SC-108_ftp Iconic Campus of the Zayed University.pdf

7/22/2019 SC-108_ftp Iconic Campus of the Zayed University.pdf

1/9

108

Reports

Steel Construction 5 (2012), No. 2

central campus area includes a con-ference centre and a library as well asadministrative buildings, faculties andcafeterias. These facilities are alsogender-segregated using structural andscheduling arrangements. A total of

approximately 213,000 m2 in grossbuilding area (GFA) will be used, withca. 100,000 m2 of this located in thecentral area.

Shortly after the end of 2008,when the contract for the entire build-ing complex was awarded to an Ara-bian-South African-Australian generalcontractor and the construction siteset up, the design was reworked in asmall invitation-based competition,searching for an improved iconic and

symbolic design value. The design sub-mitted by architects BRT Bothe RichterTeherani from Hamburg was selectedand became the basis for assignmentin April 2009. It moulds the ensembleof buildings in the central area into ahuge sculpture. The linking element

The Emirate of Abu Dhabi is planningfor the post-oil era, so education plays

a central role in its Master Plan 2030[1]. The new building complex of theuniversity, named after the late na-tional founding father H.H. SheikhZayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan [2], is lo-cated in the future Capital District di-rectly on the important connecting

road between the Abu Dhabi interna-tional airport and the old town penin-sular.

Up to 6,000 students will behoused and taught on the 75 hagrounds (Figure 1). Accommodation,sports facilities and stores are avail-able on a gender-segregated basis, lo-cated in the east campus for men andin the west campus for women. The

Iconic Campus of the Zayed University Abu Dhabi

Christian BttcherMatthias Frenz

Henning Kaufmann

DOI: 10.1002/stco.201210013

The Emirate of Abu Dhabi is planning for the post-oil era, so education plays a central

role in its Master Plan 2030. The new building complex of the Zayed University, intended

for 6,000 students, is located in the future Capital District directly on the important con-

necting road between the Abu Dhabi international airport and the old town peninsular.

Hamburg architects BRTs (Bothe Richter Teherani) symbolism-rich design moulds the

100.000 m2GFA ensemble of buildings in the central area into a huge sculpture. The link-

ing element is a jointless free-form roof of 8,000 tonnes of steel with aluminium claddingwhose shape and lightness echoes the traditional Arabic chador.

A very short time for design and construction required close cooperation within the in-

ternational team set up by a main contractor. The project required mastering of numer-

ous engineering challenges, different design philosophies, difficult interfaces between

design and construction works on a huge construction site with up to 8,000 workers

running in parallel to the design works.

1 Introduction

Fig, 1. Central Campus with Feature Roof


2/9

109Steel Construction 5 (2012), No. 2

Reports

is a jointless free-form roof of 8,000tonnes of steel with aluminiumcladding. The design intent for theshape of the building ensemble andthe sculptural roof was the shape andlightness of the chador, a semi-circu-lar cloth worn by Muslim women as amantle that exposes only the face orparts of it.

Due to the loss of time caused bythe change of design and design team,only 27 months of design and con-struction time remained as of April2009 until the contractually requiredhandover date of the complete cam-pus in July 2011.

BRT architects were assignedmainly up to design development andinterior design. Subsequent to this,Pascall + Watson architects werecomissioned for the detailed docu-

mentation of the buildings. For thefree-form roof, however, the detaileddesign including all coordinatingtasks and clarification of interfaceswas done jointly by the structural en-gineers, the main contractors projectmanagers, the steelwork contractorand cladding contractor. Because ofthe complexity, the structural engi-neers were fully assigned from the ini-tial idea until completion of the roof.

The structural design had to be

completed during the remaining 8months of 2009 and was divided intothree design steps: concept design,design development and detailed de-sign.

During form finding of the con-cept design, 16 different primaryshapes and a corresponding numberof secondary variations of the geome-try and the structural design were de-veloped and tested in close coopera-tion with the architects. Only 12weeks after assignment and devel-

oped from a total of 80 variations, the

final and efficient form was agreed.This was only made possible by theuse of a holistic, fully parameterised3D-architectural model of the build-ings and the free-form roof in Rhinoc-eros in conjunction with a new soft-ware developed in-house by the struc-tural engineers that generates thestructural elements within the archi-tectural model. The development,programming and verification of thissoftware were carried out during theproject period in parallel with the in-dividual design steps. This BIM-equivalent approach is documentedmore in detail in [6].

The first invitations to tender forthe steel structure of the free-formroof were placed even before finishingthe concept design. The subsequentearly assignment of the steelwork con-

tractor allowed local market charac-teristics of material availability, fabri-cation and assembly methods to be in-cluded in the further design process.

Sixteen weeks after the start ofthe design phase and before comple-tion of the design development phase,the procurement for the gross steeltonnage had to be placed because ofan expected significant increase insteel prices in the autumn of 2009.Also at this time, the individual cross

sections had to be designed andagreed for the upcoming pre-fabrica-tion. Selected simple parts of the steelstructure were identified and fully de-signed so that these parts could befabricated in advance.

The structural design mainly hadto be completed by the end of 2009with all corresponding connectionforces and the full three-dimensionalgeometry to be submitted digitally tothe steelwork contractor. Finally, thestructural engineers had to check the

workshop design provided by the

steelwork contractor in parallel withalready ongoing fabrication and alsohad to provide a full set of calcula-tions regarding assembly planning andpresetting.

2 Buildings in the Central Area

The central campus includes the fol-lowing buildings on a north-southaxis: Convention Center (CON) with33.000 m2 GFA including huge columnfree conference rooms and a theatrewith 1100 seats, the Administration(AF2) with 16.000 m2 GFA, the cam-pus, faculties (Interdisciplinary Stud-ies, IS), dining halls (DH) totalling17.000 GFA and a Library (LIB) with20.500 m2 GFA accomodating up to500,000 volumes and four lecturehalls. Figure 2 shows the arrange-

ment of these buildings under the freeform roof. The roof slabs of the CON(shown blue), AF2 (shown yellow)and LIB (shown red) are used forbearing points of the overlying free-form roof. The faculties (green) arefree from loads of the feature roof. Amore detailed description of the build-ings is given in [5].

3 Free-Form Roof3.1 Principles of the Design

3.1.1 External Appearance

The sculptural roof was conceived tobe a jointless, continuously curvedshape of aluminium cladding with aconstant overall thickness of only1,75 m.

The challenges inherent in thiswere multifaceted. Along with high ar-chitectural requirements of evenness,continuity of curvature, clean linesand non-visibility of joints, emphasisfell on cost, ease and time of con-

struction, the height remaining for

Fig. 2. Overall structural model of the Central Campus


3/9

110

Reports


the steel structure and the extremeenvironmental boundary conditions.Due to the proximity to the PersianGulf and the high-level, salty groundwater, the local dust and sand areslightly saline. With the considerabledewfall in the morning hours, espe-cially in summer and autumn, andthe high temperatures during the day,this leads to a baking of the dustand sand, to be countered by the es-pecially smooth surface and specialjoint construction of the cladding. Al-ternative roof claddings such as astanding seam roof cladding wouldnot serve.

The roughly 25,000 aluminiumpanels have typical dimensions of ca.1500 mm 1500 mm by 3 mm thick-ness and are mounted on their ownsubstructure at the upper side ceiling

and the soffit. This left a structuralheight of constantly only 1.50 m.

3.1.2 Interaction with the Buildings

In order to preserve the slim appear-ance of the free-form roof, it was essen-tial to support it from the buildingswherever possible. For the Conven-tion Center (CON), the Administration(AF2) and the Library (LIB), interac-tion with the roof was thus an addi-

tional design requirement that man-dated a high level of coordination andthe use of full 3D-modelling.

According to the architects spec-ifications, all structural supports of theroof needed to be nearly invisible. Thiswas achieved by using very slendercolumns, large spans, special colouringand positioning away from the edgesof the building.

The limited space for stiffeningelements within the buildings (e. g.cores) required to keep the buildings

free from any earthquake loads ortemperature related loads from thefree-form roof.

3.1.3 Sustainability

Sustainability played a major role inthe design. In light of the extremeenvironmental conditions and archi-tectural desires, the goal was to cre-ate a jointless, preferably bearinglesssteel structure with low steel con-

sumption, low maintenance require-ments and the use of local productsand workmanship where ever possi-ble.

3.1.4 Materials, Joining Technology,Production and AssemblyCapacities

For reasons of time and expense, theparticularities and capacities of thelocal market had to be observed whenselecting materials, defining joiningprocedures and choosing productionmethods.

So, for example, no steel gradesbetter than S355 J0 were used and nospecial requirements for through-thick-ness direction (so-called Z-quality)were imposed. The plate thicknessesdid not exceed the market-typicalvalue of 50 mm. On-site welding wasavoided where ever possible. Instead,high-strength friction grip (HSFG)bolts were used.

For the assembly of the free-form

roof the standard tower cranes fromthe buildings were used whereverpossible. The remaining assembly partswere chosen to be as large as possibleand installed with heavy mobile cranes.The number of temporary supportswas minimised in order to ensuregood accessability on site.

3.1.5 Official Requirements

The municipal authorities in Abu

Dhabi have not issued their own tech-nical regulations or standards so far.There are only guidelines that refer toforeign regulations and for exampleoffer additional specifications forwind and earthquake loads. For his-torical reasons, design in the Arabic

world is strongly influenced by Britishstandards. In close cooperation withand after intensive discussion with theauthorities and the main contractor, itwas agreed to base the structural de-sign on the Eurocode and the BritishNational Application Document.

3.1.6 Structural loads

Temperature was taken into ac-count with 29 C as medium valueand 22 C for deviations duringthe course of the day and an in-creased value of +30 C only forthe construction time due to directlyto sunlight exposed steel.

Sand and Rain loads were coveredwith a vertical load allowance ofqk = 0.75 kN/m

2 in consultation withthe owner and the authorities. This

covers potential sand accumulationsof 35 cm thickness on the surfaceand the relevant waterfilm thicknessduring heavy rain falls. Accumula-tions of water and sand in the inte-rior of the roof had to be prevented.

Wind loads for this special geome-try were determined via wind tun-nel tests at a scale of 1:400. Theadopted basic wind speed was takenfrom bureau of meteorolgy mea-surements at the Abu Dhabi airport

over the past 30 years. As a result ofthe wind tunnel tests, detailed dis-tributions of the wind loads for theupper and lower side of the struc-ture for 30 degree steps of the winddirection were given (Figure 3). Be-sides the quasi-static wind loads,

Fig. 3. Example for wind load distributions


4/9


Reports

the dynamic behaviour of the roofdue to wind effects was also rele-vant, but due to the time constraints,only engineering judgement andcalculations could be used in orderto address this aspect.

Earthquake loads were taken intoaccount for Zone 2A of the UBC1997. A ductility of R= 4.2 and animportance factor of I = 1.0 werechosen.

3.2 Design of the Steel Structure3.2.1 Concept Design and Form-Finding

Initially, the principal load-bearing anddeformation behaviour was analysedby simplified estimations and calcula-tions, followed by 3D-shell models, aswell as by the development of charac-teristic sections (Figure 4), and by cur-

vature analysis.To achieve a cost effective solu-

tion within the limited 1.50 m struc-tural depth, the shell-like load-bear-ing behaviour of the structure, char-acterised predominantly by normalforces, was optimized in close coop-eration with the architectural design.

As a result, the global load-bearingbehaviour could be achieved andcharacterised as follows:

In the area of the ConventionCenter (CON), the free-form roof isring-shaped and architecturally desiredmostly flat, so no shell-like load-bear-ing behaviour could be activated there.This required a structural ring capableof torsion and bending as well as nar-row spaced supports from the build-ings. The same applies to most of thearea next to the Library (LIB). Thecurves in the central area (Center),however, permit shell-like load-bear-ing behaviour.

The three areas above interactstrongly positive in case of an overalljointless system, which suits also verywell with the design principles as perchapter 3.1.

The various options for geo-metric data exchange between the ar-chitects and structural engineerswere checked for suitability early inthe design. The architects used Rhi-noceros to develop and coordinatethe outer shape geometry of the roofand the buildings in an overall model.

To arrange the complex steelstructure within the roof shape, theconfiguration of the structural gridwas first worked out in plane projec-tion, based on the previously identi-fied principles of an optimum globalload-bearing behaviour and an empir-ical grid of 5.00 5.00 m.

Then this two-dimensional config-uration was projected onto the middlesurface of the free-form roof using anin-house developed software. The spa-tial coordinates of the free-form roofrequired to do this were acquired fromthe architects geometrical data. Thespatial orientation of local beam axeswas also determined automatically byaligning the strong axes of the beamsin the directions of the normal surfacevectors of the architectural model.

Starting from these initial struc-

tural calculations, the shape of thefree-form roof and the spatial configu-ration of the structure within were in-terdisciplinary optimised (Figure 5).Additionally, the reliability and ap-plicability of the 2nd-order theory im-plemented in the structural softwarewas checked [3].

Fig. 4. Development of characteristic sections

Fig. 5. Evolution of the roof shape during form finding


5/9

112

Reports


3.2.2 Design Development

The internal structure of the free-form roof already developed in theconcept design phase and refined inseveral steps during design develop-ment is shown in Figure 6 in its hier-archical arrangement.

The primary components includethe two rings of the Convention Cen-ter and the Library, which were builtas heavy, welded rectangular hollowsections of 2000 1500 mm due totheir governing need to resist torsion.These two rings are connected directlyto the central area, whose shell-likeload-bearing behaviour is based on anupper tension ring with combinedbending capacity and additionallywide-spanning arches. The central ten-sion ring consists of welded quadratic

hollow sections of 1500 1500 mm.Parts of it are held in position by sup-porting rings projecting from four in-tegral fix points (so called buttresses).These rings are also made of weldedrectangular boxes of 1500 1500 mm.The wide span arches, up to 4.0 mdeep in cross section, which are di-rectly supported by the integral fixpoints, mainly consist of welded cir-cular hollow sections of 1500 mm indiameter and tubes of 406 mm in di-

ameter. An overview of the sectionsused is given in Figure 7.The integral fix points must si-

multaneously guarantee the overallstiffening of the roof and also rigidsupport for the wide-span archesplaced on them to prevent their fail-ure by combined bending and buck-ling. To master the attendant concen-trated loads, the 1,50 m thick integralfix points were designed as reinforcedconcrete composite structures fixedinto 2.50 m thick pile caps (Figure 8).

In order to avoid large concrete vol-umes which are difficult to compact

and associated laborious three-dimen-

sional formwork, the majority of theforces to be redirected were dealtwith in the steel structure in the so-called adaptors. The up to 8 m highand 7 m wide middle area of the inte-gral fix points was made primarily ofconcrete for the purposes of easierfixing to the pile caps. This was de-spite the multiple reinforcement lay-ers, the need for couplerbased rein-forcement connections and self-com-pacting concrete C80.

The numerous truss elements ofthe remaining structure, including in-ternal bracing elements and stiffeningedge beams, are called secondary com-ponents. Their spatial configurationand detailing in the structural modelwas optimised step by step. During theconcept design phase, all later trusseswere modelled as equivalent beamsbetween the primary nodes. From thelate design development and for thedetailed design, all the 22,000 individ-ual diagonals, posts, etc. of the trusses

had to be specified in the structuralmodel (Figure 9).

This could only be done using

pre-processing, developed in-houseespecially for this task. All finite chordand strut elements were automaticallygenerated based on a pre-analysis ofstress distributions from dead load.The global orientation of the truss el-ements was derived from the previ-ously determined normal vectors. Ad-ditionally implemented results fromindependent 2nd order flexural tor-sional buckling analysis were used toachieve the safe and economic spatial

configuration.CHS-bracing is used to supportthe shell-like behaviour, as the 5 m 5 m structural grid is primarily or-thogonally oriented for reasons ofeasier fabrication and assembling.

The outer roof edges were, bothfor architectural and structural rea-sons, specially shaped using down-ward sloped, rounded brims. Pipetruss girders with a structural depthof 3.0 m were used here to provide ad-ditional stiffness, following the shape

of the brim. The cladded shape of theroof edges is so advantageous that an

Fig. 6. Hierarchical arrangement of the structural elements

Fig. 7. Overview of main sections

primary secondary all


6/9


Reports

alternating tear off from air currentsand oscillations, feared especially forfrequent low wind speeds, will not oc-cur. In general CFD calculations or

extra tests addressing the aerodynamicstability were not possible due to thetime constraints. Engineering experi-ence and calculations based on Euro-code 1 were used instead.

The so-called tertiary componentsnot further described here include thesubstructure of the cladding, consist-ing of cold-formed Z-purlins and hol-low sections and do not belong to themain load-bearing structure.

3.2.3 Detailed Design

The spatial structural configurationwas finalised in the detailed designphase based on calculations of the full3D-system according to 2nd order the-ory. The buckling behaviour of thetruss and chords around the weak axiswas especially relevant. As agreed, thefull set of connecting forces and the fi-nal spatial configuration was handedover digitally to the steelwork contrac-tor by the end of 2009 for further pro-

curement and fabrication detailing.The full documentation of the detaileddesign was issued in February 2010.

3.2.4 Execution Planning andWork Planning

The basis of the steelwork contractorsfurther detailing for fabrication hadto be a three-dimensional presettedstructure due to large localised defor-mations under dead load. The preset-ting of the structure had to be definedalso by the structural engineers dueto the complexity of the structure andthe time constraints and handed over

digitally as a presetted spatial config-uration to the steelwork contractor.For this, the highly unequal struc-

tural deformations (Figure 10), arisingin the ideal structure due to its deadload were repeatedly transferred to thestructural model as recursive node dis-placements until the deformed struc-ture and the architecturally desiredform agreed perfectly with each other.It is particularly important to note thathorizontal presetting of up to 100 mmbecame necessary in addition to the

vertical presetting in the area of largespans of up to 450 mm. The reason isthe asymmetrical position of the fourintegral fix points and the resulting

considerable horizontal thrust.The presetted and structurally

rechecked geometry was transferreddirectly from the structural model tothe steelwork contractors workingmodel, equivalent to an executionplanning. All cross sections weregiven along with the node coordi-nates to avoid errors due to the largenumber of over 22,000 elements.

The steelwork contractor was re-sponsible for the connection design

based on the presetted geometry andincorporated the detailing into the 3Dmodel of the work planning. In viewof the considerable extent of about16.000 closely printed DIN A4 pagesof connection forces, the structuralengineers had to provide considerableassistance in standardising the connec-tions and in preparing the relevantforces.

Shop drawings were then pre-pared showing the individual construc-tion sections in plan view based on

simplified spatial configuration full spatial configuration

Fig. 9. Comparison of simplified and full spatial configuration

Fig. 8. Drawings and assembly of integral fix point


7/9

114

Reports


the steelwork contractors 3D modelof the work planning. Additional tothe elements displayed, drawings ofthe important connections and par-ticular construction details were pro-vided in order to allow another checkby the structural engineers and theirapproval for execution. The simulta-

neously prepared fabrication draw-ings were not submitted for approval;they contained all the information forthe construction of the steel structure.A total of 420 shop drawings and ap-prox. 6,500 fabrication drawings wereneeded for the project.

3.2.5 Assembly Planning

The accurate planning of the individ-ual erection stages of the roof withrelated assembly sequences was partic-

ularly important due to the simultane-ously ongoing complex constructionworks on the buildings and campus

ground and the need to keep accessroutes open. The required solutionneeded to have as few temporary sup-ports (trestles) as possible. Another is-sue was the limited lifting capacity ofthe available tower cranes, which weresupplemented by heavy mobile cranes.

It was also important to investi-

gate that during assembly larger lift-ing segments can show load-bearingand deformations differing consider-ably from the final stage. The compati-bility of deformations at the finalstage was needed to avoid affectingthe global load-bearing behaviourdue to built-in imperfections. The lift-ing segments requested by the steel-work contractor were therefore veri-fied by the structural engineers in iter-ative calculations, including checksof the connection design and the ex-

act erection sequence. The number oftrestles was also optimised as part ofthis process. Besides a number of tres-

tles for sub erection stages, only 47trestles were necessary by the end ofgeneral assembly, mostly in the areaof the central ring structures (Figure11 and 12), which maintained the pre-setted form of the structure. Work onthe roof cladding commenced imme-diately after the assembly of the sec-ondary elements within each areamaking it necessary to take into ac-count additional loads due to hangingscaffolds and wind effects during con-struction.

