Lisø PhD Dissertation Manuscript - NTNU
Lisø PhD Dissertation Manuscript - NTNU
Lisø PhD Dissertation Manuscript - NTNU
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
municipalities of Andøy and Fræna. The buildings included in the investigation were low in height<br />
relative to their width and length. For buildings with this form, the sum of the shape factors against<br />
the windward and lee wall is equal to 0.85 in NS 3491-4, while the factor may become 1.5 for a high<br />
building. In earlier codes, the corresponding shape factor is 1.2, irrespective of the height of the<br />
building. In other words, the shape factor has become significantly lower for the building form that<br />
dominates the selected buildings, while it would not have dropped so low if the buildings had been<br />
high relative to their length and width. The reduction in design wind action for the selected buildings<br />
would therefore not apply for example to high-rise buildings.<br />
Capacity exceedings compared with load increases<br />
The highest utilization ratio found for important structural components for the buildings investigated<br />
are summarised in Table 3. As the table shows, 18 buildings have a utilization ratio of more than 1.0.<br />
This represents 90 % of the buildings that were investigated. Although the design requirements for 95<br />
% of the buildings have increased since they were built, one would assume that they had built-in<br />
reserve capacities that meant that fewer buildings experienced a utilization ratio of more than 1.0.<br />
The design rules for the most important materials in the structures have changed since the<br />
buildings investigated were planned. Essentially, the materials load-bearing properties can be utilised<br />
to a higher degree now than in the past. If the buildings had been constructed in accordance with the<br />
regulations when they were built, one would therefore have expected that fewer than 18 buildings<br />
would have exceeded their capacity under current rules. The table also shows that 11 buildings have a<br />
higher utilization ratio than a load increase. This indicates incorrect planning, incorrect construction<br />
or rebuilding.<br />
It is important that all owners of buildings know what value of snow load the roof is designed for,<br />
and have routines for monitoring the snow load on the roof and clearing it when necessary. When<br />
roofs are being cleared of snow, this may in the worst-case make the stresses on the structure greater<br />
than before the snow clearance started. There are many examples of snow clearing leading to the<br />
collapse of structures. Instructions on this are contained in “Snow loads on existing roof<br />
constructions” (<strong>Lisø</strong> et al. 2000) and Report HO-1/2001 “Guidelines on snow loads on roofs”<br />
(National Office of Building Technology and Administration 2001).<br />
DISCUSSION<br />
As mentioned earlier the selected buildings in the investigation are building types regarded as being<br />
especially exposed to increasing snow loads and wind actions. The exposed building types amount to<br />
5 % of the total bulk of buildings in Norway (11 % of total building floor area).<br />
90 % of the buildings investigated have too low capacity when compared with current design<br />
rules. Thus, potentially 4.5 % of the total bulk of buildings in Norway may have too low capacity<br />
according to current regulations. The design snow loads have increased for 95 % of the investigated<br />
buildings indicating an increase in design snow loads for 4.7 % of the total bulk of buildings. 55 % of<br />
the investigated buildings have higher utilization ratio than load increase, which may indicate<br />
incorrect planning, incorrect construction or rebuilding. Thus, potentially 2.8 % of the total bulk of<br />
buildings in Norway have higher utilization ratio than load increase. However, the investigation<br />
constitutes only 20 buildings, and thus has obvious quantitative weaknesses. It must nevertheless be<br />
regarded as an important pointer on challenges concerning reliability.<br />
The investigation indicates too low reliability for a considerable number of buildings according to<br />
current building regulations. It could also be of interest considering the future reliability of the<br />
building stock taking into account possible climate changes. In Norway the design life for buildings is<br />
60 years in general and 100 years for monumental buildings.<br />
Research establishments in several parts of the world are addressing the risks associated with<br />
future climate change and the resulting impacts. According to Karl and Trenberth (2003) modern<br />
<strong>Manuscript</strong> No. ST/2005/024694 10 of 13