santiago calatrava llc.

Transcription

SANTIAGO CALATRAVA L.L.C.
OUTSTANDING PROJECTS (2001-2010)
BRIDGES
•
•
•
•
•
•
THREE SIGNATURE BRIDGES- REGGIO EMILIA – ITALY
SAMUEL BECKETT BRIDGE – DUBLIN - IRELAND
SERRERIA BRIDGE – VALENCIA - SPAIN
WOODALL RODGERS BRIDGE-DALLAS – USA
VENICE FOOTBRIDGE-ITALY
JERUSALEM BRIDGE -ISRAEL
SKYSCRAPERS
•
•
TURNING TORSO. MALMÖ. SUECIA
CHICAGO SPIRE – USA
LARGE ROOFS AND SINGULAR BUILDINGS
•
•
•
•
•
OAKA – OLYMPIC STADIUM AND VELODROME ROOFS – ATHENS 2004
WTC- PATH STATION. NEW YORK. USA
CITY OF ARTS AND SCIENCE – VALENCIA – ESPAÑA
HIGH SPEED TRAIN STATION. REGGIO EMILIA. ITALY
HIGH SPEED TRAIN STATION. LISBON. PORTUGAL
SANTIAGO CALATRAVA L.L.C.
OUTSTANDING PROJECTS (2001-2010) by
MARIO RANDO CAMPOS
MSc Construction Engineering
GAUTE MO
MSc Structural Engineering
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE: More than 20 years as structural engineer and manager PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE: 7 years as structural engineer
From 2001 to March 2010: SANTIAGO CALATRAVA LLC (Valencia)
Director of the Civil and Structural Engineering Department at the Valencia office.
From 2003 to 2007: NTNU (Trondheim), Aadnesen AS (Oslo), Polytec. Univ. of Panama (Pan. City), Price & Myers LLP (London)
Selected projects:
• World Trade Center Transportation Hub (New York)
• Oriente Station. Initial project and renovation for high speed trains (Lisbon)
• Olympic Sport Complex for Athens 2004: Olympic Stadium Roof (304m span), Velodrome Roof, Agora, Nations Wall and Main Entreances.
• Turning Torso high rise building (192m high) (Malmö)
• City of Arts and Science: Opera House, Science Museum, Umbráculo, Ägora and Serrería Bridge (Valencia)
• Cable Stayed Bridge Woodall Rodgers (400m length, 200m span)
•Samuel Beckett Bridge (95m cantilever) (Dublin)
• The three Bridges of Reggio Emilia (220m span) (Italy)
• High Speed Train Station of Reggio Emilia (Italy)
Selected Projects:
• Whitechapel Art Gallery (Price & Myers LLP, London)
• Gjersøe Bridge (Aadnesen AS, Østfold)
• Årumfjellet Pedestrian Bridge (Aadnesen AS, Østfold)
From 2007 to 2009: SANTIAGO CALATRAVA LLC (Valencia)
From March 2010: SEED WORKSHOP LTD (Simbiosis y Equilibrio entre Ecologia y Diseño S.L.) ‐ www.seed‐workshop.com
Founder and Joint Director
Selected Projects:
• Samuel Beckett Bridge (95m cantilever) (Dublin)
• Vollan Pedestrian Bridge (Hedmark)
• Neby Pedestrian Bridge (Hedmark)
• Barcode Project (Multiconsult) (Oslo)
Selected Projects:
• Samuel Beckett Bridge (95m cantilever) (Dublin)
• World Trade Center Transportation Hub (New York)
From 2009: GAUTE MO AS ‐ www.gautemo.no
THREE SIGNATURE BRIDGES. REGGIO EMILIA
SUMMARY
•The three bridges in Reggio Emilia are singular steel structures designed by Santiago Calatrava
to improve vehicular access and to provide an impressive new entrance from the north.
•These infrastructures are important links between the busy motorway A1, which links Milan to Bologna, passing the city of Reggio Emilia. The three bridges have played an important role in the urban regeneration of the city and were inaugurated in October 2007
•The main structure is the central bridge than spans the motorway and the adjacent railway. There are also twin bridges across two roundabouts next to the main bridge.
•. This work has obtained the 2009 “European Steel Design Award” given by the European Convention for Constructional Steelwork (ECCS) at the international congress in Barcelona.. .
THREE SIGNATURE BRIDGES. REGGIO EMILIA
LOCATION
CENTRAL TIED ARCH BRIDGE. MAIN DATA
Client: T.A.V. SpA , Comune Reggio Emilia
General Contractor: Rodano Consortile Scarl
Steel Subcontractor: Cimolai S.p.A.
Project Value: 18 Million euros
Total Steel S355 Tonnage: 4000 Tons
Total Concrete Volume poured: 11000m3
Height arch over deck 45m , Main Span 220 m
CENTRAL BRIDGE. STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTION
Structural Layout:
•The primary member in the structural scheme is the central arch (type “Bow‐String” with 220 m span and 45 m high) subject to direct compression. •The central bridge is a single span structure with one end fully fixed in the longitudinal direction. The other end has a longitudinally sliding support with a shock absorber.
• The deck is a trapezoidal single‐cell closed box girder from which cantilever ribs spring every 3.5m to configure an overall 27m wide deck.
.
220m
CENTRAL BRIDGE. STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTION. CENTRAL ARCH
•
•
The main arch is the primary member in the structural scheme subject to direct compression. Many calculations were developed in order to study the buckling behavior due to the slenderness of the arch, including 2nd order non‐linear buckling analysis that was undertaken on a two‐stage basis. At first stage a de‐stabilizing load was applied to the model to invoke an imperfection at the crown of the arch of 270mm within the geometry. At second stage a non‐linear buckling analysis was carried out using the deformed shape from Stage 1 as the starting point for the analysis.
In this type of structure the cables restrain the in‐plane buckling of the arch via the hung‐deck with the out‐of‐plane buckling normally more restrictive (see figure). CENTRAL BRIDGE. ARCH SECTIONS
