Memorial Hospital Miramar - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

memorial hospital miramar n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Memorial Hospital Miramar PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Memorial Hospital Miramar

play fullscreen
1 / 44
Memorial Hospital Miramar
252 Views
Download Presentation
basil
Download Presentation

Memorial Hospital Miramar

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Memorial Hospital Miramar Bret King Construction Management Spring 2005

  2. Project Overview • Building Name: Memorial Hospital Miramar • Location: Miramar, Fl (Broward County) • Size: Approximately 275,000 Sq. Ft. • Project Cost: Approximately $65 million • Type: Medical Facility • Construction Dates: March 2003 – March 2005

  3. Project Overview • Primary Project Team • Owner: • Memorial Healthcare Services • Architect: • Gresham, Smith, and Partners • Construction Manager: • Centex Construction, Inc • Engineers: • Smith, Seckman, Reid, Inc. Consulting Engineers • Gresham, Smith, and Partners

  4. Project Overview • Key Attributes • Mediterranean Architecture • Serene Tropical Landscape • Very Large Site • Proposed 3-4 Story Expansion • All Private Rooms

  5. Project Overview • Site Plan

  6. Agenda • Analysis 1 – Insurance Policies • Analysis 2 – Water-Mist Fire Suppression System • Analysis 3 – Flexible Building Design

  7. Analysis 1 Insurance Policies in the Construction Industry: Contractor Controlled Insurance Policies (CCIP)

  8. Analysis 1 • Advantages of using a CCIP: • Broader coverage and higher limits for contractors

  9. Analysis 1 • Advantages of using a CCIP: • Broader coverage and higher limits for contractors • Potential cost savings

  10. Analysis 1 • Advantages of using a CCIP: • Broader coverage and higher limits for contractors • Potential cost savings • More comprehensive safety and loss control programs

  11. Analysis 1 • Disadvantages of using a CCIP: • Additional administrative duties

  12. Analysis 1 • Disadvantages of using a CCIP: • Additional administrative duties • Increased responsibility to ensure jobsite safety

  13. Analysis 1 • Keys to success • Safety!

  14. Analysis 1 • Keys to success • Safety! • Experienced CCIP manager

  15. Analysis 1 • Keys to success • Safety! • Experienced CCIP manager • Contractor cooperation

  16. Analysis 1 • Problems/Issues • Mechanical Contractor • Did not agree to terms of CCIP • Led to…

  17. Analysis 1 • Problems/Issues • Mechanical Contractor • Did not agree to terms of CCIP • Led to… • Approximately 2 month delay in schedule • $750,000 in overtime work to get project back on schedule

  18. Analysis 1 Results • CCIP Administration Costs: $196,000 • Cost savings from elimination of mark-ups: $500,000 • Schedule Impact: 2 month delay • Overtime Work: $750,000 • Total Cost Savings: $-446,000

  19. Analysis 1 Solutions • Traditional Insurance Program

  20. Analysis 1 Solutions • Traditional Insurance Program • Pre-Bid Meetings

  21. Analysis 1 Solutions • Traditional Insurance Program • Pre-Bid Meetings • Pre-Construction Meetings

  22. Analysis 2 Water-Mist Fire Suppression System

  23. Analysis 2 Water-Mist Background • Originally developed for protection of lumber drying kilns and ships • Gained popularity when Halon was deemed environmentally unsafe • Used today to protect gas turbines, machine rooms, and ships • Also used in computer rooms and laboratories • Recently used in the National Gallery of Art in Washington, DC

  24. Analysis 2 How It Works • Highly pressurized nozzles release water droplets of varying size • Mist surrounds the fire and vaporizes, absorbing energy and removing heat from the source • Mist expands greatly, forcing oxygen away from the flame

  25. Analysis 2 • Goal: To determine whether or not it would be advantageous to implement a water-mist system in the computer/data rooms and laboratories in the Memorial Hospital Miramar

  26. Analysis 2 • Existing System: Traditional pre-action fire suppression system • Disadvantages • Large amount of water used to suppress fire • Larger piping needed to hold water • Little smoke control

  27. Analysis 2 • Proposed System: HI-FOG water-mist system with smoke scrubbing • Incorporates sub-floor piping and ceiling piping • Sub-floor piping discharges mist in opposite directions causing the smoke to be sucked in and scrubbed • Ceiling mounted pipes discharge mist directly into room

  28. Analysis 2 • HI-FOG System Advantages • Uses only 10-20% of water used in pre-action system • Smaller stainless steel piping • Smoke scrubbing element • Radiant heat blocking

  29. Analysis 2 Water-Mist vs. Traditional Sprinkler Systems

  30. Analysis 2 • Initial Installation Costs • Pre-action: $810,500 • Water-mist: $912,000

  31. Initial Installation Costs Pre-action: $810,500 Water-mist: $912,000 Maintenance Costs Pre-action: $500-1000 per year Water-mist: $1000-2000 per year Analysis 2

  32. Analysis 2 Conclusion: Due to higher first costs and higher maintenance costs of the water-mist system, the existing pre-action system should be used

  33. Analysis 3 Flexible Building Design

  34. Analysis 3 • Flexibility in building design needed due to: • Rapid Population Growth • Emerging Technologies

  35. Analysis 3 • Goal: To increase the flexibility of the Memorial Hospital Miramar to enable the building to efficiently adapt to the changing needs of the user

  36. Analysis 3 • Structural Redesign • Existing System: CIP Beams and Pre-cast Soffits • Proposed: Flat Slab System with Shear Walls • 10” slabs with 3” drop panels at columns • 8” shear walls around stairs and elevators

  37. Analysis 3 • Advantages: • Simplified Formwork • Added plenum space • Height Reduction • Unrestricted placing of partitions

  38. Analysis 3 Cost Analysis • Existing Structure: $11,121,278 • Flat Slab System: $8,221,602

  39. Analysis 3 Schedule Analysis • Existing System: 26 weeks • Flat Slab System: 23 weeks

  40. Analysis 3 • Panel Partition Walls • Advantages • Quick and easy assembly • Reusable • Can be taken down and reassembled in other locations • Dust free renovations

  41. Analysis 3 Cost Analysis • Existing Walls: $593,000 • Panel System: $566,250

  42. Analysis 3 • Panel Walls can cut erection time by approximately 13 days • Walls can be taken down and reassembled nearly 2x as fast as the regular wall system

  43. Analysis 3 Conclusion Both the flat slab system and panel partition walls can not only save time and money on the project, but also give the building more flexibility to adapt to changing user needs

  44. Questions/Comments????