long span structure case study

• Hispanoamérica
• Work at ArchDaily
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Architecture News

Long-Span Buildings That Defy Gravity

• Written by Equipe ArchDaily Brasil | Translated by Tarsila Duduch
• Published on September 03, 2021

In architecture, ‘span’ is the term given to the length of a structural component that extends between two supports, or the continuous space created between two pillars of a building structure, and when we think of this element, one cannot help recalling classics such as Lina Bo Bardi's MASP , Álvaro Siza's Expo'98 Portuguese National Pavilion , and the Roman Pantheon . However, there are several other buildings with this feature, and recent projects have been using innovative and bold structures to create even more unexpected designs.

Here, we have gathered some of these creations featuring structures that span long distances using different materials, such as steel, concrete, and bamboo. Among the many different types of buildings, some even use unusual materials such as polyurethane foam and plastic, proving that there's always room for creativity and innovation in architecture.

Tianjin Binhai Library / MVRDV + Tianjin Urban Planning and Design Institute

Teshima Art Museum / Ryue Nishizawa

Soft Matter / NATURALBUILD

Tian Han Cultural Park / WCY Regional Studio

Hangzhou Xixi Green Office Complex / gad

Changsha Meixihu International Culture and Art Centre / Zaha Hadid Architects

Jewel Changi Airport / Safdie Architects

Upper Skeena Recreation Center / Hemsworth Architecture

The Arc at Green School / IBUKU

Taiyuan Botanical Garden / Delugan Meissl Associated Architects

BUGA Fibre Pavilion / ICD/ITKE University of Stuttgart

Urban Podium In Rotterdam / Atelier Kempe Thill

Bridge Gallery / Atelier Lai

Tianjin Binhai Cultural Center / gmp Architects

Beyond the Geometry Plastic 3D Printed Pavilion / Archi-Union Architects + Fab-Union

Le Monde Office Building / Snøhetta + SRA Architects

Suzhou Bay Grand Theater / Christian de Portzamparc

Moynihan Train Hall / SOM

Habitat Qinhuangdao / Safdie Architects

PGA TOUR Headquarters / Foster + Partners

Image gallery

• Sustainability

想阅读文章的中文版本吗?

You've started following your first account!

Did you know.

You'll now receive updates based on what you follow! Personalize your stream and start following your favorite authors, offices and users.

Join TheConstructor to ask questions, answer questions, write articles, and connect with other people. When you join you get additional benefits.

Confirm Password *

First Name *

Last Name *

Country Select a country… Åland Islands Afghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belau Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bonaire, Saint Eustatius and Saba Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo (Brazzaville) Congo (Kinshasa) Cook Islands Costa Rica Croatia Cuba CuraÇao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and McDonald Islands Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Isle of Man Israel Italy Ivory Coast Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Laos Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao S.A.R., China Macedonia Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Micronesia Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island North Korea Norway Oman Pakistan Palestinian Territory Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Qatar Republic of Ireland Reunion Romania Russia Rwanda São Tomé and Príncipe Saint Barthélemy Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Martin (Dutch part) Saint Martin (French part) Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines San Marino Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia/Sandwich Islands South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom (UK) United States (US) Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Vatican Venezuela Vietnam Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Western Samoa Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe

By registering, you agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy . *

Log in to TheConstructor to ask questions, answer people’s questions, write articles & connect with other people. When you join you get additional benefits.

Join for free or log in to continue reading...

Username or email *

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Sorry, you do not have permission to ask a question, You must log in to ask a question. Join now!

The Constructor

2 important failure case studies of long-span steel structures.

Do you need to remove the ads? Join now!

🕑 Reading time: 1 minute

Space structures are generally utilized in the construction of airport terminals, stockrooms, historical centers, and shopping centers where huge transverse space is required. They are architecturally appealing and structurally adaptable. Moreover, space structures are light in weight, which reduces the construction cost and help cover large zones of continuous spans effectively.

In recent years, space structures have developed and discovered their utility in the cutting-edge world of construction. Hollow steel section members and nodes with improved properties have altogether affected their application in storage spaces. 

In comparison with the ordinary column-beam structure, long-range space structures are unpredictable in design and need explicit design rules. Thus, the chances of the generation of inaccurate data for mathematical models are high. Also, because of their simplicity, grid uniformity, and redundancy, structural engineers and contractors tend to assume their strength and stability.

Primary codes for the design of long-span steel structures lack procedural rules as the codes assume the behavior of a steel structure. Thus, experience in their planning, designing, construction, and assembly plays a fundamental role in avoiding failure.  

The collapse of space structure has distinctive mechanisms due to variance in their structural form. Multi-layer framework structures (MLFS) have exceptionally large statistic redundancy and indeterminacy. Therefore, they are not inclined to progressive failure even after the collapse of an individual part. But, the progressive failure of the structure may occur if the critical members fail during service loading.  

Likewise, progressive failure can occur in structures if the critical members are subjected to higher wind and snow load. Thus, to prevent the progressive failure of the structures, an additional factor of safety is to be utilized in critical members. Sensitivity analysis can be used to determine the critical members subjected to high loading and can be susceptible to failure.

On the other hand, the collapse of single-layer framework structures (SLFS) might be initiated due to the buckling of a single member. Therefore, examining the stability of the individuals is very vital. SLFS shows more sensitivity to buckling than MLFS because of the transfer of the forces through just only one layer. The local buckling in SLFS may occur due to the snap-through buckling of single members in a localized area. Whereas the global buckling happens when a bigger region of instability is considered in the space structure. 

In this article, we discuss various causes of failure and investigation methodology and two failure case studies specifically for long-span steel structures. 

1. Ceiling Collapse of Charles De Gaulle Airport-Terminal 2E, France

On 23 rd May 2004, the ceiling of Terminal 2E of the Charles De Gaulle Airport collapsed near gate E50. A 300 mm thick curved reinforced concrete precast slab was designed for the structure of 30 m width. Researchers suggested that a 30 m long concrete precast slab collapsed on to the boarding footpath. Four people lost their lives and three were critically injured. 

1.1 Investigation Findings

The design concept used to construct the ceiling of the terminal was somewhat unusual. It was complex to understand and evaluate the force distribution since the 2D model made by the design office was not adequate as per code provisions. Redistribution of local forces from the struts to the panel was absent. Thus, the failure of a single member due to punching shear produced the collapse of domed concrete. 

In the zone of concrete failure, the composite panels seemed to be loaded by a higher level of roof loads, increasing the punching shear by 50%. Also, the structural model failed to take into account the long-term effects of terminal structure. 

More than 400 firms were engaged with the venture, and a serious level of inefficient complexity was observed in the management of the project. A high likelihood of coordination error was inescapable because of the collective individual errors and mistakes. Thus, it played a pivotal role in amounting to failure. 

The quality of the assembled panels was affected due to the delay in executing the work. Also, the delay caused the misalignment between the composite panels of concrete. Therefore, the stresses were getting accumulated due to the eccentric loading on the composite panels. 

It was observed that the design error of the slab thickness was a trade-off due to the architectural requirement. The airport authorities themselves acted as the financier and the project manager. Thus, there was no external authority to check and regulate the project. 

Reports and investigations confirmed that the terminal ceiling failed due to the poor practice of construction, low-quality concrete, and lack of structural design knowledge.  

1.2 Causes of Failure

The following points describe the leading causes of the progressive collapse: 

• Inadequate shear stiffness was developed due to the insufficient design of shear reinforcement. 
• Dowel bars were deeply embedded inside the concrete shell and created cracks in the concrete roof. 
• Several cracks were formed as a result of higher-than-expected construction loads and differential moisture and thermal movements.
• Investigation reports suggested that the margin of safety was lesser than anticipated during the design. 
• Cracks in concrete developed due to the misplacement of tensile reinforcement. Thus, the tensile stresses were not resisted effectively. 
• The horizontal column ties and longitudinal support beams were inadequate to provide enough support to the structural members. 

2. Collapse of Roof of Sultan Mizan Zainal Abidin Stadium, Malaysia

The Sultan Mizan Zainal Abidin Stadium was constructed for hosting multi-purpose games in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The seating capacity of the stadium was 50,000. The stadium was intended to have two-shell like rooftops. The support for rooftops was provided in the form of concrete buttresses and space framework structure. The stadium was comprised of a curved double-layer space network made of cylinders and steel ball joints. 

On 3 rd June 2009, a tragic collapse of the roof of the stadium occurred soon after it had opened for one year. Luckily, there were no lives lost after the failure of the long-span space structure. 

2.1 Investigation Findings

After the failure of the roof of the stadium, an investigation committee was formed. The committee reported that the design of the stadium was not as per the codal provisions. 

The structural engineer didn't consider the support conditions while modeling the roof of the stadium. The span of the roof was very large and hence the roof was susceptible to the movements at the supports. 

The roof was constructed ineffectively and prompted additional stresses in the members at support because of misalignment. The quality of materials, nature of workmanship, and testing of preliminary materials were far below the standard prerequisites. 

The structural engineer didn't take the stiffness of supports into account, which is very sensitive for large span roof structures. The complexity of the space structure was of a higher degree; therefore, a detailed structural analysis was needed to prepare working drawings for constructing the stadium. However, the designers didn't analyze the structure considering the complex architectural shape of the stadium. 

2.2 Causes of Failure

The following points describe the main reasons behind the collapse of the roof of the Sultan Mizan Zainal Abidin Stadium:

• After the failure of the structure, it was evident from the site debris that the steel components were defectively welded. Therefore, quality control in the pre-fabrication stage was lacking.
• The design for temporary supports was not adequate. Thus, additional construction loads were applied to the supports. 
• No internal checks were conducted on the strength of the structure during the erection process. 
• During the modeling of the stadium, the critical factors for wind speed, wind direction, risk factor, and importance factor were not considered. 
• The orientation of the stadium was not based upon the topological conditions of the site. Moreover, the stadium was not designed for critically identified wind loads.
• Due to the use of poor-quality material and improper design, the overall factor of safety of the structure was reduced. 
• Incorporation of poorly conceived plans, strategies, and faulty implementation of quality control checks and control systems by the management contributed to the collapse
• Desired skills and competency of the project manager and his team members were questionable. They were not trained to handle an endeavor of such magnitude and complexity.   

Multi-layer framework structures (MLFS) have exceptionally large statistic redundancy and indeterminacy. Therefore, they are not inclined to progressive failure even after the collapse of an individual part. But, the progressive failure of the structure may occur if the critical members fail during service loading. The progressive failure can likewise happen to structures if the critical members are subjected to higher wind and snow load. Thus, to prevent the progressive failure of the structures, an additional factor of safety is to be utilized in critical members. 

The collapse of single-layer framework structures (SLFS) might be initiated due to the buckling of a single member. Therefore, examining the stability of the individuals is very vital. SLFS shows more sensitivity to buckling than MLFS because of the transfer of the forces through just only one layer. The local buckling in SLFS may occur due to the snap-through buckling of single members in a localized area. Whereas the global buckling happens when a bigger region of instability is considered in the space structure.

In comparison with the ordinary column-beam structure, long-range space structures are unpredictable in design and need explicit design rules. Thus, the chances of the generation of inaccurate data for mathematical models are high. Also, because of their simplicity, grid uniformity, and redundancy, structural engineers and contractors tend to assume their strength and stability. Primary codes for the design of long-span steel structures lack procedural rules as the codes assume the behavior of a steel structure. Thus, experience in their planning, designing, construction, and assembly plays a fundamental role in avoiding failure.  

5 Disastrous Foundation Failures in New York City

Top 5 Biggest Dam Failures in the World

Collapse of Willow Island Cooling Tower: One of the Worst Construction Disasters in the History of US

Ravi Panwar

Related posts.

Analysis of Moment Resisting Frame and Lateral Load Distribution

Limit State, Working Stress and Ultimate Load Method of Structural ...

Acrow Case Study

Long span rail bridge case study, long span rail bridge allows for innovative structure replacement.

An Acrow 700XS panel bridge was recently used in Columbus Ohio to provide temporary uninhibited travel for rail traffic, while a new permanent vehicular underpass was constructed.

While Acrow Panel bridges are common to vehicular applications, they are also used to carry extremely heavy rail traffic; even Cooper E80 loading requirements. In a combined project with TranSystems (permanent and temporary bridge engineer) Shelly and Sands Construction (bid winning contractor) and Franklin County (owner), Acrow was able to provide a 125 foot clear span bridge capable of carrying the rail owned by the Indiana and Ohio Railway.

The railroad bridge over Alkire Road was a simple stone tunnel that served users well for more than 100 years. However, changes in horizontal and vertical clearance requirements and roadway capacity necessitated a replacement of the bridge to provide a safer environment for motorists. The existing structure was built in 1902, with a span of 19.25 feet between the stone-faced abutments. The posted minimum vertical clearance at the spring line of the arch was 12.17 feet, which required many trucks, school buses and emergency vehicles to travel the middle of the roadway, forcing oncoming traffic to stop suddenly. The structure was hit several times throughout its life, so widening the roadway was a crucial adjustment.

The project began design in 2003. TranSystems Inc requested a quote from Acrow for a temporary structure capable of carrying a Cooper E80 load and spanning a 125 foot gap. As with all complex jobs, there were many obstacles that were in the way for the replacement of the existing structure including railroad outing restrictions, right of way traffic limitations, the proximity of two large stone culverts over the tributary to Scioto Big Run and construction cost limitations. The use of an Acrow panel bridge minimized these issues allowing the project to be completed within the established time given, and reducing the costly “car rerouting” expenses that the rail line imposed on the contractor should it be necessary. Additionally, with the limited time given by the rail line, only a fast modular system like Acrow’s panel bridge could be installed in the narrow 6 day timeframe given for the initial temporary replacement. The speed of the install was amplified during the removal; the entire Acrow structure was “picked” and disassembled offline and thus streamlined the swap of the permanent placed structure.

The total cost of the project was $6.1 million. This project won an award from the Regional ASHE Organization and continues to be recognized in the greater Ohio area for its on time completion and innovation. It was also submitted for the National ASHE recognition.

You also might be interested in

Detour Rental in New York State Keeps Traffic Moving During Major Interstate Reconstruction

A temporary detour bridge from Acrow was successfully used to keep traffic flowing in the final phase of a complex years long project to reconstruct Interstate 81and NY Route 17 in the city of Binghamton, NY.

Acrow Bridges Maintain Traffic Flow Across the Charles River

The North Washington Street Bridge is critical to Boston’s infrastructure. Owned by the City of Boston, and administered by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MASSDOT), the bridge carries over 40,000 vehicles a day and serves as the main bus route between Boston and Charlestown.

Four Detour Bridges Maintain Traffic During I-94 Modernization Project in Michigan

A project to replace or repair 17 bridges on Interstate 94 and resurface 10 miles of the roadway in Calhoun County, Michigan, broke ground in late March 2023 and is part of the state’s multiyear I-94 Modernization Project.

Acrow Supplies Temporary Detour Route During Bridge Replacement in Ohio

The Old Rockside Road Bridge in Independence, Ohio, was built over the Cuyahoga River in 1960 to link the City of Independence with the Village of Valley View.

Acrow’s Detour Structure Provides Access Over Railroad During Bridge Replacement in Pennsylvania

Situated just outside of downtown Pittsburgh and constructed in the early 1900s, the Kenmawr Bridge carried vehicular and pedestrian traffic over the mainline tracks of the Norfolk Southern Railroad.

Acrow Bridge Restores Critical Route for Louisiana Residents Impacted by Hurricane Ida

Hurricane Ida was a destructive Category 4 storm that made U.S. landfall in Louisiana at the end of August 2021 and caused widespread damage and loss of life across numerous states as far north as Connecticut.

Acrow Detour Bridges Lessen Impact of Multi-Year Interstate Renovation in Massachusetts

In Northampton, Massachusetts, four aging bridges on I-91 were slated for replacement. Two bridges carry traffic over Route 5 and tracks of the B&M Railroad and the other two over Hockanum Road, a short distance to the north.

Reconnecting a Key Route After Flooding in Western Colorado

Heavy snowfall buildup on Colorado’s Western Slope led to excessive runoff in spring 2023. In early May, this flooding led to the washout of a section of Colorado State Highway 133 (SH 133) between the small towns of Paonia and Somerset.

Acrow Bridge Permits Uninterrupted Traffic Flow During Highway Construction in Colorado

The bridge spanning the Gunnison River on State Highway 92, east of Delta, Colorado, was built in 1938. Despite ongoing maintenance, its load capacity was reduced in 2016.

Temporary Acrow Bridge Minimizes Work Zone Impact During Highway Construction in New Jersey

New Jersey’s I-295 Direct Connect project aims to increase safety and lower congestion at the intersection of I-295 with I-76 and Route 42 in Camden County.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Long Span and Long Span and complex Structure complex Structure

RELATED PAPERS

Pratik Uchil

Jaime Sanchez-Alvarez

Andres Labarca

flora caroline

Marta Gil Pérez

Johana C Siliwire

thomas leslie

Rehan Jamil

Laurence Tuazon

Jayaraman Rathnam

Craggy Cory

Puangco Dela Fuente

Steel Construction

Raphael Choong

ANYANWU BLESSING CHIKA

Shahana Puthiyaparambath

alberto ramos

Duy Phan Tường

Engineering Research Publication and IJEAS

Sadeq Sinan

Ali Elnezamy

KARTIK PATEL

fingki amelia

Dissertation submitted as part requirement for the Master Degree in Advanced Architectural Studies

Konstantinos A Sakantamis

Sadeq Sinan , adonis bibat

Jonggyun Paik

Friend Chid

Roy Suherdin

Joan De Guzman

Mahesa Eka Putra

adonis bibat

Pukar Bhandari

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024