ALL CHANGE

From the introduction to IGS Intelligent Glass Solutions - The Glass Supper Special Issue 4/2011

“First see that the design is wise and just; that ascertained; pursue it resolutely.” [William Shakespeare, 1564-1616]

A special issue of the IGS was published in connection with the inaugural Glass Supper event in London, December 2011.  The event brought together in a new setting people within the world of building envelope design and technology, facilitating discussion and the exchange of ideas.

In line with the Glass Supper agenda, the IGS Issue offers an exclusive overview of new frontiers of facade technology, design, and professions, featuring some of the most prominent projects around offering insights into current challenges and recent achievements.  The cross section of case stories and opinion is high calibre and worth your while in this age of information overload.

The collection of articles offers a positive outlook and sets out a number of exciting opportunities for the Industry.  The common denominator is high performance as a driver - high performance at component scale, building scale, or - indeed - at district/urban scale.  The iconic projects presented as case stories are of course not typical, but they do (quite literally) put high performance on the map and they may serve as inspiration for others with comparatively smaller projects.

The articles show progress from different perspectives.  Distinguished authors write about state-of-the-art sustainable master planning for Masdar City in the Middle East, cutting edge skyscraper design for The Shard in London and ‘HQ’ in Abu Dhabi, super exclusive residential development for One Hyde Park in London, and leading environmentally responsible design for the European Central Bank and the Dancing Towers in Hamburg.

The Issue and the Glass Supper explore technological progress and new frontiers. Unsurprisingly, the focus is on glass and glazed facades with a mix of articles on structural performance, testing, geometry-driven design, and light management.  Common to the stories featured is the drive for perfection, presented from different but inter-linked perspectives.

“Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing more to take away.” [Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, 1900-1944]

A new generation of architects are emerging.  They have grown up with computer-aided design, they are more than conversant with information technology generally, and they are keen to break the mould of new architecture.  Now, while there is nothing new about young architects wanting to make their mark, the current market conditions and the ever increasing focus on sustainable design together put additional pressure on the industry to come up with new methods and technologies.

When talking about complex geometry buildings, it is worth distinguishing between freeform and facetted buildings, both of which can be highly demanding in terms of technology and design process. Freeform buildings - and fluid form architectural envelopes - not only require management of complex geometrical data, but also manufacture of curved elements.  The material selection and the details of production processes quickly become fundamental to developing buildable and commercially feasible solutions.  Similarly, facetted buildings require extensive work on complex interfaces to assess feasibility and manage risks and costs.

“Form follows function - that has been misunderstood. Form and function should be one, joined in a spiritual union.” [Frank Lloyd Wright, 1867-1959]

Clients (Investors; Developers; Building Owners) employ others to develop their projects and turn them into ‘reality’. A commercially, architecturally, and technically successful project depends on the management of the process and the competencies of the people involved.  Conventional methods and definitions of responsibilities are beginning to fall short.

The importance of the building envelope is undisputed.  The building envelope is a key element of architectural expression - the face of the building, if you will - it is essential in terms of building performance = and it easily represents 25 per cent of construction costs.

As the field becomes increasingly technological the need for specialist input grows.  Yet, there is no formal set of qualifications for those who deal with the design, production, and installation of facades.

• Is the building envelope a key architectural element?  Tick!
• Does the building envelope represent significant risks?  Tick!
• Does the building envelope represent significant opportunities?  Tick!
• Is the building envelope key to building performance?  Tick!
• Do Clients explicitly state their requirements in terms of professional accreditation?  No!

Tic ... Tic ... Tic ... Tic ... BOOM!

The absence of professional accreditation and certification may explain some of the very costly problems commonly encountered on construction projects - regardless of scale, budget, type of project, and geographical location.

Once Clients begin to explicitly require certification - for example in their contracts and specifications - the industry will need to react and the level of certified competency immediately becomes an important parameter when contracts are awarded.  Such accreditation is NOW being offered through the Society of Facade Engineering.

The ability to clearly define and articulate architectural intent and specify performance will go a long way to avoid misunderstandings, problems, disappointment, and financial losses.  While the Client requires the right collaborators to put down the information in some form of contractual document, the Contractor needs to employ the right people to pick up the information and respond with appropriate solutions that are appropriately costed.  For the process to run smoothly, the Client in turn needs people and advisors with the right skills to engage with the contractors and check whether the contractual information is understood and respected.

The need to come up with sustainable solutions - in the first instance driven by a ‘stick’ approach through building regulations on national and international level - in the second instance as a ‘carrot’ approach by first movers and visionary clients who have understood the commercial benefit of high performance and voluntary certification of their buildings.

The trend is there, clearly.  In a competitive market, the costumer will opt for the building with the best environmental rating - everything else equal.  And environmentally responsible design has been shown to be good for business at multiple levels.

Little wonder then that there is such a need for a fresh approach to collaboration and delivery of integrated design solutions.

While we should celebrate the vast achievements described in the IGS Glass Supper Issue and take comfort in the fact that development is taking place across the industry, it is also clear that new technological progress can only be brought into practice if these new integrated principles are reflected by the scope and skills of the professions and the available methods of procurement.

Quoting one of the greatest architects and engineers of all time:

“Many are ready, when listening to the inventor, to belittle and deny his achievements, so that he will no longer be heard in honourable places. But after some months or a year they use the inventor’s words, in speech or writing or design. They boldly call themselves the inventors of the things they first condemned, and attribute the glory of another to themselves.” [Filippo Brunelleschi, 1377-1446]

It is easy to dismiss new ways of doing things with reference to trivial challenges, whereas a change in the right direction often requires commitment and effort.

All Change ...

Pushing the Envelope

"In a sense, we are witnessing a return to design before the era of air-conditioning and a rediscovery of fundamental design principles coupled with cutting edge technological solutions."

The past year has been dominated by two issues, which will continue to impact on the way we go about our business as building designers. Firstly, the implications of climate change and the way our buildings increasingly need to deliver high performance and low impact. The effects are felt in the form of legislation, but also increasingly as a demand in the marketplace for sustainability rated buildings. Secondly, the economic crisis has had – and continues to have – significant implications, and both businesses and professionals are feeling the strain.

During these difficult times, the Society of Facade Engineering (SFE) has been steadily expanding and raising awareness of the facade engineering as an essential component of integrated design and delivery of buildings and building envelopes. The discipline is potentially maximising value for clients and offering the broad technical approach needed for the realisation of sustainable buildings to increasingly challenging programs and budgets in a global market. This could be the decade of the Facade Engineer.

The Society is embryonic and a step change is needed in terms its uptake by the industry. We need to reach critical mass for industry to identify SFE membership as the only recognition of professional qualifications and experience, for individuals to seek membership as a way of furthering their careers, and for clients to come to expect accredited professionals working on the delivery of their projects. Good work is being done and we are continuing to reach out geographically and across the more traditional disciplines.

In his influential work De Architectura, Roman architect Vitruvius talks about the three elements of Architecture: Commodity, Firmness, and Delight. There are interesting parallels to the nature of façade engineering in that the building envelope needs to fulfil the functional requirements and meet the specified performance criteria, while having a fundamental impact on architectural aesthetics and the intangible qualities of the resulting enclosed space. This, then, is perhaps one of the aspects that appeal to a new generation of technically minded architects and architecturally minded engineers? There is no doubt that the nature of façade engineering can be both complex and stimulating. Appropriate application of highly specialised skills is potentially the difference between a successful project and a less successful one.

The need for specialist input stems from the gradual transition from traditional to non-traditional methods and technologies. Technological progress and the industrialisation of the construction industry mean that the role of the Architect is changing from that of controlling the design through a profound knowledge of materials and techniques to a role of orchestration of a multitude of specialist skills, knowledge, and industry intelligence – possibly benefiting from façade engineering input throughout the various stages of the design process. The increasing complexity of the technology and the recognition that not many architectural practices can sustain in-house skills in every field resulted in façade engineering as a relatively new professional discipline. The first façade engineering groups were set up around 20 years ago in response to the need for specialist input on technically challenging projects. Façade engineering covers the grey area between the more traditional disciplines but also overlaps significantly with all of them, to varying degrees depending on the circumstances.

The advances of computational design tools have empowered designers and manufacturers and the results show in the realisation of large scale freeform architectural projects. While the designs are made possible by technology, they also pose significant challenges in term of communication and coordination across the design team and the entire supply chain. The management of information is paramount in terms of delivery and the early stage engineering is critical in order to test technical feasibility and assess the building envelope budget.

