Open Collections

UBC Undergraduate Research

Earth Systems Science Building : ESSB life cycle assessment Baumann, Robert; Ho, Hilda; Valdebenito, Maria Jose Apr 2, 2012

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
18861-Baumann_R_et_al_SEEDS_2012.pdf [ 3.07MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 18861-1.0108562.json
JSON-LD: 18861-1.0108562-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 18861-1.0108562-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 18861-1.0108562-rdf.json
Turtle: 18861-1.0108562-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 18861-1.0108562-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 18861-1.0108562-source.json
Full Text
18861-1.0108562-fulltext.txt
Citation
18861-1.0108562.ris

Full Text

UBC Social Ecological Economic Development Studies (SEEDS) Student Report       Earth Systems Science Building - ESSB Life Cycle Assessment Robert Baumann, Hilda Ho, Maria Jose Valdebenito  University of British Columbia CIVL 498E April 2, 2012           Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report”.  PROVISIO  Th is stu d y has been comp leted by und erg rad u ate stu d en ts as part of their  cours ework at the Univ ersity of British Colu mb ia (UBC) an d is als o a  contr ib uti on to a larg er eff o rt – the UBC LCA Pro ject – which aims to  supp ort the develo pmen t of th e field of life cycl e asses s men t (LCA).    The info rmati o n and findin g s con tain ed in this rep ort have not been throu gh a  full criti cal rev iew an d shou ld be con s idered preli min ary.   If furth er info rmati o n is req uir ed pleas e con tact th e cou rs e instru ctor Rob  Sianchuk at rob .sianch u k @g mail .co m            2      Life Cycle Analysis – CIVL 498E  [2012] Earth Systems Science Building - ESSB Life Cycle Assessment Robert Baumann, Hilda Ho and Maria Jose Valdebenito  3  Executive Summary  This report presents the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of the new Earth Systems Science Building (ESSB) for which construction is expected to be completed in the year 2012 at University of British Columbia (UBC) in Vancouver, British Columbia.. The report shows the impact of the materials used for the structure of the complete building; specifically in raw material extraction, manufacturing of  the construction materials, and construction of the envelope of the whole building. Furthermore it also takes into account the impact of the transportation of these materials. To measure the quantities of the material used in the building and to estimate the environmental impact of such materials and activities two software were used. In addition, a sensitivity analysis was performed on five materials to determine how much it affects the environmental impact to increasing each material by a factor of 10%. The results of the analysis are presented in graphs and tables and show that concrete and glazing are responsible of the greatest environmental impacts of the building.                        4  Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ 3 List of Figures .......................................................................................................................................... 6 List of Tables ........................................................................................................................................... 6 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Project Description ............................................................................................................................. 7 Components Breakdown .................................................................................................................... 8 Goal of study .......................................................................................................................................... 9 Intended Application .......................................................................................................................... 9 Reasons for carrying out the study .................................................................................................... 9 Intended audience ............................................................................................................................ 10 Intended for comparative assertions ............................................................................................... 10 Scope of Study ...................................................................................................................................... 11 Product system to be studied........................................................................................................... 11 Functions of the product system ...................................................................................................... 13 Functional Unit ................................................................................................................................. 13 System Boundary .............................................................................................................................. 13 Allocation procedures ...................................................................................................................... 14 Tools and Methodology ........................................................................................................................ 15 Building Model Development ............................................................................................................... 16 Structure and envelope .................................................................................................................... 16 Material Takeoff Development .................................................................................................... 16 Material Takeoff Assumptions ......................................................................................................... 17 Use phase ............................................................................................................................................. 18 Energy Use Development ................................................................................................................. 18 Energy Use Assumptions .................................................................................................................. 19 Results and Interpretation ................................................................................................................... 20 Inventory Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 20 Bill of Materials ............................................................................................................................. 20 Foundations ...................................................................................................................................... 21 Columns & Beams............................................................................................................................. 21 Floors ................................................................................................................................................ 22 Roof .................................................................................................................................................. 22 Walls ................................................................................................................................................. 23 Energy use ............................................................................................................................................ 25 5  Impact Assessment ............................................................................................................................... 27 Global Warming Potential ................................................................................................................ 27 Ozone Layer Depletion ..................................................................................................................... 28 Weighted Resource Use ................................................................................................................... 28 Smog Potential ................................................................................................................................. 29 Human Health Respiratory Effects ................................................................................................... 29 Eutrophication Potential .................................................................................................................. 29 Fossil Fuel Consumption ................................................................................................................... 30 Acidification Potential ...................................................................................................................... 30 Uncertainty ........................................................................................................................................... 31 Sensitivity Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 32 Chain of Custody Inquiry ...................................................................................................................... 40 Functions and Impacts.......................................................................................................................... 42 Building Functions ............................................................................................................................ 42 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................ 43 Appendix A: IE Input Document ........................................................................................................... 44 Appendix B: IE Input Assumptions Document ...................................................................................... 70           6  List of Figures Figure 1 ESSB, East view ......................................................................................................................... 7 Figure 2 Specific Building Characteristics of the ESSB ............................................................................ 8 Figure 3 Generic unit processes considered within Building Demolition process by Impact Estimator software, extracted from Life Cycle Assessment of UBC Biological Sciences Complex Renew Project. .... 11 Figure 4 Generic unit processes considered within Construction Product Manufacturing process by Impact Estimator software, extracted from Life Cycle Assessment of UBC Biological Sciences Complex Renew Project ............................................................................................................................................. 12 Figure 5 Generic unit processes considered within Building Construction process by Impact Estimator software, extracted from Life Cycle Assessment of UBC Biological Sciences Complex Renew Project ..... 12 Figure 6 Examples of Interior Wall Assemblies, Extracted from Architectural Drawings .................... 24 Figure 7 Sensitivity analysis results for Primary Energy Consumption ................................................ 32 Figure 8 Sensitivity analysis results for Weighted Resource Use ......................................................... 33 Figure 9 Sensitivity analysis results for Ozone Depletion Potential ..................................................... 34 Figure 10 Sensitivity analysis results for HH Respiratory Effects Potential. ......................................... 35 Figure 11 Sensitivity analysis results for Eutrophication Potential. ..................................................... 36 Figure 12 Sensitivity analysis results for Acidification Potential .......................................................... 37 Figure 13 Sensitivity analysis results for Smog Potential. .................................................................... 38 Figure 14 Sensitivity analysis results for Global Warming Potential. ................................................... 39 List of Tables Table 1 Bill of Materials (Building Total) .............................................................................................. 20 Table 2 Bill of Materials (by Assembly Group) ..................................................................................... 21 Table 3 Annual Energy Utilization Intensity by End Use for Reference building and Proposed ESSB building[8] ................................................................................................................................................... 25 Table 4 Summary of the energy consumption by end use for the MNECB and the Proposed[8] ........ 26 Table 5 Summary measures table by Assembly Group ........................................................................ 27 Table 6 Results broken down by assembly for Global Warming Potential .......................................... 27 Table 7 Results broken down by assembly for Ozone Layer Depletion ............................................... 28 Table 8 Results broken down by assembly for Weighted Resource Use. ............................................ 28 Table 9 Results broken down by assembly for Smog Potential ........................................................... 29 Table 10 Results broken down by assembly for HH Respiratory Effects .............................................. 29 Table 11 Results broken down by assembly for Eutrophication Potential .......................................... 