DOCSLIB.ORG

Wide-Open Spaces

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Wide-Open Spaces Wide-Open Spaces Brian H. Caudle, P.E Photo by Mark Green new age in multipurpose March and need a weather-tight arena- venues began when Reliant like setting for the rodeo and its concert Houston’s Reliant Stadium opened in Hous- events. The solution to satisfy these di- ton, TX last August. Reliant verse needs was to build the NFL’s first Stadium features the Stadium is home to two retractable roof stadium. Amajor tenants: the Houston Texans and This modern venue is located less largest retractable roof the Houston Livestock Show and than 200 yards from another milestone in the U.S., made Rodeo. These two tenants have vastly structure, the Astrodome. The As- possible by innovative different requirements. The Houston trodome opened in 1965 as the first en- Texans are the newest team in the Na- closed football or baseball stadium and engineering and high- tional Football League and prefer to was called the “Eighth Wonder of the play their games on natural grass turf World.” The curved steel lamella dome strength steel. in an open-air setting. However, the supports a 640’ roof span, which more Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo than doubled any previous roof span. fill the seats from late February to mid- After years of hosting thousands of his- Modern Steel Construction • July 2003 torical sporting and entertainment events the venerable old stadium is ready to share the lime light with an- other trend-setting showplace, Reliant Stadium. Signaling a new standard for stadi- ums throughout the world, Reliant Sta- dium opened to rave reviews from players, fans and the media. Reliant Stadium is the NFL’s largest stadium, covering over 12 acres and comprising 1.9 million sq. ft. With 12,000 tons of cooling capacity, it is the largest indoor air-conditioned space in Texas and, other than multi-terminal airports, Re- liant Stadium is the state’s largest pub- lic assembly space. It is also the first NFL stadium with an operable roof, and at 4.25 acres, it is the largest such roof in the United States. The translu- cent fabric roof creates an instant archi- tectural landmark and a positive new image for the City of Houston. RETRACTABLE ROOF— Schematic drawing of Reliant Stadium roof structure.The roof system was extensively tested A STEEL AND FABRIC KITE to withstand wind uplift, unbalanced loading, lightning strikes and corrosion damage. It is the Design of the distinctive retractable first roof of its kind to be constructed in the United States.The tri-chord-truss-framed roof splits and glides toward end zones on supertrusses. roof was the most challenging aspect of the project for Walter P. Moore, the structural engineer for Reliant Sta- dium. Imagine constructing a giant lightweight kite, one football field wide and three football fields long—and then try to control that kite in hurricane force winds! The operable portion of the roof consists of two enormous but elegant fabric-clad panels that ride along two parallel supertrusses. The two bi-parting panels abut over mid- field and dock over each end zone. Each 385’-by-250’ panel is framed with five tri-chord trusses spanning across the width of the playing field. The 24% translucent Teflon-coated fiberglass fabric is tensioned between the tri- chord trusses. Walter P. Moore worked closely with Uni-Systems, the mechanization engineers, to create the computer-con- trolled moving roof. Each tri-chord truss is supported on a carrier beam with two 36”-diameter steel wheels rid- ing on a single steel rail. A computer- ized system of 40 5-horsepower, 460-volt, three-phase motors power the 40 steel wheels that can open or close the roof panels in less than 10 minutes. The 6”-tall, 175-lb. crane rail rests on a concrete slab at the top chord of the su- A 400-ton crane and a 650-ton crane perform a tandem lift of a fabricated side section of the pertrusses. The operation of the roof is east supertruss. The scoreboard box truss (still supported on erection towers) can be seen framing into the left side of the concrete supercolumn. July 2003 • Modern Steel Construction tive to its supporting rail For further economy, the concrete position. This lateral motion rail slab atop the supertrusses was had to be accommodated in made composite with the truss top a relatively short vertical chord. The composite steel/concrete distance of 16’. At the east supertrusses on Reliant Stadium are end of the retractable roof believed to be the largest ever used in a tri-chord trusses, a four-bar building structure. linkage was integrated into To speed construction, the su- the truss to form its connec- pertrusses were erected in large, pre- tion to the transport carrier fabricated pieces, starting at each beams riding along the rail. column and working toward the cen- This linkage allows free lat- ter. The final pieces were custom-fabri- eral movement of the east cated to fit perfectly. In total, there are Photo by Wes Thompson end of the roof trusses while more than 1.5 linear miles of primary so quiet that fans hardly notice it is keeping the transporter car- long-span trusses in the roof of Reliant moving overhead. rier wheels vertical. This concept al- Stadium. To accommodate the vertical toler- lows only modest lateral thrust loads ances of the 1,000’-long rail, an innova- and reduces potential wear on the HIGH STRENGTH STEEL tive two-wheel transporter system was wheels and rail. This linkage system Throughout the roof, ASTM A913 designed. A “plug ‘n play” electrical provided an economical, easily con- Grade 65 steel was used to reduce ton- system allowed the tri-chord roof structed solution to a very challenging nage, contributing greatly to the econ- trusses to be quickly erected at the design problem. (Read more about omy of the Reliant Stadium structural north end of the stadium and immedi- stress relief in long-span roof systems system. ASTM A913 Grade 450 was se- ately moved south along the rail with a in the article “Stress Relief” in Novem- lectively used in the long-span trusses minimum of field electrical connec- ber 2002 issue of Modern Steel Construc- to reduce steel weight and cost. tions. Erecting the tri-chord trusses in tion at www.modernsteel.com.) As with all compression members, one location then moving them on the truss members in Grade 65 steel rely on rail allowed reuse of the erection tow- THE SUPERTRUSS maintaining short unbraced lengths for ers and saved time by not having to An elaborate, but efficient, steel economy. Several strategies can be em- move the cranes, further speeding con- structural system supports this enor- ployed in large trusses to keep un- struction. mous roof. Two massive supertrusses braced lengths in an economical range Inside of each carrier beam are hy- clear span 620’ between concrete su- for Grade 65 steel usage. The primary draulic scissor clamps that can be tight- percolumns along either field sideline. strategy used on Reliant Stadium was ened around the rail as soon as the roof The bottom chord of each supertruss is the use of built-up laced compression panels stop moving. This first-of-its- gently arched to accommodate for members in the supertrusses. In total, kind computerized clamping system sight lines of the seating bowl, creating roughly 2950 tons of A913 Grade 65 keeps the steel and fabric panels from a truss with minimum depth of 50’ at steel was used in Reliant Stadium, “flying away” during high winds mid-span and a maximum depth of 72’ which resulted in an overall savings of at the supercolumns. In order to find an approximately 740 tons. FOUR BAR LINKAGE economical design for a truss with the The full economic benefit of using One of the design and engineering mid-span depth shallower than the Grade 65 is difficult to quantify, but innovations developed for the Reliant depth at the supports, the structural fabrication, handling, and erection sav- Stadium roof was a unique stress-relief engineer tied the truss rigidly to the su- ings due to reduced weight did mag- four-bar linkage detail. The design of a percolumn, thereby achieving a rigid nify the pure material tonnage savings. long-span roof system to accommodate frame action between the truss and its In addition, the lighter steel weight led potential restraint forces caused by supporting columns. to savings in the supercolumns and temperature, creep, shrinkage, founda- The maximum factored moment at foundations. The light steel weight was tion settlement and construction toler- the top of each supercolumn is 800,000 crucial in fitting the supertruss base ances is always a significant challenge. kip-feet. The transfer of load from the plates in the very limited bearing area This is particularly true for a roof that supertruss to the supercolumn was ac- available on top of the supercolumns. moves on a parallel rail system. complished through six large built-up The lighter steel weight made possible The roof structure rides on rails steel columns supported on base