One of the key challenges for the years to come is the existing building mass, which needs to be upgraded to perform to today’s standards and contribute to the mitigation of climate change. We need to fundamentally alter the prevailing perception that existing buildings are somehow less exciting than new ones. Requalification of buildings and cities will become an increasingly important market and we need the right technologies and skills to face the challenges ahead. The building envelope is instrumental to the successful combination of upgraded performance and architectonic qualities. Both aspects will drive up the value of assets and lead to the demand for new retrofitting technologies and techniques, including thermal insulation and solar shading systems.

We are seeing an increasing focus on materials in the design of building envelopes. The term new materials frequently refers to high tech products being developed by the industry and/or sometimes transferred from other sectors such as aerospace or automotive. As an example, we are seeing an increase in the uptake of composite materials such as fibre-reinforced polymers (FRP) in architectural applications. Similarly, a number of adhesives have been adopted in the development of advanced glazing technology. Just as frequently though, the materials are merely used in a novel way or introduced as a modern interpretation of traditional methods of construction. An example is the recent focus on timber-based construction, which is increasingly popular as cladding due to its aesthetical qualities and sustainable characteristics.

The performance of commercially available curtain walling systems is enhanced incrementally through design optimisation and development of glazing technology. In terms of thermal performance, the principal limiting factor is the framing, which is typically based on use of thermally broken aluminium extrusions. The combination of aluminium frames and the glazing edge conditions leads to linear thermal losses and relatively high thermal transmittance (U-value). The benefit of high performance insulation is somewhat limited by the performance of the framing and can therefore be hard to justify the associated costs.

There is a need for façade systems that respond to the building energy regulations and the significantly more stringent requirements in the future. The technological response must be environmentally responsible as planning and legislation are increasingly used as instruments to drive a more sustainable development. More visionary clients will often rank sustainability very highly from the outset, while comparatively more conservative clients will need to address the issues in order to meet the building regulations and/or get planning permission.

The challenges are being dealt with at different levels across the industry. The Integrated Building Envelope is an example of joint development of novel technological solutions in collaboration across the value chain. The Danish foundation Realdania supported the collaborative project under the Building Lab DK programme. As part of a wider-ranging commercial development project, an industry consortium explored the use of composite materials in curtain walling. The initiative is an effort to challenge conventional technologies and maximise the opportunities offered by pultruded FRP materials in architectural applications. FRP’s low thermal conductivity means that there is no need for additional thermal breaks to achieve high thermal performance. The pultrusion process allows for production of large cross sections, which means that it is possible to reduce the number of components, thereby potentially simplifying the assembly process and creating a new architectural expression. A simple and highly integrated modular system can be realised with significantly reduced depth of the façade system, thus potentially maximising the value of the building footprint.

A first concept has been developed, aimed at maximum utilisation of the intrinsic properties of the composite material within the context of curtain walling:

• Low thermal conductivity
• Large pultruded FRP sections
• Compact (slim) system
• Structurally bonded connections
• Lightweight
• Limited number of parts
• Appearance (potentially translucent)

The concept addresses the fabrication and assembly processes and actively aims to minimise the number of parts and the need for machining. The result is a potentially highly rationalised manufacturing process and reduced risk in terms of workmanship.

[The Integrated Building Envelope _ Visual Mock-up]

The drive for buildings to become energy efficient and carbon neutral (i.e. not resulting in emissions of carbon dioxide, the exact definition of carbon neutrality is currently being debated extensively) may ultimately result in range of buildings that are – on average – net exporters of energy. The approach is to first maximise energy-efficient design and operation (minimising demand) and subsequently introduce appropriate renewable energy systems such as ground source heat pumps.  Low cost photovoltaic technology is an area where the building envelope offers true integration potential and consequently acceptable payback periods. The ability for professionals to introduce such systems appropriately is increasingly important. The feasibility of concepts needs to be tested during the early stages of design in order to avoid gain confidence that the project will meet the required performance standards, be technically feasible, and that the budget is likely to be met. The linking of analytical design tools is potentially facilitating this process. Again, integration and transdisciplinary working is a recipe for success and the careful definition of interfaces by suitably qualified professionals will prove crucial in order to avoid costly problems downstream, during commissioning and operation.

The development of advanced technology has often led to what appears to be complex buildings with variable and automated facades that respond to changes in environmental conditions and user behaviour. Clearly these systems represent progress in a technological sense and, when dealt with appropriately, the technology can facilitate high performance and bring about interesting architectural opportunities. There is, however, also a risk that certain systems are incorporated because they are seen as advanced technology and have come to symbolise high performance design (or even sustainable solutions). Green Wash is the term used to describe design which is over-sold and under-delivered as sustainable through high tech gimmicks as opposed to pragmatic, evidence-based (and perhaps less exciting) solutions. Every project is unique and needs to respond to the client’s requirement, local climate, etc, and there is no one-size-fits-all solution for building design. The aim should always be high performance - low impact. At times the appropriate solution will be a highly technological design, at other times a passive design will be more appropriate. Passive design is based on fundamental principles and seeks to maximise the benefit of the natural climate and the physics of the building form, orientation, materials, etc. To this end, the building envelope is of fundamental importance and much can be gained from early stage studies of the impact of the building envelope on the environmental performance of the building. Advanced design tools and appropriate use of building physics has a lot to offer in this field. In a sense, we are witnessing a return to design before the era of air-conditioning and a rediscovery of fundamental design principles coupled with cutting edge technological solutions.

FACADE ENGINEERING EXPLAINED

What do façade engineers do?

Façade Engineers concern themselves with everything to do with a building’s external envelope above ground level. Many names can be used to describe the envelope, for instance:

·         Cladding

·         Curtain wall

·         Stonework

·         Glass

·         Masonry

·         Other materials and cladding types

Some façade engineers are also skilled in roofing.

Façade Engineers will consider the performance of such materials and systems in various respects:

·         Weathertightness

·         Structural behaviour

·         Interaction with the primary structure

·         Thermal gains and losses through the façade

·         Occupant comfort and energy efficiency

·         Shading

·         Condensation

·         Ventilation

·         Durability

·         Sustainability

·         Natural light admittance

·         Fire behaviour of the building envelope

·         Acoustic performance

·         Safety and serviceability

·         Security

·         Maintenance and buildability

Façade Engineers provide advice on both existing and new buildings. They may be involved in design, working alongside the architect, QS and structural and mechanical engineers, or may work within contracting or manufacturing. Alternatively, they may be involved in surveying or diagnostic and remedial work. Some façade engineers are involved in research and testing.

What is a façade engineer?

Façade Engineers come from a range of backgrounds but most usually architectural, structural or building physics.  In order then to become a facade engineer, they have then developed a wider breadth of cladding skills and a deeper knowledge than they would encounter within their original discipline.

Many façade engineers will be generalist façade engineers. These are able to advise across the full range of materials, systems and performance types.

Specialist façade engineers will typically first have attained a level of knowledge across all façade types and then have chosen to specialise in one particular aspect of façade engineering. Examples are façade engineers whose emphasis is in building envelope physics, using analytical modelling skills; or façade engineers that specialise in a particular cladding material such as stone or glass. Parallels exist with other professions with generalist and specialist divisions e.g. legal where there are solicitors and barristers, and medicine where there are general practitioners and consultants.

It may be difficult for clients at the inception of their project to decide which type of façade engineer they require.  A general practice façade engineer is best placed to determine this for the particular circumstances of a client’s individual project and advise on façade specialisms that may be needed.

What value can façade engineers contribute to a project?

·         Performance led design. Delivering facades that do what is required of them!

·         Excellence in design

·         Risk control

·         Driving cost out

·         Continuity through  fabrication and installation stages

·         Attention to quality as the design becomes a physical reality

·         Verifying performance.

·         Cladding performance when the occupants move into the building

·         Troubleshooting when problems occur

How does this differ from what others in the design team already do?

Facades have become complicated beyond the skills of architects, structural and mechanical engineers. Facades require a dedicated engineer with a particular range of skills and experience, who understands their behaviour and can undertake their design, manufacture and installation better, more efficiently and more comprehensively than can a traditional architect, structural or mechanical engineer.

[Selfriges, Birmingham UK _ Future Systems. Photo (c) Graham Gaunt]

The role of the Society of Facade Engineering in setting standards

The SFE was established in order to:

·         Act as a qualifying body for competency in the façade engineering profession. This involves assessment of candidates’ experience and knowledge in facades and their skills to handle client’s façade requirements professionally and competently.

·         Protect clients’ interests by allowing them to identify competent façade engineers through the membership grading system.

·         Act as a learned body maintaining and  raising the technical and professional standards of the façade engineer

The SFE is not a Trade Body. Membership is not achieved simply by subscription.

[Source: Society of Facade Engineering _ www.facadeengineeringsociety.org]

"It's hard to fall out of love with Mies's glass box"

Architects' obsession with glazed facades is coming to an end, says Arup facade specialist Mikkel Kragh. He tells Amanda Birch how the future will look very different.


You have said that this could be the decade of the facade engineer - what did you mean by that?


The building envelope represents 25% of construction costs. It is fundamental in terms of building performance, it is the image of the building and there is tremendous need for co-ordination and integration to avoid costly failures and shortcomings. The focus on value for money, combined with environmental performance as a driver, is putting new emphasis on the role of the facade engineer as an integrator.


What are the key issues facing facade design?


Architects need to be aware of two main issues: first, adapting existing buildings to deal with a changing climate; and, second, enhancing performance to mitigate climate change. With retrofit and new- build we need to consider performance not just in terms of energy consumption but also embodied carbon.


Are we going to see fewer commercial buildings with floor-to-ceiling glass?


I was part of a glass debate a few years ago and it was considered that the market was driving the floor-to-ceiling aesthetic. Letting agents claimed they couldn't attract tenants without large amounts of glass. We felt we should educate the market.


It's not necessary to feature fully glazed buildings - non-transparent facades can be just as exciting. However, we are not there yet. The market appears to expect transparent buildings. It's almost a default expectation and is not the right starting point. In the future we will see an increased emphasis on materiality - glass is a wonderful material but it could be used differently.


We are doing research into composite facades [glass fibre reinforced polymers] and we should be considering low carbon options and designs for disassembly and the reuse of materials.

[translucent fibre-reinforced polymers]

In our research into timber as a structural material in high-rise buildings, we predict that timber will be used as a low-carbon structural material that will be integrated with the cladding, and we will see a return to more traditional ways of construction.


Is energy-efficiency becoming more important than a facade's appearance?


It depends on who you are talking to. As someone once said:


"Good architecture must be sustainable but not all sustainable architecture is good architecture."


There are architects who go further than the building regulation requirements, but the typical scenario is an architect asking: "How much glass can we get?" This is obviously the wrong question as it's aiming for the lowest acceptable performance of the facade and this is really sad.


It is hard to fall out of love with Mies's glass box, but I predict that materials and materiality will drive a new trend after having indulged in so-called "transparency" for the last few decades.

[Ludwig Mies van der Rohe]

What buildings have you worked on with facades that we could learn from?


With Ropemaker Place [designed by Arup Associates] we designed a facade that fulfilled three scenarios: it complied with building regulations, it followed the client's brief, and the team wanted to design a sustainable building for a low-energy tenant - it was brilliant!

[Ropemaker Place _ Arup Associates. Photo (c) James Ward]

I also worked on the Danish Pavilion for the Shanghai Expo 2010 with Danish architect BIG. We proposed not having air-conditioning in the pavilion, which fundamentally changed everyone's expectations for a summer Expo in Shanghai. Instead we naturally ventilated the building.  The pavilion was made from a perforated steel envelope and featured large openings at ground and roof level. It was a beautifully integrated building and attracted 5.5 million visitors.

[Danish Pavilion, Expo 2010, Shanghai _ BIG Architects]

What new facade materials are you researching?


We've been working on composite materials [glass fibre reinforced polymers] and what these new materials can do in high performance facade systems. We are also looking at low-cost, transparent, building-integrated photovoltaics, which is the Holy Grail. We are focusing on bringing down the cost of PVs and we are at the early stages of developing this. The technology won't be on the market for another few years and we are yet to see if these PV coatings are aesthetically acceptable.

[translucent fibre-reinforced polymers _ The Integrated Building Envelope]

I'm also involved with companies such as Formtexx to create cost- effective free-form envelopes that enable architects to work more freely with form.


Has there been an improvement in collaboration between the disciplines of architecture, structures and services to achieve a well-integrated facade?


There is always room for improvement, but it has got better. Clients are more aware now and we can save them money and trouble if they possess a good business sense and want facades that not only comply with the regulations, but deliver over and above this level to provide high performance and low environmental impact.


Why do you believe the term facade engineering should be changed to building envelope engineering?


A lot of people associate facade engineering with hi-tech steel and glass but it is much more than that. Facade engineering also deals with, for example, roofs, conventional brickwork, stone and composites and is a very broad field. However, I fear the name won't change as people have invested a lot of time and energy putting facade engineering on the map.


Are the Part L building regulations relating to facade design stringent enough?


Personally, I think some curtain walling systems will struggle to comply with a strict interpretation of the regulations. Coming up with solutions and understanding the subtleties required is not that trivial anymore.
We will see new systems coming in and less transparent facades, but I do believe we can go further. The end game is that buildings should be energy efficient. How we get there is a political decision and a compromise between industry professionals and a need to reduce carbon emissions.


What is your favourite facade?


This is not an easy question as there are many modern examples, but I will mention an historical example instead, which is Gropius's Bauhaus in Dessau. It's an unbelievably modern and elegant building for its time especially when you take into account that it was built in 1925. 

[Walter Gropius]

The facade wouldn't perform to today's standards, so it has problems, but I would like to take inspiration from it for developing facade design that, as they say, does what it says on the tin - it's very simple, does the job and is outstanding.

[Bauhaus Dessau _ 1925 _ Walter Gropius]

[Building Design 21 April 2011 (c) 2011 CMP Information Ltd.]

Facade Engineering Insight

YouTube style interview recorded in connection with the Facade Design and Engineering conference in London, October 2010.

Design Science

"

The function of what I call design science is to solve problems by introducing into the environment new artifacts, the availability of which will induce their spontaneous employment by humans and thus, coincidentally, cause humans to abandon their previous problem-producing behaviors and devices. For example, when humans have a vital need to cross the roaring rapids of a river, as a design scientist I would design them a bridge, causing them, I am sure, to abandon spontaneously and forever the risking of their lives by trying to swim to the other shore.

"

[R. Buckminster Fuller, from Cosmography _Source: Buckminster Fuller Institute]

Engineering and Material Evidence (interview)

Your specialisms are; facade engineering, building physics, integrated design, facade technology and R&D, building performance simulation. What do you find so fascinating about the building skin?


I find the building envelope fascinating because of its obvious impact on architectural expression and the spaces we design. Successful design, engineering, and production of building envelopes require integration across disciplines. The building envelope has a – for me at least – unparalleled impact on the perceived qualities of architecture – in terms of both aesthetics and performance.


At the seminar you said: “there is definitely science in what we do”, This, I believe, is related to your understanding of Material Evidence! How is Material Evidence developed and evaluated in your praxis?


We would probably never use the term ‘Material Evidence’, but our Firm [Arup] is generally known for its creative and innovative approach to Design. As engineers – or designers – we are often trying out solutions beyond ‘the known’ and forced to work from first principles. One of my tasks is to spot research elements embedded in our engineering work – Research which would normally go undetected because the engineer sees it as a natural part of solving an engineering problem or challenge. Communication is instrumental to the creative approach and the testing of innovative ideas involves mathematical, physical, and virtual modelling.


In the Material Evidence seminar you talked about the idea of “total design” as a practise taking place between the disciplines. Could you elaborate on this idea and explain how this new interdisciplinary process creates a new platform for research in architecture?


Total Design takes on different meanings depending on context. I guess it’s shorthand for integration of disciplines and the aspiration to not try and engineer an architectural vision, but develop solutions, which work well at every level. For sake of argument: the shape of a roof may be driven by a certain ventilation strategy, while at the same time working well structurally and generating a beautiful space. Another example is the way building design should be sustainable, integrated with the urban context as well as the use of resources and energy – aspects which require a range of skills not necessarily pertaining to traditional building engineering disciplines.


This Material Evidence or knowledge you produce. How is that spread within the Firm? How do you recycle knowledge within the Firm?


The harvesting and dissemination of knowledge is the corner stone of development and innovation. In Arup, we have recognised the importance of knowledge sharing a long time ago and the result is a wide range of tools and platforms, ranging from skills networks and online forums to project databases and various forms of publications. We have also recently launched the Arup University, which takes our in-house training to another level with well-defined learning standards and collaborations with Universities.


At the seminar you mentioned the roadmap; what is the role of the roadmap?


Roadmapping is a type of management forecasting tool that can be used in a number of ways: as a method for capturing a time sequence of trends, targets and responses, as a living agenda covering tactical and strategic level objectives as a company-wide project plan. It can also act as an enabler for sharing market goals in supply chains and promotes team buy-in to corporate strategy and planning. We develop the roadmaps in workshops with key people in the firm and use the roadmap when prioritising our internal investments.


In the seminar you present the project “THE INTEGRATED BUILDING ENVELOPE” What is the main motivation for entering into such a project?


We were invited to a pre-project, exploring innovation and future building technology. It was an interesting opportunity to network and explore development opportunities. After a series of workshops, we proposed to create a consortium and develop new technology, employing new materials in a commercial building envelope application. It was a way of ‘pushing the envelope’ in terms of technology and the way facade systems are developed. Clearly we were also interested in the networking aspect.


At the seminar you said: It is because we feel that we can do better; according to seeking an alternative to aluminium! Could you elaborate on this professional drive for inventing better solutions?


We were not specifically seeking and alternative to aluminium, we were rather seeking to see how far we could get, using composites in a commercial curtain walling applications. Aluminium is the de facto standard in curtain walling frames. Because of the very high thermal conductivity of aluminium and the need to reduce thermal transmission, the frames need to be thermally broken which introduces complexity and cost. We started with a material with a lower thermal conductivity – a material with modifiable characteristics – and wanted to design around the properties of that material instead of mimicking conventional materials such as steel and aluminium. We set ourselves a series of very ambitious goals and worked to what we saw as a commercially relevant set of performance requirements.


The participants involved in this project represented a section through the supply chain. How does this group of different trade groups help to create new knowledge /Material Evidence?


We put together a consortium across the supply chain in an effort to develop technology, which was considered in a 360° view. We facilitated sharing of knowledge through a considered combination of workshops, site visits, and in-depth research and design. The sharing of knowledge and the development of concepts took place through use of sketching, modelling, and prototyping as appropriate. We went to great lengths to create an environment where information could be shared and the participants were free to contribute, using the most appropriate means of design communication.


What is the role of the demonstrator in this particular project?


We developed a number of models – both virtual and physical – during the project. We delivered what we called a visual mock-up on the conclusion of the first stage of the project (which was supported by Realdania under the Building Lab DK programme). The purpose of the visual mock-up was to communicate to ourselves and to our prospective clients ‘the look and feel’ of the new material in a novel curtain walling application. Clearly, an important element of this activity was to learn about the material and the challenges associated with the assembly processes.


You described a model on Buildability as a trinity of financial, technical and architectural importance. You said; “If you can solve this triangle you have a project”. Could you elaborate on the three aspects?


Did I? Well yes, when we deal with the relatively complex projects, we need to develop solutions which are technically feasible within the available budget, while ‘delivering’ the architectural vision. Compromises are inevitable and so the challenge is to develop a solution which meets (or exceeds!) the client’s brief, manage expectations along the way, and work closely with the contractors to minimise or avoid problems during construction. A typical example would be the delivery of a fluid form architectural building envelope in a relatively rational and economical way. The way you break down the fluid form into discrete elements is inevitably a compromise for the architect. Technically it needs to be feasible and buildable. And it needs to be realised within a given budget or it’s ‘back to the drawing board’.


At the seminar you talked about the many buildings being thought in two dimensions; you talked about the ability to think in build dimension, could you elaborate on this?


I was referring to the way details are traditionally drawn up in two dimensions whereas the real challenge is to resolve the interface details in three dimensions. The widespread use of CAD means the details may be mistakenly read as resolved, whereas they may not be fully developed at all. We say that ‘the devil is in the detail’ and this is particularly the case for complex building details. An experienced designer will be able to think the detail in three dimensions and also be able to sketch it freehand. The ability to sketch is key to ‘thinking on your feet’ and developing buildable solutions. There is a generation gap between, on the one hand, the wiz kids who master advanced CAD software but have limited design experience and, on the other hand, experienced designers with limited knowledge of – and interest in – CAD tools.


You talked about this “hands on” - material and - building process. How does that contribute to the development of knowledge?


Again, I was referring to the way your knowledge of materials and the way things are put together naturally informs the way you go about designing – whether you are designing building envelopes or other things. If you are exploring ways of using new materials in architecture - or using materials in a new way in architecture – it is probably a good idea to spend some time in the workshop or the factory to gain an understanding of their characteristics and behaviour. An example is our building envelope development project, exploring the use of fibre-reinforced polymers (glass fibre) in facades. The experience of cutting the material and testing different types of bonded connections gave the designers an appreciation of the limitations and the possibilities.


You presented a series of beautiful hand drawn detail drawings and discussed these as being a particular way of solving problems. How do you learn from this material evidence?


The sketches are a fundamental part of the development of facade details and communication between the various members of the design team and other stakeholders. The sketch is powerful as a very immediate means of communication and, while the format clearly sets out principles and subtle details, it also clearly shows that it is design in development. A CAD drawing may be seen as a final design even if, in reality, it is an early draft and full of flaws. A catalogue of sketches is a good starting point for development of solutions in response to project-specific requirements.


How does material evidence like the demonstrator intersect with other sorts of material evidence such as detailed hand sketches and cad drawings?


The hand sketches are part of the exchange of ideas and the development of solutions, which are then firmed up as detailed drawings and shop drawings. The mock-up allows the designer to explore the materiality and also experience the issues associated with working the material and assembling the components and the system. The mock-up communicates to other stakeholders what the concept is in a way which a sketch would only do to specialists.


Would it be right to say that the demonstrator tests solutions suggested by the sketches? What is a shop drawing?


The sketches are used to develop the solutions while the visual mock-up (or the demonstrator) is a physical representation of the preferred option. Shop drawings are the production information which is fed from the designers to the workshop or factory.


You talked about the sketch book as a way to document this process and to communicate it. What is the role of the sketch book?


The sketch book has become our preferred way of communicating our design process because it captures the process and sets out options and solutions in a condensed way. The graphical nature of the sketchbook appeals to architects and clients and helps steer the conversation towards design decisions. It is also a quite powerful medium for back tracking the process you have been through and avoid time-consuming discussions. The sketchbook usually does not capture ‘hard core’ engineering calculations, but deliberately seeks to provide examples of previous projects and suggest alternative solutions and recommendation.


How do you as a project manager create breeding ground for this kind of knowledge production?


It depends on the context. In our development project it was interesting to observe the ‘creative tension’ between the abstract and open-minded architects wanting to explore unchartered territory and – in sharp contract – the detail-focussed engineers, who were keen to agree on a solution to be able to go away and work it up in detail. I put the group in different situations and different settings to facilitate and encourage new perspectives and new collaborations. Sometimes it worked very well, sometimes it worked less well. Again, it comes down to people and it is intrinsically challenging to free up the most gifted designers to spend time on what can be seen as an ‘esoteric’ activity.


Would you re-use this method in future development projects?


Overall, I was pleased with the method. Ideally, the process would have been more intensive and the meetings would have been more frequent, but the idea of meeting in different locations and doing workshops followed by research and engineering activity worked well and – unsurprisingly – the group worked better and better as the project progressed.


Could you maybe specify or sum up on the overall method “workshops followed by research” in relation to our topic?


In this context the workshop is a forum for presentation of work carried out by individuals and working group, discussion and exchange of ideas, collaborative design and identification of areas for further research and development. The participants leave the workshop with an understanding of the challenges across the board and not just from their own perspective. Their efforts during the following stage will ideally be informed by considerations brought to the table by the project partners and the impact of their research will potentially be higher.


E.g. how is material evidence from the workshops evaluated or transferred into research or knowledge? And what kind of “engineering activity” follows after each workshop?


The activities in a workshop will span across presentations in various forms, enquiry, discussions and collaborative sketching, model building, and ad hoc testing. There is a sense of validation after the review in the workshop, but the theories need backing up by some analytical work such as engineering calculations and physical testing.


[Dr Kragh, interviewed by Maria Hellesøe Mikkelsen, Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, School of Architecture]