Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
1
Mountain Ridge Project
* 07/16/96 Owner: Tomo Cerovsek Contract: Architectural Design: Mario Sargac Engineering Design: Michael Jewsbury Construction Manager: Roger Lee Apprentice: Kit Fleming Location: Hope River, Lake Tahoe Conceptual Development Phase 4 Alternate Designs for Instructional Lab Facility 11/22/2018 *
2
Ridge Team ~ Architectural
3
I
4
Alternative #1 3rd floor plan 1st floor plan 2nd floor plan
Faculty offices Chair’s office Senior Admin. office Secretaries Faculty Lounge Student offices Auditorium Large classrooms Small classrooms Seminar rooms Instructional labs computer machine room Technical support Storage 1st floor plan Faculty offices Chair’s office Senior Admin. office Secretaries Faculty Lounge Student offices Auditorium Large classrooms Small classrooms Seminar rooms Instructional labs computer machine room Technical support Storage 2nd floor plan Faculty offices Chair’s office Senior Admin. office Secretaries Faculty Lounge Student offices Auditorium Large classrooms Small classrooms Seminar rooms Instructional labs computer machine room Technical support Storage
5
Alternative #1 entrance from Ridge View Rd
6
Alternative #1 gaining natural light
7
Alternative #1
8
Alternative #1 fractionized structure
9
II
10
Alternative #2 room layout affinity / rejection extra security
11
Alternative #2 2nd geometry 2 entrances from N room layout
1st floor plan Faculty offices Chair’s office Senior Admin. office Secretaries Faculty Lounge Student offices Auditorium Large classrooms Small classrooms Seminar rooms Insrtuctional labs computer machine room Technical support Storage 3rd floor plan Faculty offices Chair’s office Senior Admin. office Secretaries Faculty Lounge Student offices Auditorium Large classrooms Small classrooms Seminar rooms Insrtuctional labs computer machine room Technical support Storage 2nd floor plan Faculty offices Chair’s office Senior Admin. office Secretaries Faculty Lounge Student offices Auditorium Large classrooms Small classrooms Seminar rooms Insrtuctional labs computer machine room Technical support Storage 2nd geometry 2 entrances from N room layout challenging cantilever
12
Alternative #2 entrance from Ridge View Rd
13
Alternative #2
14
Alternative #2
15
Alternative #2 mountain & river view
16
III
17
Alternative #3 3rd floor plan 1st floor plan 2nd floor plan
Faculty offices Chair’s office Senior Admin. office Secretaries Faculty Lounge Student offices Auditorium Large classrooms Small classrooms Seminar rooms Instructional labs computer machine room Technical support Storage 1st floor plan Faculty offices Chair’s office Senior Admin. office Secretaries Faculty Lounge Student offices Auditorium Large classrooms Small classrooms Seminar rooms Instructional labs computer machine room Technical support Storage 2nd floor plan Faculty offices Chair’s office Senior Admin. office Secretaries Faculty Lounge Student offices Auditorium Large classrooms Small classrooms Seminar rooms Instructional labs computer machine room Technical support Storage
18
Alternative #3 Ridge View road entrance AutoCAD 3D model
19
Alternative #3 two grids / two options exterior / interior grid
utilizing two grids two grids two grids / two options exterior / interior grid
20
Alternative #3 proposal of extra columns combined grid extra columns
combining two grids
21
Alternative #3 NetMeeting session
22
IV
23
Alternative #4 soft fluid among stones 2nd floor plan 1st floor plan
