Army National Guard Readiness Center
Arlington, Virginia
Amanda C. Farace
Structural Option
AE Senior Thesis 2009 I 2010
 

Technical Report I

Technical Report I studies the structural concepts and existing conditions of the Army National Guard Readiness Center Addition. This report contains a detailed description of the structural system and how the components work together. Wind and Seismic lads were determined and calculations were performed to analyze the design of the building. To view the full report in PDF Format please click on the image to the right.

Technical Report I

Technical Report II

Technical Report II is a Pro-Con study of three alternate floor systems and the existing floor system of the Army National Guard Readiness Center Addition. The existing was designed as as a 2-way flat slab with edge beams. The three alternate system that were analyzed include:

 
- Hollow Core Precast Planks on Steel
 
- Steel Composite Framing
 
- Post-Tensioned Slab

Typical bay analysis was used to design each system. All three systems were the compared using various criteria related to cost, contractibility, weight, depth and several others to determine if any of the aforementioned system may be a potential area of interest for the structural proposal of AE Senior Thesis. To view this full report in PDF format please click on the image to the right.

 

Technical Report II

Technical Report III

Technical Report III is a detailed analysis of the lateral system for the Army National Guard Readiness Center Addition. This analysis was completed through hand calculations and the use of a computer model generated by ETABS. Lateral forces determined in the preliminary analysis prepared for Technical Report I were applied to the building's lateral force resisting system of ordinary reinforced concrete shear walls. The output from the ETABS model was compared to the hand calculated values to verify the shear strength of the walls. This report also investigates torsion, shear, building drift, story displacement and overturning moments. Code and industry limits and standards were used to compare to the results and verify the system. To view this full report in PDF format please click on the image to the right.

 

Technical Report III

User Note: While great efforts have been taken to provide accurate and complete information on the pages of CPEP, please be aware that the information contained herewith is considered a work-in-progress for this thesis project. Modifications and changes related to the original building designs and construction methodologies for this senior thesis project are solely the interpretation of Amanda Farace. Changes and discrepancies in no way imply that the original design contained errors or was flawed. Differing assumptions, code references, requirements, and methodologies have been incorporated into this thesis project; therefore, investigation results may vary from the original design.
This page was last updated on December 1, 2009, by Amanda Farace and is hosted by The Pennsylvania State University AE Department ©2009