The New Science Building at Texas A&M International University

1. The New Science BuildingTexas A&M International UniversityLaredo, TX Nicole Griffith

2. The New Science Building • 3 Story Cast-in-Place Concrete Structure • 80,000 S.F. • Estimated Cost of $18 Million • Houses Science Labs, Classrooms, Offices • Features a Planetarium and the Dean’s Office Tower

3. The New Science Building • Owner: Texas A&M University System • General Contractor: Constructors & Associates, Inc. • San Antonio, TX • Construction Began June 2003 • Main Building Completed December 2004 • Planetarium Complete May 2005 by Owner

4. Thesis Overview • 4D Modeling • Structural and Construction Feasibility Review of the Planetarium Concrete

5. CM Depth 4D Modeling

6. Reasons for Using 4D Modeling • Complicated Schedule Setup Makes Sequencing and Level of Detail Difficult to Maintain • Unique Structure of the Planetarium Can Make Visualizing the Construction Process Difficult • 4D Modeling is a Key Technology Vitally Important to the Construction Industry

7. 4D Modeling • Create 3D Model of the Structure Using Autodesk Revit 7.0 • Export into AutoCAD 2004 format • Export into Common Point 4D • Link to Structure Schedule

8. 4D Modeling • Revit is a Parametric Modeling Tool • Model using Building Components • Unique Structures, Such as the Planetarium, can be Difficult to Represent • Must be Exported into AutoCAD First in Order to Export into Common Point • Looses Detail, Difficult to Control Layers

9. Revit Model

10. AutoCAD Model

11. Common Point 4D Model

12. Results • Multiple Sequencing and Level of Detail Errors Discovered in the Structure Schedule • Using a 4D Model Could Have Eliminated Problems that Resulted Due to Confusion from the Construction Schedule

13. Sequencing Error

14. Inconsistent Sequence

15. Sequencing Error

16. Sequencing Error

17. CM Depth/Structural Breadth Structural and Construction Feasibility Review of the Planetarium Concrete Structure

18. The Planetarium

19. Planetarium Concrete • Architectural Concrete Structural Base • As-Cast Smooth Finish • No Further Finishing After Formwork Removal • Plastic-Laminated Plywood Formwork • Result was Unacceptable to the Owner • Variations in Color • Inconsistent Texture • Surface Imperfections (Lift Lines, Air Pockets) • Visible Formwork Joints

20. Planetarium Concrete • Investigate Both the Project Specifications as well as Standard ACI Specifications • Look for Inconsistencies, Areas for Concern • Review and Suggest Alternate Formwork • Review and Suggest Alternate Concrete Mix Design/Specifications • Review and Suggest Alternate Concrete Placement Methods

21. Standard Specifications • Perform Slump Tests on Trial Batches at Highest & Lowest Expected Ambient Temperatures • Not Specified or Performed for Project • Poured in mid-July Creates Cause for Concern

22. Project Specifications • No Fly Ash • No Form Ties • Mock-Ups & Pre-Installation Meetings • Not Implemented Due to Time Constraints • Small Samples Submitted Instead • Well-Sealed Formwork Joints • Not Properly Constructed

23. Formwork • Conventional Forms • Most Economical for This Type of Project • Simple, but Proper Construction is Important • Non-Reactive Form Release and Other Agents • Smooth Finish is Not Optimal for Appearance Elevates Visibility of Surface Defects

24. Formwork

25. Resulting Recommendations • Use Plywood Formwork with a Textured Plastic Liner • Use a Non-Reactive Form Release Agent That Will Not Affect the Appearance of the Concrete Finish

26. Resulting Recommendations • Consider the Use of Fly Ash in the Design of the Architectural Concrete • Fly Ash Contains Properties That May Help Resolve the Problems Encountered • Be Sure That Any Additives, Such as Water Reducing Agents and Curing Compounds, Will Not Alter the Finished Appearance of the Concrete

27. Resulting Recommendations • Maintain Similar Temperatures for Concrete, Rebar, Formwork, and Any Other Affected Materials at all Times When Concrete is Being Poured to Eliminate Color and Texture Variations and Lift Lines

28. Resulting Recommendations • Provide a Large-Mass Mockup of the Architectural Concrete Using Same Materials and Methods of Placement to Ensure the Quality of the Final Product • Be Sure to Pour the Concrete for the Mockup at the Same Temperature as is Expected for the Actual Pour

29. Resulting Recommendations • Coordinate all Interested Parties, Particularly the Concrete Contractor and Steel Erector, Before the Production of Shop Drawings, to Ensure That All Parties Are Aware of Others’ Requirements for Construction so that Delays and Additional Costs Can be Avoided

30. Conclusions • Use a 4D Model to Eliminate Problems That May Result Due to Confusion from the Construction Schedule, Sequencing, and Level of Detail Errors • Reconsider the Concrete Mix Design, Formwork Type, and Placement Requirements of the Planetarium Architectural Concrete in Order to Achieve the Desired Finish

31. Questions?

32. Acoustical Breadth Planetarium Acoustical Analysis

33. Acoustical Analysis • Owner’s Representative Had Concerns Regarding the Acoustical Quality of the Planetarium • The Planetarium Space Itself • The Effect of Mechanical Room Noise Adjacent to the Planetarium Space

34. Reverberation Time • Performed on Planetarium Space • Results Were Acceptable – 0.95 s @ 500 Hz • Acoustical Quality Was Much Poorer During Construction

35. STC Calculation • Performed for the Mechanical Room Walls • Result Was STC Rating of 42 – Acceptable • Well-Constructed Insulated Walls