RFP 2of4.pdf

Appendix C – Structural Calculations

Calculation Subject:

Project Name:

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: Date:

2 =

3 =

NOTES:

Reference Code/Notes: PROJECT LOCATION MAP

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

6/1/2018

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

Structural and Forensic Engineers 50 S. Beretania Street, #C-119C, Honolulu, Hawaii 96813

Tel: 808.533.2210 Fax: 808.533.2686

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: 0 Date:

8 1.) Project Location, building dimensions and gravity loads

9 2.) Proposed PV System Weights

10 3.) Seismic Parameters

11 4.)

12 5.)

NOTES:

Gravity Member Checks

1/0/1900

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

Seismic Lateral Distribution Force Check

To verify the proposed PV system meets code (Ch. 34 IBC) for additions to existing structures, the forces on a member shall not increase by more than 5%, unless the increased forces on the element are still in compliance with the code for new structures. This evaluation will determine, at times conservatively, the structure's existing loads and make the comparison to the proposed PV system.

Reference Code/Notes: CALCULATION INTRODUCTION

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

CALCULATION SUMMARY OF CONTENTS

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

6/1/2018

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: 0 Date:

1 Address: = US Army Reserves Center

2 Zip Code: = Tafuna, American Samoa

3 Latitude: = -14.332

4 Longitude: = -170.72

8 > The metal decking is assumed to be a Vulcraft Type N 16 gage deck.

9 > Per site visit on 3/13/2018-3/16/2018, standing seam metal roof was noted.

10 > Mech./elec./plumbing is excluded from the seismic check, but included in the gravity.

14 = 160 ft

15 = 325 ft

16 = 9.50 ft

17 Height (Upper Roof - Eave) = 11.50 ft

18 Height (Upper Roof - Ridge) = 19.75 ft

19 Roof Slope (Lower) = 3.00 : 12

20 Roof Slope (Upper) = 3 : 12

21 = 52000 sq.ft

22 = 53612 sq.ft

25 = 1.00 psf

26 W410x60 @ 6' o.c.1 = 11.31 psf

27 = 1.13 psf

28 Deep Rib Metal Deck Type N 16 Ga = 5.00 psf

29 W530x101 at Ridges3 = 0.40 psf

30 = 0.25 psf (Assume: Western North)

33 Upper Roof Dead Loads 19.08 psf

34 1022.8969 kips

41 = 1220.00 ft

42 = 9.00 ft

43 = 84.00 psf

44 = 1.00 psf

45 = 104.47 kips

NOTES:

3/4" Rigid Insulation

Building Width

6/1/2018

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

Bldg Footprint

ASSUMPTIONS USED IN EVALUATION

Standing Seam Metal Roof

Information provided by available record drawings.

Building dimensions and dead loads are conservative rough estimates.

Applied as PSF over entire roof

Weight of CMU

Wall Height

CLEAR STORY WALL DEAD LOADS:

Insulation

OTHER DEAD LOADS

CMU Wall Length

W410x132 at Ridges3

Building Length

Height (Lower Roof - Eave)

UPPER ROOF DEAD LOADS

STRUCTURE DIMENSIONS

Reference Code/Notes: PROJECT LOCATION

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

Roof Area

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: 0 Date:

3 = 650

4 Module Self Weight = 41 lbs ea

5 Racking Weight (incls. Rails, conns,etc.) = 7 lbs / module

6 Electrical (microInverters) = 3.4 lbs / module

7 Upper Roof Weight = 33.03 kips

13 Module Weight (psf) 62.6 in x 41.5 in = 2.82 psf / module

17 Zip Code: = Tafuna, American Samoa

18 Site Class = C (Assumed)

19 Building Occupancy Category = II

20 Seismic Importance Factor IE = 1.00

21 Short Spectral Acceleration SS = 0.330 UFC 3-301-01 Table F-3

22 Long Spectral Acceleration S1 = 0.150 UFC 3-301-01 Table F-3

23 Soil Coefficient - Short Spectral Acceleration FA = 1.20 ASCE 7-10 Table 11.4-1

24 Soil Coefficient - Long Spectral Acceleration FV = 1.65 ASCE 7-10 Table 11.4-1

25 Adjusted Response - Short Spectral Acceleration SMS = 0.396 ASCE 7 Eq. 11.4-1

26 Adjusted Response - Long Spectral Acceleration SM1 = 0.248 ASCE 7 Eq. 11.4-2

27 Short Spectral Acceleration SDS = 0.264 ASCE 7 Eq. 11.4-3

28 Long Spectral Acceleration SD1 = 0.165 ASCE 7 Eq. 11.4-4

29 Seismic Design Category - Short Spectral Accel = C

30 Seismic Design Category - Long Spectral Accel = C

38 R = 5.0

39 Approximate Building Period: Ta = 0.187 sec < T L

40 Response Coefficient: CS = 0.010 < 0.053 < 0.176

41 (min) (max)

42 CS = 0.053

NOTES:

SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS

SEISMIC FORCES

ASCE 7-10 (UNO)

Upper Roof

6/1/2018

1/0/1900

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

PV LAYOUT - PROPOSED

The structure's dead loads are determined and calculated to yield the most conservative results.

The structure's seismic base shear will be estimated using the ELF procedure with the SFRS as a bearing wall system with ordinary masonry shear walls in both longitudinal and transverse directions. Diaphragm is flexible, therefore no torsion forces are included.

Response Modification Factor:Table 12.2-1

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

Reference Code/Notes:

Panasonic N330/N325

Number of Modules

12.8-2

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: 0 Date:

4 NOTE:

11 Check Typical W410x60 Roof Beams:

14 Original Structure Loads

15 = 11.31 psf

16 W410x60 @ 6' o.c.1,3 = 1.13 psf

17 = 5.00 psf

18 Deep Rib Metal Deck Type N 16 Ga = 0.40 psf

19 W530x101 at Ridges3 = 0.25 psf

20 = 0.00 psf

21 psf

22 psf

23 Total Dead Load = 18.1 psf

24 Roof Live = 12.0 psf (Assuming Lr Reduct.)

26 New Loads w/ PV System:

27 Original Dead Load (See above): = 18.1 psf

28 PV System = 2.8 psf

29 Total Dead Load = 20.9 psf

30 Roof Live # = 10.0 psf No RLL in PV area

31 Comparative Summary of Governing Design Load Combinations:

32 Diff

33 LC1 DL 18 DL 21 15.6% > 5%, NG See Note 1 below

34 LC2 DL+Lr 30 DL+Lr 31 2.7% < 5%, OK

35 Notes:

36 1.)

40 2.)

NOTES:

To verify the proposed PV system meets code (Ch. 34 IBC) for additions to existing structures, the forces on a member shall not increase by more than 5%, unless the increased forces on the element are still in compliance with the code for new structures.

Existing Design

IBC 3403.2

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

Reference Code/Notes: CHECK STRUCTURAL FRAMING MEMBERS - GRAVITY CONDITION

The PV system covers only 1/2 the roof, with the other half of the roof design for Lr, therefore to account for live load on the non-PV side, an equivalent Lr is applied (approx. estimated).

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

6/1/2018

W410x132 at Ridges3

For typical photovoltaic installations on roofs, it is common industry and professional practice to reduce and even remove the building's roof live load of the code prescribed 20 psf (typical), in the area covered with PV modules.

This design philosophy is validated in that the PV modules and their framework are not designed nor are required to support the roof live load (i.e. typically defined as maintenance by workers, equipment, and materials). Roof live load still remains as a consideration where the PV system does not cover the roof or where access areas/paths are provided for maintenance.

Although the difference from the existing roof's design load to the proposed PV system load is greater than 5%, the new design PV total dead load (LC1) of 22 psf is less than the existing governing design load (LC2) of 31.

Therefore by inspection, the roof is okay to support the new PV system dead load.

The PV system covers half of the Bldg 1 roof area and thus no roof live load is included on this half of the roof (i.e.

Lr=0). If/when the PV system is maintained, the roof live load is "re-applied", as in the original design loads only where there is no PV modules. Thus the roof structure and buildings elements are okay by inspection.

Therefore, the WF Beams are in conformance with code requirements for additions to existing buildings, and thus can accommodate the proposed PV system's gravity loads.

Proposed PV Design

The following is intended to compare the roof's original design loads with the proposed PV system by comparing the applicable gravity design load cases applicable to the design of the structural member.

Standing Seam Metal Roof

3/4" Rigid Insulation

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: 0 Date:

3 Check Metal Decking:

4 Tributary Width (6') = 6.00 ft 5 Existing Dead Load = 21.3 psf

6 Existing Roof Live Load = 20.0 psf

7 Proposed PV System = 2.82 psf

8 No. of Spans = 1.0 Based on Inspection

10 Allowable Load (Bending) = 118.0 psf

11 Allowable Load (Deflection) = 110.0 psf l/240

16 Stanchion Spacing: = 6.00 ft

17 Tributary Width per Support Rail = 2.61 ft Modules are "Portrait"

18 > Assuming a continuous three-span rail, the stanchion support reaction:

19 Stanchion Reaction = 1.1w*L = 48.48 lbs (Std beam formula)

21 > 22 = 8.08 psf

24 Original Structure Loads

25 Total Dead Load = 18.1 psf

26 Roof Live = 20.0 psf

27 New Loads w/ PV System:

28 Original Dead Load (See above): = 18.1 psf

29 PV System = 8.1 psf

30 Total Dead Load = 26.2 psf

31 Roof Live = 10.0 psf

33 Comparative Summary of Governing Design Load Combinations:

34 Diff

35 LC1 DL 18 DL 26 44.7% > 5%, NG See Note 1 below

36 LC2 DL+Lr 38 DL+Lr 36 -5.0% < 5%, OK

37 Notes:

38 1.)

42 2.)

NOTES:

Since the PV system is supported by a racking system typically consists of stanchion supports (currently at an unknown spacing) check point load gravity effects on the metal decking. Since the stanchion support spacing is unknown, consider the standard spacing of 6'-0".

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

6/1/2018

Assume this stanchion point load occurs at the center of the decking span, therefore the equivalent distributed load from this point load is then:

The existing and proposed PV design loads remain less than the allowable Heavy Decking Bending and Deflection loads (See Line #10 and #11).

The 16 Ga Type N decking spans 6' ft between the roof beams. There are several checks for the decking as indicated below, reviewing both stress and deflection (serviceability).

CHECK STRUCTURAL FRAMING MEMBERS - GRAVITY CONDITION (cont.)

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

Reference Code/Notes:

The lower roof decking is identical to the upper roof and therefore okay by comparison to the upper roof decking evaluation presented above.

Existing Design Proposed PV Design

The difference from the DL is less than 5% therefore by inspection, the roof is okay to support the new PV system dead load.

Therefore, the existing metal decking is in conformance with code requirements for additions to existing buildings, and thus can accommodate the proposed PV system's gravity loads.

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: 0 Date:

NOTES:

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

6/1/2018

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

Reference Code/Notes: METAL DECKING TABLES

IBC 3403.2

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: 0 Date:

13 CS = 0.053

14 Upper Roof = 1127 kips

15 Lower Roof = 0 kips

16 1127 kips V = 60 kips 17 Upr PV System = 33 kips

18 Lwr PV System = 0 kips

19 1160 kips V ' = 61 kips

21 Seismic Distribution w / PV % Per

22 Level wx hx wxhx Cvx Fx wx wxhx Cvx Fx Level

23 (k) (ft) (ft-k) (k) (k) (ft-k) (k) (k)

24 Upr Rf 1127 19.8 22265 1.000 60 1160 22918 1.000 61 3% < 10%, OK

26 1 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 0

27 1127 22265 1 60 1160 22918 1 61 3% < 10%, OK

32 Therefore, the change in weight of the roof is:

33 FROOF(N) 61.3 kips

34 FROOF(E) 59.5 kips

NOTES:

< 10%, OK

The information used above conservatively excludes the weight of the walls, partitions, mezzanine, attic, etc.

Original Seismic Distribution

PER THE 2012 IBC, IF THE SEISMIC FORCE FOR AN ELEMENT OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IS NOT INCREASED BY MORE THAN 10 PERCENT, THE STRUCTURE DOES NOT NEED TO BE DESIGNED TO CONFORM TO THE SEISMIC-FORCE

RESISTANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW STRUCTURES.

= = 2.9% Increase

Inclds Clear Story Wt

Inclds Wall (Trib)

6/1/2018

Total Building Weight

DL =

2.9%

DLNEW =

< 10%, OK

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

Reference Code/Notes:

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

SEISMIC EVALUATION

Seismic Base Shear

Therefore, the existing building is in conformance with code requirements for additions to existing buildings for seismic and thus can accommodate the proposed PV system.

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: Date:

2 =

3 =

NOTES:

Reference Code/Notes: PROJECT LOCATION MAP

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

6/1/2018

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: Date:

8 1.) Project Location, building dimensions and gravity loads

9 2.) Proposed PV System Weights

10 3.) Seismic Parameters

11 4.)

12 5.)

NOTES:

Seismic Lateral Distribution Force Check

Gravity Member Checks

6/1/2018

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

To verify the proposed PV system meets code (Ch. 34 IBC) for additions to existing structures, the forces on a member shall not increase by more than 5%, unless the increased forces on the element are still in compliance with the code for new structures. This evaluation will determine, at times conservatively, the structure's existing loads and make the comparison to the proposed PV system.

Reference Code/Notes: CALCULATION INTRODUCTION

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

CALCULATION SUMMARY OF CONTENTS

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: Date:

1 Address: = US Army Reserves Center

2 Zip Code: = Tafuna, American Samoa

3 Latitude: = -14.332

4 Longitude: = -170.72

8 > The metal decking is assumed to be a Vulcraft Type N 16 gage deck.

9 > Per site visit on 3/13/2018-3/16/2018, standing seam metal roof was noted.

10 > Mech./elec./plumbing is excluded from the seismic check, but included in the gravity.

14 = 69 ft

15 = 91 ft

16 = 9.50 ft

17 Height (Upper Roof - Eave) = 11.50 ft

18 Height (Upper Roof - Ridge) = 19.75 ft

19 Roof Slope (Lower) = 3.00 : 12

20 Roof Slope (Upper) = 3 : 12

21 = 6279 sq.ft

22 = 6474 sq.ft

25 = 1.00 psf

26 Metal Purlins @ 22' O.C. = 4.00 psf

27 = 1.13 psf

28 Deep Rib Metal Deck Type N 16 Ga = 5.00 psf

29 = psf

30 = psf

33 Upper Roof Dead Loads 11.13 psf

34 72.019345 kips

41 = 9.00 ft

42 = 6.48 kips

43 = 69.00 ft

44 = 8.28 kips

45 = 6.48 kips

NOTES:

Column

ASSUMPTIONS USED IN EVALUATION

Information provided by available record drawings.

Building dimensions and dead loads are conservative rough estimates.

Applied as PSF over entire roof

Beam length

CLEAR STORY WALL DEAD LOADS:

Beam

OTHER DEAD LOADS

Column Height

Standing Seam Metal Roof

3/4" Rigid Insulation

Building Width

Building Length

UPPER ROOF DEAD LOADS

Roof Area

Height (Lower Roof - Eave)

STRUCTURE DIMENSIONS

6/1/2018

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

Reference Code/Notes: PROJECT LOCATION

Bldg Footprint

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: Date:

3 = 100

4 Module Self Weight = 41 lbs ea

5 Racking Weight (incls. Rails, conns,etc.) = 7 lbs / module

6 Electrical (microInverters) = 3.4 lbs / module

7 Upper Roof Weight = 5.10 kips

13 Module Weight (psf) 62.6 in x 41.5 in = 2.83 psf / module

17 Zip Code: = Tafuna, American Samoa

18 Site Class = C (Assumed)

19 Building Occupancy Category = II

20 Seismic Importance Factor IE = 1.00

21 Short Spectral Acceleration SS = 0.330 UFC 3-301-01 Table F-3

22 Long Spectral Acceleration S1 = 0.150 UFC 3-301-01 Table F-3

23 Soil Coefficient - Short Spectral Acceleration FA = 1.20 ASCE 7-10 Table 11.4-1

24 Soil Coefficient - Long Spectral Acceleration FV = 1.65 ASCE 7-10 Table 11.4-1

25 Adjusted Response - Short Spectral Acceleration SMS = 0.396 ASCE 7 Eq. 11.4-1

26 Adjusted Response - Long Spectral Acceleration SM1 = 0.248 ASCE 7 Eq. 11.4-2

27 Short Spectral Acceleration SDS = 0.264 ASCE 7 Eq. 11.4-3

28 Long Spectral Acceleration SD1 = 0.165 ASCE 7 Eq. 11.4-4

29 Seismic Design Category - Short Spectral Accel = C

30 Seismic Design Category - Long Spectral Accel = C

38 R = 3.5

39 Approximate Building Period: Ta = 0.187 sec < T L

40 Response Coefficient: CS = 0.010 < 0.075 < 0.252

41 (min) (max)

42 CS = 0.075

NOTES:

SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS

SEISMIC FORCES

ASCE 7-10 (UNO)

Upper Roof

6/1/2018

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

PV LAYOUT - PROPOSED

The structure's dead loads are determined and calculated to yield the most conservative results.

Table 12.2-1

The structure's seismic base shear will be estimated using the ELF procedure with the SFRS as a steel rigid frame in both longitudinal and transverse directions. Diaphragm is flexible, therefore no torsion forces are included.

Response Modification Factor:

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

Reference Code/Notes:

Panasonic N330/N325

Number of Modules

12.8-2

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: Date:

4 NOTE:

11 Check Typical W410x60 Roof Beams:

14 Original Structure Loads

15 = 4.00 psf

16 W410x60 @ 6' o.c.1,3 = 1.13 psf

17 = 5.00 psf

18 = psf

19 = psf

20 = psf

21 psf

22 psf

23 Total Dead Load = 10.1 psf

24 Roof Live = 12.0 psf (Assuming Lr Reduct.)

26 New Loads w/ PV System:

27 Original Dead Load (See above): = 10.1 psf

28 PV System = 2.8 psf

29 Total Dead Load = 13.0 psf

30 Roof Live # = 6.0 psf No RLL in PV area

31 Comparative Summary of Governing Design Load Combinations:

32 Diff

33 LC1 DL 10 DL 13 27.9% > 5%, NG See Note 1 below

34 LC2 DL+Lr 22 DL+Lr 19 -14.3% < 5%, OK

35 Notes:

36 1.)

40 2.)

NOTES:

To verify the proposed PV system meets code (Ch. 34 IBC) for additions to existing structures, the forces on a member shall not increase by more than 5%, unless the increased forces on the element are still in compliance with the code for new structures.

Existing Design

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

Reference Code/Notes: CHECK STRUCTURAL FRAMING MEMBERS - GRAVITY CONDITION

IBC 3403.2

The PV system covers only 1/2 the roof, with the other half of the roof design for Lr, therefore to account for live load on the non-PV side, an equivalent Lr is applied (approx. estimated).

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

6/1/2018

For typical photovoltaic installations on roofs, it is common industry and professional practice to reduce and even remove the building's roof live load of the code prescribed 20 psf (typical), in the area covered with PV modules.

This design philosophy is validated in that the PV modules and their framework are not designed nor are required to support the roof live load (i.e. typically defined as maintenance by workers, equipment, and materials). Roof live load still remains as a consideration where the PV system does not cover the roof or where access areas/paths are provided for maintenance.

Although the difference from the existing roof's design load to the proposed PV system load is greater than 5%, the new design PV total dead load (LC1) of 13 psf is less than the existing governing design load (LC2) of 22.

Therefore by inspection, the roof is okay to support the new PV system dead load.

The PV system covers half of the Bldg 3 roof area and thus no roof live load is included on this half of the roof (i.e.

Lr=0). If/when the PV system is maintained, the roof live load is "re-applied", as in the original design loads only where there is no PV modules. Thus the roof structure and buildings elements are okay by inspection.

Therefore, the WF Beams are in conformance with code requirements for additions to existing buildings, and thus can accommodate the proposed PV system's gravity loads.

Proposed PV Design

3/4" Rigid Insulation

The following is intended to compare the roof's original design loads with the proposed PV system by comparing the applicable gravity design load cases applicable to the design of the structural member.

Standing Seam Metal Roof

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: 0 Date:

3 Check Metal Decking:

4 Tributary Width (6') = 6.00 ft 5 Existing Dead Load = 14.0 psf

6 Existing Roof Live Load = 20.0 psf

7 Proposed PV System = 2.83 psf

8 No. of Spans = 1.0 Based on Inspection

10 Allowable Load (Bending) = 118.0 psf

11 Allowable Load (Deflection) = 110.0 psf l/240

16 Stanchion Spacing: = 6.00 ft

17 Tributary Width per Support Rail = 3.22 ft Modules are "Portrait"

18 > Assuming a continuous three-span rail, the stanchion support reaction:

19 Stanchion Reaction = 1.1w*L = 60.02 lbs (Std beam formula)

21 > 22 = 10.00 psf

24 Original Structure Loads

25 Total Dead Load = 10.1 psf

26 Roof Live = 20.0 psf

27 New Loads w/ PV System:

28 Original Dead Load (See above): = 10.1 psf

29 PV System = 2.8 psf

30 Total Dead Load = 13.0 psf

31 Roof Live = 10.0 psf

33 Comparative Summary of Governing Design Load Combinations:

34 Diff

35 LC1 DL 10 DL 13 27.9% > 5%, NG See Note 1 below

36 LC2 DL+Lr 30 DL+Lr 23 -23.8% < 5%, OK

37 Notes:

38 1.)

42 2.)

NOTES:

Since the PV system is supported by a racking system typically consists of stanchion supports (currently at an unknown spacing) check point load gravity effects on the cedar decking. Since the stanchion support spacing is unknown, consider the standard spacing of 6'-0".

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

The 16 Ga Type N decking spans 6 ft between the roof beams. There are several checks for the decking as indicated below, reviewing both stress and deflection (serviceability).

6/1/2018

1/0/1900

Assume this stanchion point load occurs at the center of the decking span, therefore the equivalent distributed load from this point load is then:

The existing and proposed PV design loads remain less than the allowable Heavy Decking Bending and Deflection loads (See Line #10 and #11).

CHECK STRUCTURAL FRAMING MEMBERS - GRAVITY CONDITION (cont.)Reference Code/Notes:

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

The lower roof decking is identical to the upper roof and therefore okay by comparison to the upper roof decking evaluation presented above.

Therefore, the existing metal decking is in conformance with code requirements for additions to existing buildings, and thus can accommodate the proposed PV system's gravity loads.

Existing Design Proposed PV Design

The difference from the DL is less than 5% therefore by inspection, the roof is okay to support the new PV system dead load.

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: 0 Date:

NOTES:

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

1/0/1900

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

6/1/2018

Reference Code/Notes: CEDAR DECKING TABLES

IBC 3403.2

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: 0 Date:

19 CS = 0.075

20 Upper Roof = 78 kips

21 Lower Roof = 0 kips

22 78 kips V = 6 kips 23 Upr PV System = 5 kips

24 Lwr PV System = 0 kips

25 DLNEW = 84 kips V ' = 6 kips

27 Original Seismic Distribution Seismic Distribution w / PV % Per

28 Level wx hx wxhx Cvx Fx wx wxhx Cvx Fx Level

29 (k) (ft) (ft-k) (k) (k) (ft-k) (k) (k)

30 Upr Rf 78 19.8 1550 1.000 6 84 1651 1.000 6 6% < 10%, OK

31 < 10%, OK

32 1 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 0

33 78 1550 1 6 84 1651 1 6 6% < 10%, OK

38 Therefore, the change in weight of the roof is:

39 FROOF(N) = 6.3 kips = 6.5% Increase < 10%, OK 40 FROOF(E) 5.9 kips

NOTES:

1 The information used above conservatively excludes the weight of the walls, partitions, mezzanine, attic, etc.

< 10%, OK

6/1/2018

Total Building Weight

DL =

6.5%

Inclds Clear Story Wt

Reference Code/Notes:

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

1/0/1900

SEISMIC EVALUATION

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

Inclds Wall (Trib)

Seismic Base Shear

Therefore, the existing building is in conformance with code requirements for additions to existing buildings for seismic and thus can accommodate the proposed PV system.

PER THE 2006 IBC, IF THE SEISMIC FORCE FOR AN ELEMENT OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IS NOT

INCREASED BY MORE THAN 10 PERCENT, THE STRUCTURE DOES NOT NEED TO BE DESIGNED TO

CONFORM TO THE SEISMIC-FORCE RESISTANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW STRUCTURES.

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: Date:

2 =

3 =

NOTES:

Reference Code/Notes: PROJECT LOCATION MAP

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

6/1/2018

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: 0 Date:

8 1.) Project Location, building dimensions and gravity loads

9 2.) Proposed PV System Weights

10 3.) Seismic Parameters

11 4.)

12 5.)