•The arch consists of two 4 sided trapezoidal boxes with 1.02m distance between them. Both boxes are intermittently connected which contributes significantly to the behavior of the arch for lateral buckling. The inner face of each box is a truss and not standard plate.. •the arch is easy for inspection and maintenance during the service life of the bridge. The plate thicknesses of the arch range between 30mm and 65mm.
CENTRAL BRIDGE. STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTION. CENTRAL ARCH
•
The springing of the arch is one of the more particular parts of the bridge as the big oculus captures the attention of the users. This part plays an important role in the structural scheme because is the element which carries all the forces from the arch to the deck. The springing is mainly a box made of thick plates with internal stiffeners in order to avoid the local buckling of the webs. CENTRAL BRIDGE. STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTION. DECK
•
•
The deck is the tie of the structural scheme and as such is the member which is subjected mainly under tension efforts. The deck works also like a beam supported elastically by each pair of cables because it is the member of the bridge that supports directly the live loads.
The deck is a trapezoidal single‐cell closed box girder from which cantilever ribs spring every 3.5m to configure an overall 27m wide deck (including lateral parapets). The box girder is made of plates of 30‐60mm thickness. The running surface for the vehicles is a steel orthotropic deck made of a 14mm plate with open longitudinal stiffeners of 20mm CENTRAL BRIDGE. STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTION.CABLES
•
The 50 pairs of 44mm diameter cables of the main bridge are locked coil with the fixed anchorage within the arch and the active anchorage in the central box girder. In this way the torsional rigidity of the structure is pre‐dominantly controlled by the torsional
stiffness of the central box girder. CENTRAL BRIDGE. STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTION
•
•
•
SUPPORT CONDITIONS
The central bridge, as a tied arch, is a single span structure with one support fully fixed in the longitudinal direction. The other end has a longitudinally sliding support with a 3500kN shock absorber (Lock‐Up Device or LUD) provided in order to allow the low velocity displacements primarily from temperature and to restrain the longitudinal direction for the seismic event. In this way the horizontal forces from the seismic action are distributed at both abutments.
There are 4 pot bearings at the abutments. The abutments are made of reinforced concrete and they carry the reactions from the bridge to the ground by 36 units of 1.5m diameters piles at each abutment. STEEL FABRICATION
CENTRAL BRIDGE. ERECTION. LAUNCHING
The structure was erected taking into account that the traffic flowing along the motorway below should be maintained during the erection. The contractor proposed to launch from one side the deck with large segments of the arch on it.
CENTRAL BRIDGE. ERECTION.LIFTING ARCH SEGMENTS
. The segments of the arch were lift by means of three temporary towers provided with heavy lifting systems CENTRAL BRIDGE. ERECTION.LIFTING ARCH SEGMENTS
CENTRAL BRIDGE. FINISHES
CENTRAL BRIDGE. FINISHES
TWIN BRIDGES. STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTION
Structural Layout:
The twin bridges across the roundabouts are cable stayed bridges consisting of 1400tons of
S355 steel for each one. The pylon is positioned in the transversal plane to the direction of the
bridge (Figure) and divides the deck in two symmetrical spans of 90m
.
220m
90m
TWIN BRIDGES. STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTION. CENTRAL ARCH
•
•
The main bearing element is the central steel pylon, which is a 69m high arch and rises 58m over the platform
The pylon is positioned in the transversal plane to the direction of the bridge and divides the deck in two symmetrical spans of 90m. The transversal section of the pylon is a non regular 7 sided polygon made of 38 mm plates.
TWIN BRIDGES. STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTION. CENTRAL ARCH
TWIN BRIDGES. STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTION. DECK
•
•
The platform is 12.5 m wide and is supported by 25 pairs of cables. It is divided in one lane per direction for the vehicular traffic. The concept of the deck is identical to that of the central bridge, a central hollow box from which two cantilever ribs spring to form a total 14.6m wide deck (including lateral parapets). The ribs are spaced longitudinally at 3.5m centers. The box girder is made of 15 and 22 mm thick plates and the floor for the vehicles is a steel orthotropic deck made of a 14mm plate with open longitudinal stiffeners of 20mm
TWIN BRIDGES. STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTION.CABLES
•
The 25 pairs of 60mm diameter cables of each twin bridge are locked coil type and they are anchored from the center of the deck to the pylon making a very original pattern
TWIN BRIDGES. STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTION
•
•
SUPPORT CONDITIONS
Both ends of the deck are sliding supported. The central support of the deck at the mid span consists on a rigid connection with the pylon. This support is the point which restrains the deck longitudinally. Due to the fact that both ends of the bridge are sliding supports, one of the critical load conditions was the unsymmetrical case of just one span loaded. In this case the cables of the non loaded span play the role of back stays. In this typology of bridge under this event the resisting action is the bending and axial stiffness of the deck. TWIN BRIDGES. STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTION
•
•
For the torsional load cases, the pot bearings (compression‐only supports) are supplied with a couple of bars (tension‐only supports) placed at both edges of the transversal section. In this way the torsional
forces can be absorbed by taking advantage of the lever arm between one of the bars and the opposite pot bearing. Benefits in the cost of the bearings are also important because uplift‐resisting devices are not necessary and the pot bearing can be standard. The bars are anchored to the end of the rib with a slotted pin which allows the longitudinal movements of the deck.
The abutments are made of reinforced concrete and they carry the reactions from the bridge to the ground by 15units of 1.5m diameters piles at each abutment. The pylon is supported by means of two piles caps of 42 piles of 1.5m diameter
TWIN BRIDGES. ERECTION
•
The erection of the cable stayed bridges was more conventional but not less interesting. The erection consisted on supporting the deck with just two temporary supports. The Pylon was erected in three large pieces (two straight legs and the tip of the arch) without any support. Then the cables were installed and put in tension in order to remove the temporary supports
TWIN BRIDGES. ERECTION
TWIN BRIDGES. FINISHES
TWIN BRIDGES. FINISHES
SAMUEL BECKETT BRIDGE, DUBLIN
SUMMARY
•
•
•
•
Opened December 2009
Landmark movable structure spanning the maritime gateway to the City, linking the outer orbital route.
Located east of the City’s centre and within the newly developed Docklands’ area.
For private car use, public transport, cyclists and pedestrians.
Client & Engineer: Dublin City Council
Engineer’s supervision: Dublin City Council & Flint & Neill
Designer:
Santiago Calatrava
Independent Checker: Roughan & O’Donovan
Contractor:
Graham Hollandia JV
Project cost: Construction Period:
ca. 60 000 000 Euros
30 months
SAMUEL BECKETT BRIDGE
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
123 m long swing‐balance‐cable stayed bridge with an inclined and curved pylon, and with unequal spans. The bridge rotates 90° in the horizontal plane to allow ships to pass, with the axis of rotation approximately 28m from the south quay. Steel tonnage: Deck 1860 t, Pylon 373 t, Cables 90 t
Counter Ballast tonnage: Steel + Heavy Concrete 2820 t
SAMUEL BECKETT BRIDGE. DESIGN
STRUCTURAL LAYOUT AND DESIGN
As the Samuel Beckett Bridge is a swing bridge, two main conditions needed to be designed for:
1. “Open position”: No vehicular loading and no support at the ends.
2. “Closed position”: Subject to live loadings and support at the embankments.
The bridge was first designed for the “Open position”. ‐ Balance bridge, i.e. obtain minimal net moment at central support by prescribing the counterbalance mass.
‐ Achieve required profile of the structure and alignment at abutments: By specifying tensions in fore and backstays.
‐ Design the structure without vehicular loading.
Secondly the balanced bridge with correct shape was designed for the “Closed position”.
‐ Design the structure with live loads.
Therefore, all the elements of the bridge were designed according to an envelope of the two conditions.
DECK
The main fore deck structure, the “front span”, is a multi‐cell box girder, made up from relatively thin (10‐
20mm) steel plates stiffened internally using a combination of longitudinal bulb flats, angle sections and trapezoidal stiffeners. Cantilevered from this main box section are the ribs and steel decking which form the pedestrian and cycle tracks. The back span, which houses the counterbalance, is also a multi‐cell box girder but, made up from un‐stiffened steel plates (20‐60mm). The cells in the back span were generally filled with a heavy, self‐compacting concrete, which also supports the steel plates, preventing them from buckling locally. SAMUEL BECKETT BRIDGE. DESIGN
DECK
The cross section of the deck consists of two pedestrian and cycle tracks and four lanes for car traffic, two of which can be adapted to accommodate trams in the future. The top of the box at the front span consists of a 14 mm thick plate with 12 mm trapezoidal stiffeners. The 36 mm mastic asphalt layer was taken account of in the fatigue check for this orthotropic deck.
The single, central, line of forestays supporting the front span from a curved pylon tends to lead to large torsional forces in the deck due to unbalanced live loadings either side of the line support. Therefore, an advantage of using a multi‐cell box section is its inherent torsional rigidity.
PYLON
The pylon was fabricated from shaped and welded thick steel plates (80‐120 mm), forming a variable box section. The 25 forestays are attached to the curved, inclined and slender pylon. The pylon in turn transmits the applied cable reactions, via axial forces mainly, but also bending moments, to its base where it is fully connected to the main deck and the central lifting cylinder, and to its apex where it is restrained by the six inclined backstays. The pylon is restrained from buckling in the longitudinal direction by the forestays, but is slender in the transverse direction between the top and bottom where it is restrained by the backstays and deck structure. The buckling factor (for the first shape of buckling) was found to be 3.6.
CABLE STAYS
The cable‐stays are all locked coil strands, with twenty‐five 60 mm diameter strands supporting the front span and a total of six 145 mm diameter strands towards the back. Bridon Locked Coil Strands: Fore Stay Diameter: Min. Breaking Load: Max. Permanent Force:
Max. Working Load:
60mm
3590kN
961kN
1292kN
Back Stay Diameter: Min. Breaking Load: Max. Permanent Force:
Max. Working Load:
145mm
20100kN
9200kN
10050 kN
CENTRAL SUPPORT
The main support in the river consists of eighteen 1200 mm diameter cast‐in‐place piles supporting a 15x15m pilecap, 3 m deep and a circular concrete pier of varying diameter housing the hydraulic turning and lifting equipment, and the horizontal and vertical bearings, which support the entire bridge while turning. The equivalent spring stiffness of the pier was found and applied as circular spring support in the FE‐model of the steel superstructure.
SAMUEL BECKETT BRIDGE
LOCKING PIN & EXPANSION JOINT SYSTEM At the ends of the bridge hydraulically controlled locking‐pins attach the bridge structure to the housings cast into the abutments. The locking pins are designed as part of the bridge rotation mechanism and provide the final alignment of the bridge, vertically and horizontally. This is necessary due to the range of deflections at the bridge ends such as temperature effects and cable sag. An intelligent hydraulically controlled expansion joint system is installed.
SAMUEL BECKETT BRIDGE. CONSTRUCTION
CENTRAL SUPPORT
Site investigation revealed the possibility of water pressure in the rock exerting an uplift on the underside of the clay, such that it could cause the base of the cofferdam to heave. Pressure relief wells were installed and the piezometers indicated that the pressure under the base remained at safe levels during construction. The top section of the pier was complex in its geometry with the outside surface curving in two planes. Bespoke formwork was designed and assembled and the concrete cast in quarters.
CENTRAL CYLINDER
The central cylinder has a diameter of 2.5 m and has a plate thickness of 120mm. To reduce the friction moment resistance at the bottom, a 15 tonnes cone‐shaped cast item was welded on. At the level of the horizontal bearings Iconel (austenitic nickel‐chromium‐based superalloy) was welded on and machined to create a hard and low‐friction surface. This cylinder transfers the entire weight of the bridge (5,850 tonnes) and any out of balance moment when the bridge is turning or in open position. SAMUEL BECKETT BRIDGE. CONSTRUCTION
ROTATION MECHANISM
FABRICATION, ASSEMBLY AND TRANSPORT
The deck was fabricated first in eight sections and the pylon in five. The size of the individual elements to was dictated by the facilities at Hollandia’s workshops (amount of handling necessary and their painting facility). Hollandia determined that the bridge deck should be made up of eight sections and that these, once painted, would be joined together on a prepared assembly area where the completed unit could be easily transferred onto a sea going barge for transport to Dublin. SAMUEL BECKETT BRIDGE. CONSTRUCTION
WELDING
A range of welding processes were used during fabrication with each method selected to suit the joint configuration and position. Automated processes such as submerged arc were used whenever possible but with manual methods, mainly flux core, also being used extensively. All butt welds and a proportion of fillet welds were examined using UT methods for buried defects and MPI for surface breaking defects. All visible welds were ground flush due to architectural reasons.
ASSEMBLY
ASSEMBLY
As the deck deck sections came out of the paint shop they were positioned at the correct position and height at the assembly area, and welded to the adjacent section, finally forming one bridge deck. The pylon base section was prefabricated and fitted to the bridge deck and the remaining four sections were welded together, lifted positioned and temporarily supported whilst the final circumferential welds were laid.
LOAD OUT
The bridge was no ready to be transferred onto the barge. Trailers was positioned underneath the bridge and drove off the assembly area and onto the barge in a slow and controlled manner. SAMUEL BECKETT BRIDGE. CONSTRUCTION
SEA TRANSPORT
The Contractor investigated the sea route from Hollandia’s fabrication yard in Rotterdam to Dublin. The East Link Bridge in Dublin was found to be the limiting width restriction and the Konigshaven Bridge in Rotterdam giving the height limit. A detailed follow up investigation identified that if some railings and street furniture could be temporarily removed from the East Link Bridge it would be possible for the complete bridge superstructure, including pylon and stays, to pass through on a suitable tide level. SAMUEL BECKETT BRIDGE. CONSTRUCTION
SEA TRANSPORT
The superstructure was shipped to Dublin in May 2009. The journey from Rotterdam to Dublin was carefully monitored throughout the 628 mile journey. This took eight days to complete as the shipment was forced to shelter from high winds for a period before traversing the Irish Sea.
