Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

442 views

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

- AS1170.2 Examples
- Wind Assessment to AS1170.2
- Portal Frame Design-worked Example
- Portal Frame
- Portal Frames
- 118812445-AS-1170-1-2002
- Design of Portal Frame
- Portal Frame Design Example
- Staad Supports
- AS2699.1 Built-In Components for Masonryconstruction Part 1 - Wall Ties
- As 1720-1988 Part 1 - Timber Structures
- NZBC - Handbook
- Be Amd Notes
- Analysis of portal frame building
- Timber Portal Frames Datafile
- Torsion Stiffness MOdification Factor of 0.1
- Strand7 Roofrack Assignment
- 2870 11 Seminar
- Basis of Structural Analysis
- Snap Fit Design

You are on page 1of 92

‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 1 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

CHH Woodproducts New Zealand

Disclaimer

This design example has been prepared solely to provide guidance and recommendations to suitably qualified engineers and other suitably qualified

design professionals for diligent and professional use by them (and no other person) in the calculation of design solutions for LVL portal frame systems

in accordance with currently available New Zealand Standards.

To the best of Carter Holt Harvey’s knowledge and belief this example has been prepared in accordance with currently available technology and

expertise however good design and construction practice may be affected by factors outside the control of Carter Holt Harvey and beyond the control and

scope of this design example. This example is not intended to be used as the sole recipe, nor is it to be considered the authoritative method, for

producing the relevant design and it is assumed that the relevant designers will employ sound and current engineering knowledge and will take all

reasonable care when designing LVL portal frame solutions using this example.

Accordingly, Carter Holt Harvey and its employees, agents and design professionals accept no liability or responsibility whatsoever and howsoever

arising for any losses, damages, costs or expenses (whether direct, indirect and/or consequential) arising from any errors or omissions which may be

contained in this example, nor does it accept responsibility to any persons whatsoever for designs prepared in reliance upon this example or any other

information contained in this document.

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 2 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction

2.1 Dead Load

2.2 Live load

2.3 Wind load

2.4 Proposed Purlin Layout

2.5 Connection Design

2.6 Lateral restraint design

2.7 Purlins supporting axial loading

3.1 Proposed Portal Frame

3.2 Serviceability

3.3 Strength

3.4 Design Actions

3.5 Rafter Design

3.5.1 Combined bending and compression

3.5.2 Combined bending and tension

3.5.3 Flybrace design

3.6 Column Design

3.6.1 Combined bending and compression

3.6.2 Combined bending and tension

3.6.3 Flybrace design

3.7 Gusset Design

3.7.1 Knee Gusset Design

3.7.2 Ridge Gusset Design

3.7.3 Nail Ring Design

3.7.3.1 Knee Nail Ring Design

3.7.3.2 Ridge Nail Ring Design

3.8 Column to Footing Design

4.1 Wind Loading

4.2 Connection Design

5.1 Wind Loading

5.2 Connection Design

6.1 Wind Loading

6.2 Connection Design

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 3 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

7.2 Connection Design

8.0 Mullion Design, End Wall

8.1 Wind Loading

8.2 Connection Design

10.0 Bibliography

September 2008

Free fax 0800 808 132

Web : www.chhwoodproducts.co.nz/engineerszone

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 4 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

1.0 Introduction

This design example has been provided as an aid to engineers in the development of design solutions for LVL

and I-beam portal frame systems. The development of loading and the design of footings are not covered as

part of this example as their nature is not specific to timber. The design example has been prepared assuming

the building is proposed for Auckland, is within an Industrial Estate, and is subject to the following site

information:

Building length 60.0 m, consisting of 6 x 10.0 m bays

Building Clear Height 6.0 m

Dominant openings 6.0 x 6.0 m in one end and one side wall

Cladding Pierce fixed sheeting of weight 6.0 kg/m2

Region A6, v500 = 45 m/s, v20 = 37 m/s

Terrain Category 3

Directional Multipliers as per AS/NZS 1170.2:2002

This example has been based on relevant current design standards as detailed below:

• AS/NZS 1170.0:2002 Structural design actions. Part 0: General principles

• AS/NZS 1170.1:2002 Structural design actions. Part 1: Permanent, imposed and other actions

• AS/NZS 1170.2:2002 Structural design actions. Part 2: Wind actions

• NZS 3603:1993 Timber structures standard

• AS 1720.1-1997 Timber structures. Part 1:Design Methods

Note: Snow and Earthquake loading have been ignored due to location.

• Technical Note 82-07-04 - Limit States Design Information for Specific Engineering Design for New

Zealand Construction.

• Mitek Specifiers’ and Users’ Manual.

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 5 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Purlin Spacing 1600 mm (max.)

Typically a hyJOIST purlin roof system becomes cost effective at spans above 6.0 m whilst hySPAN or MSG pine

pulins remain cost effective for spans less than 6.0 m.

Assume roof sheeting mass of 6.0 kg/m2 plus a miscellaneous load of 1.0 kg/m2

w*g = + self_weight

1000

∴ w*g = 0.17 kN/m

Serviceability

Deflection of timber i-beams requires the consideration of shear deflection as well as bending deflection.

Additional guidance on the calculation of shear deflection can be found in many Timber Design texts and is briefly

discussed in Technical Note 82. Timber components subjected to long term loads such as dead load require the

consideration of creep effects. Table 2.5, NZS 3603:1993 demonstrates the relationship between duration of load

and creep. The k2 factor is applied to elastic deflections. LVL products are considered dry at the time of supply

and can be assumed to have a moisture content less than 18%.

δT = k2(δbending + δshear )

5.w.l 4 w.l 2 5 × 0.17 × 9910 4 0.17 × 99102

δ = k2 + = 2 .0 . 9

+ 6

384.EI x 8.GAw 384 × 2338 × 10 8 × 2.39 × 10

∴ δG = 20.0mm or Span 495

Serviceability limits for timber purlins are the same as those applied to other building products. For long term

deflection of industrial purlins span/300 or 30.0 mm are deemed acceptable.

Live load of 0.25 kPa applied in accordance AS/NZS 1170.1:2002 Table 3.2.

Serviceability

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 6 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

δQ = 1.0. 9

+ 6

384 × 2338 × 10 8 × 2.39 × 10

∴ δG = 23.5mm or Span 421

Strength

Based on respective k1 and load combination factors, combined dead and live load design actions will always be

more critical for design than permanent loads where low roof masses (less than 20 kg/m2) are applied.

∴ w1*.2G +1.5Q = 0.80kN / m

M 1*.2G +1.5Q = =

8 8

∴ M 1*.2G +1.5Q = 9.8kNm

The bending capacity of an I-beam is based on the critical flange stresses due to bending. For composite timber I-

beams the bending moment capacity can be based on a lever arm action about the centroid of the flanges with

one flange in tension and the other in compression for a single span application. The restraint offered to the

compression flange is instrumental in the capacity of the I-beam. Further guidance on the bending moment

capacities of I-beams may be found in Technical note 82.

Purlin design assumes the use of pierce fixed roof sheeting providing continuous lateral restraint to the

top flange of the purlin. Since compression edge is fully restrained k8=1.0.

Since k8>0.73

where:

AF = 90 × 36 −

(318 − 288) × 12

2

2

∴ AF = 3060mm

D1 = 360 − 36 = 324mm

∴ ØM bx = 23.6kNm > M *

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 7 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

0.80 × 9.9

v1*.2G +1.5Q =

2

∴ v1*.2G +1.5Q = 4.0kN

∴ ØV = 10.1kN > v *

w1* = 0.84 × 1.6 × (1.0 × 1.5 ×− 0.9 − + 0.61)

∴ w1* = −2.63kN / m

w2* = 0.84 × 1.6 × (1.0 × 1.0 ×− 0.9 − + 0.61)

∴ w2* = −2.02kN / m

Calculate weff

Calculate Reactions

∴ R* = − 11.84kN

Calculate Moment

−

* − 2.63 × 3.0 2 −

M = 11.84 × 4.955 −

Wu − 2.02 × 2.0 × 4.0

2

*

∴ M Wu = − 30.7 kNm

0.17 × 9.9 2 −

M 0*.9G +Wu = 0.9 × + 30.67

8

∴ M 0*.9G +Wu = −28.8kNm

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 8 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Calculate weff

−

* 30.67 × 8

weff =

9 .9 2

*

∴ weff = − 2.50kN / m

For uplift

∴ w0*.9G +Wu = − 2.35kN / m

Serviceability

To obtain the serviceability wind load the ultimate uniform loads can be factored by the square of the ratio

serviceability wind speed to ultimate wind speed.

2

v

ws = s × ws

vu

2

37

ws = × − 2.50= − 1.69kN / m

45

5× − 1.69 × 9910 4 − 1.69 × 9910 2

δ w = 1.0. 9

+

384 × 2338 × 10 8 × 2.39 × ×10 6

∴ δ w = 99.0mm or Span 100

The acceptance of serviceability is at the engineer’s discretion. On the basis of applied local pressure factors and

the instantaneous nature of the wind gust span/100 is deemed acceptable.

Strength

Since the tension flange is fully restrained under uplift actions and the hyJOIST purlin is a composite section, use

Appendix C of NZS3603:1993 for stability calculations.

Check Capacity

Calculate S1

0.5

1.1.EI x

S1 = Eq. C1.1, NZS 3603

M E .y

where:

Technical Note 82

ME = ?

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 9 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Eqn. C7 may be employed due to the continuous restraint offered to the tension flange by the pierce fixed sheeting.

A suitably designed lateral restraint system provides intermediate buckling restraint to the purlins.

2

(EI y ) D + yo2 π + GJ

2

4 Lay

ME = Eq. C7, NZS 3603

(2. yo + yh )

where:

9 2

EI y = 57.7 × 10 Nmm GJ = 1848 × 106 Nmm 2

Lay = 9910 / 4 = 2478mm (Restraint at quarter points)

2

3602 π

(

57.7 × 10 9

)

+ 180 2 + 1848 × 10

6

ME = 4 2478

−

2 × 180+ 180 ( )

∴ M E = 43.7 kNm

0.5

1.1. × 2338 × 109

⇒ S1 = 6

43.7 × 10 × 180

∴ S1 = 18.1

Calculate k8

Since 25>S>10

k8 = a1 + a2 .S + a3 .S 2 + a4 .S 3

1

k8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 18.1+ − 0.0116 × 18.12 + × 18.13

5000

∴ k8 = 0.76

Since k8>0.73

where:

2

AF = 3060mm

D1 = 324mm

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 10 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

∴ ØM bx = 29.4kNm > M *

Note: Where k8 < 0.73 the moment capacity becomes a function of the compression flange buckling

rather than the tension flange being critical. The moment capacity equation is altered to represent this

where the characteristic tension stress is replaced by the product of the stability factor k8 and the

characteristic compression stress.

Case 1

w*i = qu .spacing .(ka .kl .c pe − c pi ) + 0.9.wg

w1* = 0.84 × 1.6 × (1.0 × 1.5 ×− 0.9 − + 0.61) + 0.9 × 0.17

∴ w1* = −2.48kN / m

w2* = 0.84 × 1.6 × (1.0 × 1.0 ×− 0.9 − + 0.61) + 0.9 × 0.17

∴ w2* = −1.88kN / m

1 3 .9 2

R0*.9G +Wu = − 1 . 88 × + −2.48 × 6.0 × 6.9

9 .9 2

∴ R0*.9G +Wu = −11.81kN

Case 2

w*i = qu .spacing .(ka .kl .c pe − c pi ) + 0.9.wg

w1* = 0.84 × 1.6 × (1.0 × 2 ×− 0.9 − + 0.61) + 0.9 × 0.17

∴ w1* = −3.09kN / m

w2* = 0.84 × 1.6 × (1.0 × 1.0 ×− 0.9 − + 0.61) + 0.9 × 0.17

∴ w2* = −1.88kN / m

* 1 6 .9 2

R 0.9 G +Wu = − 1.88 × + −3.09 × 3.0 × 8.4

9 .9 2

∴ R0*.9G +Wu = −12.2kN

0 .8 × 9 .9

R* = = 4.0kN

2

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 11 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Timber capacity is dependant on the duration of the load in question, this must be taken into account in the

determination of the critical load case. One method of assessing the critical design load is to remove the duration

of load factor,k1, from the capacity equation and divide the load action effect by k1,

*

RMax − 12.2 4.0

= max ,

k1 1 .0 0 .8

*

Rmax

∴ = −12.2kN

k1

Since k1 was taken into account in the calculation of design action, apply k1=1.0

Table 14, Technical note 82

∴ ØV = 12.6kN > v*

Therefore the HJ360 63 hyJOIST is suitable for use as a purlin based on the implied loading at

a spacing not exceeding 1600 mm

Connection of hyJOIST purlins to LVL rafters needs to ensure that the structural integrity of both the hyJOIST purlin

and the hySPAN rafter are maintained. Connection to the hyJOIST by nailing through the plywood web provides

the most cost effective method of connection for purlins typically subject to high wind loads (please note this type

of connection is not recommended for i-beams subject to high permanent and/or live loads). Nailing through

plywood allows for nailing close to the end/edge of the plywood. Packing out the web and using proprietary joist

hangers can also provide a suitable connection however the cost of the packing, brackets and labour involved can

make this an expensive alternative.

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 12 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Purlin connection blocks, or seating blocks as they are sometimes called, have been used in a number

of design situations for connection of C or I beam purlins where the connection block is either screwed

or nailed to the rafter and the web of the composite purlin is connected directly to the connection

block. A purlin connection block is proposed for connection using Ø2.87 diameter nails through the

plywood web and 14g type 17 screws through the connection block to the rafter. Target the connection

for design shear capacity, ØVps of the purlin.

Note: The selection of a suitable purlin connection block needs to take into account the end and edge distances of

the fasteners as well as the spacing along and across the grain. The use of 4 x-banded connection block reduces

the tendency of the long band to split, allowing for the spacing of fasteners into the face to be similar along the

grain to across the grain. The orientation of the connection block is important where the plywood web is fixed to

the face of the connection block.

Qn = n.k .Q k Eq. 4.2, NZS 3603

where:

k=1.4 since nails are through plywood with flat head nails.

k=1.1 since we are proposing 20 nails per connection Cl. 4.2.2.2(g) NZS 3603

(linear interpolation between 1.3 for 50 nails and 1.0 for 4 nails)

Other ‘k’ modification factors are not relevant as timber is dry, nails are in single shear and are nailed into the

edge or face of the timber.

∴ n = 19.4

Say 20/50xØ2.87 FH nails, nailed through plywood web into purlin connection block

Type 17 screws are preferred for timber connection as they are a self drilling screws through the timber.

Qn = n.k .Qk Eq. 4.6, NZS 3603

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 13 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

where:

Other ‘k’ modification factors are not relevant as timber is dry, screws are in single shear and are screwed into the

edge or face of the timber.

*Ø=0.8 is applied as Type 17 screws are as reliable as nails in service.

∴ n = 4.76

Say 5/100x14g type 17 Hex Head screws, screwed through the purlin connection block into the rafter.

The lateral restraint system needs to prevent the top and bottom flange of the hyJOIST purlin from

moving independently of each other. Many systems are appropriate but may require the fabrication of

special components. One of the most effective systems is to use hyJOIST pieces together with a

hyCHORD bottom flange restraint and continuous mild steel galvanised strap over the top, as shown

below.

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 14 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

* 0.05M A

FA = k33 .k34 .k35 . Eq. B9, NZS 3603

d (nr + 1)

where:

k34 = 0.4

m +1 22 + 1

k35 = min ,5 = min ,5 = 5

2 2

M A = 28.79kNm

d = 360mm

nr = 3

FA = 1.0 × 0.4 × 5 ×

360(3 + 1)

∴ FA = 2.0kN

N c* = N t* = 2.0kN

Typically a 45 mm thick section is recommended to allow for a 75mm long screw through both the lateral restraint

and into the flange of the hyJOIST. Using hyCHORD for the lateral restraint is a good choice given its high strength

and lower cost.

N c* ≤ ØN ncx and

N c* ≤ ØN ncy Eq. 3.17, NZS 3603

∴ ØN ncy = Ø.k1.k8 . f c . A

where:

2

Ø = 0.9 f c = 45MPa A = 90 × 45 = 4050mm

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 15 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

k10 .L Lay

S3 = or whichever is less Eq. 3.15, NZS 3603

b b

1600

S3 =

45

∴ S3 = 35.6

Since 25>S3>10

k8 = a5 .S a6

k8 = 235.5 × 35.6 −1.937

∴ k8 = 0.23

Since k1 = 1.0

N nt = k1.k4 . f t . A Eq. 3.21 NZS 3603

∴ ØN nt = Ø.k1.k4 . f t . A

where:

A = 90 × 45 = 4050mm 2

k1 = 1.0

∴ ØN nt = 120.3kN

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 16 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Qn = n.k .Qk Eq. 4.6, NZS 3603

where:

Other ‘k’ modification factors are not relevant as timber is dry, screws are in single shear and are screwed into the

edge or face of the timber.

*Ø=0.8 is applied as Type 17 screws are as reliable as nails in service.

Consider Qk reduction due to the penetration into the receiving member (Purlin/blocking)

Penetration = 75-45 = 30 mm

4.76

Reduction factor = = 0.68

7

So:

∴ n = 1.11

Say 2/75x14g type 17 Hex Head screws, screwed through the purlin connection block into the rafter.

Purlins in end bays may be subjected to tension and compression forces from braced bays. These

forces need to be considered in the design capacity. Refer to section 9.0, Longitudinal bracing.

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 17 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

The following portal frame has been analysed using elastic structural analysis with Microstran. Elastic

structural analysis of a timber portal frame differs little from that applied to steel members except for

the different section and material properties. For solid timber a five percent allowance for shear

deflection is included in the average modulus of elasticity which removes any need for the separate

consideration of shear deflection.

To achieve portal frame action rigid connections need to be made at both the ridge and eave. One of

the most efficient methods of providing rigid connections is via use of nailed plywood gussets. The

additional stiffness provided by the knee and ridge gussets is generally ignored in analysis.

3.2 Serviceability

Serviceability design limits for timber and steel buildings are very similar where the consideration of

cladding and absolute clearances need to be taken into account in the relative stiffness of the frame.

Short term duration of loading for wind, live and earthquake loads may be calculated by applying a

duration of load factor of 1, hence using the elastic deflection directly from analysis packages. For long

term loads the effects of creep need to be taken into account. NZS 3603 Table 2 defines k2 as 2.0 for

loading of twelve months or more where the moisture content is less than 18%.

Deflection

Load Case k2

Vertical Horizontal

Dead load* 2.0 96.2 mm or span/302 16.2 mm or height/396

Live load 1.0 75.5 mm or span/385 9.6 mm or height/668

Wind loading

Lateral wind1 1.0 134.7 mm or span/216 28.4 mm or height/225

Lateral wind2 1.0 74.5 mm or span/390 15.7 mm or height/408

Longitudinal wind1 1.0 108.5 mm or span/268 13.5 mm or height/475

Longitudinal wind2 1.0 64.6 mm or span/450 8.1 mm or height/792

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 18 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

* It is typical to pre-camber the portal by its un-factored deflection (ie. Approx 50 mm in the case)

3.3 Strength

The selection of design moments is important in the design of timber portal frames. The nature of the

interaction of gussets provide specific locations for the selection of critical design actions for the

design of rafters, columns gussets and nail rings. Hutchings and Bier [2000] provide guidance on the

design moment locations as shown below.

Location B – Column design actions

Location C – Knee gusset design actions

Location D – Gusset to rafter at knee connection actions

Location E – Gusset to column connection actions

Location F – Ridge gusset design actions

Location G – Ridge gusset to rafter design actions

A further check along the rafter is require where the critical design actions may not to be at the

gusseted location and should be taken as the maximum along the rafter.

The consideration of critical design actions also needs to take in account the effect of duration of load factors for

capacity, hence affecting the determination of critical load case. As with steel portal frames the bending moment

diagram should also be taken into account together with the lateral and torsional restraint offered by purlins,

girts and flybraces. The following design actions have been tabled as being of interest, other actions have been

dismissed by inspection. The point of contraflexure is within close proximity for each case meaning that the

critical load case can be determined by inspection.

Column Rafter

M* N* V* M* N* V*

Load Case k1 kN kN kN kN kN kN

1.2G+1.5Q 0.8 -240.0 -84.1 71.5 -268.0 -60.4 50.5

0.9G+Wu - Lat 1.0 271.0 101.0 55.4 293.0 67.3 87.6

1.2G+Wu - Lat 1.0 -276.0 -113.0 62.3 -307.0 -79.2 -95.0

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 19 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Column Rafter

M*/k1 N*/k1 V*/k1 M*/k1 N*/k1 V*/k1

Load Case k1 kN kN kN kN kN kN

1.2G+1.5Q 0.8 -300.0 -105.1 89.4 -335.0 -75.5 63.1

0.9G+Wu - Lat 1.0 271.0 101.0 55.4 293.0 67.3 87.6

1.2G+Wu - Lat 1.0 -276.0 -113.0 62.3 -307.0 -79.2 -95.0

A check of the capacity of main frame members of a timber portal frame involves a check of combined bending and

buckling action, both in plane and out of plane, and a check of combined bending and tension.

Design Criteria

M x* N c*

+ ≤ 1.0 Eq. 3.23 NZS 3603

ØM nx ØN ncx

2

M x N c*

*

+ ≤ 1 .0 Eq. 3.24 NZS 3603

ØM ØN

nx ncy

M n = k1.k 4 .k5 .k8 . f b .Z Eq. 3.4 NZS 3603

For solid sections with member depths greater than 300 mm, apply size factor (k11, AS 1720.1). For

further information refer AS1720.1 (Clause 2.4.6) or Technical Note 82.

where:

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 20 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

0.167

300

k11 =

d

0.167

Cl. 2.4.6 AS1720.1

300

∴ k11 = = 0.83

900

d 2 .b 900 2 × 90

Z= =

6 6

∴ Z = 12.15 × 106 mm3

∴ ØM n = 435.65.k1 .k 8 kNm

Since k1=0.8

ØM n = 348.52.k 8 kNm

Calculate k8

The timber structures standard does not talk about ‘critical flange’ like the steel structures standard however

similar principles apply to the restraint of LVL beams. Guidance is provided for solid sections in Clauses 3.2.5 of

NZS 3603:1993 for end-supported beams with discrete restraint to the compression edge (Cl 3.2.5.2) and tension

edge continuously restrained (Cl 3.2.5.3). Typically these can be useful in the calculation of slenderness of simple

beams and secondary framing however composite sections and members within structural frames require

analysis using Appendix C of NZS3603:1993 for slenderness calculations.

0.5

1.1.EI x

S1 = Eq. C1 NZS 3603

M E.y

900 3 × 90

EI x = 13200 × = 72.17 × 1012 Nmm 4

12

900

y= = 450mm

2

Therefore:

0.5

176.418 × 109

S1 =

ME

Some authors including Milner [1997] have developed theories based on the contribution of lateral restraint

offered to the tension edge by purlins and girts, such theories are beyond the scope of this example.

