BRACING OF TIMBER TRUSSED ROOFS IN SOUTH AFRICA

Walter Burdzik1, Primus Nkwera2

ABSTRACT: The bracing of timber trussed roofs and the effective length, or buckling length, of the top chord has led
to an ongoing debate in South Africa. One of the problems with bracing is that some of the bracing used is still based on
a strength criterion instead of strength and stiffness. Bracing rules that are based on experience have been applied to
bigger and bigger spans, without an analysis being undertaken to see whether the accepted buckling length is still true.
When queried about the bracing system, one of the reasons that is presented is that it is used in other countries. This is
done without reference to the spacing of the trusses, the width of the timber used or the buckling length that is used in
that country.

The authors investigate the most common types of bracing used in South Africa and apply buckling analyses to typical
truss layouts. In the analyses, the bracing is placed in the correct position, with regard to the centre line of the truss
members and the low torsional stiffness of the timber is taken into account. The load factors that are obtained from
these analyses are then used to illustrate how one can calculate the buckling length of the top chord. The calculated
buckling lengths show that some of the assumptions about effective lengths may not be as conservative as was assumed
and that further work may be required to ensure that timber trussed roofs have an acceptable safety index when
compared to other materials.

KEYWORDS: Trussed roofs, bracing, load factor, buckling length, compression chord

1 INTRODUCTION 123 roofs. This was later changed by a South African

As is the case in most countries, where nail plated
trusses are used to support the cladding material, the
loading on a truss is part of the pre-processing package
that is used and only experienced operators are supposed
to be able to change or adjust the loads. Assumptions are
made about the member sizes and the truss is then ready
for an initial analysis. A centre line analysis using beam
elements is applied and the forces so obtained are used to
size the members in accordance with SANS 10163:
Part 1 [1]. The stiffness of the connectors is sometimes
taken into account, and in most cases the trusses are
reanalysed with the correct sizes once these have been
obtained.
The top chord or compression is braced by means of
some form of bracing system and assumptions are made
about the buckling length of the member. SANS 10163:
Part 2 [2] had a rule of thumb of minimum Le/b equal to
15 for tiled roof or the spacing of the purlin for sheeted
Institute for Timber Construction in-house rule which
suggests an effective buckling length of the spacing of
the trusses, i.e. 750 mm to 900 mm.
However, one must recognize the different bracing
systems that are now used and that these may lead to
very different buckling lengths.
For small spans, i.e. up to 10 m a diagonal brace is used.
A 36 mm x 111 mm timber member is fixed to the
underside of the compression chord and runs at about 45º
when seen in plan. Two to three nails are used to fix the
brace to the top chord, see Figure 1. Maximum spacing
rules are used to ensure that trusses are not too far from
the brace. Battens are placed on top of the compression
chord and these are then fixed with 1 nail. The buckling
length of the top chord is then assumed to be the spacing
of the trusses.

1
Walter Burdzik, Department of Civil Engineering, University
of Pretoria, Hillcrest Pretoria, 0001. Email:
walter.burdzik@up.ac.za
2
Primus Nkwera, NACTE, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Email: Nkwera@nacte.go.tz

Figure 1: Diagonal Brace at 45º nailed to underside of
compression chord.
For larger spans, the diagonal brace may be
supplemented by a zigzag bracing frame that is fixed to
the underside of the battens, zigzag members nailed to
the inside face of the compression chords or alternatively
the whole system may be braced with metal straps called
speedbrace®. The speedbrace is nailed directly onto the
top chord before the battens are then nailed into place.
The buckling length in both these cases is assumed to be
15 times the width of the top chord, usually 540 mm.
2 ANALYSIS
2.1 PHILOSOPHY
A number of issues need to be addressed before any
buckling analysis is undertaken:
One must accept that if sheeted roofs are analysed, that
the stiffness of one of the top chords may be equal to the
5th percentile stiffness and that one may have to then
design the whole roof for that one slightly less stiff truss.
This will only be true if the buckling length does not
exceed the spacing of the purlin.
It can be shown that when a number of compression
members are connected together by means of closely
spaced battens the buckling stiffness will tend towards
the average for the grade of timber being used.
One must recognize that the torsional stiffness of the top
chord in timber trusses is substantially less than for other
building materials other than perhaps ultra-light cold
rolled steel. This is important when the bracing and the
members that are being braced have the bracing on
opposite sides of the member. Take for instance a
diagonal brace that is nailed to the underside of a top
chord and this braces other trusses via the battens that
are nailed to the top of the chord.
2.1 OUT-OF-PLANE BUCKLING
The K- factor or effective length factor is used to adjust
the actual un-restrained length of a compression member
to account for prevailing boundary conditions. Many
software design packages use a default effective length
factor of 0,85, implying some form of rotational joint
restraint by adjacent members. Some design codes also
specify effective length factors for compression
members in lattice trusses, BS 5400 Part 3 [3] in table
11, specifies effective length factors for buckling in the
plane of the truss as well as out of the plane of the truss.
In all cases the values given in Table 11 of BS 5400
Part 3 [3] are less or equal to 0,85. Eurocode 5 [4] gives
the effective column length for members of triangulated
trusses with loading at the nodes as the bay length.
Furthermore, for strength verification the calculated
force must be increased by 10%. SANS 10162:1[5]
15.3.1, states “The effective length for buckling in the
plane of the truss shall be taken as the distance between
the lines of intersection of the working points of the web
members and the chord. The effective length for
buckling perpendicular to the plane of the truss shall be
equal to the distance between the points of lateral
support.” This is then a conservative solution when the
lateral supports are fairly rigid.
Boundary conditions are not merely a function of
connection details and continuity, but are influenced by
the capacity of adjacent members at the node. Consider
the example of a simple lattice truss with a constant
section shown in Figure 2 below where lateral supports
are provided at nodes, A, B, C, D, E, F and G:
Figure 2: This figure shows the possible buckled shape
of the top chord.
The compression chord ABCDEFG is divided into equal
portions. The basic principle that the buckling load for
member ABCDEFG is unique shows that an effective
length factor of less than one for a particular member is
consistent with an effective length factor of greater than
one in the adjacent members as shown in equation 1
below:
π 2 EI π 2 EI π 2 EI (1)
= =
(k AB L )
2
⋅ PAB (k BC L )
2
⋅ PBC (kCD L )
2
⋅ PCD
For the loading as shown, the force in ABCDEF will
vary over the length of the truss. If the member is of
constant section, equation 1 can only be satisfied if the
buckling length is taken as L = LAB = LBC = LCD. If the
torsional stiffness of the lacing elements is ignored, an
effective length factor of less than one is clearly
incorrect. Once again, the buckling strength of the chord
ABCDEF is unique. In order to still satisfy equation 1,
the effective length factors for the members with the
lower forces are greater than for those members with the
higher forces.
It is significant that the Eurocodes for steel design
specifically, have discarded the practice of using
tabulated effective length factors in the design of both
compression and flexural members. Elastic buckling
loads are used as a basis of design, and such loads are
commonly calculated using computer programs.
Stanway, Chapman & Dowling [6] have discussed the
influence of elastic supports at any position of the length
of the strut, thereby considering the influence of un-
equal bay lengths and the beneficial restraint offered by
adjacent sub-critical elements having a shorter buckling
length. The basis of elastic buckling analysis is
subsequently discussed.
Most PC based analysis packages are capable of
performing buckling analysis on framed structures using
beam elements, and individual members using shell
elements. It is important that the user is aware of the
actual process and the premises on which such analyses
are based. The method of buckling analysis of a frame
structure is presented in Coates, Coutie and Kong [7], as
described below.
In the case of a linear elastic analysis of a framed
structure, deformation is linearly related to load, or,
expressed in matrix form:
(2)
P = KsΔ
where P is the force or load matrix,
Δ is the displacement matrix,
Ks is the stiffness matrix.
The terms of Ks are constant for a given structure,
provided that second order effects are neglected,
therefore Ks is independent of P. If, however, the
influence of axial forces on member stiffness is included,
Ks becomes a function of P, or Ks = Ks(P).
In the case where axial loads are not neglected, equation
(2) becomes non-linear, but if the axial loads are known,
the deflections may be calculated.
λP = K s ( λP ) Δ (3)
In equation (3), the term λ has been inserted as a load
multiplier. As the loads are progressively increased, a
state of neutral equilibrium is achieved where any
deflection is possible for a given load level. This state
defines instability and may be referred to as λ = λcr. The
critical state is consistent with the matrix Ks(λP)
becoming singular.
A test of the singularity of the matrix Ks can therefore be
used as a check on stability, if it is non-singular and
positive definite, the structure is stable – if it is singular
the structure is on the point of collapse. The value of λcr
is therefore a multiple whereby an arbitrarily chosen load
can be multiplied to achieve a state of collapse. The
following comments regarding the value of λcr should be
clearly noted:
• λcr is not a safety factor. Even if P is chosen
to represent load effects at working loads, the
influence of inelastic buckling is not taken
into account in an elastic buckling analysis.
• In the case where buckling modes are de-
coupled, for example lattice structures
consisting of pin-ended members, the value
of λcr applies to the member most susceptible
to buckling, and has no application to other
members.
• If a two-dimensional analysis were to be
carried out to determine λcr, the value so
obtained obviously does not apply to out of
plane buckling.
The significance of an elastic buckling analysis is that
the value of λcrP is the elastic buckling load of the
critical member or portion of a structure, or of the
structure as a whole. Burdzik and Dekker [8] have
shown that in order to calculate the inelastic buckling
load, and therefore the factored resistance of the critical
member, the following procedure may be followed:
• Calculate the equivalent effective un-braced
length from the relationship:
π 2 EI
λcr P =
(KL )2
therefore:
π 2 EI
KL =
λcr P
or
Pe (4)
K=
λcr ⋅ P
where: Pe = Euler buckling load for a compression
member hinged at both ends.
P = applied load
K = effective unbraced length factor
2.2 STIFFNESS OF CONNECTORS
There are a number of ways of modelling the connector
between, for instance, the batten and the top chord. One
of the methods is the use of a spring as a connector. This,
however, does not adequately address the torsion on the
top chord. If a beam element analysis is applied to the 3-
dimensional model, it is better to model the nail with an
element that has the same bending stiffness as the
transverse stiffness of the nail.
View a 3,2 mm nail with a stiffness of 800 kN/m.
Assume a top chord with a depth of 111 mm and a batten
with a depth of 36 mm. The distance of the two
centrelines is then = 73,5 mm. It would not be out of
place to assume that the nail is placed in double flexure.
One now has to determine the flexural stiffness of a
member in double flexure that has the same stiffness as
the nail. See Figure 3 for forces involved.
Figure 3: Deflected shape of connector used to calculate
an equivalent stiff member
− M AB − M BA 6 EI AB × Δ + 6 EI AB × Δ
VBA = = (5)
L AB L3AB
But VAB/Δ is equal to the stiffness of the nail, k.
The required flexural stiffness EI can be calculated as
follows:
k × L3AB
EI AB =
12
The equivalent diameter of a steel nail that now connects
the batten to the top chord can be determined from this
equation. If the modulus of elasticity of the steel is
206 GPa:
k × L3AB 800 × 0,07353
I AB = = = 1,285 × 10 −10 m 4
E × 12 206 × 10 6 × 12
The diameter of the equivalent round nail with the
required second moment of area is 7,2 mm.
2.3 SHEAR MODULUS
It accepted that the shear modulus of South African pine
is about equal to MOE/16. Not all software packages
have the facility to input the shear modulus. Prokon [9],
the package used in the following analyses uses a
Poisson Ratio, ν, of 0,2. The shear modulus is then
calculated from the following equation:
E E
G= = ( 8)
2(1 + ν ) 2,4
This shortcoming can be overcome by reducing the
St Venant torsional constant of the relevant members by
16/2,4 = 6,67.
3 ANALYTICAL MODELS
3.1 DIAGONAL BRACE
The diagonal brace is only applied to spans of less than
10 m for tiled roofs. This was changed to 10,5 m to
simplify the input of the battens and the diagonal brace.
With a spacing of 750 mm, the top chord is usually of a
36 mm x 111 mm, grade 5 timber with an average MOE
equal to 7800 MPa. To save time, only the half structure
was analysed and Fink type truss will be used.
The stiffness of the nails was calculated in accordance
with the Euro Code 5 [4] for long term loading. Buckling
of the top chord is a long term problem as the tiles move
over one another as the temperatures vary, thereby
negating the short term diaphragm effect.
Loading of the truss was the self weight and the tile
weight that was applied to the battens. The result of the
buckling analysis was then used to calculate the buckling
length of the top chord. The buckled shape is shown in
Figure 4. The load factor, λ, obtained from the buckling
analysis will then be compared to the accepted effective
or buckling length.
(6)
(7)
Figure 4: Buckled shape of the roof with a diagonal
brace.
The load factor, λ, = 7,0 for the self weight and the tile
load. The average compressive force in the top chord
= 4,525 kN. The total length of the top chord may be
used as long as the compression force is the average
force. The effective buckling length can be obtained
from the following equation:
π 2 EI π 2 × 7,8 × 106 × 0,111 × 0,0363
KL = = = 1,024 m
λcr P 7,0 × 4,525 × 12
This is somewhat longer than the value of 0,76 m that
has been assumed.
The loss in compressive strength is quite significant. The
SANS10163: Part 1 [1] defines the resistance of a
compression member as follows:

fc
Cr = φ × β b × Ag × ( 9)
γ m1 × γ m 2 × γ m3 × γ m 4
Where: φ is a partial material factor = 0,67.
βb is a buckling factor given by a curve fit
Ag is the gross cross-sectional area.
fc is the compressive stress at 0 slenderness
γm are partial material factors, such as duration
of load, load sharing, size effect.
The increase in the buckling length would reduce the
buckling factor, βb based on a buckling length of 0,76 m
from 0,6 to 0,39.
If a similar analysis is carried out and the assumption is
made that the centrelines of the top chords, the battens
and the bracing intersect, i.e. no offset between the
bracing and the members being braced, a very different
picture emerges. Note the buckled shape shown in
Figure 5.
Figure 5: Diagonal brace, using bracing on centreline of
the trusses and battens
The load factor, λ, in this case = 31,6, the average
compressive force is 4,53 kN and the resultant effective
buckling length = 0,48 m. This may explain the
previously held belief that the slenderness ratio Le/b =
15, with Le = 540 mm.
3.2 SPEEDBRACE®
The Speedbrace® consists of punched metal plate that
has a fold so that it can span between trusses without
sagging too much. The Speedbrace® is placed prior to
the battens being nailed and an attempt is made to place
it at 45º. The battens are then nailed into place and the
Speedbrace® and the battens do not necessarily intersect
on top of a truss.
As this is only a preliminary attempt to quantify the
buckling length of top chords that are braced by means
of the Speedbrace®, it was assumed that the Speedbrace®
and the battens intersect on the truss. The span was also
increased to 12 m and only the half structure and a
Warren type layout was used. The top chord size was
increased to reflect the bigger span, thereby changing
length and diameter of the connector element. As an
alternative to accepting that the Speedbrace® could be
pulled tight, a 1 mm slack was allowed in each bay of
the brace. The analysis also only allowed tension in the
brace.
Figure 6: Buckled shape when metal strapping or speed
brace is used to brace 12 m trussed roof.
The load factor, λ, was = 9,4 for the bracing pulled
tightly and about the same for the 1 mm slack in the
bracing. The average compressive force in the top chord
was equal to 5,08 kN.
The effective length in this case was 966 mm which is
also greater than the accepted 7500 mm spacing. The βb
would reduce from 0,818 (assumed Le = 540 mm) to
0,43, which is perhaps an acceptable reduction of 47%.
3.3 ZIGZAG BRACING
Zigzag bracing is sometimes used instead of the diagonal
bracing or even the bracing frame. Members are nailed
onto the underside of the compression chords in one of
the bays in a zigzag formation as shown in Figure 7.
A 10,5 m span truss was braced using a 36 mm x
111 mm section, nailed to the underside of the
compression chord. With a spacing of 750 mm, the top
chord is usually of a 36 mm x 111 mm, grade 5 timber
with an average MOE equal to 7800 MPa. To save time,
only the half structure was analysed and Fink type truss
was used.
The buckling analysis showed that this system is stiff
enough to prevent actual buckling of the compression
member and that the load factor, λ, = 3,11. The buckling
length, however = 1,54 m and the buckling factor, βb
dropped to 0,19.

Figure 7: Buckled shape when a zigzag brace is nailed
to the underside of the compression chord in one of the
bays.
3.4 BRACING FRAME
Bracing frames were traditionally used for large span
trussed roofs. Because of the flexibility of the setup, the
bracing frame is often used in conjunction with a
diagonal brace. The diagonal brace stiffens the roof as a
whole and prevents pack of card collapse, whereas the
bracing frame reduced the buckling length of the top
chord.
Once again the analysis is limited to 12 m span, Fink
truss with 36 mm x 149 mm compression chords. The
tiles are assumed to have a mass of 50 kg/m2. The
analysis was carried out on a braced system with only
the bracing frame and without the diagonal braces.
Figure 8: The buckled shape of a roof braced by means
of a bracing frame.
The load factor, λ, was = 12,29 and the average
compressive force in the top chord was equal to 5,08 kN.
The effective length in this case was 845 mm which is
also greater than the accepted 750 mm spacing. The βb
would reduce from 0,818 (assumed Le = 540 mm) to
0,525, which is a reduction of 36%.
4 DISCUSSION
4.1 INTERACTION EQUATIONS
The lateral buckling length of the compression chord of
braced truss roof is determined for permanent loading
only. As the tiles will not move under imposed or live
loads, the question arises as to how the interaction
equation for beam columns must be applied. The
interaction equation, for lateral torsional buckling, in its
simplest form can be written as in equation (9):
Cu U1x × M ux
+ ≤ 1,0 ( 9)
Cr M rx
Where:
Cu is the ultimate axial load
Cr is the axial resistance based on the buckling length
U1x is the magnification factor for P-Δ effect
Mux is the ultimate moment about the X-axis
Mrx is the resistance taking lateral torsional buckling into
account.
Is it safe to say that the axial force as a result of imposed
loading will have a shorter buckling length than the long
duration loading and that one could base the strength on
a buckling length tending towards 0, i.e. Cr0? The same
reasoning could be applied to the bending moment, i.e.
Mr0.
The interaction equation could then be given by equation
(10)
Cusw Cuimposed M uxsw M uximposed ( 10)
+ + + ≤ 1,0
Cr Cr 0 M rx M rx 0
Cusw is the ultimate self weight axial load
Cr is the axial resistance based on the buckling length
Cuimposed is the ultimate imposed load axial load
Cr0 is the axial resistance based on 0 buckling length
U1x can be removed if a second order analysis is
undertaken.
Muxsw is the ultimate self weight moment about the X-
axis
Mrx is the resistance taking lateral torsional buckling into
account.
Muximposed is the ultimate imposed load moment about the
X-axis
Mrx0 is the resistance moment with no buckling taken
into account.
5 CONCLUSIONS
It was not the intention of the authors to set up a table of
effective lengths for different types of bracing. The
effective or buckling length depends not only on the type
of bracing, but also the position of the bracing relative to
the battens. A 36 mm x 111 mm compression chord
braced by means of a diagonal brace will have a different [4] EUROCODE 5. Design of timber structures. Part 1:
buckling length to a 36 mm x 149 mm compression General Rules and Rules for Buildings. NVN-ENV
chord braced in the same way and under the same 1995-1-1
compressive force. This is because the distance between
the centroids of the batten and the chord will be [5] SANS 10162-1, 2004. The structural use of steel Part
different. 1: Limit-states design of hot-rolled steelwork, South
African Bureau of Standards, Pretoria, South Africa.
The authors also realise that the number of computer
models and analyses are fairly limited. They do, [6] STANWAY GS, CHAPMAN JC and DOWLING PJ.
however, show that making assumptions about effective 1992. A simply supported imperfect column with a
or buckling lengths can be dangerous. The transverse elastic restraint at any position. Proceedings
SANS 10163:2 [2] assumption of an effective length of Institution of Civil Engineers Structures & Buildings,
15 x b may in some instances lead to structures that do 1992, 94, May, 205-206
not meet the minimum requirement of the safety index
for structures. The reduction in strength for the limited [7] COATES RC, COUTIE MG and KONG FK,
analyses undertaken can be seen in Table 1. It is then no Structural Analysis, Second Edition, Thomas Nelson and
wonder that engineers that design in other building Sons Ltd, Great Britain.
materials treat timber structures with some misgiving.
[8] Dekker, NW, Burdzik, WMG, A Rational Approach
Table 1: Reduction in compressive strength over the
to Obtaining Effective Lengths of Compression
assumed strength for the various types of bracing used in Members in Framed Structures. Journal of the South
South Africa. African Institution of Civil Engineers, Vol 47, No 2,
2005.
Brace Type Compression Span Reduction [9] PROKON SOFTWARE CONSULTANTS LTD,
chord (mm’s) (m) % PROKON suite of structural analysis programs, Pretoria,
Diagonal 36 x 111 10,5 35 2009.
Zigzag 36 x 111 10,5 68
Speedbrace 36 x 149 12,0 47
Frame 36 x 149 12,0 36

Before codifying effective lengths for braced timber

roofs in South Africa, limitations will have to be placed
on the spans to be braced with a given bracing system
and further investigation of the effect of the pitch and the
truss layout need to be undertaken. As this is a time-
consuming exercise, it is up to the nail plate system
suppliers to set the limits on the span versus bracing so
that only the maximum span needs to be investigated.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Professor Burdzik would like to thank Professor Dekker
of the Department of Civil Engineering at the University
of Pretoria for his invaluable assistance as well as the
Department for their continued support for this project.
The authors would also like to thank Prokon for year
after year donating the software to the Department.

REFERENCES
[1] SANS 10163: The structural use of timber: Part 1,
Limit-states design: 2003. South African Bureau of
Standards. Pretoria, South Africa.

[2] SANS 10163: The structural use of timber: Part 2,

Allowable stress design: 2001. South African Bureau of
Standards. Pretoria, South Africa.

[3] BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION, BS5400

Part 3, 2000, Steel, concrete and composite bridges.
Code of practice for design of steel bridges.