Brelsford Visitor Center

Washington State University

By Amie Sullivan, P.E., S.E.

KPFF Consulting Engineers was an Award Winner for the Brelsford Visitor Center project in the 2014 NCSEA Annual Excellence in Structural Engineering awards program (Category – New Buildings under $10M).

The Brelsford Visitor Center sits near the junction of the Washington State University (WSU) campus and downtown Pullman at the corner of Main and Spring streets. The location was chosen to recognize the historical significance and celebrate the vitality of the town-gown relationship that has existed between the City of Pullman and WSU for more than 123 years. The $1.3 million facility was delivered using the design-build method with a team lead by Sellen and Olson Kundig as contractor and architect. KPFF provided structural and civil engineering for the new 4,277 square-foot building that now serves as a showcase for the university’s wide-ranging activities. WSU awarded the project in February 2013, construction began on May 20, 2103, and the Grand Opening was celebrated in October 2013. Driven by the aggressive schedule and a tight budget, the team pushed boundaries and responded to design and construction challenges with creative solutions. Ultimately, the team was able to deliver the iconic structure the University was looking for in just eight short months. The most prominent architectural statement, the 40-foot-tall illuminated tower, is also a primary structural element. Composed of two curved steel segments, the west segment supports a series of cantilevers at the roof edge. The east segment is a free standing element. To maintain the project budget and schedule, the tower was stitched together with several curved sections rather than one piece of steel. To avoid a segmented look, KPFF worked closely with the steel fabricator to create discrete welded splices, successfully giving the tower the seamless look the architect desired. Three 15-foot-high concrete letters that spell W-S-U are another distinctive feature. The letter “U” serves as a building column supporting the overhanging roof on the west end. To meet budget and schedule, the letters were cast in concrete on-site and tilted up in place. To control cracking and provide durability, the letters were reinforced with a welded rebar mesh. KPFF designed the lifting brackets and erection assemblies to support the letters and minimize stresses while they were being erected. The board formed concrete wall on the south elevation of the building is an example of how creative problem solving was used incorporate the structural systems within the framework of the architectural vision. This concrete wall was an important feature in the architectural design of the building. By making this wall a primary lateral element used to support the lateral loads both in-plane and out-of-plane (in a cantilevered manner), KPFF eliminated braced frames or moment frames that would have otherwise been required, saving money and keeping the rest of the glass pavilion very light and open. The Visitor Center is one of the first commercial applications of cross laminated timber (CLT) in the country. The panels are made up of three layers of 2-by-6 planks that are stacked crosswise and glued together. The CLT roof spans 14-feet between supports and cantilevers in both directions at the roof edge. The site was constrained by numerous Environmentally Critical Area buffers, and these constraints pushed the building to the corner of the site atop a combination of bedrock and uncontrolled fill. KPFF worked with the geotechnical engineer to provide a foundation system that would fit the budget and control differential settlement. Efficiency in systems and finishes was achieved by integrating the structural elements into the architectural design in other ways, as well. The building features polished slab-on-grade floor, exposed steel and glulam beam framing, steel angle columns nested into the re-entrant corners of the window wall system, and an exposed CLT ceiling finish.▪

Amie Sullivan is an associate at KPFF Consulting Engineers in their Seattle office. She can be reached at amie.sullivan@kpff.com.

ASSOC I A T I O N S NATIONAL COUNCI L

NCSEA News

Rick Warren’s book, Th e Purpose Driven Life, has encouraged over 60 million readers to ask themselves, “What on earth am I here for?” I often ask myself that question. Th ere isn’t a simple answer. I think my purpose in life varies, depending on who I’m relating to at any particular moment. I have diff erent purposes in my life as I relate to work, family, faith, and friends. Fortunately, NCSEA’s purpose isn’t as complicated as pondering the meaning of life. Our focus is singular. We exist for the benefi t of our Member Organizations. Last October, NCSEA updated our Mission Statement to better refl ect our purpose. NCSEA advances the practice of structural engineering by representing and strengthening its Member Organizations. Are we fulfi lling our purpose? I think so. Here are a few examples.

Representing

1) Th e Code Advisory Committee represents MOs at

ICC code hearings. 2) Th e Structural Licensure Committee represents MOs in states that don’t yet have SE licensure. 3) Th e Advocacy Committee represents MOs to the media, general public, students, and educators. 4) Th e Basic Education Committee represents MOs to universities regarding their structural engineering curriculum. 5) Th e SEER Committee represents MOs on matters related to emergency response. 6) STRUCTURE magazine represents MOs as practicing structural engineers.

Strengthening

1) Th e Young Member Group Support Committee strengthens our organizations by encouraging the next generation of structural engineers. 2) Th e Grant Program strengthens MOs by fi nancially supporting their programs. 3) Th e Summit strengthens MOs by encouraging delegate collaboration. 4) NCSEA Publications strengthen MOs by providing technical guidance. 5) Th e Continuing Education Committee strengthens

MOs through webinars and the SE Review Course. 6) Th e Delegate model strengthens MOs by sharing knowledge and experiences with other MOs and with NCSEA. Does this mean our job is done? No. Th ere’s always room for improvement. So what are we going to do in the next year? Here are a few of our plans.

A. Assess and revise NCSEA’s organizational structure to better serve our new Mission Statement.

B. Improve the eff ectiveness and engagement of

NCSEA delegates.

C. Streamline and improve communications between

NCSEA and its MOs.

D. Create a fi nancially secure future for NCSEA. In all of our activities, we need to focus on communication. As in our businesses, work that is not reported is the same as work that is not done. Engineers may develop a complex computer analysis model to design a structure. But, if they don’t communicate that information on drawings, then it’s as if they never did the analysis. Th e same goes for NCSEA. If a committee prepares a wonderful resource, but no one ever knows about it, all of that eff ort goes to waste. NCSEA plans to form a new committee in the next few months – the NCSEA Communications Committee. Our charge for this committee will be to ensure that all of NCSEA’s work is communicated to its intended audience. Th e committee will fi rst gather information from other NCSEA Committees, NCSEA staff , and MOs. Subsequently, the committee will distribute that information using the most eff ective means: website, email, phone, snail mail, etc. Another important task of the Communications Committee will be to establish a means for MOs to share ideas, successes, and challenges. It is likely that this resource will take the form of an internet forum or message board. Users will be able to post experiences related to topics such as membership engagement, quality content/speakers for meetings, maintaining active committees, developing a steady revenue and dues structure, attracting new membership, and leadership development. Th is new resource will help MOs learn from each other and avoid re-inventing the wheel. Finally, using information gathered from the forum, NCSEA will develop How-To Guides for common topics. We’ve already completed guides on starting a young members group, starting a student chapter, and starting a high school outreach program. In the future, we are likely to look at developing guides on topics such as building a website, publishing a newsletter, organizing continuing education seminars, getting sponsors/vendors, and starting an awards program. In 2015-2016, we’ll be doing our best to advance the practice of structural engineering by representing and strengthening our Member Organizations. If you have ideas of how we can represent and strengthen your MO, please feel free to contact me directly – brian@soundstructures.net. NCSEA exists for the benefi t of our MOs. We’re here to help. Just tell us where it hurts. Brian Dekker President, NCSEA Board of Directors

NCSEA Webinars

November 10, 2015 Designing for Wind Loads Using the Directional Procedure in ASCE 7 T. Eric Staff ord, P.E., Eric Staff ord & Associates November 17, 2015 Calculating Wind Loads for Components and Cladding T. Eric Staff ord, P.E., Eric Staff ord & Associates December 1, 2015 2015 International Building Code – Signifi cant Structural Changes Sandra Hyde, P.E., Senior Staff Engineer, International Code Council, Product Development Group

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS NCSEA CONTINUING EDUCATION

Diamond Reviewed More detailed information on the webinars and a registration link can be found at www.ncsea.com. Subscriptions are available! 1.5 hours of continuing education. Approved for CE credit in all 50 states through the NCSEA Diamond Review Program. www.ncsea.com.

Incoming President Brian Dekker; Outgoing President Barry Arnold and wife Debbie

Ashraf Habibullah and Computers & Structures Inc. (CSI) sponsored Thursday’s festive event

Young Member Summit Scholarship Recipients Young Engineer Attendees

NCSEA Delegate Collaboration Session

Mark your Calendars! 2016 Structural Engineering Summit: September 14 – 16, Disney’s Contemporary Resort, Orlando

Thank You to the Structural Engineering Summit Sponsors:

Platinum

Gold

Silver

Bronze

Copper

NCSEA News

T R U C TURAL S

ASSOC I A T I O N S NATIONAL COUNCI L

The Newsletter of the Structural Engineering Institute of ASCE Structural Columns

Monday, February 15, 2016

Track

Soil – STrucTure inTeracTion

earThreTaining STrucTureS FoundaTionS/ rain loadS codeS & BuildingS

BuSineSS & ProFeSSional

PracTice 1 emerging ToPicS

caSe riSk managemenT convocaTion

10:00 AM – 11:30 AM

International Geotechnical Panel Discussion Design, Construction & Performance of Deep Excavations Bridge Scour & Erosion: The Way Forward ASCE/SEI 41: What’s Coming in the 2017 Edition? Structural Engineering Licensure as it Relates to Geotechnical Engineering Innovative Systems for Seismic Resistance Soil/Structure Interaction: Dialogue Between Engineers to Create Good Soil Reports

1:00 PM – 2:30 PM

Soil-Structure Interaction for Energy GeoStructures Design, Construction & Performance of Retaining Walls What Structural Engineers Need to know about Rain Loads Seismic Evaluation of Cold-Formed Steel-Framed Structures The Risk of Professional Practice Structural Wall Research: Recent Research & International Collaboration Characteristics of Higher Performing Design Firms

3:00 PM – 4:30 PM

Advancements in Micropile Foundation Technology: Design, Analysis, & Construction The Future of Earth Retention: Construction, Design, & Practice Dynamic Behavior ASCE/SEI 7-16 Seismic: Learn From The Experts Geotechnical & Structural Engineering: From Project Conception through Construction Reliability-Based Design Tackling Today’s Business Practice Challenges: A Structural Engineering Roundtable

Tuesday, February 16, 2016

Track

Soil – STrucTure inTeracTion

earThreTaining STrucTureS FoundaTionS codeS & BuildingS

BuSineSS & ProFeSSional

PracTice 1 emerging ToPicS develoPmenTS in earThquake engineering

10:00 AM – 11:30 AM

1:00 PM – 2:30 PM

Interaction of Geotechnical & Structural Engineers for the Design of Tunnels & Underground Structures Case Histories & Design Methods for Braced Excavations Geo-Structural Solutions in Railroad Applications Update on 2016 AISC Standards Debate: Who is Better Qualified to Design GeosyntheticReinforced Walls: Structural Engineers, Geotechnical Engineers, or Both? Novel Methods of Educating Geotechnical & Structural Enginers Panel Discussion: Implementing NRC Recommendations Related to the Assessment of Earthquake-Induced Soil Liquefaction

Tunnels & Underground Space Analysis & Performance of MechanicallyStabilized Earth Walls Shallow Foundations & Rafts Seismic Performance of Tall Buildings The Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA) Presents: Risk Management Case Studies from GBA Leaders Life-Cycle Cost Design & Assessment in Structural & Geotechnical Engineering Post-Earthquake Reconnaissance Findings From the M7.8 Gorkha Earthquake

3:00 PM – 4:30 PM

Instrumentation & Monitoring for Tunnels & Underground Construction Internal Stability Design & Analysis of MSE Walls: Influence of Facing Elements Case Studies on HydroCompressive (Collapsible) Soils in Western Colorado Seismic Resiliency & Innovation of Structures A Real Claim Presentation 2016 Managing Risk in Geotechnical & Structural Analysis & Design Updated Earthquake Ground-Motion Maps for ASCE/SEI 7-16 & Beyond

Wednesday, February 17, 2016

Track

Soil – STrucTure inTeracTion TeSTing & modeling FoundaTionS STrucTural healTh moniToring oF geoTechnical

SySTemS geohazardS emerging ToPicS SuSTainaBiliTy & reSilience

8:00 AM – 9:30 AM

Foundations: Case Studies & Applications Structural Research Better Drilled-Shaft Design Through Better Data Case Studies: Large-Scale Sensing & Monitoring Projects for Structural & Geotechnical Systems Hydraulic Fracturing & Geoenvironmental Issues Closing The Gap: Probabilistic Methods for Decision Support Across Complex Structural & Infrastructure Systems Lifecycle Analysis & Carbon Calculation: Part 1

10:00 AM – 11:30 AM

Simulation Methods for Performance Evaluation of Soil-FoundationStructural Envelope Computational Modeling Design & Construction of Pile Foundations Monitoring & Health Assessment of Geotechnical Systems PerformanceBased Liquefaction Assessment & Mitigation Sustainability Rating Life-Cycle Analysis & Carbon Calculation: Part 2

Register early and save. For more information including registration and housing, visit our website at www.geo-structures.org.

PavemenTS/ Wind iSSueS BridgeS

SeiSmic- & geo-hazardS SuSTainaBiliTy/ reSilience lighTning round nonBuilding STrucTureS, nonSTrucTural comPonenTS & Their FoundaTionS SiTe characTerizaTion

ground imProvemenT

Modeling & Testing Stability and Loading of Long Span Bridges under Wind Action Stability & Stabilization of Slopes, Dams, & Embankments: Part 1

PerformanceBased Wind Engineering Bridge Analysis Site Factors: Code Issues

Subgrades & Unbound Layers Structural Analysis of Bridge Substructure Components Stability & Stabilization of Slopes, Dams & Embankments: Part 2 Disaster Resilience – Indispensable for Sustainable Design Risk Analysis & Reliability Topics Wind Loads on Solar Panels Seismic Site Characterization Soil Improvement for New Seismic Code Requirements

Alternative Approaches to Multi-Hazard Analysis & Design of Structures

SEI Climate- Action Initiative Corrosion Topics

Geotechnical Topics Analysis of Nonbuilding Structures Vibrations: Serviceability Condition Assessment of Structural Systems Under Service Loads

Modular Construction Practices for Industrial, Infrastructure, & Power Facilities Advancements in Field and Laboratory Characterization of Coastal Deposits Ground Improvement for Structures

unSaTuraTed SoilS lighTning round 2

SeiSmic- & geo-hazardS SuSTainaBiliTy/ reSilience lighTning round nonBuilding STrucTureS, nonSTrucTural comPonenTS & Their FoundaTionS SiTe characTerizaTion

ground imProvemenT

Foundations & Slope-Stability for Collapsible & Expansive Soils Structure Modeling, Investigation, and Evaluation Liquefaction Testing & Modeling ASCE/SEI 7-16 Tsunami: The New Resiliency Approach & Design Provisions Grouting & Structures Structural Topics Wind Energy Structures & Their Foundations Dynamic Properties & Behavior of Soils Ground Improvement: Testing, Modeling & Evaluation

Impact of Desiccation Cracks on the Behavior& Performance of Geo-Structures

Soil-Structure Interaction in Unsaturated Soils Seismic Analysis of Bridge Components Liquefaction: Case Histories Experimental & Analytical Investigation of Robustness of Structures

Innovations in Building Systems and Materials Liquefaction Effects on Structures Strategies for Enhancing Structural Robustness Resiliency & Sustainability Foundations for Specialized Structures

Advance in PerformanceBased Design Seismic Design of Large Buried Reservoirs Advanced SiteCharacterization Techniques

In-Situ Testing & Soil Properties Grouting & Structures: Advances in Grouting Materials & Testing Soil Improvement Methods – Research & Practice: Part 1

PavemenTS BridgeS

SeiSmic- & geo-hazardS BlaST & imPacT lighTning round nonBuilding STrucTureS, nonSTrucTural comPonenTS & Their FoundaTionS SiTe characTerizaTion

ground imProvemenT

Pavement Foundation Systems: Part 1 Bridge Scour: A Hydraulic, Geotechnical, & Structural Problem

Pavement Foundation Systems: Part 2 Structural Design of Deep Foundations The Effect of Lanslides, Avalanches & Debris Flows on Structures

Potential Effects of Surface Fault Rupture on Infrastructure Advances in BlastResistant Structures & Design: Part 1

Advances in Blast-Resistant Structures & Design: Part 2 Tunnels & Underground Spaces Energy GEO-Structures Topics & Materials

Extreme Loads Innovations in Structural & Geotechnical Engineering for Tunnels & Underground Structures Computer Modeling in Geomechanics Grouting & Structures: Case Studies

Small-Scale Testing Methods in Geotechnical Engineering Soil-Improvement Methods – Research & Practice: Part 2

View the interactive Technical Program, including all presenters and abstracts at www.geo-structures.org.

CASE in Point

CASE 962-E Self-Study Guide for the Performance of Site Visits during Construction This guide is intended for the younger engineer but will be useful for engineers of all experience levels. Structural engineers know that site visits are crucial construction phase services that help clarify and interpret the design for the contractor. Site visits are also opportunities to identify construction errors, defects and design oversights that might otherwise go undetected. Engineers should include adequate construction phase services as a part of their scope of services to insure the design intent is properly implemented. CASE 962-F A Guideline Addressing the Bidding and Construction Administration Phases for the Structural Engineer This document has been developed to assist all the parties associated with the bidding and construction administration phases of a project with the primary emphasis on those issues associated with the structural engineer (SER). It is important that the design team remains proactive in communicating with the contractor and the owner after the construction documents have been issued. This communication during the construction phase, as well as during the pricing and bidding process, should have as its primary goal the assistance, interpretation and documentation for the improvement of the constructed project. This is a guide to the SER’s roles after the construction documents have been issued for construction. It provides guidance on pre-bid and pre-construction activities through the completion of the project. The appendices contain tools and forms to assist the SER in applying this guide to their practice. This guideline includes suggested approaches to the various components that can make up the bidding and construction administration phases. CASE 962-G Guidelines for Performing Project Specific Peer Reviews on Structural Projects Increasing complexity of structural design and code requirements, compressed schedules and financial pressures are among many factors that have prompted the greater frequency of peer review of structural engineering projects. The peer review of a project by a qualified third party is intended to result in an improved project with less risk to all parties involved, including the engineer, owner, and contractor. Many aspects of the peer review process are important to establish prior to the start of the review, in order to ensure that the desired outcome is achieved. These items include the specific goals, scope and effort, the required documentation, the qualifications and independence of the peer reviewer, the process for the resolution of differences, the schedule and the fee. The intention of these guidelines is to increase awareness of such issues, assist in establishing a framework for the review and improve the process for all interested parties. CASE 962-H National Practice Guideline on Project and Business Risk Management This guideline is intended to assist structural engineering companies in the management of risk associated with projects and to provide commentary regarding the management of risk associated with business practices. The guideline is organized in two sections that correspond with these two areas of risk, namely Project Risk Management and Business Practices Risk Management. The goal of the guideline is to educate and inform structural engineers about risk issues so that the risks they face in their practices can be effectively mitigated, thus making structural engineering firms more successful. You can purchase these and the other Risk Management Tools at

www.acec.org/coalitions/coalition-publications

WANTED

Engineers to Lead, Direct, and Get Involved with Case Committees!

