Session Dates
07 Nov 2018 - 08 Nov 2018
Abstract
Steel deck diaphragm systems, which are commonly used for roof construction in steel-framed buildings, consist of many parts such as corrugated steel deck sheets, sidelap fasteners between adjacent sheets, structural fasteners from the sheets to the supporting beams or joists, chord elements, and collectors. Load-deformation behavior of a steel deck diaphragm system is typically dominated by sidelap and structural fastener limit states. To understand and accurately model the behavior of steel deck diaphragm systems, it is therefore necessary to characterize the behavior of the individual fasteners. The effect of local geometry and detailing at these fasteners such as how the sheets fit together, fastener proximity to the sheet edge, and fastener location relative to the corrugation is not well understood.
This paper presents a testing program including 80 specimens with single fasteners in flat steel deck sheets (not corrugated) that remove the effects of corrugation and edge distance. The testing program included two types of sidelap fasteners (#10 screws, #12 screws), four types of structural fasteners (powder actuated fasteners, pneumatic power actuated fasteners, arc seam welds, #12 screws), as well as other variations such as number of deck plies for structural fasteners (1 ply to support, 2 ply, and 4 ply), deck thickness (22 gage, 20 gage and 18 gage), and loading (monotonic and cyclic). A companion suite of 60 monotonic and cyclic tests were conducted with deck geometry and detailing representative of typical construction. By comparing results between these two sets of tests, the effect of deck geometry and fastener location was isolated.
Department(s)
Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering
Meeting Name
Wei-Wen Yu International Specialty Conference on Cold-Formed Steel Structures 2018
Publisher
Missouri University of Science and Technology
Document Version
Final Version
Rights
© 2018 Missouri University of Science and Technology, All rights reserved.
Document Type
Article - Conference proceedings
File Type
text
Language
English
Recommended Citation
Shi, Y.; Torabian, S.; Schafer, Benjamin W.; Easterling, W. S.; and Eatherton, M. R., "Sidelap and Structural Fastener Tests for Steel Deck Diaphragms" (2018). CCFSS Proceedings of International Specialty Conference on Cold-Formed Steel Structures (1971 - 2018). 5.
https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/isccss/24iccfss/session11/5
Sidelap and Structural Fastener Tests for Steel Deck Diaphragms
Steel deck diaphragm systems, which are commonly used for roof construction in steel-framed buildings, consist of many parts such as corrugated steel deck sheets, sidelap fasteners between adjacent sheets, structural fasteners from the sheets to the supporting beams or joists, chord elements, and collectors. Load-deformation behavior of a steel deck diaphragm system is typically dominated by sidelap and structural fastener limit states. To understand and accurately model the behavior of steel deck diaphragm systems, it is therefore necessary to characterize the behavior of the individual fasteners. The effect of local geometry and detailing at these fasteners such as how the sheets fit together, fastener proximity to the sheet edge, and fastener location relative to the corrugation is not well understood.
This paper presents a testing program including 80 specimens with single fasteners in flat steel deck sheets (not corrugated) that remove the effects of corrugation and edge distance. The testing program included two types of sidelap fasteners (#10 screws, #12 screws), four types of structural fasteners (powder actuated fasteners, pneumatic power actuated fasteners, arc seam welds, #12 screws), as well as other variations such as number of deck plies for structural fasteners (1 ply to support, 2 ply, and 4 ply), deck thickness (22 gage, 20 gage and 18 gage), and loading (monotonic and cyclic). A companion suite of 60 monotonic and cyclic tests were conducted with deck geometry and detailing representative of typical construction. By comparing results between these two sets of tests, the effect of deck geometry and fastener location was isolated.