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 21 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

c

L

[

M E = 5 (EI )y .GJ ]

0.5

Eq. C3 NZS3603

ay

where:

0

β= =0 β = ratio of bending moments between buckling restraints

268

90 3 × 900

EI y = 13200 × = 721.71 × 10 9 Nmm 4

12

Since for rectangular sections:

B D × B3

J = 1 − 0.63 × × Eq. C2 NZS 3603

D 3

90 900 × 90 3

GJ = 660 × 1 − 0.63 × × = 135.25 × 10 9 Nmm 2

900 3

Therefore:

5 .5

ME = [

721.71 × 10 × 135.25 × 10

9 9

]0.5

4900

∴ M E = 350.68kNm

From previous:

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 22 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

0.5

176.418 × 109

S1 = 6

350.68 × 10

∴ S1 = 22.43

Since 25>S1>10

k8 = a1 + a2 .S + a3 .S 2 + a4 .S 3

1

k8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 22.43+ − 0.0116 × 22.432 + × 22.433

5000

∴ k8 = 0.56

ØMn<M* so consider flybrace. The flybrace needs to be located relative to purlin spacing along the

rafter but also needs to offer the appropriate level of stability to the rafter. Propose 3rd purlin from eave.

c

L

[

M E = 5 (EI )y .GJ ]0.5

Eq. C3 NZS 3603

ay

where:

171.1

β= = 0.64 β = ratio of bending moments between buckling restraints

268.0

Therefore:

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 23 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

3.82

ME = [

721.71 × 10 × 135.25 × 10

9 9

]

0.5

1741

∴ M E = 685.51kNm

From previous:

0.5

176.418 × 109

S1 = 6

685.51 × 10

∴ S1 = 16.04

Since 25>S1>10

1

k 8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 16.04+ − 0.0116 × 16.04 2 + × 16.04 3

5000

∴ k 8 = 0.86

Therefore:

5 .5

ME = [

721.71 × 10 × 135.25 × 10

9 9

] 0.5

3160

∴ M E = 543.78kNm

From previous:

0.5

176.418 × 109

S1 = 6

543.78 × 10

∴ S1 = 18.01

Since 25>S1>10

1

k 8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 18.01+ − 0.0116 × 18.012 + × 18.013

5000

∴ k 8 = 0.77

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 24 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Consider region along rafter between point of contraflexure and apex along the rafter.

Since purlins provide restraint to compression edge, Lay = 1600 mm where c5 = 3.1 (moment ratio

between purlins = 0 (conservative)).

3 .1

ME = [

721.71 × 10 × 135.25 × 10

9 9

]0.5

1600

∴ M E = 605.33kNm

From previous:

0.5

176.418 × 109

S1 = 6

605.33 × 10

∴ S1 = 17.07

Since 25>S1>10

1

k 8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 17.07 + − 0.0116 × 17.07 2 + × 17.07 3

5000

∴ k 8 = 0.81

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 25 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

∴ ØN ncx = Ø.k1.k8 . f c . A

where:

2

Ø = 0.9 f c = 45MPa A = 900 × 90 = 81000mm

k10 .L Lax

S2 = or whichever is less NZS 3603 Eq. 3.14

d d

1.0 × 14221

S2 =

900

∴ S 2 = 15.80

Since 25>S2>10

1

k 8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 15.80+ − 0.0116 × 15.80 2 + × 15.80 3

5000

∴ k 8 = 0.87

Since k1 = 0.8

From previous:

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 26 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

k10 .L Lay

S3 = or whichever is less Eq. 3.15 NZS 3603

b b

1600

S3 =

90

∴ S3 = 17.78

Since 25>S3>10

k 8 = a1 + a 2 .S + a 3 .S 2 + a 4 .S 3 Cl C2.10 NZS 3603

1

k 8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 17.78+ − 0.0116 × 17.78 2 + × 17.78 3

5000

∴ k 8 = 0.78

Since k1 = 0.8

Combined actions

268.0 60.4

+ = 0.92 ≤ 1.0 Eq. 3.23 NZS 3603

299.7 2278.1

2

268.0 60.4

+ = 0.83 ≤ 1.0 Eq. 3.24 NZS 3603

299.7 2047.0

Design Criteria

N t* M *

+ ≤ 1 .0 Eq. 3.25 NZS 3603

ØN nt ØM n

M* = -171.8 kNm (along rafter)

N t* = 69.9 kN V* = 87.6 kN

From previous:

ØM n = 435.65.k1.k8 kNm

1

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 27 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

ØM n = 435.65.k8kNm

Calculate k8

Consider compression edge restrained by purlins at 1600 c/c until point of contraflexure.

c

L

[

M E = 5 (EI )y .GJ ]

0.5

Eq. C3 NZS 3603

ay

where:

176.2

β= = 0.60 β = ratio of bending moments between buckling restraints (purlins)

293.2

GJ = 135.25 × 109 Nmm 2

Therefore:

3.90

ME = [ 9

721.71 × 10 × 135.25 × 10

9

]

0.5

1600

∴ M E = 761.54kNm

From previous:

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 28 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

0.5

176.418 × 10 9

S1 = 6

761.54 × 10

∴ S1 = 15.22

Since 25>S1>10

1

k 8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 15.22+ − 0.0116 × 15.22 2 + × 15.22 3

5000

∴ k 8 = 0.90

Check remaining sections between points of contraflexure (ie. Negative moment along the rafter)

Consider region along rafter between point of contraflexure and apex along the rafter.

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 29 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Three buckling zones exist for wind uplift, each restrained at strategic purlin locations by flybraces.

Consideration of bending moment diagram and restraint locations display.

Region 2 c5 ~ 3.1, Lay = 2x1600 = 3200 mm

Region 3 c5 = 3.1, Lay = 2x(1050+229) = 2558 mm

c5

Since: M E = function

L

ay

3 .1

⇒ ME = [

721.71 × 10 × 135.25 × 10

9 9

]0.5

3200

∴ M E = 302.66kNm

From previous:

0.5

176.418 × 109

S1 = 6

302.66 × 10

∴ S1 = 24.14

Since 25>S1>10

1

k 8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 24.14+ − 0.0116 × 24.14 2 + × 24.14 3

5000

∴ k 8 = 0.49

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 30 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

N nt = k1.k4 . f t . A Eq. 3.21 NZS 3603

For solid sections with member depths greater than 150 mm, apply k11 size factor for tension. For

further information refer AS1720.1 (Clause 2.4.6) or Technical Note 82.

where:

A = 900 × 90 = 81000mm

k1 = 1.0

0.167

150

k11 =

d

0.167

Cl. 2.4.6 AS1720.1

150

∴ k11 = = 0.74

900

∴ ØN nt = 1780.2kN

Combined actions

69.9 171.8

+ = 0.84 ≤ 1.0 q. 3.25 NZS 3603

1780.2 213.5

Vn = k1.k4 .k5 . f s . AS Eq. 3.4 NZS 3603

where:

Ø = 0 .9 k1 = 1.0

Technical Note 82

k 4 = k 5 = 1 .0 f s = 5.3MPa

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 31 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

AS = 2.b.d / 3

2 × 900 × 90 Cl 3.2.3.1 NZS 3603

∴ AS = = 54000mm 2

3

∴ φVS = 257.6kN > V *

* 0.05M A

FA = k33 .k34 .k35 . Eq. B9, NZS 3603

d (nr + 1)

where:

k34 = 0.4

m +1 1+1

k 35 = min ,5 = min ,5 = 1

2 2

M A = −171.1kNm

d = 900mm

nr = 1

0.05 × 171.1 × 10 6

F A = 1 .0 × 0 .4 × 1 ×

900(1 + 1)

∴ FA = 1.9kN

Note: FA is the horizontal force and is shared between two components, one in tension and one in

compression.

N c* = N t* = 1.90kN

1.90

N c* = N t* = = 2.7 kN

Cos (45)

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 32 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Typically a 45 mm thick section is recommended to allow for a 75mm long screw through both the flybrace and into

the flange of the hyJOIST. Using hyCHORD for the lateral restraint is a good choice given its high strength and

lower cost.

N c* ≤ ØN ncx and

N c* ≤ ØN ncy Eq. 3.17 NZS 3603

∴ ØN ncy = Ø.k1.k8 . f c . A

where:

2

Ø = 0.9 f c = 45MPa A = 90 × 45 = 4050mm

k10 .L Lay

S3 = or whichever is less Eq. 3.15 NZS 3603

b b

764

S3 =

45

∴ S 3 = 16.98

Since 25>S1>10

1

k 8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 16.98+ − 0.0116 × 16.98 2 + × 16.98 3

5000

∴ k 8 = 0.82

Since k1 = 1.0

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 33 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

N nt = k1.k4 . f t . A Eq. 3.21 NZS 3603

∴ ØN nt = Ø.k1.k4 . f t . A

where:

A = 90 × 45 = 4050mm

k1 = 1.0

∴ ØN nt = 120.3kN

Qn = n.k .Qk Eq. 4.6, NZS 3603

where:

Other ‘k’ modification factors are not relevant as timber is dry, screws are in single shear and are screwed into the

edge or face of the timber.

*Ø=0.8 is applied as Type 17 screws are as reliable as nails in service.

Consider Qk reduction due to the penetration into the receiving member (Purlin/blocking)

Penetration = 75-45 = 30 mm

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 34 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

4.76

Reduction factor = = 0.68

7

So:

∴ ØQn = 4.0kN

Qn = n.k . p.Qk Eq. 4.9, NZS 3603

where:

Other ‘k’ modification factors are not relevant as timber is dry, screws are in single shear and are screwed into the

edge or face of the timber.

*Ø=0.8 is applied as Type 17 screws are as reliable as nails in service.

∴ ØQn = 4.45kN

Say 2/75x14g type 17 Hex Head screws, screwed through pre-drilled holes in flybrace into rafter and

purlin.

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 35 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Design Criteria

M x* N c*

+ ≤ 1.0 Eq. 3.23 NZS 3603

ØM nx ØN ncx

2

M x* N c*

+ ≤ 1 .0 Eq. 3.24 NZS 3603

ØM nx ØN ncy

From previous:

ØM n = 435.65.k1.k8 kNm

Since k1=0.8

ØM n = 348.52.k8kNm

Calculate k8

0.5

176.418 × 109

S1 =

ME

Girts provide tension edge restraint to the outside of the outside of the frame. By inspection from the

rafter analysis one flybrace is proposed at the middle girt, 3490 mm from the ground.

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 36 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

c

L

[

M E = 5 (EI )y .GJ ]

0.5

Eq. C3 NZS 3603

ay

where:

Region 1

− 179.3

β= = 0.59 β = ratio of bending moments between buckling restraints

− 303.0

Lay = 2530mm

Region 2

0

β= =0 β = ratio of bending moments between buckling restraints

− 179.3

Lay = 3470mm

EI y = 721.71 × 109 Nmm 4

GJ = 135.25 × 109 Nmm 2

3.92

ME = [ 9

721.71 × 10 × 135.25 × 10

9

]

0.5

2530

∴ M E = 484.08kNm

From previous:

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 37 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

0.5

176.418 × 10 9

S1 = 6

484.08 × 10

∴ S1 = 19.09

Since 25>S1>10

1

k 8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 19.09+ − 0.0116 × 19.09 2 + × 19.09 3

5000

∴ k 8 = 0.71

From previous:

k10 .L Lax

S2 = or whichever is less Eq. 3.14 NZS 3603

d d

1.0 × 6000

S2 =

900

∴ S 2 = 6.67

From previous:

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 38 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

k10 .L Lay

S3 = or whichever is less Eq. 3.15 NZS 3603

b b

1660

S3 =

90

∴ S3 = 18.44

Since 25>S3>10

1

k 8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 18.44+ − 0.0116 × 18.44 2 + × 18.44 3

5000

∴ k 8 = 0.75

Since k1 = 0.8

Combined actions

240.0 84.1

+ = 1 .0 ≤ 1 .0 Eq. 3.23 NZS 3603

247.5 2624.4

2

240.0 84.1

+ = 0.98 ≤ 1.0 Eq. 3.24 NZS 3603

247.5 1968.3

Design Criteria

N t* M *

+ ≤ 1 .0 Eq. 3.25 NZS 3603

ØN ØM

nt n

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 39 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

ØM n = 435.65.k8kNm

Calculate k8

c

L

[

M E = 5 (EI )y .GJ ]

0.5

NZS3603 Eq. C3

ay

where:

177.7

β= = 0.66 β = ratio of bending moments between buckling restraints (grits)

271.0

GJ = 135.25 × 109 Nmm 2

Therefore:

3.78

ME = [

721.71 × 10 × 135.25 × 10

9 9

]0.5

1660

∴ M E = 711.43kNm

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 40 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

From previous:

0.5

176.418 × 109

S1 = 6

711.43 × 10

∴ S1 = 15.75

Since 25>S1>10

1

k 8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 15.75+ − 0.0116 × 15.75 2 + × 15.75 3

5000

∴ k 8 = 0.87

∴ ØN nt = 1780.2kN

Combined actions

101.0 271.0

+ = 0.77 ≤ 1.0

1780.2 379.0

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 41 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

The knee and ridge connections of an LVL portal frame can be completed by using a plywood gusset.

Plywood gussets allow an ease of fabrication and can be readily fixed using machine driven nails.

Plywood or minimum 4 x-band gussets are recommended for use in heavily nailed rigid connections

because the x-band plies help reduce the tendency of the long band plies to split. This allows the nail

spacing to be governed by the grain direction of the rafter or column which ever the gusset is being

fastened to.

Plywood is available in Stress Grade F11 from Carter Holt Harvey in thicknesses up to and including 25

mm. For thicknesses over 25 mm required for large span portal frames CHH have developed 4 x-band

hySPAN sheets (2400x1200) in a 42mm thickness allowing 28 mm (8 plies) of parallel plies.

Design actions can be factored by the duration of load factor k1 for comparison in the determination of

the critical design action.

Knee Ridge

M* N* V* M* N* V*

Load Case K1 kNm kN kN kNm kN kN

1.35G 0.6 -123.0 -31.6 19.2 69.7 -19.0 2.5

1.2G+1.5Q 0.8 -324.0 -83.1 50.5 183.6 -50.1 6.6

0.9G+Wu – Lat 1.0 362.0 102.2 -54.3 -156.9 71.1 -5.0

1.2G+Wu –Lat 1.0 -382.0 -111.7 -65.2 171.2 -75.5 14.5

0.9G+Wu – Long 1.0 239.1 64.6 55.1 -117.0 65.9 25.3

1.2G+Wu –Long 1.0 -295.4 -60.3 -69.7 161.0 -56.6 7.5

Knee Ridge

M*/k1 N*/k1 V*/k1 M*/k1 N*/k1 V*/k1

Load Case K1 kNm kN kN kNm kN kN

1.35G 0.6 -205.0 -52.6 32.0 116.2 -31.7 4.2

1.2G+1.5Q 0.8 -405.0 -103.9 63.1 229.5 -62.6 8.3

0.9G+Wu – Lat 1.0 362.0 102.2 -54.3 -156.9 71.1 -5.0

1.2G+Wu –Lat 1.0 -382.0 -111.7 -65.2 171.2 -75.5 14.5

0.9G+Wu – Long 1.0 239.1 64.6 55.1 -117.0 65.9 25.3

1.2G+Wu –Long 1.0 -295.4 -60.3 -69.7 161.0 -56.6 7.5

The capacity of a plywood gusset is based on the critical depth at which the gusset bends, which is a

horizontal line across the centroid of the rafter and column intersection as shown below.

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 42 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

and column depth are equal, the critical

section for the knee connection may be

calculated by:

L−D

Depthcs = D +

D

1 + 1 − tan θ

2L

Design Criteria

2

N c* M i* Vi*

+ + ≤ 1.0 Eq. 6.17 NZS 3603

ØN nc ØM ni ØVni

2

N t* M i* Vi*

+ + ≤ 1.0 Eq. 6.18 NZS 3603

ØN nt ØM ni ØVni

It is typical that the design shear and tension action effects have little influence on the size of a gusset and can in

many cases be omitted from calculation such is their effect on sizing. Compression loads are generally past

through in bearing and not required for consideration in gusset design.

Load case - 0.9G+Wu (Lateral wind) - (Combined bending, tension and shear)

Many authors have proposed methods of calculating the capacity of plywood gussets. Batchelor [1984] proposes

a bilinear stress distribution along the critical section while Hutchings [1987] methodology assumes a

triangulated stress distribution across the critical section and recommends the application of a size factor.

Hutchings [1987] methodology is applied in this example. This methodology is suitable for application to both

opening and closing moments of portal frames, and has been used on many portal frame structures. Milner and

Crosier [2000] propose a similar calculation based on a triangulated stress distribution but propose an alternate

critical section and omit the use of the size factor.

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 43 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

2

t e .d

M ni = k1 .k 8 .k14 .k15 . f pb . Eq. 6.10 NZS 3603

6

Now include size factor - for further information on size factor, k11 refer AS1720.1 (Clause 2.4.6) or Technical Note

82.

te .d 2

Therefore ØM ni = Ø.k1.k8 .k11.k14 .k15 . f pb .

6

t .d 2

ØM ni = 2.Ø.k1.k8 .k11.k14 .k15 . f pb . e

6

Ø = 0 .9

k1 = ?

k8 = 1.0 (localised, gusset edges are restrained by gusset stiffeners)

k14 = 1.0 (moisture content < 18%)

k15 = 1.0 (only parallel plies are being considered)

0.167

300

k11 = Cl. 2.4.6 AS1720.1

d

f b = 48MPa

t e = (42 − (4 × 3.5)) = 28mm

28 × d 2

ØM ni = 2.0.9 × k1 × 1.0 × 1.0 × 1.0 × k11 × 48 ×

6

ØM n = 403.2 × k1 .k11 .d 2 kNm

1200 − 900

d = 900 +

900

1 + 1 − tan (7.5)

2 × 1200

∴ d = 1177.2mm

0.167

300

k11 =

1177.2

∴ k11 = 0.80

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 44 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

∴ ØM ni = 447.0 × k1 .kNm

2

Vni = .k1.k8 .k14 .k15 .k18 . f ps .t.d Eq. 6.16 NZS 3603

3

where:

k1 = ?

k14 = 1.0 (moisture content < 15 %)

k15 = 1.0 (face grain = 0˚)

2

Vni = 2 0.9 × × k1 × 1.0 × 1.0 × 1.0 × 1.0 × 5.3 × 42 × d

3

∴Vni = 267.12 × k1 .d .kN

Since d = 1177.2mm

where:

k1 = ?

k14 = 1.0 (moisture content < 15 %)

k15 = 1.0 (face grain = 0˚)

∴ ØN nt = 1663.2.k1 .d .kN

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 45 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

∴ ØN nt = 1496.9 × k1 .kN

where:

k1 = ?

k14 = 1.0 (moisture content < 15 %)

k 8 = 1.0 (localised, gusset edges are restrained by gusset stiffeners)

k15 = 1.0 (face grain = 0˚)

t e = 28mm (parallel plies only)

∴ ØN nc = 2268.0 × k1 .d .kN

∴ ØN nc = 2041.2 × k1 .kN

Combined bending, compression and shear from Eq. 6.17, NZS 3603:1993

2

83.1 324.0 50.5

+ + = 1.07 ≥ 1.0

0.8 × 2041.2 0.8 × 447.0 0.8 × 314.5

It is typical to consider the maximum implied forces on the structure, rather than the applied forces at the specific

design location. However if the design criteria is not met then consideration of the implied design actions at the

design location may be required. Therefore consider moment and shear forces at critical stress line for analysis.

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 46 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

2

83.1 303.0 50.5

+ + = 0.97 ≤ 1.0

0.8 × 2041.2 0.8 × 447.0 0.8 × 314.5

Combined bending, compression and shear from Eq. 6.18, NZS 3603:1993

2

102.2 362.00 54.3

+ + = 0.90 ≤ 1.0

1.0 × 1496.9 1.0 × 447.0 1.0 × 314.5

The design of the ridge gusset is similar to the knee gusset where the design capacity is based on the

moment resistance offered by the ridge gusset section. Typically a mitre type joint is considered.

Hutchings [1989] proposes a 0.9 factor be applied to the critical section as defined below.

Savings in design and fabrication can be made by keeping the distance ‘L’ constant across the ridge and the knee

gussets. Whilst the ridge gusset may be ‘thinner’ often for consistency of purlin lengths and minimum gusset

order quantities it may be preferable to maintain similar gusset thicknesses.

D

Dgusset = + L. tan θ

Cosθ

Depthcs = 0.9.Dgusset

Design Criteria

2

N c* M i* Vi*

+ + ≤ 1.0 Eq. 6.17 NZS 3603

ØN nc ØM ni ØV

ni

2

N t* M i* Vi*

+ + ≤ 1.0 Eq. 6.18 NZS 3603

ØN nt ØM ni ØVni

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 47 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

900

D gusset = + 1200 × tan(7.5)

Cos (7.5)

∴ D gusset = 1065.7 mm

d = 0.9 × D gusset = 959.2mm

0.167

300

k11 =

959.2

∴ k11 = 0.82

∴ ØM ni = 305.5 × k1 .kNm > M *

From previous:

∴Vni = 256.2 × k1 .kN

From previous:

∴ ØN nt = 1663.2.k1 .d .kN

∴ ØN nt = 1496.9 × k1 .kN

From previous:

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 48 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

∴ ØN nc = 2268.0 × k1 .d .kN

∴ ØN nc = 2041.2 × k1 .kN

Combined bending, compression and shear from Eq. 6.17, NZS 3603:1993

2

50.1 183.6 6 .6

+ + = 0.63 ≤ 1.0

0.8 × 2041.2 0.8 × 305.5 0.8 × 256.2

Combined bending, compression and shear from Eq. 6.18, NZS 3603:1993

2

71.1 156.9 5 .0

+ + = 0.57 ≤ 1.0

1.0 × 2041.2 1.0 × 305.5 1.0 × 256.2

The design of the nail ring is important because more than half of the nailing needs to be performed on

site. It is also important to consider end and edge distances together with allowable nail spacings

(both along and across the grain) for the chosen fasteners. Selection of the nail diameter is also critical

as it will affect the available spacing and hence number of nails within the group as well as the

required penetration into the column/rafter. A staggered nail pattern provides an increased moment

capacity by maximising the lever arm action about the nail group centroid.

The design of nail groups associated with rigid moment connections are often subjected to combined

actions including bending, axial and shear forces. Whilst the bending and axial forces contributions

are minor they need to be taken into account. It is normally most efficient to calculate the proportion of

force remaining in the nails after the contribution to the design moment affect is taken out.

The complexity of calculations for the nail ring mean hand calculations can be time consuming and

conservative. For this reason computer packages are often employed to develop design solutions. The

following design data have been taken from design capacity tables relating to the corresponding roof

pitch and member size.

