robust resilient resistant REINFORCED CONCRETE STRUCTURES
Edition
Contents
004
RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY 010 Folded Plate Structures: an Ingenious and Efficient Construction Principle 020 Ultralight Formwork System for Thin, Textile-reinforced Concrete Shells 028 Folded Plate Floor Slabs in Prestressed Concrete
034 D igital C onstruction – 3D Concrete Printing 040 Semi-Finished Products in Structural Carbon P restressed Concrete
ROOFS 048 Concert Hall in Blaibach 060 Tram Stop at Berlin Main Railway Station
066 High-speed Railway Station in Montpellier 076 Chalice C olumns for Stuttgart 21
MULTI-STOREY BUILDINGS 088 Single-family House in Gordola 098 Administration and Conference Building in Garching 110 Station Hall with Multistorey Parking Garage in Bordeaux 118 ESO Supernova in Garching
126 Schlotterbeck Residential and Office Building in Zurich 134 BioBío Regional Theatre in Concepción 142 taz Publishing House in Berlin 150 Office Building in Lyon
BRIDGES AND INFRASTRUCTURE BUILDINGS 160 Two Stations on the B udapest Metro 170 De Lentloper Bridge in Nijmegen 180 Railway Viaduct over the Almonte River near Cáceres
192 Hagneck Hydroelectric Power Plant 202 Demolishing Major Bridges. A Job for Engineers 208 Bridge Construction, Quo Vadis?
APPENDIX 218 Authors 220 Image Credits
005
222 Project Participants 224 Imprint
Foreword Jakob Schoof
Top Performer in Flux
006
Concrete is the material which makes possible the greatest heights and farthest depths of construction. Neither the 828-m high Burj Khalifa, the world’s tallest building, nor the Gotthard Base Tunnel, reaching 2,450 m below the central Alps, could have been achieved without reinforced concrete. However, concrete also has high and low points in the context of design: the same material that expresses the extreme slenderness of the shell roofs of Heinz Isler and Ulrich Müther, also identifies with concrete panel structures from the postwar era and the economics-driven design of motorway bridges that cut through so many river valleys with the most Brutalist possible monotony. Not by chance, a – cautiously expressed – ambivalent view of concrete developed out of this: the uninterrupted fascination of many engineers and architects with concrete stands in contrast to its rejection by broad sections of the public. Both sides base their judgements on the architectural experiences of the last 150 years, although concrete is far older. The material used by the ancient Romans stood the test of time, not only in the world- famous dome of the Pantheon in Rome but also in numerous arched structures and as the core material in multi-skinned walls. Following the end of the Roman Empire, concrete construction was largely forgotten in Europe until the late modern period. After Joseph Monier was awarded the first patent for concrete reinforced with iron in 1867, the material advanced step-by-step to become the leading technology of modern construction. The works of engineers and architects such as Francois Hennebique and Le Corbusier were crucial, revolutionary contributions to the rationalisation and aestheticisation of concrete. Their successors, on the other hand, have left us a problematic inheritance of defective, “maintenance-intensive” concrete structures, the repair and replacement of which keep today’s engineers continuously busy. It is crucial that we learn from the mistakes of the past. In many situations, reinforced concrete remains indispensable, even today, because no other material comes anywhere near it in terms of protection against fire, noise and moisture. Its design diversity is likewise unbeatable – the structures discussed in this book bear witness to this fact. However, sustainable reinforced concrete construction today requires not only material-efficient and durable load-bearing structures, but also careful consideration of what should be built, where and when. To do anything other would be environmentally and economically i rresponsible. If the global cement industry were a country, it would occupy third place behind China and the USA in the CO2 emissions league table. It accounts for between 4–8% of global emissions, depending on the method of calculation and production processes involved. Although binders with a much more favourable greenhouse effect, such as ground granulated blast-furnace slag from iron ore smelting and fly ash from coal-fired power plants, are now also available, the supply is unlikely to be anywhere near sufficient to satisfy even the world’s current hunger for concrete. Finding a way out of this dilemma requires pioneering work in many areas: in the development of new, more efficient load-bearing structures, in basic research into new concrete mixes and processing methods and, last but not least, in dealing with the concrete heritage of the past. Our book “robust resilient resistant” gives insights into the many facets of this work, from 3D printing with reinforced concrete to the refurbishment and demolition of road bridges and experiments with new types of arched structures, and from multi-storey buildings to semifinished products of prestressed carbon reinforced concrete. It also shows in detail some of the most impressive concrete structures of recent years, including the roofs of the new below-ground station at Stuttgart Hauptbahnhof and the TGV station in Montpellier, the metro stations in Budapest and an office building in Lyon with column cross sections describing, in an exaggerated form, the increasing vertical loads from top to bottom of the building. We hope you find them a rich source of inspiration for your own work with reinforced concrete and a cause for some moments of critical reflection over a material in flux that is absolutely certain to exercise a powerful influence over construction in the future.
007
St. Paulus Church, Neuss-Weckhoven. Project design: Fritz Schaller, Christian Schaller Structural design: Stefan Polónyi
014
Essay
015
Folding – an efficient construction principle
Text Tom Van Mele, Tomás Méndez Echenagucia, David Pigram, Andrew Liew, Philippe Block
Ultralight Formwork System for Thin, Textile- reinforced Concrete Shells 020
ESSAY
HiLo is a research and innovation unit for lightweight construction and smart and adaptive building systems. Construction began in 2018 on this two-storey innovation hub and collaborative working space on NEST, EMPA’s modular research building in Dübendorf, Switzerland. The roof of the unit is a double-layered, doubly curved, carbonfibrereinforced concrete shell structure with integrated hydronic heating and cooling and a thin-film photovoltaic system on top. With a total height of 7 metres, the roof covers an area of 120 square metres and has a total surface area of 160 square metres. A full-scale prototype of the bottom layer of the concrete roof was built at the Robotic Fabrication Lab of the Institute of Technology in Architecture at ETH Zurich as a dress rehearsal for its innovative construction system. The base of the system is composed of r eusable scaffolding elements that support a set of timber edge beams. A cable net spans between the beams and the lower supports, and a fabric on top serves as shuttering for the sprayed concrete. The
cable net is comprised of custom-cut steel cables connected by rings and brackets and is d esigned such that it deflects under the weight of the wet concrete into the correct final geometry, which it then supports until the shell has cured. To achieve this, the cable net must be precisely tensioned at the correct angle from specific anchor points on the CNC-milled edge beams. CABLE NET DESIGN The anticlastic shape of the concrete shell structure is the result of a custom-developed, multi-criteria optimisation process that balances architectural and functional constraints, such as possible touchdown regions, headroom clearances and solar orientation, with structural and fabrication requirements. 021
Formwork System for Thin, Textile-reinforced Concrete Shells
Text Marc Mimram, Michele Bonera
A
B compression
taut stress
D
2.97
C
1.30
E
1.30
2.97
1.30
8.27
1.30
8.42 2.97
16.84 8.27
8.42
16.84
1.30
1.30
8.27
8.42
2.78
16.84
1.45 2.78
1.45
F 1.45
8.42
1.45
8.42
8.42
2.78
16.84
8.42
High-speed Railway station
1.45
8.42 16.84
070
8.42
16.84
1.45
COMPLEX ROOF STRUCTURE The roof of the new high-speed train station in Montpellier consists of a perforated concrete structure of 115 modular, precast “palm” units of white, ultra-high performance concrete (UHPC).
These doubly curved elements offer permanent protection against the sun and rain. Open gaps between the elements allow n atural ventilation of the hall.
OVERALL STRUCTURE The load-bearing structure of the station has four main layers: the lowest is the reinforced concrete plinth, which has a grid of 18 × 19.45 m determined by the arrangement of the platforms. The second layer includes all the reinforced concrete constructions above the station hall
floor. The third structural layer is a multi-span welded steel column and beam frames (5 spans of 19.45 m longitudinally, 2 spans of 18 m and 36 m transversely). The fourth structural layer is the modular roof elements spanning between the steel main girders.
STRUCTURE OF THE ROOF ELEMENTS The palms are self-supporting precast units with a span of 16.84 m. They consist of a variable cross section central rib prestressed by four T15S cables and a doubly curved and perforated shell with edge upstands and are only 40 mm thick. The four reinforced corner bearings of each roof element rest on support brackets attached to the steel girders. The palms behave as statically determinate beams with pinned bearings at one end and longitudinally sliding bearings at the other. They do not provide any stiffening to the overall structure. In addition to their selfweight, they also carry maintenance access, snow, wind, temperature changes and earthquake loads. The extremely delicately proportioned shape of the elements required the design of a new UHPC mix, which incorporated a high proportion of stainless steel fibres (Ductal B3 FI 1.75 %).
A cross and longitudinal section of the structural steelwork, static system
B isometric view of a roof element showing compression and tension zones
071
Montpellier (FR)
C isometric view of tructural steelwork
Connecting the compression-loaded top edge to the pretensioned bottom edge by the thin, perforated shell, allowed each palm to act as a vaulted Vierendeel girder. The more highly loaded ends of the shell have fewer perforations. A transverse rib at the ridge prevents the V-shaped cross section from folding in on itself. As a result, the elements are very stiff. Their maximum deflection under self-weight including creep is 14.6 mm at the ridge, i.e. only 1/1200 of the span. The analysis using Sofistik took into account nonlinear behaviour in arriving at the design of the c omplex geometry of the system and allowed crack widths to be limited to 0.01 mm. The high density and low porosity of the UHPC e nsures that the elements are waterproof. Glass inserts seal the openings in the palms. The model of the whole roof indicated that the structural steel frames would deflect a maximum of +/- 28 mm laterally under earthquake loads, from which the joint width of 70 mm was derived.
D isometric view of support brackets on main girder
E v ertical section of type 3 roof element scale 1:100
F v ertical section, plan of type 5 roof element scale 1:100
G
I
H
J
K
5
0.07
1
0.98
2 0.24 3 4
0.36
2.42 K vertical section of roof scale 1:25 1 40-mm UHPC (ultrahigh performance c oncrete)
G isometric view of a roof span, each of the five roof spans consists of a group of four elements of different shapes at each end and 15 identical elements between the end groups
H–J production, site storage + installation of roof lements e
072
High-speed Railway station
2 400/160-mm opening with glass cover 3 UHPC rib 4 pretensioned element with 4 T15S cables
5 aluminium plate, powder-coated
VARYING DEGREES OF TRANSPARENCY The number of transparent openings in the palms above the hall reduces from north to south, which limits the amount of light and heat admitted. In addition, the density of the openings is less on the west-facing parts to reduce the entry of afternoon sun. The proportion of
6
transparent openings varies from 8 % in the southwest to 25 % in the northeast. The elements in the external roof projection over the forecourt are thicker and evenly perforated to create a gentle transition between indoor and outdoor lighting conditions.
7.00 5.98
L 0.60
0.40 7
0.61
6
0.29
0.10 8
0.14
0.60
8 0.61 c 0.29
7
0.14 8
1.20 c
c
0.81
9
1.40 cc
5.98 0.40
1.20 c
7.00
0.81
9
1.40
L vertical section of roof edge, horizontal section of column scale 1:20 6 UHPC roof element 7 1200/600-mm beam
welded out of 50-mm steel plate 8 UHPC cladding 9 1400/810-mm column welded out of 65/55-mm steel plate
073
Montpellier (FR)
0.10 8
E
E freestanding reinforcement of a chalice foot before erection of formwork
080
Chalice Columns for Stuttgart 21
SOAP FILMS AND SUSPENDED MODELS The development of the geometry of the chalice is based on methods Frei Otto used in projects such as the German Pavilion at the 1967 World’s Fair in Montreal. He created a membrane surface using soap film and suspended models to arrive at an isotropic, even flow of tension forces under self-weight. The light eyes transfer the forces from the support points in the membrane surfaces without causing peaks of stress at the load introduction points. The geometry derived
from the suspended models was “frozen” and then turned upside down to give the required form of the compression structure. Even though the basic shape of the chalice was modified over the course of the design, it is still essentially the same. Due to their shape and the openings in the top, the chalices reflect daylight far into the platform hall. Ventilation flaps in the steelglass structure, which close the top of the light eyes, allow natural ventilation and airconditioning.
