Penn State · Architectural Engineering · Structural Option

Tamara Alenezi

Structural engineer in training, designing how buildings carry load from the frame out to the façade.

Tamara is finishing her architectural engineering degree at Penn State, in the ABET-accredited structural option. She is trained in steel, concrete and timber design, indeterminate analysis, and wind and seismic loading, and works in analysis models (SAP2000, ETABS, RAM) as well as coordinated BIM documentation (Revit, AutoCAD). She is looking for an entry-level role designing building structures.

See the calculations Browse the thesis

Diagram: the capstone building's windward face. Velocity pressure goes up with height, and the edge zone suction controls the cladding design.

B.A.E.Architectural Engineering, Structural Option. Expected Dec. 2026

123.56 psfGoverning Zone 5 suction used to design three façade systems

0.52 inInterstory drift (h/400) each façade system was checked to accommodate

3Enclosure systems detailed from glass to slab: curtain wall, punched window, rainscreen

SheetS-01

Calculations · from coursework to capstone

How the numbers were made

Each topic below follows one part of the degree into the capstone calculations, step by step, with the actual inputs, equations and results from the thesis sheets. Open any card to see the full process.

01 · Member design

Floor system & member design

Three floor systems compared by demand/capacity ratio. Also the CLT fire char check, steel tonnage and embodied carbon.

DCR = demand / capacity → ≈ 98% flexure (CLT composite)

AE 401 · 402 · 403 · 405Open →

02 · Analysis

Structural analysis & modeling

Gravity load path, the RAM model with orthotropic stiffness modifiers, the floor vibration check and spandrel torsion.

T = (w·e)·L = 0.1246 × 26.5 = 3.30 k·ft

AE 308 · AE 430Open →

03 · Lateral loads

Wind: components & cladding

The full ASCE 7-22 C&C chain from her hand calculations: velocity pressure, zone pressures, panel forces and drift.

p = 89.54 (−1.20 − 0.18) = −123.56 psf

AE 430 · Wind & SeismicOpen →

04 · Buildings

Enclosure assemblies & connections

Layer-by-layer wall weights, line loads passed to the gravity model, thermal performance and connection load paths.

PLF = Σ PSF × h = 13.19 × 17.5 = 230.83 plf

AE 202 · 221 · 222Open →

05 · Computation

Calculation tools & data

The spreadsheets, models and scoring methods behind the sheets, plus a live calculator that reruns her C&C chain.

q_h = 0.00256 K_hK_ztK_dK_eV² (try it)

AE 240 · AE 441Open →

06 · Practice

Integrated design & decisions

How a four-discipline team turned owner requirements and a new site into a set of documented engineering decisions.

Target: −30% embodied carbon → achieved ≈ −40%

AE 372 · 481W · 482Open →

SheetS-02

Senior capstone

Moving a classroom building to the hurricane coast

The structural team was given an existing general purpose classroom building and asked to redesign it for a new site in Boca Raton, Florida, with three added stories and an owner requirement to use mass timber. The move to the coast changes almost everything: much higher wind speeds, a more humid climate, more thermal demand, and the Florida Building Code.

The team replaced the original composite steel deck with cross-laminated timber (CLT) panels on steel framing. They also redesigned the foundations and rebuilt the enclosure for coastal wind. Tamara's part was the enclosure: choosing the façade systems, deriving their components & cladding wind demands, detailing every connection back to the structure, and checking that they can take the building's drift.

Project

General Purpose Classroom Building

Site

Boca Raton, FL · Risk Category III

Firm

Anchor Point Engineering (student team)

Structural

Tamara Alenezi · Nicholas DeMarco · Kevin Regep · Kohshin Noma

Other disciplines

Lighting/Electrical · Mechanical · Construction

Her sheets

S.3.1–S.3.3 enclosure connections · AP.1–AP.6 C&C, assemblies, drift, hand calcs

3D model of the six-story classroom building with callouts to the unitized curtain wall, fiber cement panels, and punched windows — **AP.1 · Enclosure overview.** Where the three systems sit on the building: the unitized curtain wall, the fiber cement rainscreen and the punched windows.

45.8%

Less steel by weight: 2,218,402 lb → 1,201,907 lb, after the lighter CLT deck let the frame be resized.

Team result · sheet S.2

≈ 40%

Lower embodied carbon in the gravity superstructure, beating the project's 30% target.

