Prediction of Local Snow Loads On Roofs

Prediction of local snow loads on roofs
Vivian Melysund
Dissertation submitted for the Philosophiae Doctor Degree (PhD) in Structural Engineering at the Faculty of Engineering Science and Technology, Department of Structural Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)
Contact information: SINTEF Building and Infrastructure P.O.Box 124 Blindern, NO-0314 Oslo, Norway Telephone +47 22 96 55 55 Or Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) Department of Structural Engineering Richard Birkelands vei 1 A, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway Telephone +47 73 59 47 00 vivian.meloysund@sintef.no
ISBN Printed version: 978-82-471-2491-8 ISBN electronic version: 978-82-471-2490-1 ISSN 1503-8181 Doctoral thesis serial number 2010:247
Printed by Tapir Uttrykk, Trondheim, Norway 2010.
This PhD study has been carried out within the SINTEF research & development programme Climate 2000 Building constructions in a more severe climate (2000-2007) tjenester.byggforsk.no/prosjekter/klima2000
Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs
Acknowledgements
This PhD study has been carried out within the SINTEF research programme Climate 2000 Building constructions in a more severe climate (2000-2007), strategic institute project Impact of climate change on the built environment. I gratefully acknowledge the programme management for giving me the opportunity to carry out this study. I also thank all construction industry partners of the programme and the Research Council of Norway (NFR reference no. 154002). I would like to express a warm appreciation and thank my two supervisors at NTNU, Professor Karl Vincent Hiseth and Professor Bernt J. Leira, for many discussions and advices. I would also like to thank the University of Life Sciences, especially Professor Emeritus Egil Berge and Professor Emeritus Halvor Hib, permitting the use of their field observation data in my work and useful help in the search for background information. I also wish to thank Research Director PhD Kim Robert Lis for many discussions and thorough reviews. March 2010 Vivian Melysund
iii
iv
Summary
Large snow loads on roofs during the winter season of 2005 - 2006 led to the collapse of several buildings in Norway. In Central Europe, during the same winter season, there were several serious accidents related to heavy snow loads where many people were killed or injured. Hence, there is a need for evaluating the background for snow loads used in the design of buildings and an assessment of the reliability of buildings which are subjected to roof snow loads. The snow load represents one of the most important structural loads in Norway. The magnitude of the snow load varies throughout the country depending on local climate. In the current Norwegian standards, characteristic snow loads on roofs are found by means of simple expressions for the relationship between snow depth on the ground and snow loads on the roof. In addition, rules are given in order to account for the effects of wind, roof geometry and heat transfer on roof snow loads. An investigation is performed in order to obtain a reliable indicator as to whether existing buildings in Norway meet current regulatory requirements concerning safety against collapse caused by snow loads and wind actions. The analysis comprises studies of 20 existing buildings in five high-snowfall and five high-wind municipalities in Norway. The investigation demonstrates that most of the buildings considered have higher calculated probability for collapse owing to snow loads than the regulations now require. It also indicates too low calculated reliability for a considerable number of buildings in Norway, when evaluating the possible implications of the findings. An unexpected result in this study is the discovery that many buildings have even lower calculated reliability than the historical increase in design loads should imply. Weather data from meteorological stations in Norway for a reference period of 30years, 1961-1990, are used to quantify the effects of wind exposure on roof snow loads according to the definitions in the Norwegian standard NS 3491 and the international standard ISO 4355. It is shown that the procedure in an informative annex of the standard does not reflect the actual effects of wind exposure on roof snow loads in Norway, the main reasons being oversimplifications in the definition of the exposure coefficient and the extreme variations of the climate in Norway. As a result of the present work, the Norwegian snow load standard NS-EN 1991-1-3, which recently has been published, includes an improved definition of the exposure coefficient. Whether it is beneficial to differentiate roof snow loads in view of material costs, is studied by means of a selected house concept. This study lead to unexpected conclusions which challenge the prevailing view that increased calculated capacity results in unacceptable increased costs for the individual house owner. In this investigation, a timber detached house is designed for different roof snow load levels. Some differences are found when evaluating the degree of building material consumption, but the economic effect is small. When comparing the costs of increased reliability of all houses to the total damage insurance payments, conclusions may be drawn that it is more reasonable not to increase the reliability.
v
From an environmental perspective reduced material consumption is however highly appreciated. Since the costs of increasing the calculated reliability and the negative effects on the environment probably are limited, an individual property owner would most likely prefer to invest in increased reliability. Models for predicting roof snow loads and snow density on the ground are developed using meteorological data as input which extends the application of the models. Snow load and density measurements performed at 105 sites by Professor Hib at the Agricultural University of Norway (now the University of Life Sciences, UMB) in the period 1966 to 1986 are analysed. New knowledge of the influence of local climate on resulting maximum snow loads is achieved. A clear correlation is found between observed climate and the measurements. The study also reveals that the relation between local climate and snow load is complex. The results are a step forward in the process of understanding these relations. The work has revealed that wind velocity as a single parameter probably is of less importance in relation to maximum snow loads than previous research has indicated. Additional work is necessary and should focus on further developing the method for predicting snow loads on roofs, which in turn can be used to improve standards and regulations. The snow measurements performed by Hib were done within a small area in Norway. Additional work should also aim at investigating the results in view of data from other parts of the country. The methods developed in the current study for predicting snow loads on roofs are important in order to understand the climates significance on the accumulation of roof snow loads. In a longer perspective it can be used to improve the European standards recommendations with respect to design roof snow loads. It is also demonstrated in which way the methods can be used to estimate roof snow loads in areas subjected to large snow falls with short duration. In this way, snow clearance of roofs can be carried out in time. Roof snow loads for buildings located in the city of Kristiansand in Norway are calculated. Methods for collection and preparation of the necessary meteorological input are presented, including development of parameters for building sites where limited meteorological data exist.
vi
Table of contents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................... III SUMMARY ................................................................................................................V TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................... VII LIST OF PAPERS ................................................................................................... IX 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 2 BACKGROUND............................................................................................... 1 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES ............................................................................ 3 THE WINTER CLIMATE IN NORWAY ............................................................... 3 WIND AND SNOW LOADS ON ROOFS............................................................... 5 BUILDING REGULATIONS AND DESIGN STANDARDS ..................................... 14 STRUCTURAL SAFETY ................................................................................. 16
MAIN FINDINGS ............................................................................................ 20 2.1 INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY .......................................................... 20 2.2 PART A: STRUCTURAL SAFETY AND RELIABILITY ....................................... 21 Increased snow loads and wind actions on existing buildings: Reliability of the Norwegian building stock (Paper I) .................................................................. 21 2.3 PART B: ANALYSES OF CURRENT DESIGN RULES ......................................... 23 Effects of wind exposure on roof snow loads (Paper II).................................... 23 Economical effects of reduced roof snow loads (Paper III) .............................. 23 2.4 PART C: METHODS FOR IMPROVED CALCULATION OF ROOF SNOW LOADS .. 25 Predicting snow density using meteorological data (Paper IV) ........................ 25 Predicting roof snow loads using meteorological data (Paper V) .................... 26
3 EXAMPLE OF APPLICATION: LOCAL SNOW LOADS ON ROOFS IN KRISTIANSAND ..................................................................................................... 28 4 5 FURTHER WORK .......................................................................................... 33 CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................. 35
REFERENCES......................................................................................................... 38 COMPLEMENTARY WORK CARRIED OUT AS PART OF THE PHD STUDY ...................................................................................................................... 41 INDIVIDUAL PAPERS ............................................................................................ 1
vii
viii
List of papers
Part A Structural safety and reliability
I.
Melysund, V., Lis, K.R., Siem, J. and Apeland, K. (2006) Increased snow loads and wind actions on existing buildings: Reliability of the Norwegian building stock. Journal of structural engineering, 132(11), 1813 1820.
Part B Analyses of current design rules
II.
Melysund, V., Lis, K.R., Hygen, H.O., Hiseth, K.V and Leira, B. (2007) Effects of wind exposure on roof snow loads. Building and Environment 42(10): 37263736. Melysund, V., Hiseth, K.V., Leira, B. and Lis, K.R. (2008) Economical effects of reduced roof snow loads. Proc. of the 6th International Conference on Snow Engineering, Whistler, British Columbia, Canada 2008. Engineering Conference International, Brooklyn, New York, U.S.A.
III.
Part C Methods for improved calculation of roof snow loads
IV.
Melysund, V., Leira, B., Hiseth, K.V. and Lis, K.R. (2007) Predicting snow density using meteorological data. Meteorological Applications 14: 413-423. Melysund, V., Hiseth, K.V., Leira, B., Lis, K.R. and Berge, E. (2010) Predicting roof snow loads using meteorological data Meteorological Applications (submitted).
V.
These papers will be referred to by their Roman numerals.
ix
1 Introduction
1.1 Background
Large snow loads on roofs during the winter season of 2005 - 2006 led to the collapse of several buildings in Norway. Schools, sports halls and shops were among the building types with damage. There were no death casualties in the accidents, only material damage was reported. In Central Europe, during the same winter season, there were several serious accidents related to heavy snow loads, where many people were killed or injured. The two most serious accidents were the collapse of a market hall in Moscow, where 66 people died, and the roof collapse of an exhibition hall in southern Poland, where 62 people died. There were also reports of serious accidents in the Czech Republic and Germany. After these accidents, it has been a matter of concern whether the design regulations concerning roofs to withstand snow loads are adequate or if they should be improved. The climate differences in Norway imply large variations in snow loads. Due to the rugged topography of the country, the amount of precipitation and the magnitude of wind actions in exposed western locations are highly different from sheltered inland areas in the eastern part. The temperatures are generally higher in southwest parts of the country compared to eastern and northern parts. Previously, the design roof snow loads did not reflect these differences in a proper way. The building regulations of 1949 (valid until 1970), for instance, referred to a general snow load on roofs corresponding to 1.5 kN/m2 (National Office of Building Technology and Administration 1949). This value could be reduced or increased by local building authority. Current regulations are more differentiated; however they are not based on a thorough registration of roof snow loads throughout the country. The regulations rely on an assumed relationship between ground snow loads and roof snow loads. This relationship is expressed as a function of roof slope, energy flux trough the roof and wind exposure. The snow loads on the ground vary from 1.5 to 9.0 kN/m2 in the current regulations. There are few scientifically documented measurements of snow loads on roofs in Norway. Consequently, the regulations do not account for the large climatic variations in the country (ref. paper II). There is a need for more thorough knowledge of roof snow loads as a function of local climate. With this knowledge, the effects of future climate change on roof snow loads could be evaluated and taken into consideration. In NS 3491-3 Design of structures - Design actions - Part 3: Snow loads (Standards Norway 2001), snow loads on roofs are expressed by s = Ce Ct sk (1)
1 of 42
where s k is snow load on the ground and the parameters , C e and C t describe the conditions on the roof. A similar expression can be found in ISO 4355 Bases for design of structures Determination of snow loads on roofs (International Organization for Standardization 1998). The exposure coefficient C e takes into account that wind removes snow from flat roofs. The coefficient gives a snow load on a sheltered roof twice as large as that on a windswept roof. The shape coefficient describes the distribution of snow load on the roof due to geometry. The thermal coefficient C t defines the reduction of the snow load on the roof as a function of the heat flux through the roof. In practice, it has turned out to be difficult for consultants in structural engineering to determine the exposure coefficient C e . The main reason is the meteorological input which is needed. According to an informative annex in ISO 4355 and NS 3491-3, the exposure coefficient is a function of: , the mean temperature in the coldest winter month N, the number of days with a wind velocity above 10 m/s, where N is defined as an average for the three coldest months of the year.
Mean values for many years are recommended, usually 30 years. This meteorological information is available from advanced weather stations, merely. If a building site happens to be located near such a station, the data needed is still not easily accessible. In NS 3491-3, snow loads on the ground are specified for the municipality centre in each of the 434 Norwegian municipalities (50-year return period). Rules are given for increasing these values with respect to the buildings sites height above sea level compared to that of the municipal centre. The standard also allows using other reliable sources for the ground snow load in particular cases, for instance measurements performed close to the building site and over a long period (at least 20 years). Due to the topography in Norway, it is not always appropriate to apply height as the only parameter for differentiating local ground snow loads. As a particular example, a maximum snow depth of 275 cm was measured in the winter season 1999/2000 at the meteorological station Grnligrotten situated at 87 m above sea level in the municipality of Rana (at the arctic circle in Northern Norway), while at the meteorological station Mo i Rana III (40 m a.s.l.) 6 km away, the corresponding measured maximum snow depth was only 105 cm (ref. www.met.no). Furthermore, meteorological stations are placed in order to enable a good representation of regional climate, i.e. the differences in measured snow depth are not likely to be explained by the degree of wind exposure. The current methods for calculating roof snow loads found in the Norwegian standard do not reflect the differences in climate which can be observed within short distances. As a result, a majority of the roofs may be designed for snow loads which deviate from the prescribed design load with 50 years return period. There is a need for methods which include the effects of local wind actions, local precipitation
2 of 42
amounts and local temperatures on roof snow loads. Developing models which use meteorological data as input will ensure results which easily can be used by structural engineers all over the country, without the need of advanced computer software. On the other hand, increased geographic differentiation and more complex calculation methods can contribute to higher risk of errors and evasions. Investigations carried out by SINTEF Building and Infrastructure indicates that the cost of repairing building process induced building defects in Norway amounts to 5% of the annual capital invested in new buildings. Correcting faults and repairing defects which arise in buildings during the construction process are estimated to cost another 4%. The construction industry in Norway therefore seeks solutions which contribute to a reduction of the amount of building defects.
1.2 Purpose and objectives

The main purpose of the present work is to contribute to improved methods for adapting roof snow loads to local climate. In this work the effects of wind on roof snow loads will have a special focus. The work is intended to contribute to the development of more accurate criteria and standards of practice concerning snow loads on roofs. The objectives are accordingly: To study the reliability of the Norwegian building stock identifying the vulnerability with respect to snow loads, To analyze selected topics of current design rules for snow loads in order to find areas with potential of improvement, To contribute to improved design methods for predicting roof snow loads based on local climate, To evaluate the importance of differentiated roof snow loads through a case study.
Data from the Norwegian Institute of Meteorology are applied. It may simplify use and further development of the results in equivalent studies, for instance in the development of methods for other climatic zones or analyses of the impact of future climatic changes.
1.3 The winter climate in Norway

The Norwegian climate is extremely varied. From its southernmost point (Lindesnes) to its northernmost (North Cape) there is a span of 13 degrees of latitude, or the same as from Lindesnes to the Mediterranean Sea. Furthermore, the rugged topography of Norway gives large local differences over short distances. Norway is often regarded as a cold and wet. The country shares the same latitude as Alaska, Greenland and Siberia, but has a rather pleasant climate compared to these areas. Thanks to its
3 of 42
westerly location, on the east side of a vast ocean with a huge, warm and steady ocean current near its shores and a dominating south-westerly air flow from the Atlantic Ocean, Norway has a much more friendly climate than the latitude indicates. The highest winter temperatures can be found in the coastal areas of the southern and western part of Norway (see Figure 1). Vgsy (Sogn og Fjordane County) on the southwest coast has monthly normal temperatures in the period November to March varying from 2.6 C to 5.5 C. Sviny at Hery (Mre og Romsdal County) recorded the highest mean monthly temperature ever, with 9.1 C in November 2000. Except for uninhabited mountain areas, the coldest area throughout the winter season is the Finnmark Plateau (inland area, Finnmark County). One of the weather stations there, Karasjok, has monthly normal temperatures in the period from November to March varying from 9.4 C to 17.1 C. The coldest month ever was in 1966, when Karasjok recorded a mean monthly temperature of 27.1 C. The inland climate of Norway is subject to extreme changes in temperature on short temporal scales. Rros (Sr-Trndelag County, south-east of Norway), for instance, experienced in March 2005 a maximum monthly temperature of 13,2 C while the minimum monthly temperature was 39,4 C. There are also large differences in the normal winter precipitation in Norway. The largest monthly normal precipitation is found some tens of kilometres from the coast of Western Norway. These amounts are among the highest in Europe. Grndalen at Flora (Sogn og Fjordane County) has a monthly normal precipitation varying from 261 to 425 mm in the period November to March. Several other stations in this area follow closely. Grndalen has also the record for one-month precipitation, with 1190 mm in January 1989. The inner part of south-east Norway), the Finnmark Plateau (Finnmark County), and some smaller areas near the Swedish border, are all lee areas in relation to the large weather systems which mainly arrive from the west. Common for these areas are the low annual precipitation and that a showery precipitation during summer is the largest contributor. Kautokeino (Finnmark County) has lowest monthly normal precipitation varying from 7 to 18 mm in the period November to March. One of the lowest recorded winter precipitation amounts for the same period (November to March) is only 23 mm, measured at this station in 1942-43. Large precipitation amounts result in high snow depth on the ground. At a meteorological station in Odda (Hordaland County in the southwest) a snow depth of 490 cm were measured in March 1983. Norway is a mountainous country with the main settlements being located in valleys and along the coast. This gives two characteristic types of wind climate for the built environment. Inland settlements experience a wind climate governed by valleys. The main wind direction is along the valley, with a decrease in wind speed due to topographic effects. The costal areas suffer a higher frequency of extreme winds due to less topographic effects. The strongest wind registered at any location in Norway was 62 m/s at the Sviny lighthouse (Mre og Romsdal County on the western coast of Norway) in January 1992. The climate statistics in this section are obtained from www.met.no.
4 of 42
Figure 1 Map of Norway
1.4 Wind and snow loads on roofs

During snowfall, the presence of wind makes the snow load on roof different from that on undisturbed ground. Drifting occurs even for light winds (0.3 1.5 m/s). At higher wind velocities (1.6 3.3 m/s) the snow particles move in a more horizontal than vertical direction. Drifting affects the deposition of snow; particles are transferred through areas with high wind velocities and accumulate in areas with low wind velocities. At wind velocities between 3.4 m/s and 5.4 m/s the snow moves considerably faster horizontally than vertically, and significant redistribution may occur. Higher winds often blow the snow away leaving the roofs almost bare. The same winds may deposit large drifts on the ground or against structures and may result in the formation of snow ramps of such size that ground snow begins drifting onto the roofs (Nordli 2000, Taylor 1979).
5 of 42
Snowdrift formations are highly dependent on the detailed wind velocity patterns across the roof, which in turn are functions of wind direction and duration, roof geometry, and the local surroundings near the building (Figure 2). In areas where the wind is accelerating, there will be removal of snow, since a higher volume is drifting out of the area than into it. In areas of decelerating wind, the snow will accumulate, since a higher volume drifts in than out (Irwin et al. 1995, Isyumov 1971).
Figure 2 Local wind velocity around buildings (SINTEF Byggforsk Research Sheets no. 471.043)
The wind produces both static and pulsating pressures on structures. According to Bernoullis equation the sum of static and velocity pressure is constant along a streamline: p + U2 = const (2)
The magnitude and distribution of the wind velocity pressure are dependent on the geometry of the structure and the intensity of the wind load. Wind pressure at a point of a structure can be expressed as q point = C p U tot 2 (3)
where is the air density and U tot is the total wind velocity (i.e. the sum of mean velocity and fluctuating velocity). The pressure coefficient C p is defined as the ratio of velocity pressure on the building surface and velocity pressure on the undisturbed upstream air flow. Considering only along-wind turbulence U tot can be separated into the mean velocity U and the fluctuating velocity component u (see Figure 3): U tot = U + u (4)
6 of 42
Figure 3 Wind profile (Dyrbye and Hansen 1997)
The mean wind profile can be expressed by a logarithmic expression:

U ( z ) = u* 1
ln
z z0
(5)
where u * is the friction velocity, is von Krmns constant (equal to 0.4) and z 0 is the roughness length. The friction velocity is defined as:
u* =
(6)
where 0 is the surface shear stress and is the air density. The value of u * depends on the roughness length z 0 and is about 3 4 % of the wind velocity at a height of 10 m (Mellor, 1965). The roughness length z 0 is a function of the terrains roughness which retards the mean wind at the ground surface, see Figure 4. According to NS 3491-4 Design of structures - Design actions - Part 4: Wind loads the roughness length z 0 has a value of 0,003 at rough, open sea and a value of 1 in urban areas or areas with spruce forest.
Figur 4
The terrains roughness retards the mean wind at the ground surface (Dyrbye and Hansen 1997)
The turbulence component of the wind, u, can be expressed by means of the turbulence intensity, I z :
7 of 42
(7) U ( z) where u (z) is the standard deviation for the turbulence component and U(z) is the mean velocity. The turbulence intensity I u can be assumed constant in homogeneous terrain but varies as a function of height above ground z and roughness length z 0:
I u ( z) = 1 ln( z / z 0 )
I u ( z) =
u ( z)
(8)
When the wind meets topographical elements (like escarpments or hills) or obstacles (like buildings) the wind properties will change. The shape and roughness of the structure which is subjected to the wind is decisive for the resulting velocity pressure on a structure. The pressure coefficient C p (defined in connection with Equation 3) is a measure of the decrease or increase of pressure relative to that of the undisturbed upstream air flow. Figures 5 and 6 show areas with increased pressure on pitched roofs.
Dir.
Flat roofs
Mono pitched roofs
Duo pitched roofs
Area with increased wind loads
Figure 5 Areas with increased pressure (high values of C p ) on pitched roofs (SINTEF Byggforsk Research Sheets no. 471.041).
The wind flow field is disturbed for buildings in the wake of other buildings. In the near wake the mean flow and turbulence intensity are affected by separating shear
8 of 42
layers and vortices shed from the upstream building edges. The mean wind decreases and the turbulence increases in the direction of the flow. The near wake may have a length up to a few building heights. In the far wake the effects on the wind flow field decays. The wind profile may be significantly affected for a length of 10 to 20 building heights downwind and 2 to 3 building heights/widths in other directions see Arya (2001). If a building is more than twice as high as the average height of the neighbouring buildings, the design of the neighbouring building should be designed for an increased wind velocity according to NS-EN 1991-1-4, section A.4. Reference is made to Davenport (1962), Dyrbye and Hansen (1997), Simiu and Scanlan (1986) for a detailed description of wind loads on structures. When snow falls in the presence of wind, the snow may accumulate on buildings in wake areas such as valleys, the lee side of peaked or arched roofs, lower roofs sheltered by higher roofs or behind obstructions on roofs (Boyd et al. 1981). This occurs in such a way that it tends to smooth out details. This accumulation may change the wind flow field through lower roughness and thereby result in less turbulence.
Figure 6 Areas with higher pressure (high values of C p ) (SINTEF Byggforsk Research Sheets no. 471.043)
Redistribution of snow may also occur in periods without snowfall. Snow may be transferred onto the roof from its surroundings, snow may be redistributed across the roof or snow may blow off the roof. Snow transport can be divided into suspended transport and unsuspended transport, see Figure 7. Unsuspended transport takes place in a layer 125 cm above the surface. Saltation and creep are the two kinds of unsuspended transport. Saltation refers to the way in which the drifting snow particles appear to jump along the surface, and is the dominant mode of transport for particles larger than 0.1 mm (Tabler 1988). Creep describes particles that roll along the surface. Suspended transport or suspension is defined as snow transported by turbulent wind at a higher level (approximately 1 100 m) than unsuspended transport (Norem 1974, Mellor 1965).
9 of 42
Figure 7 Snow transport (Norem 1974, based on Mellor 1965)
Whether unsuspended transport or suspended transport will dominate the snow redistribution depends on the properties of the snow and the wind velocity. In order to move snow particles by creep or saltation the friction and cohesive forces of the snow particles have to be exceeded. The threshold wind velocity is defined as the wind velocity where this kind of transport begins. Only unsuspended transport is possible at a wind velocity just above the threshold velocity. At higher wind velocities the particles are lifted further up into the suspension layer and suspended transport takes place (Schmith 1980, Li and Pomeroy 1997). According to Otstavnov and Rosenberg (1989) drifting occurs at average wind velocities above 4 m/s during snowfall and above 6.5 m/s with no snowfall. Other studies have focused on a more instant threshold wind velocity and not a wind velocity averaged over a longer period as applied in that study. According to Mellor (1965), threshold wind velocities of 3 to 8 m/s at a height of 10 m are needed in order to transport loose and unbounded snow. If the surface snow is densely packed and firmly bounded, a threshold wind velocity can be above 30 m/s. According to Kind (1981) the threshold wind velocity is approximately 5 m/s at a height of 10 m for fresh dry snow, 11 m/s for slightly aged or hardened snow and 23 m/s for snow hardened by very strong winds. Li and Pomeroy (1997) evaluated 1-hour observations from the period 1970 to 1976 at 16 meteorological stations in the Canadian prairies. Based on these studies, threshold wind velocities were recorded and presented as a function of temperature. It was concluded that threshold wind increased nonlinearly with ambient air temperature above 25 C. An average threshold wind velocity of 9.9 and 7.7 m/s was observed for respectively wet and dry snow transport. An average threshold wind velocity of 7.5 and 8.0 m/s was observed for respectively fresh and aged snow. Wind makes the snow particles split and become smaller. Smaller particles imply a higher ratio of suspended transport (Tabler 1988). Once at the surface, snow crystals rapidly become bonded to each other, and these larger particles inhibit wind transport (Schmith 1980). Snow deposited during windy conditions becomes more densely packed than snow deposited during calm air. The amounts of snow redistributed by the wind is dependent on the particle-, windand surface properties (particle weight, cohesion forces, wind velocity, non-erodible
10 of 42
surface elements etc.). The properties of the snow layer will change with time. Snow particle bonding tends to increase as a result of mass and energy fluxes and changes in the state of the snow crystals, mainly through the process called metamorphism. Temperature gradient metamorphism makes water condensate in the colder outer layer of the snow and causes snow crystals to grow. Equitemperature metamorphism causes growth of ice bonds by sintering and strong cohesion between crystals, and is a result of local differences in vapour pressure due to the crystal geometry. Metamorphism generally results in increase of surface snow density, mechanical continuity and hence strength over time (Li and Pomeroy 1997). High temperatures increase the cohesion forces between the snow particles and thereby the threshold wind velocity. Measurements show an exponentially increase in cohesive forces with increasing temperatures (Schmidt 1980). ura et al. (1967) presented data showing that the threshold wind velocity increased with increasing temperature above 7 C, presumably due to cohesive forces (based on meteorological observations). Other observations indicated that the threshold wind velocity for fresh snow seemed to be constant and equal to 3 m/s at temperatures below 2.5 C. Transport rates for drifting snow based on mean wind velocity are developed based on the study of for instance drifting ground snow in Antarctica, Canadian Prairies and Siberia. The expression developed by Pomeroy et al. (1991) is a function of mean velocity U (in m/s, 10 m above the ground) and is based on integration over a height of 5 m:
4 qT = 2.2 106U10.04
(9)
where q T is expressed in kg/s per metre perpendicular to the wind. Similar expressions for redistribution of snow on multi-level flat roofs are developed where the amount of available drifted snow is the main parameter (ORourke and Kuskowski 2005). The total duration of wind will determine the mass of snow accumulated or depleted on the roof. Even low velocities of long duration may give significant drifts and unbalanced loads. The drifts are influenced by the rate of snowfall, its duration, and the time between snowfalls (Taylor 1979). Prevailing calculation methods for snow loads on roofs are mainly based on results from field investigations and wind tunnel experiments rather than analytical calculations of the wind field, snow transport and erosion/deposition. One reason is the lack of a theoretical basis for such analysis. Another reason may be the large variation in meteorological parameters, roof structures and surroundings. The amount of snow on a roof has often been measured in the field, expressed in terms of the ratio to ground snow load. The differences in roof and ground loads are mainly due to changes in wind climate, sliding and heat transfer through the roof. These changes have been expressed through the shape coefficient (accounting for wind effects and sliding), the exposure coefficient C e (accounting for wind effects)
11 of 42
and the thermal coefficient C t (accounting for heat transfer) in the Norwegian standard NS 3491-3 (Standards Norway 2001): s = Ce Ct sk (10)
where s k is the snow load on the ground and s is the roof snow load. Shape coefficients and exposure coefficients have been developed for simple roof geometries through field investigations. These results have been supported by laboratory experiments (wind tunnel and water flume) where also more complex roof geometries have been examined. Table 1 summarizes field investigations for flat roofs with varying wind climate. The values for the exposure coefficient and shape coefficients for flat and pitched roofs found in many standards are based on the listed field investigations.
Table 1 Ground to roof snow conversion factors for flat roofsa) Reference Ratio ground snow load/roof snow load Sheltered SemiWindsheltered swept Otstavnov and Rosenberg 1989b) 0.98 0.72 0.46 Lutes 1970 0.90 0.60 0.30 Taylor 1979 0.80c) ORourke 1983d) 0.76 0.57 0.55 Hib 1988 s k = 1.0 kN/m2 0.82 e) 2 s k = 3.5 kN/m 0.62 e) Lberg 1976 0.55 0.27 Com. European Communities 1999 0.90 0.74 0.58
a) To be compared to C e in NS 3491-3, i.e. 0.8C e for flat roofs b) Assumed snow cover for 3.5 months. Average winter wind velocity in sheltered, semi-sheltered and windswept area are assumed to be respectively 2 m/s, 4 m/s and 6 m/s c) Snow ground load with 30-year return period was used when calculating roof-to-ground ratio d) Values are recalculated by the author in order to be applicable for unheated roofs e) Degree of wind exposure was not registered. s k ground snow load. The ratio ground snow load/roof snow load is found to depend on the amount of snow load on the ground.
In the European Snow Load Program 1997-1999 (Commission of the European Communities 1999) wind tunnel tests were performed on pitched, flat, multilevel and curved roofs for a single snowfall in order to verify measured roof snow loads in nature. The roof shape coefficients for flat roofs and roofs with small roof slope were basically confirmed, although the values found in the experiments were generally larger than those obtained from full-scale measurements. For large roof slopes the tests suggested a slight increase of the shape factors for both the leeward and the windward side of pitched roofs compared to shape factors in the current EN standard.
12 of 42
Figure 8 Wind tunnel experiments (Commission of the European Communities 1999)
Sliding of snow on pitched roofs depends on several factors. The component of the snow weight which is parallel to the roof produces the driving force of the sliding. This force is restrained by anchoring forces for instance over the ridge or chimneys, and compression forces due to frozen snow at the eaves. On the roof surface, sliding is restrained by cohesion and friction. The friction forces increase with increasing roof snow loads while the cohesion forces are not affected by the magnitude of snow loads (Taylor 1983, Taylor 1985).
Figure 9 Load components of sliding snow (Taylor 1983)
Several field investigations have documented the effects of sliding (Taylor 1985, Hib 1988). The results of these investigations show a reduction of snow loads for roof angles larger than 20 30, and no roof snow loads at all for angles larger than 60 70. The reduction is larger for smooth roofing materials than materials with a high coefficient of friction. In figure 10, which shows the results of the investigations done by Hib, it can be seen that roofs with metal roofing has a lower coefficient of friction, and consequently less snow loads, than roofs with other roofing material. It can also be seen that the snow loads are generally higher at the leeward side of the roof than at the windward side. This is due to drifting.
13 of 42
Figure 10 Reduction of snow loads for high roof angles proposed by Hib (Hib 1988)
A method for quantifying snow load reduction due to heat transfer through glass roofs has been suggested by Sandvik (1989). By combining a simple numerical heat transfer model with meteorological observations of temperature, precipitation and wind velocity in Norway, a conservative amount of melting snow has been prescribed. In the report to The Commission of the European Communities (1999), a more detailed model is discussed, which also accounts for heat transfer within the snow cover and to/from the atmosphere. A method for taking into account increased sliding due to water film on the boundary between glass/snow, as a function of roof angle, is also suggested. The concept of using ground snow loads as basis for determination of roof snow loads is useful because it covers the influence of local differences in climate parameters, such as precipitation and temperature. In field investigations where the ratio of ground snow load/roof snow load is documented, it is therefore particularly important to measure undisturbed ground snow loads. For sites exposed to wind this can obviously be difficult. An alternative would be to prescribe roof snow loads as a function of observed precipitation amounts; however this would disregard the influence of other parameters, such as melting, and catchment errors. Calculation methods primarily based on field investigations may be inaccurate due to a high degree of generalisation with respect to climate, topography and building geometry. Some of the derived ground to roof conversion factors are based on a too small number of measurements. Shape factors for curved roofs and multilevel roofs are areas where more research should be performed. Field investigations documenting shape coefficients and exposure coefficients are to a high extent performed for medium to small buildings, and do not sufficiently take into consideration the redistribution which may occur on large roofs. Shape and exposure coefficients as a function of roof size should therefore be focused on.
1.5 Building regulations and design standards

The building regulations of 15 December 1949 (National Office of Building Technology and Administration 1949) referred to a general snow load on roofs equal to 1.5 kN/m2. This value could be reduced or increased by the individual building authority with the Ministrys approval. The influence of the roof shape on the snow load was calculated in a simple way. The snow load was multiplied by a shape factor equal to 1.0 for roof slopes less than 30. For roof slopes between 30 and 60, the 14 of 42
shape factor should be reduced linearly from 1.0 to 0.0. The regulations prescribed that accumulation of snow on the roof should be taken into consideration. In the case of pitched roofs, the roof structure should be calculated for unbalanced snow load, i.e. snow load on only one side of the roof. In the building regulations of 1 August 1969 (National Office of Building Technology and Administration 1969), the requirement concerning general snow load equal to 1.5 kN/m2 was maintained, but the guidance to the regulations indicated a few municipalities in which the snow load should be taken as 1.0 kN/m2, 2.0 kN/m2 or 3.0 kN/m2. To account for the roof shape, reference was made to the shape factors in NS 3052 (Standards Norway 1970). In March 1970, the first standard on structural loads, NS 3052 Calculation of loading, was issued. The general basic value for snow loads on roofs was still unchanged at 1.5 kN/m2, and the shape factors also remained as before. This standard indicated that, for areas with especially high snowfall, the basic value was to be assessed with the aid of snow maps. Reference was made to zones with values of up to 1.5 kN/m2, between 1.5 and 2.5 kN/m2 and above 2.5 kN/m2. Areas of high, shortterm snowfall with subsequent melting needed to be assessed in particular. In February 1979, the 1st edition of NS 3479 Design loads for structures (Standards Norway 1979a) was issued. The section dealing with snow loads contained a direct translation of ISO 4355 Snow loads on roofs. The concept of characteristic snow loads on the ground was introduced. The concept was defined as the load that had a probability P = 0.8 of not being exceeded in a single year, i.e. a return period of (1/(1-0.8)) = 5 years. Snow loads on roofs were calculated as the product of the characteristic snow load on the ground and a shape factor for the roof structure. Characteristic snow loads on the ground were largely between 1.5 kN/m2 and 3.5 kN/m2. In previous standards, only shape factors had been given for pitched roofs. The new standard quoted shape factors for a number of typical roof shapes such as pitched roofs, shed roofs, curved roofs, multi-span roofs, multilevel roofs and roofs with superstructures. In the case of roofs for which snow removal was difficult, a return period of at least 20 years needed to be designed for. To prevent that traditional small timber houses would have to be strengthened, the standard which applied to timber structures, NS 3470 Timber structures Design rules(Standards Norway 1979b), was brought into line with the new snow load design rules and issued during that same year. In the 3rd edition of NS 3479 (Standards Norway 1990), which was published in October 1990, a thermal coefficient C t was introduced, that reduced the theoretical snow load on transparent roofs as a result of heat transfer through the roof. The snow load could be reduced if the lowest expected indoor temperature in the winter was higher than 5 C. In the same revision, the characteristic snow load on the ground was changed for a number of municipalities. NS 3490 Design of structures Requirements to reliability (Standards Norway 1999) was issued in 1999, and prescribed that a 50-year return period should be adopted for environmental loads in general. This means that the characteristic snow load on the ground, s k , was redefined. A 50-year return period for a snow load means
15 of 42
that it has a probability equal to P = 0.98 of not being exceeded in a single year. Until new characteristic snow loads were issued, NS 3479 was to be used for determination of loads with a return period of 50 years. In NS 3491-3 Design of structures Design actions Part 3: Snow loads (Standards Norway 2001) a number of revisions has been made. The most important change is that a characteristic snow load on the ground with a 50-year return period, s k , is specified for all 434 municipalities in Norway. This results in a significant increase in the snow load on the ground in certain municipalities. The basic value for s k is quoted for the centre of each municipality. In addition, rules are introduced concerning the adjustment of s k based on the building sites height above sea level compared to that of the municipal centre. The bulk of the municipalities now have a value for snow loads on the ground between 3.0 kN/m2 and 4.5 kN/m2. A few coastal municipalities have values as low as 1.5 kN/m2, and in some inland municipalities values of up to 9.0 kN/m2 are introduced. Another change that is important for many buildings, is the change in the shape factors for pitched roofs. For roof slopes between 15 and 60, the shape factor on the lee side has been reduced. The reduction is largest for roof slopes of about 30, where the shape factor on the lee side has been reduced from 1.2 to 0.8. The shape factor for pitched roofs has been changed so that the value never exceeds 0.8. Shed roofs and curved roofs have also undergone certain changes associated with the shape factor. A new coefficient, known as the exposure coefficient, has also been introduced in NS 3491-3. This is a dimensionless constant which accounts for the effect of wind drifting dry snow off the roof. The coefficient depends on the local temperature and wind climate during the coldest winter months, and its value ranges between 0.6 and 1.2. In the calculations, s k must be multiplied by the exposure coefficient. Rules for calculating snow guards and snow overhanging the edge of a roof have also been introduced in the standard. In April 2010 NS-EN 1991-1-3 Eurocode 1: Actions on structures - Part 1-3: General actions - Snow loads (Standard Norway 2008) will supersede NS 3491-3. Only minor revisions have been performed in this standard compared to NS 3491-3. For instance, there is an adjustment of the shape factor for curved roofs.
1.6 Structural safety

In view of the currently valid snow load standard several roof structures in Norway have presumably such a low load carrying capacity that they may be in danger of collapse for large snow loads. Table 2 provides an overview of a number of large buildings where snow has triggered or caused significant damage or collapse. The summary is not complete, but gives an idea of which types of buildings that are especially vulnerable to damage. The table is based on information from insurance companies, SINTEF Building and Infrastructure and newspapers (Lis et al. 2000).
16 of 42
Table 2 Cases of collapse as a result of major snow loads

Building Type of building County Built (year) Time of collapse/ damage 2010 2009 2008 2007 2007 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 1999 1999 1996 1994 1994 1988 1987 1987 1983 1975
Swimming bath Shop Industrial facility Sports hall Shop Storehouse Sports hall Barn Sports hall Barn Barn Industrial facility Swimming pool Community hall School Community hall School Sports hall Sports hall Sports hall Industrial facility Sports hall School Industrial facility Sports hall Industrial facility Drill hall (military facility) Troms Industrial facility * Year of rebuilding or reconstruction.
Hatlestrand skule Rimi, Larvik Gameleveien, Lrenskog Gimlemoen, Kristiansand Europris, Kristiansand Rudshgda, Ringsaker Lier Skien Ringerike ridesenter Rnholt, Porsgrunn vre Mosby, Kristiansand Larvik Stongelandet skole Bardufoss Samfunnshus Lenangen Skole Mlselv Storvoll Skole Troms Tennishall Lkens-hallen Lofothallen Aukra Asker Tennishall Drammen Harstad Birkenes-hallen Svelvik Karosseri Epokehallen
Hordaland Vestfold Akershus Vest-Agder Vest-Agder Hedmark Buskerud Telemark Buskerud Telemark Vest-Agder Vestfold Troms Troms Troms Troms Nordland Troms Akershus Nordland Romsdal Akershus Buskerud Troms Aust Agder Vestfold Troms Troms
1974
1971 1965 1970 1990* 1978/ 1996*
1982
For most of the collapsed buildings, defects during planning or construction have been identified as the most likely cause of damage. In some cases, the damage has resulted from applicable building regulations not being adhered to, or construction at the site not being in accordance with the design calculations. In a few cases, the snow load assumed in the calculations has been lower than the actual loading. Safety level of structures One of the most important functions of building legislation has always been to ensure technically sound structures. Although it is not possible to build structures that have zero probability of failure, methods have been developed for documenting the inherent safety level. Two such methods are based on an explicit probabilistic representation of loads and resistance. These are frequently referred to as the fully probabilistic method (sometimes the level III method) and the second-moment method (or level II method), respectively. A third method is based on a semiprobabilistic representation, and is commonly referred to as the partial factor method (or the level I method). This latter method is the one which is most commonly adopted by current design standards. The second-moment method is 17 of 42
employed when use of the partial factor method must be calibrated against higherlevel failure reliability requirements. The fully probabilistic method is used to develop basic formats regarding design of structures. For ready reference the different methods for reliability calculations are briefly discussed below. Reliability calculations by the fully probabilistic (level III) method The level III method represents the most general and academic approach. To allow reliability calculations based on this method, the probability distributions for the factors important for structural failure must be known. The probability of failure can then be calculated and compared to a given requirement concerning the maximum annual probability of failure. The Norwegian Technical Regulations under the Planning and Building Act (National Office of Building Technology and Administration 1997) prescribes higher-level requirements of this kind with respect to the maximum annual probability of failure of building structures. The structures are categorized into reliability classes depending on the consequences of a possible failure, and the requirements become stricter as the consequences of failure increases. The second-moment method (level II) The second-moment method (level II) is a simplified and more practical approach than fully probabilistic reliability calculations. The expected value and the standard deviation for the factors of importance must be known when using the method. It is not required that complete statistical information is available (i.e. the joint probability distributions). Partial factor method (level I) The partial factor method is the most convenient method and is used virtually always when building structures or structural components must be designed by engineers in accordance with current regulations. The method is a semi-probabilistic method in which the total safety is represented by separate safety factors being applied to the structural capacity and the load effect. The main principle is that the factored design resistance (or capacity) must be greater than or equal to the value of the factored design load. Characteristic resistance is usually defined as the 5 % fractile value of the resistance. This corresponds to the value for which 5 % of the capacity measurements in an infinitely long series of samples have lower values, and accordingly 95 % will have higher values. Partial factors for material properties take into account uncertainties in material properties, mechanical model uncertainties and dimensional variations. The characteristic value for load action is defined in terms of an established probability P based on annual extremes, so that it is not likely to be exceeded within a single year. In the case of environmental loads, a return period of 50 years is usually assumed (i.e. P = 0.98). The partial factors for load actions take into account uncertainties associated with the actions themselves, load model uncertainties and dimensional variations.
18 of 42
When the partial factor method is used, it is theoretically possible to build two completely different buildings that have approximately the same safety level. This can be done even if the buildings have different applications, are located at two geographically different sites, have different construction methods, have different quality management systems, are built from different materials etc. If, for example, the buildings have different geographical locations, the same safety level will be achieved by different values being applied for the environmental loads. With detailed regulations concerning the load and design aspects, it is possible to achieve the same safety level for different buildings. The more detailed the regulations, the more accurately it is possible to construct a building with the desired safety level. The drawback of detailed specific regulations is, of course, that the planning and design phase requires a high level of expertise and becomes time-consuming and expensive. Design of structures and structural safety Prior to the new series of design standards introduced in 1973, a calculation method referred to as the allowable stress principle was used. The safety level was then expressed in terms of a single safety factor by which the characteristic capacity of the material was divided. In light of the fact that snow loads and wind actions were minimally adapted to the variable climatic conditions pertaining in Norway, there is no doubt that the structures that were built in accordance with these regulations at various locations in Norway had widely different safety levels. With the introduction of NS 3052 in 1970, and the new generation of design standards in 1973, the partial factor method was also introduced. Theoretically, the change in the rules led to less variation of safety levels for buildings that were built at various geographical locations and with various materials than had been the case before. In the last regulation amendment process, the reliability standard NS 3490 (Standards Norway 1999) and the snow load and wind action standards NS 3491-3 (Standards Norway 2001) and NS 3491-4 Design of structures Design actions Part 4: Wind loads (Standards Norway 2002a) were introduced. The reliability standard prescribes a 50-year return period for environmental loads as mentioned earlier, also for snow loads. The partial factors for design loads (or design actions) depend on the reliability classes and a more detailed and extensive system for combinations of loads has been introduced. When NS 3490 was introduced, the partial factor for snow loads in the ultimate limit state was reduced from 1.6 to 1.5. A reduction factor k L by which the partial factor should be multiplied was also introduced (with a value of 0.8 1.0 depending on the reliability class). Thus, the magnitude of the partial factor for design loads has been reduced, particularly for the low reliability classes. With respect to the partial factors for the materials, it is now possible to make them dependent on the reliability class. In April 2010 Eurocodes will supersede the Norwegian standards in the series NS 3491. Generally, there are minor alterations in these standards as compared to NS 3491.
19 of 42
2 Main findings
2.1 Introduction and methodology

The presentation of the main findings in this thesis is divided into three parts. In part A, the structural safety and reliability of the Norwegian building stock is studied. According to the objectives of the study, the vulnerability with respect to snow has a special focus. In Part B the current design rules for snow loads are studied in order to find areas with potential for improvement. Finally, in Part C, methods for improved calculation of roof snow loads are presented. Part A describes the results of an analysis of the reliability of the Norwegian building stock considering snow loads and wind actions. An evaluation of the most exposed building types is performed, including considerations of the historical development of design loads and experiences from registered roof collapses. Based on this evaluation a selection of existing buildings is made. It is assessed whether they meet the safety requirements set in the current regulations through field investigations and design calculations. On this background, possible implications for buildings in Norway are discussed. Through the case histories in section 1.6 and this investigation, it is demonstrated that snow loads on roofs are important and that a high number of existing buildings most likely do not have the reliability level required by the authorities for new buildings. In Part B, a critical eye is cast at the current snow load regulations. It is found to be difficult to use the methods proposed for determining the effect of wind exposure on roof snow loads. It is investigated whether the presently codified method is appropriate. The development of modern design standards often implies an increase in the degree of detailing. It is evaluated whether this development is beneficial through an analysis of the effects of differentiation of roof snow loads for a timber detached house. This investigation considers the differences in safety in addition to economic and environmental aspects. The results in part B demonstrate that the current regulations have weak points. Further development of standards and regulations has to consider the benefits of increased detailing versus the risk of errors and evasions. Advanced calculation models, which have been developed in geophysics and hydrology, can be used to predict snow loads with a higher degree of accuracy than the models proposed in this work. The use of advanced models demands thorough insight in meteorology and geophysical processes in order to calculate realistic timeseries of snow loads during the winter season. In part C, methods for predicting snow density and snow loads based on simple meteorological parameters are developed. The methods provide sufficiently accurate results for structural engineering purposes, without the use of advanced computer software.
20 of 42
In the period from 1966 to 1986 Professor Halvor Hib at UMB performed depth and density measurements of snow on the ground at 105 sites in the area of s. These measurements are analysed in order to evaluate local climate factors which are of importance for roof snow loads. s is situated in Akershus County in the southeast of Norway. The area has a relatively stable winter climate (moist mid-latitude climate with cold winters according to the Kppen Climate Classification System). The measurements of Hib were carried out at the time of maximum snow depths. The registrations were not done exactly at the same time every year. However, most of the data were usually collected in mid-February. A total of 608 measurements were carried out. No measurements were performed during winter seasons with maximum snow loads on ground below approximately 0.40 kN/m2. The following research methods have been applied to obtain the presented results: Field investigations of buildings (Paper I). Field measurements of snow loads on roofs (Papers IV and V). Structural design calculations (Papers I and III). Analyses of climate data from the Norwegian Meteorological Institutes Climate archive (Papers II, IV-V). Literature surveys (all papers).
Methods and delimitations are thoroughly described in the referred individual papers.
2.2 Part A: Structural safety and reliability

Increased snow loads and wind actions on existing buildings: Reliability of the Norwegian building stock (Paper I)
Referring to the number of roof collapses and the recurrent discussions on high roof snow loads as to whether it is necessary to clear the roofs or not, it is relevant to quantify the reliability of the building stock in Norway. The high number of roof collapses due to snow loads in Germany and strategies to handle the problems are also discussed in Strasser (2008). The principal objective of the investigation has been to obtain a reliable indicator as to whether existing buildings in Norway meet current regulatory requirements concerning safety against collapse owing to snow loads and/or wind actions, and also to establish a basis for the analysis of future climate change impacts on the Norwegian building stock. The analysis comprises design documentation investigations and field studies of 20 existing buildings in five high-snowfall and five high-wind municipalities in Norway (Siem et al. 2003; Melysund et al. 2004). Statistical data for e.g. building type, year of construction and geographical localization of the approximately 3.7 million registered buildings in Norway are available in the Ground Property, Address and Building Register (GAB). Special attention has been paid to exposed types of buildings, and the buildings have been randomly selected within the exposed building categories. Assessments of whether the regulations are satisfactory, and theoretical parameter studies of the regulations, are not included in the investigation. The investigation focuses on assessing the
21 of 42
buildings main load-bearing structures and, to a lesser extent, their secondary loadbearing structures. Some clear indications of aspects that ought to be considered as a representative trend for the building types investigated have been found. 18 out of 20 buildings have a utilization ratio of more than 1.0 (90 % of the buildings investigated). The design requirements for 95 % of the buildings have increased since they were built. Nevertheless, one would assume that the buildings had built-in reserve capacities resulting in fewer buildings experiencing a utilization ratio of more than 1.0. As many as 11 out of 20 buildings have higher utilization ratio than the load increase should imply. It is difficult to obtain structural drawings and design calculations for existing buildings. Such documentation is particularly important when buildings are to have alterations or when reconstructions are carried out. Public authorities should therefore establish a system ensuring that such documentation is made and maintained. The rules for determining wind loads that were introduced in 2002 have led to most of the buildings investigated having greater calculated reliability against collapse owing to wind load than the current regulations require for new buildings. However, for buildings in municipalities exposed to wind, for tall buildings or in places with special topographical conditions, safety may, on the other hand, decrease. The rules for determining snow loads, introduced in 2001, have led to most of the buildings investigated having lower calculated reliability against collapse owing to snow loads than the regulations now require. The exposure coefficient is set to unity in these calculations. The investigation indicates too low reliability according to the structural codes for a considerable number of buildings according to current building regulations, when evaluating the possible implications for buildings in Norway. The exposed building types amount to 5 % of the total bulk of buildings in Norway (11 % of total building floor area). Potentially 4.5 % of the total bulk of buildings in Norway may have too low capacity according to current regulations. Design snow loads may have increased for 4.7 % of the total bulk of buildings. The investigation indicates that a somewhat careless approach is often applied in relation to planning, or that this process is completely omitted, in the case of alteration and additional work. This may lead to significant exceeding of design capacity. It is therefore also important that rebuilding, reconstruction and addition (extension) projects are adequately designed. Scenarios for future climate change indicate both increased winter precipitation and increased temperature, and will result in changes regarding snow loads on roofs in parts of the country. An increase in frequencies of strong winds in areas also exposed today is estimated (IPCC 2007, Benestad 2005). According to these scenarios, the future reliability of buildings in these areas could decrease.
22 of 42
2.3 Part B: Analyses of current design rules

Effects of wind exposure on roof snow loads (Paper II)
In this paper, weather data from meteorological stations in Norway, for the 30-year reference period 1961-1990, are applied in order to determine the exposure coefficient C e according to the definition in ISO 4355 Bases for design on structures - Determination of snow loads on roofs (International Organization for Standardization 1998). An equivalent expression is used in NS 3491-3. First, historical field investigations of snow loads on roofs are evaluated, giving the background for the exposure coefficient. Next, values for the exposure coefficients are calculated for 389 meteorological stations, and the ability of the coefficient to take wind effects into consideration is discussed. Finally, possible approaches for improving the calculations of wind exposure on roof snow loads are suggested. It is shown that the exposure coefficient as defined in an informative annex of ISO 4355 does not reflect the actual effects of wind exposure on roof snow loads in Norway. The main reason is the coarse simplifications of snow transport theories in combination with extreme climate variations. It must be revised and improved to serve as an applicable tool for calculating design snow loads on roofs, using the best available data from meteorological stations in Norway. As a result of the present work, the Norwegian snow load standard NS-EN 1991-1-3 (Standards Norway 2008), which recently has been published, includes an improved definition of the exposure coefficient. In Norway there are large areas subjected to heavy snow fall in combination with strong - and frequent wind. In these areas the wind affects roof snow loads, and one would expect the exposure coefficient to have a low value. However, the definition of the exposure coefficient, as given in ISO 4355, apparently does not consider transport of snow off the roof in these areas. Hence, a too heavy design snow load is prescribed. On the other hand, in areas which should be characterized as shielded (i.e. no reduction due to wind exposure) a too low design snow load may be used according to this definition.
Economical effects of reduced roof snow loads (Paper III)

Improved calculation methods and tools have made it possible to increase the degree of detailing in modern building design. The environmental loads to be used in design calculations, such as snow loads and wind actions, can reflect the local topography and climate more accurately than before. Current design tools allow each structural component to be optimized, regarding dimensions. The paper deals with the possible benefits that can be achieved by differentiation of roof snow loads with respect to the material costs of a selected house concept. Differentiation within a specific snow load zone is examined - in addition to a more general differentiation between different zones. The importance of these differences when considering the total building costs is evaluated. Finally, the extent of damage related to snow loads is examined.
23 of 42
Figure 11 Exposure coefficients according to ISO 4355 for 389 meteorological stations (weather data from the reference 30-year period 1961 1990) and characteristic snow load on the ground (kN/m2, 50-year return period) for municipality centres.
A detached timber house is selected as case-study. It is designed to resist six levels of roof snow load: three different snow load zones with varying degree of wind exposure (high/low). Obviously, the material consumption depends on the loading, but the economic significance is small. The cost difference is 3 % for the two highest snow zones, for the lowest snow zone there is almost no economic benefits to be
24 of 42
gained. When comparing the buildings designed with highest/lowest roof snow loads, the cost difference is 6 %. The material costs constitute 33 % of the total building costs, and 24 % of the total house costs (includes also installations like plumbing, heating and ventilation). When including other costs, such as ground costs, projecting, VAT etc. the material costs becomes 17 %. The maximum cost difference due to snow loads is hence 1.8 % of the total building costs, 1.3 % of the total house cost and 1.0 % of the total project costs, respectively. The degree of damage can be reduced by means of an excessive built-in safety. According to statistics for residential buildings developed by the Norwegian Financial Services Association (FNH) for the period 1997 2005, damage payments for the category where roof snow load is included constitute only 6 % of the total payments and have an annual average of 27.6 million (see www.fnh.no). Snow loads as a cause of damage is probably a small part of this category, but assume that it constitute half of the payments. Divided by the total number of residential buildings (1.4 million), the annual payment is 10. Anticipating that the economic lifetime of the building is 60 years, the total average payment for each building is 600. It has to be emphasized that the share of this sum resulting from snow load damage is rather uncertain. The price differences in the present study can also be seen as the costs for increasing the reliability for this type of building. The level of damage can be reduced with a higher built-in safety. A key unknown is the ratio of increase in material cost divided by the decrease in damage cost (further assuming there is no human injury involved). If it is assumed that the decrease in damage cost is small for a given increase of material cost, conclusions may be drawn that it is more reasonable not to increase the material cost. If, on the contrary, it is assumed that the decrease in damage cost is significant, the investment in additional material cost will be worthwhile. Quantification of this effect is beyond the scope of the present study and should be performed as part of future investigations.
2.4 Part C: Methods for improved calculation of roof snow loads

Predicting snow density using meteorological data (Paper IV)
Due to extreme differences in local climate and topography, a large variation in snow loads on the ground can be observed within short distances in Norway. NS 3491-3 (Standards Norway 2001) does not take this variation into account. As a result, many buildings are designed with a doubtful estimation of characteristic snow load on the ground. Adequate equipment for surveillance of snow depths, in combination with more advanced calculation methods, should be used to improve the national maps for snow loads on the ground. This will require detailed information of snow density depending on geographical location and climate during the period of snow accumulation. Advanced calculation models, which have been developed in geophysics and hydrology, can be used to calculate snow density and associated loading with a 25 of 42
higher degree of accuracy than the method proposed in this paper (for instance multilayered models; Loth and Graf, 1998; Xue et al., 2003). The use of advanced models demands thorough insight in meteorology and geophysical processes in order to calculate realistic time-series of snow loads during the winter season. The objective of the current study is to develop a method for predicting characteristic snow density based on simple meteorological parameters. The method should provide sufficiently accurate results for structural engineering purposes, without the use of advanced computer software. 608 snow density (bulk weight density) measurements from the period 1967 1986 are used in a multiple regression analysis. The measurements are performed at 105 sites in the s area. A clear correlation is found between observed climate and measured snow density (here in kg/m3). The analysis results are promising, with a coefficient of determination equal to 70 % and a standard deviation equal to 24 kg/m3 (0.24 kN/m3) compared to measured values. The equation is expressed as
= 230 + 0,0167 RH snow + 2,23 f drift 1,84d 4,66 10 4 ptot + 2,4t sun 1,89 R p
(10)
This suggested equation has six predictors and one constant. The most important predictor concerns the climate during snowfalls and is the sum of relative air humidity when it is snowing (RH snow ). Other important parameters reflect the climate during the whole accumulation period, like the amount of solar radiation (t sun ) and the frequency of high wind velocity and simultaneous snow, which is able to drift (f drift ). The parameters RH snow , f drift and t sun are found to increase the density. The parameters snow depth (d), sum of atmospheric pressure (p tot ) and sum of precipitation as rain (R p ) are found to decrease the density. The most important parameters in generally applied density equations, as given in an informative annex of ISO 4355, are snow depth, mean wind and mean temperature. Combinations of these parameters are investigated without achieving satisfactory correlation. These results are not included in the present paper. Snow density values calculated by use of the Norwegian standard NS 3491-3 will in most cases be overestimated. The expressions in ISO 4355 are less applicable to prescribe snow density for a climate as studied in the present investigation. Still, they can be used as simple and rough estimates.
Predicting roof snow loads using meteorological data (Paper V)

According to works by Isyumov (1971), Isyumov et al. (1974) and Isyumov et al. (1977) snow load on a particular roof is the running sum of incremental loads added by individual snowfalls during the course of winter and the depletion of the roof snow load by wind action and various thermodynamic processes:
R(t ) = Ri r ( )d
i =1 0
N (t )
(11)
Both the roof snow load deposition R and the depletion r are functions of roof properties (geometry, heat loss etc.), surrounding environment (terrain roughness, 26 of 42
shelter etc.) and meteorological parameters (snowfalls, wind velocity, temperature etc.). In this paper similar models as for the snow density are utilised for prediction of roof snow loads using meteorological data as input, thus extending the application. Snow load measurements performed at 105 sites in the area of s are considered. The distances between the measurement sites and the meteorological station in the area, vary between 0.6 and 14 km. 608 measurements were carried out at the time of maximum snow depth. No measurements were performed during winter seasons with maximum snow loads on ground below approximately 0.40 kN/m2. A clear correlation is found between observed climate and measured roof snow loads. Multiple regression equations for prediction of overall maximum roof snow load, s max , and maximum roof snow load at the windward side of the roof, s windw , are developed (both in kN/m2). The results of the analysis are promising, with a coefficient of determination for the overall maximum roof snow load equal to 74 % and a standard deviation of 0.19 kN/m2. The coefficient of determination for maximum roof snow at the windward side is 68 % and the standard deviation of the error is 0.18 kN/m2. The equations are expressed as smax = 0.87 + 0.136 d + 0.00364Tsnow 0.00223t 0.00477 + 0.733 3 vmean (12)
3 swindw = 0.527 + 0.208 d 7.59 103 + 0.04vmean 0.012 Pr 4.36 103 vsnow,loc (13)
The most important predictor in both models is the snow depth on the ground (d) observed at the meteorological station. The roof angle () and the mean wind velocity (v mean ) at the meteorological station are also important parameters. In addition, a parameter describing the temperature during snowfalls (T snow ) and the age of the snow cover (t) are predictors in the model for overall maximum roof snow load. A parameter describing the local wind velocity during snowfall (v snow,loc ), where local topography and shielding in the wind direction are included, is important for the snow loads at the windward side. In addition, the amount of rain (P r ) is important at the windward side of the roof. The methods presented in this paper are based on simple meteorological parameters and provide sufficiently accurate results for structural engineering purposes. Other advanced prediction models are not easily accessible for structural engineers in general.
27 of 42
3 Example of application: local snow loads on roofs in Kristiansand

Results from paper V are used in this chapter in order to calculate maximum roof snow loads in the area of Kristiansand, in Norway. Methods for collection and preparation of the necessary meteorological input are presented, including selection of parameters for building sites with limited meteorological data available. It is difficult, especially for the owners of large properties, to determine the roof snow loads and to decide whether clearing of roofs is necessary. Kristiansand is a municipality in the south-east of Norway (Vest-Agder County, see Figure 1), which often experiences heavy snowfalls within short time spans. An example is February 1960, when the registered diurnal precipitation at the meteorological station in Mestad was 128.7 mm (water equivalent). Three buildings collapsed in this area in the winter season of 2006 2007, see section 1.6 and Table 2. The application of the methods, which are developed in this work for prediction of roof snow load, is demonstrated for buildings located in this area.
Mestad Kjevik
Eg
Figure 12 Map of Kristiansand
Measurements from three meteorological stations in the municipality of Kristiansand are employed. These are: Eg, Kjevik and Mestad (see Figure 12 and Table 3). Temperature and wind data are not measured at the meteorological station at Mestad.
Table 3 Meteorological stations and observed parameters
Meteorological station Eg Kjevik Mestad * height above sea level ** precipitation Height* (m) 22 12 151 Operation years 1957 - 75 1946 - 02 1900 Measured meteorological data Wind Snow depth Prec.** Temp. x x x x x x x x x x -
28 of 42
Temperature and precipitation variations within the Kristiansand area give local differences in snow loads, see the table below.
Table 4 Extreme monthly values in the period January - March
Meteorological station Kjevik Mestad Kristiansand S Eg Mean wind velocity (m/s) Value Date 6.0 Jan. 84 7.3 Feb. 69 Precipitation (mm water) Value Date 341 Jan. 88 443 Jan. 75 333 Feb. 14 Snow depth (cm) Value Date 170 Feb. 70 204 Mar. 37 165 Mar. 54
Maximum roof snow loads are calculated by application of the results from paper V where an equation for the overall maximum snow load is given on the basis of meteorological parameters (see chapter 2): smax = 0.87 + 0.136 d + 0.00364Tsnow 0.00223t 0.00477 + 0.733 3 vmean (12)
The parameter T snow (measure of temperature during snowfalls) describes the climate during snow fall. The parameter v mean (in m/s) concerns the wind climate for the whole accumulation period. In addition, the snow depth d (in cm), age t (total number of observations) and roof angle are applied parameters. The meteorological input needed is daily precipitation, snow depth, wind velocity and air temperature. Based on these data the parameters T snow and the age t are developed. Mestad has the largest snow depths as can be seen in Figure 13. There is a large variation in the annual extreme snow depth; some years there are almost no snow on the ground. Mestad has an average annual maximum snow depth of 79 cm (109 measurement years) while Kjevik (57 measurement years) and Eg (72 measurement years) have mean snow depths of 44 cm and 56 cm, respectively. A larger fraction of the snow covers, at the time when the annual extreme values occur, have a higher age at Mestad than at the other two stations, see Figure 14. Mestad is situated farther away from the coast and at a higher elevation. Hence, it experiences both higher precipitation amounts and lower temperatures.
29 of 42
A nnual extr eme snow depths

Lognormal
Frequency
20
10
Loc Scale N
3,503 0,8177 59
0 0 40 80 120 160 200 Annual extreme snow depths (cm) KJEVIK 240
Frequency
20 10
Lognormal
Loc Scale N 3,835 0,6352 72
0 0 40 80 120 160 200 Annual extreme snow depths (cm) EG 240
Lognormal
Frequency
20 10 0 0 40 80 120 160 200 Annual extreme snow depths (cm) MESTAD 240
Loc Scale N
4,247 0,5429 109
Figure 13 Distribution of annual extreme snow depths (cm) at three meteorological stations fitted to a lognormal distribution.
A ge of snow cover at maximum snow depth

50 Weibull
Shape Scale N 0,8363 68,74 58
Frequency
25
0 0 100 200 300 400 Age (no. of observations) KJEVIK 500
Weibull
Frequency
20 10 0 0 100 200 300 Age (no. of observations) EG 400 500
Shape Scale N
0,7069 58,90 19
30
Weibull
Shape Scale N 1,122 131,9 108
Frequency
15
0 0 100 200 300 400 Age (no. of observations) MESTAD 500
Figure 14 Distribution of age of snow cover (no. of observations) at meteorological stations fitted to a Weibull distribution. With three observations a day, the number of days are 1/3 x Age (i.e. total number of observations).
No wind and temperature parameters are registered at Mestad. Adjusted data from the other two stations are used in order to describe both air temperature and wind
30 of 42
velocity. The daily temperatures for Mestad are computed by assuming a constant deviation relative to the observed temperatures at Kjevik: 2.5 C. Temperatures at both Eg and Kjevik are evaluated. With a constant temperature deviation of 2.5 C, the ratios of the calculated roof snow loads for flat roofs at Mestad, Eg and Kjevik are approximately similar to the corresponding ratios of ground snow depths at the three sites. The wind climate at the meteorological stations is not expected to be very different. Both the stations at Eg and Mestad are surrounded by terrain elements which tend to decelerate the wind. Kjevik is situated at an airport and is more exposed. The differences in mean wind velocity for the observed snow covers at Eg and Kjevik are on the average 11 % (Kjevik highest). The corresponding mean wind for Kjevik is taken to be representative for the mean velocity at Mestad. For the years where no wind data are available for Kjevik, the average mean wind velocity at that station is applied (equal to 4.4 m/s). Roof snow loads can be calculated for each winter season and for various roof angles based on Equation 12. The results for flat roofs can be seen in Figure 15. The results are based on daily observations during 58 winter seasons at Kjevik, 19 winter seasons at Eg and 59 winter seasons at Mestad. Winter seasons with a maximum snow depth on the ground equal to 20 cm or below are excluded from the analysis.
20
20
20 15 15
15
Frequency
Frequency
10
Frequency
0 1 2 3 4 Eg (kN/m2) 5
10
10
5 5
2 3 Kjevik (kN/m2)
2 3 4 Mestad (kN/m2)
Figure 15 Calculated roof snow loads for flat roofs.
A lognormal distribution is found to provide the best fit for the calculated roof snow loads at the three meteorological stations. However, the results for Eg (see Figure 15) indicate that multi-peak distributions might be required in order to fit the histograms well. According to the Norwegian Standard NS 3490 (Standards Norway 1999) environmental loads to be used when designing buildings shall have a return period 31 of 42
of 50 years, i.e. an annual probability of 0.02 to be exceeded. The statistical computer program Minitab Statistical Software (www.minitab.com) is used in order to find the characteristic design values for each data set (Kjevik, Eg and Mestad). For flat roofs the characteristic roof snow loads for Kjevik, Eg and Mestad are 2.84 kN/m2, 4.83 kN/m2 and 5.00 kN/m2, respectively (50 years return period).
Kjevik, 0 deg.
Lognormal; Loc=0,1703; Scale=0,423; Thresh=0 0,9 0,6
Eg, 0 deg.
Lognormal; Loc=0,3729; Scale=0,5853; Thresh=0
M estad, 0 deg.
Lognormal; Loc=0,7565; Scale=0,4153; Thresh=0 0,5
0,8 0,5 0,7 0,4
0,6
0,4 0,3
Density
Density
0,3
0,4 0,2 0,3 0,2
0,2 0,1 0,1 0,02 0,0 0 X 2,83 0,0 0 X 4,83 0,02
Density
0,1
0,5
0,02 0,0 0 X 5,00
Figure 16 Calculated characteristic roof snow loads for flat roofs with return period of 50 years.
The standard NS 3491-3 prescribes a ground snow load value of 4.0 kN/m2 for the municipality of Kristiansand. This corresponds to a roof snow load of 3.2 kN/m2 assuming a shape factor of 0.8. The standard seems to underestimate the roof snow loads at Mestad. The calculations for Eg are based on only 19 data sets which may have lead to uncertainties. Furthermore, the calculations for Mestad are based on assumed values of the temperature. The results illustrate that differences in climate has a large influence on roof snow loads. In the Norwegian snow load standard the ground snow loads are based on snow depth measurements and a simple assumption of snow density. The standard does not account for other climate parameters which are important for the assessment of design roof snow load.
32 of 42
4 Further work
The presented investigations emphasise the importance of monitoring snow loads on roofs. Existing buildings which are considered to be vulnerable to the occurrence of large snow loads are primarily buildings with large spans which are made of light structural materials and which may contain crowds of people. Within this category, buildings made before 1979 are especially vulnerable due to low values of the design snow load. It is difficult for the owners of large properties to determine the roof snow loads in order to decide when clearing of roofs is needed. Models for predicting roof snow loads should hence be an important tool when developing monitoring systems for roof snow loads. It is also difficult to obtain structural drawings and design calculations for existing buildings. Such documentation is particularly important when buildings are to have alterations or when reconstructions are carried out. Public authorities should therefore establish a system ensuring that such documentation is made and maintained. Further work should focus on developing tools for geographic differentiation of snow loads, including local topography and climate variations, to be used in standards and regulations. Due to extreme differences in local climate and topography, a large variation in snow loads on roofs can be observed within short distances in Norway. The standards do not take this variability into account. As a result, many buildings are designed with a doubtful estimation of roof snow loads. For instance, should adequate equipment for surveillance of snow depths, in combination with more advanced calculation methods, be used to improve the national maps for snow loads on the ground. It is also shown that the exposure coefficient as defined in an informative annex of ISO 4355 and NS 3491-3 does not reflect the actual effects of wind exposure on roof snow loads in Norway. It must be revised and improved to serve as an applicable tool for calculating design snow loads on roofs, using the best available data from meteorological stations. The presented work summarizes field investigations which form the basis exposure coefficients and shape coefficients in the standards. Some of the derived ground to roof conversion factors are based on a too small number of measurements. Field investigations are to a high extent performed for medium to small buildings, and do not sufficiently take into consideration the redistribution which may occur on large roofs. Shape and exposure coefficients as a function of roof size should therefore be focused on. Shape factors for curved roofs and multilevel roofs are also areas where more research should be performed. Further development of standards and regulations has to consider the benefits of increased detailing versus the risk of errors and evasions. The development of modern design standards often implies an increase in the degree of detailing. In the presented work it is evaluated whether this development is beneficial through an analysis of the effects of differentiation of roof snow loads for a timber detached house. This analysis also contains a discussion of damage costs due to snow loads versus the costs of built-in safety. If it is assumed that the decrease in damage cost is small for a given increase of material cost, conclusions may be drawn that it is more reasonable not to increase the material cost. If, on the contrary, it is assumed that the 33 of 42
decrease in damage cost is significant, the investment in additional material cost will be worthwhile. Quantification of this effect should be performed as part of future investigations. The snow measurements performed by Hib were done within a small area in Norway and combined with data from one meteorological station. Further work should aim at investigating the results of the presented work in view of data from other parts of the country. Possible measurement uncertainties in conjunction with the applicable meteorological station could then be reduced. The capability of the proposed empirical formulae to estimate snow density and loads in different climates could then also be assessed.
34 of 42
5 Conclusions
The collapse of several buildings in Central Europe during the winter of 2006 and large amounts of snow in Norway during the last winter seasons have given increased focus on snow loads on roofs as well as the general reliability of buildings. The Norwegian building regulations of 1949 referred to a general snow load on roofs corresponding to 1.5 kN/m2. Several revisions through the years have increased the design roof snow loads gradually. According to the current regulations, snow loads on roofs with a return period of 50 years are required. In the current Norwegian standards (European standards with national annexes) the roof snow loads are expressed as the product of snow load on the ground and factors accounting for roof geometry, wind exposure and heat transfer through the roof. Snow loads on the ground are given for each of the 434 municipalities in Norway varying from 1.5 to 9.0 kN/m2. In this thesis the reliability of the Norwegian building stock is studied identifying the vulnerability with respect to snow loads. It is also investigated whether the governing rules are able to differentiate the design snow load in a study of the exposure coefficient (accounts for local effects of wind exposure) and guidelines for deciding snow density. In addition, calculations are performed on a single family house demonstrating the economical effects of differencing snow loads on roofs. In this work historical field measurements of snow loads on roofs are analyzed in order to describe the relation between the local climate and the magnitude of these loads. This analysis also suggests an improved prediction of snow density based on local climate. Reliability of the Norwegian building stock A study analysis which comprised investigation of 20 existing buildings in Norway has been performed. The current rules for determination of snow loads have shown that most of the buildings investigated have a lower calculated reliability against collapse, due to snow loads, than the regulations now require (90 % of the 20 buildings investigated). The investigation indicates a too low reliability for a considerable number of buildings in Norway according to current building regulations, when considering the possible implication of the findings. The exposed building types amount to 5 % of the total bulk of buildings in Norway (11 % of total building floor area). Potentially 4.5 % of the total building stock in Norway may have a too low load carrying capacity according to current regulations. An unexpected result in this study is the observation that many buildings (55 % of the 20 buildings) have even lower calculated reliability than the historical increase in design loads should imply. As a consequence, roofs have to be cleared in order to avoid collapse of buildings due to high snow loads. A guideline has been developed (commissioned by the building authorities) for building owners when considering critical snow load on roofs. The guideline was produced as part of the research programme Climate 2000. An alternative to snow clearing is strengthening of critical structural elements.
35 of 42
Differentiation of snow loads in current design rules Weather data from meteorological stations in Norway for the 30-year reference period (1961 1990) are applied in order to determine the exposure coefficient according to the definition in the current standards (ISO 4355 and NS 3491-3). It is shown that the exposure coefficient as defined does not reflect the actual effects of wind exposure on roof snow loads in Norway, the main reasons being oversimplifications in the definition of the coefficient and the extreme variations of the climate in Norway. As a result of the present work, the Norwegian snow load standard NS-EN 1991-1-3, which recently has been published, includes an improved definition of the exposure coefficient. The temperature and wind categories are altered in order to better describe conditions when wind blows snow off the roofs. According to the Norwegian Standard NS 3491-3 snow density is calculated based on age of the snow cover and wetness. The analysis in this thesis shows that the resulting density also depends on several other climate parameters. The analysis also reveals that the snow density expressions in the standard are less applicable than the developed method to estimate snow density for the studied climate. Economical effects of differentiating roof snow loads It is also investigated whether it is beneficial to differentiate roof snow loads when considering material costs of a selected house concept. A particular type of timber detached house is designed to resist six different levels of roof snow load. For each case, the required consumption of building materials is evaluated. Some differences are observed between the six different cases, but the economic effect is small. When comparing the buildings designed with highest/lowest roof snow loads, the price difference in building materials is 6 %. It is also found that the maximum price difference constitutes 1.0 % of the total project costs when all planning, materials and labour are included. The costs of increasing the reliability for the studied timber detached house are high compared to estimated total damage payments, and conclusions may be drawn that it is more reasonable not to increase the reliability (seen from a society perspective). Increasing the roof snow loads with a factor of 4.5 results in an increase of the total building budget of 1.0 %. Since damage is not evenly distributed, strengthening of the load bearing structure and an increase of material costs may in any case be preferred by an individual property owner. From an environmental perspective reduced material consumption is highly appreciated. Assuming that the increase in material consumption for a house is not higher than the cost increase, it can be concluded that the negative environmental effects of increasing the reliability are limited. Prediction of snow loads Models for predicting roof snow loads and snow density on the ground are developed using meteorological data as input, thus extending the application of the results. Snow load and density measurements performed at 105 sites by Professor Halvor Hib at the Agricultural University of Norway in the period 1966 to 1986 are analysed.
36 of 42
A clear correlation is found between observed climate and the measurements. New knowledge of the influence of local climate on resulting maximum snow loads is achieved. The methods provide sufficiently accurate results for structural engineering purposes, without the use of advanced computer software. The most important predictor is snow depth on the ground. Roof angle is also an important parameter. The work shows that wind velocity as a single parameter probably has lower importance considering maximum snow loads than previous research has indicated. The reason for this is most likely the accumulation of snow through a long winter season in Norway while many previous studies are based on single snow events. Another reason may be that the effects of local wind are partly included in other parameters, for instance the roof angle and snow depth. A new model for prediction of snow density is developed. The result of the analysis shows that depth is an important parameter when predicting snow density, but it is rather imprecise transforming it to a load without considering several climate influences. The most important predictor concerns the climate during snowfalls and is the sum of relative air humidity when it is snowing. Another important parameter is the frequency of high wind velocity and simultaneous snow, which is able to drift. The method should be used in combination with adequate equipment for surveillance of snow depths in order to improve the national maps for snow loads on the ground. Overall conclusions The study demonstrates that the current regulations have weak points: the definition of the exposure coefficient, the snow density expressions and methods for local differentiation of roof snow loads. The method for predicting roof snow loads may be further developed to a useful and important tool, for improved economy and increased reliability. The study reveals that the relation between local climate and snow load is complex, and the results are a step forward in the process of understanding these relations. In a longer perspective it can be used to improve standards describing design roof snow loads. Further development of standards and regulations has to consider the balance of the benefits which are associated with increased detailing against the increased risk of errors and evasions. Increasing the detailing of roof snow calculations may have limited importance when considering the limited costs of increasing the calculated reliability. It is difficult to obtain structural drawings and design calculations for existing buildings. Such documentation is particularly important when buildings are to have alterations or when reconstructions are carried out. Public authorities should therefore establish a system ensuring that such documentation is made and maintained.
37 of 42
References
Arya S.P. 2001. Introduction to micrometeorology. 2nd edition. International geophysics series Vol. 79. Academic Press, London, Great Britain. Benestad R.E. 2005. Climate change scenarios for northern Europe from multimodel IPCC AR4 climate simulations. Geophysical Research Letters 32. L17704. Boyd D.W., Schriever W.R. and Taylor D.A. 1981. Snow and buildings. In: Gray D.M., Male D.H. (eds.) Handbook of snow: Principles, Processes, Management & use. Pergamon Press, p. 562 - 579. Commission of the European Communities 1999. DGIII-D3: Scientific support activity in the field of structural stability of civil engineering works - Snow loads - Final report. University of Pisa, Dep. of Structural Engineering, Prof. Luca Sanpaolesi, Pisa, Italy. Davenport A.G. 1962. The response of slender line-like structures to a gusty wind. Proc. Institution of Civil Engineers 1962 Vol. 23, London, p. 389408. Dyrbye C. and Hansen S.O. 1997. Wind loads on structures. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, England. Hib H. 1988. Snow Load on Gable Roofs - Results from Snow Load Measurements on Farm Buildings in Norway. Proc. of the First International Conference on Snow Engineering 1988, Santa Barbara, California, U.S.A. CRREL Special Report 89-6, p. 95-104. International Organization for Standardization 1998. ISO 4355: Bases for design on structures - Determination of snow loads on roofs. 2nd ed. 1998. International Organization for Standardization, Genve, Switzerland. IPCC, 2007: Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson, Eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Irwin P.A., Gamble S.L. and Taylor D.A. 1995. Effects of roof size, heat transfer, and climate on snow loads: studies for the 1995 NBC. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 1995 Vol. 22, p. 770 - 784. Isymov N. 1971. An approach to the prediction of snow loads (PhD Thesis). The University of Western Ontario, Faculty of Graduate Studies, London, Canada. Isyumov N, Davenport. 1974. A Probabilistic Approach to the Prediction of Snow Loads. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 1(1974), p. 28 49. Isyumov N, Mikitiuk M. 1977. Climatology of snowfalls and related meteorological variables with application to roof snow load specifications. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 4(1977), p. 240 256. Kind R.J. 1981. Snow drifting. In: Gray D.M., Male D.H. (eds.) Handbook of snow: Principles, Processes, Management & use. Pergamon Press, p. 338 - 359. Li L. and Pomeroy J.W. 1997. Estimates of Threshold Wind Speeds for Snow Transport Using Meteorological Data. Journal of Applied Meteorology Vol. 36 March 1997, p. 205 -213. Lis, K.R., Prestrud, O., Gjestvang M. and Rasmussen, F. (2000). Snlast p eksisterende tak-konstruksjoner. Tiltak for utsatte bygninger (in Norwegian), 38 of 42
NBI Report No. O10210-1, Norwegian Building Research Institute, Oslo, Norway. Loth B. and Graf H. 1998. Modeling the snow cover in climate studies. 1. Long-term integrations under different climatic conditions using a multilayered snowcover model. Journal of Geophysical Research. 103, p. 1131311327. Lutes D.A. 1970. Snow loads for the design of roofs in Canada. Proc. of the Western Snow Conference. Victoria, British Colombia, Canada, p. 61 - 67. Lberg P.A. 1976. Snlaster p tak (in Norwegian). Arbeidsrapport nr. 5. Norwegian Building Research Institute, Oslo, Norway. Mellor M. 1965. Cold Regions Science and Engineering, Part III, Section A3c, Blowing snow. U.S. Army Material Command, Cold Regions Research & Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, New Hampshire, U.S.A. Melysund, V., Lis, K.R., Siem, J. and Apeland, K. 2004. Investigation of snow loads and wind actions on existing buildings in Norway. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Snow Engineering, Davos, Switzerland, A.A. Balkema Publishers, Leiden, Netherlands, 113 127. National Office of Building Technology and Administration 1949. Byggeforskrifter av 15. desember 1949 utferdiget i henhold til 6 i lov om bygningsvesenet av 22. februar 1924 (in Norwegian), National Office of Building Technology and Administration, Oslo, Norway. National Office of Building Technology and Administration 1969. Byggeforskrifter av 1. august 1969 utferdiget i henhold til 6 i bygningsloven av 18. juni 1965 (in Norwegian), National Office of Building Technology and Administration, Oslo, Norway. National Office of Building Technology and Administration 1997. Regulations concerning requirements for construction works and products for construction works - Technical Regulations under the Planning and Building Act of 14 June 1985 No. 77. In: National Office of Building Technology and Administration. Nordli . 2000. Fjellet i sn, vind, sol og tke - Dannevigs Fjellbok (in Norwegian). Det Norske Samlaget, Oslo, Norway. Norem H. 1974. Utforming av veger i drivsnomrder (in Norwegian). Meddelelse nr. 11. Institutt for veg- og jernbanebygging, Norges tekniske hgskole, Trondheim, Norway. ORourke M. and Kuskowski N. 2005. Snow Drifts at Roofs Steps in Series. Technical Note in Journal of Structural Engineering, Oct. 2005, p. 1637 1640. O'Rourke M., Koch P. and Redfield R. 1983. Analysis of roof snow load case studies - Uniform Loads. Cold Regions Research & Engineering Laboratory, CRREL Report 83-1. Otstavnov V.A. and Rosenberg L.S. 1989. Consideration of Wind Effect in Standardization of Snow Load. In: A multidisciplinary approach to snow engineering: 1st International Engineering Foundation. US Army Corps of Engineers Cold Regions 8387.500 SR 89-6, Vol. 89-6, 1989, p. 256 - 263. ura H., Ishida T., Kobayashi D., Kobayashi S. and Yamada T. 1967. Studies on blowing snow II. International Conference on Low Temperature Science 1966, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan, p. 1099 1117.
39 of 42
Pomeroy J.W., Gray D.M. and Landine P.G. 1991. Modelling the transport and sublimation of blowing snow on the prairies. Proceedings of the 48th Eastern Snow Conference, p. 175 188. Sandvik R. 1989. Calculation of maximum snow load of roofs with high thermal transmittance. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Snow Engineering 1988, Santa Barbara, California, U.S.A., CRREL Special Report 89-6, p. 317 - 324. Schmidt R.A. 1980. Threshold wind-speeds and elastic impact in snow transport. Journal of Glaciology Vol. 26. No. 94 1980, p. 453 467. Siem, J., Melysund, V., Lis, K.R., Strandholmen, B. and Prestrud, O. 2003. Snog vindlaster p eksisterende bygninger. Rapport fra prosjekt 1 og 2 i FoUprogrammet Klima 2000 (in Norwegian), NBI Report No. 114, Norwegian Building Research Institute, Oslo, Norway. Simiu E. and Scanlan R.H. 1986. Wind effects on structures. An introduction to wind engineering, 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., New York, U.S.A. Standards Norway 1970. NS 3052: Calculation of loading (in Norwegian), 1st ed. March 1970, Standards Norway, Oslo, Norway. Standards Norway 1979a. NS 3479: Design loads for structures (in Norwegian), 1st ed. Feb. 1979. Standards Norway, Oslo, Norway. Standards Norway 1979b. NS 3470: Timber structures - Design rules (in Norwegian), 3rd ed. Nov. 1979. Standards Norway, Oslo, Norway. Standards Norway 1990. NS 3479: Design of structures - Design loads, 3rd ed. Oct. 1990. Standards Norway, Oslo, Norway. Standards Norway 1999. NS 3490: Design of structures - Requirements to reliability (in Norwegian), NS 3490, 1st ed. June 1999, Standards Norway, Oslo, Norway. Standards Norway 2001. NS 3491-3: Design of structures - Design actions - Part 3: Snow loads (in Norwegian), 1st ed. March 2001, Standards Norway, Oslo, Norway. Standards Norway 2002a. NS 3491-4 Design of structures - Design actions - Part 4: Wind loads (in Norwegian), 1st ed. May 2002, Standards Norway, Oslo, Norway. Standards Norway 2008. NS-EN 1991-1-3 Eurocode 1: Actions on structures. Part 1-3: General actions. Snow loads (in Norwegian), 1st ed. 2008, Standards Norway, Oslo, Norway. Strasser U. 2008. Snow loads in a changing climate: new risks? Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences No. 8, p. 1 8. Tabler R.D. 1988. Snow fence handbook, release 1.1. Tabler & Associates, Laramie, Wyoming, U.S.A. Taylor D.A. 1979. A survey of snow loads on the roofs of arena-type buildings in Canada. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering Vol. 6 1979, p. 85 - 96. Taylor D.A. 1983. Sliding snow on sloping roofs. Canadian Building Digest CBD 228, Division of Building Research, National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, Canada. Taylor D.A. 1985. Snow loads on sloping roofs: two pilot studies in the Ottawa area. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering Vol. 12 1985, p. 334 - 343. Xue Y, Sun S, Kahan DS, & Jiao Y. 2003. Impact of parameterizations in snow physics and interface processes on the simulation of snow cover and runoff at several cold regions sites. Journal of Geophysical Research. 108(D22), 8859.
40 of 42
Complementary work carried out as part of the PhD study

Melysund, V., Lis, K.R., Siem, J. and Apeland, K. 2004. Investigation of snow loads and wind actions on existing buildings in Norway. Proc. of the 5th International Conference on Snow Engineering (Bartelt, Adams, Christen, Sack & Sato eds.), Taylor & Francis Group, London, 113-127. Melysund, V., Hiseth K.V., Leira, B. and Lis K.R. 2008. Development of design snow loads on roofs in Norway. Proc. of the 6th International Conference on Snow Engineering, Whistler, British Columbia, Canada 2008. Engineering Conference International, Brooklyn, New York, U.S.A.
41 of 42
42 of 42
Individual papers
Part A Structural safety and reliability
I.
Melysund, V., Lis, K.R., Siem, J. and Apeland, K. (2006) Increased snow loads and wind actions on existing buildings: Reliability of the Norwegian building stock. Journal of structural engineering, 132(11), 1813 1820.
Paper I is based on research presented in Siem, J., Melysund, V., Lis, K. R., Strandholmen, B., Prestrud, O., 2003: Sn- og vindlaster p eksisterende bygninger Rapport fra prosjekt 1 og 2 i FoU-programmet Klima 2000, Report 114, Norwegian Building Research Institute, Oslo [in Norwegian]. The work is also presented at the 5th International Conference on Snow Engineering in Davos, 2004.
Increased Snow Loads and Wind Actions on Existing Buildings: Reliability of the Norwegian Building Stock1
Vivian Melysund, Ph.D.2; Kim Robert Lis, Ph.D.3; Jan Siem4; and Kristoffer Apeland5
Abstract: Results from an investigation of snow loads and wind actions on 20 existing buildings in Norway are presented. The objective has been to investigate to what extent existing buildings meet current regulatory requirements relating to safety against collapse owing to snow loads or wind actions. Eighteen buildings have a utilization ratio of more than 1.0 under current regulations. The new design rules have led to most of the buildings investigated having reduced safety against collapse owing to snow loads and greater safety against collapse owing to wind actions than the regulations now demand. The investigation indicates too low reliability for a considerable number of buildings according to current building regulations when evaluating the possible consequences of the conclusions in a national perspective. Scenarios for future climate change indicate both increased winter precipitation and increased temperatures, and thus changing the snow loads on roofs. Wind scenarios for the decades to come indicate an increase in frequencies of strong winds in areas also exposed today. Thus, the future reliability of the buildings in these areas could decrease. DOI: 10.1061/ ASCE 0733-9445 2006 132:11 1813 CE Database subject headings: Bearing capacity; Buildings; Climatic changes; Norway; Reliability; Snow loads; Structural design; Structural safety; Wind loads.
Introduction
Background Large snow loads on roofs during the winter of 1999/2000 led to the collapse of several buildings in northern Norway. The accident at Bardufoss Community Centre, where the roof caved in and claimed three lives, was the most serious of these accidents Fig. 1 . The most important causes of this collapse were a faulty construction of the roof when the building was erected and larger snow loads on the roof than it was designed for. Earlier, many roof structures in Norway have not been designed to withstand sufciently large snow loads from the viewpoint of current design rules. Several roof structures in parts of
Preliminary results presented at the Fifth International Conference on Snow Engineering, July 2004, Davos, Switzerland. 2 Fellow, SINTEF Building and Infrastructure, P.O. Box 124 Blindern, NO-0314 Oslo, Norway, and Dept. of Structural Engineering, Norwegian Univ. of Science and Technology, Richard Birkelandsvei 1 A, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway. E-mail: vivian.meloysund@sintef.no 3 Fellow, SINTEF Building and Infrastructure, P.O. Box 124 Blindern, NO-0314 Oslo, Norway, and Dept. of Civil and Transport Engineering, Norwegian Univ. of Science and Technology, Hgskoleringen 7 A, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway. 4 Professor, Dept. of Architectural Design, History and Technology, Norwegian Univ. of Science and Technology, Alfred Getz vei 3, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway. 5 Doctor Technices, Dr. Techn. Kristoffer Apeland AS, P.O. Box 7029 Majorstuen, NO-0306 Oslo, Norway. Note. Associate Editor: Shahram Sarkani. Discussion open until April 1, 2007. Separate discussions must be submitted for individual papers. To extend the closing date by one month, a written request must be led with the ASCE Managing Editor. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and possible publication on June 2, 2005; approved on January 12, 2006. This paper is part of the Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 132, No. 11, November 1, 2006. ASCE, ISSN 0733-9445/2006/1118131820/$25.00.
1
the country have, presumably, such a low load carrying capacity in relation to the current design codes that they may be in danger of collapse. Table 1 provides an overview of a number of large buildings where snow has triggered or caused signicant damage or collapse Lis et al. 2000 . The summary is not complete, but gives an idea of which types of buildings are especially vulnerable to damage. Table 1 is based on information from insurance companies and SINTEF Building and Infrastructure. For most buildings, defects during planning or construction have been the most likely cause of damage. In some cases, the damage has resulted from applicable building regulations not being adhered to, or construction at the location not being in accordance with the design calculations. In a few cases, the snow load assumed in the calculations has been lower than the actual loading. The hurricane Beaufort Number 12 that occurred in northwest Norway on New Years Day 1992 caused damage to buildings costing somewhere in the region of $200 million. Wind velocities of 62 63 m / s were recorded, the highest wind velocities ever recorded on mainland Norway. The bulk of the damage was related to roofs and roong, primarily due to insufcient anchoring. Most of the damage that appeared could have been avoided if the existing building regulations and codes of practice had been adhered to National Ofce of Building Technology and Administration 1993 . Investigations into the damage that took place in 1992 showed that during the period 19501991 the likelihood of structures in new buildings having too low load carrying capacity was increasing. The investigations also demonstrated that if the safety levels in the regulations were to be conformed to, it would be necessary to update the wind action provisions. Fifty-ve percent of the recorded cases of damage caused by the hurricane in northwest Norway in 1992 involved buildings erected before 1970 National Ofce of Building Technology and Administration 1993 . The fact that a building has served well for many years is thus no guarantee that it will withstand subsequent hurricanes.
JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING ASCE / NOVEMBER 2006 / 1813
Downloaded 14 Nov 2010 to 158.36.140.163. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit ttp://www.ascelibrary.org h
studies of the regulations are not included in the investigation. The investigation focuses on assessing the buildings main loadbearing structures and, to a lesser extent, their secondary loadbearing structures.
Building Regulations and Design Codes

Development of Design Codes for Snow Loads and Wind Actions The building regulations of December 15, 1949 National Ofce of Building Technology and Administration 1949 referred to a general snow load on roofs corresponding to 1.5 kN/ m2. This value could be reduced or increased by the individual building authority with the Ministrys approval. The importance of the shape of the roof for the size of the snow load on the roof was calculated in a simple way. Structures should normally be designed for a wind pressure equal to 1.0 kN/ m2, while a wind pressure equal to 1.5 kN/ m2 should be used in exposed areas. In heavily exposed areas, building authorities could increase these basic values with the Ministrys approval. The sum of the wind shape factors for lee and windward walls for a closed building was 1.2 i.e., 1 + 0.2 . In NS 3052 Standards Norway 1970 snow maps were introduced showing zones with roof snow loads with values of up to 1.5 kN/ m2, between 1.5 and 2.5 kN/ m2, and above 2.5 kN/ m2. Four curves for the wind pressure were introduced: Curves A, B, C, and D, as seen in Fig. 2. The code quoted many more-detailed rules for the wind shape factors than the building regulations of 1949. The sum of the shape factors for the lee and windward walls was in the code also set to 1.2 i.e., 0.7+ 0.5 . Compared to the building regulations of 1949, the changes in NS 3052 largely implied a reduction in the wind velocity pressures in exposed areas. In NS 3052 the partial factor method was introduced. The partial factor for snow loads was set to 1.6 while the partial factor for wind actions was set to 1.5. In NS 3479 Standards Norway 1979 the section dealing with snow loads contained a direct translation of ISO 4355 snow
Fig. 1. Bardufoss community centre reprinted with permission. National Ofce of Building Technology and Administration, Oslo, Norway
Principal Objectives and Delimitations The principal objective of the investigation has been to obtain a reliable indicator as to whether existing buildings in Norway meet current regulatory requirements concerning safety against collapse owing to snow loads and/or wind actions, and also to establish a basis for the analysis of future climate change impacts on the Norwegian building stock. The analysis encompasses design documentation investigations and eld studies of 20 existing buildings in ve high-snowfall and ve high-wind municipalities in Norway Siem et al. 2003; Melysund et al. 2004 . Statistical data for building types, year of construction, and geographical localization of the approximately 3.7 million registered buildings in Norway are available in the Ground Property, Address and Building Register GAB . Special attention has been paid to exposed types of buildings, and the buildings have been randomly selected within the exposed building categories. Assessments of whether the regulations are satisfactory and theoretical parameter
Table 1. Cases of Collapse as a Result of Major Snow Loads Building Type of building County Troms Troms Troms Troms Nordland Troms Akershus Nordland Romsdal Akershus Buskerud Troms Aust Agder Vestfold Troms Troms Built year 1971 1965 1970 1990a 1978/1996a 1982 Time of collapse/damage 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 1999 1999 1996 1994 1994 1988 1987 1987 1983 1975
Stongelandet Skole Swimming pool Bardufoss Samfunnshus Community hall Lenangen Skole School Mlselv Community hall Storvoll Skole School Troms Tennishall Sports hall Lkens-hallen Sports hall Lofothallen Sports hall Aukra Industrial facility Asker Tennishall Sports hall Drammen School Harstad Industrial facility Birkenes-hallen Sports hall Svelvik Karosseri Industrial facility Epokehallen Drill hall military facility Troms Industrial facility a Year of rebuilding or reconstruction.
1814 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING ASCE / NOVEMBER 2006
Table 2. Link between Reliability Class, Failure Consequences, Reliability Index, and Maximum Annual Probability of Failure Maximum annual probability of failure 105 104 103 102
Reliability class 4 3 2 1
Consequence examples of construction Particularly considerable consequences atomic reactor Considerable consequences shopping center Moderate consequences ofce building Limited consequences house
Reliability index 4.26 3.71 3.09 2.32
Fig. 2. Wind pressure curves reprinted from NS 3479/A1, with the permission from Pronorm AS, Oslo, Norway
1.5. A reduction factor kL with a value of 0.81.0, depending on the reliability class by which the partial factor must be multiplied is also introduced. The extensive revisions of the codes have increased the level of detail in the regulations considerably. The objective is to achieve a safety level in accordance with Table 2. In other words, the intention is to achieve a more uniform safety level for buildings that have the same reliability class even if they are built in different places, and also to obtain different safety levels for structures classied in different reliability classes. A thorough description of the historical development of design loads for wind actions and snow loads is presented by Melysund et al. 2004 .
loads on roofs. Characteristic snow loads on the ground for each municipality 5-year return period with values largely between 1.5 and 3.5 kN/ m2 were introduced. In the case of roofs from which snow was difcult to clear, a return period of at least 20 years needed to be accounted for. The code quoted snow shape factors for a number of typical roof shapes. As a result of the hurricane that struck northwest Norway on New Years Day 1992, two new wind curves were introduced for a selection of coastal municipalities in a revision of NS 3479 Standards Norway 1994 : Curves E and F see Fig. 2 . The partial factor for wind actions was set to 1.6. In NS 3491-3 Standards Norway 2001 characteristic snow loads on the ground with a 50-year return period was specied. The bulk of the municipalities now had a value for snow loads on the ground of between 3.0 and 4.5 kN/ m2. A few coastal municipalities had values as low as 1.5 kN/ m2, and in some inland municipalities values of up to 9.0 kN/ m2 were introduced. Pitched roofs, shed roofs, and curved roofs have also undergone certain changes associated with the shape factors. In NS 3491-4 Standards Norway 2002a a classication of the whole country has been carried out so that wind exposure for all 434 municipalities is dened. Exposure is dened by means of a reference wind velocity varies between 22 and 31 m / s . Roughness of the terrain in an area 10 km against the wind direction is important for the wind pressure in this code called the gust velocity pressure . The code denes ve such categories of terrain roughness. Other parameters of importance for the gust velocity pressure are the wind direction, the height of the building site above sea level, and the topography. In this regulation amendment process, NS 3490 Standards Norway 1999 prescribes a 50-year return period for environmental loads. The partial factors for environmental loads are set to
Selection Criteria and Methodology

Limits of Use The consequences of a collapse are greater in buildings in which many people are present than in buildings with few people. A collapse in public buildings such as sports halls, shops, and the like has, therefore, greater consequences than, for example, in storage facilities in which it is less probable that people will be present. This is also apparent from the reliability approach set out in numbers in Table 2 in which, under current rules, more stringent requirements are imposed on structures whose collapse may have major consequences. Temporary structures are often more poorly planned and designed than permanent structures. This is in accordance with Norwegian codes if the building is designed to have a short lifetime and the return period for the environmental loads is adjusted for this. However, temporary structures often remain in use for a much longer time than expected. This means that the safety level for such structures in practice often is too low. Material Use and Geometry For light roofs, the specic weight is often low compared to the snow load that the roof is required to withstand. If the snow load exceeds the design value, the total load has increased virtually the same percentage as the snow load. If the specic weight had been high, the percentage increase would have been much smaller. Lightweight structures are, therefore, more vulnerable to an increase in snow load above the load for which the structure is designed than heavy structures. In other words, heavy structures
have greater built-in safety when the snow load increases beyond the load that the structure is designed to withstand. Another selection criterion is the maximum span of a building. The consequences of a collapse in buildings with large spans are usually great. A number of types of construction may be sensitive to unbalanced loads. When the structures are being cleared of snow, this may in the worst case make the stresses in the structure larger than before the snow clearance started. There are many examples of snow clearing leading to the collapse of structures. It is, therefore, important to know whether the structure can carry the unbalanced load that arises during snow clearance. Year of Construction, Loads, and Geographical Location Design loads on buildings have changed considerably in the period from 1949 to today. The year of construction may, therefore, tell something about the buildings safety level. In general, older buildings in high-snowfall areas may have a lower safety with respect to snow loads than newer buildings. The difference in safety level with respect to wind action is probably somewhat less. The safety level is probably affected mostly in areas that are heavily exposed to the environmental loads, when snow loads and wind actions in the regulations are increased from general loads that have applied to the entire country to differentiated loads that are adjusted to the actual environmental load variation in Norway. Increased wind actions, therefore, probably have the greatest consequences for coastal areas from northwest Norway northward. Locally, roughness of terrain and topography may be of great signicance for the wind actions that the buildings experience. Inland areas high above sea level are most vulnerable to increased snow loads. Locally, topography and wind action are also important for the snow loads that the building experiences. Construction Process Questions may be raised as to whether buildings erected by way of voluntary communal work or that are self-built, are more vulnerable to collapse than other buildings. It has been claimed that savings on design costs and technical expertise in the construction phase are often made for such buildings. Such savings can lead to little or no documentation of the structures being produced, and there may be a lack of people with the necessary technical competence to take overall responsibility for the execution of the work. This can lead to unfortunate improvisations on site that are assessed by the person implementing the project as good enough. It is, therefore, reasonable to believe that there is a greater probability of weak points that can result in the sudden collapse of such buildings. Prefabricated structures are often imported. It has been claimed that the design calculations do not always meet the design rules set out in Norwegian codes and that many structures have been designed for relatively small snow loads compared to Norwegian requirements. Structures have been imported from countries such as Denmark that are designed for snow loads well below those required in Norway. History of Buildings Reconstruction or rebuilding may lead to signicant changes in both design loads and load-bearing capacity. Columns and beams
in outer walls for example may be centrally arranged during rebuilding, and thus assume greater loads. The need to strengthen structural elements, including foundations, may be extensive and is not always met. When walls are removed or new openings established, the stabilizing elements of columns can change, or the anchoring may change, resulting in reduced load-bearing capacity. Modifying the construction of roof structures may result in load change. For example, roofs that are changed from roong membranes to tiles acquire an additional load of about 0.5 kN/ m2. Additional insulation of roofs in older buildings may lead to reduced snow melting. Assuming the same precipitation pattern, this may result in larger quantities of snow remaining on the roof than before the additional insulation. Changing the use of buildings, which may lead to greater consequences in the event of collapse, makes it necessary to reassess the capacity of the structures. In the case of a change of use from, for example, a storage building to a building for public use, the requirement concerning maximum annual probability of failure becomes more stringent, and there may be a need to strengthen the building. Selection Criteria It would be desirable to identify a selection of buildings that could at large be characterized as communal halls, sports halls, buildings used by many people, lightweight structures, prefabricated buildings, buildings with large spans, buildings supplied as package solutions, buildings with modied applications, buildings erected via communal voluntary work, temporary structures, and converted buildings. These building types are all regarded as being especially exposed to increasing snow loads and wind actions. The number of buildings investigated has for economical reasons been limited to 20. This number of buildings is too small to render possible valid statistical analyses of the reliability of the building stock in Norway as a whole, but importance has been attached to the sample being random and having a geographical spread. The results may in this way be assessed as a representative trend for the parts of Norway that have experienced signicant changes in the rules governing snow loads and wind actions. It was, therefore, decided that the buildings should represent 10 municipalities in six counties. The municipalities have been chosen in such a way that half are in an area exposed to high wind actions and the other half are in a high-snowfall area. The municipalities are Andy, Bardu, Frna, Grane, Kristiansund, Nittedal, Ryrvik, Troms, Trondheim, and rland see Fig. 3 . Troms, Bardu, Grane, Ryrvik, and Nittedal are situated in high-snowfall areas. Andy, rland, Trondheim, Kristiansund, and Frna are in areas exposed to high wind actions. In light of the fact that the regulations governing snow loads and wind actions have changed over three periods of time, it was decided that the sample should represent these periods. The periods can briey be characterized as: Before 1970, when the 1949 building regulations were in force. Between 1970 and 1979, when NS 3052 was in force. After 1979, when NS 3479 was in force. The buildings are all compared with todays design rules, including the current reliability code, NS 3490 Standards Norway 1999 , the current rules for determining snow loads, NS 3491-3
Selected Buildings Based on the assessments above, 20 buildings were selected see Table 3 . Table 3 lists the municipality in which the buildings were selected, the building type, and the requirement that currently applies to characteristic snow load on the ground and to the reference wind velocity. As shown in Table 3, attempts have been made to keep the selected buildings as anonymous as possible. Problems in obtaining the necessary documentation implied that an investigation of only one building was conducted in two of the municipalities, while this was extended to three buildings in two other municipalities. Three of the buildings were constructed in the period before 1970, eight were built in the period 197079, and nine were built in the period after 1979. This implies that the loads are determined by the 1949 building regulations for three of the buildings, by NS 3052 for eight of the buildings, and by NS 3479 for nine of the buildings. Project Documentation Investigation and Field Study Calculation models, loads, forces, and solutions used when the buildings were constructed have been investigated. The forces in the structure were then determined in accordance with new load requirements, and the capacities checked in accordance with new design rules. In light of these analyses, the structures utilization ratio has been determined in accordance with new calculation rules, and the need for reinforcement assessed. On site, whether the structures have defects or deciencies that are not apparent from the project documentation investigation were investigated. Special attention was paid to the investigation of whether or not the construction was in accordance with the documentation, and whether or not there were weaknesses in the structure owing to reduced durability or due to reconstruction.
Fig. 3. Geographical localization of the investigated buildings
Standards Norway 2001 , and the current rules for determining wind actions, NS 3491-4 Standards Norway 2002a . To fulll the requirement for randomness in the sample of buildings, the Norwegian Mapping Authority was asked for permission to search the GAB Register. However, the search criteria available proved to be limited. For buildings older than 1983, data in the register are normally limited to details of the buildings identity, building type, ownership, and possibly the address. For buildings erected after 1983, more information is available. A search based on selected building types reduced the sample from the approximately 3.7 million buildings in the register to around 9,000 buildings in the municipalities in question. In the search results, 1012 buildings were chosen from each of the 10 municipalities selected. In selecting the buildings, the time when the building was registered or erected was used as an indicator of the buildings age. Where the buildings oor space was stated, this has been used as an indicator for nding buildings comprising main load-bearing structures with spans of more than 10 m. The selected municipalities were then asked to provide the following information for each of the chosen buildings: A copy of the building licence application form. Copies of plan drawings and front elevations used in the building licence application. Conrmation on whether or not the municipality had archived construction drawings and design calculations. The information was used to select the buildings that would best suit the original priorities of the investigation. To make the investigation practicable, buildings for which documentation existed were given priority.
Results
Geometry and Material Data External dimensions, maximum spans, and the material of the main load-bearing structures are shown in Table 3. The buildings external dimensions are quoted as width, length, height, and roof slope. The height indicates the cornice height for buildings with approximately at roofs and the roof ridge height for buildings with other roof shapes. Additions or extensions that are not included in the assessments have not been included in the dimensions. As is apparent from the values in the table, the buildings selected can be characterized as medium-sized buildings with medium spans. The roof slope varies between 0 and 26. All the buildings are of low height relative to their width and length. Essentially, the buildings included in the investigation are lightweight constructions, because buildings of this type are empirically expected to be most vulnerable. Availability and Scale of the Documentation When the investigations started, the writers were prepared for the fact that it might be difcult to obtain full documentation on the load-bearing structures in the buildings, which in this context have been dened as design calculations and structural drawings. Although there were requirements in the building regulations up
Table 3. Summary of Findings Changes in design Changes Width/ roof in design Maximum Structural length/ Roof Maximum snow height slope wind utilization calculations span Snowb Windc Windd kN/ m2 m/s kN/ m2 loads m loads ratio m available 26 15 22 5 3 12 18 12 21 20 20 10 17 8 18 7 12 8 24 24 24 22 12 13 8 0.7e/4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 7.5 2.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 8.0 8.0 6.0 6.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 31 31 31 24 24 30 30 30 26 30 22 22 22 22 25 25 27 27 26 26 26 30 30 1.3 1.5 1.5 0.8 0.9 1.4 1.5 1.5 0.9 1.3 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.8 1.2 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.8 1.4 1.2 0.9 2.0 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.6 1.2 1.8 1.4 1.3f 2.4f 1.5 1.7 2.4f 2.4 1.7 1.4 2.7 1.8 1.6 1.7 1.0 0.8 1.4 1.2 1.1 0.7 0.8 1.2 1.3 1.2 0.8 0.6f 0.4f 0.6 0.7 0.8f 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.8 1.1 0.7 1.1 0.8 1.2 1.5 4.0 0.8 1.5 2.8 3.2 1.5 1.3 2.3 1.4 1.8 3.7 1.6 3.7 1.2 1.1 5.0 1.7 1.6 1.0 1.8 Yes Yes No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
Building Andy 1 Andy 2a Andy 2b Bardu 1 Bardu 2 Frna 1a Frna 1b Frna 2 Grane 1 Kristiansund 1 Nittedal 1a Nittedal 1b Nittedal 2 Nittedal 3 Ryrvik 1 Ryrvik 2 Troms 1 Troms 2 Trondheim 1 Trondheim 2 Trondheim 3 rland 1 rland 2
Built year Type of building 1989 Greenhouse 1979 Terminal building 1991 1994 Community center 1984 Shopping center 1977 Storage depot 1991 1978 Sports hall 1987 Storage depot 1959 Sports hall swimming pool 1955 Bus terminal 1982 1984 Sports hall 1961 Storage depot 1975 Sports hall 1973 Community center 1991 Post terminal 1979 Goods terminal 1978 Sports hall 1977 Shopping center 1982 Storage depot 1985 Shopping center 1991 Garage
Materiala
Aluminum 12/26/6 Timber/steel 14/45/7 Timber 18/42/9 Steel/concrete 21//8 Steel 42/40/9
Timber/steel 30/50/9 4 Timber 10/24/7 22 Concrete 17/51/12 14 Siporex/steel 28/51/5 Flat Steel Timber Timber/steel Timber Steel/concrete Steel Timber Steel Timber Concrete Timber 44/36/10 13/85/8 12/22/6 13/34/7 43/84/8 48/48/9 24/44/9 30/61/8 12/36/6 13/64/7 8/10/4 16 7 Flat 15 Flat Flat 22 Flat 18 Flat 22
Mean value 4.6 1.0 1.6 0.9 2.0 a Material in main load-bearing structure. b Current characteristic snow load on the ground. c Current reference wind velocity. d Current requirements concerning characteristic wind loads against building gust velocity pressure . e Load according to the Greenhouse Code NS-EN 13031-1 Standards Norway 2002b when account is taken of a 15-year return period and thermal coefcient. f Change in characteristic load on building.
to 1997 that design calculations should form part of the building licence application, it is well known that many municipalities have not enforced this requirement. In light of the information supplied by the municipalities, a total of 20 buildings were selected. Buildings with available documentation were given priority. It was decided at an early stage that built-in structures would not be opened and investigated. It was therefore necessary to obtain the best possible documentation so that built-in structures were known from the documentation. If there were links between available documentation in the municipality and existing documentation, such selection criteria would lead to the buildings most extensively planned being included in the investigation. Buildings that were planned in detail are probably also those with the fewest defects. It has not been possible to assess the signicance of this aspect within the scope of this investigation. A lack of important documentation for buildings included in the investigation can affect the results. The calculations must then be based on our own assumptions and assessments, which may be different from the constructors see Table 3 for information on available structural calculations . Decient information on hid-
den, structural measures may then be signicant. A lack of documentation makes it difcult to uncover the reason for chosen structural designs unambiguously. All buildings in the investigation were approved for erection by the local authority the municipality in which they are located . But, according to the available documentation, only 14 of the selected buildings proved to be designed by professionals. The actual number of buildings designed by professionals is probably higher. Changes in Design Snow Loads and Wind Actions for Selected Buildings Current requirements for characteristic snow loads on the ground and characteristic gust velocity pressures against the selected buildings are presented in Table 3. In Table 3, Andy 2, Frna 1, and Nittedal 1 are quoted with a and b versions. Here, a means the original building and b means additions or extensions . Furthermore, the changes in design loads on the buildings are shown, where current requirements are compared with the
requirements that applied when the building was being designed. Table 3 shows that the changes in design snow loads vary between 0.8 and 2.7 and have a mean value equal to 1.6. The changes in design wind action against the buildings vary accordingly between 0.4 and 1.4 and have a mean value equal to 0.9. In other words, the design snow load has on the average increased, while the design wind action has on the average been reduced. As Table 3 indicates, only two buildings in two municipalities experienced reduced design snow loads, one experienced an unaltered load level, while the rest experienced increased snow loads. The changes in the rules for snow loads have, therefore, been of major importance to the requirement concerning design snow loads on most of the buildings that have been investigated. Buildings with a low roof slope dominate the investigation. Pitched roofs with roof slopes of between 15 and 60 have been given reduced shape factors for snow loads on the lee side of the roof. For the seven buildings with roof slopes 15, the increase in design load is on the average 1.4, which is somewhat lower than the mean value for all the buildings. The changes in the wind action rules have not been as important as the change in the snow load rules for the design loads on the buildings investigated. As Table 3 shows, the changes in the rules have only resulted in a signicant increase in the wind action on the buildings in the coastal municipalities of Andy and Frna. The buildings included in the investigation were low in height relative to their width and length. For buildings with this form, the sum of the shape factors against the windward and lee wall is equal to 0.85 in NS 3491-4, while the factor may become 1.5 for a high building. In earlier codes, the corresponding shape factor is 1.2, irrespective of the height of the building. In other words, the shape factor has become signicantly lower for the building form that dominates the selected buildings, while it would not have dropped so low if the buildings had been high relative to their length and width. The reduction in design wind action for the selected buildings would, therefore, not apply for example to high-rise buildings. Capacity Exceedings Compared with Load Increases The highest utilization ratio found for important structural components for the buildings investigated are summarized in Table 3. As Table 3 shows, 18 buildings have a utilization ratio of more than 1.0. This represents 90% of the buildings that were investigated. Although the design requirements for 95% of the buildings have increased since they were built, one would assume that they had built-in reserve capacities, which meant that fewer buildings experienced a utilization ratio of more than 1.0. The design rules for the most important materials in the structures have changed since the buildings investigated were planned. Essentially, the materials load-bearing properties can be utilized to a higher degree now than in the past. If the buildings had been constructed in accordance with the regulations when they were built, one would, therefore, have expected that fewer than 18 buildings would have exceeded their capacity under current rules. Table 3 also shows that 11 buildings have a higher utilization ratio than a load increase. This indicates incorrect planning, incorrect construction, or rebuilding. It is important that all owners of buildings know what value of snow load the roof is designed for, and have routines for monitoring the snow load on the roof and clearing it when necessary. When roofs are being cleared of snow, this may in the worst case make the stresses on the structure greater than before the snow clearance started. There are many examples of snow clearing
leading to the collapse of structures. Instructions on this are contained in Lis et al. 2000 and Report HO-1/2001 National Ofce of Building Technology and Administration 2001 .
Discussion
As mentioned earlier, the selected buildings in the investigation are building types regarded as being especially exposed to increasing snow loads and wind actions. The exposed building types amount to 5% of the total bulk of buildings in Norway 11% of total building oor area . Ninety percent of the buildings investigated have too low a capacity when compared with current design rules. Thus, potentially 4.5% of the total bulk of buildings in Norway may have too low a capacity according to current regulations. The design snow loads have increased for 95% of the investigated buildings, indicating an increase in design snow loads for 4.7% of the total bulk of buildings. Fifty-ve percent of the investigated buildings have a higher utilization ratio than load increase, which may indicate incorrect planning, incorrect construction, or rebuilding. Thus, potentially 2.8% of the total bulk of buildings in Norway have a higher utilization ratio than load increase. However, the investigation constitutes only 20 buildings, and thus has obvious quantitative weaknesses. It must, nevertheless, be regarded as an important pointer on challenges concerning reliability. The investigation indicates too low a reliability for a considerable number of buildings according to current building regulations. It could also be of interest considering the future reliability of the building stock, taking into account possible climate changes. In Norway the design life for buildings is 60 years in general and 100 years for monumental buildings. Research establishments in several parts of the world are addressing the risks associated with future climate change and the resulting impacts. According to Karl and Trenberth 2003 modern climate change is now dominated by human inuences large enough to exceed the bounds of natural variability, the main source of global climate change being human-induced changes in atmospheric composition. Regional changes in climate, particularly increases in temperature, have already affected several physical and biological systems in many parts of the world, for example, shrinkage of glaciers, thawing of permafrost, and lengthening of mid- to high-latitude growing seasons McCarthy et al. 2001 . Norways climate is extremely varied. One of the main reasons for large local differences in temperatures, precipitation, and wind speed over short distances are the rugged topography. The countrys long coastline and steep topography make it particularly exposed to extreme events like coastal storms, avalanches, and landslides. Regional scenarios for climate change over the next 50 years in Norway indicate an increased risk for extreme weather. Together with a warmer climate, especially during winter, an increased risk for intense precipitation over parts of coastal Norway and more frequent incidents of strong winds along the coast of the two northernmost counties and off the coast is estimated. These scenarios, emanating from the project regional climate development under global warming RegClim see www.met.no , are downscaled from a global climate model run by the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg. According to these scenarios the future reliability of buildings in exposed areas could decrease.
Conclusions
The principal objective has been to obtain reliable indicators as to whether existing buildings in Norway meet current regulatory requirements concerning safety against collapse as a result of snow loads and/or wind actions. Some clear indications of aspects that ought to be considered as a representative trend for the building types investigated have been found. Eighteen out of 20 buildings have a utilization ratio of more than 1.0 90% of the buildings investigated . The design requirements for 95% of the buildings have increased since they were built. Nevertheless, one would assume that the buildings had built-in reserve capacities resulting in fewer buildings experiencing a utilization ratio of more than 1.0. It is difcult to obtain structural drawings and design calculations for existing buildings. Such documentation is particularly important when buildings are to have alterations or reconstructions carried out. Public authorities should, therefore, establish a system ensuring that such documentation is made and maintained. The new rules for determining wind loads that were introduced in 2002 have led to most of the buildings investigated having greater calculated reliability against collapse owing to wind load than the current regulations require for new buildings. For buildings in municipalities exposed to wind, for tall buildings, or in places with special topographical conditions, safety may, on the other hand, decrease. The new rules for determining snow loads, introduced in 2001, have led to most of the buildings investigated having lower calculated reliability against collapse owing to snow loads than the regulations now require. A careless approach is often adapted to planning, or this process is completely omitted in the case of alteration and additional work. This may lead to signicant design capacity excess. Thus, rebuilding, reconstruction, and addition extension projects must also be adequately designed. The investigation indicates too low a reliability for a considerable number of buildings according to current building regulations when evaluating the possible consequences of the conclusions in a national perspective. Potentially 4.5% of the total bulk of buildings in Norway may have too low a capacity according to current regulations. Design snow loads may have increased for 4.7% of the total bulk of buildings. Scenarios for future climate change indicate both increased winter precipitation and increased temperature, and will result in changes regarding snow loads on roofs in parts of the country. An increase in frequency of strong winds in areas also exposed today is also estimated. According to these scenarios the future reliability of buildings in these areas could decrease.
construction industry partners and the Research Council of Norway. Special thanks are extended to Professor Jan Vincent Thue, Professor Karl Vincent Hiseth, and Professor Tore Kvande for comments on the text.
References
Karl, T. R., and Trenberth, K. E. 2003 . Modern global climate change. Science, 302, 17191723. Lis, K. R., Prestrud, O., Gjestvang, M., and Rasmussen, F. 2000 . Snlast p eksisterende takkonstruksjoner. Tiltak for utsatte bygninger. NBI Report No. O10210-1, Norwegian Building Research Institute, Oslo, Norway in Norwegian . Lis, K. R., Kvande, T., and Thue, J. V. 2005 . Climate 2000Building enclosure performance in a more severe climate. Proc., 7th Symp. on Building Physics in the Nordic Countries, the Icelandic Building Research Institute, Reykjavik, Iceland, 211218. McCarthy, J. J., Canziani, O. F., Leary, N. A., Dokken, D. J., and White, K. S., eds. 2001 . Climate change 2001: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K. Melysund, V., Lis, K. R., Siem, J., and Apeland, K. 2004 . Investigation of snow loads and wind actions on existing buildings in Norway. Proc., 5th Int. Conf. on Snow Engineering, Davos, Switzerland, Balkema, Leiden, Netherlands, 113127. National Ofce of Building Technology and Administration. 1949 . Byggeforskrifter av 15. desember 1949 utferdiget i henhold til 6 i lov om bygningsvesenet av 22. februar 1924. National Ofce of Building Technology and Administration, Oslo, Norway in Norwegian . National Ofce of Building Technology and Administration. 1993 . Orkan 1992. Norwegian Building Research Institute, Oslo, Norway in Norwegian . National Ofce of Building Technology and Administration. 2001 . Rd om sn p tak, Melding HO-1/2001. National Ofce of Building Technology and Administration, Oslo, Norway in Norwegian . Siem, J., Melysund, V., Lis, K. R., Strandholmen, B., and Prestrud, O. 2003 . Sn-og vindlaster p eksisterende bygninger. Rapport fra prosjekt 1 og 2 i FoU-programmet Klima 2000. NBI Rep. No. 114, Norwegian Building Research Institute, Oslo, Norway in Norwegian . Standards Norway. 1970 . Beregninger av belastninger, NS 3052, 1st Ed., Standards Norway, Oslo, Norway in Norwegian . Standards Norway. 1979 . Prosjektering av bygningskonstruksjoner Dimensjonerende laster, NS 3479, 1st Ed., Standards Norway, Oslo, Norway in Norwegian . Standards Norway. 1994 . Amendments to NS 3479:1990Design of structuresDesign loads, NS 3479/A1, 1st Ed., Standards Norway, Oslo, Norway in Norwegian . Standards Norway. 1999 . Design of structuresRequirements to reliability, NS 3490, 1st Ed., Standards Norway, Oslo, Norway in Norwegian . Standards Norway. 2001 . Design of structuresDesign actionsPart 3: Snow loads, NS 3491-3, 1st Ed., Standards Norway, Oslo, Norway in Norwegian . Standards Norway. 2002a . Design of structuresDesign actionsPart 4: Wind loads, NS 3491-4, 1st Ed., Standards Norway, Oslo, Norway in Norwegian . Standards Norway 2002b . GreenhousesDesign and constructions Part 1: Commercial production, NS-EN 13031-1, 1st Ed., Standards Norway, Oslo, Norway in Norwegian .
Acknowledgments
This paper has been written within the ongoing SINTEF Research and Development Programme Climate 2000Building Constructions in a More Severe Climate 20002006 , strategic institute project Impact of Climate Change on the Built Environment Lis et al. 2005 . The writers gratefully acknowledge all
Part B Analyses of current design rules
II.
Melysund, V., Lis, K.R., Hygen, H.O., Hiseth, K.V and Leira, B. (2007) Effects of wind exposure on roof snow loads. Building and Environment 42(10): 37263736. Melysund, V., Hiseth, K.V., Leira, B. and Lis, K.R. (2008) Economical effects of reduced roof snow loads. Proc. of the 6th International Conference on Snow Engineering, Whistler, British Columbia, Canada 2008. Engineering Conference International, Brooklyn, New York, U.S.A.
III.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Building and Environment 42 (2007) 37263736 www.elsevier.com/locate/buildenv
Effects of wind exposure on roof snow loads

Vivian Melysunda,b,, Kim Robert Lisa,c, Hans Olav Hygend, Karl V. Hisethb, Bernt Leirae
b a SINTEF Building and Infrastructure, P.O. Box 124, Blindern, NO-0314 Oslo, Norway Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Department of Structural Engineering, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway c Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Department of Civil and Transport Engineering, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway d Norwegian Meteorological Institute, P.O. Box 43, Blindern, NO-0313 Oslo, Norway e Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Department of Marine Technology, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway
Received 20 June 2006; received in revised form 22 August 2006; accepted 26 September 2006
Abstract This paper presents results from an investigation of the suitability of the exposure coefcient as dened in ISO 4355 Bases for design of structuresDetermination of snow loads on roofs, based on thorough analyses of weather data from 389 weather stations in Norway for the reference 30-year period 19611990. First, the background of the exposure coefcient is examined. Historical eld investigations of snow loads on roofs are also evaluated. Next, values for the exposure coefcients in Norway are calculated according to ISO 4355. Finally, possible approaches aiming at improving calculations of wind exposure on roof snow loads are suggested. It is shown that the exposure coefcient as dened in ISO 4355 does not reect the actual effects of wind exposure on roof snow loads in Norway, the main reasons being oversimplications in the denition of the coefcient and the extreme variations of the climate in Norway. The denition is based on coarse simplications of snow transport theories, and must be revised and improved to serve as an applicable tool for calculations of design snow loads on roofs in Norway. r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Buildings; Roofs; Snow; Snow loads; Structural design; Wind loads
1. Introduction In the current Norwegian snow load standard NS 3491-3 Design of structuresDesign actionsPart 3: Snow loads [1] snow loads on roofs are dened as s mC e C t s0 , (1)
where s0 is snow loads on the ground. The parameters m, Ce and Ct describe conditions on the roof. The exposure coefcient Ce takes into account that wind removes snow from at roofs. Using this coefcient the snow load on a sheltered roof becomes twice as large as the snow load on a windswept roof. The shape coefcient m describes the distribution of snow load on the roof due to geometry. The thermal coefcient Ct denes the reduction of the snow
Corresponding author. SINTEF Building and Infrastructure, P.O. Box 124, Blindern, NO-0314 Oslo, Norway. Fax: +47 22 69 94 38. E-mail address: vivian.meloysund@sintef.no (V. Melysund).
load on the roof as a function of the heat ux through the roof. An equivalent expression can be found in ISO 4355 Bases for design of structuresDetermination of snow loads on roofs [2]. In practice, it has turned out difcult for consultants in structural engineering to determine the exposure coefcient Ce. The main reason is the meteorological input needed. According to an informative annex in ISO 4355 and NS 3491-3, the exposure coefcient is a function of the mean temperature, y, in the coldest winter month and number of days, N, with a wind velocity above 10 m/s where N is dened as an average for the three coldest months of the year (see Table 1). Mean values for many years are recommended (usually 30 years). This meteorological information is available merely at advanced weather stations. If a building site happens to be located near such a station, the data needed is still not easily accessible. In this paper weather data from meteorological stations in Norway for the reference 30-year period 19611990 is
0360-1323/$ - see front matter r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2006.09.005
ARTICLE IN PRESS
V. Melysund et al. / Building and Environment 42 (2007) 37263736 Table 1 Exposure coefcient according to ISO 4355 Winter temperature Category A B C Mean temp. (1C) y42.5 2.5pyp2.5 yo2.5 Winter wind category I (No1) 1.0 1.0 0.8 II (1pNp10) 1.0 0.8 0.8 III (N410) 0.8 0.6 0.5 3727
used to determine the exposure coefcient Ce according to the denition in ISO 4355. First, historical eld investigations studying snow loads on roofs are evaluated giving the background of the exposure coefcient. Next, values for the exposure coefcients are calculated for 389 meteorological stations, and the suitability of the denition in order to describe the effects of wind exposure is discussed. Finally, possible approaches aiming at improving calculations of wind exposure on roof snow loads are suggested. 2. Background 2.1. Snow load on roofs according to ISO 4355 In ISO 4355 Bases for design of structuresDetermination of snow loads on roofs [2] the snow load on the roof is dened as the sum of a balanced load sb, a drift load part sd and a slide load part ss (see Fig. 1): s sb sd ss . (2) The balanced load sb is uniformly distributed on the roof (except for curved roofs) and a function of characteristic snow load on the ground s0, exposure coefcient Ce, thermal coefcient Ct and slope reduction coefcient mb: sb s0 C e C t mb . (3) The slope reduction coefcient, mb, denes the reduction of the snow on the roof due to roof slope and surface material. High slopes and smooth surface materials make the snow slide from the roof. In Fig. 2 slope reduction coefcient mb is shown for a single pitched roof with nonslippery surface. The thermal coefcient Ct denes the reduction of the snow load on the roof as a function of the heat ux through the roof, causing snow melting. The exposure coefcient Ce denes the balanced load on a at horizontal roof of a cold building, as a fraction of the characteristic snow load on the ground. The coefcient includes the effect of snow being removed from at roofs by wind. According to an informative annex in ISO 4355 it is a function of the mean temperature, y, in the coldest winter month and number of days, N, with a wind velocity above 10 m/s (N is an average for the three coldest months of the year, see Table 1). In addition to the balanced load sb, a drift load part sd has to be included in order to take into account snow
Fig. 1. Balanced snow load sb and drift snow load sd on pitched roofs.
1.0 0.8 0.6 b 0.4 0.2 0.0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Roof slope (deg.)
Fig. 2. Slope reduction coefcient mb for simple pitched roofs with nonslippery surface.
accumulation on leeward side of the roof due to drifting. The drift load sd is a function of characteristic snow load on the ground s0, exposure coefcient Ce, thermal coefcient Ct, slope reduction coefcient mb and drift load coefcient md: sd s0 C e C t mb md . (4) The drift load coefcient md multiplies with mb and denes the amount and distribution of additional load on a leeward side or part of a roof. The coefcient depends on wind exposure and geometry of the roof. In Fig. 3 the multiplication mb md for various exposure coefcients Ce is shown for a single pitched roof with non-slippery surface. The slide load ss takes into account slide from an upper roof onto a lower roof, or a lower part of a roof. 2.2. The historical background of the exposure coefcient In the period 19561967, the National Research Council of Canada established more than 50 observation stations across Canada, where snow depth and density
ARTICLE IN PRESS
3728 V. Melysund et al. / Building and Environment 42 (2007) 37263736
0.5 0.4 0.3 b*d 0.2 0.1 0.0 0 10 20 30 40 Roof Slope (deg.) 50
Ce=1.0 Ce=0.8 Ce=0.6 Ce=0.5
60
Fig. 3. Drifted shape coefcients mb md for simple pitched roofs with nonslippery surface.
measurements were registered once a week and immediately following major snowfalls on the ground and for a variety of roofs and wind exposures [3]. The roofs were both at and sloped and varied in size. The survey concluded that the roof-to-ground ratios depend primarily on the degree to which a roof is sheltered from wind. Wellsheltered roofs had ratios up to approximately 0.9, whereas nearly all unobstructed roofs had ratios of less than 0.6. Well-exposed, unobstructed roofs in generally open areas had ratios of less than 0.3. Lutes [3] did not discuss whether heat loss was included in these results. Otstavnov and Rosenberg [4] presented a method where average wind velocities for the whole winter season were used in order to describe snow drifting from at roofs during snowfall. Experiments were performed on at roofs and an expression for the roof-to-ground conversion factor was developed (effect of heating was excluded). In addition, an expression was developed for the total amount of snow drifted from the roof between snowfalls. This amount was found to be a function of the average wind velocity between snowfalls and the summarized time this kind of drifting occurs during the winter season. Otstavnov and Rosenberg [4] reported a close correlation between the number of days with snowfall and the total ground snow load. In the period 19661986 professor Hib at the Agricultural University of Norway measured snow depths and densities on cold pitched roofs on approximately 200 agricultural buildings in Norway [5]. The measurements were performed at the assumed maximum seasonal roof load. A total of 1300 measurements were done. Measurements were also performed in undisturbed areas close to the buildings. The effect of wind was not evaluated. Based on his observations, Hib proposed roof-to-ground conversion factors for both leeward and windward side of the roof depending on roof angle and ground snow load. The magnitude of the ground snow load was found to
affect the conversion factor strongly. A ground snow load equal to 1.0 kN/m2 gave a conversion factor of, respectively, 0.75 and 0.82 for windward and leeward side of the roof. A ground snow load equal 3.5 kN/m2 produced a conversion factor of, respectively, 0.48 and 0.62 for windward and leeward side. These formulas were restricted to buildings with ground snow load equal 3.5 kN/m2 or less and buildings not fully sheltered. After heavy snowfalls in the winter of 19751976, snow depths and densities were measured at 55 pitched roofs (roof angles 18251) in Trondheim, Norway [6]. The snow was measured at 612 points at the most heavily loaded roof side. In addition, snow load was measured on the ground at 94 locations in the area of Trondheim. The roofs were anticipated to be cold roofs. The authors of this paper have calculated an average roof-to-ground ratio of 0.27 for windswept areas (based on the data from Lberg [6]). For sheltered areas the average roof-to-ground ratio is calculated to 0.55. Taylor [7] performed a survey of snow loads on roofs of arena-type buildings in Canada. Data were collected for 32 curved roofs and 16 gable roofs through a 4-year pilot study of snow on buildings, case histories and newspaper reports (snow events in the period 19561977). It was concluded that the maximum of the uniformly distributed loads for both gable and curved roofs, sheltered from wind, was approximately 80% of the specied 30-year return ground load. Five of these buildings were reported to be unheated. The effect of heat loss was not considered separately. In case studies performed by ORourke et al. [8], roof and ground snow loads were measured for 199 buildings in Northeast, Midwest and Northwest USA, during three winter seasons in the period 19751978. A total of 253 roofs were measured. Conversion factors dened as the ratio between the maximum roof load and the maximum ground load were calculated. Areas with infrequent snowfalls and small accumulations were reported to have higher ground-to-roof conversion factors than colder areas with substantial ground snow accumulation. Average conversion factors were calculated to be 0.78 for the sheltered roofs, 0.59 for the semi-sheltered roofs and 0.53 for the windswept roofs when the effects of roof slope and heating were included. Based on this study, the average ground-toroof conversion factors for unheated at roofs are recalculated by the authors of this paper to be 0.76 for the sheltered roofs, 0.57 for the semi-sheltered roofs and 0.55 for the windswept roofs. In the European Snow Load Program 19971999, roof snow loads were measured for 55 pitched roofs and 26 at roofs in Switzerland, Italy, Great Britain and Germany in the winter season 19981999 [9]. The roof-to-ground ratio for at roofs was calculated to 0.90 for sheltered roofs, 0.74 for semi windswept roofs and 0.58 for windswept roofs. When selecting the buildings for this project, unheated or very high thermal insulated roofs were required (whether this requirement was met was not considered).
ARTICLE IN PRESS
V. Melysund et al. / Building and Environment 42 (2007) 37263736 Table 2 Exposure coefcients for at roofs References Exposure coefcient Sheltered Otstavnov and Rosenberg [4] Lutes [3] Taylor [7] ORourke et al. [8]c Hib [5] s0 1.0 kN/m2 s0 3.5 kN/m2 Lberg [6] Com. Eur. Comm [9]
a a
3729
Semi-sheltered 0.72 0.60 0.57 0.55 0.74
Windswept 0.46 0.30 0.55 0.27 0.58
0.98 0.90 0.80b 0.76 0.82d 0.62d 0.90
increased nonlinearly with ambient air temperature above 25 1C. An average threshold wind velocity of 9.9 and 7.7 m/s was observed for, respectively, wet and dry snow transport. An average threshold wind velocity of 7.5 and 8.0 m/s was observed for, respectively, fresh and aged snow. Results from eld investigations show a reduction in roof snow load with increasing wind exposure (Table 2). The values of the exposure coefcients vary, possibly as a result of differences in the denitions of the categories. Although it can be concluded that wind exposure is of large importance for the resulting snow loads on roofs.
Assumed snow cover for 3.5 months. Average winter wind velocity in sheltered, semi-sheltered and windswept area are assumed to be respectively 2, 4 and 6 m/s. b Snow ground load with 30-year return period was used when calculating roof-to-ground ratio. c Values are recalculated by the authors of this paper in order to apply unheated roofs. d Degree of wind exposure was not registered. s0ground snow load.
3. The exposure coefcients for Norway according to ISO 4355 Data from 389 meteorological stations in Norway is used in order to derive temperature zones and wind categories as dened in ISO 4355 [2]. Within the normal period (19611990), stations with at least 15 years of data are used. Temperature zones are based on reference grids for the normal period developed by the Norwegian Meteorological Institute. As seen in Fig. 4, almost none of the stations have mean temperatures above 2.5 1C in the coldest winter month. Temperature category A (as dened in ISO 4355) is only represented at small offshore islands in the southern part of Norway, and it is therefore not visible on the map in Fig. 4. Mean temperatures between 2.5 and 2.5 1C are mainly found in the coastal areas in south and west. For a majority of the stations, mean temperatures below 2.5 1C are registered for the coldest winter month. Almost none of the meteorological stations situated in the zone with mean temperatures between 2.5 and 2.5 1C have less than one day with wind velocity above 10 m/s. In south and west, stations situated at places highly exposed to wind (e.g. at lighthouses on islands/peninsulas) have more than 10 days with wind velocities above 10 m/s. In settled areas, the number of days with wind velocities above 10 m/s is mainly between 1 and 10. In the northern part of Norway, the number of days with wind velocities above 10 m/s exceeding 10 days is found for this temperature zone also in settled areas. Considering the areas with mean temperatures below 2.5 1C in the coldest winter month, some characteristics can be observed. In the inland of southern Norway, the stations situated in the mountainous areas have mainly between 1 and 10 days with wind velocity above 10 m/s in the three coldest winter months. For lower regions, where the building density is highest, the number of days with wind velocity above 10 m/s is mainly below 1. Further north the number of days with wind velocity above 10 m/s is mainly between 1 and 10 days. At some of the stations highly exposed to wind, the number of days with wind velocity above 10 m/s exceeds 10 days. These stations are mainly situated in areas close to the sea where the building density is low.
The ndings of the investigations, which indicate the effect of wind blowing snow from roofs, are summarized in Table 2. In investigations performed by Irwin et al. [10], the effect of roof size on snow loads was studied. It was concluded that there was a trend towards increased uniform snow loads on at roofs with increasing size. It was recommended to account for roof size when considering roofs with characteristic lengths above, respectively, 75 and 200 m for sheltered and open wind exposure (characteristic length equals width * (2width/length)). ISO 4355 [2] denes wind categories and temperature classes in connection with determination of the exposure coefcients Ce (see Table 1). The justication of the recommendations is somewhat vague. According to Otstavnov and Rosenberg [4] drifting occurs at average wind velocities above 4 m/s during snowfall and above 6.5 m/s with no snowfall. Other studies have focused on a more instant threshold wind velocity and not a wind velocity averaged over a longer period. According to Mellor [11] threshold wind velocities of 38 m/s at a height of 10 m are needed in order to transport loose and unbounded snow. If the surface snow is densely packed and rmly bounded threshold wind velocity above 30 m/s may occur. According to Kind [12] the threshold wind velocity is approximately 5 m/s at a height of 10 m for fresh dry snow, 11 m/s for slightly aged or hardened snow and 23 m/s for snow hardened by very strong winds. Li and Pomeroy [13] evaluated hourly observations from the period 19701976 at 16 meteorological stations in the Canadian prairies. Based on this studies threshold wind velocities were recorded and presented as a function of temperature. It was concluded that threshold wind
ARTICLE IN PRESS
00'0" 720'0"N
100'0"E
200'0"E
300'0"E 720'0"N
670'0"N
670'0"N
620'0"N
620'0"N
570'0"N
570'0"N
100'0"E
200'0"E
Fig. 4. Winter temperature categories and winter wind categories as dened in ISO 4355 for 389 meteorological stations (weather data from the reference 30-year period 19611990). See also Table 1 for explanation.
In Fig. 5 the exposure coefcients (according to ISO 4355) for 389 meteorological stations are presented. For 85% of the meteorological stations the exposure coefcient is 0.8, for 8% the value is 0.6, for 6% the value is 1.0 while for 2% the value is 0.5. Six meteorological stations (2%) achieve values of the exposure coefcient equal to 0.5. Two of these stations are situated in the mountains of southern Norway 1828 and 2062 m above sea level, respectively. The other four stations are situated in the northernmost parts of Norwegian mainland, 701 North at the gateway to the North-east Passage and to the Barents Sea. Three of these stations are situated at lighthouses close to the sea and exposed to the weather. Only one station is situated in a settled area: Vard radio in Vard.
Thirty meteorological stations (8%) achieve values of the exposure coefcient equal to 0.6. Nineteen of these stations are situated at lighthouses. Seven stations are situated at small island communities on the edge of the coastline heavily exposed to the weather. Only four stations (1%) are situated in settled areas: rland III, Bod, Andya and Loppa. None of the meteorological stations in this category is situated in the eastern part of Norway where the building density is highest. Twenty-two meteorological stations (6%) achieve values of the exposure coefcient equal to 1.0. These stations are placed shielded from the wind typically at the farther end of the long fjords of western Norway. None of the stations in northern Norway is in this category.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
V. Melysund et al. / Building and Environment 42 (2007) 37263736 3731
00'0" 720'0"N Characteristic snow load on the ground 1.5 2 and 2.5 3 and 3.5 4 and 4.5 5 and 5.5 6 and 6.5 7 and 7.5 8 670'0"N
100'0"E
200'0"E
300'0"E 720'0"N
Exposure Coefficient (Ce) 0.5 0.6 0.8 1.0
670'0"N
620'0"N
620'0"N
570'0"N
570'0"N
100'0"E
200'0"E
Fig. 5. Exposure coefcients according to ISO 4355 for 389 meteorological stations (weather data from the reference 30-year period 19611990) and characteristic snow load on the ground (kN/m2, 50-year return period) for municipality centres.
Three hundred and thirty-one meteorological stations (85%) achieve values of the exposure coefcient equal to 0.8. Almost all of the stations in settled areas are found in this category. Exceptions are one station with an exposure coefcient of 0.5, four stations with exposure coefcients of 0.6 and 22 stations with exposure coefcients of 1.0 as mentioned above. 4. Evaluation of the exposure coefcients for Norway 4.1. Historical eld investigations Results from eld investigations show a reduction in roof snow load with increasing wind exposure (see Table 2). The calculated values of the exposure coefcient
according to ISO 4355 [2] for building sites with mean temperature between 2.5 and 2.5 1C are in fairly good agreement with these results, and to the conservative side. But there is no available research supporting ISOs description of wind categories. In regions with a mean temperature above 2.5 1C, ISO 4355 allows a reduction of the snow loads on the roof only at building sites with more than 10 days of wind velocity above 10 m/s. This seems not to be justied by eld investigations. It is nevertheless reasonable considering the fact that high temperatures reduce the ability of wind actions to transport snow. Whether this temperature limit should be 2.5 1C is uncertain. In regions with a mean temperature below 2.5 1C, ISO 4355 recommends a reduction of snow loads also when the
ARTICLE IN PRESS
building is completely shielded. An exposure coefcient equal to 0.8 for this situation agrees with some of the research results (see Table 2). Some questions remain: were the buildings in the historical investigations completely shielded? Is it possible to obtain a completely shielded building? For a completely shielded building the snow load on a at roof is expected to be equal to the snow load on the ground. 4.2. Snow transport theories According to snow transport theories drifting occurs even for light winds (0.31.5 m/s). At higher wind velocities (1.63.3 m/s) the snow particles move more horizontally than vertically. Drifting affects the deposition of snow;
particles are transferred through areas with high wind velocities and accumulate in areas with low wind velocities. At wind velocities between 3.4 and 5.4 m/s the snow moves considerably faster horizontally than vertically, and signicant redistribution may occur. Higher winds often blow the snow off the roofs leaving them almost bare [7,14]. The limit of 10 m/s chosen for the wind categories seems unreasonable considering the fact that drifting occurs at wind velocities as low as 0.31.5 m/s. A larger number of meteorological stations are expected to achieve a value of the exposure coefcient below 0.8. In Canada heavy snowfalls often coincidence with high wind velocities according to [15]. This is not the pattern in Norway. In Norway heavy snowfalls may occur at low wind velocities as well as at higher wind velocities.
00'0" 720'0"N
100'0"E
200'0"E
300'0"E 720'0"N
Mean winter temperature 2.5 - 5 0 - 2.5 -2.5 - 0 -5 - -2.5 -7.5 - -5 -10 - -7.5 -12.5 - -10 -15 - -12.5 < -15
670'0"N
670'0"N
620'0"N
620'0"N
570'0"N
570'0"N
100'0"E
200'0"E
Fig. 6. Mean winter temperature (1C, DecemberFebruary, weather data from the reference 30-year period 19611990).
ARTICLE IN PRESS
4.3. The Norwegian climate Norway is a country with large variations in mean temperatures and wind velocities. In Fig. 6 mean winter temperatures are given (DecemberFebruary). There is a pattern of low winter temperatures in the mountainous regions of southern Norway and the inland regions in the far north. Coastal areas in southwest have temperatures between 0 and 2.5 1C, while the inland in the far north has winter temperatures less than 15 1C. In Fig. 7 number of days with wind stronger than 5 m/s for months with normal temperature less than 1 1C is presented. Temperature 1 1C is chosen as a limit to consider all months with high probability of snow and snowdrift. The map also
shows number of months with normal average temperature less than 1 1C. Approximately 90% of the Norwegian mainland has six or more months with average temperature less than 1 1C. That is, six or more months with possible snow and snowdrift. In Fig. 7, there is a clear pattern of higher probability of high winds in the costal areas. It should be noted that the costal areas do not always have the highest number of occurrences (days with wind stronger than 5 m/s for months with normal temperature less than 1 1C), but these regions also have fewer months with temperatures below 1 1C. In the middle of Norway (approximately 62671 North) this pattern is most pronounced. In this region the coastal areas have at least one month with mean temperatures below 1 1C less than
00'0"
100'0"E
200'0"E
300'0"E 720'0"N
720'0"N
Days with wind > 5 m/s 0 - 25 26 - 50 51 - 75 76 - 100 101 - 150 151 - 250 Months with Temp <= 1 C 0-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 >8
670'0"N
670'0"N
620'0"N
620'0"N
570'0"N
570'0"N
100'0"E
200'0"E
Fig. 7. Days with wind velocity above 5 m/s in months with mean temperature 1 1C or below for 389 meteorological stations (weather data from the reference 30-year period 19611990).
ARTICLE IN PRESS
the inland, but a higher number of days with wind above 5 m/s. Norway also has large variations in snow loads (see Fig. 5). Characteristic snow loads on the ground varies from 1.5 kN/m2 in coastal areas in the south up to 9.0 kN/m2 in some inland areas (50-year return period). As documented, Norway has areas with high snow loads (Fig. 5) and high frequency of wind (Fig. 7). In these areas the wind affects roof snow loads, and the exposure coefcient is expected to achieve its lowest value. As seen in Fig. 4 the denition of the exposure coefcient as given in ISO 4355 does not point out these areas as areas where wind blows snow away from roofs. Many of the meteorological stations with an exposure coefcient of 0.8 are situated in areas exposed to wind and snow (e.g. the mountainous areas of southern Norway and stations along the coastline). Exposure coefcients lower than 0.8 are therefore expected for these stations. 4.4. Main ndings Historical eld investigations show that the effects of wind on roof snow loads are of signicance for a large part of buildings. According to snow transport theories snow drifting occurs even for low wind velocities. Norway has a climate with low winter temperatures, large snow amounts and high frequency of wind. The denition of the exposure coefcient found in ISO 4355 is too conservative and does not manage to differentiate the buildings in settled areas. The stations found to be most windswept are situated in areas where no or a very few buildings are located. Other stations situated in areas known as windswept and with high snow loads are found in the same category as more shielded stations. According to the denition in ISO 4355 the buildings in the eld investigations of Hib [5] and Lberg [6] have all exposure coefcient equal to 0.8 although the documentation shows exposure coefcients considerably lower for the investigated buildings. Norway has large variations in snow loads (Fig. 5). The lowest snow loads are due to heavy snowfalls over a short period while the higher snow loads are a result of accumulation over a long winter season. It seems reasonable that areas with low snow loads have higher exposure coefcients than areas with high snow loads. This is taken into account in ISO 4355 when differentiating the exposure coefcient according to mean temperatures, but the limits chosen are not substantiated thoroughly through research results. Another way of taking into consideration the accumulation length is to include the length of the winter season when deciding the exposure coefcient for a specic building site. In the procedure presented by Otstavnov and Rosenberg [4] both the length of the winter season and number of days with snowfalls are included. Number of days with average wind velocities above 10 m/s in the three coldest months denes the wind category according to ISO 4355. When selecting three months, it is indirectly assumed
that this is the length of the winter season. Other periods should be considered when evaluating areas with lower or higher accumulation period. Mean temperatures for the coldest winter month are needed when determining the value of the exposure coefcient. At rst thought this temperature could also be considered as a value taking into account the possibility of snow to be transported by wind actions. In this situation the actual length of the winter season should be chosen. As mentioned above it can also be a measure of the size of the snow ground load. This correlation should then be scientically documented. 5. Discussion and further work Meteorological stations are located to enable a good representation of regional climate. Typical locations are in agricultural and settled areas, airports and lighthouses. That is, these areas have a better representation than mountainous regions. Maximum snow loads on the roof often do not appear simultaneously with maximum snow loads on the ground. In the measurements reported by ORourke et al. [8] maximum snow loads on roofs were measured independent of maximum snow loads on the ground. In the measurements performed by Hib [5] the roof and the ground were measured simultaneously. It also seems reasonable that the exposure coefcients decrease as the return period of the characteristic snow loads on the ground increases. When measuring snow loads the exposure coefcients therefore are expected to be higher in a normal year compared with a year when extreme loads occur. In measurements reported by Taylor [7] snow loads on the ground with return period of 30 years were used when calculating the roof-to-ground ratio. Similar evaluation should be performed also for other measurement data, for instance the data of Hib [5]. In Norway the meteorological data needed is not easily accessible for structural engineers. The data basis can be bought at the Norwegian Meteorological Institute, but the wind category (according to ISO 4355 [2]) has to be calculated either by meteorologists or by consultants in structural engineering. After deciding the mean temperature and wind category for the nearest meteorological station delivering such data, the structural engineer has to evaluate if these values are reasonable for the temperature and wind climate at the specic building site. Local topography including altitude, surrounding buildings and trees has to be evaluated in order to decide the wind category. High-resolution maps are required. This evaluation is time-consuming and demands high qualications. The investigation presented will be used as an important basis for ongoing studies within the ongoing Norwegian Research and Development Programme Climate 2000 [16], e.g. the relationship between snow loads on roofs and wind exposure will be further investigated [17]. In this article the suitability of the exposure coefcient as dened
ARTICLE IN PRESS
in ISO 4355 is analysed. Further work should focus on developing a denition reecting the physical processes more correctly. There is, for instance, a need for taking into account the length of the snow accumulation. The denition of wind categories should also be looked into, and a more detailed method specifying wind exposure should be developed. The authors are now addressing these issues. When using the exposure coefcient, the snow load on a sheltered roof becomes twice as large as the snow load on a windswept roof. The signicance of this coefcient according to total building costs will be studied. How much could the society prot with a more extensively use of this exposure coefcient? The advantage of built-in security accounting for future change in wind exposure or climatic impact could be desirable. In recent years, methods to detail the design process according to snow loads have been developed. However, advanced tools and data processing are required. These tools are often not available for structural engineers, and high qualications are required. The risk of engineers using these methods erroneously is also present. Further work should focus on developing tools enabling differentiation of snow loads, and thus including local topography and climate. The robustness of the Norwegian building stock will also be addressed as part of the Climate 2000 programme, e.g. through analysis of statistical data from the Ground Property, Address and Building Register along with knowledge on process induced building defects [18]. The lifetime of the built environment depends closely on the severity of local climate conditions, and a sensible way of ensuring high-performance building enclosures in a country with extreme variations could be to develop more sophisticated climate classications or exposure indexes for different building materials and building enclosures. This work is now concentrated on issues related to building technology or building physics, and include development of methods for classifying different climate parameters and their impact on building enclosure performance [18,19]. 6. Conclusions It is shown that the exposure coefcient as dened in an informative annex of ISO 4355 does not reect the actual effects of wind exposure on roof snow loads in Norway, the main reasons being oversimplications in the denition of the coefcient and the extreme variations of the climate in Norway. The denition is based on coarse simplications of snow transport theories. It must be revised and improved to serve as an applicable tool for calculating design snow loads on roofs, using the best available data from meteorological stations in Norway. As documented in this paper, Norway has areas with high snow loads and high frequency of wind. In these areas the wind affects roof snow loads, and the exposure coefcient is expected to achieve its lowest value. The
denition of the exposure coefcient as given in ISO 4355 does not point out these areas as areas where wind blows snow away from roofs. Acknowledgements This paper has been written within the ongoing SINTEF Research and Development Programme Climate 2000 Building Constructions in a More Severe Climate (200007), strategic institute project Impact of Climate Change on the Built Environment. The authors gratefully acknowledge all construction industry partners and the Research Council of Norway. A special thanks to Dr. Kristoffer Apeland for valuable comments on the text. References
[1] Standards Norway. NS 3491-3 Design of structuresdesign actionsPart 3: snow loads. Oslo, Norway: Standards Norway; 2001 (in Norwegian). [2] International Organization for Standardization. ISO 4355 Bases for design on structuresdetermination of snow loads on roofs. 2nd ed. ` Geneve, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization; 1998. [3] Lutes DA. Snow loads for the design of roofs in Canada. In: Proceedings of the Western snow conference, Victoria, BC, Canada, 1970. p. 617. [4] Otstavnov VA, Rosenberg LS. Consideration of wind effect in standardization of snow load. In: A multidisciplinary approach to snow engineering: rst international engineering foundation. US Army Corps of Engineers Cold Regions 8387.500 SR 89-6, vol. 89-6; 1989. p. 25663. [5] Hib H. Snow load on gable roofsresults from snow load measurements on farm buildings in Norway. In: Proceedings of the rst international conference on snow engineering, Santa Barbara, CA, USA: CRREL Special Report, 89-6, 1988, p. 95104. [6] Lberg PA. Snlaster pa tak. Arbeidsrapport nr. 5. Oslo, Norway: Norwegian Building Research Institute; 1976 (in Norwegian). [7] Taylor DA. A survey of snow loads on the roofs of arena-type buildings in Canada. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 1979;6: 8596. [8] ORourke M, Koch P, Redeld R. Analysis of roof snow load case studiesuniform loads. CRREL Report 83-1 1983. Cold Regions Research & Engineering Laboratory; 1983. [9] Commission of the European Communities DGIII-D3. Scientic support activity in the eld of structural stability of civil engineering workssnow loads. Final report. Pisa, Italy: University of Pisa, Department of Structural Engineering, Prof. Luca Sanpaolesi; 1999. [10] Irwin PA, Gamble SL, Taylor DA. Effects of roof size, heat transfer, and climate on snow loads: studies for the 1995 NBC. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 1995;22:77084. [11] Mellor M. Cold Regions Science and Engineering, Part III, Section A3c, Blowing snow. Hanover, New Hampshire, USA: US Army Material Command, Cold Regions Research & Engineering Laboratory; 1965. [12] Kind RJ. Snow drifting. In: Gray DM, Male DH, editors. Handbook of snow: principles, processes, management and use. Oxford: Pergamon Press; 1981. p. 33859. [13] Li L, Pomeroy JW. Estimates of threshold wind speeds for snow transport using meteorological data. Journal of Applied Meteorology 1997;36:20513. [14] Nordli . Fjellet i sn, vind, sol og takeDannevigs Fjellbok. Oslo, Norway: Det Norske Samlaget; 2000 (in Norwegian). [15] Isyumov N, Mikitiuk M. Climatology of snowfalls and related meteorological variables with application to roof snow load
ARTICLE IN PRESS
3736 V. Melysund et al. / Building and Environment 42 (2007) 37263736 building stock. Journal of Structural Engineering 2006;132(11): 181320. [18] Lis KR, Kvande T, Thue JV, Harstveit K. A frost decay exposure index for porous, mineral building materials. Building and Environment 2006, accepted. [19] Rydock JP, Lis KR, Frland EJ, Nore K, Thue JV. A driving rain exposure index for Norway. Building and Environment 2005;40(11): 14508. specications. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 1977;4: 24056. [16] Lis KR, Kvande T, Thue JV. Climate 2000building enclosure performance in a more severe climate. In: Proceedings of the seventh symposium on building physics in the nordic countries. Reykjavik, Iceland: The Icelandic Building Research Institute; 2005. p. 1195202. [17] Melysund V, Lis KR, Siem J, Apeland K. Increased snow loads and wind actions on existing buildings: reliability of the Norwegian
ECONOMICAL EFFECTS OF DIFFERENTIATED ROOF SNOW LOADS

Vivian Melysund SINTEF Building and Infrastructure, P.O. Box 124 Blindern, NO-0314 Oslo, Norway Karl V. Hiseth Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Dep. of Structural Engineering, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway Bernt Leira Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Dep. of Marine Structures, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway Kim Robert Lis SINTEF Building and Infrastructure, P.O. Box 124 Blindern, NO-0314 Oslo, Norway
ABSTRACT
The economical effects of differentiated roof snow loads are studied for material consumption in a detached residential house of timber. Some differences are found for high snow loads compared to low snow loads, but the effect on material costs is small. However, reduced material consumption is highly appreciated from an environmental point of view.
INTRODUCTION
Improved calculation methods and tools have made it possible to increase the degree of detailing in modern building design. The environmental loads to be used in design calculations, such as snow loads and wind actions, can reflect the local topography and climate in a higher degree than earlier. Advanced design tools now make it easier to calculate each structural component in detail. Earlier the highest utilized components were often given most attention. The objective of this paper is to investigate whether it is beneficial to differentiate roof snow loads when looking at material costs of a selected building project. Firstly, differentiation within a snow load zone is examined - in addition to a more general
differentiation. Secondly, the importance of these differences when looking at the total building costs is evaluated. One way of differentiating snow loads is by use of the exposure coefficient, C e , which takes into account the effects of wind blowing snow from roofs. Due to the exposure coefficient the snow load on a sheltered roof becomes twice as large as the snow load on a windswept roof (International Organization for Standardization (1), Standards Norway (2)). However, it has turned out difficult to make use of the coefficient, the main obstacle being to obtain the needed meteorological input (Melysund et al. (3)). The built environment affects nature through energy use, emissions and use of raw materials. The construction industry consumes approximately 40 % of the material resources in Norway (Grip Senter (4)). A reduction in material consumption may have large economical and environmental effects. Reduced snow loads and thus reduced material consumption may benefit the whole society.
DESIGN OF BUILDINGS AND THE NORWEGIAN WINTER CLIMATE

The climate in Norway is extremely varied, the rugged topography being one of the main reasons for large local differences in temperatures, precipitation and wind velocities over short distances. Norway has a much friendlier climate than the latitude indicates, thanks to a long coast line facing the northern extension of the Gulf Stream. The bulk of Norway has normal mean temperatures below 1 C at least seven months of the year (reference 30-year period 1961 90). Exceptions are coastal areas in the south and south-west (Melysund et al. (3)). The highest precipitation rates are found some ten kilometres from the coast of Western Norway, and these amounts are among the highest in Europe. Less precipitation amounts are found in the inner part of stlandet (in the south-east), the Finnmark Plateau (in the north), and some smaller areas near the Swedish border, which are all lee areas in relation to the large weather systems. Low temperatures result in high snow amounts during winter. Exceptions are areas in south-west with higher temperatures and winter precipitation mainly as rain. The historical development of the Norwegian building stock and building traditions implies both an adaptation towards different preconditions for use of buildings and varying styles of architecture, but also an adjustment towards the extreme climatic variations throughout the country. Wood is, due to easy access, the most common building material. Traditional detached houses in Norway are timber frame houses with foundation walls of concrete or light expanded clay aggregate, outer walls of timber framework and roofs consisting of roof trusses. The cladding is primarily wood panelling. Roofs are normally covered with tiles or roofing membrane. Snow loads usually govern the design of roof structures, while high thermal insulation demands govern the thickness of walls. Compared to other European countries, Norwegians more often live in detached houses or other small dwelling houses, which they own. While eight out of ten Norwegian households live in houses that they own, this applies to only four out of ten German households (source: Statistics Norway, www.ssb.no). Most residential
buildings in Norway are bought as package solutions and erected by local builders. The buildings are to a lesser degree adapted to local climate (Eriksen et al. (5)), and the design of the buildings is usually not performed in detail (i.e. many structural members may not be highly utilised but have large overcapacities). Other buildings, such as blocks of flats, commercial buildings and industrial buildings are usually designed individually by structural engineers. The environmental loads are normally adapted to local climate, and the structures are usually more detailed designed than for residential houses. Main load bearing systems used are primarily concrete and/or steel. The buildings are mainly erected under contracts where owner of the project hires each contractor or contracts with property developers hiring subcontractors.
Figure 1 The prefabricated timber frame house Ninni from Mesterhus (Photo: Mesterhus)
BUILDING REGULATIONS AND DESIGN CODES

In Norway the partial factor method is used when designing buildings. The design lifetime for buildings is 60 years in general and 100 years for monumental buildings. A 50-year return period is prescribed for environmental loads. The partial factors for environmental loads are set to 1.5 in the ultimate limit state. The partial factors must be multiplied by a reduction factor k L with a value of 0.9 1.0 depending on the reliability level attempted achieved (National Office of Building Technology and Administration (6), Standards Norway (7)). Snow loads on roofs are calculated as the product of the characteristic snow load on the ground s k for the building site, an exposure coefficient C e , thermal coefficient C t and a shape factor which gives the distribution and the relative amount of snow load on the roof (Standards Norway (2)):
s = Ce Ct sk
(1)
Characteristic snow on the ground is specified for each municipality in Norway. In addition, rules concerning the adjustment of these values based on the building sites height above sea level compared with that of the municipal centre are given. The bulk of the municipalities have a value for snow loads on the ground of between 3.0 kN/m2 and 4.5 kN/m2. A few coastal municipalities have values as low as 1.5 kN/m2, and in some inland municipalities values of up to 9.0 kN/m2 are set.
METHODOLOGY
As of January 2006 a total of about 3.7 million buildings are registered in Norway. About 1.4 million of these are residential buildings, and there are 2,3 million nonresidential buildings. These are registered in the Ground Property, Address and Building Register (GAB) which include all Norwegian buildings above 15 m2. For buildings older than 1983, the data in the register is normally limited to details of the buildings identity, the building type, ownership and possibly the address. For buildings erected after 1983, more information is available. The statistics in this section are obtained from Statistics Norway (8) and www.ssb.no.
Table 1 Distribution of building types Type of building Residential buildings - detached houses - other buildings Garages, holiday homes Agricultural and fish industry buildings Industrial and storage buildings Office and commercial buildings Schools and cultural buildings Hotels and restaurants Hospitals etc. Other buildings * buildings erected after 1983 Number (%) 37.1 0.9 41.4 14.1 3.0 1.0 1.2 0.8 0.1 0.4 Floor area* (%) 42.4 9.9 9.4 2.8 12.1 12.0 5.4 1.3 1.9 2.8
38 % of the buildings in the register are residential buildings, 37 % of these buildings are detached houses. 41 % of the buildings in the register are garages and holiday homes while 14 % are agricultural and fishery buildings. When looking at the buildings erected after 1983, 52 % of the registered floor area is in residential buildings (42 % in detached houses). 12 % of the floor area is in industrial and storage buildings, while 12 % is in offices and commercial buildings. See Table 1. Today approximately eight out of ten people live in urban areas compared to 50 per cent after World War II. In Norway as a whole there are more than 900 urban settlements (a collection of houses is described as an urban settlement if at least 200 people live there and the distance between houses is less than 50 metres). Compared to other European countries, Norwegians more often live in detached
houses or other small dwelling houses, which they own. 23 % of the residential buildings in Norway are situated in the three largest cities: Oslo, Bergen and Trondheim. These cities have characteristic ground snow load in the municipality centre of respectively 3.5 kN/m2, 2.0 kN/m2 and 3.5 kN/m2. When looking at the whole country, 94 % of the floor area is in buildings situated in municipalities with characteristic snow load on the ground in the centre equal 4.5 kN/m2 or below. 36 % of the floor area is in buildings situated in municipalities with characteristic snow load on the ground equal 3.0 or 3.5 kN/m2, while 34 % of the floor area is in buildings situated in areas with characteristic snow load on the ground equal 4.0 or 4.5 kN/m2. See Table 2. Since the characteristic snow load on the ground may be increased for buildings with height above the municipality centre, the actual snow loads will be slightly higher than these statistics show. Table 2 Distribution of buildings depending on characteristic snow load on the ground in municipality centre Characteristic snow Floor area* load (%) on the ground s k (kN/m2) s k = 1.5 12.1 s k = 2.0 2.5 12.0 s k = 3.0 3.5 35.8 s k = 4.0 4.5 33.7 s k = 5.0 5.5 4.3 s k = 6.0 6.5 1.9 s k > 7.5 0.1 * buildings erected after 1983
In order to evaluate the economical effects of differentiated roof snow loads, a detached house in timber is selected for further investigations. The house type called Ninni is sold as a pre-fab solution by Mesterhus. Mesterhus is the largest manufacturer of prefabricated housing in Norway, and the selected house type is one the most popular models. See Figure 1 and 2 for picture and sketch of the building. The building is designed to withstand three different levels of characteristic snow load on the ground: 2.0 kN/m2, 3.5 kN/m2 and 4.5 kN/m2. At each snow load level, calculations are performed with both maximum and minimum value of the exposure coefficient C e (0.6 1.2). Imposed loads are chosen according to NS 3491 (Standards Norway (9)), load combinations are chosen according to NS 3490 (Standards Norway (7)) and timber structures are designed according to NS 3470 (Standards Norway (10)). Design calculations are performed for each roof snow load level, resulting in six different lists of material use. The lists include external and internal coverings like wood panelling on walls, roof tiles, internal wall covering, ceiling boards and flooring boards. Flashings, gutters and roof safety devices are also included. The lists do not include plumbing and electrical installations, heating and ventilation systems, flooring, wall paper, painting, tiles, mouldings, kitchen fittings, bathroom installations and backfill materials on the site.
Figure 2 Section of the timber frame house Ninni from Mesterhus
The price data base from HolteProsjekt (Holteprosjekt Innovation (11)), with trade prices of more than 10 000 building components, is used when evaluating the material costs for different levels of roof snow loads. The data base contains market prices for building contractors of medium size and includes discounts (5 35 % depending on product category). The prices are based on the price level in central areas of Eastern Norway in May 2005. Material costs include necessary fasting materials as nails, bolts and glue, and the prices are adjusted in order to include material waste (0 10 % depending on material category). The prices also include transport costs from storehouse/supplier to construction site (assuming a maximum distance of 40 50 km). The total prices are increased by 10 % in order to account for the profit of building contractors (5 - 6 %) and other conditions not already included like insurances, risk, accounts etc. (4 5 %). VAT is not included. Labour costs are not included, except for prefabricated components.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Snow is the main load action on roof structures like snow fences, roof battens, roof trusses, dormer structures and supporting beams at the ridge of the roof. The snow loads are also expected to be important for columns, beams and timber frame walls supporting the roof trusses. Snow loads do not affect structural components as for instance floor structures. The evaluation has revealed material price differences in the categories roof and walls and columns, but no price differences in the other categories. In Table 3 the results are summarized. For roof structures the material price differences are 8 % within the two highest snow zones and 17 % when comparing the buildings designed with highest/lowest roof snow loads. For walls and columns the material price of the building designed for highest snow loads are 3 % higher than the others. When looking at total material costs the price differences are 3 % within the two highest snow zones. For the last snow zone there is almost no price difference. When comparing the buildings designed with highest/lowest roof snow loads, the price difference between total material costs is 6 %.
Table 3 Material costs in Euro for the building designed for different levels of characteristic snow load on the ground s k and exposure coefficient C e s k = 3.5 s k = 4.5 Snow load s k = 2.0 kN/m2 kN/m2 kN/m2 C e value 1.2 0.6 1.2 0.6 1.2 0.6 Roof 14 349 14 216 15 489 14 277 16 602 15 313 Walls and columns 8 179 8 179 8 179 8 179 8 411 8 179 Floors and beams 2 015 2 015 2 015 2 015 2 015 2 015 Doors and windows 12 151 12 151 12 151 12 151 12 151 12 151 Other components 9 328 9 328 9 328 9 328 9 328 9 328 Total 46 021 45 888 47 161 45 949 48 506 46 986
For roof structures the major differences is found in snow fence prices. Higher price differences for roof trusses were expected. Some truss designers in Norway have a rule of thumb saying that the price of a roof truss increases by 5 % for each kN/m2 of characteristic snow load on the ground. This is not the fact for the selected attic truss (width equal to 9.3 m and height equal to 3.9 m). The truss has a mid support, and the angle of the top chord is 40. There is practically no price difference between the most heavily loaded roof truss and the roof truss with smallest loads. The dimensions of the top chords are mainly ruled by the thickness of the thermal insulation. There is little economic benefit to be gained with reduced height of top chords, since there is a need of space for thermal insulation heights equal to 300 mm. The bottom chords are mainly ruled by comfort demands on the floor construction (deformation requirements). Traditionally roof trusses as for example fink trusses are expected to have larger price variations depending on design snow loads. For the category walls and columns the price difference is due to different dimensions of external timber frame walls. The price database from HolteProsjekt is in some cases not sufficiently detailed. Some assumptions of the variations have been made, based on for instance volume. Calculated total building costs are summarized in Table 4. The material costs constitute 33 % of the total building costs (include building materials and labour), and 24 % of the total house costs (includes also installations etc.). When including other costs as ground costs, projecting, VAT etc. the material costs constitute 17 %. The price difference due to different levels of snow loads constitute respectively 1.8 % of the total building costs, 1.3 % of the total house cost and 1,0 % of the total project costs. The differences in material consumption are higher than the price differences. When looking at the volume of wood in structural components, the differences are 13 % within the highest snow zone, 6 % within the second snow load zone and 3 % within the lowest snow load zone. When comparing the buildings designed with highest/lowest roof snow loads, the difference is 17 %. For the roof trusses the
differences are 17 % within the highest snow zone, 10 % within the second snow load zone and 6 % within the lowest snow load zone. Table 4 Total project costs in Euro including materials and labour for a typical detached house according to HolteProsjekt (Holteprosjekt Innovation 11) Costs in Total costs (gross Euro/m2 area of 183 m2) gross area Building 793 145 168 Plumbing, heating and ventilation installations 133 24 257 Electrical installations 86 15 708 Telecommunications, alarms etc. 28 5 146 Other installations 22 3 974 Other costs 64 11 644 Total house costs 1 125 205 898 Projecting, administration etc. 127 23 296 Land costs, financial costs, VAT etc. 313 57 304 Total project costs 1 566 286 497
CONCLUSIONS
In this investigation a timber detached house is designed for six roof snow load values: three different snow load zones with varying degree of wind exposure (high/low). Some differences are found when evaluating the degree of building material consumption, but the economic effect is small. The price difference is 3 % within the two highest snow zones, for the last snow zone there is almost no economic benefits to be gained. When comparing the buildings designed with highest/lowest roof snow loads, the price difference is 6 %. The material costs constitute 33 % of the total building costs, and 24 % of the total house costs. When including other costs, such as ground costs, projecting, VAT etc. the material costs constitute 17 %. The maximum price difference according to snow loads constitute respectively 1.8 % of the total building costs, 1.3 % of the total house cost and 1.0 % of the total project costs. From a social economic perspective, an increased reliability by choosing high levels of design snow loads may not be justified when looking at the damage cost due to roof snow loads. But damage is not evenly distributed, and for an individual house owner, increased building costs may be preferred. More important; reduced material consumption is highly appreciated from an environmental perspective. The construction and operation of buildings account for about 40% of all energy use in Norway. A reduction in material consumption may have large environmental effects.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This paper has been written within the ongoing SINTEF research and development programme Climate 2000 - Building Constructions in a More Severe Climate (2000 - 2007), strategic institute project Impact of Climate Change on the Built Environment. The authors gratefully acknowledge all construction industry partners and the Research Council of Norway.
REFERENCES
1. International Organization for Standardization (1998) ISO 4355: Bases for design on structures - Determination of snow loads on roofs. 2 ed. Genve, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization. Standards Norway (2001) NS 3491-3: Design of structures - Design actions Part 3: Snow loads (in Norwegian). Oslo, Norway: Standards Norway. Melysund, V., Lis, K.R., Hygen, H.O., Hiseth, K.V. and Leira, B. (2007) Effects of wind exposure on roof snow loads. Building and Environment 42(10), 3726-3736. Grip senter (2003) Sluttrapport - koBygg-programmet 1998 - 2002 (in Norwegian), Oslo, Norway: Grip senter. Eriksen, S., yen, C., Underthun, A., Lis, K.R. and Kasa, S. (2005) Adaptation to climate change: the case of the housing sector in Norway. In: 6th Open Meeting of the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change Research Community, University of Bonn, Germany, 9-13 October 2005. National Office of Building Technology and Administration (1997) Regulations concerning requirements for construction works and products for construction works - Technical Regulations under the Planning and Building Act of 14 June 1985 No. 77. In: National Office of Building Technology and Administration. Standards Norway (2004) NS 3490: Design of structures - Requirements to reliability (in Norwegian). 2 ed. Oslo, Norway: Standards Norway. Statistics Norway (2006) Population- and Housing Census 2001 Documentation and main figures, Oslo, Norway: Statistics Norway. Standards Norway (1998) NS 3491-1: Basis of design and actions on structures - Actions on structures - Part 1: Densities, self-weight and imposed loads (in Norwegian). Oslo, Norway: Standards Norway. Standards Norway (1999) NS 3470: Design of timber structures - Design rules - Part 1: Common rules. 5 ed. Oslo, Norway: Standards Norway. HolteProsjekt Innovation (2005) Kalkulasjonsnkkelen 2005. 24 ed. Vol. 18, Oslo, Norway: HolteProsjekt Innovation.
2. 3.
4. 5.
6.
7. 8. 9.
10. 11.
KEYWORDS
Building, building regulations, cost, Norway, roof, snow loads, structural design.
Part C Methods for improved calculation of roof snow loads
IV.
Melysund, V., Leira, B., Hiseth, K.V. and Lis, K.R. (2007) Predicting snow density using meteorological data. Meteorological Applications 14: 413-423. Melysund, V., Hiseth, K.V., Leira, B., Lis, K.R. and Berge, E. (2010) Predicting roof snow loads using meteorological data. Meteorological Applications (submitted).
V.
METEOROLOGICAL APPLICATIONS Meteorol. Appl. 14: 413423 (2007) Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/met.40
Review Predicting snow density using meteorological data

Vivian Melysund,a,b *Bernt Leira,c Karl V. Hisethb and Kim Robert Lisa,d
b a SINTEF Building and Infrastructure, PO Box 124, Blindern, NO-0314 Oslo, Norway Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Department of Structural Engineering, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway c NTNU, Department of Marine Technology, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway d NTNU, Department of Civil and Transport Engineering, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway
ABSTRACT: This paper presents a simple method for predicting snow density by use of weather data. Six hundred and eight snow density (bulk weight density) measurements from the period 19671986 are used in a multiple regression analysis. The measurements are performed at 105 sites in the As area situated in Akershus County in southeast Norway. The area has a relatively stable winter climate. Weather data from an observing station with three registrations a day are used in the analyses. The distance between the measurement sites and the meteorological station varied between 0.6 and 14 km. A clear correlation is found between the observed climate and the measured snow density. A multiple regression equation is developed with a coefcient of determination equal to 70% and a standard deviation equal to 24 kgm3 . Snow density values suggested in the Norwegian code NS 3491-3 is in most cases overestimated. Expressions given in an annex to the international regulations for snow loading on roofs (ISO 4355) are less applicable to prescribing snow density for climate studied in this investigation. Still, they can be used as simple and rough estimates. Copyright 2007 Royal Meteorological Society
KEY WORDS
buildings; density measurements; Norway; meteorological data; snow; snow loads; structural design
Received 26 October 2006; Revised 31 August 2007; Accepted 26 September 2007
1.
Introduction
1.1. Principal objectives and scope The principal objective of the current paper is to describe a methodology for the prediction of snow density (bulk weight density) by means of weather data. In Norway, the snow depth is measured at 540 meteorological stations during winter, typically by the use of a yardstick. The associated snow load, on the ground, is then calculated by means of a simple assumption of snow density (Table I). Snow loads on ground are used as a basis to estimate snow loads on roofs, according to the Norwegian code NS 3491-3 Design of structures - Design actions - Part 3: Snow loads (Standards Norway, 2001). The code contains the recommended values for snow load on the ground for all municipalities in the country. Because of the extreme differences in local climate and topography, a large variation in snow loads on the ground can be observed within short distances in Norway. NS 3491-3 does not take this variability into account. As a result, many buildings are designed with a doubtful estimation of characteristic snow load on the ground. Adequate equipment for surveillance of snow depths, in
* Correspondence to: Vivian Melysund, SINTEF Building and Infrastructure, PO Box 124, Blindern, NO-0314 Oslo, Norway. E-mail: vivian.meloysund@sintef.no Copyright 2007 Royal Meteorological Society
combination with more advanced calculation methods, should be used to improve the national maps for snow load on the ground. This will require detailed information of snow density depending on geographical location and climate during the period of snow accumulation. Advanced calculation models that have been developed in geophysics and hydrology can be used to calculate snow density and the associated loading with a higher degree of accuracy than the method proposed in this paper (for instance, multi-layered models; Loth and Graf, 1998; Xue et al., 2003). The use of advanced models demands a thorough knowledge of the weather and geophysical processes in order to calculate realistic time series of snow loads during the winter season. The objective of the current study is to develop a method for predicting characteristic snow density based on simple weather parameters. The method should provide sufciently accurate results for structural engineering purposes, without the use of advanced software. Scenarios for future climate change indicate both increased winter precipitation and increased temperatures (McCarthy et al., 2001; Karl and Trenberth, 2003; regclim.met.no; Benestad, 2005). A realistic estimation of characteristic loads is, therefore, even more important than before. In addition, predicting snow density by use of weather data makes it possible to evaluate also the
414
V. MELYSUND ET AL.
Table I. Bulk weight density of snow according to EN 1991-1-3 and NS 3491-3 (settled snow is measured several hours or days after its fall; old snow several weeks or months after its fall). Type of snow Fresh Settled Old Wet Bulk weight density (kg m3 ) 100 200 250350 400
previously published and were included in his work related to shape coefcients for roof snow loads (Hib, 1988). The work of Hib supported the changes in shape coefcients for pitched roofs given in EN 1991-1-1 Eurocode 1 Actions on structures Part 13: General actions Snow loads (European Committee for Standardization, 2003), on which the equivalent Norwegian code NS 3491-3 (Standards Norway, 2001) is based. 1.2. Background
effects of climate changes with respect to roof snow loads in different parts of the country. The focus on climate has increased the interest in meteorological monitoring that should be used for predicting snow loads. The Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE) and the Norwegian Meteorological Institute, for instance, are developing geographic information system (GIS) based snow maps of snow water equivalent (percentage of normal, millimetres and rank) for Norway (Engeset et al., 2004). In their calculations, spatial estimation of temperature and precipitation is used in combination with observations from the Norwegian meteorological network. A snow model with 1 1 km2 and one-day resolution is used. Maps are produced daily and presented to users by web- and GIS-based interfaces. In addition, an archive of daily grid data from the winter of 1962 is available (www.met.no). In the Norwegian code, NS 3491-3, the snow load on a roof, s (kg m2 ), is dened as: s = Ce Ct sk (1)
where sk (kg m2 ) is the snow load on the ground, represents the snow load shape coefcient accounting for undrifted and drifted snow load arrangements depending on the roof shape, Ce is the exposure coefcient, which concerns reduction or increase of snow load as a fraction of ground snow load due to wind exposure and Ct is the thermal coefcient dening the reduction of snow load as a function of heat ux through the roof. An equivalent expression can be found in ISO 4355 Bases for design of structures Determination of snow loads on roofs (International Organization for Standardization, 1998). In NS 3491-3, snow loads on the ground (50year return period) are specied for the centres of all 434 municipalities in Norway. Rules are given for increasing these values depending on the height of the ground above sea level at a building site compared with that of the municipal centre. In particular cases, the code allows for using other reliable sources to assess the ground snow load, for instance, when the snow load has been measured near the building site for at least 20 years. In this paper, snow density and snow depth measurements performed by Professor Halvor Hib at the former Agricultural University of Norway (now the Norwegian University of Life Sciences, UMB) during the period 19661986 are used. These measurements have not been
Copyright 2007 Royal Meteorological Society
If the temperature during snowfall is well below the freezing point, the snow typically has a rather low density. Snow falling at higher temperatures usually has a considerably higher density. After a snowfall, metamorphism, compaction and wind action will increase the density. The process when water condenses in the cold outer layer of the snow cover and causes snow crystals to grow is called temperature gradient metamorphism. Equitemperature metamorphism is a result of local differences in vapour pressure due to crystal geometry and causes growth of ice bonds by sintering and strong cohesion between crystals. Gravitation forces compact the snow cover; i.e. the larger the depth, the higher the compaction. Strong winds will make snow crystals divide and the snow cover becomes more densely packed. See Sommerfeld and LaChapelle (1970); Langham (1981) and Pomeroy et al. (1998) for further information on these processes. The mean density of snow, as given in NS 3491-3 and EN 1991-1-3 (European Committee for Standardization, 2003), is shown in Table I. The table shows that the time since snowfall has a major impact on the density. In addition, the density of wet snow is given. In an informative annexe to ISO 4355 Bases for design of structures Determination of snow loads on roofs (International Organization for Standardization, 1998), two alternative methods for calculating snow density are proposed. These are based on formulae from the former USSR and Japan. In the former USSR the following expression was used to calculate the density of snow, (kg m3 ): 3 = (90 + 130 d)(1.5 + 0.17 T )(1 + 0.1 v) (2) where d is the snow depth (m), T is the mean temperature ( C) during the period of snow accumulation and is the average wind velocity (ms1 ) in the same period. Another formula for the snow density (kg m3 ), which is derived from empirical investigations in Japan reads: =A d +B (3) where d is the snow depth (m). A and B are constants inuenced by the mean temperature of the snow zone during the accumulation season. ISO 4355 also describes a relationship between snow load (50-year return period) and snow depth used in the USA: s50 = 1.91(d50 )1.33 (4)
Meteorol. Appl. 14: 413423 (2007) DOI: 10.1002/met
PREDICTING SNOW DENSITY USING METEOROLOGICAL DATA
415
where s50 is the snow load (kPa) on the ground and d50 is the snow depth (m) on the ground, both with return periods of 50 years. Equation (4) takes into account that the maximum ground snow load does not necessarily occur on the same day as the maximum ground snow depth (according to ISO 4355). In Pomeroy et al. (1998) recommendations are given with respect to density of new and aged snow. For fresh snow, the expression developed by Hedstrom and Pomeroy (1998) is recommended: s = 67.9 + 51.3eT /2.6 (5)
Table II. Mean temperatures, mean wind velocities, total precipitation amounts and maximum snow depths in January in the area of As for the measurement period 19671986 and the reference 30-year period 19611990. Year Temperature ( C) 7.7 3.5 8.2 2.6 6.8 5.0 2.3 7.6 3.7 9.2 5.2 9.6 7.7 4.8 Wind velocity (m s1 ) 1.6 1.7 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 2.0 1.3 1.5 1.8 2.6 1.4 2.2 Precipitation (mm) Snow depth (cm) 63 74 28 3 18 51 47 34 11 56 28 40 48
where T is the temperature ( C). For aged wind-blown snow covers with snow depths above 60 cm, Pomeroy et al. (1998) recommend an expression for the density on the basis of investigations of Shook and Gray (1994) and Tabler et al. (1990): s = 450 + 20 470 (1 ed/67.3 ) d (6)
1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1977 1978 1980 1981 1982 1984 1985 1986 19611990
33 93 24 56 19 70 54 24 13 24 89 41 62 49
where s is the mean snow density (kg m3 ) and d is snow depth (cm). For smaller snow depths, Pomeroy et al. (1998) report a small covariance between depth and density (Shook and Gray, 1994).
2.
Measurements
In the period 19661986, Professor Halvor Hib at UMB performed depth and density measurements of snow on ground at 105 sites in the area of As (As is situated in Akershus County in the southeast of Norway). The distances between the measurement sites and the meteorological station in the area vary between 0.6 and 14 km. The area has a relatively stable winter climate (moist mid-latitude climate with cold winters according to the K ppen Climate Classication System). The mean o temperatures, mean wind velocities, total precipitation amounts and maximum snow depths (as registered at the meteorological station in the area) are given in Table II. In addition, the table contains monthly mean temperature and maximum precipitation amount for January in the reference period 19611990. There are large variations in maximum snow depths, precipitation amounts and mean temperatures for winter seasons. Owing to the hilly topography in the As area, both precipitation amounts and wind velocities may have large local variations. Large weather systems from the south-east and the simultaneous low atmospheric pressure often result in snowfall and wind in this area. The highest wind velocities are normally in the north-west direction, but these are seldom accompanied by snowfall (Nordli, 2000). The measurements of Hib were carried out at the time of maximum snow depths. The registrations were not done at exactly the same time every year; however, most of the data were usually collected in mid-February (earliest measurement in week no. 3 and latest in week no. 12). A total of 608 measurements were carried out
(Table III). No measurement was done in winters with maximum snow loads on ground below approximately 40 kg m2 . Snow density measurements were done by using a sharp-edged tube with internal cross-section of 80 cm2 . The snow inside the tube was weighed and the density was calculated. Verication tests showed that the measurements were accurate within 1% (Hib, 1988). Weather observations and measurements are performed by the Norwegian Meteorological Institute three times a day [local time 0800, 1300 and 1900 {coordinated universal time (UTC) +1}] at a meteorological station (climate weather station) in As. Air temperatures are measured 2 m above the ground with an accuracy of 0.1 C. In addition, minimum, maximum and mean temperatures
Table III. Number of snow density measurements in each measurement year. Winter season 19671968 19681969 19691970 19701971 19711972 19761977 19771978 19791980 19801981 19811982 19831984 19841985 19851986 Sum No. of measurements 100 115 150 6 35 70 53 10 3 29 6 13 18 608
416
V. MELYSUND ET AL.
between the observations are registered at the meteorological station. At each observation time, the 10-min mean wind velocity, v, is measured 10 m above the ground, together with the average wind direction. As shown in Section 3, the wind velocities (three observations a day) are used to calculate mean wind velocities for the snow cover. Precipitation (mm water equivalent) is measured once a day (local time 0800, UTC + 1). The accuracy of the precipitation measurements (e.g. due to catchment errors) is not evaluated. Relative humidity (RH) and air pressure, p, are measured three times per day. Air pressure was measured with an accuracy of 0.1 hPa. Snow depth, d, was measured by use of a yardstick once per day (local time 0800, UTC + 1). This is a measure of the accumulated snow depth (not only precipitation as snow since last measurement). The weather at the observation time and between observations is also registered three times per day. The meteorological data are obtained from www.met.no
more to the total value of the parameters than the climate during small snowfalls. vsnow =
t
Psnow vprec Psnow RH

t
(8) (9)
RHsnow =
where Psnow is the amount of precipitation as snow (in mm water equivalent), t is the age of the snow cover (total number of observations) and RH is the relative air humidity (in %). vprec is the mean wind velocity in the observation period (in m s1 ) when it is simultaneously snowing. The threshold temperature for whether the precipitation falls as rain or snow is set to 1.4 C, according to Skaugen (1998). Between snowfalls many climate parameters inuence the density of the snow. At high wind velocities snow particles are drifting: fdrift is dened as the number of times the wind velocity, v, has exceeded 4 m s1 and the snow is in such a condition that it may drift: fdrift = f (v > 4 m s1 ) (10)
3.
Analyses
Multiple regression analyses are suitable in order to predict snow density by use of weather data. The analyses are based on a function of the following type: y = 0 + 1 x1 + 2 x2 + . . . . + k xk (7)
where f is the number, or frequency, of wind velocities, v, above the limit (10 min wind velocity recorded three times per day). The parameter, vmean , represents the mean velocity for each snow cover: vmean = 1 t v
t
where y is the response, in this case snow density. xk are the predictors and k are the regression coefcients. A regression analysis examines the relation of the response to the predictors. The selected predictors in the analysis are parameters assumed to be of importance for determining the response. The analysis searches for the combination of predictors xk (including regression coefcients k ) resulting in a response, y, with a high coefcient of determination, R 2 . The coefcient of determination is the proportion of variability in the data set that is accounted for by the statistical model. For a good model, R 2 should be close to unity. The parameters investigated as predictors in this study are those expected to be of signicance, considering knowledge from the literature and the authors own experience from earlier investigations. The analyses are performed by use of the statistical software program MINITAB. For the parameters representing the frequency, or sum, of a specic observation, the values reect the diurnal number of observations at the meteorological station. At the station in As, there are three observations per day. If a snow cover has an age, t, of 120, it means that there have been 120 observations since the snow cover was established. Hence, the age of the snow cover is 40 days. Two parameters describe the climate during snowfalls. vsnow is a measure of wind velocities during snowfalls, while RHsnow summarizes the observed relative air humidity for all periods with snowfall. As seen in Equations (8) and (9), vsnow and RHsnow are scaled in order to account for the amount of precipitation at each snowfall. Thus, the climate during large snowfalls contributes
(11)
where v is the 10 min mean wind velocity (in m s1 , recorded three times per day) and t is the age of the snow cover (total number of observations). tsun represents the amount of solar energy absorbed by the snow cover: tsun =
t
s (1 a)
(12)
The parameter s is the daily sun hours, and the albedo, a, accounts for the amount of radiation reected by the snow cover. The variation of albedo with summation of daily maximum temperatures since the last snowfall is found in Harstveit (1984), referring to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1956). In order to describe the effects of high air temperatures, two parameters are dened. Theat is calculated by summarizing the observed temperatures, T , above the freezing point in the accumulation period: Theat =
t
when
T > 0 C
(13)
where T is the observed air temperature (in C, observations three times per day). The mean temperature for each snow cover is represented by Tmean : Tmean = 1 t T
t
(14)
417
where T is the observed temperature (in C, observations three times per day) and t is the age of the snow cover (total number of observations). ptot summarizes the atmospheric pressures observed in the accumulation period of the snow cover: ptot =
t
(15)
where p is the observed atmospheric pressure (in hPa, observations three times per day). Other parameters used in the analyses are the observed snow depth d (in cm) taking into account the effect of compaction, the parameter t which is the age of the snow cover (accounting for the effects of metamorphism) and Rp summarizing the total amount of precipitation as rain (in mm) experienced by the snow cover: Rp =
t
Prain
(16)
parameter, xk , there is no inuence on the response, y, (i.e. the coefcient k is equal to zero). If the p-value P is lower than the -level, the association between the response and predictor is statistically signicant. The -level is the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis when the null hypothesis is really true, i.e. nding a signicant association when one does not really exist. The smaller the p-value, the smaller is the probability for making a mistake by rejecting the null hypothesis. If the p-value is higher than the -level, the predictor may be excluded. A commonly used -level is 0.05 (corresponding to 95% condence level). Evident correlation is found between the observed climate and the measured snow density. Equation (20) is the result of the regression analysis with the six most signicant parameters, i.e. the combination of six parameters from Equation (17) with highest coefcient of determination (R 2 ). The coefcient of determination is 70% and the standard deviation is 24 kg m3 . = 230 + 0.0167RHsnow + 2.23fdrift 1.84d 4.66 104 ptot + 2.4tsun 1.89Rp (20) where is the snow density in kg m3 . The snow density is an average for the whole snow layer. RHsnow (sum of relative air humidity in percentage, see Equation (9)) describes the climate during snowfall. The parameters ptot (sum of atmospheric pressure for the snow cover in hPa, see Equation (15)), fdrift (number of times with wind velocity above 4 m s1 and simultaneous snow able to drift, see Equation (10)), tsun (a measure of the amount of sunlight absorbed by the snow cover, see Equation (12)) and Rp (the amount of rain experienced by the snow cover in milli metres, see Equation (16)) describe the climate in the whole accumulation period. In addition, the snow depth d (in centimetres) is an important parameter. Measurements with standardized residuals (ratio of the residuals, ei , to the standard error of estimate, Sy.x ) above an absolute value of 3 are expected to be outliers (statistical observation that is markedly different in value from others in the sample). Twelve such outliers have been eliminated. The SE, t-value and p-value of each regression coefcient are listed in Table IV. The parameters in the regression model interact, and it is difcult to show the effect of a single parameter graphically. In Figure 1, the observed values for some parameters are compared with the calculated values using Equation (20) (solved with respect of the studied parameter and where the measured density is set as ). As can be seen, there is some scatter. Considering the physical interpretation of Equation (20), the constant of 230 can be seen as a start (or initial) density. The predictors of the regression equation increase or decrease the density depending on the sign of the regression coefcient. Parameters found to increase the density are RHsnow , fdrift and tsun . Parameters found to decrease the density are d, ptot and Rp . Equation (20) clearly indicates that the snow density decreases with increasing sum of atmospheric pressure
The snow density is nally expected to be a function of: = f (X) where X = (d fdrift ptot vmean vsnow Rp RHsnow t tsun Theat Tmean ) (17)
4.
Results
Multiple regression analyses are performed with the parameters in Equation (17). The standard error (SE ), tvalue (T ) and p-value (P ) of each regression coefcient are calculated and used to exclude the least signicant parameters. The standard error SE is dened as: SE = (X X)1 s 2 (18)
where s is the estimated standard deviation of the error term in the regression model and X is the matrix of predictors. The t-value (T ) is dened as: T = k SE (19)
The t-value for a predictor can be used to test whether the response is accurately predicted. The larger the absolute value of the t-value, the more likely it is that the predictor is signicant. If the model is overtted, i.e. too many predictors are included in the analysis in relation to the number of observations, a too high coefcient of determination, R 2 , can be achieved. A model with high R 2 may not be useful if there are no signicant effects present. One way to determine whether the observed relationship between the response and a specic predictor is signicant is to test the null hypothesis. The null hypothesis (H0 ) is explicitly formulated here as follows: for a specic
418
V. MELYSUND ET AL.
Table IV. Regression coefcients with standard error of coefcient (SE coeff.); t-value, T (estimated coefcient divided on SE coefcient); and p-value, P (probability of obtaining a test statistic that is at least as extreme as the actual calculated value, if the null hypothesis is true). P < 0.05 means that the association between the response and predictor is statistically signicant. T = k SE 1 . The larger the absolute value of T , the more likely it is that the predictor, xk , is signicant. Predictor xk Constant RHsnow fdrift d ptot tsun Rp
a
Coefcient k 230 0.0167 2.23 1.84 4.66 104 2.40 1.89
Standar error SE 5.27 5.64 104 0.15 0.10 2.8 105 0.15 0.16
t-value T 43.62 29.55 15.22 18.00 16.46 16.15 11.62
p-value P 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Stepwise coeff. of determination R 2 (%)a
33 40 44 53 62 70
Regression analysis where parameters are added one by one. The method adds the predictor that results in largest increase of R 2 .
Observed value (sum, %)
Relative humidity RH_snow 16000
8000
0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000
Calculated value (all measurements summarized, in %) Depth d Observed value (cm) 90
60
30 0 20 40 Calculated value (cm) 60 80 100
Observed value (no. of occ.)
Frequency of wind allowing snow drift f_drift 40
20
0 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Calculated value (no. of occurences)
Figure 1. Calculated values using the regression model (Equation (20)) versus the observed values. This gure is available in colour online at www.interscience.wiley.com/ma
ptot . High pressure in the winter season normally means cold weather, and no precipitation while low pressure normally means higher temperatures and precipitation. The sum of the atmospheric pressures over the whole accumulation period provides information on both mean temperatures and precipitation amounts. High temperatures result in increased snow densities. Large precipitation amounts lead to compaction of the snow layer and increases the snow density. A high sum of relative air humidity during snowfalls (RHsnow ) may also indicate the temperature. A snow cover with a high value of RHsnow has experienced higher temperatures (and thereby more wet snow) than a snow
cover with a lower value of RHsnow . These results are consequently as expected. High wind velocities enable the snow to drift. Drifting snow gives smaller snow crystals and compaction of the snow cover, and therefore the snow density increases. A windswept snow cover is expected to be more densely packed than a less windswept snow cover. There is a tendency towards increasing density with increasing snowdrift (fdrift ), as can be seen in Equation (20). Figure 1 indicates that there may be a better description of this effect than a linear relationship, but the physical processes are complex and it is hard to nd a simple expression that could give a better correlation.
419
One could expect higher average snow densities for large snow depths, due to compaction. This is also true when the inuence of the snow depth is studied separately, as can be seen in Figure 2. However, in Equation (20), where several effects are combined, the regression coefcient for d has a negative sign, which means that large snow depths tend to decrease the density. This tendency can also be seen in Figure 2 for snow covers that have experienced a certain amount of temperatures above the freezing point. For large snow depths, the external climate inuences the density to a lesser degree than smaller snow depths. Only the upper part of the snow cover is exposed, and for large snow depths this area constitutes only a small part of the total snow cover. Thus, the snow depth, d, can be seen as a corrective term for the other external climate parameters. The analyses show that the density increases with increasing amount of solar radiation (tsun ). Solar radiation supplies energy and consequently increases the temperature in the snow layer, which leads to compaction and increased snow density. The analyses also show that the density decreases with increasing amount of precipitation as rain (Rp ). Snow cover may absorb rain, and the snows density increases. Repeated rainfalls, on the other hand, demolish the ice structure and reduce the snow covers ability to absorb water. As a result, the snow density decreases. The authors expected temperature parameters to be more signicant than the predictors in Equation (20). The values of the parameters RHsnow , ptot , tsun and Rp depend on the temperatures experienced by the snow cover.
These parameters are better predictors than temperature parameters alone because they also provide information on other conditions. ptot , for instance, is a better predictor than temperature parameters because it correlates with both temperatures and amount of precipitation. The weather data are not in a continuous time series and the measurements do not record all variations in the climate (hourly data are only available for a small number of meteorological stations in Norway). Local adjustments at each measurement site could be necessary when evaluating precipitation rates and effects of wind.
5.
Discussion and further work
Snow depth, mean wind and mean temperature are the most important parameters in the expressions for snow density in ISO 4355 (Equations (1)(3)). Combinations of these parameters ( d, 3 T mean and vmean ) are investigated without achieving sufcient correlation. These results are not included in this paper. As can be seen in Table IV, the parameter with highest coefcient of determination (R 2 ) in a simple regression analysis, is RHsnow where R 2 equals 33%. If two parameters are combined in a multiple regression analysis, the combination RHsnow and fdrift gives the highest coefcient of determination (40%). In a simple regression analysis, the snow depth, d, has a coefcient of determination equal to 5%. According to NS 3491-3, old snow (several weeks or months after snowfall) has a density between 250 and 350 kg m3 (Table I). Of the measured snow densities in this investigation, 64% are below 250 kg m3 and
Density (kgm-3)
300 250 200 150 100 20 30 40 50 60 Depth (cm) 70 80 90 100
Density (kgm-3)
300 250 200 150 100 20 30 40 50 60 Depth (cm) 70 80 90 100
Figure 2. Density as a function of snow depth. In the upper part of the gure black circles are measurements with values of Theat below 10, grey squares are measurements with values of Theat between 10 and 75 while triangles are measurements with values of Theat above 75. This gure is available in colour online at www.interscience.wiley.com/ma Copyright 2007 Royal Meteorological Society Meteorol. Appl. 14: 413423 (2007) DOI: 10.1002/met
420
V. MELYSUND ET AL.
350
300 Density (kg m-3)
250
250
200
200
150
100 0 50 100 150 200 Age (days x 3) 250 300 350
Figure 3. Measured densities versus age of snow cover. This gure is available in colour online at www.interscience.wiley.com/ma
40
30 Percent
20
10
0 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.1 Ratio calculated/measured value
Figure 4. Calculated densities using Equation (20) (95% fractile values) divided by measured values (tted to a loglogistic distribution with Loc = 0.1791 and Scale = 0.06194). This gure is available in colour online at www.interscience.wiley.com/ma
34% have values below 200 kg m3 (Figure 3). The recommended values in NS 3491-3 overestimate the snow density in most cases. The snow covers in the current analyses have been accumulated gradually. Thus, the bottom layer of the snow covers can be characterized as old while the top layer is fresh. The density equation suggested in NS 3491-3 is too conservative and does not properly deal with gradually accumulated snow covers. The calculated snow densities by use of Equation (20) represent mean values: 95% fractile values are achieved by increasing the calculated snow densities by two times the standard deviation of error (2 24 kg m3 ).
Calculated 95% fractile values for the snow densities are compared with the measured densities in Figure 4. Only 5% of the calculated values are below measured values, while for 44% of the calculations the ratio of calculated to measured value exceeds 1.2. When the calculations are done according to Equation (2), 26% of the calculated values are below the measured density values (Figure 5). The ratio of the calculated to measured value exceeds 1.2 for 39% of the calculated values. Compared to the analyses results, Equation (2) is less accurate for prediction of snow density, regarding the climate studied in this investigation.
421
40
30 Percent
20
10
0 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8 Ratio calculated value/measured value 2.1
Figure 5. Calculated values according to Equation (2) divided by measured values (tted to a loglogistic distribution with Loc = 0.1202 and Scale = 0.1038). This gure is available in colour online at www.interscience.wiley.com/ma
40
30 Percent
20
10
0 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8 Ratio calculated value/measured value 2.1
Figure 6. Calculated values according to Equation (4) divided by measured values (tted to a loglogistic distribution with Loc = 0.3535 and Scale = 0.1078). This gure is available in colour online at www.interscience.wiley.com/ma
This is because Equation (2) underestimates the snow density in many cases. The equation is nevertheless useful for simple and rough estimates. When calculating snow density by use of Equation (4), almost all (97%) calculated densities are below the measured values (Figure 6). The equation is less applicable for an occasional/arbitrary period in a climate as studied in this investigation. Equation (4) is meant to be used for snow depths with a 50-year return period. A comparison between measured snow densities and calculations by use of Equations (2), (4) and (20) is summarized in Table V.
The density measurements were done within a small area in Norway and combined with data from one meteorological station. Further work should aim at investigating the results in view of data from other parts of the country. Possible measurement uncertainties in conjunction with the used meteorological station could then be reduced. The capability of the proposed empirical formula to estimate snow density in different climates would then also be demonstrated. The current investigation will be used as input to ongoing studies within the Norwegian research and development programme Climate 2000 (Lis et al., 2005). In
422
V. MELYSUND ET AL.
Table V. Comparison of measured snow density and calculated snow density (in kg m3 ) using Equations (2), (4) and (20) (95% fractile values). Statistical data for the ratio calculated value/measured value. Density equation Equation (2) Equation (4) Equation (20) (new method) Mean Standard deviation 0.21 0.14 0.14 No. of occurrences below 1.0 (%) 26 97 5 No. of occurrences above 1.2 (%) 39 1 44 Figure no. 5 6 4
1.14 0.71 1.21
Climate 2000, the relationship between snow loads on roof and wind exposure is subjected to further investigations (Melysund et al., 2006, 2007). The signicance of the magnitude of roof snow load according to total building costs will also be addressed. Will society prot from a more detailed prediction of roof snow loads? The advantage of a built-in safety margin accounting for a future change in wind exposure and climate will most likely be benecial. In recent years, methods to rene the design process with respect to snow load have been developed. However, advanced tools and data processing are required. These tools are often not available for structural engineers, and high qualications within meteorological and geophysical processes are required. The risk that advanced methods will be used in an unintended manner is therefore present. Further work should focus on developing tools for geographic differentiation of snow loads, including local topography and climate variations.
to prescribe snow density for a climate as studied in this investigation. Still, they can be used as simple and rough estimates. Acknowledgements This paper has been written as part of the ongoing SINTEF research and development programme Climate 2000Building constructions in a more severe climate (20002007), strategic institute project Impact of climate change on the built environment. The authors gratefully acknowledge all construction industry partners and the Research Council of Norway. A special thanks to Professor emeritus Halvor Hib and Professor Egil Berge at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB) for allowing use of their measurements, and to Dr Hans Olav Hygen (Norwegian Meteorological Institute) for valuable comments on the text. References
6.
Conclusions
A clear correlation is found between observed climate and measured snow density. A multiple regression equation for prediction of snow density is developed. The results are promising, with a coefcient of determination equal to 70% and a standard deviation equal to 24 kg m3 compared to measured values. The suggested equation has six predictors and one constant. The most important predictor RHsnow (sum of relative air humidity when snowing) concerns the climate during snowfalls. Other important parameters reect the climate in the whole accumulation period, such as tsun (the amount of solar radiation) and fdrift (frequency of high wind velocity and simultaneous snow which is able to drift). The parameters RHsnow , fdrift and tsun are found to increase the density. The parameters d (snow depth), ptot (sum of atmospheric pressure) and Rp (sum of precipitation as rain) are found to decrease the density. The most important parameters in density equations presented in an informative annexe of ISO 4355 are snow depth, mean wind and mean temperature. Combinations of these parameters are investigated without achieving satisfactory correlation. These results are not included in this paper. Snow density values calculated by use of the Norwegian code NS 3491-3 will in most cases be overestimated. The expressions in ISO 4355 are less applicable
Benestad RE. 2005. Climate change scenarios for northern Europe from multi-model IPCC AR4 climate simulations. Geophysical Research Letters 32: L17704. Engeset R, Tveito OE, Alfnes E, Mengistu Z, Udns HC, Isaksen K, Frland EJ. 2004. Snow map system for Norway. In Proceedings, XXIII Nordic Hydrological Conference 2004 , Tallinn. European Committee for Standardization. 2003. EN 1991-11: Eurocode 1 Actions on Structures Part 13: General Actions Snow Loads. European Committee for Standardization: Brussels. Harstveit K. 1984. Snowmelt modelling and energy exchange between the atmoshere and a melting snow cover, PhD thesis, Geophysical Institute, Meteorological Division, University of Bergen, Norway. Hedstrom N, Pomeroy JW. 1998. Intercepted snow in the boreal forest: measurement and modelling. Journal of Hydrological Processes 12: 16111625. Hib H. 1988. Snow load on gable roofs. Results from snow load measurements on farm buildings in Norway. In Proceedings, the First International Conference on Snow Engineering. CRREL Special Report 89-6 , Santa Barbara, 95104. International Organization for Standardization. 1998. ISO 4355 Bases for design on structures Determination of snow loads on roofs. In International Organization for Standardization, Gen` ve. e Karl TR, Trenberth KE. 2003. Modern global climate change. Science 302: 17191723. Langham EJ. 1981. Physics and properties of snow cover. In Handbook of Snow: Principles, Processes, Management and Use, Gray DM, Male DH (eds). Pergamon Press; New York 275337. Lis KR, Kvande T, Thue JV. 2005. Climate 2000 building enclosure performance in a more severe climate. Proceedings, the 7th Symposium on Building Physics in the Nordic Countries. The Icelandic Building Research Institute: Reykjavik; 11951202. Loth B, Graf H. 1998. Modeling the snow cover in climate studies. 1. Long-term integrations under different climatic conditions using a multilayered snow-cover model. Journal of Geophysical Research 103: 11 31311 327. Meteorol. Appl. 14: 413423 (2007) DOI: 10.1002/met
PREDICTING SNOW DENSITY USING METEOROLOGICAL DATA McCarthy JJ, Canziani OF, Leary NA, Dokken DJ, White KS (eds.). 2001. Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. Melysund V, Lis KR, Siem J, Apeland K. 2006. Increased snow loads and wind actions on existing buildings: reliability of the Norwegian building stock. Journal of Structural Engineering 132(10): 18131820. Melysund V, Lis KR, Hygen HO, Hiseth KV, Leira B. 2007. Effects of wind exposure on roof snow loads. Building and Environment 42(10): 37263736. Nordli O. 2000. Fjellet i sn, vind, sol og t ake. Dannevigs Fjellbok (in Norwegian). Det Norske Samlaget, Oslo. Pomeroy JW, Gray DM, Shook KR, Toth B, Essery RLH, Pietroniro A, Hedstrom N. 1998. An evaluation of snow accumulation and ablation processes for land surface modelling. Hydrological Processes 12: 23392367. Shook D, Gray DM. 1994. Determining the snow water equivalent of shallow prairie snowcovers. In Proceedings, 51st Annual Meeting Eastern Snow Conference, Dearborn, 8995.
423
Skaugen T. 1998. Studie av skilletemperatur for sn ved hjelp av samlokalisert snpute, nedbr- og temperaturdata (in Norwegian). Rapport nr. 11. NVE Norges Vassdrags- og Energiverk, Oslo. Sommerfeld RA, LaChapelle E. 1970. The classication of snow metamorphism. Journal of Glaciology 9(55): 317. Standards Norway. 2001. NS 3491-3: Design of structures Design actions Part 3: Snow loads (in Norwegian). Standards Norway, Oslo. Tabler RD, Pomeroy JW, Santana BW. 1990. Drifting snow. In Cold Regions Hydrology and Hydraulics, Ryan WL, Crissman RD (eds). ASME: New York, USA; 95146. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1956. Snow Hydrology: Summary Report of the Snow Investigations. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, North Pacic Division: Portland, OR. Xue Y, Sun S, Kahan DS, Jiao Y. 2003. Impact of parameterizations in snow physics and interface processes on the simulation of snow cover and runoff at several cold regions sites. Journal of Geophysical Research 108(D22): 8859.
Predicting roof snow loads using meteorological data

