This document provides descriptions of all new features, bug fixes, and other changes made to the Canadian version of the WoodWorks Sizer program since its inception in 1993.
This file last updated with changes on July 15, 2022.
Click on the links below to go to the changes for the corresponding release.
Click on the link below to read a description of the change to WoodWorks Sizer 2020 for Update 3.
Starting with version 10.1 (March 2019), a KD factor of 1.0 corresponding to standard term (live) loads was being used for combined-axial-and-bending design even if the bending moment component was due to higher proportion of long-term loads than standard-term loads and a factor less than 1.0 should be calculated using O86 220.127.116.11.
Since the highest KD factor for axial force Pr and moment Mr is applied to both criteria when used in the combined formulas from O86 6.5.9, 7.5.12, etc., this results in an error only if the KD for Pr is also derived from predominantly long-term loading or is totally long term. A typical case is eccentric axial loading due to predominantly to dead and storage live loads.
(The use of the highest KD is shown in the CWC Wood Design Manual, Section 5.1, Example 1 - Glulam Column and in the CWC’s Introduction to Wood Design 10.1, Example 10.1 Column subjected to snow, wind and dead loads.)
The incorrect KD appears in the Comb’d Fc and Comb’d Fb outputs in the Factors table of the Design Check output and leads to a combined ratio that can be significantly non-conservative.
For the case of a pin-pin column subjected to D = 2397 lbs, L = 1516 lbs, and, Ls = 505 lbs all with 50 mm eccentricity, the critical load combination was 1.25D + 1.5L + 1.25 Ls, so 18.104.22.168 should be calculated. The program showed factors of 0.86 for axial and for pure bending design, but for combined axial and bending the factor was 1.0. The combined ratio shown in the Force vs Resistance table was of 0.77 when it should be 1.02, and the output showed a pass when a failure warning should appear.
The operation of the Live and roof loads come directly from interior surface checkbox in Load Input view has been changed to apply to specific live loads on the member, and indicates those come from an exterior surface, and only those are excluded from load combinations that contain both live loads and snow loads. Previously no load combination was generated with both live loads and snow loads if this setting was selected.
This change enables you to model common circumstances, such as a beam or CLT panel supporting an interior living area and a balcony, for which live loads and snow loads should only be exclusive on part of the member, in this case the balcony. The interior occupancy load should be combined with the exterior snow load. This can be accomplished by making separate partial line loads for the interior and balcony and checking the box only for the balcony load.
A wall or column supporting both a roof and an interior floor area roof can also be designed using this change.
The CLT database contained only one rolling shear value fs that was applied to both the transverse and longitudinal layers, but there are circumstances in which they can be different, so a value for transverse layers has been added to the database, to the Database Editor input, and to the calculation procedure for rolling shear from O86 22.214.171.124.
Since the fs values listed in O86 Table 8.2 are the same for transverse and perpendicular layers for all stress grades, the CLT database that comes with the program has identical fs values for transverse and longitudinal direction. You can now make different values for your own custom CLT database files.
Note that the perpendicular-to-face compression strength fcp in O86 Table 8.2 are also the same for transverse and perpendicular layers, but compressive design in O86 8.4.7 uses only the longitudinal value, as transverse layers are not subject to lateral compressive loads. It appeared that two columns were made in Table 8.2 with identical data for fs and fcp only because it was a convenient way to present the information, but we have since been informed of proprietary products with differing rolling shear in alternate layers.
For rectangular steel columns loaded on the d-face, i.e., weak-axis design, the program calculated deflections as if the column was loaded on the b-face. These incorrect deflections appeared in the Force vs Resistance table of the Design Check and in the Analysis diagrams. The moment of inertia I for strong-axis loading was also shown in the Calculations section of the Design Check.
Moment and shear calculations were unaffected.
For example, a 4.72 m, 152 mm x 76 mm x 4.8 mm pinned-pinned column, with a 1.75 to 2.63 kN trapezoidal wind load applied to the wider face, the live deflection was 8.9 mm but should heave been 25 mm and the moment of inertia I was 5.96 x 106 mm4 but should be 2.02 x 106 mm4.
This has been corrected.
In applying Note to O86 B.4.2, Table B.2 regarding the 70 mm minimum to the residual fire-reduced section for the smallest effective dimension of the member, after which heat-transfer analysis is required, the following problems were corrected
a) Direction Applied
The program was applying the minimum whenever any two sides were exposed, regardless of whether the member was exposed on both sides in that direction. For example, if the top and side were exposed, it was applying the minimum to the width of the member, even though only one side was exposed in that direction.
b) 35-mm Limit for One Side
The program was applying a limit of 35 mm to members exposed on just one side, although no such limit is required by the CSA O86 and the Commentary to B.4.2 explains that the reason for the limit is the concentration of heat in the center of the section when the member is exposed on two opposite sides. This 35-mm limit has been removed.
Note that the program does not check for the smallest effective dimension, so that for example for a member exposed on 3 sides, and the direction that is exposed on one side to is reduced to 65 mm, the program still applies the 70 mm limit to the direction exposed on two sides, whereas technically the limit should be 65 according to the semantics of the Note to Table B.2.
The following changes were made to the implementation of floor joist vibration design using O86 A.5.4.5
a) Shear Deflection Adjustment (Bug 3633)
For the CSA O86 A.5.4.5 joist vibration method, the program was applying an adjustment to I-joist stiffness EIjoist to account for shear deflection that is based on the formula for uniform loads on a single span:
EIjoist = EI / ( 1 + 384 * EI / ( 5 * K * Lv2 ) )
However, since the method is based on the analysis of a joist loaded by a point load at mid-span, the adjustment for that loading condition is now being used:
EIjoist = Lv2 / ( Lv2 / EI + 96 / K )
Lv is the vibration-controlled span, EI is the true bending stiffness of the joist, and K is the published shear deflection constant.
The line in the Detailed Design Calculations output that showed the uniform load formula for EIjoist now shows the point-load formula.
The point-load formula is already used in the CCMC Concluding Report method for I-joist vibration, which is based on a similar methodology to the O86 A.5.4.5 method, as per sections 5.4.1 and A.4.4.1 of the Report.
The uniform load single span formula was being used because Note 1 of O86 A.126.96.36.199.1 to refers to the O86 Commentary, and Commentary A.5.4.5 gives the equation for sawn lumber and refers to FPInnovation’s Mid-rise Wood-Frame Construction Handbook for I-joists, which shows the uniform load formula in section 4A1.2.2 . We have received advice from the O86 committee that the point load equation can be used instead.
For an I-joist which experiences significant shear deflection, the use of the point load formula reduces the vibration-controlled span length by roughly one percent.
b) Application of 5% Increase to O86 Vibration Span Length (Bug 3659)
The program was applying the 5% increase for either bracing or gypsum board ceiling from O86 086 A.188.8.131.52 Note 2 or Note 3 on each iteration of the calculation of the allowable vibration-controlled span lv, when it should determine the allowable span first then apply the increase. This causes an error in the order of roughly 1% in the allowable span.
The iterations are required because some of the calculations to determine lv use the span length l, and an iterative procedure is required to converge to a span length l such that lv = l. The application of the 5% increase should be done after the iterative process is complete, not within that process.
Note that only one of the two 5% increases is ever applied at the same time due to an as yet unpublished O86 Commentary.
As an example, for a 3-m single-span No.1/No.2 grade SPF 38 x 184 mm joist with lateral bracing or gypsum board ceiling increase, the allowable vibration-controlled span lv calculated by Sizer was 3.562 m and is now 3.535 m, a difference of 0.76%.
c) Limitations on CCMC Report Method (Custom Change 224)
When the CCMC Report method is chosen for I-joists, the following limitations from A.184.108.40.206.(b) have now been implemented
i. Subfloor thickness
In the I-Joist Floor Details dialog box, the 31.5 mm sheathing thickness has been removed to conform to th2 28.5 mm maximum
ii. EIeff Modification Factor
The modification factor applied to the effective composite bending stiffness EIeff has been reduced to 1.2 from 1.4.
iii. Concrete Topping
The input in the I-Joist Floor Details dialog box for concrete topping has already been disabled. No contribution from concrete topping is allowed.
d) Doubled Blocking for I-joist Vibration (Custom Change 225)
When the CCMC Report method is chosen for I-joists, the following changes have been made relating to the Doubled blocking checkbox in the I-Joist Floor Details box:
i. Number of Blocking Courses
Doubled blocking is allowed only when one course of blocking is selected and is applied at midspan. Previously it had been allowed for any number of courses.
The dotted lines in the joist drawing showing the blocking were unaffected by this setting and showed just one course of blocking. Now two courses are shown separated by 24 inches, centered in the joist.
When generating span tables for I-joists, the program was using the approximate method which applied an adjustment to stiffness EI based on the shear deflection of a uniformly loaded, simple span beam. This could result in different spans than were calculated in Sizer beam mode using the rigorous numerical method. For one example the span table showed 18.74’ allowable span for an I-joist that passed design at 19.43 feet.
The program now uses the rigorous method for calculating shear deflection introduced in Sizer 2020 when generating span tables.
Database files for Global LVL beams and columns have been added to the program.
a) KLH Materials
A database file for KLH CLT products has been added to the program, and KLH floor, roof and wall panels can be selected.
b) Center Layer Thickness
To accommodate KLH layup sizes, an input has been added to Database Editor for center layer thickness, which you can enter if it is different than what would be expected from alternating transverse and longitudinal layers. This is available for all custom CLT products, not just KLH.
The Element5 CLT material database has been revised with some new and some removed layup sizes.
b) Material Unusable in Concept Mode due to Long Filename (Bug 3717)
The Element5 CLT.cls database filename was more than the 15-character filename limit, so that in Concept mode, the Groups Dialog did not allow you to change to this material and issued a warning. The filename has been reduced to Element5.cls to rectify this. The material selection in the program is still called Element 5 CLT.
Nordic Lam and Nordic Lam+ column materials were incorrectly designated as multi-ply, so that the Built-up members inputs in Column mode were activated when they should be disabled. These materials are now available as single-ply columns only.
The following changes have been made the program output for Versa-Lam
a) Design Notes
In the Design Notes that appear in the Design Check and Design Summary output reports
- Any reference to Versa-Lam or VERSA-LAM has been changed to Versa-Lam® LVL
- A note pertaining to multi-ply connections now appears only for multi-ply members. Previously it appeared for all members. The note has been rewritten for compactness.
- A note gave certification references to several Boise Engineered Wood products which are not in WoodWorks Sizer. It now refers only the CCMC 12742-R Versa-Lam Evaluation Report.
b) Material Specification
The description of the member section that appears in the Design Check output used the Material, Species and Grade inputs in such a way that unnecessarily repeated the Versa-Lam name in two different ways. It has been modified to output the material name more compactly, e.g.,
Versa-Lam® LVL Built-Up, 2.1E 3100.
Versa-Lam® LVL, 2.1E 3100
The Katerra CLT material database file has been removed from the program. Katerra no longer operates and Katerra products are no longer manufactured or sold.
The following problems associated with the introduction of floor joist vibration design using O86 A.5.4.5 were corrected
a) Concept Mode Crash for O86 Vibration Design (Bug 3645)
If O86 A.5.4.5 vibration design was selected to be performed, then the program crashed upon design whenever there was a floor area in Concept mode for which the O86 A.5.4.5 method applied and that passed design the other design criteria. It is the default to use O86 A.5.4.5, which was also used for files from previous versions due to Bug 3647.
Users of 2020 Update 2 and earlier can avoid this by unchecking Include vibration design in the Design Settings or selecting the NBC vibration method.
b) Vibration Method for Files from Previous Versions (Bug 3647)
For files made with versions previous to Sizer 2020 (version 11), which were designed with the O86-14 or -09 design codes, the program by default used the A.5.4.5 vibration method even though it was only introduced in O86-19. This occurred for all materials when the Vibration design setting had been set, although in previous versions, the setting pertained only to CLT.
For sawn lumber, in previous versions, the NBC vibration method was triggered by the existence of sheathing on the joist, so if the older file has sheathing, the program now activates the NBC setting in the Design settings to ensure consistent designs.
For SCL and glulam joists or I-joists, vibration design is now unchecked by default when older files are read in.
The behaviour for CLT is unaffected.
For these files, it is still possible to activate vibration design in the Design Settings and change the design code and/or vibration method; this correction pertains only to the default behaviour when the file is opened for the first time.
This bug could result in a crash in Concept mode due to bug 3645.
c) SCL and Glulam Vibration Method for Old Design Codes (Bug 3648)
If the O86-14 or O86-09 design code was selected in the Design Settings, and the Vibration design checkbox was also checked, the program performed the O86 A.5.4.5 procedure for SCL and glulam joists, even though it was only introduced in O86-19. Vibration design is no longer performed for these materials for these design code options
The SCL and glulam button indicating that O86 A.5.4.5 is the only method used for these materials is now grayed out when O86-14 or O86-09 is selected, consistent with the graying out of the settings options for I-joists and sawn lumber for these design codes.
Note that this happened for any such file made with versions previous to Version 11.0 due to bug 3647.
When searching for valid column designs with unknown widths and depths, and the Apply auto-eccentricity feature enabled, the program sometimes issued an error message for insufficient memory and shut down. This has been corrected.
In the default list of beam materials in Beam Input view, for both main member and supporting member, the Nordic Lam material appeared twice. For supporting members, this caused the last member in the list not to appear, which is by default Rough Timber using O86 14 design values. However, if you had created a custom beam material, then the last such material you had made would be the one that did not appear.
This has been corrected in the database.ini file that is included in the program installation. If you have retained your database settings from a previous installation and wish to remove this material, contact WoodWorks technical support for instructions.
Under the option Beam supports area load from continuous joists in Beam Loads view, when the Other button was selected, the 2-span button remained selected when it should have been deselected and the associated Larger span/shorter span input disabled. The % of area load input associated with 2-span remained disabled when it should have become active. Thenceforth, with further user interface operations, the buttons became inoperable.
This has been corrected and these inputs are again operating as intended.
The following corrections were made to the operation of the Laterally supported at support checkbox that appears at the bottom of the Supports for bearing and notch design data group.
a) Steel Beams (Change 194a)
The checkbox disappeared when a steel beam is selected and then you performed other UI operations, however the setting affects the unsupported length used in the selection of steel moment resistance from tables so it should remain visible and active.
Note that it was possible to work around this problem by changing materials, checking the box, then changing the material back to steel.
b) I-joists (Change 194b)
The setting remained visible and functioning when I-joists were selected, but it has no effect on I-joist design. It now disappears when I-joists are selected, which is consistent with the behaviour for CLT, which is also not affected by this setting.
6. Title of Lateral Stability Design Settings Group (Change 194a)
The words “factor KL” have been removed from the title of the Design Setting group Lateral stability factor KL, so it now just says Lateral stability. The change was made because the Unsupported length Lu ends at points of zero moment setting affects the selection of steel moment resistance from tables, and there is no KL factor in steel design. Furthermore, part of the effect of the Built-up member width b setting is not directly related to the KL factor.
Nordic Lam has been added to the list of material selections for supporting member sill plates.
The CLT layup data group that appeared in the upper right corner of the Wall Panel Input view has been removed as it contained only the Layers input, which has been moved to be at the bottom of the material and section size inputs next to Panel orientation.
If a new file was opened when another file was already open, the Design Setting Report interior and cantilever deflections separately” was taken from the previously open document rather than from the last time you applied Save as default for new files for that setting. This has been corrected.
The following issues the output of steel beams design results have been corrected.
a) Warning Message for Zero Moment Resistance Bug 3433)
When the bending moment resistance Mr in a steel beam database for a given unsupported length Lu was 0, the Design Check output indicated a failed bending moment design with Mr = 0.0, without indicating why. Now, a red note appears alongside the failure warning saying,
Bending moment design failed because there is no moment resistance Mr listed in the Steel database for this section size and unsupported length Lu
b) Member Volume in Design Summary (Bug 3571)
In the Design Summary report listing passing member sections, for steel beams, a column for member volume was output showing a value based on the width x depth of a rectangular wood section, which is not the volume of the ordinarily I-shaped steel cross sections.
This column is now called Mass for steel members and shows the total mass of the member in kg or lbs.
In the Design Summary output report that lists passing sections for unknown design, and in the “non-enhanced" (ASCII text) Design Check report, a Design Note regarding built-up members did not wrap properly and extends past what is ordinarily the right margin of the page.
This caused a warning message to appear when printing, and if you chose to print anyway, a few centimeters of text were cut off at the left of the page, rendering the report unusable.
This did not occur for the enhanced Design Check that is usually output, or for the same note in the Concept Mode output.
It affected only built-up beams with more than one ply, and has been corrected.
For lumber sections of 4” nominal thickness or less and deeper than the greatest depth in the beam or column database file, a warning message appeared in the Design Check output that is intended for members that are too thick for the lumber grade properties from O86 Table 6.3.1.A, saying a timber member should be used instead. Member depth does not affect this classification so the message should not appear for deep members that are not too thick to be lumber. It has been removed.
In the Loads table of the Analysis, Design Check, and Design Summary output reports, for CLT floor and roof panels, self-weight was shown as a Full UDL with units kN/m or plf when it should be an Area load with units psf or kN/m^2. This has been corrected.
When there is a concentrated load on the member, it is now possible to select the “load combination” created for each position of the concentrated load, and view the Analysis results for these configurations. Previously concentrated load combinations were only shown if they were the critical combination on the member.
The program now outputs the Simpson Hanger Selector database version number in the Design Note that appears in the Design Check report when the hangers are used, and in the Building Codes box that is accessed from the Welcome box. The current version is 2020.4.22.
In the note appearing in the deflection diagrams for CLT members giving the factor representing creep deflection, the word Dead has been changed to Permanent to reflect the fact that storage live loads and hydrostatic load are also included in the component to which the creep factor is applied.
The following changes have been made to the calculation of long-term load duration factor KD from O86 220.127.116.11 for shear design. Note that shear analysis values are used to determine the PL and PS values used in 18.104.22.168 – the effects of the loads are used rather than the loads themselves for each design criterion.
a) Ratio Calculated at Right End Only
The calculation was always using the shear analysis values at the right end of the span even if the critical shear force occurred at the left end. This caused an incorrect KD factor to occasionally be used.
b) Countervailing Live and Permanent Shear.
If the permanent and live shear components have different + or - signs, the program was using the absolute value of the PL/Ps ratio, which does not make physical sense. Now it takes the KD factor for the load type that dominates in the determination of the direction of overall shear force.
In the analysis diagrams, the load combination shown for the uplift bearing reaction was that for the last support on the beam, when it should be for the bearing reaction shown, which is the critical uplift bearing of all supports on the beam.
Note that this was problem corrected for version 11.1 for ordinary, downward bearing reactions but the fix did not extend to uplift.
If the current user was not the one to install WoodWorks and had not already run WoodWorks 2020 prior to update 1, an error message stating "Unable to run WoodWorks because you are not connected to the Internet or unable to contact license server" was incorrectly being displayed on start-up preventing WoodWorks from running. This happened to a small but significant number of users.
4. Indexing of CLT Factor Krb in Output (Change 178b)
The heading to the Factors table of the Design Check output showed Krb,0 for transversally loaded panels and Krb,90 for longitudinal panels, but it should be the opposite, according to O86 22.214.171.124 (a) and (b). This has been corrected.
The links below lead to descriptions of the changes to WoodWorks Sizer for Update 1 to Sizer 2020.
Starting with version 11.0, for load combinations having a wind load and another non-dead load such as snow or live, the deflection due to wind load was not being included in the deflection of the member, neither Live nor Total deflection.
The incorrect deflections were used to check deflection against allowable limits, and they appeared in the Analysis diagrams when the load combination is selected. These deflections could appear in the Design Check results, but typically another load combination was incorrectly determined to be critical for this reason and appeared instead. This occurred for all member types and has now been corrected.
For example, for a wall stud with eccentric axial 4.14 kN/m dead and 9.12 kN/m snow loads, and lateral wind load of 1.2 kN/m2, the total defection was 2.0 mm from the D + S combination, but should have been 29.5 mm, from the D + W + 0.5S combination. The member should have failed the deflection check but passed.
In some instances, for load combinations containing snow loads, the program determined the load duration factor KD for shear design via a faulty calculation of the long-term loading formula from O86 126.96.36.199 when it have been using the 1.0 factor for live or snow loads from Table 188.8.131.52. Usually this results in a KD of 0.65 instead of 1.0 and a conservative error in the shear resistance Vr.
This occurred because the contribution of snow load was neglected in the determination of PS in the PL/PS ratio in the long-term KD formula. The incorrect KD appeared in the Factors table of the Design Check output for the critical load combination, and in the KD factors table Analysis Results for all load combinations containing snow.
As this is based on an internal numeric error it is difficult to ascertain how often it would have occurred, and in one case by simply adding a snow load to several others on the member, the problem went away.
This example was a 10.25’ long 1-3/4 “x 9-1/2”, built-up LVL with a set of partial snow and dead loads from the start to 7.25’ and another such set from 7.25’ to the end, and dead and live point loads at 9.25 feet. The correct critical load combination for shear, 1.25D + 1.5S + 1.0L was chosen, but with a KD factor of 0.65 when it should have been 1.0, resulting in a shear resistance Vr of 10297 lbs when it should be 15842 lbs. When an additional point snow load was added, the KD factor was correctly changed to 1.0 for the critical combination and for all snow combinations shown in the Analysis results.
There may also be cases where a different load combination was chosen than the one that should govern because of this problem.
The span length used in the O86 A.5.4.5 I-joist vibration calculation is now the vibration-controlled allowable span length that is being calculated by the procedure rather than the longest actual span length of the member being evaluated. The former use of the actual span length meant that the allowable span could change based on the input member length and that span tables generated depended on an arbitrary initial span length.
Now an iterative procedure is implemented which calculates the vibration-controlled span length and uses it in the calculations for the next iteration, until the difference between iterations becomes very small.
In O86 A5.4.5, the span l is used in the following places:
- the adjustment in EIjoist to consider shear deflection,
- in ĒĀ1 when there is topping,
- in the factors KL and Kj leading to Ktss.
The actual span was originally used because there is no guidance in the O86 about what was intended, and different symbols, l and lv, are used for these span lengths. However, the CCMC Concluding Report… method for I-joists says to iterate on the vibration-controlled span length Lv, recalculating until it converges to a value, and the same principle applies here.
