C 3

TIMBER FRAME WALL STUD

DESIGN DATA

Subject
It is required to check the adequacy of 38 x 89 mm Strength class C24 studs spaced at 600 mm
centres in a ground floor external domestic wall panel. The wall supports 4.0 m span first floor
joists, the first floor wall panel and a trussed rafter roof spanning 8.0 m. The stud length is 2.4 m
and the panel is sheathed externally with plywood and lined internally with plasterboard.

2X.r is a relatively complicated design problem because the stwls are subject to four
It is necessary to ident& the source of each action, because
separate variable actions.
the $ values depend on the types of action concerned.
A quick method is given for checking the deflection of a wind-loaded

column.

Service class
Clause 3.1.5

Service class 2

BSEN338

Properties of Strength class C24

Properties for softwood Strength class C24 may be obtainedfrom
I in the Introduction to the Design Examples.

Bending strength
Compression strength parallel to grain
Compression strength perpendicular
to grain
E mean parallel to grain
Minimum modulus of elasticity parallel to grain

fm.k
fc.0.k
f0J.k
E O,nrpn
Eo,05

=
=

=
=
=

BS EN 338 orfrom Table

24.0
21.0
5.3
11 000
7 400

N/nUI?
N/tllrt?
N/mm2
N/mm2
N/mm*

Dimensions and section properties

b
h
L

Breadth of section
Depth of section
Length of column

=38
=89
= 2400

i%e section size is a North American

Design Examples.

mm
mm
mm

size, given in Table 4 of the Introduction

to the

Area

38 x 89

3 382 mm*

Section modulus

w,

38 x 84
6

50 170 mm3

I,

38 x 8g3

2 232 000 OMIT

Second moment

of area

12

14of24

TRADA,

HughendenVelley,

High Wycombe,

Bucks. HP14 4ND. UK

o TRADA

1994. C

C 3

TIMBER FRAME WALL STUD

Figure 51.6
lhe major axis of a rectangular section is y-y and the minor axis z-z.
It is assumed that the plywood sheathing restrains the stud against buckling about the
weaker z-z axis.

Actions
On plan:

Self weight of:

0.830
0.250
0.310
0.700

rafters on slope 0.68 kN/m2

ceiling
first floor wall and ground floor wall construction
first floor joists + partition allowance (0.35 + 0.35)
Imposed

kNlm2
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2

on plan:

loads on:

rafters
ceiling of roof
first floor
wind load say (C,

+ C,Jq

(0.7 + 0.3) x 0.87

0.53
0.25
1.50
0.87

kN/m2
l&/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2

There is differentiation in EC5 between the duration of load for self weight (permanent),
storage load at ceiling level (long-term), and imposed rafter load and wind load (short-

Permanent

load per stud

roof (rafters,

x 0.6

x 8.0

2.592 kN

0.446 kN

0.840 kN

0.223 kN

0.446 kN

EG,, (mid-height)

4.101 kN

CG4, (base)

4.324 kN

0.600 kN

1.8OOkN

=
=

first floor
ground

floor wall (mid height)

ground

floor wall (base)

0.31 x 0.6 x 2.40

0.70
0.31

x 0.6
2
x 0.6

x 4.00
x 2.4

2
0.31 x 0.6 x 2.4

load per stud

roof ceiling

Medium-term

Q 141

0.25

x 0.6

x 8.0

load per stud

first floor

b TRADA

+ 0.25)
2

first floor wall

Long-term

(0.830

ceiling etc)

1994. C

Q42

TRADA,

Hughrnden

1.50 x 0.6
2

Valley,

x 4.0

High Wycombe,

Bucks. HP14 4ND. UK

15 of 24

C3

Short-tern

TIMBER FRAME WALL STUD

load per stud

roof rafter

Q43

wind

Qk4

=
=

0.530
0.870

0.6 x 8.0
2

x 0.6 x 2.4

1.272 kN

1.253 kN

Partial safety factors and variable action coefficients

YG

YQ

Yh4

1.35
1.50
1.3

Table 2.3.3.1
Table 2.3.3.2

Values for the variable action coeficients or combination factors are given in Table 2
of the NAD and in Table 7 of the Introduction to the Design Examples.

Action

ULTIMATE

$0

*I

Roof ceiling

441

0.5

0.4

First floor

Q142

0.5

0.4

Roof rafter (snow)

Qk3

0.7

0.2

Wind

Qt4

0.7

0.2

LIMIT STATE

For the strength verification of wall s&s, it is usually necessary to check the bearing
strength of the bottom plate, and the buckling resistance of the stud (combined bending and
compression) under wind load.

BEARING
STRENGTH
OFBOTTOMPLATE
Thebearing strength must be adequate for each of the four possible load cases: permanent
load only; permanent + long-term load; permanent + long-term + medium-term; and
permanent + long-term + medium-term + short-term.
In each load case, the strength
properties (i.e. the bearing strength) are modified by the value of k_, which corresponds
to the shortest duration of load included in the load case.
3.1.7(2)
The critical load case may therefore be determined by dividing the design value of the load
on the bottom plate for each load case by the corresponding value of k_,. The load case
which produces the largest quotient is the critical one.

16 of 24

TRADA,

Hughenden

Valley,

High Wycombe,

Bucks. HP14 4ND. UK

a TRADA

1994. C

C 3

TIMBER FRAME WALL STUD

Design value of actions

Nd

%G G,

N+,

YG

N d,h8

YG%.Z

YQ Qu

C#o.i
i>l

(2.3.2.2a)

Qbi

7Q.i

Permanent
(A.2

1.35 x 4.324

5.837 kN

5.837

6.737 kN

Long-term
+

YQQW

+ 1.5 x 0.6

Medium-term

There are two variable actions, Q,, and Q,,, Since the value of $,, is the same for both
of them, the greater value of Nd is obtained by taking the larger variable action as the
dominant one, i.e Qk,*

Nd,mcditon

yGG,2

5.837

TQ

(Q,,

v%,,,Q~,)

+ 1.5 (1.8 + 0.5 x 0.6)

8.987 kN

Short-term

Three variable actions, Qk,,, Qk,2 and Q,,. contribute to the axial load, but in this load
case Q,, has a d@erent tiO value. The dominant action may quickly be determined as the
one for which the product Qk,l (1 -+,,J is greatest.

Qw (1 - Ad

Thus,

442

(1

h.3

Qw

(1

&,3

=
=

Q,__ is the dominant

N d&m

0.6 (1 - 0.5)
1.8 (1 - 0.5)
1.272 (1 - 0.7)

action.

YG

$2

5.837

YQ

=
=
=

0.3
0.9
0.38

Therefore
(Q,,

k,Qw

~o,~Q~J

+ 1.5 (1.8 + 0.5 x 0.6 + 0.7 x 1.272)

For solid timber in Service class 2

10.32 kN

Table 3.1.7
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9

5.837
0.6

a l-RADA

1994.

TRADA,

Hughenden Valley, High Wycombc,

9.73

Bucks. HP1 4 4ND. UK

17 of 24

TIMBER FRAMJI WALL STUD

C3

6.737
0.7

9.62

8.987
0.8

11.23

10.32
0.9

11.47

load case gives the maximum value, hence

The short-term

Nd

10.32 kN (short-term)

Strength modification factors

Clause 5. I. 5

Bearing strength

lhe wall studs at each end of a wall panel share the load with the djacent
adjoining panels, so bearing beneath these end studs is not critical.

For 38 X 89 mm intermediate
Distance to end:
Bearing length:
Distance between
From Table 5.1.5,

kc.90

studs at 600 mm centres,

studs:

>
=
=

a
e
P,

1oomm
38mm
(600 - 38)

the dimensions

in the

in EC5 Figure 5.1.5a are:

>

562

stud

150 mm

for 4, > 150, a 1 100, 150 > P 2 15

1 + 150 - e

1.659

170

Load sharing

Since only one bottom plate takes the vertical loads in a wall panel, load sharing is not
applicable to the verljkation of bearing strength.

Strength verification
Bearing stress

Nd

u c.%d

10.32

x 1 000
3 382

3.05 N/mm

Bearing strength

kc.90k%dfQ0.k

fc,%d

(2.2.3.2a)

YM

1.659

x 0.9

x 5.3

6.09 N/mm

1.3
fc.5Q.d

18 of24

%O,d

Ei

Bearing
strength
adequate

rvired

TRADA,

Hughenden

Valley, High Wycombe,

Bucks. HP14 4ND. UK

o TFtADA

1994. C

C 3

TIMBER FRAME WALL STUD

BUCKLINGRESISTANCE
OF STUD
Design values of effects of actions
Since column design involves a combined stress formula,
than combinations of loads must be investigated.

combinations

of stresses rather

Axial compression stresses at mid-height

Design stress due to EG,,

Hence

YG

1.35 x 4.101 x 1 000

3 382

%G,d

1.5 x 1 000 Qki

%,Ql

1.637 N/mm*

0.444 x 0.6

0.266 N/mm2

0.444 x 1.8

0.798 N/mm2

0.444 x 1.272

0.564 N/mm2

11.24 N/mm2

Q,i
A

0.444 Qti

3 382
Hence

YQ

Design stress due to Qki

CG,l
A

.d

c.QZd

uc,Q%d

Lateral bending stress on major axis

Design stress due to Qk4

Myd
w
Y

where

My,,

%,Q4,d

Hence

YQ

Q,2 L
8

1.5 x 1.253 x 1 000 X 2 400

8 x 50 170

Strength modification factors

Size
l%e characteristic bending strength of solid timber may be increased for depths in bending
Clause 3.2.2(4)
of less than 150 mm.

ip TRADA

1994. C

TRADA,

Hughenden Valley, High Wycombe,

Bucks. HP14 4ND. UK

19 of 24

C 3

k,,

TIMBER FRAME WALL STUD

1.3
OR

Therefore

= 1.11

k,,

Compression strength
The compression strength factor, k,, is most easily obtained from Table I in TRADA s
(The alternative calculation
Design Aid: Beam and Column Modification Factors.
procedure is illustrated in Design Example Cl).
The Design Aid also reproduces the
recommendations
given in BS 5268 : Part 2 for the selection of effective length. In this
example, the eflective length is taken as 0.85L.

For bending about the major axis

=

L .=cY

0.85

L 4Y
h

x 2 400

2 040
89

2 040 mm

22.9

0.445

From Figure 1 in the Design Aid

kGY
Load sharing

The wall studs, in their support of the vertical and horizontal loads, may be considered to
act as part of a load distribution system.
Clause 54.6

kIS

II

1.1

Since the short-term load case was critical for bearing, it is evident that, with the addition
of another short-term variable load in the wind load, the short-term load case will be
critical for buckling also.

Design values of material

Compression

fc,J,d

properties

strength

k,S kmcdfc,o,,

key is introduced

20 of 24

1.1 x 0.9 x 21.0

1.3

YM

15.99 N/mm2

later in the combined bending and compression formula.

TRADA,

Hughenden

Valley,

High Wycombe,

Bucks. HP14 4ND. UK

@ TRADA

1994. C

C 3

TIMBER FRAME WALL STUD

Bending strength

flsvP

k, k,S kcd f,k

YM

Combined

bending

1.11 x 1.1 x 0.9 x 24.0

1.3

_-

20.29 N/mm2

and compression

If either kc,Y or k,, is less than 1.0, it must be shown that the combined bending and
compression requirements given in Clause 5.2. I(4) are satisfied. (This requirement is not
given in EC5, but it is equivalent to the one given in Clause 5.2.1(3)).

k C.Y

0.445, so for bending

uc.0.d

+ _ m.y.d

k,, fc,0,d

stresses applied to the major bending

axis, it must be shown that

fw,d

(5.2.1J must be evaluated according

determine its limiting value.

CYGG, + yQ.1Qtg +

to the combination

rules given by (2.3.2.2a)

W0.iYQ.iQ&i

to

(2.3.2.2a)

It is evident that either Q,,, (as before) or Qk,4will be the dominant variable action.

With Qk2 as the dominant variable action, (5.2. If) and (2.3.2.2a)
ucGd
3.

c,Qfd

~O,lc,Ql,d

kc,y

1.637 + 0.798

0.4164

GO.1

uc,Ql,d

4.Q3.d

~0,4%,Q4.d

fmy.d
x 0.266 + 0.7
x 15.99

+ 0.5
0.445

+ 0.3878

$0.3

fc.O,d

With Q44 as the dominant

Uc,G,d

$0.2

0.804

<

variable

action,

c,QZ,d

$0.3

@TRADA

0.3603

1994. C

TRADA,

x 11.24
20.29

1.0 as required

(5.2. If) and (2.3.2.2a)

uc,Q3,d

give

um,Q4,d

fnqy,d

x 0.266 + 0.5 x 0.798

0.445 x 15.99

+ 0.5540

+ 0.7

x 0.564

kc,y c.0.d

1.637 + 0.5

give

0.914

Hughenden

<

+ 0.7

x 0.564

+ 11.24
20.29

1.0 as required

Valley, High Wycombe,

Bucks. HP14 4ND. UK

Section is
adequate to
resist buckling

21 of 24

c3

TlMBERFRAME

WALL STUD

SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATE - Deflection

FULL DESIGN METHOD

ike instantaneous deflection at mid-span

column may be calculated as

where

uinrr

u,,,,~,
ut__
E
I
P
L

=
=
=
=
=
=

uqbl

caused by loading a laterally

[ EI -7.1pL]

+ uh

[E* YgL2

loaded pinned

instantaneous defIection at mid-span due to lateral load only

initial deflection due to bow
= mean modulus of elasticity
4. I(3)
Eo,,
second moment of area in direction of deflection
Nxe7 = axial service load
column length

Since the permitted initial bow in solid timber column members is L/300 (EC5 Clause
7.2.P(1)), it is neither appropriate not possible to include u,, in the value of rr,,
However, the additional deflection due to u,, p reduced by the axial load N,, is included
and is represented by the second term in the above formula.
Hence, using a value of
U bmv- - LNOO, the formula for uinrrgiven above may be rewritten as

uincr

where

1 -

u~im~

300

(1)
3

xec2

t$

+ O.ldL

0.14

E0,~ I

It may be assumed that the critical deflection condition for a timberframe

wall stud will
be the instantaneous deflection under wind load, with wind as the dominant variable
load. (This is demonstrated in Design Example C2). For this condition, the deflection
limitation recommended in EC5 is
u2,iWr

L/300

Clause 4.3.1(2)

Instantaneous deflections are calculatedfrom

unfactored by ~c or yp
The deflections
according to the rules given by:
+

service loads, i.e. the characteristic loaak

thus calculated separately are combined

(4.1.a)

Ctit,i Qtz,i
i>I

The deflection of timber frame

2040 mm.
(p

E_ f
o-

=
Y

N,,

wall studs may be calculated

using the eflective length of

x (2 400)2

11 000 x 2232000

0.0002346

%ls,

u],~, is the increase in initial bow caused by the dead weight alone.

22 of 24

TRADA, Hughenden Valley, High Wycombe,

Bucks. HP14 4ND. UK

@l-RADA 1994. C

C3

SecI

EG,,

0.0002346

From equation
Ul,iEd

TIMBER FRAME WALL STUD

4.101 kN

x 4.101

x 1 000

0.9621

0.85 mm

0.5221 N/mm

9.38 mm

(1) above
1
l-0.14

O.lr$L
300

0.1 x 0.9621 x 2 400

(1 - 0.1 x 0.9621) x 300

u~,~,~*is the deflection at mid-span caused by the wind alone.

F scr,udl

Using Formula

1.253

Q
-?

x 1 000

2 400

2 from the Bending Formulae

0.5221 x 2 4002
11 000 x 2 232 000

Design Aid

5 x 2 400*
89*
384
+T
I

uZ,inrris the total instantaneous deflection caused by applying the four variable loads in
combination.
It is calculated from Equations (1) and (4.la) above as uinrr- u,,~~.

With wind as the dominant

variable

%,I + h., Qw + $1,~

Qw + 63 Qu

4.101 + (0.4 x 0.6) + (0.4 x 1.8) + (0.2 x 1.272)

5.315 kN

0.0002346 x 5.315 x 1 000

1.247

11.86 mm

11.01mm

@ TRADA

1994.

action

m
1
1 - 0.1 x 1.247

u.

11.86

lnI

0.14L
2,4,~+~
I

g 38 + 0.1 x 1.247 x 2 400

*
300

ul,im*

0.85

TRADA,

HughendenValley,

High Wycombe,

Bucks. HP14 4ND.

UK

23 of 24

C 3

TIMBER FRAME WALL STUD

Recommended deflection limitation

Clause 4.3.1(2) recommends

However,
dejlection

that, in general,

u,.,,

L/300

<

it is customary in the design of timberframe wall studs to permit a calculated

of L/200. i%is allows for the additional stl@%ess provided by the sheathing.

L/200

u.+,,_

as required

%iml,luu
<

u2inc.l

2400/200

12 mm

Defktion
satisfactory

APPROXTMATEDESICNMETHOD

Provided that L/h > 17.5, the deJection

ifit can be shown that
L2
Eowhere

I[

F,,
N scr

crF sI + P NJ

of a wind-loaded

1.0

lateral (wind) service load (N)

axial service load (N)

=
=

(II
General wind-loaded columns
Sheathed timber frame wall stu&
Ihe above formula

column should be acceptable

should sati&

P
Glulam
0.16
0.14

P
Solid timber
0.20
0.17

3.9
2.6

the recommendations:

for general columns

for timber frame wall stu&

UZ.ilw

u2,ilw

L/300
L/2a)

and uM+
and uMrfi

I
I

L/200
L/167

limber frame wall studs should be securely fastened to structural sheathing material
which may be assumed to reduce the calculated defection to within normal acceptable
limits.

L2I[

Eo-

2400 mm

FSC51

Q44

4 101 + 0.4 x 600 + 0.4 x 1 800 + 0.2 x 1 272

=
=

Eo,I

=
=

2.6
0.17
11 000 N/mm2
2 232 000 mm4

CXF
sr

1 253 N (dominant variable load)

5 315 N

2 4002
[2.6 x 1 253 + 0.17 x 5 315 ]
11 000 x 2 232 000

@L] =
=

24 of 24

0.98 < 1.0 as required.

TFtADA,

Hughenden

Valley,

High Wycombe,

Deflection
satisfactory

Bucks. HP14 4ND. UK

@l-RADA

1994. C