LONDON AQUATICS CENTRE
Sam Baker/ARCT1066/Rahesh Ram AN IN-DEPTH CASE STUDY OF THE LONDON AQUATICS CENTRE INCLUDING DETAILS ON THE OLYMPIC PARK BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER THE LEGACY CONVERSION
INSPIRED BY THE FLUIDITY OF WATER
"Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park will become a place unlike any other in the capital, a place that combines all the elements that make London the world’s greatest city: the beautiful open spaces, the architecture, the innovation, the quality, the creativity, the sense of fun and excitement." Boris Johnson -
FOR MORE INFORMATION VISIT THEOLYMPICPARK.TUMBLR.COM
Introduction
CONTENTS PART 1 - OLYMPIC PARK 4 - Introduction An introduction to the surrounding boroughs.
park
and
the
8 - Infrastructure A guide to the development and construction of the park and its later operation, including information on infrastructure and urban strategy.
10 - Development How the ethos of the park was established and how the site was chosen and developed.
PART 2 - AQUATICS CENTRE 14 - Introduction A brief introduction to the London Aquatics Centre.
15 - Early Design A walk-through of the first concepts of the Aquatics Centre and how the original competition scheme evolved.
20 - The Team A summery of the various companies that worked on the Aquatics Centre with Zaha Hadid Architects.
22 - Construction Details on the construction elements of the building.
of
various
'I was first inspired by landscape topography and liquid space, so, the idea of water, fluidity, and we're talking about it for years, how we can design space which is more like liquid, but we didn’t really know right away what that would mean...' Zaha Hadid on the Aquatics Centre
52 - Legacy Conversion An explanation into what changed when the Olympic Games ended.
58 - Additional Features Further details on elements of the building.
REFERENCING GUIDE For all referencing see the final page of the booklet, referencing will be presented page by page.
PAGE 2
PAGE 3
The Olympic Park
W
ith all three of Britain’s previous Olympic bids failed, London’s 2012 Olympic campaign got off to a slow start as the Government took time to decide whether to launch a bid. London achieved candidate status in May 2005, but it still ranked behind Paris and Madrid. On July 6th 2005 the International Olympic Committee awarded Britain the chance to host the 2012 Olympic Games. At the time of the IOC awarding London the bid, the projected cost of hosting the event was around £2.5 billion, this estimation was raised to £9 billion shortly after the bid was won. There was concern that the event would be paid for by funds that had been raised for other good causes around Britain. The final cost of the Olympic project was actually estimated to be around £11.3 billion with the majority of the money (£9.3bn) coming from public sector funding. The single largest item of spending, at roughly £1.8bn, was the preparation of the Olympic Park which included costs for the local infrastructure, roads, cleaning the site and installing power lines.
T
he park is located east of Greater London and just north of Greenwich. It makes up part of the East London Green Grid and was used as a means of linking the Thames and Lee Valley Regional Park. In October 2011 the Olympic Park Legacy Company submitted an outline planning application to transform the Olympic park following the 2012 Games. Architect practice Allies & Morrison led the team working on the proposals for the Olympic Park along with Maccreanor Lavington, Witherford Watson Mann and landscape architects Vogt.
PAGE 4
T
he plans for the Olympic project involved the regeneration of huge areas of land in East London, making a powerful case for an Olympic legacy, with the main stadiums and athlete's accommodation close together. The proximity of the Olympic park to the surrounding boroughs; Newham, Tower Hamlets, Hackney and Waltham Forest, benefited the boroughs as the major regeneration around the Stratford area took place. The continuation of the Olympic Legacy at the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park, as it was named to commemorate the Diamond Jubilee of Elizabeth II, will continue to benefit the local boroughs even with the Games finished.
'Legacy Communities Scheme’ and the area would consist of up to 6,800 new homes and 130,000sqm of employment space. The neighbourhood Chobham Manor, located near the Athlete’s village and the Velodrome, was the first to be developed with a focus on terrace housing surrounding the residential blocks. Chobham manor includes 960 homes, a medical centre, two nurseries, two large community spaces and small retail and food units. It is clear that with projects such as the Legacy Communities Scheme being implemented after the Games have finished, the regeneration will continue benefiting the local area for some years to come.
PAGE 5
The Olympic Park
T
he park is situated in an area straddling four east London boroughs; Newham, Tower Hamlets, Hackney and Waltham Forest. The greater part of the park resides in Newham and as a result the regeneration of the local area is more noticeable here than in any of the other boroughs. Newham will ultimately benefit most from the legacy campaign as, of the six new neighbourhoods planned, four of them are located within the London Borough of Newham. Their names are Chobham Manor, Pudding Mill, Marshgate Wharf and The International Quarter. The only borough that does not benefit from a new neighbourhood is Waltham Forest due to its separation from the greater whole of the Olympic Park. PAGE 6
T
he London Legacy scheme involves the creation of six new neighbourhoods. Of these six neighbourhoods, five are residential; Chobham Manor, Pudding Mill, Marshgate Wharf, Sweetwater and East Wick. The remaining neighbourhood is commercial; The International Quarter (T.I.Q). Each of the residential neighbourhoods offers a different category of housing, from privately owned houses to rent-able apartments. Along with different housing styles, each of the neighbourhoods has an individual aesthetic, for example, the Pudding Mill neighbourhood has elements relating to its industrial heritage. Alongside the construction of the six new neighbourhoods, the London Legacy Development Corporation has plans to construct various new facilities within the borders of the Olympic Park. The facilities included within the neighbourhood scheme are: Educational facilities, Health centres, Community and Leisure spaces and a new Library. PAGE 7
The Olympic Park
A
A key principle for the design of the Olympic park was to make it one of the best connected places in London. This convergence of transport infrastructure was considered for both the initial planning of the site and the legacy conversion. The train and tube connections that were planned were considered so that all major London destinations could be reached within 35 minutes of departure. Along with the citywide transport considerations, the Olympic park master-plan aimed to create a network of connections to the surrounding neighbourhoods that would aid the site’s transition from industrial wasteland to a welcoming park. This networks of streets, paths, roads and bridges provides a clear movement pattern across the park.
T
he Olympic Park was to become a central hub within London. The convergence of train, tube and DLR lines has turned the once disconnected area of Stratford into one of the most connected transport hubs in the country. PAGE 8
T
he heating and cooling services installed within the Olympic Park comprises of 18km of distribution pipework, 2km worth of cooling and 16km of heating, to provide the Olympic venues with heating and cooling as well as supplying the local neighbourhoods. The Olympic Park District Heating and District Cooling Network, referred to as the DCDC Network, is connected to the Olympic Park Energy Centre and makes use of the centres biomass boilers for combined cooling, heating and power. The underground system was designed with future expansion in mind to meet the requirements of the Legacy conversion after the Olympic Games had ended. PAGE 9
The Olympic Park
B
T
he Olympic park is in the center of the Lee Valley regeneration area, east of the City of London borough. The boroughs overlapping the regeneration area are all part of the continuing legacy campaign, the two highlighted boroughs that do not overlap; ‘Greenwich’ and ‘Barking and Dagenham’ still played a role during the 2012 Olympics though they aren’t benefiting from the legacy improvements. Barking and Dagenham hosted one of the final stages of the Olympic torch delivery and as such, streets that the torch was planned to pass were renovated. Greenwich is considered connected to the park as the equestrian events of the Olympic games were hosted in Greenwich park. The DLR connection between Greenwich and the park also made Greenwich a key borough during the 2012 games. With so many visitors coming to the Olympic Games, accessibility was paramount. The ODA’s biggest task was to construct the means of accessing the Olympic Park. PAGE 10
In order to link the park to surrounding areas and to the greater whole of London, a large amount of work had to be done. The ODA planned around the existing transport infrastructure of the Stratford area and also began planning the construction of new bridges and highways that would grant improved accessibility to the park. Along with the improved accessibility, the infrastructure was also planned with consideration of both the future legacy of the park and bearing in mind that materials would need to be delivered to the site during its development. Over the course of the infrastructure development the ODA built more that 30 new bridges and numerous waterways and railways. Of the bridges constructed, the most notable is the 40 meter wide pedestrian bridge that not only serves as the main point of access for the Olympic Park but also serves as the roof structure for the Aquatic Centre’s training pool.
efore the site was chosen, the area was considered to be an area of socio-economic deprivation with the local area having almost double the average unemployment in England. The area was also known for its high crime rates and the poor health of the population. The site specifically was a post-industrial area that was bordering on a state of abandonment and dereliction. After years of fly-tipping and negligence the quality of the site degraded to the point that, when the park was being constructed, steps had to be taken to decontaminate the soil. Even with the soil put through a rigorous process of cleansing that involved numerous dump trucks moving the soil into a machine that stripped the contaminated soil of hydrocarbons and organic matter. Although the process improved the quality of the soil greatly, the level of contamination was so high that the soil could still not be used as topsoil. To make use of the refined dirt it was decided that the greater portion of the landscaping could be made with the processed soil and a topsoil layer could be added to separate the potentially harmful material from the public. The topsoil layer, made of fresh organic soil, was made to a depth of 800mm with a bright orange protective layer to separate the hazardous and organic soils and to warn any future workers where the fresh soil ends and the contaminated soil begins. PAGE 11
The Olympic Park
W
hen the IOC awarded the Olympic bid to London it was largely a result of the planned Legacy scheme. The key driving force of the Olympic Legacy plan was to avoid repeating the mistakes of the previous hosts. Almost all recent hosts of the Olympic Games spent huge amounts of money creating grand facilities for the games but failed to plan for the long term use of the venues after the games had finished. The Olympic Park Legacy Company (OPLC) was responsible for the long term planning that went into the Olympic bid. Some of the key ideas they supported were regeneration and sustainability. The OPLC also used the 'Ten One Planer Living’ principles as the base guidelines for their own environmental policies.
PAGE 12
T
he topography of the Olympic Park is one of its defining features. It extends from a low point along the banks of the River Lea to high points nearly 12 meters above the river. One of the highest areas within the park is the mountain biking area to the east of the Velodrome. This is because a large portion of the treated soil from the original site was used to create a mountain biking area. PAGE 13
London Aquatics Centre
D
esigned in 2004 by Zaha Hadid Architects almost a full year before London won the Olympic bid. The Aquatics Centre would become one of Zaha Hadid’s first big UK projects. Responsible for housing the majority of the pool based events during the 2012 Olympic Games and holds 2 50m pools and a 25m competition diving pool. The venue, referred to as the Gateway to the Olympics, consists of a large curving form that rises out of the ground in sweeping gesture. The architectural concept of the London Aquatics Centre was drawn from the idea of water in motion and the fluid geometry it creates. In addition a key design principle was making the building and surrounding environment work in sympathy with the river landscape and topography of the Olympic Park. An undulating roof synonymous with a wave rises from the ground - enclosing the pools of the Aquatics Centre. The Centre was designed with flexibility in mind to accommodate the capacity of the London 2012 Olympic Games whilst also providing a more reasonable size and capacity once the Games were over and the Legacy scheme was initiated.
PAGE 14
A
bove are the very first ideas produced by Zaha Hadid architects for the London Aquatics Centre. Even from the very first drawings and models made, the ethos and design style of the practice can be seen. A key principle that was followed throughout the design and development of the Aquatics Centre was that the building should convey the idea of liquid and fluidity in its form and the early iterations show this in the form of flowing roofs.