SEA TRANSPORT
The sea transport and the sudden appearance of a land mark structure received a lot of positive publicity in local and international media. The Samuel Beckett Bridge through East Link Bridge when arriving in Dublin. SAMUEL BECKETT BRIDGE. CONSTRUCTION
C.O.G. AND SKIDDING
Following arrival in Dublin, with the bridge still supported on the barge and now moored to the quay wall, it was necessary to ballast the back span using heavy concrete and steel blocks to ensure the centre of gravity was located centrally within the support zone. The structure was then skidded along the sea going barge to a position that allowed the back span to be supported on a second barge, hence leaving the bridge support area free above the river. The bridge lifting cylinder had been positioned within the main support pier and would later be welded to the main structure.
LOAD TRANSFER
With the bridge now balanced and supported on two barges, at high tide the barges were moved so as to position the bridge support area directly above the pier that had been cast in the river. As the tide level continued to reduce, the barges could be moved away from the bridge leaving the structure balanced and supported on the rim bearing. SAMUEL BECKETT BRIDGE. CONSTRUCTION
FIRST ROTATION / CLOSING OF BRIDGE
Once in position, the final welded connection of the bridge lifting cylinder was made and the hydraulic system connected and temporarily activated to rotate the bridge to span the river for the first time.
COUNTER‐BALLAST
Some of the cells are filled with a combination of steel blocks and concrete. In order to achieve the final bridge balance the amount of steel ballast placed on‐site during construction in these cells was adjustable. This allows for the addition or removal of mass in order to balance any future changes made to the super‐imposed dead loads on the bridge. The final balancing was carried out by removing the horizontal bearings at the central support, leaving only three vertical supports. If any of the two supports at the bridge ends did or did not not have any weight on itself, the counter ballast had to be adjusted until both had approximately no reaction. During this process one could easily calculate what the out‐of‐balance moment was knowing reaction, measured with load‐cells and arm of cantilever.
GEOMETRY CONTROL
As the Contractor reported actual dead‐loads and deflections a significant amount of re‐analysis was required to achieve a good balance between final cable forces and bridge deformations. Where cable forces were changed to amend the deformation of the ends of the deck, stresses in the bridge structure changed accordingly and had to be checked. The back span of the bridge is extremely stiff, whilst the pylon and front span deform relatively easily. This resulted in a complex equation with numerous variables, which was finally solved by amending levels at the abutments, ballast quantities and cable forces.
SERRERIA BRIDGE – VALENCIA (2005-2008)
Cable stayed bridge. Span 155m. Deck width 38m
Inclined curved pylon‐ height 125m
SERRERIA BRIDGE - VALENCIA
Client: CACSA (Public entity of the Valencia Regional Govern)
General Contractor: Joint venture: FCC and Pavasal
Steel Subcontractor: HORTA Coslada, La Coruña, Spain
Project Value: 40 Million euros
Project Completion Programme: 3 years
Total Steel Tonnage: 5055 Tons
Total Concrete Volume poured: 21 160 m3
Height pylon125m , Main Span 155m , total Length 350m
Erection of Pylon unit. Bolt connected and welded
JERUSALEM BRIDGE – ISRAEL
Period of Construction:
April 2006 to August 2008 (without the track bed)
Transport the future light rail system and pedestrians over a major intersection and plaza
Curved deck‐plan view. Cable‐stayed bridge. The mast forms an angle
JERUSALEM BRIDGE – ISRAEL
General Contractor:
RAMET
Steel Fabricator:
KOOR Metals (CIMOLAI SPA as subcontractor)
Span = 160m Height of Pylon = 118m
Steel Tonnage:
Deck = 2720 tons
Footbridge = 48 tons
Pylon = 1241 tons
Concrete:
5500 cubic meter VENICE FOOTBRIDGE. ITALY
2005‐2008
Static scheme: Depressed Arch. Span 81m. Rise 4.8m Rise/Span ratio 1/16
Weight steel structure 408 tons
Special precaution : Horizontal reactions‐control of settlements
VENICE FOOTBRIDGE. ITALY
2005‐2008
OLYMPIC GAMES ATHENS 2004
OLYMPIC STADIUM AND VELODROME ROOFS
INTRODUCTION
Santiago Calatrava : Project of aesthetic unification of OAKA area for the 2004 Olympic Games
Two singular structures:
•Olympic Stadium Roof
•Velodrome Roof
OLYMPIC STADIUM ROOF. ATHENS
Goal: Provide a new roof for the existing stadium
compatible with the renovation works..
Main Challenges:
• Tight schedule (18 months for fabrication, erection
and finishes).
• Special Structural Tipology (tied arches large span).
• Analysis difficulties (non-linearity, cables, seismic
loads).
Description:
• The roof will be composed of a pair of bent “leaves,”
which will cover a surface of some 25,000 m2. The two
halves are simmetrical and connected only at two
points.
• Each half-roof is 250 m long and has a variable width
between 45 and 75 m and is suspended by cables
connected to the main arch.
• The roof is covered with policarbonat pannels, instead
of the laminated glass pannels designed in the project,
replaced due to time limitations .
• The bearing structure is made of steel withe painted..
STRUCTURAL LAYOUT
Main bearing system: 2 paralell arches type “Bow‐String” 304m span, 80m height and located 141.4m apart.
Transmission of horizontal loads External side: diagonal elements
Internal side: diagonals and vierendeel beam at three last ribs.
4 bearing points
North Side: Fully restrained movements and rotations
South Side: Fully restrained but longitudinal displacements.
STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTION
Main bearing system :
• Main arch (Ф 3.25m) – Primary member in Compression.
• Torsion tube (Ф 3.6m) – Tie of the structural scheme and main support for the ribs of the roof, capable of carrying the torsional efforts due to unbalance loads.
• Connections – Both tubes are fully fixed at the supports and linked by means of 8 pairs of cables diameter 90mm and 104mm.
• Weight balance: The center of gravity of each half roof is located at 2m from the arch plane towards inside. OLYMPIC STADIUM ROOF. ATHENS
STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTION
Roof structural elements:
• Transverse Ribs: 54 ribs per half roof every 5m. The ribs carry the load of the pannels to the main bearing system.
• Secondary cables: The ribs are fully connected to the torsion tube and suspended by means of a pair of cables hanging from the arch. • Other elements at the roof planes:
‐ Edge tubes.
‐Upper and lower anchor tubes.
‐Diagonals.
‐Profiles RHS.
‐Purlins UPN.
ERECTION AND STRUCTURAL IMPLICATIONS– ARCH ERECTION
MAIN DECISIONS
• Erection of the two half‐roofs separated from the stadium • Preassembly and welding on ground of large elements : 4 pieces of 70m.
• One half‐roof started 3 weeks before OLYMPIC STADIUM ROOF. ATHENS
ERECTION AND STRUCTURAL IMPLICATIONS– ARCH ERECTION
First Stage‐ Partial Removal of shoring towers of arches:
Desapeo
• Lowering 250mm at temporary towers ¾ span and removing rest of temporary towers.
Desapeo
250mm
Desapeo
250mm
• This process transfers 1850ton on the definitive supports 42% of the final weight.
• Benefits:
1.Using the elements of the central tower for the secondary towers.
2.Reduction of forces in other elements due to arches selfweight. Reduction up to 30% bending moments transverse ribs.
Reduction up to 30% axial effort at diagonals and longitudinal elements .
ERECTION AND STRUCTURAL IMPLICATIONS–ERECTION OF HALF-ROOFS
Second Stage Erection Half ‐ Roofs:
• Stressing secondary cables, removal of secondary towers, and finally removing shoring towers under arches.
•The main structure (arch‐torsion tube) is bearing on final supports 9000ton.
•The longest ribs had to be reinforced with temporary trusses until both roofs were connected.
Temporary steel beams and skidd‐shoes
ERECTION AND STRUCTURAL IMPLICATIONS
SKIDDING OF HALF-ROOFS
Equipment:
1. Final roof supports equiped with temporary steel beams mounted on skidd‐shoes bearing on concrete walls.
2. Steel skidd‐shoes on PTFE layer sliding on stainless steel tracks.
Concrete wall and lateral guiding
Lateral dampers
3. Hidraulic jacks for movement.
4. Lateral dampers mounted at north side.
Sliding data:
Final supports
1. Speed: 1.4mm/seg
2. Máximum aceleration: 7.2mm/seg2
3. Friction coeficient: 2.6%
Temporary beams
Hidraulic jacks
ERECTION AND STRUCTURAL IMPLICATIONS– SKIDDING OF HALF-ROOFS
Final position after sliding :
• The connection joint of the two half‐
roofs were intentionally left separated 160mm as erection tolerance. The gap is filled with steel plates.
.
ERECTION AND STRUCTURAL IMPLICATIONS–FINAL SUPPORTS FIXED TO FOUNDATIONS
Supports North Side: Fully restrained all the movements.
Supports South Side: Fully restrained, but longitudinal movement
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
Most important issues:
1.Arches stability.
2.Construction stages taked into account in the analysis. 3. Cables modelling.
4.Modelling of variable depth ribs, incluiding lateral buckling analysis. 5.Non‐geometric linearity – Precambers included in the analysis.
6. Acctions:
6.1 Wind: Wind tunnel tests for load estimation.
6.2 Seismic actions, two different analysis: Response spectrum linear dynamic analysis and non‐linear analysis with equivalent static loads. OLYMPIC STADIUM ROOF. ATHENS
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS AND MAIN DATA
PROJECT: OLYMPIC STADIUM ROOF. OAKA-ATHENS 2004
CLIENT:
EYDE / GREEK MINISTRY OF CULTURE
ARQUITECTURAL AND STRUCTURAL DESIGN:
SANTIAGO CALATRAVA
GENERAL CONTRACTOR:
AKTOR
STEEL SUB-CONTRACTOR:
CIMOLAI
CABLE SUPPLIER:
TENSO-TECCI
SKIDDING EQUIPMENT:
ENERPAC
ROOF PANNELS
GALLOP
TOTAL SURFACE COVERED:
24000 m2
STEEL QUANTITY:
17950 ton ( 185 ton cables)
OLYMPIC VELODROME ROOF. ATHENS
DESCRIPTION
•The wooden ring of the existing Velodrome
had to be covered with a roof that is woodclad on the interior (for acoustical purposes)
and metal-clad on the exterior, with a central
area of sun-protected laminated glass.
• The bearing structure is a pair of double
bowstring-tied arches made of tubular steel.
With dimensions of 145 m long by 100 m
wide and rising to a height of 45 m.
•The roof will shield the athletes from
potentially disruptive winds. To improve
conditions for athletes and spectators, the
interior of the Velodrome will also be
completely renovated.
Longitudinal Elevation
Plan View
ERECTION PROCESS - Sliding
•Erection of the roof separated 140m from its final
position .
Main data
Steel in structure
Cables
Total surface covered
3380 tons
80 tons
11900m2
Concrete poured
700 m3
Piles lenght
720 m
Participants
Client
Arquitectural and Structural design
EYDE. Greek Ministry of Culture
Santiago Calatrava L.L.C.
General Contractor
AKTOR. Greece
Steel Subcontractor
METKA. Greece
Sliding system
ALE-LASTRA. Spain
TURNING TORSO. MALMÖ
SUMMARY
•The Turning Torso Tower is a high‐rise building for offices and dwelling designed by Santiago Calatrava in the city of Malmö. The shape of the tower is based on a sculpture called Twisting Torso, by Santiago Calatrava, which is inspired on a human body in a twisting motion.
•The Tower has 55 floors and is composed by nine geometrically equal cubes, each of one consisting of six floors. The total height is 190 m.
• The floors have a pentagonal shape with a surface of 420 m2. Each level rotate 1,62º with respect to the floor below. The total rotation between the lower plan and the top of the building is 90 º. •The main load bearing structural element is a central concrete core with an internal diameter of 10,5m and variable thickness between 2,5m to 0,40 m. •Another carachteristic element is the external steel truss that stiffened the tower against horizontal loads. TURNING TORSO. MALMÖ
LOCATION
HSB Turning Torso is located in Malmö ( Sweden ) at the Western Harbour area, near the sea and close to the city center. The intention of the owner HSB Malmö was to create a landmark for the city.
FOUNDATION
Main tower foundation
•The foundation of the Turning Torso consists of a cylindrical box with a diameter of 30m and a depth of 15m. The foundation slab rests on the limestone bedrock identified in the Geotechnical Site Investigation and has a depth of 7m in order to counteract the effects of the water uplift and to guarantee the required maximum excentricity of the resultant of the ground reaction force on the slab and to minimize the required reinforcement amount. CONCRETE STRUCTURE
Vertical Structural Elements
Central Core
•
The main load bearing structural element for vertical and horizontal loads is the central concrete core, which has an internal diameter of 10,5m and variable thickness between 2,5m in the basement to 0,40 m at the top of the tower. •
Inside this core there is the elevator and staircases secondary core. Concrete Column
•
There is a continuous reinforced concrete column (aproximate dimensions 1.5x1.5 m) located at the corner of the plans.
CONCRETE STRUCTURE
Conical slab: 90-40 cm thickness
Deck level : Diagonals and Horizontals
anchorages
Standard Floors: 27 cm thickness
Conical slab: 90-40 cm thickness
CONCRETE STRUCTURE
Standard Slabs
•Each cube is composed of 6 rc slabs. The upper 5 are standard slabs 27 cm thick, fully fixed to the concrete core and supported by means of steel columns at the perimeter that transfer the load to the lower conical slab. STANDARD SLAB
Deck levels : Diagonals anchorage
• The upper slab of each cube or “deck level” is where the diagonals and horizontals are connected. These slabs are thicker at the anchorage area
“DECK LEVEL”
STEEL STRUCTURE
Main Elements
STEEL STRUCTURE
Exterior exoskeleton
•The exterior steel truss or exoskeleton provides additional horizontal stiffness to the building. • It is formed by the main column or spine (900 mm diameter pipe), which is connected to the diagonals and horizontals elements (variable diameter from 700mm to 300mm)
• The main spine is braced at every level to the concrete floors by means of stabilizers, and has a pin joint at every cube in order to avoid large hyperstatical forces. STEEL STRUCTURE
STRUCTURAL LOADS
Wind
• The wind effects were studied carefully at the Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel Laboratory, Ontario, Canada (Alan G. Davenport Wind Engineering Group). The determination of the overall structural loads and responses was made conducting force‐balance tests and pressure tests on a rigid model . The resonant response of the building due to dynamic amplification of the buffeting response at the natural frequencies of the building were determined analytically through the measurement of force spectra and the dynamic properties of the building. Together with the statistical wind climate model of wind speed and direction, predicted values of loads and responses were determined for various return periods. • The studies showed also that the peak acceleration at the top levels for a 100 year return period was 0,02 g, well below the allowed limits for residential buildings. STRUCTURAL LOADS
CONCRETE COLUMN:
Cube
-4
1
Shinkrage and Creep
Shrinkage(m/m)
-2.9·10
Creep(m/m)
-3.9·10
-4
9
-2.9·10
Total(m/m)
-4
0
Equivalent Temp (ºC)
-6.8·10
-4
-68
-2.9·10
-4
-29
NOTES:
1.- Linear interpolation for the intermediate cubes
•Due to the fact that two different materials were used for the vertical bearing structures, concrete at the core and column and steel at exterior truss, the effects of shinkrage and creep are important as they will provoke internal forces of compression at the steel elements and tension at the concrete ones.
2.- The assumed thermal factor of the concrete is αc=10-5 (ºC)-1
STRUCTURAL CORE:
Cube
Horizontal Direction
Shrink
Creep
Total
Vertical Direction
Thermal
Shrink
Creep
Total
factor
m/m
m/m
m/m
1
-3·10-4
0
-3·10-4
9
-3·10-4
0
-3·10-4
Thermal
factor
-1
m/m
m/m
m/m
αc,v (ºC)-1
10-5
-3·10-4
-1.85·10-4
-4.85·10-4
1.62·10-5
10-5
-3·10-4
-0.2·10-4
-3.2·10-4
1.07·10-5
αc,h (ºC)
NOTES:
1.- Linear interpolation for the intermediate cubes
2.- A constant variation of temperature has been applied to the whole core = -30 ºC
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
Global Model
• The structural analysis of the building was made with a global finite element model with the sofware SAP 2000. The model simulates all the concrete and steel elements as well as the foundations slabs and piles.
Deck‐
level
Standard level
Perimeter columns
Conical slab
Shear Walls
(radial and perimetral)
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
Verification of Concrete elements. Reinforcement area.
•Due to the important hyperstatical forces and the interaction between the different elements (core, cloumn, slabs and shear walls ) it is not possible to analyzed each element isolated but to extract the forces from the global FEM model. After the analysis of the model the output results of the shell elements of the core, slabs and shear walls, and for all load combinations were processed with a post‐processing program in order to obtain the necessary reinforcement in both local directions and both faces of the element for the predominant case, considering all forces and moments and the material features. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
Analysis of displacements
•The displacements for serviceability Limit State were calculated at the top of the buiding for the worst wind actions for a 100 year return period. • The maximum drift (lateral deflection) corresponds to south winds and the value was 360 mm . This magnitude is f/H=1/528, which is within the limits of total building drift for this return period.
ERECTION PROCESS
Erection Method
• After finishing the foundations started the construction of the concrete core . The core was cast in a sliding form, which means that the form is suspended between vertical beams and can slide upwards, one floor at a time, by way of jacks.
The walls around staircase and lifts were poured in forms suspended underneath the sliding form. The walls were poured in connection with the casting of the core. Once the concrete had hardened to a pre‐
determined degree, the core form as well as the forms for the staircase and lift shafts could then climb upwards to the next floor.
• The next step in the pouring cycle was to form and pour the structural slab around the core before the cycle could be repeated with the core and lift shafts. Most of the reinforcement was prefabricated at shop in order to form large “steel cages” and then erected to its final position where can be overlapped . .
ERECTION PROCESS
•During the pouring of each slab the temporary supports were kept at least 7 levels below. •The core, lift shafts and structural slabs were poured with vibrated concrete while the transversal bracing walls under each cube were made with so‐called self‐compacting concrete. Because of its flow capacity, this type of concrete does not need vibrating. This method was used because the transversal walls were made after the structural slab above and below them were finished, making it impossible to insert vibration rods down into the concrete.
•The forms for the floors were rotated approx. 1.6 degrees for each floor in order to create the characteristic twist of the building. The time table dictated that a new floor tier was poured every 10th day on the average for more than a year
ERECTION PROCESS
• The erection of the exterior exoskeleton started when the construction of the concrete structure had reached the 5th cube and was completed few weeks later than the concrete. • Finally the façade and interior finishes were completed. MAIN DATA
Quantities
Height of building : 192 m.
Number of floors above ground: 55
Total surface : 31,900 m2
Apartaments total surface (cubes 3 to 9) : 16,500 m2
Offices total useful surface(cubos 1 y 2) : 4,500 m2
Concrete: 25,000 m3
Reinforcement steel: 4,400 Tons.
Steel structure”Exterior exoesqueleton”: 820 Tons. Façade surface: 20,000 m2
Glass surface: Elevators : 3 for apartaments, 2 for offices.
5,500 m2
PARTICIPANTS
Client
HSB Malmö Ek För
Construction Manager
HSB Malmö and NCC Construction Malmö
Architecture and Structural Design
Santiago Calatrava SA, Zürich/Valencia
Interior Design
Samark Arkitektur & Design AB, Malmö
Geotechnical Advisor
Dr. Vollenweider, Zürich
Geotechnical Investigation
SWECO, Malmö
Structural Checker
SWECO, Stockholm
Concrete 1 (Underground concrete structure) PEAB AB
Concrete 2 (Concrete Structure above ground) NCC Construction AB
Façade fabrication
Grupo Folcrá Edificación SA, España
Steel Fabricator
Emesa, España
Steel Erector
Promecon, Dinamarca
Elevators
KONE AB
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION

santiago calatrava llc.

Transcription

Similar documents

Salginatobel Bridge

info! - American Senior Communities

m8 harthill bridge lanarkshire, uk

Every Day Counts in Improving Mobility: A l d B id C i Every Day

pdf - aman architecture

Suspension Wire 2

Steep Rock 1696 sq.ft. - Star Ready To Move Homes

Arthur Ravenel Jr. Bridge Charleston, SC

covered bridge tour

The Bridge Builder