1. 2001 Winter Presentation

2. Site Location

3. Site View

4. 1923 1968 1972 Boston Improved Sewage Site History

5.  Peninsula, surrounded by water  Area of in-filled land  Winter snow Site Constraints

6. Engineering Constraints Soil Properties Compactable Soil 4000 psf bearing capacity Capacity, silt/clay and sand mixture 20’ water table Loading Live Load50 psf Dead Load70 psf Wind Load35 psf Roof Load28 psf

7. Budget Information

8. “With a clear understanding of the historical influences of site, the land, the harbor, the history of Boston…” Architect’s Vision

9. Architectural Design 1 (Redesign) Keep the integrity of the DOME Allow open center to remain Evaluate programmatic functionality Relocate sloped floor rooms to basement level for ease of constructability of slabs

10. Architectural Design 1 (Redesign)

11. Engineering Design 1 Steel (Redesign) Composite steel design Regular column grid Easy installation Steel moment frame Typical Beam: W14X26 c=1” Moment Frame: W16X36

12. Design 1 Steel Estimate (Redesign) Total = $3,145,000

13. Engineering Design 1 Precast (Redesign) 12” masonry wall 24” deep precast concrete girders

14. Design 1 Precast Estimate (Redesign) Total = $3,231,000

15. Design 1 Schedules Finish Dates: Steel - 09/28/16, Precast - 10/05/16 Durations : Steel – 8 mo & 4 wks, Precast – 9 mo Precast Steel

16. Architectural Design 2 Concepts Flow like the waves of the bay Structure like the hull of a boat Gesture towards the historic influence of the site Open walls towards the oak trees Individuality between faculty and students

17. Architectural Design 2 Auditorium Classrooms, seminar rooms, labs Student offices Faculty offices, facilities, administration

18. Engineering Design 2 Steel  Gravity System  Composite steel design  No truss for auditorium Typical Beam W14X30 Typ Girder W24X55 Typ Col W12X40 Auditorium beam w24X76

19. Engineering Design 2 Steel  Foundation layout  Strip & spread footings  Steel bracing  Tube 3X3X1/4

20. Design 2 Steel Estimate Total = $2,722,000

21. Engineering Design 2 Precast Concrete gravity system  Load bearing wall, 2-way slab  48’ post-tensioned girders

22. Engineering Design 2 Precast  Foundation layout  3’ wide strip footing  12” masonry walls  Load path

23. Design 2 Precast Estimate Total = $2,800,000

24. Design 2 Schedules Finish Dates: Steel - 09/14/16, Precast - 09/21/16 Duration: Steel – 8 mo & 2 wks, Precast – 8 mo & 3 wks Precast Steel

25. Architectural Design 3 Concepts  Box in a box  Simple, double structure  Advantageous use of sloped classroom and auditorium floors  Flow of light to below grade level  Exterior wood structure to gesture towards trees

26. Architectural Design 3 Auditorium Classrooms, seminar rooms, labs Student offices Faculty offices, facilities, administration

27. Architectural Design 3

28. Engineering Design 3 Steel Inside Frame Plan Gravity SystemSteel Bracing Tube 3x3x1/4

29. Engineering Design 3 Steel Outside Frame Plan Flat RoofSteel Knee Brace Frame

30. Design 3 Steel Estimate Total = $3,083,000

31. Engineering Design 3 Wood Inside Frame Plan Gravity System Wood Wall Lateral System

32. Engineering Design 3 Wood Outside Frame Plan Pre-fabricated wood truss with knee brace Prefab wood truss 2"X6" Column 12"DIA Knee brace 2"X6" Joist 2"X4" Steel Brace 12"X2"

33. Engineering Design 3 Wood Outside Structure Load Path Gravity Load Lateral Load

34. Engineering Typical Connection Steel Bracing Wood With Steel Plate & Bolts

35. Design 3 Wood Estimate Total = $2,978,000

36. Design 3 Schedules Finish Dates : Steel - 08/24/16, Wood - 09/07/16 Durations: Steel – 7 mo & 3 wks, Wood – 8 mo & 1 wk Wood Steel

37. Equipment Selection Skid Steer Loader Mini Excavator Truck Crane

38. Budget Comparison

39. Design Evaluations DesignArchitectEngineerCM 1S Attractive Dome Design Moment Frame Is Expensive Constructability & Budget Concerns 1P Good CirculationDome Poses Wind Load Problems Constructability & Budget Concerns 2S Concept Fits Local Area Rigid Diaphragm Problem Best Budget 2P Least Visually Pleasing Rigid Diaphragm Problem Good Budget 3S Best Looking BuildingGirders Have Deflection Problem Very Constructible 3W Very Interesting Building Sloped Roof Helps Snow Load Very Constructible

40. Decision Matrix DesignAttractiveInterestBudgetScheduleTotal 1S 435517 1P 346619 2S 651315 2P 562417 3S 22318 3W 11428 Explanation of design rankings: 1=Best…6=Worst Lowest point total wins

41. Design Choice Design 3 Best combination of strengths vs. weaknesses were 3W & 3S from matrix Wood/Steel Hybrid Combine the attractiveness/interest of 3W with the cost and schedule benefits of 3S Keep wood exterior structure of 3W, but incorporate the steel interior structure of 3S

42. Team Dynamics/Interaction

43. “The most challenging and the most successful part of this whole process is the perpetual learning of our own and each others discipline and how we must collaborate in order to succeed.” “The structural system is not the only aspect of the building. We need to think about the others' intentions and constraints. Compromising between different intentions is very important in developing a successful project.” “The greatest thing we will take away from this class is learning how to successfully work in a challenging situation with diverse people on a project with little contact.”

44. Lessons Learned Cross-Discipline Knowledge Vocabulary Interests/Concerns Teamwork Tolerance Dependence/Collaboration Organization/Work Habits Technology New Applications

45. 2001 Winter Presentation Questions?