S TRUCTURAL R EDESIGN OF THE A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER Presented By: Amanda C. Farace Faculty Consultant: Dr. Thomas Boothby The Department.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ASHA National Office Building 2011 AE Senior Thesis Ryan Dalrymple 5 th year Structural Option BAE/MAE Advisor: Dr. Thomas Boothby Photo Courtesy of Boggs.
Advertisements

Fraser Centre State College, PA Tyler Strange Structural Option Consultant: Dr. Thomas Boothby April 13, 2011 Tyler StrangeStructural Option Fraser Centre.
Carl Hubben – Structural Option Ae senior thesis Office Building-G EASTERN UNITED STATES.
Jeremiah Ergas AE 482 – 5 th Year Senior Thesis Structural Option April 15 th, 2008 Faculty Consultant: Dr. Ali Memari Northside Piers – Brooklyn, NY Structural.
A Medical Office Building For The Primary Health Network Daniel Goff I Structural Option Dr. Thomas Boothby l Faculty Advisor Sharon, Pennsylvania Source:
Penn State Hershey Medical Center Children’s Hospital Hershey, Pennsylvania Matthew Vandersall Structural Option AE Senior Thesis Dr. Richard Behr.
The University Sciences Building Northeast, USA Final Presentation Chris Dunlay Structural Option Dr. Boothby.
Frank Burke Structural Option Sallie Mae HQ Reston, VA.
3711 Market Street 3711 Market Street Philadelphia, PA Zachary Yarnall l Structural Option AE Senior Thesis l Spring 2010 Faculty Consultant l Professor.
Courtesy of Holbert Apple Associates Georgia Avenue Building Introduction Statistics Gravity System Lateral System Problem Statement & Solution.
Samuel M. P. Jannotti Structural April 14, 2008 American Eagle Outfitters Quantum III: South Side Works.
360 State Street New Haven  CT  Structural | Sabrina Duk | T. Boothby.
Kirk Stauffer BAE / MAE - Structural Option Senior Thesis Project Life Sciences Building The Pennsylvania State University University Park Campus.
UNC Imaging Research Building UNC Imaging Research Building Chapel Hill, NC Daniel R. Hesington, LEED AP l Structural Option AE Senior Thesis l Spring.
Rockville Metro Plaza II Rockville Pike John Vais | Structural Option PSU AE Senior Thesis 2014 Faculty Advisor – Dr. Hanagan Rockville, Maryland
Hershey Research Park Building One Jonathan Krepps Structural Option Senior Thesis 2013 Faculty Advisor: Dr. Hanagan.
All Hakuna Resort photos in courtesy of LMN Development LLC Young Jeon Structural Option Advisor: Heather Sustersic Hakuna Resort AE Senior Thesis 2015.
Nick Szakelyhidi Structural Option Office Building Washington, DC Nick Szakelyhidi Structural Option.
GARY NEWMAN STRUCTURES OPTION ADVISOR: DR. HANAGAN SENIOR THESIS PRESENTATION SPRING 2008.
AMERICAN EAGLE OUTFITTERS Quantum II Corporate Headquarters Michael Sandretto Spring – 2007 Structural Option.
Southeast View of IRMC West View of IRMC. Presentation Outline Introduction Existing Structure Thesis Goals Structural Depth Lighting Breadth Conclusion.
BRYAN DARRIN SENIOR THESIS PRESENTATION MILLENNIUM HALL DREXEL CAMPUS PHILADELPHIA, PA.
Structural System Redesign Existing Conditions Proposal Gravity Design Lateral Design Cost Comparison Schedule Impact Conclusions.
Final Thesis Presentation Washingtonian Center Lee ResslerApril 15, 2008 Faculty Advisor: Dr. Memari.
Duquesne University Forbes Expansion
The Odyssey Condominium Aaron Snyder Arlington, Virginia
SEAN BEVILLE STRUCTURAL OPTION ADVISOR: PROF. BOOTHBY APRIL 13, 2009 TEMECULA MEDICAL CENTER “STRUCTURAL SYSTEM OPTIMIZATION” THE DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURAL.
H OTEL | N ORTHEAST U.S. J ORDAN R UTHERFORD | S TRUCTURAL O PTION F ACULTY A DVISOR | D R. T HOMAS B OOTHBY AE S ENIOR T HESIS | A PRIL 8, 2013.
Gateway Plaza Wilmington, DE Elizabeth Hostutler Structural Option.
300 North La Salle Liam McNamara BAE / MAE Senior Thesis April 13 th, 2010.
Helios Plaza Houston, TX Advisor - Dr. Hanagan Kevin Zinsmeister Structural Option.
