Slip Connection at Top of Non-Load Bearing CMU Partition
Slip Connection at Top of Non-Load Bearing CMU Partition
(OP)
I am designing a large pre-engineered steel building with frames that span about 133 feet (ice hockey rink). Part of the building has a mezzanine, really a second floor, with a sports bar and an exercise room. The non-load bearing CMU walls aroung these spaces extend to the roof above (the architect shows them butting to the roof, which of course should not be done).
I want to devise some sort of slip connection to brace the top of these walls up at the roof, but I don't know how much the roof will deflect (pre-engineered, but not designed yet). If I assume the roof could deflect as much as span/180, this would be almost 9 inches!!!
Has anyone else seen this before?
I want to devise some sort of slip connection to brace the top of these walls up at the roof, but I don't know how much the roof will deflect (pre-engineered, but not designed yet). If I assume the roof could deflect as much as span/180, this would be almost 9 inches!!!
Has anyone else seen this before?
DaveAtkins






RE: Slip Connection at Top of Non-Load Bearing CMU Partition
RE: Slip Connection at Top of Non-Load Bearing CMU Partition
RE: Slip Connection at Top of Non-Load Bearing CMU Partition
RE: Slip Connection at Top of Non-Load Bearing CMU Partition
RE: Slip Connection at Top of Non-Load Bearing CMU Partition
RE: Slip Connection at Top of Non-Load Bearing CMU Partition
But PMR06 raises a good point as well, and I'm not sure how to deal with that. I do think that vertical deflection of the frame is more likely than lateral deflection of the entire building, however.
DaveAtkins
RE: Slip Connection at Top of Non-Load Bearing CMU Partition
RE: Slip Connection at Top of Non-Load Bearing CMU Partition
I plan to look at the PEMB shop drawings when they arrive--if the deflection is < 10-1/2", I can revise the detail.
DaveAtkins
RE: Slip Connection at Top of Non-Load Bearing CMU Partition
RE: Slip Connection at Top of Non-Load Bearing CMU Partition
RE: Slip Connection at Top of Non-Load Bearing CMU Partition
Good luck DaveAtkins! I'd love to hear a follow up on this.
RE: Slip Connection at Top of Non-Load Bearing CMU Partition
RE: Slip Connection at Top of Non-Load Bearing CMU Partition
RE: Slip Connection at Top of Non-Load Bearing CMU Partition
If it were me, and seeing how much PEMB's deflect (especially during snow!) I would design any CMU structure inside the PEMB as standalone. You'll never be able to force the PEMB to design it to a tighter limit.
RE: Slip Connection at Top of Non-Load Bearing CMU Partition
I hope the Architect is not using a hung ceiling as there will be a noticeable sag when the roof deflects and then no sag where it is connected to the walls. Also, where pipes are hung from the roof structure and then go thru walls with a sleeve. Pipes may rupture with those kind of movements if not detailed correctly!
RE: Slip Connection at Top of Non-Load Bearing CMU Partition
Yes, I believe they do, but these metal building codes are simply more specific to the design of the lighter thickness elements. The building still must satisfy the adopted code in the jurisdition in which it is built.
RE: Slip Connection at Top of Non-Load Bearing CMU Partition
RE: Slip Connection at Top of Non-Load Bearing CMU Partition
This type of situation is best avoided entirly by convincing the client to use framed walls instead. I have had problems with framed partitions and less than 3 inches of roof deflection even though there had been an allowance for movement.