Iona Orams
Week 3 Studio Journal
This week’s studio consisted of a brief overview of safety procedures and theory followed by four site visits around the university campus. The first site was the Eastern Precinct Student Centre: a newer atrium linking two older buildings together as part of the Eastern Resource Centre. The atrium provides a sheltered casual study and eating area as well as the entrance to the library in the older building. Potential construction constraints may be the need for the older buildings to support the new roof structure. Access to the site whilst in construction may have been an issue, as the area is long and narrow and care must have been taken to prevent damage to surrounding buildings. Smaller machinery, ramps and on-site construction of larger structural components may have been needed to address this constraint. Structural elements of the atrium include a large, steel frame spanning the area between the two buildings. The use of steel allows the structure to remain rigid and supportive in order to span the entire area whilst carrying the loads of glass panels and timber beams. The impact of the load of the steel frame upon the surrounding buildings would have needed to be carefully considered. The second site we visited was the Melbourne School of Land and Environment. We were required to again observe the new linking structure between two older buildings. The area between the two existing buildings on this site would have been even smaller than that of the area between buildings at the ERC. Access would have therefore again been a potential construction constraint. The bearing capacity of the surrounding older buildings and the potential for damaging surrounding buildings would have also been constraints during construction. Another constraint which was pointed out by Warwick was the differing heights between the floor and first level landing between the two older buildings. In order to address this, the building used a mezzanine with a ramp to cross from one building to another on the first level.
ENVS10003
Iona Orams
Week 3 Studio Journal
The roof of the building would have been a steel structure, suggested by the inclusion of deep-set skylights in the upper-level ceiling. However, minimal steel would have had to have been used in the overall structure in order for it to be lightweight and able to be supported by the existing buildings. Incorporation of the old and new was evident by the exposed red bricks from the inner wall shared with the older building. The use of recycled bricks beside newer materials made for a smoother transition between the old and new buildings.
The third site was the Queen’s College Extension which is the extension of an existing older building. Again, the size of the site was very small, meaning space and access would be a limitation during construction. This is because the site is located close to a main walkway and existing surrounding buildings. It could be seen that a timber frame was supporting the structure combined with the use of tilt-up, precast concrete slabs. Steel columns with FSBW supporting part of the existing building were being incorporated into the extension.
Site four was the new Main Oval Pavilion which was only at the beginning stages of the construction process. A modern pavilion facing onto the sporting oval was being built onto part of the old pavilion. Building onto the heritage-listed building would mean that extra care needs to be taken to prevent damage to the old building. This would include careful evaluation of the supporting capacity of the old building and appropriate employment of structural systems and materials in order to address this. Other construction constraints include waterproofing the old building and the existing site to ensure no water damage occurs. A concrete basement slab and concrete block work is included in the existing initial stages of construction. Floor joists had been laid on the ground level and started bars were being used to connect the concrete blocks together.
ENVS10003
Iona Orams
Week 3 Studio Journal
The final site we visited was the Ormond Theology Centre Reception. It is a large finished modern extension to an older stone building. Again, it was clear that a major construction constraint would have been building alongside a much older and potentially more fragile building, particularly as the extension is large with a heavy frame. The sloping, overhanging roof of the building was embedded with a large skylight, suggesting that a steel frame was used. The overall structure was a composite of concrete and steel, with bagged offform concrete bricks used. Wire mesh panels and adjustable thin metal slats provided shading to much of the side and front of the building without restricting airflow. Ribbed glass brick work covered the front wall of the reception while glass panels allowed light into the entrance.
ENVS10003