Advanced Data and Computational Methods for Design

(ACM610)

Lisa MacRae
1902660
MArch Architecture
CONTENTS

01 Project Brief & Sustainability

Strategy 06 Whole-life Carbon Assessment
and Circularity Appraisal

02 Architectural Concept
Drawings 07 Conclusion

08
03
References / Bibliography
Assessment of Operational
Carbon using Thermal Dy-
namic Simulation

04 2D and 3D Drawings of Details

Representative of the Circular
Economy Strategy

05 Thermal Bridge Calculation of

Developed Detail
01

Project Brief & Sustainability

Strategy
01
Project Brief & Sustainability
Strategy

Project Overview:

The building will accommodate a loose-fit office and be 1800m² in size, and will be located within Cumbernauld. The loose-fit office is designed to support long-term
adaptability, reducing the requirement for any major future renovations. The design responds positively to the requirements of evolving businesses and meets oc-
cupants needs. The project comprises of some key design principles such as energy efficiency and sustainability which are key to meeting global goals and design
requirements. A simple floor plate in the design ensures natural light will reach internal spaces, and a central core allows for the placement of building services and
accommodation for main circulation. The design remains open plan with no dividing partitions, allowing the design to be flexible/adaptable for improved airflow
throughout.

In terms of location, there are a number of different sites around Cumbernuald’s town centre chosen by the client for the project, where the designer has reviewed
all the different options.

Key project goals have been set out by the client, as they are aware of the changing climate and impact of the built environment and construction industry. The key
goals/targets set out to achieve are as follows:

- A project focuses on sustainability where it is durable and long-lasting, but has the ability to be adapted in the future.

- To have a simplicity in form, where user experience is optimal.

- Achieve PassivHaus standard, building detailing is crucial in limiting thermal bridging.

- Achieve a BREEM excellent rating.

In addition to this, the client has requested that the project sets out to achieve and make use of some of the key principles of the circular economy which are:

- Design out Waste

- Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA)
- Design in Layers
- Material Reuse and Recovery

These are essential to extending the building’s life-cycle and minimising any environmental impact.

Design Principles:
More specifically the circular economy principles that will be implemented into the design are as follows:

Design out Waste, Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA) and Design in Layers. The design did however consider ‘Material Reuse and Recovery’, but setting
out to achieve all 4 circular economy principles would be difficult for the designer to achieve.

Simplicity in Form: The simple open plan layout of the building and use of a modular structure will enable efficient building reconfiguration, allowing the building to
host a range of different functions over time. The loose-fit building approach to the design ensures that the building can be changed and adapted without any sig-
nificant alterations. This means that there will be a reduction in future energy consumption and material use during renovations.
1. Design Out Waste:

In terms of the design, the building will minimise the production of waste and make use of mod-
ular construction using prefabricated elements. The construction activities for this project will be
moved to a facility where the environment is better controlled, and the site will act as the main
assembly point. This links with another circular economy principle that the designer sets out to use
DfMA. Off-site prefabrication ensures the building components are precise, helping to reduce
excess waste and material off-cuts. In addition, little waste will be generated through the adop-
tion of a loose-fit plan. This means that any future changes to the building’s use will be achieved
through minimal waste generation. The minimisation of construction waste for this project also
aligns directly with the designers sustainability goals for the project. Materials from the demol-
ished Megastructure will be reused by the designer for the loose-fit office building, this includes
re-purposing the concrete into a form of recycled aggregate concrete, which will form the
foundation and ground floor slab for the building. The designer has also opted to use reclaimed
wood for the flooring finish too.

2. Design in Layers:

The designer has opted to implement ‘design in layers’ into the project. This enables the build-
ing to be adaptable in the future, as there will be a separation in the building’s functional layers
(structure, services and finishes). This strongly aligns with the designer’s goal for achieving a sus-
tainable and efficient building, as designing in layers achieves air tightness and ensures long-
term building flexibility. This approach will not only allow for future adaptability of the building,
DfMA Overlay to the
but also enable easy access to carry out essential maintenance work without causing disruption RIBA Plan of Work
to other building components/layers. Adopting this approach in the design extends the life cycle
of the building and cuts down on wasteful and expensive reconstruction. MAINSTRE AMIN G DESIGN FOR
MANUFACTURE AND AS SEMBLY
IN CO NSTRUCTIO N

2nd Edition, 2021

3. Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA):

The designer sets out use ‘Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA)’ in the project, this
will ensure a consistent quality in components whilst advantageously reducing on-site waste, as
building components will be prefabricated off-site in a controlled environment. The use of DfMA
also aligns with the designer’s goals of achieving PassivHaus standard, where air leakage and
thermal bridges can be minimised due to a high level of precision been taken when designing
the building components. DfMA also enables lower transportation costs, less material waste,
quality production control and improved energy performance during the building’s operation.
Additionally, DfMA enables components, pre-assembilies and sub-assembilies to be easily re-
used, which supports circular economy practices and the project’s reduction goals for whole
life carbon. The project will use ‘CCG OSM Ltd’ located in Glasgow for the DfMA, which is only
13.1 miles from the site location. DfMA is also seen to be at the heart of pro-actively taking action
against climate change, by promoting sustainable construction methods.
Precedent Study Examples:

3. The Edge, Amsterdam, Netherlands

Circular Economy Principle: Design out Waste

Description: This building has integrated circular economy principles such

as design out waste. The project’s main focus was minimising the produc-
tion of waste during the construction phase of the project. The design
therefore made use of prefabricated and modular components which
enables the building to be easily reused and disassembled in the future.

2. The Pompidou Centre, Paris, France

Circular Economy Principle: Design in Layers

Description: This building has separated its systems, where the services,
structure and functional spaces are outlined. This enables time efficient
building service repairs or upgrades without causing disruption to oth-
er building components. The building has also adopted a system where
functional layers are colour coded (yellow is for electricity, blue is for air,
red is for vertical circulation, and green is for water).

Key Features:
- Interior space is open, enabling flexible use, as mechanical and structur-
al systems are placed on the exterior side of the building.
- Exposed service and mechanical systems.

1. The Bloomberg Building, London, UK

Circular Economy Principle: DfMA

Description: Prefabrication and modular construction components have

been extensively used on this building designed by Foster + Partners. This
enables efficient building adaptability and construction.

Key Features:
- Stone cladding is prefabricated.
- Ceiling panels are modular and have integrated services within them.
Site Considerations:

Figure 1.0 shows the different site options, where a thorough site analysis has been carried out to determine the best site for the project and brief. This has enabled
clear conclusions to be drawn, where different strengths and weaknesses have been identified. Initially Site 2, was to be the selected location, but through analysis
and research, it was determined to be unsuitable due to a number of factors: there is already a planning application in place set to demolish the Megastructure and
the sheer size of the building could lead to retrofit inconsistencies.

Site Consideration Analysis:

Site 1:
Strengths: Central location with open views.

Weaknesses: Size of the site is small, where

parking/landscaping would be minimal.

Site 2

Strengths: Accessible site in centre of Cum-

bernauld with existing services/foundations.

Weaknesses: Scheduled for demolition,

retrofit of building could have inconsistencies
due to size.

Site 3
Strengths: Accessible site with road access.

Weaknesses: Located in Tesco car park where

high carbon emissions from cars could affect
the air quality in the building in terms of ventila-
tion. Issues with overshadowing from the large
Tesco.
Site 4

Strengths: Accessible flat site with close trans-

portation links (trains). No overshadowing.

Weaknesses: Could have soil contamination

from being a brownfield site. Figure 1.0
Site Selection:

Upon analysis of the above site options and examining the strengths and weaknesses of each, ‘Site 4’ would be best suited to the brief due to a number of positive
contributing factors: accessible flat site, no overshadowing, close transportation links, open views and adequate levels of natural light. The size of the site will also pro-
vide car parking spaces and landscaping, further enhancing the design. Site 4 can be seen highlighted below in Figure 1.1.

Site 4 :

The images below are a snapshot of Site 4 from 2008 to 2023 in Google Map Street View.
This helps to further understand the conditions and usage of the site. From the year 2008
to 2012 Site 4 remained mostly untouched, but from the year 2018 onwards works has
been undertaken. When reviewing Site 4 online, plans had been submitted to the North
Lanarkshire Council page. This included the construction of a “Reverse Power Generation
Facility Comprising Custom Designed Shipping Containers” (North Lanarkshire Council,
2018, P.01), this can be seen from 2018 onwards. In terms of current planning applications,
plans have been submitted for the construction of a gymnasium, which takes up a corner
section of the site.

In terms of Site 4’s current state, with knowledge of it’s past history, there is no indication
of a highly contaminated site, as no industrial plants have been built here. This has also
Figure 1.1
been confirmed through the use of historic maps as seen in figures 1.8 to 1.11.

Figure 1.2 - 2008 Figure 1.3 - 2010 Figure 1.4 - 2012

Figure 1.5 - 2018 Figure 1.6 - 2020 Figure 1.7 - 2023

Historical Maps of Site 4:

The images below show Site 4’s historical maps dating from the 1860’s to the 1960’s. This is helpful in further understanding the site’s previous uses. This also helps to
confirm that the site didn’t contain any contaminated buildings/factories.

Figure 1.8 - 1860’s Figure 1.9 - 1890’s

Figure 1.10 - 1910’s Figure 1.11 - 1960’s

Site Analysis:

Location:

The selected Site 4 is located within Cumbernauld, just outside the main town centre zone.

Physical Barriers:

The designer has highlighted potential physical barriers such as the presence of trees and vegetation surrounding the site, which will help capture CO2 emissions and
protect the site from any prevailing winds. A negative aspect of this could be the potential damage that the tree routes could cause to the buildings foundations, or
drain blockages.

Access:

There is currently direct access to the site, via a footpath and road. The closest main road to the site, which would be used to transport building materials is the B8054.
The image below shows main access roads in blue, railway line access in yellow and site boundary in red.

Topography & Vegetation:

The designer looked into the topography of the site and there is a
7 metre level change across the site. Spotlight heights have been
indicated in the image to the left-hand side.

In terms of existing site vegetation, there is a belt of trees towards

the south side of the site. Large pockets of trees and vegetation
can also be spotted around the site. The images below shows key
areas of surrounding vegetation, which is also indicated on the site
plan map.

1. 2.

Railway Road Access Site Boundary

 Site Analysis:
Climate:
The images below are taken from a climate analysis web page that the designer has used. The temperature graph shows that Cumbernauld reaches an average high
of 18.9 °C and average low of 0.4 °C. In terms of precipitation, October is seen to reach 123 mm of rainfall, compared to April, which receives about 59 mm. The daily
sunshine graph shows that May to August receive the longest hours varying from 5.5 hours in May to 4.6 hours in August, whereas December receives the smallest at 1
hour on average of sunshine daily. Although not show in a graph, Cumbernauld is a hill-top town and does receive strong prevailing south-westerly winds.
Temperature Chart Precipitation Chart Sunshine Chart

Building Placement and Orientation Options:

The designer tested out different building orientation options in order to understand the most suitable in terms of daylight factors, maximising solar gain, surrounding views
and enhancing thermal comfort. The designer opted for the first building orientation option (outlined in green). This orientation maximised views and solar gain. At this
stage the designer then started to think more about window placements, ensuring overheating would be avoided. In terms of massing, the building’s form factor calcu-
lations can be found in Task 2. The designer was mindful of the surrounding context, where trees have been planted around the site to compliment the proposed mass
height. The designer has also carried out a shadow cast analysis test, which ensures that the proposed mass doesn’t impact the surrounding buildings with overshadowing.
Site Analysis:

Key:

East & West Natural Light

South Natural Light

North Natural Light

Main Site Access Point

Prevailing Winds
Site Model:

In order to fully understand Site 4 and its current condition, a 3D SketchUp model was created. Site models are key to project delivery, testing out different design
options and gaining an understanding of existing site conditions and any potential issues that may be underlying. The topographical and CAD map data used was
generated from digimaps; which is a source that uses Ordnance Survey (OS) mapping data. For the surrounding context buildings, PlaceMaker was originally used,
but proved to show inaccuracies in height data, so Google Earth Pro and Google Earth Street View were used to generate more accurate data. From this, smaller
site details such as fencing and access were detailed in. The site model is a key tool which can be exported into other BIM software to further analyse site conditions
such as sun path analysis and overshadowing. It also serves as a base for generating render details and promoting designs. In terms of time efficiency, the site model
was quickly and efficiently constructed making it a reliable and key computer generative tool when testing out building forms and gaining a more in-depth under-
standing of site conditions. The images below show screenshots taken from the model showing key approach views and site access points.
Sustainability Outcomes:

When considering sustainability outcomes for this project, the client has requested that specific targets are met and that the design is aware of climate change and
optimising user comfort/experience. When considering this the designer has set out to achieve the following:

1. Comfort Metrics:

This project ensures the human comfort factors are taken into account and adhered to, as thermal comfort is key to any
environment. The image to the right-hand side breaks down the 6 key points which are: Air Speed, Air Temperature, Ra-
diant Temperature, Metabolic Rate, Clothing Insulation and Humidity. These factors are essential for creating spaces that
provide support for both mental and physical well-being of the occupants. To further expand on this, in terms of thermal
comfort it is important to maintain a consistent temperature throughout the office design, where temperatures should vary
from 20 - 24 °C. This can be achieved through integrating adjustable systems such as operable windows or HVAC/MVHR
systems to optimise occupant comfort. Another key element to thermal comfort is controlling the levels of humidity in the
building - this will be essential to avoid dampness or dryness and should be kept to a 30 - 60% range. The project has also
considered the importance of indoor air quality and acknowledges that the integration of a ventilation system will provide
building occupants with fresh, clean air and the removal of any pollutants. The project aims for CO2 levels to be below
1000 ppm in spaces that are regularly occupied, where a high air exchange rate will be ensured. The designer has also
highlighted the importance of lighting quality, where natural light will be maximised and energy-efficient LEDs will also be
used. To avoid the possibility of computer screen glare from the windows, the designer has strategically placed windows,
where louvres and adjustable internal blinds will be fitted. In terms of daylighting requirements the design will aim for a min-
imum daylight factor of 2% within 80% of occupied spaces.

2. Certification Targets:

The project sets out to achieve a PassivHaus standard, which will result in the loose-fit office building being energy effi-
cient, providing optimal comfort levels for building occupants. This will also reduce the buildings operational costs (lower
energy consumption) and will reduce the environmental impact. The use of PassivHaus certification will also compliment
the designers targets for achieving a BREEM excellent rating. Building Research Establishment Environmental Method
(BREEM) is a sustainability certification which assesses the environmental performance of buildings in terms of its well-be-
ing, energy, materials and water. By targeting this certification, the project will achieve a high sustainability standard, this
strongly aligns with the goals set out within this project.

3. Embodied Carbon Targets:

The designer has targeted an embodied carbon value of <750 kgCO2e/m² for the loose-fit office building. This tar-
get value aligns with industry benchmarks and frameworks set out in the RIBA 2030 Climate Challenge report, which
states business as usual targets (1400 kgCO2e/m²), the 2025 target (<970 kgCO2e/m²) and the 2030 target of <750 kg-
CO2e/m² for new build offices. This strongly aligns with the sustainability goals set out to be achieved within this pro-
ject. As the design has prioritised the use of low carbon materials such as CLT and reclaimed wood, and has adopt-
ed DfMA as one of the circular economy principles, these will contribute to the building’s lower carbon footprint.
The designer will use computer software’s such as One Click LCA and IESVE to calculate and monitor the carbon
emissions within the design. The will highlight opportunities to reduce emissions and produces data for recognition
standards such as BREEM, which this project sets out to achieve.
Materials:

Materials selected for the loose-fit office building are as follows:

1. Foundations & Ground Floor Slab: The foundation and ground floor slab for the loose-fit office building will make
use of the demolished Megastructure’s materials. As the Megastructure is constructed from concrete, the design-
er has decided to make use of this in the form of recycled aggregate concrete. This enables the material to be
locally sourced from the Megastructure, cutting down on carbon emissions in terms of transportation. The de-
signer does however recognise the carbon output of concrete, but as this will be re-purposed and recycled from
the Megastructure it does result in a lower carbon output compared to using freshly poured concrete. In terms of
statistics, recycled aggregate concrete is 10 - 20% lower in CO2 emissions compared to freshly poured concrete,
resulting in a lower carbon footprint. This also positively contributes to the designer’s compliance with green build-
ing standards, as using recycled materials demonstrates the designer’s commitment to more sustainable con-
struction practices. Additionally, this reduces the waste output for the Megastructure in terms of demolition waste
on landfill sites.

2. Structural Frame: The structural frame for the loose-fit office building will comprise of glulam for the structural
elements (columns and beams) and Cross Laminated Timber (CLT) for the floor panels. These materials are not
only suitable for mid-rise buildings such as the 6-storey loose-fit office building, but they provide excellent thermal
insulation quality and are more energy efficient to produce compared to other materials such as steel. In terms
of the material certification for the structural frame, the designer has made sure to responsibly source FSC certi-
fied wood, this ensures that sustainable and ethical forestry practices and measures have been undertaken. In
terms of locating the glulam and CLT, this will be sourced from ‘Glulam Solutions Limited’ in Inverurie, Aberdeen-
shire. This company specialises specifically in the design, supply and installation of both glulam and CLT. Although
transportation of the materials will contribute negatively to the carbon emission output, this is the only manufac-
turer which will source both structural materials closest to the site in Cumbernauld. The designer has recognised
this, but by sustainably sourcing the materials and choosing lighter materials, larger quantities can be transported
each trip, helping to reduce the number of trips required compared to heavier materials such as concrete or
steel. The designer’s choice for using both glulam and CLT to form the structural frame for the building enables a
lower carbon building output, positively contributing to achieving the client’s requirements.

3. Windows: The designer has opted to use triple glazing Low-E windows for the loose-fit office building. Triple
glazed Low-E windows are comprised of three layers of glass, and contain two insulating layers/spaces in be-
tween them. These are usually filled with krypton or argon gas which act by minimising heat transfer. When com-
paring triple glazed Low-E windows with standard single or double glazing, the soundproofing and thermal insu-
lation levels are unmatched. By adding a Low-E coating to the triple glazed windows this works by reducing the
loss of heat during winter periods and minimises heat gain during summer periods. It also works by reflecting infra-
red radiation (heat) back into a room, whilst allowing natural light to filter through. The U-values are low and are
typically around the 0.6-0.8 W/ m².K mark, providing improved thermal performance compared to single (5.0-6.0
W/ m².K)or double glazed (2.8-3.0 W/ m².K) windows. As triple glazing Low-E windows will be used for the building,
cooling and heating demands will be reduced resulting in a more energy efficient design. The building will also
experience enhance comfort levels, where the risk of condensation will be reduced due to the internal glass sur-
face being warm. The triple glazed Low-E windows will be sourced from ‘Eco Windows’ in East Kilbride, 21.1 miles
from the site, helping to reduce the carbon footprint in terms of transportation. If the windows were to be includ-
ed in the prefabricated panels constructed at ‘CCG OSM Ltd’, it would be 7.8 miles to there and then and then
13.1 miles to the site.
4. Insulation: As the client requested a low carbon building that meets PassivHaus standard, the designer re-
searched different insulation options for the loose-fit office building. Table1.0 shows a breakdown of different op-
tions, where ‘Wood Fibre Insulation’ was selected as the most appropriate, due to its low thermal conductivity,
low carbon and being made from renewable wood waste. The designer did however consider other insulating
materials such as hemp and cellulose insulation, but these required more specialist equipment for installation
and had a slightly higher thermal conductivity. In terms of locating wood fibre insulation for the project, it will be
sourced from ‘Ultimate Insulation Supplies Ltd’ in Stirling which is 14.5 miles from the site location. As this materi-
al will be locally sourced, its transportation will reduce the carbon footprint. The insulation will be included in the
prefabricated panels constructed at ‘CCG OSM Ltd’, it would be 26.9 miles to there and then 13.1 miles to the
site. Wood fibre insulation can also be recycled and reused/re-purposed in other construction projects once re-
moved from a building, depending on its condition. As the insulation type is applied in a board, batt or roll form it
can be easily removed from a building without causing damage to the material.

Insulation Type Thermal Applications Key Features

Conductivity (λ)
Wood Fibre Insulation 0.038-0.045 Floors, Walls, Roof Low carbon, made from renewable wood waste,
W/m.K biodegradable, high thermal efficiency, acoustic
insulation.
Cellulose Insulation 0.034-0.040 Floors, Walls, Roof Low embodied carbon, derived from recycled
W/m.K paper, blow-in application.
Hemp Insulation 0.040-0.045 Roof, Walls, Internal Pest and Mold resistant, renewable crop,
W/m.K Partitions breathable, lightweight, stores carbon.
Cork Insulation 0.038-0.040 Roof, External Long lifespan, fire, moisture and pest resistant,
W/m.K Walls, Partitions 100% recyclable and natural.
Sheep Wool 0.035-0.040 Roof, Walls, Low carbon, renewable material, biodegradable,
Insulation W/m.K Ceilings natural material.
Straw Bale Insulation 0.045-0.050 Walls (thick layers) Low carbon footprint, agriculture byproduct, high
W/m.K acoustic and thermal performance.
Table 1.0

Compact Solid-Timber PassivHaus (London): The designer felt it was appropriate to make reference to some key
precedent studies which have used similar insulating materials (wood fibre insulation). The compact solid-timber
PassivHaus in London is a prime example of this, where it has also similarly used CLT panels. The house has been
insulated with multiple layer of wood fibre insulation contributing to the U-value of 0.10 W/m²K, resulting in a high
thermal performance and energy efficient design. The wall composition is as follows:
OUTSIDE
Zinc Cladding
WBP Ply Substrate (22mm)
Ventilated cavity timber battens (40mm)

Gutex Ultratherm (60mm)

Gutex Thermosafe Homogen
140+120mm

Heliotopix Flangehead Screws

Breathable Proclima DA mem-

brane, taped with Tescon Vana
CLT wall panel
INSIDE
4. Roofing: The designer has opted for a flat/slightly sloped roof structure for the loose-fit office building. This will
be constructed by using CLT to form the structural base, where wood fibre insulation will be used internally to
insulate. Rigid board insulation will then be used to externally insulate the roof, where a vapour barrier and EPDM
covering will be used to protect the roof from any water ingress. The roof will slightly taper towards North to allow
for excess water run off. The roof will also support the building’s plant facilities and accommodate solar PVC pan-
els to convert/collect sunlight into electricity for the loose-fit office building.

5. Cladding: The cladding system for the loose-fit office will consist of locally sourced ‘Scottish larch timber’. The
material offers good thermal performance, minimal maintenance with a long lifespan, and absorbs CO2 when
it’s being grown. Scottish larch timber is also a low-carbon material, as the timber is sustainably sourced from FSC
certified forests. This ensures that the Scottish larch is renewable, as it is harvested in a way which ensure forests
can regenerate, enabling a continuous cycle of carbon sequestration. In terms of recycling and reusing the ma-
terial, the Scottish larch can either be reused or re-purposed in other construction applications, cutting down on
waste. In its final end of life stage, it can be broken down into wood chips for biomass energy. The Scottish larch
will be sourced from ‘Scottish Wood’ in Fife and has a distance of 34.9 miles to ‘CCG OSM Ltd’, where it would
be attached to prefabricated panels. It would then have a 13.1 mile distance to the site in Cumbernauld. This will
result in a transportation carbon footprint, but it is minimal compared to other sources for this material. In order to
maintain the cladding system and maintain the look, the designer has opted to use a natural, non-toxic oil-based
stain such as Osmo or Rubio Monocoat to protect the building. This offers protection against weather conditions,
providing durability and also low maintenance. As this will be natural and non-toxic, it allows the cladding system
to be recycled or reclaimed in the future.

6. Interior Finishes (Partitions and wall treatment): The internal partitions in the loose-fit office block will be con-
structed from a simple timber stud frame. This will ensure the load carried down to other floors won’t be too much
and this can be locally and sustainably sourced. Initially, the designer opted to use CLT for the internal partitions,
but due to the weight and expense, a simple stud timber frame partition would work just as effectively. The tim-
ber to construct the partitions will be locally sourced from ‘Beatson’s Building Supplies’ in Cumbernauld, this re-
sults in a very low carbon footprint in terms of transportation as it is located beside the site. The wall surfaces will
be finished with plasterboard and a non-toxic paint.

7. Flooring and Finishes: The intermediate floor will be constructed from CLT and will be insulated using wood fire
insulation. This also has acoustic properties to buffer noise transmittance to other floors. The floor finish will make
use of reclaimed wood, which contributes positivity to the project’s sustainability strategy and aims, i.e. designing
a building with low carbon materials.
User Experience:

In terms of user experience, this has been prioritised by the designer where the office space will promote productivity and health and well-being. Some key aspects
the designer has considered are as follows:

1. Air Quality: Good air quality is vital for both the productivity and health of building occupants, poor air quality
can lead to a decrease in concentration levels tiredness and discomfort. The designer has therefore integrated
a ‘Mechanical Ventilation with Heat Recovery’(MVHR) system, which will constantly supply the building with fresh
air. Another key factor taken into consideration by the designer is humidity control, this will maintain comfortable
levels at (40 - 60%). This will avoid the possibility of creating an environment with either a lot of moisture or an envi-
ronment with very dry air, which could severely impact building occupants health and comfort levels.

2. Natural and Artificial Lighting: The designer has strategically placed windows within the design to maximise
natural lighting. This is shown to support the health and well-being of building occupants. The designer has also
incorporated adjustable internal blinds and external shading devices to avoid the possibility of overheating and
computer screen glare, which can have an impact on eye strain and comfort levels. The designer has set out to
achieve a minimum daylight factor of 2% within 80% of occupied spaces, which will reduce the requirement of
artificial lighting, but energy efficient LED’s will be incorporated within the design.

3. Thermal Comfort: Thermal comfort is a key factor that the designer has acknowledged. This will affect the build-
ings occupants productivity levels and ability to maintain focus. In terms of the project’s design response to this,
a HVAC system will be implemented into the design in order to provide a comfortable environment that has a
consistent indoor temperature throughout the year. This will avoid the possibility of having cold or hot spots within
the building. The designer has also implemented operable windows within the design, this will enable building oc-
cupants with the opportunity to control and adapt the ventilation and airflow of the internal environment to their
preference.

4. Acoustics: The designer has considered the impact a lack of acoustic treatment would have on the building
occupants experience. As the design will be using wood fibre insulation, which has excellent acoustic perfor-
mance values and sound absorption properties, this will improve the sound quality within the building.

5. Experience: The designer has also incorporated the use of non-toxic materials and the integration of plants
and greenery into the design. This helps promote a healthy work environment for building occupants, where they
will also have access to areas of greenery and path networks out-with the building. This will provide the opportu-
nity for relaxation and allow a connection with nature. The design will incorporate planting and greenery to wrap
around the building, which will enhance window views and create an atmosphere that reduces stress.
02

Architectural Concept Drawings

02
Architectural Concept Drawings

Concept Overview:
The loose-fit office building will take a simple square volumetric form, which has a good heat loss form factor. The computer software Revit was used to produce the
floor plans, elevations, sections and 3D model. The simple design layout enables smooth circulation around the office block. A dedicated service zone within the
building accommodates for stair access, a lift, riser and sanitary facilities.
*The floor plans Concept Details:
above show a - The service zone within the building has been strate-
sketched concept gically placed against the North elevation because a
design, more detailed limited number of windows is required due to the build-
and scaled floor ing orientation and heat loss factors.
plans can be found in
the next few pages.* - Sanitary facilities and main building services have
been placed in-line with each other on every floor, this
enables services to run straight and avoids any build-
ing complications.

- Main office space is open-plan and has been strate-

gically placed towards the South, East and West ele-
vations to optimise views, natural light and have ac-
cess to openable windows. To avoid computer screen
glare or the possibility of overheating, internal blinds
Ground Floor Plan First Floor Plan - To Fifth Floor Plan and operable louvres will be implemented into the
design.
Concept Details:
The floor plans show a public entrance area, kitchenette, and cloak room. When running energy simu- - The building’s main entrance has been strategically
lations on the building these spaces will be simplified to reduce confusion and provide a clear picture of placed to the east side of the building, as the site does
data output. experience prevailing winds from the south-west.

Circulation Diagram/Sketch: Primary Circulation

Glazing Ratios: Secondary Circulation

= 6% = 12% = 20% = 12%

North East South West Ground Floor Plan First Floor Plan - To Fifth
Floor Plan
Form Factor & Building Efficiency:

The designer has opted for an efficient and suitable building form, which adheres to the clients requirements of a ‘simple and basic building design’. The form factor
ratio is the ratio of the building’s exterior envelope area (floor, walls, and roof) to its floor area (usable). The form factor of any building plays an important role in es-
tablishing factors such as sustainability, building cost and energy efficiency, which has been at the forefront on the design. A lower form factor ration will result in a
reduction of heat loss within the building, therefore enhancing the energy efficiency.

Loose-Fit Office Form Factor:

The designer has therefore opted for a basic square shape with the dimensions of 17.5m x 17.5m. This Heat Loss Form Factor = Heat Loss Area/Treated Floor Area
compact shape will minimise the transfer of heat through the building’s envelope because there is a
balance between the internal volume and surface area. Irregular or elongated building forms with the Heat Loss Form Factor = 1872.5/1837.5
same floor area have more external surface areas, so would experience more heat transfer, resulting
in a less efficient building form. Another reason the designer choose a simple square building form is Heat Loss Form Factor = 1.019
due to the cost-effectiveness of it. This will be simple to construct and there will be a reduction in ma-
terial waste due to its simple building form. The use of this form also minimises the risk of thermal bridg- Heat Loss Form Factor = 1.02
ing, as there will not be as many joints or external corners.
Calculation:
Surface to Volume Ratio = Envelope Area/Volume
The designer has set out a heat loss form factor calculation, which has helped to establish the most ef-
ficient building form. The the gross internal floor area (GIFA) for the loose-fit office building is 1800m², as Surface to Volume Ratio = 1872.5/5512.5
specified by the client. The building dimensions are: 17.5m x 17.5m, 6 storeys high, 3m height from floor
to floor.
Surface to Volume Ratio = 0.339
The designer has also carried out a surface to volume ratio calculation, which is also key when estab-
lishing how efficient the selected building form is. The calculations can be seen to the right-hand side.
Surface to Volume Ratio = 0.34/m
The proposed building results in a heat loss form factor of 1.02, and a 0.34/m for surface to volume ra-
tio. These values have been aligned with the LETI design guide and PassiveHaus guidance.

Volume = Length x Width x Height Elevation Envelope Area = (Length x Width) x4

Volume = 17.5 x 17.5 x 18 Elevation Envelope Area = (18 x 17.5) x 4

Volume = 5512.5m3 Elevation Envelope Area = 1260m²

Floor Envelope Area = (Length x Width) x 2

Floor Envelope Area = (17.5 x 17.5) x 2

Floor Envelope Area = 612.5m²

Total Envelope Area = 1260 + 612.5

Total Envelope Area = 1872.5m²

Site Plan
Scale: 1:1000
 First Floor Plan - To Fifth Floor Plan
Ground Floor Plan Scale 1:100
Scale: 1:100
Roof Plan
Scale: 1:100
North Elevation
Scale: 1:100
East Elevation
Scale: 1:100
South Elevation
Scale: 1:100
West Elevation
Scale: 1:100
Section A-A
Scale: 1:100
Axonometric
Scale: N/S
03

Assessment of Operational Carbon

using Thermal Dynamic Simulation
03
Assessment of Operational Carbon
using Thermal Dynamic Simulation

Introduction:

In order to understand and evaluate the space heating demand, operational carbon emissions and energy use intensity (final energy) of the loose-fit office build-
ing, the dynamic thermal simulation computer software IESVE (Integrated Environmental Solutions Virtual Environment) has been used by the designer. The designer
also regularly made reference to the ‘LETI Climate Emergency Design Guide’ for commercial offices, which provides target recommendation values for achieving a
net-zero carbon building. It provided information on embodied carbon, demand response, operational energy, heating and hot water and data disclosure.

