Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide Second Edition
Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide Second Edition
Scholars' Mine
AISI-Specifications for the Design of Cold- Wei-Wen Yu Center for Cold-Formed Steel
Formed Steel Structural Members Structures
01 Oct 2007
Recommended Citation
American Iron and Steel Institute, "Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition" (2007). AISI-
Specifications for the Design of Cold-Formed Steel Structural Members. 160.
https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/ccfss-aisi-spec/160
This Technical Report is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars' Mine. It has been accepted for
inclusion in AISI-Specifications for the Design of Cold-Formed Steel Structural Members by an authorized
administrator of Scholars' Mine. This work is protected by U. S. Copyright Law. Unauthorized use including
reproduction for redistribution requires the permission of the copyright holder. For more information, please
contact [email protected].
Cold-Formed Steel Framing
Design Guide
Second Edition
October 2007
Preface
This publication is intended as a guide for designers of cold-formed steel framing (CFSF)
systems for buildings. CFSF products include cold-formed studs, joists, rafters, trusses
and miscellaneous bracing and connection components. They may be stick built on site
as individual members or panelized into pre-assembled systems for walls, floors or
roofs.
The material presented in this publication has been prepared for the general information
of the reader. While the material is believed to be technically correct and in accordance
with recognized good practice at the time of publication, it should not be used without
first securing competent advice with respect to its suitability for any given application.
Neither the American Iron and Steel Institute, its Members nor T.W.J. Trestain Structural
Engineering warrant or assume liability for the suitability of the material for any general
or particular use.
This guide has been prepared to assist practicing structural engineers to design cold-
formed steel framing (CFSF) systems. This is the second edition of the Guide – the first
was published January 2002 (AISI 2002a).
A general review of the basic structural principles is provided along with a number of
detailed design examples covering wind bearing and axial load bearing stud walls and
joists. The design examples are based on the 2001 North American Specification for the
Design of Cold Formed Steel Structural Members (AISI 2001a) and the Supplement 2004
to the North American Specification (AISI 2004). Reference is also made to ASCE 7-05
(ASCE 2005) and the 2006 International Building Code (IBC 2006). The examples show
how to translate the information available in load tables into complete structural
systems. Both screwed and welded connection details are included with an emphasis on
screwed. Useful information on the strength of commonly used concrete anchors and
self-drilling screws is also included.
A number of methodologies are proposed to handle design problems not covered in the
AISI Specification. These include a rational method to check the warping torsional
stresses in channel members, an approximate method to check the bearing stresses
under the bottom track of axial load bearing stud wall assemblies and a method to check
the strength and stiffness of inner and outer top track assemblies for wind bearing
applications.
Page i
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
A universal designator system for Cold-Formed Steel Framing (CFSF) members has been
used throughout the Guide. This product identification method is described in
Appendix I.
The first edition of the Design Guide (AISI 2002a) has been completely rewritten to
reflect improvements in the design of CFSF members and connections.
• The load combination factors as required by ASCE 2005 have been used including a
0.7 factor on wind for deflection calculations from IBC 2006.
• The design examples have been revised to conform to the latest design standards
including the AISI Specification (AISI 2001a) and the AISI Supplement (AISI 2004). In
addition, AISI/COFS standards have been used where applicable (COFS 2004a,
2004b and 2004c).
• Powder actuated fasteners have been added to the examples.
• A single outer top track deflection detail has been added.
• A slide clip detail for connecting wind bearing jamb studs has been added.
• A design methodology for flat strap blocking-in has been provided.
• Design Example #2 has been expanded to include both welded and screwed
connections.
• The design method for checking cantilevering stud deflections has been expanded.
• An alternative parapet design using cantilevering HSS posts has been added.
• The connection details in Design Example #4 have been converted from welded to
screwed to reflect the more common practice.
• A jack stud has been added to the built-up jamb detail in Design Example #4.
Load Tables
In the first edition of the Guide, the generic load tables prepared by the Steel Stud
Manufacturers Association (SSMA) were used as the source for section properties and
floor and wall load capacities. Generic tables based on the latest codes and standards
(AISI 2001a, AISI 2004, ASCE 2005 and IBC 2006) were not available during preparation
of this second edition and the output from industry standard software, AISIWIN1 (Devco
2006), has been used instead. Thus in the design examples where reference is made to
"load tables" or "manufacturer's tables", it is actually AISIWIN output that has been
used. Note that the AISIWIN output is to the 2001 AISI Specification (AISI 2001a)
including the 2004 Supplement (AISI 2004).
1
AISIWIN is an industry standard steel stud and joist software package prepared by Devco
Software Inc.
Page ii
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
There are a number of other valuable resource documents for the design of cold-formed
steel structures. These are either referenced in the Design Guide or are available at the
following websites:
• American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) – www.steel.org
• Association of the Wall and Ceiling Industries – www.awci.org
• Center for Cold-Formed Steel Structures (CCFSS) – www.umr.edu/~ccfss
• Cold-Formed Steel Engineers Institute (CFSEI) – www.cfsei.org
• Steel Framing Alliance (SFA) – www.steelframing.org
• Steel Stud Manufacturers Association (SSMA) – www.ssma.com
Acknowledgements
The American Iron and Steel Institute and the Steel Stud Manufacturers Association
would like to acknowledge the contribution of Mr. Tom Trestain, P. Eng. of T.W.J.
Trestain Structural Engineering, Toronto, Canada who was retained for the preparation
of this publication. Mr. Trestain is experienced in the design and installation of CFSF
products and is an active member on the AISI Committee on Specifications and the AISI
Committee on Framing Standards as well as other voluntary industry committees.
The development of this Guide has been greatly assisted by the Dietrich Design Group
Inc. who volunteered the CAD linework for the drawings.
A number of individual engineers have also added their expertise to this project. Rob
Madsen at Devco Engineering provided many helpful interpretations of industry
practice on the West Coast. In addition, he authored the AISIWIN software package that
was used during the preparation of the Guide and provided any needed technical
support. Ed DiGirolamo and Nabil Rahman of the Steel Network and John Matsen of
Matsen Ford Design Associates were also very helpful regarding practices in the East. In
Canada, Scot McCavour at McCavour Engineering provided much practical and useful
advice along with one of their in-house details (Figure 3-17), and the willingness of
Raymond van Groll at Atkins & van Groll Inc. to share his expertise has been gratefully
received.
Lastly, many thoughtful comments were provided by the review committee from the
AISI Committee on Specifications. The implementation of their ideas has improved the
Guide considerably.
Page iii
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Page iv
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Table of Contents
Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide .................................................................................i
Preface.......................................................................................................................................... i
Scope and Purpose of the Guide .............................................................................................. i
Changes from the 1st Edition of the Design Guide ............................................................... ii
Load Tables ................................................................................................................................ ii
Other Sources of Information ................................................................................................. iii
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................. iii
Introduction...............................................................................................................................viii
1. Design Guide Focus......................................................................................................... ix
2. LRFD Versus ASD............................................................................................................ ix
3. Loads....................................................................................................................................x
3.1 Wind, Earthquake and Gravity Nominal Loads ................................................x
3.2 Load Combination Factors ....................................................................................x
4. Design Strengths for Cold-Formed Steel Framing Elements .......................................x
4.1 Member Design Strengths .....................................................................................x
4.2 Member Design Strength as a Function of Bracing.......................................... xi
4.2.1 Bracing for Wind Bearing Studs .......................................................... xi
4.2.2 Bracing for Axial Load Bearing Studs................................................ xv
4.2.3 Bracing for Joists and Rafters ............................................................ xvii
4.3 Design Strengths for Connections ..................................................................xviii
4.3.1 Welds ...................................................................................................xviii
4.3.2 Screws ..................................................................................................xviii
4.3.3 Concrete Anchors and Fasteners .....................................................xviii
Design Example #1 Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed
Design Approach...................................................................................................................... 1-1
Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1-1
Step 1 – Given ......................................................................................................................... 1-1
Step 2 – Design Wind Load................................................................................................... 1-1
Step 3 – Typical Stud Selection............................................................................................. 1-3
Step 4 – Bottom and Inner Top Track.................................................................................. 1-4
Step 5 – Window Framing Members................................................................................... 1-5
Step 6 – Final Stud and Track Member Selection ............................................................ 1-16
Step 7 – Top Track Deflection Detail ................................................................................. 1-17
Step 8 – Connection Design ................................................................................................ 1-26
Design Example #2 Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and
Welded or Screwed Connections ........................................................................................... 2-1
Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 2-2
Step 1 – Typical Stud Design ................................................................................................ 2-2
Step 2 – Through-the-Punchout Bridging Design ............................................................. 2-9
Step 3 – Check Bottom Track and Sill Track for Lateral Instability .............................. 2-20
Step 4 – Jamb Stud................................................................................................................ 2-21
Step 5 – Miscellaneous Connection Design ...................................................................... 2-23
Page v
Table of Contents
Design Example #3 Wind Bearing Wall with Strip Windows ............................................... 3-1
Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 3-1
Step 1 – Given ......................................................................................................................... 3-1
Step 2 – Design Wind Loads................................................................................................. 3-1
Step 3 – Design Earthquake Loads ...................................................................................... 3-3
Step 4 – Alternative Design Approaches ............................................................................ 3-3
Step 5 – Typical Stud Design ................................................................................................ 3-8
Step 6 – Typical Track.......................................................................................................... 3-11
Step 7 – Typical Stud Connections..................................................................................... 3-12
Step 8 – Stud Infill ................................................................................................................ 3-28
Step 9 – Alternative Detail for Shop Applied Finishes ................................................... 3-30
Design Example #4 CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall .................................... 4-1
Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 4-1
Step 1 – Given ......................................................................................................................... 4-2
Step 2 – Floor Joist Selection ................................................................................................. 4-5
Step 3 – Floor Joist Bridging ................................................................................................. 4-6
Step 4 – Floor Joist Web Stiffener......................................................................................... 4-7
Step 5 – Joist to Web Stiffener Connection ......................................................................... 4-9
Step 6 – Rim Track................................................................................................................ 4-10
Step 7 – Typical Stud ........................................................................................................... 4-10
Step 8 – Jamb Studs .............................................................................................................. 4-13
Step 9 – Track Selection ....................................................................................................... 4-14
Step 10 – Header................................................................................................................... 4-16
Step 11 – Frequency of Bridging Anchorage .................................................................... 4-25
Step 12 – Bridging Anchorage ............................................................................................ 4-34
Step 13 – Bridging to Typical Stud Screwed Connection ............................................... 4-40
Page vi
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Appendix F - Bearing Stress Distribution Between Track and Concrete for Axial Load
Bearing Studs .......................................................................................................................... F-1
Appendix H - Simplified Conservative Design Approach for Equal Leg Angles without
Lips .......................................................................................................................................H-1
Page vii
Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Page viii
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Introduction
This guide was written with a focus on the fundamental principles of cold-
formed steel design as they relate to CFSF construction. It shows how to use product
literature published by the CFSF manufacturer when executing the design of building
systems.
An intimate knowledge of the AISI North American Specification for the Design of
Cold-Formed Steel Structural Members with 2004 Supplement (AISI 2001a, AISI 2004), while
desirable, is not essential. The examples focus on those areas of the AISI Specification that
require the designer's attention. Much of the work has already been done during the
preparation of product literature by the CFSF manufacturer with section properties and
load tables calculated and ready to use in tabular form.
In the Design Guide, the examples have been prepared with more detail than
required for routine design. With experience, the designer will learn which secondary
effects can be ignored to streamline the design process. In addition, the examples are not
intended to preclude other design approaches and details. There are many satisfactory
ways to design CFSF systems.
Note that the Design Guide is almost entirely dedicated to hand calculation
methods. Hand calculation is useful for illustration purposes but may not be the most
efficient approach for routine design. Experienced practitioners automate the design
process as much as possible typically by writing their own spreadsheet type programs
or purchasing commercial cold-formed steel software packages or both.
Page ix
Introduction
3. Loads
3.1 Wind, Earthquake and Gravity Nominal Loads
The Design Guide does not attempt to interpret the wind and gravity load
provisions in the various building codes. Instead, the nominal design wind and
gravity loads are assumed.
The load combination factors for allowable strength design have been taken
from ASCE 7-05 (ASCE 2005) Section 2.4. These load combination factors are
consistent with the 2006 International Building Code (IBC 2006).
The deflection limit state for wall studs is checked for 0.7 times the nominal
wind load (for components & cladding). The 0.7 factor is taken from the AISI
Standard for Cold-Formed Steel Framing - Wall Stud Design (COFS 2004a).
Member capacities in the form of moment, shear, and web crippling design
strengths and moments of inertia for checking deflection are generally available
in published load tables. These tables also typically contain load data for wind
and axial load bearing studs and roof and floor joists.
For this edition of the Guide, the allowable spans, loads and section properties
have been derived using AISIWIN which is an industry standard software
product. 2 The output from AISIWIN (Devco 2006) conforms to the latest
requirements of the AISI Specification (AISI 2001a) and the AISI Supplement (AISI
2004). The increase in strength due to cold work of forming has been included
for flexure where applicable.
Unless note otherwise, the following yield and tensile strength values for both
stud and track have been used.
• For thicknesses less than or equal to 0.0451", Fy = 33 ksi and Fu = 45 ksi.
• For thicknesses greater than 0.0451", Fy = 50 ksi and Fu = 65 ksi.
These assumed yield and tensile strength values are common for stud whereas
track is more typically available with a yield strength of 33 ksi for all
2
For the first edition of the CFSF Guide, the allowable spans, loads and section properties
were taken from the Steel Stud Manufacturers Association (SSMA) generic load tables.
However, at the time of writing, the SSMA tables were not updated to the latest version of the
AISI Specification (AISI 2001a) and the AISI Supplement (AISI 2004). In the interests of
having all data to the latest standards, the output from AISIWIN has been used instead.
Page x
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
thicknesses. Check with the local CFSF manufacturers before specifying track
with a yield strength of 50 ksi – a special order may be required.
Note that the design expressions in the AISI Specification do not include
members subject to torsional loading between bracing points. For this case, the
AISI Specification requires testing (Section F) or rational analysis.
Page xi
Introduction
eccentricity more typical for wall studs with an old style wrap around
brick tie or for sheathing attachment when the screw is in tension.
Advantages:
Page xii
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Disadvantages:
The steel strap face bridging in Figure III is designed to act only in
tension. Because the studs all have a tendency to twist in the same
direction, the straps must be periodically anchored to the primary
structure and/or blocking-in between the studs is required every few
stud spaces as required structurally.
Advantages:
Page xiii
Introduction
Disadvantages:
Advantages:
Page xiv
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Disadvantages:
Allowable height tables for wind bearing studs typically assume that
the studs are clad with perfect sheathings on both sides. These
sheathings are assumed to completely restrain the studs laterally with
no consideration given to lateral instability or secondary torsional
stresses. When using such load tables, care is required to insure that this
assumption can be achieved in practice. See Note I.
Note I
Axial load bearing studs resist both wind and axial loads.
Page xv
Introduction
weak axis bracing forces accumulate over a number of studs and the
bridging, therefore, requires periodic anchorage to the primary structure.
Figure V illustrates a common method for transferring bridging forces to
the structure through the use of steel flat strap cross bracing.
The Standard for Cold-Formed Steel Framing – Wall Stud Design (COFS
2004a) proposes another sheathing braced design approach where the
sheathings are adequate to act alone without the benefit of steel bridging
(although bridging is required for short term loading in the absence of
sheathing). The capacity of the stud is limited by a number of strength
Page xvi
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
limit states with the local strength of the sheathing to stud connection
frequently controlling. With the exception of residential construction,
this design approach has not been widely used by the stud industry for
a number of reasons:
Load tables for axial load bearing studs typically assume one of three
possible bracing conditions:
(i) The studs are clad with perfect sheathings which completely restrain
the studs laterally and only allow column buckling about the stud
major axis. When using such load tables, care is required to insure
that this assumption can be achieved in practice.
(ii) The studs are designed with an all steel approach with no reliance
on sheathings. Overall major axis column buckling is checked along
with minor axis flexural and torsional-flexural effects between the
lines of bridging. The secondary stresses due to wind induced
torsion are usually considered to be small enough to be neglected.
(Very few load tables explicitly account for warping torsional stresses.)
(iii) The studs are clad with imperfect sheathings and designed in
accordance with the Standard for Cold-Formed Steel Framing – Wall
Stud Design (COFS 2004a)
Joists and rafters are typically designed neglecting torsion and lateral
instability effects because sheathings such as plywood subfloors in
combination with finished ceilings provide the necessary diaphragm
strength. Where sheathing is absent on one or both sides, bridging is
usually required to prevent twisting.
Page xvii
Introduction
4.3.1 Welds
The unit strengths of fillet and flare groove welds are defined in the AISI
Specification Sections E2.4 and E2.5. The unit strength is a function of the
weld type, the weld length and the direction of loading.
4.3.2 Screws
The design strength for sheet metal and self-drilling screw connections
is defined in the AISI Specification. Analytical expressions are provided
with the exception of the shear and tensile strength of the screw itself.
These tensile and shear strengths are provided in Appendix A.
Page xviii
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Design Example #1
Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a
Sheathed Design Approach
Introduction
This design example is based on the sheathed design approach which assumes that the
sheathing is structurally adequate to resist the torsional component of loads not applied
through the shear center and to resist the effects of lateral instability. Members are
designed using simple beam theory. All connections are fastened with self-drilling
screws.
For welded connections and an unsheathed design approach, see Design Example #2
where the secondary effects of torsion and lateral instability are included.
Figure 1-1 shows the components of a wind bearing infill wall assembly. The numbers
shown in Figure 1-1 correspond to the applicable design step used in this example The
basic design steps are as follows:
Step 1: Given
Step 2: Design Wind Load
Step 3: Typical Stud Selection
Step 4: Bottom and Inner Top Track
Step 5: Window Framing Members
Step 6: Final Stud and Track Member Selection
Step 7: Top Track Deflection Detail
Step 8: Connection Design
Step 1 – Given
• EIFS (exterior insulation finish system) exterior finish that applies a uniform load to
the studs.
• Stud spacing = 16" o.c.
• Stud height = 13'-0"
• Interior and exterior sheathings provide adequate torsional restraint for loads not
applied through the shear center and for lateral instability.
• No axial loads other than the self weight of the assembly.
• L/360 deflection limit
• Stud depth = 6" for architectural considerations
From the governing building code, the nominal wind load = ±28 psf.
Page 1-1
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
Load combination factors for allowable strength design (ASD) are based on ASCE 7-05
(ASCE 2005) Section 2.4. For strength, the full nominal wind load is used. For
deflection, 0.7 times the nominal wind load is used. For further discussion refer to the
Introduction Item 3.2.
Page 1-2
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Refer to a manufacturer's wind bearing stud allowable height table with the following
details:
• Height = 13'-0"
• Spacing = 16" o.c.
• Nominal wind load = 28 psf
• Deflection limit = L/360
Note that typical wind bearing tables include checks on the following:
• Deflection check at 0.7 times nominal wind load
• Midspan moment check at nominal wind load
• End shear check at nominal wind load
• Web crippling may or may not be flagged in the allowable height tables
Web crippling is flagged and therefore needs to be checked. (See Note 1-1)
Note 1-1
For a typical stud to track connection (welded or screwed), the allowable web
crippling strength of the stud is adequately predicted by the AISI Specification
Eq. C3.4.1-1 assuming a nominal bearing length of 1 inch (Drysdale 1991)
provided there is at least that much bearing between the stud and the vertical
leg of the track. For this web crippling calculation to be valid, web punchouts
are not permitted near the end of the stud. Load tables typically set the distance
from the centerline of the last punchout to the end of the stud at 12" minimum.
Punchouts closer than 12" to the end of the stud may or may not result in a
reduction to the allowable web crippling strength. Refer to the AISI
Specification web crippling provisions for guidance.
Page 1-3
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
From tables for 1" bearing length and end one flange (EOF) fastened condition:
The Standard for Cold-Formed Steel Framing - Wall Stud Design (COFS 2004a) provides
a design procedure for checking local failure (tear through) of the track. The COFS
standard does not require this failure mechanism to be checked when the thickness of
the track is greater than or equal to the thickness of the stud.
Try a track that is thinner than the typical stud – 600T125-33 (33) track.
where:
Pnst = nominal strength for stud to track connection when subjected to
transverse loads
tt = design track thickness
wst = 20 tt + 0.56α (α = 1 when tt is in inches and α = 25.4 when tt is in
mm)
Fut = tensile strength of the track
Ω = 1.70
tt = 0.0346"
Fut = 45 ksi
Therefore, 600T125-33 (33) track is acceptable for typical stud tear through. For a
discussion of final track selection see Step 6.
Page 1-4
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
The transfer of wind loads from the window assembly to the surrounding stud
framing is a complicated issue depending on the structural behavior of the
window itself and the connection of the window to the surrounding CFSF
members.
Height 6.50
= = 2.00 for glass and the two way distribution is appropriate.
Width 3.25
Page 1-5
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
Note 1-2
A 2-way wind load distribution (Fig. 1-2) is usually adequate for windows with a
height/width ratio greater than or equal to 2. This design example was also checked with a 4-
way distribution (calculations not included here) indicating the following "errors" in the 2-
way assumption:
Jamb Stud
Moment 4-Way/2-Way = 0.99
Shear 4-Way/2-Way = 1.00
Deflection 4-Way/2-Way = 0.99
Note that the as-built behavior of the window sill, head and jamb CFSF framing may vary
from either the 2-way or 4-way assumption depending on both the structural behavior of the
window itself and the as-built connection of the window to the surrounding CFSF members.
