DIS System
Overview and Features
Overview of Prefabricated Steel Framing System (DIS System)
High Quality System
- Complete prefabricated steel framing structure constructed by cutting-edge program with automated designing and producing
- Additional coating finish is unnecessary due to the excellent durability obtained by using hot-dip galvanized iron(HGI)
Excellent Economical Efficiency
- It is designed to maximize the member stiffness so as to minimize the amount of members
- Weight lightening allows minimization of fundamental frame structures
- Inexperienced mechanics can easily install and subsequently it is capable of to reducing labor costs as well as construction period
- Minimize the construction period by removing the processing work such as cutting in the construction field but by using bolts instead.
- Prompt, precise and perfectly constructed buildings we create, for example, in the size 330 - 660 m² of buildings, it only takes 7-13 days from order to production and construction
- Steel Frame (DIS) : 2~3 days, Finishing (Panel) : 5~10days
- Constructible without heavy equipments required for delivery operation
Perfect Technical Support
- Provides perfect structural calculation and steel frame drawing
- Provides perfect prefabrication work; construction design drawing; order sheet, as well as technical support from the head office
Prompt Supply
- About 1,000 m² of factory daily yields products in the quantity for a building
- Production time is short due to the automatic production line so the supply dead-line is flexible
Comparison Table of DIS-system and H-BEAM
Structure Comparison Table of Prefabricated Steel Framing System (DIS-SYSTEM)
|
Category
|
Previous Steel Framing System
|
Prefabricated Light-weight
Steel Framing System
|
Ref.
|
|
Quality
|
- Depending on the hand work of mechanic workers, quality uniformity is not guaranteed.
- Due to the construction field work, product surface is rough and perfect system is hard to be obtained.
|
- Material quality is sustainable uniformly thanks to the 100% automated equipments
|
|
|
Time Required
for Production
|
- Upon the finish of steel frame drawing, shop drawing is required for production and the shop drawing takes long because of the large number of drawing sheets and relatively small number of drawing experts.
- The raw-material processing in the factory takes long time and precision is inferior
|
- Structural calculation and design drawing work can be operated promptly. Relatively short production time and product credibility are also obtained.
- Brackets are produced by molding so it is possible to mass produce
|
|
|
Structural
Stability
|
- The members are produced by hot-rolled molding and the subsequent heavy thickness may cause excessive design. Also, construction of small buildings is conducted based on empirical knowledge instead of structural calculation and the structural stability cannot be guaranteed.
|
- The structural program perfectly designs structure, so the optimal member design is realized.
- Verifies the resistance and rigidity of member and body of the structure through practical experiment on the actual structure
|
More than 40% reduction of weight ratio
|
|
Raw-material
Credibility
|
- Because of using general steel plates, anticorrosive paint is applied but that causes rough surface, repetitive and restoring painting upon passage of time.
|
- Every material uses hot-dip galvanized iron(HGI) steel plates thus possesses remarkable capability of rust proofing and corrosion preventing that is better than previous anticorrosive paint. (semi-permanent)
|
High-quality material wherein the raw-material coil is made up of hot-dip galvanized iron(HGI)
|
|
Recycle
|
- Recycle is impossible because the joint connection is performed by soldering or by bolts.
|
- In case of 100% prefabrication construction, perfect recycle is possible by removing the bolts and prefabrication again.
|
Does not cause environmental pollution because DIS system is environment-friendly
|
|
Time required
for Construction
|
- Takes long time due to the complex processing, low constructability, miscellaneous field work that includes soldering, high-strength bolt assembly and the like After the first painting, repeat the painting with touch-up paint at construction site, so the construction period lengthened and the quality degraded.
|
- Construction period can be reduced due to the whole process is performed in the factory and prefabrication-only in the construction field. (for a building of 660m², it takes about 5 days)
|
It takes 15 days for the finish work (panel), compared to the general system that takes a month
|
|
Category
|
DIS SYSTEM
|
H Type class structure
|
(C Type class) structure
|
|
Building weight
|
o
|
x
|
o
|
|
Production properties
|
o
|
Δ
|
x
|
|
Construction period
|
o
|
Δ
|
Δ
|
|
Construction Quality
|
o
|
Δ
|
x
|
|
Economical efficiency
|
o
|
x
|
o
|
|
Structural Stability
|
o
|
o
|
x
|
|
Notes
|
Top
|
Middle
|
Bottom
|
|
o
|
Δ
|
x
|
Material and Shape
Material
1) DIS-BEAM: KS D3506 Hot-dip Galvanized Steel Sheet
|
Material
|
Yield strength
|
Tensile strength
|
Elongation (%)
|
Test piece (In Korea)
|
|
N/mm²
|
Kg/mm²
|
N/mm²
|
Kg/mm²
|
|
SGHC400
|
Min. 295
|
Min. 30
|
Min. 400
|
Min.41
|
Min. 18
|
No.5 CutIn Rolling Direction
|
M16x140
2) fixing bolt : M16x4
|
Bolt
|
Axial
diameter
|
Axial
section area
|
Effective
section area
|
Long-term
allowable force
|
Short-term
allowable force
|
Material
yield force
|
Fractural
yield force
|
|
mm
|
cm²
|
cm²
|
ton
|
ton
|
ton
|
ton
|
|
M16
|
16
|
2.01
|
1.51
|
2.41
|
3.62
|
3.62
|
61.18
|
3) Anchor bolt (product with performance not less than Hilti HSA M16 x 140(in case fcc ≥ 30N/ mm²))
|
Category
|
M16 [ kN]
|
|
Drawing
|
0°
|
1 4 . 0
|
|
Complex load
|
3 0°
|
1 4 . 2
|
|
4 5°
|
1 4 . 3
|
|
6 0°
|
1 4 . 3
|
|
Shearing
|
9 0°
|
1 4 . 5
|
Thickness 1.6, 2.0, 2.3, 3.0
Section Properties
SINGLE TYPE
|
A STANDARDS
|
ã?· - 220 x 65 x 16 x 12
|
ã?· - 300 x 65 x 16 x 12
|
|
SHAPE
|
|
|
|
THICKNESS(mm)
|
1.6
|
2.0
|
2.3
|
3.0
|
1.6
|
2.0
|
2.3
|
3.0
|
|
WEIGHT(kg)
|
4.9
|
6.2
|
7.1
|
9.2
|
5.9
|
7.4
|
8.5
|
11.1
|
|
SECTION AREA A(mm²)
|
675.3
|
838.9
|
960.3
|
1,239.0
|
803.3
|
998.9
|
1,144.4
|
1,479.0
|
|
CENTER
AXIS
|
X(mm)
|
109.2
|
109.0
|
108.3
|
108.5
|
149.2
|
149.0
|
148.8
|
148.5
|
|
Y(mm)
|
18.6
|
18.4
|
18.3
|
17.9
|
15.6
|
15.4
|
15.3
|
14.9
|
|
INERTIA
MOMENT
|
Ixx(cm4)
|
467.4
|
574.4
|
658.1
|
830.2
|
945.0
|
1,165.2
|
1,327.1
|
1,693.6
|
|
Iyy(cm4)
|
36.2
|
44.1
|
49.8
|
62.1
|
40.4
|
49.2
|
55.5
|
69.2
|
|
SECTION
MODULOUS
|
Zxx(mm³)
|
41.7
|
51.6
|
58.9
|
75.4
|
62.6
|
77.4
|
88.4
|
113.3
|
|
Zyy max(mm³)
|
19.5
|
24.0
|
27.3
|
34.7
|
25.8
|
31.9
|
36.3
|
46.3
|
|
Zyy min(mm³)
|
8.1
|
9.9
|
11.2
|
14.0
|
8.4
|
10.3
|
11.7
|
14.2
|
|
RADIUS OF
GYRATION
|
Rxx(mm)
|
83.9
|
83.7
|
83.5
|
83.1
|
109.7
|
109.3
|
109.1
|
108.5
|
|
Ryy(mm)
|
24.2
|
24.0
|
23.8
|
24.4
|
23.4
|
23.3
|
23.0
|
22.6
|
DOUBLE TYPE
|
A STANDARDS
|
ã?· - 220 x 65 x 16 x 12
|
ã?· - 300 x 65 x 16 x 12
|
|
SHAPE
|
|
|
|
THICKNESS(mm)
|
1.6
|
2.0
|
2.3
|
3.0
|
1.6
|
2.0
|
2.3
|
3.0
|
|
WEIGHT(kg)
|
4.9
|
6.2
|
7.1
|
9.2
|
5.9
|
7.4
|
8.5
|
11.1
|
|
SECTION AREA A(mm²)
|
675.3
|
838.9
|
960.3
|
1,239.0
|
803.3
|
998.9
|
1,144.4
|
1,479.0
|
|
CENTER
AXIS
|
X(mm)
|
109.2
|
109.0
|
108.3
|
108.5
|
149.2
|
149.0
|
148.8
|
148.5
|
|
Y(mm)
|
18.6
|
18.4
|
18.3
|
17.9
|
15.6
|
15.4
|
15.3
|
14.9
|
|
INERTIA
MOMENT
|
Ixx(cm4)
|
467.4
|
574.4
|
658.1
|
830.2
|
945.0
|
1,165.2
|
1,327.1
|
1,693.6
|
|
Iyy(cm4)
|
36.2
|
44.1
|
49.8
|
62.1
|
40.4
|
49.2
|
55.5
|
69.2
|
|
SECTION
MODULOUS
|
Zxx(mm³)
|
41.7
|
51.6
|
58.9
|
75.4
|
62.6
|
77.4
|
88.4
|
113.3
|
|
Zyy max(mm³)
|
19.5
|
24.0
|
27.3
|
34.7
|
25.8
|
31.9
|
36.3
|
46.3
|
|
Zyy min(mm³)
|
8.1
|
9.9
|
11.2
|
14.0
|
8.4
|
10.3
|
11.7
|
14.2
|
|
RADIUS OF
GYRATION
|
Rxx(mm)
|
83.9
|
83.7
|
83.5
|
83.1
|
109.7
|
109.3
|
109.1
|
108.5
|
|
Ryy(mm)
|
24.2
|
24.0
|
23.8
|
24.4
|
23.4
|
23.3
|
23.0
|
22.6
|
Experiment and Structure Analysis
Experiment and Structure Analysis on Portal Frame Actual Structure
1. Experiment on Portal Frame Actual Structure
1) Purpose of Experiment
- Evaluation on structural stability of gable frame with light gauge stee
- Evaluation on rigidity and internal force of joint between members
- Evaluation on rigidity and internal force of column, floor and anchor area
- Evaluation on rigidity and internal force of main member
- Review on lateral-buckling constraint of beams by the purlin
2) Overall View of Installation of the Test Subject
3) Result of Experiment
|
element
|
load
|
Design value( kg / m² )
|
Actual value( kg / m² )
|
Actual value /Design value
|
|
220x65x18x10x2.3T
|
Gravity
|
67.2
|
196.0
|
2.92
|
|
Gravity+ horizontality
|
84.0
|
149.9
|
1.78
|
|
300x65x18x10x3.0T
|
Gravity
|
69.0
|
116.1
|
1.68
|
|
Gravity+ horizontality
|
84.0
|
139.1
|
1.66
|
|
load
|
Design Value
|
Actual Value(mm)
|
|
|
|
Gravity Deflection
(h/250):delta _{a}
|
Horizental Deflection (mm):
|
Gravity Deflection (mm):
|
Horizental Deflection (mm):
|
|
Gravity
|
28.8
|
20.0
|
18.2
|
5.26
|
0.632
|
0.263
|
4) Conclusion
- Light gauge steel gable frame was prefabricated and constructed on-site by non-skilled workers to apply design load, and has produced stable movements
- lnternal force of test subject was sufficiently stable with 1.8 of the design load average.
- Displacement of test subject at design load was stable with 0.18 - 0.63 of the allowable design displacement.
- Stability was acquired when the beam-columns and beam members were designed according to criterion
2. Detailed Analysis on Joint - conducted by 'POSMIDAS CO., LTD.
1) Overview
- Structural sufficiency of the rigidity and internal force of member and member joint was confirmed through experiment
- Alteration in rigidity of joint was predicted due to eaves bracket's lack of upper flange and ridge bracket's upper flange gap, requiring detailed review on the matter.
2) Structural analysis model
- Structural form: Two-dimensional structure (Portal Frame) with width of 15.4m, column height of 4.5m, and column incline of 10%
- Weight: Applied unit lateral weight upon column to compare rigidity of joint.
- General analysis model (model without section loss in joint) General analysis model using beam element ? hypothesis of rigid link connection condition in joint
- Detailed analysis model (model considering section loss in joint) Precise modeling on joint using plate element and connected with beam element
- Detailed model and hypothetical condition of joint
- Modeling of joint was done with 2 ' 
'-shaped steel-frame and 1 connector plate
- Connect bolting area with rigid link as the confining condition of joint
- Connect segment using plate element and beam element with rigid link
3) Comparison of Analysis
-Displacement on joint and moment value on the column's floor surface was compared for the analysis As a result of the comparison, the relative error of the displacement ranged from a minimum of 2.25% to a maximum of 4.99%, with the relative error of the moment ranged from a minimum of 0.60% to a maximum of 1.62%. According to the analysis, as seen in the table below, the joint rigidity of the detailed analysis model was seen to be relatively higher than the general analysis model, with only a scant difference in value.
|
Classification
|
General Model
|
Detailed Model
|
Relative Error
|
|
Lateral displacement of joint
|
A ( Protruding Eaves )
|
27.393mm
|
26.776mm
|
2.25
|
|
B ( Ridge )
|
27.339mm
|
26.411mm
|
3.61
|
|
C ( Eaves )
|
27.393mm
|
26.025mm
|
4.99
|
|
Max moment of column
|
Left
|
5.387ton-m
|
5.350ton-m
|
0.60
|
|
Right
|
5.387ton-m
|
5.300ton-m
|
1.62
|
