Wesley A. Brown Field House Wesley A. Brown Field House Annapolis, Maryland Annapolis, Maryland Peter Schneck Construction Management Dr. Riley October 17, 2007
Wesley A. Brown Field House Wesley A. Brown Field House Annapolis Annapolis, Maryland Maryland Project Overview Presentation Outline Analysis 1 – Fabric Mechanical Distribution Comparison • Project Overview Project Overview Analysis 2 – • Analysis 1 – Analysis 1 – Fabric Mechanical Distribution Fabric Mechanical Distribution Waterproofing Options for the Comparison Comparison Wesley A. Brown Field House • Analysis 2 – Analysis 2 – Waterproofing Options for the Waterproofing Options for the Analysis 3 – Wesley A. Brow n Field House Wesley A. Brow n Field House Properties of Concrete Products • Analysis 3 – Analysis 3 – Properties of Concrete Products roperties of Concrete Products with Fly Ash w ith Fly Ash w ith Fly Ash Analysis 4 – Penn • Analysis 4 – Analysis 4 – Penn State’s Coal Fired Pow er enn State’s Coal Fired Pow er State’s Coal Fired Power Plant and Plant and Uses for its Coal Combustion Plant and Uses for its Coal Combustion Uses for its Coal Products Products Combustion Products • Acknow ledgements Acknow ledgements Acknowledgements • Questions Questions Questions Peter Schneck Peter Schneck Constructi Construction Manag on Management ment Dr. Riley . Riley
Wesley A. Brown Field House Wesley A. Brown Field House Annapolis Annapolis, Maryland Maryland Project Overview Project Overview Analysis 1 – Fabric Location: Mechanical United State Naval Academy Distribution Comparison Annapolis, Maryland Analysis 2 – Project Cost: Waterproofing Options for the $45 million Wesley A. Brown Size: Field House 140,000 Sq. Ft. Analysis 3 – Properties of 2 Levels Concrete Products with Fly Ash Duration: 26 months Analysis 4 – Penn State’s Coal Fired February 2006 – March 2008 Power Plant and Uses for its Coal Building Function: Combustion Products Collegiate multi-sport complex Support for collegiate athletics and events Acknowledgements Project Delivery Method Questions Design-Build Peter Schneck Peter Schneck Construction Manag Constructi on Management ment Dr. Riley . Riley
Wesley A. Brown Field House Wesley A. Brown Field House Annapolis Annapolis, Maryland Maryland Project Overview Project Overview Analysis 1 – Fabric Project Team – Organizational Chart Mechanical Distribution Comparison Analysis 2 – Ow ner: Waterproofing Options for the Naval Facilities Engineering Command / The United States Wesley A. Brown Naval Academy Field House Guaranteed Maximum Price Analysis 3 – Construction Manager Properties of Hensel Phelps Construction Concrete Products Company with Fly Ash Lump Sum Analysis 4 – Penn State’s Coal Fired Power Plant and Uses for its Coal Architect Mechanical Electrical Structural Fire Associate Combustion of Record: Engineer: Engineer: Engineer: Protection: Architect Products HKS Inc. Kavocs M.C. Dean Thorton National Shalom Whitney & Tomasetti Fire Baranes Associates Protection Associates Acknowledgements Questions Peter Schneck Peter Schneck Construction Manag Constructi on Management ment Dr. Riley . Riley
Wesley A. Brown Field House Wesley A. Brown Field House Annapolis Annapolis, Maryland Maryland Project Overview Project Overview Analysis 1 – Fabric Mechanical Site Layout Distribution Comparison • Tight Site Fencing Space – Analysis 2 – Waterproofing Neighboring Options for the building Wesley A. Brown Substation Field House Storage/Staging • One-w ay Building Analysis 3 – Streets – Footprint Properties of 4 Story Stone Building McDonough Hall Concrete Products Difficult for with Fly Ash deliveries Analysis 4 – Penn • Naval Storage/ Traffic State’s Coal Fired Staging Trailer Site Bancroft Hall Academy’s Power Plant and 7 Story Uses for its Coal Campus – Stone Combustion Building Parking Products Security: w orkers and Acknowledgements deliveries Questions Peter Schneck Peter Schneck Constructi Construction Manag on Management ment Dr. Riley . Riley
Wesley A. Brown Field House Wesley A. Brown Field House Annapolis Annapolis, Maryland Maryland Project Overview Analysis 1: Analysis 1 – Fabric Mechanical Fabric Mechanical Distribution Comparison Distribution Comparison Problem: Analysis 2 – The current mechanical distribution system design in Waterproofing Options for the the Wesley A. Brow n Field House has G90 double- Wesley A. Brown w alled pre-insulated ductw ork in the athletic field Field House area. This ductw ork is to be installed at heights over Analysis 3 – 40’. The diameter of the ductw ork is up to 58”. This Properties of ductw ork is expensive, difficult to install, and Concrete Products requires precious space on the project for lay-dow n with Fly Ash Analysis 4 – Penn Goal: State’s Coal Fired Power Plant and To find an alternative ductw ork system that Uses for its Coal addresses cost, schedule, and space issues on the Combustion Products Wesley A. Brow n Field. The system needs to satisfy the Naval Academies require for a mechanical Acknowledgements system in a state-of-the-art athletic facility. Questions Peter Schneck Peter Schneck Construction Manag Constructi on Management ment Dr. Riley . Riley
Wesley A. Brown Field House Wesley A. Brown Field House Annapolis Annapolis, Maryland Maryland Project Overview Analysis 1: Fabric Mechanical Distribution Comparison Analysis 1 – Fabric Mechanical Distribution Comparison A fabric ductw ork system from Ductsox Fabric Air Dispersion Products w as investigated as an Analysis 2 – Waterproofing alternative to the Steel Ductw ork. Options for the Wesley A. Brown Using the Ductsox Fabric Air Dispersion Design Field House Guide, a Ductsox System for the Wesley A. Brow n Analysis 3 – Field House using the follow ing steps of design. Properties of Concrete Products 1. Shape with Fly Ash 2. Design Layout Analysis 4 – Penn State’s Coal Fired Power Plant and 3. Fabric Uses for its Coal Combustion 4. Air Dispersion Products 5. Suspension Acknowledgements Questions Peter Schneck Peter Schneck Construction Manag Constructi on Management ment Dr. Riley . Riley
Wesley A. Brown Field House Wesley A. Brown Field House Annapolis Annapolis, Maryland Maryland Project Overview Analysis 1: Fabric Mechanical Distribution Comparison Analysis 1 – Fabric Mechanical Distribution 1. Shape – The shape is cylindrical fabric duct, due to the exposed Comparison application. This shape also allow s for any of the fabrics to be chosen Analysis 2 – Waterproofing 2. Design layout – The design layout w as one that closely resembles Options for the Wesley A. Brow n’s current Mechanical Layout. The tw o 42,000 cfm Wesley A. Brown Air Handler Units distribute air dow n four 190 foot runs of fabric Field House duct at 21,000 cfm. The maximum velocity for a Ductsox system w ith inlet fittings is 1,400 fpm, how ever reducing the velocity to Analysis 3 – Properties of 1,200 fpm reduces and stress and noise. Using the design chart the Concrete Products diameter of fabric cylinders is determined to be 58” using 1,200 fpm with Fly Ash as the inlet pressure. Analysis 4 – Penn State’s Coal Fired Power Plant and Uses for its Coal Combustion Products Acknowledgements Questions Peter Schneck Peter Schneck Construction Manag Constructi on Management ment Dr. Riley . Riley
Wesley A. Brown Field House Wesley A. Brown Field House Annapolis Annapolis, Maryland Maryland Project Overview Analysis 1: Fabric Mechanical Distribution Comparison Analysis 1 – Fabric Mechanical Distribution 3. Fabric – Sedona-Xm a porous fabric w as selected to replaced the Comparison double w alled steel. The porous fabric does not allow of condensation to form in the ductw ork, by creating a layer of protective tempered air. Analysis 2 – Waterproofing Options for the Wesley A. Brown Field House Analysis 3 – Properties of 4. Air Dispersion – The Air Dispersion w as calculated by using the Concrete Products orifice chart in conjuction w ith the required throw distance. Using the with Fly Ash formula: (Height – 6) x 1.00 = Required Throw Analysis 4 – Penn State’s Coal Fired For required throw at a height of 40’, it w as determined that 34’ of Power Plant and Uses for its Coal required throw w as needed. Using the orifice chart 3” holes every 9” on Combustion center are required. Products 5. Suspension System – Lastly a tw o row suspended H-track system Acknowledgements w as chosen to support the 58” diameter and for its ability to vary in attachment height Questions Peter Schneck Peter Schneck Construction Manag Constructi on Management ment Dr. Riley . Riley
Recommend
More recommend
