Transcript Document

Final Presentation of Bay
Architect
Cindy Chan
Engineer
Yang, Yao-Hung
Construction
Manager
David Walthall
Project Introduction
• Engineer School of the
Bay University in San
Francisco
• 3-story building with a
total of 30,000 sq. ft
• Provided innovative
facilities with access to
Internet and
Telecommunication
Site Constrain
•
Earthquake Zone
•
Humidity Control -Sea Fog
•
Heating/Cooling Degree
( 1921/23 below 65 o F)
Architectural Constraint
•
30’ height limit
•
Maintain the existing
footprint, circulation and
transportation route
San Francisco State University
Spine Project
Information Resource
Center
Act of Recording, Analyzing,
and Storing located at the
spine area
Curve Project
The curve generates
the movement
physically, visually, and
conceptually
Structure Alternatives
SPINE
Core +
Brace+
Steel SMRF
CURVE
Core +Steel
MRF and
lightweight
concrete slab
and steel deck
Structural Challenges
• Steel SMRF system
•Steel SMRF system
• Core wall
Cantilever Part
• Cantilever
• Auditorium
•Core wall
Auditorium
Steel SMRF
• Moment
connection
•W24 resist two NS-EW
seismic force
W24x229 I-Beam
W24x131 I-Beam
Core Wall
•Connect with gravity
system
•C-shape core decreases
torsion moment
•Cast in place 10
inch core wall.
•Share the vertical loading
Cantilever
•Moment Connection
20 ft
10 ft
•Sap Modeling 20ft
•Sap Modeling 10ft span
Auditorium
• Add balcony to increase seats
Modeling Curve with SAP
2000
Foundation
4X4 spread footing
• Df square=4' (Depth under
the soil)
• Bsquare=3.6' (Width of the
footing)
• Dthick=1' (thickness of the
footing)
– Water table - 16-20’
– Soil Friction angle - 20
– Cohesion - 250 lb/Ft2
Evaluation
Pro
Pro
A: Clear conceptual approach
A: Multi spatial movement
E: Uniform structural system
E: Simple gravity system
C: Large amount of repetition, symmetry
C: Re-assembly of materials
Con
Con
A: Exceeding height limit, form is too rigid
A: Lack of informal social space
E: Eccentric moment issue
E: Complicated concrete beams
C: Large amount of glass structure
C: Non-Uniform beam
Vision of the Engineering Building
•
•
Encourage informal social interaction between
faculty and student
Ecological and Climate Responsive design to
maximize building life cycle, increase user
comfort and save energy cost
Parking
2nd
Entrance
Main Entrance
1st Floor
First Floor Program sq. ft
5%
7%
4%
13%
71%
Auditorium
Small classrooms
Restroom/Janitor
Student offices
Seminar rooms
2nd Floor
Second Floor Program sq. ft
4%
3%
18%
52%
15%
3% 5%
Faculty offices
Chair office
Secretaries
Student offices
Administration
Storage Room
Faculty lounge
Cantilever
Structure
2nd Floor Balcony
Open Student
Discussion Space
Basement
Basement Program sq. ft
11%
5%
29%
2%
16%
37%
Large classrooms
Instructional labs
Comp. machine Rm
Technical support
Storage,Mech. Rm
Restroom/Janitor
Section
Faculty
Office
Auditorium
S. Class
Room
Comp.
Lab
Interaction- Auditorium
A - 40’ span
A+E+C
Structural
Supports
MEP Location
E – Curve wall and 2
columns inside the
auditorium provide
structural stability
A – Column space
become aisle.
Idea: Balcony floor
A+Mentor
Circulation
Security Issues
Auditorium - circulation
Roofing
PV Modules – Photo Wall PV 750-80 +
Power Guard Structural system
•
Daylight: North facing roof monitor
with clear glass panel
•
Energy: Photovoltaic panels facing
south
•
Natural ventilation: Operable glass
panel
HVAC
Thermal Mass
Curve and West wall are
Built by mass concrete
wall to
Minimize AC
Controlled AC zone,
Bring in outside cool air
Natural Ventilation
•
Between Floor slab
•
Large open Window
Layout
Crane Radius
Site
Most Congested
Concrete work
done
Total length of project = 8.5 months
4D Construction Sequence
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Budget Factors
• San Francisco area factor of 124%
• Inflation of 2.5 – 3 %
Translates into a 5.5 million dollar
donation in 2015 being worth 3.2
million dollars in 2001
Budget
Final Cost of Alt 2 - Curve
Base Cost
Architectual Fees
Engineering Fees
Field Testing
Surveying
Monthly Crane Rental
$ 3,052,665.72
5%
2%
$ 15,000.00
$ 1,000.00
$ 20,000.00
Total
$
$
$
$
$
152,633.29
61,053.31
15,000.00
1,000.00
120,000.00
$ 3,402,352.32
Budget
Breakdown of MEP
Access flooring
$140,000.00
Mechanical
$161,920.00
$45,000.00
Fire
Protection
$105,000.00
$300,000.00
Electrical
Plumbing
Projected Savings
• Average Educational building consumes:
575.3 kWh/day
• 104 PV Panels generate
332.4 kWh/day
• At $0.12 per kWh, building saves
$958.47 per day
$349,839.86 per year
Computer Integrated
A/E/C
Take advantage from web based technologies
– MSN
– NetMeeting
– Email
– Discussion Forums (PBL)
– Group web space (PBL)
Group Assessment
• Collaborative Inadequacies
– Need to have more portions of product model shared
– Time Control
• Collaborative Successes
– Strong integration of structure and architecture on design
stage
– Friendly relationship
– Systematically achieve project requirement through
interactive design process
Lessons learned
• Through sharing 3D models
– Save time and increases efficiency
– Easily to figure out and solve conflictions
• Everyone should use compatible technology
• Formatting correct communication protocols
– Understand what other discipline needs
– Properly propose what you need
• Take necessary courses needed
Thank you.. Mentors