Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Ryan Johnson - Structural Option

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Ryan Johnson - Structural Option"— Presentation transcript:

1 Ryan Johnson - Structural Option
800 North Glebe Arlington, VA Ryan Johnson - Structural Option AE Senior Thesis – 2010

2 OUTLINE Project Info Existing Structure Project Goals Structural Depth
Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion Questions and Comments OUTLINE

3 Project Info General Building Data Existing Structure
Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion General Building Data Location: Arlington, VA Occupancy Type: Mixed-Use Office Distinctive Architectural Features Building Setbacks At Levels 4,6 And 8 Sail-like Sweeping Glass Curtain Walls Precast Concrete Panels, Decorative Stone And Metal Cladding Building Setbacks Located At Levels 4, 6, 8

4 EXISTING STRUCTURE Project Info General Building Data Size: 316,000 SF
Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion General Building Data Size: 316,000 SF Completion Date: 2011 Estimated Project Cost: $62 Million 3 Below Grade Parking Levels 1 Level Retail On Ground Level 9 Levels Of Offices EXISTING STRUCTURE

5 EXISTING STRUCTURE Existing Structure Project Info Project Goals
Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion EXISTING STRUCTURE

6 Existing Structure N Existing Structure Project Info
Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion Existing Structure Column Foundations Range In Size From 4’-0” Up To 14’-0” Caissons Supporting On-grade Columns 6’-0” Thick Mat Foundation Supporting Shearwalls 12” Foundation Wall Around Parking Substructure N CAISONS

7 Existing Structure Existing Structure Project Info
Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion Existing Structure Post-tensioned Girders With 9” Thick One-Way Slab 10.5” Two-way Slabs Used For Building Stepouts Two 12” Think “C” Shaped Shear Walls At The Building’s Core Y X

8 PROJECT GOALS Existing Structure Project Info Project Goals
Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion PROJECT GOALS

9 Project Goals Project Goals Project Info Existing Structure
Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion Project Goals Uniform Slab Type And Thickness Uniform Column Sizes Reduce Lateral loads Carried By The Shearwalls Determine Affects On Floor Plans Compare Sequencing And Cost

10 STRUCTURAL DEPTH Structural Depth Project Info Existing Structure
Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion STRUCTURAL DEPTH

11 Structural Depth Structural Depth Design Process Project Info
Existing Structure Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion Structural Depth Design Process Initial Plan Layout Slab Design Lateral System Design

12 Structural Depth Slab Design 30’ x 12” d = = 8” two-way post-tensioned
Project Info Existing Structure Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion Slab Design Slab Type And Thickness Direction Of Banded Tendons Tendon Stresses Altered To Account For Opening And Nonuniform Slab Edges 30’ x 12” d = = 8” two-way post-tensioned 45

13 Structural Depth X - Direction Y - Direction Project Info
Existing Structure Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion X - Direction Distributed Tendons 4 7-wire Strands Per Tendon Uniformly Spaced To Allow For 250 psi Minimum Precompression Stress Y - Direction Tendons Banded Along Column Strip 25 7-wire Strands Per Tendon Grouping 650 Kips Average Tendon Forces

14 Structural Depth Project Info Existing Structure Project Goals
Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion Immediate Load Deflection = Service LC – (Dead +Balanced) Time Dependent Deflection = Long Term LC–(Dead + Balanced)

15 Structural Depth Lateral System Design Initial Design Initial Design
Project Info Existing Structure Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion Lateral System Design Initial Design Uniform R-value For Both Directions (R=6) existing had not included basement Initial Design Shear wall core

16 Structural Depth Lateral System Design Redesign Redesign Project Info
Existing Structure Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion Lateral System Design Redesign Different R-value Per Direction (Rx = 5,Ry = 5.5) Ordinary Reinforced Shearwall & Duel System PT Flat Plate Slabs Used In LFRS Not In Code Redesign Shear Wall Core Concrete Moment Frame Included In Y - Direction

17 Structural Depth Lateral System Design System Comparison
Project Info Existing Structure Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion Lateral System Design System Comparison Loading Condition: Wind Load Case 1 Controlled Both Designs Displacement Max X: 53% Reduction Max Y: 27% Reduction Story Drift Max X: 45% Reduction Max Y: 20% Reduction

18 EXISTING STRUCTURE Structural Depth Column Design Project Info
Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion Column Design EXISTING STRUCTURE

19 Structural Depth DEPTH CONCLUSION Project Info Existing Structure
Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion DEPTH CONCLUSION Uniform Slab Type And Thickness Reduced Need for PT Girders Lateral System Successfully Altered Building Rotation Reduced Shear Wall Loads Reduced Drift And Displacement Reduced

20 Architectural Breadth
Project Info Existing Structure Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion Architectural Breadth

21 BUILDING ENVELOPE STUDY
Project Info Existing Structure Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion BUILDING ENVELOPE STUDY Existing Curtain Wall Stick Built Anchors At Each Level Aluminum Mullions Insulating Glass Unit ¼” Clear Heat Strengthened Plys ½” Air Space Low-E Coating On Surface #2

22 Architectural Breadth
Project Info Existing Structure Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion ORIGINAL FLOOR PLAN REDESIGNED FLOOR PLAN

23 Architectural Breadth
Project Info Existing Structure Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion ORIGINAL FLOOR PLAN REDESIGNED FLOOR PLAN

24 Construction Breadth Construction Breadth Project Info
Existing Structure Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion Construction Breadth

25 Thesis Building Redesign
Project Info Existing Structure Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion Current Building Thesis Building Redesign 43 Days Of Construction 94 Days Of Construction

26 Thesis Building Redesign
Project Info Existing Structure Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion Original Design Comparison Thesis Building Redesign

27 Comparison and Conclusion
Project Info Existing Structure Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion Conclusion: Uniform Slab Type &Thickness and Column Sizes Reduced Floor Weight And Material Use Lateral System Modified To Include Moment Frame Shearwall Loads Reduced Floor Plans Were Not Overly Modified Sequencing and Cost Increase

28 QUESTIONS Acknowledgements: Project Info Existing Structure Structura
Project Goals Structural Depth Architectural Breadth Construction Breadth Comparison and Conclusion Acknowledgements: Structura The JBG Companies Cooper Carry The Pennsylvania State University Dr. Linda Hanagan Professor M. Kevin Parfitt Professor Robert Holland Professor Paul Bowers The entire AE faculty and staff Special thank you to my parents, my family and my good friends. QUESTIONS


Download ppt "Ryan Johnson - Structural Option"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google