Non-building structures similar to buildings
Non-building structures similar to buildings
(OP)
Hi,
As per ASCE, Industrial buildings qualify as non-building structures similar to buildings. Can Hangars qualify as non-building structures similar to building? Does ASCE specifically call out structures that fall under this category?
Thanks
As per ASCE, Industrial buildings qualify as non-building structures similar to buildings. Can Hangars qualify as non-building structures similar to building? Does ASCE specifically call out structures that fall under this category?
Thanks






RE: Non-building structures similar to buildings
Hangers are simply "buildings" as well. I think if you look in ASCE 7 under the non-building similar to building tables you get a feel for what they are talking about.
Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Non-building structures similar to buildings
RE: Non-building structures similar to buildings
RE: Non-building structures similar to buildings
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Non-building structures similar to buildings
I came across some explanation in structural engineer magazine, which states if the aircraft hangar is just used for maintenance of aircraft, it can be treated as a nonbuilding structure. See the attached link
http://www.structuremag.org/?p=11265
RE: Non-building structures similar to buildings
RE: Non-building structures similar to buildings
If the hangar encloses an aircraft and is only used to shelter crews maintaining the aircraft, then it's a nonbuilding structure.
Put a washroom/break room/supervisor's office in there for the mechanics and it's a building.
Same with a chemical plant: build a structural steel framework to support some pipe and vessels, and it's a non-building structure. Put a roof and cladding walls on it to keep out the wind and snow, it's still a nonbuilding structure. Put a lab, control room or other occupancy on it, it's now a building.
The trouble is, it seems there are people out there who think that anything with a roof and walls is a building, requiring all the protections intended for structures which are continuously rather than intermittently occupied. That drives up cost and complexity which often means that things that SHOULD be enclosed, are NOT enclosed merely to satisfy these rules. That isn't actually making things safer for workers one bit.
RE: Non-building structures similar to buildings
Any building used for limited occupancy can be classified as nonbuilding structure. So building manufacturing widgets can also be treated as nonbuilding structure.
RE: Non-building structures similar to buildings
This scenario is no different than any other occupancy change a structure could be subject to- and it has the same effect with regard to code updates and and enforcement.
RE: Non-building structures similar to buildings
RE: Non-building structures similar to buildings
Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Non-building structures similar to buildings
RE: Non-building structures similar to buildings
Occupancy U (Utility & Misc.): Aircraft hangers (for 1 or 2 family residence)
Occupancy S-1 (Storage - Group 1): Aircraft Repair Hangers
The fact that a building or structure could somewhere down the road be changed to a different occupancy use has no effect on the design of the building. If it does have a occupancy change then the proper procedures need to be followed for doing so, which would likely result in a reanalysis of the structure.
RE: Non-building structures similar to buildings
That said, we should err on the side of life safety and not try to squeeze every dollar out of someone's initial construction cost.
RE: Non-building structures similar to buildings
I would be interested to know exactly how much budget is saved in materials by this non-building classification. If you know, please post that. Or is the motivation to expand the building heights per ASCE 7-10 Table 12.2-1?
A few examples of code minimum designs are below. Hopefully they were unoccupied.
RE: Non-building structures similar to buildings
If this logic is taken to its end, every building would be built with the strongest, most robust, most durable techniques and materials available, for the most strenuous and dangerous occupancies, and the highest possible live loads. The side effect of this would be that no one would be able to afford to build anything.
You either respect the code, or you don't- you can't have it both ways just because there's a part of the code you don't like.
Ultimately, at some point in the process, the code must be interpreted by a human to determine whats appropriate and what isn't. This is why we are all able to pay our mortgages.
RE: Non-building structures similar to buildings
I appreciated your perspective, but respectfully disagree. Most of the engineering we do considers (balances) reliability, total cost, and constructability. If a modification in design will cost 2% extra to the construction budget, but give 30% extra reliability for extreme events, this is a good bargain.
My point is not to specify stainless steel where mild steel is adequate. However, when an engineer attempts to interpret the code in a manner that is in dispute, or not generally accepted by his peers, and he believes this approach will save construction dollars, then it is reasonable to ask: Just how much savings are you achieving, how much extra future risk are you incurring, and also assigning to the life of the project. If you can't answer this with a decent confidence level, it is prudent to take the more accepted and slightly more conservative approach to the code.
This is particularly true of PEMBs.