Possible solution to past CM examination question

Question 1 - April 2008

Sports Arena

by Dr Peter Gardner

The information provided should be seen as an interpretation of the brief and a possible solution to a past question offered by
an experienced engineer with knowledge of the examiners’ expectations (i.e. it's an individual's interpretation of the brief
leading to one of a number of possible solutions rather than the definitive "correct" or "model" answer).
CM Exam 08:Layout 1 16/5/08 10:06 Page 5

Question 1. Sports Arena

Client’s requirements
1. A circular sports arena is to be built on a vacant site; see Figure Q1.
2. The Client has specified that the building shall be 80.0m in diameter internally. The height of the underside
of the roof is to be a minimum of 18.0m above the floor in the centre and 20.0m at the perimeter of the arena.
The interior of the arena shall be column free.
3. The roof over the arena is to be a lightweight structure and should be of a pleasing appearance.
4. Around the perimeter of the arena is a permanent structure that supports the seating and provides
accommodation at level 1 for offices and public amenities and at level 2 for storage. The seating will be made
of precast concrete planks which have a maximum span of 8.0m.
5. A 5.0m wide by 4.0m high clear access way is located around the perimeter of level 1 and level 2 shown
shaded in Fig.Q1. The area under the sloping seating at level 2 is for storage only and there are no
restrictions on the placement of structure in this area.
6. The Client wishes to retain flexibility of use within level 1 of the permanent perimeter structure and has
stipulated that the area will be completely unobstructed other than for two lines of internal columns on
concentric grid lines measured from the centre of the arena. A minimum spacing of 6.0m between column
centres shall be maintained in all directions. A minimum clear height to underside of structure of 4.0m is
required throughout. There are no limits on column spacing around the perimeter wall, which is to be clad in
masonry.

Imposed Loading
7. Roof 0.6kN/m2
Floor levels 2 and 3 5.0kN/m2
Seating Area Precast planks dead load of 8.0kN/m2 and live load of 5.0kN/m2
Floor level 1 20.0kN/m2
Loadings include an allowance for partitions, finishes, services and ceilings.

Site Conditions
8. The site is level and located on the edge of a major city centre. The site has a public parking area on all sides.
Basic wind speed is 40m/s based on a 3 second gust; the equivalent mean hourly wind speed is 20m/s.
Ground conditions
Borehole 1 Ground - 2.0m Made ground (fill)
2.0m-8.0m Stiff clay. C=90kN/m2
Below 8.0m Rock. Allowable bearing pressure = 1000kN/m2
Borehole 2 Ground - 4.0m Made ground
4.0m -10.0m Stiff clay. C=80kN/m2
Below 10.0m Rock. Allowable bearing pressure = 1000kN/m2
Ground conditions change linearly between the 2 boreholes and groundwater was not encountered.

Omit from consideration

9. Detailed design of staircase, precast seating planks and specialist finishes to level 1 floor.

continued overleaf

5
CM Exam 08:Layout 1 16/5/08 10:06 Page 7

SECTION 1 (50 marks)

a. Prepare a design appraisal with appropriate sketches indicating two distinct and viable solutions for the
proposed structure including the foundations. Indicate clearly the functional framing, load transfer and
stability aspects of each scheme. Identify the solution you recommend, giving reasons for your choice.
(40 marks)
b. After the design has been completed, the Client advises you that he wishes to hang a large advertising
and lighting box weighing 50 tonnes from the middle of the roof. Write a letter to the Client explaining
how this might be achieved. (10 marks)

SECTION 2 (50 marks)

For the solution recommended in Section 1(a):
c. Prepare sufficient design calculations to establish the form and size of all the principal structural
elements including the foundations.
(20 marks)
d. Prepare general arrangement plans, sections and elevations to show the dimensions, layout and
disposition of the structural elements and critical details for estimating purposes.
(20 marks)
e. Prepare a detailed method statement for the safe construction of the building and an outline construction
programme.
(10 marks)

7
CM Exam 08:Layout 1 16/5/08 10:06 Page 4

4
Introduction
This is a relatively straightforward question but it concerns a very large, long-span structure
which is likely to be outside the experience of most graduate engineers. It consists of a circular
sports arena of 80 metres diameter with an unobstructed/unsupported clear span and a
permanent internal perimeter structure, primarily to provide seating, but also circulation walkways
and storage.

The roof span contains the greatest complexity. Questions of this nature, with a fixed geometry
and a large single span, at first reading can appear to offer very limited options for alternative
schemes; however a little thought will often provide distinct structural options. This thinking
process should take place very early on in your initial assessment of a question. If you're really in
a situation where the brief limits you to a single "obvious" solution then you should think very
carefully about continuing, as the questions clearly ask for "two distinct and viable solutions". In
this case I believe there are many clear viable alternatives within the constraints of the question.

The issues

• Circular building of 80 metres diameter.

• No internal support at all.
• Variable clear internal height.

• Permanent perimeter structure providing seating, offices, circulation and storage.

