Building Information Modeling EEB HUB

Proposal for The Pennsylvania State University’s

EEBHUB BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING STUDIO - SPRING 2013 Magnum Vis Group Landscape Architecture Tom Kyd Architecture

Alicia Schneider Construction Management Eric Ripkin Structural Alex van Eeden Mechanical Kieran Carlisle Lighting/Electrical Reinhardt Swart

The Pennsylvania State University Department of Architecture Department of Landscape Architecture Department of Architectural Engineering

Contents BIM Execution Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Final Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 League Island Park . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Building 7R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Lighting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Energy Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Structural . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

i

BIM Execution Plan

BIM Execution Plan

Software Interaction

The software interaction diagram illustrates how each discipline using different software interacted with one another. The color coordination represents each discipline.

This BIM execution plan is used to guide our team through the design process in order to produce a complete integrated building product.

It is specifically used to create a workflow for our overall project that defines the scheduling, deliverable, and goals. The execution plan provides information for content, and provides details of the responsibilities of each teammate, allowing for a structured and organized work process.

2

Schneider IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Kyd

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

Ripkin

Carlisle

Swart

van Eeden 3

BIM Execution Plan

Landscape Architecture Model

Architecture Model

Project Vasari/ Site Analysis

Structural Model

Navisworks

Mechanical Model

BIM Model Work Flow

Lead and Lag Time

The model work flow shows the primary interaction of the disciplines in relation to one another.

Lead and lag time are shown in this diagram through he representation of color coordinated disciplines. The thinker the bar the more influence that specific discipline had over the rest.

Schneider 4

Kyd

Ripkin

Carlisle

Swart

van Eeden IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Schneider

Kyd

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

Ripkin

Carlisle

Swart

van Eeden 5

Final Design

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK Final Design The final design of building 7R and League Island Park is a holistic integration of all the disciplines that led to the best possible design solution.

This design through our collaborative effort incorporated all of our original goals that we agreed upon.

6

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

7

Final Design

“Improving building efficiency may not sound too sexy until you realize that our homes and businesses consume 40% of the energy we use.”

-President Barack Obama

Building 7R Program Educational Spaces:

General Classrooms (2)

Technology Classrooms (2)

Training Classroom

Training Rooms (2) Administrative Spaces:

Director Offices (3)

Administrative Support

Instructor Prep

Mission Statement

Equipment Display/Assembly

Equipment Gallery

Auditorium/Lecture Hall

Mechanical Spaces

Electrical Spaces Building Support

Storage

Rest rooms

Circulation

The energy efficient building along with the public park will serve as a demonstration tool for energy efficient technology that is affordable, innovative, and near market ready. Using energy efficient designs in a didactic manner will facilitate accelerated market adoption fostering high performance outcomes that lead to considerable return on investment, promote job growth, and set a new standard in the project planning process.

8

Energy Efficient Building Hub

Improving Building Efficiency

-Mission of improving energy efficiency in buildings, “re-energizing them for the future”

In the winter of 2012, President Obama visited Penn State’s main campus, speaking on energy efficiency and the impact on the economy. The quote highlights the President indirectly calling energy efficiency sexy, in an attempt to appeal to the public the importance of energy conservation and usage. The administration’s energy plan of reducing commercial energy bills by $40 billion equates to 20% of the country’s energy consumption. The EEB HUB at the Philadelphia Navy Yard acts as a cornerstone to accomplish this

-Goal is to reduce energy use in the U.S. commercial building sector by 20% by 2020 -Focus on designing, demonstrating, and deploying customized retrofits and constructions that are technically sound and financially feasible

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

goal, showcasing the building industry’s ability to conserve energy and prevent carbon emissions.

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

9

Final Design

Option 1: Sawtooth roof Cantilevered Auditorium Entrance Corridor Atrium Green roof system Summer Solstice 3pm

Winter Solstice 3 pm

Building 7R Final Design Concepts

There were three main concepts behind this design that were carried through from the very beginning of the design process. The first was to create the most sustainable design possible through the use of integrated systems, orientation, and passive methods. This concept drove the building’s form, orientation on site, and some of the features on the building envelope and interior.

Summer Solstice 5pm

10

The second was to create a connective architecture that would make a connection between Building 661 and the proposed research campus. Another

Winter Solstice 8am

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Option 2: Location on site Mechanical space displayed Mechanical dispersed Roof lines/Rainwater retention Comparable classrooms Sheltered main entrance Buffer atrium space Green roof system

Option 3: Large, south, glass facade Views from inside to park Change in roof levels

aspect of this would be creating an architecture that compliments the rich history of the Navy Yard, all the while applying new technologies and innovative ideas.

The third design concept was to create an environment that would teach visitors upon entering the building and landscape. This was achieved through transparency, exposed building systems, and interactive areas where people can alter their environment and watch energy consumptions.

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

11

Final Design

KEY Site Pedestrian Route Office Building Residential Building Research Building Greenway Street Collector Street Secondary Street Open Space

3D massing model

Context Map

12

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

13

Final Design

Building 7R From League Island Park

14

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

15

Final Design

View from to 7R

16

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

17

Final Design

Constitution Entrance

Gallery

Mechanical/Auditorium

Entrance

Event Space/ Stormwater Island

Path

Meadow

Passive Lawn

Wetland Mound

Sidewalk Kitty Hawk

League Island Park Site Section

The building’s geometry works in a collective way through the landscape in order to draw connections between League Island Park and building 7R.

18

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

19

Final Design

Master Plan

Program Plan

Shaded Space

Plaza Event Lawn Classroom Shaded Space

The programs found through the park were used to match 3 elements; a campus feel, educational, and sustainability. The shapes and sizes of the program spaces are based on circulation routes, which are derived by major pedestrian circulation. The circulation patterns found match that of our analysis for heavy pedestrian traffic from the North-West corner to the mid-campus crossing.

Paths also directly lead to and from building 661.

Having the building on the north corner of the site allows for a stronger visual connection between the building and park. The shaded spaces and passive lawn space allow for a variety of activities for different experiences. The event lawn provides a space throughout the year to host events while also providing a permeable hardscape for seating and equipment. The service area contains the transformer and emergency generator, while also providing a space for exhibition of trailer trucks.

The master plan shows the breakup of the vegetation, spaces, and circulation. You can specifically see that there are mid-street crossings connecting to building 661 and to the research campus. The major crossing from the northwestern corner to the research campus is lined with brick in order to denote its hierarchy.

Open Space Shaded Space

661

Passive Lawn

Wetland

20

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

21

Final Design

Outdoor Plaza Daytime

Outdoor Plaza Nighttime

The outdoor plaza features an environment for visitors to relax, sit, and eat. Six Saucer magnolias are located in the space providing a 4 season beautification of the space, while also providing small shading for the buildings southern facade during the summer. The plaza allows for a unique connection between the building and the park by providing easy access and function.

22

Nighttime rendering shows up lighting for trees, as well as lighting from 7R.

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

23

Final Design

Structural Soil Cells

Raingarden View to Building

These cells can hold up to 92% of soil while structural soils hold around 20%. The cells allow for root systems to grow larger, are sometimes cheaper than structural soils, and also help qualify for LEED accreditation.

24

The classroom faces 7R with an open view to the mechanical room allowing for a visual connection between the park and the building.

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

25

Final Design

Rain Garden

Teaching Platform

Passive Lawn

Grass Seating

Classroom Section

Upland

Irrigation

Landscape mound

Wetland Mound section

The outdoor class room uses a terraced seating design that can hold up to 40 people. This classroom is strategically placed to create a didactic landscape for a variety of learning constructs. It is surrounded by vegetation to create a barrier for noise and movement.

26

Wetland

The Delaware River along Philadelphia shorelines is a tidal wetland area. These unique wetlands provide a variety of diverse vegetation as well as an important stopping point for the Atlantic flyway for avian migration. Currently there is only 200 acres of tidal marshlands versus during the colonization of Philadelphia there was 10 square miles. The wetland mound representation is used to mimic these tidal wetlands while also providing an important educational value and physical barrier along Kitty Hawk.

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

27

Final Design

Stormwater Islands

This section shows the movement of the stormwater islands as they move from the south part of the site to the north. The infiltration islands are connected allowing for a redundant and resilient system that treats stormwater on site.

Using the existing grade in conjunction to these infiltration islands minimizes earthwork needs.

Island 1

28

Island 2

Island 3

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Main Paths

Island 4

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

29

Final Design Aa 3

Aa Aa Aa 3 3 3

As

Kl Aa 1 3

Kl Aa 1 3

Tc 9

Sa 5

Qty. Canopy

Gt 23

Ea 9

Qr

As

Ms 6

Ad 3

Fa As Fa

Mp 1

Kl 8

Cf 2

Ad 2

Rc 5

NS 3

NS 3

Bp 3

Fa As

Ad Fa 5

Kl 2 Cf 3

Qr

Fa

As

Ad 3

As

Rp

As

Rp

Ad 1

Rp

Rp

Fa Fa

Fa

Qr

Cf 3

Planting Plan

Rp Ea 3

Qa 13

30

Ad Ds 3 3

As

Ea 5

Fa

Ad 3

As

Fa

Ds 6

As

Fa

Ea 5

Ds 3

Pa 6

Fa Fa

The planting pallet chosen was based off the recommendation from the master plan, all year round appeal, native species, and functionality.

The main paths that run through the site are lined with Sugar Maples and Black Locusts.

As

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Abr. Botanical Name

3 Qr 5 Rp 11 Fa 23 Gt 11 As 6 Ns 6 Ms 3 Bp 5 Pa 13 Qa 9 Tc Understory Tree 9 Cf 1 Mp 16 Ad Shrub 10 Kl 12 Aa 5 Rc 6 Sa 16 Ea 11 Ds Grasses Sn

Common Name

Size/Cont.

Condition

Quercas rubra Robinia pseudoacacia Fraxinus americana Gleditsia triacanthos Acer saccharum Nyssa sylvatica Magnolia × soulangeana Betula papyrifera Platanus × acerifolia Quercus acutissima Ulmus 'Morton'

Red Oak Black Locust White ash Honey Locust Sugar Maple Black Tupelo Saucer Magnolia Paper Birch London Plane tree Sawtooth Oak Accolade Elm

6" Caliper 6" Caliper 6" Caliper 4" Caliper 4" Caliper 4" Caliper 4" Caliper 3" Caliper 3" Caliper 3" Caliper 3" Caliper

WB WB WB WB WB WB WB WB WB WB WB

Cornus florida Malus 'Prairiefire' Amelanchier 'Downy'

Flowering dogwood Prariefire Crabapple Downy Serviceberry

12-15' Height 12-15' Height 8-10' Height

BB BB BB

Kalmia latifolia Aronia arbutifolia Rhododendron catawbiense Symphoricarpos albus Euonymus alatus Diervilla sessilifolia

Mountain laurel Red Chokeberry Catawba Rhododendron Common Snowberry Burning Bush Bush Honeysuckle

4 Gallon 4 Gallon 4 Gallon 3 Gallon 3 Gallon 3 Gallon

Pot Pot Pot Pot Pot Pot

Sorghastrum nutans 'Bluebird'

Bluebird Indian Grass

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

Seeded

31

Final Design Average Monthly Rainfall 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0

Inches

Average Rainfall in Philadelphia

Grading Plan

The buildings FFE is set at 8.50 requiring a fill to raise the building creating ramps that all have ADA accessibility. The cut and fill values are both around 2000 cubic yards of earth work, leaving an extra of 87 cubic yards of fill needed.

32

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Stormwater Context

The green color represents infiltration areas, while the gray represents impervious surfaces. The total volume of stormwater holding capacity is 18,563 cubic feet, while a 100 year storm that produces an average of 7.6 inches of rain within a 24 hour period creates a runoff volume of 4,545 cubic feet.

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

33

Final Design

Stormwater Roof to Raingarden

Building 7R Section Cut

The movement of water from the roof of the building flows to a conjunction point that feeds into a 2 story green wall inside of building 7R, from there it flows back out of the building into the patio space and rain garden through a water runnel. The green roof provides a variety of advantages such as acoustic controls, heat and cooling insulation, and stormwater management.

34

The movement of water from the roof of the building into a two-story green wall required a high degree of collaboration between multiple disciplines.

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

35

Final Design Mounting bracket

Green wall panel

Waterproof Membrane

Green wall frame

Irrigation drip line

1/4� Screw

Green Wall

Water Runnel

The Green wall is composed of several layers that allow plant material to thrive yearlong inside the building 7R. The composition of the green wall allows for a unique interior experience that connects the landscape with the built environment, while also providing stormwater management and educational value.

36

The water runnel connects from the green wall moving water from the interior of the building to the patio. The water runnel follows a unique path allowing for the geometry of the building to be expressed in the landscape while also providing a didactic element by giving the impression of water movement even when the runnel has no water in it.

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

37

Final Design

Bio-swale section

Bio-swale perspective

Green Roof

Bio-Swale

The movement of water from the eastern portion of the green roof will separate at two points, one leading down a artful rain water designed runnel to the north side of the building. The other water runnel leads through the event lawn area and connects to the stormwater island.

38

The movement of water from the eastern portion of the green roof will separate at two points, one leading down a artful rain water designed runnel to the north side of the building. The other water runnel leads through the event lawn area and connects to the stormwater island.

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

39

Final Design

Landscape Utilities Clash Detection

Geothermal Wells

The collaboration of our team allowed us to produce this clash detection. The Yellow lines represent electrical lines that feed to light poles placed 40ft apart providing 1 ft. candles of luminosity. The existing utilities Indicated in red show stormwater pipes that are to be abandoned.

The irrigation lines in blue connect to 6� pop-up spray heads and to tree root watering systems.

Finally the stormwater pips in purple connect the stormwater islands together while also providing raised drop inlets for overflows.

40

Upon modeling building 7R with Trane Trace 700, a cooling coil total capacity of 86.2 tons is achieved, paired with a heating coil total capacity of 58.6 tons, thus the cooling coil tonnage is used to size the components in the system. Given a rate of one ton of cooling for every 200 feet of pipe, 70 wells are incorporated into the design at a depth of 250’. Working with the landscape architect, Tom Kyd, the wells are placed in collaboration, close to the building to minimize piping and costs, but also integrated with the landscape to avoid any IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

conflicts with other underground pipes as well as the features of the landscape including collection ponds.

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

41

Final Design

Building Floor Plans

Level 1 Floor Plan

Building 7R Level 2 Floor Plan

42

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

The layout of this design can be divided into two different areas. The first being the more public, display and gathering areas on the western side of the building. This portion of the design has the mechanical pen, auditorium, and equipment gallery. The two main programmatic areas are divided by an entrance corridor that connects the Constitution Avenue entrance to the League Island Park entrance. To the east of this corridor is the educational portion of the design. The administrative areas, classrooms, and training

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

areas are located here. This portion of the design is also characterized by small mechanical spaces that are located between classrooms to create comparable environments, and allow for classes to interact with Building 7R. The educational portion of the design is also characterized by an atrium along the double skin faรงade allowing ample daylight, passive heating and cooling, natural ventilation, and views to League Island Park.

43

Final Design

Building 7R Program Analysis

Based off the design architecture firm Kieran Timberlake created for the site, this design is within 10% of the program given. Extra space was allotted to areas of the design we felt were crucial to the success of the building as a teaching tool. The auditorium, mechanical rooms, some classrooms, and the administrative spaces were some of the areas allowed to expand for the benefit of the users of the building. The net to gross square footage for this design are fairly close, leading to conclusions that the layout and form of the design is efficiently using the allowed area.

44

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

45

Final Design

Structural Diagram

Mechanical System

The mechanical system chosen for our design is based on energy efficiency, interdisciplinary collaboration, site conditions, sustainability, carbon emissions, and reflecting Magnum Vis’s goal of education through transparency and system function. Thus a geothermal loop provides heating and cooling to a series of ground source heat pumps paired with a dedicated outdoor air system for Building 7R. The ample amount of landscape and uninterrupted below grade earth from the creation of League Island Park allows 46

Structure and Mechanical Diagram

the required square footage for geothermal wells to be dug to provide 100% of the cooling and heating for the functions of the building. The series of ground source heat pumps throughout the building increase energy efficiency while providing a greater control of comfort and regulation. The dedicated outdoor air system works well with the ground source heat pumps to provide a large amount of fresh outdoor air into the spaces while minimizing the size of ducts needed to carry the air throughout the building. The dedicated outdoor

Integrated Design

Integrated Design

System integration was a crucial part of this design. All 6 disciplines worked closely together to generate the most sustainable, cost efficient building life, and appealing design. Due to the intricate structural and mechanical systems in this design the collaboration of the architect, mechanical engineer, and structural engineer was crucial. This design was a lesson in how every trade’s system is crucial to the finished design. The integration of lighting, landscape, and architecture was another main focus in the design.

air unit, located on the second floor, includes a heat recovery wheel, needed for both LEED certification, as well as maximizing the energy savings.

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

47

Final Design

View from Constitution Avenue Entrance

Constitution Avenue Entrance

The entrance to Building 7R from Constitution Avenue is characterized by a two story glass faรงade allowing views deep into the building and to the park beyond. The elevated entrance has a system of ramps and stairs that lead visitors into the building from the front of the research campus.

The entrance is also characterized by a set of monolithic stairs in front of the building that allow for a seating area along Constitution Avenue.

Constitution Ave Entrance

View to Park

48

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

49

Final Design

League Island Park Entrance

League Island Park Entrance

The League Island Park entrance is unique because as visitors approach Building 7R they walk under the cantilevered auditorium having a direct view into the mechanical pe. As visitors move into the building they are guided by the descending floor of the auditorium, and the green wall to their right , that extends from outside the building into the entrance corridor. Upon entering the building from either entrance the building systems are made visible as a way to inform the visitors of how they building functions and the systems involved.

Surface mounted T8 fixtures compliment the architectural forms and structural and mechanical systems. All the systems are exposed, including the lighting.

50

View from League Island Park Entrance

League Island Park Entrance

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

51

Final Design

Interior View Of The Equipment Gallery

Gallery From Constitution Avenue

Equipment Gallery

Auditorium and Mechanical Pen

The equipment gallery acts as a beacon and ico for Building 7R and the proposed research campus.

By locating the gallery on the corner of 12th street and Constitution Avenue, it allows for transparency into the research conducted by the EEB Hub, and activates the faรงade along Constitution Avenue.

This space would be used to display information, equipment, and new technologies being researched in the EEB Hub.

The auditorium was a major area of collaboration between all disciplines. This tiered auditorium would be used for lectures, presentations, and work sessions. With the mechanical pen below, the auditorium cantilevers out into the park creating a connection with the landscape to the south and an entrance piece for visitors approaching the building from the south.

Structurally this was a challenge, and it was also a decision in the design that drove the overall cost of the building up. As a team we decided that the

Equipment Gallery Looking To Entrance

52

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

benefits of having the cantilever outweighed the initial costs.

The suspended pendants are semi-direct T5 fixtures that effectively light the space to 40 fc on the table tops. Retractable track lights are used to highlight a lecturer as well as the front board when necessary. Digital controls are used to allow for dimming and multi-use lighting scenes. Careful placement of the fixtures were influenced greatly by the sloped ceiling and the structural design.

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

53

Final Design

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK Auditorium Mechanical Design

The design of the lecture hall poised some challenges as the tiered seating created a unique scenario to integrate the lighting, structural, and mechanical systems into one. The solution, from a mechanical stand point, is to provide conditioned air to the space from below, and return the air in the back of the auditorium above the seats. This solution minimized clashes with both the structure and lighting designs. The supply air, highlighted in blue, provided by a ground source heat pump, enters the space via a plenum below the first and 54

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

second row seats. One added concern involved the possible noise and vibration from the mechanical space below. In designing the system, the plenum creates an extra acoustically insulated wall to prevent sound transmission. In addition, the mechanical system below the auditorium is in no way mounted to the ceiling or directly connected the structure of the auditorium, eliminating the possibility of noise transmission from vibrations.

The return air, highlighted in red, returns the air via the auditorium corridor to the heat pump, where

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

it is mixed with preconditioned outside air. The components highlighted in green represent the hydronic system, notably the recycled rainwater tank to be used for non-potable water usages throughout the building, including toilet water.

55

Final Design

Pre Clash Detection

Navisworks Model

Daylighting Of The Auditorium

Auditorium During Evening Classes

Auditorium

The lighting had to be coordinated closely with the structural system to ensure there was the proper amount of luminance all the while avoiding clashes with the beams in the space. The beams were larger in this space to account for the weight of the cantilever. There are two different light settings for the auditorium based on its purpose at the time.

The first is low dimmed lighting with emergency lights located along the floor, and the second is using daylight and electrical lighting for a well-lit work session.

56

Administrative Area

The administrative area was an area where as a team we had to work together to coordinate all systems. These images show how after clash detection these problems were resolved. Without the BIM/IPD process, these clashes would not have been detected until construction was in progress.

The administrative area has the directors’ offices, open work stations, a receptionist desk, and a kitchenette area.

Presentation In Auditorium

Administrative Area Post Clash Detection

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

57

Final Design

Double Skin Facade

In order to maximize day lighting into the spaces, while balancing and controlling the solar heat loss/gain through the envelope, we collaborated in creating a two level double skin façade along the southern face of the classroom corridors. The dynamic features of the double skin façade allow for added control of the day lighting and heat gain into the spaces. The exterior glazing is composed of a hardened single layer of glass, fully glazed. The interior glazing is composed of a double pane glazed glass, featuring a low E coating, and solar control glazing. The cavity separating the two, with a 2’8” air gap is naturally ventilated, with air entering the space from below, and exhausted at the top, ventilated both from and to the outside by buoyancy stack effects during the summer months and periods of solar irradiation. Solar heat gains are reduced as the warm is vented to the outside. Automatically controlled solar shading devices integrated into the air cavity control the amount of daylight allowed into the space, limiting glare, while double acting as absorption elements for the solar radiation. The temperature difference between the outside air and the heated air in the cavity must be significant for this natural ventilation to occur. During winter and periods without solar radiation, the extra skin provides additional thermal insulation for the envelope. The overall U-value of the space equates to 0.188 Btu/hr-ft2-F which corresponds with an R value of 5.319 hr-ft2-F/ Btu. These values parallel double skin facades featured throughout the United States and Europe, where previous studies have been performed.

Buffer Zone

Classrooms

The circulation zone between the double skin façade and the classrooms acts as a buffer zone in the building. This zone can be flooded with light which is then borrowed by the classrooms to the north through a frosted glass wall. The buffer zone was an area of intense collaboration as the beams were being sized the mechanical and lighting system had to react and move. This space looks to compliment the Navy Yard’s history with the materials used, and open lofty feel.

The classrooms are located on the north which allows for natural, even diffused lighting to come in through the windows and clearstory. As mentioned before there would also be borrowed light coming through the frosted glass walls to the south. The mechanical, lighting, and structure all being exposed required close collaboration to maximize the classrooms ability to teach the users of the building.

Out double skin façade also features operable windows on the interior face of the façade, allowing for occupant control and comfort, without compromising the internal acoustical environment. The application of a second exterior skin enhances the sound insulation performance significantly, achieved through the use of heavier glass and a deep cavity. Given the location of Building 7R is prone to air traffic noise pollution, the acoustical performance of the envelope is key in providing occupant comfort. The double skin façade also features energy savings through the use of shading devices and precooling cycles, reduced environmental impacts during the operational life of the façade, and greater protecting of the shading devices that would otherwise be directly exposed to the elements.

Double Skin Facade Diagram

58

Transverse Section

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

59

Final Design

Exterior View of Double Skin Facade

Level 1 Southern Atrium - Louvers Closed

Level 1 Southern Atrium - Louvers Open

Level 1 Southern Atrium

Southern Atrium

Level 2 Southern Atrium - Winter

60

The Southern atrium changes with the time of day and season. In winter without the shades closed the light is able to reach deep into the building, but with the shades that lighting is controlled and glare is reduced in the building. In the summer little to no light is able to reach into the space, therefore reducing the cooling load in the building. At night the faรงade allows complete transparency into the design, and illuminates from within the park.

Linear fluorescent and high-bay fixtures effectively light the space.

Level 2 Southern Atrium - Summer

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

61

Final Design NORTH

NORTH

NORTH

NORTH

June 21 at 11:30 AM

December 20 at :30 AM

Useful Daylight Autonomy below 100 lux

Useful Daylight Autonomy between 100 and 2000 lux

NORTH

NORTH

October 20 at 4:30 PM

Useful Daylight Autonomy above 2000 lux

Lighting

Daylighting + Double Skin Facade

The public corridor behind the southern facade is a dynamic and dramatic space. The abundant amount of daylight creates interesting visual appeal and provides the opportunity for abundant energy savings. The space is sufficiently lit with daylight alone for most the year. Solar glare is limited however, using stacked louvers as well as three foot overhangs on the facade. The corridor acts as the second “buffer zone� before the sunlight enters the classroom spaces through the frosted glass walls. High profile angle summer 62

sun is controlled with shading devices. Operable louvers within the first buffer zone (the double skin facade) tilt according to local sun conditions.

If desirable, these louvers can block most of the direct daylight that enters the space. When open, these louvers effectively diffusely reflect daylight into the two-story atrium. The daylight creates an inviting space within the building and draws people down the corridor, demonstrating the effective use of daylight as both a heating and lighting resource. The goals of the architecture

and program are emphasized in this space.

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Daylighting + Double Skin Facade

As a result of the daylighting design, the public space is insufficiently lit by daylight only for about 20% of the year (useful daylight autonomy less than 100 lux). The same space is sufficiently and comfortably lit by daylight for approximately 70% of the year (useful daylight autonomy between 100 and 2000 lux). The space is over lit by daylight, which is mitigated by the use of louvers and overhangs, for approximately 10% of the year (useful daylight autonomy greater than 2000 lux).

These statistics reinforce the efficiency of the space; it justifies the notion of moving the building to the north on the site to increase daylight use.

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

63

Final Design

Longitudinal Section

Longitudinal Section

This section shows the division of the public spaces to the educational portion of the building. It also shows the transparency of the classrooms, and the length and narrowness of the design. This is to maximize the daylighting in the design, and the natural ventilation that can be achieved by using the double skin faรงade and northern windows.

64

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

65

Final Design

Longitudinal Section

Training Classroom

Technology Classroom

Classrooms

The classrooms are designed to be a teaching tool in sustainability even if there are no classes at the time. The use of daylighting paired with electrical lighting, sustainable mechanical systems, and exposed structural systems is a way for visitors to experience the architecture while learning about how the building was designed. The classrooms have large windows that look to draw memories of the historic buildings that are located around the Navy yard.

The brick finishes on the interior of the building also look to compliment the history of the navy yard, all the while having the newest technologies working on the interior.

Classroom

66

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Classroom Mechanical Spaces

Helping to make the user’s experience even more interactive with Building 7R, there are small mechanical rooms located between the classrooms that have a glass wall facing the circulation zone along the southern façade. These spaces allow classes to alter settings of the building and watch the energy usages increase or decrease, and after a period of time the systems will reset to a default setting. These rooms paired with the operability of the double skin façade create a unique experience where users of the building can control and change their environment.

Classroom Mechanical Space

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

67

Final Design NORTH

NORTH

June 2 at 10:50 AM

Daylighting Classrooms

The unique architecture and implementation of a double-skin facade allows for interesting daylight application. Every classroom, training room, and techroom along the southern corridor has an EcoGlass Frosted glass wall to the south.

The frosted glass wall creates a dynamic lighting solution; southern sun is controlled with the two buffer zones of the double-skin facade, fins, and overhangs. Daylight that does manage to directly penetrate the corridor and strike the frosted glass will be diffusely transmitted into the classrooms.

68

NORTH

June 20 at 12:30 PM

The frosted glass wall thus effectively controls solar glare but still allows for ample comfortable daylighting. Large northern windows in these spaces allow for additional diffuse daylighting throughout the year. Seen in these Daysim images, high illuminance levels from daylight exist in both the winter and the summer. Diffuse daylight from both the north and south allows for more uniform light levels while adding visual appeal and space definition to the interior design of Building 7R.

NORTH

NORTH

December 20 at 11:30 AM

Photosensors will be used with multi-zone dimming controls in these spaces to allow for ultimate user flexibility and effective energy savings.

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Useful Daylight Autonomy below 100 lux

Daylighting Classrooms

As seen here, the Useful Daylight Autonomy (UDI) at 100 lux and below is small, around 30%.

Accordingly, daylighting will be inefficient* in the space 30% of the time for a whole year. The UDI is approximately 70% for light levels between 100 and 2000 lux, corresponding to beneficial and energy efficient daylighting. UDI over 2000 lux is minimized and occurs rarely in the space. Seen to the right, the Daylight Autonomy at 200 lux occurs for 33% of the year. This demonstrates the clear potential for lighting controls and energy efficient

NORTH

Useful Daylight Autonomy between 100 and 2000 lux

Useful Daylight Autonomy above 2000 lux

lighting design as a result of the comfortable daylight.

*[Ref. IES Handbook]

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

69

Final Design

Navisworks Clash Detection

Level 2 Lounge Space

Upper Corridor

Systems Integration

The lounge on the second floor is an inviting space that has visibility along Constitution Avenue and also to the first floor entrance below. The upper corridor moves people from the elevator to the corridor along the southern faรงade through a skylight and atrium space that allow for transparency through the entire design. The vertical lighting scheme also helps to draw people along this corridor to the auditorium and southern corridor while accentuating the structural design.

The upper corridor was a major area of clashes for our team. The main duct runs come out of the Dedicated Outdoor Air System room, and had to be adjusted and coordinated with the structural system as both systems went through analysis and were sized. Without the BIM/IPD process, many of the clashes that were detected early in the design process would not have been caught. Through building models, and clash detection we were able to coordinate all systems to create a more sustainable, efficient, and comprehensive design.

Upper Corridor

70

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Lighting/Mechanical/Structural Integration

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

71

Final Design

Lighting Power Densities (W/SF): *White designates recommended value *Green designates as designed value

IES Recommendations (maintained avg. horz. lux): *White designates recommended value *Green designates as designed value

Training Room/Tech Classroom | 1.24 | 0.95

Training Room/Tech Classroom | 500 | 523, 460 (clerestory)

Director Office/Administration | 1.11 | 0.80

Director Office/Administration | 300 | 421

Gallery | 1.59 | 1.52

Gallery | 500 | 455

Lecture Hall | 0.79| 0.77

Lecture Hall | 50 (present), 400 | 410

Rest rooms | .98 | 0.55

Rest rooms | 50 | 62

Atrium | 1.02 | 0.82

Atrium | 50 | 54

Stairs | 0.69 | 0.49

Stairs | 100 | 95

TOTAL DESIGN WATTAGE: 13,537 Watts TOTAL ACTUAL WATTAGE: 11,188 Watts

Emergency | 50 lux* (edu, medium activity, medium refl, OPP)

25 kW Diesel Generator

27,000 SF 216000 (PF) 216 kW, 240 kVA 667 Amps-----> 800 A (building)

Building Automation System

In relation to the mechanical and lighting systems, the building will implement a Building Automation System (BAS) for further energy savings and owner flexibility. The lighting will be on a Digital Addressable Lighting Interface (DALI) system; this protocol will communicate to the mechanical control system, BACnet, through a gateway interface. Hereby, the system can be controlled by individual occupants of the space or one central computer monitoring system. Photosensors and occupancy sensors are used to increase energy 72

Path lighting | 5 lux at grade (walkways distant from roadway)

10 lux at grade (roadway walkway)

5 lux at 6’ AFG (walkways distant from roadway)

15 lux at 6’ AFG (roadway walkway) *107 lux 30” into any space (OPP standard) Fixture Schedule

Electrical Distribution System

savings in response to daylighting, vacancy, and load shedding demands.

An outside transformer will step down the 13.2 kV utility voltage to 480/277V. Underground service runs will service the main electrical room on the first floor where a switchgear houses all the main breakers. The 480V switchgear services various distribution panels located throughout the floor plan. 480V to 208V step-down transformers are matched with some distribution panels to allow service to receptacle and other 208/120V equipment. The lighting is on 277V to reduce voltage drop across longer wire runs.

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

A 25 kW diesel generator sits outside near the transformer. The generator will be used in case of emergency and will service the N/E (normalemergency panel) as well as additional Automatic Transfer Switches (ATS) that lead to stand-by loads. For the relatively small size of the building, separate lighting/receptacle panelboards, motor/ AHU panelboards (on 480V), several distribution panelboards, and a singular switchgear will efficiently service the normal loads.

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

73

Final Design

Top corridor (3’ overhang): 7’-6” penetration Tan(Ap) =O15’/(3’+9.5’) O Ap = 50.2 -----> any angle below 50.2 , overhang ineffective Bottom corridor (3’ overhang): 7’-6” penetration assuming no other shading devices Tan(Ap) = 34’/(3’ + 9.5’) O

O

Ap = 69.8 -----> any angle below 69.8 , overhang ineffective

Double-skin Facade Model for Daysim

Properties of operable fins in double-skin facade

Building Model for Daysim

Daysim Modeling

Daysim Modeling

Daysim was used for daylight calculations. The Revit model was first imported into AutoCAD and then simplified and modified. This model was then imported into Daysim where daylight and energy calculations were performed.

74

Preliminary calculations were done to determine the size and spacing of the overhangs.

Calculations were performed at winter and summer solstices using known profile angles and geometry. When modeling the operable louvers in the double-skin facade, the louvers were created as transparent materials that diffusely reflect sun into the space (seen on the left Excel spreadsheet).

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

75

Final Design LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations

Building 7R

Project Checklist

Sustainable Sites

18 Y

?

6 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

The Cooling Coil Peak Loads graph illustrates the components that resulted in a total capacity of 58.6 tons of cooling. The envelope loads make up the majority of the load, consuming almost two thirds of the components with 552,071 Btu/hr. People also consist of a large portion of the peak loads, with a total capacity of 389 occupants making up 19% of the peak loads with 174,953 Btu/hr. The total cooling coil peak load is 924,500 Btu/hr.

The Monthly Energy Costs illustrate the energy savings of Building 7R over its ASHRAE Standard 90.1 counterpart. The ASHRAE 90.1 model is shown in red, while Building 7R is shown in blue. Clearly, throughout the year, Building 7R out performs the ASHRAE Standard, a savings of $16,531.18 per year given current Philadelphia energy utility rates. The Energy Usage Intensity, a measure of building energy per square foot, equates to 35.54 kBtu/SF per year, a 40% advantage over the ASHRAE 90.1 baseline of 59.05. These values also compare to the actual design of Building 7R, warranting their validity. Another measure of energy efficiency, the square footage per ton turns out 321.23 for our design, a 6% betterment over the ASHRAE 90.1 baseline of 303.27.

76

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Credit 3

Credit 4.2

Credit 4.4 Credit 5.1 Credit 5.2 Credit 6.1 Credit 6.2 Credit 7.1 Credit 7.2 Credit 8

Construction Activity Pollution Prevention Site Selection Development Density and Community Connectivity Brownfield Redevelopment Alternative Transportation—Public Transportation Access Alternative Transportation—Bicycle Storage and Changing Rooms Alternative Transportation—Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles Alternative Transportation—Parking Capacity Site Development—Protect or Restore Habitat Site Development—Maximize Open Space Stormwater Design—Quantity Control Stormwater Design—Quality Control Heat Island Effect—Non-roof Heat Island Effect—Roof Light Pollution Reduction

Water Efficiency

Y 4 2 4

With the energy outputs of Trane Trace 700, a detailed breakdown of the energy usage for Building 7R as well as ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is established. Modeling both facets enables the comparison of the two, proving the energy efficiency of our design.

The Energy Source Consumption pie graph illustrates the energy usage of different components of the structure. Most notable is the auxiliary, which compiles the pumps and fans which operate the ground source heat pumps, geothermal system, as well as moving the conditioned air through the spaces. The auxiliary consumes 26% of the energy with 76,526 kWh. The total energy consumption is 235,268 kWh.

Credit 2

Credit 4.3

10

Energy Analysis

Credit 1

Credit 4.1

N

Energy Analysis

Y Prereq 1

N N N

Prereq 1 Credit 1 Credit 2 Credit 3

Energy and Atmosphere

Y Y Y 10 7 2 2 3

Prereq 1 Prereq 2 Prereq 3 Credit 1 Credit 2 Credit 3 Credit 4 Credit 5

Y

Prereq 1

N N

Credit 1.1 Credit 1.2 Credit 2 Credit 3

2 to 4 2 2 to 4

Possible Points: 35

Fundamental Commissioning of Building Energy Systems Minimum Energy Performance Fundamental Refrigerant Management Optimize Energy Performance On-Site Renewable Energy Enhanced Commissioning Enhanced Refrigerant Management Measurement and Verification Green Power

Materials and Resources

9

2 2

Credit 6

1 5 1 6 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Possible Points: 10

Water Use Reduction—20% Reduction Water Efficient Landscaping Innovative Wastewater Technologies Water Use Reduction

24

N

Materials and Resources, Continued

Possible Points: 26

N

Y

N Credit 4 Credit 5

N 1 15 Y Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Credit 6 Credit 7

1 to 19 1 to 7 2 2 3 2

1 to 3 1 1 to 2 1 to 2

Recycled Content Regional Materials Rapidly Renewable Materials Certified Wood

Prereq 1 Prereq 2 Credit 1 Credit 2 Credit 3.1 Credit 3.2 Credit 4.1 Credit 4.2 Credit 4.3 Credit 4.4 Credit 5 Credit 6.1 Credit 6.2 Credit 7.1 Credit 7.2 Credit 8.1 Credit 8.2

Initially, we modeled a schematic design of the building envelope in Autodesk Vasari to measure the effects of wind and solar heat gain on the exterior surfaces of the structure. Through this analysis, we determined the building should be placed on North-West corner of the space, not only for integration into the future urban layout of the Navy Yard, but also to maximize the effects of the solar gain on the south façade and blocking the winter wind from the other buildings surrounding the structure.

Possible Points: 15

Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control Outdoor Air Delivery Monitoring Increased Ventilation Construction IAQ Management Plan—During Construction Construction IAQ Management Plan—Before Occupancy Low-Emitting Materials—Adhesives and Sealants Low-Emitting Materials—Paints and Coatings Low-Emitting Materials—Flooring Systems Low-Emitting Materials—Composite Wood and Agrifiber Products Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source Control Controllability of Systems—Lighting Controllability of Systems—Thermal Comfort Thermal Comfort—Design Thermal Comfort—Verification Daylight and Views—Daylight Daylight and Views—Views

Innovation and Design Process Credit 1.2 Credit 1.3 Credit 1.4 Credit 1.5

Innovation in Design: Specific Innovation in Design: Specific Innovation in Design: Specific Innovation in Design: Specific Innovation in Design: Specific LEED Accredited Professional

1

Credit 2

4

Regional Priority Credits

1 1 1 1

Credit 1.1

81

Total

Credit 1.2 Credit 1.3 Credit 1.4

Regional Regional Regional Regional

Priority: Priority: Priority: Priority:

Certified 40 to 49 points

Modeling in Trane Trace 700

1 to 2 1 to 2 1 1

Indoor Environmental Quality

Credit 1.1

Possible Points: 14

Storage and Collection of Recyclables Building Reuse—Maintain Existing Walls, Floors, and Roof Building Reuse—Maintain 50% of Interior Non-Structural Elements Construction Waste Management Materials Reuse

?

2 2

Specific Specific Specific Specific

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Possible Points: 6 Title Title Title Title Title

LEED Analysis

Following USGBC’s guide for LEED rating under New Construction 2009, Building 7R achieves Platinum LEED Rating, consisting of a total of 81 points, broken down into 18 points from Sustainable Sites, 10 from Water Efficiency, 24 from Energy and Atmosphere, 9 from Materials and Resources, 15 from Indoor Environmental Quality, 4 Regional Priority Credits, and 1 Innovation and Design Process point. A large portion of the LEED credits come from Optimizing Energy Performance, with a 31% advantage over ASHRAE 90.1 established 10 LEED points. Additionally, On-Site Renewable Energy resulted in 7 LEED points, while the lighting and mechanical controls for the building added additional energy savings and credits.

1 1 1 1 1 1

Possible Points: 4 Credit Credit Credit Credit

1 1 1 1

Possible Points: 110 Silver 50 to 59 points

Gold 60 to 79 points

Platinum 80 to 110

After modeling Building 7R in Revit, using the envelop U and R-values, the design was modeled in Trane Trace 700, to calculate the energy loads and savings over ASHRAE Standard 90.1. Our design’s envelope featured U-Values offering added savings over the ASHRAE minimums. In addition, 53% of the envelope is glass, most notably the double skin façade along the southern classroom corridor, maximizing the amount of light penetrating into the spaces. While this amount of glass is sometimes considered excessive, especially in a

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

sustainable design, the double skin facades allows for additional control of the day lighting and heat gain into the space. Given Trane Trace 700’s limits in energy energy design and the dynamic nature of a double skin façade, modeling the double skin façade poised a challenge to the group. However through hand calculations, an R-value of 5.319 hr-ft2-F/Btu is achieved. Additional information regarding the outputs of Trane Trace can be found under Energy Analysis.

77

Final Design

LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations

Building 7R

Project Checklist 18

0

0

Y

?

N

Sustainable Sites

d

Credit 1

Site Selection

N

d

Credit 2

Development Density and Community Connectivity

5

Site previously undevelopment.

N

d

Credit 3

Brownfield Redevelopment

1

Not a Brownfiled Redevelopment site to our knowledge.

d

Credit 4.1

Alternative Transportation—Public Transportation Access

6

Planned subway station within 1/2 mile walking distance.

d

Credit 4.2

Alternative Transportation—Bicycle Storage and Changing Rooms

1

No changing rooms/showers available.

d

Credit 4.3

Alternative Transportation—Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles

3

Implement a vehicle sharing program for occupants.

1

Site previously undevelopment.

d

Credit 4.4

Alternative Transportation—Parking Capacity

2

No new parking provided, only street parking.

1

C

Credit 5.1

Site Development—Protect or Restore Habitat

1

No new parking provided, only street parking.

N 2

2

2

d

Credit 5.2

Site Development—Maximize Open Space

1

1

d

Credit 6.1

Stormwater Design—Quantity Control

1

Stormwater management plan enacted.

1

d

Credit 6.2

Stormwater Design—Quality Control

1

Stormwater infiltration through green roof.

1

C

Credit 7.1

Heat Island Effect—Non-roof

1

Shade provided for over50% of the site hardscape.

1

d

Credit 7.2

Heat Island Effect—Roof

1

Vegetated roof covers majority of the roof area.

1

Limit interior light transmitted to exterior between 11pm and 5 am. Also, exterior lighting for safety additionally limiting illuminance at property line.

1

Notes:

15

0

0

Y

?

N

d

10

0

0

Y

?

N

d

Prereq 1

Storage and Collection of Recyclables

Credit 1.1

Building Reuse—Maintain Existing Walls, Floors, and Roof

Credit 8

Light Pollution Reduction

Water Efficiency

Y

d

Prereq 1

Water Use Reduction—20% Reduction

4

d

Credit 1

Water Efficient Landscaping

2

1 to 3

Reuse 55%

1

Reuse 75%

2

Reuse 95%

3

Credit 1.2

Building Reuse—Maintain 50% of Interior Non-Structural Elements

1

No existing structure prior to construction.

C

Credit 2

Construction Waste Management

1 to 2

Developed construction waste management plan and

50% Recycled or Salvaged

1

recycable and/or salvage construction debris.

Y 75% Recycled or Salvaged

2

Materials Reuse

Credit 3

1 to 2

Reuse building materials and products to reduce demand

Reuse 5%

1

for virgin materials and reduct waste.

Reuse 10%

2

Recycled Content

Credit 4

1 to 2

Recycable wood used for the ceiling décor throughout

10% of Content

1

the spaces.

Y 20% of Content

2

C

Credit 5

Regional Materials

C

Credit 6

Rapidly Renewable Materials

10% of Materials Y 20% of Materials N

No existing structure prior to construction.

C

C

1

C

Given the placement of Philadelphia and the Navy Yard,

1

attaining 20% of the building as regional materials is

2

easily possible.

Commercial fixtures, fittings, and appliances.

Y No Potable Water Use or Irrigation

1

Indoor Environmental Quality

Notes:

Only used captured rainwater for nonpotable uses for

Y

d

Prereq 1

Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance

2

irrigation.

Y

d

Prereq 2

Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control

1

d

Credit 1

Outdoor Air Delivery Monitoring

1

CO2 monitoring throughout the building.

Outdoor air ventilation rate 30% above min. ASHRAE rate

4

Meet the minimum requirements of ASHRAE Standard 62.1 Smoking is prohibited in the building.

Credit 2

Innovative Wastewater Technologies

2

Captured rainwater - Living Green Wall

1

d

Credit 2

Increased Ventilation

1

4

d

Credit 3

Water Use Reduction

2 to 4

Water efficiency increased through employed strategies

1

C

Credit 3.1

Construction IAQ Management Plan—During Construction

1

Reduce by 30%

2

to use 40% less water than baseline calculations for

1

C

Credit 3.2

Construction IAQ Management Plan—Before Occupancy

1

IAQ management plan developed for preoccupancy phase

Reduce by 35%

3

the building.

Y Reduce by 40%

4

1

All adhesives and sealants in the interior of the building contain low-emitting air contaminants.

1

Paints and coatings do not exceed VOC content limit.

1

All flooring does not exceed VOC content limit.

?

Prereq 1

Fundamental Commissioning of Building Energy Systems

Y

d

Prereq 2

Minimum Energy Performance

Y

d

Prereq 3

Fundamental Refrigerant Management

10

d

Credit 1

Optimize Energy Performance

d

Credit 2

1 of 5

1

C

Credit 4.4

Low-Emitting Materials—Composite Wood and Agrifiber Products

1

All composite wood and agrifiber contain no added ureaformaldehyde resins.

1

d

Credit 5

Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source Control

1

Permanent entryway systems and sufficient exhaust.

1

d

Credit 6.1

Controllability of Systems—Lighting

1

Task lighting/individual controls and flexible controls in shared spaces.

1

d

Credit 6.2

Controllability of Systems—Thermal Comfort

1

Individual comfort controls for the building occupants meeting needs and comfort preferences.

31.1% better energy performance over ASHRAE 90.1.

Zero use of CFC-based refrigerants.

1 to 19 4

Improve by 20% for New Buildings or 16% for Existing Building Renovations

5

1

d

Credit 7.1

Thermal Comfort—Design

1

ASHRAE Standard 55 thermal comfort requirements met.

Improve by 22% for New Buildings or 18% for Existing Building Renovations

6

1

d

Credit 7.2

Thermal Comfort—Verification

1

Permanent monitoring to ensure thermal comfort.

Improve by 24% for New Buildings or 20% for Existing Building Renovations

7

d

Credit 8.1

Improve by 26% for New Buildings or 22% for Existing Building Renovations

8

1

Daylight and Views—Daylight

1

Through simulation, applicable spaces have daylight illuminance levels between 110 lux and 5400 lux.

Improve by 28% for New Buildings or 24% for Existing Building Renovations

9

1

More than 90% of regurarly occupied spaces have direct line of sight to outdoors via glazing.

1

d

Credit 8.2

Daylight and Views—Views

Y Improve by 30% for New Buildings or 26% for Existing Building Renovations

10

Using ASHRAE Standard 90.1 Zone 4 Baseline system and

Improve by 32% for New Buildings or 28% for Existing Building Renovations

11

values, achieved an energy efficient model, 31.1% better

Improve by 34% for New Buildings or 30% for Existing Building Renovations

12

than the baseline values.

Improve by 36% for New Buildings or 32% for Existing Building Renovations

13

Improve by 38% for New Buildings or 34% for Existing Building Renovations

14

d/C Credit 1.1

Innovation in Design: Specific Title

1

Improve by 40% for New Buildings or 36% for Existing Building Renovations

15

d/C Credit 1.2

Innovation in Design: Specific Title

1

Improve by 42% for New Buildings or 38% for Existing Building Renovations

16

d/C Credit 1.3

Innovation in Design: Specific Title

1

Improve by 44% for New Buildings or 40% for Existing Building Renovations

17

d/C Credit 1.4

Innovation in Design: Specific Title

1

Improve by 46% for New Buildings or 42% for Existing Building Renovations

18

d/C Credit 1.5

Innovation in Design: Specific Title

1

d/C Credit 2

LEED Accredited Professional

1

On-Site Renewable Energy

1 to 7

Geothermal system paired with ground source heat

1% Renewable Energy

1

pumps serves at the primary heating and cooling source

3% Renewable Energy

2

for the building.

5% Renewable Energy

3

7% Renewable Energy

4

9% Renewable Energy

5

11% Renewable Energy

6

Y 13% Renewable Energy

7 Enhanced comissioning authority individual and plan.

2

d

Credit 4

Enhanced Refrigerant Management

2

Refrigerants chosen that minimize/eliminate emissions that contribute to climate change.

Credit 5

Measurement and Verification

3

Credit 6

Green Power

2

LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations Project Checklist

0

?

N

Y

2

C

0

Y

Innovation and Design Process

Measurement and verification plan attainable through controls and monitoring devices.

?

Notes:

LEED Accredited Professional on proposed project team.

Possible Points: 4 Notes:

N

d/C Credit 1.1

Regional Priority: Specific Credit

1

Water Use Reduction

1

d/C Credit 1.2

Regional Priority: Specific Credit

1

Site Development - Maximize Open Space

1

d/C Credit 1.3

Regional Priority: Specific Credit

1

Site Development - Protect or Restore Habitat

1

d/C Credit 1.4

Regional Priority: Specific Credit

1

Alternative Transportation - Parking Capacity

0

0

Total

4 of 5

Possible Points: 110 Certified 40 to 49 points

Silver 50 to 59 points

67,487 174,953 92,586 335,026

8 20 11 39

Internal Loads Lights People Misc Subtotal

37,403

4

859,531

100

% 4 0 16 2 22 47

0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0

OA Preheat Diff.

RA Preheat Diff.

196,169 138,774

31 22

Grand Total

632,733

100

Annual Energy Usage Source: Electric (kWh) Consumption 235,268 Multiplier $0.16 Cost $36,642.88 Total $ 36,642.88

Cooling Coil Selection Total Capacity Coil Airflow (ton) (MBh) (cfm) 86.2 1,034.2 33,200 Heating Coil Selection Total Capacity Preheat Airflow (ton) (MBh) (cfm) 58.6 703.2 33,200 Engineering Checks % OA 16.2 cfm/SF 1.2 cfm/ton 385.23 SF/ton 321.23 Btu/hr-SF 37.37 No. People 389 Total Area SF 27,685 % Glass 53 Energy Source Consumption Consumption (kWh) % Building E. Primary Heating 10,703 22.1 Primary Cooling 27,215 9.4 Auxiliary 76,526 26.5 Lighting 51,798 18 Receptacle 69,026 23.9

Lighting Costs (kWh) Consumption Multiplier Energy Cost

Building 7R Trane Trace 700 Results

51,798 $0.16 $8,287.68

Building Area EUI

Energy Consumption 983,990 kBtu/yr 27,685 SF 35.54 kBtu/SF-yr

Cooling Coil Peak Envelope Loads (Btu/h) Roof 15,280 Glass solar 198,356 Glass/Door 48,224 Wall 14,572 Infiltration 187,245 Subtotal 463,677

% 1 18 4 1 17 42

Heating Coil Peak Envelope Loads (Btu/h) Roof 39,040 Glass solar 0 Glass/Door 188,349 Wall 28,940 Infiltration 279,684 Subtotal 536,013

Internal Loads Lights People Misc Subtotal

86,509 174,861 138,489 399,859

8 16 13 37

Internal Loads Lights People Misc Subtotal

Ventilation Load

223,630

30

1,095,464

100

Grand Total

1

81

%

% 5 0 25 4 36 70

0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0

OA Preheat Diff.

233,661

30

Grand Total

769673

100

Possible Points: 6

4 0 0 Regional Priority Credits LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations Project Checklist

Enhanced Commissioning

C

1

1

Credit 3

78

3 of 5

Improve by 18% for New Buildings or 14% for Existing Building Renovations

C

N

Low-Emitting Materials—Adhesives and Sealants

Commissioning authority individual and plan.

2

3

Credit 4.1

IAQ management plan developed for construction phase

Notes:

Improve by 48%+ for New Buildings or 44%+ for Existing Building Renovations 19 7

C

C Credit 4.2 Low-Emitting Materials—Paints and Coatings 1 LEED1 2009 for New CConstruction and Major Renovations Project Checklist Credit 4.3 Low-Emitting Materials—Flooring Systems

Possible Points: 35

N C

1

1 55 0 0 7 64

Heating Coil Peak Envelope Loads (Btu/h) Roof 24,599 Glass solar 0 Glass/Door 104,042 Wall 11,895 Infiltration 141,616 Subtotal 282,152

Monthly Energy Consumption Month Electric (kWh) Jan. 21,622 Feb. 19,703 Mar 19,173 Apr 15,104 May 18,924 Jun 21,555 Jul 23,493 Aug 25,039 Sep 18,249 Oct 16,544 Nov 16,665 Dec 19,197 Total 235,268

Possible Points: 15

2 to 4

d

Y

Grand Total

Minimum of 50% of wood-based materials certified in accordance with the Forest Stewarship Council.

2

Y

Ventilation Load

1

Certified Wood

Credit 7

1 to 2

Internal Loads Lights People Misc Subtotal

Possible Points: 10

Reduce by 50%

24 0 0 Energy and Atmosphere LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations Project Checklist

Cooling Coil Peak Envelope Loads (Btu/h) Roof 8,906 Glass solar 475,139 Glass/Door 1,783 Wall 2,028 Infiltration 64,215 Subtotal 552,071

Recycables collected in bins throughout and stored in receiving/storage space.

C

C

Vegetated open space adjacent to the building greater in area than the building footprint.

Possible Points: 14 Notes:

Erosion and sedimentation control plan enacted.

2

1

Materials and Resources

Notes:

d/C

N

3

N

N

Construction Activity Pollution Prevention

N

0

?

