UBC Social Ecological Economic Development Studies (SEEDS) Student ReportEmma BrownAllard Hall LCA StudyCIVL 498CNovember 18, 201310651529University of British Columbia 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”. 1 | P a g e PROVISIO This study has been completed by undergraduate students as part of their coursework at the University of British Columbia (UBC) and is also a contribution to a larger effort – the UBC LCA Project – which aims to support the development of the field of life cycle assessment (LCA). The information and findings contained in this report have not been through a full critical review and should be considered preliminary. If further information is required, please contact the course instructor Rob Sianchuk at rob.sianchuk@gmail.com Allard Hall LCA Study Emma Brown CIVL 498C November 18, 201 3 1 Executive Summary This report is the final project for CIVL 498C, Life Cycle Analysis, which is being taken as a Civil Engineering fourth year technical elective. The subject of this report is Allard Hall, which is the building for the Faculty of Law on UBC Point Grey campus. Detailed information about Allard Hall is contained in this report. The life cycle analysis, as well as accompanying definitions and information, are detailed in this report. A life cycle assessment was performed previously for this building, also as a final project for a previous year of this class. For this project the previous LCA report and model was reorganized and modified where appropriate. To do this the take-off software On Screen Take-off, as well as the Athena Impact Estimator for Buildings software were used. Subsequent to the reassessment of the building, benchmarks for impact categories were created using LCA information from various other UBC buildings. The results of the reassessment of Allard Hall were then compared with the benchmarks, and the results were that Allard Hall had significantly lower impacts than the benchmarks. All of the information concerning the results of the LCA study on Allard Hall, as well as the comparison with the generated benchmarks are included in this report with accompanying figures. 2 Contents List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................................................ 3 List of Tables .............................................................................................................................................................................. 4 1.0 General Information on the Assessment ................................................................................................................ 4 Purpose of the assessment ............................................................................................................................................. 4 Intended Use of Assessment ...................................................................................................................................... 5 Reasons for Carrying out the Study ........................................................................................................................ 5 Intended Audience ........................................................................................................................................................ 5 Comparative Assertions .............................................................................................................................................. 6 Identification of building ................................................................................................................................................. 6 Other Assessment Information ..................................................................................................................................... 7 2.0 General Information on the Object of Assessment ............................................................................................. 7 Functional Equivalent ....................................................................................................................................................... 7 Reference Study Period .................................................................................................................................................... 8 Object of Assessment Scope ........................................................................................................................................... 9 3.0 Statement of Boundaries and Scenarios Used in the Assessment ............................................................. 11 System Boundary .............................................................................................................................................................. 11 Product Stage...................................................................................................................................................................... 12 Construction Stage ........................................................................................................................................................... 13 4.0 Environmental Data ...................................................................................................................................................... 14 3 Data Sources ....................................................................................................................................................................... 14 Data Adjustments and Substitutions ........................................................................................................................ 15 Data Quality ......................................................................................................................................................................... 15 5.0 List of Indicators Used for Assessment and Expression of Results ........................................................... 16 6.0 Model Development ...................................................................................................................................................... 17 7.0 Communication of Assessment Results ................................................................................................................ 20 Life Cycle Results .............................................................................................................................................................. 20 Annex A - Interpretation of Assessment Results ...................................................................................................... 22 Benchmark Development .............................................................................................................................................. 22 UBC Academic Building Benchmark ......................................................................................................................... 23 Annex B - Recommendations for LCA Use ................................................................................................................... 29 Annex C - Author Reflection .............................................................................................................................................. 30 Annex D – Impact Estimator Inputs and Assumptions .......................................................................................... 38 Bibliography ............................................................................................................................................................................ 80 List of Figures Figure 1 - Building Modules .............................................................................................................................................. 12 Figure 2 - All Impact Categories, % Difference.......................................................................................................... 24 4 Figure 3 - Fossil Fuel Consumption................................................................................................................................ 25 Figure 4 - Global Warming ................................................................................................................................................. 25 Figure 5 - Acidification ........................................................................................................................................................ 26 Figure 6 - Human Health Criteria - Respiratory ....................................................................................................... 26 Figure 7 - Eutrophication ................................................................................................................................................... 27 Figure 8 - Ozone Layer Depletion ................................................................................................................................... 27 Figure 9 - Smog ....................................................................................................................................................................... 28 Figure 10 - Cost versus Global Warming ..................................................................................................................... 29 List of Tables Table 1: Assessment Information ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Table 2 - Functional Equivalent Definition ................................................................................................................... 8 Table 3 - Building Definition ............................................................................................................................................. 10 Table 4 - Bill of Materials for Total Building .............................................................................................................. 19 Table 5 - Allard Hall LCA Results .................................................................................................................................... 20 1.0 General Information on the Assessment P urpose of the assessment The general purpose of doing a building LCA is to determine the environmental performance of the building and its components, in a quantifiable manner. The purpose of 5 this assessment is to organize a previously performed LCA on Allard Hall into CIQS standards, improve the previous LCA where possible, and compare the environmental performance of Allard Hall with benchmarks generated by improved LCA studies of other UBC buildings, which are carried out by peers. Intend ed Use of Assessment The intended use of this study is to compare the environmental performance of Allard Hall with other UBC buildings. Reasons for Carrying out the Study The reasons for carrying out this study are to organize the elements of Allard Hall into CIQS standards, assess the accuracy of the previous assessment, improve the previous assessment model where possible, create benchmarks for UBC buildings, compare results of Allard Hall assessment against benchmarks, and suggest things to consider when implementing LCA. Intended Audience There is a wide intended audience for this study. LCA students in future years are part of the intended audience. Just as this study uses the LCA study of Allard Hall performed by students in 2012 and improved LCA studies of other UBC buildings currently being performed by other students, in the future this study could be used by students to compare with other buildings or further improve the study. UBC Properties Trust Planners and policy makers are also part of the intended audience. This study, along with studies of other UBC buildings, can be used by them to determine what construction components have less of an environmental impact, which can inform policy decisions. Another part of the intended audience is the designers and contractors involved in UBC building projects, who can use this study, along with studies of other UBC buildings, to make informed decision on 6 the construction components to use in their projects in order to minimize the environmental impact. Finally, the intended audience also includes the public since these reports will be make publicly available. The public can constitute other UBC students, faculty, administration, or anyone who is interested in LCA studies of UBC buildings. Since the intended audience of this study is quite varied, is it important that the language and terminology used in this study be accessible to varying degrees of familiarity with LCA. Comparative Assertions This study of Allard Hall is in many ways a comparative assertion, since it uses LCA findings of other UBC buildings to create benchmarks to compare the results of this study against. The results of this study are being used to create benchmarks which other students are using to compare their buildings with. The results found in this study and presented in this report are intended to be used in the future to compare other buildings against. I dentification of building Allard Hall is the main building for the University of British Columbia’s (UBC) Faculty of Law. It is located on UBC’s Point Grey campus, at 1822 East Mall, and was constructed in 14 months in order to open in September of 20111. The building was designed by Diamond and Schmitt Architects in collaboration with CEI Architecture, the general contractor was ITC Construction group, and the property owner is the UBC Properties Trust. Allard Hall is a four-storey, 141,000 square foot building, which cost approximately $56M to construct in 20112. The cost of construction for this building in 2013 Canadian dollars is $56.56MA major challenge in the structural design of this building was accommodating the weight of 1 . N.p.. Web. 19 Nov 2013. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allard_Hall>. 2 . N.p.. Web. 19 Nov 2013. <http://www.ubcproperties.com/portfolio_detail.php?category=Location&list=Vancouver&id=Allard Hall Faculty of Law Building>. 7 an extensive library collection. This was done successfully, and the building boasts a three-storey law library, as well as classroom space, meeting space, and large lecture halls. It was designed to meet LEED Gold standards and reduce energy consumption by 50%, through several sustainable features such as a Geo-exchange system3. Other Assessment Information Table 1: Assessment Information Client for Assessment Completed as coursework in Civil Engineering technical elective course at the University of British Columbia. Name and qualification of the assessor First Author: Emma Brown, Undergraduate Civil Engineering Student Second Authors: Dominique Bram Guevarra, Eric Howie, Patti Shen Impact Assessment method Athena Impact Estimator for Buildings, Version 4.2.0208 TRACI version 2.2 Point of Assessment Two years post-construction Period of Validity 5 years. Date of Assessment Completed in December 2013. Verifier Student work, study not verified. 2.0 General Information on the Object of Assessment Functional Equivalent The functional units used in this study to normalize the results of the study are: 3 . N.p.. Web. 19 Nov 2013. <http://www.ceiarchitecture.com/project/ubc-allard-hall-law-building/>. 8 Per square metre of institutional academic building constructed The functional unit of m2 was selected because it can be used to directly compare the environmental impacts of Allard Hall with other buildings, particularly other UBC buildings. Table 2 - Functional Equivalent Definition Aspect of Object of Assessment Description Building Type Institutional Technical and functional requirements LEED Gold, BCBC 2006, structural capacity to support a large library, Library, classrooms, office space, meeting rooms, large lecture halls, forums. Pattern of use -Business hours for administration staff, support staff, and faculty members -Business hours for classroom and lecture hall use -Extended business hours for library -All hours access for law students and law faculty -Daytime use on weekends and weekdays for general public -Special weekend use of forum auditorium for special events and lectures Required service life 100 yearsi Reference Study Period The reference study period chosen for this assessment is one year. This is not equal to the service life required for UBC buildings, which is 100 years. EN 15978 stipulates that the default value for the reference study period should be the required service life of the building. There are several reasons why the reference study period for this assessment is not the service life of 100 years. The reference study period of one year only addresses the 9 product and construction process stage of the building, which is Module A of EN 159784. In order to make the scope of this assessment reasonable for the timeframe over which it was conducted (approximately 2.5 months), Modules B and C, the use and end of life stages of the building, were excluded. Module D is supplementary information, such as reuse, recycling, and recovery potential, and since it is outside of the system boundary, it is generally excluded5. A purpose of this study is to compare the environmental impacts with other UBC buildings; however, the time of construction and service life of the buildings on UBC campus vary greatly. Especially considering the relatively recent requirements of LEED Gold standards, which inherently has requirements for the building. In order to conduct the study in a manner that is conducive to comparison, the studies had to be normalized and a reference study period of one year, which only assesses the product and use stages, was chosen. Ob ject of Assessment Scope An LCA study on a building should include the building, from its foundation to the external works enclosed within the area of the building’s site, according to EN15978. This assessment of Allard Hall includes everything from its foundation to external works, except for interior finishes, fittings, mechanical systems and equipment, electrical components, and site work. The building components have been sorted using a modified version of the CIQS level 3 elements. These components were excluded in order to maintain a reasonable scope for this assessment. Furthermore, some of the components excluded from this study, such as mechanical systems, have changed significantly over the years; and therefore it would be difficult to compare the studies of various UBC buildings, which is in part what this assessment is intended for. 4 . N.p.. Web. 19 Nov 2013. <http://www.coldstreamconsulting.com/services/life-cycle-analysis/whole-building-lca/en-15978-standard>. 5 . N.p.. Web. 19 Nov 2013. <http://etool.net.au/eblog/environment/en-15978/>. 10 In essence this study is addressing the structure, envelope, and partition walls of Allard Hall. Allard Hall’s foundation is comprised of pad and strip footings with slabs on grade, on both the basement level, which is not the full footprint of the building, and the ground level. The building’s structural system is primarily concrete and consists of cast in place walls, beams, columns, and floor slabs. The building envelope is primarily curtain wall and the partition walls are mostly steel stud walls with a few concrete block walls. Table. Building Definition Template. Table 3 - Building Definition CIVL 498C Level 3 Elements Description Quantity Units A11 Foundations Concrete strip footings, concrete pad footings 2506.55 m 2 A21 Lowest Floor Construction Concrete slabs on grade 2506.55 m 2 A22 Upper Floor Construction Concrete columns and concrete beams from basement levels to level 4. Concrete suspended floor slab from levels 1 to 4. 9710.5 m 2 A23 Roof Construction Concrete columns and beams on level 5. Concrete roof suspended slab. Steel joist roof. 7439.4 m 2 A31 Walls Below Grade Concrete cast- in- place walls on basement level. Furring on all floors. 7542.2 m 2 A32 Walls Above Grade Concrete cast- in- place walls on levels 1 to 5. All curtainwall. 6639.5 m 2 11 Concrete block exterior partition walls. B11 Partitions Steel stud partition walls on all floors. Concrete block interior partition walls. 9679 m 2 3.0 Statement of Boundaries and Scenarios Used in the Assessment System Boundary The only building life cycle module included in this study of Allard Hall is Module A. Modules B, C, and D have been excluded for reasons previously stated. Module A includes the product stage, involving raw material supply, transport, and manufacturing, as well as the construction process stage, involving transport and construction-installation process. These stages are described thoroughly in the following sections. The system boundary for this assessment is from the extraction of raw materials to when the building has been constructed and is ready for occupancy. 12 Figure 1 - Building Modules Product Stage The product stage of this LCA assessment takes into consideration the raw material supply, transport and manufacturing models prior to construction of the building. It is essentially considers the ‘cradle to gate’ processes for the building products and services that are reference flows for the construction stage. The Athena LCI Database was not developed from trade or government data sources, but it was developed from scratch using actual mill or engineering process models6. For the raw material supply, the Athena LCI Database uses information from regional product market analyses7. Data for raw material supply begins at the extraction of resources; the Athena LCI Database tracks the energy use, as well as emissions to air, land, and water per unit resource8. Activities such as reforestation and beneficiation are also considered in the data for this module. 6 . N.p.. Web. 19 Nov 2013. <http://www.athenasmi.org/resources/about-lca/technical-details/>. 7 . N.p.. Web. 19 Nov 2013. <http://www.athenasmi.org/resources/about-lca/technical-details/>. 8 . N.p.. Web. 19 Nov 2013. <http://www.athenasmi.org/resources/about-lca/technical-details/>. 13 For the transport module of the product stage, the Athena LCI Database uses weighted average transportation profiles based on distance, and takes into account difference in transportation based on region9. The database simplifies information by treating all offshore raw materials being produced in North America as though they obtained in North America. The transportation considered in this module is between the place of resource extraction and the mill or plant. In the manufacturing module, which generally accounts for the largest part of embodied energy and emissions, the Athena LCI Database considers differences in recycled content based on region10. Furthermore, it includes resource extraction information and considers differences in manufacturing technology. In this database, this module begins with the delivery of the raw resources and ends with the finished product prepared for shipment. Construction Stage The construction stage of LCA encompasses the transportation and construction-installation process modules. In essence it measures the environmental impacts of the materials from the gate of the factory to the practical completion of the construction work. The transportation module accounts for embodied energy and emissions of the construction materials from the factory or mill to the construction site. The Athena LCI Database accounts for variations in transportation based on location, and applies the typical transportation distances to the construction site within each city they are applied11. This is especially important for materials such as large dimension lumber, which can only be obtained from the British Columbia or the Pacific Northwest of the USA. This database 9 . N.p.. Web. 19 Nov 2013. <http://www.athenasmi.org/resources/about-lca/technical-details/>. 10 . N.p.. Web. 19 Nov 2013. <http://www.athenasmi.org/resources/about-lca/technical-details/>. 11 . N.p.. Web. 19 Nov 2013. <http://calculatelca.com/faqs/ 14 treats all offshore products as if they were manufactured in North America12. This module also accounts for the transportation of construction equipment to and from the site. The construction-installation process module takes account of the energy used to construct the elements of the building on site, for example from machines like cranes and mixers13. It also accounts for the waste generation, concrete formwork, and temporary heating and ventilation. 4.0 Environmental Data Data Sources This study uses the Athena LCI Database for material process data, as well as the US LCI Database for energy combustion and pre-combustion processes for electricity generation and transportation. The Athena LCI Database has been developed and is currently managed by the Athena Sustainable Materials Institute. The Athena LCI Database does not use data from trade or government sources, but instead was developed from the beginning from mill or engineering process models. This database is still growing and more than 2 million dollars have been invested in it. The US LCI Database was developed and is maintained by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and its partners. This database was developed and is maintained by NREL’s High-Performance Buildings research group, who worked closely with industry partners and government stakeholders. 12 . N.p.. Web. 19 Nov 2013. <http://www.athenasmi.org/resources/about-lca/technical-details/>. 13 . N.p.. Web. 19 Nov 2013. <http://www.athenasmi.org/resources/about-lca/technical-details/>. 15 Data Adjustments and Substitutions The Impact Estimator model that was created for the previous assessment of Allard Hall in 2012, as well as and the On-Screen Takeoff file used to created it, was checked for accuracy and validity. More detail about is provided about this in section 6.0 Model Development. The previous model of Allard Hall was found to be as accurate as possible, given the limitations of the Impact Estimator; therefore no data adjustments or substitutions were made. Data Quality The quality of the data is determined by its ability to satisfy the stated requirements. To describe data quality, there are five types of uncertainty, which are data uncertainty, model uncertainty, temporal uncertainty, spatial uncertainty, and variability between sources. Data uncertainty is caused by variations in the values of measurements to derive the numerical values. Model uncertainty arises due to simplifications of aspects of the model that cannot be properly modeled. This type of uncertainty is likely to occur frequently when buildings are modelled with the Impact Estimator, since there is limited choices of component inputs. For this assessment there is some model uncertainty, as several components, such as 250mm cast-in-place walls, were modeled in a simplified manner due to the limitations of the Impact Estimator. Temporal uncertainty is due to variations of data over time. A possible source of temporal uncertainty in the Athena LCI Database and US LCI Database are the methods used in manufacturing new products, as these methods might change as new technology is developed. 16 Spatial uncertainty arises from fluctuations in the real world between geographical sites. The Athena LCI Database was compiled through surveys of different regions, which attempts to minimize the spatial uncertainty; however variability in the amount of data available for the various regions would cause spatial uncertainty. Furthermore, spatial uncertainty would arise when a building is assessed that is not located in one of the fifteen cities that the Impact Estimator allows one to choose from. Variability between sources is caused by differences in sources of the inventoried system, such as variation in comparable technical processes. 5.0 L ist of Indicators Used for Assessment and Expression of Results The impact assessment method used in this assessment and in the previous 2012 assessment on Allard Hall is the Athena Impact Estimator for Buildings (Version 4.2.0208). Athena uses the EPA Tool for Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental Impacts (TRACI v 2.1, 2012). The impact categories used in this assessment are as follows: o Global Warming Potential. The category indicator used is kg of CO2 equivalent mass. There are many endpoint impacts for this category, one of which is aquatic ecosystems. o Acidification potential for air. The category indicator used is moles of H+ equivalent mass. A possible endpoint impact of acidification are crops. Acidification can lead to increased aluminum in the soil solution, which can disrupt the cell wall structure of plants and inhibit their nutrient uptake14. 14 . N.p.. Web. 19 Nov 2013. <http://www.apis.ac.uk/overview/issues/overview_acidification.htm>. 17 o Human Health Criteria – Respiratory. The category indicator used is kg of PM 10 equivalent mass. An endpoint impact of this category are the cardiac and respiratory systems of humans15. o Eutrophication potential for air and water. The category indicator used is kg of N equivalent mass. Possible endpoint impact of this category are bodies of water. o Smog potential for air. The category indicator used is kg of O3 equivalent mass. Endpoint impacts of this category are plants and trees, as smog can cause growth loss, premature again, and decrease in pollen production for trees16. o Ozone depletion potential for air. The category indicator used is kg of CFC 11 equivalent. Some endpoint impacts of this category are marine life and agriculture. Plankton, which is the first vital step in the aquatic food chain, is threatened by increased UV radiation17. Some agriculturally grown plants, such as wheat, soybeans, rice, barley, oats, and many more, experience reduced photosynthesis, growth, and flowering due to increased UV radiation. o Fossil fuel consumption. The category indicator used is MJ. An endpoint indicator of this category is air quality. 6.0 Model Development The original model of Allard Hall was developed for the previous 2012 report. Structural drawings were used in conjunction with the take-off software OnScreen TakeOff, to 15 . N.p.. Web. 19 Nov 2013. <http://www.apis.ac.uk/overview/issues/overview_humanhealth.htm>. 16 . N.p.. Web. 19 Nov 2013. <http://are.berkeley.edu/courses/EEP101/spring03/AllThatSmog/extern.html>. 17 . N.p.. Web. 19 Nov 2013. <http://www.bcairquality.ca/101/ozone-depletion-impacts.html>. 18 determine the sizes of the various elements. An inputs and assumptions excel document was compiled contained all the quantities determined from OnScreen TakeOff, as well as any adjustments that were made to make the information compatible with the impact estimator software. In addition, any assumptions that were made in the process were detailed in the excel document. The adjusted quantities were then inputted into the Impact Estimator and results were generated. For this report and assessment, the previous model and data was used, sorted, and modified. The level 3 elements were sorted into CIQS format, in order to standardize the assessment process with other UBC buildings being assessed. The next stage of this assessment involved checking the Impact Estimator model from the previous assessment of Allard Hall in 2012, as well as the associated OST files, for accuracy and validity. The scaling of the drawings on OST was checked and found to be accurate. The measurements determined from OST were checked as well. At first several measurements from the previous model appeared to be inaccurate; however, upon further inspection these values were confirmed as accurate. Due to the limitations of the Impact Estimator in selecting the type of assembly, for several components the dimensions were modified so that the model accurately represented the volume of concrete. Although these modifications create some inaccuracies and the resulting model does not precisely represent the actual building, upon further inspection it was determined that the modifications made create a model that is as accurate as possible given the limitations of the Impact Estimator. Other components that were checked include the material properties and component quantities. Initially it appeared that the quantities of the footings inputted into the Impact Estimator model was different than what was shown on the OST file. However, after observing the drawings more closely it became evident that the footings were accurately modeled in the Impact Estimator file, because footings are located on both the basement and ground level of Allard Hall, since the basement level is smaller than the 19 building footprint. As the previous model of Allard Hall was found to be as accurate as possible after inspection, no changes were made and no new LCA information was substituted into the model. The details of the sorted Level 3 inputs and assumptions for this assessment of Allard Hall are provided in Annex D. The Bill of Materials report produced by the Impact Estimator for the total building shown below: Table 4 - Bill of Materials for Total Building #15 Organic Felt 1674.764 m2 3 mil Polyethylene 2768.3392 m2 5/8" Fire-Rated Type X Gypsum Board 25704.0231 m2 5/8" Regular Gypsum Board 6511.9641 m2 Air Barrier 2768.3392 m2 Aluminum 38.4152 Tonnes Cedar Wood Bevel Siding 536.579 m2 Cold Rolled Sheet 0.5129 Tonnes Commercial(26 ga.) Steel Cladding 274.0212 m2 Concrete 20 MPa (flyash av) 292.0775 m3 Concrete 30 MPa (flyash av) 5692.5735 m3 Concrete Blocks 34717.3679 Blocks Double Glazed No Coating Air 938.1353 m2 EPDM membrane (black, 60 mil) 2053.3982 kg Expanded Polystyrene 14024.3277 m2 (25mm) FG Batt R11-15 43466.9237 m2 (25mm) Galvanized Sheet 8.3275 Tonnes Galvanized Studs 119.7753 Tonnes Glazing Panel 133.1374 Tonnes Hollow Structural Steel 3.4291 Tonnes Joint Compound 32.1521 Tonnes Metric Modular (Modular) Brick 2151.7593 m2 Mortar 726.0972 m3 Nails 2.8096 Tonnes Natural Stone 514.1651 m2 Paper Tape 0.369 Tonnes Rebar, Rod, Light Sections 448.3175 Tonnes Screws Nuts & Bolts 4.1944 Tonnes 20 Small Dimension Softwood Lumber, kiln-dried 7.5386 m3 Solvent Based Alkyd Paint 20.045 L Water Based Latex Paint 766.3033 L Welded Wire Mesh / Ladder Wire 2.5455 Tonnes 7.0 Communication of Assessment Results Life Cycle Results The following table summarizes the Impact Assessment results for Allard Hall. Table 5 - Allard Hall LCA Results Life Cycle Stage Process Level 3 Element Building Total A11 Foundation A21 Lower Floor Construction A22 Upper Floor Construction A23 Roof A31 Walls Below Grade A32 Walls Above Grade B11 Partitions Fossil Fuels (MJ) Manufacturing Material 436827 436827 8268600 2836147 1459957 8767689 25179094 26650617 Transportation 37248 37248 406143 87490 88023 237353 130841 118946336 Total 474075 474075 8674780 2923637 1547980 9005041 2648750 27840081 Construction Construction-Installation Process 101920 101920 798414 167920 164692 565325 156752 2142664 Transportation 57142 57143 437860 163322 105222 824305 132289 1967701 Total 159063 159063 1236274 331242 269914 1389630 289041 4110365 Assembly Total 63313 633138 9911054 3254879 1817894 10394671 2937791 31950446 Global Warming (kg CO2eq) Manufacturing Material 66103 66103 820115 261458 159377 918274 180994 2798308 Transportation 2237.8 2237.8 24702 4968.2 5108.4 14504 7612.1 70899 Total 68340 68341 844817 266426 164485 932778 188606 2869207 Construction Construction-Installation Process 8554.4 8554.5 72150 14792 14768 59453 12635 206900 Transportation 4209.9 4209.9 33360 7607.4 6968.0 62678 8312.0 141989 Total 12764.5 12764 105510 22399 21736 122131 20947 348889 Assembly Total 81105 81105 950327 288825 186221 1054909 209553 3218097 A c i d i f i c a t i o n ( M o l e s o f H + e q ) Manufactur Material 434.28 434.28 5438.9 1292.8 969.13 8091.2 1140.2 19924.4 21 ing Transportation 13.928 13.928 152.24 31.743 31.897 89.972 44.282 440.51 Total 448.21 448.21 5591.1 1324.5 1001.0 8181.1 1184.5 20365 Construction Construction-Installation Process 61.291 61.291 577.55 109.59 107.37 423.01 85.636 1518.2 Transportation 20.317 20.317 156.01 57.233 37.225 293.37 46.537 698.91 Total 81.608 81.608 733.56 166.82 144.59 716.38 132.17 2217.2 Assembly Total 529.82 529.82 6324.7 1491.3 1145.6 8897.5 1316.7 22582 Human Health ʹRespiratory (kg PM10eq) Manufacturing Material 184.30 184.30 1794.2 372.29 319.68 5179.6 202.11 9075.5 Transportation 0.39076 0.390759 4.2840 0.88372 0.8941 2.5268 1.2689 12.365 Total 184.69 184.69 1798.49 373.18 320.57 5182.1 203.38 9087.8 Construction Construction-Installation Process 9.5890 9.5889 92.450 16.848 16.723 100.74 16.290 304.10 Transportation 0.61981 0.61981 4.8155 1.5153 1.0952 9.0520 1.3476 21.168 Total 10.209 10.209 97.266 18.364 17.819 109.80 17.637 325.26 Assembly Total 194.89 194.89 1895.8 391.54 338.39 5291.9 221.02 9413.1 Eutrophication (kg Neq) Manufacturing Material 19.760 19.759 559.90 149.44 73.561 367.16 99.797 1377.8 Transportation 0.97417 0.97417 10.658 2.2150 2.2303 6.2949 3.1173 30.815 Total 20.734 20.734 570.56 151.66 75.792 373.45 102.91 1408.63 Construction Construction-Installation Process 3.4366 3.4366 35.031 6.9521 6.4125 21.026 5.4508 85.118 Transportation 1.4589 1.4589 11.245 3.9347 2.6423 21.143 3.2870 50.068 Total 4.8954 4.8954 46.275 10.887 9.0548 42.169 8.7377 135.19 Assembly Total 25.63 25.63 616.84 162.55 84.85 415.62 111.65 1543.8 Ozone Layer (kg CFC-11eq) Manufacturing Material 0.0003769 0.0003769 0.0040196 0.000712 0.000703 0.00451 0.001557 0.01425 Transportation 9.1120E -08 9.119E -08 1.006E -06 2.031E -07 2.083E -07 5.91E -07 3.087E -07 2.889E -06 Total 0.0003770 0.00037699 0.0040206 0.0007126 0.0007032 0.00451 0.001557 0.01425 Construction Construction-Installation Process 1.884E - 05 1.884E -05 0.00020133 3.565E -05 3.705E -05 0.000244 6.796E -05 0.0007241 Transportation 1.68E - 07 1.680E -07 1.331E -06 3.076E -07 2.789E -07 2.49E -06 3.33E -07 5.669E -06 Total 1.901E - 05 1.901E -05 0.0002026 3.596E -05 3.733E -05 0.0002468 6.829E -05 0.000729 Assembly Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 Smog (kg O3eq) Manufacturing Material 8989.155041 8989.2 100581 20099 16502 106331 9301.5 315670 Transportation 493.1131722 493.11 5389.9 1124.0 1129.3 3185.4 1567.5 15596 Total 9482.268 9482.3 105971 21223 17631 109517 10869 331266 22 213 Construction Construction-Installation Process 1890.852777 1890.9 17236 3219.7 2875.2 10521 889.19 40343 Transportation 718.4214696 718.42 5516.8 2023.3 1316.2 10374 1645.6 24714 Total 2609.274247 2609.3 22752 5242.9 4191.5 20895 2534.74 65057 Assembly Total 12,091.54 12091 128724 26466 21823 130412 13404 396323 Several hotspots were identified for each level 3 elements for the global warming impact category. For element A11, Footing_F5 contributed to 54.42% of the total global warming impact. For element A21, SOG_100mm_Interior contributed 70.27% of the total, and for element A23, Roof_Concrete Suspended Slab_4.8LL contributed 43.75%. For element A31, 1.1.1 Wall_Cast-in-Place_200mm_Basement contributed to 42.39% of the total. For element A32, 1.2.17 Exterior_Partition_W1_Main contributed to 23.70% of the total. And for element B11, 1.2.5 Interior_Partition_P2_Main contributed to 46.76%. Subsequent to this section are several Annexes that provide information that is not part of the EN 15978 requirements. Annex A contains further interpretation of the assessment results. Annex B contains recommendations for LCA use. Annex C contains a reflection of the study. And finally, Annex D contains the Impact Estimator inputs and assumptions. Annex A - Interpretation of Assessment Results Benchmark Development A benchmark is a standard or point of reference against which things can be compared. In order to create benchmarks for LCA, environmental impact data from various LCA studies must be collected. These LCA assessments must have a similar reference study period, must 23 use the similar impact assessment methods, and must have the same functional units. Using the same functional units and presenting benchmarks as environmental impact/functional unit is essential, otherwise the data from the LCA studies is incompatible and cannot be used to make benchmarks. Moreover, the goal and scope, as well as the model development of the LCA studies to be used to make benchmarks must be the same, or at least very similar. Benchmarks can be created for a variety of unifying characteristics, such as region, use of building, type of building construction, classification of building, and many more. It is inevitable that the building process will have environmental impacts, and LCA assessments are beneficial in that they make the audience aware of what the environmental impacts are; however, without benchmarks to compare against, it is impossible to determine if the building under assessment has a higher or lower environmental impact than average. Furthermore, benchmarks allow the overall comparison of environmental impacts of different building regions, or different building types, or different building categories. UBC Academic Building Benchmark Benchmarks were created from the seventeen UBC building assessed. The benchmarks were created from information on the GoogleDrive taken at 2pm on Sunday, November 17, 2013. The results of this study on Allard Hall are compared against the benchmarks in the following figures. 24 Figure 2 - All Impact Categories, % Difference -700 -600 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 Total A11 A21 A22 A23 A31 A32 B11 % Difference Between Allard Hall and Benchmark Fossil Fuel Consumption Global Warming Acidification Human Heatlh Criteria - Respiratory Eutrophication Ozone Layer Depletion Smog 25 Figure 3 - Fossil Fuel Consumption Figure 4 - Global Warming 0.00 500.00 1,000.00 1,500.00 2,000.00 2,500.00 3,000.00 3,500.00 4,000.00 4,500.00 5,000.00 Total A11 A21 A22 A23 A31 A32 B11 MJ/m2 Fossil Fuel Consumption Benchmark Allard Hall 0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00 300.00 350.00 400.00 Total A11 A21 A22 A23 A31 A32 B11 kg Co2eq/m2 Global Warming Benchmark Allard Hall 26 Figure 5 - Acidification Figure 6 - Human Health Criteria - Respiratory 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 Total A11 A21 A22 A23 A31 A32 B11 Moles of H+eq/m2 Acidification Benchmark Allard Hall 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 Total A11 A21 A22 A23 A31 A32 B11 kg PM10eq/m2 Human Health Criteria - Respiratory Benchmark Allard Hall 27 Figure 7 - Eutrophication Figure 8 - Ozone Layer Depletion 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 Total A11 A21 A22 A23 A31 A32 B11 kg Neq/m2 Eutrophication Benchmark Allard Hall 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total A11 A21 A22 A23 A31 A32 B11 kg CFC-11eq/m2 Ozone Layer Depletion Benchmark Allard Hall 28 Figure 9 - Smog Allard Hall had lower values for all the impact categories when compared to the benchmark values. The following is a scatter plot of total cost of construction in 2013 Canadian dollars versus global warming potential for the UBC buildings used to create the benchmarks. 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00 50.00 Total A11 A21 A22 A23 A31 A32 B11 Smog (kg O3eq/m2) Smog Benchmark Allard Hall 29 Figure 10 - Cost versus Global Warming The above figure of building cost versus global warming is inaccurate and imprecise in many ways. The values for cost were intended to be in 2013 Canadian dollars; however the cost calculations were all done separately by different students and taken from a common information drive, it was impossible to know at the time of data extraction if the cost values had been inflated to 2013 dollars. Furthermore, since the cost calculations were done by individual students, it is difficult to verify if the calculations were done in a congruent and accurate manner. Annex B - Recommendations for LCA Use Life cycle analysis can be a powerful tool to use in the design stage of a building. It can be utilized to inform designers and planners of the potential impacts that their building designs would have on the environment. It can be used for building designers and planners to explore many different options for building components and accurately compare them 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Global Warming (kg CO2eq) Cost (Millions of 2013 CAD$) GWP 30 based on the impact categories of LCA results. In order for LCA to become more widely used in building design and appropriate for various types of projects, there are several things that should be considered. Constant development and maintenance of LCI databases, to improve the quality and variety of products involved, should be undertaken. The development of benchmarks for buildings groups by categories such as geographical region, use, classification, and construction would help LCA become a more powerful design tool. Furthermore, life cycle modules beyond product and construction stages should be considered for buildings, and benchmarks should be created for these stages as well. In order for benchmarks to be created, normalization methods will need to be developed to make the comparison valid for buildings with different uses and service lives. In efforts to operationalize LCA in building design, it is important to consider how the impact categories should be prioritized. Many professionals have differing opinions concerning which impact categories are most important, and which should be minimized the most. Although it is unlikely to have all professionals involved come to a consensus concerning the prioritization of impact categories, it is important to explicitly outline how the LCA results will be used and how the impact categories are prioritized. The steps and considerations outlined above should be used when attempting to operationalize LCA methods, data and their use in practice at UBC. Annex C - Author Reflection Prior to this class, I had only been exposed to LCA briefly in CIVL 200. Sustainability is a topic that has been integrated into a large number of the classes I have previously taken. 31 This course, CIVL 498C, covered the entire LCA process, from the history of LCA to the practice of LCA, as well as related topics such as social LCA and LCC. What interested me about this course is drive to move towards more sustainable building practices, and the methods that can be used to assess the impacts of construction projects. Although this project has been time consuming and using the software has been at times been frustrating, the overall experience of looking in such detail at an LCA study has been rewarding. However, a large portion of this project hinged on the quality of work of the previous study of the building. Graduate Attribute Name Description Select the content code most appropriate for each attribute from the dropdown menue Comments on which of the CEAB graduate attributes you believe you had to demonstrate during your final project experience. 32 1 Knowledge Base Demonstrated competence in university level mathematics, natural sciences, engineering fundamentals, and specialized engineering knowledge appropriate to the program. N/A = not applicable During this project I did not need to demonstrate compentancy in mathematics, natural sciences, engineering funcamentals (other than knowledge of construction practices), or specialized engineering knowledge. 2 Problem Analysis An ability to use appropriate knowledge and skills to identify, formulate, analyze, and solve complex engineering problems in order to reach substantiated conclusions. N/A = not applicable In this project I did not need to use appropriate knowledge and skills to identify, formulate, analyze, and solve complex engineering problems in order to reach substantatiated conclusions. 3 Investigation An ability to conduct investigations of complex problems by methods that include DA = developed & applied This project involved some investigation, but not into very complex problems. 33 appropriate experiments, analysis and interpretation of data, and synthesis of information in order to reach valid conclusions. Experiments were not used in this project. Analysis and interpretation was heavily used in this project. Synthesis of information in order to reach valid conclusions was also involved in this report. 4 Design An ability to design solutions for complex, open-ended engineering problems and to design systems, components or processes that meet specified needs with appropriate attention to health and safety risks, applicable standards, and economic, environmental, cultural and societal considerations. N/A = not applicable This project did not involve any design work. 34 5 Use fo Engineering Tools An ability to create, select, apply, adapt, and extend appropriate techniques, resources, and modern engineering tools to a range of engineering activities, from simple to complex, with an understanding of the associated limitations. DA = developed & applied If one considers microsoft excel, OST, and Athena engineering tools, then engineering tools were used in this project. 6 Individual and Team Work An ability to work effectively as a member and leader in teams, preferably in a multi-disciplinary setting. N/A = not applicable This project did not involve any team work. 7 Communication An ability to communicate complex engineering concepts within the profession and with society at large. Such ability includes reading, DA = developed & applied Communication was used in this project, in the form of a written report. 35 writing, speaking and listening, and the ability to comprehend and write effective reports and design documentation, and to give and effectively respond to clear instructions. 8 Professionalism An understanding of the roles and responsibilities of the professional engineer in society, especially the primary role of protection of the public and the public interest. 36 9 Impact of Engineering on Society and the Environment An ability to analyze social and environmental aspects of engineering activities. Such ability includes an understanding of the interactions that engineering has with the economic, social, health, safety, legal, and cultural aspects of society, the uncertainties in the prediction of such interactions; and the concepts of sustainable design and development and environmental stewardship. DA = developed & applied To some extent this category is applicable to this project. 10 Ethics and Equity An ability to apply professional ethics, accountability, and equity. DA = developed & applied I had to apply ethics and accountability in this project, in information gathering, proper citation, not 37 plagarising, and managing time in an efficient manner. 11 Economics and Project Management An ability to appropriately incorporate economics and business practices including project, risk, and change management into the practice of engineering and to understand their limitations. N/A = not applicable Other than a basic calculation of 2013 building cost using inflation rates, this project did ot incorporate economic or business practices. 12 Life-long Learning An ability to identify and to address their own educational needs in a changing world in ways sufficient to maintain their competence and to allow them to contribute to the advancement of knowledge. DA = developed & applied This project required a significant amount of investigation, which encourages life-long learning. 38 Annex D ʹImpact Estimator Inputs and Assumptions Element Quantity Units Assembly Type Assembly Name Input Fields Known/Measured Info IE Inputs A11 Foundations 26980 ft^2 Concrete Footing 1.2.1 Footing_F1 Length (ft) 49.2 49.2 250 7 m^2 Width (ft) 4.9 4.9 Thickness (in) 17.7 17.7 Concrete (psi) 4351 400 0 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #5 #5 1.2.2 Footing_F2 Length (ft) 70.85 70.85 Width (ft) 5.90 5.90 Thickness (in) 19.68 19.68 Concrete (psi) 4351 400 0 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #5 #5 1.2.3. Footing_F3 Length (ft) 52.48 57.73 Width (ft) 6.56 6.56 Thickness (in) 21.65 19.68 Concrete (psi) 4351 400 0 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #6 #6 1.2.4 Footing_F4 Length (ft) 135.79 176.53 Width (ft) 7.54 7.54 Thickness (in) 25.58 19.68 Concrete (psi) 4351 400 0 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #6 #6 1.2.5 Footing_F5 Length (ft) 9.84 16.73 Width (ft) 9.84 9.84 Thickness (in) 33.46 19.68 Concrete (psi) 4351 400 0 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #8 #6 1.2.6 Length (ft) 17.71 17.71 39 Footing_F6 Width (ft) 2.95 2.95 Thickness (in) 9.84 9.84 Concrete (psi) 4351 400 0 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #4 #4 1.2.7 Footing_SF1 Length (ft) 555.39 555.39 Width (ft) 1.97 1.97 Thickness (in) 9.84 9.84 Concrete (psi) 4351 400 0 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #5 #5 1.2.8 Footing_SF2 Length (ft) 420.43 462.47 Width (ft) 6.56 6.56 Thickness (in) 21.65 19.68 Concrete (psi) 4351 400 0 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #8 #6 1.2.9 Footing_SF3 Length (ft) 54.15 70.39 Width (ft) 8.20 8.20 Thickness (in) 25.58 19.68 Concrete (psi) 4351 400 0 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #8 #6 1.2.10 Footing_SF4 Length (ft) 57.72 57.72 Width (ft) 4.92 4.92 Thickness (in) 13.78 13.78 Concrete (psi) 4351 400 0 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #6 #6 1.2.11 Footing_1500mm_LowerFloor Length (ft) 54.42 163.26 Width (ft) 21.33 21.33 Thickness (in) 59.04 19.68 Concrete (psi) 4351 400 0 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #10 #6 1.2.12 Footing_250mm_LowerFloor Length (ft) 3.28 3.28 Width (ft) 3.94 3.94 Thickness (in) 9.84 9.84 Concrete (psi) 4351 400 0 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #4 #5 40 1.2.13 Footing_400mm_GroundFloor Length (ft) 40.10 40.10 Width (ft) 52.48 52.48 Thickness (in) 15.74 15.74 Concrete (psi) 4351 400 0 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #6 #6 1.2.14 Footing_750mm_GroundFloor Length (ft) 48.25 48.25 Width (ft) 9.84 9.84 Thickness (in) 19.68 19.68 Concrete (psi) 4351 400 0 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #8 #6 1.2.15 Footing_400mm_GroundFloor Length (ft) 8.20 8.20 Width (ft) 4.92 4.92 Thickness (in) 15.74 15.74 Concrete (psi) 4351 400 0 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #5 #5 1.2.16 Footing_500mm_GroundFloor Length (ft) 14.76 14.76 Width (ft) 4.92 4.92 Thickness (in) 19.68 19.68 Concrete (psi) 4351 400 0 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #6 #6 1.2.17 Footing_1500mm_GroundFloor Length (ft) 56.25 168.75 Width (ft) 6.56 6.56 Thickness (in) 59.04 19.68 Concrete (psi) 4351 400 0 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #8 #6 A21 Lowest Floor Construction 26980 ft^2 Concrete Slab on Grade 1.1.1 SOG_10 0mm_Exterior L ength (ft) 57.78 57.78 2506 m^2 Width (ft) 57.78 57.78 Thickness (in) 4 4 Concrete (psi) 4000 400 0 Concrete flyash % - Average 1.1.2 SOG_10 0mm_Interior Length (ft) 154.98 154.98 Width (ft) 154.98 154.98 41 Thickness (in) 4 4 Concrete (psi) 3000 300 0 Concrete flyash % - Average 1.1.3 SOG_20 0mm_Interior Length (ft) 54.42 54.42 Width (ft) 54.42 54.42 Thickness (in) 8 8 Concrete (psi) 3000 300 0 Concrete flyash % - Average A22 Upper Floor Construction 10452 2 ft^2 Concrete Column 3.1.1 Column_Concrete_Beam_N/A_Lowerlevel 9710 m^2 Number of Beams 0 0 Number of Columns 6 6 Column Height(ft) 0.00 0.00 Bay sizes (ft) 19.68 19.68 Supported span (ft) 19.68 19.68 Supported Area(ft2) 387.30 388.00 Live load (psf) 0.00 0 3.1.2 Column_Concrete_Beam_Concrete_GroundLevel Number of Beams 20 20 Number of Columns 43 43 Column Height(ft) 13.12 13.12 Bay sizes (ft) 19.68 19.68 Supported span (ft) 19.68 19.68 Supported Area(ft2) 387.30 388.00 Live load (psf) 0.00 0 3.1.3 Column_Concrete_Beam_Concrete 42 _Level2 Number of Beams 11 11 Number of Columns 64 64 Column Height(ft) 13.12 13.12 Bay sizes (ft) 19.68 19.68 Supported span (ft) 19.68 19.68 Supported Area(ft2) 387.30 388.00 Live load (psf) 0.00 0 3.1.4 Column_Concrete_Beam_Concrete_Level3 Number of Beams 8 8 Number of Columns 83 83 Column Height(ft) 13.12 13.12 Bay sizes (ft) 19.68 19.68 Supported span (ft) 19.68 19.68 Supported Area(ft2) 387.30 388.00 Live load (psf) 0.00 0 3.1.5 Column_Concrete_Beam_Concrete_Level4 Number of Beams 13 13 Number of Columns 87 87 Column Height(ft) 13.12 13.12 Bay sizes (ft) 19.68 19.68 Supported span (ft) 19.68 19.68 Supported Area(ft2) 387.30 388.00 Live load (psf) 0.00 0 Concrete Suspended Slab 4.1.2 Floor _Concrete Suspended Slab_3.6LL 43 Roof Width (ft) 2618.43 261 8.4 Span (ft) 18.403 18.403 Concrete (psi) 4000 400 0 Concrete flyash % - Average Live Load (psf) 75 75 4.1.3 Floor _Concrete Suspended Slab_4.8LL Roof Width (ft) 2965.05 296 5.05 Span (ft) 19 19 Concrete (psi) 4000 400 0 Concrete flyash % - Average Live Load (psf) 100 100 A23 Roof Construction 80080 ft^2 Concrete Suspended Slab 5.1.1 Roof _Concrete Suspended Slab_2.4LL 7 43 9 m^2 Roof Width (ft) 1280.568 128 0.5 Span (ft) 18.542 18.542 Concrete (psi) 4000 400 0 Concrete flyash % - Average Live Load (psf) 50 50 Steel Joist Roof 5.2.1 Roof_Steel Joist Roof Roof Width (ft) 3122.83 312 2.83 Span (ft) 18.04 18.04 Decking Type - None Decking Thickness (in) 1.5 0.75 Steel Gauge - 18 Joist Type 7/8 x 10 1 5/8 x 10 Joist Spacing 28 24 3.1.4 Column_Hollow Structural Steel_Beam_N/A_Level5 Number of Beams 7 7 44 Number of Columns 31 31 Column Height(ft) 0.00 0 Bay sizes (ft) 19.68 19.68 Supported span (ft) 19.68 19.68 Supported Area(ft2) 387.30 388.00 Live load (psf) 0.00 0 A31 Wa lls Below Grade 81183 ft^2 Cast- in-Place 2.1.1 Wall_Cast-in-Place_200mm_Basement 7542 m^2 Length (ft) 863.00 863.00 Height (ft) 13.70 13.70 Thickness (in) 7.87 8 Concrete (psi) - 4000 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #15M #5 2.1.2 Wall_Cast-in-Place_300mm_Basement Length (ft) 233.00 233.00 Height (ft) 13.70 13.70 Thickness (in) 11.81 11.81 Concrete (psi) - 4000 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #15M #5 2.1.3 Wall_Cast-in-Place_400mm_Basement Length (ft) 41.00 54.68 Height (ft) 13.70 13.70 Thickness (in) 15.75 11.81 Concrete (psi) - 4000 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #15M #5 Opening Type Door Door Number 1 1.000 45 Material Hollow Metal Steel Interior Door 2.1.4 Wall_Cast-in-Place_450mm_Basement Length (ft) 72.00 108.03 Height (ft) 13.70 13.70 Thickness (in) 17.72 11.81 Concrete (psi) - 4000 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #15M #5 Opening Type Door Door Number 1 1 Material Wood Hollow Core Wood Interior Door 2.1.5 Wall_Cast-in-Place_600mm_Basement Length (ft) 15.00 30.00 Height (ft) 13.70 13.70 Thickness (in) 23.62 11.81 Concrete (psi) - 4000 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #15M #5 2.1.6 Wall_Cast-in-Place_1000mm_Basement Length (ft) 7.00 23.34 Height (ft) 13.70 13.70 Thickness (in) 39.37 11.81 Concrete (psi) - 4000 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #15M #5 Furring 2.3.1 Furring_F1_Basement 46 Length (ft) 299.00 299.00 Height (ft) 13.70 13.70 Wall Type Non Load Bearing Stud Weight - Light (25Ga) Sheathing Type none none Stud Thickness (in) 1" metal furring system 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 Stud Spacing (in) 16 24 Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board Material/Number 16mm regular Gypsum Regular 5/8" Material/Number - - Opening Type Door Door Number 5 5 Material Hollow Metal Steel Interior Door 2.3.2 Furring_F3_Basement Length (ft) 126.00 126.00 Height (ft) 13.70 13.70 Wall Type Non Load Bearing Stud Weight - Light (25Ga) Sheathing Type none none Stud Thickness (in) 2 1/2 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 Stud Spacing (in) 16 16 Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board Material/Number 16mm regular Gypsum Regular 5/8" Material/Number - - 2.3.3 Furring_F1_Main Length (ft) 362.00 362.00 Height (ft) 12.47 12.47 Wall Type Non Load Bearing 47 Stud Weight - Light (25Ga) Sheathing Type none none Stud Thickness (in) 1" metal furring system 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 Stud Spacing (in) 16 24 Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board Material/Number 16mm regular Gypsum Regular 5/8" Material/Number - - Opening Type Door Door Number 1 1 Material Hollow Metal Steel Interior Door 2.3.4 Furring_F3_Main Length (ft) 3,599.00 3,599.00 Height (ft) 12.47 12.47 Wall Type Non Load Bearing Stud Weight - Light (25Ga) Sheathing Type none none Stud Thickness (in) 2 1/2 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 Stud Spacing (in) 16 16 Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board Material/Number 16mm regular Gypsum Regular 5/8" Material/Number - - Opening Type Door Door Number 5 5 Material Wood Hollow Core Wood Interior Door 2.3.5 Furring_F4_Main Length (ft) 730.00 730.00 Height (ft) 12.47 12.47 48 Wall Type Non Load Bearing Stud Weight - Light (25Ga) Sheathing Type none none Stud Thickness (in) 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 Stud Spacing (in) 16 16 Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board Material/Number 16mm regular Gypsum Regular 5/8" Material/Number - - Opening Type Door Door Number 21 21 Material Wood Hollow Core Wood Interior Door A32 Walls Above Grade 71467 ft^2 Cast- in-Place 2.1.7 Wall_Cast-in-Place_200mm_Main 6 63 9 m^2 (see assumptions) Length (ft) 619.00 430.00 Height (ft) 12.47 12.47 Thickness (in) 7.87 8 Concrete (psi) - 4000 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #15M #5 2.1.8 Wall_Cast-in-Place_300mm_Main Length (ft) 855.00 855.00 Height (ft) 12.47 12.47 Thickness (in) 11.81 11.81 Concrete (psi) - 4000 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #15M #5 2.1.9 Wall_Cast-in-Place_400m 49 m_Main Length (ft) 166.00 221.38 Height (ft) 12.47 12.47 Thickness (in) 15.75 11.81 Concrete (psi) - 4000 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #15M #5 Opening Type Door Door Number 4 4 Material Wood Hollow Core Wood Interior Door 2.1.10 Wall_Cast-in-Place_450mm_Main Length (ft) 289.00 433.62 Height (ft) 12.47 12.47 Thickness (in) 17.72 11.81 Concrete (psi) - 4000 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #15M #5 Opening Type Door Door Number 5 5 Material Wood Hollow Core Wood Interior Door 2.1.11 Wall_Cast-in-Place_600mm_Main Length (ft) 57.00 114.00 Height (ft) 12.47 12.47 Thickness (in) 23.62 11.81 Concrete (psi) - 4000 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #15M #5 2.1.12 Wall_Cast-in-Place_1000mm_Main 50 Length (ft) 28.00 93.34 Height (ft) 12.47 12.47 Thickness (in) 39.37 11.81 Concrete (psi) - 4000 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #15M #5 2.1.13 Wall_Cast-in-Place_300mm_5thFloor Length (ft) 19.00 19.00 Height (ft) 16.40 16.40 Thickness (in) 11.81 11.81 Concrete (psi) - 4000 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #15M #5 2.1.14 Wall_Cast-in-Place_400mm_5thFloor Length (ft) 29.00 38.67 Height (ft) 16.40 16.40 Thickness (in) 15.75 11.81 Concrete (psi) - 4000 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #15M #5 Opening Type Door Door Number 1 1 Material Hollow Metal Steel Interior Door 2.1.15 Wall_Cast-in-Place_450mm_5thFloor Length (ft) 63.00 94.53 Height (ft) 16.40 16.40 Thickness (in) 17.72 11.81 Concrete (psi) - 4000 Concrete flyash % - average Rebar #15M #5 Opening Type Door Door Number 1 1 51 Material Hollow Metal Steel Interior Door Curtain Walls 2.4.1 Curtain_Wall_FM2_600_lounge Length (ft) 73.00 73.00 Height (ft) 13.12 13.12 Wall Type Curtain Curtain Percent viewable glazing 85 85 Percent spandrel panel 15 15 Insulation thickness (mm) 125 125 Spandrel panel type glass Opaque Glass Panel Spandrel Opening Type Door Door Number 2 2 Material Glass Aluminum Exterior Door, 80% Glazing 2.4.2 Curtain_Wall_FM2_800_lounge Length (ft) 94.00 94.00 Height (ft) 13.12 13.12 Wall Type Curtain Curtain Percent viewable glazing 80 80 Percent spandrel panel 20 20 Insulation thickness (mm) 125 125 Spandrel panel type glass Aluminum Exterior Door, 80% Glazing 2.4.3 Curtain_Wall_FM2_0_lounge 52 Length (ft) 104.00 104.00 Height (ft) 13.12 13.12 Wall Type Curtain Curtain Percent viewable glazing 100 100 Percent spandrel panel 0 0 Insulation thickness - - Spandrel panel type - - 2.4.4 Curtain_Wall_FM2_1500_lounge Length (ft) 104.00 104.00 Height (ft) 13.12 13.12 Wall Type Curtain Curtain Percent viewable glazing 62 62 Percent spandrel panel 38 38 Insulation thickness (mm) 125 125 Spandrel panel type glass Opaque Glass Panel Spandrel 2.4.5 Curtain_Wall_Glass_forum Length (ft) 109.00 109.00 Height (ft) 13.12 13.12 Wall Type Curtain Curtain Percent viewable glazing 100 100 Percent spandrel panel 0 0 Envelope Insulation thickness - - Spandrel panel type - - Opening Type Door Door Number 2 2 Material Glass Aluminum Exterior Door, 80% 53 Glazing 2.4.6 Curtain_Wall_FM2_1200_southwest Length (ft) 182.00 182.00 Height (ft) 13.12 13.12 Wall Type Curtain Curtain Percent viewable glazing 70 70 Percent spandrel panel 30 30 Insulation thickness (mm) 125 125 Spandrel panel type glass Opaque Glass Panel Spandrel 2.4.7 Curtain_Wall_FM2_2000 Length (ft) 309.00 309.00 Height (ft) 13.12 13.12 Wall Type Curtain Curtain Percent viewable glazing 50 50 Percent spandrel panel 50 50 Insulation thickness (mm) 125 125 Spandrel panel type glass Opaque Glass Panel Spandrel 2.4.8 Curtain_Wall_FM2_Terrace Length (ft) 129.00 129.00 Height (ft) 13.12 13.12 Wall Type Curtain Curtain Percent viewable glazing 100 100 Percent spandrel panel 0 0 Insulation thickness - - Spandrel panel type - - 54 2.2.17 Exterior_Partition_W1_Main Length (ft) 1,159.00 1,159.00 Height (ft) 13.12 13.12 Wall Type Concrete Block Concrete Block Reinforcement - #4 Envelope Category Cladding Cladding Material Brick (modular metric) Brick (modular metric) Envelope Category Air and Vapour Barrier Air and Vapour Barrier Material Air Barrier Air Barrier Envelope Category Air and Vapour Barrier Air and Vapour Barrier Material Vapour Retarder Membrane Polyethylene 3 mil Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material semi-rigid, flexible (polyurethane?) Polystyrene Expanded Thickness 125 125 Opening Type Window Window Number 75 75 Total Area (ft²) 2743.800 2743.800 Frame Type - Aluminum Frame Glazing Type - Standard Glazing Fixed / Operable Fixed Fixed 2.2.18 Exterior_Partition_W1.1_Main Length (ft) 109.00 109.00 Height (ft) 13.12 12.47 55 Wall Type See 1.1.7 Reinforcement See 1.1.7 Envelope Category Cladding Cladding Material Brick (modular metric) Brick (modular metric) Envelope Category Air and Vapour Barrier Air and Vapour Barrier Material Air Barrier Air Barrier Envelope Category Air and Vapour Barrier Air and Vapour Barrier Material Vapour Retarder Membrane Polyethylene 3 mil Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material semi-rigid, flexible (polyurethane?) Polystyrene Expanded Thickness (mm) 125 125 2.2.19 Exterior_Partition_W2_Main Length (ft) 58.00 58.00 Height (ft) 13.12 13.12 Wall Type Concrete Block Concrete Block Reinforcement - #4 Envelope Category Cladding Cladding Material 12mm prefinished wood Wood Bevel Siding - Cedar Envelope Category Air and Vapour Barrier Air and Vapour Barrier Material Air Barrier Air Barrier Envelope Category Air and Vapour Barrier Air and Vapour Barrier Material Vapour Polyethy56 Retarder Membrane lene 3 mil Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material semi-rigid, flexible (polyurethane?) Polystyrene Expanded Thickness (mm) 125 125 2.2.20 Exterior_Partition_W3_5thFloor Length (ft) 188.00 188.00 Height (ft) 16.40 16.40 Wall Type Concrete Block Concrete Block Reinforcement - #4 Envelope Category Cladding Cladding Material 32mm stone veneer Natural stone Envelope Category Air and Vapour Barrier Air and Vapour Barrier Material Air Barrier Air Barrier Envelope Category Air and Vapour Barrier Air and Vapour Barrier Material Vapour Retarder Membrane Polyethylene 3 mil Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material semi-rigid, flexible (polyurethane?) Polystyrene Expanded Thickness (mm) 125 125 2.2.21 Exterior_Partition_W3.1_5thFloor Length (ft) 80.00 80.00 Height (ft) 16.40 12.47 57 Wall Type See 1.1.7 Reinforcement See 1.1.7 Envelope Category Cladding Cladding Material 32mm stone veneer Natural stone Envelope Category Air and Vapour Barrier Air and Vapour Barrier Material Air Barrier Air Barrier Envelope Category Air and Vapour Barrier Air and Vapour Barrier Material Vapour Retarder Membrane Polyethylene 3 mil Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material semi-rigid, flexible (polyurethane?) Polystyrene Expanded Thickness (mm) 125 125 Opening Type Door Door Number 4 4.000 Material Hollow Metal Steel Exterior Door 2.2.22 Exterior_Partition_W4_5thFloor Length (ft) 109.00 109.00 Height (ft) 16.40 16.40 Wall Type Steel z-girts Non Load Bearing Stud Weight Heavy (20ga) Heavy (20ga) Sheathing Type none none Stud Thickness 200mm 1 5/8 