270 likes | 284 Views
This presentation outlines the proposed conversion of the existing concrete structural system to steel for a hotel and convention center in Schaumburg, Illinois, aiming for additional column-free space, time and cost savings, and improved structural performance. Detailed background information, design goals, proposal overview, construction impacts, and conclusions and recommendations are provided.
E N D
Eric Yanovich Senior Thesis Eric Yanovich Structural Option Structural Option Schaumburg Hotel and Hotel and Convention Center Convention Center Schaumburg Schaumburg, Illinois
Presentation Outline • Background project Information • Existing structural System • Design Goals • Proposal and Solution Overview • Construction Impacts and Considerations • Overall Conclusions and Recommendations Omission of Presentation • Lighting Breadth (Typical guestsuite)
Project Information General Information • 1551 Thoreau DriveSchaumburg, Illinois • 17 Story Hotelwith 500 guest suites covering over 436,000 SF • Project Total =$207 MillionHotel Structure =$99 Million • 5 Story Atrium, Restaurant, and 4 Star Accommodations • Design Partners • Architects: John Portmanand Assoc. & Daniel P. Coffey and Assoc. • Structural Engineer: Halvorson Partners Eric Yanovich Background Project Information
Building Location Eric Yanovich Background Project Information
Building Site Eric Yanovich Background Project Information
Design Codes • International Code Council • 2003 International Building Code • 2003 International Fire Code • American Instituteof Steel Construction • 3rd Edition Manual of Steel Construction (LRFD) • American Societyof Civil Engineers • Minimal Design LoadsFor Buildings (ASCE 7-02) • American Concrete Institute • Building Code Requirementsfor Structural Concrete (ACI 318-02) Eric Yanovich Existing Structural System
Existing Structural System • Cast-in-place Concrete Columnsand Beams • 10” Post-tensioned Concrete Flat Plate Slab • Circular(42” dia) Concrete Columnsin Atrium Space • Shear wallsfor lateral Force Resistance • 9’8” Typical Story Height Circular Atrium Columns Shear Walls Eric Yanovich Existing Structural System
Lateral System • 11”-18” Thick Shear Walls • 6-8ksi Concrete • 9 walls creating 3C-Shaped Elements Eric Yanovich Existing Structural System
Design Goals Conversion of the Concrete Frameto Steel Considerations and Project Scope • Removalof a rowof columns • Time/Cost savings • Replacement of post-tensioned slab system with composite slab • Analysis of Braced Frame Performance Eric Yanovich Design Goals
Design Goals Conversion of the Concrete Frameto Steel Advantages • Additional Column-Free Space • Time savingsin erection • Less Specialized Construction Concerns • Lateral System Compatibility • Lateral System Performance • Increased Story Height (17”) Eric Yanovich Design Goals
Structural Proposal Conversion of the Concrete Frameto Steel • Note Frame Layout Eric Yanovich Proposal and Solution Overview
Structural Proposal Gravity System • Typical Beam Sizes Range from W12x311 to W24x55when part of the braced frames Please See Appendix B of the Final Report for Complete Beam/Girder Sizes Eric Yanovich Proposal and Solution Overview
Structural Proposal Lateral System • Typical Column Sizes Range from W14x311 at the base to W14x90 on upper levels • Brace Member Average in Size to W12x45 for most of the frames* *Please see Appendix B for per member sizes Eric Yanovich Proposal and Solution Overview
Structural Proposal Concerns of system Changes • Typical Window Sizes Located in the Corridor Eric Yanovich Proposal and Solution Overview
Structural Proposal Proposal Summary • Deflections Including the Original Shear-wall System were well outside the L/480per story drift Limit • The Braced Fames reduce the overall drift to 5.1”resulting in a per story drift of L/470 • The Original System had a deflection equalto 4.4” (L/510) Eric Yanovich Proposal and Solution Overview
Construction Impacts • What is the Economical Impact? Eric Yanovich Construction Breadth
Construction Impacts • What is the Scheduling Impact? • Consideringthe on-site construction times to be the same, each project’s timelinecan be seen below Eric Yanovich Construction Breadth
Final conclusions & Recommendations • Comparable Drift of the Proposed structure Vs. the current design • More Layout Flexibility • Cost Savings of Almost 16% • Schedule time saving of 10 weeks Personal Recommendation: Proposed Steel Structure with Braced Frames Eric Yanovich Final Conclusions and Recommendations
Questions / Answers Eric Yanovich Questions and Answers
Lighting Breadth • Whatdoes this structure frame? Eric Yanovich Over-Time
Lighting Breadth • Whatdoes this structure frame? Eric Yanovich Over-Time
Lighting Breadth Eric Yanovich Over-Time
Construction Impacts Eric Yanovich Construction Breadth - Over-Time
Construction Impacts Eric Yanovich Construction Breadth - Over-Time
Construction Impacts Eric Yanovich Construction Breadth - Over-Time