Bryan A. Quinn Johns Hopkins University – Charles Commons Bryan A. Quinn Construction Management...

Bryan A. QuinnBryan A. Quinn

Johns Hopkins University – Charles CommonsJohns Hopkins University – Charles Commons

Bryan A. Quinn

Construction Management

Advisor: Dr. Michael Horman


Johns Hopkins University – Charles CommonsJohns Hopkins University – Charles CommonsJohns Hopkins University Baltimore, MD

“Planning for Success Builds

Success”



Project BackgroundProject Background

DBOM/BOT Delivery ComparisonDBOM/BOT Delivery Comparison

Alternative Concrete Slab SystemsAlternative Concrete Slab Systems

Duct Rerouting/MEP CoordinationDuct Rerouting/MEP Coordination

OverviewOverview


Johns Hopkins University – Charles CommonsJohns Hopkins University – Charles CommonsProject BackgroundProject Background



Project StatisticsProject Statistics

Size: 313,000 sf, 618 bedsSize: 313,000 sf, 618 beds

Projected Cost: $54,000,000Projected Cost: $54,000,000

Projected Schedule: June ’04 - July ‘06 Projected Schedule: June ’04 - July ‘06

Project Delivery Method: Design-Bid-BuildProject Delivery Method: Design-Bid-Build

$67,000,000$67,000,000

June ’04 -Oct ‘06June ’04 -Oct ‘06


Owner

Contractor

A/E

Contract







OverviewOverview




GoalsGoals

Introduce owners to integrated Introduce owners to integrated delivery methodsdelivery methods

Apply research to reduce the Apply research to reduce the overall Charles Commons overall Charles Commons scheduleschedule

Create a model for which owners Create a model for which owners can attain success with more can attain success with more effective delivery decisionseffective delivery decisions

DBOM/BOTDBOM/BOT



Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM)Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM)

Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT)Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT)

Owner

Contractor

A/E

O&M Sub

BankContractor

A/E

Owner

O&M Sub

Contract

Contract

DBOM/BOTDBOM/BOT

Transfer after 15-30 Transfer after 15-30 yearsyears



Building Construction MarketBuilding Construction Market

Clackamas County Public Services BuildingClackamas County Public Services BuildingSchedule:Schedule: July 2003 – July 2004July 2003 – July 2004

Initial Cost:Initial Cost: $16.9 million$16.9 million

O&M Cost/year:O&M Cost/year: $96,408/year for 30 years$96,408/year for 30 years

DBIA AwardWinning

DBOM/BOTDBOM/BOT



Building Construction MarketBuilding Construction Market

UW Research & Technology BuildingUW Research & Technology BuildingSchedule:Schedule: July 2004 – March 2006July 2004 – March 2006

Initial Cost:Initial Cost: $29,850,000$29,850,000

O&M Cost/year:O&M Cost/year: $125,000/year for 30 years$125,000/year for 30 years

3D MEPCoordination

DBOM/BOTDBOM/BOT



Schedule ReductionSchedule Reduction

Saves Saves 10 10 monthmonthss

DBOM/BOTDBOM/BOT



Owner’s Guide to Delivery Method SelectionOwner’s Guide to Delivery Method Selection

DBOM/BOTDBOM/BOT



Delivery Method ComparisonDelivery Method Comparison

Issue DBB DB DBOM BOT

Team Interfaces

Design Changes

Best Value

Lifecycle/Green

Bonds/Guarantees

Owner’s Risk

Schedule Reduction

DBOMDBOMFavorable Fair Unfavorable

DBOM/BOTDBOM/BOT







OverviewOverview




GoalsGoals

Eliminate factors that upset the Eliminate factors that upset the success of the overall project success of the overall project

Recapture the cost and schedule Recapture the cost and schedule losseslosses

Improve the constructability of Improve the constructability of the St. Paul buildingthe St. Paul building

DBOM/BOTDBOM/BOT



Existing StructureExisting Structure

Post-tensioned slabs with drop capsPost-tensioned slabs with drop caps8” structural slab8” structural slab

29’ largest span29’ largest span

6’x6’ drop caps6’x6’ drop caps

Slab loadsSlab loadsLL: 125 psf LL: 125 psf

DLDLSuperimposedSuperimposed : 28 psf : 28 psf

DLDLSelfweightSelfweight: 100 psf: 100 psf

Structural SlabsStructural Slabs

NN

SS

EEWW



Existing StructureExisting Structure

Concrete StrengthsConcrete StrengthsColumnsColumns

1st-2nd floors: 8000 psi1st-2nd floors: 8000 psi

3rd-4th floors: 6000 psi3rd-4th floors: 6000 psi

5th-10th floors: 4000 psi5th-10th floors: 4000 psi

Slabs/Edge BeamsSlabs/Edge Beams

1st-2nd floors: 6000 psi1st-2nd floors: 6000 psi

3rd-10th floors: 4500 psi3rd-10th floors: 4500 psi

Shearwalls: 4000 psiShearwalls: 4000 psi




Alternative Concrete Slab SystemsAlternative Concrete Slab SystemsFlat plate slabFlat plate slab

One-way beams with drop capsOne-way beams with drop caps

Precast plank on CIP beams & columnsPrecast plank on CIP beams & columns

Not considered:Not considered:

Flat plate slab with drop capsFlat plate slab with drop caps

Precast plank on precast beams & columnsPrecast plank on precast beams & columns




Flat plate slabFlat plate slabACI 318, Table 9.5b: Live & ACI 318, Table 9.5b: Live & Long-term Deflections Long-term Deflections

Modeled Gravity, Wind & Modeled Gravity, Wind & Earthquake LoadsEarthquake Loads

14” thick, 4000 psi14” thick, 4000 psi





One-way beams with drop capsOne-way beams with drop capsACI 318, (9.5.2.1): clear span/28ACI 318, (9.5.2.1): clear span/28

Modeled Gravity LoadsModeled Gravity Loads

9” slab, 14” beam-joists @ 28”9” slab, 14” beam-joists @ 28”





Precast plank on CIP beams & columnsPrecast plank on CIP beams & columnsModeled Gravity LoadsModeled Gravity Loads

8”x4’ SpanDeck by Nitterhouse8”x4’ SpanDeck by Nitterhouse

24”x16” CIP beams24”x16” CIP beams





Value EngineeringValue Engineering

-$731,412 -$249,305 --$731,412 -$249,305 -$705,488$705,488




Schedule ReductionSchedule Reduction

Saves 48 Saves 48 daysdays




Constructability ReviewConstructability Review

Issue PT Flat Plate

One-way

Precast

Safety

Building Height

MEP Coordination

On-site Mistakes

Delivery/Laydown

Complexity

Value Engineering

Schedule Reduction

Flat PlateFlat Plate








OverviewOverview




GoalsGoals

Recover losses from increased Recover losses from increased building height due to flat plate building height due to flat plate slab slab

Insure MEP Coordination success Insure MEP Coordination success by using a multi-dimensional by using a multi-dimensional modeling method modeling method

DBOM/BOTDBOM/BOT



Duct Rerouting & SizingDuct Rerouting & SizingCoordinate plenum spaceCoordinate plenum space

Six rerouted ductwork branchesSix rerouted ductwork branches

Air flowrateAir flowrate

Air velocity Air velocity

Friction losses Friction losses

Equivalent length of straight ductEquivalent length of straight duct

Pressure dropPressure drop

Duct ReroutingDuct Rerouting



Value EngineeringValue Engineering

Savings of 18” on total building heightSavings of 18” on total building heightSaved Building Cost: $396,000Saved Building Cost: $396,000

Six adjusted branches of ductworkSix adjusted branches of ductworkAdded Material Cost: $1,177Added Material Cost: $1,177

Duct ReroutingDuct Rerouting



2D & 3D MEP Coordination2D & 3D MEP CoordinationInterior Walls, HVAC, Plumbing, Electrical, SprinklerInterior Walls, HVAC, Plumbing, Electrical, Sprinkler

Difficulty dividing zones into equal work quantities Difficulty dividing zones into equal work quantities among tradesamong trades

First FloorFirst Floor Second FloorSecond Floor Third Third FloorFloor

MEP CoordinationMEP Coordination



4D MEP Coordination4D MEP Coordination





Issue 2D 3D 4D

Barriers to Entry

Software Deficiencies

Lack of Technicians

Ability to Eliminate Interferences

Team Communication

Ability to Eliminate Sequence Problems

3D3D


+ Duct Rerouting Saves $394,823



ConclusionConclusionHire an O&M contractor and use DBOM DBOM delivery

Saves on long-term costs & 10 months

Use flat-plate structural slabsflat-plate structural slabs

Saves $731,412 & 48 days

Use 3D3D for MEP coordination & rerouting ductwork

Saves $394,823

ConclusionConclusion



1.1. Show owners how to Show owners how to use the Integrated use the Integrated Project Delivery System Project Delivery System Selection Model.Selection Model.

2.2. Think simple. Design Think simple. Design structures that have structures that have little impact on other little impact on other systems.systems.

3.3. Use the right MEP Use the right MEP Coordination technology Coordination technology for your project.for your project.

4.4. But most of all, planning But most of all, planning for success now pays off for success now pays off later!later!



AcknowledgementsAcknowledgementsFellow AE studentsFellow AE students

Frank BurkeFrank Burke

Lourdes DiazLourdes Diaz

Jess LucasJess Lucas

Sean HowardSean Howard

Shawn JonesShawn Jones

AE AdvisorsAE AdvisorsDr. Michael HormanDr. Michael Horman

Prof. Kevin ParfittProf. Kevin Parfitt

Prof. Moses LingProf. Moses Ling

Pete DahlPete Dahl

Fellow SBER staffFellow SBER staffAlly DiazAlly Diaz

Dominic WikerDominic Wiker

Mike DiProspero, JHU Mike DiProspero, JHU Office of Facilities Office of Facilities ManagementManagement

John Whitlow & Jon John Whitlow & Jon Szczeniak, CollinsWoermanSzczeniak, CollinsWoerman

My Mom & DadMy Mom & Dad

Mike SynnottMike Synnott

Kristen EashKristen Eash

Alexis PacellaAlexis Pacella

Jenny HampJenny Hamp

Jayme AntolikJayme Antolik



Questions?Questions?



Examples of Site CongestionExamples of Site Congestion



Public IPDSSPublic IPDSS



Direct Design Method, ACI 318-05 Section Direct Design Method, ACI 318-05 Section 13.6.113.6.1

In each condition, there are at least four spans in In each condition, there are at least four spans in all directionsall directions

The most drastic rectangular bay is 17’ x 29’, The most drastic rectangular bay is 17’ x 29’, which has a lwhich has a l22/l/l11 = 1.71 < 2.0 = 1.71 < 2.0

The most drastic shift in span length between two The most drastic shift in span length between two adjacent spans is 9’, or 31%, less than one-third of adjacent spans is 9’, or 31%, less than one-third of the largest spanthe largest span

Columns are offset 6”-3’ from the building gridColumns are offset 6”-3’ from the building grid

There are only a few instances of cantilevers and There are only a few instances of cantilevers and irregular column grids, which would be assessed irregular column grids, which would be assessed individuallyindividually



Column Layout for One-way Beams and Precast Column Layout for One-way Beams and Precast PlankPlank

Beams/Plank run East-Beams/Plank run East-WestWest



Existing Mechanical SystemExisting Mechanical System

CAV, All-air systemCAV, All-air system

Localized gas furnaces for apartmentsLocalized gas furnaces for apartments



Duct Rerouting ExampleDuct Rerouting Example

26”x12” supply duct rerouted through 26”x12” supply duct rerouted through mechanical room to not impede massive mechanical room to not impede massive 60”x24” return duct 60”x24” return duct



Duct Rerouting Example ContinuedDuct Rerouting Example Continued

Branch pressure drops were maintained in Branch pressure drops were maintained in rerouted casererouted case



Examples of 3D MEP CoordinationExamples of 3D MEP Coordination

Bryan A. Quinn Johns Hopkins University – Charles Commons Bryan A. Quinn Construction Management...

Documents

Transcript of Bryan A. Quinn Johns Hopkins University – Charles Commons Bryan A. Quinn Construction Management...