RAHINAH IBRAHIM Stanford University Architect CRAIG LONG Kansas University Engineer JORGE FUENTES Stanford University Construction Manager ROXANNE ZOLIN Stanford University Owner

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA, USA Precipitation: Temperatures: Seismic Zones MapWind Speed Zones Map

DOUBLE SQUARE DESIGN- Site Location Plan

REDESIGN

REDESIGN: AEC 1 Gym Cafe Perspective View Nominal cost for construction Makes building very compact Maintain no view for 4 nos Faculty rooms

REDESIGN: AEC 2 Improving Indoor Quality Increase Faculty rooms from 16 to 20. Provide views to all Faculty rooms. Faculty Lounge has view of river. Improving Outdoor Quality Additional landscape-integrated steps Café on top of 2F floor slab protected from afternoon sun Gym Cafe Perspective View

Auditorium Span Pratt-Type Truss Openings for hallways and circulation Satisfies the architectural constraints REDESIGN: AEC 2

Structural Framing Original Framing Complex Geometry Difficult Connections High Fabrication cost REDESIGN: AEC 2

Structural Framing New Framing Simplified Geometry Simpler Connections Standardized Fabrication  $avings REDESIGN: AEC 2

Redesign Alternatives Schedule Comparisons

Redesign Estimates

General & Redesign Constructibility Issues & Alternatives Limited access to site due to levy Floodplain- best solution is to elevate structure

SQUARE BASE

TEAM DESIGN APPROACH C- Build an Offshore Oil Rig E- Design a Bridge A- Design A Highrise Building on piers to minimize hydraulic impact

SQUARE BASE DESIGN: Concept ROTATING SQUARES - for floor expansion GOLDEN SECTION -for vertical expansion

SQUARE BASE DESIGN SECTION VIEW FROM BUILDING

SQUARE BASE DESIGN 1ST FLOOR PLAN 3RD FLOOR PLAN 2ND FLOOR PLAN Administration Faculty/Student Offices Classrooms/Lab Terrace Restroom Circulation

SQUARE BASE DESIGN: AEC 1 Live Loads Terrace, Interior Atrium – 100 psf Corridors, Computer Lab – 100 psf Auditorium, Classrooms & Offices – 50 psf Roof – 20 psf Dead Loads Cast-in-Place Concrete – 150 lb/ft 3 Steel Construction – 60 psf Flooring, ceiling, lights – 15 psf HVAC – 5 psf Partitions – 20 psf Exterior Cladding – 30 psf Structural Constraints – Gravity Loads

SQUARE BASE DESIGN: AEC 1 Seismic Constraints Moderate seismic activity; Zone 3 Occupancy category, I = 1.0 Sandy soil with subsurface rock Wind Constraints Design wind speed, V 45 = 90 mph Structural Constraints – Lateral Loads

Structural Piers Lower Level Structure Foundation Concerns COST SQUARE BASE DESIGN: AEC 1 Impact of elevated structure Water corrosion Soil difficulty Additional lateral load Flooded structure made complicated by...

SQUARE BASE DESIGN: AEC 2 Structural system that defies gravity

Structural Concept Due to Rotating Concept Slender Roof Framing Traditional Framing System “Table Top” Stable Platform SQUARE BASE DESIGN: AEC 2

SQUARE BASE DESIGN: AEC FT King-Post Truss Post Tension Concrete Beam 24” x 30” 5000 psi Concrete Steel Tension Cords Difficult Detailing SQUARE BASE DESIGN: AEC 3

SQUARE BASE DESIGN: AEC 4 North – South Truss Cantilever Gravity Resisting System Cantilever Lateral Resisting System East - West Truss Decorative Element Completes the Square External trusses to perform aesthetically and structurally

SQUARE BASE DESIGN: AEC 5 Flexible open plan design 1ST FLOOR PLAN 3RD FLOOR PLAN 2ND FLOOR PLAN Core Placement Study

Two-Joists with Elevated Floor Space for Building Services Required Additional Columns Two-Way Slab System Waffle Slab Column Free Environment More Complicated HVAC Routing SQUARE BASE DESIGN: AEC 5

SQUARE BASE DESIGN: AEC 6 Freeflowing interior spaces

Open Plan Structural Solutions Option 2 Steel/Concrete Composite System Shear Wall Service Core Option 1 Cast-in-Place Concrete Frame Shear Wall Service Core SQUARE BASE DESIGN: AEC 6

Structural Option 1 2 nd Floor Plan Column 1’x1’ Beam 12”x24” 3 rd Floor Plan Two-Way Slab 6”x6” Tube Brace SQUARE BASE DESIGN: AEC 6

Structural Option 2 3 rd Floor Plan Joist W16x26 W8x24 SQUARE BASE DESIGN: AEC 6 Roof Plan ¾” Dia. Cable 16” Open-Web Joist

Foundation System Drilled Pier 2’-6” Diameter / 30’ Depth Drilled Pier Array 1-6” Diameter typical CIP Transition Piece to Shear Wall SQUARE BASE DESIGN: AEC 6 Foundation Isometric

SQUARE BASE DESIGN- AEC 7 SECTION Administration Faculty/Student Offices Classrooms/Lab Terrace Restroom Circulation Preliminary Core Plan

SQUARE BASE DESIGN: CM CM ( slide) Comparison of Estimates (Totals, structural costs and elevating elements costs- piers and floor + lift) Schedule length comparison (including phase milestones) Critical Construction Issues Construction alternatives Concrete vs Concrete/Steel Composite Estimate and schedule

SQUARE BASE DESIGN: CM CM ( slide) Comparison of Estimates (Totals, structural costs and elevating elements costs- piers and floor + lift) Schedule length comparison (including phase milestones) Critical Construction Issues Construction alternatives Concrete vs Concrete/Steel Composite Estimate and schedule

Square Alternatives Schedule Comparisons

Square Alternatives Cost Breakdown

Square Design Constructibility Issues & Alternatives Long span members Constructing 1st level- before or after 2nd level

DOUBLE SQUARE DESIGN

DOUBLE SQUARE DESIGN- Concept GOLDEN SECTION - for floor expansion - for vertical expansion

DOUBLE SQUARE DESIGN- Plans Administration Faculty/Student Offices Classrooms/Lab Terrace Restroom Circulation

DOUBLE SQUARE DESIGN- Section & Elevation Lobby Atrium Exposed Corridor Balconies

DOUBLE SQUARE DESIGN: AEC 1 More columns for structural stability

DOUBLE SQUARE DESIGN- AEC 2 Core Placement Study Fulfilling fire egress requirements Minimum distance between exits is 80ft. Minimum egress width is 5’-6”. Minimum 20ft atrium opening. Minimum 3 exits at 2nd Floor, others 2 nos. Sprinklered egress on all floors.

DOUBLE SQUARE DESIGN- AEC 2 Core Placement Study Fulfilling fire egress requirements Minimum distance between exits is 80ft. Minimum egress width is 5’-6”. Minimum 20ft atrium opening. Minimum 3 exits at 2nd Floor, others 2 nos. Sprinklered egress on all floors.

Structural Options 1 DOUBLE SQUARE DESIGN: AEC 2 Laterally Braced Frame 4.5” Steel-Concrete Slab Columns W18x40 typ External Bracing Conflicts with Architect’s Vision Composite Column Below Waterline

Structural Options 2 DOUBLE SQUARE DESIGN: AEC 2 Cast-in-Place Frame 10” Shear Wall 12” x 12” Columns Typ. Complex Framing Requirements Conflict with CM Budget 10” Inclined Slab in Auditorium

Structural Options 3 DOUBLE SQUARE DESIGN: AEC 2 Composite Steel-Concrete SMRF at Exterior Frame Bracing Auditorium Framing

Double Square Alternatives Schedule Comparisons

Double Square Alternatives Cost Breakdown

Double Square Contractibility Issues & Alternatives Complex structure- more uncertainty, more risk Height limit- 20’ on equipment

Comparison of Estimates to Budget

Site Layouts access TC trailers Mat’l laydown Mat’l laydown 20’ Clearance

EQUIPMENT SELECTION

Construction Trade-off Analysis AdvDisadv RedesignTraditional constbuilt on floodplain expensive Square BaseLong-span beams Double SquareComplex-more uncertainty

DECISION MATRIX SQUARE BASE DESIGN Strong concept and good interior plan. The structural system is integral in the building aesthetic. Looks complicated but can be build with current equipment and tools. DOUBLE SQUARE DESIGN Weaker concept with too much columns going to the ground. Structural analysis is complicated and time consuming. More foundation works and complex auditorium construction DOUBLE SQUARE DESIGN Most inhibited rooms have good external view. Has more columns to pass building loads to the ground. Has bigger staging area to work with. SQUARE BASE DESIGN Requires effort to work around the fire requirements. Long huge spans to support building loads. Requires precise sequencing of tasks during construction. REDESIGN Need to have less angular smaller rooms. Auditorium causes less flexible 3rd Floor layout. Most expensive among these three options. REDESIGN Better quality learning and working spaces. Less complicated to framing system. Conventional construction method. PROSCONS

RECOMMENDATIONS We are recommending the Square Base Design for further development: A- The quality of space and the overall design is good while building is able to satisfy all technical requirements. E- The structural system is simple yet elegant and plays an integral part of the design. C- Even though it looked complicated, it is actually cheaper and simpler to build.

TEAM DYNAMICS C- Build an Offshore Oil Rig E- Design a Bridge A- Design A Highrise 2. SHIFT IN DESIGN APPROACH 1. DUAL BACKGROUND PROFESSIONALS Architect is also Construction Manager Engineer is also Architect Construction Manager is also Engineer 3. HAVING GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH THE OWNER

VALUABLE LESSONS So far, we have learned: A- It is better to start collaborating earlier in design. E- Solutions only work through communication C- Time management is very crucial. Thank you In Spring 2001: A- Use IT tools more efficiently. E- Be more assertive in communicating structural necessities C- Managing time and scheduling teamwork.