IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIa.. .

Q‘ ‘. u. '
D

LIBRARY
» a Michigan State
. g ,.0 University

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled

“WHOLE HOUSE” PERFORMANCE CRITERIA
FRAMEWORK AND ITS APPLICATION

presented by
LORI SWARUP

has been aocepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

Master of degree in Construction Management

 

 

Science
M é 3/7”” ’

 

Major Professoi’s’ Signature
Till; a" A, 32 m .7

Date

 

MSU is an Affinnative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

#
2/05 c/ClFlC/DateDqundd-pj 5

“WHOLE HOUSE” PERFORMANCE CRITERIA FRAMEWORK
AND ITS APPLICATION

By

Lori Swarup

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
In partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

Construction Management Program

2005

v

ABSTRACT

“WHOLE HOUSE” PERFORMANCE CRITERIA FRAMEWORK AND ITS
APPLICATION

By
Lori Swarup

It is difficult to affect change in a complex industry such as home building. This is
due to fragmentation of the industry, lack of new techniques and involvement of a large
number of trades in the building process. Therefore, the inefficiencies, which are inbuilt
into the production process, have remained. Each building system is dealt with separately
such that there are inevitable negative interactions among them.

The “Whole House” approach promotes the idea that the home be viewed as a
system that is composed of different components which must work together and therefore
comes across as a credible direction to take with the intent of revolutionizing the
homebuilding industry in the long run. The challenge it addresses is to use the synergies
among building systems to better the performance of the home. Integrative systems
thinking or systems integration is fundamental to the generation of a design and in the
aPproach to its implementation. The aim is to be able to achieve both, total system
unification and complete independence while designing for flexible programming.

A “Whole House” performance criteria (WHPC) framework was developed
through research, based on the building systems integration approach, which assists the
user in SYStematically tabulating the building systems interactions. The WHPC
framework was then used to develop a sample “Whole House” criterion which was
applied to three case study designs one each for site—built, factory-built and hybrid home

to determine which design comes closest to being an ideal “Whole House” design.

Acknowledgement

To begin with I thank my parents for insisting I enroll for further studies and for
not taking no for an answer. Without you mumma and papa this would have been
impossible and without you little sis, good work with holding up the home front.

It has been my utmost pleasure to have worked under the guidance of Dr. Matt
Syal to complete my Masters of Science degree here at Michigan State University. I
would like to extend my thanks and regards to you for guiding me both academically and
personally. Dr. Tariq, it has been a pleasure to have known you and learnt from you. Prof.
Vojnovic, Ithank you for your time, support and Optimism.

Kunal, my friend and now my partner for life, thank you for being there for me.

My friends here at MSU especially Mallik, Gopu and Abhishek thank you for

your good humor and encouragement.

iii

Table of contents

List of Figures ....................................................................................... ix

1. Chapter 1 - Introduction

1.1 Overview ..................................................................................... .1
1.2 Need statement ............................................................................... 3
1.2.1 “Whole House” as an option ...................................................... 4
1.2.2 Need for development of the criterion ............................................ 5
1.3 Overall goal and objectives ................................................................ 6
1.3.1 Objectives ............................................................................. 6

1.4 Research scope and uniqueness ............................................................ 7
1.5 Methodology .................................................................................. 8
1.5.1 Objective 1 .............................................................................. 8
1.5.2 Objective 2 ............................................................................ 11
1.5.3 Objective 3 ............................................................................ 12
1.5.4 Objective 4 ............................................................................ 13
1.5.5 Objective 5 ............................................................................ 14

1.6 Expected outcomes and deliverables .................................................... 15
1.7 Summary ..................................................................................... 16
2. Chapter 2 — Literature Review — “Whole House” Evolution

2.10verview ..................................................................................... 17
2.2 Results of Prior NSF research ............................................................. 17
2.3 Introduction to “Whole House” .......................................................... 20
2.3.1 History of “Whole House” .......................................................... 21
2.3.2 Origin of “Whole House” (Before 1990’s) ........................................ 21
2.3.2.1 Industrial Revolution .................................................... 22

2.3.2.2 Operation Breakthrough ................................................ 23
2.3.3 Similar initiatives across the world ............................................. 24
2.3.4 Partnership for Advancement of Technology in Housing (PATH). . . . . ....26
2.3.5 The Whole House Roadmap ...................................................... 27
2.3.6 PATH Research Agenda Workshop ............................................. 29
2.3.7 The PATH concept home ........................................................ 30

2.4 Factory Built homes ....................................................................... 31
2.4.1 Manufactured ...................................................................... 31
2.4.2 Modular ............................................................................. 32
2.4.3 Panelized ............................................................................ 33
2.4.4 History .............................................................................. 34

2.5 Recent developments ...................................................................... 35
2.5.1 Open building ...................................................................... 36
2.5.1.1 Decision making parameters in open building.........................36

2.5.1.2 Key concepts .............................................................. 37

2.5.2 Sustainable development ......................................................... 38
2.5.3 Zero energy homes ................................................................ 39
2.5.4 Lean construction .................................................................. 40

iv

2.5.4.1 Key concepts .............................................................. 40

2.5.5 Supply Chain Management ....................................................... 41
2.6 Existing attempts at developing a criterion ............................................. 42
2.6.1 Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) .................. 43
2.6.2 Energy Star ......................................................................... 46
2.6.3 Environmental Impact Matrix .................................................... 48
2.6.4 The Whole House Calculator .................................................... 50
2.6.4.1 The Battelle Method ..................................................... 51

2.6.5 Other contributors ................................................................. 52
2.6.5.1 Cleaner Technology Substitute Assessment (CTSA) ............... 52

2.6.5.2 Federal guidelines ........................................................ 53
2.7 Summary ..................................................................................... 54

3. Chapter 3 - Literature Review — Tools and Techniques

3.1 Overview .................................................................................... 56
3.2 Systems Integration tools .................................................................. 56
3.2.1 Building Systems Integration Handbook (BSIH) matrix ..................... 5 8
3.2.2 Performance parameters .......................................................... 59
3.2.3 Systems decision models ......................................................... 60
3.3 Mechanical Electrical Plumbing (MEP) Integration ................................... 60
3.3.1 Sequential Comparison Overlay Process (SCOP) ............................ 61
3.3.2 The Korman Model ................................................................ 62
3.4 Building systems ............................................................................ 64
3.4.1 Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) .......................... 64
3.4.1.1 HVAC design techniques ................................................ 64

3.4.1.2 HV AC distribution systems ............................................. 66

3.4.1.3 HVAC zoning controls .................................................. 67

3.4.1.4 HVAC fuels ............................................................... 67

3.4.1.5 Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) ................................................ 68

3.4.2 Plumbing / Sewer .................................................................. 69
3.4.2.1 Distribution design ........................................................ 69

3.4.2.2 Water conservation ....................................................... 70

3.4.3 Electrical systems .................................................................. 72
3.4.3.1 Distribution design ........................................................ 73

3.4.3.2 Alternative fuel ........................................................... 73

3.4.4 Fire protection ..................................................................... 74
3.4.5 Communication / Structured Wiring systems ................................. 75
3.4.6 Home Automation systems ...................................................... 75

3.5 Structural and Architectural Integration ................................................. 77
3.5.1 Alternative Framing Materials ................................................... 77
35-2 Tilt-up Roofs for Manufactured and Modular Homes ........................ 80
3'53 Hybrid Modular/Panelized Housing ............................................. 82

3.6 Sustainable approaches to design ........................................................ 83
3.6.1 Passive Solar design ............................................................... 83
3.6.2 Active Solar design ............................................................... 881;

3.6.3 Bio based materials / Recycled content materials

3.6.4 Energy star products .............................................................. 87

3.7 Summary .................................................................................... 91
4. Chapter 4 — Proposed “Whole House” performance criteria framework

4.1 Overview .................................................................................... 93
4.2 Levels of integration ....................................................................... 95
4.3 Modeling techniques ........................................................................ 95
4.4 Identification of Building systems ........................................................ 95
4.5 Determination of performance parameters ............................................... 96
4.5.1 Spatial flexibility ................................................................... 97
4.5.2 Thermal Performance .............................................................. 97
4.5.3 Structural Integrity ................................................................. 98
4.5.4 Ease of construction ............................................................... 98
4.5.5 Ease of maintenance ............................................................... 99
4.5.6 Sustainable design ................................................................ 100

4.6 Developed BSIH matrix .................................................................. 100
4.7 Developed Systems Decision models ................................................... 104
4.8 “Whole House” performance criteria (WHPC) framework .......................... 105
4.8.1 Performance criteria framework ................................................ 106

4.9 Summary ................................................................................... 108

5. Chapter 5 — Sample “Whole House” criterion and its applications

5.1 Overview .................................................................................... 110
5.2 Sample “Whole House” criterion components ....................................... 110
5.3 Scoring system for the sample criterion ................................................ 112
5.4 Application of “Whole House” criterion ............................................... 115
5.4.1 Site-built home ................................................................... 116
5.4.2 F actory-built home ............................................................... 1117
5.4.3 Hybrid home ...................................................................... 118
5.4.4 Comparison of applied criterion ................................................ 119

5.5 Feedback on WHPC framework, sample criterion and application process ...... 122
5.5.1 General observations ............................................................. 123
5.5.2 Specific observations ............................................................ 124
5.5.2.1 Indoor Air Quality ...................................................... 125

5.5.2.2 Site and consumer related issues ...................................... 125

5.5.2.3 Financial analysis ....................................................... 125

5.5.2.4 Other factors ............................................................. 126

5.6 Summary ................................................................................... 127

6. Chapter 6 — Summary and conclusions

6.1 Overview ................................................................................... 129
6.2 Summary .................................................................................... 131
6.2.1 Objective 1 .......................................................................... 131
6.2.2 Objective 2 .......................................................................... 132
6.2.3 Objective 3 .......................................................................... 133
6.2.4 Objective 4 .......................................................................... 133

vi

6.2.5 Objective 5 .......................................................................... 134

6.3 Limitations of the research ............................................................... 135

6.4 Conclusions and inferences .............................................................. 136

6.5 Areas of future research .................................................................. 138

7. References ....................................................................................... 142
Appendix A (Background information) ............................................... 152

a. Matrix of specifics for LEED criteria

Appendix B1 (BSIH matrixes) ......................................................... 166
a. BSIH matrix for 2 system interactions
b. BSIH matrix for 3 system interactions

Appendix B2 (Systems Decision models) ............................................ 178
Structure + HVAC + Plumbing
Structure + HVAC + Electrical
Structure + HVAC + Communication
Structure + HV AC + Interior A
Structure + HVAC + Interior B
Structure + Plumbing + Electrical
Structure + Plumbing + Communication
Structure + Plumbing + Interior A
Structure + Plumbing + Interior B
Structure + Electrical + Communication
Structure + Electrical + Interior A
Structure + Electrical + Interior B

. Structure + Communication + Interior A
Structure + Communication + Interior B
Structure + Interior A + Interior B
HVAC + Plumbing + Electrical
HV AC + Plumbing + Communication
HVAC + Electrical + Communication
HVAC + Interior A + Interior B
Plumbing + Electrical + Communication

canespparrrra‘mrmepge

Appendix Cl .............................................................................. 199
a. “Whole House” performance criteria (WHPC) framework
Appendix C2 .............................................................................. 204
a. Sample “Whole House” performance criterion
Appendix C3 .............................................................................. 221
a. Applied sample “Whole House” performance criterion to Site-built
home.

vii

Appendix C4 .............................................................................. 232
a. Applied sample “Whole House” performance criterion to Factory-built
home.

Appendix C5 ............................................................................. 243
a. Applied sample “Whole House” performance criterion to Hybrid
home.

viii

 
 

List of Figures

Figure 1.1:
Figure 2.1:
Figure 2.2:
Figure 2.3:
1981) ........
Figure 2.4:
Figure 3.1:
Figure 3.2:
Figure 3.3:
Figure 3.4:
Figure 3.5:
Figure 3.6:
Figure 4.1:
Figure 4.2:
Figure 4.3:
Figure 5.1:
Figure 5.2:
Figure 5.3:

Research methodology ............................................................ 10
Building systems integration (Russell 1981) ................................... 23
Manufactured Housing Factory (Banerj cc 2003) ............................. 32
Numbers contained in the Modular Number pattern up to 120 (Russell
.......................................................................................... 35
Matrix of specifics for LEED criterion ......................................... 45
Levels of integration (Rush 1986) ............................................... 58
BSIH matrix (Rush 1986) ........................................................ 59
Systems architecture for MEP integration (Korman 2001) .................. 63
Rainwater harvesting system requirements (Toolbase 2004) ............... 71
Hinged roof assembly (Fleet 2004) ............................................. 81
Eave overhang assembly (Reidelbach 1982) .................................. 81
Part BSIH matrix for 2-systems interactions along with reasoning... . 103
WHPC framework based on the EIM ......................................... 109
WHPC framework based on the LEED guidelines .......................... 109
Assumptions made based on the “Whole House calculator” ............... 114
Weights for each building system ............................................. 114
Comparison of scores obtained ................................................. 120

ix

Chapter 1 — Introduction

1.1 Overview

Provision of adequate housing has been a primary concern in all societies and
over the years, various attempts have been made to address this need. The most
significant among them has been the mass production movement or the industrial
revolution (Reidelbach 1982). Manufactured homes (MH), which are mass-produced
within a controlled factory facility, have been the leaders among the factory-built housing
sector within the United States. The average square foot cost of a manufactured house is
10 to 35% less than a comparable site-built house (MHI 2005). It has also been observed
that the multi section home shipments have been increasing steadily (MHI 2005).

Previous research funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) at Michigan
State University (MSU) and Purdue University, studied the present MH production
process and the assembly plant, in order to make the process more efficient (Banerjee
2003). The next step in the overall goal of being able to “produce homes, faster, at lower
costs and with high quality " is to question the very design of the home in order to make it
more efficient.

This next logical transition has been termed the “Whole House” approach.
According to the “Whole House Roadmap,” the “Whole House” approach is based on
Total systems integration, which leads to (1) an understanding of the impact of various
systems on other aspects of the house and then (2) uses that understanding of the impact
of systems interactions for better future designs with the goal of both avoiding
unintended negative interactions and improving performance without increasing cost

(PATH 2003).

Since the 19205, builders have tried to develop housing that could be mass
constructed. Many housing approaches stimulate “systems thinking” in design,
construction and maintenance of homes and a blurring of the lines between industrialized
and traditional construction. The beginning of “Whole House” can be traced back to the

late 1940’s with the introduction of mass productions concepts such as Levittown. This
was a community of 17,450 detached homes built within four years in Pennsylvania
(Martin 2004). Among the few national attempts to encourage housing technology
research in the last decade, Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing (PATH) is
the only program that was instituted in 1994 to address a variety of residential
construction sectors and performance traits. Through its efforts to improve the design
and construction industry as a whole, known as the National Construction Goals, PATH
was formally launched by the White House and US. Congress in 1998. While other
federal programs, such as the US. Department of Energy’s Building America and the
DOE/Environmental Protection Agency’s Energy Star, explore the specific contribution
of “Whole House” and “systems thinking” approaches to issues of energy and resource
consumption, PATH addresses multiple characteristics of housing performance (Martin
2004).

Before moving further into the discussion regarding “Whole House” and the need
for research on the topic, it is important to state the definitions of the various housing
forms. For the purpose of this thesis the following definitions for site-built homes ,
factory-built homes and hybrid homes will be applicable:

I Site-Built homes -— Housing constructed mostly at the home site (Senghore 2001).

' Factory-Built homes — Homes built largely within a factory facility on an
assembly line and partly assembled on site. The major kinds of factory built
homes are as follows: modular, panelized and manufactured homes. Previous
research conducted at MSU and Purdue focused on Manufactured homes, which
are built according to the HUD code within a factory facility as a single, or a
double section for the complete home (Senghore 2001).

' Hybrid homes — Homes that are completed as an integration of site-built with one
or more forms of factory-built homes. There have been many attempts in the past
to hybridize home production, among them, the “on-site” factory concept (Cohen
2003), where the factory facility is mobile and is set up on the site itself, and the
on-going research on the design of hybrid homes (Garcia 2005).

Although the body of knowledge and approaches to this concept are diverse and
manifold, it is the author’s understanding that “sustainable design” is an important
inference of the “Whole House” approach. Sustainable design is the design of a home,
which is environmentally responsive in terms of overall energy consumption and
construction materials. In other words, it is a design that has minimal negative impact on

global resources.

1.2 Need statement

Research has been conducted so far with focus on improving the production
process of a factory-built home as well as the supply chain and the layout design of the
production facility (Hammad 2001, Senghore 2001, Chitla 2002, Mehrotra 2002,Banerjee

2003, Barriga 2003, Barshan 2003, Sabharwal 2004). In addition to the production

aspect, it is also important to consider other aspects of housing design and construction.
Overall performance of the house, as well as case of preconstruction through the
reduction of players involved, construction and maintenance are important issues.

It is difficult to affect change in a complex industry such as home building. This is
due to fragmentation of the industry, lack of new techniques and involvement of a large
number of trades in the building process. As a result, assimilation of new technology is
slow and geographically scattered leaving the homebuilding industry unchanged for a
long period of time. Inefficiencies, which are inbuilt into the production process, have
remained. Each building system is dealt with separately, consequently negative
interactions among them are inevitable and systems integration techniques must be
adopted (PATH 2001). Systems do not fimction efficiently leading to increased energy
consumption for the home. As part of systems integration, it is also important to address
responsible energy consumption and reduced environmental impact. It is estimated that
the residential building industry accounts for 20% of all energy consumption in the
United States (Koeleian 2005). It is important to address these deficiencies and develop a
process, which will allow the product to be more efficient. “Whole House” redesign,

which focuses on building systems integration, seems to be a reasonable direction to take.

1.2.] “Whole House” as an option

The “Whole House” approach promotes the idea that the home be viewed as a
system composed of different components which must work together. It is the author’s
belief that the “Whole House” approach is not revolutionary, for developers have made

isolated attempts over the years. But the idea of bringing all these concepts together is

1p.

revolutionary at this time; it may not be a viable option in the distant future. At present
the “Whole House” approach comes across as a credible direction to take in order to
revolutionize the homebuilding industry in the long run. The challenge it addresses is to
use the synergies among building systems to better the performance of the home (PATH
2003). Integrative systems thinking or systems integration is fundamental to the
generation of a design and in the approach to its implementation. The aim is to be able to
achieve both total system unification and complete independence while designing for
flexible programming (Rush 1986). The integrative system must achieve a design, so that
the failure of one building system may not affect any other. The proposed research is an

attempt to streamline and systemize the building systems integration.

1.2.2 Need for development of the criterion

At present, the literature relevant to the “Whole House” approach is fragmented,
and understanding of the approach is also incomplete. As a consequence, the process of
implementation of “Whole House” is unclear.

Research has been focused on developing a framework, which will form the basis
for effective design, building and maintenance of a “Whole House”. This would also help
in rethinking of the industry approach to design and construction of a home. The intent of
the proposed research is to develop a “Whole House” performance criteria framework,
based on the building systems integration approach. This will assist in systematically
tabulating all the concepts propagated by the “Whole House” approach and integrating

them into the design of a home. Since no such criteria exist in literature (PATH 2003,

Martin 2004), the output of the proposed research will be seen as a unique addition to this
field.

The author acknowledges the presence of other important issues dealt within the
purview of “Whole House”, such as site and consumer related factors. These factors will
not be included within the scope of this thesis. Moreover, certain aspects such as
chemical and biological process and their impact on indoor air quality will be discussed

as future research areas.

1.3 Overall goal and objectives
The overall goal of the research is the “development of a “Whole House”

performance criteria framework and its application to site-built, factory built and hybrid

housing.”

1.3.1 Objectives

1. To map the evolution of the “Whole House” approach.

2. To develop “systems integration models” in order to demonstrate systems
interactions and their impact on each other.

3. To develop a “Whole House” performance criteria framework.

4. To develop a sample “Whole House” criterion and apply it to site-built, factory-
built and hybrid case study homes.

5. To review the “Whole House” performance criteria framework based on feedback

from researchers and industry personnel.

. .. H . s- ,7.” L. H. vs.

 

1.4 Research scope and uniqueness

Previously, research has been conducted to model the MH production and
material flow process and to develop and implement simulation models in order to
identify the bottlenecks in this process. In addition, various aspects of production facility
layout, components assembly design, and supply chain management were explored. The
following research will be outside the realm of the production facility and will be
intended to address the issues relating to building systems integration within the overall
“Whole House” design. The author acknowledges that other aspects such as site and
consumer related factors as well as, indoor air quality relating to chemical and biological
aspects also exist and these topics will be addressed as a part of future research.

The understanding of “Whole House” has been based on the definition laid out by
the Whole House Roadmap, and therefore the proposed research will be restricted to the
identification of interactions of major building systems. Suitable performance parameters,
which relate to the performance expectations from identified building systems, will be
determined through research. The performance parameters defined here are not
considered as an exhaustive list. Many other parameters may exist, but for the purpose of
this thesis the major parameters have been included.

The author’s intent is to address the issue of residential design with a “Whole
House” approach. This will include both site-built and factory-built homes, where
factory-built homes are generic to all types of homes built within a factory facility, such
as manufactured, panelized, and modular homes. The sample criterion developed through

this research will be reviewed through feedback from researchers and industry

I“

professionals, and inferences will be drawn regarding the most effective use of this

criterion.

1.5 Methodology
The proposed research will be conducted using the following research steps. Each
research objective will be associated with one or more of the steps. The specific

objectives have been indicated in the form of a model in Figure 1.1.

1.5.1 Objective 1
To map the evolution of the “Whole House” approach.
Step 1 - Conduct Literature Review.
1. Origin of “Whole House” (Before 1990’s) —
a. The industrial revolution and design of buildings thereof (Russell 1981,
Dietz, Cutler 1971)
b. Evolution of modular design (Gilbert 1984)
c. Historical reference to the evolution of factory built housing and

Operation Breakthrough (Fein 1972)

2. Recent developments
a. HUD history and formation of PATH (Martin 2004, PATH 2000)
b. Whole House roadmap (PATH 2003)

c. NSF Research Agenda workshop focus group (Martin 2004)

3. Related examples

a. Concept home from PATH (PATH, URL 2004)

b. Zero energy home (ZEH) design (ZEH 2004)

c. Open building concepts and their relation to the “Whole House” approach.
Detailed references and discussion are included in Chapter 2.

(1. Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) — it is
anticipated that the framework developed through this research is akin to
the LEED specifications (LEED 2002).

4. Tools and techniques

a. Systems integration tools used to help determine the type and extent of
integration required. Detailed discussion and references are included in
Chapter 3.

b. Mechanical Electrical and Plumbing (MEP) integration and building
systems design. Detailed discussion and references are included in Chapter
3.

c. Recycled content materials, bio based materials and alternative framing
materials, which replace lumber. Integrative materials, allowing for
integration of uses; for example structured wiring, which integrate wiring
for telephone, data and video communication. Detailed discussion and
references are included in Chapter 3.

(1. Energy efficient design techniques. Detailed discussion and references are
included in Chapter 3.

e. Management tools and other contributors such as Lean design, supply
chain management, consumer perception. Detailed discussion and

references are included in Chapter 3.

pm .

 

.00. IO- 9.

322.232.. getaway. u... «Eu...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

«$6.3. 2.. 5 83. 8 9 2.8.5

1 .855... 9...? 3.5 .n
.o 39.5.. ....u .3330... . 80.9.... wee...
i . 32.5.3.8.
82.93.... 3...... I ..> _ can... a o. 5.... ..o........... .
1' o... .8. 50......» ME... < .N .35.. E... 22.. .eoEouaeaZ ..
5.3.... o... ”5......“ .. no.5... m...
.e 5......«3... ...... ...........o..n..a..... .o
2...... .3353... a 3.26.. .8 8.5.5.3. 5.8.. ...u.o.....o 3.2.”... ...
3......— Eo... 3...... 8.8 “7.2.... 8.:
326...... ....a 25.8.2 .9
5.8.. 2:89.»
3.2330 8.5—. 0.2.3 4......2 “52....— ....¢ 3:39.... mm: A.
.22....— _.....u.....o...>..n.. ......m 3.2.... 5...... .22.. 3.3.9.... 3.893 ...
£33.. ..c...u....c 95...... o. 3.58.. ”5...: .23. 8:333. ...... «.8... .v
0.: an EOU 1 => Eng—0...; t0n=¢= 26:33.8 Saw °_0>0A— I —= A—m-Hx— .6
_ ”2...... 5.5 a
83...... o... 250.. :39... 3.2.9 PEN ...
5.... .8. 5.3.... 5...
3 5:35.... 2.. £5.38- ... mks. 5...... 2...... 2.8.80 .a
.23....2. 2.95.... .2. 39.38... .N - 8.9.35. .533. .m
8.....7. 8.8 .o a... .. A .\ an...»
s
:9... ...... saw: 8 3.3.... .. _ 2.8. 359.33 snout. 59.38.. .9
... 0E... 2. .7962... 8.3: 9.2.3 4.
. =3. 9.29.3... SEEMS... 3.9.1...
... 3:50.. a... 3.8.8 25.9.. h. ES.
m .88....288. 3585.35 8 so... 9.0.0.5.... vogue... .050 . r. ”52....— ...n...8 3:03.353 .c eons—.93.. ...... 8.... 9:: a
o o... .3 on... o .
" 3:89.88 3.2.3.1.... 8:58....8... ..o 3am. . n... to. n. 9.. =. .. ...—. 83988-256 2.993— N
.
m 5.83.88 .0 8am. . u. sumac: 9.2.3.. .2. :fitO .—
u 9...... .96 3882.33. u
u .85.... s an... 2 232:... 28° 5:...- s... as: .o 3:35.. . m
u u
L

l‘l

1.5.2 Objective 2
To develop “systems integration models” in order to demonstrate systems interactions
and their impacts on each other.
The following methodology Steps 2 to 5 will be completed in order to accomplish
Objective 2, based on the modeling techniques described in Chapter 4.
Step 2 — Model the “Whole House” as an overall systems integration model.
This step consists of modeling the complete home at a macro level. This includes all the
building components such as the substructure, envelope, mechanical — electrical —
plumbing, HVAC and communication. This will be accomplished using the BSIH matrix.
It was determined that developing Building Systems Integration Handbook (BSIH)
matrixes for 2-system and 3-system interactions will provide the information required,

although the actual number of combinations can be many more when considering eight

building systems.
Step 3 — Determine performance parameters.

The performance parameters reflect the expectations from a “Whole House” design and

were based on the following:

0 Flexibility of usage and ability of the structure to adapt to different requirements over
time

0 Ease of construction

0 Ease of maintenance of all building components

0 Other identified parameters such as environmental responsiveness

11

Di

Step 4 — Understand the impact of “systems interactions” among the selected
building components.

This was accomplished by generating “systems decision models” for each set of building
system interactions based on the predetermined performance parameters. The
understanding of the systems interactions generated here forms the basis for the sample
“Whole House” performance criterion framework. It was determined that the systems
decision models developed for 2-system interactions are redundant and therefore the

models will be completed for all 58 possible 3-system interactions only.

1.5.3 Objective 3

To develop a “Whole House” performance criteria framework.

Step 5 — Review any existing attempts to define similar frameworks.

The following were identified as existing attempts, which will guide the production of the
“Whole House” performance criteria framework.

1. LEED — It is the most widely accepted set of guidelines for design and construction
of sustainable buildings. The LEED criterion is comprehensive in its approach taking
into account everything from site specifics to the materials used in the building. The
criterion specify credits, which must be met in order to receive the minimum
certification or the silver, gold or platinum certification based on the number of
credits received (LEED 2002).

Energy Star - The guidelines specify the design process to be employed for achieving

the Energy Star label based on the geographical location of a home (Energy 2003).

12

3. Environmental Impact Matrix (EIM) — The matrix is a tool developed by the Design
Work Group West Michigan Sustainable Business Forum. It is a rating system that
can be used as a template for rating environmental impact and can be used by product
developers for a wide variety of products and companies (DFE 1999).

4. Whole House Calculator — The “Whole House” calculator is a scoring system that
allows the user to determine whether the design of a home comes close to being an
ideal “Whole House” design based on a set of performance scores. The research is
presently being conducted at the Housing Research Center at Virginia Tech
University (O’Brien et al 2005).

Step 6 — Review and determine the appmpriate option and formulate the
framework.

Three options were considered for the framework; the first originating from the EIM
(DFE 1999), another originating from the “Decision Selection Method” (DSM 2005) and
the last based on the LEED guidelines format (LEED 2002). It was determined that the
LEED format was more comprehensive and allowed the user to systematically tabulate

all the information required.

1.5.4 Objective 4

T0 develop a sample “Whole House” criterion and apply it to site-built, factory-built and
hybrid case study homes.

Step 7 — To develop a sample “Whole House” performance criterion.

The sample criterion was formulated to demonstrate the usage of the framework. It is a

consequenbe of the framework, which is intended to be sufficiently flexible to include

13

 

 

4'

individual requirements and is therefore subjective to the researcher. The sample criterion
has three major sections based on which the building systems are defined; the intents
relating to each performance parameter when looking at one specific building system, the
strategies used to achieve these, and the information resources required. The information
resources are based on the literature review conducted.

Step 8 - To demonstrate the application of the sample criterion to site-built, factory-
built and hybrid case study homes.

This was accomplished through the application of the sample criterion on three case
studies one specific to each site-built, factory-built and hybrid case study homes. The
drawings and specifications for the site-built and hybrid home case studies were obtained
through a major homebuilder. The factory-built home case study was modified from the
design of the same home. The application of the sample criterion refers to a set of scores
attributed to the strategies employed in the design and construction of each home and

their effectiveness with respect to the performance parameters specified through research.

1.5.5 Objective 5

To review the “Whole House” performance criteria framework based on feedback form
researchers and industry personnel.

Step 9 - To compare the results obtained for the three case study homes.

The results were obtained in the form of points for each case study. These points were
then compared to the ideal “Whole House” score, which is the total number of points
obtained hypothetically if all strategies are considered highly effective. The results were

expressed as a percentage of the ideal score and then compared.

14

 

Step 10 — Feedback on the “Whole House” performance criterion framework and its
applications.

Feedback on the criterion was obtained through interviews with involved researchers, in
the production of the “Whole House Roadmap” and participants of the “Whole House”
focus area at the NSF Research Agenda Workshop, and with industry professionals

involved in the hybrid and innovative approaches to housing.

1.6 Expected outcomes and deliverables
The expected outcomes of this research will be as follows:
1. The organization of literature relevant to the “Whole House” approach.

2. The systems interactions model for a complete home.

3. Detailed systems interaction models for the identified building components.

4. A sample “Whole House” performance criteria framework.

5. A sample “Whole House” performance criterion and its application to site-

built, factory-built and hybrid homes.

The intent of the research is to set forth a framework for the development of a
sample performance criterion and not an accurate “Whole House” performance criterion
itself. The author concedes the criterion may take many forms based on individual
differences and therefore the accuracy of the criterion itself is not in question. It is

expected that this research will serve as a basis for further research into the development

of a comprehensive “Whole House” performance criterion.

15

 

4D

1.7 Summary

The anticipated impacts on the industry through the proposed research would be
manifold. Through the use of the “Whole House” approach, the building process from
design to commissioning would be streamlined. The attempt is to integrate the process of
building systems design such that the process is rendered much more efficient. The
proposed research touches upon the issue of responsible environmental design, which is
fast becoming a global concern.

The “Whole House” approach seems most appropriate in addressing the above-
mentioned issues. Although the origins of “Whole House” are not new the term has been
coined recently through the research conducted by PATH and as such, further research
must be attempted. The term includes within its purview all aspects of design,
management, construction and postconstruction issues. The approach would be most
valuable if assimilation in everyday construction can be achieved. This research is
intended to be an early attempt at addressing “Whole House” through the building

systems integration approach.

16

 

Chapter 2 — Literature Review — “Whole House” Evolution

2.1 Overview

According to NAHB analysis of department of commerce statistics - the median
cost of houses increased by 32% from 1992 to 1997 while the median salaries increased
by only 24% (PATH 2001). The Manufactured Housing (MH) industry has been one of
the largest proponents of affordable housing in the past, and thus previous research has
been focused on further reducing the cost incurred during production within the factory
facility.

The following research is a continuing academic exploration, from the
improvement of the MH factory facility design and production process set out by the
National Science Foundation (NSF) in the form of research grants awarded over the past
six years. This research seeks to explore beyond the factory facility and to address issues
that relate to the overall performance of the home including site-built, factory-built and
any hybrid of the two forms. In an effort to identify technological advancements in the
home building industry, Partnership for Advancement in Housing (PATH) released the
Whole House and Building Process Redesign Roadmap (PATH 2003). This chapter
includes the evolutionary process of the “Whole House” approach. Specific milestones,

which have been responsible for the generation of the concept, will be discussed.

2.2 Results of prior NSF research
NSF has funded two projects so far (Grant CMS-OO80209: Modeling of

Manufactured Housing Production and Material Utilization and Grant CMS-0229856:

l7

H

Manufactured Housing Production Process Analysis and Facility Layout) at Michigan

State University and Purdue University/University of Cincinnati. These projects focus on

MI-I production, facility layout, and material supply chain process, along with an effort to

define “Whole House” production (Syal et a1 2004).

The main aim of the first research project was to model the MH production and

material flow process and to develop and implement simulation models in order to

identify the bottlenecks in this process. In addition, preliminary aspects of production

facility layout were explored. As part of this research project and other related research

efforts at Michigan State University and Purdue University/University of Cincinnati, the

following theses and reports were produced.

Production and Material Flow Process Model for Manufactured Housing Industry
(Senghore 2001).

Simulation Modeling for Manufactured Housing Processes (Hammad 2001).
Performance Assessment Of Planning Processes During Manufactured Housing
Production Operations Using Lean Production Principles (Chitla 2002).

Facilities Design Process of a Manufactured Housing Production Plant (Mehrotra
2002)

Manufactured Housing Industry: Material Flow and Management (Barriga 2003).
Manufactured Housing Trends and Building Codes (Syal et a1 2002).

Until the intervention of NSF, limited research work has been completed in the

area of manufactured housing. Moreover, there have not been many research attempts,

which encompass both MH production improvement and overall supply chain efficiency.

However, through the NSF-PATH projects efficient production process and material flow

18

management in MH as well as innovative factory layouts were investigated and
developed.

In terms of building process optimization, a simulation model was developed for a
generic MH factory to identify process bottlenecks, which constrain productivity
(Hammad 2001). It was determined that the industry can benefit from the use of more
modern equipment, such as faster cranes and a less labor intensive way of moving
materials from feeder to main stations (Senghore 2001). At the same time, production
optimization was investigated considering factory layout Optimization. Following this,
space and proximity requirements in a production plant were developed as a process
model and detailed steps involved in the layout design generation process were compiled
(Mehrotra 2002, Banerjee 2003). Most recently, as part of a PhD Thesis at Purdue
University, an Activity-Streamlining Model (ASM) was developed for MH operations
using the critical path method that was tested via simulation on four factory design
alternatives such as, the spine, the J -shape, the central layout, and the U-shape. These
alternative designs offer productivity improvement as much as two, three, and four times,
respectively, when compared to the existing U-shape systems (Hammad 2003).

Jeong analyzed the characteristics of the current supply chain in the MH industry
at the macro level and identified significant process bottlenecks with regard to process
time from order to installation of a MH unit. It was determined that streamlining of the
information flow plays an important part in the overall performance of the supply chain
parties. Broad adoption of information technologies by the MH industry was also

recommended (J eong 2003).

19

As part of the second research project, investigators have completed work on

detailed aspects of production facility layout and supply chain management. The

completed work has resulted in the following theses and reports.

Decision Support System (DSS) for manufactured housing production process
and facility design (Abu Hammad 2003).

Supply chain analysis and simulation modeling for the manufactured housing
industry (J eong 2003).

Methodology for evaluating and ranking manufactured houses based on
construction value (Barshan 2003).

Material flow based analysis of manufactured housing production plant facility
layout (Banerjee 2003).

Integration of production process and material flow by developing alternative

component assemblies in order to produce homes at lower costs within the factory

(Sabharwal 2004).

2.3 Introduction to “Whole House”

The notion of the “Whole House” approach was pushed in the late 19403 with the

introduction of mass production concepts, Levitt and Sons constructed 17,450 detached

homes at Pennsylvania within a span of four years (Wright 1981). HUD’s 1969 launch of

Operation Breakthrough in response to US housing shortages added an impetus towards

the “Whole House” approach. Operation Breakthrough was instituted to invite

innovative models for mass producible housing, and many concept designs were

submitted. The complete list of conceptual designs submitted to HUD can be found in the

20

t...
(A

 
 
 

H\.

book entitled Housing systems proposals for Operation Breakthrough (HUD 1970).
Created to encourage “new technology, improving architectural design, using the full
range of labor skills and overcoming building code, zoning, and labor constraints,” these
systems incorporated all aspects of the design and construction process, including zoning
assessments, multiple-use designs, streamlined mass-produced building materials, and

expedited construction methods (Martin 2004).

2.3.1 History of “Whole House”

This section deals with the evolution of the “Whole House” approach. It is
apparent that this idea is not novel. The concepts have existed since the Industrial
Revolution, but the term “Whole House” was coined later, while assimilating all these
fragmented tools and concepts. The discussion begins with the origin of the concepts and
then continues with a discussion of initiatives, which deal specifically with the “Whole
House” approach. Similar initiatives over the world will also be discussed in brief to give
the reader an understanding of the extent of the “Whole House” presence in the world

community.

2.3.2 Origin of “Whole House” (before 1990’s)

The origin of the concepts, which are part of the “Whole House” approach, can be
traced back to the industrial revolution. A large impetus towards the inclusion of these
concepts into mainstream homebuilding was the “Operation Breakthrough” initiated by

HUD. These two initiatives are discussed in this section in some detail.

21

2.3.2.1 Industrial Revolution

Though the Industrial Revolution started in Great Britain in the late 18th century,
it spread rapidly to Europe and the USA. The most prominent example of the impact of
the industrial revolution in the United States is the city of Chicago. The Great Chicago
fire in the year 1871 gave designers an impetus to design the loop anew and the buildings
built there in the late 1800’s are hi gh-rise complex structures.

The progression of modern architecture saw in its wake the use of new materials,
such as steel, to design structures, the requirement for the resolution of complex building
systems existing within one structure, and finally mass production, rather than traditional
stick built, to facilitate and fasten the building process. Designers have been
experimenting with the issue of integrating complex services as part of a built structure.
This was achieved by using shell structures for roof and floor slabs, which provided the
building with structural integrity, as well as a convenient location of electrical, and
HVAC runs. The shell structures served the purpose of sound and heat insulation between
floors as well. The intent was to integrate services with the building structure to
economize space, along with increasing the efficiency and facilitating ease of access to

building services (Russell 1981).

22

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 2.1: Building systems integration (Russell 1981)

2.3.2.2 Operation Breakthrough

Operation Breakthrough, was an initiative by the federal government to promote
research and development in housing in the 19705. It was started in the summer of 1969
under the leadership of George Romney, Secretary of the United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD). All proposals were sorted into two categories:
(a) complete housing systems that were essentially ready for production and (b) advanced
components and concepts of software or approaches needing further research (Fein
1972). Due to lack of technical expertise and experience this particular approach was not
as successful as anticipated and failed to meet its overall objective of promoting new
technologies in housing. In spite of the perceived failure, several technologies were
identified and promoted. This laid the foundation for the development of the Partnership
for Advancing Technology in Housing (PATH), again an initiative of the US.

government (PATH 2000).

23

2.3.3 Similar initiatives across the world
Germany (F ein 1972)
> Null-Punkt (Zero point) — The system derives its name from the mode of
connecting the load-bearing members. In this system points of least stress or zero
stress occur at the weakest points and that the maximum stress occurs at the point
of maximum structural strength. Since these components were designed to be
prefabricated, the system would be easy to transport and relatively light for ease
of handling.
> Okal-House system — The system was designed to produce 2,000 units per year. It
dealt with the production of prefabricated components, being flexible enough to
be able to be arranged in fifty different housing designs.
United Kingdom (Fein 1972)
> Mark 45 - The system was built to permanent specifications and structures were
completely extendible and relocatable. It was essentially a panel system and used
external wall panels and structural steelwork.
Switzerland (Fein 1972)
> Norm-Modul system — The system was made up of three principal members, the
column with its variants, the beam, and the decking elements with thermal
insulation incorporated within them. The mechanical systems were distributed in
the basement and from there, carried up in ducts, which ran through a core in the
building. The design was on a 1.2 meter grid so that partitions could be planned as

per requirements.

24

France (Fein 1972)
> Fiorio system — This system was designed using load bearing walls, with a hollow
burnt clay core, which took advantages of the lightness and thermal insulation
qualities of clay products. Each panel consisted of an external layer of concrete
with a self-cleaning external finish. All units were designed to be prefabricated in
the factory and then transported to the site where they were set on trailers
designed to place the units vertically.
United States (Fein 1972)
> Levitt Technology — Proposal for a factory built volumetric module housing
system with flexibility in unit arrangement and floor plans. There were two basic
modular types: wet modules included baths, kitchens, and heating and air
conditioning units. Dry modules were essentially living spaces; wood framed
sectionalized housing modules that were factory produced.
> Triad — A 3 bedroom modular house produced by Hodgson Houses consisting of
two modules; one, which included the living areas. The plan here was open
without any partition walls. The other was a bedroom wing, which was separated
and thus quiet. Inserted between the two was a glass ended entry and dining unit.
The house included insulation and utilities, major kitchen appliances, plus interior

and exterior finishing.

25

 

2.3.4 Partnership for Advancement of Technology in Housing (PATH)

PATH is a partnership with the private sector initiated in the year 1998 when

Congress sanctioned $980,000 to HUD for work to be conducted by PATH, $10 million

has been appropriated since. The overall goal of PATH is:

"To stimulate the public and private sectors to develop and use new technologies

that could improve the performance and reduce the costs of American homes "

The aspects of home building researched are materials, products, tools and

equipment, subsystems, and systems that are incorporated into houses and the home

construction process. The PATH program seeks to achieve many goals:

Improved durability of materials and components

Reduced carbon emissions through reduced energy use

Reduced water use

Reduced construction waste

Increased use of recycled, engineered, or alternative construction materials
Increased use of renewable energy

Improved disaster resistance

Improved safety for construction workers

The program sets out roadmaps to promote research in certain key areas that are

identified by the panel of experts. One such roadmap is the Whole House and Building

Process Redesign Roadmap. All of the objectives described above have come together to

form the “Whole House” thought process (PATH 2000).

26

2.3.5 The Whole House Roadmap

The Whole House and Building Process Redesign Roadmap was prepared by
Newport Partners LLC for HUD, Office of Policy Development and Research under the
PATH initiative (PATH 2003). PATH has come about to address the following issue;
improve quality, durability, environmental efficiency, and aflordability of tomorrow '5
homes. Following this objective research is conducted on relevant subjects, so that they
may be addressed more thoroughly. Several roadmaps have been developed in the past to
facilitate this objective. With the same intention the Whole House Roadmap was initiated
in 2001 and finally completed and submitted in August of 2003. The roadmap begins
with a view of what the “Whole House” approach is understood to be; it then proceeds to
detail specific visions, goals and objectives, along with the methods for achieving these.
Finally it suggests some future research areas, which may be looked into. The “Whole
House” vision is defined by the roadmap as follows:

“By 2010, home design and construction is eflicient, predictable, and controllable

with a median cycle time of 20 working days from groundbreaking to occupancy

with resulting cost savings that make homeownership available to 90 percent of

the population. Homebuyers are pleased with the product since the homes have

fewer defects and builders and subcontractors improve margins through the sale

of more homes. ”

The “Whole House” approach is largely defined in the context of the “systems
approach”. The systems approach, or systems integration, suggests that the home be
viewed as a system comprised of several different components and participants. The key

to “Whole House” redesign is to anticipate and resolve conflicts that arise between these

27

components at the outset so that the design and construction process will be rendered
more efficient. It is also important to take advantage of the synergies or interactions
between two or more building systems; for example, integrated communications wiring
which is now available and is referred to as “Structured wiring”; we shall discuss and
many other products in detail in Chapter 3. The systems approach is not new to
construction; designers have been exploring possibilities such as structural designs,
which incorporate wiring and plumbing systems within them.

The roadmap recognized several barriers to the inclusion of “Whole House”
concepts into mainstream homebuilding. The industry is fragmented and this situation is
not conducive to innovation. Aesthetics and function appear to be primary consideration
for the design of homes, whereas durability, energy efficiency, or systems design seems
to be secondary. The regulatory process and consumer perception hamper innovation,
since small homebuilders do not want to take risks. Certain objectives have been set out
to address the above-mentioned issues. These are:

0 Integrating various subsystems or components to optimize design and operation

0 Integrating fiinctions of various components or subsystems in a home

0 Modifying the management approach and/or other processes to simplify the schedule,
reduce negative interdependencies and simplify construction

0 Expanding the use of factory-built assemblies including whole-building systems.

This research is based largely on the understanding of the “Whole House”
approach set out by the Whole House roadmap. The focus will be on building systems

integration.

28

2.3.6 PATH Research Agenda Workshop
To further research ideas upon the “Whole House” approach, the NSF -PATH
housing research agenda workshop was organized and executed in Florida in February
2004. Position papers were submitted by 45 housing researchers under five focus areas
(1) Construction Management and Production; (2) Structural Design and Materials; (3)
Building Enclosures, Energy, and Indoor Air Quality (IAQ); (4) Housing Technology,
Community and the Economy; and (5) Systems Interactions and “Whole House”
Approach.
For the purpose of this research we shall focus Area 5, which refers to the “Whole
House” approach. Under this title the following research papers were most significant:
- “Building the whole greater than the sum of its parts: contextual zing ‘whole
house’ technologies and initiatives” Focus area summary paper (Martin 2004).
' “Whole House Production: Integration of Factory-built and Site-built
Construction” (Syal et a1 2004).
' “Automated Construction by Contour Crafting — Related Robotics and
Information Technologies” (Khoshnevis 2004).
' “Bio-Based Composite Materials for Whole House Design: Potential
Applications and Research Needs” (Shenton et al 2004).
' “Whole House Design Through the Application of Multi-functional Precast

Panels” (Ellis et al 2004).

29

2.3.7 The PATH concept home

The PATH concept home is an attempt to demonstrate the objectives of the
“Whole House” approach and its realistic inception into mainstream design of homes. An
architectural model of the home was created to demonstrate these concepts. The model
was displayed at Portland, Oregon, and at the 2005 International Builders' Show at
Orlando, Florida.

The primary objective to be accomplished by the home is that it should be able to
adapt to change and thus a flexible floor plan has been designed, which can be changed
as per the changing requirements of the occupants. The next step is to make sure that all
building systems function independently, so that there are no tangled electrical,
communication and plumbing lines hidden within the walls. This is referred to as the
“systems thinking” or the “Whole House” approach. After having separated the building
systems it is important to organize their distribution through the home, and for this
purpose a utility chase is incorporated that includes electrical, HVAC, communication
and plumbing services within one space. This process will facilitate the ease of
maintenance and upgrading of the utilities at any point without disturbing the structural
fabric of the home. The home also integrates the use of factory built components with site
built technologies using the most optimum of the two to reduce the production time,
traditionally six to nine months, to 20 days. Finally it propagates the use of integrative
materials; for example, the roof incorporates solar panels as part of the envelope, as well
as an electricity-generating device.

The concept home has been referred to as the home of the future “which evolves

with its occupants ” and is made up of “moveable walls It is a step towards a “Whole

30

 

, .-

4.1.

‘v.

 

 

 

‘ \
"‘~ 5.
u

.-,
o...

‘ «.-

4 'V
\

-..,_ a
"r

. s.._
.V‘ ‘

‘ n

v v

 

 

1.;
. n
n.
-.
\-
.
\ . -
'I..
4".
la. ..
.. ‘
I
\‘I_,\-.
K"
‘-.
.5
. ‘..
d
. .__
\_ fl
. ,‘
_ .

 

House” design and demonstrates the practical applicability of the techniques propagated

thereby (PATH, URL 20040.

2.4 Factory-Built homes

Factory-built homes are defined as those homes that are built, either partially or as
a whole, within a factory facility and then transported to a site where they are assembled.
These homes have proven to be affordable alternatives to housing in the United States.
The development has been rapid and now many manufacturers offer consumers a variety
of choices, which make the product all the more attractive. The genesis of this kind of
home is from the “mobile homes” concept, which was further improved to form the

Manufactured, Modular and Panelized homes (Senghore 2001).

2.4.1 Manufactured

At the outset all factory-built homes were referred to as mobile homes. As the
factory-built housing industry matured and both products and production process became
more sophisticated, distinctions were made among the types of factory-built homes. The
name was coined in the year 1980 by the federal government when all industrialized
housing came to be referred to as “Manufactured homes” or “HUD code homes”. These
are factory-built home units, which can be built either as a single section, or a double
section, based on the space requirements. These sections are then transported in entirety
to the specific site. The share of manufactured housing among all factory-built housing is

relatively large. It was estimated that in the year 1998 the percentage of affordable

31

housing covered by MH was 22.7%, since then the numbers have decreased but not
substantially (Banerjee 2004, MHI 2000).

A manufactured home is a unit that is mostly completed in a factory setting. The
manufactured home goes through five different stages in the assembly line within the
manufacturing facility, starting from station one, where the chassis is assembled, to the
final station where the home is finally cleaned up and ready to be delivered at site. These
homes meet the HUD codes, and resemble the site-built homes to a large extent (Banerjee

2004).

 

Figure 2.2: Manufactured Housing Factory (Banerjee 2003)

2.4.2 Modular

Defined as non-residential structures that are 60 to 100 percent factory-built,
commercial modular buildings are designed so that they can be constructed at one
location, the factory, and then used by occupants at another location where the building is
to be placed. Although originally used to design commercial buildings, the technology is

also used in the housing sector. The word "modular" describes a construction method

32

 

 

‘Y'

,. u

where individual modules stand-alone or are assembled together to make up larger
structures (MOD URL 2004a).

Primarily, four stages make up modular construction. First, design approval by the
end user and any regulating authorities; second, assembly of module components in a
controlled environment; third, transportation of modules to a final destination; and fourth,
erection of modular units to form a finished building. These homes are built as per
manufacturers predetermined designs, along with client input (MOD URL 2004b).
Modular homes relate to a larger extent to traditional stick built homes, which increases
their overall popularity. This is because it is possible to affect more complex designs
through the stacking of several boxed units that can be designed and completed within a

factory. These homes must meet state or local building codes at the parent site.

2.4.3 Panelized

Panelized homes are defined as homes where panels are built as flat units that
represent a whole wall with windows, doors, wiring and outside siding. These are
constructed in the factory and then transported to the site and assembled. Panelized
homes must meet the state or local building codes specific to their location (Senghore
2001)

Exterior wall panels are constructed on a horizontal wall table. Working on the
flat surface, all the panels for one side of the house are built together. The wall panels are
framed with studs and plywood. Windows are installed in the panels at the factory facility
when the wall is flat on the table, so considerable time is saved on the site. Wall panels

are available in two forms, “open” wall panels for buildings with less post and beam

33

\n.

 

 

 

frame, or occasionally in areas where “closed” panels are not approved. Although the
same construction system is used open panels are shipped with no inside finish or
insulation; hence, the term, “open”, whereas “closed” panels have insulation and interior
finish installed. The roof panels consist of rafiers, insulation, exterior plywood top, and
interior finish fabricated to panel sizes. For the roof panels, the frame is built, then a
vapor retarder, insulation, and the interior ceiling finish is installed. The panels are
vented, providing an air space running from the vent strip at the bottom to the ridge vent
at the peak. Panelized housing is not as popular as manufactured or modular housing; it
represented only 6.3 % of the total share of factory built housing according to a 1998

census (Banerjee 2004).

2.4.4 History

The concept of modular systems came into existence in the early 1960’s. Created
by Le Corbusier, the “modular is a measuring tool based on the human body and
mathematics”(Fein 1972). Along with Le Corbusier, other architects such as Moshe
Safdie promoted the concept. Moshe Safdie is possibly one of the beginning thinkers of
prefabrication and ease of construction through design. His name is indivisibly attached
to the Montreal Fair — Expo 67 and his exhibition there of the Habitat. I quote the
designer: (Gilbert 1984)

“...in order to take the 75% of building into a factory you have to deal not with

the panels but with volumes of space. You had to fabricate cells of space in the

factory and put your mechanical services, plumbing, bathrooms whatever else

there was into them in an assembly line procedure. You would then assemble the

34

modules on site and if connections were simple you would have a 95 % factory

produced building”

Component sizes needed to be standardized so that there is no waste of material
during fabrication. The Modular Number pattern based on this principle called for a range
of basic product sizes based on the elimination of prime numbers and their multiples

starting with 7.

 

1,2,3,4,5,6,8,9,l0,12,15,16,] 8,20,24,27,30,32,36,40,45,48,54,60,64,72,80,90,

96,108,120

 

 

 

Figure 2.3: Numbers contained in the Modular Number pattern up to 120 (Russell

1981)

The concept of standardization was translated into factory produced components,
or boxed units, which were assembled on site, thereby cutting down construction time.
Factory fabrication and assembly of compatible subsystems results in the production of
three dimensional space modules which are complete or partially complete and can be
used to form entire buildings that require varying degrees of on-site finishing (Russell

1981).

2.5 Recent developments

This section deals with other schools of thought on building design that feed into
the “Whole House” approach. Open building concepts, Lean construction and Zero
energy homes all contribute in some manner to the concepts inherent to the “Whole

House” approach. It is important to discuss all these developments in order to have a

35

 

due

complete understanding of the entirety of the “Whole House” approach and, therefore,

the expectations of such as a design.

2.5.1 Open building

Residential Open Building is an integrative approach to design, financing,
construction, fit-out and long-term management processes of residential buildings. The
intent is to analyze the processes in all their complexities to determine appropriate tools
and techniques to complete a design in an organized manner. Open building lends itself
to adaptation and ease of construction. The intent is to extend the usability of the product
(the built structure) over its lifetime, inasmuch as the structure is able to adapt to new
uses during its lifetime. The early realizations of this approach were spearheaded by John
Habraken, who was a young Dutch architect. He published a small volume titled
“Supports: An Alternative to Mass Housing” which is a translation fiom the original
1962 text (Habraken 1972). He noted that mass housing had altered the relationship of a
dweller with his environment. Habraken believed that it was important to consider the
lack of personal relationship with a dwelling environment as perpetrated by the industrial
revolution. The intent was to be able to give the dwellers a reasonable degree of choices
as to the interior placement of their particular unit; thus, the aspect of mass production

could be interposed with the notion of individual choice (Kendall 2000).

2.5.1.1 Decision making parameters in open building

The following objectives are set out by Open building adopters (Kendall 2000):

I The users choice during design.

36

I The building process is a team effort and must be coordinated as so.

I All building systems are replaceable and can be integrated — The concept of
the Fit-out.

I All building systems and the building as a whole must be able to assimilate
change.

I The built environment is the product of an ongoing design process, which
transforms periodically. There is a dynamic approach to the built form and
design.

I The distinct levels of intervention must be recognized such as:

> Urban level decisions involve the public realm which includes built
form and space, infrastructure requirements such as local amenities,
roads, parking, utility, setbacks, street furniture and so on.

> Support (base building) level involves those parts of the building,
which are common to all occupants such as the base building.

> Infill (fit-out) level includes the interior structural aspects of the built
structure, which is sustained for a period of 10-20 years.

> Layout level is as the name suggests, the internal layout of the building

unit.

2.5.1.2 Key concepts

The following statements are the key concepts for the open building approach

(Kendall 2000):

37

*9

u:

2.5.2

Levels — The intent is to design according to the distinct decision-making
levels defined as above. The theory of levels takes into account that several
parties have several levels of control between the phases of the building.
Supports — The supports include the shared utilities of the built structure, such
as building structure and facade, staircases, electrical, and HVAC.

Infill — These systems are used to infill an existing support system. They
include complex mechanical systems.

Unbundling decision-making —- The concept is to divide the building into
distinct bundles of technology. Here the systems integration aspect relating to
building systems comes into play.

Capacity — The idea of capacity includes designing the form to be an open-
ended and dynamic fabric and designing space or form (at multiple scales)
with built-in capacity to accommodate more than one “program of function”
over time.

Sustainability — The issue of sustainable design or environmentally responsive

design must be taken into consideration as well.

Sustainable development

In 1987 the United Nations World Commission on Environment and

Development report entitled “Our Common Future” formalized the use of sustainable

development by providing the first definition (DFE 1999):

"meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future

generations to meet their own needs. "

38

The notion of equity associated with the use of natural resources was not only
extended not only to physical areas but also among generations of inhabitants. As we
begin to realize that we are using natural resources at a rate, which cannot equal the
renewal process, we must include processes that reduce the waste of energy in any form.
As of the present, the homebuilding industry has been left far behind in its ability to
embrace this very important requirement. As a result, only about 10% of new homes in
the United States are built significantly above the minimum efficiency standards

(Koeleian 2005).

2.5.3 Zero energy homes

A Zero Energy Home (ZEH) combines state-of-the-art, energy-efficient
construction and appliances with commercially available renewable energy systems such
as solar water heating and solar electricity. This combination can result in net zero energy
consumption. A ZEH, like most houses, is connected to the utility grid, but can be
designed and constructed to produce as much energy as it consumes on an annual basis.
With its reduced energy needs and renewable energy systems, a ZEH can, over the course
of a year, give back as much energy to the utility as it takes (DOE 2004). Researchers
plan to carry this even further by defining the next stage for such a design would be to
generate enough energy to give back to the local grid over and above its own usage
capacity; these are referred to as Net Positive homes.

Zero Energy Homes have a number of advantages over traditionally built homes;
they provide improved comfort conditions for the occupants, since the energy-efficient

building envelope reduces temperature fluctuations and, as such, is more reliable during

39

 

 

 

la-

 

blackouts. There is added financial security since the home generates its own energy it
protects the user from fluctuations in energy prices. And of course environmental

sustainability since a ZEH saves energy and reduces pollution (ZEH 2004).

2.5.4 Lean construction

Lean construction is a derivative of the original Lean production system
envisioned by Henry Ford for improving the productivity of the Ford Motor Plant. The
Lean vision revised on the concept of mass production in order to include within it
aspects such as consumer specific design, continuous improvement, error proof
management and just in time are the founding beds of this philosophy. The Lean
construction philosophy also stems from these very dictates of maximizing value and
minimizing waste. The primary propagator of this thought process was the book he
fichine That Changed The World (Womack et al. 1990). Lean construction may be
defined as follows (Womack et al 1996):

“Lean construction is a production management based project delivery system

emphasizing the reliable and speedy delivery of value. It challenges the generally

accepted belief that there is always a trade between time, cost and quality. "

2.5.4.1 Key concepts
The following concepts are key to the Lean construction philosophy (LC 2004):
I Project Delivery is the simultaneous design of the facility and its production
process concurrently so as to determine the design as per the performance

requirement from the production process.

40

2.5.5

Value engineering, or value to the customer, is defined, created and delivered
throughout the life of the project.

Performance is based on maximizing value and minimizing waste at the
project level.

Decision-making is decentralizing through transparency and empowerment.
This means providing project participants with information on the state of the
production systems and empowering them to take action.

Action is coordinated through pull and continuous flow as opposed to
traditional schedule driven push, with its over-reliance on central authority
and project schedules to manage resources and coordinate work.

Control is defined as making things happen. Planning system performance is
measured and improved to assure reliable workflow and predictable project

outcomes.

Supply Chain Management

With the introduction of the “Whole House” approach to the home building

process, it will be necessary to reconsider the alignment of the supply chain. This is

essential to render the entire process efficient. Technological advancements and

recommendations can only be successful if the supply chain has the ability to mould itself

to serve best within the prevailing circumstances. It will be essential to recommend

updated supply chain characteristics, along with means and methods to integrate the

supply chain with the “Whole House” process model.

41

 

 

The inception of the currently prevailing supply chain is associated with the
housing boom after the World War II. After the Housing Act was passed in the year
1949, almost one million new low-cost housing units were commissioned for
construction; at this time, the importance of a fast and reliable supply chain became
apparent. It is predicted that 75% of the home building will be carried out by the 20
largest homebuilders in the industry by the year This hypothesis is questionable, simply
because the infrastructure, in this particular case the supply chain, is not adequate at
present to fulfill the demands of organizations that continue to grow larger. Initial forays
into expanding the domain of access were achieved by the introduction of the web-based
supply chain. Quote:

“Davidow and Malone (1992) in their visionary book, “The Virtual

Corporation, " predicted that information processing capabilities would result in

a business revolution. "

It has been recognized in academic circles that the use of information technology (IT)
will provide “value-adding solutions to remove waste and latency from supply chains”

(John et al 2004).

2.6 Existing attempts at developing a criterion

The following guidelines are most widely accepted as guidelines for the design
and construction of energy efficient homes. Both LEED and Energy Star guidelines are
comprehensive and address all the issues relating to design and construction of a home. It
is the author’s opinion that the LEED guidelines are more comprehensive in the sense

that they take into account site specifics, along with materials and performance of the

42

.0
.‘II‘ I
3'“ n
u.-
~:-'\; 1 1‘
A”. D.
p-v- -,;
,r'. ..'.
._ .

If

.

v~u _rll
‘ ?.
“>1
{r .

" ’ L.
O
i" ..
~ ~
T"...
-

 

-
r
A“.
‘a
"s
' "i.
..,.
.
1
'r
‘ l
“.-
. ,
.- ‘
. ,.
". .
‘ .
v
.
‘4._
‘ -
.,.
v
H.
I.

 

 

 

built structure. The LEED guidelines format will serve as a point of departure for the
sample “Whole House” criterion. This section includes other concepts, which may lend
themselves to the formulation of the sample criterion, such as the Environmental Impact
matrix, the “Whole House calculator” (which is a recent addition to the body of
knowledge) and other contributors.

Finally the author feels it is important to recognize the existence of attempts made
by the EPA to promote energy efficiency in construction in the form of the CTSA and the
Federal guidelines. The Federal guidelines are significant because they are the first
comprehensive recognition of requirements for sustainable design for federal buildings.

This might lead to a wider acceptance of “green building” or “sustainable building”.

2.6.1 Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)

The LEED certification standard is a product of the US Green Building Council
(USGBC). It is the most extensive and well-recognized certification standard, which
distinguishes green building design. The intent is to outline design guidelines, along with
a design-training program toward sustainable design. The formal mission statement set
out for the LEED guidelines by the USGBC is as follows (LEED 2002):

“LEED encourages and accelerates global adoption of sustainable green

building and development practices through the creation and implementation of

universally understood and accepted standards, tools and performance criteria. ”

The LEED certification is processed along two different levels, the Horizontal
products are main LEED products which span the full range of possible building types

and phases in the life of a building, whereas Vertical products are specific technical

43

 

features of the buildings or the processes that take place within them that demand special

treatment. In these instances, a LEED Application Guide gives specific advice on how to

apply LEED and also on any special exceptions or interpretations that can be used to deal

with specific problems or simply to assist an application. The certification standard is

given out at 4 distinct levels of compliance:

LEED Certified projects achieve 40% or more of the Core Credits
LEED Silver projects achieve over 50% of the Core Credits
LEED Gold projects achieve over 60% of the Core Credits

LEED Platinum projects achieve over 80% of the Core Credits

The general characteristics of the sections specified for the LEED guidelines for

New Construction & Major Renovations (LEED-NC) Version 2.1 (LEED 2002) have

been simplified in the form of a matrix developed by the author depicted in part in Figure

3, the complete matrix is included as part of Appendix A.

44

actuate Guam: .5. 353% .3 5.332 3.." 9...“:—

 

.§§§6m§._§_m5
wtegbmmmvocamm. uofimssfigofi
figsceamfltnméomfiggcmsg

an: an 9.25. 83 .335:
$358383 8 53 83cm

99 Sn SE39 on a 5595 as
8.98 3:58 68 €305 Fa 85.53
x3582 3% $9.35 2 8:3?

6cm. 8835955938..“ 9.089
s an... 3 3.8.3.8 a gas“.

 

 

 

8.823] 1. n....4.....o..5.s.... 1.1
.6 9538 o. Eatoo 2 Emcee 85.82 88.05,,

 

92a .3608,“ 8% gm 2. mam-d

. . {lieu Eta .§_ 8.5.5

£§w~2mc§9§§$§c§

Ev8§56888§58mfim88§8 95.882. 860.8 aims—ESQ ésfismafiusgzamz F Egg 8
Soggm Evobmmamflegvmooog
a. .. n 4 .4... .ggficvfifibfii

Egg, «0

 

nfiflaBeamo.§e6§§=§a§E
Egcsauoocafiéopggfififififi
Sgggtsawngsumccsavazx,
seguesénzfiacraSaogEg

29299.
5; 85.3 8.55 Ba .828 $953
a.» on. ones base! 2 E58. 3 $80

It

.ofimS?§3m$8§_
gégfigscfbgg

saw—owwgwf Po

 

.gbmcnuwxxem.
§.§g§m§8§cfl:_§,
9.58.8 m§_b.06§.§s§. 58.. 588,

 

2.93 .8658
an 82 68.58 9.89 gm 8% E8

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

baggaggwhamfimimuomeégégggg assigns; E .38
898ia8<h25§8<h3§h5 agtfinfigfigrsxdi .4 1 . . llr r. SeantBomeSapm E
3 gig <
magi 8585 E25 .620 53:88 .2

 

 

45

2.6.2 Energy Star

Energy Star is a nationally recognized, voluntary program designed to identify
and promote energy efficient products, new homes and buildings to consumers and
businesses across the United States, developed by the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA). Homes that are independently verified to be at least 30% more energy efficient
than homes built to the 1993 national Model Energy Code or 15% more efficient than the
state energy code, whichever is more stringent.

The design, manufacturing, installation and certification procedures are described

below in the form of steps specified (Energy 2003):

I Step 1 - Select the climate region where the home will be cited based on the
Figure specified by the Energy Star guidelines.

I Step 2 - Select an Energy Star design package which is specified in tabular
form set out by the EPA: (1) select the climate region (2) select the duct
leakage level that the plant can hope to achieve (3) select the type of heating
equipment (4) finally select the appropriate U values or the Solar Heat Gain
Coefficient (SOGC).

The following specifics are stated in the matrix to be followed in order to achieve

the Energy Star rating.

I Maximum Duct leakage - Refers to the amount of leakage from an air
distribution duct as measured using a “Duct Blaster”.

I Minimum Heating Equipment Efficiency - Electric heat pumps — ARI (Air-
Conditioning and Refiigeration Institute). Here the performance specification

to be considered is the HSPF (Heating Seasonal Performance Factor). Fossil

46

fuel-burning furnaces — GAMA (Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association).
Here the performance specification to be considered is the AFUE (Annual
Fuel Utilization Efficiency).

Maximum U value - Refers to the ability of the home’s envelope to resist heat
flow. This value should be calculated such that all surfaces that impact energy
use are considered.

Solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC) - Refers to the ability of the window to
block solar heat from entering the home. The higher the SHGC the more solar
heat is transmitted through the window.

Minimum Hot Water Equipment Efficiency -— Energy efficiency of the hot
water heater measured in terms of Energy Factor.

Thermostat Type — Programmable thermostat.

Minimum Cooling Equipment Efficiency - Equipment rating as certified by
ARI and published in the ARI Directory of Certified Unitary Products. Air
conditioners and heat pumps in the cooling mode are rated in terms of
Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio (SEER).

Heat Recovery Ventilator - A heat recovery ventilator (also called an air—to-air
heat exchanger) is a ventilation system that consists of two separate air-
handling systems; one collects and exhausts stale indoor air and the other
draws in fresh outdoor air and distributes it throughout the home. At the core
of an HRV is a heat transfer module. Both the exhaust and flesh air streams
pass through this module, and the heat from the exhaust air is used to preheat

the fresh air stream. Only the heat is transferred; the two air streams remain

47

physically separate. Typically, an HRV is able to recover 70-80 % of the heat
from the exhaust air and transfer it to the incoming air. This dramatically

reduces the energy needed to heat fresh air to a comfortable temperature.

2.6.3 Environmental Impact Matrix

The “Environmental Impact Matrix” (EIM) is a tool developed by the Design
Work Group West Michigan Sustainable Business Forum as a rating system to evaluate
progress toward achieving sustainability in new products and services. The goal in
creating the matrix was to establish a system that can be used as a template for rating
environmental impact. It is usable by product developers for a wide variety of products
and companies (DFE 1999).

The idea is based on Life Cycle Thinking (LCT), which is a unique way of
addressing environmental problems from a systems perspective. In this way of thinking, a
product or service system is evaluated or designed with a goal of reducing potential
environmental impacts over its entire life cycle. Put simply, the LCT results are
qualitative in nature whereas the Life cycle analysis (LCA) results are quantitative (DFE
1999)

It is important to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the tool before using
it. The strengths of the Environmental Impact Matrix are as follows:

I It is easy to use, straightforward and logical.
I If used consistently, it will provide a measure of product-to-product

improvements.

48

I It is a self-analysis and enabling tool to help a company reduce its
environmental impact over time.
I The total score is useful as a comparative environmental impact

measurement between similar internal products.

The weaknesses are as follows:

I It cannot be used as a complete Life Cycle Assessment.
I Hard data may not be available to support each company’s index values,

in which case experience and judgment should prevail.

The procedure to implement this tool is as follows:

1.

Step One: First, in the horizontal rows list all the various materials, sub-
processes, etc. that go into a product or service. List one product or service per
EIM, using multiple pages as necessary.

Step Two: Assign a value range using internal company goals, objectives, or
definitions to determine least impact and worst impact. The matrix uses a
range of 0 to 5 range but the user should feel free to adjust numeric values to
better reflect company goals or priorities. If an environmental aspect is not
relevant, a zero rating may be used.

Step Three: The physical weight of each component should be recorded in the
Physical Weight column. It may be beneficial to include all material needed
including waste, not just the material in the final product.

Step Four: Go across the matrix for each line item component, add each

impact value, and record the sum in the Subtotal Column.

49

5. Step Five: Multiply the subtotal by the weight and record for each line item
component.

6. Step Six: Record the final score in the Final Score space.

The intent of the matrix is to allow the developer to perform “what if” scenarios

based on current production practice to determine the least environmental impact score.

2.6.4 The “Whole House” calculator

The “Whole House” calculator is a quantitative model, which allows the user to
determine whether the design of a home is close to being a “Whole House” design. The
research is being conducted at the Housing Research Center at Virginia Tech University
(O’Brien et a1. 2005). The calculator is a tool that takes into account the processes,
products and materials used to design, engineer, and construct a house. Then the
calculator uses performance scores for each characteristic of the house that are
customized by the requirement of the prospective buyer or builder and then modified by
the way the materials and processes interact with each other to arrive at a “whole house
score”. This whole house score is compared to the ideal whole house score for the same
home in percentile. The user may then conduct analysis to determine which design is
closest to being a “Whole House” design. The “Whole House” calculator serves as a
comparison tool rather than a design tool. It does not assist the user in designing a
“Whole House” but rather in determining whether a pre-designed home fits the
performance requirements of a “Whole House” (O’Brien et al. 2005).

The Battelle Method that is described below serves largely as the scoring system

for this approach and acts as the skeleton for the “Whole House Calculator”. Both the

50

choice of the buildings systems and the kinds of interactions are the opinion of the
authors. The credits assigned to building systems as well as the scoring of the interactions
are based on the researchers’ understanding. The authors intend to conduct a process of
validation through the review of this report by an experts’ panel. However at this time the
“Whole House Calculator” may be viewed as an industry model rather than pure

academic research.

2.6.4.1 The Battelle method

The “Whole House” calculator is based on the method developed by the “Battelle
Columbus Laboratory” in the United States. Although referred to the Battelle method in
the calculator text it is originally called the Environmental Evaluation System (EES). The
method lists seventy-eight parameters based on environmental, social and economic
aspects based on their level of importance. These levels of importance are associated with
a value between 1 and 1000, and then curves of quality of environment are generated,
compared to each parameter. Four categories are defined under which the human
environmental is assessed; these are ecology, physical and chemical factors, aesthetic
factors and social interest. These four factors are divided into twenty components that are
further subdivided into eighty-one parameters.

The categories, components and parameters are arranged in descending order.
Each category is associated with a relative coefficient of importance from 0 to 1. Finally
the relationship between each of the eighty-one parameters and environmental quality are
generated based on the afore-mentioned curves. A variation of this method is used to

formulate the “Whole House” calculator.

51

 

H

S

 

i1!

0:.

2.6.5 Other contributors

This section includes some of the methods found during literature review that may
prove useful in the formulation of the criteria in the future. It is the author’s opinion that
at this time the methods stated in this section are in their inception stages and may require
some more relevant research before they are useful. Also these methods were not directly
useful for the study in question, since the “Cleaner Technology Substitute Assessment”
method addresses the use of chemicals in the industry and the federal guidelines are
primarily a federal document that recognizes the impact of environmentally conscious

design and seeks to assimilate these methods in the mainstream homebuilding industry.

2.6.5.1 Cleaner Technology Substitute Assessment (CTSA)

The Cleaner Technology Substitute Assessment (CTSA) is a methodology for
evaluating the comparative risk, performance, cost, and resource conservation of
alternatives to chemicals currently used by specific industry sectors. This is developed by
the US. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Design for the Environment (DfE)
Program, the University of Tennessee Center for Clean Products and Clean Technologies,
and other partners in voluntary, cooperative, industry-specific pilot projects. The relevant
terminology used is described below (EPA 2004):

I A Cleaner Technologies Substitutes Assessment (CTSA) is a repository for all of the
technical information developed by a DfE project, including risk, competitiveness
(i.e., performance, cost, regulatory status, market availability), and conservation data.

A use cluster is a product- or process-specific application in which a competing set of

52

chemical products, processes, or technologies can substitute for one another to
perform a particular function.

I A substitute or an alternative is any traditional or novel product, technology, or
process that performs a particular function.

I A substitutes tree is a graphical depiction of: (1) the alternative chemical products,
technologies, or processes that make up the use cluster; and (2) their relationship to
each other within the functional category defined by the use cluster.

I An information module is a standard analysis or set of data on the substitutes.
Information modules are designed to build on or feed into one another to form an

assessment of the substitutes.

2.6.5.2 Federal guidelines

It is important to point out the existence of this federal document as it
acknowledges the fact that green building or sustainable design has become an important
and accepted aspect of construction today. The DRAFT Federal Guide for Green
Construction Specs is being deve10ped by EPA in a partnership with the Federal
Environmental Executive and the Whole Building Design Guide, to help Federal building
project managers meet various mandates as established by statute and Executive Orders,
as well as, EPA and DOE program recommendations. The Federal Guide for Green
Construction specifications read as a legal document that must be referred to for the
design of Federal building projects. This document has been discussed for the purpose of
documentation and was recognized as a significant contribution in the field of guidelines

development for the design of environmentally responsive buildings. In the author’s view

53

the document provides a legal basis for the design of federal buildings and is a
compilation of energy guidelines such as LEED, Energy Star and local code. The
document comprises of several sections, which range from administrative requirements to

site preparation, and finally commissioning (WBDG 2004).

2.6 Summary

The building industry has gone through a series of evolutionary steps, some
identified as steps towards the “Whole House” approach. With the evolution in the early
90’s in building construction and the complexities of buildings constructed, it became
incumbent upon designers to develop procedures to render the design and building
process more integrated. Building systems gained a new significance in the overall design
due to the magnitude and complexity. New building systems, such as fire retardants and
HV AC, were introduced.

For the purpose of this research, the association has been restricted to home
building although the author does not deny the possibility of the extension of this
approach to all form of design and construction. The approach to such design is referred
to as the “systems approach”, which states that the home be looked upon as a system
which incorporates several components within it. The systems approach extends itself
from the relationship of parties involved in the construction process to the actual
interaction between the different building systems within a single home unit. Finally the
“Whole House” approach looks into sustainable design such that materials and appliances
used within a home do not affect the environment adversely. Performance requirements

in terms of energy consumption are also an important characteristic.

54

The present research is an attempt to develop a framework for the development of
a sample “Whole House” criterion, which will help users to identify as well as design,
homes following the “Whole House” approach. In order to formulate this criterion, the
author has identified the LEED and Energy Star guidelines as possible take-off points for
the format of the sample criterion since these are already accepted criteria for sustainable
development and design. Also, the formats provide required information in an organized
and comprehensive manner to the user. In the author’s opinion the LEED guidelines are
comprehensive and may form a satisfactory basis for the design of the sample “Whole

House” criterion.

55

Chapter 3 - Literature Review — Tools and Techniques

3.1 Overview

The previous chapter focused on the history of the “Whole House” concept. In
this chapter the review will focus on tools and techniques, which have been introduced
over the years, as parts of the body of knowledge relevant to “Whole House”. The
following tools and techniques are recent introductions and have not been assimilated
into the main stream for the large part. The discussion in this chapter is based on the
following topics: (1) Systems integration modeling tools, which focus on determining the
extent and kind of integration required. (2) Mechanical electrical plumbing (MEP)
integration techniques. (3) Identification of all building systems present within a home,
such as HVAC, plumbing, electrical, fire protection, communication, and home
automation systems. Here the review will be based on better performance through change
in design or type of fuel. (4) The chapter concludes with a review of tools that will assist

in determining the performance of a “Whole House” design.

3.2 Systems Integration tools

The total systems approach or system integration is concerned with the logical
selection of materials and methods in order to obtain value in terms of the functioning
model rather than the use of any specific technology or material. Building subsystems
must be integrated such that each subsystem remains separately accessible along with
serving a dual purpose. For example, a hollow tube structural column may serve as an air

duct, or a shaped floor deck structural member may function as a light coffer. An analysis

56

of needs, accessibility, available resources and methods for joining different building
systems provides a substantial range of options. In developing a sequence for selecting
specific approaches the focus should be the performance requirements for the building
during its lifetime (Ezra 1989, Fein 1972).

This section deals with the concept of systems integration and possible means and
methods to achieve the same. The modeling techniques included in this section are from
the book entitled The Building Systems Integration Handbook by Richard Rush (Rush
1986). Rush begins by dividing the home into four components, together referred to as
the “four function model”. This constitutes the four distinct building systems that
comprise the design and fimctioning of a built structure (Rush 1986).

1. Structure — That part of a built space that transfers loads to the foundation and
supports the envelope of the building to provide integrity.

2. Envelope —- That part of the structure, which protects the user from the natural
elements and the interior fi'om damage.

3. Mechanical — All building systems, which make it possible for the user to temper the
indoor environment of the built structure. This includes building systems such as
HVAC, plumbing, electrical, fire protection, and communication.

4. Interior — Those parts of the building visible when inside the building. This may
include exposed ducts or electrical raceways, carpeting etc.

The four-function model may be viewed as a simplified format to facilitate

understanding, but for the purpose of research this model will be expanded to include

each building system separately. The separate building systems will be discussed in

greater detail later in the chapter.

57

3.2.1 Building Systems Integration Handbook (BSIH) matrix

The Building Systems Integration Handbook (BSIH) matrix is a tool used to

determine the extent of integrative design required for any two or more building systems.

Although Rush formulates the BSIH matrix for the four-function model only, it is

possible to extend this format to include individual building systems. The author will

follow the academic model for the BSIH matrix with modifications specific for the

analysis. The matrix compares any two or more building systems for the levels of

integration they have among each other. The levels of integration specified here are

(Rush 1986):

1. Remote —- when two systems do not touch physically.

2. Touching — when two systems are in contact although there is no permanent

connection.

3. Connected — when two systems are permanently attached by some means.

4. Meshed — when two systems are interrelated and occupy the same space. This is a

more restrictive relationship than the connected relationship.

5. Unified — when two systems are no longer apart but use the same material or

method to perform different functions

 

\ .'
\_,.-'

Touching

 

Connected

Meshed

Unified

 

 

Figure 3.1: Levels of integration (Rush 1986)

58

.\

Figure 3.1 is a representation of the BSIH matrix; the shaded sections represent
the types of integration existing between two systems. The model allows the designer to
ascertain the extent of the relationship between the components of the four-function
model. The author proposes the extension of this matrix to take into account relationships
between distinct building systems, which are at present combined within the mechanical
aspect of the four-function model. The determination of specific building systems to be

studied will be included in further chapters.

ouching

 

Figure 3.2: BSIH matrix (Rush 1986)

3.2.2 Performance parameters

The next step is to define the performance requirements from a design; these are
termed as the performance parameters and refer to the expectations from a “Whole
House” design. Each strategy finally decided upon must accomplish some or all of the

performance requirements or parameters. Rush defines the following performance

59

I"-

_.s.

 

 

parameters: spatial, thermal, air quality, acoustics, visual and building integrity (Rush
1986). Performance parameters may be defined as per individual requirements and may
vary. For the purpose of this research, specific parameters will be determined in later

chapters.

3.2.3 Systems decision models

After having determined performance parameters, the intent is to systematically
formulate all physical decisions that need to be taken when integrating two or more
building systems taking into account the performance requirements from the building
systems. For example Systems decisions for HVAC systems relating to spatial
performance may be regarding the size, volume, form, configuration, expansion
capability, material and ornament for service generators such detailed decision
parameters may be defined relating to each performance criterion. These decision
parameters may be depicted in the form of a flow chart as in Figure 3.1. This chart shall
be referred to as the “systems decision model”. The above-mentioned models allow the
designer, in this case the author, to tabulate the requirements of the identified building

systems integration (Rush 1986). An example is provided in Figure 3.3.

3.3 Mechanical Electrical Plumbing (MEP) Integration

This section will focus on the prevailing method for integrating mechanical,
electrical and plumbing operations within one system. Since separate qualified
individuals deal with all these building systems, the integration is for the most part

cosmetic and not integrative. The integration process is linear and is largely concerned

60

 

| Q

 

with solving individual problems relating to each building system rather than integrative
design. Attempts have been made to address this shortcoming and one such attempt will
be discussed in this section. The MEP integration model developed as a computer
modeling technique by Korrnan (Konnan 2001) aims at rendering the integration process

much more cyclic and integrative design oriented.

3.3.1 Sequential Comparison Overlay Process (SCOP)

Current practice for MEP coordination is executed after the preliminary design
and placement of essential building systems and sizing has been completed. At this stage
specific routing of each building system has not been specified. Later each specialty
design consultant will complete the design, including checking for clearances,
architectural requirements and any other constraints.

Drafting software is employed and coordination is affected though manual
overlay of the architectural drawings and the drawings for the specific building systems.
The overlay process generally used is refereed to as Sequential Comparison Overlay
Process (SCOP). This is an iterative process of sequentially overlaying multiple drawings

0f Various trades. The logical sequence followed for the overlay process is as follows; (1)
architectural drawings (2) HVAC dry (3) HV AC wet (4) plumbing (5) fire protection (6)
and electrical. This is in essence a linear process and problems identified at the time of
CoOrdination are solved through a meeting of all design disciplines involved in the design

of the building (Konnan 2001).

61

3.3.2 The Korrnan Model

In the age of information technology the use of integrative software renders the
process of integrating building systems much more cyclic than linear, and the iterative
steps can be completed without impediment. At the present time most design drawings
are completed on CAD software, and as such, integration is a real prospect. An academic

computer based model has been developed at Stanford University which allows the
decision making to be cyclic rather than linear (Korrnan 2001). For the purpose of this
research, the procedure for the development of the model, rather than the model itself,
Will be important; and as such the viability of the model will not be discussed.

The researcher identified three main criteria to be considered for effective MEP
Coordination and integration was affected leading from here: operations and maintenance,
design criterion and intent and finally construction issues. This defines the input required
for the integration. The input output model has been defined as in Figure 3.2.

The input for the model starts with what the author refers to as “product models”.
These were three-dimensional drawings produced by all contractors for their own specific
building system. These product models were prepared in the 3D CAD software. The final
“geometric model” integrates all the product models to form the complete image of the
built structure. Along with the physical information some non-physical information
l“elated to the project, such as cost, material type, equipment sizes, installation time and
iIIStallation sequence, access space, and frequency were also required. The database for

the coordination contained some of this information but user specific databases may also

be developed.

62

g'.‘

r
-..

Control for the coordination model was achieved through an integrated
knowledge database. This database included information regarding system function and
performance, insulation and clearance, fabrication, installation, start-up, testing,
accessibility and safety. The tool abstracts the data from the geometric model and this
data serves as a comparison base in determining the type of interferences and further

recommendations to resolve such interferences.

Control

 

°Operations and Maintenance

IDesign criteria and intent

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0Construction
Input Output
Modified Product
Product Model Model
0Product model of Coordinated
building system MEP product model of

building or plant

T 1 Product models
00 for individual
building systems

 

 

IProduct model of Coordination
building or plant ‘ ‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Product Information Evaluate!
~User defined
pa ters Product Evaluation
concerning ' oAdvice and
components In evaluation of
product model product model
Mechanisms

 

 

Model-based reasonirg
-Expand product model
Check for interferences

Determine relationships between
components

Heuristic reasoning

-Evaluate arrangement of components

 

 

-Rearrange components

 

Figure 3.3: Systems architecture for MEP integration (Korrnan 2001)

The output of the MEP coordination model is a coordinated product model. The

applicability of this tool is evident in its capability to eliminate any kind of meeting

63

requirements for all specialty contractors, thus saving the design team substantial time,
which is reflected in cost savings. The software tool is not viable for commercial use as
of now and is limited in its capabilities to interface several kinds of drafting software.
The author of the research has conducted two case studies to demonstrate the practical

use of the software (Korman 2001).

3.4 Building systems

This section will review all identified building systems prevalent within a home
design. The review will be based on design techniques, material, methods and fuel
alternatives identified that might aid in improving the performance of the building

System. Integrative design and products, which integrate more than one usage, will also

be discussed.

3.4.1 Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC)

The HVAC systems is that part of the building system that tempers the
environment and renders it comfortable for the user. It also helps in maintaining the
indoor air quality of the home, which is imperative for the health of the occupants. The
following sections will focus on the design techniques, distribution methods, and control

SBistems that can be employed to better the performance of the system.

3.4.1.1 HVAC design techniques

‘ High efficiency gas furnace — The core aspect that renders these furnaces more

efficient than traditional designs is that they are able to condense the water vapor

64

from the exhaust gases and capture the heat of condensation. Condensing furnaces are
expensive because they require corrosion resistant materials, but they can have
efficiencies as high as 97% (PATH 1999). High efficiency fumaces receive the
Energy star for appliances and are an excellent option. Although initial costs might be
comparatively higher, these are offset by overall savings.

Heat recovery ventilator (HRV) - Also referred to as an air-to-air heat exchanger, it is
a ventilation system that consists of two separate air-handling systems: one that
collects and exhausts stale indoor air and the other draws in fresh outdoor air and
distributes it throughout the home. At the core of an HRV is a heat transfer module.
Both the exhaust and fresh air streams pass through this module, and the heat from
the exhaust air is used to preheat the fresh air stream. Only the heat is transferred; the
two air streams remain physically separate (Energy 2003).

Whole House ventilators — Since hot air rises the intention is to release the heat
trapped in the roof hollow or attic area. This is essentially a large fan installed in the
attic or stairwell which pulls hot air from the living areas into the attic and then
releases it to the atmosphere through ventilators, due to decrease in pressure fresh air
is pulled in through the windows. This is a fairly simple technique to reduce cooling
loads in milder climates (ZEH 2004).

Radiant barriers —— Light reflective materials are installed on the roof to reflect excess
heat so that the house is not heated through absorbing ambient heat. Several kinds of
materials might be used; foil, paint coatings and chips. This again is a fairly simple

technique, which reduces cooling loads (ZEH 2004).

65

i

.jll

 

3.4.1.2 HVAC distribution systems
Measures must be taken to improve the performance of existing distribution
systems in order to realize the maximum efficiency of the energy used to run the system.

New and improved performance systems are available today to replace traditional

distribution systems, which may not be as effective. The following section discusses

some of these options.

I Older air distribution systems must be rehabilitated by sealing the supply duct to
minimize the loss of conditioned air. According to a HUD study, leaky ductwork
increases energy by 30%. This may also cause air pressure problems which results in
drafts and uneven room temperature. Water distribution systems may be rehabilitated
by adding foam-based insulation to seal the return pipes. The author feels it is
important to mention the possibility of rehabilitation of existing HVAC systems, we
will not go into greater detail on this issue although since the present research does
not look into rehabilitation (PATH 1999).

I Mini duct HVAC system — This is comprised of small diameter flexible ductwork that
can be run through drywall along studs and joists without having to cut through them.
Equipment costs may be higher for this system although system performance and ease
of installation and replaceability are aspects to be considered (PATH 1999).

' Radiant heating and cooling panels — These systems run hot or cold water through
piping embedded in the floor or a wall panel. These piping systems can be easily
embedded into the structural floor at the time of manufacture without the need for

installation on site. These systems are presently not very cost effective, since they are

66

 

 

 

U
..

not popularly used in building design and thus are expensive to design and

manufacture (Ezra 1989, ZEH 2004).

3.4.1.3 HVAC zoning controls

In the present day scenario, zoning controls become more and more pertinent in

terms of increasing the efficiency of the HVAC system. HVAC "smart" zoning

technology consists of dampers and electronic controls that attach to standard central air
systems. By providing controlled damping at the base of each branch duct, multiple zones
can save energy and increase occupant comfort and convenience. Quite simply
temperature and flow of air can be controlled over a multitude of spaces as per usage
required and so all piping will not be conducting the same amount of energy whether or
not it is needed (PATH URL 2004c).

This can be considered as a step towards systems integration, which allows for
more flexibility in design and installation. The flexibility, which is now built into the

System allows for energy efficiency in usage.

3.4.1.4 HVAC fuels
Solar energy is fast becoming one of the most attractive sources of energy for all
building systems, primarily because it is an abundant natural resource without many
adverse effects. Passive systems use building orientation and construction materials to
enhance natural processes to collect, store, and distribute heat, while active systems
er“ploy pumps and/or fans. Photovoltaic (PV) systems convert solar energy directly to

DC power, which is inverted to AC power for home use. Installation costs and product

67

costs are high and returns are along way into the future, so this is yet not a viable

alternative for lower income housing (Energy URL 2004b).

3.4.1.5 Indoor Air Quality

Indoor materials and appliances that release gases or particles into the air that are
undesirable for human consumption are the primary cause of indoor air quality problems
in homes. Inadequate ventilation is one of the primary problems, since the home then
does not have enough outdoor air to dilute emissions from indoor sources and vent these

out of the home. High temperature and humidity levels due to inadequate ventilation and
faulty HVAC ducting can also increase concentrations of some pollutants.

There are many sources of indoor air pollution in any home which include
combustion sources such as oil, gas, kerosene, coal, wood, and tobacco products.
Materials and furnishings used within the home such as asbestos-containing insulation,
Wet or damp carpet, and cabinetry or furniture made of certain pressed wood products.
Certain household cleaning products and outdoor sources such as radon, pesticides, and
Outdoor air pollution also pose a problem.

Energy Star provides users with instructions regarding remodeling of homes with
Special consideration for indoor air quality. This includes procedures on how to handle
l‘ecognized indoor pollutants such as lead, moisture, inadequate ventilation, asbestos,

mold, volatile organic compounds, paints and combustion materials (EPA URL 2005).

68

X
a!

w.
n

 

3.4.2 Plumbing / Sewer

The plumbing and the sewer system serve three primary functions, first the
distribution of hot and cold water, second the collection and disposal of wastewater and
black water or soil waste, and finally collections and disposal of storm water. Piping for
these systems may use any or a combination of the following processes: gravity drained
Waste systems; as the name suggests, the piping uses the gravitational pull and is sloped
downward towards the city mains. Pumped waste systems may be used where the level of
the piping is below the level of the city lines such that it needs to be pumped up. Pressure
driven systems use the difference in pressure to pull water through hot and cold water
pipes. The possibility of the integration of plumbing stacks or cores with other utility
systems, along with simplification of the design process, is also a prime concern. In the

present industry environment, the following approaches lend themselves to better

performance of plumbing systems.

3.4.2.3 Distribution design

' Aluminum-Plastic Composite Water Piping — The piping is a multipurpose pressure

piping that can be used for hot and cold-water distribution and is suited to both indoor
floor heating or outer snowmelt systems. The material is lightweight, flexible,
corrosion resistance and the strength is enhanced since the plastic core is laminated
on both interior and exterior edges by an aluminum piping. The product can operate

at pressures ranging from 90 to 300 pounds per square inch (psi) and can withstand

operating temperatures of up to 210 degrees Fahrenheit. The flexibility of the pipe

69

lends itself to ease in design. It can be installed within floors and ceilings and can also
be snaked through walls (PATH URL 2004b).

I Drain water heat recovery — A heat recovery device is attached to existing waste
water drains to capture the heat from the waste water, which is then used to preheat
the hot water for usage around the home. Storage-type units have a tank containing a
reservoir of clean water, drain water flows through a spiral tube at the bottom of the
heat storage tank, and water in the tank warms and rises to the top. Water heater
intake water is preheated by circulation through a coil in the top of the tank. The
system is designed so it does not lose stored heat to cold wastewater. Non-storage
units have a copper heat exchanger that replaces a vertical section of a main waste
drain such that the warm water flows down the waste drain. Incoming cold supply
water flows through a spiral copper tube wrapped around the copper section of the
waste drain where heat is picked up by the cold supply water and is sent to the cold
side of the fixtures (i.e. shower) or to the water heater. Some non-storage units
exchange heat between the drainpipe and the incoming cold water supply line by a
horizontal heat exchange device that thermally connects the drainpipe and the cold
water supply tube. Initial installation costs are not very high and thus this is a

recommended method to achieve better energy performance for a home (PATH URL

20041).

3.4.2.4 Water conservation

' Rainwater harvesting — This is the process of forming catchments for the rainwater

logged on roofs and other surfaces so that instead of allowing runoff the water may be

70

channeled toward a common pool and used for non-potable water requirements or
potable uses after treatment. If followed, this approach can be substantially beneficial
in reducing the water requirements of a community. The system is constituted of a
catchment area which is primarily the roof, a rain water conveyance system including
gutters and leaders, holding areas that can be any kind of storage device such as
cisterns) a roof-wash system (usually the first 10 -20 gallons of rain are diverted from
the cistern, a delivery system which includes pumps, and finally a treatment system
which is constituted of filters and/or purifiers. Systems can be custom designed or
retrofitted as per the requirements. Figure 3.3 is a pictorial representation of the

system requirements.

 

Mounts calm

 

 

 

 

Figure 3.4: Rainwater harvesting system requirements (Toolbase 2004)

Installation costs vary tremendously based on the requirements of the user and the

quality of water supplied in the area. It is important to stress at this point the need to

71

design with permeable surfaces on the ground so that it is possible to harvest
underground water and replenish it through rainwater percolation. Tarred or mettled
surfaces must be avoided and paved surfaces should be encouraged (PATH URL
2004k)

Greywater reuse - This process extends itself from the rainwater harvesting
procedure. Building water refuse through plumbing systems is of two kinds;
wastewater and black water or soil waste. Wastewater is the water from baths and
sinks; the intent is to be able to reuse this water for non-potable uses such as irrigation
and recycling through the wastewater stack. A Greywater reuse system generally
consists of a three-way diverter valve, a treatment assembly such as a sand filter, a
holding tank, a bilge pump, and an irrigation or leaching system. Since most
traditional plumbing systems combine both the wastewater and black water stacks
including Greywater reuse would involve adding a separate stack, which may lead to
space constraints. Newly designed homes may be designed with this technique in
mind in order to minimize the overall usage of water through the lifetime of the home

(PATH URL 2004j).

3.4.3 Electrical systems

Electrical systems are the mainstay of any built structure and possibly the largest
cOntributor to energy usage and costs over the lifetime of the home. It will be beyond the
S(tope of this research to discuss the details of an electrical system, therefore in the

following section the author restricts the documentation to technology lending itself to

integrative design.

72

3.4.3.3 Distribution design

I Electrical raceways — Running wires through wall cavities is a cumbersome process
and at some level compromises the structural integrity of the home. Electrical
raceways make it possible to run the wiring of a home independent of the built
structure, thus making it easier to install and access the wiring in the event of a
breakdown. These raceways are PVC baseboards, which come in white and laminate
finish to blend into the décor, and these can be mounted easily on drywalls. There are
several advantages to this product; it is easy to install, no special tools or expertise are
required, and is relatively inexpensive. A combination of electrical and
communication wiring can also be run through the same raceways (PATH URL
2004d)

I Power line networking — An ordinary AC electrical outlet can be converted into a
network port, without drilling through walls. A device is plugged into an electrical
outlet referred to as the “node”. No software is required to complete the connection,
although the home must be wired for a broadband connection. One device is
connected directly into the cable/DSL modem or the router though which the
broadband service comes, and the power cord is plugged into any AC outlet. Next, an
identical device is connected to separate power outlet, which is connected to the PC

(PLN 2005).

3-4.3.4 Alternative fuel
I

Solar electricity — Solar energy or energy derived from sunlight can be utilized within

the home in two forms, passive energy and active energy. Passive solar energy is in

73

the form of heat absorbed by the building envelope during the daytime, along with the
use of natural lighting rather than artificial lighting. The heat retained within the
building envelope is critical, in the sense that it reduces energy requirements during
the nighttime. It is essential to develop design strategies and use materials that are
able to retain this heat for an extended period of time. Active solar energy is trapped
through the use of photo voltaic cells, which convert the direct heat gain from the sun

into usable AC to run building systems within the home (Energy URL 2004b).

3.4.4 Fire protection

Fire protection systems begin with appropriate material selection and design
decisions such as fire escapes. An important component of a fire protection system is the
sprinkler layout and placement of fire extinguishers. The purpose of the combination of
these approaches is to allow the users enough lead-time to safely evacuate the premises.
Fire protection systems fall into four categories: wet systems, where water in the pipes is
always under pressure and the reduction in pressure due to hot air causes the sprinkler
heads to burst; dry systems where the pipes contain compressed air or nitrogen instead of
Water; pre-action systems, which are similar to dry systems, except that valves let water
into the pipes before the sprinkler system turns on; and finally, deluge systems, where the
Sprinklers are always open and go off at once (Korman 2001). The fire protection system
is not considered for the purpose of this thesis, although the author believes that it is

important to mention the presence of the system.

74

V
\

 

I.

3.4.5 Communication / Structured Wiring systems

All communication systems typically installed within a home will be discussed in
this section. These include wiring for telephone, data and video communication.
Structured wiring systems are used to integrate these communication uses. A structured
wire is a low-voltage, hi gh-perfonnance wire that is capable of broadband distribution of
telephone and data, it is composed of four twisted pairs of high capacity wires enclosed in
an insulated cover (Centex 2004). The most commonly used variety is the Category 5
wiring for voice and data transfer and RG-6 cabling for video signals. Wires run fi'om a
central location directly to each wall plate or outlet location. Such a layout can result in
substantial wiring for separate runs for each outlet. Therefore, the installation requires
advance planning to provide locations that maximize user flexibility while minimizing
the amount of wire runs (PATH URL 2004c). These also provide low voltage sensing and
communications functions that can become the basis for more extensive automation
systems. Initial costs and installation costs may be higher than traditional communication

wiring.

3.4.6 Home Automation systems

Home automation as an idea came into existence around the mid 1980’s and since
then many manufacturers have been pursuing it. The intent is to automate building
systems through the use of computer technology, such that every appliance and building
system is controlled through a single personal computer. Home automation is no longer a
vision of the future, it is becoming an expensive, although popular, reality (PATH URL

2004i).

75

There are three types of home automation controls: individual control devices,
distributed—control systems, and centrally controlled systems.

0 Individual control devices control a single appliance or function such as
programmable thermostats, occupancy detectors, photosensitive lighting controls,
as well as security sensors. These are commonly found in homes designed and
built today.

0 Distributed-control system uses standard power line wiring, telephone wire (4
pair), video wire (dual coaxial), radio frequency signals, and infrared signals.
These systems allow appliances to communicate with each other over existing
wiring after computer chips are added to their wiring systems. Structured wiring
is used to enable such systems. These systems are outside the scope of this
research and thus will be dealt with as future research areas.

. Centrally controlled systems route signals between a central computer and
appliance controllers or environmental sensors. This allows the system to control
the functioning of the entire building envelope. The idea of “smart homes”
springs from this technology. For the purpose of this research we will not be
discussing these in detail and will refer to them as future research areas.

These systems have built-in savings associated with them, such as automatic shut-
off capabilities offsetting the wastage of energy. Occupancy sensors are an excellent
addition to outdoor lighting for nighttime illumination. Although technology, installation
and products costs are high and may increase the initial costs by a substantial amount, the

cost of replacement of parts is lower, since these smart systems control surges and protect

76

.r

.I‘

.0
.\

 

the equipment. It is believed that individual control systems have a proven record for

energy savings over the lifetime of the home.

3.5 Structural and architectural integration

This section will focus on tools and techniques, which integrate structural and
architectural requirements. This includes hybrid design techniques and alternative
framing materials. Hybrid design techniques, such as tilt up roofs for manufactured and
modular home, which allow for ease in transportation will be discussed. The intent is to
tabulate tools and techniques, which offer alternatives to traditional systems; these are
hybrid systems, which use technology from both site-built housing as well as factory

produced components.

3.5.] Alternative framing materials

The use of lumber in the construction of homes in the United States has been
extensive, and it is estimated that residential construction and remodeling accounts for
two-thirds of the lumber purchased in the country today (HUD 1994). The cost of lumber
has been steadily increasing, and it is becoming increasingly uneconomical to use this
material. The environmental costs of the excessive use of lumber must also not be
ignored. The US. uses twice as much wood as other industrial nations, according to the
Wood Reduction Clearinghouse. It takes about one-and-a-half acres to grow the
dimensional lumber for a typical American home not including another 10,000 sq. ft. of

panel products, such as plywood and oriented strand board (OSB). Wood use is projected

77

to double over the next few decades. It is anticipated that the existing forests will not be

able to meet the increasing demands (Energy URL 2004a).

This section demonstrates the practical and economic feasibility of using

alternatives to traditional timber frame construction. The alternatives considered for the

purpose of this study are as follows (HUD 1994):

Foam-core structural sandwich panels — A foam-core structural sandwich panel,
hereafter referred to as a foam-core panel, consists of a foam material sandwiched
between two facings. The foam material is usually made from molded-bead expanded
polystyrene (EPS), extruded polystyrene (XPS), urethane, or polyisocyanurate. The
facing materials provide the panel’s structural strength. Facing materials commonly
include oriented strand board (OSB), wafer board, and plywood. The material has
better thermal resistance in both wall and roof framing than timber framing. These are
more durable, and the materials allows for custom forms to be built. Larger roof spans
are possible, and since these are prefabricated there are lower labor requirements on
site. The large size of the units does make it difficult to maneuver on site, heavy
machinery such as cranes are required, and there is a higher initial cost associated
with the material.

Light-gauge steel framing - Steel framing has been used for many years as partition
studs in both commercial and residential construction. With higher lumber prices,
heavier-gauge members are becoming more attractive for use as bearing wall studs
and floor and roof framing. Members are manufactured by a cold-forming process, in
which various thicknesses of sheet steel are put through a series of roll forming dies

that form the sheets into desired widths, lengths, thicknesses, and shapes. Steel can be

78

used as individual framing members in much the same way as wood. Since
standardization becomes a prerequisite, the overall production costs may be reduced
over a period of time. This material also requires no cutouts for running electrical
wiring since the chases are prefabricated. Compared with timber framing, the unit
cost of steel framing is not much higher (around 7% more than timber framing)
therefore the material and equipment costs on site are reduced. A disadvantage is that
additional insulation must be provided, since steel has lower thermal performance
than timber. Also specialized labor may be required to erect the building since the
material is relatively difficult to handle, which also reduces overall productivity on
site.

Welded-wire sandwich panels — Welded-wire sandwich panels are composed of a
polystyrene or polyurethane insulation core surrounded by a welded-wire space
fi'ame. A layer of shotcrete is sprayed or trowel-applied over the wire mesh. The
strength of the system and rigidity is provided by diagonal truss wires welded to the
wire mesh on each side. The panels can be used as floors, load-bearing exterior or
interior walls, partitions, or roofs. There is ease of running wiring since, no cutouts
are required and the structural strength is much higher. The disadvantages are that
accuracy may not be achieved which leads to double work on site. Both plumbing and
electrical operations must be carried out in two stages, first to run the wiring and the
piping through the wire mesh, and then to pull the wiring and make the connections
alter the shotcrete is completed. Welded-wire sandwich roof panels, while easy to
erect, are difficult to support. The panels alone cannot support the wet weight of the

shotcrete. Consequently, the required shoring is an extra step that takes a long time to

79

u

1&1

.
"”5
4.1M

[snub

in“; J

 

1“” ‘11-.

m... ,
r

 

s
.‘w ‘,
~-

‘v.

 

 

   

complete and delays the schedule. The roof requires a seven-day period for curing
and the costs are substantially higher due to cost of material and additional shoring
costs.

. Concrete systems — Fiber reinforced cellular concrete (FRCC) panels are suited for
home energy conservation, since thermal performance is enhanced due to the cellular
composition of the material. Insulated concrete forms (ICF) are used as floor systems
largely because they have required strength with shallower depths and they have

better thermal and acoustic performance (O’Brien et al 2005).

3.5.2 Tilt-up Roofs for Manufactured and Modular Homes

In conventional manufactured homes the roof pitches are much lower to facilitate
transportation through overpasses and bridges, thus, a height restriction is imposed on
these homes. Hinged roofs for modular homes allow the use of larger pitch heights so that
attic spaces may be usable. These houses are transported with the roofs collapsed and
then brought up to their original heights once placed on site. The upper half of the top
chord member laps and bolts to the side of the lower half. At the ridge the vertical truss
member is similarly bolted to the lapped top chord member. The bolts act as hinges and
enable the upper part of the top chord and the vertical portions to fold and rest for

shipment on the bottom chord and diagonal members (Fleet 2004).

80

 

\ HINGE ROOF HAVlNG A
KEYSTONE BLOCK ASSEMBLY

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 3.5: Hinged roof assembly (Fleet 2004)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 3.6: Eave overhang assembly (Reidelbach 1982)

The cave overhang is added in an effort to design housing closer to traditional stick built
homes. The overhang is built as a component and attached to the eave of the roof during

production. The typical overhang, which is 12 inches wide, is then folded back to rest on

81

 

(I!

.m-

a":

the roof, where it is temporarily fastened for shipping. At the jobsite it is flipped down

and nailed into position (Reidelbach 1982).

3.5.3 Hybrid modular/panelized housing

Factory panelization of some components offers a compromise between site
building and full factory assembly. Garages are most economical to build as panels bolted
together on site. For all but the largest modules, there is usually enough transporter area
to fit framed panels either side-by—side or front-to back with the modular units. To
prevent damaging vibrations, assemblers use various methods to temporarily affix the
panels to the modular boxes. Often these are strapped on. Altemately, for large or oddly
shaped pieces, temporary 2x12 joists and brackets are used to hold the units together.

In conventional modular, steep roofs are often designed to hinge up on site.
However, these are often framed with 2x6’s and 2x4's, limiting the amount of insulation
between rafters. These roofs often require additional pieces and labor. Hybrid
manufacturers sometimes find it more economical and energy efficient to truck roofs
separately from the boxes, especially cathedral roofs or those flamed with 2x12's for
thicker insulation. Depending on the size and configuration, the roof is delivered in one
or several units (PATH URL 2004b).

Hinging the floor to compress the shipping size of the unit addresses the issue of
just "shipping air" in a box. In its folded position, the shell still has room for roof trusses
and other components, reducing the number of transporters needed. Set by crane, the
"roof" of the structure folds down to become a wall, the telescoping floor joists are

expanded, and roof trusses are installed. The system can be detailed with standard infill

82

steel stud walls or to accommodate a SIP envelope. Since the units are delivered without
installed roofs, they may be appropriate for multi-story housing, with a steel frame that
can meet fire codes. The narrow shipping size is economical also for remote or hard-to-
reach areas.

But the advantages of hybrid modular come more from scheduling than first cost.
Because panels and boxes can be built while the site is prepared, the construction cycle
can be half that of an entirely site-built house. Savings come in reduced construction loan
interest, and land that generates income sooner. Availability of manufacturing facilities
willing to carry out this process is lower today, and so cost saving may be offset by

market dynamics.

3.6 Sustainable approaches to design

As consumers become more and more aware of the implications of energy costs
over the lifetime of the structure and of the possible adverse environmental impacts of
certain practices it is imperative that the industry address issues of sustainability as well.
It is possible to reduce the liabilities of a built structure both to the owners as well as the
society at large through conscientious design and streamlining of the process itself. This
would reduce both one-time costs, as well as lifetime costs of the built structure; this is
beneficial for the consumer, along with addressing environmental issues, which are fast

becoming reasons for concern for all major societies in the world.

3.6.] Passive solar design

The information for this section has been taken from Eicker (2003).

83

Maximum use of daylight rather than artificial lighting is one of the primary
strategies of passive solar design. This is achieved by providing openings for all
spaces including the wet cores. Internal rooms without access to a peripheral wall can
be lighted using regular skylights and solatube skylights.

Sunlight also provides solar heat that can be captured within the home during the
daytime to be slowly released during the night. This is achieved largely through the
proper orientation of the design. Placing the larger portion of windows on the south
side of the home increases comfort both in summer and winter along with reducing
fuel consumption for heating and cooling the home.

Use of overhangs on windows that are retraceable to maximize the use of sunlight in
winters, and which can be put in place to protect the windows from direct sunlight

during the summers while being able to light the space.

3.6.2 Active solar design

The information for this section has been taken from (Eicker 2003).
Solar cell technology constitutes a thin film cell based on amorphous silicon, which
are applied to both flexible metal substrates and coated glass. Encasing the
photovoltaic cells usually 6 sqm in size forms standard modules. Along with glass
panels a range of photovoltaic roof tiles are now available which are impermeable
and easy to connect to the standard tiles. The solar cells covert direct current (DC) to
usable alternating current (AC). The cells can be used to produce current for stand-
alone appliances or can be connected to the local grid to provide power to the home

and introduce any additional usable power into the local grid.

84

a:

0 Solar thermal water collectors follow the same concept of using photovoltaic cells to
trap solar energy and convert it into usable power. These can be used to heat

swimming pools or usable water supply for within the home.

3.6.3 Bio-Based materials / recycled content materials
Bio-based chemicals and materials are commercial or industrial products derived

from biomass feedstock. Bio-based products include bio-chemicals, renewable plastics

natural fibers, and natural structural material.

Products exist that contain recycled post-consumer paper by-product, gypsum, and
recovered gypsum, wood waste, wood chips, and annually renewable agricultural fibers.
These materials include hardboard made from waste wood, wallboard made from perlite,
gypsum and recycled post consumer newsprint; 100% recycled newsprint fiberboard and
fiberboard made from straw (Green 2004).

0 Renewable plastics — plastics produced from biomass resources show great promise
for replacing materials derived from petrochemicals. General categories include
plant-based polymers, carbohydrate polymers (cellulose starch and chitin) and lignite.

0 Natural fibers — New products based on natural fibers are being developed including
insulation and geo-textiles for control applications. These fibers are being used to
replace nonrenewable materials as fillers for many products.

0 Natural Structural Materials — Many building products such as engineered lumber and
structural panels made primarily from wood have been used traditionally. New
composite structural materials are being made to incorporate biomass fibers as fillers

with other organic material (e. g. Plastics).

85

Fiber reinforced gypsum panels — Made from gypsum, perlite, and cellulose from
recycled newsprint and telephone directories, for interior use on ceilings and walls.
These can be nailed, screwed and stapled easily providing uniform strength and
superior holding characteristics. The material also resists surface abrasion and impact
damage. Taping is not required and the surface is fully scrubbable. It provides good
sound and thermal insulation but is heaver than traditional wallboard and needs to be
scored on both sides for cutting.

Thermo-ply insulated sheathing —— Made from several continuous piles of wood fiber,
the material is rated for water resistance. It consists of white polyethylene coating on
one side and aluminum radiant barrier on other. A thin roof and wall sheathing is
installed for structural applications. The material is cheaper to install than plywood
and is stronger than foam or fiberboard sheathing and is non-toxic.

Pan TERRE panel — Made from equal amounts of mixed waste paper and agricultural
fibers such as straw, rice hulls or peanut shells, the panel is finish coated with
recycled Kraft board (or sent raw to manufacture cabinets and flooring). It has many
applications including exterior sidewall sheathing, roof sheathing, false ceilings, and
cabinetry. It is easy to handle, saw, glue and nail and can be finished with a variety of
material such as wood veneers, paperboard or plastic laminates. It can also be
manufactured using indigenous waste material.

Meadowood wall and ceiling board — It is made from ryegrass straw which is an
agricultural by—product. It can be used as an exposed decorative panel or faced with
wood veneer for a desired interior finish. The material is also being made available as

a core material for laminated trim and interior building panels.

86

0 Wheat board - Wheat board is created from wheat chaff as a substitute for traditional

wood fiberboard. Unlike wood fiberboard, it does not use formaldehyde.

3.6.4 Energy Star products

Energy Star appliances are certified for comparably lesser energy usage than
traditional appliances over their lifetime, along with reduction of generated by products,
which are detrimental to the environment. Some of the types of Energy Star appliances

are discussed below (EPA URL 2004):

1. Clothes Washers - Compared to a model manufactured before 1994, an ENERGY
STAR qualified clothes washers can save up to $110 per year on utility bills.
Qualified clothes washers clean clothes using 50% less energy than standard washers
and use 18-25 gallons of water per load, compared to the 40 gallons used by a
standard machine. Qualified washers extract more water from clothes during the spin
cycle; this reduces the drying time and saves energy and wear and tear on clothes.

2. Dishwashers - Qualified dishwashers can save more than $25 a year in energy costs.
Qualified dishwashers use a minimum of 25% less energy than the federal minimum
standard for energy consumption and an average of 44% less water than conventional
models. Since they use less hot water compared to conventional models, an ENERGY
STAR qualified dishwasher saves about $100 over its lifetime.

3. Refiigerators - Qualified models use high efficiency compressors, improved
insulation, and more precise temperature and defrost mechanisms to improve energy

efficiency. Qualified models use at least 15% less energy than required by current

87

federal standards, and 40% less energy than the conventional models sold in 2001.
Many options are available for consumers to choose fiom.

. Air-source Heat Pumps - Electric air—source heat pumps, often used in moderate
climates, use the difference between outdoor air temperatures and indoor air
temperatures to cool and heat the home. Qualified heat pumps have a higher seasonal
efficiency rating (SEER) and heating seasonal performance factor (HSPF) than
standard models, which makes them about 20% percent more efficient than standard
new models and 20—50% more efficient than the products traditionally used.

. Geothermal Heat Pumps - Geothermal heat pumps are similar to ordinary heat pumps,
but use the ground instead of outside air to provide heating, air conditioning, and, in
most cases, hot water. Because they use the earth's natural heat, they are among the
most efficient and comfortable heating and cooling technologies currently available.
Qualified geothermal heat pumps use about 40-60 % less energy than a standard heat
pump and are quieter than conventional systems.

. Televisions - If half of all the US. households replaced their regular TV with an
ENERGY STAR model, the change would have the same effect as shutting down a
power plant. Qualified models use about 25% less energy than standard units.

. Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs (CF Ls) - If every household in the US. replaced
one light bulb with an Energy Star qualified compact fluorescent light bulb (CFL), it
would prevent enough pollution to equal removing one million cars from the roads.
Qualified CFLs use 66% less energy than a standard incandescent bulb and last up to
10 times longer. Replacing a 100-watt incandescent with a 32-watt CFL can save you

at least $30 in energy costs over the life of the bulb. Qualified CF Ls operate at less

88

10.

11.

than 100F; they are also safer than typical halogen bulbs, which are frequently used in
floor lamps or torchieres and burn at 1,000F. Due to their high heat output, halogens
can cause burns and fires while CF Ls are cool to the touch.

Residential Light Fixtures - By replacing the five most frequently used lights in the
home with Energy Star qualified lighting, savings of about $60 each year can be
achieved in energy costs. Energy Star fixtures last 10,000 - 20,000 hours which
means, with regular use (i.e., 3.5 hours per day), the bulb will not need to be changed
for at least seven years. Qualified fixtures distribute the light more efficiently and
evenly than standard fixtures.

Computers - An Energy Star qualified computer uses 70% less electricity than
computers without enabled power management features. If left inactive, ENERGY
STAR qualified computers enter a low-power mode and use 15 watts or less.
Spending a large portion of time in low-power mode not only saves energy, but helps
equipment run cooler and last longer and can save enough electricity to light an entire
home for more than 4 years.

Thermostat Type - Programmable thermostats that can be automatically set back to
lower temperatures, based on ambient temperatures which are zoned such that
individuals may determine their own comfort space without heating/cooling the entire
home.

Heat Recovery Ventilator - A heat recovery ventilator (also called an air-to-air heat
exchanger) is a ventilation system that consists of two separate air-handling
systems—one collects and exhausts stale indoor air and the other draws in fresh

outdoor air and distributes it throughout the home.

89

12. Windows, Doors, & Skylights

a. Improved frame materials - Window frames have the greatest impact on the
insulating capacity of the window. In Regions with cold winters qualified
windows use wood, wood composites, vinyl, and fiberglass for frames. In regions
with a mild cold season or none at all, windows with aluminum frames can be
energy efficient. Thermally broken aluminum frames are generally more efficient
than their solid aluminum counterparts.

b. Multiple glazing (Multi-pane) - Multiple panes improve the energy efficiency of
windows, but adding other advanced technologies is necessary to achieve the
greatest efficiency.

c. Glass coatings - A low-emittance (or "Low-E") glass coating is a microscopically
thin film applied to the glass. This coating keeps heat inside in winter and outside
in summer and must be chosen based on the climate of the parent site. High solar
gain Low-E coatings allow as much heat from the sun to enter the house as clear
glass. Windows with high solar gain Low-E coatings generally have solar heat
gain coefficients between 0.56 and 0.75. Moderate solar gain Low-E coatings
screen a portion of the sun's heat, keeping the home cooler in summer but
admitting a good amount of solar heat in winter. Windows with moderate solar
gain Low-E generally have solar heat gain coefficients between 0.41 and 0.55.
low solar gain Low-E coatings screen the most heat from the sun. By blocking
ultraviolet radiation, these coatings also reduce fading of fumiture, floor
coverings, artwork, and window treatments. Windows with low solar gain Low-E

generally have solar heat gain coefficients between 0.20 and 0.40.

90

(1. Gas fill - Some energy efficient windows have Argon, Krypton, or other gases
between the panes. These odorless, colorless, non-toxic gases provide better
insulation and a lower U-Factor. Many windows qualify for ENERGY STAR
using only air. Windows with spacing of at least 1/2 inch for air or Argon fill and
at least 3/4 inch for Krypton perform best.

e. Warm edge spacers - A spacer keeps a window's glazing layers the right distance
apart. In the past, spacers were made of aluminum. In cold climates, aluminum
can cause significant heat loss, leading to condensation on the window. Today's
warm edge spacers--made of steel, foam, fiberglass, or vinyl--lower the U-Factor
and prevent condensation.

f. Improved weather stripping - Weather stripping has also improved over the last
20 years. More durable, better performing plastic weather stripping is used in
most ENERGY STAR qualified windows.

Many more of such appliances are now easy to buy and install within existing homes and
are reasonably popular for many larger commercial chains to stock them. It was the
author’s intent to tabulate some of the primary appliances but many more are now in

existence.

3.7 Summary

This chapter begins with reviewing techniques that can be employed in order to
determine the nature of and the extent of, the integration required between any two or
more building systems. Next the products and tools specific to each building system

present within a home have been discussed. This has been referred to as Mechanical

91

Electrical and Plumbing integration and as the name suggest the section also looks into
tools and techniques, which offer such solutions. In determining the products to be
considered the author has taken into account both integrative technique as well as those,
which render the building more sustainable. The energy efficiency of the home has been
considered as a supplementary performance criterion for the purpose of this thesis.
Structural and architectural integration techniques are discussed next. After the
building systems such as the utilities are designed to ensure that they do not interfere with
each other, it is important to consider their integration with the structural envelope of the
home. Here we discuss alternative framing techniques, which reduce the use of lumber as
well being bale, to integrate utilities without compromising the structural integrity of the
envelope. Hybridization of factory built housing is a significant step towards integrative
design. Sustainable approaches to design include products that are certified by Energy
Star as being energy efficient or products that use alternative sources of energy. Bio-

based materials of renewable content construction materials are also discussed.

92

Chapter 4 — Proposed “Whole House” Performance Criteria

Framework

4.1 Overview

This chapter includes a detailed description of the “Whole House” performance
criteria development process, based on the building systems integration. The integration
techniques used are based on the book Building Systems Integrption Hgndboolg, by
Richard D. Rush and endorsed by the American Institute of Architects (AIA) (Rush
1986)

As discussed in Chapter 3, the building system integration techniques begin with
defining the four- function model, which refers to the four basic building components.
This forms the basis for all modeling. It is the author’s belief that for a complete
understanding of the building systems interactions, it is important to expand the four-
function model to include individual building systems. The next step is to define the
performance parameters, which refer to the expectations from a “Whole House” design.
The performance parameters will be based on research and will be restricted to issues
relating to systems integration. Sustainability has also been included as a supplementary
parameter, since it is one of the underlying expectations for a “Whole House” design. It is
the author’s opinion that sustainable design is intrinsic to the “Whole-House” approach
and must be addressed.

In order to determine strategies for the design of a “Whole House” based on the
performance parameters defined earlier, it is important to understand the levels of

integration among building systems. The building systems referred to here have already

93

been defined. The levels of integration are defined next; these will assist the researcher in
understanding the types of integration that exist among building systems. Further, it will
assist the researcher in determining strategies for effectively using the synergies, which
may exist among these building systems.

Next, it important to determine the combinations of building systems for which
detailed modeling will be conducted. Since there are eight building systems in total, the
systems combinations can start from 2-systems, all the way to 8-systems all together.
Given the scope of the thesis, it is adequate to complete detailed modeling on 2-systems
interactions, e.g. Structure and HVAC, and 3-systems interactions, e. g. Structure, HVAC
and Electrical.

The BSIH models are developed for both the 2-system and 3—system interactions.
In addition the systems decision models are developed for the 3-system interactions only,
since it was determined that systems decision models for 2-systems interactions were
redundant and repetitive, and did not provide sufficient evidence to determine relevant
strategies. Detailed description of the modeling will be provided in the relevant sections
of the chapter.

The conclusions generated through this modeling form the basis for the
development of the sample “Whole House” criterion. The sample “Whole House”
criterion will be discussed in the next chapter with a brief discussion of the
developmental process that will focus on the information generated through the modeling
conducted. It is the author’s intent to put forth a framework for the development of a

criterion. Efforts were made to assure that the proposed framework is flexible enough to

94

l I

accommodate individual requirements, while providing theoretical substantiation for the

contents of the criterion.

4.2 Levels of integration

The first step is to understand the four-function model. The home functions are
divided into four primary parts: structure, envelope, mechanical and interior; together
these are referred to as the “four-function” model. These four functions are tested for
their level of integration. As described in Chapter 3 (section 3.2.1) there are five levels of

integration; remote, touching, connected, meshed and unified.

4.3 Modeling techniques

The modeling was conducted as per the techniques provided in Chapter 3 (section
3.2.1 and 3.2.3). Although the testing for levels of integration can be carried out for any
number of combinations, the focus was placed on the 2-system combinations, such as
structural and mechanical or structural and envelope and 3-systems combinations, such as
structural, mechanical and envelope. The purpose of the modeling was to formalize the
information required for the generation of the sample “Whole House” performance

criterion.

4.4 Identification of building systems

The first step to begin modeling for this thesis is to determine and define the

building systems, which must be integrated in the design of a home. The following

95

building systems have been determined for the purpose of this thesis. Abbreviations have

been indicated for each building system and these will be utilized during modeling:

Structure (Str) - That part of the building elements that provides stability to the home
and allow it to stand.

Envelope (Env) - That part of the building elements that protects the occupants from
climate and other natural forces.

Heating Ventilation and Cooling (HVAC) - The building system that tempers the
living environment for comfort.

Plumbing (Plum) - The building system that provides water supply to all outlets.
Electrical (Elec) - The building system that provides electrical supply to run all home
appliances and support systems.

Communication (Comm) - The building system that provides communication supply
such a phone, cable and Internet.

Interior type A (Int A) - Those interior systems that are visible from the inside of the
home and are in some manner connected to the structure or the envelope. This
includes partition walls that do not serve any structural purpose, exposed ducts,
electrical raceways, heating and cooling vents, lighting fixtures etc.

Interior type B (Int B) - Those interior systems that are visible from the inside of the

home and are movable such as fumiture, movable storage etc.

4.5 Determination of performance parameters

This section deals with determining and defining the performance parameters. As

mentioned earlier, the performance parameters refer to the characteristics that the design

96

of a home must achieve in order for it to be deemed a “Whole House” design. The
parameters determined for the purpose of this thesis are; spatial flexibility, thermal
performance, structural integrity, ease of construction, ease of maintenance and includes
a supplementary parameter which is sustainable design. These parameters are primarily
based on past and ongoing research and researchers’ understanding (PATH 2001, PATH

2003, PATH 2004, O’Brien et al 2005, Syal, Hastak 2004, Sabharwal 2004, Garcia 2005)

4.5.1 Spatial flexibility

This parameter deals with the issue of flexibility of usage of space and
adaptability of the structure over time, based on consumer choice and requirements.
These are some of the primary expectations from a “Whole House” design. This can be
accomplished through open space planning and use of furniture or temporary storage to
define spaces rather than partition walls. The floor plan can be designed on a grid such
that sliding panels may be attached or removed as per the requirements. Utility services
could be laid out under the sub floor or within roof paneling such that wall panels are not
restricted by utility distribution. Finally utility distribution should be detachable such that

it is possible to mount on a different panel as the requirements for space change.

4.5.2 Thermal performance

Thermal performance, deals primarily with the issue of human comfort. Secondly,
it deals with addressing possibilities of using design techniques, products and tools that
increase the thermal efficiency of the home. This can be achieved by using daylight to

supplement the heating requirements of the home with window systems that trap daytime

97

heat to release it during the night. Also by using daylight rather than artificial lighting
within the home during the daylight hours. It is also important to seal the envelope and all
possible escape routes for heat and cold from the home especially attic spaces. The use of
heat recovery systems to reuse the heat generated by the cooling systems is another
strategy to accomplish thermal efficiency. Introduction of zoned controls to allow the
user to change the temperature based on their level of comfort and usage will help reduce

unnecessary heating and cooling.

4.5.3 Structural integrity

Structural integrity is the underlying requirement for any structure. In the present
scenario, where different kinds of factory-produced components are available, integrating
them together to form a hybrid design becomes a feasible option. The integration of
factory produced components and altemative-framing techniques must be checked for
structural integrity when brought together. This can be accomplished through designing
on a grid so that it is easier to integrate all forms of factory built units. Also avoiding
puncturing of the walls while setting up utility distribution systems improves the
structural integrity of the design. The use of materials, which have better structural

performance, may also be explored.

4.5.4 Ease of construction
Ease of construction refers to the ease of assembly where components are used.
For both site-built and factory-built homes, this would mean ease of assembly on site.

Ease of assembly will lead to reduction of punch list items through reduction of errors

98

 

I

during construction. This can be accomplished by simplifying design of utility systems,
disentangling these and integrating them within one utility core such that components are
easily put together. Modular design is an important strategy to simplify the construction
process. Design can be based on "use modules" referring to (1) wet cores, which include
bath and kitchen areas, (2) dry cores, which include the living areas, and, (3) utility cores
that are concentrated cores that house the distribution for all building systems. Also, all

distribution systems for building systems may be detachable and / or wireless.

4.5.5 Ease of maintenance

Ease of maintenance or replaceability and accessibility is one of the recognized
expectations from a “Whole House” design. The disentangling and integration of building
systems leads to an ease of handling these systems over the lifetime of the home, as well
as an ease of maintenance through ease of access. Design of a utility core that can be
accessed easily from a designated spot in the home, is one of the primary strategies. The
utility core serves as a single vertical conduit for all building systems such that all
building systems can be accessed at one point without difficulty or without having to
compromise the structural integrity of the home. It is also important to design distribution
and placement of building systems such that the failure of one system does not affect any
other. An integration of building systems will lead to a reduction of material used such as
for wireless systems. Home automation also allows for increased ease in monitoring and

maintaining building systems.

99

4.5.6 Sustainable design

For the purpose of this thesis, the term "sustainable design" refers to
environmentally responsive design and use of tools, techniques and, products, which
increase the energy efficiency of a home over its lifetime, thereby reducing the need for
consumption of non-renewable and natural resources. These strategies include active
solar design, such as use of solar panels; passive solar design, which deals with daytime
lighting and use of shading devices that reduce the need for artificial sources of light.
Another important consideration is glazing design, which increases window insulation
and therefore, the thermal efficacy within the home. Water also being a natural resource
must be conserved; therefore strategies such as rainwater harvesting and grey-water reuse
must be incorporated. Sealing of building junctions to decrease loss of energy improves
the thermal efficacy and in turn allows for better performance of the HVAC system.
Finally it is also important to pay attention to materials used for building; recycled
content materials contain recycled content which makes them desirable from the point of

view of being environmentally responsive.

4.6 Developed BSIH matrix

The BSIH matrix is, as indicated earlier, a tool that allows the researcher to assess
the kind of integration between any two or more building system. In the following
sections we will discuss the process of developing the BSIH matrixes for the 2-system
and 3-system interactions. Since there are 8 building systems that have been considered
for the purpose of this thesis, the system interaction combinations could be up till 8-

system interactions. The BSIH matrixes were developed for 2-system and 3-system

100

interactions only, since it was determined that any further matrix development would
only result in repetitions.

In a BSIH matrix the system combinations are placed on the vertical axis and the
levels of integration on the horizontal axis. Each interaction is then matched with one or
more level of integration. The BSIH matrixes are developed for each 2-system and 3-
system interaction to depict their level of integration. The choices are based on certain
reasons that are stated along with each strategy. The detailed matrices developed for this
particular research along with the reasons for the choices are illustrated with an example
in Figure 4.4. Finally the purpose of developing the matrices and the inferences gathered
from the exercise, are discussed.

There are 28 possible combinations for the 2-systems interactions and 57 possible
combinations for the 3-system interactions, which have been accessed. Each combination
has been accessed for its level of integration with each other and then the reasoning for
the choice has also been tabulated. Figure 4.1 is a part of the BSIH matrix developed for
the 2-system interactions; the complete matrix is included in Appendix A. A complete
BSIH matrix developed for the 3-system, interactions along with the reasoning, is also
included in Appendix B1.

The BSIH matrix allows the researcher to understand as well as tabulate the
extent of integration between any two or more building systems in a systematic format.
This provides a preliminary understanding of systems integration applications, along with
a formal framework on which to base the choice of integrative strategy as being suitable
or not. The BSIH matrix serves as a valuable tool in conveying the need for integrative

design, while also shedding some light on the manner in which to approach it for each

101

specific systems interaction. The understanding generated by going through this exercise
is used to develop detailed integration models for each scenario. The detailed modeling
will allow the researcher to substantiate the choice of strategies as well as materials and

products.

102

“5:83.. 5?» wee... 23:99.35 nfioumhmé .8.— fibaa :5: tan— 2... 9...»:—

 

  

 

  

,. Efioaoiaamafiafln .

  

5.50 + hm

   

00—m— + hm

  

 

:95; 05.3 «in ma his
=9. .. gas. sane 2.

. >2: 35mm» eogfifiwn .

. . .2525...“
952380583520
5.505553%..—

E—Jh .7 Law

 

:. .4533... .
0:72; no 393 .3 8 «.2»: .
as: 3&2: 2.1 383:3 . ..
p.932 Quwuoaaufiow . w

. . .2533: a... .55 ...,.
,. . cosmos 3 BE 3.3.50 .3.”

 

 

 

 

 

25.5....

3.82

vogue—Eco

 

 

   

 

05»: + hm

 

Em + hm

 

 

 

 

55:3.

 

82:3.

 

 

103

4.7 Developed Systems Decision models

This section will focus on the next step in the modeling for systems integration in
order to develop a “Whole House” performance criterion framework and subsequent
sample “Whole House” criterion. The systems decision models allow the researcher to
systematically tabulate all physical decisions, which must be taken in order to integrate
two or more building systems. Systems decision models will be developed for 3-system
interactions only, since it was deduced through research that 2-system interactions would
afford insufficient variability to allow for integrative design. Also, all 3-system
interactions have not been included in this research, since it was deduced that most
parameters stated begin to be repetitive and therefore only the relevant scenarios have
been incorporated. A total of twenty, 3-system interactions, have been found to be useful.
One example is discussed in the body of the text, and the remaining models developed
will be included in Appendix B2.

A systems decision model is comprised of two sections, the intents and the
strategies. The intent section includes all the physical decisions that must be taken for
each building system when integrated with two or more building systems based on the
performance parameters of the “Whole House” design. Physical decisions are tabulated
specific to each performance parameter under each building system.

The author refers the reader to appendix B2 for a complete list of 20 systems
decision models. The model is composed of three units, each depicting one of the
building systems, which in this case are structure, HV AC and electrical respectively.
Within each unit decisions pertaining to each performance parameter are tabulated. Since

all three units must interact with each other, physical decisions to be taken under each

104

head must also be coordinated. Once all the decisions have been tabulated, inferences are
made specific to each performance parameter. The inferences will serve as strategies to
be followed in order to successfiJlly integrate the three building systems.

The systems decision models developed will serve to systematically tabulate all
information required to make decisions regarding integration of two or more building
systems. Afier the systems decisions models were developed for the chosen interactions,
it was determined that certain inferences were common to all building systems
interactions. This led the researcher to deduce that these inferences were vital to a
“Whole House” design. These inferences also provided the basis for suggesting strategies
for designing a “Whole House” taking into account total systems interactions.

The systems decision models serve as the backbone for the “Whole House”
performance criterion framework and the subsequent sample “Whole House” criterion.
The framework is divided into three main parts: intents, strategies, and finally
requirements in terms of material, personnel or expertise. The intents as well as the
strategies will be extracted from the systems decision models, and the requirements
section will be completed through literature review of new materials and methods

available.

4.8 “Whole House” performance criteria (WHPC) framework

The BSIH matrixes and the systems decision models developed in earlier sections
form the basis for the formulation of the WHPC framework. In the following sections, the
format and the contents of the criteria will be discussed in detail. Three optional formats

were considered; the first based on the Environmental Impact Matrix (DFE 1999), second

105

on the Decision Selection Method (DSM 2005) and the third based on the LEED
guidelines (LEED 2002). The formats were tested for their ability to allow the user to
conduct what-if scenarios in order to determine the appropriateness of the design with
respect to “Whole House”, as well as being comprehensive in providing all the relevant

information.

4.8.1 Performance criteria framework

The first framework option (Fig 4.2) is based on the EIM (DFE 1999) which
allows the user to determine the types and extent of environmental impacts of a product
design and to conduct “what if’ scenarios to improve the environmental performance and
to lower the total score. A detailed description of the process in provided in Chapter 2,
section 2.6.3.

The second framework option is based in the Decision Selection method (DSM
2005). Many alternatives may appear when finalizing decisions regarding the use of
strategies to fulfill certain intent. The final decision-making must take into account the
requirements of the customer and the capability of the company. The best decision which
is tabulated is that alternative which optimizes the total product value based on
requirements which have been stated. The systematic process is refereed to as the
Decision Selection Method (DSM). The following steps must be completed: first
determination of performance requirements, which have been specified in the thesis as
six performance parameters. The criteria tree or the criteria flowchart is formulated next,
it is produced on a top down basis by asking the question “How will this be

accomplished?” This has been accomplished in the thesis in the form of the systems

106

 

 

 

”J

 

 

decision models. A datum is determined next, based on which the applicability of the
results will be tested; here the datum is the ideal “Whole House” score. The existing
concept is rated next, which is done with the help of the scoring system developed. The
detailed scoring system will be discussed in Chapter 5. Finally, the results are compared
to determine the appropriateness of a system with respect to the ideal “Whole House”
score.

The third framework option is based on the LEED guidelines and the manner in
which the information is laid out in their text. The LEED guidelines divide the
information required into intents, strategies and requirements. The intents refer to what
needs to be achieved, the strategy is the process that will be. employed to achieve it, and
the requirements are the physical needs to fulfill the strategy, such as the particular types
of codes to be followed, or the expertise required, or the materials required, and so on.
Each set of intents, strategies and requirements refers to a particular credit that must be
achieved, in order to be certified as a LEED building. The same breakup was used to
define the framework option. In lieu of the credits, the intents, strategies and
requirements were defined for a set of design considerations under each building system.

It was determined that the third option was better suited to depict the ‘Whole
House” criterion. This option represents a more comprehensive manner of presenting the
information required to design a “Whole House”. The author concedes that since the
thesis focuses on the framework development, rather than the actual criterion, the
framework may undergo changes as one uses it to develop the criterion itself. A section
of the actual framework developed has been included in Figure 4.3 and the complete

framework is provided in Appendix Cl.

107

 

 

The framework will be used to conduct “what-if” scenarios by scoring the
strategies employed in the design and construction of a home. The rating and scoring
system will be discussed in detail in the next chapter. The LEED guidelines are used to

formulate the framework only and have no bearing on the scoring system.

4.9 Summary

This chapter includes the modeling techniques used to formulate the “Whole
House” performance criteria framework. In order to understand building system
interactions, these were modeled using established modeling techniques. It is the author’s
intent to use the framework to formulate a sample “Whole House” criterion that is
provided in the next chapter. By systematically tabulating the information required to
affect systems integration with the BSIH matrixes and the systems decision models, the
researcher was able to sufficiently understand, as well as corroborate, the strategies stated
within the WHPC fiamework. The author concedes that the content of the framework is
subjective and so are the chosen intents and strategies; these will largely be based on the

level of expertise of the user as well as individual preferences.

108

II I'l1v. ‘I 00"! . .ln Il'-t . I'I UIII IOInIOI Ills-Inuit- . .uII.I It

........ _ .11: _ l.l.la.......ul.. _ .2..!l...i:2. \ h...\ru.... I \ {liaitdilu \ )...l......€ \ii. . ; ~...l|...lll-:‘\.=:uh \

85.9an 9mm: 2: no 323 foiofiah 03:3 ”mi 25E

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n

N

_.

<
m..9oEm.ma 9295.3 :9on «ES: 5:00 3:585 mucus—Leta 3:3..6:
8cmE3ton. mocmgotmn. 0355825 no comm ho ommm .953an 355.; 353m Econ—cognac".
c939 02
32:09.: 33225 E85 «E32? mEESm
setup—:85 oiEaxm

 

 

E:— ofi =o coma: 4332......— Um=>> and. 0.5»...—

 

 

.m. :98... .88.. 29...? 2. 3.82% 22. 9: 28m 9.. 5.95 a: .82
9.828 6: - m 658:8. . w 658% 5888. 8 mg. - m 558% $2082 - N 658% was 9 9.6% 52°32 - F .932.» no... . o

.32.... mm BE 3 as wages. 8:853. 2. co 6&5 “.8588“ a. .25 8.683... €83 3.828 comm 358.9...

._.a
a. .25. 8:869... 38 8 v9.3 =9, 8 ..~ .2 .88 3 >8. 3.: .2833... 9.2.3 5.8.28 EB. 99:253. .826... 9.. 5 38a 8 :5. £36
28m .2...

 

 

 

 

 

$853... :36

are .88 85:852. 8.8.5950 arms... 08% 3.3.3..
.288 sown 38m. .8388 .28.: 3.5%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

109

'3'

(I)

Chapter 5 — Sample “Whole House” Criterion and Its

Applications

5.] Overview

The WHPC framework was developed and presented in the previous chapter. In
this chapter, the framework will be used to develop a sample “Whole House” criterion,
along with a scoring system that will be used for applying the sample criterion to three
case studies; site-built home, factory-built home and hybrid home. The scores obtained
for these will be compared as a percentage of the hypothetical ideal “Whole House”
score, which is the sum of all the ideal scores. Based on the results achieved from the
scoring of strategies employed in a design, it can be ascertained whether the design
approaches an ideal “Whole House” design. The step is included to allow the user to
conduct “what-if” scenarios with respect to the choice of strategies employed to design a
home. It is anticipated that the hybrid home will achieve the highest “Whole House”
score, based on the assumptions made earlier with regards to the sample “Whole House”

criterion.

5.2 Sample “Whole House” criterion components

There are five components that constitute the complete criterion namely; building
systems, design considerations, intent, example strategies and finally information
resources / professional expertise. The sample “Whole House” criterion is provided in

Appendix C2.

110

l.

The building systems constitute the first column and are the same as discussed in the
previous chapter. These are Structure / Envelope which have been incorporated
together, since it was determined during the formulation of the criterion that the
information included under these two heads were overlapping; HV AC, Plumbing,
Electrical, Communication, Interior A, and Interior B.

Each building system is further defined with a set of three major design
considerations that are presented as rows within the first column. These are
architectural design specifics, such as space usage in terms of placement of units and
arrangement of partitions. Engineering design encompasses all services design issues,
and lastly special design considerations include active passive solar design, choice of
fuel, alternative techniques, and any other special considerations.

Under each design consideration, a set of intents is specified pertaining to each
performance parameter. This forms the next column in the criterion; the individual
intents are specified in each row relating to the particular design consideration. For
example, the intent stated under the spatial flexibility parameter pertaining to
architectural design considerations is “Changeability of spaces”. This can be
interpreted as: in order to achieve spatial flexibility based on architectural design the
user must design for changeability of spaces.

The intent specified under each design consideration for each building system is then
associated with a strategy. The strategies are specific to the user and may be tabulated
as per the individual expertise. This forms the next column in the criterion; the intent

in a particular row is associated with a strategy. A set of example strategies has been

111

;

specified for the purpose of this thesis. For example the intent “Changeability of
spaces” is achieved using the example strategy “Grid based design”.

5. Once the strategies have been specified, the last section tabulates the information
resources or professional expertise required to realize the strategy that has been
specified earlier. This forms the last column in the criterion; the strategy in a
particular row is associated with an information resource. For example “Grid based
design” will require “Design expertise” in order to accomplish the strategy. Other
information resources are included, as part of the text of the thesis and readers will be

referred to the relevant sections.

5.3 Scoring system for the sample criterion

Once the framework was the developed based on the LEED guidelines, a scoring
system was set up to score the strategies used within a design in order to conduct “what-
if ’ scenarios to determine the most appropriate strategy. The scoring system is based on
the “Whole House Calculator” whereas the framework is based on the LEED guidelines.
Each building system is associated with a certain weight that refers to the role of the
strategies pertaining to that building system, in the overall performance of the home. The
building system that affects the performance of the home to a large degree is given a
larger weight than others. The weight age/credit system defines the level of importance of
each building system within the complete design of the home. The systems are weighted
as a percentage of the total weight of 8. The choice of level of importance is based on the
rating system used in the formulation of the “Whole House calculator” report (O’Brien et

al 2005). The tool developed at Virginia Tech has been discussed in detail in Chapter 2

112

 

l‘ r

f

section 2.6.4.1. This is primarily a scoring system developed to test a existing design to
determine to what extent it approaches a “Whole House”. The report defines a set of ten
building systems and assigns credits to these. These credits are used a basis for the credit
system developed for this thesis. Although the individual systems defined for the Whole
House calculator are different from the ones defined for the purpose of this research,
certain assumption have been made. I

Figure 5.1 illustrates the assumptions made, the first column refers to the systems
defined within the “Whole House calculator” text, the second column tabulates the
weights assigned for each system. The third column refers to the assumptions made by
the author for the purpose of this thesis; for example process design weights will be
divided evenly for all building systems other than structure and envelope. Foundation,
structure and envelope defined separately for the calculator will be combined and
associated with the Structure/Envelope section, and so on. Based on the assumptions
made, certain weights have been determined as provided in Figure 5.2 for each building

system.

113

 

Systems Weights Assumptions
Will be evenly

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Process Design 5 divided except for
structure
Foundation 15
Superstructure 25 Structure / Envelope
Envelope 15
Interior partitions 2 .
Millwork 3 Interlor B
Distribute evenly
Utility distribution 7 among utility
systems
Assuming elec here
Electrical 10 Electrical refers ‘° 9'“ .d'St' we” Electrical 60%
and comm lines % of
total divided as
Plumbing 5 Plumbing Communication 25%
Thermal 13 HVAC Interior A 15%
Total 100

 

 

 

 

Figure 5.1: Assumptions made based on the “Whole House calculator”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No Building system %age Weight ‘
1+2 Structure / Envelope 55.00 4.4

3 HVAC 16.00 1.28

4 Plumbing 8.00 0.64

5 Electrical 8.00 0.64

6 Communication 4.00 0.32

7 Interior A 6.00 0.48

8 Interior B 3.00 0.24

100 8

 

 

 

 

Figure 5.2: Weights for each building system

The next step is the scoring of each strategy based on it level of effectives in
achieving a particular performance parameter. The scoring will be conducted on a scale
of 1-5, where 1 represents the least effective strategy and 5, being the most effective
strategy. After scoring each strategy on this scale, a total score is determined under each
building system. The weighted score is the product of the total score for each building

system and the weight assigned to it (Eq 1). The sum of these weighted scores for all

114

 

building systems is the final score (Eq 2). Once each case study has been scored, it will
be compared against the ideal “Whole House” score of 755 points. This will be referred
to as the ideal score. The ideal score may be viewed as a hypothetical score only based on
the sample criterion developed for this thesis. This number may change based on
whoever is conducting the analysis and formulating the framework. The results of the

scoring of the case studies will be expressed as a percentage of the ideal score.

{Raw scores x Weight = Weighted score (Eq 1)

ZWeighted score = Final score (Eq 2)

The intent of the criterion is to be able to conduct “what-if’ scenarios in order to
determine which strategy may render the design closer to being a “Whole House” design.
The total score, which is the sum of the weighted scores, is compared with the ideal
“Whole House” score for this particular scenario. The ideal score is computed by
assigning the “most effective” score to all the strategies, (which is 5) and then computing
a total score. This ideal score is then compared to the score obtained for a particular case
study in terms of percentage, which gives the user an idea of how close the case study
design comes to being a ideal “Whole House” design. These comparisons will be made in

the following sections where the criterion is applied to the three case studies.

5.4 Application of “Whole House” criterion

This section deals with the application of the sample “Whole House” performance

criterion developed to three distinct case studies, site-built home, factory-built home and

115

finally hybrid home. A major homebuilder has provided the case studies for the site-built
home and the hybrid home. Both homes are based on the same design but have different
approaches to construction. For the factory-built home case study, a hypothetical, double
section factory built home similar to the other two case studies was developed. The rating
associated with each strategy is based on the understanding of the researcher but will be

corroborated with a discussion of the specific strategy used within the design.

5.4.1 Site-built home

The design and drawings for the case study are the property of a major
homebuilder and were shared with the research team for academic purposes only. The
specifications for the case study design are as follows: Basement: Footprint except garage
includes walkout light well. First floor: 2 car garage, formal living and dining, family
room, kitchen, powder and laundry room. Second floor: 3 bedroom, master suite and 2
baths. The gross square footage is 4198square feet for the entire home. The HVAC and
plumbing specifications and electrical drawings have been provided as well as framing
and foundation plans. Communication and interior plans shall be assumed standard; it is
also assumed that no specialized furniture design is recommended and no moveable
partitions are used. None of the additional options have been considered for the analysis;
only the basic option has been used.

Regular timber framing with wooden studs (2 x 4), 16 inches on center with
gypsum board is used for the superstructure; and pre-engineered roof trusses are used for
the floors and the roof. Cast in place foundation walls are used for the basement.

Electrical and HVAC distribution is largely through the floor and through a vertical

116

mechanical chase running from the basement to the second floor. The specifications for
the HVAC ducting include mastic and duct tape as insulation to be installed on all the
corners. The ducting used is flex duct that is easier to install. An optional zoned HVAC
system has also been specified, and all supply air registers openings on exterior walls are
specified to be insulated with rigid urethane insulation board (R12). The design also
specifies use of low ‘E’ glass for all skylights, and all doors and windows are to be
insulated. The design does specify that most openings should be oriented East/W est,
which may not be the most desirable orientation in terms of passive solar design
strategies.

All intents within the “Whole House” criteria are scored with respect to the
information associated with the design. In instances where it is determined that the intent
was not considered within the design, these have been stated and the strategy employed is
considered ineffective since the intent is non-existent. The scoring for each intent is
subjective and is based on the understanding of the user, in this case the author. The
author concedes that the scores may be different, based on the individual conducting the
analysis. The “Whole House’ score for the site-built home was 310, with respect to the
ideal score of 755 as stated before, this represents 41.06% of the ideal “Whole House”
score. The completed criterion sheet for the site-built home has been included in

Appendix C3.

5.4.2 Factory-built home

The case study design for the factory-built home was developed from the case

study design for the site-built home. It is designed as a double section home with each

117

section being 16” wide as per the HUD codes. The home is designed as a single storey
unit such that it can be transported with case. No special additions have been made to the
design, as the basic specifications remain the same. The design specifications are as
follows; the first section includes a family room, dining, and kitchen that are part of the
open plan with an additional powder room and utility room with a rear access. The
second section includes the master bedroom, bath and walk in closet, with two additional
rooms that share one bath. The first section is 16 feet wide and 48 feet long and the
second section is 16 feet wide and 39 feet long. The specifications are assumed to be the
same as the original design for the site-built home.

It is assumed that the sections are built on a chassis that is used to transport the
home to the site. Standard specifications have been based on the body of knowledge
generated by the research team at MSU and Purdue University on manufactured housing
under the NSF research grants.

The “Whole House’ score for the factory-built home was 391, this represents
51.8% of the ideal “Whole House” score. The completed criterion sheet for the factory-

built home has been included in Appendix C4.

5.4.3 Hybrid home

The hybrid home case study design was similar to the site-built home as well and
was provided by the same major homebuilder. The architectural design specifications in
this case are the same as the site-built home, and so are the plans. The only difference is
the construction process and the materials used. These are based on the components

produced by the major homebuilder at their privately owned factory facility. There are

118

four basic components that the factory manufactures; foundation walls, structurally
insulated wall panels (SIP) with windows attached, floor trusses with complete
assemblies and steel studs for internal partitions. These are manufactured as per the
specifications of the design and then transported to the site on specially designed trailers
to enhance ease of construction at site. The OSB (Orient Strand Board) used for the SIP’s
is specially designed to have equal strength in both axes such that it is easy to use; it also
makes it possible to attach windows without adding headers, thereby reducing the
manufacturing time improving and structural integrity immensely. Another special
addition is a specially manufactured insulation strip which is used for door and window
openings, further reducing any loss of heat and cold from within the home during its
lifetime, thereby increasing the inherent efficiency of the HVAC system. The component
has been designed and manufactured by the major homebuilder and is due to be patented.
The roof systems are pre-manufactured roof trusses that are subcontracted. Several other
possibilities to standardize the production of a home are being considered.

The “Whole House’ score for the hybrid home was 506; this represents 67.02% of
the ideal “Whole House” score. The completed criterion sheet for the hybrid home has

been included in Appendix C5.

5.4.4 Comparison of the criterion application on three case studies

All three designs for site-built, factory-built and hybrid homes are similar, in
order to maintain a certain consistency. The intent for the application was not to critique
the architectural design or structural design of the home but to score the building systems

and their performance. It is assumed that the specifications are standard and the quality of

119

construction is satisfactory for all three case studies. Since the specifications for all three
designs are similar, a large part of the scoring was similar. The results have been

presented both as points achieved, as well as percentages of the ideal “Whole House”

 

 

 

 

 

score (Fig 5.3).
Home Type Score °/o age
Ideal Whole House 755 100
Site-built 310 41.06
Factory-built 391 51 .8
Hybrid 506 67.02

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 5.3: Comparison of scores obtained

The decisions regarding the scoring of each strategy were partly based on an
understanding of the specification and partly on whether the intent was considered at the
time of the design. In cases where it was felt that the intent was not consciously included
into the design process, the strategy was scored as being ineffective since it was non-
existent. In instances where the intent was considered, the strategy was scored based on
the author’s understanding of the specifications and the details represented in the
drawings supplied by the major homebuilder. The reasons stated for choosing a score for
a particular strategy may be reviewed.

In all three cases the engineering drawing, design consideration for the building
systems excluding structure/envelope, received similar scores. This is because these
building systems are designed and placed in relatively the same manner for all three types
of home. The differences in scoring for the three types of homes were noticed mostly in

the materials used and in the construction process.

120

It was determined that the component design and assembly process used in the
construction of the hybrid home provides it with enhanced structural performance owing
to the specially manufactured OSB. Special insulation strip installed with the window
openings allows for better thermal performance for the interior, consequently enhancing
the thermal efficiency of the HVAC system. Both the factory-built home and the hybrid
home take advantage of the ease of construction affected through components assembly
whereas the site—built home received lower scores, since the intent was not considered as
a separate entity. For site-built homes it is assumed that the management team placed on
site by the General Contractor (GC) will manage the construction process and therefore
designing for ease of construction is not considered. This particular design has received
better scores for the ease of maintenance performance parameter, since the design
incorporates a mechanical chase for the distribution of HVAC ducts over floors,
rendering it easily accessible. The mechanical chase is included in the architectural
design for all three types of homes and therefore the scores received are similar.

Another significant observation is that all three types of homes received
ineffective scores for all intents stated for the Interior (Type B) building system. This is
because the furniture placement for the interiors is an afterthought in most of the building
designs today. It is author’s intention to introduce the concept of using internal fumiture
placement as an effective means of increasing thermal efficiency within the home.
Furniture placement could also assist in defining spaces such that no structural or
partition walls are required; this would serve to improve the spatial flexibility within the

home.

121

The results obtained for the three case studies were as anticipated, based on the
performance parameters specified beforehand. The site-built home case study received
the least score; this is largely because the production process does not take advantage of
the inherent ease of assembly of factory-produced components. In addition, there were no
attempts to use materials with enhanced thermal and structural performance. The factory-
built case study home received relatively better scores with respect to ease of
construction and therefore a better overall score. The hybrid home case study received the
highest score compared to the other two types of homes. This is because, along with
enjoying the advantages of factory built components that are assembled easily on site,
this particular case study design also used specially designed materials and products, such

as high performance OSB and insulating strip for opening.

5.5 Feedback on the WHPC framework, sample criterion, and application process
The effectiveness of the research outputs and the process of their application were
reviewed with the help of feedback from selected academic/ government researchers and
industry professionals. A summary of the research outputs, their development process
and case study applications were sent to the selected professionals and telephone
interviews were conducted. During the interviews the responses were organized based on
a predetermined list of questions, although discussions were open and certain general
observations were made and noted by the researcher. The survey set from the academia
and governmental researchers was determined based on their past and ongoing research
activities in the area of “Whole House”. A total of three academic researchers were

interviewed. The survey set from the industry professionals was based on the type of

122

‘5.

work conducted by the organization and their interest in incorporating new materials and

processes into their product. A total of three industry personnel were interviewed.

5.5.1 General observations

Overall it was argued that the research approach and the outputs are timely and
will mark a well-needed contribution to the emerging field of “Whole House”. It was
noted that the academic/ governmental researchers’ community felt that the framework
was simplistic in its approach; however the industry community felt that the approach
was rather complicated and may be difficult to assimilate within the industry. This
observation was to be expected and does not seem unusual. The intent of the research was
to put forth a framework flexible enough to incorporate individual requirements as one of
the initial contributions to this field. Although it was intended that the framework itself
be easily understood and therefore easy to use, it is natural that the professional
community prefers a more hands-on approach than academic research sometimes offers.
The “Whole House” approach has only lately been recognized as a credible direction to
take with the intent of revolutionizing the homebuilding industry, and therefore its
introduction into the mainstream industry may take a few more years.

In general, it was stated that the framework was adequately substantiated, when
relating to building systems interactions through the use of the modeling techniques. The
author recognizes the presence of many other modeling techniques, which have been
used by other researchers. It was also observed that as an initial academic exploration, the
research provided a valuable starting point. To a large degree, specifics of the building

systems chosen as well as the performance parameters were not questioned, since the

123

framework is intended to be flexible and the choice will be subjective to the specific user.
Specific concerns have been acknowledged in the following section, which include
suggestions for further research.

This research focuses on the modeling of systems interactions that leads to an
understanding of the intents and further allows the user to associate with it the
appropriate strategy. The underlying intent in the formulation of the framework is to
allow the user to substitute design and construction strategies at the pre-construction
stage. The WHPC framework is intended to serve as a design assist tool and not only as a

scoring tool for an existing design.

5.5.2 Specific observations

Certain critical observations were made which include inclusion of Indoor Air
Quality (IAQ) as one of the performance parameters owing to the attention this particular
aspect is receiving through homebuilding claims today. It was noted that site and
consumer related aspects must be addressed as part of the overall “Whole House”
approach. Another observation was that financial analysis must be conducted in order to
render the approach much more realistic. Certain additional performance parameters were
suggested such as aesthetics and functionality, which have been addressed. Lastly it was
noted that the building systems interactions had been considered for their physical
proximity and placement and along with this non-physical levels of integration, must also

be considered. These will be discussed in some detail in the relevant sections.

124

5.5.2.1 Indoor Air Quality (IAQ)

IAQ includes two significant parts; first adequate ventilation for the home and
second, chemical / biological processes within the built structure with regards to
materials used as well as adequate ventilation and access to outside air within the home.
Adequate ventilation was included as a special design consideration for the HVAC
building system. It was observed that in the present day a large part of homebuilding
litigation is caused by harmful chemical residue and emissions within the home and
therefore it is important to consider the effect of construction materials at the time of
design. The chemical and biological processes are recognized as a future research

direction to be included in detail within the next thesis produced by the research team.

5.5.2.2 Site and consumer related issues

It was also noted that design and production aspects such as specific site
considerations and consumer specifics should also be included. The research team
concedes that although we recognize the importance of including these aspects within the
overall “Whole House” design approach, for the purpose of this thesis the focus has been
on physical interactions among building systems. These aspects will be included as future

research directions.

5.5.2.3 Financial analysis
It is important to consider cost implications when addressing new technology. It
was pointed out that the user must be able to derive some advantage in terms of first costs

and / or lifetime costs. According to a government researcher affordability is a real

125

a"

 

 

 

II
\I

possibility with the “Whole House” approach. It is the author’s opinion that under the
present circumstances, where the supply chain functions as a separate entity, this might
not be possible to achieve. However, if the supply chain were personally monitored and
designed for the specific purpose of a homebuilder, affordability could be built in due to
achieved reduction in cost based on the streamlining of the design and construction

process. The financial analysis will be addressed as a future research direction.

5.5.2.4 Other factors

It was observed that additional performance parameters such as affordability as
discussed earlier, aesthetics and functionality could be explored. It is the author’s opinion
that although aesthetics can be included, the definition would be entirely subjective; the
government researcher making this observation agreed with this contention. Owing to the
diversity of preferences this parameter is at best quantifiable for a local user set for a
specific site. Surveys would need to be conducted within the area that the residential
community is to be placed. As for functionality, the author refers the reader to the
definition of spatial flexibility as a performance parameter.

The levels of integration stated within the text for the purpose of the BSIH matrix
were discussed and it was observed that these largely referred to the physical proximity
and location of the building systems. Along with physical levels of integration, non-
physical levels of integration referred to a “systemic interactions” must also be
recognized. Systemic interactions may be defined as cause and effect interactions; for
example, if a user owns pets this could affect the IAQ, if the ventilation system is not

designed to take into account this factor.

126

 

 

 

5.6 Summary

The building systems integration models and the WHPC framework were
discussed in the previous chapters. This chapter focused on the sample “Whole House”
criterion and the scoring systems developed in order to conduct what-if scenarios to
analyze the case study designs with respect to an ideal “Whole House” design. This
analysis can assist designers, builders, and users in establishing the best strategy to
follow.

The sample criterion was applied to three case study designs. The results obtained
as scores for each design were based on the author’s understanding of the design and
specifications. The results are also subject to the choice of performance parameters and
individual approach to the same. Based on the criterion application, the Hybrid home
received the best “Whole House” score. The advantage was noticed with the ease of
construction for a hybrid home, since it was designed as a component assembly, and the
production process and the supply chain was monitored by the same homebuilder. Also,
ease of construction exerts more influence in the scheme for this research, since it is one
of six performance parameters; if the number of performance parameters were increased
it would dilute the effect of this one factor.

Finally, the performance criteria framework and the resultant sample “Whole
House” criterion were discussed with involved personnel from both academic and
industry sectors. This served as the review process for the research approach and outputs.
It was noted that the framework was adequately formulated and the sample criterion was

adequate for the purpose of the thesis. The comprehensiveness and accuracy of the actual

127

criterion are not in question here, since the research intends to put forth a framework

rather than a prescriptive and accurate “Whole House” criterion.

128

Chapter 6 — Summary and Conclusions

6.1 Overview

The “Whole House roadmap” (PATH 2003) defines the “Whole House” approach
in terms of building systems integration. The intent is to be able to design in a manner
that reduces the negative interactions that exist among building systems, since they are
not designed to interact, and also to use the synergies that exist among building systems
to better the performance of the home without increasing the cost.

The research conducted through this thesis was aimed as an initial foray into the
emerging field of the “Whole House” approach. The research team intended that this be
the beginning of a series of academic research projects related to the inclusion of the
“Whole House” approach into mainstream home building. Therefore with this thesis the
aim was to understand the “Whole House” approach through literature review and then
attempt to put forth a preliminary “Whole House” performance criteria framework. This
is intended to be a framework that equips the user with tools and techniques to effectively
substantiate strategies that must be employed to achieve a “Whole House” design. During
the review of the research methodology and outputs it was stated that this was valuable
academic research with the object of developing a pool of knowledge upon the “Whole
House” approach. This framework will be fiirther developed and refined before it can be
used as a prescriptive tool to determine how to design and build a “Whole House”.

Chapter 1 presented the goals and objectives that the author aimed to achieve,
along with a detailed methodology and the need for this research. Chapter 2 is referred to

as stage one of the literature review, which focused on the evolution of the “Whole

129

House” approach. The review was divided into three parts: first the origins of the concept
before the 1990’s including the initiatives by the US. government to promote relevant
research in housing, next recent developments which include other schools of thought
which feed into the “Whole House” approach, such as lean construction and open
building, and finally other attempts at developing a criterion were discussed such as the
LEED guidelines, the Energy Star guidelines and more.

Chapter 3 deals with stage two of the literature review, focused on the tools and
techniques, used to achieve a “Whole House” design. The review begins with
determining the modeling tools needed to put forth a preliminary understanding of
building systems integration. Mechanical electrical plumbing (MEP) integration
techniques were discussed since it was important to mention the existence of such
techniques. All building systems, which function within the home, were identified and
the means and methods to improve the performance of these systems through change in
design or type of fuel were discussed. This chapter forms the basis for the information
resources needed for the sample “Whole House” criterion.

Chapter 4 deals with the “Whole House” performance criteria framework. The
framework development process begins with a review of the building systems identified
for this research followed by the performance parameters and their definitions. The
framework options were discussed next, and the most appropriate framework based on
the LEED guidelines was decided upon. The chapter also includes the modeling
techniques, which assist the user to formulate an understanding of the building systems
interactions. Two modeling techniques were used; the BSIH matrix were developed for

2-system and 3-system interactions and the systems decision models for 3-systems

130

 

 

r"

 

 

 

interactions were completed. Both these modeling techniques have been endorsed by the
AIA (Rush 1986). This formed the basis for the information included within the sample
“Whole House” criterion.

Chapter 5 deals with the sample “Whole House” criterion and the scoring system
developed in order to conduct “what-if” scenarios. The sample criterion was applied to
three case studies, one each for site-built, factory-built and hybrid home. The application
of the criterion is based on the understanding of the researcher and the results achieved
are subjective to this research. It was determined that the hybrid home receives the

highest “Whole House” score.

6.2 Summary
This section includes the steps canied out to achieve the goals and objectives set
out for this research. The hypothesis set out for the purpose of this thesis has been proven

correct based on the research conducted.

6.2.1 Objective 1
To map the evolution of the “Whole House” approach.

Step 1 — Conduct literature review.
This was accomplished through the literature review conducted in chapter 1 and 2, which
included the evolution process and the tools and techniques present today to better the
performance of the home. The intent here was to review relevant literature within the

scope of the “Whole House” approach to building systems integration.

131

 
 
 
 
 

6.2.2 Objective 2
To develop “systems integration models” in order to demonstrate systems interactions
and their impacts on each other.
Step 2 — Model the “Whole House ” as an overall systems integration model.

The overall model for the home was accomplished using the BSIH matrixes for 2-system
and 3-system interactions. Although the actual number of combinations can be much
more when considering eight building systems, it was determined that these would be
adequate to formulate an understanding of levels of interactions.

Step 3 — Determine performance parameters.
The performance parameters refer to the performance expectations from a “Whole
House” design. For the purpose of this research six parameters are defined which are
spatial flexibility, thermal performance, structural integrity, ease of construction, ease of
maintenance, and a supplementary parameter; sustainable design. The selection was
based on the researcher’s understanding of the most critical performance requirements
from a “Whole House” design.

Step 4 — Understand the impact of “systems interactions " among the selected
building components.
This was accomplished by generating “systems decision models” for each set of building
system interactions based on the predetermined performance parameters. The
understanding of the systems interactions generated here forms the basis for the sample

“Whole House” criterion. It was determined that the systems decision models developed

132

the

 

 

for 2-system interactions are redundant, and therefore the models will be completed for
58 possible 3-system interactions only.
6.2.3 Objective 3
To develop a “Whole House” performance criteria framework.
Step 5 — Review any existing attempts to define similar frameworks.
The following were reviewed in detail: LEED guidelines, Energy Star guidelines,
Environmental Impact Matrix, Whole House Calculator, and other contributors such as
the Cleaner Technology Substitute Assessment and Federal guidelines for green building.
Step 6 - Review and determine the appropriate option and formulate the
framework.
Three options were considered; one based on the EIM (DFE 1999), another based on the
DSM (DSM 2005), and the third based on the LEED guidelines (LEED 2002). It was
determined that the LEED guidelines were the most appropriate format for the “Whole
House” performance criterion framework. The format used is comprehensive in the sense

that it provides adequate information in an organized outline.

6.2.4 Objective 4
To develop a sample “Whole House” criterion and apply it to site-built, factory-built and
hybrid case study homes.

Step 7 — T 0 develop a sample “Whole House ” performance criterion.
A sample “Whole House” performance criterion was formulated based on the format
inspired by the LEED guidelines and the understanding of building systems interactions

generated through the modeling techniques. The format has three sections; the intents, the

133

strategies, and the information resources. Each building system was further defined,
based on three major design considerations; architectural design, engineering design
specifics, and special design considerations. The intents were tabulated based on the
specific design considerations for each building system in order to fulfill each of the six
performance parameters. A strategy and information resource corresponds to a specific
intent and these are indicated in terms of the specific section within the thesis text.

Step 8 - T 0 demonstrate the application of the sample criterion to site-built,
factory-built and hybrid case study homes.
Three case studies were scored based on the sample “Whole House” criterion that was
formulated through research. The drawings and specifications for the site-built and hybrid
home case studies were obtained through a major homebuilder. The factory-built home
case study was modified from the design of the same home. Basic design and
specifications were considered similar for all three case studies to avoid being swayed by

the quality of the architectural design.

6.2.5 Objective 5
To review the “Whole House” performance criteria framework based on feedback form
researchers and industry personnel.

Step 9 - T 0 compare the results obtained for the three case study homes.
The results of the application of the criterion to the three case studies were expressed in
the form of points achieved. These points were compared to the ideal “Whole House”
score, which is a hypothetical score, based on all strategies being most effective in

achieving the set of performance parameters defined. These comparisons were then

134

 

 
 

er 1“.

 

presented in the form of percentage of the datum score giving the reader a measure of
how close a design comes to being an ideal “Whole House”. It was determined that based
on the assumptions made during this research the hybrid home received the largest score.
Step 10 - Feedback on the “Whole House ” performance criterion framework and
its applications.
The “Whole House” performance criteria framework and the sample criterion were
reviewed by a survey set including both academia! government researchers and industry
personnel. It was determined that the framework provided adequate substantiation for the
content of the sample “Whole House” criterion. It was also stated that since the
fi'amework was considered flexible enough to include individual choices in terms of
defining building systems and performance parameters, it was considered robust. Several
areas of research were pointed out as being important which will be included in the future

research areas.

6.3 Limitations of the research

The major observation was that the “Whole House” approach has been viewed in
terms of building systems integration. The overall “Whole House” approach, however,
may include many other factors not included in the body of this research. The framework
developed, is on the other hand flexible enough to include all the important aspects and
therefore the author does not consider this a significant limitation.

The framework may be considered limited in its approach since it is subjective to
whomever may be using it to formulate a “Whole House” criterion. The content of the

sample criterion itself is intended to be an example rather than firm fact. The tool set

135

forth in this research is intended to be an initial step towards a prescriptive “Whole
House” criterion, which may eventually become a set of firm guidelines.

The result obtained with regard to the hybrid home being the most effective when
leading to a “Whole House” design is subjective to assumptions made during this
research. This result could have been obtained due to the following reasons: the
understanding of the researcher based on the specific construction methods employed by
the homebuilder constructing the hybrid home, the observation that case of construction
was a major contributor to the higher score, and since this accounts for a large part of the
performance parameters, it could have affected the result. Moreover the fact that external
factors, such as specific site conditions, labor and supply chain particulars, and
extraneous climatic conditions, have not been considered could vary the result under

different circumstances.

6.4 Conclusions and inferences

This section focuses on the conclusions and inferences made based on the
research conducted. After having conducting the modeling it was concluded that the 2
and 3 system interaction modeling was adequate for the understanding of building
systems interactions. The framework developed is also considered adequately
substantiated through the use of these modeling techniques and allows for refinement
through future research. The ideal “Whole House” score obtained for the purpose of this
thesis is a hypothetical score and may be different based on the formulation of the
framework, chosen performance parameters, as well as individual requirements in terms

of design. The modeling techniques used for the purpose of this thesis are required for the

136

 

purpose of substantiating the claims made within the sample criterion. It was concluded
that it was indeed imperative to conduct the modeling in order to have an understanding
of the systems interactions. This understanding allows the user to decide upon the intents
and strategies to be included within the criterion.

It can also be concluded through the review of literature conducted for this
process that sealing the home for optimal HVAC performance is an important factor to be
considered at the time of design especially sealing of the attic spaces. Also integrative
communication and electrical distribution is no longer a thing of the future and must be
incorporated into mainstream building.

It was observed that a large part of the problem existing today is the ineffective
interactions among different trades, which results in negative interactions among building
systems. This led the author to infer that building systems interactions are the most
important aspect to be considered in relation to the “Whole House” approach. It can be
inferred from the literature review that most of the technology and products available
today which enhance the performance of the home in one form or another are cost
intensive in terms of one time initial costs. They do however reduce the lifetime costs of
the home, and therefore in order to render the approach more acceptable, lifetime costs
will have to be recognized as an important specification for a home. A large part of the
challenge in assimilating “Whole House” strategies is to educate the user with regards to
long-term advantages. It can also be inferred that interior furniture placement can be used
for other than aesthetic purposes, which could include the partition of spaces such that the
use of partition walls would be reduced thus giving the user much more flexibility in

floor plan. This could also be used to channel the air movement within the home based on

137

the climatic requirements over the year as weather changes. Last but not the least it can
be inferred that sustainable design is an intrinsic requirement of all “Whole House”
strategies and approaches and must be reviewed in greater detail.

Finally it can also be concluded that the hybrid home is in fact the best “Whole
House” solution for several reasons. To begin with the hybrid, component assembly
approach along with the supply chain is personally monitored which provides increased
efficiency and ease in functioning on site. This approach also gets past the stigma
attached to factory built homes since consumers associate these with regular site-built
homes. This approach also provides opportunities for innovation within a setting where
one entity handles all trades involved in the design and production of the home, which
renders it more effective.

Future research directions are discussed in this chapter. It is anticipated that these
are not likely to be assimilated into mainstream construction in the near future. It is the
author’s understanding that substantial research is required in the areas chosen in order to
make it possible for them to be accepted as realistic and viable options by a large part of

the industry.

6.5 Areas of future research

This section deals with the list of future research directions that is not considered
exhaustive, although it is the authors’ understanding that at the present time these ideas
are widely mentioned in the academic community and research is underway upon the

subjects.

138

 
 
 
 
 
 
 

-
.-
.
'K
v.
u.
u.
‘L
Q
t
‘1
\C
\
‘1
l
\

1. Expansion of the framework

The immediate research direction to take based on this research would be the expansion

of the proposed framework by including all aspects of IAQ especially chemical and

biological processes within the home. Site and consumer related issues must also be

considered. Finally financial analysis and design for affordability are important aspects to

consider in order to render the product more acceptable by the consumer.

2. Development of a comprehensive “Whole House” criterion and prescriptive
guidelines

The next step that the author anticipates is the development of a comprehensive “Whole

House” criterion using the enhanced framework. The comprehensive criterion could be

put through review with a panel of experts in order to develop a set of prescriptive

guidelines to design a “Whole House” similar to the manner in which the LEED

guidelines are set out. This would help in assimilating the “Whole House” approach into

the industry.

3. Sustainability

It is the author’s belief that in order to take a comprehensive look at the “Whole House”

approach it is important to consider aspects of sustainability. This is a vast subject and

must be undertaken as a separate research attempt in order to do justice to it.

4. Other contributors

This section includes several other future research directions that are considered

important. The idea of “self healing homes” comes from the technological advancement

in the use of material technology. Structural polymers of all kinds are traditionally

susceptible to cracks but there have been developments in the field of such structural

139

polymers that can automatically heal those cracks. This self-healing polymer incorporates
a microencapsulated healing agent and a catalytic chemical trigger within an epoxy
matrix. An approaching crack ruptures embedded microcapsules, releasing healing agent
into the crack plane through capillary action. An additional unique feature of the healing
concept is the utilization of living polymerization (that is, having un-terminated chain-
ends) catalysts, thus enabling multiple healing events (Energy URL 2004c).

Net positive homes are extension to the idea of Zero energy homes. ZEH are
homes that generate enough energy to supplement the usage needs of the individual home
in question. A Net positive home on the other hand is intended to generate enough energy
to be able to give back to the local grid. Sometimes these two terms are used
interchangeably.

Smart homes or intelligent homes are a futuristic approach to home fimctioning
and design. The overall concept is to automate the functioning of the residence using a
control system to integrate the various automation systems. Integrating the home systems
allows them to communicate with one another through the control system, thereby
enabling single button and voice control of the various home systems simultaneously
(Energy URL 2004d).

The construction processes today are plagued with issues such as low labor
efficiency, high accident rates, lower work quality and lack of control on the worksite.
These problems can be mitigated through the use of automation. A new technique of
automation is layered fabrication also known as Rapid prototyping or Solid free form
fabrication. As the name suggests the procedure involves the production of an object by

forming it layer by layer. The key feature is the use of two trowels, which in effect act as

140

two solid planar surfaces, to create surfaces on the object being fabricated that are
exceptionally smooth and accurate. This operation is controlled through computer
programming such that the arms of the equipment are instructed as per input to software.
It can be used for concrete and plaster surfaces. The proposal is to extend this application
in the construction industry through the visionary use of a gantry carrying the robotic

arms of the equipment (Khoshnevis 2004).

141

(Banerjee 2003)

(Barshan 2003)

(Barriga 2003)

(BFI 2002)

(BFI, URL 2003)

(Bull 1993)

(Chitla 2002)

(Centex 2004)

(Cohen 2003)

References

Banerjee, D. (2003). “Material Flow based Analysis of
Manufactured Housing Production Plant Facility Layout,”
Master ’5 Thesis, Construction Management Program,
Michigan State University. East Lansing, MI.

Barshan, A. (2003). “Methodology for Evaluating and
Ranking Manufactured Houses based on Construction
value” Master ’3 Thesis, Construction Management
Program, Michigan State University. East Lansing, MI.

Barriga, M. Edgar. (2003) “Manufactured Housing
Industry: Material Flow and Management.” Masters Thesis,
Purdue University. West Lafayette, IN.

“Open Building: A New Paradigm for Health Care
Architecture THE INO HOSPITAL Bern, Switzerland” - A
Project of the Building Futures Institute College of

Architecture and Planning, Ball State University, Muncie,
IN, November 2002

Building Futures Institute — Annual Report J an-Dec 2003,
Ball State Univ. College of Architecture and Planning,
Muncie, IN. Dr.Stephen Kendell Director URL —
http://www.bsu.edu/web/capweb/bfi/ viewed Jan 2004

John W Bull “Life Cycle Costing for Construction” (1993)
Chapman & Hall, Glasgow NZ

Chitla, V. (2002). “Performance Assessment Of Planning
Processes During Manufactured Housing Production
Operations Using Lean Production Principles” ” Master ’s
Thesis, Construction Management Program, Michigan
State University. East Lansing, MI.

Presentation by Centex Homes at the International Builders
Show “Structured Wire Networks for Residential
Construction” by Randy Luther, Vice President URL
http://www.toolbase.org/secondaryT.asp?TrackID=&Categ
ogID=359 viewed Dec 2004

Cohen Brothers marketing literature (2003), Denver, CO

142

(Dietz, Cutler 1971)

(DFE 1999)

(DOE 2004)

(DSM 2005)

(Dolez et al 2001)

(Ellis et al 2004)

(Energy 2003)

(Energy URL 2004a)

(Energy URL 2004b)
(Energy URL 2004c)

(Energy URL 2004d)

Albert G H Dietz, Laurence S Cutler “Industrialized
Building Systems for Housing” (1971) MIT Press, MA

West Michigan Environmental Action Council (1999)
“Designing Products and Services with Sustainable
Attributes” Web Site: www.sustainable-busforumbrg
viewed Dec 2004

DOE Building Technology website “Zero Energy
Buildings” URL
http://www.eere.energy.gov/solarbuildings/zero_energy_bl
ds.html.,viewed Feb 2004

University of Leicester, UK, First year design exercise
handout URL http://www.le.ac.uk/eg/design/vearl/index.html
viewed Apr 2005

Patricia Dolez, Monica Marek, Brian J Love -
“Photopolymerizable Acrylic Resin: Effect of Curing Time
and Temperature” (2001) Journal of Applied Polymer
Science, Vol. 82, pg 546—554, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Michael W. Ellis and Yvan J. Beliveau (2004), Research
Agenda Workshop paper “Whole House Design Through
the Application of Multi-functional Precast Panels.” Focus
Area 5 URL http://www.pathnet.org/sp.asp?id=12201
viewed Dec 2004

Energy Star Labeled Manufactured homes Sep 2003,
“Design, manufacture, installation and certification
procedures” Prepared for the US Environmental Protection
Agency URL
http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=bldrs lenders rate
rs.pt builder manufactured viewed Oct 2004

“To Save trees Cut wood” URL —
http://oikos.com/esb/54/wood.html viewed Feb 2004

URL www.solarelectricitv.org viewed Oct 2004
URL http://www.autonomic.uiuc.edu/ viewed Oct 2004
URL

www.businessba1ls.com/intelligentbuildingsdesi gn.htm
viewed Oct 2004

143

 

(EPA 2004)

(EPA URL 2005)

(Ehrenkrantz 1989)

(Eicker 2003)

(Fein 1972)

(Flanagan 1989)

(Fleet 2004)

(Garcia 2005)

(Gilbert 1984)

(Green 2004)

(Hammad 2003)

(Hammad 2001)

US. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Design for
the Environment (DfE) Program, “CTSA methodology”
URL http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/dfe/tools/ctsa.htm viewed Nov
3% viewed Oct 2004

URL http://www.epagov/iaq/homes/hip-front.html viewed Apr
2005

 

Ezra D Ehrenkrantz “Architectural systems — A needs

resource and Design approach” (1989) Me Graw Hill Inc.
NY

Eicker, Ursula (2003) “Solar Technologies for Buildings”
John Wiley & Sons Ltd. West Sussex, England

Gerry E.Fein (1972) “The Evaluation Of The Technical
And Spatial Aspects Of Selected Types Of Pre-fabricated
Modular Construction” Masters Thesis, Department of
Urban Planning, Michigan State University, East Lansing,
MI

Roger Flanagan, George Norman, Justin Meadows,
Graham Robinson “Life Cycle Costing — Theory and
Practice” (1989) BSP Professional Books, Oxford, Boston

Fleetwood construction manual, Fleetwood Enterprises, Inc
URL http://www.fleetwoodhomes.com

Juan Pablo Garcia (2004) “Alternative Housing Systems:
The Hybrid home” Masters Thesis, Purdue University,
West Lafayette, IN (Due to be completed Jan 2005)

Herbert Gilbert “Walter Gropius, Konrad Wachsmann -
The Dream of the F actory-Made House” (1984) MIT Press,
MA

URL www.greenbuilder.com/sourcebook/EngSheet.html
viewed July 2004

Abu Hammad, A. (2003). “D88 for Manufactured Housing
Production Process and Facility Design”, PhD Thesis,
University of Cincinnati. Cincinnati, OH.

Abu Hammad, A. (2001). “Simulation Modeling for
Manufactured Housing Processes.” Master ’s Thesis,
University of Cincinnati. Cincinnati, OH.

144

(Habraken 1972)

(HUD 1994)

(HUD 2000)

(HUD 2001a)

(HUD 2001b)

(HUD 2001c)

(HUD 2002a)

Habraken, John “Supports: an alternative to mass housing”
(1972) The Architectural Press, Ibndon and Praeger, New
York. Originally published in Dutch under the title: “De
Dragers en de Mensen” (1962) Scheltema en Holkema,
Amsterdam

HUD Publication July 1994 “Alternative Framing Materials
in Residential Construction: Three Case Studies” URL
http://www.huduser.org/publications/destech/destech1 .html
viewed Feb 2004

Industrializing the Residential Construction Site (2000).
HUD Publications, US. Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Washington DC, URL
http://www.huduser.org/publications/destech/destech2.html
viewed Feb 2004

Industrializing the Residential Construction Site Phase 11:
Information Mapping (2001). HUD Publications, US.
Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Washington DC, URL
http://www.huduser.org/publications/destech/destechZ.htrnl
viewed Feb 2004

HUD Publication December 2001 “Model Guidelines for
Design, Fabrication and Installation of Engineered
Panelized Walls” URL
http://www.huduser.org/publications/destech/destechl .html
viewed Mar 2004

HUD Publication December 2001 “Life Cycle Assessment
Tools to Measure Environmental Impacts: Assessing their
applicability to the Homebuilding Industry” URL
http://www.huduser.org/publications/destech/destechl .html
viewed Mar 2004

Information Technology to Accelerate and Streamline
Home Building (2002). HUD Publications, US.
Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Washington DC, URL
http://www.huduser.org/publications/destech/destech2.html
viewed Mar 2004 '

145

(HUD 2002b)

(J eong 2003)

(John et a1 2004)

(Kendall 2000)

(Korrnan 2001)

(Koeleian 2005)

(Khoshnevis 2004)

(LC 2004)

(LEED 2002)

HUD publication January 2002 “Design, Fabrication and
Installation of Engineered Panelized Walls: Two Case
Studies” URL
http://www.huduser.org/publications/destech/destechl .html
viewed Oct 2004

Jeong, Jae G. (2003). “Supply Chain Analysis and
Simulation Modeling for the Manufactured Housing
Industry.” Master 's Thesis, Purdue University. West
Lafayette, IN.

John Taylor, Hans ij‘rnsson, “Identification and
Classification of Value Drivers for a New Production
Homebuilding Supply Chain” Research paper, Lean
Construction institute URL
http://www.leanconstruction.org/ viewed Nov 2004

 

Stephen Kendall, Jonathan Teicher, “Residential Open
Building”(2000) E& FN Spon, NY

Korrnan, T. M., (2001). “Integrating Multiple Products
Over Their Life-Cycles: An Investigation of Mechanical,
Electrical, and Plumbing Coordination,” PhD. Thesis,
Stanford University, CA.

Keoleian G.A, S.Blanchard and P.Reppe 2001, “Life Cycle
Energy, Costs and strategies for Improving a Single Family
House”, Journal of Industrial Ecology 4 (2) p 135-156

Behrokh Khoshnevis 2004, Research Agenda Workshop
paper “Automated Construction by Contour Crafting —
Related Robotics and Information Technologies.” Focus
Area 5 URL http://www.pathnet.org/sp.asp?id=l2201
viewed Dec 2004

URL www.1eanconstruction.org viewed Nov 2004

Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)
Nov 2002 “Green Building Rating System For New
Construction & Major Renovations (LEED-NC) Version
2.1” Prepared for the USGBC (US Green Building
Council) URL
http://www.usgbc.org/LEED/LEEDtmain.asp viewed Nov
2004

146

(Martin 2004)

(Mehrotra 2002)

(MHRA 2003)

(MHI 2005)

(MOD URL 2004a)

(MOD URL 2004b)

(Morley 2000)

(Mullens 2003)

(O’Brien et al 2005)

(PATH 1999)

Martin, Carlos (2004) Research Agenda Workshop paper
(Unpublished research paper) “Building the whole greater
than the sum of its parts: contextualizing ‘whole house’
technologies and initiatives” Del E. Webb School of
Construction and School of Architecture, Arizona State
University, AZ

Mehrotra, N. (2002). “Facilities Design Process of a
Manufactured Housing Production Plant,” Master ’s Thesis,
Construction Management Program, Michigan State
University. East Lansing, MI.

Manufactured Housing Research Alliance (MHRA) (2003).
“Technology Roadmapping for Manufactured Housing.”
New York, NY

Manufactured Housing Institute,
http://www.manufacturedhousing.org/media_center/quick_
factsZOOS/advantageshtm viewed May 2005

 

Modular Buildings Institute website “About the process”
URL — http://www.mbinet.org viewed Feb 2004

Modular Buildings Institute website “A New Focus on FBS
Factory Built Structures” URL — http://www.mbinet.org
viewed Feb 2004

Michael Morley, “Building with Structural Insulated Panels
(SIP’s)”(2000) The Taunton Press,Inc. Newtown, CT

Mullens, M. (2003). Housing Constructability Lab.,
University of Central Florida, Orlando, F l.
http://hcl.engr.ucf.edu/research.htm viewed Dec 2003

Michael O’Brien, Ron Wakefield, Virginia Tech with
assistance from Mark Nowak, Newport Partners LLC. “A
Preliminary Method to Develop a Calculator for Evaluating
Physical Design Characteristics and Whole House
Performance Scoring” Unpublished report.

“HVAC / Plumbing: Volume 8 of the Rehab Guide” 1999,
Partnership for Advancing Technologies in Housing, US.
Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Washington DC, URL
imp://www.pathnet.org/sp.asp?mc=tools publications
viewed Dec 2004

 

147

(PATH 2000)

(PATH 2001)

(PATH 2002a)

(PATH 2002b)

(PATH 2003)

(PATH URL 2004a)

(PATH URL 2004b)

Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing: Year
2000 Progress Assessment of the PATH Program (2000)
Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems
(CETS) URL
http://www.nap.edu/books/0309073367/html/7.html viewed
Dec 2004

Whole House and Building Process Redesign (2001).
Background Paper, NAHB Research Center and
Partnership for Advancing Technologies in Housing, US.
Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Washington DC, URL
http://www.pathnet.org/sLasp?mc=tools publications
viewed Dec 2004

Advanced Panelized Construction (2002). PA TH

T echnologv Road Map, NAHB Research Center and
Partnership for Advancing Technologies in Housing, US.
Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Washington DC, URL
http://www.pathnet.org/sp.asfi?mc=tools publications
viewed Mar 2004

PATH Roadmap November 2002 “Energy Efficiency in
Existing Homes” Volume 2 URL
http://www.pathnet.org/sp.asp?mc=tools publications
viewed Feb 2004

Whole House and Building Process Redesign (2003).

PA TH Technology Road map, Partnership for Advancing
Technologies in Housing and Newport Partners, US.
Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Washington DC, URL
http://www.pathnet.org/sp.asp?mc=tools publications
viewed Dec 2003

PATH website “Tilt up roofs for Manufactured and
Modular homes” URL —-
http://www.toolbase.org/secondaryT.asp?TrackID=&Categ
oryID=l377 viewed Mar 2004

PATH website “Hybrid Modular and Panelized Housing”
URL —
http://www.toolbase.org/secondaryT.asp?TrackID=&Categ
oryID=l377 viewed Mar 2004

148

(PATH URL 2004c)

(PATH URL 2004d)

(PATH URL 2004c)

(PATH, URL 2004f)

(PATH URL 2004g)

(PATH URL 2004h)

(PATH URL 2004i)

(PATH URL 2004j)

(PATH URL 2004k)

(PATH URL 20041)

(Pulte 2003)

(RAND 2003)

PATH website “Structured Wiring systems” URL —
http://www.toolbase.org/secondaryT.asp?TrackID=&Categ
oryID=359 viewed Mar 2004

PATH website “Electrical Raceways” URL —
http://www.toolbase.org/secondaryT.asp?TrackID=&Categ
oryID=lO60 viewed Mar 2004

PATH website “HVAC Smart Zoning Controls” URL —
http://www.toolbase.org/secondaryT.asp?TrackID=&Categ
oryID=1306 viewed Mar 2004

“PATH concept home” URL
http://www.pathnet.org/sp.asp?id=l1175 viewed Dec 2004

PATH website “Solar Cooling” URL —
http://www.toolbase.org/tertiaryT.asp?TrackID=&Category
ID=1402&DocumentID=209l viewed Mar 2004

PATH website “Aluminum-Plastic Composite Water
Piping” URL -
http://www.toolbase.org/secondaryT.asp?TrackID=&Categ
oryID=l 041 viewed Mar 2004

PATH website “Home Automation” URL —-
http://www.toolbase.org/tertiaryT.asp?TrackID=&Docume
ntID=3208&CategoryID=358 (viewed on 02/03/04)

PATH website “Greywater reuse” URL —
http://www.toolbase.org/secondaryT.asp?TrackID=&Categ
oryID=104l viewed Mar 2004

PATH website “Rainwater harvesting” URL —
http://www.toolbase.org/secondaryT.asp?TrackID=&Categ
oryID=1041 viewed Mar 2004

PATH website “Rainwater harvesting” URL —

http://www.toolbase.org/secondaryT.asp?TrackID=&Categ
oryID=104l viewed Mar 2004

Pulte Homes (2003), Components Factory and other
Innovations Brochure, Pulte Homes, Detroit, MI

Building Better Homes — Government strategies for
Promoting Innovation in Housing (2003). Rand

149

ll-

 

(Russell 1981)

(Reidelbach 1982)

(Rush 1986)

(Sabharwal 2004)

(Senghore 2001)

(Shenton et al 2004)

(Shrikant et a1 2001)

(Spiegel et al 1999)

(Syal et al 2002)

Corporation Report co-authored by Scott Hassell, Any
Wong, Ari Houser, Debra Knopman, Mark Bernstein. US.
Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Washington DC, URL
mpzflwwwrandorg/publications/MR/MRI 65 8/ viewed
Dec 2003

Barry Russell “Building Systems Industrialization and
Architecture” (1981) John Wiley & Sons Inc. NY

J.A.Reidelbach, “Modular Housing in the Real —- a study of
the industry and the product focusing on the wood framed
sectional unit.” (1982) Modco, Annandale, VA

Richard D Rush “The Building Systems Integration
Handbook” (1986) John Wiley & Sons Inc. NY

Sabharwal, A (2004) Component Assembly animation as
part of his “Thesis Proposal defense”, Master ’s Thesis,
Construction Management Program, Michigan State
University. East Lansing, MI.

Senghore, O. (2001). “Production and Material Flow
Process Model for Manufactured Housing Industry,”
Master ’s Thesis, Construction Management Program,
Michigan State University. East Lansing, MI.

Harry W. Shenton III and Richard P. Wool 2004, Research
Agenda Workshop paper “Bio-Based Composite Materials
for Whole House Design: Potential Applications and
Research Needs.” Focus Area 5 URL
http://www.pathnet.org/sp.asp?id=l2201 viewed Dec 2004

Shrikant N, John J Lascala, Erde Can, Shantararn S Morye,
George I Williams, Giusepper Plamese, Selim H
Kusefoglu, Richard p Wool “Development and Application
of Triglyceride-Based Polymers and Composites” (2001)
Journal of Applied Polymer Science, Vol. 82, pg 703—723,
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Ross Spiegel, Dru Meadows “Green Building Materials”
(1999) John Wiley & Sons Inc. NY

Syal, M. and Mehrotra, M. (2002). “Manufactured
Housing Trends and Building Codes,” Research Report,

150

(Syal, Hastak 2004)

(Womack et a1. 1990)

(Womack et al. 1996)

(WBDG 2004)

(ZEH 2004)

Construction Management Program, Michigan State
University, East Lansing, MI.

Syal, M and Hastak, M Research Agenda Workshop paper
(2004) “Whole House Production: Integration of Factory-
built and Site-built Construction”, Focus Area 5 URL

http://www.pathnet.org/sp.asflid=l 2201 viewed Dec 2004

Womack, J. P., Jones, D.T., and R005, D. (1990). The
Machine That Changed the World: The Story of Lean
Production. MacMillan Publishing, New York, NY.

Womack, J. and Jones, D. (1996). Lean thinking: Banish
Waste and Create Wealth in Your Corporation, Simon &
Schuster, N.Y.

Federal Guide for Green Construction Specs “Whole
Building Design Guide” 2004 Draft report by the US EPA
URL http://www.wbdg.org/inde@hp viewed Nov 2004

URL www.cere.energy.gov/buildings/ viewed Oct 2004

151

Appendix A

152

 

 

 

ICIOIIWDUIIOIIUIIHQ'Oh

. l 111 iillllmhnhlE-wbl ll

 

0::003000 0030.0

0020.5: 0:090: .00 9:00:80 0:62.: .0500. :0
0.0E :0 $0 00390 00595: 0:50.00: :00 06003000
9.0.5: .0300: :0 0:0E .0 30 51020.5: 0:: .0 00:0>
oom 55:3 00. .00: 0032055905 E0_:0>:00 £3.

005.60: m:_m:0:0\m::030:0
0:0 00.00: 00.65 00 :030 00...:060

.00... 0.506050 E0: 00000::

0Eoom
050:0:0 w 000.05 0_0>0_m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

000.90 0.055 03000 0050.0 00:. :3: _0:0:2:0:_ :o:00000:0: 5.3 90:30 0:: c9000 :c0an_0>00 0:0_ 0:0 :0::__00 00:00m P .:0:0:o00:0:._. 0>:0E0:_< N00
00:00:08 9.0.5: >: 0500: 00:: 0...: 0:0E00 ._0 ...0:0: 0008 .00: 9.0.5: 0:. 0.5 .0000: 00000<
0:020 0:05 :0 0...: :0 9:: v: :0 :0:0:0 >03030 :0 =0: :0:0:000:0: 2:80. 0: 00:00:80 m:.0__:0 .00: 0:00E050 E0: 08008. :0:0:000:0F 0:030
Em: ._.0._ :0SEE00 0 :0 0__E N: 25.3 60.90 0:08.. 05:: :0 >0>.__..0 5.000030: 0 E00000 ::0E00_0>00 0:0. 0:0 :0_S__00 00:00m F .:0:0:o00:0:. 0>:0E0:_< :00
3.0:. 0:0 055:0: 0:0_ 0.2000005
.>0:000 .:00...-0:0.0E:0 00 :80 00600.0
E0EE0>om 0.000: .0 0.0.0 ._000_ 0 >0 0.0::305 9:0: :00 3:000:00: 0:0 0 €060.08. 0:0 0:0. 00020003 :0 050000 9.6300:
0 00 00:000.”: 0:0 0 :0 mo 2:0E000004. 0:0 00.000 00:300 :000 >:000:0 0:0 85:00:. .:0:0:_E0::00 .0E0E:9.>:0 00200.00
_0.:0E:9_>:m __ 000:0 5 -8me 5.0.0:: :0 :0 0:00E x0: 3::00. 00:0 0.0::305 0. 00:00:00 ._0 .00: >0 0000:0800 0. E0E0o_0>00.
>8 00:0:.E0::00 00 00::0E3000 0:0 0 :0 00.000 020 000090 8:00.00 0:0 0:: 0::30 00:3 00:0 0000E00 0.02.020: _ ::0E00_0>000m 20:56.0 no
559550 >090 028 0:00 .00 :00: 000300 08.00
:0 >:_0:00 E0E00.0>00 E:E_:.E 05:00.0 :0 55.; 0005000: 0.50: 0:0 0:00: 020000
00:82 00 :05 00:0 0:53: >0 0000 20:00 000000 00:0 :09: 0: 00:00:00. 0:0 020.0503 80:90 05:03:00.0: m::0_x0
:0 9:000 0: 52:00 2 >:.0:00 002009 0000..0c_ 020 000090 8.6000 0:0 0:: @550 5.3 000.0 :09: 0. .:0E00_0>00 .0::0:U _ 30:00 :c0an_0>0D mo
0:00: 0.30.000 0 0: 0.0.0000 0. :03? 00:: 0:0 (Emu.
>0 00::00 00 000: :00>.09 0:: 80: cm :05 .030. 0:00:90: 0:0 0 :0 0:02.: 0 :0 8.602
8.000 5:5 0:0_ 660 w: 0:. >0 00900 00 0:00:00 5.3 00.5.00: m::0:0 0:0 0:800 00:30.03. 0.: E0: .000E. _0::0E:9.>:0 0:: 00:00:
0:0 0:0:0; 0:00:00: 020:0 :0 00.000 :0: :03: 0:0 0:: :000E. >=0E_:._E 0: E0069 :0 :9000 0:0 00:0 0:0:0000005 :0 EOE00_0>00 0.020 r :0.80.0w 05 :0
0:00:50 0:06 0.
00:03.... 00000 0:0 00:00:30 .0::00 :0:0.:0E_000 .0500: E95000
0:0 8.00:0 .000. :0 .n 060:0 .00:_>:0< 8:080:00 0:0 000.: E0E_000 050:0: 50 000.0 :000
:0: E0E0mmc0§ :00; E05 .300: .00E0:00wv .m:_:0_:E 020000 .:0:0:.:00 0:0 b050E0: 5:030 0.0 0:0 00:03 A: 6:000
moo.~m-m\mmm (mm .02 E0Esooo (am 30:0. :03: 00 :030 00.00.0000 m:_>0_0E0 000.050 :0 0809:. 02.000: 00:00.. 0: :2090 6:50 2.0509000 :0:0E0E.00w 0cm 5.09m E
1i 3 023 0305303 . <
:0E0550 “:2:—
m: . a 003.8% :080 :osutom0o

oz

 

 

153

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

30062.39:

 

 

3.00.0.6

 

62:.

 

 

 

200.0

 

..0:.... 0.03600 .0 >...:030
0:0 0.0. 0:. :_ 0000.000 $3 0 :. 0:300. .0:. :0.0 .0003 0.00.030 0:0 9.:03: .0:.:3
60600906 .0.—0.5.60.0 0 6060.06. 603 :0:. .0.00.m 0:0 .0..0. 60:09:. 0000090. 00 :030 0003
0. 0005392006. 9:008 ._ .0 0.0. 09050.0 .000 .30: 0.00.0000: .0. 00.0.0c0m 00629 0.03620
VN ..00> meF 6060200000 0:. 9.000000 60.. 0.0. 00300 0000030 030.2006. 0N.6.:.E
09050.0 .000 .30: vw ..00> m... .:0600.0>00..000 0:. 0. 9.>00 030.200 0:0 0.00. :00.0m 2.00m
0.:0>0.0 .05 :0.0 60600906 .0.0..>E.0.0 0 6060.06. 00:0... 9:0660 >0 0.50.. 0.030690 :92 0.026620 950:06 >0 030.. >...:03O 0:0 0.0m
.9000 0. .0300 .0 :0:. 000. 0. 0005392006. 9:008 .. .920: £06.06 0. 0:0 60.0.0 0:. :9000 .203 _0.3.0: .0 8.5.60 0:0 :0..03.0.0 ..6... . 60600905. .0.036.0.m_ F00
..:..0.00. 60600.03: 0:. _0.3.0: ..0:. 0. 000.0 0000.000 >_0:0.>0.0
0. .0300 0. .0:. 9.0..30 0:. 0. 600000 00.0 00000 :000 0.0.00. 0:0 0:0 9:0.x0 0:. .0 00663.00,
0.000.000 .0000: 20....6 0:0 00030600 >..0.0>.:3 0066.6 0. 00:00:30: 8:060:00.
0600 :00. 0.860.500. 963 .000. o: 5.3 000.0 .0“. 00606 600.0 :0..00.0m 0.00:0.0: .>..0.0>.00.0 0.0660
503 >0 0:0 0:. .0. 9.:o~ .000. 0:. >0 000.0090 00.0 :....> 00 00. 9:0:0 0:0 .9900 005.03. 0:0 0.50: 0030.0 0. 000.0 0000600 6.0600 .:060o.0>0o
:000 0000.9. 0:0 .::0.00. 60602050 0:. 003000 0:0 0:. .0006. >._0E.:.6 0. 6.0.00. .0 :9000 0.0.00. 0:0 000.0 .0..3.0: 9:008 020080 F ”00:06:05 0..m 0003000 «.00
690.090.. 00.0000
0 02.0: 5.; 0000030 030.2006. 9.00.00. >0 2:60.00. 0.0.0
9.0.5: 0:. 9.03.0.8. 00.0 0:0 0:. .0 $00 .0 E3E.:.E 0.3.0: ..0:. 0. 000.0 0000.000 >_030.>0..0
0 0.0.00. 00:0 0000.0>00 >_0:0.>0.0 :0 ..0 0000030 0.0.00. 0:0 0:0 9:000 0:. .0 00:06:00,
0.000600 5.; 000.0 00.02.98 0co>00 .00. mm 0~.E.:.6 0. 00:00:30: 8:060:00,
0:0 00:90.. :0:0.0 2.33 :.06 0:0 0>03x_0.s .0630 09:06 >:00.0 :0._00.0m 0.00:90: ,>:0.0>.00.0 0.0660 0000w
>03000. 206:0 0:0>00 .00. m. ..0.06:00 9.0.50 :..3 00 00. 9:0:0 0:0 .90000 00:30.03. 0:0 .950: 0030.0 0. 000.0 0000600 :000 0.0.00m .0 50.0.0
0:. 0:o>00 .50 0. 00:00.20... 0:0 :6: 0:0 0.0.6005 0:0 0:. .0006. >_.06.:.E 0. .::0.00. .0 :9000 0.0.00. 0:0 000.0 .0.3.0: 9:000 020080 F “00:00.3.05 0..m 0003000 F00
0600308 90.50
0:. .0 3... 9.200 .0 0.00000 m.000:0> .0 0.80.00
.0. 90:00 0060.0.0 00.>0.0 0:0 0.00.0.0 :0..0.._.00:0.
.0. 90:00 .50: 0: 000 .0 ”06003000 9.0.50
0:. .0 {on 9.200 .0 0.00000 0.0090) .0 0.80.00 .0. 09.0.50
90:00 09.0.0.0 0030.0 0:0 060695.00. 963 .000. 6000.00 5.3 00 ..00. 90:00 9:0:0 .003 0.0.:0> >0c003000 0.9.0 60.. 0.0006. 2.00000 90:00
E3E.:.E .0000x0 .0: .30 ..006 0. 2.00000 90:00 SM. .00.0:00 000 000.090. 90:00 0066.2 .:0600.0>00 0:0. 0:0 :0..3..00 00300”. F 60:0:0060... 0>..060..< v00
0.80.30 00.000. .0 00.0...:0>
20.0.0000 00 .036 00. 0. 9. 03. 0300000 .0 0.30... 0:00:90:
0:0 0:. .0 2.00000 90:00 0.0.:0> .0.0. 0:. .0 {on :.;> 08:20 9:020. .o 0:..0c00 0:0 0.000 0:.
.0. 000:0.0 9.03.0. .03..0>:060..0 ..0.0:. .0 .00.0.:0> 9:0:0 00.0000 06030.0 6090260600.
000:. .0. 90:00 0060.20 0050.0 0:0 06003000 0:0 0:0..0.0 9.03.0. .03. 0>..060..0 .003 0.506930 60.. 0.0006. 00.0.:0> .03“. 02.0622
9.0.50 .0 $0 .0. 00.0.:0> .03. 0>..060..0 0030.0 00 :030 00...:060 :0:0..000:0.. 0030.0 60609050 0:0. 0:0 :o:3._00 00300”... F 69.000090; 02.060.2— mi...

 

 

 

00.300000

02

 

 

154

 

 

,tmvcaon xcmaoa 9.. $389 SEEEB

.9: E9. Eu: 0: .9... :03 9:2me 9m; :95
68:38 5.306 05 69. £99. acacaoe 9. 3E: m N
.0 mocfimfi m SEE 9.9.8:. >c< 5:896 9: 55.3
..m. :95 95:9. 5.6.xm __m .0 m2? maucwo 83:..me
9.. new $3893 296...: So 6:. 9.6.5“. 9: 92:; ..m.
..mnm 9:59. 8:95 _.m .o w2m> £8ch :58.me mp;

,mEm_..oam wacmzo. ucm mmumtam 8:503?
.26. .mocmc.E:_ :98 :3 320:. 8.5.8
Em; 889 0. $628503 .39: EEano
m 9.6: 9.5.9. 96 9.. .mUoE new .2938
99.3 mEEQ. mam oN_E_c._2 695:8 3m
.29: Ucm mcfm: m:m.to mc§o>m 2E; m_w>m_

.mEmEcescm
.mEBuoc co .omaE. EwanE>wo

889 ucm wwwuom 5m 29: 905E. .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

£9. £8 SEEmE 0. 99:0 955m: 0.6 602 ucm 9.2.3 9.. E9. 338: Em: 29.5: m .V cozoabmm co=a=om Ea: mo
dwE .09 9: .0 cans .98 29:09.8 >9:
96:66 8m: on cmo .09 099mg; ucm 089m :9:
.0 mco_.mc_nEoo .85 .09 0c. .0 econ 38. .m 5. .09
Acmfiwmmz ,cwa. m :99... .o ”39.3 .09 on. .0 «can 69.88% .8... 830m: 9 £09 8659.: .959. 2.6:; ccm cmEaz ucm 068.6928,
.0 E:E_c_E m .0. 80v 2km... 5.3 mocmEooom c. 8.3. 0cm 008.?sz ace—mac. .wgwcoo 92605 :0 SEE w~_E_c_E 0. 885 88.985,
awn; md .mmmx .m .0 3_>_mm_E$ 9509 €23.55 :9; .cfiano .0. x00. 2 .>om..m.w>9wcm.z§3 ucm 88.9% c858 80:93.6.
new $269.9 229:. EmiEoo ”2.5 >omwzm 8: 9% 82. m<km >Omwzm 9.. ES .5235 REES. 3:99 .8; 8.6mm. F .oom .85 new? .8: NKU
$3325
9.. .0 $3 .0 E:E_c_E m .0. 330559; °\oom :9: 60:90me .8:
www: Ema? .cwEmtfia 0.5.58 cm mm: .o 6%th 9: 83m: 0. $9.99: 88.93.: 3.9me
85685 E .0298 .o 0:30.935 .30QO 95:3 .0 .0 938 95 :80 vcm £09 c093 mm
°\eom .o 8386...: m 83a .0 ”.80 .mmwma .m>m.sx.m3 £0. zoom mmomtam 8.2mm? 5.3 .06 .wx_m;mu.m
95th 9.63.2: .mmomtzm 30559:. .0025: w.m._m demo. .8. .w... mwomtaw 862.38 .559. 02.9.3 ucm cmEg vcm w.mE._oo.o.E
m5 .0 econ .39 .m .o. EwEw>ma 25 :80 .6ch 3.0 9.69%. 5.9900 .9560. 9.6.52 :0 Egg m~_E_c_E 9 .985 08998::
3mm. 5 .o 08909.9. mficBmE 885.295.0898, ..m.m>o 9.. 3:59;. ucm 85.8. gmomucfl new $8.93 c328 08:92.6
.59. mm: 58cm .98.. m 95.3. 39% 8505 5.3 gm 9.. :0 303.3 882.98 82M .cwfima .mEEE. wocmfi. Km; 83an r .ooméoz gumtw ucmfi. .8: F50
..cmmctfi 29: m. .9222; aim ”Sow
.80. B ESE. movaumi EmEmmmcms. .wmm m.<&w
E 85.00 .ELEm Soc .vmtmw?m 05 o. .93 5 :9:
m8. £59m __m 60: mmcfimo. .maccm mmm..w>m 9.. co
“Emma E... 399383 .99 .cquo_w>wu..woa .maccm ..wfisgofi WEE 9..
399m $5 .0 °\eov 0cm 3w... 3:8 Umucoamam .92 .3: o. 3.9.505 0cm 8:3 .9... 8.939 .mEmEEmEoU 9.656% ocm Caz-EEC. m .m
..cwEno.o>wu..moq :3ch 09996 05 .0 $3 9689 2 .mbcmzmz 862.28 mm zuzm .3.ng .8 9.398. .toca .wfizctofi 8.65:. m «52.59%
8368 wEEw>m #5669. 8635.53 2m 62.9.50 .5850: .929. .o .moEwcowE c930 .3 2.6: .295 5.2m: .0 cgnamfi .. .. p ucoEwumcms. 5635.05 ~60
85.5.3601 3.5385 2.8:. =u20 scan—.33 oz

 

 

155

..1 .v W.A v )-(.._...:. 7.— .....-.~..... ) ....-. ..‘.... .L—I». .voa\v

IIOIIIIOU'i

.n..:p..»._.-uv

 

 

.v—

5...).- #:.

. 5.. ..u...

‘ “IHWIIIJWJI~\O. u m I

..L: ...

yk. : .. .. u.

n

.. .s

......g

11:4.1. s.» .\..:

{51.}...4

.‘.5.

..—-..:—.~:.. :. :.-:~

.
.u

b h ‘1th r1.

7. ..~
~..:.:. .7u..\.. ‘ :7: .C\ s
\4.-.~¢i\ -\s\ h

nuu¢shusv~ aw-lw-n \

§ -\ .x..-.v\
? J. :2 .
.nbuu,.>\a

l‘ .
‘Iz

 

2:686:36. 8:620:66 6.2.... mm? .o .6<

5.6.”. 3.65 6:. 6.9.665 6.6 €0.69... 9636:. 6:.
ac. .5: 6:. .2 666.3666 6:..6666 66: .662. 6:. :6:.
.662. 666. $8 66... 663.36 :_ 6:. 6566.6 >9qu

U684

660636 6:6 6866? 69:659.. .m:.:w:c
65.: 6:6 6.5. 66 :26 6:966:86 6.6.8
.:o: .2 66236.6 6:6 663:...06 .o 6636.
666:0“. 66866 .662. 6.26.06 6:. 66:66.

0. 28:3 .6688 6:6 665.: 666.662. 6:6
6.6.5. m:.68Eou 66 :26 66.3.2 to 66.3.2
5:92:63... 663 666.5: 6:. .2 6666:
.662. 6.6.8.5: 6:6 656.8 6:. 6.6:..6m

.mE666 6.62.6662. 6:6
>696 .662. 699:3: :o :623: 6:. 66166.
2 696.5: :_:._2. 5:66.26 .662. 6~.E.x6_2

   

8.6366”.

 

6.666.506. 8:685:66 6.2.x; mom. .o .94
5.6.“. 3.6:w 6:. 65.66:. 6.6 €0.69... 9626:. 6:.

.666:

66068 6:6 68666 62:656.: .m:.:m:=
6:..3 6:6 6:2 66 :26 6:966:36 6.26.06
:6: .2 66236.0 6:6 663.506 6 6636.
666:00 6:65.66 .662. 6.66.06 6:. 66366.

o. 93:66 E66380 6:6 669.... 666.662. 6:6
6.6.5. 66.60658 66 :26 66.3.... to 66.2.2

68666 662.6662. 6:6

c\oOM “COcUJUmm me ._®~N>>_ N50

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

6:62;: 6:. .2 66.6.8.8 6:..666: 66: .662. 6:. :65 3:66.239: 66: 696.5: 6:. .2 6666: 3:636 .662. 66.6.:3E :o :692. 6:. 66.66. 5:68me
.662. 666. 92.8 663 6666.666 :_ 6:. 66666.6 .9qu .662. 6.6.8.3: 6:6 6.6.8 6:. 6.68.6m o. 66:6..3: :.:..2. 3:66.26 .662. 6~.E.x6§ F #8 60.6366”. 663 66.5 foo
.2656: 56:6 62:656.... 9.666 668.66..
662.6662. 66.8 .o 66:6>6>:ou 6662.66
60.6666 .2 662.66 .0 662.206 96:6. 666:0”.
66.:6. 0. 6.6 :0 662.6662. .o 0600. 66.. mo 693.? 6.62.6662. 66:66. 6. 6.6:..3 66.656. .2566
2.8 .o E3E.:.E 6 3 66:66.68 6662.66 696.56 .2 666.662. 6:6 6.6.6. 6:609:06 66 :26 .666. 6:. 96665:. 6.....2. 6:6866 .662. 6660.853
.662. 6.66.8 66630.6 3696.5... .0 66: 6:. 663666. 665...: >6 6:6 66.3.... 3:66.223: 3.0690; 6.66.06 6:6 6626662. .6 :o..6.6:6m 66.661 — 6.62.6662. 6>_6>o::. mo
.2 6636.0 86:6 662.....66 6:6:
.mE666 :969... 6666.66. .:6:6E.6a 666:0”. 6.:6E6.So6. :969... 6658.6
.66:_ .o: 06 KO .666... 6.5666 0. 9.662. _6_..:_ .2 .o 66:66. 2 6666 68:692. :..2. 6666696. 8.69.:
668.6. :969... 6.6 .2 66: .662. 6.66.06 .6 66:.E..6 6:. :6666 6:6 669: 6666666. 66.52666 .c0..mmc.. 6666666. 02 .o 663 6.26.06 02
o. .662. 6.6 66.966. .0 :6. 66.2666 2:6 66: 65.26.66 o. 66:66 666:2..06 6 E.2.6n. .2 .662. 656.8 .0 6w: 6:. 66:.E._6 .o ..E: — 6563626.. .:6.uEm .662. ~40
.:o..6m..._ .2 662.65 .206 .662.E.06
6:6: 6.66:8 6:6 6E66>m :969... 5:66.26
6:66;. .6:o_.:6>:oo :9: 6m: 6.566.566. 8.69... 66:.E..6
63 $8 .3 c969... .2 :o..QE:m:oo .663 .o 6266. 2 666.6 68:66.62 :..2. 663666.
6.6.8 66:06. 6. .662. 6.6 66.6.66. .0 :6. 66.3666 6:. :666: 0:6 666). 6660666. 66:60.36. :269... 6660666. *8 .3 60.566.
66: mo 30.09.66. c969... >o:6_o_:6-:m.: 663 6:.E.6.6u o. 6.96:6 668.628 6 €2.66 .2 .662. 656.06 .0 66: 6:. 6.6:_E_.6 .0 :65 F 49.38623 6225 .66; :0
r. >o=o_uEw .863
85583.6: 62686.6 68:. «66.0 53:32... oz

 

 

156

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6. $8 $06
a $66 $66
6 $0.. $06
6 $66 $66
6 $06 $06
6 $3 $3
6 $om $8
6 $6. $3
N {co—V o\oON
. $6 $6.
258 666.6 65626 66.6 2.62
6:..6666 6:. o. 666an0 60:68.86:
36:6 3.6660 66.6666... 3.66 62.0666
606 60.... 6:. 3:66. 6:6 60:68.0:60 36:6 .66: 3.66 9.66686 5.2.
<zwm2w<mxw< 6:. 666666 0. 660.: 6.6.65.6 6.3088 66.6.8666 6669:. 6.6.6936 60:66. 0.
3 666.36. 6:663 366 .2 .6663: 600 6 6.63 68622.60 36:6 66.....me 6.6666 6.650666 6:. 6.666 60:68.96: 60:6:tot6n.
36:6 6:. 0. 66.69.00 600 36:6 :3666 60:66”. 0. 3666 6:6 600.6):6 356.5: 6:. 3660 36:6 .0 6.6.6. 96666:. 99:2 0. o. . 36cm 6~.E..QO .0
66669.6. 060 o: 666: 6:. 6660.606
931 26: 3.06% 6396.5: 2.6: .0“.
.:066>:00 50666:: 060 66669.6. 666:. .2 6:66:66 668606.06.
6266:6588 6 6.6.0606 _.:6E0.306 o<>I 656.5: 6 .0066 6:6 6.6.69.6. 06.0 666:
6666 6:666 3:666. :6:>> 6:666 mwo<>I 656.5: 6:. 6680.606 >366. 0. 2.0.62. :6 636:8 2. 6660.63
666: 2.6: :. 6.6.69.6. 66669060 .0 66: 06N 66663 o<>I 356.6 3:66. 6:2. .c0..6.066 6:060 60:66”. 6.6.6066... me<>I :. 6.63666. 060 «.0
65.666: 6:. 0. 66.69.60 8:66.260
36:6 3.625 662.666.: 36:6 62.026
600 60E 6:. >366. 6:6 60:6E.0..60 36:6
.6356 6.0:. m. .6>6:0.:2. .6600 36:6 6:. 666666 0. 660:. :0..6.:E.m 6.30Eoo
.600. 6:. .0 6.666666 .60....3. mam... .om 6.66:6.m 6 663 60:66.26: 36:6 66:..me .2663 6:6 356.5: 666: 6:. .2 36.2.6 2. 60:66.22.
<zmw<w<m1w< 5.2. 29:00 0. 356.5: 6:. 3.660 0. 68663 6:6 600.636 96.5: 6:. 3660 36:6 .0 .6>6. E:E.:.E 6:. :m..:66w 6.6.6066... 36cm EaE.:.s. Na
66.6.0E00 6.6 m6...>..o6
356.66.86.00 60:0 6006. 9.6.6.888
6 60:60.0 0. .666 9.866.868
6006. 6566.868 6:. .66. 6:6 6.:6E3006 6.: :. 2:36.506. .66:6.:. 66 6.6600 0. 66.65.60 6:6
6 66.06.00 6:6 :66 6 60.666 6:6 20.606686 9.866.688 6620:. :62. 6:.:062868 66.66:. 663666 6.6 6:666 6:6 26:66 3. 6:.:266.EE00 6:663
6:6 69.2.6.6 6:. 362.6. .666. 35:06....88 6 66663 6 .6066 6:6 3.65:6 9.566.868 6 6666.6 656.5: 6.68622 6:. 6.6666 6:6 36> 6.6.3066... 656.56 6.6.2665“. .n.
2 8236.26 0
35525.8: 8.8.2.6 22... .620 8.3.33: oz

 

 

157

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6:26... .0 60607. 0: 66... .6:. 666.636
6.6666666 6... 6:6 6.66326. 3.6666
696.5: 36: .0“. 6:96... .0 69.0: :.6.:06
6:0.6... .0 6060: :.6.:06 .6:. 660:. 666.66. 6:6 6.66.665 6.6666636
.0: 06 .6:. 666.636 6.6666666 6... 6:6 6666.266 6... 6:6 666.6326. 3:.6: 666.636 356.5: .8296 66.605. 6:. :..3 66:6..6606
:0..6.6m...6. 6:6 U<>I 66. 656.5: 6660 ..6.6:_ 3:66.06 82:66. 6356.5: 6:636. :6:>> 2.66 606666 6:6 :0..6.666 6:0~0 663666. F 6:666... 330 v0
6.66 6.6.6606 8:626:06 6:6 .66.. 6:0 :_:..3
66366. 66.6.6.-3:.:0.66.6606 3:66.650 .0 6.5.86.
.0. :6.6 6 65626:. ...6.6 5.60 :._3 :0..6.660 656.3:
3636. 0. 666.6 :. 66.606 6 66: 66:0.66668 66666. 66 6.6.660
6:.60 666.636 0. 62.6.6. 6.6...6026 6.66.606 6:. 6666:: :9666 6:. 0. 66.65.66 6:6 6668.6:06 663.666
3636. ..6:6 36:56 9.60.66.66.66 .:66:6666:. c< :. 2.66 360566 96966668 6:. 63695 6. 9.6.50 6...:6 6:. .6:. 6.06:6 6:6 36> F m:.:0.66.6600 .6:0...66< no
2...... .660. 6:. 5.; 9.6.6:.
.6: .0 636.666 6.6. 66.36.66 666:. 393.66 666.63 3.66 6.66366. 66: 36:6 .6:. ..660. :..3
:6:>> 6636.626 663-05 6:6 66660.: .263: .6666. 6..6.:0 .0 66: 6:. :330.:. 2606 36:6 .6:::6 66.660666 6.6666. .6.:66:o..>:6 66:66. 0.
.30. ..6E.6:.063 .6:.3 ..6.06 3:.626 .0 :0..66.. 6 66 6666666 66. 66: 3.6:6 .666 :_ 26636.66 3.66 6.06366. 6..6.:0
6.06366. 6:6 9.5.66. :0: .0. 66.0.6 6:. 666664. .65. 6.3:. ..60 6:. .0 $8 .666. .6 3.668 .0 6.6>6. 35666.8. 65:386. 6:6 666.3065. F $0N “3.6:w 6.06366”. GNU
xii: .660. 6:. 5.3 3:66;.
.6: .0 636.6266 6.6. 66.36.66 666:. 353.666 666.63 3.6:6 6.06366. .66: 36:6 .6:. ..660. :..3
:6:>> 66.36.66 6630.: 6:6 66660.0 66>: .6666. 6..6.:0 .0 666 6:. :m:0.:. :68 36:6 .6:::6 66.6.8666 6.6666. _6.:66:0..>:6 66.66. 0.
.30. ..6665063 653 ..6.06 65626:. .6..:6.06 36:6 .0 :0..66.. 6 66 66666.66 66. 66: 3.6:6 66.0 :. 3.66:6..66 36:6 6.06366. 6..6-:0
6.063606. 6:6 9.5.66.6: .0. 66.0.6 6:. 66666< .66. 6.9.6.5: 6:. .0 $9 .666. .6 3.665 .0 6.6>6. 35666.8. 65:386. 6:6 636.0065. F $oF “3.6:w 6.06366”... «do
3...... .68. 6... 5.; 6626:.
.6: .0 666.666 6.6. 66.66.26 666:. 653.666 666.636 36:6 6.66366. .66: 36:6 .63. ..662 5.3
:6:>> 6636.626 663.0... 6:6 66660.: .963: .6666. 6.6.5 .0 66... 6:. 6.39:. :68 36:6 .626 66.6.8666 6.6666. .6.:66:0..>:6 66:66. 0.
-30. 66.65066. 6:.... ..6.06 6560.6 .0 5:66.. 6 66 66666.66 66. 66: 36:6 66.0 :. 26666.66 36:6 6.06366. 2.6.60
6.06366. 6:6 m:..:_.06. :0: .0. 66.0.6 6:. 66666.6 .66. 6.9.6.5: 6:. .0 $m .666. .6 3.665 .0 6.6>6. 35666.2. 65:386. 6:6 606.085 F $m ”3.65 9:636:61. FNo
8:663:66E 66.96% 66.... «.665 5.566666 02

 

 

 

 

 

 

158

 

0000.00. 00000. .0.3.03..0000 000 00.060000
3000.3 00.03.0x0 00.0.00 000 00.0 5000.0. ..000

.0030. 00.250 .0 .0000

00. 300030 00.30... 00.00.20 000 00.0.00
00.000000. 03000.3 00 0030 0.0000088
00.00.30 000.003 000 0.0003000 00.2.30 0.
0.0.. 09.00.80.000 0000 .00. 0.00E0.0 05600
0.00500 ..000000 000 ..000 0.3.02.0

000000.. 000 0002005000. 0.000.00.

0. 0.0.0. >00. 00 0000.50 300 .0 00000..
.0.00E00..>00 00300. 000 0.003 00300.
000.3000. .9250 0.0.0. 000.3000. 0200000

.80 9.0 0.8..
0:03 05.0.0.0 .0 $0.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

000 0.0.02.0 00.0.50 00000.0 .0 $00 .000. .0 0.0.0.0.). 00.03.00. .000.0..30 00000.0 .0 0030. 00.0000 0.00.0 00.0.50 0000.0 .0 0.030 0... 00. 00001“. . 0.0.0.0: .0030”. 00.0.50 :0
0.0.00.
000 00000.0 000.0 0.0000000 00.003000
0000.60. .0 0.00000 000 00.300090 00. .0 0.0003000 ..0000 0.30.0.6 0 .0. 00.03.00. 00:050. .0.
.0300... 0.0.50 000 0.0.0000 0.003 .000. 30000. 00.0 0.000.0E .0 000.90 000 00:00:00 09.0.0000 0.0000. 0. .0 0000006
.00.00>000 0 0. 00.000. 000 0000 000000.000 0. .00. 00. 0. 00.8000 0. 000 00.0.50 0.000 00. 000 0. 00.300 0. .00. 0.0003000 00.0..30 0050.050”.
000.0.0 000 00:00:00 0.00.050. .0. 00.0 00 0.000.000 00200 .00. 00.0 0.0.000000 0.000 00 0050.0 >0 00.0.0000 0.003 .0 0000300. 00. 0.0....00... . .0 00:00:00 0 000.90 .0
9 000.3000”. .0 0.00205 o
0.0.00.0 0000.0 00. .3000 0.0.00 .0. 0.0.0
000.0333 005.000.0000 .0300 0.003000.
0000.0 00. 0.000. .00. 20030 0 E00
.0 00.000000 0.003000... 0.0000; 000.000
0.00.00.500. 000000.000 0.03090 0000.0 0000.0 0030.0. 0.0.00.0 3.53 00.00.80
.000. 00003.00 00.3000”. .0. .0000 00. 0 000000 0000.0 0 00.00.00. .0300 000.000 0000.0
00 0.0 000.300 0.0030000 ..00..000 3.000 0.003000. 0 0.0.. 00500.0 00 >00. .0300 000.0 000.300 0.000 0002.00 0.0~ .00
.00>-03. 0 .000. .0 0. 00.00000 >0 000.300 0.003000. 0.0>0 6008.30. .0 0000.0.0 ..00000.000 0 00 00.00.00000. 3.000 0.003000. 00.300
00.. 3.00.000 0.00.0..30 00. .0 $00 .000. .0 0050.0 00.3 00.00 0.0.. 002.00 0. .0300 000.0 -000 .0 003 000 .00E00.0>00 00. 000.3ch . .0300 000.0 00
0.00 00.
0. 00.0000 0.03.00 0000. 0. 000500 00.0.00.0
00.000.00.00. 0000.000 00.0..30 00030
.0000 0. 00.0 00..00000> .0 00.00.3000: 0
00.0 0000000000 .003 000 30.000 0.30000. .00... .05 0000000000 0000050000
.0030 0. 0.00.0500 0.3 00.0.50 00. 00.000 000300 0.03 000 3.000 00.0.50 .0 09.00.0000 09.00000>
000 000000000 .0. 0000.00 0000.00. 030300000 ..0.00_ 0.00.0 0. 0.00.0.0 0.03 000 3.000 00. .0003. 000 3:50.03800 00.0000 00. .0. 0030.0 . 000 .005230002 00
0.0082503. 3.00.2.0 .00.... «.020 000000000 02

 

 

 

 

 

159

 

0_0:0.0E 050.5: :0 $0 .000_ .0 :0: 00:. .E0: 0:0
0.03005. £000.02 000:0. .6 00:05:20: 0000200 003

 

.0E0._ 02.0.6000 0:0 0.0:: 055:5:

0:0 2.05000 .0060: 0:0 0:000 0:50:00
.0550: 0.000 0:0 0E000 00 :030 0.0:0:0E
0000200 00.0:00 0.5.0030 _0:0:0E . 50.00
:20000. 0:0 c0000 0: :0 0.5 0_0:0.0E
0000200 0.052005 0. 0055:0000 >:_.:00_

 

0005000. 50:; :0 05000005

0:0 :0_.00._.x0 0:. :53 00.0.0800 0.0005
050300.. 30:05. .200; 00:00.. 0. 0:0
0_0:0.0E 5 :.> :0: 0:0800 00:00: 0. .005
5 0.03005 0:0 5000.06 0505: 0033:

$0 00:00. 005000”: :00

 

0.003 0500:. 0:0.
9:00 8:02.080 :0 $05 .000_ .0 000200
020:0 0.050”. 0.000 50.020 _0:0.0E 053.5030
.:0_a .c0E000:0E 0.003 0 .:0E0_0:.._ 0:0 uo_0>0o

 

000005

5:02.080 0:. 5020395 0.5::0 05.050:
500... 0:0 05.050: :0: 0:0 5:02.080

0:. :0 00:0 050000 0 0.03.000 :000505
0:0 .0900 0:000:03 2:030 .0050 .000;
:30 0:00.: 0.00:8 0.0:: ._0.0E 0:080:00
0:000 0::00_0 0:0. 05.050: 50.050

00.0 0.0000500 0. 0.0.5.0.:

0.00030: 60500”: 000005 055805508
0:. o. x000 0005000.. 000500.. 030200..
60:00”: 500000 0:0. 80: 0:000 05:00.0
0:0_ 0:0 :0 6800 .:o=02.0:00 :020

 

 

$00 :020 .:0E000:05_
0.003 :0_.02.0:oo «No

 

0.002. 05:00.0 0:0_
0:0 :0_._.0E00 69.02030 :0 $00 .000. :0 000200
55:0 0633: .2000 5.2020 _0.:0.0E 0:35:03?
60.0 .:0E000:0E 0.003 0 .:0E0_QE_ 0:0 00.050

000005

8:02.080 0:. 50:08.5. 0:0:0 05.030:
0.00: 0:0 05.9.00: ..0: 0:0 5:02.080

0:: :0 00.0 050000 0 0.03.000 .:0_.0_:05
0:0 .0200 2005.03 E3093 000.0 .0003
:00.0 0:003 0.05:8 0.0:: 0.0:: 0:080:00
.0500 05:00.0 0:0_ 05_0>00._ 00.0:00

.0050 0.050500 0. 0_0:0.0E

050030. 605000. 000005 055600502
0:. 0. 0.00: 0005000.. 00.0500. 050.050:
:00500m .0080... ___:0:0_ E0: 0:000 05:00.0
0:0. 0:0 :0..._0E00 60:02.0:00 :0>_o

___:0:0._ 50$
$00 0020 “50200805:
0.002. 5002.080 two

 

$60.90 05:00 0:0 005050 :00_:

0.000 0:03 5:05: 0000 =0:0 :0: 0:. :0 won .000_
.0 0:0 20:90.: 05:09 _05.02.0-:0: 0:0 0059:0000
3005; 05028.0 0:20.: 0:0 :30 5.0.5. =0:0

.0030: 05550 :0 .c0.x0

0:. 3.50:0 005.5: 050630 0:0 020.000
.00.:0:00E 030053 00 :50 3:089:00
00.0050 0002003 0:0 0.:000000 05035 0.
3.0: 55220500 008 .0:. 050500 05601
050550 ._0:0.:o: 0:0 =0:0 05:02.0

0:0 05:02.0 05550 05:00.0 :0 $00: .000_ .0 50.50E 050205 0050.50 05:00.0 :0 0030: 00.050

080:0... 0:0 0::3.00:::0E 0.0:0.0E
0. 0.50: 0:. 00 005550 30: :0 0.0095
.0.:0E:0.__>:0 00:00: 0:0 0.003 00:00:

0005000: .0550 50.0.. 0005000: 020050
0.00.0 0505: 05.006 :o 296 0:: 0:. 0:0.xm

05.026

-coz\__20-coz :0 .80

20 2202.05.20 :0 $8.
50.502 ”$80 2050 0.

ZS

 

.A_0_:0.0E 05:09 _05.02.0-:0: 0:0 093E300
3005:. 05020.8 .0560: 0:0 5.0 5:050: =0:0
0:0 05:02.0 050:3 05:00.0 :0 $8: .000. .0 50.502

.0000: 050.5: :0 .:0.x0

0:. >:_.:030 0050:: 050830 0:0 080.30
_00_:0:00E 03005; 00 :50 9:089:00
00.0050 000.00: 0:0 0::003000 05050 0.
x0: 500580.500 008 :0:. 0.:0E0_0 0550K
.0.:0E0_0 =0:0-:o: 0:0 __0:0 05:02.0
05020:. 0050.5: 05.008 :0 0000: 000.080

 

0005000: 05:50 50.0: 0005000.. 0:00:00

.:80:0: 0:0 055.00:::0E 0_0:0.0E
0: 0.0.0: >0... 00 005550 30: :0 0.0095
.0.:0E:05>:0 00:00.. 0:0 0.003 00:00.

 

800825001

 

   

00.00.86

0.8.0 052.3 05.2.8 :o 0.06 o... 2. 200m.

 

«:2:—

 

 

 

     

 

 

 

§« 0: :80

202. 8.05 :o °:8:
50.503. 0030”. 05050 NE

   
  

 

5.288

 

160

:v. y... .-..... ..--.1.\._- . .. . . . .
.. .........,a
. ..
b0.[ l\ 1l.. \ ‘ IQ . v. V ‘
Ia‘nu I .w‘ .llhr..KNthu‘ 1'3... . . . .
an“

 

.mw__E com. .o 369 m $5.3
2.30.09 0920935.: 0:: 0909wa 90 5:. 303005

00.55:. $9.90.: .30. .0 39:00:05

.90. 0:. 3:550 0:0 00.55:. 90 £9.99:
.80. 09.50% 9.. .05 93:0 60.62.88

0:50 ..mom mi. 99:00 :00 .9: 90.50%

5:99: ucm m.m...9mE 3.500. 0:0 £999:

.:o:m:00m:9t

ES. 0:239 9009:. .m.:0E:9.>:9

9.. 9.0309 0:0 35:80 5:069

9.. 0:25:08 .699: 6059 9: 55.;
0920925.: ucm 090908 9: 5:. 903005

3.05.09 09300.39:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0cm £9.99: 9.0.5: .0 {com .0 EaE.:_E m 0m: 0858 3.80. 5. .03 .0205 m cmfifiwm 0:0 29:99: 9.0.5: 5. 0:98: 8090:. . $8 55:905. 5:0.qu who
00.55:. w.m:9m..: .80. .o 32:099. .:o..m:05wcm:
.90. 0:. 3:530 0::' 002mm; 9m 20:99: :5... 09:39 $0.55 .m.:wE:0:_>:w
.000. 09.60% 9... 5:. 98:0 :0503550 9.. 0:63.09 0:0 25:80 5:059
,mw._E com .0 3.09 @550 .80 mi. 96.2% :00 .9... 90.503 0:. m:.:0003m 399.. :059 9.. :EEs
m 55.3 2.05.09 0920930.: 9m 5:. 903005 5:99: 0cm 20:99: 32:00. 0cm $3.99: 0920055,: 0cm 0909.5 05 .9: 903005 3:80.09 0920930.:
0cm $0.908 090.52 .0 $8 .0 82:5? m 05 00058 3.000. :0. .00m .0905 m 5.39m 0cm £9.99: 9.0.5: 5. 0:9:00 3090:. .. {com 0.9.902 5:050”. e mo
m_m:9mE 59:00 00.0.69 .0 0095900
.80. 9.. 35:03: 0:0 00:05; 90 m.m:9mE $5.99:
50.05 9.. :_ $999: 9.. .0 03.9, .90. 59:00 00.989 00:5wa 9: 5:. 93:0 £9; .50: .0 9.80005 ocm 5:09.08
0:. .0 $0— .80. .0 992.550 59:00 5:525:50: 60:08.38 occao .500 mi. 39:00 :00 E9. 0:539 908:: 090309 90.90:. 29:30:.
9: .0 ..0:.0co m2: E950 00.0.69. 562300.500, .9... 90.50% 5:99: 3500. ucm m.m:9mE 55:99.: 59:00 00.969 99088:. .500 m: + 563200.600.
.0 Esw 9... a... :03 59:00 00.9.09 5.; $955.: $3 59:8 00.989 :0. .80 .0905 m 5.59%. 5:. 303005 96.5: :0. 0:080: 0590:. F $0. 59:00 00.0.60”. ~60
00.53:.
w_m:9mE 59:00 00.0.69 .0 03500.00
_m§ 0:. 3.59.6 0:0 00.56:. 9m 29:99: 05:99.:
.0905 9.. :. £9.99: 0:. .0 03.0) .90. 59:00 00.039 00:6me 9.. 5:. 93:0 995 26: .0 9.30005 0cm 5209.6
0:. .0 3m .98. .m $53950 59:8 5:535:50: ,:o..02.m:00 9.50 ..mom mi. m>mE0m :8 ES. 0:239 9009:. 9.0309 90.99.. 20590:.
0:. .0 ..m:.m:0 9.5 E950 00.0.69 5an50.50: .05 90.503 5:99: 2.50:. 0cm £9.99: .m.m:9mE 59:00 00.0.39 9909008, .500 N: + 5:50:00
.0 E3 9.. .05 :03 59:00 00.039 5.3 £399: 3: 59:8 00.9.09 :0. .80 .0905 m :m._nm.mm .05 903005 96.5: :0. 0:060: 3090:. — .503 {am 59:00 00.0.03. :6
.mEm: 02.9800 95 0.0.5 .9255.
0cm 65:58 @089. 0cm @000 .a:__0:m0 .m0050m9 99; .0 968005,
.0500: @500 0cm mEmmn mm :03. 05:99.: 0cm 5:09.08 9.. 5.; 090.088 $0095
.000ng 53:00 90.50% 5:99: .9590: 9.0309 399: .933 8:09 0. 0:0
.m_m:9mE 9.0.50 .0 $9 .30. .m 5. 3:295... 0cm 5539 0:0 :93: 0:635 9:. £999: £999.: 59.; 5. 0:06.00 00:09 0. .008
303005 .mitoiE v9.39 5 00:90.29 000029. 9.5 00323 99098:. 0. 3:530:00 3.50.0. :. £03.85 05 m.m.:9mE 9.0.5: 0301 — $9 .33: 09:30”. «.00
5:059:33! noaggaiw «coac— =t20 coantonon oz

 

 

161

 

 

 

0 50:00.2

.Sow.m0 9.9.19. 5.; 0800.080 0. 50000000
10 000.: ..0 .0. 6:00.006 «00 05 0. 00¢ 2008.00.00
00000000 00.2.0 .00. E5. 0 c. 0000:..0000
co..0_.E0> 00000 00 x000000. 00030.0 .00. E00?

.20.
£0.90 000900.30 00.0.50 0.... 5.3 0.00:3
0005 00.00.... 0:0 0.8000 0:00:00...

.mc.00...0.s 0:0 000000
E00008 6.0.9.0. 0.0.000 0.0.. 0. 9.09.09:

00.02.55.
$00. 0006.0 000.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0:00:00... 300. 0008.0 000.00 €058.00 0 :06... 0008.0 000.00 5.3 80.0% 0<>I 0... 00.000 65. 3:000 ..0 .0000. .0. 2.00000 0030.0 . F0
.mE0.0>m c0..0_..c0> .Awkw.
00.0.9.0 c0..0_..c0> 00.0.00. 5.2. 00.00. 9.0.05.0 00.0.00. 5.; 0800. 9.0.060 0.0.0000 0.060 80000.. 0.0050935 0. 00.0.0.3 2. .9600 .05.. 0.00.0
0.0.0000 0030.0 .0 00.0.50 00. c. 9.0.00.0 ..0.00.n. 0030.0 .0 9.6 .00 0.... c. 9.0.080 0020.0 0:0 0:00:80 050.50 .0 0.300000 .c0>0.n. 000500.90 000000» .0.:0E:0..>cw Na.
0.0m co..0...c0> 05 00.0... 000000... .0 0000:0800, 000.000 .c0c.E0.coo 0.0000000 0....
0.0.0800 0 .0. .I x.0c000< ..oo~.~0 m<mxw< E9. >020 00.0.... ..0 0.000. 0:0 0:0 05 .0 0500.0; 000 00.0.00 00. 0. 9.50.0000,
00m. 00c000< 005.000 0:0 $5000 ..< .000... :0 060.090 O<. 0:00.00 30:00. 000005 02.. 09.0.50 0. 020.090 3.000 ..0 .000...
0.00.0002 .0. co..0_..c0> .mmmTNw m<mxw< 0.00:0.0 00000.0.0. 00. .0 0.00.0058. :0..0...c0> .0 .c0E00.0>00 0... .c0>0.0 o. 0000:0200, 2.
030000000 00.00.? .0 0.000.953. E:E_:_E 00. .005; 00. 00:. 0. £0.03 0<>I 00. 00.000 as. 5:000 ..0 .0000. 0.06.0.5 zm..00.mm 000500.90 00:0E.0..00 OS E:E.:..2 X.
2:000
mr .8:0€:0..>:m .000... m
00:06:. 08:00.0 000.5 00.200009.
.0 009000.00 .05. 0... 3.0.000 0:0 00:00:.
0.0 20:00.0 0003 00:58.00“. 0.... .00.
002.0 000 00.0.0000 3.00000 0.50.0306 0.00:0 600005000 00.50 0.000 0.... 00.000
B00“. 0... 5.; 09.00.0000 5 00...:00 0.00090 ..00 .00. 0.0..0000 3.0.00. 000 06:00.0 .E0E00000E
0:0 £000.05 000000003 .0 {com .0 EaE.c.E 0 00: 0003 0000.00.09. .0. .000 60.0.0 0 cm..00.mm 60.0. 0.0.9.0000. 20.002.00.300 000.0005 _ 002$ 00.....00 ..0
00:90:. 0.0 0.0.00.0... 0.003000.
20.00. 000.0000 00. .00. 0.00:0 500000008
00.50 0.050 0:0 900.000 30.90003,
0.000 0000 .0300000 .mwO 0.000
00:00.. 800.00.. 0000.000. 000 00000 0.000
0008.0 05 c. 000... 20:00.0 000 0.0.0008 090.50 3000 0.00.00 .00; 00000.. 000800 00 00:0 0.0.0.0...
..0 .0 00.0.. .90. 0.... .0 $0 .0. ..00000 .0 0.0.6 .00>-c0. 0.0090... 00.2.00 .000 0.5 0.0.000 :00 .05 0.003000. 20.00. 5.; E05 00.00.00. >0
0 55.; 00.00200 3.00.0... 0.0 .0... 0.00.0 50.. 0008. 0.0.0000 0:0 0.0.00.9: 30:00. 0:0 0.0.00.9: 2000.0... 0.003000. 0.0.8.000. 0:0 £000.06 0.0.0.05.
90000.0 000 m.0..0.0E 00.0.50 0.003000. 20.00. 00: 0.003000. 00.00. .0. .000 60.0.0 0 00:00am 30. 0%... .0 0000.000 0:0 00: 05 00:00: P 0.00305”. 20.000. 00
300523.03... 00.03050 «:2... 200.0 00.5.3000 oz

 

 

162

.1. .2. . 3.217.); Ii... .112... . ..< w...:,.:. . :~ ~1.2:::~ :- ‘..:.l~ :..))

...‘.....~.... ... .2 ?._..).~. ‘15-. .:~s..:- ~ )..~x... ...s. .:I?:... .: :.. .\.....- \.
a.»~.l:‘. ‘;.-. )~o\,):.-.. .h).. ..ss».l .-.- : .5 . ‘..\¢..\.\ §

¥§D§~ ' |1| \L’

b/\~_v..lh< >;~—..:.._-...... o...‘.— 2.1... :v.....: _......_.:..T.
A:. .v ..... -..).— 7:..- .L:
3.1.2....4: .‘.\n ~ .x. I.u.1~....) .‘

u....-.-..—...-) p.-v....v . .,.......::. u»..-

.no...).. ..s.... ..nv...,.. . :..
.2.......... .1... ......,A.. ./\\/. . .2: 1:21...

 

. .. .... .: :.....—. ~n...- .
...-\/ )..-. ....-...

 

nn‘o‘~\|\u nluluh

 

Q12

 

Ihw EKN s s

 

 

'Ilo‘a’b‘I-oulv‘tnb

 

,w::0E0.._:00: $.00 0:00:06 m._00m :090
.0 0:6: 0:0:00500 _00_E0:0 0:0 00> 0:: 000008
:0: 6:.: mm::000 0:0 950: E0: m:o_mw_c:0 00>

0030000 00 2500

0.0:; 8:000 :000 :_ 00.0% 2:006 0:0 28:
00> :0:: 985 9:08:80 8:023:00

:_ 00::000 0:0 £500 00>.30: @0000

9:00:80 0:0 90.0.9: :0 0:09:02:
0:0 :2600 05 0: 5:50: 80:0 0::05:
2.0::060 08.000 00 :0:: m::0:_E0::00

00::000 0:0 £50m

 

0000.000 00 m.:0_00w 0:0 3:00:00 000:;
:0:00w :000 c. 00:06 3090 0:0 03:: 00> :0:. 058m
.mE0E3000 :0:0::m:00 :_ 00:90,: 00>.30: 36000

.0 :o:0_:amm 0050.0 EmEmmmcm—z 2:000
:_< 002 00 0:. :0 $589500: 0:. 000000
..0 00E $2.: 80:: 00 000: 9:003 =0 Qz<

5:0:0 :_< .0000 5:00 :0 BE: 60::00
00> E0050 0:: :0:. $0. 00 6:.: 00m:
2:0.03 0:0 8:50:00 :0 E980 00> 0::

:0: E 03: 520500 0:20 Ewemmmcmz,

 

0.0 00.050 $09 :0 0006
5:05: 9 gum—s: 0:_0> 9:00:01 >0:0_0Ew E:E_:_s_

30: 5:5 50.20:: 0925: 0.002703. E:E_:_E 0
.0:0:00 3:00:80 0: :0:: 0:0 00:0 8:85:00 :93

m_0>0_ E0:_Em::00 0:: 50: :0 50:3: m:_0__::
x00; 02 0 £0000 20:00:00: 0: :0::

 

.co:0::m:00 :0 0:0 0:: .0 00__0_m:_ 0.00::
:0: mam—d mm m<m10< 3 00980.00 m0 .9 :o 91mg
0:_0> 0900001 >0:0_0_cw E:E_:_s_ 0 0>0: :05 0.00::
3:05.: 000600 0560:: E0: m_0:0:0E 0209080
00:90:. :0 05:0 00:03 60.90 .m 0.00:0 .39
.:0:0E:m:00 00:: 359.5 00.0300 :0. 0::0050
0<_ <20<Em 000:088000: 05 000008 :0 .00.).

0:500 0:098 .:0:0_:m:_ mm :03 0.0090,:
02.8030 :0 :0:0:.Em::00 060 0: m_0:0:0E
0o :0:0__0:w:_ 0r: 00:0:000 003:0:
:0:0:_Em::00 :0::95 0:0 m0050m 605:0:
6::00 _:0:0::m:00 05.50 60:03 0<>I

0:: 80:90 0: :0_0 E0Emm0cmE OS :0 600<

 

 

 

20:00:08 :0 9:0: .0 $00 600. .0 :0. 30: :0 .0
5:096 05 :_ 00:0 0:0~ :0 £00: 0:: :0 $00 :0:: $0.
:0: 00295 :0:: E0200 :0: :0:.E0. 0:0 5.39.50

0 20:0:0800 080:0 00.0_::0> £0.30: :0: 30709.
w<mxw< >0 00:6:080 m0 0.0 o. .0200 :0 :0:. 0.005
3me 30:02:02.0 00:0:0 :0 :0 :_ :30: .05 080.93
:0:0_::0> :9000 60:55: 00:0_::0> 2.02:0:09: :0”.

0o mm0:0>:00:0 00:06 ..0 0:: E0» 0300:;
0.20000 0:0 602.00 :00: :00: :0 :00:
00:: mm :03 :o:0_::0> 30:.m:.0 .:0:0_::0>
2.00.0?32 .:o:0_::0> E06000_0m_0 m:_0:.0:_
3.0905 :0:0__.:0> :0 30:? 0 05w:
000560 00 :00 30:02.00000 00:0:0 :_<
.mwoc0>:00c0 00:05 :0 00.5000 0. 000.030
90.5: 0:0 E0.w>m 0<>I 0:: :0500

 

8:25.503.

 

:0 .0005 :0 2::03 05 00:00". P 90:905. m:_:_Ew.300 ~60
9:00:00: 0:0 @9065 .0 02004.03
0:0 :0::00 0:: 0: .250: 50:0 0::06:
20::060 039000 00 :05 0::0:_E0::00 m::0_00w w m0>fi0c0<
:0 0000:. :0 2::03 0.: 00:00”. — “20:00: m:_:_Em.30._ :0
2:00:80
090.5: 0:0 0:00:03 8:030:00 :0 0:02
0902:: 0:: c. .__03 0:0 :0::00 0:: 9063 0.0: 0: 000 3:00:80
:_ 00000:: :0:0>0:0::0:0E:m:00 05 E0: 0:80m ”:0E “5800082
05:30.. 20.090 3.0:: :0 500$ E0>0i F OS 5:020:00 w.n0
0:000 :03 8:003 0:0 0.:
2:00:80
050.50 0:0 0:00:03 8:35:00 00 0:6:
.203 0:0 00.800 0:. £063 90: 0. 00:0 8:030:00,
:_ 000090 :0:0>0:0::0:0::m:00 0:: E0: 9:50 ”:05 E0E0mm:05_ ,
05:300.. mE0_00:0 2:0:0 :0 .0005 E0>0i — 0<_ 8:036:00, ..no
5% 9.6.5: 9:
.0.:003000 050.50 .0 0:09:03
0:0 :2Eoo .223 05 «500:0 01.0 500.: .0
0:0:E 0:0 €02.00 020093 0:. :2 00390 — 08:02.85. :9.0_::0> No
22... .020 83:88 oz

 

 

02080.00

 

 

 

 

 

163

 

.0:0~ 0.08:0 :00 000:0: 00:93060 55? 5:50
>:_0.E:: 0:.0:_0:_ 00:00:06 :00E00 _0E:0£ :0: .mmmF

000:0:
:00E00 000:: :.0E_0E 0: E060 0(>I
0:0 000_0>:0 0:_0__:n 0:. :0.000 0:0 000:0:

9:00:80 0925: :0
0:00:03 0:0 >:>:0:00:0 0:: 950000 :0::

~00 F hm
w<mxw< :Es 00:0:0E00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

00:000< 000700 0:00:06 w<mxw< 5.3 20600 02:50 20:5: 0:0 0:20:00E0: :0::06w E0E:0:>:0 0.00:0:E00 >=0E:0£ 0 095:0 F ”:00E00 _0E:0::. Fso
9:00:00: 0:_0__:: :0 0:00:03 0:0 :00E00
5:50:09: 0:. 295:0 o. 000:0 00:05:50
0300:; 050:000 0:0 :0 0E8:000_0 .0.: 000000 E00800
000:0 0050000 25500: .:0:0E_:00.:0: :_ 9:00:000 0:_E0: 0.00: 90:50 0:::0: 0020:. 50.050 .:_:E :_ 00:90 050000 :0 9:00:08
0:: :0 {com 600_ :0 :0: 0:::0__ 0:0 0:20:00E0: 0: 00.00.90 .0:::0__ 0:0 0:20:00E0: .30.:0 _0:0_>_0:_ >: 5:50 E060 0:::0__ 0:0 000000 :0:0E_:0n:.:0z
.2605 5: 08309 :000 5: 90:50 00390 5: 05:50 0:00:00: :Es 090.5: 0:: :0000 :0:0:E0> ,_0E:0:: :0 00. :0:: 0 00:90 F ”956$ :0 >:__00__0:E00 0.00
9:00:80 0:_0__:: :0 0:00:03 0:0 02:50
.>._>:0:0o:0 0:: 000E0:0 0: 600:0 00:05:50,
:03 0300:; 050500 0:0 :0 0E00:000.0 0.: 000000 E00800
:0_0E_:00 0:10 :00: 0F :__.:_.s 000:0 000300 3.0500: 0930: :00: .0_0:E00 0:.E0: 0020: 00050 ._::E :_ 00:0:0 0:.0000 :0 9:00:80
:0 :0: :00: 05:00 000 :00 0:0N _0:E00 0:::0__ 0:0 0: 00.09020 0920: 0:0 0:30:00E0: 2.0::0 _0:0_>_0:_ >0 .0:E00 E060 0:::0: 0:0 000000 :0:0E:00
0:0 300:...) 050500 0:0 :0 000:0>0 :0 609 :0 00:90 :0: 05:50 E00800 :Es 0:_0__:: 0:: :0000 :o:0_::0> ._0E:0:: :0 _0>0_ :0:: 0 00390 F 0E06>w :0 3:505:50 F00
050.5: 0:: 0::0E0 lull
60: 9:0:_E0::00 0:59:00800 E0>0:0
6:050 0098 0:0:0000 :35 0:02:00 x000 o: x000 0: 090:0 :0 9:0 00 :0:0 0:560 039:0
£5) 000:0 000000000 00.55 .A0E00: 0:_E_:0.,0:.>000 .0:::00::0:0 E0:0:E00 :06:_ 0995:
0:0 000:0 090001008: 0:028: 9:000 00: 0:. :0 60: 0:: :5: 5:050. 00.0.60 9.0.50 5:000 :0 :000E. >_00:0>00
_00_E0:0 0:0:>> .20 000050800 .:_0 05.000 0: :90 o: 9:0:.E0E00 5.; 0:50: 5: 0E06>0 :0:: 0_00_E0:0 0:00:00: 2.0::0000 5:50 8500
090:0 02:00 9560 >03>:E0 E0:0E:00 >0_0Em 0:.0E30 0:0 6:30 905000 :0600 0. 9:00:80 0:_0::0 :0 050000 0_0>< F E0550 0 _00_E0:0 500:. 00
, 9:00:80 0:0 90:06:. :0 0:00:03
0:0 :00E00 0:: o: _::E:0: 50:0 0::0:E_
0:00: 00>:00_0E5_-00:: 00000 0:00: 00>:00_0E:2.00:: 00000 0: £0.50 2.0::050 .0858 0:0 0:: 95:50.50. 0oo>> 0:000E00
0: £950 6:E 90:85 59:50 0:0 0002. 0:000E00 :0:: 903090 59:00 0:0 0003 @0000 :0 500E :0 3:52: 0:: 00:00”. F 00:90:: 0::2Emio: v60
00000500 0:0 0E06>0 9:00:000 0:0 90:06; :0 0:09:03
0:059»: 60: 3:030 00:00 05:; 0006 2:006 0:0 9E: 00> :0:: 0:0 :268 0:: 0: 52:0: 5ch 0::0E:
:< 500:. 7000.. :005 00550:. 03”. 0:0 00:00 0:: :o 0505 ,9:0E:000 5:026:00 :. 0E90>0 :0::900 .0:0500 0:0 :0:: 9:0EE0E00 .0900
9:080:30: 0:. 00020 :0 .09: 6:E 0E06>0 50:00 0:0 90:00:: 00:00 00>-.so: £0000 :0 500:: :0 3::03 0:: 00:00”. F 0.05.02 0:_=_Em§0._ 000
3552303. 02032.0 23:. «.080 scan—:33 oz

 

 

 

. . . JH‘.‘I.\‘J.,,U.0 .\

 

50x0 0:508:90

.E0x0
:0..0..00:000 0mm. 0:. 0000 2.3000005
.00.:0 00:90.0”. 00m... 0:. >030 09500:

000090 5:00:98 0:0 8:05.000
0:. 05.9096 0. 0:0 .0090 050.50

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

00:00:84. 000.. 0:. 00.0.0900 2.2000800 00: .0: .:0 000:099000: 0. 00:00:95 0550: .: 500:0 Cum. 0 >0 005300: 50909:. .0:0.000:9n.
.0:. £00. .0090 0:. :0 ::00.0.:00 .00.0:.:0 0:0 .000. .< .0:0.000:9n_ 00..00:00< cum... 0 0505.2. :0.000 0:. 0005005 0:0 000000 0 h : 00:00:02 000.. ..No
0500 00 0E00 v.—
0>000 00 0900 0.:
0300 00 0900 N:
.E0.0>w 05.0w.
08.9.0 0.0.0:: 05950 :85 000.. 0:. 2. 00009000
:0 0.020:0 0.9.8:: :0 .:0E0o.0>00 >..::EEoo >..00.:.0000 .0: 00500.00 050.50 :090 5
.0.:0E0:.:00: 0:. .009 .0::00:000 :0 8:00:00 .00:09:0::00 8:090:00 0>..0>o::. 60:0 E0.0>m 05.0w.
0. 000: 00 £99 .0:. 00.00.96. 509000 c0600 0:. 0.60000 00 :0:0 000.. >0 00:0>00 .0: 0:0 050::m 500:0 him... 0:: >0 .00 0.5905300:
0:0 00:0..0900 0.968900 0. 0.00906 0000090 .0:. 0050009 :0 00.00.96 209.: .>0:0.0.::0 0:. 0>000 8:090:00 .0:o..000x0
0:. 00:0:0Eoo :0: .:0E0:.:00: 0000090 0:. .:.00:0 0.03 :0 8:090:00 >0:0:0 00 :03 ..00:0 :0: 0.500 009030 00 0. >..::.:000o
8:962. 80890 0:. :o .8... 9.. 2.300. 92:; s 8:065:00 000. 0 0086 2.0.8.830 0... 0.8.90 new 0600. c0000 00390 o:. «e: c0000 5 8:985 .0
000090
0 00.000 .0 02.96:... ..:
.00>0.:00 0.0.00: ::0..>00 0:0
0.0>0_ 06:00:00: 000000 0. .009: :0::0900
:0 .00_0>:0 0 ::.3 00.00.96 0:..:0..>00 .0009
:0 0:0..0_:0_00 03 0529300 6.00:0. 0:00:00
E0: 00.900.50.20 0:0 0:_~0.0 00:09:0t00
:0.: .000300 0500.6 .:0:0:::00 500.5 050.50 0::
0:0 .9000 00.0500 050.50 0000905 :0 000:0 00.0:000 2:0.:00: 0:. 0.5 0303 0:0
00.0930 0:0 000000 50:00 00.00. .0:03 .0050 :0: 00.0.0 :00: 39.0.6 .co..0.:0.:o 050.50 .:0:>00 :0 :0..0:09.5 0:: :0:0::. 0:000:30
00.03000 00000 ..0 :0 can» 5 20:90:00 .:0_.::0 .0050 00205 :00.0:00 0. 00.00.95 05.3.38 0:. 0:0 000000 :0005 :00500 8.60550 000000 :0 $0...
..0 05029.0: 00m :0 5.00“. .:0:>0n. 9:559 0 0>0.:0< 500.5 00.5me 0. 050.50 0:. :0.000 0 2:00:80 050.50 0:. :0: 00390 . .:0..>0Q .0305 0:0 30.300 :00
0.0.:09000
00 0:050:00 050::0 .0:..00 >..00..0Eo.:0
050.5: o. 050.5: 9.. c. 50.0% 9.0.505 2.0.5::
0:. 5 060.0% :0..00.:.0.E::00 90:0 :0..00.:.0.E:: 0:0 05.0.0090. 0 50.50.: 0:0 ..065 000:0:
:0 0000028000 0:. 0:0 00:090.:00 00:90... .0905 00:88 000:: 50.509 o. 9062.. 0<>I .0.:000000 050.5: :0 906$
:05 9.50 999000 00390 0. 00:00:80 60.020 0:0 000.090 050.5: 0:. :0600 0:0 000:0: 050:...03 0:0 23.83090 0:. 000008 .0:. 058.605. 50:05:00
35:03:05 2.0.5:: 0:0 05.90050. 50:05:00 0 ..065 00:68 2.0.5:: 0:0 05.0.0080. 5:00.00 .c0:::9.>:0 05000.58 2.05:0... 0 00390 : ”00:900 .099... «so
— 3:052:50”: «0.50.9.5 «:3:- «520 cozatoaon Oz

 

 

165

Mendix Bl

166

a. BSIH matrix for 2 s stem interactions

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

raceways are
also connected
to the wall
structure.

 

 

Remote Touching Connected Meshed Unified
In some cases
Structural both may be
elements may be able to be told
the studs and the apart for e.g.
envelope may be alternative
the drywall framing
+ .

Str Env attached to the materials such
studs. In this as foam core
case both are panels where the
peimanently structure and the
attached. envelope are

unified.
Outlets may be
The actual meshed with the
generator .
e ui ment Ducting, floor structure.
q. p AHU may be distribution Sometimes the
might be placed touchin the s stem is idea of
Str + HVAC within a g y
structure where connected to the connected and
basement space
they are placed structural meshed may
and be remote to s stem have to be based
the structural y
on a value
system. .
Judgment.
Distribution
Fixtures such as systems “lay.”
meshed Within a
the water closet .

Str + Plum wall caVity as

are connected to
part of the

the structure.
overall
structure.

Electrical

outlasts are

connected to the

structure with

Actual screws or bolts. Wiring may be

Str + Elec appliances may Distribution meshed Within

be remote from systems such as the wall
the structure. the electn'cal structure.

 

 

167

fit-”l

b
0 -

31GC

p
Ml ‘

 

{4‘
iii at

 

 

 

Remote TouchinL Connected Meshed Unified
Actual Outlets and Wiring may be
a liances may raceways are meshed within
Str + Comm pp connected to the
be remote from wall or floor the wall
the structure. structure.

StI'UCtllI'C.

 

All mentioned
parts of the Int

 

 

 

 

 

Str + Int A A system are
connected to the
structure.

All interior
elements are
remote from the
Str + Int B structure since
they are
movable and
replaceable.
The actual
523::32; Ducting system
might be placed AHU may be may be
Env + . . touching the connected to the
Within a
HVAC envelope Where envelope
basement space
and be remote they are placed through the
from the structure.
envelope.
Fixtures such as
the water closet

Env + Plum are connected to
the envelope via
the structure.
Electrical outlets
as well as the
distribution

Env + Elec systems are

 

 

 

connected to the
envelope via the
structure with
screws or bolts.

 

 

 

168

 

\
lomm

3.5x ° lnl

[it ° ln

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Remote Touching Connected Meshed Unified
Outlets and
raceways are
Env + connected to the
Comm .
envelope Via the
structure.
All mentioned
parts of the Int
A system are
+
Env Int A connected to the
envelope via the
structure.
All interior
elements are In some
remote fi’om the instances
Env + Int B envelope since interior elements
they are may be touching
movable and the envelope.
replaceable.
HV A C + Systems are
Plum remote from
@h other.
HV A C + Systems are
Elec remote from
each other.
[IV A C + Systems are
I Comm remote from
each other.
[TV A C + Int Systems are HVAC outlets
A remote from may be
each other. considered Int A
Systems are
HVAC + Int
B remote from
each other.
Systems are
Plum + Elec remote from
each other.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

169

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Remote Touching Connected Meshed Unified
Plum + Systems are
Comm remote from
each other.
Plum + Int Systems are
A remote from
each other.
Plum + Int Systems are Outlets may be
remote from .
B conSidered Int A
each other.
Wiring Adapters which
. . . can transfer data
Elec + distribution may on exis tin
Comm be from the . g
. electrical
same caVity. . .
Wiring.
Outlets may be
Elec + Int A considered Int A
Systems are
remote from
each other in
Elec + Int B cases Where the
objects are
moveable and
replaceable.
Comm + Int Outlets may be
A considered Int A
Comm + Int Systems are
B remote from
each other.
Systems are In many
remote from instances sytems In instances a

Int A + Int
B

 

 

each other in
cases Where the
objects are
moveable and
replaceable.

 

may be touching
such as a
partition wall
and a piece of
furniture.

 

 

 

piece of
fumiture may
serve as a
partition wall.

 

170

 

 

 

 

t-[ni-

S3 Em

i5” ‘ Em
forum

Mini

 

 

b. BSIH matrix for 3 system interactions

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Remote Touching Connected Meshed Unified
HV AC
distribution In many cases
Str + Env + systems are the envelope and
HVAC connected to the structure might
structure via the not be different
envelope
Plumbing
distribution In many cases
systems are the envelope and
Str + Env + Plum connected to the structure might
structure via the not be different
envelope
Electrical
distribution In many cases
systems are the envelope and
Str + Env + Elec connected to the structure might
structure via the not be different
envelope
Communication
distribution In many cases
Str + Env + systems are the envelope and
Comm connected to the structure might
structure via the not be different
envelope
Partition walls In many cases
and fixtures are the envelope and
Str + Env + Int A connected to the .
structure via the structure might
not be different
envelope
Movable In many cases
furniture may be the movable
Str + Env + Int B remote from the .
structure and the units may be
touching
envelope
In most cases the The outlets are
two builing connected to the
:3; HVAC + systems would structure in both
be remote from cases HVAC
each other and plumbing
In most cases the The outlets are
S tr + HV A C + two building connected to the
Elec systems would structure in both
be remote from cases HVAC
each other and electrical

 

171

 

- HVA
l3...

 

 

ifirPh

hmm

iu‘lh

I»—

Sir‘PIL

k! ‘ Eitl
(3mm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Remote Touching Connected Meshed Unified
The outlets are
In most cases connected to the
the two building structure in both
+ +
Str HVAC systems would cases HVAC
Comm
be remote from and
each other communication
systems
31:13:53: [grim Structure and
Str + HVAC + HVAC systems
structure and .
Int B Will be
HVAC systems
. connected
in most cases
Distribution In many cases
Plumbing and 83,321: fognlzioth electrical
Str + Plum + electrical Electricalg distribution will
. Elec systems Will be . be unified with
systems Will be
remote the structural
connected to the wall
structure
Distribution In man cases
. systems for both y . .
Plumbing and lurnbin and communication

Str + Plum + communication Sommungcation distribution will

Comm systems will be . be unified with
systems Will be

remote the structural
connected to the wall
structure
. Irie curl-W or
Plumbing plumbing are

Str + Plum + Int distribution and part of both
oulets Will be .

A Plumbing
connected to the systems as well
structure

an In
Int H elements 1 M
will remote from Plumbing

Str + Plum + Int structure and SWZEsfifalm distribution will

B plumbing bestiuchin y be connected to

systems in most g the structure
Structure and In some cases
Str + Elec + electrical. and electrical and
communication communication
tComm .
systems Will be systems are
connected unified
The outlets for
electrical are

Str + Elec + Int Structure and part of both
electrical Will be .

electrical
connected

systems as well

as Int A systems

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

172

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Remote Touching Connected Meshed Unified
Int B elements In many cases
Will remote from electrical
St + El + I t B structure and lime?“ and Int distribution will
r ec n electrical best): :21; may be unified With
systems in most u g the structural
cases wall
The outlets for
Structure and communication
JStr + Comm + communcation are part of both
Int A systems will be Communication
connected systems as well
as Int A systems
Int B elements
Will remote from Communication
Str + Comm + structure and Structure and Int distribution will
. . B systems may
Int B communication be touchin be connected to
systems in most g the structure
cases
Int B systems Int A systems
Str + Int A + Int Int B elements may be toucing may be
B Will be remote structure and Int connected to the
A systems structure
HVAC and Envelope will be
Env + HVAC + Plumbing connected to
Plum systems are both systems via
remote the structure
HVAC and Envelope Will be
Env + HVAC + Electrical connected to
Elec systems are both systems via
remote the structure
HVAC and Envelope will be
Env + HVAC + Communication connected to
FComm systems are both systems via
remote the structure
Envelope will be
Env + HVAC + connected to
Int A both systems via
the structure
Envelope will be
Env + HVAC + Int B systems :11; Bbscy 2:11:11 connected to
Int B may be remote y g HVAC systems
the envelope .
Via the structure

 

173

 

Int 4
Eu

Iii ~ l
[0mm

Intel

in“;

[it ~

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Remote Touching Connected Meshed Unified
Plumbing and Envelope Will be
Env + Plum + electrical connected to
Elec systems will be both systems via
remote the structure
Plumbing and Envelope will be
Env + Plum + communication connected to
100mm systems will be both systems via
remote the structure
Outlets are part
. of both
Env + Plum + Int All systems Will .
plumbing
A be connected
systems and Int
A
Int B elements
Will remote from Plumbing
Env + Plum + Int envelope and Envelope and Int distribution will
. B systems may
B plumbing . be connected to
. be touchm g
systems in most the structure
0.8825
Envelope and In some cases
Env + Elec + electrical. and electrical and
communication communication
Comm .
systems Will be systems are
connected unified
The outlets for
Envelope and electrical are
+ + ,
Env Elec Int electrical WI“ be part of both
A connected electrical
systems as well
as Int A systems
Int B elements In many cases
will remote from Envelo e and Int electrical
Env + Elec + Int envelope and B s sterins ma distribution will
B electrical be 3mm y be unified with
systems in most g the structural
cas_es wall as well as
The outlets for
Envelope and communication
Env + Comm + communcation are part of both
Int A systems will be Communication
connected systems as well
as Int A systems

 

 

174

 

 

livl

IHHC ~
loam

HVAC .
EiIB

iii AC

A

“film

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Remote Touching Connected Meshed Unified
Int B elements . .
will remote from Communication
Envelope and Int distribution will
Env + Comm + envelope and
Int B communication B systems may be connected to
. be touching the structure via
systems in most
the envelope
cases
Int B systems initiAbsgstems
Env + Int A + Int Int B elements may be touching y
. connected to the
B Will be remote envelope and Int .
structure Via the
A systems
envelope
HV AC and
HVAC + Plum + Plum?” and
Elec electrical
systems are
‘ remote
HV AC and
HVAC + Plum + Plumb“? ”‘9
communication
Comm
systems are
remote
HV AC and HVACinand :11; 113::me
HVAC + Plum + Plumbing 1’1“” g 3
Int A systems are sy are sy are part
remote connected to the of Int A systems
Int A systems as well
Int B systems ’
may be remote
HVAC + Plum + as well as
Int B HVAC and
plumbing
systems
In some cases
HVAC + Elec + All systems are electrical and
Comm remote communication
systems are
unified

 

 

 

 

 

 

175

 

HVAC
flit B

HHC
~lul A

HVAC -
. In B

l AC-
”[3

ilum ~
{Ohm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Remote Touching Connected Meshed Unified
HVAC + Elec + Electrical g
Int A s stems are systems are systems are part
erote connected to the of Int A systems
Int A systems as well
HVAC + Elec + All systems are
Int B remote
HVAC and HVAC and . The outlets for
. . communication both building
HVAC + Comm Communication
+ Int A systems are systems are systems are part
remote connected to the of Int A systems
Int A systems as well
HVAC + Comm All systems are
+ Int B remote
The outlets for
HVAC + Int A + Int B elements building systemsr
Int B Will be remote are part of Int A
systems as well
Plumbing In some cases
Plum + Elec + systems are electrical. and
remote from communication
Comm .
electrical and systems are
communicaiton unified
Plumbing and The outlets for
Plum + Elec + Int electrical building systemSI
A systems will be are part of Int A
remote systems as well
Plum + Elec + Int All systems are

B

 

 

remote

 

 

 

 

 

 

176

Plum
Ilm A

Elec -
lm A

Elec-
hi B

it...

Com;
“it B

 

 

Remote

Touching

Connected

Meshed

Unified I

 

Plum + Comm +
Int A

Plumbing and
communication
systems will be
remote

The outlets :ZDSI
building sy

are part of Int A
systems as well.
In some cases
electrical and
communication
systems are
unified

 

Plum + Comm +
Int B

All systems are
remote

 

Plum + Int A +
Int B

Int B elements
Will be remote

 

The outlets for
building syst
are part of Int A
systems as well

 

Elec + Comm +
Int A

Electrical and

communication
systems may be

touching

The outlets for
building sy

are part of Int A
systems as well.
In some cases
electrical and
communication
systems are
unified

 

Elec + Comm +
Int B

Int B systems are
remote

Electrical and

communication
systems may be

touching

In some cases
electrical and
communication
systems are
unified

 

Elec+ IntA+ Int
B

Int B systems are
remote

The outlets for
building syslernsH
are part of Int A

systems as well

 

Comm + Int A +
Int B

 

 

Int B systems are
remote

 

 

 

 

The outlets for
building sy

are part of Int A
systems as well

 

 

177

Appendix B2

178

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Physical decisions for Physical decisions for Physical decisions for Physical decisions for E
HVAC systems HVAC systems Plum systems Plum systems 0.)
Sheila! flexibility W W W , , “-
_ Selection ofappropriate HVAC - Selection of appropriate HVAC syste - Placement of - Placement of distribution 5
s stem — Building type distribution system system
— Building type - Aesthetics — Wall distribution - Utility core
— Sizing - Space requirements ~ Floor distribution .
— Aesthetics - Fire safety - Design for vertical W
- Noise and vibrations - Placement of equipment such as stacking of wet cores - Placement of equipment
_ Space requirements rooftops - Water less outlets - Ease of handling
- Passive Solar heating - Active 3015" design ‘ Space requirements
_ Active solar heating Thermal performance - Access
Ease of construction - Loss of heat from - Placement of distribution
Thermal performance - Placement of equipment heated water during system
I. - Human contort zone (db) 68—78F, - Ease of handling distribution - Ease of handling
3 RH 20-70% — Space requirements - Insulation of wiring - Oulets
- Sun control to reduce solar heat - Access - Crawl space design - Distribution core
gain (Shading (refer Bobenhausen - Placement of distribution system - Grey water resue — Clarity of installation
1994 — Ease of handling - Waterless outlets instructions
- Heat loss due to building envelope - Oulets - Reduction Of water
(refer Bobenhausen 1994) - Distribution core consumption W
- Integrating Heating and ventilating - Clarity of installation instructions - Rainwater harvesting - Accessibility
requirements (HRV) - Compactness of distribution
- Selection of appropriate HVAC Ease of maintanence - Inteferences from other utility
system - Accessibility systems
— Building type - Compactness of distribution - Fixtures reliability
— Climate — Inteferences from other utility systems - Equipment reliability
- Heating requirements
' Eeipollse time , . .. Physical decisions for Physical decisions for |
- eliability and maintainability l
- Passive solar heatin Str systems Str systems
9 l
- Active solar heating Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity I
— Fuel requirements - Selection of appropriate Str system — Not applicable I
l - Building type I
l - Sizing of memebers Ease of construction
. I - Aesthetics — Ease of handling ‘
I I - Standardization of members - Space requirements I
I I - Movability of partitions - Access '
I — Handelability of members - Handelability of members '
I - Size - Size '
. Weight - Weight i
I - Rainwater harvesting design ’ - Clarity of installation instructions I
' - Grey water reuse l
' Ease of maintanence i
' Thermal performance - Accessibility I
l — Sealing wall cavity — Compactness of distribution I
I - Material thermal performance - Distribution of utility systems I
I - Junctions energy loss - Utility core / structural core I
I - Wall and roof — Embedded utility runs I
I — Wall and floor I
I — Subfloor energy loss
I - Reduction of loss of heat from distribution of heated water |
- Use of solar water heaters I
Y - Use of solar panels to generate electricity for water heaters y
I lnferences for integration between Str, HVAC and Plum systems Ease of construction I
I Spatial flexibility - Grid design to facilitate usage of prefabricated components I
i - Movable walls and partitions for flexibility of usage - "Use moduleS" which are dry cores, wet cores, utility cores l
l - Design for "Use modules“ (Wet cores / Dry cores / Utility cores) serve as - OSB strength redesign for ease during construction with I
I structural cores respect to placement of windows I
I - Design on a grid for flexibility I
I - Snap on / sliding walls Ease of maintanence I
I - Rainwater harvesting through design - Utility cores intergarte all utlities in one space such that they I
I - Grey water reuse design to be incorporated are easy to maintain I U)
I - Easy access of all utlities Q)
I Thermal Performance - HVAC distribution to be placed in the subfloor to faciltate ‘ -~
- Passive energy design / shading ease of access '
' - Active energy design / use solar panels - Detacheable panels on the subfloor to facilitate access ' Q)
‘ - Wall material thermal performance - Plumbing through vertical stack avoiding horizontal l ‘5
' - Glass composition for the windows to better the thermal performance distribution l K
| — Sealing junctions I— ____________________ _ l H
I — Better thermal performance through improved OSB design for framing walls I Sustainable design 10)
l — Grey water reuse - Active / Passive solar design I
i I — Shading devices I
I Structural integrity I - Daylighting techniques I
I - Utility core serves as a structural core ' - Window glazing design
I ~ Design on a grid for integrity ' - Greywater reuse I
I - Use of alternative framing vs regular wooden stud walls ' - Waterless outlets l
I — OSB strength redesign to increase structural strength in both directions I ' Rainwater harvesting I
| - Junction sealent / qaskets '

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
   
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Physical decisions for Physical decisions for Physical decisions for Physical decisions for ‘H
HVAC systems HVAC systems 4 Elec systems Elec systems 5
Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity My My 1.:
- Selection of appropriate HVAC - Selection of appropriate HVAC - Selection of appropriate Elec service — Placement of equipment 5
system system system - Placement of distribution system
- Building type - Building type - Building type - Raceways
- Sizing - Aesthetics - Sizing - Utility core
— Aesthetics - Space requirements - Aesthetics
— Noise and vibrations - Fire safety — Overhead / Underground W
- Space requirements - Placement of equipment such as - Clearence required — Placement of equipment
- Passive Solar heating rooftops - Placement of distribution system - Ease of handling
- Active solar heating - Active Solar design - Raceways - Space requirements
I. - Wall embedded - Access
3 Thermal performance Ease of construction - Utility core - Placement of distribution system
- Human confort zone (db) - Placement of equipment — Ducting system - Ease of handling
68-78F, RH 20-70% - Ease of handling - Flexibility of usage - Oulets
- Sun control to reduce solar heat - Space requirements — Placement of outlets - Distribution core
gain / shading (refer - Access — Capacity - Clarity of installation instructions
Bobenhausen 1994) - Placement of distribution system — Fire safety
- Heat loss due to building — Ease of handling - Natural light as an alternative Ease of maintanence
envelope (refer Bobenhausen - Oulets - Accessibility
1994) - Distribution core Thermal performance — Compactness of distribution
— Integrating Heating and - Clarity of installation instructions — Distance run for distribution system to - Inteferences from other utility
ventilating requirements (HRV) determine energy lost systems
- Selection of appropriate HVAC Ease of maintanence - Sealing building structure to avoid - Lighting fixtures reliability
system - Accessibility energy loss - Equipment reliability
- Building type - Compactness of distribution - Type of wiring
- Climate - Inteferences from other utility - Utility core to avoid dispersion of I
- Heating requirements systems energy I
- Response time - Effectiveness of lighting fixtures l
- Reliability and maintainability - Natural light as an alternative I
- Passive solar heating - Lighting fixtures I
- Active solar heating I
' FUBI reqUirements Physical decisions for Physical decisions for I
I Str systems Str systems I
I Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity l
I - Selection of appropriate Str system — Not applicable I
- Building type |
I - Sizing of memebers Ease of construction I
I - Aesthetics - Ease of handling 1
I - Standardization of members - Space requirements I
O l - Ivlovability of partitions I — Access I
I - Handelability of members — Handelability of members I
I - Size - Size l
l - Weight - Weight I
I — Clarity of installation instructions I
I Thermal performance
I - Sealing wall cavity Ease of maintanence I
I - Material thermal performance — Accessibility I
I - Junctions energy loss - Compactness of distribution '
I - Wall and roof -- Distribution of utility systems '
I - Wall and floor - Utility core / structural core I
- Subfloor energy loss — thedded utilitv runs 1
I Inferences for integration between Str, HVAC and Elec systems Ease of construction i
I Spatial flexibility — Grid design to facilitate usage of prefabricated components l
i - Movable walls and partitions for flexibility of usage - "Use modules" Wthh are dry COWS, WEI COIGS. utility cores I
l - Design for "Use modules" (Wet cores / Dry cores / Utility cores) serve as — OSB strength redesign for ease during construction with respect to I
I structural cores placement of windows I
I — Alternative framing materials for ease of handling I
I - Use of movable storage units to define space Ease of maintanence I
I - Design on a grid for flexibility - Utility cores intergarte all utlities in one space such that they are I (I)
I — Snap on / sliding walls easy to maintain Q)
I - Utility runs to be under the floor structure to increase manouverability - Easy access Of all utlities I '~
I - Electrical distribution through raceways I
Thermal Performance - Flexibility of placement of distribution systems through the use of I g
I - Passive energy design / shading detacheable raceways l (U
' - Active energy design / use solar panels - HVAC distribution to be placed in the subfloor to faciltate ease of | k
l - Wall material thermal performance access I w
l - Glass composition for the windows to better the thermal performance ' Detacheable panels in the SUbflOOI for easy 300955 IV)
I — Sealing junctions ________________________ I
I - Betterthermal performance through improved OSB design for framing walls IrSustainable design I
| '- Energy Star appliances I
I Structural integrity '- Active / Passive solar design I
I - Utility core serves as a structural core '- Shading devices
I — Design on a grid for integrity |- Daylighting techniques I
I - Use of alternative framing vs regular wooden stud walls I' WInGOW glazmg design I
L — OQR strength redesign In inr‘mnsp structural strength in hnth riirm‘tirms l‘ JunC-tion sealent / QESKEIS I

 

 

 

 

 

 

   
   
    
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Physical decisions for Physical decisions for Physical decisions for Physical decisions for ‘lu
m0 systems HVAC systems Comm systems Comm systems 5
Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity MHex—ibility Wm H
- Selection ofappropriate HVAC — Selection ofappropriate HVAC - Placement of distribution syste — Placement / flexibilityof distributio 5
system system - Wall distribution system
- Building type - Building type - Floor distribution
- Sizing — Aesthetics - Flexible distribution systems Ease of construction
- Aesthetics - Space requirements such as raceways which may be — Placement of equipment
- Noise and vibrations - Fire safety unclipped and placed as required - Ease of handling
— Space requirements - Placement of equipment such as - Distribution over existing — Space requirements
- Passive Solar heating rooftops electrical wiring - Access
- Active solar heating - Active Solar design - Wireless systems - Placement of distribution system
- Integrated wiring systems for - Ease of handling
Thermal performance Ease of construction phone cable and - Oulets
- Human confort zone (db) 68-78F, RH - Placement of equipment internet/structured wiring - Distribution core
I; 20-70% - Ease of handling - Clarity of installation instructions
I" - Sun control to reduce solar heat gain - Space requirements Thermal performance
lshading (refer Bobenhausen 1994) — Access - Not applicable Ease of maintanence
— Heat loss due to building envelope - Placement ofdistribution system — Accessibility
(refer Bobenhausen 1994) - Ease of handling - Compactness of distribution
- Integrating Heating and ventilating — Oulets - Integration of communication
requirements (HRV) - Distribution core wiring
- Selection of appropriate HVAC - Clarity of installation instructions — Integration with electrical systems
system - Fixtures reliability
— Building type Ease of maintanence - Equipment reliability
- Climate — Accessibility
- Heating requirements - Compactness of distribution |
- Response time - Inteferences from other utility I
- Reliability and maintainability systems I
- Passive solar heating I
‘ Active solar heating Physical decisions for Physical decisions for I
- Fuel requirements Str systems Str systems I
I Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity l
- Selection of appropriate Str system - Not applicable I
I - Building type I
I - Sizing of memebers Ease of constructi_op I
i - Aesthetics - Ease of handling I
I - Standardization of members — Space requirements I
I - Movability of partitions - Access I
I — Handelability of members - Handelability of members I
I - Size - ize .
' I - Weight - Weight I
I — Rainwater harvesting design - Clarity of installation instructions I
I - Grey water reuse
I Ease of maintanence I
I Thermal performance - Accessibility I
I - Sealing wall cavity - Compactness of distribution I
- Material thermal performance - Distribution of utility systems i
I - Junctions energy loss - Utility core / structural core I
I - Wall and roof - thedded utilitv runs l
I - Wall and floor I
I - Subfloor energy loss I
;--~------—---—————————————————e——I ——————————————— !
I lnferences for integration between Str, HVAC and Comm systems Ease 0f CONSUUCUOn I
I Spatial flexibility - Grid design to facilitate usage of prefabricated components
I _ Movable walls and partitions for flexIbIIIIy of usage - "Use modules“ which are dry cores, wet cores, utility cores I
I — Design for "Use modules“ (Wet cores / Dry cores / Utility cores) serve as structural ‘ OSB strength redesrgn for ease during construction WIIII I
cores respect to placement of windows I
I - Design on a grid for flexibility I
I - Snap on / sliding walls Ease of maintanence I
I - Integrative wiring / structured wiring for phone cable and internet ' UIIIIIY cores intergarte all utlities in one space SUCh that they I
I — Data transfer over existing electrical wiring are easy to maintain I U)
l - Flexible placement of raceways so that they can be moved around as per chages in ' Easy access Of all utlities I .9
I spatial arrangement - Use of structured wiring I
I - Integration of electrical and communication systems I Q)
I Thermal Performance - Flexibility of placement of distribution systems through the use I ""
I - Passive energy design / shading. Active energy design / use solar panels OI detacheable raceways I E
I - Glass composition for the windows to better the thermal performance ‘ HVAC distribution to be placed in the SUbflOOF i0 faciltate ease “'
I - Sealing junctions 0f access I (a
I - Better thermal performance through improved OSB design for framing walls ‘ Detacheable panels on the SUbflOOI for easy access II
: Structural integrity II—Sustalnable design i
I - Utility core serves as a structural core ' Active / Passive solar design I
I - Design on a grid for integrity I - Shading devices I
- Use of alternative framing vs regular wooden stud walls I ' Daylighting techniques I
I - OSB strength redesign to increase structural strength in both directions I ' Window glazing design I
I l - Junction sealent / gaskets I

 

  

 

 

. .. flit? 72.35.40 \

 

Z8I

 

Physical decisions for
HVAC systems

Spatial flexibility

Physical decisions for
HVAC systems

Structural Integrity

- Selection of appropriate HVAC system - Selection of appropriate HVAC

\—

Physical decisions for Int
A systems

Spatial flexibility
— Placement of distribution for

Physical decisions for Int
A systems

Structural Inte rit
- Design of partition wall layout

- Building type system HVAC system - Design on a grid

- Sizing — Building type - Wall distribution — Material / improved strength
- Aesthetics — Aesthetics — Floor distribution OSB

- Noise and vibrations - Space requirements - Flexible distribution systems

— Space requirements - Fire safety such as raceways which may be Ease of construction

- Passive Solar heating
— Active solar heating

Thermal performance

- Human confort zone (db) 68-78F, RH
20-70%

- Sun control to reduce solar heat gain /
shading (refer Bobenhausen 1994)

— Heat loss due to building envelope
(refer Bobenhausen 1994)

- Integrating Heating and ventilating
requirements (HRV)

- Selection of appropriate HVAC system

- Reliability and maintainability
- Passive solar heating
— Active solar heating
- Fuel requirements

 

- Placement of equipment such as
rooftops
— Active Solar design

Ease of construction
- Placement of equipment
~ Ease of handling
- Space requirements
- Access
- Placement of distribution system
- Ease of handling
- Oulets
- Distribution core

- Compactness of distribution
- Inteferences from other utility
systems

 

 

 

 

unclipped and placed as requirec
- Wireless systems

- Clip on outlets

- Partition walls to be moveable
- Raceways to serve as skirting
for walls

Thermal performance

- Sealing loss from distribution
systems

- Placement of distribution
systems in the crawl space to be
insulated

 

 

 

- Placement of equipment
- Ease of handling
- Space requirements
- Access
- Placement of distribution system
— Ease of handling
- Oulets
— Distribution core
— Clarity of installation instructions

Ease of maintanence
— Accessibility
— Compactness of distribution

— Building type - Clarity of installation instructions - Zoned heating and cooling to — Integration of communication
— Climate allow for flexibility wiring

- Heating requirements Ease of maintanence - Integration with electrical

- Response time - Accessibility systems

- Fixtures reliability
- Equipment reliability

 

 

Physical decisions for
Str systems

Physical decisions for
Str systems

 

Spatial flexibility
- Selection of appropriate Str
system

Structural Integrity
- Not applicable

 

- Building type Ease of construction
- Sizing of memebers - Ease of handling
— Aesthetics - Space requirements
- Standardization of members - Access
- MovabilityI of partitions - Handelability of members
I - sfée I'm: I'Vr I u - Weight
- Weight - Clarity of installation

- Rainwater harvesting design
- Grey water reuse

Thermal performance
- Sealing wall cavity
- Material thermal performance
- Junctions energy loss
- Wall and roof
- Wall and floor
— Subfloor energy loss

 

instructions

Ease of maintanence

- Accessibility

- Compactness of distribution

- Distribution of utility systems
~ Utility core / structural core
— Embedded utility runs

 

 

 

 

I Spatial flexibility
- Design on a grid for flexibility
- Snap on / sliding walls

spatial arrangement
- Wireless systems

I Inferences for integration between Str, HVAC and Int A systems

I - Movable walls and partitions for flexibility of usage
I - Design for “Use modules" (Wet cores / Dry cores / Utility cores) serve as structural cores

— Flexible placement of raceways so that they can be moved around as per chages in

Ease of construction

- Grid design to facilitate usage of prefabricated

components

cores

- OSB strength redesign for ease during construction
with respect to placement of windows

Ease of maintanence

- "Use modules" which are dry cores, wet cores, utility

Intent

I - Zoned heating and cooling to allow for flexibility - Utility cores intergarte all utlities in one space such U)
I that they are easy to maintain .2
l Thermal Performance - Easy access of all utlities
| — Passive energy design / shading. Active energy design / use solar panels Q)
I - Glass composition for the windows to better the thermal performance through the use of detacheable raceways ‘H
I — Sealing junctions - HVAC distribution to be placed in the subfloor to E
I - Better thermal performance through improved OSB design for framing walls faciltate ease Of access ‘IU
- Detacheable panels on the subfloor for easy access U)

I
I Structural integrity

— Utility core serves as a structural core

- Design on a grid for integrity

- Use alternative framing vs. regular wooden stud walls

- OSB strength redesign to increase structural strength in both directions

r_Sustainable design

~ Energy Star appliances

- Active / Passive solar design
- Shading devices

- Daylighting techniques

- Window glazing design

- Junction sealent / gaskets

 

I
I
I
I
I
l
I
l
I
I
I
— Flexibility of placement of distribution systems I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

 

I
|
I
|
l
I
L1.

/
/

 

 

 

€81

  
 
 

 
   
  

Physical decisions for
HVAC systems
Spatial flexibility
- Selection of appropriate HVAC system
- Building type
- Sizing
- Aesthetics
— Noise and vibrations
- Space requirements
- Passive Solar heating
- Active solar heating

Thermal performance

— Sun control to reduce solar heat gain /
shading (refer Bobenhausen 1994)
- Heat loss due to building envelope (refer
Bobenhausen 1994)
- Integrating Heating and ventilating
requirements (HRV)
- Selection of appropriate HVAC system
- Building type
- Climate
- Heating requirements
— Response time
- Reliability and maintainability
— Passive solar heating
- Active solar heating
- Fuel requirements

 

- Human confort zone (db) 68—78F, RH 20-70%

Physical decisions for
HVAC systems

Structural Integrity
- Selection of appropriate HVAC

system
- Building type
- Aesthetics
- Space requirements
- Fire safety
- Placement of equipment such as
rooftops
- Active Solar design

 
  
 

Ease of construction
— Placement of equipment
— Ease of handling
- Space requirements
- Access
- Placement of distribution system
— Ease of handling
— Oulets
- Distribution core
- Clarity of installation instructions

Ease of maintanence

- Accessibility

— Compactness of distribution
- Inteferences from other utility
systems

 

   
  
       
     

Physical decisions for Int
B systems

Physical decisions for Int
B systems

 

Spatial flexibility

- Use of moveable
storage units as
partitions

— Primary utility systems
to be attached to
structural walls

- Roof mounted utilities
to facilitate flexibility

Thermal performance
- Flexible design for

height of partitions so
that they can be lowered
during summer time to
facilitte movement of air

 

Structural Integrity
— Not applicable

Ease of construction

- Open plans to facilitate
ease in design and
construciton

Ease of maintanence

— Seperate furniture units
which are replaceable
and moveable

Intent

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Spatial flexibility

— Design on a grid for flexibility
- Wireless systems

- Moveable storage units

W

- Sealing junctions

Structural integrity
- Utility core serves as a structural core
- Design on a grid for integr‘q
- Use alternative framing vs r c a"

 

 

Physical decisions for
Str systems

Physical decisions for
Str systems

 

 

 

Spatial flexibility
- Selection of appropriate Str system
- Building type
~ Sizing of memebers
- Aesthetics
- Standardization of members
- Movability of partitions
— Handelability of members
- Size
- Weight
- Rainwater harvesting design
- Grey water reuse

Thermal performance
- Sealing wall cavity
- Material thermal performance
- Junctions energy loss
— Wall and roof
- Wall and floor
- Subfloor energy loss

Structural Integrity
- Not applicable

Ease of construction
— Ease of handling
- Space requirements
- Access
- Handelability of members
— Size
— Weight
- Clarity of installation instructions

Ease of maintanence

- Accessibility

— Compactness of distribution

- Distribution of utility systems
- Utility core i‘ structural core
- thedded utilitv runs

 

 

 

- Passive energy design shading. Active energy cesrgn use 5: a' :a
- Glass composition for the windows to better the {henna :e‘cc'a'u

- Betterthermal performance through improved OSB ce
- Changeable height of storage units for intema a ' r“:

Inferences for integration between Str, HVAC and Int B systems

- Movable walls and partitions for flexibility of usage
- Design for "Use modules" (Wet cores i’ Dry cores I Utility cores: serve as snot- a

PA

- Zoned heating and cooling to allow for flexibility

  
 
 
 

 

 

 

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Strategies

 
      

 

\l I Olivi'iin iriltt sillilitt Ilia. .ufirulr d. '. {III

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.32208 5293a

 

 

‘78I

 

Physical decisions for
Plum systems

Spatial flexibility
- Placement of distribution
system

- Wall distribution

— Floor distribution
- Design for vertical stacking of
wet cores
- Water less outlets

Thermal performance
— Loss of heat from heated water

during distribution

- Insulation of equipment and
piping

- Crawl space design

- Grey water resue

- Waterless outlets

- Reduction of water consumption
- Rainwater harvesting

 

 

 

Physical decisions for
Plum systems

Structural Integrity
- Placement of distribution system

- Utility core

Ease of construction
— Placement of equipment
- Ease of handling
- Space requirements
- Access
- Placement of distribution system
— Ease of handling
— Oulets
- Distribution core
- Clarity of installation instructions

Ease of maintanence

- Accessibility

- Compactness of distribution
- Inteferences from other utility
systems

- Fixtures reliability

— Equipment reliability

 

 

 

Physical decisions for
Str systems

Physical decisions for
Str systems

 

Spatial flexibility
- Selection of appropriate Str
system

- Building type

- Sizing of memebers

- Aesthetics
- Standardization of members
- Movability of partitions
- Handelability of members

- Size

- Weight

Thermal performance
- Sealing wall cavity
- Material thermal performance
- Junctions energy loss
- Wall and roof
- Wall and floor

Structural Integrity
- Not applicable

Ease of construction

— Ease of handling

- Space requirements

- Access

- Handelability of members
- Size
- Weight

- Ciaii'ty of iiisiaiiaiiuii inst. sch-one

Ease of maintanence

- Accessibility

- Compactness of distribution

- Distribution of utility systems
- Utility core / structural core

L i i

- '— ‘ utilitv runs

 

Physical decisions for
Elec systems

Spatial flexibility
- Selection of appropriate Elec service

system
- Building type
- Sizing
- Aesthetics
- Overhead / Underground
- Clearence required
- Placement of distribution system
- Raceways
- Wall embedded
- Utility core
— Ducting system
— Flexibility of usage
- Placement of outlets
- Capacity
- Fire safety
- Natural light as an alternative

Thermal performance

- Distance run for distribution system to
determine energy lost

- Sealing building structure to avoid
energy loss

— Type of wiring

- Utility core to avoid dispersion of
energy

- Effectiveness of lighting fixtures

- Natural light as an alternative

- Lighting fixtures

Physical decisions for
Elec systems

Structural lnte rit

- Placement of equipment

- Placement of distribution system
- Raceways
— Utility core

Ease of construction
- Placement of equipment
- Ease of handling
- Space requirements
- Access
- Placement of distribution system
- Ease of handling
— Oulets
- Distribution core
— Clarity of installation instructions

Ease of maintanence

- Accessibility

- Compactness of distribution
- Inteferences from other utility
systems

- Lighting fixtures reliability

- Equipment reliability

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

— Subfloor energy loss

 

 

Spatial flexibility

cores

- Design on a grid for flexibility
- Snap on / sliding walls

- Raceways

Thermal Performance

- Sealing junctions

- Utility stack to be insulated

Structural integrity

- Design on a grid for integrity

 

- Movable walls and partitions for flexibility of usage
- Design for "Use modules" (Wet cores / Dry cores / Utility cores) serve as structural

- Alternative framing materials for ease of handling

- Use of movable storage units to define space

- Utility runs to be under the floor structure to increase manouverability

i
I

I

l

I

I

I

l

l

I

I

l

I - Passive energy design / shading
I - Active energy design / use solar panels
i

I

i

i

I

|

l

l

I

I

I

I

- Better thermal performance through improved OSB design for framing walls
- Insulation for plumbing equipment and piping

- Utility core serves as a structural core

- Use alternative framing vs. regular wooden stud walls
- OSB strength redesign to increase structural strength in both directions

Ease of construction

- Grid design to facilitate usage of prefabricated components
- “Use modules" which are dry cores, wet cores, utility cores

— OSB strength redesign for ease during construction with

respect to placement of windows

Ease of maintanence

- Utility cores intergarte all utlities in one space such that they

are easy to maintain
- Easy access of all utlities

- Integration of electrical and communication systems
- Flexibility of placement of distribution systems through the use

of detacheable raceways

- HVAC distribution to be placed in the subfloor to faciltate ease

of access

- Plumbing through vertical stack and avoid horizontal

distribution

rSustainabIe design
- Energy Star appliances

- Shading devices
- Daylighting techniques
- Window glazing design
- Greywater reuse

|
|
|
I
|

I - Waterless outlets

| - Rainwater harvesting

l - Junction sealent / gaskets
l

- Active / Passive solar design

 

 

 

Intent

E ————————————————————————————————————————————————— Y

Inferences for integration between Str, Plum and Elec systems

IGS

Stra te

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Physical decisions for Physical decisions for Physical decisions for Physical decisions for H
Plum systems Plum systems Comm systems Comm systems 5
Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity ‘l—I
— Placement of - Placement ofdistribution system — Placement of — Placement / flexibilityof distribution 5
distribution system — Utility core distribution system system
- Wall distribution - Wall distribution
- Floor distribution Ease of construction - Floor distribution Ease of construction
- Design for vertical - Placement of equipment - Flexible distribution — Placement of equipment
stacking of wet cores - Ease of handling systems such as - Ease of handling
- Water less outlets - Space requirements raceways which may be - Space requirements
- Access unclipped and placed as - Access
Thermal performance — Placement of distribution system required — Placement of distribution system
— Loss of heat from - Ease of handling - Distribution over - Ease of handling
i—* heated water during - Oulets existing electrical wiring — Oulets
8 distribution - Distribution core - Wireless systems - Distribution core
- Insulation of wiring ~ Clarity of installation instructions - Integrated wiring - Clarity of installation instructions
- Crawl space design systems for phone cable
- Grey water resue Ease of maintanence and internet / structured Ease of maintanence
- Waterless outlets - Accessibility wiring - Accessibility
— Reduction of water - Compactness of distribution — Compactness of distribution
consumption - Inteferences from other utility Thermal performance — Integration of communication wiring
- Rainwater harvesting systems - Not applicable - integration with electrical systems
— Fixtures reliability - Fixtures reliability
I - Equipment reliability - Equipment reliability
I
| I
I Physical decisions for Physical decisions for I
I Str systems Str systems I
i Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity i
i - Selection of appropriate Str — Not applicable I
I system I
I - Building type Ease of construction I
I - Sizing of memebers — Ease of handling I
I - Aesthetics - Space requirements I
I - Standardization of members - Access
I - Movability of partitions — Handelability of members I
- Handelability of members - Size I
l - Size - Weight '
: — Weight - Clarity of installation instructions '
- I
' Ease, of maintaneng '
l ' Thermal performance - Accessibility I
I — Sealing wall cavity - Compactness of distribution I
j i — Material thermal performance - Distribution of utility systems i
i I — Junctions energy loss — Utility core / structural core I
I I - Wall and roof - '— ' ‘ ‘ ' utilitv runs I
I - Wall and floor I
I - Subfloor energy loss I
i I

 

Inferences for integration between Str. Plum and Comm systems W

S atial flexibilit - Grid design to facilitate usage of prefabricated

- Movable walls and partitions for flexibility of usage cpmponents I, , i

- Design for "Use modules" (Wet cores / Dry cores / Utility cores) serve as structural cores ' Use modules Wh'Ch are dry cores, WGt cores, ”may
- Alternative framing materials for ease of handling cores _ . .

_ Use of movable storage units to define space — QSB strength redeSIgn for ease during construction
_ Design on a grid for flexibility With respect to placement of Windows

- Snap on / sliding walls

- Utility runs to be underthe floor structure to increase manouverability W

_ Structured wiring - Utility cores intergarte all utlities in one space such
that they are easy to maintain (I)
Thermal Performance — Easy access'of all utlities _1)
- Passive energy design / shading ' Structured Wiring . . .
_ Active energy design / use solar panels - Integration of electrical and communication systems Q)
is
E
_ Sealing junctions — HVAC distribution to be placed in the subfloor to is
- Better thermal performance through improved OSB design for framing walls facfltate ease 0f access (I)

I.
Structural integrity #Sustainable desi n
— Utility core sen/es as a structural core

- Design on a grid for integrity

- Use alternative framing vs. regular wooden stud walls

- OSB strength redesign to increase structural strength in both directions

- Active / Passive solar design
- Shading devices

- Daylighting techniques

- Window glazing design

- Greywater reuse

' - Waterless outlets

i- Rainwater harvesting

I - Junction sealent / gaskets

/ L _______________________ ‘

I
I
I
l
|
|
l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I _ Wall material thermal performance - Flexibility of placement of distribution systems
I
l
I
I
l I
l |
| |
| l
l |
I
I
I

i
I
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
I
I
I
- Glass composition for the windows to better the thermal performance through the use Of detacheable raceways I
I
l
I
I
I
i
i
I
I
I
I

 

 

 

Physical decisions for
Plum systems

 

981

   

 

 

 

Spatial flexibility
- Placement of distribution
system

- Wall distribution

— Floor distribution
- Design for vertical stacking of
wet cores
- Water less outlets

Thermal performance
- Loss of heat from heated

water during distribution
— Insulation of wiring

- Crawl space design

- Grey water resue

- Waterless outlets

- Reduction of water
consumption

- Rainwater harvesting

 

Spatial flexibility

- Design on a grid for flexibility
- Snap on / sliding walls

Thermal Performance

- Sealing junctions

Structural integrity

- Design on a grid for integrity

 

Physical decisions for
Plum systems

Structural Integrity
— Placement of distribution

system
- Utility core

Ease of construction
- Placement of equipment
- Ease of handling
- Space requirements
- Access
- Placement of distribution
system
- Ease of handling
- Oulets
- Distribution core
- Clarity of installation instructions

Ease of maintanence

- Accessibility

- Compactness of distribution
- Inteferences from other utility
systems

- Fixtures reliability

 

 

- Equipment reliability

 

 

 

Physical decisions for Int
A systems

Spatial flexibility
- Placement of distribution for

HVAC system

- Wall distribution

- Floor distribution
- Flexible distribution systems
such as raceways which may be
unclipped and placed as required
- Wireless systems
- Clip on outlets
- Partition walls to be moveable
- Raceways to serve as skirting
for walls

Thermal performance
- Sealing loss from distribution

systems

- Placement of distribution
systems in the crawl space to be
insulated

- Zoned heating and cooling to
allow for flexibility

 

 

Physical decisions for Int

A systems

Structural Integrity

— Design of partition wall layout
- Design on a grid

— Material / improved strength OSB

Ease of construction
— Placement of equipment
- Ease of handling
- Space requirements
- Access
- Placement of distribution system
— Ease of handling
- Oulets
- Distribution core
- Clarity of installation instructions

Ease of maintanence

- Accessibility
- Compactness of distribution

- Integration of communication wiring
- Integration with electrical systems

— Fixtures reliability
— Equipment reliability

 

 

Physical decisions for
Str systems

Physical decisions for
Str systems

 

- Selection of appropriate Str
system

- Building type

- Sizing of memebers

- Aesthetics
- Standardization of members
- Movability of partitions
- Handelability of members

- Size

- Weight

Thermal performance
- Sealing wall cavity
- Material thermal performance
- Junctions energy loss
- Wall and roof
- Wall and floor
- Subfloor energy loss

 

Structural Integrity
- Not applicable

Ease of construction

— Ease of handling

- Space requirements

- Access

- Handelability of members
- Size
- Weight

- Clarity of installation

instructions

Ease of maintanence

- Accessibility

- Compactness of distribution

- Distribution of utility systems
- Utility core / structural core
- Embedded utility runs

 

Inferences for integration between Str, Plum and Int A systems

- Movable walls and partitions for flexibility of usage
- Design for "Use modules" (Wet cores / Dry cores / Utility cores) serve as structural cores
- Alternative framing materials for ease of handling
- Use of movable storage units to define space

- Utility runs to be under the floor structure to increase manouverability

- Passive energy design / shading

- Active energy design / use solar panels
— Wall material thermal performance

- Glass composition forthe windows to better the thermal performance

- Better thermal performance through improved OSB design for framing walls

- Utility core serves as a structural core

- Use alternative framing vsi regular wooden stud walls
- OSB strength redesign to increase structural strength in both directions

 

 

 

Ease of construction
- Grid design to facilitate usage of prefabricated

components

cores

- OSB strength redesign for ease during construction

— "Use modules" which are dry cores, wet cores, utility

with respect to placement of windows

Ease of maintanence

- Utility cores intergarte all utlities in one space such

that they are easy to maintain

- Easy access of all utlities

- Flexibility of placement of distribution systems
through the use of detacheable raceways

~ Plumbing through vertical stacks and avoid horizontal

distribution

rSustainabIe design

- Energy Star appliances

- Active / Passive solar design
- Shading devices

— Daylighting techniques

— Window glazing design

- Greywater reuse
I - Waterless outlets

I - Rainwater harvesting
I - Junction sealent / gaskets

 

 

 

I95

Stra te

  

1 I III

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Physical decisions for Physical decisions for Physical decisions for Int Physical decisions for Int ‘5
[Plum systems Plum systems B systems B systems a,
Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity ‘I—J
- Placement ofdistribution — Placement ofdistribution system - Use of moveable storage units as — Not applicable 5
system - Utility core partitions .
- Wall distribution - Primary utility systems to be Ease of construction
— Floor distribution Ease of construction attached to structural walls - Open plans to facilitate ease in
- Design for vertical stacking - Placement of equipment - Roof mounted utilities to facilitate design and construciton
of wet cores — Ease of handling flexibility
- Water less outlets - Space requirements Ease of maintanence
— Access Thermal performance - Seperate furniture units which are
Thermal performance - Placement of distribution system - Flexible design for height of replaceable and moveable
- Loss of heat from heated - Ease of handling partitions so that they can be
water during distribution - Oulets lowered during summer time to I
- Insulation of wiring - Distribution core facilitte movement of air I
i—- - Crawl space design — Clarity of installation instructions I
03 — Grey water resue
- Waterless outlets Ease of maintanence . . , l
_ Reduction of water _ Accessibility Physical decisions for Phystcal dec13ions for I
consumption - Compactness of distribution Str systems Str systems I
- Rainwater harvesting - Inteferences from other utility systems Spatial flexibility Structural Integrit} I
' Fixtures reliability - Selection of appropriate Str - Not applicable I
I - Equipment reliability system I
I - Building type Ease of construction I
i — Sizing of memebers — Ease of handling I
I — Aesthetics - Space requirements i
I — Standardization of members - Access I
I - Movability of partitions — Handelability of members I
l I - Handelability of members - Size I
- Size - Weight I
l I - Weight - Clarity of installation instructions I
' Thermal performance Ease of maintanence I
l - Sealing wall cavity — Accessibility l
l - Material thermal performance - Compactness of distribution '
| - Junctions energy loss - Distribution of utility systems i
I — Wall and roof — Utility core / structural core l
I - Wall and floor - Embedded utility runs I
i - Subfloor energy loss - Replaceability of outlets I
' I
' i

 

Inferences for integration between Str. Plum and Int B systems Ease 0t construction
Spatial flexibility - Grid design to facilitate usage of prefabricated
- Movable walls and partitions for flexibility of usage components

- "Use modules" which are dry cores, wet cores, utility
cores
— OSB strength redesign for ease during construction

- Design for "Use modules“ (Wet cores / Dry cores / Utility cores) serve as structural cores
- Alternative framing materials for ease of handling

- Use of movable storage units to define space I
_ Design on a grid for flexibility With respect to placement of windows
- Snap on / sliding walls

- Utility runs to be under the floor structure to increase manouverability W

- Utility cores intergarte all utlities in one space such

Thermal Performance that they are easy to maintain U)
- Passive energy design / shading ' Easy access Of all utlities fl.)
_ Active energy design / use solar panels - Integration of electrical and communication systems ‘
_ Wall material thermal performance - Flexibility of placement of distribution systems 0,)
‘hl
E
- Better thermal performance through improved OSB design for framing walls faciltate ease 0f access 1.-
- Changeable heights for storage units to facilitate air movement ' Plumbing through vertical stacks and avoid horizontal U)
distribution
Structural integrity I_ __________________ _

- Utility core serves as a structural core ISustainflesyigp
- Design on a grid for integrity i ' Energy Star appliances
- Use alternative framing vs. regular wooden stud walls I ‘ Active / Passive solar design
— Shading devices
' - Daylighting techniques
'- Window glazing design
' - Greywater reuse
l - Waterless outlets
I - Rainwater harvesting
I - Junction sealent / gaskets

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
|
I
|
| - Glass composition for the windows to better the thermal performance ””0th the use Of detacheable raceways
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I — OSB strength redesign to increase structural strength in both directions
I
I
I
|
I

I
i
|
i
I
I
I
I
|
I
I
|
|
I

_ Sealing junctions - HVAC distribution to be placed in the subfloor to I
i
I
I
I
|
I
I
i
I
I
I
|
I

 

 

 

 

 

 

i1

_..I.. r Iatemcoaemuagmfm a; 6:2 : _ _

 

 

 

 

  
 
 

    
    

 
  
 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Physical decisions for Physical decisions for Physical decisions for Physical decisions for ‘IE
Elec systems Elec systems Comm systems Comm systems a,
Spatial flexibility Wilt): Spatial flexibility W H
_ Selection of appropriate Elec service system - Placement of equipment _ pIacemem of distribution system _ Piacemem / flexibilityof E
_ Building type ~ chemeantsof distribution system ‘ Wall distribution distribution system
Z/sxiezsrigetics - ufifiteyvcoyre - Floor distribution .
— Overhead / Underground - Flexible distribution systems W
‘ Clearence requred W such as raceways which may be — Placement of equipment
' PIEcemem Ofdismbmion SyStem ' figgsgffnéggiiuépmem unclipped and placed as required — Ease of handling
Iwiifg'niiidded - Space requirements - Distribution over existing - Space requirements
~ Utility core - A 885 electrical wiring - Access
' DUCtlng SYStem ‘ Placement 0f dismmtlo” “Stem - Wireless systems - Placement of distribution system
_ FleXibmty omsage ’ Ease 0f handlmg — Integrated wiring systems for - Ease of handling
- Placement of outlets - Oulets .
. capacity . Distribution core phone cable and Internet - Oulets
- Fire safety — Clarity of installation instructions - Distribution core
' Na‘ural light as 3” alternative . Thermal performance - Clarity of installation instructions
I_I Ease of maintanence _ Not applicable
00 Thermal performance - Accessrbility .
0° - Distance run for distribution system to - Compactness ofdistribution Ease Of maintanence
determine energy lost - Inteferences from other utility systems _ Accessibility
— Sealing building structure to avoid energy « Lighting fixtures reliability _ Compactness Of distribution
loss — EqUIpment reliability I I .
-Type ofwiring - Integration of communication
- Utility core to avoid dispersion of energy WIrlng
‘ EfieCllVeneSS (”lighting fiXlures — Integration with electrical systems
- Natural light as an alternative _ Fixtures reliability
- Lighting fixtures . . . .
I1 - EqUIpment reliability
I Physical decisions for Physical decisions for
i Str systems Str systems I
' Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity I
l - Selection of appropriate Str - Not applicable I
i system |
I - Building type Ease of construction '
I - Sizing of memebers — Ease of handling I
i i - Aesthetics - Space requirements I
‘I I - Standardization of members - Access I
l I - Movability of partitions - Handelability of members i
I — Handelability of members - Size I
I I - Size - Weight I
I I - Weight - Clarity of installation instructions I
l 1 Thermal performance Ease of maintanence :
I I - Sealing wall cavity - Accessibility I
'1 ' ‘ - Material tnermai pertormance — Compactness of distribution
3 l - Junctions energy loss - Distribution of utility systems '
I l - Wall and roof - Utility core / structural core I
I | - Wall and floor - Fmbedded utilitv runs l
i I - Subfloor energy loss '
I I
I I
I I
I I
i |
I l
I I
I I

 

Ease of construction

- Grid design to facilitate usage of prefabricated components
- "Use modules" which are dry cores, wet cores, utility cores
— OSB strength redesign for ease during construction with
respect to placement of windows

Spatial flexibility

- Movable walls and partitions for flexibility of usage

- Design for "Use modules" (Wet cores / Dry cores / Utility cores) serve as structural
cores

- Alternative framing materials for ease of handling

- Use of movable storage units to define space

- Design on a grid for flexibility

I

I

I

|

I
Ease of maintanence '
— Utility cores intergarte all utlities in one space such that they I
are easy to maintain I
I

I

I

I

I

i

i - Snap on / sliding walls , , U,
- Utility runs to be under the floor structure to increase manouverability ' Easy access Of all utlities . '9
- Integration of electrical and communication systems
- Flexibility of placement of distribution systems through the use Q)
— Passive energy design / shadin Of “Viewable raceways H
_ Active energy design / use solar panels - HVAC distribution to be placed in the subfloor to faciltate ease E
— Sealing junctions Of access 25

- Better thermal performance through improved OSB design for framing walls r' " —. """" . ————————————————— I
Sustainable deSIgn

- Energy Star appliances

— Active / Passive solar design

- Shading devices

I

Structural integrity I
I

- Daylighting techniques '

I

|

I

I

- Utility core serves as a structural core I
- Design on a grid for integrity i
- Use alternative framing vs. regular wooden stud walls .

- OSB strength redesign to increase structural strength in both directions I ' Window glazing design

' - Junction sealent / gaskets

I
l
l
I
I
I
i
l
I
I
' Thermal Performance
|
|
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

 

 

 

 

E;

 

68f

 

 

 

Physical decisions for
Elec systems

Spatial flexibility

- Selection of appropriate Elec service
system
- Building type
- Sizin
- Aesthetics
- Overhead / Underground
- Clearence required
- Placement of distribution system
- Raceways
- Wall embedded
- Utility core
- Ducting system
- Flexibility of usage
- Placement of outlets
- Capacity
- Fire safety
— Natural light as an alternative

Thermal performance

- Distance run for distribution system to
determine energy lost

- Sealing building structure to avoid
energy loss

Physical decisions for
Elec systems

Structural Integrity
- Placement of equipment

- Placement of distribution syste
- Raceways
- Utility core

Ease of construction
- Placement of equipment
- Ease of handling
- Space requirements
- Access
- Placement of distribution systerr
- Ease of handling
- Oulets
- Distribution core
- Clarity of installation instructions

Ease of maintanence

- Accessibility

- Compactness of distribution
- Inteferences from other utility
systems

- Lighting fixtures reliability

- Equipment reliability

 

 

 

Physical decisions for Int
A systems

Spatial flexibility
- Placement of distribution for

HVAC system

- Wall distribution

- Floor distribution
- Flexible distribution systems such
as raceways which may be
unclipped and placed as required
- Wireless systems
- Clip on outlets
- Partition walls to be moveable
- Raceways to serve as skirting for
walls

Thermal performance

- Sealing loss from distribution
systems

— Placement of distribution systems
in the crawl space to be insulated

- Zoned heating and cooling to
allow for flexibility

 

 

 

- Type of wiring

- Utility core to avoid dispersion of
energy

- Effectiveness of lighting fixtures
- Natural light as an alternative

 

- Lighting fixtures

 

 

 

Physical decisions for Int
A systems

Structural Inte rit
— Design of partition wall layout

- Design on a grid
— Material / improved strength OSB

Ease of construction
- Placement of equipment
— Ease of handling
- Space requirements
- Access
— Placement of distribution system
— Ease of handling
- Oulets
- Distribution core
— Clarity of installation instructions

Ease of maintanence

- Accessibility

- Compactness of distribution

- Integration of communication
wiring

- Integration with electrical system
- Fixtures reliability

— Equipment reliability

Intent

 

 

 

Physical decisions for
Str systems

Physical decisions for
Str systems

 

- Selection of appropriate Str
system

- Building type

- Sizing of memebers

- Aesthetics
- Standardization of members
- Movability of partitions
- Handelability of members

- Size

— Weight

Thermal performance
- Sealing wall cavity
— Material thermal performance
- Junctions energy loss
- Wall and roof
- Wall and floor
- Subfioor energy loss

 

Structural Integrity
- Not applicable

Ease of construction
- Ease of handling
- Space requirements
- Access
- Handelability of members
— Size
- Weight
— Clarity of installation instructions

Ease of maintanence

- Accessibility

— Compactness of distribution

- Distribution of utility systems
— Utility core / structural core
- Embedded utility runs

- Replaceability of outlets

 

 

 

 

 

Spatial flexibility

- Design on a grid for flexibility

— Snap on / sliding walls

Thermal Performance
- Passive energy design / shading

 

— Sealing junctions

- Insulation for wiring
- Utilty core to be insulated

Structural integrity
- Utility core serves as a structural core
- Design on a grid for integrity

 

Inferences for integration between Str, Elec and Int A systems
- Movable walls and partitions for flexibility of usage
- Design for "Use modules" (Wet cores / Dry cores / Utility cores) serve as structural cores

- Alternative framing materials for ease of handling
- Use of movable storage units to define space

- Utility runs to be under the floor structure to increase manouverability

- Active energy design / use solar panels

— Better thermal performance through improved OSB design for framing walls

— Use alternative framing vsi regular wooden stud walls
- OSB strength redesign to increase structural strength in both directions

Ease of construction

— Grid design to facmtate usage of prefabricated

components

cores

- OSB strength redesign for ease during construction
with respect to placement of windows

Ease of maintanence

- Utility cores intergarte all utlities in one space such
that they are easy to maintain

- Easy access of all utlities

- Integration of electrical and communication systems
- Flexibility of placement of distribution systems
through the use of detacheable raceways

- HVAC distribution to be placed in the subfloor to
faciltate ease of access

lSustainable design
I

|- Shading devices

|- Daylighting techniques
i - Window glazing design

- "Use modules" which are dry cores, wet cores, utility

- Energy Star appliances
l- Active / Passive solar design

 

 

l' Junction sealent / gaskets

_1

I98

Stra te

 

 

  
 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Physical decisions for Physical decisions for Physical decisions for Int Physical decisions for Int ‘O-I
Elec systems Elec systems B systems B systems g
Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity in
- Selection of appropriate Elec service - Placement of equipment - Use of moveable storage units — Not applicable 5
system - Placement of distribution system as partitions
- Building type — Raceways - Primary utility systems to be Ease of construction
- Sizing - Utility core attached to structural walls — Open plans to facilitate ease in
- Aesthetics - Roof mounted utilities to design and construciton
— Overhead / Underground Ease of construction facilitate flexibility
— Clearence required - Placement of equipment Ease of maintanence
- Placement of distribution system - Ease of handling Thermal performance - Seperate furniture units which are
- Raceways - Space requirements - Flexible design for height of replaceable and moveable
— Wall embedded — Access partitions so that they can be
- Utility core - Placement of distribution system lowered during summer time to I
[B - Ducting system - Ease of handling facilitte movement of air I
O - Flexibility of usage - Oulets
- Placement of outlets - Distribution core '
- Capacity - Clarity of installation instructions I
- Fire safety I
- Natural light as an alternative Ease of maintanence I
- Accessibility I
Thermal performance — Compactness of distribution I
- Distance run for distribution system - Inteferences from other utility i
to determine energy lost systems I
- Sealing building structure to avoid ~ Lighting fixtures reliability I
energy loss - Equipment reliability I
- Type of wiring I
' Utility COTE ‘0 avoid dispersion 0f Physical decisions for Physical decisions for I
energyI Str systems Str systems I
_ Effectiveness Of lighting fixtures Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity I
- atural light as an alternative . . t
_ Lighting fixtures - Selection of appropriate Str system - Not applicable I
- Butldlng type I
i I - Sizing of memebers Ease of construction I
I I - Aesthetics — Ease of handling I
t I — Standardization of members - Space requirements I
- Movability of partitions - Access
' - Handelability of members - Handelability of members '
I ' - Size — Size '
i I - Weight — Weight I
' I - Clarity of installation instructions I
I Thermal performance I
j I - Sealing wall cavity Ease of maintanence I
l I - Material thermal performance - Accessibility |
i - Junctions energy loss - Compactness of distribution i
I I - Wall and roof — Distribution of utility systems I
t I ~ Wall and floor - Utility core / structural core I
i I - Subfloor energy loss - Embedded utilitv runs I
I I
I I
I I
I l
I I

 

Inferences for integration between Str, Elec and Int B systems W
S atial flexibilit — Grid design to facilitate usage of prefabricated

- Movable walls and partitions for flexibility of usage components , ..
- Design for "Use modules" (Wet cores / Dry cores / Utility cores) serve as structural cores _ Use modules “mm are dry cores, wet cores, Ut'my
cores

- Alternative framing materials for ease of handling

- Use of movable storage units to define space

— Design on a grid for flexibility

— Snap on / sliding walls

- Utility runs to be under the floor structure to increase manouverability

- OSB strength redesign for ease during construction
with respect to placement of windows

Ease of maintanence

- Utility cores intergarte all utlities in one space such ‘0
Thermal Performance that they are easy to maintain .9
— Passive energy design / shading ' Easy access Of all utlities
_ Sealing junctions — Flexibility of placement of distribution systems 8
- Betterthermal performance through improved OSB design for framing walls through the [7'38 Of detacheable raceways E
- Changeable heights of storage units to facilitate air movement ‘ HVAC distribution to be placed in the subfloor to N
faciltate ease of access 0)

Structural integrity I‘— ————————————————— —‘
Sustainable design

- Utility core serves as a structural core
- Energy Star appliances

- Design on a grid for integrity A t' / P . I d t
- c we asswe so ar esrgn

I
- Use alternative framing vs. regular wooden stud walls i
- OSB strength redesign to increase structural strength in both directions I ' Shading devices
- Daylighting techniques
I - Window glazing design
I - Junction sealent / gaskets
I

I I
l |
I I
I |
I I
l I
I I
I I
I I
I |
I I
I - Active energy design / use solar panels — Integration of electrical and communication systems I
I |
I I
I I
I l
I I
I |
I |
I I
I I
|

. I

 

 

 

 

 

 

T61

 

Physical decisions for
Comm systems

Spatial flexibility
- Placement of distribution
system

- Wall distribution

- Floor distribution

be unclipped and placed as
required

- Distribution over existing
electrical wiring

- Wireless systems

phone cable and internet/
structured wiring

Thermal performance
— Not applicable

- Flexible distribution systems
such as raceways which may

- Integrated wiring systems for

Physical decisions for
Comm systems

Structural integrity
- Placement / flexibilityof distribution

system

Ease of construction
- Placement of equipment
- Ease of handling
- Space requirements
- Access
- Placement of distribution system
- Ease of handling
- Oulets
- Distribution core
- Clarity of installation instructions

Ease of maintanence
- Accessibility
- Compactness of distribution

 

 

- Integration of communication wiring
- Integration with electrical systems

- Fixtures reliability

- Equipment reliability

 

Physical decisions for Int
A systems

Spatial flexibility
- Placement of distribution for
HVAC system

— Wail distribution

- Floor distribution
- Flexible distribution systems such
as raceways which may be
unclipped and placed as required
- Wireless systems
- Clip on outlets
- Partition walls to be moveable
— Raceways to serve as skirting for
walls

Thermal performance

- Sealing loss from distribution
systems

- Placement of distribution systems
in the crawl space to be insulated

— Zoned heating and cooling to
allow for flexibility

 

 

 

 

 

Physical decisions for
Str systems

Physical decisions for
Str systems

 

 

Spatial flexibility
- Selection of appropriate Str

Thermal performance

- Sealing wall cavity

- Material thermal performance
- Junctions energy loss

system
— Building type Ease of construction
- Sizing of memebers - Ease of handling
- Aesthetics — Space requirements
- Standardization of members - Access
— Movability of partitions - Handelability of members
- Handelability of members - Size
— Size - Weight
- Weight - Clarity of installation instructions

- Wall and roof
- Wall and floor

Structural integrity
- Not applicable

Ease of maintanence

- Accessibility

- Compactness of distribution

— Distribution of utility systems
- Utility core / structural core
— Embedded utilitv runs

 

 

 

- Subfloor energy loss

 

 

Physical decisions for Int
A systems

Structural Integrity

— Design of partition wall layout

- Design on a grid

- Material / improved strength OSB

Ease of construction
- Placement of equipment
- Ease of handling
- Space requirements
- Access
- Placement of distribution system
- Ease of handling
- Oulets
- Distribution core
~ Clarity of installation instructions

Ease of maintanence

— Accessibility

— Compactness of distribution

- Integration of communication wiring
- Integration with electrical systems

- Fixtures reliability

- Equipment reliability

;
Intent

 

 

I Spatial flexibility

I - Snap on / sliding walls
- Raceways

Thermal Performance

- Sealing junctions

Structural integrity

 

I inferences for integration between Str, Comm and Int A systems

I - Movable walls and partitions for flexibility of usage
I - Design for "Use modules" (Wet cores / Dry cores / Utility cores) serve as structural cores
I - Alternative framing materials for ease of handling
I - Use of movable storage units to define space

I - Design on a grid for flexibility

I - Utility runs to be under the floor structure to increase manouverability

I - Passive energy design / shading
' - Active energy design / use solar panels

I
I - Betterthermal performance through improved OSB design for framing walls
I
I

- Utility core serves as a structural core

- Design on a grid for integrity

- Use of alternative framing vs. regular wooden stud walls
- OSB strength redesign to increase structural strength in both directions

Ease of construction
- Grid design to facilitate usage of prefabricated

components

cores

- “Use modules" which are dry cores, wet cores, utility

- OSB strength redesign for ease during construction
with respect to placement of windows

Ease of maintanence

— Utility cores intergarte all utlities in one space such
that they are easy to maintain

- Easy access of all utlities

- Integration of electrical and communication systems
- Flexibility of placement of distribution systems

through the use of detacheable raceways

f—Sustainabie design
— Energy Star appliances
- Active / Passive solar design

I - Shading devices

I - Daylighting techniques

I - Window glazing design

I - Junction sealent / gaskets

 

 

 

I95

Stra te

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Physical decisions for Physical decisions for Physical decisions for Int Physical decisions for Int ‘H
Comm systems Comm systems B systems B systems 5
Spatial flexibility Structural integrity Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity in
- Placement of distribution - Placement / flexibilityof distribution - Use of moveable storage units - Not applicable 5
system system as partitions
- Wail distribution - Primary utility systems to be Ease of construction
— Floor distribution Ease of construction attached to structural walls — Open plans to facilitate ease in
— Flexible distribution systems - Placement of equipment — Roof mounted utilities to deSIQn and construciton
such as raceways which may be - Ease of handling facilitate flexibility
unclipped and placed as required - Space requirements Ease of maintanence
- Distribution over existing - Access Thermal performance - Seperate furniture units which
I... electrical wiring - Placement of distribution system - Flexible design for height of are replaceable and moveable
S - Wireless systems - Ease of handling partitions so that they can be
- Integrated wiring systems for - Oulets lowered during summer time to
phone cable and internet - Distribution core facilitte movement of air
- Clarity of installation instructions
Thermal performance
- Not applicable Ease of maintanence
- Accessibility i
I - Compactness of distribution I
I - Integration of communication wiring I
I - integration with electrical systems I
I - Fixtures reliability I
I - Equipment reliability I
I Physical decisions for Physical decisions for '
: Str systems Str systems I
I Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity :
I - Selection of appropriate Str ~ Not applicable I
I system
I - Building type Ease of construction I
I - Sizing of memebers - Ease of handling '
- Aesthetics - Space requirements I
I - Standardization of members - Access '
I - Movability of partitions - Handelability of members I
I - Handelability of members - Size I
I - Size - Weight I
I — Weight — Clarity of installation instructions I
I I Thermal performance Ease of maintanence I
I - Sealing wall cavity — Accessibility I
I I - Material thermal performance — Compactness of distribution I
I - Junctions energy loss - Distribution of utility systems I
I I — Wall and roof — Utility core / structural core I
‘ I - Wall and floor ~ Embedded utility runs I
I - Subfloor energy loss - Changeable outlets I
| I
l I
I Inferences for integration between Str, Comm and Int B systems w . I
I Spatial flexibilit} - Grid deSIgn to faCIlltate usage of prefabricated I
I - Movable walls and partitions for flexibility of usage components .. . .I I
I - Design for “Use modules" (Wet cores / Dry cores / Utility cores) serve as structural cores ’ Use modules Wh'Ch are dry cores, wet cores, “t'l'ty I
- Alternative framing materials for ease of handling cores . .
' - Use of movable storage units to define space - OSB strength redesign for ease during construction '
I _ Design on a grid for flexibility with respect to placement of windows I
I - Snap on / sliding walls . I
I - Utility runs to be under the floor structure to increase manouverability W I . . '
I _ Raceways - Utility cores intergarte all utlities in one space such I
I that they are easy to maintain I
I Thermal Performance - Easy access of all utlities I U)
I Wt)“ / shading - Integration of electrical and communication systems I Q)
I _ Active energy design / use solar panels - Flexibility of placement of distribution systems I '~
I _ Sealing junctions through the use of detacheable raceways I
I - Better thermal performance through improved OSB design for framing walls ' HVAC distribution to be placed in the subfloor to I g
I faciltate ease of access I {U
I Structural integrity I— — ‘. — — — _ _____________ _ I h
I - Utility core serves as a structural core I W I U)
I - Design on a grid for integrity - Energy Star appliances .
I - Use alternative framing vs. regular wooden stud walls I ' ACIIV‘? / Passive solar deSIgn '
- OSB strength redesign to increase structural strength in both directions ' Shading deVIces I
| I — Daylighting techniques I
I I — Window glazing design I
| I - Junction sealent / gaskets I
l

 

 

 

 

 

€6T

 

 

 

Physical decisions for Int
8 systems

Physical decisions for Int
B systems

Physical decisions for Int
A systems

Physical decisions for Int
A systems

 

Structural Integrity
- Not applicable

Spatial flexibility
- Use of moveable storage units as

partitions

- Primary utility systems to be
attached to structural walls

- Roof mounted utilities to facilitate
flexibility

Ease of construction
- Open plans to facilitate ease in
design and construciton

Ease of maintanence
- Seperate furniture units which
are replaceable and moveable

Thermal performance

~ Flexible design for height of
partitions so that they can be
lowered during summer time to
facilitte movement of air walls

 

 

 

 

Physical decisions for
Str systems

Spatial flexibility

Physical decisions for
Str systems

Structural Integrity

systems

 

 

Spatial flexibility
- Placement of distribution for
HVAC system

- Wall distribution

- Floor distribution
- Flexible distribution systems
such as raceways which may be
unclipped and placed as required
- Wireless systems
- Clip on outlets
- Partition walls to be moveable
- Raceways to serve as skirting for

Thermal performance
- Sealing loss from distribution

- Placement of distribution
systems in the crawl space to be

Structural Integrity
- Design of partition wall layout

- Design on a grid

Ease of construction

- Placement of equipment
- Ease of handling
— Space requirements
— Access

- Ease of handling
- Oulets
- Distribution core

Ease of maintanence
- Accessibility
— Compactness of distribution

 

Ease of maintanence
- Accessibility

I
|
I
I
I
I
I
|
I
I
i
I
i
I
I
l
| Thermal performance
I - Sealing wall cavity
I - Material thermal performance — Compactness of distribution
I - Junctions energy loss - Distribution of utility systems
I - Wall and roof - Utility core / structural core
I - Wall and floor - utilitv runs
I - Subfloor energy loss
I
I
I
i
I
l
I
I
I
I
|
I

 

1.14.:

 

 

 

 

 

- Material / improved strength OSB

- Placement of distribution system

- Clarity of installation instructions

 

 

_ Selection of appropriate Str _ Not app|Icable inSUiated I I - Integration of communication
system - Zoned heating and cooling to wiring
_ Building type Ease of construction allow for flexibility — Integration with electrical
- Sizing of memebers - Ease of handling systems
- Aesthetics — Space requirements ' Fixtures reliability
- Standardization of members - Access - Equipment reliability
- Movability of partitions - Handelability of members
- Handelability of members - Size
- Size - Weight
- Weight - Clarity of installation instructions

 

Inferences for integration between Str, Int A and Int B systems

I Spatial flexibility

I - Movable walls and partitions for flexibility of usage

- Design for "Use modules" (Wet cores / Dry cores / Utility cores) serve as structural cores
- Alternative framing materials for ease of handling

- Use of movable storage units to define space

— Design on a grid for flexibility

- Snap on / sliding walls

- Utility runs to be under the floor structure to increase manouverability

i
I
I
i
I
I
i Thermal Performance

I - Passive energy design / shading

i - Active energy design / use solar panels

I - Wall material thermal performance

I - Glass composition for the windows to better the thermal performance

I -Sealing junctions

I - Betterthermal performance through improved OSB design for framing walls
1

I

Structural integrity

- Utility core serves as a structural core

- Design on a grid for integrity

- Use alternative framing vs. regular wooden stud walls

- OSB strength redesign to increase structural strength in both directions

 

i
i
i
i
i
|_

Ease of construction

— Grid design to facilitate usage of prefabricated
components

- "Use modules" which are dry cores, wet cores, utility
cores

- OSB strength redesign for ease during construction
with respect to placement of windows

Ease of maintanence

- Utility cores intergarte all utlities in one space such
that they are easy to maintain

- Easy access of all utlities

— Integration of electrical and communication systems
- Flexibility of placement of distribution systems
through the use of detacheable raceways

- HVAC distribution to be placed in the subfloor to
faciltate ease of access

rSustainable design

I — Energy Star appliances

I- Active / Passive solar design
I — Shading devices

|- Daylighting techniques

i- Window glazing design

i - Junction sealent / gaskets

 

 

Intent

res

Stra te

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Physical decisions for Physical decisions for Physical decisions for Physical decisions for H
Elec systems Elec systems Plum systems Plum systems 2
Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity M W 3
- Selection of appropriate Elec service system - Placement of equipment — Placement of — Placement of distribution 2
- Building type - Placement of distribution system distribution system system ‘
- Sizing - Raceways - Wall distribution - Utility core
- Aesthetics - Utility core - Floor distribution
- Overhead / Underground - Design for vertical Ease of construction
- Clearence required Ease of construction stacking of wet cores - Placement of equipment
— Placement of distribution system - Placement of equipment - Water less outlets — Ease of handling
- Raceways - Ease of handling - Space requirements
- Wall embedded - Space requirements Thermal performance - Access
- Utility core - Access - Loss of heat from - Placement of distribution
- Ducting system - Placement of distribution system heated water during system
I,‘ - Flexibility of usage — Ease of handling distribution — Ease of handling
‘0 - Placement of outlets - Oulets - Insulation of wiring - Oulets
— CapaCIty — Distribution core - Crawl space deSIgn — Distribution core
- Fire safety — Clarity of installation instructions — Grey water resue - Clarity of installation
— Natural light as an alternative - Waterless outlets instructions
Ease of maintanence - Reduction of water
Thermal performance - Accessibility consumption Ease of maintanence
- Distance run for distribution system to - Compactness of distribution — Rainwater harvesting — Accessibility
determine energy lost - Inteferences from other utility - Compactness of distribution
— Sealing building structure to avoid energy systems - Inteferences from other utility
loss - Lighting fixtures reliability systems
- Type of wiring - Equipment reliability - Fixtures reliability
- Utility core to avoid dispersion of energy - Equipment reliability
- Effectiveness of lighting fixtures
— Natural light as an alternative Physical decisions for Physical decisions for
— Lighting fixtures HVAC systems HVAC systems
I Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity
I - Selection of appropriate HVAC system - Selection of appropriate HVAC system
I - Building type — Building type
I - Sizing — Aesthetics
- Aesthetics - Space requirements
I — Noise and vibrations - Fire safety
i - Space requirements - Placement of equipment such as rooftops
- Passive Solar heating — Active Solar design

- Active solar heating
Ease of construction

 

 

i
|

i

I

i

I

I

I

I

i

I

I

- Human confort zone (db) 68-78F, RH 20-70% - Ease of handling I
in AA i
I

I

I

I

i

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

 

 

 

 

 

i
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I I W - Placement of equipment
I I -Sun control .c reduce solar heat gain ,’ shading . Space requirements
I (refer Bobenhausen 1994) — Access
i I - Heat loss due to building envelope (refer - Placement of distribution system
I l Bobenhausen 1994) - Ease of handling
I - Integrating Heating and ventilating requirements - Oulets
I (HRV) - Distribution core
I - Selection of appropriate HVAC system - Clarity of installation instructions
I - Building type
I - Climate Ease of maintanence
I - Heating requirements - Accessibility
I - Response time - Compactness of distribution
I - Reliability and maintainability - Inteferences from other utility systems
I - Passive solar heating
- Active solar heating
Y - Fuel requirements y

 

 

 

I Inferences for integration between HVAC, Plum and Elec systems _Ease 0f COI'ISIIUCIIOII i
1 Spatial flexibility - Grid design to facilitate usage of prefabricated I
| — Movable walls and partitions for flexibility of usage components I
I - Design for “Use modules" (Wet cores / Dry cores / Utility cores) serve as structural cores ' "Use modules" WhICh are dry cores, wet cores, UIIIIIV I
I - Design on a grid for flexibility cores I
I _ Snap on / sliding walls - OSB strength redesign for ease during construction with I
I - Rainwater harvesting through design respect I0 placement 0f Windows I
I - Grey water reuse design to be incorporated _Ease 0f maintanence U)
I Thermal Performance — Utility cores intergarte all utlities in one space such that I Q)
I - Passive energy design / shading they are easy to maintain I '~
I - Active energy design / use solar panels ' Easy access Of all Utilties I
_ Wall material thermal performance - Integration of electrical and communication systems i g
I - Glass composition for the windows to better the thermal performance ' Flexibility OI placement 0f distribution systems IhIOUQh the I (u
I - Sealing junctions use of detacheable raceways I k
I - Betterthermal performance through improved OSB design for framing walls ' HVAC distribution to be placed in the SUbIIOOI IO faciltate I (‘7)
I — Grey water reuse ease of access I
I Structural inte; rit — D_eta_ch_eaplepapel§ in_th_e s_ubfloo_r tgfagililatg apce_ss_ _ I
i - Utility core serves as a structural core I_Sustainable design I
I - Design on a grid for integrity I— Energy Star appliances - Greywater reuse I
l - Use alternative framing vs. regular wooden stud walls I' Active I Passive solar design ‘ Waterless outlets I
I - OSB strength redesign to increase structural strength in both directions I' Shading devices ' Rainwater harvesting
I i- Daylighting techniques - Junction sealent / gaskets I
i- Window olazino design I

 

 

ll

. N ~.s.....l..)(.\ .(..s((/V
9:ng ESQ

mEmzmxw EEOO mESmAm EEOO
50» 9.0.5wa .moixca so; m:0..m.5mo 363th

but mCO‘mequ smoxwxcn‘

   

i

 

 

 

 

..karkrsor... .r..: ..r: (:0

. CEC~U~¢U E:_&
”I .2 Season spasm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

% i

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Physical decisions for I Physical decisions for I I Physical decisions for Physical decisions for I...
Comm systems Comm systems Plum systems Plum systems 2
Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity Q)
- Placement of - Placement / flexibilityof distribution system - Placement of distribution system — Placement of distribution system E
distribution system - Wall distribution - Utility core \
- Wall distribution Ease of construction — Floor distribution
- Floor distribution - Placement of equipment - Design for vertical stacking of Ease of construction
- Flexible distribution - Ease of handling wet cores - Placement of equipment
systems such as - Space requirements - Water less outlets - Ease of handling
raceways which may be - Access - Space requirements
unclipped and placed as - Placement of distribution system Thermal performance - Access
required - Ease of handling - Loss of heat from heated water - Placement of distribution system
- Distribution over - Oulets during distribution - Ease of handling
existing electrical wiring - Distribution core - Insulation of wiring - Oulets
E - Wireless systems - Clarity of installation instructions - Crawl space design - Distribution core
U1 - Integrated wiring - Grey water resue - Clarity of installation instructions
systems for phone cable Ease of maintanence - Waterless outlets
and internet - Accessibility - Reduction of water consumption Ease of maintanence
- Compactness of distribution — Rainwater harvesting — Accessibility
Thermal performance - Integration of communication wiring - Compactness of distribution
- Not applicable - Integration with electrical systems - Inteferences from other utility
- Fixtures reliability systems
- Equipment reliability - Fixtures reliability
— Equipment reliability

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Physical decisions for Physical decisions for
HVAC systems HVAC systems
Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity
- Selection of appropriate HVAC system - Selection of appropriate HVAC system
- Building type - Building type
- Sizing - Aesthetics
- Aesthetics - Space requirements
— Noise and vibrations - Fire safety
— Space requirements - Placement of equipment such as rooftops
- Passive Solar heating - Active Solar design

I

i

I

i

l

i

I

|

I

- Active solar heating I
Ease of construction I
Thermal performance - Placement of equipment I
i

|

|

i

l

I

I

i

i

i

I

I

i

I

 

 

- Human contort zone (db) 68-78F, RH 20—70 % — Ease of handling
I - Sun control to reduce solar heat gain / shading (refer — Space requirements
i Bobenhausen 1994) - Access
— Heat loss due to building envelope (refer - Placement of distribution system
Bobenhausen 1994“ — Ease of handling
' i — Integrating Heating and ventilating requirements I — Oulets
I (HRV) — Distribution core
I - Selection of appropriate HVAC system — Clarity of installation instructions
I - Building type
I — Climate Ease of maintanence
I - Heating requirements — Accessibility
- Response time — Compactness of distribution
I - Reliability and maintainability - Inteferences from other utility systems
1
I

- Passive solar heating

- Active solar heating
- Fuel requirements Y

Inferences for integration between HVAC, Plum and Comm systems Ease Of construction
Spatial flexibility - Grid design to faCIlitate usage of prefabricated components
_ Movable walls and partitions for flexibility of usage - "Use modules" which are dry cores, wet cores, utility cores

— Design for "Use modules" (Wet cores / Dry cores / Utility cores) serve as structural ' OSB strength redesign IQI ease during construction WIIII
respect to placement of Windows

 

 

 

 

cores

- Design on a grid for flexibility I (I)

- Snap on / sliding walls Ease of maintanence ,, I q,

_ Rainwater harvesting through design — Utility cores intergarte all utlities in one space such that they are '~

- Grey water reuse design to be incorporated easy I0 maintain I I Q)

— Structured wiring and Raceways - Easy accessIof all utlities N
— Structured wrring ('3

Thermal Performance — Integration of electrical and communication systems ‘5

- Active energy design / use solar panels of detacheable raceways I

_ Wall material thermal performance - HVAC distribution to be placed in the subfloor to faCIItate ease

- Glass composition for the windows to better the thermal performance 0f access

- Sealing junctions — Detacheable panels in the subfloor for ease of access

- Better thermal performance through improved OSB design for framing waiis I— _____________________ _

Sustainable design
- Energy Star appliances
- Active / Passive solar design - Greywater reuse

- Grey water reuse

l
I
I
I
I
I
l
|
I
l
|
l - Passive energy design / shading - Flexibility of placement of distribution systems through the use
|
I
I
I
|
I
I Structural integrity
I
l
i

- Utility core serves as a structural core - Shading devices - Waterless OUtIeIs I
- Design on a grid for integrity - Daylighting techniques - Rainwater harvesting
- Use alternative framing vs. regular wooden stud walls ' Window glazing design ‘ Junction sealent I QaSkPIS

— OSB strength redesign to increase structural strength in both directions

 

 

 

 

co. m:0.m.o®b._mo.m>:m _

 

so. m:O.m.o®U 50.65:”. §

.iilii I

~i

LC‘ ”ccmam‘CT ..l l .. i

I. - .,

 

Physical decisions for

Elec systems

Structural Integrity Spatial flexibility

- Placement of equipment — Selection of appropriate Elec service
— Placement of distribution system system

Elec systems

Physical decisions for Physical decisions for
Comm systems Comm systems

I / Physical decisions for

 

Structural Integrity
- Placement / flexibilityof
distribution system

Spatial flexibility
- Placement of distribution system
- Wall distribution

Intent

— Floor distribution - Raceways - BuiIding type
— Flexible distribution systems such Ease of construction - Utility core - Sizmg .
as raceways which may be - Placement of equipment — Aesthetics

- Overhead / Underground
- Clearence required
- Placement of distribution system

unclipped and placed as required
- Distribution over existing electrical
wiring

- Ease of handling
- Space requirements
— Access

Ease of construction
- Placement of equipment
- Ease of handling

— Wireless systems - Placement of distribution system - Space requirements — Raceways
- Integrated wiring systems for — Ease of handling - Access — Wall embedded
phone cable and internet - Oulets - Placement of distribution system — Utility core

- Distribution core — Ease of handling — Ducting system

 

 

I_.
‘0? Thermal performance - Clarity of installation instructions — Oulets — Flexibility of usage
- Not applicable - Distribution core — Placement of outlets
Ease of maintanence - Clarity of installation instructions — Capacity
- Accessibility — Fire safety

- Compactness of distribution

- Integration of communication
wiring

- Integration with electrical systems
— Fixtures reliability

- Equipment reliability

Ease of maintanence

- Accessibility

- Compactness of distribution
- Inteferences from other utility
systems

— Lighting fixtures reliability

— Equipment reliability

— Natural light as an alternative

Thermal performance

- Distance run for distribution system
to determine energy lost

- Sealing building structure to avoid
energy loss

- Type of wiring

— Utility core to avoid dispersion of

 

 

 

 

 

 

Physical decisions for

 

HVAC systems

 

Spatial flexibility
- Selection of appropriate HVAC system
- Building type

- Passive Solar heating
- Active solar heating

Thermal performance
- Human confort zone (db) 68-78F, RH 20-700/0
- Sun control to reduce solar heat gain / shading
(refer Bobenhausen 1994)
- I Ieat loss due to building cnvclepc {refer
Bobenhausen 1994)
- Integrating Heating and ventilating requirements
(HRV)
- Selection of appropriate HVAC system

- Building type

- Climate

- Heating requirements

~ Response time

- Reliability and maintainability
- Passive solar heating

Physical decisions for
HVAC systems

 

— Sizing — Building type

- Aesthetics - Aesthetics

- Noise and vibrations — Space requirements
- Space requirements - Fire safety

I - Placement of distribution system

Structural Integrity
— Selection of appropriate HVAC system

- Placement of equipment such as rooftops
- Active Solar design

Ease of construction

- Placement of equipment
- Ease of handling
- Space requirements
— Access

 

— Ease of handling
- Oulets
— Distribution core
- Clarity of installation instructions

Ease of maintanence

— Accessibility

- Compactness of distribution

— Inteferences from other utility systems

 

 

 

energy
— Effectiveness of lighting fixtures
- Natural light as an alternative

- Lighting fixtures

 

 

- Active solar heating

 

 

 

 

Inferences for integration between HVAC, Elec and Comm systems

Spatial flexibility

- Movable walls and partitions for flexibility of usage

- Design for "Use modules" (Wet cores / Dry cores / Utility cores) serve as structural cores
— Design on a grid for flexibility

- Snap on / sliding walls

— Rainwater harvesting through design

- Sealing junctions

- Better thermal performance through improved OSB design for framing walls
- Grey water reuse

- Insulation of utility stack

Structural integrity

- Utility core serves as a structural core

- Design on a grid for integrity

- Use of alternative framing vs. regular wooden stud walls

- OSB strength redesign to increase structural strength in both directions

 

I- Junction sealent / gaskets

Ease of construction

- Grid design to facilitate usage of prefabricated
components

- "Use modules" which are dry cores, wet cores, utility
cores

- OSB strength redesign for ease during construction
with respect to placement of windows

through the use of detacheable raceways

- HVAC distribution to be placed in the subfloor to
r_fac_ilta_te page pf a_ccgss_ ___________
Sustainable design

I .

I- Energy Star appliances

— Active / Passive solar design

I- Shading devices

I— Daylighting techniques

I- Window glazing design

 

 

- Grey water reuse design to be incorporated Ease of maintanence <8
- Structured wiring and Raceways — Utility cores intergarte all utlities in one space such "
Thermal Performance that they are easy to maintain

- Passive energy design / shading - Easy access of all utlities 8
- Active energy design / use solar panels - Structured Wiring (3
— Wall material thermal performance - Integration of electrical and communication systems ‘5
- Glass composition for the windows to better the thermal performance ' FIBXIbIIIIY 0f placement 0f dISIrIbUIIOFI systems (I)

 

_’ OEC...!.£ flu OEQ‘Usau a UEQ‘UEO q LEQ§O§O —\
_ E. .0. mcofifioc _mo.m>c& ~ E. ‘0. wcoifiou 505le \ K .5 c9 mco‘m‘omb 82¢.le \ 2: cox 2&0meme 59%;.st

 

 

L61

 

Physical decisions for Int
A systems

Spatial flexibility
- Placement of distribution for

HVAC system

- Wall distribution

- Floor distribution
- Flexible distribution systems
such as raceways which may be
unclipped and placed as required
- Wireless systems
- Clip on outlets
- Partition walls to be moveable
- Raceways to serve as skirting
for walls

Thermal performance

— Sealing loss from distribution
systems

— Placement of distribution
systems in the crawl space to be
insulated

- Zoned heating and cooling to

 

allow for flexibility

Physical decisions for Int Physical decisions for Int
A systems B systems

Structural Integrity
- Design of partition wall layout

- Design on a grid
- Material / improved strength OSB

Ease of construction
- Placement of equipment
- Ease of handling
- Space requirements
- Access
- Placement of distribution system
- Ease of handling
— Oulets
- Distribution core
- Clarity of installation instructions

Ease of maintanence

- Accessibility

- Compactness of distribution

- Integration of communication wiring
- Integration with electrical systems
- Fixtures reliability

 

 

- Equipment reliability

 

Spatial flexibility
— Use of moveable

storage units as
partitions

- Primary utility systems
to be attached to
structural walls

- Roof mounted utilities
to facilitate flexibility

Thermal erformance
- Flexible design for

height of partitions so
that they can be lowered
during summer time to
facilitte movement of air

Physical decisions for Int
B systems

— Not applicable

Ease of construction
— Open plans to facilitate ease in
design and construciton

Ease of maintanence

- Seperate furniture units which are
replaceable and moveable

 

 

 

 

 

 

Physical decisions for
HVAC systems

Physical decisions for
HVAC systems

 

Spatial flexibility
— Selection of appropriate HVAC system

Structural Integrity

- Selection of appropriate HVAC system

i - Building type - Building type

- Sizing — Aesthetics
( - Aesthetics - Space requirements
i - Noise and vibrations - Fire safety

- Space requirements
- Passive Solar heating
- Active solar heating

Thermal performance
- Human contort zone (db) 68—78F. RH
20-70%
- Sun control to reduce solar heat gain /
Siiadii‘tg (refer Bobenhausen i994)
- Heat loss due to building envelope
(refer Bobenhausen 1994)
- Integrating Heating and ventilating
requirements (HRV)
- Selection of appropriate HVAC system
- Building type
- Climate
- Heating requirements
- Response time
- Reliability and maintainability
- Passive solar heating
- Active solar heating

 

 

 

- Fuel requirements

- Placement of equipment such as

rooftops
- Active Solar design

Ease of construction

- Placement of equipment

— Ease of handling
- Space requirements

- Roots:

— Placement of distribution system

- Ease of handling
- Oulets
- Distribution core

- Clarity of installation instructions

Ease of maintanence
- Accessibility

- Compactness of distribution
- Inteferences from other utility systems

 

 

 

 

 

 

Spatial flexibility

- Design on a grid for flexibility
- Snap on / sliding walls

Inferences for integration between HVAC, Int A and Int B systems

- Movable walls and partitions for flexibility of usage
— Design for "Use modules" (Wet cores / Dry cores / Utility cores) serve as structural cores

Ease of construction
- Grid design to facilitate usage of prefabricated

components
- "Use modules“ which are dry cores, wet cores. utility

cores

- OSB strength redesign for ease during construction

Intent

- Rainwater harvesting through design with respect to placement of windows U)
Ease of maintanence 0)
Thermal Performance - Utility cores intergarte all utlities in one space such -~
- Passive energy design / shading that they are easy to maintain
- Active energy design / use solar panels ' Easy access Of all utlities 8
_ Wall material thermal performance - Integration of electrical and communication systems CU
- Glass composition forthe windows to better the thermal performance ' Flexibility 0f placement Of distribution systems if,
- Sealing junctions through the use of detacheable raceways (I)

- HVAC distribution to be placed in the subfloor to
faciltate ease of access

Structural integrity r—__g__SJstaflna_ble_dESI_n _____________
- Utility core serves as a structural core i' Energy Star appliances

_ Design on a grid for integrity |- Active / Passive solar design

- Betterthermal performance through improved OSB design for framing walls

- Use alternative framing vs. regular wooden stud walls " Shading devices

I - Daylighting techniques

|- Window glazing design

,- Junction sealent / gaskets

- OSB strength redesign to increase structural strength in both directions

 

 

 

 

 

   
 
     
 
  

  
 
 

    
  

   

  
   
  

 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Physical decisions for Physical decisions for Physical decisions for Physical decisions for H
Plum systems Plum systems Elec systems Elec systems 5
Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity Spatial flexibility Structural Integrity ‘l—I
- Placement of distribution system - Placement of distribution system - Selection of appropriate Elec service - Placement of equipment 5
- Wall distribution - Utility core system — Placement of distribution system
- Floor distribution — Building type - Raceways
- Design for vertical stacking of wet Ease of construction - Sizing - Utility core
cores - Placement of equipment - Aesthetics
— ater less outlets - Ease of handling - Overhead / Underground Ease of construction
- Space requirements — Clearence required - Placement of equipment
Thermal performance - Access — Placement of distribution system - Ease of handling
- Loss of heat from heated water - Placement of distribution system - Raceways ~ Space requirements
during distribution - Ease of handling - Wall embedded - Access
- Insulation of wiring - Oulets - Utility core — Placement of distribution system
- Crawl space design - Distribution core — Ducting system — Ease of handling
- Grey water resue - Clarity of installation instructions - Flexibility of usage — Oulets
H - Waterless outlets — Placement of outlets — Distribution core
KO - Reduction of water consumption Ease of maintanence — Capacity - Clarity of installation instructions
0° - Rainwater harvesting - Accessibility — Fire safety
- Compactness of distribution - Natural light as an alternative Ease of maintanence
- Inteferences from other utility — Accessibility
systems Thermal performance — Compactness of distribution
- Fixtures reliability - Distance run for distribution system to - Inteferences from other utility
- Equipment reliability determine energy lost systems
— Sealing building structure to avoid - Lighting fixtures reliability
energy loss - Equipment reliability
Physical decisions for - Type of wiring
I Comm systems - Utility core to avoid dispersion of
Spatial flexibility Physical decisions for energy. ‘ .
1 _ Placement of distribution Comm systems - Effectiveness of lighting fixtures
i system - Natural light as an alternative
_ Floor distribution - Placement / flexibilityof distribution

- Flexible distribution System

systems such as raceways
which may be unclipped
and placed as required

- Distribution over existing
electrical wiring

- Wireless systems

- Integrated wiring systems
‘, for phone cable and interne

Ease of construction
- Placement of equipment
- Ease of handling
- Space requirements
- Access
- Placement of distribution system
- Ease of handling
- Oulets
- Distribution core
- Clarity of installation instructions

 

 

 

|

I

I

I

I

I

I

|

I

I I
. - Wall distribution Strucma' ”“9 ”t - Lighting fixtures
I

I

I

I

|

I

|

I

I

Thermal performance
- Not applicable

 

Ease of maintanence

- Accessibility

- Compactness of distribution

- Integration of communication wiring
— Integration with electrical systems

- Fixtures reliability

Y — Equipment reliability Y

 

 

 

 

— Utility core serves as a structural core

- Design on a grid for integrity

- Use alternative framing vs. regular wooden stud walls

— OSB strength redesign to increase structural strength in both directions

- Energy Star appliances

- Active / Passive solar design
- Shading devices

- Daylighting techniques

- Window glazing design

- Greywater reuse

- Waterless outlets

- Rainwater harvesting

- Junction sealent / gaskets

i Inferences for integration between Plum, Elec and Comm systems Ease 0f construction |
1 Spatial flexibility - Grid design to facilitate usage of prefabricated components I
I — Movable walls and partitions for flexibility of usage - "Use modules“ which are dry cores, wet cores, utility cores 1
l - Design for “Use modules" (Wet cores / Dry cores / Utility cores) serve as structural ' OSB strength redesign for ease during COTTSVUCTIOFI With respect
1 cores to placement of windows '
l - Alternative framing materials for ease of handling I
I — Use of movable storage units to define space Ease 0f maintanence '
I - Design on a grid for flexibility - Utility cores intergarte all utlities in one space such that they are '

- Snap on / sliding walls easy to maintain i
I - Utility runs to be underthe floor structure to increase manouverability ' Easy access Of all utlities i U)
| - Integration of electrical and communication systems I Q)
I Thermal Performance — Flexibility of placement of distribution systems through the use 0 i l‘
l - Better thermal performance through improved OSB design for framing walls detacheable raceways l q,
l _ Grey water reuse - HVAC distribution to be placed in the subfloor to faciltate ease o I ‘hl
I - Insulation of utility stack access I (U
I r— ——————————————————————— I h
i Structural integrity Sustainable design (I)
I
I
I
I
I
I
|
i

 

 

 

 

ilI‘

Appendix C]

(View as joined at A-B-C-D)

199

95:53.8. _o....— a

 

 

 

smug 5‘? a

 

 

 

Eugenia 5:3 38%

 

 

 

an... uۤe=m

 

 

 

.98.. 338.25,,

:]—~ n

 

 

 

Iguana—5:

5.55.5.2.
£30 .2 as...

 

 

 

3%.? 5.3.. 23..., ..

 

 

 

.25.. 99.96 .

 

 

 

8.33.250 5.8.. 28% n

 

 

 

5.3.. BEEN. N

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. t L a
5.8.. 15.8.2.5. _

 

 

 

U<>l 4A

..8 33 Ea... ..

 

 

 

..mfiov 58 3.53., -

 

 

 

8.3398 5.3. 38%

200

 

 

.58.. marks—Ea

 

 

Ens .

 

 

 

fl—Nn

only»;

:8 a.3 En: a

 

 

 

:33“. .23 253. u

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.55.38 5.8.. 38% n
5.8.. 9.5%.". N
“111 . L a _
9.82:5 H
.32.. ..38 bras... 3.53:2. 3:55..
.aezcias .583
no an.— »e a Esta—ram 15.. u. .—
2. 3.. m a 9.3.3. ..z
«:85

 

l£

 

 

 

. .i “a
I? .

... .

..

 

 

..u . in

I.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

taste:

 

a:

 

.. Ts

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.8... 4......— 42.8 true...— ooeuE.e._.& 3:330: .98.. .EEE 42.3 e brie...— ouunE.£.& @555:
sans-:5 .9 Sam .9 Sum 1.53.5 1.52:. 33% 03-5835 .3 8am . u 3.5.5.5 3.52:. 3.3m
.i . . . Larsen. . .. . . . a _<

 

201

 

Pugh—é

5.8—. can... 03.on a

 

8.28.2.8 .58.. 38....

 

 

.98.. 9.5.9...

 

 

 

Ian-l),
£4.11 .

 

Ila-N m

3 25c 5......—

acoEBEco. 3.25 a

 

5.83.38 an... 38%

 

5.53 mam—nonmmnm

 

5.8.. 328.25.

U~Nn

 

2 3:: 3.5....

5.86 93:58.: a

202

 

 

 

8:5.28 5..w... 1.8%

 

 

 

 

:-

 

 

h—N m

. 1 . .
5.8.. 15832.3:

 

 

L

5.85233. 3.25 n

 

5.923.309 canon Exam

 

 

. 1 . . I

 

 

.98.. .

 

 

Ihl[~ N n

. .338...
.8. 2...... .33 t a. 85.5.... =31...
sfiaiam .e a... .e a... 1.33.8 1E2: .515 3.3.2.238 5.3.. . .ez

 

..
=5... 2.3 35......

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.8: ..EuE 42.3 _. E- SEES: 5.2:: auto: ..:_uE 53 e 8.- av...— oufiE..¢. :31»:
933.325 .9 «am 3 Sum 7.3.5.5 ..E.o._.~ 32an 032-525 .3 enum— .. a n.— _...:.u...=m .15.!— h 3.3m
3.9.1.: _u:e_nu£e..— \ 39:53. c2353....— uo_uo.n..m 035:”.—

 

 

 

203

Appendix C2

(yiew as ioined at E-F—G—H-I-J-K—L)

204

     

 

   

 

      
    

  
    

  

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

         
 

 

  

   

    

 

 

 

 

   

      

    

    

   

 

 

x .5 ..i . a
383mb.—
mafiwzgmuo SD
2... .98 39.029...
«03 5 59—55 . v — . m D
.. carat—.05 .,
A 9382.32 .. gown”. aw”... m 5.8.338 93.3. a
45:... 3Q.— o>...w.uBE , , , u i. D Mi
. . , nouauvmmnooII
e..u.........2.m .
. 2:205:13?
.555... ..<..
. ma...»..........5,,
=53w55 ., , ,... M W.“ 5...: ,. .,
BEES... , «53.5 . , 5.8—. , ” amide watoonmmum N
o 05 V ..o 5:5.on _ 28 28.8.2... 3.362 , H ,i
u i .. . . moo—ho 8.3.635 ,.
3.2.333... W. 2.38%.... ..MMHMM 85.5.... . 88...... M 5.9.. 3562...... .
. . . . $3882 .25... 3.3.2 2:38.55 .. . .
>5.— .u.=8=..m <
.28.. , 4 . 33...: 85.5.8.2. 2.3.5.. assesses
03:53.5 .9 8am— ,, ,1. 1.32:5 7.52:. 3.25 :23“: .92
2.85., . ,. 2:8»? 9.5:...—

 

 

 

205

 

 

 

 

.::.:

f ,
and 00m .03..

   
  

 

 

 

: z» . 4. L ‘

 

00030: mica...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SEO ..0 3:03.03... \ 000.250. :0:-3.8:.

 

 

 

 

2.0.9? 3.3»: 03.30.30
36..” 00m :93:
.03.. 3:205 .
0033-05 w::..m= .5
00.. ”MW...” :0 . $1..“ :0 . 3.6.“ 0.000... 30:50.3
. u N o m c v N o m u :5. Sta... .0. .8. .38 20:2. 3.3..
300% .0.—.03. .36. 00m 50.. ..o.m 00m .0.“... .98 . w. .3
E .503 3m: .93: ..._cm .550: .28 . v 3 ._ D
30803:.
9d 00.. ..u .953.
.0."... mE0.m>m “MNMMHNM
“00.200352: .3 20.. 0..
0... 5. .....
mm w:..>.0m
0.03:9: 0ma.o.m
r< H «- 1i!— 1 N.
000 5.0.. 5.2.0... wE. wwwwwou
MEEM: .32 . c ._ Q
3N BESS: m 0:.... £05... 0.8
02:09.0 00m .03.. 00:39.0 3.; gum—3:. 02:09.0 :0 E 003...... 5.35 03.32.00 mco..u::.nb_=5 0:: 0.00
:wfi0a 3.03%.. :0... :mfi0fl 200.0% .0333. :wiofl =0 MEEEBE .0 : .EB :33: mic—:3 w:=u0w .03 .050 g
60.2550... 0.8 .055 c : Sm ..0:.... 3.0 - 8.36.: 0.5
Fred 8.. AYN $4.2m cg 00m Edd 00m
.0.“... .0.—.03.: 00m .03.. 00... .03.. 8.0.. 2.0.0.? .30.. £3.20... 3.9.09.0 .0.—.03.: :: ”WWW...“ 22.0.52: 20...... mmwm. 3W5...” :98:
E0250, 0.503% :0... 9:03.? 8.200.308 mEEM... :w.m0D E038 00.0.33. . .S. E 9.05 :o :26 3 .: .0:... .0033 2.0
0 0.30 00 ..:..E0. .. a 0. 0>....:..0 . =0 wig—M03. . . 0.8 E8... .
v . a . I. m u. .. I .. . ..< 0.8 .955
:ufiou 4:3... 02.8 5.50.... 00:05.83.— b=3_..0= 5.00.. 4:3... 3:00 5.38:. 00...=:.£.0._ 3:310:
03-5525 3 03m .0 000m .0.—505.3 _-E.0._._. 32%—m 0305325 .3 000m 3 00.0”.— .u.50:..m 3.52:. 3..an

 

.0. 0.3% 0. Esau

 

 

206

 

 

     

 

 

 

       

958.. V . 53m?
. no.5 08
..— 2558 .5.“ nova—Ea. :98.“ unsung a
2min... mo 83 mo “5:583 . .
22... Etc 865 a

. , ..g, gang—«mo omD ,‘

 

 

 

 

 
    

955:3.
.5.— na 3:03 ‘
25 mag»:

  

 

 

      

2:9— 05 .
ESE 380.8» .m.
=8; .3 33M

, 0358a ,.
a . an S 88%.? V
, engaged M.,

  

 

mEBmxm ,
couanfiflv .,
, vs 2.5% fl
. 52533 ..8 .

3:25:32 .V

33m w

    

335 .«o 32

. . , . H :98 wagon—w
Ecouusvox . macaw—vow: , . v . .5

 

585m: . u.

 

=29: . true...— 8553:2—
uEnESnam . . , . .232...“ 1.52:.

cafioo
Emu“. 1:38.302
U< .
Augufiavfiaoo
5.83
2:82? age—man

 

 

 

what

 

 

     

2.3:...
:52...“

    

 

       

 

 

 

207

 

0.00 DE...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

00.0.2.3 .-:0.n3.0... \ 30....03. 00.0.5.0...—

 

 

 

 

0m. 0 9.0 miss... 3030.0 3.60.... .0.... .00—3.;
09.598 $.30 .... 03.0.0... 030000.00. 5.3 0......» .0000...
. ..maon. . . .
. ..0 on: $0.500 090‘. 0.. 0. E20...“
00.30.55
.0.: EMMMM .00..
..0:.0 Ned .0.... .0.... .0..“ .0.... N e m 0.... 3.2.0 .a.0w 3.000 3.0m 3.0.... .28
. o m 000 5.0.. 00m 3.0.. . o m 00m 5.0..
:93“. .0.0m cwfiov 5.0m 5.3.0 3.0m
. . . 5...; 00m
“My”. ”WWW.” .0..0.. $.30 w....000 .0.... m:..000 0....
. U<>= 9.8.0.. 00:0N $500.. 00=0N
U<>.. 00:0N 00:0N
.0....0... m:.~.=0m.00.
03.398 2......” 00.. 02:09. 0 000.0030 9.50.6 00m: .0.. 30:0
5.3 .0.... 0.0... .80.. .0.0.....0> ..w. E. E 30...... 0 .x0 0.. 0. E0703 0. .00... .0 .00.
. Q b0>000. .00.. .30 :0 usage... 3. .n. b03000. .00... ..w..0.... 529$
0.00 >52. 00......Em5,
.. m A . . 000 .0 0.. 0 0:00.09. 0.00 >53:
t. 02:09.0 02:09.0 . v m .. 02009.0 $50.... 30:00.3... m...0E0......0. . . 0.00 .00 .0.00
950.00... \ .0.... 3.0... 0 . 09¢ U<>... :0_.0:=_.w=..00w . 7.0:. 9:20.?
. . $.30 5.30 cw.3n. V . . 0.0.0.0.... 0. DEC .50. 50.300 .03 - 5.3..
30.9% .0....3. . 0.2.00.9? . 003.. .033 .
. 28 0......
$0..
N 2... 5.5.6 ..3 0:00 0.0.0.00 SEE: .000... 005.00.. 0.50.93 .0.... 3.7.5.020... .0...
$.30 40...... 02.00 ~3.30.... 00:08.83; 5:310... 5.3.. 00.0.... 42.00 bras... 00:05.0 .0.. ~9......3c
.—
0305505 ..0 03”.. ..0 03m 1.0.00.5 .252... .0325 03.....825 .0 03m ..0 03m. 1.30....m 3.0.0.; .0325

 

330.3% 0.0.0:”.—

 

 

.1

208

 

   

 

 

 

    

 

      

 

    

 

 

      

     

      

   

     

  

 

.3006... , .
0000.000.» €000.03... 0
3055.02.00 , b.3000... .000...
, .32 33.02
0.8 25.2....
_ 0 , 32... 83:03. 0
3.0.02.0.
052.3 590,. x
0.8 05.859
50.0% ,,
503...“... _ ,
.0 0......qu N
$.80 ._ 050... 02.8 .. V 3.08... 0:.-ESE. $.33: 750200.28
0.0.0.505 .0 03H .0 03“.. H .u....0....m .352... 3.2—m 5.3:. .07.
., ; ‘ 2.8.... .,_. 3.8%. 00.2....—

 
 

 

 

 

209

. 0.....me

“Mint

a) “3.30.143 V

       

 

v ‘ . n 0. . .. . kMfl mfg \....u .‘T...%
u... .3 .. . tum“... 3“. 1.03....
. . a... .2». . .. 0-
r .7 1:2... .u

.0... ..

20.1.0310... nix.

 

      

 

 

 

 

080:0...
..0 0.30. 5.00..
00.5000 3.000. 0.300002. 0....
00.0.0 00.00>
000000 0...... 050.000
.0.. 00.00.00... 00.03.00...
=2. 000.00 ..0 00.00.00...
.0.. 2.5 .25 0.00.003.
0.50 950.00... 000.80....
23.30 .253. 052.3 05.80

2......“ 000 000.. 0.50....

8.0.. .8050? on 0. 80.0.0 0 0.0 0.00
D0300. .00.. E3000. .00: .0. c .. D
5.00.. .0.—.0:. .00—.00 b.5000. 00:05.0...2. 350.00.. 5.00.. 00.0... .00—.00 b.5000. 0003.00.00 .00.—3.00...
0.000.505 ..0 000m. .0 000m .0.—50....5 .0:—.0:... .0325 0300.805 ..0 00am ..0 000m .0....0005m .0:—.0.... .0625

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

00.0.0000 1.3.08.0..— . 000.5000. 00:05.0...—

 

00.w895m 0......an

 

 

210

   

2..

 

 

 

 

 

  

  

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

  

 

agawfifism a
83:3»? >20 acuagoufiazr a
..ouEuEmnou
swifsuam m
83.5.... .
.85an
32.60“ .V
8:: V
55.3 ggfiw 5:353“. ,
.8: we 8.6 8.593.
38:38..
,. V. 2. v .. Em... ”ataxia N
.. 3235:263— Smeousa .. .
,m 5.8.. 35.03.52 .
,V : 9.35....— u
:28: , brunt: 095E312. 3.3.5: 35530223
2:25:25 m _E=U=.=m 1.52:. .525 an}: 62

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

,_ 3.89m» Mia—Em

 

 

211

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

£5.93
..oh 8... 5.3.5 MERE ..Bom
$62.. .28
Avdéd com $.N.v.m 8m 3.93%. 3.2%?
SuameBmxm ..ouucmfiufixm 3.32 .89: .35 3:2 .633 .65
2.2% 8. B...
.80: 832...? omwaMxo on 9 E29? umwcflfimfiwfi
.0538. :8: . on .0538. :3: .— _ .E >
8:598 3:398 Swim 8m ofltoqxu 9.8 2.28:me E06? 28 $3 56%
cmfioo 55.5 .5qu E29? cwaoo SB cwfio—u E baa—U 5.53:2? 88 QED
1 . x53 omfiofi . 88 9:5 . . .8 .822:ch . .
..umuuu JEIE amcou .3th:— vo=uE.o._._2_ 5:523: 5:2. 45-:— dngu @192: yoga—5:2. basic:
03.5.3.5 a: enum— uo 3am 7.5.2....m _-E..o._.—. .5qu 03.5525 ..o 8.”.— .o unam— _a=59=.=m 15.3.; .525
33.35.... 1.5333; \ 89:58.. 55:53....— uofiuuubm 93.53.”.—

 

 

212

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.8.. waging,

 

 

 

:38. 338.20...

 

 

5.8.. . V . 35......8... _ 1 3.5.5..

2:. .20 2.3
«Sq—.135 .252... .525 A t E

5.8.. .
2:89? «3.2.3:

 

 

  

 

LL
H-

 

 

ES...

  

 

dz

 

 

 

213

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ME... ~66. .0.... 3.0.5 .28
. c m 00.. .01.
m .m 0 ..o
0005......“ .8. Who...
.8. $.05. m.
:1. a «S
.01.. 0005...... .80 “Hum
.8. 3.0...
9.3,. 28 be...
000 .0.0.. 00.9698 mat... .o. .050 .5. .080
$5.530: 5.30 00.. 02.83.... .03 - 5.00..
0.... .026... 0.8 3:5
. . . A" fl V fl . . . . tn. V 0 <1: (0:— V<J <t¢J . . (.113...)—
0MM.M..W.M 000 .01.. 0A0” W0M0w...“w..W0M .0.0.. :38... 10:80.0 mac...» ..m.m0.. 002.0 10:80.0
g a 3? ?
3.6..” 0.08 .mdéd .8300... 32.0.50
000. .0.0.. 8509.0 h 0.53. 3min 000 000 .0 0.. 30...... 0.5.8.50... :0 ME...» :03 :0... .050. 0.2.3000.
0.00.3.3... ..w.m0n. a v . .0.0.. 0.0383. .. =3 3.0:”. E 9.0.0 0 . . ..o..:..:.m6 ..o 00...
. . ..o......=m... oz 0.33003. . A 3.0.3.... . . .
.50. 3.0.5 . .0256... .1 3
5.00.. 4:1... 40.30 5.50.... 00:25:10.. .0.—5.0.0.. 5.00.. 4:1... .250 3.50.... 00.....50...0.. 3:310:
030:1...5 ..o 00.... .0 000.. 1.5055 1.50.... 1226 032.135 .0 000m. .0 000m. 1.5.05.5 1.50.. h. 1..an
00.5050 15.0.0.0... \ .00.—.30. ..o....:..o..... 00501.5 0350....

 

 

214

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0...: 85¢ m w. c. c o. 0.000 0.3.1.0050
000.. .. . .
m0...3..0 .0 0 .3 0900 03.0.9.0 0
. n 0000000.... m 0. 0.. . .0 . .
. 00.3.3.0. ,
00.00.00.008
0300.. 1.0005 n
50.0.?
W 00000.... n 000.550...
.. 0 000m. ..0 0.00.000... . .
w0...3 000... o.
m0c.3 3.5003000 x 0.0000 350.0. 0 m 0 3.0 0 ,
n .. m .0200... m 5 . ..ea .5 m 3. .. p 00.8.. 0:52:05 N
00.050 00: ..0 000m. 3.0.0.8908 0. 00.05.55
.0 000m.
0.03.
3.0.0.. 1.800.586. .
“NM... gamma—GU H
.. U .00. .5 0300.. .5 ..01... .5 ..0000 .5 5.50.0. 00:00:23.. .5 52.0.00: 100.130.0000
20.5 1.0... 03001.25 .0 000m ..0 000m 1.0.00.5 1.0.0.... , 1.1.5 .0, 0200a. .02
. .080. . 0.00.0.3 “0:.—.0..

 

 

215

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8m Snub 8.93% . mat?
was—.833: 322:5 .8583
D== 533‘“ DE 3”:
an: ohm...“ £32 3% 5:26 9E5
uNuhoowwb mifozon BEEaMmMm :oznoiafifioo
a 0:: 530; u 3 Wu...“ fififlou—o
hot—www.mcum Atowmhwwm ofltunxo $6.1m 03 “WNW.“ mat? mEuamxm 98:2.me :95 55 .558 39532
vohaorbm «mo—25> sauce £95 £523; mzaBounx cohausbw, 322:5 E bra—U BHMWHH—MH he 8:
:33". 4:18 42.3 >358:— ouaaEnoEua hum—Bio: =38“. ..EnE Jugou hinge:— ouaufihc: 5555:
03.5525 he 8n”.— .3 3am 1.5.955 .252; 1325 05.5525 be 8a”.— 3 Sum 1.53:6 15.3.; .533
33.6%» 1:330..on \ 83:80.. 55258.: 83835 yin—Sn.—

 

 

216

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.8:—

 

 

 

nanmmm ӣ23m

 

 

8.3. 8.8 2 m 2 2 a. {an 33:35 ‘
828.3% ‘ watts W } , .
m Eflofim . n E2050 .3 3.: .
‘8 mag u so
m. gun—:83 m a = 3.582572 36.5 5
E2050 .3 8: .
f ‘8 83
cwamw 3.08m m
£33 52:3
m aucsoacofifim m . ..o cos—“SEE
21.: mac—3 .
fl W 9:98qu m . .
0358:”.—
8 bang:
3:530 3:253
REESE m bps—3.3 m Begum—3:0 n coma—3:. m 82:5 awrfiv wcgoswcm N
mo 83 .3 08m \ 93832 83622 0320809
Ewen 328.202 _
Inga-hang:
. .Ilml
.5 .3 8 was. .32. cm. 42.8 am :33... cm 82.58.... am $3.5: 3.2.2....28
.. udw .30... ‘ ‘ 032.325 .3 93m . .3 8am . 3.583% .252; , 323m 9.0. 530A: 62

 

 

217

 

  

       

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

805:9"? MSU—.520: ..mowaxwfiuu, warm? Ravage?
H m .38: 2: 53o. 3 m 25 8.5
v5 N.o.m Ea v 9m 03
_.o.m 08 undo: 598v 805.3% EHEoW harem m “Who
:33“. flow :3. 38cm o>. a: >z < .3. m
s hub-P: u=§= Eat“:
moo—Rina ommwuoxo ._ m WNW—”o 0333:.
.37. .855 . D S m RES—Em .82
85.598 5.. w n the: 55% 5:29?
. 5:89? .
summon m8 ca? 51602 mac—2;»
. . . main NEE—35 om: mics—m :95
.moQ . Q . o u ”— manuoam, _ no: . . U 2 v .2 act; vomoaxm we um:
I] [I I
:9qu 45a:— Ju=oo mar—no.5 3533:2— bEnuuo—u 530.. 45-5 42.3 brass 355.83: .0555:
03.5525 he 8.”.— .3 on.“ 15.93% 15.3.; 3.2—m 3.13526 he Sun.— .3 Sun.— _a.:=o=.=w .2525. 15.3
85.358 1:230..ch ‘ wool—=89. senate..— mguxabm 935:”.—

 

 

 

218

 

mmh

86%

0.38 .3:—

 

 

 

 

 

 

n=§a 95:22
.8: $695. 32. 8an 03.on s
535228
528.. 38% m
03.830!
.35:—
53. SSE bigwwhwfino 38.53.. none...— ”out“ 2%”... :98 muse—=9.
833.88... \ mum—.3— .oomwm Jab . .a... a . v . . m N
03.2.3? .. 3 v EE=m _ v02
ban—amino 9.5.5:. ageing.
922.0 3.352 35:52 bnhuoommu 0383.30 nuanuflwfion mm 88% ..o 5.3“. 3.5.3.224. _
..o 8am .. 5 35832 _ 5 _ . 2 £38935
3 2.5.5 .528..— U
_. in 9...... an...» E. .5 855......2. 3.3:... .22....238
assign-é .9 8am .9 San.— .E:§..=m 15.2.... 3:25 5.89 v :2
2:89? 9:21.:

 

 

 

.5...—

 

 

 

 

 

219

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Eu... 12.25.. lama... lamina.
002... 05 05.34.01 0>. «E0 <
.095.— u.& S . ..
89:2... 0.. ..8
.8... .22... 5.50.. 2.2.0.52:
. . . ..0:.? 02.2.5.0 $50.. .2262
0m: 3:22.. .2352 E 5:20 .
. . . 0.21....
0>....E2_<
hum—3552
3.9..” 00m 00. .0.0.. 3.0m 9N 00m 9.2“ 00. 10253.:
. mmO 59.0....
.20.. 3.2a... 2:2... 0 00m .80.. .80.. mE2m..m .80.. £2.03... 02:03.. 1:22.. 5. E .25.... 2.28.52: 20...... w. .v. 0...... :32...
2.2.50 0.38.352... 3.0.90 3.32.1.5... mega... swig. 22:8 00.0.00”. .1 95.23.... E 3:20 ..o .25 ._ 0W0 ._....o @025 2.0
00.9.03. 0... 2...»: 0... 0>....E2_< 0.8 9:5 .—
=u.m0_. 4:1... 42.8 >350...— ovation .5313: 5...... 4:1... 42.3 Etna...— 0..............0._ .3555:
2.15826 ..0 0...”. ..o 0.1”.— 1.59....m 15.2.... 1..an 0.1.1.26 ..o 0...“.— .o 03”.. 1.52:6 13.0.; 1.1.5

 

 

3.5.0.... 1.3.30.1..— . 39.530. 5.15.8..—

 

m0_u01..m 0.9.1.”.—

 

 

220

Amendix C3

(View as joined at 1-2-3-4-5)

221

 

 

 

 

Building systems i Intent __ ~— 1
N0. (Design Cr. S - l g . . .t.
patial w ( Thermal , i ti uttura S R H W ‘
constderations) flexibility Sc. Reasons performance Sc. Reason, . integrity t c. (.isons
A Structure / Env. 4.4 l |

 

l

l The minimum code

 
 
     
     

  
  

 

 

           
   
    
 
  
 
   
    
  
     
     
  

 

 

    
  
    
  
  
 
 
 
  

 

Since open planning is l requirements have Since no structural
used to some degree in the been enforced with elements are
first floor design the gypsum board oti 2 x M0 abl changeable or
t . . . \"C' C i
. i Changeability strategy IS not completely Material thermal 4 16 inch OC It is moveable the
1 Architectural deSign 2 . . . 4 . changeable ‘ _ .‘
of spaces ineffective but stnee the performance assumed that this I merit strategy is non
i . s . . e e ’ s , t
intent was not central to spCCitication is cxrstent therefore it
the design it cannot be effective but not as is considered
considered effective effective as using incffectn e
N alternative materials
N
‘ N
l
i
. . Since no flexible
l 4 Reduction 01 ,. , -
1 The desrgn has not been Since no speCific ‘ . . . . units are delincd
t . loss ofheat and l- leXibilit) ot ,
y . . . . eiiVisagcd as a modular steps have been taken . the strategy is non
2 Engineering destgn Modular destgii 1 . cold from . assembling . t ,
l destgn and therefore there b 1d the strategy Will be '1 e\istent therefore it
ui mg . . . uni s V
‘ are no components. ” considered ineffective. is constdered

i enveiope

ineffectn c

H71- -

The strategy has not

 

been coriSidercd
Decreased use of . .
.s . , . although minimum
arttlictal lighting .

requirements are

fulfilled.

 

 

'i‘il? {170‘ CHICHI L5 ' l r
restricted due to plan
therefore must be

. achieved through
Air mov eiiient

..

within the home

l
'. ienergy therefore the l

‘aI‘llllL‘létl means \\ hich
involves expending

strategy is considered
ineffective

     
    
     

Special design
consideration

, t

The strategy is non Integrative

The strategy is non

Use of ‘
Active solar dcsion CMSKCHI lltCI‘ClOI'C ll
3

alternative

 

 

i

l

l

l existent therefore it is eiierU '

l 1 t , s V a) is considered

energy sources | «considered iiieftective structure , it
I inetlective.
i

11

Bathroom at the 2nd
floor is ventilated

b Passive solar design Sunlight in wet artificially. All the

4

 
 
 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

areas other bathrooms have
appropriate access to
sunlight
Use of sunlight l ’l he strategy is ign—
as per seasonal i existent therefore it is
‘ ‘ ' ‘ I ‘ " ‘ ‘ ineffective,
l l l l '
i l l
I | l [

 

EZZ

 

 

1 f

Intent

 

Ease of
const.

Reasons

I Ease ofmaint. [Sal

Reasons

Sustainable
design

' Se. I Reasons

Total sc. Sc. x (fr.

 

[Sc-I
l

l

l

 

The strategy is non

 

The strategy is non

 

 

 

 

therefore the strategy is
considered effective.

 

 

l ll' / The strategy is non existent
, lias‘ ifiant ltt’ . , . . . s g . .‘ g,
Ease 01:1 1 existent therefore it is chafi£eabilit ‘C l existent therefore It 15 Material chotcc theielore it is considered
assent y considered ineffective 5 y considered ineffective inellectivc
E f The strategy is non l‘ 1‘ of h indlina / The strategy is non
" ‘ . , . 2' :e ‘ , t . .
45L Obl 1 existent therefore it is f 7 abilit “ l existent therefore it is
M‘ _ , . eiante' . . t .
dbSLm y cons1dered ineffective o y consnlercd inelfcctivct
Assumed that the
specifications are clearly
Clarity of _ defined all through the
instructions construction process and

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Low
maintaianencc

requirements over
lifetime

Assumed that the
specifications are clearly
defined all through the
construction process and
therefore the strategy is
considered effective.

Reduction in use
oftraditional
energy sources

The strategy is non existent
therefore it is considered
ineffective.

 

Reduction in use
oftraditional

etiergy SOUI‘CCS

The strategy is non existent
therefore it is considered
ineffective.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

E:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Building systems I lnteiit —l 2
No. ( Design Cr Spatial Thermal Structural
' . - . t . ‘ c. Reasons . Sc. Reasons
conSideiations) flexibility SC Reasons performance S integrity
B HVAC 1.28 l l F l l l
I Architectural design l l l
a Com-tort P ”a ha I “3‘
Space t Tvpe ofl [VAC Determined that [’1 K m m 0‘ Structural integrity
i ' 'm‘t s . , ' ,L cc c
require u A mechanical chase is systems to be Water based systems i g has bCCIt
. . l for placement . . i . - g ,c , units and _ , g. \ _ \ ‘v H
2 Engineering destgn f 't . d 5 used and most distribution used and its 3 are most effective distribution considcitd since
0. mil 5 (.m is through the floor. inherent Gas fircd HVAC 1 most distribution is
distribution ‘ . g .g . system _ ‘
effictency system is used heic. through floor.
systems
N No heat recovery
4.\ Reorganization The strategy is non Reuse of heat system is used
of spaces to be 1 existent therefore it is getieratcd Within 5 therefore the strategy
possible considered ineffective. the home is considered
ineffective
l
l i Option for xoned HVAC
1 Heating and . . .
, systems Within the design
cooling as per 5 . ,
. the strategy is conSidered
; requirements i. .
l effective.
1) Special design
‘ consideration
The strategy is non
a Choice of Fuel Use of . ‘ _ existent thci‘etoi'e it is
alternative fuels constdercd
t ineffective.
l Distribution system
i , ,' t s 3‘ - visit _.
. Passive design Placement of organized thru subfloor Use of sunlight Lou l glass is used
b itechniques distribution 5 and mech chase mm for daytime 5 therefore strategy is
‘ system supply registers located heating considered effective
} within the partition walls.
l l l l l
. , i No heat rccoverv
FlClelllty of Reuse of heat . '
. . . Use of flex ducts for . . svstcni therefore
distribution 5 . . generated \Hlllll] 5 ‘ . ,
manageability strategv is constdered
system the home . '.
ineffective.
‘ Insulated windows
Reduction of
,. and doors are used
loss of neat and . .
- but no additional
cold from 5 . i .
. , insulation is used. the
butlding . .
strategy is conSidered
envelope ” .
reasonably effective.
I The distribution
Reduction of system is insulated
loss ol‘heat and with duct tape and all
cold from 5 ducting in the attic
distribution space is insulated
system with 2" batt
insulation,
Adequate Design ofthe HVAC
Indoor Air Quality natural and /or system provides
(ventilation) artifiCial 4 adequate vent. The
ventilation attic is not specified
provided as vented.
Cumulative score 21 39 5 2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

%: J

2 I lntent

7: ' S .‘t" zbl' ,, Se.x
L tse 0' {Sol Reasons [ Ease of maiiit. (Sc. Reasons I m (”m ( 1 Se. I Reasons [0‘3] SC-

 

 

 

eonst. design
l l l l l l

l l l l l
l

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

na iia nzi
‘ . The stratc' is non , c . The sti‘ateg is non . . Sonic measures have been
base ol . by c _ _ lzas‘c ol handling . “y . . . Reduction in ‘ H ..
ll 1 existent therefore it is / l l ll 1 cxtstent therefore it is l 1. n I Y 3 taken such as low 1: glass
assem ) . . e, . c iangea )1 i . .. . oss o c e ‘g , .
y considered ineffective ‘ y considered ineffective y for skylights.
Assumed that the Access for within the
N Cl ,1 f specifications are clearly liasc of access of mechanical chase is easy
mi 0 .. . . . . . . ,
N . y . 5 defined therefore the distribution 3 but regular distribution
U1 instructions . ,
strategy is considered systems through the wall as in
‘ effective. traditional construction.
, . lilimination of
. The strategy is non
‘ Lesser no of . . . unnecessary ,
l . _ l extstcnt therefore it is . _ ‘ 5 Zoned systems are optional
l paits considered ineffective heating OI
l cooling
l
t
l
l
l - 7‘ ,7
l ,. . Reduction in ,, .
l lhc strategy is non use 0'. lhe strategy is non CXISlCHI
1t Renewable fuel 1 existent therefore it is traditional 1 therefore it is considered
1 considered ineffective, ‘ ineffective
i energy sources
l
l
l Distribution 5 Use of flex ducts for
material manageability

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 12 5 9 95.00 l21.6()

 

 

§

 

 

 

9ZZ

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Building systems L lntent
No. (Design Cr. ati Thermal Structural
. . . ns Se. Reasons . Se. Reasons
constderations) flexibility SC R9350 performance integrity
C l lPlumbing 0.64 l l l l l l l l
1 Architectural design l l l l l l l l
Copper piping is used
but no 5 ccial
Wet cores have been . g . p
. . . . insualtion to be
. . . Wet cores to be consolidated to a certain Reduction in _ . g . g
2 Engineering design . 3 . . 1 provided theicf0ie
‘ ‘ “ consolidated extend cspecrally at the loss of heat ‘ g .
. the strategy is
first floor. . _
conSIdeied
ineffectne
No special systems are No heat recovery
Restrict used other than a Reuse ofheat system is used
distribution 3 mechanical chase generated within 1 therefore the strategy
lines therefore reasonably the home is considered
effective. ineffective.
Reduced The strategy is non
horizontal 1 existent therefore it is
distribution considered ineffective.
1 Special design
_ t . J ‘.
The strategy is non
. _ . . Grcv water existent therefore it is
a Water consen ation ' l .
reuse conSidercd
ineffective.
b Fuel requirements
(‘nnud ‘5' score .7 z 0
D Electrical 0.64 l l —
l l l l l a
1 Architectural design . 1' t ( ( ‘
Avoid . . . . .
. . . Distribution svstciii is .\o special
. . . The strategy is non ‘COITIpl‘OttllSIng ' .
. . . Distribution to , ” . . . through the wall, the Adequate insulation is
2 Engineering destgn , l CXlSlCnI therefore it is structural ‘ . . . . .. .
‘ be flexible . . . . . . strategy is considered insulation specified for
constdercd ineffective. integrity to . ..“', .
‘ . . lnCllCClHC. electrical \\ iring.
place wiring
. . . Orientation for
Distribution through \vall .
. . _. . , . . . openings mostly
compromises llCMbllllV ot Reduction of . , . ‘
Placement of . ' . ... [:ast \\ est is not as
. .- . space layout in the use of artifictal . . .
distribution l . _. . . . . 4 satisfactory as South.
‘ inteiior of the house the lighting in the . . '
system > . . . Minimum gla/ed
strategy is consrdered daytime . ” .
. i. . . opening required
ineffectne. . ”
provided.
Use ofcfticicnt Strategy non existent
outlets therefore ineffective.
1 Special design
' consideration
a Energy requirements
Cumulative score 2 6 l

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LZZ

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

lntent
Ease of . l Sustainable S u g ‘ Sc. x
. . . e. Reasons Total sc. 1
const. I So! Reasons I Ease of maint. ' Sc. Reasons destgn (,r.
fix,“
The strate is non . . i The strate is non
Ease of . gy . . Ease ol handling . gy . .‘
bl l CXistent therefore it is /chan eabil't 1 eXIstent therefore it is
assem y conSidered ineffective g y eonSidered ineffective
Access for within the
mechanical chase is easy
Ease of access 3 but regular distribution
through the wall as in
traditional construction.
The strategy is non existent
Grey \\ ater . . .
1 theretore it is considered
reuse . .. .
inettective.
Reduction in , . .
fhe strategy is non CXISICHI
use of . f .
. . 1 therefore it is conSIdered
traditional . .. .
inettective.
energy sources
l l l l l4l 2i Ht!) 988
l I l l
The strate7 is non . . . The stratc is non
Ease of . by . . lzasc oi handling . gy . .
assembl l eXistent therefore it is /ehan eabilitv 1 extstent therefore it is
y considered ineffective g ' considered ineffective
Access for within the
i . mechanical ChilS‘ is “as r'
Integration The strategy is non , .k .L >
. . . . but regulardistribution
With other 1 extstent therefore it is Ease ofaceess 3 ‘
. . , through the “all has
uses eonSidered ineffective . f . .
inbudt difficulties as in
traditional construction.
Regular copper \\ iring in
.. . PVC ‘ajing i.‘ u.‘ ‘ i th ‘r‘lor‘
Use eftieient k x “ x, “L t H k
. . 3 the strategy Will be
\HFmE .
“ eonSidered reasonably
effective.
Use ofeffieient ‘ Strategy non existent
outlets therefore ineffective.
Use of alt. .
Strategy non CXlSlCnl
sources of 1 w _ .
_ therefore ineffective.
energx
l i 2 l i i 4i i l 5 l 26.00 16.64

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SZZ

 

 

 

 

 

     
 

 

 

 

    
     

 

 

 

 

  
 

 

 

 

 

 

   
  
 
  
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

  
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

 

    
 

   
 
    
  

  
   
  
    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Building systems lntent
No. (Design Cr. g . u .. ,. . q . 't '-|
t at l lliuinal .ti ut ura N g
t .- 1 t .. - . p M Sc. Reasons . Sc. Reasons , Sc. Reasons
Lonsu u ations) flexibility performance Integrity
E Comm. 0.32
1 Architectural design
Distribution through
Avoid \vall compromises
. . i The strategy is non compromising tlc\ibility ofspace
, . . , Distribution to . ' . _ . .
2 lziigincering design i ll .1 l existent therefore it is structural l layout in the interior
we exi ) c . . .. . . . .
considered ineffective. integrity to of the house the
place \viring strategy is considered
ineffective.
Distribution through \vall
) . compromises flexibility of
l lacemcnt ot _ '
, . , space layout in the
distribution . ’ .
interior of the house the
system .
' strategy is considered
ineffective
1S pccial design , 77 iii fiflii’ if, 77. 777 T if 7 ‘
~_l\
a integrative design ‘
l Cumulative score 2 l | l . l 0 I
I“ l \lnterior (Type A) 0.48 l l l l l l1 \ l
73.7. 7777 . 7. .7- .. ...7 7. 7 7 ..... f . . 7...- . . .
1 Architectural design
, .-\dequatc insulation Moveablc Strategv non
. . . Detachable Strategy non existent Adequate ' .
Itngincering design . ' . .. . is inbuilt into changeable e\Istent tlicielore
outlets therefore ineffective insulation ‘ ..
products elements ineffective
.. . , , l'lc\ibilit\ ot Strategv non
lzliminatc Strategy non existent ' ‘ ' ,
_. . . .. assembling e\istcnt therefore
\yiiing therefore ineffective. ‘ ..
units iiieftectiv e
liliniination of Strategy non existent
partition walls therefore ineffective.
Special design
consid elation
l ncrgv requirements l SL ol tlliciciit Stiatcgy non existent
outlets therefore iiietfectiv c
lisc ofeflicieiit Strategy non existent
wiring therefore ineffectiv c.
Cumulative score 3 l l 7 l l 2

 

 

 

 

 

 

6Z2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

lntent
Ease of . , Sustainable ‘ ‘ Sc. x
. . mai . . Reasons , Se. Reasons Total sc.
const. Sc. Reasons Ease of nt Sc design Cr.
Regular copper wiring in
The strate V is non , . , The strate ,y is non . PVC casing is used therefore
Ease of . by . . base 01 handling , g, . . Use effiCient ‘ .
bl l existent therefore it is / h bit 1 exrstent therefore it is wirin’ 3 the strategy Will be
' em . . .. . eanrea ii . . .. .
ass y conSidcred ineffective 5 y constdercd ineffective 27 considered reasonably
effective.
Access for within the
mechanical chase is easy
. but regular distribution
Ease of access 3 ”
through the wall has
inbuilt difficulties as in
traditional construction.
int with Strategy non existent Elimination of 1 Strategy non existent
other uses therefore ineffective. wiring therefore ineffective.
2 5 3 13.00 4.16
Ease of Strategy non existent liasc of handling Strategy non existent
1 . . . . l . . .e .
assembly therefore ineffective. /changcability therefore ineffective.
... . Strate iv non existent
latticient outlets l .5“ . .. .
therclore ineffective.
Use of
alternative 1 Strategy non existent
sources of therefore ineffective.
energy
Efficient 1 Strategy non existent
rappliances therefore ineffective.
‘ 1 l 1 3 25.00 12.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OEZ

 

Building systems

 
  
   

 
 
 
   
 

lntent

   
  
  
  

 
 
 
 

 
   

 

 

 

requirements

 

Modular
furniture
design

Engineering design

Special design
consideration

Flexible space

. Access floor
deSign

Movable walls

Cumulative score 8

Final score

 

 

..—

..t

therefore ineffective.

Strategy non existent
therefore ineffective.

Strategy non existent
therefore ineffective.

Strategy non existent
therefore ineffective.

 

 

N0 (.Design Ch Spatial Sc Reasons Thermal Sc Reasons Structural Reasons
constderations) flexibility ' performance ' Integrity ‘ l
G Interior (Type B) 0.24
Cha 0' b’lit . . . Moveable/ Strater non
. . ng ‘1 I y Strategy non extstcnt Material thermal Strategy non CXistent 5y .
Architectural design of spaces as l 1 changeable 1 exrstent therefore

performance therefore ineffective.

elements

Summer and
winter partition
design

Strategy non existent
therefore ineffective.

H

Strategy non existent

Material choice 1 . .
therefore ineffective.

   

ineffective.

 

 

 

ISZ

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

       

   
  
         
      

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I lntent
Ease of . . Sustainable . Se. x
Se. Reasons Ease of maint. Sc. Reasons l , Se. Reasons "I otal sc.
eonst. | deSign Cr.
|
Ease of Strategy non existent liase of handling Strategy non existent . . Strategy non existent
l . . . . l ' . .. . Material chorce l e ' . . .
assembly therefore ineffective. /ehangeability therefore ineffective. therefore ineffective.
______ Alternative
Ease of Strategy non existent Ease of handling Strategy non existent material use 1 Strategy non existent
assembly therefore ineffective. /' changeability therefore ineffective rather than therefore ineffeetn e.
lumber
Reusable l Strategy non existent
materials therefore ineffective.
I
l 2 l l 2 3 15.00 3.60
l l l 228.00 532

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix C4

(View as joined at 6-7-8-9-10)

232

 

lt

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.52:

 

 

‘l‘i

2:89? wit—=5.

 

 

 

 

 

EEZ

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- - lntent
Building systems
No (DeSIgn Cr. S t. [f] S R Thermal Sc Rtasons Str Integrity Sc Reasons
' ' a in ex e. easons . - “ ‘ 3 - ‘ . ~ - ‘- ~
consmerations) P perform
A Structure / Envelope 4.4
The minimum code
requirements have
. . . been enforced with
Changeability is . . w . . .‘ ..
. , gypsum board on 2 x / ( hangcabilit} is \ci)
e . . very minimal due . . e . Mmeable, . .
. . (,hangeability of , . Material thermal g 4 16 inch OC. It is minimal due to
1 Architectural dcsrgn l to minimal 3 . changeable l , . , q
spaces . performance assumed that this \ minimal required
required structural . s . . elements _
. specrfieation is structural desrgn.
desrgn. . .
effective but not as
effective as using
alternative materials
The entire home is Since no specific steps
larvel dcsianed . . have been taken to , . . .
.° y D t Reduction of loss 1 t if . . t t ( litlligctlbllll} is \erv
usm0 com orten 5 com c e its in en - . . . . '
. . . . D . p . ofheat arid cold p . l‘lClelllly of minimal due to
2 Engineering destgn Modular destgn 5 such as foundation . . 1 such as specral . . l . .
from building . , assembling units minimal required
walls, wall panels, insulation the strategy .
envelope . , structural design.
floor truss systems Will be considered
and rooftrusses. ineffective.
The strategy has not
. been considered
Decreased use of . .
. . , . 2 although minimum
artificral lighting .
. re
fulfilled.
Air movenu‘nr is
. restricted due to the
plan and therefore
must be achieved
Air movement through artificial
within the home means which involves
expending energy
therefore the strategy
is considered
ineffective
3 Special design
consideration
, . The strategy is non
Use of iltcrrr Hive The 51“”ng ‘8 non l t t' ' t 1 lM f ' '
. . . . a z * t " . . . . n eura ive exrs en tiere ore it is
a Active solar design ‘. l existent therefore it is D l .
energy sources . . . . energy structure considered
consrdered ineffective ‘ . .. .
ineffeetne
One bathroom at the
second floor is
ventilated artificially
b Passive solar design Sunlight in wet 4 with no natural light.
areas All the other
bathrooms have
appropriate access to
sunlight,
Use of suniight The strategy is non
as per seasonal 1 existent therefore it is
requirements considered ineffective
_ , mm“
Cumulative score 6 13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6

 

 

VEZ

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

lntent
Ease 0f Sc. Reasons Ease of maint. Se. Reasons Sustainable design Se. Reasons Total sc. Sc. x Cr.
eonst.
Changeability is very
minimal due to minimal
. . . required structural The strategy is nori
Ease of 4 Ease 0t assembly ls Ease ofhandling/ 4 design. Handling is Material choice 1 existent therefore it is
assembly reasonably enhanced changeability greatly enhanced due to considered ineffective
a factory produced
product
Changeability is very
minimal due to minimal
Ease of Ease ofassernbly is Ease ofhandling/ required structural
4 . . 4 des1gn. Handling is
assembly reasonably enhanced changeability .
greatly enhanced due to
a factory produced
product
The industry has set
up a system ofclcar
Clarity of inst. 5 and precise
instructions for
assembly
Low maintaianence The strategy is non Reduction in use of The strategy is non
requirements over 5 existent therefore it is traditional energy 1 existent therefore it is
lifetime considered ineffective sources considered ineffective
Although there is no
direct usage of alternative
Reduction in use of energy sources, the mass
traditional energy 4 production ofcomponcnts
sources constitutes sortie
reduction ofcnergy usage
overall.
13 13 6 66.00 290.40

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SSZ

 

Building systems

lntent

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No. ( Design Cr.
. Thermal ‘ .
considerations) Spatial flex Se. Reasons be. Reasons Str. Integrity Se. Reasons
perform
B HVAC 1.28
1 Architectural design
a Comfort requirements P na na na
. . . Structural integrity
Space Most distribution It has been determined .
. . . Type ofHVAC has been considered
requirements for 18 through that Water based Placement of .
. . systems to be . srnce most
. . . placement of subfloor, srnee this . systems are the most units and . . , .
2 Engineering dCSlgll , 5 . , used and its 4 . . . . 5 distribution is
units and a Single storey unit . effective. A gas fired distribution
. . . . inherent . through floor, the
distribution mechanical chase . HVAC system is used system . .
, . effieiency system is constdercd
systems is not required. here. . .
effective.
Reorganization of
. . No heat recovery
. , spaces is possrble .
Reorganization . Reuse oflieat system is used
to a certain extent . .
ofspaees to be 3 owin to generated wrthin 1 therefore the strategy
possible g the home is considered
component _ _
. ineffective.
assembly desrgn.
Heating and Zoned HVAC
cooling as per 1 options may not be
requirements available
‘ Special design \, l \ q

 

 

 

Use ofalternative

The strategy is non

 

 

 

a Choice ofFuel 1 existent therefore it is
fuels . . . .
conSIdered ineffective.
Distribution
system organized
. . Placement of thru subfloor and Use ofsunlight Low "E" glass is used
Passwe destgn . . . . . .
t h . es distribution 5 mech chase wrth for daytime 5 therefore strategy is
ec n1 u . o . .
q system supply registers heating consrdered effective

 

located within the
partition walls.

 

 

 

Flexibility of
distribution
system

 

Use of flex ducts
for manageability

Reuse ofheat
generated vvithin 1
the home

No heat recovery
system is used
therefore the strategy
is considered
ineffective.

 

 

 

 

 

Reduction of loss
ofheai and cold
from building
envelope

..—

A manufactured home
may not come wrth
standard with any
speeial energy design
due to the small
margin of profit.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7 lntent
Ease 0f Se. Reasons Ease of maint. Se. Reasons Sustainable design Se. Reasons Total sc. Sc. x Cr.
const.
na na 1’18.
$ A manufactured home
i 0‘ . . Com onentized . . may not come with
Ease of Ease ofassembly is Ease ofhandling/ _ p . . Reduction in loss of ‘ .- . . .
l 5 . . . 5 construcrton, reduction 1 standard nith an) special
assembly immensely enhanced changeability . energy .
ofpunch list energy desrgn due to the
small margin ofprofit.
The industry has set Distribution systems are
Chart of up a system ofclcar Ease ofaceess of mostly accessed through
‘ l . . . . .
instruZtions 5 and precise distribution 4 the crawl space which
instructions for systems may not be considered as
assembly the best possible option.
Since the
Manufactured home
is built as a unit and Elimination of
Lesser no 0f 5 ‘ . . Zoned systems are not
. transfen ed to srte the unnecessary heating or 1 .
parts . . . ’ optional
no of parts on Site are cooling
virtually non
existent.
‘ _ ,Li W ~ 77 if, _. Vfieéi,, _ >,7,
, t
.
The strategy is non Reductrori in use of The strategy is non
Renewable fuel 1 existent therefore it is traditional energy 1 existent therefore it is
1 considered ineffective. sources considered ineffective
i
l
l
1
Distribution 5 Use offlex ducts for
material manageability
7

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LSZ

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. . lntent
Building systems
No. (Design Cr. Thermal S R St I 't S R
' ‘ S atial flex Se. Reasons . c. easons r. nte ri y t e. easons
conSIderations) P perform 2.
. . All distribution
Reduction ot loss .
. systems in the crawl
of heat and cold ' . .
. . . . 5 space is insulated and
from distribution . . .
ideally lifted from the
system
ground.
It is assumed that the
desiun ofthe HVAC
Adequate natural 1"] ) 'd 1.0
. . , .- . s 5 en rovi es r
Indoor Air Quality and /or artiliCial y i . ,
. i . . 4 adequate ventilation of
(ventilation) ventilation . . , . .
. indoor air. The attic is
provided . e
not speCilied as
vented.
Cumulative score 19 22 5
(7 Plumbing 0.64
1 Architectural design
Copper piping is used
but there is no
, . . . mention of am s a *eial
. _. . Wet cores to he The wet cores are Reduction in loss . . ' I L
2 Engineeiing dCSIgn _ \ . 1 insulation to be
i consolidated consolidated ofheat _ . l d “ r ‘

‘ x>xv'- I« ‘_‘ )\,I~> A)\‘ \\»;
strategy is considered
ineffective.

. . , No heat recovery

i l he strategy is non . .
Restrict . ' . Reuse of heat system is used
. . . existent therefore . i .
distribution 1 . . , generated Within 1 therefore the strategy
. it is eonsalered , .
lines . . the home is c0iiSidered
ineffective. . .. .
‘inetleetive.
The strategy is non i
Reduced . “
. CXlSICIll therefore
horizontal l . . .
. . . it is conSidered
distribution , t .
ineffective.
3 Special design
consideration
The strategy is non
a Water conservation Grey water reuse I existent therefore it is
considered ineffective.
b Fuel requirements
I [Cumulative score 7 3 0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8 lntent
Ease 0f Sc. Reasons Ease of maint. Se. Reasons Sustainable design Sc. RCaSOIIS Total SC- SC- X CT-
const.

N

o:

00
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1 20 1 1 1 10 l 3 79.00 101.12
1
1 1 1 1 1 1
. 1 1 1 1 1
1
l The components are
‘ transported on specially
‘ designed trailers to
1 facilitate access at the
‘ Ease of Ease ofassembly is Ease ofhandling/ . . . .
. . 3 JObSlle and placement is
assembly reasonably enhanced changeability

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

= conducted using a ciane. i

. The punch list items are

reduced largely by using
‘ this construction process.
1
‘ Distribution systems are
1 mostly accessed through
Ease ofaccess 4 the crawl space which
i may not be considered as
‘ the best possible option.

\The strategy is non

 

existent therefore it is
considered ineffective,

 

traditional energy 1 existent therefore it is
sources considered ineffective.

 

 

 

 

\ Grey water reuse

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘Rcduction in use of \The strategy is non

41.00 26.24

 

 

 

 

 

 

    
   
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. . lntent 9
Budding systems
No. ( Design Cr. Thermal
. . - , . ' ' ‘ . R asons
conSiderations) Spatial flex Se. Reasons perform Se. Reasons Str Integrity Sc 6
Electrical 0.64
Architectural design
. Avoid . . . .
, . t 1 . - 15 . . I
. . , Th.“ strategy 15 non compromising Distribution system No special insulation
1 . . Distribution to CXistent therefore through the wall, the Adequate . x 'f‘ 1. _
Engineering de5ign , l . . . structural l . . , . 1 is spcei icd or
be fleXible it is constdercd i . strategy is conSidered insulation ‘. V, _.
_ i integrity to place i r electi ical w iiing.
ineffective. , . ineffective,
Wiring
N
b.)
\o
1 1 __—__—_._._
‘ |
1
1 1 Orientation for
1 Distribution openings is specified
1 system is through as most East/West
1 the wall, since this which is not as
‘ compromises Reduction of use satisfactory as South.
1 Placement of . . . t . . . . *
1 . . . fleXibilitv of space ofartifiCial Minimum of %
1 distribution 1 . ’ . . . 4 .
layout in the lighting in the glazed opening
1 system . . . _ .
interior 0fthe daytime required which has
house the strategy been provided, One
1 is considered bathroom on the
1 ineffective. second floor has not
1 window access.
1
1
t
a . The strateU is non
Use or effiCient . Cy . . ,
1 CXlSlClll therefore it is
outlets . . ., .
conSidered ineffective.
1
‘ 3 Special design
consideration
3 Energy requirements
1 1 1
1 Cumulative score 2 6 1 1
E1 1(‘ ‘ ‘ 0.32 1
1 1 Architectural design 1
. Avoid . . .
The strategy is no comprom'sing Distribution system is
. t t . I
2 Engineering design Distribution to 1 existent therefore structural ‘ through the wall, the
be flex1ble it is consrdered inte ritv to lace strategy is considered 9
ineffective. . ,g ‘ p ineffective.
Wiring

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

\O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

      
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, _,_ 4 <—
lntent
Ease M Sc. Reasons Ease of maint. Se. Reasons Sustainable design Sc. Reasons Total sc. Se. x Cr.
const.
The components are
transported on specially
designed trailers to
. , facilitate access at the
Ease of Ease of assembly is Ease ofhandling/ . . . .
bl 4 bl l d l b‘l't 5 JObSlfe and placement is
' 1 1e cianeaii .
assem y rreasona y C! m c g y conducted usrng a crane.
The punch list items are
reduced largely by using
this construction process.
, Distribution systems are
. The strategy is non
Integration . , , . mostly accessed through
. exrstent therefore it rs .
With other 1 . Ease ofaccess 4 the crawl space which
1coriSidered .
uses . . mav not be considered as
ineffective ’ , .
the best pOSSible option.
Regular copper \\ iring in
PVC casrng is used
Use efficient wiring 3 therefore the strategy \\ ill
be considered reasonably
1 l 1 1 ,effeetixe,
1 r 1
The strategy is non
Use ofeft‘icicnt outlets l existent therefore it is
considered ineffective.
. The strate<r is non
Use ofalteriiativc . by , ,
sourc s ofeier l existent therefore it is
e i . r , , .. .
5y consrdercd lIlelCClHC.
1 5 1 9 1 1 5 1 28.00 17.92
The components are 1
transported on specrally
designed trailers to Regular copper wiring in
Ease of 4 Ease of assembly is Ease ofhandling/ gallium access at the . . . . PVC casrng is used
assembly treasonably enhanced changeability 5 Jobsrte and placement is Use efficient Wiring 3 theretore the strategy will
conducted usrng a crane. be considered reasonably
The punch list items are effective.
reduced largely by using
this construction process.

 

 

considerations)

 

 

 

 

 

Building systems

( Design Thermal

SC‘ perform

Spatial flex Reasons

of
in the
of the
the strategy
considered

desrgn

design

(Type A)
design

T1011

design therefore

non
therefore

non
therefore

design

. of efficient
reqmrements

ofefficrent

(Type B)

non
thermal
therefore

non and

design therefore partition

non
therefore

space design

non
therefore

lntent

Se.

Reasons Str. Integrity Sc. Reasons

insulation is
into products

Flexibility of
units

1101]

ineffective.

non existent
ineffective.

non existent
ineffective.

non existent non

ineffective. ineffective.

non existent
ineffective.

 

 

Z’VZ

 

 

 

 

 

lntent

 

 

 

 

 

Ease 0‘ Se. Reasons Ease of maint. Se. Reasons Sustainable design Sc. Reasons lotal sc. Se. x Cr.
const.
Distribution systems are
mostly accessed through
Ease of access 4 the crawl space which
may not he considered as
the best possible option.
Integration The strategy is non
with other . existent therefore it is
consrdercd . . .. .
uscs . .. . considered ineffective
ineffective
Ease of Strategy non existent
assembly therefore ineffective.

 

 

  
    
     
 
 
    
    

Use ofaltcrnative

sources of energy

Efficient appliances

 

 

 

  

 

Strategy non existent

therefore ineffective.

Strategy non existent

therefore iiieffcctixc.

Strategy non existent

therefore ineffective.

 

 

   
   

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

      
            
   
 
 
 

        

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mwfl
Ease of 1 Strategy non existent Ease of handling/ Strategy non existent M't l ‘l .\ Strategy non existent
assembly therefore ineffective. changeability therefore ineffective. d “M L 10'“ therefore ineffectiy c.
Ease of 1 Strategy non existent Ease of handling/ 1 Strategy non existent Alternative material Strategy non existent
assembly therefore ineffective. changeability therefore ineffective. tisc rather than lumber therefore ineffective.
. S u ‘0 ‘11" .

Reusable materials “and ”.0” ffmiuu
therefore lllCllCCllVC.

1 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 14.00 3.36

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 206.00 454

 

 

 

 

 

 

Apmmdix C5

(View as joined at 11-12-13-14-15—16)

243

 

 

 

 

2522 "52:5

  

: _ 2.3:—

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

lntent l 1
Building systems
N0. congiggfiilons) Cr. Spatial flex Sc. Reasons ZESLT: Sc. Reasons Str Integrity Sc. Reasons
A Structure / Env. 4.4 1 F
Possible to add Through discussion with Since components are
internal partitions the factory personnel it built within a factory
With ease although . was determined that a M . { bl / and the design is
. . Changeability of It IS 7“” pOSSlbic.m Material special strength OSB is ‘hiialje 3 composed of
1 Architectural deSIgn spaces 4 modify the (”(15ng thermal being manufactured by L d “i ‘ component assembly
form 0fthe home Performance their suppliers which elements it will be relatively
WIthOUt . . affords the similar easier to change and
cpmtjtroniisipg ti]: strength in both axes. move components.
3 rue ura in egri y.
N
J.\
b
A special insulating strip
is being used to insulate Since components are
The entire home is the door and window built within a factory
largely designed Reduction of openings. Also due to the and the design is '
using components loss of heat composition of'the 088 it I, , . ‘ q ‘7
7 Engineering design Modular design 5 such as foundation and cold from 5 is possible to place Flex1bility 0f . composed Of
' . . . . . assembling units component assembly
walls, wall panels, building Wll’ldOWS Wilhln a preeut ” it will be relatively
floor truss systems envelope SlP without adding easier [0 chanUc and
and rooftrusses. headers further increasing move eomponbents.
the integrity 0fthe wall
panel
Decreased use The strategy has not been
ofartificial 2 iconsidcred although
lighting minimum requn‘ements
i are fulfilled.
‘ Air movement is restricted
Air movement therefore involves
within the 1 expending energy
home therefore the strategy is
considered ineffective
3 Special design
} consideration
i . . Use Of The strategy is non lnte rative Ificstjiifttfiiieltiiffft is
1 a ACUVC solar dCSlgn alternative 1 existent therefore it is energgv structure ' i '
l energy sources considered ineffective " i . .. .
ineffective
One bathroom at the
second floor is ventilated
‘ ‘ Sunlight in wet artificially with no natural
b Passwe solar deSign light. All the other
areas
bathrooms have
appropriate access to
sunlight.
Use ofsunlight The strategy is non
as per seasonal l CXistent therefore it is
requirements considered ineffective
- “1"
Cumulative score 9 l9 7 I]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/ .,.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

11 lntent
Ease of Sustainable T l S C
. ns . Sc. Reasons . Se. Reasons ota sc. c.x ,r.
Ease of const. Sc Reaso maint. desrgn
The components are
transported on specially Steel, concrete are usable
E f designed trailers to facilitate materials and OSB is a
. 1185:“? / access at thejobsite and M t , l recycled content material.
. . a eria . . .
Ease of E386 of alssemfily 15d :11 mgb'l' 5 placement is conducted h _ 5 There IS minimal lumber
’ n e 1 1t . c Oice .
assembly immense y en ance c a g a usmg a crane. The punch used m the home
y list items are reduced construction mostly in the
largely by using this roof.
1 construction process.
N
1 -l-\
\ U1
l
l
i
1 The components are
transported on specially
designed trailers to facilitate
Ease Of access at the 'obsite and
Ease of Ease of assembly is handling / . J
5 . . . 5 placement lS conducted
assembly immensely enhanced changeabilit .
usmg a crane. The punch
y list items are reduced
1 largely by usmg this
1 construction process.
The concerned party has
. expended reasonable
Clarity of efforts in training the
tinstructions involved personnel and
instructions for assembly
are clear, ,
. e. 4 __ _ __ .e— ._.41_. ’11 _____ .— I
i
. The materials used are steel Reduction in
Low maint. . . .
frequircment studs and high strength use of The strategy is non CXISICI‘II
s over 5 OSB, SlP's. These will traditional 1 therefore it is considered
. . re ' ' . ' ~ \ ' n
lifetime quire. relatively lower energy ineffective
maintainence over time. sources
. . Althou h there is no ' c
Reduction in g . due I
use of usage of alternative energy
. . sources. the mass production
traditional .
ofcomponents constitutes
energy .
some reduction of energy
sources
usage overall.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

lntent 12
Building systems
N0. congjggfgons) CF. Spatial flex Sc. Reasons 12:33:11 Sc. Reasons Str Integrity Sc. Reasons
B HVAC 1.3 __ .____
1 Architectural design
a Comfort requirements P na na na
Structural integrity
N Space . . Type Of It has been determined . . has been considered
g requirements for A mechanical chase HVAC that Water based systems Placement of since most
i 2 Engineering design placement Of 5 IS. used al‘d m0“ systems K.) b? 4 are the most effective. A UT? and 5 distribution is
units and distribution is used and its .. , .‘ distribution g g
. . . . gas fired HV AC system is thiough flooi. the
distribution through the floor. inherent used here. system system is considered
systems Cffic‘ency effective.
i
i
t
i
i
i
i
i
‘ Reorganization of
i . . spaces is possible to Reuse of heat No heat recovery system
| Reorganization . .
r a certain extent generated is used therefore the
I of spaces to be 3 . . . .
possible owmg to Within the strategy is conSidered
component home lanfCCIIVC,
assembly design.
Since there is an
option for zoned
Heating and HVAC systems
cooling as per 5 within the design
itequirements ‘ the Strategy is
considered
effective.
3 Special design
consideration
Use of The strategy is non
a Choice of Fuel alternative 1 existent therefore it is
‘ fuels cons1dered ineffective.
i
i
Distribution system
is largely restricted
to subfloor and
‘ mech chase with
supply registers
Passive design Placement of located within the Use ofsunlight Low "E" glass is used
techniques distribution 5 partition walls. for daytime 5 therefore strategy is
system Since the heating considered effective
distribution is
organized the
strategy is
considered
effective.
Flexibility of Reuse of heat No heat recovery system
distribution Use of flex ducts generated is used therefore the
system for manageability within the strategy is considered
home ineffective.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5 . i... .
£55.»..4d’dyshiwaufia z! ‘11.... .. \

 

 

 

.llJIIflfluflflu-Illnflflflflufi

 

 

ddHil i

2.3.:

 

 

"Eosmflggzam

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

it; Lfldi I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

12 lntent
E359 0" Sustainable Se Reasons Total sc. Sex Cr.
Ease of const. Se. Reasons maint. SC- Reasons design
(if
na na na
A special insulating strip is
being used to insulate the
i The components are door and window openings.
‘ transported on specn‘illy- Also due to the composition
1 E iii]: filifibbssiie‘zilifdhmc Reduction in 0fthe OSB it is possible to
l \‘ Ease of 5 Ease ofassembly is placement is conducted loss of place Windows Within a
‘ assembly immensely enhanced changeabilit using a crane. The punch energy precut Sl‘P Without adding
y list items are reduced headers illl'thI‘ ineieusing
. , the integrity of the wall
largely by usmg this panel. Some measures have
construction process. been taken such as Low ”E'
glass for skylights.
The concerned party has Access for within the
expended reasonable Ease of mechanical chase is easy but
Clarity of efforts in training the access of regular distribution through
instructions involved personnel and distribution the wall has inbuilt
instructions for assembly systems difficulties as in traditional
are clear, '
Due to component design Elimination
within the factory including 4.
Lesser no or wail pancis me no ot’parts i ‘Of -, .
parts 5 to be handled on site is ’ . ‘y 5 Zoned systems are optional
rimmensely reduced. This heating or
also includes JlT delivery. cooling
Reduction in
Renewable The strategy is non existent use of The strategy is non existent
fuel 1 therefore it is considered traditional 1 therefore it is considered
ineffective. energy ineffective
sources

 

 

 

 

 

 

Distribution Use of flex ducts for
material manageability

U‘I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Intent 13
Building systems
NO- ( DESIE" C“ Thermal . . V
. . . -. . ‘ 4 < < C . Reasons Str Inte rity Se. Reasons
constderations) Spatial flex Sc. Reasons perform SC 2
A special insulating strip
is being used to insulate
the door and windovt
Reduction of openings. Also due to the
loss of heat and composition ofthe OSB it
cold from 5 is possible to place
building wtndows within a precut
envelope SIP without adding
headers further increasing
the integrity ofthe wall
N panel.
b
00
Reduction of The distribution system is
loss of heat and insulated with duct tape
t cold from 5 and all ducting in the attic
i distribution space is insulated \\ ith 2"
i system butt insulation.
. A l t It is assumed that the
L cc ua e . . .
i l des1gn oi the HVA(
. . , natural and /or . .
i Indoor Air Quality a t f ial system provides tor
. . ' r i ie ' . .
(ventilation) . adequate ventilation ol
ventilation . . ,, .
. indoor air. Ihe attic is not
provided . _
spectlied as vented.
Cumulative score 23 26 5
C Plumbing 0.6
1 Architectural design
i i ' i
(‘o 7 er )I mm is Lise l but
Wet cores hate been i p’ i i ‘ k.
, there is no mention 0! any
consolidated to a . . . .
j . . . . Wet cores to be . Reduction in special insualtion to be
_ ,lzngineering design _ 3 certain extend . . .
‘ consolidated . loss 01 heat provided theretore the
cspectally at the . ,
strategy is constdercd
first floor. . ‘,
ineflectne.
l
i
i
“ No special systems
i
are used other than
, Reuse ofheut .
\ a mechanical chase No heat reeov ei‘v system is
Restrict 3 therefore the s stem generated I d l ‘ f * l I '
distribution lines . , y within the .USL Um 0'91" Shaw)
is eonSidcred is conSidered ineffective.
home
reasonably
‘ effective,
t
The stra ‘u '
Reduced ‘ tcgy is non
eXistent therefore it
horizontal l . .
. , , is constdercd
distribution . .
ineffective.
3 Special design
consideration
The strategy is non
. . . , - Gre water _ 5‘ , y
a Water eonseivation y l CXistent therefore it is
reuse . _ .
eonSidered ineffective.
b Fuel requirements
Cumulative score 7 3 0 l3
/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PSI iguamaE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

13 Intent
Ease 0f ‘ R Sustainable Se Reasons Total se. Sex (.‘r.
Ease of const. Se. Reasons maint. Sc. easons design .

N
4>
so

i 20 9 I l 94.00 12032

i‘ \ lThe r‘rmxpnnmttv. are i

l

placement is conducted
using a crane. The punch list
items are reduced largely by
using this construction
process.

assembly immensely enhanced changeabilit

transported on specrally ;
designed trailers to facilitate
Ease Of access at the obsite and
Ease of 5 Ease ofassembly is handling i’ 5 J

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The strategy is non existent
therefore it is conSidered
ineffective.

Grey water
reuse

l
Access for Within the
mechanical chase is easy but
a regular distribution through
a . .
the wall has inbu1lt
difficulties as in traditional
construction. ‘
i I i

i
i

Reduction in

use of The strategy is non existent
l

t

 

traditional therefore it is considered
energy ineffective.

SOUI‘CCS

i
t
\

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

l 2 l 51.00 32.64

 

 

A— h
.—..

 

 

‘ a
w J‘fk

 

OSZ

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

lntent
Building systems
No. ( Design Cr. Thermal ~
' ' ' Str lnte ’rltV Sc. Reasons
conSiderations) Spatial flex Sc. Reasons perform Sc. Reasons L .
D Electrical 0.6
1 Architectural design
Distribution system is
Th t t . Avoid through the wall. since the
D' 'b . .ets rjtigy 1: no.1 compromismg wall is a SIP this does not Adet uate No special insulation
. . t r _ . . ,. . g
2 Engineering design b 15;“ ubtlion to l .CXIS end (”dc 0 e l structural 3 compromise the thermal insuliition l is spccnied tor
e C“ e ls eonSi' ere integrity to performance therefore the i ClCCII'iC‘dl “'ll'l'lt’v
ineffective. . _ .‘ . ‘
place Wiring strategy is conSIdcred
effective.
Distribution system Orientation for openings
is through the wall, is specified as most
since this East/West which is not as
compromises Reduction of satisfactory as South.
Placement of . . . . ._ . . . ' * ,
distribution 1 flCXibility of space use ot artilieial Minimum of ”/o gla/ed
layout in the lighting in the opening required which
system . . .
interior 0fthe daytime has been provided. One
house the strategy bathroom on the second
is considered floor has not window
ineffective. access.
Use of The strategy is non
efficient I existent therefore it is
outlets considered ineffective.
3 Special design
consideration
a Energy requirements
Cumulative score 2 10 l
E Communication 0.3

 

 

 

Architectural design

 

 

 

Engineering design

 

 

Distribution to
be flexible

 

 

 

The strategy is non
existent therefore it
is considered

: ineffective.

 

 

 

 

Avoid
compromising
structural
integrity to
place wiring

 

 

Distribution system is
through the wall, since the
wall is a SIP this does not
compromise the thermal
performance therefore the
strategy is considered
effective.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ISZ

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   
 
   
     
   
       
   
 
     

 

 

  
 
    
 

 

 

  
 
    
   

   
 

   
    
 

 

 
  
      
 

 
  
    
 

   

  

 

 

 

 

  
    
       
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

14 lntent
Ease of Sustainable U ‘ ‘ T l S C _
' . . Reasons , e. Reasons ‘, Sc. Reasons ota sc. c.x .i.
Ease of eonst Sc maint. design
____ ww/ .__ _ _ _
_._ __4________,——— ___._____________
The components are
transported on specially
2 . dcsigiicd trailers to facilitate
Ease of . .
a . . . . access at tlie_iobsite and
Ease of Ease of assembh is handling .
5 . ‘ . . 5 placement is conducted
assembly immenselv enhanced cliangetibilit . _ ,.
' ' ‘ using a crane. lhe punch
\‘ . .
' list items are reduced
largely by using this
construction proccs .
Access for within the
. . _ mechanical chase is can but
Integration The strategy is non CXISICIII , . '
. ‘ . .‘i . regular distribution through
with other therefore it is considered 3 ‘
. .. . the wall has inbuilt
ises lllCilCCllVC ..- . . . .
ditticulties as in traditional
construction.
Regular copper wiring in
, .. . l’VC casing is used ilicreforc
lsc etticiciit “ .
. 3 the strateg\ \\lll be
l . . l \\ HUT}y ‘1‘ ‘ ' v',\r).~~v]ril~l~
, l i ll i l i _’ .-._.t.. i.
Use of The strategy is non e\istent
efficient I therefore it is considered
outlets ineffecti\ e,
Use of
. The strategy is non c\istent
alternative . 7'
. l theretore it is considered
sources of . .. ,
lnCllCCllVC.
encrm
l l 6 l l l 8 l l l 5 l 32.00 20.48
The components are
transported on specially

Ease of
Ease of Ease of assembly is handling /
assembly immensely enhanced changeabilit 5
y

designed trailers to facilitate
access at thejobsite and
placement is conducted
using a crane. The punch
list items are reduced
largely by using this
construction process.

Use eflieicnt
wiring

Regular copper wiring in
PVC casing is used therefore

3 the strategy will be
considered reasonably
ef‘ective.

 

 

 

 

 

 

ll

 

 

ZQZ

 

 

 

 

 

  
    
 
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  
 
   

 

 

 

 

   
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

lntent
Building systems
N0 ( Design Cr. Thermal . - . ~ .
. . . '. . 4 t ‘ ns Str lnte ritv Sc. Reasons
consrderations) Spatial flex Sc. Reasons perform Sc. R0150 t1. .
Distribution system
is through the wall.
since this
Placement of
distribution 1
system
ineffective.
1 Special design
‘ ) consideration
a Integrative design \
Cumulative score 2 i 5 0
F Interior (Type A) 0.5 ‘
1 Architectural design ‘ l k
The strategv is non 'l‘lic sti‘ateg\ is non
. “ . . Mm cable . ' . . ._
. . . Detachable CXistent therefore it Adequate . _ Adequate insulation is existent therefore it is
2 Engineering deSign l . , . . . . changeable
“ ” “ outlets is conSidered insulation inbUilt into products considered
. .. . elements ..
inet’tectiye. inetlectiyc.
The strategy is non The strategy is non
. , . , . existent therefore it Flexibility of e\istciit therefore it is
Eliminate wiring l . . .’ . .
“ is conSIdcred assembling units considered
ineffective, ineffectii c.
The strategy is non
iElimination of 1 existent therefore it
partition walls is considered
ineffective,
1 \SpeCial design
. .J ..
Use of The strategy is non
a Energy requirements efficient I existent therefore it is
outlets considered ineffective.
Use of The strategy is non
efficient I existent therefore it is
wiring l considered ineffective.
Cumulative score ‘ \ 3 ‘ 7 k 2 15

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

l; lntent
Ease of Sustainable ‘ ‘ T H _ ,
4 t. s s .. otal st. Sui Cr.
“ ‘ . . Reasons . Sc. Rtasons x , Sc. Rtasoiis
base of eonst Sc maint. (ltSign
Access for within the
[\3 . .
U1 mechanical chase is easy but
Ease of rcgtilar distribution through
access ' the wall has inbuilt
difficulties as in traditional
construction.
Integration The strategy is noti existent V . . . The strategy is non existent
. c . '. . lzlimiiiation i . . i
\\ ith other 1 theretore it is constdercd f , . l theretorc it is constdercd
. .e . 0 Wiring . fl .
uses incttcctiye. ” inettcctiye.
o 9 3 25.00 8 00
. . 'Ease oi‘ :, c . ' ’
c The strategy is non existent . l he strategy is non existent
Ease ot i . '. . handling i f“, _
l theretore it is eons‘idered . . 1 theretorc it is considered
assembly . .i . cliangcabilit . e.
' incttectne. inctlectnc.
y
e H . The strategy is non existent
htticicnt , ‘ '. V
l tlieretore it is considered
outlets , it i
inettectiye.
Use of , . .
_ . The strategy is non existent
alteinatiye c . '. ,
c | theretore it is considered
sources of . .
ineffective.
energy
Efficient The strategy is non existent
i therefore it is considered
appliances . i t
lineftective.
15 1 1 3 47.00 22.56

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

l lntent , l6
Building systems

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No. (Design Cr. Thermal l .
considerations) Spatial flex Sc. Reasons perform Se. Reasons Str Integrity Se. Reasons
G Interior (Type B) 0.2 I I i 1i i
l l
st ' is non . . , The strategy is non
Changeabilitv 01 The rategy . Material The strategy is non Moveable/ ,- g t ._ . _
i t ‘ ‘ extstcnt therefore it . _ ‘ . . extstcnt lllCICltilL it is
1 Architectural destgn spaces as l . side d thermal l eXistcnt therefOie it is changeable I considered
is con re . . .c . c
, '- ' ‘r‘d ‘tt ‘tiye. ‘l ‘m ‘nts , H .
requuements ineffective. performance C0nSldt, c inc ec c L c ineffective.
The strate is non Summer and t
. gy . i The strategy is non
N . i . Modular extstcnt therefore it Winter . .
U1 2 Engineering destgn . . . . V . l extstcnt therefore it is
.;.\ furniture deSign is consrdered partition . . i .
. . . constdercd ineffective.
ineffective dCSign
3 Special design
consideration
The strategy is non
. . existen h ref r‘ it
a Flextble space destgn Access floor 1 . H e 0 L
is constdercd
ineffective.
i
The strategy is non
existent theref '
Movable walls 1 . . ore It
is conSidered
ineffective.
‘ Cumulative score 8 4 2 l l
' l i i l ‘
1 [Final score : l [l i i { I l()

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

       
     
      
      
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

16 lntent
Ease of Sustainable ,. ‘ ‘
Ease of const. Sc. Reasons , Sc. Reasons , Sc. Reasons lotal se. Sex (, r.
maint. destgn
”if—é ___*,_____’__s___.fi_
. . Ease of . . , . g _ .
The strategy is non extstcnt . The strategy is non CXlStCtli . lhc strategy is non existent
Ease of . . i handling/ . . , Material . g i . . g
I therefore it is constdercd ” . . therefore it is constdercd . 1 therefore it is considered
assembly . . ehangcabilit . . chOice . .. .
ineffective. ‘ ineffective ineffective
Y
i . Ease of . . Alternative ,. .
The strategy is non extstcnt , The strategy is non extstcnt . lhc strategy is non existent
Ease of . . , handling / . . . . material use . . . .
N 1 therefore it is conSIdered . . 1 therefore it is constdercd l therefore it is consrdcred
U! assembly . . . changeabtltt . . . rather than , . .
U1 ineffective. ineffective. ineffective.
lumber
1 The strategy is non existent
1 therefore it is considered
. ineffective.
i
2 i for i i
l i ~ i I 3 14.00 3.36
i
16 i i i i } 360.00 654

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

II"

‘3 (_ __

   

igii‘iiiiiiijiiiiiiiiji