EXTENSIVE FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING Because the complex geometry cannot be clearly expressed in 2D drawings, the design of the load-bearing structure was based on a 3D model from the very beginning (fig. C). The model included precise detailing of the reinforced concrete structure and showed all the shell’s joints, in-built components and ducts. The structural design used various finite element models (FEM) based on the geometric model. These models were capable of simulating all the stages of construction and load cases, including seismic effects and structure/earth interactions. The critical load cases for the design were those
involving self-weight, fill on top of the structure, seismic effects, temperature and other imposed strains. The 3D model not only contained the geometry but also all the information about the load-bearing structure with coordinates. The 600 or so structural drawings for the shell roof were based on the model, which was also used as the basis for their data by many design and construction partners in other disciplines. The contractors used it for designing their formwork, and the structural engineers for the reinforcement design and detailing.
HIGH DENSITY OF REINFORCEMENT The complex reinforced concrete structure has a high density of reinforcement in some areas. In typical parts of the shell roof, each face has four layers of bar reinforcement. To make maximum use of the internal lever arm and to ensure adequate concrete cover, the bar reinforcement had to closely follow the component geometry. This resulted in four different basic bent bar forms. The structural engineers used their in-house 3D software to determine the precise geometric line of each bar. This data was then converted into actual reinforcing bars using a 3D reinforcement design program. Generating the bent forms took into account the elastic- plastic behaviour of the reinforcing steel and the technical limits of bar-bending machines. This 081
Stuttgart (DE)
revealed at an early stage in the design that certain bent-bar shapes could not be manufactured. The number of complex shapes, such as bars that had to be bent in different planes, could then be deliberately reduced to a minimum. A typical inner chalice with around 300 tonnes of reinforcement required 350 DIN A0 reinforcement drawings. A total of 12,000 such drawings were needed to detail the reinforcement for the complete shell roof. The 3D reinforcement model also proved useful on site: the contractors could check individual bar positions and fixing details against the design at any time in the drawing container.
THE SCOOP An unusual reinforcement feature is the scoop (figs. A, C), a strengthening upstand running partially around and over the top of the chalice. The scoop surrounds and carries the light eye. The forces from the steel/glass structure of the light eye are picked up by the scoop and transferred into the surounding concrete of the shell. This area has to be reinforced like a beam, which leads to local high concentrations of reinforcement. 32-mm diameter closed stirrups were arranged in a large ring surrounding the
scoop (fig. D). To be able to fix the tangential- running reinforcement conveniently from above and avoid having to painstakingly thread it into position, the s tirrups were left open at the top and closed only a short time before concreting. Special U -shaped stirrups were designed for this task: their ends each had a steel plate to allow the stirrups to be simply closed using a transverse bar (figs. F, G).
FORMWORK AND CONCRETING The formwork design was also based on the 3D model. All the chalice columns are cast using three sets of formwork in which the individual elements can be varied according to the desired geometry. Around 600 glued timber board elements were manufactured by CNC milling, sanding and reinforcing with intermediate layers of GFP-reinforced resin. In addition to the complex geometry of the formwork elements, another challenge was to remove all the air from around the formed surfaces during concreting. The flowing consistency (F5) of the specially developed concrete mix, optimisation of concreting speed and intensity of vibration all helped prevent the formation of voids. A sample chalice was constructed to demonstrate the feasibility and provide a cast surface for reference as the work progressed. This took the form of a full-scale partial segment of a typical inner chalice. During steel fixing, the
necessary vibrators and concrete hoses were integrated into the reinforcement cage and then pulled out as the concreting progressed. A video camera monitored the behaviour of the concrete as it rose up the forms in the areas not directly visible. Any breaks in the concreting process would have shown up as pour marks at the surface. To ensure this could not happen, a second batching plant was always on standby. Stripping the forms from the chalice columns normally started after about three days. This ensured that the concrete surface came into contact with oxygen as soon as possible to keep any blue colouration to a minimum. Temporary 12-m long props were put in place around the chalice after stripping (fig. H). These temporary steel props had a square cross section with varying wall thicknesses. They prevent possible deformation along the edges of the chalice until the shrinkage gaps are closed.
