Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Evaluating Re-use of Existing Exterior Envelope
Re-skin vs. Renovate
• is a Registered Provider with The American Institute of Architects Continuing
Education Systems (AIA/CES). Credit(s) ear...
Learning Objectives
At the end of this program, participants will be able to:
1) Will understand the typical service life ...
The greenest
building is the one
that is already built.
Evaluation of Existing Structures
• Structural failure of façade or cladding
• Water intrusion
• Master Plan for long term Ownership
• New Ownership
Major R...
Step One - Investigation and Evaluation of Existing
• Owner
• Architect
• Building Envelope Consultant
• Structural Engine...
5 Key Items
Structural Integrity
Thermal Performance
Permeance
Significance
Life Cycle
Good Condition Poor Condition
Good ...
Program, Design and Client Input
User Inputbuilding
envelope
M,C,R
Option 1
• re-glaze only
• conventional HVAC
• bldg. en...
Significance of façade
Historic
Tax credits or Federal $ - must comply with review
(Professional recommendation is the sam...
•Change of Use
•5% increase of Lateral Load
•Improvements worth over 50% of Building Value
What triggers a code upgrade?
2...
Code and standards
If the owner wants windstorm
insurance through
TWIA, evaluation and/or
upgrades may be required
Physical/Structural Characteristics of the
Building Envelope
Deficiencies in one or more of these areas
can lead the decis...
• Document Review
• Visual Assessment
• Establish Monitoring
Investigative Techniques
Performance of façade systems
• Differential Movement
• Displacement
• Cracking
Control of water
• Plugged weepholes
• Mal...
• Condition of Vertical Support Systems
Shelf angle
Lintels
Panel support clips
Typical distress conditions
• Corrosion
• ...
(Natural Stone, Cast Stone, Brick, Terra Cotta)
Indefinite service life with proper design and
maintenance
Typical Deterio...
Envelope Exterior - Masonry
Condition of Façade Materials: Precast Panels
Indefinite service life with proper design and
maintenance
Typical Deteriora...
Condition of Façade Materials: Glazing Systems
10-20 year lifespan (sealants and gaskets )
50+ year lifespan -CW structure...
Insulated panels
Metal building type
Aluminum composite panels
Copper or Stainless Flashing
20-40 year service life with p...
Step Two - Present Options & Constructability Review
• Design Alternatives
• Impact of Codes and Standards
• Hidden Condit...
Physical/Structural Characteristics of the
Building Envelope
Deficiencies in one or more of these areas
can lead the decis...
• Arms-length investigation
• In-situ testing
• Non-destructive Evaluation
Investigative Techniques
• Condition of Substrate/Weatherbarrier
• Does system permit remedial repair of
lateral systems?
• Does a weather barrier ...
Systems are typically concealed
Failure represents significant risk to public safety
Typical warning signs
• Outward displ...
Condition of Structure (At perimeter)
• Façade elements may restrict access to
superstructure
Condition of Structural Fram...
Thermal performance of existing wall
Wufi Model to evaluate existing
Wufi Model to evaluate proposed renovation
Affect of ...
Air and Water permeance of existing wall
Air/Water vapor barrier location and integrity
Vapor drive - new 2013 materials v...
Tools for review of Insulation & Vapor Barrier
Sample WUFI Output
Air Temperature
Dew PointRelative Humidity
Water Content
Exterior Interior
BRICK
CAVITY
AIR BARRIER
& E...
• THERM's heat-transfer analysis allows you to evaluate a
system energy efficiency and local temperature
patterns, which m...
Step Three - Cost Benefit Analysis
Building Life-Cycle Cost (BLCC) Program—Economic analysis tool developed by the
Nationa...
Owner’s long term plans : calculate the life cycle implications of recladding vs. cladding
repair.
Government - Lifetime
D...
At what point does the cost of
remediation approach the cost of
recladding?
Repair vs Reclad
Low cost
Repair
High Cost
Rem...
Park Towers - 2000
YEAR BUILT: 1972
ENVELOPE REVIEW ISSUE: New Owner
PROJECT START DATE: 1998
COST: $27M Core & Shell + Ga...
Restore for Historic Significance and PerformanceCase Study – U of H Roy G Cullen RESTORE
YEAR BUILT: 1938
ENVELOPE REVIEW...
Case Study – Sylvan Beach Pavilion RECLAD + RESTORE
YEAR BUILT: 1956 with 1962 & 1980 additions
ENVELOPE REVIEW ISSUE: Hur...
YEAR BUILT: 1973
ENVELOPE REVIEW ISSUE: Campus precast buildings had
some repairs and exposed rebar and spalls, but iconic...
Pros
• New head height at window openings (9’-0”) allows more daylight and use of underfloor air on both floors.
• Replaci...
If 30% - 50% of exterior cladding must be removed for
remediation, replacement may be a more cost effective
alternate, dep...
Typically Reactive
Implementation
Mandates Periodic
Inspections
Future – Façade Ordinances
Questions?
This concludes The American Institute of Architects Continuing Education Systems
Course
Sustainable Design
The BIM model allows for early staged energy
calculations using DOE-2 compatible energy
modeling softwa...
• EVALUATION Structural
Air / Water /Heat infiltration
Market position Site and
Context
• COST Project cost
life cycle cos...
To Reclad or not to Reclad?
To Reclad or not to Reclad?
To Reclad or not to Reclad?
To Reclad or not to Reclad?
To Reclad or not to Reclad?
To Reclad or not to Reclad?
To Reclad or not to Reclad?
To Reclad or not to Reclad?
To Reclad or not to Reclad?
To Reclad or not to Reclad?
To Reclad or not to Reclad?
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

To Reclad or not to Reclad?

1,509 views

Published on

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

To Reclad or not to Reclad?

  1. 1. Evaluating Re-use of Existing Exterior Envelope Re-skin vs. Renovate
  2. 2. • is a Registered Provider with The American Institute of Architects Continuing Education Systems (AIA/CES). Credit(s) earned on completion of this program will be reported to AIA/CES for AIA members. Certificates of Completion for both AIA members and non-AIA members are available upon request. •This program is registered with AIA/CES for continuing professional education. As such, it does not include content that may be deemed or construed to be an approval or endorsement by the AIA of any material of construction or any method or manner of handling, using, distributing, or dealing in any material or product. •Questions related to specific materials, methods, and services will be addressed at the conclusion of this presentation. •In October 2010, the AIA/CES system was updated with the new CES Discovery system, in that time we have transferred more than one million records. This new update has made it necessary to remind us of the AIA/CES policies and procedures, to introduce the “new” provider ethics, and to reintroduce the AIA/CES audits/quality assurance program. This presentation covers those areas giving providers the opportunity to give feedback and input.
  3. 3. Learning Objectives At the end of this program, participants will be able to: 1) Will understand the typical service life of different cladding materials in the Texas Gulf Coast area. 2) Will be able to identify critical failures of different cladding materials that indicate replacement. 3) Will be able to calculate the life cycle implications of re-cladding vs. cladding repair. 4) Will be able to identify the potential energy impacts of replacing or maintaining a building’s envelope.
  4. 4. The greenest building is the one that is already built. Evaluation of Existing Structures
  5. 5. • Structural failure of façade or cladding • Water intrusion • Master Plan for long term Ownership • New Ownership Major Reasons to Review the Envelope
  6. 6. Step One - Investigation and Evaluation of Existing • Owner • Architect • Building Envelope Consultant • Structural Engineer • MEP Engineer • Project Manager or Broker • Facilities Engineer
  7. 7. 5 Key Items Structural Integrity Thermal Performance Permeance Significance Life Cycle Good Condition Poor Condition Good Performance Low Performance Low Permeance High Permeance Existing Image vs New Design Short Life vs Long Term
  8. 8. Program, Design and Client Input User Inputbuilding envelope M,C,R Option 1 • re-glaze only • conventional HVAC • bldg. envelope repairs T,D Option 2 • modify precast: raise header • new vertical strip curtainwall • underfloor HVAC Option 3 • remove all precast: new unitized curtainwall • underfloor HVAC Option 1 • re-glaze only • conventional HVAC • new arch. metal at monitors • new skylights Option 3 • remove all precast, new unitized curtainwall • underfloor HVAC • all new monitors & piping Option 2 • remove precast below brim, new curtainwall • underfloor HVAC @ 1st fl, conventional HVAC @ 2nd • mods to monitors for daylight amenities building schematic design T C Kirksey / WPM renovated offices 8 Nov 2007 M R program detail WORKSuser list Kirksey D Kirksey amenities building Program, Design and Client Input – Building Use
  9. 9. Significance of façade Historic Tax credits or Federal $ - must comply with review (Professional recommendation is the same) Iconic Represents Campus Identity or Owner History Intangibles - Façade Value
  10. 10. •Change of Use •5% increase of Lateral Load •Improvements worth over 50% of Building Value What triggers a code upgrade? 2012 IBC - Chapter 34 Existing Building Code Energy Code Compliance Code and standards
  11. 11. Code and standards If the owner wants windstorm insurance through TWIA, evaluation and/or upgrades may be required
  12. 12. Physical/Structural Characteristics of the Building Envelope Deficiencies in one or more of these areas can lead the decision matrix for recladding: • Condition of Façade Materials • Condition of Vertical Support Systems • Performance of façade systems Visual Inspection
  13. 13. • Document Review • Visual Assessment • Establish Monitoring Investigative Techniques
  14. 14. Performance of façade systems • Differential Movement • Displacement • Cracking Control of water • Plugged weepholes • Malfunctioning downspouts • Improper flashing Visual Inspection
  15. 15. • Condition of Vertical Support Systems Shelf angle Lintels Panel support clips Typical distress conditions • Corrosion • Cracking • Displacements Visual Inspection -
  16. 16. (Natural Stone, Cast Stone, Brick, Terra Cotta) Indefinite service life with proper design and maintenance Typical Deterioration Conditions Cracking Spalling Delamination Displacement Efflorescence Mortar condition Prior remedial treatments Envelope Exterior - Masonry
  17. 17. Envelope Exterior - Masonry
  18. 18. Condition of Façade Materials: Precast Panels Indefinite service life with proper design and maintenance Typical Deterioration Conditions • Cracking • Spalling • Prior remedial treatments Envelope Exterior - Concrete
  19. 19. Condition of Façade Materials: Glazing Systems 10-20 year lifespan (sealants and gaskets ) 50+ year lifespan -CW structure and single pane glazing Traditional Windows • Flanged • Punch Systems • Curtainwall / Unitized • Stick/Storefront Sealants/Gaskets • Polyurethane • Silicone • Compressed gaskets • Zipper gasket • Structural silicone Envelope Exterior – Curtainwall & Windows
  20. 20. Insulated panels Metal building type Aluminum composite panels Copper or Stainless Flashing 20-40 year service life with proper design and maintenance Typical Deterioration Conditions • Oil-canning • Corrosion Envelope Exterior – Metal
  21. 21. Step Two - Present Options & Constructability Review • Design Alternatives • Impact of Codes and Standards • Hidden Conditions • Constructability • Budget
  22. 22. Physical/Structural Characteristics of the Building Envelope Deficiencies in one or more of these areas can lead the decision matrix for recladding: • Condition of Lateral Support Systems • Condition of Substrate/Weatherbarrier • Condition of Structure (At perimeter) Hidden Conditions
  23. 23. • Arms-length investigation • In-situ testing • Non-destructive Evaluation Investigative Techniques
  24. 24. • Condition of Substrate/Weatherbarrier • Does system permit remedial repair of lateral systems? • Does a weather barrier exist? • Water • Air • Vapor • Insulation • What is condition of existing materials? • Antiquated systems • Asbestos Containing Materials • Water Damage Substrate Analysis
  25. 25. Systems are typically concealed Failure represents significant risk to public safety Typical warning signs • Outward displacement of masonry • Spalling • Localized failure Current wind load requirements VS Building Code in effect at time of construction Condition of Lateral Support Systems
  26. 26. Condition of Structure (At perimeter) • Façade elements may restrict access to superstructure Condition of Structural Frame & Foundation
  27. 27. Thermal performance of existing wall Wufi Model to evaluate existing Wufi Model to evaluate proposed renovation Affect of hot-humid climate Affect HVAC assumptions/systems and operation - Existing and Future Review of Water Vapor Permeance
  28. 28. Air and Water permeance of existing wall Air/Water vapor barrier location and integrity Vapor drive - new 2013 materials vs Historic or late 20th century alternates Tar paper Tyvek Peel & stick Mass wall Intrusion from leaks – any opening in envelope Review of Water Vapor Permeance
  29. 29. Tools for review of Insulation & Vapor Barrier
  30. 30. Sample WUFI Output Air Temperature Dew PointRelative Humidity Water Content Exterior Interior BRICK CAVITY AIR BARRIER & EXT. GYP INSULATION INT. GYP. & VINYL WALLPAPER 3 Year Cycle Shaded Area = 3 Year Cycle Tools for review of Water Vapor Dewpoint
  31. 31. • THERM's heat-transfer analysis allows you to evaluate a system energy efficiency and local temperature patterns, which may relate directly to problems with condensation, moisture damage, and structural integrity. Tools for review of Thermal Performance
  32. 32. Step Three - Cost Benefit Analysis Building Life-Cycle Cost (BLCC) Program—Economic analysis tool developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology for the U.S. Department of Energy Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP). http://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/information/download_blcc.html#blcc http://www.wbdg.org/tools/athena_eie.php LCCA can be performed at various levels of complexity. Its scope might vary from a "back-of-the-envelope" study to a detailed analysis with thoroughly researched input data, supplementary measures of economic evaluation, complex uncertainty assessment, and extensive documentation. The extensiveness of the effort should be tailored to the needs of the project.
  33. 33. Owner’s long term plans : calculate the life cycle implications of recladding vs. cladding repair. Government - Lifetime Developer - 100% Lease and Sell Owner/Operator - Lifetime with Exit strategy High Maintenance cost – deferred maintenance problem Life Cycle Cost Analysis
  34. 34. At what point does the cost of remediation approach the cost of recladding? Repair vs Reclad Low cost Repair High Cost Removal Repair Scope Extents of façade material removal Improve Performance of façade systems Typically local Repair of Vertical Support Systems Typically local (10%) Repair of Structure Typically local (20%) Repair of Façade materials Varies greatly - Local to Global Repair of Lateral Support Systems Minimal with appropriate substrate, Global with poor substrate Repair of Substrate Typically global Extents of façade removal required for various repairs
  35. 35. Park Towers - 2000 YEAR BUILT: 1972 ENVELOPE REVIEW ISSUE: New Owner PROJECT START DATE: 1998 COST: $27M Core & Shell + Garage DESIGN SUMMARY – Vacant 13 years; purchase price allowed consideration of re- branding for new Class-A image. 24” floor extension was added to perimeter for NRA of 24,000 SF Case Study – Park Towers RECLAD
  36. 36. Restore for Historic Significance and PerformanceCase Study – U of H Roy G Cullen RESTORE YEAR BUILT: 1938 ENVELOPE REVIEW ISSUE: Campus Master Plan, Water Intrusion of Historic First Building on U of H Campus PROJECT START DATE: Not Started PROJECT COST: Est. $3.2 M DESIGN SUMMARY: Detailed review of documents and Broroscope investigation revealed that water intrusion was impacting limestone anchors. Previous re-windowing was not draining correctly. Limestone panels spalling.
  37. 37. Case Study – Sylvan Beach Pavilion RECLAD + RESTORE YEAR BUILT: 1956 with 1962 & 1980 additions ENVELOPE REVIEW ISSUE: Hurricane Ike Damage to Curtainwall – Building abandoned since damage PROJECT START DATE: 2012 PROJECT COST: $3.2 Million DESIGN SUMMARY: Historic Restoration of 1950’s Mod Building for Harris County.
  38. 38. YEAR BUILT: 1973 ENVELOPE REVIEW ISSUE: Campus precast buildings had some repairs and exposed rebar and spalls, but iconic imagery in a build to suit campus. PROJECT START DATE: 2009 PROJECT COST: $300 Million DESIGN SUMMARY: Restoration of Campus Lab Building with interior and glass element update for new office use Case Study – Shell Technology Center RESTORE
  39. 39. Pros • New head height at window openings (9’-0”) allows more daylight and use of underfloor air on both floors. • Replacing glass w/ high performance low-e glass allows more visible light, less solar heat gain • Improved waterproofing at windows and overall exterior with new installation • New window mullion spacing will be closer to 5’-0” OC • Replacement of monitor allows upgrade of 30 year old pipe infrastructure. It allows phased replacement during construction by having pipes at base roof level installed prior to demo. Future maintenance of piping at roof level is safer. Re-using structural slab (previous monitor floor) below pipe rack improves waterproofing below pipes. • Replacement of monitor improves campus appearance by lowering overall height of secondary roof structure. • New skylight at center allows double loaded office with perimeter circulation on glass and along skylight • Additional demo will require construction waste recycling • Construction sequence will expose interior to weather; requires full building shut down to optimize contractor’s work time Cons
  40. 40. If 30% - 50% of exterior cladding must be removed for remediation, replacement may be a more cost effective alternate, depending on cost of cladding materials. Integrity of Façade Assembly Other factors – what is the business decision?! • Will new façade lead to increase in rent? • Can it lower energy usage? • Project staging - is building occupied? Re-skin vs Rehabilitate Existing
  41. 41. Typically Reactive Implementation Mandates Periodic Inspections Future – Façade Ordinances
  42. 42. Questions? This concludes The American Institute of Architects Continuing Education Systems Course
  43. 43. Sustainable Design The BIM model allows for early staged energy calculations using DOE-2 compatible energy modeling software. This helps with glazing selection and adds valuable cost/payback calculations for the owner. BIM @ Kirksey
  44. 44. • EVALUATION Structural Air / Water /Heat infiltration Market position Site and Context • COST Project cost life cycle cost improved energy performance. • APPEARANCE Historic importance of the façade Market position Site and Context •

×