×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

(OP)
We are designing a general aircraft hangar building with 50 foot simple span steel header beams that support prefab wood trusses spaced at 24 inches.  I am concerned about lateral support of the compression flanges.  Using ASD AISC 9th Edition, for W27x94 (Fy=50) beams with Fb=.66Fy, lateral bracing supports would need to occur at maximum 8.9 ft (Lc) spacings and would be designed for capacity of 4.9 kips horizontal force (using 2% of the maximum compression flange force).

Question 1:  Could lateral bracing be provided by wood trusses?  If so, is it reasonable to use a design horizontal force of 4.9*2.0/8.9=1.1 kips per truss and provide adequate connectors from the truss to the nailer plate and from the nailer plate to the beam flange?  In other words, can a designer distribute the lateral bracing force along the length of the beam?

Question 2:  In lieu of bracing by the trusses, is it permissible to use full fitted web stiffeners, spaced at Lc or less, to brace the top flange by connecting it to the relatively laterally-stable bottom tension flange?

Any code or text references would be appreciated!

RE: Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

Quote:

Question 2:  In lieu of bracing by the trusses, is it permissible to use full fitted web stiffeners, spaced at Lc or less, to brace the top flange by connecting it to the relatively laterally-stable bottom tension flange?

That doesn't work. You can't brace a top flange with a vertical stiffener.



RE: Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

If the wood trusses bear directly on the steel beam they will provide the lateral bracing for the top flange.

RE: Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

I don't see anything in the code that allows you to distribute the required strength by the ratio of the brace spacing over Lc.  In addition to the required strength, Appendix 6 of the new code has a stiffness requirement, something you should pay attention to, seeing you're bracing steel with wood.

RE: Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

If you want the trusses to provide bracing, you'll have to provide the truss engineer with bracing forces and design connections to handle the brace force.  This is unusual so I typically won't use trusses as bracing per se.  Instead I feel comfortable saying that with trusses, my unbraced length, say L/2 instead of at each truss location.  By the time you go through everything it may prove easier to just provide more beam weight and leave it at that.  

RE: Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

Read the 13th Ed. Manual, Spec. Appendix 6.

RE: Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

I have dealt with this same issue myself--on a project with a steel truss top chord (a WT) braced by wood roof trusses.  Basically, I did what you are proposing--I figured out what my maximum unbraced length could be, and provided enough connections IN THAT LENGTH for the 2 percent force.  So I did not distribute the 2 percent force across the entire truss span, but only across the assumed unbraced length.

In your case, if you assume the beam is braced 2' oc, I think you should design for the 2 percent force every 2' oc.  If you assume the beam is braced 6' oc, you should design for the 2 percent force every 6' oc.

DaveAtkins

RE: Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

I concur with the way you propose to provide bracing. But don't forget the bottom flange.  You will probably have net uplift under some wind conditions, so you have to brace the bottom flange accordingly.

It is unnecessarily expensive to design a beam spanning 50 ft to be unbraced.  The load will always brace the beam if adequate connections exist.

RE: Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

Would anyone explain why a full fitted stiffener can't be used? I am trying to understand the rationale behind it. Would it not prevent local buckling?

RE: Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

slickdeals:

The flange brace is intended to prevent lateral torsional buckling of the section - twisting.  The stiffeners are useless in the prevention of LTB.

RE: Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

Yes, I should have been more explicit.  The vertical stiffeners, as MarcbSE says, DO help to brace against local buckling (web or flange) but the original post was definitely talking about lateral torsional buckling of the overall member.

For any sort of element to resist LTB, you must have some external entity to brace the beam against to reduce the unbraced length of the compression flange and reduce Lb.

RE: Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

Stiffeners used in that manner are not always useless.  If the top flange is in compression and something's providing torsional restraint at the bottom flange, then stiffeners might provide enough web distortional stiffness to make a torsional brace point.  Doesn't work for continuously braced situations, though.

RE: Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

Appendix 6.3.1b includes the following:

Quote:

When Lb is less than Lq, the maximum unbraced length for Mr, then Lb in Equation A-6-8 shall be permitted to be taken equal to Lq.

Can anyone point to any code language or research that indicates that it is proper to distribute the required brace strength by the ratio of Lb/Lq, when Lb is less than Lq?

RE: Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

jmiec, I've never heard of such a thing.  Doesn't sound correct to me.

That's not what the quoted language is saying (although not sure if that's what you're implying).  Lq will certainly be larger than Lb, often by a very wide margin.  Plugging Lq into the equations results in much less severe requirements.  The crappy part is coming up with Lq (say Section F4 applies, for example).

RE: Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

271828-

If I understand the op, he/she wishes to distribute the required brace force by the ratio of Lb/Lq.  This comes from Question 1:

Quote:

...is it reasonable to use a design horizontal force of 4.9*2.0/8.9=1.1 kips per truss...

While it seems reasonable, I don't think the Appendix 6 allows it.  However, from some of the responses, it appears that others believe it is correct to ratio the required brace strength, or, put another way, to distribute the required force to adjacent braces. So, I'm asking if anyone can back up that position.

I quoted Appendix 6.3.1b to show that the code had addressed short unbraced lengths for the stiffness requirement, but was mum on the strength requirement.  




RE: Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

(OP)
Thanks, everyone, for your comments.  I now understand that web stiffening is not a proper substitute for external bracing, although it could serve to brace the bottom flange of a beam over a torsionally connected column if the top flange were laterally supported (for instance at a continuous or cantilevered beam support).  In that case, it would serve as a type of weak-axis moment connection through the bottom flange.

Appendix 6 of the 13th Edition is quite helpful in describing design parameters for bracing, but does not specifically allow LATERAL bracing forces to be distributed along the beam length, as my Question 1 proposes.  However, there are provisions for continuous TORSIONAL bracing on a per-foot basis (Section 6.4.2b).  I think we can discretize that for every truss bearing condition (2' o.c.) and provide connections on both the top and bottom flanges to resist the design torsional bracing moment.  We will ask the wood truss designer to accommodate those forces.

RE: Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

It only works if your bracing member can take the moment.

RE: Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

telebob,

You are on safe ground.

csd72,

What moment?  I think we are talking about an axial force.

RE: Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

hokie66,

The bracing force is required at the top flange, the brace is at the bottom flange, the bracing now also needs to take the moment from this eccentricity otherwise it will twist.

RE: Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

csd72,

Telebob's last post says he is providing connections at both the top and bottom flange.

RE: Web stiffeners for compression flange bracing?

(OP)
It is a TORSIONAL brace to keep the section from twisting, differentiated from a LATERAL brace that would keep the compression flange in a straight horizontal position.

So, for the torsional brace, I will add steel tabs on the underside of the upper flange and also on the upper side of the lower flange, bolt wood struts at each location, then connect the far ends together through a truss node, say 8 feet away.  This will result in a torsional brace with a moment arm of 8 feet, with low forces (in this specific case, only about 400 pounds) that can be easily carried by the wood truss.

Again, the torsional bracing is provided because AISC 13th Ed Appendix 6 allows a calculation to determine the required bracing moment per foot for continuous torsional bracing, but not for continuous lateral bracing.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources