Design of Metal Roof Deck Diaphragms For Low-Rise Steel Buildings

Design of Metal Roof Deck Diaphragms for Low-Rise Steel Buildings
Robert Tremblay cole Polytechnique, Montral, Canada North American Steel Construction Conference Orlando, Florida May 12, 2010
Plan
Background Information SDI Method Example 1 (US) Example 2 (Canada) & Modelling Conclusions C l i
www.aisc.org/conferencepdh
May12 May13 ED69A WE86S
R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal
1. Background Information
Structural St t l System
ROOF BEAMS (typ.) ROOF JOISTS (typ.)
V
VERTICAL X BRACING (typ.) COLUMN (typ ) (typ.)
Sidelap Joist (typ ) (typ.) Deck Sheet Sidelap Fastener (typ.)
Frame
Button punch Weld
Frame Fastener (typ.)
Weld Screw or Nail
Screw
Joist (typ.) Deck Sheet
ROOF BEAMS (typ.)
ROOF JOISTS (typ.)
V
VERTICAL X BRACING (typ.) COLUMN (typ.)
G, EI
w=V/L
F + S
L/2
L/2
S
Su
0.4 Su 1
G'
G = S / = P (a / b) /
S=P/b =/a
2. SDI Method
http://www.sdi.org/
http://www.cssbi.ca/
R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal 10
Shear Strength
1. Edge Panel:
Qf Fe xe Qf Qf Fp xp Pn L Fe = 2 Qf xe / w Fp = 2 Qf xp / w Qf Qf Fp Qf Qf Fe w/2
2. Intermediate Panel:
Qf Fe 1 xe1 xe2 Pn w/L Fe 2 Qf Qs Qf Fp2 Qs L
Qs
Qf Fp1
Qs
Qf Fp1
Qs Fe 1
Qf w/2 Pn w/L Qf
xp1 xp2 Fp2 Qf Fe 2 Qs
Shear Strength
3. Corner Fastener:
4. Elastic Shear Buckling:
Sn = min (Sne, Sni, Snc, Snb )

13
Shear Stiffness
P S
Su
SDI Procedure : G = P( (a/b) /b)
0.4 Su 1
G'
G = S / = P (a / b) /
S + C + d
S=P/b =/a
14
Shear Stiffness
15
16
+ equations for shear strength and stiffness f various for i fasteners f t
18
19
Shear Stiffness
(3 spans assumed in tables) when using the tables

21
22
23
http://www.cssbi.ca/
24
http://www.canamgroup.ws
http://www.us.hilti.com
http://www.vulcraft.com
http://www cssbi ca/ http://www.cssbi.ca/

http://www.wheelingcorrugating.com/
3. Example 1 (U.S.)
1.5'' steel deck (sheets 25 25'-0" -0 long) X-Bracing (typ.) Joists @ 75''o/c 5
Truss (typ.)
10 @ 20'-0" = 200'-0"
A Roof dead load = 21 psf Weight of walls = 5 psf Roof snow load = 35 psf Site Class D Ss = 0.30 g ; S1 = 0.07g TL = 6 s
- Boston, MA - SCBF - R=6, Cd=5.0 & O=2.0 - Seismic loads resisted by diaphragm & X-braces
4 @ 25'-0" = 100'-0"
26
Design parallel to short walls X-Bracing Rigid diaphragm => torsion Regular structure Equivalent q Lateral Force Procedure applies pp Wind loads neglected
A
10 @ 20'-0" = 200'-0"
4 @ 25'-0" = 100'-0"
Design g Assumptions
Occupancy Category II => Importance Factor, I = 1.0 hn = 22 ft & CBF => Ta = 0.02 0 02 (22) 0.75 = 0.20 0 20 s V based on amplified period => CuTa = 1 1.6(0.20) 6(0 20) = 0 0.32 32 s (to be verified)
W = 593K
0.02 V
Assume T = 1.6 x Ta = 0.32 s = 1.0 (SDC B)
0.54 V = 16.6 K
CM
V = 30.8
CR
0.46 V
R = 6.0 & I = 1.0 => Cs = 0.052 0 052 => V = 30.8 30 8K (Eh) Include torsional effects
0.3 Boston
Sa (Elastic) Cs (CBF - R = 6.0)
K
0.02 V 10' 10 100' 100
-1 1.
.0 11
Sa (g) / Cs
22'
0.2 0.1 0.0
41.3O 25'
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Period, T (s)
T/C /C brace system

Bracing members:
Tension-compression bracing required for SCBF Use ASTM A500, gr. C square HSS (Fy = 50 ksi) Pu 16.6K/2/cos(41.3o) = 11.0K (negl. gravity loads) b/t < 0.64(E/Fy)0.5 = 15.4 (AISC 341-05) KL/r < 4.0( 4 0(E/Fy)0.5 = 96 (AISC 341 341-05) 05) with L = (252 + 222)0.5 x 12 = 400 in., K = 0.5 0 5 (X-bracing) (X-bracing), but KL/r < 200 permitted if columns designed for the brace expected yield tensile capacity
Select HSS 3x3x3/16: (tdes = 0.174) Ag = 1.89 in2 b/t = (3.0-3x0.174)/0.174 = 14.2 < 15.4 OK KL/r = (0 (0.5)(400)/1.14 5)(400)/1 14 = 175 < 200 OK (but > 96) cPn = 13.9K > 11.0K Check Pu = 11.0K with OK
16.6K
-1 1. 0
K
.0 11
gravity loads once columns are designed

41.3 25' 25
O
22'
30
Tension capacity of brace connections: ARyFy = (1.4)(50)(1.89) = 132K, but not greater than the brace force than can be transferred to the brace by the system ( (e.g., foundation f d ti overturning t i uplift). lift) Note: brace force corresponding to 0Eh (0 = 2.0) does not apply Compression capacity of brace connections: 1.1RyPn = (1.1)(1.4)(13.9/0.9) = 23.8K
31
Diaphragm (incl. collectors & chords):

Diaphragm and collector elements on short walls designed for 16.6K/100 = 166 plf. Currently, ASCE 7 & AISC do not require design of these elements for load combinations with overstrength (0Eh) or forces corresponding to yielding in braces!!
V 0.54 V = 16 16.6 6K
CM CR
0.02 V
0.46 V
0.02 V 10' 100'
32
Diaphragm designed for Su = 166 plf:

1 1/2 wide rib (WR) roof deck (Canam P3606): span = 75; sheet length = 225 #10 screw sidelap connectors Hilti X-ENP-19 L15 frame fasteners
Select 22 ga. (0.0295) (0.0295 ) deck with 36/4 fastener layout & 2 sidelap connectors/span (SDI 3rd ed.): Sn = 354 plf & G G = 14.3 k/in
Joist (typ.) Deck Sheet Sidelap Fastener (typ.) Frame Fastener (y ) (typ.)
33
Span = 6.25 6 25 => Sn = 545 plf. plf Sn = 0.65 0 65 x 520 = 354 plf K1 = 0.304 ft
Span = 6.25 => Snb = 1315 plf Snb = 0.80 x 1315 = 1052 plf >> Sn
35
36
37
G = G K1 = 0.304 ft K2 = 870 k/in / K4 = 3.78 Dxx = 1072 ft Check with spreadsheet:
870
3.78 + (0.3)1072 + (3)(0.304)(6.25) 6.25 870 G = 3.78 + 51.5 + 5.70 G = 14.3 k/in
= 548 plf
= 14.7 k/in
Collectors designed for Pu = 8.30K: (SDC B: no need to design for overstrength)

c)
16.6 K /100' = 0.166 kip /ft - 8.30 K 4.15 K - 4.15 4 15 K
22'
25' (typ.)
0.02 V V 0.54 V = 16.6 16 6K

CM CR
0.46 V
0.02 V 10' 100'
39
Chords designed for Pu = 7.9K :

a)
Joist (typ.) Deck Sheet
c)
Sidelap Fastener (typ.) Frame Fastener (typ.)
CR CM V = 30.8 30 8
K
15.7K / 200' = 0.0785 kip/ft
PLAN
b)
7.7K
d)
-7.9 K
6.3 K -1.6 K
0.0785 kip/ft
- 7.7 K
22' 20 (typ ) (typ.)
30.8 K / 200' = 0.154 kip/ft
PLAN
ELEVATION (LONG WALL)
Pu = (154 plf)(200)2 / 8 / 100 = 7.7K
Select W8x10, A = 2.96 in2

