roof framing connections in conventional residential construction

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The resistance of a multiple nailed connection at 5 percent nail diameter offset limit state iscalculated as follows:P ' %= n5P CMCtCdCegCdiCtn(A3)where:n, P, C M, C t , C d , C eg , C di , C tn = refer to Equation A2.The resistance of a multiple nailed connection at ultimate load limit state is calculated as follows:Pult= n P CMCtCdCegCdiCtn(A4)where:n, C M, C t , C d , C eg , C di , C tn = refer to Equation A2.PF e,ultF b,ult= load resistance determined using Equation (A1)with F e = F e,ult and F b = F b,ult (refer to Sections 3.4and 4.1);= ultimate dowel bearing strength;= ultimate dowel bending strength.The calculations are organized in three groups to correspond to the tasks under the testingprogram: heel joint connections, full-scale roof-to-wall connections, and individual roof-to-wallconnections. Results are presented in a table format. The adjustment factors, which are notdirectly applicable to the tested connection configurations and equal to unity, are not included.1. RAFTER-TO-CEILING JOIST CONNECTION (HEEL JOINT) TESTSNail8d common –toe-nailedD, inTABLE A1NDS ALLOWABLE VALUES FOR INDIVIDUAL NAILSF em,5% , F es,5% , F b,5% ,Kpsi psi psiD C D C d C tnZ’, lbIII m III s IV0.131 3,665 3,665 81,491 2.2 1.6 0.85 0.83 120 85 8710d common 0.149 3,665 3,665 80,639 2.2 1.6 1.0 1.0 220 220 16016d pneumatic 0.132 3,665 3,665 83,691 2.2 1.6 1.0 1.0 191 191 12816d pneumatic –toe-nailed0.132 3,665 3,665 83,691 2.2 1.6 1.0 0.83 180 123 106Nail8d common –toe-nailedTABLE A25 PERCENT OFFSET VALUES FOR INDIVIDUAL NAILSF Z’, lbD, in em,5% , F es,5% , F b,5% ,Cpsi psi psid C tnIII m III s IV0.131 3,665 3,665 81,491 0.85 0.83 165 118 12010d common 0.149 3,665 3,665 80,639 1.0 1.0 302 302 22016d pneumatic 0.132 3,665 3,665 83,691 1.0 1.0 263 263 17616d pneumatic –toe-nailed0.132 3,665 3,665 83,691 1.0 0.83 247 169 146A-2
Nail8d common –toe-nailedTABLE A3ULTIMATE VALUES FOR INDIVIDUAL NAILSF Z’, lbD, in em,ult , F es,ult ,Fpsi psi b,ult psi C d C tnIII m III s IV0.131 5,510 5,510 108,772 0.85 0.83 246 173 17010d common 0.149 5,390 5,390 108,357 1.0 1.0 440 440 31016d pneumatic 0.132 5,503 5,503 118,300 1.0 1.0 393 393 25716d pneumatic –toe-nailed0.132 5,503 5,503 118,300 1.0 0.83 369 251 213Config. #Rafter-to-JoistConnection(Heel Joint)TABLE A4RESISTANCE OF TWO PARALLEL HEEL JOINTSNumberof jointsNDS AllowableValue, lb5% Offset Value, lb Ultimate Value, lbIII m III s IV III m III s IV III m III s IV123453-10d Common NailsUnattached3-10d Common NailsAttached with 3-8dCommon Toe-Nails3-16d Pneumatic NailsUnattached3-16d Pneumatic NailsAttached with 3-16dPneumatic Toe-Nails12-16d PneumaticNailsUnattached2 1,317 1,317 962 1,812 1,812 1,322 2,643 2,643 1,8592 1,489 1,489 1,133 2,047 2,047 1,558 2,984 2,984 2,2002 1,147 1,147 769 1,577 1,577 1,057 2,357 2,357 1,5402 1,360 1,360 981 1,869 1,869 1,350 2,783 2,783 1,9662 4,587 4,587 3,075 6,308 6,308 4,228 9,428 9,428 6,1602. FULL-SCALE ROOF-TO-WALL CONNECTION SYSTEM TESTSNail8d common –toe-nailed12d pneumatictoe-nail16d pneumatic –toe-nailedD, inTABLE A5NDS ALLOWABLE VALUES FOR INDIVIDUAL NAILSF em,5% , F es,5% , F b,5% ,Kpsi psi psiD C D C d C tnZ’, lbIII m III s IV0.132 3,075 6,093 81,491 2.2 1.6 0.85 0.83 113 113 920.131 3,075 6,093 90,596 2.2 1.6 1.0 0.83 151 151 970.120 3,075 6,093 83,691 2.2 1.6 1.0 0.83 168 167 112A-3
Page 2 and 3:
PATH (Partnership for Advanced Tech
Page 9 and 10:
LIST OF TABLESTable 1 - Selected Re
Page 11: LIST OF FIGURESPageFigure 1 - Rafte
Page 14 and 15: Section 3. Section 4 includes three
Page 16: Therefore, it can be assumed that t
Page 19 and 20: TABLE 1SELECTED RESISTANCE DATA FRO
Page 21 and 22: Uplift tests were conducted on toe-
Page 23 and 24: Table 3 summarizes specific gravity
Page 25 and 26: connections. Test results were used
Page 27: measurements were collected by the
Page 31 and 32: An examination of the load-deformat
Page 34 and 35: 32 percent. The differences between
Page 36: 4.1.4 Design ApplicationsThis secti
Page 39 and 40: 4.2 TASK 2 - FULL-SCALE ROOF-TO-WAL
Page 41 and 42: double top plate was fastened to th
Page 43 and 44: TABLE 16SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS FOR
Page 45 and 46: Figure 16Truss Separation from Top
Page 47 and 48: Table 17 compares the experimental
Page 49 and 50: Maximum 0.2 sec design spectral res
Page 51 and 52: TABLE 18SPECIMEN CONFIGURATIONS FOR
Page 53 and 54: 700600500400Load, lb30020010010 cur
Page 55 and 56: Figure 26Toe-Nailed Joint ResponseT
Page 57 and 58: 5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONSThe anal
Page 59 and 60: [7] Wilkinson, T. L. 1993. Bolted C
Page 61: APPENDIX ACALCULATION OF LATERAL NA
Page 65 and 66: Nail8d common -toe-nailed16d pneuma
show all

roof framing connections in conventional residential construction

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?