NOTES:

Seismic Lateral Distribution Force Check

Gravity Member Checks

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

6/1/2018

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

To verify the proposed PV system meets code (Ch. 34 IBC) for additions to existing structures, the forces on a member shall not increase by more than 5%, unless the increased forces on the element are still in compliance with the code for new structures. This evaluation will determine, at times conservatively, the structure's existing loads and make the comparison to the proposed PV system.

Reference Code/Notes: CALCULATION INTRODUCTION

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

CALCULATION SUMMARY OF CONTENTS

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: 0 Date:

1 Address: = US Army Reserves Center

2 Zip Code: = Tafuna, American Samoa

3 Latitude: = -14.332

4 Longitude: = -170.72

8 > The metal decking is assumed to be a Vulcraft Type N 16 gage deck.

9 > Per site visit on 3/13/2018-3/16/2018, standing seam metal roof was noted.

10 > Mech./elec./plumbing is excluded from the seismic check, but included in the gravity.

14 = 91 ft

15 = 205 ft

16 = 9.50 ft

17 Height (Upper Roof - Eave) = 11.50 ft

18 Height (Upper Roof - Ridge) = 19.75 ft

19 Roof Slope (Lower) = 3.00 : 12

20 Roof Slope (Upper) = 3 : 12

21 = 18655 sq.ft

22 = 19233 sq.ft

25 = 1.00 psf

26 Metal Purlins @ 22' O.C. = 4.00 psf

27 = 1.13 psf

28 Deep Rib Metal Deck Type N 16 Ga = 5.00 psf

29 = psf

30 = psf

33 Upper Roof Dead Loads 11.13 psf

34 213.97052 kips

41 = 9.00 ft

42 = 3.24 kips

43 =

44 =

45 = 3.24 kips

NOTES:

Column psf

ASSUMPTIONS USED IN EVALUATION

Information provided by available record drawings.

Building dimensions and dead loads are conservative rough estimates.

Applied as PSF over entire roof

CLEAR STORY WALL DEAD LOADS:

OTHER DEAD LOADS

Column Height

Standing Seam Metal Roof

3/4" Rigid Insulation

Building Width

Building Length

Height (Lower Roof - Eave)

UPPER ROOF DEAD LOADS

STRUCTURE DIMENSIONS

6/1/2018

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

Reference Code/Notes: PROJECT LOCATION

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

Bldg Footprint

Roof Area

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: 0 Date:

3 = 350

4 Module Self Weight = 41 lbs ea

5 Racking Weight (incls. Rails, conns,etc.) = 7 lbs / module

6 Electrical (microInverters) = 3.4 lbs / module

7 Upper Roof Weight = 17.99 kips

13 Module Weight (psf) 62.6 in x 41.5 in = 2.85 psf / module

17 Zip Code: = Tafuna, American Samoa

18 Site Class = C (Assumed)

19 Building Occupancy Category = II

20 Seismic Importance Factor IE = 1.00

21 Short Spectral Acceleration SS = 0.330 UFC 3-301-01 Table F-3

22 Long Spectral Acceleration S1 = 0.150 UFC 3-301-01 Table F-3

23 Soil Coefficient - Short Spectral Acceleration FA = 1.20 ASCE 7-10 Table 11.4-1

24 Soil Coefficient - Long Spectral Acceleration FV = 1.65 ASCE 7-10 Table 11.4-1

25 Adjusted Response - Short Spectral Acceleration SMS = 0.396 ASCE 7 Eq. 11.4-1

26 Adjusted Response - Long Spectral Acceleration SM1 = 0.248 ASCE 7 Eq. 11.4-2

27 Short Spectral Acceleration SDS = 0.264 ASCE 7 Eq. 11.4-3

28 Long Spectral Acceleration SD1 = 0.165 ASCE 7 Eq. 11.4-4

29 Seismic Design Category - Short Spectral Accel = C

30 Seismic Design Category - Long Spectral Accel = C

38 R = 2.0

39 Approximate Building Period: Ta = 0.187 sec < T L

40 Response Coefficient: CS = 0.010 < 0.132 < 0.440

41 (min) (max)

42 CS = 0.132

NOTES:

SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS

SEISMIC FORCES

ASCE 7-10 (UNO)

Upper Roof

6/1/2018

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

The structure's dead loads are determined and calculated to yield the most conservative results.

Table 12.2-1

The structure's seismic base shear will be estimated using the ELF procedure with the SFRS as a bearing wall system with ordinary masonry shear walls in both longitudinal and transverse directions. Diaphragm is flexible, therefore no torsion forces are included.

Response Modification Factor:

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

Reference Code/Notes:

Panasonic N330/N325

Number of Modules

PV LAYOUT - PROPOSED

12.8-2

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: 0 Date:

4 NOTE:

11 Check Typical W410x60 Roof Beams:

14 Original Structure Loads

15 = 4.00 psf

16 Metal Purlins @ 22' O.C. = 4.00 psf

17 = 1.13 psf

18 Deep Rib Metal Deck Type N 16 Ga = 5.00 psf

19 = 0.00 psf

20 = 0.00 psf

21 psf

22 psf

23 Total Dead Load = 14.1 psf

24 Roof Live = 12.0 psf (Assuming Lr Reduct.)

26 New Loads w/ PV System:

27 Original Dead Load (See above): = 14.1 psf

28 PV System = 2.8 psf

29 Total Dead Load = 17.0 psf

30 Roof Live # = 6.0 psf No RLL in PV area

31 Comparative Summary of Governing Design Load Combinations:

32 Diff

33 LC1 DL 14 DL 17 20.2% > 5%, NG See Note 1 below

34 LC2 DL+Lr 26 DL+Lr 23 -12.1% < 5%, OK

35 Notes:

36 1.)

40 2.)

NOTES:

To verify the proposed PV system meets code (Ch. 34 IBC) for additions to existing structures, the forces on a member shall not increase by more than 5%, unless the increased forces on the element are still in compliance with the code for new structures.

Existing Design

IBC 3403.2

CHECK STRUCTURAL FRAMING MEMBERS - GRAVITY CONDITION

The PV system covers only 1/2 the roof, with the other half of the roof design for Lr, therefore to account for live load on the non-PV side, an equivalent Lr is applied (approx. estimated).

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

Reference Code/Notes:

6/1/2018

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

Although the difference from the existing roof's design load to the proposed PV system load is greater than 5%, the new design PV total dead load (LC1) of 17 psf is less than the existing governing design load (LC2) of 26.

Therefore by inspection, the roof is okay to support the new PV system dead load.

The PV system covers half of the Bldg 3 roof area and thus no roof live load is included on this half of the roof (i.e.

Lr=0). If/when the PV system is maintained, the roof live load is "re-applied", as in the original design loads only where there is no PV modules. Thus the roof structure and buildings elements are okay by inspection.

Therefore, the WF Beams are in conformance with code requirements for additions to existing buildings, and thus can accommodate the proposed PV system's gravity loads.

Proposed PV Design

3/4" Rigid Insulation

For typical photovoltaic installations on roofs, it is common industry and professional practice to reduce and even remove the building's roof live load of the code prescribed 20 psf (typical), in the area covered with PV modules.

This design philosophy is validated in that the PV modules and their framework are not designed nor are required to support the roof live load (i.e. typically defined as maintenance by workers, equipment, and materials). Roof live load still remains as a consideration where the PV system does not cover the roof or where access areas/paths are provided for maintenance.

The following is intended to compare the roof's original design loads with the proposed PV system by comparing the applicable gravity design load cases applicable to the design of the structural member.

Standing Seam Metal Roof

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: 0 Date:

3 Check Metal Decking:

4 Tributary Width (6') = 6.00 ft 5 Existing Dead Load = 14.0 psf

6 Existing Roof Live Load = 20.0 psf

7 Proposed PV System = 2.85 psf

8 No. of Spans = 1.0 Based on Inspection

10 Allowable Load (Bending) = 118.0 psf

11 Allowable Load (Deflection) = 110.0 psf l/240

16 Stanchion Spacing: = 6.00 ft

17 Tributary Width per Support Rail = 3.22 ft Modules are "Portrait"

18 > Assuming a continuous three-span rail, the stanchion support reaction:

19 Stanchion Reaction = 1.1w*L = 60.49 lbs (Std beam formula)

21 > 22 = 10.08 psf

24 Original Structure Loads

25 Total Dead Load = 14.1 psf

26 Roof Live = 20.0 psf

27 New Loads w/ PV System:

28 Original Dead Load (See above): = 14.1 psf

29 PV System = 2.8 psf

30 Total Dead Load = 17.0 psf

31 Roof Live = 10.0 psf

33 Comparative Summary of Governing Design Load Combinations:

34 Diff

35 LC1 DL 14 DL 17 20.2% > 5%, NG See Note 1 below

36 LC2 DL+Lr 34 DL+Lr 27 -21.0% < 5%, OK

37 Notes:

38 1.)

42 2.)

NOTES:

Since the PV system is supported by a racking system typically consists of stanchion supports (currently at an unknown spacing) check point load gravity effects on the cedar decking. Since the stanchion support spacing is unknown, consider the standard spacing of 6'-0".

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

The 16 Ga Type N decking spans 6 ft between the roof beams. There are several checks for the decking as indicated below, reviewing both stress and deflection (serviceability).

6/1/2018

Assume this stanchion point load occurs at the center of the decking span, therefore the equivalent distributed load from this point load is then:

The existing and proposed PV design loads remain less than the allowable Heavy Decking Bending and Deflection loads (See Line #10 and #11).

CHECK STRUCTURAL FRAMING MEMBERS - GRAVITY CONDITION (cont.)Reference Code/Notes:

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

The lower roof decking is identical to the upper roof and therefore okay by comparison to the upper roof decking evaluation presented above.

Therefore, the existing metal decking is in conformance with code requirements for additions to existing buildings, and thus can accommodate the proposed PV system's gravity loads.

Existing Design Proposed PV Design

The difference from the DL is less than 5% therefore by inspection, the roof is okay to support the new PV system dead load.

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: 0 Date:

NOTES:

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

6/1/2018

Reference Code/Notes: METAL DECKING TABLES

IBC 3403.2

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Proj #: 4110 Designed By: CS Date:

Submittal: FINAL Checked By: 0 Date:

19 CS = 0.132

20 Upper Roof = 217 kips

21 Lower Roof = 0 kips

22 217 kips V = 29 kips 23 Upr PV System = 18 kips

24 Lwr PV System = 0 kips

25 DLNEW = 235 kips V ' = 31 kips

27 Original Seismic Distribution Seismic Distribution w / PV % Per

28 Level wx hx wxhx Cvx Fx wx wxhx Cvx Fx Level

29 (k) (ft) (ft-k) (k) (k) (ft-k) (k) (k)

30 Upr Rf 217 19.8 4290 1.000 29 235 4645 1.000 31 8% < 10%, OK

31 < 10%, OK

32 1 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 0

33 217 4290 1 29 235 4645 1 31 8% < 10%, OK

38 Therefore, the change in weight of the roof is:

39 FROOF(N) = 31.0 kips = 8.3% Increase < 10%, OK 40 FROOF(E) 28.7 kips

NOTES:

1 The information used above conservatively excludes the weight of the walls, partitions, mezzanine, attic, etc.

< 10%, OK

5/14/2018

Total Building Weight

DL =

8.3%

Inclds Clear Story Wt

Reference Code/Notes:

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

PV INSTALLATION ROOF STRUCTURE EVALUATION

SEISMIC EVALUATION

UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVES CENTER

Inclds Wall (Trib)

Seismic Base Shear

Therefore, the existing building is in conformance with code requirements for additions to existing buildings for seismic and thus can accommodate the proposed PV system.

PER THE 2006 IBC, IF THE SEISMIC FORCE FOR AN ELEMENT OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IS NOT

INCREASED BY MORE THAN 10 PERCENT, THE STRUCTURE DOES NOT NEED TO BE DESIGNED TO

CONFORM TO THE SEISMIC-FORCE RESISTANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW STRUCTURES.

Structural and Forensic Engineers

Appendix D – Facility Roof Report

Jeremiah Edwards, RRC Stafford Consulting Engineers 9115 Harris Corners Parkway Suite 230 Charlotte NC 28269 704-597-9000 704-597-5262

Puletasi Wong-Mageo

AS004

PO BOX 2508

TAFUNA, AS

96799-9998

AS004

Date : January 12, 2010

Facility:AS004 Facility SummaryFull Facility Roof Report

Facility:

Contact Name:

Contact Telephone:

Contact Fax:

Date of Last Inspection:

Type of building:

Type of Neighborhood:

AS004

PO BOX 2508

TAFUNA

AS

96799-9998 U.S.A.

Puletasi Wong-Mageo

(684) 699-9384 Ext:

Army Reserve Center

Airport

Oct 28, 2009

Facility Notes

The facility is on Airport Road adjacent to the runway.

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting Engineers

Page: 2

Roof Section List Roof Type Estimated

Replacement Value

Photo Section / Name / Year

Installed

Size / Height

Condition Index/

*RCI/

ASLR(Yrs)

19,375 sq. ft.

18 ft.

$1,159,593.75Good

11(Yrs)

OMS (AB)

Garage

Standing Seam Sheet Metal

Roofing

6,880 sq. ft.

21ft.

$588,240.00Good

11(Yrs)

OMS (MB) 01

Maintenance

Standing Seam Sheet Metal

Roofing

4,835 sq. ft.

15 ft.

$413,392.50Good

11(Yrs)

OMS (MB) 02

Maintenance /

Office

Standing Seam Sheet Metal

Roofing

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 3

Roof Section List Continued...

Roof Type Estimated

Replacement Value

Photo Section / Name / Year

Installed

Size / Height

Condition Index/

*RCI/

ASLR(Yrs)

450 sq. ft.

11ft.

$26,932.50Good

11(Yrs)

USARC (AB)

Pump House

Standing Seam Sheet Metal

Roofing

45,470 sq. ft.

12 ft.

$3,887,685.00Good

11(Yrs)

USARC (MB)

Training -Admin

Standing Seam Sheet Metal

Roofing

$6,075,843.75

*RCI Rating 0 -100 where 100 is excellent

77,010

Action Items - Summary Section ID Activity Type Allocation Urgency Amount

OMS (AB) Repair Expense High $4,000

OMS (MB) 01 Repair Expense High $2,500

OMS (MB) 02 Repair Expense High $1,500

USARC (AB) Repair Expense High $2,250

USARC (MB) Repair Expense High $18,000 $28,250

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 4

Recommendation Summary Section ID Budget

Year Activity Type Action Item ? Allocation Urgency Budget Amount

Repair2010OMS (AB) Yes Expense High $4,000

Replacement2020OMS (AB) No Capital Low $1,159,825

Repair2010OMS (MB)

Yes Expense High $2,500

Replacement2020OMS (MB)

No Capital Low $588,360

Repair2010OMS (MB)

Yes Expense High $1,500

Replacement2020OMS (MB)

No Capital Low $413,475

Repair2010USARC

(AB)

Yes Expense High $2,250

Replacement2020USARC

(AB)

No Capital Low $26,940

Repair2010USARC

(MB)

Yes Expense High $18,000

Replacement2020USARC

(MB)

No Capital Low $3,888,460

$6,105,310

Capital Budgets - 10 Years Section

ID

2019201820172016201520142013201220112010

OMS

(AB)

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

OMS

(MB) 01

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

OMS

(MB) 02

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

USARC

(AB)

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

USARC

(MB)

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 5

Expense Budgets - 10 Years Section

ID

2019201820172016201520142013201220112010

$4,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0OMS

(AB)

$2,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0OMS

(MB) 01

$1,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0OMS

(MB) 02

$2,250 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0USARC

(AB)

$18,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0USARC

(MB)

$28,250 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total

Total Budgets - 10 Years

2019201820172016201520142013201220112010Section

ID

OMS

(AB)

$4,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

OMS

(MB) 01

$2,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

OMS

(MB) 02

$1,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

USARC

(AB)

$2,250 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

USARC

(MB)

$18,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$28,250 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 6

Facility:AS004 Garage Roof - OMS (AB)Full Facility Roof Report

Roof Name:

Roof Size:

Est. replacement Cost:

Existing System Type:

Year Installed:

Height: 18 Ft.

Slope:

Interior Sensitivity:

Drainage:

Currently Leaking?

History of Leaking?

Drainage and Leak Details:

19,375 sq. ft.

$ 1,159,593.75

Garage

Standing Seam Sheet Metal Roofing

3 in 12

Normal Sensitivity

Gutters and downspouts are in fairly good condition. Minor leaks were observed in isolated locations at the soil vents.

Adequate

Yes

Yes

Assessed Service Life Remaining (Years) :

Existing Roof System Construction Method Of AttachmentDescriptionLayer Type

Roof panels Standing seam metal roofing Mechanically attached

Deck Purlin Mechanically attached

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 7

Overall Core Condition No core taken.

Roof panels are attached to purlins with clips. Purlins are approximately 12 inches on center at perimeter, corners, ridge and hips. Purlins are approximately 24 inches on center in the field of the roof.

Roof panels generally consist of 0.050 inch prefinished aluminum panels, 16 inches in width with one stiffening bead.

Gutters generally consist of 0.063 inch stainless steel gutters with a cricket placed in the bottom of the gutter and sealed. Gutters are approximately 13 inches deep and 20 inches wide.

Core Photos Photos Date Description

Oct 28, 2009 View of underside of panels.

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 8

Membrane Defects - Outstanding

1250ModerateDeteriorated sealant

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

Deteriorated sealant at gutters.

Also, minor debris in gutter.

100ModerateFastener corrosion

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

Corroded fasteners at metal roof panels. Fasteners are corroded at ridge caps, valleys and at the ends of the panels.

100ModerateFastener missing

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

Fasteners missing from mechanical curbs. Fasteners have either completely deteriorated or were never installed.

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 9

Membrane Defects - Outstanding Continued...

3ModeratePenetrations (Pipe) Improperly flashed

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

Vent pipe flashings are not the proper type and they are corroding.

6ModerateEquipment (Metal) Damaged

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

Screens installed in the goose neck vents have corroded and fallen out.

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 10

100ModeratePanel (Metal) Improperly secured

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

Fasteners at panel ends are deteriorated or missing.

2ModerateEquipment mod corrosion

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

Corrosion on equipment curb cover.

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 11

12ModerateGuy Wire Missing / Deteriorat

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

Guy wire components are deteriorated and there are not sufficient wire clamps. Also, some are not properly installed or have failed.

20ModerateDrainage (Gutter) Open joints

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

Gutter joints are leaking. Sealant between the gutter and the cricket inside the gutter is deteriorated.

1ModerateEquipment damaged

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

The insect screen is deteriorated at the interior of the louver.

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 12

Roof Top Details Flashing MetalFlashing

Membrane DescriptionDetail TypePhotos

Exhaust vent None Painted MetalEquipment

Ventilator is in generally good condition. Curb cover is corroded and needs to be replaced.

