×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Snow Drift

Snow Drift

Snow Drift

(OP)
Hi all,

I have an existing building with a slope roof and a new building with a flat roof.  The existing building is about 20' higher than the new building.  I calculated the snow balance  and the snow drift based on windward direction on the new flat.  Then, I calculated the sliding snow from the existing slope roof on the new flat roof.  Let say my balance snow is 20 psf, drift is 80 psf, and sliding snow is 30 psf.  My question is how can I put them all together?  Do I use balance + sliding + drift or balance + drift? I know that the sliding snow will be controled over the balance on the portion of the flat roof.  I couldn't find the clear explaination in the ASCE-05.  Thank you all in adveance.  Below is a simplified sketch.

-------------\
   Slope Roof \
               \
----------------
                I  \Drift (7' per calc.)
                I   \
                I-------Sliding Snow (15' per code)
                I-----------------------Balance Snow (100')
                I-----------------------Flat Roof

RE: Snow Drift

I don't have my ASCE 7 in front of me, but I am almost certain that sliding snow is superimposed on the BALANCED snow load.  This means you don't add balanced plus drifted plus sliding snow.  Compare balanced plus drifted to balanced plus sliding, and use the worse case.

DaveAtkins

RE: Snow Drift

I would do it regardless of any ASCE 7 requirements as the combination is logical from what I have seen in the field.  

Mike McCann
McCann Engineering

RE: Snow Drift

(OP)
Thank you Mike McCann & DaveAtkins.  

RE: Snow Drift

In ASCE 7-02, the commentary section C7.9 on Sliding Snow indicates that sliding snow can occur with drifting. So, we should be adding balanced+drifting+sliding. Here is the quote:

"Distribution of sliding loads might vary from a uniform load 5 ft (1.5 m) wide, if a significant vertical offset exists between the two roofs, to a 20 ft (6.1 m) wide uniform load, where a lowslope upper roof slides its load onto a second roof that is only a few ft (about 1 m) lower, or where snow drifts on the lower roof create a sloped surface that promotes lateral movement of the sliding snow."

RE: Snow Drift

There have been many debates on this in this website, but I think they need to be superimposed on each other.  

Drifting snow is to be added to the balanced snow load.



http://eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=107700

RE: Snow Drift

The way ASCE is written, it would appear that they are not required to be superimposed:
7.7.1: "Drift loads shall be superimposed on the balanced snow load."
7.9: "Sliding loads shall be superimposed on the balanced snow load"

Having said that, I have always assumed the worst condition by adding them.  I think it is reasonable to believe that drifting snow could occur, followed by snow sliding on top of it.  My exception to this would be if the drift height on the lower roof were as high as the snow depth of the upper roof. (As permitted by ASCE 7-7.9)

The old BOCA codes had a diagram specifically showing the sliding surcharge superimposed on the drift surcharge.  But back then, they also simply specified the sliding height as 40% of the drift height.

RE: Snow Drift

I agree with JKW05 on the interpretation of ASCE.

Also, using balanced + drift + sliding would be conservative but probably over-conservative as the likelyhood of seeing the design values for all three simultaneously is unlikely.

Perhaps balanced + 0.75*drift + 0.75*sliding may be a good thing to use if you feel the need to combine all three...   

RE: Snow Drift

I've seen the aftermath of a roof that was not designed for the full load described above.  Lucky no one was killed.

After seeing that, I chose to err on the conservative side.  The Codes do not have all the answers.  That's the reason they're always changing.  

Mike McCann
McCann Engineering

RE: Snow Drift

What about the dynamic effects of the sliding snow falling onto the roof below?  If this is a large drop, this force could cause damage to the roof below.  

RE: Snow Drift

msquared48: I am not trying to start an argument against being conservative, but I am curious about the failure you speak of (I always want to learn).  Was it determined that the roof was properly designed and constructed to the current code (worst case of the balanced + drift and balanced + sliding) and that the actual snow loading exceeded that causing the failure?

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources