Nearly Completed Large Binocular Telescope Facility Yields Many Lessons Learned
James H. Slaglea, John M. Hilla, Warren B. Davisona, Wood Hartb & Jose Teran U.c
a LBT Project Office/USA
b Hart Construction Management Services, Inc.
c M3 Engineering & Technology Corporation.
The University of Arizona, Steward Observatory
Tucson AZ 85721-0065, USA
PO Box 1416
Safford AZ 85548, USA
2440 W. Ruthrauff Road, Suite 170
Tucson AZ 85705, USA
Abstract:
The use of a team approach by contractors, engineers and management to build the Large Binocular Telescope (LBT) has been successful in maintaining quality construction at a reasonable price. No matter how efficient the team, the building of a 16-story building, with a totally unique design, and on just 1.2 acres of land at an elevation of 3191 meters does present formidable problems. This paper will present the current status of the LBT construction on Mt. Graham and how the team approach has continued to be successful in providing quality solutions on a timely basis while keeping the costs of construction to a minimum. The paper will discuss many issues that project managers must plan for when undertaking new and unique designs and what steps managers can take to avoid costly delays.
Keywords: astronomical telescopes, telescope construction, telescope enclosures
1 INTRODUCTION
After three and half years of construction, the Large Binocular Telescope (LBT) enclosure will be ready to receive the telescope components and mirrors. The Large Binocular Telescope will consist of two 8.4 primary mirrors on a common mounting. These mirrors provide a collecting area equivalent to an 11.8-meter circular aperture plus a diffraction baseline of 22.8 meters. The F/1.14 focal ratio of the primary mirrors allows the construction of a relatively compact telescope enclosure. Sitting on a 1.2-acre site at an elevation of 3191 meters, the enclosure rises 16 stories from the ground. The top 12-story rotating structure weighs in excess of 1400 tons and co-rotates with the telescope. This paper will provide managers of large and small projects with insights and lessons learned concerning the planning and building of future projects. Additional details of the telescope are described by Hill & Salinari (1998) and by Hill & Salinari (2000).
2 TELESCOPE AND SITE DRIVE ENCLOSURE DESIGN
The construction of the LBT enclosure has provided many unique problems for the management and staff of the LBT project offices located at the University of Arizona (Tucson, Arizona) and Arcetri Observatory (Florence, Italy). Led by the Project Director, John Hill, the Deputy Director, Piero Salinari, and the Assistant Director, Jim Slagle, the small staff of the LBT project office incorporates the talents of the engineering and architectural firms of M3 Engineering & Technology Corporation (Tucson, Arizona), European Industrial Engineering S.r.l. (Mestre, Italy) and ADS International S.r.l. (Lecco, Italy)
To understand the problems facing the engineering of the enclosure it is important to understand better the site chosen for LBT. In the United States, usable telescope sites are mainly found on U.S. government owned and controlled land. The site for LBT is located in southeast Arizona in the Coronado National Forest controlled by the U.S. Forest Service. The site chosen for the telescope has been further complicated by being located within an endangered species refugium area. Because of the habitat of this species and other government restrictions, only 1.2 acres of land was allowed for construction of the enclosure. The location and altitude of the site limited the construction season to only the months between April and November of each year. Snow levels between 2 and 5 meters and temperatures with wind chill factors below minus 20 degrees Celsius are not uncommon during the winter months. There are 56 kilometers of paved and unpaved road. While the paved road is generally in good condition, it is typically a two-lane mountain road that contains a great many tight turns. The unpaved portion of the road actually narrows in some places to one lane or 4.2 meters in width. The shortened constructions season coupled with the small site provided challenges to both the designers and the builders of the LBT enclosure.
The design goal of the LBT enclosure was to build an economical enclosure that would enhance the operation of the short-focal length mirrors. The co-rotating type of enclosure requires less volume. This proved to be very important to the small site and the need for large cranes required during erection. The enclosure incorporates the use of standard structural steel elements coupled with minimal field welding. This reduces the fire hazard since the site is located in a dense forest. In addition, less field welding resulted in the reduction of construction costs. Also, by reducing the size and volume of the structure and incorporating a 600 ton box-like steel foundation that sits on 4 bogies, the box foundation with its steel floor serves as a stiffener for the rotating structure. The rotating structure design, however, incorporates many critical tolerances. The two shutter doors also act as stiffeners for the rotating portion of the building in adverse wind and weather conditions. By using conventional framing, bolted connections, and designs that serve multiple functions, the telescope enclosure has reduced the total amount of steel and labor.
Figure 1.
The site of the LBT enclosure on Emerald Peak in the Pinaleno Mountains of sout
heastern Arizona as it was in March 1999. The site
occupies 1.2 acres out of the forest with the access road approaching from the l
ower left. In this view, about
80\% of the structural steel of the rotating enclosure is in place. The siding
has already been installed on the fixed portion of the building. The aerial phot
o was taken by
Stephen Criswell.
3 UNIQUE PARTNERSHIP LEADS TO ECONOMICAL AND ON-TIME CONSTRUCTION
To build the enclosure, an unusual partnership was formed between the general contractor, Hart Construction Management Services (Safford, Arizona) and the project office. The project office actually worked side-by-side with the general contractor in breaking down each of the phases of construction. Along with M3 Engineering & Technology, the project office and general contractor were able to competitively bid each phase of construction. The project office and the general contractor thus shared the risk and responsibility of selecting and managing each of the sub-contractors used to build the enclosure. Because of the independent schedules of both the telescope and the production of the mirrors, coupled with the short construction season, this partnership allowed the project to get the best possible construction price and to keep the construction on a tight operational schedule.
4 TELESCOPE ENCLOSURE CONSTRUCTION BREAKS ALL THE RULES
In the planning stage, it is the goal of every manager to have a project that is without any delays and cost overruns. Telescope projects, however, cannot be measured against the rules and norms of other types of construction. Telescope enclosures, which contain ever increasingly more sophisticated scientific equipment, are using the latest and best equipment and materials. Because of the unique but demanding requirements, the project manager, construction manger and their engineering and architectural firm find themselves in a project that contains a multitude of hidden problems. It is with this background that this paper will turn to the ``lessons learned'' on the LBT project with the hope that it may provide future project managers the advantage of avoiding pitfalls in their construction projects.
5 LESSONS LEARNED - THE HARD WAY
5.1 Parameters of Management Define Your Future
This section will discuss briefly the outside or environmental influences that project managers must work in and how they affect their decision-making ability. The telescope's funding sources and the country where the telescope will be located are major factors in planning the budget and contractor selection of the project.
If you are a project manager/director of a telescope project who derives your financial backing from national or federal government sources, your freedom of management is limited to the regulations of the funding source. Many governmental agencies have set rules for the procurement and purchasing of contractor and subcontractor selection. As a project manager, you may be limited to the selection of only the low bidder or you may be forced to choose among a limited list of engineering/architectural firms, contractors, and suppliers approved by governmental agencies. You may be limited as to the contractor you can choose. The LBT project has had the financial benefit of operating without a great deal of governmental restrictions. The Large Binocular Telescope Corporation is a privately-owned, non-profit corporation of international investors who together created project offices located at the University of Arizona and Arcetri Observatory. This allowed LBT to be free of many restrictions found in ``national projects''. Senior management is provided by a Board of Directors, and the project offices provide for day-to-day management. The financial benefit comes from the fact that there are few restrictions placed on the project office for selection of suppliers, contractors, and other sources. This has allowed the LBT project offices to jointly use the best of European and U.S. manufacturing talent.
Figure 2.
Construction workers preparing the concrete forms for the upper surface of the
telescope pier. The pier is a concrete cylinder topped with a steel frame
and a thin layer of concrete. The cylinders on the right are the locations of th
e anchor bolts for the Azimuth Ring
of the telescope. The observing chamber floor is just at the top of the picture.
Near the center of the frame are the supports for the enclosure cable chain,
and some temporary braces for jacking plates to be embedded in the concrete.
Figure 3.
View of the LBT enclosure from the ground below in August 1999. This view shows
the
front side of the rotating enclosure with the structure of one of the two slidin
g shutters in place. The two shutters latch against the side walls and against
the central portal structure. The bridge of the permanent overhead crane can
be seen in the observing chamber.
Figure 4.
Construction workers installing the insulated metal panels that form the skin o
f the
rotating enclosure in October 1999. The structure for one of the side ventilatio
n doors in the
observing chamber is seen in the background. The main vertical columns of the
building are trussed to keep their thermal inertia low. Photo by Lori Stiles.
5.2 Selecting Your Contractor - Beware of Your Greed
As stated above, the LBT project office has worked in an enviable position of being able to select sub-contractors working closely with the general contractor and the engineering/architectural firm. The project office representative, general contractor, and the architectural/engineering firm representative formed a management team approach for selecting all sub-contractors. The LBT management team was able to research potential bidders and then use the bids to negotiate the best price. While the project office was not required to use the lowest bid, justification for not selecting a low bid was required by the LBT Corporation Board of Directors.
There is a major pitfall in this type of selection process. The LBT management team proved to be extremely good negotiators. We were able to select high quality contractors while keeping our projected costs low. We failed, however, to recognize that when a company submits an artificially low bid, we should challenge the estimate. Construction companies do make mistakes. Because some contractors have not had any experience with telescopes, they are not used to the demanding tolerances. As a project manager, you may feel you negotiated a great price, only to see the extra costs of a contractor who tries to recoup his loss. No matter how tight a contract you may have or how protected you may feel, if a contractor takes a severe loss you will have problems. The contractor may attempt to recoup his losses through any change orders that you may have. Contractors can also take labor/cost saving options without your approval and knowledge that may defeat the structural integrity of your project. Once a project manager recognizes that he/she is in this situation, do not ignore it. If you address the problem early enough, there may be ways that your construction team can help the contractor. Many contractors are not afraid to ``open their books'' when they have made a mistake. Your attentiveness and willingness to work with the contractor will keep your project on schedule and keep the quality of workmanship from falling. While bankruptcy is an extreme option, it is more than likely the contractor will ask for arbitration.
In many cases, the construction team was able to select the best company and also a very low price. All contractors bidding on the LBT project were required to personally drive to the construction site and receive personal briefings on the site conditions and restrictions. This was a prerequisite for the company prior to being allowed to bid. While some of the contractors had ``telescope experience'', most of the sub-contractors had never experienced construction in a remote location. In all cases, the LBT management team was looking for a ``not-to-exceed'' price. In most cases, the LBT management team received excellent bids by very experienced contractors.
5.3 Support Equipment for Telescopes Can Present Problems
Whether the telescope is large or small or whether it rotates or is stationary, the telescope will continue to need the best support systems possible. No matter what you intend to buy and from what country you intend to buy it, a program manager has to insure that he has a complete set of installation drawings and documents prior to installation. This sounds like pretty basic advice and it is not a problem when you have paid a single general contractor a specific fee for a ``turn key'' operation. But, if you are managing a project where the cost is important and you are on a tight budget, this section's importance will become evident.
The LBT project, as noted, is a private consortium with partners rightfully concerned about their investment. Because the telescope project is a large-scale production, there are many different support systems to bid, procure, and install. The project office is responsible for managing the contracts, and many of the systems are being supplied by companies from around the world. It is essential that in your contract you require that all shipping documents and support documents be sent prior to the receipt of equipment. If possible, it would be helpful for you to have a representative at the site during packaging to insure proper documentation is accomplished. In the case of LBT, the contractor hired to assemble many of the systems was not the same contractor who furnished the system.
Upon receipt of any support system, a thorough inventory should be made and any shipping damages should be noted. If you are to have any claims against the shipping company or the contractor you need to make immediate notification. Make sure that you have the most up-to-date revision of the drawings - both construction and installation. Unfortunately, modifications and changes do occur but the construction site is the last place for the drawings to arrive. You will save a tremendous amount of time and money if your documentation is complete, current and in the hands of your installers prior to the arrival of the equipment.
5.4 Change Orders Are Inevitable - Control Them!
Because the telescope and its supporting enclosure is unique and is a state of the art design, there will always be changes. Every project manager seeks to eliminate or reduce the number of changes. Even with the best of preplanning and the most detailed of designs, there will be integration problems that require changes. All change orders need to be approved by the architectural/engineering firm, the general contractor and the owner (the project office). While this seems cumbersome, it does not have to be.
Many times, individual contractors, while in the development of shop drawings, will request changes. These changes can be handled on a case-by-case basis through the architectural/engineering firm as long as they relate to structural issues but do not affect time and cost. On every request for change from any contractor engaged in your project you should insure that they document any additional time and cost data. In the case of construction, there are many changes made daily that involve only the contractor and the engineering firm. These are issues that do not result in an adverse condition to the project. All changes that result in a time and cost addition should be signed off by the project office, the general contractor, and the architectural/engineering firm.
By monitoring any change to cost and time, the project manager will benefit in many ways. First are the obvious checks and balances that are inherent in this requirement. You are ultimately responsible for your project and thus these changes could alert you to an overall design problem. Second, you will also be aware of problems your contractor may be experiencing. To have this type of approval, the management team must be willing and capable of providing quick response. There should not be any delays over 24 hours in approval, yet in all cases the problem should be understood. The project office representative has to be available on site and to both the general contractor and architectural/engineering firm. If a larger problem exists, the project office needs to take prompt and appropriate action.
5.5 Independent Quality Checks Are Essential
The LBT project office has provided for the use of independent quality inspections through out the construction phase of the project. Many projects, as noted, are contractor ``turn key'' where the owner accepts the construction upon completion. Retention of payment may be held until substantial completion, but in all cases a guarantee is a contractual norm in a telescope project. Because LBT was not a turn key operation, the LBT project office elected to use an outside construction inspection company to periodically check the progress of various sub-contractors. From the very beginning of the foundation of the building, an independent agency provided documented inspections to insure the contractors were within the desired specifications.
The use of an outside agency provides the project office and the general contractor with an additional sense of security that the contractors are performing up to standards. It also affords the management team with a non-biased evaluation that can be used should any problems be discovered. The use of an independent expert has never been challenged by any of the LBT contractors and has actually been received in a positive nature.
5.6 Contingency Money and Your Budget
In any telescope project that has limited funding, a contingency budget line is essential. Estimating the cost of a telescope project is not a project for the weak. A project office should view any estimate provided by any source with a critical eye. All estimates made prior to construction need a review, at a minimum of 6-month intervals, since estimates are a product of the costs and information available at a specific point in time. Since telescope construction is done on sites that are either difficult to access or have restrictions due to climate, etc., any estimate will change over time. A project manager should quickly assess if an additional factor is required to be added to make the estimate more realistic. Construction equipment rental costs, material costs, and, in some cases, labor costs seem to only go in one direction. Even with a ``turn key'' project, be prepared for changes that will require additional funding. While it is the primary role of the project manager to hold the line on costs, reality will require the project manager to use additional funding on any unique or ``one of a kind'' building project. Like the estimate, the contingency factor needs to be reviewed every six months to insure the budget remains a management tool. Without this review, the management tool is broken.
5.7 The Last Year is the Manager's Test
The last year of any major construction project is the final exam for good project management. Even with the best coordination of a management team, it is in this period of time that you will experience the challenges of insuring that your project will be ready on time. For the LBT enclosure, the last year represents the installation of all the major support systems, wiring, plumbing, ducting, and finishing needed to be ready to accept the telescope.
While many project managers do not like to hear the words ``field fit'', one can be guaranteed that this will happen. Even with the best integration of all the different contractor requirements, there will be changes to the final installation. This is the time where all the safety codes, building codes, operating inspections and tests are required to be successfully met.
Because of the excellent design and construction, LBT has had very few obstacles to overcome. This is directly due to the constant vigilance of the management team done on the site. It is essential that your contractors have direct access on the site to the architectural/engineering firm and the general contractor. Weekly schedules become important to the management team to insure that work is scheduled to reduce conflict, priorities are scheduled to help all contractors know what is expected, and what the problems are that need to be resolved. What helps the contractors in the final year is having the support of the management team as small problems arrive. Simply stated, you need to have continuous support from those who can make decisions, and provide this support in an expeditious manner. What you do not want is individual contractors making their own decisions without coordination.
5.8 There is Always Room for Learning
The construction of the enclosure for the Large Binocular Telescope is almost complete. By the end of the year 2000, the enclosure will have all the building support systems installed and the project office will begin to coordinate the telescope installation phase. While most all of the large telescope construction projects are unique, there is a common thread that is the same for all future projects. This paper has provided just a few of the more common areas that present day-to-day problems for project managers. The purpose of this paper was not to prioritize or even list the lessons learned from LBT. It was to present common sense issues that may help any project manager in the future.
The best possible advice I could give to any project manager, is pick people you can work with under pressure. The management team of Hart Construction Management Services and M3 Engineering & Technology are knowledgeable, professional, and responsive. The key word is responsive. Time is money. Everyone has heard this statement but not many people are as sensitive to it as they should be. Telescope construction cannot be done by a committee. There has to be a decision maker ready to provide guidance to the contractor. When it involves your budget and your time schedule, the general contractor has to be able to turn that decision back to the contractor as quickly as possible. Project Managers are not always blessed with the knowledge of a mechanical, electrical, civil, and structural engineer. The management team is composed of trust and understanding with the goal of keeping the project on schedule. With the above lessons learned and good team management, a project manager can keep his project moving in a positive direction. The goal is not to have to learn these lessons more than once.
REFERENCES
- Hill, J. M. & Salinari, P. 1998, ``The Large Binocular Telescope Project'', Proc. S.P.I.E., 3352, pp. 23-33.
- Hill, J. M. & Salinari, P. 2000, ``The Large Binocular Telescope Project'', Proc. S.P.I.E., 4004, (These Proceedings).
- Slagle, J. H., et al. 1998, ``Management and construction of the Large Binocular Telescope enclosure: meeting unusual challenges with a competitive discipline'', Proc. S.P.I.E., 3352, pp. 334-343.
Figure 5.
An aerial view of the enclosure for the Large Binocular Telescope
on Emerald Peak in December 1999. This view shows the ventilation doors on the l
eft side and rear of the
structure, the rails for the sliding shutters, the elevator shaft on the rear of
the structure, and the downwind exhaust ducts. The roof panels slope
inward to a drain in order to manage the runoff water from snow melted by
forced air heat beneath the skin of the roof. Photo by Stephen Criswell.
About this document ...
Nearly Completed Large Binocular Telescope Facility Yields Many Lessons Learned
This document was generated using the LaTeX2HTML translator Version 96.1 (Feb 5, 1996) Copyright © 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, Nikos Drakos, Computer Based Learning Unit, University of Leeds.
The command line arguments were:
latex2html -split 0 -link 0 -show_section_numbers -html_version 3.1 encl00c.tex.
The translation was initiated by John Hill on Sat Jul 22 15:18:32 MST 2000