The design methodology, including k factors, from AS1720.1 has been applied to create nail ring

capacities for a number of section sizes and gusset widths. These tables can be found in Engineering

Bulletin No.2, Rigid Moment Connections using CHH veneer based products. AS1720.1 was used due to

its close relationship between the lateral capacities of nails in testing with CHH’s range of LVL and the

published values for joint group JD4. It should be noted that many of the ‘k’ factors used in calculation

of connection capacities differ between the standards and it is recommended that for connections

these not be mixed and matched.

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 49 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

The critical design actions need only be considered in the nail ring design as the effects of stress reversal do not

affect the nature of the nail design.

#

As per Table 2.7, AS1720.1

The methodology proposed for the calculation of nail group capacity for combined bending, axial and

shear force involves the following steps:

1. Calculate moment capacity of nail rings in accordance with AS1720.1. AS1720.1 provides a

capacity calculation for transfer of in plane moments through nailed moment ring such that:

i =n 3

r 2

φM j = φ .k1 .k13 .k14 .k16 .k17 .rmax .Qk .∑ i AS1720.1 Eq. 4.2(4)

i =1 rmax

where:

n = number of fasteners

Qk= characteristic strength of fastener

ri= distance to the ith fastener from the centroid of the fastener group

rmax= the maximum value of ri

Ø = capacity factor (0.8 - nails used with primary elements in structures other than houses)

k1 = duration of load factor (Clause 2.4.11, AS1720.1)

k13 = 1.0 (nails in side grain)

k14 = 1.0 (nails in single shear)

k16 = 1.1 (nails driven through plywood gussets)

k17 = multiple nail factor for resisting in plane moments (AS1720.1 Table 4.3(B))

Qk = 810 N (Ø3.15 nail, JD4 strength group, AS1720.1 Table 4.1 (B))

Since nail rings will be applied through gusset pairs the total moment resistance offered by nail

rings connecting gusset pairs is:

i=n 3

r

φM = 2.φ .k1 .k13 .k14 .k16 .k17 .rmax .Qk .∑ i

2

i =1 rmax

2. Calculate remaining portion of nail capacity after bending actions have been considered.

3.

a. φQn = φ .k1 .k13 .k14 .k16 .k17 .Qk

M*

b. φN axial / shear = 1 − × φQn × n

φM

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 50 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

4. Calculate vectorial sum of the combined axial and shear forces for comparison with remaining

capacity. These forces are assumed to be evenly distributed over the nail group.

* (N ) + (v ) , (N ) + (v )

* 2 * 2 * 2 * 2

N axial / shear = max c t

Engineering Bulletin 2 – Rigid Moment Connection Details can be used for selection of the moment ring

capacity for the nail ring to suit the 7.5˚ roof pitch and 1200 mm wide gusset as drawn above.

From Table 50, Engineering Bulletin 2 for nine (9) nail rings

φM = 0.77 × 454.14

∴ φM = 349.7 kNm

and φQn = 0.855kN

Calculate remaining nail group capacity after resistance to moment has been calculated.

M*

φN axial / shear = 1 − × φQn × n

φM

324.0

φN axial / shear = 1 − × 0.855 × (684 × 2 )

349.7

∴ φN axial / shear = 86.0kN

Calculate vectorial sum of axial and shear force, divided by k1 for direct comparison

* (N ) + (v ) , (N ) + (v )

* 2 * 2 * 2 * 2

N axial / shear = max c t

83.1 2 50.5 2 102.2 2 54.3 2

*

0.77 0.77

N axial / shear = max + , +

1 .0 1 .0

*

N axial

*

∴ N axial / shear = 126.3kN

*

Since N axial / shear > φN either add an additional nail ring or adjust nail size. Try using a Ø3.33 nail.

Using Table 3 from Engineering Bulletin 2 the capacity of the nail rings can be factored proportionally to

the Characteristic Capacity of the nail laterally loaded in single shear.

898

Ø3.33/Ø3.15 factor = = 1.11

810

Therefore:

φM = 0.77 × 454.14 × 1.11

∴ φM = 388.15kNm ≥ M *

φQn = 0.855 × 1.11

and

∴ φQn = 0.949kN

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 51 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Calculate remaining nail group capacity after resistance to moment has been calculated.

M*

φN axial / shear = 1 − × φQn × n

φM

324.0

φN axial / shear = 1 − × 0.949 × (684 × 2 )

388.15

∴ φN axial / shear = 214.6kN > N *

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 52 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Engineering Bulletin 2 – Rigid Moment Connection Details can be used for selection of the moment ring

capacity for the nail ring to suit the 7.5˚ roof pitch and 1200 mm wide gusset as drawn above.

From Table 50, Engineering Bulletin 2 apply four (4) nail rings. Since we are using Ø3.33 nails in the

knee connection, apply same nail size in the ridge, therefore apply 1.11 factor from previous to apply

nail ring capacities from Table ##.

∴ φM = 227.3kNm ≥ M *

and φQn = 0.949kN From previous

Calculate remaining nail group capacity after resistance to moment has been calculated.

M*

φN axial / shear = 1 − × φQn × n

φM

183.6

φN axial / shear = 1 − × 0.949 × (344 × 2 )

227.3

∴ φN axial / shear = 125.52kN

Calculate vectorial sum of axial and shear force, divided by k1 for direct comparison

* (N ) + (v ) , (N ) + (v )

* 2 * 2 * 2 * 2

N axial / shear = max c t

50.1 2 6.6 2 71.1 2 5.0 2

*

0.77 0.77

N axial = max + , +

/ shear

1 .0 1 .0

/ shear = max (65.6,71.1)

*

N axial

*

∴ N axial / shear = 65.6 kN < φN

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 53 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Connection of portal frame columns to footings can be achieved by base brackets that are suitably sized and fixed

directly to the LVL columns. A similar design philosophy is applied to the design and specification of hold down

anchors and base plates as would normally be applied to steel where the buckling of the plate under tension

needs to be considered.

The connection of the base brackets to the column could be achieved using nails, screws or bolts. Nails are

typically not recommended of base plates in larger structures because of the number of nails required combined

with the fact they would need to be hand driven through holes in plates. Bolts can be used and are good to aid in

the transfer of bracing loads across the column. Screws are ideal for most base bracket connections due to their

ease of application. It is important that screw patterns are staggered for both sides of the column so that splitting

of the LVL does not occur.

Again reactions are factored to take into consideration duration of load factors.

PF1

Rx Ry (Rx2+Ry2)0.5 Angle

Load Case k1 kN kN kN

1.35G 0.6 19.19 35.82 40.6 61.8

1.2G+1.5Q 0.8 50.53 86.87 100.5 59.8

0.9G+Wu (Lateral) 1.0 -58.60 -99.28 115.3 59.4

1.2G+Wu (Lateral) 1.0 -53.96 115.53 127.5 65.0

0.9G+Wu (Long) 1.0 -24.61 -78.67 82.4 72.6

1.2G+Wu (Long) 1.0 52.50 102.30 115.0 62.8

k1 adjusted values

PF1

Rx Ry (Rx2+Ry2)0.5 Angle

Load Case k1 kN kN kN

1.35G 0.6 31.98 59.70 67.7 61.8

1.2G+1.5Q 0.8 63.16 108.59 125.6 59.8

0.9G+Wu (Lateral) 1.0 -58.60 -99.28 115.3 59.4

1.2G+Wu (Lateral) 1.0 -53.96 115.53 127.5 65.0

0.9G+Wu (Long) 1.0 -24.61 -78.67 82.4 72.6

1.2G+Wu (Long) 1.0 52.50 102.30 115.0 62.8

It is typical in Timber structures to provide a moisture barrier at the base of the columns to eliminate the column

from getting wet and staying wet during the construction period. This can be typically achieved by using H3.2

treated Plywood and melthoid at both the LVL column end and ground as detailed in the structural drawings.

Downwards loads may be considered to be taken out in bearing so for the design of connections only uplift loads

need be considered.

Qn = n.k .Qk Eq. 4.6, NZS 3603

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 54 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

where:

Other ‘k’ modification factors are not relevant as timber is dry, screws are in single shear and are screwed through

close fitting steel plates into the edge or face of the timber.

*Ø=0.8 is applied as Type 17 screws are as reliable as nails in service.

Since critical design reaction is 115.3 kN, calculate minimum number of 14g screws.

∴ n = 34.9

Say 48/14gx50 type 17 Hex Head screws, screwed through base plate sides into column.

Proposed Connection

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 55 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Girt Spacing 1660 mm

The capacity of solid timber girts is also dependant on the nature of lateral tortional buckling restraint and the

critical edge to which the loading and restraint is provided. It is therefore important to consider both positive and

negative wind pressures.

Case 2 cp,e= -0.3, cp,i= +0.61

w1* = 0.84 × 1.66 × (1.25 ×+ 0.7 − − 0.56)

∴ w1* = +1.93kN / m

w2* = 0.76 ×1.66 × (1.5 ×− 0.65 − + 0.54)

∴ w2* = −1.84kN / m

Serviceability

2

37

ws = × + 1.93= + 1.30kN / m

45

5.w.l 4

δ w = k 2 .

384.EI x

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 56 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

5× + 1.30 × 4923 4

δ w = 1.0. 9

384 × 283 × 10

∴ δ w = 35.3mm or Span 140

Strength

M* = =

8 8

*

∴ M = 5.79kNm

V* = =

2 2

* *

∴ N = V = 4.73kN

M n = k1.k 4 .k5 .k8 . f b .Z Eq. 3.4 NZS 3603

where:

Ø = 0 .9 k1 = 1.0

Technical Note 82

k 4 = k 5 = 1 .0 f b = 48MPa

∴ ØM n = 11.7.k8kNm

Continuous restraint to compression edge via pierce fixed sheeting, therefore k8=1.0

Vn = k1.k4 .k5 . f s . AS Eq. 3.4 NZS 3603

where:

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 57 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Ø = 0 .9 k1 = 1.0

Technical Note 82

k 4 = k 5 = 1 .0 f s = 5.3MPa

AS = 2.b.d / 3

2 × 190 × 45 Cl 3.2.3.1 NZS 3603

∴ AS = = 5700mm 2

3

∴VS = 27.2kN > V *

−

w.l 2

* 1.84 × 4.9 2

M = =

8 8

*

∴ M = −5.5kNm

From previous:

ØM n = 11.7.k8 kNm

Calculate k8

Continuous lateral restraint is provided to the tension edge via pierce fixed sheeting.

Calculate S1

d

S1 = 3. Eq. 3.6 NZS 3603

b

190

S! = 3 × = 12.67

45

Since 25>S1>10

k8 = a1 + a2 .S + a3 .S 2 + a4 .S 3

1

k8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 12.67 + − 0.0116 × 12.67 2 + × 12.673

5000

∴ k8 = 0.97

∴ ØM = 11.7 × 0.97

ØM = 11.3kNm > M *

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 58 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Connection of hyCHORD girts is easiest performed using proprietary brackets and screws or nails. The proposed

bracket is manufactured by Mitek. It is important to ensure that the depth of proprietary brackets is at least 60%

of the depth for beams up to 50 mm thick. Propose JH47x190 to suit 190x45 hyCHORD. It is typical to apply a

practical minimum number of nails for bracket and beam stability, for members around 190 mm deep we

recommend a minimum of 10/Ø3.15x35 FH nails ie. 5/Ø3.15 nails per tab.

Check Capacity

Qn = n.k .Qk Eq. 4.2, NZS 3603

where:

NZS 3603

n = 10

k=1.25 since nails are through steel side plates < 3.0 mm thickness.

Other ‘k’ modifaction factors are not relevant as timber is dry, nails are in single shear and are nailed into the

edge or face of the timber.

∴ Qn = 6.3kN > N *

The 190x45 hyCHORD girt to span 4.9 m at maximum 1660 mm spacing is adequate to support the

design load.

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 59 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

The mullion is best calculated as a vertical member supporting a series of point loads that share a common spacing, which

is typical of mullions. Standard beam formulae have been adapted to best provide accurate but easy to calculate

equations. Refer Appendix 1 for beam equations, where n is the number of girts.

Mullion Span 6.4 m

Girts provide lateral restraint to the compression edge for positive pressures and to the tension edge for negative

wind pressures. Girt reactions have been recalculated excluding the local pressure factors as the mullion does not

directly support the cladding.

Serviceability

2

37

Ps = × + 8.61= + 5.82kN

45

n=4

Appendix 1

P.L3 1 4

δw = k 2 . .n.3 − 1 + 2

192.EI 2 n

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 60 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

5820 × 6400 3 1 4

δ w = 1 .0 x 6

× 4 × 3 − 1 + 2

192 × 13200 × 142 x10 2 4

∴ δ w = 30.3mm or Span 211

Strength

+

* P.l 8.61 × 6.4

M = n. = 4×

8 8

*

∴ M = 27.55kNm

−

P.l 7.35 × 6.4

M * = n. = 4×

8 8

* −

∴ M = 23.5kNm

+

P 8.61

V * = (n − 1).

= 4×

2 2

* * +

∴ N = V = 17.2kN

Positive Pressure.

Calculate k8

0.5

L 2

0.5

ay . d

S1 = 1.35 − 1 Eq. 3.5 NZS 3603

b b

0.5

1660 300 2 0.5

S1 = 1.35 − 1

63 63

∴ S1 = 14.95

Since 25>S1>10

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 61 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

k8 = a1 + a2 .S + a3.S 2 + a4 .S 3

1

k8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 14.95+ − 0.0116 × 14.952 + × 14.953

5000

∴ k8 = 0.90

M n = k1.k 4 .k5 .k8 . f b .Z Eq. 3.4 NZS 3603

where:

Ø = 0 .9 k 1 = 1 .0

Technical Note 82

k 4 = k 5 = 1 .0 f b = 48MPa

∴ ØM n = 40.82.k8kNm

Since k8=0.90

ØM = 36.74kNm > M *

Negative Pressure.

Calculate k8

Consider Stability equation for Discrete Restraint to Tension Edge from AS 1720.1.

0.5

Lay

1.35

d

S1 = Eq. 3.2(5) AS 1720.1-2008

b d

1.35 0.5

300 1660

S1 =

63 300

∴ S1 = 19.34

Since 25>S1>10

k 8 = a1 + a 2 .S + a3 .S 2 + a 4 .S 3

1

k 8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 19.34+ − 0.0116 × 19.34 2 + × 19.34 3

5000

∴ k 8 = 0.70

M n = k1.k 4 .k5 .k8 . f b .Z Eq. 3.4 NZS 3603

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 62 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

where:

Ø = 0 .9 k 1 = 1 .0

Technical Note 82

k 4 = k 5 = 1 .0 f b = 48MPa

∴ ØM n = 40.82.k8kNm

Since k8=0.70

ØM = 28.6kNm > M *

Vn = k1.k4 .k5 . f s . AS Eq. 3.4 NZS 3603

where:

Ø = 0 .9 k1 = 1.0

Technical Note 82

k 4 = k 5 = 1 .0 f s = 5.3MPa

AS = 2.b.d / 3

2 × 300 × 63 Cl 3.2.3.1 NZS 3603

∴ AS = = 12600mm 2

3

∴VS = 60.1kN > V *

Two different connections are required for the mullion. Connection to the ground is proposed using

Mitek CF2x brackets whilst the connection to the eaves beam can be performed using two Mitek N21

Diagonal Cleats. The design capacities expressed in the Mitek literature are based on fully nailing out

the holes. We can calculate a reduced number of fasteners for ease of installation whilst maintaining

the structural integrity. It is recommended that the reduced number of fasteners are evenly distributed

across the tab/bracket area.

Qn = n.k .Qk Eq. 4.2, NZS 3603

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 63 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

where:

NZS 3603

n=?

k=1.25 since nails are through steel side plates < 3.0 mm thickness.

Other ‘k’ modification factors are not relevant as timber is dry, nails are in single shear and are nailed into the

edge or face of the timber.

ØQn = n × 0.631kN

17.22

∴n = = 27.25

0.631

Load in shear only.

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 64 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 65 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Mullion location Mid-span (critical)

Positive pressure

Negative pressure

Serviceability

2

37

Ps* = ×+ 17.22= + 11.64kN

45

2

37

w = ×+ 0.97 = + 0.66kN / m

*

s

45

5×+ 0.66 × 98284 +11640 × 98283

δw = 1.0. 9

+

384 × 4435 × 10 48 × 4435 ×109

∴ δw = 70.0mm or Span 140

Strength

M* = + = +

8 4 8 4

*

∴ M = 53.8kNm

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 66 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

V* = + = +

2 2 2 2

* *

∴ N = V = 13.4kN

M n = k1.k 4 .k5 .k8 . f b .Z Eq. 3.4 NZS 3603

For solid sections with member depths greater than 300 mm, apply k11 size factor. For further

information refer AS1720.1 (Clause 2.4.6) or Technical Note 82.

where:

Ø = 0 .9 k 1 = 1 .0

Technical Note 82

k 4 = k 5 = 1 .0 f b = 48MPa

0.167

300

k11 =

d

0.167

Cl. 2.4.6 AS1720.1

300

∴ k11 = = 0.95

400

∴ ØM n = 68.9.k 8 kNm

Continuous restraint to compression edge via pierce fixed sheeting, therefore k8=1.0

ØM = 68.94kNm > M *

Vn = k1.k4 .k5 . f s . AS Eq. 3.4 NZS 3603

where:

Ø = 0 .9 k1 = 1.0

Technical Note 82

k 4 = k 5 = 1 .0 f s = 5.3MPa

AS = 2.b.d / 3

2 × 400 × 63 Cl 3.2.3.1 NZS 3603

∴ AS = = 16800mm 2

3

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 67 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

∴VS = 80.1kN > V *

M* = + = +

8 4 8 4

* −

∴ M = 44.3kNm

From previous:

ØM n = 68.94.k8kNm

Calculate k8

Continuous lateral restraint is provided to the tension edge via pierce fixed sheeting.

Calculate S1

d

S1 = 3. Eq. 3.6 NZS 3603

b

400

S! = 3 × = 19.04

63

Since 25>S1>10

k8 = a1 + a2 .S + a3 .S 2 + a4 .S 3

1

k8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 19.04+ − 0.0116 × 19.042 + × 19.043

5000

∴ k8 = 0.72

∴ ØM = 68.94 × 0.72

ØM = 49.6kNm > M *

Connection of the eaves beam to the column needs to provide both torsional restraint as well as

adequate fastening for the horizontal wind loads. It is proposed to use a combination of a pair of Mitek

MS1430 split joist hanger together with a Mitek N21 Diagonal Cleat.

Calculate load taken by split joist hangers using 6/ 14g type 17 Hex Head screws per member

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 68 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Qn = n.k .Qk Eq. 4.6, NZS 3603

where:

k=1.25 since nails are through steel side plates < 3.0 mm thickness.

Other ‘k’ modification factors are not relevant as timber is dry and screws are in single shear.

*Ø=0.8 is applied as Type 17 screws are as reliable as nails in service.

∴ ØQn = 18.2kN

Qn = n.k .Qk Eq. 4.2, NZS 3603

where:

NZS 3603

n = 10

k=1.25 since nails are through steel side plates < 3.0 mm thickness.

Other ‘k’ modification factors are not relevant as timber is dry, nails are in single shear and are nailed into the

edge or face of the timber.

∴ Qn = 6.3kN

∴ QT = 24.5kN > N *

Proposed Connection

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 69 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

ØQ = 20.0kN Mitek Literature

ØQ = 29.6kN Mitek Literature

Girt Spacing 1660 mm

The capacity of solid timber girts is also dependant on the nature of lateral tortional buckling restraint and the

critical edge to which the loading and restraint is provided. It is therefore important to consider both positive and

negative wind pressures.

qu=0.84 kPa Case 1 cp,e= -0.65, cp,i= +0.61, kL= 1.5, over 6.0 m

Case 2 cp,e= -0.65, cp,i= +0.61, kL= 2.0, over 3.0 m

qu=0.76 kPa Case 1 cp,e= +0.7, cp,i= -0.65, kL= 1.25, over 3.0 m

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 70 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

w1* = 0.84 × 1.66 × (2.0×− 0.65 − + 0.61)

∴ w1* = −2.66kN / m

w2* = 0.84 × 1.66 × (1.0×− 0.65 − + 0.61)

∴ w2* = −1.76kN / m

Calculate weff

Calculate Reactions

∴ R* = − 6.63kN

Calculate Moment

−

2.66 × 1.5 2 −

*

M Wu = − 6.63 × 3.0 − − 1.76 × 1.5 × 2.25

2

*

∴ M Wu = − 10.96kNm

Calculate weff

−

* 10.96 × 8

w eff =

6 .0 2

*

∴ weff = − 2.44kN / m

Calculate Reactions

1 − 3 .0 2 −

R* = 2 . 66 × + 1.76 × 3.0 × 4.5

6 .0 2

∴ R* = − 7.31kN

Serviceability

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 71 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

2

37

ws = ×− 2.44= − 1.62kN / m

45

5.w.l 4

δw = k2.

384.EI x

5×− 1.62 × 6000 4

δw = 1.0. 9

384 × 684 × 10

∴ δw = 40.0mm or Span 150

Strength

M n = k1.k 4 .k5 .k8 . f b .Z Eq. 3.4 NZS 3603

where:

Ø = 0 .9 k 1 = 1 .0

Technical Note 82

k 4 = k 5 = 1 .0 f b = 48MPa

∴ ØM n = 18.7.k 8 kNm

Calculate k8

Since negative pressures produce a higher moment than positive pressure for this case and continuous restraint

is offered, the tension edge restraint will produce a less stable option, hence we only need to consider capacity for

negative pressure in this case.

Continuous lateral restraint is provided to the tension edge via pierce fixed sheeting.

Calculate S1

d

S1 = 3. Eq. 3.6 NZS 3603

b

240

S1 = 3 × = 16.0

45

Since 25>S1>10

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 72 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

k8 = a1 + a2 .S + a3 .S 2 + a4 .S 3

1

k8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 16.0+ − 0.0116 × 16.02 + × 16.03

5000

∴ k8 = 0.86

∴ ØM = 18.67 × 0.86

ØM = 16.1kNm > M *

Vn = k1.k4 .k5 . f s . AS Eq. 3.4 NZS 3603

where:

Ø = 0 .9 k1 = 1.0

Technical Note 82

k 4 = k 5 = 1 .0 f s = 5.3MPa

AS = 2.b.d / 3

2 × 240 × 45 Cl 3.2.3.1 NZS 3603

∴ AS = = 7200mm 2

3

∴ VS = 34.34kN > V *

Propose JH 47x190 to suit 240x45 hySPAN so that the same bracket can be used for both side and end walls (Depth

of bracket is 79.2 % of girt depth so suitable).

Qn = n.k .Qk Eq. 4.2, NZS 3603

where:

NZS 3603

n = 12

k=1.25 since nails are through steel side plates < 3.0 mm thickness.

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 73 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Other ‘k’ modification factors are not relevant as timber is dry, nails are in single shear and are nailed into the

edge or face of the timber.

∴ Qn = 7.6kN > N *

The 240x45 hySPAN girt to span 6.3 m at maximum 1660 mm spacing is adequate to support the

design load.

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 74 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Wind posts may be designed for buildings where smaller frames are used in the end walls. Wind posts would be required

to resist axial loads from the frames as well as horizontal wind loads. A reduced frame was not used in this example as its

analysis is similar to other portal frame components where special attention is paid to the bending moment diagram and

restraint offered by purlins. Additional end wall bracing may also be required to limit the sway achieved by the reduced

section frame.

End wall mullions are typically symmetrical about the ridge line to allow for repetition of detail and order lengths.

Depending on spans and quantities individual calculations of mullion sizes may have cost benefits. In this case given

there are only four mullions per end wall we will design the mullion that has the maximum span.

End wall mullions can be detailed to fix to the inside or outside of the end wall frame. Connection to the outside of the

frame is less complicated because the purlins do not create clashes with proposed mullion locations.

Girts provide lateral restraint to the compression edge for positive pressures and to the tension edge for negative

wind pressures. Girt loads have been recalculated excluding local pressure factors.

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 75 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Serviceability

2

37

Ps = × + 10.56= − 7.14kN

45

n=5

P.L3 1 1 1

δw = k 2 . .n − .3 − 1 − 2 Appendix 1

192.EI n 2 n

7140 × 8200 3 1 1 1

δ w = 1 .0 x 6

× 5 − × 3 − 1 − 2

192 × 13200 × 336 x10 5 2 5

∴ δ w = 55.9mm or Span 147

Strength

+

P.l 10.20 × 8.2

M = (n − 1).

*

= (5 − 1)×

2 2

8.n 8×5

* +

∴ M = 50.2kNm

−

P.l 10.56 × 8.2

M * = (n 2 − 1).

= (5 2 − 1)×

8.n 8×5

* −

∴ M = 52.0kNm

−

P 10.56

V * = (n − 1).

= (6 − 1) ×

2 2

* *

∴ N = V = 26.4kN

Positive Pressure.

Calculate k8

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 76 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

0.5

L 2

0.5

ay . d

S1 = 1.35 − 1 Eq. 3.5 NZS 3603

b b

0.5

1660 400 2 0.5

S1 = 1.35 − 1

63 63

∴ S1 = 17.35

Since 25>S1>10

k8 = a1 + a2 .S + a3 .S 2 + a4 .S 3

1

k8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 17.35+ − 0.0116 × 17.352 + × 17.353

5000

∴ k8 = 0.80

M n = k1.k 4 .k5 .k8 . f b .Z Eq. 3.4 NZS 3603

where:

Ø = 0 .9 k 1 = 1 .0

Technical Note 82

k 4 = k 5 = 1 .0 f b = 48MPa

∴ ØM n = 72.6.k 8 kNm

Since k8=0.80

ØM = 58.1kNm > M *

Negative Pressure.

Calculate k8

Consider Stability equation for Discrete Restraint to Tension Edge from AS 1720.1.

0.5

Lay

1.35

d

S1 = Eq. 3.2(5) AS 1720.1

b d

1.35 0.5

400 1660

S1 =

63 400

∴ S1 = 24.69

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 77 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Since 25>S1>10

k 8 = a1 + a 2 .S + a 3 .S 2 + a 4 .S 3

1

k 8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 24.69+ − 0.0116 × 24.69 2 + × 24.69 3

5000

∴ k 8 = 0.47

From previous:

∴ ØM n = 72.58.k8kNm

Since k8=0.47

The effect of beam slenderness have reduced the capacity of this section such that it is not suitable to support the

required load. In this type of situation it is an opportunity to select a thicker, lower strength and cost section such

as 400x90 hy90 to replace the 400x63 hySPAN. Whilst hy90 has a lower Characteristic Bending Strength the

additional thickness means that a 63mm hySPAN and 90mm hy90 compare favourably with each other as a direct

strength and stiffness comparison (refer Appendix 2). The fact that the hy90 section in question has a lower depth

to breadth ratio means it is more stable, and hence may be suitable for the end wall mullion.

1.35 0.5

400 1660

S1 =

90 400

∴ S1 = 15.26

Since 25>S1>10

k8 = a1 + a2 .S + a3 .S 2 + a4 .S 3

1

k8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 15.26+ − 0.0116 × 15.262 + × 15.263

5000

∴ k8 = 0.89

For hy90:

Ø = 0 .9 k1 = 1.0

Technical Note 82

k 4 = k 5 = 1 .0 f b = 35MPa

So:

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 78 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

400 2 × 90

ØM n = 0.9 × 1.0 × 1.0 × 1.0 × k8 × 35 ×

6

∴ ØM n = 75.60.k8 kNm

Since k8=0.89

ØM = 67.3kNm > M *

Vn = k1.k4 .k5 . f s . AS Eq. 3.4 NZS 3603

where:

Ø = 0 .9 k1 = 1.0

Technical Note 82

k 4 = k 5 = 1 .0 f s = 5.3MPa

Consider reduced section at notch for shear capacity, notch to match 240 deep girt.

AS = 2.b.d / 3

2 × 240 × 90 Cl 3.2.3.1 NZS 3603

∴ AS = = 14400mm 2

3

∴VS = 68.7kN > V *

The mullion notch to accommodate the rafter needs to be checked. The notch will only fracture due to an opening

moment which would be caused by a positive wind pressure. Since the rafter acts as a support for the mullion the

moment at the notch is zero, however the shear force needs to be considered as per equation 3.7, NZS 3603.

M* = 0 kNm, V* = N* = 26.4 kN

M*

V * + 1 .2 ≤ 1.5Ø.k1.k4 .k5 .k7 . f s . Asn Eq. 3.7, NZS 3603

dn

where:

Ø = 0 .9 k1 = 1.0

Technical Note 82

k 4 = k 5 = 1 .0 f s = 5.3MPa

It is best practice to always make the notch slope as long as possible to limit the stress concentration at the notch

location.

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 79 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Since:

bn = 4 × 160 = 640mm

a ≥ 0.1.d

2 .2

k7 = 0.25 Table 3.1 NZS 3603

d

2 .2

∴ k7 = = 0.49

4000.25

Asn = 2.b.d n / 3

2 × 240 × 90 Cl 3.2.6 NZS 3603

∴ AS = = 14400mm 2

3

26.4kN ≤ 50.5kN

Connection to the ground is proposed using Mitek CF2x brackets, similar to the side wall mullion. The

connection to the rafter requires tension capable fixings. One system using proprietary brackets

involves the use of three Mitek concealed purlin cleats (CP80) together with one suitable length

cyclone tie.

CT1200 Cyclone Tie, wrapped around mullion with 5 nails per end.

3/ Concealed purlin cleats (CP80), fixed with 8/Ø3.15x30 FH nails and 4/14gx35 type 17 screws per

bracket

*

∴ ØQ = 13.0 + 24.0 = 37.0kN > N Mitek Literatue

Proposed Connection

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 80 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 81 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Portal Frame action takes care of the lateral loads however Longitudinal Bracing is required to transfer the

longitudinal forces to the ground. For spans up to 20m strap bracing is a cheap and easy way to achieve the

required longitudinal bracing requirements. For spans above 20m the installation time required for strap bracing

can outweigh any advantages of the low costs of materials. Traditional threaded rod may be used for bracing or

timber braces can be developed.

Timber (LVL) braces can be used for loading in tension and compression and can be suitably fixed to purlins and

girts to reduce buckling lengths. Both Mitek and Pryda have proprietary brackets suitable for connection to timber

frames.

Matching bracing points with mullion/wind post loads is theoretically the best option but is nearly always

impractical for larger structures. Essentially the braced bays will act as a truss transferring the loads through the

purlins between braced bays. This can be easily modelled using structural analysis packages.

1 heave + hridge b

Area = . .

2 2 2

1 6.789 + 8.764 30

Area = . .

2 2 2

Area = 58.3m 2 / side

_ wall = q u . A.(c p ,e (W ) − c p ,e ( L ) )

*

Pend

* + −

Pend _ wall = 0.76 × 58.3 ×( 0.7 − 0.3)

*

∴ Pend _ wall = 44.3kN

d 60.0

= = 7 .7

h 7.79

Cl 5.5 AS/NZS 1170.2:2002

d 60.0

= = 2 .0

b 30.0

Since both building ratios exceed 4 the friction force acting on the building needs to be resisted.

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 82 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Area = )

2

∴ Area = 656.6m 2 / side

For large buildings the area may be broken up into its roof and wall contribution to take advantage of the lower

loads to be resisted however for this example the loads do not reach levels where any significant advantage may

be gained.

c f = 0.04 - Ribs across the wind direction AS/NZS 1170.2 Table 5.9

*

P friction = qu . A friction .c f

*

Pfriction = 0.76 × 656.6 × 0.04

*

∴ Pfriction = 20.0kN

*

PTotal = Pend* _ wall + Pfriction

*

*

PTotal = 44.3 + 20.0

*

∴ PTotal = 64.3kN

For long buildings it is good practice to have a bracing bay each end of the building rather than relying on the

building to transfer all bracing loads from one end to the other, for this example we propose two braced bays.

Therefore the horizontal load to be transferred in each braced bay is 32.15 kN.

Consider Roof Bracing Layout (Wall Bracing similar except tension only)

32.15

Rbrace = = 40.3kN

Cos37.1

32.15

Rbrace = = 38.2kN

Cos32.6

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 83 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Propose 2/90x45 hyCHORD braces, separated with 7mm plywood strips to form a spaced column.

∴ ØN ncx = Ø.k1.k8 . f c . A

where:

Purlin _ spacing

Lay =

Sinα

1600

∴ Lay = = 2652mm

Sin37.1

This component is considered to be a spaced column. Clause E4 of AS1720.1 details stability equations for spaced

columns. This procedure can be used to determine the slenderness coefficient for this member.

A

S 5 = 0.3g13 .g 28 .L. Eq. E4(5) AS1720.1

I

where:

g28=1.0 Table E5 AS1720.1

A=2x90x35=6300 mm2

90

(

I yy = 77 3 − 7 3 × )12

∴ I yy = 3.421 × 10 3 mm 4

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 84 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

6300

∴ S 5 = 0.3 × 1.0 × 1.0 × 2652 ×

3.421 × 10 3

∴ S 5 = 34.15

Since S5>25

k 8 = a5 .S a6

k 8 = 235.5 × 34.15 −1.937 Eq. 3.18 NZS3603

∴ k 8 = 0.25

Since k1 = 1.0

Qskl = 2.Qkl Table 4.9 NZS3603

Apply joint group J3 for bolts parallel to the grain Technical Note 82

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 85 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

∴ Qkl = min(23.14,25.31)

∴ Qkl = 23.14kN

Qn = n.k1 .k12 .k13 .Qsk Eq. 4.17 NZS3603

ØQn = Ø.n.k1 .k12 .k13 .Qk

where:

k1 = 1.0 k12 = 1.0 k13 = 1.0

Therefore:

∴ ØQn = 64.8kN > N *

Qn = f pj . Aw Eq. 4.19 NZS3603

ØQn = Ø.n. f pj . Aw

where:

Ø = 0 .7 n = 2 f pj = 14.5MPa

Aw = 65 × 65 − π × 18 2 NZS 3603

∴ Aw = 3206.7 mm 2

Therefore:

∴ ØQn = 65.1kN > N *

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 86 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Purlins in end bays may be subjected to tension and compression forces from braced bays. These

forces need to be considered in the design capacity. The load to be transferred through the purlin

system in both tension and compression is relative to the force in the brace. This force can be

calculated as a designer would for a steel building.

Consider column action of purlins subject to axial force due to bracing loads.

∴ ØN ncx = Ø.k1.k8 . f c . A

Take only the flange area into account. Remember to include for the penetration of the web into the flange.

Technical Note 82 includes guidance on the calculation of hyJOIST section properties.

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 87 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

where:

Ø = 0 .9 f c = 45MPa

t.(hr − hw )

A = 2. B.h f −

2

9 × (318 − 288) 2

A = 2. 90 × 36 − = 6210mm

2

6

EA = 13200 × 6210 = 81.97 × 10 N

0.5

0.823(EA)

S3 = Eq. D2 NZS3603

PE

(

0.823 81.97 × 106

S3 =

) 0.5

PE

0.5

67.46 × 106

∴ S3 =

PE

π 2 (EI )y

PE =

L2E

π 2 × 2338 × 109

PE =

9910 2

∴ PE = 235150 N

Calculate S3

0.5

67.46 × 106

∴ S3 = = 16.93

235150

Since 25>S1>10a

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 88 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

k8 = a1 + a2 .S + a3.S 2 + a4 .S 3

1

k8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 16.93+ − 0.0116 × 16.932 + × 16.933

5000

∴ k8 = 0.82

Since k1 = 1.0

From previous:

Calculate Euler buckling load. Design assumes that top edge of purlin is continuously restrained by

roof sheeting and bottom flange is effectively restrained by lateral restraint.

2

2

(EI )y π d + yo2 + GJ

Lay 4

PE = Eq. D3 NZS3603

y o ( y o + 2. y e ) +

(EI )× + (EI )y

(EA) (EA)

2

π 360

2

57.7 × 109 × + 180 2 + 1848 × 106

2478 4

PE = 9

2338 × 10 57.7 × 109

180(180 + 2 × 0 ) + +

(

81.97 × 106 ) (

81.97 × 106 )

∴ PE = 127582 N

Calculate S3

0.5

67.46 × 106

∴ S3 = = 22.99

127582

Since 25>S1>10

k 8 = a1 + a 2 .S + a3 .S 2 + a 4 .S 3

1

k 8 = 0.21 + 0.175 × 22.99+ − 0.0116 × 22.99 2 + × 22.99 3

5000

∴ k 8 = 0.53

Carter Holt Harvey Limited September 2008

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 89 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

Since k1 = 1.0

Combined actions

28.8 9.6

+ = 1.02 ≤ 1.0 Eq. 3.23 NZS3603

29.4 205.8

2

28.8 9.6

+ = 1.03 ≤ 1.0 Eq. 3.24 NZS3603

29.4 133.3

Note that the combined actions are 3 % over, however both axial and bending moment capacities are based on the

flange area of the hyJOIST, although listed at 36 mm the hyJOIST flanges have a minimum thickness of 38 mm,

therefore increasing the capacity by 3 %.

N nt = k1.k4 . f t . A Eq. 3.21 NZS 3603

∴ ØN nt = Ø.k1.k4 . f t . A

Since the section depth of the individual components is less then 150, size effect factor k11 can be ignored.

where:

k1 = 1.0

∴ ØN nt = 184.44kN

Combined actions

28.8 9.6

+ = 1.03 ≤ 1.0 Eq. 3.25 NZS 3603

29.4 184.4

Note that the combined actions are 3 % over, however both axial and bending moment capacities are based on the

flange area of the hyJOIST, although listed at 36 mm the hyJOIST flanges have a minimum thickness of 38 mm,

therefore increasing the capacity by 3 %.

The HJ360 90 hyJOIST are suitable for the imposed combined actions from longitudinal winds wind

loads and bracing.

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 90 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

10.0 References

1. CHH Woodproducts New Zealand, Technical Note 82-07-04, Limit States Design Information for

Specific Engineering Design for New Zealand Construction.

2. CHH Woodproducts New Zealand, Engineering Bulletin No. 2 –Rigid Moment Connections

using CHH veneer based products.

3. Batchelor, M.L. (1984), Improved Plywood Gussets for Timber Portal Frames, Proceedings of

the Pacific Timber Engineering Conference, Auckland 1984, Paper No. 185B.

4. Hutchings B.F (1989), Moment Joist Design, Design, Construct and Detailing in Timber

Conference, 15-17 May, 1992, Timber Development Association (NSW) Ltd.

5. Hutchings B.F and Bier H (2000), Timber Engineering Design Made More Accessible,

www.chhwoodproducts.co.nz/engineerszone

6. Milner H.R (1987), The Design and Construction of Timber Portal Frames, Chisolm Institute of

Technology

7. Milner H.P and Crozier D.A (2000), Structural Design of Timber Portal Frame Buildings,

Engineers Australia Pty Ltd.

8. National Association of Forest Industries, Timber Datafile SS1, Timber Portal Frames, National

Association of Forest Industries

9. Standards Australia, AS 1720.1-1997 Timber Structures, Part 1: Design methods

10. Standards New Zealand, NZS 3603:1993 Timber structures standard

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 91 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

The following design action equations have been provided from commonly available equations for a series of

evenly spaced point loads as idealised for a mullion in service.

Due to the nature of loading of mullions ‘n’ in the equations is the number of girts supported by the mullion. It

is assumed that the loads applied by girts at each location are equal.

Where n is odd:

P.L3 1 1 1

∂= n − n .3 − 2 1 − n 2

192.EI

M max =

2

(

n − 1 .P.L )

8.n

n. P

R* =

2

Where n is even:

P.L3 1 4

∂= .n.3 − 1 + 2

192.EI 2 n

P.L

M max = n.

8

n.P

R* =

2

Note: The reaction equation differs slightly from the conventional reaction equation for a series of point loads

supported by a simply supported beam. This is to take into account the fact that a girt is located at the base

of the mullion.

Project: 30 metre Span LVL Portal Frame Design Date: Sept. ‘08

For: Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts NZ Page: 92 / 92

At: Industrial Park, Auckland, New Zealand Designed : C.R

The following serviceability and strength (bending moment) comparisons between a 63 mm hySPAN section

and a 90mm thick hy90 have been provided to illustrate the relative similarities between the sections. The

Characteristic Properties have been taken from “Limit States Design Information” Technical Note 82-07-04.

Serviceability Strength

B.D 3

B.D 2

EI = E. ØM = Ø.k1−8 . f b

12 6

90.D 3 90.D 2

EI hy 90 = 9500. = 71250.D 3 ØM hy 90 = Ø.k1−8 .35. = 525.D 2

12 6

63.D 3 63.D 2

EI hySPAN = 13200. = 69300.D 3 ØM hySPAN = Ø.k1−8 .48. = 504.D 2

12 6

∴ EI hy 90 > EI hySPAN ∴ ØM hy 90 > ØM hySPAN

As can be seen above, in both serviceability and strength limit states, an equivalent depth 90mm thick hy90

exhibits structural properties exceeding those of a 63mm hySPAN. Please note that these comparisons do not

take into account the effects of lateral stability.

- AS1170.2 ExamplesUploaded byandrew_ferrier388
- Wind Assessment to AS1170.2Uploaded byConrad Harrison
- Portal Frame Design-worked ExampleUploaded bysanjeevkr
- Portal FrameUploaded byScribd Saya
- Portal FramesUploaded byAltayeb Yassin
- 118812445-AS-1170-1-2002Uploaded by최문섭
- Design of Portal FrameUploaded byJajun Ichrom
- Portal Frame Design ExampleUploaded bykstayrosk
- Staad SupportsUploaded byAnonymous q0irDXlWAm
- AS2699.1 Built-In Components for Masonryconstruction Part 1 - Wall TiesUploaded bytoddlbyrnes
- As 1720-1988 Part 1 - Timber StructuresUploaded bypvdang
- NZBC - HandbookUploaded byRerehou
- Be Amd NotesUploaded byHaitham Mansour
- Analysis of portal frame buildingUploaded byTaofik Kay Lawal
- Timber Portal Frames DatafileUploaded byMannie Button
- Torsion Stiffness MOdification Factor of 0.1Uploaded byLuisito Sta. Ines
- Strand7 Roofrack AssignmentUploaded byJoel Forbes
- 2870 11 SeminarUploaded byOwen Lin
- Basis of Structural AnalysisUploaded bySoumen Debnath
- Snap Fit DesignUploaded byDavid García Salvatierra
- Portal Frame DesignsUploaded bylhoha76409
- Staad ReportUploaded byNageswara Rao Nanduri
- 1 French 8NCEE-001072 Subgrade Modulus.pdfUploaded byDemçe Florjan
- FAQ DeflectionUploaded byNatarajan Saravanan
- Two -Way Slab ActionUploaded bynvnrev
- PlasticDesign_UnbracedFramesUploaded byW
- A New Approach to the Analysis of a Tubesheet for a U Tube Heat Exchanger 1996 International Journal of Pressure Vessels and PipingUploaded byAPI
- Effect of Soil Structure Interaction on Gravity DamUploaded byAnonymous D5s00DdU
- Member Design Summary-r0Uploaded byMustufa F Kanjeta
- (ASCE)0733-9445(2002)128-9(1099).pdfUploaded bysourabh mahana

- ENSINGER Essentials Technical Know-how for Plastic Applications (2)Uploaded byTeodor Caragioiu
- 312157 Magna Crete TDSUploaded byUlises Gustavo Vela Bustillos
- expt2 partially miscible liquidsUploaded byJean Criste Cainila
- Lease Contract - Braulio LimUploaded byMartin Martel
- Dell Working CapitalUploaded byARJUN M K
- Uco bankUploaded byPuja Sahay
- Types of VirtualizationUploaded byClydee DeCastro Vegh
- Lakoff_Why It MattersUploaded byTow Teck Soon
- Geopolymer Formation and Its Unique PropertiesUploaded bymohammadi_790141120
- 7_e-Summit_LOS RETOS DEL COMERCIO ELECTRÓNICO TRANSFONTERIZO (JUNTOZ).pdfUploaded byEl Hombre Que Fue Jueves
- PartnershipUploaded bywood_ksd3251
- Dopod 838 ProUploaded bysalipalli
- CCTV PolicyUploaded byKeenanMartinez
- Create Your Professional Plot Outline by Holly LisleUploaded bySharon Cleere
- 02-20-13Uploaded bygrapevine
- Topic - 4 (Informed Search and Exploration) [14.02.17].pptUploaded bymusabbir
- test1aUploaded bylupoqb
- Attacks the Attacks Began at the Al Noor Mosque in RiccartonUploaded byAnonymous Je4nQKBPX
- Progecad Architecture Quickstart AncadUploaded byAlfred Harvey Elacion
- ARTechnical ReferenceUploaded bykottamramreddy
- 72_Optimum PT Waffle SlabUploaded byLau Kim Hwa
- Complete Indoor and Outdoor LED Lighting Solutions at NormasymUploaded byRune Larsen
- rima reportUploaded byapi-435783953
- 96 - Honky Tonk Woman-tabUploaded byneerajjdn
- 06 Control of BLDC Motor With the Help of Pulse Width ModulationUploaded byGururaj Banda
- Lease FinanceUploaded bypriyankakataria143
- Tehnomag ClujUploaded byRusuAdrianDorel
- York County court schedule for Dec. 20, 2013Uploaded byYork Daily Record/Sunday News
- PDF_ChallanList_4-18-2017 12-00-00 AMUploaded byPrince Digital Computers
- Unit 2Uploaded byEvan Crizcool