End Wall Panel Flange Geometry for Arch Steel Buildings

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current end wall panels in arch-style steel buildings lack sufficient strength for high-wind applications without an internal framework, have a low strength-to-weight ratio, and are costly and difficult to manufacture, often requiring custom filler panels and additional processing steps.

Innovation Solution

An end wall panel design featuring an odd number of upper flanges with multiple web sections extending at an angle, joined by lower flanges, and flange stiffeners that are shorter than the web portions, allowing for increased moment of inertia and easier installation, fabricated from a 33-inch wide coil to match standard arch panel dimensions, reducing manufacturing costs and eliminating the need for internal frameworks.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Strength

If the current end wall panel design with two upper flanges and web sections at 32 degrees is used, then the panel can be manufactured from sheet metal, but it has low moment of inertia and cannot withstand high wind loads

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvewind load resistanceVSAvoidpanel structure complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The panel is divided into multiple segments including an odd number of upper flanges (at least three), multiple lower flanges, and web sections connecting them. This segmentation increases the moment of inertia and wind load resistance while maintaining manufacturability from sheet metal

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The angle between upper flanges and web sections is changed from the conventional 32 degrees to at least 40 degrees. This parameter change increases the moment of inertia and allows the panel to withstand high wind loads while complying with AISI NASPEC 2001 Section B4.2

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Ease of manufacture

If end wall panels with 1.5 feet coverage dimension are used, then they can be manufactured from standard sheet metal, but filler panels are required for standard entryway sizes increasing cost and complexity

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemanufacturing simplicityVSAvoidinstallation complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The coverage dimension of the panel is changed from the conventional 1.5 feet to 2 feet. This parameter change allows the panels to accommodate standard entryway sizes without requiring filler panels, simplifying both manufacturing and installation while reducing overall complexity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Ease of manufacture

If a 23 inch wide metal sheet is cut from a 46.5 inch wide coil, then the end wall panel can be fabricated, but additional processing steps and material loss occur increasing cost

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefabrication easeVSAvoidmanufacturing efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The flat width of the sheet metal panel is changed from 23 inches to approximately 33 inches. This parameter change allows the panel to be cut from standard width coils without requiring slitting operations, eliminating additional processing steps and material loss while improving manufacturing efficiency

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The panel design is made universal by using standard 33-inch wide coils for fabrication. This allows the same coil width to be used for multiple building components, improving productivity and eliminating the need for specialized narrow coils

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

4Reliability

If the panel design complies with AISI NASPEC 2001 Section B4.2, then it meets building codes for high-wind applications, but the angle between upper flange and web section must be at least 40 degrees requiring redesign

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecode complianceVSAvoiddesign complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The angle between upper flanges and web sections is changed to at least 40 degrees to comply with AISI NASPEC 2001 Section B4.2. This parameter change ensures code compliance for high-wind applications while the systematic redesign of the flange and web section configuration maintains design simplicity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS8726605B2End wall panel
Publication Date: 2014.05.20 KING SOLOMON CREATIVE ENTERPRISES CORP
  • US8726605B2 patent drawing
  • US8726605B2 patent drawing
  • US8726605B2 patent drawing

AI summary

An end wall panel for an arch-style steel building is disclosed. The end wall panel is fabricated from metal sheet and consists of a plurality of upper flanges spaced apart from one another. The upper flanges are connected to lower flanges by a web section extending at an angle from the upper flange. Flange stiffeners also extend at an angle from the outermost upper flanges. The end wall panel provides increased strength in an arch-style steel building and can withstand critical wind loads without additional stiffeners. The end wall panel is also inexpensive to manufacture and install into an arch-style steel building.