coppin state university

Corinne Ambler Penn State AE Senior Thesis Construction Management

Coppin State UniversityHealth and Human Services Building

Baltimore, Maryland


Presentation Outline

Project Overview

Construction Cost Escalation Analysis

Solar Shading Analysis

Overhead Pedestrian Bridge Illumination

Summary and Conclusions

Questions


Project Overview

Project Overview

Construction Cost Escalation


Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements

Questions & Comments

PresentationOutline Academic Facility

– Early Childhood Demonstration Center– Lecture Halls– Meeting Rooms– Offices– Outpatient Health Clinic– Research Labs– Moot Courtroom– Forensic Lab– Overhead Pedestrian Bridge

Size: Five Stories 150,000 ft2

Cost: $48.6 Million

Dates of Construction:

January 2006 – June 2008

Project Features

Project Team

Building Envelope

Structure

Mechanical & Electrical Systems

Site Conditions


Project Overview

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements


PresentationOutline

Construction ManagerArchitect

Design Collective, Inc Barton Malow Company

Client

Coppin State University

Owner

University of Maryland, Baltimore

Structural Engineer

Hope Furrer Associates

MEP Engineer

RMF Engineering, Inc

Organizational Chart

Delivery Method: CM at Risk with a Soft GMP

SC- Services ContractPC – Professional Contract

Project Features

Project Team

Building Envelope

Structure


Site Conditions


Project Overview

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements


PresentationOutline

Façade Materials– Glazed Aluminum Curtain Wall– Glazed Storefront– Face-Brick Veneer with Masonry Cavity– Cast Stone Panels– Insulated Metal Panels

Roof Materials– Metal Screen– EPDM Single Ply Membrane– Hot Fluid Applied Roof

Project Features

Project Team

Building Envelope

Structure


Site Conditions


Project Overview

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements


PresentationOutline

Framing– ASTM A992 Structural Steel

Decking– Composite Metal Deck – 3” 3500 psi Reinforced Lightweight

Concrete

Foundation– 4000 psi Cast-in-Place Caissons, Grade Beams &

Foundation Walls

Project Features

Project Team

Building Envelope

Structure


Site Conditions


Project Overview

Project Features

Project Team

Building Envelope

Structure


Site Conditions

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements


PresentationOutline

Electrical System– 480Y/277 Volt Service – 400kW Emergency Back-Up

Generator

Mechanical System– 6 Rooftop Air Handling Units– (2) 400 Ton Chillers– (2) 200 HP Boilers


Project Overview

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements


PresentationOutline

Site Conditions– Located in Baltimore, Maryland on a College Campus– 8 miles Northwest of Inner Harbor– 3 Site Entrances

Project Features

Project Team

Building Envelope

Structure


Site Conditions


Volatility of Escalating Construction Costs


PresentationOutline

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements



Problem:

Managing the risk of maintaining a Budget in the Current Market Conditions. Factors Increasing Risk: -Volatility of Material Costs -Escalation of Labor Wages

Solution:

Alter the way Contractors are Procured and Paid.-Institute a Pre-Qualified Interview Process-Allow Bid to Reflect Current Market Prices

Phase I Phase II Phase IIIExcavation and Grading Fireproofing Final Sitework

Demolition Glass Systems LandscapingDeep Foundations Fire Protection Masonry

Concrete Mechanical Misc. MetalsStructural Steel Elevators Electrical Carpentry & Woodwork

Metal PanelsRoofing

Doors, Frames and HardwarePartitions and Ceilings

Ceramic TilePainting and Coating

Lab Casework

Trades in Each Bid Phase Coppin State University - Health and Human Services Building

Conditions– Project Bid to Contractors in Three Phases– Hurricane Katrina Hit During Bidding Process– Materials Escalated Unprecedented High– Owner Forced to Alter Budget or Building– Considered Removing Early Childhood Demonstration Center– Asked State of Maryland for $5 Million More

Steel & Glazing Bid Most Over Estimated Budget5 Story Main Building

1 StoryX


PresentationOutline

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements


Construction Cost EscalationBrian Barnes Contractor Finishes, IncJohn Bechtel Owner The Pennsylvania State UniversityBrook Behner Contractor Homewood General Contractors, IncLee Evey Construction Manager Design Build Institute of AmericaSarah Forrest Estimator Hensel Phelps Construction Co.Scott Franckowiak Contractor MBR ConstructionHope Furrer Designer Hope Furrer AssociatesBob Grottenthaler Construction Manager Barton Malow CompanyMerton Harris Designer RMFMatt Herbert Designer Design Collective, IncTelly Koutris Contractor David Allen CompanyKeith Lambert Contractor Zephyr AluminumMike Miller Construction Manager SouthlandJorge Scotti Owner University of Maryland, BaltimoreKen Simonson Economist AGC Chief EconomistTodd Sody Contractor Sody ConcreteTodd Vochinsky Estimator Barton Malow Company

Contacts for Cost Escalation Interview

Current Market Conditions:

Escalation of Labor Wages

-Construction Industry Produced 1 out of 10 New Jobs

-Recent Years Employment Dropped 0.2%

-Hourly Wages increased 4.8% in 2006

-Labor Wages Increase 5% by end of 2007

Resources

-Engineering News Record (ENR) Database

-AGC Escalation Reports

Causes of Labor Wage Increase

Lower Employment Levels

Low Levels of Unemployment in Current Economy

Decline in Residential Eliminated Low Un-Skilled Workers

Higher Levels of Employed Skilled Workers

Shortage of Apprentices Coupled with Shortage of Teachers


PresentationOutline

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements



Current Market Conditions:

Escalation of Material Costs

-Inflation/Escalation Free Era from 2001-2003

-Volatile Escalation of Material Prices from 2004-2006

-Material Costs have Decreased in Recent Months

-Material Costs Expected to Rise 6-8% by end of 2007

Cost Escalation

CPI-U is the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers

-Used to Help Predict Project Cost Changes

Causes of Material Escalation

Increased Fuel Prices

-Anything Being Shipped or Hauled

-Raw Materials and Finished Products

-Petroleum Products – PVC, Roofing/Waterproofing, PVC Pipe & Asphalt

Increase In Global Economy (India and China)

-Longer Lead Time for Materials

Materials Affected Most

-Concrete

-Steel

-Drywall/Gypsum

Products Affected by Multiple Material Escalation – Cast-in-Place Concrete

-Aluminum -Copper

-Glass

-Lumber

*Statistics from AGC Inflation Report


PresentationOutline

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements



Construction Cost Escalation is a Risk for:

-Contractors-Construction Managers-Designers-Owners-Vendors

Current Strategy

Incorporate an Inflation/Escalation Percentage Increase and then Pass the Risk to the Next Party

Problem with Current Strategy

As Risk is Passed a Premium is Paid by the Owner for an Event that May Never Occur

Current Strategy for Managing Risk


PresentationOutline

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements



Recommendation

-Make an Effort to Simplify Bid Documents

-Procurement of Contractors be Changed to a Pre-Qualified

Interview Process

-Require Contractor to Bid on Current Market Prices

-Review Material Cost Escalation Quarterly

Simplification of Bid Documents

-Require Designer and Construction Manager to complete a Thorough Constructability Review

-Eliminate Addendums-Involve a Contractor

Bid Current Prices

-Require that Contractor’s Bid does not include the Cost of Escalation and Inflation

-Assess Material Escalation Quarterly-Include Cost of Escalation for Materials Bought

Each Quarter on Every Third Pay Application

Altered Contractor Procurement

-Only Allow Pre-Qualified Contractors to Participate in an Interview

-Implement an Interview Process Contractors

-Score Contractors on Three Separately Areas

-Fee Proposal

-Technical Submission

-Interview

-Highest Score Wins the Job

Benefit

-Increase Competition Between Contractors

-Decrease Problem of High Wages with Low Productivity


PresentationOutline

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements



Conclusion

-Allow Owner to Manage the Risk of Cost Escalation and Inflation

-Reduce the Amount of Money Spent on Managing Risk

To Allow the Owner

‘To Get More Building For His Buck’


Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements


Solar Shading AnalysisPresentation

Outline

Existing Sunshade runs along the 5th Floor Perimeter Serves as a Capital to Complete an Aesthetic Look

Sunshade is 4’-1 ¾ “ Above Head of Window Existing Redesign

Problem– Sunshade does not Minimize Solar Heat Gain

Solution– Minimize Solar Heat Gain by Extending and Lowering

Sunshade– Minimize Initial and Operating Cost


Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements



Outline

Existing Conditions

- Located at 39.18°N Latitude and 76.67°W Longitude

- 5th Floor Exposure Aligned with North/South Axis

- 4’ Tapered Outrigger with 4” Airfoil

- Sunshade Mounting Tab Welded to Girder

5th Floor Exposure

Existing Sunshade Connection

4’ Tapered Outrigger 4” Airfoil


Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements



Outline

Constants

- Reynolds - “Mechanical and Electrical Equipment for Buildings” pg 1638 & 1648

Mechanical Impacts

Calculation of Solar Heat Gain

Effects of Lowering Sunshade

Effects of Extending Sunshade

South East West South East West North South East West North South East West8 8.1 55.3 1.00 0.69 0.00 0.15 0.09 0.00 5 75 111 5 3159 11210 139665 8427 0.4 12 7798169 16.8 44 1.68 1.74 0.00 0.25 0.24 0.00 12 160 154 12 7583 21403 166418 20225 0.4 12 103502110 23.8 30.9 2.06 3.44 0.00 0.30 0.47 0.00 16 213 124 16 10110 26612 101517 26967 0.4 12 79298711 28.4 16 2.25 7.85 0.00 0.33 1.00 0.00 19 244 61 19 12006 29414 26276 32023 0.4 12 47865412 30 0 2.31 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.00 20 254 21 21 12638 30280 29042 35394 0.4 12 5152991 28.4 16 2.25 0.00 7.85 0.33 0.00 1.00 19 244 19 61 12006 29414 26276 32023 0.4 12 4786542 23.8 30.9 2.06 0.00 3.44 0.30 0.00 0.47 16 213 16 124 10110 26612 22127 123722 0.4 12 8763413 16.8 44 1.68 0.00 1.74 0.25 0.00 0.24 12 160 12 154 7583 21403 16595 202820 0.4 12 11923254 8.1 55.3 1.00 0.00 0.69 0.15 0.00 0.09 5 75 5 111 3159 11210 6915 170215 0.4 12 919196

Total Btu: 7068294

January

Solar Heat Gain Coefficient

Solar Heat Gain (Btu)Percent Shaded (SF) Solar Heat Gain Factor (Btu/h-ft2)Solar Time

Altitude (degrees)

Azimuth (degrees)

Shadow Length (ft) Hourly BtuSunny Days per Month

Shadow Length = tan(Altitude) x Length of Overhangcos(Azimuth)

Shadow Length

Shadow Length = tan(Altitude) x Length of Overhangcos(Azimuth)

East and West Sides

South Side

North South East WestHeight (ft) 7.33 6.83 7.33 7.33Length (ft) 86.17 25.33 188.58 229.83

Area(ft2) 631.89 173.11 1382.94 1685.44

Percent Shaded = Shadow Length x Length of GlassTotal Area of Glass

- Azimuth

- Altitude

- Solar Heat Gain Factor

- Viracon Glass VE 1-52 Defines Solar Heat Gain Coefficient

- Estimated Number of Sunny days per month


Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements



Outline

Constants

- Reynolds - “Mechanical and Electrical Equipment for Buildings” pg 1638 & 1648

- Azimuth- Altitude- Solar Heat Gain Factor

- Viracon Glass VE 1-52 Defines Solar Heat Gain Coefficient

- Estimated Number of Sunny days per month

Mechanical Impacts




South East West South East West North South East West North South East West8 8.1 55.3 1.00 0.69 0.00 0.15 0.09 0.00 5 75 111 5 3159 11210 139665 8427 0.4 12 7798169 16.8 44 1.68 1.74 0.00 0.25 0.24 0.00 12 160 154 12 7583 21403 166418 20225 0.4 12 103502110 23.8 30.9 2.06 3.44 0.00 0.30 0.47 0.00 16 213 124 16 10110 26612 101517 26967 0.4 12 79298711 28.4 16 2.25 7.85 0.00 0.33 1.00 0.00 19 244 61 19 12006 29414 26276 32023 0.4 12 47865412 30 0 2.31 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.00 20 254 21 21 12638 30280 29042 35394 0.4 12 5152991 28.4 16 2.25 0.00 7.85 0.33 0.00 1.00 19 244 19 61 12006 29414 26276 32023 0.4 12 4786542 23.8 30.9 2.06 0.00 3.44 0.30 0.00 0.47 16 213 16 124 10110 26612 22127 123722 0.4 12 8763413 16.8 44 1.68 0.00 1.74 0.25 0.00 0.24 12 160 12 154 7583 21403 16595 202820 0.4 12 11923254 8.1 55.3 1.00 0.00 0.69 0.15 0.00 0.09 5 75 5 111 3159 11210 6915 170215 0.4 12 919196

Total Btu: 7068294

January

Solar Heat Gain Coefficient

Solar Heat Gain (Btu)Percent Shaded (SF) Solar Heat Gain Factor (Btu/h-ft2)Solar Time

Altitude (degrees)

Azimuth (degrees)

Shadow Length (ft) Hourly BtuSunny Days per Month

Solar Heat GainX (Btu) = (1-ASX)ATXFX + ASX ATXFN

ASX is the Shaded Area for Side X

ATX is the Total Area of Glass for Side X

FX is the Solar Heat Gain Factor for Side X

FN is the Solar Heat Gain Factor for the North Side

When…

Hourly Solar Heat Gain (Btu) = Solar Heat Gain Coefficient

Solar Heat Gain

Sunny Days per Month

xx


Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements



Month Btu per Month

January 9,171,824February 11,290,921March 14,263,934April 16,668,644May 19,361,664June 20,657,017July 22,163,105August 19,301,728September 18,547,310October 15,776,857November 9,466,098December 7,491,578Yearly Total: 184,160,679

Month Btu per Month

January 7,068,294February 8,293,033March 10,217,519April 12,269,298May 14,496,006June 15,572,578July 16,679,511August 13,533,949September 13,680,595October 11,807,527November 7,278,966December 5,849,392Yearly Total: 136,746,668

PresentationOutline

Mechanical Impacts



Extending Sunshade

Current Btu Re-design Btu Change in Btu184,160,679 136,746,668 47,414,011

Overhang Length of 4’

4’-1 ¾ “ Above Head of Window

Overhang Length of 4’

0“ Above Head of Window


Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements



Outline

Mechanical Impacts


Lowering Sunshade


4' 136,746,668 0 05' 126,315,695 10,430,973 10,430,9736' 117,007,831 19,738,837 9,307,8647' 109,139,949 27,606,719 7,867,8828' 102,663,315 34,083,353 6,476,6349' 97,006,771 39,739,897 5,656,54410' 92,129,427 44,617,241 4,877,344

Difference Between 4' and New Length (Btu)

Length of Sunshade

Yearly Btu Difference per Length Increase (Btu)

Sunshade Located at Head of Window

Lowered

Extended


Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements



Outline

Structural Impacts

Addition of 156 Steel Plates Around 5th Floor Perimeter

- A36 24”x 7”x 3/8”

-Welded to Girder Beam at 5’ O.C.

Existing Connection Redesigned Connection

Existing ConnectionRedesigned Connection


Initial Cost

4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Summary & Conclusions

Acknowledgements



Current Btu Re-design Btu Change in Btu Savings184,160,679 136,746,668 47,414,011 $141

7191 7048 143 4.29 $3,079

Re-design Lowest Hourly

Difference in Hourly Btu

Change in Tons

Demand Charge Saved

Current Lowest Hourly Btu

460 0.036458333 0.00546875 19.28645833 156 $2.00 $6,017.38

Cost ($/lb) Cost ($)Number of Plates

Weight of Steel

(lb/ft3)

Volume of Steel

per Plate (ft3)

15% for Labor

(ft3)Weight per Plate (lb)

PresentationOutline

Cost Impacts

Electrical Supply Savings

Electrical Demand Supply Charge Savings

Chiller Reduction Savings

Structural Steel Plate Cost

Additional Length of Sunshade Cost

4' 3,188 $05' 4,006 $33,9986' 4,833 $68,3707' 5,669 $103,1168' 6,512 $138,1529' 7,364 $173,563

10' 8,225 $209,348

Sunshade Length (ft)

Area of Sunshade (SF)

Cost ($)Electrical Supply Savings

Electrical Demand Supply Charge Savings

4.29 450 $8.95 $17,277.98

Number of Square Feet per Ton

Amount Saved (Tons)

Cost ($/SF) Total Initial Savings ($)

Chiller Reduction Savings

Structural Steel Plate Costs

Lowering Sunshade Extending Sunshade

$17,278-$6,017

$141$3,079

Total First Year Savings ($): $14,480Additional Savings per Year ($): $3,220

Initial One Time Chiller Savings

Electricity Savings per YearInitial One Time Steel Plate Cost

Item

Demand Charge Savings per Year

Savings

Cost per Additional Foot for Material and Labor

Yearly Btu

Cost ($) Initial Savings ($) Yearly Savings ($)

Additional Length + Steel Tonnage Reduction Demand + Supply4' $6,017 $17,278 $3,220 05' $40,015 $21,628 $4,026 46' $74,387 $25,977 $4,829 97' $109,133 $30,206 $5,606 138' $144,170 $34,556 $6,400 169' $179,581 $38,906 $7,192 1910' $215,366 $43,255 $7,981 21


Payback Period (Years)


Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements



Outline

Conclusion & Recommendation

Lower the Sunshade 4’-1 ¾” but do not extend the Sunshade

Consider Installation of Sunshade on All Windows

Lowered

ExtendedExistingLower Sunshade

Lowered Sunshade

- Initial Savings $14,480- Yearly Savings $3,220- No Schedule Impact


Overhead Pedestrian Bridge Illumination Analysis


Bridge Illumination Analysis

The Overhead Pedestrian Bridge connects the New Campus to Old Campus and is a visible symbol of the college for all who drive down W.

North Avenue.

Problem

-Ignored Architectural Feature of the Campus

-Lighting is Dull and Industrious

Solution

-Create a Prestigious Symbol for Coppin State University

-Highlight the Structure and Architectural Features of Bridge

-Hide the Light Source

-Maintain a Horizontal Illuminace Level of 5 footcandles and a Vertical Illuminance Level of 3 footcandles

PresentationOutline

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements

Questions& Comments

Bridge Conditions– Connects with Health and Human Services Building on 2nd Floor– Will Connect to a Future Parking Garage– Crosses W. North Avenue

Community Outreach– Early Childhood Demonstration Center– Outpatient Health Clinic– Community BBQ



Existing Conditions

- 40 Pendant Ceiling Mounted Fixtures

- Structure is not Highlighted

- No Light Focused on Structure

- Light Source is Visible

PresentationOutline

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements

Questions& Comments

Interior View

Pseudo Color RenderingExterior View

Exterior View


Bridge Illumination AnalysisPresentation

Outline

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination


Acknowledgements

Questions& Comments

Redesigned Lighting Scheme

- Small Fixtures Blend into Space

- Fixtures Painted to Match Truss Color

- FF-1 Ceiling Mounted Every 20 feet

- FF-1 have Emergency Battery Ballasts

- FF-2 Wall Mounted Every 10 feet on Alternate Sides

Pseudo Color Rendering

-Average Illuminance of 6.18 footcandles

-Maximum Illuminance 11.6 footcandels

NO. Type Watts Type Lamps

FF-1Diecast Aluminum,

Ceiling Surface Mounted Downlight

Gardco Lighting- 300/O/CR/50M

H/277/NP1

50W MH

50W Electronic 1 277 7

FF-2Diecast Aluminum,

Wall Surface Mounted Downlight

Gardco Lighting- 301/O/W/50MH

/277/NP1

50W MH

50W Electronic 1 277 16

VoltageFixture

Qty.Label Description Catalogue NO.

Lamp Ballast

FF-1 FF-2



Hidden Light Source that Highlights the Structure and Architectural Features with a Sufficient Amount of Light

PresentationOutline

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements

Questions& Comments

Interior View

Exterior View

Exterior View



Outline

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements

Questions& Comments

Electrical Impacts - ASHRAE Design Criteria of Maximum of 3 Watts/ft2 Met

- Redesign Power Density 80% Less than Allowable

- Existing and Redesigned System Circuited to

Panelboard LPN2

- Circuit 4 Redesigned According to NEC

Label Qty WattsTotal Watts

FF-1 7 52 364FF-2 16 52 832

11962040

0.586275

Total Watts:Square Feet:

Power Density:

Redesigned Power Density

Label Qty WattsTotal Watts

FF-1 40 35 140014002040

0.686275

Total Watts:Sqare Feet:

Power Density:

Existing Power DensityCircuit 4 Redesign

Circuit 4 - 20A, Single Pole, 277V

Allowable Total Wattage on Circuit 4

16A x 277V x 1(Power Factor) = 4,432 Watts

1,196 Watts < 4,432 Watts

All Fixtures on Same Circuit

VOLTAGE: MIN. C/B AIC:

SIZE/TYPE BUS: OPTIONS:

SIZE/TYPE MAIN:

DESCRIPTION LOCATION LOAD (WATTS) C/B SIZE POS. NO. A B C POS. NO. C/B SIZE LOAD (WATTS) LOCATION DESCRIPTION

Lighting Offices 2900 20A/1P 1 * 2 20A/1P 1800 Corridor LightingLighting Offices 2100 20A/1P 3 * 4 20A/1P 1196 Bridge LightingLighting Exterior 500 20A/1P 5 * 6 20A/1P 1100 Cove LightingLighting Control Panel 2900 20A/1P 7 * 8 20A/1P 0 0 LightingLighting Control Panel 2900 20A/1P 9 * 10 20A/1P 0 Spare 0 20A/1P 11 * 12 20A/1P 0 Spare 0 20A/1P 13 * 14 20A/1P 0 Spare 0 20A/1P 15 * 16 20A/1P 0 Spare 0 20A/1P 17 * 18 20A/1P 0 Spare 0 20A/1P 19 * 20 20A/1P 0 Spare 0 20A/1P 21 * 22 20A/1P 0 Spare 0 20A/1P 23 * 24 20A/1P 0 Spare 0 20A/1P 25 * 26 20A/1P 0 Spare 0 20A/1P 27 * 28 20A/1P 0 Spare 0 20A/1P 29 * 30 20A/1P 0 Spare 0 20A/1P 31 * 32 20A/1P 0 Spare 0 20A/1P 33 * 34 20A/1P 0 Spare 0 20A/1P 35 * 36 20A/1P 0 Spare 0 20A/1P 37 * 38 20A/1P 0 Spare 0 20A/1P 39 * 40 20A/1P 0 Spare 0 20A/1P 41 * 42 20A/1P 0

CONNECTED LOAD (KW) - A 7.60 TOTAL DESIGN LOAD (KW) 23.09

CONNECTED LOAD (KW) - B 6.20 POWER FACTOR 1.00

CONNECTED LOAD (KW) - C 1.60 TOTAL DESIGN LOAD (AMPS) 28

10K

PROVIDE FEED THROUGH LUGS

P A N E L B O A R D S C H E D U L E

FOR PANELBOARD 1L1B

SURFACE

480Y/277V,3PH,4W

150A

150A/3P C/B

PANEL TAG:

PANEL LOCATION:

LPN2

Room 212

PANEL MOUNTING:

Feeder Requires (3) #10 Wires in ½” EMT Conduit



Outline

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination


Acknowledgements

Questions& Comments

Cost Impacts

- Lamp Maintenance Reduced

- Number of Fixtures Decreased

- Redesigned Fixtures Inexpensive

Lamp Maintenance Reduction

-Existing Lamp is Linear Fluorescent T8

-Redesigned Lamp is Metal Halide

-Linear Fluorescent Lamps Lose Efficiency and Lamp Life in Low Temperatures Present in Baltimore,

Maryland

-Metal Halide is Better for Outdoor Application

Number of Fixtures

-Existing has 40 Fixtures

-Redesign has 23 Fixtures

Redesigned Fixture

-Actual Cost of Existing Feature Could Not be Found

-Actual Cost of Redesigned Fixture Could Not be Found

-Redesigned Fixture Can be Purchased from a Low-end Manufacturer

Metal Halide Linear Fluorescent



Outline

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination


Acknowledgements

Questions& Comments

Conclusion & Recommendation Redesigned Lighting Scheme Recommended

- Creates a Prestigious Symbol for the College - Maintains or Lowers Cost

Redesign

Exterior View

Existing

Redesign

Interior View

Existing

RedesignExisting


Questions and CommentsPresentation

Outline

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements


Acknowledgements

Barton Malow CompanyCoppin State University & University of Maryland, BaltimoreDesign Collective, IncFamily and FriendsFellow Architectural Engineering StudentsArchitectural Engineering Faculty


Summary and Conclusions


Solar Heat Gain Recommendation

Lower the Sunshade 4’-1 ¾”

– First Year Savings of $14,480– Yearly Additional Savings $3,220

Overhead Pedestrian Bridge Illumination

Utilize Redesigned Lighting Scheme

– Creates Prestigious Symbol– Highlights Structure and Architecture– Hides Light Source


-Allow Owner to Manage the Risk of Cost Escalation and Inflation

-Reduce the Amount of Money Spent on Managing Risk

To Allow the Owner

‘To Get More Building For His Buck’


Project Overview



Bridge Illumination


Acknowledgements


Solar Shading Analysis Current Btu Re-design Btu Change in Btu Savings

184,160,679 136,746,668 47,414,011 $141

7191 7048 143 4.29 $3,079

Re-design Lowest Hourly

Difference in Hourly Btu

Change in Tons

Demand Charge Saved

Current Lowest Hourly Btu

4.29 450 $8.95 $17,277.98

Number of Square Feet per Ton

Amount Saved (Tons)

Cost ($/SF) Total Initial Savings ($)

PresentationOutline

Cost Impacts

Electrical Savings

Demand Supply Charge Savings

Tonnage Reduction Savings


Additional Length of Sunshade Cost

460 0.036458333 0.00546875 19.28645833 156 $2.00 $6,017.38

Cost ($/lb) Cost ($)Number of Plates

Weight of Steel

(lb/ft3)

Volume of Steel

per Plate (ft3)

15% for Labor

(ft3)Weight per Plate (lb)

4' 3,188 $05' 4,006 $33,9986' 4,833 $68,3707' 5,669 $103,1168' 6,512 $138,1529' 7,364 $173,563

10' 8,225 $209,348


Area of Sunshade (SF)

Cost ($)

Change in Btu COP of Chiller

x $0.608/kwhx 3412 kwh/Btu

Electrical Savings

Demand Supply Charge Savings

Volume per Plate x 1.15 (Labor) x 460 lb/SF x Number of Plates x $2/lb

Tonnage Reduction Savings

Tons Saved x 450 SF/ton x $8.95/SF


Additional Cost per Foot

Payback Period of Extension

$41.56/SF (Includes Labor) x Area of SunshadeHourly Change in Btu x 365 Days x COP of Chiller x $10/ton

12000 Btu/ton

(Yearly Savings + Initial Savings – Initial Costs) Yearly Savings

Cost ($) Initial Savings ($) Yearly Savings ($)

Additional Length + Steel Tonnage Reduction Demand + Electric4' $6,017 $17,278 $3,220 05' $40,015 $21,628 $4,026 46' $74,387 $25,977 $4,829 97' $109,133 $30,206 $5,606 138' $144,170 $34,556 $6,400 169' $179,581 $38,906 $7,192 1910' $215,366 $43,255 $7,981 21


Payback Period (Years)


PresentationOutline

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements



Implementation

-Owner must Demand Constructability Review be Completed

-Construction Manager can Run Pre-Qualified Interview Process

-Party Managing Pay Application can Implement Quarterly Material Cost

Escalation Adjustments


PresentationOutline

Project Overview



Bridge Illumination

Acknowledgements



Case Study

Conditions:

-One Year Project December 2005 to December 2006

-Management of the Cost of Steel Escalation

-Estimated Current Price of Materials in Scope $4 Million

Owner Saves $380,000

Estimated Cost $4.52 Million

Risk Managed

$4.28 Million

Only Hold Price for 10 Days $4.5 Million

$4.7 Million

Additional Contractor Added Inflation (5%)

Vendor Added Inflation (5%)

Contractor Added Inflation (7%)

Owner Added Inflation (13%)

Risk Passed

$4 Million

$4.32 Million

$4.32 Million

Owner Increases Contract Price to Adjust for Escalation

Contractor Purchases Steel in February 2006 with 8% Increase

Contractor Bid