Expansion-Movement Joint Spacing - Structure vs Facade Joint Size 1

[RFreund]

Let's say we have a building expansion (movement) joint at the center of a 600' long building. Assume the thermal criteria controls the size of the joint and it needs to be 2" wide. The building is a single-story steel framed structure with metal stud acting as backup for brick veneer. The brick will have expansion joints spaced roughly 20' on center as is typical with brick. In this case it doesn't see to me that the brick would need a 2" gap at the building expansion joint as I wouldn't expect the brick to move 2". I believe I would just need the 2" gap between the roof framing and roofing material. Does this sound reasonable?

Thanks!

EIT

http://www.HowToEngineer.com

 

[HTURKAK]

Hi RFreund (Structural)(OP);

Find below my suggestions ;

- I would not prefer a single EJ with 2" gap for 600 ft bldg.. Divide to 3 or better 4 zones.. With this set up, the necessary EJ gap will be in the order of 1/2 in so can be managed with slotted holes rather than providing double frame.

- You are expected to provide vertical bracings for each zones.. the location of VB's should be considered keeping symmetry , roof bracings, brick , wall cladding..

- The horizontal roof bracings at roof should be considered separately considering the roof cladding , VB locations etc..

If this is a real project ,Pls post the structural plan or some sketches to get more valuable responds..

 

[RFreund]

HTURKAK - thanks for the response, I appreciate any and all feedback.

Divide to 3 or better 4 zones.. With this set up, the necessary EJ gap will be in the order of 1/2 in so can be managed with slotted holes rather than providing double frame

Is it really more economical to have 2 or 3 expansion joints? As you mentioned, you will need vertical bracing for each "zone". I'm not so sure this is the most economical way to space your expansion joints. I've been wrong before though.

EJ gap will be in the order of 1/2 in so can be managed with slotted holes rather than providing double frame

I'm not the biggest fan of handling expansion joints with slotted holes. Especially if they are bearing slotted holes. Maybe if the expansion is small as you mentioned and the holes are non-load bearing. But I caution the use of slotted holes to allow for movement.

If this is a real project ,Pls post the structural plan or some sketches to get more valuable responds.

This is more of a hypothetical question in regards to the veneer expansion joint size. But I feel like I've done a fairly decent job at describing the example project. Let me know if you need any specific info to change your decision.


EIT

http://www.HowToEngineer.com

 

[HTURKAK]

In order to avoid doubling the frame at EJ , i proposed 2 or 3 EJ.. Doubling the frame at EJ not only increase the steel works but foundation , roofing, cladding details..I do not know the temperature range in your region..Still you may provide EJ without doubling ..In this case, provide VB at the mid bay/s of the longitudinal frame, so, the expansion calculation will be based on half of the length .. ( VB at 150 ft of 300 ft module ) Common practice is to provide EJ for bldgs wider than 300 ft in my region..


Could not get (the holes are non-load bearing ?).. Pls look the following detail ( excerpt from Graham W. Owens - Steel Designers' Manual )

Good luck..

 

[KootK]

Your brick will be stacked on a foundation stem wall, right? If so, I don't see it moving very far and, therefore, don't see it needing any extreme jointing between the brick on either side of he expansion joint.

I think that your real issue here is that your steel frame is going to try to move 1" laterally adjacent to your brick which is going to attempt to move not at all laterally. And, as you know, the roof edge detailing usually isn't set up to accommodate this kind of relative movement.

 

[RFreund]

@HTURKAK - thanks for clarifying. I understand your points.

Your brick will be stacked on a foundation stem wall, right? If so, I don't see it moving very far and, therefore, don't see it needing any extreme jointing between the brick on either side of he expansion joint.

Right, agreed. Thanks.

I think that your real issue here is that your steel frame is going to try to move 1" laterally adjacent to your brick which is going to attempt to move not at all laterally. And, as you know, the roof edge detailing usually isn't set up to accommodate this kind of relative movement.

Right. Couple ideas here:
1. Maybe the brick ties can accommodate some or most of this movement.
2. I'm trying to envision something where the roofing material is attached to steel frame and there is some coping piece that just floats over the top of the brick. Or something like that. I'd have to give it some thought, but I guess that's the next step (mostly an Arch concern, but you know we get all the questions).

Thanks!


EIT

http://www.HowToEngineer.com

 

[Brad805]

We have had Koot's discussion a few times lately with EOR's that want expansion gaps, but their chord members (floors and roof) are welded to our wall panels. Odd, they never want to re-design their assemblies. I would expect your typical brick tie will be sufficiently flexible in the LSF wall to flex for the brick work. The typical details at the top of the wall at the roof intersection will be an interesting discussion given the trades involved. I would expect a lot of, what you talking about?