1. Lake Team 2001 Winter Quarter Presentation March 16, 2001 Architect: Robert Williamson, U.C. Berkeley Engineers: Dominik Weiss, FHA, Switzerland Markus Mathys, FHA, Switzerland Construction Manager:Ravi Raghu, Stanford Owner: Peter Demian

2. Site Context Situated on Lake Geneva, Switzerland Surrounded by the Alps Nearly flat site

3. Site Location 10, 108 sq. ft. footprint Clear view to the lake Easily accessible by two roads

4. Climate 20°C mean temperature in summer Annual snow fall – 30in 3 months of continuous snowing (incentive to enclose the site before snowfall begins)

5. Soil Conditions Soil conditions – excellent gravel –Easy to excavate –Safety regulations: 1:1 or 1:2 sloping allowed. Beyond that use sheet piles Humus Good gravel Water plate Lake Geneva

6. Equipment Based on capacity and requirement After analysis of different available equipments (Capacity 1.54m 3 ) Backhoe Crane Dump trucks Concrete pump

7. Equipment Mobile Crane – Boom 54m

8. Site Plan Bonus double access roads Can divert traffic if needed and use the other side of the road Mobile crane

9. New Design #1 Concept Development Surrounding mountains inspired the idea of protruding elements at various angles. Respond to the site Create an icon for the University A

10. 1 st Iteration Initial 1 st floor plan Small Classrooms Auditorium Large Classrooms Lab Seminar Room Entrance A

11. 2 nd Iteration Provides more assignable floor area for required spaces Based on simpler structural system Circulation is clearer Less expensive Auditorium Large Classrooms Small Classrooms Seminar Rooms Storage A

12. Plans and Sections 1 st Floor 2 nd Floor3 rd Floor Auditorium Large Classrooms Small Classrooms Seminar Rooms Storage Labs/Computer Room Small Classrooms Seminar Rooms Student Offices Faculty Offices Faculty Lounge A

13. Mountain Concept general considerations Auditorium with firm seating 4kN/m2 Other areas 5kN/m2 Other areas General 3kN/m2 Balcony, stairs 4kN/m2 Snow On the flat roof 0.9kN/m2 Wind Max. wind load 1.4kN/m2 E

14. Columns are made of structural steel Ceilings are composite steel and concrete Stabilization through an elevator core and two moment resisting frames in the facade. Strip foundation Main girder Secondary girder 7.55m 8.23m 6.38m 5.10m6.70m4.28m 14.0m 23.16m E Mountain Concept 1st alternative: steel-concrete-composite

15. The red line are moment resisting frames Are dimensioned for the blue loads All other steel members are connected to the concrete 7.55m 8.23m 6.38m 5.10m6.70m4.28m 14.0m 23.16m Main girder Secondary girder Mountain Concept 1st alternative: steel-concrete-composite E

16. Auditorium Large Classrooms Large steel members with smaller secondary girders No extra columns in the auditorium Steel member 4.65m 11.84m4.45m 5.93m Mountain Concept 1st alternative: steel-concrete-composite E

17. The secondary girder between a main girder. Small construction height. Mountain Concept 1st alternative: steel-concrete-composite High construction height. The secondary girder on top of the main girder Concrete flooring h=150mm Metal sheet Secondary girder h=360mm Main girder h=450mm 450mm 360mm 150mm 360mm 150mm 450mm E

18. Connection between a main girder and two columns Mountain Concept 1st alternative: steel-concrete-composite Connection between a main girder and two secondary girder column H=140mm column H=140mm Main girder Flat bar Screw (shear) Concrete flooring h=150mm Metal sheet Secondary girder h=360mm Main girder h=450mm Tongue with two screws E

19. Strip Foundation Mountain Concept foundation alternative: Plate foundation Strip/spread foundation. Between the foundation a swimming bed plate The bed plate will be the foundation. If necessary there will be different heights of the plate. Swimming bed plate columns Bed plate with different heights 2.0m 0.5m 2.0m 0.5m E

20. Mountain Concept Alternative 1 C

21. C

22. Total cost of the design alternative $5.28M Mountain Concept Alternative 1 C

23. January 1, 2015 June 15, 2015 Mountain Concept Alternative 1 C

24. End construction – June 15 th Resource allocation considered in the schedule Steel construction aids the fast completion Can create a closure early to prevent weather delays Lead time for procurement high Mountain Concept Alternative 1 C

25. Mountain Concept 2nd alternative: concrete columns and plates made out of concrete One elevation core and two shear walls to stabilize the building The ceiling is jointed with the walls in the auditorium Foundation plate 7.55m 8.23m 6.38m 5.10m6.70m4.28m 14.0m 23.16m E

26. Mountain Concept 2nd alternative: concrete As an example the load path for wind load Clamped shear walls to guide the loads to the foundation q Wind 7.55m 8.23m 6.38m 5.10m6.70m4.28m 14.0m 23.16m E

27. Using the walls in the classrooms to support the ceiling of the auditorium Just one column in the whole auditorium Classroom walls made of concrete Mountain Concept 2nd alternative: concrete Auditorium Large Classrooms Terrain column Arched vault 4.65m 11.84m4.45m 5.93m E

28. Connection from the wall to the ceiling of the auditorium column Ceiling 2 nd floor Reinforcement Ceiling auditorium Wall classroom Connection from a column to the ceiling 30cm 35cm 30cm Mountain Concept - Solution 2nd alternative: concrete E

29. Concrete framing system cheaper than the steel one Trade off in time Total cost of concrete alternative – 4.91m Timeline – Jan 1 st to Jul 13 th Mountain Concept Alternative 2 C

30. Total framing cost of $612382 as opposed to $762109 for the steel framing Mountain Concept Alternative 2 C

31. New Design #2 Concept Development Central atrium can divide the building into a private sector and a public sector All vertical movement can be contained within the circular atrium Atrium creates a central gathering space A

32. 1 st Iteration Auditorium Large Classrooms Small Classrooms Seminar Rooms Labs/Computer Room Student Offices Faculty Offices Storage AE

33. 2 nd Iteration 2 cores will contribute to a better structural solution and result in a lower cost AE

34. Atrium Concept Construction Iteration: masonry-concretesteel-concrete- composite 2nd alternative:1st alternative: E

35. 1st/2nd/3rd floor: steel columns  vertical forces moment resisting frames and diagonals  lateral and vertical forces Atrium Concept 1st alternative: steel-concrete-composite E

36. Slab: main beams built-up girders concrete slab Atrium Concept 1st alternative: steel-concrete-composite section view spans: 6-8m spans: 7-11.6m E

37. View at shearwall: Atrium Concept 1st alternative: steel-concrete-composite see detail Section through Auditorium: E

38. screw connections no shear studs (partial composite action) single span built-up girders Atrium Concept 1st alternative: steel-concrete-composite E

39. Atrium Concept Alternative 1 Total framing cost of $786720 for the steel framing Simpler exterior glazing Total project cost – $5.4m Timeline – Jan 1 st to June 28 th C

40. Atrium Concept Alternative 1 Constructibility issues –Partially Composite design recommended –100% composite action not easy to construct –Connections in MRF not as critical because of no seismic effect C

41. 1st Floor: reinforced masonry concrete slab and columns main beams above auditorium View to lake atrium main beams Atrium Concept 2nd alternative: masonry-concrete E

42. 2nd / 3rd floor: masonry concrete slab and columns Atrium Concept 2nd alternative: masonry-concrete section E

43. Longitudinal section of auditorium: Atrium Concept 2nd alternative: masonry-concrete Detail of slab and main beam: E

44. Cross-section of slab and main beam above auditorium: Atrium Concept 2nd alternative: masonry-concrete E

45. Foundation below auditorium and large classrooms: General foundation: Atrium Concept Details E

46. Glass dome above atrium: Atrium Concept Details E

47. Atrium Concept Alternative 2 Total framing cost of $597589 as opposed to $786720 for the steel framing Total project cost – 4.97m Timeline – Jan 1 st to august 12 th C

48. Materials Choices Options considered for concrete – Precast vs. Cast in place –Precast economically infeasible EIFSConcrete $ 22.5 per sf Fast to erect Good thermal insulation and immune to cracking $12 per sf Impacts schedule Sturdy but is labor intensive C

49. Sequencing Issues Excavation Erection Steel Vs Concrete C

50. New Designs at a glance Cost Breakdown C

51. New Designs at a glance C

52. Budget C

53. New Designs at a glance C

54. Mountain ConceptAtrium Concept A Pros: Cons: Strong Conceptual Idea Fulfills Program Req’s. Issues of heat gain/loss through glazing Pros: Cons: Symmetrical Design easier to construct Lack of conceptual development; Does not respond to the site E SteelConcreteCompositeConcrete Pros:Light construction; faster to build Pros:Availability of matl.;Ease of stabilization; Uniform matl. Pros:Light Const.; Short erection time; Space for HVAC Pros:Heat insulation; high stiffness, low deformation; low operation costs Cons:Difficult connections; not easy to stabilize Cons:High dead load; heavy construction Cons:Higher operation cost Cons:Req’s more man power; longer erection time C Pros:Faster erection; quicker const. of enclosure to protect from weather Pros:Lower const. costPros:Very effective and fast to erect Pros:More economically feasible Cons:Lead time for procurement high, higher cost Cons:Longer const. Period; higher dependancy on good weather; precast is more expensive Cons:Fully composite action not suitable; steel procurement delays; expensive Cons:Impact on scheduling

55. Design #3 Redesign Concepts The gym is a place of exhibitionism The café should be public and have access to an outdoor space A

56. Plan Development Original Plan 2 nd Iteration 1 st Iteration AE/CA A

57. General idea: hanging the gym up with steel-diagonals Redesign structural idea Concrete slab concrete shear-walls and columns steel columns E

58. Redesign structural idea fire exit/ fire stairs on this side total span: 6m 3rd floor: light timber construction glass front at all three sides of gym CAFETERIA GYM 3rd floor: timber construction steel columns and diagonals 6m concrete slab t = 0.3m E

59. Redesign Additional Cost for the Gym and Cafeteria $340000 –$250000 for the gymnasium (framing only) –$90000 for the cafeteria Schedule Impact –Gym to be supported by the floor above –Can project out only after the upper floor framing is constructed –Additional 2 weeks for the framing alone C

60. Redesign Considerations Constructibility issues –Separate scaffolding for the gym ? –Connections not too detailed –Might have MEP impacts on the extended part C

61. Team Dynamics Good communication through forums Very little synchronous communication due to time difference and schedule conflicts We were not always aware of what the other team members were doing Had to rush towards the end

62. Lessons Learned Constant synchronous communication is necessary for feedback and conflict resolution. Interdisciplinary involvement at every step of the process will keep us in synch Concrete decisions must be made in order to allow progress to advance We will meet at least 3 times a week throughout the next quarter

63. Conclusion After proposing these alternatives to the owner, Peter Demian, we reached an agreement to pursue the concrete alternative of the mountain concept, combining certain elements from each of the two iterations. This decision was based on the site response, feasibility, and constructibility of the conceptual design.