STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN

and STRUCTURAL BRACING

PRACTICES DESIGN CRITERIA

I. GENERAL DERIVATION OF PROCEDURE1

For zero roof pitch AISI Eq. D.3.2.1-5 reduces to Eq. 1.

0.053b1.88 L0.13
PLN = C tr 0.95 1.07 0.94 W Eq. 1
np d t

Where:

W = Roof load for the entire bay

PLN = the NET anchorage force that is required to be resisted by anchorage device(s)
along the frame line
And the remainder is a dimensionless parameter derived from testing which takes into
account the inherent system resistance. Equation 1 was derived empirically with flat test
specimens (i.e. zero roof pitch). Therefore, it will be assumed herein that Equation 1 will
produce correct results at ө = 0.

General flexure theory provides Equation 2 at zero roof pitch.

I xy
PLT = W Eq. 2
Ix

Where:

PLT = the TOTAL anchorage force that is required to be resisted by the system plus
anchorage device(s)
Ixy/Ix = A dimensionless parameter derived from a shear flow analysis or other methods.

Given these two equations it is possible to derive the implied inherent system resistance
factor at ө = 0 as shown in Eq. 3.

⎡ I xy 0.053b1.88 L0.13 ⎤
FSI = ⎢ − C tr 0.95 1.07 0.94 ⎥ Eq. 3
⎣⎢ I x np d t ⎦⎥

The inherent system resistance will then be equal to:

RSI = FSI W Eq. 4

1
Commentary to DM Section 4.7 is new.

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.7.C

BUILDINGS, 2/1/2005 Rev. 0 Page 1 of 19
INC.
STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN
and STRUCTURAL BRACING
PRACTICES DESIGN CRITERIA

From Equation 4 a new expression can be written for the NET anchorage force based
on a combination of flexure theory and the AISI provisions as shown in Equation 5.

⎡⎛ I ⎞ ⎤
PLN = ⎢⎜⎜ XY ⎟⎟Cos (θ ) − Sin(θ ) − FSI Cos (θ )⎥W Eq. 5
⎣⎝ I X ⎠ ⎦

Equation 5 is not yet complete. The inherent system resistance behaves as a passive
spring. Therefore, if no displacement is produced, no system resistance will be
produced. The angle at which no displacement is produced is assumed as that
corresponding to the principal axis of the ZEE purlin ө0. Therefore, as the roof pitch ө
approaches ө0, the inherent system resistance diminishes to zero. Therefore, the
following multiplier to the FSI term is required.
(1 – Tan(ө)/ Tan(ө0)). In which Tan(ө0) can be approximated by IXY/IX.

Thus equation 5 becomes equation 6:

⎡⎛ I ⎞ Tanθ ) ⎤
PLN = ⎢⎜⎜ XY ⎟⎟Cos (θ ) − Sin(θ ) − FSI Cos (θ )(1 − )⎥W Eq. 6
⎣⎝ I X ⎠ I XY I X ⎦

Through use of Equation 6, the system resistance may be separated from the total
required resistance. The benefit of this is to remove the error in the current specification
which produces erroneous results at higher roof pitches. The negative sign causing the
system resistance to add to the total force is automatically taken care of in the algebra.

II. SPECIAL CASES OF EQUATIONS 3 and 6

There are two special cases of Equations 3 and 6.

Case 1: Multiple-Span Systems at end supports

Case 2: Simple-Span Systems

For both of these cases the values of Ctr produce the anchorage forces resulting from
one side of the frame line only. However, Equation 2 represents the entire force for the
bay. Therefore the equations must be modified as shown below.

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.7.C

BUILDINGS, 2/1/2005 Rev. 0 Page 2 of 19
INC.
STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN
and STRUCTURAL BRACING
PRACTICES DESIGN CRITERIA

SPECIAL CASE 1: Multiple-Span Systems at end supports

⎡ I xy 0.053b1.88 L0.13 ⎤
FSI = ⎢ − 2C tr 0.95 1.07 0.94 ⎥ Eq. 3-a
⎣⎢ I x np d t ⎦⎥

1 ⎡⎛ I XY ⎞ Tanθ ) ⎤
PLN = ⎢⎜ ⎟⎟Cos (θ ) − Sin(θ ) − FSI Cos (θ )(1 − )⎥W Eq. 6-a
2 ⎣⎜⎝ I X ⎠ I XY I X ⎦

SPECIAL CASE 2: Simple-Span Systems at interior supports

⎡ I xy 0.220b1.5 ⎤
FSI = ⎢ − 2(0.5) 0.72 0.90 0.60 ⎥ Eq. 7
⎣⎢ I x n p d t ⎦⎥

⎡⎛ I ⎞ Tanθ ) ⎤
PLN = ⎢⎜⎜ XY ⎟⎟Cos (θ ) − Sin(θ ) − FSI Cos (θ )(1 − )⎥W Eq. 6
⎣⎝ I X ⎠ I XY I X ⎦

SPECIAL CASE 2-a: Simple-Span Systems at end supports

For simple span purlins at end supports use Equations 7 and 6 above but divide
Equation 6 by 2.

III. REVERSED PURLIN ROWS

When purlin rows are reversed as a method to reduce anchorage and diaphragm forces
the equations must be modified. Reversing purlins has two effects as follow.

• The reversed purlins produce a down-slope force that offsets the up-slope force
given in the first component of Equation 6.

When some purlin rows are reversed the first step in revising Equation 6 can be written
as follows assuming all purlin rows have equal loading (i.e. equal spacing with uniform
load).
⎡⎛ I ⎞ Tanθ ) ⎤
PLN = ⎢⎜⎜ XY ⎟⎟Cos (θ )(n pT − nd − nd ) − Sin(θ ) − FSI Cos (θ )(1 − )⎥W Eq. 8
⎣⎝ X ⎠
I I XY I X ⎦

Where: npT = Total number of purlin rows

nd = number of reversed purlin rows

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.7.C

BUILDINGS, 2/1/2005 Rev. 0 Page 3 of 19
INC.
 STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN
and STRUCTURAL BRACING
PRACTICES DESIGN CRITERIA

The term (npT – nd – nd) can be simplified to: (1 – 2nd/npT) Factor 1

Observation of the derivation of Equation 3 will reveal that Factor 1 must also be applied
to FSI for the same reasons it is applied to the first term in Equation 6.

• Reversing purlins has the effect of changing the value of ө0.

From flexure theory with reversed purlins the value of ө0 can be calculated as follows.

⎡⎛ I ⎞ ⎤
P0 = ⎢⎜⎜ XY ⎟⎟Cos (θ )(1 − 2nd n pT ) − Sin(θ )⎥W Eq. 9
⎣⎝ I X ⎠ ⎦

Application of algebra to Equation 9 produces the following.

Tan(θ 0 ) =
I XY
(1 − 2nd n pT ) Eq. 10
IX

Given the derivations above, Equation 6 can be written as follow to account for reversed
purlin rows.

⎡⎛ I ⎞ Tan(θ ) ⎤
PLN = ⎢⎜⎜ XY ⎟⎟Cos (θ )(1 − 2nd n pT ) − Sin(θ ) − FSI (1 − 2nd n pT )Cos (θ )(1 − )⎥W
⎢⎣⎝ I X ⎠ ( I XY I X )(1 − 2nd n pT ) ⎥⎦

Also, from algebra given the equations for reversed purlins, the optimum number of
reversed purlins is given by Equation 12.

⎡ I ⎤ n pT
n d (opt ) = ⎢1 − X Tan(θ )⎥ Eq. 12
⎣ I XY ⎦ 2

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.7.C

BUILDINGS, 2/1/2005 Rev. 0 Page 4 of 19
INC.
STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN
and STRUCTURAL BRACING
PRACTICES DESIGN CRITERIA

IV. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS

All of the above equations, like those in the AISI Specification, assume that all bays are
of equal spacing and all purlins are of equal thickness. In practice these are frequently
not the case. Therefore, it will frequently be required to perform the anchorage analysis
in parts. This is done simply by evaluating the equations for the bays on either side of
the frame line based on the respective purlins and value for W. Then, the final
anchorage force will be the average anchorage forces from the two analyses.

Example # 1: Multi-Span Interior Support

8.5 Z 0.092
b = 2.5 in.
d = 8.5 in.
t = 0.092 in.
np = 15
L = 25 ft.
W = 52.5 kips

MULTI-SPAN INTERIOR SUPPORTS - Example #1

20.0000
PLN per eqation 6
15.0000 AISI D3-2-1-5
Flexure Theory (PLT)
10.0000

5.0000

0.0000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
-5.0000
PLN (kips)

-10.0000

-15.0000

-20.0000

-25.0000

-30.0000

-35.0000
Roof Pitch (X:12)

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.7.C

BUILDINGS, 2/1/2005 Rev. 0 Page 5 of 19
INC.
STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN
and STRUCTURAL BRACING
PRACTICES DESIGN CRITERIA

Example # 2: Multi-Span Interior Support

11.5 Z 0.065
b = 3.5 in.
d = 11.5 in.
t = 0.065 in.
np = 4
L = 40 ft.
W = 18 kips

MULTI-SPAN INTERIOR SUPPORTS - Example #2

6.0000
PLN per eqation 6
AISI D3-2-1-5
4.0000
Flexure Theory (PLT)
AISI D.3.2.1-5 (MOD)
2.0000

0.0000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
-2.0000
PLN (kips)

-4.0000

-6.0000

-8.0000

-10.0000

-12.0000
Roof Pitch (X:12)

NOTE: This example was chosen to demonstrate that a small number of thin deep
purlins will provide minimal system resistance. In this case, the system resistance
appears to be practically zero since the curve fall directly on the flexure theory curve.
Upon inspection of AISI Equation D.3.2.1-5 it will be seen that the value Ctr is outside
the parenthesis. If the plot in example 2 for the AISI equation were to apply Ctr to the
first term in the parenthesis only, all three curves will coincide as shown in Example 2
by the curve for AISI D.3.2.1-5 (MOD). This implies that the Ctr term may have been
erroneously applied when the original equations for flat roofs were extrapolated for all
roof pitches.

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.7.C

BUILDINGS, 2/1/2005 Rev. 0 Page 6 of 19
INC.
STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN
and STRUCTURAL BRACING
PRACTICES DESIGN CRITERIA

Example # 3: Multi-Span First Interior Support

8.5 Z 0.092
b = 2.5 in.
d = 8.5 in.
t = 0.092 in.
np = 15
L = 25 ft.
W = 52.5 kips

MULTI-SPAN 1st INT. SUPPORT - Example #3

20.0000
PLN per eqation 11
AISI D3-2-1-5
Flexure Theory (PLT)
10.0000

0.0000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
PLN (kips)

-10.0000

-20.0000

-30.0000

-40.0000
Roof Pitch (X:12)

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.7.C

BUILDINGS, 2/1/2005 Rev. 0 Page 7 of 19
INC.
STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN
and STRUCTURAL BRACING
PRACTICES DESIGN CRITERIA

Example # 4: Multi-Span First Interior Support

11.5 Z 0.065
b = 3.5 in.
d = 11.5 in.
t = 0.065 in.
np = 4
L = 40 ft.
W = 18 kips

MULTI-SPAN 1st INT. SUPPORT - Example #4

6.0000
PLN per eqation 11
AISI D3-2-1-5
4.0000
Flexure Theory (PLT)

2.0000

0.0000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
-2.0000
PLN (kips)

-4.0000

-6.0000

-8.0000

-10.0000

-12.0000
Roof Pitch (X:12)

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.7.C

BUILDINGS, 2/1/2005 Rev. 0 Page 8 of 19
INC.
STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN
and STRUCTURAL BRACING
PRACTICES DESIGN CRITERIA

Example # 5: Multi-Span End Support

8.5 Z 0.092
b = 2.5 in.
d = 8.5 in.
t = 0.092 in.
np = 15
L = 25 ft.
W = 52.5 kips

MULTI-SPAN END SUPPORT - Example #5

10.0000
PLN per eqation 9
AISI D3-2-1-5
5.0000 Flexure Theory (PLT)

0.0000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

-5.0000
PLN (kips)

-10.0000

-15.0000

-20.0000

-25.0000
Roof Pitch (X:12)

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.7.C

BUILDINGS, 2/1/2005 Rev. 0 Page 9 of 19
INC.
STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN
and STRUCTURAL BRACING
PRACTICES DESIGN CRITERIA

Example # 6: Multi-Span End Support

11.5 Z 0.065
b = 3.5 in.
d = 11.5 in.
t = 0.065 in.
np = 4
L = 40 ft.
W = 18 kips

MULTI-SPAN END SUPPORT - Example #6

6.0000
PLN per eqation 9
AISI D3-2-1-5
4.0000 Flexure Theory (PLT)

2.0000

0.0000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
PLN (kips)

-2.0000

-4.0000

-6.0000

-8.0000

-10.0000
Roof Pitch (X:12)

NOTE: For this condition the proposed curve does not coincide with the flexure theory
curve. In fact, it produces higher anchorage forces than flexure theory. This is indicative
of an error in the AISI equation when np is low. The same example with different values
for np produced the following results.

np = 5 Æ The proposed curve coincides with the AISI curve both of which produce
higher values than flexure theory.

np = 6 Æ The proposed curve coincides with the flexure theory curve.

Larger values of np converge toward a set of curves similar to those in Example 5.

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.7.C

BUILDINGS, 2/1/2005 Rev. 0 Page 10 of 19
INC.
STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN
and STRUCTURAL BRACING
PRACTICES DESIGN CRITERIA

Example # 7: Simple Span Interior Support

8.5 Z 0.092
b = 2.5 in.
d = 8.5 in.
t = 0.092 in.
np = 15
L = 25 ft.
W = 52.5 kips

SIMPLE SPAN - Example #7

20.0000
PLN per eqation 13
PL per AISI D.3.2.1-2 (MOD)

10.0000 PLT (Flexure theory)

0.0000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
PLN (kips)

-10.0000

-20.0000

-30.0000

-40.0000
Roof Pitch (X:12)

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.7.C

BUILDINGS, 2/1/2005 Rev. 0 Page 11 of 19
INC.
STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN
and STRUCTURAL BRACING
PRACTICES DESIGN CRITERIA

Example # 8: Simple Span Interior Support

11.5 Z 0.065
b = 3.5 in.
d = 11.5 in.
t = 0.065 in.
np = 4
L = 40 ft.
W = 18 kips

SIMPLE SPAN - Example #8

8.0000
PLN per eqation 13
6.0000 PL per AISI D.3.2.1-2 (MOD)
PLT (Flexure theory)
4.0000

2.0000

0.0000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
-2.0000
PLN (kips)

-4.0000

-6.0000

-8.0000

-10.0000

-12.0000

-14.0000
Roof Pitch (X:12)

Once again, small numbers of thin deep purlins should not produce significant system
effect. This is demonstrated by the close fit between the proposed curve and the flexure
theory curve and is considered validation of the proposed method.

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.7.C

BUILDINGS, 2/1/2005 Rev. 0 Page 12 of 19
INC.
STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN
and STRUCTURAL BRACING
PRACTICES DESIGN CRITERIA

IV. TRANSFERRING ANCHORAGE FORCES ACROSS THE RIDGE

In gabled buildings it is possible to cause both roof planes to act in unison by

transferring anchorage forces in the diaphragm across the ridge. Figure 1 shows a
model from which the equations may be derived.

wT L2
L1
w1 w2
Θ1 Θ2
FIGURE 1
Anchorage Force Transfer
Across Ridge

L1 = Plane width on left side of ridge

L2 = Plane width on right side of ridge
L1P = Plan width on left side of ridge = L1Cos (Θ1)
L2P = Plan width on right side of ridge = L2Cos (Θ2)
Θ1 = Left roof slope
Θ2 = Right roof slope
w1 = Uniformly distributed diaphragm load in left diaphragm due to anchorage forces
w2 = Uniformly distributed diaphragm load in right diaphragm due to anchorage forces

The uniformly distributed horizontal transfer of force across the ridge is dependant on
the values of w1 and w2 and the relative diaphragm stiffness on each side of the ridge.
The relative diaphragm stiffness is proportional to L1, L2 and Θ1 and Θ2. .

Based on compatibility of horizontal diaphragm displacements on both sides of the ridge

the following equations can be written with respect to the sign convention shown in
Figure 1.

The NET uniformly distributed horizontal force is given by Equation 13

H
wNET = w1Cos (θ1 ) − w2 Cos(θ 2 ) Eq. 13

The resulting NET uniformly distributed forces on each side of the ridge are given by
equations 14 and 15
H
wNET L1P
w1NET = Eq. 14
(L1P + L2 P )Cos(θ1 )
H
wNET L2 P
w2NET = Eq. 15
(L1P + L2 P )Cos(θ 2 )

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.7.C

BUILDINGS, 2/1/2005 Rev. 0 Page 13 of 19
INC.
STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN
and STRUCTURAL BRACING
PRACTICES DESIGN CRITERIA

The force transferred across the ridge is given by Equation 16.

wT = (w1NET − w1 )Cos(θ1 ) Eq. 16

+ wt indicates tension across the ridge

- wT indicates compression across the ridge

V. CONVERTING IN-PLANE FORCES TO EQUIVALENT VERTICAL LOADS

The in-plane loads derived above for each side of the ridge derived above are directly
applicable to the calculation of diaphragm shears and deflections. However, in order to
arrive at the resulting anchorage forces, it is necessary to convert the in-plane loads into
equivalent vertical loads so that the inherent system resistance can be accounted for.

The relationship between in plane diaphragm forces and vertical loads is given by
Equation 17.

⎡ I XY ⎤ Equiv
− plane = ⎢
winNET Cos (θ )(1 − 2nd n p ) − Sin(θ )⎥ wVert Eq. 17
⎣ IX ⎦

From Equation 17 we can solve for the equivalent vertical load.

winNET
− plane
Equiv
wVert = Eq. 18
⎡ I XY ⎤
⎢ Cos (θ )(1 − 2nd n p ) − Sin(θ )⎥
⎣ IX ⎦

It should be noted that reversing purlins in conjunction with transferring forces across
the ridge must be done with caution. If too many purlins are reversed Equation 18 will
produce an extremely high equivalent vertical force and may result in a zero divide
error. In general, if more than a few rows of purlins are required to be reversed in
conjunction with force transfer across the ridge, the reversed purlin option should be
selected alone without across ridge transfer.

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.7.C

BUILDINGS, 2/1/2005 Rev. 0 Page 14 of 19
INC.
STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN
and STRUCTURAL BRACING
PRACTICES DESIGN CRITERIA

V. LOADS INDUCED ON RIDGE PURLINS

Transfer of in-plane forces across the ridge of a gabled roof produces vertical loads in
the ridge purlins. These loads are a function of the magnitude of the force transferred
and the roof slope.

wT
Uniform ridge
wNET purlin reaction
wRP
Θ
FIGURE 2
Ridge Purlin Loads

Figure 2 shows the uniformly distributed loads acting at the ridge purlin. The uniform
reaction along the ridge purlin (wRP) due to the in-plane NET diaphragm force and the
ridge transfer force is given by Equation 19.

wRP = wt Sin(θ ) Eq. 19

Based on the sign convention shown in Figure 2, the uniform load on the ridge purlin will
be an uplift load. This will be the most common under gravity loading and hence will
tend to reduce the purlin gravity load. However, there are conditions that may cause the
loading to be downward. It is important to remember that the ridge purlin has a smaller
tributary area than the main roof purlins even though the purlin size may be the same.
As a result, the ridge purlins often have excess capacity and these forces will not be a
problem. However, these loads must be inspected to determine if the ridge purlin is OK.

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.7.C

BUILDINGS, 2/1/2005 Rev. 0 Page 15 of 19
INC.
STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN
and STRUCTURAL BRACING
PRACTICES DESIGN CRITERIA

VI. DELIVERING LOADS ACROSS THE RIDGE

The load delivered across the ridge is delivered uniformly to the ridge purlins at each
panel rib. For Panel Rib roofs the forces must pass through the #12-14 structural
fasteners. In the case of SSR, the loads must pass through each panel clip unless
through-fasteners are used at the ridge purlin. The capacity of the panel attachments at
each rib are given in Table 1.

TABLE 1
Nominal Capacity of Rib
Connection to Eave Purlins (1),(2)
Panel Type Pn (kips)
26 ga. PR 3.23
26 ga. PR-2 (3) 6.46
24 ga. PR 3.86
24 ga. PR-2 (3) 7.72
24 ga. SSR 1.70 (5)
(4)
24 ga. SSR-tf 7.72
24 ga. SLR 1.7 (5)
24 ga. SLR-tf (4) 7.72
Table 1 Notes:
1. Tabulated values are nominal strength values based on AISI Eq. E4.3.1-4 with FU = 65 ksi. For
ASD divide values by Ω = 3. For LRFD multiply values by Ǿ = 0.5.
2. Values are based on #12-14 structural fasteners. d = 0.216 inches.
3. PR-2 applies to Panel Rib with (2) fasteners per rib.
4. SSR-tf and SLR-tf applies to panels with (2) through-fasteners per rib.
5. Values for transfer through panel clips only are based on testing. One half of the tested values
are used to account for the fact that the test setup engaged more than one clip. The allowable
values have been multiplied by three to convert them to nominal strength values.

In addition to the rib attachment capacity, the capacity of the rib itself must be
considered. Equations 20, 21 and 22 provide rib capacities as a function of roof load.
These equations were developed based on data provided by the CFSTM program using
a maximum purlin space of five feet. Only the rib profiles themselves were modeled.

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.7.C

BUILDINGS, 2/1/2005 Rev. 0 Page 16 of 19
INC.
STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN
and STRUCTURAL BRACING
PRACTICES DESIGN CRITERIA

PANEL RIB COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH

Pn = −.0243LR + 1.647 kips / rib (LR >= 20 psf) EQ. 20-A

Pn = −.0486 LR + 2.142 kips / rib (LR < 20 psf) EQ. 20-B

PANEL RIB TENSILE STRENGTH

Tn = −.3256 LR + 14.142 kips / rib (LR >= 20 psf) EQ. 20-C

Tn = −.3267 LR + 14.166 kips / rib (LR < 20 psf) EQ. 20-D

SSR RIB COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH

Pn = −.0675LR + 6.555 kips / rib (LR >= 20 psf) EQ. 21-A

Pn = −.0891LR + 7.002 kips / rib (LR < 20 psf) EQ. 21-B

SSR RIB TENSILE STRENGTH

Tn = −.3051LR + 17.673 kips / rib (LR >= 20 psf) EQ. 21-C

Tn = −.009 LR + 11.754 kips / rib (LR < 20 psf) EQ. 21-D

SLR RIB COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH

Pn = −.09 LR + 5.04 kips / rib (LR >= 20 psf) EQ. 22-A

Pn = −.0181LR + 3.6 kips / rib (LR < 20 psf) EQ. 22-B

SLR RIB TENSILE STRENGTH

Tn = −.2007 LR + 19.602 kips / rib EQ. 22-C

Where: LR = Gravity load applied to the panels (psf)

Both connection capacity and rib capacity must be checked.

It is assumed that the ridge cap for all three panels is not capable of transferring any
force between the two ridge purlins. Therefore, special ties as shown in Figure 3 will be
used.

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.7.C

BUILDINGS, 2/1/2005 Rev. 0 Page 17 of 19
INC.
STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN
and STRUCTURAL BRACING
PRACTICES DESIGN CRITERIA

L2 x 2 x 1/8
L ≈ 3 ft.

F F

#12-14 SDF

FIGURE 2
Ridge Force
Transfer Detail

In Figure 2 the capacity of the tie angle will be governed by the shear strength of the
fasteners.

TABLE 2
Nominal Fastener Strength by Purlin
Thickness
Purlin Thickness Fn (kips)
(in.)
.059 2.41
.065 2.65
.073 2.98
.082 3.35
.092 3.76
.105 4.29
.120 4.74
Table 2 Notes:
1. Values are nominal strength based on AISI Eq. E4.3.1-2 and E4.3.1-3. For ASD divide by Ω = 3.
For LRFD multiply by Ǿ = 0.5
2. FU = 70 ksi for purlin material and 65 ksi for angle material. Capacity in the 0.120 purlins is
controlled by the angle material.

The force required to be resisted by each angle and the corresponding panel rib is the
uniform ridge transfer force, (wT), as defined above, times the angle spacing. Angles
should be spaced at even multiples of the panel rib spacing. For spacing greater than
the panel rib space, the panel diaphragm strength/stiffness will transfer the force in the
intermediate rib(s) to the angle location. If the angle connection, rib connection or rib
capacity is exceeded, the angles will need to be spaced more closely. In no case will
the angle spacing be less than the panel rib spacing.

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.7.C

BUILDINGS, 2/1/2005 Rev. 0 Page 18 of 19
INC.
STANDARDS SECONDARY PURLIN
and STRUCTURAL BRACING
PRACTICES DESIGN CRITERIA

Example:

• SSR roof (rib space = 2 feet)

• wT = 500 plf (compression)
• Transfer angle spacing = 4 feet
• Roof load on panels = 30 psf
• Ridge purlin = 8.5 Z 0.073

Force per rib = 0.5(4) = 2.0 kips

Pn = −.0675(30) + 6.555 = 4.53 kips / rib
Pa = 4.53/1.8 = 2.52 kips > 2.0 kips OK

Allowable force for SSR clip transfer = 1.7/3 = 0.57 kips < 2.0 kips NG
Æ Through-fasteners at ridge purlin will be required.

VP DESIGN MANUAL Section: 4.7.C

BUILDINGS, 2/1/2005 Rev. 0 Page 19 of 19
INC.