270 likes | 399 Vues
This thesis presents a comprehensive structural redesign proposal for the Schaumburg Hotel and Convention Center in Illinois. Covering over 436,000 square feet and comprising 500 guest suites, this project aims to convert the existing concrete frame system to a steel structure. It details the design goals, proposed solutions, construction impacts, and offers conclusions and recommendations that emphasize cost and time efficiency. With a total project budget of $207 million, this proposal highlights the advantages of improved layout flexibility and structural performance.
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