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!

*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.

Jobs

Design Live Load for Elevated Tennis Courts

Design Live Load for Elevated Tennis Courts

(OP)
Trying to run some prelims to win a bid for an site expansion so I don't have tons of info. Part of the expansion is to add parking below grade and use the deck as tennis courts. I feel that the closest category in ASCE7 is the "bowling alleys or other recreational areas" at 75psf. I feel this is justifiable, however I am concerned that the worst case could be that at some random point the courts are used for some public assembly that would more fit into a 100psf category. Has anyone else ever had a similar issue when trying to justify LL?

RE: Design Live Load for Elevated Tennis Courts

I would think 100 psf minimum... but, dynamics would be a much bigger issue.

Dik

RE: Design Live Load for Elevated Tennis Courts

(OP)
The rationale behind not using 100 is that 98% of the time (or more) there will be about 12 people on the deck. The rationale for using 100% is that other 2% when they might use the courts for some ceremony or whatnot. It feels overly conservative to punish the design for 'maybes' like that. The "occupancy" is for approximately ten to twenty people to be playing tennis at one time...not to have a public gathering. I can see it both ways and know that increasing the live load 25psf will have a pretty sizable effect on the design.

RE: Design Live Load for Elevated Tennis Courts

I would think as dik said deflection and vibration would be the largest issue. I would likely design it for the 100 psf and then not need to worry about those issues knowing that for 98% of the time it would be no where near loaded.

RE: Design Live Load for Elevated Tennis Courts

I doubt that it will make much difference, costwise. Formwork, placement, finishing all the same. Maybe a bit extra in concrete and/or reinforcement. So I would just use 100.

RE: Design Live Load for Elevated Tennis Courts

Then along comes a new owner that wants to park cars there.

RE: Design Live Load for Elevated Tennis Courts

OG... then use 50 (for parking garages)? If long spans, then vibration will likely govern... I'd still use 100...

Dik

RE: Design Live Load for Elevated Tennis Courts

If you read the commentary in ASCE 7 they admit that most of the live load requirements are much higher than what is typically found on the various types of floors.
But then they state that the loading requirements are there for the reason that sometimes the floors do get heavily loaded and you need to design to the less frequent, but potential (probable) and occasional heavier loading.

So your 100 psf would probably be what I'd do.

Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies

RE: Design Live Load for Elevated Tennis Courts

I like 100 psf too but I think that can be a "last legs" design with serviceability etc off the table. Ideally, your vibration control at more reasonable loads would still govern. What's your proposed system? Two way RC? Precast? TJI?

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: Design Live Load for Elevated Tennis Courts

If there are spectator stands or bleachers, I am onboard with 100 psf or more. If there are JUST tennis courts with people only (no type of carts or vehicle access)40 psf or so sounds more reasonable to me.

RE: Design Live Load for Elevated Tennis Courts

I'm willing to bet money that the member proportions needed to handle the deflections and vibrations at 75psf will actually meet the 100psf design allowance.
Dave

Thaidavid

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


Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close