Mansfield University Dormitories Mansfield, Pennsylvania

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Mansfield University Dormitories Mansfield, Pennsylvania"

Transcription

1 Mansfield University Dormitories Mansfield, Pennsylvania Michael Mahoney Construction Option Senior Thesis Presentation 2013 The Pennsylvania State University

2 II. III. IV. Modular Setting Precision

3 Project Overview II. III. Modular Setting Precision IV. Project Team Owner: Mansfield University Architect: WTW Architects Construction Manager: Wohlsen Construction Cost: $39 Million Function: Student Residence Buildings Size: Building C: 79,500 SF Building D: 135,400 SF Room Type: Suite Style Room Including Bathroom Capacity: 700 Students Facilities: Kitchen, Snack Shack and Health Center Height: 4 Stories Schedule: August 2012 October 2013 Delivery Method: Risk with GMP

4 Modular Units Are Typically 10ft x 50ft x 10ft tall PROBLEM II. III. IV. Modular Setting Precision Added Time Needed During Preconstruction for Modularization GOAL Evaluate the Value of Time Saved in the Field vs. Time Spent During Precon Evaluate if BIM Would Increase Productivity in Modular Unit Construction

5 Michael Mahoney TOTAL PROJECT 300 units 7 Types of Units Type E Room II. BUILDING C BUILDING D III. IV. Modular Setting Precision 27 Units per Floor 108 Units Total 48 Units per Floor 192 Units Total Type C Room Building C Type Total Ppl/Rm Residents B C E G H I Building D Type Total Ppl/Rm Residents B C D E F G H

6 II. III. Modular Setting Precision IV. Stick Built Schedule Large Crew Sizes Durations Taken from Phase I Dormitory Construction Durations Adjusted for Size of Building 112 Day Total Duration

7 II. III. Modular Setting Precision Michael Mahoney Set 10 Units a Day 300 Total Units Modular Unit Schedule 30 Total Days of Modular Setting February 12, :00 PM 5 Units Set IV. Schedule Comparison 112 Days Stick Built vs. 30 Days Modular 82 Days Difference 16 Weeks Difference February 13, :00 PM 15 Units Set

8 II. III. Modular Setting Precision IV. Modular Unit Schedule Set 10 Units a Day 300 Total Units 30 Total Days of Modular Setting Schedule Comparison 112 Days Stick Built vs. 30 Days Modular 82 Days Difference 16 Weeks Difference General Condition Costs Saved 16 Weeks Saved Costs $170,000 per a Month Total Savings of $680,000 Preconstruction Costs 16 Weeks of Preconstruction

9 BIM Uses in Design Phase Uses of BIM Design Modular Unit Construction and BIM Design Reviews Design Authoring Highly Repetitive Work II. III. Modular Setting Precision IV. 3D Coordination Phase Planning Advantages of BIM Field Productivity Easier to Interpret Starting Point for Field BIM X X X Design Reviews 3D Coordination Engineering Analysis Sustainability Evaluation Code Validation Phase Planning Cost Estimation Existing Conditions Modeling 280 of 300 Rooms are Type B or C Trades Are Working for the Same Company Increased Cooperation Factory Atmosphere Design Engineers Locally Located

10 II. III. Modular Setting Precision IV. CONCLUSION Preconstruction Took 16 Weeks Modular Setting Saved 16 Weeks BIM is not Ideal for Modular Construction

11 Modular Setting Analysis PROBLEM II. III. IV. Modular Setting Precision Precision of Modular Setting Technique GOAL Find More Precise Way to Sent Units

12 Modular Setting Analysis II. III. Modular Setting Precision IV. Step 1: Delivery of Modular Unit Step 2: Attach Rigging Step 3: Crane Lifts Unit into Place Step 4: Crew Members in Lifts Guide Unit into Final Placement Step 5: Fasten Units and Detach Rigging

13 Modular Setting Analysis II. III. Modular Setting Precision IV. Step 1: Delivery of Modular Unit Step 2: Attach Rigging Step 3: Crane Lifts Unit into Place Step 4: Crew Members in Lifts Guide Unit into Final Placement Step 5: Fasten Units and Detach Rigging

14 Modular Setting Analysis II. III. Modular Setting Precision IV. Step 1: Delivery of Modular Unit Step 2: Attach Rigging Step 3: Crane Lifts Unit into Place Step 4: Crew Members in Lifts Guide Unit into Final Placement Step 5: Fasten Units and Detach Rigging

15 Modular Setting Analysis II. III. Modular Setting Precision IV. Step 1: Delivery of Modular Unit Step 2: Attach Rigging Step 3: Crane Lifts Unit into Place Step 4: Crew Members in Lifts Guide Unit into Final Placement Step 5: Fasten Units and Detach Rigging

16 Modular Setting Analysis II. III. Modular Setting Precision IV. Step 1: Delivery of Modular Unit Step 2: Attach Rigging Step 3: Crane Lifts Unit into Place Step 4: Crew Members in Lifts Guide Unit into Final Placement Step 5: Fasten Units and Detach Rigging

17 Modular Setting Analysis II. III. Modular Setting Precision IV. Possible Errors in Setting Process Men on Lifts Adjusting Units into Place Plumb and Level Large Gaps Create More Finish Work for Field Subcontractors Slower Schedule Example: 0.5 Degrees Off for 4 Floors Gap at the Top Would be 10.5 Inches Create Possible Structural Issues

18 Modular Setting Analysis Possible Solution GPS Machine Control for Dozers Sensor II. III. Modular Setting Precision System Would Check Unit Location with 3D Model Operator Interface IV. GPS Transmitter