When using the CCMC procedure for I-joist floor vibration, the program always designed for a 5/8” nailed Softwood (CSP) subfloor and one row of blocking regardless of the Material, Thickness, Fastening, and Bracing inputs from the I-Joist Floor Details dialog. These incorrect materials were shown in the Calculations section of the Design Check report, and led to incorrect values of the vibration-controlled span lv.
This has been corrected and the currently selected members are used for CCMC vibration design.
In Column mode, when only axial concentric loads were applied to a member resting on a non-wood or no support, the Reactions table did not appear, so that the unfactored axial reactions for each load type which ordinarily appear in this table were not shown.
This has been corrected, and these reactions now appear for all cases of axial loading.
6. Glulam Beam Volume Z in Total Shear Resistance Wr for Fire Design (Bug 3530)
For shear fire design of glulam members, the beam volume Z used for total shear resistance Wr in O86 184.108.40.206 is now calculated using the full section rather than the fire-reduced section.
O86 B.3.5 says that size factors Kz for each design criterion are to be based on the original cross-section dimensions, and although the factor Z-0.18 is not designated a size factor in 220.127.116.11, the CSA S6 Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code, section 9.7.2, treats Z-0.18 as a size factor.
In the span tables, the no span length was given for 23/32" (18.5 mm) OSB subfloor sheathing at 24” spacing, instead “n/a” was shown. 18.5 mm sheathing at 24” spacing is permissible as per O86 Tables 9.3 and A.9 showing the panel mark 1F24 (24 being the joist spacing), with 18.0 as the minimum thickness.
Both 18.0 and 18.5 mm OSB thickness are now available for selection, and the span table generates span lengths for both.
A proprietary CLT material called Katerra CLT has been added to the program for wall panels, floor panels and roof panels. This material includes stress grades V2 and CE1.
The following changes have been made to the thicknesses that appear in the Vibration Details dialog and in the program output. The thicknesses used in the vibration design calculations have not changed.
a) Metric Design Thicknesses
The OSB floor sheathing thickness for Vibration design using the CCMC or NBC methods are now restricted to being a subset of those from O86 Table A.9 (previously A.9.2.2B) and plywood thicknesses are now restricted from those that are from Tables 9.1 and 9.2.
i. CCMC Method
For the CCMC method, the OSB thicknesses are now 12.5, 15, 15.5, 18, 18.5, 22, and 25 mm. Previously, thicknesses corresponding to exact conversion of fractional Imperial thicknesses in 1/16” increments were listed, although they do not necessarily correspond to any commercial product. Several sizes were removed for this reason.
For plywood, the 17.5 mm thickness has been removed. The 12.5, 15.5, 18.5, 20.5, 22.5, 25.5, 28.5- and 31.5-mm thicknesses have not changed.
The design data used for these thicknesses have not changed, the program uses the closest size listed in the table from the CCMC Concluding Report that was based on the fractional Imperial sizes.
ii. NBC Method
For the NBC method, 18.5 mm is now listed instead of 19 mm. The data for the 19 mm thickness shown in NBC A-18.104.22.168.(2) is still used for 18.5 mm. The 15.5 mm thickness has not changed.
b) Imperial Thicknesses.
For all methods, plywood and OSB thicknesses when converted to Imperial are now in most cases rounded to the nearest 32nd to conform with current publications and marketing. Previously they were rounded to the nearest 16th.
The exception to rounding to the 32nd is the18.5 mm OSB size that is shown as ¾” rather then 23/32” to distinguish it from the 18.0 mm size.
i. O86 Method
The OSB thicknesses 12, 15, and 18 mm that were converted to ½”, 9/16”, and 11/16”, have been changed to 15/32”, 19/32”, and 23/32”, respectively. These are the values shown in CWC and APA literature.
The plywood thickness corresponding to 18.5 mm is now 23/32” instead of ¾”, as what was once nominal 3/4” plywood is now commonly sold and referred to as 23/32”.
ii. CCMC Method
Several OSB thicknesses not corresponding to metric sizes in Table A.9 were removed. The remaining imperial OSB sizes have not changed.
The ¾ plywood size is now shown as 23/32, and the 11/16 size has been removed.
iii. NBC Method
The ¾ plywood size is now shown as 23/32.
c) Sheathing Material Names
The nomenclature in the Vibration dialog input for the plywood and OSB materials was not consistent between the NBC, O86 and CCMC methods, showing
- For O86: CSP, DFP, OSB
- For CCMC: Softwood, Douglas Fir, OSB
- For NBC, one selection: Plywood/OSB
These have been replaced by one set of names for all three method,
This nomenclature is the same as used in the Shearwalls program.
One consequence is that in the program output for the NBC method, the specific material used is now shown instead of Plywood/OSB, although it has no impact on the design results.
When calculating SCL shear deflection using the True E option introduced with version 11 but using an SCL material from a database file from a previous version of the program, no results appeared in the Analysis vs Design table of the Design Check output, and some were missing from the Bearing and Reactions table.
When using the Apparent E option, the design results were output as expected. However, as True E is the default Setting, this problem occurred by default for SCL materials from old database files.
Now when such an SCL material is designed, the program automatically changes the design setting to apparent E and approximates shear deflection, outputting a message recommending that you modify the material database to include True E.
For I-joist database files that were provided or made with versions 11.0 or earlier and used in version 12.0, the following problems occurred.
a) Self-Weight for Loads Analysis
For files provided with Sizer, the self-weight was 0.0 so the weight of the I-joist was not considered in the analysis of the joist.
For such files made by users with Database Editor, the self-weight was the unrealistically high 1.0 kN/m.
It was possible to circumvent these problems by turning off self-weight in Load Input View and entering a self-weight of the member.
Now when such database files are detected, the self-weight for member analysis is calculated as it was before, by multiplying the density value from the database Species properties by the width and depth of the member.
b) Axial Stiffness EA
Axial stiffness EA was not included in older database files, so the value used for the new O86 and CCMC vibration procedures was the unrealistically low 1.0 N, leading to a longer vibration-controlled span than expected.
Now if an old database file as been detected, upon running design, the program will not run the vibration criterion, issuing a message instructing you to add the EA and self-weight values to the database for each section using Database Editor.
Starting with version 11, the program always used the CSA O86 method for fire design of glulam members, regardless of the selection in the Design Settings. Upon first opening the Settings, neither the NBC Appendix D-2.11 or the O86 Annex B button was selected, but O86 should have been. Then both could be selected simultaneously and could no longer be changed.
When only the NBC
method was selected, a design note for NBC appeared in the Design Check output,
however the Analysis vs Design table always showed O86 design.
The buttons now function properly and the fire design procedure corresponding to the Design setting selection appears in the design results.
Upon opening an existing file with Beam member type, the Vibration button was enabled even though vibration design applies to floor joists only. Upon clicking the button and entering the Vibration dialog, all subfloor and topping text boxes were blank, but if you tried to select from a drop-list, the program crashed.
If you did not open the Vibration box or try to use it, you could proceed without problems and design the member.
The Vibration button is no longer enabled for beams under any circumstances.
After Reset original settings is checked, the Design Setting for using O86 22.214.171.124(b) for shear design only when it provides an advantage over O86 126.96.36.199(a) remained deactivated even though the resetting of the For beams less than 2 m^3 should have activated it. This has been corrected.
The following problems with vibration results in the Design Check output have been corrected:
a) Analysis vs. Design Table
In the Analysis vs. Design table
- For the CCMC I-joist procedure, the allowable span Lv, the unit, and the Analysis/Design ratio did not align with similar data in other rows of the table, by 2 spaces.
- For the O86 5.4.5 procedure, the design ration symbols L/Lv were not being shown, as they are with the other criteria and procedures.
- The symbol Lmax in the Analysis column representing the largest actual span has been changed to L, as it could have been misinterpreted as the maximum allowable span.
b) Calculations Section
In the Calculations section of the Additional Data,
- For the CCMC procedure, the line showing input floor data was not indented to line up with the lines above nor shown in the same font style. It now starts with Vibration instead of Floor input data for consistency with the other procedures.
- For the O86 5.4.5 procedure, the line showing key vibration data was not indented to line up with the lines above.
The following changes have been made to design notes for SCL materials that appear in the Design Check, Design Summary, and the Concept mode Design Results.
a) Beam and Column Mode
When shear deflection is calculated with True E, the note now mentions the shear modulus G = E /16, where E is the modulus of elasticity. When Apparent E is used, the existing note about approximate shear deflection is reworded slightly.
b) Concept Mode
A note has been added to say that calculations with True E and G = E /16 are used when the section size for a design group has been specified, and that approximation with Apparent E is used when searching for unknown sections.
An obsolete statement about the dead load being no greater than half the live load has been removed from the existing note.
The program does not allow fire endurance calculations for shear design of notched members. The following changes were made to the Design Check results for this case:
a) Fracture Shear Resistance (Bug 3555)
The program placed “N/A” in the shear resistance and design ratio columns of the Analysis vs. Design table for all shear design criteria except that the fracture shear resistance criterion from O86 188.8.131.52 for sawn lumber and 184.108.40.206.2 for glulam showed values Fr and Vf / Fr as if they had been designed. These now show N/A for fire design.
b) Failure Warning (Bug 3556)
The program showed a red failure warning in this case for the design criterion Shear (fire). This has been removed, and an explanatory warning message is shown in the place where other messages pertaining to special circumstances are shown. The design failure message could have been misconstrued as the program designing for fire, but failing.
c) Factors Table (Bug 3555)
The lines in the Factors table showing design strengths and modification factors used for all fire shear design criteria have been removed.
In the Analysis vs. Design table of the Design Check output, for the sawn lumber fracture shear design criterion from O86 220.127.116.11, the text in all the columns did not align with similar data in other rows of the table. The symbols Vf, Fr, Vf / Fr and their associated data, and the units, were all shifted 2 spaces to the left. This has been corrected.
The links below lead to descriptions of the changes to WoodWorks Sizer for Update 1 to Sizer 2020.
The program now implements the CSA O86-19 Engineering design in wood design standard, including Update 1, March 2020.
Although O86-19 is referenced by NBC 2020, the program continues to implement the NDS 2015 design code for the time being.
In the Design Code drop list in the of the Design settings, the choice CSA O86-19 / NBC 2015 has been added to the existing choices.
This selection is reflected in the Design Settings output, the About Sizer box accessed from the Help menu, the Welcome box and the Building Codes box accessed from Welcome box.
All references to O86 clauses in the program input, output, and messages were changed to refer to the clause numbers in O86-19 if CSA O86-19 is selected.
The specification of importance factors from O86-14 5.2.3 and of load combinations from 5.2.4 have been removed entirely from the design standard, which now refers to the identical importance factors and load combinations listed in the NBC 2015.
When O86-19 is the selected design standard,
a) Importance Factor
References to Table 18.104.22.168 for importance factors have changed to NBC Table 22.214.171.124.-A for snow, Table 126.96.36.199 for wind, and Table 188.8.131.52 for earthquake.
b) Load Combinations
References to ultimate limit states combinations from Table 184.108.40.206 have been changed to NBC Table 220.127.116.11.A. Those for serviceability limit states from Table 18.104.22.168 are changed to O86-14 22.214.171.124, as the NBC does not list serviceability load combinations.
