aus Modern aircraft hangars: A review of the design trends Synopsis ‘The design, construction and operation ofan efficient aera. maintenance hangar probably represents the largest and most important single investment mace by an-akraft ‘operator with regard to aireratt support series. At the heart of ths is the design process whieh, when executed propery, duces the one-off ost of construction and optimises the ‘ongoing organisational and maintenance cots. The design so can be challenging do the requraments of long clear spans, the necessary provision for substantial loads to be suspended from the roof, sport restrictions on building height and the uncetainty imposed by the need to cater for progressively largor aircraft. This paper reviews over 20 165m Alternative single bay hangar layouts Fig 6. (bottom) Alternative nangar roof profes Hangar vsage Ranga buldings have traditionally been rectangular and framed in many ways to generate a simple bullding plan. -ovever some have adopted the tight minima ftprint or “tlangular shape to minimise land-take and building costs Refer othe alternative hangar fotprint arrangements at ‘ated in Fig 4)-The approach can reduce the building volume bby as much as 25% and consequently heating costs. Mining ‘he building feosprint will also mean thatthe available spe for Storage and wing tip clearances will bo reduced. This aspact ‘must be investigated with the operatae to determine the effect, fon circulation of personnel end material flow throvgh the hangar Unless the extemal site conetrints dictate ctherwise, ‘ho eset ofa largor hangar fxiprin ean be offset by improving the efcieney ofthe sicratmintenancecyele to minim the Joasin revenue. Stepped fat roof ‘Theairraf parked postions depend onthe operator's preferred rethod ofmaintenanc which wil dictate whether the aircraft fs talbi ornoeei oF whether flexibly fr each ie require, ‘The choie of oo type should theafore he reviewed on each rae to determine the optima frm Typical roof praia are ‘lustrated in Fig outlining atypical stepped arrangement and ‘afat roof Clearly the profled raf esti large sireraft tothe ‘nose-n* position, but by reducing the building volume the heating or cooling exes wll also bo reduced substantially. ‘Flateostructures tend tobemore popular in warm cimatos, where heatings not an seus and dears are open continueusly ‘Thilo allows grater ueage ofthe hangar plan by mixing tll- int andnoeen'airerafy The resulant hangar width ie recod by overlopping the wing zones and aeceptng that eoquencng of the aircraft movement wil be necaesary (oa Fig 6A Hat rot strueaye wl lo alow a drive-through configuration which i ‘oneal to casualty hangars where minor maintenance is undertaken an thealreraft are parks for short perio atime, ‘igs shows the British Airway’ drive through ensuslty hangar st Heathrow airport, which ea mulibay hangar, 100m 10023 in plan, with 2.5m high folding dors and has ben operational Sinoe 1971 ‘When cnsieringthe form of thereof itil lsobenecessary to caablch the impact on the structural yolution due to the Arsinage requirements. Bxtesive rf arens il require large utters, which are usually best placed a the hangar primer Th achiews the slopes required, the structure can be icine to fallow the roofline If thebrtam boom remains orion then suspended equipment or crane rilscan be ennectd dre to the structure. This arrangement is used successfull in many bbangars Tho alkernative io adopt paalle! boom snd icine the trstes to flow the rot profile. With this sarangement, suspended equipment must be supported on varying height racks ‘Suspended equipment Overhead eranes and other equipment i usually suspended fiom the roof structure inthe majority of hangars. For long spane this euperimpoced lad ean be significant and mt be ‘assessed soeurately at the enmmencement ofthe design. ‘Thecrane iting capacity wll vary or diferent aircaf types butts now common fr mul-brdge 15teranes tobe providedwith the capability of tandem lifting The equipment and rail Joads can usually be represented by @ uniformly distebuted load of O25KPa for the development of the gencral fame cnnoxpt, These loads aro more effiiently carved by sharing. ‘thom over a numberof main ref members by ineuding verti= cal bracing to create partial wo way distribution of the led ‘Alrera docking strictures are the main sourve of lading ‘which is freqsenty suspended fromthe hangar root in onder to ‘provide multilevel sess: to te areraf tll and fussage, The Jade from these structures are considerable aan way fom 40 © 1508 The tal docking, shown in Fig 7, provides a evel platform arrangement to accese a 2747 tall etructure and ‘weighs 150¢ including an allowance of for personnel acces, "These lads wil vary depending onthe operational sophisti tion and sive of sirrat to be docked. Such structures must therefore be identified early in the design process to ensure aloquae sith ofthe roof strate singe movement between the airerat and the sees dosking ie an important consdera- Fig. British Airways ‘Maintenance Caraitf, tail and fuselage suspended access docking Fig 8. (below) Aeroflot Hangar, Shannon Airport with ‘overrun door frame Fig. right) British Airways Maintenance Cari, 3 bay hangar with nine 25m wide sla ‘doors, Cari Wales International Airport Exess tion. Usually suspanded equipment imposes a more stringent Tieton rofdefletion than woul be normal, inorder to prevent the platform edges impacting on the sides of the traf. This aspect eritial with regard tothe fatelage design, where mult level working platforms usually touch the aircraft skin shove and below the curved ees of the aire. Hangar doors Door heights vary dopending on the oirraf tail height and presently the highest in sonic isthe Heeing 747-00 series aircraft at 19.6, Predictions forthe New Largor Alrerafe ail height range upto 25m. ‘The design and operational aspects of hangar dears ean vary considerably however, they arealmast always flor supported on ‘xed ral and only require lateral restraint at door head, this ‘is usually provided bya roller mechanism. Alternatively, there are fabri dots, which fl vertically and need to be supported by an overhead door structure. ‘Single bay hangars will require an oversun on one or both sides of ho hangar ta allow full pening ofthe doors and unob- structed aircaft movement (eee Fig 8). On large multichay hangars doors can be contain on multirails between gable ends (ce Fig 9) An altzmative to bath ofthese systems i {ncude a sliding, multipanel door which can be rtcctad on a ‘ingle ral placed lose otha side walls, ‘The char door opening height for 2 BT47 ie normally not lower than 21.5m and the door thickness will be between 500mm and 70Gmn, depending onthe panel width and wind Joading characteristics. Dor panel widths vary considerably f a oo | from about dm up to Tin according to the acess Oexbiity required. or example, the Bris Airways Maintenance Cardi (BAMO, Uaree-baybeavy maintenance hangar at Cari Wales Airport has nine doors over three area bays (se ig 9) each door being approximately 25m wide and placed on thre rails whic llaws upto tw fullbas tobe accssed at any time Other hangars however, have neluded full hangar bay with dears up. to 75m wide Some doors incu personnel acoss at low level and an amount of glazing to allow natural lighting into the hhangorThisieilluctrted on the BAM hangar which init the total lazing onthe doors to approximately 11%, The preferred oor system must be ectablehel at the cape opportunity ‘hedesig prosass to dentiy the impacton the main structure. lexbitity for anger adaption ‘The fleubilty to modify or extend a hangar may nover be required, but with aircraft sizes and maintenance procedures being’ updated continuouely, the hangar layout will almost Inevitably cbange duving the life ofthe building Developing 2 design conceptto allow fr change ned ot place any constraints ‘on the building design, bt if the requirements. are identified carly inthe progess then the requirements can usualy be incor porated ata lower east. Fire ystems Fire prezeston measure aro normaly cover by cal ul {ng codes and often a hanger an be identified asa single-storey building requiring no special measures. However, it is more usual thealines to ignpose thir own standardsto minimise aireratisuranas. snd thie may require active fre suppression systems tbe installed, ‘Stems fr dedicated airera postions ean be Noor mounted although itis more common for an overhead dehuge to bo ‘included, Th resulting pipework impose significant loads on {August 2002 ~The Structural Engineer|25| i Table 7 Stepped and fat oof singe bay hangars ‘weaion ~complaed 5 ‘ase Pla Fern gh my gt tao Stow HT samsTCaR aan stejpedron 5 ‘sation 685 anxTinep BE steppe nt >; 8s a & Ba raw Mines Ue sapere TET aaa S| a re, Use (aver) Fig 10. (above) ‘Aeroflot hangar, Moscow Fig 14 (ett) Bish Airways ‘hangar, Manchester (Proto courtesy of ‘hereof aswell as requiring considerable water storageoutsde | Booth Doors) the hangar. The design parameters forthe protection systems are often taken from the US National Fire Protection (NFP) ‘8409 Standard, ‘As an example ofa typiel application, the fie protection system inthe BAMC three-bay hangar at Cardiff Wales alrport ‘comprised an overhesl deluge sytem placa long the ine of each airerat fuselage, combined with sx foam cannons dedi- fated to each bay. Normal bulbed sprinklers protected atess below and directly above the mezzanine Door This was a Tre ‘engineered installation’ designed to achieve optimum perform- ‘ance whilst minimisingeast and space demands fr pump roams ‘nd water storage tars, Ibrespetion of whether an enginoored or ill overhead deliage syste installed hore wll ba requirement er a vartial po Table 2 Stepped and fat roof malt ay Fangars “eaten Competed Spank Daan Farm weston Spon oar ahr) ight) 2 hing 2 150m 10m a a a ‘pond ie Ls nich 2. Gey ~aRaC Gia 158 sTI8IH| ——“ es" 30m 072039) spp er Bom aC TRS pn —— 26|The Stucturol Engineer 6 August 2002 Dank and distribution runs of main supply pipes through the rot Generally the loading i small, round 0.15KPs, bat in concentrated pipe hanks loads can reach 5kNim or higher over ‘arlatively lanyebandwidth. Lazdings will depend on Uhovalve oom position relative to the hangar bays and the avaliable space fr pip work distribution, "TheNFP AdD'stansard also suggests that ho vertical srue ture is tobe protacted by pasive or watercoling systems In ‘Burope & Asia such applications are usually neutralised hy fre engineering the installations and targeting the sirrafepol- ‘lone with deluge andlor foam cannons, Where workshop i attached diet to the hangar, separation is nenssary and it ‘is usual to provide a firewall to provide 90 minutes protection, ‘Structural tems Theat ofthe see! frame canbe as much as 20% of the ests of the entre projet, so tie vital that the structural slution ‘provides the minimum overall buildingst, taking nto acaunt feretin ani temporary works. Hangar arolargo impressive buildings and they are seldom similar, although the structural solutions ean be categorised into number of relate families, as oulined below: primary and scondary ginder systems space framee ‘antlevered ref structures chad structures cable stayed ‘Thee categories have been established flloing an extensive erature review and sce eositent with observations mage by Wiallin in a paper prepared fer the 1989 Airport Forum! ‘In ener fo achieve economy of material using these proven ‘slutions,t would be reasonable to expect some standardisation btwn hangs within ech group. However, this seems no to be tho cace and it may be duet the fact that the visual impact And operational approach requis by each airline is usually ‘iret. Primary examples of maintenance hangars which illustrate the aplication ofthe structural aystemsdentife, ae seb below Primary and secondary girder systems ~ singlebay ‘hangars:The hangars summarised in Table 1 are of a sina ‘orm and cover stepped ad Mat woof structures, "Thamsin feature oftheachangars that they al awe ata aly spanning trusses ‘The Ae‘Rianta hangar at Shannon Airport was designed sing dg trusses and took only 9 moths to complete trom {he start design tend of eonstrtion The AerRianta hang |n Masco although slightly larger, adopted the cama standard ‘orm. These tw hangars are shown in igs 8 and 10. "The British Airways hana alco has a steppe reat the building fstprinthos been reduce by incorporating a’noc in’ bx, approximately 30m x 20m deop atthe var and the doar height rsluced by incorporating atl st (ne Fig 1. "The United Arlnes hangar ses afl roo and incorporates tose ofbangar doors to allow adrivethrough arrangement. "Thestablty ofthese singebay structures is usually provided by diagonal bracing placed in the sidewalle and roof or by ‘moment frames The average weightof the structural tel used in thes structures hos been estimated using the information contsined inthe technical papers tobebebwoen 70 and Sky Primary and secondary girder systems ~ multsbay ‘hangars: The hangars in Table 2 incorporate a large fsa gnder above the hongar doors fr theft ref structures and a Sine girder at. the change nieve nthe atepped rea hangars, "The dan Sits (see Fig 12) and Lufthansa hangars have & similar at ef arrangement but the later uses. deep fia ner with wcoelary memlsrs which span to the back ofthe hangar ‘oth the BAMC and Aer Lingus hangars have a stepped eof, ‘frm principally adopeed to ptinieavalumse and heatingests.