Roof anchors None NoneProjection

Guy wires and exposed fasteners are beginning to corrode. Fasteners are not sealed.

Pipe Rubber boot Galvanized steelProjection

Pipe flashing is corroded and needs to be replaced.

Goose neck exhaust None Painted MetalEquipment

Exhaust vents are lightly corroded. Generally, exposed fasteners and guy wires are in poor condition.

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 13

Roof Top Details Continued...

Flashing MetalFlashing

Membrane DescriptionDetail TypePhotos

Gutter None NoneDrain/Scupper

Generally, gutters and downspouts are in fairly good condition.

Sealant between the gutter and the cricket inside the gutter, between drains, is deteriorated. Sealant and bond breaker should be replaced.

Overall Roof Inspection Assessments InspectorInspecting CompanyInspection TypeDate

Oct 28, 2009 "Needs" Analysis Stafford Consulting Engineers Jeremiah Edwards

Standing seam metal roof panels are in generally good condition. Roof panels should last several more years. The guy wire systems on the ventilators and the exposed fasteners are corroded and in generally poor condition. Sealant inside the gutter between the gutter and the cricket within the gutter is in generally poor condition. Gutter joints are leaking. Corroded elements and sealant should be replaced.

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 14

Recommendations Details Budget

Year Activity Type Action

Item ?

Allocation Urgency Quotation $

Repair2010 Expense HighYes $4,000

Replace all guy wires and ensure that they are properly installed.

Remove all exposed fasteners and replace with non-corroding fasteners with rubber washers.

Remove debris and seal all joints in the gutter system.

Remove sealant from the transitions between dissimilar materials, including all door and window frames, etc., and replace with new.

Remove corroded vent pipe flashing and replace with non-corroding flashings.

Provide fasteners at panel ends where they are missing.

Replace corroded/damaged/missing screens from ventilators.

Remove corroded fasteners from the roof panels and flashing components and replace with non-corroding fasteners.

Replace corroded curb covers.

Replace screens on goose neck vents with non corroding screens.

Install missing fasteners at mechanical curbs.

Replace screens at louvers with non corroding screens.

Replacement2020 Capital LowNo $1,159,825

Remove existing metal roof panels and associated flashings and replace with new.

$1,163,825

Recommendation Summary Budget

Year Activity Type Action

Item ?

Allocation Urgency Budget

Amount

Repair Yes Expense High2010 $4,000

Replacement No Capital Low2020 $1,159,825

$1,163,825

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 15

Recommendation Details (Action Items) AmountUrgencyAllocationType Of Activity

Repair Expense High $4,000

Replace all guy wires and ensure that they are properly installed.

Remove all exposed fasteners and replace with non-corroding fasteners with rubber washers.

Remove debris and seal all joints in the gutter system.

Remove sealant from the transitions between dissimilar materials, including all door and window frames, etc., and replace with new.

Remove corroded vent pipe flashing and replace with non-corroding flashings.

Provide fasteners at panel ends where they are missing.

Replace corroded/damaged/missing screens from ventilators.

Remove corroded fasteners from the roof panels and flashing components and replace with non-corroding fasteners.

Replace corroded curb covers.

Replace screens on goose neck vents with non corroding screens.

Install missing fasteners at mechanical curbs.

Replace screens at louvers with non corroding screens.

$4,000

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 16

Facility:AS004 Maintenance Roof - OMS (MB)

Full Facility Roof Report

Roof Name:

Roof Size:

Est. replacement Cost:

Existing System Type:

Year Installed:

Height: 21 Ft.

Slope:

Interior Sensitivity:

Drainage:

Currently Leaking?

History of Leaking?

Drainage and Leak Details:

6,880 sq. ft.

$ 588,240.00

Maintenance

Standing Seam Sheet Metal Roofing

3 in 12

Normal Sensitivity

Gutters and downspouts are in fairly good condition. Minor leaks were reported in the maintenance bay near a soil vent.

Adequate

Yes

Yes

Assessed Service Life Remaining (Years) :

Existing Roof System Construction Method Of AttachmentDescriptionLayer Type

Roof panels Standing seam metal roofing Mechanically attached

Insulation Unknown Unknown

Deck Metal Mechanically attached

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 17

Full Facility Roof Report

Overall Core Condition No core taken.

Roof panels are attached to the metal deck. Insulation materials between the roof panels and roof deck could not be observed.

Roof panels generally consist of 0.050 inch prefinished aluminum panels, 16 inches in width with one stiffening bead.

Gutters generally consist of 0.063 inch stainless steel gutters with a cricket placed in the bottom of the gutter and sealed. Gutters are approximately 13 inches deep and 20 inches wide.

Core Photos Photos Date Description

Oct 28, 2009 Roof Deck from Interior

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 18

Full Facility Roof Report

Membrane Defects - Outstanding

3ModeratePenetrations (Pipe) Improperly flashed

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

Vent pipe flashings are not the proper type and they are corroding.

100MajorFastener corrosion

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

Guy wire fasteners are corroded.

100ModerateFastener missing

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

Fasteners missing from mechanical curbs. Fasteners have either completely deteriorated or were never installed.

50MajorFastener corrosion

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

Corroded fasteners at mechanical curbs.

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 19

Full Facility Roof Report

Membrane Defects - Outstanding Continued...

700ModerateDeteriorated sealant

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

Deteriorated sealant at gutters.

Also, minor debris in gutter.

6ModerateEquipment (Metal) Damaged

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

Screens installed in the goose neck vents have corroded and fallen out.

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 20

Full Facility Roof Report

Membrane Defects - Outstanding Continued...

100ModeratePanel (Metal) Improperly secured

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

Fasteners at panel ends are deteriorated or missing.

2ModerateEquipment mod corrosion

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

Corrosion on equipment curb cover.

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 21

Full Facility Roof Report

Membrane Defects - Outstanding Continued...

12ModerateGuy Wire Missing / Deteriorat

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

Guy wire components are deteriorated and there are not sufficient wire clamps. Also, some are not properly installed or have failed.

1MajorDebris

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

Debris is inside one soil vent pipe.

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 22

Full Facility Roof Report

Membrane Defects - Outstanding Continued...

10ModerateDrainage (Gutter) Open joints

QuantitySeverityType Of Defect

Gutter joints are leaking. Sealant between the gutter and the cricket inside the gutter is deteriorated.

January 12, 2010Prepared By: Stafford Consulting

Page: 23

Full Facility Roof Report

Roof Top…