Jamb Axial Bracing CFS Designer

[Structintern3]

Hey guys,

So I've always entered head/sill as the only axial bracing for a cfs jamb stud. I don't feel I can justify the load path otherwise. Just wondering, do you guys do rhe same? Or if you disageee with this and do it differently why?

 

[KootK]

I often assume that whatever is bracing the adjacent studwork is also bracing the jamb studs at the same interval for buckling in the plane of the wall. Similar to with wood, I use my judgment though. If it's a five ply stud pack carrying a zillion pounds then I might not rely on field bracing for jamb post stability.

 

[milkshakelake]

I leave CFS jambs and posts unbraced in-plane, only pinned at ends. I used to work for someone who did a massive volume of CFS projects and he said that the jambs are more likely to be doing the bracing than to be braced by the studs (through bridging) and headers. It makes sense to me and it's been working fine.

If you're only bracing it at the headers, what about a CFS post or jamb that doesn't have headers? Wouldn't you brace it at the floor levels? If you can't justify that load path, I think the top/bottom track can provide sufficient in-plane bracing.

The other thing to consider is that if it's a square jamb, then some intermediate bracing won't actually make a difference in the strength. Because you have buckling in two directions and the other direction is fully unbraced. It's different for studs, which are very weak in minor axis.