behave as pure cantilevered beams. Unfortunately, posts in post-frame buildings are not point-loaded, and embedded posts are supported in such a way that they behave more like propped cantilevers. To adjust equation T-1 so that it can be applied to posts subjected to a variety of loadings and above-grade constraint conditions, load P is replaced with an equivalent shear force and bending moment located at the ground surface. Using predefined nomenclature: Va is substituted into equation T-1 for P, and Ma is substituted for the product of P and h. In addition, the adjusted allowable lateral soil pressure at onethird the embedment depth, SL, is replaced by the quantity S d / 3. This substitution eliminates having to recalculate SL every time the embedment depth changes. With these substitutions, equation T-1 appears in ASAE EP486 (1999a) as: d 2 = 3.51Va/(S b)[1+(1+(0.62 Ma S b d)/ Va2)1/2] Because it is somewhat confusing, the ASAE EP486 equation was rewritten for this design manual in the form of Equation 8-6. The first major revision to ASAE EP486 (due for release in 2000) will contain several changes, including a switch from equation 8-6 to equation 8-7. Equation 8-7 is based on five common assumptions: (1) only the post (and not the footing) resists lateral loads, (2) the post behaves as a rigid body below grade (3) soil type remains constant, (4) at a given depth, soil resisting pressure, q, is equal to the product of soil stiffness, k, and lateral post movement at that depth, and (5) soil stiffness, k, at a distance, y,
Equations 8-6 and 8-7 must be solved by iteration. For Load Case B, Va and Ma must be input with opposing signs. Note that equation 8-6 is in a slightly different form than appears in any of the three referenced documents. See the following technical note on equation development for additional information.
Technical Note Non-Constrained Post Equations Equation 8-6 for the embedment depth, d, of non-constrained, non-collared posts appears in most code documents as: d = 0.5 A [1 + (1 + 4.36 h / A)1/2] (T-1)
8-8
below grade is equal to the product of the horizontal subgrade reaction, nh, and the distance below grade, y. In equation form, the soil resisting pressure, q, for a non-constrained, noncollared post is given by Meador (1997) as: q where: q = actual soil pressure at a depth y below grade, lbf/ft2 (kPa) constant of horizontal subgrade reaction, lbf/ft4 (N/m4) lateral post deflection at grade, ft (m) depth below grade, ft (m) distance from surface to point of post rotation in soil, ft (m), (see figure 8.2) = nh (y y2/do) (T-2)
nh = =
soil pressure, q, does not exceed the adjusted allowable lateral soil pressure, SL = S y. It can be shown that every time a designer does this, the depth at which the actual soil pressure is closest to the allowable pressure is right at the surface. In other words, for a non-constrained post, the designer does not need to compare S y and q from equation T-5 at every value of y, instead, the designer only needs to check it at y = 0. It follows that the embedment depth, d, needed to ensure that the actual soil pressure does not exceed the allowable soil pressure at the surface (or any point below the surface) is given as: d 2 = (18 Va + 24 Ma / d )/(S b) (T-6)
y = do =
Equation T-2 is a parabolic function that produces the soil pressure profile shown in figure 8.2. If a summation of the horizontal forces in figure 8.2 is set equal to zero, and the bending moment around any point is equated to zero, the following two equations can be obtained for the grade deflection , and distance to post rotation point, do. = (24 Ma + 18 Va d)/(d 3 nh b) do = (3 Va d + 4 Ma)/(4 Va + 6 Ma /d) (T-3) (T-4)
Equation T-6 is not used in practice as field and laboratory tests have shown that it is extremely conservative for non-constrained posts. This is because when actual soil pressures at the surface equal the allowable soil pressure, the actual soil pressure at points below the surface are below (and in most cases substantially below) allowable soil pressures. Consequently, nonconstrained post foundations are no where near failure when allowable soil pressures near the surface are exceeded. A more realistic embedment depth is obtained by replacing S in equation T-6 with 3S. The resulting equation is equation 8-7. Note that when this equation is used, actual soil pressure will exceed allowable soil pressure for points between y = 0 and y = 2do/3, and for points deeper than y = 4do/3. For an in-depth discussion and greater detail on non-constrained post foundation equation development see Meador (1997).
Examination of equation T-4 shows that the point of post rotation is two-thirds the embedment depth when there is no shear in the post at the ground surface (Va = 0). When there is no moment in the post at the ground surface (Ma = 0), the point of post rotation is located at threequarters of the embedment depth. If both Va and Ma are positive and non-zero, the point of rotation is between two-thirds and three-fourths of the embedment depth. Substitution of equation T-3 into equation T-2 yields the following equation for soil pressure: q = (18 Va + 24 Ma/d)(y y 2/do)/(d 2 b) (T-5) Typically, a designer selects a value for d, such that for all points below the surface, the actual
8.7.4 Required Embedment Depth for Constrained Posts Without Collars. A free body diagram of a constrained, non-collared post is shown in figure 8.3. Minimum post embedment depth, d, for the constrained, non-collared case is calculated using one of the following equations. From ASAE EP486 (1999a), AWPI (Patterson, 1969), and the UBC (ICBO, 1994): d= 4.25 Ma S b
1/3
(8-8)
8-9
From ASAE EP486.2 (1999b): 4 Ma d= S b where: d = Ma = S = b = minimum embedment depth, ft (m) bending moment applied to foundation at ground surface, ft-lbf (N-m) adjusted allowable lateral soil pressure, lbf/ft per ft (kPa/m per m) effective post width, ft (m), see Section 8.7.1
1/3
(8-9)
of these is a switch from equation 8-8 to equation 8-9. Equation 8-9 is based on the same assumptions as described for equation 8-7. These assumptions result in the following equation for actual soil resisting pressure, q, for a constrained, non-collared post (Meador, 1997): q where: q = actual soil pressure at a depth y below grade, lbf/ft2 (kPa) constant of horizontal subgrade reaction, lbf/ft4 (N/m4) lateral movement of post at a depth y = d, ft (m) depth below grade, ft (m) = nh y 2 / d (T-2)
nh = Note that equation 8-8 is in a slightly different form than appears in any of the three referenced documents. See the following technical note on equation development for additional information. y = =
Technical Note Constrained Post Equations Equation 8-8 for the embedment depth, d, of constrained, non-collared posts appears in most code documents as: d where: d P h = = = post embedment depth, ft (m) applied lateral force, lbf (N) distance from ground surface to point of application of force P, ft (m) adjusted allowable lateral soil pressure at the full embedment depth, lbf/ft2 (kPa) effective post width, ft (m) = [4.25 P h / (SL b)]
1/2
Equation T-2 is a parabolic function that produces the soil pressure profile shown in figure 8.3. If the bending moment around any point in figure 8.3 is equated to zero, the following equation is obtained for the lateral movement, , of the post at a depth, d. = 4 Ma /(d 3 nh b) (T-3)
(T-1)
Substitution of equation T-3 into equation T-2 yields the following equation for soil pressure: q = 4 Ma y 2/(d 4 b) (T-4)
SL = b =
Equation 8-8 is derived from equation T-1 by substituting bending moment, Ma, for the product of P and h, and replacing SL with the quantity Sd. This latter substitution eliminates having to recalculate SL every time the embedment depth changes. As described in the previous technical note on non-constrained posts, the first major revision to ASAE EP486 will contain several changes. One
The actual soil pressure increases at an increasing rate as y increases. The allowable lateral soil pressure, SL, increases at a constant rate as y increases (note: SL = S y). This means that if a designer ensures that the actual soil pressure, q does not exceed the allowable pressure at a depth, y = d, then the actual stress will be less than the allowable for all points between the ground surface and y = d. In equation form: S y > q = 4 Ma y 2/(d 4 b) for y = d (T-5)
Equation T-5 becomes equation 8.9 after it is rearranged so that d is the dependent variable. For an in-depth discussion and greater detail on constrained post foundation equation development see Meador (1997).
8 - 10
8.7.5 Required Embedment Depth for Posts With Collars. This design manual does not contain embedment equations for posts with collars. For such equations, see ASAE EP486 (1999a, 1999b) and Meador (1997).
Ground Level
Post
dT
P / SV
(8-10)
Collar Footing 2r
Figure 8.5. Schematic of relevant uplift resistance components for post foundation with an attached circular collar.
Ground Level
Post
AP
dT
Collar l1
l2 Unattached Footing
Figure 8.6. Schematic of relevant uplift resistance components for post foundation with an attached rectangular collar.
8 - 11
The volume of displaced soil, VS, is calculated using the following equations: For circular footings and collars: VS = dT [r 2 + dT r tan + dT 2 tan2 / 3] dT Ap
forced upward. 8.10.2 Problems. Frost heave can induce large differential movements in the foundation. This differential movement can crack building finishes, and induce significant stress in structural connections and components. When ice lenses thaw, soil moisture content increases dramatically. The soil is generally in a saturated state with reduced strength. As soil water drains from the soil, effective soil stresses increase and the foundation will generally settle. 8.10.3 Minimizing Frost Heave. Frost heave can be minimized by: (1) avoiding clays and silts, (2) extending footings below the frost line, and (3) providing good drainage. 8.10.3.1 No Silts and Clays. Fine grained soils such as clays and silts are more susceptible to frost heave because (1) water is drawn upward by the fine pores which function as capillaries, and (2) there is much more surface area in a unit volume of fine grained soil, and therefore more surface area for water adsoprtion. 8.10.3.2 Footing Depth. The most sure fire way to avoid frost heave problems is to locate the footing where water never freeze. It is for this reason that codes require foundations to be located below the frost line. Exceptions include footings on rock and floating foundation systems. A floating foundation is reinforced so that it can float as a monolithic unit as the soil swells and shrinks. 8.10.3.3 Water Drainage. Proper surface and subsurface drainage can reduce frost heave. Drainage of surface waters from a builder is enhanced by installing rain gutters, adequately sloping the finish grade away from the building, and raising the building elevation to a level above that of the surrounding area. Subsurface drainage is achieved with the placement of drain tile or coarse granular material below the maximum frost depth, with drainage to an outlet. Such drainage lowers the water table and interrupts the flow of water moving both vertically and horizontally through the soil.
For rectangular footings and collars: VS = dT (l1 l2 - Ap) + dT2 tan (l1 + l2) + dT 3 tan2 / 3 volume of displaced soil, ft3 (m3) distance from ground surface to top of collar, or to top of footing if collar is not present, ft (m) radius of collar, or footing if collar is not present, ft (m) angle of internal soil friction post cross-sectional area, ft2 (m2) length and width of a rectangular collar or footing, ft (m)
where: VS = dT = r =
= Ap = l1, l2 =
8.9.5 Uplift Resistance, U. The resistance to uplift, U, is calculated as: U where: U = MF = w = dT = VS = g = uplift resisting force, lbf (N) mass of all foundation elements that are attached to the post, lbm (kg) soil density, lbm/ft3 (kg/m3) distance from ground surface to top of collar, or to top of footing if collar is not present, ft (m) volume of displaced soil, ft3 (m3) gravitational constant, 1 lbf/lbm (9.81 N/kg) = g ( MF+ w VS ) (8-11)
8 - 12
8.10.4 Concrete Floors. If the ground beneath a concrete floor can freeze, the floor should be installed such that its vertical movement is not restricted by embedded posts or by structural elements attached to embedded posts. While concrete shrinkage may break bonds between a floor and surrounding components, more proactive measures will ensure independent vertical behavior. For example, plastic film can be placed against surrounding surfaces prior to pouring the floor. 8.10.5 Concrete Backfill. The use of poured concrete as a backfill material may actually increase the likelihood of frost heave. The rough soil-to-concrete backfill interface provides the potential for significant vertical uplift forces due to frost heave. Also, the placement of concrete in holes that decrease in diameter with depth provide additional risk for frost heave. 8.10.6 Top Collars. Although common in past years, placement of collars at the ground surface (to increase lateral load resistance) has all but been abandoned due to frost heave considerations.
Merritt, F.S. 1976. Standard Handbook for Civil Engineers, pp. 7-53. Patterson, D. 1969. Pole Building Design. American Wood Preservers Institute (AWPI), Washington D.C. Whitlow, R. 1995. Basic Soil Mechanics. 3rd edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York, NY
8.11 References
ASAE. 1999a. ASAE EP486: Post and pole foundation design. Shallow post foundation design. ASAE Standards, 46th Edition. ASAE,. St. Joseph, MI ASAE. 1999b. ASAE EP486.2: Shallow post foundation design. In review. ASAE. St. Joseph, MI. Hough, B.K. 1969. Basic Soils Engineering, 2nd Edition. Ronald Press Co. Table 7-2, p. 249. International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO). 1994. Uniform Building Code, 1994 Edition. ICBO, Whittier, CA McGuire, P. M. 1998. Overlooked assumption in nonconstrained post embedment. ASCE Practice Periodic on Structural design and Construction, 3(1):19-24. Meador, N.F. 1997. Mathematical models for lateral resistance of post foundations. Trans of ASAE, 40(1):191-201.
8 - 13
8 - 14
1a
2a
3a
4a
5a
6a
1b
2b
3b
4b
5b
6b
9.1.3 Wind Loads. It is assumed that the example building is located in a jurisdiction that has adopted the 1994 Uniform Building Code. Design wind loads calculated according to this code are presented in Table 9.2 Table 9.2. Wind Loads Wind speed 80 mph Exposure category B Windward wall, qww 8.13 psf Leeward wall, qlw -5.08 psf * Windward roof, qwr 3.05 psf Leeward roof, qlr -7.12 psf * * Negative loads act away from the surface in question. Positive loads act toward the surface in question.
For the nominal 6- by 6-inch No. 2 Southern Pine posts: E = 1.2 x 106 lbf/in.2 (No adjustment for wet conditions is necessary for Southern Pine timbers. It is generally required for laminated posts.) 76.26 in.4 144 in.
I = Hp =
9-1
Frame stiffness, k, is obtained by summing individual post stiffness values (equation 5-2). This summation yields: k = 184 lbf/in.
9.3.2 Diaphragm Stiffness, Ch. The diaphragm assembly used in this example is Test Assembly 11 in Table 6.1. Its properties are summarized in Table 9.3. Table 9.3. Diaphragm Properties Metal thickness 29 gage Assembly width, 3 x a 36 ft Assembly length, b 12 ft Allowable shear strength, va 107 lbf/ft Effective in-plane shear 3700 lbf/in. stiffness, c Effective shear modulus, G 3700 lbf/in. In-plane shear stiffness for a single diaphragm section is calculated using equation 6-9, which is given as. cp = G bh s cos()
9.3.3 Shearwall Stiffness, ke. There are no large doors in the endwalls of the example building. Lacking a specific tested endwall assembly, the 12 ft high endwalls will be assumed to have the same shear stiffness as an 8 ft section of the roof diaphragm; that is, ke will be set equal to Ch or 12,640 lbf/in.
Substitution of appropriate values yields: cp cp = = (3700 lbf/in.)(18 ft) (10 ft)(cos(18.43)) 7020 lbf/in.
The horizontal shear stiffness, ch, of a single diaphragm section is calculated using equation 6-10 which is given as: ch = cp cos2 ()
Substitution of appropriate values yields: ch = (7020 lbf/in.) cos2(18.43) = 6320 lbf/in. Total horizontal shear stiffness of a diaphragm element, Ch, is found by summing the stiffness values of the two sections that comprise each diaphragm element (see equation 5-4). Ch = 6320 + 6320 = 12,640 lbf/in.
9-2
For later calculations, it is convenient to calculate R in terms of its components roof, windward wall and leeward wall. RR = 10(6)(3.05 + 7.12) = 610.2 lbf RW = 10(12)(.375)(8.13) = 365.8 lbf RL = 10(12)(.375)(-5.08) = -228.6 lbf RR + RW RL = 1205 lbf
The difference between eave load, R, and the horizontal restraining force, Q, is the amount of the eave load that is transferred by the center post-frame to the foundation. R Q = 120 lbf The eave deflection, , for a post-frame with stiffness, k, subjected to an eave load, R, and horizontal restraining force, Q, is given as: = (R Q) / k
Eave deflection for the center post-frame is given as: = = (1205 lbf 1085 lbf) / 184 lbf/in. 0.652 in.
9.5.3 Simple Beam Analogy Equations. As previously noted, the simple beam analogy equations for diaphragm shear force, Vh, and diaphragm displacement, y, can be used when R, k, ke and Ch are constant. These two equations are given in Section 5.6.6 as: Vh = Ch s [A sinh( x) + B cosh( x)] y = A cosh( x) + B sinh( x) + R/k Input parameters and calculated equation constants for the simple beam analogy equations have been compiled for this example analysis in Table 9.4. Maximum diaphragm shear is calculated by setting x = 0 in., or: Vh = 12,640 lbf/in.(1.0054x10-3 in.-1) (120 in.)[-6.286 in.(0) + 2.181 in.(1)] Vh = 3326 lbf Maximum diaphragm displacement is calculated by setting x = L/2 = 360 in. , or: y = -6.286 in.( 1.0662) + 2.181 in.( 0.3699) + 1205 lbf/(184 lbf/in.) 0.6535 in.
The horizontal restraining force, Q, that must be applied to the center post frame (i.e., frame 4 in figure 9.1) is given as:
9-3
Table 9.4. Parameters for Simple Beam Analogy Equations 1205 lbf R 120 in. s 720 in. L 12,640 lbf/in. ke 184 lbf/in. k 6.549 in. R/ k 12,640 lbf/in. Ch 1.0054x10-3 in.-1 * 0.7239 L 1.2737 cosh( L) 0.7888 sinh( L) -23.890 * D 0.2631 in. * ye -6.286 in. * A 2.181 in. * B cosh(0) 1 sinh(0) 0 1.0662 cosh( 360 in.) 0.3699 sinh( 360 in.) * Equations for calculation of these values are given in Section 5.6.6.
The force transferred to the foundation by the center frame (frame 4) is equal to the product of eave displacement, y, and frame stiffness, k, or: yk = 0.6535 in. (184 lbf/in.) = 120.2 lbf
The horizontal restraining force, Q, for the frame 4 is equal to the difference between the eave load, R, and the 120.2 lbf, or Q = 1205 lbf 120.2 lbf = 1084.8 lbf
Note that ye in table 9.4 is the eave displacement of the endwall. 9.5.4 DAFI. As previously mentioned, DAFI is a computer program specifically written for determining load distribution between diaphragms and frames. DAFI can be downloaded free from the NFBA web site (www.postframe.org). The maximum shear force in the diaphragm. Vh, is numerically equal to the load resisted by the endwall frame. In figure 9.2, this value is given as 3353.2 lbf. Note that this value is more precise than the 3340 lbf value calculated from the mS values in table 5.1 because the values in table 5.1 are only given to three significant figures. It is important to note that the shear load
FRAME FRAME APPLIED HORIZONTAL LOAD RESISTED FRACTION OF NUMBER STIFFNESS LOAD DISPLACEMENT BY FRAME APPLIED LOAD --------------------------------------------------------------------1 12640.00 602.5 .2652868 3353.2 5.5655 2 184.00 1205.0 .4829074 88.9 .0737 3 184.00 1205.0 .6122254 112.6 .0935 4 184.00 1205.0 .6551232 120.5 .1000 5 184.00 1205.0 .6122254 112.6 .0935 6 184.00 1205.0 .4829074 88.9 .0737 7 12640.00 602.5 .2652867 3353.2 5.5655 DIAPHRAGM DIAPHRAGM SHEAR SHEAR NUMBER STIFFNESS DISPLACEMENT LOAD -------------------------------------------1 12640.00 .2176206 2750.7 2 12640.00 .1293180 1634.6 3 12640.00 .0428978 542.2 4 12640.00 .0428979 542.2 5 12640.00 .1293180 1634.6 6 12640.00 .2176206 2750.7
Figure 9.2. Output from computer program DAFI for example building.
9-4
listed for each diaphragm in the DAFI output is essentially an average shear load in the diaphragm. For example, the average shear load in diaphragm 1 is listed as 2750.7 lbf. To calculate the maximum shear load in each diaphragm element, simply add the quantity R/2 to the average value. For this example analysis, half the eave load is 602.5 lbf. Adding this to the average shear load in diaphragm 1 yields the expected maximum shear force in the diaphragm of 3353.2 lbf. The amount of eave load transferred to the foundation by each frame is listed in figure 9.2 under the column heading load resisted by frame. The difference between this value and the eave load, R, is the horizontal restraining force, Q. The load resisted by the most heavily loaded frame (i.e., frame 4) is 120.5 lbf. This equates to a horizontal restraining force for frame 4 of 1084.5 lbf (1205 lbf 120.5 lbf). 9.5.5 Comparison of Methods. The ANSI/ ASAE EP484.2 tables (tables 5-1 and 5-2), simple beam analogy equations, and program DAFI yield identical values for maximum diaphragm shear, horizontal restraining force, and eave deflections. Again, it is important to note that the ANSI/ASAE EP484.2 tables and the simple beam analogy equations are restricted to designs with fixed values of Ch, k, R, and ke. Although DAFI is more versatile, a DAFI analysis requires computer access. The simple beam analog equations can be quickly solved with a hand calculator that supports hyperbolic trigonometric functions. 9.5.6 Diaphragm Shear. The maximum inplane shear force, Vp, in a diaphragm section is calculated from the maximum horizontal shear force, Vh, in the diaphragm elements using equation 5-9 which is given as: Vp,i = (ch,i / Ch) Vh / (cos i)
Diaphragm elements 1 and 6 are both subjected to the maximum horizontal shear, Vh, of 3350 lbf. Consequently, the in-plane shear force in diaphagm sections 1a, 1b, 6a and 6b is given as: Vp = 6320 lbf/in (3350 lbf) 12,640 lbf/in (cos 18.43) 1766 lbf
Vp =
Dividing the in-plane shear force by the slope length of a diaphragm section yields the in-plane shear force on a unit length basis, vp. vp = vp = 1766 lbf /(18 ft / cos (18.43)) 93.1 lbf/ft
9.5.7. Post Forces. The most critical posts from a design perspective are those associated with the most heavily loaded frame. In the example building this is the center post-frame (a.k.a. frame 4). There are two basic methods for determining post forces. The first is to analyze the frame with a plane-frame structural analysis program, the second is to assume the truss is rigid and then use a series of equations to calculate post forces. A structural analog for a plane-frame structural analysis of frame 4 is shown in figure 9.3a. Post forces obtained with this analog are given in figure 9.3b. For this example analysis, the load combination of full dead + full wind + snow was used, with a roof dead load of 5 psf and a roof snow load of 30 psf (Note: in practice, the building designer must check all applicable load cases). The force applied to the frame by the diaphragm, qp, was applied as a force of 30.12 lbf per foot of top chord. This force was obtained by first combining equations 5-10 and 5-11 into the following equation: q p,i = Q (c h,i / Ch ) / b i (9-1)
For this example analysis, all six diaphragm elements have the same Ch, and all twelve of the diaphragm sections shown in figure 9.1 have the same horizontal stiffness, ch and slope, , that is: Ch = ch,i = = 12,640 lbf/in. 6320 lbf/in. 18.43
where: Q is the horizontal restraining force (1084.5 lbf for frame 4); ch,i is the horizontal stiffness of diaphragm segment i (6320 lbf/in); Ch is the horizontal stiffness of diaphragm element i (12,640 lbf/in); and bi is the horizontal span of diaphragm segment i (18 ft).
9-5
psf .05 x 3
sx
30.1 2
0 in.-lbf
7.1 2p sf
t
ft lbf/ 12 30.
lbf/f
Leeward post 662 lbf 449 lbf 25100 in.-lbf 3821 lbf (b) 2646 lbf 20700 in.-lbf
s x 8.13 psf
(a)
Figure 9.3. (a) Structural analog for frame 4 of the example building (s = 10 ft). (b) Resulting forces on post ends. Lateral deflection at the top of the windward and leeward posts were 0.572 and 0.735 inches, respectively.
Roof dead + 1/2 snow = 7200 lbf Vertical component of windward roof pressure = 549 lbf + Vertical component of diaphragm restraining force = 180.75 lbf 9 ft Horizontal component of windward roof pressure = 183 lbf + Horizontal component of diaphragm restraining force = -542.25 lbf 3 ft 3 ft Vtw 9 ft 9 ft 9 ft 3 ft 3 ft Vtl Horizontal component of leeward roof pressure = -427.2 lbf + Horizontal component of diaphragm restraining force = 542.25 lbf Vertical component of leeward roof pressure = -1281.6 lbf + Vertical component of diaphragm restraining force = -180.75 lbf
Pw = 3821 lbf
s x 5.08 psf
Pl = 2646 lbf
In lieu of a computer analysis, post axial forces for a two-post frame can be obtained by drawing a free-body diagram of the truss and summing forces about each truss-to-post connection. Such a free-body diagram for frame 4 of the example building is shown in figure 9.4. The axial forces (Pw and Pl) obtained in this manner are identical to those obtained via the computer analysis (figure 9.3).