19 Modular Setting Analysis II. III. Modular Setting Precision IV. Modular Subcontractor s Precision Check Factory Dimension Check Setting Order Crew On Lifts Check

20 Modular Setting Analysis II. CONCLUSION GPS Machine Control System is Costly III. IV. Modular Setting Precision Modular Subcontractor s Checks in Factory Saved a lot of Work in the Field GPS system is not Recommended

21 PROBLEM II. III. IV. Modular Setting Precision Nonconventional Flooring System GOAL Evaluate a More Common System

22 Current Flooring System 2x10 Wood Floor Joists II. III. IV. Modular Setting Precision Plywood Sheathing W10 Structural Steel Beams and Girders Steel Tube and W10 Steel Columns CMU Walls Around Stairwell and Elevator CMI Walls Separating Core from Modular Sections

23 II. III. IV. Modular Setting Precision Michael Mahoney Proposed Flooring System 10 Inch Thick Concrete 2 Way Reinforced Slab Flat Plate Design 12 Inch Concrete Walls 2ft x 2ft Concrete Columns Structural Breadth Analysis Meets Maximum Moment Requirement 2 Way Slab Reinforcing Design Horizontal Rebar Vertical Rebar

24 II. III. IV. Modular Setting Precision Estimated Cost Difference of $82,000

25 Transmission Loss (db) Michael Mahoney 70 Flooring Transmission Loss CONCLUSION Advantages of Concrete System Wood Concrete II. III. Modular Setting Precision Cost Better Sound Transmission Class Frequency (Hz) IV. Disadvantages of Concrete System Concrete Subcontractors in North Central Pennsylvania Harsh Winters

26 Panelized Façade Design PROBLEM II. Traditional Masonry Construction III. Modular Setting Precision North Hall Library Straughn Hall IV. GOAL Find a Cost Effective Panelized Façade System

27 Panelized Façade Design Façade Ground and First Floor Cast Stone Masonry II. Floors 2-4 Brick Masonry III. Modular Setting Precision North Hall Library Straughn Hall IV. Owner s Expectations Same Façade as Other Buildings on Campus Beginning of Project Value Engineering

28 Panelized Façade Design Potential Panelized Façade Systems Thin Brick Panels II. III. IV. Modular Setting Precision $43 per SF Precast Concrete Panels $42 per SF Erect About 900 SF per an 8 Hour Day

29 Panelized Façade Design II. III. Modular Setting Precision Brick $926,000 Difference Cast Stone $194,000 Difference Masonry Façade Cost Estimate Brick Stone SF Cost/SF Cost SF Cost/SF Cost Building C 13, $ $ 235, , $ $ 590, Building D 23, $ $ 424, , $ $ 487, $ 659, $ 1,078, IV. Total Panelized Façade Cost Estimate $1.1 Million Difference Thin Brick Precast Concrete SF Cost/SF Cost SF Cost/SF Cost Building C 13, $ $ 565, , $ $ 696, Building D 23, $ $ 1,020, , $ $ 575, $ 1,585, $ 1,272,148.80

30 Panelized Façade Design Panelized Façade Installation Sequence Building C Building D II. Masonry: 81 Days Masonry: 110 Days III. Modular Setting Precision Panelized: 21 Days Panelized: 31 Days IV. Masonry: 2 Crews 110 Days to Complete Panelized: 1 Crew 52 Days to Complete Difference of 58 Days or Over 11 Weeks

31 Panelized Façade Design CONCLUSION Positives II. III. IV. Modular Setting Precision 11 Week Schedule Reduction General Condition Cost Savings Disadvantages $1.1 Million Cost Difference Owner s Expectations Caused Large Difference Panelized EFiS Similar Cost to Masonry Brick

32 Industry II. III. Modular Setting Precision IV. Project Team Members Wohlsen Construction Mansfield Auxiliary Corporation WTW Architects Simplex Industries AE Faculty Special Thanks for Support Advanced Exterior Systems Friends and Family

33 Mansfield University Dormitories Mansfield, Pennsylvania Michael Mahoney Construction Option Senior Thesis Presentation 2013 The Pennsylvania State University

34 Appendix

35 Appendix Wood Concrete Concrete Columns Cost Data Amount Cost Number Total Cost $ vert LF 52 vert LF $ 9, /column 3 columns $ 28, Additional Reinforcing $ 5.20 SF 52 SF $ /column 3 columns $ Concrete Flat Plate $ SF 8160 SF $ 130, $ 130, Concrete Walls $ SF 9532 SF $ 230, $ 230, Additional Reinforcing $ 1.25 SF 9534 SF $ 11, $ 11, Total $ 401, Steel Columns Type Cost Data Amount Cost Number Total Cost W10 $ vert LF 52 vert LF $ 6, /column 4 columns $ 24, HSS $ vert LF 52 vert LF $ 5, /column 15 columns $ 75, Steel Column Fireproofing W10 $ vert LF 52 vert LF $ 1, /column 4 columns $ 6, HSS $ vert LF 52 vert LF $ 1, /column 15 columns $ 24, Structural Steel Floor $ SF 8160 SF $ 162, $ 162, x10 Wood Joists $ 3.47 SF 8160 SF $ 28, $ 28, /4 Plywood Underlayment $ 1.13 SF 8160 SF $ 9, $ 9, " Batt Insulation $ 0.59 SF 8160 SF $ 4, $ 4, CMU walls $ SF 9531 SF $ 146, $ 146, Total $ 484,358.08