Pre-Engineered Metal Buildings:
Advantages and Disadvantages
By Jon A. Schmidt, P.E., and
Ronald L. Younker, P.E.
Owners traditionally hire engineering
consulting firms to provide design
services and contractors to provide
construction services.
While this statement may seem self-
evident, anyone familiar with the cur-
rent climate in the design and con-
Many structural engi- struction industry realizes that the line
between these two phases has been
neers are expediting blurred, and in some cases obliterated.
the preparation of This is due not only to the emergence
of the design-build project delivery
method, but also to the compression
contract documents for of schedules even in traditional
design-bid-build arrangements.
bidding by requiring Clients want their projects faster and
cheaper, without sacrificing quality.
contractors to design As a result, many structural engineers
are expediting the preparation of con-
tract documents for bidding by requir-
certain elements in ing contractors to design certain ele-
ments in accordance with specified
accordance with parameters. This is especially true
with steel-framed buildings, for which
specified parameters. a common option for reducing design
time is the specification of a pre-engi-
neered metal building (PEMB).
An Alternative Design Process
PEMBs have a long and successful
history, especially in warehouse con-
struction. Initially, an owner could
simply select a particular size and
configuration out of a catalog to
obtain the structure needed. Over
time, the industry has become more
sophisticated, adding sufficient design
capability to accommodate more com-
plex buildings. For such projects, con-
sulting engineers do not design or
detail the building frame. Instead,
they provide the necessary criteria to
permit the PEMB manufacturer to
perform these tasks.
4 Burns & McDonnell
PEMB structures and their individual
elements are often customized to the
specific stress distributions produced
by the design loads, reducing material
costs. Because they consist almost
entirely of standardized components,
PEMBs can be fabricated and erected
quickly, resulting in lower labor costs
and shorter schedules. PEMBs are
commonly furnished complete with
roofing and siding, so that a single
source is responsible for providing the
entire building envelope. These fac-
tors have combined to make PEMBs
increasingly attractive for a wide
range of building types.
However, PEMBs do have their draw-
backs. Perhaps the most significant
from a design standpoint is the fact
that PEMB manufacturers generally
do not perform any foundation
design. The engineering consultant
still must complete this task and pro-
vide for the foundations in the con-
tract documents. Unfortunately, if the
entire project is issued for bid in one
package, it is necessary for the struc-
tural engineer to do the following:
1. Assume a structural system type
(braced and/or rigid frames) and
configuration.
2. Calculate approximate dead, col-
lateral, live, snow, wind, seismic,
and other loads.
3. Estimate the building base reac-
tions.
4. Design the anchor bolts and foun-
dations accordingly for bidding
purposes.
To prevent excessive changes later, the
engineer will prepare the contract
documents, especially the PEMB spec-
ification itself, to ensure that the
building actually provided will be
consistent with the foundation design.
This may limit the PEMB manufactur-
er's ability to economize the super- they certainly can be adapted to
structure design. For example, the other building configurations, such
engineer might assume that the build- complexities diminish the advan-
ing is braced and has columns with tages PEMBs have to offer. Also,
pinned bases to minimize foundation even relatively minor changes in
costs. The PEMB manufacturer will the owner's requirements for the
have to design and furnish the build- building during design and/or
ing accordingly, even if rigid frames construction — for example, relo-
with fixed bases might result in a less cating cranes or roof-mounted
expensive structure. equipment, or adding a mezzanine
— may require a redesign of all or
Additional Considerations part of the PEMB. Every PEMB manu-
Only well after the construction con-
tract has been awarded will the select-
• Applicability of manufacturer's facturer has its own
standards. Every PEMB manufac-
ed PEMB supplier submit the final
reactions and anchor bolt require-
turer has its own set of standards
for such items as wall panel, roof,
set of standards for
ments, which the engineer must then
and coating systems, and there is
review and compare with the design
assumptions. Even if the building con-
usually a cost premium associated such items as wall
with any deviation from them.
figuration matches that assumed,
more often than not the engineer still
However, they are not compatible panel, roof, and
with the requirements of every
must perform at least some redesign,
and the owner must then issue a
project. For example, an owner
may opt for an exterior paint sys-
coating systems,
change order.
tem that is more corrosion-resist-
Sometimes, to avoid this, the engineer
ant, or perhaps just a different and there is usually
color, than the one typically pro-
will deliberately oversize the founda-
tions from the beginning to account
vided by the PEMB supplier. a cost premium
for the uncertainties, which adds to
the construction cost. An alternative is
• Excessive deflections. PEMBs tend
to exhibit relatively large move-
associated with any
to issue a separate PEMB package for
ments under design loads, which
bid and award as early as possible in
can create problems for sensitive deviation from
the design process, so that the engi-
finishes or equipment. For exam-
neer can obtain reactions before
preparing the foundation drawings.
ple, if an owner prefers masonry or them.
precast concrete exterior walls to
The danger here is that the informa-
the metal siding traditionally
tion included in the PEMB package,
offered by PEMB manufacturers,
which may be preliminary at best, will
the specified lateral deflection tol-
be incomplete, resulting in coordina-
erances under wind and seismic
tion problems and, again, change
loads must be much tighter than
orders down the line.
usual, which again may negate the
traditional benefits of using a
Other issues to consider when evalu-
PEMB.
ating whether to use a PEMB for a
particular project include the follow-
• Lack of flexibility for future modi-
ing:
fications. PEMBs typically consist
of a series of rigid frames, which
• Limitations on building geometry.
PEMBs are best suited for regular,
rectangular construction. Although

TechBriefs 5
may have lean-to bays on one or
both sides. Unless specific provi-
sions are made in the original
design, PEMBs are generally diffi-
cult to expand except by providing
additional rigid frames at one end
or the other. Also, since members
are sized very carefully for the
original design loads, there is not a
great deal of reserve strength, and
even if there is some, it is difficult
or impossible to determine how
much. Reinforcement may be nec-
essary if the building's function or
layout changes significantly in the
years ahead, but may not be practi-
cal since the structure typically
must somehow be unloaded as
much as possible before the
changes can be made. In any case,
an owner cannot undertake any
significant modification of a PEMB
without considerable participation
by its original designer/manufac-
turer.
Pre-Engineered Metal Buildings
Advantages
• Relatively low design and construction costs
• Rapid design, delivery, and erection
• Option of single-source responsibility for build-
ing envelope
Conclusion
Owners have more options than ever
for the design and construction of
their facilities. Naturally, no single
approach is best suited to every proj-
ect. Owners must give careful consid-
eration to all of the factors affecting
the cost and functionality of the struc-
tures that they develop. They should
bring a consulting engineering firm on
board as early in the process as possi- Jon Schmidt is a senior struc-
ble to assist with the decisions that
tural engineer, specializing in the
need to be made. A pre-engineered
analysis and design of aviation
metal building may be an excellent
and industrial facilities. He has
choice for some projects, but can
become problematic for others. worked for Burns & McDonnell
since 1994.
Disadvantages
Ron Younker is an associate
• Separation of responsibility for building and structural engineer, with nearly
foundation design, and difficulty of coordinating 30 years of experience in the
interfaces design of aircraft hangars and
• Repeated or excessive foundation design, or other major facilities. He joined
building design based on only preliminary Burns & McDonnell in 1988.
information
• Limited building geometry, including potential
need to redesign for even minor changes
• Possible incompatibility of manufacturer's stan-
dards with project standards
• Frequently large deflections
• Inflexibility for future modification or expansion
6 Burns & McDonnell