Q&A: Building Emory University’s Biomedical Research Lab

ATLANTA – A new $68 million health sciences research building (HSRB) opened at the Emory University in Atlanta on June 25. The 200,000-square-foot building houses a wet laboratory space that features 90 molecular biology laboratory modules, a drug discovery laboratory module and a nuclear magnetic resonance laboratory. The other portion of the building includes a dry research space with dry laboratories, conference space, formal and informal collaboration spaces, support space, a Biosafety Level 3 laboratory suite and a 10,500-square-foot vivarium.
The building connects to Emory Children’s Center and is adjacent to Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta and Emory University’s Department of Pediatrics. Brassfield & Gorrie, with offices in Atlanta, served as the construction manager. Healthcare Construction + Operations News spoke with Ben Norton, LEED AP BD+C, senior project manager for the construction firm, about the complexities of the project.
Q: What are some of the major design elements incorporated into the research facility?
Norton: The building veneer consists mainly of marble with granite also being used in a lower wainscot application. The university’s architect had been working with the project architect from very early on in the schematic design phase in trying to select the look of the stone for this building. At Emory, the stone veneer is a very important aspect to the design parameters of their campus and a lot of people outside the project team are involved in the decision. The designer’s intent was to have a wide range of marble used in a random pattern.

The first challenge Brasfield & Gorrie had to overcome was sourcing and pricing a stone that could meet the design intent. We priced three scenarios for the project using Georgia Marble, Italian “Carrera” and Portuguese “Amadeus.” Through our research, the designer’s intent range caused significant waste of material blocks from the Georgia Marble and Italian quarries, but the Portuguese marble had an incredible variation in a single block, which resulted in significant cost savings. Once we had decided on the stone, we chose a fabricator that was also the supplier that owned the quarry, which reduced cost from having to go through a middleman fabricator.

The team arranged a trip to Portugal through our stone subcontractor, Crystal Marble, to develop the stone range and pattern mock up. This trip and planning was done eight months before stone installation was to start on the project in order to ensure we had no delivery problems with such a large order and scope of the project. In Portugal, the designers finalized a range of nine different stone variations. We built a large mock up at the fabricator’s facility and defined what each variation was with a number. The design team then worked to design the typical random pattern. From this information, Brasfield & Gorrie and Crystal Marble developed a very specific pattern of these different variations for the entire veneer and numbered each stone on the detailed shop drawings for review. The shop drawings were reviewed by the designers and the owner and approved.

As a result of the different sizes of each stone and nine different variations, it presented a situation that only one specific number stone could go on one specific location of the building. The first step was getting it right in detailing; however, the next step was executing the installation correctly. Brasfield & Gorrie and Crystal Marble developed a plan that had pictures of the different stone variations and the numbered detailed shop drawings on each scaffold so that the installers could follow the puzzle to ensure wrong stones were not installed in the wrong place. We also dedicated more supervision for quality control to monitor this installation. All of this planning resulted in no errors in fabrication or installation, an installation ahead of schedule and a zero punch list of the stone as it related to replacing or moving stones around that were in a wrong place or up to someone’s discretion. The designers and owner were very satisfied with the end product.

Q: What were the greatest challenges on the construction project?

Norton: Some of the challenges included demolition of an existing 150,000-square-foot dormitory complex, removal of unsuitable soils, and mass rock and trench rock blasting and removal. The mass rock encountered provided a significant challenge to the team as it related to schedule, cost and adjacent buildings impact. The rock was anticipated early in preconstruction and the team developed a plan to overcome the challenge. Once the rock was discovered and quantified, the team worked together to minimize the impact to the existing facilities. We met with the administrators of both the Emory Children’s Center and the Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta to discuss the scope, duration and expectations of this part of the work. We developed a plan to blast rock at a specific time every day that worked around the facilities surgery and other vital operations. The result was a well-planned operation that resulted in no incidents or disruptions of service.

The Emory HSRB is a research lab that inherently contains very complex MEP systems and lab casework or equipment. The coordination of these systems and equipment with the concrete structure was a challenge to meet the aggressive concrete structure schedule duration. The team utilized BIM early in the process to provide coordination, increase prefabrication of piping and ductwork, and ensure that the schedule could be met. Also, having global leaders like ISG Fume and similar ones as a contributor is the perfect solution for your lab, in terms of equipment quality and customization.

Brasfield & Gorrie led the BIM coordination process and had every detail modeled to include all concrete slab penetrations, MEP piping and ductwork cast in place anchorage systems, and all electrical in-slab rough in. In order to accomplish this, all members of the design team and the construction team had to work collaboratively and quickly on equipment submittals, layout decisions, conflict resolution and problem solving. This teamwork effort led to minimum field conflict clashes and changes in scope due to unforeseen errors which increased productivity, prefabricated materials capabilities and schedule duration that resulted in the concrete structure duration between ahead of schedule by a month and the overall MEP rough-in ahead of schedule.

Q: What was unique about this project that differed from projects you’ve completed in the past?

Norton: The building was designed to connect to the existing Emory Children’s Center via an enclosed 10,250-square-foot, two-story bridge consisting of dry laboratory space and a pedestrian corridor on each floor. This 160-foot-long steel structure was designed to be supported by four columns on deep foundations, and Macalloy tension rods supported the double-decker truss structure during the lift. Though the design was basic, the challenge was hoisting the 140-ton bridge in place with minimal closure of Haygood Drive, the active public street below. ?

Extensive planning and coordination began during the buyout period, over a year before the lift. During a four-week period prior to the scheduled lift, the bridge was constructed on the ground, parallel to the road it would span, atop temporary foundations. All rods were fully tensioned, a portion of the slab decking was installed, and the permanent columns were set in place. Third-party engineers were consulted to provide a detailed lifting schedule, and the team developed a thorough critical lift plan. ?

Haygood Drive was closed at 7 p.m. on Friday, while two cranes – a 550-ton tower crane and an 800-ton hydraulic crane, one of only three of its kind in the country – mobilized. The lift began at sunrise Saturday morning. The bridge was lifted once to confirm that calculations were accurate; then it was hoisted, rotated and set down temporarily for the 550-ton crane to reposition. The final lift put the bridge in place for the column splice connections. Demobilization commenced on Sunday morning, and the road was reopened by 7 p.m., only 48 hours after the initial closure.