UBC Undergraduate Research

Life Cycle Analysis of the H.R. Macmillan Building, University of British Columbia Tang, Ivan Yip-Hang Mar 30, 2009

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
18861-HRMacMillan_Yip-Hang Tang,I_2.pdf [ 6.61MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 18861-1.0077972.json
JSON-LD: 18861-1.0077972-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 18861-1.0077972-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 18861-1.0077972-rdf.json
Turtle: 18861-1.0077972-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 18861-1.0077972-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 18861-1.0077972-source.json
Full Text
18861-1.0077972-fulltext.txt
Citation
18861-1.0077972.ris

Full Text

LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS OF THE H.R. MACMILLAN BUILDING, UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA  Ivan Yip-Hang Tang CIVL 498C, University of British Columbia March 30, 2009  ii  Tang  Tang  iii  ABSTRACT A life cycle analysis of the materials used for the structural and envelope elements was completed for the H.R. MacMillan building at the University of British Columbia (UBC). This study, completed in conjunction with twelve other studies on UBC buildings, was done to determine the environmental impacts of the building design and its construction elements. The scope of this LCA study covers the structure, envelope and operational energy usage of the H.R. MacMillan building on a square foot basis. OnCenter’s OnScreen Takeoff and the Athena Sustainable Materials Institute’s Impact Estimator (IE) were the two main software tools used. OnScreen Takeoff was first used to create an inventory of the construction elements in the building. That data was then formatted and entered into the Impact Estimator, from which reports can be generated to show measures based on the Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and other environmental Impacts (TRACI) version 2.2, developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). The environmental impacts of the building are quantified in eight TRACI impact categories, such as primary energy consumption and global warming potential. In both performing the takeoffs and creating the building model in IE, a number of assumptions had to be made, adding uncertainties to the results. For this LCA, only the manufacturing and construction life cycle stages are considered. Highlights of the results include: 437 MJ of embodied energy per square foot, 250 kg of weighted raw resource use per square foot, and less than 0.01 kg CFC-11 equivalent/kg ozone depletion potential per square foot. It was concluded that the H.R. MacMillan building has a higher environmental impact that the average academic building. A sensitivity analysis was completed to analyze the relative effects of five materials. Concrete and bricks had by far the largest effects in each of the impact categories. An analysis was also completed to assess the energy performance of the building. The current insulation of the building was compared to improved insulation to meet the Residential Environmental Assessment Program (REAP) standards. The payback period of the building with the improved insulation was found to be less than three years.  iv  Tang  TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures............................................................................................................................v List of Tables .............................................................................................................................v Introduction...............................................................................................................................1 Goal and Scope ..........................................................................................................................3 Goal of Study...........................................................................................................................................................3 Scope of Study .........................................................................................................................................................4 Tools, Methodology and Data................................................................................................................................4  Building Model..........................................................................................................................7 Takeoffs....................................................................................................................................................................7 Bill of Materials......................................................................................................................................................12 Summary Measures................................................................................................................................................14 Sensitivity Analysis ............................................................................................................................................17  Building Performance .............................................................................................................27 Conclusions .............................................................................................................................30 Author’s Commentary ....................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined. Appendix A – Formatted Inputs Appendix B – Input Assumptions  Tang  v  LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 - Aerial View of the H.R. MacMillan Building...............................................................................1 Figure 2 - Sensitivity Analysis of Primary Energy Consumption ...............................................................1 Figure 3 – Sensitivity Analysis of Weighted Resource Consumption........................................................1 Figure 4 - Sensitivity Analysis of Global Warming Potential ......................................................................1 Figure 5 - Sensitivity Analysis of Acidification Potential .............................................................................1 Figure 6 - Sensitivity Analysis of Human Health Respiratory Effects Potential ......................................1 Figure 7 - Sensitivity Analysis of Eutrophication Potential.........................................................................1 Figure 8 - Sensitivity Analysis of Ozone Depletion Potential.....................................................................1 Figure 9 - Sensitivity Analysis of Smog Potential..........................................................................................1 Figure 10 - Comparison of Energy Usage of Current Insulation vs Improved Insulation.....................1 Figure 11 - Consumption of Steam Energy in 2008.....................................................................................1  LIST OF TABLES Table 1 - Building Characteristics....................................................................................................................2 Table 2 – H.R. MacMillan Bill of Materials .................................................................................................13 Table 3 - Summary Measures by Life Cycle Stage ......................................................................................14 Table 4 - Sensitivity Analysis Percentage Results........................................................................................17 Table 5 – Comparison of Insulation Types with Embodied Energy.......................................................27  vi  Tang  Tang  1  INTRODUCTION The H.R. MacMillan building, originally the Forestry Agriculture building, was built in 1967 on the Point Grey campus of the University of British Columbia. The design of the concrete and brick building was of ‘Modern Tudor’ architecture, featuring Gothic-style ornaments and brick pilasters. It has a unique shape, enclosing a semi-vegetated courtyard containing several trees (see Figure 1). The three-storey-plus-one-ground-floor building serves as an academic research building, originally containing approximately 11 classrooms, 43 labs and 65 offices. It also features one large lecture theatre, and a library on the top floor. Table 1 details the building’s structural and envelope elements. The building is heated by steam provided from a centralized generator on campus burning natural gas.  Figure 1 - Aerial View of the H.R. MacMillan Building  2  Tang  Table 1 - Building Characteristics  Building System Structure  Specific characteristics of MacMillan Concrete beams and columns, and concrete blocks supporting concrete tees; Penthouse: steel WF beams and columns  Floors  Ground: Concrete slab on grade with polyethylene vapour barrier; First, Second, and Third Floors: Concrete tees with topping  Exterior Walls  Ground: Cast in place walls, some with modular brick cladding, rigid insulation; First, Second, and Third Floors: concrete block walls with modular brick cladding, rigid insulation and windows, concrete cast in place walls with modular brick cladding and rigid insulation; Penthouse: modular brick cladding Ground: concrete block walls; First, Second, and Third Floors: concrete block walls, some with plaster or modular brick cladding, and aluminum framed curtain walls Most windows standard single glazed, either aluminum or steel frames, a few windows double glazed  Interior Walls Windows Roof  Main Roof: Suspended slab with rigid insulation, some with plaster; Penthouse Roof: Steel decking  Tang  3  GOAL AND SCOPE The goal and scope of this study, as discussed in the subsequent sections, was defined in accordance to International Standard ISO 14044:2006, Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Requirements and guidelines.  Goal of Study This life cycle analysis (LCA) of the H.R. MacMillan building (hereafter referred to as MacMillan) at the University of British Columbia (UBC) was carried out as an exploratory study to determine the environmental impact of its design. This LCA of MacMillan is also part of a series of twelve others being carried out simultaneously on respective buildings at UBC with the same goal and scope. The main outcomes of this LCA study are the establishment of a materials inventory and environmental impact references for the H.R. MacMillan building. An exemplary application of these references is in the assessment of potential future performance upgrades to the structure and envelope of MacMillan. When this study is considered in conjunction with the twelve other UBC building LCA studies, further applications include the possibility of carrying out environmental performance comparisons across UBC buildings over time and between different materials, structural types and building functions. Furthermore, as demonstrated through these potential applications, this MacMillan LCA can be seen as an essential part of the formation of a powerful tool to help inform the decision making process of policy makers in establishing quantified sustainable development guidelines for future UBC construction, renovation and demolition projects. The intended core audience of this LCA study are those involved in building development related policy making at UBC, such as the Sustainability Office, who are involved in creating policies and frameworks for sustainable development on campus. Other potential audiences include developers, architects, engineers and building owners involved in design planning, as well as external organizations such as governments, private industry and other universities whom may want to learn more or become engaged in performing similar LCA studies within their organizations.  4  Tang  Scope of Study The product system studied in this LCA are the structure, envelope and operational energy usage associated with space conditioning of MacMillan on a square foot finished floor area of academic building basis. In order to focus on design related impacts, this LCA encompasses a cradle-to-gate scope that includes the raw material extraction, manufacturing of construction materials and construction of the structure and envelope of MacMillan, as well as associated transportation effects throughout.  Tools, Methodology and Data There were two main software tools utilized to complete this LCA study; OnCenter’s OnScreen Takeoff and the Athena Sustainable Materials Institute’s Impact Estimator (IE) for buildings. The initial stage of the study was a materials quantity takeoff, which involved performing linear, area and count measurements of the building’s structure and envelope. To accomplish this, OnScreen Takeoff version 3.6.2.25 was used, which is a software tool designed to perform material takeoffs with increased accuracy and speed in order to enhance the bidding capacity of its users. Using imported digital plans, the program simplifies the calculation and measurement of the takeoff process, while reducing the error associated with these two activities. The measurements generated are formatted into the inputs required for the IE building LCA software to complete the takeoff process. These formatted inputs as well as their associated assumptions can be viewed in Appendices A and B, respectively. Using the formatted takeoff data, version 4.0.51 of the IE software, the only available software capable of meeting the requirements of this study, was used to generate a whole building LCA model for MacMillan in the Vancouver region as an Institutional building type. The IE software is designed to aid the building community in making more environmentally conscious material and design choices. The tool achieves this by applying a set of algorithms to the inputted takeoff data in order to complete the takeoff process and generate a bill of materials (BoM). This BoM then utilizes the Athena Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) Database, version 4.6, in order to generate a cradle-to-grave LCI profile for the building. In this study, LCI profile results focus on the manufacturing and transportation of materials and their installation into the initial structure and envelope assemblies. As this study is a cradle-to-gate assessment, the expected service life of  Tang  5  MacMillan is set to 1 year, which results in the maintenance, operating energy and end-of-life stages of the building’s life cycle being left outside the scope of assessment. The IE then filters the LCA results through a set of characterization measures based on the mid-point impact assessment methodology developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), the Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and other environmental Impacts (TRACI) version 2.2. In order to generate a complete environmental impact profile for MacMillan, all of the available TRACI impact assessment categories available in the IE are included in this study, and are listed as; •  Primary energy consumption  •  Weighted raw resource use  •  Global warming potential  •  Acidification potential  •  Human health respiratory effects potential  •  Eutrophication potential  •  Ozone depletion potential  •  Photochemical smog potential Using the summary measure results, a sensitivity analysis was then conducted in order to  reveal the effect of material changes on the impact profile of MacMillan. Finally, using the UBC Residential Environmental Assessment Program (REAP) as a guide, this study then estimates the embodied energy involved in upgrading the insulation and window R-values to REAP standards and calculates the energy payback period of investing in a better performing envelope. The primary sources of data for this LCA are the original architectural and structural drawings from when the H.R. MacMillan building was initially constructed in 1967. The assemblies of the building that were modelled include the foundation, columns and beams, floors, walls and roofs, as well as the associated envelope and openings (i.e. doors and windows) within each of these assemblies. The decision to omit other building components, such as flooring, electrical aspects, heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) system, finishing and detailing, etc., are associated with the limitations of available data and the IE software, as well as to minimize the uncertainty of the model. In the analysis of these assemblies, some of the drawings lack sufficient material details, which necessitate the usage of assumptions to complete the modelling of the building in the IE  6  Tang  software. Furthermore, there are inherent assumptions made by the IE software in order to generate the bill of materials and limitations to what it can model, which necessitated further assumptions to be made. These assumptions and limitations will be discussed further in the Building Model section and, as previously mentioned, all specific input related assumptions are contained in the Input Assumptions document in Appendix B.  Tang  7  BUILDING MODEL To model the H.R. MacMillan building, the software program OnScreen Takeoff was first used to measure, count and inventory the building elements. The measurements were then formatted in order to create a model of the building in the Athena Sustainable Materials Institute’s Impact Estimator (IE) for buildings. This section details the process used for performing the takeoffs and discusses any assumptions and limitations throughout the whole modelling process. The bill of materials (BoM) is also presented, discussing the five largest amounts and how assumptions in the modelling process may have lead to deviations of material amounts. Lastly, the summary measures by life cycle stage are presented and further analyzed with a sensitivity analysis.  Takeoffs In OnScreen Takeoff, three measurement conditions are used: linear, area, and count. After importing the architectural and structural drawings into the program and applying the appropriate scale factor, these conditions are used to inventory all the elements of the building to be considered. The linear condition records distances and was used for items such as walls, strip foundations, and height measurements. The area condition records areas and was used for items such as floors and roof area. The count condition records multiples of repeated items and was used for items such as pad footings, windows, and doors. The takeoffs were performed as precisely as practically possible, but some challenges arose during the process. Since the drawings were hand-drawn from 1967, the digital versions were scanned copies of the original. For this reason, there were instances where assumptions were used when poor quality (i.e. blurry sections or scan lines confused with dimension lines) affected the accuracy of the takeoffs. In addition, the accuracy of the building model was affected if required data was not available. For example, the size of rebar may not be specified and it would have to be assumed. A number of assembly groups were modelled for entry into the Impact Estimator (IE); these include slab on grade foundations, footings, block walls, cast in place walls, curtain walls, columns and beams, suspended slab roofs, open web steel joist roofs, and concrete precast double tee floors. The following provides a description of each assembly group and how it was modelled, and any high-level assumptions that were made that affect all the inputs in the particular assembly group.  8  Tang  Concrete slabs on grade foundation  The concrete slab on grade (SOG) foundation at the floor of the ground level was modelled using the area condition. In the Impact Estimator (IE), there are two options for the SOG thickness: 4” or 8” thickness. In cases where the ideal rebar input was unavailable in the Impact Estimator, the next nearest option was selected and assumed for modelling purposes. The concrete flyash content was not specified in the drawings; it was assumed to be the average amount. Concrete is assumed to have a strength of 3000 psi for all cases unless otherwise noted, as specified. Also, the vapour barrier was assumed to be 6 mil, instead of 4 mil, as this was the only option in the IE. Concrete footings  Concrete footings used to help form the building foundation were modelled using either the linear condition (e.g. strip/wall footings with specified cross-sectional dimensions) or the count condition (e.g. pad/column footings with specified dimensions). The IE limits the thickness of footings to 19.7". For footings thicker than this limit, the thickness was set to 19.7" and the width was increased accordingly to maintain equal volume. See drawings 386-07-009 and 386-07-010 for specifications of footing dimensions. The linear condition was used to model the concrete stairs as footings. After measuring an average stair thickness (assumed to be 10”) and width, the length of stairs was measured using a linear condition. The internal stairs have a 1” plaster topping which was omitted as the IE does not have an option to add a layer of plaster to concrete footings. The concrete columns inside the pilasters surrounding the exterior of the building are modelled as footings. The cross-sectional dimensions are specified (drawings 386-07-011 and drawings 386-07-013) and the lengths were measured using a linear condition. The pilaster columns contain various rebar sizes; #4 rebar was assumed to be the average. For all concrete footings, the flyash content was not specified in the drawings; it was assumed to be the average amount. Concrete is assumed to have a strength of 3000 psi for all cases unless otherwise noted, as specified. Concrete block walls  The majority of walls in the H.R. MacMillan building are concrete block walls. They were modelled using the linear condition for distances. The linear condition was also used to measure the wall height and it was found to be 12’. This value is used as an assumption for the heights of all  Tang  9  walls. A different category was used to measure walls depending on the type of wall construction. Some walls have 1” rigid insulation (assumed to be 1” extruded polystyrene), modular brick cladding, or plaster finish, or a combination of these elements. A different category was also used for walls with differing openings, such as solid wood doors, glazed steel doors, or window openings. In the IE, concrete block walls are assumed to use 8” x 8” x 16” hollow concrete blocks with every third vertical core grouted and reinforced with one steel bar (assumed to be #4), and additional grouting and rebar is included at all openings. These conditions are assumed for all concrete block walls in MacMillan. For all instances where walls had a plaster finish, it was assumed to be regular 5/8” thick gypsum board (plaster is not available as an option in the IE). Even though operable windows are an option in the IE, all windows are considered fixed for conformity to the rest of the LCA studies conducted on other UBC buildings. Steel window frames are also assumed to be aluminum frames in the IE as there is no option for steel. All doors made from wood, including those that are glazed, are assumed to be solid wooden doors. Glazed aluminum doors were assumed to be 80% glazed. Cast in place walls  Some of the walls of the ground floor are cast in place concrete walls. They were measured using the linear condition. Similar to concrete block walls, different categories were used to perform takeoffs depending on the wall construction and wall openings. All the same assumptions were made. Note that bituminous waterproof compound was omitted as it is not available in the IE. Glazed curtain walls  Glazed curtain walls occur most often at the doorways to external and internal stairs. They are also modelled using the linear condition. It was assumed that the curtain walls had 90% viewable glazing and 10% opaque metal spandrel. The IE also requires a positive input for thickness of insulation. Since there was no insulation, this was assumed to be 0.0001. All the glazed metal doors were assumed to be 80% glazed aluminum doors. Concrete columns and beams  Concrete columns and beams support the floors in H.R. MacMillan. The linear and count conditions were used to measure these elements. The count condition was used to measure the number of columns and beams. The linear condition was used to measure the floor to floor height.  10 Tang  The bay size measurement was obtained by using the linear condition to measure the total distance between a series of columns, then dividing that by the number of columns to produce the average bay size. The IE requires that the bay size be 10’ or greater. The bay size was assumed to be 10’ in cases where the average bay size was less than 10’. The supported span was obtained by using the linear condition to measure the total span, then dividing that by two to produce the average span. The total span was divided by two since the floors are supported at each external wall, and in between by one series of columns. In the IE, three options are available for the live load: 45 psf, 75 psf, and 100 psf. None of the specified live loads matched these options so the closest options were assumed. For labs and offices, 100 psf was used instead of the specified 120 psf (labs) and 50 psf (offices) for a conservative assumption. For classrooms, 45 psf was used instead of the specified 60 psf since 100 psf was an overestimation for labs and offices; this creates a more balanced overall estimate. For the third floor columns supporting the roof, 45 psf was used for the specified snow load of 40 psf. Note that the size of the columns and beams are calculated by metrics embedded in the IE. Steel wide flange (WF) columns and beams  Steel wide flange columns and beams are used for the ‘penthouse’, which acts as a protective housing for the exhaust ducts from the labs. Similar to concrete columns and beams, the count condition was used to measure the number of columns and beams, and the linear condition was used to measure the floor to floor height. The same technique was used to obtain the average bay size. The calculated average bay size was 5.85’ but it is assumed to be 10’ due to this limitation in the IE. Suspended slab roofs  A suspended slab roof is used for the H.R. MacMillan building. The linear condition was used to measure the width and spans of the roof. The IE requires the span input to be 30’. Thus for instances where the span is greater than 30’, the span is set to 30’ and the width is adjusted accordingly to maintain the same area. The live load was assumed to be 45 psi, the nearest option to the specified 40 psf snow load. The plaster finish was assumed to be regular 5/8” gypsum board as plaster is not available as an option in the IE. The 1” rigid insulation was assumed to be 1” extruded polystyrene. The flyash content was not specified in the drawings; it was assumed to be the average  Tang  11  amount. Concrete is assumed to have a strength of 3000 psi for all cases unless otherwise noted, as specified. Open web steel joist roofs  The roof of the ‘penthouse’ was assumed to be an open web steel joist roof. Similar to the suspended slab roof, the width and span was measured using the linear condition. In the IE, the span requires a minimum of 15.09’. The span was set to 15.09’ and the width was adjusted accordingly to maintain the same area. It was assumed to be a commercial steel roof system. Concrete precast double tee floors  Concrete precast tees are used for the flooring system. Although the precast tees in the H.R. MacMillan building are single and not double tees, this was assumed to be the case as it is the closest option. The count and linear condition was used to take measurements. The count condition was used to measure the number of bays and the linear condition was used to measure the bay size and the span size. The technique used to measure span size was the same as that used in concrete columns and beams. Due the span size being limited to 30’, the span was set to 30’ and the number of bays was adjusted accordingly to produce the equivalent floor size. The live load assumptions were the same as that used in concrete columns and beams. Extra basic materials  In the Impact Estimator, additional materials can be entered manually to account for any components that are not covered by the default assembly groups. For the H.R. MacMillan building, this section was used to add concrete (20 MPa = 3000 psi) for the precast concrete caps that are on top of the pilasters and that surround the exterior edge at the roof. Modular brick was added for the penthouse walls and for the pilasters. Finally, mortar was added for the penthouse brick walls and the brick cladding on the pilasters.  Refer to Appendix B for the Impact Estimator Input Assumptions, which outlines all the highlevel and specific assumptions, including detailed calculations, used in the IE model.  12 Tang  Bill of Materials After all the inputs have been entered into the Impact Estimator, a bill of materials (BoM) can be generated to list all the materials and their amounts used in the building model. See Table 2 for the BoM for the H.R. MacMillan building. Five materials with among the largest quantities are: 5/8” regular gypsum board, 3000 psi concrete (average flyash), concrete blocks, extruded polystyrene, and modular brick. The quantities of these materials have been affected by certain assumptions which could make them overestimations or underestimations. Since plaster is not available in the Impact Estimator as a wall or roof envelope material, an assumption was made to replace plaster with 5/8” regular gypsum board in all cases where plaster existed for roofs and walls. Because of this assumption, the entire quantity of gypsum board is an overestimation. No gypsum board was shown to exist in the original drawings. The 3000 psi concrete unsurprisingly shows up as one of the highest quantities as it was used for the foundations, cast in place walls, suspended slab roof, and in extra basic materials for the precast concrete caps. For all instances where the concrete strength was not specified, it was assumed to be 3000 psi. This was noted in the General Notes in drawing 386-07-009. However, the concrete caps were precast, meaning they were made at a manufacturing plant away from the site. If the manufacturing company used a different type of concrete, not 3000 psi, then the quantity in the BoM has been overestimated due to the “6.1.1 - Precast Concrete Cap for Pilaster Col'n 0,1,2,3FL Types A,B,H,M” and “6.1.2 - Precast Concrete Cap linear” inputs. For concrete blocks, assumptions were made regarding the heights of various walls. To a certain extent, the lengths of various walls were assumed as well. For example, there was no drawing provided for the wall layout of the north side of the ground floor. Thus, the walls lengths (0FL - Int - 8" conc blk (corridor typ)” were estimated based on a physical site visit of the building. It was also assumed that all concrete block walls used the same concrete block wall construction as is defined in the IE, which is not the case for the real building. Adding up the total effects of the assumed wall dimensions, combined with the assumption that all concrete blocks are the same, this could lead to an overestimation or underestimation of the quantity of concrete blocks in the BoM. Extruded polystyrene was assumed to be used when the drawings specified 1” rigid insulation. It is assumed that all parts of the roofs and exterior walls (e.g. “2.1.5 - 1FL - Ext - 6'' conc blk - 1'' insul - brick (lab typ)”) contain this layer of insulation. However, it is not known if extruded polystyrene was actually used as the insulation in the building. If it wasn’t, then the quantity in the  Tang  13  BoM is a 100% overestimation. Assuming that extruded polystyrene was used, the assumption that all exterior walls and roofs used this could overestimate the amount in the BoM if it wasn’t actually used in everywhere in these particular walls and roofs. For modular brick, it was assumed to be used on all exterior wall surfaces, as well as on the pilasters, and on some internal walls. However, on the actual building, it can be seen that not the entire exterior walls are clad with brick. There is a strip of exposed concrete between each storey. This (e.g. “2.1.7 - 1FL - Ext - plaster - 6'' conc blk - 1'' insul - brick (office typ)” leads to an overestimation in the BoM quantity. Table 2 – H.R. MacMillan Bill of Materials Material  Quantity  Unit  5/8" Regular Gypsum Board  131497.3116  sf  6 mil Polyethylene  37588.32865  sf  Aluminium Cold Rolled Sheet  27.92154  Tons  1.0976  Tons  Concrete 3000 psi (flyash av)  8121.74553  yd3  Concrete 4000 psi (flyash av)  2991.97628  yd3  Concrete 9000 psi (flyash av) Concrete Blocks EPDM membrane Expanded Polystyrene Extruded Polystyrene Galvanized Decking Galvanized Sheet Glazing Panel Joint Compound Metric Modular (Modular) Brick  4586.47272  yd3  209116.0703  Blocks  3389.29863  Pounds  140.14611 100774.5279 5.48816  sf (1") sf (1") Tons  3.87601  Tons  20.38485  Tons  11.05878  Tons  104422.7401  sf  Modified Bitumen membrane  1152.15121  Pounds  Mortar  1097.65832  yd3  Nails  131.75873  Tons  Open Web Joists  2.23293  Tons  Paper Tape  0.12689  Tons  Rebar, Rod, Light Sections Screws Nuts & Bolts  334.33651  Tons  0.77143  Tons  Small Dimension Softwood Lumber, kiln-dried  12.40757  Mbfm  Solvent Based Alkyd Paint  10.85478  US gallons  Standard Glazing  15825.20873  sf  Water Based Latex Paint  45.71523  US gallons  Welded Wire Mesh / Ladder Wire  32.16381  Tons  9.9912  Tons  Wide Flange Sections  14 Tang  Summary Measures After the inputs have been entered into the Impact Estimator, a results report of summary measures can be generated showing the environmental effects of the building model by life cycle stage (or by assembly group). The Impact Estimator can produce a report of summary measures for five life cycle stages: manufacturing, construction, maintenance, end-of-life, and operating energy. For the purpose of this LCA, only the manufacturing and construction stages are considered. The effects of the H.R. MacMillan building are shown in Table 3. The summary measures are the output assessment results for the building’s impacts for eight environmental impact categories, based on the US EPA’s midpoint impact estimation Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental Impacts (TRACI): embodied primary energy consumption, weighted raw resource use, global warming potential, acidification potential, human health respiratory effects potential, aquatic eutrophification potential, ozone depletion potential, and photochemical smog potential. Table 3 - Summary Measures by Life Cycle Stage Impact Category Primary Energy Consumption  Weighted Resource Use  Global Warming Potential  Acidification Potential  HH Respiratory Effects Potential  Eutrophi -cation Potential  Ozone Depletion Potential  Smog Potential  MJ  kg  (kg CO2 eq / kg)  (moles of H+ eq / kg)  (kg PM2.5 eq / kg)  (kg N eq / kg)  (kg CFC11 eq / kg)  (kg NOx eq / kg)  57,453,810  37,266,745  5,514,303  1,760,862  14,822  104.39  0.01  21,106  1,323,886  41,088  2,307  790  0.95  0.01  0.00  17.81  58,777,696  37,307,833  5,516,610  1,761,651  14,823  104.40  0.01  21,124  1,473,406  67,684  101,997.41  51,324  54.83  0.00  0.00  2,025  Manufacturing Material Transportation Total Construction Material Transportation  6,028,675  137,201  9,705.58  3,156  3.80  0.02  0.00  70.65  Total  7,502,081  204,885  111,703.00  54,479  58.62  0.02  0.00  2,095  66,279,777  37,512,718  5,628,313  1,816,131  14,882  104.42  0.01  23,220  437.12  247.40  37.12  11.98  0.10  0.00  0.00  0.15  Total Effects Overall Per sq.ft.  Primary energy consumption  Primary energy consumption is all the embodied primary energy, including all direct and indirect energy used to make a product from raw material extraction to the finished product. In the Impact Estimator, it is reported in megajoules (MJ). This category encompasses the energy used in  Tang  15  all processes of the product’s creation, including energy associated with powering manufacturing machines. The Impact Estimator also accounts for indirect energy use associated with transporting, converting and delivering fuel and energy. The higher the embodied energy, the less desirable it is as it means more energy was required to produce the item. Each component in the building model has an effect on embodied energy. Since even small components can have a large embodied energy, the uncertainty in the building model can create very imprecise primary energy consumption values. Weighted raw resource use  Raw resource use is the amount of raw resources used in the production of a building material or product, and is reported in kilograms (kg). However, since resources cannot be compared by a unit mass, a weighting factor is applied. For example, a unit of timber cannot be compared to a unit of metal ore. The weighting index numbers that the Impact Estimator reference were established through a survey of a number of resource extraction and environmental specialists across Canada. The value that the Impact Estimator reports is a summed total of the raw resource usage after applying the index numbers. The factored numbers can be thought of as ‘ecologically weighted kilograms’ but the weighting is reflective of the opinions of the surveyed experts. As with embodied energy, all components have an effect on this impact category as raw materials are required to produce any building product or material. However, it is uncertain how much each product or assembly group affects the final reported value. Global warming potential  Global warming potential is the measure of a product or material’s potential to contribute to global warming via the greenhouse effect, and is measured relative to the effect of carbon dioxide (CO2). The units are in kilograms or tonnes CO2 equivalent. The effect of all other chemicals is assigned a multiple of the CO2 equivalent. Due to the unknown reactivity and stability of chemicals in the atmospheric environment, the temporal effects of chemicals on global warming are uncertain. Greenhouse gas emissions are primarily produced when fuels are combusted, but some products also produce emissions during manufacture or processing. The Impact Estimator uses a detailed life cycle modelling technique that captures all the relevant emissions, including any released during processing. Uncertainty arises in modelling greenhouse gas emissions and global warming potential as it is difficult to account for emissions produced during complex processes, such as those for manufacture.  16 Tang  Acidification potential  Acidification potential is a regional effect that concerns human health and the health of other living organisms. The acidification potential of air or water emissions are calculated based on of its H+ equivalence effect on a mass basis. It is reported in moles of H+ equivalent/kg. High concentrations of NOx and SO2 are thought to produce adverse effects on life. However, much uncertainty is present in this field as it is not yet widely understood. Human health respiratory effects potential  Human health respiratory effects potential deals with the effects particulate matter have on human health, particularly the respiratory system. Particulates have a serious impact on human health, e.g. the EPA says particulates from diesel fuel combustion are the number one source of respiratory deterioration and diseases such as asthma and bronchitis. This impact category is reported in kg PM2.5 equivalent/kg. Aquatic eutrophification potential  Eutrophication is the process of enriching previously nutrient scarce surface water bodies with more nutrients and is measured relative to nitrogen equivalents. The addition of nutrients to a body of water leads to an increase in photosynthetic aquatic plant life (e.g. algae). The new growth can dominate and devastate natural species and cause other consequences such as foul odours or dead fish. Aquatic eutrophication potential is reported in kg N equivalent/kg. Ozone depletion potential  Ozone depletion potential measures impacts related to the reduction of ozone layer within the stratosphere. This is a protective layer in the atmosphere which absorbs the large majority of the sun’s ultraviolet light. The depletion is caused by emissions of ozone depleting substances, including CFCs, HFCs, and halons. The ozone depletion potential of each of a chemical or substance is measured relative to CFC-11, and is reported in kg CFC-11 equivalent/kg. Photochemical smog potential  Smog is a type of air pollution, the product of industrial and/or transportation emissions being trapped close to ground level where it reacts under certain atmospheric condition with sunlight. Smog is a serious issue affecting human health in many cities. Industries release nitrogen  Tang  17  oxides (NOx) and other man-made products release volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Such compounds can severely affect people with heart and lung diseases such as bronchitis and asthma. Smog potential is reported in kg NOx equivalent/kg.  Sensitivity Analysis To analyze the relative effects that materials have on each of the TRACI impact categories, a sensitivity analysis for five materials was completed. The summary measures were re-evaluated after adding and subtracting 10% of the material from the Bill of Materials for the following materials: concrete (20 MPa = 3000 psi), concrete (60 MPa = 9000 psi), concrete blocks, extruded polystyrene, and modular brick. The effects on each of the impact categories are shown in Table 4. The highlighted values are those with the largest impact for a given impact category. Note that the waste factors inherent to the Impact Estimator when manually adding or subtracting materials was not accounted for this sensitivity analysis. Table 4 - Sensitivity Analysis Percentage Results on Construction and Manufacturing Life Cycle Stages Impact Category Primary Energy Consumption  Weighted Resource Use  Global Warming Potential  Acidification Potential  HH Respiratory Effects Potential  Eutrophi -cation Potential  Ozone Depletion Potential  Smog Potential  MJ  kg  (kg CO2 eq / kg)  (moles of H+ eq / kg)  (kg PM2.5 eq / kg)  (kg N eq / kg)  (kg CFC11 eq / kg)  (kg NOx eq / kg)  Concrete+10% (20 MPa)  1.37%  4.49%  2.24%  2.33%  2.14%  0.07%  3.35%  2.76%  Concrete-10% (20 MPa)  -1.37%  -4.49%  -2.24%  -2.33%  -2.14%  -0.07%  -3.35%  -2.76%  Concrete+10% (60 MPa)  1.09%  2.74%  1.94%  2.05%  1.70%  0.05%  2.99%  2.45%  Concrete-10% (60 MPa)  -1.09%  -2.74%  -1.94%  -2.05%  -1.70%  -0.05%  -2.99%  -2.45%  0.67%  0.08%  0.80%  0.89%  0.75%  0.04%  0.92%  0.77%  Concrete Blocks10%  -0.67%  -0.08%  -0.80%  -0.89%  -0.75%  -0.04%  -0.92%  -0.77%  Extruded Polystyrene+10%  0.11%  0.01%  0.06%  0.06%  0.01%  0.00%  0.00%  0.31%  Extruded Polystyrene-10%  -0.11%  -0.01%  -0.06%  -0.06%  -0.01%  0.00%  0.00%  -0.31%  2.28%  0.31%  1.50%  1.86%  1.43%  0.07%  0.00%  0.10%  Concrete Blocks+10%  Brick+10%  18 Tang  Brick-10%  -2.30%  -0.31%  -1.51%  -1.88%  -1.44%  -0.07%  0.00%  -0.10%  From the results shown in Table 4, it can be seen that 3000 psi concrete has the largest effect in every impact category, except embodied primary energy which modular brick has the biggest effect in. Brick also has an equal effect to 3000 psi concrete in eutrophification potential. Interesting, 9000 psi (primarily used for the precast concrete double tees) had much less of an effect than the 3000 psi concrete. Also interesting is that extruded polystyrene had minimal effect in any of the impact categories. It was expected to have a greater effect due to its chemical nature. Comparing concrete blocks to the 3000 and 9000 psi concrete is also interesting. The effects of the concrete blocks are small compared to the both types of concrete, even though all three are made from concrete. This type of analysis is very valuable when performing an LCA on a building at the design stage or the renovation stage as it shows the potential impacts before the building is built or renovated. For example, from this analysis, one can conclude that building a brick wall instead of a concrete wall is a better choice since bricks have a much less impact on each of the impact categories (except embodied primary energy and eutrophification potential) compared to 3000 psi concrete. The following graphs compare the effect of adding or subtracting 10% of the five materials for each impact category. The amounts are separated into the manufacturing and construction life cycle stages.  Tang  19  Figure 2 shows the sensitivity analysis for embodied primary energy. One can conclude from this graph that the majority of the embodied energy is in the manufacturing of the materials, and not in their construction/transportation stage. As mentioned in the previous section, modular brick has the largest effect on embodied primary energy.  Figure 2 - Sensitivity Analysis of Primary Energy Consumption  20 Tang  Figure 3 shows the sensitivity analysis for weighted raw resource consumption. One can conclude from this graph that the large majority of raw resources are consumed in the manufacturing stage. The construction/transportation stage represents a very small amount of resource consumption. Concrete (20 MPa = 3000 psi) has the largest effect of resource consumption by far.  Figure 3 – Sensitivity Analysis of Weighted Resource Consumption  Tang  21  Figure 4 shows the sensitivity analysis for global warming potential. One can conclude from this graph that the majority of global warming potential is produced in the manufacturing stage. The construction/transportation stage represents a much smaller potential. Concrete (20 MPa = 3000 psi) has the largest global warming potential, followed by modular brick.  Figure 4 - Sensitivity Analysis of Global Warming Potential  22 Tang  Figure 5 shows the sensitivity analysis for acidification potential. One can conclude from this graph that the large majority of acidification potential is developed in the manufacturing stage. Concrete (20 MPa = 3000 psi) has the largest acidification potential, closely followed by modular brick.  Figure 5 - Sensitivity Analysis of Acidification Potential  Tang  23  Figure 6 shows the sensitivity analysis for human health respiratory effects potential. One can conclude from this graph that the manufacturing stage creates a large cause for concern for respiratory effects. The construction/transportation stage represents a relatively small concern. The two types of concretes have the highest effect in this impact category.  Figure 6 - Sensitivity Analysis of Human Health Respiratory Effects Potential  24 Tang  Figure 7 shows the sensitivity analysis for eutrophification potential. One can conclude from this graph that the large majority of eutrophification potential is developed in the manufacturing stage. The construction/transportation stage represents a tiny amount compared to manufacturing. Concrete (20 MPa = 3000 psi) and modular brick have the same, largest effect.  Figure 7 - Sensitivity Analysis of Eutrophication Potential  Tang  25  Figure 8 shows the sensitivity analysis for ozone depletion potential. One can conclude from this graph that all of the ozone depletion potential is due to the manufacturing of materials. The two types of concretes have the biggest effect on ozone depletion by far.  Figure 8 - Sensitivity Analysis of Ozone Depletion Potential  26 Tang  Figure 9 shows the sensitivity analysis for smog potential. One can conclude from this graph that the large majority of smog potential is developed in the manufacturing stage. The construction/transportation stage represents a small amount of in comparison to manufacturing. The two types of concretes have the largest effects on smog potential.  Figure 9 - Sensitivity Analysis of Smog Potential  Based on Figures 2 to 9, it can be seen that the effects on all impact categories are primarily due to the manufacturing stage of the materials.  Tang  27  BUILDING PERFORMANCE It is also important to analyze operational energy building performance in an LCA, if possible. The insulation in the walls and roofs is the main element that traps the heat and prevents it from being lost to the external environment (in heating dominated climates such as Vancouver). To determine the best type of insulation (available in the Impact Estimator) in terms of performance and embodied energy, the manufacturing embodied energy for one square feet of one inch of each type of insulation was evaluated. The embodied energy in the construction was omitted as it was relatively much less. The results are presented in Table 5 with the R-value for one inch of corresponding insulation. Table 5 – Comparison of Insulation Types with Embodied Energy Fiberglass Batt  Rockwool Batt  Blown Cellulose  Expanded Polystyrene  Extruded Polystyrene  Foam Polyisocyanurate  Embodied Energy (MJ)  1.56  2.45  0.174  3.60  7.19  6.11  R-value  3.14  3.14  3.10  4.00  5.00  6.25  Embodied Energy/ R-value  0.50  0.78  0.06  0.90  1.44  0.98  Insulation  From Table 5, after normalizing the embodied energy to R-values, blown cellulose is by far the lowest embodied energy per R-value. However, it also has the lowest R-value per inch of material. This means it would take 13” (ie. 40/3.1) of blown cellulose to reach the R-40 requirement for roofs under the Residential Environmental Assessment Program (REAP) standards. This is obviously impractical for renovation purposes. The foam polyisocyanurate is a good candidate as replacement insulation. It has a relatively high embodied energy to R-value ratio but the highest R-value per inch. It would only take 40/6.25 = 6.4” to achieve the R-40 requirement for roofs. This is much more practical. Since it has such a high R-value, the energy payback period due to savings from operational energy loss is much quicker. Figure 10 compares the energy usage between the current insulation versus the same building with insulation improved to REAP standards (R-40 for roofs, R-18 for walls). For the purpose of this analysis, the energy usage is assumed to be the same as the energy loss. These energy  28 Tang  loss values are calculated using this formula: Q = (1/R)A∆T, where R is the R-value of the insulation, A is the area of the material (insulation) undergoing conductive heat transfer, and ∆T is the temperature difference between the inside of the building and the outside ambient temperature.  Figure 10 - Comparison of Energy Usage of Current Insulation vs Improved Insulation  Three building components are considered for this calculation: exterior walls, windows, and roofs. The areas of these components are measured from OnScreen Takeoff using linear and area conditions. The current R-values of the components are 5.0, 0.91, and 5.0, respectively. The embodied energy from the Impact Estimator summary measures is the initial embodied primary energy of the building with the current insulation. Then, the building model is adjusted by removing the current insulation and ‘new’ insulation was added to meet REAP standards. 2.5” of polyisocyanurate (R-7.2/inch) for the walls and 5.6” of polyisocyanurate for the roof were added. The windows were also changed to low E silver argon filled glazed windows (R-3.75). The embodied energy of this improved building was re-evaluated. The embodied energies of the current and improved buildings are entered at year 0 (when the building was hypothetically constructed). Using  Tang  29  the heat transfer formula described above, the cumulative energy usage (loss) is calculated. From Figure 10, the payback is where the two lines intersect. That is, even though the embodied energy of the improved building is higher due to more insulation, it would only take 2 to 3 years before the building with the improved insulation would save more energy compared to the current building. That represents significant energy savings, especially considering the steam energy consumption used per year (Figure 11).  Figure 11 - Consumption of Steam Energy in 2008  30 Tang  CONCLUSIONS After creating the building model in the Athena Sustainable Materials Institute’s Impact Estimator (IE), a Bill of Materials and summary measure reports were generated. The results of the summary measures, normalized to per square foot of usable building space, are: 437 MJ embodied energy, 250 kg of weighted raw resource use, 37 kg CO2 equivalent/kg global warming potential, 12 moles H+ equivalent/kg acidification potential, 0.10 kg PM2.5 equivalent/kg respiratory effects potential, 104 kg N equivalent/kg eutrophification potential, less than 0.01 kg CFC-11 equivalent/kg ozone depletion potential, and 0.15 kg NOx equivalent/kg photochemical smog potential. Compared to the averaged results from the other LCA studies completed for academic buildings, the H.R. MacMillan building has a higher value for every impact category except for eutrophification potential and ozone depletion potential. In these two categories, the final values are too small and too close to draw definite conclusions. These results mean that the H.R. MacMillan building has a higher environmental impact compared to the average UBC academic building. A sensitivity analysis was completed to analyze the relative effects of five materials. Concrete (20 MPa = 3000 psi) and modular bricks had by far the largest effects in each of the impact categories. Also from the sensitivity analysis, it was concluded that the large majority of the effects in the impact categories occurred in the manufacturing life cycle stage, and not in the construction stage. An analysis was also completed to assess the performance of the building. The current insulation of the building was compared to improved insulation to meet Residential Environmental Assessment Program (REAP) standards. The payback period of the building with the improved insulation was found to be between two to three years. The results of this LCA are very important to analyze the building design and construction elements, as well as to assess potential upgrades to the building. Namely, improved insulation could significantly reduce the operational energy consumption. When these results are combined with the other LCA studies of other buildings on campus, it creates a powerful network of information from which to make informed decisions or to make new assessments. It is recommended that these results be shared with sustainability groups, the building and construction industry, as well as the University of British Columbia community.  APPENDIX A – FORMATTED INPUTS  General Description Project Name Project Location Building Life Expectancy Building Type Operating Energy Consumption Assembly Group  Assembly Type  H.R. MacMillan Vancouver 1 year Institutional 1,329,042 kWh/month  Assembly Name  Input Fields  Input Values Known/Measured  EIE Inputs  1 Foundation 1.1 Concrete Slab on Grade 1.1.1 - Slab 4'' thick #3  Envelope  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Category  100 354.34 4 3000 Vapour Barrier Polyethylene 4 mil  100 354.34 4 3000 average Vapour Barrier Polyethylene 6 mil  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash %  100 9.34 8 3000 -  100 9.34 8 3000 average  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash %  25 1.17 10 3000 -  25 1.17 10 3000 average  Material 1.1.2 - Slab 8'' thick #4  1.2 Concrete Footing 1.2.1 - Ftg Linear 14'' x 10''  Rebar  #5  #5  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  147 1 12 3000 #5  147 1 12 3000 average #5  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  19 1.33 10 3000 #5  19 1.33 10 3000 average #5  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  150 1.33 12 3000 #5  150 1.33 12 3000 average #5  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  1460 1.67 12 3000 #5  1460 1.67 12 3000 average #5  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  34 2 10 3000 #5  34 2 10 3000 average #5  Length (ft) Width (ft)  178 2.33  178 2.33  1.2.2 - Ftg Linear 14'' x 12''  1.2.3 - Ftg Linear 16'' x 10''  1.2.4 - Ftg Linear 16'' x 12''  1.2.5 - Ftg Linear 20'' x 12''  1.2.6 - Ftg Linear 24'' x 10''  1.2.7 - Ftg Linear 28'' x 10''  Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  10 3000 #5  10 3000 average #5  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  15 2.83 12 3000 #5  15 2.83 12 3000 average #5  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  703 3.00 24 3000 #5  703 3.65 19.7 3000 average #5  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  33 3.17 12 3000 #5  33 3.17 12 3000 average #5  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  2.83 5 12 3000 #5  2.83 5 12 3000 average #5  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  3.83 3 12 3000 #5  3.83 3 12 3000 average #5  1.2.8 - Ftg Linear 34'' x 12''  1.2.9 - Ftg Linear 36'' x 24''  1.2.10 - Ftg Linear 38'' x 12''  1.2.11 - Ftg Pad 2'10'' x 5'0'' 1'0'' deep #5  1.2.12 - Ftg Pad 3'10'' x 3'0'' 1'0'' deep #5  1.2.13 - Ftg Pad 4'0'' sq 1'3'' deep #5 Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  4 4 15 3000 #5  4 4 15 3000 average #5  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  4.5 4.5 15 3000 #5  4.5 4.5 15 3000 average #5  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  4.5 4.5 15 3000 #6  4.5 4.5 15 3000 average #6  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  4.5 5.17 21 3000 #5  4.5 5.51 19.7 3000 average #5  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  5 5 18 3000 #5  5 5 18 3000 average #5  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in)  5.17 5.17 18  5.17 5.17 18  1.2.14 - Ftg Pad 4'6'' sq 1'3'' deep #5  1.2.15 - Ftg Pad 4'6'' sq 1'3'' deep #6  1.2.16 - Ftg Pad 4'6'' x 5'2'' 1'9'' deep #5  1.2.17 - Ftg Pad 5'0'' sq 1'6'' deep #5  1.2.18 - Ftg Pad 5'2'' sq 1'6'' deep #5  Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  3000 #5  3000 average #5  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  5.5 5.5 18 3000 #5  5.5 5.5 18 3000 average #5  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  5.75 5.75 24 3000 #5  5.75 7.01 19.7 3000 average #6  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  6.5 6.5 24 3000 #6  6.5 7.92 19.7 3000 average #6  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  7 5.5 22 3000 #6  7 6.14 19.7 3000 average #6  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  7.6 6 24 3000 #5  7.6 7.31 19.7 3000 average #6  1.2.19 - Ftg Pad 5'6'' sq 1'6'' deep #5  1.2.20 - Ftg Pad 5'9'' sq 1'9'' deep #6  1.2.21 - Ftg Pad 6'6'' sq 2'0'' deep #6  1.2.22 - Ftg Pad 7'0'' x 5'6'' 1'10'' deep #6  1.2.23 - Ftg Pad 7'6'' x 6'0'' 2'0'' deep #6  1.2.24 - Stair #1,4 - #4 - 1'' plaster topping  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  276 4.25 10 3000 #4  276 4.25 10 3000 average #4  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  342 7.33 10 3000 #4  342 7.33 10 3000 average #4  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  23 6 10 3000 #4  23 6 10 3000 average #4  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  1500 1.58 12 3000 #4  1500 1.58 12 3000 average #4  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  3100 1.75 12 3000 #4  3100 1.75 12 3000 average #4  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash %  234 1.75 12 3000 -  234 1.75 12 3000 average  1.2.25 - Stair #2,3 - #4 - 1'' plaster topping  1.2.26 - Stair ext - #4  1.2.27 - Pilaster Col'n 0FL Type A 1'0" x 1'7"  1.2.28 - Pilaster Col'n 0FL Type B 1'0" x 1'9"  1.2.29 - Pilaster Col'n 0FL Type C 1'0" x 1'9"  Rebar  #4  #4  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  663 1.75 12 3000 #4  663 1.75 12 3000 average #4  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  1419 0.67 14.5 3000 #4  1419 0.67 14.5 3000 average #4  Length (ft) Width (ft) Thickness (in) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Rebar  510 1.25 13.5 3000 #4  510 1.25 13.5 3000 average #4  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors  Interior 308 12  Interior 308 8  0  0  0 None None None 8  0 Fixed None None 8  1.2.30 - Pilaster Col'n 0FL Type D 1'0" x 1'7" #7Vert  1.2.31 - Pilaster Col'n 1,2,3FL Type H 1'2.5" x 8" #5Vert  1.2.32 - Pilaster Col'n 1,2,3FL Type M 1'11" x 1'1.5" #5Vert  2 Custom Wall 2.1 Concrete Block Wall 2.1.1 - 0FL - Int - 4'' conc blk - brick (partial corridor)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Door Type Category  Solid wood door Cladding  Material  Bricks - modular  Solid wood door Cladding Bricks modular  Interior 50 12  Interior 50 12  0  0  0 None None None 0 None  Plaster 5/8"  0 Fixed None None 0 None Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8"  Interior 557 12  Interior 557 12  0  0  0 None None None 8  2.1.2 - 0FL - Int - 4'' conc blk - plaster (stair typ)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category Material  Gypsum Board  2.1.3 - 0FL - Int - 4'' conc blk (lab partition typ)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category Material  Solid wood door None None  0 Fixed None None 8 Solid wood door None None  Wall Type Length (ft)  Interior 1250  Interior 1250  2.1.4 - 0FL - Int - 8'' conc blk (corridor typ)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category Material  12  12  0  0  0 None None None 24 Solid wood door None None  0 Fixed None None 24 Solid wood door None None  Exterior 909 12  Exterior 454.5 12  187  94  1528 Operable Steel  Brick - modular Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1  764 Fixed Aluminum Standard glazing (double pane) 0 None Cladding Brick modular Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1  Exterior 144 12  Exterior 144 12  0  0  2.1.5 - 1FL - Ext - 6'' conc blk - 1'' insul brick (lab typ)  Window Opening  Door Opening Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type  Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category Material Category Material Thickness (in)  Standard (single pane) 0 None Cladding  2.1.6 - 1FL - Ext plaster - 4'' conc blk 1'' insul - brick (west facade)  Window Opening  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows  Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type  Door Opening  Envelope  Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type  0 Operable Steel  Brick - modular  0 Fixed Aluminum Standard glazaing (double pane) 0 None Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8" Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1 Cladding Brick modular  Exterior 444 12  Exterior 444 12  77  77  1177.4 Operable Steel  1177.4 Fixed Aluminum Standard glazaing (double pane) 0 None Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8" Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1 Cladding  Standard (single pane) 0 None  Category  Gypsum Board  Material Category  Plaster 5/8" Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1 Cladding  Material Thickness (in) Category Material 2.1.7 - 1FL - Ext plaster - 6'' conc blk 1'' insul - brick (office typ)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type  Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type  Standard (single pane) 0 None  Category  Gypsum Board  Material Category  Plaster 5/8" Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1 Cladding  Material Thickness (in) Category  Material  Brick - modular  Brick modular  Interior 26 12  Interior 26 12  0  0  0 None None None 4 Aluminum, 80% glazing None None  0 Fixed None None 4 Aluminum, 80% glazing None None  Interior 75 12  Interior 75 12  0  0  0 None None None 0 None  Plaster 5/8"  0 Fixed None None 0 None Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8"  Interior 739 12  Interior 739 12  0 0  0 0  2.1.8 - 1FL - Int - 4'' conc blk - 80% glz door  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category Material  2.1.9 - 1FL - Int - 4'' conc blk - plaster (stair typ)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category Material  Gypsum Board  2.1.10 - 1FL - Int - 4'' conc blk (corridor typ)  Window Opening  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window  Door Opening  Envelope  Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category Material  None None None 35 Solid wood door None None  Fixed None None 35 Solid wood door None None  Interior 1542 12  Interior 1542 12  0  0  0 None None None 18 Solid wood door None None  0 Fixed None None 18 Solid wood door None None  Interior 283 12  Interior 283 12  0  0  0 None None None 13  0 Fixed None None 13 Solid wood door Gypsum Board Gypsum  2.1.11 - 1FL - Int - 4'' conc blk (lab partition typ)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category Material  2.1.12 - 1FL - Int plaster - 4'' conc blk brick (west corridor)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type  Solid wood door  Category Material  Gypsum Board Plaster 5/8"  Category Material  Brick - modular  regular 5/8" Cladding Brick modular  Interior 408 12  Interior 408 12  0  0  0 None None None 0 None  Plaster 5/8"  0 Fixed None None 0 None Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8" Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8"  Exterior 746 12  Exterior 248.67 12  202  68.00  1920.3 Operable Steel  640.1 Fixed Aluminum Standard glazaing (double pane) 0 None Insulation Polystyrene  Cladding  2.1.13 - 1FL - Int plaster - 4'' conc blk plaster (office/class partition typ)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category Material Category Material  Gypsum Board Plaster 5/8" Gypsum Board  2.1.14 - 2FL - Ext - 6'' conc blk - 1'' insul brick (lab typ)  Window Opening  Door Opening Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type  Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category Material  Standard (single pane) 0 None Insulation Polystyrene  Thickness (in) Category Material  extruded 1 Cladding Brick - modular  extruded 1 Cladding Brick modular  Exterior 478 12  Exterior 746 12  77  77  1177.4 Operable Steel  Brick - modular  1920.3 Fixed Aluminum Standard glazaing (double pane) 0 None Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8" Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1 Cladding Brick modular  Exterior 231 12  Exterior 231 12  0  0  0 Operable Steel  0 Fixed Aluminum  2.1.15 - 2FL - Ext plaster - 6'' conc blk 1'' insul - brick (office typ)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type  Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type  Standard (single pane) 0 None  Category  Gypsum Board  Material Category  Plaster 5/8" Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1 Cladding  Material Thickness (in) Category Material 2.1.16 - 2FL - Ext plaster - 4'' conc blk 1'' insul - brick (west facade)  Window Opening  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type  Door Opening  Envelope  Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type  Brick - modular  Standard glazaing (double pane) 0 None Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8" Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1 Cladding Brick modular  Interior 26 12  Interior 26 12  0  0  0 None None None 4 Aluminum, 80% glazing None None  0 Fixed None None 4 Aluminum, 80% glazing None None  Interior 76 12  Interior 76 12  0  0  0 None None None  0 Fixed None None  Standard (single pane) 0 None  Category  Gypsum Board  Material Category  Plaster 5/8" Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1 Cladding  Material Thickness (in) Category Material 2.1.17 - 2FL - Int - 4'' conc blk - 80% glz door  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category Material  2.1.18 - 2FL - Int - 4'' conc blk - plaster (stair typ)  Window Opening  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type  Door Opening  Envelope  Number of Doors Door Type Category Material  0 None  Plaster 5/8"  0 None Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8"  Interior 763 12  Interior 763 12  0  0  0 None None None 43 Solid wood door None None  0 Fixed None None 43 Solid wood door None None  Interior 1623 12  Interior 1623 12  0  0  0 None None None 29  Gypsum Board  2.1.19 - 2FL - Int - 4'' conc blk (corridor typ)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category Material  2.1.20 - 2FL - Int - 4'' conc blk (lab partition typ)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category Material  Solid wood door None None  0 Fixed None None 29 Solid wood door None None  Wall Type Length (ft)  Interior 263  Interior 263  2.1.21 - 2FL - Int plaster - 4'' conc blk brick (west corridor)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors  12  12  0  0  0 None None None 9  Brick - modular  0 Fixed None None 9 Solid wood door Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8" Cladding Brick modular  Interior 623 12  Interior 623 12  0  0  0 None None None 0 None  Plaster 5/8"  0 Fixed None None 0 None Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8" Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8"  Exterior 746  Exterior 373  Door Type  Solid wood door  Category  Gypsum Board  Material Category  Plaster 5/8" Cladding  Material 2.1.22 - 2FL - Int plaster - 4'' conc blk plaster (office/class partition typ)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category Material Category Material  Gypsum Board Plaster 5/8" Gypsum Board  2.1.23 - 3FL - Ext - 6'' conc blk - 1'' insul brick (lab typ) Wall Type Length (ft)  Window Opening  Door Opening Envelope  Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type  Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category Material Thickness (in) Category Material  12  12  135  68  2019.7 Operable Steel  Brick - modular  1009.85 Fixed Aluminum Standard glazaing (double pane) 0 None Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1 Cladding Brick modular  Exterior 485 12  Exterior 485 12  77  77  1177.4 Operable Steel  1177.4 Fixed Aluminum Standard glazaing (double pane) 0 None Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8" Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1 Cladding Brick -  Standard (single pane) 0 None Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1 Cladding  2.1.24 - 3FL - Ext plaster - 6'' conc blk 1'' insul - brick (office typ)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type  Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type  Standard (single pane) 0 None  Category  Gypsum Board  Material Category  Plaster 5/8" Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1 Cladding Brick - modular  Material Thickness (in) Category Material  modular 2.1.25 - 3FL - Int - 4'' conc blk - 80% glz door  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category Material  Interior 25 12  Interior 25 12  0  0  0 None None None 4 Aluminum, 80% glazing None None  0 Fixed None None 4 Aluminum, 80% glazing None None  Interior 79 12  Interior 79 12  0  0  0 None None None 0 None  Plaster 5/8"  0 Fixed None None 0 None Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8"  Interior 772 12  Interior 772 12  0  0  0  0  2.1.26 - 3FL - Int - 4'' conc blk - plaster (stair typ)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category Material  Gypsum Board  2.1.27 - 3FL - Int - 4'' conc blk (corridor typ)  Window Opening  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2)  Door Opening  Envelope  Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category Material  None None None 37 Solid wood door None None  Fixed None None 37 Solid wood door None None  Interior 1490 12  Interior 1490 12  0  0  0 None None None 13 Solid wood door None None  0 Fixed None None 13 Solid wood door None None  Interior 280 12  Interior 280 12  0  0  0 None None None 6  0 Fixed None None 6 Solid wood door Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8"  2.1.28 - 3FL - Int - 4'' conc blk (lab partition typ)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category Material  2.1.29 - 3FL - Int plaster - 4'' conc blk brick (west corridor)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type  Solid wood door  Category  Gypsum Board  Material  Plaster 5/8"  Category Material  Cladding Brick - modular  Cladding Brick modular  Interior 468 12  Interior 468 12  0  0  0 None None None 4  Plaster 5/8"  0 Fixed None None 4 Solid wood door Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8" Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8"  279 12 3000 #5 8 -  279 12 3000 #5 8 Average  45  45  787.4 Fixed Aluminum  787.4 Fixed Aluminum Standard glazaing (double pane)  2.1.30 - 3FL - Int plaster - 4'' conc blk plaster (office/class partition typ)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Wall Type Length (ft) Height (ft) Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type  Solid wood door  Category  Gypsum Board  Material Category Material  Plaster 5/8" Gypsum Board  2.2 Cast in Place Wall 2.2.1 - 0FL - Ext - 8'' cast - 1'' insul - brick  Window Opening  Length (ft) Height (ft) Concrete (psi) Rebar Thickness (in) Concrete flyash % Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type  Glazing Type  Standard (single pane)  Door Opening  Envelope  Number of Doors  Material Thickness (in) Category  5 Aluminum, 80% glazing Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1 Cladding  Material  Brick - modular  Length (ft) Height (ft) Concrete (psi) Rebar Thickness (in) Concrete flyash % Number of Doors Door Type Category  338 12 3000 #5 8 4 Aluminum, 80% glazing Cladding  Material  Brick - modular  338 12 3000 #5 8 Average 4 Aluminum, 80% glazing Cladding Brick modular  1255 15 3000 #5 8 -  1255 15 3000 #5 8 Average  64  64  741.1 Fixed Aluminum  741.1 Fixed Aluminum Standard glazaing (double pane) 4 Aluminum, 80% glazing Gypsum  Door Type Category  5 Aluminum, 80% glazing Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1 Cladding Brick modular  2.2.2 - 0FL - Ext - 8'' cast - brick  Door Opening  Envelope  2.2.3 - 0FL - Ext plaster - 1'' insul - cast 8'' (below grade)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Length (ft) Height (ft) Concrete (psi) Rebar Thickness (in) Concrete flyash % Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type  Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category  Standard (single pane) 4 Aluminum, 80% glazing Gypsum Board  Material Category Material Thickness (in)  Plaster 5/8" Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1  Board