plates by using Grade 65 steel also helped to along the supertruss that can vary sig- large enough to distribute the compres- control differential settlement between nificantly in the distance between sive loads and to accommodate the re- the supercolumns and the bowl con- them, caused by supertruss movement quired number of 2½”-diameter, courses. under lateral load, temperature, and 20’-long, ASTM A354, Grade BD an- construction tolerance. When all ex- chor rods. The lateral shear was trans- EXCEEDING GOALS pected tolerances and deflections were ferred through steel “drag” plates with The owners had multiple goals in added up, it was determined that one 2½”-diameter ASTM A354, Grade BD designing and building Reliant Sta- end of the truss had to be able to move anchor rods.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Safeco Field Seattle, Washington
    Safeco Field Seattle, Washington n 1995, Seattle’s profes- sionalI baseball team, the Mariners, decided they wanted a new stadium. Across the country, great baseball venues were being created, echoing the early days of old-style stadiums, fresh grass fields, and the great outdoors. After 21 years of playing in the fully enclosed Kingdome, the Mariners, too, wanted out in the sun, both for the joy of playing outside and the financial boost it would bring the team. But Seattle’s rainy climate dic- tated that the stadium be equipped with an “umbrella” to shield fans on days of inclement weather. And, thus, the demand was made: Build us a new stadi- um, open to the sky, with real grass, but make sure we can cover the field and the fans when it rains. Plus, do it by opening day 1999. With those ground rules, the design team set to work. The result is Safeco Field, a 47,000 seat, state-of-the-art, retractable roof ballpark. This one-of-a-kind project offers a landmark public amenity that will keep major league baseball in the region for years to come. It pro- vides good family entertainment, while stimulating economic growth and redevelopment in the area. Proactive management and innovative design solutions were required to meet the aggressive Modern Steel Construction / March 2000 project schedule and design chal- lenges. The retractable roof was designed for speedy erection and to minimize the impact on the construction of the seating bowl. The close proximity to the Seattle Fault required special seismic considerations, such as the use of an innovative viscous damping system in the roof that reduces the seismic forces by 50%.
    [Show full text]
  • Design Considerations for Retractable-Roof Stadia
    Design Considerations for Retractable-roof Stadia by Andrew H. Frazer S.B. Civil Engineering Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2004 Submitted to the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of AASSACHUSETTS INSTiTUTE MASTER OF ENGINEERING IN OF TECHNOLOGY CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING MAY 3 12005 AT THE LIBRARIES MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY June 2005 © 2005 Massachusetts Institute of Technology All rights reserved Signature of Author:.................. ............... .......... Department of Civil Environmental Engineering May 20, 2005 C ertified by:................... ................................................ Jerome J. Connor Professor, Dep tnt of CZvil and Environment Engineering Thesis Supervisor Accepted by:................................................... Andrew J. Whittle Chairman, Departmental Committee on Graduate Studies BARKER Design Considerations for Retractable-roof Stadia by Andrew H. Frazer Submitted to the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering on May 20, 2005 in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Engineering in Civil and Environmental Engineering ABSTRACT As existing open-air or fully enclosed stadia are reaching their life expectancies, cities are choosing to replace them with structures with moving roofs. This kind of facility provides protection from weather for spectators, a natural grass playing surface for players, and new sources of revenue for owners. The first retractable-roof stadium in North America, the Rogers Centre, has hosted numerous successful events but cost the city of Toronto over CA$500 million. Today, there are five retractable-roof stadia in use in America. Each has very different structural features designed to accommodate the conditions under which they are placed, and their individual costs reflect the sophistication of these features.
    [Show full text]
  • The Astrodome Contained Multitudes
    1 FALL2008.cite 8 T h e A s t r o Revival tent, rodeo, baseball and football arena, bullfight- ing ring, monster truck pit—the Astrodome contained multitudes. Over the years architects have been imagining possibilities for its next incarnation. Conceived of by David Bucek, this 1990 illustration depicts a sanctuary for survivors of a worldwide ecological disaster. The glory days, 19 e t the decline, i c . 8 the future 0 0 2 L L A odome By Madeleine McDermott Hamm F n 1999, as the Houston Astros were packing up their gear and preparing Ito exit the Astrodome for the new downtown baseball-only ballpark, team owner Drayton McLane received a prophetic phone call from an architect in Rome. “He wanted to bring a production crew to Emmett insists, “No one at the county level wants to Judge Emmett says the county spends about $3 Houston to film the Astrodome,” McLane recalls. tear down the Astrodome.” million a year on minimum maintenance of the “And he said, ‘Don’t let them tear down the After the Astros moved downtown to Minute Astrodome (now officially called Reliant Astrodome Astrodome.’” Maid Park (originally Enron Field), Reliant Stadium as part of the Reliant Park complex). Some estimate Now, nine years later, preservationists and was erected next door to the Dome, opening in 2002 the figure closer to $5 million. Whatever the bottom Houstonians with memories of the Astrodome’s for the Texans’ football games. Today the line, the results equal neglect. glory years fear that the mostly abandoned, mini- Astrodome stands silent and dark.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution of Stadium Design
    Evolution of Stadium Design by Erika Yaroni Bachelor of Engineering Stevens Institute of Technology, 2011 Submitted to the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ENGINEERING in Civil and Environmental Engineering at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY !d A JUNE 2012 ARCHIVES © 2012 Erika Yaroni. All Rights Reserved The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part in any medium now known or hereafter created. / A Author: Department of Civil and Elironmental Engineering SMay 11, 2012 Certified by: Jerome J. Connor Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering )lesis Supervjsor Accepted by: 6'igM epf Chair, Departmental Committee for Graduate Stu nts Evolution of Stadium Design by Erika Yaroni Submitted to the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering on May 11, 2012 in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Engineering in Civil and Environmental Engineering ABSTRACT Stadiums are more than just facilities for organized sport; they offer a gathering site for people with shared interest, provide economic benefits to the surrounding community, and most importantly represent the advancements in architecture and engineering. When stadiums were first developed, their main focus was to provide enclosure for athletes' play and little attention was given to spectators. Most Greek and Roman athletic facilities are guilty of this. While the general geometry of stadiums remains the same today, the structure itself has changed tremendously. As this thesis will point out, there is a multitude of structural systems that have been employed in the design of stadiums.
    [Show full text]
  • SF-Retractable Roofs the Past.Indd
    By Surinder Mann and Bryan Tokarczyk Safeco Field courtesy of NBBJ The idea of moving roofs on sports stadia has been around for thousands of years. In fact, the coliseum in Rome had a movable linen awning in ancient times. By nature of the venue supported, stadia roofs free-span incredible distances. Much of their function is to protect the players and spectators from the environment. However, many of the activities require natural turf, and therefore sunlight - hence the introduction of one solution, the retractable roof system. This article examines the structure and background of the retractable roofs that have been built in the US over the last decade or so, and attempts to envision the future for this unique form of building. Minute Maid Park courtesy of HOK S+V+E STRUCTURE magazine • November 2004 33 Miller Park courtesy of HKS Past Concept For over three decades, designers have Retractable roofs have improved the In the concept phase of such facilities, seriously considered the working attributes predictability of the game’s scheduling over constructing a team of key players is essential of stadia roofs that can open and close upon open venues, bringing more spectators to successfully working through the feasibility command. The nature of the large facilities, from farther away to view a game or event, of architectural, structural, and mechanization long spans, and impressive loading conditions which was much more likely to be held than ideas. Unique to the retractable roof is the encourages designers to exercise all in the past. Owners have embraced this introduction of a mechanization team who will their design expertise, as well as improvement in game predictability, as well as have the perspective of the roof’s operability seek out new skills.
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes of the Meeting of January 5, 2011 Beginning at 12:30 PM 200 Ross Street First Floor Hearing Room Pittsburgh, PA 15219 in Attendance
    Division of Development Administration and Review City of Pittsburgh, Department of City Planning 200 Ross Street, Third Floor Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219 Minutes of the Meeting of January 5, 2011 Beginning at 12:30 PM 200 Ross Street First Floor Hearing Room Pittsburgh, PA 15219 In Attendance: Members Staff Others Others (cont.) Noor Ismail Makenzie Diehl Keith Cochran John Menniti Ernie Hogan Ahmed Martin Anne Nelson Linda McClellan Eloise McDonald Travis Williams Arthur Sheffield Jeff Wilhelm Jeff Slack Joe Serrao Dusty Kirk Gary English John Jennings Matthew Galluto Lloyd Wright James Eash John Stephen Scott Leib Audrey Reihblum Scott Pollock Steve Swartz Pat Washington Sandy Brown New Business Approval of Minutes: In regards to the November 2010 minutes, Mr. Serrao moved to approve. Ms. Ismail seconded the motion, all members voted in favor. Certificates of Appropriateness: In regards to the November 2010 Certificates of Appropriateness, Mr. Serrao moved to approve, Ms. McClellan seconded, all members voted in favor. Other: Applications for Economic Hardship: None Upcoming Demolitions: None Adjourn: Mr. Serrao moved to adjourn, Ms. McClellan seconded the motion, all voted in favor. Discussion on hearing items follows on the attached pages. 1 Pittsburgh HRC Minutes – January 5, 2011 Iron City Brewery Individual Landmark OWNER: WARD: .......................................... 6th APPLICATION RECEIVED:12/15/2010 Iron City Brewery, LLC LOT & BLOCK: ................. 26-A-300 3340 Liberty Avenue SITE VISITS: Pittsburgh, PA 15201 INSPECTOR: ....................... JIM KING CERTIFICATES OF APP.:00-000 COUNCIL DISTRICT: ......................... APPLICANT: Iron City Brewery, LLC ZONING CLASSIFICATION: ............... 3340 Liberty Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15201 ARCH. RATING:................................. NATIONAL REGISTER: LISTED ......................................... ELIGIBLE ...................................... Proposed Changes: Proposed demolition of “Pipe Shop” Building Discussion: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Western Canada!
    Local Culture Corner September 2016 Western Canada! The IMAGINiT Western Canada territory is made up of the following provinces… from west to east… British Columbia (we just say BC, where our Vancouver office is), Alberta (where our Calgary and Edmonton offices are) and Saskatchewan (we just say Sask, where our Saskatoon office is). The best way to pronounce Saskatchewan is just take out the vowels, everyone say it together…ssktchwn. We also work with a couple of northern territories, Yukon and Northwest Territories. In this month’s issue we will feature Vancouver and Saskatoon. Stay tuned for our article about our Alberta offices in an upcoming newsletter!!!! The distance “as the bird flies” between Vancouver and Toronto is 2090 miles. The distance between Vancouver and Calgary is 420 miles. Calgary to Edmonton is 175 miles and Edmonton to Saskatoon is 301 miles. Local Culture Corner September 2016 Vancouver: We have three employees in the Vancouver office, Carrie Urdiga (MFG Account Executive), Paul Hollas (AEC Account Executive) and Jeff Morrow (AEC Sr. Solutions Consultant). Carrie Urdiga and Paul Hollas Jeff Morrow Our office is located in the city of Richmond, BC, a suburb south of the City of Vancouver. The area is made up of many cities, Richmond, Surrey, Delta, Burnaby, Coquitlam, and Langley to mention a few… which are usually generalized into “Vancouver”. The population of greater Vancouver is 2.5 million. Vancouver is a city surrounded by the Pacific Ocean on the west and the Rocky Mountains to the east. The city itself is very mountainous… but has rich farm soil throughout.