The On-line Help has not yet been updated where necessary to reflect changes in the O86-19 other than design code clause reference numbers.
The following material properties for Hem-Fir lumber species for beam and stringer sizes have increased based on Table 6.6 (formerly Table 6.3.1C).
- The bending strength fb for SS grade has changed from 14.5 MPa to 16.8 MPa, for No.1 grade it has changed from 11.7 MPa to 14.4 MPa, and for No.2 grade, it has changed from 6.7 MPa to 14.4 MPa.
- The parallel to grain compression strength, fc for SS grade has changed from 10.8 MPa to 13.0 MPa, for No.1 grade it has changed from 9.0 MPa to 12.4 MPa, and for No.2 grade, it has changed from 5.9 MPa to 12.4 MPa.
- The modulus of elasticity E for SS grade has changed from 10,000 MPa to 11,500 MPa, for No.1 grade it has changed from 10,000 MPa to 11,000 MPa, and for No.2 grade, it has changed from 8000 MPa to 11,000 MPa.
- The Modulus of elasticity E05 for SS grade has changed from 7000 MPa to 8000 MPa, for No.1 grade it has changed from 7000 MPa to 7500 MPa, and for No.2 grade, it has changed from 5500 MPa to 7500 MPa.
2. Lateral Stability for Members with Depth-to-Width Ratio £ 2.5 (126.96.36.199.1, 188.8.131.52.1)
According to 184.108.40.206.1, for laterally unsupported sawn lumber beams, the lateral stability factor, KL may be taken as unity if the maximum depth-to-width ratio of the member does not exceed 2.5:1. A similar clause 220.127.116.11.3 (now 18.104.22.168.1) for glulam members was never implemented in Sizer, so the following applies to glulam, SCL, and sawn lumber:
a) Laterally Supported at Support Checkbox
For sawn lumber, glulam and SCL members with a depth-to-width ratio £ 2.5, the “Laterally supported at support” checkbox is made invisible. This is because the end supports are no longer required to be laterally supported for this case.
b) Design Note
The design note that says beams require restraint against lateral displacement and rotation at points of bearing is no longer output for members that have depth-to-width ratio £ 2.5. It is still output for those with a ratio between 2.5 and 4.
According to a combination of what is now said in 22.214.171.124.2 and 126.96.36.199.4, the prescriptive lateral support conditions in 188.8.131.52.3 allowing a KL = 1 do not apply to built-up beams, which must be calculated using 184.108.40.206 unless the depth to width ratio is less than or equal to 2.5.
Furthermore, as per 220.127.116.11.3, for built-up members, the determination of the depth-to-width ratio is be controlled by the Design Setting selection for full member width vs. single ply width only for members with a depth-to-width ratio £ 2.5, otherwise the setting does not apply.
- In the line For sawn lumber and SCL, the word solid has been added before sawn. The reference to 18.104.22.168 removed.
- The checkbox that allows for KL =1 to always be used, now says Satisfies prescriptive conditions in O86 22.214.171.124.3 for KL =1” . Previously it did not refer to a design code clause.
- For the Design setting for the width b used for lateral stability calculations for built-up members, the reference is changed from 126.96.36.199 to 188.8.131.52.1.
For glulam members, the system factor KH in O86 7.4.4 (formerly 7.4.3) has changed from 1.1 to 1.0 for compression side notch shear strength (184.108.40.206), and for tension side notch fracture shear strength (220.127.116.11.2.)
This factor is shown in the Factors table of the Design Check if the notched end is critical for shear design.
The length of unsupported notch ec used to determine whether equation a) or b) in O86 18.104.22.168 (earlier 22.214.171.124) is used for shear resistance for compression side notches, the changed to be the distance d - dn from the support edge, where d is the member depth and dn is the notch depth. Previously it was just the depth d.
Throughout O86 8.4 for CLT design,
- The word flatwise has been inserted before bending moment resistance, bending stiffness, and shear resistance. resulting in the addition of the subscript f to many symbols.
- The subscript for major strength direction which was formerly y or zy is now 0, and the subscript to minor strength direction which earlier was x or zx is now 90.
The following changes to symbols used for CLT design have accordingly been applied to any instance of the symbol in the program input, output or messages:
a) Bending Moment and Stiffness (126.96.36.199)
- Bending moment resistance Mr is now Mr,f,
- Effective bending stiffness (EI)eff is now (EI)eff,f.
- Section modulus Seff is now Seff,f.
- Bending moment resistance in the major strength direction is changed from Mr,y to Mr,f,0. In the minor strength direction it is changed from Mr,x to Mr,f,90,.
- Section modulus Seff,y is now Seff,f,0 and Seff,x is Seff,f,90.
- Effective bending stiffness (EI)eff,y is now (EI)eff,f,0 and (EI)eff,x is (EI)eff,f,90.
- The panel thickness hx has been changed to h90.
- The adjustment factor Krb,y is changed to Krb,0 and Krb,x is changed to Krb,90.
b) Shear Stiffness (188.8.131.52)
- Shear stiffness GAeff is now GAeff,f
- Panel widths bx and by have changed to b0 and b90
- The shear stiffnesses (GA)eff,zy and (GA)eff,zx are now (GA)eff,f,0 and (GA)eff,f,90,
c) Shear Resistance (184.108.40.206)
- The shear resistance Vr,zy is now Vr,f,0, and Vr,zx and is now Vr,f,90.
- The gross cross-sectional area Ag,zy is now Ag,0. and Ag,zx is now Ag,90.
The program implements the new design provision in O86 A.5.4.5 for maximum allowable vibration-controlled floor joist span length, for sawn lumber, glulam, SCL, or I-joists.
The existing Design Setting to activate CLT vibration has been expanded to include all materials and to provide a choice of the existing NBC A-220.127.116.11.(2) procedure for sawn lumber and A.5.4.5. For I-joists, a choice between A.5.4.5 and the CCMC report method described below is provided.
The CLT Manufacturers performance span adjustment setting that was in this data group has been moved to the Vibration dialog box described below.
The NBC method is disabled for multi-ply members, members greater than 1.5” thick, and multi-span members. The A.5.4.5 method is allowed for any size joist and any support condition.
A Vibration Details dialog box has been added to provide the necessary inputs for the A.5.4.5 procedure. A Vibration button in Beam View invoking this dialog replaces the
a) Subfloor Data Group
For O86, the choices are OSB, CSP, and DFP.
For NBC, this is disabled.
For O86, the choices come from O86 Table A.1 and must be selected; they cannot be typed in. It defaults to ¾” or the metric equivalent.
For NBC, the existing inputs are shown.
For O86 the choices are Mechanical and Glued. It defaults to Mechanical.
For NBC, the existing choices are shown.
iv. Panel Width
This defaults to 4 feet or the metric equivalent.
For NBC, the existing input for Bracing appears here.
b) Topping Data Group
The choices for Type are None, Concrete, and Wood panel
There is also a Topping choice for None, in which case the other Topping inputs are disabled.
The Wood panel type selection activates an input identical to the Material input for subfloors. When Concrete is selected, Material is disabled.
The Wood panel type selection activates an input identical to the Thickness input for subfloors.
When Concrete is selected, Thickness becomes a box you type a value into. It defaults to either 1” or 25 mm.
For NBC, all of this is disabled.
c) Allowable span increase
Checkboxes are present for allowable span increases
5% for lateral bracing
5% for gypsum board ceiling
20% effective stiffness increase for multi-span end fixity effect
As per A.5.4.5, the lateral bracing and multi-span inputs are unchecked and disabled if concrete topping is selected. The gypsum board input is unchecked and disabled if any topping is selected.
In addition, the existing inputs for CLT multi-span non-structural elements and for manufacturers performance have been moved into this box from the Beam View and Design Settings, respectively.
If selected in the Design Setting, Vibration becomes a design criterion, and the program compares the allowable vibration-controlled span with the longest non-cantilever span on the member for each candidate section. If the allowable span is less, the section is passed over when searching for an allowable design.
If you have selected such a member without specifying unknowns, a failure warning appears in the Design Check. It is the same failure warning that currently appears for sawn lumber NBC vibration.
For I-joists, O86 A.18.104.22.168 allows for the use of the 1997 Concluding Report, Development of Design Procedures for Vibration Controlled Spans using Engineered Wood Members, created by CWC and others for the Canadian Construction Materials Center (CCMC).
The axial stiffness EA and the linear self-weight have been added to the I-joist database properties and can be specified in Database Editor. These are needed in the A.5.4.5 procedure. The default I-joist database has been modified by calculating these values using the flange and web materials for standard APA I-joists.
The Vibration button has been incorporated in the Joist Groups dialog and replaces the sawn lumber Vibration input that was previously there. The Vibration design criterion is applied each member in the Concept mode group as it is in Beam mode.
a) Materials Specification
If O86 vibration is selected, the program shows the inputs relevant to vibration design in the materials specification that appears under the beam drawing.
b) Force vs. Resistance Table
Vibration design results comparing longest span to allowable span are output in the Force vs. Resistance table as they currently are for the NBC approach, the only difference being that the symbol lv replaces L for the allowable span.
c) Calculations Section
In the CALCULTIONS section, a line is output with the EIeff, mL, and Ktss values that are the major components of the allowable vibration-controlled span lv.
d) Design Note
A design note gives a reference to the method used (O86, NBC, or CCMC), and for O86, gives any span or effective stiffness percent increases.
An output screen and associated text file has been created for Detailed Design Calculations. It is accessed from the main toolbar. It shows the following data used in the A.5.4.5 procedure:
a) Input Data
Data input in the Vibration dialog and other data, such as the larges span, joist spacing, etc., relevant to the calculations.
b) Material Properties
Information from tables A.1 and A.2 such as sheathing EI and EA values, other values hard-wired into A.5.4.5 the load-slip modulus s1 , and value from the database like joist E and I-joist EI.
All the intermediate equations in A.5.4.5 are shown.
d) Intermediate Data
Any value in A.5.4.5 given a symbol like EIc or EA1bar is given in a hierarchical order corresponding to the calculation procedure. The values are all in metric, even if Imperial is chosen as the unit system.
For CLT, SCL, and I-joist materials, the program now implements rigorous shear deflection calculations based on Timoshenko beam theory, which has been incorporated in our matrix stiffness loads analysis engine.
(Sawn lumber and glulam materials do not require rigorous shear deflection analysis because the effect of shear deflection is incorporated in published modulus of elasticity E values.)
For SCL, it used an “apparent” EI provided by the manufacturer which could also be inaccurate or overly conservative.
For SCL, a setting has been added to allow you to choose between using the manufacturers published Apparent E value, and not calculate shear deflection, or use True E and calculate shear deflection. True E values have been added to all SCL database files, and Apparent E retained.
It is possible, therefore, that a member which just barely passed the deflection check when searching for a design fails the Design Check, or that a section that would just barely pass the Design Check is passed over when searching for a passing section.
This is because in the absence of shear deflection, the program designs for unknown section size using an arbitrary stiffness EI and relies on linearity to adjust the resulting deflections once the section was known and EI can be calculated.
In Concept Mode, if the section size of a design group is specified ahead of time, and True E is selected in the Design Settings, the program will calculate shear deflection of the member. Otherwise, it is approximated using Apparent E.
The value of shear stiffness GA is output in the Calculations section of the Design Check next to bending stiffness EI.
You can now generate a table of maximum allowable spans for a given loading and beam or joist configuration instead of performing ordinary beam or joist design. Note that this is currently considered a “Beta” feature as it has not yet been rigorously tested for all member types and materials.
This feature is activated via a Preferences setting. Note that you have to uncheck the setting to return to regular beam design mode.
b) Span Input
In beam view, you can enter any number of spans, and the program will generate tables for the largest span based on the proportion of the lengths of the spans. For example, if you input 2-, 3-, and 5-meter spans, the program an allowable span length of 12.5 m represents a beam with 5-, 7.5-, and 12.5-meter spans.
c) Section Input
If any section parameters are input, rather than left known, the table generated will be for sections with that parameter only. For example, if 2” is selected as a width, and depth is unknown, a table will be generated for 2” thick members with spans for 2”, 3”, 4”, 6” … deep members.
Similarly, you can specify species and grade to generate spans for that material only, or leave them unknown to generate a table for all possibilities.
d) Load Input
The program will generate spans for the input loads. It is recommended to use full line and full area loads, as point loads and partial loads maintain their position from the start of the member, so you cannot for example specify a point load that stays at the center of the span or at an interior support.
The program considers all design criteria, including deflection and fire design if they are selected to be active, when determining the maximum allowable span.
The span table is output in place of the usual Design Summary. An introductory section shows the loads and other input parameters, with the span table below.
For joists, there are columns for the maximum spans for 12”, 16”, 19.2” and 24” spacing. For beams, there is just one maximum span.
Using the Format settings, you can format the spans as either decimal feet or feet and decimal inch.
Beside the Preferences setting there is a checkbox that allows you to output the spans to whole inches when using the feet-inch format.
h) Allowable Bearing Lengths
Notes at the bottom of the table indexed by letters a, b, c, etc. beside the spans in the table give the maximum required bearing length for any of the supports on the beam or joist
For CLT, the program was incorrectly reducing the shear stiffness GAeff by 75% when calculating total deflection and 50% for live deflection.
It was implementing an old provision from the FPInnovations CLT Handbook, however that had been superseded by the creep factor of 2.0 that had been included when the CSA O86 CLT provisions were added.
The GAeff value was used to calculate the approximate shear deflection formula. Although with the implementation of the new shear deflection feature this will be replaced with more accurate values, the correction has nevertheless been made.
Starting with Canada 10.3, the additional I-joist deflection due to the approximate shear deflection formula was no longer being applied, resulting in deflections that were typically 10% less than they should be. The shear deflection formula adjusted deflections based on the shear deflection for a simple span beam with uniform deflection but applied it to all loading and span conditions.
This has been corrected with the implementation of the new matrix analysis-based shear deflection which replaces the approximate formula.
A proprietary CLT material called Element5 CLT has been added to the program for wall panels, floor panels and roof panels. This material includes only stress grade V2.
For the Weyerhaeuser materials,
a) Timberstrand LSL
All strength properties except for bending strength fb have changed.
b) Microllam LVL
The modulus of elasticity E has changed.
c) Parallam PSL
The modulus of elasticity E and y-axis compressive strength fcpy have changed.
For sloped beams it is now possible to view the horizontally projected beam dimension lines for full and clear span in the beam drawing in both Beam View and the Design Check report.
The check box Show horizontally projected beam span dimension lines has been added to the Preferences Settings. By default, it is turned off and the sloped member span dimension lines are shown. When it is checked, the horizontally projected beam dimension lines are shown.
In the Loads Input View, load Name disappeared when the load distribution was changed from the default to any other. If you then entered a name again, the load name persisted and was shown in the design results.
This has been corrected.
In the Design Settings, when the default value of the | Mf/Mr | ratio that is used for applying the bearing length KB factor was changed from 0.5 to any other, a crash occurred upon exiting the dialog. This has been corrected.
The links below lead to descriptions of the changes to WoodWorks Sizer for Version 10.3
Starting with version 10.2, the program was using double the value of the reaction due to point loads within a distance d of the centre of a support when equating it with the compressive resistance Q’r to determine the required bearing length Lb for loads applied near a support using O86 22.214.171.124, 126.96.36.199, 188.8.131.52 and 184.108.40.206.3 for the various materials.
This created required bearing lengths roughly twice what they should be, causing the beam to fail in bearing design when it shouldn’t, and shortening the design span by the min required bearing, affecting the calculations of shear force and bending moment. The incorrect bearing lengths appeared in the Bearings and Reactions table of the Design Check output, and the shear and moment values in the Analysis diagrams, Analysis Results, and the Analysis vs. Design table of the Design Check. This problem has been corrected.
Problems with the application of the system factor KH = 1.1 from O86 Table 6.4.4 to the following design procedures were corrected:
a) Combined Axial and Bending Design (Bug 3517)
Starting with version 10.1, for wall studs or built-up columns, the axial resistance Pr used for combined axial and bending from O86 6.5.10 did not include KH. It was also excluded from the calculation of the slenderness factor Kc in 220.127.116.11.4, which is used in the calculation of Pr for this purpose in 18.104.22.168.3. KH was included in the Pr used for axial compression design.
The incorrect Pr appeared in the Combined row of the Analysis vs Design table. The Factors table showed a KH = 1.1. factor for Comb’d Fc, however it was not actually applied to the calculation.
For a typical example, this caused the Pr value to be 50.17 when it should have been 53.17 lbs, and the interaction equation in 6.5.10 to be 0.36 instead of 0.35.
b) Weak-axis Glulam Bending Moment Design (Bug 3563)
Starting with version 10.0, the weak-axis moment resistance Mry for rotated glulam beams and for columns loaded on the d-face did not include the system factor KH, resulting in an Mry that was too low by a factor of 1.1, the value of KH from O86 Table 6.4.4.
For y-axis design, glulam beams are considered to be a built-up system of No 2. grade lumber, as per O86 7.5.3, designed for moment with 22.214.171.124, using full member depth as b, and to which the system factor is applied as per 126.96.36.199.
The incorrect Mry appeared in the Force vs Resistance table of the Design Check report, however, KH appeared in the Factors table as 1.1 even though it was not used.
For beams with a
tension-side notch at the critical location for shear design, the program did
not apply the fracture shear design criterion, Fr, from O86
188.8.131.52.2, when the span type was Design span, so in this case a section failing this check still
A line for this criterion should have appeared In the Force vs Resistance table, but did not, and the line in the Factors table starting with the symbol Ff was not shown.
The fracture shear check was made when the span type was Full span or Clear span. It now appears for Design span as well.
Prior to version 10.2, the approximate adjustment for shear deflection of CLT panels based on the single-span, uniform load formula was not applied to spans less than 8 feet. This restriction was removed, causing the deflections of cantilever spans to be unrealistically high, particularly for short cantilevers for which the cantilever deflection can be several times that of the main span, when it should be less. The incorrect values of deflection appeared in the Analysis vs Design Table of the Design Check and in the Analysis Diagrams.
With the introduction in version 10.2 of the new method in Beam and Column mode to designate fire-exposed faces of the member, there was no reduction of the sections of members in Concept mode due to charring, so effectively fire design using CSA O86 Annex B was not done. This has been corrected, and the program applies charring to the faces based on the input for number of sides exposed in the Concept mode Design Groups forms.
When a member is imported from Concept mode to beam mode, the Design Groups input is converted to specific sides exposed in beam and column mode.
In the analysis of user-applied moments to right cantilever beam spans and columns with a fixed base and free top, the program was subtracting rather than adding the "fixed-end" deflection to the deflection due to rotation at supports.
As a result, downward deflections at the cantilever could be significantly lower than they should be, so that the maximum deflection that is compared to the deflection limit in the design of the member is too low. For beams that experience uplift at the cantilever, this created larger-than-expected deflections. For columns, this caused the deflection due to the moment to be applied on the opposite side of the column than it should, creating inaccuracies when combined with deflections from other sources.
The incorrect deflections can be seen in the Analysis diagrams and in the maximum deflection shown in the Design Check report. Deflections due to applied moments on a left-end cantilever, or other column fixity conditions, were correct.
In a beam with a 6-meter middle span and a 2-meter cantilevers on each side and 10 kN-m applied moment at each end of the beam, the cantilever deflections were 3.6 mm on the right end and 10.9 mm on the left end, although these should have been the same. The left cantilever deflection is the correct one.
Starting with version 10, for all columns with height ranging from 19.8 to 29.8 feet and some columns between 29.8 and 40 feet with only eccentric axial snow or live load, bending design was performed with the load duration factor KD = 0.65 for long term loads when it should be using the standard term factor, 1.0. This caused lower than expected bending moment resistance Mr
The incorrect KD appeared in the Factors table of the Design Check output and in the Analysis Results, and has been corrected.
When a joist area rested on sloped supports so that the joists are loaded obliquely for snow, dead, and live loads, Concept mode did not calculate or assign an oblique angle to the joists.
This is legitimate for wind loads, which are assumed to act perpendicular to the surface, but for snow, live and dead loads this assumes that the joists are rotated within the frame such that they sit vertically. Roof framing is never constructed in this way, so that the program was not considering weak-axis loading that exists on the joists, and overloading them in the strong axis.
Now, when there are no wind loads on the joist area, the oblique angle is calculated, and appears when the joist is transferred to beam mode.
The case where there are oblique live, snow or dead loads, but wind loads that are not oblique, is not handled by Sizer in either Beam or Concept mode. For the sake of conservatism in strong-axis design, in Concept Mode, wind loads are now considered to take precedence and the oblique angle Is not calculated or assigned in the presence of wind loads.
Note that Concept mode was correctly considering the oblique angle when factoring the intensity of snow loads, due to the fact that they are projected loads in a horizontal plane rather than loads that are applied in the sloped plane, it just was not accounting for the oblique direction of loading.
When a CLT panel rested on sloped supports such that the one-meter design width was loaded obliquely for snow, dead, and line loads, Concept mode designed the panel as if it were horizontal and the loading is not oblique. When such a member was transferred to beam mode, there was no oblique angle. Note that in beam mode, oblique angle is disabled for CLT panels.
Now, unless there are only wind loads on the panel, the program dies not design oblique CLT panels, issuing a warning in the Design by Groups and Design by Member output next to the group or member, similar to what is done for out-of-plane joist areas. Oblique CLT panels can be designed for wind loading, which is assumed to be applied perpendicular to the surface.
Sizer cannot design CLT panels for oblique loading as the physics are different for CLT than for beams and columns, which handle it via x-axis and y-axis strengths. For CLT, it would be necessary to make complex adjustments in the analysis engine, and as sloped CLT panels are rare, it was not considered to be worth the effort.
The 0.9 factor from O86 Table 6.3.1C Note (1) that is to be applied to the modulus of elasticity E for sawn lumber No 1 and No 2 grade beams in the “beams and stringers” category when such members are loaded on the wide face was not applied in the case of non-rotated, x-axis loading in a custom section with a b value greater than d. It was applied in the case of y-axis loading in a rotated beam with a d value greater than b.
As a result, for a 241 x 140 mm member, EI was 331 x 106 kN-mm2 when it should have been 297 x 106 kN-mm2. The live deflection should have been 3.5 mm, but the output showed 3.2. This has been corrected.
The Simpson Hanger database has been updated to the April 2020 version. Previously the January 2019 version was in use.
Weyerhaeuser filenames were longer than is permissible in Sizer, and have been shortened to include Weyerhaeuser, e.g. WhaeuserBm.cwb, instead of WeyerhaeuserBm.cwb.
As a result of the long file names, when trying to make a Concept mode group with Weyerhaeuser materials, the program behaved unpredictably and often would not save the changes. When a file with a Weyerhaeuser design groups was created, and then opened, it would immediately crash.
Possibly other program malfunctions could occur due to these filenames.
1. CLT Panel Lateral Support (Changes 124a, 124b and 124c)
The following changes pertain to lateral support for CLT panels in Beam and Column modes:
a) Laterally Supported at Support Checkbox
b) Ke for Width b Input
In Lateral support spacing section of Column input view, the end fixity factor Ke for Width b is now disabled, as lateral support is not relevant for CLT panels in the in-plane direction.
c) Lateral Support in Drawing
The drawing of the b-face of the column no longer depicts the lateral support, as this face is a one-metre or one-foot section of the panel surface and there is no support at its edge. However, out-of-plane lateral support exists at the panel end, and is still shown above the drawing as e.g. Ld = full.
The following changes pertain to CLT panels acting as supports or supported members in Beam mode:
a) Panel Support for Beams and Joists
It is now possible to select wall panels as a support type for beams and joists. When selected, the list of bearing length sizes corresponds to the wall panel standard thicknesses.
b) Bearing Length for Wall Panel Supports
When wall panels were selected as a support type for floor or roof panels, no list of bearing lengths appeared. Now a list of standard wall panel thicknesses is shown.
c) Bearing Width for Supported CLT Panels
If a floor or roof panel is selected as the main member type, then the Bearing width inputs are disabled, because the width is assumed to be the 1-meter or 1-foot standard width.
The disabled box shows Same as panel, whereas it used to default to Same as beam.
In the Concept mode Joist Design Groups dialog when Roof or Floor Panels was selected, or in the Wall Design Groups dialog when Wall Panel is selected,
a) Service Conditions
The checkbox for Dry service is now selected by default and is disabled.
The input Spacing, which applies to joists and not panels, has been removed.
The Width input has been disabled, so it is no longer possible to type a new width to replace the standard 12” or 1000 mm design width. The disabled box still shows the standard width.
It was possible to type a value in the Depth input, however CLT design does not allow for custom depth, and the depth can now only be selected from the list of standard depths from the CLT database.
e) Lateral Supports
The inputs indicating the member is laterally supported on the b- and d- faces for columns, and the top and bottom faces for beams, were previously activated and defaulted to having no lateral support, a condition that does not ordinarily apply to CLT panels.
These inputs are all now set to true by default, as a panel is self-supporting laterally. They are disabled except for the case of d face support on wall panels, as it is possible that a wall end not be supported by another wall.
f) CLT Panel Input in Joist Design Groups Menu
The checkbox Case 2 load sharing is unchecked and disabled by default
g) Required Performance Input
The obsolete and unused joist vibration input Required performance was removed.
The following changes pertain to the Fire resistance data group of the Design Groups input forms in Concept mode. wall Gr fire design in Concept mode using CSA O86 Annex B.
a) Joists and Wall Studs
The inputs in the wall and joist group forms have been made inactive when wall studs or joists are selected. Previously they were active, but the data input would have no effect on design. O86 fire design is for large-section members only as per B.1.1 and B.2.1, and the inputs remain available when CLT wall, roof, or floor panels are selected.
a) Fire Duration Nomenclature
Fire endurance rating was changed to Required duration for consistency with the nomenclature in Beam and Column modes.
The following changes have been made to the Design Check output for CLT panels:
a) Material Description (Change 137)
The material specification has been changed to
- Show the species as input in Beam or Column view.
- Remove the coded identifier of metric depth and number of layers
- Add the number of layers explicitly
so that what once showed, e.g.,
CLT Floor Panel, E1 244-9 9-5/8” (12” width)
CLT Floor Panel, S-P-F, E1, 9 Layers 9-5/8” (12” width)
b) Volume Units (Change 137)
The units shown beside the wood volume underneath the material specification have changed from m^3 to m^3/m and cu.ft. to cu.ft./ft. , because the volume shown is for a one-meter or one-foot standard design width.
c) Stress Units in Factors Table (Change 127)
For CLT design, the header of the Factors table in the Design Check now shows the units (psi or MPa) after the symbol F representing stresses Fs, Fb and Fcp .
The value of stiffness EI shown in the Calculations section of the Design Check report did not include the factor 0.9 factor from O86 Table 6.3.1C Note (1) that is to be applied to the modulus of elasticity E for sawn lumber No 1 and No 2 grade beams in the “beams and stringers” category when such members are loaded on the wide face. This has been corrected.
3. Exponentiation Symbol in Output of EIy (Change 149)
In the Group Type section of the Wall Design Groups in Concept mode, the words stud and panel are no longer capitalized.
The extension lines for beam span dimensioning sometimes overlapped with the lateral support depicted on top of the beam. This has been corrected, and now the lines for Clear and Full span extend to the same distance above the top of the beam.
The program now allows you to select the CSA O86-14 wood design standard with the 2010 NBC building code. Although the O86-14 is referenced by NBC 2015, it is permissible to use it with the NBC 2010, which references CSA O86-14, and some jurisdictions have not yet adopted NBC 2015.
If there is a conflict between CSA O86-14 and NBC 2010 provisions, the NBC 2010 provision is used to ensure compliance.
In the Design Settings, the choice CSA O86-14 / NBC 2010 has been added to the Building code dropdown box.
b) Ultimate Limit States Load Combination Factors
Between NBC 2010 and 2015, and between CSA O86-09 and -14, the following changes were made to ultimate limit states load combination factors shown in O86-14 Table 184.108.40.206 (Table 220.127.116.11 in O86-09).
For load combinations 2) and 3), the companion load factor for live and snow loads, when these loads are combined with each other but without wind or earthquake, increased from 0.5 to 1.0 for CSA O86-14 / NBC 2015 vs. CSA O86-09 / NBC 2010 When CSA O86-14 / NBC 2010 is selected, the 0.5 is used.
ii. Sustained Live Load due to Storage and Equipment
The companion load factor for live loads due to storage for load combination 3), which has snow loads as the principal load, increased from 1.0 to 1.5 for CSA O86-14 / NBC 2015 vs. CSA O86-09 / NBC 2010. When CSA O86-14 / NBC 2010 is selected, the 1.0 is used.
These combinations are shown in the Load Combinations dropdown in the Analysis diagram screen, in the Critical Load Combinations section of the Additional Data in the Design Check output, and in the Analysis Results output. The sustained live load factor is also shown in the Sustained live loads due to… input .
The changes are described more described more fully in Sizer 9.3 - CSA O86-14 Design Standard, below.
For those jurisdictions still complying with NDS 2010, this option allows for use design provisions introduced in O86-14 regarding glulam shear design for notched members and the glulam size factor for bending, Kzbg described in Sizer 9.3 - CSA O86-14 Design Standard, below.
d) Program Information
The design codes and standard chosen are reflected in the Welcome box, the Help/ About Sizer box, and the Building Codes box, and in the design note in the Design Check and Design Summary output.
For MSR and MEL wall studs, the tensile resistance Tr was less than it should be, by a factor equal to the tensile strength ft in MPa. This often resulted in the design to fail when it shouldn’t have.
The incorrect Tr appeared in the Force vs. Resistance table in the Design Check output. This has been corrected.
The following problems pertaining to the contribution of automatically generated self-weight to bearing design have been corrected.
a) Beam Bearing Design (Bug 3456)
Starting with version 10.1, bearing design in beam mode was not considering the automatically included self-weight. The factored and unfactored reactions in the bearing design table correctly included the self-weight, but it was not being considered in calculating the design ratio used to determine whether the member passed the design check.
It was also not being considered when calculating the minimum required bearing length, which is reported when bearing lengths are unknown, and used to determine the design span.
b) Long-term Load Duration Factor (Bug 3470)
Starting with version 10.1, when calculating the long-term load duration factor KD (O86 18.104.22.168) for shear resistance, the program was subtracting the automatic self-weight from the effect of the long-term loads PL rather than adding it. This caused the program to use a slightly higher duration factor KD than expected, as it was undercalculating the ratio of long term to standard term shear components.
c) Column Reaction in Analysis Diagram
The following problems affected only the display of column reactions shown in the Analysis Diagrams; the self-weight was correctly handled in the Design Check output.
i. Load Combination Factor for Self-weight (Bug 3444)
The factored bearing reaction was calculated using a self-weight component that did not include the dead load combination factor.
ii. Self-weight Only (Bug 3445)
When self-weight is the only axial load for a given load combination, no bearing reaction was shown.
Upon opening a beam or column file with Sill plate selected as the supporting member type, for sawn lumber sills, the program uses a size factor for bearing Kzcp from O86 22.214.171.124 of 1.0, instead of the 1.15 factor for flat use. For SCL sills, it uses the fcp compressive resistance rather than the weak axis fcpy value.
The program now includes version 2019.1.1.0 of the database of Simpson beam and joist hangers. The changes according to Simpson that may possibly apply to the implementation in Sizer are
- Added HUC hangers
- N10 nails used with IUS series attached to a thick header.
For Louisiana-Pacific beams, columns, joists and wall studs, the materials listed below have been disabled if they applied to that member type: They can be activated via Database Editor for inclusion in Sizer but will not appear by default.
a) 2.0E LVL
- All 3½”, 4-3/8”, 18-3/4” depths
- For all but 5-1/8” thickness, 5-1/4” depth
- For all but 7” thickness, 7” depth
- For 1½”, thickness, 11-1/4”, 16”, 18” , 20”, and 24” depths
- For 3-1/2” thickness, 11-1/4” depth
- For 5-1/4” thickness, 9-1/4”, 20” and 24” depths
- For 7” thickness, 9-1/4”, 11-1/4”, 20” and 24” depths
b) 2.2E LVL
- All 1-1/2” thicknesses
- All 3½”, 4-3/8”, 5-1/4”, 5-1/2”, 7”, 7-1/4”, 11-1/4”, and 18” depths
- For 1-3/4” thickness, 9-1/4”, 9-1/2, 14”, and 16” depths
- For 3-1/2” thickness, 9-1/4”, 9-1/2, 16”, 18-3/4", and 24" depths
- For 5-1/4" thickness, 24" depths
- For 7" thickness, 20 " and 24" depths
c) 1.35E LSL
- All 1-3/4" thicknesses
- All 5-1/4", 7", 9-1/4", 9-1/2", 11-1/4" and 18-3/4" depths
- For 1-1/2" thickness, 4-3/8" depths
- For 3-1/2” thickness, 11-7/8", 14", 16", 18", 20", and 24" depths
d) 1.55E LSL
- All 4-3/8", 5-1/4", 7", and 18-3/4" depths
- For 1-1/2" thickness, 14", 16", 18", 20", and 24" depths
- For 1-3/4" thickness, 11-1/4" depths
- For 3-1/2” thickness, 3-1/2", 5-1/2", 7-1/4", 11-1/4" and 20" depths
e) 1.75E LSL
- All 5-1/4", 7", 11-1/4", 18", 18-3/4", 20", and 24" depths
- For 1-1/2" thickness, 3-1/2", 4-3/8", 9-1/4", and 9-1/2" depths
- For 1-3/4" thickness, 3-1/2", 4-3/8", 5-1/2", 7-1/4", and depths
- For 3-1/2” thickness, 9-1/4", 9-1/2", 11-7/8", 14", and 16" depths
In some cases, design of beams, joists and floor panels with concentrated loads would use the long-term load duration factor KD = 0.65 for shear design, regardless of the load types in the critical load combination. This occurred for all materials except for glulam and has been corrected.