Check and diaphragm flexibility:

w=V/L
Chord (typ.) Steel Deck Units (typ.)
V Vertical X Bracing (typ.)
F + S
Collector (typ.)
L/2
L/2
41
w=V/L
w = 30.8k / 200 ft = 154 plf
F + S
B = 0.11 (Bracing)
L/2 L/2
F = 5 wL4/(384 EI)
I = 2 x 2.96 ( (12 x 50) )2 = 2.13 x 106 in4 F = 0.089
Connectors (HSS) W8x10 2 A = 2.96 in
SECTION "A"
L = 200 ft b = 100 ft G = 14.3 k/in
S = wL2/(8 Gb) S = 0.54 0 54

= Cd(B + D) / I = 5.0 5 0 (0.11 (0 11 + 0 0.63) 63) / 1 1.0 0=3 3.7 7 Less than 2% drift limit (5.28 for hn = 22)
0.63 > 2 x 0.11 = 0.22
=> Flexible diaphragm => Out-of-plane X-braces dont resist V
0.55 V = 16.9 K CM
V = 30.8 CR
0.45 V
10' 10
100' 100
43
Verification of the Building Period

w=V/L
T = 2
M W = 2 K g V
B D
For flexible diaphragms (ASCE-41):
W ( B + 0.78D ) = T 2 g V
W ( 0.10 B + 0.080 D ) , in inches V

0 06 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
T = CuTa
V/W
Computed T
W = 593k Under V = 30.8k, B = 0.11 & D = 0.63
Period, T (s)
T [ (593 / 30.8) (0.004 x 0.11 + 0.0031 x 0.63) ]0.5 = 1.09 s

ROOF BEAMS (typ.)
ROOF JOISTS (typ.)
Elastic
x 1/R
VERTICAL X BRACING (typ.) COLUMN (typ ) (typ.)
V=
Ve R of f th the vertical ti l system t
45
4.15K 16.6K /100' = 0.166 kip/ft - 8.30 K - 4.15K
Bracing Roof Members Diaphragm (Inelastic) V

Collector
Columns V
Collector
22'
25' (typ.) 29.3K
Anchor Bolts Bracing Collector Elements Connections & Foundations
117K /100' = 1.17 kip/ft
- 58.5
- 29.3K
23.8 23 8K
132 K
22'
25' (typ.)
ELEVATION (END WALL)
46
4. Design Example 2 (Canada)

Seismic Loads
76.0 m
Site: Montreal, , Site Class C Vertical Bracing: Tension-Only (T/O) Bracing Type MD: Ro = 1.3, 1 3 Rd = 3.0 30 Roof snow loads: Ss = 2.48 kPa Building Height : 8.6 m Design along N-S direction
45 5.6 m
47
Joists (typ.) G
Tension-Only X-Bracing (typ.)
Steel Deck 38 mm Deep 3 Spans Min.
6 @ 7600 = 4 45 600
W460x52 (typ.) 10 @ 7600 = 76 000 1 11

450
500 18 600
Membrane + Insulation + Gypsum board + Steel deck + Joists/Beams + Electr./Mech. = 1.23 kN/m2
Precast pre-insulated 2 panels : 4.94 kN/m

76.0 m
10 000 300 [mm]
WRoof = (45.6)(76.0) [ 1.23 kPa + (0.25)(2.48 kPa) ] = 6410 kN WWalls = 2 (76.0) (76 0) [ (9 (9.1) 1)2/2/8.6 /2/8 6 ][ 4.94 4 94 kPa ] = 3620 kN W = 6410 + 3620 = 10 030 kN
45.6 m
V = S(T) IE W / (Ro Rd)

Ta = 2 x 0.025 x 8.6 = 0.43 s (to be verified) S = 0.422 IE = 1.0 10 Ro = 1.3 Rd = 3.0
V = [(0.422) (1.0) (10030) ] / [ (1.3) (3.0)] = 1080 kN

76 0 m 76.0
CM 7.6 m
1080 kN
648 kN
Accidental eccentricity = 0.1 x 76.0 m = 7.6 m Note: Contribution of the vertical bracing parallel to the direction of loading is neglected (fl ibl diaphragm). (flexible di h )
Design of the Vertical Bracing