30 Table 12 Results broken down by assembly for Primary Energy Consumption (Fossil Fuel Use). ....... 30 Table 13 Results broken down by assembly for Acidification Potential .............................................. 31 Table 14 Functional Spaces of the ESSB Building ................................................................................. 42      7  Introduction Project Description The Earth Systems Science Building (ESSB) is a building currently under construction and expected to be finished during Summer 2012. With a gross square meter of 15,452 the building consists of a 5 storey  Mid-Rise type with 2 underground floors1.It includes teaching, laboratories and office spaces for the department of Earth and Ocean Science (EOS), the Department of Statistics, the Pacific Institute for Mathematical Sciences (PIMS), the Dean of Science, and the Pacific Museum of the Earth (PME).  The building is constructed at the site where both the Earth and Ocean Sciences East Building (EOS EAST) and the Engineering Annex Building were located2. Both buildings were demolished. The location of the new building is at 2219 Main Mall, north of Sustainability Street in Vancouver, BC. The project site boundary is defined by a 12.0m setback from the Main Mall oak trees to the East, a 30.5m setback from the Scarfe Building to the North, and in alignment with the South face of the Beaty Biodiversity Whale Pavilion to the South and the EOS Main building to the West. The construction of the building has a total cost of $75 million3. Its ownership is in a partnership of the Faculty of Science with UBC Properties Trust. The architects for the project are Busby and Associates Architects and Maple Argo Architects. The general contractor is Bird                                                           1 Reed Construction Data, “Earth Systems Science Building (ESSB), Wesbrook Mall, UBC Main Campus, V6T 1Z4” 2 Campus + Community Planning – UBC Vancouver: http://www.planning.ubc.ca/vancouver_home/consultations/current_projects/academic_lands/articles233.php 3 University of British Columbia Request For Decision: http://bog.sites.olt.ubc.ca/files/2010/10/SUB-BG-09.06.03_5.4.pdf Figure 1 ESSB, East view 8  Construction Company and its Environmental Construction Engineer is ACM Environmental Corporation. Components Breakdown The structure of the building is made of steel, concrete and timber. Concrete and rebar were mainly used for the foundations and for the support of the slabs on grade in each floor and in the basement. Timber as cross laminated timber was used in the floor of the roof. A mixture of wood and concrete columns and beams provides the structural configuration in the interior floors, which also supports the curtain wall that was designed for the building. The curtain wall provides environmental control, allowing the entrance of natural light to the interiors. It also permits the users to have views and connection with the natural landscape in the exteriors. Partitions in the interior spaces are made of steel stud framing.  Figure 2 Specific Building Characteristics of the ESSB       9  Goal of study This study will serve as contribution to the database of LCA studies currently being developed worldwide. The purpose of the database is to provide a framework and baseline to compare performance of buildings regarding its environmental impact.  The results of the LCA study will provide a materials inventory and environmental impact reference for the ESSB building as well as a sense of how well UBC is performing at developing less harmful buildings for the environment. The format is set so that the parameters of the study are referred to the guidelines of ISO 14040 and 14044. Intended Application Describes the purpose of the LCA study. This LCA study will be used in two ways. The first one being a transparent marketing tool to communicate the impacts of removing the old EOS buildings and replacing it with the new ESSB building; and the second one, as an exemplary demonstration of the latest in environmental impact accounting methods that contributes to the further development of such activities. When completed, this study will also contribute in creating a benchmark for new buildings in UBC, so that developers can make informed decisions about the environmental impacts associated with the construction of buildings in UBC. Reasons for carrying out the study Describes the motivation for carrying out the LCA study. The motivation of this study is to demonstrate the usefulness of LCA as a tool to assess environmental impacts of buildings, aimed at identifying possible opportunities to improve the environmental performance of building’s life cycles. The study is also done to promote the development of the UBC LCA database, providing future scholars and green builders with information to carry out similar studies on LCA.     10  Intended audience Describes those who the LCA study is intended to be interpreted by. The results of this study are to be primarily communicated to those involved in building development related policy making at UBC, such as the UBC Sustainability Office, UBC Sustainability Initiative (USI), UBC SEEDS Program, and all other campus members who are involved in creating policies and frameworks for sustainable development on campus. In addition to them, other potential audiences include external organizations such as industry and government groups observing and involved in green building design, and other universities whom may want to learn more or become engaged in performing similar LCA studies within their organizations. Intended for comparative assertions State whether the results of this LCA study are to be compared with the results of other LCA studies. This study is part of a group of studies being conducted on UBC buildings, which at collectively considered as the UBC LCA Database.  This study has been carried out using a similar Goal & Scope document to the other studies in the UBC LCA Database.  In this way, this study is being used for comparative assertions, though primarily with other studies as benchmarks being developed for future construction projects at UBC.      11  Scope of Study The following are descriptions for a set of parameters associated with the actual modelling of the study.  Product system to be studied Describes the collection of unit processes that will be included in the study. A unit process is a measurable activity that consumes inputs and emits outputs as a result of providing a product or service.  The main processes that make up the product system to be studied in this LCA study are the demolition of a building (Figure 3), the manufacturing of construction products (Figure 4) and the construction of a building (Figure 5).  These three processes are the building blocks of the LCA models that have been developed to describe the impacts associated with the ESSB Building (i.e. Renovating and Building New).  The unit processes and inputs and outputs considered within these three main processes are outlined below.         Figure 3 Generic unit processes considered within Building Demolition process by Impact Estimator software, extracted from Life Cycle Assessment of UBC Biological Sciences Complex Renew Project. 12   The inputs and outputs occurring at various stages in a buildings life cycle are captured. That said, the building demolition unit process captures the grave (end of life), and the construction product manufacturing and building construction processes captures the cradle to gate (ie: resource extraction, manufacturing construction products and construction of a building). The organization of these processes into the product systems to describe the impacts of renovating rather than building new requires the definition of a system boundary (detailed later in this report).    Figure 4 Generic unit processes considered within Construction Product Manufacturing process by Impact Estimator software, extracted from Life Cycle Assessment of UBC Biological Sciences Complex Renew Project Figure 5 Generic unit processes considered within Building Construction process by Impact Estimator software, extracted from Life Cycle Assessment of UBC Biological Sciences Complex Renew Project 13  Functions of the product system Describes the functions served by the product focused on in the LCA study.  The New ESSB Building modelled in this LCA is designed to fulfill two main functions: 1) act as safe and climate controlled buildings that separate their occupants and structures from the environment; 2) act as an academic institutional building for students and faculty at the University of British Columbia Vancouver campus. Functional Unit A performance characteristic of the product system being studied that will be used as a reference unit to normalize the results of the study. The functional units used in this study to normalize the LCA results for material components of the ESSB Building are per whole post-secondary academic building constructed.  System Boundary Details the extent of the product system to be studied in terms of product components, life cycle stages, and unit processes. The system boundary is determined by having a Cradle-to-Grave approach to the study. In the case of this study for the Earth Science Systems Building, two existing buildings had to be demolished (EOS East Northwing and EOS East Southwing) and a new building is built in place.  This LCA models the impact of these scenarios of a new building being constructed. The Impact Estimator software produces these impacts based on the unit processes. Specifically this study includes the construction products used to create their structure and envelopes. The materials included are indicated by defining product components within the products studied. These material product components consist of the following: Footings, slabs on grade, walls, columns and beams, floors, roofs, associated doors and windows and insulation. These material components are at the same time assemblies of construction products.   The finishing materials used in the ESSB were not included in this study’s system boundary.    14  Allocation procedures Describes how the input and output flows of the studied product system are distributed between them and other related product systems. The end of the existing EOS Building and the cradle-to-grave of the new ESSB Building presented a conflict in determining the cut-off because of their shared life cycles.  This required an allocation requirement for the ESSB LCA study. To ensure that only the impacts directly caused by a product within a given life cycle stage are allocated to that product, a cut-off allocation method was used. The result of applying the cut-off application method is that the manufacturing of the previous EOS Building is allocated to the previous life cycle and is thus outside of the system boundary of the new ESSB Building. Including the demolition effects in the new ESSB results is essential to capture additional impacts caused by this process. Although construction and demolition are both wastes direct from the product systems, their potential subsequent life cycles were outside the scope of this LCA study. For that matter, the study will not include the consideration of waste treatment processes or possible subsequent life cycles.                   15  Tools and Methodology The study is developed by utilizing two software currently used in LCA. To take quantities from the building drawings necessary for On-Screen Takeoff 3 was utilized through documenting area, linear and count quantities. Using imported digital drawings, the program facilitates the calculation of these quantities by keeping takeoffs organized. Once the measurements were completed, Athena Impact Estimator v.4.1, the only available software capable of meeting the requirements of this study, was used to generate a whole building LCA model for the Earth Science Systems Building (ESSB). 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, in order to estimate a cradle-to-grave LCI profile for the building4. The IE 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 the ESSB, all of the available TRACI impact assessment categories available in the IE are included in this study, listed as;  · Global warming potential  · Acidification potential  · Eutrophication potential  · Ozone depletion potential  · Photochemical smog potential  · Human health respiratory effects potential  · Weighted raw resource use  · Primary energy consumption  The primary sources of data used in modeling the structure and envelope of the ESSB are the set of architectural and structural drawings provided by the firms to conduct the LCA study. The assemblies of the building that are modeled include the foundation, columns and                                                           4 Life Cycle Assessment of the Hebb Building CIVL 498C Final Report, 3/29/2010 16  beams, floors, walls and roofs, as well as their associated envelope and/or openings (i.e. doors and windows). The decision to omit other building components, such as flooring, electrical aspects, 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 model5. During the analysis of the different assemblies, several assumptions had to be made to complete the modelling in the IE software, mainly due to the lack of specific information in the drawings. 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. These assumptions and limitation are contained and detailed in the Input Assumptions document in Appendix B.   Building Model Development Structure and envelope Material Takeoff Development For the foundation, areas of footings were found using the area conditions in OnScreen Takeoff (OST). The thickness of each footing was listed in the Footing schedule in the structural drawings of the building. For the columns and beams, count conditions were used so that we know how many columns and beams are on each floor. The floor-to-floor heights were calculated from the elevations of each floor from the structural drawings.   The floors areas were also estimated using OST.  Areas were accounted for each floor depending on their thickness and material. Each take-off was taken separately for each material. In other words, several take-offs were performed depending on how many materials the floor was composed of. Only the structural materials were taken into account.  The roof take-offs were performed in the same manner as the floors. The areas were taken separately from the roof level and from level five, which included a deck around the perimeter of the floor. For walls, a linear condition was used in the OnScreen Takeoff software (OST). The assembly of each wall was done determined through architectural plans, sections and elevations. These                                                           5 Life Cycle Assessment of the Hebb Building CIVL 498C Final Report, 3/29/2010 17  drawings provided specific details for each type of wall, describing structural components as well as interior and exterior finish schedules. One of the main challenges faced here was trying to associate the actual materials used in the walls with the ones available in the Impact Estimator software. The criteria was asking the course instructor, using the ‘Help’ section in the software and web-searching for the most similar surrogate materials. For concrete walls, the information was provided by the structural drawings, containing shear walls and retaining walls. It was difficult though to find specific heights for some of the walls in the drawings, and so floor-to-floor heights were used. Finally, doors and windows were associated with each type of wall using a count condition in OST. Here again, the more similar types of doors were used when the actual ones did not exist. Material Takeoff Assumptions For many of our quantity takeoffs, the material used in the actual structure is not found in the Impact Estimator, so we have to assume a similar type of material in the software.   Furthermore, in the quantity takeoffs conducted for floors, for level one was considerably thicker than other levels in some sections of the floor. To account for the difference it was assumed that extra concrete was used in place. Although this assumption did not affect the Impact Estimator result, it did affect the height of columns of adjacent floors.  Roof material specifications were not clear either from the structural and architectural drawings. In some parts in the deck of level five the composition was of a roof assembly “roof deck” and of “future green roof”. The difference between both composition was that one included concrete and the other one consisted of a composite of wood and insulation. The assumption made was that “future green roof” was taken as the final choice for the Impact Estimator inputs because most of the deck was made of this type of roof, and only a relatively small section was presenting this conflict.   For the case of walls modeling other considerations were taken into account as well. The length of the concrete cast-in-place walls needed adjusting to accommodate the wall thickness limitation in the Impact Estimator. It was assumed that interior steel stud walls were light gauge (25Ga) and exterior steel stud walls were heavy gauge (20Ga). According to the general notes in the structural plans, normal weight concrete for retaining walls is 25MPa and 18  for shear walls 35Mpa. The IE allowed for 20, 30 or 60MPa, so 30MPa was used to model all concrete walls. In the other hand, fly ash content for retaining walls was modeled as 40%, which was found to be the closest value for the actual content of 35%. Interior walls also needed some adjustments. Gypsum boards were adjusted depending on their location and most similar element found in the IE, for example, Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8'' was the closest surrogate for Type X Gypsum Board Gypsum. Also the thickness of these elements was fixed in the IE (25.381mm-507.614mm). Another variation was regarding the insulation where acoustic insulation was modeled as fiberglass batt, as it was the closest surrogate to this kind of material. Finally, no information about the type of painting was provided in the architectural plans, so Latex Water Based was assumed to be used where painting finish was indicated.   For more information on how numbers were obtained and what assumptions were made to complete specific parts of the quantity takeoffs, please refer to the IE Inputs Assumptions Document in Appendix B. Use phase Energy Use Development  Use phase energy consumption information were found in results of the LEED energy model of the ESSB building, detailed in a memo written by Stantec provided to us via Rob Sianchuk. The model is developed using construction drawings and specifications dated September 7th, 2010, information from the design team, and approved shop drawings. The model was completed for May 27th, 2011. Please note that this date is before to the completion of the ESSB building. For further details and a summary of the results in the energy model, refer to a later section entitled “Energy Use” under “Inventory Analysis”.6                                                              6 Martina Soderlund, Stantec Consulting, “Earth System Science Building (ESSB) - LEED Energy Model Results Summary”, Memo dated May 26, 2011 19  Energy Use Assumptions As the building remains incomplete to this day, the energy model is only an estimate of the proposed building's performance in terms of energy use. Some modelling inputs were assumed for the assembly of the building, based on baseline values of a reference building and modelling guides. Also, energy consumption associated with lab water heating and specific lab equipment were excluded from calculations as they are considered process energy. Moreover, the memo we received which details these results have not been subject to third party review, and is not a part of the final package for the energy model. 7                                                                                   7 Martina Soderlund, Stantec Consulting, “Earth System Science Building (ESSB) - LEED Energy Model Results Summary”, Memo dated May 26, 2011 20  Table 1 Bill of Materials (Building Total) Results and Interpretation Inventory Analysis Bill of Materials The materials used to construct the ESSB building are listed below in the Bill of Materials. Refer to Table 1 for Bill of Materials of the Building Total, and refer to Table 2 for the Bill of Materials broken down into different assemblies of the building.  21  Foundations For the foundation, because it is made up of only concrete and rebar, makes up a significant portion of the total concrete and steel for the building. Because of their lengths and thicknesses, the strip footings (ie: Footing_SF1 and Footing_SF4) have a greater impact as they use more concrete and rebar than the pad footings. Because of the software limitations, what was measured and what we were able to input were different, such as the 40% actual flyash used in all the concrete for foundations, versus the 35% selected flyash, which is the closest number to the actual value for the Athena Impact Estimator. This causes the Bill of Materials to list a material that might not actually be in the building. Columns & Beams For columns and beams, the major materials are concrete and rebar, as most of the larger structural columns in this building are concrete columns. There are also wood columns, but they are smaller in comparison. The basement has the greatest number of concrete columns (Column_Concrete_Beam_N/A_Basement), so this is the input that makes up the greatest portion of concrete for columns and beams. For all columns, the amount of rebar was not calculated through measurements or numbers in the structural drawings, but was calculated Table 2 Bill of Materials (by Assembly Group) 22  automatically by the Impact Estimator when we imported our inputs. This could cause an under or over estimation of rebar and affect the amount of steel in our building. Floors Materials components of the floor assembly were very consisted and it did not deviated between each floor. The structure of the floor was characterized by insulated suspended slab consisting of a composition of concrete, which is the greater contributor to the thickness of the floor; a thin layer of insulation; and, a layer of wood accounted as laminated strand lumber.  The material with the largest amount is concrete. Concrete is presented in the study with two different thickness, especifically as Floor_Concrete_Suspendedslab_193mm and as Floor_Concrete_SuspendedSlab_100mm. Both descriptions of the material account for an area of 4468.7 m2 throughout the building. The next material with the largest quantity measured is insulation which was assumed to be Foam Polyisocyanurate. Insulation is present as a sublayer of the floor in between the two main components, concrete and wood; and it is referenced in the study as Floor_Insulation_SuspendedSlab_25mm. Insulation takes an area of 3056 m2 and although it is a thin layer, it is used throughout the building and it adds up to a larger number. Lastly, wood is utilized in the bottom part of the floor structure. It has been assumed that the wood utilized is laminated strand lumber with a reference in the study as Floor_Wood_SuspendedSlab_89mm. The area accounted for wood is similar to the insulation with 3056 m2. Roof The roof assembly consists of two different levels with the same structure. The first level is referred as a deck of the fifth floor and the roof of the building itself is on top of the fifth floor. It has been assumed that both roof consist of the same composition, although in the architectural drawings it was not clear whether the composition was a future green roof or a typical R1 roof. We assumed it to be a future green roof in every section where this conflict was present. 23  Roof composition consisted of two main components: Wood as Cross Laminated Timber and insulation as Foam Polyisocyanurate. Insulation in the roof is referenced in the study as Roof_insulation and the area accounted for insulation of the roof is 718m2. Cross laminated timber is the main structural component of the roof. It supports the roof in an efficient way and its thickness is of 0.152 meters. The reference for the cross laminated timber in  the roof is Roof_CrossLaminatedTimber and the area accounted for the cross laminated timber in the roof and the deck of the fifth floor is of 708 m2. Walls The wall assemblies for the ESSB consist of concrete cast-in-place interior and exterior walls in the basement and sub-basement levels. The building was designed with three different structural cores also made of reinforced concrete. These walls accounted for the greatest use of concrete among walls due to their thickness (from 350-430mm) and run through the total height of the building. Concrete strength was set to 35 MPa and 35% percent content of concrete fly ash for these type of walls. For all the other concrete walls (basement level) concrete strength was set to 25 MPa and 35% content of concrete fly ash was used to model the building, as indicated in the general notes in the structural plans. Many of these walls required length adjustments to accommodate the wall thickness limitation of either 200mm or 300mm in the Impact Estimator.   Other assumptions for walls had to be made, for example, all the walls were described to have acoustic insulation which was modeled as fiberglass bat, or the gypsum board that had to be used was the standard one in the IE software. One of the most important impacts of the building refer to the glazing. The building exterior facades are composed by a curtain wall made of Low-E glazing and opaque glass spandrel with insulation. More than 70% of the buildings facades are made of glass, accounting for almost 1000m2 in the Bill of Materials. According to our sensitivity analysis, this condition produces one of the greatest overall impacts of the building.    24   Figure 6 Examples of Interior Wall Assemblies, Extracted from Architectural Drawings 25  Energy use The energy use profile is taken from the energy model detailed by Stantec, as stated previously. For this LCA study, a design life of 60 years is used for all our analyses. However, the Stantec memo on the proposed energy model does not specify the design life, it has defined that analyses are to end use of the building for the model scope. As stated in the memo, the proposed energy model will achieve 55% energy savings (including non-regulated energy) and 59% energy cost savings (excluding non-regulated energy). The reference used in this comparison is a 1997 Model National Energy Code for Buildings (MNECB) reference building. For the utilities and types of energy involved in the ESSB building, please refer to Table 3 and Figure 4.     Table 3 Annual Energy Utilization Intensity by End Use for Reference building and Proposed ESSB building[8] 26   Table 4 Summary of the energy consumption by end use for the MNECB and the Proposed[8]  As shown, the highest energy consumers for the building comes from plug loads, fans, and cooling.8                                                           8 Martina Soderlund, Stantec Consulting, “Earth System Science Building (ESSB) - LEED Energy Model Results Summary”, Memo dated May 26, 2011 27  Impact Assessment After putting our inputs into the Athena Impact Estimator, we have impact assessment results for each assembly group. These results are generated using the built-in impact assessment method (TRACI). A summary of our results for the impacts of this building are presented below in Table 5, with more details provided later in this section. Site Preparation impacts are not allocated across assembly goups, as they represent the full demolition of the previous structure, hence this data is omitted and only a final value is reported for that row.  Global Warming Potential Global warming potential (GWP) is measured in CO2 equivalent units and estimates the potential impact cause by released greenhouse gases. Using these units, it is much easier to compare between two assemblies that may be releasing different types of gases, as it will instead report the amount of CO2 that would be created in place of that gas which will contribute the same amount to global warming.          Table 5 Summary measures table by Assembly Group Table 6 Results broken down by assembly for Global Warming Potential 28  Ozone Layer Depletion Ozone layer depletion, measured in CFC-11 equivalent units, is the reduction of the ozone layer caused by emissions such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). The ozone layer is a protective layer within the atmosphere, hence its depletion could cause damaging effects to our environment, as well as negative health effects to living things.         Weighted Resource Use Weighted Resource Use involves the weighted measure for resource extraction effects, such as the size of the extraction site and length of time the site is disturbed. The unit, ecologically weighted kilograms, means the relative environmental effect that the extraction process creates.              Table 7 Results broken down by assembly for Ozone Layer Depletion Table 8 Results broken down by assembly for Weighted Resource Use. 29  Smog Potential Smog potential is measured in NOx equivalents per kilogram of emissions and describes the potential of emissions to contribute to the formation of photochemical ozone, which often comes from burning fossil fuels in industry and transportation.          Human Health Respiratory Effects Human Health Respiratory Effects are the contributions of particulates in the air caused by process activity.  Particulates are known to cause respiratory problems for humans.         Eutrophication Potential The Eutropication Potential is the building assembly’s ability to fill surface waters with nutrients (ie: Phosphurus and Nitrogen), leading to the over-consumption of other necessary chemicals such as oxygen in the water. Far too much nutrients in a body of water can be toxic to aquatic life. This can have a great impact on aquatic inhabitants and can even result in Table 9 Results broken down by assembly for Smog Potential Table 10 Results broken down by assembly for HH Respiratory Effects 30  massive numbers for fish kills. The units of this impact category are units of Nitrogen equivalents.         Fossil Fuel Consumption Primary Energy Consumption is essential the use of fossil fuel. It includes all energy used to transport and transform raw materials into products. It also includes any energy involved in extraction, processing, manufacturing, construction, and indirect energies from processing or transforming this energy. Its units of Mega joules, which is a unit for energy.         Acidification Potential Acidification Potential estimates the potential increase the amount acidity in water, soil and air cause by air emissions. This impact category is measured in terms of hydrogen ion equivalents (moles H+e), a common component of all acids. The category indicator is H+ mole equivalent per kilogram of air emissions.   Table 11 Results broken down by assembly for Eutrophication Potential Table 12 Results broken down by assembly for Primary Energy Consumption (Fossil Fuel Use). 31         Uncertainty Assumptions in floor’s take offs had to be taken to define the average thickness of the floor throughout the building. Different cross sections were presented specifically in the thickness of parts of the floor to counter this problem so that a concise measurement could be taken for columns calculation as well as volume of some of the components of the floors. Another assumption made was to determine that a overlap of the floor structure in the first floor was small enough to be taken into account. Furthermore, stairs were standardized and the thickness of each step was assumed to be the same for the whole building.  The cross section of the floor also presented a composite shear connector which was of the same composition of the rest of the floor (ie. concrete-insulation-wood). For that matter, it was not included in the material take off of the floor since it was very unsure the physical limit of the “shear connector” therefore, hard to quantify; and, it was determined that it will not significantly influence the overall results of the impacts.  The inputs for the Impact Estimator were modified to fit the constraints of the software. For example, area of the floors was taken from multipliers of its length and width.  In addition, extra thickness was added to the first floor due to its larger thickness of the floor, which somehow, had to be compensated with one of the composition materials. In the roof the assumption made was that the area defined as “future green roof” is the same composition as the rest of the roof but the cover of “vegetation matter” was not taken into account because there was not such material in the Impact Estimator. Furthermore, concrete was not accounted as a material for the composition of the roof because the architectural and structural drawings mention the existence of it, it was not clearly determined if concrete was ultimately used, therefore, it was considered as incomplete information. Table 13 Results broken down by assembly for Acidification Potential 32  Sensitivity Analysis Using the results output from the Athena Impact Estimator for Buildings, a sensitivity analysis was performed for five materials. The method for this analysis involves looking through the bill of materials, selecting the five materials we wish to analyse; then, adding 10% more of the material in the IE model and generate new results.  From this output, and the selected impact categories, we can deduce which material the building is most sensitive to. This will also help us verify how much uncertainty can affect our LCA study, as many assumptions had to be made. The five materials chosen for this study are the ⅝” Gypsum board, 30MPa Concrete with 25% flyash, Galvanized studs, the Glazing panels, and GluLam sections. Primary Energy Consumption is highly sensitive to the amount of glazing panels and somewhat sensitive to the amount of concrete in the building. This is likely because glazing panels require a large amount of energy to gather raw materials, manufacture, refine, and transport. A similar assumption can be made for concrete.                Figure 7 Sensitivity analysis results for Primary Energy Consumption 33  Weighted Resource Use is most affected by the amount of concrete in the building, followed by the amount of glazing panels. The other materials make very little difference in our case. The result is expected, as manufacturing concrete involves a great amount of raw materials, that is, it takes a lot of resources to produce. The same reasoning goes for why weighted resource use is also sensitive to glazing panels.                   Ozone depletion potential is affected on similar levels by glazing panels and concrete. Recall that the ozone layer is reduced by these types of emissions. The two materials produce the most emissions of the five during their manufacturing processes as they require more raw materials to manufacture.    Figure 8 Sensitivity analysis results for Weighted Resource Use 34                  Human Health Respiratory Effects Potential is of particular concern when it comes to impact assessments due to the potential to cause harm to human beings through air. Glazing panels are once again the material that will have the greatest impact. The other materials in the study cause little or no effect. As previously mentioned, glass panels involve chemical processes which result in chemical emissions into the environment, such as the air we breathe. The chemical particles may also be harmful to human health. Moreover, maintence of glazing panels during the lifetime of the building will also cause particulate matter to be released into the air, for example, from the cleaning process.      Figure 9 Sensitivity analysis results for Ozone Depletion Potential 35                    For the ESSB building, Eutrophication Potential is most affected by glazing panels, followed by concrete. Chemicals from the manufacturing and maintenance of glazing panels can easily contribute to the eutrophication potential as they could run off into bodies of water and cause harm to the aquatic environment and its inhabitants.         Figure 10 Sensitivity analysis results for HH Respiratory Effects Potential. 36                    Acidification Potential, or the potential of air or water to have an increase in acidity, is most sensitive to an increase in the amount of glazing panels. Glass production involves a lot of chemicals which causes a large amount of unwanted chemicals releasing into the environment. Although concrete has some affects to acidification potential as well, this impact category is far more sensitive to glazing panels. The gypsum board, galvanized studs, and glulam sections show almost no effect, due to the small percentage they make up for the entire building.        Figure 11 Sensitivity analysis results for Eutrophication Potential. 37                     Smog Potential is most sensitive to glazing panels, and somewhat sensitive to concrete. Again, because of the emissions from the manufacturing processes of glazing penls and concrete, they are the materials that have the greatest effect on this impact category.          Figure 12 Sensitivity analysis results for Acidification Potential 38                   Global warming potential is highly sensitive to the amount of glazing panels in our building. The production of glass panels requires a great deal of energy, as discussed earlier in the sensitivity for primary energy consumption. High temperatures are also involved in manufacturing. This causes a large amount of greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere, increasing the global warming potential.         Figure 13 Sensitivity analysis results for Smog Potential. 39                   Figure 14 Sensitivity analysis results for Global Warming Potential. 40  Chain of Custody Inquiry      41  The exercise was developed for the exterior white brick cladding used in the North and East facades of the building. The exercise was executed by contacting the architects first, to know the name of the company that manufactured the product. In the architecture firm, the contact is Jana Foit, one of the head architects working on the building. An email was sent to her asking for the relevant information. She sent us back the name of the company which was Basalite Concrete Products. With this information we tracked the company on the internet and found a phone and email for inquiries. Later, Shelagh Wright, from architectural sales, was contacted. Finally, she was able to give us the information that we needed, regarding components of the product, extraction and manufacture plants location and type of transportation used.  This process was relatively short and not so difficult because we had the contribution of the architects and a representative of the brick company. It took us about 2-3 days to have the information to complete the exercise, but it would be a totally different scenario if we had to account for a greater amount of materials in the buildings. In this case the relatively simple procedure would turn to be a more complex task as it would involve many different assembly types and thus, hundreds of different materials. It would be almost impossible to account for a complete chain of custody study as it would involve a large number of hours dedicated to it and even though, it is probable that not all the information would be gathered. A more adequate approach could be to address this chain of custody for the most important materials, those contributing to the greater environmental impacts.           42  Functions and Impacts Building Functions The ESSB Building provides space for teaching, laboratories and office spaces for the department of Earth and Ocean Science (EOS), the Department of Statistics, the Pacific Institute for Mathematical Sciences (PIMS), the Dean of Science, and the Pacific Museum of the Earth (PME).  Specifically there is 30% dedicated to testing labs, 30% dedicated to office spaces, and 20% for computer labs and research space. The old EOS East building was also intended to provide office and research space for faculty, but was far smaller in size.  Table 14 Functional Spaces of the ESSB Building               43  Conclusion This LCA study on the new ESSB building was performed at an undergraduate level using only the resources available to us as students of CIVL498E at the University of British Columbia.  Software such as OnScreen TakeOff, Athena Impact Estimator, and Microsoft Excel were key components in the compilation of our results. Through these software, we were able to do quantity take offs and create a building model through Impact Estimator. Results generated were the Bill of Materials and the Summary Measures Tables (by Life Cycle or by Assembly). It is important to note that to achieve resulting outputs, assumptions had to be made to account for lack of information or software limitations. These assumptions lead to uncertainties in our results, such as underestimating or overestimating a material.  Using the Bill of Materials, we are able to perform a sensitivity analysis on five materials in our building, in which we added 10% of each material to see how it would affect the environmental impact results of the building. We found that in many impact categories, the material that had the most effect on the environment were the glazing panels, followed by the amount of concrete used in the building. Glazing panels were significant effect in terms of Human Health Respiratory Effects Potiential and Smog Potential. Through the energy use models, we established that the new ESSB building when compared to a 1997 Model National Energy Code for Buildings (MNECB) reference building, will result in over 50% of energy savings. As the old EOS East and Engineering Annex buildings that were replaced by the ESSB are prior to 1997, we could conclude that the ESSB building would be more efficient in energy use than the older buildings.  After performing this LCA study through transparent methods that can be duplicated, we are able to see the environmental impacts of the ESSB throughout its design life, and can compare these results with other buildings built for similar functions. Given the time and resources available for the compilation of this report, further analyses can be done to provide a much more detailed LCA that would have greater accuracy and reduced uncertainty. We would recommend that LCA be performed for all buildings in the future to build an abundant database that can be used for green building design.  44  Appendix A: IE Input Document  Assembly Group Assembly Type Assembly Name Input Fields Input Values Known/ Measured IE Inputs 1  Foundation             1.1  Concrete Slab-on-Grade     1.1.1 SOG_125mm             Length (m) 10.00 10.00       Width (m) 13.60 17.00       Thickness (mm) 125 100       Concrete (MPa) 25 30       Concrete flyash % 40% 35%     1.1.2 SOG_200mm             Length (m) 33.60 33.60       Width (m) 30.00 30.00       Thickness (mm) 200 200       Concrete (MPa) 25 30       Concrete flyash % 40% 35%   1.2  Concrete Footing     1.2.1  Footing_PF1             Length (m) 18.2 18.2      Width (m) 1.4 1.4      Thickness (mm) 350 350      Concrete (MPa) 25 30      Concrete flyash % 40% 35%      Rebar 20M 20M     1.2.2  Footing_PF2             Length (m) 8 8      Width (m) 0.8 0.8      Thickness (mm) 250 250      Concrete (MPa) 25 30      Concrete flyash % 40% 35%      Rebar 15M 15M     1.2.3.  Footing_PF3             Length (m) 12.6 15.12      Width (m) 1.8 1.8      Thickness (mm) 600 500      Concrete (MPa) 25 30      Concrete flyash % 40% 35%      Rebar 20M 20M     1.2.4  Footing_PF4             Length (m) 32 60.8      Width (m) 3.2 3.2      Thickness (mm) 950 500      Concrete (MPa) 25 30      Concrete flyash % 40% 35% 45        Rebar 25M 20M     1.2.5  Footing_PF5             Length (m) 12 16.8      Width (m) 2.4 2.4      Thickness (mm) 700 500      Concrete (MPa) 25 30      Concrete flyash % 40% 35%      Rebar 25M 20M     1.2.6  Footing_PF6             Length (m) 19 19      Width (m) 1 1      Thickness (mm) 350 350      Concrete (MPa) 25 30      Concrete flyash % 40% 35%      Rebar 15M 15M     1.2.7  Footing_SF1             Length (m) 107.046 107.05      Width (m) 0.5 0.5      Thickness (mm) 300 300      Concrete (MPa) 25 30      Concrete flyash % 40% 35%      Rebar 15M 15M    1.2.8  Footing_SF2            Length (m) 87.43166667 87.4300000       Width (m) 0.6 0.6      Thickness (mm) 250 250      Concrete (MPa) 25 30      Concrete flyash % 40% 35%      Rebar 15M 15M    1.2.9  Footing_SF3            Length (m) 77.628 77.63      Width (m) 1 1      Thickness (mm) 350 350      Concrete (MPa) 25 30      Concrete flyash % 40% 35%      Rebar 15M 15M    1.2.10  Footing_SF4            Length (m) 83.10266667 83.10      Width (m) 1.5 1.5      Thickness (mm) 350 350      Concrete (MPa) 25 30      Concrete flyash % 40% 35%      Rebar 15M 15M    1.2.11  Footing_SF5            Length (m) 44.0765 44.0765      Width (m) 2 2      Thickness (mm) 350 350      Concrete (MPa) 25 30 46       Concrete flyash % 40% 35%      Rebar 15M & 25M 15M    1.2.12  Footing_SF7            Length (m) 37.53688889 37.54      Width (m) 2.7 2.7      Thickness (mm) 350 350      Concrete (MPa) 25 30      Concrete flyash % 40% 35%      Rebar 15M & 25M 15M    1.2.13  Footing_SF8            Length (m) 16.95903505 16.96      Width (m) 2.197 2.20      Thickness (mm) 400 400      Concrete (MPa) 25 30      Concrete flyash % 40% 35%      Rebar 15M & 35M 15M    1.2.14  Footing_SF9            Length (m) 37.1795 37.1795      Width (m) 2 2      Thickness (mm) 300 300      Concrete (MPa) 25 30      Concrete flyash % 40% 35%      Rebar 15M & 25M 15M 2 Walls             2.1  Cast In Place     2.1.1  Wall_Cast-in-Place_W1_200mm       Length (mm) 10687 10687       Height (mm) 4200 4200       Thickness (mm) 200 200       Concrete (MPa) 25 30       Concrete flyash % 40 35       Rebar #15M  Vert, #15M Horiz #15M     Envelope Category Insulation Insulation       Material Rigid Board Insulation (R20) Polystyrene expanded       Thickness (mm) 50 50       Category Vapour Barrier Vapour Barrier       Material Fluid Applied Waterproofing Polyethylene 6 mil       Thickness - -     2.1.2  Wall_Cast-in-Place_W2_250mm       Length (mm) 76980 96225       Height (mm) 4200 4200       Thickness (mm) 250 200       Concrete (MPa) 25 30 47        Concrete flyash % 40 35       Rebar #15M  #15M     Envelope Category Insulation Insulation       Material Rigid Board Insulation (R20) Polystyrene expanded       Thickness (mm) 50 50       Category Vapour Barrier Vapour Barrier       Material Fluid Applied Waterproofing Polyethylene 6 mil       Thickness - -     2.1.3  Wall_Cast-in-Place_W3_300mm       Length (mm) 120247 120247       Height (mm) 4200 4200       Thickness (mm) 300 300       Concrete (MPa) 25 30       Concrete flyash % 40 35       Rebar #25M  Vert, #15M Horiz #20M     Envelope Category Insulation Insulation       Material Rigid Board Insulation (R20) Polystyrene expanded       Thickness (mm) 50 50       Category Vapour Barrier Vapour Barrier       Material Fluid Applied Waterproofing Polyethylene 6 mil       Thickness - -     2.1.4  Wall_Cast-in-Place_W5_300mm       Length (mm) 128089 128089       Height (mm) 4200 4200       Thickness (mm) 300 300       Concrete (MPa) 25 30       Concrete flyash % 40 35       Rebar #15M  Vert, #15M Horiz #15M     Envelope Category Insulation Insulation       Material Rigid Board Insulation (R20) Polystyrene expanded       Thickness (mm) 50 50       Category Vapour Barrier Vapour Barrier       Material Fluid Applied Waterproofing Polyethylene 6 mil       Thickness - -     2.1.5  Wall_Cast-in-Place_W6_350mm       Length (mm) 16654 19430       Height (mm) 4200 4200       Thickness (mm) 350 300       Concrete (MPa) 25 30 48        Concrete flyash % 40 35       Rebar #30M/20M  Vert, #15M Horiz #20M     Envelope Category Insulation Insulation       Material Rigid Board Insulation (R20) Polystyrene expanded       Thickness (mm) 50 50       Category Vapour Barrier Vapour Barrier       Material Fluid Applied Waterproofing Polyethylene 6 mil       Thickness - -     2.1.6  Wall_Cast-in-Place_W7_300mm       Length (mm) 23680 23680       Height (mm) 4200 4200       Thickness (mm) 300 300       Concrete (MPa) 25 30       Concrete flyash % 40 35       Rebar #25M  Vert, #15M Horiz #20M     Envelope Category Insulation Insulation       Material Rigid Board Insulation (R20) Polystyrene expanded       Thickness (mm) 50 50       Category Vapour Barrier Vapour Barrier       Material Fluid Applied Waterproofing Polyethylene 6 mil       Thickness - -     2.1.7  Wall_Cast-in-Place_W8_300mm       Length (mm) 23100 23100       Height (mm) 4200 4200       Thickness (mm) 300 300       Concrete (MPa) 25 30       Concrete flyash % 40 35       Rebar #15M  Vert, #15M Horiz #15M     Envelope Category Insulation Insulation       Material Rigid Board Insulation (R20) Polystyrene expanded       Thickness (mm) 50 50       Category Vapour Barrier Vapour Barrier       Material Fluid Applied Waterproofing Polyethylene 6 mil       Thickness - -     2.1.8  Wall_Cast-in-Place_W9_300mm_4200mmHeight       Length (mm) 14190 14190       Height (mm) 4200 4200       Thickness (mm) 300 300 49        Concrete (MPa) 25 30       Concrete flyash % 40 35       Rebar #15M #15M     Envelope Category Insulation Insulation       Material Rigid Board Insulation (R20) Polystyrene expanded       Thickness (mm) 50 50       Category Vapour Barrier Vapour Barrier       Material Fluid Applied Waterproofing Polyethylene 6 mil       Thickness - -     2.1.9  Wall_Cast-in-Place_W9_300mm_5000mmHeight       Length (mm) 14040 14040       Height (mm) 5000 5000       Thickness (mm) 300 300       Concrete (MPa) 25 30       Concrete flyash % 40 35       Rebar #15M #15M     Envelope Category Insulation Insulation       Material Rigid Board Insulation (R20) Polystyrene expanded       Thickness (mm) 50 50       Category Vapour Barrier Vapour Barrier       Material Fluid Applied Waterproofing Polyethylene 6 mil       Thickness - -     2.1.10  SW1_350m_4200mmHeight       Length (mm) 37119 43306       Height (mm) 4200 4200       Thickness (mm) 350 300       Concrete (MPa) 35 30       Concrete flyash % 35 35       Rebar #15M  Vert, #15M Horiz #15M     2.1.11  SW1_350mm_5000mmHeight       Length (mm) 1020 1190       Height (mm) 5000 5000       Thickness (mm) 350 300       Concrete (MPa) 35 30       Concrete flyash % 35 35       Rebar #15M  Vert, #15M Horiz #15M     2.1.12  SW5_430mm_4200mmHeight       Length (mm) 25345 36328       Height (mm) 4200 4200 50        Thickness (mm) 430 300       Concrete (Mpa) 35 30       Concrete flyash % 35 35       Rebar #15M  Vert, #15M Horiz #15M     2.1.13  SW5_430mm_5000mmHeight       Length (mm) 5420 7769       Height (mm) 5000 5000       Thickness (mm) 430 300       Concrete (MPa) 35 30       Concrete flyash % 35 35       Rebar #15M  Vert, #15M Horiz #15M   2.2  Concrete Block Wall     2.2.1  Wall_E6.2_ConcreteBlock_152mmSteelStud       Length mm) 10760 10760       Height (mm) 5000 5000       Rebar #15M #15M       Sheathing Type - -       Stud Spacing - -       Stud Weight - -       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 152 39 x 152     Envelope Category Insulation Insulation       Material Mineral Wool Blanket Insulation         Thickness 150mm         Category Vapour Barrier Vapour Barrier       Material Vapour Retarder Polyethylene 6 mil       Thickness - -       Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWB         Thickness 16mm       2.2.2  Wall_16_2H_CMU_Wall             Length (mm) 365593 365593       Height (mm) 4786 4786       Rebar #15M #15M     Envelope Category Paint Paint       Material - Latex Water Based     Door Opening Number of Doors 71 71       Door Type Hollow Metal Door Steel  Interior Door   2.3  Curtain Wall 51      2.3.1  Wall_CurtainWall_AllGlazing_12800mm Height       Length (mm) 37560 37560       Height (mm) 12800 12800       Percent Viewable Glazing 100 100       Percent Spandrel Panel 0 0       Thickness of Insulation (mm) - -       Spandrel Type (Metal/Glass) Opaque Glass Opaque Glass     Window Opening Number of Windows 27 24       Total Window Area (m2) 39 39       Frame Type Aluminum Frame Aluminum Frame       Glazing Type Low E Glazing  2SSG Low E T in Glazing       Operable/Fixed Operable Operable     2.3.2  Wall_CurtainWall_AllGlazing_14400mm Height       Length (mm) 11540 11540       Height (mm) 14400 14400       Percent Viewable Glazing 100 100       Percent Spandrel Panel 0 0       Thickness of Insulation (mm) - -       Spandrel Type (Metal/Glass) Opaque Glass Opaque Glass     Window Opening Number of Windows 12 12       Total Window Area (m2) 17 17       Frame Type Aluminum Frame Aluminum Frame       Glazing Type Low E Glazing  2SSG Low E T in Glazing       Operable/Fixed Operable Operable     2.3.3  Wall_CurtainWall_AllGlazing_17700mm Height       Length (mm) 5570 5570       Height (mm) 17700 17700       Percent Viewable Glazing 100 100       Percent Spandrel Panel 0 0       Thickness of Insulation (mm) - -       Spandrel Type (Metal/Glass) Opaque Glass Opaque Glass     2.3.4  Wall_CurtainWall_Opaque Glass Spandrel_5090mm Height       Length (mm) 147630 147630       Height (mm) 5090 5090 52        Percent Viewable Glazing 79 79       Percent Spandrel Panel 21 21       Thickness of Insulation (mm) 140 140       Spandrel Type (Metal/Glass) Opaque Glass Opaque Glass     Door Opening Number of Doors 16 16       Door Type Aluminum Glazed Door Aluminum Exterior Door, 80% glazing     2.3.5  Wall_CurtainWall_Opaque Glass Spandrel_4100mm Height       Length (mm) 171510 171510       Height (mm) 4100 4100       Percent Viewable Glazing 61 61       Percent Spandrel Panel 39 39       Thickness of Insulation (mm) 140 140       Spandrel Type (Metal/Glass) Opaque Glass Opaque Glass     Door Opening Number of Doors 15 15       Door Type Aluminum Glazed Door Aluminum Exterior Door, 80% glazing     2.3.6  Wall_CurtainWall_Opaque Glass Spandrel_4410mm Height       Length (mm) 191496 191496       Height (mm) 4410 4410       Percent Viewable Glazing 54 54       Percent Spandrel Panel 46 46       Thickness of Insulation (mm) 140 140       Spandrel Type (Metal/Glass) Opaque Glass Opaque Glass     Window Opening Number of Windows 28 28       Total Window Area (m2) 40 40       Frame Type Aluminum Frame Aluminum Frame       Glazing Type Low E Glazing  2SSG Low E T in Glazing       Operable/Fixed Operable Operable     Door Opening Number of Doors 7 7       Door Type Aluminum Glazed Door Aluminum Exterior Door, 80% glazing     2.3.7  Wall_CurtainWall_Opaque Glass Spandrel_2390mm Height       Length (mm) 647574 647574 53        Height (mm) 2390 2390       Percent Viewable Glazing 73 73       Percent Spandrel Panel 27 27       Thickness of Insulation (mm) 140 140       Spandrel Type (Metal/Glass) Opaque Glass Opaque Glass     Window Opening_Strip window Number of Windows 196 196       Total Window Area (m2) 294 294       Frame Type Aluminum Frame Aluminum Frame       Glazing Type Low E Glazing  2SSG Low E T in Glazing       Operable/Fixed Operable Operable     2.3.8  Curtain_Wall_Interior_4786mm_Height       Length (mm) 27920 27920       Height (mm) 4786 4786       Percent Viewable Glazing 100 100       Percent Spandrel Panel 0 0       Thickness of Insulation (mm) - -       Spandrel Type (Metal/Glass) - -     Door Opening Number of Doors 7 7       Door Type Aluminum Glazed Door Aluminum Exterior Door, 80% glazing     2.3.9  Curtain_Wall_Interior_2700mm_Height       Length (mm) 223330 223330       Height (mm) 2700 2700       Percent Viewable Glazing 100 100       Percent Spandrel Panel 0 0       Thickness of Insulation (mm) - -       Spandrel Type (Metal/Glass) - -     Door Opening Number of Doors 35 35       Door Type Solid Core Wood Door Solid Wood Door   2.4  Steel Stud     2.4.1  Wall 1.1_92mm_SteelStud       Length (mm) 360100 360100 54        Height (mm) 2700 2700       Sheathing Type None None       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c.       