A N A LY S I S A N D D E S I G N O F C O N C R E T E B U I L D I N G
T H E W E S T I N G H O U S E E L E C T R I C C O M PA N Y C O R P O R AT E H E A D Q U A R T E R S
C R A N B E R R Y, P A
JESSICA L. LAURITO
STRUCTURAL OPTION
AE SENIOR THESIS
APRIL 14, 2009
PENN STATE
UNIVERSITY
TOPIC OUTLINE
Background Information
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
T H E W E S T I N G H O U S E E L E C T R I C C O M PA N Y
C O R P O R AT E H E A D Q U A R T E R S
•Building Background Information
•Existing Building Conditions
•Project Goals
•Design Process
•Design Implications and RAM Model
•Lateral Loads and Considerations
•Schedule Comparison
•Cost Analysis Study
•Sustainable Architecture Study
•Recommendations
•Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements
•Questions
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M AT I O N
Background Information
Existing Conditions
T H E W E S T I N G H O U S E E L E C T R I C C O M PA N Y
C O R P O R AT E H E A D Q U A R T E R S
Project Goals
 Function:
Corporate Headquarters and Office Space
Design Process
 Project Size:
434,800 sq. ft.
 Stories:
5 above grade, 1 below grade
 Total Cost:
$55,878,000
 Construction:
February 2008 – May 2009
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Building Location: Cranberry, Pennsylvania
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Background Information
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
EXISTING STRUCTURAL STEEL FRAMING
S t e e l f r a m i n g
C o m p o s i t e m e t a l d e c k L W C t o p p i n g
T y p i c a l f l o o r h e i g h t 1 4 ’
F o u n d a t i o n : S p r e a d f o o t i n g s a n d c a i s s o n s
M o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n s a t e v e r y c o l u m n
T y p i c a l b a y s i z e i s 4 5 ’ x 2 4 ’
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Background Information
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
4 3 4 , 8 0 0 S F B U I L D I N G O N E
B U I L D I N G S T W O A N D T H R E E O N E A C H S I D E T O S T A R T
THE CAMPUS
T H E B U I L D I N G I S E Q U I P P E D W I T H A M E N I T I E S S U C H A S :
C A F E T E R I A
G Y M
L O C K E R R O O M S
O F F I C E S
E X E C U T I V E C O N F E R E N C E R O O M S
L E E D C E R T I F I E D B U I L D I N G G O A L
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Background Information
Existing Conditions
8 3 A C R E S I T E I N B U T L E R C O U N T Y
E A S I L Y A C C E S S I B L E F R O M I - 7 9 , I - 7 6 ,
AND
PA - 2 2 8
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
Site Map From www.google.com
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Background Information
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Background Information
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
P R O B L E M S TAT E M E N T
Background Information
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Structural Depth
 The building has been shown to be effective with the existing
system. However, the wind moment connections at every
column could be more efficient.
 The typical bay size fits into the L1/L2>2 requirement, making
it ideal for a one-way slab.
Construction Management Breadth
 Before a final decision can be made on the effectiveness of
the new building structure, the systems must be compared
for cost and construction time.
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
Sustainable Architecture Breadth
 As a corporate headquarters, the building should make a
statement.
 LEED certification is a requirement to the owner.
 A campus of this magnitude needs to be integrated into the
environment.
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
PROJECT GOALS
Background Information
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Structural Depth Goals
 Redesign the structural system using reinforced cast-in-place
concrete and a one-way slab with beams floor system
Implement the code effectively and efficiently
Design a practical building
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Construction Management Breadth Study Goals
Calculate a cost estimate for redesigned building
Generate a schedule for redesigned building
 Effectively compare the new cost and schedule with Turner
Construction Company’s actual cost and schedule
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
Sustainable Architecture Breadth Study Goals
Incorporate the building into the environment
Successfully implement a green roof
Detail, specify plants and materials, size drainage
system pipes
Determine number of LEED points possible for new design
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
DESIGN PROCESS
Design Codes Used:
Background Information
IBC 2006
Existing Conditions
ACI 318-08
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
ASCE 7-05
Design Basis
AISC Steel Construction Manual 13th Ed.
 Dead load= weight of concrete + superimposed loads
Live load= 70 PSF (50 Office and 20 Partition)
 Same building as the steel, only concrete
 No beams, just girders and slab
Cost Analysis
 Additional load for green roof =100 PSF dead and patio live load= 100 PSF
Sustainable Architecture
 Hand design checked in RAM Structural System and rechecked with lateral by hand
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
 Foundations resized for new building
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
D E S I G N I M P L I C AT I ON S
Background Information
Concrete Design Considerations
Existing Conditions
One-way slab L1/L2>2
Project Goals
Transverse reinforcement for shrinkage and temperature
Design Process
Moment transfer in concrete is different than in steel
Design Implications
Foundation impact on spread footings and caissons
Resized for new dead load
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
D E S I G N I M P L I C AT I ON S
Background Information
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Design Process
Determine superimposed loads from drawings and ASCE 7-05
Perform a preliminary design of slabs, beams, and columns
Determine location of CMRF’s
Create a RAM Structural System Model
Compare the preliminary sizes to the RAM generated model sizes
Hand calculation of lateral loads
Update beam and column sizes for lateral loads in RAM model
Spot check column sizes with PCA Column
Spot check lateral beam by hand
Update RAM model
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
D E S I G N I M P L I C AT I ON S
Background Information
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Design Assumptions
The ideal condition for the gravity members was assumed to be a
simply supported beam
The lateral members were assumed to be the ideal fixed-fixed
connection to the columns
Lateral Loads
The column connection to the foundation was assumed to be pinned
Schedule Comparison
The seismic response coefficient was assumed to be R=3.0
Cost Analysis
Model has ordinary moment frames in RAM Structural System
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Green roof and inclusive loads are present (separate analysis without
performed for breadth)
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
D E S I G N I M P L I C AT I ON S
Background Information
Design Process
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
D E S I G N I M P L I C AT I ON S
Background Information
Existing Conditions
Design Process
Concrete Moment Resisting Frame Detail
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
D E S I G N I M P L I C AT I ON S
Background Information
Existing Conditions
RAM STRUCTURAL SYSTEM MODEL
Whole building framing
Project Goals
Design Process
Design
Implications
Design
Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
D E S I G N I M P L I C AT I ON S
Background Information
Existing Conditions
RAM STRUCTURAL SYSTEM MODEL
Whole building framing beams
Project Goals
Design Process
Design
Implications
Design
Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
Beam Size
Total
Length (ft)
Density
(PCF)
24x34
32000.00
145
30x34
96
145
34x34
28x34
32x34
Weight (#)
Volume
(ft3)
26293333 181333.33
98600
Volume
(yd3)
6716.05
680
25.19
223.87
145 260594.78 1797.2054
66.56
71.01
102.88
145
145
68067.78 469.43296
112711
777.32
17.39
28.79
185057.3
6854.0
Total Beam volume
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
D E S I G N I M P L I C AT I ON S
Background Information
Existing Conditions
RAM STRUCTURAL SYSTEM MODEL
Whole building framing columns
Project Goals
Design Process
Design
Implications
Design
Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
24x24
8141.5
145
4722070
Volume
(ft3)
32566
28x28
622
145
360760
2488
92.15
Recommendations
30x30
32x32
986.5
72
145
145
572170
41760
3946
288
146.15
10.67
Acknowledgements
34x34
18
145
10440
72
2.67
36x36
182
145
105560
728
26.96
48x48
220
145
127600
880
32.59
40968
1517.33
Column Size
Sustainable Architecture
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
Total
Length (ft)
Density
(PCF)
Weight (#)
Total Column Volume
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
Volume
(yd3)
1206.15
STRUCTURAL OPTION
D E S I G N I M P L I C AT I ON S
F O U N D AT I O N I M P L I C AT I O N S
Background Information
Old and New Foundation Sizes for spot checked columns
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Size Column
Design
Implications
Design
Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
28
24
24
24
28
24
30
28
24
28
24
48
24
24
28
0.7-C
1-B
1-C
1-D
2-D
4-B
1-E
6-B
7.9-C
8-B
8-C
13-A
14-A.4
15-B.7
16-E
Type of
Foundation
spread footing
spread footing
spread footing
spread footing
spread footing
spread footing
caisson #48
spread footing
spread footing
spread footing
spread footing
spread footing
spread footing
spread footing
caisson #53
New
Final RAM RAM
Size Height Capacity Required Required Required New
Capacity Height Size Height
(ft)
(in)
(k)
(k)
Size
Height (in) Size (ft)
(k)
(in)
(ft)
(in)
5
9.5
12
11
12
10
5.5
10
13
11
13
8
8
12
4
18 200
28 722
36 1152
34 968
36 1152
32 800
146 712.749
32 800
40 1352
34 968
40 1352
32 512
32 512
36 1152
306 376.991
384.844
978.696
1471.816
1606.032
2179.108
1417.268
957.832
1454.464
1342.364
922.328
1330.536
570.728
418.416
1782.08
1316.164
6.936
11.061
13.564
14.169
16.504
13.310
13.484
12.954
10.737
12.896
8.446
7.232
14.925
18.273
39.397
49.499
51.518
56.044
47.480
146
42.858
45.460
33.426
45.460
14.111
25.211
53.536
306
7 392
11.5 1058
14 1568
14.5 1682
17 2312
13.5 1458
7.00 1084.30
13.5 1458
13 1352
11 968
13 1352
9 648
8 512
15 1800
8.25 1399.22
22
44
54
56
60
52
150
48
50
38
50
18
30
58
310
8
11
13
14
16
13
24
36
42
42
48
42
13
12
11
12
9
7
14
36
36
30
36
24
18
48
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
L AT E R A L L O A D S
Background Information
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
SEISMIC DESIGN LOADS
Floor
wx (k)
hx (ft)
k
hx (ft)
k
wxhx
Cvx
Story Force Story Shear Moment at
Fx (k)
Vx (k)
Floor (ft-k)
Penthouse
6481.1
92.5
1115.41
7229044
0.179
293.33
0 27133.348
Roof
5
4
18245.1
14162.0
13922.9
74.5
60
46
797.56
570.24
377.75
14551503
8075727
5259370
0.361
0.200
0.130
590.46
327.69
213.41
293.33 43989.083
883.79 19661.364
1211.48 9816.8534
3
16960.3
32
215.24
3650482
0.091
148.13
1424.89 4740.0283
2
17785.3
18
88.23
1569200
0.039
63.67
1573.02 1146.1239
1
Sum
19178.2
106734.9
92.5
3164.42
40335326
1.000
1636.69
1636.69
1636.69
106486.8
The seismic load for the redesigned concrete building is considerably larger than for the
as-built steel building, which is to be expected since the new building is more massive.
Floor
Penthouse
Roof
5
4
3
2
1
Sum
hxk (ft)
wxhxk
Cvx
Story Force Story Shear Moment at
Fx (k)
Vx (k)
Floor (ft-k)
wx (k)
hx (ft)
4213
4240.5
4713.6
4726.5
4724.0
4653.4
5444.4
28502.4
92.5
74.5
60
46
32
18
1678.33
1176.85
825.15
533.66
294.28
114.53
7070795
4990465
3889471
2522321
1390147
532940
0.347
0.245
0.191
0.124
0.068
0.026
136.16
96.10
74.90
48.57
26.77
10.26
74.5
2944.46
20396140
1.000
392.75
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
0
136.16
232.25
307.15
355.72
382.49
392.75
392.75
12594.449
7159.2331
4493.7722
2234.2278
856.60376
184.72265
14928.56
STRUCTURAL OPTION
L AT E R A L L O A D S
Background Information
WIND LOAD FOR THE REDESIGNED CONCRETE BUILDING
Existing Conditions
Level
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Load (kips)
N-S
E-W
Wind Design
Shear (kips)
N-S
E-W
Moment (ft-k)
N-S
E-W
Pent
Roof
5
4
3
2
193.4
151.5
144.8
138.0
132.6
140.2
38.8
30.2
29.3
28.1
27.4
31.0
0
193.4
344.9
489.7
627.7
760.3
0
38.8
69.0
98.3
126.4
153.9
3481.3
2196.7
2026.7
1932.5
1856.3
2523.7
698.2
437.6
410.7
393.8
384.1
557.2
Total
900.5
184.8
900.5
184.8
10535.9
2183.4
Note: Total Base Shear includes load from Windward and Leeward pressures
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
W I N D L O A D F O R T H E A S - B U I LT S T E E L B U I L D I N G
Level
Load (kips)
N-S
E-W
Wind Design
Shear (kips)
N-S
E-W
Moment (ft-k)
N-S
E-W
Pent
Roof
5
4
3
2
196.5
152.9
146.0
139.1
133.5
140.9
39.6
30.5
29.7
28.4
27.7
31.2
0
196.5
349.4
495.4
634.6
768.1
0
39.6
70.1
99.7
128.1
155.8
3536.7
2217.2
2044.3
1948.0
1869.4
2536.6
712.1
442.4
415.2
397.7
387.5
562.0
Total
909.0
187.0
909.0
187.0
14152.2
2916.9
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
S C H E D U L E C O M PA R I S O N
Background Information
T U R N E R C O N S T R U C T I O N C O M PA N Y
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design- Bid-Build
Design Process
Started foundations March 3rd, 2008
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Finished construction October 17th, 2008
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
S C H E D U L E C O M PA R I S O N
REDESIGNED BUILDING SCHEDULE
Background Information
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Start foundations on March 3rd, 2008
Finish structure on December 9th, 2008
Lead time for steel is insignificant -steel will be on site when foundations are finished
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
 Time difference because of sequencing, could potentially be sequenced differently if
more crews were on site
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
 Turner pushed ahead with the schedule finishing before their estimated date effectively
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
C O S T A N A LY S I S S T U D Y
R E D E S I G N E D B U I L D I N G E S T I M AT E
Background Information
Detailed Cost Analysis of the Structure-No Green Roof
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Level
Reinforcement
Cast in Place
Concrete
Location Factor:
98.9%
Description
Foundation
Columns
Beam/Slabs
SUB-TOTAL
Foundations
Amount
58 Ton
156Ton
504 Ton
719
6100 CY
Material Price
$935.00
$935.00
$935.00
$935.00
$109.00
Material Cost
$54,230
$147,263
$470,642
$672,134
$664,900
Labor Price
$430.00
$430.00
$430.00
$430.00
$14.90
Labor Cost
$24,940
$430.00
$216,445
$241,815
$90,890
Equipment Price
$30.35
$30.35
$30.35
$30.35
$5.55
Equipment Cost
$1,760
$4,780
$15,277
$21,817
$33,855
Total Cost
$80,930
$152,473
$702,363
$935,766
$789,645
Columns
Slabs
1443 CY
14192 CY
$109.00
$109.00
$157,189
$1,546,928
$34.00
$18.20
$49,031
$258,294
$16.95
$9.15
$24,444
$129,857
$230,664
$1,935,079
Beams
6477 CY
$109.00
$706,026
$26.50
$171,648
$1,320.00
$8,550,036
$9,427,710
SUB-TOTAL
28211
$109.00
$3,075,043
$20.20
$569,864
$1,352
$8,738,191
$12,383,098
Total Structure Estimate:
$13,173,000
Total Labor Cost:
$812,000
Total Material Cost:
$3,748,000
Total Equipment Cost:
$8,761,000
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
T U R N E R C O N S T R U C T I O N C O M PA N Y
Turner Construction Company Budgets
Deep foundations (caissons)
Concrete (Spread ftgs, slabs)
Structural Steel
Total Structure
Whole Building
$215,000
$5,199,000
$7,892,000
$13,306,000
$55,878,000
 $30.60/SF vs. $30.90/SF
 R.S. Means is not as accurate as
real estimates
Turner had contractors actually bid
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
S U S TA I N A B L E A R C H I T E C T U R E S T U D Y
T H E W E S T I N G H O U S E E L E C T R I C C O M PA N Y
C O R P O R AT E H E A D Q U A R T E R S
Background Information
Existing Conditions
 Functions and benefits
Project Goals
Design Process
Patio
Meeting area
Lunch area
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Storm water collector
Reduces heat island effect
www.deq.state.mi.us/documents/deq-ess-p2-p2week-greenroofresources.doc
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
S U S TA I N A B L E A R C H I T E C T U R E S T U D Y
Background Information
Plant Layout on accessible roof on 3rd floor
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
S U S TA I N A B L E A R C H I T E C T U R E S T U D Y
Background Information
Existing Conditions
No green roof structure costs $13,173,000 or $30.60/SF
 With green roof, structure costs $1,159,000 or $2.68/SF more
 Beam and columns needed to be resized, the slab was checked and found to be adequate
Project Goals
 Green roof adds 100 PSF dead and100 PSF live load to the accessible portion
Design Process
Detailed Cost Analysis of the Structure
Level
Design Implications
Reinforcement
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Cast in Place
Concrete
Location Factor:
98.9%
Description
Foundation
Columns
Beam/Slabs
SUB-TOTAL
Foundations
Amount
58 Ton
175 Ton
572 Ton
805
6100 CY
Material Price
$935.00
$935.00
$935.00
$935.00
$109.00
Material Cost
$54,230
$163,625
$534,820
$752,675
$664,900
Labor Price
$430.00
$430.00
$430.00
$430.00
$14.90
Labor Cost
$24,940
$430.00
$245,960
$346,150.00
$90,890
Equipment Price
$30.35
$30.35
$30.35
$30.35
$5.55
Equipment Cost
$1,760
$5,311
$17,360
$24,432
$33,855
Total Cost
$80,930
$169,366
$798,140
$1,123,257
$789,645
Columns
Slabs
1518 CY
14192 CY
$109.00
$109.00
$165,462
$1,546,928
$34.00
$18.20
$51,612
$258,294
$16.95
$9.15
$25,730
$129,857
$242,804
$1,935,079
Beams
7197 CY
$109.00
$784,473
$26.50
$190,721
$1,320.00
$9,500,040
$10,475,234
SUB-TOTAL
29007
$109.00
$3,161,763
$23.40
$271,330
$1,352
$9,689,482
$13,122,575
Total Structure Estimate:
$14,332,000
Total Labor Cost:
$863,000
Total Material Cost:
$3,915,000
Total Equipment Cost:
$9,714,000
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
An additional week is needed to erect the green roof building than without it
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
R E C O M M E N D AT I ON S
Background Information
Existing Conditions
Recommendations
The building was successfully redesigned and the code was correctly implemented
Project Goals
It is possible to have a reinforced concrete building
Design Process
Based on cost and schedule, this system is not recommended
Design Implications
$30.90/SF vs. $30.60/SF
March-October vs. March-December
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
The addition of a green roof however, is recommended.
 If the building were in concrete the green roof structural cost would be
$2.68/SF of building or $20.24/SF of green roof
 One additional week construction for the additional structure
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Background Information
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
I would like to thank:
Turner Construction Company
Bob Hennessey
Design Process
 LLI Engineering
Design Implications
 Westinghouse Electric Company
Lateral Loads
 Wells Real Estate Funds
Schedule Comparison
Penn State University
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Dr. Hanagan
Prof. Parfitt
Prof Holland
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
And the rest of the AE faculty and staff
Family and friends
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
QUESTIONS
Background Information
Existing Conditions
Q UESTIONS
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
?
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
FLOOR PLANS
Background Information
THIRD FLOOR EAST
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
FLOOR PLANS
Background Information
THIRD FLOOR CENTER
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
FLOOR PLANS
Background Information
ROOF EAST
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
FLOOR PLANS
Background Information
ROOF CENTER
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Background Information
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Whole Building Steel
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
East Building Steel
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
West Building Steel
Acknowledgements
Questions
Pictures taken by Jessica L. Laurito on 8/19/2008
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
REFERENCE SLIDE
Background Information
P O R TA L M E T H O D A N A LY S I S F O R R E D E S I G N E D
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
REFERENCE SLIDE
Background Information
Existing Conditions
H A N D C A L C U L AT E D B E A M
Preliminary Beam Design
Project Goals
Design Process
Design
Implications
Design
Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
Based on this preliminary design and interior
gravity beam can be 24”x34”
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
REFERENCE SLIDE
Background Information
PCA C OLUMN CHECK
Column D-7.9 Fourth Floor
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Design
Implications
Design
Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
REFERENCE SLIDE
Background Information
Wind Frame 19
TORSION
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Wind Frame 22
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Seismic Frame 19
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Seismic Frame 22
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
REFERENCE SLIDE
Background Information
DRIFT FOR REDESIGNED BUILDING
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Controlling
Controlling
Seismic
Wind
Story
Pent
Roof
5
4
3
2
Allowable
(in) Total
TotalDrift
Drift Ratio
Allowable Total Drift (in)
Story
Story Drift
StoryAllowable
AcutalStory
DriftDrift
Story
DWind=H/400
height (ft)
(in)height (ft) DWind
= H/400dxe/hsx=0.02*1.0/3
Ratio
(in)
92.5
Pent
0.087 92.5
< 0.54 0.0004
Acceptable
<
0.39369
0.006667
< 2.775 Acceptable
74.5
Roof
0.035 74.5
< 0.4350.0005
Acceptable
<
0.30695
0.006667
< 2.235 Acceptable
60.05
0.044 60.0
< 0.42 0.0008
Acceptable
<
0.27184
0.006667
< 1.8
Acceptable
46.04
0.093 46.0
< 0.42 0.0009
Acceptable
<
0.22799
0.006667
< 1.38
Acceptable
32.03
0.049 32.0
< 0.42 0.001
Acceptable
<
0.1345
0.006667
< 0.96
Acceptable
18.02
0.085 18.0
< 0.54 0.0009
Acceptable
<
0.08531
0.006667
< 0.54
Acceptable
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
D R I F T F O R T H E A S - B U I LT S T E E L B U I L D I N G
Story
Roof
Controlling
Wind
Controlling
Seismic
Drift (in) Total
Allowable Total Drift (in)
Story
Story Drift
TotalDrift
DriftRatio
Story Allowable
Acutal Story
Drift Allowable
Story
DWind=H/400
height (ft)
(in)
DRatio
dxe/hsx=0.02*1.0/3
(in)
height (ft)
Wind= H/400
0.127 74.5
< 0.435
Acceptable
0.0011
<
0.187 60.0
< 0.420.0013
Acceptable
<
1.02425
<
0.006667
0.89767
<
0.006667
2.235
Acceptable
5
74.5
Roof
60.0
5
1.8
Acceptable
4
3
2
46.0
4
32.0
3
18.0
2
0.247 46.0
< 0.420.0014
Acceptable
<
0.257 32.0
< 0.420.0012
Acceptable
<
0.207 18.0
< 0.540.0006
Acceptable
<
0.71044
<
0.006667
0.46336
<
0.006667
0.20662
<
0.006667
1.38
0.96
0.54
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
REFERENCE SLIDE
SEISMIC CALCULATIONS
Background Information
Redesigned Values
Existing Conditions
Seismic Design Values, ASCE 7-05
Project Goals
Response Modification Coefficient
Coefficient
R= 3
CU= 1.7
Table 12.2-1
Table 12.8-1
Design Process
Fundamental Period
Seismic Response Coefficient
T= 1.5999
CS= 0.015
Sec. 12.8.2
Eq. 12.8-3
Building Height (above grade)
h= 92.5
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
As-Built Values
Schedule Comparison
Seismic Design Values, ASCE 7-05
Cost Analysis
Response Modification Coefficient
Coefficient
R= 3
CU= 1.7
R= 3.5
CU= 1.7
Table 12.2-1
Table 12.8-1
Sustainable Architecture
Fundamental Period
Seismic Response Coefficient
T= 1.780
CS= 0.014
T= 1.780
CS= 0.012
Sec. 12.8.2
Eq. 12.8-3
Building Height (above grade)
h= 92.5
h= 92.5
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
REFERENCE SLIDE
SEISMIC CALCULATIONS
Background Information
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Design Process
Seismic Design Values, ASCE 7-05
Occupancy
Importance Factor
Site Class
Spectral Response Acceleration, short
Design Implications
Spectral Response Acceleration, 1 sec
Site Coefficient Fa
Lateral Loads
Site Coefficient FV
MCE Spectral Response Acceleration, short
Schedule Comparison
MCE Spectral Response Acceleration, 1 sec
Design Spectral Acceleration, short
Cost Analysis
Design Spectral Acceleration, 1 sec
Seismic Design Category
II
I= 1
Table 1-1
Table 11.5-1
D
SS= 0.12
S1= 0.046
Table 20.3-1
Fa= 1.6
FV= 2.4
Table 11.4-1
Figure 22-1
Figure 22-2
Table 11.4-2
SMS= 0.192
SM1= 0.1104
Eq. 11.4-1
SDS= 0.128
SD1= 0.0736
Eq. 11.4-3
B
Eq. 11.4-2
Eq. 11.4-4
Table 11.6-1
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
REFERENCE SLIDE
SEISMIC CALCULATIONS
Background Information
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
Calculated Values
SS= 0.12
S1= 0.046
SMS=
USGS Website Values
SS= 0.125
S1= 0.048
(From Figure 22-1)
(From Figure 22-2)
Fa*SS = 0.192
FV*S1 = 0.1104
Design Process
SM1=
Design Implications
SDS= 2SMS/3= 0.128
SD1= 2SM1/3= 0.0736
SMS= 0.2
SM1= 0.116
SDS= 0.133
SD1= 0.077
A (Table 11.6-1)
B (Table 11.6-2)
Lateral Loads
Fa Values (Table 11.4-1 ASCE 7-05)
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
D
SS=0.5
SS=0.75
SS=1.0
SS≥1.25
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.2
1
FV Values (Table 11.4-2 ASCE 7-05)
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
SS≤0.25
D
S1≤0.1
S1=0.3
S1=0.3
S1=0.4
S1≥0.5
2.4
2
1.8
1.6
1.5
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
REFERENCE SLIDE
SEISMIC CALCULATIONS
Background Information
Redesigned Values
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
CT = 0.016
X = 0.9
Ta=
Design Process
(From Table 12.8-2)
(From Table 12.8-2)
x
Cthn =
0.9411255
Ts= SD1/SDS = 0.575
0.8Ts=
<Ta therefore must use Table 11.6-1,2
0.46
Design Implications
TL= 12
(From Fig. 22-15 p. 228 ASCE 7-05)
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
SDS/(R/I) =
0.0427 (12.8-2)
SD1/(T*R/I) =
0.0153 (12.8-3)
2
SD1TL/(T R/I) =
0.3324 (12.8-4)
≥
0.01 (12.8-5)
CS= MAX
for T>TL
Cost Analysis
CS=
Sustainable Architecture
0.0153
T= CU*Ta = 1.5999134
V= Cs*W
1636.69
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
REFERENCE SLIDE
WIND CALCULATIONS
Background Information
Basic Wind Speed (V) mph
Exposure Category
Importance Factor (I)
Wind Directionality Factor (Kd)
Topographic Factor (Kzt)
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
90
B
1
0.85
1
From Table 6-3
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
From RAM
H (ft)
Kz
qz
H (ft)
Kz
qz
92.5
74.5
60
46
32
18
0
0.9675
0.908
0.85
0.79
0.712
0.59
0.57
14.354
13.471
12.611
11.720
10.563
8.902
8.456
92.5
74.5
60
46
32
18
0
0.966
0.909
0.854
0.792
0.714
0.605
0.575
14.331
13.486
12.670
11.750
10.593
8.976
8.531
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Floor
Heights
Level
18 Penthouse
14.5
Roof
14
5
14
4
14
3
18
2
Total
Height
92.5
74.5
60
46
32
18
Wind Pressures (psf)
KZ
qZ
N-S
Windward
0.9675
0.908
0.85
0.79
0.712
0.59
14.354
13.471
12.611
11.720
10.563
8.902
11.54
10.99
10.46
9.91
9.20
7.90
N-S
Leeward
-8.21
-8.21
-8.21
-8.21
-8.21
-8.21
N-S
Side Wall
E-W
Windward
-10.43
-10.43
-10.43
-10.43
-10.43
-10.43
12.20
11.61
11.43
11.04
10.65
10.45
E-W
Leeward
E-W
Sidewall
-4.91
-4.91
-4.91
-4.91
-4.91
-4.91
-10.49
-10.49
-10.49
-10.49
-10.49
-10.49
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
REFERENCE SLIDE
WIND CALCULATIONS
Background Information
Existing Conditions
Wind Design
Project Goals
Design Process
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Level
Load (kips)
Shear (kips)
Moment (ft-k)
N-S
E-W
N-S
E-W
N-S
E-W
Pent
Roof
5
4
3
2
193.4
151.5
144.8
138.0
132.6
140.2
38.8
30.2
29.3
28.1
27.4
31.0
0
193.4
344.9
489.7
627.7
760.3
0
38.8
69.0
98.3
126.4
153.9
3481.3
2196.7
2026.7
1932.5
1856.3
2523.7
698.2
437.6
410.7
393.8
384.1
557.2
Total
900.5
184.8
900.5
184.8
10535.9
2183.4
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Level
Recommendations
Roof
5
4
3
2
Total
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
Load (kips)
N-S
E-W
151.6
144.8
137.9
132.3
139.5
706.1
30.5
29.7
28.4
27.7
31.2
147.5
Wind Design
Shear (kips)
N-S
E-W
0
151.6
296.4
434.3
566.6
706.1
0
30.5
60.2
88.6
116.3
147.5
Moment (ft-k)
N-S
E-W
2198.6
2026.7
1930.7
1852.1
2511.1
10519.2
442.4
415.2
397.7
387.5
562.0
2204.8
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
REFERENCE SLIDE
WIND CALCULATIONS
Background Information
0.00256 KhKztKdV2I= 14.836
qp =
Existing Conditions
GCpn=
Project Goals
Design Process
1.5
-1
Pp = qpGCpn =
n1 =
43.5
22.254
-14.836
Basic Wind Speed (V) mph
Exposure Category
Importance Factor (I)
Wind Directionality Factor (Kd)
Topographic Factor (Kzt)
1.163 eq (C6-15) n1> 1
90
B
1
0.85
1
therefore Rigid structure
0.9
H
Design Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
gQ =
gV =
G= 0.85
z= 0.6h =
zmin = 30'
1/6
Iz = c(33/z) =
є
Lz = l(z/33) =
3.4
55.5
0.275
380.55
Cost Analysis
QN-S=
√(1/(1+0.63( B+h/Lz)0.63)) =
0.731
Sustainable Architecture
QE-W=
√(1/(1+0.63( B+h/Lz)0.63)) =
0.832
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Gf N-S= 0.925 [(1+1.7IzgQQ)/(1+1.7gvIz)]=
0.7722744
Gf E-W= 0.925 [(1+1.7IzgQQ)/(1+1.7gvIz)]=
0.8296736
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
REFERENCE SLIDE
F O U N D AT I O N I M P L I C AT I O N S
Background Information
Caissons
Existing Conditions
Uncored Caisson
Project Goals
Axial capacity = area x allow bearing - weight of caisson
Design Process
Design
Implications
Design
Implications
Uplift capacity NON-EMBEDDED CAISSON = Soli Friction + Weight of Caisson
0 ft Embedment
CAISSON
Pile D
Area
Circumf.
Weight
Tu
[ft]
[sf]
[ft]
[kips]
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
5.00
5.50
6.00
6.50
7.00
7.50
Uplift
Axial
[kips]
Capacity
Capacity
w/ SF
w/o Core w/o Core
[kips]
[kips]
19.63
15.71
35.83
12.04
47.87
553.21
23.76
17.28
43.36
13.24
56.60
669.39
28.27
18.85
51.60
14.44
66.04
796.63
33.18
20.42
60.56
15.65
76.21
934.93
38.48
21.99
70.23
16.85
87.08
1084.30
44.18
23.56
80.63
18.05
98.68
1244.73
Length =
12.17 ft
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION
REFERENCE SLIDE
Background Information
F O U N D AT I O N I M P L I C AT I O N S
Spread footings
Existing Conditions
Project Goals
soil bearing
caisson bearing
8 ksf
30 ksf
Design Process
qu= Pu/A
Design
Implications
Design
Implications
Lateral Loads
Schedule Comparison
d^2(4VC+q)+d(2VC+q)w=q(BL-w)
Punching Shear
VC≤ f(2+4b C)√(f'c)bOd
f4√(f'c)bOd
f(asd/bo+2)√(f'c)bod
Cost Analysis
Sustainable Architecture
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
f= 0.75
b C= 1
f'c= 3000
a= 40
30
20
int
edge
corner
Questions
JESSICA L. LAURITO
T HE WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
STRUCTURAL OPTION