1. 2001 Final Presentation

2. The Atlantic Team JARED Georgia Tech Construction Manager PETER Georgia Tech Construction Manager HANS Georgia Tech Owner KIM Georgia Tech Architect YIP Stanford Engineer

3. Our Site - Boston

4. Site Location

5.  Peninsula  Area of in-filled land  Winter snow Site Constraints

6. Design Evaluation Architect: Concept fits local area Less visually pleasing Engineer: Rigid diaphragm problem Construction Managers: Best budget Architect: Best looking building Engineer: Girders have deflection problem Sloped roof helps snow load Construction Managers: Very constructable & best schedule Alternative 1Alternative 2

7. Design Choice Alternative 2 Best combination of strengths vs. weaknesses Wood / Steel Hybrid Combine the attractiveness / interest of 2W with the cost and schedule benefits of 2S Keep wood exterior structure of 2W, but incorporate the steel interior structure of 2S

8. Architectural Design Kim Ferraro

9. Design Vision 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

10. Floor Plans Auditorium Classrooms, seminar rooms, labs Student offices Faculty offices, facilities, administration

11. Sections Special Auditorium and Classroom Section Typical Section

12. 3D Model

13. Structural Design Wai Yip Chan

14. 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

15. Engineering Design 3 Timber Steel Hybrid System

16. Evolution & Process Evolution TIE V Brace

17. Inside Frame Plan Typ Beam: W14X30 Typ Girder: W24X55 Typ Col: W12X40

18. Outside Frame Plan Pre-fabricated wood truss with knee brace Prefab wood truss 2"X6“ @ 24” Column 12"DIA Knee brace 2"X6" Joist 2"X4"

19. ETAB Model Large drift in the top floor Maximum moment at the mid-height of the timber columns

20. Load Path Structure Load Path Gravity Load Lateral Load

21. Typical Connection Steel Bracing Wood / Steel Plate & Bolts

22. Construction Jared Ford Peter Knobel

23. Site Layout Crane: Arm Length = 106 ft Construction Road: 280 Feet Long Trailers: Located at Entrance Safety: Trailers & Toilets Not in Crane’s Radius

24. Constructions Methods Simultaneous Erection of Interior and Exterior Structure Prefabrication of Roof Trusses Work Sequence From the Center of the Building to the Two Outside Parts of the L-Shape -> Better Material Flow -> Simultaneous Work Opportunities

25. Budget Information

26. Cost Estimate

27. Cost Summary Total Means Cost = $2,920,500

28. Schedule

29. Schedule Summary Total Length of Construction: 160 work days = 33 weeks Evaluation: Completion 5 weeks earlier than required

30. Structure Sequencing Graded Site ExcavationFootingsFoundationBasement WallsBackfillInterior ColumnsExterior ColumnsInterior BeamsSlabsRoof TrussesRoof BracesRoof Decking

31. Construction Sequencing Complete Building

32. Equipment Selection Steer Loader Truck Crane Excavator Telescopic Handler

33. Team Dynamics ANYBODY OUT THERE?

34. A-E: Location of Auditorium E-C: Embedding of Exterior Columns in the Foundation A-C: Size and Scale of Glass Storefront A-E-C: Material Selection (Weather Constraints) A-E-C: Roof Shape and Structure A-E-C: Excavation Constraints (Infilled Land, Water) A-Owner: Building Height C-Owner: Budget and Schedule Iteration Issues THINKING DISCUSSION COMPROMISE CHANGE SOLUTION DECISION

35. Team Process “The process can be frustrating. We should always bear in mind that the other parties are not our enemies. We have the same goal, to design the building. Don’t let it get too personal, use the communication tools provided in this class, and then less frustration will occur.” “After getting to know the other’s expectations and concerns better, we handled all issues much easier, faster and more effective during the spring quarter by anticipating everybody’s opinions and, therefore, avoiding problems even before they arose.” “This spring we not only worked more thoroughly but understood that every detailed decision in one discipline in turn impacted the other two disciplines...Continuously iterating as we proceeded with the project”

36. Lessons Learned Cross-Discipline Knowledge Objectives and Concerns Different and Discipline-Based Development Habits Teamwork Efficiency Reliability Organization / Work Habits Technology New Hardware & Software More Effective Use

37. 2001 Winter Presentation Questions?