×
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

Question about temporary structural loading.
3

Question about temporary structural loading.

Question about temporary structural loading.

(OP)

I've got a structure I'm designing that will be in place about 4 months (only for 4 months). The thing I'm trying to decide is whether or not to use full lateral loads or something less. I know ASCE puts out a standard on this [i.e. ASCE 37]....my question is (for anyone who has this standard): does this standard address load magnitude vs. specific duration time? And (if this is addressed and you feel generous): what kind of magnitude are we talking for 4 months duration (approximately)?
 

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

What structural load are you designing for, gravity, wind? For temporary bracing elements I will only use a 100yr design event for wind opposed to the 500yr return interval which is usually designed for. This is specified in the loading code that I use. It would also depend on the type of structure that is being designed. If it is a structure that is likely to see it's design load during it's design life than I would not make any reductions other than the minimum which is specified in the code.

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

(OP)
It's the wind load I'm worried about. Something that is going to be up in Southeastern Georgia in the summer months makes me worry about the possibility of everything from thunderstorms to hurricanes.

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

Is this structure to be erected in August of 2012?

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
Motto:  KISS
Motivation:  Don't ask

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

(OP)

Quote:

Is this structure to be erected in August of 2012?  

Nope. June 2010....will be down sometime in September 2010.

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

Yes, ASCE 37 deals with load durations.

 

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

Keep in mind that many "temporary" structures that were built 20 years ago are still in service...design for that potential.

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

(OP)

Quote:

Yes, ASCE 37 deals with load durations.

So is it significantly less than the full amount for 4 months duration (if you [or anyone else reading this] have this reference)?

If it's close: the heck with it, I'll just use the full design loads. But if it's (say) half......it will justify me going out and buying the reference to read the fine print and get the load down exactly. (Where I'm working they don't have this on the shelf.....so I'm trying to brow beat my boss into getting it and this will give me ammo.)  

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

Ron:

For that matter, "temporary" barracks structures for the  military built in the 40's are still in service today!

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
Motto:  KISS
Motivation:  Don't ask

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

Mike,
That's exactly what I was thinking of.  I remember many of those structures at Ft. Jackson, Ft. Dix, and Ft. Bliss.

When the base closings were going on, I couldn't help but think about all the new buildings that would be "abandoned", compared to the old ones that had served for so many years..such a waste.  Big difference in benefit to cost.

Ron

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

I agree with Ron and Mike.  Design the structure just as you would a permanent structure.

BA

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

When I was in the Corps of Engineers in Officers' Basic in Ft Belvoir, Virginia, they showed us plans of those wooden barracks - made during WWII.   

On those plans, in bold letters, it stated that the planned service life of those structures was only five years.  After that time, they were to be demolished.

The point is that things change, to include intentions.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
Motto:  KISS
Motivation:  Don't ask

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

(OP)
The point that (in many instances) a temporary structure may wind up being permanent is well taken. But in my case it cannot be permanent because it blocks a main service route into a particular part of a plant. (And the expected duration will be noted on the drawings.....in fact, we are even referencing the letter from the client stipulating that it will not be up beyond a certain point).

So it kind of goes back to my question from before: for that duration, what kind of % of the max load are we talking? (Ball park for anyone that has this reference.)
 

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

3doorsdwn...there is not a single factor that can be applied.  In ASCE 37, there's a factor for each of many different conditions.  You'll need a copy of ASCE 37 if you want to try to apply it to your design.

I'm not convinced that it applies to your case.  It is moreso intended to address temporary construction loads and exposed structural conditions during construction. There is a provision that includes "temporary structures" but my interpretation of that is such temporary structures as formwork or shoring, not a completed structure that is used for a short period of time.

Further, if you are in a wind area or snow area that is significant, the time of year that the building will be used will be critical to your design.

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

How much liability insurance do you have?

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
Motto:  KISS
Motivation:  Don't ask

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

I'm away from my office right now and don't have access to ASCE 37 - I'll check on it but at 4 months the "downgrading" of wind force due to the supposedly temporary condition may not be all that much.  ASCE 37, as others above have suggested, is really for structures used to facilitate construction of other structures.  

In your case, the 4 months indeed might grow to 6, 8, or 800 months.

 

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

(OP)

Quote:

I'm away from my office right now and don't have access to ASCE 37 - I'll check on it but at 4 months the "downgrading" of wind force due to the supposedly temporary condition may not be all that much.  ASCE 37, as others above have suggested, is really for structures used to facilitate construction of other structures.  