Faculty offices Chair’s office Senior Admin. office Secretaries Faculty Lounge Student offices Auditorium Large classrooms Small classrooms Seminar rooms Insrtuctional labs computer machine room Technical support Storage 1st floor plan Faculty offices Chair’s office Senior Admin. office Secretaries Faculty Lounge Student offices Auditorium Large classrooms Small classrooms Seminar rooms Insrtuctional labs computer machine room Technical support Storage 3rd floor plan Faculty offices Chair’s office Senior Admin. office Secretaries Faculty Lounge Student offices Auditorium Large classrooms Small classrooms Seminar rooms Insrtuctional labs computer machine room Techincal support Srorage soft fluid among stones
24
Alternative #4 sense of gravity
25
Alternative #4 entrance from Ridge View Rd
26
Alternative #4 growing structure
27
Alternative #4
28
Alternative #4 building as balancing item
30
Structural 11/22/2018
31
INTRODUCTION Structural Scope Design Parameters Four Alternatives
Gravity Framing Seismic Framing Four Alternatives Material Selection Systems MEP 11/22/2018
32
4 Alternates 1 2 3 4 11/22/2018
33
Alternate 1 First Floor Second Floor Third Floor Added Shear Wall
34
Alternate 2 First Floor Second Floor Third Floor
35
Alternate 2 Roof Truss Sections Added Bracing Tower
36
Alternate 3 First Floor Second Floor Third Floor Added Support
37
Alternate 4 First Floor Second Floor Third Floor 11/22/2018
38
Alternate 4 First Floor Second Floor
39
Alternate 4 Third Floor Roof
40
Steel RC Precast Wood 1) Overall cost 2) Constructability
Fabrication Time 3) Reliability 4) Versatility 5) Lightweight RC 1) Overall Cost 2) Formwork Time to Cure 5) Heavy Precast 2) Fabrication Time Less Formwork Wood 2) Availability Mill Time 5) Light
41
Seismic Framing for Each Alt.
Determine the magnitude of seismic forces Design of Steel/Concrete/Composite diaphragm Conceptualization of Lateral Force Resisting Elements Details, Details, Details 11/22/2018
42
Seismic Loading
43
Diaphragm Distributes shear forces to LFRs
Static analysis showed maximum stresses to be 200 psi Maximum Metal deck-PCC composite on 2nd,3rd,and Roof Steel deck 10’ between beams “one-way” Portland cement concrete via pump-truck Wire mesh reinforcement and chord steel Shear Stud Reinforcement Steel Deck Concrete Diaphragm 11/22/2018
44
Overturning forces are not significant LFR Systems
Steel Chevron Bracing Moment Frames Concrete Ductile Shear Walls Moment Frame Precast Post Tensioned Moment Frame 11/22/2018
45
Seismic Framing: CBF WT18x65 2L6x6x1/2 Shear Deformation
46
PT Moment Frame Special PT Moment Resisting Frame
Precast Sections: Moment Frame allowable in building code with special testing Construction Problems, Ductile and Safe, Allows long, open, uninterrupted spans 11/22/2018
47
Structural: Seismic Framing
Shear Wall Cast-in-Place Simple Ductility depends on failure mechanism Requires Architectural Space 11/22/2018
48
Typical Connection Details
Worst Case Steel Connections 11/22/2018
49
Typical Connection Details
Column Foundation Column Beam Confinement 11/22/2018
50
Foundation System Function of our foundation system Site Profile
Handle vertical loads Resist lateral forces Site Profile Bedrock Very high bearing capacity Very low settlements Shallow Foundation Bearing pressures 5 kips/sq.ft. 4’x4’ Footings under columns 12”-18” strip footing (Perimeter and LFRs)
51
Slab on Grade Floor Systems Slab on grade under bulk of structure
6” thick, reinforced, expansion joints, chord steel Moisture prevention- vapor barrier and poorly graded gravel. Perimeter insulation
52
MEP Considerations Steel MEP Concrete MEP Light Light 11.5’ 10.5’ 10’
9’ 9’ 11/22/2018
53
Construction 11/22/2018
54
General Construction Issues:
Budget (in 2000): Total Budget…$4,200,000 Structural Budget…$370,000 Schedule Mobilize on Site…October 3, 2011 Early Occupancy Requirement…May 1, 2012 Completion Date…September 28, 2012 11/22/2018