Data Input:

The designer worked through the IESVE model and input key data such as: LETI Climate Emergency
Design Guide
How new buildings
Weather Data can meet UK
climate change
targets

U-values
2020

Heating
2021

2022

Cooling 2024 2023

Domestic Hot Water Systems

2030

Air Supply
100% of all
designed new
2025
buildings to be
zero carbon

Path to zero carbon

Aux Energy

Systems
L ONDON
E NERGY
T RANSFORMATION

Building Operating Hours

I NITIATIVE

LETI Design Guide

Electrical Lighting

IESVE Overview:

In terms of a project overview, the designer modelled the office building in IESVE and initially generated an energy report which had an EUI of 97 kWh/m². This was
compared to the LETI commercial office guidance which stated a target value of 55 kWh/m². From this the designer made alterations to the IESVE model where an
EUI value of 52 kWh/m² was achieved. The following pages will explain the IESVE modelling process and explain measures taken to lower the EUI value to achieve the
target value.
IESVE Main Modelling Values:

In terms of the model settings, the designer used the following to set up and produce the IESVE model.

Weather Data: Glasgow Ap

The designer set the weather file location to Glasgow Airport, as this was geographically the closest to Cumbernauld, where the site is, making it the most represent-
ative for weather conditions. The weather data was sourced from the ASHRAE database. Key values such as wind speed, average temperature and solar radiation
levels were important when assessing the office building’s energy performance; calculating the cooling and heating demands and establishing if renewable energy
could be integrated into the project. The images below show the input weather file data used in the IESVE model and a graph which shows the weather data on an
annual basis (01 Jan to 31 Dec) and represents the maximum dry-bulb temperature in red, minimum dry-bulb temperature in green and the maximum wet-bulb tem-
perature in blue.

28

26

24

22

20

Temperature (°C)
18

16

14

12

10

6
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan
Date: Thu 01/Jan to Thu 31/Dec

Max Dry-bulb Temperature Min Dry-bulb Temperature Max Wet-bulb Temperature

Solar Arc Data Analysis
Using the computer software IESVE, the designer felt it was appropriate to further analyse and understand the Sun’s orientation path (solar arch) in relation to the
modelled office block. The images below show the Sun’s positioning during the longest and shortest days (in terms of daylight) within the year (20th June at 12:00
when the Sun is at its highest and 21st December at 12:00, when the Sun is at its lowest). This enabled the designer to establish the most appropriate building orienta-
tion, where shading devices would be required, and gave an understanding on where PV solar panels should be placed.

20th June 12:00 21st December 12:00

IESVE Modelling Process
The designer first imported a DWG plan of the office block, which ensured the IESVE model was accurate to the different room, window and door dimensions. It also
ensured that the placement was correct - the office block was modelled in ‘ModelIT’ for the first half. It’s important to note that the designer maintained an organ-
ised room group folder system, where selected rooms were assigned to specific folder groups - this was helpful later on when assigning thermal templates. Spaces
were assigned under ‘Stairs-Toilets’, ‘Plant Room’, ‘Office Space’ and ‘Roof’.

Folder Organisation

Ground Floor Plan Axonometric

Left

Front Axonometric with internal

Back Right
view

The images above show screenshots taken from IESVE model generated by the designer. The windows are represented in green, the main door is represented in red
and the building envelope is represented in blue.
U-values
Using IESVE the designer modified and created new project constructions to represent the external walls, internal partitions, doors, windows, roof, ground/exposed
floor and the internal ceiling/floor. This was key to generating accurate wall build-ups and other construction components that represent the office building. This is
also important when gaining an understanding on the building’s thermal performance values. The U-values generated were compared against guidance from ‘The
Scottish Building Regulations’, LETI and the PassivHaus standard, this ensured that the calculated U-values either met or exceeded the target values. For example
when doing this the designer made adjustments to the insulation thickness in the wall to help improve the U-value. As U-values measure the rate in which heat trans-
fers though a given material, having a lower value will result in the selected material being more effective at limiting the transfer of heat. By targeting a low U-value,
this will result in a more comfortable and energy efficient building. The image below shows a summary of the different U-values and component thickness from the
IESVE model.

Building Element LETI Target Passivhaus Target

Roof ≤ 0.10 W/m²K ≤ 0.10 W/m²K
Windows ≤ 1.0 W/m²K ≤ 0.80 W/m²K
External Walls ≤ 0.18 W/m²K ≤ 0.15 W/m²K
Floors ≤ 0.13 W/m²K ≤ 0.15 W/m²K

U-value Targets
Building Element LETI Target Passivhaus Target
Roof ≤ 0.10 W/m²K ≤ 0.10 W/m²K
Windows ≤ 1.0 W/m²K ≤ 0.80 W/m²K
External Walls ≤ 0.18 W/m²K ≤ 0.15 W/m²K
Floors ≤ 0.13 W/m²K ≤ 0.15 W/m²K
Table 2.0
U-value Targets
Internal Ceiling/Floor Exposed Floor

Internal Partition Roof

 External Window
External Wall

Door
Construction Assignment
The next step involved assigning the project constructions to the different building components such as external walls, internal partitions, doors, windows, roof,
ground/exposed floor and the internal ceiling/floor. The designer worked through the construction build-ups, ensuring the U-values and G-values were appropriate,
and hitting benchmark targets for PassivHaus and LETI. From this, the constructions were assigned appropriately. The images below shows the construction assign-
ment for the different building components.

Ground/ Exposed Floor Roof

External Wall External Glazing

Internal Partition Door

Internal Floor/ Ceiling

Apache - Apache Systems
The next step the designer took was saving the IESVE model before opening up Apache, which is the thermal calculation and simulation component to IESVE. Within
this the designer started to work through the ‘Apache System’ where the main building systems (Heating, Cooling, DHW, AUX Energy and Air supply) could be modi-
fied to suit the project. The designer didn’t alter the Cost, Solar Heating or the Control settings in IESVE Apache system these we kept to the standard values. In terms
of key documentation, the designer made regular reference to the IESVE assumptions guide (CIBSE Guide G) and the LETI guide for commercial offices. In terms of
cooling and heating, these were based off these two documents and the Hot Water was based off the CIBSE Guide G document. The Auxiliary energy values were
based off IESVE Assumptions Guidance (Part L2A). The screenshots below are taken from the IESVE model and show the Apache system data that the project used.

Heating - Main System Cooling - Main System

Hot Water - Main System Aux Energy - Main System

Air Supply - Main System
Apache - Building Template Manager (Office)
The designer then looked into the ‘Building Template Manager’ which has been used to manage the project templates for different aspects such as occupancy
profiles, HVAC systems and ventilation and infiltration systems. The designer first looked at the ‘UK-Office-Medium-Office’ template. In terms of the ‘System’, the HVAC
system, DHW system and the Auxiliary ventilation system were kept as the IESVE assumptions/ recommendation document. In terms of the heating, cooling and sys-
tem outside air supply, these settings and input values were also based off the IESVE standards set out in the guidance document. When looking at the next sec-
tion which is the ‘Space Conditions’, the values and profiles were based off a combination off both the LETI design guidance and the IESVE assumption guidance.
In terms of the next section ‘Internal Gains’, this altered (lowered) to correlate with the LETI design guidance. The next section ‘Air Exchanges’ is based off the IESVE
guidance document. The infiltration has a max flow of 0.05 ach, and the auxiliary ventilation has a max flow of 0.06 l/(s.m²). The next section ‘Building Regulations’
was kept at the IESVE standard set. The final section ‘Comfort’ was reviewed, but also kept at the IESVE standard set. Data input values for each section can be seen
in the screenshots below.

System - Office Space Conditions - Office

Internal Gains - Office Air Exchanges (Infiltration) - Office

Air Exchanges (Aux Ventilation) - Office Building Regulations - Office

Comfort - Office
Apache - Building Template Manager (Plant Room, Storage)
The designer then looked at the ‘UK-Office-Medium-Plant Room - Storage’ template. In terms of the ‘System’, the HVAC system, DHW system and the Auxiliary ven-
tilation system were kept as the IESVE assumptions/ recommendation document. In terms of the heating, cooling and system outside air supply, these settings and
input values were also based off the IESVE standards set out in the guidance document. When looking at the next section which is the ‘Space Conditions’, the values
slightly differ from the previous office settings. The heating operation profile for the plant room and storage is set to be continuously off. This decision was based off
the spaces not regularly being occupied and also through IESVE guidance. In terms of the ‘DHW Consumption’, this has been set to a value of 0.0000 l/(h.pers), this
was also based off IESVE assumptions. The cooling operation profile was set to be off continuously. The ‘Plant (auxiliary energy)’ was tabbed as ‘set to heating pro-
file’, this is slightly different to the office ‘Plant (auxiliary energy), where it was tabbed to ‘set independently’, this is based on IESVE guidance. In terms of the humidity
control this has been set to a minimum % saturation of 0 and maximum % saturation of 100. This is different when comparing it to the offices humidity control which
had a minimum % saturation of 40 and maximum % saturation of 60. These values for the plant room and storage have also been set in the IESVE template. In terms of
the ‘Internal Gains’, nothing has been set, where it has been based upon IESVE guidance. The ‘Air Exchanges’ is based off the IESVE guidance document, where the
‘Infiltration’ has a max flow of 0.05 ach. The next section ‘Building Regulations’ was kept at the IESVE standard set. The final section ‘Comfort’ was reviewed, but also
kept at the IESVE standard set. Data input values for each section can be seen in the screenshots below.

System - Plant Room, Storage Space Conditions - Plant Room, Storage

Internal Gains - Plant Room, Storage Air Exchanges (Infiltration) - Plant Room, Storage

Building Regulations - Plant Room, Storage Comfort - Plant Room, Storage

Apache - Building Template Manager (Stairs, Toilets)
The designer then looked at the ‘UK-Office-Medium-Stairs - Toilets’ template. In terms of the ‘System’, the HVAC system, DHW system and the Auxiliary ventilation sys-
tem were kept as the IESVE assumptions/ recommendation document. In terms of the heating, cooling and system outside air supply, these settings and input values
were also based off the IESVE standards set out in the guidance document. When looking at the next section which is the ‘Space Conditions’, the values slightly differ
from the previous office and plant room-storage settings. The heating operation profile for the stairs - toilets is set to be on an operation profile of 08h - 18h and have
a constant set-point of 19°C. This is slightly different when compared to the office settings which show a constant set-point of 21°C. This decision was based off the
IESVE assumption guidance. In terms of the DHW, this has been ‘linked to occupancy’, where it has a ‘DHW Consumption’ value of 1.0000 l/(h.pers). This is based off
IESVE assumptions and guidance. The cooling operation profile has been set to be continuously off. In terms of the ‘Plant (auxiliary energy)’, this was tabbed as ‘set
independently’, which is the same as the office settings, this is also based on IESVE guidance. The humidity control profile matches the plant room and storage set-
tings, where it is set to a minimum % saturation of 0 and maximum % saturation of 100. These values have also been set in the IESVE template. In terms of the ‘Internal
Gains’ this has ‘Fluorescent Lighting’ which has been lowered to match the LETI design guide. The ‘Air Exchanges’ is based off the IESVE guidance document, where
the ‘Infiltration’ has a max flow of 0.05 ach and the auxiliary ventilation has a max flow of 0.06 l/(s.m²). The next section ‘Building Regulations’ was kept at the IESVE
standard set. The final section ‘Comfort’ was reviewed, but also kept at the IESVE standard set. Data input values for each section can be seen in the screenshots
below.

System - Stairs, Toilets Space Conditions - Stairs, Toilets

Internal Gains - Stairs, Toilets Air Exchanges (Infiltration) - Stairs, Toilets

Building Regulations - Stairs, Toilets

Air Exchanges (Aux Ventilation) - Stairs, Toilets
Comfort - Stairs, Toilets
Energy Report No. 01 Energy Report No. 02

Energy Model Output Report Energy Model Output Report

Project: Cumbernauld Offie Block (Test 1) Design Team: Project: Cumbernauld Offie Block 5.5 test Design Team:
Address: Energy Analyst: Address: Energy Analyst:
Climate File: GlasgowEWY.fwt Owner: Climate File: GlasgowEWY.fwt Owner:
Simulation: Cumbernauld Office Block (Test 1).aps Conditioned Area (m²): 1990.0000 Simulation: Cumbernauld Office Block 5.5.aps Conditioned Area (m²): 1990.0000

Annual Energy Consumption (kWh/m²/year) & CO2 kgCO2/m²/yr Project Viewer - 3D Model Annual Energy Consumption (kWh/m²/year) & CO2 kgCO2/m²/yr Project Viewer - 3D Model
Energy End Use Site Energy Source Energy CO2 Emissions Energy End Use Site Energy Source Energy CO2 Emissions
Heating Fossil Fuel 0.0 0.0 0.0 Heating Fossil Fuel 0.0 0.0 0.0
Heating Electricity 0.1 0.2 0.0 Heating Electricity 0.1 0.2 0.0
Space Cooling 26.9 40.2 3.6 Space Cooling 9.8 14.6 1.3
Fans Interior 2.2 3.3 0.3 Fans Interior 2.2 3.3 0.3
Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pumps 2.2 3.3 0.3 Pumps 2.2 3.3 0.3
DHW Fossil Fuel 0.0 0.0 0.0 DHW Fossil Fuel 0.0 0.0 0.0
DHW Electricity 16.4 24.7 2.3 DHW Electricity 16.4 24.7 2.3
Interior Lighting 23.1 34.9 3.2 Interior Lighting 23.1 34.9 3.2
Exterior Lighting 0.0 0.0 0.0 Exterior Lighting 0.0 0.0 0.0
Receptacle 25.0 37.8 3.5 Receptacle 25.0 37.8 3.5
Data Center 0.0 0.0 0.0 Data Center 0.0 0.0 0.0
Cooking Fossil Fuel 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cooking Fossil Fuel 0.0 0.0 0.0
Cooking Electricity 0.0 0.0 0.0 Site Energy Use Intensity Cooking Electricity 0.0 0.0 0.0 Site Energy Use Intensity
Elevators & Escalators 0.0 0.0 0.0 Elevators & Escalators 0.0 0.0 0.0
Refrigeration 0.0 0.0 0.0 Refrigeration 0.0 0.0 0.0
Process 0.0 0.0 0.0 Process 0.0 0.0 0.0
TOTAL (ex renewables) 95 144 13 TOTAL (ex renewables) 78 118 10

Site Energy Dashboard (MWh) Site Energy Dashboard (MWh)

Site Energy Flows – Sankey Diagram Site Energy Flows – Sankey Diagram
Fuels End Uses Fuels End Uses

Annual Fuel Costs and Peak Demands Annual Fuel Costs and Peak Demands
Fuels Cost (£) Peak Day Peak Time Peak Demand Fuels Cost (£) Peak Day Peak Time Peak Demand
Electricity 16,688.00 15-Aug 15:00 63.5 kW Electricity 13,666.00 15-Aug 15:00 45.0 kW
Fossil Fuel 0.00 01-Jan 0:00 0.0 kW Fossil Fuel 0.00 01-Jan 0:00 0.0 kW
Total 16,688.00 01-Jan 0:00 Total 13,666.00 01-Jan 0:00

Peak Energy Sources for Electricity (kW), Fossil Fuel (kW) and Onsite Power Generation (kW): Top 3 Contributors Peak Energy Sources for Electricity (kW), Fossil Fuel (kW) and Onsite Power Generation (kW): Top 3 Contributors

Integrated Environmental Solutions 2024.0.0.0 Integrated Environmental Solutions 2024.0.0.0

LETI Climate Emergency Design Guide
The designer regularly referenced the ‘LETI Climate Emergency Design Guide’ for commercial offices. This provides target recommendation values for achieving a
net-zero carbon building. The images below show what the designer referenced when working through IESVE data.

0 0
30 31

Commercial offices
Operational energy Heating
Heatingand
andhot
hotwater
water Demand
Demandresponse
response
Implement the following indicative design measures: Implement the
Implement following
the measures:
following measures: Implement the the
Implement following measures
following to smooth
measures energy
to smooth energy
demand andand
demand consumption:
consumption:
Fuel
Fuel
Fabric U-values (W/m2.K) Window areas guide Reduce energy consumption to:
(% of wall area) Ensure
Ensure heating
heating and hot
and water
hot generation
water is is
generation Peak reduction
Peak reduction
Walls 0.12 - 0.15
fossil fuel
fossil free
fuel free Reduce heating andand
hot hot
water peak
Floor 0.10 - 0.12 North 25-40% Reduce heating water peak

55
Energy Use
East 25-40% Intensity energy demand
energy demand
Roof 0.10 - 0.12 Heat
Heat
(EUI) in GIA,
Windows 1.0 (triple glazing) - South 25-40% The average carbon content of of
heat supplied
excluding The average carbon content heat supplied Active demand
Active response
demand measures
response measures
1.2 (double glazing) West 25-40% renewable (gCO
(gCO /kWh.yr) should
/kWh.yr) bebe
should reported
reportedin-use
in-use
kWh/m2.yr energy
2
2 Install heating and cooling set point
Install heating and cooling set point
Doors 1.2 control
control
Balance contribution Heating
Heating
daylight and Maximum 1010
W/m Reduce lighting, ventilation andand
smallsmall
W/mpeak heat lossloss
(including
2
Fabric efficiency measures Maximum 2
peak heat (including Reduce lighting, ventilation
overheating ventilation) power energy consumption
Air tightness <1 (m3/h. m2@50Pa) ventilation) power energy consumption
Thermal bridging 0.04 (y-value) Include external
shading
Reduce space
heating
demand to:
15
kWh/m2.yr
Connect to community wide ambient loop
Connect to community wide ambient loop
heat-sharing network to allow excess heat
heat-sharing network to allow excess heat
Electricity generation and storage
Electricity generation and storage
Consider battery storage
G-value of glass 0.4 - 0.3 from cooling to be made available to other Consider battery storage
from cooling to be made available to other
Include openable buildings
buildings Electric vehicle (EV) charging
Power efficiency measures windows and
Hot water Electric vehicle (EV) charging
Lighting power density 4.5 (W/m2 peak NIA) cross ventilation Hot water Electric vehicle turn down
Maximum dead leg of 1 litre for hot water Electric vehicle turn down
Lighting out of hours 0.5 (W/m2 peak NIA) Maximum dead leg of 1 litre for hot water Reverse charging EV technology
Maximise renewables pipework Reverse charging EV technology
Tenant power density 8 (W/m2 peak NIA) to generate the annual pipework
energy requirement for 'Green' Euro Water Label should be used Behaviour change
ICT loads 0.5 (W/m2 peak NIA) Behaviour change
Small resi at least two floors of the Med/high resi for'Green' Eurooutlets
hot water Water(e.g.:
Labelcertifi
shoulded be used
6 L/min Incentives to reduce power consumption
Small power out of hours 2 (W/m2 peak NIA) for hothead
water outlets (e.g.:
flowcertified 6 L/min
development on-site shower – not using restrictors). andIncentives
peak gridto reduce power consumption
constraints
shower head – not using flow restrictors). and peak grid constraints
Encourage responsible occupancy.
System efficiency measures Encourage responsible occupancy.
Form factor of 1 - 2
MVHR 90% (efficiency)
Heat pump SCoP ≥ 2.8
Chiller SEER ≥ 5.5
Central AHU SFP 1.5 - 1.2 W/l.s
A/C set points 20-26oC

Embodied carbon Data disclosure

Focus on reducing embodied carbon Data
Meter disclosure
and disclose energy consumption as follows:
for the largest uses: OFFICE Meter and disclose energy consumption as follows:
2% (Metering strategy following BBP
Average split of embodied carbon Metering
Better Metering Toolkitfollowing
guidance)
123 Disclosure
per building element: Metering (Metering strategy BBP
123 Disclosure
Products/materials (A1-A3) Better Metering Toolkit guidance)
1. Record meter data at half hourly intervals 1. Carry out an annual Display Energy Certificate
Transport (A4)
48% - Superstructure 1.(DEC) and include as part of annual reporting
Reduce 2.1. Separate
Record meter
landlorddata
andattenant
half hourly
energy intervals
use meters Carry out an annual Display Energy Certificate
45% embodied
2. and clearly landlord
label meters
andwith serial numberuseand 2. Report energy consumption by fuel type reporting
(DEC) and include as part of annual
17% - Substructure carbon by
Separate
end use
tenant energy meters
Construction (A5) 48% and clearly label meters with serial number and 2.andReport
respective
energybenchmarks
consumption fromby the DEC
fuel type
40% or to: technical table
end use renewable energy generation
3. Submeter and respective benchmarks from the DEC
16% - Façade 3. For technical table
multi-let commercial offices produce
Maintenance and 4.3. Use
Submeter
a centralrenewable
repository energy
for datageneration
that has a
<600
annual landlord energy (base
3. For multi-let commercial offi building) rating
ces produce
replacements (B1-B5)
15% - MEP 4. Use a central repository forstorage
minimum of 18 months data data that has a andannual
tenantlandlord
ratings as well as(base
energy or instead of a rating
building)
kgCO2/m2 5. minimum
Provide of 18 months
thorough dataschematics
set of meter storage and whole building DEC
and tenant ratings as well as or instead of a
End of life disposal (C1-C4) information on maintenance and use of meters whole
4. Upload building
five years ofDEC
data to a publicly
4% - Internal finishes 5. Provide thorough set of meter schematics and
2% School 3% information
6. Ensure oncommissioning
metering maintenance and use of meters
includes accessible database such as GLA and/or
Area in GIA 4. Upload five years of data to a publicly
validation of manual compared to half hourly CarbonBuzz.
6. readings.
Ensure metering commissioning includes accessible database such as GLA and/or
validation of manual compared to half hourly CarbonBuzz.
readings.
Energy Report No. 03

Energy Model Output Report

Energy Report No 0.3 (Final)
Project: Final Report Design Team:
Address: Energy Analyst:
Climate File: GlasgowEWY.fwt Owner: Lisa MacRae The final energy report generated from IESVE can be seen on the left-hand side. This
Simulation: Final Report.aps Conditioned Area (m²): 1990.0000
was achieved through the designer running a ‘ApacheSim (Dynamic Simulation’,
Annual Energy Consumption (kWh/m²/year) & CO2 kgCO2/m²/yr
Energy End Use Site Energy Source Energy CO2 Emissions
Project Viewer - 3D Model
which generated the report. The report can be broken down into the buildings ‘An-
Heating Fossil Fuel 0.0 0.0 0.0 nual Energy Consumption’ (kWh/m²/year) & CO2 kgCO2/m²/yr. This section of the re-
port displays the ‘Space Heating Demand’, which is the amount of energy which is
Heating Electricity 2.1 3.3 0.3
Space Cooling 9.3 13.9 1.3
Fans Interior
Heat Rejection
0.7
0.0
1.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
required to heat the building in order to maintain a comfortable indoor temperature.
Pumps
DHW Fossil Fuel
0.7
0.0
1.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
This section also shows the ‘Operational Carbon emissions’, which is the amount of
DHW Electricity 8.4 12.8 1.2 CO2 equivalent emissions generated by the building’s energy usage during the oper-
ation period.
Interior Lighting 12.5 18.9 1.7
Exterior Lighting 0.0 0.0 0.0
Receptacle 18.7 28.4 2.6
Data Center 0.0 0.0 0.0
Cooking Fossil Fuel
Cooking Electricity
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 Site Energy Use Intensity
The next section of the report displays the ‘Energy Use Intensity’(EUI), which is the ‘to-
Elevators & Escalators 0.0 0.0 0.0 tal energy consumed per unit area of the office building’. Energy Report No. 01 gen-
erated a very high EUI of 95 kWh/m², from this the designer made a few alterations to
Refrigeration 0.0 0.0 0.0
Process 0.0 0.0 0.0
TOTAL (ex renewables) 52 79 7
some of the design values such as infiltration, auxiliary ventilation, lighting and com-
Site Energy Dashboard (MWh)
puter values. This was seen to make a difference as the second report generated a
EUI of 78 kWh/m². This result was an improvement from the first energy report, but as
the designer is targeting the LETI guidance, which has an EUI of 55 kWh/m² more al-
tercations were required to improve the energy report result. The designer therefore
made adjustments to the building’s U-values, and referenced the LETI design guide
more closely, which resulted in a lower EUI of 52 kWh/m². This result has greatly im-
Site Energy Flows – Sankey Diagram proved the performance and energy efficiency of the office building, enabling the
Fuels End Uses
design to adhere to set goals and target values. The improved U-values and lower
EUI also positively contribute to the building’s adherence and compliance with Pas-
sivHaus standards and sustainable certifications such as BREEM. In terms of the ‘Space
Heating Demand’ the site energy value is 2.1 KWh/m²/year and source energy is 3.3
KWh/m²/year, which has a total of 5.4 KWh/m²/year. The ‘Operational Carbon Emis-
sions’ is a total of 7 CO2 kgCO2/m²/yr, but this excludes renewables such as solar,
which the designer is incorporating into the design.
Annual Fuel Costs and Peak Demands
Fuels Cost (£) Peak Day Peak Time Peak Demand
Electricity
Fossil Fuel
9,116.00
0.00
16-Feb
01-Jan
8:00
0:00
36.5 kW
0.0 kW
The use of IESVE has enabled the designer to efficiently design a building which ad-
Total 9,116.00 01-Jan 0:00 heres to current target values and guidance, meeting the client’s initial brief.
Peak Energy Sources for Electricity (kW), Fossil Fuel (kW) and Onsite Power Generation (kW): Top 3 Contributors

Integrated Environmental Solutions 2024.0.0.0

04 4

2D and 3D Drawings of Details Representative

of the Circular Economy Strategy
2D External Wall to Intermediate Floor Junction Detail 1:10
The detail to the left hand-side shows the designers 2D external
KEY - External Wall wall to intermediate floor junction detail, this is explained further
on the next page.
1 - Wood Larch Cladding (30mm)

2 -Air Gap (40mm)

3 - EPDM (1mm)

4 - Breather Membrane / Sheathing Board (13mm)

5 - Wood Fibre Insulation (210mm)

6 - Wood Fibre Insulation (100mm)

7 - Air Tight Layer (1mm)

8 - OSB (13mm)

9 - Air Gap (50mm)

10 -Plaster (12mm)

KEY - Intermediate Floor

11 - Reclaimed Hardwood (12.5mm)

12 - Sheathing Board (12.5mm)

13 - Wood Fibre Insulation (200mm)

14 - CLT (150mm)

15 - Plaster (12.5mm)
3D External Wall to Intermediate Floor Junction Detail The detail to the left hand-side shows the designer’s 3D external wall
to intermediate floor junction detail. Number 1 represents the Scot-
10 tish larch timber, which has a thickness of 30mm. The next layer shows
KEY - External Wall a 40mm air gap with timber batons to attach the cladding system.
The air gap will allow air flow, avoiding the encouragement of a high
1 - Wood Larch Cladding (30mm) humidity and mould growth. The next layer is EPDM (1mm), followed
9 by the sheathing board (13mm). Layer 5 and 6 represent the wood
2 -Air Gap (40mm) fibre insulation at thickness of 210mm and 100mm, in between layer
8 5 and 6 are the wooden studs. Layer 7 represents the air tight layer
3 - EPDM (1mm) 7 (1mm). Layer 8 is the OSB layer followed by layer 9 which shows the
air gap at 50mm thick with timber studs. This also acts as the service
4 - Breather Membrane / Sheathing Board (13mm) void. This is followed by a 12mm layer of plasterboard for layer 10.
6 Number 11 represents reclaimed wood for the flooring at 12.5mm.
5 - Wood Fibre Insulation (210mm) Number 12 represents the sheathing board (12.5mm), this is followed
by 200mm of wood fibre insulation, 150mm for the CLT structure and
6 - Wood Fibre Insulation (100mm) 12.5mm for the plaster. The external wall to intermediate floor junc-
tion doesn’t show the glulam structure, as it wasn’t taken through a
7 - Air Tight Layer (1mm) 5 section which shows it, but this is a part of the building’s structure.
In terms of the integration of circular economy strategies, the de-
8 - OSB (13mm) signer has used reclaimed wood for the flooring finish and has also
4 designed in layers. Designing in layers achieves building air tightness
9 - Air Gap (50mm) 3 and also enables long-term building flexibility. In terms of mainte-
nance, the possibility of causing disruption to other building materials
10 -Plaster (12mm) won’t occur due to this decision by the designer. This detail shows a
2 continuous loops of wood fibre insulation, which reduces the possi-
bility of thermal bridging. This will be the detail that the designer uses
KEY - Intermediate Floor for HTflux, which will assess for thermal bridges in the next section.
11
1 12
11 - Reclaimed Hardwood (12.5mm)
13
12 - Sheathing Board (12.5mm) 14

13 - Wood Fibre Insulation (200mm)

14 - CLT (150mm) 15

15 - Plaster (12.5mm)
05 4

Thermal Bridge Calculation of Developed Detail

HTflux Overview:

In order for the designer to assess and evaluate the thermal performance of the junction detail from the previous task, the computer software HTflux has been used
- this assesses heat transfer and runs thermal simulations. By using HTflux, the designer has continued to meet the client’s requirements and certification standards/ex-
pectations.

The designer first imported and drew the external wall to intermediate floor junction detail, before assigning the appropriate materials. Material allocation can be
seen in the images below, where modifications were made to the wood fibre insulation type, the thermal conductivity was slightly adjusted to represent a more re-
alistic value. The internal climate, represented in pink and the external climate represented in blue have also been added, these simulate realistic conditions. The
designer did make alterations to the external climate value, where the temperature was set to 0°C. The white spaces at the ends of the detail represent adiabatic
space - where there is no heat transfer occurring as a boundary condition has been set.
Bemessung - minimale Oberflächentemperatur | Wärmebrücken-Tutorial

Materials Material / Boundary Modifications

MATERIALANSICHT
Int. climate R0.13 Ext. climate R0.13 - 0 degres Insulation (XPS) - Wood Fibre
Insulation
Plaster Wood / Plywood OSB board
Air cavity ISO 6946 (auto) Timber |500 kg/m³)

00001 | 11/12/24 1
Linear Thermal Transmittance (Psi-value):

The next step involved the designer checking if the external wall to intermediate floor
junction detail effectively minimised the chances of thermal bridging. This was carried out
by setting a testing point within the detail, before running it through the simulation. In or-
der for the detail to minimise thermal bridging from occurring, the Psi-value needs to be
less than 0.04 W/(mK). When the designer ran the simulation a Psi-value of 0.001W/(mK)
was achieved, this indicates that almost no thermal bridging will occur within the detail.
This also exceeds the PassivHaus Psi-value of ≤ 0.01 W/(mK).

As a Psi-value of 0.001 W/(mK) was achieved, no detail modifications or improvements

were required.

Psi-value

U-value and Surface Temperature:

The designer then carried out a U-value test point within the detail, which shows a value
of 0.109 W/(m²K). The designer felt it was appropriate to run a temperature simulation on
the detail, in order to assess the condensation risk and likelihood of mould growth from
occurring. The results showed that the condensation risk was low, at a value of f*RSI =
0.962. The set vale is ≥ 0.75 to avoid the possibility of mould growth or condensation from
occurring. The designer also ran a heat flux assessment, which shows the direction and
rate of heat transfer through the details materials and components. This was also useful in
identifying if areas within the detail would gain heat (Summer) or lose heat (Winter).

U-value

Heat Flux Assessment

Condensation and Mould Risk Assessment
Report Generation:

The designer also generated a report which can be seen in the following pages.

