For vertical circular equipment that passes through floor slabs, should the lifting hole be square or circular?
Thread Content
Provide the civil engineering department with the requirements for creating openings in floors (for steel structures): when vertical circular equipment needs to pass through a floor (a floor that is not supported by the equipment), should these openings be rectangular or circular? A. Raise the circular hole, allowing the civil engineering team to decide on the position of the beam themselves. B. Provide lifting holes to determine the position of the beam by oneself. Which approach do you think is more reasonable? Let’s share our opinions... This post was last edited by hutom123 on 2009-3-29 at 19:30.]
The former. Don’t go into offside position first; don’t place the pipes at the locations of the structural beams, as long as they don’t interfere with each other ； Square holes pose safety risks, as the gaps at the four corners are quite large; there have been instances where property owners requested that steel plates be used to fill these holes.
As the owner, 1) I hope the design provider will provide holes, as this will facilitate the installation of pipes and equipment insulation, as well as make future maintenance easier. 2. The positions of reinforced concrete beams and columns should be determined by the civil engineering team, taking into full account requirements such as piping layout, so as to avoid conflicts during construction. 3. After the equipment installation and process piping are completed, seal the holes with steel plates to ensure safety during future operations. For reference!
Leave a round hole. The disadvantages of square holes are as mentioned on the second floor. Circular beams are commonly used around round holes these days; in some cases, reverse beams are installed around the holes to prevent water leakage, while in other cases steel plates are embedded there for waterproofing. The insulation layer of the circular device’s casing is used to hold these waterproof steel plates in place, so that the presence of the holes is not visible, resulting in a more aesthetically pleasing appearance.
Without the requirement for a support point, round holes are not only aesthetically pleasing and practical but also safe. After all, it’s a steel structure, so it’s easy to work with.
I completely agree with the opinion from the second floor. The issue related to beams is something that the civil engineering field needs to take into account, but installation, as well as future maintenance processes and the equipment involved, are also aspects that need to be considered. The opinion from the second floor is definitely that of an expert.
Just tell it what size the circular device is and what diameter of hole is required. If weight support is needed, the load on the device as well as the location of the support base must be specified. As for whether to use a round hole or a square hole, and how to design the beam, that is determined by the civil engineering team.