Designing for the actual load transfer details around windows is complicated, often not
known at the time of stud design and usually not required.
Page 1-6
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Required Moment
2
PL w L
M req = +
4 8
⎡ 296 (6.5) 45.5 (6.5)2 ⎤ ⎡ 12 ⎤
=⎢ + ⎥⎢ ⎥
⎢⎣ 4 8 ⎥⎦ ⎣ 1000 ⎦
= 8.66 in . kips
Required Shear
Required Inertia
PL3 5wL4
δ= +
48EI 384EI
⎡ 296 (78) 3 5 ( 45.5 / 12 ) (78) 4 ⎤
=⎢ + ⎥ [0.70]
⎢⎣ 48 ( 29.5) (10 6 ) I 384 ( 29.5) (10 6 ) I ⎥⎦
0.1128
=
I
Page 1-7
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
Reinforced window head for gravity loads – see Figures 1-6A and 1-6B.
The 600T125-43 (33) track has adequate major axis strength to resist wind loads.
Some strengthening may be required, however, to resist the tendency for the
window head to sag under the weight of the wall assembly above. The sagging
will be further aggravated by the friction between the inner and outer top track
when some relative slab movement occurs. The inner top track (if the inner and
outer top track deflection detail is used as shown in Figure 1-12) cannot be relied on as
a stiffening element because it may not be continuous over the window.
For this window try creating a built-up section as in Figure 1-6A. Assume the
additional stud and track sections resist gravity load and the remaining track
section resists wind.
Page 1-8
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
wL2
M req =
8
⎡ 3.25 ( 9 ) ( 6.5) 2 ⎤ ⎡ 12 ⎤
=⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ = 1.85 in . kips
⎣⎢ 8 ⎦⎥ ⎣ 1000 ⎦
5wL4
δ=
384EI
5 ( 3.25 ) ( 9 / 12 ) (78) 4
=
384 ( 29.5) (10 6 ) I
0.0398
=
I
Page 1-9
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
Iy(def) ≈ fully effective weak axis inertia for stud and track
= 0.148 + 0.044 = 0.192 in4 > 0.183 in4 OK
Note that the fully effective (unreduced for local buckling) weak axis
inertias have been used for the deflection check since manufacturers'
tables rarely show effective weak axis inertias appropriate for deflection
calculation. This is an unconservative assumption but adequate given the
additional stiffening from attached sheathings and the inner top track
(even if discontinuous over the window) not accounted for here.
In Figure 1-6B sag is resisted by the major axis strength and stiffness of 2 -
600S162-43 (33) (the typical stud):
Page 1-10
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Required Inertia
Page 1-11
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
P = 296 lb.
P1 = 6.50(45.5) = 296 lb.
w1 = 18.6 lb/ft
L = 156 in. (span length)
a = 39 in. (distance from support to P)
δ=
5w 1 L4 P1 L3
384EI
+
48EI 24EI
+ (
Pa
)
3L2 − 4a 2
=
0.70
⎢ + +
[ ]
⎡ 5 (18.6 / 12 ) (156 ) 4 296 (156 )3 296 (39 ) 3 (156 )2 − 4 (39 )2 ⎤
⎥
29.5 (10 6 ) I ⎣⎢ 384 48 24 ⎦⎥
1.603
=
I
1.542
δ exact =
I
1.542
I req = = 3.56 in 4
0.433
Page 1-12
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
The calculations for the jamb selection are summarized in Table 1-1.
This table is based on the design approximation that the allowable moment and
inertia of the built-up sections are the simple addition of the component parts.
See Note 1-3 for an alternative approach.
Page 1-13
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
Note that the track section used as part of the built-up member will exceed 10'-0"
in length which may require a special order. Check with the local manufacturers.
For studs a punched section is assumed for allowable shear, allowable moment
and inertia. The track is not punched.
Built-Up Component
Section Sections
Page 1-14
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Built-up section D consists of two back to back studs reinforced with a track
section that does not transfer any end shear (see the back to back alternative Figure
1-10). The allowable web crippling strength, Pext, of two studs connected back to
back is actually greater than two times the web crippling strength for a single
stud. Refer to the AISI Specification Section C3.4.1 and the following calculations:
C t 2 Fy sin θ ⎛ R ⎞⎛ N ⎞⎛ h⎞
Pall = ⎜ 1 −C R ⎟⎜ 1 + C N ⎟⎜ 1 − C h ⎟
Ω ⎜ t ⎟⎜ t ⎟⎠⎜⎝ t ⎟⎠
⎝ ⎠⎝
Choose coefficients for built-up sections and end one flange loading.
Coefficients and safety factors are the same for fastened and unfastened
conditions.
R = 0.0712"
t = 0.0451"
Depth = 6"
h = Depth - 2t - 2R = 5.767"
N = 1"
Fy = 33 ksi
θ = 90 degrees
C = 10
CR = 0.14
CN = 0.28
Ch = 0.001
Ω = 2.00
substituting
Pall = 0.634 kips per web
Note that the track reinforcing for the built-up jamb stud may not be necessary in
order to satisfy strength or stiffness requirements but is required to facilitate
connections at the window head and sill and for the connection of the window
frame itself.
It was noted earlier under typical bottom and inner top track that if the track
thickness is equal to or greater than the thickness of the stud, then track tear
through need not be checked. This conclusion is based on single stud to track
connections and may not apply to studs back to back. However, the design
expression in Step 4 for a single stud can be conservatively applied to the back to
back case to check the track thickness.
Page 1-15
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
Two studs toe to toe are not recommended as a built-up member in screwed
construction because it is difficult to effectively connect the studs together. This
toe to toe configuration is only recommended in welded construction.
Note 1-3
As an alternative approach to built-up jamb member selection, the load, W, carried by each
of the component parts can be apportioned according to the relative stiffness of the members.
By equating deflections, the following formulas can be obtained:
WTOTAL
WSTUD =
I X ( TRACK )
1+
I X ( STUD )
WTRACK = WTOTAL − WSTUD
This relative stiffness approach can produce more conservative results when moment
controls the jamb selection. Usually, deflection or web crippling govern and the simple
addition approach used here is adequate. When moment controls, the simple addition
approach is likely still valid because the member that first reaches yield is assumed to shed
any additional loading to the other parts of the built-up member that still have strength
reserve. This assumption has not been confirmed by testing. Note that the relative stiffness
approach does not apply to web crippling because the stud section(s) are assumed to carry all
of the load for this case.
Note 1-4
It can be impractical to mix different thicknesses of stud and different thicknesses of track on
the same project - or at least on the same floor.
• Mixed thicknesses can result in the wrong thickness in the wrong place on site.
• Manufacturers do not stock stud and track but rather they roll to order. By specifying
one type of stud and track the delivery time is reduced and the cost premium for small
production runs is eliminated.
Page 1-16
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
There is little justification for mixing thicknesses of stud and track on this project. See
Note 1-4. The following member selections are therefore appropriate:
Two different top track deflection details are proposed – an inner and outer top track
(Figure 1-12) and a single top track (Figure 1-13)
In either case, the top track detail will be used to accommodate slab deflections (and the
possible effect of column shortening) such that the studs are not loaded axially. This
detail also accommodates construction tolerance in the slab to slab height such that the
studs do not have to be custom cut to length on site. Allow for a construction tolerance
of say ± 1/4" (The ±1/4" implies considerably better than average concrete tolerances on
this project).
From the project structural engineer, the specified long-time slab deflection due to all
sustained loads and the immediate deflection due to live load occurring after attachment
of steel stud wall = 1/2" upper floor slab relative to lower floor slab and vice versa. The
effect of column shortening is assumed to be negligible.
At the time of installation the deflection gap should be 3/4" plus or minus the
construction tolerance of 1/4". This results in a minimum possible gap at the time of
installation of 1/2" which as adequate to accommodate slab deflections above assuming
the slab below does not deflect. Conversely, if the slab below deflects 1/2" and the slab
above does not deflect then the maximum possible gap is 3/4" + 1/4" + 1/2" = 1-1/2".
See Figures 1-12 and 1-13.
Page 1-17
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
Page 1-18
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Step 7(a) – Inner and outer Top Track Deflection Detail with Concrete Screw Anchors
The deflection gap is taken as the clear distance between the head of the concrete screw
anchor and the inner top track. The maximum total gap is given by 1-1/2" + 3/16" = 1-
11/16". (Note that wedge type expansion anchors are not practical in this application because the
exposed portion of the fastener interferes too much with the deflection gap.)
Assuming a minimum engagement of 3/4", then the leg of the outer top track must be
1-11/16" + 3/4" = 2-7/16".
The 1-11/16" maximum total gap is used in the calculations that follow to determine the
thickness of the outer top track.
Summary:
Tolerance = ±1/4"
Deflection = 1/2"
Concrete screw anchor head = 3/16"
Minimum installation gap = Deflection + Screw Head
= 1/2" + 3/16" = 11/16"
Maximum installation gap = Deflection + Screw Head + 2 x Tolerance
= 1/2" + 3/16" + 1/2" = 1-3/16"
Maximum possible gap = Maximum installation gap + Deflection
= 1-3/16" + 1/2" = 1-11/16"
One leg of the outer top track is assumed to be loaded uniformly by the inner top track
which spreads the concentrated reactions from the studs.
This assumption is reviewed in Appendix E where the inner top track is analyzed as a
beam on an elastic foundation (i.e. the outer top track).
Figure 1-14 illustrates the cantilever design assumption for the outstanding leg of the
outer top track. Check the required track thickness.
Page 1-19
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
⎛ Stud Height ⎞
P=⎜ ⎟w
⎝ 2 ⎠
= ( 13 / 2 )( 28)
= 182 lb / ft of length for strength
Mall = (1/6)bt2Fy/Ω
= (1/6)(12)t2(50,000)/1.67
= 59900t2
307
t≥ = 0.0716 in.
59900
Note 1-5
1. The outer top tack has been sized using an elastic section
modulus. If a plastic section modulus, Z=(1/4)bt2, had been used,
the allowable moment, Mall, would have been 50% higher.
Check the outer top track horizontal movement using the formula developed in
Appendix D:
P ⎡⎢ L 2 L 1 L 2 ⎤⎥
2 3
δ≥ +
EI ⎢ 8 3 ⎥
⎣ ⎦
Page 1-20
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
where:
⎛ Stud Height ⎞
P=⎜ ⎟w
⎝ 2 ⎠
= ( 13 / 2 ) ( 28) (0.7 )
= 127 lb. for deflection ( per foot of length )
Note 1-6
Use 0.0713" thick outer top track with 2-7/16" leg length.
Note 1-7
Sheathings are used in this design example to brace the studs to resist the torsional component
of loads not applied through the shear center and to resist the effects of lateral instability. These
sheathing forces are transferred to the top and bottom tracks where they accumulate until the
track is connected to the primary structure. Note in Figure 1-12 that the inner top track is not
connected to the outer top track and transfer of the bracing forces to the structure requires
special detailing. One choice is illustrated in Figure 2-23 with the last stud anchored to the
shearwall or column. Alternatively, the inner and outer top track can be connected together
(screws or welds) adjacent to shearwalls or columns where relative slab deflection and/or where
the accumulative effect of column axial shortening is not expected to occur. Detail A on Figure
3-16 (or some variation) is another possible choice.
This periodic anchorage of the inner top track is also worthwhile for racking resistance in the
plane of the wall to resist seismic forces and construction abuse.
Page 1-21
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
Step 7(b) – Inner and Outer Top Track Deflection Detail With Powder Actuated Fasteners
Powder actuated fasteners have a negligible head dimension when installed and
no allowance for the head is required when detailing the deflection gap.
Tolerance = ± 1/4"
Deflection = 1/2"
Concrete anchor head = 0"
Minimum installation gap = Deflection + Anchor Head
= 1/2"
Maximum installation gap = Deflection + Anchor Head + 2 x Tolerance
= 1/2" + 0" + 1/2" = 1"
Maximum possible gap = Maximum installation gap + Deflection
= 1" + 1/2" = 1-1/2"
And assuming a minimum engagement of 3/4", the leg of the outer top track
must be 1-1/2" + 3/4" = 2-1/4".
Reworking the track thickness calculations from Step 7(a) but with a cantilever leg
length of 1-1/2" gives the following:
t = 0.0675"
Use next standard design thickness = 0.0713" with Fy = 50 ksi.
and reworking the outer top track horizontal movement calculations with t =
0.0713" and L2 = 1-1/2" gives:
δ ≥ 0.033"
See Figure 1-13. Compared with the inner and outer top track detail the single outer top
track has the following advantages and disadvantages:
Advantages
• Easier to install
• Fasteners that connect the top track to the primary structure can be inspected.
• Fasteners such as wedge type expansion anchors can be used since the
fastener head does not interfere with the deflection gap.
Disadvantages
• The single top track deflection detail provides no torsional restraint to the top
of the studs and a line of bridging is typically required close to the end of the
stud. (If through-the-knockout style bridging is used the bridging is typically
Page 1-22
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
located 12 inches from the end of the stud. Flat strap bridging can be closer to the
end because there is no knockout to compromise web crippling capacity of the stud.)
• Only a local portion of the top track is mobilized to resist a stud reaction.
This is particularly an issue for larger jamb reactions where a supplementary
slide clip might be required.
• The web crippling capacity of the stud may be lower.
The deflection gap summary will be the same as Step 7(b) except that the minimum
engagement is increased to maintain web crippling capacity (calculations to follow).
Assuming a minimum engagement of 1 in., the leg of the outer top track must be
1-1/2" + 1" = 2-1/2".
The thickness of the single top track can be checked using the provisions of the Standard
for Cold-Formed Steel Framing - Wall Stud Design (COFS 2004a).
The above equations are valid within the following range of parameters:
Stud Section
Design Thickness 0.0451 in. to 0.0713 in.
Design Yield Strength 33 ksi to 50 ksi
Nominal Depth 3.50 in. to 6.0 in.
Nominal Flange Width 1.625 in. to 2.5 in.
Stud Spacing 12 in. to 24 in.
Stud bearing Length 3/4 in. minimum
Track Section
Design Thickness 0.0451 in. to 0.0713 in.
Design Yield Strength 33 ksi to 50 ksi
Page 1-23
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
In addition, the clear distance from the stud to the end of the track must be
greater than or equal to wdt/2 (Commentary COFS 2004a).
Note that the thickness of the track cannot be solved for directly - use trial and error.
Try t = 0.0872" with e = 1.5" (no fastener head clearance required) and Fy = 50 ksi
Note that this design thickness exceeds the 0.0713 in. limit in COFS 2004a. This
extrapolation of the design equations is deemed acceptable under the rational
analysis provisions of the AISI Specification Section A1.1 and the Ω = 2.80 is more
conservative than the safety factor requirements of that section.
Note also that for the single top track deflection detail, no analytical method for
checking serviceability is currently available.
The typical stud web crippling check (Step 3) was based on 1" of bearing length
and the end one flange (EOF) fastened condition. The fastened approach is not
permitted for single top track deflection details because both stud flanges are not
connected to the track flanges. Web crippling therefore reverts to the expression
in the AISI Specification for unfastened end one flange loading. See the AISI
Specification Table C3.4.1-2.
C t 2 Fy sin θ ⎛ R ⎞⎛ N ⎞⎛ h⎞
Pall = ⎜ 1 −C R ⎟⎜ 1 + C N ⎟⎜ 1 − C h ⎟
Ω ⎜ t ⎟⎜ t ⎟⎠⎜⎝ t ⎟⎠
⎝ ⎠⎝
Page 1-24
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
where:
R = 0.0712"
t = 0.0451"
Depth = 6"
h = Depth - 2t - 2R = 5.767"
N = 3/4" or 1"
Fy = 33 ksi
θ = 90 degrees
C =4
CR = 0.14
CN = 0.35
Ch = 0.02
Ω = 1.85 (unfastened)
substituting
Therefore use minimum engagement of 1" for the single top track deflection
detail.
For a jamb stud, assume the single top track design provisions apply (from Section C4.3
COFS 2004a),
t = 0.1017 in.
e = 1.5 in.
Fy = 50 ksi
Substituting gives:
wdt = 9.65 in.
Pndt = 0.832 kips
Pr = Pndt /Ω = 832/2.80
= 297 lb. < 565 lb. UNSATISFACTORY
The jamb stud overstresses the single top track. Provide a proprietary slide clip to
connect the top of the jamb stud to the primary structure.
Page 1-25
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
Member selection has been based on the assumption that the inner and outer wall
sheathings provide adequate torsional restraint for loads not applied through the shear
center and for lateral instability.
Provided the sheathing acts as a brace, a number of connection details have no required
forces to resist and the detailing of these connections is therefore based on industry
practice rather than structural design. These details include bridging and stud to top and
bottom track connections. Other connection details require engineering.
Use #10 self-drilling screws with low profile heads to connect stud to track (flange to
flange). See Figure 2-16.
Figure 1-15 illustrates the details for the stud to top track connection using self-drilling
screws. See Note 1-8.
Note 1-8
1. With welded construction, the long legged inner top track can be replaced with
conventional track. The welds do not interfere with the sliding connection.
2. Do not install drywall screws above the line of the #10-16 self-drilling screw
shown; otherwise, the performance of the sliding connection will be impaired.
Page 1-26
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
The connection requirements for a track and stud jamb member are not defined in the
AISI Specification. Experience in the field indicates that a connection spacing of 24" o.c. is
adequate. The details are shown in Figure 1-16.
Page 1-27
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
The connection requirements shown in Figure 1-17 are similar to the built-up jamb.
These fastener requirements would also apply to the alternative built-up window head
in Figure 1-6B.
Figure 1-18 illustrates the details of the screwed sill track to jamb stud connection.
Page 1-28
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Note 1-9
1. Minimum dimension for screw gun clearance varies depending on the manufacturer of
the screw gun. A minimum of 5/8" is generally adequate.
2. Choose angle one thickness heavier than the connected members but not less than
0.0566". This rule of thumb is intended to control deformation in the angle connector.
3. It is generally good practice to install self-drilling screws through the thinner material
into the thicker. This connection detail is an exception to the rule.
Page 1-29
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
V = 296 lb.
V1 = 296/2 = 148 lb.
V2 = Ve/4 = 296(0.75)/4 = 55.5 lb.
Determine screw shear capacities by AISI E4.3 assuming #10-16 self-drilling screws.
Note 1-10
The AISI provisions in E4 are based on a statistical review of a large number of screw
tests including a variety of screw types and connection details. The AISI Specification
allows the use of test values in lieu of the design expressions in E4.
Allowable shear
Screw allowable shear limited by E4.3.1 tilting and bearing
t2/t1 = 0.797 < 1.0 therefore choose the governing Pns from AISI Equations
E4.3.1-1, E4.3.1-2 and E4.3.1-3.
3
Pns = 4.2 ( t 2 d) 1 / 2 Fu 2 = 789 lb. − governs
Pns = 2.7 t 1 dFu1 = 1887 lb.
Pns = 2.7 t 2 dFu 2 = 1041 lb.
Gives:
Page 1-30
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
e = 3/4" for angle and track with the thinner track governing.
Conservatively assume that the resultant shear acts perpendicular to the
end of the sill track.
Pns = teFu
= 0.0451(0.75)(45)
= 1.522 kips
Gives:
Screw allowable shear limited by E4.3.3 shear in the screws themselves. Refer to
the AISI Supplement (AISI 2004)
Pns = Pss
Where Pss = nominal shear capacity of screw. See Appendix A, Table A-1.
Gives:
Note 1-11
1. Add a stud under the connection to resist dead load and construction abuse at the
time of window installation. See optional cripple stud in Figure 1-1. As a design
alternative, this additional stud could also be designed to pick up the end reaction
due to wind from the sill track and thereby eliminate the need for a clip angle
connection. The connection between the sill track and the additional stud could be
analyzed using the provisions of The Standard for Cold-Formed Steel Framing –
Wall Stud Design (COFS 2004a) Section C4.2(c).
Page 1-31
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
Provide angles top and bottom at window head to resist wind load plus dead load and
construction abuse – particularly at the time of window installation.
The bottom track to concrete connection (see Figure 1-22) is designed for both wedge type
and screw type concrete anchors.
Page 1-32
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Note 1- 12
1. Reference Drysdale 1991 recommends an anchor spacing less than or equal to 2'-8" o.c.
regardless of the type of anchor used. This spacing is necessary to control local and overall
track deformations.
2. The bottom track anchor is assumed to be loaded in shear only with negligible pull-out due
to prying.
Allowable shear - for load data see Appendix B.1 – Tables B.1-1 and B.1-2.
Page 1-33
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
From Tables B.1-1 and B.1-2, interpolate between edge distances for
allowable fastener shear. (Interpolation is permitted – see Appendix B.1
Notes)
Pn = mf CdtFu
Pn = 0.75(3)(0.25)(0.0451)(45)(1000)
= 1142 lb.
Vall = Pn / Ω = 1142/2.50
= 457 lb.
Page 1-34
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Assume simple span with worst case location of stud end reactions.
Allowable shear
Page 1-35
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
Use spacing = 24" o.c. < 2'-8" o.c. (See Note 1-12) OK
Allowable shear - for load data see Appendix B.3 – Table B.3-1.
Pn = mfCdtFu
Page 1-36
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Pn = 0.75(3)(0.145)(0.0451)(45)(1000)
= 662 lb.
Vall = Pn / Ω = 662/2.50
= 265 lb.
Page 1-37
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
Note 1-13
3. Do not place bottom reinforcing steel along the line of the concrete anchors.
4. Wedge type expansion anchors are not practical in this application because the
exposed portion of the fastener interferes too much with the deflection gap.
5. Unlike the bottom track condition, extra fasteners are not required at jamb studs
because of load spreading by the inner top track.
Page 1-38
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Allowable shear
Allowable tension
Page 1-39
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
Check interaction using equation from Appendix B.2 Note 5 with s = fastener
spacing in feet:
⎛ sT ⎞ ⎛ sV ⎞
⎜ ⎟+⎜ ⎟ ≤ 1.0
⎜T ⎟ ⎜V ⎟
⎝ all ⎠ ⎝ all ⎠
⎛ s 102.4 ⎞ ⎛ s 182 ⎞
⎜ ⎟+⎜ ⎟ ≤ 1.0
⎝ 200 ⎠ ⎝ 400 ⎠
s = 1.03'
For this case the deflection gap is reduced to 1-1/2" because there is no fastener
head interference. See Figure 1-26 and the caution in Note 1-14.
Note 1-14
1. From Reference ASCE 2005 Section 13.4.5 – Power actuated fasteners shall not be
used for tension load applications in Seismic Design Categories D, E, and F unless
approved for such loading.
Page 1-40
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Allowable shear and tension – for load data see Appendix B.3 – Table B.3-1.
Allowable shear
Allowable tension
Check interaction equation from Table B.3-1 Note 3 with s = fastener spacing in
feet:
⎛ sT ⎞ ⎛ sV ⎞
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ T ⎟ + ⎜ V ⎟ ≤ 1.0
⎝ all ⎠ ⎝ all ⎠
⎛ s 91 ⎞ ⎛ s 182 ⎞
⎜ ⎟+⎜ ⎟ ≤ 1.0
⎝ 170 ⎠ ⎝ 270 ⎠
s = 0.831'
Note that powder actuated fasteners have relatively small head diameters and
pull-over and the interaction of shear and pull-over should be checked as
possible limit states. Check for the 10" o.c. fastener spacing.
Page 1-41
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
Assume the pull-over provisions for screws apply to powder actuated fasteners.
See the AISI Specification Section E4.4.2.
Pnov = 1.5t1dwFu1
where:
t1 = 0.0713" (outer top track)
dw = 0.322" (fastener head diameter Table B.3-1)
Fu1 = 65 ksi
Pnov = 1.5(0.0713)(0.322)(65)(1000)
= 2240 lb.
Check interaction for combined shear an pull-over using AISI Supplement (AISI
2004) Section 4.5.
Q T 1.10
+ 0.71 ≤
Pns Pnov Ω
For this case the deflection gap is reduced to 1-1/2" because there is no fastener
head interference. See Figure 1-26.
Page 1-42
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
The concrete screw anchor spacing derived for the inner and outer top track case
(1.03' actual rounded to 1'-0" o.c.) could be used here. See Step 8(i)i. However,
the fastener spacing can be increased somewhat because the deflection gap does
not have to provide head clearance for the screw anchor.
Check interaction using equation from Appendix B.2 Note 5 with s = fastener
spacing in feet:
⎛ sT ⎞ ⎛ sV ⎞
⎜ ⎟+⎜ ⎟ ≤ 1 .0
⎜T ⎟ ⎜V ⎟
⎝ all ⎠ ⎝ all ⎠
⎛ s 91 ⎞ ⎛ s 182 ⎞
⎜ ⎟+⎜ ⎟ ≤ 1 .0
⎝ 200 ⎠ ⎝ 400 ⎠
s = 1.10'
Note 1-15
The single top deflection track design provisions in COFS 2004a do not include any limit
on fastener spacing. However, the background research (as reported in Gerloff 2004) was
based on a maximum fastener spacing equal to the stud spacing and this is proposed here
as an upper limit.
The analysis here will be the same as for the inner and outer top track for Step 8(i)ii. See Note
1-14.
Page 1-43
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
Allowable tension
For load data see Appendix B.1 Tables B.1-1 and B.1-2.
From Tables B.1-1 and B.1-2, interpolate between edge distances for
allowable fastener tension. (Interpolation is permitted – see Appendix B.1
Notes)
Check interaction of tension and shear using the equation from Appendix B.1
Note 9 with S = fastener spacing in feet.
5 5
⎛ ST ⎞ 3 ⎛ SV ⎞ 3
⎜ ⎟ +⎜ ⎟ ≤ 1 .0
⎜T ⎟ ⎜V ⎟
⎝ all ⎠ ⎝ all ⎠
5 5
⎛ 91 S ⎞ 3 ⎛ 182 S ⎞ 3
⎜ ⎟ +⎜ ⎟ ≤ 1.0
⎝ 312 ⎠ ⎝ 397 ⎠
S = 1.74' o.c. > stud spacing of 16" o.c. (See Note 1-15)
Page 1-44
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Table 1-2
Top and Bottom Track to Concrete Connection Summary
Embedment Number of
Top or Bottom Spacing
Anchor Size & Type Depth Fasteners at
Track (inches)
(inches) Jambs
1/4" diameter wedge
2 24 2
anchor
Notes
1. For the inner and outer top track, no additional top track fasteners are required at jamb
locations since concentrated loads are spread by the inner/outer top track detail.
2. For the single outer top track used in this design example, no additional top track
fasteners are required at jamb locations because the jamb is connected at the top with a
proprietary slide clip. See Section 8(k) for the slide clip connection details.
3. For top track deflection details where earthquake design is a consideration, there may be
restrictions on the use of powder actuated fasteners in tension. See Note 1-14.
Page 1-45
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
From Step 7(c) a proprietary slide clip is required to transfer the top jamb reaction to the
underside of the concrete floor slab. The engineering for the connection between the
stud and the clip is assumed to be provided by the slide clip manufacturer. The
connection between the slide clip and the concrete remains the responsibility of the
CFSF designer.
It is assumed that two fasteners are required between the side clip and the concrete in
order to provide some torsional restraint. Based on the sheathed design assumption in
this example, there is no direct torsion applied to the connection from the jamb stud but
there will be some inherent eccentricities in the connection itself. Assume all the
connection eccentricity is resisted at the slide clip to concrete connection. See Figure 1-
27.
For this connection, the 3/8" diameter wedge type expansion anchor has been selected
with 2" embedment. See Appendix B.1 Tables B.1-1 and B.1-2.
Page 1-46
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Instead use 3" minimum edge distance to allow for some variation in the location
of the slab edge along with the 2" minimum spacing. Using these distances, the
concrete anchors will be asymmetrically placed as shown in Figures 1-28 and 1-
29.
Page 1-47
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
The anchor spacing and edge distance requirements in Table B.1-2 need to be
reworked (by interpolation rounded to the nearest 1/8") for an embedment depth of
2". The results are given in the following table:
Table 1-3
Tension Shear
(inches) (inches)
Scr 4-1/2 4-1/2
Smin 2 2
Ccr 3-1/2 4-7/8
Cmin 2 2-1/2
Interpolate allowable tension and shear values from Table B.1-1 for a 2"
embedment depth.
Table 1-4
V1 = V/2 = 565/2
= 233 lb.
V2 = 0.75V/2 = 0.75(565)/2
= 212 lb.
Shear resultant
Page 1-48
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Allowable shear
Establish the shear reduction factors for edge distance by interpolation. The
values for Ccr and Cmin are taken from Table 1-3 above.
Establish the shear reduction factors for spacing by interpolation. The values for
Scr and Smin are taken from Table 1-3 above.
Using these factors the allowable shear from Table 1-4 above is reduced as
follows (see Appendix B.1 Note 8):
Vall = 1239(0.605)(0.90)
= 675 lb.
Allowable tension
Establish the tension reduction factors for edge distance by interpolation. The
values for Ccr and Cmin are taken from Table 1-3 above.
Establish the tension reduction factors for spacing by interpolation. The values
for Scr and Smin are taken from Table 1-3 above.
Page 1-49
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
Using these factors the allowable tension from Table 1-4 above is reduced as
follows (see Appendix B.1 Note 8):
Tall = 1094(0.933)(0.60)
= 612 lb.
Check interaction of tension and shear using the equation from Appendix B.1 Note 9.
5 5
⎛ T ⎞ 3 ⎛ V ⎞ 3
⎜ ⎟ +⎜ ⎟ ≤ 1.00
⎜T ⎟ ⎜V ⎟
⎝ all ⎠ ⎝ all ⎠
5 5
⎛ 377 ⎞ 3 ⎛ 315 ⎞ 3
⎜ ⎟ +⎜ ⎟ = 0.73 ≤ 1.00 OK
⎝ 612 ⎠ ⎝ 675 ⎠
On some projects, the top track is connected to the underside of a spandrel beam rather
than the underside of the slab. The quantity of bottom reinforcing steel in the spandrel
beam may make the installation of drilled anchors difficult. For projects such as this, an
embedded plate may be more practical. Suggested details are shown in Figures 1-30 and
1-32.
Assume embedded plates at maximum recommended spacing for anchoring outer top
track = 24" o.c. (Note 1-13).
By taking moments
T1 = 1.50(2)(182)/6
= 91 lb. per weld
2 2
Vreq = V1 + T1 = 182 2 + 91 2
= 203 lb. per weld
Page 1-50
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Vall = 0.75tLFu/Ω
= 0.75(0.0713)L(65)(1000)/3.05
= 1140L lb.
Page 1-51
Design Example #1, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with Screwed Connections and a Sheathed Design
Approach
Note 1-16
2. For this simplified method, the strength of fillet and flare groove welds in cold formed
steel thicknesses less than or equal to 0.10" is a function of the tensile strength of the
sheet and the length of the weld. It is assumed that the necessary weld leg size is
available to develop the strength of the parent material.
3. Show a nominal weld size on drawings of say 1/8" accompanied by a note "For material
less than or equal to 0.10" thick, drawings show nominal weld leg sizes. For such
material, the effective throat of welds shall not be less than the thickness of the thinnest
connected part."
4. The Fu values for various ASTM steels can be found in AISI 2002b, Part I.
Treq = 2(182)(1.5)/(4+1)
= 109 lb. per fastener
Allowable shear and tension from Appendix B.4, Table B.4-1 assuming a 1/4"
thick embedded plate.
Page 1-52
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Interaction check
⎛ T ⎞ ⎛ V ⎞
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ T ⎟ + ⎜ V ⎟ ≤ 1.00
⎝ all ⎠ ⎝ all ⎠
⎛ 109 ⎞ ⎛ 182 ⎞
⎜ ⎟+⎜ ⎟ = 0.48 < 1.00 OK
⎝ 675 ⎠ ⎝ 575 ⎠
Note that where earthquake design is a consideration there may be restrictions on the use of
powder actuated fasteners in tension – see Note 1-14.
Page 1-53
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Design Example #2
Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach
and Welded or Screwed Connections
Page 2-1
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
Introduction
This design example assumes an all steel system where the restraint of the sheathings is
ignored. All connections are designed as welded or screwed. An inner and outer top
track deflection detail is assumed.
Members are checked for lateral instability and for the torsional effects of loads not
applied through the shear center. Bridging is checked for the accumulated torsion
between bridging lines.
The layout of the members and the design wind loads are identical to Design Example 1.
See Figure 2-1. The numbers shown in Figure 2-1 correspond to the applicable design
step used in this example. Refer also to the following:
Step 6 - General Comments on Welded Connections
Step 7 - Details at Shearwalls
Step 8 - Parapets
Check the typical stud selected in Design Example 1 for warping torsion using the
approximate method outlined in Appendix C.
This design example uses a torsional eccentricity from the shear center to the centerline
of the web as illustrated in Figure 2-3A. This eccentricity would be typical for positive
wind pressures loading the exterior sheathing which in turn load the compression flange
of the stud. Abbreviated calculations are also provided for a torsional eccentricity from
the shear center to the centerline of the flange (Figure 2-3B). This eccentricity would be
typical for negative wind pressures loading the exterior sheathing with the attaching
screws in tension. Note that the torsional analyses assume the sheathings load the studs
but do not provide any meaningful or reliable torsional restraint.
The stud spans from A to D as shown in Figure 2-2 with bridging at points B and C. This
gives an unsupported length Lu = 4'-4". The applied wind load = 37.3 lb/ft is assumed to
act through the web centerline. A component of this load, F, will act on the half-beam
which is analyzed as a continuous beam with the top and bottom track and the bridging
lines acting as supports.
Page 2-2
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Page 2-3
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
Derive the properties for the torsional "half-beam" using the linear method. For further
examples of the linear method and properties of line elements see AISI 2002b, Part I,
Section 3. For this example, neglect the corner radii.
Xcg = ΣLX/ΣL
= 2.0025/3.5461 = 0.5647 in. (from web centerline)
= 0.1056 in 3
I 0.06204
S y( lip ) = =
F lg − X cg − t / 2 1.625 − 0.5647 − 0.0451 / 2
= 0.0598 in 3
Load on "half-beam"
F = P(e/h)
P = 37.3 lb/ft
e = m = 0.670 in. (distance from shear center to web centerline)
h = depth – t = 6 – 0.0451 = 5.95 in.
F = 37.3(0.670/5.95)
= 4.20 lb/ft
Mt(req) = FLu2/10
= 4.20(4.33)2/10
= 7.87 ft.lb
Page 2-4
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
(If the moment on the half-beam is to be checked at the midheight of the stud - i.e. mid-
distance between bridging lines - then Mreq = FLu2/40. See Note 2-1, Item 1.)
σw = Mt(req)/Sy(lip)
= 7.87(12)/0.0598 = 1580 psi
For combined bending and warping torsion calculate the moment reduction
factor, R defined as follows:
σ bend
R=
σ bend +σ w
12300
R= = 0.886
12300 + 1580
Page 2-5
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
Note 2-1
1. For this design example, the maximum warping torsional effects occur at a line of
bridging whereas the maximum primary bending moment occurs at midspan. A more
rigorous design procedure would check Mall(reduced) both at the line of bridging and at
midspan against Mx(req) calculated for each of the two locations. As a design expediency,
this example assumes the maximum warping torsion and the maximum primary bending
moment both occur at the same location even though this is not the case.
2. There is some interaction between warping torsion and lateral instability not accounted
for in this procedure. Refer to the discussion at the end of Appendix C.
3. Where the restraint of sheathings is to be ignored, the effect of warping torsional stresses
can generally be neglected for routine design provided there is adequate bridging.
F = 9.15 lb/ft
σw = 3440 psi
R = 0.781
Lu = 4'-4" = 52"
Assume:
Kt = Ky = 1
J = 0.000303 in4
Page 2-6
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Cw = 1.10 in6
r0 = 2.58 in.
A = 0.447 in2
ry = 0.576 in.
Sf = full unreduced section modulus
= 0.772 in3
Mall = 16.68 in.kips (fully braced allowable moment for subsequent calculation
of Fya )
and
E = 29,500 ksi
G = 11,300 ksi
π2E π 2 ( 29500)
σ ey = =
2 2
⎛ K yL y ⎞ ⎡ (1)( 52 ) ⎤
⎜ ⎟ ⎢ 0.576 ⎥
⎜ ry ⎟ ⎣ ⎦
⎝ ⎠
= 35.7 ksi
1 ⎡ π 2 EC w ⎤
σt = ⎢ GJ + ⎥
2
Ar0 ⎢⎣ (K t L t ) 2 ⎥⎦
1 ⎡ π 2 ( 29500 ) (1.10 ) ⎤
= ⎢ 11300 (0.000303 ) + ⎥
(0.447 ) ( 2.58 ) 2 ⎢⎣ [(1 ) ( 52 )]2 ⎥⎦
= 41.0 ksi
C b r 0 A σ ey σ t
Fe =
Sf
( 1 ) ( 2.58 ) ( 0.447 ) ( 35.7 ) ( 41.0 )
=
0.772
= 57.2 ksi
Assuming Fya is not available in load tables (both Mall and Sx(eff) are based on
the fully braced condition)
Fya = MallΩ/Sx(eff) = 16.68(1.67)/0.767
= 36.3 ksi
2.78 Fya = 2.78(36.3) = 100.9 ksi
0.56 Fya = 0.56(36.3) = 20.3 ksi
Page 2-7
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
10 ⎛ 10Fya ⎞
Fc = Fya ⎜⎜ 1 − ⎟
⎟
9 ⎝ 36Fe ⎠
10 ⎡ 10 ( 36.3 ) ⎤
= ( 36.3 ) ⎢1 − ⎥
9 ⎣ 36 ( 57.2 ) ⎦
= 33.2 in.kips
Note 2-2
1. The next step in the AISI Specification is to calculate a revised effective section
modulus, Sc , with Fya replaced by Fc . The moment capacity reflecting lateral
buckling is then given by Mall = Mn/Ω = ScFc /Ω . For typical lightweight steel
framing profiles, calculating Sc requires considerable work with little benefit.
Use instead the following procedure:
2. Where section capacity does not include the effect of cold work of forming, Fya
is replaced by Fy throughout Step 1(b).
Therefore from Steps 1(a) and 1(b), the allowable moment of the typical stud is reduced
by warping torsion and by lateral instability. However, there is sufficient bridging and
strength reserve such that the basic stud selection is unaffected.
Page 2-8
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
The bridging channel is designed as a continuous beam supported by the major axis
bending strength of each stud and loaded by the twisting moment from each stud. This
is illustrated in Figure 2-5. Assume a 5-span (i.e. 5 stud spaces) condition as shown in
Figure 2-6.
Page 2-9
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
The outside span is critical and is shown with the moment coefficients in Figure 2-7. The
moment, M, is derived from the top and bottom flange brace requirements given in the
AISI Supplement D3.2.2.
PL = 1.5(m/d)W
where:
W = wa
w = load/ft on the stud for strength = (16/12)(28) = 37.3 lb/ft
a = bridging spacing = 4.33 ft.
m = stud web center line to shear center = 0.670"
d = 6"
PL = 1.5(0.670/6)(37.3)(4.33)
= 27.1 lb.
Then the moment resisted by the bridging channel is given by the flange
brace couple with a lever arm equal to the depth of the stud. See Figure
2-8.
Page 2-10
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
M = 27.1(6) = 162.6 in.lb and the resulting moment values in the outside
span are illustrated in Figure 2-9.
Section will be fully effective at Fy = 33 ksi (i.e. λ ≤ 0.673 for all elements at f
= Fy AISI Specification B2.1 – calculations not shown here).
Sx = 0.0520 in3
ry = 0.145 in.
A = 0.130 in2
J = 0.000138 in4
Cw = 0.00104 in6
x0 = 0.254 in.
r0 = 0.622 in.
Page 2-11
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
Check strength:
Mall = FySx/Ω
= (33)(0.0520)/1.67
= 1.03 in.kips
E = 29,500 ksi
G = 11,300 ksi
Kt = Ky = 1
12.5M max
Cb =
2.5M max + 3M A + 4M B + 3M C
where Mmax, MA, MB and MC are illustrated in Figure 2-9. Using similar
triangles and absolute values:
x = 0.610L
y = 0.390L
Mmax =M
MA = 0.590M
MB = 0.180M
MC = 0.230M
Cb = 2.20
π2E π 2 ( 29500 )
σ ey = =
2 2
⎛ K yL y
⎞ ⎡ (1 )(16 ) ⎤
⎜ ⎟ ⎢ 0.145 ⎥
⎜ ry ⎟ ⎣ ⎦
⎝ ⎠
= 23.91 ksi
1 ⎡ π 2 EC w ⎤
σt = ⎢ GJ + ⎥
2
Ar0 ⎢⎣ (K t L t ) 2 ⎥⎦
1 ⎡ π 2 ( 29500 ) (0.00104 ) ⎤
= ⎢ 11300 (0.000138 ) + ⎥
(0.130 ) (0.622 ) 2 ⎣⎢ [(1 ) (16 )]2 ⎦⎥
= 54.52 ksi
Page 2-12
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
C b r 0 A σ ey σ t
Fe =
Sf
( 2.20 ) (0.622 ) ( 0.130 ) ( 23.91 ) ( 54.52 )
=
0.0520
= 123.5 ksi
For Fe ≥ 2.78Fy
Note 2-3
PL = 1.50(e/d)W = 1.50(1.460/6)(37.3)(4.33)
= 59.0 lb.
Page 2-13
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
Refer also to Design Example #2, Step 6 for general comments on welded construction.
From Step 2(a), the twisting moment transferred from stud to bridging
channel:
Use t = 0.0566"
Note 2-4
The following design rules for wind bearing stud bridging clip angles are suggested:
• Based on field experience and a limited amount of research (Drysdale 1991,
Green 2004a), it is recommended that the thickness of the bridging clip angle
be the greater of the thickness of the stud or 0.0566".
• Leg lengths to be 1-1/2".
• Length to be ≥ stud depth minus 1/2".
• Screws (or welds) in outer portion of the web of the stud.
Page 2-14
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Using the linear method, the maximum required load per inch of weld
length is given by:
M req 162.6
q req = = = 434 lb / in.
S weld ( 1 .5 ) 2 / 6
With the lower strength bridging channel governing, the allowable weld
capacity per inch of weld length is given by (See Appendix A.1):
Page 2-15
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
Note 2-5
M req 354
q req = = = 944 lb/in.
S weld ( 1.5 ) 2 /6
See Figure 2-12. For member sizes not shown, see Figure 2-10.
Page 2-16
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Determine screw shear capacities by the AISI Specification E4.3 assuming #10-16
self-drilling screws.
t2/t1 = 1.0 therefore choose the governing Pns from AISI Equations
E4.3.1-1, E4.3.1-2 and E4.3.1-3.
3
Pns = 4.2 ( t 2 d ) 1 / 2 Fu 2 = 1109 lb. − governs
Pns = 2.7 t 1 dFu 1 = 1887 lb.