F scoop stirrup with steel special construction in transport template
H 12-m long temporary props prevented any deformation of the chalice edges between stripping and closure of the shrinkage gaps.
082
Chalice Columns for Stuttgart 21
G scoop reinforcement fixed in place showing special steel components
F
G
H
083
Stuttgart (DE)
Trains operating on the new Madrid–Lisbon line cross the Almonte River near Cáceres in Extremadura, Spain. The viaduct carrying them is 996 m long, spans 384 m over the river, has a deck supported on 20 piers 36 –45 m apart and is the largest reinforced concrete arch in the world carrying high-speed trains. No part of the substructure – not even temporary works – could be located in the river because of strict environmental protection rules. This required a very detailed investigation of the various possible
elevation scale 1:6000
construction phases for the erection of the arch approach structures scale 1:10 000
182
Railway Viaduct
bridge types and how they could be constructed. The deck is designed as a continuous beam with sliding bearings on the piers and a fixed bearing at the arch crown. The arch performs all the critical functions in the transfer of the dynamic forces generated by trains travelling at speeds of up to 350 km/h. The arch was erected from both sides of the river as cantilevering arch segments supported by temporary cables. Andreas Ordon
183
Almonte near Cáceres (ES)
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND DETERMINING THE IDEAL SHAPE OF THE ARCH The design had to fulfil very stringent dynamic, serviceability and safety criteria. Given the type of structure, the construction method and the serviceability requirements, the complex calculations involved an iterative determination of an ideal antifunicular arch shape that took into account the dynamic amplification of railway
D
loading. Next followed a detailed analysis of the construction stages, nonlinear modelling of the serviceability and ultimate limit states and a detailed dynamic analysis. Wind tunnel tests on a reduced model confirmed the calculated performance of the structure in wind and the aeroelastic behaviour of the bridge.
E
F
G
H
I
D, E ovable scaffolding m system for the continuous beam deck
F – I travelling formwork for the arch
186
Railway Viaduct
187
Almonte near Cáceres (ES)
AUTHORS FRANCISCO BARTOLOMÉ Francisco Bartolomé is an engineer with B y B Ingeniería in Santiago de Chile and was responsible for the structural engineering design of the Theatre BioBío in Concepción. ROLAND BECHMANN Roland Bechmann is managing director of Werner Sobek and has been responsible for the design of the new below-ground station at Stuttgart Hauptbahnhof since 2009. THOMAS BECK Thomas Beck is a structural engineer and since 1999 managing partner of a.k.a. ingenieure in Munich. He was responsible for the structural engineering design of the concert hall in Blaibach. PHILIPPE BLOCK Philippe Block is professor of architecture and struc ture at ETH Zurich, where he founded the Block Research Group (BRG). He is also director of the Swiss National Centres for Competence in Research (NCCR) – Digital Fabrication. BART BOLS As a project engineer at consulting engineers Ney & Partner, Bart Bols was responsible for the “De Lentloper” Bridge in N ijmegen. MICHELE BONERA Michele Bonera is a structural engineer and was responsible for the engineering design of the roof structure of the highspeed railway station in Montpellier. 218
GUILLERMO CAPELLÁN Guillermo Capellán ia a consulting engineer and technical director at bridge design consultants Arenas & Asociados, which, together with IDOM Consulting, Engineering, Architecture, designed the high-speed railway viaduct over the Almonte near Cáceres. STEPHAN ENGELSMANN Stephan Engelsmann is a structural engineer. He is professor of structural design at the Stuttgart State Academy of Art and Design and managing partner of Engelsmann Peters. BURKHARD FRANKE Burkhard Franke is a freelance architect, editor and photographer. He is a frequent author of articles for Detail and structure – published by Detail. ANDRES GABRIEL Andreas Gabriel, who is an architect with extensive practice experience, was an editor at Detail until 2018, where he was involved with the conception and implementation of themed publications, specialist books and new journal profiles.