If you’re looking for ways to expand and strengthen your business skillset, look no further than serving on one (or more!) CASE Committees. Join us to sharpen your leadership skills – promote your talent and expertise – to help guide CASE programs, services, and publications. We have a committee ready for your service: • Risk Management Toolkit Committee: Develops and maintains documents such as business practices manuals and policies for engineers under CASE’s Ten Foundations for Risk Management. Please submit the following information to htalbert@acec.org: • Letter of interest • Brief bio (no more than 2 paragraphs) Expectations and Requirements To apply, you should • be a current member of the Council of American

Structural Engineers (CASE) • be able to attend the groups’ two face-to-face meetings per year: August, February (hotel, travel partially reimbursed) • be available to engage with the working group via email and conference call • have some specific experience and/or expertise to contribute to the group Thank you for your interest in contributing to your professional association!

The CASE Risk Management Convocation will be held in conjunction with the joint Geo-Institute/Structures Congress at the Sheraton Phoenix Downtown and Phoenix Convention Center in Phoenix, AZ, February 14 – 16, 2016. For more information and updates go to www.geo-structures.org.

The following CASE Convocation sessions are scheduled to take place on Monday, February 15:

10:00 AM – 11:30 AM Soil/Structure Interaction: Dialogue between Engineers to Create Good Soil Reports

MODERATOR: Mr. Brent L. White, S.E., ARW Engineers PANEL SPEAKERS:

Structural Engineer Panelist: Michael Murphy, P.E., m2

Structural Geotechnical Panelist: William M. Camp, III,

P.E., D.GE., S&ME, Inc.

1:00 PM – 2:30 PM Characteristics of Higher Performing Design Firms

MODERATOR/SPEAKER: Mr. Timothy J. Corbett, SmartRisk

3:00 PM – 4:30 PM Tackling Today’s Business Practice Challenges – A Structural Engineering Roundtable

MODERATOR: David W. Mykins, P.E., Stroud Pence & Assoc.

Follow ACEC Coalitions on Twitter – @ACECCoalitions.

2016 Small Firm Council Winter Seminar

Next Stage Financials: Valuation and Exit Strategy Essentials for Small Firms February 12–13, 2016; Phoenix, AZ

Presented by Matt Fultz of Matheson Financial Advisors, this 1½ day seminar will allow attendees to learn and apply key financial metrics driving value in an engineering firm. The speaker will explore the impact a volatile economy has on financial management beyond revenue, profits, backlog, and staff size. Attendees will broaden their understanding of engineering firm valuation and its relationship to ownership transition. This seminar is for any employee within a small firm tasked with analyzing financial data, such as: owners, principals, CEOs and CFOs. ACEC’s Small Firm Council (SFC) was established to protect and promote the interests of the smaller engineering firms. Its winter meeting provides an exclusive forum for small firm principals to attend seminars, network with peers, address key issues affecting their firms, learn and share new ideas. Attendees provide valuable input that helps SFC direct the business and legislative agenda for the coming year. To learn more, visit www.acec.org/sfc.

Location

Embassy Suites Phoenix Biltmore

2630 East Camelback Road Phoenix, AZ 85016

Hotel Main # 602-955-3992 Online Reservations Special Rate–$219/night until January 13, 2016

To register for the seminar:

www.acec.org/calendar/calendar-seminar/ 2016-small-firm-council-winter-seminar

Questions? Call 202-682-4377 or email htalbert@acec.org.

Registration

Early-bird registration thru December 5th CASE Members – $424 ACEC Members – $674 Non-members – $924

Standard registration after December 5th CASE Members – $499 ACEC Members – $749 Non-members – $999

CASE Winter Planning Meeting – SAVE THE DATE

The 2016 CASE Winter Planning Meeting is scheduled for February 11-12 in Phoenix, AZ. If you are interested in attending the meeting, or have any suggested topics/ideas from a firm perspective for the committees to pursue, please contact Heather Talbert at htalbert@acec.org.