Tim Mooney_Two In One

TWO IN ONE A KIT OF PARTS TO BUILD THE CIRCULAR FUTURE

Swinburne University of Technology Master of Architecture Design Thesis Circular Economy, Semester 2 2022 Studio Leaders: Canhui Chen & Peter Petrov Timothy Mooney 103452963

CONTENTS Project Abstract

4

1 /BACKGROUND Waste in Australia Issues with Recycling Responses and Circular Economies

6 7 9

2 /MATERIALS AND CASE STUDIES Material Suitability Case Study - Villa Welpeloo Case Study - The Circular Building Case Study - Peoples Pavilion Thesis Question

13 14 20 23 24

3 /DESIGN FOR DISASSEMBLY Key Performance Requirements A Kit of Parts Design Logic Steel Connections Exploded Axo Test Plan

27 28 32 33 34 37

4 /TRIAL SITES

2

Swinburne SR Building Embodied Energy Site Analysis

39 41 42

Auburn High School

44

5 /PROPOSAL Existing Massing Development

47 48

Proposal Axonometric Plans Perspectives Sections Reuse Project Reuse Profile

50 54 62 68 70 74

6 /APPENDIX

80

7 /REFERENCES

84

3

PROJECT ABSTRACT A KIT OF PARTS TO BUILD THE CIRCULAR FUTURE

For the past 30 years Architects have largely operated in an almost post scarcity economic conditions. Land prices boomed, materials from every corner of the global we’re easily available and there was always some new innovation of our globalized economy on the horizon. Unfortunately it is becoming increasingly clear that this period of architectural history was an exception. In March 2020 the Covid-19 Pandemic swept across the planet and exposed the vulnerability of global trade systems. Practically overnight factories were forced to shut or radically alter their production. While freight services operating on Just in Time Delivery models suddenly developed massive backlogs and ballooned in price.

This Thesis will explore how Architects might be able to create a set of universal components using common construction materials that can be assembled and disassembled with relative ease allowing materials to be reused in future projects reducing new material requirements and turning old structures into a resource than can be tapped by the construction industry, thus reducing reliance on imported material and lowering carbon emissions. While Disrupting the traditional linear model of construction in favor of a circular relationship.

As a test case the kit of parts will be applied to two projects. A new Architecture Building at Swinburne University that will act as circular economy research center and teaching space for AEC Disciplines built utilizing the structure of the Existing SR Building. Then use the recovered components to explore their re usability providing club facilities and spectator stands at Auburn High School proving the projects circular economy credentials.

4

1/BACKGROUND AN INTRODUCTION TO WASTE AND THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY

CONSTRUCTION WASTE IN AUSTRALIA

13,000,000 60% RECYCLED TONS OF WASTE

92%

METALS RECYCLED

80%

MASONRY RECYCLED

24%

PLASTICS RECYCLED

(Hyder Consulting, 2011)

INTRODUCTION TO WASTE The construction industry is one of the largest contributors to non-food waste in Australia creating 13,000,000 tons of waste each year. Of this waste around 60% is Recycled (Kabirifar, Mojtahedi and Wang, 2021) while on the surface this might seem like a decent figure there are a few key problems with recycling that make it less than ideal response to the problem of waste.

As recycling usually requires high levels of manual labor, energy use and is limited to areas with specialized processing facilities.

(Cáceres Ruiz and Zaman, 2022)

6

THE PROBLEM WITH RECYCLING

COSTLY

Usually requires a lot of manual labor greatly reducing profit.

ENERGY INTENSIVE Metals especially require smelting which is energy intensive.

SPECIALIZED FACULTIES Requires specifically designed facilities which may be far away from site and have limited throughput.

(Cáceres Ruiz and Zaman, 2022) (Reck and Graedel, 2012)

7

OTHER CHALLENGES IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY The Covid 19 Pandemic In concert with the war in the Ukraine exposed the weaknesses of modern supply chains. Goods that we’re previously cheap and plentiful have suddenly become expensive with lengthy lead times. Combined with the many issues the world was facing before this latest crisis supply systems are under a level of stain that as not been experienced since the 20th Century. While this has presented problems across range of institution the construction industry been one of the most heavily affected. (OCED, 2022) KEY ISSUES Collapse of Global Supply Chains (OCED, 2022) - Leads to long waits for materials - Unexpected delays along with prices rises can disrupt construction schedules - Particularity has affected the construction industry.

Climate Change (Müller, Krick and Blohmke, 2021) Need to reduce emissions in the construction industry and move toward methods that construction methods that produce lower green house gases and have longer lives.

Labour Costs (Deloitte, 2016) - In developed nations labour makes up a huge portion of the cost of a building.

- These high costs compound when poor planning requires late changes on site.

- Materials are labour intensive to install Material Independence (Productivity Commission, 2021) - The more materials a country has to import the more vulnerable it is to price shocks and global crisis.

- Insecure supply chains mean that imported materials my be harvested from unsustainable sources or may use unethical labour practices in the supply chain.

8

A CIRCULAR RESPONSE Circular Economies are an economic production model that focuses on creating self sustaining loops within the economy that take materials that would otherwise be discarded and place them into Reuse, Re-manufacture or Recycling systems the key difference of circular approach to the older recycling systems is place recycling is a last resort if the material cannot be easily reused in this manufactured from. This results in materials that go through the circular economy being used for longer before being heavily reprocessed making more efficient use of their embodied energy and raw material use. (ARUP, 2016) (ARUP, 2018) Effects (ARUP, 2018) - Materials are not placed in landfill reducing pollution and land area used for landfill.

- Reinserting these materials into the supply chain we can reduce the need to manufacture new materials and supplement existing supply chain shortfalls.

- Processing of the materials creates local jobs in all areas close to where materials are produced and most needed.