Bollinger+Grohmann in Vienna. He is a specialist in parametric structural engineering design, working in particular on the ESO Supernova project in Garching. He is also a development team member for the “Karamba3d” analysis software.
ANDREW LIEW Andrew Liew is a structural engineer and was post- doctoral researcher in the Block Research Group (BRG) at ETH Zurich. Today he is a lecturer at the University of Sheffield.
HEIKE KAPPELT Heike Kappelt is a civil engineer. She started in the Detail project team in 2016 and almost two years later joined the editorial team for structure – published by Detail. Since January 2020, she has been a member of the Detail editorial team.
VIKTOR MECHTCHERINE Viktor Mechtcherine is the Director of the Institute of Construction Materials and a full professor at Technical University (TU) Dresden. One of his main areas of research is 3D printing of concrete.
EMMANUEL LIVADIOTTI Emmanuel Livadiotti is a structural engineer and was PABLO JIMÉNEZ responsible for the struc GUIJARRO tural engineering design Pablo Jiménez Guijarro is the engineering manager for of the parking garage in Bordeaux. In 2001, together construction area III at the with Taha Aladine, he found Spanish national railway company ADIF AV, the client ed the engineering consultancy MaP3, which de for the high-speed railway signed the engineering viaduct over the Almonte details for the architect. near Cáceres.
TOM VAN MELE Tom Van Mele is co-director LUDOLF KRONTAL Ludolf Krontal is the manag and head of research and ing partner of Marx Krontal development of the Block Research Group (BRG) at consulting engineers. The office specialises in design ETH Zurich. ing bridgeworks on existing and new bridges and planned TOMÁS MÉNDEZ the demolition of the Lahn- ECHENAGUCIA PASCUAL GARCÍA ARIAS tal Bridge in Limburg. Pascual García Arias is the Tomás Méndez Echenagucivil engineering manager cia is an architect and was JOSEF KURATH at IDOM Consulting, Engipost-doctoral researcher in Josef Kurath teaches struc- the Block Research Group neering, Architecture – Madrid, which, together with tural engineering, strength (BRG) at ETH Zurich. Today bridge consultants Arenas & of materials and construc he is Assistant Professor at tive design at Zurich Uni Asociados, designed the University of Washington. versity of Applied Sciences high-speed railway viaduct ZHAW in Winterthur, Switzer- MARC MIMRAM over the Almonte near land. He is head of the fibre- Marc Mimram is an archiCáceres. reinforced plastics research tect, structural engineer group. He is a founding MORITZ HEIMRATH and the founder of the Marc partner at Staubli, Kurath Moritz Heimrath works Mimram Architecture & und Partner AG consulting as an architect and office Ingénierie consultancy. He engineers in Zurich. partner at consultants was responsible for the
APPENDIX
structural engineering ANDREA PEDRAZZINI design of the high-speed Andrea Pedrazzini, a railway station in Montpellier structural engineer, is the owner and founder of the LAURENT NEY Pedrazzini Guidotti engineer ing consultancy in Lugano. Laurent Ney is a structural engineer and architect. He is He was responsible for the head of the engineering the structural engineering consultancy Ney & Partner design of the Namics office and was responsible for the building in St. Gallen and design and structural engithe single-family house in neering for the Lentloper Gordola. Bridge in Nijmegen. DAVID PIGRAM TORSTEN NOACK David Pigram is co-founder Torsten Noack has been and director of the architecdeputy project manager at ture firm supermanoeuvre Werner Sobek working on and a senior lecturer at the the design of the new below- University of Technology ground station at Stuttgart Sydney (UTS), Australia. Hauptbahnhof since 2009. TIVADAR PUSKAS ANDREAS ORDON Tivadar Puskas is partner at Andreas Ordon is an archi- the engineering consultancy tect and works for StollenSchnetzer Puskas Internawerk Architekten. From tional in Basle and was 2014 to 2017, he was a free- responsible for the struc lance editor for the maga