Design Solution · Structural Systems
Design Solution · Dream about it
Big-span timber trusses delivered at steel-shed cost.
Large-span timber trusses span the building at the same cost as the steel portal frame that utility sheds usually default to, while cutting embodied carbon. Proving cost parity removes the main barrier to choosing timber for agricultural and industrial buildings. It offers a reusable low-carbon archetype for the shed typology.
The proposition here is cost parity between a large-span timber truss and the steel portal frame that agricultural and industrial sheds almost universally default to — removing the principal commercial barrier to choosing timber and therefore cutting the embodied carbon of the shed typology. That is a meaningful claim if it holds, because the economics, not the engineering, are what have kept timber out of this building type. The evidence is project-level and self-reported, with no independent cost analysis or lifecycle carbon assessment cited, so parity is asserted rather than demonstrated. A specifier would need to understand the basis of cost comparison — whether it includes procurement complexity, specialist fabrication lead times, and the on-site erection sequence — because long-span timber trusses carry a more constrained supply chain than steel portal frames, which is a real programme risk. If the cost case survives scrutiny on your project, this is a replicable low-carbon archetype worth developing; if it does not, timber remains the more expensive option on pure first-cost grounds.
#timber #long span #embodied carbon #shed