×
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

Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

(OP)
Hello,

What are different conceptual methods can be review to change columns from Tapered to Straight in PreEng building.

Is it possible to reduce the column sizes significantly?

Thanks,

 
 

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

Why?  Most tapered columns are for single span bents.  Straight columns are often used when the bent is multi-span.

Are you designing a PEMB?  The manufacturers usually have dedicated software for their proprietary designs, which are difficult to replicate.

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

column size normally dose not reduce if the same plates are used for the flanges and webs.

http://www.nceng.com.au/
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning."

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

(OP)
Thank you all,

This is process-industrial and clear span buidling. Other deciplines desing aussumed the straight coulmn and model the duct and piping, which are now clash with actual column size, No doubt!!.

Thus, I am trying to see if I can reduce the column size to avoid the rework.

RS

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

If the column is not taking a moment from frame action, there is no reason to taper it.  

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
http://mmcengineering.tripod.com
 

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

Who would make an assumption that a pre-engineered building did not have tapered columns?  The tapers are there for a reason.  Sounds like a problem for the other disciplines.  By the way, how did they get the sizes for the straight columns which were assumed?

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

PEMB's are regularly designed with straight columns, although as everyone has indicated the tapered column is the preference.  Depending upon the restrictions placed upon the depth of the column, the change can be done for anywhere from minimal cost to a very large added cost as the column depth gets smaller.  There may also be issues associated with sidesway for shallow column depths.

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

You are taking on responsibilities and liabilities for a building which has more than likely been designed to a FoS of 1.001 and maybe not even seen the worst load combinations it could see in its lifetime.  You have no access to the original design, don't know many of the details of the existing structure or the exact materials used and how they interact on this tight a design.  What you are proposing is not a simple design problem.  Don't even offer to do this.  Just getting started on what you are offering to do will take longer than redoing the Mech. designs.  And, all this because some Mech. designers did a poor job in their original modeling and decision making.  Why not tell them to move the ducts and piping 6" or 1', good original modeling should allow that fairly easily.  You'll still have plenty of hassle in justifying the new hanging loads on the existing structure.
 

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

I perhaps missed the original point.  I would not recommend redesigning an existing tapered column to replace it with a straight column.  For new construction that has not been erected, it is certainly possible for the metal building manufacturer to provide a straight column for a price.

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

Once again be sure to remind all the powers that be, as they're rerouting all the pipes and ductwork, how much money they saved using a PEMB.
Could this mistake happen with a custom designed building? It happens all the time. But you would have the information at hand to make a technically sound decision.
I totally agree with all the posters above in not redesigning the columns. Even if you have the calculations, it's a losing proposition. How are you going to transfer the moments at the knuckle? How about deflections? Will the baseplate work?  

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

Sounds like a coordination issue between the architect and the PEMB guys. PEMB suppliers have a responsibility to coordinate their work with the architectural and MEP designers, just as the SE does on a "regular" building. After all is said and done, either the PEMB design can be modified or it can't. If it can't, then MEP guys gotta work around it and the architect may have to make some adjustments. In my experience, the SEOR designs the building foundations based on some assumptions regarding the final PEMB, but is not responsible for helping the PEMB engineers engineer their final product. Or maybe I am just missing something here?

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

Why does everyone jump straight to this issue being due to negligence from the PEMB?  We work from Contract Documents and follow the Code just like any other SE group, so why should I be labeled as a bad engineer.  There is a lot of good information shared here, but there is also a lot of witch hunting of an entire industry sector due to some perceived short comings.

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

audeuce02,
Everyone?  In rereading the posts above, I couldn't find anyone suggesting negligence on the part of the PEMB engineers...maybe in some other threads, but certainly not in this one.  A bit sensitive, are we?

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

There was the suggestion that the building was designed to the gnat's ass....this is likely what has annoyed Audeuce20.

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

Maybe, but I thought PEMB designers considered that sort of comment as complimentary.  Negligence?  Bad engineer?  Nobody said that.

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

True

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

I apologize.  Its just a culmination of all threads regarding PEMB.  

