North / South America
One World Trade Center Reaches Milestone
Aug, 13 2009
(New York) -- Construction crews on the massive One World Trade Center site Wednesday reached a milestone by placing the largest steel column to date for the $3.1 billion tower in Lower Manhattan.
The 60-ft, 70 ton beam will serve as one of 24 perimeter columns that surround the building’s core. Once placed, the columns will allow the initial floors of the tower – including the lobby – to be built out. Each of the 24 columns was manufactured at the ArcelorMittal plant in Luxembourg. The steel plates were shipped to North America and fabricated in shops in South Plainfield, N.J. and Terrebonne, Canada. The columns are being delivered to the site from New Jersey over the George Washington Bridge.
Tishman Construction is managing construction on the 2.6 million-sq-ft, 102-story structure for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which will own and manage the building. Construction began in April 2006 on the steel-frame tower designed by Skidmore, Owings & Merrill of New York. As of last month, the superstructure had risen 105 ft above grade. More than 2,300 tons of steel had been erected and Collavino Construction Corp. of New York had placed more than 33,000 cu yd of concrete.
The team is using 14,000-psi iCrete, a precisely blended mix of aggregates and cement, for the up to 6-ft, 6-in thick core shear walls. Thirteen shear walls had been poured as of last month, with the psi reaching 17,000 on several occasions. Maximum concrete temperatures must stay below 160 degrees F, with maximum differential temperatures between the wall center and face maintained within 35 degrees F. The mix employs fly ash and slag, using only 300 pounds of cement per cu yd instead of more than 1,000 pounds of a comparable mix. Collavino is pumping at a rate of 120 cu yds per hour, at a working pressure of 240 bars, over a distance of 400 ft with a 10-in clump and a 28-in spread. The team is utilizing “tree-saving” steel forms and externally mounted vibrators.
“Workers are erecting steel and pouring concrete on a daily basis, placing some of the largest steel members ever fabricated and completing some of the largest continuous pours on record,” according to a written statement from Tishman.
In early July, construction workers spent 14 consecutive hours pouring 1,250 cubic yards of concrete on the eastern side of the tower, bringing it to street level. The pour began in the rain and was the largest performed to date for One World Trade Center. It formed the base of a large fountain on the plaza level, as well as concrete boxes where Swamp White Oak trees will be planted. More than 125 trucks delivered the concrete to the site.
The Port Authority has secured the first private tenant for One World Trade Center –Vantone Industrial Co. It joins prospective state and federal government tenants and brings the building to 50% occupancy.
Port Authority spokesman Steve Coleman stated in an email that One World Trade Center, the National September 11 Memorial and Museum, and the WTC Transportation Hub are on schedule. Current target dates, according to the Lower Manhattan Construction Command Center are 2013 for Tower One; September 11, 2011, for the memorial plaza and mid-2013 for the rest of the memorial; and mid-2014 for the transportation hub.
By Jack Buehrer and Debra Wood
Comments
3 Comment(s)
Add Your Comments
IMPORTED STEEL columns at WTC
What an indictment of American concrete (and steel)technology! Now I will admit that, as a consulting engineer in the UK in the mid 1960s, I did have some huge steel columns for a major steelworks in Scotland fabricated in an Irish shipyard. But that was for a major project which had to be completed within 12months of starting the design work, and I do not see a similar degree of urgency at the WTC.
Perhaps some of the explanation lies in another article in your same issue, again referring to results of 9.000psi for a 12,000psi grade and, in the current article, 17,000psi results for a 14,000psi grade on this project. Such results do not suggest reliable, closely controlled concrete, so maybe they were scared of concrete columns.
Many years ago in Australia we were using steel pipe columns pumped full of 100MPa (14,500psi) concrete - simple, cheap, local, - why not? Certainly they need fire protection to the essentially external steel, but so do the columns reported here. Of course to day we would happily use 150MPa concrete.
At Petronas Towers, then the world's tallest,insitu concrete columns were used and concrete with a mean strength of 100MPa had a standard deviation of 3MPa(450psi).
Come on America! IMPORTED steel columns! You ought to be ashamed of yourselves!
Posted By : Ken Day
Posted On : 8/13/2009 6:05:56 PM
towers
OK so the reason they used the higher strength concrete than needed is pretty obvious, if you re-read the article it tells you they cut cement demand by 2/3's so the higher strength concrete should be the same cost or less than a typical mix.
So why not increase the strength? with a strong enough base it may allow them to add a few extra levels, for either more office space or maintenance floors or offer more flexibility in regards to floor loadings.
Posted By : Bede Meredith
Posted On : 8/16/2009 12:44:35 AM
Pretty obvious opinions
Bede, I don't see the relevance of your comment. My remark referred to variability of concrete and not having the confidence to use high strength concrete columns.It is not practicable to change the design of a major building like this half-way through construction, although higher EARLY strength might permit faster construction. However the cement reduction was no doubt achieved by a high pozzolan (fly ash?)content giving LOWER early strengths.
So we can all have our own opinions as to what is "pretty obvious" and to whom.
Posted By : Ken Day
Posted On : 9/1/2009 7:31:05 PM
West China Cement Limited ("WCC" or the "Company") announces an investment in the Longqiao cement plant. More
(India) -- Shiva Cement today announced that the dispatch of cement and clinker during the month Jan`10 was down by 3.8% in comparison to Jan `09 due to temporary drop in production.
More