Components of a Circular Economies Reuse: Materials are in good condition and are easy to use and require litte extra labour to prepare them. By designing with this in mind architects can design components so they are as easy to reuse as possible and document both the assembly and disassembly of structures making it as easy as possible to reuse components. (ARUP, 2016) Examples: Unused construction material from a site, old electronics after users upgrade, out of style furniture, recovered steel beams from a demolition.

Remanufacturing: Recovered materials that cannot be reused in their recovered form may require processing to restore their condition. This is generally more labour intensive than reuse and as result can be expensive making it hard to justify for materials that have low value on the secondary market. (ARUP, 2016) Examples: Brick usually needs to be cleaned to remove excess mortar and to restore appearance, refurbished electronics can be returned to manufacturers who replace any damaged components and replace the battery.

Recycling: recycling is the most intensive of the 3 as it involves transforming a object back into a raw state. This is even more labor intensive and can also be quite energy intensive.

Metals for example requite application of high heat to melt them down allowing them to turned into new forms. For composites and complex materials the recycling process can require removal of permanent glues, chemical processing, granulating and other intensive processes. A such recycling tends to favor materials that are of high initial purity or have high value to offset extraction costs. (ARUP, 2016) Examples: Metals, Paper, PETG and Glass All 3 of these techniques are an important part of circular economy but the most preferable will almost always be reuse due to it’s simplicity and low environmental impact as such where preferable this project will focus on reusing materials in their original state.

9

CIRCULAR ECONOMIES ARE THE SOLUTION

REUSE OVER RECYCLING A reuse first approach maintains materials in their original form allowing easy reuse.

REDUCED EMBODIED ENERGY

Material are derived locally not imported from overseas and have reduced processing costs.

SUPPLY CHAIN SECURITY

Supply chains the use reclaimed materials are more resilient against global disruption.

10

(ARUP, 2018), (ARUP, 2016)

11

2/MATERIALS & CASE STUDIES IDENTIFYING SUITABLE MATERIAL AND EXAMPLES OF CIRCULAR BUILDINGS

RDS RDS RDS RDS

RDS

SUITABILITY OF MATERIALS FOR CIRCULAR METALS

Ease of Reuse

Market Availability (Recycled Building Centre, 2022)

Cost Premium | +/-30%

Processing & Wastage

(Universal Beams, 2022) (Recycled Building Centre, 2022)

Ease of Reuse

Market Availability

Ease of Reuse

Market Availability

(Recycled Building Centre, 2022)

(Universal Beams, 2022) (Recycled Building Centre, 2022)

(Recycled Building Centre, 2022)

(Universal Beams, 2022) (Recycled Building Centre, 2022)

Cost Premium | +/-30%

BRICKS

Ease of Reuse

Market Availability

Ease of Reuse

Market Availability

(Recycled Building Centre, 2022)

Cost Premium | +/-30% Cost Premium | +/-30%

Processing & Wastage Processing & Wastage Processing & Wastage

(Universal Beams, 2022) (Recycled Building Centre, 2022)

Cost Premium | +/- 10%

Processing & Wastage

(Brick Recylers, 2022)

(Austral Bricks, 2022) (Brick Recylers, 2022)

Ease of Reuse

Market Availability

Cost Premium | +/- 10%

Processing & Wastage

Ease of Reuse

Market Availability

(Brick Recylers, 2022)

Cost Premium | +/- 10%

(Austral Bricks, 2022) (Brick Recylers, 2022)

Processing & Wastage

(Brick Recylers, 2022)

(Austral Bricks, 2022) (Brick Recylers, 2022)

(Brick Recylers, 2022)

(Austral Bricks, 2022) (Brick Recylers, 2022)

Ease of Reuse

PLASTICS Market Availability Cost Premium | +/- 10% Processing & Wastage

Easeof ofReuse Reuse Ease

MarketAvailability Availability Market (Recycled Building Centre, 2022)

Cost Premium | +/-30% Processing&&Wastage Wastage -80% Processing

Often 2022) free or (Recycled Very Cheap (Universal Beams, Building Centre, 2022)

Ease of Reuse

Market Availability

Cost Premium | -80%

Processing & Wastage

Ease of Reuse

Market Availability

Cost Premium | -80%

Processing & Wastage

Ease of Reuse Ease Easeof ofReuse Reuse

Market Availability Market MarketAvailability Availability

Ease of Reuse

Market Availability

Cost Premium |Up to 80% Processing & Wastage

Ease of Reuse

Market Availability

Cost Premium |Up to 80% Processing & Wastage

(Brick Recylers, 2022)

Often free or Very Cheap Often free or Very Cheap

Cost Premium | -80% Processing & Wastage Often free or Very Cheap Cost Premium |Up to 80% Cost Premium | +/10% Processing Processing&&Wastage Wastage

TIMBER

Heritage Timbers can carry a huge premium (Austral Bricks, 2022) (Brick Recylers, 2022)

Heritage Timbers can carry a huge premium

Heritage Timbers can carry a huge premium

Ease of Reuse Ease of Reuse (ARUP, n.d.)

Ease of Reuse Ease of Reuse

Market Availability Market Availability (ARUP, n.d.)

Market Availability Market Availability

Cost Premium |Up to 80% Processing & Wastage Heritage TimbersPremium can carry a huge premium Cost Processing & Wastage Unknown Cost Premium | -80% Processing & Wastage Often free or Very Cheap Cost Premium Processing & Wastage

Ease of Reuse

(ARUP, n.d.)

Market Availability

(ARUP, n.d.)

Unknown

(ARUP, n.d.)

(ARUP, n.d.)

Unknown

Ease of Reuse

Market Availability

Cost Premium

(ARUP, n.d.)

(ARUP, n.d.)

