Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: Aeroplane Hanger

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Paul and others,

        I would like to thank those of you who have responded to my inquiry.
If there are others who would like to respond all responses will be welcome.

        Paul Ransom's first paragraph really says it all; cost is the primary
thing to consider right now and that's what we are doing.  To that end any
additional responses, no matter how far "off the wall" they may seem to be
will be very welcome.

        Demolition is not an option but building a new, higher, bay or even a
complete new hanger may be an option.  The client would, however, like to
explore the roof raising option as his first choice.  Another option we have
not yet explored is lowering the floor since it's possible that larger,
heavier aircraft may necessitate rebuilding the floor.

        I'm expecting, like Paul is, that the foundations will be o.k. since
they are on piles and the loads indicated on the drawing seem to be
substantial (but I haven't checked them yet).

Best regards, and thanks,

H. Daryl Richardson

Paul Ransom wrote:

> > From: Daryl Richardson <h.d.richardson(--nospam--at)shaw.ca>
>
> >         I have been asked to provide engineering services for the
> > lifting of an aeroplane hanger roof by ten feet.  This sounds like the
>
> >         My question is: how would one proceed to physically do the work
> > in the field, keeping in mind that not only must it be done but it must
> > be done safely?
>
> I'd be asking cost questions before I got too excited about raising the
> building. It MAY be feasibile to simply demolish the existing (possibly
> saving some of the cladding and secondaries - purlins/girts, windows,
> doors, sprinklers, etc.) but buy new rigid frames and endwalls to suit
> the taller structure. There is a good chance that the foundations will
> be adequate.
>
> You will need to have an adjustable support at mid-span of the
> clear-span frames, as well, since the columns will spring outwards when
> the building is lifted from the foundation. The centre jacking can be
> used to control the column spreading. Alternately, move the side
> supports in to the rafter points of inflection and cable across between
> opposite sidewall columns.
>
> >         The building is a pre engineered rigid frame steel building 120
> > feet square by about 18 feet high with tapered beams and columns.  There
> > is a horizontal bolted joint between the columns and the beams.  It has
>
> Horizontal haunch joints sound like a Butler signature. Do you know the
> manufacturer? You MAY be able to get some assistance from the
> manufacturer as to the capacities of standard components and materials
> from that era.
>
> I'm guessing that the haunch connection is about 5' deep. This would
> make your haunch node about 18'-1'- 5'/2 = 14.5 ft. Adding 10 ft is like
> raising the structure 10'/14.5' = 70%.
>
> > the pre engineered package.  The building is 25 plus years old and
> > appears to be in excellent condition.
>
> The plate and mill sections are PROBABLY 44 ksi if from a Canadian
> manufacturer at that time. This was pre-desktop-computer-design and will
> probably be almost standard from the manufacturer.
>
> > One contractor's proposal (very preliminary, in fact discussion
> > only) is to secure the roof with cable or rod bracing against wind; use
> > adjustable telescopic columns to support the roof; jack each column in
> > sequence a few inches at a time until ten feet is achieved; insert
> > prefabricated column sections into place and bolt it down; finally
>
> You would be attaching to a small (exisiting) column base that would
> likely have minimal moment capacity. See my suggestion below.
>
> > reinforce the frames for the new design loading (I know from past
> > experience that pre engineered buildings have virtually no reserve
> > strength so substantial reinforcement will be required).
>
> There is always reserve strength but it is rarely in the place that you
> want it.
>
> > From: Clifford Schwinger <clifford234(--nospam--at)yahoo.com>
>
> > I'm just shooting from the hip here, but how about
> > building some concrete new foundations and concrete
> > piers (or walls) on each side of each column and
> > jacking the whole building up onto new piers. Design
> > the piers to take all the forces in a way that no
> > modifications to the existing hanger structure would
> > be required.
> >
> > Cliff
>
> I think that this is the most practical possibility if the same building
> envelope must be used. You may have issues with the building bracing due
> to the higher door tributary height.
>
> Another option would be to investigate the possibility of raising the
> building and COMPLETELY REPLACING ONLY THE COLUMNS of the rigid frames.
> The rafters should be adequate if the new tall columns are similar
> stiffness to the shorter originals. The girts could be unfastened at
> each frame while the column is replaced (cladding will hold the girts in
> position). The new column would not be much more expensive than the 10'
> extension after the labour is added.
>
> This kind of job is as much a detailing nightmare as the engineering
> analysis.
>
> Field reinforcing is rarely cost effective for PEMBs except for very
> localized situations (probably not this case).
>
> New pre-eng building is about CDN$10/sf erected (about CDN$150,000 for a
> replacement plus demolition/disposal less scrap recovery).
>
> --
> Paul Ransom, P. Eng.
> Civil/Structural/Project/International
> Burlington, Ontario, Canada
> <mailto:ad026(--nospam--at)hwcn.org> <http://www.hwcn.org/~ad026/civil.html>
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> *   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
> *
> *   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
> *   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
> *   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> *   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> *   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
> *   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
> *   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
> *   site at: http://www.seaint.org
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********



******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********