648 kN
8.6 m
= 48.5 deg.
X en T/O : Tf = 489 kN HSS ASTM A500 gr. C Fy = 3 345 5 MPa a 3 requirements : Tr = A Fy > Tf KL/r < 200 , with K = 0.5 and L = Lc-c - 500 mm 11 000 mm bo/t < 330/Fy0.5 si KL/r < 100 0 5 si 425/Fy0.5 i KL/r KL/ = 200 & linear interpolation if 100 < KL/r < 200
HSS 102x102x4.8 :
A = 1630 mm2 Tr = 506 kN > Tf (= 489 kN) KL/r = 5500 / 39.4 = 140 < 200 OK b/t = (102 4 x 4.30) / 4.3 = 19.7 < 19.8 OK
52
Diaphragm Design
Expected strength of bracing members & expected horizontal shear in diaphragm, Vu
Tu = AR yFy ,o R y = 1.1 Cu = 1.2 1 2 AR yFy /
2.68 68 1 + 2 y
1/1.34
AR yFy
Vu /2
KL R yFy y = r 2E
Tu
Cu
Tu
Cu
HSS 102x102x4.8 :
RyFy = 385 MPa Tu = 628 kN Cu = 176 kN
Vu = 4 (Cu + Tu) ( (cos ) = 2130 kN (whole ( h l building) b ildi ) >> V = 1080kN

Vu = 4 (Cu + Tu) (cos ) = 2130 kN (whole building) < V with RoRd = 1.3 = 3240 kN OK Design shear flow: qf = (2130 kN / 2) / 45.6 m = 23.4 kN/m
q
f
Tu
Cu
Tu
Cu
Vu /2
Canam P3606 Steel Deck : Joist Spacing : 1900 mm 19 mm Welds & No. 10 Screws
Select t = 1.21 mm W ld on 36/9 Welds screws at 150 mm o/c qr = 24.8 kN/m > 23.4 kN/m G = 24.3 kN/mm
55
Alternative solution :
56
Lateral Deformations
w=V/L
w = 1080 kN / 76.0 m = 14.2 kN/m

b
F + S
B = 21.1 mm (Bracing) F = 5 wL4/(384 EI)

I = 2 x 6440 (45 600/2)2 = 6.70 x 1012 mm4 F = 4.6 4 6 mm
L/2
L/2
HSS Connectors W460x52 A = 6640 mm2
SECTION "A"
L = 76 000 mm b = 45 600 mm G = 24.3 kN/mm
S = wL2/(8 G Gb) b) S = 9.3 mm

Check Inter-Storey Drift:

Under E :
Expected = RoRdElastic
Elastic = 21.1 + 4.6 + 9.3 = 35.0 mm Expected = (1.3)(3.0)(35.0) = 137 mm = 0.016 hs

< 0.025 hs => OK !
58
Using a Numerical Model (SAP2000)
Membrane Element
0.01 x ABeam (no connectors) 0.5 x Abracing (T/O)

Properties of the membrane elements:

= 7.7x10-8 kN/mm3
E = 200 kN/mm2 G = 76.92 kN/mm2 t = 1.21 mm
60
Modification of the stiffness of the membrane elements:

Axial Stiffness Modification: Kx (f11) & Ky (f22) Modifier od e = 0.001 0 00 (deck axial stiffness neglected) Shear Stiffness Modification: G (f12) G = 24.3 kN/mm G = G x t G = 76.92 x 1.21 = 93.07 kN/mm Modifier = 24.3 / 93.07 = 0.261
61
Modification of the seismic mass:

w = 1.23 kN/m2 + (0.25)(2.48 kPa) = 1.85 kN/m2 6 kN/mm 2 = 1.85x10-6 / w=xt = 7.7x10-8 x 1.21 = 9.317x10-8 kN/mm2 Modifier = 1 1.85x10 85x10-6 / 9.317x10 9 317x10-8 = 19.9
62
B = 21.1 21 1 mm F = 4.3 mm S = 9.5 mm

x 50
Total = 34.9 mm
x 200
Modification of the stiffness of membrane elements:

Modifier Kx (f11) = 1219 / 914 = 1.333 Modifier Ky (f22) = 0.001
Joist (typ.) Deck Sheet Sidelap Fastener (typ.)
Frame Fastene (typ.)
Total = 33.5 mm
Verification of the Building Period

w=V/L
T = 2
M W = 2 K g V
B D
For flexible diaphragms (ASCE-41):
W ( B + 0.78D ) = T 2 g V
W ( 0.004 B + 0.0031D ) , in mm V
For the example building (Section 2) :
W = 10 030 kN Under V = 1080 kN, B = 21.1 mm & D = 15.2 mm T [ (10 030 / 1080) (0.004x21.1 + 0.0031x15.2) ]0.5 = 1.11 s
L
Diaphragm (EI G (EI, G') ) Bracing Bents (KB)
T = 2
( KB + KD ) W
KBKD g
2 with : KD = 3 2 L EI + L G'b
For the sample building (Section 2) :
KB = 1080 kN / 21.1 mm = 51.1 kN/mm G = 24.3 G 24 3 kN/mm, kN/mm I = 6.70 6 70 x 1012 mm4 L = 76 000 mm, b = 45 600 mm KD = 97.0 kN/mm => T 1.10 s
From Numerical Simulation: T = 1.10 s
67
NBCC 2005: Ta = 0.025 hn = 0.025 (8.6 m) = 0.215 s but T = 2 x Ta = 0.43 s permitted if verified by dynamic analysis
0.8 0.6
Ta, CNB = 0.215 0 215 s - S = 0.67 0 67 T = 2 Ta, CNB = 0.43 s - S = 0.42
S (g) ( )
04 0.4 0.2 0 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
T = T calc = 1.10 s - S = 0.13
T( (s) )
V=
S(T) Mv IE W Rd Ro
68
Numerical modelling useful for more complex structures:
. Lachapelle, Lainco Inc. / R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal
69
1 4 2
. Lachapelle, Lainco Inc. / R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal
70
Conclusions
SDI method is a comprehensive approach to assess shear h strength t th and d stiffness tiff properties ti of f metal roof deck diaphragms. S Seismic i i d design i forces f can be b reduced d d by b taking t ki advantage of the diaphragm flexibility on the building g period, but realistic (conservative) ( ) period estimates are needed. Capacity design approach needed to prevent inelastic response in the diaphragms, including chords and collectors.
71

Design of Metal Roof Deck Diaphragms For Low-Rise Steel Buildings

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Design of Metal Roof Deck Diaphragms For Low-Rise Steel Buildings

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Design of Metal Roof Deck Diaphragms for Low-Rise Steel Buildings

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

Sidelap Joist (typ ) (typ.) Deck Sheet Sidelap Fastener (typ.)

Button punch Weld

Frame Fastener (typ.)

Weld Screw or Nail

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

Joist (typ.) Deck Sheet

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

ROOF BEAMS (typ.)

ROOF JOISTS (typ.)

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

xp1 xp2 Fp2 Qf Fe 2 Qs

4. Elastic Shear Buckling:

Sn = min (Sne, Sni, Snc, Snb )

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

SDI Procedure : G = P( (a/b) /b)

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

+ equations for shear strength and stiffness f various for i fasteners f t

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal 17

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

(3 spans assumed in tables) when using the tables

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

http://www cssbi ca/ http://www.cssbi.ca/

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

Assume T = 1.6 x Ta = 0.32 s = 1.0 (SDC B)

0.02 V 10' 10 100' 100

0.2 0.1 0.0

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

T/C /C brace system

gravity loads once columns are designed

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

Diaphragm (incl. collectors & chords):

0.02 V 10' 100'

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

Diaphragm designed for Su = 166 plf:

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

G = G K1 = 0.304 ft K2 = 870 k/in / K4 = 3.78 Dxx = 1072 ft Check with spreadsheet:

Collectors designed for Pu = 8.30K: (SDC B: no need to design for overstrength)

0.02 V V 0.54 V = 16.6 16 6K

0.02 V 10' 100'

R. Tremblay, Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal

Chords designed for Pu = 7.9K :

15.7K / 200' = 0.0785 kip/ft

30.8 K / 200' = 0.154 kip/ft

ELEVATION (LONG WALL)

Pu = (154 plf)(200)2 / 8 / 100 = 7.7K

Select W8x10, A = 2.96 in2