Existing Column Removal
Existing Column Removal
(OP)
I have a project where the client would like to remove an existing column from a building in two locations (see attached). The original idea (which had the new support beam framed 90 degrees to what is currently shown) was to frame a new joist girder to the underside of the existing joist and use X bridging to stabilize the top of the new girder. With the new girder direction the options are less desirable.
1) Remove the existing girder and install a new joist girder that can span desired length (sort of the existing columns if necessary).
2) Frame a new girder to the underside of the existing girder utilizing kickers to stabilize the top chord of the new girder. This girder is to run from existing column to existing column
3) Same as option #2 but run the new girder the necessary length (short of the column to column location (as shown in the attached sketch)
I like #1 but I think the client is going to want #3. This is going to require me to figure out a way to stabilize the top of the new column in the middle of the new girder.
Has anyone done something similar before?
Please keep in mind I am aware of the foundation concerns hence the different options.
1) Remove the existing girder and install a new joist girder that can span desired length (sort of the existing columns if necessary).
2) Frame a new girder to the underside of the existing girder utilizing kickers to stabilize the top chord of the new girder. This girder is to run from existing column to existing column
3) Same as option #2 but run the new girder the necessary length (short of the column to column location (as shown in the attached sketch)
I like #1 but I think the client is going to want #3. This is going to require me to figure out a way to stabilize the top of the new column in the middle of the new girder.
Has anyone done something similar before?
Please keep in mind I am aware of the foundation concerns hence the different options.






RE: Existing Column Removal
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: Existing Column Removal
Not really tons of headroom, but rather a low clear height required. The initial plan called for an 8' deep joist girder manufactured by a joist mfr. I can stabilize the top of the column with kickers, just something I am not enthusiastic about. I have thought about coming off the bottom chord of the existing girder with a vertical slotted connection in such a way that we can if we add kickers to the bottom chord of the girder it will support the column directly below.
I have a meeting with the owner and fabricator scheduled and I am going to float a few of these ideas out there to see how what they think.
RE: Existing Column Removal
The new girder will be pushed up snug against the bottom of the old one? If that's the case, I wouldn't bother with the slotting. Of course, getting snug contact between two cambered things 'aint easy so maybe you've got something else in mind.
While I absolutely would stabilize the top of the column for good measure, in a sense, it's not even technically necessary. You've already stabilized the load that the column supports, by way of the kickers to the new girder top chord. That, plus a little weak axis stiffness in the girder top chord, and you should be good to go.
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: Existing Column Removal
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: Existing Column Removal
The original idea was to keep the joist girder acting as normal and just support the column with a 96G2N100k girder. In this revised scheme the intent was to keep that girder selection, however if it's possible to support the underside of the existing girder continuously would that even make sense (could use a 96G14N13k or something similar). The reason for the slotted connection at the column support was for the column that was 10' away from the existing. The slot would allow the girder to move so we don't get load reversal. However, again, if we continuously support the existing girder with a new girder is this even a concern..... thinking about it some more, if I am concerned with it...... I could add a vertical member into the existing girder above the column and have the fabricator cut a small section out of the bottom chord of the existing girder at the column.
I am now more enthusiastic about option 3. I can continuously support the existing girder with a new girder. Shim the space between the two girders if necessary and then add kickers on each side of the bottom chord of the existing girder to the top chord of the existing joists.
RE: Existing Column Removal
30 ft. bays with a column removed. The girders were WF beams so a bit different than your situation though.
Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Existing Column Removal
Your detail 3 shows w12x19 cross beams between the two 27x84 girders. Out of curiousity, when/how were these installed? It seems these are included in construction sequence item 6, meaning they were slipped between the two girders, rotated into place, bolted up, and then shimmed to the existing girder. There was enough room to perform all this work?
RE: Existing Column Removal
I don't recall any issues with getting things installed.
We did install new columns and I think we added to the existing column footings - or at least checked them due to the 50% greater load.
Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Existing Column Removal
Yes, thank you JAE. It's rare that somebody is willing to share this much detail about one of their solutions. It's going in the KootK archive fo' sure.
I'm leaning the other way and would prefer to grab just the column and leave a gap between the new and existing girders. I think that arrangement would be easier to fab/install. I'd also take comfort in not having messed with the behavior of the existing girder much at all. There's a fair bit of complexity and uncertainty associated with a partial, continuous bearing solution in my opinion.
Some other things to consider:
1) You could use a pair of new girders sandwiching the existing column. That would make for convenient column removal and would keep the existing girders behaving as originally intended. One could also install the new girders beside the existing girders rather than beneath them. You might get back 24" of head room if there's any value associated with that.
2) See the sketch below for another solution. It would be pretty efficient and you could dial up the pretension to grab the existing load without incurring a bunch of additional deflection. Also, it would be easy to bring into the facility in pieces I would think. Is it correct to assume that the big new girder would have to shipped as field spliced segments?
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: Existing Column Removal
Part of the problem I have is that the owner took my idea with the new joist girder running parallel with the joist and rotated it 90 degrees. Now everyone is sold about going in this direction (new girder parallel to the existing girder). Using two beams/girders was something I thought about, but the budget has been set and unless two girders will save money they are going to want to stick with one.
I thought about your option #2 but while moving the materials into the building may be easy, I believe there is some uncertainty with what is essentially a field built truss. I think there was a discussion on these forums a while back, but what braces the column out of the plane shown?