Tom yost BAE/MAE - structural option granby tower norfolk, virginia senior thesis presentation 14 april 2008 introduction overview proposal goals depth.
The Towers at the City College of New York Robin Scaramastro - Structural Option - Advisor: Dr. Memari Senior Thesis Final Presentation – Spring 2007.
URS – ARENA DISTRICT OFFICE BUILDING DAVID LEE STRUCTURAL OPTION.
Dan Donecker BAE/MAE – Structural Option Senior Thesis Project 35 West 21 st Street New York, New York.
Howard County General Hospital Patient Tower Addition Columbia, MD Kelly M. Dooley Penn State Architectural Engineering Structural Option.
Ryan Pletz Structural Dr. Hanagan The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architectural Engineering Senior Thesis April 14, 2008.
Signal Hill Professional Center: Implementing a Concrete Structural System Joseph Henry,Structural Option Dr. Linda Hanagan, Advisor Penn State Architectural.
Senior Thesis 2006 The Pennsylvania State University
Rensselaer, NY Meral Kanik Structural Option Advisor: A.M. Memari April 14, 2008.
Jonathan Goodroad Structural Option 2005 Thesis Penn State AE Delaware State University Administration and Student Services Building.
T IMOTHY H P ARK – S TRUCTURAL O PTION. Building Summary Current Systems Proposal Description Gravity Lateral Other Structural Factors Breadth Options.
Adam Love Structural Senior Thesis Presentation 2010 The Pennsylvania State University FDA OC/ORA Office Building Silver Spring, MD.
N EW Y ORK, N EW Y ORK 100 Eleventh Avenue © Tyler E. Graybill | Structural Option AE Senior Thesis Presentation | April 12, 2010 Faculty.
Brad Oliver – Structural Option Advisor – Professor Memari.
Oklahoma University Children’s Medical Office Building Oklahoma City, Oklahoma AE Senior Thesis Final Report April 14, 2014 Jonathan Ebersole Structural.
Fordham Place Bronx, NY Aric Heffelfinger Structural Option Spring 2006.
Justin Purcell Structural Option Advisor: Dr. Hanagan.
151 First Side William J. Buchko introduction overview proposal structural depth acoustics breadth cm breadth conclusions 151 First Side Pittsburgh, PA.
Computer Associates International, Regional Office
Park Potomac Office Building “E” Kyle Wagner l Structural Option AE Senior Thesis l Spring 2010 Faculty Consultant l Prof. Kevin Parfitt.
Eastern USA University Academic Center Alexander AltemoseIStructural Option.
SteelStacks Performing Arts Center Sarah Bednarcik | Structural BAE/MAE Faculty Advisors: Dr. Linda Hanagan & Dr. Ali Memari Spring Thesis 2013Bethlehem,
Chagrin Highlands Building One Beechwood, Ohio Branden J. Ellenberger - Structural Option Senior Thesis 2004.
Michael A. Troxell Structural Option Senior Thesis 2006 The College of Business Administration Northern Arizona University Flagstaff, Arizona.
T HE D UNCAN C ENTER D OVER, D ELAWARE R ACHEL G INGERICH, S TRUCTURAL O PTION S ENIOR T HESIS P RESENTATION A PRIL 15, 2008.
Biobehavioral Health Building The Pennsylvania State University Daniel Bodde Structural Option Advisor – Heather Sustersic.
THE NORTHBROOK CORPORATE CENTER Redesign of the Lateral Load Resisting System.
Arlington Gateway Hotel 801 North Glebe Road Arlington, Virginia Michael Gray Penn State University AE Senior Thesis Presentation 2005.
Albany Medical Center Patient Pavilion Albany, Ny Thomas J. Kleinosky – Structural Senior Thesis 2012 | Advisor: Dr. Hanagan.
Hunter Woron Spring 2012 Structural Professor Parfitt.
R. Bryan Peiffer– Structural Option AE Senior Thesis 2011 Three PNC Plaza, Pittsburgh Pa.
CONDOMINIUM TOWER & PARKING
Advisor: Professor M. Kevin Parfitt
Introduction James W. & Frances G. McGlothlin Medical Education Center
Outline Introduction Structural Redesign Gravity System
Ryan Johnson - Structural Option
TOWERS CRESCENT BUILDING B Mike Synnott Structural.
North Shore at Canton The Pennsylvania State University
Mitre III Building McLean VA Debra Schroeder Structural Option.
Presentation transcript:

S TRUCTURAL R EDESIGN OF THE A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER Presented By: Amanda C. Farace Faculty Consultant: Dr. Thomas Boothby The Department of Architectural Engineering The Pennsylvania State University April 13, 2010

1. Introduction & Building Overview Introduction Location Building Statistics Existing Structural Conditions 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions P RESENTATION O UTLINE 1.Introduction & Building Overview Introduction Location Building Statistics Existing Structural Conditions 2.Structural Depth Analysis Proposal Summary Design Goals Gravity System Redesign Lateral System Redesign Progressive Collapse Design 3.Breadth Studies Construction Management Analysis Acoustical Analysis 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER A MANDA C. F ARACE P RESENTATION O UTLINE

1. Introduction & Building Overview Introduction Location Building Statistics Existing Structural Conditions 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions I NTRODUCTION A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER A MANDA C. F ARACE P RESENTATION O UTLINE I NTRODUCTION Location

1. Introduction & Building Overview Introduction Location Building Statistics Existing Structural Conditions 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions L OCATION A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER A MANDA C. F ARACE P RESENTATION O UTLINE 111 S. George Mason Dr., Arlington, Virginia Approximately 5 miles outside of Washington D.C. On the same site as the location of the current Army National Guard Building 15 acre site  Includes a 248,000 square foot existing facility, two 3-2tory parking garages, and several small out buildings.

1. Introduction & Building Overview Introduction Location Building Statistics Existing Structural Conditions 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions B UILDING S TATISTICS A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE Joint Headquarters Administrative Building 5 Stories Above Grade and 3 Below Includes Offices, Training Areas, Auditorium and more Square Footage 251,000 Gross Square footage Architecture Unique Triangular shape Façade mimics existing building Project Duration December 2008-March 2011 Project Delivery Method Design-Bid-Build Cost $100 Million Anticipated to Achieve LEED Silver Rating

1. Introduction & Building Overview Introduction Location Building Statistics Existing Structural Conditions 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions I NTRODUCTION A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE I NTRODUCTION Existing Structural Conditions

1. Introduction & Building Overview Introduction Location Building Statistics Existing Structural Conditions 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions Floor System 9” Two-way reinforced concrete flat slab Column strips and edge beams f’ c =4,000 psi Typical No. 6 and No. 8 reinforcement Columns Cast-in-place reinforced normal weight concrete Typical 22” x 22” Typical No. 8 reinforcement Typical No. 3 ties Foundation 32” concrete mat slab E XISTING G RAVITY S YSTEM A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE Existing Structural Plan

1. Introduction & Building Overview Introduction Location Building Statistics Existing Structural Conditions 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions Lateral System Ordinary reinforced concrete shear walls 12” Thickness Both North-South and East-West direction f’ c =4,500 psi Located around elevator cores and stairwells as well as along the corridor of the long side E XISTING L ATERAL S YSTEM A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE Location of Shear Walls:

S TRUCTURAL D EPTH A NALYSIS A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE 1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis Proposal Summary Design Goals Gravity System Redesign Lateral System Redesign Progressive Collapse Design 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions S TRUCTURAL D EPTH S TUDY Proposal Summary

P ROPOSAL S UMMARY A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE 1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis Proposal Summary Design Goals Gravity System Redesign Lateral System Redesign Progressive Collapse Design 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions Depth Study Redesign of the structural system to include a steel framing system as opposed to the existing cast-in-place concrete structure in order to compare the structural systems to determine which building material is more beneficial. Gravity System Composite metal decking with composite beams and steel columns Lateral System Ordinary-Moment Resisting Frames Progressive Collapse Design Breadth Topics Construction Management Analysis Acoustics Analysis

D ESIGN G OALS A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE 1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis Proposal Summary Design Goals Gravity System Redesign Lateral System Redesign Progressive Collapse Design 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions Respect the existing layout and architectural features of the building Choose a single lateral system and layout that will work effectively Design the structural steel system for progressive collapse mitigation Design a structural steel system that reduces overall building costs Reduce the construction schedule by designing a steel structural system that is more efficient to erect

S TRUCTURAL D EPTH A NALYSIS A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE 1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis Proposal Summary Design Goals Gravity System Redesign Lateral System Redesign Progressive Collapse Design 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions S TRUCTURAL D EPTH S TUDY Gravity System Redesign

Beam, Girder, and Slab Design Composite metal deck with concrete slab 3VLI, 19” gage metal deck 3 ½” Concrete Slab Advantages: -Slab design meets 3 hour fire rating -No shoring is required -Quicker and Easier to erect Disadvantages: -Infill beams are required -Deeper floor assembly G RAVITY S YSTEM R EDESIGN A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE 1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis Proposal Summary Design Goals Gravity System Redesign Lateral System Redesign Progressive Collapse Design 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions 28’ 25’ Typical Bay Sizes :

Beam, Girder, and Slab Design Infill Beams and Girders Composite members Typical beams: W12’s Typical Girders: W18’s Advantages: -Lighter than concrete -Span long and irregular bays -Erected Quicker than concrete Disadvantages: -Require Fireproofing -Deeper floor assembly G RAVITY S YSTEM R EDESIGN A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE 1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis Proposal Summary Design Goals Gravity System Redesign Lateral System Redesign Progressive Collapse Design 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions Typical Floor Layout: W12 x 14 W18 x 35

Column Design Typical size: W10’s Live load reduction used in accordance with ASCE 7-05 Spliced at every other level Optimized to increase the redundancy of shapes Advantages: -Lighter than concrete -No affect on existing architecture -Erected Quicker than concrete Disadvantages: -Require Fireproofing G RAVITY S YSTEM R EDESIGN A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE 1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis Proposal Summary Design Goals Gravity System Redesign Lateral System Redesign Progressive Collapse Design 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions RAM Model – Interaction Diagrams:

S TRUCTURAL D EPTH A NALYSIS A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE 1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis Proposal Summary Design Goals Gravity System Redesign Lateral System Redesign Progressive Collapse Design 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions S TRUCTURAL D EPTH S TUDY Lateral System Redesign

L ATERAL S YSTEM R EDESIGN A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE 1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis Proposal Summary Design Goals Gravity System Redesign Lateral System Redesign Progressive Collapse Design 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions Lateral System Design Loads Wind Loads Location Parameters for Arlington, VA ASCE 7-05, Chapter 6 Design Method 2 – Analytical Method Controls lateral design in both East-West and North-South directions Wind Forces in North-South Direction: Wind Forces in East-West Direction:

L ATERAL S YSTEM R EDESIGN A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE 1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis Proposal Summary Design Goals Gravity System Redesign Lateral System Redesign Progressive Collapse Design 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions Lateral System Design Loads Seismic Loads Ground Parameters for site location ASCE 7-05, Chapters 11 & 12 Equivalent Lateral Force Analysis Method Seismic Forces:

L ATERAL S YSTEM R EDESIGN A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE 1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis Proposal Summary Design Goals Gravity System Redesign Lateral System Redesign Progressive Collapse Design 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions Serviceability Standards Allowable Drift & Displacement Wind < h/400 Seismic < 0.020h x Values taken from RAM model and compared to allowable drift and displacement values Serviceability Controls in the East-West Direction Displacement in East-West Direction: Drift in East-West Direction:

L ATERAL S YSTEM R EDESIGN A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE 1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis Proposal Summary Design Goals Gravity System Redesign Lateral System Redesign Progressive Collapse Design 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions Steel Moment Resisting Frames Located around the perimeter of the building Controlled by wind loads in north-south direction and serviceability in east-west direction Optimized to increase the redundancy of shapes Advantages: -Lighter than concrete -Minimal affect on existing architecture -Erected Quicker than concrete Disadvantages: -Require Fireproofing -Expensive connections -Deep Members Location of Moment Frames: RAM Model: Green Elements – Gravity Members Red Elements – Lateral Members

S TRUCTURAL D EPTH A NALYSIS A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE 1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis Proposal Summary Design Goals Gravity System Redesign Lateral System Redesign Progressive Collapse Design 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions S TRUCTURAL D EPTH S TUDY Progressive Collapse Design

P ROGRESSIVE C OLLAPSE D ESIGN A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE 1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis Proposal Summary Design Goals Gravity System Redesign Lateral System Redesign Progressive Collapse Design 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions Definition of Progressive Collapse Commentary found in ASCE 7-05 defines progressive collapse as… “the spread of an initial local failure from element to element, eventually resulting in the collapse of an entire structure of a disproportionately large part of it.” ASCE and material specific codes do not provide explicit and enforceable requirements General Services Administration (GSA) Progressive Collapse Analysis and Design Guidelines (2003) Department of Defense (DoD) Unified Facilities Criteria – Design of Buildings to Resist with Progressive Collapse (UFC )

P ROGRESSIVE C OLLAPSE D ESIGN A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE 1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis Proposal Summary Design Goals Gravity System Redesign Lateral System Redesign Progressive Collapse Design 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions Analysis 1 - Direct Design Approach: Localizes building failure by requiring the structure be capable of bridging over missing structural elements GSA Guidelines Threat Level – High Level of Protection Assumes instantaneous loss of critical column Plastic Analysis using virtual work method Load Combination: 2(DL+0.25LL) Demand Capacity Ratios (DCR) for each member Q UD =Demand Capacity Q CE =Expected Capacity Plastic Hinge Formation:

P ROGRESSIVE C OLLAPSE D ESIGN A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE 1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis Proposal Summary Design Goals Gravity System Redesign Lateral System Redesign Progressive Collapse Design 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions Analysis 1 - Direct Design Approach: Localizes building failure by requiring the structure be capable of bridging over missing structural elements GSA Guidelines Threat Level – High Level of Protection Assumes instantaneous loss of critical column Plastic Analysis using virtual work method Load Combination: 2(DL+0.25LL) Demand Capacity Ratios (DCR) for each member Q UD =Demand Capacity Q CE =Expected Capacity Bays Designed:

P ROGRESSIVE C OLLAPSE D ESIGN A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE 1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis Proposal Summary Design Goals Gravity System Redesign Lateral System Redesign Progressive Collapse Design 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions Analysis 1 - Direct Design Approach: Localizes building failure by requiring the structure be capable of bridging over missing structural elements GSA Guidelines Threat Level – High Level of Protection Assumes instantaneous loss of critical column Plastic Analysis using virtual work method Load Combination: 2(DL+0.25LL) Demand Capacity Ratios (DCR) for each member Q UD =Demand Capacity Q CE =Expected Capacity Member Sizes: W21 x 44 W21 x 73 W27 x 102 W33 x 118 W33 x 152 W 14 x 257

P ROGRESSIVE C OLLAPSE D ESIGN A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE 1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis Proposal Summary Design Goals Gravity System Redesign Lateral System Redesign Progressive Collapse Design 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions Analysis 2 - Indirect Method: Requires consideration of strength, continuity, and ductility of connections for resisting progressive collapse DoD Guidelines Threat Level – Low Level of Protection (LLOP) Requires the structure be mechanically tied Peripheral Ties Internal Ties Ties to Columns Vertical Ties Horizontal Ties Typical Moment connections can meet these requirements Tie Forces:

P ROGRESSIVE C OLLAPSE D ESIGN A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE 1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis Proposal Summary Design Goals Gravity System Redesign Lateral System Redesign Progressive Collapse Design 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions Analysis 2 - Indirect Method: Requires consideration of strength, continuity, and ductility of connections for resisting progressive collapse DoD Guidelines Threat Level – Low Level of Protection (LLOP) Requires the structure be mechanically tied Peripheral Ties Internal Ties Ties to Columns Vertical Ties Horizontal Ties Typical Moment connections can meet these requirements Tie Force Requirement Equations: Internal Tie Forces = 0.5(1.2DL+1.6LL)S t L 1 Peripheral Tie Forces = 0.25(1.2 DL+1.6LL)S t L 1 Column Ties: Horizontal Tie Forces Vertical Tie Forces = (A TRIB )(1.2DL+1.6LL)

1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies Construction Management Analysis Acoustical Analysis 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions B READTH S TUDIES A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE B READTH S TUDIES Construction Management Analysis

1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies Construction Management Analysis Acoustical Analysis 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions C ONSTRUCTION M ANAGEMENT A NALYSIS A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE Cost Analysis Existing Concrete Structure Costs Proposed Steel Structure Costs

1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies Construction Management Analysis Acoustical Analysis 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions C ONSTRUCTION M ANAGEMENT A NALYSIS A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE Schedule Analysis Existing Concrete Structure Costs 5 Construction Zones Floor to Floor Construction Multiple crews used for forming Approximately 67 Days per Floor Total Construction: 337 Days

1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies Construction Management Analysis Acoustical Analysis 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions C ONSTRUCTION M ANAGEMENT A NALYSIS A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE Schedule Analysis Proposed Steel Structure Costs 5 Construction Zones Floor to Floor Construction Single crews used Approximately 28 Days per Floor Total Construction: 171 Days

1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies Construction Management Analysis Acoustical Analysis 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions C ONSTRUCTION M ANAGEMENT A NALYSIS A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE Results Reduced schedule by 166 days Saved Approximately $125,000

1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies Construction Management Analysis Acoustical Analysis 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions B READTH S TUDIES A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE B READTH S TUDIES Acoustical Analysis

Area under Cooling Towers: 1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies Construction Management Analysis Acoustical Analysis 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions Due to reduction in the concrete thickness possible acoustical issues may be induced Noise transmission from the mechanical penthouse to the office spaces on Level 5T must be checked The area under two cooling towers was considered A COUSTICAL A NALYSIS A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE

1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies Construction Management Analysis Acoustical Analysis 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions Due to reduction in the concrete thickness possible acoustical issues may be induced Noise transmission from the mechanical penthouse to the office spaces on Level 5T must be checked The area under two cooling towers was considered Existing Floor System: 9” Concrete slab Additional 6” concrete below the equipment base Proposed Floor System: 3 VLI metal deck with 3 ½” concrete slab Additional 6” concrete below the equipment base A COUSTICAL A NALYSIS A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE Existing Penthouse Floor System Proposed Penthouse Floor System

1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies Construction Management Analysis Acoustical Analysis 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions Results The proposed floor system is adequate in restricting sound penetration No additional acoustical materials are required A COUSTICAL A NALYSIS A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE

1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions Design Goal Analysis Recommendations Acknowledgements 5.Questions C ONCLUSIONS A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE R ECOMMENDATIONS & E VALUATION

1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions Design Goal Analysis Recommendations Acknowledgements 5.Questions D ESIGN G OALS A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE Respect the existing layout and architectural features of the building Choose a single lateral system and layout that will work effectively Design the structural steel system for progressive collapse mitigation Design a structural steel system that reduces overall building costs Reduce the construction schedule by designing a steel structural system that is more efficient to erect

1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions Design Goal Analysis Recommendations Acknowledgements 5.Questions R ECOMMENDATIONS A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE The proposed steel framing and moment frames would be a feasible alternative to the existing cast-in-place concrete structure for the Army National Guard Readiness Center

1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions Design Goal Analysis Recommendations Acknowledgements 5.Questions A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE I would like to thank the following individuals for their assistance in the completion of this thesis Tompkins Builders, Inc Everyone working on the Army National Guard Readiness Center Addition Army National Guard LTC Rodney Graham The Pennsylvania State University Thesis Consultants - Dr. Thomas Boothby - Professor Kevin M. Parfitt - Professor Robert Holland The entire Architectural Engineering Department and Professors at Penn State for their support and guidance over the years Family and Friends A special thank you to family, friends, and peers for the much needed support and help they have provided. It would have been a difficult process without their love and understanding throughout this process.

1.Introduction & Building Overview 2.Structural Depth Analysis 3.Breadth Studies 4.Recommendations & Conclusions 5.Questions Q UESTIONS A RMY N ATIONAL G UARD R EADINESS C ENTER P RESENTATION O UTLINE A MANDA C. F ARACE