CENE 476 F20
Concrete Canoe
Team Members:
Russell Collins
Marie Cook
Kyle Julle
Scott Murphy
Ryan Wassenberg
2
NAU Canoe Background
NAU Canoe Background
1977: First NAU Canoe
2015: Dreadnoughtus is the best scoring NAU canoe to date (showcased in EGR lobby)
Figure 1: 2015 NAU Canoe Team with Dreadnoughtus.
Photo taken directly from Source [1].
3
Project Understanding
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
Concrete Canoe Competition [2]
Category Maximum Points
Technical Proposal 35
Enhanced Focus Areas Report 30
Technical Presentation 25
On-Site Competition 10
Total Maximum Points 100
Each year the rules released by the Committee on
Concrete Canoe Competitions (C4) are modified to
restrict different parts of the design/build process.
Figure 2: ASCE Request for Proposals Cover Page [2]
New to the competition
:
Enhanced Focus
Areas Report
R. John Craig Legacy
Competition
Peer Review of
Technical Proposal
90
4
Project Technical Considerations and Challenges
Technical Considerations
Concrete Mixture
Reinforcement
Hull Design
Structural Design
Aesthetics
Potential Challenges
Mix Design
Mentee Involvement
COVID-19
Figure 3: Russell & mentees preparing to perform a slump test.
Photo Credit: Ryan Wassenberg
2020-2021 Enhanced Focus Areas
Simplified Mix Design & Improving the NAU Mentee Program
Project Scope
Task 1: Enhanced Focus Areas
Task 2: Mix Design
Task 2.1: Mix Design Research
Task 2.2: Mix Design Testing
Task 2.3: Final Mix Design
Task 3: Hull Design
Task 3.1: Hull Design Research
Task 3.2: Hull Design Analysis
Task 3.3: Final Hull Design
5
Figure 4: Full concrete cylinder compared to crushed sections
Photo Credit: Marie Cook
Project Scope
6
Task 4: Reinforcement
Task 4.1: Research
Task 4.2: Analysis
Task 4.3: Final Reinforcement
Task 5: Structural Design
Figure 5 (left): Fiber Reinforcement
Photo Credit: Marie Cook
Figure 6 (below): Mesh Reinforcement
Photo Credit: Marie Cook
Project Scope
Task 6: Conference
Task 6.1: Conference Technical Proposal
Task 6.2: Enhanced Focus Areas Report
Task 6.3: Conference Presentation
Task 6.4: R. John Craig Legacy Competition
Task 6.5: Peer Review of Technical Proposal
Task 7: Impacts
Task 8: Deliverables
Task 9: Project Management
7
Figure 7: Pacific Southwest Conference at UCLA
Figure taken directly from Source [3].
8
Critical path
shown in red
Milestones
shown as
diamonds
Staffing
9
Staffing matrix shown to the right was
used to determine number of hours
predicted for each employee.
Staff Positions
Title Abbreviation
Principal Design Engineer PDE
Design Manager DM
Project Design Engineer PE
Quality Manager QM
Graduate Field Engineer EIT
Technician/Drafter TD
Laborer/Lab Technician LT
Task PDE DM PE QM EIT TD LT
Task 1: Enhanced Focus Areas 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Task 2: Mix Design 8 40 22 32 40 2 52
Task 2.1: Mix Design Research
3 24 6 0 12 0 0
Task 2.2: Mix Design Testing
4 16 16 32 28 0 52
Task 2.3: Final Mix Design
1 2
Task 3: Hull Design 3 10 6 10 4 26 0
Task 3.1: Hull Design Research
1 6 6 6 4 0 0
Task 3.2 Analysis
1 4 0 4 0 24 0
Task 3.3: Final Hull Design
1 2
Task 4: Reinforcement 11 24 0 10 8 0 16
Task 4.1: Research
8 8 2 2 2
Task 4.2: Analysis
2 16 8 6 14
Task 4.3: Final Reinforcement
1
Task 5: Structural Design 16 16 16 6 10 2 0
Task 6: Conference 6 2 0 0 0 0 0
Task 6.1: Conference Technical Proposal
1
Task 6.2: Enhanced Focus Areas Report
1
Task 6.3: Conference Presentation
2 2
Task 6.4: R. John Craig Legacy Competition
1
Task 6.5: Peer Review of Technical Proposal
1
Task 7: Impacts 3 0 0 30 0 0 16
Task 8: Deliverables 51 12 120 40 124 8 0
Task 9: Project Management 34 12 12 12 20 12 12
Total Hours by Staff Position 136 120 180 144 210 54 100
Project Total Hours
944
Cost Estimate
Rates used for
personnel cost
analysis were
provided by the RFP
from C4 [2]
Materials cost
analysis is for the
materials required to
complete the mix
design testing
10
Engineering Services Cost Estimate
Description QTY Unit of Measure Rate (USD/UM) Cost
PERSONNEL (direct employee costs + indirect employee costs)
Principal Design Engineer
136 HR $ 165 $ 22,440
Design Manager
120 HR $ 148 $ 17,760
Project Design Engineer
180 HR $ 132 $ 23,760
Quality Manager
144 HR $ 115 $ 16,560
Graduate Field Engineer
210 HR $ 82 $ 17,220
Technician/Drafter
54 HR $ 66 $ 3,564
Laborer/Lab Technician
100 HR $ 82 $ 8,200
Personnel Total
$ 109,504
TRAVEL
Travel for Material Acquisition [4] 600 Miles $ 0.36 $ 216
Travel Total
$ 216
LAB USE
Field Station 6 Days $ 110 $ 660
Materials Testing Laboratory 4 Days $ 110 $ 440
Lab Use Total
$ 1,100
MATERIALS
Cementitious Materials 1 CF $ 8.50 $ 8.50
Aggregates 3.5 CF $ 5.50 $ 19.25
Admixtures 0.5 GAL $ 16.50 $ 8.25
Reinforcement 1 LS $ 77.00 $ 77.00
Materials Total
$ 113.00
Project Total $ 110,933
11
[1] 2015 Northern Arizona University Concrete Canoe, Dreadnoughtus. Available:
https://www.ceias.nau.edu/capstone/projects/CENE/2015/ConcreteCanoe/conference.html
[2] Committee on Concrete Canoe Competitions, 2021 Request for Proposals. American Society of
Civil Engineers, 2021.
[3] ASCE at UCLA, Pacific Southwest Conference Mailer 1. American Society of Civil Engineers, 2021.
[4] “NAU Fleet Services,” Rental Vehicles. [Online]. Available: https://in.nau.edu/comptroller/travel-
welcome/. [Accessed: 20-Oct-2020].
References
Questions?
12