You are also correct that the joist girder would need to be shipped in two pieces and bolted together in the field. I have talked to a supplier (I think the supplier) and they don't seem to think it is going to be a problem.
RE: Existing Column Removal
Got it. The two girders may well save money:
1) Your design should be governed by deflection. As such, from a material perspective, the quantity may not change much.
2) All the effort of shimming etc may add up to something.
3) If the two girder system will eliminate a bunch of shoring etc associated with the column removal, that may be big money.
Sometimes clients just get ideas in there head and fixate. Clearly, if you've promised it, you're not going to take it away without a good reason.
What kind of uncertainty? You'd be hard pressed to find a more determinate truss. And it offers excellent options for displacement control.
1) Run a brace from the roof deck to the column at the elevation of the bottom of the existing girders. Let the column cantilever down from there stability-wise OR;
2) Splay the four rods slightly as they leave the column.
3) Install a light, perpendicular cross bracing truss to connect the bottoms and tops of the two severed columns.
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: Existing Column Removal
What kind of uncertainty? The kind when you go out onsite expecting one thing and end up with anther after specifically telling the people involved what you are looking for. The pieces may not be perfectly straight in the end, the geometry might not be as perfect as is drawn in CAD which will reduce the amount of weld you can count on. I understand what you are getting at, but I feel better with items being build and welded in the shop vs the field.
RE: Existing Column Removal
RE: Existing Column Removal
RE: Existing Column Removal
No, from what I can tell the foundations were only sized for gravity loads and not uplift like they should have been. This means they were designed to support 1,600 square feet of roof and not much more. The client was made aware of this at the beginning and he was instructed to include adding new footings under the existing columns in his budget. When they were trying to win the tenant and reduce costs, we moved one column 15' away from the existing column (to avoid this in one instance thus saving money). Now the client wants to go back to the original plan.
RE: Existing Column Removal
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: Existing Column Removal
RE: Existing Column Removal
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: Existing Column Removal
There isn't enough space to slide the girder up that high plus we have to deal the rerouting some roof drains. The idea the fabricator came up with had me placing the TC of the girder at the bottom of the existing joist. The issue I have with that is the existing joist girders slope causing conflicts with the bracing for the new girders.
And I don't see adding the kickers which are only attached to the top chord of the existing joists causing a "moment connection" in the joist. The idea is to apply the kickers in-between the existing joist and then use a L5x5 to take the stabilization forces back to the joist. This way 4 joists shard this stabilization force not 2, and we have something good to weld to.
RE: Existing Column Removal
Got it.
Not sure I get how the slope impacts the bracing. Can you elaborate? Regardless, if you're just picking up the column, as I'd recommend, the slope shouldn't cause any issues that can think of.
How are you handling bottom chord bracing for the new girders? Running the bottom chords out to the columns and tying in laterally with slots?
See sketches below for the problem, to the extent that there is one, and a cost neutral improvement (in my opinion). The 5x5 introduces some beneficial flexibility, I agree.
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: Existing Column Removal
How am I going to handle the bracing of the BC of the new girder, the same way they joist manufacturer would normal do this, brace it back to the TC of the joists. Actually haven't given it much thought as the manufacturer typically handles this. I might put a feeler out to them if the is the direction that we go.
Interesting sketch. I will give it some thought, not sure I like the vertical slots (although I know why they are there).
RE: Existing Column Removal
Ah. Is it at least a single slope? Or does one existing girder slope up and the other down? Some options:
1) My proposed detail eliminates the issue.
2) Use a pair of mated, long leg angles back to back to form a zee shape. Adjustable.
That sounds like quite the forest of long bracing angles. Some alternatives that the joist supplier may be able to help with:
1) My detail eliminates this issue also as the bottom chord is also effectively braced.
2) Internally cross brace the two new girders.
3) Make the girder botttom chords laterally stiff enough that they can span between columns without bracing.
4) Make the bottom chords heavy enough that they're self stabilizing without any help.
I'd look into supporting the column at the bottom of the new girders. You're inherently more stable that way.
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: Existing Column Removal
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: Existing Column Removal
I really appreciate you opinion on this. You made me go back and check the beam alternative. Upon doing so I realized the only way to do this is to use a joist girder. If I use 2-40x149 beams my total load deflection is 4 inches at 298#/foot. If I use a 2-72G girders my total load deflection is 2 inches at approx 140#/foot weight and it's easier to "grab some extra moment of inertia" with the joist girder.
I also like your idea of "supporting" the column on the bottom chord of the truss. This will give some added stability to the system.
RE: Existing Column Removal
RE: Existing Column Removal
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: Existing Column Removal
Just a few minor things here and there mostly relating to coordination with the joist mfr and the steel fabricator not "pricing" things correctly. Once everyone was on the same page it was an easy process. Remember, we had a meeting onsite with the fabricator prior to final engineering. What is shown is my initial design interpreted by the fabricator and then put through final engineering. Time will tell if the design is good or not.
Of note: I calculated initial deflection of the system under dead load of 5/8" so we had the fabricator jack the girders 3/8" (attach the column to the girders then shim each end 3/8" then remove the column). As measured in the field (using the best methods I could without spending tons of money on equipment) I measured a deflection at one location of 1/4" and the other at 1/8" (2 columns were removed). So it appears as if we are on the right track.
RE: Existing Column Removal
Professional Engineer (ME, NH, MA) Structural Engineer (IL)
American Concrete Industries
https://www.facebook.com/AmericanConcrete/