The following problems were corrected, relating to the input mechanism for fire design introduced with version 10.1, which uses checkboxes indicating which of the 4 sides were exposed rather than a single input allowing 0.3, or 4 sides exposed.
a) Opening Project Files from Previous Versions (Bug 3478)
For existing projects made with versions before 10.1, Sizer would perform fire design according to CSA O86 Annex B, but without reducing the effective section on any of the sides, leading to non-conservative design.
If the checkboxes indicating exposed sides were checked after the file was opened, Sizer reduced the section on those sides and designed correctly, however the output under the member description would show incorrect information, or no information, after the words Exposed to fire on and Protection:
These problems have been corrected.
b) Exposed Sides Options for CLT Roof Panels (Change 121)
When the Glulam fire method Design setting was set to NBC, Appendix D-2.11, Sizer was applying the assumption that either 0, 3 or 4 sides are exposed to timber as well as glulam; however timber always uses the CSA O86 Annex B method for which any of the sides can be exposed.
In other words, after you checked one checkbox, the program checked and disabled 2 other checkboxes according to the assumptions for the NBC method. It now allows control of all 4 checkboxes for timber members.
c) Exposed Sides Options for CLT Roof Panels (Change 122)
For CLT roof panels, the input for exposure from the top has been disabled.
The following problems pertaining to the application of the treatment factor KT for CLT from O86 8.3.3 when you specified preservative or fire-retardant treatment for roof, wall, or floor panels were corrected
a) KT for Strength Design (Bug 3477)
KT was not applied to the shear, bending, axial, or combined axial and bending design strengths. The factors were shown in the Factors table in the Additional Data, however for preservative treatment, factors from for wet service conditions were shown, although CLT is restricted to dry conditions. The user-input fire treatment factors or the preservative treatment factors from Table 6.4.3 are now applied and appear correctly in the output.
i. Slenderness Factor KC
For compressive axial design from O86 8.4.5, in the determination of the slenderness factor KC, it is now being applied to both the compressive strength FC in the numerator and the E05 value in the denominator. For fire retardant treatment, these values cancel, but for preservative treatment the ratio 0.75 / 0.9 of factors for modulus of elasticity vs. other properties is applied.
ii. Combined Axial and Bending
For combined axial and bending design from O86 8.4.6, the KT factor is applied to Pr, Mr, and E05 in the PE term of PE, v. It is not applied to the shear rigidity (GA)eff in the expression for PE, v ; if this was intended it would have been included in the expression, as it was for PE.
b) KT for Bearing Design (Bug 3477)
KT was applied to FCP for bearing design, but for preservative treatment the KT for wet service factor of 0.85 Table 6.4.3 was used. The dry service 0.75 factor is now used. KT is applied to both supporting and supported CLT members, on the assumption that both are treated.
c) KT for Stiffness (Bug 3473)
KT was not being applied the stiffness as required by O86 8.3.3. The user-input fire retardant factor or the 0.9 preservative factor from Table 6.4.3 is now applied to the stiffness (EI)eff when used to calculate deflections. It Is not applied to (EI)eff used to calculate Seff for bending moment resistance Mr from 126.96.36.199, as this would mean the factor would be applied twice.
i. Shear Rigidity (GA)eff
Both (EI)eff and shear rigidity (GA)eff is are modified by KT when used in formula based on A.8.5.2 to adjust deflections for the effect of shear deformation. Since this formula has (EI)eff in the numerator and (GA)eff in the denominator, KT has no effect on the adjustment; however the factor is applied to the (EI)eff that is used to calculate deflections before the adjustment.
When rigorous calculation of shear deflection is added to the program using the Timoshenko factor φ, (EI)eff is also the numerator and (GA)eff in the denominator of φ, so KT will have an effect only on the bending stiffness EI in this case as well.
In the Calculations section of the Additional Data, a note has been added for CLT and I-joists, saying shear deflection is based on a formula for single spans and uniform loading, and is approximate for other conditions.
The design note regarding the adjustments to CLT vibration span limits from O86 A.8.5.3 for non-structural elements and for manufacturers performance expectations (Note 3)
- no longer repeats the statement that vibration design is according to A.8.5.3 given in another note
- makes it clear that the increase was to the limit and not to the span itself
- is now output for decrease in span limit for a negative Note 3. adjustment. Previously the decrease was implemented but the note not output.
The Design Setting for the adjustment to CLT vibration span limit from O86 A.8.5.3 Note has been reworded to indicate that it is for “manufacturer’s performance”.
The output of the values Seff, (EI)eff, (GA)eff, G, E, G┴ and E┴ in the Calculations section of the Additional Data in the Design Check has been reorganised to fit in 2 lines instead of 4.
The exponent e06 after the value for stiffness EI in the Calculations section of the Additional Data section of the Design Check has been restored; it had been dropped in version 10.1.
If Print to fit on one page in the Format settings is checked the program sometimes print with a font size less than what can fit on a page, e.g. it used a font size 4 although a font size of 5 fits when the checkbox is not selected, and it is only with a font size of 6 that the design report was printed in two pages.
When entering loads in the pop-up dialog view using the tab key to navigate between controls, the load start and end was no longer after the load magnitude, so it was not possible to enter all the information for a load without cycling through other inputs. This has been corrected and the load inputs are tabbed sequentially from left to right.
Starting with version 10.1, when in Column mode, when the Point of Interest view is entered, the program immediately crashed. This has been corrected.
3. Column Supporting Member Force Qf and Design Ratio (Bug 3431)
Starting with version 10.1, the force shown the support bearing force Qf was always shown as 0 in the Forces vs Resistance table, and the ratio Qf/Qr shown and used to determine a passing section used the lateral reaction at the bottom of the column rather than the axial force. These problems have been corrected.
a) Hanger Capacity for Standard-term Uplift Loading (Bug 3447)
For standard-term uplift loads, which have a load duration factor KD = 1.00, the program was using the Simpson hanger uplift capacity for short-term loading, then dividing by the out the KD = 1.15 factor. For long-term loads, it was using the standard-term capacity so determined then multiplying by 0.65. However, Simpson provides different capacity values for live/snow and for wind/earthquake, and the live/snow capacities are not necessarily the wind/earthquake ones divided by 1.15, because KD affects only some aspects of hanger capacity, i.e. the fastener connections. Any steel design considerations are not affected by KD.
For this reason, the program now uses the Simpson database capacity value for the live/snow for standard-term loads. For the rare case of long-term uplift loading, Sizer conservatively multiplies the capacity by KD = 0.65, as Simpson does not provide long-term uplift capacities.
b) Hanger Capacity for Short-term Downward Loading (Bug 3448)
For short-term loads (wind and earthquake), the program was using the Simpson hanger capacity for standard-term loading, which has a KD factor of 1.0, then multiplying by the KD = 1.15 short-term factor.
Currently the program is using getting the Simpson hanger capacity for load duration factor KD = 1, then multiplying by the KD factor for the load combination. This can lead to non-conservative capacities, because the KD affects only some aspects of fastener capacity, i.e. the fastener connections. Any steel design considerations are not affected by KD.
The program now conservatively uses the hanger capacity for standard term loads without multiplying by 1.15. For short-term loads, Sizer conservatively multiplies the capacity by KD = 0.65, as Simpson does not provide downward-loaded capacity values for long-term or short-term loads.
Correspondence with Simpson confirmed that an increase is not permitted for short-term loads and that capacities can by multiplied by 0.65 for long-term loads.
c) I-joist Headers (Bug 3452)
I-joist materials were missing from the Header material options for Simpson hanger support type. This has been corrected, and I-joists can now be used as supporting members with Simpson hangers.
d) Design Results for Downward Force on I-Joists (Bug 3387)
When Simpson Hangers were used with I-joist main members, the program did not report meaningful results for hangers loaded downwards. In the Bearing and Reactions table:
- The Support row under Bearing|Capacity had a value of 0 when it should show the capacity of the hanger.
- The Design Ratio row under Bearing\Support, showed “1.#J”.
- In the Des ratio|Load comb row and in the Critical Load Combinations section of the Additional Data table , it showed #0 instead of the governing load combination number.
- At the end of the bearing table, a note saying the maximum reaction is from a different load combination due to the KD factor appeared when it shouldn’t.
- A warning message always appeared for failed bearing design even when the design did not fail.
- This occurs for both roof and floor joists, and for design for unknowns or when the hanger is selected.
Simpson hanger design results for uplift loads appeared correctly.
a) Grade Properties*
For all Versa-Lam LVL beam, column, joists and wall studs, including built-up members, the grade material properties fv, fc, fcp, fcpy and fvy were updated to those in the March 28, 2019 of the CCMC 12472-R Evaluation report.
i. Compression Parallel to Grain fc
For 1.8E (formerly 1.7), change fc from 30.3 MPa to 33.0 MPa.
For 2.1E (formerly 2.0), change fc from 34.7 MPa to 33.0 MPa
ii. Compression Perpendicular to Grain, fcp
For all materials, change fcp from 5.58 MPa to 5.65 MPa.
iii. Compression Perpendicular to Grain, y-axis fcpy
For all materials, change fcpy from 10.51 MPa to 9.41 MPa.
iv. Shear fv
For all materials, change fv from 2.07 MPa to 2.16 MPa.
v. Shear, y-axis fvy
For all materials, change fvy from 4.0 MPa to 3.65 MPa.
vi. 1.8 2750 Columns
The 1.8 2750 column grade has been removed.
b) Species Name
The “Species” name that appears in the output reports has been changed from Versa-Lam LVL to LVL, to remove the duplication of name Versa-Lam in the Design Check output. It has been retained for built-up members, as for those only V-LAM is shown as the material name.
c) Grade Name
The format of Grade names has been changed from e.g. VL2800 2.0E to 2.1E 2800. The E value shown is now that for the true modulus of elasticity, rather than the apparent modulus, although the database E value has not changed and Sizer designs using apparent modulus without calculating shear deflection.
d) Apparent Grade Names
For those users who still want the reports to show the apparent modulus of elasticity E in the Grade Name, a new “Species” called LVL (apparent) has been added, showing the grade names in the format e.g. VL 2.0 2800. These grades have the exact same properties as the corresponding grades showing real E in the name, including the E value.
There is no unknown species selection, so that the design summary output will not repeat identical solutions.
Starting with version 10.1, the message saying that the number of unique load locations had been exceeded and that the would not be able to generate correct results was triggered after only 25 loads were placed at unique location instead of the intended 100.
This has now been increased to 150.
This usually occurs for repeating point loads.
a) Right-to-left Reactions
Reactions were no longer shown in the R->L row, even if such reactions existed.
b) Load Combination for L->R Reactions
When the supporting member type was None or Non-wood, the L->R reactions in the Reactions table always showed #0 as the critical load combination. The values of the reactions correspond to the correct load combinations, however.
Starting with version 10.1, after a nominal Imperial value in is selected for Depth (d), e.g. 6”, the Depth to field showed the actual value, e.g. 5-1/2. The value would change to correct nominal value if other inputs were accessed. This has been corrected and the nominal value appears from the start.
The following problem introduced with version 10.1 was fixed, and a revised installation of Design Office 10, Service Release 1 was distributed.
The links below lead to descriptions of the changes for Version 10.1 of WoodWorks Sizer.
The program now allows you to specify the faces of a member that are exposed to fire. Previously, for you could only select from 0, 3 or 4 sides exposed, and the program would assume 3 sides was 2 side faces and top or bottom.
The Fire Design data group has checkboxes surrounding a section of the member allowing you to specify which of the 4 faces are exposed.
For timber or glulam designed using CSA O86 Annex B, any or all of the sides can be selected.
For the NBC fire design method for glulam, only 3 sides and 4 sides are allowed, as before. You can choose which of the smaller faces are exposed, or whether both these faces are exposed. Both larger faces are always exposed.
For CLT floor and roof panels, you can select the top or bottom but not both. Similarly, for wall panels, left or right, but not both.
Fire design is deactivated by deselecting all checkboxes, which is the default condition.
b) Exclusion of Invalid Materials
Previously, when an invalid material like built-up lumber members or SCL was selected, the program would allow input of number of exposed sides then revert to 0 when the design button was pressed. Now it disables the input of exposed sides when one of these materials is selected.
c) Fire Design
For the CSA O86 method, the program reduces the design section by calculating a char depth for each exposed face.
The choice of top or bottom exposed beam or CLT floor panel surfaces does not affect design. Neither does the choice of left or right beam surfaces, or column surfaces perpendicular to applied loading.
For column surfaces parallel to the applied force and CLT wall panels, the choice of left or right surface can have design consequences due to axial load eccentricity.
The choice of smaller exposed faces for the NBC method has no design consequences.
Input fire protection is assumed to apply to each exposed face.
The choice of exposed faces is shown in the materials specification of the Design Check output as follows, as the case may be:
Exposed to fire on [ one [b,d]-face, opposing [b,d]-faces, both [b,d]-faces and one [b,d]-face, all four faces ]
2. Section Modulus Seff for CLT Moment Design
The following problems with the calculation of the effective section modulus Seff from O86 188.8.131.52 for CLT moment design were corrected.
a) Panel Depth Used for Transverse Seff,x (Change 54)
The section modulus Seff,x from O86 184.108.40.206 for the minor strength axis (transverse) CLT design was calculated with a panel depth h which included the outer longitudinal layers, when the depth hx with these layers excluded should have been used.
For a typical example of a 315 mm thick V1 grade floor panel, the section modulus was 5.62 million mm^3 when it should be 7.22 million mm^3 resulting in a bending moment resistance of Mr of 23.26 kN-m when it should be 19.44 kN-m.
b) Neutral Axis for Fire Design (Change 101)
The program was not considering the note in O86 B.6.2 regarding the need to calculate the location of the neutral axis when determining the moment of inertia and section modulus fire design bending moment resistance. For a typical example, this problem caused the bending moment capacity to be calculated as 4932 lb-ft when it should have been 3904 lb-ft.
The method for
calculating Seff for fire design is given
in the FPInnovations CLT handbook, Chapter 8, Eqn. 9,
in which the term h/2 in in O86 220.127.116.11 for is replaced by h – y, where y is
the neutral axis given by Handbook Eqn. 4 as ∑ yi ti / ∑ ti
is the distance to the centroid of
each layer, and ti is the
thickness of each layer.
Note that since E┴ perpendicular to the direction of loading is E/30, those layers are ignored in the calculation, so this simplified formula is used rather than Eqn. 6 in the CLT Handbook, which includes Ei in the summations in the numerator and denominator.
For the interaction equations for combined axial and bending resistance, for both tension and compression, Sizer now applies the duration factor KD to both moment resistance Mr and the axial resistance Pr or Tr for the shortest duration of loads (highest factor) for either direction of stress. In other words, the program examines a load combination for combined design, and uses the load duration factor corresponding to that combination for both axial and bending resistance, regardless of which load types within the combination contribute to axial and bending stress.
Previously, the program applied KD factors calculated separately for axial resistance and bending resistance using only the loads that contributed to stress in each direction.
For example, for a column under concentric compressive dead load and lateral live load, the program used 0.65 for compression and 1.0 for bending, but now uses 1.0 for both.
These interaction equations are found in O86 6.5.10, 7.5.12, 8.4.6, and 18.104.22.168 for sawn lumber, glulam, CLT and SCL, respectively. The procedure of using the shortest term KD factor is shown in the CWC Wood Design Manual, Section 5.1, Example 1 - Glulam Column and in the CWC’s Introduction to Wood Design 10.1, Example 10.1 Column subjected to snow, wind and dead loads.
For the case that O86 22.214.171.124 is used to determine a KD for long-term loading, the program applies the highest factor so calculated to both directions.
a) Critical Load Combination Shown for Combined Axial and Bending (Bug 3386)
In the Factors table of the Additional Data, the program was showing the load combination number for the loads contributing to axial stress design for both the axial and bending lines in the table. This load combination corresponded to the KD factor used in this check, however, due to the change for Bug 3385, above, the same load KD factor is now used for both axial and bending components in the combined equation, and the critical load combination will be in fact the same for these components.
Please note that the fact the same load combination number was shown may have misled users to believe we were already correctly using the same load combination in each direction.
The following problems affecting columns and walls loaded on the d-face entered the program for version 10 and have been corrected.
a) Bending Strength for Lateral Support Factor KL
The built-up bending strength for No. 2 Grade members that is used for glulam weak-axis design using O86 7.5.3, was being used to calculate the weak-axis lateral support factor KL (O86 126.96.36.199.4) for sawn lumber materials, instead of the published bending strength for those materials.
b) Built-Up Grade for Lumber Column Lateral Support Design
When built-up column materials were set to Ignore in Database Editor, designing any sawn lumber or glulam column in Sizer caused a crash.
c) Built-Up Grade for Lumber Column Lateral Support Design
The warning messages shown when built-up column database files were missing or disabled in Database Editor so that glulam weak-axis glulam design according to O86 7.5.3 was not possible, have been clarified and improved, and the same message now appears for both beams and columns.
The calculation of the critical notch length of 0.25d in O86-14 188.8.131.52.1 was including ½ the min. req’d bearing length, when it shouldn’t have. Beyond this critical length the shear strength is based on residual depth rather than full depth, and it is measured between the member depth d from the inner edge of the support and the beam end. This has been corrected.
The program was not applying the 20% allowable vibration span increase from O86 A.8.5.3 for CLT floor panels due of the effect of non-structural elements when this option was selected in Beam view. This has been corrected.
Starting with version 10, a point of interest was added to a wall stud or column in Column Mode, the program crashed when member design was invoked. It did not happen for beams. This has been corrected.
If the Design setting Satisfies lateral support conditions and d/b for KL= 1 indicating that lateral support conditions from O86 184.108.40.206 are met, and the checkbox in the Supports for bearing design data group indicating that interior multi-span supports are not laterally supported was unchecked for any interior support of a multi-span beam, the program now longer over-rides the KL = 1 setting to apply the lateral support factor KL based on 220.127.116.11.
The setting was overridden because of the requirement in 18.104.22.168. that lateral support be provided at points of bearing to prevent lateral displacement and rotation. This has been reinterpreted to mean end supports only, as support in two places is sufficient to prevent displacement and rotation of the beam. KL = 1 is now applied regardless of lateral support for interior supports.
When a new span is added to create a multi-span beam, the Laterally supported at support checkbox for interior supports is now unchecked by default. Previously it was checked, but in most common situations lateral supports are not provided to interior supports.
The following changes have been made to the explanatory text that appears in the Lateral support spacing section of Beam view under certain circumstances.
a) Unrestrained Lateral Supports (Change 2f)
The text when the KL = 1 Design setting is set has been revised to remove the explanation that KL can be overridden if there are unrestrained interior lateral supports, as described in the previous item.
For multi-span beams, text now appears indicating whether interior supports are restrained, as the input for this is under the Supports for Bearing and Notch Design and not immediately evident in this section of the Beam view.
b) For Calculate KL Setting (Change 2a)
The explanatory text now appears when the setting Calculate KL using 22.214.171.124, is selected, indicating that the use of the spacing input depends on d/b > 4 as per O86 126.96.36.199.1 (a). Previously it only indicated that the inputs only apply when d/b > 9 when KL = 1 was selected as per 188.8.131.52.1 (f), which it still does.
c) For Glulam (Change 2a)
The explanatory text now appears in all cases for glulam, indicating that the use of the spacing input depends on d/b > 2.5 as per 184.108.40.206.1.
The following changes were made for the Support for bearing design input for CLT wall panels.
a) Member Type Choices
The Type choice Bottom plate has changed to Sill plate. Bottom plate is relevant to framed walls only.
b) Bearing Length Choices
The Bearing length Lb choices have changed from Column width and Column depth to Panel width and Panel depth.
c) Bearing Length for Sill Plate Supports
When Sill plate is selected as the type, the Bearing length Lb input is now disabled and shows Panel width. That is, we assume they are continuously supported and show the calculation for the 1m or 1ft standard width.
d) Lower Support
When Panel width is selected as the Bearing length Lb, the lower support will be set to None and disabled. This will always be the case for Sill plate support type.
This is because we assume continuous upper wall panel support for the standard 1 m or 1’ panel width, in which case the lower support of the sill plate or CLT floor becomes irrelevant, because O86 220.127.116.11.2 for loads at the support reduces to O86 18.104.22.168.1 for all other conditions when one bearing length is greater than 1.5 times the other.
For exterior supports of CLT floor and roof panels, the program was always using a value of 1.5” or 38 mm as the minimum bearing length, instead of the one input in the Design settings. This value is used as a lower limit on the design bearing length and appears in a note under the Bearing design table when used as the design bearing length.
The following problems pertaining to the CLT long-term deflection creep adjustment factor Kcreep from O86 A.8.5.2 were corrected:
a) Floor Panel Default Creep Factor (Bug 3340)
For floor panels, the default Kcreep that appeared in Load Input view for new files was 1.5, but this value should have been 2.0, as per O86 A.8.5.2. This has been corrected.
b) Roof Panel Creep Factor (Change 88)
The input for Kcreep in Load Input view was available only for floor panels, and Sizer used the default value of 2.0 O86 A.8.5.2 for roof panels. It is now available for roof panels. Previously Sizer used the default value of 2.0 for roof panels.
For fire design of CLT wall panels with doubled outermost parallel layers, the calculation of shear rigidity (GA)eff from 22.214.171.124 now treats the doubled outermost parallel layers on either side as a single, doubly thick layer. For fire design, (GA)eff is used in the resistance to combined axial and bending from 8.4.6.
There are no standard CLT layups with doubled outermost layers, but it is possible to create doubled custom layups using Database Editor.