Arup Journal 1 2012

The Arup Journal
The Marina Bay Sands Special Issue Issue 1 2012
The Arup Journal

About Arup
Arup is a global organisation of designers, Arup’s core values drive a strong culture Printed by Pureprint Group using
®
engineers, planners, and business of sharing and collaboration. their environmental print
technology. The printing inks are
consultants, founded in 1946 by Sir Ove made from vegetable based oils and
Arup (1895-1988). It has a constantly All this results in: no harmful industrial alcohol is used
evolving skills base, and works with local a dynamic working environment that in the printing process with 98% of
and international clients around the world. inspires creativity and innovation
any dry waste associated with this
SURGXFWLRQGLYHUWHGIURPODQG¿OO
Pureprint Group is a CarbonNeutral®
Arup is owned by Trusts established for the a commitment to the environment and the
FRPSDQ\DQGLVFHUWL¿FDWHGWR
EHQH¿WRILWVVWDIIDQGIRUFKDULWDEOH FRPPXQLWLHVZKHUHZHZRUNWKDWGH¿QHV Environmental Management
purposes, with no external shareholders. our approach to work, to clients and System ISO 14001 and registered
This ownership structure, together with the collaborators, and to our own members to EMAS, the Eco Management
core values set down by Sir Ove Arup, and Audit Scheme.
robust professional and personal networks
DUHIXQGDPHQWDOWRWKHZD\WKH¿UPLV
The Marina Bay Sands Special Issue

that are reinforced by positive policies on
organised and operates. The Arup Journal
equality, fairness, staff mobility, and Vol47 No1 (1/2012)
knowledge sharing Editor: David J Brown
Independence enables Arup to: Designer: Nigel Whale
the ability to grow organically by attracting Editorial: Tel: +1 617 349 9291
shape its own direction and take a long- and retaining the best and brightest email: [email protected]
term view, unhampered by short-term individuals from around the world – and Published by Global Marketing
pressures from external shareholders from a broad range of cultures – who share and Communications,
GLVWULEXWHLWVSUR¿WVWKURXJKUHLQYHVWPHQW those core values and beliefs in social Arup, 13 Fitzroy Street,
usefulness, sustainable development, and London W1T 4BQ, UK.
in learning, research and development, to Tel: +44 (0)20 7636 1531
VWDIIWKURXJKDJOREDOSUR¿WVKDULQJ excellence in the quality of our work. Fax: +44 (0)20 7580 3924
scheme, and by donation to charitable All articles ©Arup 2012
organisations. With this combination of global reach and a
collaborative approach that is values-driven,
Special thanks to Brian Mak,
$UXSLVXQLTXHO\SRVLWLRQHGWRIXO¿OLWVDLP Jenny Lie, and Franklin Kwan
to shape a better world. for their help in co-ordinating
this special edition.
Issue 1 2012
We shape a better world | www.arup.com
58086_Arup_Cvr.indd 1 24/02/2012 23:06

4 Singapore’s vision for Marina Bay
6 Introduction to Marina Bay Sands
8 Designing Marina Bay Sands
10 Collaboration with Safdie Architects
12 Geotechnics and foundation design
The Sands Hotel and Sands SkyPark
16 The hotel towers
20 Hotel atrium walls
24 The Sands SkyPark
The podium
The following past and present staff members Sarah Huskie, Philip Iskandar, Mellissa Ismail, Priya Palpanathan, Jack Pan, Kathy Pang,
32 The podium roofs IURP$UXSRI¿FHVZRUOGZLGHDUHDPRQJWKRVH Sha Mohamed Ismail, Anthony Ivey, Frank Jeczmionka, Jack Pappin, Stuart Pearce, Alan Philp,
ZKRPDGHVLJQL¿FDQWFRQWULEXWLRQVWRWKHGHVLJQ Steven Jenkins, William Jimenez, Hong Geng Jin, Maggie Puvannan, Chris Pynn, Jie Qian,
37 Podium underslab drainage system of Marina Bay Sands. Matt Johann, Carl Jones, Steven Jones, Virgilio Quinones, Jim Quiter, Nizar Abdul Rahim,
Edmond San Jose, Chak-Sang Kan, Yiu-Fai Kan, Mohan Raman, Rey Redondo, Adrian De Los Reyes,
38 Sands Expo and Convention Center Man Kang, Subash Kathiresan, Teng Chong Khoo, Archie Ricablanca, Darlene Rini, Peter Romeos,
Joy Aclao, Nur Liyana Ahmad, Ian Ainsworth, Amanda Kimball, Ben Kirkwood, Henrik Kjaer, Ian Del Rosario, Alex Rosenthal, Ken Roxas,
41 Retail areas Graham Aldwinckle, Jarrod Alston, Evan Amatya, Sing Yen Ko, Duraibabu Damodaran Kothanda, Matthew Ryan, Emily Ryzak, Richard Salter,
Joseph Amores, Richard Andrews, Christine Ang, Jeyatharan Kumarasamy, Viann Kung, Kin-Kei Kwan, Katherina Santoso, Majid Haji Sapar, Haico Schepers,
42 The casino Ling Ling Ang, Siow Ting Ang, Christopher Anoso, Chris Kwok, Henry Kwok, Nelson Kwong, Andrew Lai, David Scott, Lin Ming See, Richie See, Janice Sendico,
Easy Arisarwindha, Mark Arkinstall, Feng Bai, David Lai, Kristin Lai, Otto Lai, Philip Lai, Bee Lian Seo, Kartini Shabani, Henry Shiu,
44 Theatre structures Jaydy Baldovino, Warren Balitcha, Venugopal Barkur, Raymond Lai, Alvin Lam, Clement Lam, Ernest Lam, Margaret Sie, Michael Sien, Chris Simm, Nick Simpson,
Rachel Baylson, Dan Birch, Hay Sun Blunt, Joe Lam, Derek Lau, Eric Lau, James Lau, Jeffrey Lau, Kenneth Sin, Alexandra Sinickas, Jimmy Sitt,
46 The event plaza Greg Borkowski, Sarah Boulkroune, Nick Boulter, Tony Lau, Wai-Lun Lau, Henry Law, Michelle Lazaro, Nathan Smith, Andrew Snalune, Penelope Somers,
Peter Bowtell, Ashley Bracken, Claire Bristow, Bill Lee, Budi Lee, Cheryl Lee, Chris Lee, Noel Sotto, Charles Spiteri, Jimmy Su, Doreen Sum,
48 The ArtScience Museum Daniel Brodkin, Jessica Cao, Neil Carstairs, Chung Hei Lee, Davis Lee, Francis Lee, Gordon Lee, Joyce Sum, Daojun Sun, Malar Suppiah,
Matt Carter, Kartigayen Poutelaye Cavound, Hiang Meng Lee, John Lee, Kin Shang Lee, Muljadi Suwita, Jamie Talbot, Hon-Wing Tam,
54 The Crystal Pavilions Chee Wah Chan, Chris Chan, George Chan, Nicholas Lee, Patrick Lee, Peter Lee, Sebastian Lee, Jonas Tam, Winfred Tam, Kok Yong Tan, Mac Tan,
Kam-Lam Chan, Ken Chan, Marco Chan, Serena Lee, Yi Jin Lee, Kevin Legenza, Suan Wee Tan, Vicky Tan, Rajesh Tandel, Johnson Tang,
60 Bayfront Avenue and Michael Chan, Tat-Ngong Chan, Wayne Chan, John Legge-Wilkinson, Steven Lenert, Tino Leong, Joyce Tang, Lim Mei Tang, Willis Tang, Brendan Taylor,
Yun-Ngok Chan, Renuga Chandra, Angela Chen, Wing-Kai Leong, Erin Leung, Koon-Yu Leung, Larry Tedford, Sean Teo, Ming Jong Tey,
Downtown Line 1 Carrie Chen, Chi-Lik Chen, Melissa Chen, Sam Leung, Stephen Leung, Stuart Leung, Nithi Thaweeskulchai, Andra Thedy, Kia Ling Tho,
Harold Cheng, Cecilia Cheong, Joy Cheong, Vivian Leung, Ben-Qing Li, Chi-Shing Li, Lei Li, Helen Tolentino, Michael Tom, Roberto Tonon,
Specialist skills Patrick Cheong, Va-Chan Cheong, Kenny Cheung, Shawn Li, Zhuo Li, Alex Lie, Jenny Lie, Keithson Liew, Roland Trim, David Tse, Jeff Tubbs, Mart Umali,
Henry Chia, Wah-Kam Chia, Reve Chin,
64 The façade systems Clyfford Ching, Park Chiu, Derek Chong,
Kim Hoe Liew, Christina Lim, Deyuan Lim, Richard Vanderkley, Karthik Venkatesan, David Vesey,
Keong Liam Lim, Patricia Lim, William Lim, Angie Lin, Henry Vong, Doug Wallace, Delu Wang, Qian Wang,
Sok Poi Chong, TS Choong, Henry Chow,
68 Fire engineering Hee Kung Chua, Wee Koon Chua, Rene Ciolo,
Jonathan Lindsay, Brett Linnane, Rudi Lioe, Amy Liu, Ekarin Wattanasanticharoen, Toby White, Garry Wilkie,
Charlie Liu, Chris Liu, Xi Liu, Franky Lo, Huw Williams, Ashley Willis, Berlina Winata, Ian Wise,
Richard Clement, Ranelle Cliff, Lyonel Cochon,
72 Acoustics Russell Cole, Yimin Cong, George Corpuz,
André Lovatt, Sin Ching Low, Danny Lui, Jack Lui, Alex Wong, Ambrose Wong, Dick Wong, Joseph Wong,
Kwok-Man Lui, Marcellus Lui, Kok Mun Lum, Kin-Ping Wong, Ling Chye Wong, Mary Wong,
Joseph Correnza, Anne Coutts, Robert Coutu,
76 Blast-resilient design Raymond Crane, Josh Cushner, Richard Custer,
Malcolm Lyon, Michael Macaraeg, Juan Maier, Ruth Wong, Suman Wong, Tim Wong, Wijaya Wong,
Alex Mak, Brian Mak, Dylan Mak, Louis Mak, Joanne Woo, Andrew Woodward, Colin Wu, Gin Wu,
Yang Dang, Bruce Danziger, John Davies, Louise Mak, Martino Mak, Dexter Manalo, Louis Wu, Tao Wu, Wendy Wu, Xiaofeng Wu,
Delivering success Lauren Davis, Ethelbert Derige, Antonio Diaz, Mukunthan Manickavasakar, Anand Mariyappan, Takim Xiang, David Xiong, Jingfeng Xu, Dai Yamashita,
Mike DiMascio, Ran Ding, Nick Docherty,
78 Site phase supervision Graham Dodd, Matt Dodge, Andrew Douglas,
Patrick McCafferty, Sean McGinn, Brendon McNiven, Frances Yang, Zhi-Qiang Yang, Wison Yang, Seven Yau,
Maciej Mikulewicz, Wing Sze Mo, Junaidah Mohd, Mehdi Yazdchi, Yanli Ye, Sam Yeung, Victor Yeung,
Pierre Dubois, Andy Ellett, David Farnsworth,
79 Leveraging global skills Garth Ferrier, Kai Fisher, Raymond Fok, Clarice Fong,
Martin Mok, Polly Mok, Lydia Mokhtar, Andrew Mole, Wing-Cheong Yeung, Yiu-Wing Yeung, Reman Yick,
Rodel Moran, Jon Morgan, Dean Morris, Kek-Kiong Yin, Colin Yip, Alan Yiu, Jack Yiu,
Raymond Fong, Vivien Foo, Kathy Franklin, Feng Gao,
80 Completing the programme Chris Gildersleeve, Gina Goh, Gladys Goh,
Samir Mustapha, Vaikun Nadarajah, Bob Nelson, Heng Yong, Jennifer Yong, Lip Bing Yong, Lily You,
Andrew Neviackas, Derek Ng, James Ng, Jason Ng, Yuki Yu, Zhen Yuan, Matthew Yuet, Carlos Zara,
Ian Grierson, Ken Guertin, Liana Hamzah,
81 Conclusion James Hargreaves, Rotana Hay, Donal Hayward,
Ka-Yuen Ng, Peck Nah Ng, Andrew Nicol, Hai-Tao Zhang, Jing Zhang, Liang-Liang Zhao,
Phamornsak Noochit, Alison Norrish, Ada Oh, Zhi Qin Zhou, Jing Zhuang.
Eric He, Zheng-Yu He, Grace Hendro, Kok Hui Heng,
82 Credits Argi Hipolito, Andy Ho, Chong Leong Ho, Don Ho,
Edwin Ong, Janice Ong, Natalie Ong, Khine Khine Oo,
Kamsinah Osman, Ayca Ozcanlar, Jin Pae,
Kent Ho, Stanley Ho, Wee Keong Ho, Peter Hoad,
Dennis Hoi, Martin Holt, Anna Hon, Andrew Hulse,
1.
58086_Arup_Cvr.indd 2 24/02/2012 23:06

Marina Bay Sands, Singapore
Conceived by architect Moshe Safdie and engineered by Arup, Singapore’s new
waterfront resort includes: three 55-storey hotel towers topped by the 1ha SkyPark;
South East Asia’s leading MICE (meetings, incentives, conferences and exhibitions)
hub; two theatres, a casino, shops, two Crystal Pavilions and promenades; and the
unique lotus-shaped ArtScience Museum.
The Arup Journal 3/2011 3
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 3 24/02/2012 21:29

Singapore’s vision for Marina Bay
1. Singapore Flyer
Author 2. Gardens by the Bay

Jenny Lie East
The centrepiece of our redevelopment of the city is Marina Bay ...

It will be a city in our image, a sparkling jewel, a home for all of
us to be proud of, a home that will belong to all of us.
Lee Hsien Loong, Singapore Prime Minister, 2005
Singapore and urban renewal Creating value

Singapore has been engaged in urban In planning Marina Bay, specific attention
renewal since the mid-1950s, with the was paid to creating value. The masterplan
formulation of its masterplan from 1952-55 focuses on encouraging a mix of uses
and approval by government in 1958. (commercial, residential, hotel and
The subsequent establishment of the Urban entertainment) to ensure that the area
Redevelopment Authority (URA)1 in 1974 remains vibrant around the clock. Along the
was a key milestone in focusing efforts to waterfront and fronting key open spaces,
maximise land usage in this small, densely building heights are kept low, maximising
packed country. The masterplan has since views to and from individual developments
undergone eight reviews, and defines five further away from the waterfront, enhancing 1.
Regions: the West, North, North-East, East, their attractiveness, and creating a dynamic
and Central. Within the Central Region is “stepped-up” skyline profile as well as more
Central Area, which embraces Marina Bay. pedestrian-scaled areas. The development of Evaluation of Marina Bay Sands design
Marina Bay is supported by state-of-the-art In the design evaluation portion of the
The Marina Bay vision thus began some 40 infrastructure worth more than $4.5bn. tender, a panel of local and international
years ago. Located at Singapore’s southern architects commended the MBS design as
tip, this 360ha development was designed to Marina Bay features: superior to other bids in terms of pedestrian
seamlessly extend the downtown district and circulation and layout, as well as best fit with
• over 400 000m2 of Grade A office space
further support the city-state’s continuing the Marina Bay landscape. They liked the
growth as a major business and financial hub • 101ha of Gardens by the Bay hotel towers being set back from the
in Asia2. It is an artificial bay, and • a common services tunnel housing data waterfront to open up expansive views of the
groundwork for its transformation into a and telecommunications cables, sewers city and the entire Marina Bay, making the
waterfront business district was laid as long and services skyline more attractive and distinctive, but
ago as the late 1960s, with land reclaimed in the MBS trump card was its promise to bring
phases between 1969 and 1992. • a 5.5km long promenade linking all the convention visitors to Singapore with
major attractions around Marina Bay 110 000m2 devoted to this – half of what
With Singapore’s signature city skyline as a • the iconic Helix Bridge and a separate Singapore had earmarked for the whole
backdrop, Marina Bay is envisioned as a vehicular bridge linking Marina South and downtown business district.
Garden City by the Bay, a 24/7 destination Marina Centre
presenting an exciting array of opportunities This pledge, plus the inclusion of the
for people to explore new living and lifestyle • extension of roads linking directly to the ArtScience Museum, two performing
options, exchange new ideas and information city and airport theatres and no less than six celebrity chefs,
for business, and be entertained by rich • five new underground MRT stations gave it top marks in tourism appeal, a
leisure and cultural experiences in a category comprising 40% of the total score.
distinctive environment. • the new Marina Barrage, making the Bay
a 182ha haven for motorised and Singapore aims to double tourist arrivals to
non-motorised recreational activities. 17M and triple tourism receipts to $30bn by
2015. The completion of Marina Bay Sands
This was the background against which, in is expected to make this happen – an extra
May 2006 after a highly competitive bidding $2.7bn, or 0.8%, will mark its contribution
process, Las Vegas Sands was declared to the Singapore economy by 2015.
winner with its design by Safdie Architects
for Marina Bay Sands, a business-oriented
References
integrated resort on the east side of (1) www.ura.gov.sg
Marina Bay.
(2) www.marina-bay.sg
4 The Arup Journal 1/2012
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 4 24/02/2012 21:29

6. MARINA BAY SANDS 10. Marina Bay 11. One Marina
Financial Centre Boulevard
8. Common 12.
3. Gardens by the Bay 5. The Helix services tunnel UOB Plaza
South 4. Bayfront Bridge Bridge
7. Downtown Line 9. Marina Bay 13.
(DTL) Waterfront OCBC
promenade Centre
Arup involvement in Marina Bay

1. Singapore Flyer 4. The Helix Bridge 9. Marina Bay 12. UOB Plaza Key to Arup disciplines
Building on experience gained 5. Bayfront Bridge Waterfront Promenade At 280m, UOB Plaza 1 is A Acoustics
from the London Eye, Arup’s These new bridges provide By creating a range of street one of the tallest buildings
award-winning design resulted pedestrian and vehicular furniture that doubles as in Singapore with three levels AV Audiovisual
in a revolving structure that connections between the old environmental intervention and of basement carpark. B Blast engineering
is resilient, comfortable and new precincts of Singapore. as a near-zero energy city Arup designed large steel BI Building information
for passengers and aesthetically Intricate and lightweight, the gallery, Arup helped enhance trusses to create a 50m x 50m modelling
unique. (C, E, F, G, M, S, T) Helix is a world first for this this waterfront promenade as a column-free space within the
type of design. (C, E, G, L, M, comfortable outdoor space for podium, and introduced a C Civil engineering
2. Gardens by the Bay East Mr, S) viewing the Singapore skyline. permanent underslab drainage E Electrical engineering
Arup looked to nature for (C, E, Es, G, L, M, Mr, S) system to limit uplift water En Environmental consulting
inspiration and designed a 6. MARINA BAY SANDS pressures under the basement.
water management strategy that (A, AV, BI, C, F, Fc, G, I, R, S, 10. Marina Bay (C, Fc, G, S) Es Environmental
uses Marina Bay as a reservoir Se, T) Financial Centre sustainability design
to supply the garden’s water Arup’s innovative fire 13. OCBC Centre F Fire engineering
features and themed areas. 7. Downtown Line engineering approach scored Arup’s innovative construction
(underground) Fc Façade engineering
(B, E, G, M, Mr, S, T, W) several firsts in Singapore and method for Singapore’s first
This 40km project required raised the bar for local fire modern skyscraper allowed G Geotechnical engineering
3. Gardens by the Bay South Arup to design a floating engineering standards. for simultaneous construction I Infrastructure
This 54ha garden features retaining wall system in soft This includes the use of the of the bank’s floors, leading to
marine clay ground conditions, L Lighting
Singapore’s first conservatories, cabin concept as a smoke a 35% reduction in
housed in two large biomes. and in close proximity to an hazard management strategy construction time. (C, G, S) M Mechanical engineering
Arup designed a natural smoke existing line. (C, E, En, G, M, for a retail outfit, total internal Mr Maritime engineering
venting system and an S, T, Tn) discharge for core staircases, R Risk consulting
innovative glass façade system and a space-efficient vertical
that supports the conservatories’ 8. Common services tunnel protection design for a high-rise S Structural engineering
microclimates. (F, Fc) (230KV/22KV electrical residential tower. (F) Se Security consulting
substation and tunnel)
Arup allowed for the T Transport planning
11. One Marina Boulevard
construction of this 3km Compared to a code-compliant Tn Tunnel design
underground common solution, Arup’s fire engineering W Water engineering
services tunnel that houses a design allowed this building to
comprehensive range of be constructed substantially
telecommunication and utilities closer to its neighbours, thereby
networks with the capacity for maximising the use of limited
expansion to meet changing land space in the heart of the
utility needs. (Fc, G, R) CBD. (F)
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 5 29/02/2012 21:26

Introduction to Water Taxi
Marina Bay Sands
1
3 North
2
ArtScience
4 Museum
Author 5 6 7 N
Va-Chan Cheong 8
MARINA
BAY Crystal
9 Pavilion
9 10 North
s
Theatres
Overview
ppe
Sho
Early in 2005, Arup was engaged by the
The
resort developer Las Vegas Sands 11
12
Corporation (LVS) to work on the planned

integrated resort development at Marina Bay,
1. Esplanade – Theatres on the Bay
Singapore, branded as Asia’s most exciting 2. Marina Bay Seating Gallery
Event
Plaza Casino
urban lifestyle hub-to-be and the centrepiece 3. Singapore Flyer
Sands
of Singapore’s redevelopment. With other 4. Floating platform SkyPark
Crystal
elements then completed, under construction 5. The Helix Bridge Pavilion
or planned – Marina Bay Financial Centre, 6. The Bayfront Bridge South
Sands Hotel
various residential premises, the floating 7. Benjamin Sheares Bridge
es
e
nu
pp
8. Merlion
platform, and the Singapore Flyer1, plus the
ve
ho
tA
eS
9. Marina Bay Sands
existing Esplanade Theatres on the Bay –
on
Th
yfr
10. Gardens by the Bay South
the Marina Bay Sands integrated resort
Ba
y
11. The Promontory
kwa
(MBS) was to complete the “necklace” of 12. East Coast Parkway (ECP) Sands Expo
Par
tourism attractions in the Marina Bay area. and
ast
Convention
Water Taxi
t Co
Center
South
This crowning jewel would energise and
Eas
activate the whole waterfront through its
connections to other leisure and 0 100m
entertainment destinations, such as the

Marina Barrage and the future Gardens by
1.
the Bay. It would also be one of the area’s
significant visual markers, together with the
Esplanade, the signature Merlion sculpture, Origins the Tourism Board announced that the
the Flyer, and the city skyline itself. Conceived by Singapore’s Urban development rights had been awarded to
Redevelopment Authority and Tourism LVS in preference to the Malaysian casino
The new pedestrian Helix Bridge, completed Board, the resort was envisaged as including operator Genting and two Las Vegas rivals:
in 2010, continues the link along the Marina
hotel space, landscaped sky terraces, MGM Mirage, teamed with local developer
Bay promenade, putting MBS within a
convention/exhibition areas, entertainment, CapitaLand, and Harrah’s, which had joined
seven-minute walk (500m) of the Singapore
recreation, public attraction, lifestyle, retail, with another local company, Keppel Land.
Flyer, the Gardens by the Bay and Marina
and dining facilities, casino, links to the
Centre, and 12 minutes (800m) to the Arup’s contribution
existing infrastructure network, an
Esplanade Theatres, the Merlion, and the For this mega-project Arup provided a
observation deck, night lighting, public art,
existing central business district (CBD). one-stop design service to its client,
etc. The design competition parameters were
expressed as EXPLORE (new living and including advance works, infrastructure,
As described in the previous article,
lifestyle options), EXCHANGE (new structural, civil, and geotechnical
the whole development is envisaged as
business ideas, and information) and engineering, and traffic, acoustic, façade, fire
Singapore’s new downtown, its facilities
ENTERTAIN (rich cultural experiences, and risk consulting. Design team members
both boosting tourism and making it South
fun and beautiful surroundings.) came from many offices including Boston,
East Asia’s leading MICE hub (meetings,
Brisbane, Melbourne, Hong Kong,
incentives, conferences and exhibitions). In early 2005 the architect Paul Steelman Shenzhen, and Singapore.
The lotus-like ArtScience Museum and Design Group, in association with Arup
unique cantilevered SkyPark observation For its work on the scheme design, the
Hong Kong and other consultants, helped
platform are already icons as identifiable Boston office had the advantage of being
LVS in the RFC (request for concept) stage
with Singapore as Sydney Opera House is close to Safdie Architects. Arup Singapore
of the development competition, to a
for its home city and Australia. was involved in the advance works,
shortlist by the Tourism Board for the RFP
(request for proposals) stage. From then on, foundations, and substructure, as well as
Arup worked successively on the RFP, the fire and façade engineering designs.
schematic and detailed designs. The Boston- Arup Australia worked on the traffic
based Safdie Architects was engaged by LVS consultancy and the dynamic behaviour of
for the RFP competition, and in May 2006, the structures, notably the SkyPark.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 6 25/02/2012 00:37

Hong Kong was responsible for Arup’s geometrically complex ArtScience Museum
overall performance and for the civil works and the extraordinary 66.5m cantilevered A continuing client relationship
design, while the detailed superstructure SkyPark 200m above ground.
Author: Va-Chan Cheong
design was a collaboration between
The relationship between Arup and LVS originally
Singapore, Shenzhen and Hong Kong. Construction sequencing was another big began in August 2002. George Chan, a former
Arup Singapore, with representatives from challenge; it included both top-down and Director of Arup in Hong Kong, was invited by Phil
Hong Kong, was responsible for day-to-day bottom-up methods. Since the works Kim, Senior Partner and Managing Director for
liaison with the client and contractors to involved many different disciplines and Asia at the Jerde Partnership architectural practice,
ensure proper implementation of the designs. trades, the procurement packaging and to join a meeting with the executives of LVS to
discuss the strategy for developing a casino project
interfacing between them required serious in Macao. (Phil Kim and George Chan had
This project demonstrates how Arup’s global consideration so as to achieve and complete successfully collaborated recently on the
resources respond to project design and the works within the constrained time-frame. Langham Place Mall project in Hong Kong.)
management challenges, eg in this instance Chan’s innovative ideas and appreciation of the
the architect being in the US and the client Arup’s cross-continental collaboration need for timely completion of the project impressed
and building site in Singapore. contributed significantly to the project’s LVS, and in September 2002 Arup was appointed as
engineering consultant for the Venetian Sands
success, overcoming challenges related not Macao. Piling began in December 2002 and within
The firm deployed expertise across four only to construction issues but also the 18 months, the 15 330m2 casino was completed and
continents, and made a virtue of the different severe global financial crisis that happened opened to public, on May 18 2004.
time zones to overcome geographical during construction. After completion of this project, Arup’s relationship
restraints and facilitate continuous design with the client continued on to the Cotai Macao
development through real-time co-ordination Originally scheduled for 2009, the official Parcel 1, an integrated resort development with a
gross floor area of 975 000m2 on newly reclaimed
between the parties. Alongside its opening of Marina Bay Sands took place on land between Coloane and Taipa. Parcel 1 started in
comprehensive civil and structural 23 June 2010 at 3.18pm, after a partial June 2004 and opened in August 2007.
engineering experience, Arup also deployed opening that included the casino on 27 April Then, while construction at Cotai was in full swing,
its expertise in fields such as materials, 2010. The SkyPark opened a day later, on the Singapore Tourism Board announced on 26 May
dynamics, risk engineering, bridge 24 June. The theatres were completed in 2006 that LVS had won the bid and was to be
engineering, and frequently involved the time for the first performance by awarded the license to build Singapore’s first casino
at Marina Bay. The LVS proposal best met the
range of skills within its Advanced “Riverdance” on 30 November 2010, city-state’s economic and tourism objectives, and
Technology Group. followed by the ArtScience Museum in would significantly strengthen Singapore’s position
February 2011 and the Crystal Pavilions in as a leading destination for conventions and
Each principal element in MBS is a major September 2011. exhibitions. The proposal also possessed unique
project and a significant building in its own design elements, developed by Safdie and Arup,
that would give Marina Bay a memorable profile.
right. MBS was technically challenging right Reference Arup’s relationship with LVS thus continued when
from the enabling works, foundations and (1) ALLSOP, A, et al. The Singapore Flyer. the firm was appointed for this project in July 2006.
basement construction at the outset, to the The Arup Journal, 43(2), pp2-14, 2/2008. The schematic design by Arup’s Boston office and
Safdie, also based in Boston, was completed in
December 2006, and the whole design package was
transferred from Boston to Singapore in January
2007. With the joint efforts of Arup Hong Kong and
Arup Singapore, the ground-breaking (in every
sense) project at Marina Bay started in January
2007. The first phase was completed in April 2010.
Now, following Marina Bay Sands, Arup is again
working with LVS for Parcel 5 and 6 in Cotai,
Macao, another integrated resort. This is anticipated
to be completed in early 2012.
1. Location plan and site plan.

2. Architectural rendering of Marina
Bay Sands from the south-west.
2.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 7 24/02/2012 21:29

Designing
Marina Bay Sands
Author
Moshe Safdie, Safdie Architects
1.
The vision
The 1Mm2 mixed-use complex of Marina
Bay Sands should not be considered as a
building, but as an urban sector. From the
outset we recognised Marina Bay’s potential
to demonstrate our capacity to create a new
kind of urban centre for the 21st century:
vital, connected with nature, interactive, of a
humane scale, and climatically sustainable,
its enormous complexity and size
notwithstanding. Thus the first strategic
move was to look into urban design
traditions in search of an appropriate
organising structure. Traditional cities,
particularly those of the Greco-Roman
period, were always designed around major
spines, the criss-crossing Cardo Maximus 2.
(north-south) and Decamanus (east-west),
along which all the major public structures, Hotel complex and ArtScience Museum building would form a wall-like barrier
temples, palaces and agoras were organised. Having conceived what came to be known as between the downtown and the sea across to
the “podium building”, we turned to the the east. Seen from incoming cruise liners, a
Singapore’s Urban Redevelopment Authority other two major pieces: the hotel complex single tower would also have blocked the
conceived the Bay frontage as a segment of and the ArtScience Museum. For the view of the city, so we decided to split the
the continuum of promenades that surround promontory, the site programme called for a hotel into three towers, with the emphasis on
the Bay and extend up the Singapore River. major cultural building, an icon for achieving a delicate and dynamic scale for
The landfill that provided the site for Marina Singapore. We decided on a museum of them (Fig 2). Since each tower comprises
Bay was itself intended to create an enclosed ArtScience as best representing the spirit of two paralleled stretches of rooms straddling
bay, helping to complete the loop and, Singapore and evolved a design of below- a corridor, we decided to give individual
through the construction of a dam, convert grade galleries as well as a floating structure identity to each of the half slabs, slipping
the Bay into a freshwater reservoir. reaching tall with skylights, to serve as this them in section so as to read independently
icon. Now dubbed “the hand of welcome” by of each other, and spreading them at the
We seized on the promenade concept as the some and “the lotus” by others, it is the base to form a continuous series of atria.
opportunity to create an even more powerful centrepiece of the promenade experience As the site tapered, the spread at the base
spine – an indoor/outdoor Cardo Maximus surrounding the Bay. varied from tower to tower.
extending along the waterfront and cutting
inland in two perpendicular cross-spines A major planning decision was to set the Next came the question of providing an
connecting to the hotel and to the hotel back east of the Bay Boulevard, so as appropriate network of parks, gardens and
subway along Bay Boulevard (Fig 1). not to encumber the pedestrian scale of the swimming pools appropriate to an urban
Having determined the fundamental podium building. As all three other resort of this scale. With land all used up and
structure of public place, we aligned by competitors placed the hotel close to the the decision that we best not place these atop
shops providing access to the larger program water’s edge, this proved to be a significant the long-span casino and convention centre,
components: the convention centre, casino, move. Though it might have been more we invented the concept of the SkyPark, a
two theatres, and three hotel towers along efficient to place the approximately 3000 1.24ha network of gardens bridging the three
them. Everything fell into place. modules in a single hotel tower (as in Las towers and cantilevering 66.5m towards the
Vegas’ Sands), we recognised that such a north, forming a public observatory
overlooking the city on the 57th floor.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 8 24/02/2012 21:29

1. Development of the architectural
spine concept.
2. Sketch by Moshe Safdie of the
hotel towers and ArtScience Museum
from the Bay.
3. Architectural rendering of Marina
Bay Sands looking south-east.
4. The SkyPark from above, looking
south-west.
3.
Further considerable challenges had to be
overcome, eg excavating six levels into the
water table in what was highly unstable
landfill, and retaining the water and soil
pressure while foundation and basement
levels were constructed. Construction
sequences and, in particular, temporary
supports for the construction of the hotel
towers and their atria, the ArtScience
Museum, and the long-span spaces in the
podium, proved to be as challenging as the
final design was set in place.
Unified language and co-operation

The major task, however, was to develop an
architectural-engineering language for the
4.
project that would unify the parts, a system
of detailing, cladding, and connectivity that
Challenges to the design team the other disciplines and all the specialist would allow each individual element its
Each of these strategies presented a series of consultants including landscape, lighting, uniqueness while at the same time making it
structural, mechanical, and construction etc. Indeed, two comprehensive teams of cohesive as the whole. Working with the
logistics challenges of the highest order. stateside (USA) consultants and their Arup façade team, developing for example
counterpart Singapore consultants were the cladding systems for the podium and for
A major challenge to the structural and formed as work slowly shifted from Boston cladding the SkyPark belly, each and every
architectural team working together was that to Singapore. The hallmark for the process part required a unique solution while at the
the entire concept (including its presentation) was the workshops that occurred every three same time being part of the family of details.
occurred within four months. This was the weeks, where architecture and engineering
result of the client LVS deciding to turn to teams, specialist consultants, and client In my 47 years of practice, I have never seen
Safdie Architects only four months before representatives from Las Vegas and Asia such a formidable team effort, fundamentally
the submission deadline. Since it can be seen gathered in Boston for two to three days at a harmonious in its character, encompassing
that the concept as presented and selected by time to evolve the design and make the five continents, interacting with contractors
the Singapore government was almost required decisions. and suppliers from across the world,
identical with what was built four years later, co-ordinating through meetings, “see-and-
the initial concept held up to the test of later As this progressed, sub-teams were formed share” sessions and every other device
development. Indeed it was the Arup team’s to deal with each component: the Spine invented in our computer era, with such a
work with our team in Boston, with the which included the retail, the MICE singularity of purpose moved by an ambition
support of Aedas, the client’s design and convention centre, the casino, the theatres, for excellence.
construction team, over four months that the ArtScience Museum, the Crystal
became reality four years later. Pavilions, and the hotel. Each presented
a complex project of its own, involving
Given the four-year schedule for design and hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth
construction, formidable organisational of construction.
moves occurred. The team expanded
exponentially to embrace Aedas and Arup
offices across the globe including those in
the region, as well as engineering teams in
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 9 24/02/2012 21:29

Competition design beams to resist tie forces at the base.
Building on a long relationship of Each leg, only half the building width and
collaborative design, Moshe Safdie invited carrying substantial load, required detailed
the Boston and New York offices of Arup to analysis for lateral buckling. Indeed, a
join the team comprising Safdie Architects, system of parallel shear walls coupled with
Aedas, and Las Vegas Sands Corporation transverse cores in each half was carefully
to participate in the MBS competition. designed to resist this effect (Fig 2).
The competition, which ran from January
Collaboration with through March, 2006, culminated in a Finally, recognising the challenge of
constructing the inclined legs, Arup’s
Safdie Architects design that featured bold geometric forms,
including the sweeping hotel towers and engineers developed a shoring strategy and a
the iconic ArtScience Museum. staged construction analysis as early as the
Authors schematic stage to ensure that the towers
Daniel Brodkin Patrick McCafferty The towers rise from their base in two halves could be constructed without compromise to
before merging some 20 storeys above and the completed building.
then reaching up to over 50 storeys in total.
Spanning the top floors is the SkyPark, an Structural concept for the Museum
expansive structure in its own right that Safdie’s form for the ArtScience Museum
bridges the towers and culminates in its responds to the galleries within. Two floors
66.5m cantilever beyond the northernmost occupy each of the museum’s “fingers” to
tower. The Museum’s form, in turn, create distinct galleries arrayed around a
highlights the galleries within and anchors central atrium (Figs 3, 4). This arrangement
the north end of the resort along a called for a screen around the atrium to
promontory on the bay. create a sense of enclosure to each gallery
while still encouraging views between them.
The government of Singapore announced the In keeping with the design goals, it was
team as winners in June 2006, but the agreed that this screen should serve a
schedule left little time to celebrate. With a structural function to reinforce its integrity,
piling tender package due that September, and Arup’s strategy took the form of a
the design team began to mobilise quickly. cylindrical diagrid (Fig 5).
The Arup team rapidly grew internationally,
and put the latest telecommunications and The overall structure is configured to focus
3-D documentation tools to work so as to horizontal forces caused by wind,
co-ordinate design efforts across multiple earthquake, and unbalanced gravity loads on
continents simultaneously. In addition, a tension ring at the top of the diagrid,
Arup appointed one of its Principals to a demands for which this form is particularly
leadership co-ordination role, travelling efficient. A spiralling compression ring and a
extensively to calibrate the efforts of each colonnade of “mega-columns” work together
team in person. to protect the diagrid from the gravity loads
and horizontal thrusts generated along the
Structural concept for hotel towers bottoms of the cantilevered galleries.
Safdie’s design of the hotel towers, with
their independent “legs” at the lower levels,
creates a dynamic form while defining space
for a contiguous connecting lobby
uninterrupted by hotel structures. While this 1. Structural design of hotel towers.
arrangement implied “A-frame” structural 2. Buckling analysis for hotel towers.
action, it also posed significant technical 3. Cross-section through the
challenges for the Arup team (Fig 1). ArtScience Museum.
4. Plan of the ArtScience Museum.
The team therefore developed a shear link 5. Structural diagrid for the
using steel trusses just above the lobby to ArtScence Museum.
ensure positive engagement of the two 6. Safdie’s design for the ArtScience
halves, with a system of post-tensioned Museum.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 10 24/02/2012 21:29

1. 2.
3. 4.
5. 6.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 11 24/02/2012 21:29

Geotechnics and
foundation design
Benjamin
Sheares
Bridge
Authors
Philip Iskandar Leong Wing Kai
A
Jack Pappin
BC
Reclaimed
1990s
Introduction
MBS Marina Bay Sands is on reclaimed land,
site
Reclaimed comprising sand infill overlying deep soft
1970s clay marine deposits, above an underlying
very stiff-to-hard Old Alluvium (OA) layer.
Fill This soft marine clay, coupled with the
East Coast A
Soft marine clay
Old Alluvium (OA)
proximity of the East Coast Parkway
Parkway C
Mean sea level highway and the Benjamin Sheares Bridge,
B +100.5m RL posed significant challenges to the design of
1. the excavation works.
Museum
Section A-A Retail area area The 15.5ha MBS development is founded on
the underlying very stiff-to-hard OA layer
using a forest of barrettes and 1m-3m
diameter bored piles. The average basement
excavation depth was around 20m, and with
Deep OA valley over 40% of the concrete construction
30m thick
occurring 18m-35m underground, the
required timetable was only made possible
by Arup’s innovative approach to excavation
in the first year. Overall, some 2.8Mm3 of fill
and marine clay was taken from the site, ie
Theatre Retail about 800 trucks a day for two years!
Section B-B MICE area Casino area area area The development also required Arup to
engineer a 35m deep cut-and-cover tunnel
for the Downtown Line 1 (DTL1) extension
to Singapore Mass Rapid Transit rail next to
Deep OA valley the Benjamin Sheares Bridge, which links
35m thick the island’s east and west coasts and had to
remain operational throughout construction.
Site geology
The Marina Bay area has had several phases
of reclamation, the latest completed in the
mid-1990s. Most of the MBS development
Section C-C Hotel Hotel Hotel Hotel car park sits on this latest reclamation zone (Phase
tower 1 tower 2 tower 3 and cooling tower
VIII), while the eastern side is located within
the Phase VB reclamation zone, completed
in the late 1970s (Fig 1). Ground level across
Deep the site is generally flat at about +103m to
Deep
OA
valley
+103.5m, with the recorded groundwater
OA valley
15m thick
25m table at approximately +100.5m.
thick
The subsoil conditions typically comprise a

12m-15m thick layer of reclamation fill
overlying 5m-35m of Kallang Formation
2. soils, underlain by the stiff-to-hard OA.
The Kallang Formation is predominantly
soft marine clay, with some interbedded
1. Aerial view of the MBS site firm clay and medium dense sand of
before development. fluvial origin.
2. Geological sections.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 12 24/02/2012 21:29

Under the main podium area, covering the
Sands Expo and Convention Center (MICE),
casino, retail, theatres and ArtScience
Museum, there is a marine clay deposit, up
to 35m thick at the southern end, which thins
toward the north (Fig 2, A-A, B-B). On the
eastern side, where the hotel, district cooling
system, and DTL1 extension are located, the
soft marine deposit is some 10m thick,
except at the northern and southern end
where deep valleys in the OA are
encountered (Fig 2, C-C).
Circular diaphragm walls for

Semi-circular Peanut minimum strutting
Circular DCS box To overcome the challenges of the bulk
excavation and minimise shoring in the
difficult soil environments, Arup’s
3. excavation design included five huge
N N reinforced concrete cofferdams:
12 130m • two circular, 120m diameter, in the

MICE area
25
35 • one circular, 103m diameter, and one
21 twin-celled and peanut-shaped, 75m
diameter, in the hotel area
18 11
• one semi-circular, 65m radius, in the
ArtScience Museum area.
25 15
18 120m
Each circular cofferdam was a dry enclosure,
18
15
103m within which excavation and subsequent
11
18
construction could be carried out without the
120m
11 need for conventional temporary support.
18 Excavation 2.8Mm3 of soil Temporary strut
The only constraint was that excavation
depths (m) removed Top-down slab at ground level within a cofferdam must take place before
800 trucks/day
for two years
Top-down slab at lower level excavation outside (Figs 3-5).
4. 5.
The 120m diameter cofferdams were among
the largest ever deployed both by Arup and
in Singapore generally, and notable for their
excavation depth – down to 18m below
ground (Fig 6). They allowed work to
progress across the site simultaneously.
The design of the north cofferdam in
conjunction with a steel truss system to the
perimeter diaphragm walls at the MICE area
allowed independent excavation between
there and the casino and theatre areas to the
north. The single-layer steel truss/strut
system enabled the 11m deep excavation to
be completed outside the two cofferdams in
the MICE area.
3. Aerial view of MBS site showing

positions of cofferdams.
4. Excavation depths.
5. Minimal strutting.
6. Excavation in 120m diameter
circular cofferdam.
6.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 13 24/02/2012 21:29

7. Model for hotel twin-cell After various considerations, it was decided
8m wide, 15m deep
cantilever fin walls Crosswall cofferdam (“peanut”) in the that the practical way forward was to design
SAP2000 program. the B2 slab to act as a continuous support
8. Diaphragm walls removed to between the two retaining walls on the
excavation level.
west and east sides, which then allowed
9. Excavation in semi-circular excavation to B4 and construction of the
cofferdam.
substructure and superstructure above B2 to
10. Excavation sequence in casino
and retail areas.
proceed concurrently. These two activities
proceeding simultaneously gave
considerable time savings (Figs 10a-d).
Continuously reinforced
7. diaphragm wall for DCS box
For energy efficiency, the Singapore
Due to the vicinity of the East Coast Government required MBS to incorporate
Parkway, innovative use of the peanut- a district cooling system (DCS), its plant
shaped diaphragm wall, without any housed in a deep reinforced box east of the
crosswall above excavation level, enabled theatre area (Fig 11). Shear walls constructed
unhindered bulk excavation of the with the DCS box enabled unhindered bulk
breakwater mole that had been buried excavation across the theatre area to the
during previous reclamation (Fig 7). west. Within the DCS box, the team used
partial “top-down” excavation within
Parts of the diaphragm walls of the two hotel minimum temporary strutting. The DCS box
cofferdams doubled as permanent hotel also doubled as a retaining structure for the
basement walls and loadbearing elements for deepest excavation in the DTL1 tunnel
the hotel towers. The remaining parts of where a deep valley of soft marine clay is
these walls, and both the 120m diameter present. As the theatre structures are isolated
8. cofferdam diaphragm walls, had to be from the rest of the development, the DCS
removed down to the excavation level by box has to permanently support the lateral
“wire cutting” them into liftable blocks loads from the ground to the east of the
before removal (Fig 8). DTL1 tunnel.
Top-down construction in the casino area The large shear forces to be transferred into
As the layer of soft marine clay is generally the underlying OA needed continuously
thinner in the northern part of the site, to reinforced diaphragm walls, and to achieve
create the four-level basement in the casino this support, three east-west shear walls were
area a top-down excavation method with constructed (Fig 12). Each is 1.5m thick and
minimum temporary props was used, in about 50m long, and comprises a series of
conjunction with a simultaneous top-down “male” (6.4m) and “female” panels (3.0m).
excavation in the adjacent DTL1 tunnel area. To ensure continuity, the shorter female
9.
Retail area Casino area DTL1 Retail area Casino area DTL1
RL (m) L1 RL (m) L1
100 Sea Prop B2M 100 B2M
Sea B2
90 90
80 80
70 70
60 60
50 50
a) Excavate to basement B2M level and cast B2M slab with temporary prop. b) Partially excavate to B4 and complete B2 slab at retail.
Retail area Casino area DTL1 Retail area Casino area DTL1
RL (m) L1 RL (m)
100 Sea B2M 100 Sea
B2
90 B4 90
80 80
70 70
60 60
50 50
c) Complete excavation and cast B4 slab. d) Complete structure.

10.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 14 24/02/2012 21:29

11. Construction in the theatre area,
showing the adjacent DCS box.
12. Locations of shear walls.
13. Construction of shear wall.
14. Elevation of south end of
Benjamin Sheares Bridge.
15. Method of allowing articulation
DCS box between pier and deck.
16. 1.8m high adjustable shear pin.
17. Section on plan of adjustable
shear pin.
11.
Pier 21
N panels are cast with steel end plates on both N
ends, leaving about 1.5m of reinforcement

1 5
bars unconcreted at each end for future Connection at
pier 22, originally
2
3
lapping with the subsequent male panel fixed but now
made adjustable
reinforcement (Fig 13). While this type
4
of wall is relatively common in Taiwan, DCS
box
Shear walls this was Arup’s first experience with Benjamin
1 North podium
it elsewhere. Sheares Bridge
el
(theatre)
t u nn
south abutment
2 DCS box
Managing the impact of excavation on the
RT
3 DTL1 SMRT tunnel
SM
4 Cooling tower Benjamin Sheares Bridge
L1
Excavation within the deeper end of the
DT
5 Benjamin Shears
Bridge
12. DTL1 tunnel adjacent to the Benjamin 15.
Sheares Bridge (Fig 14) was carried out
using a stiff temporary strutted T-shape
diaphragm wall and the DCS box.
Underside
Inevitably, lateral ground movement would of deck
affect the bridge and calculations showed
that this would overstress the shear
connections between piers and deck. Deck
The existing fixed shear pins between the crossbeam
deck and the southernmost pier (22) were

therefore replaced by fewer, but adjustable, Pier
pins (Figs 15-17). Periodic adjustment of crosshead
these enabled the last section of the bridge
deck to articulate in plan and rendered the 16.
whole bridge tolerant of the ground
movement inevitably caused by the deep
excavation for MBS and the DTL1 tunnel.
Conclusion
The basement structure was completed in
2009. Arup’s innovative approach to the 17.
excavation design in these difficult site and
time constraints set a benchmark for future
13. large-scale excavations both within
Singapore and elsewhere.
Pier 21
Pier 22
South abutment
MBS site
14.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 15 24/02/2012 21:29

16 The Arup Journal 1/2012 1.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 16 24/02/2012 21:29

The hotel towers

Authors
Rudi Lioe Wijaya Wong
Unique and complex geometries

Each of the three 55-storey hotel towers has
its unique geometry, with varying curvatures
on their east sides. The combination of these
curvatures and the buildings’ verticality on
the west side creates an open continuous
space within that links all three towers,
forming a grand atrium at ground level.
It was essential to create a realistic 3-D

analysis model that was capable of
representing the towers’ complex behaviour,
including deformation, wind-induced
movement, and stresses between elements,
and so the design team used building
information modelling (BIM) extensively
to resolve the many co-ordination and
2. documentation issues that arose from the
unique and complex geometries (Fig 2).
Loading
Unlike most high-rise towers, the primary
lateral stability demands on the MBS hotel
towers 1 and 2 are induced by gravity loads.
The dramatic curve of the eastern halves
creates overturning forces due to gravity
loads in the short direction that overshadow
those due to wind or notional loads.
The assumed material properties had to be
a) c) given particular attention, since these lateral
loads are permanent, not transient as is
usually the case with wind loads.
Elevator core walls
provide stability in
X-direction. The primary lateral system in the towers
consists of the reinforced concrete shear
Typical support wall
provides stability in
2. CAD model of complete MBS walls between the rooms and the concrete
Y-direction. structural framing. cores around the elevators. The walls and
Intermediate wall and
3. 3-D analysis models and cores provide stiffness in the short direction,
Z return walls with link structural system: while the cores and sway action between
beams for sloping leg a) ETABS models for checking the
Y
X
stability in X-direction. overall stability of the hotel towers at
walls and slabs supply longitudinal
early stages of design; resistance (Fig 3).
b) GSA model for checking overall
b)
stability of hotel tower, at transfer
of design from Arup Boston to
Arup Singapore;
3. c) CAD model of an early design
stage for the SkyPark (truss system).
1. The Arup Journal 1/2012 17
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 17 24/02/2012 21:29

In each tower, the link trusses on level 23, Short-term movements due to self-weight
which accommodates the plantroom, fulfil were offset by applying precamber during
a vital role (Fig 4). Without them, the two construction. As the completed towers are
walls would act independently and expected to continue deforming sideways
significant differential displacement would due to their geometry, concrete creep, and
occur across the corridor at the upper levels. shrinkage effects before converging in 30
This would have resulted in unacceptable years’ time, this was factored into the early
cracking and out-of-level floors. The use of design of the various building services such
embedded steel sections with shear studs as the vertical transportation system,
enables the forces to be effectively building enclosure, MEP services, etc.
transferred from the external braces to the
wall elements. The sectional geometries of Detailed analysis provided an estimate of the
the truss elements were also sized to fit short-term and long-term movements of the
within the wall thickness. towers, and a corresponding specification
was prepared to assist contractors in the
As self-weight was the factor driving the selection and detailed design of the affected
lateral demands on the structures, it was finishes and services (Figs 6-8).
prudent to adopt a floor system that offered
the lightest overall structural weight. Construction
The floors were therefore designed in Building the very inclined towers 1 and 2
post-tensioned concrete with a maximum proved to be another challenge, as this was
span of 10m. This arrangement eliminated impossible without massive temporary
the need for internal columns and provided works. Rigorous studies early in the design
the lightest combination of horizontal and stage to assess the available construction
vertical structure. options concluded that it would be very
costly, if not practically impossible, to
Movements construct the towers without introducing
The asymmetrical geometry meant that 4. lock-in stresses on the structures, and so
lateral movement is induced not only by reasonable lock-in stresses were considered
lateral load but also by gravity load. in the designs of the key structural elements.
As this behaviour was critical both during
construction and after completion, the Subsequently, a performance-based
following tower movements were observed specification was prepared to give tenderers
and carefully studied: the flexibility to provide their preferred
temporary works system while limiting the
• angular rotation at the tops lock-in stresses in the key elements.
• maximum deflection on elevations
For towers 1 and 2, the main contractor and
(vertical and lateral)
specialist advisor together devised a
• differential settlement between straight temporary works system combining post-
and sloping walls tensioned and steel strutting systems.
• differential settlement between adjacent The latter were installed to prop the sloping
wall bays walls against the straight walls so as to
limit movement, while a series of vertical
• differential movement between the towers, post-tensioned tendons were provided in
which would affect the behaviour of the the walls to control the lock-in stresses
SkyPark. (Figs 9-11). As tower 3 had an almost
vertical geometry, it could be constructed
without any temporary works.
At the various construction stages, further

5.
thorough analysis was performed to estimate
the stresses and movements, to ensure
4. Tower 1 link trusses. compliance with the design intent.
5. Tower 1 link trusses under A real-time monitoring system was
construction. implemented during construction to
monitor the actual stress level and
movement. If this differed from what was
predicted, a back-analysis was carried out.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 18 24/02/2012 21:29

1
A
B
Cantilever
4 X1 4
Y1
1 Angular rotation at
the top of the tower
Tower 3
2 Maximum on
elevation 9.
X2 3 Differential settlement
Y2 between straight
and curved wall
4 Differential Bridge L25

settlement between
adjacent wall bays
(X2, X3, Y2, Y3 similar) L23
C D 2 L21
3 3 1
E Prop 1
Tower 2
2 L15
F 2
Prop 2
Bridge
X3 Y3
Prop 3
Movement joint L1
Directional guided
Tower 1 bearing
Fixed bearing B3
Vertical core Sloping core

6. 8. 10.
6. Deflection stage of tower 1.

7. Angular rotation at top of tower.
8. Movement joints between towers
and SkyPark.
9. Wall post-tensioned tendons.
10. Cross-section through lower part
of tower 1 showing temporary
strutting.
11. Tower 1 under construction.
A
B
A
11.
L 1 = 30m (Tower 1)
7.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 19 24/02/2012 21:29

1.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 20 24/02/2012 21:29

1. The Sands Hotel atrium, looking north
from the main entrance.
2. Atrium walls extending from tower 1,
each side of the main entrance.
3. Wind arbors designed by Ned Kahn on
west atrium wall.
Hotel atrium walls

Authors
Brendon McNiven Xiaofeng Wu
Introduction
The unique and complex geometry by which
all three 55-storey hotel towers splay out
towards their bases creates an equally unique
set of open spaces between them, with the
walls on the inner sides of the towers linking
these open spaces to form the grand Sands
Hotel atrium (Fig 1). This begins at a height
of approximately 20 storeys at tower 1
(south end), and angles down to around six
storeys at tower 3. Its width also decreases,
from approximately 40m in tower 1 to
2. 20m in tower 2 to 10m in tower 3.
The integrated design of the atrium was
aimed at ensuring the highest standards of
safety and comfort as well as a remarkable
aesthetic experience for guests of the Sands
Hotel. This article mainly focuses on the
structural design of the atrium walls.
Natural light is brought in through the roofed

glass atrium walls between the towers, while
inside, air-conditioning creates thermal
comfort. In elevation, the tallest atrium walls
extend out of tower 1 at the southernmost
end (Fig 2), with the top lines sloping down
to the walls between towers 2 and 3.
Following the towers’ body surfaces, the
profile of the linking atrium walls integrates
visually with them. The west side vertical
atrium walls are also externally decorated
with wind arbors designed by Ned Khan1
(Fig 3), the constant movement of which
furnishes a special visual experience.
3.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 21 24/02/2012 21:29

Structure 4. Layout plan of atrium walls in Porte-cochère
relation to hotel towers. north end canopy Porte-cochère
The atrium walls (Figs 4, 6) are framed with north end wall
aesthetic and structurally efficient steel 5. The vertical west atrium wall
between towers 1 and 2.
trusses connected by horizontal transoms, Tower 3 west side glazing
6. Atrium wall structures: Hotel
with rectangular hollow sections used as the tower 3 N
A, B west side; C south side;
main structural members. The layout of the D, E east side. Escalator enclosure
trusses was arranged to achieve modulation
with the glass panels, so as to enable
economical and fast construction. D Atrium east wall
Atrium west wall A
Except for the atrium walls on the south side

of tower 1, which extend out from the tower
Tower 2 west side glazing
shear walls suspended from the roof above
(Figs 2, 6C), the other walls between the Hotel
three tower blocks span vertically from tower 2
ground level to the steel truss roofs above Atrium west wall B
(Figs 6A, B, D, E). The maximum span is Escalator enclosure

47m in the wall trusses between towers 1 Atrium piazza pavilion E Atrium east wall
and 2 (Figs 6B, E), with a minimum span of
27m between towers 2 and 3 (Figs 6A, D).
Tower 1 west side glazing
The trusses are pin-connected at the bottom Hotel Vertical walls
by cast-in base plates, and vertical slot holes tower 1
Horizontal canopy/
are provided at the connections between the enclosures
roof trusses to allow relative vertical Porte-cochère C
Porte-cochère
south end wall
movements. The glass panels are supported south side walls
by T-shaped transoms which are tied by 4.

Porte-cochère south canopy
double stainless steel rods to the primary
horizontal RHS transoms.
Besides carrying loading from the glazing,

the horizontal RHS transoms play an
essential role as the lateral stability system
of the wall trusses. In the west side vertical
walls (Figs 6A, B), the horizontal RHS
transoms are pin-connected on the south side
to the tower shear walls.
Horizontal slot holes are provided on the

north side connections with the tower shear
walls to allow relative lateral movement of
the towers as well as movement of the walls
due to thermal effects. The boundary
conditions are the same in the east side walls
(Figs 6D, E), but the mechanism is different
due to the inclined architectural layout.
Horizontal RHS transoms act with CHS
braces to form closed triangular load paths
as the lateral stability system.
The glass panels and the primary and

secondary steel elements were produced in
factories and transported to site for erection.
The base plates at ground level and the tower
shear walls were cast in situ. The modulation
of supply and design of the glass panels and
trusses facilitated a speedy, efficient and
economic construction of the atrium walls.
Reference
(1) http://nedkahn.com 5.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 22 24/02/2012 21:29

Steel truss
Tower 2
roof
Steel truss
roof
Tower 2
Tower 3
Tower 3
Horizontal
RHS transoms Horizontal CHS
braces
T-shaped
transoms tied
by double rods
Horizontal RHS
transoms
Steel truss T-shaped transoms

roof tied by double rods
A Atrium wall between towers 2 and 3 (west side). D Atrium wall between towers 2 and 3 (east side).
Tower 1
shear walls
Tower 1
shear walls
C Atrium wall extending out from tower 1 (south side).

Steel truss
roof Tower 1
Tower 1
Horizontal
Tower 2 RHS transoms
Tower 2
T-shaped
transoms tied
by double rods
Horizontal
CHS braces
Horizontal
RHS transoms
T-shaped transoms
tied by double rods
B Atrium wall between towers 1 and 2 (west side). E Atrium wall between towers 1 and 2 (east side).
6.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 23 24/02/2012 21:29

1.
2.
The Sands SkyPark Introduction

The 38m wide and 340m long Sands
Authors SkyPark (Figs 1, 2) is the world’s longest
Brian Mak Brendon McNiven habitable cantilevered observation deck, and
Wijaya Wong has now become a symbolic icon for
Singapore. Covering more than 1ha and as
long as four and a half Airbus A380s, the
SkyPark sits atop the three 55-storey towers
1. The completed Sands SkyPark. of the Sands Hotel and includes facilities
2. CAD model of SkyPark. such as landscaped gardens, signature
3. Infinity pool.
restaurants, an infinity pool (ie where the
water appears to have no boundary) covering
4. Underside of the completed
SkyPark between hotel towers. nearly 1400m2 and containing 1.4M litres of
5. Structural layout of SkyPark,
water (Fig 3), and a 66.5m cantilevered
showing movement joints. viewing platform that offers visitors a 360˚
view of the city. Over 7000 tonnes of steel
was used in the SkyPark’s construction.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 24 24/02/2012 21:29

3.
a) Box girder
Movement joint Truss
66.5m
cantilever
Steel frame with
columns at 10m c/c Steel frame with
columns at 10m c/c
b)
4.65m/6.15m 4.65m/6.15m
10m
Tower 2 Tower 2 Tower 3
4. 5.
Structural design The movement joint strategy (Fig 5) was to as implemented in Singapore. However,
The SkyPark consists of a steel frame with split the SkyPark into three zones that BS5950 does not include clauses to cover all
composite slab for flooring above towers 1 correspond to the hotel towers, and isolate of the relevant structural checks which had
and 2 (Fig 5). The bridge sections, spanning each portion laterally. The SkyPark elements to be carried out. Specifically, it requires that
over 50m between the towers, each comprise are fully articulated to allow for differential reference be made to BS5400: Part 32 for the
three longitudinal steel trusses, with cross- movement of the towers under gravity, wind design of longitudinally stiffened webs and
girder beams supporting the composite deck and seismic loads, and form the bridge compression elements, and so the design is
at approximately 4m centres. The central lift trusses already noted between the towers. referenced to BS5400-3.
cores of each hotel tower penetrate through While simply supported, the bridge bearings
the SkyPark to provide – in addition to are provided with special ties to hold each Additionally, BS5950 is not expected to
access for users – comprehensive lateral deck in place in the event of an earthquake. cover adequately restraint of compression
restraint through their connection to the steel flanges by U-frame action and design of
structure combined with the diaphragm Another significant challenge was to box girder support diaphragms. To achieve a
action of the composite slab. formulate a design that allowed for safe and safe and efficient design, verification of the
easy erection so high above the ground, and steel box girder thus follows BS5400-3
A major challenge was to cater for the this was achieved through a combination of as implemented in Singapore, with
natural movements of the towers upon which bridge and building technology. Though the modifications of the partial safety factor on
the SkyPark was to be supported, and this structural form of the SkyPark has more in design load (γfL) to BS5950 and the safety
was met through the design and construction common with typical bridge structures than factor on design resistance (γm) to BS5400.
of five distinct joined plates. with buildings, it was designed to BS59501
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 25 24/02/2012 21:29

a) Main box girder Cantilever segments
1 2 3 4 5 6
Column support
Scheme 1: Space truss constructed from I-sections
b) 175mm-225mm thick 4m wide x 3.55 -10m 1.25m-1.75m deep transverse

composite deck slab deep box girder place girder at 4.2m c/c
Scheme 2: Raised landscape deck alternative
66.5m cantilever
Scheme 3: Box girders with crossbeam 7.
Scheme 4: Post-tensioned box girder (final scheme)
6. 8.
The cantilever structure A 3-D analysis model was created in the To account for the flexibility of the shear
The most challenging aspect to the design OASYS GSA v8.2 program3 to model the wall supporting the SkyPark columns, their
team was the cantilever that extends 66.5m main steel structures over tower 3 and the supports were modelled as a spring with
and 200m above the ground from tower 3, cantilever (Fig 8), beam elements being used vertical stiffness equal to that of the shear
and much time and analytical effort was to model the steel girders and the crosswall below.
spent by Arup’s bridge and dynamics members. For the longitudinal prestressed
specialists to understand its complex box girder, the element centre is offset to the A local finite element model using 2-D
behaviour under wind and human excitation centroid of the section such that the bending plate elements was created using Strand7
(dancing, etc). due to prestress eccentricity is incorporated. software4 to determine the load path and
local stress at the diaphragm and adjacent
The team considered several options for its Since a movement joint separates this web/flange panels (Figs 9, 10).
design (Fig 6), and finally chose a post- structure from the bridge section between
tensioned box girder solution. As a result, towers 2 and 3, the bridge section was Crossbeams and transverse stiffeners were
the cantilever’s structure comprises a pair of modelled separately and the reaction force also included in this model, while translation
variable depth box girders with longitudinal from it put back to this model for further and rotation restraints were calibrated with
stiffeners in both flanges and webs, and analysis. For simplicity, the upper deck the global GSA model. Tendons with
intermediate transverse web stiffeners. structure also was not included in this prestressed forces were modelled using
The maximum depth of the box girders is model (loading from the upper deck beam elements and offset from the top
10m at the end support from tower 3; structure is applied as a grid area load on flange, and loading at the crossbeams and
otherwise the box girders are generally this model for analysis). ends of the cantilever beam were extracted
3.55m deep (Fig 7). from the global GSA model and applied at
the corresponding location.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 26 24/02/2012 21:29

a) a)
Base plate
Diaphragm Access
opening
b)
9.
b) Vertical stress
from tendon
deviation
Prestress
tendon
10.
11.
6. Design evolution of cantilever Dynamic behaviour incorporated several changes so as to

section. A fourth challenge was, as already noted, correctly model the structure’s dynamic
7. Cantilever elevation a) and the dynamics of the SkyPark in response to behaviour. To improve the response of the
plan b).
strong winds and vibration caused by people cantilever under dancing crowds, the box
8. GSA global model. movement. The structure’s dynamic girder taper near the tip was reduced, thereby
9. Ultimate limit state moment properties were particularly hard to predict stiffening the second bending mode of the
envelope in east girder a);
shear envelope in east girder b).
as the SkyPark incorporates so many structure. This modification gave a
structural elements and architectural finishes, significant improvement in performance for
10. Isometric of support diaphragm
finite element model (near-side all of which make their contribution. dancing crowds and some reduction in wind
web plate not shown). Large tuned mass dampers, acting in a load response. The team also advised the
11. Support diaphragm: Checking of similar manner to shock absorbers, were client that management control is required
support diaphragm with opening a); incorporated within the structure’s belly, for “vandal load” (a small group of highly
relationship between support and large-scale vibration tests were co-ordinated and vigorous dancers).
diaphragm and tendon b). conducted to verify the design.
The design predictions for the SkyPark’s
Using linear dynamic analysis in the Strand7 dynamic performance were based on various
program, the team investigated in detail the assumptions in terms of structural properties,
cantilever’s behaviour when subjected to the forces applied by people, and the effect
dynamic loads from human activities and of a crowd on the structure. To confirm the
wind loads. This finite element model was performance of the completed cantilever,
based on the static analysis model, but
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 27 24/02/2012 21:29

12.
13.
a) Bridge trusses. c) Cantilever sections.
14. 15.
a programme of dynamic tests was carried issues, typical segments of approximately purposes, and then the main lift to the top of
out on 24-27 May 2010. This included 50 tonnes each were fabricated and the tower began the following day. Once it
measuring the modal properties of the delivered to site for assembly, and trial was fully raised, the section was slid into the
structure in addition to vibration response assembly of steel girders was carried out to designated position for final fixing.
measurements of individuals and groups confirm their configuration and geometry.
walking, jumping, and dancing (Figs 12-14). At the rate of 15m per hour for each lift, it
Erection took almost a whole day for each section to
These tests were also intended to give the Erection of the steelwork for the SkyPark be lifted and placed in position. After each
MBS Operations and other stakeholders the was completed at the end of December segment was lifted, a five-day interval
opportunity to experience the vibration 2009. To meet the challenge of the vertical ensued for fixings between the components,
levels and comment on their acceptability. lift, Arup bridge engineering experts measurements, tightening bolts, touching up
All were deemed positive and acceptable, contributed ideas from the conceptual design paintwork, etc, before the process began all
but it was recommended that use of the stage onwards. At workshops attended by over again with the next.
SkyPark cantilever for dancing events be the design and construction teams, team
carefully managed to ensure adequate members comprehensively discussed the Special arrangements were required for the
comfort levels. method and lifting procedure, along with main box girders, as the lift was paused at
numerous reviews of the method statement 60m above ground so as to align the eastern
Fabrication and proposal to ensure safe construction of box girder to the final orientation. This was
Steel plates varying in thickness from 6mm the SkyPark. due to the shape of the base of tower 3.
to 150mm were used for the structure. A movable lifting gantry was fixed at the
For the cantilever support, 1.2m diameter The six bridge trusses (each weighing secondary beams between the main box
columns with various wall thicknesses approximately 400 tonnes), two box girders girders, a method that is normally used in
– 30mm, 40mm, 50mm, and 63mm – were (each approximately 700 tonnes) and the bridge construction for lifting
purpose-designed. Normalised plates were cantilevered parts (six sections, each cantilevered elements.
bent with longitudinal welds to form the approximately 200 tonnes) were all
column geometry, and were subsequently assembled at ground level prior to the lift. Including temporary steelwork, over 7000
stress-relieved to meet the design Once assembled, each of these 14 major tonnes was hoisted 200m above ground in
requirements. To pre-empt possible logistical sections was then raised a few hundred 13 weeks, a great achievement for both the
millimetres above ground for monitoring design and construction teams.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 28 24/02/2012 21:30

16.
17. 18.
References 12-14. Around 120 people at the tip

(1) BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. BS5950: of the cantilever for dynamic testing.
1990. Structural use of steelwork in building. Design in 15. Erection sequence of the 14
composite construction. Code of practice for design of major sections.
simple and continuous composite beams. BSI, 1990.
16. Erection of bridge truss.
(2) BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. BS5400:
17. Erection of box girders.
Part 3: 2000. Steel, concrete and composite bridges.
Code of practice for design of steel bridges. BSI, 2000. 18. Cantilever under construction.
(3) www.oasys-software.com 19. Completed Sands SkyPark
(overleaf).
(4) www.strand7.com
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 29 24/02/2012 21:30

Sands SkyPark facts:
• 340m long from the northern tip • 4413 tons of temporary steelwork • estimated weight of aluminium
to the south end used in construction hull cladding: 350 tonnes
• maximum width: 40m • 146m long infinity edge to • total weight of lifted sections for
• 66.5m long cantilever swimming pool cantilever: 2600 tons
(application to Guinness World • three pools containing • heavy lifting gantries: 1905 tons
Records in process) 1.42M litres of water • length of strand cable used in
• public observation deck at RL • 500 trees up to 8m tall, selected strand jacking operations: 77km
295, 191m above ground level for hardiness and suitability for • heavy lifting of 14 segments
• highest public area at RL 299, the constant breeze at the completed in just under 13 weeks
195m above ground level SkyPark elevation
• approximately 200 tons of bolts
• 7692 tonnes of permanent • 2200m3 of soil, weighing used in steelwork.
steelwork 3300 tonnes
19.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 30 24/02/2012 21:30

The podium
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 31 24/02/2012 21:30

The podium roofs
N
Author
Juan Maier Brendon McNiven
0 100m
Canopies
Theatres
Casino
MICE facility
View corridors
Introduction
Technically challenging like every part of
the Marina Bay Sands development, three
separate long-span roofs enclose the podium
buildings: the casino, the theatres, and the
state-of-the-art Sands Expo and Convention
Center (MICE facility) (Figs 1, 2).
The roofs span up to 120m and have highly

individual, stepped, wave-form surfaces.
In addition, the retail arcade that extends
along the western side of the podium is
sheltered by lightweight steel canopy
structures, cable-stayed back to the concrete
1.
podium. Erection of the roof steelwork
commenced in April 2009 and was
completed by the end of that year.
Design of the podium roofs

The podium roofs have highly complex
geometries, the fundamental elements of
their form and shape being based on
Euclidean geometry, such as how arcs are
derived from toroidal surfaces. The architect
cleverly pushed and pulled these seemingly
independent geometries together into an
overall form that appears to be vastly more
complex than the sum of its original
components (Fig 3). The concept of using
developable geometry was very important to
the design team, not only for enhancing
understanding of the structure, but also to
help its constructability.
Supporting the greatest surface area of each

of the three roof structures is a spine truss,
2. curved in elevation and in plan. Over long
spans, the latter can induce large overturning
moments, but this effect is efficiently
combated by the rotational stiffness of the
secondary roof trusses connected either side.
These are 2-D planar in nature and, with

spans of 120m maximum, vary in depth from
4m at the springing points to 8m at their
centres. The span lengths were finely
balanced between the architect’s desire to
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 32 29/02/2012 20:26

1. Plan showing those elements of
Marina Bay Sands that are covered
by the podium roofs and canopies.
2. Structure of the roofs and
canopies.
3. Roof geometry developed from
surfaces of a torus.
4. Stability of spine truss.
5. MICE facility roof under
construction.
3.
maximise clear span openings and the need

to maintain an efficient structure. To match
the building form, all the roof trusses are Stepped surface
curved in elevation, “concave up” (CU) to

the west of the spine truss, and “concave Spine truss
down” (CD) to the east (Fig 4). Smooth surface
Lateral stability is maintained by forming a Concave down

continuous diaphragm plane of cross-bracing (CD) truss
along the CU side. On the CD side, which Concave up
features the stepping wave form surface, a (CU) truss
continuous line of bracing could not be
established, so various patterns were
investigated for optimal lateral stability.
Since the continuous diaphragm on the 4.
CU side provides most of the roof’s lateral
stability, an efficient bracing pattern for the
CD side could be achieved by limiting the
bracing to every second bay with only
discreet fly-bracing members stabilising the
unbraced bays back to the braced bays.
Steel section sizing was rigorously

optimised, with the aim of minimising the
roofs’ total self-weight and thus the total cost
of structural steel, while still complying with
BS5950. This was accomplished by writing
customised software, linked directly with
Arup’s in-house structural analysis platform
GSA, that firstly read the forces and
moments of every element in the analysis
model, then calculated the utilisation ratio
of the elements, and finally evaluated the
element’s utilisation ratio based on
predefined acceptance criteria. If the element
did not fall within the acceptance range, the
program selected a new section size for it 5.
from a predefined pool of section sizes.
This process was reiterated until all the

elements fell within the acceptance range.
Using this program had the added benefit of
helping to automate the analysis and design.
For example, the 10 000+ elements of the
MICE roof analysis model would have been
close to impossible to design using
traditional methods.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 33 24/02/2012 21:30

6.
The canopies required pre-tensioning level of the dialogue with shop detailing firms and
The lightweight, tension-stayed canopies Macalloy bars so that under full dead and fabricators to obtain best practice advice on
(Fig 6) are also geometrically complex and superimposed dead load, there would be no preferred detailing and fabrication processes.
doubly curved. Fabricated steel box rafters, net downward deflection at the points where The team produced full 3-D models of the
up to 1m deep, form their ribs, with RHS the tension stays connect to the rafters. steel structures as a basis to beginning a shop
cross-members running transversely to The non-linear analysis model also drawing model that would later be issued as
provide lateral stability through moment- considered slenderness effects, and adjusted part of a construction set of documents to the
frame action. The rafters are in turn the elements’ stiffness in the model based on appointed fabricator/contractor. This same
supported by tension stays from a system the axial loads they attracted, thus permitting model was used for the analysis, design and
of Macalloy bars and carefully placed tall elastic buckling behaviour to be observed. documentation of 2-D drawings, and for
tubular masts. The largest canopy is nearly co-ordination and collaboration with the
as large as a soccer pitch, measuring 45m Secondly, the team undertook a full buckling architect and other consultants. All this was
x 90m in plan. analysis of all the critical load cases to critical, as it would have been nearly
determine the buckling load factors and impossible to develop, analyse/design or
At three locations along the retail corresponding buckling mode shapes. build structures with this level of complexity
promenade, the canopies are linked by These shapes could then be correlated to a with only 2-D documentation (Fig 7).
pedestrian footbridges of varying lengths. set of initial imperfections in the canopy
These are double tied arches, spanning up structure so as to determine moment Parametric modelling was also used to great
to 70m over the concrete podium structure. amplification factors and apply them to the advantage, especially during design
Their design was complicated by being results of the earlier non-linear analysis, development. Software such as Bentley’s
curved in plan; the tied arches on either side so as to evaluate the structure’s susceptibility GenerativeComponents enabled the roof
of each bridge have different spans, thus to buckling. The amplification factors used structures to be modelled with predefined
creating differential stiffness across the deck. were inversely proportional to the buckling variables to allow for future modifications
load factors and directly related to the where necessary. This parametric model
Since the canopies are extremely light and magnitude of initial imperfection represented could then be integrated into the 3-D design
flexible, they tend to exhibit non-linear by the buckled mode shapes. and documentation to permit rapid
behaviour, so elaborate analyses were carried modification of the geometry. With the
out. First, a full second-order non-linear 3-D integrated design and documentation parametric relationships already set up, the
analysis of the structure was undertaken, and An innovative aspect of this project was the new geometry could be easily incorporated
then used in combination with a custom-built integrated use of 3-D modelling in all facets into the existing structural analysis model.
software program, written specifically for of design, analysis and documentation. Any resulting changes in member section
these canopies. It iteratively determined the Early in the design, Arup began an open sizes, along with the new geometry, were
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 34 24/02/2012 21:30

the factory, as well as any adjustments or
Rhino GSA modifications so as to save time during
Architect
Structural analysis
optimisation
erection and installation. The cranes’ size
and capacity were predetermined, and
checks made on crane parking locations to
ensure adequate capacity during lifting.
Lifting lugs were pre-welded to segments in
the factory after determining the lifting
points from the segment’s centre of gravity.
Bentley GenerativeComponents Bentley Structural TriForma This greatly saved time during erection as it
Parametric model Documentation model
avoided the need to find the centre of gravity
by trial and error on site. Erection clips, to
ensure the segments were aligned and fitted
precisely together, were also pre-welded on
to reduce erection time, and bolted
connections were used wherever possible.
Where welding was required, it was greatly
2-D documentation 3-D documentation speeded up through the use of FCAW
Fabrication (flux-cored arc welding). This needs only
model limited protection in windy environments –
a major concern at locations near the sea.
7.
directly translated into 2-D and 3-D top and bottom points. A vertical custom jig 6. Completed canopies.
documentation. This innovative workflow permitted fit-up welds to align the masts, 7. 3-D design process.
saved much time in redrawing the model followed by sequence welding to complete 8. Tubular mast being fabricated.
each time a modification, either small or the sections. Additionally, the complex
large, was made. geometry also required special compound
and profile cutting of sections, heavy
Fabrication bending of tapered or curved members, and
In addition to the head start the fabricators implementation of cross stiffener plates
gained in their shop drawing workflow through boxed up sections.
process from the 3-D models, Arup also
prepared a schedule of both open and closed To meet the fast-track construction
section profiles for each of the members programme, 24-hour/day fabrication was
in the podium roof structures (ie I-section implemented, with continuous shifts of
vs circular hollow section profiles). dedicated fabrication manpower.
Fabricators could then choose the best These included engineers, supervisors,
profile type to maximise cost-effectiveness, fitters, welders, grinders, and QA/QC, NDT
procurement strategy, lead time, and (non-destructive test) and ITA (independent
fabrication process. For the complex inspection and testing agency) personnel. 8.
doubly-curved spine trusses, the fabricators All of this helped to achieve the highest
preferred hollow section profiles to open possible quality in the final product.
I-sections. Conversely, for the planar 2-D
CU and CD trusses that only curved in one Erection
direction, they favoured open I-section The fabricators spent much time pre-
profiles as being less expensive and having planning every work phase, so that the
shorter lead times than hollow sections. segments comprising the structure were as
easy as possible to handle, store, transport,
Given the extremely complex 3-D geometry, and install. They studied all possible site
innovative custom jigs were needed to access, storage space and cranage capacity
properly and accurately fabricate the before deciding how the segments would be
components. For the canopy structures, the sized, and transport companies were
masts required precise setting out so as to consulted over delivery routes that might
accurately define the 3-D location of their limit their dimensions. All were trial-fitted at
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 35 24/02/2012 21:30

On repetitive areas of steelwork like the Work safety and health officers and safety
canopy structures, custom assembly jigs co-ordinators were deployed throughout the
were used to temporarily support the rafters site to ensure a safe working environment.
and masts (Fig 10). These enabled the Risk assessments were carried out before
structure to be assembled, fitted up, bolted work began, as well as safe work procedures
and welded into position. On de-propping, and safety management systems.
they were shifted to the next location.
Temporary works design was also carefully
Careful alignment of the canopy structures reviewed and endorsed by qualified
was also required. As these are highly Professional Engineers. Strict and close
flexible, the length of the tension stays had supervision throughout construction ensured
to be precisely calculated so that during safe completion of the works.
erection the canopies could be installed
(unloaded) to a level higher than their final
level. Later, they would deflect with the
added weight of roof cladding and finishes,
and the whole structure settled into its final
position. Canopy levels were adjusted
through detailed survey and use of tension
stay turn-buckles.
In addition to cranes, electric winches were

also used to speed up work. These are light 9. Canopy in front of The
and easy to handle, and can lift up to Shoppes arcade.
2 tonnes. This greatly reduced erection 10. Temporary jig supporting
canopy rafters.
time, alleviating the need for constant
reliance on cranage.
10.
9.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 36 24/02/2012 21:30

Podium underslab drainage system
Authors Column/wall Inner face of

diaphragm wall
Otto Lai Wing-Kai Leong 100mm 20mm
cast iron Lowest single size
pipe basement slab aggregate
Lowest
basement slab
500mm
N No-fines concrete perimeter
gutter
12
Bored pile
Perforated 150mm
25 Pipe perforated
pipe
35 unperforated pipe with
21 through rodding eye
concrete
18 11
(a) Pressure relief point. (c) Perforated pipes to perimeter gutter drain.
25 15 Hotels
Screw-down double-greased Manhole cover
18 sealed inspection cover
18 for rodding
Puddle flange Removable Lowest
15 screwcap basement slab
11
18
Lowest
11 basement slab No-fines concrete
18 Excavation depths (m)
No-fines concrete
Area where underslab
Cased, minimum
drainage was constructed
200mm diameter
1. To well borehole Spacers
150mm perimeter
perforated gutter
pipe Approved
filter material 10m into Old
Alluvium layer
(b) Typical rodding eye detail. (d) Typical pressure relief well.
1. Underslab drainage location plan. 50mm blinding layer 1500g polythene Fine sand layer Realtex 15NW
2. Sub-systems forming the
underslab drainage system. 2.
The underslab drainage system was designed Normal maintenance is expected to keep the
to relieve the lowest basement slabs of uplift system in full working order. Should part of
water pressure, and thereby negate the need the underslab drainage system malfunction,
for hold-down tension piles. The system was however, the pressure relief points (Fig 2a)
installed in part of the south podium (the local to the affected area will automatically
north donut beneath some of the MICE overflow, alerting the owner to the problem
facilities), the north podium, the ArtScience before any structural damage occurs.
Museum, and the DCS (district cooling Flushing of the system by way of the
system) area (Fig 1). The differences in rodding eyes and the pressure relief wells
excavation depth are due to the range of would be carried out to restore the system its
basement levels across the site. The MBS full capacity. In the worst case scenario,
drainage system as constructed is the largest localised remedial works may be required.
of its type in Singapore.
The system typically comprises a drainage

blanket formed of 20mm single-size
aggregate, perforated pipes, perimeter gutter
drains, piezometers, sump pumps, and
pressure relief wells (Fig 2). The seepage
groundwater collected by the system is
discharged into the public drainage system
outside the site.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 37 24/02/2012 21:30

Sands Expo and Convention Center
Authors
Don Ho Otto Lai
Background
The Sands Expo and Convention Center is
the southernmost element of the whole
Marina Bay Sands development.
More commonly known to the design team
as the meetings, incentives, conference and
exhibitions (MICE) facility, it can host up to
45 000 convention delegates in total, its
space able to accommodate a maximum of
2000 exhibition booths and 250 meeting
rooms. It can thus handle events of any size,
from an intimate meeting for 10 persons to
lavish presentations for up to 11 000 people.
The largest and most flexible meeting and
exhibition venue in Singapore, it contains
south-east Asia’s biggest ballroom (Fig 1)*.
The gross area of 120 000m2 is spread across

five floors plus mezzanines, all of which sit
atop five more basement levels. The gigantic
footprint, 240m x 140m, makes it the most
extensive single building of the entire MBS
development in terms of land area occupied.
1. Timing
Fronting the coastal area of the
development, MICE was required to be
one of the first MBS facilities to become
operational, despite being one of its largest.
The stipulated schedule for opening Phase 1
meant a very limited construction time,
beginning in early 2008 and extending to the
end of 2009 in time for the opening.
The main floors were therefore designed

with composite slabs on long-span steel
frames, the use of this “propless” scheme
allowing construction work on several
floors to be carried out in parallel (Fig 2).
This design also minimised the manpower
needed on site. This was an important
consideration, as on-site manpower
requirement is a major factor in a country
2. like Singapore which imports a lot of foreign
labour to service its construction industry.
* The original competition entry scheme promised the

largest ballroom in Asia. Part-way through the design, a
bigger one previously overlooked was discovered
elsewhere. The plans for the new ballroom were
promptly updated and enlarged to ensure that the
development delivered on its earlier competition-
winning promises!
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 38 24/02/2012 21:30

Deck above
Foreign labour content is managed by the
government through the enforcement of
strict quotas on construction sites. Brickwork
Necessarily, design time was also limited,

extending from the outset of the project to Exit Corridor
mid-2009, but by running the design and
construction phases in parallel, the Arup
team innovatively re-engineered the Movable
partitions
conventional design cycle. This enabled
the principal structural elements to be put
in place when only the preliminary
architectural design was ready, as one of
the major uncertainties during the structural
Storage pit
design phase was the placement of the
massive moving partitions for the
convertible meeting rooms. 3.
Instead of applying an unnecessarily

conservative design load, the Arup team
recommended the architect to orient the
opening directions of the movable partitions
to the gravity load paths of the structures,
with each partition’s storage pit located on
a main truss spanning between columns
(Fig 3). This arrangement allows for a high
degree of flexibility, yet ensures that the
designed condition with distributed wall Plastic
loading is the most critical loading hinges
condition among the numerous

operational combinations.
4. 6.
Efficiency
As it was such a major element in the whole
MBS project, MICE naturally contributed a Load 1. The main ballroom.
very considerable portion of the total cost. Yielding 2. Construction work for MICE
under way in late spring 2009.
This being the case, only a slight variant
in the efficiency of the MICE structural 3. Typical framing.
Redistribution
design could have significantly affected 4. Pre-function area.
the overall budget. Buckling Fracture 5. Illustration of typical load-
deflection relationship.
So as to make the best use of materials, 6. Formation of plastic hinges.
the team carried out an advanced, non-linear,
Elastic
elastoplastic, large displacement analysis
with consideration of the static construction
sequence. This analysis reflected the most Lock-in
Deflection
realistic structural response by considering
the lock-in stresses from construction and 5.
the redistribution of forces through yielding
and buckling (Fig 5). Fig 6 shows the
formation of plastic hinges in a typical bay
under the designed ultimate loading.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 39 29/02/2012 19:59

7.
Comfort This analysis convinced the Arup team that

Vibration is inevitable in flexible, long-span the structure would perform appropriately
structures if they are to be economically for the nature of the facility, with very
feasible. To ensure that MICE is a first-class limited noticeable effects on occupants from
conference facility, the Arup team had to structural vibration.
carefully study the structural factors
involved in ensuring occupant comfort The team also gave recommendations to the
under human-induced vibrations. client on precautions for possible comfort
0.56m/s2
concerns if the facilities were used for any
0.48 Conventional footfall vibrations resulting unusual events.
0.40
0.32 from individual unco-ordinated actions
0.24
0.16
contribute hardly any significant movement Conclusion
0.08 to such a massive long-span structure, but Given the scale of the MICE facility within
0
8. the size of the grand ballroom meant that the whole development, the Arup team
slab movement caused by the synchronised applied best practices to enable such a
actions of large groups of dancers could demanding megastructure to be constructed
cause concern. Factors like crowd patterns, within the tightest time-frame and to the
7. Trade show in progress at the dance styles, music rhythms, and the effects most stringent budget.
Sands Expo.
from transfer structures were all studied.
8. Peak acceleration of typical bay Through close co-operation between
under extreme “social dance”
conditions. Fig 8 shows the typical vibration response of designers from different offices and
the ballroom floor under an extreme event of disciplines, the whole team put forward its
500 people doing synchronised dancing at utmost efforts for the successful completion
the critical frequency in a typical 33m x 18m on time of this world-class conference and
structural bay. The predicted dynamic exhibition venue, which forms an vital
performance was verified by direct site component in the grand development of
measurements, together with feedback Marina Bay Sands.
from participants.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 40 24/02/2012 21:31

Retail areas
Most of the MBS buildings include retail areas.
The largest of these – “The Shoppes at Marina Crystal
Bay Sands” – includes over 300 stores plus Pavilion
north
food and beverage outlets along the whole
north-south length of the podium. A canal runs
through the Shoppes, similar in style to the one Shoppes
at the Las Vegas Venetian, with sampan rides Crystal

for guests corresponding to the gondola rides at Pavilion
south
the Venetian. As well as the retail areas, the
development has many places to eat and drink,
including several celebrity chef restaurants,
some located in the Sands Hotel atrium and the
SkyPark. Two internationally-renowned Canal
nightclubs and a flagship store for Louis Hotel atrium
and SkyPark
Vuitton are housed in the Crystal Pavilions.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 41 24/02/2012 21:31

The casino
Se
Authors co
nd
N
Otto Lai Patrick McCafferty ar
yv
iew
10
5m co
rri
do
r
tail
Re
m
50
Atrium
55
m
Overview Level 4 at the top of the building houses the
e
Pr
nu
im
1.5
ve
The casino is housed in the middle of the mechanical systems for the entire casino,
ary
tA
15
on
vie
three major buildings on the podium, lying while levels B3 and B4 are used for vehicle
yfr
w
Ba
co
between the MICE facility to the south and parking as well as to house the tanks for
rrid
the theatres to the north. Its four-storey potable water and for fire-fighting (another 1.
or
reinforced concrete structure is supported part of Arup’s commission was the fire
by diaphragm walls and bored piles, and engineering design – escape, smoke control
the building also includes five levels of and fire compartmentation: see also the gaming room of the casino supports a
basement. The casino is immediately article on the fire engineering, pp68-71). network of 16 500 LED lights and over
bordered by retail areas to the west, by the 130 000 precision-cut Swarovski crystals.
primary and secondary view corridors on the Construction With a footprint of 520m2 and measuring
south and north sides respectively, and by The original proposed construction approximately 24.4m across and over 6m
Bayfront Avenue to the east (Fig 1). sequence was top down from level B2M, deep, this signature piece is one of the
enabling the basement levels to be built at largest installations of its kind anywhere in
Lateral stability is provided by frame the same time as the superstructure. the world, nestled snugly between the
action between the columns and beams; Foundation construction began in 2007 and finished ceiling above and a series of
this enabled large open spaces and flexible was completed in 2008, with “plunge in” decorative ceiling ribs below (Fig 3).
space usage without having to change the columns cast into bored piles that extend
positions of walls when programming the 40m into the Old Alluvium layer. Given the compressed construction schedule
use of the spaces. The large atrium in the of the project, the casino roof was erected
middle of the casino required floor openings After level B2M was cast, however, the and the ceiling ribs were being fabricated
up through four levels, and this continuous construction sequence was changed so as before the final configuration of the
large vertical void in the floor diaphragm to expedite the reinforced concrete works. chandelier had been established by the
had to be taken into account when designing The top-down construction below level B2M architect. Arup was thus tasked with
for lateral stability (Fig 2). was revised to allow for excavation to level form-finding the fabrication geometry of the
B4/B5 and level B3 constructed later. chandelier cable net and of analysing the
The floor-to-floor heights in the casino itself complex buckling behaviour of the
were different from those in the immediately Deviation of the “plunge in” columns had to chandelier’s compression ring to within
adjacent structures, due to the need for be initially considered on level B2M, and extremely tight tolerances.
higher headrooms there, and so the B2M consequently at level B4 once excavation
level was introduced as the main gaming had reached that level, and again at level B3 Arup’s in-house non-linear structural
level with most of the level B1 in the after formwork was carried out to that level. analysis solver, Oasys GSA GSRelax, was
ancillary areas being deleted. This, however, Pile deviation was considered at level B4, employed for the many hundreds of millions
made connections into the adjacent once piles were exposed and cut to correct of non-linear analysis iterations required to
structures difficult and also created cut-off levels. establish a fabricated geometry that, once
headroom issues. Beam depths had to be installed, would drape to within exacting
co-ordinated carefully so as to fulfil the Also, to increase speed of construction, tolerances between the finished ceiling
headroom requirements, with atypical single and double T-section precast units above and the decorative ribs below.
connection detailing being needed. were employed for the flooring. The building Once an acceptable geometry was thus
had to be completed in time for the planned determined, a suite of non-linear buckling
The amount of light emanating from above “soft” opening on 27 April 2010. analyses of the perimeter compression ring
alone would have been inadequate for the were then conducted to investigate the ring’s
large B2M gaming area below the atrium, so The casino chandelier robustness against buckling forces induced
individual trellises, designed by Arup, were Composed of an intricate weave of high by the cable net, establish an appropriate
provided at each gaming table, containing strength cables suspended from an system of lateral restraint from the casino
surveillance cameras and loudspeakers in undulating perimeter steel compression ring, roof to the ring, and enable final design and
addition to local lighting (Fig 3). the feature chandelier high above the main detailing of the ring and its support system.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 42 24/02/2012 21:31

Floor-to-floor heights (m) 1. Plan of the casino building,
enclosing the irregularly shaped
L4 atrium.
L3 6.3 2. North/south cross-section through
View Casino View
corridor L2 6.8 corridor casino showing levels.
L1 7.25 3. Casino interior, showing the
B2M 8.5
chandelier centrally placed to
B3 4.6 illuminate the atrium gaming area.
B4 4.1
B5 3.2
2.
3.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 43 24/02/2012 21:31

1.
Theatre structures The two theatres are located side-by-side

in the north-east area of MBS (Fig 2).
They have two entrances, one facing the
Authors
grand arcade node and the other Bayfront
Otto Lai Brian Mak
Avenue, and they share a lobby, which
provides for easy flow of pedestrian traffic
before and after performances as people
move to the ArtScience Museum, the grand
Introduction arcade and waterfront promenade, as well as
The Marina Bay Sands development to the casino and the hotel.
includes two fully-equipped proscenium
theatres. The Grand Theater has a seating “Box-in-box” structures
capacity of 2139, and is designed for Arup’s design for the structure of the
show-based entertainment ranging from theatres was basically a conventional
popular acts and concerts to special touring “box-in-box” reinforced concrete frame,
events. The slightly smaller Sands Theater so as to provide the greatest flexibility for
(Fig 1), seating 1679, offers a different kind construction (Fig 3). The external box is
of theatrical experience, where Broadway- formed by the podium structures and the
type shows are performed. basement walls, which provide overall
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 44 29/02/2012 20:15

N
Theatres
Outer "box" Theatre

(entire MBS boxes
podium)
Concrete
piers for stability
Double boxes
around stage areas
2. 3.
1. Interior of the completed Sands

Theater.
2. Theatre shells under construction.
The structures were built between
April and December 2009.
3. The “box-in-box” structural
arrangement, showing the additional
double box surrounding each stage
area and the positions of the
concrete piers.
4. Cantilevered steel balcony.
5. Concrete piers for temporary
stability.
4. 5.
stability for the theatres against soil load. into the theatres, and of internal noise and Construction of the theatres was undertaken
The internal box is a reinforced concrete vibration from them into surrounding areas, “outside-in”, the concrete shells being
shell for each theatre defining its shape. additional double structures with a minimum completed before the steel balconies were
The internal box transfers all gravity loads 50mm cavity between them were provided at begun. The shells were slender cantilevered
from the theatre to the ground, so that any the interface between theatre stage and structures with concrete piers integrated into
modifications to the internal theatre layout surrounding structure (Fig 3). them to provide temporary stability (Fig 5).
involved only checking gravity load, and did The verticality of the theatre shell walls
not affect the external podium structures and Theatre construction was stringently controlled so as to minimize
basement walls. Internally the Grand Theater and the Sands any adverse impacts from construction
Theater are very similar, each containing a tolerance on the subsequent steel balcony
The acoustic benefits of box-in-box partially raked auditorium floor and one truss installation.
construction are significant. One is that a balcony. The balconies are steel cantilevered
decoupled inner and outer structure reduces frames (Fig 4) with concrete decks for the A similar procedure was adopted for the
the transmission of vibrational energy that seating, while at the top of each building Cirque du Soleil theatre at the Venetian
could reradiate inside the theatre as airborne beneath the curving roof (see pp32-36) is the Macau (also an Arup project), and it proved
noise. Another is that the resilient air space 150mm thick composite slab that comprises to be very effective and efficient in terms of
between boxes greatly improves sound each theatre’s level 4. This accommodates time and construction logistics.
isolation from exterior noise. So as to limit the MEP plant room, and is supported by
transmission of outside noise and vibration 3.5m deep steel trusses.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 45 24/02/2012 21:31

The event plaza Introduction
Located along the marine deck between
Authors the North and South Crystal Pavilions,
Va-Chan Cheong Franky Lo this moving platform connects the upper
and lower promenades (Fig 1). It can be
used to host various events itself, or to
provide 2770 seats for events either at the
lower promenade waterfront or on the
stage at the upper promenade (Fig 2).
With a total area of about 2300m2, the

platform is divided into series of steps
supported by a mechanical system that
operates vertically to position the steps
in different configurations for events,
depending on whether they are on the lower
or upper promenade, or at the platform itself.
The platform can be raised to a maximum
3.7m from its lowest operating level.
Removable steps, and handrails for access
and prevention against falling, are
variously provided to suit the different
platform profiles.
1.
Total 4834 seats 0 10m Portable

bleachers
Raised
platforms: Operable
2770 seats plaza panels
Stage Stage
Bleachers:
2064 seats
a) Plan for lower promenade event. b) Elevation for lower promenade event.
Total 3419 seats

Operable
Raised plaza panels
platforms: Additional
2770 seats seating Stage
Lower
promenade
Stage
Front seats:
649 seats
c) Plan for upper promenade event. d) Elevation for upper promenade event.
2.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 46 29/02/2012 19:58

N
Structure
The main structure of the event plaza
comprises reinforced concrete U-shaped
“tubs” under the platform spanning over the Extent of fixed
reinforced
water on marine piles. The platform itself is concrete deck
formed of a composite deck with profiled
Geared motor
steel sheeting resting on steel beams. Extent Shaft
Jack
The design live load is 7.5kPa to cater for of moving

platform
public crowds as well as for its use as a Jack casing
stage for hosting events, and detailed
considerations regarding vibration induced Screw
by activities on the deck were made in the Bellows spring
design to avoid discomfort being caused to Nut

users from any excessive vibration. Nut casing
Extendable
screw jacks Screw cover
The tubs are mostly in parallel layout at
approximately 12m spacing, and
interconnected with tie beams (Fig 3).
Nine series of extendable screw jacks are U-shaped reinforced
installed along the centres of the tubs at concrete “tubs”
about 2.2m spacing to provide vertical

support to the platform deck (Fig 4).
At the eastern edge of the platform, adjacent 0 20m
to the main podium structure, a continuous
reinforced concrete wall with a buttress 3. 4.
houses the guide rails that provide lateral
restrain to the platform. To facilitate its rapid
erection under the tight programme, the
reinforced concrete tubs were precast, while
the main parts of the platform decks were
shop-prefabricated in advance.
Moving the platform

At each jack position in the tubs, a sleeve
opening is provided for the screw rod to pass
through when the platform is lowered. At the
undersides of the tubs, waterproof sockets
connecting to the sleeve openings prevent
potential corrosion of the screw rods from
a) Underside of platform supported by screw jacks. b) Installation of nut casting on reinforced concrete tub.
contact with water (Fig 5). The platform
loading is transmitted through the screw rods
to the concrete structure by nut casing units
bolt-anchored to the tubs.
Capped on each pair of screw rods, a jack

casing formed by a grid of steel beams
houses the geared motor, the shafts, and the
jack at top of each rod. The motor provides
power for the rotary action of the screw rod,
causing it to rise or descend and thus raise
or lower the platform to the desired level. c) Jack casing on top of screw jack. d) General view of platform in construction.
All the motors are controlled by a central
system that synchronises the level of each 5.
platform step to provide different platform
topographies, including flatted profiles as 1. Architect’s impression of the event 4. Exploded view of screw jack and
the stage for hosting events, or in stepped plaza alongside the marine deck. jack casing.
configuration to provide seating for events 2. Configurations of the platform for 5. Building the moving platform.
in the upper and lower promenades. events on the upper and lower
promenades.
3. General arrangement of event
plaza reinforced concrete structure.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 47 29/02/2012 20:00

1.
The ArtScience Museum This unique structure features over 5500m2

of galleries housing the permanent and
touring exhibitions, and embraces a
Authors
spectrum of influences from the relationship
Dan Birch Joe Lam Mac Tan
between art and science, to media and
technology, to design and architecture.
Visitors appreciate not only the building’s
iconic form and the world-class exhibits
Introduction within, but also the virtuosity of its
Designed by Moshe Safdie Architects as a innovative roof, which channels rainwater
symbolic gesture of welcome to guests from through the central atrium (Fig 2).
across the globe, the lotus-shaped ArtScience
Museum (ASM) is situated at the north-west The lotus form
extremity of the MBS site, on a promontory Approximately the same size as Bilbao’s
overlooking Marina Bay (Fig 1). Guggenheim, Singapore’s new Museum
seems to float above its surrounding
Following its opening on 17 February 2011 reflective pool, almost as if it were upside
by Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien down. The overall structure comprises two
Loong, the museum has become a premier levels of concrete basement below ground
destination for major international touring level plus the sculptural steel frame of the
exhibitions from the most renowned lotus itself, containing a further two floors
2. collections in the world, with initial of gallery space and a plant level (Fig 3).
attractions ranging from artefacts from the The lotus form is approximately 62m high
Titanic to a comprehensive survey of above grade and has 11m of vertical support
Salvador Dalí’s art (Figs 15-16, p53). below grade. The roof is 80m across at its
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 48 24/02/2012 21:31

widest point. The highly complex geometry
required Arup to adopt innovative 3-D
parametric modelling technologies, the use
of which gave a significant reduction in
modelling time, better co-ordination,
visualisation of the complex steelwork, and
Water
improved communication with the client. oculus
The lotus form comprises 10 petals of

varying height and width on a radial axis
and spaced evenly at 36˚. The “petals” were Gallery
rationalised from the free-form geometry Gallery
developed by Safdie Architects at the
competition stage, and the top, bottom and Gallery Promenade
Lily pond
side surfaces of each were defined by Entry pavilion
flattened spheres or spheroids (Fig 4). This

led to a series of doubly curved surfaces,
each with constant radius on plan and
variable radius vertically. Gallery Gallery
Structural scheme (see also pp10-11) Open atrium

Each petal is formed by secondary members
spanning onto primary girders, which load 3.
side trusses that bend downwards in
cantilever action. The side trusses of
adjacent petals meet at waler beams which Side truss
resist out-of-plane forces caused by the

steps in the roof between each petal.
Loads from the side trusses are resolved at
the waler beams and transferred to the radial
mega-trusses (Fig 5).
These act as cantilevers, taking the museum Waler

loads to the vertical supports which consist beam
of a central diagrid structure and a series of

10 mega-columns, inclined outwards. Mega-truss
Tensile loads in the top chords are resolved

into the tension ring which connects to the
4. 5.
top of the diagrid, while the compressive
loads are resolved into the compression ring
below. The vertical loads are carried by the
inclined mega-columns (Fig 6). Compression
Tension
The architectural vision inspired a building
shape that resulted in an eccentric structure. Tension ring
The overturning forces thereby generated,
together with wind loads, are resisted by the
diagrid acting as a vertical cantilever in Mega-trusss
conjunction with the inclined mega-columns.

Galleries Galleries
Com
mpression ring
1. The ArtScience Museum nearing

completion.
2. Water feature in the central atrium,
showing the diagrid structure.
3. Architectural cross-section.
4. Spheroid geometry of the petals Inclined mega-column
in Rhino. Hyperbolic diagrid
5. The primary structure in 6.
Microstation Triforma.
6. The structural scheme.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 49 24/02/2012 21:31

7.
8.
3-D modelling and coordination
The highly complex geometry of the lotus
shape led the design team to use parametric
modelling techniques for the structural steel
skeleton. Initially MSA developed a Rhino
model (Fig 7) to generate the surface
profiles, and then Arup used these surfaces
to develop a parametric model of the
steelwork centrelines using Bentley’s
GenerativeComponents software.
For the steelwork of one petal, a parametric

model was developed with the use of
GenerativeComponents (Fig 8), so that
Arup could then automatically develop the
centreline model for the other petals’
varying geometry.
The centreline model was then exported to

generate a spaceframe analysis model of the
roof in Arup’s own GSA program, and
following analysis and section size
definition, the GSA analysis model was
imported into Bentley MicroStation Triforma
to accurately model all the steel sections for
both size and location. On completion of the
3-D drafting, the model was exported to
9. Tekla (Fig 9) and issued to the steelwork
contractor as the basis for their fabrication
model. The MicroStation model was also
used to generate a record set of 2-D
drawings for the project.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 50 24/02/2012 21:31

It was critical to get a steelwork contractor
on board early and producing fabrication
drawings, and the direct issue of the 3-D
steelwork model in this way proved
invaluable in co-ordinating the complex
geometry, reducing requests from the
steelwork contractor for information, and
vastly speeding up production of the
fabrication information.
Using such advanced programs for

documentation enabled better
communication and reduced the time taken
to produce shop drawings, as they provided
geometrically correct design models to the
fabricator. They also enabled real-time
interchange between analysis software
and documentation modelling packages.
Since the 3-D models were co-ordinated
among the consulting team members,
this minimised the likelihood of further
co-ordination being needed after the shop
drawings were produced, and speeded up the
progress of fabrication and the reviewing
process. A draftsman from the steelwork
fabricator noted that Arup issuing the 3-D 10.
model for the steelwork directly to them
saved them three months in drafting time.
The substructure
As described in the earlier article on the
MBS excavation and foundation design
(pp12-15), huge cofferdams were used on
much of the site to facilitate bulk excavation
and minimise shoring in the difficult soil
environments. Among these was the 130m
diameter semi-circular cofferdam for the
ASM (Fig 11).
This cofferdam was supported primarily by 11. 12.

the permanent basement retaining walls and
temporary ground anchors to its west and support the mega-columns and diagrid, after 7. Architectural Rhino model.
east respectively, enabling the 12m deep which the central core of the steel structure 8. GenerativeComponents parametric
bulk excavation to proceed unsupported and was installed concurrently with the model of a petal.
unhindered. Ring action was used to take the remainder of the substructure. Levels B1 and 9. Tekla model.
water pressure, the reaction forces of the L01 were constructed in parallel with the 10. Structural steel skeleton under
ring being restrained by ground anchors at programme to install the fingers and radial construction.
the north side and the contiguous bored pile trusses, as the L01 structure was used as a 11. Excavation within coffer dam for
wall at the south side of the diaphragm wall. temporary working platform. the ASM.
This allowed excavation without the need 12. The completed Museum.
for shoring and thus saved overall The ring beams and radial beams at the
construction time. oculus area link with the large 1.8m-3.0m
diameter piles under the mega-columns;
Building such a very large reinforced these piles were designed to resist the large
concrete structure close to the harbour lateral forces from the mega-columns.
waters created some challenges, exacerbated This enabled the construction of the
in this instance by time constraints (as substructure and installation of the steel
already indicated, a key program driver structure at same time.
had been the complexity of the steelwork).
Critical was the construction of the ring
beams and radial beams at the oculus area to
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 51 24/02/2012 21:31

Outside Maximum 825mm (panel width of white cladding)
GFRP rainscreen cladding Aluminium circular hollow section
Maximum 350mm
Aluminium bracket
Aluminium standing seam roof assembly
13. Typical section of cladding
build-up.
50mm
14. The egg-shell skin of the
completed ArtScience Museum.
15, 16. The 2011 exhibition
Insulation
“Dalí: Mind of a Genius”.
Inside
13.
The skin Table 1

A fundamental aspect of the façade design
Eggshell Double- Factory- Monolithic Light
was the need for a smooth seamless, Material
appearance curved applied finish joint weight
egg-shell skin, and extensive studies were
Prefinished compressed
made to determine how this could be fibre cement
formed. A heavy site-finished concrete shell
Glassfibre reinforced
was quickly dismissed due to structural concrete
concerns, and the search for a solution
focused on the concept of a cladding skin Solid aluminium panel
sitting above and below an inner standing
seam roof. Filled resin
A standing seam is a very robust and High-pressure laminates

practical system for this application. It
creates a continuous weather line and allows Fibre-reinforce polymer
for a rainscreen cladding of choice to be
attached to the seams without the need for
support penetrations, thus reducing the risk The use of this new material posed several Conclusion
of leaks and failures (Fig 13). challenges, not least among them being the Integrating the engineering and architectural
identification of a grade of FRP that would design of the ASM was perhaps Singapore’s
A greater challenge, though was to develop provide excellent fire resistance and most sophisticated building undertaking yet.
an over-cladding that had the eggshell finish. performance. Testing was a critical part of As with Sydney Opera House, another
A wide range of locally-sourced materials obtaining approval from Singapore’s Fire waterfront icon with which Arup is
was considered and reviewed against several Safety and Shelter Department for its use. historically linked, the ASM profile is a
criteria (Table 1). Mock-ups and other tests were also bold new visual identifier for Singapore.
completed by the sub-contractors to
Based on the findings, fibre-reinforced demonstrate that they could achieve the In addition, the finished building reflects
polymer (FRP) was chosen for the skin. appearance and structural performance. Moshe Safdie’s intention:
Typically used in high-performance racing
yachts, this use of 12 500m2 of FRP was a FRP is factory fabricated into moulded “From the inside out, every element in the
first in terms of its scale and highly visible panels which, though they can be large in design of the ArtScience Museum reinforces
application for a Singapore project. size, still have to be joined together on site the institution’s philosophy of creating a
The doubly-curved FRP skin made jointless to achieve a monolithic skin. The sub- bridge between the arts and sciences.
construction possible, resulting in a seamless contractor, DK Composites, developed a The building combines the aesthetic and
and continuous surface (Fig 14). method of bonding adjoining panels with functional, the visual and the technological,
seamless joints so that the skin moves and and for me, really represents the forward
responds monolithically, with provisions looking spirit of Singapore.”
made at the perimeter and in the intermediate
supports for expansion and contraction.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 52 24/02/2012 21:31

14.
15. 16.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 53 24/02/2012 21:31

The Crystal Pavilions 1. Completed South Pavilion.
2. Completed North Pavilion.
Authors 3. Dewatering at the South Pavilion
Don Ho Joe Lam Brian Mak after installation of tubular piles and
cofferdam.
4. Excavation within cofferdam for
the North Pavilion.
1.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 54 24/02/2012 21:31

2.
Introduction
The North and South Crystal Pavilions are
two glowing “jewels” for resort visitors to
explore, and seem to float in Marina Bay
west of the MBS podium. In fact they are
securely founded in the Bay strata, and
linked to the podium by cast in situ
submarine tunnels, which bring visitors
from the basement retail area to enjoy the
contrasting sense of open water. The North
Pavilion houses a flagship store for Louis
Vuitton (Arup’s client for the fitout), while
the other enables visitors to dine on the
water. Two slender steel bridges provide
3. 4.
alternative access to the Pavilions.
Geotechnical challenges The constructed foundations were The foundation and excavation works were
The geology here generally comprises an compression load tested using the successfully completed in early 2010, and
approximately 15m-25m thick band of Statnamic method, which involves launching the general sequence of works may be
soft-to-firm marine/fluvial clay layer a reaction mass that weighs about 5% of the summarised as follows:
overlaying the Old Alluvium (OA) formation weight required for a conventional static
(see also pp12-15). Another consideration in load test. Conventional tension load testing • pile installation and testing of pile
the Pavilions’ location and founding was was carried out on the tubular piles and foundations
water level; following completion in 2008 of mini-piles. • circular cofferdam installation
the Marina Barrage across the Marina
Channel that feeds Marina Bay, the highest The Pavilion basements and connecting • dewatering within circular cofferdam
level in this reservoir area was 2.5m above submerged tunnels were constructed in the • linear cofferdam installation and
mean sea level. dry. For both Pavilions, dewatering to the excavation within circular cofferdam
seabed plus about 2m depth of bulk
The Pavilions and their connecting structures excavation was carried out within circular • dewatering and excavation within linear
are founded primarily on the underlying OA and adjoining linear cofferdams (Figs 3, 4). cofferdam
layer using open-ended driven tubular steel The latter extend from both Pavilions to the • construction of basement structure within
piles. It was anticipated that the foundations basement retail areas in the podium, and circular and linear cofferdams
would be subject to compression loads house the cast in situ access tunnels.
during construction but to permanent uplift • forming of opening in circular cofferdam
forces during operation, so at areas where The circular cofferdams were extended to enable structural connection of the
higher uplift forces were expected, mini- through the soft marine clay to found on the access tunnels and Pavilion basements
piles were constructed at the toes of the underlying alluvial sand, with radial lateral • basement construction completion and
tubular piles to increase tension capacity. restraint provided by circular steel section temporary works removal.
Due to the tight construction programme, waler beams installed prior to the
the foundations were subjected to the full dewatering. After dewatering, bulk
uplift forces prior to completion of the excavation towards the centre of the circular
Pavilion superstructures. cofferdams was carried out. Allowance was
made in their design for anticipated closing
in during initial dewatering, to bear against
the restraining ring waler beams.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 55 24/02/2012 21:31

5. Detail of the North Pavilion
nearing completion.
6. 3-D model of the connections and
façade fin.
7. Connections and façade fin as
built.
8. GSA model of North Pavilion.
9. Construction progress for both
Pavilions, July and September 2010.
Pavilion roofs
With the Pavilion façades tilting 20° from
the vertical in different directions, and the
two roofs on each Pavilion having
completely different gradients, the structures
have an inevitable tendency to lateral
movement. This imposed big design and
construction challenges, even taking into
account the effect of self-weight. To achieve
the high transparency that the name “Crystal
Pavilion” implies, the Arup team decided to
support the decorative outer frames with
lightweight steelwork (Fig 5), and provide
the lateral stability with prestressed
Macalloy ties.
Since the prestressing system could only

provide full stability for the roofs when they
were prestressed to the design load,
maintaining stability during construction was
a critical factor. The Arup team indicated
clearly in the tender drawings the structural
5. requirements during construction, and the
contractor’s construction sequence analysis
was carefully reviewed before approval, well
before any steelwork was delivered to site.
To avoid unbalanced forces or local
overstress of members, the ties were
prestressed in stages, one-by-one around the
roof. The prestress force in each was
increased by a small percentage until every
tie was prestressed to its full design load.
As the connections and members are

exposed, structural detailing was of major
architectural importance, so the architect
6. 7. asked Arup to develop and document all the
connection detail in 3-D, for which Bentley
Structure was used (Figs 6, 7). All the
connections were sketched out and designed
early in the process, and then reviewed
through local workshops in Singapore and
See and Share sessions between the Hong
Kong and US offices until the connection
detailing was as the architect wanted. All of
the team then worked together to draw up
every typical and non-typical connection
detail in 3-D.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 56 24/02/2012 21:31

This not only showed the architect how the
final details would appear but also identified
all the geometrically complex connections,
which were analysed and adjusted to make
them aesthetically acceptable to the architect
before being passed for construction.
The 3-D model (Fig 8) was issued to the
contractor as a reference and used as a base
for overlaying with the contractor’s
submitted 3-D model. This revealed any
clashes, reducing by over 50% subsequent
requests for information (RFI).
So as to provide extra flexibility for the floor

arrangement, the conventional reinforced
concrete structures are separated from the
Pavilions’ steel roofs. However, as the outer
frame can move relative to the inner core
under the designed lateral load, the potential
drift was carefully calculated and numerous
sections cut from the 3-D model, to ensure 8.
that every edge of the concrete core is
sufficiently distant from the outer frame.
a) South Pavilion, July 2010. c) North Pavilion, July 2010.
b) South Pavilion, September 2010. d) North Pavilion, September 2010.
9.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 57 29/02/2012 19:51

3.5m
100mm
350mm
600mm 84˚
20mm
thick plate
2.65m
10mm thick
end plate
15mm 15mm
thick plate thick plate
1.0m
0.8m diameter x
19mm thick pile
10. 11.
Integrated design to achieve The footbridges human-induced vibration (footfall) analysis

architectural intent During the design stage, the local authority model (Fig 14), the team used a lower bound
Transparent glass roofs need to be as devoid informed the team that a footbridge to each soil stiffness in estimating the fixity point of
of services as possible. To avoid air ducts at Pavilion was required for alternative access, the pile (the depth at which the soil acts as a
roof level, an underfloor supply system was as well as means of escape in case of fire. lateral restraint to it). This lower bound
selected, but the consequent need for They extend some 40m and 50m to the assumption was to ensure that any secondary
openings around the edge of the floor plate North and South Pavilions respectively, effects were not underestimated.
made for some structural challenges. each supported by 10 slender piers.
The Level 1 floor acts to prop the top of For strength checking, another computer
the slanted basement wall (Fig 10), and With the design of the Pavilions already model was built, the main difference from
considerable forces were thereby induced in established, these bridges had to be the footfall model being that full-length piles
the Level 1 floor both from keeping the complementary – elegant and transparent, with closely-spaced soil springs were
slanted basement wall in position and from with very slender profiles, and a minimum included. As the team was more confident
the slanted steel roof columns on the top of number of piers extending as deep into the about the magnitude of lateral loading from
the wall. The Level 1 floor structure had to water as possible before connecting to the wind and wave action, this gave a clearer
be analysed in great detail, and the floor piles. This was because the Marina Barrage indication of the soil/structure interaction.
openings positioned in consultation with the effectively fences the Bay off from the sea,
building services engineer so that they were so that by the time MBS opened, the Bay’s Reactions from each soil spring were
feasible in both structural and mechanical fresh water would be clean enough to make checked to make sure they were within
engineering terms. the seabed clearly visible. acceptable limits. Where soil springs were
overstressed, they were removed and the
Unlike other types of buildings where façade In addition to these aesthetic requirements, computer model rerun iteratively until all
supports are normally concealed or clad, the there were site constraints. Because raking were are within the allowance load. It was
façade support structures for the Crystal piles from the main Pavilion structures later determined that the structural size was
Pavilions are architectural features, and had already extended into the bridge areas, each mainly dictated by human-induced vibration,
to be carefully engineered by the Arup bridge could only be supported by a single not design strength.
façade team. The main beam-to-façade fin central line of piers, rather than also be
detail is designed to avoid any unwanted stabilized by raking piles. Conclusion
stiffeners, and the final product has the Despite the difficult environment and the
very clean detail required by the architect. The slender bridge columns and piles range of design challenges that it generated,
resulted in an undesired cantilever mode the design team successfully realised the
shape being dominant (Figs 11, 12). Pavilions’ unique and complex design with
The effective cantilever length of the column high precision and quality. They were the
+ pile element is very critical in affecting the final elements of MBS to open to the public,
frequency of this mode (Fig 13), so in the in September 2011.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 58 24/02/2012 21:31

10. The South Pavilion complete.
11. Cross-section through bridge/
pier/pile structure.
12. 3-D model of bridge structure.
13. First mode behaviour of bridge.
14. Human-induced vibration
(footfall) model for the South
Pavilion footbridge.
15. Completed footbridge to the
North Pavilion.
Maximum resonant
response factor: 10.0
15.0
12.5
10.0
7.5
5.0
2.5
0
12. 13. 14.
15.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 59 24/02/2012 21:31

1.
Bayfront Avenue runs through the heart of enabling the movement of manpower and
MBS, separating the hotel towers and materials around the site, it also functioned
podium structures (Figs 1, 4). The Avenue as a working platform/temporary support for
links the new resort not only with its other areas, eg the SkyPark steelwork was
Bayfront Avenue and immediate surroundings, but also with other assembled on top of it. The structure below,
developments like Gardens by the Bay and the future Bayfront Station, was then
Downtown Line 1 the Marina Bay Financial Centre, forming a constructed after the ground slab was cast.
further element in the Marina South area’s
Author complete road network. Parts of the DTL1 extension cut-and-cover
Brian Mak tunnels were constructed by the bottom-up
The new road opened to traffic on 25 April method. Soil is excavated to the required
2010, enabling bus, taxi and other vehicular depth, and then casting of the concrete
access to the resort. An underground link to progresses upwards until the roof of the
the SMRT network is also being added, with structure is completed.
the inclusion of Bayfront Station as part of
Singapore’s Downtown Line 1 (DTL1) Extensive co-ordination between the design
development, being constructed here beneath team and the local authority was needed
Bayfront Avenue (Figs 2, 3). This station, concerning the interface between Bayfront
which opened on 14 January, 2012, now Station and MBS. Detailed structural
interfaces with the Shoppes, the Sands Expo analyses were performed to ensure that any
and Convention Center, and the Sands Hotel, deflections in the diaphragm walls would
so as to provide even easier public access to have no adverse effects on those parts of the
and from the area (Fig 6 overleaf). DTL1 that were already constructed, and the
planned excavation sequence was adhered to
Bayfront Avenue was built by the top-down strictly to avoid any adverse impacts to
method (Fig 5 overleaf), and the structure either the resort or the station structure.
played an important role in the early
construction stages as it formed the heart and A major constraint on the tunnel construction
linkage for all the other areas. As well as was the existing Benjamin Sheares Bridge,
which carries an eight-lane cross-Singapore
arterial route that here runs adjacent to the
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 60 24/02/2012 21:31

