Pros And Cons Of Mil Mill Construction

Properly built and maintained, mill construction can be a structure that fires can be brought under control before the building is involved in the fire (Brannigan & Corbett, 2015). Unlike mill construction, buildings of ordinary construction are plagued with void spaces that are inherent parts of the construction. Like buildings of ordinary construction, heavy timber buildings may suffer the same disadvantages of having unprotected void spaces. This is due to there design as well as old mill buildings being converted to buildings that were not a part of the original design of the structure. These conversions of the new heavy timber building leaves the buildings at a greater risk of fire spread than that of the mill construction buildings of the past.

Unlike ordinary construction, mill construction was designed in a manner that did not allow for unprotected void spaces. These buildings also utilized members that were inherently stable and are inherently fire resistive (Brannigan & Corbett, 2015). The members will char on the exterior rather than ignite therefore ensuring structural stability. These buildings also utilize fire cuts in the walls where support members for flooring are secured. In the event of a fire, the fire cut will allow for the floor to collapse without bringing down the exterior wall of the building. Whereas the floor collapse will and should prevent any further interior operations in the building, the exterior of the building should remain stable prevent a complete structural collapse that would endanger other buildings and anyone located in the immediate collapse zone. Mill construction also incorporates scuppers in the building to drain excess water from the building. These play a key role in alleviating excessive weight caused by fire operations that if allowed to build up on the floors could cause a