380 likes | 503 Views
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
E N D
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
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 • Core wall • Cantilever • Auditorium • Steel SMRF system Cantilever Part • 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 • Share the vertical loading • Cast in place 10 • inch core wall.
20 ft 10 ft Cantilever • Moment Connection • Sap Modeling 20ft • Sap Modeling 10ft span
Add balcony to increase seats Auditorium
Foundation • Df square=4' (Depth under the soil) • Bsquare=3.6' (Width of the footing) • Dthick=1' (thickness of the footing) 4X4 spread footing • – Water table - 16-20’ • Soil Friction angle - 20 • Cohesion - 250 lb/Ft2
Evaluation Pro A: Multi spatial movement E: Simple gravity system C: Re-assembly of materials Con A: Lack of informal social space E: Complicated concrete beams C: Non-Uniform beam Pro A: Clear conceptual approach E: Uniform structural system C: Large amount of repetition, symmetry Con A: Exceeding height limit, form is too rigid E: Eccentric moment issue C: Large amount of glass structure
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
1st Floor Parking 2nd Entrance Main Entrance
Open Student Discussion Space Cantilever Structure 2nd Floor Balcony
Section Faculty Office S. Class Room Auditorium Comp. Lab
A+E+C Structural Supports MEP Location Interaction- Auditorium A- 40’ span 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
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 Access flooring Mechanical Fire Protection 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