DOC PREVIEW
Stanford CEE 115 - Multi Attribute Collective Decision Assistance for Design Integration

This preview shows page 1-2-15-16-17-32-33 out of 33 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 33 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 33 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 33 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 33 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 33 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 33 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 33 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 33 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

MACDADIMulti Attribute Collective Decision Assistance for Design IntegrationAssistance for Design IntegrationPresented to CEE 115/2151/10/2008by Dr. John ChachereMACDADI’s purposefor project and participantspj p pGoal: build and maintain consensusfromGoal: build and maintain consensus from project inception to clearer, better decisionsMethod: integrate processes andtechnologies advancing four project metricsggpj1. Comprehensive obtain all relevant data2Preciseinterpret data consistently2.Precise interpret data consistently3. Transparent promote awareness of data4. Systematic clear process to reach deliverableMACDADI’s Six ElementsThe Knight Management CenterA new campus for the Graduate School of Business 360,000 square feet$275 million Project Cost$275 million Project Cost$105 million gift from Phil Knight Trustee design approval: Fall 2007 Groundbreaking: Summer 2008Groundbreaking: Summer 2008 Occupancy: 2010 – 2011Current practice: Decision matrices representgoals, options, analysesg,p , yS c o re K e y: 3 = M u c h B e tte r, 0 = N o E ffe c t, -3 = M u ch W o rse , ? = n o t e n o u g h in fo to d e c id eComments Score Comments ScoreStructure+ Garage will be less expensive+ Superstructure less cost but Turner should fi?- Probably not enough regularity to m ake concrete inexpensive? ? Minim ize First Costbcrite riaP rim ary C rite riaSteel Concrete confirmNon-Struct?? Mini+ Faster to erect2- Not enough regularity for fast erection-1Column= 12" D eep. If Finishes & Fireproofing is required, 18" total.0= 18-24" Exposed, larger under large transfer girders0+ No wall in E-W direction because of M Fs Space Needs (cols, floor depth, BF & SW)Above+ M o re e fficie nt tra n s fe r (e .g . vie re n d e e l tru ss? )2- 48" Deep Transfer G irders-2Around Op- Slightly Deeper Around Perim eter+ M o re fle x ib ility?+ Thinner Profiles- less flexibility, beam s fly through large openings?At Exteri- T hicker E xte rior P erim e ter (18 ")-1+ Thinner Profiles (8")1R o o f F ram in g+ S te e l a llo w s m u c h fle x ib ility . A ll s te e l ro o f is probably cheapest.2- Probably will need steel or tim ber, so new contractor needs to be brought in-1+ Geometry n o t lim ite d . C o st o f geom etric 1- Openings, cantilevers, notches harder to 1C o m p a tib ilityygirre g u laritie s is less re la tive to con c re te . 1pg, ,accom m odate without increasing depth. -1Future Flexibility+ Easier to add floor openings later+ Easier to poke holes through beam s+ M F provides more space flexibility in E-W direction+ B F a llo w s o p e ning s fo r fu ture2- M o re d iffic u lt to a ccom m od a te fu tu re services, because there are beam s and big c o n cre te w a lls -1+ re la tiv e ly lig h t2- 30% H e a vier F O B-3+easier to poke through steel beam s and?-Sm all services (conduits sprinklers etc )? W eight on GarageService C o m p a tib ility F le x ib ility easier to poke th ro u g h steel beam s and around braces - but m ore beams in the way horizontally. + m o re fle x ib ility fo r flo o r o p e n in g s? Small services (conduits, sp rinkle rs, etc.) can't pass through beams.- S e rvices th rough w alls takes m ore coordination+ E a sier to p a s s s e rv ice s in e x te rio r b a ys, - Less flexibility at transfer girders.- large floor openings difficult to accommodate ?+ m o re ductile b efore da m a g e oc cu rs+ easier to control dam age to gravity system+ lighter1- le s s d u c tile- m any large m onolithic transfer girders- heavie r.-1 Im p ro v e S eis m ic Performance Service In te g ratio nStructural options and a decision matrix Use M aterials ResponsiblyTo Be Confirmed?To Be Confirm ed, info needed from Turner on fly ash and slag availability, m aterial sources.? Aesthetics & Finishes- C olum ns and prim ary girders need fire p ro o fin g0+ If exposed, m inimal firing.0AEC projects do not systematically and transparently: Dfi i tiDefine organizationsWho are the relevant designers and stakeholders in the decision?Establish goalsScore Key: 3 = M uch Better, 0 = No Effe ct, -3 = M uch Worse, ? = not enough in fo to decideComments Score Comments ScoreStructure+ Garage will be less expensive+ Superstructure less cost but Turner should confirm?- Probably not enough regularity to make concrete inexpensive? ?Non-Struct?? Mini+ Faster to erect2- Not enough regularity for fast erection-1Column= 12" Deep. If Finishes & Fireproofing is required, 18" total.0= 18-24" Exposed, larger under large transfer girders0+ No wall in E-W direction because of MFsAbove+ More efficient transfer (e.g. vierendeel truss ?)2- 48" Deep Transfer Girders-2Around Op- Slightly Deeper Around Perimeter+ M ore flexibility?+ Thinner Profiles- less flexibility, beams fly through large openings?At Exteri- Thicker E xterior Perim eter (18")-1+ Thinner Profiles (8")1Roof Framing+ Steel allow s m uch flexibility. All steel ro of 2- Probably will need steel or timber, so new 1 Minimize First CostbcriteriaPrimary Criteria Space Needs (cols, floor depth, BF & SW)Steel Concrete gWhose goals? How developed? What do they mean? Which are most important? How should they be measured?Generate optionsRoof Framingyis probably cheapest.2y,contractor needs to be brought in-1+ Geometry not limited. Cost of geometric irregu laritie s is les s rela tive to conc rete. 1- Openings, cantilevers, notches harder to accommodate without increasing depth. -1Future Flexibility+ Easier to add floor openings later+ Easier to poke holes through beams+ MF provides more space flexibility in E-W direction+ BF allows openings for future2- More difficult to accom mo date future services, because there are beams and big concrete walls -1+ relative ly light2- 30% Hea vier FO B-3+ easier to poke through steel beams and around braces - but more beams in the way horizontally. + more flexibility for floor openings?- Small services (conduits, sprinklers, etc.) can't pass through beams.- Services through walls takes more coordination+ Easier to pass services in exterior bays, - Less flexibility at transfer girders.- large floor openings difficult to accommodate ?+ more ductile before damage occurs+ easier to control damage to gravity system+ lighter1- less ductile- many large monolithic transfer girders- heavier.-1 Use Materials RiblTo Be Confirmed?To Be Confirmed, info needed from Turner on fly ash and slag availability, material ? Improve Seismic Performance Weight on Garage Service


View Full Document

Stanford CEE 115 - Multi Attribute Collective Decision Assistance for Design Integration

Download Multi Attribute Collective Decision Assistance for Design Integration
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Multi Attribute Collective Decision Assistance for Design Integration and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Multi Attribute Collective Decision Assistance for Design Integration 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?