Scribd
Upload
4K views

Purlin Design Examples

This document provides an example of designing a purlin system for a roof with specific loading and building constraints. It summarizes the steps taken: 1. Critical load combinations were determined for the ultimate and serviceability limit states. 2. The roofing profile spans were optimized based on the rafter length and number of purlins required. This determined that 8 purlins with 1.6m intermediate and 1m end spans were needed. 3. Purlin sizes were selected by checking capacities and deflections against design load combinations using load span tables for single span, lapped, and reduced end span purlin systems. A 120x0.95mm lapped purlin was

Uploaded by

Nwe Oo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
4K views

Purlin Design Examples

This document provides an example of designing a purlin system for a roof with specific loading and building constraints. It summarizes the steps taken: 1. Critical load combinations were determined for the ultimate and serviceability limit states. 2. The roofing profile spans were optimized based on the rafter length and number of purlins required. This determined that 8 purlins with 1.6m intermediate and 1m end spans were needed. 3. Purlin sizes were selected by checking capacities and deflections against design load combinations using load span tables for single span, lapped, and reduced end span purlin systems. A 120x0.95mm lapped purlin was

Uploaded by

Nwe Oo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Purlin Systems

2.4.8 DESIGN EXAMPLE TOP NOTCH PURLINS


Selected Loadings
Dead Load, G = 0.12 kPa
Live Load, Q = 0.25 kPa
Snow Load, Su = 0.5 kPa
Outward Limit State Wind Loads, Wu = 0.95 kPa (ultimate state) and Ws = 0.66 kPa
(serviceability state).
Inward Wind Loading is not significant for this roof.
Building Constraints
Portal Spacing, LP = 5 m
Roof Pitch, 

= 10 degrees

Rafter Length, LR = 10.0 m (distance from eaves purlin to


ridge purlin)
Cladding Profile = Styleline x 0.40 mm BMT

Critical Design Load Combinations for the Ultimate Limit State (AS/NZS 1170.0,
clause 4.2)
i) W*ULS
= 1.2G + 1.5Q
= (1.2 x 0.12) + (1.5 x 0.25)
= 0.52 kPa
ii) W*ULS
= 1.2G + Su +  cQ
= (1.2 x 0.12) + 0.5 + (0.0 x 0.25)
= 0.64 kPa
= 0.9G + Wu
= (0.9 x 0.12) 0.95
= 0.84 kPa
iii) W*ULS
(outward)
Critical Design Load Combinations for the Serviceability Limit State (AS/NZS 1170.0,
clause 4.3)
i) W*SLS
= LP /300 under G + l Q = [0.12 + (0.0 x 0.25)] x 300/150
= 0.24 kPa
ii) W*SLS
= LP /150 under Ws
= 0.66
= 0.66 kPa
(outward)
For i) we have converted the load by a factor of 300/150 in order to compare the load directly with
Ws in the Top Notch load span tables as these are based on span/150.
Optimise Roofing Profile Spans
In this case we have a restricted access roof where the point load requirement limits the
intermediate span of the Styleline x 0.40 mm BMT profile to 1.6 m. End spanning capability of the
roofing is reduced to 1.1 m, i.e. 70% of the intermediate span. Generally these spans will not fit the
rafter length exactly, hence the requirement to Optimise.
The optimised roofing profile intermediate span is based on the rafter length and the number of
purlins, NP (assuming at least four) and is given by LRI = LRT / [NP 1.6].
Try 7 Purlins,
Try 9 Purlins,
Try 8 Purlins,

LRI = 10.0/(7 1.6)


LRI = 10.0/(9 1.6)
LRI = 10.0/(8 1.6)

=
=
=

1.85 m
1.35 m
1.56 m

No good
Not controlling
Intermediate spans and 1.26 m edge spans

From this, 8 purlins are required and the purlin spacings may be rationalised to 1.6 m intermediate
spans and 1.0 m spans at the sheet ends.
Continued on next page

May 2004

Purlin Systems

2.4.8 DESIGN EXAMPLE TOP NOTCH PURLINS continued


Optimise Purlin Size
The Top Notch load span tables assume that the top flange of the Top Notch purlin is continuously
restrained by screw fastened roof sheeting. (The tables shall not be used if the top flange is not fully
restrained.)
Check design capacities W *ULS < bWbx
1. Single Span Purlin Design
a) All Bays (5 m span)
Check design capacities (using those given in the simple span Top Notch load span tables):
W*ULS
= 1.6 x 0.64
= 1.02 kN/m
c.f 1.31 kN/m for a 120 x 0.95
W*ULS
= 1.6 x 0.84
= 1.34 kN/m
c.f 1.62 kN/m for a 150 x 1.15
Check deflections
W*SLS
= 1.6 x 0.66

1.06 kN/m

c.f 1.12 kN/m for a 150 x 1.15

Therefore both wind load outward and deflection govern and a 150 x 1.15 Top Notch purlin is
required.
Therefore use,
150 x 1.15 Top Notch purlins single span at 1.6 m intermediate spacings and 1.0 m at sheet ends.
Typically for multiple bay structures it would be more efficient to use a lapped purlin system as
shown below.
2. Lapped Span Purlin Design
a) Check End Bays (5 m span)
Check design capacities (using those given in the lapped end span Top Notch load span tables):
W*ULS
= 1.6 x 0.64
= 1.02 kN/m
c.f 1.18 kN/m for a 100 x 0.75
W*ULS
= 1.6 x 0.84
= 1.34 kN/m
c.f 1.76 kN/m for a 100 x 0.95
Check deflections
W*SLS
= 1.6 x 0.66
= 1.06 kN/m
c.f 1.15 kN/m for a 120 x 0.95
Therefore wind load deflection governs the end span and a 120 x 0.95 lapped Top Notch is required.
b) Check Internal Bays (5 m span)
Check design capacities (using those given in the lapped internal span Top Notch load span tables):
W*ULS
= 1.6 x 0.64
= 1.02 kN/m
c.f 1.64 kN/m for a 100 x 0.75
W*ULS
= 1.6 x 0.84
= 1.34 kN/m
c.f 1.64 kN/m for a 100 x 0.75
Check deflections
W*SLS
= 1.6 x 0.66
= 1.06 kN/m
c.f 1.36 kN/m for a 100 x 0.95
Therefore wind load deflection governs the internal span and a 100 x 0.95 lapped Top Notch is
required.
Therefore use,
Top Notch 120 x 0.95 lapped purlins at 1.6 m intermediate spacings and 1.0 m at sheet ends.
(The size is governed by the end bays.)
Typically,Top Notch purlins must have the same depth on all bays and different thicknesses are not
mixed when specifying Top Notch purlins for practical reasons.

May 2004

Purlin Systems

2.4.8 DESIGN EXAMPLE TOP NOTCH PURLINS continued


3. Lapped Reduced-End Span Purlin Design
The dependable strength characteristics are higher for internal spans on continuously lapped span
purlin systems.Therefore typically a reduction in the end bay spacings of 20% to 30% will result in a
more efficient purlin optimisation.Try reducing the end bay span by 20% to 4 metres.
a) Check End Bays (4 m span)
Check design capacities (using those given in the lapped end span Top Notch load span tables):
W*ULS
= 1.6 x 0.64
= 1.02 kN/m
c.f 1.85 kN/m for a 100 x 0.75
= 1.6 x 0.84
= 1.34 kN/m
c.f 1.85 kN/m for a 100 x 0.75
W*ULS
Check deflections
W*SLS
= 1.6 x 0.66
= 1.06 kN/m
c.f 1.09 kN/m for a 100 x 0.75
Therefore all design cases require a 100 x 0.75 lapped Top Notch.
b) Check Internal Bays (5 m span)
As for example 2b) above.
A 100 x 0.95 lapped Top Notch is required.
Therefore use,
Top Notch 100 x 0.95 lapped purlins at 1.6 m intermediate spacings and 1.0 m at sheet ends, on end
and internal bays.
The above examples use the same wind load on the end bays and the internal bays. However a more
rigorous wind load analysis is likely to have different wind loads on the end and internal bays.
In the calculation of wall elements, optimisation follows the same logic as illustrated above except
the wind loading is typically lower on wall elements and the cladding spans (therefore the purlin
spacings) are not limited by foot traffic criteria.Typically girts can be spaced approximately 20%
further apart than purlins.

May 2004

You might also like