To obtain post shears and bending moments without reliance on a computer is a straight forward process if the truss is assumed to be completely rigid. When this assumption is made, the lateral movement, , of all posts at their truss attachment point will be equal to that obtained using the methods outlined in Sections 9.5.2, 9.5.3 and 9.5.4. Post shear and post bending
9-6
moment can then be calculated using the following equations which assume zero bending moment at the top of the post. Vy = kp R i + s q (Hp y) (9-2)
Using equation 9-2, the shears at the top, Vt, and bottom, Vb, of the windward post of frame 4 are: Vt = (91.9 lbf/in.)(0.655 in.) 365.8 lbf + (10 ft)(8.13 psf) (12 ft 12 ft) 305.6 lbf
My = (s q / 2)(Hp y)2 + Vt (Hp y) (9-3) Mmax = - Vt2 / (2 s q) where: Vy = kp = = Ri = = = s = q = Hp = y = My = Vt = Mmax = post shear at distance y from base, lbf (N) post stiffness, lbf/in. (N/mm) lateral movement of post top, in. (mm) contribution of wall pressure to eave load, lbf (N) RW for windward wall RL for leeward wall frame spacing wall pressure, lbf/ft2 (N/m2) post height, ft (m) distance from post base, ft (m) bending moment in post at distance y from base, lbf-ft (N-m) Vy at y = Hp, lbf (N) bending moment at y = Hp + Vt /(sq) (i.e., at the point of zero post shear) Vb Vt = (9-4) Vb = (91.9 lbf/in.)(0.655 in.) 365.8 lbf + (10 ft)(8.13 psf) (12 ft 0 ft) = 670.0 lbf
and the shears at the top, Vt, and bottom, Vb, of the leeward post of frame 4 are: Vt = (91.9 lbf/in.)(0.655 in.) 228.6 lbf + (10 ft)(5.08 psf) (12 ft 12 ft) 168.4 lbf
Vt = Vb Vb
= (91.9 lbf/in.)(0.655 in.) 228.6 lbf + (10 ft)(5.08 psf) (12 ft 0 ft) = 441.2 lbf
Positive sign conventions for the preceding variables are illustrated in figure 9.5.
Equation 9-3 yields bending moments at the base of the windward and leeward posts of 26200 and 19640 lbf-in., respectively. The difference between these values and those in figure 9.3b are due to the rigid truss assumption. According to equation 9-4, bending moments at the point of zero shear in the windward and leeward posts are 6890 and 3350 lbf-in., respectively.
Figure 9.5. Positive sign convention for variables used in equations 9-2 and 9-3.
9-7
CSI
(9-5)
CD = CM =
where: CSI fc fb Fc = = = = = Fb = = FcE = = combined stress index actual compressive stress actual bending stress allowable compressive stress Fc CD CM CF Ci CP allowable bending stress Fb CD CM CF Ci CLCr Cf CV critical buckling design stress K E I / ( le / d )2
CF = Ci = CL = Cr =
and: Fc = Fb = CD = CM = CF = Ci = CP = CL = Cr = Cf = CV = E = I = le /d = K = = tabulated compressive stress tabulated bending stress load duration factor wet service factor size factor incising factor column stability factor beam stability factor repetitive member factor form factor volume factor E CM Ci moment of inertia slenderness ratio 0.3 for visually graded lumber 0.384 for machine evaluated lumber Cf = CV = CP =
CP =
1.60 since the shortest duration load in the combination of loads is wind 1.00 for modulus of elasticity, compression and bending of Southern Pine timber regardless of moisture content 1.00 for nominal 6- by 6-inch No.2 Southern Pine 1.00 since Southern Pine does not need to be incised for pressure treatments 1.00 since post is square 1.00 because post spacing exceeds 24 inches. Note that this value is non-zero for mechanically laminated posts 1.00 since posts are rectangular 1.00 since posts are not gluedlaminated 1.00 at the base of the post where support is provided in both directions is less than 1.00 at locations removed from supports that keep the post from buckling. For such cases, CP is calculated using NDS equation 3.7-1.
It follows that at the base of both the windward and leeward posts: Fc = Fb = FcE = ( 525 lbf/in.2)(1.60) = 840 lbf/in.2 ( 850 lbf/in.2)(1.60) = 1360 lbf/in.2 A very large number if the effective buckling length, le, is assumed to be very small because of support at the base. As a result, the ratio fc / FcE in equation 9-5 is assumed to equal zero.
Actual stresses for the windward post are: fc = = PW / A = 3821 lbf / (30.25 in.2) 126 lbf/in.2 M / S = 26200 lbf-in. / (27.73 in.3) 945 lbf/in.2 (at the base) 6890 lbf-in. / (27.73 in.3) 248 lbf/in.2 (at point of zero shear)
fb = = fb = =
and at the base of the windward post: CSI = ( 126 / 840 )2 + ( 945 / 1360 ) = 0.02 + 0.70 = 0.72 < 1.0 OK The other critical location to check the combined stress index (CSI) is at the point of maximum bending moment (point of zero shear) in the upper portion of the post. At this location, the column stability factor is generally based on an effective column buckling length of 0.8 Hp (see
For No. 2 Southern Pine timber, the tabulated compression and bending stresses and modulus of elasticity are: Fb = Fc = E = 850 lbf/in.2 525 lbf/in.2 1,200,000 lbf/in.2
9-8
NDS Appendix G), which results in the following slenderness ratio: le / d = 0.8 (144 in.) / 5.5 in. = 20.9 thus:
The minimum embedment depth, d, is: d = d = 4.25 (2180 lbf-ft) (532 lbf/ft3) (0.64 ft) 3.00 ft < 4 ft OK
1/3
FcE = =
The ratio of FcE / Fc is 0.976. This yields a Cp of 0.682, resulting in the following allowable compressive stress, Fc. Fc = = ( 525 lbf/in.2)(1.60)(0.682) 573 lbf/in.2
9.6.4 Leeward Post Stresses. Because (1) the axial force and maximum bending moments associated with the leeward post are all less than those for the windward post, (2) the windward and leeward posts are similarly supported, and (3) the windward post is not overstressed, there is not need to check stresses in the leeward post. 9.6.5 Leeward Post Embedment. Unless the post-frame designer makes special provisions to tie the base of the leeward post to the floor slab, it will be non-constrained. Since this is a UBC jurisdiction, embedment depth will be checked using equation 8-6, which is given as follows: d2 = 7.02 Va + 7.65 Ma / d S b
The CSI at the point of maximum moment in the upper portion of the post is: CSI = ( 126 / 573 )2 + 248 / [1360 (1 - 126/820)] = 0.05 + 0.22 = 0.27 < 1.0 OK 9.6.3 Windward Post Embedment. The windward post is constrained by the floor slab. Since our example building is in an UBC jurisdiction, embedment depth will be checked using equation 8-8 which is given as: d= 4.25 Ma S b
1/3
Solution of this equation is an iterative process. The values for S and b are as determined for the windward post. Leeward post base shear and bending moment where previously calculated as 441 lbf and 1640 lbf-ft, respectively d2 = d = 7.02(441 lbf) + 7.65(1640 lbf-ft)/d (532 lbf/ft3) (0.64 ft) 4.22 ft > 4 ft
For this example, the soil is assumed to be a firm silty sand which puts it in class 4 (firm) of Table 8.1 a soil with a tabulated lateral soil pressure of 200 lbf/ft per foot of depth. In accordance with the UBC, the tabulated lateral pressure can be adjusted for wind loading by a factor of 1.33. Since the posts are more than six diameters apart, the allowable lateral pressure can also be doubled for isolated conditions. Thus, the allowable lateral soil bearing pressure is: S' = = (200 lbf / ft2 / ft)(1.33)(2) 532 lbf / ft2 / ft
As previously calculated, the moment at grade is 26200 lbf-in or 2180 lbf-ft. The effective width of the post, b, is: b = (1.4)(5.5 in)/12 = 0.64 ft
At this point, the post-frame designer must apply engineering judgement. It is important to remember that the analogs in this example produce conservative values for base moments and shears, especially for the non-constrained case. The designer must also consider what is known about the soil type and its variability on the building site. If an embedment of 4 ft rather than 4.22 ft satisfies uplift requirements as calculated elsewhere (not included in this example) an experienced post-frame designer could validly judge that an embedment of 4 ft. is OK.
9-9
This example has focused solely on those items that are unique to post-frame. The post-frame designer should be able to perform the remaining checks and designs using commonly accepted practices and techniques.
9-10