• Maximum span of 8 metres for seating (probably safest to make any support with a
maximum spacing of 8 metres).
• Two clear access walkways, both 5m x 4m.
• Storage area under the seating has no structural restriction (requirement five)

• Potentially contradictory requirements in relation to level one of the permanent perimeter

structure with requirement for it to be unobstructed other than for two lines of internal
columns on concentric circular grids (requirement six).
• A minimum of six metres between columns in all directions. A minimum clear height to
the underside of both level one and level two structures of 4 metres (consistent with
requirement for walkways).

• There are no limits on external columns.

• External elevation to the masonry (stability system?)

• There are no constraints in relation to the site (vacant and accessible).

• Substantial quantity of made ground, overlying stiff clay which itself overlies rock with a
substantial ground bearing pressure.
• Profile varies across the site, with no ground water.
• We are likely to have a substantial structure which should probably be founded on the
rock.
• The depth of made ground will necessitate an engineered ground floor slab.

ISE CM Q1 2008
Interpretation of the brief
The question probably breaks down to four sections, with only the main roof structure likely to
cause any significant difficulty. The four elements are: the 80 metres clear span roof, the seating
area, the stability system and the perimeter wall, the foundation system & ground floor.

As far as the roof is concerned, we have a large span with a varying clear height. This allows us
to provide greater depth in the centre, thus although it's not a requirement in terms of satisfying
the brief, it would seem sensible to follow the internal profile. It would be difficult to provide a
satisfactory answer to this question without providing significantly different structural schemes for
the roof.

There is no constraint on the external dimensions of the structure, allowing us a completely free
hand outside the envelope specified in the question.

The walkways and seating provide the only significant constraints in terms of the brief, but there
is nothing here that should cause us any difficulty. This element could form part of the overall
stability system, or could just satisfy its own functional requirements.

The whole structure is clad in masonry, the support of which will need to be considered.

The superstructure and two distinct and viable solutions

Despite the structure’s size and pre-defined geometry there is significant possible variation in the
superstructure and the associated stability system. My initial thoughts go along the lines of using
the circular shape to provide a ring beam to resist forces from the roof structure (arch etc), or a
relatively simple beam and stick with an independent stability system, or some variant on a portal
frame. Even at the preliminary stage, there are so many possibilities that the problem becomes
narrowing them down in a form that can be presented in a time-constrained answer, rather than
scratching your head for a second scheme.

Although the geometry (circular structure) provides opportunities for a 3D structure consisting of
radial elements, it also gives us the difficulty of multiple beams meeting at the centre. This is
likely to be an issue for every option other than simple 2D frames. This may lead us to consider
some form of central ring beam which picks up any structural elements converging at the centre,
but clearly it would be very difficult to transmit bending with this configuration.

Developing the ring beam idea, leads us to a variety of options of domes or arches in
compression where the ring beam resists the horizontal thrust, or tension structures where the
ring beam holds the roof elements apart.

A combination of individual trusses, supported on the lattice stanchions would provide a very
straightforward and simple-to-analyse arrangement.

Some form of portalised truss would provide inherent stability, and could easily accommodate the
spans we are dealing with. This could be modified to a three pinned arch, or a combination of
towers and cables supporting a light-weight roof structure.

The geometry is well-suited to a true 3D roof, whether it be an arch, a tension structure or a more
traditional 3D space frame, but of course this arrangement would be virtually impossible to design
by hand (for the purposes of the exam).

Drainage could be an issue with some structural forms and should be taken into account.

ISE CM Q1 2008
The diagrams following this commentary develop some of these ideas.

Some of the structural arrangements proposed may be susceptible to wind up-lift. If this results in
load reversal, and you haven't identified this possibility, you have a potentially serious flaw in your
proposal. This is always an issue to keep in the back of your mind.

Stability
There are two fundamental options for the stability system, either utilising a beam and stick
arrangement for the principal structure, which needs an independent stability system, or
alternatively using frames, that due to their geometry, have inherent stability.

The shape of the building and the lack of any large openings means there is ample opportunity
for bracing between the columns, and in the roof. If frames are used that have inherent stability
(three-pinned arch or portal frame), additional bracing should be provided in the walls and roof for
torsional resistance and overall robustness.

The ground conditions, foundations and ground floor slab

The ground conditions are relatively straightforward, with a thick layer of made ground over the
site and rock below at a depth of 8 - 10m. Bearing in mind the size of the structure, it would be
sensible to go straight on to the rock.

The rock is only 10 metres below ground level, and therefore some form of pad foundation would
be perfectly feasible, but in reality this would just be a variation on a piled solution (it's only the
construction method that would be different, the structural action would be the same, albeit that
pads would provide a potentially greater area per foundation than would be readily achievable
with a pile). Assuming that we have sufficient variation in the superstructure to satisfy the "two
distinct and viable schemes" requirement, it would probably be sensible to propose a single
foundation solution, with a discussion of possible variations on that theme.

The perimeter wall will need a significant foundation, probably using either a ring of piles, or
“trench fill” constructed directly off the rock.

Because of the thickness of the made ground, the ground floor slab will need to be an engineered
solution (although the surface could be grass in which case it could be potentially be applied to
the existing material). Assuming the arena surface is solid, the ground floor slab and the
walkways could potentially be supported from the clay (not the fill), but it would probably be more
straightforward to pile into the rock for the whole structure. This would avoid any issues of
differential movement between the clay and the rock. Ground improvement could be considered.

The letter
The letter is straightforward in that the client wishes to hang a large advertising and lighting box
from the middle of the roof, so superficially the letter could just explain how this might be
achieved. However, we have a very large weight in the middle of an 80 metres span roof, which
is going to have considerable implications for the structure. A client may not realise the
implications of such a request and therefore some lateral thinking in relation to alternatives, to
minimise the effect on the structure (in addition to explaining how the actual request might be
achieved), could be beneficial.

ISE CM Q1 2008
There are many issues relating to the provision of the advertising box which gives scope for well-
written helpful advice in the form of a letter to your client. As is always the case in these
situations, part of the answer must respond to the client’s request, whatever the structural
consequences (ie it's not for the client's engineer to say this cannot be done, but to draw the
client's attention to the consequences of the proposal, and offer alternatives which may produce
a better/cheaper solution).

The issues that you may care to think about, and potentially build into your answer for this part of
the question, could include: the significance of hanging 50 tonnes from the middle of a large clear
span and the practicality of doing this as requested, deflection, investigating the possibility of
achieving the same objective with less weight, providing smaller multiple advertising/lighting units
which could be located away from the middle of the roof, providing an independent support
system (possibly cables) with the implications of restricted visibility.

Summary
The size of the overall structure, and the requirement for an 80 metres clear span, makes this a
daunting structure under any circumstances, and one that is likely to be outside the individual
experience of most graduate engineers. However the brief is straightforward, and doesn't contain
anything that should give us particular cause for concern. As long as a candidate can find "two
distinct and viable solutions", which I think the analysis above suggests is relatively
straightforward, then there is no reason why any reasonably experienced candidate should not
achieve a comfortable pass with this question.

ISE CM Q1 2008
 Possible solution to past CM examination question

Question 5 - April 2008

Crocodile Tank

by Bob Wilson

The information provided should be seen as an interpretation of the brief and a possible solution to a past question offered by
an experienced engineer with knowledge of the examiners’ expectations (i.e. it's an individual's interpretation of the brief
leading to one of a number of possible solutions rather than the definitive "correct" or "model" answer).
CM Exam 08:Layout 1 16/5/08 10:06 Page 17

Question 5. Crocodile Tank

Client’s requirements
1. A tank is required at a wildlife centre to accommodate crocodiles. The plan area of the tank is to be between
3600m2 and 4000m2 and the smallest plan dimension must be at least 40.0m. The tank must be of concrete
construction and should be 2.0m deep generally, reducing to 1.0m at the perimeter. The tank will normally be filled
with water but should be capable of being completely drained for maintenance.
2. Three “islands” are required in the tank, on which crocodiles may roam. Each island must be of minimum plan
area 50m2 and the combined plan area of the islands must not exceed 300m2. Islands must be a minimum clear
distance of 15.0m from the tank perimeter and a minimum clear distance of 15.0m apart. The ground surface
around the perimeter of each island is to be at water level and must rise to at least 0.5m above water level.
Structures may be supported on the islands but no structural supports of any kind are permitted elsewhere in the
tank.
3. An observation tower is to be provided on one of the islands. The tower should have viewing platforms at 4m and
8m above water level. Each platform should have a plan area of at least 10.0m2.
4. Pedestrian access of minimum unobstructed width 2.0m is to be provided from the perimeter of the tank to the
observation tower.

Imposed loading
5. Pedestrian access and viewing platforms 5.0kN/m2

Site Conditions
6. The site is level and is located in open country. Basic wind speed is 46m/s based on a 3 second gust; the equivalent
mean hourly wind speed is 23m/s.
7. Ground conditions:
Ground level – 4.0m Sand, N=18
Below 4.0m Clay, C=100kN/m2
Ground water was encountered at 1.0m below ground level

SECTION 1 (50 marks)

a. Prepare a design appraisal with appropriate sketches indicating two distinct and viable solutions for the proposed
tank, observation tower and pedestrian access. Indicate clearly the functional framing, load transfer and stability
aspects of each scheme. Identify the solution you recommend, giving reasons for your choice. (40 marks)
b. During construction of the tank it is found that test results for concrete used in a section of the tank including the
base and walls have achieved only 70% of the required design strength. Write a letter to the Client describing your
proposals for dealing with this problem. (10 marks)

SECTION 2 (50 marks)

For the solution recommended in Section 1(a):
c. Prepare sufficient design calculations to establish the form and size of all the principal structural elements
including the foundations. (20 marks)
d. Prepare general arrangement plans, sections and elevations to show the dimensions, layout and disposition of the
structural elements and critical details for estimating purposes. (20 marks)
e. Prepare a detailed method statement for the safe construction of the structures and an outline construction
programme. (10 marks)

17
CM Exam 08:Layout 1 16/5/08 10:06 Page 16

There is no Figure Q5

16