Structural Concrete 2010

Student Design Competition

The Concrete Centre logo

Paper Setting Panel

Dr Howard Taylor
Prof Michael Dixon
Dr John Cairns

Former President of the IStructE

Former President of the IStructE
Heriot Watt University

Dr Adam Crewe

University of Bristol

Mr Roger Hewitt

Pell Frischmann

Mr Chris Playle

WSP

Dr Andrew Minson
Mr Costas Georgopoulos

The Concrete Centre

The Concrete Centre

Award Judging Panel

Dr Howard Taylor
Mr Michael Dixon

Former President of the IStructE

Former President of the IStructE

Mr Roger Hewitt

Pell Frischmann

Mr Chris Playle

WSP

Dr Andrew Minson
Mr Costas Georgopoulos

The Concrete Centre

The Concrete Centre

Competition Moderator
Prof Peter Waldron

Sheffield University

Contents (pagination to be revised)

Introduction
1. PROJECT BRIEF
2. DESIGN DATA
2.1 Loadings
2.2 The Site
3. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
3.1 Conceptual Design Report
3.2 Verification of Structural Viability
3.3 Drawings
4. ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
4.1 Local
4.2 National
5. AWARDS
5.1 University Level
5.2 National Level
5.3 Presentation
5.4 Eligibility
6. RULES
Entry Form
Calculation Sheet

4
8

11

11

12

INTRODUCTION
Structural Concrete 2010 sets a prestigious professional challenge for all students
studying structural design as part of UK University BEng, MEng and MSc degree
courses in Civil and / or Structural Engineering.
This demanding student design competition aims to encourage interest and raise
competence in designing with concrete. The competition offers a stimulating and fun
challenge to students, while supporting the curricula of Civil and Structural Engineering
Departments of UK Universities. Significant cash prizes are on offer: 1,250 for the
national winner, with other prizes for second place, runners up and individual university
winners, all to be presented at a special awards ceremony. There will also be a
Sustainability prize for the student who demonstrates the best understanding of this
subject in his/her submission. These awards reflect the significant commitment from the
judges and academics who, together with The Concrete Centre, have carefully
developed this years competition. Initiative, creativity and accuracy are called for, and
will be assessed by the judges. Above all, this competition has been designed to stretch
the technical competence of the students taking part.
Because it is so flexible, Structural Concrete 2010 can easily be incorporated into
existing university curricula, with a content that reflects an independent project, a group
project or a module assessment run over the first, second or both semesters of the
academic year.

This years challenge

The 2010 project is a rooftop swimming pool over a car park forming part of a residential
development in a southern European city. The structure is to provide parking
accommodation for the linked residential apartment blocks and a recreation space for
the occupants. The client, a company engaged in regeneration of inner city sites, has
commissioned an initial structural design from a firm of consulting engineers. Entrants
must respond as if they are part of the consultants team.

The Concrete Centre is the central development organisation for the UK cement and
concrete industry. Our objective is to assist all those involved in design and construction
to realise the full potential of concrete as an adaptable and sustainable construction
material. For more information on The Concrete Centre visit www.concretecentre.com

1. PROJECT BRIEF : Minprodas Development

The Minprodas development is to be constructed on a brownfield site on the

periphery of a southern European city. The brief requires off-street parking and
the incorporation of leisure and recreation facilities for residents. Site density and
economic factors determine that parking be provided in a multi-storey car park
with leisure and recreation facilities above. The Project Developer has
commissioned an initial structural design from a firm of consulting engineers.
The car park/pool building is to be rectangular in plan, with residential blocks
adjoining on east and west sides, Figure 1. The car park/pool building and the
adjoining residential blocks are to be structurally independent. No columns may
be placed within 3.0m of the boundary between car park and residential blocks,
nor may any foundations extend beyond the site boundary. Access to the pool
area for leisure users will be via a pedestrian link to the residential blocks at roof
level. Roof level is to be at 15.0m to tie in with residential floor levels, Figure 2.
The lift/stair core will provide car park access and service access to the roof
area.
The main swimming pool is to be 25.0m long by 14.0m wide, Figure 3, with a
water depth varying from 0.9m to 2.0m, Figure 4. A smaller paddling pool of
7.0m by 12.0m with a water depth of 0.6m will be separated from the main pool
by a 2.0m wide walkway. Pool design features a clearance of 0.2m between
water level and pool rim. The pools are to be designed as water retaining
structures with a normal operating water temperature of 28oC. The designer may
decide where to locate the pool in the north-south direction. The roof level is to
be surrounded by a 3.0m high parapet.
Access to car parking is from the main access road to the south of the
development at ground level. A service road borders the building to the north.
Each parking bay is to a minimum clear width of 2.4m and a length of 4.8m. In
addition, 6 disabled bays 3.2m wide are to be provided at ground floor level.
Vehicle aisles and ramps are to have a minimum width of 6.0m for two-way flow
and the ramp gradient must not exceed 1 in 7. A minimum clear floor-to-ceiling
height of 2.1m is required. No structures or services are permitted to intrude into
vehicle zones. The layout adopted must maximize the number of parking spaces
available.
Precast concrete cladding panels and parapet walls will be used on north and
south elevations. It is expected that these will have both an aesthetic and
protective role.

2. DESIGN DATA
Verification of structural viability should be carried out in accordance with current British
Standards or Eurocodes. Entrants should clearly state the documents used in support of
calculations. Materials specifications should be defined to current Standards.

Fire resistance of 2 hours is required.

2.1 Loadings
Dead loads of structural elements: as found.
Cladding: an average value of 2.4kN/m2 of elevation for the precast concrete cladding
and parapet on the northern and southern elevations of the building.
Imposed loadings:
- Pool surround

2.5kN/m2

Car park and ramps

2.5kN/m2

Stairs

5.0kN/m2

These loadings include an allowance for services. All values are characteristic values.
2.2 The Site
Exposure conditions
The site is flat, and situated on the periphery of a city..
The basic site wind speed, Vb should be taken as 22 m/sec (based on the mean hourly
wind speed as given in BS6399-1:1996), or the value of fundamental basic wind velocity,
vb,map, should be taken as 23 m/sec (based on BS EN 1991-1-4:2005). Snow loading
may be neglected.
Ground Conditions
See borehole logs in Appendix A. Locations of test boreholes are shown on Figure 1
Ground water level should be taken as 1.0m below ground level.

Figure 1: Site Plan

Figure 2: Section A-A

Figure 3: Roof Plan

Figure 4: Pool detail

3. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
The submission is to comprise four components:
3.1 a conceptual design report
3.2 an appendix containing design calculations to verify the viability of the selected
scheme
3.3 drawings.
3.4 An outline sustainability plan
The submission must not exceed 60 single sided A4 pages and three A3 size drawings.
Only one copy is needed.
3.1 Conceptual Design Report
A maximum of 30 pages, of either 1.5 line spaced text in a maximum 11pt font, or
neatly hand written in black ink, which should include:
vi. An appraisal of two distinct and viable design solutions in structural concrete for
the building, together with their associated beam/column/wall layouts.
The appraisals should comprise sketches of a typical car park floor and of the
pool level with supporting notes, outlining the intended load transfer
mechanisms, framing and stability functions, and some brief notes on
construction methodology.
vii. An evaluation of the merits and disadvantages of the two solutions.
The evaluation should identify significant differences such as cost or buildability
between the two alternatives, and make a recommendation in favour of one
solution.
viii. A description of the foundation scheme adopted for the preferred solution, with a
rationale for the selection. A fully detailed design for the foundation scheme is not
required.
ix. An outline specification for the materials used in pool finishes.
x. An outline specification for concrete and reinforcing materials.
xi. A method statement for a safe construction procedure for the building.
xii. A statement of how robustness to avoid disproportionate collapse is satisfied.
xiii. After completion of your design, the client acquires a second and similar
development site, this time in a seismically active area, and initially proposes to
use the existing design for its construction. Write a letter to the client outlining the
modifications necessary to the first design for a similar building at the second
site.

3.2

Verification of Structural Viability

The verification of structural viability of the selected scheme should be demonstrated in

Appendices to the conceptual design report to make up the balance of the report. (The
maximum total length of the design report, sustainability appraisal plus Appendix is 60
pages A4).
The Appendices should contain sufficient design calculations by hand (calculation sheet
included may be used) to establish the form and size of all structural elements for the
chosen scheme. Entrants should decide how best to convey this information within the
space constraints imposed. Calculations for individual elements should enable a checker
to clearly understand their contribution to the strength and stability of the whole
structure, and the load paths assumed. Hence, if computer output is presented,
validation by (approximate) hand calculations is also required. Consideration should be
given to performance at both Serviceability and Ultimate Limit States.
Outline the procedure to be adopted for testing the watertightness of the pool and the
remedial action to be taken should minor leaks be evident (maximum 1 page).
Note: calculations are not required for stairs, cladding and parapet components, and
protective barriers in the car park.
3.3

Drawings

A total of three A3 drawings should be included. Drawings may be prepared using

appropriate CAD software, or by hand. In either case, notes and dimensions should not
be smaller than the equivalent of an 11pt font.
Two of the A3 drawings should be used to present general arrangements, sections and
elevations of the building to show the layout, disposition and dimensions of structural
elements for estimation purposes. Drawings should be to an appropriate scale and must
be dimensioned. Reinforcement details should not be shown on these two drawings.
The third drawing should show:
a) the reinforcement detail at the junction between pool floor and pool walls,
b) the reinforcement detail at the junctions between a horizontal pool support
member and the vertical components which support it.
c) the detail of the fixing arrangement for a precast concrete cladding panel.
together with sketches and notes as appropriate to describe the completed construction.
The sketches should be approximately to scale but need not be fully dimensioned.
3.4

