M&E services Airport case study
traffic flow around the terminal multi-storey car park, and temporarily moving the passenger entry and exit point to the terminal via the arrivals concourse, which is one level below departures; and
• Areas of the terminal that are fundamental to its operation and cannot be bypassed – immigration and security search, for example – were designed to be completed in small packages of work in engineering hours (23:00-04:00 nightly). It was relatively simple to design many of the
A CAD model image showing the coordination of one of the ‘bookend’ offices (which are suspended within the check- in concourse at either end)
>
was commissioned, the ‘as constructed’ thermal model showed the building would achieve energy savings of approximately 20% over that required by Building Regulations Part L.
Passenger challenge Aside from driving down the energy consumption, the design team had to cope with the complex challenge set by the nature of the T4 building: it was essential that the building was kept operational and fully open to the public, with all building services maintained throughout. When the project team took possession of the
terminal building, it was dealing with around 19m passengers a year. Throughout the project, airlines began to decant from the building to make space for incoming carriers. However, the number of passengers passing through never dropped below 4m. The question that drove the design team’s thought process from the start was: ‘How do you design a project portfolio of this magnitude without disrupting the travelling public?’ Recognising the size of the challenge, BAA assisted
the design team from the earliest point, by helping to identify and engage with all of the numerous stakeholders involved. They included individual airlines, retailers, HM Customs, the UK Border Agency, the Metropolitan Police, baggage handling, London Underground, Heathrow Express and car park operators, among many others. Gaining an understanding of an individual stakeholder’s requirements was a fundamentally important exercise for the design team and significantly influenced the overall design in terms of construction phasing and buildability. The phasing strategy that emerged from the review
was as follows: • To maintain passenger flow through the check-in process, the check-in concourse was constructed in four sequential sections moving east to west, ensuring that sufficient check-in desks were available;
• The departures forecourt was effectively closed to the travelling public by reversing the entry/exit and
36 CIBSE Journal October 2010
M&E systems to suit the phasing strategy, but other aspects of the M&E, including the power distribution infrastructure and the terminal fire detection and public address/voice alarm system, proved to be more challenging. The team identified early on that additional capacity would be required on the landside power distribution network with a new 11kV substation being a key requirement of the new extension. The need for early ‘power on’, coupled with the phasing strategy, effectively dictated the substation location, but this was ruled out, primarily on aesthetic grounds. The M&E design team worked closely with the
wider team to develop alternative options for the substation location and identified a suitable location at arrivals level. Armed with this alternative location, the team quickly set about re-planning the construction sequence for that area. On the fire alarm system, Morgan Sindall had the
benefit of having successfully completed the design for the replacement of the whole T4 fire alarm system two years previously. This detailed knowledge was absolutely vital in understanding how the evacuation zones overlapped with the construction zones, and allowed the design team to develop detailed step- by-step cause-and-effect sequences that ensured the safety of passengers and staff throughout the whole construction cycle. Identifying and addressing issues of this nature
early within the whole team was acknowledged by the client as being of fundamental importance to the projects’ eventual success. Geoff Sykes, BAA project leader for T4, says: ‘The
M&E team was flexible enough to establish the project requirements through constant engagement with the client team and the contractor, while ensuring that design solutions delivered were innovative, and ultimately represent best value to the client. ‘Despite an extremely challenging programme, the
team pulled together to complete an excellent project on time and on budget.’ l
Alasdair Macintosh is associated director of electrical services, Dominic O’Hara is associate mechanical services engineer, and George McBride is sector leader for aviation and infrastructure at Morgan Sindall Professional Services.
www.morgansindall.com
T4 TEAM Architect: 3D Reid; structural engineer: Buro Happold; M&E services: Morgan Sindall Professional Services; quantity surveyor: Turner Townsend; construction manager: Vinci
www.cibsejournal.com
Morgan Sindall
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84