Lake Team 2001

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

• 20C 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 11 or 12 sloping allowed.
  Beyond that use sheet piles

6
Equipment

• Based on capacity and requirement
• After analysis of different available equipments
• (Capacity 1.54m3)

• 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
A

• Respond to the site
• Create an icon for the University

Surrounding mountains inspired the idea of
protruding elements at various angles.
10
1st Iteration
A
Entrance
Small Classrooms Auditorium Large
Classrooms Lab Seminar Room
Circulation
Initial 1st floor plan
11
2nd Iteration
A

• 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
Circulation
12
Plans and Sections
A
2nd Floor
3rd Floor
1st Floor
Labs/Computer Room Small Classrooms Seminar
Rooms Student Offices
Faculty Offices Faculty Lounge
Auditorium Large Classrooms Small
Classrooms Seminar Rooms Storage
13
Mountain Concept general considerations
E

• 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

14
Mountain Concept 1st alternative
steel-concrete-composite
E
5.10m
6.70m
4.28m

• 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

7.55m
8.23m
6.38m
14.0m
Main girder Secondary girder
23.16m
15
Mountain Concept 1st alternative
steel-concrete-composite
E
5.10m
6.70m
4.28m

• 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
14.0m
Main girder Secondary girder
23.16m
16
Mountain Concept 1st alternative
steel-concrete-composite
E

• Large steel members with smaller secondary
  girders
• No extra columns in the auditorium

Large Classrooms
Steel member
4.65m
5.93m
Auditorium
11.84m
4.45m
17
Mountain Concept 1st alternative
steel-concrete-composite
E

• The secondary girder between a main girder. Small
  construction height.

• High construction height. The secondary girder on
  top of the main girder

150mm
150mm
Concrete flooring h150mm
360mm
Metal sheet
360mm
Secondary girder h360mm
Main girder h450mm
450mm
450mm
18
Mountain Concept 1st alternative
steel-concrete-composite
E

• Connection between a main girder and two
  secondary girder

• Connection between a main girder and two columns

Concrete flooring h150mm
Screw (shear)
column H140mm
Metal sheet
Flat bar
Secondary girder h360mm
Main girder
Tongue with two screws
Flat bar
Main girder h450mm
Screw (shear)
column H140mm
19
Mountain Concept foundation alternative
E

• Plate foundation

• Strip Foundation

• The bed plate will be the foundation. If
  necessary there will be different heights of the
  plate.

• Strip/spread foundation. Between the foundation a
  swimming bed plate

columns
columns
Swimming bed plate
0.5m
0.5m
0.5m
0.5m
2.0m
2.0m
Bed plate with different heights
20
Mountain Concept Alternative 1
C
21
Mountain Concept Alternative 1
C
22
Mountain Concept Alternative 1
C
Total cost of the design alternative 5.28M
23
Mountain Concept Alternative 1
C
January 1, 2015
June 15, 2015
24
Mountain Concept Alternative 1
C

• End construction June 15th
• 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

25
Mountain Concept 2nd alternative concrete
E
5.10m
6.70m
4.28m

• 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
14.0m
23.16m
26
Mountain Concept 2nd alternative concrete
E
5.10m
6.70m
4.28m

• As an example the load path for wind load
• Clamped shear walls to guide the loads to the
  foundation

7.55m
8.23m
6.38m
qWind
14.0m
23.16m
27
Mountain Concept 2nd alternative concrete
E

• 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

Large Classrooms
Arched vault
column
4.65m
5.93m
Terrain
Auditorium
11.84m
4.45m
28
Mountain Concept - Solution 2nd alternative
concrete
E

• Connection from the wall to the ceiling of the
  auditorium

• Connection from a column to the ceiling

30cm
column
Reinforcement
30cm
Reinforcement
Wall classroom
35cm
Ceiling 2nd floor
35cm
column
Ceiling auditorium
29
Mountain Concept Alternative 2
C

• Concrete framing system cheaper than the steel
  one
• Trade off in time
• Total cost of concrete alternative 4.91m
• Timeline Jan 1st to Jul 13th

30
Mountain Concept Alternative 2
C

• Total framing cost of 612382 as opposed to
  762109 for the steel framing

31
New Design 2 Concept Development
A

• 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

32
1st Iteration
A
E
Auditorium Large Classrooms Small
Classrooms Seminar Rooms
Labs/Computer Room Student Offices Faculty
Offices Storage
33
2nd Iteration
A
E

• 2 cores will contribute to a better structural
  solution and result in a lower cost

34
Atrium ConceptConstruction
E

• Iteration

2nd alternative
1st alternative
masonry-concrete
steel-concrete- composite
35
Atrium Concept
1st alternative steel-concrete-composite
E

• 1st/2nd/3rd floor
• steel columns ? vertical forces
• moment resisting frames and diagonals ?
  lateral and vertical forces

36
Atrium Concept1st alternative
steel-concrete-composite
E

• Slab
• main beams
• built-up girders
• concrete slab

view
spans 6-8m
spans 7-11.6m
section
37
Atrium Concept1st alternative
steel-concrete-composite
E

• View at shearwall

see detail
Section through Auditorium
38
Atrium Concept1st alternative
steel-concrete-composite
E

• screw connections
• no shear studs (partial composite action)
• single span built-up girders

39
Atrium Concept Alternative 1
C

• Total framing cost of 786720 for the steel
  framing
• Simpler exterior glazing
• Total project cost 5.4m
• Timeline Jan 1st to June 28th

40
Atrium Concept Alternative 1
C

• Constructibility issues
• Partially Composite design recommended
• 100 composite action not easy to construct
• Connections in MRF not as critical because of no
  seismic effect

41
Atrium Concept
2nd alternative masonry-concrete
E
View to lake

• 1st Floor
• reinforced masonry
• concrete slab and columns
• main beams aboveauditorium

atrium
main beams
42
Atrium Concept2nd alternative masonry-concrete
E

• 2nd / 3rd floor
• masonry
• concrete slab and columns

section
43
Atrium Concept2nd alternative masonry-concrete
E

• Longitudinal section
• of auditorium

Detail of slab and main beam
44
Atrium Concept2nd alternative masonry-concrete
E

• Cross-section of
• slab and main beam
• above auditorium

45
Atrium Concept
Details
E

• Foundation below auditorium
• and large classrooms

General foundation
46
Atrium ConceptDetails
E

• Glass dome above atrium

47
Atrium Concept Alternative 2
C

• Total framing cost of 597589 as opposed to
  786720 for the steel framing
• Total project cost 4.97m
• Timeline Jan 1st to august 12th

48
Materials Choices
C

• Options considered for concrete Precast vs.
  Cast in place
• Precast economically infeasible

EIFS Concrete
22.5 per sf Fast to erect Good thermal insulation and immune to cracking 12 per sf Impacts schedule Sturdy but is labor intensive
49
Sequencing Issues
Sequencing Issues
C
Erection
Excavation
50
New Designs at a glance
C
Cost Breakdown
51
New Designs at a glance
C
52
New Designs at a glance
C
Budget
53
New Designs at a glance
C
54
Mountain Concept Mountain Concept Mountain Concept Mountain Concept Mountain Concept Atrium Concept Atrium Concept Atrium Concept Atrium Concept Atrium Concept
A Pros Cons Pros Cons Strong Conceptual Idea Fulfills Program Reqs. Issues of heat gain/loss through glazing Strong Conceptual Idea Fulfills Program Reqs. Issues of heat gain/loss through glazing Strong Conceptual Idea Fulfills Program Reqs. Issues of heat gain/loss through glazing Pros Cons Pros Cons Symmetrical Design easier to construct Lack of conceptual development Does not respond to the site Symmetrical Design easier to construct Lack of conceptual development Does not respond to the site Symmetrical Design easier to construct Lack of conceptual development Does not respond to the site
E Steel Steel Steel Concrete Concrete Composite Composite Composite Concrete Concrete
E Pros Light construction faster to build Light construction faster to build Pros Availability of matl.Ease of stabilization Uniform matl. Pros Light Const. Short erection time Space for HVAC Light Const. Short erection time Space for HVAC Pros Heat insulation high stiffness, low deformation low operation costs
E Cons Difficult connections not easy to stabilize Difficult connections not easy to stabilize Cons High dead load heavy construction Cons Higher operation cost Higher operation cost Cons Reqs more man power longer erection time
C Pros Faster erection quicker const. of enclosure to protect from weather Faster erection quicker const. of enclosure to protect from weather Pros Lower const. cost Pros Very effective and fast to erect Very effective and fast to erect Pros More economically feasible
C Cons Lead time for procurement high, higher cost 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 Fully composite action not suitable steel procurement delays expensive Cons Impact on scheduling
55
Design 3 Redesign Concepts
A

• The gym is a place of exhibitionism
• The café should be public and have access to an
  outdoor space

56
Plan Development
A
A
E/C
A
2nd Iteration
Original Plan
1st Iteration
57
Redesignstructural idea
E

• General idea
• hanging the gym up
• with steel-diagonals

Concrete slab concrete shear-walls and columns
steel columns
58
Redesignstructural idea
E

• total span 6m
• 3rd floor light timber construction
• glass front at all three sides of gym

6m
3rd floor timber construction
steel columns and diagonals
GYM
concrete slab t 0.3m
CAFETERIA
fire exit/ fire stairs on this side
59
Redesign
C

• 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

60
Redesign Considerations
C

• Constructibility issues
• Separate scaffolding for the gym ?
• Connections not too detailed
• Might have MEP impacts on the extended part

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.