O
riginally the design for the Aquatics Centre covered a much larger area and the first few models made show an attempt to draw the desired fluid shape from the topography of the site. These first three models, seen at the top of the page, though simple in construction begin to inform the context of the building in relation to its surroundings and give an early indication of the buildings orientation on the site. These early competition scheme designs were considered too expensive and time consuming to produce and the designs were eventually value engineered and developed to the building that exists on the site today. PAGE 15
London Aquatics Centre
T
he original design for the Aquatics Centre was considerably larger than the final iteration of the building. As the concept models show there are many key elements carried through from the original design to the final building. The size of the building however has been drastically reduced, originally the water polo arena would have been housed inside the smaller element of the structure. As the images show the key idea of a fluid form has been used as it was in the early sketches and conceptual stages. A virtual render of the buildings roof was used to quickly create multiple iterations of the water-like building. This design of the original competition scheme was considered to be too overbearing by the ODA and the cost of the building would be too far over-budget.
PAGE 16
PAGE 17
London Aquatics Centre
T
he original competition design consisted of two components separated by a footbridge. Following a decision by the ODA, it was decided that the competition scheme was too large and would interrupt the flow of the park and as a result the design of the building was reduced down to its second incarnation. PAGE 18
The second design still contained elements of its predecessor but was greatly reduced in size. This second iteration was still two separate components but the greater part of the structure was far more compact. Following further ODA budgeting the building was once more reduced in size to the design that exists today.
O
ne of the key reasons that London won the bid for the Olympics was that there was a long term plan in place to create a lasting legacy once the Games had finished. The most notable element of the final design was the temporary seating stands, the 'wings' projecting from either side of the building.
When compared to the previous two iterations of the Aquatics Centre it is clear why the ODA approved the last version. A large concern of hosting the Olympic Games is what to do with the grand venues once the Games have passed, the temporary 'wings' of this last design allow the building to serve both long and short term goals. PAGE 19
London Aquatics Centre
Z
aha Hadid Architects is a world renown practice known for its neo-futuristic buildings, characterised by fragmented geometry and curving forms. In 2004 the practice won the design competition for the London Aquatics Centre. Though Zaha Hadid herself is the figurehead for the practice, many architects worked on the Aquatics Centre throughout its development. A total of 34 different architects worked on the project though at any one time there were no more than 24 architects working on the design. The competition team that originally developed the building was composed of 10 architects and they continued to give input until the project's completion.
PAGE 20
A
t the top of the page is a representation of the design team structure. It gives an idea of who was responsible for what during the development and eventual construction of the building. ARUP played a big role in the Olympics and worked on most venues.
The second chart shows the projected timeline for the design development. The deadline was unmovable so it was important that each of the project goals was met within its timeslot. As shown the earlier timeslots were short meaning the design team had to work fast.
PAGE 21
London Aquatics Centre
P
erhaps the most notable part of the Aquatics Centre is its roof, designed in a wave-like shape to represent the fluidity of water. The roof is primarily made of two materials. The underbelly and facade is made of red louro; a tropical hardwood known for its durability in high moisture environments. The roof, which cannot be seen from ground level, is made from highly flexible aluminium.
PAGE 22
T
he upper facing side of the roof is a complex 3D, double curved shape. The lower of the two curves give the building its axis on the site and the 3 pools inside are aligned on this same axis. The undulations on the underside of the roof create a visual separation inside the pool hall between the competition pool and the diving pool. As well as creating this internal differentiation, the lower points of the roof, excluding the 'belly' in the centre, serve as the structural anchors that support the roof. PAGE 23
London Aquatics Centre
Connection to underside of gutter
Low Level Anti Vandal build-up
Internal steel structure Kerto Channel at facade line
T
he facade of the Aquatics Centre roof was carefully chosen to complement the graceful curvature of its geometry. The final choice of red louro was chosen for two key reasons, in terms of durability the wood is highly moisture resistant and has naturally occurring oils that deter insects and fungi. The second reason is that when weathered the wood takes on a reddish grey colour that was desirable to give continuity from the metal grey sheets of aluminium that made the top of the roof.
PAGE 24
External Cladding: Solid Louro Gamela boards backed with acoustic insulation and thermal insulation as appropriate Recessed Downlight Housing
Aluminium substructure
Internal Cladding: Louro Gamela Veneered Birch Ply with acoustic backing
PAGE 25
London Aquatics Centre Structural steel purlin Cladding clip Extruded aluminium rod Customizable to achieve bending Ball and socket joint Sliding lug Secondary connection bracket
1
2
Dowel screw Primary aluminium frame Secondary aluminium frame Primary connection bracket Rotative collar
3
4
5
6
A
7 PAGE 26
bove is an inside to outside diagram of how the red louro panels would have been affixed to the structure of the roof. 1: The roof's steel structure is prepared with connection points. 2: An enclosure panel consisting of a vapour barrier, insulation, rafter support, plywood panel and second vapour barrier is attached to the steel structure. 3: Aluminium substructure fastened to steel structure. 4: Secondary aluminium substructure attached to the primary substructure. 5: Cladding fastening system attached to aluminium framework. 6: Cladding boards attached to fastening system. 7: Process repeated until entire facade is covered.
T
he roof is referred to as 'floating' because of the way it meets the ground. One downside of red louro wood is that it becomes less resistant if it remains in contact with ground for too long. To overcome this, a podium separates the roof from the ground.
The timber cladding stops 200mm above the ground and a sloped drainage channel around the base of the roof sheds water towards the glazed sides of the building where the water drains away. Textured asphalt rises towards the roof and gives the impression that it floats.
PAGE 27
London Aquatics Centre
Aluminium roof Continuous welded gutter Anodized aluminium panel and gutter trim Timber cladding
T
he roof of the Aquatics Centre is made of highly flexible aluminium sheets. Applied using the 'Kalzip XT' cladding system, each sheet overlaps the sheet beside it. A seal at the joint of the aluminium sheets prevents water seeping through and into the roof structure. The aluminium cladding is not directly applied to the steel structure but is instead clipped on to a substructure. A layer of insulation and acoustic-lined timber separate the primary structure of the roof from the aluminium cladding layer.
PAGE 28
A
long with being highly flexible and well suited for complex geometries, the Kalzip XT system offers on-site production. Components don't have to be pre-fabricated and brought to the site but can instead be supplied as and when they are needed.
The aluminium sheets and curvature of the roof mean that an advanced drainage system is not required. Water runs into gutters where the timber cladding and aluminium meet. The gutter is not viewable from the ground so that the graceful curve of the roof is constant.
PAGE 29
London Aquatics Centre
T
he roof of the Aquatics Centre spans 160m by 80m at its farthest points. To support the geometries of the roof, 2800 tonnes of steel were used to create a framework of cantilevered long span fan trusses. A large arches either side give the roof its curvature.
PAGE 30
The steel structure of the roof rests on three anchor points, two smaller pillars at the northern end of the building, with the top of the pillars level with the footbridge, and one larger pillar at the southern end, forming part of a large wall behind the diving boards.
T
he design of the roof's structural system had to be well thought out, even after the roof had been value engineered to the form it has today the roof was still huge. Its main supports were only 22m wide and the wings overhang these supports on both sides.
The solution is a structure formed of 2D roof trusses that travel from the front to the back of the roof's long axis, perpendicular to the wings. The wings are arches connected to in-plane trusses that transfer their weight via tie into the central trusses.
PAGE 31
London Aquatics Centre
T
he complex 3D curve of the roof is created by purlins, which run perpendicular to the trusses. The purlins only curve in one dimension so the curve of the building comes from relatively simple 2D elements that are essentially beam sections.
T
he roof is supported on spherical bearings, fixed at the southern end and sliding at the 2 northern supports. The southern fixture allows movement longitudinally but not laterally, this helps the structure withstand wind; the northern fixtures can slide in both directions.
PAGE 32
PAGE 33
London Aquatics Centre
I
nside the roof of the Aquatics Centre is a network of walkways that provide access to the lighting systems of the pool area as well as any areas of the roof that may need maintenance. Along with providing maintenance access to the lights, the roof void was used during the Olympic Games to give a larger range of camera angles without interrupting the view of the pools. PAGE 34
PAGE 35
London Aquatics Centre
T
he walkway within the roof void gives access to the connection between the roof structure and the ground support. The two connection shown are at the southern point of the building and allow the roof to move longitudinally. In the photos shown the measurement marker shows the building to be roughly 4 units off of centre, this is possibly due to the light wind coming from the South-East at the time that the photo was taken or, alternatively, as the sun was shining on the building the heat could have caused some expansion which would have resulted in the roof shifting and possibly effecting the markers position.
PAGE 36
PAGE 37
London Aquatics Centre
T
he glass used for the glazed wall incorporated a frit pattern that was carefully designed to reduced the glare of the sun as well as providing a degree of privacy for those using the pools. Unfortunately not long after the Legacy conversion it was found that because the frit pattern had only been considered for the users of the pool, the lower panes of glass had a denser pattern than the higher panes, this meant that the anti glare effects of the frit were reduced at the higher levels. When people started to use the higher diving boards on bright days they were being dazzled by the un-fritted light. To amend the unsafe conditions a layer of vinyl sheeting was stuck to the inner side of the glazed wall to obscure the light, though successful the implementation of the vinyl was poor and ultimately detracts from the aesthetic of the building.
T
he glazed wall on either side of the Centre was not put in place until after the Games had finished and the Legacy scheme came in to effect. The wall is made of a steel framework with fritted glass panels mounted on it.
PAGE 38
T Dip 10mm Max=72.99
he steel structure of the glazed wall meets the roof at the 'Kerto Channel’ a slot in the roof that previously housed the seating stands. The top of the steel structure is narrower than the channel to compensate for the frame flexing in the wind, the maximum flex of the frame is almost 73mm but severe conditions would be required to cause this. PAGE 39
London Aquatics Centre
T C
he walkway within the roof void gives access to the connection between the roof structure and the Centre ground required support. reating the Aquatics The the two expertise connection of shown are different at the many southern point of but the building and allow that the companies the company roof to move longitudinally. the PERI, photos perhaps had the largest inputIn was a shown the engineering measurementcompany. marker shows the formwork PERI was building to befor roughly 4 unitsthe off ofconcrete centre, responsible creating this is possibly to theItlight wind elements of thedue Centre. could be coming argued from the theroof South-East thelabour time intensive that the that was the at most photo alternatively, as the sun part ofwas the taken designor,but when considering the was shining the building heat could quantity of on concrete used inthethe building have the caused expansion would and effortsome it took to makewhich the moulds havetheresulted the opinion roof shifting for concrete, in in my PERI had and the possibly effecting markers position. largest job during the construction.
PAGE 40
T
o create the moulds used in construction PERI used phenolic plywood. Using CNC production from a 3D generated Aquatics Centre, PERI ensured that the 200+ 3D moulds that were manufactured would be within a 10mm tolerance. As the Centre required a uniform, blemish free concrete finish, only adhesives could be used to join the final layers of facing plywood. To comply with the ODA's sustainability standards all of the plywood was sourced from sustainable forests. PAGE 41
London Aquatics Centre
O
ne of the most beautiful elements of the Aquatics Centre is the use of concrete. Created with blemish free moulds and coated with PSS20, a starch based chemical that gives the concrete its stain resistance and slight sheen, the graceful curvature of the walls give a sense of continuity with roof. The interface between the brushed metal, glass and concrete also gives an aesthetic of simple elegance that only improves the building.
T
he main structure of the building consists of almost 50,000 tonnes of concrete and used 25% recycled aggregate and 50% cement alternative to reduce the environmental impact. This concrete structure rests on 1800 25m-long piles which were placed to avoid 2 underground powerline tunnels which existed on the site.
PAGE 42
PAGE 43
London Aquatics Centre
T
he roof of the training pool is cast concrete with a number of large geometric ceiling coffers. As the training pool was not used for any events in the Olympic Games filming was not an issue and as such permanent lighting was installed. A layer of light diffusing fabric, that doubles as an acoustic buffer, sits above the coffers, backlit with fluorescent luminaires. This lighting gives a sky-lit ambience to the pool.
PAGE 44
PAGE 45
London Aquatics Centre
T
he design of the diving boards in the Centre was carefully considered and many iterations were produced. The final design was selected because of the way that it is constructed. To save on making multiple moulds for the casting, each of the diving boards is constructed from re-usable moulds. The diagram at the top of the page shows how the moulds were re-used to create different parts of the diving boards. Beside it is the layout of the reinforcement within the concrete.
PAGE 46
PAGE 47
London Aquatics Centre
T
here are 3 pools in the London Aquatics Centre, a 50m competition pool, a 25m diving pool and a 50m training pool. The 50m competition pool is 3 meters deep but has a movable base that can be quickly raised or lowered to change the depth of pool.
PAGE 48
The diving pool also has a movable floor but usually operates at 5 meters depth except when catering for elite training or competition. There are a total of 12 diving boards available with heights ranging from 1m to a maximum of 10 meters.
T
o maintain 3 large public pools a great deal of hardware is needed. During my tour around the building I was shown the large underground filtration area as well as the hydraulic system that controls the pool's height and the pool's heating systems.
The filtration room was laid out like a long corridor with huge filter vats on either side, each of the large pools requires 5 filter vats and numerous other devices to clean such a high volume of liquid. Mesh grates block most debris while UV lights kill any bacteria in the water.
PAGE 49
London Aquatics Centre Roof void
Spherical Bearings
Ventilation
Filtration room
T
here is a great deal of infrastructure that makes the Aquatics Centre function yet there is no obvious evidence that it is there aside from the occasional vent. This is because it has been cleverly integrated into the design of the building, for example the grass hill at the southern end of the building conceals vents that draw air in to the building, along with this the roof void is used to run electrical cables from one end of the building to the other, powering lights on the way.
PAGE 50
PAGE 51
London Aquatics Centre
T
o accommodate the audience of the Olympic Games while also planning ahead to the Legacy conversion stage of the London Games a temporary stand was built on either side of the Aquatics Centre. These temporary stands raised the seating capacity from 2,500 people to 17,500 during the Games.
PAGE 52
The temporary stands took the form of two wings, one on either side of the building. The seating stands were made of a steel framework with PVC sheeting making up the majority of the facade. The angle of the seating gave spectators a clear view of both pools despite the 'belly’ of the roof dipping between the stands. PAGE 53
London Aquatics Centre
T
he temporary seating of the Centre raises the buildings footprint from 15,950m2 to 21,897m2. Generally the design of the stands was poorly received, possibly due to its cumbersome appearance on the site, with the wings over-extending the area around the building and requiring additional support.
PAGE 54
T
hough people felt that the wings were a clumsy addition to the Centre I think that it was a fairly elegant solution to the Olympic/Legacy conversion, the wings match the curvature of the roof without any interruption and don't detract from the curvature.
When the stands were first erected and the PVC sheeting was applied it wasn't until almost half of one side had been completely faced that somebody noticed that the PVC sheets had a different front and a back and one side of the seating stand had to be refaced.
PAGE 55
London Aquatics Centre
Timber cladding Loose fabric attached to timber ceiling allows limited movement Gable wall steelwork Clamped fabric to close gap between steelwork and gable frame Clamping plate for loose fabric Steel frame to form curve along Legacy roof Gable wall fabric facade
PVC
Without Precamber Bad deflection
Temporary roof baffle fabric along Legacy roof gutter Loose fabric to seal along gutter and timber ceiling edge
With Precamber
Loose fabric fixed to timber ceiling to a c c o m m o d a t e
Ideal deflection
Gable wall PVC fabric facade Timber cladding
W
T
he diagrams above show how the temporary stand interfaced with the Aquatic Centres roof. Originally there would have been timber panels linking the temporary and permanent structures but this idea was omitted.