Unknown

Ease of Reuse

Market Availability

PLASTER BOARD Cost Premium

Processing & Wastage Processing & Wastage

Cost Premium |Up to 80% Processing & Wastage Heritage Timbers can carry a huge premium

BASED ON THIS EVALUATION OF AVAILABLE MATERIALS IT WAS DETERMINED DETERMINED THAT METALS WOULD BE GOOD PRIMARY MATERIAL TO FOCUS ON FOR THIS PROJECT. IT ALSO MADE CLEAR Ease of Reuse Market Availability Cost Premium Processing & Wastage THAT ANY USE OF PLASTIC IN THE PROJECT WOULD HAVE TO PRIORITIZE EASY OF REUSE TO ENSURE IT DIDN’T END UP IN LAND FILL (ARUP, n.d.)

(ARUP, n.d.)

Unknown

13

CASE STUDY 1 IN DETAIL

fig 1. Villa Welpeloo Exterior (Strauss, n.d.)

VILLA WELPELOO Superuse Enschedenther Netherlands, 2009

Designed for a couple who wish to showcase a collection of paintings by young artists. While also attempting to use as much recycled materials as possible.

The project is around the reuse of industrial materials and machines and waste rather than just focusing waste recycled materials from the construction industry. The facade of the building is constructed of cable reels from the Twente cable factory. The steel structure is composed of columns from a Textile paternoster (a device for the storage and retrieval of rolls of fabric) and the roof beams from an old factory. Instead of installing a lift a scissor lift that was used in construction is permanently installed with some minor alterations.

(Strauss, n.d.)

Inside the house much of the art works and joinery also make use of recycled materials including chairs made from old signs and Kitchen Cabinets made from recycled plywood.

14

fig 2. Living and Gallery Space (Strauss, n.d.)

The art works on display also shows off circularity here the table is made out of a reused billboard.

fig 3 & 4. Lift and Kitchen Area (Michler, 2011) The lift is an industrial scissor lift used during construction that was installed permanently.

15

CIRCULARITY STRATEGY: RECLAIMED TIMBER FACADE

The entirety of the buildings facade is constructed out wood reclaimed from industrial cable spools. The facade has a approximate external area of around 395m² that means that in order to cover the entire area at least 43 spools would be required to fully cover the facade. This figure assumes that all sections of wood from a spool are reused. The round upper sections of the spool may have to be joined together to get timbers of uniform size. Alternatively the builder could discard sections that are too short but this would obviously create additional waste so it would be ideal to minimize offcuts. From the photos it appears that each timber on the facade is lapped (see detail) shorter sections could be placed behind the longer ones hiding joins and reducing waste it is unclear if the was done in this project.

fig 4. Wood Clad Areas of Facade and Visualization of Required Cable Spools

fig 5. Deconstructed Cable Spool Showing total amount of reclaimed timber.

16

fig 6. Dimensions of Standard Large Cable Spool

FACADE AND ROOF DETAIL

Reclaimed Steel Beam HEA 140 Profile

Reclaimed Polystrene Instalation

Recycled Cable Reel Cladding

fig 7. Standard detail of Villa Welpeloo modeled for original 2d detail.

Shown above is 3D detail of the facade that illustrates how each of the main recycled materials are used in the facade. The details show that even when working with reclaimed materials that might have variable levels of quality it is still possible to design a clean high quality that successfully integrates all of the recycled components. This is helped greatly by using recycled materials that are as close as possible to standard industry materials. For example the reused steel beams are standard European HBA 140 profile making it extremely easy to use due to it’s known structural performance and common use. The cable spools while requiring some processing to break down are composed on untreated wood making them easy to work with. The use of close to pre-finished materials does make products much easier to reuse the harder problem is making use of construction waste that cannot or is very labour intensive to reuse in the general industry.

17

STEEL FRAME MATERIAL FLOWS

IRON ORE MINE IRON ORE MINE ORE BAKING

PATERNOSTER FACTORY

PATERNOSTER FACTORY IRON SMELTER PATERNOSTER

T PLA

ORE BAKING

IRON SMELTER

FORGE

OFFCUTS

TRE

OFFCUTS PATERNOSTER TEXTILE FACTORY SERVICE LIFE FORGE DECOMMISSIONING

SAW

TEXTILE FACTORY

SERVICE LIFE DECOMMISSIONING STEEL DISSASEMBLED HOT ROLLER

KILN

STEEL DISSASEMBLED HOT ROLLER UNUSED STEEL BOX STEEL BOX MATERIAL SECTION SECTION UNUSED STEEL BOX STEEL BOX MATERIAL SECTION SECTION VILLA SCRAP RECYCLED WELELOO VILLA SCRAP RECYCLED Energy Use STEEL FRAME WELELOO Water Use MATERIAL FLOWS STEEL FRAME MATERIAL FLOWS

18

Fuel Use/Trans

CAB AS

US CABL Recycling

Waste

Energy Use

Fuel Use/Trans

Water Use

Waste

Recycling

TIM MA

TIMBER FRAME MATERIAL FLOWS

TIMBER PLANTATION TIMBER

PLANTATION TIMBER PLANTATION TREES FELLED

MIN 30 YEARS OFMIN GROWTH 30 YEARS

WASTE DISSASEMBLED Nails and Low OF GROWTHDISSASEMBLED WASTE MIN 30 YEARS Quality Timbers Nails OF GROWTH WASTE and Low

Timbers Nails and Quality Low

TREES FELLED TREES FELLED SAWN TO BOARDS

TIMBERS

Quality Timbers

TIMBERS TIMBERS

OFFCUTS

(Arup, 2016)

