The Mountain Ridge Team Mountain Ridge Team Final Presentation The Ridge University Engineering Building May 15, 1998 Architect: Humberto Cavallin Engineer: Alec Zimmer Construction Manager: David Miller Owner Representative: Luciana Barroso The Mountain Ridge Team

The Mountain Ridge Team Presentation Outline The Project Statement Early Proposed Concepts The Idea: Product, Evolution, and Process The Final Product Summary: The Team Process The Mountain Ridge Team

The Mountain Ridge Team Project Definition Facility: A new 30,000sf academic building for The Ridge University School of Engineering with classrooms, labs, offices and auditorium Year: 2010 Location: Tahoe City, California The Mountain Ridge Team

Project Definition: Physical Constraints Must use one of 2 existing footprints The Mountain Ridge Team

Project Definition: Physical Constraints Must use one of 2 existing footprints 35’ height restriction Very heavy snow loads Moderate to high seismicity (Zone 3) Remote site with limited access The Mountain Ridge Team

Proposed Concept - Lshape1 The Mountain Ridge Team

Proposed Concept - Square1 The Mountain Ridge Team

Proposed Concept - Lshape2 The Mountain Ridge Team

Proposed Concept - Square2 The Mountain Ridge Team

Proposed Concept - Square2 The Mountain Ridge Team

The Mountain Ridge Team The Iterative Process Square2 E C Lshape2 A O Square1 Lshape1 First Quarter Second Quarter The Mountain Ridge Team

The Mountain Ridge Team Site Plan The Mountain Ridge Team

The Mountain Ridge Team The Building 1 2 3 The Mountain Ridge Team

The Mountain Ridge Team Activities Administrative Students Educational The Mountain Ridge Team

Architectural Evaluations - Floor 1 The Mountain Ridge Team

Architectural Evaluations - Floor 2 The Mountain Ridge Team

Architectural Evaluations - Floor 3 The Mountain Ridge Team

Architectural Evaluations - Section The Mountain Ridge Team

Architectural Evaluations - Section The Mountain Ridge Team

Engineering Loads- Gravity Loads Dead Loads Including 25 psf floor & partitions 10 psf MEP equipment 83.5 psf for 6.5” slab and metal deck 109.6 psf total (205 psf is seismically effective) Live Loads Including 100 psf in halls & library 50 psf in offices 40 psf in classrooms The Mountain Ridge Team

Engineering Loads- Seismic and Snow Loads 223 psf Ground Snow 1.0 Importance Factor 0.6 Exposure D Factor Nominally Flat Roof 133 psf roof snow load (75% is seismically effective) Seismic Loads from 1994 UBC Z = 0.3 Seismic Zone 3 T = 0.203 by Method A C = 2.75 for firm soil Rw = 8 compromise for this dual system Vbase = 608 kip Mot = 9426 k-ft The Mountain Ridge Team

Engineering Evaluations - Floor Details and Load Path Composite steel deck - concrete slab Shallow beam sections Typical Sections: Beams sizes from W10x12 to W12x30, unshored construction All columns W12x40 to facilitate connections Shear connections only Cross Beam: W10x19, Typ. Ext. Girder: W10x22, Typ. Typ. Vertical Gravity Load Transfer Column: W12x40, Typ. 12” Shearwalls Resist All Lateral Loads Second Floor Beams - Plan View The Mountain Ridge Team

Engineering Evaluations - ETABS model Verify period with modal analysis Evaluate deflections and interstory drift Verify load path assumptions Problems in model The Mountain Ridge Team

Engineering Evaluations - Cross Sections at Lines 1 and 3 Note typical sections and detail references The Mountain Ridge Team

Engineering Evaluations - Critical Connection Details Third Floor Moment Frame Connection Detail The Mountain Ridge Team

Engineering Evaluations - Shear Wall-Beam Connection Details The Mountain Ridge Team

Engineering Evaluations - Shear Wall Design Resist all lateral loads, both seismic and wind Mot = 1061.9 k-ft per wall Vbase = 484 k No boundary zones No additional moment reinforcement Torsional effects are negligible The Mountain Ridge Team

Engineering Evaluations - MEP Assumptions Steam heat and chilled water from central facility 15’ x15’ room provided on ground floor for equipment Circular ducts standard throughout with rectangular ducts in congested areas, 18” max. Small equipment rooms provided on all floors for advanced communications equipment Air requirements in auditorium are 20 CF/person/minute, given an approximate capacity of 250 people The Mountain Ridge Team

Engineering Evaluations - Three-Dimensional Model The Mountain Ridge Team

The Mountain Ridge Team Contractor - Site Plan The Mountain Ridge Team

Contractor - Fall 2011 Schedule The Mountain Ridge Team

The Mountain Ridge Team Contractor - Spring 2012 Schedule The Mountain Ridge Team

Contractor - Winter Respite Analysis Impractical to weatherproof before winter weather hits Either shut job down during winter or rent tent for $42,000 per month Project can still be completed comfortably if dormant for <4 months Respite allows for coordination and planning The Mountain Ridge Team

Contractor - Estimate Details Location adjustment factor of 1.15 $160/s.f. 1998 dollars ($210/s.f. 2010 dollars) 6% Contractor fee 10% Architecture and Engineering fee The Mountain Ridge Team

Contractor - Critical Phases of Work Heaviest lift complete The Mountain Ridge Team

Contractor - Critical Phases of Work Floors and roof complete The Mountain Ridge Team

Contractor - Equipment Crane selection for steel erection 50T hydraulic rough terrain crane with 65’ boom Critical lift: 4 ton beam at 60’ radius Gradall material handlers The Mountain Ridge Team

Contractor - Estimate Progression The Mountain Ridge Team

Contractor - Schedule Loading 2011 2012 The Mountain Ridge Team

Contractor - Budget Breakdown The Mountain Ridge Team

Contractor - Inflation Analysis The Mountain Ridge Team

Contractor - Construction Cost Index The Mountain Ridge Team

Product, Evolution, and Process A/E/C/O Height variance Ramp in rear of building 2 plane vs. 4 plane roof system C/E Beam spacing Floor system A/E/O Window wall Balcony in rear 3rd floor Shearwall Entrance façade column locations A/C/O Cladding Excavation costs The Mountain Ridge Team

Floor and Structural Systems - E/C Trade-off Analysis Concrete for floor decks: Lightweight concrete? Normal weight concrete? Steel Framing: Moment resistant frames - shop welded? Eccentrically braced frames? Simple gravity frames? The Mountain Ridge Team

Beam Spacing - E/C Trade-off Analysis 20’ column grid Beams can be spaced at 10’ or 20’ on center? Larger beam spacing means fewer pieces, fewer connections and thus faster construction. But, also requires deeper slabs Cost basically unaffected Long-term usability chosen over short-term construction schedule benefits The Mountain Ridge Team

Basement Layout vs. Excavation - A/E/C/O Trade-Off Analysis Building Functioning Space allocation slope floor, owner requirement Costs Activities and program requirements O/A Evaluation The Mountain Ridge Team

Ramp in Rear of Building - A/E/C/O Trade-Off Analysis Relationship with the excavation Development of the option Rejection of the ramp alternative The Mountain Ridge Team

East Balcony and Column Locations - A/E Trade-Off Analysis Owner requirements for a balcony Architectural solution - cantilever Engineer’s response with additional columns - spares moment connections Added Columns Plan of East Balcony The Mountain Ridge Team

Window Wall and West Balcony - A/E/O Issues The Requirements of O/A/E The communications breakdowns The positioning of walkway supports The Mountain Ridge Team

Exterior Cladding - A/C/O Cost vs. Appearance Concerns Plaster or stone Stone more has institutional, timeless appearance Stone $1 million than plaster Stone/plaster combination chosen The Mountain Ridge Team

Product, Evolution, and Process The building solution is the PRODUCT The A/E/C team interaction is the PROCESS The iterations along the way are EVOLUTION Process is the Cause Evolution is the Effect Product is Summation of those effects The Mountain Ridge Team

Evaluation of Communication Media and Resources Hardware vs. Software Progress in the Future The Mountain Ridge Team

At the Core of Our Process... Complementing skills Sharing points of view Mutual concern for cross disciplinary problems Mentor Interaction The Mountain Ridge Team

Summary of Team Process Importance of information flow transfer Team dynamic The role of the owner O C A E The Mountain Ridge Team

Creating a Better Solution Dave’s Axiom 2 times better process = 8 times better product! The Mountain Ridge Team

The Mountain Ridge Team We acknowledge the support of Luciana Barroso and the Course Mentors! The Mountain Ridge Team