First, the primary rings were as-sembled with lifting segments up to30 m long and 50 t in weight usingheavy mobile cranes. Until the pri-mary ring structure was connected tothe integral fix points, the pin-endedcolumns were replaced by bracedtrestles in the area of the buildings to

ensure sufficient horizontal stabilityduring construction. Even with onlypartially built primary rings, the sec-ondary structure could be graduallyassembled in a consistent sequencefrom south (LIB) to north (CON)(Figure 13).

The depropping of the structurefrom its temporary supports using hy-draulic jacks was another critical as-sembly step. The planning and super-vision involved was correspondingly

extensive. First, measures were taken toavoid local eccentricities at the sup-port points. Four symmetrically placedjacks with up to 100 t capacity wereused per support point. Next, it waschecked whether all trestles could belowered at the same time or whetherparts of the roof would have to be low-ered step by step. As a result, 11 suffi-ciently independent trestle groupswere identified using the deformationfigures under dead load and takinginto account loads on the trestles

see Figure 14. The jacks within thesegroups were lowered simultaneouslyby a pre-defined amount until the roof

Fig. 12. Trestles under central ring structure

Fig. 10. Vertical deformations underdead load

Fig. 11. Arrangement of temporarysupports (trestles)


8/9


Reports

was self supporting. Some areas weresequentially lowered by only 50 %;they were then lowered the remain-ing 50 % of the way in a second run-through.

3.3 Quality Control3.3.1 Mock-up

A complete segment of the Conven-tion Center roof was used as mock-upto check the appearance, colouring,functionality and installation method-ology before beginning the erectionwork (Figure 15). Flaws identified herewere corrected in further planningand the installation methodology ad-justed.

3.3.2 Inspection and Supervision

Due to the rough assembly conditionsin the desert, often only basically qual-

ified workers, and considerable timepressure, a three-step quality controlprocess was introduced. First, the steel-work contractor carried out agreedinspection and quality checks in theshop and on site. This was supportedby the structural engineers checkingthe documents submitted by the steel-work contractor and by the main con-

tractor providing comprehensive su-pervision of execution works on site.Finally, the structural engineers carriedout a spot check inspection for theerection of critical building elements.This three-step system has proven re-liable on site.

To check the prestressed non-slipin service screwed connections dur-ing assembly, a DTI (Direct TensionIndicator) procedure with separatewashers was used and the preload

forces were verified by random spotchecks.Where joints with butt welds

were necessary, e. g. on the primaryring structure (Figure 16), these werechecked both in the shop and on thesite 100 % visually and non-destruc-tively by ultrasonic and magnetic tests.Fillet welds, used only at a few sec-ondary points, were checked 100 %

visually and 10 % non-destructively.To verify the exact position of

the structural elements during assem-bly and recognise any settlement oftrestles, permanent measurements ofthe structure at narrow spaced mea-suring points were carried out [4]. Er-rors due to temperature effects weretaken into account and compensated

for by multiple measurements.The considerable up to 450 mm

horizontal and vertical deformations ofthe structure occurring at the trestlesduring depropping correlated very wellwith the values calculated in advance.

During the assembly and produc-tion of the smooth aluminium cladding(Figure 17), various watering tests wererun at different points to ensure theimpermeability of the upper surface.

During lifetime regular inspections

relying on the German DIN 1076 andVDI-guideline 6200 will be carried outin the future. Individual panels of theroof cladding will be used as entrypoints for this purpose.