Y

Prereq 1

6

0

Y

Possible Points: 26

C

Y

9

Gold 60 to 79 points

Platinum 80 to 110

Jan. Feb. Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total

Monthly Energy Consumption Month Electric (kWh) Gas (therms) 16,535 1652 14,661 1560 19,172 991 18,460 487 24,691 62 29,368 0 33,097 0 32,150 11 22,964 75 20,901 470 18,793 690 16,611 1225 267,401 7223

Engineering Checks % OA cfm/SF cfm/ton SF/ton Btu/hr-SF No. People Total Area SF % Glass

19.1 1.01 306.77 303.27 39.57 389 27,685 53

Lighting Costs (kWh) Consumption 63,209 Multiplier $0.16 Energy Cost $10,113.44

Cooling Coil Selection Total Capacity Coil Airflow (ton) (MBh) (cfm) 91.3 1,095.5 28,004 Heating coil Selection Total Capacity Preheat Airflow (ton) (MBh) (cfm) 64.1 769.7 5,349

Source: Consumption Multiplier Cost

Annual Energy Usage Electric (kWh) Gas (therms) 267,401 7223 $0.16 1.3 $42,784.16 9389.9 Total 53174.06

Energy Source Consumption Consumption (kWh) % Building E. Primary Heating 10,703 Primary Cooling 27,215 Auxiliary 76,526 Lighting 51,798 Receptacle 69,026

Building Area EUI

22.1 9.4 26.5 18 23.9

Energy Consumption 1,634,924 kBtu/yr 27,685 SF 59.05 kBtu/SF-yr

ASHRAE Standard 90.1 Trance Trace 700 Results

2 of 5

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

79

Final Design

Occupancy Classification/Load: Mixed Use Occupancy - Separated

Occupancy B: 216.55

Occupancy A3: 175.25

Total building occupancy load: 392.41 Heights and Areas:

2 story building - 35’ - Allowable:35’

27,732 GSF - Allowable by program: 25,200x10%=27,720 GSF

Level 1: 14,934 GSF

Level 2: 10,350 GSF Type of Construction:

Type II B - Allowable height: 2 story 55’ Allowable GSF: 9,500 GSF

Structural Frame: Unprotected steel

Floor 1: Slab on grade

Floor 2: Concrete on metal deck

Roof: Metal deck w/ built up insulation, membrane, and green roof Fire Protection System:

Fully Sprinkled Means of Egress:

Min. egress width: fire stair 44” / door clearance 36” / corridor 6’

Max. egress path: 250’ sprinkled / 200’ in atrium

Number of Exits: 2 located 141’ apart: half the diagonal of the total bldg.

Plumbing Fixture Counts:

Level 1: LAV-M WC-M URNL LAV-F WC-F

3 2 1 3

Level 2: LAV-M WC-M URNL LAV-F WC-F

3 2 2 3

Level 1 Code Analysis

4

4

Level 2 Code Analysis

80

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

81

Final Design

Structural

Structural Schedules

Above is a schedule of the columns that are used throughout the building. As you can see there is not a big variance in the number of sizes with the W10x33 being used the most.

Below is the foundation schedule. We used pile caps with 3 piles to create a larger surface area around the concrete piles, reducing the cost and creating a strong foundation system that would reduce the amount of hydrostatic uplift on the 82

Wind Calculations

building. We also used rectangular footings the help distribute the weight of the building more evenly throughout the site.

Above is an Excel spread sheet showing the wind pressures coming from west to east. They were only calculated from the west to east direction because the prevailing winds come from the west and therefore the highest pressures would be in that direction.

On the right you will find the beam schedule. As opposed to the column schedule there is a high variance in the sizes of w shapes used.

The sizes of all these members, with the exception of the foundations were gotten from the RAM output youshown later IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

83

Final Design

RAM First Floor Loading Layout

Load Data Tables

As you can see in the image above there had to be different load cases used for certain areas of the floor. Therefore this caused a high variance in the beams that were used. The loads that correspond to the patterns are on the following page.

All of the loads you see above correspond to the image on the previous page. All of the live loads were taken from the International Building Code tables which best fit the description of our building.

The dead loads came from the miscellaneous loads due to flooring, mechanical equipment and lighting fixtures hanging on the floor below.

The mass dead load came from the wet weight of the concrete above the decking.

84

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

85

Final Design

Second Roof Level

Main Roof level

The image to the left shows the loading layout of the load case shown in the chart above. This was one of two of the non-green roofs in the entire building and it also had a skylight in the center of it. The load was not taken out for the skylight due to the fact that if it was left in it would only produce a more conservative beam size.

The image above shows the load pattern for the main roof. This was the largest of all the roofs and heaviest due to the green roof used. Working with the landscape architect we figured out the roof to have a dry weight of 30 psf. This weight was put into the dead load due to that it will be constantly acting on the roof. The wet weight of the room was 50 psf. The extra 20 psf was put into the live load because it will not be constantly acting on the roof, which in turn helped reduce the beam sizes.

The load chart above is that same as the ones on the previous pages, where the live load was taken from the International Building Code tables. The dead load was a typical built up roof load.

86

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

87

Final Design

Auditorium Roof

Member Forces in the Cantilever

The image to the left shows the load that was put on the auditorium roof. It was another typical built up roof load as on the second roof level. The only change was in the live load due to the use and size of the auditorium.

88

These images correspond to the frame members in the auditorium. Due to the size of the auditorium and the cantilever the bracing shown in red in the top left image was needed to not only make the structure stable but also help reduce the beam sizes in the frame. The image above shows the maximum moments in those bracing members which were used along with the steel manual to find the sizes necessary. The image to the left is the loading that was put on the frame to achieve the loads in the members.

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

89

Final Design

General Conditions $541,687 Site & Building $10,700,027

Landscaping $1,661,924 Building/Site Cost Breakdown

Construction

Program Comparison

The overall design criteria provided for the building program was a total of 25,200 ft2, with important spaces such as the lecture hall provide 4,500 ft2 and the equipment gallery, providing 1000 ft2.

Our 7R program design has a gross square footage that is within 5% of the total and a net square footage of just a couple thousand ft2 less than this number. Our design proves to have an economical design criterion because of how close the gross and net square footages are to each other. Major differences in program square footages appear 90

Project Estimate

in areas of the building that have more or less importance. The lecture hall is considered one of the most important spaces in our building, so an extra 7,000 ft2 was awarded to this space.

Other areas of importance include the equipment gallery and the mechanical/electrical spaces.

The mechanical/electrical spaces are considered important due to the role the EEB Hub will play in the study of its own systems.

Total cost of the project is driven by several factors. They are the general conditions, site and building cost, and landscaping cost. The general conditions cost was generated from all of the necessary temporary equipment needed for construction. This includes utilities, trailers, storage, fencing, toilets, and safety equipment.

This totaled to a cost of $541,687.46. The building and site cost included the foundations, superstructure, exterior enclosure, roofing, interior finishes, MEP systems, fire protection, and IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

site work. The major costs came from the exterior enclosure, the MEP systems, and the interior construction. Specifically, systems that drove this estimate up were the large steel members for the cantilevered lecture hall, a double skin facade, and the green roofs. These total costs came out to a total of $10,700,027. Lastly, landscaping had a great cost impact for the project. The total cost came out to $1,661,924. These three important cost factors totaled for a final estimated project cost of $12,903,638.

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

Total Cost $12,903,638 91

Final Design

P

D

R

U

O

R

J

A

E

T

C

I

T

O N

Duration: 11.5 Months

92

IPD/BIM Studio - Spring 2013

Project Schedule

The total duration of the 7R EEB Hub was a little over 11 months. This project had a start date of April 7, 2013, and a closeout date of March 24, 2014. Using a west – east phasing technique, the project was able to be fast tracked, allowing different trades to avoid clashing during construction. This project contains integrated systems that make it as sustainable and green as it can be. Not only are these special features expensive, but they also cause a major impact on the schedule of construction. The steel erection

of the west, although a small section than the east, took around 4 weeks to erect, because it the delicacy of the picks. The double skin façade also had a long duration of 4 weeks, which greatly impacted the schedule.

Thomas Kyd, Alicia Schneider, Eric Ripkin, Alex can Eeden, Kieran Carlisle, Reinhardt Swart

93