SAWN TO BOARDS OFFCUTS SAWN TO BOARDS OFFCUTS

ATTACHED TO ATTACHED FACADE TO FACADE ATTACHED TO FACADE VILLA SCRAP WELELOO VILLA SCRAP

KILN DRYING KILN DRYING KILN DRYING CABLE SPOOL ASSEMBLY CABLE SPOOL

ASSEMBLY CABLE SPOOL ASSEMBLY USED FOR CABLEUSED STORAGE FOR

USEDCABLE FOR STORAGE CABLE STORAGE

DISSASEMBLED

OFFCUTS OFFCUTS OFFCUTS

SCRAP

VILLA WELELOO WELELOO

SERVICE LIFE SERVICE LIFE SERVICE LIFE

Energy Use Fuel Use/Trans Recycling TIMBER CLADDING Water Use Waste MATERIAL Energy Use Fuel Use/Trans Recycling TIMBER FLOWS CLADDING

Use Use/Trans Waste Energy UseWaterFuel TIMBERMATERIAL CLADDINGFLOWS Water Use Waste MATERIAL FLOWS

Recycling

CASE STUDY 2

fig 8. Exterior view of the “The Circular Building” showing exposed superstructure with visible bolted connections (ARUP, 2016)

THE CIRCULAR BUILDING ARUP London United Kingdom, 2016

“The Circular Building” was a 2016 experimental building designed to be a test platform for the construction industry might go about building a truly circular building.

The projects main goal was to create a building that was low waste, self supporting, and able to be dissembled and reused once the installation concluded. There are two strategies that we’re employed by ARUP to achieve this firstly the steel structure relied on bolted and clamped connections rather than welded connections which would typically be used for steel structures. Secondly the building was designed as a series of layers as shown in fig 9. the steel forming the key structure of the building with facade

20

elements being attached as a series of panels that could be bolted to the structure and then removed intact during disassembly. The design of this system is very important as it is usually in the cladding of a structure that the most irreversible connections are used such as glues, nails, staples and spray foams.

By creating a panelized system the designer allows for some use of these connections which have many desirable qualities while also designing in the connections at the panel level that will allow them to be reused.

(ARUP, 2017) Another key aspect of the project was the installation of a suite of sensors that closely monitored the performance of the building and a QR code tracking system that allowed each component of the building to be easily tracked during the disassembly process.

(Santos, 2017)

fig 9. Exploded Axometric of Circular Building Showing the Layers Making Up the Facade and Structure (ARUP, 2017)

21

fig 10. Building Interior showing plywood walls and acoustic panels along with steel structure (ARUP, 2017)

fig 11. Close Up of Bolted Steel Connections (ARUP, 2017)

22

CASE STUDY 3

PEOPLE’S PAVILION ARUP Eindhoven Netherlands, 2017

Like the Circular Building the Peoples Pavilion was designed as a temporary structure with a heavy focus on creating demountable connections.

The key focus of the project was designing with “borrowed” materials that had come from demolished building or loaned from the manufacturer before going to be to used in their originally intended building. By doing this the project aimed to create a structure with zero carbon footprint.

Material sources Roof - Borrowed from Greenhouse Company Facade - Saved from Demolished Building Lighting and Heating - Borrowed Bar - Borrowed Plastic Tiles - From recyled PETG bottles This building is fantastic exmaple of the pay of designing and planing for reuse by creating a system that allows for material borrowing to become a core part of the construction industry we can create structure with almost no carbon footprint after the initial building has reached the end of it’s lifespan.

23

THESIS QUESTION

CAN WE CREATE A KIT OF PARTS THAT ALLOWS US TO REUSE THE CORE OF A BUILDING REDUCING MATERIAL WASTE, ENERGY INTENSIVE RECYCLING AND OVERALL EMBODIED ENERGY? ​

24

25

3/DESIGN FOR DISASSEMBLY DESIGNING THE KIT OF PARTS

KEY PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS STANDARDIZED

Where Possible Use Standard Construction Materials

REVERSIBLE CORE

All Core Structure other than the Slab can be Disassembled via the use of reversible connections

STANDARDIZED LENGTH Common set of lengths to minimize the number of unique components

SCALABLE

Able to be used from buildings at a range of scales

LENGTH

Longest Structural Member Size of 10m to Allow Easy Road Transport

BUILDING LAYERS

By separating core structure from elements with shorter life spans we are able to selectively replace elements of the building lengthening the life span of the entire system

BASED ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE CASE STUDIES I DEVELOPED SET OF KEY REQUIREMENTS THAT WOULD GUIDE THE DESIGN OF THE COMPONENTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION KIT 27

THE KIT OF PARTS

Using the performance requirements as a guide i selected the key components of the kit. Here the focus was on selecting products that already existed in standardized forms to allow the system to be easily sourced across the country protect it from being discontinued. And to create something industry was conformable with using. As such the components primarily draw from ISO steel profiles, prefabricated facade panels at common spacings and standard roof panels.

L Channels

Square Hollow Section

Universal Beams

Roof Sheet 28

Cold Form Steel

Universal C

Columns

Louver System

Dampal Therm 29

THE KIT OF PARTS - PANELIZATION

From this Slection of parts I then combined them into a set to panels that shared a common base unit allowing them to be used together in a range of combination to achive architecture of diffrent scales the key driver was the steel wall panels from which the rest of the sizes we’re determined

Floor System

30

4 Unit Panel

3 Unit Panel

Louver Panels

Dampal Term Pa

Roof System

2 Unit Panel

1 Unit Panel

anels 31

DESIGN LOGIC

1. Panel Sizes are based on a base horizontal unit of 2400 Allowing for a range of spans up to 9.6m and 600 spaced facade elements, Floor to ceiling of 3800 allows for flexible programing.

2. Standard Steel profiles allow system to easily be created in any ISO standard steel country and ensures that parts will always be available to expand the system.

32

KEY STEEL CONNECTIONS

Steel Connections where kept standard where possible above is a collection of common connection that occur in the structure designed to connect using rigid and non rigid bolted connections so as to avoiding welds unless absolutely required. The connections are based on the standard connection design from the Steel Designers Handbook (Gorenc, Tinyou and Syam, 1996)

33

KIT OF PARTS - APPLIED LEGEND 1 - Dampatherm Panels 2 - Dampatherm Fixing System 3 - Single Length Panel 4 - Triple Length Panel 5 - Steel Cross Bracing 6 - Louver Subframe

7 - Louver System 8 - Standard Trimdek Roof Panels

9 - Roof Subframe and Parapet 10 - Roof and Floor Substructure

11 - Finished Floor 12 - Corner Columns

System in context showing all the panels being connected into a simple box here we can see the layer approach allowing the decision to be made about which side of the building gets louvers. In future this could be expanded to offer a range of different facade and shading systems to introduce visual variation into the system and expand the systems vocabulary.

34

2

1

3

8 9

10

11

5

4

6 7

35

FACADE IN DETAIL

UB

M10 Bolt

RHS L Flange

Above is a Isometric section of a section of the system showing how the steel sections connect to attach the facade to the panel system.

36

PLAN TESTING

STUDY BED 1

LIVING

BED 2

BED 3

ENSUTE

KITCHEN

BATH

LAUNDRY

9600mm Panel 7200mm Panel 4800mm Panel 2400mm Panel

Here i carried out a test to ensure that small room sizes we’re possible with the system while they we’re some of the limits imposed by the system meant spaces we’re not as flexible you would desire in a smaller building.

To avoid this issue it will likely always be preferable to utilize the large spans of the steel structure to create a free plan show above is Le Corbusiers free plan inside an external a form created from the panel system.

37

4/TRIAL SITES INTRODUCTION TO THE SITES WHERE WE WILL BE APPLYING TESTING THE SYSTEM

38

PRIMARY SITE

fig 1. Site Extents Satellite View (Google, 2022)

SWINBURNE UNIVERSITY SR BUILDING

SWINBURNE UNIVERSITY, HAWTHORN, VICTORIA 3122 Sitting a the heart of campus the SR building is generally unremarkable building that is easy for the casual visitor or student to walk past. Despite the building enjoying close proximity to the highly trafficked John Street and student residences. The building currently provides a few specialist rooms from OT student and the campus’s dance studio. But it’s placement between the Swinburne Advanced Manufacturing and Design Centre and ProtoLAB makes the site ideal for a new architecture building

that will programmatically connects unite the design school and provide a physical presence for architecture on campus rather than having to share existing facilitates.

The Building will also provide architecture student with permanent studio space. AS the Architecture school is new and constantly growing it is likely the facility will need a larger space in the next 15-20 years as such this building will be an ideal candidate to test the kit of parts and reuse concept

EXISTING CONDITIONS SUMMARY - Existing Campus Building - Provides Nursing Specialist Rooms - Occupational Therapy Rooms - Dance Studio - Centrally located on campus but easily ignored.

- The missing heart of Campus!

SITE PROPOSAL - Architecture Students Currently Lack Dedicated Studio Space - Create a new hub for Architecture on Campus - A showcase of the circular economy - Design for medium term life space to prepare for replacement as the facility grows over the next 15 years

39

fig 2. Swinburne SR Building Exterior Source: Self

fig 4. Swinburne SR Building Rear Source: Self

fig 4. Swinburne SR Building Side View Source: Self

40

EMBODIED ENERGY

TOTAL: 17000GJ

TOTAL: 220T/CO2

Using the Epic embodied energy database i carried out a calculation of the approximate amount of embodied energy that went into the construction of the current structure based on the large amount of energy already expended it was decided to preserve as much as the original structure as possible to maximize energy savings.

41

SWINBURNE PRECINCT KEY ISSUES

Campus Faculty Programing

Key Pedestrian Axes

42

SITE KEY ISSUES

Zoning Limitations

Key Pedestrian Connections

43

REUSE SITE INTODUCTION

fig 5. Auburn High School Grounds (Google, 2022)

MATERIAL REUSE SITE: AUBURN HIGH SCHOOL 126 Burgess St, Hawthorn East VIC 3122 Auburn High School is a coeducational high school located in Hawthorn East the school has approximately 500 students. The school is composed of a four level main building which contains classrooms and administrative faculties, an indoor gymnasium and lecture theatre and extensive outdoor sporting faculties including a cricket pitch and soccer fields. The main school buildings are currently undergoing a major refurbishment along with the addition of a new preforming arts center and some alteration to the grounds closest to the school. The sporting fields are open to the public when not in use by the school and are also used by the nearby Schools, a number of community teams also use the grounds for games and training.

The outdoor fields currently lack any protected outdoor areas for spectators or teams

44

there are presently no club rooms on site for community teams to stage events and the only onside facility is small old brick building with toilets and some limited equipment storage.

As one of the outcomes of this thesis the dissembled materials from the circular economy hub will be used to construct: New Club Rooms with a small event space, change rooms and additional storage space. Along with sheltered spectator seating on the eastern side on the grounds.

The proposed new structures will be evaluated by the amount of reused material from the initial structure and the embodied energy savings over a brand new structure.

EXISTING CONDITIONS - School of 500 Students - Large Grounds and Strong Sport Focus - Grounds also serve public teams - No spectator facilities and old very limited equipment storage. fig 6. Auburn High School Main Building (Google Maps, 2022)

PROPOSAL - Using the reclaimed components from the Swinburne design hub create a new club house and spectator area for the grounds - Acting as a test case for the reuse of the system similar buildings could be rolled out to other sporting fields fig 7. View of Sporting Fields From Auburn Road | West (Google Maps, 2022)

fig 8. Proximity of Secondary Site to Swinburne to Control Emoboddied Energy During Transport | Satellite Imagery: Google Maps

45

5/PROPOSAL THE KIT APPLIED TO THE SR BUILDING

46

EXISTING BUILDING

N

Existing Building On Site

As previously covered the decision was made to preserve as much as the original building as possible the other key preservation decision was to maintain the three large gum trees of the east of the site this placed restrictions on where the building could be extended.

N

Areas of Demolition

Shown above in the blue are the building areas that are to be demolished fully it has been limited to the front facade and roof of the single story extension on the sites east.

47

MASSING DEVELOPMENT

INITIAL PROGRAMMING

ITERATION 1

ITERATION 2

ITERATION 3

48

ITERATION 4

ITERATION 5

ITERATION 6

A range of massing experiments explore how we might extend and build on top of the existing structure. Here i established the the idea of hanging the new area off the old elements to create a division between new and old and get extra foot print to the rear of the building. I also experimented with extending the structure over the train line but zoning regulations made that infeasible.

49

PROPOSAL

Exterior View of Proposal

50

N Based on the application of the kit to the remaining features and my massing studies i developed the above final proposal the design focus on activating the front of the site introducing a new lecture theatre and social are at the front of the building while also introducing a new entry at the rear of the building as the levels advance the building becomes more private transitioning into the Architecture Studios

51

VIEW OF STEELWORK

52

N

53

PROGRAM & LAYOUT

Bat &S

Tool Store

Open Studi

Office Workshop

Ground Floor - Workshop, Open Studio & Lecture Theatre

54

C

Sto

throoms Services

io

Coffee Shop Atrium

torage Lecture Theatre

N The ground floor focuses of public program featuring the lecture theatre, workshop, Atrium with coffee shop and open studio space while also introducing a connection between the between the rail walkway and Wakefield Street. The majority of the ground floor is made up of the existing structure with a reconfigured internal layout.

55

Stud

Studio Spa Open Plan Office

First Floor - Studio & Study Space & Staff Offices

56

dio Space

ace Study Space

N The first floor transitions into masters studios and office space.

The introduction of a new elevator core between the two studios provides access to upper levels and ground.

57

Studio Spac Event Spac Studio Space

Second Floor - Master Students Studios & Event Space

58

ce/ ce

Studio Space

N From the second floor onward the building is now entirely new structure using the kit system here it transitions entirely to private studios for the masters students. The rear elevator provides all hours access and the open layouts allows the spaces to be easily reconfigured for exhibitions and presentations.

59

Studio Spa

Third Floor - Masters Students Studio

60

ace

N

61

RENDERED VIEWS

View of Front Entry 62

63

View of Rear Entry 64

65

View of 2nd Floor Studio Space 66

67

SECTIONAL VIEWS

Section A-A - South to North

Section B-B - South to North

68

Section C-C - West to East Across Site The accompanying sections display the relationship between the existing structure and new portions.

69

DISASSEMBLY & TRANSPORT

At the conclusion of the buildings 15 years or so life span it are the disassembled the dissembled components loaded onto flatbed truck in conformance with VicRoads transport regulations. The main components can be transported in a relatively low number of trips this combined with the close proximity to the reuse site minimizes carbon emissions during transport.

70

OFF TO AUBURN HIGH

71

PROPOSAL

Using the recovered components from the Circular Innovation Hub we can build the club house and spectator stands for the Auburn High sporting fields the terrain on the west of the site is elevated providing the ideal place to create an elevated platform for spectators with a BBQ area pushing the kit into quite different application

72

N The Proposal manages to reuse around 50% of the steel work from the innovation hub see next page for a full tally and is almost entirely constructed out of the reclaimed components resulting in a structure that is both low cost financially and in terms of energy.

See following pages for calculation of the savings.

73

PROPORTION OF REUSE BUILDING 1 - RECLAIMED 33 X DOUBLE FRAMES 04 X SINGLE 05 X HALF FRAMES BUILDING 2 - REUSED 13 X DOUBLE FRAMES (40%) 3 X SINGLE (75%) 5 X HALF FRAMES (100%) EE OF DOUBLE FRAME 130GJ TOTAL INITIAL EE 5,135GJ EE REUSED 2310GJ

BUILDING 1 - RECLAIMED 497 X PC PANELS BUILDING 2 - REUSED 84 X PC PANELS (16%) PER UNIT 13.46 + 1.5 = 14.9GJ TOTAL INITIAL EE 7,435GJ EE REUSED 1,189GJ

BUILDING 1 - RECLAIMED 7 X SHADING PANELS BUILDING 2 - REUSED 2 X SHADING PANELS (30%) PER UNIT EE 41.3 TOTAL INITIAL EE 289GJ EE REUSED 86.7GJ

74

BUILDING 1 - RECLAIMED 858M2 FLOOR AREA BUILDING 2 - REUSED 570M2 FLOOR AREA (66%) EE PER M2 5.6GJ TOTAL INITIAL EE 4,804GJ EE REUSED 3170.64GJ

BUILDING 1 - RECLAIMED 540M2 FLOOR AREA BUILDING 2 - REUSED 220M2 ROOF (50%) EE PER M2 1.2GJ TOTAL INITIAL EE 648GJ EE REUSED 324GJ

MISC.

BUILDING 1 - RECLAIMED 70M2 TRANSPARENT ROOF BUILDING 2 - REUSED 0M2 DANPAL ROOF(0%) NC

75

ENERGY SAVINGS According to Trelor and Fay (2005) on average a commercial building has an initial embodied energy of 15 GJ/m2 of floor space i’ve added a slight loading of 3GJ to this figure to account for the extra EE of school buildings.

Using this figure its is possible to calculated how much embodied energy was saved by utilizing the existing building and how much was saved by reusing the recovered materials to build the Auburn High spectator stands.

Total Embodied Energy in Existing Structure Total 17,000GJ

Embodied Energy of Extension 18,311GJ Embodied Energy of average of building with same floor area 26,668GJ Savings | 26668 - 18311 = 8,357GJ

76

Embodied Energy Saved via Reuse 6,010GJ As shown by the EE calculation due to the extensive use of steel this kit of parts actually has a higher initial embodied energy than a more typical building. While we we’re able to 8357GJ vs constructing a brand new building all those savings come come from the reuse of the existing structure. Had we built a brand new structure using the kit of parts we would have likely used substantially more energy than a more traditional building. The savings of the system only start to come into play when the system is reused in the reuse example we recover 1/3rd of the total embodied energy. The spectator stands are a special case don’t make extensive reuse of the PC panel if we we’re to use the reclaimed materials on building closer to the original we would increase the savings even more.

CONCLUSIONS

Looking at the final analysis of the initial EE of the Swinburne Project and the Auburn High Projects. I think final system is broadly successful while the system does have higher EE costs during initial manufacture that are no so high that they cannot be recovered when reusing the components in a secondary project. And the benefits will only increase the more times they can be reused. The Key challenges facing the system will be ensuring the components are actually reused at end of life this could be added by tracking system and careful documentation. To increase savings more optimization of the system are no doubt possible and will increase the savings.

Had i had more time i think the logical expansion of this system would be expanding the kit to allow for the creation of a wider array of architectural forms, explore other compatible facade systems which may help reduce EE and increase possible aesthetics of the system. Additionally there is the possibility of integrating a secondary lighter weight system that can be used in areas that have less structural loading in a secondary material that could be used to further control EE. However it’s worth considering that the more unique components exist in the system the more new components are likely to be required with each reuse as it is unlikely the old and new structure will have the same part requirements as such any expansion of the base panel system should be somewhat conservative.

77

6/APPENDIX USING RHINO.INSIDE TO AUTOMATICALLY EVALUATE REVIT MODEL EE

DIGITAL QUANTIFICATION OF EMBODIED ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS USING EPIC, GRASSHOPPER AND REVIT EP.iC Database The Environmental Performance in Construction initiative is a project by the University of Melbourne to create a free open access model for accessing that embodied environmental effects of construction projects. The database if notable for being one of the few free models covering Australia. Regional differences in terms of materials used and differing production and transport methods make the use of overseas data in accurate for the Australian context.

Revit -> Grasshopper -> EPiC Connection EPiC is currently primarily interacted with as a plugin to Rhinos Visual Programming Interface Grasshooper as Rhino is not a full BIM modeling suite it can be time consuming to correctly model all the materials required to generate accurate material geometry in rhino for assessment by epic. This is especially true of complex building components such as layered walls, floors and roofs. Revit however is able to correctly quantify the layers of a wall along with correct calculation of joins and thin layers.

So in order to combine the advantages of each platform i have created a more advanced script that uses the Rhino.Inside Revit connector to pull in the appropriate geometry and material take offs into grasshopper sort them by wall types and do material take offs before passing the results to EPiC for analysis. Over the next few pages i will briefly explain the main data processing techniques used to correctly sort the data from revit for processing.

fig 1. Rhino Inside Revit Logo

fig 2. EPiC Database Logo (EPiC Team, n.d.)

80

MODEL SETUP

fig 1. Example Model containing the main data types walls, doors, windows etc. planned to be analyzed using EPiC built in Revit

fig 1. Revit Material Browser

fig 2. Wall Assembly Showing Material Layers

81

PROGRAM FLOW

fig 1. Example Model containing the main data types walls, doors, windows etc. planned to be analyzed using EPiC built in Revit

82

83

7/REFERENCES

DIRECT REFRENCES ARUP (2016a) The Circular Building. Available at: https://www.arup.com/perspectives/ the-circular-building (Accessed: 13 November 2022).

ARUP (2016b) The Circular Economy in the Built Enviroment. Available at: https://www. arup.com/perspectives/publications/research/section/circular-economy-in-the-built-environment.

ARUP (2017) The Circular Economy Building | Arup Associates, Archello. Available at: https://archello.com/project/the-circular-economy-building (Accessed: 13 November 2022).

ARUP (2018) First Steps Towards a Circular Built Enviroment. Available at: https://www. arup.com/perspectives/publications/research/section/first-steps-towards-a-circular-built-environment.

Cáceres Ruiz, A.M. and Zaman, A. (2022) ‘The Current State, Challenges, and Opportunities of Recycling Plastics in Western Australia’, Recycling, 7(5), p. 64. Available at: https://doi. org/10.3390/recycling7050064.

Deloitte (2016) Construction sector – outlook, labour costs and productivity. Victoria: Deloitte. Available at: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/au/Documents/ Economics/deloitte-au-economics%E2%80%93outlook-labour-costs-productivity-310316. pdf.

Google (2022a) ‘Auburn High School Satellite Imagery’. Google Maps. Available at: https:// www.google.com/maps/@-37.8405638,145.044616,17.29z.

Google (2022b) ‘Swinburne Univeristy Satellite Imagery’. Google Maps. Available at: https:// www.google.com/maps/@-37.822172,145.0379056,17.87z.

Gorenc, B., Tinyou, R. and Syam, A. (1996) Steel Designers Handbook. 6th Edition.

Hyder Consulting (2011) Construcrtion and Demolition Waste Status Report. Goverment Report. Queensland: Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, p. 197. Available at: https://www.dcceew.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/construction-waste.pdf.

Kabirifar, K., Mojtahedi, M. and Wang, C.C. (2021) ‘A Systematic Review of Construction and Demolition Waste Management in Australia: Current Practices and Challenges’, Recycling, 6(2), p. 34. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling6020034.

Michler, A. (2011) ‘Villa Welpeloo’, Inhabitat - Green Design, Innovation, Architecture, Green Building | Green design & innovation for a better world, 1 February. Available at: https:// inhabitat.com/modern-dutch-house-built-from-salvaged-billboards-and-umbrellas/new5-114/ (Accessed: 18 August 2022).

Müller, M., Krick, T. and Blohmke, Dr.J. (2021) Putting the construction sector at the core of the climate change debate | Deloitte Central Europe, Deloitte. Available at: https://www2. deloitte.com/ce/en/pages/real-estate/articles/putting-the-construction-sector-at-thecore-of-the-climate-change-debate.html (Accessed: 13 November 2022).

OCED (2022) The supply of critical raw materials endangered by Russia’s war on Ukraine, OECD. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/ukraine-hub/policy-responses/the-supply-ofcritical-raw-materials-endangered-by-russia-s-war-on-ukraine-e01ac7be/ (Accessed: 13 November 2022).

Productivity Commission (2021) Vulnerable Supply Chains. Goverment Report. Available at: https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/supply-chains/report/supply-chains.pdf (Accessed: 13 September 2022).

Reck, B.K. and Graedel, T.E. (2012) ‘Challenges in Metal Recycling’, Science, 337(6095), pp.

690–695. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1217501.

Santos, S. (2017) Arup Designs Prototype Building Based on Circular Economy Principles, ArchDaily. Available at: https://www.archdaily.com/868121/arup-designs-prototype-building-based-on-circular-economy-principles (Accessed: 13 November 2022).

Strauss, T. (no date a) Villa Welpeloo, Superuse Studios. Available at: https://www. superuse-studios.com/projectplus/villa-welpeloo/ (Accessed: 18 August 2022).

Strauss, T. (no date b) Villa Welpeloo, Superuse Studios. Available at: https://www. superuse-studios.com/projectplus/villa-welpeloo/ (Accessed: 8 September 2022).

Trelor, G. and Fay, R. (2005) Building Materials Selection - Greenhouse Stratergies. Design Guide. Enviroment Design Guide, p. 12.

86

ADDITONAL RESOURCESS East, A.N. (2018) Paper Architecture, Architects Zone. Available at: https://architects.zone/ paper-architecture/ (Accessed: 11 August 2022).

Friedrich, D. (2022) ‘Additive manufacturing of post-process thermoformed wood-plastic composite cladding’, Automation in Construction, 139, p. 104322. Available at: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.autcon.2022.104322.

Godfrey, R. et al. (no date) ‘Victorian waste flows’, p. 70.

‘Helping Victoria Grow: Recycling In Construction’ (no date). Victoria State Gov: Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions.

Kabirifar, K. et al. (2020) ‘Construction and demolition waste management contributing factors coupled with reduce, reuse, and recycle strategies for effective waste management: A review’, Journal of Cleaner Production, 263, p. 121265. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jclepro.2020.121265.

Kabirifar, K., Mojtahedi, M. and Wang, C.C. (2021) ‘A Systematic Review of Construction and Demolition Waste Management in Australia: Current Practices and Challenges’, Recycling, 6(2), p. 34. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling6020034. Łątka, J.F. et al. (2022) ‘Properties of paper-based products as a building material in architecture – An interdisciplinary review’, Journal of Building Engineering, 50, p. 104135.

Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2022.104135.

Senthil Kumar, K. and Baskar, K. (2015) ‘Recycling of E-plastic waste as a construction material in developing countries’, Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 17(4), pp. 718–724. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-014-0303-5.

Wood / Plastic / Composites - Archtoolbox (no date). Available at: https://www.archtoolbox. com/materials-systems/wood-plastic-composites/ (Accessed: 11 August 2022).

Ajmal, M.M. et al. (2021) ‘Socio-economic and technological new normal in supply chain management: lessons from COVID-19 pandemic’, The International Journal of Logistics Management [Preprint]. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLM-04-2021-0231.

‘The Circular Economy in the Built Environment’ (no date).

ARUP (no date) Evaluating re-use potential: Material profiles and vision for project workflow. UK: ARUP. Austral Bricks (2022) Brick and Paving Retail Price List Victoria - 1st April 2022. Price List.

Austral Bricks.

Brick Recylers (2022) Brick Recyclers. Available at: http://www.thebrickrecyclers.com.au/ (Accessed: 7 September 2022).

87

Recycled Building Centre (2022) Steel I Beams 130w X 205h - Length approx 5m, Recycled Building Centre. Available at: https://www.recycledbuildingcentre.com.auhttps://www. recycledbuildingcentre.com.au/steel-i-beams-130w-x-205h-average-length-of-4m (Accessed: 7 September 2022).

Universal Beams | 200 UB (2022) Steel Builders. Available at: https://www.steelbuilders. com.au/products/universal-beam (Accessed: 7 September 2022).

EPiC Team (no date) EPiC Database Logo, https://msd.unimelb.edu.au/research/projects/ current/environmental-performance-in-construction. Available at: https://msd.unimelb. edu.au/research/projects/current/environmental-performance-in-construction.

Anna (2018) Steel beams, trusses and posts., The Salvage Yard. Available at: https://www. thesalvageyard.com.au/steel-beams-trusses-and-posts/ (Accessed: 8 September 2022).

Barbuta, M. et al. (2015) ‘Wastes in Building Materials Industry’, in V. Pilipavičius (ed.)

Agroecology. InTech. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5772/59933.

Circular Buildings Toolkit - Arup (no date). Available at: https://www.arup.com/en/expertise/services/advisory-services/circular-buildings-toolkit (Accessed: 8 September 2022).

Timbersearch8.jpg (JPEG Image, 630 × 466 pixels) (no date). Available at: https://www. thejunkmap.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Timbersearch8.jpg (Accessed: 8 September 2022).

‘WOODEND: Recycled timber and architectural hardwoods’ (no date) The Junk Map. Available at: https://www.thejunkmap.com.au/portfolio/timbersearch/ (Accessed: 8 September 2022).

88