Energy Dynamics in Design; an inquiry on embodied energy through architectural detailing by Abhinav Jayanti

Energy Dynamics in Design

an inquiry on embodied energy through architectural detailing Abhinav Jayanti UA3317 Guided by Prof. Sankalpa

Directed Research Program Spring 2022 Faculty of Architecture, CEPT University 1

Page left blank intentionally

UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAMME IN ARCHITECTURE STUDENT NAME: J. Abhinav DRP TITLE: Energy Dynamics in Design; an inquiry on embodied energy through architectural detailing

APPROVAL The following study is hereby approved as a creditable work on the approved subject carried out and presented in the manner, sufficiently satisfactory to warrant its acceptance as a prerequisite to the degree of Bachelor of Architecture for which it has been submitted. It is to be understood that by this approval, the undersigned does not endorse or approve the statements made, opinions expressed or conclusion drawn therein, but approves the study only for the purpose for which it has been submitted and satisfies him to the requirements laid down in the academic program.

Signature of the Guide Prof. Sankalpa

Dean, Faculty of Architecture Prof. Anjali Yagnik Date:

Page left blank intentionally

Declaration This work contains no material which has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma in any University or other institutions and to the best of my knowledge does not contain any material previously published or written by another person except where due reference has been made in the text. I consent to this copy of DRP, when in the library of CEPT University, being available on loan and photocopying. Student Name: J. Abhinav Date:

02-05-2022

Signature of the student

Page left blank intentionally

Acknowledgment I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my research guide, Prof. Sankalpa for his constant pragmatic views and inputs through the course of this research. I am extremely grateful to his support towards this process right from initiating the research topic and providing the necessary impetus to this research. I would like to thank my highly spirited research partner, Jay Odharia, for constantly pushing me to work at my best, and help me shape the structure of my research document while accompanying me to my site visits. I would like to thank Kakani Associates, JMA Design Collaborative and Studio 4000, for their kind co-operation with all the data they have shared through interviews and drawings along with the permissions provided for visiting their respective projects. I am grateful to them for helping me find a direction and clarity for research apart from the resources shared. I would like to specially thank Ar. Surya Kakani, Mrs. Jaai Kakani, Ar. Gautam, Ar. Mehul Bhatt and Ar. Smit Vyas for all their time and patience with the interviews. I am forever grateful to my family for providing me with all resources and support necessary to work on this research and through my entire journey since day one of starting my academic pursuit. I would like to give a special mention to my mother, Mrs. Himani Jayanti for her constant interest in my academic life and her discussions which helped me during my course and my father, Mr. Subramanyam J. Jayanti, for providing me with resources and support crucial in shaping my academic journey. I am grateful to all the faculties at CEPT for guiding me through my five formative years of academics in architecture, shaping my thought process and pushing me to think critically. I am apologetically grateful to my precious friends, Abishek, Sanandan and Shambhavi for giving me constant support, validation and inputs through the exhaustingly repetitive discussions. I cannot imagine making it through this process without their constant warmth, support and guidance. I would like to dedicate this research towards all the tremendous efforts of professionals from distinct fields of work that are constantly addressing, diagnosing and countering the affects of the deadly climate change faced by this planet with every passing moment.

Contents 01 Positioning of Research

1.1 Need for research 1.2 Research question 1.3 Aim 1.4 Objectives 1.5 Scope 1.6 Limitations

02 Methodology

03 Parameters of Analysis

3.1 Materiality

3.1.1 Physical attributes

3.1.2 Embodied energy

3.2 Constructibility

3.2.1 Ease of assembly

3.2.2 Efficient use of construction resources

3.3 Functionality 3.3.1 Structure 3.3.2 Fenestration 3.3.3 Protection

04 Rubric for Analysis

05 Context of Case studies - Aalloa, Gandhinagar

06 Case studies

6.1 S.O.A.C.H. NGO, Kakani Associates

6.2 The Perch, JMADC

6.3 Weekend house, Studio 4000

07 Inference

08 Appendices

8.1 List of figures 8.2 List of images 8.3 List of tables

09 Bibliography

Positioning of Research 1.1 Need for research In the current global scenario, with clearly evident impacts of climate change, it becomes the responsibility of architects to weigh the factors affecting their design outcomes against the energy requirements to manifest them. It is hence necessary to examine the design detailing decisions with respect to their environmental impact in terms of the energy expenditure arising from the choice of materials, construction methods and functional requirements. While detailing manifests a design into reality, it brings out the critical aspects as well, which are not comprehensible during the process of design. This becomes further critical in the conditions involving a combination of a precise industrial material and an organic natural material of distinct embodied energy values. A thorough technical analysis of the detailing of various components and members of a built environment will help in comprehending these aspects of the design.

1.2 Research question How do design decisions impact the consumption of embodied energy for an architectural project?

1.3 Aim “To establish a framework to investigate detailing as a combination of choices exercised on the basis of materiality, constructibility and functionality for building components with respect to their embodied energy consumption, in contemporary built environments.”

1.4 Objectives • • • •

To document composite or combination of details in building elements and components. To identify and organize the type of details on the basis of location of connections in a building. To calculate the embodied energy of the elements of the building. To analyze material, functional and constructibility choices while working out a detail.

1.5 Scope • • •

• •

•

Natural materials - Building materials that are of an organic and irregular finish by the virtue of their derivation from natural conditions. Industrial materials - Building materials that are of a clear and precise finish by the virtue of their manufacturing from industrial set-ups. The ecological aspects investigated through the research are the embodied energy of the elements involved in the chosen conditions, the energy expenditure of the construction process, the maintenance and operational energy. The parameters in the framework of analysis shall be analyzed in reference to the mentioned books alone. This research focuses on the detailing challenges of architecture offices operating from Ahmedabad, Gujarat, in their projects of weekend houses built during 2011-2021 at Aalloa hills, 50km to the north of Ahmedabad. The data for certain parameters of the research shall be gathered through interviews with the agencies involved in the process of construction, along with the architects, involved in the detailing and making processes.

1.6 Limitations • •

•

A major portion of the research is based on the subjective responses as a result of interviews conducted as mentioned in the methodology. For the analysis of physical attributes, in order to analyze the weathering and deterioration of the materials, the study would be observational and descriptive only. The calculations for energy expenditure is in terms of electricity and fossil fuel only. These calculations are based on the figures derived from multiple research papers mentioned in the references. The per unit EE values of each material are derived from different sources, hence cannot be considered authentic for the chosen projects due to differences in methods of production, transportation and construction. The values calculated for the quantities of the materials used in terms of mass (kg), surface area (m2) or volume (m3) are derived from the interviews and representation drawings issued by the respective architectural offices and hence are approximate. All the values of embodied energy are considered in terms of MJ/kg or MJ/m2 or MJ/m3 owing to the distinctions in the available research on each material. The equivalent embodied energy values are all considered in MJ, while the final value of the overall energy consumed by each project shall be taken in terms of embodied energy per builtup area as in MJ/m2. The EE of PCC is not clearly found in existing research while the values for its components, cement, sand, and aggregates are known individually (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 132). The EE of PCC is calculated based on the volumetric ratio of its components, which in this research is assumed to be 1:4:8 (cement : sand : aggregate). 11

Methodology

1. Defining the parameters of materiality, constructibility and functionality and deriving a questionnaire to collect the relevant data from the designers. 2. Documenting building components and elements from 3 chosen case studies of built environments that involve a composite or combination of materials with distinct embodied energies in contemporary built environments. 3. Investigating selected conditions from each case study based on the

defined parameters of materiality,

constructibility and

functionality in reference to the

books The Ecology of Building Materials (Berge, 2009), Architectural

Detailing:

Function,

Constructibility,

Aesthetics (Allen, 1993) and Principles of Architectural Detailing (Olie et al., 2004) respectively. 4. Establishing and hence analyzing the factors influencing the choice of the architects with the help of the gathered data and through interviews with the respective architects and constructors. 5. Quantifying (broadly) the embodied energy for the identified conditions, based on a set of research papers. (Praseeda et al., 2015) (DIXIT, 2013) (Reddy, 2009) (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003) 6. Comparing the derived data to that of a conventional condition in order to relatively comprehend the differences as a result of the choices made by the architects.

Figure 1; Methodology flow chart

Parameters of Analysis 3.1 Materiality

Materiality in this research is pertaining to the tangible medium of manifesting design solutions into a built environment. The choices of building materials made as a result of the design detailing decisions shall be analyzed while determining their environmental impact simultaneously.

3.1.1 Physical attributes The choice of a particular palette of materials for certain conditions and combinations is governed by various factors pertaining to their physical properties and visual characteristics that contribute to the overall built environment. The framework to assess design decisions analyses the choice of materials under the sub-parameters (Figure 2) of ; physical properties, with respect to structural strength (spanning - tensile[1]/ bearing compressive[2]), susceptibility to weathering based on permeability[3] of air and moisture, thermal conductivity[4] or thermal capacity[5] (Berge, 2009, 62-63); visual characteristics, with respect to the colour, texture, size and proportions of the material. The relevant sub-parameters can only be applied to analyze material choices depending upon the factors that govern the process of detailing a particular condition. For example, in case of a roof condition, the

1. Tensile strength expresses the limiting amount to which a material can be stretched until failure. 2. Compressive strength expresses the limiting amount of pressure that a material can tolerate until failure. 3. Permeability indicates the tendency of a material to allow the passage of a fluid (air or water) through its mass. 4. Thermal conductivity indicates a material’s ability to conduct heat. 5. Thermal capacity indicates a material’s ability to contain heat (Berge, 2009, 62-63).

Figure 2; Sub-parameters under materiality

structural material shall be examined for its tensile or compressive strength depending on the forces acting upon it, while the material cladded over it shall be examined based on its susceptibility to weathering, its thermal conductivity and thermal capacity to insulate against the direct solar radiation faced by the condition.

3.1.2 Embodied Energy 6. Embodied energy (EE): sequestered in building materials during all processes of production, on-site construction, and final demolition and disposal (Dixit et al., 2010, 1238). 7. Operating energy (OE): expended in maintaining the inside environment through processes such as heating and cooling, lighting and operating appliances (Dixit et al., 2010, 1238). 8. Embodied carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e): GHG emitted, to produce a material, product or building (Wolf et al., n.d., 68).

“The building sector is responsible for 40% global energy consumption and 30% of anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions” (UNEP SBCI, 2009) (Wolf et al., n.d., 68). While the choices of building materials should fulfill the necessities of the built environment, it is crucial to do so while limiting the resultant adverse impacts on the environment. The environmental impact of the material choices made by designers in the process of detailing a design can be measured in the form of energy expenditure {sum of embodied energy (EE)[6] and operational energy (OE)[7]} and carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e)[8] released as a result of the raw material extraction, transportation and processing from the source to the built environment (Berge, 2009,7) (Praseeda et al., 2016, 211).

Figure 3; Material life cycle from cradle to grave (Berge, 2009, 7)

Each material goes through a certain set of processes from its cradle to grave, as broadly illustrated in Fig 3 (Berge, 2009, 7), which contribute to the total EE and CO2e. The overall EE of a material can be estimated as a sum of the indirect energy components and the direct energy components. The indirect energy components are derived from the extraction of raw materials while the direct energy component is derived from the transportation and production processes that the raw material undergoes to be prepared as a building material (Praseeda et al., 2015, 680). These building materials can be categorized as natural materials, industrially manufactured materials, industrial byproducts, recycled materials and reused materials (Praseeda et al., 2015, 680).

This research focuses only on the EE of the materials chosen. The EE of materials in this study is presented in terms of primary energy as suggested by a few studies (Praseeda et al., 2015, 683) (Dixit et al., 2010, 1238) (DIXIT, 2013, 118). This implies that the calculations account for the fuel mix used for electricity generation in the Indian context (Praseeda et al., 2015, 683). Due to the variations in energy sources, processes and efficiency, arriving at a single unique value of EE for a given material is unachievable (Praseeda et al., 2015, 683). This research broadly refers to the values of EE provided by a few associated research papers (Praseeda et al., 2015) (Praseeda et al., 2016) (DIXIT, 2013).

3.2 Constructibility Constructibility in this research is pertaining to the ease and efficiency of assembling the members to construct a built environment swiftly, smoothly and economically (Allen, 1993, 169).

3.2.1 Ease of Assembly It is essential for a designer to be considerate of the challenges faced by those who build in order to provide with designs that can be achieved economically with a basic skill-set of the craftsman (Allen, 1993, 171). The following parameters[9] for assessing the ease of assembly of a detail have been derived from the book “Architectural Detailing: Function, Constructibility, Aesthetics” by Edward Allen and Patrick Rand (Allen, 1993). • • • • • • • •

Uncut units Minimum number of parts Ease of handling a unit Repetitious assembly Accessible connections Detailing for disassembly Installation clearance Non-conflicting systems

(Allen, 1993,171)

3.2.2 Efficient use of construction resources With the contingency in the availability of building material, tools and equipment, and skilled craftsmen for a project, the process of construction is at the mercy of the designer’s detailing process. (Allen, 1993, 215) It is hence essential for a designer to be aware of the processes undertaken in the process of manifesting a detail in the construction site. This helps the designer make an informed decision with an anticipation for potential errors and a eventual wastage of material, time or energy (Allen, 1993,191)

9. The parameters for analyzing constructibility and functionality are not quantifiable and hence can only be applied in a boolean manner where a detail can be scrutinized on the basis of whether it satisfies a parameter completely, partially or does not satisfy at all.

3.3 Functionality Functionality in this research is pertaining to the performance of the detailing of the resultant assembly of the chosen materials in a certain condition that is subject to address various contextual conditions. The built environment has a certain set of needs and challenges it caters to in order to serve the purpose and program it is designed for and hence the detailing needs to contribute to the same (Allen, 1993,3).

3.3.1 Structure It is vitally important for the structural system of a building to be detailed with the utmost precision and care (Allen, 1993,113). This research examines the detailing of the connections between members of the same material and distinct materials that form a larger overall system that supports the rest of the members of the building. The overall connections need to be analyzed as combinations that are subject to various forces of load while they are integrated with the rest of the members of the built environment. In each case study, the following conditions shall be examined to maintain a uniformity while analyzing distinct combinations in each project. • Footing condition • Connection between bearing and spanning members • Terminal condition of the roof

3.3.2 Fenestration Fenestrations in the walls, floor or the roof create an interface between the interior and the exterior of a built form that joins spaces for functional or visual reasons and thus establishes a relationship between them (Deplazes, 2005, 184). Every aperture in a building needs to be detailed in multiple layers in order to control the permeability of air, water, light, heat and sound. (Allen, 1993) The chosen fenestration conditions in the case studies shall be analyzed on the basis of the permeability of light and views they offer as compared to the optimal permeability required for the contextual conditions.

3.3.3 Protection The elements used for the structural systems or fenestrations are susceptible to wear and tear due to various forces of nature. The maintenance and upkeep of the built environment depends upon how the building actively resists the forces of weathering. Certain protective elements are hence used in a certain form to control the effects of these forces and make it convenient to maintain the integrity of the built environment. For the protective elements, the permeability to the flow of water, heat, moisture need to be critically analyzed.

Rubric for Analysis

A comprehensive analysis of the process of detailing requires the knowledge of the specifications of the materials used along with the factors affecting the choice of the materials, the method of assembly and the functional requirements that are to be achieved through the design. Each case study shall be analyzed on the basis of a wall section taken from a certain part of the built environment. The three conditions chosen for the analysis are the key structural junctions of footing, bearing to spanning and terminal / roof conditions (as per the sub-parameter 3.3.1.). The wall section is a tool to identify each element in the building, hence providing the material palette of the design along with the specifications of the quantities and sizes, while revealing the connections between the elements. The first step of analysis is to identify each element comprising the condition with respect to the material composition, cross sectional dimensions and area or volume of it in the overall built environment. This is to quantify the amount of the material being utilized as a result of the design decisions emerging from the process of detailing the built form. The quantification also helps calculate the amount of embodied energy(EE) throughout the project. Further, the quantities derived from the wall section are cross-sectional alone, hence the wall section alone cannot provide the details of the overall application of the materials throughout the project. These quantities shall be further applied with the help of plans of the overall project in order to derive the overall quantities of each material used throughout the project. In case of elements that are not conventionally used for that particular function, the calculations for EE also include those for the hypothetical condition where the conventional materials are used instead. This provides for a comparative study of the energy expenditure of the condition with respect to conventional practices. The application of each element, once described in terms of its details, shall be analyzed as per the factors stated by the designers in the interviews. These factors shall be analyzed with respect to the parameters of materiality, constructibility and functionality, as mentioned in chapter 3. This part of the analysis serves as a justification of the amount of embodied energy required to achieve the conditions designed. Through this analysis, one can constantly be informed of the energy requirements of the design decisions that are affected by factors of materiality, constructibility and functionality.

Figure 4; Rubric of analysis

Context of case studies Aalloa, Gandhinagar, Gujarat Located on the western bank of the Sabarmati river, to the north of Gandhinagar, a portion of the ravines of Aalloa, an agricultural village, have been converted into packaged plots of land for weekend homes and residences secluded from urbanity. The seasonal river flows during the monsoon for a period of around 4-5 months, giving the site a very dynamic nature throughout the year. The hot and dry summers almost erase the presence of the river with vast stretches of sand and dry shrubs visible from above the plateaus of the ravines. The monsoons bring back the tropical greenery to the site along with a majestically flowing Sabarmati along the meanders. The topography of the ravines along with the alluvial sandy loam soil (Purswani, n.d.), pose a formidable challenge for any construction activities here. The loose soil requires special foundation methods to hold onto, while the terrain is difficult to scale at certain parts for construction work to be undertaken without disrupting its existing natural landscape. Along with these, the region comes under a seismic zone III (Mohan et al., 2018) and a hot and dry climatic zone (Purswani, n.d.). Another challenge to the built environments is the presence of a multitude of creatures. The built forms and the ecology need to be protected from each other, especially in the case of ants and termites. Located at a distance of around 20 km from Gandhinagar, the raw materials required for construction are mostly available within a radius of around 50 km. The conventional construction methods here involve the use of burnt clay brick masonry and reinforced cement concrete slabs. 20

Image 1; Sabarmati river at Aalloa in March

Image 2; Sabarmati river at Aalloa in September Sabarmati River

Aalloa Narmada canal

Gandhinagar

Ahmedabad

Figure 5; Locating Aalloa with reference to Gandhinagar and Ahmedabad

N km 0

2.5

Case Studies 6.1 S.O.A.C.H. NGO, Kakani Associates Designed for an NGO with an attached residence, the built environment follows a strikingly uniform architectural language throughout. Situated on a plateau on the ravines of Sabarmati, the NGO actively facilitates the socio-economically disadvantaged from the rural areas with education, skill-development and vocation. With exposed recycled brick masonry as the load bearing structural system, the project has spans of timbrel vaults, shallow masonry domes and filler slabs at different locations. The overall built environment consists of two distinct built forms (Fig. 6; Plan), one of the NGO with the workshop space and the offices, the other with residences. The wall section (Fig. 7,8; Section AA’) across the workshop space is considered for the analysis, while the elements of the NGO block alone, have been taken into consideration for the calculations and analysis.

Image 3; View of the NGO block from the north-east

A’

Offices

Residence

Workshop

N m

Figure 6; Plan

0.5

6.1.3

6.1.2

6.1.1 m

Figure 7; Section AA’

Image 4; View from the RCC ring beam in the workshop space of the NGO

Image 5; View of the double-volume workshop space in the NGO

Reinforced cement concrete Coping beam 60 mm thick

China Mosaic Flooring 15mm thick

Plain cement concrete Leveling bed 80mm thick

Recycled debris brick Masonry wall

Mild steel Shutter frame

6.1.3

25 x 25 x 4 mm SHS

1 brick thick

Mild steel Tie rod 30mm Ø

Autoclaved aerated concrete Infill (debris of the blocks) Terracotta tile Timbrel vault 100mm thick, 4 layers of tiles span = 4500mm, rise = 440mm

Reinforced cement concrete Ring beam 470 x 360 mm

Lime Flooring Plain cement concrete Leveling bed 60mm thick

Autoclaved aerated concrete Infill (debris of the blocks) Recycled brick Shallow masonry dome

6.1.2

230mm thick span = 4500mm, rise = 420mm

Reinforced cement concrete Ring beam 350 x 270 mm

Reinforced cement concrete Coping beam 60 mm thick

Lime pointing Recycled debris brick masonry wall 11/2 brick thick

Lime Flooring Reinforced cement concrete Grade slab 100 mm thick

Plain cement concrete Leveling bed 110 mm deep

Sand bed 150 mm deep

Fly Ash brick masonry wall

6.1.1

1 1/2 brick thick

Plain cement concrete Footing strip 500 x 100 mm

Figure 8; Section AA’

