Alcoa business services center
Download
1 / 36

Alcoa Business Services Center - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 103 Views
  • Uploaded on

Alcoa Business Services Center. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Efficiency Considerations for Modern Design. Geoffrey E. Measel – Structural Option 2004 Senior Thesis. Introduction Thesis research. Structural Depth Alternate Floor Systems Alternate Foundation Systems Core Framing For UFADS

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Alcoa Business Services Center' - helki


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Alcoa business services center

AlcoaBusiness Services Center

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Efficiency Considerations for Modern Design

Geoffrey E. Measel – Structural Option 2004 Senior Thesis


Introduction thesis research
IntroductionThesis research

  • Structural Depth

    • Alternate Floor Systems

    • Alternate Foundation Systems

    • Core Framing For UFADS

  • Mechanical Breadth

    • Under Floor Air Distribution System

  • Construction Breadth

    • Direct Cost Of Each System

    • Overall Building Cost

    • Schedule Impact


Introduction presentation outline
IntroductionPresentation Outline

  • Introduction

  • Structural Depth

    • Alternate Floors

    • Alternate Foundation

    • Building Impacts

  • Mechanical Breadth

    • Under Floor Redesign

  • Construction Management

  • Conclusions

  • Questions


Introduction project players
IntroductionProject Players

  • General Contractor: PJ Dick Inc.

  • Construction Manager: PJ Dick Inc.

  • Architects:

  • Primary: Pfaffmann & Associates

  • Interior: IKM Inc.

  • Engineers:

  • Structural: Atlantic Engineering Services

  • Mechanical: Ray Engineering

  • Electrical: Hornfeck Engineering, Inc.

  • Site Consultant: Civil & Environmental Consultants Inc.

  • Owner: Jackson Row Holdings C/OThe Rubinoff Company


IntroductionLocation


Introduction building statistics
IntroductionBuilding Statistics

  • Function Types:

    • Multi-tenant office

    • Ground Floor Retail

    • Underground Parking Garage

  • Size:

    • 228,500 NRSF

    • 6 Stories

  • Cost Information:

    • Overall Cost: $26 million

    • $19.3 million (excluding tenant fit-out work)

  • Delivery Method: Design-Bid-Build with CM at Risk


  • Structural existing steel framing
    StructuralEXISTING STEEL FRAMING


    Structural existing core framing
    Structuralexisting core framing


    Presentation outline
    Presentation Outline

    • Introduction

    • Structural Depth

      • Alternate Floors

      • Alternate Foundation

      • Building Impacts

    • Mechanical Breadth

      • Under Floor Redesign

    • Construction Management

    • Conclusions

    • Questions


    Structural floor re design
    Structuralfloor re-design

    • Existing Composite

    • My Existing (Control for Study)

    • Percentage Composite

      • Shored

      • Unshored

      • Cambered

    • Non-Composite

    • Joists

    • Pre-Cast Concrete


    Structural floor re design1
    Structuralfloor re-design

    Floor Framing Comparison


    Structural foundation re design
    StructuralFoundation Re-design

    • 7.5” Diameter Mini-Pile

      • Pall =(.4 to .5) Fy As + (.35 to .45) F’c Ac

        • Fy =Yield Stress of Steel Casing (80ksi)

        • As =Cross-sectional area of steel casing (7.86 in2)

        • F’c =28 day Compressive Strength of grout (4000 psi)

        • Ac =Cross-Sectional area of grout (35.78 in2)

    Mini-Piles

    150 Ton Capacity

    300 Piles

    Existing Auger Cast Piles

    95 Ton Capacity

    374 Piles


    Structural core re design
    StructuralCore Re-Design

    • Existing Core Framing

    • My Existing (Control for Study)

    • Raised Floor Framing

    • Beam Raised Floor

    • Raised Core Framing


    Structural core re design1
    StructuralCore Re-Design

    Existing Core Framing


    Structural core re design2
    StructuralCore Re-Design

    Raised Floor Core

    24” Raised Tate Access Floor


    Structural core re design3
    structuralCore Re-Design

    Beam Raised Floor

    W21X44 with Slab


    Structural core re design4
    StructuralCore Re-Design

    Raised Core Framing


    Structural core re design5
    StructuralCore Re-Design

    Raised Core Framing

    Option 1

    Option 2


    Structural core re design6
    StructuralCore Re-Design

    Core Framing Comparison


    Presentation outline1
    Presentation Outline

    • Introduction

    • Structural Depth

      • Alternate Floors

      • Alternate Foundation

      • Building Impacts

    • Mechanical Breadth

      • Under Floor Redesign

    • Construction Management

    • Conclusions

    • Questions


    Mechanical under floor
    MechanicalUnder-Floor

    Raised Floor Design

    ConCore 2000

    • System Weight: 11.5 lbs/sq. ft

    • Concentrated Load: 2000 lbs

    • Uniform Load: 500 lbs/sq. ft

    • Ultimate Load: 5750 lbs

    • Impact Load: 150 lbs


    Mechanical duct work re design
    MechanicalDuct work Re-Design

    Existing Duct Plan

    Re-Designed Duct Plan


    Presentation outline2
    Presentation Outline

    • Introduction

    • Structural Depth

      • Alternate Floors

      • Alternate Foundation

      • Building Impacts

    • Mechanical Breadth

      • Under Floor Redesign

    • Construction Management

    • Conclusions

    • Questions


    Const mgmt cost summary
    Const. MgmtCost Summary

    Overall Floor Framing Cost Comparison


    Const mgmt cost summary1
    Const. Mgmtcost summary

    Overall Core Framing Cost Comparison


    Const mgmt cost summary2
    Const. Mgmtcost summary

    Foundation Comparison

    • Existing Auger Cast Piles

      • 374 Piles *( 50’) * $30.00/ft = $561,000

      • Schedule: 50’ (374 piles) / 350 = 53 days

    • Micro-Piles (Mini-Piles)

      • 300 Mini-piles*($55.00/ft) 50’ = $825,000

      • 300 mini-piles * 50’ / 275ft/day = 54.5 days


    Const mgmt cost summary3
    Const. Mgmtcost summary

    Projected Mechanical Savings

    • Reduction of Construction Cost:

      • -HVAC Cost = $283,040

    • Enhancement of Property Value:

      • -Tenant Re-Occupancy = $312,131

  • Improvement in Tenant Attractiveness:

    • -Life Cycle Savings (1st Year) = $304,168

    • -Staff Productivity (1st Year) = $635,400


  • Summary conclusions
    Summary & Conclusions

    • Structural:

      • Floor Framing: 70% Composite Unshored

        • Watch Steel Prices- 100% Comp. Shored

    • Foundation: Stay with Auger Cast Piles

      • If Schedule becomes an issue go with Mini-Piles

  • Core Framing: Raise the Core

  • Mechanical: Under Floor Air Distribution


  • Special thanks
    Special Thanks

    • Atlantic Engineering Services

      • John Schneider

      • Andy Verrangia

    • PJ Dick

      • Frank Babic

      • Matt Wetzel

    • Pfaffman & Associates

    • G.E.M. Inc.

    • AE Faculty

      • Kevin Parfitt

      • Walt Schneider

      • Jonathan Dougherty

    • AE Classmates

    • My Family




    Structural floor re design2
    Structuralfloor re-design

    Percentage Composite Comparison Unshored


    Structural floor re design3
    Structuralfloor re-design

    Percentage Composite Comparison Shored


    Structural floor re design4
    Structuralfloor re-design

    Existing Floor Comparison


    Structural core re design7
    StructuralCore Re-Design

    Steel Systems Comparison


    Structural foundation re design1
    StructuralFoundation Re-design

    Pile Cap Re-Design


    ad