MIT Department of Architecture Professor Les Norford
lnorford@mit.edu TA Helen Xing
hxing@mit.edu
4.455 INTEGRATED BUILDING SYSTEMS
Fall
2001
Principles of Integrated building Systems
The intent of this course is a reconsideration of the design process through the introduction of the various notions and strategies of integration. We will devote most of the term to considering is the directed integration of various systems of a building for the purpose of achieving a higher performance level as a whole than would be possible without an integration strategy. To this end it will be critical that the class (lectures, demonstrations, assignments, design projects) be structured such that the goals that are identified and the results that are achieved have been sought after within a rational framework of clearly stipulated criteria. Those criteria must consider the forces that exist as part of the site and the climate of the location, the performance goals that are important to the building, and the various ways in which the building, as an assembly of systems, may achieve those performance goals.
II. Building Systems
For the purpose of this course we will designate the necessary systems of a built facility to be the following:
1. Structure
2. Exterior Envelope
3. Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning.
4. Lighting
A building system is defined as a coordinated set of elements intended to achieve a clearly defined performance specification. This set of elements may be combinations of devices, assemblies, material configurations, controls and other electronic, mechanical and structural strategies employed to address a specific goal.
III. Process of Integration
As pointed out by Rush [1] , “The more unified a building is, the more difficult it is to call out its distinct systems; parts often have more than one purpose and defy simple generic classification.” This unification is often the result of a process in which separate systems have converged to achieve multiple performance goals with the utilization of a singular element. This particular form of integration is often the most difficult to achieve and must be evaluated very carefully.
Furthermore, the identification of four distinct system classes allows a process in which it is possible to clearly designate a system that is intended to address a specific set of stressors. Therefore, each system will entail a separate process of evaluation leading to a final configuration.
The process in which each of these systems will be evaluated is the following:
1. Identification of the stressors that directly relate to that system.
2. Formulation of a performance specification.
3. A statement of intent in which the system is clearly mandated to address the matrix of stressors and meet all other elements in the performance specification.
4. Identification of the integration opportunities between the system under study and all other systems of the building.
5. Final selection and design of the system towards an optimally integrated condition.
It is important to state at the outset that the separation of these various systems does not mean that the process is one in which the summation of separate systems designs a building makes. In fact, the link between these semi-autonomous processes is the understanding that an overall work-in-progress is always present. While it is necessary to isolate the particular conditions that one is addressing at any one time, it is also possible and critical that a holistic interest is always part of the process.
In addition, it is important to keep in mind that the architecture of the building is directly related to the physical demands of an integration process. In other words, the architecture will be the result of a process in which a selection and design of systems will necessarily modulate, and in some cases, substantially determine the form of the building. You will encounter a number of examples over the course of term in which the form of the architecture is not necessarily absolutely determined by the performance goals of the analysis of climate, location, program, etc. In fact, most buildings cannot prove a necessary and sufficient correlation between the final form of the architecture and the performance goals. However, buildings that are well integrated do have a very high level of correlation between the form that is necessary for achieving performance goals and those goals.
In addition, it will become quite clear that only certain aspects of the architecture will impact, in a significant way, the attempt to achieve a set of performance specifications. For example, the section of a building may be the most important aspect of the architecture in reducing wind-related pressure on the exterior wall. It will be important to isolate those aspects of the architectural form that directly, and sometimes, indirectly, relate to the performance specifications.
IV. Principles of Integration
The first step of the process of integration is the definition of the term. While we will encounter a number of definitions over the course of the term, the following statements will serve to set the process in motion.
General definition:
Building integration is the organized consideration of the interrelationship between the productive systems of a facility for the purpose of optimizing the effectiveness of the collection of systems as a whole.
Specific definition:
Building integration is the organized consideration of HVAC, structural, lighting, exterior envelope and other assemblies of a facility for the purpose of reducing energy, material and time consumption, as well as other things, in the satisfaction of a detailed performance specification.
For the moment, these definitions are useful for a general grasp of the intent of the process. However, explicit within each definition is the requirement of the optimization of certain aspects of the functioning of a building. In the second definition, the performance specification is the place in which the criteria for optimization are listed.
The following building integration principles are an introduction to what will become a detailed listing of criteria and eventually the performance specification particular to each system.
A successful strategy for building integration may result in one or more of the following:
Time
· A reduction in the overall design time - all consultants included - necessary to fully design all aspects of a building.
· A reduction in the overall construction period, from site preparation and demolition to a state of full occupation.
· A reduction in the frequency of design changes necessitated by coordination in the field.
Material
· A reduction in the overall quantity of material consumed during the construction of the facility.
Continuing Costs
· A reduction in the overall cost of operation for the facility.
· A reduction in the overall cost of maintenance for the facility.
Environment
· A reduction in the fully assessed environmental impact on the local area, the region, and the world.
and/or
Space
· an increase in the efficiency of the use of space as measured by the ratio of enclosed net to gross square feet (meters).
Passive Systems
· An increase in the opportunities for the truly effective use of passive systems.
Adaptive Reuse
· an increase in the flexibility of the adaptation of the facility to another programmatic function as measured by the overall time, material, and energy required for the change.
Future Expansion
· an increase in the ease of expansion as measured by the overall time, material and energy required for the change.
This list is neither comprehensive nor should it strictly determine a set of priorities for a building integration design process. In addition, a good building integration process may not fulfill all, or even a majority, of the items listed above. For a particular location and building program it is highly likely that only a small number of the items above are truly important to attempt. In fact, it is suggested that one prioritize the most important aspects of the situation to identify a limited number of important integration goals. Assignment 1 will suggest a technique for beginning the process of establishing the ‘lead issue(s)’ for determining an integrated building strategy.
V. Building Systems Integration and Sustainable Design Principles
Sustainable Design Principles are a close relative to Integrated Design Principles. In fact, many of the performance goals of one are essentially identical for the other. For this reason, the topic of sustainable design will be a part of this course, and more on this subject will be offered later in the semester.
Integration is not so different from the architect’s goal of finding a single element of a design that solves a multitude of problems. The intended spirit of the class may be served by relabeling it “Innovative Building Systems.” Wonderful inspiration for this approach comes from such luminaries as Peter Rice and Ted Happold, both of whom worked for the legendary Ove Arup. Can you name others? Any from the United States? Any from your own country?
Integration, innovation or sustainable design should be impelled by a very real environmental imperative. Buildings need to perform better than they typically do and architects bear a responsibility to make that happen. In real life, buildings may not live up to expectations, because expectations (performance goals) are fuzzy or flabby or because design thinking and supporting engineering was fuzzy or flabby. We will place some emphasis on accurate estimates or, in at least one assignment, measurements of building performance. Wallpaper made of CFD or lighting simulations won’t do the job.
[1] Rush, Richard. The Integration Building Systems Handbook. Page 8.