Bemessung - minimale Bemessung - minimale Oberflächentemperatur | Wärmebrücken-Tutorial

Oberflächentemperatur PROJEKTINFORMATION
Project name: Wärmebrücken-Tutorial

Project ID: 00001

Wärmebrücken-Tutorial
Project Date: 11/12/24

Creator data
Company Ihr Unternehmen

Creator Bearbeiter

Address and contact Adresse

information Telefon
email

Customer data
Customer Kunde XY

Contact person Herr Sowieso

Address and contact Demostraße 1

information Demostadt
001 123 123456
email@demo.com

00001 | 11/12/24 1
Projekt-ID: 00001 | 11/12/24
 Bemessung - minimale Oberflächentemperatur | Wärmebrücken-Tutorial Bemessung - minimale Oberflächentemperatur | Wärmebrücken-Tutorial

MATERIALIEN & RANDBEDINGUNGEN MATERIALANSICHT

USED MATERIALS Int. climate R0.13 Ext. climate R0.13 - 0 degres
Insulation (XPS) - Wood Fibre
Insulation
Material λ W/(mK) Obj. Comment Plaster Wood / Plywood OSB board
Air cavity ISO 6946 (auto) Timber |500 kg/m³)
Insulation (XPS) - Wood 0.038 4 HTflux Standard Materials, no warranty as to
Fibre Insulation the completeness or accuracy of the data

Plaster 0.70 3 HTflux Standard Materials, no warranty as to

the completeness or accuracy of the data

Wood / Plywood 0.11 3 HTflux Standard Materials, no warranty as to

the completeness or accuracy of the data

OSB board 0.12 3 HTflux Standard Materials, no warranty as to

the completeness or accuracy of the data

ISO6946 HTflux Standard Materials, no warranty as to

Air cavity ISO 6946 (auto) ε=0.9/0.9; 3 the completeness or accuracy of the data
auto.
Timber |500 kg/m³) 0.13 5 EN 12524

BOUNDARIES

Boundary T °C RH (%) Objects Comment

Int. climate R0.13 20.0 50 2

Ext. climate R0.13 - 0 degres 0.0 50 1

HEAT TRANSFER RESISTANCE

Name R (m²K)/W from material to material

dyn1 0.13 ALL Int. climate R0.13

dyn2 0.17 ALL Int. climate R0.17
dyn3 0.10 ALL Int. climate R0.10
dyn4 0.04 ALL Ext. climate R0.13 - 0 degres
dyn5 0.04 ALL Ext. climate R0.13
dyn6 0.25 ALL Int. climate R0.25

00001 | 11/12/24 1 00001 | 11/12/24 1

 Bemessung - minimale Oberflächentemperatur | Wärmebrücken-Tutorial Bemessung - minimale Oberflächentemperatur | Wärmebrücken-Tutorial

TEMPERATURANSICHT WÄRMESTROMANSICHT

Simulation resolution: 1.5 mm; Cell count: 803,136 Simulation resolution: 1.5 mm; Cell count: 803,136

00001 | 11/12/24 1 00001 | 11/12/24 1

06 4

Whole-life Carbon Assessment and

Circularity Appraisal
 (OneClickLCA) Whole Life Carbon Assessment and Circularity Appraisal:

Overview:
In order for the designer to assess and evaluate the circular economy and whole life carbon of the office building, the software tool ‘OneClickLCA’ was used. This
tool is designed for carbon footprint analysis and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), within the manufacturing and construction industries. The tool has enabled the design-
er to evaluate the office building’s environmental impact in terms of materials and the lifecycle of the office building. The software tool has also provided insight into
embodied carbon, which has enabled the designer to look more closely at material selection and compliance values for PassivHaus and BREEM certification. The
designer first conducted a whole life carbon assessment, and based this on the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) methodology. The RICS methodology is
professional guidance that the designer has followed closely - it provides guidance for calculating the office building’s whole life carbon assessment.

In terms of the ‘Circular Economy Appraisal’, this helped the designer identify areas and opportunities for enhancing resource efficiency and minimising waste
through evaluating and assessing the selected materials recycling, reuse and lifecycle performance. When in the software, the designer specified the following are-
as: the material service life which determines the material’s service life before it needs to be replaced. The next heading is recycled which is used to document the
material’s circularity and doesn’t directly affect LCA results. The next heading is renewable which again doesn’t directly affect LCA results, but it is used to document
the material’s circularity, this is also the case for the material reused section. The wastage section represents the construction site wastage for the selected material.
DFD or design for disassembly of the material also needs to be specified, DFA, design for adaptability, establishes if the selected material is adaptable for future use.
The final section looks at the end of life (EOL) process of the selected material, which determines the outcomes and environmental impacts related to the decon-
struction, the disposal and the potential recycle or reuse of the material at the end of it’s lifecycle.

The images below show the whole life carbon assessment guidance from EN 15978 and an adapted form of EN 15978, EN 15643 and EN 17472, which has been
dular information for the assessment as per EN 15978
sourced from the RICS whole life carbon assessment booklet. 19
IP

Whole life carbon assessment information

Whole life carbon – system boundary
Information beyond the
Embodied carbon/life cycle embodied carbon
construction works
Upfront carbon life cycle
Pre- Benefits and loads beyond
Product Construction In use End of life
construction the system boundary

A0 A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 C1 C2 C3 C4
D1
Net output flows from

Construction and installation

Nonphysical process before
reuse
recycling

construction, preliminary
studies, tests and design
energy recovery

Raw material supply

other recovery

Deconstruction and

Waste processing
Refurbishment
Manufacturing

Replacement
Maintenance
D2

demolition
Transport
Exported utilities,

Transport

Transport

Disposal
e.g. electric energy

Repair
thermal energy

Use
potable water

Upfront biogenic carbon Biogenic carbon Biogenic carbon Biogenic carbon

Operational carbon

B6 Operational energy

B7 Operational water

User carbon
User activites not covered
B8
in B1–B7

EN 15978 Adapted
Figure 2:from ENand
Building 15978, EN 15643,
infrastructure EN stages
life cycle 17472and information modules (adapted from
EN 15978, EN 17472 and EN 15643, with additions to illustrate biogenic carbon)

Emissions and removals of all types of carbon (fossil carbon, land use and land use change
1. Whole Life Carbon Calculation:

The designer first conducted a whole life carbon assessment

based on the (RICS) methodology. The first steps involved
setting the parameters for the office block assessment. In
the building assessment section the building reference was
set to ‘UK reference building v2022.1’, with a specified build-
ing type of ‘office building’ and a gross floor area (GFA) of
1800m². The calculation period of the building was set to 60
years, which is in line with the RICS methodology guidance.
The next steps involved setting the height, width, depth and
internal floor height and other building specifications such as
floor thickness and envelope thickness were also detailed.
This produced a building overview that specified the current
carbon footprint, Tn CO2e of the building parts alongside the
kg CO2e/m² GFA values. The initial value was 509 kg CO2e/
m² GFA, so the designer made modifications to the material
and building parts such as the foundations, staircase type,
external door type to achieve a lower value of 256 CO2e/m²
GFA. This can be described as indicative modification to the
model.
Before Modifications = 509 kg CO2e/m² GFA

After Modifications = 256 CO2e/m² GFA

In the main OneClickLCA whole life carbon tool the designer inputted data under the following headings:

Building Materials - where only the ground floor, external walls and roof were modified.

Construction Site Operations

Water Consumption on an annual basis

Energy Consumption on an annual basis

Maintenance on an annual basis

Emissions & Removals

Calculation Period

Discounting Scenarios

Building Area

In the materials section the designer only made adjustments to the ground floor, external walls and roof. Within this the designer set the materials and values to
match the ones within the office block, to show a more accurate representation. This involved modifying items such as the insulation, adding in cladding systems and
roofing finishes to match. It’s important to note that the designer set the country to United Kingdom, the unit to m² and type to manufacturer, but this couldn’t be
achieved for all material types. For each building material the designer specified the service life, EOL process, transport distance (km) and transport method. These
modifications are specific to the office building.

For the transport distances, the designer calculated the distance from the material manufacturers to the DFMA unit (CCG OSM Ltd) and then to the site, as building
components are to be prefabricated. For the wood fibre insulation this had a distance of 26.9 miles to the DFMA unit and then 13.1 miles from there to the site, this
converted to a total value of 40 miles which is 64 km. The glulam and CLT had a larger total value of 213 km, but both materials come from the same manufacturer.
In terms of the EOL process, the designer specified that each material would either be reused or recycled at the end of its service life. This would cut down on the
wastage % and avoid materials being sent to landfill, reducing environmental impact.

The designer then looked into the construction site operations, where a construction site scenario was added. The resource used was ‘Average site impacts - tem-
perate climate (North) (per GFA), EU electricity mix, 2024’. The designer also added a deconstruction/demolition scenario. The designer then looked into the water
consumption on an annual basis, where total water consumption used was ‘wastewater - Thames Water Utilities Ltd’. Water consumption in OneClickLCA refers to
the total amount of water used throughout the office building’s lifecycle across different stages. The designer then looked at the energy consumption, where the en-
ergy use specified was ‘Electricity, United Kingdom, SAP 10.1 and 10.2’, at a quantity of 52000 kWh. In terms of the emissions and removals section, the designer in the
refrigerant leakages section added ‘Refrigerant R32 (Irish Green Building Council (IGBC))’ at a quantity of 10 kg. Then next sections looked at the calculation period
which is 60 years, and the building area which was specified to ‘Gross Internal Floor Area (IPMS/RICS) 1800m². In terms of the discounting scenarios this was kept at
the default of ‘No discount’.
Whole Life Carbon Calculation Results:

The images below show the whole life carbon calculation results, where an embodied carbon benchmark of ‘A’ at a value of 353 kg CO2e/m² was achieved. The
embodied carbon benchmark is calculated for a fixed 60 year period of assessment.

As the total embodied carbon is 353 kg CO2e/m², when comparing this to the results found in IESVE it can be calculated that the EUI: 52 kWh/m² x the 60 years = 3120
kWh/m² of energy usage. The operational carbon can be obtained from IESVE, though very indicative it was measured at 7kg CO2e/m²/yr x 60 years, the total op-
erational carbon spent will be 420 kg CO2e/m² for 60 years. The total carbon spent per m² per 60 year period can then be calculated by combining the embodied
carbon with the operational carbon which is: 353 + 420 = 773 kg CO2e/m² for 60 years. This result hasn’t taken in the renewable energy sources that would be used
(solar).

Embodied carbon by structure - A1-A3

Embodied Carbon by life-cycle stage

When looking at the results more closely, it can be found that when referring to the ‘embodied carbon by life-cycle stage’ A1-A3 Materials at 68% is the highest. This
is at the product stage within the project when referring to RIAS methodology guidance, the designer could swap materials out for less carbon intensive ones. This
can be found on the next few pages. The results also show that ‘A4 transport’ stage, ‘C2 Waste transport’ stage and ‘C3 Waste processing’ stage are at 1%, which
indicates that the embodied carbon is low, this is due to the designer locally sourcing materials and reusing or recycling them at the end of their service life. ‘B4-B5
Replacement’ which is the in-use stage is at 30%, this relates to the replacement of materials of building components during the office building’s in-use phase. This
also includes emissions from the manufacturing, transportation and installation replacement of the materials. The designer could lower this value by selecting more
low-carbon, durable materials.
Whole Life Carbon Calculation Results:
Whole Life Carbon Calculation Results (Most Contributing Materials):

The designer then reviewed the most contributing materials, where it was highlighted that the air handling unit is the most carbon intensive. The designer then re-
viewed alternative less carbon intensive units that could be used instead.

The designer also looked at the ‘leveling screed’, which could be swapped out for an alternative such as ‘dry leveling screed’ which has a GWP CO2/KG of 0.01
compared to a GWP CO2/KG of 0.302 for the existing material.

