Issuu on Google+

B.A.  ARCHITECTURAL  STUDIES   FLORENCE  H  GRAHAM     STAGE  II  PORTFOLIO      

120270411     2013-­‐2014  


YEAR  DESIGN  REPORT


NONDSIGN  MODULES

DESIGN  MODULES

CONTENTS

CHARETTE

ARC2023 PLACE  OF  HOUSE

PLACED,  DISPLACED

ARC2010 ENVIRONMENTAL   DESIGN  &  SERVICES

LIVING  ON  THE  EDGE

ARC2009 ARCHITECTURAL   TECHNOLOGY

CIVIC  CENTRED

ARC2009 ARCHITECTURAL   TECHNOLOGY

CROSSOVER


CcHhAaRrEeTtTtEe WwIiLlDd?


POP-­‐UP  STRUCTURE  DISPLAY


PpRr

OoJj

EeCc Tt

2

PpLlAa CcEeDd DdIiSs PpLlAaCcEeDd


DEVELOPMENT SCULPTURAL DISPLACED   STAGGERED ILLUDING SLIDEABLE STEPPED LIGHT LIGH STRIPS EFFECT FEATURE CONTOURS   LINEAR SHADOW SCALE JUNCTIONS CHIAROSCURO CROSSOVER THRESHOLD REFLECTIVE PARALLEL JUXTAPOSE JUX


GROUND  FLOOR  PLAN

FIRST  FLOOR  PLAN

TRANSITIONAL  SPACE


LIGHT  STUDY  SECTION

YARD  SECTION

STREET  ELEVATION


SHORT  SECTION

LONG  SECTION


STREET  ELEVATION  IN  TERRACE


LlIiVvIiNnGg OoNn TtHhEe EeDdGgEe


MAPPING  BOOKLET  -­‐  SITE  ANALYSIS HISTORY

LIGHT  STUDY

LIGHT  STUDY

GREEN  SPACES

ROUTE  A  

ROUTE  B

ROUTE  C

ART/SCULPTURE


2-­‐DIMENSIONAL  &  3-­‐DIMENSIONAL  DIAGRAMS  OF  FORM  DEVELOPMENT

PRECEDENTS


DEVELOPTING  THE  FORM  THRIUGH  MODEL  MAKING


PLANS  -­‐  BEFORE  DESIGN  IMPROVEMENTS


+  STREET  LEVEL

STREET  LEVEL

IMPROVED  PLANS


IMPROVED  PLANS

+  SLIPWAY  LEVEL

SLIPWAY  LEVEL


LONG  SECTION

1:50  MODEL


ORIGINAL  ELEVATION

RIVER  ELEVATION


ORIGINAL

SHORT  SECTION

SHORT  SECTION  SET  INTO  WIDER  SITE


LIME  STREET  ELEVATION

ORIGINAL  ELEVATION  


MODELS  BEFORE  DESIGN  ADJUSTMENTS

IMPROVED  MODEL  -­‐  1:100


PRIVATE  SECTOR

OBSCURING  THE  VIEW CIRCULATION  VIEWS  FROM  THE  EXTERIOR

PUBLIC  SECTOR

PRIVATE  VS  PUBLIC  DIVIDE VERTICAL  DIVIDE


ANGLING  FOR  VIEWS  DIAGRAMS

EAST  ELEVATION  ANGLED  FOR  VIEWS  DOWN  THE  RIVER WEST  ELEVATION  ANGLED  FOR  VIEWS  UP  LIME  STREET

EXTERNAL  ACCESS  ROUTES  FROM  LIME  STREET

CIRCULATION  THROUGH  THE  SITE   +  SHOWING  HOW  ROUTES  INTERACT  WITH  SLIPWAY  ON  DIFFERENT  LEVELS


CcIiVvIiCc CcEeNnTtRrEeDd

VIEWS  FROM  THE  SITE

VIEWS  OF  THE  SITE  FROM  THE  SURROUNDING  AREAS


JOURNEY  TO  THE  SITE

From  the  Station,  down  Front  Street  to  the  sea,  and  then  down  towards  Site  A.  Showing  the  contrast  as  the  street  widens  and  opens  up  to  the  sea,  and  then  drops  down.


Through  conceptual  sketches  I  came  up  with  a  design  intention  of  stacked    tube    elements,    which    would                allow    for    large    glazed    areas    to    be  incorporated  at  the  end.    To  further  develop  this  I  began  to             twist  and  manipulate  these  forms  to  look  out  towards  key  views.  

 Further  development  of  model  making,  and  site  analysis  allowed  me  to  come  up  with  a  more  layered  concept.  Through  looking  at  the  surrounding  seaside  town,  I  noticed  the  “Tynemouth  Effect”  occurring  throughout  the  town,  where  the  streets  link  into  each  other  through  a  T-­‐junction  


CONCEPTUAL  DRAWING


CONCEPTUAL  DRAWING

CONCRETE  WALL  SECTION  


CONCEPT  BOARD


GROUND  FLOOR  PLAN


FIRST  FLOOR  PLAN

N


SECOND  FLOOR  PLAN

N


SHORT  SECTION   B-­‐B


LONG  SECTION  A-­‐A


SOUTH  FACING  ELEVATION

An  experimental  photomontage,  to  learn  photoshop  techniques.


ROUTES/CIRCULATION  DIAGRAMS

GROUND  FLOOR  PLAN

FIRST  FLOOR  PLAN

EXTERNAL  CIRCULATION

LONG  SECTION

SECOND  FLOOR  PLAN

INTERNAL  CIRCULATION


INTERIOR  SPACE  ZONING  DIAGRAMS

GROUND  FLOOR  PLAN

CORE  ACCOMODATION

LONG  SECTION

FIRST  FLOOR  PLAN

EXHIBITION/GALLERY

SECOND  FLOOR  PLAN

GOVERNMENT

CULTURE?LIBRARY


FRAMING/ANGLING  FOR  VIEWS  DIAGRAMS GROUND  FLOOR

SECOND    FLOOR  

FIRST  FLOOR

ROOF  PLAN  -­‐  VERTICAL  CIRCULATION  VIEW  POINTS


CcRrOoSsSsOoVvEeRr VvEeLlOo-­CcIiTtYy

MAP  OF  SATELLITES  AROUND  SHEFFIELD


ROUTES  TO  THE  SITE

ROUTES  THROUGHOUT  THE  SITE

VIEWS  OUT  FROM  THE  SITE

LOAD  PATHS  WITHIN  STRUCTURE

Xx-­Xx:

Yy-­Yy:

PROPOSED  REUSING/RENOVATING  ROUTES


CONSTRUCTION  WALL  DIAGRAM


1:2  MODEL  OF  RHOMBIC  DODECAHEDRON

MODULE  DIAGRAMS  OF  CONSTRUCTION/USE


Environmental Design + Services Energy Strategy In my design the tutor’s flat is situated on the ground, and first floor of my foyer. It is partially buried into the site, and above is a floor for the residents. The U-values for the flat which need to be considered, are the external walls and the ground floor.

Construction – Exposed exterior The construction of the walls can be broken down into sections; one being the two external walls creating the façade of the flat, while the other is the wall creating the back wall of the space that is buried under the ground. The fourth wall is an interior wall, between the flat and the rest of the foyer. The general construction of the entire design is a (box) timber-framing structure, as it is a sustainable, renewable source. The walls creating the façade, consists of alternate strips of glazing and exterior timber cladding. These walls compromise of a timber frame construction, where the insulation is placed between the wall studs behind the cladded sections. To improve the performance, and U value of an insulated timber frame construction various options are available. One option is Kingspan’s Thermawall TW55 or Kooltherm K12, which have a thermal conductivity of 0.02-0.023W/mK depending on thickness. Alternately, Rockwool can be used to fill the voids, in general it has a conductivity of 0.034-0.038W/mK depending on the particular mineral wool product. Cellotex is another option, which has a thermal conductivity of 0.021-0.022W/mK. Steico provides a less common, but more environmentally sustainable product, Steicoflex, a wood fibre flexible insulation board that has a thermal conductivity of 0.038W/mK. Despite this not being the least thermally conductive and so not the best overall performance, it is the most sustainable and environmentally friendly, non-toxic, recyclable product in its use of a renewable source. Due to this I would use this insulation, especially as its performance isn’t poor; it’s as efficient as certain other types of non-sustainable insulation. Overall, the natural thermal properties of timber help maximise the efficiency of the insulation, as wood is a poor conductor so helps contain heat; therefore will help increase the performance of the carbon-neutral insulation. The timber framing generally is made up of soft wood vertical studs and horizontal rails. The thermal conductivity of these elements are 0.083-11W/mK if Cedar, and 0.12W/mK if Douglas Fir is used. Engineered wood is another option; such as glulam, LVL (laminated veneer lumber), and I-beams. The benefit of using these products is

that they are stronger than natural wood. However glulam, for an example, has a thermal conductivity of 0.13W/mK parallel to the gluelines and 0.15W/mK perpendicular to the glue lines. This is not as low the natural wood so not the most viable option. In the case of my design, I will use a lightweight timber structure, which is a better insulator, as thermal conductivity increases with density. The material I would use is Douglas Fir, as it can sourced locally, in the Newcastle area, and has a reasonable thermal conductivity so would be the most sustainable option. Douglas fir would also be used for the external cladding, which is a non-loadbearing structure, and is made up of timber panels. Throughout the interior of the structure, plasterboard will be used to line the walls. Standardly gypsum plasterboard is used, which has a thermal conductivity of 0.19W/ mK. However, an alternate option would be Kingspan Kooltherm K17, which is an insulated plasterboard with a thermal conductivity of 0.021W/mK and also has a class 0 fire rating. Table showing R-Values (m2 K/W) : (thickness/conductivity) Building Element

Internal Boundary

-

Thermal Conductivity W/mK -

Plasterboard

Kingspan Kooltherm K17

0.021

0.025

1.19

Services Void OSB (for racking, vapour control, and airtightness) Insulation

SmartPly OSB3

0.13

0.015

0.17 0.12

Steico Steicoflex (flexible/between Studs) Steico Fibre Sheathing Permafol Fire-Proof Membrane Douglas Fir -

0.038

0.2

5.26

0.046 0.033 0.12 -

0.06 0.01 0.2 -

1.30 0.30 0.17 1.67 0.04

Breather Membrane Ventilated Cavity Cladding External Boundary

Product

Thickness

R-Values

m

m2 K/W

-

0.13

R tot = 10.35 U value =0.0966 This U-value is close to 0.1 m2 K/W, so therefore meets the Association for Environment Conscious Building’s Gold Standard.


Environmental Design + Services Energy Strategy Construction – sheltered/Buried Wall The back wall is buried in the site, therefore requiring a buried wall. Due to ‘earth-bunding’, heat loss on this side of the building should be reduced, as it is against a thermally significant mass. However, issues can arise from being in contact with the ground, such as damp, but if appropriate waterproofing is installed along with sufficient insulation it can be a beneficial element to the construction. The majority of this structural section is made of concrete, where alternate options are available; one being dense with the thermal conductivity of 1-1.8W/mK and the other lightweight with 0.1-0.3W/mK. Therefore a lightweight concrete is the more efficient choice, however due to an endothermic reaction large levels of carbon dioxide are released so therefore this material is not environmentally friendly. A more sustainable approach would be to use Masterblock, which involves a block work construction containing 20% of recycled materials, and have a thermal conductivity of 0.25 W/mK. An alternative option is Enviroblock, which is produced from 73% minimum of secondary, and recycled materials, which is compliant with ISO 14001, and has achieved BES 6001:2008 Responsible Sourcing Certificate from BRE Global, and was the first to do so. The dense block has a thermal conductivity of 1.074W/mk and the light block is 0.049W/mK. The light blocks have a much lower conductivity to the lightweight concrete; therefore is a reasonable choice, as it is more sustainable. To insulate this wall, the construction of it includes placing the insulation on the exterior, followed by a waterproof layer, and then the blockwork. Non-porous insulation should be used, if not a waterproof membrane should be used. For the insulation a closed-celled extruded polystyrene sheet should be used, as it is more efficient as it uses less building elements due to it not being porous. Foamular XPS is used as a water vapour barrier for foundations and the perimeters of structures, so is appropriate, it also has a conductivity of 0.029W/mK. Alternatively Kingspan’s Styrozone can be used, which has a thermal conductivity of 0.029W/mK at the needed thickness of ≤ 120mm. However, it is not considered to be as strong for this sort of use, so the Foamular XPS insulation will be used. While the best waterproofing system to use would be Bentonite clay sheets, which uses natural materials and has a conductivity of 1.14W/mK. This is not the most common method but the most sustainable, and is self-healing. A more standard approach is a combination of layers; including a ‘emulsion waterproof membrane’(Paraphalt = 0.43

W/mk), a ‘heavy grade’ waterproof membrane (EPDM, petrochemicals = 0.2W/mK), and a liquid water sealant (EasiPour=0.15). These all involve chemicals, which are harmful to the environment so a more natural approach of Bentonite clay sheets will be used. Table showing R-Values (m2 K/W) : (thickness/conductivity) Building Element

External Boundary Insulation Waterproof Layer Block work Insulation Plasterboard Internal Boundary

Product

Foamular XPS Bentonite clay EnviroBlock Steico Steicoflex Kingspan Kooltherm K17 -

Thermal Conductivity W/mK 0.029 0.2 0.049 0.038 0.021 -

Thickness m 0.08 0.015 0.215 0.2 0.025 -

R-Value m²K/W 0.04 2.76 0.075 4.39 5.26 1.19 0.13

R tot = 13.845 U value =0.072 2 This U-value is lower than 0.1 m K/W, so therefore meets the Association for Environment Conscious Building’s Gold Standard.

Construction – Ground Floor For the ground floor, there will be a concrete solid floor, with a timber floor installed above. In general, the thermal conductivity of foundation blocks should allow for their moisture content – thermal conductivity of 0.25 W/m·K is the recommended level for foundation blocks of autoclaved aerated concrete. The Sub Base is made of ‘crushed recycled aggregate, which has a thermal conductivity of 1.1W/mK, and is a sustainable product as it is made up of 30% crushed glass that enriches the silica. Additionally, as a replacement to Hard Core, Jabcore will be used as its thermal conductivity is 0.036W/mK, whereas the standard material is 1.04W/mK at an appropriate thickness; therefore Jabcore is a much more efficient product. The DPM, within the structure is negligible in the consideration of the U-Value due to its minimal thickness. For the insulation, Steico will be used as to keep continuality with the rest of the construction, and for its environmentally friendly nature. Douglas Fir will also be used, as to stay in keeping with the rest of the structure.


Environmental Design + Services Energy Strategy

Using daylight Dialux

Table showing R-Values (m2 K/W) : (thickness/conductivity) Building Element

External Boundary Sub Base Hard Core Damp Proof Membrane Concrete Insulation Floor Screed Timber Joist Floor Cladding Internal Boundary

Product

Recycled Aggregate Jabcore Classic 100 EnviroBlock Steico Sand Cement Screed Douglas Fir Douglas Fir

Thermal Conductivity W/mK 1.1 0.036 0.049 0.038 1.1 0.12 0.12 -

Thickness m 0.3 0.15 0.00025 0.215 0.2 0.075 0.2 0.06 -

R-Value m²K/W 0.04 0.27 4.2 4.39 5.26 0.07 1.6 0.5 0.13

Through creating a Dialux model, the exact daylight levels my interior would receive could be visualised and tested. Throughout doing so in Figure 1, I found that there was too much light entering the space, which would therefore make it an unpleasant room to occupy. To tackle this I removed the glazing from the doors in Figure 2, which was the largest area of light creating an issue, and also filling a circulation space, which does not require as much natural lighting as people just pass through and do not spend a great majority of time.

R tot = 16.46 U value =0.0607 This U-value is lower than 0.1 m2 K/W, so therefore meets the Association for Environment Conscious Building’s Gold Standard.

Construction – Glazing Within my design the glazing takes up the open space between the alternate cladded, and insulated wall studs; therefore there is a large amount of glazing. The living area in particular, there are two external walls with a large proportion of glazing. Due to this, a more insulated window construction needs to be installed, to reduce heat loss through these areas. The most efficient at doing so would be to use triple glazing, with two argon fills and two low emissivity coatings to further efficiency. Through doing so the U-value would be 0.8W/m2K, which is half of what Building Regulations request (1.6W/m2K). InsulGlaze, fits within these requirements and has a high performance low emissivity coating to stop heat from escaping, an argon gas fill, and a wider cavity. This method is also commonly used for sustainable designs.

Figure 2 Figure 1

Through doing this the space became a more efficiently lit space, as the working tops and dining have sufficient lux levels of above 100. This therefore means that throughout the day, little electrical light will be needed, especially as the distribution of glazing gives an even amount of light across the area (with the exception of the front door). This is also the case with the rest of the flat so excess light will not be an issue. This results in the overall design being much more sustainable as electrical lighting accounts for up to 15% of overall electrical consumption in homes, and so reducing its use results in a more electrically efficient space. This is furthered by the amount of solar gain received as the windows are orientated towards the South, South-East, which is 267.049W. If shading is wanted, shutters could be installed.


Environmental Design + Services Energy sources to meet demand Energy

Electrical

Through completing the spreadsheet and a series of tables, I have been able to calculate and improve the U-values of the walls, flooring, and glazing, which has reduced the requirement for heating, as through structural efficiency the heat is retained. This has been done through using materials with a low thermal conductivity, and therefore resulting in a lower U-value and a higher efficiency through doing so. This has resulted in the SAP value of 85.5, and the improvement of DER over TER 26%; therefore achieving credit 6. Additionally, there are other measurements of the flat’s sustainability performance that the above does not cover. These include my use of sustainable, natural, and recycled materials, which where possible can be locally sourced. To improve the flat’s energy strategy, supplementary to the structural elements, sustainable methods of energy provision can be used. Table showing values for energy requirements + resultant C02 emissions:

Despite my tutor’s flat being situated on the ground floor, and 1st floor of my foyer; there are opportunities for photovoltaic solar panels to be put on the roof one storey above. This would also be a sustainable and environmental opportunity, as the more electricity generated, the lower the cost. However the overhead cost of instalment is high, but can be cost effective if a large system is used . Green Deal finance is also available, additionally the Feed-In Tariff scheme that based on a 4kWp solar PV system, generates a tariff of 14.9p/kWh, as what is not used gets exported to the grid (the tariff however depends on your Energy Performance Certificate). Therefore, this would work successfully as they can be easily be orientated towards the South, optimising efficiency. This therefore means that they will be exposed to a greater amount of direct sunlight, and consequently produce more energy. Generally groups of cells are mounted together in panels, which would be possible on the roof of the foyer, especially as they come in a variety of shapes and sizes so the most appropriate PV systems can be installed. UniSolar panels, output 68W and within an area of 46m2, more than 60 panels could be installed. However, approximately 30 panels would be sufficient, if not excessive. 6 hours exposure to sunlight for 150 days per annum 1836kWhr This therefore would suffice, and if suitable for the Feed-In Tarriff would be beneficial. It could also provide electricity for the rest of the foyer.

KWhr/yr

Kg C02/Year

Cost £

Electricity for Pumprs

130

67.2

15.6

Electricity for Lighting

178.1

218.1

50.6

Total Electricity

308.1

285.3

66.2

Heating System

4034.7

798.9

125.1

Water Heating System

3730.5

738.6

115.6

Total Heating

7765.2

1537.5

240.7

Florence H. Graham Student Number:120270411 Environmental Design + Services ARC2012

Heating The additional space could be used to install a Solar Thermal Heating System, which uses panels that use the sun’s energy to heat domestic hot water, that is then stored in a hot water cylinder. The technology is simple, effective, and sustainable. To be cost effective a minimum of 3m2 is required. Baxi Solarflo’s panels have a 95% absorber efficiency, and can produce up to 60% of the energy required to heat domestic hot water.


Florence  H  Graham  120270411 ARC2009  Architectural  Technology Living  On  The  Edge Site  A


structural diagrams overview of structure

The  form  of  structure  employed  is  a  timber-frame  construc-­‐ tion  within  the  most  occupied  areas  of  the  design.  Through   the   use   of   a   timber-frame   for   the   dwelling,   a   thickness   of   200mm  of  insulation  can  be  installed  in  the  external  walls;   therefore   improving   energy   ratings   for   this   section   of   the   building.   Additionally,   timber   as   a   constructional   material   advantageously  is  quick  and  easy  to  assemble  comparative-­‐ ly.  It  is  also  a  sustainable  choice.     Contrastingly,   where   a   larger   proportion   of   wall   openings   can  be  seen,  a  steel  portal  frame  will  have  to  be  used  to  en-­‐ sure   structural   stability.   Additionally,   where   the   design   is   submerged  below  street  level  due  to  the  extreme  change  in   height   between   the   site   boundaries,   a   retaining   concrete   wall  will  be  used,  as  timber  can’t  be  used  in  these  circum-­‐ stances.   However,   to   stay   within   my   design   concept   these   elements  will  be  clad  with  timber.  

Private  Dwelling

Public  Building


structural diagrams primary structure

Retaining  Wall   Timber  Frame  Construc on

Steel  Frame  Construc on Load  Bearing  Wall  

Steel  I-Beams  


structural diagrams primary structure secondary structure

Timber  Floor  Joists

Steel  Floor  Construc on   Timber  Roof  Joists

Steel  Portal  Frame Roof  Support

Concrete  Slab  Flooring


structural diagrams tertiary structure

Timber  Wall  Sheathing

Timber  Floor  Decking

Timber  Roof  Decking


tectonic / constructional study tectonic intent The   most  significant   material   choice   within   my   design   was   for  the  cladding,  which  consists  of  a  thick  timber  element  as   to  create  a  contrast  between  the  solid  areas,  and  wall  open-­‐ ings.  The  use  of  timber  within  my  design  was  to  keep  with   my   concept   of   a   wood-work   workshop,   and   so   transferred   the   use   of   materiality   throughout   the   design.   The   original   choice  in  using  timber  throughout  the  concept  was  also  due   to  it  being  a  sustainable  material  due  to  it  being  of  a  renew-­‐ able,   organic   nature.   This   was   then   furthered   by   using   Douglas   Fir,   which   can   be   locally   sourced   from   Kielder;   therefore   making   it   an   environmentally-sustainable   con-­‐ struction.   This  extends  into  my  choice  of  construction,  where  a  timber   frame  structure  was  used  in  the  private  dwelling.  Internally,   this  allows  for  a  crisp  finish  with  plaster-boarding.  However,   for  larger  areas  of  the  building  a  steel  portal  frame  will  have   to   be   used   as   to   hold   the   larger   proportions   of   glass   and   higher   ceilings.   This   change   is   due   to   my   design   concept,   where  there  is  a  clear  vertical  split  between  the  two  defini-­‐ tive   areas.   In   the   private   areas,   a   tighter   cladding   and   a   more   compact/standard   split   between   floors   is   used   to   make   it   a   more   private.   While   for   the   public   sectors,   the   cladding  becomes  wider  spread  so  it  is  a  more  open  space   to  occupy  and  the  spaces  between  each  floor  become  dou-­‐ ble  height  to  further  this  effect.  These  areas  will  therefore   have   to   just   be   clad   with   the   timber   previously   used   as   to   allow  for  aesthetic  continuity  throughout  the  design.

wall section - 1:20 1 Wall  to  Roof  Construc on

2 Intermediate  Floor  Construc on

3 Window  Detail

4 Wall  to  Ground  Floor  &   Founda on  Construc on


tectonic / constructional study wall section - 1:10 Timber  Ver cal  Cladding Thick  due  to  wanted  design  effect

Plasterboard Ven lated  Cavity Services  Void For  electrical  wires,  and  hea ng  pipes

Ver cal  Timber  Ba en Supports  Cladding

Horizontal  Timber  Ba en Supports  plasterboard

Horizontal  Timber  Ba en Supports  Cladding.  Chamfered  edge   to  allow  water  to  run  off.  

Timber  Joist Breather  Membrane

Part  of  Timber  Frame  Construc on (holds    elements  together)

OSB  Board Timber  Sheathing Insula on   Compact  Fit


tectonic / constructional study – critical junctions (1) wall to roof – 1:10

Waterproofing Steel  Cap

Membrane/Insula on Deck

Protects  junc ons

Timber  Joists Vapour  Control  Layer Turned  up  over  insula on (sealed  by  waterproofing  above)

Vapour  Control  Layer (in  ceiling)

Insula on   Tightly  packed  into  the  voids  be-­‐ tween  the  eaves.  

Compressible  Filler

Plasterboard Line  Ceiling

Timber  Ba en Covers  plasterboard  junc on

Breather  Membrane Timber  Studs Support  junc on

Insula on   Compact  fit

Vapour  Control  Layer


tectonic / constructional study – critical junctions (2) window detail-1:10

window head+sill details – 1:5

Timber   Lintel

 Damp  Proof  Course  -  Cavity  Tray   Cavity  barrier,  provides  drainage  and  allows   Breather  Membrane  to  fold  under  cladding.

Breather   Membrane

Com-­‐ pressible   Filler

Fire  Insulate Vapour Control  Layer

Folds  under   cladding

Folds  under  to   window

Insula ng  cavity  tray

Sealant Window  Head  &  Lintel Need  to  be  level  (stop  air  infiltra on)

Triple  Glazing

Insula on   for   Window   Reveal Air  Tightness  Tape

Argon  Filled  

Sealant Compressible  Filler Vapour Control  Layer

Breather   Membrane Folds  under   window  to  in-­‐ ternal  window   reveal  

Folds  over  to  win-­‐ dow

Protects  junc on  &  allows  water   to  run  off

Cill Solid  to  close  cavity

Insula on Compact  fit

Damp  Proof  Course (below  window  and  under  sill)

Sealant Internal   Window   Sill  

Insula on   for   Window   Reveal


tectonic / constructional study – critical junctions (3) wall to upper floor (intermediate floor) – 1:10

Vapour  Control  Layer Wraps  around  stud  and  back  to   lining  inner  wall  

Gap  to  allow   mber  floor  to   expand  and  contract (due  to  heat)

Timber  Floor Air  Tightness  Barrier Between  VCl  and  Joist

Timber  Stud   Suppor ng  Intermediate   Floor

Breather  Membrane

Insula on Plasterboard   For  Ceiling

Vapour  Control  Layer Insula on (Compact  Fit)

Breather  Membrane


tectonic / constructional study – critical junctions (4) wall to ground floor & foundations - 1:10 Vapour  Control  Layer Con nues  down  and  folds   under  the  insula on.

Breather  Membrane Folds  under  interior  wall  

Gap  to  allow   mber  floor  to   expand  and  contract (due  to  heat)

Insula on Between  two  construc onal     elements

External  Ground   Level  

Vapour  Control  Layer Under    below   mber  floor   to  allow  it  to  slide  when  expanding  and  contrac ng

Insula on   Above  slab.  

Sand  Infill  

Concrete  Blocks   To  create  strong/firm   base  for   mber  frame   structure  above

Concrete  Slab Damp  Proof   Membrane Under  slab  and  wraps   up    past  insula on     through  to  cavity

Sand  Blinding Concrete

So  Rough  Sub  Base   can’t  puncture  DPM

Wall  Founda on  Support

Sub  Base Founda ons  for  Ground  Floor


tectonic / constructional study sustainability ratings external wall—a+ u value—0.0966 Retaining  Wall—U  Value—0.072

internal wall—a+

upper floor construction—a+


tectonic / constructional study sustainability ratings

ground floor construction—b roof construction—a+

windows—a+

u value — 0.0607

Mine  would  be  be er  in  areas  as  tripled  glazed.  

 (thicker  insulation  used)


Florence H Graham ARC2009 Architectural Technology Assessment Access For All & Means Of Escape


Means of escape

Access For All Disabled Parking: 1 → The disabled parking, within my design, is located by the main entrance into the library and moot hall. This means that entering the building is easily accessible, and close-by. Within this area two disabled bays can be placed. → The dimensions of these bays require ’1200mm accessibility zone between, and a 1200mm safety zone on the vehicular side’. There should also be sufficient space to enter/exit the vehicle, and circulate to the boot/rear. Within these requirements, the surfaces should be slip-resistant and smooth (changes in height under 3mm). These bays should also be clearly labelled for clarity of designated use. Access for Wheelchair Users to Main Entrance:2 → The first requirement is for there to be access with a minimum of 1:15 gradient, which in this case the gradient is far lower than that and visually invisible. Along this route, recognisable symbol signposting will be used, as to allow for a clear, described path to be made. Additionally, from the provided bays, the main entrance is easily visible. → The entrance into the building is level with the site, and there is not a change in height, so a level landing of 1500mm x 1500mm is not required but would be if this was not the case. → The entrance will have an overhang to provide weather protection, and sensor reactive powered doors to allow for ease of use. Although will have an emergency override system to be used in the case of an emergency. Within my design the doors are glass so if assistance is needed, help can be provided, as it is visible from the reception. This also allows for collisions to not be made between occupants passing through. These doors will meet standards, as they will be visibly marked to show a solid entity is there. Door guards will also be in place to prevent visitors walking into the door swings when in use. → These doors also will be a minimum of about 2400mm as to provide a sufficient emergency exit for the occupant capacity. This width is more than sufficient, as a minimum of 1000mm is required to provide for wheelchair access. Access for Wheelchair Users within the Building:3 → Within my design, there is ease of disabled access both horizontally, and vertically. Each storey consists of flat levels, and non-stepped levels, therefore allowing for an ease of manoeuvrability. There is also a lift at the centre of the building to provide for vertical access within close proximity at any given point. The flooring is also slip-resistant as to provide a stable footing. → Within the interior distribution of rooms, the number of doors have been reduced to a minimum requirement, where necessary. This therefore promotes the ease of accessibility within the building. → As the reception is first point of call, it must be easily accessible and convenient to use. This is furthered by its ease of visibility when entering the building through the main doors as it is en route. The desk gives access for both standing and seated visitors, thusly providing for any given situation. Within the reception a disabled access toilet is provided in the waiting area, as to allow for immediate use if needed. → On each individual floor, disabled toilets are provided as to allow access without having to change floors. → Within the vertical route, the lifts are 2000mm x 2000mm, which is within the disabled access regulation. While the horizontal access, the main corridors are a minimum of 2000mm, allowing for ease of circulation and passing, along this route there are passing places if required. Visual or Hearing Impairment Strategy: → Within my design, the principal exits are glass so if assistance is needed when entering help can be provided. Warning sensors, a distance of 800mm away, are also provided, along with visual signs. → On each step on the stairs visibility strips that are hard wearing will be installed. While in the lifts, enough time is provided to ensure the doors do not close on the occupant when entering the space. → At the reception a hearing loop will also be used, and there will be no glass screen to remove the chance of glare which can impair lip reading. → Throughout the design, a contrast between floors, ceilings, and walls as to not disorientate visitors. 1. Approved Document B, Vol.1&Vol.2, p.20 2. Approved Document B, Vol.1&Vol.2, p.27-28 3. Approved Document B, Vol.1&Vol.2, p.33-38 4. Approved Document B, Vol.1&Vol.2, p.33-38

Calculating the Occupancy Level:1 Storey Room 2nd Floor

Mayor’s Office

Floor

61.38

Library Book Stack Area

160.74

Debating Chamber

158.12

Seating/Reading Area Lobby Area

Interview Rooms

Library Reception/ Archive Crèche/Kids Library

Ground Floor

55.1

Admin Office I.T. Room

1st

Room Area (m2)

36.85 27.67 37.98 71.58 45.78 64.53

Library Book Stack Area

115.87

Classroom

62.02

Reception/Waiting Area Cafe

Art Gallery/Exhibition Space

38.74

108.55 151.81

Floor Space Factor (m2/per person)

Occupant Capacity

1.0

36

6.0

9

6.0

10

7.0

22

6.0 1.0 0.5

Sub Total

1.0 7.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 5.0

37

316

81

71

7.0 2.3

4

6

Sub Total

28 16 38 62

474

108 30

Sub Total Grand Total

238 793

Minimum Escape Route Corridor & Door Opening Width For Each Story: Maximum occupancy level for each story is between 60 – 600 occupants, meaning 2 escape routes are required; therefore within this design 2 escape routes will have to be provided per storey. To allow for alternative escape routes, they should be 45° or more apart. If this is not possible the two routes should be separated by a fire resisting structure. The minimum escape route corridor, and door opening width per storey is: 2nd Floor = 850mm, 1st Floor = 2370mm, Ground Floor = 1190mm. 2 Minimum Stair Width For Each Stair: Stair Storey Occupants Served Floors Served Minimum Stair Width (mm) 2A 2nd Floor 81 1 850 nd 2B 2 Floor 81 1 850 st 1A 1 Floor 555 2 2775 1B 1st Floor 555 2 2775 Staircases are labelled according to storey, and lettered according to alternative route plan based on a simultaneous evacuation under the assumption that one route would be unavailable.3 Minimum Width For Each Final Exit: Formula: W = ((N/2.5) + (60S))/80 W = ((793/2.5) + (60x2775))/80 W is width of final exit in metres W = 2398.45 N is numb. of people served by ground floor exit S is stair width in metres Within my design there are two final exits at opposing ends of the building. This allows for the provision of alternative routes in the case where one becomes unavailable. Both exits will Florence H Graham have to be a minimum of about 2.4 metres wide.4 ARC2009 Civic Centred Written Strategy 1. Approved Document B, Vol.1&Vol.2, p.135 2. Approved Document B, Vol.1&Vol.2, p.35&37 04/05/14 3. Approved Document B, Vol.1&Vol.2, p.37 4. Approved Document B, Vol.1&Vol.2, p.38


Site Development plan

Florence H Graham ARC2009 Civic Centred Written Sheet 04/05/14 Scale: 1:250


2

-

second floor

Florence H Graham ARC2009 Civic Centred Written Sheet 05/05/14 Scale: 1:200


1

-

first floor

Florence H Graham ARC2009 Civic Centred Written Sheet 05/05/14 Scale: 1:200


g

-

ground floor

Florence H Graham ARC2009 Civic Centred Written Sheet 05/05/14 Scale: 1:200



FHGraham - Architecture Stage 2