V. Melysund1 2*, K. V. Hiseth2, B. Leira3, K. R. Lis1 and E. Berge4
1
SINTEF Building and Infrastructure, P.O. Box 124 Blindern, NO-0314 Oslo, Norway,
E-mail: vivian.meloysund@sintef.no, fax +47 22 69 94 38. Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Department of Structural Engineering, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway.
3
2
Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Department of Marine Technology, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway.
Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Department of Mathematical Sciences and Technology, P.O.Box 5003, NO-1432 s, Norway.
ABSTRACT: In this paper models for predicting roof snow loads are presented. Meteorological data are used as input in these models, thus extending the application of the results. Snow load measurements performed by Professor Halvor Hib at the Agricultural University of Norway in the period 1966 to 1986 are analysed. Evident correlation is found between the observed climate and the measured roof snow loads. Models for overall maximum roof snow load and maximum roof snow load at windward side of the roofs are found. The coefficient of determination for overall maximum roof snow load is 74 % and the standard deviation of the error is 0.19 kN m2. The coefficient of determination for maximum roof snow at windward side is 68 % and the standard deviation of the error is 0.18 kN m-2. The most important predictor is snow depth measured at the meteorological station. Roof angle and mean wind velocity is also important parameters. The methods presented in this paper are based on simple meteorological parameters and provide sufficiently accurate results for structural engineering purposes. The models presented can be used to calculate local roof snow loads at sites where meteorological data are available.
KEY WORDS: Buildings; Roofs; Snow; Snow loads; Structural design; Wind loads
1. Introduction and background

In the current Norwegian snow load standard NS 3491-3 Design of structures - Design actions - Part 3: Snow loads (Standards Norway, 2001) snow loads on roofs are defined as
Correspondence to: V. Melysund, SINTEF Building and Infrastructure, P.O. Box 124 Blindern, NO-0314 Oslo, Norway. E-mail: vivian.meloysund@sintef.no
Page 1 of 18
s = Ce Ct sk
(1)
where s k is snow loads on the ground. The parameters , C e and C t describe conditions on the roof. The exposure coefficient C e takes into account that wind removes snow from flat roofs. Using this coefficient the snow load on a sheltered roof becomes twice as large as the snow load on a windswept roof. The shape coefficient describes the distribution of snow load on the roof due to geometry. The thermal coefficient C t defines the reduction of the snow load on the roof as a function of the heat flux through the roof. An equivalent expression can be found in ISO 4355 Bases for design of structures Determination of snow loads on roofs (International Organization for Standardization, 1998) and EN 1991-1-1 Eurocode 1 Actions on structures Part 13: General actions Snow loads (European Committee for Standardization, 2003). According to NS 3491-3 characteristic snow loads on the ground s k in the municipality centres of Norway varies from 1.5 kN m-2 in coastal areas in the south up to 8.0 kN m-2 in some inland areas (50-year return period). There are large local variations in snow loads within each municipality due to variation in climate and topography. Local adaptation of the roof snow loads are in NS 3491-3 permitted through an increase of the ground snow load s k for building sites at an altitude above the municipality centre, through the exposure coefficient C e and through using local measurements of the ground snow load instead of the value prescribed for the municipality centre. In practice, it has turned out difficult for consultants in structural engineering to determine the exposure coefficient C e . The main reason is the meteorological input needed. According to an informative annex in ISO 4355 and NS 3491-3, the exposure coefficient is a function of the mean temperature, , in the coldest winter month and number of days, N, with a wind velocity above 10 m s-1 where N is defined as an average for the three coldest months of the year. Mean values for many years are recommended (usually 30 years). This meteorological information is available merely at advanced weather stations. If a building site happens to be located near such a station, the data needed is still not easily accessible. In Melysund et al. (2006) it is shown that the exposure coefficient C e as defined does not reflect the actual effects of wind exposure on roof snow loads in Norway, the main reasons being oversimplifications in the definition of the coefficient and the extreme variations of the climate in Norway. The definition is based on coarse simplifications of snow transport theories, and must be revised and improved to serve as an applicable tool for calculations of design snow loads on roofs in Norway. NS 3491-3 allows using other reliable sources for the ground snow load s k in particular cases, for instance measurements performed nearby the building site and over a long period (at least 20 years). Norwegian Meteorological Institute performs snow depth measurements at 540 sites in Norway which could be used as a supplement to the values prescribed for the 434 municipalities in the standard. According works by Isyumov (1971), Isyumov et al. (1974) and Isyumov et al. (1977) snow load on a particular roof is the running sum of incremental loads added by individual snowfalls during the course of winter and the depletion of the roof snow load by wind action and various thermodynamic processes:
Page 2 of 18
R(t ) = Ri r ( )d
i =1 0
N (t )
(2)
Both the roof snow load deposition R and the depletion r are functions of roof properties (geometry, heat loss etc.), surrounding environment (terrain roughness, shelter etc.) and meteorological parameters (snowfalls, wind velocity, temperature etc.). In this paper similar models for predicting roof snow loads are presented. Meteorological data are used as input in these models, thus extending the application of the results. Snow load measurements performed by Professor Halvor Hib at the Agricultural University of Norway in the period 1966 to 1986 will be used. These measurements are previously not published and were included in his work resulting in proposals for new snow load shape coefficients to be used when calculating roof snow loads (Hib, 1988). The work of Hib supported the changes in shape coefficients for pitched roofs given in EN 1991-1-1 (European Committee for Standardization, 2003) of which the equivalent Norwegian standard NS 3491-3 (Standards Norway, 2001) is based on.
2. Measurements
In the period 1966 to 1986 Professor Halvor Hib at UMB performed depth - and density measurements of roof snow loads at 105 roofs (cold pitched roofs) in the area of s. The distances between the measurement sites and the belonging meteorological station in the area, vary between 0.6 and 14 km. s is situated in Akershus County in the south-east of Norway. The area has a relatively stable winter climate (moist midlatitude climate with cold winters according to the Kppen Climate Classification System). Mean temperatures, mean wind velocities, total precipitation amounts and maximum snow depths (as registered at the meteorological station in the area) are given in Table 1. In addition, the table contains monthly mean temperature and maximum precipitation amount for January in the reference period 1961 1990. There are large variations in maximum snow depths, precipitation amounts and mean temperatures for winter seasons. Due to the hilly topography in the s area, both precipitation amounts and wind velocities may have large local variations. Large weather systems from southeast and simultaneously low atmospheric pressure often results in snowfall and wind in this area. The highest wind velocities are normally in the north-west direction, but these are seldom accompanied by snowfall (Nordli, 2000). The measurements of Hib were carried out at the time of maximum snow depths. The registrations were not done exactly at the same time every year, however most of the data were usually collected in mid-February (earliest measurement in week no. 3 and latest in week no. 12). A total of 608 measurements were carried out, see Table 2. No measurement was done in winter seasons with maximum snow loads on ground below approximately 0.40 kN m-2. Snow density measurements were done by using a sharp edged tube with internal cross section of 80 cm-2. The snow inside the tube was weighed and the density was calculated. Verification tests showed that the measurements were accurate within 1 % (Hib, 1988). Snow depth measurements were also performed several places on the roofs in order to map the distribution.
Page 3 of 18
Weather observations and measurements are performed by the Norwegian Meteorological Institute three times a day (local time 0800, 1300 and 1900 (UTC+1)) at a meteorological station (climate weather station) in s. Air temperatures are measured 2 m above the ground with an accuracy of 0.1 C. In addition, minimum, maximum and mean temperatures between the observations are registered at the meteorological station. At each observation time, the 10 minute mean wind velocity, v, is measured 10 m above the ground, together with the average wind direction. As shown in Chapter 3, the wind velocities (three observations a day) are used to calculate for instance mean wind velocities for the snow cover. Precipitation (mm water equivalent) is measured once a day (local time 0800, UTC+1). The accuracy of the precipitation measurements is not evaluated (e.g. catchment errors). Relative air humidity, RH, and air pressure, p, is measured three times a day. Air pressure is measured with an accuracy of 0.1 hPa. Snow depth, d, is measured by use of a yardstick once a day (local time 0800, UTC+1). This is a measure of accumulated snow depth (not only precipitation as snow since last measurement). The weather at the observation time and between observations is also registered three times a day. The meteorological data are obtained from www.met.no.
3. Analyses
Multiple regression analyses are suitable in order to predict snow density by use of meteorological data. The analyses are based on a function of the following type:
y = 0 + 1 x1 + 2 x 2 + .... + k x k
(3)
where y is the response, in this case snow load. x k are the predictors and k are the regression coefficients. A regression analysis examines the relation of the response to the predictors. The selected predictors in the analysis are parameters assumed to be of importance for determining the response. The analysis search for the combination of predictors x k (including regression coefficients k ) resulting in a response, y, with high coefficient of determination, R2. The coefficient of determination is the proportion of variability in the data set that is accounted for by the statistical model. For a good model, R2 should be close to unity. The parameters investigated as predictors in this study are those expected to be of significance, considering knowledge from the literature and the authors own experience from earlier investigations. The analyses are performed by use of the statistical software programme MINITAB. First, a model for predicting maximum snow load on roofs is found. In addition maximum load at the windward roof side is predicted. For the parameters representing the frequency or sum of a specific observation, the values of the parameters reflect the diurnal number of observation at the meteorological station. At this station there are three observations a day. Then if a snow cover has the age t of 120 it means that it has been 120 observations since the snow cover started to perform, i.e. the snow cover is 40 days. The most important aspects when snow falls are amount of precipitation, wind velocity, temperature, roof geometry and effects of topography. Predictors have to be defined reflecting these aspects.
Page 4 of 18
The parameter v snow is a measure of wind velocities at the meteorological station during snowfalls while T snow is a measure of temperatures. As seen in Equations (4) and (5), the parameters v snow and T snow are scaled in order to account for the amount of precipitation at each snowfall. Thereby the climate at a large snowfall contributes more to the total value of the parameters than the climate at a small snowfall. vsnow = Psnow v prec
t
(4) (5)
Tsnow = Psnow Tprec

t
P snow is the amount of precipitation as snow at the meteorological station (in mm water equivalent) and t is the age of the snow cover (no. of observations). v prec is the mean wind velocity in the observation period (in m s-1) when it is simultaneously snowing. T prec is the mean temperature in the observation period (in C) when it is simultaneously snowing. The threshold temperature for whether the precipitation falls as rain or snow is set to 1.4 C according to Skaugen (1998). A third climatic parameter is ground snow depth, d , observed at the meteorological station. This parameter reflects the amount of precipitation. In addition it is a measure of the climate during and between snowfalls. Other important parameters during snowfalls are roof angle, . P tot (in mm water equivalent) is a parameter which summarize the total amount of precipitation at the meteorological station in the accumulation period of the snow cover. P r summarizing the total amount of precipitation as rain (in mm) experienced by the snow cover.
Ptot = ( Prain + Psnow )

t
(6)
Pr = Prain
t
(7)
v snow,loc is a parameter which are meant to reflect the local wind conditions at the measurement places during snowfalls including topography and shielding from other buildings. This parameter is developed for only 284 of the total 608 measurements based on registrations of topography and nearby buildings. The local wind velocities are calculated using simple standardized methods (Standards Norway, 2002). The registration is performed in 2007 and may not reflect exactly the local conditions at the measurement times (the conditions may have changed meanwhile). vsnow,loc = Psnow v prec ,loc
t
(8)
Between snowfalls several parameters influence the roof snow loads. The most important parameters are expected to be climatic parameters as temperature and wind velocity. At high wind velocities the surrounding topography may also be of
Page 5 of 18
importance. In addition roof characteristics as roof angle, roofing material and heat flux through the roof may influence the snow loads. At high wind velocities snow particles are drifting. The parameter f drift is defined as the frequency of wind velocities exceeding 4 m s-1 at the meteorological station when the snow is simultaneously in such a condition that it may drift: f drift = f (v > 4 m s-1) (9)
where f is the frequency of wind velocities, v, above the limit. Another parameter v mean is the mean velocity for each snow cover: vmean = 1 v t t (10)
where v is the 10 minute mean wind velocity (in m s-1) at the meteorological station and t is the age of the snow cover (no. of observations). Both f drift and v mean have corresponding local parameters: f drift,loc and v mean,loc . These parameters have been developed using the same methods as v snow,loc accounting for topography and nearby buildings. The parameter t sun summarizes the amount of sun absorbed by the snow cover: tsun = s (1 a)
t
(11)
where the parameter s is daily sun hours and the albedo, a, takes into account amount of radiation reflected by the snow cover. The variation of albedo with summation of daily maximum temperatures since last snowfall is found in Harstveit (1984, referring to U.S.A.C.E., 1956). In order to describe the effects of high temperatures on the snow layer, the mean temperature T mean is calculated for each snow cover: Tmean = 1 T t t (12)
where T is the observed temperature (in C) at the meteorological station and t is the age of the snow cover (no. of observations). Other parameters used in the analyses are roofing material group m (metal sheets or other roofing materials) and the parameter t which is the age of the snow cover. Since only cold roofs are included in the analyses, heat flux through the roof is not considered. The roof snow loads, s, is expected to be a function of several parameters: s = f (d, f drift , f drift,loc , m, t, t sun , v mean , v mean,loc , v snow , v snow,loc , P r , P tot , T mean , T snow , ) (13) The analyses and thereby the results are restricted by the meteorological parameters available. The meteorological data is non-continuous and does not record all variations in the climate. The development of local parameters which take into account
Page 6 of 18
local wind conditions also include simplifications and does not reflect the local conditions exactly.
4. Results
Multiple regression analyses are performed with the parameters in Equation (13). The standard error (SE), t-value (T) and p-value (P) of each regression coefficient is calculated and used to exclude the least significant parameters. The standard error SE is defined as:
SE = ( X X ) 1 2
(14)
where is the estimated standard deviation of the error term in the regression model and X is the matrix of predictors. The t-value (T) is defined as:
T=
k
SE
(15)
The t-value for a predictor can be used to test whether the response is accurately predicted. The larger the absolute value of the t-value, the more likely it is that the predictor is significant. If the model is over-fitted, i.e. too many predictors are included in the analysis in relation to the number of observations, a too high coefficient of determination, R2, can be achieved. A model with high R2 may not be useful if there are no significant effects present. One way to determine whether the observed relationship between the response and a specific predictor is significant or not, is to test the null hypothesis. The null hypothesis is here explicitly formulated as H 0 : for a specific parameter, x k , there is no influence on the response, y, (i.e. the coefficient k is equal to zero). If the p-value P is lower than a -level, the association between the response and predictor is statistically significant. The -level is the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis when the null hypothesis is really true, i.e. finding a significant association when one does not really exist. The smaller the p-value, the smaller is the probability for making a mistake by rejecting the null hypothesis. If the p-value is higher than the -level, the predictor may be excluded. A commonly used -level is 0.05 (corresponding to 95 % confidence level). See www.minitab.com. Evident correlation is found between the observed climate and the measured maximum roof snow loads, s max (in kN m-2). Equation (16) is the result of the regression analysis with the five most significant parameters, i.e. the combination of five parameters from Equation (13) with highest coefficient of determination (R2). The coefficient of determination (R2) is 74 % and the standard deviation of the error is 0.19 kN m-2. smax = 0.87 + 0.136 d + 0.00364Tsnow 0.00223t 0.00477 + 0.733 3 vmean (16)
Page 7 of 18
The analysis is based on 608 snow load measurements. Measurements with standardized residuals (ratio of the residuals, e i , to the standard error of estimate, S y.x ) equal an absolute value of three or above are expected to be outliers (statistical observation that is markedly different in value from others in the sample). 12 such outliers have been eliminated. The standard error (SE), t-value and p-value of each regression coefficient are listed in Table 3. The parameter T snow (measure of temperature during snowfalls) describes the climate when snow falls. The parameter v mean describes the wind climate in the whole accumulation period. In addition the snow depth d (in cm), age t (no. of observations) and roof angle are important parameters. The most important parameter is snow depth on the ground, d, observed at the meteorological station. This parameter reflects amount of precipitation and other climate influences like temperature for the whole accumulation period. Melting occurs and the snow depths reduce when the temperature increases above 0 C. The age, t, of the snow cover is another important parameter. High age results in reduced loads. The authors expected that high age would increase the snow load. For snow covers with equal depths, an old snow cover is expected to be heavier than a younger snow cover due to compaction. It then has to be concluded that also the age is a measure of the degree of climate influence. An old snow cover has probably experienced a larger amount of for instance sun radiation, high temperature etc. than a younger one. In addition metamorphosis which occurs in old snow covers prevents drifting of snow. High roof angles, , mean lower roof snow loads. High roof angles make drifting more difficult for crosswise wind directions. Another effect of high roof angles is sliding from the roof at high temperatures, especially for smooth roofing materials like metal sheets. In the work of Hib (1988) it was found that the ratio roof snow load to ground snow load decreased as the roof angle increased above 20. Functions and polynomials of the roof angle are used as predictors without achieving higher correlation that the predictors in Equation (16). T snow is a measure of the temperatures during snowfalls. The higher the temperature is when snowing, the lower is the value of the parameter. T snow is weighted by the amount of precipitation, i.e. high snowfalls contribute more to the value of the parameter than small snowfalls. The snow crystals are usually small and light at low temperatures during snowfalls and they normally become larger and heavier at increasing temperatures. T snow is then a measure of how easy the wind transports the snow crystals. A high value of the parameter may indicate large snowdrifts. The three most important parameters include information on the climate in the accumulation period. The predictors may interact or correlate, and the stepwise coefficient of determination may not be achieved for each predictor separately (see Table 3). The parameter v mean is the mean wind velocity at the meteorological station in the accumulation period. During snowfalls snow is moved from area on the roof exposed to wind and deposited in more sheltered area or completely removed from the roof. Between snowfalls the snow may, in the same way, be redistributed from exposed to sheltered area. The results of high wind velocities are large snowdrifts and an increase of maximum snow loads.
Page 8 of 18
In Figure 1 calculated values using Equation (16) is compared with measured values. Some scatter occurs. This is probably due to the long distance between the observation station and the measurement sites in addition to the difficulties in making parameters reflecting the climate influences on the snow pack. The meteorological data are not continuous time series and the measurements do not record all variations in the climate (hourly data are only available for a small number of meteorological stations in Norway). Parameters reflecting local conditions in a higher degree within precipitation, temperatures and wind effects may increase the accuracy of the model. Evident correlation is also found between the observed climate and the measured maximum roof snow loads on the windward side of the roof (in kN m-2). Equation (17) is the result of the regression analysis with the five most significant parameters, i.e. the combination of five parameters from Equation (13) with highest coefficient of determination (R2). The coefficient of determination (R2) is 68 % and the standard deviation of the error is 0.18 kN m-2.
3 swindw = 0.527 + 0.208 d 7.59 103 + 0.04vmean 0.012 Pr 4.36 103 vsnow,loc
(17)
The analysis is based on 282 snow load measurements. Measurements with standardized residuals (ratio of the residuals, e i , to the standard error of estimate, S y.x ) equal an absolute value of three or above are expected to be outliers, and six such outliers have been eliminated. The standard error (SE), t-value and p-value of each regression coefficient are listed in Table 4. The parameter v snow,loc (measure of local wind velocity during snowfalls) describes the climate when snow falls. The parameter v mean (mean wind velocity) and P r (amount of rain) describe the wind climate in the whole accumulation period. In addition the snow depth d (in cm) and roof angle are important parameters. When comparing the maximum snow loads at the windward side, s windw , with the overall maximum snow load, s max , it can be seen that three of the predictors are the same: depth (d), roof angle () and mean wind velocity (v mean ). The parameter describing the temperatures during snowfalls, T snow , is replaced by another parameter indicating the temperature in the whole accumulation period, P r (amount of rain). Temperatures above freezing prevent drifting. In addition repeatedly rainfalls deteriorate the ice structure and allow drainage of water from the snow pack, i.e. reduce the loads. In addition to v mean , a parameter describing the local wind velocity during snowfall is important for the snow loads at the windward side; v snow,loc . It is a measure of the mean wind velocity during snowfalls where local topography and shielding are included. For this parameter the wind direction is of importance. In Figure 2 calculated values using Equation (17) is compared with measured values. As for the equivalent figure for maximum snow load, some scatter is observed. The local wind velocity during snowfall is found to be more significant for snow loads on the windward side than the leeward side. Very light winds and simultaneously snowfall make the snow flakes drift from the windward side. Whether the snow is transported to more sheltered area of the roof or away from the roof is strongly dependent on the roof geometry and the wind conditions on the site (for instance shielding). The parameters in this analysis do not manage to describe these effects adequately.
Page 9 of 18
5. Discussion and further work

The authors expected wind parameters to be more significant. It is very difficult to describe local wind conditions based on discontinuous data from an observation station placed several kilometres away. It is especially difficult to include the effects of local topography and shielding from other buildings in several directions. Buildings are designed for a 50 years life time. During this period changes in terrain roughness (for instance growing/removing of trees) and local shielding most likely appear. Such effects which lead to reduction of maximum snow loads on roofs may therefore be neglected. This kind of changes may also be the reason to the scatters seen in Figure 1 and 2. The presented method is developed for the time of the season with maximum snow load. In Figures 3 and 4 the model is used to illustrate accumulation of roof snow load in the period before the measurement times for two roofs which is situated respectively 3,2 km and 2,5 km from the meteorological station. Both roofs are pitched roofs. Roof no. 1 has a roof angle of 31.5 while the roof angle in roof no. 2 is 44. Figure 3 is predicted accumulation in the winter season 1967-68 while Figure 4 is the winter season 1976-77. As can be seen in Figures 3 and 4 the roof snow loads for both overall maximum snow loads and the maximum snow loads at windward side of the roofs are strongly dependent of the snow depth measured at the meteorological station. The other parameters increase or decrease the climate impacts. It can for instance be seen that high wind velocities results in larger differences in snow loads at leeward and windward sides of the roofs. In the roof snow prediction model developed by Isyumov (1971) roof snow accumulates day-by-day based on daily simulations of meteorological parameters like wind velocity, wind direction, air temperature, snow amount and snow density. The distribution (including redistribution) and melting of snow on the roof is also simulated on daily basis dependent on wind velocity, wind direction and air temperature. This model is complex and demands, for every location, the probabilistic distribution of the meteorological parameters in the model. In addition a description of the deposition and drift removal characteristics of each roof type has to be included in the model. Compared to Isyumovs model the presented model has advantages since it do not require any climate input other than the meteorological data which in Norway is free and available on the internet. The maximum loads can be calculated for simple roof types with sufficient accuracy without a day-by-day accumulation. In a longer perspective further development of Isyumovs model may results in more detailed and accurate roof snow loads. Some questions rise: Is it is possible to prescribe the nature and its randomness in a high degree? Are future changes in surroundings of a building an argument for decreased detailing of local conditions? In Norway the Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE) and the Norwegian Meteorological Institute are developing GIS-based snow maps of snow water equivalent on ground (percentage of normal, millimetres and rank) for Norway (Engeset et al., 2004). In their calculations, spatial estimation of temperature and precipitation is used in combination with observations from the Norwegian meteorological network. A snow model with 1x1 km-2 and one-day resolution is used. Maps are produced daily and presented to users by web- and GIS-based interfaces. In addition, a historical archive of daily grid data from the winter of 1962 is available (www.met.no). This model could be further developed in order to prescribe snow loads also on roofs. The method then has to be extended in order to include other climate
Page 10 of 18
parameter like for instance wind velocity and differences in deposition and redistribution for different roof geometries. Compared with the presented method this model is an advanced model which demands thorough insight in meteorology and geophysical processes. The method presented in this paper on the other hand is based on simple meteorological parameters and provide sufficiently accurate results for structural engineering purposes. The snow load measurements were done within a small area in Norway and combined with data from one meteorological station. Further work should aim at investigating the results in view of data from other parts of the country. Possible measurement uncertainties in conjunction with the used meteorological station could then be reduced. The capability of the proposed empirical formula to estimate snow loads in different climates would then also be demonstrated.
6. Conclusions
Snow load measurements performed in the period 1966 to 1986 are analysed. A clear correlation is found between observed climate and measured snow density. Multiple regression equations for prediction of overall maximum roof snow load and maximum roof snow load at windward side of the roof are developed. The analyses results are promising with a coefficient of determination for overall maximum roof snow load equal 74 % and a standard deviation of the error is 0.19 kN m-2. The coefficient of determination for maximum roof snow at windward side is 68 % and the standard deviation of the error is 0.18 kN m-2. The most significant predictor in both models is snow depth on the ground observed at the meteorological station. Roof angle and mean wind velocity at the meteorological station are also important parameters. In addition a parameter describing the temperature during snowfalls and the age of the snow cover are predictors in the model for overall maximum roof snow load. A parameter describing the local wind velocity during snowfall, where local topography and shielding in the wind direction are included, is a significant predictor for the snow loads at the windward side. In addition the amount of rain is important at the windward side of the roof. The methods presented in this paper are based on simple meteorological parameters and provide sufficiently accurate results for structural engineering purposes. Other advanced prediction models are not easily accessible for structural engineers in Norway. The models presented can be used to calculate local roof snow loads at sites where meteorological data are available. They may in a long term perspective contribute to the development of standardized roof snow loads which are adapted to local climate in a higher degree than current regulations.
Acknowledgements
This paper has been written within the ongoing SINTEF research & development programme Climate 2000 - Building Constructions in a More Severe Climate (2000 2007), strategic institute project Impact of Climate Change on the Built Environment
Page 11 of 18
(Lis et al., 2005). The authors gratefully acknowledge all construction industry partners and the Research Council of Norway. A special thanks to Professor emeritus Halvor Hib and Professor Thomas K. Thiis at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB) for allowing use of their measurements and for useful comments on the text.
References
Engeset R, Tveito OE, Alfnes E, Mengistu Z, Udns HC, Isaksen K, Frland EJ. 2004. Snow map system for Norway. In Proceedings of the XXIII Nordic Hydrological Conference, Tallinn, Estonia. European Committee for Standardization. 2003. EN 1991-1-1: Eurocode 1 Actions on structures Part 1-3: General actions Snow loads. European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium. Harstveit K. 1984. `Snowmelt modelling and energy exchange between the atmosphere and a melting snow cover` PhD thesis. University of Bergen, Geophysical Institute, Meteorological Division: Bergen, Norway. Hib H. 1988. `Snow Load on Gable Roofs - Results from Snow Load Measurements on Farm Buildings in Norway.` In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Snow Engineering, Santa Barbara, California, USA, 1988. CRREL Special Report 89-6; 95-104. International Organization for Standardization. 1998. ISO 4355 Bases for design on structures - Determination of snow loads on roofs, 2nd edn. International Organization for Standardization: Genve, Switzerland. Isymov N. 1971. `An approach to the prediction of snow loads.` PhD Thesis . The University of Western Ontario, Faculty of Graduate Studies: London, Canada. Isyumov N, Davenport. 1974. A Probabilistic Approach to the Prediction of Snow Loads. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 1(1974): 28 49. Isyumov N, Mikitiuk M. 1977. Climatology of snowfalls and related meteorological variables with application to roof snow load specifications. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 4(1977): 240 256. Lis KR, Kvande T, Thue JV. 2005. Climate 2000 - Building Enclosure Performance in a More Severe Climate. In Proceedings of the 7th Symposium on Building Physics in the Nordic Countries, Reykjavik, Iceland, 2005. The Icelandic Building Research Institute: Reykjavik, Iceland; 1195 - 1202. Melysund V, Lis KR, Hygen HO, Hiseth KV, Leira B. 2006. Effects of wind exposure on roof snow loads. Building and Environment 42(10): 37263736. Nordli . 2000. Fjellet i sn, vind, sol og tke - Dannevigs Fjellbok (in Norwegian). Det Norske Samlaget: Oslo, Norway. Skaugen T. 1998. Rapport nr. 11 Studie av skilletemperatur for sn ved hjelp av samlokalisert snpute, nedbr- og temperaturdata (in Norwegian). NVE Norges Vassdrags- og Energiverk: Oslo, Norway. Standards Norway. 2001. NS 3491-3 Design of structures - Design actions - Part 3: Snow loads (in Norwegian). Standards Norway: Oslo, Norway. Standards Norway. 2002. NS 3491-4 Design of structures - Design actions - Part 4: Wind loads (in Norwegian). Standards Norway: Oslo, Norway.
Page 12 of 18
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1956. Snow Hydrology: Summary Report of the Snow Investigations. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, North Pacific Division: Portland, Oregon, U.S.A.
Table I. Mean temperatures, mean wind velocities, total precipitation amounts and maximum snow depths in January in the area of s for the measurement period 1967 1986 and the reference period 1961 1990. Temperature Wind velocity Precipitation Snow depth Year (C) (m s-1) (mm) (cm) 1968 -7,7 1,6 33 63 1969 -3,5 1,7 93 74 1970 -8,2 1,3 24 28 1971 -2,6 1,4 56 3 1972 -6,8 1,5 19 18 1977 -5,0 1,6 70 51 1978 -2,3 2,0 54 47 1980 -7,6 1,3 24 34 1981 -3,7 1,5 13 11 1982 -9,2 1,8 24 56 1984 -5,2 2,6 89 28 1985 -9,6 1,4 41 40 1986 -7,7 2,2 62 48 1961 - 1990 -4,8 49 -
Table II. Number of snow load measurements each winter season. Total number of Number of measurements measurements with corresponding local Winter season wind parameters 1967 - 1968 100 44 1968 - 1969 115 41 1969 - 1970 150 51 1970 - 1971 6 1 1971 - 1972 35 26 1976 - 1977 70 37 1977 - 1978 53 22 1979 - 1980 10 8 1980 - 1981 3 3 1981 - 1982 29 22 1983 - 1984 6 6 1984 - 1985 13 10 1985 - 1986 18 11 Sum 608 282
Page 13 of 18
Table III. Regression coefficients for maximum roof snow loads (Eq. 16) with standard error of coefficient (SE coeff.), T-value (estimated coefficient divided on SE coefficient) and P-value (probability of obtaining a test statistic that is as least as extreme as the actual calculated value, if the null hypothesis is true). Stepwise coefficient of determination R2 (%) Predictor Coefficient SE Coeff. T P Constant -0.87 -0.1419 -6.13 0.000 0.136 9.68 10-3 14.02 48 d 0.000 T snow 3.64 10-3 2.26 10-4 16.09 0.000 57 t 2.23 10-3 1.35 10-4 -16.48 0.000 70 4.77 10-3 7.49 10-4 -6.36 72 0.000 0.733 0.1173 6.25 74 3 v mean 0.000
Table IV. Regression coefficients for maximum snow load at windward side of the roof (Eq. 17) with standard error of coefficient (SE coeff.), T-value (estimated coefficient divided on SE coefficient) and Pvalue (probability of obtaining a test statistic that is as least as extreme as the actual calculated value, if the null hypothesis is true). Stepwise coefficient Predictor Coefficient SE Coeff. T P of determination R2 (%) Constant -0.527 0.084 -6.26 0.000 0.208 0.011 19.36 28 d 0.000 -3 -4 7.59 10 9.82 10 -7.73 40 0.000 -3 3 0.04 3.24 10 12.46 51 vmean 0.000 -3 Pr -0.012 1.28 10 -9.25 0.000 63 -4.36 10-3 6.82 10-4 -6.39 68 vsnow,loc 0.000
Figure captions
Figure 1. Calculated values using the regression model for maximum roof snow load (Equation (16)) vs. observed values. Figure 2. Calculated values using the regression model for maximum snow load at windward side of the roof (Equation (17)) vs. observed values. Figure 3. Accumulation of maximum roof snow load (s_max: overall maximum using Equation (16), s_ww: maximum at windward side of roof using Equation (17)) and climate parameters observed at the meteorological station prior to the measurements in the winter season 1967 - 68 for two roofs (Hostvedt and Monsrud) in the s area. Figure 4. Accumulation of maximum roof snow load (s_max: overall maximum using Equation (16), s_ww: maximum at windward side of roof using Equation (17)) and climate parameters observed at the meteorological station prior to the measurements in the winter season 1976 - 77 for two roofs (Hostvedt and Monsrud) in the s area.
Page 14 of 18
1,8 1,6
Measured value (kN/m2)
1,4 1,2 1,0 0,8 0,6 0,4 0,2 0,0 0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0 1,2 Calculated values using eq. 16 (kN/m2) 1,4 1,6
Figure 1. Calculated values using the regression model for maximum roof snow load (Equation (16)) vs. observed values.
Page 15 of 18
1,6 1,4
Measured values (kN/m2)
1,2 1,0 0,8 0,6 0,4 0,2 0,0 0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0 Calculated values using Eq. 17 (kN/m2) 1,2 1,4
Figure 2. Calculated values using the regression model for maximum snow load at windward side of the roof (Equation (17)) vs. observed values.
Page 16 of 18
1,40
Snow load (kN m-2) Snow depth (m)
1,20
1,00
s_max_roof1 s_max_roof2 s_ww_roof1 s_ww_roof2 Snow depth
0,80
0,60
0,40
0,20 33 53 73 93 113 133 153 173 Age (no. of observations)
15
Precipitation (mm), temp (deg.), wind (m s-1)
10 5 0 33 -5 -10 -15 -20 -25 Age (no. of observations) 53 73 93 113 133 153 173 Wind Precipitation Temperature
Figure 3. Accumulation of maximum roof snow load (s_max: overall maximum using Equation (16), s_ww: maximum at windward side of roof using Equation (17)) and climate parameters observed at the meteorological station prior to the measurements in the winter season 1967 - 68 for two roofs (Hostvedt and Monsrud) in the s area.
Page 17 of 18
0,90 0,80
Snow load (kN m-2) Snow depth (m)
0,70 0,60 0,50 0,40 0,30 0,20 0,10 0,00 129 s_max_roof1 s_ww_roof1 s_max_roof2 s_ww_roof2 Snow depth
179
229 Age (no. of observations)
279
15
Precipitation (mm), temp (deg.), wind (m s-1)
10 5 0 129 -5 -10 -15 -20 -25 Age (no. of observations)
179
229
279
Wind Precipitation Temperature
Figure 4. Accumulation of maximum roof snow load (s_max: overall maximum using Equation (16), s_ww: maximum at windward side of roof using Equation (17)) and climate parameters observed at the meteorological station prior to the measurements in the winter season 1976 - 77 for two roofs (Hostvedt and Monsrud) in the s area.
Page 18 of 18
DEPARTMENT OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY N7491 TRONDHEIM, NORWAY Telephone: +47 73 59 47 00 Telefax: +47 73 59 47 01
"Reliability Analysis of Structural Systems using Nonlinear Finite Element Methods", C. A. Holm, 1990:23, ISBN 82-7119-178-0. "Uniform Stratified Flow Interaction with a Submerged Horizontal Cylinder", . Arntsen, 1990:32, ISBN 82-7119-188-8. "Large Displacement Analysis of Flexible and Rigid Systems Considering Displacement-Dependent Loads and Nonlinear Constraints", K. M. Mathisen, 1990:33, ISBN 82-7119-189-6. "Solid Mechanics and Material Models including Large Deformations", E. Levold, 1990:56, ISBN 82-7119-214-0, ISSN 0802-3271. "Inelastic Deformation Capacity of Flexurally-Loaded Aluminium Alloy Structures", T. Welo, 1990:62, ISBN 82-7119-220-5, ISSN 0802-3271. "Visualization of Results from Mechanical Engineering Analysis", K. Aamnes, 1990:63, ISBN 82-7119-221-3, ISSN 0802-3271. "Object-Oriented Product Modeling for Structural Design", S. I. Dale, 1991:6, ISBN 82-7119-258-2, ISSN 0802-3271. "Parallel Techniques for Solving Finite Element Problems on Transputer Networks", T. H. Hansen, 1991:19, ISBN 82-7119-273-6, ISSN 0802-3271. "Statistical Description and Estimation of Ocean Drift Ice Environments", R. Korsnes, 1991:24, ISBN 82-7119-278-7, ISSN 0802-3271. Properties of concrete related to fatigue damage: with emphasis on high strength concrete, G. Petkovic, 1991:35, ISBN 82-7119-290-6, ISSN 0802-3271. "Turbidity Current Modelling", B. Brrs, 1991:38, ISBN 82-7119-293-0, ISSN 0802-3271. "Zero-Slump Concrete: Rheology, Degree of Compaction and Strength. Effects of Fillers as Part Cement-Replacement", C. Srensen, 1992:8, ISBN 82-7119-357-0, ISSN 0802-3271. "Nonlinear Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Structures Exposed to Transient Loading", K. V. Hiseth, 1992:15, ISBN 82-7119-364-3, ISSN 0802-3271. 1
"Finite Element Formulations and Solution Algorithms for Buckling and Collapse Analysis of Thin Shells", R. O. Bjrum, 1992:30, ISBN 82-7119-380-5, ISSN 0802-3271. "Response Statistics of Nonlinear Dynamic Systems", J. M. Johnsen, 1992:42, ISBN 82-7119-393-7, ISSN 0802-3271. "Digital Models in Engineering. A Study on why and how engineers build and operate digital models for decisison support", J. Hyte, 1992:75, ISBN 82-7119-429-1, ISSN 0802-3271. "Sparse Solution of Finite Element Equations", A. C. Damhaug, 1992:76, ISBN 82-7119-430-5, ISSN 0802-3271. "Some Aspects of Floating Ice Related to Sea Surface Operations in the Barents Sea", S. Lset, 1992:95, ISBN 82-7119-452-6, ISSN 0802-3271. "Modelling of Cyclic Plasticity with Application to Steel and Aluminium Structures", O. S. Hopperstad, 1993:7, ISBN 82-7119-461-5, ISSN 0802-3271. "The Free Formulation: Linear Theory and Extensions with Applications to Tetrahedral Elements with Rotational Freedoms", G. Skeie, 1993:17, ISBN 82-7119-472-0, ISSN 0802-3271. "Hyfast betongs motstand mot piggdekkslitasje. Analyse av resultater fra prving i Veisliter'n", T. Tveter, 1993:62, ISBN 82-7119-522-0, ISSN 0802-3271. "A Nonlinear Finite Element Based on Free Formulation Theory for Analysis of Sandwich Structures", O. Aamlid, 1993:72, ISBN 82-7119-534-4, ISSN 0802-3271. "The Effect of Curing Temperature and Silica Fume on Chloride Migration and Pore Structure of High Strength Concrete", C. J. Hauck, 1993:90, ISBN 82-7119-553-0, ISSN 0802-3271. "Failure of Concrete under Compressive Strain Gradients", G. Markeset, 1993:110, ISBN 82-7119-575-1, ISSN 0802-3271. "An experimental study of internal tidal amphidromes in Vestfjorden", J. H. Nilsen, 1994:39, ISBN 82-7119-640-5, ISSN 0802-3271. "Structural analysis of oil wells with emphasis on conductor design", H. Larsen, 1994:46, ISBN 82-7119-648-0, ISSN 0802-3271. "Adaptive methods for non-linear finite element analysis of shell structures", K. M. Okstad, 1994:66, ISBN 82-7119-670-7, ISSN 0802-3271.
"On constitutive modelling in nonlinear analysis of concrete structures", O. Fyrileiv, 1994:115, ISBN 82-7119-725-8, ISSN 0802-3271. "Fluctuating wind load and response of a line-like engineering structure with emphasis on motion-induced wind forces", J. Bogunovic Jakobsen, 1995:62, ISBN 82-7119-809-2, ISSN 0802-3271. "An experimental study of beam-columns subjected to combined torsion, bending and axial actions", A. Aalberg, 1995:66, ISBN 82-7119-813-0, ISSN 0802-3271. "Scaling and cracking in unsealed freeze/thaw testing of Portland cement and silica fume concretes", S. Jacobsen, 1995:101, ISBN 82-7119-851-3, ISSN 0802-3271. "Damping of water waves by submerged vegetation. A case study of laminaria hyperborea", A. M. Dubi, 1995:108, ISBN 82-7119-859-9, ISSN 0802-3271. "The dynamics of a slope current in the Barents Sea", Sheng Li, 1995:109, ISBN 82-7119-860-2, ISSN 0802-3271. "Modellering av delmaterialenes betydning for betongens konsistens", Ernst Mrtsell, 1996:12, ISBN 82-7119-894-7, ISSN 0802-3271. "Bending of thin-walled aluminium extrusions", Birgit Svik Opheim, 1996:60, ISBN 82-7119-947-1, ISSN 0802-3271. "Material modelling of aluminium for crashworthiness analysis", Torodd Berstad, 1996:89, ISBN 82-7119-980-3, ISSN 0802-3271. "Estimation of structural parameters from response measurements on submerged floating tunnels", Rolf Magne Larssen, 1996:119, ISBN 82-471-0014-2, ISSN 0802-3271. Numerical modelling of plain and reinforced concrete by damage mechanics, Mario A. Polanco-Loria, 1997:20, ISBN 82-471-0049-5, ISSN 0802-3271. Nonlinear random vibrations - numerical analysis by path integration methods, Vibeke Moe, 1997:26, ISBN 82-471-0056-8, ISSN 0802-3271. Numerical prediction of vortex-induced vibration by the finite element method, Joar Martin Dalheim, 1997:63, ISBN 82-471-0096-7, ISSN 0802-3271. Time domain calculations of buffeting response for wind sensitive structures, Ketil Aas-Jakobsen, 1997:148, ISBN 82-471-0189-0, ISSN 0802-3271. "A numerical study of flow about fixed and flexibly mounted circular cylinders", Trond Stokka Meling, 1998:48, ISBN 82-471-0244-7, ISSN 0802-3271.
Estimation of chloride penetration into concrete bridges in coastal areas, Per Egil Steen, 1998:89, ISBN 82-471-0290-0, ISSN 0802-3271. Stress-resultant material models for reinforced concrete plates and shells, Jan Arve verli, 1998:95, ISBN 82-471-0297-8, ISSN 0802-3271. Chloride binding in concrete. Effect of surrounding environment and concrete composition, Claus Kenneth Larsen, 1998:101, ISBN 82-471-0337-0, ISSN 0802-3271. Rotational capacity of aluminium alloy beams, Lars A. Moen, 1999:1, ISBN 82-471-0365-6, ISSN 0802-3271. Stretch Bending of Aluminium Extrusions, Arild H. Clausen, 1999:29, ISBN 82-471-0396-6, ISSN 0802-3271. Aluminium and Steel Beams under Concentrated Loading, Tore Tryland, 1999:30, ISBN 82-471-0397-4, ISSN 0802-3271. "Engineering Models of Elastoplasticity and Fracture for Aluminium Alloys", Odd-Geir Lademo, 1999:39, ISBN 82-471-0406-7, ISSN 0802-3271. "Kapasitet og duktilitet av dybelforbindelser i trekonstruksjoner", Jan Siem, 1999:46, ISBN 82-471-0414-8, ISSN 0802-3271. Etablering av distribuert ingenirarbeid; Teknologiske og organisatoriske erfaringer fra en norsk ingenirbedrift, Lars Line, 1999:52, ISBN 82-471-0420-2, ISSN 0802-3271. Estimation of Earthquake-Induced Response, Smon lafsson, 1999:73, ISBN 82-471-0443-1, ISSN 0802-3271. Coastal Concrete Bridges: Moisture State, Chloride Permeability and Aging Effects Ragnhild Holen Relling, 1999:74, ISBN 82-471-0445-8, ISSN 0802-3271. Capacity Assessment of Titanium Pipes Subjected to Bending and External Pressure, Arve Bjrset, 1999:100, ISBN 82-471-0473-3, ISSN 0802-3271. Validation of Numerical Collapse Behaviour of Thin-Walled Corrugated Panels, Hvar Ilstad, 1999:101, ISBN 82-471-0474-1, ISSN 0802-3271. Strength and Ductility of Welded Structures in Aluminium Alloys, Miroslaw Matusiak, 1999:113, ISBN 82-471-0487-3, ISSN 0802-3271. Thermal Dilation and Autogenous Deformation as Driving Forces to Self-Induced Stresses in High Performance Concrete, yvind Bjntegaard, 1999:121, ISBN 82-7984-002-8, ISSN 0802-3271.
Some Aspects of Ski Base Sliding Friction and Ski Base Structure, Dag Anders Moldestad, 1999:137, ISBN 82-7984-019-2, ISSN 0802-3271. "Electrode reactions and corrosion resistance for steel in mortar and concrete", Roy Antonsen, 2000:10, ISBN 82-7984-030-3, ISSN 0802-3271. "Hydro-Physical Conditions in Kelp Forests and the Effect on Wave Damping and Dune Erosion. A case study on Laminaria Hyperborea", Stig Magnar Lvs, 2000:28, ISBN 82-7984-050-8, ISSN 0802-3271. "Random Vibration and the Path Integral Method", Christian Skaug, 2000:39, ISBN 82-7984-061-3, ISSN 0802-3271. "Buckling and geometrical nonlinear beam-type analyses of timber structures", Trond Even Eggen, 2000:56, ISBN 82-7984-081-8, ISSN 0802-3271. Structural Crashworthiness of Aluminium Foam-Based Components, Arve Grnsund Hanssen, 2000:76, ISBN 82-7984-102-4, ISSN 0809-103X. Measurements and simulations of the consolidation in first-year sea ice ridges, and some aspects of mechanical behaviour, Knut V. Hyland, 2000:94, ISBN 82-7984-121-0, ISSN 0809-103X. Kinematics in Regular and Irregular Waves based on a Lagrangian Formulation, Svein Helge Gjsund, 2000-86, ISBN 82-7984-112-1, ISSN 0809-103X. Self-Induced Cracking Problems in Hardening Concrete Structures, Daniela Bosnjak, 2000-121, ISBN 82-7984-151-2, ISSN 0809-103X. "Ballistic Penetration and Perforation of Steel Plates", Tore Brvik, 2000:124, ISBN 82-7984-154-7, ISSN 0809-103X. "Freeze-Thaw resistance of Concrete. Effect of: Curing Conditions, Moisture Exchange and Materials", Terje Finnerup Rnning, 2001:14, ISBN 82-7984-165-2, ISSN 0809-103X Structural behaviour of post tensioned concrete structures. Flat slab. Slabs on ground", Steinar Trygstad, 2001:52, ISBN 82-471-5314-9, ISSN 0809-103X. "Slipforming of Vertical Concrete Structures. Friction between concrete and slipform panel", Kjell Tore Foss, 2001:61, ISBN 82-471-5325-4, ISSN 0809-103X. "Some numerical methods for the simulation of laminar and turbulent incompressible flows", Jens Holmen, 2002:6, ISBN 82-471-5396-3, ISSN 0809-103X. Improved Fatigue Performance of Threaded Drillstring Connections by Cold Rolling, Steinar Kristoffersen, 2002:11, ISBN: 82-421-5402-1, ISSN 0809-103X.
"Deformations in Concrete Cantilever Bridges: Observations and Theoretical Modelling", Peter F. Takcs, 2002:23, ISBN 82-471-5415-3, ISSN 0809-103X. "Stiffened aluminium plates subjected to impact loading", Hilde Giver Hildrum, 2002:69, ISBN 82-471-5467-6, ISSN 0809-103X. "Full- and model scale study of wind effects on a medium-rise building in a built up area", Jnas Thr Snbjrnsson, 2002:95, ISBN82-471-5495-1, ISSN 0809-103X. Evaluation of Concepts for Loading of Hydrocarbons in Ice-infested water, Arnor Jensen, 2002:114, ISBN 82-417-5506-0, ISSN 0809-103X. Numerical and Physical Modelling of Oil Spreading in Broken Ice, Janne K. kland Gjsteen, 2002:130, ISBN 82-471-5523-0, ISSN 0809-103X. Diagnosis and protection of corroding steel in concrete, Franz Pruckner, 20002:140, ISBN 82-471-5555-4, ISSN 0809-103X. Tensile and Compressive Creep of Young Concrete: Testing and Modelling, Dawood Atrushi, 2003:17, ISBN 82-471-5565-6, ISSN 0809-103X. Rheology of Particle Suspensions. Fresh Concrete, Mortar and Cement Paste with Various Types of Lignosulfonates, Jon Elvar Wallevik, 2003:18, ISBN 82-471-5566-4, ISSN 0809-103X. Oblique Loading of Aluminium Crash Components, Aase Reyes, 2003:15, ISBN 82-471-5562-1, ISSN 0809-103X. Utilization of Ethiopian Natural Pozzolans, Surafel Ketema Desta, 2003:26, ISSN 82-471-5574-5, ISSN:0809-103X. Behaviour and strength prediction of reinforced concrete structures with discontinuity regions, Helge Br, 2004:11, ISBN 82-471-6222-9, ISSN 1503-8181. High-strength steel plates subjected to projectile impact. An experimental and numerical study, Sumita Dey, 2004:38, ISBN 82-471-6282-2 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-6281-4 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Alkali-reactive and inert fillers in concrete. Rheology of fresh mixtures and expansive reactions. Brd M. Pedersen, 2004:92, ISBN 82-471-6401-9 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-6400-0 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. On the Shear Capacity of Steel Girders with Large Web Openings. Nils Christian Hagen, 2005:9 ISBN 82-471-6878-2 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-6877-4 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181.
Behaviour of aluminium extrusions subjected to axial loading. sten Jensen, 2005:7, ISBN 82-471-6873-1 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-6872-3 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Thermal Aspects of corrosion of Steel in Concrete. Jan-Magnus stvik, 2005:5, ISBN 82-471-6869-3 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-6868 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Mechanical and adaptive behaviour of bone in relation to hip replacement. A study of bone remodelling and bone grafting. Sbastien Muller, 2005:34, ISBN 82-471-6933-9 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-6932-0 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Analysis of geometrical nonlinearities with applications to timber structures. Lars Wollebk, 2005:74, ISBN 82-471-7050-5 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-7019-1 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Pedestrian induced lateral vibrations of slender footbridges, Anders Rnnquist, 2005:102, ISBN 82-471-7082-5 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-7081-7 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Initial Strength Development of Fly Ash and Limestone Blended Cements at Various Temperatures Predicted by Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity, Tom Ivar Fredvik, 2005:112, ISBN 82-471-7105-8 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-7103-1 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Behaviour and modelling of thin-walled cast components, Cato Drum, 2005:128, ISBN 82-471-7140-6 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-7139-2 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Behaviour and modelling of selfpiercing riveted connections, Raffaele Porcaro, 2005:165, ISBN 82-471-7219-4 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-7218-6 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Behaviour and Modelling og Aluminium Plates subjected to Compressive Load, Lars Rnning, 2005:154, ISBN 82-471-7169-1 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-7195-3 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Bumper beam-longitudinal system subjected to offset impact loading, Satyanarayana Kokkula, 2005:193, ISBN 82-471-7280-1 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-7279-8 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Control of Chloride Penetration into Concrete Structures at Early Age, Guofei Liu, 2006:46, ISBN 82-471-7838-9 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-7837-0 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181.
Modelling of Welded Thin-Walled Aluminium Structures, Ting Wang, 2006:78, ISBN 82-471-7907-5 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-7906-7 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Time-variant reliability of dynamic systems by importance sampling and probabilistic analysis of ice loads, Anna Ivanova Olsen, 2006:139, ISBN 82-471-8041-3 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-8040-5 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Fatigue life prediction of an aluminium alloy automotive component using finite element analysis of surface topography. Sigmund Kyrre s, 2006:25, ISBN 82-471-7791-9 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-7791-9 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Constitutive models of elastoplasticity and fracture for aluminium alloys under strain path change, Dasharatha Achani, 2006:76, ISBN 82-471-7903-2 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-7902-4 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Simulations of 2D dynamic brittle fracture by the Element-free Galerkin method and linear fracture mechanics, Tommy Karlsson, 2006:125, ISBN 82-471-8011-1 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-8010-3 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Penetration and Perforation of Granite Targets by Hard Projectiles, Chong Chiang Seah, 2006:188, ISBN 82-471-8150-9 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-8149-5 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Deformations, strain capacity and cracking of concrete in plastic and early hardening phases, Tor Arne Hammer, 2007:234, ISBN 978-82-471-5191-4 (printed version), ISBN 978-82-471-52072 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Crashworthiness of dual-phase high-strength steel: Material and Component behaviour, Venkatapathi Tarigopula, 2007:230, ISBN 82-471-5076-4 (printed version), ISBN 82-471-5093-1 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Fibre reinforcement in load carrying concrete structures, se Lyslo Dssland, 2008:50, ISBN 978-82-471-6910-0 (printed version), ISBN 978-82-471-69247 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Low-velocity penetration of aluminium plates, Frode Grytten, 2008:46, ISBN 978-82-471-6826-4 (printed version), ISBN 978-82-471-6843-1 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Robustness studies of structures subjected to large deformations, rjan Fyllingen, 2008:24, ISBN 978-82-471-6339-9 (printed version), ISBN 978-82-471-6342-9 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181.
Constitutive modelling of morsellised bone, Knut Birger Lunde, 2008:92, ISBN 978-82-471-7829-4 (printed version), ISBN 978-82-471-7832-4 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Experimental Investigations of Wind Loading on a Suspension Bridge Girder, Bjrn Isaksen, 2008:131, ISBN 978-82-471-8656-5 (printed version), ISBN 978-82-471-8673-2 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Cracking Risk of Concrete Structures in The Hardening Phase, Guomin Ji, 2008:198, ISBN 978-82-471-1079-9 (printed version), ISBN 978-82-471-1080-5 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Modelling and numerical analysis of the porcine and human mitral apparatus, Victorien Emile Prot, 2008:249, ISBN 978-82-471-1192-5 (printed version), ISBN 978-82-4711193-2 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Strength analysis of net structures, Heidi Moe, 2009:48, ISBN 978-82-471-1468-1 (printed version), ISBN 978-82-471-1469-8 (electronic version), ISSN1503-8181. Numerical analysis of ductile fracture in surface cracked shells, Espen Berg, 2009:80, ISBN 978-82-471-1537-4 (printed version), ISBN 978-82-471-1538-1 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Subject specific finite element analysis of bone for evaluation of the healing of a leg lengthening and evaluation of femoral stem design, Sune Hansborg Pettersen, 2009:99, ISBN 978-82-471-1579-4 (printed version), ISBN 978-82-4711580-0 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Evaluation of fracture parameters for notched multi-layered structures, Lingyun Shang, 2009:137, ISBN 978-82-471-1662-3 (printed version), ISBN 978-82-471-1663-0 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Modelling of Dynamic Material Behaviour and Fracture of Aluminium Alloys for Structural Applications Yan Chen, 2009:69, ISBN 978-82-471-1515-2 (printed version), ISBN 978-82 471-1516-9 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Nanomechanics of polymer and composite particles Jianying He 2009:213, ISBN 978-82-471-1828-3 (printed version), ISBN 978-82-471-1829-0 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Mechanical properties of clear wood from Norway spruce Kristian Berbom Dahl 2009:250, ISBN 978-82-471-1911-2 (printed version) ISBN 978-82-4711912-9 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181.
Modeling of the degradation of TiB2 mechanical properties by residual stresses and liquid Al penetration along grain boundaries Micol Pezzotta 2009:254, ISBN 978-82-471-1923-5 (printed version) ISBN 978-82-471-1924-2 (electronic version) ISSN 1503-8181. Effect of welding residual stress on fracture Xiabo Ren 2010:77, ISBN 978-82-471-2115-3 (printed version) ISBN 978-82-471-2116-0 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Pan-based carbon fiber as anode material in cathodic protection system for concrete structures Mahdi Chini 2010:122, ISBN 978-82-471-2210-5 (printed version) ISBN 978-82-471-2213-6 (electronic version), ISSN 1503-8181. Structural Behaviour of deteriorated and retrofitted concrete structures Irina Vasililjeva Sther 2010:171, ISBN 978-82-471-2315-7 (printed version) ISBN 978-82-471-2316-4 (electronic version) ISSN 1503-8181.
10

Prediction of Local Snow Loads On Roofs

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Prediction of Local Snow Loads On Roofs

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Printed by Tapir Uttrykk, Trondheim, Norway 2010.

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Part A Structural safety and reliability

Part B Analyses of current design rules

Part C Methods for improved calculation of roof snow loads

These papers will be referred to by their Roman numerals.

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

1.2 Purpose and objectives

1.3 The winter climate in Norway

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Figure 1 Map of Norway

1.4 Wind and snow loads on roofs

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Figure 3 Wind profile (Dyrbye and Hansen 1997)

The mean wind profile can be expressed by a logarithmic expression:

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Mono pitched roofs

Duo pitched roofs

Area with increased wind loads

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Figure 7 Snow transport (Norem 1974, based on Mellor 1965)

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Figure 8 Wind tunnel experiments (Commission of the European Communities 1999)

Figure 9 Load components of sliding snow (Taylor 1983)

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

1.5 Building regulations and design standards

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

1.6 Structural safety

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Table 2 Cases of collapse as a result of major snow loads

1971 1965 1970 1990* 1978/ 1996*

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

2.1 Introduction and methodology

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

2.2 Part A: Structural safety and reliability

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

2.3 Part B: Analyses of current design rules

Economical effects of reduced roof snow loads (Paper III)

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

2.4 Part C: Methods for improved calculation of roof snow loads

Melysund, V./ Prediction of local snow loads on roofs

Predicting roof snow loads using meteorological data (Paper V)