Structural Questions - Minneapolis EHRM_BAE Response.pdf
PDF 4 MB Posted
- Attached to
- Y1DA--EHRM Training and Admin Space Support Construction DBB Support Construction Minneapolis VAMC Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 36C77622R0019
About this file
This document contains questions and answers related to structural drawings for a construction project at the Minneapolis VA Medical Center. The project involves renovations to the emergency, heart, and radiology departments including construction of new training and administrative spaces. Key details include structural questions around beam layout and connections to existing atrium walls, fire rating requirements for perimeter walls, and maintaining barrier enclosure during construction. Shoring of atrium walls above new structure is identified as a means and methods issue for the contractor to address. The expansion joint at grid line X is noted as requiring expansion connection details similar to those shown for grid line 18.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 23
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
• What is carrying the 16’5 ¾” steel structure that jets out into the surgical waiting area? I do not see columns and the wall details just look to clip to structure with no support.
Answer: Moment connections with a back span beam are shown, i.e., the W18x76 are cantilevered from line 14
• The drawings show the atrium walls being type B. this is a wall consisting of 1 layer of 5/8” gyp on each side. The existing atrium walls are 2 layers each side. Should this wall be 2 layers of 5/8” gyp each side for fire rating?
Answer: Perimeter Atrium walls listed as Type B are new walls being constructed. Per Sheet AD102 and
AD201 the existing Atrium Walls at those locations are to be removed from the top of the integral wall base to the bottom of deck for the interstitial space above. The fire rating for those walls is 1HR as indicated by Wall Type B.
• The structural beam layout and structural details do not show existing atrium wall. There are multiple large impacts for where the drawings show structure being installed.
o The atrium walls are “balloon” framed. They are walls stacked on top of each other and clipped to concrete structure at main floor levels and steel structure at interstitial levels. The location of beams running parallel to grid lines would force the existing wall to be removed and then replaced.
Answer: Per existing drawings provided to BAE, the existing construction is shown to have studs supported at each interstitial floor.
What would the wall connection look like top and bottom of new structure?
Answer: It is the design intent that the new wall connection to match existing connections, similar.
Would the remaining atrium wall above carry itself until the new structure is installed without shoring?
Answer: Shoring to be determined by Contractor’s means and methods.
How would the perimeter fire rating be achieved? No cuts of the designed interface between structural and atrium walls exist.
Answer: It is the design intent that the wall comply with the UL rating listed on sheet
1384-A501 and the Beam Penetration shall comply with UL 263.
The removal of atrium wall from level 2 to top of steel would expose the interstitial space to construction area. Does this force temp wall situation in interstitial?
Answer: Yes, contractor to maintain ICRA Barrier around construction area per drawings and specifications.
o Details were altered in the 1M mental health project so that perimeter beams landed outside of the existing atrium walls so that rating could be achieved. The connection of carrying beams to existing structure were accomplished by penetrating the atrium walls and not demoing completely.
Answer: Bid as detailed. Contractor if awarded the job can provide alternate design recommendation at VA discretion, for review and approval.
• Shoring of the atrium walls above new structure would likely be needed but is not mentioned in drawings. Is this assumed as a means and methods situation?
Answer: Yes, means and method of construction
• The item that would be in the VA’s best interest to redesign before accepting bids is the fact that grid line X is also a building expansion joint. The structural details show expansion connections for grid 18 but nothing along grid X.
Answer: Refer to details 5 and 7/S200, similar.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .