arup journal 2 (2013)

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

1/96

The Arup Journal

Issu

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

2/96

4 Revitalising Amsterdams museums:an introductionJoop Paul

6 Refurbishing the RijksmuseumKarsten Jurkait Siegrid Siderius

26 Enhancing the Stedelijk MuseumMarcel de Boer Marille Rutten

Siegrid Siderius

Frank Van Berge Henegouwen

38 The Bill & Melinda GatesFoundation CampusPeter Alspach Hans-Erik Blomgren

Cormac Deavy Steve McConnell

Anne Marie Moellenberndt

Jay Oleson Sara Paul Betsy Price

Simon Reynolds Jesse Vernon

60 The Al Bahar towers:multidisciplinary design forMiddle East high-riseAndy Armstrong Giorgio Buffoni

David Eames Roy James Leonora Lang

John Lyle Konrad Xuereb

74 The Fulton Center:design of the cable netZak Kostura Erin Morrow Ben Urick

84 Lloyds Cloudless:reglazing Lloyds of London a rst for recyclingMark Bowers Philip King

90 Developing bio-responsive faades:BIQ House the rst pilot projectJan Wurm

Front cover: Detail of BIQ House atIBA, Hamburg the worlds frst

bio-responsive faade.

This page: Rear faade of therefurbished Rijksmuseum inAmsterdam.

2 The Arup Journal 2 /2013

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

3/96

The Arup Journa

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

4/96

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

5/96

The Arup Journa

The original building underwent vaphases of modernisation, and from 1954 its total usable space was extethe insertion of intermediate storeys(entresols). In 1954 the Sandberg w(named after the then director) was alongside, but this has subsequentlyway for the new extension (nicknamBathtub), the design for which wapresented in 2004 by Benthem CrouArchitects. Their plan also includedextensive renovation of the Weissmbuilding, in which various 20th cenmodications like the entresols werremoved and the building restored toriginal state. As with the Rijksmusthere have been more visitors than eIn the rst six months after reopeniStedelijk was visited by 500 000 pewhereas 800 000 per year were exp

Transforming the squareWith these transformations of theRijksmuseum, the Stedelijk Museumsoon the neighbouring Van Gogh Mthe Museumplein has gained anothedimension, as the main entrances ofbuildings now point towards the squIt is the citys focus for all kinds of and social events for example thQueens Day, sometimes described worlds biggest street party (to beKings Day in 2014 following the aof Queen Beatrix and the accessionWillem-Alexander), and the Uitmarannual opening of Amsterdams cul

season at the end of August.

Catalyst for Arup in AmsterdamBoth projects have not only helped transform the city, but have also beefurther catalyst for the growth of thArup ofce in Amsterdam, followinearlier key projects like the AmsterPublic Library and the Nescio BridgThese important museums have ledgrowing reputation and portfolio form in the world of Dutch arts and to which Arup is proud to contribut

IntroductionIn the 23 years since 1990, The Netherlandshas invested some 1.5bn in over 40museums. Around half of this budget hasbeen spent in the city of Amsterdam, withabout 500M of that for two museums ofinternational importance. These are theRijksmuseum, celebrated for its Golden Ageart collection, and the Stedelijk Museum,which houses the citys leading collection ofcontemporary art. The Rijksmuseum wasclosed in 2003 and the Stedelijk in 2004 for

renovations and signicant extensions, andboth have now been reopened by QueenBeatrix: the Stedelijk in autumn 2012 andthe Rijksmuseum following in spring 2013.

These extensive restorations togetherwith the 20072011 renovation of theScheepvaartmuseum (the NationalMaritime Museum, focusing on Dutchnautical history), the opening in 2009 ofthe Hermitage Amsterdam (a branch ofthe St Petersburg Hermitage, focusingunsurprisingly on Russian art) and the 2012opening, also by Queen Beatrix, of the newEYE Film Institute Netherlands have

enabled Amsterdam to regain its status as aninternational cultural destination alongsideits other well-known attractions to bothinhabitants and tourists.

The areaAmsterdams Museumplein (MuseumSquare) is situated immediately south-westof the outermost canal forming the perimeterto the citys historic centre, the uniqueconcentric semi-circular rings of streets andcanals built on reclaimed land in the 17thcentury (Fig 1).

Until the second half of the 19th century

only a handful of peasants houses weresituated where the museums now stand,but with the presence here of the 1883International Colonial and ExportExhibition, the city governance allocated thisarea to be a new art and culture zone forAmsterdam. To underline this goal thestreets were named after famous painters.

Nowadays the main cultural institutions sitedon the Museumplein are the Rijksmuseum,the Stedelijk Museum, the Van GoghMuseum (1973) and the Concertgebouw(Concert Hall, 1881) (Figs 23).

The RijksmuseumDesigned by the long-lived and prolicDutch architect Pierre Cuypers (1827-1921),the Rijksmuseum was opened in 1885 as thehome of the countrys national museum.The collection initially comprised collectionsfrom the Dutch regents and objects fromstate institutions, but was soon extendedto include paintings and illustrations of theCity of Amsterdam. Due the ever-growingcollection and changing visions for itsoverall concept and direction, theRijksmuseum was renovated several timesover the years. Between 1904 and 1916,new galleries to the south-west of the main

building were added today known asthe Philips Wing and later used toaccommodate and exhibit the collection of19th century paintings and drawings donatedby Mr & Mrs Drucker Fraser. Between 1950and 1960 the original patios were changedinto galleries, creating even more space.

The latest renovation, based on the designsof Cruz y Ortiz, has reinstated the buildingsoriginal layout. The built-in galleries in theatria have been demolished, so that the atrianow offer copious daylighting and a sense ofspace. Paintings, craftsmanship and historyare no longer separated, but show in one

chronological circuit an integrated accountof Dutch art and history. A new pavilion hasbeen added, also designed by Cruz y Ortiz,to display the Asian collection.

The museum has been modernised in manyways, but at the same time Cuypers originalarchitectural details have been brought back,illustrating the Rijksmuseums new adage:Continue with Cuypers. The Rijksmuseumis now a tting attraction for 21st centuryvisitors, the numbers of whom have farexceeded expectations. The museumwelcomed 500 000 visitors in the rst twomonths after reopening, compared with the

2M per year expected.

Stedelijk MuseumThe Stedelijk Museum was founded towardthe end of the 19th century, initiated byseveral committed and well-to-do citizensto meet their desire to promote and exhibitcontemporary art. The original building,designed by Adriaan Willem Weissman,was opened in 1895.

AuthorJoop Paul

Author

Joop Paul is a Director of Arup, and a membEurope Board. He was Project Director for tredevelopments of both the Rijksmuseum anStedelijk Museum.

Image credits1Nigel Whale; 23Benthem Crouwel.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

6/96

6 The Arup Journal 2/2013

Refurbishing the Rijksmuseum

Introduction

For generations every Dutch child hasbeen taken at least once in its life to theRijksmuseum. For Amsterdam tourists a visitis an obligatory item in the itinerary, tomarvel at Rembrandts The Night Watchand

other masterpieces of the Dutch Golden Age(Fig 1). In addition, the museum houses avast collection of Dutch and Colonial artfrom the 15th to the 20th centuries from paintings and Delft chinaware todollhouses, ship models, armour, furnitureand garments visited by over a millionvisitors per year.

The building itself is also a work of art,purpose-designed by Pierre Cuypers in thelate 19th century to house and display theroyal collection of Dutch art, and coveredwith frescoes by renowned contemporaryartists (Fig 2). Already during its

construction the building was extended toexhibit more of the ever-growing collection,and had further additions (the SouthPhilips Wing, Drawing School, andDirectors Villa). In the 1960s the twooriginal courtyards within each of the eastand west wings disappeared under new foorareas and an auditorium; at the same time theoriginal high vaults were hidden by falseceilings to accommodate distribution forlighting and air-conditioning (Figs 36).

2.

1.

LocationAmsterdam, The Netherlands

AuthorsKarsten Jurkait Siegrid Siderius

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

7/96

The Arup Journa

The new areas provided more exhibitionspace, but the building became lesstransparent and more difcult to navigate;the original spaciousness was lost, and thefrescoes covered by layers of paint. With yetmore growth, increasing numbers of visitors,and demands for better restoration andstorage facilities, the Dutch Parliamentdecided in 1999 that the building should besubstantially refurbished to the standards ofa 21st century museum.

The objective was to:(1) resolve the access problem caused bythe public passage (the Museumstraat)incorporated in Cuypers original design,which ran through the building between theeast and west wings and effectively dividedit into two disconnected halves;(2) create a completely new building for thevarious restoration workshops (the AtelierBuilding); and(3) incorporate appropriate spaces for amuseum shop and catering.

Forming the teamThree main stakeholders were to managethe task: The Rijksmuseum itself as buildinguser; the then Ministry of Spatial Planning,Housing and the Environment as buildingowner; and the Ministry of Education,Culture and Science as owner of thecollection. Members from each of the threethus came together to form their own clientbody, the Programmdirectie Het NieuweRijksmuseum to manage the design andconstruction process.

In 2001 the internationally renownedSpanish practice Cruz y Ortiz fromSeville won the architectural competition.

It had designed, among other projects,the Spanish Pavilion at the Hanover Expo2000, train stations for Seville and Basle,and stadia at Madrid, Seville and Huelva.For the restoration aspects, the Dutchpractice Van Hoogevest Architecten joinedthe team under Cruz y Ortizs lead to adviseon where and how to recover the originaldesign. Later, in 2004, the French designerWilmotte completed the architectural team,undertaking the exhibition design.

In a separate competition in 2002, tmain engineering contracts, for struand services design and building phadvice, were tendered. Arcadis, alrestructural designer of the adjoiningunderground parts of the Museumpwas commissioned for the structurethe services design and building phwent to Arup, for which the rm fojoint ventures respectively with thepractices Van Heugten (now part ofHaskoning), and DGMR. Arup/Van

was commissioned to advise on theinstallations of groundwater thermaIT/communications, security, and elighting, while Arup/DGMR was cofor re safety, daylighting, and matstudies. The Atelier Building was nArups commission.

With the team established, a series workshops was held to agree strategachieve the demanding brief and dehow members would work togetherAlistair Guthrie (Arup Fellow and mexpert) coined the expression bestcompromise, and this carried throuthe project.

Best overall compromiseAs each team presented its objectivit became clear that some aims werconict (eg modernising the buildinthe same time bringing back its oldor having an open building but alsoproviding close ambient control).

To achieve the best overall solutionto agree what would work best for tmuseum, in some cases accepting sthat were not the optimum individu

for one discipline but would allow function satisfactorily too, and meeoverall criteria of a world-class muhistoric national monument.

This approach was actively embracwhole team, and produced some truremarkable solutions that would nobeen possible otherwise. This articlhighlights some of them.

4.

3.

5.

6.

35. The 1960s refurbishmentin progress.

6. Upper level gallery after1960s refurbishment.

1. The Night Watchin the refurbishedRembrandt Room.

2. Intermediate level gallery beforeany refurbishment.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

8/96

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

9/96

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

10/96

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

11/96

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

12/96

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

13/96

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

14/96

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

15/96

The Arup Journa

40.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

16/96


41.

42.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

17/96

The Arup Journa

41. Refurbished east courtyard.

42. Refurbished west courtyard.

43. Servicing restored courtyards:(a) Special materials and detailing toimprove room acoustics;(b) Make-up air via transfer grilles in

passage faades with integratedconvectors;(c) Manifolds for underoor heating;(d) Information desks treatedadditionally by fan-coil units;(e) Underoor heating in all areas.

44. Return air inlet in the westcourtyard.

45. CFD analysis of ambientconditions in the courtyard.

43. 44.

45.

The courtyardsThe recovered courtyards are the centrepieceof the refurbishment. The west courtyardfunctions as the new main entrance, but bothare accessible from the street and form asingle space. The original faades have beenrestored to their original glory, and theoriginal glazed roof has been reinstated(albeit in modern double-glazing) as has theinterior, secondary, roof layer that is now

used to reduce the solar loads in the space.

Since the courtyards are working spaces forthe museum staff, the thermal conditions,lighting and acoustics had to be designedaccordingly. The spaciousness of these areasrequired special treatment, but again withoutimposing on the aim of bringing back theoriginal structure.

This ambient control was achieved by atwo-fold approach. A basic tempering of theambient conditions is derived from thegallery return air that ows from the groundand intermediate oor galleries, and thus

allows the courtyards to function as bothsuper-sized plenums and high-efciency heatrecovery devices (all excess energy from thegallery return air is used here); unwantedinltration is reduced by using revolvingdoors at the entrances. This tempering issupported by an underoor heating systemand a balancing of the high-level shadingbetween the desired natural lighting and thelimitation of solar thermal loads.

Locally, areas where staff work permanentlyhave been treated with further measures(fan-coils, infrared emitters). Here, localcontrol has been enabled (Fig 43).

Fresh air is supplied to the space viatransfer grilles in the newly-created windowsto the passage; at the same time unwantedinltration is reduced by the revolving doors.The resulting ambient conditions from these

solutions were rst tested in a 3-D CFDmodel to ensure that draft and cold spots inpopulated areas would be avoided (Fig 45).

With great reverberating volumes, numeroushard surfaces, and many sources of ambientnoise from the visitors, the courtyards werealso at risk of forming an acousticallyunintelligible environment, unacceptableboth for the museum operations (eg ticketsales) and visitors (eg tour guides).

Once again, a 3-D study of the spaces wasundertaken to establish the effects andevaluate the impact of possible solutions.

Here the features of the design were usedto achieve the desired acoustic effect, byconstructing the ceiling sculptures inabsorbent material, and by nishing theupper parts of the walls with acousticmaterial. The nal result maintains its senseof spaciousness without the acoustic effects(echoes) that are normally encountered insuch a large space.

a

b

e

d

c

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

18/96


LightingAs in any museum, lighting playsrole in bringing exhibitions at theRijksmuseum to life; at the same a critical factor in preserving the museums care, necessitating adhstrict limits on the extent and typeillumination. In an additional comArups lighting team was broughtto deal with the daylighting and thof the electrical lighting system, bfeature lighting to spaces like the and staircases, and for the exhibit

Daylighting

Cuypers original design relied hedaylight, but over the decades sinbuilding was frst completed this progressively reduced by windowblocked up and by the introductiosuspended ceilings. The design inrefurbishment was to make the Ra daylit museum again (Fig 47).

Glass type 1 with adjustable louvres

Glass type 1 without louvres

Glass type 1 blacked out

Glass type 4

N

46.

47.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

19/96

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

20/96

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

21/96

The Arup Journa

For the new Asian Pavilion designeCruz y Ortiz, only recessed linear trthe ceilings are used to supply the alighting (Fig 56).

The display case design by Wilmottnot include integrated lighting, but rthe artworks inside being lit from thand track systems above; to facilitatthe cases were designed to be as tranas possible, with special non-reect(Fig 57). The display cases in the APavilion do have integrated lightingdiffused glass top that makes the edto disappear.

56. Recessed linear tracks forlighting in the Asian Pavilion.

57. Display cases using specialnon-reective glass, in the 18th

Century Gallery.

57.

56.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

22/96

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

23/96

The Arup Journa

Fire

Museums pose special challenges in resafety design. Apart from the requirements ofnormal buildings to prioritise the safeevacuation of occupants, protection of thepriceless artwork is a driving factor.In addition, the security needs forsafeguarding the artwork from theftsometimes contradict the needs of reprotection. And here in the Rijksmuseum,restoring the buildings original geometryand nishes added a further level ofcomplexity to the challenge.

As many elements of modern re safetydesign could not be used in the historicbuilding, alternative solutions had to befound and agreed. The nal re safetystrategy again evolved from a results-oriented collaboration of all disciplines,and a close co-ordination with the City ofAmsterdam Fire Department from the startof the process.

62.

61.

The rst task was to reduce the riskthe building; for this purpose the stamost frequent causes of res develomuseums were studied and addresseone to reduce the corresponding riskThis involved, for example, special in the electrical installations, and hisensitive re detection systems adapto the geometries of the various spaas well as a review of the museumsoperational procedures.

A particular challenge was thecompartmentation of the building; tcourtyards had to be kept separate fgalleries in case of a re, but the veconcept relied on the spaces to be coThe solution lay in developing custowindows (Fig 62) which met the neprovide an air path between galleriecourtyards, an acoustic attenuation, barrier between the spaces, and re smoke resistance in case of a re.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

24/96

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

25/96

The Arup Journa

Authors

Karsten Jurkaitis an Associate Director in theDsseldorf ofce, and led the design team for theRijksmuseum restoration.

Siegrid Sideriusis an Associate Director in theAmsterdam ofce, and led the lighting design team forthe Rijksmuseum restoration.

Project creditsClient:Het Nieuwe Rijksmuseum Promoters:

Netherlands Ministry of Spatial Planning, Housing andthe Environment/Netherlands Ministry of Education,Culture and ScienceArchitect: Cruz y Ortiz ArquitectosStructural engineer:Arcadis Bouw & Vastgoed BVMechanical, electrical, public health, civil, ICT, andexhibition lighting designer in JV (with Van Heugten);

building physics, acoustics, re, daylighting designer inJV (with DGMR):Arup Giulio Antonutto-Foi,

Aitor Arregui, Monica Bamogo, Johan Beudeker,Remco Boukens, Marco Briede, Javier Caselles,Pablo Checa, Mark Chown, Simone Collon,Steve Done, Tom Fernando, David Gilpin,

Alexej Goehring, Alistair Guthrie, Rupert Inman,Chema Jimenez, Karsten Jurkait, Ben Kreukniet,Carmelo Lacayo, Florence Lam, Javier Pinan,

Mani Manivannan, Andrew McNeil, Jesus Moracho,Wolfgang Muller, Robert Murphy,

Rouven Nieuwenburg, Nieves Perez Pacios,James Quinton, Jim Read, Robert Senior,Siegrid Siderius, Alex Thomas, Rogier Van D

Daan Van Konijnenburg, Imke Van Mil,Jaap Wiedenhoff, Darren Woolf Local archiArchitecten Restoration consultant: Van HoArchitecten Exhibitions designer: Wilmotte Building services JV partner: Van Heugten

physics JV partner:DGMR Landscape archCopijn Tuin- en landschapsarchitectenConstruction manager:BRINK Groep.

Image credits

1, 20, 4142, 46, 61, 6465John Lewis Ma26, 1415, 17, 3536 Courtesy Van Hooge

Architecten; 7Courtesy Cruz y Ortiz Arquit89, 30, 53, 60Pedro Pegenaute; 10, 13, 1647, 51, 54, 59, 63Nigel Whale; 1112, 19, 244, 62Karsten Jurkait; 18, 43Indigo; 22, 245, 4849, 58Arup; 24Rouven Nieuwenbur

Haskoning); 28Arcadis; 29, 40, 50, 55, 57I33DGMR; 38, 39 University of Dresden;52, 56, 66Erik Smits.

63. Energy concept.

64. Delftware exhibition in thespecial collections gallery on theground oor.

65. Special collections gallery on theground oor.

The new Rijksmuseum has beenhighly successful with the publicsince its reopening.

66. Fireworks for the formal openingby Queen Beatrix on 14 April, 2013.

66.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

26/96


Enhancing the Stedelijk Museum

Introduction

To maintain and consolidate its key positionin the world of contemporary art and design,the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam hasbeen renovated and extended with the newaddition designed by Benthem CrouwelArchitects. The rejuvenated Museum wasopened ofcially by Queen Beatrix on 22September 2012. Museum Director AnnGoldstein commented: With this long and

eagerly awaited reopening, the Stedelijk

Museum Amsterdam re-establishepowerful position among the grealeading art institutions. It puts Amthe limelight as a centre of artistiand breathes new life into Museuone of the foremost cultural landsthe world. Above all, with the comof Mels Crouwelss bold and brillfunctional building, we are addinmajor new work to our collection

of Dutch home-grown modern des

1.

Location

Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Authors

Marcel de Boer Marille Rutten Siegrid Siderius Frank Van Berge Henegouwen

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

27/96

The Arup Journa

Architects concept and Arups roleBenthem Crouwels award-winning designwas submitted in 2004. Though the projectcomprised both the refurbishment of the1895 Weissman building and the addition ofa new building (the bathtub) that wasradically different in external appearance,the architects conception reected thewishes of the client that it should respectthe existing building and that the end resultshould form a single unit (Figs 34).

The starting point for the restoration was toreveal the neo-Renaissance character of theoriginal 1895 building, celebrated for itsmajestic staircase, grand rooms and use ofnatural light. During the renovation somenon-original intermediate oors wereremoved, and new connections madebetween exhibition spaces. At thecompetition stage, Arup advised Benthem

Crouwel on the structural design (Fig 5)and undertook the lighting design, the aimof which was to maximise the use of naturallight in the museum, within the constraintsof art conservation.

A key part of the concept was the relocationof the main entrance. The team determinedthat the entrance in the existing building,with all the functions associated with it,could no longer function as such, and so themuseum as a whole was reoriented to facesouth-east, with the entrance now accessedvia the new building from Museumplein.

3.

New construction substructure

New construction superstructure Existing building

4.

5.

1. Museum shop in the transparentground oor of the new building.

2. The original building underconstruction in 1893.

3. Architects impression.

4. Relationship between new and old.

5. Arups initial structural concept forthe new building.

2.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

28/96


6. The new entrance area.

7. Structural design at thecompetition stage.

6.

7.

Cantilever from steelribs in the boxstructure

Floor inserted incorridor zone actingas bracing structurefor basement wall

Beam structure forcolumn-free span

Self-supportingsteel structure

Truss withcorridor zone Elevator tower

providing stability andbearing structure

Columns behind glafaade supportbuilding volume

Truss in outsidewall surface

Wallssepaexist

Elevatorprovidinbearing

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

29/96

The Arup Journa

For the bathtub, Arup designed a steelstructure with load-bearing columns behindthe glazed curtain walling, trusses within theexterior walls, and trusses in the transversedirection in various grid patterns (Fig 7).Stability is provided by wall elements andsteel portals. By having only part of the newbuilding above ground and sinking twooors of it below ground level, the existingbuilding was kept virtually intact and itsoriginal aspect preserved as far as possible,the glazing on the new buildings groundoor allowing the faade of the old buildingto remain visible. Arup also carried out thelighting design for the new building.

The Weissman buildingThe 1895 building is known for itssymmetrical layout, its central staircase(Fig 8), its diversity of rooms and galleries,and above all for the rooms on the upperoor, with its magnicent (natural) overheadlight and fabric ceilings. All these deningfeatures were retained in the new design.Mezzanine oors that had been installedduring the 1950s were removed, and

various recesses were created for thenew installations.

Air supply and extraction are routed throughrecesses in the arches of the vaulted oors.In the basement the air is conveyed throughducts to various riser points, made possibleby cutting a large number of recesses in thebasement and a ground-level intake to drawin air from the exterior. The new positioning

8.

8. The head of the central staircase inthe refurbished Weissman building.

9. The large exhibition space in thebasement can be subdivided bytemporary walls to suit specicrequirements.

10. Building below the water tablefor the new basement.

of pillars as a result of the 1950srefurbishment was taken into account whencreating the recesses in the interior walls.Also, the high level of the water table meantthat watertightness was an importantdesign factor.

Another challenge was to prevent distortionof the original wall murals by Karel Appel.As with the sinking (drilling) of the sheetpiling and the foundation piles, the particularconditions at each location had to be taken

into account.

SubstructureA two-level basement was built under thesquare and the new superstructure, down toa depth of 8.5m below ground level andlocally 12m at the goods and truck lift.The basement is a 90m x 45m concrete shellwith outer walls varying in thickness from500mm to 800mm depending on the lateralforces. The basement oor is 500mm thick,built on an under-water concrete oor.

The walls at ground oor level are supportedby system oors, matching the span of theinstallations. The oor systems employed arehollow-core slabs, I-beams and heavy-dutygirders, featuring a continuous compressionlayer. The interior walls are also 500mmthick concrete. Stringent requirements wereimposed for watertightness (crack width) inthe basement oor as well as the basementwalls, on account of the museum functionslocated in the basement (Fig 10).

10.

9.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

30/96


Superstructure of the new buildingIn addition to the basement, the newconstruction comprises a glass-enclosedground oor as well as the opaque,seemingly solid, bathtub-shapedsuperstructure above that seems to hoverover the ground level (Fig 11), throughwhich the original building is visible.Together with the new entrance to themuseum, this transparent ground oorhouses an information centre, library, shop,

and restaurant with terrace. The two upperlevels accommodate a large exhibition spaceand auditorium on the lower level, andofces above. A large canopy cuts throughthe new structure at the height of the gutterof the original building.

The superstructure comprises steestructures with hollow-core slab the steel faade trusses make it pothe superstructure to be supportedpoints, ve columns and one cona solution that allows for a large oexhibition space. Arup and BenthCrouwel collaborated on optimisistructure, including the location obearing points and the trusses.

During the contract award stage, contractor introduced some renesteel superstructure from the specdesign that Arup had supplied.

11.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

31/96

The Arup Journa

Specifcation designThe superstructure was originally dto be carried on four bearing pointsthe east consisting of two columns wbox girder above, stabilised by a cowall, and a stabilising portal to the w14m in height up to the underside oofce oor. The east and west bearisupport two lattice trusses at 15m cEach has a centre span of around 48extends 20m either side. The museuis located between the lattice trusse4.72m and 6.92m above ground levhollow-core slabs having unsupportof 15m. These hollow-core slabs aron heavy wide-anged I-beams (HDin European nomenclature). These Hproles can also be used as steel co

The ofce oor, 14m above groundincorporatesLightCatchers1, propri

apertures through which natural lighthe museum hall directly from the oDue to the location of these, the teadecided to position the hollow-corethe ofce oor span parallel to the tThe plate girders for the canopy arecontinuous from truss to truss and chollow-core slab oor, 200mm thickspanning 6m. The roof also consistshollow-core slabs, supported by truthe transverse direction perpendiculfaade lattice trusses. The columns trusses bear the canopy girder (Fig

In addition, Arup conducted an anal

the canopy structure, to gauge the deffect of this very large projection ocomfort (Fig 14).

In the specication Arup laid down construction methodology in whichsuperstructure was to be built in layto the small number of bearing poinlimiting the load on the basement roThe bottom rail of the truss was suptemporarily until the hollow-core sllaid and the trusses completed. The were self-supporting thereafter.

13.

12.

14.

11. The signature bathtub shape ofthe new building.

12. New entrance exterior.

13. The original specication designfor the superstructure, showing thefour bearing points.

14. Dynamic analysis of canopy.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

32/96


The optimised designAt the start of the execution phase, Arup andBenthem Crouwel were asked to consider,jointly with the main contractor, reducingthe quantity of steel in the superstructure.Two optimisation proposals were examined:(1) to make the outer wall on the groundoor loadbearing, or (2) to increase thenumber of bearing points under thesuperstructure. In the end it was decided to

raise the number of bearing points fromfour to six (Fig 15).

The use of six bearing points changed theform of the trusses and reduced their weight.The new row of bearing points consists of aconcrete wall and a column with a boxgirder above.

This optimisation resulted in the followingalterations to the specication design:

replacing the wide-anged I-beam proles(HD sections) with regular I-beams (HEsections), and so reducing the self-weight

changing the span direction of the hollow-core slab at the ofce oor and roof oorlocations

forming the continuous canopy in sectionsending outside the lattice trusses

combining the trusses with a quarter girderbetween the ofce oor and the roof oor(Figs 1618).

In addition, the optimisation also causedchanges to the installation design. In thespecication design there was space betweenthe hollow-core slab oor and the lattice

trusses, whereas in the optimised design thegirders are congured with duct feed-through apertures in the web.

Using six bearing points enabled the latticetrusses to be formed in two sections.The columns, box girders and portal wereinstalled rst, and the trusses wereassembled on the basement roof and hoistedinto place in two sections. The bottom rail,now constructed in the heaviest availableregular I-beam prole, was too high to laythe hollow-core slabs over it, so these wereultimately laid off-centre next to the

I-beams. This had benets for hoisting intoposition, but drawbacks on account of theeccentricity. To cope with this, extra beamswere tted at 6m centres between the bottomrails of the lattice trusses and between thehollow-core slabs (Fig 19).

By grouting the reinforced joints betweenthe hollow-core slabs and the lattice truss,the hollow-core slabs provided transversestability during construction. The disc actionof the hollow-core slab oor compressionlayer ensured horizontal transfer to theconcrete walls and the stabilising portal,as previously noted.

Modifying the specication design of thecanopy resulted in an increase in distortionsand the consequent dynamic effect, whichwere countered by using additional struts tothe roof. The installation recesses wereplaced in the webs of the top rail. Due to thedimensions of the recesses it was impossibleto absorb further deection in the top rail ofthe lattice trusses, so hinges were ttedlocally in the top rail to eliminate bendingmoment. The bearing reaction of the ofceoor was transferred away directly to thetruss verticals through an additional steel

structure. The anges of the top rail weredesigned to locally absorb the tension.

The use of regular I-beams (HE 1000M) alsoresulted in the connecting paths between theexisting and new buildings being blocked, sothe sections were lowered locally by around200mm. This modied construction methodresulted in more temporary connectionsduring construction (Table 1).

15.

17.

16.

18.

19.

15. Revised superstrucwith six bearing points

16, 17. Truss erection.

18. Construction of holcore slabs.

19. Support to hollow ctruss, including extra s

beams at 6m centres.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

33/96

The Arup Journa

Condition 3

Lattice truss lower rail HE 1000M

Six bearing points

Office floor and roof floor hollow-corespan perpendicular to lattice trusses

Canopy supported on outer wall girderoutside lattice trusses only

Museum floor hollow-core slabs laid bthe HE 1000M members; linking beam

between lattice truss bottom rails due teccentric bearing

Continuous outer wall girder in lieu oftrusses; the outer wall girder is stabilisusing it in double configuration

Ducts running through the lattice truss

Lattice truss lower rail HD400/509

Four bearing points

Office floor and roof floor hollow-coreslab span parallel to lattice trusses

Canopy as a continuous construction

Museum floor hollow-core slabs laidcentrally on bottom rails of trusses

Trusses to support the roof

Ducts running over the lattice truss girders

Specification design

Table 1: Differences between the specification design and the optimised design

Optimised design

20.

21.

2021. The brick faade of theWeissman building provides both awarm backdrop to functions in thenew entrance area, and a strikingcontrast to its architecture.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

34/96


22.

23.

The lighting designAs already mentioned, the original designby Weissman of the original Museum wasalways noted for its daylighting, and whenit closed for renovation one of the mainlighting considerations was to maintain thefeeling of it being ooded with daylight.However, analysis and testing showed thatthe existing daylight levels were in factmuch too high for the health of the artworks.

Arup was commissioned to design thelighting, and help resolve the potentialconict between user experience andconservation by designing both thedaylighting and articial lightinginstallations, working closely with BenthemCrouwel to ensure that the lighting wasintegral to the architectural design.

Existing buildingThe existing museum has two main daylightsystems. On the ground oor the galleryspaces are lit from vertical windows, whilethe rst oor galleries are mostly illuminatedfrom above through the museums pitchedroof, via a horizontal laylight. To determinethe optimum daylighting approach, Arupstudied the suns path and the number ofhours of daylight availability in combinationwith the museum layout and orientation.This revealed two key factors:(1) for conservation of the artworks, the lightentering the vertical windows needed to bereduced, but (2) at the same time visibility tothe outside had to be maintained, to keep theconnection with the city of Amsterdam.

To meet both requirements, the vertical

windows were tted with at, translucentscrim, which in combination with theglazing itself ensures the correct lighttransmission. The scrim was architecturallydesigned to exactly t the window frame,creating the impression of a continuous wallthat allows soft daylight in, and gives anonly slightly obscured view out, due to theheaviness of the scrim fabric.

22. Beneath the gallerydiffusing vellum layer installed with adjustabintegrated recessed trafor accent lighting.

23. First oor gallerieslaylight have been givelighting racks, with indaimed upwards to cast reected light down in

As the Stedelijk exhibits much modern art,spaces are often required to be blacked out.When this is the case the scrim is replacedwith an identically detailed blackout screen.

Underneath the laylight a diffusing vellumlayer has been installed with integratedrecessed track to allow for accent lightingwith adjustable spots (Fig 22). This vellumensures a smooth white architectural nish to

the space, allowing just a subtle visibility ofthe original daylight construction frames.

For the ground oor galleries, and those rstoor galleries without the laylight, suspendedtrack lighting is provided. The illuminationfrom this is indirect, aimed upwards to theceiling and casting diffuse reected lightback down into the spaces (Fig 23).

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

35/96

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

36/96


New buildingDaylighting at the ground oor level ofthe new building is abundant due to theglass faade on all sides. In the evenings,ceiling xtures ensure appropriate lightlevels in the space, recessed to avoid anycluttering effect.

From the ground oor entrance, the mainstair takes visitors down to the basementlevel, which contains the most extensiveclear-span exhibition gallery in theNetherlands (Fig 27). By the use oftemporary walls, this single large spacecan be subdivided to suit specicexhibition requirements.

Its location below ground level means thatthis gallery has no daylight access, whichmakes it ideal both for video installationsand particularly light-sensitive artworks.

The lighting design here is again a recessedtrack system, which allows for exiblemounting of spot and oodlights.

The other galleries in the new buildingare on the rst oor, within the bathtub.To allow visitors to move betweenexhibitions without the distraction of othersentering and using the various ground oorfacilities, an enclosed escalator runs directlybetween the lower level and the rst oor,skipping the ground oor. This escalatortube has already proved to be a prime visual/photo opportunity feature of the refurbishedmuseum, the enclosed space with its bright

lighting transporting visitors betweenartistic worlds and enhanced by the audioart incorporated within it (Fig 28).

To allow some daylight into the rst oorgallery space, two linear slots of skylightswere introduced along the length of thespacer (Figs 2930). Due to the buildingsorientation and the limited size of theseapertures, daylight does not light the spaceuniformly here, but adds a dynamic elementto the gallery. As with the skylights in theoriginal building, these can also be blackedout if the exhibition requires this.The articial lighting is by recessed track,

similar to the solution in the lower level.

27.

28.

29.

30.

27. Large basement exhibition space.

28. The brightly lit escalator tube.

29. Daylight path into galleries.

30. Linear daylight catchers runalong the gallery edge.

31. Lighting at night emphasises thetransparency of the ground oor.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

37/96

The Arup Journa

Reference

(1) www.econation.be/en/what-is-lightcatcher/

Authors

Marcel de Boer is an Associate in the Amsterdam ofce,and was Project Manager for structural engineeringdesign of the Stedelijk Museum.

Marille Ruttenis a structural engineer in theAmsterdam ofce, and was a member of the structuraldesign team for the Stedelijk Museum.

Siegrid Sideriusis an Associate Director in theAmsterdam ofce, and was a member of the lightingdesign team for the Stedelijk Museum.

Frank Van Berge Henegouwenis a senior civil/structural

engineer in the Amsterdam ofce, and was a member ofthe structural design team for the Stedelijk Museum.

Project creditsClient:Project Management BureauPromoter: Gemeentelijk Grondbedrijf AmsterdamArchitect:Benthem CrouwelArchitectsStructural engineer and lighting designer:Arup

Johan Beudeker, Sander Boogers, Linda Bukman,Melissa Burton, Jeroen Coenders, Marcel De Boer,Thijs Gielleit,Stefan Greven, Arjan Habraken,

31.

ConclusionThe architect deliberately created a verystrong visual contrast between the exteriorsof the new and the existing buildings, but intheir interiors the new and the old areseamlessly connected, allowing visitors toexperience the museum as one continuousstructure. The lighting does the same throughthe use of similar solutions, with just subtledifferences to match the changingarchitectural context.

In the rst three months following itsopening, the refurbished Stedelijk Museumwelcomed over 300,000 visitors, well inexcess of the estimated quarter-million.The result shows that the new museum hasbeen embraced by the audience.

Michele Janner, Ger Jonker, Ben Kreukniet,Paul Marchant, Andrew McNeil, Joop Paul,Zhiwei Qian, Reinier Ringers, Marille RuttJeff Shaw, Siegrid Siderius, Edwin Thie,Frank Van Berge Henegouwen, Petra Van DWesley Van Der Bent, Rogier Van Der HeideClarissa Van Der Putten, Imke Van Mil, Jori

Peter Vermeij, John Wooter, Yuguang Yang,Talal ZmarrouBuilding services engineer:HVan Muijen Faade engineer: Solico BVSpecialist consultant:Imtech NVMain contractor:Royal Volker Wessels Stevi

AcknowledgmentsThis paper is an edited version of articles tha

inBouwen met Staal, February 2013, on the design of the Stedelijk Museum, and inMonMay 2013, on the lighting design.

Image credits

1, 6, 9, 12, 20, 2223, 26, 31Jannes Linders2 Stadsarchief Amsterdam; 3Benthem Crouw45, 7, 10, 1315, 19, 24, 29Arup;8, 25, 28, 30 Siegrid Siderius;11, 21, 27Joh

Marshall; 1618Phillip Nijman.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

38/96


The Bill & Melinda GatesFoundation Campus

Introduction

In 2005, a team from the Seattle architecturalrm NBBJ met with Melinda Gates todiscuss design and planning for the new Bill& Melinda Gates Foundation headquarters inthe Citys downtown. The Foundation had

originally been established in 1994 as theWilliam H Gates Foundation, but this waschanged to its present name ve years later.

The Foundations ambitious goals range farand wide, from eradicating age-old scourgessuch as malaria and polio, and producing therst HIV vaccine, to preparing every studentin the United States to graduate from highschool ready for college and a career.

Melinda Gates took the lead in plUS$500M campus, and for inspirtoured a host of notable buildingsWellcome Trust charity in Londonbiotech giant Genzyme in Cambrto the Finnish Embassy in Washin

She envisioned the new headquarmodel of durability, green designworkplace efciency.

Arup worked with NBBJ on the mand one of the rms rst critical to help generate the campus Desi(Fig 2), a guiding document coveFoundations design aspirations, iits sustainability goals. Later in 2

LocationSeattle, WA

AuthorsPeter Alspach Hans-Erik Blomgren

Cormac Deavy Steve McConnellAnne Marie Moellenberndt Jay OlesonSara Paul Betsy Price Simon ReynoldsJesse Vernon

1.

1. The North Building Melinda Gates Foundawith the atrium on the

2. The campus Design

3. Reception area.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

39/96

The Arup Journa

I I

PROJECT IRIS July 12, 2005 D E SI G N P R E C E P T S

WorkplaceWorking, Learning, Collaborating

ExpressionRepresenting the Foundation

Campus/Landscape DesignThe Institution in the City

SustainabilityHealth and EnvironmentSustainable Design Baseline: LEEDSilver or better.

TechnologyRequirements and Systems

Security/Campus (NotElectronic)Requirements and Systems

1 Equity. Include provisionssupporting each employees work

needs

Serene/Thoughtful. Reflective andquietly inspiring

Green Space. Inviting outdoorspaces, emphasizing softscape,

designed to be used more thanviewed

Health and comfort. Design forfresh air and thermal comfort with

non-toxic materials

Scalable Infrastructure. Allow forrevisions over time to energy and

communications systems

Integrated Security. Desigprofile, well integrated, aesth

pleasing security measures

2 Daylight Access. Provide access tonatural light for all

Visually Appealing.Cl ean lines andsimple forms with interest

Consistency. Cohesive, distinctiveform and style throughout the set ofbuildings,unified but not repetitive

Well-Being.Design for connectionsto nature (views, outdoor access,climate awareness) and daylight forall employees

Reliable Systems. Use integratedfunctional building systems of demonstratedreliability

Defined Site Boundary. Desite perimeter by unambiguophysical security element defoundation property

3 Collaboration. Enhance culture ofcollaboration, promoting formal andinformal interaction within and amongprograms

Timeless. Enduring qualities andexcellent proportions, not tech-y ordated

Internal Orientation. Campusdesign supports tranquility, repose,and social dimension of foundation

Personal Control. Provideopportunities for personal choice andcontrol

Accessible Infrastructure. Design forsecurereasonable accessibility of buildingsystems

Layered Security. Create psecurity to prevent unauthorvehicular and pedestrian acc

4 Community. Convey commonpurpose and identity, designing forvisual and literal connectivity

Humble/Mindful. Lofty and aspiringyet modest and respectful

Adaptability. Allow for designflexibility of future master planphases, while retaining essentialcampus qualities

Delight. Design to delight thesenses and inspire creativity

Information Technology. Incorporateprogressive yet tested technology whilemaintainingadaptability to changes intechnology and intent

Mitigate Vehicle Threat. Ebuilding envelope to mitigateand damage in areas adjacepublic vehicle access

5 Quiet. Support focused work,minimizingdisruptive auditory andvisual elements

Inspiring. Significant, motivating,inspiring attainability of foundationmission, expressed externally andinternally

Legibility.D esign for clarity of wayfinding and orientation, includingclear, well defined entry sequence tocampus

Site Ecosystems. Develop site toenhance local ecosystems (reduceheat, improve air quality, enhancebiodiversity)

Event servicing. Design to integrate eventservice provisions without disruption(unobtrusive, broadcast quality, transparentto user/audience)

Controlled Access. Createincremental levels of securityfor building areas

6 Vitality. Create environmentbalancing energy and serenity

Optimistic. Hopeful, ambitious,unconstrained by status quo yetpractical,expressed externally andinternally

Water. Inc orporate water whereappropriate to convey calm andcreate pleasant sound

Materials Conservation. Usematerials in ways that minimizenegative life cycle impacts, andincludes local/recycled materials

Purposeful Technology.Adapts appropriately to the venue be itinternally or externally focused; flashy ormainstream; cutting edge or reliable andtested. The outcome is connective, itresults in correct response

Separated Parking. Provi dparking for designated foundusers and avoid public parkinbuildings

7 Scale. Design appropriate scales ofidentity for individual, group, andcommunity spaces

Detailed. Finely detailed, neitherostentatious nor spare, not decorated

Phasing. Allow for phasedcompletion of master plan whilecreating interim complet eness

Watershed Protection.Accommodate water flows on naturalhydrological cycles

To be developed further, as Programdeterminations are made

8 Adaptability. Incorporate flexibilityand infrastructure to supportchanging workplace scenarios

Externally Focused. Emphasis onthe grantees and the foundationsmission and presence in the world

Servicing. Provide efficient andfunctional yet discreet service accessand facilities

Water Conservation. Maximizeconservation and reuse of water onsite

9 Learning. Opt imize environment forexchange of ideas

Dynamic. Sense of energy andurgency, not placid

Vehicular Circulation. Provideunobtrusive access to buildings andparking in support of each phase

Climate Neutrality. Minimizegreenhouse gas emissions andozone depletion

10 Continuity. Maximize connectivity ofwork areas to enhance flexibility andminimize isolation

Night Experience. Design foroutdoor night use, consideringoutdoor lighting, lighting from within,effect of city skyline

Energy Resources Conservation.Minimize energy use and maximizepotential for renewable energyoptions

11 Productivity. Incorporate amenitiesin balance with productivity andsuccess in the work place

Context Response. Allow forincreased connection to changingcommunity in future, while meetingsecurity requirements

2.

Decision making and collaboration

Decision making for the campus was drivkey factors the Foundations Design Prand a spirit of collaboration. The Design Pserved as a constant reminder of the Founvalues and overarching goals for the projethe team referred to them constantly whenevaluating design solutions particularlyfacing the tough choices sometimes neces

budget challenges. By having a clear clienarticulated for the whole team, decision mwas relatively straightforward for all its m

The joint team of architects, engineers andcontractors approached major decisions toensure buy-in from all parties and thorougconstructability reviews. A total-cost-of-olife-cycle evaluation was performed for msystems; this accounted for the Foundation

expected 100-year life while maintaining clients remit that all decisions be economsound. The total-cost-of-ownership approincluded frst costs, operational and maintcosts, capital equipment replacements, andcommodity costs. This fnancial analysis wsupplemented by a non-fnancial evaluatiocapture some of the aspects of performancnot as easily quantifed fnancially.

3.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

40/96


joined the NBBJ-led design teamstructural, mechanical, electrical,plumbing (SMEP) engineering sesubsequently added acoustics, aud(AV), information and communictechnology (ICT), faades, and mconsulting. As well as NBBJ and the team included Sellen ConstruSeneca Group, Gustafson Guthrie(GGN), McKinstry, KPFF, and C

In 2006, a meeting was held withGates to review NBBJs initial arconcepts based around the DesignWhen plans for a set of unassumirectangular buildings were unveilthanked the team for delivering wasked for, but sent them back to thboard. The space initially envisiohumble and mindful also needebold. It had to make a statement r

the Foundations own expansive aI wanted something thats rootedNorthwest,Ms Gates said, but itneeded to be iconic and represewe do. And the work we do is gloreaches out to the world.1

The campus duly embodies connebetween the Foundations global and its local community, with strurepresent both local roots (commthe Pacic Northwest) and global(the belief that every life has equaThe masterplans three prominentwings cantilever above the campu

rotated in different directions likereaching out to the world (Fig 4).buildings support the neighbourhcontext, aligning with the orthogoCity grid, providing wide new pewalkways and returning nearly hato green space. With its curved gland City-centre site, the Foundativisible to and linked with the comand neighbourhood.

Project overviewCompleted in spring 2011, this nefor all the Foundations staff occu12 acres (4.9ha), replacing an asp

parking lot with a campus that intwo acres (0.8ha) of living roofs anative plantings.

The masterplan (Fig 5) comprisesabove-ground structures and was three phases: (1) the garage, incorthe Visitor Center; (2) the seven-sNorth (A) and South (B) Buildingconnected by a basement; and (3)

4.

4. Concept diagrams of a boldercampus.

5. Site masterplan.

6. Solar control blinds help maintainthermal efciency.

7. The Visitor Center.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

41/96

The Arup Journa

Building (currently in design, and which willadd an additional 400 000ft2(37 200m2)).The museum-style Visitor Center opened inMay 2012 and includes hands-on exhibitsabout the Foundations mission (Fig 7).

At 900 000ft2(83 600m2) gross for phases1 and 2, the project incorporating ofces,an atrium, a data centre, a commercialkitchen, service spaces, loading docks andbelow-grade parking demonstrates howlarge-scale sustainable architecture can bedelivered at the highest level.

The multifunctional basement, which runsunder most of the site, includes car parking,a loading dock, MEP equipment rooms, andmore specic programme requirements suchas tness rooms, catering kitchens, storage,the data centre, and security kiosks.The buildings above have consistentarchitectural styling and detailing, andbuilding systems. At its east end, the NorthBuilding ows into a lightweight glassand steel atrium.

The Foundation needed a workplaceenvironment that supports the unique

needs of its partners and staff. Each ofceneighbourhood accommodates 20-25people, with conference rooms and informalseating areas creating intimate, cohesiveteam spaces. Shared amenities encourageexchange of ideas and the 60:40 splitrespectively between open and privateareas allows for both collaborative andheads-down work.

ab

d

hf

e

g

c

a Nort h Building

b Future East Building

c Atrium

d Reception Building

e So uth Building

f Visito r Center

g Garage

h The Knuckle

N

5.

6.

7.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

42/96


Melinda Gates said she hopes that all thishelps the Foundations employees, who hailfrom 37 countries, to do their best work:If having a space where people cancollaborate better leads to that, then I thinkweve achieved our mission.

The core purpose of the campus is to createa workplace environment that supports theunique needs of the Foundations partnersand staff. Face-to-face connections are apriority for its constantly travellingworkforce. A curved, glass breezeway alongthe inner curve of each building serves as themain circulation corridor, offering visualconnections to anywhere on the campus.Standing at the end of a building, the viewercan see all six oors of staff and partnersworking, collaborating and traversing.

A central staircase is used to encourageinformal interactions, and the atrium isdesigned as the social hub, where staff andpartners enter each morning, grab coffee,and start their day. The entire campus isdesigned to serve as an extended workplacefor a highly exible workforce.

The site

Early use as a trolley and bus barn hadleft local high concentrations of soilscontaminated with hydrocarbons. This wastaken into account in the buildings earlyplanning and orientation, locating thebelow-grade spaces to minimise theexcavation and subsequent off-site treatmentand disposal of the contaminated ground.To prevent gaseous intrusion into thebuilding, the slab on grade and perimeterbasement wall over the entire site wereconstructed with an impermeable vapourbarrier system in addition to awaterproong membrane.

Above ground, the landscape desintegrates the site with the buildinserves as a visible reection of thsustainability. The water featuresfrom rainwater, provide local habbirds and other wildlife.

The site is also an extension of thworkplace, creating outdoor envirwhere staff can work amidst a peawithin the City, aided by an IT indesigned to maximise workplace by providing wireless and cellulaavailability throughout the campuwas to be able to work online anyinformal gathering spaces, conferrooms, atrium, within elevators, aoutdoors without disconnectinthe network.

8.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

43/96

The Arup Journa

Workplace design

Planning the spacesUltimately, the building is about itsoccupants and their mission in realigoals of the Foundation. The main bcomprise 64ft (19.5m) wide, four-st

ofces above a deeper podium struchouses additional ofce space and sfunctions including a convening centraining centre and servery/dining f

As already noted, the ofce worksporganised around neighbourhoods20-25 people. These needed to be hexible: though they were basicallyaround a 60:40 ratio of open/closedthe Foundation wanted the exibilitaccommodate layouts ranging from10:90 open/closed. This desire for extended throughout the design of tbuilding systems.

The brief was to create a column-frexible space, and at the same timemaximise clear heights. Given the nexibility in programming the ofcthe team selected a 50ft x 30ft (15.29.1m) column grid, and a compositegravity frame (Fig 9), with three sepconcrete shear wall cores for lateral(Fig 10), as the structural system foNorth and South Building towers.

A 30in (760mm) depth allowance focomposite beams and slab achievedand also allowed for and incorporat

mechanical, electrical, plumbing anprotection distribution. The oor becantilever off each column line, cretotal 64ft (19.5m) building width, venough for multiple interior ofce larrangements. As part of the focus ousers, the team undertook nite elemanalyses to assess human-induced vof complete oor plates, ensuring aoccupant comfort and client satisfacwhile maintaining an economic strusteel oor solution.

8. The campus is visible to andlinked with the community andneighbourhood.

9. Digital structural model of the rsttwo phases of the Campus, showingthe North Building (foreground),South Building (behind left), andgarage (behind right).

10. The three concrete cores,showing the scale of the construction.

9.

10.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

44/96


That was the question posed by the Foundation toNBBJ to validate its proposal to invest $8M above thestandard curtain-wall benchmark on glazing for the

project. NBBJ sought oor-to-ceiling, argon gas-lled,double-glazed units with interior laminated glass litewindows for the ofce wings to enable a 30% increase

in faade energy performance and glass units twice thetypical width mullions 10ft (3m) across instead ofthe standard 5ft (1.4m). Conveying the integrity of thisspecication was crucial to NBBJs vision for aworkplace design that wasnt just the backdrop toinnovation, but that actively courted it.

Transparency one of ve vision critical designstrategies NBBJ employed to signify the Foundationsculture and values included the expansive glazing,which would allow employees to see one another acrossthe campus courtyard while working in separate

buildings. The strategy of connecting employeesvisually arose in part out of the fact that Foundationemployees, global experts in their elds, travelfrequently. Demanding schedules can make teamworkmore difcult to orchestrate, and visual connectionscould abet this.

Besides providing further visual signication of theFoundations mission and its openness toward its urbanSeattle location, transparency would also create a newstandard in high-performance workspace designthrough the penetration of daylight and the viewsafforded. These windows would also reduce energycosts and contribute to a consistent distribution of heat,and hence greater comfort, for employees. Goals suchas eradicating some of the worlds most perniciousdiseases demand a space that enables brilliant thinkingand creativity, space that literally works to connect and

inspire employees. In the service of that, NBrecommendation would allow daylight deepcirculatory spaces areas known for bringtogether in both planned and serendipitous wThe designers sought to leverage the possibemployees hatching and building on great id

staircases as well as at their desks.

But to accomplish that required designers tocase for value to Melinda Gates, who was refor ensuring the judicious use of design andconstruction funds for the building. NBBJ ato present the benets of this solution. Arupquantitative cost-benet analysis of windowmechanical systems, which compared the inrelationship between up-front glazing costs long-term energy savings. What truly createmoment where the Foundation understood timportance of the design solution was when

presented qualitative information derived frresearching a wide range of building typolohospitals, schools, corporations where viexpansive daylighting has been documentedanecdotally, to increase productivity and en

Arups development of the technical and aninformation from their experience creating sa wide range of building types is what helpe& Melinda Gates Foundation truly understawasnt just about aesthetics, but it was a straincrease employees creative productivity anintellectual capital. Yes, windows can do thaArups sophistication helped us execute ourvision to its fullest.

Steve McConnell, Managing Partner, NBBJ

11.

Windows to the creative inspiration

Could you explain the case for value,given the design teams recommendationfor a premium curtain wall system?

12.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

45/96

The Arup Journa

FaadesThe faade design was another importantfactor in the overall architectural design.The Foundation wanted a faade thatsignied its particular culture and valuesrather than that of a typical ofce building.A 5ft (1.5m) wide module is commonly usedin commercial faades because it co-ordinates well with internal space planning,but NBBJ observed that use of this tends toproclaim ofce however it is dressed up.Narrower modules of 4ft (1.2m) expresscurving plans well by the way they formsmall facets, but they are associated withresidential schemes or, worse, older ofces.A module width of 10ft (3m) was preferableto create wide windows and a faade rhythmwith spacious horizons. From an early stageit was clear that the width of the faadepanels would be a signicant design factorin the importance it had for expressing the

Foundations culture and values.

The panel width not only establishedthe character of the faade but also hada signicant impact on the buildingsoverall energy performance and internalenvironment. The panel width is the same onboth the inward-facing breezeway and theoutward-facing faades. On the breezewaythe large oor-to-ceiling glass panels,accentuated by an elevated ceiling withtapered cantilevered beams, highlight theinner transparency of the campus, bringingofce activity and life to its heart.

The higher ceilings also allow for increaseddaylight penetration to the workspaces bythe breezeway circulation zone. At the outerfaade a more traditional 30in (760mm) sillprovides more external privacy while stillallowing for views and daylight to theopposite perimeter. The 10ft (3m) panelwidth also reduced the thermal bridgingof the faade, allowing for improvedthermal performance.

Panels 10ft (3m) wide and 6ft 7in (2m) tallmay not sound difcult to make for abreezeway, but they needed to be heattreated for strength and thermal shock

resistance, and laminated for securityreasons. The team realised that nearly allglass tempering machines in the US at thattime were less than 10ft (3m) wide, whichmeant the glass would have small waves ofdistortion running up and down the pane.That looks bad from the outside, and evenworse to occupants, whose view out isdistorted by the lens effect created whentwo wavy panes are laminated together.

Given that some distortion was inevitable,it would be much less noticeable if thewaves ran from side to side but thatnecessitated a machine over 10ft (3m) wide.Arups UK-based glazing specialists workedwith global and American suppliers, thecontractors, and NBBJ to provide severalprocurement options to keep pricingcompetitive while achieving the criticalglazing vision for the campus.

Incorporating the servicesAn underoor air distribution systemworks in concert with access-ow powerand data distribution to allow for a highlyrecongurable workspace; the system alsoenables exible reconguration of coolingand more individual control of thermalcomfort than typical HVAC solutions.

An 18in (460mm) deep access oor at thepodium levels accommodates the higherdemands associated with conference andmeeting facilities, while a 16in (410mm)deep access oor is used at the upper ofceoors due to reduced loads and the desireto keep oor-to-oor distance as low aspossible. A 2in (50mm) clearance betweenthe oor beams and the suspended ceilingcreates the return air path.

13.

11. Open space in front of the NorthBuilding.

12. The tall, wide glazing panelsaccentuate visual connections acrossthe campus.

13. Structure/building services 3-Dco-ordination model.

The underoor electrical distributiosystem, for both power and data, uspre-manufactured exible cables wquick-connect ttings for each workand to plug into oor boxes. Spare cat the distribution points accommodneed for any future increase in workdensity, while spare cable length at box allows small moves for them asto co-ordinate with furniture over ththe facility. Spare capacity in the HVsystem allows for up to a 20% increcooling output.

Integral to the structural beams are pco-ordinated service openings with capacity for future overhead distribuwith an extra opening at the roof beallow for rainwater leader routing wimpeding future penetration capacit

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

46/96


Cantilevers, knuckles and cowlsAt the building ends and central sweepingcurved regions or knuckles, rakingcolumns (approximately 25 from vertical)and wide-anged hangers create cantileversof up to 60ft (18.3m) that allow oor levels37 to project over and be visually distinctfrom the lower two-storey, steel-framedpodiums (Figs 1416).

At each level where a corridor runs alongthe inner edge of the oor plate, the steelcantilever beams and ceiling are taperedto allow for increased oor-to-ceiling

height and more favourable naturaldaylight through the exterior faade.During construction, each steel hanger wassupported off temporary shoring columnsthat were removed after the steel framingwas completed.

At the building ends, the hangers alsosupport exterior 30ft (9.1m) steel boxcantilevers at level 3 and a roof andconnecting side walls that frame out thearchitecturally expressed building cowls.

14. 15.

16.

14. Digital model of compositestructure, showing raking columns at

building end.

15. Raking columns and hangersunder construction at knuckle.

16. The sweeping curved portion orknuckle of the North Building, whereraked columns enable the cantileverof levels 37, visually distinct fromthe two-level steel-framed podium.

17. South Building cowl underconstruction.

18. Interior of North Building cowl

19. Completed South Building cowl.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

47/96

The Arup Journa

At the cantilevered cowl tips, 2.5in(63.5mm) upward cambers were reqensure that the cowl in its unshored state would reside within the buildinenvelope. Diligent, co-ordinated detthe cowl structure with the architectstone and copper nishes was necesachieve the desired result (Figs 17

At the roof level, the horizontal forcthe raking columns are transferred bthe seismic core via steel diaphragmeld-welded to the top ange of thebeams. This structural approach allo

unimpeded building services routingofce ceiling plenum below.

The cantilevered structure intruded access oor zone at several areas, reco-ordination with the HVAC distribIn these areas the beams used intumpaint instead of typical spray-on reto reduce the blockage of airow at perimeter, while sheet metal plenumconstructed around the steel to allowdiffusers to sit within the oor abovbeams and align with the continuoulinear perimeter grilles along the bre

18.

17.

19.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

48/96


Energy systemsA distributed central plant energy systemprovides heating, cooling and power back-upto the campus. This central plant isdistributed between the two buildings, basedon available roof space and load matching.

The hot water plant is on the roof of theNorth Building, and provides both spaceheating to the entire campus and domestichot water heating to the large loads (kitchen,dining, tness, and convening centre) withinthe North Building itself. The main heatinghot water plant consists of eight high-efciency condensing gas boilers with asupply temperature of 120F (49C) and acombined thermal output of 15 000MBH(4400kW). The heating hot water boilerplant is supplemented by a 120 ton (422kW)heat recovery chiller that recovers heat fromthe data centre, IT closets, transformers, andkitchen refrigeration systems.

The domestic hot water plant serving theNorth Building uses a 1000 MBH (290kW)gas-red condensing boiler, supplementedby a solar thermal array 47 evacuatedtube solar collectors that is estimated tocontribute around 37% of the domestic hotwater heating energy.

A central chilled water plant in the SouthBuilding provides cooling for the campus.The chilled water plant utilises 960 tons(3376kW) of air-cooled chillers combinedwith a 750 000 gallon (2.84M litre) thermalenergy storage (TES) tank (Fig 22). The TEStank is located below grade at the south endof the South Building, with the air-cooledchillers on the roof and pumping plant in thebasement adjacent to the TES tank.

The chilled water plant design was driven byseveral key variables, one being theFoundations desire to be a responsibleconsumer of water. The team evaluated six

21.20.

22.

20. Rooftop AHU with coil pipingconnections and roof leveldistribution.

21. TES heat exchangers and pumpsin the main TES pump room.

22. The TES tank.

23. The generator plant.

24. Reecting pools.

23.

Transformer cooling code var

In Seattles building code, transformer

prescribed to use exhaust fans to draw

in whenever the space temperature exc

(21C). While efcient, this approach r

three-hour rated separation for both the

exhaust air paths and dumps the heat to

The Foundations two transformer room

basement, beneath a highly designed la

integral to the function and aesthetic of

campus. The intrusion of rated intake a

terminations was thus a major design c

That physical constraint made Arup loo

alternatives to the codes prescriptive a

transformer room conditioning, and rea

challenge presented an opportunity t

the waste heat from the transformers an

to heat the building.

The team worked with the City of Seatt

Seattle City Light, the local electrical u

provider, to develop the solution: each

room served by two recirculating chille

AHUs. Heat recovery to the heating ho

domestic hot water systems is via a heachiller that captures waste heat from the

transformer rooms and other cooling lo

IDF closets and kitchen refrigeration sy

CFD simulation demonstrated cooling

effectiveness to the utility, and the team

with the Seattle re department to addr

safety concerns an illuminating proc

parties as to the real intent behind man

code requirements. The nal system eli

vertical rated shafts and terminations, s

and met all the aesthetic goals. The City

solution so much that it is considering m

future versions of the code to explicitly

implementing the Arup approach.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

49/96

The Arup Journa

central plant technologies, ultimately settlingon air-cooled chillers with thermal energystorage as the optimal blend of energyconservation, water conservation, andoperational savings. By using an air-cooledchiller plant with TES, the chillers runpredominantly at night when outdoortemperatures are cool.

The cool outside air eliminates much ofthe energy penalty traditionally associatedwith air-cooled chillers, while the lack ofcooling towers eliminates the use of about2.6M gallons (9.9M litres) of water peryear compared to water-cooled chillers.The chilled water plant can be adapted forfuture expansion or energy rate structurechanges by simply changing the TES tanksoperational strategy.

The electrical supply is provided fromthe City utility to two transformer vaults,one at each of the main buildings.The electrical system is designed to allowthe Foundation to switch over seamlesslyfrom the current radial supply to a morerobust network supply from the grid whenit becomes available.

If an electricity outage occurs, the generatorplant (Fig 23) provides the data centre andother campus elements with standby power,and with n+1 redundancy (one generatormore than necessary to keep the data centreand life safety loads operational).Arup implemented a strategy that allows thegenerators to be properly tested, saves spaceon site, and puts the energy produced duringthe tests to productive use.

24.

Diesel generators used as standby psources often end up with operationelectrical loads well below generatincapacity, which can in time lead to emaintenance problems. This is oftenaddressed by using temporary load bequipment (imagine a hair dryer theshipping container) to impose a largthe generators, alleviating the low-lmaintenance concerns. The load bandischarges the energy produced by tgenerator during the test as hot air.

To maintain the data centre operatiooutages, the team decided to connecentire chiller plant to the generator pthus use the entire chiller plant electto load-test the generators. This allogenerator testing with permanently-equipment only, eliminating the neespace for temporary load bank equip

A nal benet of this approach is thproduced during the generator test iproductive use the chilled water generator testing is used to charge thtank and eventually to cool the buildfollowing day.

Water systemsWater programs are one of the Founkey missions and water conservatiofocus of much of the campuss sustasolutions. Embracing a recent rulingstate Department of Ecology that perainwater collection within the CitySeattle (where served by a combine

storm water system), the team develone of the countrys largest rainwateharvesting systems.

Despite its reputation for rain, Seattactually has a two to four-month sumperiod, which coincides with peak wconsumption from landscape irrigatcooling use, and evaporation from wfeatures (Fig 24). To meet the initia100% of the irrigation and water feamake up from harvested rainwater AGGN and KPFF looked at a balancesupply-and-demand approach to brithe dry period.

To minimise the storage tank size, tlooked at non-traditional water sourincluding the capture and use of nea250 000 gallons (950 000 litres) ofcondensate from the 20+ air handlin(AHUs) on the project that typicallydumped during the summer exaca source was needed.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

50/96


Given this additional water source,Arup determined that toilet ushing andwater feature needs could also be met withcollected rainwater, if a place could befound for a 1M gallon (3.8M litre) watertank. The team identied an unused void inthe basement excavation that met the sizerequirements and would simplify thebasement construction as it reducedshoring and slab stepping.

The basement structure contains the14 200ft2(1320m2) rainwater harvestingstorage tank (Fig 25), which has a 30in(760mm) thick concrete slab on grade and18in (460mm) thick perimeter concretewalls. As there are occupied spaces aroundthe tank perimeter at the basement level,a waterproong membrane was applied toits interior surfaces.

To further mitigate the risk of leaks,additional measures were taken includingwater stops at all concrete constructionjoints, use of proprietary corrosion-resistantreinforcing bars, and a proprietary concretemix with integral waterproong andcorrosion protection admixture for castingthe tanks base and walls.

The nal campus rainwater system harvests2.5M gallons (9.5M litres) per year fromapproximately one-third of the 12 acre(4.9ha) site, meeting 100% of the irrigationdemand and 95% of the overall non-potabledemand. The storage tank doubles as a

stormwater overow volume to helpminimise ooding of local sewers, helpingto alleviate surcharge issues on the localcombined sewer/storm water system thatdischarges surcharges to the Puget Sound.

Basement

The basement of the Foundationinterconnects all the buildings on thecampus, providing parking as well as utilityrouting and support services such as thetness centre, kitchen, loading dock,shipping and receiving, data centre, and alarge portion of the MEP spaces. As thebasement is thus a major service route forthe building, early co-ordination was criticalto set out the correct dimensional allowancesand get the main routing paths co-ordinatedbetween major load centres (Fig 26).

At grade, the steel ofce towers bear on atwo-storey cast-in-situ basement structurethat encompasses the entire site and providesan additional 400 000ft2(37 000m2) of oorarea. Beyond the towers, the grade levelaccommodates a landscaping buildupallowance of 5ft (1.5m) for water features,

soil, paving and large tree pits. In addition,the design required a large live loadallowance for re truck access.

These loads, totalling over 750lb/ft2(3660kg/m2), are supported on 16in(400mm) two-way at plate slabs with dropcaps on a 30ft (9.1m) square column grid.The slabs were cast monolithically withoutmovement joints, but with 28-day delay pourstrips to mitigate in-plane restraining forcesfrom shrinkage and creep.

All below-grade parking areas were keptoutside the tower building footprint, which

allowed for all the large tower column loadsto carry directly down to spread footingfoundations without the need for transferbeams, while at the same time maintainingan efcient car parking layout.

25.

a)

b)

26.

25. Rainwater storage t

26. Access route in the(a) digital model; (b) b

27. The garage (see folwas the rst element ofto be completed, and it(0.6 ha) green roof, by in Seattle, is now well

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

51/96

The Arup Journa

27.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

52/96


The GaragePrior to overall demolition on the campussite, a new ve-storey underground post-tensioned (PT) concrete parking garage with2000 vehicle spaces was built to replace thelarge surface parking lot used by the SeattleCenter (SC) (Fig 28). The garage had to beoperational before campus constructioncould begin.

The garage design, incorporating the shelland core design for the Visitor Center, beganin early 2006 and excavation commenced in

January 2007. It was an aggressive schedule construction of the parking levels,including foundations and basement walls,was nished in 12 months, while a furthersix months was needed for the one-storeysteel-framed, 1.4 acre (0.6 ha) living roof.

Only one of the ve levels is above ground,yet the most common, efcient structuralsystem for parking in the Pacic Northwestwas used cast-in-place PT concretebeams, in this instance 60ft (18.3m) longand typically 18in (460mm) wide x 34in(864mm) deep, supporting a 6in (150mm)thick PT slab. The buildings footprint is

240ft (73.15m) x 347ft (105.8m),surrounded by 14in18in (355mm460mm)thick perimeter basement walls andsupported on spread footings.Underground PT concrete is uncommon,but with careful detailing and constructionit can be successful.

The structure features reduced energy useand advanced lighting design for a parkingstructure. Skylights bring natural light intothe upper levels, and glass-housed elevators,used as the main pedestrian entries, drawdaylight deep into the lower levels.The mechanical system includes the use oftwo small exhaust fans wherever one largefan would be typically used. Only one ofthe two needs to be turned on when exhaustdemands are low; smaller fans run moreefciently than large fans running belowcapacity. Computational uid dynamics(CFD) analysis was used to optimise theirlocations. As a result, the garage uses37% less energy than a typical code-compliant garage.

The garage was awarded LEED-NC(Leadership in Energy and EnvironmentalDesign for New Construction) Gold(Version 2.2) certication, among thecountrys rst LEED Gold freestandinggarages. It also boasts the regions largestgreen roof (Figs 27, 2930).

Structural movement during andafter post-tensioningThe large PT forces applied to the ends of thebeams and slabs caused them to shorten dueto strain, and subsequently shrinkage andcreep continued this shortening. If the wallsand columns were rigidly xed to the PTbeams and slabs, this would have restrictedthe free shortening of those elements, leadingto severe cracking and migration of the PTforces from full application where intended.Details were therefore developed to providefor shortening of the PT elements whereverthey would connect to others. Sequences ofconcrete casting, PT application, andformwork stripping became vital to thedesigns success.

To stop the basement walls restraining(1) the movements necessary for application

of PT force to the beams and slabs and(2) shrinkage and creep of the whole oorplate, they were shotcreted at least 2160days after the beams and slabs were post-tensioned (Fig 31). In effect they formeddelay strips all around the structure, allowingthe beams and slabs to receive PT and toshrink and creep away from the basementwalls. Wall construction was thus no longeron the critical path and this helped focusactivities on the oor framing.

Most PT beam jacking was done lines where the ends of PT beamsaccessible. To allow movement duafter PT, a special horizontal slip was used above each beam at coluadjacent to ramped oors. Foamesleeves were placed around each creinforcing bar above each slip plallow the bars to bend slightly.

Delayed casting joints betweenadjacent piecesCasting new concrete adjacent to cast concrete required delay waccording to types of element and so as to allow shortening, creeshrinkage. Each oor was dividedseparate casts (Fig 32), arranged asequenced to allow maximum delbetween adjacent casts. The basemperimeter was enclosed with a destrip, usually provided by the baseor a shored strip left open along thMajor delay pour strips cut each with a 60-day delay, these were solast concrete to be cast for the gar

Construction sequence and PT

jacking accessAccess for PT jacking proved necseveral areas not planned in the oconcepts, with blockouts and strespockets to allow the contractor tojacking locations prior to casting solid. Blockouts were sized not onjacks and personnel, but the necedetailing to place the bars within tblockout when it was cast back (F

28.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

53/96

The Arup Journa

33.

34.

35.

29. 30.

31.

Soil

Column

Basement wall

Slab

Beam

32.

60ft(18.3m)

347ft (105.8m)

60ft(18.3m)

60ft(18.3m)

60ft(18.3m)

Constructionjoints

Delay pourstrip

Ramp up

Ramp up

1 2

5

4

3

28. Interior of parking garage.

29, 30. The garage living roof.

31. Basement walls were shotcretedmuch later than the casting of the

post-tensioned beams, slabs, andreinforced concrete columns.

32. Areas for casting on each oor(ve numbered), major construction

joints, and the major delay pourstrips in the middle of the oor plate.The 240ft (73.2m) dimension forareas 1 and 3 were post-tensionedwith jacks from each end, equivalentto a one-ended PT jacking pull of120ft (36.6m), the maximum allowed

by the specication.

33. Garage cross-section showingindividual casting of beams andcolumns: construction jointsrepresented by lines across thecolumns. Beams along the rampswere generally cast with the shortcolumn below them.

34. Where PT jack access wasneeded at a concrete beam endadjacent to a basement wall, an end

portion of the beam was left open onshoring (hatched), and cast after

jacking. PT jack access at the ends ofconcrete slabs was similar.

35. For PT jack access at a concretebeam end along the ramp, where thebeams were almost in line, the area

hatched was formed, shored, but leftopen for access to the jacking end.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

54/96


36.

5/25/2018 arup journal 2 (2013)

55/96

The Arup Journa

A trench n-tube heater along the soand south-east faades controls dowfrom the tall glazing, augmented byarchitectural shelf created at the fathe two in combination keep drafts occupant head level. Multiple CFD of the atrium under different occupaclimate conditions tuned the designthe design team and Foundation conin the solution which was quicklthe test at the opening party for the and construction team, where nearlypeople gathered to celebrate the sucthe project on a warm summer even

Fire engineering designThis was also critical to the atriumPreliminary code calculations indicneed for a 350 000ft3/min (165 000 smoke exhaust s

arup journal 2 (2013)

Documents