In your case, the 4 months indeed might grow to 6, 8, or 800 months.

Well I appreciate it. At this point I'm starting to wonder if I'll need this to justify designing for full design forces.....(sort of the opposite that I was thinking before).

But it cannot stay up for 4 months [and really....people are already raising flame about it being up that long]. The plant would shut down if it stayed up that long.

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

Just what size of building and what materials are you using that it will make such a cost issue wheither it is designed as a temporary building or not?

Garth Dreger PE
AZ Phoenix area

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

(OP)

Quote:

Just what size of building and what materials are you using that it will make such a cost issue wheither it is designed as a temporary building or not?

It's really too complicated a situation to lay out here (including the scheduling of everything). The temporary structure is a steel frame to be built.....(and yet another twist in this is I'm expected [to speed things up] to use an abandoned foundation that's off to the side).

It's got more twists than a pretzel......that's why I kept my original post as simple as possible so we didn't wind up discussing less critical parts.
 

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

For info purposes only,  I can tell you the British Standards, have a seasonal factor for sub-annual periods of 1,2,4 or 6 months.  

For 4 month periods the site wind speed can be reduced by between 0 and 27%.

These obviously only apply to the UK, but going on that it would appear unlikely that you can get a "50%" reduction from your code, and if as you say your building it during storm season I would guess the reduction factor will be zero...

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

ASCE 37-02 allows you to reduce your wind speed based on the duration of construction.  I know for a short duration (6 weeks or less, maybe?), the factor is 0.75.  Your wind speed is squared, so the design pressure goes down to almost half.  I don't have the document in front of me, so I can't say what it is for 4 months, but I would think it worth looking into.

I'd recommend buying ASCE 37-02.  I don't think it is very expensive, and it will provide a lot more insight than the responses here.  I'm also not sure it would apply to your temporary structure.

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

The title of ASCE 37-02 is Design Loads on Structures During Construction.

It is not "Design Loads on Temporary Structures" for a reason.

If this structure will be used in a manner consistent with a permanent structure and we are discussing design for it as a finished product, I would not see a justification to even use 37-02.

There could be a justification for a reduced period based on the life of the strucutre, but in south GA during the summer, you run the risk of seeing the maximum events for the area, so I think you are back where you started from.

For the price of ASCE37-02 (or the new edition), it is still a document worth picking up, even if it only helps you understand what others should be doing in the construction process.

Hope it helps,


Daniel Toon

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

Being a fellow Georgia engineer, my vote is for full loads.  Especially with the predicted hurrican season this year.  This also sounds like a critical entrance to the plant so the savings versus risk doesn't seem like a good trade.  Design for full loads and tell them 'it's the code'.

ZCP
www.phoenix-engineer.com

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

3doorsdwn - I agree with DTGT2002 that ASCE 37 is for loads during construction, not for temporary structures (which will really be temporary).

IMHO, you will find better guidance in the International Building Code. The latest edition that I have is 2003. See Table 1604.5 "Classification of Building and Other Structures for Importance Factors".  Category I includes "Certain Temporary Facilities" and allows the following factors for loading:
Seismic: 1.0
Snow: 0.8
Wind: 0.87 (with a footnote about hurricane prone regions).
These numbers may give you a general idea of what reductions are considered prudent.
However, for your case (this summer) I would give serious consideration to zcp's advice.

www.SlideRuleEra.net idea
www.VacuumTubeEra.net r2d2

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

(OP)
Thanks everybody!

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

Where I went to school, we had several classes in buildings that were designed to be temporary.  In 1920.  Still standing today.

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

s my final comment here, it's all well and good that you are trying to save your client money.  That's commendable and what we should do where warranted.  

However, you have to temper that thought with the fact that if the structure fails, who is first in line to take the hit?  It's you.  Never forget that fact either.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
Motto:  KISS
Motivation:  Don't ask

RE: Question about temporary structural loading.

Public Safety, Liability,  Professional engineer license - These are not worth risking because there is always a remote possibility something may go wrong. Having no knowledge about the pretzels with many twists, I would recommend a design with  redundancies. If site conditions permit and there are no visual constraints on how the site may look, guying may be a cheap but effective option. When you design a support system for 85 mph wind,  there is a very marginal cost penalty to upgrade to 95 mph. So, trying to fine tune the design to save money may not be worth the trouble considering the risk.  

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