Sistema de Cobertura em Estrutura Metálica Roll-On: um Estudo de Caso
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2236130813643Keywords:
Roll-On System, Metal cover and elementsAbstract
The civil engineering works have shown in several industrial systems segments, as in this case running topping a metallic structure, which potentially relates directly to the use of the conventional method of execution. This work aims to facilitate the use of the system coverage in Steel Structure Roll-On. To achieve the goal, we use specific literature searches in order to submit a work of large method of execution coverage roll-on metallic structure, presenting their construction techniques, material specifications, which cover members of the parties and case study with presentation of figures , getting a better understanding of the particularities of this system. The work will be studied in Shopping Sightseeing Waters, located in Goiás Avenue to North Perimeter, with approximately 70,000.00 square meters of coverage roll-on metallic structure. It is considered a work of great size, and very complex because of the many curves in its architectural structure , its numerous lifts , technical slabs , and two skylights (Works of Art), which cause many detachments of uprights , beams , different patterns of flashings and drip pans , numerous reinforcements in the roof structure and several cuts on beams Roll -On . The choice of construction method for the project under study, will be addressed during the review, explaining why the acceptance of a totally new design, with execution parameters in the categories of time, cost and distinct quality in relation to the most comprehensive method on the market Goias, conventional.
Downloads
References
ABNT – Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas. NBR 8800: Projeto e execução de estruturas de aço
de edifícios (método dos estados limites). Rio de Janeiro, 1986.
AISI - American Iron and Steel Institute. AISI 2001: Especificação norte americana para o Projeto de aço
formados a frio, de elementos estruturais de aço. Washington, DC, 2001.
Marko Sistemas Metálicos. Produtos Roll-on. [S.l.], 2004. Disponível em: http://www.marko.com.br/rollon_cobertura.asp. Acesso em: 21 abril 2013.
QUIÑONES, B. J. C. Execução de cobertura em estrutura metálica, São Paulo – SP. UAM, 2006. Monografia.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Ethical guidelines for journal publication
The REMOA is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
