Fairfield Inn and Suites Pittsburgh, PA Amanda Smith Structural Option AE Senior Thesis 2010 Advisor: Dr. Ali Memari
Fairfield Inn and Suites Pittsburgh, PA • Existing Building Information • Façade Breadth Study • Project Goals • Construction Management Breadth Study Presentation Outline • Structural Depth Study • Conclusions and Recommendations • Gravity System • Lateral Resisting System • Foundation Impact • Acknowledgements
Fairfield Inn and Suites • Existing Building Information Pittsburgh, PA • Project Goals • Structural Depth Study • Gravity System • Lateral Resisting System • Foundation Impact • Façade Breadth Study Existing Building Information • Construction Management Breadth Study • Conclusions and Recommendations • Acknowledgements Amanda Smith Structural Option AE Senior Thesis 2010 Advisor: Dr. Ali Memari
Fairfield Inn and Suites • Existing Building Information Pittsburgh, PA • Project Goals • Structural Depth Study • Location: Gravity System • • Downtown Pittsburgh Lateral Resisting System • • 228 Federal St, Pittsburgh, PA Foundation Impact • Building Statistics: Façade Breadth Study • Occupancy - Hotel • • Size – 80,000 SF Construction Management Breadth Study • Stories – 10 stories above grade + 1 story below grade • Conclusions and Recommendations Project Cost: • • $19 million Acknowledgements Amanda Smith Structural Option AE Senior Thesis 2010 Advisor: Dr. Ali Memari
Fairfield Inn and Suites • Existing Building Information Pittsburgh, PA • Project Goals • Structural Depth Study Existing Structural System • Gravity System • Lateral Resisting System Foundation: • Foundation Impact • Auger Cast Piles • Façade Breadth Study • 16” diameter • Topped by concrete pilecaps • Construction Management Breadth Study • Support 24”x24” reinforced concrete piers • Conclusions and Recommendations • Grade Beams • 36” to 48” depth • Acknowledgements • Run between pilecaps Amanda Smith Structural Option AE Senior Thesis 2010 Advisor: Dr. Ali Memari
Fairfield Inn and Suites • Existing Building Information Pittsburgh, PA • Project Goals • Structural Depth Study Existing Structural System • Gravity System • Lateral Resisting System Gravity System: • Foundation Impact • Typically 8” precast concrete plank floor • Façade Breadth Study • Concrete masonry load bearing walls • Transfer Beams • Construction Management Breadth Study • Columns supporting lobby • Conclusions and Recommendations Lateral Force Resisting System: • Acknowledgements • Concrete masonry shear walls • 10” thick walls around perimeter • 8” thick walls in core Amanda Smith Structural Option AE Senior Thesis 2010 Advisor: Dr. Ali Memari
Fairfield Inn and Suites • Existing Building Information Pittsburgh, PA • Project Goals • Structural Depth Study • Gravity System • Lateral Resisting System • Foundation Impact • Façade Breadth Study Project Goals • Construction Management Breadth Study • Conclusions and Recommendations • Acknowledgements Amanda Smith Structural Option AE Senior Thesis 2010 Advisor: Dr. Ali Memari
Fairfield Inn and Suites • Existing Building Information Pittsburgh, PA • Project Goals • Structural Depth Study Problem Statement • Gravity System • Lateral Resisting System • Building Weight • Foundation Impact • Poor Soil Site • Load bearing walls • Façade Breadth Study • High base shear value • Construction Management Breadth Study Problem Solution • Conclusions and Recommendations • Design lighter structural system • Acknowledgements • Steel Moment Frames • Core CMU shear walls Amanda Smith Structural Option AE Senior Thesis 2010 Advisor: Dr. Ali Memari
Fairfield Inn and Suites • Existing Building Information Pittsburgh, PA • Project Goals • Structural Depth Study Project Goals • Gravity System • Lateral Resisting System Structural Depth Study: • Foundation Impact • Reduce overall building weight by redesigning gravity system • Façade Breadth Study • Optimize the lateral force resisting system • Foundation check • Construction Management Breadth Study Façade Breadth Study: • Conclusions and Recommendations • Effect of steel frame on façade • Acknowledgements Construction Management Breadth Study: • Impact on construction schedule and cost Amanda Smith Structural Option AE Senior Thesis 2010 Advisor: Dr. Ali Memari
