6
Fachthemen DOI: 10.1002/stab.201410167 400 © Ernst & Sohn Verlag für Architektur und technische Wissenschaften GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin · Stahlbau 83 (2014), Heft 6 1 Introduction Spartak Moscow is one of the most high profile clubs in the Russian Fed- eration and they regularly qualify for the UEFA Champions League. How- ever, the club has never owned their With the 2018 FIFA World Cup in Russia in everyone’s sights, international architects and engineers are beginning to grapple with the challenges and complexities of delivering world class stadium designs in unfamiliar territory. In this paper, the authors explain how they have overcome both the technical and regulatory challenges in delivering the engi- neering design of the Otkritie Arena, the new home of FC Spartak Moscow. Otkritie-Arena: Die Gestaltung des neuen Stadions von Spartak Moskau. Langsam, aber sicher gewinnt der FIFA World Cup 2018 in Russland mehr Raum im öffentlichen Be- wusstsein. Für Architekten und Ingenieure ist es an der Zeit, sich den Aufgaben und Her- ausforderungen zu stellen, die der Bau eines Stadions auf Weltniveau in ungewohntem Gebiet mit sich bringt. Im vorliegenden Beitrag wird berichtet, wie sowohl technische als auch behördliche Hürden bei der Gestaltung und der Konstruktion der Otkritie-Arena – dem neuen Heimatstadion von Spartak Moskau – zu meistern waren. own stadium and currently uses the facilities at the Luzhniki Olympic Sta- dium. AECOM was appointed in early 2010 to design a brand new 45000 seat stadium for the club (Fig. 1). Teams of AECOM architects and engineers from the company’s London and Mos- cow offices worked together on both the conceptual and detailed design for the new stadium to ensure that both international best practice and local regulatory compliance were met. Prior to AECOM’s appointment, the club had been trying for many years to get the project off the ground, but had been frustrated by both the approvals process, and spiralling costs. They had a number of design options under consideration which really did not reflect the realities of what the club needed. AECOM’s ini- tial task was to get right back to first principles to produce an efficient, eco- nomically sustainable stadium design. 2 Site Conditions The new stadium is located on the site of the disused Tushinskiy Aerodrome in the North West of the city and sits alongside the Moscow River. The Moscow metro confines the site to the North West with the Moscow River to the south and east of the site. The site is within the flood zone of the Mos- cow River and has had extensive flood protection measures put in place over the past 30 years. The site conditions themselves had a major influence on the design. The site geology was very challenging; the top 15 m of soil comprise highly compressible alluvial deposits, and groundwater is less than a metre be- low the existing site formation level. As a result, the entire stadium sits on piles up to 45 m long and an intercon- nected grillage of 1.5 m deep ground beams, to raise it out of the ground (Fig. 2). The poor ground conditions and high water table meant there was little Otkritie Arena: Design of the new Spartak Moscow Stadium Peter Ayres Thomas Webster Fig. 1. The Otkritie Arena: A new home for Spartak Moscow Bild 1. Die Otkritie-Arena: Das neue Heimatstadion von Spartak Moskau

Otkritie Arena: Design of the new Spartak Moscow Stadium

  • Upload
    thomas

  • View
    225

  • Download
    4

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Otkritie Arena: Design of the new Spartak Moscow Stadium

Fachthemen

DOI: 10.1002/stab.201410167

400 © Ernst & Sohn Verlag für Architektur und technische Wissenschaften GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin · Stahlbau 83 (2014), Heft 6

1 Introduction

Spartak Moscow is one of the most high profile clubs in the Russian Fed­eration and they regularly qualify for the UEFA Champions League. How­ever, the club has never owned their

With the 2018 FIFA World Cup in Russia in everyone’s sights, international architects and engineers are beginning to grapple with the challenges and complexities of delivering world class stadium designs in unfamiliar territory. In this paper, the authors explain how they have overcome both the technical and regulatory challenges in delivering the engi-neering design of the Otkritie Arena, the new home of FC Spartak Moscow.

Otkritie-Arena: Die Gestaltung des neuen Stadions von Spartak Moskau. Langsam, aber sicher gewinnt der FIFA World Cup 2018 in Russland mehr Raum im öffentlichen Be-wusstsein. Für Architekten und Ingenieure ist es an der Zeit, sich den Aufgaben und Her-ausforderungen zu stellen, die der Bau eines Stadions auf Weltniveau in ungewohntem Gebiet mit sich bringt. Im vorliegenden Beitrag wird berichtet, wie sowohl technische als auch behördliche Hürden bei der Gestaltung und der Konstruktion der Otkritie-Arena – dem neuen Heimatstadion von Spartak Moskau – zu meistern waren.

own stadium and currently uses the facilities at the Luzhniki Olympic Sta­dium.

AECOM was appointed in early 2010 to design a brand new 45000 seat stadium for the club (Fig. 1). Teams of AECOM architects and engineers

from the company’s London and Mos­cow offices worked together on both the conceptual and detailed design for the new stadium to ensure that both international best practice and local regulatory compliance were met.

Prior to AECOM’s appointment, the club had been trying for many years to get the project off the ground, but had been frustrated by both the approvals process, and spiralling costs. They had a number of design options under consideration which really did not reflect the realities of what the club needed. AECOM’s ini­tial task was to get right back to first principles to produce an efficient, eco­nomically sustainable stadium design.

2 Site Conditions

The new stadium is located on the site of the disused Tushinskiy Aerodrome in the North West of the city and sits alongside the Moscow River. The Moscow metro confines the site to the North West with the Moscow River to the south and east of the site. The site is within the flood zone of the Mos­cow River and has had extensive flood protection measures put in place over the past 30 years.

The site conditions themselves had a major influence on the design. The site geology was very challenging; the top 15 m of soil comprise highly compressible alluvial deposits, and groundwater is less than a metre be­low the existing site formation level. As a result, the entire stadium sits on piles up to 45 m long and an intercon­nected grillage of 1.5 m deep ground beams, to raise it out of the ground (Fig. 2).

The poor ground conditions and high water table meant there was little

Otkritie Arena: Design of the new Spartak Moscow Stadium

Peter AyresThomas Webster

Fig. 1. The Otkritie Arena: A new home for Spartak MoscowBild 1. Die Otkritie-Arena: Das neue Heimatstadion von Spartak Moskau

Page 2: Otkritie Arena: Design of the new Spartak Moscow Stadium

401

P. Ayres/T. Webster · Otkritie Arena: Design of the new Spartak Moscow Stadium

Stahlbau 83 (2014), Heft 6

cope with the thermal movements ex­pected for an 80 °C temperature range, the bowl is split into 12 segments with vertical movement joints at approxi­mately 50 m intervals through the grandstands. Each of the 12 segments has its own stability system allowing them to act independently making a multi phased construction sequence available to the contractor (Fig. 4).

One of the most noticeable fea­tures of the new stadium is that the VIP boxes, banqueting suites and Presidential lounges are all banked together over three floors on the west side of the stadia. This was a direct response to the Russian tradition of hospitality and networking. The team initially considered a conventional bowl with VIP boxes at one or two levels around the stadium, but in dis­cussion with the owner, it soon be­came clear that an intimate, intercon­nected VIP zone was much more suited to the Russian way. Moscow is home to more billionaires than any other city in the world, so inspiration was taken from how horse race courses, which are well known for their more affluent clientele, worked, and that became the model (Fig. 5).

Another key benefit of locating the VIP suites and main club facilities into one stand is that the remainder of the stadium can be extremely cost ef­fective, since the other stands can be treated as semi­ open spaces and re­quire very few building services and only basic finishes.

phere and contribute to the team’s home field advantage.

Reinforced concrete is the mate­rial of choice for stadium structures in Russia; the approach suits the every­day construction worker and the addi­tional robustness provided by contin­uously tied reinforced concrete beams helps in achieving Russian code re­quirements and provides resilience against the harsh climatic conditions that are experienced in Moscow.

The structural frames are on a consistent 7.6 m grid which allows for maximum repetition of the concrete frame and precast seating unit. To

opportunity to recess the lower tier of the bowl into the ground to provide a top fed lower bowl. The design team considered landscaping the site to bring the external levels around the stadium up to ease internal spectator access, but the ground was so soft that the overburden weight of the fill ma­terial on the compressible soils would have left the client with long term sett lement problems for decades.

As a result, all spectators will en­ter the stadium at pitch level, access­ing the lower tier at mid height via staircases; upper levels are accessed via a series of lifts, staircases and esca­lators. In addition, the stadium is sur­rounded by a 50 m stand­off zone. This was designed in response to re­cent Russia counter terrorism guide­lines, but also provides excellent space for event overlay for the FIFA World Cup (Fig. 3).

3 Superstructure

The superstructure design is domi­nated by the stadium bowl and VIP zone. The aim was to produce a tight, efficient bowl which would create an intimate club atmosphere, and be highly cost­ effective to build. To cre­ate this sense of intimacy, a two­tier rectilinear design, which places fans as close as possible to the pitch, was chosen. Views of the pitch will be ex­cellent; almost every seat in the sta­dium has C­values in excess of 90 mm. This will generate an intense atmos­

Fig. 2. Ground conditionsBild 2. Beschaffenheit des Untergrunds

Fig. 3. Arial view of the new stadium and precinctBild 3. Luftbild des neuen Stadions in seiner Umgebung

Page 3: Otkritie Arena: Design of the new Spartak Moscow Stadium

P. Ayres/T. Webster · Otkritie Arena: Design of the new Spartak Moscow Stadium

402 Stahlbau 83 (2014), Heft 6

3.1 Dynamic performance

A key aspect of the design develop­ment was how the structure would perform under crowd excitation. The response of structures to vibration is an increasingly important area of work for structural engineers; stadia must provide unobstructed views for spectators and clear access and circu­lation within the concourses, a brief that lends itself to long cantilevers and slender members with column free spaces. Consequently, these struc­tures can be sensitive to dynamic loading. Whether an exciting game of football or a high tempo rock concert, the crowd itself applies a dynamic load to the stadium structure that can excite natural modes of vibration.

Conventionally, the dynamic analysis of stadium structures has been based on simple harmonic mo­tion, with many designers choosing to limit the first dynamic response of the primary structure to 6 Hz. This is a conservative method that attempts to model crowd behaviour as a har­monic input force to a single­degree of freedom (SDOF) vibrating system. A theoretical force is applied to a model of the structure and the behav­iour of the structure is then estimated (Fig. 6).

The traditional method does not model how actual crowd behaviour affects loads applied to the structure, an effect known as “human structure interaction” (HSI). The modelling of HSI leads to a higher level of analyti­cal complexity, a multi­degree of free­dom (MDOF) vibrating system, where there is a basic feedback loop – the vibration of the structure affects the force which is driving the vibration. By taking this effect into account in the design of Stadium Spartak, AECOM’s engineers were able to avoid unneces­sary and potentially costly additional stiffening of the structure.

3.2 Roof design

For structural engineers, the domi­nant feature of any stadium is the roof. Stadium roof structures are very different from the structures encoun­tered in conventional buildings. The sheer scale of these structures means that many of the simplifying assump­tions that engineers can usually justify

Fig. 4. Revit model showing reinforced concrete bowl structureBild 4. Revit-Modelldarstellung der Stahlbeton-Konstruktion der Tribüne

Fig. 5. Interior view showing VIP boxes in West standBild 5. Innenansicht mit Blick auf die VIP-Bereiche der westlichen Tribüne

Fig. 6. Schematic of dynamic model Bild 6. Schema des Modells für dynamische Belastungen

Page 4: Otkritie Arena: Design of the new Spartak Moscow Stadium

403

P. Ayres/T. Webster · Otkritie Arena: Design of the new Spartak Moscow Stadium

Stahlbau 83 (2014), Heft 6

mid­span depth of approximately 21 m and the shorter perpendicular trusses span approximately 180 m, with a mid­span depth of 17 m. Secondary beams then spans from the concrete columns at the back of the grand­stands to the primary trusses spanning across the stadium. The secondary beams and roof cladding are designed to intersect with the primary trusses at mid height. The effect of this is that approximately half the truss sits above the roof plane and half below, which helps to soften the visual impact of such massive structures (Fig. 7).

The interlocking mega­truss de­sign specifically addresses Russian disproportional collapse regulations, since even under a theoretical failure of one truss, the orthogonal trusses can redistribute the loads safely. This may seem like a conservative ap­proach to international designers, but the requirement for such onerous con­ditions is born of concerns about the quality of steelwork fabrication in the emerging Russian market.

The interaction of the me­ga­trusses is more complex than it ap­pears. It is necessary to balance the relative stiffnesses of the trusses so that they each carry a reasonable pro­portion of the load under normal con­ditions. The overall geometry of the mega­trusses has a greater direct influ­ence on the stiffness of the trusses than the individual sizes of the steel components. The intersecting nature of the top and bottom chords meant that a change in geometry in one set of trusses needed to be followed through to the other trusses. This

There are plenty of highly sophisti­cated computer programmes at our disposal today, but it is essential that specialist stadium engineers retain an intuitive three dimension understand­ing of the structure, how forces will be transferred to the supports, and how the roof will deform under loading and thermal stresses.

The roof for the Otkritie Arena is supported by four interlocking steel mega­trusses which span back to eight principal support points around the stadium. The design responds to a range of criteria including buildability, structural efficiency and robustness together with being able to cope with the extremes of the Moscow climate.

The longer trusses span 217 m along the length of the pitch with a

for general structural engineering can­not be applied.

One very basic and underlying assumption of most structural engi­neering is that the deformations un­der load remain small relative to the cross sectional size of the structural members elements used in the struc­ture. This one assumption cannot be applied for long span structures, as deformations can be much greater than the cross sectional size of the structural members within roof struc­ture. The effects of the change in geo­metry must be fully considered and this includes the use of large displace­ment non linear analysis.

This is one of the reasons why stadium designers consider them­selves part of a very exclusive club.

Fig. 7. Revit model showing roof structureBild 7. Revit-Modelldarstellung der Dachkonstruktion

Fig. 8. Flume tank testing for snow drift (photos: RWDI) Bild 8. Modellierung von Schneeverwehungen im Strömungskanal (Fotos: RWDI)

Page 5: Otkritie Arena: Design of the new Spartak Moscow Stadium

P. Ayres/T. Webster · Otkritie Arena: Design of the new Spartak Moscow Stadium

404 Stahlbau 83 (2014), Heft 6

for the primary roof trusses and the use of higher drifting loads for the sec­ondary roof structure. The resulting characteristic snow loads on the sta­dium roof are, nevertheless, far higher than would be the case in much of Western Europe; the general distrib­uted load is 2.6 kN/m2 and localised drift loads are as high as 5.2 kN/m2.

A further critical aspect in the de­sign of the roof is allowing for move­ment at the roof bearings due to both thermal movement and shortening of the trusses under loading. Moscow is subject to an extreme temperature range, from –40 °C in winter to +40 °C in summer. For stability, the roof must act as a continuous diaphragm and therefore the roof has been designed to “breathe” to accommodate these thermal movements.

To allow the roof to breathe, a single direction restrained bearing is placed in the middle of the edge roof on each side of the stadium. These transfers the horizontal forces to the stability systems within the concrete structures below. Bi­directional bear­ings are used on all other supports. The total movement range predicted at the mega­truss supports can be in excess of 200 mm when both thermal movement and deformation of the trusses under load are considered.

4 Regulatory environment

Designing a stadium for the extremes of the Moscow winter was only part of the story for AECOM’s design team. Obtaining regulatory approval for construction was the next step.

able height of top and bottom chords. This ensured that the two types of me­ga­truss intersected at exactly the same point and would deform evenly.

3.4 Climatic conditions

Snow falls in Moscow are very high. The snow freezes onto roof structures throughout the winter and the weight builds up as rain and melt­water is trapped within it through the daily freeze­thaw cycle. Russian codes for snow loading do not accurately pre­dict snow loading on major long span structures, especially the effects of snow drift over large areas.

To optimise the structural mem­bers sizes and reduce the self weight of the roof, AECOM commissioned RWDI of Toronto Canada to under­take a series of wind tunnel and water flume modelling tests of the snow drift distribution on the roof (Fig. 8). This allowed the design of the roof to be based on lower distributed snow loads

made balancing the stiffness a com­plex and iterative exercise.

3.3 Parametric design

A series of parametric design studies was undertaken to rapidly investigate and optimise the roof geometry. To break the problem down into manage­able parametric loops, the approach was to disassociate the geometry of the top and bottom chords for each of the trusses; the curved top chords were given priority in defining the geo metry whilst the bottom chords were manipulated to control stiffness.

Bespoke in­house parametric tools were developed using Excel and VB script to calculate the geometry and iteratively optimise the member sizes of the roof trusses via an XML link with the finite element software. For each calculation, parameters were set at acceptable deformation limits between the two sets of trusses along with a minimum and maximum allow­

Fig. 9. Construction progress internal March 2014Bild 9. Bauzustand innen, März 2014

Fig. 10. Construction progress external March 2014Bild 10. Bauzustand außen, März 2014

Page 6: Otkritie Arena: Design of the new Spartak Moscow Stadium

405

P. Ayres/T. Webster · Otkritie Arena: Design of the new Spartak Moscow Stadium

Stahlbau 83 (2014), Heft 6

sented both technical and regulatory challenges, but by employing a combi­nation of international stadium ex­perts with experienced local Russian engineers, the design of the project has been successfully delivered and construction is nearer completion; the stadium is on target to open in 2014, four years ahead of the World Cup (Figs. 9 and 10).

The successful and timely deliv­ery of the stadium has been rewarded with conformation from FIFA and the Local Organising Committee that the stadium will be a host venue for the 2018 World Cup.

Autoren dieses Beitrages:Peter Ayres BEng CEng MICE MIStructE, [email protected],Thomas Webster MEng CEng MICE MIStructE,AECOM, MidCity Place, 71 High Holborn, London, WC1V 6QS

tions from the Russian SNiPs, GOSTs and STC must have been met. This process can be lengthy, and engaging with the local Design Institutes from the conception of the project is essen­tial to ensure that all these criteria are met without delay to the programme.

The Expertize approvals process can be very challenging for a non­Rus­sia practice. Engineers can use state of the art performance based design techniques to develop a highly effi­cient structure, but it still needs to be approved by Russian State Authori­ties. The contribution of AECOM’s in­country Russian engineers and ar­chitects was crucial in successfully obtaining the necessary approvals.

5 Conclusion

The new Otkritie Arena will be one the first new generation stadia to be completed since Russia was awarded the 2018 FIA World Cup. The design and delivery of the stadium has pre­

The Russian “SNiP” Design and Construction Codes Regulations and “GOST” State Standards and regula­tions are the only primary codes of practice currently recognised in Rus­sia. These codes are normally aimed at the design of typical 6 to 10 storey buildings. Unfortunately much of this documentation is not applicable to stadium design, so as part of the de­sign process documents known as the Special Technical Conditions (STC) must be created by the design team and approved by local Russian Design Institutes.

The STC is specific to the devel­opment, and once created, it effec­tively passes into law, and becomes the technical benchmark against which the design and construction of the project is assessed for regulatory approval by the Russian permitting authorities, collectively known as “State Expertize”. To achieve receive approval to construct from Expertize can be complex. All the design condi­