Rockville| Maryland Penn State AE Senior Capstone Project Justin A. - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

rockville maryland penn state ae senior capstone project
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Rockville| Maryland Penn State AE Senior Capstone Project Justin A. - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland Penn State AE Senior Capstone Project Justin A. Woishnis | Construction Option Advisor: James Faust PROJECT OUTLINE Project Introduction Project Background NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Site


slide-1
SLIDE 1

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE

Rockville| Maryland

Penn State AE Senior Capstone Project Justin A. Woishnis | Construction Option Advisor: James Faust

slide-2
SLIDE 2

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE

Rockville| Maryland

Penn State AE Senior Capstone Project Justin A. Woishnis | Construction Option Advisor: James Faust

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

PROJECT OUTLINE

slide-3
SLIDE 3

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE

Rockville| Maryland

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis | Construction Management |

Project Size| 600,000 S.F. Base Building 575,800 S.F. Parking Garage Building Function| Office/ Research Contract Value | $96 Million Contract Type| Design-Build Total # of Floors | 8 Owner| The JBG Companies General Contractor| DAVIS Construction PROJECT OUTLINE

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

slide-4
SLIDE 4

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

Site Plan

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Existing Site

Base Building Parking Garage New Parking Lot

During Construction

Construction Parking Tenant Parking

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

slide-5
SLIDE 5

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

Features Twin 7-story Towers w/ 3-story Connector Lower-Level including:

  • Data Center
  • Fitness Center
  • Auditorium

Green Roof Curtain Wall

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

slide-6
SLIDE 6

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

Co Core & Shell Cast-In-Place Concrete Structure Post-Tension Beams Precast Panel Facade Batch Plant

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Tower Cranes

slide-7
SLIDE 7

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

Problem Background

  • LEED Gold Certification
  • No Renewable Energy Sources
  • Large Energy Consumption

Problem Solution

  • Roof-Mounted Solar Photovoltaic Array
  • Large Available Roof Areas w/ Minimal Sun

Obstructions Site/Roof Investigation Blue- Available Roof Area: 28,441 S.F. Red- Penthouse Area: 4,359 S.F.

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

ANALYSIS TOPIC #1 SOLAR R (P (PV) AR ) ARRAY

slide-8
SLIDE 8

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

Fall Equinox

September 22nd

Spring Equinox

March 20th

Winter Solstice

December 21st

Summer Solstice

June 20th

10:00 AM 1:00 PM 4:00 PM 10:00 AM 1:00 PM 4:00 PM

Optimum Roof Area = 20,617 7 S.F.20,617 S.

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Shading Analysis

slide-9
SLIDE 9

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

Initial Investigation:

  • Full electricity Load = NOT FeasiblE
  • 50% Electricity Load = NOT Feasible
  • 10% Electricity Load = Still NOT Feasible

Revised Approach:

  • Limit Energy Target
  • All 24 Hour Lighting
  • Main Lobby Entrance, Corridors, Elevator

Lobbies, Stairways and Exit Signs

Type Description Lamps West East West East Total RC1 9" Aperture Semi-Recessed Downlight 1-F32WTRT 17 25 544 800 1344 RF1 6" Recessed Linear Light Fixture 2-F28T5 3 3 168 168 336 RC2 5 1/2" Aperture Downlight 1-F32WTRT 9 12 288 384 672 RM3 Adjustable Semi-Recessed Wall Washer 1-32W PMH 7 7 224 224 448 JL1C Decorative Lit Panel w/ Remote LED Driver/Transformer LED 4.5W/LF 4 4 360 360 720 PM1 Decorative Pendant 1-70W 1 3 70 210 280 JM2 Linear Light Fixture 3-CMH70 4 4 840 840 1680 JM1 Surface Mounted Lobby Fixture 14-CMH20 1 280 280 RM2 6" Lensed Wall Washer 1-70W, PAR30 3 4 210 280 490 RM1 6" Aperture Downlight 1-70W, PAR30 1 1 210 210 420 JL1A Decorative Lit Panel w/ Remote LED Driver/Transformer LED 4.5W/LF 4 4 360 360 720 RF3 10" Recessed Linear Light Fixture 4-F21T5 4 336 336 3554 4172 7726 Watts Total Exit Signs ( 2-way) 3.4 408 Exit Signs (1-way) 1.8 281 Elevator 2-F28 2352 Stairway 2-F28 4256 7297 15023 kW 15.023 Overall Total (Watts) Count Watts Main Lobby & Corridor Lighting TOTAL

15023 kW 15.023 Overall Total (Watts)

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Energy Use Study

U.S. DOE, Annual Energy Review 2009 Average Site Energy Intensity per Square Foot calculated to be 19,344,000 kwh

slide-10
SLIDE 10

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE Total Energy Assumed 24 Hours/Day Lighting

Energy per Day

  • 16 kW * 24 hours = 384 kwh/day

Energy per Month

  • 384 kW * 30 days = 1

1,520 kwh Energy per Year

  • 384 kW * 365 days = 140,160

60 kwh kwh

Solar Array designed to produce annual wattage of at least 140,160 0 kwh Determining # of Panels to reach output: SAM (System Advisor Model)

  • 372 Total Panels
  • Produce 141,293 kwh
  • 3 inverter units

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

slide-11
SLIDE 11

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

Typical Panel: 5’ spacing & 39° tilt New SunPower Panel

Panel Section SPR-305-WHT-U 305 (96 Cell Panels) Rack System SunPower T10 Solar Roof Tile

  • 10° Tilt
  • 1

1.35 inch Spacing

Sketch of Panel Layout

Shading Considerations:

  • Penthouse, Davits, Parapets

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Panel Selection and Layout

slide-12
SLIDE 12

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

Total Initial System Cost (Prior to Rebates/Incentives)

Rebates and Incentives

  • Federal Tax Credit: 30% of gross installation
  • Montgomery County-High Performance Building Property

Tax Credit:

  • LEED-NC Gold = 25% Exemptions Amount (5 year

term)

  • Clean Energy Production Tax Credit
  • $0.0085/kwh claimed against the state income

tax (5 year term)

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland Overall Total Incentive Amounts (5 Year Term) Total MC- High Performance Property Tax Credit $1,562,500 Clean Energy Production Tax Credit $6,000 Total $1,568,500

Payback Period Based on Rebates & Incentives:

  • Approxim

imat ately y 3 Years

Incentive Name Description Cost Reduction Adjusted Cost Initial Cost $1,186,033 Federal Tax Credit 30% of Gross Installation $355,809 $830,224 MC-High Performance Property Tax Credit 25% Exemption Amount $312,500 $517,724 Clean Energy Production Tax Credit $0.0085/kWh $1,200 $516,524 Final Cost $516,524 PV System Cost After Rebates & Incentives (1st Year of Installation)

Initial System cost for Installation Including First Year Rebates & Incentives Total Applicable Rebate & Incentive Costs over 5 Years

Item # of Units Cost Module 372 $338,344.19 Inverter 3 $52,920.00 Installation 7 $/Wdc Total $1,186,032.41 Initial PV System Costs

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

System Costs

slide-13
SLIDE 13

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

 Structural Breadth Roof Structure Impact

Sources:

  • Building Code Requirements for

Structural Concrete (ACI I 318-08) 8) and Commentary

  • 8.3

8.3- Metho hods ds of Anal alysi sis

  • Pos. & Neg. Moments (int. & Ext. Face)
  • 13.6- Di

Direct ct De Design gn Method hod

  • Design Procedure for One-Way Flat

Slab Reinforcement

Exterior & Interior Bay “Worst-Case Scenario”

Panel Weight = 52 lbs.

  • Dead Load = 100 psf
  • Live Load = 30 psf
  • Panel Load = 3 psf

Wu = 0.172 ksf One-way y sla lab rei einf nfor

  • rce

ceme ment Anal alysi sis Rebar Spacing:

  • Bottom Bars: 12” to 1

1”

  • Top Bars: 8” to 7”

PT Beam Analysis: (Negligible)

  • Panels Less than 3% Total Roof Load
slide-14
SLIDE 14

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Summary & Recommendation

  • Large Available Roof Spaces to Implement System
  • 372 Panels
  • High Efficiency
  • Minimal Structural Impact
  • Short Payback Period, Optimal to Install System
slide-15
SLIDE 15

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Analysis Topic #2: Tec Technol nology

  • gy Into

to the Field ld Problem Background

  • Large Quantity of Similar Materials
  • Managing Deliveries/Materials
  • Site Congestion

Problem Solution

  • Research Technology Applications
  • Tablet PC’s for Coordination &

Material Tracking Possible Applications Overview

  • Smart Box
  • Tablet PC
  • iPad
  • Motion F5v
slide-16
SLIDE 16

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Material Tracking

Tablet PC Ideas for Material Tracking

  • Precast Panel delivery/Placement
  • Punch-List Management
  • Steel Erection/Placement

iPad used for construction practices On-Site Tracking Software Vela Systems mobile iPad App

  • Record Site Conditions and Material Arrivals
  • Model Viewing Capabilities
  • 1. Proposed Delivery Date
  • 2. Has Material Been Delivered?
  • 3. Date and Time of Delivery?
  • 4. Quantity?
  • 5. Location on Site
  • 6. Has Material Been Installed?
slide-17
SLIDE 17

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Case Study MetL tLife ife Stadium adium, ,

East Rutherford, N.J.

  • $998 Million
  • 2.2 Million s.f. Football Arena
  • Skanska USA Building
  • More than 3200 Precast

Concrete Pieces

  • Utilized RFID tags for tracking

Benefits its

  • Aware of Status of all Precast members including:
  • Production
  • Delivery
  • Site Preparation
  • Installation Status
  • Vela Systems and Tekla Corp. provide a Field BIM/Tablet

solution

  • Each Piece Designed and Tracked for One Specific

Location

Results/F lts/Feedb edbac ack

  • Efficient Coordination of Fabricated Pieces
  • Easily Identify jobsite Laydown area and Site

Accessibility upon Material Arrival

Estim timat ated ed Savin ings gs

  • Accelerated Schedule by 10 Days
  • Generated $1 Million in Savings
slide-18
SLIDE 18

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Feasibility Impleme menting nting with An Analysis sis Topic pic #4 #4

  • Short Interval Production Schedule (SIPS) for

Façade Re-sequence

  • Increased need for Coordination
  • Each Day will Require Specific Panels At

Designated Locations

  • Tablet PC allows efficient communication

between Field Personnel and Manufacturer

Co Concern rns

  • RFID Tag Prices Outweigh Overall Benefit to Project
  • Who will absorb the additional costs to pay for the

system?

Recomm

  • mmendat

endation ion

  • Application of RFID Tracking Systems Not Feasible
  • Tagging more beneficial for larger-scale projects,

industrial construction or stadiums

slide-19
SLIDE 19

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

CMU Overview Fully Grouted and Reinforced CMU

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Analysis Topic #3: Replac acin ing Interior rior CM CMU Wall w/ Pr Precas ast Problem Background

  • Time-Consuming Installation Process
  • Extensive Field Cutting Required
  • Scaffolding Increases Safety Concerns

Problem Solution

  • Improved Constructability
  • Minimize Installation Cost
  • Schedule Acceleration Dependent on Building

Enclosure (Analysis Topic #4)

slide-20
SLIDE 20

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

Advantages:

  • Durability
  • High Strength
  • Fire Ratings
  • Low Maintenance

Requirements

PROJECT OUTLINE

Disadvantages:

  • Very Labor Intensive
  • Extensive Field-Cutting
  • Corners/Angles
  • Scaffolding Required

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Extensive Field-Cutting & Customized Corner Blocks Non-Linear Wall increases quantity of corner connections

slide-21
SLIDE 21

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

Infor

  • rmation

mation Summar mary Size: 8” x 8” x 16” Quantity: 6,544 Crew Size: 6 Daily Output: 80 Cost: $14/S.F.

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

CMU Estimate

Total Square Footage = 5,817 S.F.

Material Cost Unit Quantity $/S.F. Total CMU Block S.F. 5,817 14 $81,438 Duration Unit Quantity Daily Output Total (Days) CMU Block Ea. 4,602 80 58

Material Cost Duration of Installation

Quantity/Duration Estimate Takes into Account Space for 3/8” Mortar Joints

slide-22
SLIDE 22

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Precast Overview Advantages:

  • Substantial Decrease in Installation Time/Cost
  • f on-site Labor
  • Manufactured in Controlled Location
  • Decrease in Potential Delays due to

Uncontrollable Site Factors

  • Design-Build Delivery Method

Disadvantages:

  • Long Lead Time for Engineering/Design
  • Increased Coordination with MEP Engineers for

Penetrations

  • Early Design of Steel Embed Connection Locations
  • Designing to Withstand Blast Loading

Connection Detail of Precast to Concrete to Floor Slab

slide-23
SLIDE 23

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Pre recas cast Prope ropertie ties

  • Minimum 7” Thick Solid Precast

Panel

  • Maximum Width = 12’-0”
  • 5-6 Month Lead Time

Infor

  • rmation

mation Summar mary Size: 12’ x 12’ x 7” Daily Output: 15-20 Panels Cost: $15/S.F. Quantity: 41 Panels (Based on S.F.) Duration: 2.73 Days Non-Linear Orientation of Wall requires Numerous Customized “L ”-Shaped Panels New Total Quantity: 49 Panels New Duration : 3.5 Days

Duration Unit Quantity Daily Output Total Precast Panel Ea. 49 15 3.5 Days

Duration of Installation

Material Cost Unit Quantity $/S.F. Total Precast Panel S.F. 5,817 15 $87,255

Material Cost

Precast Estimate

slide-24
SLIDE 24

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Options ions to to Minimize imize Effects fects

  • High Early Strength Concrete Utilized for

Ground & 2nd Level Slab

  • Precast Walls As Additional Shoring
  • Minimal Overtime Work To Remain on Schedule

Results/Feasibility

Project Effects

  • Delay in 2nd Level Slab

Construction

  • Require Proper Curing of

Ground Level to Support Wall loads

Material Duration (Days) Cost CMU 58 $81,438 Precast 3.5 $87,255 SAVINGS 54.5 ($5,817) Results

Material Cost and Duration Comparisons

slide-25
SLIDE 25

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Site e Logis istics tics/Ph /Phas asing ing Pla lan

  • Visualize Relationship Between

Trades

  • Precast Erection Begins At

North End of Lobby

  • Concrete Crew Will Follow

Precast Installation

  • Minimal Overall Conflicts

Precast Installation Screenshots

slide-26
SLIDE 26

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Consideration

  • Analysis topic #4 involves New Façade Erection

Sequence

  • Enclose Lobby Early in Sequence to allow early

start of Interior Work

  • Precast Costs outweighed by New Interior

Finishes Start Date Summary/Questioning

  • Precast Requires Increase in

Design and Coordination

  • Lack of Incentive to utilize

Precast

  • What makes the Delay for Precast

Worthwhile?

  • Decision of Utilizing Precast

Dependent on Building Enclosure

slide-27
SLIDE 27

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Problem Background

  • Issues with Crane Limitations
  • Overtime Costs Endured
  • Excessive Crane Movement/Relocating

Problem Solution

  • Increase Crane Capacities
  • Create more stringent Productivity/Schedule Goals
  • Develop New Crane /Façade Sequences for Maximum

Erection Efficiency

Analysis Topic #4: Alternativ ative e Façad ade Sequen ence ce

Cranes unable to perform Numerous Picks

slide-28
SLIDE 28

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Initial Sequence 200 Ton Crane 100 Ton Crane

  • 1. Moves to SE Corner of West Building
  • Formwork and Shoring not fully stripped on the east

building.

  • 2. Moves to East Elevation of East Building
  • PEPCO permanent power utility ductbank taking place
  • n the north end of site.
  • 3. Moves to SE Corner of South Elevation
  • Elevation coordinated and fabricated last
slide-29
SLIDE 29

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Cr Crane Moves es Short: 30 min. Long: 1 Day

  • Each Position based on

Specific Panel Weights

Overtime 10 Days

  • Shockey’s 300 ton Crane

required to make Picks

Capacity $/day Duration Total 100 Ton 1300 1.38 $1,793 200 Ton 2300 3.94 $9,060 Overall Total $10,852 Cost of Crane

Type Time + 1/2 Hours Total Crane Operator 38.50 1.5 80 $4,620 Foreman 30.55 1.5 80 $3,666 Layout (3) 32.45 1.5 80 $11,682 Welder (3) 42.31 1.5 80 $15,232 Rigger 33.63 1.5 80 $4,036 Truck Driver 20.62 1.5 80 $2,475 Overall Total $41,711 Overtime Costs

Costs Endured During Crane Movements

Item Total Overtime $41,711 Labor $3,670 Crane $10,852 Total Cost $56,234 Overall Costs

Type Duration Hours Total Crane Operator 38.50 1.32 10.56 $407 Foreman 30.55 1.32 10.56 $323 Layout (3) 32.45 1.32 10.56 $1,028 Welder (3) 42.31 1.32 10.56 $1,340 Rigger 33.63 1.32 10.56 $355 Truck Driver 20.62 1.32 10.56 $218 Overall Total $3,670 Cost of "Down Time"- Crane Moves Costs endured due to Overtime and Productivity Loss Crane and Labor Costs Display Money That Could be Utilized for Erection

slide-30
SLIDE 30

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

New Façade Scheduling & Sequencing

Consider siderat ations ions

  • Many Typical Panels
  • Repetitive Nature of Façade and

Installation Practices New w Appr proa

  • ach
  • Develop SIPS for Façade to

Increase Productivity

  • Push Precast Crew to work

Vertically Shor

  • rt

t Inter erval al Produ roduct ction ion Sched hedul ule e (SIPS PS)

  • Day-to-Day Labor Productivity Requirements

Precast Installation

Trad ade Sequ quence nce

  • Precast Erection
  • Backwelding
  • Punch Windows
  • Caulking/Waterproof

Lower Level (LL) Precast Floor 1-7 Precast (Typical Panels) Backwelding/Final Welds Punch Windows Caulking/Waterproofing

Preview of SIPS

slide-31
SLIDE 31

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Phas asing ing Sche hedul dule

  • First Complete Lower Level of

Building (Non-Typical)

  • Apply SIPS to Levels 1-7 (Typical)

Basis is of SIPS

  • Elevations
  • Crane Positions
  • Bay Numbers

New Sequence of Panel Erection New Crane Positioning

slide-32
SLIDE 32

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Crane Operator Works Overtime to Move Crane

Cost/Schedule Results

Crane ne Posit ition ioning ing

Capacity Distance No. of Moves Duration (Days) Total Days 200 Ton Short 23 0.0625 1.438 Long 1 300 Ton Short 2 0.0625 0.125 Long 1 Overall Total 1.563 Total Hours 12.5 Crane Moves/Relocation

Crane Operator Time + 1/2 Duration (Ho Total 38.50 1.5 12.5 $722 Overtime Costs for Crane Moves

Overtime $41,711 Labor $3,670 Crane $10,852 Total Cost $56,234 Overtime $722 Labor $0.00 Crane $0.00 Remaining Total $55,512 Cost Difference

Substantial Savings with Crane Utilization Plan

Building Original Duration Actual Duration New Duration Total West 66 54 34 20 East 60 51 34 17 Connector 12 11 11 37 Precast Duration Summary Total Savings (Days)

SIPS PS Results lts

  • Saves 37 Days for Precast Erection

Type Duration Work Hours Total Crane Operator 38.50 37 296 $11,396 Foreman 30.55 37 296 $9,043 Layout (3) 32.45 37 296 $28,816 Welder (3) 42.31 37 296 $37,571 Rigger 33.63 37 296 $9,954 Truck Driver 20.62 37 296 $6,104 $102,884 Labor Savings (Precast Crew) Overall Total

WO GRUBB Crane Rental Costs Duration (37 Days) Total 200-Ton Crawler $20,000 1 Month $20,000 $6,700 3 Weeks $20,100 $2,300 2 Days $4,600 $44,700 Crane Savings Overall Total

SIPS PS Results lts

  • Labor and Crane Cost

Savings of $147,584

slide-33
SLIDE 33

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Summary/Questioning

  • Crane movements during overtime
  • SIPS Schedule for East/West

Building

  • Precast Erection Saves 37 days
  • Schedule Reduction Saves

$147,584 ,584 Consideration

  • Combined Use of Analysis topic #3 would prove beneficial

to overall project

  • Due to Extensive level of coordination and material

procurement, Lobby South Elevation not Feasible for early completion

  • Confirmed as NOT FEASIBLE by DAVIS Project Engineer
  • 1. Designing and Developing Drawings
  • 2. Cutting Stone (Canada)
  • 3. Shipping Stone (Canada to U.S.)
  • 4. Formwork
  • 5. Casting
slide-34
SLIDE 34

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

Summar ary y of Co Conclusion/ usion/Recom ecomme mendation ndations

Analysis #1: Solar PV Array

  • Rebates and Incentives allow System to be Desirable by

Owner

  • 3-Year Payback Period
  • Analysis #2: Technology to the Field
  • Cost of Systems Does not Outweigh Project Benefits

Analysis #3: Replace Interior CMU Wall w/ Precast

  • Substantial Decrease in On-Site Labor
  • Deemed Beneficial Solely based on Building Enclosure,
  • therwise no incentive to Implement
  • Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence
  • SIPS Saves Substantial Time and Money
  • Larger Crane Sizes increases Erection Efficiency
slide-35
SLIDE 35