Pns = 2.7 t 2 dFu 2 = 1307 lb.
Gives:
Page 2-17
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
Pns = teFu
= 0.0566(0.337)(65)
= 1.24 kips
Gives:
Pns = Pss
Gives:
Required tension per screw (from moments about "c" in Figure 2-12)
Page 2-18
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Pnov = 1.5t1dwFu1
Note 2-6
Page 2-19
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
Step 3 – Check Bottom Track and Sill Track for Lateral Instability
Assume:
Kt = Ky = 1
E = 29,500 ksi
G = 11,300 ksi
Cb = 1 (Conservative - see AISI Specification Equation C3.1.2.1-10 if less
conservative value required.)
π2E π 2 ( 29500 )
σ ey = =
2 2
⎛ K yL y
⎞ ⎡ (1)(16 ) ⎤
⎜ ⎟ ⎢ 0.337 ⎥
⎜ ry ⎟ ⎣ ⎦
⎝ ⎠
= 129.2 ksi
1 ⎡ π 2 EC w ⎤
σt = ⎢ GJ + ⎥
2
Ar0 ⎣⎢ (K t L t ) 2 ⎦⎥
1 ⎡ π 2 ( 29500 ) (0.307 ) ⎤
= ⎢ 11300 (.000260 ) + ⎥
(0.383) ( 2.28 ) 2 ⎢⎣ [(1 ) (16 )] 2 ⎥⎦
= 176.8 ksi
Page 2-20
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
C b r0 A σ ey σ t
Fe =
Sf
( 1 ) ( 2.28 ) ( 0.383 ) ( 129.2 ) ( 176.8 )
=
0.604
= 219 ksi
Therefore, based on the fully braced strength checks from Design Example #1,
the bottom track and sill track are OK.
Refer to the Jamb Stud Selection Table 1-1 in Design Example #1.
Try built-up section E. The AISI Specification does not define interconnection
requirements for this type of built-up member. Experience indicates that a connection
spacing of 16" o.c. is adequate. The welds are required to transfer shear between the two
stud sections and to generate at least partial closed section torsional behavior. See
Figure 2-13.
Page 2-21
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
From Design Example #1, Table 1-1, this jamb stud is overstressed in web crippling.
Recalculate the web crippling Pall using instead the expression and coefficients provided
in COFS 2004a Section C4.2(a). See Notes 1-1 and 2-7. See also additional limitations on
the use of this web crippling expression in Section C4.2(a) (COFS 2004a).
C t 2 Fy sin θ ⎛ R ⎞⎛ N ⎞⎛ h⎞
Pall = ⎜ 1 −C R ⎟⎜ 1 + C N ⎟⎜ 1 − C h ⎟
Ω ⎜ t ⎟⎜ t ⎟⎠⎜⎝ t ⎟⎠
⎝ ⎠⎝
R = 0.0712"
t = 0.0451"
Depth = 6"
h = Depth - 2t - 2R = 5.767"
N = 1"
Fy = 33 ksi
θ = 90 degrees
C = 3.7
CR = 0.19
CN = 0.74
Ch = 0.019
Ω = 1.70
substituting
Pall = 0.392 kips per web
Note 2-7
The stud to track web crippling expression in COFS 2004a assumes that both flanges
of the stud are connected to both flanges of the track. For the inner and outer top
track detail used here, this condition is met. However, for the single top track
deflection detail, this condition is not met (there is no connection between the stud
flanges and the single top track) and web crippling reverts to the expression provided
in the AISI Specification for the unfastened, end one flange condition.
The toe to toe stud configuration from Step 4(a) is not recommended for screwed
construction because it is difficult to effectively connect the studs together with screws.
Page 2-22
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Use instead built-up section D from Table 1-1 Design Example #1. See Design Example
#1 Step 8(d) for suggested interconnection requirements.
Note that the weld requirements for the alternative window head built-up section in
Figure 1-6B would be similar.
Note 2-8
• All of the stud end shear is transferred in bearing against one upstanding leg of the
track. Therefore, the welds (or screws) are not required to transfer any stud end shear.
• Welds (or screws) are required to provide torsional restraint to the end of the stud.
• Welds (or screws) are not required to provide torsional restraint to the track.
(Depending on the fastening of the track to the primary structure some torsional
restraint might be required but it has been neglected here.)
• The general case of torsion at the end of the stud is provided in Appendix I. For the
design of this connection, the torsional term, Kawm, described in Appendix I, is
conservatively neglected.
Page 2-23
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
Preq = (0.670/6)(243)
= 27.1 lb.
Note that the weld configuration shown in Figure 2-15 allows welding from one
side.
See Step 5(c) for design assumptions and required load per screw.
t2/t1 = 1.0 therefore choose the governing Pns from the AISI Specification
Equations E4.3.1-1, E4.3.1-2 and E4.3.1-3.
3
Pns = 4.2 ( t 2 d) 1 / 2 Fu 2 = 789 lb. − governs
Pns = 2.7 t 1 dFu 1 = 1041 lb.
Pns = 2.7 t 2 dFu 2 = 1041 lb.
Page 2-24
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Page 2-25
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
Gives:
Not applicable
Screw allowable shear limited by E4.3.3 shear in the screws themselves. Refer to
the AISI Supplement
Pns = Pss
Where Pss = nominal shear capacity of screw. See Appendix A, Table A-1.
The end connection transfers both shear and torsion from the sill member. The torsional
component is described as a general case in Appendix I. For the purposes of this design
example, the term Kawm (as described in Appendix I) is neglected. See Figure 2-17
and from Appendix I the required torsional moment on the weld group
(neglecting Kawm) is given by:
Mreq = Rm = Vreq m
Mreq = 296(0.336)
= 99.5 in.lb
Page 2-26
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
See Figure 2-18. Using the linear method, the maximum required load per inch of
weld length is given by the vector addition of the 2 stress components:
2 2
⎛ M req ⎞ ⎛ Vreq ⎞
q req = ⎜ ⎟ + ⎜ ⎟
⎜S ⎟ ⎜A ⎟
⎝ weld ⎠ ⎝ weld ⎠
Sweld = Iweld/c
= 2 [1/12(1)3 + 1(2.5)2 ] / 3
= 4.22 in2
Page 2-27
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
2 2
⎛ 99.5 ⎞ ⎛ 296 ⎞
q req = ⎜ ⎟ +⎜ ⎟
⎝ 4. 22 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠
= 150 lb/in
For detailing of this connection refer to Figure 1-18. The forces on the fasteners are the
same as Design Example #1 Step 8(f) except that here the torsional moment, M, is
superimposed.
From Step 5(e) the moment and shear applied to the connection are given by the
following specified values:
For screws connecting the angle to the sill track see Figures 2-19 and 2-20.
Page 2-28
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Shear resultant
Vreq = V12 + V22 = 148 2 + 55.5 2
= 158 lb.
Treq = T1 = M/4.75
= 99.5/4.75
= 20.9 lb.
Page 2-29
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
Pnov = 1.5t1dwFu1
The governing nominal tensile strength is given by Pnot = 328 lb. and
Vreq Treq
+ ≤ 1.0
Vall Tall
158 20.9
+ = 0.79 < 1.00 OK
263 109
For screws connecting the angle to the jamb stud see Figure 2-21.
Therefore, by inspection OK
Page 2-30
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Page 2-31
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
The strength of welds in cold formed steel in thicknesses less than or equal to 0.10 inches
is a function of the tensile strength of the sheet and the length of the weld. It is assumed
that the necessary weld leg size is available to develop the strength of the parent
material.
Show a nominal weld size on drawings of say 1/8" accompanied by a note "For material
less than 0.10" thick, drawings show nominal weld leg sizes. For such material, the
effective throat of welds shall not be less than the thickness of the thinnest connected
part."
The minimum practical parent material thickness for welding varies with the skill of the
welders and the welding procedure used. A common recommended minimum thickness
is 0.0451". There is no minimum weld length requirement in the AISI Specification - a 1"
minimum is used here
Refer to Appendix A.1 for the origin of the general formula for the nominal strength of
fillet and flare-bevel groove welds, 0.75tLFu.
The Fu values for various steels can be found in AISI 2002b, Part I.
1. Many connections can be made without supplementary clip angles such as the
window head and sill to jamb connections (Figures 2-17 and 2-22).
2. Special long-legged inner top tracks are not required for the inner and outer top
track deflection detail.
3. Welded connections (with experienced welders) have generally less labor content
than screwed connections. This is particularly the case in thicker material (say ≥
0.0566") and in shop conditions.
1. Experienced and certified welders capable of working with lightgauge material may
not be available. Damaged members from burn through is the usual consequence of
inexperience.
Page 2-32
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
2. In shop conditions, the fumes from the galvanizing vapors are toxic and require
special air handling or special masks.
3. The galvanized coatings are locally damaged by the heat of welding and touch-up
with a zinc rich paint is usually required.
4. Where a strength increase from cold work of forming is used (as in this Guide) there is
the possibility that this strength increase can be lost due to the heat of welding. The
AISI Specification requires testing to evaluate this effect. See Section A7.2(c).
Alternatively, the cold work of forming effect can be conservatively ignored.
Note 2-9
Anchor the last stud to the shearwall or column with wedge type expansion anchors at
say 2'-8" o.c. This anchorage eliminates any differential wind load deflections between
the stud and the shearwall or column, effectively anchors the bridging and provides
racking resistance in the plane of the wall.
Page 2-33
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
Step 8 – Parapets
Page 2-34
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Note 2-10
1. Some parapets are designed to accept substantial vertical and lateral loads from
window washing equipment, swing stages etc. and also may be required to function as
a guard. It is assumed that these loads do not apply to this project. Nevertheless,
parapet design should anticipate considerable abuse during construction (gravel
buggies) and in the completed structure (re-roofing operations).
2. Figure 2-25, as illustrated, is generally not acceptable. A fixed base moment resisting
condition is required which cannot be achieved by anchoring the bottom track to the
top of the roof slab.
This detail will work if each stud is directly connected to the roof slab with a full
moment connection. There are proprietary connection devices available for this
purpose. Alternatively, provide anchor plates cast into the roof slab at regular
intervals with hot-rolled angles, channels or hollow structural sections welded to the
anchor plates and cantilevering over the height of the parapet to support the top track.
The studs are then designed for the relatively trivial simply supported condition
between the tracks. The top track is designed to span between the cantilevering posts
and the bottom track is designed to span between fasteners into the roof slab which
will be controlled by the 2'-8" o.c. maximum recommended spacing in Drysdale 1991.
This cantilevering post design approach is detailed in Step 8(a) that follows.
3. The design calculations for the alternative configuration in Figure 2-24 are provided
in Step 8(b).
For this purpose, flat strap face bridging is provided 12" below the roof support angle.
The 12" distance between the reaction point and the line of bridging will induce
warping torsional stresses in the studs which is checked in Step 8(c) using the model
proposed in Appendix C. The bridging itself is checked in Step 8(e) (welded) and 8(f)
(screwed).
For projects where the parapet is low, the line of bridging at the roof slab level may not
be required because the parapet top track is close enough to provide adequate torsional
restraint. The warping torsional stresses, for this case could also be checked using the
model proposed in Appendix C.
Page 2-35
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
Page 2-36
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
i) Top Track
Assume continuous top tack supported by posts at 5'-4" o.c. For strength check
assume a 2 span condition and for deflection assume 1 span.
Combined bending and shear - AISI Specification Section C3.3.1 as revised in the
AISI Supplement
2 2
⎛ Ω bM ⎞ ⎛Ω V⎞
⎜ ⎟ + ⎜⎜ v ⎟⎟
⎜M ⎟
⎝ nxo ⎠ ⎝ Vn ⎠
2 2 2 2
⎛ M ⎞ ⎛ V ⎞ 2.88 ⎞ ⎛ 0.225 ⎞
= ⎜ ⎟ +⎜ ⎟ = ⎛⎜ ⎟ + ⎜ ⎟
⎜M ⎟ ⎜V ⎟ ⎝ 9.11 ⎠ ⎝ 1.377 ⎠
⎝ all ⎠ ⎝ all ⎠
Try 4" x 4" x 1/8" HSS (Fy = 33 ksi) at 5'-4" o.c. For HSS use the AISI Specification.
Page 2-37
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
P = track reaction
= 1.25wL (for the two span track condition - worst case)
= 1.25(67.6)(5.33)
= 450 lb.
Mreq = PL = 450(4.83)(12/1000)
= 26.1 in.kips
w/t = 31.5
t = 0.116"
Sx = 2.20 in3
I = 4.40 in4
A = 1.77 in2
J = 6.91 in4
Check if the HSS is subject to local buckling by the AISI Specification B2.1
2 2
kπ 2 E ⎛ t ⎞ 4 π 2 29500 ⎛ 1 ⎞
Fcr = =
( )
⎜ ⎟
12 1 − υ 2 ⎝ w ⎠ ( )⎜ ⎟
12 1 − 0.3 2 ⎝ 31.5 ⎠
= 107.5 ksi
f 33
λ= =
Fcr 107.5
Page 2-38
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Allowable moment
Mall = FySx /Ω
= 33(2.20)/1.67
= 43.5 in.kips > 26.1 in.kips OK
Allowable shear
Ek v 29500 ( 5.34 )
= = 69.1
Fy 33
Fv = 0.60Fy = 0.60(33)
= 19.8 ksi
For 2 webs
2 2
⎛ ΩbM ⎞ ⎛Ω V⎞
⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ + ⎜⎜ v ⎟⎟
⎝ M nxo ⎠ ⎝ Vn ⎠
2 2 2 2
⎛ M ⎞ ⎛ V ⎞ 26.1 ⎞ ⎛ 0.450 ⎞
= ⎜ ⎟ +⎜ ⎟ = ⎛⎜ ⎟ + ⎜ ⎟
⎜M ⎟ ⎜V ⎟ ⎝ 43.5 ⎠ ⎝ 10.5 ⎠
⎝ all ⎠ ⎝ all ⎠
3
PL3 0.7 ( 450 )( 4.83 x 12 )
δ= =
3EI 3 ( 29500 ) (1000 ) I
0.693
=
I
Page 2-39
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
2 L cant 2( 4.83)(12 )
δ max = =
360 360
= 0.322 in.
0.693
I req =
0.322
0.36C b π
Lu = EGJI y
Fy S f
Cb = 1 (conservative)
Fy = 33 ksi
Sf = 2.20 in3
E = 29500 ksi
G = 11300 ksi
J = 6.91 in4
Iy = 4.40 in4
Substituting:
The strength of welded joints with t > 0.10" is limited by the approximate method
in Appendix A or shear through the effective throat of the weld itself.
tmin = 0.116"
Fy = 33 ksi
Electrode Fxx = 60 ksi
Page 2-40
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
From Appendix A
Sweld = Iweld /c
= 2[(1/12)(4)3 + (4)(2)2]/2
= 21.3 in2
The maximum required load per inch of weld length is given by the
vector addition of the 2 stress components
2 2
⎛ M req ⎞ ⎛ V ⎞
q req = ⎜⎜ ⎟ + ⎜ req ⎟
⎟ ⎜A ⎟
⎝ S weld ⎠ ⎝ weld ⎠
Substituting
Page 2-41
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
Connect track to cap plate with 4 – #10-16 self drilling screws. OK by inspection.
The parapet dimensions and loading are illustrated in Figure 2-28. See also Figure 2-32.
Reactions
Moments about A
13.83RB – 37.3(17.83)2/2 = 0
RB = 429 lb.
Page 2-42
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
For cantilever
Note 2-11
1. For the web crippling check to be valid, web punchouts are not permitted in the vicinity
of the reaction at B. The required distance can be checked from the AISI Specification
Section C3.4.2 Eq. C3.4.2-2 by setting Rc = 1 and solving. Gives:
x = 1.89h + 0.887d0
= 1.89(5.767)+ 0.887(1.50)
= 12.2"
Therefore, the required distance between the edge of bearing and the edge of the
punchout must be ≥ 12.2" for no reduction in web crippling.
Derive the web crippling allowable strength at B for interior one flange
condition, unfastened and 3" bearing length. From the AISI Specification Section
C3.4 and Table C3.4.1-2
C t 2 Fy sin θ ⎛ R ⎞⎛ N ⎞⎛ h ⎞
Pall = ⎜ 1 −C R ⎟⎜ 1 + C N ⎟⎜ 1 − C h ⎟
Ω ⎜ t ⎟⎜ t ⎟⎠⎜⎝ t ⎟
⎝ ⎠⎝ ⎠
where:
R = 0.0712"
t = 0.0451"
Depth = 6"
h = Depth - 2t - 2R = 5.767"
N = 3"
Fy = 33 ksi
θ = 90 degrees
C = 13
CR = 0.23
CN = 0.14
Ch = 0.01
Ω = 1.65
substituting
Check combined bending and web crippling at B (AISI Supplement Section C3.5.1 )
Page 2-43
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
⎛ P ⎞ ⎛ M ⎞ 1.33
0.91 ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ + ⎜⎜ ⎟≤
⎟ Ω
⎝ Pn ⎠ ⎝ M nxo ⎠
where:
P = RB = 0.429 kips
M = MB = 3.58 in.kips
Pn = ΩwPall = 1.65(0.714) = 1.178 kips
Mnxo = ΩbMall = 1.67(16.68) = 27.9 in.kips
Ω = 1.70
Substituting:
0.46 ≤ 0.782 OK
2 2 2 2
⎛ ΩbM ⎞ ⎛Ω V⎞ ⎛ M ⎞ ⎛ V ⎞
⎜ ⎟ + ⎜⎜ v ⎟⎟ = ⎜ ⎟ +⎜ ⎟
⎜M ⎟ ⎜M ⎟ ⎜V ⎟
⎝ nxo ⎠ ⎝ Vn ⎠ ⎝ all ⎠ ⎝ all ⎠
where:
M = MB = 3.58 in.kips
V = VB = 0.280 kips
Mall = 16.68 in.kips
Vall = 1.24 kips (use punched shear)
Substituting:
2 2
⎛ 3.58 ⎞ ⎛ 0.280 ⎞
⎜ ⎟ +⎜ ⎟ ≤ 1.00
⎝ 16.68 ⎠ ⎝ 1.24 ⎠
0.31 ≤ 1.00 OK
Page 2-44
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Note 2 - 12
The simplified approach in Figure 2-29 is used here even though the slope is not zero at the
base of the cantilever. A more rigorous model is shown in Figure 2-30 with Ls and δc taken
to the middle of the back span. Where deflected shapes are different from that shown in
Figure 2-30, Ls and δc can be taken instead to the point of zero slope.
Page 2-45
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
δc = 0.172"
As shown in Figure 2-30, there is a distance of 12" between the roof reaction point and
the line of bridging. The torsional eccentricity of the reaction point (with respect to the
shear center of the section) will induce warping torsional stresses in the studs which can
be checked using the model proposed in Appendix C. See also Step 1(a) from this design
example for additional background to the procedure.
The torsional loads on the "half-beam", w and P, are illustrated in Figure 2-31 and
are derived as follows:
w = 28(16/12)(e/h) = (28)(16/12)(0.670/5.95)
= 4.20 lb/ft
Page 2-46
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Then
σbend = Mx(req) /Sx(eff) = 3580/0.767
= 4670 psi
R factor:
σ bend 4670
R= =
σ bend +σ w 4670 + 4460
= 0.512
Note 2-13
Note that the R.Mall should not be used in the interaction equations for moment
and shear and moment and web crippling in Step 8(b).
Page 2-47
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
Page 2-48
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Use 3" x 6" bent plate with long leg horizontal. By inspection, t = 1/4" is
adequate.
Required shear
Vreq = RB = 429 lb/stud (from Step 8(b))
= 429(12/16) = 322 lb/ft
Check interaction of shear and moment using the equation from Appendix B.1
Notes B.1 Item 9 with S = fastener spacing in feet.
Page 2-49
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
5 5
⎛ ST ⎞ 3 ⎛ SV ⎞ 3
⎜ ⎟ +⎜ ⎟ ≤ 1 .0
⎜T ⎟ ⎜V ⎟
⎝ all ⎠ ⎝ all ⎠
5 5
⎛ 241 S ⎞ 3 ⎛ 322 S ⎞ 3
⎜ ⎟ +⎜ ⎟ ≤ 1.0
⎝ 612 ⎠ ⎝ 675 ⎠
For jamb locations (by inspection) use 2 anchors spaced at Scr = 4-1/2" (For Scr see
Design Example #1 Step 8(k) Table 1-3)
OK by inspection.
Page 2-50
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Assuming a uniform stress along the length of the weld the load per weld is
given by taking moments about "a"
For both the slide clip and the bent plate Fu = 65 ksi
Use 1" weld length top and bottom as a minimum practical weld length.
vi) Slide Clip to Bent Plate Powder Actuated Fastener (PAF) Connection
Assuming equal tensile force in each PAF the force in each PAF is given by
taking moments about "a"
Page 2-51
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
Check pullover assuming the AISI Specification Section E4.4.2 applies to PAF's
Note 2-14
Where powder actuated fasteners act in tension it is preferred to provide two or more
fasteners in the interests of structural redundancy. Also where earthquake design is a
consideration, there may be restrictions on the use of powder actuated fasteners in tension -
see Note 1-14.
Page 2-52
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
As discussed in Note 2-10 Item 3, the proprietary slide clip is assumed to provide no
torsional restraint and a line of bridging is required. The line of bridging is shown in
Figure 2-32, a distance of 12" from the roof reaction point (RB). For the bridging flat strap
details see Figure 2-36. For blocking-in details see Figure 2-37.