6.1.1 Footing Condition Built on a plateau, the foundation of majority of the built form, including most of the NGO block, has been a shallow strip foundation with a plain cement concrete footing strip (500 x 100 mm) and a fly-ash brick (230x110x90mm) masonry footing wall of one and half brick thickness and six courses deep. The choice of fly-ash bricks was made by the architect due to the lesser cost of the material, while the application of the material remains in a domain that is not visible on the exterior of the building, the uniform visual language of the recycled debris brick masonry is maintained throughout[10]. Fly-ash bricks are made out of a mix of industrial wastes, hence decreasing the energy required to procure the raw materials. The EE of fly-ash brick masonry is 1000-1350 MJ/m3 depending upon the mix used to make the bricks (Reddy, 2009, 177,179) This cross-section of the foundation runs along the structural load bearing walls across the building. The volumes of the footing strip and the masonry wall have been calculated by multiplying their crosssectional area to the running length of the footing system. As the earth between the footing system is compacted until 150mm below the top level of the masonry footing wall, a sand bed of 150mm depth is laid to avoid water retention while preventing the propagation of termites into the interiors of the building. Since the sand is procured from within 10-20km of the site, the EE of the sand used is assumed to be 28 MJ/m3 considering 1.75 MJ/m3 per kilometer of transportation (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 132). This is followed by a 110mm deep leveling bed of PCC that provides a rigid flat surface above the sand bed for the grade slab to be cast on. A 100 mm deep Reinforced cement concrete (RCC) grade slab with beams, over the masonry footing walls, with a cross section of 350mm x 210mm. The grade slab is an essential structural element in this seismic zone due to the tensile strength it provides to keep the seismic forces from acting on the building that rests on it as suggested by the structural engineer consulted by the architect[2]. The grade slab acts as a cap to the footing system of the building and the structural interface between the elements above and below the ground. The value of EE for an RCC slab of 50-60mm depth and beams at intervals of 0.75-1m of a span of 3.6m is 491 MJ/m2 (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 134). With cross sectional dimensions nearly twice those of the case mentioned in the research, the EE value of the RCC slab in this condition can be considered to be twice as much as the condition considered for research (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 134), i.e., 982 MJ/m2. The load bearing recycled debris brick (350x230x50mm) masonry wall and piers of 1 brick thickness are laid until the bottom of the ring beam, along the structural centerlines of the building. The choice of the bricks has been made to decrease the EE of this element as it constitutes the majority of the structural volume of the building. As compared to conventional burnt clay bricks (EE = 2141 MJ/m³), using the recycled debris bricks (EE = 550 MJ/m³) can save upto 74% of EE. (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 133) (Reddy, 2009, 179). The difference in EE is majorly due to the charcoal or other fossil fuels used in firing the conventional bricks as opposed to the 6-7% cement in the recycled debris bricks.

10. As stated by the architect in the interview.

Lime pointing Recycled debris brick masonry wall 11/2 brick thick

Lime Flooring Reinforced cement concrete Grade slab 100 mm deep

Plain cement concrete Leveling bed 110 mm deep

Sand bed 150 mm deep

Fly Ash brick masonry wall 1 1/2 brick thick

Plain cement concrete Footing strip 500 x 100 mm

Figure 9 ; Detail 6.1.1 Footing condition

The architectural office is devoted to train and foster craftsmanship involving the use of recycled bricks manufactured from Kesarjan, a brick manufacturer from the south of Ahmedabad, producing bricks out of construction debris[2]. This material has been adopted by the architectural office in order to maintain the visual language while evolving the application of this material in subsequent projects. Apart from this, the application of this material governs the dimension of the wall. With a thickness of 350mm, the wall can be made of 1 brick thickness as compared to one and a half brick thickness in case of burnt clay bricks. This decreases the scope for error in the masonry work with uncut units being assembled. The masonry walls are have been given a lime mortar flush pointing throughout the project. Until the grade slab, the centerline of the structure of the building can be followed in reference to the respective previous layer. The footing masonry wall can be lined up with equal offset dimensions left from the either sides of the footing strip. The shuttering for the beams of the grade slab can be aligned to the either sides of the footing masonry wall, flushing the sides with minimum error. It is above the grade slab that the centerline cannot be clearly followed unless measured and marked from the outer edge of the grade slab. This is susceptible to errors resulting in shifting of

the centerline and can be make the building structurally vulnerable (Allen, 1993, 192). Having the same width for the footing wall, the beam and the load-bearing wall adds up to the task of achieving precise alignments throughout. Based on the structural feasibility, a greater width of the footing wall and the beam or a lesser width for the load bearing wall could provide the necessary room for errors in alignment.

6.1.2 Bearing + Spanning condition The project has two predominant masonry spanning systems which are, the timbrel vaults of terracotta tiles and the shallow masonry brick domes chosen by the architect in order to minimize the use of steel and concrete in the spanning system. The timbrel vaults are made out of 20mm thick terracotta tiles that are conventionally used as cladding tiles. These tiles are layered upon one another in interlocking patterns to achieve the overall stability required. The first layer is laid using a plywood template with the profile of the vault. This is followed by the subsequent layers with masonry patterns countering those of the previous layers. This method relatively easier requires a relatively lower skill level as well. This spanning system can ideally be applied to spaces with orthogonal plan forms. The masonry dome on the other hand requires a great understanding of the curvature and the angles required for each subsequent layer of masonry because it is done without the help of a form-work or a template. The ambiguity of the angle of return at the springing point of the dome from the projection on the ring beam is judged and achieved out of the skill developed through the experience gained by the crafts-person in the field. Since the EE value of a conventional RCC span (982 MJ/m2)[11] for the same area would be greater than those of the timbrel vault (575 MJ/ m²) and the masonry dome (418 MJ/m²) (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 135). The major contributor to the EE of the vault is the firing of the terracotta tiles, while in the dome, it is that of the 6-7% cement used to stabilize the recycled debris brick. This is the major reason behind the difference in their EE values. Masonry spanning systems exert lateral forces of thrust owing to the nature of arrangement of the units in the masonry. The load bearing recycled debris brick masonry wall and piers are primarily capable of handling compressive forces and hence the interface between the spanning vaults or domes and the wall needs to be equipped with tensile ring beams of RCC handle the forces of thrust from these masonry spanning systems (Bechthold & Schodek, 2014, 408,409). These ring beams have a profile that forms an inverted ‘T’ in order to provide surface area for the springing of the squinches of the shallow masonry brick dome. Though the forces of thrust from the timbrel vaults could be better resolved by providing the angle of return from the ring beam, the profile required for the masonry dome is followed throughout for the ease of construction through repetitious assembly. The angle of return is later achieved with mortar when the vault is constructed after the casting and setting of the ring beam. The ring beams differ in their depth and thickness throughout the built form due to varying amounts of thrust acting upon them[2]. The 28

11. As calculated in condition 6.1.1

Lime Flooring Plain cement concrete Leveling bed 60mm thick

Autoclaved aerated concrete Infill (debris of the blocks) Recycled brick Shallow masonry dome 230mm thick span = 4500mm, rise = 420mm

Reinforced cement concrete Ring beam 350 x 270 mm

Groove 15 mm deep

Figure 10 ; Detail 6.1.2 Bearing + Spanning condition

Image 6; View of the double-volume workshop space in the NGO

condition with two masonry spanning systems on the either sides of the ring beam decreases the overall forces of thrust on the ring beam by countering the lateral forces. This determines the depth of the ring beam. The ring beams for a combination of the timbrel vaults with a span of 1740mm and the shallow dome with a span of 4600mm (from condition 6.1.2), are 270mm deep and 230mm thick with projections of 60mm on the either sides. The ring beams for the condition with two timbrel vaults on the either sides (from condition 6.1.3) are 470mm deep even with the same spans (from condition 6.1.2). The large openings along the north edge of the corridor are closed with thin mild steel frames with steel mesh enclosure. These shutters are pivoted at the center and are easy to install and dismantle at the end of the life-cycle of the built form.

6.1.3 Terminal condition It was observed by the architect[2] in the case of the timbrel vault on the upper level, that the vault was developing cracks along the central line at the rise due to the amount of compression acting on the span. This was addressed with the addition of three mild steel tie rods, of 32mm diameter, connecting the ring beam at the piers in order to counter the compressive forces on the vault. This adds up to the overall EE value of the spanning system by 4253 MJ. The spanning systems have a curvature by the virtue of their structural stability, that results in a rise in the curvature at the center of the spans. The ring beams which provide the springing for the spanning systems are positioned at a height of 2100mm from the floor level, accounting for the rise on the span that provides the volume required. This allows the architect to do away with a lintel beam as the ring beam can be used for the same. These shallow curves of the domes and the vaults have a span to rise ratio of 1:10. The spans of 1740mm have a rise of 180mm and those of 4600mm have a rise of 460mm. In order to achieve a flat surface above these spanning systems, one brick thick masonry walls, 7 courses high, are added along the ring beams to reach the height of the rise. The resultant void is filled in with the debris of autoclaved aerated concrete (AAC) blocks, which is residual from construction sites using it as for infill masonry. Being a material of low density, AAC debris fills larger volumes with lesser dead load on the structure as opposed to any other infill material. Since the it is obtained from a condition where it is a by-product, the infill does not amount to an EE value except for the transportation energy which is not precisely available in research. This entire condition is leveled with a plain cement concrete bed of 60mm depth internally and 80mm on the outermost layer, laid across the span. This provides a flat, rigid, habitable surface above which, the masonry for the subsequent level is constructed. In a pattern of repetitive assembly, the same steps are followed at the upper level where the spanning systems meet the load bearing wall. In the terminal condition, the PCC leveling bed is curved upwards along the edges to avoid retaining

China Mosaic Flooring 15mm thick

Plain cement concrete Leveling bed 80mm thick

Recycled debris brick Masonry wall 1 brick thick

Autoclaved aerated concrete Infill (debris of the blocks) Terracotta tile Timbrel vault 100mm thick, 4 layers of tiles span = 4500mm, rise = 440mm

Reinforced cement concrete Ring beam 470 x 360 mm

Mild steel Tie rod 32mm Ø

Figure 11 ; Detail 6.1.3 Terminal condition

water at the edges. This is followed by a layer of a water-proofing chemical, followed by china mosaic. Any cracks through the layer of PCC over time can make it permeable to water that can seep into the infill and soak the masonry spanning system which will inadvertently leak the water into the interiors and also weaken the masonry resulting in cracks in the span. Hence, this is a very crucial condition to avoid any seepage of water.

Condition

Footing to flooring

Area(m²) (or) Volume (m³) (or) Mass (kg)

Embodied Energy per unit

Elements

Material specifications

Dimensions (as in the project)

Footing strip

Plain cement concrete (PCC) (cement:sand:aggregate::1:4:8)

100 x 500 mm (110 running metres)

5.5 m³

Footing masonry wall

Fly-ash brick 230 x 110 x 90 mm

1.5 brick thk (350 mm) 6 courses (600 mm) (110 running metres)

23 m³

Sand bed

Sand

150mm deep (155 m²)

23 m³

(Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 132)

Leveling bed

PCC (cement:sand:aggregate::1:4:8)

110mm deep (155 m²)

17 m³

(Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 133)

528 MJ/m³ (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 133)

1000 MJ/m³ (Reddy, 2009, 179)

28 MJ/m³

528 MJ/m³

982 MJ/m²

Equivalent EE (MJ)

2904

23000

644

8976

Grade slab

Reinforced cement concrete (RCC)

100mm deep slab 350 x 210 mm plinth beam

153 m²

(Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 134)

150246

Flooring

Lime screed

15mm deep 153 m²

Load bearing masonry wall

Recycled debris brick 350 x 230 x 50 mm (Exposed)

1 brick thk (350 mm) 35 courses (2100 mm) (32.6 m²)

60.3 m³

(Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 133)

Timbrel Vault

Terracotta cladding tiles

156 m²

(Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 135)

52.5 kg

(Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 132)

118 m²

(Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 135)

72 m²

(Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 134)

240 kg

(Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 132)

1 brick thk (350 mm) 7 courses (420 mm) (72 m²)

30.2 m³

(Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 133)

19509

Tie rods (x3)

Mild Steel

Shallow masonry dome

Recycled debris brick 230 x 115 x 50 mm (Exposed)

Ring beam

Reinforced cement concrete (RCC)

Window shutter frames

Mild steel

100mm deep (4 layers)

Circular section 32mm diameter 4.6 m long 3.79 kg/m

646 MJ/m³

575 MJ/m²

42 MJ/kg

38953.8

89700

2205

(Structura Main Brochure, n.d.)

Bearing to spanning

230mm deep

350 x 270 mm

SHS 25 x 25 x 2.6 mm 142.2 m 1.69 kg/m (Structura Main Brochure, n.d.)

Load bearing masonry wall (above the ring beam until the leveling bed)

Inflill

Recycled debris brick 350 x 230 x 50 mm

Debris of Autoclaved aerated concrete blocks

418 MJ/m²

982 MJ/m²

42 MJ/kg

646 MJ/m³

49324

212112

10080

Embodied Energy per unit (in case of a conventional system)

Burnt clay brick masonry 2141 MJ/m³

Equivalent EE (MJ) Percentage of (in case of a energy savings conventional system)

49243

53%

(Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 133)

Factors affecting design decisions (from interviews with the respective architects)

Parameters

Sub-parameters

To achieve the firmness required for the contextual soil type with a lesser depth of excavation

Materiality

Rigidity Elastic modulus

Not visible externally in combination with the rest of the red recycled debris brick masonry.

Materiality

Colour Size and proportions

Relatively higher density and compressive strength for bearing vertical and lateral loads.

Materiality

Compressive strength

Functionality

Permeability of organic matter

Leveling the surface above the compacted earth and the sand bed

Constructability

Installation clearance

To achieve the tensile strength required in the seismic zone

Materiality

Tensile strength

Functionality

Permeability of moisture (dampness)

The uniform texture and calm colour along with the naturally developed cracks.

Materiality

Colour Texture

Incorporated in order to build onto the guild of craftsmen trained and employed.

Constructability

Non-conflicting system

Used as continuation in the architectural language of the office across other projects.

Materiality

Colour Size and proportions

Termite proofing

Damp-proofing

Burnt clay brick masonry 2141 MJ/m³

129102.3

70%

(Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 133)

RCC span 982 MJ/m² (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 134)

The form of the module (230mmx350mmx50mm) makes Constructability it efficient to construct masonry walls of the set dimensions. 138462

41%

Low cost and fast process, almost entirely manually done.

Constructability

Ease of handling a unit Non-conflicting system

Materiality

Tensile strength Compressive strength

Low cost and fast process, almost entirely manually done.

Constructability

Ease of handling a unit Non-conflicting system

Tensile strength of the material to bear with the lateral loads of thrust from the spanning member.

Materiality

Tensile strength

Functionality

Structural

The projection of the beam is orthogonal to the beam in order to accomodate different springing angles of the squinches of the dome.

Constructability

Repetitive assembly Installation clearance Non-conflicting system

Ease of assembly and disassembly at the end of the life cycle of the building

Constructability

Installation clearance Detailing for disassembly

To counter the compressive forces on the vault RCC span 982 MJ/m² (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 134)

115876

57%

Horizontal interlocking of bearing members and built forms across the project.

Burnt clay brick masonry 2141 MJ/m³ (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 133)

64658.2

70%

Uncut units

To reach the height of the rise of Constructability the spanning systems Filling the voids above the spanning systems with larger volumes with a lesser dead load on the structure owing to the low density of the material

Materiality

Repetitive assembly Installation clearance Non-conflicting system

Density

Condition

Area(m²) (or) Volume (m³) (or) Mass (kg)

Material specifications

Leveling bed

PCC (cement:sand:aggregate::1:4:8)

70mm deep 233 m²

16 m³

(Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 133)

Parapet wall

Recycled debris brick 350 x 230 x 50 mm (Exposed)

1 brick thk (350 mm) 12 courses (840 mm) (20 m²)

16.8 m³

(Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 133)

Water-proofing

China mosaic

15mm deep 155 m²

2.3 m³

(CBPR, Wellington School of Architecture, n. d.)

Coping beam

Reinforced cement concrete (RCC)

60 x 350 mm (100 running metres)

35 m²

(Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 135)

Terminal condition

528 MJ/m³

646 MJ/m³

Equivalent EE (MJ)

8448

10853

5250 MJ/m³

Table 1; Framework for 6.1

The overall EE per built up area is 2268 MJ/m2 for the NGO block which is 293 m2 in area. The resultant equivalent EE of the NGO block would have been 29% more if done entirely in conventional materials.

Embodied Energy per unit

Elements

Dimensions (as in the project)

730 MJ/m²

12075

25550

Embodied Energy per unit (in case of a conventional system)

Equivalent EE (MJ) Percentage of (in case of a energy savings conventional system)

Factors affecting design decisions (from interviews with the respective architects)

Parameters

Sub-parameters

Constructability

Installation clearance

Used as continuation in the architectural language of the office across other projects.

Materiality

Colour Size and proportions

Water-proofing

Materiality

Permeability of water

To localize structural cracks

Materiality

Tensile stength

Constructability

Installation clearance

Leveling the surface above the AAC debris infill Burnt clay brick masonry 2141 MJ/m³ (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 133)

35968.8

70%

To facilitate the surface above the masonry for further installation of elements

Case Studies 6.2 The Perch, JMADC Designed as a series of three weekend houses for a family based in Ahmedabad, the perch is located on a clifflike condition. Though situated on a plateau, the built form is placed on its edges, leaving the plateau as a manicured space for gathering. The built form is predominantly made up of load-bearing random rubble stone masonry walls anchored to which are steel spanning frames that project out into the valley. The spaces contained by the masonry have service intensive spaces like the kitchen and toilet, while the projecting steel frame contains the leisure spaces. The choices of materials and methods of assembly have been directed towards achieving a built form that can be dismantled almost entirely for re-use and re-cycling purposes, by the end of the life-cycle of the project. The wall section (Fig. 12,13; Section BB’) across the weekend house on the north is considered for the analysis, with all calculations and analysis pertaining to this house alone.

Image 7; View of the weekend house on the north

B’

N B

m 0

0.5

Figure 12; Plan of the weekend house to the north

6.2.2

6.2.3

6.2.1

m 0

0.25

0.5

Figure 13; Section BB’

Image 8; View of the random rubble footing masonry underneath the steel spanning frame.

Image 9; Interior view of the weekend house on the north

China mosaic Flooring Kota stone slabs Floor decking

Pre-coated sheet Roofing Mild Steel Truss structure

25 mm deep

172 x 92 mm box sections

Fibre cement board Under-decking

Mud rolls Insulation

25 mm deep

90 mm Ø

Kota stone Coping

Mild steel Supports

25 mm deep

50 x 50 x 6 mm angle section

Mild steel Spanning frame

Mild Steel Roof structure

122 x 60 mm box sections

15 mm deep

Sandwiched wall panels Fibre sheet boarding with insulation 110 mm thick

Timber frame 90 x 60 mm

Toughened glass Clear glazing Sandwiched Kota stone Lintel

Mild Steel Truss structure 240 x 120 mm box sections

6.2.2

60mm deep

Burnt clay brick Masonry plumbing wall 1

/2 brick thick

Kota stone Coping 25 mm deep

Himmatnagar Stone Random rubble masonry wall 360 mm thick

Reinforced cement concrete Wall 110 mm thick

Kota stone slabs Flooring 25 mm deep

Reinforced cement concrete Grade slab 160 mm deep

Reinforced cement concrete Beam

6.2.1

460 x 380 mm

Plain cement concrete Leveling bed 100 mm deep

Sand bed 110 mm deep

Himmatnagar Stone Random rubble footing wall 460 mm thick

Figure 14; Section BB’

6.2.1 Footing Condition Situated on the edge of the plateau, the built form is anchored onto the hill by a mass of stone masonry. The anchoring mass sits on an approximately 4 feet deep random rubble masonry footing wall (460 mm thick) which is capped with an RCC grade slab for structural rigidity. The footing wall was constructed by digging up trenches and pouring the stone rubble and mortar in for setting, a process which uses mostly manual methods. The choice of using Himmatnagar stone for the random rubble masonry walls was governed by the proximity of the source of the material along with the compressive strength and visual aesthetic provided by the virtue of the colour and appearance of the material and the masonry. The choice of random rubble masonry is governed mainly by how it eliminates the energy that goes into dressing and shaping the stones while the stone used here can be obtained from a demolished built form and the cycle of reuse can continue. However, the irregularities and inconsistencies in the sizes of the stones require fine craftsmanship to be handled and precisely assembled into a masonry wall. The spaces that require plumbing services, like the kitchen and the toilet, are placed in the space enclosed by the stone masonry, in order to anchor the services to the masonry with a half brick thick plumbing wall made of burnt clay bricks. The EE of the stone [1890 MJ/m³ (CBPR, Wellington School of Architecture, n.d.)] is majorly due to its transportation, since the extraction process requires lesser energy as it does not require precise mechanized methods and is mostly a manual process. This in comparison with burnt clay brick masonry saves 12% EE. The EE of RCC, PCC and sand have been derived in the same method as in condition 6.1.1. For EE calculations, the RCC retaining wall along the stone masonry is considered as a slab with the vertical surface area of the wall being taken into account. The aspect of disassembly has been majorly applied in the spanning conditions throughout the project which have been made out of steel frame structures with fibre cement board under-decking followed by kota stone flooring. The four steel trusses of underneath the floor are anchored to the RCC beam at the grade slab level and at the bottom of each truss rests as a point load onto a pile foundation. These trusses are laterally connected to each other on top of which a flooring frame structure is placed. This is followed by laying out fibre cement boards onto the flooring frame to provide a large surface area for the stone flooring to be laid out with a thin layer of mortar. The larger area of the fiber cement boards allows them to evenly distribute the loads from the stone onto the steel frame. This overall assembly has been chosen by the architect because it facilitates for a disassembly that allows the re-use of the materials involved. The challenging terrain of the ravines make the working conditions difficult for the construction process. The mild steel frame can be assembled easier in comparison to an RCC slab which would require the shuttering, pouring and setting work that would be difficult to achieve in these conditions. The steel truss structure and flooring structure can be dismantled and recycled, whereas, an RCC slab would remain as debris at the end of the life-cycle of the built form. Therefore, virgin mild steel

Sandwiched wall panels Fibre sheet boarding with insulation 110 mm thick

Mild Steel Truss structure 240 x 120 mm box sections

Fibre cement board Under-decking 25 mm deep

Kota stone slabs Flooring 25 mm deep

Reinforced cement concrete Grade slab 160 mm deep

Reinforced cement concrete Beam 350 x 380 mm deep

Plain cement concrete Leveling bed 100 mm deep

Sand bed 110 mm deep

Himmatnagar Stone Random rubble footing wall 350 mm thick

Figure 15 ; Detail 6.2.1 Footing condition

has been used even though it has a higher EE value [42 MJ/kg (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 132)]. In addition to this the overall EE of the floor plate accounts for the 7.5 mm thick fiber cement boards [102 MJ/m² (CBPR, Wellington School of Architecture, n.d.)] used for under-decking below the 25 mm deep kota stone flooring [1890 MJ/m³ (CBPR, Wellington School of Architecture, n.d.)]. The overall flooring condition (including the span over the masonry walls) uses 30% lesser EE than a conventional RCC span. While comparing the equivalent EE values of this flooring condition to a conventional RCC slab, the kota stone flooring is not accounted for as it is assumed to be applied in both conditions.

6.2.2 Bearing + Spanning condition The members of the steel spanning frame for roof of the space enclosed by the 2.7m high load-bearing walls (350mm thick) are placed on the stone walls at a height of 2.2 m from the floor level. The steel box sections on the either sides of the frame are placed onto the stone masonry walls after flattening the masonry surface with a thin layer of mortar, without having to use any anchoring interface between the two elements of distinct precisions. This process requires precises craftsmanship in order to have

a flat surface on the irregular random rubble stone masonry wall for the industrially manufactured precise mild steel section. The truss structure for the roof is anchored to this spanning frame which is covered by the masonry wall until a level of 2.7m from the floor level. The stone masonry walls are terminated with a kota stone coping at the top. The spanning frame is followed by the fiber cement board under-decking and kota stone flooring. This is covered with a layer of 15mm deep china mosaic for waterproofing. The building envelope on the east and west is made up of a combination of clear toughened glass encased in timber frames and plasterboard sandwiched with expanded polystyrene insulation in the gable walls. The use of clear glass until a height of 2.2 m provides with permeability of light and views at the eye-level, while the sandwiched panel walls at the gables restrict the permeability of heat and organic matter given the wilderness that the context entails. Since the timber used was salvaged from existing built forms, the its EE value is negligible. The use of these materials in comparison to a one brick thick masonry wall has cut down on 32% of EE consumption, while these systems can be dismantled for re-use at the end of the life-cycle of the built form unlike a brick masonry. The roof consists of a series of mild steel purlins with angle sections onto which mud rolls are installed for insulation. Each mud roll is made of a thin timber pin wrapped around with a piece of jute from gunny bags that is dipped coated with a mix of lime, clay and straw. They provide the thermal capacity required for insulation. This is then covered with a pre-coated galvanized corrugated roofing sheet that provides the roofing cover for the space encased by the steel frame. The mud rolls can be susceptible to any permeation of organic matter and hence might be required to be replaced regularly. Though the necessity for this has not occurred, in case of a replacement the entire roofing sheet will have to be removed to do so. The steel structure for the roof, including the trusses, the purlins, angle sections and vertical supports has an EE that is 122% more than that of a typical RCC roof for the same area of span.

6.2.3 Terminal flooring condition The transition between the interior and exterior at the north end of the built form is marked by a change in flooring from kota stone over fiber cement board to a series of parallel timber slats placed 25 mm apart from each other. The condition where they meet is defined by an inverted ‘T’ section with the 2 flooring types on the either sides, while it is anchored to the steel girder underneath. The steel member at this interface accounts for any expansion changes in the 2 different flooring materials. This edge is covered from the top, by the channels for the sliding-folding doors that open into the deck. The timber deck hovers along the north edge of the built form, on top the valley. This hovering effect is accentuated by providing the 25 mm gap between each slat of timber. The span of timber is supported by 2 ‘T’ sections from the bottom. This deck is held together with the rest of the structural frame by a channel section that runs along the perimeter of the steel flooring frame.

Pre-coated sheet Roofing Mud rolls Insulation 90 mm Ø

Mild Steel Truss structure 172 x 92 mm box sections

Mild steel Supports 50 x 50 x 6 mm angle section

Mild Steel Roof structure 122 x 60 mm box sections

Kota stone Coping 25 mm deep

China mosaic Flooring 15 mm deep

Kota stone slabs Floor decking 25 mm deep

Fibre cement board Under-decking 25 mm deep

Mild steel Spanning frame 122 x 60 mm box sections

Toughened glass Clear glazing Sandwiched Kota stone Lintel

Figure 16 ; Detail 6.2.2 Bearing + Spanning condition

60mm deep

Himmatnagar Stone Random rubble masonry wall 360 mm thick

Mild steel Supports 30 x 30 x 5 mm ‘T’ sections

Timber Flooring deck Kota stone slabs Flooring 25 mm deep

Fibre cement board Under-decking 25 mm deep

Mild Steel Truss structure 240 x 120 mm box sections

Figure 17 ; Detail 6.2.3 Terminal flooring condition

Condition

Elements

Material specifications

Dimensions (as in the project)

Footing wall

Himmatnagar stone Random rubble masonry

460 mm thick 1200 mm deep (running length 24.6 m)

Area(m²) (or) Volume (m³) (or) Mass (kg) 13.6 m³

Embodied Energy per unit

1890 MJ/m³ Load bearing wall

Himmatnagar stone Random rubble masonry

Pile foundation

Grade slab

Reinforced cement concrete (RCC)

350 mm thick 2700 mm high

27 m³

400 mm diameter (3 points)

160 mm deep

26 m²

(CBPR, Wellington School of Architecture, n.d.)

76734

982 MJ/m² (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 134)

Footing to flooring

Retaining wall

110 mm thick 800 mm high (running length 10 m) 110 mm deep

18 m²

Sand

Leveling bed

PCC (cement:sand:aggregate::1:4:8)

100 mm deep

18 m²

Plumbing wall

Burnt clay brick masonry 230 x 110 x 90 mm

1/2 brick thick 10 courses high (running length 4m)

1.5 m³

Virgin Mild steel

T-section 30 x 30 x 5 mm 21.2 m long 2.21 kg/m

28 MJ/m³ (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 132)

528 MJ/m³ (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 133)

2141 MJ/m³ (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 133)

504 9504

3212

993 kg

(Structura Main Brochure, n.d.)

Floor Structure

33388

8 m²

Sand bed

RHS 122 x 61x 4.5 mm 83.6 m long 11.88 kg/m

Equivalent EE (MJ)

42 MJ/kg (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 132)

43680

47 kg

(T Sections, n.d.)

Fenestration

102 MJ/m²

Underdecking sheet

Fiber cement board

7.5 mm thick

75 m²

(CBPR, Wellington School of Architecture, n.d.)

Flooring + Coping

Kota Stone

25mm deep 97.7 m²

2.5 m³

(CBPR, Wellington School of Architecture, n.d.)

Lintels

Sandwiched Kota stone

60 mm deep 2.4 m²

0.15 m³

(CBPR, Wellington School of Architecture, n.d.)

284

Flooring deck

Salvaged timber slats

9.7 m²

(Re-used material)

Window frames

Salvaged timber

(Re-used material)

Window glazing

Clear toughened glass

6 mm thick

50.3 m²

(CBPR, Wellington School of Architecture, n.d.)

Wall panels

Plasterboard

9.5 mm thick

16.6 m²

(CBPR, Wellington School of Architecture, n.d.)

Insulation in wall panels

Expanded polystyrene foam

50 mm thick 16.6 m²

0.83 m³

(CBPR, Wellington School of Architecture, n.d.)

Waterproofing

China mosaic

15 mm deep 23 m²

0.35 m³

(CBPR, Wellington School of Architecture, n.d.)

1890 MJ/m³

7650

4725

396 MJ/m² 19919

33 MJ/m²

2340 MJ/m³

5250 MJ/m³

548

1942

1838

Embodied Energy per unit (in case of a conventional system)

Equivalent EE (MJ) Percentage of (in case of a energy savings conventional system)

Factors affecting design decisions (from interviews with the respective architects)

Parameters

Relatively convenient to dig trenches and pour the random rubble of stone with mortar into them through manual methods

Burnt clay brick masonry 2141 MJ/m³

Eliminates the process of dressing and cutting the stones into regular shapes 86925

12%

(Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 133)

Installation clearance

Constructibility

The ability to re-use the material at the end of the life-cycle of the building

Uncut units

Detailing for disassembly

The thermal mass required to insulate the spaces The visual aesthetic of the stone masonry

Sub-parameters

Thermal capacity Materiality

The structural strength of the material in load-bearing capacity

Visual appearance Compressive strength

The loose alluvial sandy soil at the steep slope of the ravines needs deep and strong anchoring Materiality

Tensile strength

Damp-proofing

Functionality

Permeability of moisture (dampness)

Termite proofing

Functionality

Leveling the surface above the compacted earth and the sand bed

Permeability of organic matter

Constructability

Installation clearance

The ability to contain the services necessary to facilitate the respective spaces, that can be accessed for future repair and maintenance with discretion.

Constructability

Accessible connections Non-conflicting system

Materiality

Tensile strength

To achieve the tensile strength required in the seismic zone To provide a monolithic rigidity to the load-bearing mass of the built form

The structural strength of the material for the span

RCC span 982 MJ/m² (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 134)

Assembly based construction 73650

30%

The ability to re-use the material at the end of the life-cycle of the Constructability building Provision of a large surface for the flooring to be laid out and distribute The visual aesthetic of the material

RCC span 491 MJ/m² (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 134)

1178.4

76%

(Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 133)

32%

Visual appearance

Detailing for disassembly Density

Constructability

Ease of handling a unit

Materiality

Thermal conductivity

Clear views and ingress of daylight

Functionality

Permeability of light and views

Lightweight and relatively convenient to assemble

Constructability

Ease of handling a unit

Durability in terms of resistance to formation or permeation of termite or ant colonies

Materiality

Resistance to weathering (Permeability of organic matter)

Water-proofing

Materiality

Permeability of water

Insulation to heat, to not absorb the heat from the direct solar radiation and transfer it to the interiors

32944

Materiality

Lightweight and relatively convenient to assemble

Burnt clay brick masonry 2141 MJ/m³ (1 brick thick 230mm)

Detailing for disassembly

Installation clearance

The ability to re-use the material at the end of the life cycle of the Constructability building Lightweight material

Installation clearance Accessible connections Detailing for disassembly

Condition

Elements

Material specifications

SHS 50 x 50 x 2.6 mm 88.8 m long 3.74 kg/m

Wall frame Fenestration

Dimensions (as in the project)

Virgin Mild steel Columns

Area(m²) (or) Volume (m³) (or) Mass (kg)

Embodied Energy per unit

Equivalent EE (MJ)

332 kg

13944

360 kg

15120

(Structura Main Brochure, n.d.)

SHS 100 x 100 x 4 mm 2.2 m high | 14 columns 11.7 kg/m (Structura Main Brochure, n.d.)

RHS 240 x 120 x 5 mm 89.6 m long 26.97 kg/m

2643 kg

(Structura Main Brochure, n.d.)

RHS 180 x 180 x 5 mm 8.4 m long 26.97 kg/m

Truss structure (for the floor)

227 kg

162918

(Structura Main Brochure, n.d.)

Channel 250 x 82 x 9 mm 29.5 m long 34.2 kg/m

1009 kg

132)

(Structural Steel Sections, n.d.)

Virgin Mild steel

RHS 172 x 92 x 5.4 mm 68.8 m long 20.88 kg/m

42 MJ/kg (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003,

1437 kg

(Structura Main Brochure, n.d.)

Truss structure (for the roof)

SHS 100 x 100 x 4 mm 8 m long 11.7 kg/m

Roof

93.6 kg

(Structura Main Brochure, n.d.)

RHS 122 x 61x 4.5 mm 112 m long 11.88 kg/m

Purlins (roof)

148789 1331 kg

(Structura Main Brochure, n.d.)

Angle 50 x 50 x 5 179.2 m long 3.8 kg/m

Insulation supports

681 kg

(Structural Steel Sections, n.d.)

Insulation at roof

Mud rolls

Roofing sheet

Pre-coated / Galvanised corrugated sheet

90 mm diameter 868 rolls 15.5 m³ 0.35 mm thick 2.6 kg/m² (Weight Chart of JSW Vishwas GC Sheets, n.d.)

224 kg

86 m²

Table 2; Framework for 6.2

The overall EE per built up area is 5610 MJ/m2 for the weekend house on the north which is 98.5m2 in area. The resultant equivalent EE would have been 8% less if done entirely in conventional materials.

35.4 MJ/kg (C. V. et al., n.d.)

7930

Embodied Energy per unit (in case of a conventional system)

Equivalent EE (MJ) Percentage of (in case of a energy savings conventional system)

Factors affecting design decisions (from interviews with the respective architects)

The structural strength of the material

Parameters

Sub-parameters

Materiality

Tensile strength

Installation clearance

Assembly based construction

Accessible connections

Detailing for disassembly Constructibility

RCC span 982 MJ/m² (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 134)

The ability to re-use the material at the end of the life-cycle of the building 68740

Detailing for disassembly

-122%

70 m²

Thermal mass required to insulate the spaces

Materiality

Thermal capacity

Lightweight and relatively convenient to assemble

Constructibility

Ease of handling a unit

Case Studies 6.3 Weekend house, Studio 4000 The design decisions of this weekend house is characterized by the modernist influences carried by the architect while being informed by the topographic undulations of the site. The built form cuts into an existing mound, while resting on it and creating a level above as well, resulting in 3 levels of floors within the house (as seen in fig 17). The composite structure of the built form is made of exposed load-bearing burnt clay brick masonry walls along the north and west while the south and east have RCC and mild steel columns that are all supporting spans of exposed RCC slabs at the three levels, covered by a doubly curved RCC roof. The folds of the retaining walls contain service intensive spaces to the north and west, while the pavilion like space is created towards the east. The wall section (Fig. 12,13; Section CC’) across the weekend house is considered for the analysis, with all calculations and analysis pertaining to this built form alone.

Image 10; View from the east

C’

6.3.3

N m 0

0.5

Figure 18; Plan

6.3.2

6.3.1

6.3.3

6.3.1

m 0

0.5

Figure 19; Section CC’

Image 11; Interior view from the upper level

Image 12; Interior view of the room on the upper level

Reinforced cement concrete Upturn 260 x 115 mm

China mosaic + backing plaster Waterproofing 60 mm deep

6.3.2

Reinforced cement concrete Roof slab 125 mm deep

Burnt clay brick Load bearing wall 1 1/2 brick thick

China mosaic + backing plaster Waterproofing 15 mm deep

Reinforced cement concrete Beam 230 x 260 mm

Timber Skirting 80 x 30 mm

Vitrified tiles Flooring 20 mm deep

Reinforced cement concrete Floor slab 130 mm deep

Reinforced cement concrete Lintel 720 x 85 mm

Reinforced cement concrete Lintel 920 x 85 mm

Clear glazing Timber frame 100 x 60 mm

Burnt clay brick Load bearing wall 2 brick thick

Stone Flooring 25 mm deep

Stone Coping 19 mm deep

China mosaic + backing plaster Waterproofing 30 mm deep

Reinforced cement concrete Beam 380 mm deep

Reinforced cement concrete Grade slab 160 mm deep

Plain cement concrete Leveling bed 150 mm deep

Sand bed 150 mm deep

Reinforced cement concrete Pile Foundation 600 mm Ø

6.3.1

Figure 20; Section CC’

6.3.1 Footing Condition The mound of alluvial sandy river soil into which the built form is placed is drilled in with pile foundations and held by a 2 brick thick retaining masonry foundation wall along the west. The retaining wall has been provided with folds to stabilize it structurally. It is within these folds that the distinct spaces like the toilets, kitchen, dining and sleeping spaces toilet in the plan have been accommodated within the house. The retaining wall extends under the middle level to enclose the space formed on the lower level, beyond which, towards the north, the RCC slab rests on pile foundations. Though undulating, the landform does not descend into a steep valley as 6.1 and 6.2. This makes it easier to use conventional methods of construction using brick masonry and RCC. The RCC slab rests on leveling beds of sand and PCC as in the other cases. In conditions where the RCC slab terminates along the ground level, an upturn has been provided to form a gutter along the edge of the slab. Internally, the floor slab is covered with a combination of a stone and terrazzo flooring (refer 6.3.3 for further details). The exposed brick work and the exposed RCC work are indeed popular in Ahmedabad as a result of the city witnessing the initial stages of the odyssey of modernism in India (Desai & Desai, 1991). This implies the availability of craftsmanship that is able to execute exposed brick and concrete work with a better expertise in comparison to any other part of the country, which has driven the decision of architects of this project to apply them in the project.

6.3.2 Bearing + Spanning Above the retaining wall from the floor level, load-bearing masonry walls of 1.5 brick thickness are laid out with small openings in the middle level but large openings in the rooms that open for the views of the wilderness beyond. The flooring spans at all the three levels are made of in-situ RCC slabs, of 130 mm depth and wide upturned beams at the exterior edges, cast over the load-bearing brick walls towards the north and west and the RCC and mild steel columns on the east and south. It is however different in case of the roof that covers the entire built form, in a doubly curved form. The form of the roof is said to be derived from the undulations of the ground conditions in order to reminisce over what was lost in the process of constructing the built form. The space underneath the roof is intended to remind one of the undulations of the site that existed before the built form did. The shuttering for the roof slab was made by professional shipwrights from Bihar, with New Zealand pine wood slats arranged in the form of a warped boat to achieve the required form. The exposed RCC surface of underneath roof is textured by the grains of the wooden slat form-work. The critical condition occurs where the sloping roof meets the masonry wall. Here, the masonry wall is chamfered on the top at an angle to receive the slab without a beam resting on it. This task requires utmost

Burnt clay brick Load bearing wall 2 brick thick

Timber Skirting 80 x 30 mm

Stone Flooring 25 mm deep

Reinforced cement concrete Beam 380 mm deep

Reinforced cement concrete Grade slab 160 mm deep

Plain cement concrete Leveling bed 150 mm deep

Sand bed 150 mm deep

Reinforced cement concrete Pile Foundation 600 mm Ø

Figure 21; Detail 6.3.1 Footing condition Burnt clay brick Load bearing wall 2 brick thick

Clear glazing Timber frame 100 x 60 mm

Stone Coping 19 mm deep

Stone Flooring 25 mm deep

China mosaic + backing plaster Waterproofing 30 mm deep

Reinforced cement concrete Grade slab 160 mm deep

Reinforced cement concrete Beam 380 mm deep

Plain cement concrete Leveling bed 150 mm deep

Sand bed 150 mm deep

Reinforced cement concrete Pile Foundation 600 mm Ø

Figure 22; Detail 6.3.1 Footing condition

precision in craftsmanship, hence making it a challenge for the constructor. The roof slab achieves structural stability due to its curves and hence can do away with any beams all along. The slab terminates with an upturn of 260mm depth and a drip mold at the bottom edge. The EE of the overall built form is majorly given by the sum of the EE of the burnt clay brick masonry and the RCC spans, that amount to 84% of the total EE. Since there is an availability of craftsmanship that can work with precise exposed brick-work, it could have been applied on bricks of lower EE. The different sized fenestrations in the masonry walls and along the RCC columns are glazed with toughened clear glass in up-cycled timber frames. It is however a challenging task to cover the openings at the roof level by the virtue of the form of the roof. This task was accomplished with by creating stencils of each opening and cutting glass according the forms derived. The glass is then fixed with timber beeding strips along all sides except for that touching the roof. Though the permeability of air, water and moisture through this gap is questionable, this edge has been left without either a frame, a beeding or even a sealant, in order to maintain the visual sanctity of the surface of the roof. The EE of the timber used throughout the project is negligible since it has been salvaged from demolished built forms. Glass is the major contributor to the EE of the fenestrations of this built form.

6.3.3 Surface treatment The project exhibits distinct types of surface treatment conditions throughout. The internal flooring in the middle and lower levels, as mentioned in 6.3.1, is a combination of stone and terrazzo. The stone slabs available in market have irregular edges. Two sides of the slabs have been cut straight with a merchandised process, while the other two have been left with the irregularities. Having been cut in strips of different widths, the stone slabs are placed in a parallel arrangement with aligning gaps between each slab at the irregularities and between each parallel line. The surface area around these stone slabs is then filled in with terrazzo along with brass strips, flattening the overall surface area. This process requires attention with the alignment of the stone slabs that are to be put in their respective rows without any mutual contact. The flooring in the upper level is done with ceramic tiles inside the rooms and the balcony. On the exterior, the vertical surfaces of the building above the middle level are exposed with waterproof chemical treatment, while the retaining wall on the west are plastered until the level of the middle slab. These plastered surfaces of the folding retaining wall are clad with irregular stone slabs remaining from the flooring and cladding of other surfaces (as in image 14). This uses up the stone wastes from the entire project, resulting in no disposal of construction waste from stone. However, this is not continued along the walls on the south which are clad with red stone slabs, including the jambs and sills of windows in this part of the project. This decision of contrasting the irregularity of the west wall has been made by the architects for its visual uniformity that is to go with the east facade of the built form that faces the river. The RCC slab gutters along the edges and the doubly curved roof slab are layered with backing plaster and china mosaic for waterproofing. 54

Reinforced cement concrete Upturn 260 x 115 mm

China mosaic + backing plaster Waterproofing 60 mm deep

Reinforced cement concrete Roof slab 125 mm deep

Burnt clay brick Load bearing wall 1 1/2 brick thick

Drip mould Shuttering texture

Figure 23 ; Detail 6.3.2 Bearing + Spanning condition

China mosaic + backing plaster Waterproofing 60 mm deep

Reinforced cement concrete Roof slab 125 mm deep

Clear glazing Timber frame 100 x 60 mm

Figure 24 ; Detail 6.3.2 Bearing + Spanning condition (fenestration)

Image 13; Interior view from the upper level

Image 14; View from the west

Clear glazing Timber frame 100 x 60 mm

Stone Jamb 25mm thick

Cement Smooth plaster 15mm thick

Burnt clay brick Masonry wall 2 brick thick

Stone Wall cladding 25mm thick

Timber flooring 15mm thick

RCC Staircase 110 mm deep

RCC Grade slab 130 mm deep

Figure 25 ; Detail 6.3.3 Surface treatment (south wall)

Stone Flooring 25mm thick

Irregularities in the edges Brass strip Terrazzo Flooring RCC Column 230 x 230 mm

Figure 26 ; Detail 6.3.3 Surface treatment (internal flooring)

Dimensions (measured on-site or from the drawings issued by the architect)

Area(m²) (or) Volume (m³) (or) Mass (kg)

Embodied Energy per unit

Equivalent EE (MJ)

Pile foundation

600 mm diameter

Floor slab (upper level)

130 mm deep slab 380 mm deep beam

102 m²

Floor slab (middle level)

130 mm deep slab 380 mm deep beam

135 m²

130 mm deep slab 260mm deep beams

70 m²

Roof slab (doubly curved)

125 mm deep slab 260mm deep upturns

177 m²

Columns

Circular sections 150mm diameter Square sections 260 x 260 mm

0.7 m³

Elements

Floor slab (lower level)

Material specifications

Reinforced cement concrete (RCC)

982 MJ/m² (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 134)

3180 MJ/m³ (CBPR, Wellington School of Architecture, n. d.)

28 MJ/m³

Sand bed

Sand

150 mm deep 176 m²

26.4 m³

(Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 132)

Leveling bed

PCC (cement:sand:aggregate::1:4:8)

150 mm deep 176 m²

26.4 m³

(Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 133)

2 brick thick (470 mm) 2100 mm high running length 55 m

54 m³

Retaining wall

Load bearing walls (upper level)

Burnt clay brick masonry 230 x 110 x 90 mm

475288

528 MJ/m³

2141 MJ/m³

1.5 brick thick (350 mm) 2100 mm high running length 80 m

59 m³

2226

739

13939

(Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 133)

231228

Cladding (on retaining wall)

Stone slab debris

25 mm thick

Flooring + Coping + Cladding

Stone slabs

25mm deep 96 m²

24 m³

(CBPR, Wellington School of Architecture, n. d.)

45360

Window frames

Salvaged timber

(Re-used material)

Window glazing

Clear toughened glass

6 mm thick

45 m²

(CBPR, Wellington School of Architecture, n. d.)

Flooring

Ceramic tiles

15mm thick 100 m²

1.5 m³

(CBPR, Wellington School of Architecture, n. d.)

Waterproofing

China mosaic + Backing plaster

25 mm deep 220 m²

5.5 m³

(CBPR, Wellington School of Architecture, n. d.)

Circular section 150 mm diameter 10.7 mm long 3.79 kg/m

40.5 kg

1890 MJ/m³

396 MJ/m²

Columns Mild steel Spanning frame

5250 MJ/m³

42 MJ/kg (Reddy & Jagadish, 2003, 132)

333 kg

(Structura Main Brochure, n.d.)

Table 3; Framework for 6.3

The overall EE per built up area is 2893 MJ/m2 for the weekend house which is 290 m2 in area. The resultant equivalent EE would not be any different from a condition with conventional materials as all materials used here are considered conventional in this research. 58

7875

5250 MJ/m³

(Structura Main Brochure, n.d.)

RHS 122 x 61x 4.5 mm 28 m long 11.88 kg/m

17820

28875

15687

Equivalent Embodied Percentage EE (MJ) Energy per of energy (in case of a unit savings (in case of a conventional system) conventional system)

Factors affecting design decisions (from interviews with the respective architects)

Parameters

Sub-parameters

The loose alluvial sandy soil at the steep slope of the ravines needs deep and strong anchoring

Materiality

Tensile strength

Local availability of craftsmen

Constructibility

Repetitious assembly

Materiality

Visual appearance

Adhering to the visual language and philosophical standpoint of modernism The form provides the necessary structural stability Flexibility in form-making The structural strength of the material

Termite proofing Leveling the surface above the compacted earth and the sand bed The structural strength of the material in load-bearing capacity Local availability of craftsmen Adhering to the visual language and philosophical standpoint of modernism

Materiality

Tensile strength

Constructibility

Ease of handling

Materiality

Compressive and Tensile strength

Functionality

Permeability of organic matter

Constructibility

Installation clearance

Materiality

Compressive strength

Constructibility

Repetitious assembly

Materiality

Constructibility

Efficient use of construction resources

The visual aesthetic of the material

Materiality

Visual appearance

Lightweight and relatively convenient to assemble

Constructibility

Ease of handling a unit

Clear views and ingress of daylight

Functionality

Permeability of light and views

The visual aesthetic of the material

Materiality

Visual appearance

Water-proofing

Materiality

Permeability of water

The structural strength of the material for the span

Materiality

Tensile strength

Assembly based construction

Constructibility

Installation clearance Accessible connections Detailing for disassembly

Utilising the waste generated from construction

07 Inference

1. The EE of the elements can be calculated broadly on the basis of the quantities of materials used and the availability of research on the EE values of the respective materials. This provides tangible numbers that can be compared to the values of the EE in case of conventional conditions, to find the difference made by the design decisions on the overall EE consumption. 2. In 6.1 and 6.2, the spanning and bearing elements are made of materials that are different from the considered conventional materials (RCC and burnt clay bricks). The figures 27 and 28 show the differences in EE values for each element in case of 6.1 and 6.2 respectively. This comparison can inform the decisions during the design process or even help provide the relevant comparisons within a project to understand the various conditions where the EE can be optimized. The comparisons show that 6.1 has saved on 29% of EE in comparison with the conventional conditions while 6.2 has spent 8% more. Since the materials used in 6.3 are considered to be conventional, there is no comparison arising in this condition. 3. To reiterate the results of the calculations, •

•

In 6.2, the overall EE per built up area is 5610 MJ/m2 for the weekend house on the north which is 98.5m2 in area. The resultant equivalent EE would have been 8% less if done entirely in conventional materials.

•

In 6.3, the overall EE per built up area is 2893 MJ/m2

80%

160000 140000 120000 100000

70%

60%

57%

53%

50%

41%

80000

70%

40%

60000

30%

40000

20%

20000

10%

Footing masonry wall

Load bearing masonry wall

Timbrel Vault

Existing

Shallow masonry dome

Convention

Load bearing masonry wall (above the ring beam until the leveling bed)

Parapet wall

% EE savings

Figure 27; Comparative graph of EE values of existing v/s conventional conditions for 6.1 180000

100% 76%

160000 140000 120000

12%

50%

32%

30%

100000 80000

-50%

60000 40000

-112%

20000 0

Masonry walls

Floor structure Existing

Lintels Convention

Building envelope

Roof structure

-100% -150%

% EE savings

Figure 28; Comparative graph of EE values of existing v/s conventional conditions for 6.2

for the weekend house which is 290 m2 in area. The resultant equivalent EE would not be any different from a condition with conventional materials as all materials used here are considered conventional in this research. 4. While it is essential to compare within a project for its elements, it would not serve right to compare different projects for their values of EE per unit area. Each project comes with its own set of conditions to address, which may not be comparable to each other. Since it is these conditions that influence the choices of different materials and methods of assembly, the EE values are directly

affected too. Though located in the same geographic context, the three projects considered for the research have to address distinct conditions of materiality, constructibility and functionality. Due to the incomparability of these conditions, the EE values too cannot be compared. 5. For conditions with materials of negligible EE, it is due to the fact that they have been up-cycled or salvaged from demolished built forms. 6. In conditions with materials of relatively high EE values, the re-usability of the materials at the end of the life-cycle of the built form needs to be taken into consideration. A re-usable material with a high EE value would use a high amount of energy in the initial built form, whereas the EE of the material when re-used would be considered to be negligible. 7. In the case of multiple elements, listing the factors according to the research framework can clarify the absolute necessity and irreplaceability of certain materials and methods as opposed to others where multiple materials and methods can be used to achieve the necessary condition, which could not be suggested as a part of the research due to the shortage of time.

Scope for further research 1. The framework can be optimized to provide with a thumb rule for substitution of materials for certain elements to achieve energy efficiency in terms of EE. The CO2e and operational energy calculations along need to applied as a part of an overall ‘Life cycle assessment’ of the chosen built form. This would include all process from the source of the materials to their demolition or re-purposing for use in other projects. This would provide a holistic understanding of the overall energy expenses of the built form. 2. The cost of materials was not factored in this research and

there is a need to compare the energy consumption to the cost of the materials and the resultant process. There have been multiple case throughout this research that have emerged as choices made based on the cost of materials and the process of assembly and the resultant operational charges. It was in theses cases that the framework fails to cater to. Hence, the framework could be more holistic with the inclusion of the factor of cost. This can further lead to focusing on the factor of affordability of energy efficiency. 3. The framework fails to provide with comparable results among different projects due to a lack of application of the parameters that make each project unique. It is essential to further define the conventional conditions to arrive at a baseline for a relative comprehension of the final values.

Appendices 8.1 List of Figures

Figure 1; Methodology flow chart [Diagram], by author Figure 2; Sub-parameters under materiality [Diagram], by author Figure 3; Material life cycle from cradle to grave, [Berge, B. (2009). The Ecology of Building Materials (C. Butters & F. Henley, Trans.). Elsevier/Architectural Press.] Figure 4; Rubric of analysis [Diagram], by author Figure 5; Locating Aalloa with reference to Gandhinagar and Ahmedabad [Diagram], by author (traced over apple maps) Figure 6; Plan, [Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from Kakani Associates. Figure 7; Section AA’, [Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from Kakani Associates. Figure 8; Section AA’, [Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from Kakani Associates. Figure 9 ; Detail 6.1.1, Footing condition, [Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from Kakani Associates. Figure 10 ; Detail 6.1.2, Bearing + Spanning condition, [Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from Kakani Associates. Figure 11 ; Detail 6.1.3, Terminal condition, [Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from Kakani Associates. Figure 12; Plan of the weekend house to the north, [Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from http://jmadc.in/h-24-aalloa-hills. Figure 13; Section BB’[Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from http://jmadc.in/h-24-aalloahills. Figure 14; Section BB’[Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from http://jmadc.in/h-24-aalloahills. Figure 15 ; Detail 6.2.1, Footing condition [Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from http:// jmadc.in/h-24-aalloa-hills. Figure 16 ; Detail 6.2.2 , Bearing + Spanning condition [Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from http://jmadc.in/h-24-aalloa-hills. Figure 17 ; Detail 6.2.3, Terminal flooring condition, [Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from http://jmadc.in/h-24-aalloa-hills. Figure 18; Plan, [Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from https://www.archdaily.com/957039/ weekend-house-at-aalloa-studio-4000?ad_medium=gallery Figure 19; Section CC’, [Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from https://www.archdaily. com/957039/weekend-house-at-aalloa-studio-4000?ad_medium=gallery Figure 20; Section CC’, [Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from https://www.archdaily. com/957039/weekend-house-at-aalloa-studio-4000?ad_medium=gallery Figure 21; Detail 6.3.1, Footing condition, [Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from https:// www.archdaily.com/957039/weekend-house-at-aalloa-studio-4000?ad_medium=gallery Figure 22; Detail 6.3.1, Footing condition [Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from https:// www.archdaily.com/957039/weekend-house-at-aalloa-studio-4000?ad_medium=gallery Figure 23 ; Detail 6.3.2, Bearing + Spanning condition, [Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from https://www.archdaily.com/957039/weekend-house-at-aalloa-studio-4000?ad_medium=gallery

Figure 24 ; Detail 6.3.2, Bearing + Spanning condition (fenestration), [Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from https://www.archdaily.com/957039/weekend-house-at-aalloa-studio-4000?ad_medium=gallery Figure 25 ; Detail 6.3.3, Surface treatment, (south wall), [Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from https://www.archdaily.com/957039/weekend-house-at-aalloa-studio-4000?ad_medium=gallery Figure 26 ; Detail 6.3.3, Surface treatment, (internal flooring), [Drawing] by author, traced over drawings retrieved from https://www.archdaily.com/957039/weekend-house-at-aalloa-studio-4000?ad_medium=gallery Figure 27; Comparative graph of EE values of existing v/s conventional conditions for 6.1, [Diagram] by author Figure 27; Comparative graph of EE values of existing v/s conventional conditions for 6.2, [Diagram] by author

8.2 List of Images Image 1; Sabarmati river at Aalloa in March, [Photograph] by author Image 2; Sabarmati river at Aalloa in September, [Photograph] by author Image 3; View of the NGO block from the north-east, [Photograph] by author Image 4; View from the RCC ring beam in the workshop space of the NGO, [Photograph] by author Image 5; View of the double-volume workshop space in the NGO, [Photograph] by author Image 6; View of the double-volume workshop space in the NGO, [Photograph] by author Image 7; View of the weekend house on the north 36, [Photograph] by author Image 8; View of the random rubble footing masonry underneath the steel spanning frame. [Photograph] by author Image 9; Interior view of the weekend house on the north, [Photograph] by author Image 10; View from the east, [Photograph] by Rahul Zota, retrieved from https://www.archdaily.com/957039/ weekend-house-at-aalloa-studio-4000?ad_medium=gallery Image 11; Interior view from the upper level, [Photograph] by Rahul Zota, retrieved from https://www.archdaily. com/957039/weekend-house-at-aalloa-studio-4000?ad_medium=gallery Image 12; Interior view of the room on the upper level, [Photograph] by Rahul Zota, retrieved from https://www. archdaily.com/957039/weekend-house-at-aalloa-studio-4000?ad_medium=gallery Image 13; Interior view from the upper level, [Photograph] by Rahul Zota, retrieved from https://www.archdaily. com/957039/weekend-house-at-aalloa-studio-4000?ad_medium=gallery Image 14; View from the west, [Photograph] by Rahul Zota, retrieved from https://www.archdaily.com/957039/ weekend-house-at-aalloa-studio-4000?ad_medium=gallery

8.3 List of Tables Table 1; Framework for 6.1, [Table] by author Table 2; Framework for 6.2, [Table] by author Table 3; Framework for 6.3, [Table] by author

Bibliography 1. Abdel, H. (2021, February 17). Weekend House at Aalloa / Studio 4000. ArchDaily. Retrieved May 3, 2022, from https://www.archdaily.com/957039/weekend-house-at-aalloa-studio-4000?ad_medium=gallery 2. Allen, E. (1993). Architectural Detailing: Function, Constructibility, Aesthetics. Wiley. 3. Bechthold, M., & Schodek, D. L. (2014). Structures. Pearson. 4. Berge, B. (2009). The Ecology of Building Materials (C. Butters & F. Henley, Trans.). Elsevier/Architectural Press. 5. CBPR, Wellington School of Architecture. (n.d.). Table of Embodied Energy Coefficients. A.1 Embodied Energy Coefficients - Alphabetical. Retrieved April 29, 2022, from https://www.wgtn.ac.nz/architecture/ centres/cbpr/resources/pdfs/ee-coefficients.pdf 6. Commoner, B. (1974). The Closing Circle: Nature, Man & Technology. Bantam Books. 7. Crawford, R. (2011). Life Cycle Assessment in the Built Environment. Taylor & Francis. 8. C. V., C., S.J., J., & R., R. (n.d.). Sustainability index for roof covering materials. Retrieved April 29, 2022, from https://www.irbnet.de/daten/iconda/CIB11522.pdf 9. Deplazes, A. (Ed.). (2005). Constructing Architecture: Materials, Processes, Structures (G. H. Söffker, Trans.). Birkhäuser Basel. 10. Desai, M., & Desai, M. (1991). Ahmedabad. Architecture Plus Design, 8(3), 22. https://www.proquest.com/ openview/ddb357e69c5255de265d199dabaa6b86/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=1816889 11. DIXIT, M. K. (2013, December). EMBODIED ENERGY CALCULATION: METHOD AND GUIDELINES FOR A BUILDING AND ITS CONSTITUENT MATERIALS. Office of Graduate and Professional Studies of Texas A&M University. https://oaktrust.library.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/151701/DIXIT-DISSERTATION-2013. pdf?sequence=1 12. Dixit, M. K., Fernández-Solís, J. L., Lavy, S., & Culp, C. H. (2010). Identification of parameters for embodied energy measurement: A literature review. Energy and Buildings, 42(8), 1238-1247. ISSN 0378-7788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2010.02.016. 13. H-24 Aalloa Hills. (n.d.). jmadc. Retrieved May 3, 2022, from http://jmadc.in/h-24-aalloa-hills 14. House in Gandhinagar | The Perch House | JMADC. (2018, May 22). YouTube. Retrieved May 3, 2022, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgxAJHIHw3w 15. Laul, A. (2013). Green is Red. Academy for Sustainable Habitat Research and Action [ASHRA]. 16. Linde, R. M., Linde, R. M., & Wakita, O. A. (1999). The Professional Practice of Architectural Detailing. Wiley. 17. Mani, M., & Reddy, B.V. V. (2012, January - March). Sustainability in Human Settlements: Imminent Material and Energy Challenges for Buildings in India. Journal of the Indian Institute of Science, 92(1). ISSN: 09704140 Coden-JIISAD. http://journal.library.iisc.ernet.in/index.php/iisc/article/view/26/26 18. Mohan, K., Rastogi, B.K., Pancholi, V., & Gandhi, D. (2018). Seismic hazard assessment at micro level in Gandhinagar (the capital of Gujarat, India) considering soil effects. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 109, 354-370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.03.007 19. Myers, F., Fuller, R., & Crawford, R. H. (n.d.). The potential to reduce the embodied energy in construction through the use of renewable materials. http://anzasca.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/p21.pdf 20. My Great Facade | Weekend House, Aalloa | By Studio 4000. (2021, August 13). YouTube. Retrieved May 3, 2022, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBlyiGdgbGI 21. Olie, J., Emmitt, S., & Schmid, P. (2004). Principles of Architectural Detailing. Wiley. 22. Praseeda, K.I., Reddy, B.V. V., & Mani, M. (2015). Embodied energy assessment of building materials in

23.

24.

25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33.

India using process and input–output analysis. Energy and Buildings, Volume 86(2015), Pages 677-686. ISSN 0378-7788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.10.042. Praseeda, K.I., Reddy, B.V. V., & Mani, M. (2016). Embodied and operational energy of urban residential buildings in India. Energy and Buildings, 110(2016), 211-219. ISSN 0378-7788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. enbuild.2015.09.072. Purswani, E. (n.d.). Ecological study of land use pattern in Gandhinagar Gujarat (B. Pathak & School of Environment and Sustainable development, Central University of Gujarat, Eds.). http://hdl.handle. net/10603/248320 Reddy, B.V. V. (2009). Sustainable materials for low carbon buildings. International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies, 4, 175-181. doi:10.1093/ijlct/ctp025 Reddy, B.V. V., & Jagadish, K.S. (2003). Embodied energy of common and alternative building materials and technologies. Energy and Buildings, 35, 129–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7788(01)00141-4 Structural Steel Sections. (n.d.). SAIL. Retrieved April 30, 2022, from https://sail.co.in/sites/default/files/ product-brochure/2020-03/Structurals.pdf Structura main Brochure. (n.d.). Tata Structura. Retrieved April 30, 2022, from https://www.tatastructura. com/engineer/pdf/brochure-yst310.pdf T sections. (n.d.). Edelstahl Lechner. Retrieved April 30, 2022, from https://www.edelstahl-lechner.de/en/ stock-range/t-sections-polished-raw/t-sections.html UNEP SBCI. (2009). Buildings and Climate Change. Summary for Decision-Makers. United Nations Environment Program Sustainable Buildings and Climate Initiative. Unwin, S. (1997). Analysing Architecture. Routledge. Weight Chart of JSW Vishwas GC Sheets. (n.d.). JSW Coated Steel Sheets. Retrieved April 30, 2022, from https://www.jswcoatedsteel.in/jsw-vishwas/weight-chart.aspx Wolf, C. D., Pomponi, F., & Moncaster, A. (n.d.). Measuring embodied carbon dioxide equivalent of buildings: A review and critique of current industry practice. Energy and Buildings, Volume 140(2017), Pages 68-80. ISSN 0378-7788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.01.075.

Page left blank intentionally

“............In the current global scenario, with clearly evident impacts of climate change, it becomes the responsibility of architects to weigh the factors affecting their design outcomes against the energy requirements to manifest them. It is hence necessary to examine the design detailing decisions with respect to their environmental impact in terms of the energy expenditure arising from the choice of materials, construction methods and functional requirements. While detailing manifests a design into reality, it brings out the critical aspects as well, which are not comprehensible during the process of design. This becomes further critical in the conditions involving a combination of a precise industrial material and an organic natural material of distinct embodied energy values. A thorough technical analysis of the detailing of various components and members of a built environment will help in comprehending these aspects of the design...............” ~ Page 10