x 8in Stud Spacing 600mm 24in Envelope Category Cladding Cladding Material prefinish commer58 ed metal cladding cial - 26ga Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material semi-rigid, flexible (polyurethane?) Polystyrene Expanded Thickness (mm) 100 100 2.2.24 Special_Exterior_Partition_W1_3400 Length (ft) 181.00 181.00 Height (ft) 11.15 11.15 Wall Type Concrete Block Concrete Block Reinforcement - #4 Envelope Category Cladding Cladding Material Brick (modular metric) Brick (modular metric) Envelope Category Air and Vapour Barrier Air and Vapour Barrier Material Air Barrier Air Barrier Envelope Category Air and Vapour Barrier Air and Vapour Barrier Material Vapour Retarder Membrane Polyethylene 3 mil Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material semi-rigid, flexible (polyurethane?) Polystyrene Expanded Thickness (mm) 125 125 Opening Type Window Window Number 11 11 Total Area (ft²) 223.700 223.700 Frame Type XXX Aluminum Frame Glazing Type XXX Standar59 d Glazing Fixed / Operable Fixed Fixed Opening Type Door Door Number 2 2 Material Glass Aluminum Exterior Door, 80% Glazing 2.2.25 Special_Exterior_Partition_W3_600 Length (ft) 642.00 642.00 Height (ft) 1.97 1.97 Wall Type Concrete Block Concrete Block Reinforcement - #4 Envelope Category Cladding Cladding Material 32mm stone veneer Natural stone Envelope Category Air and Vapour Barrier Air and Vapour Barrier Material Air Barrier Air Barrier Envelope Category Air and Vapour Barrier Air and Vapour Barrier Material Vapour Retarder Membrane Polyethylene 3 mil Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material semi-rigid, flexible (polyurethane?) Polystyrene Expanded Thickness (mm) 125 125 2.2.26 Special_Exterior_Partition_W1_50-50 Length (ft) 286.00 286.00 Height (ft) 13.12 13.12 60 Wall Type Concrete Block Concrete Block Reinforcement - #4 Envelope Category Cladding Cladding Material Brick (modular metric) Brick (modular metric) Envelope Category Air and Vapour Barrier Air and Vapour Barrier Material Air Barrier Air Barrier Envelope Category Air and Vapour Barrier Air and Vapour Barrier Material Vapour Retarder Membrane Polyethylene 3 mil Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material semi-rigid, flexible (polyurethane?) Polystyrene Expanded Thickness (mm) 125 125 Opening Type Window Window Number 170 170 Total Area (ft²) 1875.900 1875.900 Frame Type XXX Aluminum Frame Glazing Type XXX Standard Glazing Fixed / Operable Fixed Fixed 2.2.27 Special_Exterior_Partition_W1_800 Length (ft) 724.00 724.00 Height (ft) 2.62 2.62 Wall Type Concrete Block Concrete Block Reinforcement - #4 Envelope Category Cladding Cladding Material Brick (modulaBrick (modula61 r metric) r metric) Envelope Category Air and Vapour Barrier Air and Vapour Barrier Material Air Barrier Air Barrier Envelope Category Air and Vapour Barrier Air and Vapour Barrier Material Vapour Retarder Membrane Polyethylene 3 mil Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material semi-rigid, flexible (polyurethane?) Polystyrene Expanded Thickness (mm) 125 125 Opening Type Door Door Number 2 2 Material Glass Aluminum Exterior Door, 80% Glazing 2.2.28 Special_Exterior_Partition_FM2_3200 Length (ft) 724.00 724.00 Height (ft) 10.50 10.50 Wall Type Curtain Curtain Percent viewable glazing 50 50 Percent spandrel panel 50 50 Insulation thickness (mm) 125 125 Spandrel panel type glass Opaque Glass Spandrel Panel 2.2.29 Special_Exterior_Partition_FM2_3400 62 Length (ft) 461.00 461.00 Height (ft) 11.15 11.15 Wall Type Curtain Curtain Percent viewable glazing 50 50 Percent spandrel panel 50 50 Insulation thickness (mm) 125 125 Spandrel panel type glass Opaque Glass Spandrel Panel B11 Partitions 10418 5 ft^2 Partition Walls 2.2.1 Interior_Partition_P1_Basement 9679 m^2 Length (ft) 30.00 30.00 Height (ft) 13.70 13.70 Wall Type - Non Load Bearing Stud Weight - Light (25Ga) Sheathing Type none none Stud Thickness (in) 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 Stud Spacing (in) 16 16 Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board Material/Number 16mm type X / 2 Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8" Material/Number - Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material Batt Insulation Fiberglass Batt Thickness (mm) 92 92 Opening Type Door Door Number 1 1 Material Hollow Metal Steel Interior Door 2.2.2 Interior_Partition_P2_Basement 63 Length (ft) 149.00 149.00 Height (ft) 13.70 13.70 Wall Type - Non Load Bearing Stud Weight - Light (25Ga) Sheathing Type none none Stud Thickness (in) 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 Stud Spacing (in) 16 16 Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board Material/Number 16mm type X / 3 Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8" Material/Number - Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material Batt Insulation Fiberglass Batt Thickness (mm) 92 92 Opening Type Door Door Number 6 6 Material Wood Hollow Core Wood Interior Door 2.2.3 Interior_Partition_P4_Basement Length (ft) 75.00 75.00 Height (ft) 13.70 13.70 Wall Type - Non Load Bearing Stud Weight - Light (25Ga) Sheathing Type none none Stud Thickness (in) (2x) 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 Stud Spacing (in) 16 16 Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board Material / Number 16mm Gypsum 64 type X / 2 Fire Rated Type X 5/8" Material / Number - Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material Batt Insulation Fiberglass Batt Thickness (mm) 184 184 2.2.4 Interior_Partition_P1_Main Length (ft) 1,050.00 1,050.00 Height (ft) 12.47 12.47 Wall Type - Non Load Bearing Stud Weight - Light (25Ga) Sheathing Type none none Stud Thickness (in) 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 Stud Spacing (in) 16 16 Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board Material/Number 16mm type X / 2 Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8" Material/Number - Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material Batt Insulation Fiberglass Batt Thickness (mm) 92 92 Opening Type Door Door Number 47 47 Material Wood Hollow Core Wood Interior Door 2.2.5 Interior_Partition_P2_Main 65 Length (ft) 4,869.00 4,869.00 Height (ft) 12.47 12.47 Wall Type - Non Load Bearing Stud Weight - Light (25Ga) Sheathing Type none none Stud Thickness (in) 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 Stud Spacing (in) 16 16 Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board Material/Number 16mm type X / 3 Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8" Material/Number - Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material Batt Insulation Fiberglass Batt Thickness (mm) 92 92 Opening Type Door Door Number 197 197 Material Wood Hollow Core Wood Interior Door 2.2.6 Interior_Partition_P3_Main Length (ft) 349.00 349.00 Height (ft) 12.47 12.47 Wall Type - Non Load Bearing Stud Weight - Light (25Ga) Sheathing Type none none Stud Thickness (in) 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 Stud Spacing (in) 16 16 Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board Material/Number 16mm type X / Gypsum Fire 66 1 Rated Type X 5/8" Material/Number 16mm Fire Code C / 2 Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8" Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material Batt Insulation Fiberglass Batt Thickness (mm) 92 92 Opening Type Door Door Number 3 3 Material Wood Hollow Core Wood Interior Door 2.2.7 Interior_Partition_P4_Main Length (ft) 387.00 387.00 Height (ft) 12.47 12.47 Wall Type - Non Load Bearing Stud Weight - Light (25Ga) Sheathing Type none none Stud Thickness (in) 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 Stud Spacing (in) 16 16 Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board Material / Number 16mm type X / 2 Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8" Material / Number - Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material Batt Insulation Fiberglass Batt Thickness (mm) 184 184 Opening Type Door Door Number 8 8 67 Material Wood Hollow Core Wood Interior Door 2.2.8 Interior_Partition_P5_Main Length (ft) 146.00 146.00 Height (ft) 12.47 12.47 Wall Type - Non Load Bearing Stud Weight - Light (25Ga) Sheathing Type none none Stud Thickness (in) 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 Stud Spacing (in) 16 16 Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board Material / Number 16mm Fire Code C / 2 Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8" Material / Number - Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material Batt Insulation Fiberglass Batt Thickness (mm) 92 92 Opening Type Door Door Number 4 4 Material Wood Hollow Core Wood Interior Door 2.2.9 Interior_Partition_P6_Main Length (ft) 256.00 256.00 Height (ft) 12.47 12.47 Wall Type - Non Load Bearing Stud Weight - Light (25Ga) 68 Sheathing Type none none Stud Thickness (in) 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 Stud Spacing (in) 24 24 Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board Material / Number 16mm Fire Code C / 1 Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8" Material / Number 25mm for elevator, fire resistant Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8" Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material Batt Insulation Fiberglass Batt Thickness (mm) 64 64 2.2.10 Interior_Partition_P9_Main Length (ft) 148.00 Height (ft) 12.47 Wall Type - Non Load Bearing Stud Weight - Light (25Ga) Sheathing Type none none Stud Thickness (in) 1 5/8 x 6 1 5/8 x 6 Stud Spacing (in) 16 16 Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board Material / Number 16mm Type X / 2 Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8" Material / Number - Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material Batt Insulation Fiberglass Batt Thickness (mm) 152 152 Opening Type Door Door 69 Number 4 4 Material Wood Hollow Core Wood Interior Door 2.2.11 Interior_Partition_P10_Main Length (ft) 84.00 Height (ft) 12.47 Wall Type - Non Load Bearing Stud Weight - Light (25Ga) Sheathing Type none none Stud Thickness (in) 1 5/8 x 6 1 5/8 x 6 Stud Spacing (in) 16 16 Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board Material / Number 16mm Type X / 3 Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8" Material / Number - Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material Batt Insulation Fiberglass Batt Thickness (mm) 152 152 Opening Type Door Door Number 2 2 Material Wood Hollow Core Wood Interior Door 2.2.12 Interior_Partition_P3_5thFloor Length (ft) 48.00 Height (ft) 16.40 Wall Type - Non Load Bearing 70 Stud Weight - Light (25Ga) Sheathing Type none none Stud Thickness (in) 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 Stud Spacing (in) 16 16 Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board Material/Number 16mm type X / 1 Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8" Material/Number 16mm Fire Code C / 2 Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8" Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material Batt Insulation Fiberglass Batt Thickness (mm) 92 92 Opening Type Door Door Number 5 5 Material Hollow Metal Steel Interior Door 2.2.13 Interior_Partition_P5_5thFloor Length (ft) 49.00 Height (ft) 16.40 Wall Type Non Load Bearing Stud Weight - Light (25Ga) Sheathing Type none none Stud Thickness (in) 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 Stud Spacing (in) 16 16 Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board Material / Number 16mm Fire Code C / 2 Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8" Material / Number - 71 Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material Batt Insulation Fiberglass Batt Thickness (mm) 92 92 Opening Type Door Door Number 1 1 Material Hollow Metal Steel Interior Door 2.2.14 Interior_Partition_P6_5thFloor Length (ft) 10.00 Height (ft) 16.40 Wall Type - Non Load Bearing Stud Weight - Light (25Ga) Sheathing Type none none Stud Thickness (in) 1 5/8 x 2 1/2 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 Stud Spacing (in) 24 24 Envelope Category Gypsum Board Gypsum Board Material / Number 16mm Fire Code C / 1 Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8" Material / Number 25mm for elevator, fire resistant Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8" Envelope Category Insulation Insulation Material Batt Insulation Fiberglass Batt Thickness (mm) 64 64 2.2.15 Interior_Partition_P23_Basement Length (ft) 245.00 245.00 Height (ft) 13.70 13.70 Wall Type Concrete Block Concrete Block 72 Reinforcement - #4 Opening Type Door Door Number 12 12 Material Hollow Metal Steel Interior Door 2.2.16 Interior_Partition_P23_Main Length (ft) 37.00 37.00 Height (ft) 12.47 12.47 Wall Type Concrete Block Concrete Block Reinforcement - #4 Opening Type Door Door Number 2 2 Material Hollow Metal Steel Interior Door Special Interior Walls 2.5.1 Forum_Sliding_Doors (extra materials input used) Length (ft) 127.00 (1249.68 sf) (converted to square feet) Height (ft) 9.84 Wall Type Solid Wood Panel Cedar Wood Bevel Siding 2.5.2 Forum_Wood_Panel_Balcony (extra materials input used) Length (ft) 54.00 (177.12 sf) (converted to square feet) Height (ft) 3.28 Wall Type 2 wood panels Cedar Wood Bevel Siding 2.5.3 Forum_Concrete_Balcony Length (ft) 84.00 84.00 73 Height (ft) 3.28 3.28 Thickness (mm) 300.00 300.00 Wall Type Concrete Typical Concrete Values 2.5.4 Library_Glass_Wall (extra materials input used) Length (ft) 58.00 (464 sf) (converted to square feet) Height (ft) 8.00 Wall Type Glass Standard Glazing 2.5.5 Glass_Guard (extra materials input used) Length (ft) 1,191.00 1,137.70 (converted to square feet) Panel Height (ft) 2.79 2.79 Panel Width (ft) 4.27 Panel gap (ft) 0.20 (3174 sf) Wall Type Glass Standard Glazing Element Assembly Assembly Type Assembly Name Modeling Assuption* A11 Foundations Foundation Footings All footings with width larger than 500 mm are assumed to have width equal to 500mm (19.68in.) All footing concrete has average fly ash content Rebar sizes are assumed as follows: ϭϬDїηϰ ϭϱDїηϱ ϮϬDїηϲ Rebar sizes larger than 74 2 0M will be assumed to be #6. All measurements in IE are in emperial form A21 Lower Floor Construction Foundation Concrete Slabs On Grade The strength of the slabs on grade are dependant on being interior or exterior. These are denoted as 20 Mpa for Interior and 32 Mpa for Exterior and are taken in the Impact estimator as 3000psi and 4000psi respectively. All Slabs on Grade are assumed to have average content of fly ash. All measurements in IE are in imperial form All measurements taken using on screen take off for slabs do not overlap with footings and walls, but do overlap columns and beams. Columns and Beams Columns and Beams are not summarized as individual structural components. Instead, a set of beam, column and floor intesection is analyzed in the Impact Estimator Aeras of each floor are measured based on Onscreen Takeoff. All columns and beams concrete has average fly ash content Bay sizes and span sized are assumed to be 6m based on their location on the grids in the structural drawings. 75 Live load of each floor calculated as an average of the load design of that floor. Exact results are approximated later for input data. A22 Upper Floor Construction Columns and Beams Columns and Beams are not summarized as individual structural components. Instead, a set of beam, column and floor intesection is analyzed in the Impact Estimator Aeras of each floor are measured based on Onscreen Takeoff. All columns and beams concrete has average fly ash content Bay sizes and span sized are assumed to be 6m based on their location on the grids in the structural drawings. Live load of each floor calculated as an average of the load design of that floor. Exact results are approximated later for input data. Floors Concrete Suspended Slab All Slabs are noted to be 30Mpa, which is rounded to 4000 psi All Slabs on Grade are assumed to have average content of fly ash. All measurements in IE are in imperial form All measurements taken using on screen take off for slabs do not overlap with footings and walls, but do 76 overlap columns and beams. All spans lengths noted are found using a weighted average calculation. This calculation used the spans observed and averaged the values based on the area these were found. For details of these calculations, please refer to below. 4.1.2 Floor _Concrete Suspended Slab_3.6LL The live load of 3.6KN was used for all classroom and office areas as noted on the structural drawings provided 4.1.3 Floor _Concrete Suspended Slab_4.8LL A live load of 4.8KN was used for all library areas and other high load areas as noted on the structural drawings provided. Because 4.8KN is the highest live load analysed by IE, this includes Live Loads of 7.2 and 9.8, also noted in the plans. A23 Roof Roof Concrete Suspended Slab All Slabs are noted to be 30Mpa, which is rounded to 4000 psi All Slabs on Grade are assumed to have average content of fly ash. All measurements in IE are in imperial form All measurements taken using on screen take off for slabs do not overlap with footings and walls, but do overlap columns and beams. 77 All spans lengths noted are found using a weighted average calculation. This calculation used the spans observed and averaged the values based on the area these were found. For details of these calculations, please refer to below. 5.1.1 Roof _Concrete Suspended Slab_2.4LL The live load of 2.4KN was used for all roof areas as noted on the structural drawings provided Steel Joist Roof All measurements in IE are in imperial form All spans lengths noted are found using a weighted average calculation. This calculation used the spans observed and averaged the values based on the area these were found. For details of these calculations, please refer to below. 5.2.1 Roof_Steel Joist Roof The Joist Size as approximated to be W250X22 based on its description in the drawings Deck Thicness was listed as 38mm, but used 19mm in IE due to limitations. All other factors were not provided and were assumed based on typical industry standards A31 Walls Below Grade Walls Cast In Place All walls taken as 30MPA (4350psi). Actual walls were between either 25, 30, or 40. In order to 78 balance out and be conservative, 30 was chosen. 2.1.1 Wall_Cast-in-Place_200mm_Basement Flyash percentage not specified, "average" used. Slab depth was taken as 200mm (0.656ft) in all locations. Reasonable considering that a majority of the slabs are 200mm and the difference between 200mm and 225mm is negligible All reinforcement taken as #15M. Most reinforcement is actually 10M, with very few 20M bars in the larger shear walls. Lengths adjusted and 12in. thickness used for impact estimator to achieve equivalen volumes. This may create an overestimation for formwork but is necessary to not underestimate concrete. Furring 2.3.5 Furring_F4_Main Section on first floor drawing has 11ft of "F5." Doesn't exist in schedule, assumed it was F4 (similar to other furring in the area). A32 Walls Above Grade Walls Cast In Place All walls taken as 30MPA (4350psi). Actual walls were between either 25, 30, or 40. In order to balance out and be conservative, 30 was chosen. Flyash percentage not specified, "average" used. Slab depth was taken as 200mm (0.656ft) in all locations. Reasonable considering 79 that a majority of the slabs are 200mm and the difference between 200mm and 225mm is negligible All reinforcement taken as #15M. Most reinforcement is actually 10M, with very few 20M bars in the larger shear walls. Lengths adjusted and 12in. thickness used for impact estimator to achieve equivalen volumes. This may create an overestimation for formwork but is necessary to not underestimate concrete. 2.1.7 Wall_Cast-in-Place_200mm_Main "Main" refers to the 1st to 4th floor, which share similar wall heights and other characteristics. B11 Partitions Walls Partition Walls 2.2.1 Interior_Partition_P1_Basement (and all other steel stud partition walls unless stated) Stud thickness unknown, taken as 25Ga. Insulation type unknown, referred to only as Batt Insulation. "Fiberglass Batt" used. Gypsum board 16mm Type X and 16mm Fire code C both taken as "Gypsum Fire Rated Type X 5/8" 2.2.16 Exterior_Partition_W1_Main (and all other concrete block walls) Reinforcement unknown, taken as 10M (lowest value allowed by impact estimator). Insulation type unknown, referred to only as semi-rigid insulation. "Polystyrene Expanded" used. Air and water barrier unknown. "Polyethylene 3 mil" used. Glazing type unknown. "Standard Glazing" used. 80 2.2.17 Exterior_Partition_W1.1_Main 2.2.21 Exterior_Partition_W3.1_5thFloor Cladding exists over previously counted structural walls. No assembly used, only envelope. 2.2.18 Exterior_Partition_W1.1_Main In order to add cladding without a wall, part of the length of 2.1.7 was removed and added to 2.2.18 to balance out the amount of concrete used. 2.2.21 Exterior_Partition_W3.1_5thFloor In order to add cladding without a wall, part of the length of 2.1.7 was removed and added to 2.2.18 to balance out the amount of concrete used. Note, the presence of doors and height differential will make numbers slightly inaccurate. 2.3.1 Furring_F1_Basement 22mm furring system used and smallest steel stud available is 92mm. Studs placed at 600mm spacing to compensate. Special Interior Walls 2.5.1 Forum_Sliding_Doors 2.5.2 Forum_Wood_Panel_Balcony Type of wood unknown and no applicable input exists. Extra material "cedar wood bevel siding" used. 2.5.4 Library_Glass_Wall 2.5.5 Glass_Guard Type of glass paneling unknown, extra material "standard glazing" used. Bibliography . N.p.. Web. 19 Nov 2013. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allard_Hall>. 81 . N.p.. Web. 19 Nov 2013. <http://www.ubcproperties.com/portfolio_detail.php?category=Location&list=Vancouver&id=Allard Hall Faculty of Law Building>. . N.p.. Web. 19 Nov 2013. <http://www.ceiarchitecture.com/project/ubc-allard-hall-law-building/>.
UBC Undergraduate Research
Allard Hall LCA study Brown, Emma 2013-11-18
Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.
Item Metadata
Download
- Media
- 18861-Brown_E_SEEDS_2013.pdf [ 1.62MB ]
- Metadata
- JSON: 18861-1.0108749.json
- JSON-LD: 18861-1.0108749-ld.json
- RDF/XML (Pretty): 18861-1.0108749-rdf.xml
- RDF/JSON: 18861-1.0108749-rdf.json
- Turtle: 18861-1.0108749-turtle.txt
- N-Triples: 18861-1.0108749-rdf-ntriples.txt
- Original Record: 18861-1.0108749-source.json
- Full Text
- 18861-1.0108749-fulltext.txt
- Citation
- 18861-1.0108749.ris
Full Text
Cite
Citation Scheme:
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}]}"
data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
async >
</script>
</div>
Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard.
To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url: https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.18861.1-0108749/manifest