Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Effect of Sag Rods On Purlins PDF
Effect of Sag Rods On Purlins PDF
Structural Engineering
Conference ·1976
Conference
Canadienne d'ingenierie
des Structures·1976
By Peter C. Birkemoe
Author
Peter Birkemoe obtained his B.Sc. in Civil Engineering at Purdue University,
Lafayette, Indiana in 1961 and his Masters degree a year later from the
same university. In 1966 he obtained his Ph.D. from the University of
Illinois.
After a brief period in the Research and Development Division of the Port-
land Cement Association Dr. Birkemoe returned to the University of
Illinois, first as Research Assistant and later as Assistant Professor in the
Department of Civil Engineering. From 1972 to the present time he has
been with the University of Toronto as Assistant and Associate Professor
supervising graduate research on the behaviour of bolted structural con-
nections, design of light gauge steel wall and roof assemblies, and the be-
haviour of hollow structural sections.
Dr. Birkemoe is a member of several technical societies including the ASCE, ASTM and SESA. He
is also a member of the Research Council on Riveted and Bolted Structural Joints and the ASCE
Research Council on Performance of Structures, the ASCE Committee on Tubular Structures and
is Chairman of the ASCE Committee on Structural Connections.
SUMMARY
pressure due to wind) requirements of the National Bui Code have brought
n£,f-p"'~"'n
attention to the particularly severe loading limitations for compression flanges
of girts and in industrial building roofs and walls. Intuitively, role sag rod and tension
as direct bracing or constraining elements seems obvious, but the analytical
",1"1"e>f'-t" has been tedious and Iy unverified.
The two test panels which were taken to their ultimate strength showed no significant effect of the
position of the sag rod (mid-depth position versus a position in the web near the compression flange).
Bracing was sufficient to develop the full strong axis yield moment of the channels.
Finally, recommendations for taking advantage of the presence of sag rods are made and some potential
alternative bracing techniques are discussed.
SOMMAIRE
Les exigences du Code national du Batiment relativement a la pression negative (succion due au
vent) accordent beaucoup plus d'importance concernant les limites de chargement particulierement
strictes pour les semelles en compression non supportees, des entremises et des pannes pour murs et
plafonds de biitiments industriels. Intuitivement, Ie role joue par les liens et les raccords de semelles
en tension comme elements de contreventement ou de contrainte semble evident mais I'evaluation
analytique des effets a ete fastidieuse et Ie comportement n'a pas ete verifie experimentalement.
Le memoire comporte un rapide tour d'horizon de I'etat des connaissances concernant la prevision
de la resistance a la flexion des profiles legers. II souligne plus particulierement Ie cas d'une semelle
tendue supportee. II revoit une certaine quantite d'etudes analytiques et fait certaines derivations
pour tenter de simplifier les techniques analytiques. II limite egalement les donnees experimentales
sur la rigidite et la resistance tirees d'essais comportant des conditions limites realistes, plus par-
ticulierement en ce qui concerne Ie contreventement. On a donc construit une portion de mur en
vraie afin d'appliquer sur des panneaux de mur, une charge negative . Les pan-
neaux muraux etaient supportes simplement, avaient une portee de 16 pieds avec 3 fers en U de
6 pouces, lamines a froid, a 7 pieds d'entraxe; les deux bords paralleles aux fers en U etaient libres.
Les specimens d'essai comportaient une variable significative, a savoir la position du support du lien
en regard de la hauteur du fer en U afin d'evaluer I'effet du contreventement sur les entremises. Onze
essais furent effectues sur deux panneaux muraux types. Les raccordements, partiel et total, des
cornieres de support a I'ame representaient d'autres variables. Les donnees experimentales de rigid-
ite et de resistance obtenues des essais en vraie grandeur correspondaient raisonnablement bien aux
previsions de I'analyse.
Les deux panneaux d'essai qui furent portes a leur resistance a la rupture ne montrerent aucun effet
sensible de la position du lien (position ami-hauteur et position sur I'ame pres de la semelle en com-
pression). Le contreventement suffisait a deveiopper Ie plein moment a I'ecoulement autour de I'axe
majeur des en
Enfin, Ie memoire presente certaines recommandations pour tirer Ie meilleur parti de la presence des
liens et presente certaines techniques de contreventement possibles.
I
ions
steel
di inctly un
exure and buckling calcu ations for the case of compres-
(i.e. negative wind (suction) sure). This loading does
-axis exure but a combination of biaxial bending and tor-
low torsion and weak-axis flexural stiffnesses of these members
erally results in large lateral and torsional deflections at modest loads. Real-
zation of strong-axis bending strength occurs only if the section is sufficiently
braced to restrict the lateral and torsional movements.
National Building Code requires that industrial buildings in the Toronto area be
designed for negative wind pressures exceeding 40 pounds per square foot. The cur-
rent CSA 5-136 ( 1) Standard considers the behaviour of girts or purl ins with unsup-
ported compression flanges to be that of completely unsupported beams; the resulting
design based on lateral-torsional buckling would thus seem to be rather conservative
since the s of rotational a lateral support of the tension flange and dis-
anc attachments to the web (sag rods) are not included.
A major research activity on the subject of the effect and evaluation of panel at-
tachment on the bracing of flexural members has been underway at Cornell University
for many years. Recent reports by Pekoz ( 5, 6, 7 ) have included significant ex-
perimental results of tests on continuous roof purl ins which were loaded to simulate
n ive pressure (uplift) on roofs. The theoretical analyses presented were in
satisfactory agreement with the results but were somewhat unwieldy for design.
ificant recent theoretical and experimental work on diaphragm-braced beams has
carr out by Nethercot and Rockey (11) in England and by P. kstrom (12)
i i in t design a analysis
such s the verification some si lified analy-
tical s were recent phase ex 1 study reported here.
The assessment of t attached sag s was of particular interest.
Two full size walls and sted; ten load were conducted in
the elastic (servic and both walls were tested to ultimate load.
The choice of the wall panel construction was guided primarily to avoid partial
scale models and to maintain a feasible test specimen size. A 6 x 2-3/4 x 0.09
channel with flanges stiffened by 90 degree lips was chosen with a span and spacing
to develop yielding at a factored positive pressure of approximately 50 p.s.f.;
properties are tabulated in Table 1. Three channels spanned 16 feet spaced at 7
feet and were supported by web attached clip angles. Several single-skin wall panels
were considered, but the final choice was based on proportions which guaranteed beam
failure. Fastening to the beam was by self tapping screws at one foot centres, the
panels being stitched at 2 foot centres.
The section was to be tested under negative pressure loading. For this section and
span the maximum allowable flexural compressive stress was calculated by CSA S-136-
1974 to be 8 ksi, which corresponds to a pressure of 6 psf. This suction pressure
is small compared to the allowable positive pressure of 31 psf for the same assembly
and thus an opportunity to demonstrate the effects of tension flange and sag-rod re-
straints was provided. Ideally, the desired loading was supposed to maintain real-
istic restraint conditions (i.e., no interference by loading device) and to be uni-
form over the surface of the panel. Construction of a vacuum chamber, one side of
which was the test wall, provided the answer and, in addition, allowed free access
to the girt during testing. A fully assembled wall section in place on the test
chamber is pictured in Figure 1. Note that upper and lower girts theoretically re-
one lf the total load and are attached along free edges.
are y su channel ends shown in
les were we to allow ion of
avoid devel of membrane forces. Loading was accomplished
using al vacuum c eaners and controlled leakage for ntenance of
reo
sting in astic rang~ ~as performed to study the effects of various sag rod
positions and condltlons on the beam deformations and strain distributions
without ilure. The first wall panel is shown duri one such test with-
oot 3. c O d rees at idspan
when su square 1 ilure sts were conducted
on similar , the position of the sag rod at centre span was at
mid-web in the unsupported flange in the other. The progressive
2
loading to failure for second wall panel is shown in Figure 4 (sag rod at mid-
web of channel). To in a more quantitative value for the deformations, recall
that cha depth is 6 inches. The failure, Fig. 4(d), by buckling of the com-
fl dspan, is shown close-up in Fi 5 for comparison with the
11 . 1. Failure were similar except that mid-web
1 (downward) of the flange while the at-
sion ion of the web resulted in greater
that region was strained near yield.
1 of t wall ilure, Figure 6, shows the permanent deformation
of the central The lower beam was not supported by a sag rod and retained
permanent torsional and flexural deformations. (It experienced loading approximately
one lf that of the centre critical beam). The similar upper beam was sag rod sup-
ported and experienced no permanent strain or deformation.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The writer wishes to acknowledge the work of Dimos Polyzois who has recently com-
pleted a thesis (13) for the M.A.Sc. degree and who conducted the tests and analy-
sis described herein. The paper is a statement of progress in a continuing research
effort at the University of Toronto on the design of light gauge structural steel.
This research was sponsored by the Canadian Steel Industries Construction Council.
Material for construction of the test wall panels was contributed by Canadian Metal
Rolling Mills Ltd.
4
1. nad i an soci ion S136- 1 , HCold Struc-
tural
4. Winter, G., " on the 1968 ition of the Specification for the
Design of Cold-Formed Steel Structural Members
5. Pekoz, T., "Progress Report on Co ld-Formed Steel Purl in Design", Proceedi ngs
of the Third International Specialty Conference on Cold-Formed Steel
Structures, University of Missouri- Rolla, November 1975
7. Pekoz, T., "Conti nuous Purl in Tests", Department of Structura 1 Engi neeri ng
Report, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, 1975.
8. Pincus, G., and Fisher, G.P., "Behavior of Diaphragm Braced Columns and Beams",
Proceedings ASCE Vol. 92, ST2, April, 1960.
9. Errera, S.J., "The Performance of Beams and Columns Continuously Braced with
Diaphragms - I", Report No. 321, Department of Structural Engineering,
Cornell University, October, 1965.
10. Celebi, N., "Diaphragm Braced Channel and Z-Section Beams", Report No. 344,
Department of Structural Engineering, Cornell University, May, 1972.
11. Rockey, K.C., and Nethercott, D.A., "Stabilization of Beams Against Lateral
Buckling", Proceedings of First Specialty Conference on Cold-Formed
Steel Structures, University of Missouri-Rolla, August 19-20,1971.
13. Po is, D., "Flexural iour of Cold Formed Channels v/ith Unsupported
Compression Flanges". r~.A.Sc.Thesis, University of Toronto, 1976.
5
Section Properties ( Provided by tv1anufacturer)
Ix ( i n4) 6.12
Sx (in 3 ) 2.04
rx (i n) 2.37
Iy (in4) 1. 10
Sy (in 3 ) 0.59
ry (i n) 1. 01
X (in) 0.89
0 (i n) 6.0
B (i n) 2.75
L (in) 1.0
6
SON OF I BEHAVIOUR
Ex~eriment
No Sag Rod
(Mid-web) (Near Flange)
First Yield 41 psf 38 psf
(flanges)
Fa ilure 49 psf 48 psf
*Pressures shown are for the wall and pa geometry described in this report.
7
FIG. 1. WALL SPECIMEN NO.1 IN PREPARATION
FOR LOADING WITHOUT SAG RODS
8
FIG. 2. v
9
FIG. 3. VIEW OF FLEXURAL AND TORSI L ON
OF CHANNEL WITHOUT C SAG
( IDSPAN = 10° A
10
(a) Wall Loading 12 p.s.f. (b) Wall Loading 19 p.s.f.
11
(a) Test No.1, Sag Rod Located Near Compression Flange
13
30
o D. No Sag Rod
25 - I
o
o S.R. at Mid-web
o S.R. near Flange
o
I Theory
o
(No Sag Rod)
20 -
II /
o o
4-
Vl
.
0
I o
I
.
c..
........ 15
OJ
-
I
0
I
/
o
/
S-
:::s o
Vl
Vl
OJ
S- o
I
o...
o
10 - /
o
I /
No Rota tiona 1 Su pport l- __ --- - --
---- ----
-- --- I
I I
o 5 10 15 20 25
Rotation (degrees)
14
c:
.r- Or
_ _ _ _ _ :::1
<J
. _____ 0 _-----v
+J
s-
------- - - - -
---~---- 6, - -_ _ _ .6.
a;
::> .5 ~-
".-...
0
c:
.r-
- - - - - - .6.
<J
N
.,...
s- .5
o
:c
0 -
en
a;
"0
c:
0
.,....
+J 5
ro
+J
0
c:::
v No Sag Rod
---- ---
o Sag Rod at Mid-web
o Sag Rod near Flange
Theory (no sag rod)
15
60 r---------------------________________________-,
50 Failure 49 p.s.f.
__ G
.
4-
(/)
. •
0-
(l)
s-
o Vertical
:::::l
(/)
(/) 30 • Hori zonta 1
(l)
S-
o...
20
10
o
o 2 .3 4
Displacement (in.)
FIG. 9. VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT OF BEAM (WALL NO.2)
50 Failure 49 p.s.f.
-----------------
40 .,• •-- .
~
---
4- · • ~
· •
(/)
0- · 30 I /
•
/
/
(l)
S-
:::::l
f • 0
(/)
(/)
(l)
20
s-
o...
10
o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Strain x 10 3
~o
/0
40
~O
/
o
4- 0/
30
0/
til
/
OJ
S-
;:,
til
til 20
OJ
S-
o...
o
0/
:J
~/ I
10
0/
/J
cf{
//-
O~/_p-;'-'--~------~----~----__~I------~----~I----~
o 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Sag Rod Force (lbs)
17
Printed by; VERSATEL CORPORATE SERVICES LIMITED, DON MILLS, ONTARIO