55
Threats: Concrete MEP Steel MEP Light Light 11.5’ 10.5’ 10’ 10’ 9’ 9’
11/22/2018
56
General Site Condition: Ell vs. Square Footprint
11/22/2018
57
Equipment Requirements:
11/22/2018
58
Alternative #1: Square Footprint w/ 21,400SF
11/22/2018
59
Alternative #1: Construction Schedule
RC June 15, 2012 Sept. 28, 2012 Precast May 29, 2012 June 1, 2012 Steel Sept. 19, 2012 Sept. 21, 2012 11/22/2018
60
Alt #1: Strengths,Weaknesses, Opportunities & Threats
Winter weather; Excavation Threats Increase SF to lower per SF cost Could use exterior wall panel as form Opportunities Over budget Shortage of SF; Odd angles Schedule; Concrete pour Weaknesses Faster erection & better integrity than RC Faster erection than RC More flexible forms; Within Budget Strengths Pre-Cast Concrete Steel Frame Reinforced Concrete SWOT Analysis Alternative #1 11/22/2018
61
Alternative #2: Ell Footprint w/ 30,300 SF
11/22/2018
62
Alternative #2: Construction Schedule
RC June 1, 2012 Sept. 14, 2012 Shear Wall May 30, 2012 May 22, 2012 Steel Sept. 19, 2012 Sept. 12, 2012 11/22/2018
63
Alt #2: Strengths,Weaknesses, Opportunities & Threats
Hope River; Excavation Threats Construct lab area first Structurally Challenging Opportunities Over budget Early Occupancy Concrete pour: CIP vs. Prefab Weaknesses Reduced interior columns Strengths Steel Frame w/ Shear Wall Steel Frame Reinforced Concrete SWOT Analysis Alternative #2 11/22/2018
64
EC-Alternative: Ell Footprint w/ 23,350 SF
11/22/2018
65
EC-Alternative: Construction Schedule
RC June 10, 2012 Sept. 25, 2012 Precast May 22, 2012 May 15, 2012 Steel Sept. 12, 2012 Sept. 5, 2012 11/22/2018
66
EC-Alt: Strengths,Weaknesses, Opportunities & Threats
Hope River; Excavation Threats New column grid More efficient use of SF Opportunities Over structural budget Lab rooms on 2nd floor Not enough SF Weaknesses Faster erection & better integrity than RC Faster erection than RC; within budget Within budget; Meets final delivery date Strengths Pre-Cast Concrete Steel Frame Reinforced Concrete 11/22/2018
67
A-Alternative: Square Footprint w/ 38,800SF
11/22/2018
68
A-Alternative: Construction Schedule
RC June 15, 2012 Sept. 28, 2012 Shear Wall June 13, 2012 June 8, 2012 Steel Oct. 3, 2012 Sept. 28, 2012 11/22/2018
69
A-Alt: Strengths,Weaknesses, Opportunities & Threats
Winter weather; Excavation Threats Realign interior walls Reduce cost by cutting back SF Opportunities High life cycle cost due to open space Schedule; Inefficient use of interior walls Pour schedule; Over budget Weaknesses Relatively uniform spacing Cost efficient & over SF requirements Can have finish quality surface Strengths Steel Frame w/ Shear Wall Steel Frame Reinforced Concrete SWOT Analysis A-Alternative 11/22/2018
70
Overall Opportunities:
Re-use of existing structure Savings on construction schedule & cost Use of existing facade as temporary enclosure reduced weather risk Earlier start date reduced winter weather risk 11/22/2018
71
Material and Team Matrix
11/22/2018
72
MATERIALS: AEROGEL What is Aerogel?
Strengths: strength/weight, insulation Weaknesses: cost, transparency Opportunities: insulation, windows Threats: cost 11/22/2018
73
MATERIALS: SUPERCRITICAL CERAMICS
What are supercritical ceramics? Strengths: perfect formation, strength/weight Weaknesses: scale, fabrication Opportunities: environment Threats: patents 11/22/2018
74
* 07/16/96 TEAM MATRIX A C E 11/22/2018 *
75
TEAM MATRIX A E C Alternate 1 Alternate 2 Alternate 3 Alternate 4
11/22/2018
76
? FINAL SELECTION Alternate 4: dual system,
Alternate 2: steel frame and truss system, steel bracing towers Alternate 4: dual system, concrete shear walls, steel frame Owner approval pending
Similar presentations