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

PROJECT OUTLINE

Academic Acknowledgements Penn State AE Faculty

  • Craig Dubler
  • James Faust
  • Kevin Parfitt

PACE Roundtable Industry Members Special Thanks National Cancer Institute Family & Friends Industry Acknowledgements James G. Davis Construction

  • Will Cox
  • John Rappoport
  • Todd Povell

Nick Carosi, IV- Arban & Carosi Mark T. Taylor- The Nitterhouse Companies Jerry D. Davis Jr.- W.O. Grubb Kurt D. Maldovan- Balfour Beatty

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Project Introduction Project Background

  • Site Overview
  • Building properties

Analysis #1: Solar PV Analysis

  • Site/Roof Investigation
  • Shading Analysis
  • Energy Use Study
  • Panel Selection and Layout
  • System Costs

 Structural Breadth Analysis #2: Technology to the Field

  • Material Tracking
  • Case Study
  • Feasibility

Analysis #3: Interior CMU Wall To Precast

  • CMU Overview
  • CMU Estimate
  • Precast Overview
  • Precast Estimate
  • Results/Feasibility

Analysis #4: Alternative Façade Sequence

  • Initial Sequence
  • New Façade Scheduling/Sequence
  • Cost/Schedule Results

Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations Acknowledgements

slide-36
SLIDE 36

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

THANK YOU QUESTIONS?

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

slide-37
SLIDE 37

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

APPENDIX

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

PV Rack Specifications

slide-38
SLIDE 38

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

APPENDIX

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

PV Array: Constructability

Sunpower T10 Solar Roof Tiles

  • Easy to Install without any need for mechanical roof

Attachments (non-penetrating)

  • Large-scale roof tile Arrays can be installed efficiently and

commissioned quickly

  • Low-profile design blends into flat roof construction,
  • perating within the electrical grid network
  • Solar Roof Tiles will not interfere with roof drainage

(extremely flexible layout capabilities)

  • All Panels Placed on One roof Area, minimizing Wire Runs
slide-39
SLIDE 39

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

APPENDIX

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Structural Load Calculations

Live Loads Roof Live Load = 30 psf Roof Snow Load = 30 psf Dead Loads Roof Slab = 6” thick [(6”)/(12)] x 150 pcf = 75 psf Assumed Superimposed Dead Load = 20 psf Total Dead Load = 95 psf (Used 100 psf) Panel Loads Panel Weight = 52 lbs per panel

  • Trib. Area = 20’ x 20’

[(52 lb/panel) * (20 panels)] / (20’ x 20’) ]= 2.6 (Used 3 psf) Total Loads DL = 103 psf LL = 30 psf Wu = 1.2(0.103) + 1.6(0.030) = 0.172 72 ksf

slide-40
SLIDE 40

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

APPENDIX

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Property Tax Reduction

Cost of Project = $100,000,000 Property Tax Assumption = 1.25% 100,000,000 * .0125 = $1,250,000 Taxes/Year LEED-NC Gold = 25% Exemption Amount (5 year term) Cost Savings of Property Tax per Year = $312,500

slide-41
SLIDE 41

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

APPENDIX

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

Crane and Erection Details

Capacity Distance No. of Moves Duration (Days) Total Days 100 Ton Short 6 0.0625 0.375 Long 1 1 1 200 Ton Short 15 0.0625 0.938 Long 3 1 3 Overall Total 5.313 Crane Moves/Relocation WO GRUBB Crane Rental Per Month Per Week Per Day Mobilization 100-Ton Crawler $11,000 $3,700 $1,300 $10,000 200-Ton Crawler $20,000 $6,700 $2,300 $21,000 300-Ton Crawler $34,000 $11,300 $3,800 $31,000 Crane Pricing WO GRUBB Crane Rental Per Month Per Week Per Day Mobilization 300-Ton Crawler $34,000 $11,300 $3,800 $31,000 100-Ton Crawler $11,000 $3,700 $1,300 $10,000 Difference of values $23,000 $7,600 $2,500 $21,000 Additional Costs Endured With Larger Crane

Average Daily Erection Trade Original Quantity New Contract Quantity/Agreement Precast Panels 8-10 panels/day Per New Schedule/SIPS Punch Windows 10-12 units/day Per New Schedule/SIPS Curtain Wall 8 units/day Per New Schedule/SIPS Niche/Recessed Bays 8 units/day Per New Schedule/SIPS

slide-42
SLIDE 42

AE Senior Thesis | Justin A. Woishnis

APPENDIX

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Rockville| Maryland

SIPS