Gypsum regular 5/8" Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1  2.2.4 - 1FL - Ext - brick - 8'' cast - brick  Envelope  Length (ft) Height (ft) Concrete (psi) Rebar Thickness (in) Concrete flyash % Category Material  135 12 3000 #5 8 Cladding Brick - modular  135 12 3000 #5 8 Average Cladding Brick modular  2.2.5 - 2FL - Ext - brick - 8'' cast - brick  Envelope  Length (ft) Height (ft) Concrete (psi) Rebar Thickness (in) Concrete flyash % Category Material  134 12 3000 #5 8 Cladding Brick - modular  134 12 3000 #5 8 Average Cladding Brick modular  2.2.6 - 2FL - Int - 2'' cast - brick (balcony long)  Envelope  Length (ft) Height (ft) Concrete (psi) Rebar Thickness (in) Concrete flyash % Category Material  127 7.25 3000 #5 2 Cladding Brick - modular  31.75 7.25 3000 #5 8 Average Cladding Brick modular  126 3.31  31.5 3.31  2.2.7 - 2FL - Int - 2'' cast - brick (balcony short) Length (ft) Height (ft)  Envelope  Concrete (psi) Rebar Thickness (in) Concrete flyash % Category Material  3000 #5 2 Cladding Brick - modular  3000 #5 8 Average Cladding Brick modular  2.2.8 - 3FL - Ext - brick - 8'' cast - brick  Envelope  Length (ft) Height (ft) Concrete (psi) Rebar Thickness (in) Concrete flyash % Category Material  130 12 3000 #5 8 Cladding Brick - modular  130 12 3000 #5 8 Average Cladding Brick modular  225 18 3000 #5 4 -  112.5 18 3000 #5 8 Average  1  1  91.1 Fixed Aluminum  91.1 Fixed Aluminum Standard glazaing (double pane) Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8" Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1 Cladding  2.2.9 - 3FL - Ext plaster - 4'' cast - 1'' rigid insul - brick (library)  Window Opening  Length (ft) Height (ft) Concrete (psi) Rebar Thickness (in) Concrete flyash % Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type  Glazing Type Envelope  Standard (single pane)  Category  Gypsum Board  Material Category  Plaster 5/8" Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1 Cladding  Material Thickness (in) Category  Brick - modular  Brick modular  70 12 3000 #5 8 -  70 12 3000 #5 8 Average  0  0  0 None None None 4 Steel exterior door Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1 Cladding Brick - modular  0 Fixed None None 4 Steel exterior door Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1 Cladding Brick modular  31 12  31 12  90  90  10  10  0  0.0001  Door Type  Metal 6 Aluminum, 80% glazing  Metal 6 Aluminum, 80% glazing  Length (ft)  182  182  Material 2.2.10 - 0FL - Ext - 8" cast - 1" insul - brick (N loading area)  Window Opening  Door Opening  Envelope  Length (ft) Height (ft) Concrete (psi) Rebar Thickness (in) Concrete flyash % Number of Windows Total Window Area (ft2) Fixed or Operable Frame Type Glazing Type Number of Doors Door Type Category Material Thickness (in) Category Material  2.3 Curtain Wall 2.3.1 - 0FL - Int curtain - 90% glz  Door Opening  Length (ft) Height (ft) Percent Viewable Glazing % Percent Spandrel Panel % Thickness of insulation (in) Metal or Opaque Glass Spandrel Number of Doors  2.3.2 - 1FL - Int curtain - 90% glz  Door Opening  Height (ft) Percent Viewable Glazing % Percent Spandrel Panel % Thickness of insulation (in) Metal or Opaque Glass Spandrel Number of Doors Door Type  12  12  90  90  10  10  0  0  Metal 22 Aluminum, 80% glazing  Metal 22 Aluminum, 80% glazing  203 12  203 12  90  90  10  10  0  0  Metal 7 Aluminum, 80% glazing  Metal Average 7 Aluminum, 80% glazing  189 12  189 12  90  90  10  10  0  0  Metal 13 Aluminum, 80% glazing  Metal 13 Aluminum, 80% glazing  2.3.3 - 2FL - Int curtain - 90% glz  Door Opening  Length (ft) Height (ft) Percent Viewable Glazing % Percent Spandrel Panel % Thickness of insulation (in) Metal or Opaque Glass Spandrel Concrete flyash % Number of Doors Door Type  2.3.4 - 3FL - Int curtain - 90% glz  Door Opening  Length (ft) Height (ft) Percent Viewable Glazing % Percent Spandrel Panel % Thickness of insulation (in) Metal or Opaque Glass Spandrel Number of Doors Door Type  3 Mixed Columns and Beams 3.1 Concrete Column and  Concrete Beam 3.1.1 - 0FL Beams (E wing) & 0FL Beams (E wing) Number of Beams Number of Columns Floor to floor height (ft) Bay sizes (ft) Supported span Live load (psf)  10  10  10  10  13.5 11.7 20.5 120  13.5 11.7 20.5 100  48  48  13  13  13.5 24.77 27 120  13.5 24.77 27 100  20  20  20  20  13.5 8.85 21.5 60  13.5 10 21.5 45  16  16  10  10  13 11.90 20.5 120  13 11.90 20.5 100  3.1.2 - 0FL Columns (N & S wing) & 0FL Beams (N & S wing) Number of Beams Number of Columns Floor to floor height (ft) Bay sizes (ft) Supported span Live load (psf) 3.1.3 - 0FL Columns (W wing) & 0FL Beams (W wing) Number of Beams Number of Columns Floor to floor height (ft) Bay sizes (ft) Supported span Live load (psf) 3.1.4 - 1FL Columns (E wing) & 1FL Beams (E wing) Number of Beams Number of Columns Floor to floor height (ft) Bay sizes (ft) Supported span Live load (psf) 3.1.5 - 1FL Columns (N & S wing) & 1FL  Beams (N & S wing) Number of Beams Number of Columns Floor to floor height (ft) Bay sizes (ft) Supported span Live load (psf)  51  51  24  24  13 13.42 27 120  13 13.42 27 100  18  18  19  19  13 9.37 21.5 60  13 10 21.5 45  16  16  10  10  13 11.8 20.5 120  13 11.8 20.5 100  48  48  3.1.6 - 1FL Columns (W wing) & 1FL Beams (W wing) Number of Beams Number of Columns Floor to floor height (ft) Bay sizes (ft) Supported span Live load (psf) 3.1.7 - 2FL Columns (E wing) & 2FL Beams (E wing) Number of Beams Number of Columns Floor to floor height (ft) Bay sizes (ft) Supported span Live load (psf) 3.1.8 - 2FL Columns (N & S wing) & 2FL Beams (N & S wing) Number of Beams Number of Columns Floor to floor height (ft) Bay sizes (ft) Supported span Live load (psf)  24  24  13 13.42 27 120  13 13.42 27 100  Number of Beams Number of  18 19  18 19  3.1.9 - 2FL Columns (W wing) & 2FL Beams (W wing)  Columns Floor to floor height (ft) Bay sizes (ft) Supported span Live load (psf)  13 9.32 21.5 120  13 10 21.5 100  17  17  9  9  13 10.56 20.5 40  13 10.56 20.5 45  44  44  24  24  13 13.38 27 40  13 13.38 27 45  32  32  18  18  17.5 9.33 21.5 40  17.5 10 21.5 45  73  73  149  149  3.1.10 - 3FL Columns (E wing) & 3FL Beams (E wing) Number of Beams Number of Columns Floor to floor height (ft) Bay sizes (ft) Supported span Live load (psf) 3.1.11 - 3FL Columns (N & S wing) & 3FL Beams (N & S wing) Number of Beams Number of Columns Floor to floor height (ft) Bay sizes (ft) Supported span Live load (psf) 3.1.12 - 3FL Columns (W wing) & 3FL Beams (W wing) Number of Beams Number of Columns Floor to floor height (ft) Bay sizes (ft) Supported span Live load (psf) 3.2 WF Column and Beam 3.2.1 - Penthouse Columns WF & Penthouse Beams WF Number of Beams Number of Columns  Floor to floor height (ft) Bay sizes (ft) Supported span Live load (psf)  6 5.85 14 40  6 10 14 45  Roof Width (ft) Span (ft) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Live load (psf)  148 41 3000 40  202.27 30 3000 average 45 Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8" Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1  4 Roofs 4.1 Suspended Slab 4.1.1 - plaster - 4'' Susp slab - cement top - 1'' rigid insul (W wing)  Envelope  Category  Gypsum Board  Material Category  Plaster 5/8" Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1  Material Thickness (in) 4.1.2 - plaster - 4'' Susp slab - cement top - 1'' rigid insul (E wing) Roof Width (ft) Span (ft) Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Live load (psf) Envelope  148 41 3000 40  Category  Gypsum Board  Material Category Material Thickness (in)  Plaster 5/8" Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1  202.27 30 3000 average 45 Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8" Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1  Roof Width (ft) Span (ft)  364 55  667.33 30  4.1.3 - plaster - 4'' Susp slab - cement top - 1'' rigid insul (N & S wing)  Concrete (psi) Concrete flyash % Live load (psf) Envelope  Category  Gypsum Board  Material Category  Plaster 5/8" Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1  3000 average 45 Gypsum Board Gypsum regular 5/8" Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1  436 14 Excluded 40 Steel Roof System Commercial Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1  404.51 15.09 Excluded 45 Steel Roof System Commercial Insulation Polystyrene extruded 1  Number of bays Bay sizes (ft) Span (ft) Live load (psf) Topping  693 2 41 120 Included  947 2 30 100 Included  Number of bays Bay sizes (ft) Span (ft) Live load (psf)  2214 2 54 120  3985 2 30 100  Material Thickness (in)  3000 40  4.2 Open Web Steel Joist 4.2.1 - Width Penthouse - steel joist metal decking - 1" rigid insul Roof Width (ft) Span (ft) Topping Live load (psf) Envelope  Category Material Category Material Thickness (in)  5 Floors 5.1 Concrete Precast Double T 5.2.1 - 1,2,3 FL + roof double T - cement top (E wing typ)  5.2.2 - 1,2,3 FL + roof double T - cement top (N & S wing typ)  Topping  Included  Included  Number of bays Bay sizes (ft) Span (ft) Live load (psf) Topping  231 2 41 40 Included  316 2 30 45 Included  Number of bays Bay sizes (ft) Span (ft) Live load (psf) Topping  738 2 54 40 Included  1328 2 30 45 Included  Number of bays Bay sizes (ft) Span (ft) Live load (psf) Topping  389 2 49 60 Included  635 2 30 45 Included  Number of bays Bay sizes (ft) Span (ft) Live load (psf) Topping  384 2 40 60 Included  512 2 30 45 Included  Number of bays Bay sizes (ft) Span (ft) Live load (psf) Topping  368 2 50 150 Included  613 2 30 100 Included  Number of bays Bay sizes (ft) Span (ft) Live load (psf) Topping  53 2 49 40 Included  87 2 30 45 Included  5.2.3 - Roof - double T - cement top (E wing)  5.2.4 - Roof - double T - cement top (N & S wing)  5.2.5 - 1FL - double T cement top (W wing)  5.2.6 - 2FL - double T cement top (W wing)  5.2.7 - 3FL - double T cement top (W wing)  5.2.8 - Roof - double T - cement top (W wing)  6 Extra Basic  Materials 6.1 Concrete Total 20 MPa average flyash (m3) Mortar (m3)  130.17 8.63  130.17 7.18  20 MPa average flyash (m3)  20.26  20.26  20 MPa average flyash (m3)  109.91  109.91  Mortar (m3)  1.1  1.1  Mortar (m3)  7.53  6.08  Modular brick (m2)  3393.47  3248.72  Modular brick (m2)  498.51  498.51  Modular brick (m2)  2894.96  2750.21  6.1.1 - Precast Concrete Cap for Pilaster Col'n 0,1,2,3FL Types A,B,H,M  6.1.2 - Precast Concrete Cap linear  6.2.1 - Penthouse brick wall length 6.2.2 - Pilaster Col'n 0,1,2,3FL Types A,B,H,M 6.2 Extra Materials Cladding Total  6.3.1 - Penthouse brick wall length  6.3.2- Pilaster Col'n 0,1,2,3FL Types A,B,H,M  APPENDIX B – INPUT ASSUMPTIONS  Assembly Group 1 Foundation  Assembly Type  Assembly Name  Specific Assumptions  The concrete slab on grade (SOG) foundation at the floor of the ground level was modelled using the area condition. In the Impact Estimator (IE), there are two options for the SOG thickness: 4” or 8” thickness. In cases where the ideal rebar input was unavailable in the Impact Estimator, the next nearest option was selected and assumed for modelling purposes. The concrete flyash content was not specified in the drawings; it was assumed to be the average amount. Concrete is assumed to have a strength of 3000 psi for all cases unless otherwise noted, as specified. Also, the vapour barrier was assumed to be 6 mil, instead of 4 mil, as this was the only option in the IE. Concrete footings used to help form the building foundation were modelled using either the linear condition (e.g. strip/wall footings with specified cross-sectional dimensions) or the count condition (e.g. pad/column footings with specified dimensions). The IE limits the thickness of footings to 19.7". For footings thicker than this limit, the thickness was set to 19.7" and the width was increased accordingly to maintain equal volume. See drawings 386-07-009 and 386-07-010 for specifications of footing dimensions. The linear condition was used to model the concrete stairs as footings. After measuring an average stair thickness (assumed to be 10”) and width, the length of stairs was measured using a linear condition. The internal stairs have a 1” plaster topping which was omitted as the IE does not have an option to add a layer of plaster to concrete footings. The concrete columns inside the pilasters surrounding the exterior of the building are modelled as footings. The cross-sectional dimensions are specified (drawings 386-07-011 and drawings 386-07-013) and the lengths were measured using a linear condition. The pilaster columns contain various rebar sizes; #4 rebar was assumed to be the average. For all concrete footings, the flyash content was not specified in the drawings; it was assumed to be the average amount. Concrete is assumed to have a strength of 3000 psi for all cases unless otherwise noted, as specified. 1.1 Concrete Slab-onGrade 1.1.1 - Slab 4'' thick #3 The area of this slab was measured to be 35434 square feet. The following calculation determines the width input after arbitrarily selecting 100 feet as the length. = (35454 ft2) / (100 ft) = 354.34 ft 1.1.2 - Slab 8'' thick #4  The area of this slab was measured to be 934 square feet. The following calculation determines the width input after arbitrarily selecting 100 feet as the length. = (934 ft2) / (100 ft) = 9.34 ft  1.2 Concrete Footing 1.2.9 - Ftg Linear 36'' x 24''  The Impact Estimator limits the thickness of a footing to be a maximum of 19.7". The measured length was maintained and the thickness was set at 19.7". The following calculation determines the width input based on the same volume of concrete footing. = [length x width x thickness] / [length x (19.7"/12)] = [703' x 3' x (24"/12)] / [703' x (19.7"/12)]  = 3.65 feet  1.2.16 - Ftg Pad 4'6'' x 5'2'' 1'9'' deep #5  1.2.20 - Ftg Pad 5'9'' sq 1'9'' deep #6  The Impact Estimator limits the thickness of a footing to be a maximum of 19.7". The measured length was maintained and the thickness was set at 19.7". The following calculation determines the width input based on the same volume of concrete footing. = [length x width x thickness] / [length x (19.7"/12)] = [4.5' x (5+2/12)' x (21"/12)] / [4.5' x (19.7"/12)] = 5.51 feet The Impact Estimator limits the thickness of a footing to be a maximum of 19.7". The measured length was maintained and the thickness was set at 19.7". The following calculation determines the width input based on the same volume of concrete footing.  1.2.21 - Ftg Pad 6'6'' sq 2'0'' deep #6  = [length x width x thickness] / [length x (19.7"/12)] = [5.75' x 5.75' x (24"/12)] / [5.75' x (19.7"/12)] = 7.01 feet The Impact Estimator limits the thickness of a footing to be a maximum of 19.7". The measured length was maintained and the thickness was set at 19.7". The following calculation determines the width input based on the same volume of concrete footing.  1.2.22 - Ftg Pad 7'0'' x 5'6'' 1'10'' deep #6  = [length x width x thickness] / [length x (19.7"/12)] = [6.5' x 6.5' x (24"/12)] / [6.5' x (19.7"/12)] = 7.92 feet The Impact Estimator limits the thickness of a footing to be a maximum of 19.7". The measured length was maintained and the thickness was set at 19.7". The following calculation determines the width input based on the same volume of concrete footing. = [length x width x thickness] / [length x (19.7"/12)] = [7' x 5.5' x (22"/12)] / [7' x (19.7"/12)] = 6.14 feet  1.2.23 - Ftg Pad 7'6'' x 6'0'' 2'0'' deep #6  1.2.24 - Stair #1,4 - #4 - 1'' plaster topping  The Impact Estimator limits the thickness of a footing to be a maximum of 19.7". The measured length was maintained and the thickness was set at 19.7". The following calculation determines the width input based on the same volume of concrete footing. = [length x width x thickness] / [length x (19.7"/12)] = [7.6' x 6' x (24"/12)] / [7.6' x (19.7"/12)] = 7.31 feet The concrete footing assembly group was used to model stairs because of its flexibility in adjusting thickness. The linear condition was used to measure the length after the width and average thickness was measured, also using a linear condition. Stairs #1 and #4 are identical. The following calculation calculates the length of both. = (number of stairs) x (length of stairs) = 2 x 138' = 276 feet  1.2.25 - Stair #2,3 - #4 - 1'' plaster topping  The Impact Estimator does not have an option add a plaster topping to the concrete footing so the plaster topping was omitted. The concrete footing assembly group was used to model stairs because of its flexibility in adjusting thickness. The linear condition was used to measure the length after the width and average thickness was measured, also using a linear condition. Stairs #2 and #3 are identical. The following calculation calculates the length of both. = (number of stairs) x (length of stairs) = 2 x 171' = 342 feet  1.2.26 - Stair ext - #4  The Impact Estimator does not have an option add a plaster topping to the concrete footing so the plaster topping was omitted. The thickness of the external stairs were unspecified nor was there a clear cross-sectional view of the stairs. The thickness was assumed to be the same as those of other stairs (10"). The #4 rebar was also assumed as it was unspecified.  1.2.27 - Pilaster Col'n 0FL Type A 1'0" x 1'7"  1.2.28 - Pilaster Col'n 0FL Type B 1'0" x 1'9"  1.2.29 - Pilaster Col'n 0FL Type C 1'0" x 1'9"  1.2.30 - Pilaster Col'n 0FL Type D 1'0" x 1'7" #7Vert  1.2.31 - Pilaster Col'n 1,2,3FL Type H 1'2.5" x 8" #5Vert  The following calculation determines the length input for all Type A pilasters modelled as a concrete footing. = (height of one pilaster) x (number of Type A pilasters) = 50' x 30 = 1500 feet The following calculation determines the length input for all Type B pilasters modelled as a concrete footing. = (height of one pilaster) x (number of Type B pilasters) = 50' x 62 = 3100 feet The following calculation determines the length input for all Type C pilasters modelled as a concrete footing. = (height of one pilaster) x (number of Type C pilasters) = 39' x 6 = 234 feet The following calculation determines the length input for all Type D pilasters modelled as a concrete footing. = (height of one pilaster) x (number of Type D pilasters) = 39' x 17 = 663 feet The following calculation determines the length input for all Type H pilasters modelled as a concrete footing. = (height of one pilaster) x (number of Type H pilasters) = 43' x 33 = 1419 feet  1.2.32 - Pilaster Col'n 1,2,3FL Type M 1'11" x 1'1.5" #5Vert  The following calculation determines the length input for all Type H pilasters modelled as a concrete footing. = (height of one pilaster) x (number of Type H pilasters) = 30' x 17 = 510 feet  2 Custom Wall  The majority of walls in the H.R. MacMillan building are concrete block walls. They were modelled using the linear condition for distances. The linear condition was also used to measure the wall height and it was found to be 12’. This value is used as an assumption for the heights of all walls. A different category was used to measure walls depending on the type of wall construction. Some walls have 1” rigid insulation (assumed to be 1” extruded polystyrene), modular brick cladding, or plaster finish, or a combination of these elements. A different category was also used for walls with differing openings, such as solid wood doors, glazed steel doors, or window openings. In the IE, concrete block walls are assumed to use 8” x 8” x 16” hollow concrete blocks with every third vertical core grouted and reinforced with one steel bar (assumed to be #4), and additional grouting and rebar is included at all openings. These conditions are assumed for all concrete block walls in MacMillan. For all instances where walls had a plaster finish, it was assumed to be regular 5/8” thick gypsum board (plaster is not available as an option in the IE). Even though operable windows is an option in the IE, all windows are considered fixed for conformity to the rest of the LCA studies conducted on other UBC buildings. Steel window frames are also assumed to be aluminum frames in the IE as there is no option for steel. All doors made from wood, including those that are glazed, are assumed to be solid wooden doors, as there are no options for partially glazed wooden doors in the IE. Glazed aluminum doors were assumed to be 80% glazed. Some of the walls of the ground floor are cast in place concrete walls. They were measured using the linear condition. Similar to concrete block walls, different categories were used to perform takeoffs depending on the wall construction and wall openings. All the same assumptions were made. Note that bituminous waterproof compound was omitted as it is not available in the IE. Glazed curtain walls occur most often at the doorways to external and internal stairs. They are also modelled using the linear condition. It was assumed that the curtain walls had 90% viewable glazing and 10% opaque metal spandrel. The IE also requires a positive input for thickness of insulation. Since there was no insulation, this was assumed to be 0.0001. All the glazed metal doors were assumed to be 80% glazed aluminum doors. 2.1 Concrete Block Wall 2.1.3 - 0FL - Int - 4'' conc blk The wall layout drawings for the north side of the (lab partition typ) ground floors were unavailable. Thus the walls on the north side were estimated based on a physical site visit. The total length for this type of wall is 557' is based on a known length of 486' measured from drawings for the south side and an estimated length of 71' for the north side.  2.1.4 - 0FL - Int - 8'' conc blk (corridor typ)  2.1.5 - 1FL - Ext - 6'' conc blk - 1'' insul - brick (lab typ)  The wall layout drawings for the north side of the ground floors were unavailable. Thus the walls on the north side were estimated based on a physical site visit. The total length for this type of wall is 1250' is based on a known length of 510' measured from drawings for the south side and an estimated length of 740' for the north side. The Impact Estimator limits the door or window openings to a maximum of 100. In such cases, the total length of the wall, the number of window openings, and the window area are divided by 2 or 3, to decrease the number of openings (door or window) to less than 100. Then the assembly can be duplicated 2 or 3 times, accordingly, in the Impact Estimator. The following calculation determines the length and number of windows input. = total length of wall / 2 = 909' / 2 = 454.5 feet = number of windows / 2 = 187 / 2 = 94 = total window area / 2 = 1528 ft2 / 2 = 764 square feet  2.1.14 - 2FL - Ext - 6'' conc blk - 1'' insul - brick (lab typ)  The assembly was duplicated one time. The Impact Estimator limits the door or window openings to a maximum of 100. In such cases, the total length of the wall, the number of window openings, and the window area are divided by 2 or 3, to decrease the number of openings (door or window) to less than 100. Then the assembly can be duplicated 2 or 3 times, accordingly, in the Impact Estimator. The following calculation determines the length and number of windows input. = total length of wall / 3 = 746' / 3 = 248.67 feet = number of windows / 3 = 202 / 3 = 68 = total window area / 3 = 1920.3 ft2 / 3 = 640.1 square feet The assembly was duplicated two times.  2.1.23 - 3FL - Ext - 6'' conc blk - 1'' insul - brick (lab typ)  The Impact Estimator limits the door or window openings to a maximum of 100. In such cases, the total length of the wall, the number of window openings, and the window area are divided by 2 or 3, to decrease the number of openings (door or window) to less than 100. Then the assembly can be duplicated 2 or 3 times, accordingly, in the Impact Estimator. The following calculation determines the length and number of windows input. = total length of wall / 2 = 746' / 2 = 373 feet = number of windows / 2 = 135 / 2 = 68 = total window area / 2 = 2019.7 ft2 / 2 = 1009.85 square feet  2.2.6 - 2FL - Int - 2'' cast brick (balcony long)  2.2.7 - 2FL - Int - 2'' cast brick (balcony short)  The assembly was duplicated one time. The Impact Estimator has two options for the thickness of a cast in place wall: 8" or 12". This 4" cast balcony wall on the 2nd floor has brick on both sides but up to different heights. The measured height was maintained and the thickness was set to 8". The following calculation determines the length input based on the same volume. = [length x width x thickness] / [length x (8"/12)] = [127.5 x 7.25' x (2"/12)] / [7.25' x (8"/12)] = 31.75 feet The Impact Estimator has two options for the thickness of a cast in place wall: 8" or 12". This 4" cast balcony wall on the 2nd floor has brick on both sides but up to different heights. The measured height was maintained and the thickness was set to 8". The following calculation determines the length input based on the same volume. = [length x width x thickness] / [length x (8"/12)] = [126 x 3.31' x (2"/12)] / [3.31" x (8"/12)] = 31.5 feet  3 Mixed Columns and Beams  Concrete columns and beams support the floors in H.R. MacMillan. The linear and count conditions were used to measure these elements. The count condition was used to measure the number of columns and beams. The linear condition was used to measure the floor to floor height. The bay size measurement was obtained by using the linear condition to measure the total distance between a series of columns, then dividing that by the number of columns to produce the average bay size. The IE requires that the bay size be 10’ or greater. The bay size was assumed to be 10’ in cases where the average bay size was less than 10’. The supported span was obtained by using the linear condition to measure the total span, then dividing that by two to produce the average span. The total span was divided by two since the floors are supported at each external wall, and in between by one series of columns. In the IE, three options are available for the live load: 45 psf, 75 psf, and 100 psf. None of the specified live loads matched these options so the closest options were assumed. For labs and offices, 100 psf was used instead of the specified 120 psf (labs) and 50 psf (offices) for a conservative assumption. For classrooms, 45 psf was used instead of the specified 60 psf since 100 psf was an overestimation for labs and offices; this creates a more balanced overall estimate. For the third floor columns supporting the roof, 45 psf was used for the specified snow load of 40 psf. Note that the size of the columns and beams are not considered by the IE. Steel wide flange columns and beams are used for the ‘penthouse’, which acts as a protective housing for the exhaust ducts from the labs. Similar to concrete columns and beams, the count condition was used to measure the number of columns and beams, and the linear condition was used to measure the floor to floor height. The same technique was used to obtain the average bay size. The calculated average bay size was 5.85’ but it is assumed to be 10’ due to this limitation in the IE. 3.1 Concrete Column and Concrete Beam 3.1.1 - 0FL Beams (E wing) & The bay size was calculated by measuring the 0FL Beams (E wing) total distance of a series of columns then dividing that by the number of columns for the average bay size. The following calculation determines the bay size input based on the measured total bay size and the number of columns. = (measured total bay size) / (number of columns) = 117' / 10 = 11.7 feet The following calculation determines the span size input based on the measured total span and two sides that the column supports. = (measured total span size) / 2 = 41' / 2 = 20.5 feet  3.1.2 - 0FL Columns (N & S wing) & 0FL Beams (N & S wing)  The bay size was calculated by measuring the total distance of a series of columns then dividing that by the number of columns for the average bay size. The following calculation determines the bay size input based on the measured total bay size and the number of columns. = (measured total bay size) / (number of columns) = 322' / 13 = 24.77 feet The following calculation determines the span size input based on the measured total span and two sides that the column supports.  3.1.3 - 0FL Columns (W wing) & 0FL Beams (W wing)  = (measured total span size) / 2 = 54' / 2 = 27 feet The bay size was calculated by measuring the total distance of a series of columns then dividing that by the number of columns for the average bay size. The following calculation determines the bay size input based on the measured total bay size and the number of columns. = (measured total bay size) / (number of columns) = 177' / 20 = 8.85 feet --> 10 feet The Impact Estimator requires the bay size to be a minimum of 10'. In cases where the bay size is less than 10', it is assumed to be 10'. The following calculation determines the span size input based on the measured total span and two sides that the column supports. = (measured total span size) / 2 = 43' / 2 = 21.5 feet  3.1.4 - 1FL Columns (E wing) & 1FL Beams (E wing)  The bay size was calculated by measuring the total distance of a series of columns then dividing that by the number of columns for the average bay size. The following calculation determines the bay size input based on the measured total bay size and the number of columns. = (measured total bay size) / (number of columns) = 119' / 10 = 11.9 feet The following calculation determines the span size input based on the measured total span and two sides that the column supports.  3.1.5 - 1FL Columns (N & S wing) & 1FL Beams (N & S wing)  = (measured total span size) / 2 = 41' / 2 = 20.5 feet The bay size was calculated by measuring the total distance of a series of columns then dividing that by the number of columns for the average bay size. The following calculation determines the bay size input based on the measured total bay size and the number of columns. = (measured total bay size) / (number of columns) = 322' / 24 = 13.42 feet The following calculation determines the span size input based on the measured total span and two sides that the column supports. = (measured total span size) / 2 = 54' / 2 = 27 feet  3.1.6 - 1FL Columns (W wing) & 1FL Beams (W wing)  The bay size was calculated by measuring the total distance of a series of columns then dividing that by the number of columns for the average bay size. The following calculation determines the bay size input based on the measured total bay size and the number of columns. = (measured total bay size) / (number of columns) = 178' / 19 = 9.37 feet --> 10 feet The Impact Estimator requires the bay size to be a minimum of 10'. In cases where the bay size is less than 10', it is assumed to be 10'. The following calculation determines the span size input based on the measured total span and two sides that the column supports.  3.1.7 - 2FL Columns (E wing) & 2FL Beams (E wing)  = (measured total span size) / 2 = 43' / 2 = 21.5 feet The bay size was calculated by measuring the total distance of a series of columns then dividing that by the number of columns for the average bay size. The following calculation determines the bay size input based on the measured total bay size and the number of columns. = (measured total bay size) / (number of columns) = 118' / 10 = 11.8 feet The following calculation determines the span size input based on the measured total span and two sides that the column supports. = (measured total span size) / 2 = 41' / 2 = 20.5 feet  3.1.8 - 2FL Columns (N & S wing) & 2FL Beams (N & S wing)  The bay size was calculated by measuring the total distance of a series of columns then dividing that by the number of columns for the average bay size. The following calculation determines the bay size input based on the measured total bay size and the number of columns. = (measured total bay size) / (number of columns) = 322' / 24 = 13.42 feet The following calculation determines the span size input based on the measured total span and two sides that the column supports.  3.1.9 - 2FL Columns (W wing) & 2FL Beams (W wing)  = (measured total span size) / 2 = 54' / 2 = 27 feet The bay size was calculated by measuring the total distance of a series of columns then dividing that by the number of columns for the average bay size. The following calculation determines the bay size input based on the measured total bay size and the number of columns. = (measured total bay size) / (number of columns) = 177' / 19 = 9.32 feet --> 10 feet The Impact Estimator requires the bay size to be a minimum of 10'. In cases where the bay size is less than 10', it is assumed to be 10'. The following calculation determines the span size input based on the measured total span and two sides that the column supports. = (measured total span size) / 2 = 43' / 2 = 21.5 feet  3.1.10 - 3FL Columns (E wing) & 3FL Beams (E wing)  The bay size was calculated by measuring the total distance of a series of columns then dividing that by the number of columns for the average bay size. The following calculation determines the bay size input based on the measured total bay size and the number of columns. = (measured total bay size) / (number of columns) = 95' / 9 = 10.56 feet The following calculation determines the span size input based on the measured total span and two sides that the column supports.  3.1.11 - 3FL Columns (N & S wing) & 3FL Beams (N & S wing)  = (measured total span size) / 2 = 41' / 2 = 20.5 feet The bay size was calculated by measuring the total distance of a series of columns then dividing that by the number of columns for the average bay size. The following calculation determines the bay size input based on the measured total bay size and the number of columns. = (measured total bay size) / (number of columns) = 321' / 24 = 13.38 feet The following calculation determines the span size input based on the measured total span and two sides that the column supports. = (measured total span size) / 2 = 54' / 2 = 27 feet  3.1.12 - 3FL Columns (W wing) & 3FL Beams (W wing)  The bay size was calculated by measuring the total distance of a series of columns then dividing that by the number of columns for the average bay size. The following calculation determines the bay size input based on the measured total bay size and the number of columns. = (measured total bay size) / (number of columns) = 168' / 18 = 9.33 feet --> 10 feet The Impact Estimator requires the bay size to be a minimum of 10'. In cases where the bay size is less than 10', it is assumed to be 10'. The following calculation determines the span size input based on the measured total span and two sides that the column supports. = (measured total span size) / 2 = 43' / 2 = 21.5 feet  3.2 WF Column and Beam 3.2.1 - Penthouse Columns WF & Penthouse Beams WF  The bay size was calculated by measuring the total distance of a series of columns then dividing that by the number of columns for the average bay size. The following calculation determines the bay size input based on the measured total bay size and the number of columns. = (measured total bay size) / (number of columns) = 2 x 436' / 149 = 5.85 feet --> 10 feet  4 Roofs  The Impact Estimator requires the bay size to be a minimum of 10'. In cases where the bay size is less than 10', it is assumed to be 10'. A suspended slab roof is used for the H.R. MacMillan building. The linear condition was used to measure the width and spans of the roof. The IE requires the span input to be 30’. Thus for instances where the span is greater than 30’, the span is set to 30’ and the width is adjusted accordingly to maintain the same area. The live load was assumed to be 45 psi, the nearest option to the specified 40 psf snow load. The plaster finish was assumed to be regular 5/8” gypsum board as plaster is not available as an option in the IE. The 1” rigid insulation was assumed to be 1” extruded polystyrene. The flyash content was not specified in the drawings; it was assumed to be the average amount. Concrete is assumed to have a strength of 3000 psi for all cases unless otherwise noted, as specified. The roof of the ‘penthouse’ was assumed to be an open web steel joist roof. Similar to the suspended slab roof, the width and span was measured using the linear condition. In the IE, the span requires a minimum of 15.09’. The span was set to 15.09’ and the width was adjusted accordingly to maintain the same area. It  was assumed to be a commercial steel roof system.  4.1 Suspended Slab 4.1.1 - plaster - 4'' Susp slab cement top - 1'' rigid insul (W wing)  In the Impact Estimator, the span is limited to a maximum of 30'. The following calculation determines the width input based on setting the span to 30' and to maintain the same area. = (measured length) x (measured span) / 30' = 148' x 41' / 30' = 202.27 feet  4.1.2 - plaster - 4'' Susp slab cement top - 1'' rigid insul (E wing)  In the Impact Estimator, the span is limited to a maximum of 30'. The following calculation determines the width input based on setting the span to 30' and to maintain the same area. = (measured length) x (measured span) / 30' = 148' x 41' / 30' = 202.27 feet  4.1.3 - plaster - 4'' Susp slab cement top - 1'' rigid insul (N & S wing)  In the Impact Estimator, the span is limited to a maximum of 30'. The following calculation determines the width input based on setting the span to 30' and to maintain the same area. = (measured length) x (measured span) / 30' = 364' x 55' / 30' = 667.33 feet  4.2 Open Web Steel Joist 4.2.1 - Width - Penthouse steel joist - metal decking - 1" rigid insul  In the Impact Estimator, the span is limited to a minimum of 15.09'. The following calculation determines the width input based on setting the span to 15.09' and to maintain the same area. = (measured length) x (measured span) / 15.09' = 436' x 14' / 15.09' = 404.51 feet The commercial steel roof system was the nearest option to the actual steel roof assembly.  5 Floors  Concrete precast tees are used for the flooring system. Although the precast tees in the H.R. MacMillan building are single and not double tees, this was assumed to be the case as it is the closest option. The count and linear condition was used to take measurements. The count condition was used to measure the number of bays and the linear condition was used to measure the bay size and the span size. The technique used to measure span size was the same as that used in concrete columns and beams. Due the  span size being limited to 30’, the span was set to 30’ and the number of bays was adjusted accordingly to produce the equivalent floor size. The live load assumptions were the same as that used in concrete columns and beams.  5.1 Concrete Precast Double T 5.2.1 - 1,2,3 FL + roof double T - cement top (E wing typ)  5.2.2 - 1,2,3 FL + roof double T - cement top (N & S wing typ)  5.2.3 - Roof - double T cement top (E wing)  5.2.4 - Roof - double T cement top (N & S wing)  In the Impact Estimator, the span is limited to a maximum of 30'. The following calculation determines the number of bays input based on setting the span to 30' and to maintain the same area. It is also multiplied by 3 for 3 repeated floors. = (number of floors) x (number of bays) x (measured span) / 30' = 3 x 231 x 41' / 30' = 947 bays In the Impact Estimator, the span is limited to a maximum of 30'. The following calculation determines the number of bays input based on setting the span to 30' and to maintain the same area. It is also multiplied by 2 for the north and side sides, and by 3 for 3 repeated floors. = (number of sides) x (number of floors) x (number of bays) x (measured span) / 30' = 2 x 3 x 369 x 54' / 30' = 3985 bays In the Impact Estimator, the span is limited to a maximum of 30'. The following calculation determines the number of bays input based on setting the span to 30' and to maintain the same area. = (number of bays) x (measured span) / 30' = 231 x 41' / 30' = 316 bays In the Impact Estimator, the span is limited to a maximum of 30'. The following calculation determines the number of bays input based on setting the span to 30' and to maintain the same area. It is also multiplied by 2 for the north and side sides. = (number of sides) x (number of bays) x (measured span) / 30' = 2 x 369 x 54' / 30' = 1328 bays  5.2.5 - 1FL - double T cement top (W wing)  6 Extra Basic Materials  In the Impact Estimator, the span is limited to a maximum of 30'. The following calculation determines the number of bays input based on setting the span to 30' and to maintain the same area.  5.2.6 - 2FL - double T cement top (W wing)  = (number of bays) x (measured span) / 30' = 389 x 49' / 30' = 635 bays In the Impact Estimator, the span is limited to a maximum of 30'. The following calculation determines the number of bays input based on setting the span to 30' and to maintain the same area.  5.2.7 - 3FL - double T cement top (W wing)  = (number of bays) x (measured span) / 30' = 384 x 40' / 30' = 512 bays In the Impact Estimator, the span is limited to a maximum of 30'. The following calculation determines the number of bays input based on setting the span to 30' and to maintain the same area.  5.2.8 - Roof - double T cement top (W wing)  = (number of bays) x (measured span) / 30' = 368 x 50' / 30' = 613 bays In the Impact Estimator, the span is limited to a maximum of 30'. The following calculation determines the number of bays input based on setting the span to 30' and to maintain the same area.  = (number of bays) x (measured span) / 30' = 53 x 49' / 30' = 87 bays In the Impact Estimator, additional materials can be entered manually to account for any components that are not covered by the default assembly groups. For the H.R. MacMillan building, this section was used to add concrete (20 MPa = 3000 psi) for the precast concrete caps that are on top of the pilasters and that surround the exterior edge at the roof. Modular brick was added for the penthouse walls and for the pilasters. Finally, mortar was added for the penthouse brick walls and the brick cladding on the pilasters. 6.1 Concrete 6.1.1 - Precast Concrete Cap The number of precast concrete caps for the for Pilaster Col'n 0,1,2,3FL pilasters were 30 + 62 + 33 + 17 = 161; each Types A,B,H,M number corresponds to the number of each type of pilasters A, B, H, and M. The length, width, and height dimensions were specified so the total volume of concrete is determined by the following calculation. It was assumed to be 20 MPa = 3000 psi concrete. = (number of concrete caps) x (height) x (width) x (volume) = 161 x 3.33' x 1' x 1.33' = 715.56 ft3  = 20.26 m3  6.1.2 - Precast Concrete Cap linear  6.2.1 - Penthouse brick wall length  The linear condition was used to measure the total distance that the strip concrete caps covered the exterior edge of the roof. The crosssectional dimensions were specified. The total volume of the concrete is determined by the following calculation. It was assumed to be 20 MPa = 3000 psi concrete. = (measured distance) x (height) x (width) = 2911' x 1.33' x 1' = 3881.33 ft3 = 109.91 m3 The mortar for the penthouse brick wall was determined by first determining the amount of mortar associated with one square meter of brick wall. Linear conditions were used to measure the length and height of the brick wall. The following calculation determines the amount mortar used for the penthouse brick wall. = (wall length) x (wall height) = wall area = 897' x 6' = 5382 sf = 498.51 m2 = (wall area) x (mortar per wall area) = 498.51 m2 x 0.00221 m3/m2 = 1.10 m3  6.2.2 - Pilaster Col'n 0,1,2,3FL Types A,B,H,M  The mortar for the brick on the pilasters wall was determined by first determining the amount of mortar associated with one square meter of brick wall. Linear conditions were used to measure the length and width of the pilasters to obtain the brick area. This was multiplied by the number of pilasters to determine the total brick area. The following table determines the amount mortar used for the pilaster bricks.  Column type A B C D H M  avg height length width (ft) (ft) (ft) 50 1 1 50 1 1 39 1 1 39 1 1 43 1.21 0 30 1.13 1  6.2 Extra Materials Cladding 6.3.1 - Penthouse brick wall length  The brick for the penthouse walls was obtained by first measuring the length and height of the walls using a linear condition. The following calcuation determines the area of brick wall. = (length of wall) x (height of wall) = 897' x 6' = 5382 ft2 = 498.51 m2  6.3.2- Pilaster Col'n 0,1,2,3FL Types A,B,H,M  The brick for the pilasters was calculated by first using linear conditions to measure the length and width of the pilasters. Then the areas for each pilasters were multiplied by the number of pilasters. See the above table for the detailed calculation.  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.18861.1-0077972/manifest

Comment

Related Items