Check bridging force required to restrain the stud according to the AISI
Supplement Section D3.2.2. The reaction at RB will induce twisting in the stud
which in turn is partially relieved by the applied wind load.
and
m = 0.670"
d = 5.95" (centreline stud depth)
Page 2-53
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
PL = (m/d)RB
= (0.670/5.95)(429)
= 48.3 lb.
(The applied wind load 0.5a either side of the bridging line offsets PL and has been
conservatively neglected here.)
Check tensile capacity of flat strap – gross cross section check only – AISI
Specification Section C2.
Tall = Tn /Ω = AgFy /Ω
= (1.50)(0.0451)(33)/1.67
= 1.34 kips > 0.435 kips OK
The blocking-in is essentially a shear panel with equal and opposite applied
loads, T, and with the internal forces, V, required for rotational equilibrium. The
forces, V, are in turn resisted by the major axis bending strength of the
connecting studs. Also see Note 2-15.
Page 2-54
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Note 2-15
The design of blocking-in is based on the assumption that the load in the interior flat
strap is resisted by an equal and opposite load in the exterior flat strap. But equal
and opposite flat strap loads are not always possible – the end of a run of wall is one
such example. In this case, some additional flat strap anchorage is required such as
connection to a built-up jamb with sufficient weak axis strength and stiffness or
connection to a primary structural element such as a column or shearwall. Also, it
may be advantageous to space the blocking-in more closely than shown here such
that any unbalanced loads when they do occur are relatively small.
The details in Figure 2-37 assume that there is no direct weld between the flat
strap and the blocking-in. (It is difficult to weld a 1-1/2" wide flat strap to a 1-5/8"
flange.)
First, the strap loads are transferred to the flanges of two studs adjacent to the
blocking-in. The weld is the typical strap to stud weld called up in Figure 2-36
(not shown in Figure 2-37).
Then the loads are transferred to the blocking-in via the welds shown in Figure
2-37. But these welds are also simultaneously resisting the internal shear force V.
Each of the 4 welds in Figure 2-35 is therefore subject to T/2 and V/2.
For torsional eccentricity to the centreline of the flange see Note 2-16.
Page 2-55
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
Refer to Step 8(e) for the derivation of the required loads Treq and Vreq . Refer also to
Note 2-15. For the bridging flat strap details see Figure 2-36. For blocking-in details see
Figure 2-38.
Check tensile capacity of flat strap – net cross section check because of the screw
hole (The AISI Specification does not include an explicit design procedure for checking
fracture in the net section at the connection where screw fasteners are used. For the
purposes of this example, Equation C2-2 Section C2(b) is assumed to apply at the
connection. Note that more conservative expressions for checking fracture at the
connection are available in Section E3.2 but these are intended for bolted connections and
may or may not apply to screwed connections.)
Tall = AnFu /Ω
= (1.50 - 0.19)(0.0451)(45)/2.00
= 1.33 kips > 0.435 kips OK
Page 2-56
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
From Step 5(d) the allowable shear strength of the #10-16 self-drilling screw is
given by:
Vall = 263 lb/screw (t1 = t2 = 0.0451")
Unlike the welded detail, the flat strap is screw connected directly to the
blocking-in. This connection is shown in Figure 2-36.
Number of screws require for the flat strap to blocking-in connection is given by:
Use 2 screws OK
resulting in:
Vreq /screw = 158 lb.
But:
Vall /screw = 263 lb.
Vall = (263/158)(296)
= 493 lb. > 182 lb. OK
For torsional eccentricity to the centerline of the flange, see Note 2-16.
Page 2-57
Design Example #2, Wind Bearing Infill Wall with an Unsheathed Design Approach and Welded or
Screwed Connections
Note 2-16
Gives:
Treq = 948 lb.
Vreq = 397 lb.
For welded blocking-in use same details but reduce spacing to 8 stud spaces
(calculations not shown here)
For screwed blocking-in use same spacing and details except increase the number of
screws connecting the strap to blocking to 4 (calculations not shown here).
The calculations for window locations have not been done here. The following should be
considered:
1. The built-up jamb stud should be carried through to the top of the parapet. Check
for the same limit states as the typical stud. The connection to the roof slab will
require reinforcement.
2. The window built-up head detail should account for the extra weight, sag and
accidental vertical loads applied to the parapet.
3. The cantilevering studs that extend upwards from the window head will alter the
window head lateral loads compared with the typical case.
Page 2-58
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Design Example #3
Wind Bearing Wall with Strip Windows
Introduction
This design example reviews three alternative methods for framing strip windows with
cold-formed steel framing. Detailed design calculations are presented for the third
alternative, studs outside the face of the structure.
The calculations assume welded connections and an all steel system where the restraint
of the sheathings is ignored. Where accounted for, torsional eccentricities are taken to
the centerline of the web.
The section numbers for the design of individual components are identified in Figure 3-
1.
Step 1 – Given
Load combination factors for allowable strength design (ASD) are based on ASCE 7-05
(ASCE 2005) Section 2.4. For strength, the full nominal wind load is used. For
deflection, 0.7 times the nominal wind load is used. For further discussion refer to the
Introduction Item 3.2.
From the governing building code, the nominal wind load = 30 psf
Page 3- 1
Design Example #3, Wind Bearing Wall with Strip Windows
Page 3-2
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
From the governing building code for lateral force on elements of structures:
If each strip window is to be treated as a punched window, then the window head and
sill member must be able to span horizontally between the window jambs spaced at 18'-
4".
Page 3- 3
Design Example #3, Wind Bearing Wall with Strip Windows
Required moment
Mreq = [4.33(30)(18.33)2/8][12/1000]
= 65.5 in.kips
Required inertia
4
5wL4 5 ( 4.33) ( 30 ) (0.70 ) ( 220 )
δ= =
384EI 12 ( 384 ) ( 29.5) (10 6 ) I
7.83
= in.
I
For built-up window sill illustrated in Figure 3-3, try 600S162-68 (50) stud and
600T125-68 (50) track. (Track with Fy = 50 ksi may require a special order.)
From load tables (see Note 1-3 for an alternative approach to built-up member
analysis):
Sill deflections are excessive even for a built-up section made with thick members.
Therefore, the punched window approach with CFSF is not practical.
Page 3-4
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
The span length of window head and sill members can be reduced with the introduction
of CFSF mullions as shown in Figure 3-4.
This alternative is not usually acceptable architecturally since the visual effect of the
strip window is compromised.
For design purposes, the strip window has been reduced to a series of punched
windows which are similar to the infill Design Examples #1 and #2.
This detail as illustrated in Figure 3-5 is generally not acceptable. As was discussed
under cantilevering parapets (see Note 2-10 Item 2), anchoring conventional track to the
structure will create neither a strong nor a stiff moment connection.
This detail will work if anchor plates are cast into the floor slabs at regular intervals and
cantilevering hot-rolled angles, channels or hollow structural sections are welded in
place. The CFSF members are designed as infill around the hot-rolled cantilevers. This is
similar to the approach illustrated in Design Example #2 Step 8(a).
Note that with this type of detail, the differential slab deflections will be accommodated
within the aluminum extrusions for the window. This requirement should be specified
on the project contract documents.
Page 3- 5
Design Example #3, Wind Bearing Wall with Strip Windows
Step 4(d) – Studs Outside the Face of the Structure (Design Alternative #4)
See Figure 3-6. This approach is generally the most satisfactory way of framing strip
windows and it will be used in the following design example.
As for Step 4(c), Design Alternative #3, the differential slab deflections will be
accommodated within the aluminum extrusions for the window. This requirement
should be specified on the project contract documents. For purposes of the design
example, assume a structural steel building with deck reinforced slab floors.
Page 3-6
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Page 3- 7
Design Example #3, Wind Bearing Wall with Strip Windows
The wind load diagram on the typical stud is shown in Figure 3-7. Dimensions are to
center lines of supports at B and C assuming a 2" x 2" angle at B.
Note 3-1
Co-ordination with the hot-rolled steel design is required to insure that adequate bottom
flange braces are provided to pick up the stud reaction at B.
RC = 639 lb.
Maximum moment at C
Page 3-8
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
w = 60(0.70) = 42 lb/ft
gives
2 2 2 2
⎛ ΩbM ⎞ ⎛Ω V⎞ ⎛ M ⎞ ⎛ V ⎞
⎜ ⎟ + ⎜⎜ v ⎟⎟ = ⎜ ⎟ +⎜ ⎟
⎜M ⎟ ⎜M ⎟ ⎜V ⎟
⎝ nxo ⎠ ⎝ Vn ⎠ ⎝ all ⎠ ⎝ all ⎠
where:
M = Mreq at C = 9.06 in.kips
V = Vreq at C = 0.352 kips
Mall = 16.68 in.kips
Vall = 1.24 kips (use punched shear)
Substituting:
2 2
⎛ 9.06 ⎞ ⎛ 0.352 ⎞
⎜ ⎟ +⎜ ⎟ ≤ 1.00
⎝ 16.68 ⎠ ⎝ 1.24 ⎠
0.61 ≤ 1.00 OK
Page 3- 9
Design Example #3, Wind Bearing Wall with Strip Windows
Note 3-2
No web crippling check is required here because the connection transfers shear
directly from the web of the stud. This contrasts with the flange clip connection in
Design Example #2 Step 8(b) where both web crippling and combined web
crippling and bending must be checked.
Note 3-3
Based on the above design checks, a 600S162-33 (33) stud would be a possible
alternative selection. The 600S162-43 stud, with a design thickness of 0.0451", has
been chosen to facilitate welding. See Design Example #2 Step 6 for further
discussion.
Wind loads are applied normal to the wall surface while earthquake loads can
act in any horizontal direction.
Earthquake loads acting in the plane of the wall, including earthquake forces on
the windows, are transferred to the wall through the connectors. These forces can
be distributed by the weak axis strength of the studs, the shear diaphragm
strength of the finishes or flat strap cross bracing when present.
To be consistent with the "all steel" design approach used for this example, the
earthquake forces are assumed to be distributed by the weak axis bending
strength and stiffness of the studs.
Note 3-4
When the diaphragm stiffness of the sheathings substantially exceeds the weak axis
bending stiffness of the studs and if the sheathings and their connectors lack the
necessary diaphragm strength and ductility then, the studs will only be mobilized
once the sheathings are damaged. To avoid sheathing damage - provide adequate
diaphragm strength or add flat strap cross bracing.
Page 3-10
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
From ASCE 2005 ASD, the governing earthquake load combination is D + 0.7E
By proportioning the wind load moment at C, the applied weak axis earthquake
moment is given by:
From load tables choose the lesser of the weak axis moment with the lips or the
web in compression.
A 600S162-43 stud has adequate strength for in-plane earthquake forces without
relying on the shear diaphragm strength of the finishes or additional cross
bracing.
Therefore, for both wind and earthquake, use a 600S162-43 (33) studs at 24" o.c.
It is industry standard practice to match track thickness and stud thickness unless there
is a structural requirement for heavier track. In this example, 600T125-43 (33) would
satisfy both industry standard practice and structural requirements. However, in the
interests of providing additional resistance to construction abuse, the heavier 600T125-54
(50) has been selected instead.
Page 3- 11
Design Example #3, Wind Bearing Wall with Strip Windows
Page 3-12
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Step 7(a) – Lateral Support Connection at B Under Wind Load – Body of the Connector
Note 3-5
1. This connection resists the lateral wind reaction and is assumed to act as a torsional
restraint for the stud. A rigorous analysis of this connection detail would be quite complex
but this has been avoided here through the use of a number of conservative and simplifying
assumptions.
2. Section properties for the 2" x 2" x 0.0713" are not available in the product literature and
can be obtained from the formulas in AISI 2002b Part I or by interpolation as done here.
Page 3- 13
Design Example #3, Wind Bearing Wall with Strip Windows
For properties, linearly interpolate between properties for 2" x 2" x 0.060"
and 0.075" angles as provided in AISI 2002b Part I Table I-7. (Linear
interpolation is acceptable for the properties shown here but may not be for other
properties.)
and the stud shear centre to the back of the stud is given by:
m - t/2 = 0.670 - 0.0451/2 = 0.647"
• The connection between the angle and the stud transfers the torsional
restraint component Rm - Kawm (discussed in Appendix I). For the design of
the angle, it is conservative to neglect this torsional component.
• The stud shear is transferred from the web of the stud to the angle with an
eccentricity about the vertical axis of the angle.
• The axial load in the angle is transferred to the bottom flange of the hot-
rolled beam with an eccentricity about the horizontal axis of the angle.
• Conservatively assume the axial load in the angle is applied with an
eccentricity about both axes on both ends.
• Use the simplified analysis method proposed in Appendix H for fully
effective behavior.
Page 3-14
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
5190
f=
(w / t)2
5190
= = 8.70 ksi
(1.741 / 0.0713) 2
Where:
Mx = My = Pe = 105(0.540)
= 56.7 in.lb
Ωb = 1.67
Ωc = 1.80
Substituting:
Page 3- 15
Design Example #3, Wind Bearing Wall with Strip Windows
Step 7(b) – Lateral Support Connection at B Under Earthquake Load – Body of the
Connector
PE/Q = 105(3.23/30)
= 11.3 lb.
PE/Q induces a moment in the angle with a lever arm of say 4-1/2" to the
centerline of the 1" weld (Figure 3-11).
Using the limiting stress from Step 7(a) for fully effective behavior
Mall = Sf/Ωb
= 0.0758(8700)/1.67
= 395 in.lb > 50.9 in.lb OK
Page 3-16
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Therefore, a 2" x 2" x 0.0713" angle is adequate for both wind and earthquake.
Note 3-6
The 2" x 2" x 0.0713" angle has a large strength reserve. This reserve is useful for
miscellaneous parts since they can be engineered with a minimum of effort without too much
concern for precise eccentricities and loads. Also, the welding position for these parts is often
awkward and the thicker 0.0713" material is less susceptible to welding damage.
Step 7(c) – Lateral Support at B Under Wind or Earthquake Load – Welds at Either End
Step 7(d) – Vertical and Lateral Support at C Under Dead and Wind Load – Body of the
Connector
PWIND = Rc = 639 lb
Page 3- 17
Design Example #3, Wind Bearing Wall with Strip Windows
P1 = PDL = 397 lb
P2 = PWIND = 639 lb
gives
Rm − Kawm
P3 =
d
Page 3-18
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
where:
d = 4" for center to center spacing of 1" long welds when studs are 1" from
face of structure
m = centerline of web to shear center of stud = 0.670 in.
R = Rc = P2 = 639 lb.
K = 0.67 (Appendix I)
a = average distance to adjacent torsional braces
= (2.83 + 2.33)/2 = 2.58 ft.
w = 2(30) = 60 lb/ft
Substituting:
= 89.7 lb.
A = 5t
Sx = (1/4)t(5)2 = 4.17t
Zy = (1/4)(5)t2 = 1.25t2 (The plastic section modulus is used here)
Mx = P1(4) = 397(4)
= 1588 in.lb
My = P3(4) = 89.7(4)
= 359 in.lb
T = P2
= 639 lb.
Combined stresses – stability effects are negligible. (The following stress check is
equivalent to checking the AISI Specification Section C5.2.1 for strength only.)
MX MY T Fy
+ + =
SX Z Y A 1.67
For Fy = 50 ksi
Page 3- 19
Design Example #3, Wind Bearing Wall with Strip Windows
Gives:
29940t2 - 509t - 287 = 0
t = 0.107 in.
Step 7(e) – Vertical and Lateral Support at C under Dead and Earthquake Load – Body of
the Connector
The distribution of earthquake forces to the reaction points B and C in Figure 3-6 is
similar (i.e. proportional) to the distribution of wind forces. The earthquake reaction
can, therefore, be found by proportioning the wind load reaction. See Figure 3-14.
Page 3-20
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Due to earthquake:
MY = (PE/Q)(4) = (68.8)(4)
= 275 in.lb
Compared with the wind and dead load case, the earthquake moments are less
severe and t = 0.1242" is OK by inspection.
Therefore, based on dead, wind and earthquake load cases use t = 0.1242" (10 ga) bent
plate 2" x 6" angle in 50 ksi steel x 5" long.
Step 7(f) – Vertical and Lateral Support at C Under Dead and Wind Load – Angle to Stud
Welds
Each weld is loaded by 3 orthogonal forces. The required forces from Step 7(d)
are given by:
P1 = 397 lb.
P2 = 639 lb.
P3 = 89.7 lb.
Assuming a uniform stress along the length of each weld (see Note 3-7) the
required resultant shear per weld is given by:
= 193 lb/weld
Page 3- 21
Design Example #3, Wind Bearing Wall with Strip Windows
Note 3-7
The weld stresses resulting from the torsional restraint forces, P3, have been treated in an
approximate and possibly unconservative fashion here by assuming that the resulting weld
stresses are uniform along the length of the weld. A more rigorous solution, consistent
with the assumptions in Appendix G, would be :
• Calculate the linear section properties for the weld group, Sweld
• Using the linear method calculate the maximum required load per inch of weld length
qreq = Mreq / Sweld (where Mreq = 4P3 in this example). Convert the other components to
required loads per inch of weld length and find the resultant maximum qreq using the
square root function.
• Compare the resultant qreq with the allowable weld capacity per inch of length as given
by qall = Pn /(LΩ) = 0.75 tFu /Ω
The "exact" procedure has been demonstrated in Design Example #2 Step 5(e) and Design
Example #3, Steps 7(h) and 7(i). Given the strength reserve in this weld group the extra
design time for the "exact" procedure is not justified.
Step 7(g) – Vertical and Lateral Support at C Under Dead and Earthquake Load – Angle to
Stud Welds
Note 3-8
The earthquake load for weld design is higher than the earthquake load for the design of the
body of the connector. See Step 3.
For the D + 0.7E load case and Fp = 0.900Wp. (See Note 3-8.)
Assume the earthquake reaction can be found by proportioning the wind load
reaction at C.
Page 3-22
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Assuming PE/Q is distributed equally to all 4 welds, the required resultant shear
per weld is given by:
= ( 397 / 4 ) 2 + ( 215 / 4) 2
The weld strength is governed by the steel properties for the stud
Vall = 0.75tLFu/Ω
= 0.75(0.0451)(1)(45000)/3.05
= 499 lb/weld > 193 lb/weld OK
Step 7(h) – Vertical and Lateral Support at C Under Dead and Wind Load - Angle to
Concrete Pour Stop Welds
The calculation of resultant shears acting on the weld group is somewhat complex and
reference is made to the general method outlined in Appendix G.
Note 3-9
1. The sign convention in Appendix G can be confusing. In the appendix and Figure 3-15, all
forces, moments and stresses are shown in the positive direction. Co-ordinates x, y and z are
positive or negative in the usual sense. While the Appendix G sign convention has been
followed here, in some cases it may be simpler to just handle the sign of resulting stresses
intuitively.
2. The critical element of weld has been selected where stresses are maximum and also where
no weld stress relief is possible due to the direct bearing between parts.
Page 3- 23
Design Example #3, Wind Bearing Wall with Strip Windows
For the D + W load combination, the required forces are given in Step 7(d).
P1 = 397 lb.
P2 = 639 lb.
P3 = 89.7 lb.
PX = 0
Page 3-24
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
IX = 4[(1/12)(1.5)3 + 1.5(1.75)2]
= 19.5 in3
IY = 4(1.5)(1)2
= 6.0 in3
IZ = IX + IY = 25.5 in3
For the critical element of weld in Figure 3-15 with due regard to signs (see Note
3-9):
qx' = PX/A = 0
Page 3- 25
Design Example #3, Wind Bearing Wall with Strip Windows
2 2 2
q req = q x + q y + q z
Step 7(i) – Vertical and Lateral Support at C Under Dead and Earthquake Load – Angle to
Concrete Pour Stop Welds
PZ = 0
MY = 4PE/Q = 4(215)
= 860 in.lb
MZ = 1(P1) = 1(397)
= 397 in.lb
For the critical element of weld in Figure 3-15 with due regard to signs (see Note
3-9):
Page 3-26
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
qz' = 0
2 2 2
q req = q x + q y + q z
The strength of welded joints with t > 0.10" is limited by the approximate method
in Appendix A or shear through the effective throat of the weld itself.
tmin = 0.1242"
Fy = 50 ksi for angle and 33 ksi for concrete pour stop
Fu = 65 ksi for angle and 45 ksi for concrete pour stop
Electrode Fxx = 60 ksi
Allowable strength for a nominal 1/8" fillet weld (A fillet weld occurs at the toe of
the connector angle and a flare-bevel groove weld at the heel.)
From Appendix A
Page 3- 27
Design Example #3, Wind Bearing Wall with Strip Windows
The leg length of the fillet weld is limited to the thickness of the angle
connector = 0.1242"
Note that this qall is also valid for the flare-bevel groove weld at the heel of the
connector angle (same effective throat if flare-bevel grove weld not filled flush to surface
- see the AISI Specification Section E2.5)
Therefore, use the angle to concrete pour stop welds illustrated in Figure 3-13.
The strip windows are interrupted periodically and replaced with a full height stud
wall. (See elevation Figure 3-2.) This full height stud wall can be achieved by continuing
the strip window details (Figure 3-6) but adding stud infill to replace the window. A
deflection gap detail such as the inner and outer top track may be required at the top of
the stud infill. This is illustrated in Figure 3-16.
The deflection gap detail would not be required if all of the following conditions are
satisfied:
• The stud infill is located at column lines where little or no relative slab deflection
occurs.
• The accumulative effect of column axial shortening is not significant.
• Thermal expansion and contraction is not expected to be significant.
Where the deflection gap detail is used, add welded straps each end of the outer top
track to provide racking resistance for the infill studs.
Page 3-28
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Page 3- 29
Design Example #3, Wind Bearing Wall with Strip Windows
An alternative deflection gap detail for the stud infill with shop applied exterior
insulation and finish system is shown in Figure 3-17.
Page 3-30
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Design Example #4
CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
Introduction
This example covers the design of a cold-formed steel framing floor system bearing on a
steel stud wall with a window opening. Detailed calculations are included for all
elements including the stud bridging and its anchorage.
The section numbers for the design of individual components are identified in Figures 4-
1 and 4-2. Refer also to Step 12, Bridging Anchorage.
Page 4- 1
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
Step 1 – Given
Page 4- 2
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Page 4- 3
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
Page 4- 4
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Dead load
Page 4- 5
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
Deflection limit = L/360 for live load and L/240 for total load
From load tables for 40 psf live load and 40 psf dead load:
Floor joist selection has been based on the assumption that the concrete deck and the
ceiling below provide adequate torsional restraint for loads not applied through the
shear center and for lateral instability. In addition to this restraint, it is standard practice
in the industry to supply a minimum amount of bridging to align members during
erection and to provide structural integrity during construction as well as in the
completed structure. Appropriate details are shown in Figure 4-5.
A maximum bridging spacing of 8'-0" o.c. is commonly used in this situation. With one
line of midspan bracing, spacing = 15/2 = 7'-6" < 8'-0" OK
Page 4- 6
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Floor joists typically require web stiffeners to resist the joist end reactions and to transfer
the axial load from the studs above. These web stiffeners are designed in accordance
with the requirements of the AISI Supplement Section C3.6.2. A two flange loading case is
used for both the joist end reaction and the stud load above.
In the absence of a structural load distribution member at the floor level, in-line framing
is required to provide load transfer through the floor assembly to the studs below. The
CFSF industry considers framing aligned when the centerlines of the studs above, the
floor joists and the studs below all line up vertically. This alignment is illustrated in
Figure 4-4. Tolerances on in-line framing are provided in COFS 2004c, Section C1.
The stiffeners can be either inside or outside the joist. Figure 4-4 shows stiffeners
outside. Note that the definition of in-line framing does not change with the stiffener
location but the allowable tolerances as defined in COFS 2004c do. Tighter tolerances
are required for the case of stiffeners outside.
Stiffeners outside the joist can be full height whereas stiffeners inside must be cut short
to fit. The AISI Supplement Section C3.6.2 specifies that the length of stiffeners shall not
be less than the outside depth of the joist minus 3/8". Other requirements also apply –
see C3.6.2.
For stiffener details on this project see Figures 4-4 and 4-6.
D+L
Page 4- 7
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
where:
⎛ R ⎞⎛ N ⎞⎛ h⎞
Pn = C t 2 Fy sin θ⎜⎜ 1 −C R ⎟⎜ 1 + C N
⎟⎜
⎟⎜ 1 − C h ⎟
⎝ t ⎠⎝ t ⎟⎠⎜⎝ t ⎟⎠
where:
R = 0.0849"
t = 0.0566"
Depth = 8"
h = Depth - 2t - 2R = 7.717"
N = 4"
Fy = 50 ksi
θ = 90 degrees
C = 7.5
CR = 0.08
CN = 0.12
Ch = 0.048
Page 4- 8
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Substituting:
For 362T125-54 (50) stiffener the term AeFy is available in AISI 2002b
Table III-3
AeFy = 11.2 kips
Pn = 0.7(0.957 + 11.2)
= 8.51 kips
Pall = Pn /Ω = 8.51/1.70
= 5.01 kips > 2.79 kips OK
Note 4-1
As an alternative detail to Figure 4-4, the concrete floor finish could be carried to the outside
face of the studs with the bottom track of the wall above bearing on the concrete. With this
alternative, care is required to insure that the voids in the concrete created by the
corrugations in the floor deck do not create a weak link in the transmission of axial load
through the floor system. There is the additional disadvantage that the erection of steel above
cannot proceed until the concrete has been poured and at least partially cured. However, this
approach is beneficial in that the alignment of the framing may not be so critically
important.
The connection of the stiffener to the joist is described in the AISI Supplement Section
C3.6.2. A minimum of three fasteners are required and spaced such that the distance
from the joist flanges to the first fasteners shall not be less than the depth of the joist/8.
Note that Section C3.6.2 does not prescribe any forces that the fasteners are required to
resist. In this design example, any end torsional effects are assumed to be resisted by the
attached sheathings. However, significant torsional resistance is also provided by the
connection of the joist to the stiffener, the stiffener to rim track and the top and bottom
flange of the joist to the track (not shown).
Page 4- 9
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
Use 800T125-54 (50) rim track (thickness to match thickness of floor joists). See Figure 4-4
and Note 4-2.
Note 4-2
It is common practice to supply rim track with narrow flanges (1-1/4" in this example). This
type of detail implies that the axial loads in the wall studs above and below the rim track are
applied eccentrically through the outside flange of the studs. However, the rim track narrow
flange detail might be beneficial in that the end rotation of the floor joist is less likely to
transmit an end moment into the wall studs below.
In any case, appropriate design end eccentricities for this connection detail have not been
researched and engineering judgement is required. Currently, it is common practice in the
CFSF industry to design the studs in Figure 4-4 as concentrically loaded. The weakening
effect (if any) of this end eccentricity is assumed to be offset by conservative assumptions for
end fixity. (These end fixity assumptions are reviewed in Step 7.)
Provide nominal screw connection to match the stiffener to joist detail. See Figure 4-6.
The following design approach is recommended for axial load bearing steel studs. Refer
also to the discussion on bracing in Section 4.2.2 of the Introduction.
1. Use an all steel (i.e. unsheathed) design approach with steel bridging at regular
intervals to resist the torsional component of the load and the tendency for the studs
to buckle laterally. The bridging will require periodic anchorage to the primary
structure.
3. Published load tables usually assume concentric axial loads and it is common
practice to use this assumption in design.
Try 400S162-54 (50) stud and bridging spaced at 4'-0" o.c. maximum. The load tables
used for stud selection in this Guide are based on the assumption that the 4'-0" bridging
spacing can be located anywhere along the length of the stud. See Note 4-3.
Page 4- 10
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Note 4-3
When using combined axial and lateral load tables, care is required to insure that the basic
assumptions used to derive the allowable loads are understood.
1. In the past, the output in load tables typically included a 0.75 load combination factor
such that the designer only needed nominal loads to use the tables. The effect of this
approach was to provide an automatic check on two load cases L + D and 0.75(D + L +
W). However, this approach is not consistent with the many different load
combinations required by current standards such as ASCE 7-05 (ASCE 2005) and, as a
result, newer tables typically do not have embedded load factors (except for Item 2 that
follows). The designer is now required to apply the load combination factors before
entering the tables and this approach is demonstrated here in the Guide.
2. For checking wind load deflections, 0.7W may be embedded in the tables. This approach
is assumed for the design examples provided in this Guide.
3. There are two different assumptions in common use regarding bridging spacing. One
assumption (which is used here) allows a maximum bridging spacing of say 4'-0" to
occur anywhere over the length of the stud. For calculating allowable axial loads, the
unsupported length (4'-0") is assumed to be in the worst possible location (typically in
the middle). An alternative approach is to specify a maximum bridging spacing of
again say 4'-0" o.c. but to also require that the bridging be equally spaced. For the 9'-
0" stud length used here the first assumption results in a bridging spacing of 4'-0" o.c.
and the second 3'-0" o.c. This difference will have a significant impact on the allowable
axial load capacity of the wall studs.
Lr (roof LL) = 0
R (rain load) = 0
S (snow load) = 0
From ASCE 2005 the remaining load combinations are (for strength):
D+L
D+W
D + 0.75(W + L)
0.7W
Page 4- 11
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
Web crippling can be checked from wind bearing allowable height tables (if web crippling
is flagged) or from the allowable web crippling capacities typically published in load
tables.
From load tables with 1" of bearing length and the end one flange fastened
condition:
See also Step 9, 5th bullet for further discussion on the transfer of end shear in axial load
bearing studs.
A deflection check based on a load of 0.7W is typically built into axial load bearing stud
tables. For the allowable axial loads listed under 25 psf wind load, the deflection check
is actually done at 0.7(25) = 17.5 psf and subscripts in the load tables indicate that an
L/360 deflection limit does not control.
Loads from the stud above plus the floor joist reaction (from Step 4)
PLL = 1.73 kips/stud
PDL = 1.06 kips/stud.
D + L load case
W=0
Preq = PLL + PDL = 2.79 kips
From load tables for 400S162-54 (50) stud at 16" o.c. and 0 psf wind
(Conservatively use 5 psf wind if 0 psf is not available)
D + W load case
W = 25 psf
Preq = PDL = 1.06 kips/stud
From load tables for 400S162-54 (50) stud at 16" o.c. and 25 psf wind
Page 4- 12
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
W = 0.75(25)
= 18.75 psf
From load tables for 400S162-54 (50) stud at 16" o.c. and the next highest wind
= 20 psf
(From a software solution for 0.75(25) = 18.75 psf, Pall = 3.41 kips)
For this example, a built-up section consisting of 2 - 400S162-54 (50) king studs and 1-
400S162-54 (50) jack stud is adequate for the jamb (by inspection). See Figure 4-7. This
built-up section provides 2 studs (1 jack and one king stud) to resist gravity loads and
two full height king studs for wind loads. Thus each of the jamb studs will have the
same tributary loading area as the typical studs for both gravity and wind loads. The
track section is used as a connection device and its flexural strength is ignored. Note
that the track section is cut short at the top and bottom tracks and is not available to
participate in resisting axial loads.
The studs should be connected together to form a built-up section to resist wind load. A
#10-16 screw spacing of 16" o.c. is recommended.
Page 4- 13
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
For axial load, the capacity of the built-up section can significantly exceed the sum of the
capacity of the individual studs. However, the capacity of the jamb is adequate in this
example when treated as individual studs. Any uncertainties such as the eccentrically
applied gravity load from the header to the king stud can be accommodated within the
strength reserve inherent in the partial built-up behavior. (Note: The AISI Specification
addresses full built-up behaviour in Section C4.5. The fastening requirements in C4.5 are quite
onerous and are usually seen as uneconomical compared with the simpler approach of summing
the capacity of the individual studs in the jamb.)
• Axial loads are transferred in bearing between the end of the stud and the web of the
track. The stud to track screws are not designed to transfer any axial load.
• The bearing stresses between the track and concrete should be checked using the
approximate design expression proposed in Appendix F.
• Track should not be used as a beam to spread gravity loads at floor levels where
studs or joists above do not align with studs below. Where misalignment is expected,
a section with higher bending strength such as a hot-rolled angle or hollow
structural section is required. With concrete floors, a concrete haunch is sometimes
used which completely enclose the CFSF floor members over each load bearing wall.
See also the discussion on in-line framing in Step 4.
• As for wind bearing studs, shear between the stud and the track is transferred by the
stud bearing against the upstanding leg of the track except that there is the
additional benefit of friction due to end bearing. Refer to Design Examples #1 and
#2 for the design methodology for the track and the stud to track connection to resist
wind loads.
• Track may also by subjected to axial tension and compression as a result of system
lateral loads. Where axial loads are incurred, the track sections including splices
between track sections must be designed accordingly.
Page 4- 14
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Check concrete bearing under the bottom track using the approximate method in
Appendix F.
Try 400T125-54 (50) track (Track with Fy = 50 ksi may require a special order.)
From Step 4
PLL = 1.73 kips/stud
PDL = 1.06 kips/stud.
Fy 50
x = 0.938t t = 0.938(0.0566 )
fc ' 3
= 0.217"
Page 4- 15
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
where:
A = 4"
B = 1.625"
C = 0.500"
ts = 0.0566"
x = 0.217"
Substituting
Abrg = 4.21 in2
Pall = Abrg0.34fc'
= 4.21(0.34)(3)
= 4.29 kips > 2.79 kips and 400T125-54 (50) track OK
Step 10 – Header
A box header detail is proposed – see Figure 4-10. The Standard for Header Design
(COFS 2004b) includes special provisions for the design of this member but theses
provisions have not been used here.
• The upturned track on top of the header means that COFS 2004b Sections B2.3 and
B2.5 do not apply. (See COFS 2004b Commentary.)
• A recent and as yet unpublished change to COFS 2004b will require shear and
combined bending and shear to be checked.
Given the above, the header design here is based on the requirements of the AISI
Specification instead of the COFS document.
Page 4- 16
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
From Step 4
PLL = 1.73 kips/stud
PDL = 1.06 kips/stud.
Try 2 - 800S162-68 (50) unperforated joist sections with 2 - 400T125-54 (50) track sections.
The proposed built-up header configuration is shown in Figure 4-10.
Design the joist sections to carry gravity loads and the track to carry wind loads. Refer to
Design Examples #1 and #2 for wind loaded track design methodology. Note that the
top track is also assumed to provide resistance to lateral buckling such that the full
moment capacity of the joist sections is available to resist the gravity loads.
The joists sections should be specified as unpunched as discussed in Step 10(b). Note,
however, that unpunched moment and shear values may not be available in the load
tables and in this case punched values may be used as a conservative substitution.
Punched values are used here.
Page 4- 17
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
Derive the allowable web crippling at the location of load P for interior one
flange condition. Assume an unfastened condition and bearing length equal to
the flange width of the load bearing stud above = 1.625". From the AISI
Specification Section C3.4 and Table C3.4.1-2.
C t 2 Fy sin θ ⎛ R ⎞⎛ N ⎞⎛ h⎞
Pall = ⎜ 1 −C R ⎟⎜ 1 + C N ⎟⎜ 1 − C h ⎟
Ω ⎜ t ⎟⎜ t ⎟⎠⎜⎝ t ⎟⎠
⎝ ⎠⎝
where:
R = 0.10695"
t = 0.0713"
Depth = 8"
h = Depth - 2t - 2R = 7.6435"
N = 1.625"
Fy = 50 ksi
θ = 90 degrees
C = 13
CR = 0.23
CN = 0.14
Ch = 0.01
Ω = 1.65
Pall = 2(2.15)
= 4.30 kips > 2.79 kips OK
For this allowable web crippling capacity to be valid, web punchouts are not
permitted in the vicinity of the point loads. The header member has therefore
been specified as unperforated.
Check combined bending and web crippling at the location of load P (AISI
Supplement Section C3.5.1)
⎛ P ⎞ ⎛ M ⎞ 1.33
0.91 ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ + ⎜⎜ ⎟≤
⎟
⎝ Pn ⎠ ⎝ M nxo ⎠ Ω
Page 4- 18
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
where:
P = Preq = 2.79 kips
M = Mreq = 44.6 in.kips
Pn = ΩwPall = 1.65(4.30) = 7.10 kips
Mnxo = ΩbMall = 1.67(99.6) = 166.3 in.kips
Ω = 1.70
Substituting:
⎛ 2.79 ⎞ ⎛ 44.6 ⎞ 1.33
0.91 ⎜ ⎟+⎜ ⎟≤
⎝ 7.10 ⎠ ⎝ 166.3 ⎠ 1.70
0.626 ≤ 0.782 OK
2 2 2 2
⎛ Ω bM ⎞ ⎛ Ω v V ⎞ ⎛ M ⎞ ⎛ V ⎞
⎜ ⎟ +⎜ ⎟⎟ = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜M ⎟ ⎜ ⎜M ⎟ +⎜V ⎟
⎝ nxo ⎠ ⎝ Vn ⎠ ⎝ all ⎠ ⎝ all ⎠
Substituting:
2 2
⎛ 44.6 ⎞ ⎛ 2.79 ⎞
⎜ ⎟ +⎜ ⎟ ≤ 1.00
⎝ 99.6 ⎠ ⎝ 6.74 ⎠
0.61 ≤ 1.00 OK
δ =
Pa
24EI
(3L2 − 4a 2 )
Page 4- 19
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
where:
P = PLL = 1.73 kips
P = PTL = PLL + PDL = 1.73 + 1.06 = 2.79 kips
E = 29500 ksi
L = 48"
a = 16"
LL Check
δ LL =
1.73 (16 )
24 ( 29500 ) I
[
3 ( 48) 2 − 4 (16 ) 2 ]
0.2302
= in.
I
Ireq = 0.2302/0.1333
= 1.73 in4
TL Check
δ TL =
2.79 (16 )
24 ( 29500 ) I
[
3 ( 48) 2 − 4 (16 ) 2 ]
0.3712
= in.
I
Ireq = 0.3712/0.200
= 1.86 in4
The box header track to joist connection is required to provide torsional restraint at the
locations of load P and at the supports for the header. See Figure 4-11.
Torsional restraint forces, PL , by the AISI Supplement Section D3.2.2. See also
Figure 2-8.
PL = (m/d)P
Page 4- 20
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
where:
P = 2.79/2 = 1.395 kips/joist section
d = 8"
m = 0.586"
PL = (0.586/8)(1.395)(1000)
= 102 lb.
For #10-16 self-drilling screw in shear use Vall = 370 lb. from Example #2 Step
2(c). (This allowable strength is based on 2 sheets at t = 0.0566" and Fu = 45 and 65 ksi
and is conservative here.)
There are a number of acceptable ways to connect a header to the jamb studs. The
design procedure used here is as follows:
• The allowable web crippling capacity (end one flange) of the box header is calculated
assuming a bearing length equal to the flange width of the jack stud.
• The jack stud is assumed to carry this web crippling load.
• The residual end reaction for the box header is calculated and is given by the total
end reaction less the allowable web crippling capacity from above.
• This residual portion of the reaction is assumed to be transferred to the first king
stud via a shear connection detail consisting of a short piece of track.
Page 4- 21
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
Assume an unfastened condition and bearing length equal to the flange width of
the jack stud below = 1.625". From the AISI Specification Section C3.4 and Table
C3.4.1-2.
C t 2 Fy sin θ ⎛ R ⎞⎛ N ⎞⎛ h ⎞
Pall = ⎜ 1 −C R ⎟⎜ 1 + C N ⎟⎜ 1 − C h ⎟
Ω ⎜
⎝ t ⎟⎜
⎠⎝ t ⎟⎠⎜⎝ t ⎟
⎠
where:
R = 0.10695"
t = 0.0713"
Depth = 8"
h = Depth - 2t - 2R = 7.6435"
N = 1.625"
Fy = 50 ksi
θ = 90 degrees
C =4
CR = 0.14
CN =0.35
Ch = 0.02
Ω = 1.85 (unfastened - conservative)
Pall = 2(0.964)
= 1.93 kips
(For this allowable web crippling capacity to be valid, web punchouts are not permitted
in the vicinity of the point loads. The header member has therefore been specified as
unpunched.)
The web crippling load Pall = 1.93 kips is carried by the jack stud. The capacity of the jack
stud is OK by inspection.
The balance of the header reaction is carried by a shear connection to the king stud. This
required force is given by:
Page 4- 22
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Page 4- 23
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
Provide a short piece of track (6-1/2" long) to act as a shear connector. Use t = 0.0713" to
match header joist section.
V2 = [860(0.625)/5]/2 = 54 lb.
For #10-16 self-drilling screw in shear use Vall = 370 lb from Example #2 Step 2(c).
(This allowable shear is based on 2 sheets at t = 0.0566" and Fu = 45 and 65 ksi and is
conservative here)
Note the clip angles connection details at the top and bottom of the box header in Figure
4-12. These angles transfer the lateral wind loads from the header to the built-up jamb.
(Only the track portion of the box header is assumed to carry wind.)
Page 4- 24
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Design bridging to resist torsion induced in the studs by wind load (AISI Supplement
D3.2.2) and to resist the weak axis buckling of the studs. Forces will accumulate in the
bridging channel and the design check here is to determine the number of studs that can
be braced without exceeding the capacity of the bridging channel. Where the bridging
channel is at the limit of its capacity anchorage is required.
The stud torsional effect which induces major axis bending moments in the bridging
channel was previously reviewed in Design Example #2, Step 2.
The AISI Specification is silent on the bracing force required to restrain singly symmetric
columns subject to weak axis flexural buckling and/or torsional-flexural buckling. Refer
instead to COFS 2004a Section C5.1 where a bracing force equal to 2% of the design
compression load in the stud is specified. The Commentary (COFS 2004a) further states
that the 2% bracing force is accumulative between bracing points. A bracing stiffness
requirement is assumed not to apply. See Note 4-4
Note 4-4
The bridging channel will be subjected to axial load and both major and minor axis
bending moment. The capacity of the channel is checked using the beam-column
provisions in the AISI Specification C5.2.1.
Bridging major axis moment is taken from Figures 2-5, 2-6, 2-7 and 2-8.
The outside span is critical and is shown with the moment coefficients in Figure
2-7. The moment, M, is derived from the top and bottom flange brace
requirements given in the AISI Supplement Section D3.2.2.
PL = 1.5(m/d)W
Page 4- 25
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
where:
a = average bridging spacing
= (4 + 2.5)/2 = 3.25 ft.
(assumes 4 ft unbraced length at midheight)
w = load/ft on stud
= (16/12)(25) = 33.3 lb/ft
W = wa
m = stud web center line to shear center = 0.754"
d = 4"
Substituting:
PL = 1.5(0.754/4)(33.3)(3.25)
= 30.6 lb.
Then the moment resisted by the bridging channel is given by the flange
brace couple with a lever arm equal to the depth of the stud. See Figure 2-
8.
Bridging minor axis moment is illustrated in Figure 4-15. See Note 4-5.
