×
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

What is the typical way to deal with live loads for movable planters
6

What is the typical way to deal with live loads for movable planters

What is the typical way to deal with live loads for movable planters

(OP)
I have an 3rd floor exterior courtyard situation (framed floor).  The code LL is 100psf for the public area, which is all easy enough, but the architect just introduced dozens of semi-movable planters on us, layed out with various sizes and also in an artistic arrangement (weighing from 490# up to 2300#-see attached pdf).  I have ran calcs for all the planter sizes and know the worst case planter weighs in at 193psf.

These planters are intially being laid out by the architect (even though I have it in CAD, they will be undimensioned/uncontrolled in the final prints), and they are technically movable (not easily-but with work the layout could be altered in the future).

This is where I may be overthinking things.  I would like to get feedback on whether it is correct practice to go the long route and create load diagrams for each and every joist with the base 100psf everywhere and the 193psf showing where they are drawn by the architect (seems good for lighter floor, but would ignore they can be moved from the original plan and also a TON of drafting/figuring/headaches trying to deal with 'graphic'-only plans), or just add the 100psf and 193psf together (also seems wrong as it is conservative since the planters will always have open walking spaces/paths around them).

Hopefully this is an easy call, I haven't really dealt with this many 'random' objects in such an odd pattern before.  I was tentatively thinking bar joists at first design until the architect brought in planters, now I'm thinking full i-beam joists are the way to go if the load jumps to 300psf +/-.  Thanks for any help/guidance.

RE: What is the typical way to deal with live loads for movable planters

You have to figure out what a reasonable "worst case" layout of the planters might be and design for that.  And even with a reasonable worst case, I might use a bit larger load factor on the planter loads.
 

RE: What is the typical way to deal with live loads for movable planters

Take the biggest possible load on any one joist from the planters minus 100psf. Design the joists all for 100psf UDL plus the local load from the planter(s).

Michael.
Timing has a lot to do with the outcome of a rain dance.

RE: What is the typical way to deal with live loads for movable planters

I would design the joists for the 293 figure, but the beams for 100 + 193 factored down to the percent of area covered by the planters relative to the roof area.  Seems more reasonable to me.

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

RE: What is the typical way to deal with live loads for movable planters

I would analyze the worst case with a 100 psf uniform load plus 93psf concentrated loads at each planter location. Then compare that with 193 psf uniform load over the entire area. This would bracket the possible solutions to see if being conservative will substantially increase member sizes.

I am assuming that it is unlikely that people or other substantial loads will be ontop of the planters. Also, make sure the planter loads assume the soil is saturated and the planter is overflowing with water(worst case when the irragation control fails or rain water fills the planter).

RE: What is the typical way to deal with live loads for movable planters

Just design the whole area for 193 psf, and forget the 100 psf.

RE: What is the typical way to deal with live loads for movable planters

(OP)
Thanks for the bits of wisdom guys, this list has the most helpful members!  I will try several of these ideas and compare the differences btwn them, then decide.  Thanks again.

RE: What is the typical way to deal with live loads for movable planters

Ya, i am more into simplification in cases like this.  I would just apply 200 psf over everything.  Why spend more of your time than needed trying to shave off a few pennies for the owner for something you have no control over?  The cost delta will be very small, compared to some of the other approaches discussed (which are all valid, just more work, IMO).

RE: What is the typical way to deal with live loads for movable planters

Oh, forgot to add, do you have any multi-span beams?  If so, I would definitely check unbalanced loading, with spans either loaded or unloaded, to find the worst case for shear and bending.

RE: What is the typical way to deal with live loads for movable planters

(OP)
I do have a single, multi-span support beam, I will make it a point to check for 'skip-loading' as you suggested, thanks for the pointer.

RE: What is the typical way to deal with live loads for movable planters

Hmmph. I assumed, because he asked the question, mistermopar didn't want to use the 193/200psf all over.

Michael.
Timing has a lot to do with the outcome of a rain dance.

RE: What is the typical way to deal with live loads for movable planters

I'd vote for structuresguy approach. You have no idea down the road that someone's bright idea will not be your worse nightmare. I would rest easy knowing you designed for 200psf LL. Its not that big of an area to sweat a little extra steel tonnage...

You probably have this covered but make sure you design for water ponding up to your secondary drainage system.

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