ArtScience
N Museum
District cooling
system (DCS) plant
Crystal Varies
Pavilion Theatres
North
Benjamin
Sheares Bridge
Casino
Crystal TBM (tunnel boring
Pavilion machine) shaft
South
Cooling towers at
Sands ground level
Hotel
MICE
A Vehicle ramp SECTION A-A
Bayfront
Station
A
2.
Vehicle ramps overpass the
tunnels, connecting the
Varies
development on both sides
Alignment B
SECTION B-B
Alignment A1 & A2
C
Existing ground level

Alignment Alignment
C A1 & A2 B
CL
Alignment A1 tracks level

Alignment A2 tracks level
Alignment B tracks level
Bayfront
Station
3. SECTION C-C
1. Bayfront Avenue alongside the

hotel towers.
2. Alignment of DTL1 tunnels
beneath Bayfront Avenue.
3. Plan and cross-sections of DTL1
tunnels at three locations on the route
into Bayfront Station.
4. Bayfront Avenue seen from the
ground level.
4.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 61 24/02/2012 21:31

Casino DTL1 Hotel Casino DTL1 Hotel Casino DTL1 Hotel
RL (m) RL (m) RL (m)

100 100 100
90 90 90
80 80 80
70 70 70
60 60 60
50 50 50
a) Install piles, diaphragm walls and top-down slabs. b) Complete casino and retail above the DTL1 tunnel alignment. c) Continue hotel and DTL1 excavations with temporary props.
Casino DTL1 Hotel Casino DTL1 Hotel Casino DTL1 Hotel
RL (m) RL (m) RL (m)

100 100 100
90 90 90
80 80 80
70 70 70
60 60 60
50 50 50
d) Complete hotel basement and DTL1 excavation. e) Commence DTL1 tunnel boxes bottom-up and backfill. f) Complete DTL1 tunnel boxes.
5.
deepest part of the excavation in an area of

deep soft clay. The Arup team calculated that
the proposed works would cause the bridge
to move laterally by 47mm. As the deck and
piers were fixed together by pins that
allowed little lateral movement, this would
result in overstressing of the columns of the
closest pier as well as damage to the pins.
Arup’s solution to modify the connections
between the deck and the pier is described
and illustrated in the article on the MBS
geotechnics and foundation design
(pp12-15).
Without this simple but effective

modification to the bridge, the design of the
excavation works would have been
significantly complicated and taken much
longer. Arup’s solution allowed the project
programme to be met while the bridge
continued to operate as normal.
6.
5. Top-down construction sequence

for Bayfront Avenue and the
DTL1 tunnels.
6. Bayfront Station entrance.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 62 24/02/2012 21:32

Specialist
skills
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 63 24/02/2012 21:32

Transparency into account in the selection process were
In certain areas transparency was critical, architectural intent, expected transparency,
and this need for unimpeded views implied energy requirements, safety regulations, and
maximising the glass area and minimising other requirements such as acoustic
structure. These areas were: performance.
• the east-west view corridors between the Glass sources from all around the world
MICE, casino, and theatre blocks of the were considered, but as with all projects
podium, to provide good views of the city there were budget constraints, and eventually
• the retail mall, giving views of the the many types of glass used were all
promenade as well as the city beyond sourced from Asian factories. During the
study period and on into procurement and
• the west-facing hotel rooms, again to give
The façade systems views of the city
production, numerous inspections of glass
factories were necessary, and as a result
• the atria between the hotel blocks, which Arup is now very familiar with fabricators
Authors throughout Asia. In many parts of the
Russell Cole Mac Tan Alex Wong needed to have a light and airy feel.
building some of the latest high-performance
To enable these views, high light glass was used. Other areas of high
transmission was needed, with avoidance transparency required low iron glass – sand
of tinted glass so as to give good colour with low iron content avoids the tendency to
Introduction a green tint of normal clear glass.
rendition. This resulted in less areas for
The building envelopes of Marina Bay Sands
insulation which, coupled with the use of
are a fundamental part of the project’s Hotel glass curtain walls and
clear glass, implies the consumption of
architectural definition. Arup’s façade team glass fin design
greater amounts of energy. Also, concerns
covered the entire development, ranging The west-facing orientation of the hotel
had to be met about night-time views in
over several zones with multiple types of towers created an issue of thermal comfort
these areas, especially concerning the
façade, and working with the architect, the during afternoons. Safdie Architects’ design
rooms at the Sands Hotel.
other design disciplines, and the client incorporated vertical glass fins to express the
project managers to develop and refine the Energy performance building shape and complex curvature of the
design intent for these various façade types. Singapore has strict requirements on the towers, with preference for frameless glass
amount of solar and ambient energy flowing with exposed edges. Arup was tasked to
Arup subsequently provided engineered design and achieve these aesthetic
into a building. The maximum amount of
design intent drawings, and performance requirements, with the following challenges:
energy permitted is deemed to comprise the
specifications for a design-and-build
total of the thermal flows through the solid
tender contract. This also covered design • Typically, vertical glass fins in façades
areas and the glazed areas, and the solar
development and co-ordination with align with the supporting mullions, but
transmission through the vision areas.
façade contractors, reviewing of all here the fins do not; this constraint forced
Normally this is calculated across the whole
submissions, and other façade activities the Arup design to provide support on the
of a building, but in the present case MBS
that stemmed from testing through transoms (see also p22)
was considered as two buildings – the hotels
fabrication to installation.
and the podium block. • The fins do not align consistently with any
The façades were grouped into five broad façade element, as the hotel towers taper
Highly transparent areas tend to let in in elevation. The fins are spaced every 6m
packages – the hotel towers, the podium
more energy, even if high-performance from the top of the towers (level 55); this
structures, the ArtScience Museum, the
solar coatings are used (the most advanced gap reduces down to 5m at level 5 (Fig 1).
Crystal Pavilions, and “others” – but several
of which do have an impact on light
key common factors ran throughout. • The architect’s intention was for the
transmission), so areas of high energy
transmission had to be balanced with lower glass fins to be supported only at the top
Common issues and bottom, spanning the height from
performance areas. These calculations were
Architectural intent used throughout the design process to floor to floor.
Safdie Architects had a clear vision for the inform where transparency targets could • The architect wanted to express the
form and appearance of MBS, and the be achieved. In the end, careful tuning of curvature of the towers in the fins
façades were a critical aspect of this vision. the glass selection cross-checked with themselves, so that they would be
However, the programme, budget, and many the ETTV (envelope thermal transfer 1200mm wide at the top and bottom of
different performance requirements had to value) calculations. the buildings and gradually taper to
be met. This being the case it was crucial, 600mm in the middle.
given the scale of the project, that a pallet of Glass selection
materials and façade systems be developed A very detailed study of glass types was • The fins had to be made more visible by
that would impart a strong sense of cohesion carried out, with regard for the different using a more reflective glass than that used
and a consistent appearance, as well as roles the glazing would have in the various for the curtain wall glazing, thus forcing
simplify procurement and construction. areas of MBS. Factors that had to be taken the glass for the fins to exceed Singapore
statutory requirements.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 64 24/02/2012 21:32

• Maintenance had to be considered.
• The slab structural design could not
incorporate a top-fixed curtain wall
bracket that would require notching on
the existing slab.
Arup with the specialist sub-contractor
developed several options, identifying the
design and structural implications for each.
Although the architect’s intent to support the
fins only at the top and bottom could be
achieved, this would require the laminated
glass to have three layers. This in turn would
have major implications for the loads
imposed on the curtain wall system, so the
architect eventually accepted a system
having each fin supported at the rear as well
as the top and bottom, with the front edge
left exposed to achieve the visual intent.
Since the glass fins were not in line with the

curtain wall mullions, the only possible
option was for them to be fixed to the
horizontal curtain-wall transom and the stack
joint, the horizontal connection between
curtainwall panels (Fig 2). Considering the
major loading implications, Arup designed
the main support to be from the top frame of
the curtain wall. This was considered to be
the most efficient solution because it is the
only frame member in the curtain wall
1. system that takes no dead load from the
glazing. As the curtain wall was designed as
a hanging system to cater for additional
loads arising from the fin design, this made
the top transom the closest horizontal
member to the dead load brackets; this
approach minimised the loading implications
on other elements of the curtain wall panel.
The fins were designed on the same principle

as a unitised curtain wall. The three-sided
support elements were factory prefabricated,
where the fin brackets were also assembled
together with the unitised curtain wall, so as
to reduce the amount of on-site assembly
and ensure high quality of work. Since the
architect required the edge of the laminated
glass to be exposed, Arup chose the Sentry
Glas® system to reduce if not eliminate risk
of delaminating. This system also adds
structural integrity and safety.
1. Elevation of hotel tower 1,

showing non-alignment of fins and
mullions, and gradual reduction of
spacing between fins down the tower.
2. Close-up of fins, showing
connection and three-sided framing.
2.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 65 24/02/2012 21:32

3. Spring system installed at SkyPark SkyPark soffit cladding
movement joints. The design concept for the SkyPark
4. The nose of the SkyPark. included a smooth façade to its soffit.
5. Underside of the SkyPark soffit Aluminium composite cladding panels were
cladding nose panel, showing welds chosen due to colour consistency and their
and support framing.
ability to supply the colour tone that the
6. Inspecting the nose panel. architect preferred during the sample review.
Gaps between panels of 100mm and 40mm
were selected to help visually express how
the panels form the shape of the soffit.
Another challenge was the SkyPark’s

3. movement joints. It includes what are
essentially two bridge spans between the
hotel towers, and so movement joints had to
be incorporated (see also p25). The façade
cladding had to accommodate this movement
without there being any major aesthetic
impact on the panel design and pattern.
A pantograph system – a mechanical linkage

that includes an articulated assembly to
provide a motion guide for contraction or
expansion – was added in the original panel
design to regulate the centre panel between
those adjacent during any movement.
This would ensure that the gaps at the
movement joint would always be equal
whatever the structural movement.
This was later developed by the sub-

contractor, as well as an alternative spring
system solution. In this – the concept that
was the final choice for the actual installation
– two equal-capacity springs acting in
4. opposite directions keep the panel gaps
equal during movement, achieving the same
design intent and principle (Fig 3).
Thermal movement and expansion were also

carefully reviewed to ensure that the panels
will stay in place with large redundancy and
safety factors.
The nose of the SkyPark cladding has a very

small radius, forming a doubly-curved panel
(Fig 4). The aluminium composite panels
used elsewhere would not work here, so
5. solid aluminium panels were used, formed in
a similar way to the fabrication of aircraft
parts. They were carefully beaten to into
shape with computerised controls to ensure
the correct formation. This method
necessitated a minimum 5mm panel
thickness to ensure that no imperfections
6.
were visible after finishing (Figs 5, 6).
Installing the SkyPark soffit cladding was a

major challenge for the sub-contractor, with
the short programme and the needs of safety
in the process being the principal concerns.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 66 24/02/2012 21:32

7.
7. West-facing view corridor wall.
8. Cable anchorage detail at the
west-facing view corridor wall.
9. Architect Moshe Safdie signing
hotel glass samples before final
procurement, September 2007.
8. 9.
A large gantry system on tracks ensured ease View corridor walls The west-facing wall of the southern view
of installation access, at a fast rate that The conditions of the land sale included corridor running between the MICE and
would meet the programme, and ensuring sightlines that needed to be maintained casino blocks is oblique to the axis of the
safety during the operation. through the development. To this end the corridor and so is 52m wide. The wall sits
architect envisaged the creation of view between the promenade level and the bridge
Balustrading for the SkyPark observation corridors dividing the elements of the at the end of the 20m high view corridor.
deck had of course to meet rigorous safety podium block, with highly transparent walls As this wall frames the view of the main
requirements, and to achieve this, heat- at the ends each view corridor arcades. CBD of Singapore from this focal point of
strengthened Sentry Glas® laminated glass These were achieved in two principal ways. the retail spaces, here again a particularly
was again used. transparent structure was needed –
Firstly the façades team developed a a challenge, given the dimensions of the
The Bayfront façade lightweight structural support system that whole wall.
A range of different façades and podium minimized the size and density of the
building entrances face Bayfront Avenue structural elements. Secondly, highly The final scheme uses a set of vertical steel
(Fig 4, p61). At the southern end the glazing transparent glass was specified. This area mullions stabilised against the wind by a
forms the ground level colonnade to the was given priority for the use of low iron cable net (Figs 7-8). The inward wind
exhibition spaces, which then transitions into glass that increased visible light transmission pressures are resisted by a box cable behind
the southern view corridor and the casino, even though it meant a lower thermal the vertical mullion, whereas the outward
and finally the northern view corridor and insulation performance. To compensate, suctions pull against two levels of horizontal
the theatres. the double-glazing used in other areas of cables that span the width of the wall and are
the podium has less transparency and anchored to the concrete structures of the
Here the simplest form of the horizontal better thermal performance. MICE and casino blocks. Similar structural
glazing system is used, comprising systems were used for the smaller view
horizontal steel T-sections with aluminium In developing such a highly transparent corridor walls facing Bayfront Avenue.
glazing adapters fixed to the front face. structure the first objective was to use the
The double-glazed units are then clamped to largest spacing between supports: glass
the horizontal T-sections. There are no steel sheets 2.6m high x 3.7m wide with supports
or aluminum glazing sections running only along the horizontal edges. Small
vertically, with only a simple glass-to-glass transoms were used to take the load to the
seal. Stainless steel hanger bars stop the 9m major steel vertical elements at the ends of
steel horizontals from sagging. the glass panels.
Most of this elevations’s many entrances

have automated sliding doors.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 67 24/02/2012 21:32

1.
Introduction and design philosophy The fire safety strategy had to involve as
Marina Bay Sands, with its iconic design, stakeholders the parent company Las Vegas
stature and location, inevitably posed a Sands (LVS) and its insurance brokers, as
challenge in its fire and life safety design. well as Singapore Civil Defence Force
Fire engineering The large populations in the casino and the
Sands Expo and Convention Center, the
(SCDF) as the local authority having
jurisdiction. As an international company
Authors multiple basement floors (down to a fourth with significant overseas presence, LVS
André Lovatt Ruth Wong level in places), and the compacted “jigsaw” has corporate guidelines for critical fire
of different components into a single safety systems for all its properties,
building, all made MBS in fire engineering whether in the US, Macau, or Singapore.
terms “an interesting building to work on”. Insurance brokers similarly have their own
standards relating to acceptable products
and design standards to minimise risk and
losses to insured businesses and properties.
As for statutory approvals, the SCDF
planning approvals department – the Fire
Safety and Shelter Department (FSSD) –
has jurisdiction and oversees fire and life
safety compliance approvals.
It was determined fairly early on through

2. close consultation with the FSSD that the
Singapore Code of Practice for Fire
Precautions in Buildings 20071 would form
the basis for the MBS fire safety design.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 68 24/02/2012 21:32

This differed from other LVS properties in
the US and Macau where the International
Building Code (IBC)2 was used. Where the
development for design or construction
reasons departed from the Singapore Fire
Code 2007, it was agreed with the FSSD that
a performance-based approach, as permitted
under the Fire Safety Act, would be utilised
for additional flexibility. Though the
Singapore Fire Code 2007 would be the
basis for design, many aspects of the IBC, eg
the use of horizontal exits, and US National
Fire Protection Association standards, eg
NFPA133, were referenced in the final design. 1. The Sands Theater in use.
The theatres are provided with
negative smoke pressurisation in
Performance-based design and its accordance with NFPA 92A5.
application to MBS 2. Evacuation modelling for
The performance-based approach to fire simultaneous evacuation of the
safety design is not a new concept in casino, using the STEPS program.
Singapore, having been introduced there in 3. Sliding doors retracted in MICE
2004. The Singapore Fire Code 2007 has a ancillary areas.
subsection in front of each chapter, laying 4. Exit staircases at MICE.
out the root and sub-objectives of the Code 3.
with regards to fire and life safety design.
In MBS, the performance-based approach

contributed to the overarching intent to
create an iconic design masterpiece on
Singapore’s waterfront district. The fire
and life safety design had to incorporate
seamlessly the requirements of all its
relevant stakeholders, and to the advantage
of the project.
In many instances, the risk management

strategy employed by the insurance brokers
corresponded with the fire safety measures.
Such centred on the use of maximum
foreseeable loss (MFL)* walls – with
minimal two-hour fire resistance rating –
to limit burnout or complete loss to a single 4.
MFL compartment. The MFL compartment
also served as both the required separation While referenced widely in US-originated and are equipped to be automatically
between purpose groups (or classifications of codes such as IBC and NFPA 1014, the use operable for people to escape and then
use) where required under the Singapore Fire of horizontal exits is less common in to close. When not in use, the doors are
Code 2007, and as horizontal exit lines as Singapore. At MBS, however, horizontal discreetly stored in pockets hidden at
part of the means of escape strategy. exiting as a strategy has specific advantages the sides.
in that it enables the controlled evacuation of
Phased evacuation, horizontal exists, and people from one component/part of a Another new concept was the use of
the use of monumental exit stairs building as part of an overall phased monumental exit staircases within the high
Due to MBS’s large interconnecting evacuation plan, and limits disruption to population areas (Fig 4). Exit staircases up
footprint, horizontal exiting was used in ongoing businesses and operations in the to 4m wide in a scissor-stair arrangement
many parts, where people escape from a event of a false alarm (Fig 2). were provided for both MICE and the casino
location exposed to fire, heat and smoke, to so as to give sufficient capacity for the
another relatively safe place separated by The horizontal exits at the main entrances to expected populations – in the order of
distance and fire-rated construction. In most the MICE and casino also used another thousands of people per floor. This differs
cases, the horizontal exit line was designed US-originated product – horizontal sliding from the stipulations in the Singapore Fire
to coincide with the MFL separation required doors (Fig 3). Similar to horizontal fire Code 2007, which only permits up to 2m of
for insurance purposes to limit damage in a shutters, such doors are permitted under the the exit stair width to be counted as capacity,
fire incident. IBC to serve as part of the means of escape, regardless of its total width.
* An insurance industry term, meaning the worst loss likely to occur because of a single event. The Arup Journal 1/2012 69
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 69 24/02/2012 21:32

5. A corner of the MICE Grand Technical challenges included providing
Ballroom, showing temporary sufficient exit points, so that the failure of a
partitions in open position.
single exit would not impact significantly on
6. Retail atrium. the overall means of escape from the space.
7. Submerged egress tunnel at the As part of this, non-lockable doors were
South Crystal Pavilion.
provided for escape at temporary partition
walls within the MICE meeting and
ballrooms (Fig 5).
Grand Arcade and view corridors

These three zones comprise the Marina Bay
Sands Shoppes. Uninterrupted by smoke
5. curtains, each retail smoke zone is
demarcated by the curves and bends of the
impressive five-storey atrium design (Fig 6).
Technical challenges included determining

the most advantageous location for the
smoke vents (at the top curve of the roof),
so as to limit visual impact for visitors to
the fourth storey roof terraces and yet not
compromise the efficiency of the vents
during a fire. The smoke hazard management
strategy used CFD smoke modelling of the
building, with and without wind effects, for
both small and larger fires so as to assess the
buoyancy of smoke, as well as data obtained
from wind tunnel testing of the façade.
The Crystal Pavilions

For these two structures, located in the
Marina Bay waters, among the fire design
options considered at the concept stage were
the use of rescue boats, floating decks, and
submerged egress tunnels back into the
podium (Fig 7). As built, these floating
geometrical glass islands are accessible via
both a deck at water level from the outdoor
promenade and, deep within basement level
6. 2 of the Marina Bay Shoppes, via a
submerged tunnel (with an escape tunnel
running parallel to the main entrance).
The Sands Hotel

Up to 23 storeys of glass and steel form the
atrium that interconnects the three hotel
towers at ground level. The elegant steel
trusses are only partially protected with
intumescent paint, as part of a performance-
based fire safety approach which
demonstrated that there is negligible impact
of heat and smoke to the structure higher
up (Figs 8, 9).
The Sands SkyPark

Where the SkyPark spans between each
7. hotel tower and cantilevers off the end of
tower 3, the huge structural steel members
have no applied fire protection. Though this
would have been a requirement under a
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 70 24/02/2012 21:32

prescriptive design, with a performance-
based approach it was determined that any
structure outside the immediate zone around
a possible worst-credible fire within the
towers would be able to be unprotected and
yet still maintain its stability.
A performance-based approach was also

applied to the evacuation of the SkyPark
(Fig 10). With possible populations of up to
3900 persons on the 56th and 57th storeys,
the overall strategy is to evacuate people
from the SkyPark deck to floors below and
from the shadow of one tower to another.
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
8.
9.
Award
In October 2011 Arup was recognised at the inaugural
National Fire and Civil Emergency Preparedness
Council (NFEC) Fire Safety Design Excellence Awards
2011, for its “outstanding work” on Marina Bay Sands.
References
(1) SINGAPORE CIVIL DEFENCE FORCE. Code of
practice for fire precautions in buildings 2007. SCDF,
2007. www.scdf.gov.sg
(2) INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL.
International building code. ICC, 2000.
www.iccsafe.org
(3) NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION.
NFPA 13. Standard for the installation of sprinkler
systems. NFPA, 2007. www.nfpa.org
NFPA 101. Life safety code. NFPA, 2006.
www.nfpa.org
10.
NFPA 92A. Standard for smoke-control systems
utilizing barriers and pressure differences. NFPA, 2009.
www.nfpa.org
8. Fire loading analyses on hotel

atrium structure, showing ratios of
load to capacity.
9. Hotel atrium.
10. The public observation deck
on the SkyPark.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 71 24/02/2012 21:32

Acoustics
Author
Larry Tedford
Success indicators Acoustic design embodied the importance of Build like Singapore: Understanding how
Successful acoustic outcomes for most the project to Singapore, with acoustic Singapore has transformed itself in 40
projects are often difficult to define. quality taking a strategic “front-and-centre” years leads to respect for its business
If the design solution provides the intended position to help shape the design rather than environment and unique construction
experience for patrons, it is rarely noticed merely react to it. Design progress also had culture. Successful design should always
because it simply feels right. Further, there is to anticipate the potential impacts of anticipate the locale where it will be built.
nothing to see that proves that it works. procurement and construction practices Providing acoustic design guidance required
It just does. unique to Singapore. acceptance of the often counter-intuitive
building process in Singapore – different
MBS has multiple points of success. Project strategy from how a large-scale resort would be
Most are not obvious, but the challenges The primary goal was to ensure that patrons’ constructed elsewhere.
overcome manifest themselves as successful experience was world-class. Standardised
technical design, professional collaboration, objective metrics of acoustic quality can Right – right now: The density of patron
and the gestation of a significant cultural demonstrate that design targets are achieved, activities for a full amenity resort juxtaposes
shift. Awareness of the importance of but personal subjective response is the competing requirements for acoustic
acoustic comfort is a significant change in singular determinant. Simply put, acoustic experience. All design elements – be they
the quality-of-life improvements that support quality manages noise disturbance and architectural, structural, mechanical,
Singapore’s burgeoning stature as an enhances desired sounds to create an transportation, or building operations –
international destination for business and effortless and natural sensory experience. potentially conflict with acoustic comfort.
leisure pursuits. While most other Arup teams had been full Exponential design streams meant extracting
time on the project from July 2006, the the turbulent flow of information throughout,
The sheer size and scale of MBS has helped acoustics team commenced work that and this required forensic yet immediate
position Arup’s acoustic practice as one of December. To avoid an already advanced design input that would streamline design
the premier design consultancies in design strategy forcing any acoustic fait co-ordination rather than complicate it.
Singapore. A fledgling group in the accompli, the following strategies became
Singapore office in early 2006, the local the cornerstones of project progress. Design process
acoustics team was initially formed to build
Testing assumptions
upon two projects already in progress for the Protect the architecture: The architectural
Acoustic design is often more challenging
Australasian acoustics practice: Genexis themes embodied in Safdie Architects’
for sophisticated architecture that embodies
Theatre and Singapore School of the Arts. design expressed a belief about what
a highly visual aesthetic. Acoustic outcomes
experiencing the resort should be like.
can’t be seen – even poor acoustic quality
Responding to the demands of three large, As a significant environmental factor,
photographs well. Singapore’s increasing
sophisticated, and technically challenging acoustic design needed to respect that belief,
population, combined with accelerated
projects was beyond the logistics of what and be integral to realising the functionality
economic growth, has led to greater
was initially a four-person local team, so the embedded in the form. In particular, the
tolerance of acoustic pollution, so there was
support of acoustics colleagues in Australia, speed of project delivery meant a duality of
little precedent locally to counter ingrained
the UK, and the US became a distinct acoustic design co-ordination between
assumptions about acoustic quality and how
advantage. In addition to working with the architectural developments with the Safdie
it could be achieved. Fortunately, both LVS
local Singapore and Hong Kong team in Boston, and procurement, detailing,
and Safdie Architects had a distinctly more
multidisciplinary teams, the international and implementation methods by the Aedas
contemporary perspective on acoustics and
acoustics team worked non-stop for the team in Singapore.
what it meant to this resort’s successful
first six months – truly 24/7 – so that
realisation. To be world-class in every
co-ordination and design guidance could Think like Las Vegas: LVS’s business
possible way, acoustic design had to support
happen simultaneously in the US with model is extraordinarily successful because
and even safeguard the greater aspirations of
client Las Vegas Sands (LVS) and Safdie it combines understanding what appeals to
the architecture.
Architects, and in Singapore with Aedas the patrons with surgical efficiency in
and the local MBS client body. getting monumental venues built quickly.
Arup’s role was to embed acoustic design
Aligning design delivery by understanding
considerations as a highly visible and
the client’s drivers for success as the world’s
integral element in the process of design and
leading destination resort developer led to a
co-ordination. Often, strategic planning is
constant focus on acoustic recommendations
the most effective method of noise control
tested by first-cost practicality creating
for a multi-dimensional project.
durable value.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 72 24/02/2012 21:32

1.
Change management Technical solutions To maximise acoustic balance of transmitted

Change management is always difficult on sound between rooms and from corridors,
Sands Hotel and Sands SkyPark
large fast-track projects. Here, the bar was the in-room ventilation units were reviewed
The three hotel towers would be the most
raised even higher because multiple and specified to provide neutral, but not
visibly striking symbols of the resort’s
buildings and associated design streams ran silent, air-conditioning for sound masking.
grandeur, so acoustic quality for guests
in parallel. The first issue was just to be
needed to represent the luxury of – and
aware of what was changing. The second Because air-conditioning is rarely turned off
sanctuary within – a memorable visit.
was to be able to react and respond to what in Singapore, this reliable source of
The interstitial nature of the hotel’s design,
design changes meant to acoustic quality. “covering” sound could account for
however, meant balancing structural
separating wall constructions of an efficient
complexity, mechanical services, sleek and
To allow all project design stream leaders to overall thickness to maximise room size and
slender façades, and an extremely active
understand the acoustic impacts of rapid and meet targets for floor plan density.
upper level – the SkyPark. Furthermore, the
evolving change, the acoustics team
spa and luxury suites were placed directly
developed clear, objective, and high-level In any tall building, the view from the top
below massive rooftop equipment plant.
acoustic design quality criteria, often using necessitates premium spaces being at the
language deliberately reflective of the crown. However, supporting the SkyPark
As well as addressing acoustic control
client’s project goals. In some cases, acoustic amenities led to conflicts in locating
between guestrooms, a co-ordinated strategy
quality criteria were relaxed to respect the premium hotel guest suites and the luxury
of façade, structure, and cladding details was
unique nature of the operations of some of spa directly below major rooftop plantrooms.
developed to minimise acoustic leakage at
the venues. the slender architectural edges where
This was another example of careful and
guestrooms divide the span of the exterior
In MICE, for example, rapid room co-ordinated planning: the use of offsets,
envelope. Glazing configurations were
reconfiguration was fundamental to the intermediate zones for duct and sprinkler
selected to minimise traffic noise impacts
business model and to accommodate this, runouts, and advantageous use of structural
on the south façade overlooking the East
slightly lower acoustic targets were agreed. elements as mass separations ensured that
Coast Parkway, and details were
But in some cases, acoustic targets were set patrons could enjoy both panoramic views
co-developed with Arup’s façades team
higher. Hotel guestroom acoustic insulation, and solitude with no awareness of the major
to account for construction sequence,
for example, aimed to be better than any services directly above them.
attachment to the structure, and to block
existing Singapore hotels, and at parity with
acoustically weak pathways at mullion and
Sands properties elsewhere.
floor slab interstices.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 73 24/02/2012 21:32

Theatres A common issue with lyric theatres is that
As already described on pp44-45, the they tend to be too “dead” acoustically;
theatres are embedded centrally in the north while this aids speech intelligibility and
podium and retail concourse. Both are doesn’t compete with the audio systems,
intended to be truly multi-purpose, and it can also lack a sense of spatiality and
because of this need to credibly host almost excitement. A collaborative process that
any form of contemporary performance, the optimised architecture, sound system design,
theatrical, technical, and logistical demands and the right blend of acoustic energy
were challenging. redirection led to a sonic marriage for the
MBS theatres that allows amplification to
With the exception of the upper boundaries sound natural and transparent.
Walls: fabric finish with three layers 13mm
below the sculpted roofline, the bottom, plasterboard on studs behind (c165m2).
lower sides, and outer perimeters of both Walls: fabric finish with diffusion behind; diffusion Hotel structural vibration
theatres are close to various noise and mounted on three layers 13mm plasterboard on
studs (c215m2).
The same vibration analysis that informed
vibration sources. Early in the design, the Walls: two layers 13mm plasterboard on studs; wall
the theatre structural design was also used to
relationship of structure and geotechnics finish fabric with c160m2 diffusion and c160m2 assess impacts on the hotel. Structure-borne
acoustically absorptive infill behind.
accommodation of site rail tunnels mere vibration can transmit very efficiently over
metres away from the theatre envelopes Rear walls, central ceiling section (c240m2), rear ceiling
section behind followspot booth, followspot wall, and what may seem long and circuitous paths,
indicated that potential vibration upper 94m2 of proscenium wall: two layers 13mm
plasterboard on studs; finish acoustically absorptive
and re-radiate as low-frequency noise.
transmission had to be fully understood. fibreglass behind acoustically transparent material.
Front ceiling section (c550m2), upper side walls, and Full-scale guestroom mockups were built
Iterative review of structural interconnection lower section of audience side proscenium wall: two
layers 13mm plasterboard on studs.
midway through the project design to assess
and structure-borne vibration occurred Plywood construction finished with acoustically
fixtures, furnishings, façades, and
regularly for six months, and analytical absorptive fibreglass behind acoustically constructability. Because these were spatially
transparent material.
modelling of vibration transmission accurate representations of the eventual
indicated that modified locations of lateral Glass as per glazing specification.
acoustic environment, the team recorded
supports would reduce the need for a background noise in the mockup rooms with
structurally floating outer theatre shell. 2.
air-conditioning operating, and used an
Detailed study alongside structural design acoustic overlay of predicted low-frequency
co-ordination led to confidence that the rumble to demonstrate the potential impacts
design for airborne noise control of the outer of site rail transit on sleeping guests.
architectural theatre envelope would also This led to a recommendation to deal with
control re-radiated noise from rail tunnel rail vibration at source, rather than trying to
vibration. Another design strategy included design the hotel structure to minimise
detailing a special floating lower division vibration transmission.
below the theatres’ structural floor to account
for the car park and large exhaust fans Sands Expo and Convention Center
directly under both theatres. From the outset, the operational importance
of MICE to the resort was well understood.
The interior acoustic quality was developed LVS was highly successful at hosting,
in tandem with the architectural concept for reconfiguring, and seamlessly expanding or
accommodating the vast range of artistic contracting the range of convention and
performances slated in both theatres. exhibition gatherings at a mind-boggling
Elemental to the design, in addition to being turnover rate. To do all this necessitates the
quiet, was the need for the full theatrical and moving walls or operable partitions to be
sound technical systems required. The room deployed quickly and flexibly, while
acoustic design strategy was to balance enabling simultaneous adjacent use of
moderate reverberance with strong early potentially competing activities.
reflection support. This environment also
needed to be fully complementary to the MICE has kilometres of operable partitions.
full-range audio reinforcement system As well as the cost of these systems, the
designed by SAVI Inc. design had to allow for various special
configurations, minimising the storage
The primary room acoustic control strategy footprint, speed of setup, long-term
is invisible. Hidden behind an acoustically durability – all while meeting and
transparent architectural fabric facing are maintaining an appropriate level of
100
100
wall treatment zones that transition from acoustic separation.

25
75
50
sound reflective into sound scattering

(acoustic diffusion) and then to sound 100 100 150 100 50 50 100 50 To activate a cost-effective design strategy,
absorbing at the rear of the audience seating. All dimensions in mm the Arup team worked with LVS to capture a
3. knowledge base of operable partition use
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 74 24/02/2012 21:32

To understand the intricacies of how sound
would reflect and move through the gallery
“fingers”, the team used 3-D sound ray
propagation models to show the time and
distribution sequence of acoustic energy.
This provided a means to visualise the
complexities of acoustic anomalies, and to
explore architectural finish options.
Implementation and constructability

To realise practical acoustic design
outcomes, the devil is truly in the details.
4. 5. Much of what is needed for acoustic quality
is embedded in seemingly benign details
that can undermine acoustic performance.
MBS, and the sheer size and speed of the
design development to enable it,
demonstrated that getting the right
information at the right level of detail was
a case of carefully “picking your battles”.
Knowing that thousands of details generated
on the project would or could not be seen,
the team’s strategy was simply to focus on
the key details that would be breakpoints
for performance.
Fortunately, the way to attract attention to

critical details was potential cost impact.
Detailing for acoustic performance could
either cost or save large sums since the
typical multiplier – especially considering
the number of hotel guestrooms and MICE
operable partitions – would be in the
thousands. This was an example of cost
6.
scrutiny giving acoustic design a position
of significant leverage. And once the
attention was given, it was a useful magnet
1. (Previous page) The completed from its existing properties. On-site acoustic for convincing the project team where
Grand Theater. tests, plus discussions and review from detailing was critical.
2. Zones in the theatres for acoustic senior operations staff, allowed the team to
reflection/diffusion/absorption. accurately inform optimal design strategies. Outcome
3. Custom acoustic diffusor. Design considerations included product On any large project, quality outcomes for
4. Combination of acoustic diffusion performance, procurement, and most acoustics have a relatively low level of sheer
+ absorption into panels. importantly, installation and operations luck as the determining factor. The MBS
5. Acoustic diffusor + absorber impacts. This review enabled a less stringent client and project team recognised early on
panels being installed prior to specification standard for operable partition
covering with fabric-faced
that embedding acoustic design at every
architectural finish. acoustic ratings, and yet maintain the stage would favour a successful result.
6. Interior of Sands Theater showing
usability and acoustic performance needed to Singapore now has a signature destination
all acoustic wall finish configurations suit the business and operations model. resort that is a reference for quality,
in place prior to installation of final including sonic experience, while once again
fabric facing. ArtScience Museum: redefining its stature as a country small in
visualisation modelling geographical area, but with grand ambition.
ASM is an architectural and structural
marvel, even in the context of the resort’s
other aesthetic megaliths. There is nothing
conventional about the building’s expressive
architectural form, and it would be difficult
to predict sound propagation within the
complex curvature of the interiors in a
traditional way.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 75 24/02/2012 21:32

a) b)
percentage
MPa MPa strain
42.60 -23.85 0
45.85 -22.83 0.2
49.10 -21.81 0.4
52.35 -20.79 0.6
55.60 -19.77 0.8
58.85 -18.57 1.0
62.10 -17.73 1.2
65.35 -16.71 1.4
68.61 -15.69 1.6
71.86 -14.67 1.8
75.11 -13.65 2.0
78.36 -12.63
81.61 -11.61
84.86 -10.59
1. 2.
1. Stresses calculated in fabricated

steel (a) and steel-encased concrete
columns (b) subjected to close
proximity blast loading.
2. Time lapse strains experienced
by concrete-encased steel columns,
at intervals of 5 milliseconds,
subjected to close proximity
blast loading.
3. Blast pressure on the long-span
roof generated from an externally kPa
detonated improvised explosive
device. 14.9
14.3
13.0
10.5
9.2
7.9
6.7
5.4
3. 4.8
Blast-resilient design particular interest are facilities that are likely and Arup recommended measures which
to attract mass gatherings, as these could be were then introduced into the base design
Author considered a target to some terrorist groups. to “harden” the structure and façade to
Peter Hoad So when the MBS integrated resort project overcome the vulnerabilities identified and
was first mooted, MHA advised of its thus afford better protection to the occupants
requirement that the facility be designed of the building.
with special consideration for the protection
of its inhabitants in the case of a terrorist Blast analysis to assess (and upgrade) blast
Marina Bay Sands has effectively changed event in or nearby. resilience of the façade and structure
the shape of Singapore. Its iconic form and
included use of:
the amenities provided, adjacent to the Arup was engaged by the Marina Bay Sands
central business district, are attracting a owning/operating company, through the • limited issue military-derived software
significant range of visitors, including many local project architect, Aedas, to provide a
local residents, visitors, and dignitaries from • Arup-developed single degree of freedom
threat and vulnerability risk assessment.
within and outside the country. It is not just analysis software
This considered several terrorist threats
a casino, or hotel, or entertainment centre. that had been defined by the MHA. • sophisticated 3-D, non-linear analysis
It is all these and far more. With its diverse On completion of the assessment, Arup software.
entertaining, learning and accommodation undertook a detailed study of the designed
facilities in a very open and public site, form of the resort to ascertain its resilience Output from the Arup resilience, security
the integrated resort is drawing people from blast loading, based on potential scenarios and risk team was combined with input
all walks of life for a multitude of reasons. included in its threat and vulnerability risk from the numerous other Arup designers
assessment and agreed with the MHA. from the structural engineering and façade
Singapore’s Ministry of Home Affairs engineering teams to deliver a fully
(MHA) takes an active interest in the safety As a result of this study, particular integrated blast-resilient design facility,
and security of the country’s people, and of vulnerabilities were identified in the in accordance with the requirements of
proposed building structure and façade, the MHA.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 76 24/02/2012 21:32

Delivering
success
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 77 24/02/2012 21:32

Constant monitoring of all the wall The scale of the integrated resort meant that,
deflections was a statutory requirement; at the peak of construction site activities,
if they were not within agreed limits, Arup had more than 80 full-time resident
Site phase supervision the site supervision team had to order the site staff. These had to be split into three
work within that area to be stopped. eight-hour daily shifts as the construction
Author work was based on a 24/7 schedule.
Wah-Kam Chia In practice, the monitoring confirmed that As the “Qualified Professionals” who were
the system was working well within the responsible for the design and construction
predicted values generally approved by the supervision to Singapore’s Building and
local authorities. Throughout the deep Construction Authority (BCA), Arup
excavation, Arup’s proposed construction therefore had to deploy not one QP for the
Introduction method proved to be successful. supervision in accordance with the BCA’s
In the decades before Singapore gained full minimum requirement, but three.
independence in 1965, the Marina Bay Project and construction management
Sands site was a landing area for shipping, and supervision Risk and safety
both large and small. It was subsequently This was an exceptionally large project, even Inevitably such an enormous project was not
reclaimed using sand fill, and the soil for Singapore. The client, Marina Bay Sands completed entirely without site accidents.
investigation report showed this to lie above Pte Ltd, itself took the role both of project Though regrettably there were two fatalities
a very thick layer of soft peaty clay. management and construction management and some serious injuries, these were mainly
(PMCM), engaging about 400 multinational due to individual negligence and not to any
The close surroundings offered other full-time site project management and design inadequacies. Arup was fortunate in
challenges – to the east across Marina construction engineering staff to manage that none of the firm’s staff was involved in
Channel was the busy East Coast Park, the numerous contractors. any mishaps, and greatly appreciated the
immediately adjacent to the site’s northern involvement of a senior safety specialist
extremity was Benjamin Sheares Bridge, The presence of so many project and from the Melbourne office, who monitored
and to the west lay the waters of Marina construction managers, as well as the throughout construction with constant
Bay – and in addition the project had to be contractors’ own staff, gave the Arup team a reminders that safety in every aspect was of
completed within 3.5 years from the date challenging re-alignment of the role of its the utmost importance.
the site was awarded to the client. resident site staff – Arup’s Singapore
practice had been used to the “normal” way The local team was also guided by the risk
Monitoring excavations and substructure of managing projects. The fact that the client and security leader of the Australasian
Arup’s innovative use of circular and peanut- had appointed its own managers meant that practice through the process of risk analysis
shaped diaphragm walls both to minimise Arup site staff had to deal with them rather during construction, covering every aspect of
lateral movement during excavation and than liaise directly with the contractors, and risk. This helped the team to keep abreast of
provide obstruction-free excavation spaces it therefore took a while before the Arup any potential risks as well as reminding each
has already been described (pp12-15). team became accustomed to the system. member during day-to-day supervision.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 78 24/02/2012 21:32

Leveraging global skills 2014
Singapore Sports
Author Hub Capitol site
Peter Bowtell This 55 000-seat national
stadium is intended to be a
model for future sustainable
stadium design.
Rarely does a project need the global reach client team. Decision-making was rapid and
of an organisation to be fully engaged. concepts were finalised using virtual
However, delivering Marina Bay Sands prototypes and physical models. Key to the
required Arup to draw deeply upon its global process was concurrency and the ability to
skills and bring expertise to bear from all feed back development between teams on a
over the globe. In terms of sheer scale the daily basis. Globally-connected file servers
conceptual undertaking was enormous, with meant that real-time information was
billions of dollars of construction to be available to all as and when required.
delivered in less than two years. Manpower
was a key strategic resource and each region Six months saw the conclusion of all 2011
did its part in shouldering the load. schematic design and the team relocated MARINA
to Singapore where the site clearing had BAY SANDS
While Arup’s Singapore practice had already commenced. Advanced BIM
delivered significant infrastructure projects, modelling was leveraged for the design,
Singapore as a country to work in was new with massive models defining the built
to nearly all the Arup staff involved from works in an ever-changing environment.
other regions, and the design conceived by In Singapore the team swelled to over
Safdie Architects was complex. However, 80 design professionals, supported by about
pre-existing knowledge of the client Las the same number of on-site inspection staff.
Vegas Sands’ requirements from the East
Asia region’s experience on the Macau As designs approached completion,
casinos on the Cotai strip provided an specialist expertise was mobilised from
invaluable jump start. London, Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane,
Shenzhen, Manila, South Africa, the USA
Knowledge of client preference for structural and beyond. Advanced dynamics, façade,
systems enabled scheming to commence acoustics, fire engineering, traffic,
from day one, even before the architectural structural, civil, geotechnics, security risk 2008
concepts were laid out on butter papers. and resilience advice – all were much in Singapore
Arup’s Hong Kong team mobilised with demand across the project. Flyer
lighting speed, marshalling resources, This elegant and
lightweight structure
reinforcing the local Singapore practice, Arup had been involved in major Singapore pioneered major
and co-ordinating with the concept team in projects for 40 years, but Marina Bay Sands innovations in the
2001 design of giant
Boston. Senior leaders relocated at a was unprecedented, testing and challenging observation
Expo MRT wheels.
moment’s notice and in just a few weeks a the firm’s ability to deliver world-class
station
fully capable design team was operating with engineering on a massive scale.
the best resources from Singapore, East Asia, To judge from the success so far The station’s
spaceship-like
Australia, and the USA. of the end-product, it proved titanium roof
creates a
equal to the challenge. column-free
Design activities split across the globe. platform to
accommodate
In Boston, the local office combined with the Bring on the next one. large numbers of
passengers.
New York team to scheme the above-ground
elements, working side-by-side with the 1999
Safdie office. In Singapore, Singapore
conceptualisation of the in-ground works Expo
moved ahead with breakneck speed, to This was voted as
one of Asia’s best
enable early commencement of the purpose-built event
venues for its
excavations. Technology enabled rapid 1992 economically
communication between global sites, with UOB Plaza efficient design.
See and Share virtual collaboration meetings One of Singapore’s

happening frequently throughout the days 1976 tallest buildings (280m),
this was constructed
and weeks. Client briefings led by Safdie OCBC Centre through soft marine
clay, and also
Architects were held monthly, with key team Innovative design for represented an
members meeting in Boston to present to the Singapore’s first modern evolution in
building façades.
skyscraper reduced
construction time by 35%.
3/2011
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 79 24/02/2012 21:32

Marina Bay Sands Integrated Resort is already an icon for
Singapore – an industry-revolutionising project that will
change the face of construction for the next decade.
Completing the Moshe Safdie himself, the expertise of the

Advanced Technology Group and its global
programme project track record, the firm’s BIM
capabilities, the list of projects with deep
Authors basement and geotechnical challenges, the
Va-Chan Cheong Joe Lam fast-track, large-scale project experience for
several Venetian developments in Macau,
and the client’s previous trust in Arup, and
you start to omit the “im” in “impossible”.
“Impossible is nothing”
To complete a project with total ground floor Expediting construction
area of 540 000m2 – equivalent to seven of To meet the tight programme, the team had
London’s 46-storey Heron Tower, or three to consider how to accelerate construction
of Hong Kong’s 88-storey International during the schematic and design stages.
Finance Centre (2IFC) – in 48 months Precast concrete construction and
seemed unachievable to everyone in prefabricated steelwork were used wherever
Singapore. This is understandable given that appropriate to increase off-site and minimise
in the history of Singapore no project on this on-site construction work. For the
scale had ever been built, not to mention the geotechnical design, the innovative
very tight programme. introduction of circular cofferdams allowed
no use of shoring while excavation
Arup has often taken on major engineering advanced. For the ArtScience Museum, the
and design challenges but, combining the perfectionist Moshe Safdie required much important to allow smooth transition from
difficulties of a five-level deep basement tweaking of the geometry before the design one contractor to another, and Arup worked
next to seawater; three long-span steel roofs met his standards. closely with the client’s project management
over the casino, theatres, and Sands Expo team to execute this package arrangement
and Convention Center; the longest building This would have been excessively time- effectively. Although there were more issues
cantilever in the world supporting the consuming with 2-D drawings co-ordination, to be handled, they were not on the critical
northern end of the Sands SkyPark; and the but Arup’s strong BIM capabilities enabled path and the result was completion of the
geometrically challenging lotus-like the architect’s Rhino model to link with the programme in an amazing 48 months.
ArtScience Museum, “unachievable” seemed team’s own 3-D structural model, thus
not to be an overstatement and “impossible” automating the process. This allowed many Credit for completing the programme so
maybe a more appropriate word. options to be studied quickly and at least quickly initially seems due to the Arup office
three times the effort saved during detail running the project, but it would have been
Instead, the whole Arup project team seemed design compared with transferring the impossible without matching enthusiasm
to take the Adidas slogan on board from day architect’s geometry in 2-D only to the and expertise from colleagues elsewhere.
one: “Impossible is nothing”. structural model or drawings. In addition, the
use of BIM helped speed the steelwork shop The success of this project lay not only in
But from behind the scenes one could see drawings review and cut down requests for Arup’s technical capabilities per se, but in
what others could not. This was why Arup information by over 80%. how its offices could work together as a team
pursued this challenge. Combining the good to deliver the project to the highest quality
relationship that the US offices had with Maximizing the battlefield possible. Marina Bay Sands, together with
On site, the project was divided into 140+ other high-profile projects in Singapore, has
packages, excluding fit-out works. Interface set new standards for the building industry
co-ordination between packages was very in East Asia.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 80 24/02/2012 21:32

Conclusion Almost every aspect of MBS was technically There were doubts that this project could be
challenging, and stretched the limits of completed, due to site constraints and
Authors engineering. In responding, the team adopted technical and economic difficulties.
Va-Chan Cheong Otto Lai new and innovative technologies that pushed However, the design team approached all
the boundaries of current software and this in ways that opened up new resources
systems, pulling together as a design team and enhanced experience and knowledge
of global skills from four continents to across Singapore’s building industries.
Challenges communicate effectively and deliver
Using its knowledge and determination outcomes to meet the client’s needs and It exemplified what can be achieved in
to strive for excellence, Arup strove to turn the design concept into reality. situations that need engineering judgement
provide the best solutions for the client’s beyond what is distinctly covered by code.
requirements. This Arup Journal describes Benefits The MBS project also benefited the
how the firm drew on its global expertise The integrated resort elevates Singapore’s Singapore BCA (Building and Construction
for the many aims and aspects of the project, tourism and business opportunities, its Authority) engineer and accredited checker
in particular the difficult tasks such as the facilities enabling it to be a leading Asian of the project, broadening the mindset on
120m diameter cofferdams for substructure MICE hub. In addition MBS provides how to overcome such challenges, and
works, the 66.5m long cantilever steel employment opportunities for many. raising the bar of what can be accomplished
structure, the unique geometry of the The local community benefits from the with international resources.
ArtScience Museum, the glazing for the district cooling plant by avoiding the need
Crystal Pavilions, and the long-span roof for chiller plants and cooling towers on
trusses for the podium structures. buildings. This in turn optimises the use of
water and other natural resources for
generating energy.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 81 24/02/2012 21:32

Authors André Lovatt is a Principal and leads the Singapore Project credits
Dan Birch is a senior engineer in the Bristol, UK, office. He jointly led the fire safety design team for Clients: Las Vegas Sands Inc/Marina Bay Sands Pte Ltd
office. He led the design team for the structural Marina Bay Sands. Architect: Safdie Architects Singapore architect:
steelwork of the ArtScience Museum. Juan Maier is an Associate in the Singapore office. Aedas Pte Ltd Geotechnical, civil, structural, façade,
Peter Bowtell is a Principal in the Melbourne office, He led the design team for the structural steel roof of fire, BIM, acoustics, audiovisual, blast and security
and the Buildings Practice leader in Australasia. MICE, the casino and the theatres. consultant: Arup Building services engineers:
He was the Director responsible for coordinating Parsons Brinckerhoff Pte Ltd/Vanderweil Engineers
Brian Mak is an assistant engineer in the Hong Kong Quantity surveyor: EC Harris/Rider Levett Bucknall
Arup’s international effort on Marina Bay Sands. office. He was a member of the design team for the Landscape architect: Peter Walker & Partners/Peridian
Daniel Brodkin is a Principal in the New York office SkyPark, ArtScience Museum and Crystal Pavilions. Asia Pte Ltd Hotel contractor: Lian Beng Construction
and the Buildings Practice leader in New York. Patrick McCafferty is an Associate in the Boston office. Pte Ltd/SsangYong Engineering & Construction Ltd
He led the concept design phase as the Americas He was the Americas Region Project Manager for SkyPark contractor: Yongnam & JFE Engineering
Region Project Director. Marina Bay Sands and helped lead the structural Corporation JV ArtScience Museum contractor:
Va-Chan Cheong is a Director in the Hong Kong office. design team. Penta Ocean MICE/retail steelwork contractor:
He was Project Director for Marina Bay Sands. Brendon McNiven is a Principal in the Melbourne Alfasi Constructions Singapore Pte Ltd Casino and
Wah-Kam Chia is a Principal in the Singapore office. office. He was the Professional Engineer responsible for theatre steelworks contractor: Singapore Jinggong Steel
He was Project Director and QP Supervision for the site statutory design submission for the MICE/casino/ Structures Pte Ltd Foundations contractors: Soletanche
supervision contract for Marina Bay Sands. theatre roof steel structures, hotel atrium steel structures Bachy Singapore Pte Ltd/Sambo Geo-Tosfoc Co Ltd/
and SkyPark structures. L&M Foundation Pte Ltd South/North Podium
Russell Cole is a Principal in the Singapore office, and excavation and reinforced concrete contractors:
the current Building Group leader. He led the façade Jack Pappin is an Arup Fellow in the Hong Kong KTC Civil Engineering & Construction Pte Ltd/Yau Lee
consultancy team for Marina Bay Sands. office. He oversaw and led most of the geotechnical Construction Pte Ltd/Sembawang Engineers and
Don Ho is an assistant engineer in the Hong Kong design for Marina Bay Sands. Constructors Pte Ltd ArtScience Museum cladding
office. He was a member of the design team for MICE Moshe Safdie is an architect, urban designer, educator, contractor: DK Composites Sdn Bhd Retail canopies
and the Crystal Pavilions. theorist, author, and founder of Safdie Architects, contractor: YKK Architectural Products Inc
Peter Hoad is a Principal in the Sydney office and leads designer of the Marina Bay Sands integrated resort. Tenant fitout in South Crystal Pavilion: Pure Projects
the Resilience, Security and Risk Consulting Group in Mac Tan is a senior façade consultant in the Singapore Singapore Pte Ltd Theatre planning and engineering
Australasia. He led the resilience, security and risk team office. He was the façade package leader in charge of design consultant (for both theatres): Robert Campbell,
for Marina Bay Sands. all façade systems covering the hotel towers and atrium, Associate Principal, Fisher Dachs Associates
SkyPark, ArtScience Museum, and Crystal Pavilions. Performance sound, video, and production
Philip Iskandar is a geotechnical engineer in the communications design consultant (for both theatres):
Singapore office. He was a member of the geotechnical Larry Tedford is an Associate Principal in the San Michael Cusick, President, Specialized Audio-Visual Inc
team for Marina Bay Sands. Francisco office. He led the acoustics design team for Signage subcontractor: Crimsign Graphics Pte Ltd.
Wing-Kai Leong is a senior engineer in the Hong Kong Marina Bay Sands.
office. He was a member of the geotechnical team for Alex Wong is a façade designer in the Singapore
Marina Bay Sands, and led the team in the later stages office. He was the façade package leader in charge Project awards
of the project. of all façade systems covering the MICE, casino, Association of Consulting Engineers Singapore
Otto Lai was an Associate in the Hong Kong office. and theatres. ACES Engineering Excellence Award 2011:
He led the design team for the podium structures. Ruth Wong is an Associate in the Singapore office. Civil & Structural Engineering Consultant
Joe Lam is an Associate in the Hong Kong office. She jointly led the fire safety design team for Marina Hotel and SkyPark
He was a leader of the design team for the ArtScience Bay Sands. Bentley 2010 Be Inspired Award Winner
Museum, Crystal Pavilions and theatre structures. Wijaya Wong is a Senior Associate in the Singapore Institution of Structural Engineers
Jenny Lie is the senior marketing consultant in the office. He led the design team for the hotel and Singapore Structural Awards 2010 Award for Structures
Singapore office. SkyPark. He was the Professional Engineer responsible Hotel and SkyPark
for statutory design submission for the hotel.
Franky Lo is a senior engineer in the Hong Kong office. Singapore Structural Steel Society
He was a leader of the design team for the ArtScience Xiaofeng Wu is an engineer in the Singapore office. Structural Steel Design Award 2010 Award for
Museum, Crystal Pavilions and theatres. He was a member of the design team for the hotel Commercial Structures
atrium, MICE, events plaza, promenade, ArtScience Podium roof and canopy structures
Rudi Lioe is a senior engineer in the Singapore office. Museum and Crystal Pavilions.
He was a member of the design team for the hotel National Fire and Civil Emergency Preparedness
towers. Council Fire Safety Design Excellence Awards 2011
Image credits Hotel and SkyPark
Arup with the following exceptions:
Front cover, pp2-3(1) 16(1) 21(2-3) 24(1) 25(3-4)
30(19) 31 34(6) 36(9) 41 43(3) 48(1-2) 53(14) 54(1)
55(2) 60(1) 68(1) 70(6) 71(10) 83 Timothy Hursley;
4-5(1) 59(15) 77 78 Darren Soh; 6(1) 12(2) 13(4-5)
14(10) 15(12, 15) 19(6-8, 10) 22(4) 25(5) 26(6-7) 32(1)
37(1-2) 39(3, 5) 41(map) 42(1) 43(2) 45(3) 46(2) 47(3)
58(11) 61(2-3) 62(5) Nigel Whale; 7(2) 8-9(1-4) 11(6)
12(1) 46(1) 49(3) 53(14) Safdie Architects;
11(1, 3-5) 49(6) Patrick McCafferty; 13(6) Lian Beng
Construction Pte Ltd; 20(1) 22(5) 44(1) 58(10) 63
65(1-2) 70(5) 71(9) 75(6) Paul McMullin; 28(15)
28-29(15-17) JFE-Yongman JV; 29(18) Jenny Lie;
38(1) 39(4) 40(7) 53(15-16) 73(1) 80-81 Visual Media,
Marina Bay Sands; 51(12) 66(3-6) 67(9) Mac Tan;
61(4) 62(6) 67(7-8) 69(3-4) 70(7) Franklin Kwan;
79 Clarice Fong.
58086_Arup_Txt.indd 82 24/02/2012 21:32

4 Singapore’s vision for Marina Bay
6 Introduction to Marina Bay Sands
8 Designing Marina Bay Sands
10 Collaboration with Safdie Architects
12 Geotechnics and foundation design
16 The hotel towers
20 Hotel atrium walls
24 The Sands SkyPark
The podium
The following past and present staff members Sarah Huskie, Philip Iskandar, Mellissa Ismail, Priya Palpanathan, Jack Pan, Kathy Pang,
32 The podium roofs IURP$UXSRI¿FHVZRUOGZLGHDUHDPRQJWKRVH Sha Mohamed Ismail, Anthony Ivey, Frank Jeczmionka, Jack Pappin, Stuart Pearce, Alan Philp,
ZKRPDGHVLJQL¿FDQWFRQWULEXWLRQVWRWKHGHVLJQ Steven Jenkins, William Jimenez, Hong Geng Jin, Maggie Puvannan, Chris Pynn, Jie Qian,
37 Podium underslab drainage system of Marina Bay Sands. Matt Johann, Carl Jones, Steven Jones, Virgilio Quinones, Jim Quiter, Nizar Abdul Rahim,
Edmond San Jose, Chak-Sang Kan, Yiu-Fai Kan, Mohan Raman, Rey Redondo, Adrian De Los Reyes,
38 Sands Expo and Convention Center Man Kang, Subash Kathiresan, Teng Chong Khoo, Archie Ricablanca, Darlene Rini, Peter Romeos,
Joy Aclao, Nur Liyana Ahmad, Ian Ainsworth, Amanda Kimball, Ben Kirkwood, Henrik Kjaer, Ian Del Rosario, Alex Rosenthal, Ken Roxas,
41 Retail areas Graham Aldwinckle, Jarrod Alston, Evan Amatya, Sing Yen Ko, Duraibabu Damodaran Kothanda, Matthew Ryan, Emily Ryzak, Richard Salter,
Joseph Amores, Richard Andrews, Christine Ang, Jeyatharan Kumarasamy, Viann Kung, Kin-Kei Kwan, Katherina Santoso, Majid Haji Sapar, Haico Schepers,
42 The casino Ling Ling Ang, Siow Ting Ang, Christopher Anoso, Chris Kwok, Henry Kwok, Nelson Kwong, Andrew Lai, David Scott, Lin Ming See, Richie See, Janice Sendico,
Easy Arisarwindha, Mark Arkinstall, Feng Bai, David Lai, Kristin Lai, Otto Lai, Philip Lai, Bee Lian Seo, Kartini Shabani, Henry Shiu,
44 Theatre structures Jaydy Baldovino, Warren Balitcha, Venugopal Barkur, Raymond Lai, Alvin Lam, Clement Lam, Ernest Lam, Margaret Sie, Michael Sien, Chris Simm, Nick Simpson,
Rachel Baylson, Dan Birch, Hay Sun Blunt, Joe Lam, Derek Lau, Eric Lau, James Lau, Jeffrey Lau, Kenneth Sin, Alexandra Sinickas, Jimmy Sitt,
46 The event plaza Greg Borkowski, Sarah Boulkroune, Nick Boulter, Tony Lau, Wai-Lun Lau, Henry Law, Michelle Lazaro, Nathan Smith, Andrew Snalune, Penelope Somers,
Peter Bowtell, Ashley Bracken, Claire Bristow, Bill Lee, Budi Lee, Cheryl Lee, Chris Lee, Noel Sotto, Charles Spiteri, Jimmy Su, Doreen Sum,
48 The ArtScience Museum Daniel Brodkin, Jessica Cao, Neil Carstairs, Chung Hei Lee, Davis Lee, Francis Lee, Gordon Lee, Joyce Sum, Daojun Sun, Malar Suppiah,
Matt Carter, Kartigayen Poutelaye Cavound, Hiang Meng Lee, John Lee, Kin Shang Lee, Muljadi Suwita, Jamie Talbot, Hon-Wing Tam,
54 The Crystal Pavilions Chee Wah Chan, Chris Chan, George Chan, Nicholas Lee, Patrick Lee, Peter Lee, Sebastian Lee, Jonas Tam, Winfred Tam, Kok Yong Tan, Mac Tan,
Kam-Lam Chan, Ken Chan, Marco Chan, Serena Lee, Yi Jin Lee, Kevin Legenza, Suan Wee Tan, Vicky Tan, Rajesh Tandel, Johnson Tang,
60 Bayfront Avenue and Michael Chan, Tat-Ngong Chan, Wayne Chan, John Legge-Wilkinson, Steven Lenert, Tino Leong, Joyce Tang, Lim Mei Tang, Willis Tang, Brendan Taylor,
Yun-Ngok Chan, Renuga Chandra, Angela Chen, Wing-Kai Leong, Erin Leung, Koon-Yu Leung, Larry Tedford, Sean Teo, Ming Jong Tey,
Downtown Line 1 Carrie Chen, Chi-Lik Chen, Melissa Chen, Sam Leung, Stephen Leung, Stuart Leung, Nithi Thaweeskulchai, Andra Thedy, Kia Ling Tho,
Harold Cheng, Cecilia Cheong, Joy Cheong, Vivian Leung, Ben-Qing Li, Chi-Shing Li, Lei Li, Helen Tolentino, Michael Tom, Roberto Tonon,
Specialist skills Patrick Cheong, Va-Chan Cheong, Kenny Cheung, Shawn Li, Zhuo Li, Alex Lie, Jenny Lie, Keithson Liew, Roland Trim, David Tse, Jeff Tubbs, Mart Umali,
Henry Chia, Wah-Kam Chia, Reve Chin,
64 The façade systems Clyfford Ching, Park Chiu, Derek Chong,
Kim Hoe Liew, Christina Lim, Deyuan Lim, Richard Vanderkley, Karthik Venkatesan, David Vesey,
Keong Liam Lim, Patricia Lim, William Lim, Angie Lin, Henry Vong, Doug Wallace, Delu Wang, Qian Wang,
Sok Poi Chong, TS Choong, Henry Chow,
68 Fire engineering Hee Kung Chua, Wee Koon Chua, Rene Ciolo,
Jonathan Lindsay, Brett Linnane, Rudi Lioe, Amy Liu, Ekarin Wattanasanticharoen, Toby White, Garry Wilkie,
Charlie Liu, Chris Liu, Xi Liu, Franky Lo, Huw Williams, Ashley Willis, Berlina Winata, Ian Wise,
Richard Clement, Ranelle Cliff, Lyonel Cochon,
72 Acoustics Russell Cole, Yimin Cong, George Corpuz,
André Lovatt, Sin Ching Low, Danny Lui, Jack Lui, Alex Wong, Ambrose Wong, Dick Wong, Joseph Wong,
Kwok-Man Lui, Marcellus Lui, Kok Mun Lum, Kin-Ping Wong, Ling Chye Wong, Mary Wong,
Joseph Correnza, Anne Coutts, Robert Coutu,
76 Blast-resilient design Raymond Crane, Josh Cushner, Richard Custer,
Malcolm Lyon, Michael Macaraeg, Juan Maier, Ruth Wong, Suman Wong, Tim Wong, Wijaya Wong,
Alex Mak, Brian Mak, Dylan Mak, Louis Mak, Joanne Woo, Andrew Woodward, Colin Wu, Gin Wu,
Yang Dang, Bruce Danziger, John Davies, Louise Mak, Martino Mak, Dexter Manalo, Louis Wu, Tao Wu, Wendy Wu, Xiaofeng Wu,
Delivering success Lauren Davis, Ethelbert Derige, Antonio Diaz, Mukunthan Manickavasakar, Anand Mariyappan, Takim Xiang, David Xiong, Jingfeng Xu, Dai Yamashita,
Mike DiMascio, Ran Ding, Nick Docherty,
78 Site phase supervision Graham Dodd, Matt Dodge, Andrew Douglas,
Patrick McCafferty, Sean McGinn, Brendon McNiven, Frances Yang, Zhi-Qiang Yang, Wison Yang, Seven Yau,
Maciej Mikulewicz, Wing Sze Mo, Junaidah Mohd, Mehdi Yazdchi, Yanli Ye, Sam Yeung, Victor Yeung,
Pierre Dubois, Andy Ellett, David Farnsworth,
79 Leveraging global skills Garth Ferrier, Kai Fisher, Raymond Fok, Clarice Fong,
Martin Mok, Polly Mok, Lydia Mokhtar, Andrew Mole, Wing-Cheong Yeung, Yiu-Wing Yeung, Reman Yick,
Rodel Moran, Jon Morgan, Dean Morris, Kek-Kiong Yin, Colin Yip, Alan Yiu, Jack Yiu,
Raymond Fong, Vivien Foo, Kathy Franklin, Feng Gao,
80 Completing the programme Chris Gildersleeve, Gina Goh, Gladys Goh,
Samir Mustapha, Vaikun Nadarajah, Bob Nelson, Heng Yong, Jennifer Yong, Lip Bing Yong, Lily You,
Andrew Neviackas, Derek Ng, James Ng, Jason Ng, Yuki Yu, Zhen Yuan, Matthew Yuet, Carlos Zara,
Ian Grierson, Ken Guertin, Liana Hamzah,
81 Conclusion James Hargreaves, Rotana Hay, Donal Hayward,
Ka-Yuen Ng, Peck Nah Ng, Andrew Nicol, Hai-Tao Zhang, Jing Zhang, Liang-Liang Zhao,
Phamornsak Noochit, Alison Norrish, Ada Oh, Zhi Qin Zhou, Jing Zhuang.
Eric He, Zheng-Yu He, Grace Hendro, Kok Hui Heng,
82 Credits Argi Hipolito, Andy Ho, Chong Leong Ho, Don Ho,
Edwin Ong, Janice Ong, Natalie Ong, Khine Khine Oo,
Kamsinah Osman, Ayca Ozcanlar, Jin Pae,
Kent Ho, Stanley Ho, Wee Keong Ho, Peter Hoad,
Dennis Hoi, Martin Holt, Anna Hon, Andrew Hulse,
1.
58086_Arup_Cvr.indd 2 24/02/2012 23:06

The Marina Bay Sands Special Issue Issue 1 2012
The Arup Journal

The Arup Journal
About Arup
Arup is a global organisation of designers, Arup’s core values drive a strong culture Printed by Pureprint Group using
®
engineers, planners, and business of sharing and collaboration. their environmental print
technology. The printing inks are
consultants, founded in 1946 by Sir Ove made from vegetable based oils and
Arup (1895-1988). It has a constantly All this results in: no harmful industrial alcohol is used
evolving skills base, and works with local a dynamic working environment that in the printing process with 98% of
and international clients around the world. inspires creativity and innovation
any dry waste associated with this
SURGXFWLRQGLYHUWHGIURPODQG¿OO
Pureprint Group is a CarbonNeutral®
Arup is owned by Trusts established for the a commitment to the environment and the
FRPSDQ\DQGLVFHUWL¿FDWHGWR
EHQH¿WRILWVVWDIIDQGIRUFKDULWDEOH FRPPXQLWLHVZKHUHZHZRUNWKDWGH¿QHV Environmental Management
purposes, with no external shareholders. our approach to work, to clients and System ISO 14001 and registered
This ownership structure, together with the collaborators, and to our own members to EMAS, the Eco Management
core values set down by Sir Ove Arup, and Audit Scheme.
robust professional and personal networks
DUHIXQGDPHQWDOWRWKHZD\WKH¿UPLV
The Marina Bay Sands Special Issue

that are reinforced by positive policies on
organised and operates. The Arup Journal
equality, fairness, staff mobility, and Vol47 No1 (1/2012)
knowledge sharing Editor: David J Brown
Independence enables Arup to: Designer: Nigel Whale
the ability to grow organically by attracting Editorial: Tel: +1 617 349 9291
shape its own direction and take a long- and retaining the best and brightest email: [email protected]
term view, unhampered by short-term individuals from around the world – and Published by Global Marketing
pressures from external shareholders from a broad range of cultures – who share and Communications,
GLVWULEXWHLWVSUR¿WVWKURXJKUHLQYHVWPHQW those core values and beliefs in social Arup, 13 Fitzroy Street,
usefulness, sustainable development, and London W1T 4BQ, UK.
in learning, research and development, to Tel: +44 (0)20 7636 1531
VWDIIWKURXJKDJOREDOSUR¿WVKDULQJ excellence in the quality of our work. Fax: +44 (0)20 7580 3924
scheme, and by donation to charitable All articles ©Arup 2012
organisations. With this combination of global reach and a
collaborative approach that is values-driven,
Special thanks to Brian Mak,
$UXSLVXQLTXHO\SRVLWLRQHGWRIXO¿OLWVDLP Jenny Lie, and Franklin Kwan
to shape a better world. for their help in co-ordinating
this special edition.
Issue 1 2012
We shape a better world | www.arup.com
58086_Arup_Cvr.indd 1 24/02/2012 23:06

Arup Journal 1 2012

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Arup Journal 1 2012

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Arup Journal 1 2012

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Arup Journal

The Marina Bay Sands Special Issue Issue 1 2012

The Arup Journal

The Marina Bay Sands Special Issue

We shape a better world | www.arup.com

58086_Arup_Cvr.indd 1 24/02/2012 23:06

58086_Arup_Cvr.indd 2 24/02/2012 23:06

The Arup Journal 3/2011 3

58086_Arup_Txt.indd 3 24/02/2012 21:29

Author 2. Gardens by the Bay

The centrepiece of our redevelopment of the city is Marina Bay ...

Singapore and urban renewal Creating value

4 The Arup Journal 1/2012

58086_Arup_Txt.indd 4 24/02/2012 21:29

Arup involvement in Marina Bay

The Arup Journal 1/2012 5

58086_Arup_Txt.indd 5 29/02/2012 21:26

Corporation (LVS) to work on the planned

entertainment destinations, such as the

6 The Arup Journal 1/2012

58086_Arup_Txt.indd 6 25/02/2012 00:37

1. Location plan and site plan.

The Arup Journal 1/2012 7

58086_Arup_Txt.indd 7 24/02/2012 21:29

8 The Arup Journal 1/2012

58086_Arup_Txt.indd 8 24/02/2012 21:29

Unified language and co-operation

The Arup Journal 1/2012 9

58086_Arup_Txt.indd 9 24/02/2012 21:29

10 The Arup Journal 1/2012

58086_Arup_Txt.indd 10 24/02/2012 21:29

The Arup Journal 1/2012 11

58086_Arup_Txt.indd 11 24/02/2012 21:29

The subsoil conditions typically comprise a

12 The Arup Journal 1/2012

58086_Arup_Txt.indd 12 24/02/2012 21:29

Circular diaphragm walls for

12 130m • two circular, 120m diameter, in the

3. Aerial view of MBS site showing

The Arup Journal 1/2012 13

58086_Arup_Txt.indd 13 24/02/2012 21:29

c) Complete excavation and cast B4 slab. d) Complete structure.

14 The Arup Journal 1/2012

58086_Arup_Txt.indd 14 24/02/2012 21:29

ends, leaving about 1.5m of reinforcement

deck and the southernmost pier (22) were

The Arup Journal 1/2012 15

58086_Arup_Txt.indd 15 24/02/2012 21:29

58086_Arup_Txt.indd 16 24/02/2012 21:29

The hotel towers

Unique and complex geometries

It was essential to create a realistic 3-D

1. The Arup Journal 1/2012 17

58086_Arup_Txt.indd 17 24/02/2012 21:29

At the various construction stages, further

18 The Arup Journal 1/2012

58086_Arup_Txt.indd 18 24/02/2012 21:29

4 Differential Bridge L25

Vertical core Sloping core