Page 4- 26
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Note 4-5
The axial load in the bridging channel is incremented at every stud and accumulates over the
number of studs between bridging anchorage points. While each increment of axial load is
applied with a minor axis eccentricity, the accumulated axial load is assumed to be concentric.
Significant minor axis eccentricity does occur in this example at the bridging anchorage point.
Allowable design strengths will be checked using the combined compressive axial load
and bending provisions in the AISI Specification C5.2.1.
Page 4- 27
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
i) Section Properties
The following bridging channel section properties are taken from load tables or
can be calculated from the formulas in AISI 2002b Part I. (Note that the section is
fully effective at a uniform stress of Fy = 33 ksi - i.e. λ ≤ 0.673 for all elements at f = Fy
AISI Specification B2.1 – calculations not shown here. Effective properties are therefore
not required for either bending or axial load.)
t = 0.0566 in.
ri = 0.0849 in.
A = fully effective (unreduced) area = 0.130 in2
rx = 0.549 in.
ry = 0.145 in.
x0 = 0.254 in.
2 2 2
r0 = rx + ry + x 0 = 0.622 in.
Ix = fully effective (unreduced) inertia = 0.0390 in4
Iy = fully effective (unreduced) inertia = 0.00274 in4
Xcg = location of fully effective (unreduced) centroid = 0.126 in.
Cw = 0.00104 in6
J = 0.000138 in4
j = 0.787 in.
Sfx = fully effective (unreduced) major axis section modulus = 0.0520 in3
π2E π 2 ( 29500 )
σ ey = = = 23.91 ksi
2 2
⎛ K yL y ⎞ ⎡ 16 ⎤
⎜ ⎟ ⎢⎣ 0.145 ⎥⎦
⎜ ry ⎟
⎝ ⎠
π2E π 2 ( 29500 )
σ ex = = = 342.8 ksi
2 2
⎛ K xL x ⎞ ⎡ 16 ⎤
⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ ⎢⎣ 0.549 ⎥⎦
⎝ rx ⎠
Page 4- 28
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
1 ⎡ π 2 EC w ⎤
σt = ⎢ GJ + ⎥
2
Ar0 ⎢⎣ (K t L t ) 2 ⎥⎦
1 ⎡ π 2 ( 29500 ) (0.00104 ) ⎤
= ⎢ 11300 ( 0. 000138 ) + ⎥
(0.130 ) ( 0.622 ) 2 ⎢⎣ 16 2 ⎥⎦
= 54.52 ksi
β = 1 − ( x 0 / r0 ) 2
= 1 − ( 0.254 / 0.622 ) 2 = 0.8332
From AISI Specification C4.1, the flexural critical elastic buckling stress is
given by:
Fe = the lesser of σex or σey
= 23.91 ksi
1 ⎡
Fe = ( σ ex + σ t ) − ( σ ex + σ t ) 2 − 4βσ ex σ t ⎤
2β ⎢⎣ ⎥⎦
Substituting gives:
Fe = 52.91 ksi
Pn = AeFn
Fy 33
λc = = = 1.175
Fe 23.91
For λc ≤ 1.5
2 2
Fn = (0.658 )λ c Fy = ( 0.658 ) 1.175 ( 33)
= 18.52 ksi
Page 4- 29
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
From Design Example #2 Step 2(a) there is no reduction in allowable moment for
lateral instability.
Lateral buckling associated with bending about the y-axis can be checked using
the AISI Specification C3.1.2.1 with the critical elastic stress defined by Equation
C3.1.2.1-6.
This expression applies to bending about the centroidal axis perpendicular to the
symmetry axis. For typical CFSF members, it is the weaker axis by a significant
margin, lateral buckling does not occur and Fc = Fy.
That is,
Mny = SfyFy = 0.00733(33) (No local buckling)
= 0.242 in.kips
π 2 EI x π 2 ( 29500 )( 0.390 )
PEx = =
( K xL x )2 ( 16 ) 2
= 44.4 kips
π 2 EI y π 2 ( 29500 )( 0.00274 )
PEy = =
( K y L y )2 (16 ) 2
= 3.12 kips
Page 4- 30
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
To calculate Cmy, assume a concentric axial load one end and an eccentric axial
load the other with ey = Xcg. This gives:
Cmy = 0.6
Summarizing:
Pn = 2.41 kips
Mnx = 1.716 in.kips
Mny = 0.242 in.kips
Pno = 4.29 kips
PEx = 44.4 kips
PEy = 3.12 kips
Cmx = 0.344
Cmy = 0.6
Ωc = 1.80
Ωb = 1.67
ΩcP Ω b C mx M x Ω b C my M y
+ + ≤ 1.00
Pn ⎛ ΩcP ⎞ ⎛ Ω P ⎞
M nx ⎜⎜ 1 − ⎟ M ⎜1 − c ⎟
⎟ ny ⎜
⎝ PEx ⎠
⎝ PEy ⎟⎠
Page 4- 31
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
The required bridging loads are from Step 11(a) and are multiplied by the appropriate
load combination factor in the calculations that follow.
Mx = 0
My = 0.126P = 0.126(0.614)
= 0.0774 in.kips
Load Case II W + D
Mx = 0.122 in.kips
My = 0.126P = 0.126(0.233)
= 0.0294 in.kips
Page 4- 32
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Mx = 0.122(0.75)
= 0.0915 in.kips
My = 0.126P = 0.126(0.519)
= 0.0654 in.kips
Therefore, from Load Cases I, II and III interaction checks, anchoring bridging every 11
studs is OK. See Note 4-6.
Note 4-6
1. Flat strap tension bridging (Introduction Fig. III) is also an acceptable brace for axial load
bearing steel studs. Note that the accumulated force in flat strap bridging includes 2% of
the axial load in each stud plus the force necessary to restrain torsion in every stud. The
accumulation of the torsional component can be reduced with periodic blocking-in between
the studs.
2. The spacing of bridging anchorage is based on a strength criterion only. To help control the
stiffness of the bridging, arrange the bridging anchorage so that no stud is more than 6
stud spaces away from an anchorage location.
Page 4- 33
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
From Step 11(c), the bridging must be anchored every 11 studs. See Figure 4-17 for a
suggested anchorage detail using flat strap X-bracing.
See Figure 4-18. The distance between the top or bottom track and a line of bridging is
assumed to be 2'-6" with the 4'-0" maximum bridging spacing at midheight.
Page 4- 34
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
The vertical component of force in the flat straps increases the stud axial load (for
the studs serving as anchorage points):
∆P = 2Pbridging (30/32)
D + L load case
∆P = 2(614)(30/32)
= 1151 lb.
Page 4- 35
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
D + W load case
∆P = 2(233)(30/32)
= 437 lb.
∆P = 2(519)(30/32)
= 973 lb.
Allowable screw capacity (Vall /screw) is given by the following: (calculations not
shown – see Design Example #2 Step 2(c) for typical procedure)
Page 4- 36
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
iii) Number of screws required to transfer flat strap horizontal reaction into top and
bottom track
Flat strap imposes a horizontal load near the end of the stud. The stud transfers
this load into the track (top or bottom) through the stud to track screw
connection.
Page 4- 37
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
Vall /screw = 467 lb. with shear through the screw itself governing. (Calculations
not shown – see Design Example #2 Step 2(c) for typical procedure)
Tall = Tn /Ω = AnFu /Ω
= [1.50 - 2(0.190)](0.0451)(45)/2.00
= 1.14 kips > 0.421 kips
Therefore, 1-1/2" x 0.0451" flat strap with Fy 33 ksi and 2 - #10-16 screws
each end OK
In axial load bearing construction to insure a stiff connection detail, size clip angles as
per Note 2-4 except that it is recommended that the thickness of the bridging clip angle
be the greater of 0.0566" or one thickness heavier than the thickness of the stud.
Page 4- 38
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
For clip angle with 400S162-54 stud use 1-1/2" x 1-1/2" clip angle with t = 0.0713", Fy =
50 ksi and 3-1/2" long.
From Step 11(c) the maximum axial load in the bridging channel is given by D +
L Load Case
Vall /screw = 370 lb. with Equation E4.3.1-1 governing (Calculations not
shown – see Design Example #2 Step 2(c) for typical procedure).
Therefore, for transfer of forces between the bridging channel and the clip angle,
a single clip angle is sufficient.
Page 4- 39
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
First check if a single clip angle is sufficient for the connection between the clip
angle and the stud. The screws will be in tension. Again, the D + L load case
governs.
Required pullout/screw
Allowable pullout/screw
Tall /screw = 198 lb. (Calculations not shown – see Design Example #2 Step
2(c) for typical procedure)
Therefore, a single clip angle is not sufficient because the clip angle to stud
screws acting in tension do not have sufficient capacity.
Add a second clip angle as illustrated in Figure 4-20. With this configuration the
load transfer between the clip angle and the stud will be in bearing whether the
bridging channel is in tension or compression.
The bridging channel to stud connection detail is required to transfer the torsional
component of the wind load plus 2% of the axial load in the stud.
Mreq for the torsional restraint of the stud under the full wind load W.
Page 4- 40
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
From Design Example #2 Step 2(c) and Figures 2-12 and 4-21 the spacing between the
screws is given by:
x = 1.101"
Load Case II W + D
Page 4- 41
Design Example #4, CFSF Floor and Axial Load Bearing Stud Wall
(The Vreq /screw total conservatively assumes the two contributing components
are directly additive even though they act in different directions.)
Vall /screw = 370 lb. with Equation E4.3.1-1 governing (Calculations not shown –
see Design Example #2 Step 2(c) for typical procedure).
Gives
Vall = 370 lb. > 121 lb. OK
From Figure 4-21 with a 3-1/2" long bridging clip angle, the spacing between the screws
is assumed to be 2.75"
Load Case II W + D
Page 4- 42
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Tall /screw = 198 lb. (Calculations not shown – see Design Example #2 Step 2(c) for
typical procedure)
Gives
Tall = 198 lb. > 53 lb. OK
Page 4- 43
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
References
(AISC 2005) American Institute of Steel Construction. 2005. Specification for Structural
Steel Buildings, ANSI/AISC 360-05
(AISI 2001a) American Iron and Steel Institute. 2001. North American Specification for
the Design of Cold-Formed Steel Structural Members, AISI/COS/NASPEC 2001
(AISI 2001b) American Iron and Steel Institute. 2001. Commentary on North American
Specification for the Design of Cold-Formed Steel Structural Members.
(AISI 2002a) Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, CF02-1.
(AISI 2002b) American Iron and Steel Institute. 2002. AISI Manual Cold-Formed Steel
Design.
Part I – Dimensions and Properties
Part II – Beam Design
Part III – Column Design
Part IV – Connections
Part V – Supplementary Information
Part VI – Test Procedures
(AISI 2004) American Iron and Steel Institute. 2004. Supplement 2004 to the North
American Specification for the Design of Cold-Formed Steel Structural Members 2001
Edition, AISI/COS/NASPEC-SUP04.
(ASCE 2005) American Society of Civil Engineers. 2005. Minimum Design Loads on
Buildings and Other Structures, Including Supplement No. 1, ASCE Standard ASCE/SEI
7-05
(Bogdan 1999) Bogdan, M. Put, Yong-Lin Pi and Trahair, N. S. May 1999. Bending and
Torsion of Cold-Formed Channel Beams. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE.
(Bresler 1967) Bresler, Lin and Scalzi. 1967. Design of Steel Structures. Second Edition.
John Wiley & Sons.
(COFS 2004a) American Iron and Steel Institute Committee on Framing Standards. 2004.
Standard for Cold-Formed Steel Framing - Wall Stud Design, AISI/COFS/WSD-2004.
(COFS 2004b) American Iron and Steel Institute Committee on Framing Standards. 2004.
Standard for Cold-Formed Steel Framing - Header Design, AISI/COFS/HEADER-2004.
(COFS 2004c) American Iron and Steel Institute Committee on Framing Standards. 2004.
Standard for Cold-Formed Steel Framing - General Provisions, AISI/COFS/GP 2004.
(CSSBI 1991) Canadian Sheet Steel Building Institute. 1991. Lightweight Steel Framing
Design Manual.
(Devco 2006) Devco Software, Inc. 2006. AISIWIN V7.0
(Drysdale 1991) Drysdale, R. G., and Breton N. December 1991. Strength and Stiffness
Characteristics of Steel Stud Back-up Walls Designed to Support Brick Veneer. Prepared
for Project Implementation Division, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation.
McMaster University.
Page Ref-1
References
(Galambos 1968) Galambos, T. V. 1968. Structural Members and Frames, Prentice Hall.
(Galambos 1998) Galambos, T. Editor. 1998. Guide to Stability Criteria for Metal
Structures. Fifth Edition. John Wiley & Sons.
(Gerloff 2004) Gerloff, James R, Huttelmaier, Peter and Ford, Patrick. 2004. Cold-Formed
Steel Slip Track Connection. 17th International Specialty Conference on Cold-Formed
Steel Structures. Orlando, Florida.
(Green 2004a) Green, Perry S., Sputo, Thomas and Irala, Viswanath. November 2004.
Strength and Stiffness of Conventional Bridging Systems for Cold-Formed Cee Studs.
17th International Specialty Conference on Cold-Formed Steel Structures. Orlando,
Florida.
(Green 2004b) Green, Perry S., Sputo, Thomas and Irala, Viswanath. November 2004.
Bracing Strength and Stiffness Requirements for Axially Loaded Lipped Cee Studs. 17th
International Specialty Conference on Cold-Formed Steel Structures. Orlando, Florida.
(IBC 2006) International Code Council. 2006. 2006 International Building Code.
(LGSEA 2001a) Light Gauge Steel Engineers Association. January 2001. Technical Note
On Cold-Formed Steel Construction, Tech Note (542).
(LGSEA 2001b) Light Gauge Steel Engineers Association. August 2001. Newsletter.
(Miller 1989) Miller, T. H. and Pekoz, T. November 1989. Studies on the Behaviour of
Cold-Formed Steel Stud Wall Assemblies, Sponsored by the American Iron and Steel
Institute. Cornell University.
(Moore 2002) Moore, William E. and Mueller, Keith M. 4th Quarter 2002. Technical Note:
Torsional Analysis of Steel Sections. Engineering Journal. American Institute of Steel
Construction
(Roark 1975) Roark, Raymond J. and Young, Warren C. 1975. Formulas for Stress and
Strain, 5th Edition. McGraw Hill.
(Seaburg 1997) Seaburg, Paul A. and Carter, Charles J. 1997. Torsional Analysis of
Structural Steel Members. American Institute of Steel Construction Steel Design Guide
Series 9.
(STI 2005) Steel Tube Institute of North America. Updated May 2005. Hollow Structural
Sections – Dimensions & Section Properties.
(Winter 1950) Winter. G., Lansing W. and McCalley R. November 1, 1950. Performance of
Laterally Loaded Channel Beams. Four Papers on the Performance of Thin Walled Steel
Structures, Cornell University, Engineering Experiment Station, Reprint No. 33.
Page Ref-2
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Appendix A
Design Values for Self-Drilling Screws and Welds
There are a variety of acceptable fasteners for connecting CFSF members. This appendix
provides design data only for welds and self-drilling screws.
A.1 Welds
The strengths of fillet and flare groove welds are defined in the AISI Specification
Sections E2.4 and E2.5. The strength is a function of the weld type, weld length, material
thickness, material tensile strength, and the direction of loading.
The design examples in this Guide use a simplified conservative approach as follows
(The terms are defined in the AISI Specification):
• The allowable strength of all fillet and flare-bevel groove welds irrespective of
the length to thickness ratio or direction of loading is set equal to 0.75tLFu / Ω
with Ω = 3.05. This expression is valid for the welding of metallic coated or
uncoated material provided the effective throats of welds are not less than the
thickness of the thinnest connected part.
• In addition, if t > 0.10 inch, the allowable strength determined above shall not
exceed 0.75twLFxx / Ω with Ω = 2.55.
•
• For welded connections in which the thickness of the thinnest connected part is
greater than 3/16 in. reference is made to the AISC "Specification for Structural
Steel Buildings, Allowable Strength Design and Plastic Design", or the "Load and
Resistance Factor Design Specification for Structural Steel Buildings"
In the design examples, the drawings show a nominal weld size of 1/8". Where this
approach is used on engineering drawings, it should be accompanied by a note: "For
material less than or equal to 0.10" thick, drawings show nominal weld leg sizes. For
such material, the effective throat of welds shall not be less than the thickness of the
thinnest connected part."
For the purposes of this Guide, the design strength of self-drilling screw connections are
calculated in accordance with the requirements of the AISI Specification Section E4, E5
and C2. The relevant sub-sections are as follows:
Page A-1
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
It is assumed that pull-over, Section E4.4.2, does not govern for typical CFSF screwed
connections.
The sections covering tension and shear in the screw itself require the use of test values.
The ultimate strengths defined in Table A-1 will be used in the design examples.
Table A-1
Self-Drilling Screw Ultimate Strengths
8 - 18 1545 1000
10 - 16 1936 1400
10 - 24 2702 1500
12 - 14 2778 2000
12 - 24 3020 2100
1/4 - 14 4060 2600
Note A.1-1
1. The shear and tensile strengths in Table A-1 have been taken from the 2005 product
catalogue by ITW Construction Products for Buildex TEKS self-drilling self-tapping
screws and may not be appropriate for other screw types or products from other
screw manufacturers. Other screw types are acceptable provided the shear and
tensile strengths are available from the manufacturer or from test.
2. The AISI Specification allows the use of test values in lieu of the design expressions
in E4.
Page A-2
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
In addition, the design of screwed connections require the nominal hole diameter.
Appropriate values for design are provided in Table A-2 (taken from reference AISI 2001b).
Table A-2
Nominal Diameters for Screws
6 0.138
8 0.164
10 0.190
12 0.216
1/4 0.250
Page A-3
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Appendix B
Anchor Design Values
There are a variety of acceptable fasteners for connecting CFSF members to either
concrete or steel structures. This appendix provides design data for three types of
anchors: wedge type expansion anchors (concrete), self-tapping concrete screw anchors
(concrete) and low velocity pins (concrete and steel).
The design values in this appendix have been taken from ICC Evaluation Service Report
No. ESR-1385 (Issued September 1, 2004) for carbon steel Kwik Bolt 3 fasteners by Hilti
Inc. and will not be appropriate for other anchor types or anchors of similar type by
other manufacturers. Other anchor types are acceptable provided the design values are
available from the manufacturer or from test.
Alternative ACI 318-05 Appendix D design data for anchorage in cracked and uncracked
concrete can be found in ICC Evaluation Service Report No. ESR-1917 (issued September 1,
2005) for Kwik Bolt TZ anchors by Hilti.
Only a part of the design data is included here and the user is referred to the report for
additional information such as detail on the fasteners themselves, installation,
inspection, other embedment depths, other concrete types, other fastener types,
identification requirements and limits of applicability for the design values.
Table B.1-1
Carbon Steel Kwik Bolt 3
Allowable Tension and Shear Values
Installed into Normal Weight Uncracked Concrete
Anchor Embed fc' = 3000 psi fc' = 4000 psi fc' = 6000 psi
Diameter -ment
Tension Shear Tension Shear Tension Shear
(in.) Depth (lb.) (lb.) (lb.) (lb.) (lb.) (lb.)
(in.)
1-1/8 338 449 399 449 510 449
1/4 2 669 449 745 449 766 449
3 714 449 766 449 766 449
1-5/8 846 1164 1013 1268 1013 1423
3/8 2-1/2 1424 1339 1669 1423 1846 1423
3-1/2 1560 1339 1669 1423 1846 1423
2-1/4 1284 2143 1519 2541 1853 2717
1/2 3-1/2 2048 2186 2286 2541 3035 2717
4-3/4 2207 2186 2414 2541 3083 2717
Page B-1
Appendix B, Anchor Design Values
Table B.1-2
Anchor Spacing and Edge Distance Requirements
Notes B.1
These note apply to Tables B.1-1 and B.1-2 for normal weight uncracked concrete.
1. Tension values require special inspection as defined in the ICC report. For tension
values without special inspection multiply the listed value by 1/2.
5. For S and C between listed minimum and critical values, linearly interpolate the
allowable load reduction.
6. For embedments between listed values, linearly interpolate values for Scr, Smin, Ccr ,
and Cmin.
Page B-2
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
5 /3 5 /3
⎛ T ⎞ ⎛ V ⎞
⎜ ⎟ + ⎜⎜ ⎟ ≤ 1.0
⎜T ⎟ ⎟
⎝ all ⎠ ⎝ Vall ⎠
where:
T = applied tension load
V = applied shear load
Tall = allowable tension strength
Vall = allowable shear strength
10. Shear values in Table B-1.1 are reduced, where required, for the effect of fastener
threads in the shear plane. No further reduction is therefore required.
Page B-3
Appendix B, Anchor Design Values
The design values in this appendix have been taken from ICC Evaluation Service Report
No. ESR-1671 (Issued March 1, 2006) for Tapcon concrete screw anchors with advanced
threadform technology by Illinois Tool Works, Inc., Buildex Division and will not be
appropriate for other anchor types or anchors of similar type by other manufacturers.
Other screw anchor types are acceptable provided the design values are available from
the manufacturer or from test.
Only a part of the design data is included here and the user is referred to the report for
additional information such as detail on the fasteners themselves, installation,
inspection, other embedment depths, other concrete types, other fastener types,
identification requirements and limits of applicability for the design values.
Table B.2-1
Tapcon Concrete Anchors with Advanced Threadform
Technology
Allowable Tension and Shear Values
Installed into Normal Weight Uncracked Concrete
Embed fc' = 3000 psi fc' = 4000 psi fc' = 5000 psi
Anchor
-ment
Diameter Tension Shear Tension Shear Tension Shear
Depth (lb.) (lb.) (lb.) (lb.) (lb.) (lb.)
(in.)
(in.)
1 155 185 165 185 200 215
1-1/4 215 200 220 200 255 215
3/16
1-1/2 275 215 275 215 305 215
1-3/4 365 235 365 250 435 250
1 205 285 220 345 240 360
1-1/4 300 340 335 380 405 390
1/4
1-1/2 400 400 455 420 570 420
1-3/4 580 460 650 500 695 500
Page B-4
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Table B.2-2
Allowable Spacing and Edge Distances
Notes B.2
These notes apply to Table B.2-1 and B.2-2 for normal weight uncracked concrete.
1. Tension values require special inspection as defined in the ICC report. For tension
values without special inspection multiply the listed value by 1/2.
2. The critical edge and spacing distances are for full anchor capacity, and the
minimum edge and spacing distances are for reduced anchor capacity.
3. For spacings and edge distances between listed minimum and critical values,
linearly interpolate the load reduction factor.
⎛ T ⎞ ⎛ V ⎞
⎜ ⎟+⎜ ⎟ ≤ 1 .0
⎜T ⎟ ⎜V ⎟
⎝ all ⎠ ⎝ all ⎠
where:
T = applied tension load
V = applied shear load
Tall = allowable tension load
Vall = allowable shear load
Page B-5
Appendix B, Anchor Design Values
6. Under 2003 IBC, use of anchors installed in normal-weight concrete to resist seismic
loads is beyond the scope of the ICC Evaluation Service Report No. ESR-1671.
Page B-6
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
The design values in this appendix have been taken from ICC Evaluation Service Report
No. ESR-1663 (issued May 1, 2006) and ESR-2269 (issued June 1, 2007). The design
values are for Hilti X-DNI and X-U low-velocity powder actuated fasteners (PAF) and
will not be appropriate for other PAF types or PAF's of similar type by other
manufacturers. Other PAF types are acceptable provided the design values are available
from the manufacturer or from test.
Only a part of the design data is included here and the user is referred to the report for
additional information such as detail on the fasteners themselves, installation,
inspection, other fastener types, identification requirements and limits of applicability
for the design values.
Table B.3-1
Powder Actuated Fasteners
Allowable Tension and Shear Values
Driven into Normal Weight Uncracked Concrete
Notes B.3
1. The tabulated allowable loads utilize a factor of safety that is greater then or equal to
5.
Page B-7
Appendix B, Anchor Design Values
⎛ T ⎞ ⎛ V ⎞
⎜ ⎟+⎜ ⎟ ≤ 1 .0
⎜T ⎟ ⎜V ⎟
⎝ all ⎠ ⎝ all ⎠
where:
T = applied tension load
V = applied shear load
Tall = allowable tension load
Vall = allowable shear load
5. The use of fasteners to resist earthquake loads is outside the scope of the ICC
Evaluation Service Report No. ESR-1663 and ESR-2269.
6. Deeper fastener embedments of 1-1/4 and 1-1/2 inch may require specific Powder-
Actuated Tool (PAT) types and cartridge booster settings. Consult with the
manufacturer.
Page B-8
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
The design values in this appendix have been taken from ICC Evaluation Service Report
No. ESR-1663 (issued May 1, 2006) and ESR-2269 (issued June 1, 2007). The design
values are for Hilti X-EDNI and X-U knurled low-velocity powder actuated fasteners
(PAF) and will not be appropriate for other PAF types or PAF's of similar type by other
manufacturers. Other PAF types are acceptable provided the design values are available
from the manufacturer or from test. (Note that the test data for powder actuated fasteners into
steel can be transposed into allowable loads using the AISI Specification Section F. This AISI
approach can be used in lieu of the allowable loads provided in the ICC reports.)
Only a part of the design data is included here and the user is referred to the report for
additional information such as detail on the fasteners themselves, installation,
inspection, other fastener types, identification requirements and limits of applicability
for the design values.
Table B.4-1
Powder Actuated Fasteners
Allowable Tension and Shear Values
Driven into Steel
Notes B.4
1. The tabulated allowable loads utilize a factor of safety that is greater then or equal to
5.
Page B-9
Appendix B, Anchor Design Values
3. Minimum edge distance is 1/2 inches and minimum centre to centre spacing is 1
inch.
⎛ T ⎞ ⎛ V ⎞
⎜ ⎟+⎜ ⎟ ≤ 1.0
⎜T ⎟ ⎜V ⎟
⎝ all ⎠ ⎝ all ⎠
where:
T = applied tension load
V = applied shear load
Tall = allowable tension load
Vall = allowable shear load
5. The use of fasteners to resist earthquake loads is outside the scope of the ICC
Evaluation Service Report No. ESR-1663 and ESR-2269.
Page B-10
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Appendix C
Simplified Approximate Method for the Calculation of
Warping Torsional Stresses
Winter 1950 outlines an approximate method for the calculation of warping torsional stresses.
The following has been taken directly from the original paper with the exception of some added
comments in brackets and minor simplifications in the algebra.
"... The performance of a channel loaded in the plane of the web (and therefore eccentric
with respect to the shear center) can be visualized most simply by thinking of a single load
P at midspan (of a single span beam) and considering the displacement of the midspan
section as proceeding in successive stages depicted in Figure C-1. The section, then, is
thought of as being first displaced downward in simple translation (with the load P
through the shear center). The stresses introduced would be those of simple beam theory
and are indicated in character by the appropriate signs at the corners of the section (Fig.
C-1b). Next the channel is considered as cut and the two halves displaced (by the forces F
where Fh = Pe) much like two individual beams resulting in the appropriate indicated
corner stresses (Fig. C-1c). To fit the two halves together they are next rotated about their
individual shear centers, giving rise to ordinary shear stresses of the St. Venant character
(Fig. C-1d). In this inclined position, finally, the component of the vertical load parallel
to the major axis, βP, causes additional bending about the minor axis, with its
corresponding normal stresses (Fig. C-1e)...... It is evident that under such a stress
distribution cross sections distort out of their original plane; for this reason the stresses
associated, in particular, with the displacement stage (c) of Figure C-1 are generally
known as warping stresses......
(By comparison with a more precise theoretical model, it was demonstrated that warping
torsional stresses could be predicted with reasonable accuracy by adding the stresses for Figures
C-1b and C-1c only. In addition, the term βh/2 was found to be small such that F could be
approximated by Pe/h. Lastly, the analysis was extended to channels with intermediate braces as
depicted in Figure C-2.)
... The action of intermediate braces is now easily visualized. It prevents horizontal
displacement of the fictitious half-beams at the points of bracing; consequently, these
half-beams are converted from simple beams of span length equal to that of the entire
channel to continuous beams with individual spans equal to the distances between
braces (L versus l0 in Figure C-2 for the particular case of bracing at third points). The
resulting maximum horizontal bending moment on the 'half-beam' and the
corresponding stresses of Figure C-1c are less than one quarter of those obtained
without bracing, as can be verified easily by continuous beam analysis ...
For horizontal bending the cross section of each half-beam is regarded as consisting of
the flange, lip and one quarter of the web. (The one quarter web assumption was verified by
comparison with a more accurate theoretical model.) This beam is loaded horizontally at all
points where vertical loads P act on the channel by the corresponding horizontal loads F
Page C-1
Appendix C, Simplified Approximate Method for the Calculation of Warping Torsional Stresses
= Pe/h ... For distributed vertical load p the corresponding distributed horizontal load,
of course, is f = pe/h. Each half-beam so loaded represents a continuous beam
supported at the braces, as shown for one particular case in Figure C-2. Stresses from
this horizontal bending (Figure C-3b) are computed in the usual manner and
superimposed on those from vertical bending (Figure C-3a) to result in the maximum
corner stresses. (For a sample calculation see Design Example #2.)
... For design purposes, it is now possible to take one of two positions. Conservatively,
one can stipulate that the maximum corner stress shall not exceed the yield point ... Here
the use of a single channel with discrete bracing will always be less economical than one
with continuous bracing since the corner stress in the former always exceeds that of the
latter for the same load. This difference decreases with decreasing spacing of braces.
Alternatively, one can take advantage of the reserve strength by plastic stress
redistribution ...(such that) the difference between the maximum corner stress (due to
warping and simple bending superimposed) shall not exceed a specified fraction of ...(the
maximum stress due to simple bending alone). This fraction must be so specified that it shall
not adversely affect the carrying capacity i.e. such that its effect would be obliterated by
plastic redistribution.
On the basis of the experimental evidence (a series of test were run as part of this study), it is
seen that a 15% overstress does not affect the carrying capacity of the channels
significantly... It would seem, therefore, that within the limits of our test evidence, a
theoretical overstress of about 15% can be disregarded in practical design. The problem
then, merely, to locate braces such that no more than this overstress will occur.
Note C-1
1. For the design examples in this document, the 15% overstress has not been permitted and the
corner stress has been limited to the yield stress. This approach has been taken because:
• The tests that were part of this study only included the case where maximum additive
compressive stress due to warping and bending occurred at the flange/web junction.
Other studies (Bogdan 1999) indicate that the lip/flange case is more critical and the
15% allowance may not be justified.
• The effect of web punchouts on the torsional strength of the stud is not well understood.
• Some of the bridging details used in standard stud construction are somewhat flexible
and allow some twisting to occur at the bridging points. This twist may magnify the
warping torsional stresses.
• There is some interaction between lateral instability and warping torsion not accounted
for in this procedure.
• In the design examples, the procedure has been extended to loading cases not confirmed
by testing
2. More accurate methods for calculating warping torsional stresses are available. Refer to
Seaburg 1997 and Moore 2002. These references contain the solution to 12 torsional loading
cases but require torsional section properties for the cross section including J, Cw and Wns.
Wns , is the normalized warping function at point s on the cross section and is not usually
available in published load tables for lightweight steel framing members. Refer to Galambos
1968 for a method of calculation.
Page C-2
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Page C-3
Appendix C, Simplified Approximate Method for the Calculation of Warping Torsional Stresses
Page C-4
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Appendix D
Outer Top Track Flexibility Formulas
To connect wind bearing studs to the structure, inner and outer top track details are
useful for accommodating floor deflections and construction tolerances.
The detail is, however, inherently flexible. Some horizontal movement occurs in the
track whenever the studs are loaded by wind.
The following approximate formulas provide a lower bound estimate of the movement
to be expected assuming uniform loading along the length of the track. Local
deformations in the vicinity of fasteners and overall torsional deformations between
fastener locations have been neglected. See also Appendix E where it is shown that
localized increases in deflection can occur due to discontinuities in the inner top track
and due to locally heavily loaded studs (such as jambs).
Page D-1
Appendix D, Outer Top Track Flexibility Formulas
δ total = δ 1 + δ 2
= θA L 2 + δ 2
PL22 L 1 PL32
= +
8 EI 3 EI
P ⎛⎜ L 2 L 1 L 2 ⎞⎟
2 3
= +
EI ⎜ 8 3 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
Page D-2
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
δ total = δ 1 + δ 2
= θA L 2 + δ 2
PL22 L 1 PL32
= +
3 EI 3 EI
=
P
3 EI
(
L22 L 1 + L32 )
Page D-3
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Appendix E
Inner Top Track as a Beam
on an Elastic Foundation
The outer top track is typically designed as if uniformly loaded by the inner top track.
The validity of this assumption can be reviewed by treating the inner top track as a
beam supported by the outer top track which in turn functions as an elastic foundation.
While it may seem intuitively obvious that the inner top track will effectively distribute
loads from typical studs spaced at 16" or 24" o.c. it is not so clear that large reactions
from window jamb studs will be effectively distributed. A further complication is the
case of buildings with short pieces of stud wall interrupted by full height windows and
shear walls. This condition is common in condominium type projects.
The basic equations for finite length beams on elastic foundations are taken from Roark
1975.
β = (k/4EI)1/4
C2 = cosh βL sin βL + sinh βL cos βL
C3 = sinh βL sin βL
C4 = cosh βL sin βL - sinh βL cos βL
C11 = sinh2 βL - sin2 βL
CA1 = cosh β(L - a) cos β(L - a)
CA2 = cosh β(L - a) sin β(L - a) + sinh β(L - a) cos β(L - a)
F2 = cosh βx sin βx + sinh βx cos βx
F1 = cosh βx cos βx
FA4 = cosh β(x – a) sin β(x – a) – sinh β(x – a) cos β(x – a)
If x ≤ a then FA4 = 0
W C 2 C A 2 − 2C 3 C A 1
θA =
2EIβ 2 C 11
W C 4 C A1 − C 3 C A 2
yA =
2EIβ 3 C 11
y = local horizontal deflection in outer top track leg
θ F WFA 4
= y A F1 + A 2 −
2β 4EIβ 3
where:
L = Beam length, inches
a = Distance from left end to point load, inches
x = Distance from left end to deflection location, inches
k = Spring constant for outer top track, lbs/inch per inch of deflection
I = Inner top track major axis beam inertia, inches4
W = Point load, lbs
Page E-1
Appendix E, Inner Top Track as a Beam on an Elastic Foundation
Example E1
Check the inner and outer top track design from Design Example #1 as shown in Figure
E-1.
Approximate inertia of long legged inner top track by using the deflection
inertia for 600T125-43 track section with Fy = 33 ksi.
P ⎛⎜ L22 L 1 L 2 ⎞⎟
3
δ total = +
EI ⎜ 8 3 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
EI
k=
2 3
L2 L1 L2
+
8 3
24 E I
=
2 3
3L2 L1 + 8L2
Page E-2
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
L1 = 6"
L2 = 1.5"
I = (1/12)bt3
= (1/12)(1)(0.0713)3
= 30.21 x 10-6 in4/in
E = 29.5 x 106 psi
See Table E-1 for calculations of outer top track horizontal local
deflections at x = 0" and at x = 40" due to stud reactions. (These deflections
are found by solving for y = local horizontal deflection in outer top track leg
using the formulas on Page E-1.)
Check βL
Note E-1
Page E-3
Appendix E, Inner Top Track as a Beam on an Elastic Foundation
Table E-1
Σ -0.0564 -0.0515
δ = 0.0564 inches at x = 0 inches governs for the point loaded beam (the
inner top track) on an elastic foundation (the outer top track).
Then:
Note that stresses in the cantilevering outer top track leg also increase
(locally) by a factor of 1.18.
Page E-4
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Example E2
Repeat Example E1 except with the inner top track cut-off 1" to the left of the jamb. See
Figure E-2.
Table E-2
Σ -0.1183 -0.0651
Page E-5
Appendix E, Inner Top Track as a Beam on an Elastic Foundation
and at x = 16"
This example illustrates the locally high outer top track deflections (and stresses)
that can develop if the inner top track joint occurs near a heavily loaded stud. For
this case, the deflections (and stresses) will be 2.47 times those from the simple
uniformly loaded assumption. Note, however, that the stresses will be localized
and that at a distance of 16" from the end of the inner top track the ratio has
dropped to 1.36. It is likely that the high overstress implied by the 2.47 ratio will
be alleviated somewhat by plastic redistribution.
See also Note 1-5 from Design Example #1 for a discussion of plastic versus
elastic section modulus when checking the strength of the outer top track leg.
Conclusions
2. These locally high stresses are greater where the inner top track joint occurs near a
heavily loaded stud.
Page E-6
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Appendix F
Bearing Stress Distribution Between
Track and Concrete
for Axial Load Bearing Studs
The bearing stress distribution between the track and concrete for axial load bearing
studs has not been researched with the exception of some preliminary testing at the
University of Manitoba. (A summary of this work has been published – see LGSEA 2001b).
This appendix proposes a method for calculating the bearing area that should be
considered an approximation only. See Figure F-1.
The allowable bearing stress on concrete is taken from AISC 2005, Section J8.
Allowable bearing stress = 0.85fc'/Ω
= 0.85fc'/2.50
= 0.34fc'
Note F-1
Where the ratio of bearing area to the area of the concrete support is less than 1, a
higher allowable bearing stress may be permitted. Refer to the relevant concrete
specification.
The width of track that can cantilever beyond the face of the stud is shown on
Figure F-1 as "x" and is calculated as follows:
0.34 fc ' x 2
M req =
2
M all = ZFy / Ω
where :
Z = plastic sec tion mod ulus
2
= ( 1 / 4 ) bt t with b = 1"
Ω = 1.67
Set M req = M all and solve for x
Gives :
Fy
x = 0.938t t
fc '
Page F-1
Appendix F, Bearing Stress Distribution between Track and Concrete for Axial Load Bearing Studs
Note F-2
Among other approximations, this bearing area calculation does not take into account the
beneficial effect of the flange of the track nor does it account for the detrimental influence of
local buckling in the web of the stud.
Page F-2
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Appendix G
General Method for Determining Stresses
in Welded Connections
The following method is taken from Bresler 1967 except that the sign of My has been
revised to conform to the usual convention for positive moments.
At any point of the connection, the stress on the weld due to one single component of
load can be computed from the conventional formulas (Equations 1, 2 and 3). In Figure
G-1, the notation shows fx and fy as shearing stresses and fz as normal stress.
Due to forces:
I P I Py I P
fx = x , fy = , fz = z (1)
A A A
Page G-1
Appendix G, General Method for Determining Stresses in Welded Connections
Due to moments:
II Mz II Mz II Mx My
fx = y, fy = x, fz = y− x (2 )
Iz Iz Ix Iy
where :
A = ∫ dA I x = ∫ y 2 dA I y = ∫ x 2 dA
and :
I z = ∫ ( x 2 + y 2 ) dA = I x + I y
I II I II I II
fx = fx − fx , fy = fy + fy , fz = fz + fz (3)
For fillet welds, x, y, and z components of stress on a given leg of the weld are
used to determine qreq, the maximum required resultant shear force per unit
length of weld, and the latter is arbitrarily considered a "shear" force acting on
the throat section as follows:
2 2 2
q req = t f = t fx + fy + fz
See Design Example No. 3, Steps 7(h) and 7(i) for a worked examples using this
approach.
Page G-2
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Appendix H
Simplified Conservative Design Approach for
Equal Leg Angles without Lips
This appendix proposes a simplified method for calculating the axial capacity of equal
leg angles without lips.
It is proposed to restrict compressive stresses such that local buckling does not occur
either due to axial load or moment. This approach will substantially underestimate the
true capacity of angles particularly when the flat width to thickness ratio of the
unstiffened flanges is large. However, where efficient use of material is less important
than efficient use of a designer's time, this approach is useful.
f
λ= ≤ 0.673
Fcr
µ = 0.3
E = 29500 ksi
k = 0.43
Page H-1
Appendix H, Simplified Conservative Design Approach for Equal Leg Angles without Lips
5190
f= ksi
(w / t) 2
Thus if bending and axial stresses are restricted to f, then local buckling can be
neglected. Overall stability of the angle must, of course, still be checked.
Page H-2
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Appendix I
Reaction Forces at End of Stud
Figure I-1 is a free body diagram of a short piece of stud at the end support. An all-steel
design approach is assumed – that is, sheathings are assumed to provide no torsional
restraint to the studs. This free body diagram is appropriate for designing the restraint
required for the end of the stud in order to transfer the stud end shear and torsion.
• The resultant internal shear, R, at the end of the stud with a line of action through the
stud shear center.
• The accumulated torsion between the end reaction and the first line of bridging
given by Kawm with:
a = distance between the end reaction and the first line of bridging
w = wind load/unit length assumed to be applied through the web of the
stud
m = distance from the centerline of the stud web to the shear center
K = coefficient considering force distribution at supports. (Where the
accumulated torsion Kawm relieves the internal connection stresses, it is
conservative to underestimate the value for the constant K. The AISI Specification
(D3.2.2) uses K = 1.5 for interior torsional brace points. A value of K = 0.50/1.5 =
Page I-1
Appendix I, Reaction Forces at End of Stud
0.33 at the end reaction would be a conservatively low assumption consistent with
the conservatively high 1.5 value for an interior line of bridging. Alternatively,
where the accumulated torsion adds to the internal connection stresses K = 1.5(0.50)
= 0.75 would be appropriate.)
The reaction forces (and the forces applied to the end connection) consist of:
• The reaction force, R, which is assumed to be applied along the line of the stud web.
• The moment, Rm - Kawm, which is required for equilibrium.
Note that for continuous stud applications, the restraint force Rm - Kawm also applies at interior
reaction points. Once again, where the torsional component Kawm relieves the internal
connection stresses, it is conservative to underestimate the value of the constant K. For this case,
a value of K = 1.00/1.5 = 0.67 at the interior reaction would be a conservatively low assumption
consistent with the conservatively high 1.5 value (AISI Specification D3.2.2) for an interior line
of bridging.
Page I-2
AISI Cold-Formed Steel Framing Design Guide, Second Edition
Appendix J
Product Identification
The cold formed steel framing manufacturers use a universal designator system for their
products. The designator is a four part code which identifies depth, flange width,
member type and material thickness.
Example: 600S162-54
600 S 162 - 54
Notes:
2. Material thickness is given as the minimum thickness exclusive of coatings and represents
95% of the design thickness. See the AISI Specification Section A2.4.
3. For those sections with a yield strength other than 33 ksi, the yield strength used in design
needs to be identified on the contractual documents and when ordering the steel. [e.g.
"600S162-54 (50 ksi)" for 50 ksi yield material. "600S162-54 (50)" is also acceptable.]
4. For track, "T", sections, depth is a nominal inside to inside dimension. Other dimensions are
out to out.
Page J-1
Appendix J, Product Identification
5. For "S" sections (studs and joist) lip lengths are standardized as follows:
Page J-2