Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Preparation of a 3D Printed Greenplex Model for Display
Casey Neil Millard
A project submitted to the faculty of Brigham Young University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Science
Richard J. Balling, Chair Paul W. Richards
Fernando S. Fonseca
Department of Civil Engineering
Brigham Young University
December 2015
Copyright © 2015 Casey Neil Millard
All Rights Reserved
ABSTRACT
Preparation of a 3D Printed Greenplex Model for Display
Casey Neil Millard Department of Civil Engineering, BYU
Master of Science A display model of the University City Greenplex (UCG) was made from previous
students’ work of 3D printed buildings and laser cut board. Five undergraduate students were managed. The process of building the model is explained in detail. The process of building the model was explained in detail. More than 220 combined student hours were put into the making the model. The UCG was designed by other students to be a car-free, self-contained, highly connected, fully protected, multi-level city that uses many energy efficient technologies. How the UCG fits into each of these concepts was explained in detail.
Keywords: greenplex, congestion, pollution, skyscraper, skybridges, hyperstructures, ETFE, wind turbines, green technology, renewable energy, energy efficiency, green, dense urban living
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Many thanks to Dr. Balling for taking me on board as a graduate student and providing
me with the opportunity to obtain a master’s degree. Also, thanks to my wife for her valuable
support and constant optimism.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................... iv
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... vi
1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1
2 The Display Model ....................................................................................................... 3
Gather Previously Designed Buildings and Board ................................................ 4
Coordination .......................................................................................................... 6
Paint Buildings and Board..................................................................................... 8
Tape Specific Sections ........................................................................................ 12
Glue down buildings and glue in skybridges ...................................................... 13
ETFE ................................................................................................................... 14
Additional Features ............................................................................................. 16
Wind Turbines ..................................................................................................... 18
Display Case and Table ....................................................................................... 19
3 The Explanatory Chart ................................................................................................ 21
Objectives of Greenplex ...................................................................................... 21
3.1.1 Car-Free ......................................................................................................... 21
3.1.2 Self-Contained ............................................................................................... 22
3.1.3 Highly-Connected .......................................................................................... 23
3.1.4 Fully-Protected ............................................................................................... 23
3.1.5 Multi-level...................................................................................................... 24
Faculty/Student Contributors .............................................................................. 24
Space Use Key .................................................................................................... 25
Design Details ..................................................................................................... 25
Protection ............................................................................................................ 25
ETFE Atria .......................................................................................................... 26
Green Technologies ............................................................................................. 31
v
Polycentric Metropolitan Area ............................................................................ 36
4 Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 37
References ......................................................................................................................... 39
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Left to Right Shanisa Butt, Kaela Nordlin, and Rachel Hansen .......................... 4
Figure 2 Left to Right Stuart Perry and Megan Peffer ........................................................ 4
Figure 3 3D Printed Buildings ............................................................................................ 5
Figure 4 Laser Printed Board .............................................................................................. 6
Figure 5 Initial Modal Layout ............................................................................................. 8
Figure 6 Color Coated Space Use ....................................................................................... 9
Figure 7 Painting Process.................................................................................................. 10
Figure 8 Drying Process.................................................................................................... 10
Figure 9 Five Main Sections of Model ............................................................................. 11
Figure 10 Painted Topography on Board .......................................................................... 11
Figure 11 Painted Garden Areas and Walkways .............................................................. 12
Figure 12 Spacing of 1/8" Between Ribs .......................................................................... 13
Figure 13 Red and Gold Taped Sections .......................................................................... 13
Figure 14 Location of Skybridges ..................................................................................... 14
Figure 15 Cut-out, Curvature, and Direction of Wire Mesh ............................................. 16
Figure 16 High-speed Light Rail Train Figurine .............................................................. 17
Figure 17 Car Figurines to Represent Underground Parking ........................................... 17
Figure 18 Box Figurines to Represent Freight Coming Into Greenplex ........................... 18
Figure 19 Vertical Axis Wind Turbine in Guangzou, China (Griffith 2014) ................... 19
Figure 20 Figurine of Vertical Axis Wind Turbine .......................................................... 19
Figure 21 Completed University City Greenplex ............................................................. 20
Figure 22: Light Waves Passing Through Materials (LeCuyer 2008) .............................. 28
vii
Figure 23: Shading on ETFE Arranged to Block Light Rays (Peck 2011) ...................... 28
Figure 24: Shading on ETFE Arranged to Allow Light Rays to Pass (Peck 2011) .......... 28
Figure 25 Cable-Spring Support for ETFE Cushions (Bessey 2014) ............................... 29
Figure 26: ETFE Roof in Water Cube (Beijing, China) (Xin 2008) ................................ 30
Figure 27: Allianz Arena (Munich, Bavaria, Germany) (Tom 2006) ............................... 30
Figure 28: Water Cube (Beijing, China) (Comite Maritime International 2012) ............. 31
Figure 29: Population Growth (Omer 2007) ..................................................................... 32
Figure 30: (4) Openings for Wind Turbines (CTBUH 2013) ........................................... 34
Figure 31: Air Traveling Through the (4) Openings (Frechette 2009) ............................. 35
Figure 32: Wind Velocity Traveling Through Openings (Frechette 2009) ...................... 35
1
1 INTRODUCTION
A group of five undergraduate students were managed that took the previously student
designed University City Greenplex (UCG) consisting of 3D printed buildings and laser cut
board and made it into a self-explanatory model for presentation and display purposes. Dr.
Balling used this model for presentation during the Civil Engineering Conference in November
of 2014 and it is now on display in the Clyde Building on campus. The main steps consisted of
the following items.
1. Gather Previously designed buildings and board
2. Paint buildings and board
3. Tape specific sections
4. Glue down buildings and glue in skybridges
5. Apply wire mesh
6. Create wind turbines
7. Add figurines and labels
8. Make a display case and chart
Chapter 2 of this report explains in detail how the display model was made and the
management experience. Chapter 3 describes the explanatory chart on display below the display
model. Chapter 4 provides the conclusion to the report.
3
2 THE DISPLAY MODEL
In September of 2014, Dr. Balling needed to create a display model of the previously
designed University City Greenplex for presentation during the BYU Life-Long Learning Civil
& Environmental Engineering Scholarship Society Conference that would be held approximately
1.5 months later in the middle of October. He arranged for one graduate student to work on the
model. After the work began on the model, it became apparent that a large team would be
required in order to meet the two month deadline. Dr. Balling recruited five undergraduate
students and placed the graduate student into the position of being their manager. The pictures of
the undergraduate students consisting of Shanisa Butt, Kaela Nordlin, Rachel Hansen, Stuart
Perry, and Megan Peffer are shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2. Dave Anderson (lab technician)
provided the materials and space to work on the project. The UCG was planned by previous
students to accommodate the students and residents of a college town. It consists of 46 buildings
from 20 to 45 stories each. It was designed to be a car-free, highly-connected, fully-protected
city. It will house 100,000 people, of which, 33,000 will be students attending the university.
4
Figure 1 Left to Right Shanisa Butt, Kaela Nordlin, and Rachel Hansen
Figure 2 Left to Right Stuart Perry and Megan Peffer
Gather Previously Designed Buildings and Board
A previous group of BYU students had developed the layout of the greenplex under the
direction of Dr. Balling. The group underwent several iterations on their design in order to create
unique building geometries and have them fit into an attractive schematic layout. The final
design was drawn up in Google Sketch Up and sent to the University of Utah, where two student
architects exported the design through a series of software programs until the design could be
utilized by a 3D printer. Each of the individual buildings was 3D printed and a board that was cut
by a laser to show the topography inside of the atria and around the greenplex. The topography
consist of parks, baseball diamonds, stadiums, soccer fields, bike paths, swimming pools, and
gardens. These 3D printed buildings and laser cut board were brought back to BYU. Figure 3 and
Figure 4 respectively, show the freshly printed 3D buildings and laser-cut board. Dr. Balling and
his group of students presented the model at the EPA Sustainability Expo in Washington DC in
5
April, 2014. The design sparked some attention and later the Daily Herald printed an article on
the model and related greenplex ideas founded by Dr. Balling (Warnock 2014). Although the
model was a success, it required a great deal of explanation. It soon became apparent that greater
work needed to be done on the model to make it more self-explanatory. This is where the five
undergraduate and their manager stepped into the mix. The goal was to make the model into a
standalone presentation through color-coating it according to space use and showing, instead of
only telling, some of the various unique features of the greenplex.
Figure 3 3D Printed Buildings
6
Figure 4 Laser Printed Board
Coordination
A great deal of research was performed by Dave Anderson and the graduate student in
order to make sure that the materials used on the model would not harm the brittle plastic
buildings nor the soft wooden board. The adhesives had to be strong but not expand over time.
Materials used for skybridges had to be flexible enough to not punch holes through the side of
the buildings, but rigid enough to not sag under self-weight. A material to represent the
Ethylene-tetrafluroethylene (ETFE) covering had to be flexible enough to allow students to mold
it to fit various curvatures, but rigid enough to maintain its shape permanently. The paint used on
the buildings had to not eat at the plastic and the paint used on the board had to not spread as the
soft dry wood absorbed the paint.
After about 15 hours of research from the graduate student and 5 by Dave Anderson, the
team was ready to purchase materials and begin the project. The next task was to find a place to
work. The project had to be located on campus because Dr. Balling did not want the model
7
transported and damaged during travel and the students needed a large area to work on the model
simultaneously. Our two options were the structures lab in the Clyde Building or the woodshop
nearby. The structures lab would be ideal (due to the large open areas) but the model had to be
left where dust would not accumulate and other students were breaking masonry walls in that
area from 8 AM to 5 PM. The woodshop would also kick up too much sawdust and debris from
other students activities. The group had to resort to working in the structures lab during the
evenings. Obtaining all of the proper permissions to do so, set us behind schedule by 1.5 weeks
due to varying student and faculty schedules.
Once the materials were obtained and a work space was provided, the graduate student
served as the go-between for Dr. Balling and the rest of the team. Dr. Balling would explain in
detail to the manager the fine details of what he wanted in the model and the manager would then
make sure that the word was spread to each person on the team. Each student had a busy agenda
and it was found that working in groups of two or three allowed some flexibility to their
schedules and helped them to stay on task. It may have been most efficient to have all of the
team working on the model concurrently, but due to the small nature of the model, space
limitations served as the governing factor. The manager regularly worked on the model and
coordinated with the team so that each member had a partner to work with and an assignment to
complete within a short window. Most of the work on the model had to be done in a sequential
order, and as such, deadlines were extremely important. The groups changed each week and
communication became an issue. It was found that students didn’t respond well to emails, and as
such, the manager had to resort to long text messages and occasionally voicemails. Much of the
brainstorming was done upfront by the manager in order to foresee delays and plan accordingly.
The team’s efforts were coordinated to be as efficient as possible through ensuring that students
8
had all of the materials and direction beforehand in order to make their delegated tasks run as
smoothly as possible.
Paint Buildings and Board
The overall layout of the raw buildings and board before the team got started can be seen
in Figure 5. The first task was to unpack the buildings. They had been put into boxes with
packing foam and shipped back from the conference where Dr. Balling and his former students
had displayed the initial model. The team carefully transported the buildings to the structures lab
and blew off the packing foam using compressors with a relatively light air pressure. The
individual pieces were cleaned, inspected, and placed onto their respective areas on the laser cut
wooden board.
Figure 5 Initial Modal Layout
Painting the buildings came next. The group had to wait for Saturday since the spray
paint would release toxic fumes and need to be done primarily outside. A busy school campus
9
during the week would hinder the painting process. Buildings were color coated according to
space use. Figure 6 shows the color coated space use with the descriptive legend. Newspapers
were spread out set up around the painting area and buildings were separated according to color
in order to avoid overspray of one color onto another. Figure 7 and Figure 8 show the painting
and drying processes. The plastic that the buildings were made of did not permit the paint to dray
rapidly. To ensure proper that was on the buildings did not let the spray paint dry quickly. The
group waited several days to ensure that the paint had fully dried before handling the buildings.
While waiting, the group began painting the wooden board.
Figure 6 Color Coated Space Use
10
Figure 7 Painting Process
Figure 8 Drying Process
Painting the board proved to be difficult because the top layer is made of a soft wood. As
paint was put on one part of the board the soft layer would spread the color through wicking like
a liquid on fabric. To reduce this issue and ensure the most vibrant colors were used on the
model, paint markers were used. As seen Figure 9, the model is composed primarily of five
sections or leaves that circle around a center building. The center building represents the
university space of the greenplex. Due to space constrictions, only three students could paint the
board at a time. The soft wooden upper layer also soaked up a larger portion of the paint than
11
was expected and the manager had to run several times to grab extra paint markers. Upon
completion of painting the board, the key features (such as the areas inside of the atria), as well
as, other small features (such as the baseball fields and soccer fields around the outside) were
easily distinguishable. Figure 10 shows the fine detail that went into portraying the topography.
Figure 11 shows the walkways and large garden areas in-between buildings. The layout allows
for recreational areas including a seven baseball diamonds, four soccer fields, and five main
large atria sections.
Figure 9 Five Main Sections of Model
Figure 10 Painted Topography on Board
12
Figure 11 Painted Garden Areas and Walkways
Tape Specific Sections
Every seven stories in the greenplex will be used for retail. Red tape was used to
distinguish this area. The tape was chosen because a distinguishable and straight line needed to
exist between colors at the many transition points on the buildings. The tape needed to fit in
between the 1/8” ribs that stick out of each of the buildings as shown previously in Figure 12. In
order to find such a small piece of tape, vinyl that is typically used on car windows was chosen.
The tape came in strips of approximately 1/8” width and fit perfectly between the ribs of the
buildings. A couple of days after the tape was applied, the team noticed large strips of tape
falling off of the buildings, or in other words, the adhesive on the tape was not strong enough.
Instead of wasting time trying to find a different type of tape (that would have likely been more
expensive) superglue was used to bond the tape to the buildings. The glue left the tape looking
13
slightly bubbled, but overall accomplished our goal. At each corner of the housing banana
shaped buildings, a strip of gold car vinyl tape was used to represent police and fire stations. The
strips of red/gold tape can be seen in detail in the final figure of the model Figure 13.
Figure 12 Spacing of 1/8" Between Ribs
Figure 13 Red and Gold Taped Sections
Glue down buildings and glue in skybridges
Skybridges were placed between buildings to model what could be used in real life to
connect these buildings and make them highly accessible. The material for the skybridges that
had to be flexible enough to not punch through the plastic 3D buildings yet rigid enough to not
sag were cut from a sheet of a plastic foam like material that Dave Anderson found. A problem
14
arose as the skybridges were to be put into place. The buildings needed to be glued to the board
to not allow them to move but once the buildings were in place, gluing the skybridges between
the buildings became nearly impossible since only a small space between the buildings remained.
To overcome this dilemma, the center building in each of the five leaf sections were glued to the
board and then then only the immediately connecting skybridges were attached. A strip of glue
was placed on the outside of the skybridge and then the next building was glued to the board
while simultaneously connecting it to the glued free end of the skybridges. This issue could have
caused a real headache, but fortunately, the team realized early on that this dilemma would arise.
Figure 14 shows the location of the skybridges.
Figure 14 Location of Skybridges
ETFE
Wire mesh was used to portray the ETFE envelope covering the atria in-between the
buildings. The ETFE will provide a fully protected atria. The wire mesh looks similar to ETFE
except ETFE is usually arranged into hexagonal shapes. The material was chosen because it
15
would fit the desired curve around the buildings as seen in Figure 15, but held its form once
molded to that position. The mesh took a considerable time to put on since the material ended up
being slightly too rigid to easily cut the edges that had to be nearly perfect to fit the rapidly
changing geometric line around the outside of the buildings. The spaces to cut out of the mesh
for the center buildings proved to be challenging. They were first cut out by tracing the outline of
the roof edges of the center buildings onto a thin sheet of paper and then placing that paper onto
the mesh and cutting the outlined roof edges out of the wire mesh. The issue that arose with this
method was that no matter how accurate the group tried to outline and cut, the geometries never
lined up correctly when trying to mold and place the cut mesh onto the buildings. A different
method proved more time consuming but extremely accurate. A strip was cut out that would fit
over one of the five leaf sections. The wire mesh was then bent into approximately the shape
shown in the previously mentioned Figure 15. While holding the mesh in its almost final
position, each small edge of each outer banana shaped building and the roof line of each center
building was cut out piece by piece. This method worked perfectly and was used since the fibers
of each wire matrix needed to line up with each other and the mesh had to cover all five leaf
sections as shown in the previously listed Figure 15. Gluing the mesh onto the edges of the
buildings was difficult since the mesh was so rigid and the super glue dried so quickly.
16
Figure 15 Cut-out, Curvature, and Direction of Wire Mesh
Additional Features
Features were added to the rooftops of buildings and on the board to represent smart
features of the layout. A train car was added to represent the high-speed light rail transport
system between the greenplex and other locations as seen in Figure 16. The black trapezoid was
painted to represent the train tracks going underground near the greenplex. The idea is to have
the train stop under the greenplex in order to allow the train stop to not interfere with ground
level transportation and still allow the stop to be located near the center of the greenplex. The
train figurine is made from glued together balsa wood strips that were sanded down to fit the
desired curvature and painted by hand. This type of fine detail was also done on cars to show
underground parking and small boxes that represent freight coming into the greenplex as shown
17
in Figure 17 and Figure 18. Laminated pieces of paper with solar panel shapes printed on them
were used to represent solar panels on the tops of the roofs as shown in the previously listed
Figure 15. Similar methods were used to show the pools on the tops of the buildings that can be
drained for fire protection. Small figurines of trees were placed on the rooftops and board to
represent the recreational areas. Labels were placed on key features for greater clarification. A
shape similar to that of the Henry B. Erying Science Center Observatory was molded into putty
and placed on the top of the center university building to show a figurative observatory that can
rotate and has a telescope inside.
Figure 16 High-speed Light Rail Train Figurine
Figure 17 Car Figurines to Represent Underground Parking
18
Figure 18 Box Figurines to Represent Freight Coming Into Greenplex
Wind Turbines
Wind turbines proved to be difficult shape to represent in the model. The wind turbines
that the group wanted to match was the vertical axis wind turbines in Guangzhou, China shown
in Figure 19. After a great deal of brainstorming, Dr. Balling came up with a way to represent the
greenplex geometry of the wind turbine. He used five silver BYU stickers and one wooden rod.
The center of the stickers was cut out to fit the rod inside. The stickers were also cut from one
edge directly to the center and then the edges were taped to a sticker above or below it. Finally,
the stickers were spread out to span the majority of the length of the wooden rod and the rod was
placed in the model as shown in Figure 20. The top of the rod fit nicely into the wire mesh and
bottom of the rod was glued to the board.
19
Figure 19 Vertical Axis Wind Turbine in Guangzou, China (Griffith 2014)
Figure 20 Figurine of Vertical Axis Wind Turbine
Display Case and Table
In order to allow the model to be displayed and presented it needed need to be protective
case and an explanatory chart. Dave Anderson made a customized table and display case to
20
house the model. The display case primarily protects the delicate parts of the model. Dr. Balling
created a chart that lists key features of the UCG and it currently sits below the model. The final
model will remain on display in the Clyde Building to be used for inspiring students in structural
engineering classes and making presentations to off-campus visitors. The model took a combined
total of over 220 hours to build. The completed model can be seen in Figure 21.
Figure 21 Completed University City Greenplex
21
3 THE EXPLANATORY CHART
Objectives of Greenplex
An explanatory chart is located directly below the display model. Dr. Balling created this
chart to explain the uses and benefits of the UCG. Dr. Balling and previous students designed the
UCG to be a car-free, self-contained, highly connected, fully protected, and multi-level city.
These concepts will be explored in the following paragraphs.
3.1.1 Car-Free
Americans love their cars, but this passion has many consequences. The average
American family spends 17% of its income on automobile transportation (Bureau of Labor
Statistics 2014). Americans spend many hours stuck in traffic. In 1911 a horse and buggy could
average 11 mph down the street in Los Angeles, and in 2000, a car could make the rush hour trip
averaging 4 mph (Shi 200). A college graduate will spend over 4 years of their life sitting behind
a steering wheel. (Shi 2000). Americans are feeling the consequences of the pollution of cars. A
study of children living within 350 feet of freeways reported a significant increase in coughing,
wheezing, runny-nose, and diagnosed asthma (Vliet 1997). Cars also contribute to physical
inactivity which causes one of 10 deaths worldwide (Kohl 2012). Unfortunately, Americans have
become so dependent on their cars that often these consequences are ignored.
22
Eliminating the daily reliance on a car could prove to be beneficial. A car-free city would
be more navigable for pedestrians, reduce ground level congestion, and decrease traffic
accidents. Pollution levels would drop and physical activity would increase. The UCG allows
residents to have a vehicle for recreational purposes, but has otherwise been eliminated. This can
be done through the combination of mixed space use, multiple levels of skybridges, and a smart
layout. The buildings are laid out in such a way that all daily origins and destinations are located
within a 1/2 mile walking distance. Why is this important? Studies show that people are willing
to walk 1/4 to 3/4 mile before taking a car, cab, bus, or train (Donahue 2011).
3.1.2 Self-Contained
Since the UCG contains all origins and destinations for its residents, it can be referred to
as being a self-contained city. Essentially, anyone that lives there works there and has all of their
needs are provided for within the city. To do this, the mixed space use incorporates residential,
work, offices, schools, stores, hospitals, restaurants, churches, and entertainment.
The UCG is planned to house a university. In order to know the total number of residents
needed, Dr. Balling and his former students considered five college towns in the United States:
1) Auburn, Alabama, 2) Lafayette, Indiana, 3) College Station, Texas, 4) State College,
Pennsylvania, and 5) Ames, Iowa. The average population including students for these cities is
approximately 100,000 people (United States Census 2010). For this reason, the UCG will house
100,000 people, of which, 33,000 will be students attending the university.
In order to house this many people, a series of connected buildings were chosen. In order
to provide 2,700 ft2 per family of four, the complex would need to be approximately 76 million
ft2. The specific quantity that was chosen was 75,795,657 ft2. One mega-building could have
23
been chosen for the design of the UCG such as the Boeing Everett Factory. However, this
building is the largest building on the planet and its volume would have to be doubled in order to
house the 76 million square feet. In order to incorporate smaller buildings and add architectural
diversity, the series of connected buildings design was chosen. This design increases exterior
view, natural light penetration, and aesthetic appeal.
3.1.3 Highly-Connected
Skybridges will make the UCG highly connected and will be located at every 7 stories.
They allow pedestrians to travel directly from one building to another, and in turn, always be
located closer to a wider variety of facilities. Dr. Balling explained the lack of mobility between
skyscrapers without skybridges when he said, “What a shame that one can look out an office
window of a skyscraper and see the face of another person in an adjacent building, and yet to
visit that person face to face, one must descend to the ground level, negotiate congested streets,
and ascend from the ground level” (Balling 2013). Skybridges can transfer horizontal loads from
building to building and allow smaller steel sizes in columns, outriggers, beams, and trusses.
Having the greenplex work together as a system will increase the buildings natural periods and
decrease the damage that can be done by seismic activity and wind loads. Roller-connected
skybridges allow buildings to sway independently. Hinge-connected skybridges allow the
buildings to sway in unison. A study by McCall showed that hinge skybridges would provide the
greatest benefits to greenplexes in general (McCall 2013).
3.1.4 Fully-Protected
The UCG is fully-protected as described in section 3.5.
24
3.1.5 Multi-level
The only way to make the maximum walking distance a half mile is to have the UCG be
a multilevel city. This allows a person to be closer to all of their destinations from the same
origin. The mixed space use also contributes to this small walking distance.
Skybridges allow the levels above ground to be better utilized for main attractions. A
study by Bradley Mecham at BYU showed that a building with no skybridges should have all of
its main attractions at ground level to reduce congestion and travel time (Mecham, 2013).
Unfortunately, this would not alleviate the common ground level congestion. On the other hand,
Mecham also found that if a building has skybridges, the main attractions should be on the same
level as the skybridges. In other words, the multiple levels of the building can be more effective
to relieve congestion and reduce travel time if skybridges are included in the design. This is one
of many reasons that skybridges were included every seven stories in the design of the UCG. In
this manner the buildings will have a maximized usage.
Faculty/Student Contributors
Several BYU faculty and students have contributed to the design of the UCG. The faculty
consisted of a wide variety of disciplines which opened the way to a more thorough design. The
faculty consisted of Rick Balling (structures), Grant Schultz (transportation), Matt Jones
(energy), Clifton Farnsworth (construction), Michael Clay (urban planning), Brett Borup (water),
Carol Ward (sociology), Larry Walters (public management), Pat Tripeny, (architecture), Kyle
Rollins (foundations).
25
Space Use Key
As previously mentioned, the floor space consist of residential, work, offices, schools,
stores, hospitals, restaurants, churches, and entertainment. Figure 6 shows where the items listed
in the space use key on the chart are located on the actual greenplex. There are two colors shown
on the space use key that are not in Figure 6. The colors consist of black and gray and are there
to represent features on the laser-cut board. The gray represents the walkway or bike path. The
black represents the roads or railroad tracks that tunnel underneath the UCG. The light rail
transport system will stop underground near the center of the UCG. This will allow users to
remain within a half mile walking distance of where they need to go once the train stops. It will
also help to reduce the ground level congestion.
Design Details
The design of the UCG consisted of 46 diverse buildings. The diversity of building
geometries that are puzzled together into the one complex allows adds architectural appeal. Each
of the buildings are 20 to 45 stories tall. The students that assisted Dr. Balling with the design
also came up with a rough cost estimate. Of the 76 million ft2, the cost should run close to
$100.00 per ft2. The other design details were previously mentioned.
Protection
The covered atria between buildings will provide protection from rain, snow, and ice. The
atria will have unconditioned air, but will protect residents from temperature extremes through
natural ventilation. Dust and pollution will not be able to enter the atria due to a covering that is
explained in section 3.6. Many of the other forms of protection were highlighted in sections 3.1.1
and 3.1.3.
26
The UCG offers protection in times of unanticipated fires, terrorist attacks, or other
extremes through skybridges. These hallways in-between structures have become a new trend in
rise building enterprises. Five of the 7 proposals for the World Trade Center re-design
competition sponsored by the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation and Port Authority of
New York and New Jersey included layouts with skybridges (Wood 2007). Vertical systems
such as stairs or elevators can get cut off in emergencies. These vertical systems also take up
much precious floor space. In the previously mentioned study by Mecham at BYU, he proved
that adding skybridges to high-rise buildings with mixed space use reduces travel time more than
adding extra elevators (Mecham, 2013). He studied the following four building layouts.
1. Many elevators and skybridges.
2. Many elevators and no skybridges.
3. Few elevators and many skybridges.
4. Few elevators and no skybridges.
Mecham found that regardless of the number of elevators, removing skybridges from the
experiment significantly increased occupant travel time (Mecham, 2013). He proved that
skybridges decrease travel time by at least 13-60 percent.
ETFE Atria
The atria between buildings will provide a comfortable environment for residents and
decrease heating/cooling costs. Occupants traveling from building to building will never have to
experience a temperature outside of 55°F to 82°F. This temperature will be partially
heated/cooled by the heat radiation from the climate controlled buildings and mainly controlled
by natural ventilation. The less extreme atria temperature will decrease heating, ventilation, and
air conditioning (HVAC) costs inside the fully climate controlled buildings. The comfortable
27
temperature will allow gardens and social gatherings spots to be located between buildings
during all seasons. The atria will significantly reduce the amount of wind area on the individual
buildings in the UCG.
ETFE (Ethylene TetraFluoroEthylene) was the material of choice for the atria covering
because it has many benefits over traditional building materials. It weighs approximately one
percent of the weight of glass (Wilson 2009). It can transmit more light than glass in every
wavelength of visible light as seen in Figure 22 (LeCuyer 2008). The air pressure in the ETFE
cushion can be adjusted to allow light to be transmitted or reflected off of the material as seen in
Figure 23 and Figure 24. The material can stretch up to 300% before failure (Peck 2010). If a
tear occurs in a pillow, instead of replacing the entire unit, ETFE tape can be heat welded into
place. ETFE foils have a low coefficient of friction that does not allow dust, dirt, or mineral
deposits from snow or rainwater to collect and if anything does by chance accumulate on the
outside surface, the next rainstorm will wash it away (LeCuyer 2008). The 100% recyclable
material has a melting temperature of 473°F to 518°F (ETFE Properties 2015), but in the chance
that anything does get that hot, ETFE will simply shrink and shrivel instead of melt and drip
(Peck 2010). The lighter weight can decrease the cost of the supporting structure significantly
(Bessey 2014). ETFE cushions between buildings can be supported by a cable-spring truss
system as described by Bessey 2014 and shown in Figure 25. Note that the design is arched
which would allow for rainwater to be collected and recycled. The air vents would assist in the
rate of air change per hour.
28
Figure 22: Light Waves Passing Through Materials (LeCuyer 2008)
Figure 23: Shading on ETFE Arranged to Block Light Rays (Peck 2011)
Figure 24: Shading on ETFE Arranged to Allow Light Rays to Pass (Peck 2011)
29
Figure 25 Cable-Spring Support for ETFE Cushions (Bessey 2014)
ETFE has become a new trend in building façade and coverage (Balling 2013). ETFE
gained substantial recognition when it was used in the Allianz Arena for the 2006 FIFA World
Cup in Munich, Bavaria, Germany and in the National Aquatics Center (Water Cube) for 2008
Summer Olympics in Beijing, China. The lightness and strength of the material allows architects
greater freedom to span large distances and create fantastic designs without drastically affecting
their pocketbook (Peck 2010). As far as lengths go, ETFE can span up to 56 feet when arranged
into hexagonal patterns while glass can typically only span up to 14 feet. (Bessey 2014) A good
example of these large spans is illustrated by the size of various ETFE cushions used in the
Water Cube as shown in Figure 28. Architects can enhance a buildings appearance by
incorporating lighting systems into ETFE cushions. A customized light scheme can produce
30
almost any look as seen in Figure 27 of the Allianz Arena or Figure 28 of the Water Cube. It can
be easily understood why this material and its uses are quickly gaining popularity with architects.
Figure 26: ETFE Roof in Water Cube (Beijing, China) (Xin 2008)
Figure 27: Allianz Arena (Munich, Bavaria, Germany) (Tom 2006)
31
Figure 28: Water Cube (Beijing, China) (Comite Maritime International 2012)
Green Technologies
As the name “greenplex” implies, greenplexes are designed to use the best green
technologies and largest quantity of them as possible. These technologies are extremely
important to begin implementing for future use since approximately 40 percent of energy
consumption in the world is exhausted in the use of heating, cooling, and lighting, buildings
(Omer 2007), (U.S. Energy Information Administration 2015), and (Fachot 2012).
Unfortunately, most of the energy that is currently being used to provide these comforts comes
from non-renewable resources. These resources are diminishing. Figure 29 shows that the
world’s population is projected to grow at an unprecedented rate over the next 100 years and if
energy consumption of buildings is not reduced, the world’s demand on non-renewable energies
will quadruple (Omer 2007). The U.S. has already noticed this trend and by the U.S. Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007) has decreed that half of the entire
commercial buildings in the U.S. must comply with the standards of zero energy building by
32
2040 and by 2050 all new commercial buildings will be required to comply (GhaffarianHoseini
et al. 2013). Reducing consumption of energy for HFAC and electricity could drastically
alleviate the world’s global energy demand (Fachot 2012).
Figure 29: Population Growth (Omer 2007)
In order to be energy efficient, the UCG incorporates a long list of energy efficient
designs. Circulating elevators will prove beneficial since mass is moving up and down
simultaneously in a circuit. They are space efficient since an upward shaft and downward shaft
accommodate many elevator cars. Harvesting wind energy through wind mills will provide large
amount of renewable energy. Wind turbines will be placed at key locations around the building
in order to catch the maximum amount of wind energy. Using solar panels on tops of roofs and
in the blinds will not take up much space, but will allow the building to absorb large amounts of
solar energy. Geothermal energy is harvested through deep geothermal wells. The Linked Hybrid
in Beijing, China serves as an example of utilizing geothermal wells. It has 655 geothermal wells
that go 328 ft. deep (Steven Holl Architects 2009). Hydronic heating/cooling will be used to in
place of the less efficient HVAC systems. The ETFE covering offers a reduction in exposed
33
surface area. On site wastewater treatement/recycling plants will greatly reduce the costs of
shipping that material elsewhere (Balling 2013). Pools in the recreational areas on the roof can
be drained to extinguish fires. Note, this list is not exhaustive.
Wind turbines deserve a bit more explanation since they have a high energy pay-off that
does not deplete any resources. Currently, power plants eat up critical non-renewable resources
and produce atmospheric conditions that can be linked to greenhouse gasses and acid rain
(Mazen et al. n.d.). By the time energy reaches a building from a power plant, it is typically only
35% efficient. On site wind turbines can get up to 80% efficiency. These different facts and
figures make a compelling argument that perhaps wind turbines could prove overall more
beneficial and less wasteful than traditional energy harvesting methods (Frechette 2009).
The Pearl River Tower in Guangzhou, China is a great example of why greenplexes aim
to incorporate wind turbines into their design. The high rise building is 71 stories tall and was
geometrically designed to enhance wind flow through 4 openings in the building. The openings
occur at the 24th and 48th floors and can be seen in Figure 30. Each of these openings houses (2)
vertical axis wind turbines (seen in Figure 19) that harvest the wind forces to produce energy.
The design of the building allows the wind forces to increase near these openings through a
phenomena called vortex shedding. Increasing the wind forces in turn increases the quantity of
energy produced. The building was turned so that the broad sides are located perpendicularly to
the prevailing winds. As the wind hits the face of the building it wants to escape, and since it
cannot easily do so, it creates a positive pressure on the windward side of the building that tries
to push the air through the opening. Wind forces near the outside of the building follow the
rounded edges of the building over to the opposite face of the building and create large pockets
of negative pressures on the leeward face of the building that pulls the wind through the opening
34
(as seen in both Figure 31 and Figure 32). The design allows for wind forces to increase by a
factor of 2, and in turn, create more energy. Allowing the wind to pass through these areas in the
building also decreases the required size for steel members in the building. The designers’ goal
was to produce a “net zero-energy” building that would sell its excess energy to the local grid.
The local jurisdiction declined the offer, but the building is still fully capable of producing such
an energy supply. All that would be required is to configure 50 micro-turbines onto the building
that would combine efforts with the 8 wind turbines to accomplish this goal. The high-rise
building currently produces enough energy to power all of its own 71 floors (Frechette 2009). If
wind energy were harvested on more buildings in this manner, our cities would be less dependent
on depleting non-renewable resources.
Figure 30: (4) Openings for Wind Turbines (CTBUH 2013)
35
Figure 31: Air Traveling Through the (4) Openings (Frechette 2009)
Figure 32: Wind Velocity Traveling Through Openings (Frechette 2009)
Living in the UCG would be a large cultural shift. In order to ensure that the transition is
made in a costly manner, only one of the five leafs will be built at a time. In order to make sure
that the city is built in a timely manner, similar techniques as those used by the Broad
Sustainable Building Company could be used. In 2011, the Chinese company constructed a 30
36
story hotel in 15 days at a cost of $1000 per square foot (Rosenfield 2012b) The prefabrication
process is rather short as well. They built a 57 story building in 19 days after only 4.5 months of
prefabrication (Rosenfield 2012a).
Polycentric Metropolitan Area
The Wasatch Front Metropolitan Area (WFMA) can serve as a great example of how a
rapidly growing city could benefit from a greenplex instead of the traditional horizontal spread
city layout (that increases car dependency). The WFMA spans nearly 125 miles and is projected
to jump from its current 1.9 million residents to 3.5 million by 2040 (Davidson, 2012). Like
many metropolitan areas in the U.S., the area is dominated by car oriented urban sprawl. The
projected population could be accommodated with 35 greenplexes that consist of 100,000 people
each. Each of these greenplexes could be made in a unique design similar to the UCG. The
greenplexes would be connected by high speed light-rail transport systems and residents could
still drive their personal car to locations for outdoor recreation. Vehicles would not be needed for
the daily work routine. If the switch was made in the WFMA there would be 83% fewer
vehicles, 47% less air pollution, 95 % less land, 85% less fossil fuel, and 76% less water. Other
potential benefits include more walking, talking, community, and productivity. Overall there
would be less noise, stress, crime, utility cost, transport cost, and health cost. As these numbers
describe making the switch to living in a greenplex could greatly benefit large metropolitan
areas.
37
4 CONCLUSION
A model of the University City Greenplex was made from previous students’ work of 3D
printing buildings and laser cutting a board. Five undergraduate students were managed. The
process of building the model was explained in detail. More than 220 combined student hours
were put into the making the model. The UCG was designed by other students to be a car-free,
self-contained, highly connected, fully protected, multi-level city that uses many energy efficient
technologies. How the UCG fits into each of these concepts was explained in detail.
39
REFERENCES
Balling, R. (2013). “Greenplex: A Transformative Shift Towards Car-Free, Zero-Energy, 3D
Cities.” <https://ceen.et.byu.edu/sites/default/files/DepartmentResearch/Sustainability/ Greenplex_Project_Description.pdf> (2015)
Bessey, R. (2014). “Structural Design of Flexible ETFE Atrium Enclosures Using a Cable-Spring Support System.” M.S. Thesis, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2014). “Consumer Expenditures.” United States Department of Labor Comite Maritime International. (2012). “The Beijing National Aquatics Center.”
< http://cmi2012beijing.csp.escience.cn/dct/page/65616> (2015) CTBUH. (2013). “CTBUH Selects the 4 Best Tall Buildings for 2013.” Bustler
<http://www.bustler.net/index.php/article/ctbuh_selects_the_4_best_tall_buildings_for_2013/> (2015)
Davidson, L. (2012). “Utah Officials Plan How to Handle 67% Growth by 2040.” The Salt Lake
Tribune, < http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/53801882-90/utah-housing-population-regional.html.csp> (2015)
Donahue R. (2011). “Pedestrians and Park Planning: How Far Will People Walk?” Sustainable
Cities Collective, <http://sustainablecitiescollective.com/city-parks-blog/24937/pedestrians-and-park-planning-how-far-will-people-walk> (2015)
ETFE Properties. (2015). “Fluorotherm, Fluoropolymer Products.” Fachot, M. (2012). “Leaner and Cleaner Heating and Cooling.” International Electrotechnical
Commission, <http://iecetech.org/issue/2012-07/Leaner-and-cleaner-heating-and-cooling> (2015)
Frechette, R. (2009). “Seeking Zero Energy.” Civil Engineering, 79(1), 38-47. GhaffarianHoseini, A., Dahlan, N., Berardi, U. GhaffarianHoseini, A., Makaremi, N., and
GhaffarianHoseini, M. (2013). “Sustainable Energy Performances of Green Buildings: A Review of Current Theories, Implementations and Challenges.” ElSevier, 25, 1-17.
40
Griffith, T. (2014). “Pearl River Tower.” Emalak Sektoru < http://www.eladenecli.com/Hbr-
50184-Pearl-River-Tower-tr.html> Kohl, H.W. et. al. (2012). “The Pandemic of Physical Inactivity: Global Action for Public
Health.” National Center for Biotechnology Information 380(9838) 294-305 LeCuyer, A. (2008). “ETFE: Technology and Design.” Birkhauser Verlag AG, Basel, Germany Omer, A. (2007). “Energy, Environment, and Sustainable Development.” Elsevier 12(9), 2265-
2300 Mazen, R., Radwan, M., and Abdel-Samiea M. (n.d.) “Utilization of Wind Energy in Fast
Developing High-Rise Buildings.” Sohag University, <http://faculty.mu.edu.sa/public/uploads/1337696994.2126Mazen,Pearl%20River%20Tower%20Paper.pdf > (2015)
McCall, A. (2013). “Structural Analysis and Optimization of Skyscrapers Connected with
Skybridges and Atria.” M.S. Thesis, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT Mecham, B. (2013). “Modeling and Optimization of Space Use and Transportation for a 3D
Walkable City.” M.S. Thesis, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT Melia, S., Parkhurst, G., and Barton, H. (2011). “The Paradox of Intensification” Transport
Policy, 18(1) Peck, E. (2010). “Organic and Natural Forms in Building Design.” ASCE / SEI Structures
Congress 2010, 2864-2870 Peck. E. (2011). “ETFE Systems.” Fabric Achitecture < https://secure.ifai.com/fabarch/articles/0911_ce_etfe_systems.html> (2015) Rosenfield, K. (2012a). “Chinese Company Builds 57-Story Skyscraper in 19 days.” ArchDaily
< http://www.archdaily.com/199963/chinese-high-rise-constructed-in-15-days> (2015) Rosenfield, K. (2012b). “Chinese High-Rise Constructed in 15 Days.” ArchDaily
< http://www.archdaily.com/612783/chinese-company-builds-57-story-skyscraper-in-19-days> (2015)
Shi, D. (2000). “Well America: Is the Car Culture Working? Gonna Have To Face It: You’re
Addicted To Cars.” Philadelphia Inquirer, <http://articles.philly.com/2000-07-09/news/25610070_1_cars-dead-horses-automobile> (2015)
Steven Holl Architects. (2009). "Linked Hybrid."
<http://www.stevenholl.com/project-detail.php?id=58> (2015)
41
Tom. (2006). “Allianz Arena.” Wikipedia <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allianz_Arena> (2015)
United States Census. (2010). Interactive Population Map U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2015). “How Much Energy is Consumed in
Residential and Commercial Buildings in the United States?” Independent Statistics & Analysis, <http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=86&t=1> (2015)
Vliet, P., Knape, M., Hartog, J., Janssen, N., Harssema, H., Brunekreef, B. (1997). “Motor
Vehicle Exhaust and Chronic Respiratory Symptoms in Children Living Near Freeways.” U.S. National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health, 74(2), 122-132.
Warnock, C. (2014). “Professor Pitches Greenplex Proposal for Provo.” Daily Herald
<http://www.heraldextra.com/news/local/professor-pitches-greenplex-proposal-for-provo/article_00777f7f-8d5d-57e7-8bc2-0a7448f2702d.html> (2014)
Wilson, A. (2009). “ETFE: Why this Building Material is Gaining Popularity”. Architen
Landrell Associates, <http://www.architen.com/articles/etfe-the-new-fabric-roof/> (2015) Wood, A. (2007). “Bridging the Gap: An Analysis of Proposed Evacuation Links at Height in the
World Trade Center Design Competition Entries.” Architectural Science Review, 50(2), 173-180.
Xin. (2008). “Water Cube: National Aquatics Center.” Jian Zhu Xue Bao 36-47