    [Show full text]
  • Fairmont Royal York to the Metro Toronto Convention
    3. CN Tower 4. Rogers Centre 1.Union Station 5. PATH Wayfinding Signage 2. The Hockey Hall of Fame 1. UNION STATION (65 Front St. W. - Bay, York and Front Streets ) – “You build your stations like we build our cathedrals." – Edward, Prince of Wales, during the official opening of Union Station, August,1927. Toronto’s central commuter hub and busiest transportation facility in Canada, Union Station serves 250,000 passengers daily. Designed in the Beaux-Arts style, it was the largest and most opulent station erected in Canada. The Great Hall features a coffered vault ceiling of Gustavino tiles. ALSO CLOSE BY: FAIRMONT ROYAL YORK TO 2. HOCKEY HALL OF FAME (Brookfield Place, 30 Yonge St.). Located in a former THE METRO TORONTO bank building, the Hockey Hall of Fame houses the finest collection of hockey CONVENTION CENTRE (MTCC) artifacts at all levels of play from around the world; state-of-the-art games that challenge shooting and goalkeeping skills; themed exhibits dedicated to the game’s greatest players, teams and achievements; a replica NHL dressing room and NHL Estimated walking time: 4-6 minutes trophies including, best of all, hands-on access to the Stanley Cup. Distance: 450 metres or .3 miles 3. CN TOWER (301 Front St. W. ) Just west of the Metro Toronto Convention Centre is From the main entrance of the hotel on Canada's iconic National Tower, the tallest tower in the Western Hemisphere, Front Street, turn right and walk west to offering spectacular views, a spell-binding Glass Floor, motion theatre ride and the Metro Toronto Convention Centre.
    [Show full text]
  • Winning Spaces Our Global Portfolio of Sports Projects
    WINNING SPACES OUR GLOBAL PORTFOLIO OF SPORTS PROJECTS 1 WINNING SPACES Melbourne Park Redevelopment Eastern Plaza - National Tennis Centre Image courtesy of Major Projects Victoria - Peter Glenane CONTENTS SPORTING PROWESS 04 OUR PROJECTS 06 Community Icons 06 World-class Experiences 26 Flexibility and Innovation 40 Pace and Efficiency 52 OUR SERVICES 66 ABOUT US 68 Cover image Perth Arena courtesy of Cameron Chisholm Nicol and ARM, photographer Greg Hocking 3 WINNING SPACES WINNING SPACES SPORTING PROWESS WE HAVE BEEN A PROUD PLAYER IN GLOBAL SPORTS DEVELOPMENT FOR OVER FOUR DECADES, HELPING CLIENTS ENRICH COMMUNITIES AND STADIA AQUATICS CENTRES VELODROMES TENNIS CLUBS ELECTRIFY AUDIENCES Mercedes Benz Stadium Pan Am / Parapan Am Aquatics Centre Hong Kong Velodrome Melbourne Park Redevelopment Eastern Plaza – Page 30 Page 24 Page 62 National Tennis Centre WITH STRIKING AND Page 64 SUSTAINABLE VENUES. At WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff, we have a long history supporting the creation of diverse sports facilities for a rich array of clients. Our record covers everything from national stadia to school swimming pools, multipurpose arenas to specialist facilities, in a portfolio spanning the world. We bring a global skill set, passion for beautiful buildings and matchless experience to every project, working with architects, owners, councils and developers to create iconic and cost-effective structures that reward both users and operators. EQUESTRIAN CENTRES SPORTS ACCOMMODATION SPORTS CENTRES MULTIPURPOSE ARENAS Al Shaqab Equestrian Centre Commonwealth Games Athletes Village Abbotsford Entertainment & Sports Centre Seattle Arena With an intimate understanding of international Page 28 Page 60 Page 13 Page 23 sports dynamics and creative and flexible teams, we tailor global best practice to meet the needs of every project.
    [Show full text]
  • Design Considerations for a Rotating Retractable Stadium Roof Charles S
    University of Mississippi eGrove Honors College (Sally McDonnell Barksdale Honors Theses Honors College) 2014 Design Considerations for a Rotating Retractable Stadium Roof Charles S. Jenkins University of Mississippi. Sally McDonnell Barksdale Honors College Follow this and additional works at: https://egrove.olemiss.edu/hon_thesis Part of the Civil Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Jenkins, Charles S., "Design Considerations for a Rotating Retractable Stadium Roof" (2014). Honors Theses. 178. https://egrove.olemiss.edu/hon_thesis/178 This Undergraduate Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Honors College (Sally McDonnell Barksdale Honors College) at eGrove. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of eGrove. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my parents, Chuck Jenkins and Sherry Williams-Jenkins, for instilling in me a love of learning that I hope to keep for my whole life. Their counsel and support through my years at Ole Miss have been invaluable. I would like to thank the Sally McDonnell Barksdale Honors College at the University of Mississippi for the tremendous resources it provides to countless students. The Honors College made my college experience a special one and made this thesis possible. I would like to thank the entire Department of Civil Engineering at the University of Mississippi for the instruction, guidance, and friendship they have shown me. The education I have received at the University is excellent and, without it, I never could have completed this thesis. Finally, I would like to thank my advisor, Professor Elizabeth Ervin.
    [Show full text]
  • Civic Arena Pittsburgh
    76 - ISSF STAINLESS STEEL IN ARCHITECTURAL APPLICATIONS CULTURE AND HISTORY Civic Arena Pittsburgh Pittsburg, United States of America until the Houston Astrodome was built three years later. The stainless steel dome weighs almost four Civic Arena (formerly the Civic Auditorium and later thousand tons and has a diameter of a little over four Mellon Arena) was an arena located in downtown hundred feet. To cover the entire outer surface of the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The Civic Arena primarily dome, it took a whopping 166,000 square feet, 2,950 served as the home to the Pittsburgh Penguins, the tons of stainless steel sheeting. city’s National Hockey League (NHL) franchise, from The Civic Arena closed on June 26, 2010. The former 1967 to 2010. Mellon naming rights expired soon after, and the Picture sourced from Wikimedia Commons Constructed in 1961 for use by the Pittsburgh Penguins and all other events moved across the Courtesy of Daveynin Civic Light Opera (CLO), it was the brainchild of street to the new Consol Energy Center - now PPG department store owner Edgar J. Kaufmann. It was Paints Arena. After various groups declined historic the first retractable roof major-sports venue in the status for the venue, it was demolished between world, covering 170,000 sq. feet, constructed with September 2011 and March 2012. nearly 3,000 tons of stainless steel and supported In November 2011, the Penguins started selling solely by a massive 260-foot-long cantilevered arm Christmas ornaments crafted from the Civic Arena’s on the exterior. Even though it was designed and stainless steel roof.
    [Show full text]
  • CIVIC ARENA (Public Auditorium) 66 Mario Lemieux Place Pittsburgh
    CIVIC ARENA HABS No. PA-678 0 (Public Auditorium) 66 Mario Lemieux Place Pittsburgh Allegheny County Pennsylvania PHOTOGRAPHS COPIES OF COLOR TRANSPARENCIES WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA FIELD RECORDS HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior 1201 "Eye" Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20005 HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY CIVIC ARENA (Public Auditorium) HABS No. PA-678 0 Location: The Civic Arena is located at 66 Mario Lemieux Place (formerly Auditorium Place) in the extreme western or lower part of Pittsburgh's Hill District neighborhood, which is commonly known as the Lower Hill. Immediately west of the Civic Arena is Interstate 579, a depressed highway that separates the Lower Hill from the central business district. The area fronts on Washington Place, and its site is bounded by Washington Place on the west, Bedford Avenue on the north, Centre Avenue on the south, and Mario Lemieux Place on the north. Three arena surface parking lots adjoin the site: the East Lot and Melody Tent Lot are located east of the arena in the area between Mario Lemieux Place and Crawford Avenue; the West Lot is located in the triangular area between Washington Place and 1-579. The Civic Arena is located at latitude 40.441714, longitude -79.989882. The coordinate represents the center of the building, which is also the terminus of the steel cantilever truss supporting the roof. The coordinate was obtained on April 11, 2011, using Google Earth computer software. The coordinate's datum is North American Datum 1983. The Civic Arena's location has no restriction on its release to the public.
    [Show full text]