Team result · sheet S.2

65.6%

Vibration utilization of the CLT floor (10.75 ft max span vs. 16.38 ft allowable), so walking vibration doesn't govern.

Team result · sheet S.4

Bar chart: steel superstructure weight falls from 2,218,402 lb to 1,201,907 lb, with open-web joists added in the new design — **S.2 · Steel weight comparison.** Beams make up most of the saving. Open-web joists replace wide-flange beams in Zone 3. Sheet by K. Noma

3D frame model with orange arrows for floor loads into beams and girders and blue arrows thickening down the columns — **S.2 · Gravity load path.** Floor loads go to beams and girders, then accumulate story by story down the columns. Sheet by K. Noma

Rendering of CLT panels on steel beams with a concrete topping — **S.3 · Selected floor system.** 3″ concrete topping on 5-ply CLT, made composite with the steel through shear studs. Sheet by K. Noma

Isometric view of the RAM structural model of the six-story building — **S.4 · RAM model.** Orthotropic shell modifiers represent the CLT–concrete floor in the analysis. Sheet by K. Noma

SheetS-03

The drawing set

Every sheet of the thesis

All 17 structural sheets from the Anchor Point Engineering capstone, in order. Use the arrows, the sheet tabs or your keyboard's arrow keys to move through them. Click a sheet to open it full size.

Thesis sheet S.1: Code, Standards & Resources — S.1Code, Standards & ResourcesK. Noma

Thesis sheet S.1: Loading & Site Conditions — S.1Loading & Site ConditionsK. Noma

Thesis sheet S.2: Structural Framing & Weight Comparisons — S.2Structural Framing & Weight ComparisonsK. Noma

Thesis sheet S.3: Gravity Floor System Selection & Analysis — S.3Gravity Floor System Selection & AnalysisK. Noma

Thesis sheet S.4: Vibration & Modelling Procedure — S.4Vibration & Modelling ProcedureK. Noma

Thesis sheet S.: Foundations & Façades: Codes and Processes — S.Foundations & Façades: Codes and ProcessesK. Regep

Thesis sheet S.3.1: Enclosure Connections: Fiber Cement — S.3.1Enclosure Connections: Fiber CementTamara Alenezi

Thesis sheet S.3.2: Enclosure Connections: Curtain Wall — S.3.2Enclosure Connections: Curtain WallTamara Alenezi

Thesis sheet S.3.3: Enclosure Connections: Punched Window — S.3.3Enclosure Connections: Punched WindowTamara Alenezi

Thesis sheet S.: Façades: Spandrel Torsion Design — S.Façades: Spandrel Torsion DesignK. Regep

Thesis sheet S.: Façades: GFRC Components & Cladding — S.Façades: GFRC Components & CladdingK. Regep

Thesis sheet AP.1: Final Enclosure System + C&C Summary — AP.1Final Enclosure System + C&C SummaryTamara Alenezi

Thesis sheet AP.2: Fiber Cement Enclosure Component — AP.2Fiber Cement Enclosure ComponentTamara Alenezi

Thesis sheet AP.3: Curtain Wall Enclosure Component — AP.3Curtain Wall Enclosure ComponentTamara Alenezi

Thesis sheet AP.4: Punched Window Enclosure Component — AP.4Punched Window Enclosure ComponentTamara Alenezi

Thesis sheet AP.5: Façade Drift Analysis — AP.5Façade Drift AnalysisTamara Alenezi

Thesis sheet AP.6: Hand Calculations: C&C and IGU Comparison — AP.6Hand Calculations: C&C and IGU ComparisonTamara Alenezi

01 / 17

Orange tabs are Tamara's sheets. The others were authored by her structural teammates, as marked in each sheet's title block.

SheetS-04

Her scope · enclosure & components and cladding

Designing the skin for 180 mph wind

Design basis

Each façade element was analyzed as its own component under ASCE 7-22 Chapter 30. The edge zone suction (Zone 5) was taken as the governing demand for every system.

Codes	FBC 2023 · ASCE 7-22
Risk category	III
Exposure	C
Basic wind speed, V	180 mph
Enclosure	Enclosed
Velocity pressure, q_h	89.54 psf
Internal pressure, GC_pi	±0.18
Governing Zone 5 suction	123.56 psf

Procedure

Site wind parametersBasic wind speed and exposure for a Risk Category III building, from the ASCE Hazard Tool.
Velocity pressureq_z = 0.00256 K_zK_ztK_dV², evaluated at mean roof height.
Effective wind areaSet by the component's tributary area: panel, glazing unit or transom.
Surface zoneWall zones 4 (field) and 5 (edge/corner). Zone 5 suction governs.
External & internal coefficientsGC_p for the zone and area, with GC_pi = ±0.18 for an enclosed building.
Net design pressure → forcesPressure × area gives the panel force, which is followed through every connection to the structure.

System 01 · Sheet S.3.2

Unitized curtain wall

ES-UN8030 captured system · two stacked units per floor

Factory-glazed units run floor to floor and hang off the slab edge. The upper connection is a sliding anchor: the upper mullion section slips over an anchor stem welded to the lower one. That lets each floor move relative to the next under interstory drift and thermal movement without loading the glass.

Unit size: 60″ × 17′-4″
Upper unit: 5′ × 11′ · 6.80 k
Lower unit: 5′ × 6′-4″ · 3.91 k
Line load: 294.61 plf
System depth: 19.44 in
U-value: 0.34

Load path

Glass
Frame
Anchor lugs
Brackets
Slab

Punched window with laminated double glazing, showing wind force on the glass transferring to the aluminum frame and perimeter anchors — **S.3.3 · Overview.** Vision window and transom.

Wall section showing a hung shelf angle at the window head, movement joints, stud backup, and kickers resisting spandrel beam twist — **S.3.3 · Section.** Hung shelf angle per AISC DG 22.

System 02 · Sheet S.3.3

Punched windows

PGT-Sparta™ impact window · laminated 7/16″ glazing, 0.090″ PVB interlayer

A punched window doesn't go to the slab edge. It's a discrete unit anchored at its jambs, head and sill into the surrounding stud wall, so the wall is the load path. The head is detailed with a shelf angle hung from plate brackets, with a soft joint below it, following AISC Design Guide 22. Kickers back to the slab resist twist in the spandrel beam.

Vision: 4′-0″ × 7′-6″
Vision force: 3.71 kip
Transom: 4′-0″ × 4′-3″
Transom force: 2.10 kip
Line load: 246.95 plf
Anchors: Jambs · head · sill

Load path

Glass
Frame
Anchors
Stud wall

Exploded rainscreen assembly: fiber cement panel on hidden rivets, aluminum vertical rails, adjustable brackets, mineral wool insulation, vapor barrier and sheathing — **S.3.1 · Fig. 1.** Rainscreen assembly and load path.

Section through the rainscreen showing fixed and sliding point brackets at 49 inch spacing — **S.3.1 · Fig. 3.** Fixed / sliding brackets, 49″ o.c.

System 03 · Sheet S.3.1

Fiber cement rainscreen

Swisspearl / CladdingCorp · 5/16″ panels on an aluminum subframe

A ventilated rainscreen over continuous insulation. Panel fastening and fixed/sliding point logic follow Swisspearl guidance. The subframe uses a Sto-style bracket and rail system tied into the steel stud backup wall. The 4 in standoff puts a moment on every bracket, so the eccentricity was carried into the design.

Panel: 8.23′ × 4′ portrait
Panel force: 4.07 kip
Subframe: 3 rails × 3 brackets
Bracket reaction: 0.45 kip
Bracket moment: 1.80 kip-in
Backup wall: 6″ 18 ga studs

Load path

Panel
Hidden rivets
Vertical rails
Aluminum brackets
Anchors
Steel stud wall

Components & cladding summary

All three systems, governed by Zone 5 suction (sheet AP.1).

System	Component	Dimensions	Eff. wind area (ft²)	Line load	Governing demand	Panel forces
Curtain wall	ES-UN8030 unitized	60″ × 17′-4″ (5′×11′ + 5′×6′-4″)	55.0 / 31.67	294.61 plf	123.56 psf	6.80 k / 3.91 k
Punched windows	PGT-Sparta™	4′-0″ × 7′-6″ + 4′-0″ × 4′-3″	30.0 / 17.0	246.95 plf	123.56 psf	3.71 k / 2.10 k
Fiber cement	Swisspearl / CladdingCorp	8.23′ × 4′	32.92	230.83 plf	123.56 psf	4.07 k

Façade drift compatibility

Wind strength is only half of it. The building also sways, and a façade that can't follow the frame cracks glass, tears sealant and fails at its joints. With six floors at 17′-4″ (104 ft total), she checked each system against the interstory drift it has to absorb under the 10-year MRI service wind (D + 0.7W): h/600 at the ground floor and h/400 above.

The upper floor value of 0.52 in governs. Each system takes it differently: the curtain wall at its stack joint and sliding anchors, the windows at their perimeter joints, and the rainscreen through rail and joint tolerance.

Diagram of interstory drift between two floor slabs: 0.52 inches upper floors, 0.35 inches ground floor — **AP.5 · Fig. 1.** Drift between adjacent slabs controls façade movement. Drift calculation →

Interstory drift to accommodate (in)

Ground floorh/600

0.35

Upper floorsh/400 · governs

0.52

00.20.40.6

System	Movement check	Status
Curtain wall	Stack joint / anchors ≈ 0.52 in	Feasible with movement joint
Punched window	Two side joints ≈ 0.26 in each	Feasible with perimeter joint
Fiber cement	Joint / rail tolerance ≈ 0.26 in each side	Feasible with flexible jointing

Hand-rendered detail of the curtain wall mullion anchor: upper mullion slipped over an aluminum anchor stem, steel angle set flush with the slab edge, bolts, welds and fiber shims — **S.3.2 · Fig. 3.** Mullion anchor at top of slab. The slip joint is where the drift is absorbed.

Beyond strength

The appendix sheets carry the enclosure past structural checks. There are layer-by-layer assembly tables with weights and U-values for each system, and an argon vs. air IGU comparison on NFRC-rated properties (relative cost, acoustics, condensation resistance, energy efficiency). That comparison is why the curtain wall uses an argon cavity.

The component forces were also worked by hand. Sheet AP.6 has the handwritten C&C calculations for the curtain wall, punched window and fiber cement panels, alongside the NFRC comparison.

Assembly weights, U-values and the argon decision →

Bar chart comparing argon and air filled glazing units on cost, acoustics, condensation resistance, energy efficiency and U-value — **AP.3 · Argon vs. air.** NFRC-based scores, 0–10. U-value 0.28 vs 0.48.

Wall layer diagram of the fiber cement rainscreen assembly with R-values per layer — **AP.2 · Wall layers.** Rainscreen assembly, outside to inside, with the thermal value of each layer.

Handwritten components and cladding calculation for the punched windows and fiber cement panels — **AP.6 · Hand calcs.** F = p·A for each window unit and panel. Full chain →

SheetS-05

Education

Penn State Architectural Engineering

The Pennsylvania State University

Bachelor of Architectural Engineering, Structural Option

Campus: University Park, PA
Graduation: December 2026 (expected)
Accreditation: ABET-accredited program
Capstone: AE 481W / AE 482, Anchor Point Engineering

The structural option covers steel, concrete and wood design, indeterminate analysis and geotechnical engineering, alongside the integrated AE core in building systems. The education page goes through every core course: what it covers, and where it shows up in the capstone.

See the full education page →

SheetS-06

Technical skills

Tools, codes & methods

Analysis & design

SAP2000
ETABS
RAM
Steel member design
Concrete member design
Timber member design
Wind analysis
Seismic analysis
Connection load paths

Codes & standards

IBC
ASCE 7
AISC 360
ACI 318
NDS
Florida Building Code
AISC Design Guide 22

Modeling & drafting

Revit
AutoCAD
BIM coordination
SolidWorks
SketchUp
Construction details

Programming & data

Python
RStudio
Advanced Excel
Microsoft 365

Project delivery

Schematic design
Assembly & detailed estimating
Life-cycle cost analysis
Project & site planning
Sustainable design

Visualization

Adobe Photoshop

● Used directly on her capstone sheets

SheetS-07

Professional involvement

In the profession

Jan 2023 – Present

Structural Engineers Association of Pennsylvania

SEAoP · Member

Attend technical workshops and professional development sessions on structural design practice and applying the code.
Talk with practicing engineers about new design standards and sustainable building strategies.

April 2025

AISC NASCC: The Steel Conference

Attendee

Attended sessions on steel connection design, fabrication and erection.

Open to entry-level roles

Let's talk structures.

Tamara is looking for an entry-level building structures design role, starting after she graduates in December 2026. She'd be glad to walk through the capstone sheets in detail.

Email [email protected] LinkedIn ↗