Case study reveals excessive snow load led to a construction disaster, highlighting inadequate regulations.
Modern roofs for tennis courts, swimming pools, or playing fields can take various forms, but an increasingly popular design choice is pneumatic structures. These structures are supported by maintaining a higher internal pressure that upholds the membrane, achieved through a continuous air-blowing system. The difference between the pressure of the hall’s interior and atmospheric pressure ranges from 2.5 to 3.5 hPa. In practical terms, this means that the pressure on the air-supported dome is 25–35 kg/m2. Although these structures have been in operation in Europe for several decades, there are still reports of construction disasters of this type of facility. This article presents a case study of one such disaster, including material tests of the membrane, the analysis of technical documentation, and a discussion of recommendations and standard provisions. While determining the causes of the incident, it was shown that excessive snow load was the main cause of the disaster, and the lack of adequate legal regulations still has negative consequences affecting the safety of using air domes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Grzyb et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: