Tech part A+B

Materials and Construction

Resolution

MATERIAL RESEARCH

The Sustainable communities & Social Values aspect of the RIBA sustainable outcomes focuses on designing buildings that enhance societal structures, empowering residents and leading to a greater quality of life. These values align near perfectly with &’s Common Principles and also with Rural Studio’s design methodologies for Lucy Carpet House.

Through producing a low cost dwelling for the family, the students from Rural Studio were able to elevate the situation of the family.

The design of Lucy Carpet House was able to benefit the social situation of the family through harnessing sustainable methods to benefit the affordability of the design.

CONSTRUCTABILITY

Corrugated Sheeting

Carpet Tiles

Mounting Board

Metal Flashing

The external walls of the house are thick with very little air contained.

Therefore, they are well acoustically insulated.

The less robust structure of the interior walls means that sound pollution may be an issue, especially between the children’s bedrooms.

COULD BE SEEN AS LESS AESTHETIC

Plywood Frame

The house employs an innovative structure. The external wall build-up consists of carpet tiles held in compression by a ring beam on top. A secondary structure of steel rods is utilised in order to add more rigidity.

The construction of the house was aided by students in the Rural Studio project. They helped with the building of the house and also the sourcing of materials for the project.

WALL BUILDUP

THIS WOULD BE MORE COSTLY, REQUIRING NEW MATERIALS INSTEAD OF REUSED ONES

SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES & SOCIAL VALUE

Plywood Sheathing

ACOUSTICS

CONSTRUCTION

Glazing Unit

Structure

The exterior of the carpet tiles is coated in a waterproof coating, stopping water from entering the wall but allowing any moisture to exit the wall if need be.

Metal Fixing Batons

WATERPROOFING

Lucy Carpet house has a focus on using materials that are sustainable whilst also being low cost. This is reflected in the final cost of the building - $30,000.

This was achieved through the donation of 72,000 carpet tiles from a Interface Carpet who also provided the funds for the project.

The tiles had to be left to air for 7 years to ensure all harmful gasses had been removed.

The RIBA sustainable outcomes are a guide to ensuring that the design of a building is sustainable both environmentally and socially.

Lucy Carpet House is located in Mason’s Bend, Alabama, USA meaning it doesn’t have to consider or adhere to these regulations.

The house was also built in 2002, before the development goals were released in 2019 therefore, they couldn’t have been considered.

However, due to Rural Studio’s focus on sustainable social and environmental design, Lucy Carpet House meets a variety of the outcomes.

THIS WOULD BENEFIT FIREPROOFING AND INSULATION

MAIN ASSUMPTIONS: - Insulation in roof - climate driven - Insulation type - budget driven - Roof structure - structure driven - Horizontal metal purlins - structure driven

Waterproof Membrane

Elastomeric Coating

Here lies one of the key limitations to utilising pioneering materials for construction.

Breathable Membrane

Window Cassettes

Through modelling the fragment, I had to make assumptions on some of the elements of the build-up. These assumptions are illustrated here in a dashed orange line.

The majority of the assumptions I had to make about the fragment were to do with the roof build-up as there were no drawings of this area.

Plywood Sheathing

Corrugated Sheeting

RIBA SUSTAINABLE OUTCOMES

The students at Rural Studio claim that the carpet tiles are fireproof when held in compression. There is no evidence I can find in order to support this claim.

However, the principles behind it make sense, the crapet is so compressed there are no air pockets, therefore, one of fires key requirements has been removed.

In order to make more certain that the wall is fireproof, I would add a layer of gypsum board to the interior of the wall, ensuring that the buildup is fireproof.

Speculations

Fibreglass insulation

Timber

The compression on the carpet tiles forces air molecules from out of the wall build-up, not allowing any air back in.

Fire requires air to burn, therefore the wall has fire resistant properties.

Drainage

FIREPROOFING

Ring Beam

Compression Screw

Concrete

Whilst prototyping was utilised for the materiality of the project, this methodology had limitations due to budget constraints.

The students had to be economical with the areas of the building they were prototyping in order to deliver the project at a low cost.

Ring Beam

Polycarbonate Sheeting

The rural studio students utilised a prototyping design methodology during the material research stage of the design process. They utilised this methodology in order to examine how the materials would behave when used in a wall buildup. Through prototyping, it allowed them to examine the properties of the wall such as its water resistance and its fire retardance.

This methodology is in keeping with the principles & holds. Through prototyping, we can study effects and properties and see how they affect our society and our buildings. They are also in keeping as, through their use an unorthodox material has found a new lease of life as a building material.

Timber Structure

Plywood

FIRE REGULATIONS

Rebar

Steel Rods

Steel Structure

Carpet Tiles

A key element of the students involvement in the design process was their research into carpet tiles’ properties as a material.

Through this research, the students were able to discern that the compressive forces enacted on the tiles, along with an externally applied coating rendered the wall moisture resistant and fire resistant.

This allowed the build-up of the wall to be incredibly simple, consisting of just the carpet tiles and the steel substructure.

In turn, this allowed the price of construction to be kept down.

Concrete

MATERIALS:

Design Methodologies

Due to the students involvement in the construction of the building, its design was optimised in order for low skilled workers.

Areas such as the steelwork and foundations required specialists.

If the internal structure of the wall were timber, this may have made it more accessible for the students to construct. Howevee, this may have a negative effect on the structural properties.

THIS IS A BENEFIT TO THE COST OF DELIVERING THE DESIGN COULD DELIVER A LOWER QUALITY FINISH THAN IF CONSTRUCTION PROFESSIONALS HAD BEEN UTILISED.

TECHNOLOGIES PART A: CASE STUDY; LUCY CARPET HOUSE

Windows

Polycarbonate sheet walls

Concrete shelter

Interior timber walls

Loadbearing carpet walls

The carpet loadbearing walls carry the vast majority of the load imposed by the roof structure, with minimal amounts being transferred to the internal wooden walls, allowing them to be constructed using minimal materials.

The roof structure itself is lightweight, consisting of timber framing and clad in corrugated sheeting. Due to low levels of wind in the area, little live load is imposed on it.

The tower segment consists of a timber structure clad in plywood, anchored to the concrete shelter.

CONSTRUCTABILITY The relatively simple structure of the house is a result of the projects low budget. The structure had to be constructed by students, not trained builders and this is reflected in its relative simplicity.

This simplicity means that the structure is also more affordable, using low cost materials.

FINANCIAL A variety of different factors have lead to the house being delivered at a low cost of $30,000. This is considerably less than the average price of a new build house in the area ($75,000). People in the area qualified for a mortgage of around $20,000-$40,000 due to schemes such as the Rural Development 502 Programme. Therefore, the building was constructed within the scope of this mortgage.

Through doing so, the scheme is in keeping with &’s social values and common design principles.

COST EFFICIENT DESIGN

SUSTAINABLE LIFE CYCLE COST The Sustainable life cycle cost aspect of the RIBA sustainable outcomes focuses on designing buildings that are sustainable for the occupants to run.

This entails reducing running costs for heating or cooling, reducing costs for upkeep and other such expenses across a buiding’s lifespan.

Due to the design philosophy of the Rural Studio and the limited financial resources available to them and their clients, Lucy Carpet House has low running costs.

Of potential concern to the life cycle costs of the building is the potential for issues within the carpet tile wall. Due to the material being unorthodox, their is little research into how the material will weather over time. Also of concern is how the wall may be repaired as due to the construction, this may prove difficult.

SOCIAL VALUES

Environment

Mason’s Bend, Alabama’s climate is humid subtropical, with hot summers and mild winters. The area is humid with plenty of rain throughout the year.

The area experiences weather events such as tornadoes and hurricanes.

Average wind speed in the area is low, roughly 4mph yearly average, with the prevailing wind direction being SouthWesterly

ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE

CLIMATE EMERGENCY Whilst the design is largely focused on addressing social issues, it does so through an environmentally concious approach.

The repurposing of the carpet tiles goes a long way to addressing the climate emergency. The tiles were defects from the production line, tiles that would otherwise have ended up in landfill. Through their repurposing in the house, it addresses the industries issue with waste.

The use of carpet tiles provides a novel precedent in using unusual, scrap materials to construct cheap affordable housing. In a period of time when we are experiencing both a climate crisis and a housing crisis, it shows that unusual methods can be considered in order to design our way out of these issues.

U-VALUES

FCBS CARBON CALCULATOR

U values are an integral aspect of a buildings energy efficiency as they are integral to how a building contains heat. Low u values = an energy efficient building.

The FCBS carbon calculator can be used in order to gain an estimate of the overall embodied carbon of the building and also where the distribution of the carbon.

The calculator is a very rough estimate, especially in the case of Lucy Carpet House as materials such as the carpet walls can’t be inputted into the wall buildup.

From the graphs, we can see that the building’s substructure (foundations and steel frame) contribute to the most embodied carbon.

The roof and internal walls have an element of sequestered carbon due to timber aspects of their construction.

Whilst Lucy Carpet House wasn’t designed with low embodied carbon or embodied energy in mind, the socially concious design principles employed by Rural Studios have resulted in this being the case.

Carpet tiles make up one of the largest proportions of building material within Lucy Carpet house. The 72,000 carpet tiles have an embodied carbon figure of roughly 317 kg of CO2.

The carpets would The largest source of embodied carbon found within the building is from the building’s concrete foundations. Unfortunately, this is relatively unavoidable as there are few alternative options for foundations due to the frequent tornadoes in the region.

ENERGY EFFICIENCY LOW OPERATIONAL ENERGY COST EFFICIENCY

The building can be considered to be reasonably thermally efficient with low u values for the wall buildup. However, the values for the roof and floor could be greater in order to come in line with the values set out in Approved Document L (0.13 for walls, 0.11 for roofs).

The building doesn’t suffer in this regard due to the warm climate for large parts of the year. However, in a period of cold weather the residents may struggle to keep heat in the home.

LOW OPERATIONAL ENERGY COST EFFICIENCY

Construction Sequence

EMBODIED CARBON

Steel Framework - 1.37KgCO2/Kg Foundations - 0.31KgCO2/Kg Timber - 0.72KgCO2/Kg Wood Stain - 5.32KgCO2/Kg

The whole life carbon emissions aspect of the RIBA sustainable outcomes focuses on reducing the amount of crabon released into the atmosphere throughout the lifespan of a building.

This embodies the cradle to grave philosophy that we have explored within studio and within the third discourse lecture.

Lucy Carpet House has been designed in keeping with these values. Reuse of materials plays a large part in reducing the carbon emissions of the building.

The buildings low operational energy also helps to reduce the whole life carbon emissions of the building.

ENERGY EFFICIENCY

The foundations of the building are layed.

Provides STRUCTURAL support to the building.

Carpet tiles - 13.7KgC02/m2

The good health and wellbeing aspect of the RIBA sustainable outcomes focuses on designing buildings that empower their occupants to be healthy in mind and body.

This can be reached by improving properties such as air quality and natural light.

Lucy Carpet House embodies these values as it was able to elevate the family’s living quarters, moving them from living on top of one another in a caravan. This in turn will have positive effects on the mental wellbeing of the family and also improve physical health in regards to the spread of illness etc.

WHOLE LIFE CARBON EMISSIONS

Due to the building’s low level of services, the family may have to run appliances such as electric space heaters in order to do so, thus increasing the operational energy of the building during these periods.

1

Any building material has an embodied carbon value. This value denotes the amount of carbon released into the atmosphere during the materials construction. This includes; harvest, transportation and manufacturing.

GOOD HEALTH AND WELLBEING

THERMAL EFFICIENCY

Operationally the house utilises clever design and passive systems in order to reduce the mechanical load required to keep the house comfortable, further addressing the climate emergency.

Based off climatic factors, the building must respond to a large range of temperatures, along with a reasonable amount of rainfall.

Energy

The building employs a variety of environmental responses in order to effectively respond to the environmental conditions in which it is situated.

Responses such as cross ventilation reduce the amount of operational energy required to keep the building comfortable for the residents.

This allows for low energy bills for the residents, in turn also helping to address the climate emergency.

The building also employs the use of mechanical ventilation systems, allowing for the building to be more ventilated in periods where the weather is particularly warm or stuffy.

2

Steelwork is fixed to the concrete slab. Fixed with bolts, the steelwork provides greater support for the carpet walls.

3

Carpet tiles are cut to size then stacked on top of each other on the steel frame. The tiles are stacked with an overlap to give more structural integrity.

4

Window units are placed in the carpet walls once wall has reached desired height. Units held in place through compression of carpet so must be supported until wall’s completion.

5

Carpets continue to be stacked until wall reaches full height, stack higher than required as compression will reduce height of stack.

6

Lay ring beam and sheathing over top of wall. Weight compresses slightly, tighten bolt to achieve more compression, adding more structural integrity to wall.

7

Construct wooden roof structure in-situ. Insulate using fibreglass insulation to keep costs low. Apply sheathing board on top.

8

Fix roof cladding unit onto roof structure.

Unit consists of weatherproofing elements.

Speculative Prototyping Due to the budget constraints of the project, we can speculate that the students would not have been able to carry out full scale prototyping of the materials used within the projects.

However, aspects of the materials required testing in order to see how they behaved when utilised in the building’s construction.

Aspects such as moisture resistance, fire safety and compression all needed to be modelled before construction.

Compression had to be modelled as the carpet tiles would have to be stacked to a greater height than specified in order to reach the specified height of the wall when they were compressed.

This details a speculated prototyping methodology in regard to compression.

UNCOMPRESSED

MY METHODOLOGY • • • • •

Stack Carpet Tiles Measure stack height Apply compressive force (me) Measure compressed height of stack Optional - repeat at greater or lesser weights.

COMPRESSED

Through applying the same amount of compression on the tiles as the ring beam, the students could get a reasonably accurate simulation of how tall the wall must be in order to end up at the desired height once compressed.

ALEX KIDDELL : 21438658

Lecture Synthesis

Date: 31/1/24 Speaker: Kevin Flanagan Position: Architect/Partner Organisation: PLP Architecture

Date: 29/1/24 Speaker: Rhodri Evans Position: Façade designer & Architect Organisation: BDA façade consultants

The second discourse lecture was delivered by Kevin Flanagan of PLP Architecture. The lecture was entitled “Low-impact Structures: Designing with Mass Timber”, centred around the efficacy of using timber as a principal construction material in future buildings on both the small and the large scale.

Timber is a sustainable material due to its ability to be regrown and its capabilities of operating as a carbon sink. As timber grows, it gathers carbon from the atmosphere, converting it into new material for growth. The carbon is then trapped in the timber throughout its lifespan, being released upon end of life through combustion or decomposition. This is what gives timber the ability to work as a carbon sink.

The sequestration of carbon into timber products is a great benefit to its sustainability. However, in my opinion, its effectiveness depends greatly on two factors: the lifespan of the timber product and its end-of-life treatment. As the benefits of carbon sequestration are only felt whilst the carbon is stored in the timber, its lifespan can greatly affect the impact that this has. In a long-lasting product (50+ years), this carbon sequestration has a great impact. Whereas for a product with a much shorter lifespan (5 years), there is a lesser impact. In my opinion this is where materials such as brick or steel with a greater lifespan and potential for greater reusability may become a better choice from an environmental standpoint. I also feel that materials with greater options for reuse align better with &’s philosophies on circular economies and my own position towards that.

At the end of a products lifespan, the end-of-life treatment comes into play. With timber this consists of combustion or decomposition. Through decomposition, the sequestered carbon is released into the atmosphere with little to no benefit.

Combustion, on the other hand, can be utilised in order to generate electricity, providing another benefit to the material. In some rare cases, the carbon released when the timber products are burned can be captured leading to a clean, sustainable source of electricity.

One other potential issue with building more and more with timber is procurement. Throughout the lecture, Kevin referred to satellite images depicting swathes of trees, claiming they showed that we had enough timber in order to start using it more frequently. I found this viewpoint contained flaws. In my opinion, this is a very surface level way of looking at the matter.

One that doesn’t account for some of the issues associated with the mass harvest of timber. These issues include ecosystem imbalance and monocultures. The design principles of & centre around establishing, creating and curating diverse social structures. This principle to me seems directly at odds with potentially enforcing a monoculture on a different ecosystem.

Within the lecture, Kevin referred to the Paris Accord regarding CO2 emissions. As a profession, I believe that it’s important that we take initiative when it comes to legislature such as this. Digesting and taking in the information, whilst also taking a leading role in making it more stringent and encompassing when it comes to our industry.

The lecture slides presented a series of timber framed towers, illustrating the capability of the material to be used for large scale projects. Timber is a flammable material, therefore there must be strict regulations put in place in order to make these structures fire safe. In the UK, timber used in mid-rise (11-19m) developments must be rigorously tested in order to make sure it meets standards.

Overall, I believe that utilising timber when designing future buildings is going to become a hugely important way in which we can help to reverse the climate crisis we find ourselves in however, architects must also be aware that it’s not just an allencompassing solution, it’s one with nuance and many ways in which it should be considered.

Rhodri Evans delivered the first of the discourse lectures. Rhodri is a façade design consultant for Billings Design Associates, a façade consultancy firm. I found it intriguing hearing how Rhodri is a trained architect yet has found a niche where he has been able to utilise his skillset and interests. This resonated with me due to its parallels with our Professional Studies lectures.

The lecture given was titled “Advanced Façade Systems” and focused on the elements that must be taken into consideration when designing a façade system. The lecture went into detail on aspects of façade construction such as the process of glass production, how these affect the characteristics of the glass and therefore the affect this has on the façade detailing and design.

Glass is a contentious topic in the architectural industry, with critics levelling accusations of ‘greenwashing’ at those preaching the materials sustainability. The assumption is made that glass is a recyclable material due to the ability to recycle glass products such as bottles and jars. However, in the case of glazing, the glass cannot be melted down and recycled. This is due to contaminants added to the glass during the production process in order to alter the characteristics of the product.

This restriction on recyclability is at odds with &’s design principles regarding sustainability and circular economy. However, whilst the glazing isn’t recyclable, it can be reused either as whole cassettes or through reusing the panes in new cassettes. This reusability adds an aspect of sustainability to the material however, it is dependent on condition.

As an industry, the material could be made more sustainable were a move made to standardise the sizes of glazing cassettes, allowing them to be reused in other projects upon the end of life of their original building.

The lecture detailed the responsibilities of architects regarding the utilisation of glazing in façade design. I had awareness of some of these responsibilities due to prior experience within the course. However, some aspects I wasn’t aware of. These include not using monolithic toughened glass above head height. Through Rhodri’s lecture I was introduced to responsibilities like this and was also able to understand the reasons behind such responsibilities.

I will take forward the knowledge of these responsibilities into future projects, along with a greater appreciation for the intricacies of glazing properties. In past design projects the only considerations I have taken towards glazing in my designs has been whether the cassettes are double, or triple glazed. Through the knowledge gained from this lecture, I will take aspects such as G values into consideration and the affect that these will have on my designs. I will also consider the structural properties of the glazing included in my designs, making sure that glass spans aren’t ever greater than 3.2m and that glass with correct structural properties is used in areas it’s required.

The design considerations for glazing are dictated by rulings and regulatory advisories. In the UK, these advisories are mostly found within the approved documents. Advisories on a facade’s energy efficiency can be found in approved document L. Here, suggested overall U values for a façade system can be found. Whilst these are useful in developing a facade system, it could be argued that some of the values are too high, with the potential for lower U values being commonplace. Through using smaller U values in the document, large energy savings could be made, helping to address the climate crisis. Lower U-values would align with &’s values as it would encourage more sustainable building.

Overall, I found the lecture to be useful in order to help further my knowledge in an area it where it was quite superficial. I hope that the knowledge gained from this lecture can help me make more informed and potentially environmentally sympathetic decisions in the future.

The third of the tech discourse lectures was given by Les Postawa, Structural engineer and Founder at Les Postawa Associates.

The lecture was titled “Designing Structural Frames: Steel vs Concrete vs Timber”. The lecture centred around the properties of the materials and the considerations required for their use within a structural system with a key focus on how these properties affected the embodied carbon of the structures.

Les’ lecture takes an approach that differs to the previous lecture when it comes to timbers efficacy as a ‘lowest carbon’ material. The lecture had a focus on whether materials are inherently more sustainable than others when used in a structural system. Les put across throughout the lecture that, contrary to popular belief, there isn’t one material that is better than another environmentally. This aligns more with my beliefs on the topic than the previous lecture given by Kevin Flanagan did. It is my belief that often, the needs of a structural system may necessitate the use of a certain material. In this case it can be less carbon intensive to use a smaller quantity of said material than a larger quantity of a less suitable material. In some ways I believe that this aligns with my interpretation of &’s design principles. Intelligent usage of material and usage of materials that can be reused instead of being engineered for a highly specific purpose align with these principles in my opinion.

Prior to the lecture, I was more inclined to believe CLT or Glulam beams were the most carbon efficient. However, this was without considering aspects of the production process and how they affect this. In the lecture, Les’ slides showed a table illustrating the similarities of the embodied carbon values for timber, concrete and steel beams of similar sizes. Whilst these values are similar in this context, differences can be seen when evaluating a structural system as a whole.

Les also introduced the concept of ‘cradle to grave’, the concept of a materials lifecycle impact from its manufacture to its endof-life treatment. In & we have taken this concept one step further and considered it as ‘cradle to cradle’, where the materials lifecycle is considered for recyclability and reuse. I believe that this way of thinking about material reuse is one that architects should be taking more often as, by considering it as a profession, its effectiveness can be increased.

Towards the end of the lecture, les presented some projects he had worked on in the past. I found this to be insightful as it allowed a look at the more structural side of architecture, I side I feel I often neglect in my studio work. Here the projects displayed how structure can be celebrated and can become an aesthetic choice within a buildings design.

The topics touched on within the lecture are essential in helping to design more mindfully in the face of the climate crisis.

Things I have learned from this lecture can help me detail my studio project to a level that will meet certain policies such as the RIBA sustainable development outcomes.

Overall, I believe that the lecture has given me a lot to think about in regard to designing with the ‘right’ materials and optimising how those materials are used in a structural system as previously, I had a propensity to just use CLT for the structural systems of my buildings. Going forwards into studio 3.2, I will investigate using hybridised systems and also considering the concept of ‘cradle to cradle’.

Date: 19/2/24 Speaker: Laura Stafford Position: Associate Architect Organisation: 5Plus Architects

TECHNOLOGIES PART B: DISCOURSE

Date: 5/2/24 Speaker: Les Postawa Position: Founder/Structural Engineer Organisation: Les Postawa Associates

The final discourse lecture was delivered by Laura Stafford, Associate Architect at 5Plus Architects. The lecture was titled “Design for High Environmental Performance Standards”. The lecture centred around office blocks and ways in which net zero carbon can be achieved within these spaces.

Laura introduced a variety of different regulations that are aimed at helping architects design net zero buildings. These included guidance from the RIBA, RICS, UKGBC and LETI (Royal Institute of British Architects, Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, UK Green Building Council and London Energy Transformation Initiative respectively). The guidance set out in these documents targets lower figures than those provided in documents such as the Approved Documents. This approach is in keeping with &’s position on sustainability and aligns with my personal beliefs that we should be going above and beyond in order to create a more sustainable environment.

In the lecture, Laura mentioned that aspects of design such as fire safety have a significant impact on a buildings net- zero capabilities. I found this surprising as it wasn’t something I had previously taken into consideration. I had always assumed that such things wouldn’t be at odds with a sustainable building. In my opinion, it is here that ideas such as building net-zero carbon become potentially problematic. It is my belief that they should acknowledge issues such as fireproofing and include measures to mitigate them as the user’s safety in a building is of paramount importance and a net zero status shouldn’t be greatly harmed by adhering to this.

Laura also introduced some precedents, buildings designed by her firm, 5Plus Architects. These precedents included The Hive in Ancoats, Trafford Town Hall and 1 West Bar Square. These buildings all utilised different ventilation strategies, with Laura describing how these different strategies influence the net-zero capacities of the buildings. Heating systems have the biggest effect in this with The Hive having high operational energy requirements due to its gas heating. I find issue with this as it assumes that electric is ‘clean’ however, the ways in which this electricity is produced may not be clean, potentially coming from gas or coal power stations.

In relation to these precedents, Laura explained how her firm had carried out post occupancy analysis of the schemes. This was something that I found very interesting as it was something I haven’t had the chance to carry out so far in my architectural education as all my designs have been theoretical. It is something I’m looking forward to in the future as I believe it is a key part of understanding the influence we have on the built environment and where our innovations may or may not work. Post occupancy analysis is something that is in keeping with &’s philosophies as a lot of the commoning philosophies the atelier explores are pioneering in their nature. Therefore, if they were to be seen through to fruition, post occupancy analysis would be important in order to assess their efficacy.

Overall, I think that the lecture has taught me important lessons about how our buildings may sometimes not turn out how we plan them but it’s important to assess and learn from these mistakes.

COMPARING &’S PRINCIPLES Within &rchitecture, a core set of design principles are utilised in order to try and design a fairer more equitable future for both society and the environment. These principles aligned with the principles employed by the Rural Studio in the design of Lucy Carpet House in Tech Part A however, throughout the lecture series they have sometimes presented alternative viewpoints to these principles.

& CORE PRINCIPLES CP1 - CREATIVE CULTURES, Ethical practices and welcoming difference CP2 - CREATIVE USERS, Include different actors CP3 - CREATIVE PLACES, Protecting and producing commons CP4 - CREATIVE PROGRAMMES, Cultural, social, political and economic conditions CP5 - CREATIVE RESOURCES, Socially and ecologically just methods, materials and labour

Date: 12/2/24 Speaker: Andrea Cooley Position: Technical and Design Support Manager Organisation: Wienerberger The fourth discourse lecture was delivered by Andrea Cooley, Technical and Design Support Manager at Wienerberger UK. Wienerberger specialise in the manufacture of a wide variety of masonry products including bricks, roofing tiles, pavers etc.

Andrea gave a brief history of masonry throughout the lecture, detailing how history has shaped the modern-day industry. I was interested to hear how there was still so much innovation within an industry that has existed in some shape or form for thousands of years.

Having designed previous studio projects using bricks and potentially utilising them in the resolution of my current studio project it was interesting to see where I had made mistakes designing with them in the past. Bricks fit well with &’s position on material reuse as, with minimal processing, they can be taken from one building and used in another, fitting in with the circular economy values & promotes. Therefore, I aim to utilise them within studio 3.2, using principles learned from this lecture to make this successful and well realised.

During the lecture, Andrea introduced the importance of mortar colour in the overall appearance of the brickwork. In a wall of stretcher bond brickwork, 17% of the overall wall area is mortar, therefore playing a large part in the overall appearance.

This wasn’t something that I had previously considered during studio projects, choosing to go with a generic finish given by a rendering engine. Taking control over this is something I believe will give my future projects more substance.

Andrea also introduced some of the regulations around brickwork, including the rating system for the weatherproof qualities of the bricks. This was something that I wasn’t previously aware of yet had seen the code for it before when looking at brick websites. Andrea talked about the frost resistance of the bricks and how it was tested. Frost resistance wasn’t something that I had considered with bricks before as I thought that there was a universal level. Andrea also mentioned salt content as part of the code, this was something I didn’t understand however, having researched further, I have found this is a regulation on the levels of soluble salts in the brick’s makeup. There are differing levels based upon how long a brick is saturated for. An S2 rated brick is for prolonged saturation (outer leaf), an S0 brick would be for completely protected bricks.

There are legal specifications setting out how bricks should be used within a construction scheme, these can be found in BSI Standards Publications. Within these publications, details about the FS codes and other such regulations can be found. These codes are something that I am going to take into consideration while detailing my project in studio 3.2, should brickwork play a part in my design.

As a company Wienerberger are aiming to bring innovation to the masonry industry. They are doing so with a range of products that are considerate of the environment. These are beliefs that line up with the principles of &, utilising existing materials in a way that is fairer to the planet and the community. Of particular interest to me are their Corium line of brick slips as brick slips are something I am considering using in the detailing of my studio project.

Overall, I believe that the lecture has provided me with useful resources in order to make better informed decisions on the use of masonry within design projects in the future, from the rating system regarding frost resistance to the aesthetics of the masonry.

ALEX KIDDELL : 21438658