1. Andrew Diehl The Pennsylvania State University Architectural Engineering Department Structural Option 5 th Year Senior Thesis Project “The Comparison of a Pan Joist Concrete System to a Steel Frame System in UMCP Student Housing – Building B”

2. Outline Existing Building Existing Building Design Criteria Design Criteria Pan Joist Concrete System Pan Joist Concrete System Steel Frame System Steel Frame System Cost Comparison Cost Comparison Construction Management Construction Management Architecture Architecture Conclusion Conclusion Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

3. UMCP Student Housing – Building B Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

4. Project Design Team  Owner – Collegiate Housing Foundation  Architect – Design Collective, Inc.  Construction Manager – Whiting-Turner Contracting  Structural Engineer – Hope Furrer Associates, Inc.  Civil Engineer – A. Morton Thomas & Associates  MEP Engineer – Burdette, Koehler, Murphy & Associates  Geotechnical Engineer – Froehling & Robertson, Inc.  Landscape Architect – Mahan Rykiel Associates, Inc. Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

5. Location The University of Maryland  College Park, Maryland  Easy access to the big cities (Baltimore and Washington, DC)  South Campus Commons Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

6. Existing Building Building Stats  5 stories  77,445 square feet  Dormitory - R-2 classification (BOCA 1999)  2-4 Bedroom Fully-Furnished Apartments  Lobby and Student Lounges  Designed using BOCA 1996 Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

7. Existing Building, cont’d Architecture  Facade – combination of brick and pre-cast cladding  Roof – hipped roof that conceals mechanical system  Cavity wall construction Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

8. Existing Building, cont’d Mechanical System  Multi-zone system  2 – 4500 cfm Centrifugal Rooftop Chillers  3 – Split System Air Conditioning Units  Electric Heating Units Electrical/Lighting System  16 panel boards  3 phase 120V / 208V power  Fluorescent Lighting Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

9. Existing Building, cont’d Construction Management  Project Cost - ~$52 million (includes 4 other buildings)  Duration – November 2000 to August 2002  Design-Build delivery system  Demolition was required of previous building  Utility and transportation service could not be disrupted Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

10. Existing Structural System Gravity System  Hambro composite open web steel joists  Light gauge metal load-bearing exterior walls  Tube steel columns (span to 3 rd floor)  Pre-fabricated wood trusses  Wood load-bearing walls in the 5 th floor  8” reinf. CMU retaining wall with strip and spread footings Lateral System  X-braced light gauge metal stud shear walls Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

11. Existing Structural System Hambro Composite Joists Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

12. Design Criteria  Keep floor-to-floor height the same (9’-10”)  Minimize structural impact in floor plan  Open up the ceiling plenum  Minimize cost impact Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

13. Pan Joist Concrete Design Decisions  40” pans  4 ksi normal weight concrete  Grade 60 reinforcement  Slab thickness is 5” (fireproofing) Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

14. Pan Joist Concrete, cont’d Slab Design  5” thick  Flexural Reinforcement = #3s @ 5”  S&T Reinforcement = #3s @ 5” Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

15. Pan Joist Concrete, cont’d Joist Design  4’ modules  8” x 7” joists Spans Top Reinf. Bottom Reinf. Shear Reinf. 10’ & 11’ 2 #4s #3s @ 5” 15’ & 11’ 2 #5s 2 #4s #3s @ 5” 12’ & 11’4” 2 #5s 2 #4s #3s @ 5” 16’ & 11’ 2 #6s 2 #5s #3s @ 5” Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

16. Pan Joist Concrete, cont’d Girder Design Span Top Reinf. Bottom Reinf. 24’8” & 12’4” 4 #9s & 2 #7s 3 #8s & 1 #8 10’1” & 12’4” 2 #7s & 3 #8s 1 #8 & 2 #8s 25’1” & 12’4” 4 #8s & 2 #8s 2 #9s & 1 #8 16’ & 12’4” 3 #7s & 3 #7s 1 #9 & 1 #8 17’ & 12’4” 3 #7s & 2 #8s 1 #9 & 1 #8 16’ & 12’4” 2 #9s & 1 #8 1 #9 & 1 #6 17’ & 12’4” 2 #8s & 1 #8 1 #8 & 1 #8 Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

17. Pan Joist Concrete, cont’d Girder Design, cont’d  Formed from 40” pans  12”x15” and 12”x18” girders Column Design  Bi-axial columns – 14”x14” with 8 #6s  Uni-axial columns – 12”x12” with 4 #6s Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

18. Pan Joist Concrete, cont’d Bar Cut-offs Negative Reinforcement Positive Reinforcement Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

19. Pan Joist Concrete, cont’d 1 st Floor Framing Plan Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

20. Pan Joist Concrete, cont’d Recommendation  System did not meet design requirements  Column interference  Increase size of ceiling plenum  Additional cost ~$1.3 million Pan Joist Concrete is not viable Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

21. Steel Frame Design Decisions  Grade 50 steel  United Steel Deck Manufacturer  Bolted Connections Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

22. Steel Frame, cont’d Slab Design  United Steel Deck Manual  18 gage UF2X Form Deck  4 ½” concrete slab with 44 – W4.0x4.0 weld wire fabric Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

23. Steel Frame, cont’d Beam and Column Design  1.2D + 1.6L  Meet AISC design requirements  Beam Design Charts  Column Design Charts  W-shapes Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

24. Steel Frame, cont’d Beam and Column Design, cont’d Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

25. Steel Frame, cont’d 1 st Floor Framing Plan Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

26. Steel Frame, cont’d Bolted Connection  6”x8”x1/8” A36 steel angle  2 bolts Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

27. Steel Frame, cont’d Recommendation  System did not meet design requirements  Column interference  Increase size of ceiling plenum  Additional cost ~$600,000 Steel Frame is not viable Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

28. Cost Comparison  Based from R.S. Means Structural System Cost ($) Cost Difference ($) Existing501,380--- Pan Joist Concrete 1,797,100+1,295,720 Steel Frame 1,058,903+557,523 Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

29. Construction Management Site Layout  Easy flow around the building for trades and deliveries  Easy access to the lay- down area  Steel deliveries can be picked off truck and put into place  Temporary power is accessible under the site Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

30. Construction Management, cont’d Site Layout, cont’d Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

31. Construction Management, cont’d Formwork Design  Column forms are ½” plywood forms with 2x4 studs and wales  Stud spacing is 12” O.C.  Wale spacing is 18” O.C.  Column forms can be reused  Joist and Girder forms are standard 40” pans  40” pan forms will remain in place Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

32. Construction Management, cont’d Formwork Design, cont’d Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

33. Architecture Facade Design  Accent the structural design  Visually stimulating  Done by visual breaks in the facade  At column locations  White colored bricks  Disadvantages – increase in labor costs Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

34. Architecture, cont’d Facade Design, cont’d Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

35. Architecture, cont’d Interior Exposure of Structure  Visually stimulating  Not usually seen in buildings  See mechanical and electrical systems  Not done in dwelling areas  Only can be done in 2 rooms in building (lobby and lounge)  Disadvantages – increase costs in mechanical and electrical labor Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

36. Conclusions Both designs did not meet design requirements Both designs did not meet design requirements Column interference Column interference Ceiling needs to be lowered Ceiling needs to be lowered Costs the owner significant amount of money Costs the owner significant amount of money Hambro Composite Joists is viable Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

37. Thank You  Scott Stewart, PE (Hope Furrer Associates, Inc.)  Design Collective, Inc.  Dr. Thomas Boothby  Friends  Family Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

38. Questions Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

39. Foundations Pan Joist Concrete System  More Dead Load  Must watch punching shear at columns  Increase in size and thickness of footings Steel Frame System  Slight increase in Dead Load  Must watch punching shear at columns  Slight increase in size and thickness Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University

40. Structural Scheduling Pan Joist Concrete System  Set-up and stripping of formwork  Pouring and curing of concrete  Laying of reinforcement cage  ~ 1 month added to schedule Steel Frame System  Erection of members  Connection Detailing  ~ 2-3 weeks added to schedule Andrew Diehl 5 th Year AE Senior Thesis Structural Option The Pennsylvania State University