November 14, 2012
Master Planning becomes a Master Headache!
by Hinman Team
The changes to 2012 UFC 4-010-10 DoD Minimum Antiterrorism Standards for Buildings are a game changer in the way the construction and A/E industries handle not only standoff requirements, but windows, and unobstructed space. As discussed in my previous blog, The Hidden Cost of Saving Money, there are major changes to the standoff requirements under these new requirements. By varying standoff requirements, the Department of Defensehas increased complexities and uncertainties within the industry.
Now let’s dive into the real world challenges: Master planning.
Under the 2007 version of these requirements, master planning for AT/FP was simple: provide 82 feet standoff to your parking and roadways, and 148 feet to your perimeter. Then you knew you’ve provided the most cost efficient building. What could be easier?
As John A. Simone, Jr. has stated: “If you’re in a bad situation, don’t worry it’ll change. If you’re in a good situation, don’t worry it will change.” Well, I don’t know a more apropos quote for how the 2012 UFC guidelines affect master planning.
With the nightmarish confusion around standoff, you’re left to wonder, what standoff is most cost efficient? As we know from my earlier post, the most cost effective option is directly dependent upon the construction material you plan on using. Are you going with precast or metal studs? Typically, you wouldn’t know at this stage. All you’d be focused on would be the space plan--blocking and stacking to ensure everything fits.
So, what do you do?
Step 1: Take two Advil with a tall glass of water.
Step 2: Keep reading at your own peril for a look at the other relevant changes in the 2012 criteria or skip down to Step 3.
Standoffs are not the only major change that causes havoc to master planning. Since the new criteria states that all façade elements assume a pin-pin condition, it could potentially require more upfront analysis. This means if ribbon windows are used, dynamic calculations need to be performed to verify the wall can resist the blast load from the window system. There are plenty of other extremely specific changes that dictate design provisions for window systems, which I’ll cover in my webinar next month.
Moving on, instead of the old rule of 33 feet of unobstructed space regardless of construction type, the new criteria requires that unobstructed space extend out to the closest applicable standoff for the package threat. The standoff equals the distance to both parking and roads, but not less than the minimum standoff for a qualifying construction type. One big takeaway is that these changes necessitate increased interaction between landscape design and blast protection.
Confused? You’re not alone. Master planning has become more complicated, but it is not an insurmountable task. We do know we’re unlikely to see any significant changes in the near future.
So what do you do in the meantime?
Step 3: Pick up the phone and call your friendly protective design consultant to run through scenarios. We’re here to help.