Fairfield Inn and Suites • Existing Building Information Pittsburgh, PA • Project Goals • Structural Depth Study • Gravity System • Lateral Resisting System • Foundation Impact • Façade Breadth Study Structural Depth Study • Construction Management Breadth Study • Conclusions and Recommendations • Acknowledgements Amanda Smith Structural Option AE Senior Thesis 2010 Advisor: Dr. Ali Memari
Fairfield Inn and Suites • Existing Building Information Pittsburgh, PA • Project Goals Framing Plan N • Structural Depth Study • Moment frames span E-W • Gravity System • Frames spaced at 26’ and 31’ • Lateral Resisting System • Columns kept at existing locations • Foundation Impact • Columns added around the perimeter • Façade Breadth Study Design Loads • Construction Management Breadth Study ASCE 7-05 • Conclusions and Recommendations Live load values Superimposed load values • Acknowledgements Snow loads Controlling Load Combination: 1.2D + 1.6L + 0.5Lr Amanda Smith Structural Option AE Senior Thesis 2010 Advisor: Dr. Ali Memari
Fairfield Inn and Suites • Existing Building Information Pittsburgh, PA • Project Goals Hollow Core Plank Design • Structural Depth Study • Gravity System • Max Span = 31’ - 8” • Live Load = 80 psf • Lateral Resisting System • Dead Load = 10 psf • Foundation Impact • Normal weight concrete • SDL = 25 psf • Façade Breadth Study Results using PCI Design Handbook: • 78 – S • Construction Management Breadth Study • 7 strands at 8/16” dia. • Conclusions and Recommendations • Acknowledgements Amanda Smith Structural Option AE Senior Thesis 2010 Advisor: Dr. Ali Memari
Fairfield Inn and Suites • Existing Building Information Pittsburgh, PA • Project Goals Beam/Girder Design Criteria • Structural Depth Study Strength Design Criteria: ASCE 7-05 LRFD Load Combinations • Gravity System 1.4D • Lateral Resisting System 1.2D + 1.6L + 0.5(L r or S) • Foundation Impact 1.2D + 1.6L r + 0.5L • Façade Breadth Study Serviceability Criteria: Deflection Non-Composite: • Construction Management Breadth Study Dead Load ………………………….l/360 Live Load …………………………...l/360 Total Load ………………………….l/240 • Conclusions and Recommendations Economy Criteria: Camber • Acknowledgements do NOT camber: Beams that are less than 25ft Beams that requires less that ¾” of camber Amanda Smith Structural Option AE Senior Thesis 2010 Advisor: Dr. Ali Memari
Fairfield Inn and Suites • Existing Building Information Pittsburgh, PA • Project Goals Beam/Girder Design • Structural Depth Study • Gravity System Optimal members were designed with Staad and checked by • Lateral Resisting System hand calculations • Foundation Impact Example: Typical Girders • Façade Breadth Study Hand Calc. M u Staad M u φM n Length Member Size • Construction Management Breadth Study (ft.) (ft-k) (ft-k) (ft-k) Interior Girder W 14x68 13.42 180 187 390 • Conclusions and Recommendations Exterior Girder W 14x90 15.83 271 302 520 • Acknowledgements Amanda Smith Structural Option AE Senior Thesis 2010 Advisor: Dr. Ali Memari
Fairfield Inn and Suites • Existing Building Information N Pittsburgh, PA • Project Goals Column Design • Structural Depth Study • Gravity System • Columns resist gravity loads only • Lateral Resisting System • Levels 1 - 5: W14x176 • W14X90 W14X90 W14X90 W14X90 Foundation Impact W 14X 109 W 14X 109 W 14X 99 W 14X 99 W 14X 99 • Levels 6-10: W14x99 W14X90 W14X90 W14X90 W14X90 W 14X 109 W 14X 109 W 14X 99 W 14X 99 W 14X 99 • W14X90 W14X90 W14X90 W14X90 Façade Breadth Study • Columns spliced at 5 th story W 14X 109 W 14X 109 W 14X 99 W 14X 99 W 14X 99 W14X90 W14X90 W14X90 W14X90 W 14X 109 W 14X 109 W 14X 99 W 14X 99 W 14X 99 • W14X90 W14X90 W14X90 W14X90 Construction Management Breadth Study W 14X 109 W 14X 109 W 14X 99 W 14X 99 W 14X 99 Hand Calc. φP n W14X90 W14X90 W14X90 W14X90 Staad P u (k) Floor Size KL (ft) W 14X 176 W 14X 176 W 14X 176 W 14X 176 W 14X 176 P u (k) (k) • W14X90 W14X90 W14X90 W14X90 Conclusions and Recommendations W 14X 176 W 14X 176 W 14X 176 W 14X 176 W 14X 176 1 W14x176 18 753 780 1890 W14X90 W14X90 W14X90 W14X90 W 14X 176 W 14X 176 W 14X 176 W 14X 176 W 14X 176 6 W14x99 12 367 380 1210 • Acknowledgements W14X90 W14X90 W14X90 W14X90 W 14X 176 W 14X 176 W 14X 176 W 14X 176 W 14X 176 W14X90 W14X90 W14X90 W14X90 Optimal members were determined by Staad and checked W 14X 176 W 14X 176 W 14X 176 W 14X 176 W 14X 176 Amanda Smith Structural Option with hand calculations AE Senior Thesis 2010 Advisor: Dr. Ali Memari
Recommend
More recommend