4 Summary

The new Zayed University Campus inAbu Dhabi is a successful example of

Fig. 14. Trestle groups for simultane-ous depropping Fig. 15. Mock-up for steel structure and cladding

Fig. 13. Erection of the secondary structure subsequent to primary ring structure


9/9

116

Reports


international cooperation betweendesigners and builders from multiplecontinents, demonstrates the potentialof the main contractor philosophyand showcases the benefits from BIM-equivalent design approaches [6].Apart from the extreme time con-straints, the project required masteryof numerous engineering challenges.It required an understanding of differ-ent design and construction philoso-

phies, management of difficult inter-faces between design and construc-tion works and consideration of thedemand of a construction site withup to 8,000 workers running in paral-lel to the design works. Together withthe employees and students of ZayedUniversity, the main contractor andthe architects, we are happy that ourshared goal could be achieved in sucha short time. We would like to thankMubadala under the patronage of

H.H. Sheikh Nahyan Bin MubarakAl Nahyan, UAE Minister of HigherEducation and Scientific Researchand President of the Zayed Univer-

sity, for trust and confidence they ex-tended to the whole team.

References

[1] http://www.upc.gov.ae/home.aspx?lang=en-US

[2] http://www.zu.ac.ae/main/en/[3] Gensichen, V.; Lumpe, G.: Zur Leis-

tungsfhigkeit, korrekten Anwendungund Kontrolle von EDV-Programmen

fr die Berechnung rumlicher Stab-werke im Stahlbau (Teil 1). Stahlbau,Volume 77, Issue 6, June 2008, Pages447453

[4] Hayward, T.; Frenz, M.; Bttcher, C.:Up on the roof. Civil Engineering Sur-veyor, February 2011, Pages 2831,Published by ICES

[5] Bttcher, C.; Frenz, M.; Kaufmann, H.:Neubau der Zayed University AbuDhabi. Bauingenieur Jahresausgabe VDIBautechnik 2011/2012, Pages 3750

[6] Bttcher, C.: Zayed University AbuDhabi Ein Beispiel fr das Potential

von ganzheitlichen und parametri-sierten Modellen bei der nachhalti-gen Planung und Bauausfhrung.Lecture, held on the 15th buildings-

mart forum 2011 in Berlin, 15th Sep-tember 2011

[7] Pagilari, F.: Zayed University AbuDhabi by BRT Architekten/Hadi Tehe-rani Interior. THE PLAN 057, April2012, Italy

Selected Project Participants

Owner:Mubadala, Abu Dhabi, UAE

Client/Main Contractor:Al Habtoor & Murray Roberts JV, AbuDhabi, UAE

Architect:BRT Engineering (Bothe Rich ter Tehe-rani), Hamburg, GermanyRoof: up to design development, Build-ings: up to design development and in-terior designPascall + Watson, Abu Dhabi, UAEBuildings: detailed documentation

Structural Engineer:

Consulting Engineers Dr. Binnewies,Hamburg, GermanyRoof: full design service, Buildings: upto design developmentRobert Bird Group, Dubai, UAERoof: peer review of concept design/temporary support design,Buildings: detailed documentation

Project Control:Parsons, Abu Dhabi, UAE

Steelwork Contractor:Cleveland Bridge & Engineering MiddleEast, Dubai, UAE

Roof Cladding:CNYD Shenyang Yuanda Aluminium,Dubai, UAE

Wind Assessment:IFI, Aachen, Germany

Figure Credits

Figure 1: HMR/MubadalaFigure 2, 4-17: BinnewiesFigure 3: IFI

Keywords: freeform roof; form finding;parametric design; BIM; steel struc-

ture; sustainability; fast track project;design and construction; wind tunneltest; earthquake design

Authors:

Bttcher, Christian, Dr.-Ing. and IWE,

Managing Partner

Frenz, Matthias, Dr.-Ing., Managing Partner,

former project director

Henning Kaufmann, Dr.-Ing.,

Team leader of software development

All: Consulting Engineers Dr. Binnewies,

Ingenieurgesellschaft mbH, Hamburg

Alsterterrasse 10a, 20354 Hamburgwww.dr-ing-binnewies.de

[email protected]

+49(0)40-415200-0

Fig. 17. Finished roof in the campus area

Fig. 16. Prefabrication of welded segments in the shop (left: compression ring,right: crossing point tension ring)

Documents

SC-108_ftp Iconic Campus of the Zayed University.pdf