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!

*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

LY UNB & UNT in arch Bulk Storage

LY UNB & UNT in arch Bulk Storage

LY UNB & UNT in arch Bulk Storage


Hi, it's my first post.
I am new in subject of Pre Engineered Building. The picture i attached are a design that my contractor proposed and actually catching my attention, and i'm now doing internet research about this topic (definition of Ly, UNB & UNT), since for this case of arch structure, the member is actually behaving as flexural member and also compression member.
The full design is a bulk storage with a span of 100 meter, height of 30 meter and it was designed using a tapered built up member of I profile.
The profile are very slender, but the contractor reinforce it by giving member stability bracing (as governed by AISC 360 Appendix 6) per 3 meter in form of cross brace, and 12 meter in form of truss.
Hence i understand that in the staad input they define UNT & UNB by 3 meters.
But they also define Ly by 3 meters, in which my senior had comments that since the global lateral force resisting which prevents the rafter to have lateral movement are given per 12 meter, the Ly shall be by 12 meter.

I read this explanation in the C3 commentary:
"Where beams and columns rely upon braces that are not part of the lateral force-resisting system to define their unbraced length, the braces themselves must have sufficient strength and stiffness to control member movement at the brace points (see Appendix 6)."

Could this statement in the commentary section justify what my contractor doing? Since i also have seen many PEB structure that even "crazier" that they rely on purlin as member stability bracing, which i predict not even fulfilling Appendix 6 requirement, but the building is standing still (with lot of prays upsidedown)

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! Already a Member? Login


Taking Control of Engineering Documents
This ebook covers tips for creating and managing workflows, security best practices and protection of intellectual property, Cloud vs. on-premise software solutions, CAD file management, compliance, and more. Download Now
The Great Project Profitability Debate
A/E firms have a great opportunity to lead the world into the future, but the industry’s greatest asset—real-time data—is sitting wasted in clunky, archaic ERP platforms. Learn how real-time, fully interactive dashboards in a modern ERP allow you to unlock data that will shape the future of the world. Download Now

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close