• Like
  • Save
[Group 05] Multi-storey Timber Office
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

[Group 05] Multi-storey Timber Office

  • 721 views
Published

 

Published in Technology , Business
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
721
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • The project is to design a Multi-Storey Timber Office development on a contaminated site at Stratford, East London.The site is adjacent to the railway tracks with views of the Olympic Stadium.The client’s focus and interest lies in a sustainable structural design with on overall objective of exploiting the carbon benefits of engineered timber.
  • Ancient: timber -> Industry revolution: Mineral Based concrete and steel -> climate change: bringingtimberbackOnce public concern surrounding Timber high rises is overcome, a cost effective Timber high rise is a reality.Looking to the year 2020, the timber in high rise is set to increase due to its two fold advantage in sustainability and structural properties which will be presented right after considering the challenges.
  • Currently, reinforced concrete and structural steel dominate the high rise sector of the construction industry. Timber not so much as it dominates the low rise housing sector.A timber high rise development is under active research at ARUP and a final year Thesis has just been completed at Imperial College London.Since Eurocodes are not available for timber composites we are forced to go back to basics in structural design and analysis to ensure safety and regulation standards are met.
  • Our client had specified several requirements which need to be met in our design.Amongst the criteria, the key specifications include:A floor space in the range of 8,000 – 12,000 m^2A minimum clearance between the floors and a reception areaA central core providing space for services and facilities Consideration of existing piled foundations and a gas pipe running beneath the site
  • Timber is an excellent choice in terms of its thermal properties. It maximises comfort and minimises non renewable energy use. Steel has a very high conductivity; this reduces with increasing temperature. Concrete is subject to cracks due to shrinkage and tension. It is commonly used for fireproofing of steel structures.
  • Total carbon footprint of a building is composed the embodied carbon and the operational carbon. Embodied carbon is the emissions associated with the life cycle of the construction materials that make up the building. The operational carbon is the energy consumption of the building such as heating and lighting.From the table, it is very clear that steel has a much larger embodied carbon than timber, and though concrete seems has less embodied carbon, the total amount of concrete used is larger than timber.
  • When comparing the 3 different types of materials, it is clear that steel has very high Young’s modulus, strength parameters, embodied carbon and density. In comparing concrete and timber one can note the variation in price, but due to the greater density of concrete, timber structures arent as expensive as they seem
  • Timber frame buildings are often seen to be a greater risk from fire than conventional construction methods. This is not the case, steel and concrete also become damaged during a fire. Char forms on the outside of a timber member which helps to insulate the core from further damage. Hence the diameter required to maintain structural integrity for a specified period of time can be predicted.
  • There are a number of ways to ensure fire resistance is achieved. Special coatings applied or impregnated into the wood mitigate the spread of fire. Cavity barriers comprised of mineral wool fibres impede fire in concealed spaces such as risers and suspended ceilings. Compartmentation will be necessary so that the load bearing capacity of adjacent areas maintain structural integrity in the event of a fire.
  • Following the design criteria, we came up with this symmetric arrangement which will facilitate the design and construction stages. Our office will have 9 floors plus ground level providing the shown floor space.The internal structural arrangement will be composed of beams and columns which radiate outwards from the core.
  • Adhering to the necessary regulations and design criteria, we came up with 2 central area designs as shown. Central area 1 involving 2 cores was preferred due to a span reduction causing fewer columns, fire safety when a fire occurs in one core and restraints in the x,y direction and twisting.
  • The main function of the shear wall is to resist lateral loads such as wind and blast loadsThe core should possess the strength to resist lateral loads and stiffness to prevent excessive side swayThe use of two cores will prevent twisting by creating a couple in contrast to having only one which will only resist movements in the x and y directions
  • There are 12 piles in the foundation for the existing three storey buildingSince there is no bed rock, the piles rely mainly on shaft resistanceNew piles will be constructed and the existing foundation will be used to add strength and minimize costs.Bored piles will be considered than driven piles because of the possible weakening of clay during installation of driven piles
  • Fromourpreliminaryworkwehavereachedthefollowingconclusions:Ourstructurewillhavetwoshaftsforstructuralpurpose and serviceprovisionWewillhave a beam and columnskeletonsurroundedby a non-load bearingfacadeThecapacity of theexisitngfoundationswillhaveto be extended tosupportourtimber office
  • This flow chart provides an outline of the activities that are planned for the project. In the first week, we undertook a broad and general research on timber structures covering all the points addressed today, By the end of the first week, we produced a basic preliminary design which will be the foundation for the remaining weeks.
  • Building on this design, our team will be split into two to focus on structural design and thermal performance. For detailed structural design, we will make use of Eurocode 5. Additionally, software such as GSA will be used to analyse vibrations.The thermal performance team will focus on the sustainability of the structure. They will look at ways to optimise the efficiency of our building and reduce the embodied energy.
  • Once we have detailed dimensions and floor plans, we will focus on developing a fire fighting strategy to ensure safety and legal approval. Moreover, a detailed design of the foundations will be undertaken as well as a plan for the construction sequence. Finally, a CBA will be undertaken with comparative studies.

Transcript

  • 1. MULTI-STOREYTIMBER OFFICEMembersXinlu ChenVictor CulebrasSophie KirkMichail NtinalexisChirag PindoliaKarthikeyan VivegananthanNipun WijegunasekeraZhenfeng YuanSupervisors:Dr Christian MalagaDimple RanaMarc EastonGroup 5
  • 2. INTRODUCTION• Project– Design a Multi-Storey Timber office development• Site– Contaminated Clay at Stratford, East London– Adjacent to railway tracks with views of the Olympic Stadium• Client Focus– Sustainable Structural Design using engineered timber• Overall Objective– Exploit the carbon benefits of timber• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• Structural• Case Studies• Preliminary Designs• Proposed Design• Project Plan• Q&A
  • 3. TIMELINEWoodenBridges19901996:CLT developed inCentral Europe2007:Fire inHatfield2000 2010 20202010:Tallest timberbuilding in theworldThe Stadthaus,London• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• Structural• Case Studies• Preliminary Designs• Proposed Design• Project Plan• Q&APrimitivetimes
  • 4. CHALLENGES• Back to Basics– Structural design to safety standards• Experimental Stage– Timber high rise?• Foundations– Weak clay– Gas main and existing foundation• Flexible open floor plan– Span to Depth Ratio?• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• Structural• Case Studies• Preliminary Designs• Proposed Design• Project Plan• Q&A
  • 5. CLIENT CONCERNS• Fire Resistance– Wood burns!• Floor Vibrations– Railway tracks & human perception• Embodied Carbon– Sustainability for design life of 50 years• Thermal Performance– Comfort, Economics and Energy costs• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• Structural• Case Studies• Preliminary Designs• Proposed Design• Project Plan• Q&A
  • 6. SUSTAINABILITYTHERMAL PERFORMANCETimber ConcreteSteel0.14 43 0.4 - 0.7Thermal Conductivity - k - W/(m.K)• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• THERMAL• CARBON &ENERGY• MATERIAL• Structural• Case Studies• Preliminary Designs• Proposed Design• Project Plan• Q&A
  • 7. SUSTAINABILITYCARBON & ENERGY• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• THERMAL• CARBON &ENERGY• MATERIAL• Structural• Case Studies• Preliminary Designs• Proposed Design• Project Plan• Q&A
  • 8. SUSTAINABILITYMATERIAL COMPARISONTimber Steel Concrete• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• THERMAL• CARBON &ENERGY• MATERIAL• Structural• Case Studies• Preliminary Designs• Proposed Design• Project Plan• Q&A
  • 9. STRUCTURALFIRE RESISTANCEIs Timber Safe?• Public Perception• ArsonYES!• No less safe than steel or concrete• Timber has a predictable rate of charring• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• Structural• FIRE• VIBRATIONS• SERVICES• Case Studies• Preliminary Designs• Proposed Design• Project Plan• Q&A
  • 10. STRUCTURALFIRE RESISTANCE• Fire protection coatings– impregnated or applied to surface• Cavity Barriers– stop the spread of fire in concealed spaces• Compartmentation– ensures load bearing capacity of adjacent areas are unaffectedElement of Structure Fire Resistance (minutes)Cavity Barriers 30Fire Fighting Shafts 120Office Floors 30(<18m), 60(<30m),120(>30m)Compartment Walls 60• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• Structural• FIRE• VIBRATIONS• SERVICES• Case Studies• Preliminary Designs• Proposed Design• Project Plan• Q&A
  • 11. STRUCTURALFLOOR VIBRATIONS• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• Structural• FIRE• VIBRATIONS• SERVICES• Case Studies• Preliminary Designs• Proposed Design• Project Plan• Q&A• Serviceability of the Structure• Forced Vibration Analysis• Stiffness and Mass govern vibrations
  • 12. STRUCTURALSERVICES• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• Structural• FIRE• VIBRATIONS• SERVICES• Case Studies• Preliminary Designs• Proposed Design• Project Plan• Q&AService type Risk Space requiredElectrical supplies Very Low NegligibleWater supply/drain High LowHeating Med LowVentilation None Very high• All of this has to be accounted in the design!
  • 13. CASE STUDIESWood ConcreteSkyscrapers30 Level CLT Building1 2 3• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• Structural• Case Studies• Preliminary Designs• Proposed Design• Project Plan• Q&AThe Stadthaus,London
  • 14. PRELIMINARY DESIGNFLOOR PLAN• 9 floors with a total area of 8868.24 m2• Internal structural skeleton composed of beams which radiate fromthe core and are supported by columns• Symmetric arrangement to facilitate design and ease of constructionPlan View Side View• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• Structural• Case Studies• PreliminaryDesigns• FLOOR PLAN• CENTRAL AREA• STRUCTURALCORE• FOUNDATION• Proposed Design• Project Plan• Q&A
  • 15. PRELIMINARY DESIGNCENTRAL AREACentral Area 1:• 2 cores• Core 1 – 2 lifts• Core 2 – Staircase,ServicesCentral Area 2:• 1 large central core• All rooms easily accessibleAdvantages of Central Area 1:• Span reduction so fewer columns(economic and environmental)• Fire safety precaution• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• Structural• Case Studies• PreliminaryDesigns• FLOOR PLAN• CENTRAL AREA• STRUCTURALCORE• FOUNDATION• Proposed Design• Project Plan• Q&A
  • 16. PRELIMINARY DESIGNSTRUCTURAL CORE• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• Structural• Case Studies• PreliminaryDesigns• FLOOR PLAN• CENTRAL AREA• STRUCTURALCORE• FOUNDATION• Proposed Design• Project Plan• Q&AFunctions• Resist lateral forces• Strength - lateral strength to resist horizontal forces• Stiffness - lateral stiffness to prevent floors to undergo excessive sideswayFrame FrameCore
  • 17. PRELIMINARY DESIGNFOUNDATIONS• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• Structural• Case Studies• PreliminaryDesigns• FLOOR PLAN• CENTRAL AREA• STRUCTURALCORE• FOUNDATION• Proposed Design• Project Plan• Q&AExisting Piles• Weak Clay Material Su approx. 80 kPa• Friction piles• Capacity of 8,000 kNTimber office• Approx. 100,000 kN load (worst case scenario)• New Piles have to be installed in addition to the existing piles!
  • 18. PROPOSED DESIGN• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• Structural• Case Studies• Preliminary Designs• Proposed Design• Project Plan• Q&ASummary of established concepts• 2 central shafts for structural purpose and service provision• Beam and column skeleton surrounded by a non loadbearing facade• Extend the bearing capacity of the existing foundations
  • 19. PROJECT PLANWEEK 1• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• Structural• Case Studies• Preliminary Designs• Proposed Design• Project Plan• WEEK 1• WEEK 2 & 3• WEEK 4 & 5• Q&A
  • 20. PROJECT PLANWEEK 2 & 3• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• Structural• Case Studies• Preliminary Designs• Proposed Design• Project Plan• WEEK 1• WEEK 2 & 3• WEEK 4 & 5• Q&A
  • 21. PROJECT PLANWEEK 4 & 5• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• Structural• Case Studies• Preliminary Designs• Proposed Design• Project Plan• WEEK 1• WEEK 2 & 3• WEEK 4 & 5• Q&A
  • 22. QUESTION & ANSWER SESSIONAcknowledgementsDr Christian Malaga Lecturer Structural EngineeringDr Lorenzo Macorini Lecturer Structural EngineeringDr Andrew Phillips Group Design Project [GDP] CoordinatorRebecca Naessens Research and GDP AdministratorDimple Rana ARUP – SustainabilityMarc Easton ARUP – StructuralARUP Passive Design Assistant, Oasys GSAMULTI-STOREYTIMBER OFFICE• Introduction• Timeline• Challenges• Client Concerns• Sustainability• Structural• Case Studies• Preliminary Designs• Proposed Design• Project Plan• Q&A