Computer Integrated A/E/C Stanford University May 15, 1998

1. Team Pacific Computer Integrated A/E/C Stanford University May 15, 1998

2. Background… • Year: 2010 • Task: Design Classroom/Lab Facility for Pacific University School of Engineering, Oregon • Facility Will Provide a Home for Innovative Courses which Take a Team Approach to Design • Maintain Footprint of Existing Buildings • Construction Schedule of One Year • Budget: $4.5 million

3. Scheme 1 • Architecture • Utilize Square Foundation • Bridging the Disciplines • Engineering • Simple Structural Design • Bearing Walls • Construction • Preliminary Estimate: $4.38 million • Bearing Walls allow for Fastest Construction, Lowest Expense

4. Scheme 2 • Architecture: • Connectivity through View • Engineering: • Simple design • Long Spans • Construction: • Preliminary Estimate: $4.58 million • Schedule Constraints Easily Met

5. Scheme 3 • Architecture: • Innovative Design: Breaking Away From the Foundation • Flipped L-Shape to For More Interesting Appearance • Engineering: • Large Cantilevers • XXX System • Construction: • Preliminary Estimate: $4.58 million • Limited Space for Large Square Footage of Material • Difficult to Construct

6. Scheme 4 • Architecture • Breaking Away From Box Shape • Shape Fits Context of Site • Engineering • Large Cantilevers • xxx System • Construction • Preliminary Estimate: $9.17 million • Strange Shape Difficult to Construct

7. Why Schemes 3 & 4? • Preferred Architecture • Scheme Three Feasible--Safety Net • Scheme Four Best--Challenge

8. Scheme 3 Issues • Square footage • Over-budget • Material Costs • Schedule • Cantilevers • Vertical Circulation

9. Scheme 4 Issues • Over-budget • Schedule • Limited story heights • Walls

10. Scheme 4 Evolutions • Over-budget • Square footage • Material Costs • laminated wood • concrete • Roof options • Interior Systems & Finishes

11. Scheme 4 Evolutions • Schedule • Enclosure • Prefabricate Formwork • Precast exterior walls • Innovative Construction System • Relocation of Labs

12. Story Heights • Post-Tensioning to control deflections • thin flat slab • cost • mechanical • Consistent column spacing

13. Scheme 4 Evolution • Walls • Essential to design • No shear walls! • Innovative Construction Method • Material options • EIFS • Steel panels • concrete panels

14. Pacific Project • Final Decisions

15. Design Intent School of Engineering • Innovative in·no·va·tion 1 : the introduction of something new 2 : a new idea, method, or device : NOVELTY • Functionable • Vistas

16. Design Intent School of Engineering • Innovative in·no·va·tion 1 : the introduction of something new 2 : a new idea, method, or device : NOVELTY • Functionable • Vistas

17. Design Intent School of Engineering • Innovative in·no·va·tion 1 : the introduction of something new 2 : a new idea, method, or device : NOVELTY • Functionable • Vistas

18. Design Intent School of Engineering • Innovative in·no·va·tion 1 : the introduction of something new 2 : a new idea, method, or device : NOVELTY • Functionable • Vistas

19. Design Intent School of Engineering • Innovative in·no·va·tion 1 : the introduction of something new 2 : a new idea, method, or device : NOVELTY • Functionable • Vistas

20. Design Intent School of Engineering • Innovative in·no·va·tion 1 : the introduction of something new 2 : a new idea, method, or device : NOVELTY • Functionable • Vistas

21. Structural Design • Post-Tensioning • Thinner Slab • Reduce Deflections • Reduce Cracking • Reduce Jointing

22. Structural Design • Slab • 8” Concrete Flat Slab • Span to depth ratio 44 • Post-Tensioned • 1/2” monostrands • 4000psi concrete

24. No Column, No Problem? • PROBLEM... • Auditorium moved to first floor and a Column needed to be removed • Solution • Use flat plate on roof to add rigidity to upper floors above the missing Column.

25. Structural Solution • Transfer Beam • Missing column significantly increased Stresses in Slab • Addition of Transfer Beams • Horizontally • Vertically

26. Transfer Beam Layout

27. Ductile Frame Placement centers of rigidity and mass Avoid Torsion No Beams labor to form too expensive mechanical systems Lateral Resistance

28. Preliminary Layout

29. Static Load Method • Moments too high! • More beams • or MRF in the interior • More ductile frames cheaper • less form work

30. Ductile Frame Detail

31. SAP2000

32. Sap2000

33. Moment Capacity Max Neg. = 38.2k-ft Capacity = 41.2 k-ft ok Max Pos. =1.7 k-ft Capacity = 30.3 k-ft ok Max. inelastic response disp. UBC 97’ 1630.10.2 max Displacement Flr 2 = 2.64” Flr 3 = 5.28” Roof = 7.92” OK Capacity Checks

34. A look into the Future • Materials • Field Construction Methods • Management Construction Methods • Communications • Equipment • Market

35. Weather

36. Site Layout

37. Wall Systems • light cement • Energy Efficient • Easy to score and snap • Water-damage resistant • Economical • Fire resistant

38. Post-Tensioned Floor System Pros • Cheap • Light • Fast Cons • Hard to Retrofit • Dangerous

39. Equipment

42. Rationale . . . Scheme 4

43. Rationale . . . Scheme 4

44. Rationale . . . Scheme 4

45. January 15, 2012

46. Milestones: May 1, 2012

47. Requirements of HVAC System • Codes: • Title 24, UBC, UMC, SMACNA • Design: • Space (3’6”) • 24 Hour Cooling to Computer Area • Compatibility with other systems • Energy efficient • Atheistics

48. Rationale: Hydronic System • Two-pipe VAV reheat system • Savings in overall equipment cost, installation, and annual operating costs • Easily zoned for modulating temperatures • Design requirement of limited ceiling height • Straight forward to install

49. Hydronic Radiant Floor • Hydronic Radiant Floor (HRF) • PEX tubing within concrete slab or subfloor • Operating costs 20%-40% lower than Forced Air Systems • Need special training to install • Extra structural costs • Lower water temperature required

50. Hydronic Radiant Ceiling • Reduced space • Security/Acoustic panels available • Centrally located mechanical system • Architecturally invisible • No special training to install • Easily zoned especially in re-partitioned spaces