craig owsiany architectural engineering – construction management stem building hagerstown...

Craig OwsianyArchitectural Engineering – Construction Management

STEM BuildingHagerstown Community College

Hagerstown, Maryland 21742

Science Technology Engineering Mathematics BuildingSTEM Building

Hagerstown Community CollegeHagerstown, Maryland 21742

Outline

o Overview

o Analysis I: Mat Slab Redesign

o Analysis II: Green Roof Redesign

o Analysis III: Curtain Wall Redesign

o Conclusion/Findings

o Acknowledgments

o Questions Southwest View South View Southeast View

•5 Floors•Size: 62, 840 SF•Cost: $15.6 M•Duration: 18 Months

http://www.psu.edu/

Typical Lab Typical Floor Plan Energy Lab

Craig OwsianyArchitectural Engineering – Construction ManagementScience Technology Engineering Mathematics Building



Outline

o Overview





o Acknowledgments

o Questions

http://www.psu.edu/

Background Solutions Goal




Outline

o Overview





o Acknowledgments

o Questions

•Blasting•Non Competent Rock

•Reduce Cost Impact•Maintain Schedule•Ensure Structural Integrity

Analysis I: Mat Slab Redesign Structural Breadth

http://www.psu.edu/

Structural Analysis Structural Calculations Findings

Craig OwsianyArchitectural Engineering – Construction ManagementAnalysis I: Mat Slab Redesign

Structural Breadth



Outline

o Overview





o Acknowledgments

o Questions

• Sum Live and Deal Loads•Compare Against Design Load

Design>Actual=No Redesign

Design<Actual=Redesign Required

Total (lbs)

Compacted Soil (4') 496,100

Concrete-Normal Weight (5") 20,834





Concrete-Light Weight (4 1/4") 251,828

Beams 30,525

Stairs (20") 305,723

Curtain Wall & Metal Panels 23,460

Brick Veneer 92,576

Green Roof 132,688

Ceiling 28,604

Partitions 56,038

HVAC & Plumbing 57,208

Cistern 31,000

Total 2,844,119

Dead LoadsTotal (lbs)

Corridors 3rd Floor & Below 80,990

Corridors Above 3rd Floor 97,188

Classrooms 105,240

Stairs 122,289

Total 405,706

Live Loads

Dead Loads Total 2,844,119

Live Loads Total 405,706

Extended Foundation Wall Loads 139,750

Dead+Live 3,249,826

Dead +Live+Extended 3,389,576

Percentage Increase 4.12%

Total Load (P) 3,389,576

Area (A) 1,128

P/A (lbs/sf) 3,006

• Mat slab designed for 8000 psf•Actual Load = 38% of Design Load

• 10-15% load increase would require further investigation

http://www.psu.edu/

Cost Impact Savings

Craig OwsianyArchitectural Engineering – Construction ManagementAnalysis I: Mat Slab Redesign

Structural Breadth



Outline

o Overview





o Acknowledgments

o Questions

Materials LF $/LF Sq. Ft. $/Sq. Ft. CY $/CY Duration $/Crew TotalFormwork-Lumber 240 0.3 72.00$ Formwork-Plywood 755 1.41 1,064.55$ Lean Concrete 208.8 80 16,704.00$ Backfill -$ Crew 1 960 960.00$ Total 18,800.55$

GC Solution

Materials LF $/LF Sq. Ft. $/Sq. Ft. CY $/CY Duration $/Crew TotalFormwork-Lumber 480 0.3 144.00$ Formwork-Plywood 426 1.41 600.66$ Lean Concrete 20.9 80 1,672.00$ Normal Weight Concrete 34.3 92 3,155.60$ Backfill -$ Crew 2 960 1,920.00$ Total 7,492.26$

Proposed Solution

Materials LF $/LF Sq. Ft. $/Sq. Ft. CY $/CY Duration $/Crew TotalConcrete 299.3 80 23,944.00$ Total 23,944.00$

Triad Solution Cost

Solution CostTriad 23,944.00$ GC 18,800.55$ Proposed 7,492.26$

Totals

Total Savings = $16k

http://www.psu.edu/

Background Background Redesign

Craig OwsianyArchitectural Engineering – Construction ManagementAnalysis II: Green Roof Redesign

Mechanical Breadth



Outline

o Overview





o Acknowledgments

o Questions

• Conventional Green Roof • 3” Low Profile•Architectural Facets • Negligible Thermal Value • Minimal Educational Value

SF %Aggregate/Stone Gravel 308 15.2%Concrete Tile Pavers 542 26.8%Wood Panel Pavers 396 19.6%Indegenous Vegetation 776 38.4%Total SF 2022 100.0%

Green Roof Takeoffs

• LiveRoof System• 6” High Profile• Added Thermal Value • Higher Educational Value

http://www.psu.edu/

Conventional Green Roof LiveRoof System Benefits


Mechanical Breadth



Outline

o Overview





o Acknowledgments

o Questions

• Faster Installation• Low Maintenance• Immediate Vegetation

http://www.psu.edu/

Cost Impact Payback Period


Mechanical Breadth



Outline

o Overview





o Acknowledgments

o Questions

$ Markup $ Maintenance Savings Payback Period (years)Conventional Low-LiveRoof Low 24264 1,920.90$ 12.6Conventional High-LiveRoof High 34374 3,639.60$ 9.4Conventional Low-LiveRoof High 46506 1,617.60$ 28.8

Payback Period

• Payback period is 28.8 years for maintenance cost alone.

SF $/SF Total $Conventional Low Profile 2022 14.00$ 28,308.00$ Conventional High Profile 2022 20.00$ 40,440.00$

LiveRoof Low Profile 2022 26.00$ 52,572.00$ LiveRoof High Profile 2022 37.00$ 74,814.00$

Low Profile Markup 2022 12.00$ 24,264.00$

High Profile Markup 2022 17.00$ 34,374.00$ Conventional Low to Live Roof High 2022 23.00$ 46,506.00$

SF $/SF Total $Conventional Low Profile 2022 1.00$ 2,022.00$ Conventional High Profile 2022 2.00$ 4,044.00$ LiveRoof Low Profile 2022 0.05$ 101.10$

LiveRoof High Profile 2022 0.20$ 404.40$

Low Profile Savings 2022 0.95$ 1,920.90$ High Profile Savings 2022 1.80$ 3,639.60$ Conventional Low to Live Roof High 2022 0.80$ 1,617.60$

Estimating Takeoffs-Upfront

Estimating Takeoffs-Maintenance

http://www.psu.edu/

Thermal Calculations Thermal Calculations


Mechanical Breadth



Outline

o Overview





o Acknowledgments

o Questions

http://www.psu.edu/

Conventional Green Roof Heat Loss Current Green Roof Heat Loss Proposed Green Roof Heat Loss


Mechanical Breadth



Outline

o Overview





o Acknowledgments

o Questions

Materials Sq. Ft. R-Value Summer: Q=A(To-Ti)/R Winter: Q=A(Ti-To)/RModified SBS Cap Sheet 2022.00 0.70Modified SBS Base-Ply Sheet 2022.00 0.70R-30 Insulation 2022.00 30.00Decking/Concrete 2022.00 0.43Conventional Roof Total (BTU/hr) 2022.00 31.83 101.66 2223.72

Conventional Roof

Materials Sq. Ft. Lb./Sq. Ft. R-Value Conventional Roof R-Value Total R-Value Summer: Q=A(To-Ti)/R Winter: Q=A(Ti-To)/RStone Aggregate 308.00 31.25 0.15 31.83 31.98 15.41 337.14Wood Pavers 396.00 6.13 2.13 31.83 33.95 18.66 408.25Concrete Pavers 542.00 23.00 0.65 31.83 32.48 26.70 584.143" Conventional Green Roof 776.00 23.44 1.43 31.83 33.25 37.34 816.84

VegetationSoilFilter FabricDrainage ChannelRoot Barrier

Architectural Roof Total 98.12 2146.37

Current Green RoofMaterials Sq. Ft. R-Value Conventional Roof R-Value Total R-Value Summer: Q=A(To-Ti)/R Winter: Q=A(Ti-To)/R6" LiveRoof System 2022.00 2.85 31.83 34.68 93.30 2040.95

Prevegetated ModulesRoot Barrier

All Green Roof Total 93.30 2040.95

Proposed Green Roof System

• Low Profile Green Roof• Concrete Pavers• Wood Pavers• Stone Aggregate

• 100% LiveRoof System• High Profile

• 8.2% reduction from conventional roof• 5.0% reduction from current green roof

http://www.psu.edu/

Justification Educational Factor Educational Factor


Mechanical Breadth



Outline

o Overview





o Acknowledgments

o Questions

• Alternate Energy Program• Mechanical Engineering • Thermal Cameras

• Heat Sensors

http://www.psu.edu/

Background Redesign Goal


Analysis III: Curtain Wall Redesign



Outline

o Overview





o Acknowledgments

o Questions

• Stick Built Curtain Wall• Approximately 1/3 of Building Envelope• 9260 SF• Lengthy Installation Time• Site Congestion• Short Lead Time

• Unitized Curtain Wall System• Short Installation Time• Shakeout Not Required• Higher Quality Seals• Long Lead Time

• Reduce curtain wall installation time• Achieve earlier water tight date• Reduce over all schedule

http://www.psu.edu/

Schedule Schedule Acceleration





• Original Duration: 40 Days

Outline

o Overview





o Acknowledgments

o Questions

• New Duration: 20 Days

Stick Built System1. Deliver Materials2. Shakeout3. Install Sills and Jambs4. Install Mullions5. Glaze6. Caulk

Unitized System1. Deliver Modules2. Set Module3. Caulk

http://www.psu.edu/

Lead Time Installation Time





Outline

o Overview





o Acknowledgments

o Questions

Week Stick Built System Unitized System

1-6 Obtain materials Obtain materials

7 Fabricate/Deliver Fabricate/Deliver

8 Fabricate/Deliver Fabricate/Deliver

9-12 Fabricate/Deliver

Week Stick Built System Unitized System

1 Deliver/Frame Deliver/Install/Caulk

2 Deliver/Frame/Dimension Deliver/Install/Caulk

3 Deliver/Frame/Dimension Deliver/Install/Caulk

4 Deliver/Frame/Dimension/Glaze/Caulk Deliver/Install/Caulk

5 Deliver/Frame/Dimension/Glaze/Caulk

6 Deliver/Frame/Dimension/Glaze/Caulk

7 Glaze/Caulk

8 Glaze/Caulk

• Stick Built: 8 Weeks• Unitized: 12 Weeks

• Stick Built: 8 Weeks• Unitized: 4 Weeks

http://www.psu.edu/

Sequencing – Areas of Concern Resequencing





Outline

o Overview





o Acknowledgments

o Questions

• Reduced Curtain Wall Installation

• Earlier Water Tight Date

• Finishes

• MEP Rough Ins

• Begin MEP rough ins 1 week early.

• Stack MEP rough ins and finishes on 3rd, 4th and 5th floors.

• Sync water tight date and completion of rough ins.

http://www.psu.edu/

Accelerated Schedule





Outline

o Overview





o Acknowledgments

o Questions

• Overall schedule reduced by 44 days

http://www.psu.edu/

Analysis I Analysis II Analysis III





Outline

o Overview




o Conclusion/Lessons Learned

o Acknowledgments

o Questions

Mat Slab Redesign

• Current mat slab will support additional load

• Redesign not required

• Further attention given at a 10-15% load increase

Green Roof Redesign

• Cannot place an R-Value on living organisms

• Using an R-Value alone will not produce accurate heat transfer results

• Offers great value as an education tool

Curtain Wall Redesign

• 44 days saved

• Higher quality product

• Resequencing, not accelerating the schedule

• “We are sequencing trades in a manner to optimize productivity for all trades involved.”

http://www.psu.edu/

Acknowledgements Acknowledgements Acknowledgements





Outline

o Overview





o Acknowledgments

o Questions

General Contractor• Greg Ramirez, Senior Project Manager• Eric Osborne, Senior Superintendent• Brett Robinson, Field Engineer

Owner• Dawn Baker, Facilities Project

Coordinator• Robert Spong, Facilities Management

and Planning Director• Gerard Rath, Owner Rep.

Architect• Mark Merolla, Architect

Structural Engineer• Chris Johnson, Structural Engineer

Penn State AE Faculty• Bob Holland• Rob Leicht

http://www.psu.edu/

Questions





Outline

o Overview





o Acknowledgments

o Questions

Questions?

http://www.psu.edu/

craig owsiany architectural engineering – construction management stem building hagerstown...

Documents