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

Maybe I'm the one perceived as taking shots at PEMB engineers. That's not the case. I consider them very good engineers within their charter, squeezing every last psi of capacity out of their buildings. And ther's nothing wrong with that. My real issues are:
*Lack of documentation. I'm one of the schmucks who get called when someone needs a window, a load increase, a hole cut in the roof, a monorail. The calculations (we always ask for them, never really get them), are indecipherable. We might get a couple of pages of summary, no interactions, no tributary loads, no section properites, no nothing. I know the calculations are done. How about someone figuring out a presentation that can be followed after the building is built?
*As far as the retrofit projects, the PEMB supplier is never any help. Just once, I'd like to get a contribution (or a call back)from them. How is it that every PEMB supplier has lost every calculation every done? I've heard that there were floods, fires and every other kind of pestilence imaginable. I don't think it's the engineers fault. I think that the PEMB companies see follow-on service as just an invitation for litigation.
Once again, I think that PEMB engineers are very good. They do good work. But for god's sake, think of the other guy. We're trying to make our client's happy, too.

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

@audeuce02,
I, and I think others, don't dislike PEMB designers. just the product. We have some spare capacity on our designs that often allows us to respond to small changes and answer questions quickly, your buildings do not, add to that that they are proprietary so we cannot answer peremptory demands to know if we can increase the weight of dome object or another. Your product comes out of a black box, we can try to analyze it with a regular program but it almost never says yes, but your companies say it does work but they can't prove it because the design basis is proprietary. It is like buying a pig in a poke. Would you buy a car from a man who won't let you look under the hood.

Additionally, those of us are/were called out to evaluate building failures, under wind or snow load, find that the damaged building is a PEMB.

I repeat, I don't have anything against you or your colleagues, I'm sure you just as honorable and ethical as the rest of us but i do hate your product.

 

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

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

And there you have it.  What say you to Jed and Michael's comments, audeuce02?  Maybe it's not good enough anymore for us to just rely on "caveat emptor"?

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

I have no reason to continue to defend my craft.  I am out of here.
 

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

No need to be defensive, audeuce02.  I think the criticism offered here is constructive.  Closing up shop on discussion is not likely to help your cause.  We regularly get good advice on PEMB from some members, ajh1 included.

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

Jed, Paddington & Hokie, you guys are one heck of a 1,2,3 punch.  But, truth speakers.

I actually thought the O.P'er. asked the original question with considerable naivete.  And, I was just warning that there probably wasn't much reserve in the columns or the whole bldg. for that matter.  And, that these bldgs. are quite sensitive to any modifications without the programs, materials lists and code corner cutters the PEMB people employ.  PEMB's may have their place in the as-built infrastructure world, there will always be people who buy on the lowest dollar/cu.ft. enclosed basis only, but they should have a better understanding of what they are buying and its limitations, as regards any future changes to the bldg.  And, if the PEMB people want to improve their name or image a little bit, they could be more open and cooperative with the rest of the bldg. industry after the initial bldg. sale, and any changes need to be made to the bldg.  And, they could be more up-front with the potential bldg. owner about future bldg. modification limitations, deflections and flexibility, etc.  They could also mention that while their steel price looks pretty good, some of that savings will be used up in extra found. work for which they pretend they are not responsible, so as to look even better.

There are steel bldg. salesmen, there are their crafts people, and they certainly are crafty, and there are regular engineers.  Audeuce02, you shouldn't be so sensitive about what you do, as others have said you do it pretty darn well.  You squeeze every pound of steel out of those buildings; that you trim right to the bone can't be denied, and that you reduce the fabricating costs and time to the bear minimum, can't be denied either.  But, your industry could be a bit more up-front about what you are really selling, and maybe some of you engineering people could lead in bringing this about.  You could be more helpful when bldg. modifications are needed by your bldg. owner, or at least explain again what you sold him and why it can't be altered.  Your industry has really made its own reputation, and you're not improving it here, in my eyes.

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

I dont know why the PEMB engineers wouldnt want to do footing design, get a programer in, work on the program to take the reactions, and do the design. a few extra $$ on each job could add up.  

RE: Reduce the size of column Pre-Eng Building

I get asked a lot about upgrading runways and cranes in PEMB's. I basically get zero information from the owners and the original designers so anymore I just reject the request out-of-hand rather than deal with some pissy owner.

I recently looked at one where the differential settlements from frame to frame were so bad that the runway looked like someone drew it on an etch-a-sketch after a 12 pack.
Not the fault of the steel designer necessarily but the foundations were "detailed" right on the PEMB drawings and all they showed was a rectangle in plan with with a note "such n' such bars @ 12" ctrs both ways". Literally that was the extent of the foundation details. It was a joke...
Building was built in the 70's and the drawings had the title block of a very prominent metal building producer.  

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