MEMBERS

Introduction

Architect: Angela RibasUC Berkeley

Engineer: Matthias NieblingBauhaus-University Weimar, Germany

Construction Manager:

Kevin CoyneStanford University

Product Manager:

Torsten SchluesselburgFH Aargau, Switzerland

Owner: David SteinbachWeimar, Germany

BAY TEAM 2002

• BAY AREA / SAN FRANCISCOBAY AREA / SAN FRANCISCO

• UNIVERSITY OF SAN FRANCISCOUNIVERSITY OF SAN FRANCISCO

• MAIN CAMPUS AT FULTON STREETMAIN CAMPUS AT FULTON STREET

CAMPUS LOCATION

SURROUNDING:SURROUNDING:

• GOLDEN GATE PARKGOLDEN GATE PARK

(HUGE GREEN AREA)(HUGE GREEN AREA)

•RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODRESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD

•HILL AREAHILL AREA

N

CAMPUS VIEW

FULTON STREET

GOLDEN GATE AVE.

TEXTURESAREA ANALYSIS

N

SITE PANORAMIC VIEW

SITE MAP

•FLAT GROUND

•FACING FULTON STREET

N

BUILDING LOCATION

Matrix

DECISION MATRIX

$5.9 Mil $6.8 Mil

PROS:

CONS:• Extended footprint

• Interesting structure and details

• Base Isolation System costly

• Daylight / Green area inside

• Owners preference

• Large glass facade

• Construction Sequencing

• More unusual design

• Interesting structure

• EBF system is cost efficient

• More conventional design

• Relatively simple box - structure

• Retractable roof/Glass facadecostly

A

A

E

E

C

C

FOREST PLAZA

A_First concept

CORE VIEW

DESIGN CONCEPT

“AN OPEN AND FRIENDLY SPACE WHERE PEOPLE CAN INTERACT”

FOREST

PLAN

N

Technical support

Large classrooms

Computer room

Mechanical room

Storage

Restrooms

Auditorium

BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN

PLAN

Seminar rooms

Small classrooms

Large classrooms

Restrooms

N

FIRST FLOOR PLAN

Faculty office

Student office

Instructional lab

Seminar rooms

Small classrooms

Storage

Restrooms

N

SECOND FLOOR PLAN

THIRD FLOOR

PLAN

N

Chair’s office

Faculty lounge

Secretaries

ADM offices

Faculty office

Restrooms

THIRD FLOOR PLAN

A A

B B

C

C

SECTIONSSECTION CC

SECTION BB

N

SECTION CC

SECTIONS

SECTION AA

NORTH FACADE

3-D FACADES

SOUTH FACADE

EAST FACADE WEST FACADE

LOUVER DETAIL

VERTICAL / HORIZONTAL

LOUVERS GLASS

SECTION

EVALUATIONEVALUATION

Distribution of Space

0500

10001500200025003000350040004500

required

provided

STRUCTURAL SYSTEM

HEB 260

HEB 340

180x180x10 [mm]

HEB 240

Concrete Walls: 30cm

All members: Grade 50 steel

GRAVITY SYSTEM

HEB 340

10,16m

10,16m

10,16m

30,48m

HEA 220

HEB 300

GRAVITY SYSTEM

Concrete Walls: 30cm

HEB 240O 457x10 [mm]

Q 180x10 [mm]

MOMENT DIAGRAM

780 kNm

480 kNm

150 kNmMoments My (design) according to the ASCE Standard including:

1.2D + 1.0E + 0.5L + 0.2S

CONNECTION DETAILS

250 kN

150 kN

Screws: M20, 5.6

LATERAL SYSTEM

Symmetrical Lateral System

FOUNDATION

Ground Plate: 40cm

EARTHQUAKE-DEFORMATION

Maximum Deformation: 2.8cm

STAIRCASE

Structural System of the Staircase

1,80m

1,80m

2,50m

Max. 9 mm

Frequency: 10,6 Hz

Max. 560 mm

Frequency: 1,25 Hz

400x60x10 [mm]

1800x200x10 [mm]

STAIRCASE LOCATION

HEB300

HEB300

STAIRCASE CONNECTION DETAILS

Moment: 58,4 kN

Shear: 30,9 kN

N= +/- 315 kN

Lever arm: 19cm

Screws: M22, 8.8 pre-tensioned

ROOF DETAIL

STRUCTURAL SYSTEMCONNECTION DETAIL

Q120x4.5mm

Q100x4.0mm

Q60x4.0mm

STRUCTURAL TRUSS ITERATION

`

A E CFramework Truss in the Main Facade Use joists (cost)

Gravity deformations are too big

Use 4 cables to hold each joist up

Cables are too expensive,

no benefit compared to 3D-Truss

3D-Truss satisfies load requirements

Existing Buildings

Site Access (Fulton)

Project Office

Material Laydown & Storage

Building Perimeter

Site Perimeter

Crane

Site Plan

Fulton street

Materials and Methods

EXTERIOR FACADE:• Hollow-Core Concrete Panels• Glass/Louver Curtain Wall System

SUPERSTRUCTURE:• Steel Moment Frame•Cast-in-Place Composite Concrete/Steel Floor System

FOUNDATION:• Poured Reinforced Concrete Mat Slab w/ 4 Interior Column Footings

EXCAVATION:• 18’ Hard Strata

Construction Method Pros/Cons

Schedule

ID Task Name

1 Site Work

2 Substructure

3 Foundation

4 Milestone #1 - Foundation

5 SuperStructure

6 Milestone #2 - Frame

7 Exterior Façade

8 MEP

9 Interior

10 Milestone #3 - Move-In

3/1

5/10

9/30

7/57/127/197/268/2 8/98/168/238/309/69/139/209/2710/410/1110/1810/2511/111/811/1511/2211/2912/612/1312/2012/271/31/101/171/241/312/72/142/212/283/63/133/203/274/34/104/174/245/1 5/85/155/225/296/56/126/196/267/37/10July August September October November December January February March April May June July

Start: 9/20/2015 – End: 7/7/2016

Schedule Duration = 9 months

MILESTONE #3: 9/30/16 – Move-In

MILESTONE #1: 3/01/16 – Foundation Complete

MILESTONE #2: 5/10/16 – Shell Complete

Cost

Sitework2%

Exterior16%

Interior8%

Misc.3%

MEP31%

Fees16%

Superstructure17%

Foundation7%

,

Sitework $119,890.00Substructure $10,500.00Foundations $350,100.00Superstructure $905,000.00Exterior Façade $881,225.00Interiors $352,280.00Finishes $106,480.00Misc. $166,855.00MEP $1,640,100.00Subtotal $4,532,430.00

Contigency $362,594.40General Conditions $362,594.40Fee $135,972.90Excess Liability $30,367.28Fee Subtotal $891,528.98

Total: $5,423,956

Per Square Foot: $164.4

MEP/Life-Cycle Cost

4-D Model

FINAL

PRESENTATION

FISHBOW

L #2

WIN

TER Q.

PRESENTATION

FISHBOW

L #1

KICK -

OFF

TEAM INTERACTION / OUTPUT

Apprentice

- Great learning experience

ADVANTAGES

- Software solutions

- Kick off

- Other disciplines

- Different ways of working

- Other cultures

- Good mix between disciplinary, bi- disciplinary and

multi disciplinary work

ADVANTAGES (ctd.)

- Group space

ADVANTAGES (ctd.)

- Group space

- Very effective

- Easy access

- Expandable

- Granularity

- Inventory file

- Information Gathering

PROBLEMS / DIFFICULTIES

- Information Technology

- Geography

The discussion forum should be used more often

We should announce team-meetings (with all the members) once a week

The notification mechanism should be improved

Discussing with everybody (other disciplines) brings an improved learning experience

Importance of knowing if an email, attachment arrived and was useful

Process Improvement

The discussion forum should be used more often

Heavy initial use of discussion forum was lessened for a reliance on Email.

We should announce team-meetings (with all the members) once a week

Discussion with everyone (other disciplines) brings an improved learning experience.

The notification mechanism should be improved

Importance of knowing if an email, attachment arrived and was useful.

THANK YOU

Thank yous

• All the mentors of the AEC program

•Humberto Cavallin \ Architect Robert Alvarado \ Architect Daniel Gonzales

• Dr. Greg Luth \ Prof. Frank Werner \ Prof. Juergen Ruth

• ECW Weimar \ BGS Ingenieursozietaet Weimar \ Infograph Software Solutions

THANKS TO: