Most Ecnomical Grid-Steel Layout
Most Ecnomical Grid-Steel Layout
(OP)
From your expereince, what is the most comman and ecnomical grid layout using steel (beam, columns, joists). I was thinking 24'x24' or 30'x25'.
I know its a silly question, but would still want expereinced folks to share their thoughts.
Thanks,
I know its a silly question, but would still want expereinced folks to share their thoughts.
Thanks,
Kaiser






RE: Most Ecnomical Grid-Steel Layout
RE: Most Ecnomical Grid-Steel Layout
Kaiser
RE: Most Ecnomical Grid-Steel Layout
Or you can just play around with various sizes and see for yourself.
I think it does depend a lot on the type of loading and also the variations between local labor vs. material costs.
RE: Most Ecnomical Grid-Steel Layout
But then - there are a thousand variations off that for particular reasons - mostly loads, material availability, construction constraints, etc, etc
RE: Most Ecnomical Grid-Steel Layout
I would consider 25'x25' bays at the floors, and maybe 50'x50' bays at the roof, using joists and joist girders. I wouldn't go 50'x50' if your snow load is greater than 20 psf or so.
RE: Most Ecnomical Grid-Steel Layout
Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
Motto: KISS
Motivation: Don't ask
RE: Most Ecnomical Grid-Steel Layout
lightweight concrete do come with finishing premium and is not preferred around our location. The example assumes normal weight concrete 3.5" on top of 3" composite deck flutes (total 6.5" slab thickness). This configuration generally will afford 1 hour fire rating and with the help of sprinkler, you may be able to get 2 hr. rating preferred for library.
25x25: 4.40 psf steel (filler beam+girder), 28" structural depth
30x25: 4.71 psf steel, 31" structural depth
30x30: 5.57 psf steel, 31" structural depth
Any increase on the structural depth of the floor is translated into the cost for perimeter wall, so limiting structural depth may be another way to minimizing cost.