tural engineering design zine structure – published of the taz publishing house by Detail. in Berlin. ADAM ORLINSKI Adam Orlinski works as an architect at consultants Bollinger+Grohmann in Vienna. He is a specialist in parametric structural design and is a member of the development team for the structural analysis software „Karamba3d“. GERGELY PATAKI Gergely Pataki is a struc tural engineer. He joined Uvaterv Engineering Consultants in Budapest in 1999, working in particular on the two stations for the Budapest Metro. ROLAND PAWLITSCHKO Roland Pawlitschko is an architect as well as an author, architecture critic and translator. He has been working as a freelance editor with the Detail editorial team since 2007. 219
KEVIN M. RAHNER Kevin M. Rahner is partner at the engineering consultancy Schnetzer Puskas International in Basle and was responsible for the structural engineering design of the taz publishing house in Berlin. NICOLAS ROGER Nicolas Roger is a civil engineer and worked with a team of engineers from consultants Batiserf on the structural design of the office building in Lyon. THIJS VAN ROOSBROECK As a project engineer at consulting engineers Ney & Partner, Thijs Van Roosbroeck was responsible for the “De Lentloper” Bridge in Nijmegen.
AUTHORS
GREGOR SCHACHT Gregor Schacht is a struc tural engineer and has worked for consulting engineers Marx Krontal in Hanover since 2014. He is the project manager responsible for planning the demolition of the Lahntal Bridge in Limburg. LARS SCHIEMANN Lars Schiemann is Pro fessor of Structural Engineering and Design at the University of Applied Sciences, Munich. As the project manager at Mayr | Ludescher | Partner, he was the engineer responsible for the structural planning of the ESO building in Garching. ANGELIKA SCHMID Angelika Schmid has been project manager at Werner Sobek working on the design of the new belowground station at Stuttgart Hauptbahnhof since 2009. JAKOB SCHOOF Jakob Schoof has been an editor since 2009 and deputy chief editor of Detail since 2018. Among his responsibilities during this time were magazines and books in the Detail Green series on sustainable build ing. He also edited the magazine structure – pub lished by detail. HANS SEELHOFER Hans Seelhofer is a member of the management board at Dr Lüchinger+Meyer Bauingenieure – consulting engineers for structural engineering facades and lightweight structures in Zurich. He was respon sible for the structural engineering design of the Schlotterbeck development.
VALERIE SPALDING Valerie Spalding is an architect and works at the engineering consultancy Engelsmann Peters. Her dissertation focused on folded plate structures. MARTIN VALIER In 2008, together with Christian Penzel, Martin Valier founded the archi tecture and structural ngineering consultancy e Penzel Valier, which was responsible for the build ing of the Hagneck hydroelectric power plant.
IMPRINT EDITOR Jakob Schoof
DESIGN strobo B M, Munich (strobo.eu)
EDITORIAL TEAM Roland Pawlitschko, Charlotte Petereit
TRANSLATIONS Raymond Peat PROOFREADING Meriel Clemett REPRODUCTION Repro Ludwig, AT– Zell am See
© 2021 DETAIL Business Information GmbH, Munich detail-online.com The FSC-certified paper used for this book is manufactured from fibres originating from environ mentally and socially compatible sources.
224
IMPRINT
This work is subject to copy right. All rights reserved, whether the whole or part of the materialis concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in other ways, and storage in data bases. For any kind of use, permission of the copyright owner must be obtained.
Bibliographical informa tion published by the German National Library. The German National Library lists this publication in the Deutsche National bibliografie; detailed biblio graphical data is available on the internet at dnb.d-nb.de.
PRINTING AND BINDING Eberl & Kœsel GmbH & Co. KG, DE – Altusried-Krugzell PAPER Luxoart samt 1,08-f. Vol. 115 g/m2 (content) Peydur Neuleinen 135 g/m2 (cover) ISBN 978-3-95553-546-9 (print) ISBN 978-3-95553-547-6 (e-book)