Upload
aiahouston
View
102
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Citation preview
Click icon to add picture
Evaluating Re-use of Existing Exterior Envelope
Re-skin vs. Renovate
• is a Registered Provider with The American Institute of Architects Continuing Education Systems (AIA/CES). Credit(s) earned on completion of this program will be reported to AIA/CES for AIA members. Certificates of Completion for both AIA members and non-AIA members are available upon request.•This program is registered with AIA/CES for continuing professional education. As such, it does not include content that may be deemed or construed to be an approval or endorsement by the AIA of any material of construction or any method or manner of handling, using, distributing, or dealing in any material or product. •Questions related to specific materials, methods, and services will be addressed at the conclusion of this presentation.•In October 2010, the AIA/CES system was updated with the new CES Discovery system, in that time we have transferred more than one million records. This new update has made it necessary to remind us of the AIA/CES policies and procedures, to introduce the “new” provider ethics, and to reintroduce the AIA/CES audits/quality assurance program. This presentation covers those areas giving providers the opportunity to give feedback and input.
Learning Objectives
At the end of this program, participants will be able to:
1) Will understand the typical service life of different cladding materials in the Texas Gulf Coast area.
2) Will be able to identify critical failures of different cladding materials that indicate replacement.
3) Will be able to calculate the life cycle implications of re-cladding vs. cladding repair.
4) Will be able to identify the potential energy impacts of replacing or maintaining a building’s envelope.
The greenest building is the one that is already built.
Evaluation of Existing Structures
• Structural failure of façade or cladding• Water intrusion• Master Plan for long term Ownership• New Ownership
Major Reasons to Review the Envelope
Step One - Investigation and Evaluation of Existing
• Owner• Architect• Building Envelope Consultant• Structural Engineer• MEP Engineer• Project Manager or Broker• Facilities Engineer
5 Key Items
Structural Integrity
Thermal Performance
Permeance
Significance
Life Cycle
Good Condition Poor Condition
Good Performance Low Performance
Low Permeance High Permeance
Existing Image vs New Design
Short Life vs Long Term
Program, Design and Client Input
User Inputbuilding envelope
M,C,R
Option 1• re-glaze only• conventional HVAC• bldg. envelope repairs
T,D
Option 2• modify precast: raise header• new vertical strip curtainwall• underfloor HVAC
Option 3• remove all precast: new unitized curtainwall• underfloor HVAC
Option 1• re-glaze only• conventional HVAC• new arch. metal at monitors• new skylights
Option 3• remove all precast, new unitized curtainwall• underfloor HVAC• all new monitors & piping
Option 2• remove precast below brim, new curtainwall• underfloor HVAC @ 1st fl, conventional HVAC @ 2nd
• mods to monitors for daylight
amenities buildingschematic design
T
C
Kirksey / WPM
renovated offices8 Nov 2007 M
R
programdetail
WORKSuser list
Kirksey
D
Kirksey
amenitiesbuilding
Program, Design and Client Input – Building Use
Significance of façadeHistoric
Tax credits or Federal $ - must comply with review(Professional recommendation is the same)
IconicRepresents Campus Identity or Owner History
Intangibles - Façade Value
•Change of Use•5% increase of Lateral Load•Improvements worth over 50% of Building Value
What triggers a code upgrade?
2012 IBC - Chapter 34 Existing Building Code
Energy Code Compliance
Code and standards
Code and standards
If the owner wants windstorm insurance through TWIA, evaluation and/or upgrades may be required
Physical/Structural Characteristics of the Building Envelope
Deficiencies in one or more of these areas can lead the decision matrix for recladding:
• Condition of Façade Materials• Condition of Vertical Support Systems• Performance of façade systems
Visual Inspection
• Document Review• Visual Assessment• Establish Monitoring
Investigative Techniques
Performance of façade systems• Differential Movement• Displacement• Cracking
Control of water• Plugged weepholes• Malfunctioning downspouts• Improper flashing
Visual Inspection
• Condition of Vertical Support SystemsShelf angleLintelsPanel support clips
Typical distress conditions• Corrosion• Cracking• Displacements
Visual Inspection -
(Natural Stone, Cast Stone, Brick, Terra Cotta)
Indefinite service life with proper design and maintenance
Typical Deterioration ConditionsCrackingSpallingDelaminationDisplacementEfflorescenceMortar conditionPrior remedial treatments
Envelope Exterior - Masonry
Envelope Exterior - Masonry
Condition of Façade Materials: Precast Panels
Indefinite service life with proper design and maintenance
Typical Deterioration Conditions• Cracking• Spalling• Prior remedial treatments
Envelope Exterior - Concrete
Condition of Façade Materials: Glazing Systems
10-20 year lifespan (sealants and gaskets )50+ year lifespan -CW structure and single pane glazing
Traditional Windows• Flanged• Punch
Systems• Curtainwall / Unitized• Stick/Storefront
Sealants/Gaskets• Polyurethane• Silicone• Compressed gaskets• Zipper gasket• Structural silicone
Envelope Exterior – Curtainwall & Windows
Insulated panelsMetal building typeAluminum composite panelsCopper or Stainless Flashing
20-40 year service life with proper design and maintenance
Typical Deterioration Conditions• Oil-canning• Corrosion
Envelope Exterior – Metal
Step Two - Present Options & Constructability Review
• Design Alternatives• Impact of Codes and Standards• Hidden Conditions• Constructability• Budget
Physical/Structural Characteristics of the Building Envelope
Deficiencies in one or more of these areas can lead the decision matrix for recladding:
• Condition of Lateral Support Systems• Condition of Substrate/Weatherbarrier• Condition of Structure (At perimeter)
Hidden Conditions
• Arms-length investigation• In-situ testing• Non-destructive Evaluation
Investigative Techniques
• Condition of Substrate/Weatherbarrier
• Does system permit remedial repair of lateral systems?
• Does a weather barrier exist? • Water• Air• Vapor• Insulation
• What is condition of existing materials?• Antiquated systems• Asbestos Containing Materials• Water Damage
Substrate Analysis
Systems are typically concealedFailure represents significant risk to public safety
Typical warning signs• Outward displacement of masonry• Spalling• Localized failure
Current wind load requirementsVSBuilding Code in effectat time of construction
Condition of Lateral Support Systems
Condition of Structure (At perimeter)
• Façade elements may restrict access to superstructure
Condition of Structural Frame & Foundation
Thermal performance of existing wallWufi Model to evaluate existingWufi Model to evaluate proposed renovationAffect of hot-humid climateAffect HVAC assumptions/systems and operation - Existing and Future
Review of Water Vapor Permeance
Air and Water permeance of existing wallAir/Water vapor barrier location and integrityVapor drive - new 2013 materials vs Historic or late 20th century alternates
Tar paperTyvekPeel & stickMass wall
Intrusion from leaks – any opening in envelope
Review of Water Vapor Permeance
Tools for review of Insulation & Vapor Barrier
Sample WUFI OutputAir Temperature
Dew PointRelative Humidity
Water Content
Exterior Interior
BRICKCAVITY
AIR BARRIER & EXT. GYP
INSULATION INT. GYP. & VINYL
WALLPAPER
3 Year Cycle
Shaded Area = 3 Year Cycle
Tools for review of Water Vapor Dewpoint
THERM's heat-transfer analysis allows you to evaluate a system energy efficiency and local temperature patterns, which may relate directly to problems with condensation, moisture damage, and structural integrity.
Tools for review of Thermal Performance
Step Three - Cost Benefit Analysis
Building Life-Cycle Cost (BLCC) Program—Economic analysis tool developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology for the U.S. Department of Energy Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP). http://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/information/download_blcc.html#blcc
http://www.wbdg.org/tools/athena_eie.php
LCCA can be performed at various levels of complexity. Its scope might vary from a "back-of-the-envelope" study to a detailed analysis with thoroughly researched input data, supplementary measures of economic evaluation, complex uncertainty assessment, and extensive documentation. The extensiveness of the effort should be tailored to the needs of the project.
Owner’s long term plans : calculate the life cycle implications of recladding vs. cladding repair.
Government - LifetimeDeveloper - 100% Lease and SellOwner/Operator - Lifetime with Exit strategyHigh Maintenance cost – deferred maintenance problem
Life Cycle Cost Analysis
At what point does the cost of remediation approach the cost of recladding?
Repair vs Reclad
Low cost Repair
High Cost Removal
Repair Scope Extents of façade material removal
Improve Performance of façade systems Typically local
Repair of Vertical Support Systems Typically local (10%)
Repair of Structure Typically local (20%)
Repair of Façade materials Varies greatly - Local to Global
Repair of Lateral Support SystemsMinimal with appropriate substrate, Global with poor substrate
Repair of Substrate Typically global
Extents of façade removal required for various repairs
Park Towers - 2000
YEAR BUILT: 1972ENVELOPE REVIEW ISSUE: New OwnerPROJECT START DATE: 1998COST: $27M Core & Shell + GarageDESIGN SUMMARY – Vacant 13 years; purchase price allowed consideration of re-branding for new Class-A image. 24” floor extension was added to perimeter for NRA of 24,000 SF
Case Study – Park Towers RECLAD
Restore for Historic Significance and PerformanceCase Study – U of H Roy G Cullen RESTORE
YEAR BUILT: 1938ENVELOPE REVIEW ISSUE: Campus Master Plan, Water Intrusion of Historic First Building on U of H CampusPROJECT START DATE: Not StartedPROJECT COST: Est. $3.2 MDESIGN SUMMARY: Detailed review of documents and Broroscope investigation revealed that water intrusion was impacting limestone anchors. Previous re-windowing was not draining correctly. Limestone panels spalling.
Case Study – Sylvan Beach Pavilion RECLAD + RESTORE
YEAR BUILT: 1956 with 1962 & 1980 additionsENVELOPE REVIEW ISSUE: Hurricane Ike Damage to Curtainwall – Building abandoned since damagePROJECT START DATE: 2012PROJECT COST: $3.2 MillionDESIGN SUMMARY: Historic Restoration of 1950’s Mod Building for Harris County.
YEAR BUILT: 1973ENVELOPE REVIEW ISSUE: Campus precast buildings had some repairs and exposed rebar and spalls, but iconic imagery in a build to suit campus. PROJECT START DATE: 2009PROJECT COST: $300 MillionDESIGN SUMMARY: Restoration of Campus Lab Building with interior and glass element update for new office use
Case Study – Shell Technology Center RESTORE
Pros• New head height at window openings (9’-0”) allows more daylight and use of underfloor air on both floors. • Replacing glass w/ high performance low-e glass allows more visible light, less solar heat gain • Improved waterproofing at windows and overall exterior with new installation • New window mullion spacing will be closer to 5’-0” OC• Replacement of monitor allows upgrade of 30 year old pipe infrastructure. It allows phased replacement
during construction by having pipes at base roof level installed prior to demo. Future maintenance of piping at roof level is safer. Re-using structural slab (previous monitor floor) below pipe rack improves waterproofing below pipes.
• Replacement of monitor improves campus appearance by lowering overall height of secondary roof structure.
• New skylight at center allows double loaded office with perimeter circulation on glass and along skylight
• Additional demo will require construction waste recycling • Construction sequence will expose interior to weather; requires full building shut down to optimize
contractor’s work time
Cons
If 30% - 50% of exterior cladding must be removed for remediation, replacement may be a more cost effective alternate, depending on cost of cladding materials.
Integrity of Façade Assembly
Other factors – what is the business decision?!• Will new façade lead to increase in rent?• Can it lower energy usage?• Project staging - is building occupied?
Re-skin vs Rehabilitate Existing
Typically ReactiveImplementation
Mandates Periodic Inspections
Future – Façade Ordinances
Questions?
This concludes The American Institute of Architects Continuing Education Systems Course
Sustainable DesignThe BIM model allows for early staged energy calculations using DOE-2 compatible energy modeling software. This helps with glazing selection and adds valuable cost/payback calculations for the owner.
BIM @ Kirksey
• EVALUATION Structural Air / Water /Heat infiltration Market position Site and Context
• COST Project cost life cycle cost improved energy performance.
• APPEARANCE Historic importance of the façade Market position Site and Context
• Click icon to add picture