Stud Weight - 25Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 92 39 x 92     Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Type X Gypsum Board Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Insulation Insulation       Material  Acustic Insulation Fiberglass Balt       Thickness 89mm 89mm       Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Type X Gypsum Board Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Paint Paint       Material - Latex Water Based     Door Opening_Metal Doors Number of Doors 87 87       Door Type Hollow Metal Door Steel Interior Door      2.4.2  Wall 1.1_92mm_SteelStud       Length (mm) 771481 771481       Height (mm) 2700 2700       Sheathing Type None None       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c.       Stud Weight - 25Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 92 39 x 92     Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Type X Gypsum Board Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Insulation Insulation       Material  Acustic Insulation Fiberglass Balt       Thickness 89mm 89mm       Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Type X Gypsum Board Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8'' 55        Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Paint Paint       Material - Latex Water Based     Door Opening_Wood Doors Number of Doors 220 220       Door Type  Solid Core Wood Door   Solid Wood Door      2.4.3  Wall 1.2_152mm_SteelStud       Length (mm) 97289 97289       Height (mm) 2700 2700       Sheathing Type None None       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c.       Stud Weight - 25Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 152 39 x 152     Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Type X Gypsum Board Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Insulation Insulation       Material  Acustic Insulation Fiberglass Balt       Thickness 89mm 89mm       Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Type X Gypsum Board Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Paint Paint       Material - Latex Water Based     Door Opening Number of Doors 20 20       Door Type Solid Core Wood Door  Solid Wood Door      2.4.4  Wall 2_152mm_SteelStud_ At Washrooms       Length (mm) 39142 39142       Height (mm) 2700 2700       Sheathing Type None None       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c.       Stud Weight - 25Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 152 39 x 152     Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Glass Mat Gypsum Tile Backer Board Gypsum Moisture Resistant 5/8'' 56        Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Insulation Insulation       Material  Acustic Insulation Fiberglass Balt       Thickness 150mm 150mm       Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Type X Gypsum Board Gypsum Moisture Resistant 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Paint Paint       Material - Latex Water Based     Door Opening Number of Doors 1 1       Door Type Solid Core Wood Door  Solid Wood Door      2.4.5  Wall 3_92mm_SteelStud       Length (mm) 145114 145114       Height (mm) 2700 2700       Sheathing Type None None       Stud Spacing - 600 o.c.       Stud Weight - 25Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 92 39 x 92       Sheathing Type None None       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c.       Stud Weight - 25Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) Furring Channel 39 x 92     Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWS Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWS Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Insulation Insulation       Material  Acustic Insulation Fiberglass Balt       Thickness 89mm 89mm       Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWS Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Paint Paint 57        Material - Latex Water Based     Door Opening Number of Doors 23 23       Door Type Solid Core Wood Door Solid Wood Door     2.4.6  Wall 4_92mm_SteelStud       Length (mm) 24888 24888       Height (mm) 2700 2700       Sheathing Type None None       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c.       Stud Weight - 25Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 92 39 x 92     Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWS Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWS Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Insulation Insulation       Material  Acustic Insulation Fiberglass Balt       Thickness 89mm 89mm       Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWS Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Paint Paint       Material - Latex Water Based     Door Opening_Metal Doors Number of Doors 6 6       Door Type Hollow Metal Door Steel Interior Door      2.4.7  Wall 4_92mm_SteelStud       Length (mm) 586627 586627       Height (mm) 2700 2700       Sheathing Type None None       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c.       Stud Weight - 25Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 92 39 x 92     Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board 58        Material Gypsum Board, GWS Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWS Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Insulation Insulation       Material  Acustic Insulation Fiberglass Balt       Thickness 89mm 89mm       Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWS Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Paint Paint       Material - Latex Water Based     Door Opening_Wood Doors Number of Doors 7 7       Door Type Solid Core Wood Door Solid Wood Door     2.4.8  Wall 5_152mm_SteelStud       Length (mm) 94592 94592       Height (mm) 3986 3986       Sheathing Type None None       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c.       Stud Weight - 25Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 152 39 x 152     Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWS Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWS Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Insulation Insulation       Material  Acustic Insulation Fiberglass Balt       Thickness 89mm 89mm       Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWS Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm 59        Category Paint Paint       Material - Latex Water Based     Door Opening Number of Doors 4 4       Door Type Solid Core Wood Door Solid Wood Door     2.4.9  Wall 7_152mm_SteelStud_ At Washrooms       Length (mm) 54365 54365       Height (mm) 2700 2700       Sheathing Type None None       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c.       Stud Weight - 25Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 152 39 x 152     Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Glass Mat Gypsum Tile Backer Board Gypsum Moisture Resistant 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Insulation Insulation       Material  Acustic Insulation Fiberglass Balt       Thickness 89mm 89mm       Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Glass Mat Gypsum Tile Backer Board Gypsum Moisture Resistant 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Paint Paint       Material - Latex Water Based     2.4.10  Wall 8_203mm_SteelStud_ Plumbing Chase       Length (mm) 25123 25123       Height (mm) 2700 2700       Sheathing Type None None       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c.       Stud Weight - 25Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 92 39 x 92       Sheathing Type None None       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c.       Stud Weight - 25Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 92 39 x 92     Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWS Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm 60        Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Glass Mat Gypsum Tile Backer Board Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Insulation Insulation       Material  Acustic Insulation Fiberglass Balt       Thickness 89mm 89mm       Category Insulation Insulation       Material  Acustic Insulation Fiberglass Balt       Thickness 89mm 89mm       Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWS Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Paint Paint       Material - Latex Water Based     2.4.11  Wall 9_152mm_SteelStud_BrickCladding       Length (mm) 69307 69307       Height (mm) 3986 3986       Sheathing Type MDF Paneling OSB       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c.       Stud Weight - 25Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 152 39 x 152     Envelope Category Cladding Cladding       Material Brick Veneer Masonry Brick-       Thickness (mm) 90 90       Category Insulation Insulation       Material  Acustic Insulation Fiberglass Balt       Thickness 150mm 150mm       Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWS Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Paint Paint       Material - Latex Water Based     Door Opening Number of Doors 2 2       Door Type Solid Core Wood Door Solid Wood Door     2.4.12  Wall 9.1_152mm_SteelStud_BrickCladding       Length (mm) 29357 29357 61        Height (mm) 3986 3986       Sheathing Type MDF Paneling OSB       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c.       Stud Weight - 25Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 152 39 x 152     Envelope Category Cladding Cladding       Material Brick Veneer Masonry Brick-       Thickness (mm) 90 90       Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWS Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Insulation Insulation       Material  Acustic Insulation Fiberglass Balt       Thickness 150mm 150mm       Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWS Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Paint Paint       Material - Latex Water Based     Door Opening Number of Doors 3 3       Door Type Solid Core Wood Door Solid Wood Door     2.4.13  Wall 9.4_92mm_SteelStud_BrickCladding       Length (mm) 8804 8804       Height (mm) 3986 3986       Sheathing Type MDF Paneling OSB       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c.       Stud Weight - 25Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 92 39 x 92     Envelope Category Cladding Cladding       Material Brick Veneer Masonry Brick-       Thickness 90 90       Category Insulation Insulation       Material  Acustic Insulation Fiberglass Balt       Thickness 150mm 150mm       Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWS Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-62  507.614mm     2.4.14  Wall 10_64mm_SteelStud       Length (mm) 272373 272373       Height (mm) 2700 2700       Sheathing Type None None       Stud Spacing - 600 o.c.       Stud Weight - 25Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 64 39 x 92     Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material 25mm Type X Gypsum Board Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8''       Thickness 25mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWB Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Paint Paint       Material - Latex Water Based     Door Opening Number of Doors 54 54       Door Type Hollow Metal Door Steel Interior Door      2.4.15  Wall 11.1_92mm_SteelStud       Length (mm) 126760 126760       Height (mm) 2700 2700       Sheathing Type None None       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c.       Stud Weight - 25Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 92 39 x 92     Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWB Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Paint Paint       Material - Latex Water Based     Door Opening Number of Doors 2 2       Door Type Solid Core Wood Door Solid Wood Door     2.4.16  Wall 11.2_152mm_SteelStud       Length (mm) 139379 139379       Height (mm) 2700 2700       Sheathing Type None None       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c. 63        Stud Weight - 25Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 152 39 x 152     Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWB Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Paint Paint       Material - Latex Water Based     2.4.17  Wall 12.1_22mm_FurringChannel       Length (mm) 58685 58685       Height (mm) 4200 4200       Sheathing Type None None       Stud Spacing - 600 o.c.       Stud Weight - 25Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 22mm Furring Channel 39 x 92     Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWB Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm     Door Opening Number of Doors 6 6       Door Type Solid Core Wood Door Solid Wood Door     2.4.18  Wall 12.2_38mm_FurringChannel       Length (mm) 133371 133371       Height (mm) 4200 4200       Sheathing Type None None       Stud Spacing - 600 o.c.       Stud Weight - 25Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 38mm Furring Channel 39 x 92     Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWB Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm     Door Opening Number of Doors 4 4       Door Type Hollow Metal Door Steel Interior Door      2.4.19  Wall E3_152mm_SteelStud_12600mmHeight       Length (mm) 12830 12830       Height (mm) 12600 12600       Sheathing Type Exterior Sheathing OSB       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c.       Stud Weight - 20Ga       Stud Thickness 39 x 152 39 x 152 64  (mm)     Envelope Category Cladding Cladding       Material Brick Veneer Masonry Brick-       Thickness 90 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Insulation Insulation       Material Mineral Wool Board Insulation (R20) Rockwool Batt       Thickness 70.00 70.00       Category Vapour Barrier Vapour Barrier       Material Air Vapour Moisture Barrier Polyethylene 6mil       Thickness -         Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWB Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm     2.4.20  Wall E3_152mm_SteelStud_1810mmHeight       Length (mm) 393570 393570       Height (mm) 1810 1810       Sheathing Type Exterior Sheathing OSB       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c.       Stud Weight - 20Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 152 39 x 92     Envelope Category Cladding Cladding       Material Brick Veneer Masonry Brick-       Thickness (mm) 90 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Insulation Insulation       Material Mineral Wool Board Insulation (R20) Rockwool Batt       Thickness 70.00 70.00       Category Vapour Barrier Vapour Barrier       Material Air Vapour Moisture Barrier Polyethylene 6mil       Thickness -         Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWB Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm     2.4.21  Wall E3_152mm_SteelStud_910mmHeight       Length (mm) 11352 11352       Height (mm) 910 910 65        Sheathing Type Exterior Sheathing OSB       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c.       Stud Weight - 20Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 152 39 x 92     Envelope Category Cladding Cladding       Material Brick Veneer Masonry Brick-       Thickness (mm) 90 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Insulation Insulation       Material Mineral Wool Board Insulation (R20) Rockwool Batt       Thickness 70.00 70.00       Category Vapour Barrier Vapour Barrier       Material Air Vapour Moisture Barrier Polyethylene 6mil       Thickness -         Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWB Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm     2.4.22  Wall E4_152mm_SteelStud_12600mmHeight       Length (mm) 3606 3606       Height (mm) 12600 12600       Sheathing Type Exterior Sheathing OSB       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c.       Stud Weight - 20Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 152 39 x 92     Envelope Category Cladding Cladding       Material Composite Cement Panels  Fiber  Cement Siding       Thickness (mm) 25 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Insulation Insulation       Material Mineral Wool Board Insulation (R20) Rockwool Batt       Thickness 70.00 70.00       Category Vapour Barrier Vapour Barrier       Material Air Vapour Moisture Barrier Polyethylene 6mil       Thickness -   66        Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWB Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm     2.4.23  Wall E4_152mm_SteelStud_1810mmHeight       Length (mm) 386616 386616       Height (mm) 1810 1810       Sheathing Type Exterior Sheathing OSB       Stud Spacing - 400 o.c.       Stud Weight - 20Ga       Stud Thickness (mm) 39 x 152 39 x 92     Envelope Category Cladding Cladding       Material Composite Cement Panels  Fiber  Cement Siding       Thickness (mm) 25 25.381mm-507.614mm       Category Insulation Insulation       Material Mineral Wool Board Insulation (R20) Rockwool Batt       Thickness (mm) 70.00 70.00       Category Vapour Barrier Vapour Barrier       Material Air Vapour Moisture Barrier Polyethylene 6mil       Thickness -         Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board       Material Gypsum Board, GWB Gypsum Regular 5/8''       Thickness 16mm 25.381mm-507.614mm 3 Columns and Beams             3.1  Concrete Columns     3.1.1  Column_Concrete_Beam_N/A_Basement       Number of Beams 0 0       Number of Columns 55 55       Floor to floor height (m) 4.2 4.2       Bay sizes (m) 9.29 9.29       Supported span (m) 9.29 9.29       Supported Area (m2) 86.29 86.31       Live load (kPa) 4.8 4.8     3.1.2  Column_Concrete_Beam_Level1       Number of Beams 16 16       Number of Columns 34 34 67        Floor to floor height (m) 5 5       Bay sizes (m) 5.53 5.53       Supported span (m) 5.53 5.53       Supported Area (m2) 30.63 30.63       Live load (kPa) 4.8 4.8     3.1.3  Column_Concrete_Beam_N/A_Level2       Number of Beams 0 0       Number of Columns 30 30       Floor to floor height (m) 4.2 4.2       Bay sizes (m) 6.95 6.95       Supported span (m) 6.95 6.95       Supported Area (m2) 48.34 48.34       Live load (kPa) 3.6 3.6     3.1.4  Column_Concrete_Beam_N/A_Level3       Number of Beams 0 0       Number of Columns 38 38       Floor to floor height (m) 4.2 4.2       Bay sizes (m) 6.30 6.30       Supported span (m) 6.30 6.30       Supported Area (m2) 39.67 39.7       Live load (kPa) 3.6 3.6     3.1.5  Column_Concrete_Beam_N/A_Level4       Number of Beams 0 0       Number of Columns 38 38       Floor to floor height (m) 4.2 4.2       Bay sizes (m) 6.30 6.30       Supported span (m) 6.30 6.30       Supported Area (m2) 39.67 39.7       Live load (kPa) 3.6 3.6  3.2  Wood Columns    3.2.1  Column_GL_Wood_Level1      Number of Beams 0 0      Number of Columns 67 67      Floor to floor height (m) 5 5      Bay sizes (m) 5.53 5.53      Supported span (m) 5.53 5.53      Supported Area (m2) 30.63 30.63      Live load (kPa) 4.80 4.8    3.2.2  Column_GL_Wood_Level2      Number of Beams 0 0 68       Number of Columns 34 34      Floor to floor height (m) 4.2 4.2      Bay sizes (m) 6.95 6.95      Supported span (m) 6.95 6.95      Supported Area (m2) 48.34 48.34      Live load (kPa) 3.6 3.6    3.2.3  Column_GL_Wood_Level3      Number of Beams 0 0      Number of Columns 40 40      Floor to floor height (m) 4.2 4.2      Bay sizes (m) 6.30 6.30      Supported span (m) 6.30 6.30      Supported Area (m2) 39.67 39.67      Live load (kPa) 3.6 3.6    3.2.4  Column_Wood_Level4      Number of Beams 0 0      Number of Columns 40 40      Floor to floor height (m) 4.2 4.2      Bay sizes (m) 6.30 6.30      Supported span (m) 6.30 6.30      Supported Area (m2) 39.67 39.67      Live load (kPa) 3.6 3.6   3.2.5  Column_Wood_Level5     Number of Beams 0 0     Number of Columns 34 34     Floor to floor height (m) 4.2 4.2     Bay sizes (m) 7.23 7.23     Supported span (m) 7.23 7.23     Supported Area (m2) 52.21 52.21     Live load (kPa) 3.6 3.6 4 Floors            4.1  Insulated suspended slab     4.1.1 Floor_Concrete_Suspendedslab_193mm       Width(m) 88 88.05128205       Span (m) 9.75 9.75       Concrete (Mpa) 35 35       Concrete flyash % 0.25 0.25       Live load (kPa) 4.8 4.80                             4.1.2 Floor_Wood_SuspendedSlab_89mm 69        Thickness (m) 0.089 0.089       Area (m2) 3056 3056       Volume (m3) 271.984 271.984       Live load (kPa) 3.3 3.3                                         4.1.3 Floor_Insulation_SuspendedSlab_25mm       Thickness(m) 0.025 0.025       Area(m2) 3096 3096       Live load (kPa) 3.3 3.3                                                     4.1.4 Floor_Concrete_SuspendedSlab_100mm       Width(m) 370.2769231 370.2769231       Span (m) 9.75 9.75       Concrete (Mpa) 35 35       Concrete flyash % 0.25 0.25       Live load (kPa) 3.3 3.30                       5  Roof             5.1  Roof insulation     5.1.1  Roof_insulation       Area (m2) 718         Thckness 0.125         thickness125=25x5 - Area(m2) 3590         Live load (psf) 1.3     5.2 Cross laminated timber     5.2.1 Roof_CrossLaminatedTimber       Area (m2) 708         Thickness 0.152         Volume 107.616         Life load (kPa) 1.3   6 Extra Basic Materials             6.1 Steel     6.1.1  Columns_HSS_350W(Total Sum)       Hollow Structural Steel (tonnes) 23.33 23.33   6.2 Wood     6.2.1  Columns_GL_Wood(Total Sum)       Glulam Beams (m3) 17.03 17.03  70  Appendix B: IE Input Assumptions Document  Assembly Group Assembly Type Assembly Name Specific Assumptions 2  Walls  The length of the concrete cast-in-place walls needed adjusting to accommodate the wall thickness limitation in the Impact Estimator. It was assumed that interior steel stud walls were light gauge (25Ga) and exterior steel stud walls were heavy gauge (20Ga). According to the general notes in the structural plans, normal weight concrete for retaining walls is 25MPa and for shear walls 35Mpa. The IE allowed for 20, 30 or 60MPa, so 30MPa was used to model concrete walls. In the other hand, fly ash content for retaining walls was modeled as 40%, which was the closest value for the actual content of 35%.   2.1  Cast In Place         2.1.6  Wall_Cast-in-Place_W2_250mm This wall was increased by a factor in order to fit the 300mm thickness limitation of the Impact Estimator.  This was done by increasing the length of the wall using the following equation;  = (Measured Length) * [(Cited Thickness)/200mm]  = (76980) * [(250)/200]  = 96225 mm     2.1.7   Wall_Cast-in-Place_W6_350mm This wall was increased by a factor in order to fit the 300mm thickness limitation of the Impact Estimator.  This was done by increasing the length of the wall using the following equation;  = (Measured Length) * [(Cited Thickness)/300mm]  = (16654) * [(350)/300]  = 19430 mm     2.1.8   Wall_Cast-in-Place_SW1_350mm_4200mmHeight This wall was increased by a factor in order to fit the 300mm thickness limitation of the Impact Estimator.  This was done by increasing the length of the wall using the following equation;  = (Measured Length) * [(Cited Thickness)/300mm]  = (37119) * [(350)/300]  = 43306 mm 71      2.1.8   Wall_Cast-in-Place_SW1_350mm_5000mmHeight This wall was increased by a factor in order to fit the 300mm thickness limitation of the Impact Estimator.  This was done by increasing the length of the wall using the following equation;  = (Measured Length) * [(Cited Thickness)/300mm]  = (1020) * [(350)/300]  = 1190 mm     2.1.8   Wall_Cast-in-Place_SW5_430mm_4200mmHeight This wall was increased by a factor in order to fit the 300mm thickness limitation of the Impact Estimator.  This was done by increasing the length of the wall using the following equation;  = (Measured Length) * [(Cited Thickness)/300mm]  = (5420) * [(430)/300]  = 7769 mm     2.1.8   Wall_Cast-in-Place_SW5_430mm_5000mmHeight This wall was increased by a factor in order to fit the 300mm thickness limitation of the Impact Estimator.  This was done by increasing the length of the wall using the following equation;  = (Measured Length) * [(Cited Thickness)/300mm]  = (25345) * [(430)/300]  = 36328 mm   2.2  Concrete Block Wall         2.2.1  Wall_E6.2_ConcreteBlock_152mmSteelStud Polyethylene was assumed to be 6mil because the this is a below ground wall.      2.2.2  Wall_16_2H_CMU_Wall Steel Interior Door was the closest estimation to the observed doors in this wall. Latex Water Based was the painting assumed to be used as finishing material.   2.3  Curtain Wall         2.3.4  Wall_CurtainWall_Opaque Glass Spandrel_5090mm Height Aluminum Door with 80% glazing was the closest estimtation to the observed doors in this wall.     2.3.5  Wall_ CurtainWall_Opaque Glass Spandrel_4100mm Height Aluminum Door with 80% glazing was the closest estimtation to the observed doors in this wall.     2.3.6  Wall_CurtainWall_Opaque Glass Spandrel_4410mm Height Aluminum Door with 80% glazing was the closest estimtation to the observed doors in this wall.     2.3.8  Wall_Curtain_Wall_Interior_4786mm_Height Aluminum Door with 80% glazing was the closest estimtation to the observed doors in this wall.   2.4  Steel     72  Stud     2.4.1  Wall 1.1_92mm_SteelStud Since this was an interior wall, no sheathing was considered. Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8'' was the gypsum type used in the IE to model this wall.                                            This type of wall had 87 hollow metal doors and 220 solid wood doors, so the total length of this wall was divided proporcionally to account for the two different type of doors.  Acoustic insulation was modeled as fiberglass batt, as it was the closest surrogate to this kind of material. Latex Water Based was the painting assumed to be used as finishing material.     2.4.4  Wall 2_152mm_SteelStud_ At Washrooms Since this was an interior wall, no sheathing was considered. Gypsum Moisture Resistant 5/8''' was the closest element found in the IE to model this wall.                                             Acoustic insulation was modeled as fiberglass batt, as it was the closest surrogate to this kind of material.     2.4.5  Wall 3_92mm_SteelStud Since this was an interior wall, no sheathing was considered.                                              Acoustic insulation was modeled as fiberglass batt, as it was the closest surrogate to this kind of material. Latex Water Based was the painting assumed to be used as finishing material. Furring channel was replaced by a 92mm stud, as this is theclosest thickness provided by IE.     2.4.6  Wall 4_92mm_SteelStud Since this was an interior wall, no sheathing was considered.                                              Acoustic insulation was modeled as fiberglass batt, as it was the closest surrogate to this kind of material. Latex Water Based was the painting assumed to be used as finishing material.      2.4.7  Wall 4_92mm_SteelStud Acoustic Batt insulation was not available in the Impact Estimator so Fiberglass Batt was selected as the closest surrogate.  Since this was an interior wall, no sheathing was considered.                                               No information was provided for the type of painting used, so Latex Water Based was assumed to be used when painting was indicated in the architectural plans.      2.4.8  Wall 5_152mm_SteelStud Acoustic Batt insulation was not available in the Impact Estimator so Fiberglass Batt was selected as the closest surrogate.  Since this was an interior wall, no sheathing was considered.                                               Latex Water Based was the painting assumed to be used as finishing material.      2.4.9  Wall 7_152mm_SteelStud_ At Washrooms Acoustic Batt insulation was not available in the Impact Estimator so Fiberglass Batt was selected as the closest surrogate.  Since this was an interior wall, no sheathing was considered.                                               No information was provided for the type of painting used, so Latex Water Based was assumed to be used when painting was indicated in the architectural plans. 73      2.4.10  Wall 8_203mm_SteelStud_ Plumbing Chase Acoustic Batt insulation was not available in the Impact Estimator so Fiberglass Batt was selected as the closest surrogate.  Since this was an interior wall, no sheathing was considered.                                               Latex Water Based was the painting assumed to be used as finishing material.      2.4.11  Wall 9_152mm_SteelStud_BrickCladding Acoustic Batt insulation was not available in the Impact Estimator so Fiberglass Batt was selected as the closest surrogate.  MDF Panelling sheathing was replaced by OSB sheating type in the IE.                                           No information was provided for the type of painting used, so Latex Water Based was assumed to be used when painting was indicated in the architectural plans.     2.4.12  Wall 9.1_152mm_SteelStud_BrickCladding Acoustic Batt insulation was not available in the Impact Estimator so Fiberglass Batt was selected as the closest surrogate.  MDF Panelling sheathing was replaced by OSB sheating type in the IE.                                           No information was provided for the type of painting used, so Latex Water Based was assumed to be used when painting was indicated in the architectural plans.     2.4.13  Wall 9.4_92mm_SteelStud_BrickCladding Acoustic Batt insulation was not available in the Impact Estimator so Fiberglass Batt was selected as the closest surrogate.  MDF Panelling sheathing was replaced by OSB sheating type in the IE.                                           No information was provided for the type of painting used, so Latex Water Based was assumed to be used when painting was indicated in the architectural plans.      2.4.14  Wall 10_64mm_SteelStud 64mm steel stud was replaced by a 92mm stud, as this is the closest thickness provided by IE. Acoustic Batt insulation was not available in the Impact Estimator so Fiberglass Batt was selected as the closest surrogate. Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8'' was the gypsum type used in the IE to model this wall.                                           No information was provided for the type of painting used, so Latex Water Based was assumed to be used when painting finishing was indicated in the architectural plans.      2.4.15  Wall 11.1_92mm_SteelStud Acoustic Batt insulation was not available in the Impact Estimator so Fiberglass Batt was selected as the closest surrogate. Since this was an interior wall, no sheathing was considered.                                         No information was provided for the type of painting used, so Latex Water Based was assumed to be used when painting was indicated in the architectural plans.  74      2.4.16  Wall 11.1_92mm_SteelStud Acoustic Batt insulation was not available in the Impact Estimator so Fiberglass Batt was selected as the closest surrogate. Since this was an interior wall, no sheathing was considered.                                         No information was provided for the type of painting used, so Latex Water Based was assumed to be used when painting was indicated in the architectural plans.      2.4.17  Wall 12.1_22mm_FurringChannel 22mm Furring channel was replaced by a 92mm stud, as this is the closest thickness provided by IE. Since this was an interior wall, no sheathing was considered.                                         No information was provided for the type of painting used, so Latex Water Based was assumed to be used when painting was indicated in the architectural plans.      2.4.18  Wall 12.2_38mm_FurringChannel 38mm Furring channel was replaced by a 92mm stud, as this is the closest thickness provided by IE. Since this was an interior wall, no sheathing was considered.                                         No information was provided for the type of painting used, so Latex Water Based was assumed to be used when painting was indicated in the architectural plans.      2.4.19  Wall E3_152mm_SteelStud_12600mmHeight Mineral Wool Board Insulation (R20) was not available in the Impact Estimator so Rockwool Batt was selected as the closest surrogate. Exterior sheating indicated in the plans was assumed to be OSB. Air Vapour Moisture Barrier was assumed to be Polyethylene 6mil.           2.4.20  Wall E3_152mm_SteelStud_1810mmHeight Mineral Wool Board Insulation (R20) was not available in the Impact Estimator so Rockwool Batt was selected as the closest surrogate. Exterior sheating indicated in the plans was assumed to be OSB. Air Vapour Moisture Barrier was assumed to be Polyethylene 6mil.      2.4.21  Wall E3_152mm_SteelStud_910mmHeight Mineral Wool Board Insulation (R20) was not available in the Impact Estimator so Rockwool Batt was selected as the closest surrogate. Exterior sheating indicated in the plans was assumed to be OSB. Air Vapour Moisture Barrier was assumed to be Polyethylene 6mil.      2.4.22  Wall E4_152mm_SteelStud_12600mmHeight In the cladding category Composite Cement Panels were not available in the IE so Fiber  Cement Siding were selected as the closest surrogate. Mineral Wool Board Insulation (R20) was not available in the Impact Estimator so Rockwool Batt was selected as the closest surrogate. Exterior sheating indicated in the plans was assumed to be OSB. Air Vapour Moisture Barrier was assumed to be Polyethylene 6mil.      2.4.23  Wall E4_152mm_SteelStud_1810mmHeight In the cladding category Composite Cement Panels were not available in the IE so Fiber  Cement Siding were selected as the closest surrogate. Mineral Wool Board Insulation (R20) was not available in the Impact Estimator so Rockwool Batt was selected as the closest surrogate. Exterior sheating indicated in the plans was assumed to be OSB. Air Vapour Moisture Barrier was assumed to be Polyethylene 6mil.  75  3 Columns and Beams          3.1  Concrete Columns         3.1.1  Column_Concrete_Beam_N/A_Basement               Bay size & supported span are found using the square root of the total floor area divided by the number of columns. ie: Square root(Total floor area/number of coloumns).       3.1.2  Column_Concrete_Beam_Level1       Same assumption as 3.1.1.       Floor is supported by two types of columns, so the supported span and bay size are adjusted to be proportional to fraction of total amount of columns that this type of column makes up.       3.1.3  Column_Concrete_Beam_N/A_Level2       Same assumption as 3.1.2.       3.1.4  Column_Concrete_Beam_N/A_Level3       Same assumption as 3.1.2.       3.1.5  Column_Concrete_Beam_N/A_Level4       Same assumption as 3.1.2.     3.2  Wood Columns        3.2.1  Column_GL_Wood_Level1      Same assumption as 3.1.2.      3.2.2  Column_GL_Wood_Level2      Same assumption as 3.1.2.      3.2.3  Column_GL_Wood_Level3      Same assumption as 3.1.2.      3.2.4  Column_Wood_Level4      Same assumption as 3.1.2.      3.2.5  Column_Wood_Level5      Same assumption as 3.1.1.   Assembly Group Assembly Type Assembly Name Specific Assumptions 4 Floor     4.1  Insulated Suspended Slab     4.1.1 Floor_Concrete_Suspendedslab_193mm       Weighted average thickness calculation       76          Thick Length         south 300 =8*6 down to basement       north 365 =3.5*6         north 250 =2.5*6                        =SUM (F80:F83)            =F80/F$9 =E80*F85          =F81/F$9 =E81*F86          =F82/F$9 =E82*F87                     Weighted Average =SUM (G85:G90)       Different thickness in same floor. Floors overlap for 6 meters. Weighted average thickness taken depending on length of thickness on level       Wood - Composite shear connector not taken into account (pg 73 struc)       Area is taken from multipliers of length and width       Shear connector not accounted in between floors because the overall volume of the materials are the same for concrete and wood. Composite not measured because unsure of its components.                    Composition           Concrete 193          Rigid insulation 25          Laminated stramb lumber 89    77        Weighted average floor thickness =SUM (E96:E98)                      Extra thickness completed with concrete                       4.1.2 Floor_Wood_SuspendedSlab_89mm       Composition             Concrete 193          Rigid insulation 25          Laminated stramb lumber 89          Weighted average floor thickness =SUM (E105:E107)                      Different thickness in same floor. Floors overlap for 6 meters. Weighted average thickness taken depending on length of thickness on level       Wood - Composite shear connector not taken into account (pg 73 struc)       Area is taken from multipliers of length and width       Shear connector not accounted in between floors because the overall volume of the materials are the same for concrete and wood. Composite not measured because unsure of its components.        Wood stairs accounted in the floor with same characteristics     4.1.3 Floor_Insulation_SuspendedSlab_25mm       Composition       78        Concrete 193          Rigid insulation 25          Laminated stramb lumber 89          Weighted average floor thickness =SUM (E117:E119)                      Different thickness in same floor. Floors overlap for 6 meters. Weighted average thickness taken depending on length of thickness on level       Wood - Composite shear connector not taken into account (pg 73 struc)       Area is taken from multipliers of length and width       Shear connector not accounted in between floors because the overall volume of the materials are the same for concrete and wood. Composite not measured because unsure of its components.                    Rigid Board Insulation: Foam Polyisocyanurate     4.1.4 Floor_Concrete_SuspendedSlab_100mm      Wood - Composite shear connector not taken into account (pg 73 struc)      Auditorium stairs accounted in concrete. Same conditions.      Floor thickness 214mm          Concrete 100         Rigid insulation 25         Laminated stramb lumber 89       4.2 Slab on grade 79      4.2.1 Concrete_SOB_200mm      Span and width taken as total average due to several area segments.      Concrete in basement is treated as foundation concrete for Flyash content and Strength      Auditorium SOB thickness 200mm      Stairs accunted together for the whole building.    4.2.2 Concrete_SOB_125mm      Span and width taken as total average due to several area segments.      Concrete in basement is treated as foundation concrete for Flyash content and Strength      Auditorium SOB thickness 200mm      Stairs accunted together for the whole building. 5  Roof               5.1  Roof insulation     5.1.1  Roof_insulation       Future green roof is same composition as rest of roof but covered with vegetation material not taken into account.       Insulation material: Foam Polyisocyanurate   5.2 Cross laminated timber     5.2.1 Roof_CrossLaminatedTimber       Cross laminated timber is used throughout the roof. No concrete on structural drawings       Concrete was not used because architectural and structural drawings are incomplete.        Two types of roofs were showned in the deck of level 5 accounted as roof. Future green roof type of roof was selected.  

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.18861.1-0108562/manifest

Comment

Related Items