Sustainability Plan

Effective maintenance of constructed assets to maintain them in serviceable condition is

a key aspect of sustainable construction as well as in control of life cycle costs. The
client therefore requires a User Manual for the building, to be transmitted to the asset
maintenance manager, outlining the steps to be taken to monitor and maintain the

structure in serviceable condition. Prepare a bullet list of contents of the User Manual
(maximum 2 pages) covering all significant issues to be addressed in a maintenance
plan for the reinforced concrete structure, indicating the intervals at which monitoring of
each item should be undertaken.
[The User Manual for the structure is not to cover items of plant or services]

4.

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

4.1 Local
The competition will operate at two levels. All submissions made at each University will
first be judged locally by the academic tutor(s) involved with the project. The winning
submission from each University should be entered for the national level of the
competition by the tutor.
Only one entry from each University can go forward for final judging at a national level.
4.2 National
The winning entry from each individual participating university will be judged at national
level using the following generic assessment criteria:
- Compliance with the project brief
- Safety, function, stability and robustness
- Buildability, constructability and maintainability
- Speed of construction and cost effectiveness
- Appreciation of issues to be addressed in extending the useful life of a structure
- Imagination, flair and innovation
The interpretation of the above criteria by the Award judging panel will be final and
feedback will not be provided.
5.

AWARDS

5.1 University Level

The winning entry from each University will receive a prize of 250. The winning entry
will go forward to compete at national level.
5.2 National Level
The winner(s) of the competition will receive a certificate(s) and a prize of 1,250.
Runner(s) up will also receive a certificate(s) and a prize of 750.
A Third Prize of 250 may also be awarded, although if any additional awards are
deemed necessary by the Judges (e.g. Joint, First, Joint Second or Joint Third Prizes),
then the total of the above prize money will be divided up by the Judging Panel at their
discretion.
A Special Commendation and prize of 250 will also be available for the best
Sustainability Plan.
The winners Universities will also receive certificates.
5.3 Presentation
The prizes will be presented at a combined awards ceremony to be held in July 2010. All
entrants will be notified of further details on entry to the national level of the Structural

Concrete Competition. The identity of the winners will remain a secret until the awards
ceremony.
5.4 Eligibility
Structural Concrete 2010 is open only to students studying for a degree at a UK
University. Entries can be single, joint, or from teams of up to 4 students.
Although the competition is aimed at students in their final years of underegraduate
study, entries from any other appropriate undergraduate and/or postgraduate stages will
also be considered at the discretion of the academic tutor(s).

6. RULES
I. To enter the competition the University academic tutor(s) should register their
intention to participate by emailing The Concrete Centre at
Design_Competition@concretecentre.com. Registration will enable The Concrete
Centre to provide supplementary information and/or assistance if needed, and to
issue an Entry reference number.
II. The completed Entry Form (see Appendix) naming the local winners should reach
the competition organiser at the address given below by June 2010.
III. Design entries must be received by the final deadline of 4pm on June 2010.
The entry reference number should be marked clearly on all items forming the
design entry, and on the outside of the package. No other form of identification or
distinguishing mark should appear on any part of the submission.
IV. A successful competitor must be able to satisfy the judges that he or she is the
bona fide author of the design that he or she has submitted.
V. Competitors should retain the originals of the designs and drawings submitted. The
organisers cannot be held responsible for loss or damage to submissions which
may occur either in transit or during exhibition, storage or packing.
VI. The award judging panel will meet to review all submissions and agree the winning
entries on 6 July 2007.
VII. The winning designs submitted from each of the short listed Universities will be
exhibited at the awards ceremony to be held on July 2010.
VIII. Any entry shall be excluded from the competition if:
-

The competitor does not meet the eligibility requirements detailed in Section 5.4
The entry is received after the competition closing date in rule number III above
The competitor shall in any way disclose his or her identity or that of the
University
The competitor attempts to influence either directly or indirectly the decision of
the award judging panel

Only one copy of each competitor(s) design is to be sent in a single package to:
Structural Concrete 2010
Education Department,
The Concrete Centre
Riverside House,
4 Meadows Business Park
Station Approach, Blackwater
Camberley, Surrey
GU17 9AB

Back Cover

The Concrete Centre

Riverside House
4 Meadows Business Park
Station Approach, Blackwater
Camberley, Surrey GU17 9AB
Free National Helpline
0700 4 500 500
www.concretecentre.com
C The Concrete Centre