PAGE 56
hen the 170 tonne truss was built, engineers had to consider that the unsupported weight of the truss’ midsection would cause the metal framework to distort. To counteract this distortion a precamber was built in to the design. The principle of the precamber is outlined in the diagram above. In the case of the temporary seating truss, the deflection had to be within 150mm of the precamber otherwise a new truss would have had to have been built. Fortunately the calculated precamber functioned as expected and the support truss was lifted into place. PAGE 57
London Aquatics Centre
D
uring the Legacy conversion a dilapidation survey had to be completed to assure that the building would be safe to operate after key structural elements, the temporary seating being the main element of concern, had been removed. PAGE 58
When the seating was de-constructed the steel elements were melted down and recycled. Along with the removal of the seating there were superficial damages that had to be amended, water damage from the games and burn damage from the removal of the temporary stands. PAGE 59
London Aquatics Centre
Roof conduction heat loss - 25%
Integrated sensors monitor condensation
Hot water flows through hollow transom
Hollow mullion - Heated flow
Infiltration heat loss - 40%
Hollow mullion - Return flow
Facade conduction heat loss - 35%
Anodised grill
Heated air
Pool overflow
Multi-service dry duct
PAGE 60
Pool service access
PAGE 61
London Aquatics Centre
Standard pool ridge reflects waves back at swimmer.
Aquatics Centre pool ridge has 12 degree alteration and reflects waves downwards instead of back at swimmer.
T
D
espite the efforts that went in to constructing the concrete elements of the Aquatics Centre, there is no way to stop the building from shifting and signs of this can be seen in the superficial damage of concrete elements. PAGE 62
o conclude this case study I will say that the works carried out over the duration of 10 years, from first concept to Legacy conversion, have not been in vain. The London Aquatics Centre has survived the numerous design changes of the ODA and despite these cuts, the final building still retains the same grandeur and character of its predecessors. Even with the unusual demand for the building to work as both host for the Olympic Games and public swimming pool the final structure has proved immensely successful in both scenarios. Though the early Olympic design, with its large protruding wings, was generally negatively received, the building had now been liberated of the cumbersome stands and the graceful curvature of the building had been revealed to all of the praise it deserves. PAGE 63
Reference page
Pages 4-5
Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park flythrough http://queenelizabetholympicpark.co.uk/
Pages 8-9
Your Sustainability Guide To Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park 2030 http://www.spacesyntax.com/
Pages 10-11
PAGE 64
Your Sustainability Guide To Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park 2030 Park lecture - Phil Askew
Pages 26-27
Aquatics Centre Lecture - Yeena Yoon
Pages 28-29
http://www.lakesmere.com/ http://www.kalzip.com/
Pages 30-31
http://buildipedia.com/ Aquatics Centre Lecture - Yeena Yoon
Pages 32-33
http://www.turbosquid.com/
Pages 38-39
Aquatics Centre Lecture - Yeena Yoon http://www.vs-a.net
Pages 12-13
ODA - Sustainable Development Strategy http://www.susdrain.org/ Pages 40-41
http://www.peri.ltd.uk/
Pages 14-15
http://buildipedia.com/ Aquatics Centre Lecture - Yeena Yoon
Pages 42-43
http://www.huftonandcrow.com/
Pages 16-17
Aquatics Centre Lecture - Yeena Yoon
Pages 44-45
http://www.huftonandcrow.com/ Aquatics Centre Lecture - Yeena Yoon
Pages 18-19
Aquatics Centre Lecture - Yeena Yoon Pages 46-47
Aquatics Centre Lecture - Yeena Yoon
Pages 20-21
Aquatics Centre Lecture - Yeena Yoon Pages 50-51
http://buildipedia.com/
Page
23
http://buildipedia.com/ Pages 52-53
Page
25
Aquatics Centre Lecture - Yeena Yoon
Aquatics Centre Lecture - Yeena Yoon Aquatics Centre Conversion - Gregg Holland
Pages 54-55
Aquatics Centre Lecture - Yeena Yoon http://www.theguardian.com/ londonaquaticscentre.org/
Pages 56-57
Aquatics Centre Lecture - Yeena Yoon Build it Bigger Olympic Aquatic Centre
Pages 58-59
Aquatics Centre Lecture - Yeena Yoon
Pages 60-61
Aquatics Centre Lecture - Yeena Yoon http://www.vs-a.net www.cibse.org
Page
http://www.domusweb.it/ www.dezeen.com
63
PAGE 65