Purlin Girt Reinforcement

STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN/GIRT
and STRUCTURAL REINFORCEMENT

PRACTICES DESIGN SOLUTIONS
INTRODUCTION
Occasionally situations arise in which the largest standard single purlin or girt section
does not have the necessary strength or stiffness for the given span and/or loading.
This can occur in both simple and continuous span purlins and girts. When the
condition is such that the entire building is affected the solution is usually
straightforward. In this case the purlin or girt spacing is usually reduced over the entire
roof or wall to a space that will allow use of the largest member size. In some cases
however the problem may exist in only a small number of bays. Frequently the problem
is limited to a single bay. Some common examples of this are listed below.
1) End bay purlins at roof height changes with snow build up loads
2) End bays or interior bays with additional loads or longer bay spaces than the rest
of the building
3) Jamb support girts carrying large door jamb reactions
When this problem occurs in relatively few bays reduction of the purlin/girt spacing in all
bays may not be the most economical solution. The following options may be employed
to increase the strength and stiffness of the purlins/girts in individual bays.
I. Compound Sections
In some cases two members can be added together to produce a stronger stiffer
member. This method will work when positive (mid-bay) bending or deflection control
the purlin/girt design.
There are several issues to keep in mind when employing this option.
a. Never combine ZEE sections in a nested section as shown in Figure 1
(a) (b)
Figure 1 Figure 2
VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.8

BUILDINGS, 10/01/01 Rev.0 Page 1 of 16
INC.
As can be seen in the figure ZEE’s don’t nest perfectly. The thicker the section the
worse the nesting problem will be. This causes serious erection difficulty when trying to
install the roof or wall panels. It is very difficult to apply self-drilling fasteners to lapped
ZEE sections. Metal building erectors accept this difficulty in the lapped areas required
for continuous purlins because they know this is a normal part of metal building
construction and the lapped areas comprise a relatively small portion of the total length
of purlins. However, when nested ZEE’s are used over an entire bay length many
erectors will become very upset due to the unexpected costs associated with fastener
burnout, increased erection time, etc.
In general, when combining members it is best to combine a ZEE with a CEE section as
shown in Figure 2. While the CEE doesn’t nest into the ZEE perfectly, the detail
eliminates the need to penetrate both members with the fasteners. The fasteners would
be placed in the CEE section flange only if detail 2-a is used. In some cases it may be
possible to nest a 6-1/2” deep CEE girt into an 8-1/2” ZEE. Although detail 2-b may be
somewhat less economical than detail 2-a it is preferable when it can be made to work
since there are a couple of potential problems with nesting a CEE and ZEE member of
equal depths. The primary issues of concern with detail 2-a are:
¾The line of fasteners will be shifted by approximately one purlin flange width in
the bay with the compound section. This is probably not an issue for standing
seam roof systems. For through-fastened wall or roof panels the builder must
approve this solution after being informed that the fastener lines will be
interrupted. In many cases this will be acceptable but not necessarily always.
¾When detail 2-a is used the CEE section flange will protrude slightly beyond the
ZEE section flange. For double 0.120” sections this dimension could be as much
as ¼”. This is generally considered not be a problem as long as the panels are
fastened to the CEE and not the ZEE. An exception might be if a single
compound section was located between closely spaced adjacent single sections.
NOTE: Never try to nest a 6-1/2” CEE with a 6-1/2” ZEE. The CEE section has a
wider flange than the ZEE and will not nest properly.

INC.
As with all designs, some judgment will be necessary when deciding to use this
approach.
b. For continuous purlins compound sections are only effective when design is
controlled by positive bending or deflection
Consider the continuous end bay purlin shown in Figure 3.
Detail A
M+
MLap
Figure 3
If the positive moment M+ as shown in Figure 3 or deflection is controlling the purlin

design then addition of the nested CEE section as shown may serve to correct the
problem.

INC.
Thus it is seen that if a 0.12” thick single purlin won’t work it may be possible to
substitute a compound section comprised of two thinner sections. Ideally, the two
sections should be the same thickness. This will not always be possible. If design
criteria other than positive bending or deflection are controlling, or close to controlling
the design of the purlin, this solution may not work. Other design criteria that must be
considered are:
9Negative bending at the end of the lap

9Negative bending at the support
9Shear (Critical at end of lap)
9Combined bending and shear (Critical at end of laps)
9Web Crippling (Critical at supports)
9Combined bending and Web Crippling (Critical at supports)
As an example of why this solution may not work if one of the design criteria listed
above controls the purlin design consider detail A.
CEE Int. bay ZEE
Detail A
6”
End bay
ZEE
From detail A it is seen that the added CEE section does nothing to increase the
bending or shear strength of the end bay purlin at the end of the lap. Nor does it
improve the web crippling or bending strength within the lapped region. Therefore, if
any of the six criteria listed above are controlling the thickness of the end bay purlin this
solution may not work. Also, even if the positive bending moment controls the thickness
of the end bay purlin, if one or more of the six criteria listed above is close to controlling
then the thickness of the end bay purlin may need to remain and the CEE section
chosen to make up the difference in required strength and stiffness. In this case we
would be required to disregard our desire to keep the thickness of the CEE and ZEE
sections equal.

INC.
c. The CEE section must be connected to the ZEE section along its length, not just
at the ends
A. Simply Supported Compound Purlins or Girts
EXAMPLE #1:
Determine the attachment requirements between the webs of the compound simply
supported CEE/ZEE girts shown in Figure 4. Assume intermediate web connections a
1/3 points as shown.
Girt web
connection points Girt clip
GCA or
6-1/2” CEE girt GCD
8-1/2” ZEE girt 30’ bay space
+ +
+ +
a =10’-0” 10’-0” a =10’-0”
w = 0.148 k/f
Figure 4
SOLUTION:
0.148(30 2 )12
Maximum bending moment (midspan): MX = = 199.8 in − k
8
199.8
Required compound section modulus: S req = = 6.054 in 3
0.6(55)
USE: 8.5Z x 0.105 + 6.5C x 0.120

INC.
When two members of different depth are used together it is not possible to simply add
their section moduli together. The compound section modulus must be approximated
based on the sum of their stiffness as follows:
3
S compound = (IxeS(8.5) + IxeS(6.5))/4.25 ≅ (16.42 + 9.53)/4.25 = 6.10 in
4
I compound ≅ 16.42+ 9.53 = 25.95 in
4
∆ ≅ 0.7(5).148(360 )/[12(384)29500(25.95)] = 2.46” < L/120 = 2.9” OK
The amount of force to be transferred through each connector can be estimated as

follows.
I 6.5 9.53
Assume: M 6.5 = M tot = 199.8 = 73.38 in − k
I 6.5 + I 8.5 25.95
Given the fastener spacing the moment in the 6.5” C is related to the force in the
fasteners as follows.
73.38
M 6.5 = 10(12) Pfas → Pfas ≅ = 0.61 kips
120

INC.
A more accurate calculation of the fastener forces may be made using the following
stiffness compatibility relationship.
wa
48I 8.5
[ L3 − 2 La 2 + a 3 ]
Pfas = (4.8 – 1)
ª 1 1 º
« + ( 2
» 3La − 4a
3
)
¬ 6.5
I I 8.5 ¼
Where:
P fas = Force through each pair of connectors (kips)
w = uniformly distributed load (k/f)
L = Girt span (in.)
I6.5, I8.5 = Effective moment of inertia of 6-1/2” and 8-1/2” girt respectively (in4)
(.148)120
48(16.42)
[ ]
360 3 − 2(360)120 2 + 120 3
From equation 4.8 – 1: Pfas = = 0.60 kips
ª 1 1 º
[ 2
«16.42 + 9.53 » 3(360)120 − 4(120 )
3
]
¬ ¼
From this example it is seen that the approximate method yields results very
close to the more exact method and is probably sufficiently accurate as long as
at least two pair of intermediate fasteners equally spaced along the length of the
members are used.
USE: (2) ¼ - 14 x 1-1/4 Tek screws
From AISI E4.3.1 the allowable shear per fastener is controlled by the shear strength of
the body of the fastener. Vallow = 1040 lbs/fastener OK.
The moment in the 6-1/2” member is:
M 6.5 = 0.6(120) = 72 in-k ≅ 73.38 in-k (1.9% difference)
72 / 2.932 = 24.55 ksi OK

INC.
From this we can check the moment in the ZEE section. The actual loading diagram for
the 8-1/2” ZEE section is as shown in Figure 5.
8-1/2” ZEE girt 30’ bay space
10’
0.6 kips 0.6 kips
w = 0.148 k/f
Figure 5
End reaction of 8-1/2” member: R = 0.148(30)/2 – 0.60 = 1.62 kips
ª 0.148(15 2 ) º
M 8−1 / 2 = «1.62(15) − + 0.60(5)»12 = 127.8 in − k
¬ 2 ¼
Mallow = 3.864(0.6)55 = 127.51 in-k OK
If we had used the approximate method to calculate the moment in the 8-1/2 “ ZEE the
result would have been:
I 8.5 16.42
M 8.5 = M tot = 199.8 = 126.42 in − k
I 6.5 + I 8.5 25.95
127.8/126.42 = 1.01 (Very close)
NOTE: The approximate method will be sufficiently accurate as long as at least

two pairs of intermediate fasteners are used as shown in this example.

INC.
Actual shear carried by each girt:
V6.5 = 0.60 kips

V8.5 = 0.148(30/2) - 0.60 = 1.62 kips
Presumed shear capacity = 12.44 + 16.24 = 28.68 kips
Obviously, the calculated distribution of shear does not match the relative shear
capacity. However, when this nesting technique is used with simple girts shear is
extremely unlikely to control.
Actual 10 year wind deflection of 8-1/2” ZEE at midspan:
∆10 year = 0.7(3.51) = 2.46”
Presumed deflection = 0.7(5).148(3604)/[12(384)29500(25.95)] = 2.46” OK
Notes on the procedure above:
1. Equation 4.8 – 1 can be used to solve for the force through each pair of
connectors when the uniformly distributed load is applied through one of the
members only. Variables with the subscript 8.5 represent the member to which
the uniform load w is applied (e.g. to which panels are fastened). Variables with
the subscript 6.5 are for the other member.
Note: For general use of equation 4.8 – 1 variables with the subscript 8.5 apply
the member through which the uniformly distributed load w is introduced.
2. Equation 4.8 – 1 applies only to simply supported girts. Another condition of these
equations is that the CEE girt spans approximately the full length of the ZEE girt.
3. It can be seen that when at least two equally spaced connectors are used the
approximate method above produces very good results in predicting deflections
and member stresses.
IMPORTANT: Whenever nested girts are used it is necessary to use a heavier girt
clip with a special weld requirement to avoid bending of the clip under the self-
weight of the girts. Therefore, for nested girts substitute a ¼” girt clip with
continuous 3/16” fillet welds both sides. The part mark is GCA052060

INC.
B. Continuous Compound Purlins or Girts
The approximate method shown above does not produce the same accuracy of results
when applied to continuous purlins or girts as will be shown in the example.
Before deciding to use continuous compound purlins or girts there are a couple
of potential problems that must be considered.
Potential problems with continuous compound purlins or girts:
1) Nesting of CEE members into purlins will not allow for alignment of sag angle
slots. Standard punch patterns for CEE’s do not contain sag slots. Therefore, if
this method is used field connection of the sag angles using self drilling fasteners
will be required. If this is done it will be necessary to connect the CEE to the ZEE
web at each sag angle location with two ¼ - 14 x 1-1/4” self-drilling fasteners.
Obviously this will not be an issue if no sag angles are required.
2) When CEE’s are nested into ZEE’s the flange brace holes may not align.
Standard CEE sections have web holes at their ends and at nominal distances of
2’, 3’ and 4’ from the support. Thus, if simply supported members are bolted
together through their webs directly over the frame lines at both ends, as done in
the example of Figure 4, all flange brace holes will align. For continuous purlins
or girts there will be a flange brace hole available as long as the lap is set at
3’-6” as shown in figure 6. This is probably a good idea anyway since the
increased lap will improve stiffness and reduce positive moment thus reducing
the magnitude of the problem. It is also possible to detail special holes in the
CEE section webs to accommodate the flange braces.
The builder must be made aware of the relative merits and problems with
continuous compound purlins or girts and be allowed to decide whether or not to
use them.

INC.
EXAMPLE #2:
Given:
1) 5 bays at 30 feet
2) 5’-0” purlin space
3) Loading as shown in Figure 6 (40 psf roof snow)
4) SSR roof w/ 6” blanket insulation
After running a roof design on VP Command the results indicated that 8.5 x 0.120
purlins did not work. For this purlin R = 0.66 (Gravity load)
The maximum positive end bay moment was: +Mmax = 152.88 in-k
Maximum allowable moment Ma = 4.4(.6)55(.66) = 95.83 in-k NG
The maximum end bay deflection was: ∆ = 2.86 in.

Allowable deflection = L/150 = 29(12)/150 = 2.32 in. NG
Determine the member sizes and attachment requirements between the webs of the
compound continuous CEE/ZEE end bay purlins shown in Figure 6. Assume a two
intermediate web connections spaced equally along the CEE.
w = 0.212 k/f
25.5’
+Mmax
Set this lap
to 3’-6”
Figure 6
In this case positive end bay moment controlled the design of the end bay purlin.
However, Combined bending and web crippling is also at a high ratio over the supports.
Therefore, we must keep the 8.5 Z .120 in the end bay and add a CEE section to
reinforce it.

INC.
SOLUTION:
A. The approximate method
IZ
Assume: MZ = M tot ≤ M allow = 95.83 in − k
I Z + IC
From this we can calculate the required moment of inertia for the CEE section.
IZ 18.7
IC ≅ 152.88 − I Z = 152.88 − 18.7 = 11.13 in 4
95.83 95.83
TRY: 8.5 C .073 IX = 11.24 in4
And the assumed moment in the CEE section is:
IC 11.24
MC = M tot = 152.88 = 57.39 in − k
I Z + IC 18.7 + 11.24
Given the fastener spacing, assume the moment in the CEE is related to the force in
the fasteners as follows.
57.39
M C = 8.33(12) Pfas → Pfas ≅ = 0.57 kips
100
Results from approximate solution:
MZ ≅ 95.49 in-k
MC ≅ 57.39 in-k
∆ ≅ 2.86(18.7/29.94) = 1.79”

INC.
B. A more exacting approach
When we use an 8-1/2” CEE member the panels will attach to the CEE instead of the
ZEE purlin. Therefore, our structural model must be such that the external load enters
through the CEE as shown in Figure 7. We have selected to use two points of
attachment between the CEE and ZEE. Never use fewer than two.
CEE section
0.22 k/f
(3) Very stiff
links
0.22 k/f
8.33’ Lap regions

8.33’ 8.33’ Continuous
purlin string
3.5’ lap
6”
Figure 7
Structural model of
composite continuous
endbay purlins

INC.
Web connection
points
8-1/2” CEE
8-1/2” ZEE 29’0” Cl-CL frame
+ +
+ +
8.33’ 8.33’ 8.33’
25’
Figure 7-A
For the structure shown in Figure 7 we estimated an 8.5 C 0.073. The resulting forces
based on the structural analysis model of Figure 7 are:
MZ = 103.92 in-k
MC = 60.6 in-k
Pfas = 1.66 kips (Max. @ third link from left)
∆ = 1.85”
From example 2 the following are observed:
9The simplified method tends to underestimate the moment in the CEE

section and in the continuous ZEE member. In this example the differences
are 5.6% and 8.8% respectively.
9The simplified method tends to underestimate total deflection. In this case
the estimate was off by only about 3.4%.
9It is apparent from this example that if the approximate method is used the
size of the CEE section selected should be larger than the estimated
requirement by at least 10%. For this example if we had chosen an
8.5 C 0.082 instead of the 0.073” thick member the analyzed forces would
have been as follows.
MZ = 99.96 in-k
MC = 64.92 in-k
Pfas = 1.63 kips (Max. @ third link from left)
∆ = 1.57”

INC.
II. Intermediate Purlins or Girts (This option is available through VP Command)
Another option is to reduce the load on the purlins by adding intermediate simple
purlins between the continuous purlins in the bay.
Example 3:
Solve the problem in example 2 using intermediate simple purlins in the end bays.
Solution:
The allowable moment for the 8.5 Z 0.120 purlin is: Ma = 0.6(55)0.66(4.4) = 95.83 in-k
Therefore, the approximate equivalent end bay purlin space is:
Based on the continuous purlins: Smax = (95.83/152.88) 5 = 3.13 ft.

Based on the simple purlins: 0.0425(Smax)(292/8)12 = 95.49 Æ Smax = 1.78 ft.
Add (2) simple purlins between every continuous purlin space in the end bays
only
Resulting average purlin space = 5/3 = 1.67 ft.
The resulting VP Command design was:
Continuous purlins:
Bay Thickness Lap

1 0.082 4’
2 0.105 4’
3 0.092 4’
4 0.105 4’
5 0.082 4’
Simple purlins: 8.5 Z 0.105 @ 1’-8”o/c

INC.
Which solution is more cost effective? Example 2 or 3?
If we assume a 100-foot span for the 150’ long building in the examples above the
comparison would be as follows.
Option 1: Compound purlins
100/5 = 20 rows
Bay Continuous Purlins Compound CEE’s

1 (20) @ 34 ft = 680(6.05) = 4114# (40) @ 25 ft = 1000(4.13) = 4130#
2 (20) @ 38 ft = 760(5.29) = 4020#
3 (20) @ 38 ft = 760(4.13) = 3139#
4 (20) @ 38 ft = 760(5.29) = 4020#
5 (20) @ 34 ft = 680(6.05) = 4114# (40) @ 25 ft = 1000(4.13) = 4130#
Total
weight 27,677#
Option 2: Intermediate Purlins
Bay Continuous Purlins Simple Purlins

1 (20) @ 34 ft = 680(4.13) = 2808# (80) @ 30 ft = 2400(5.29) = 12696#
2 (20) @ 38 ft = 760(5.29) = 4020#
3 (20) @ 38 ft = 760(4.63) = 3519#
4 (20) @ 38 ft = 760(5.29) = 4020#
5 (20) @ 34 ft = 680(4.13) = 2808# (80) @ 30 ft = 2400(5.29) = 12696#
Total
weight 42,567#
From the above it is apparent that the compound purlin solution would be much more
material efficient in this case.
42567 – 27677 = 14,900# = 7.45 tons of purlins
As always however we must keep the erector in mind as discussed above.

INC.

Purlin Girt Reinforcement

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Purlin Girt Reinforcement

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN/GIRT

and STRUCTURAL REINFORCEMENT

a. Never combine ZEE sections in a nested section as shown in Figure 1

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.8

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.8

Consider the continuous end bay purlin shown in Figure 3.

If the positive moment M+ as shown in Figure 3 or deflection is controlling the purlin

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.8

9Negative bending at the end of the lap

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.8

A. Simply Supported Compound Purlins or Girts

a =10’-0” 10’-0” a =10’-0”

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.8

The amount of force to be transferred through each connector can be estimated as

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.8

USE: (2) ¼ - 14 x 1-1/4 Tek screws

The moment in the 6-1/2” member is:

M 6.5 = 0.6(120) = 72 in-k ≅ 73.38 in-k (1.9% difference)

72 / 2.932 = 24.55 ksi OK

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.8

8-1/2” ZEE girt 30’ bay space

End reaction of 8-1/2” member: R = 0.148(30)/2 – 0.60 = 1.62 kips

Mallow = 3.864(0.6)55 = 127.51 in-k OK

127.8/126.42 = 1.01 (Very close)

NOTE: The approximate method will be sufficiently accurate as long as at least

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.8

Actual shear carried by each girt:

V6.5 = 0.60 kips

Presumed shear capacity = 12.44 + 16.24 = 28.68 kips

Actual 10 year wind deflection of 8-1/2” ZEE at midspan:

∆10 year = 0.7(3.51) = 2.46”

Presumed deflection = 0.7(5).148(3604)/[12(384)29500(25.95)] = 2.46” OK

Notes on the procedure above:

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.8

B. Continuous Compound Purlins or Girts

Potential problems with continuous compound purlins or girts:

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.8

Maximum allowable moment Ma = 4.4(.6)55(.66) = 95.83 in-k NG

The maximum end bay deflection was: ∆ = 2.86 in.

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.8

A. The approximate method

TRY: 8.5 C .073 IX = 11.24 in4

And the assumed moment in the CEE section is:

Results from approximate solution:

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.8

B. A more exacting approach

8.33’ Lap regions

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.8

8.33’ 8.33’ 8.33’

From example 2 the following are observed:

9The simplified method tends to underestimate the moment in the CEE

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.8

II. Intermediate Purlins or Girts (This option is available through VP Command)

Therefore, the approximate equivalent end bay purlin space is:

Based on the continuous purlins: Smax = (95.83/152.88) 5 = 3.13 ft.

Resulting average purlin space = 5/3 = 1.67 ft.

The resulting VP Command design was:

Bay Thickness Lap

Simple purlins: 8.5 Z 0.105 @ 1’-8”o/c

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.8

Which solution is more cost effective? Example 2 or 3?

Option 1: Compound purlins

Bay Continuous Purlins Compound CEE’s

Option 2: Intermediate Purlins