It can be highlighted that the cladding system of wood which is at a value of 0.571 GWP CO2/KG could also be switched for an alternative material such as softwood
timber from spruce and pine at a value of 0.05 GWP CO2/KG. These substitutions would provide the opportunity to help reduce embodied carbon of the office build-
ing.
Whole Life Carbon Calculation Results (Different Format):
Whole Life Carbon Calculation Results (Different Format):
2. Circular Economy Appraisal:

The designer then carried out a circular economy appraisal which evaluates the circularity of the office building. This assesses how well the loose-fit office building
integrates circular economy principles in order to reduce environmental impact and waste, whilst maximising resource efficiency. This section will also provide an
insight into the building components and materials recovery potential, reuse and recycling. The designer only reviewed the ground floor, external walls and roof of
the project, where the service, life, recycling aspect, renewable aspect, reusing aspect, wastage %, DFD, DFA and EOL process were reviewed. For this the design-
er entered values to represent each building material found in the ground floor, external walls and roof. The designer then reviewed the ‘circularity score weighing
factors’, the calculation period, was set to 60 years and the building area, set to 1800m². This resulted in a building circularity result of 77%, where 90% of materials are
recovered and 63.2% of materials are returned. The most renewable material for the project is wood fibre insulation and most reusable would be the glulam.
Improvements the designer would make for the future would be reassigning the EOL process for materials as the factor for down cycling is high at a value of 43.3%.
To try to decrease the virgin materials from 10%, the designer could look into sourcing materials with higher recyclable content, or also look to use more reclaimed
materials such as timber for the cladding system.

Building Circularity - All Building Components

The designer then felt it was appropriate to re-run the tests but take out all building components but the ground floor, external walls and roof to test the circularity of
the building materials specified. This resulted in a building circularity of 124%, with 170.2% of materials being recovered and 77.6% of materials being returned.

Building Circularity - Only, Ground Floor, External Walls and Roof Components
Circular Economy Appraisal Results (Different Format):
Circular Economy Appraisal Results (Different Format):
07 4

Conclusion
Reflection:

Upon reflection, the designer feels that the loose-fit office building as a project has successfully integrated sustainable design principles and targets, which align with
current efficiency standards and environmental goals. The following shows what the designer set out to achieve:

PassiveHaus Certification Requirements:

1. Space Heating Energy Demand: ‘Not exceed 15 kWh per square metre of the treated floor area, annually, or 10 W per square metre for peak demand’.

2. Thermal Comfort: ‘Must be maintained in all living areas throughout the winter and summer, ensuring that not more that 10% of annual hours exceed 25 °C’.

3. Renewable Primary Energy Demand (PER to PHI method): ‘Total energy required for domestic applications such as hot water, heating and domestic electricity,
must not exceed 60 kWh per square metre of treated floor area annually’.

4. Airtightness: ‘Maximum value of 0.6 air changes per hour at 50 Pascals (ACH50), verified through an on-site pressure test, conducted in both depressurised and
pressurised conditions’.

The above criteria for PassivHaus is met through the implementation of the following 5 key construction and design principles:

1. PassivHaus windows

2. Airtightness of building

3. Ventilation with heat recovery

4. Thermal insulation

5. Thermal bridge absence

BREEM Certification Requirements:

The icons below show the 10 key categories that BREEM assess in terms of sustainability, where points are allocated across this, where weightings are altered depend-
ing on the project type (refurbishment or new build).
Circular Economy Principles:

- Design out Waste

- Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA)

- Design in Layers

- Material Reuse and Recovery

The designer selected 3 out of the 4 circular economy principles: ‘Design out Waste’, ‘Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA)’ and ‘Design in Layers’.

Embodied Carbon Targets:

The designer targeted an embodied carbon value of <750 kgCO2e/m². This target value aligns with industry benchmarks and frameworks set out in the RIBA 2030 Cli-
mate Challenge report. The designer achieved an embodied carbon benchmark of ‘A’ at a value of 353 kg CO2e/m² in the OneClickLCA software.

Operation Energy Targets:

The designer referred to the LETI guidance, where an EUI of 55 kWh/m².yr and space heating demand of 15 kWh/m².yr (same as PassivHaus target) was targeted. The
designer managed to surpass this and achieve a EUI of 52 kWh/m².yr and space heating demand of 5.4 KWh/m².yr.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the designer feels that the loose-fit office building as a project has successfully integrated sustainable design principles and targets, which align with
current efficiency standards and environmental goals. The building has achieved PassivHaus certification through successfully adhering to the requirements set out.
The office building achieved low U-values throughout, where each building component (roof, walls, floors) hit PassivHaus U-value targets. The designer also integrat-
ed triple glazed windows, with a low E coating, and incorporated an MVHR unit system within the building. The external wall to intermediate floor junction detail had
a Psi-value of 0.001W/(mK) and f*RSI of 0.962, meaning the details avoid thermal bridging and the possibility of condensation risk or mould growth.

The project achieved a space heating demand of 5.4 KWh/m².yr, which meets PassivHaus and LETI guidance. The designer also managed to achieve an EUI of 52
kWh/m².yr. The project hit an embodied carbon benchmark of ‘A’ at a value of 353 kg CO2e/m², which meets the embodied carbon targets set out by the design-
er. The total carbon spent per m² per 60 year period was also calculated, which was 773 kg CO2e/m² for 60 years, although this result hadn’t taken in the renewable
energy sources that have been used (solar).

In terms of circular economy principles, the designer achieved ‘Design out Waste’, ‘Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA)’ and ‘Design in Layers’. The build-
ing has maximised material efficiency, minimised waste, where a longer lifecycle is supported through material reuse and recycling.

The project successfully adheres to some of the BREEM points, where ‘Materials and Resources’, ‘Pollution Reduction’, ‘Health, Well-being, and Indoor Environmen-
tal Quality’, ‘Transport and Accessibility’ and ‘Energy Efficiency’ have been hit the most. The designer found a few online BREEM checklist certification options, but
‘GoAudits’ was the simplest (this can be seen on the following pages). From the survey the designer feels a BREEM excellent rating would be achieved. The designer
therefore feels that the clients requirements have been met through the successful delivery of an energy efficient, sustainable loose-fit office building design.

Final Reflection:
When reflecting on the overall process and delivery of the loose-fit office building, the designer felt the use of certain computer software’s (IESVE, OneClickLCA, HT-
flux) were key to the project delivery and results. For future projects, the designer will make use of these, as they provided key information to the designing process
and ensuring the client’s requirements were met.
08 4

References / Bibliography
ANDREWS, M., Part L2A, SBEM & What you need to know to get your building to pass. UK: Mike Andrews.

ARCH DAILY, 2010. Architecture Classics: Centre Georges Pompidou / Renzo Piano Building Workshop + Richard Rogers. [online]. Available from: https://www.archdaily.com/64028/ad-classics-centre-georges-pompidou-renzo-pi-
ano-richard-rogers [Accessed 29.10.24

ARCH DAILY, 2016. The Edge / PLP Architecture. [online]. Available from: https://www.archdaily.com/785967/the-edge-plp-architecture [Accessed 29/10/24

BUILDPASS, 2020. How to calculate form heat loss factor. [online]. Available from: https://www.buildpass.co.uk/blog/how-to-calculate-form-heat-loss-factor/#:~:text=Heat%20loss%20form%20factor%20looks,building%20is%20
at%20retaining%20heat. [Accessed 18/10/24

CCG, 2024. Building Futures. [online]. Available from: https://www.c-c-g.co.uk/community/ [Accessed 05/11/24

EHE, 2024. Wood Fibre Insulation - Should I Use it? [online]. Available from: https://www.eco-home-essentials.co.uk/wood-fibre-insulation.html [Accessed 15/10/24

EVEREST, 2024. Low-E (Low-emissivity) Glass Explained. [online]. Available from: https://www.everest.co.uk/glass/low-e-glass/ [Accessed 17/10/24

FOSTER+PARTNERS, 2024. Bloomberg. [online]. Available from: https://www.fosterandpartners.com/projects/bloomberg [Accessed 29/10/24

FSC, 2024. Wood. [online]. Available from: https://fsc.org/en/businesses/wood?gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAiA9vS6BhA9EiwAJpnXw0Fg94z39kDZRJmvUMHeJtldcWsqL5V0rdSV-ziqX1LGdiHZ7IXEExoCGY4QAvD_BwE [Ac-

cessed 09/10/24

GAZETTEER FOR SCOTLAND, 2024. Climate Information for Cumbernauld. [online]. Available from: https://www.scottish-places.info/towns/townclimate409.html#:~:text=Climate%20Description%3A&text=Summers%20are%20
very%20warm%2C%20with,mm%20in%20a%20typical%20year. [Accessed 18/10/24

GOAUDITS, 2024. BREEAM Checklist. [online]. Available from: https://goaudits.com/checklist/breeam-checklist/903/63/ [Accessed 09/12/24

JAIN, N., BURMAN, E. and MUMOVIC, D., 2024. CIBSE TM54 energy projections II: A case study using dynamic simulation with template systems modelling. Building services engineering research & technology, 45(4), pp. 511–523.

KUMAR, P., 2019. Role of CFD in evaluating occupant thermal comfort | simulationHub Blog. [online]. Available from: https://www.simulationhub.com/blog/role-of-cfd-in-evaluating-occupant-thermal-comfort [Accessed 25/10/24

LETI, LETI Climate Emergency

Design Guide. UK: LETI.

MARDALJEVIC, J., Daylighting and Compliance:

Are current standards sufficient? UK: De Montfort University, Leicester, UK.

NEUPANE, R.P. et al., 2023. Use of recycled aggregate concrete in structural members: a review focused on Southeast Asia. Journal of Asian architecture and building engineering, , pp. 1–24.

NORTH LANARKSHIRE COUNCIL - PLANNING APPLICATIONS, 2018. Planning – Application Summary - 18/00654/FUL
|
Reserve Power Generation Facility Comprising Custom Designed Shipping Containers. [online]. Available from: https://eplanning.northlanarkshire.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=P-
7ZI2TBALKG00 [Accessed 07.10.24

PASSIVE HOUSE +, 2016. Compact solid-timber passive house on London infill site. [online]. Available from: https://passivehouseplus.co.uk/magazine/new-build/compact-solid-timber-passive-house-on-london-infill-site [Accessed
12.10.24

PASSIVE HOUSE INSTITUTE, 2024. Passive House requirements. [online]. Available from: https://passiv.de/en/02_informations/02_passive-house-requirements/02_passive-house-requirements.htm [Accessed 05/12/24

RIBA, 2021a. DfMA Overlay to the Plan of Work. [online]. Available from: https://www.architecture.com/knowledge-and-resources/resources-landing-page/dfma-overlay-to-the-riba-plan-of-work [Accessed 10/10/24
RIBA, 2021b. RIBA
2030
CLIMATE
CHALLENGE
VERSION 2 (2021). [online]. Available from: https://www.architecture.com/about/policy/climate-action/2030-climate-challenge?srsltid=AfmBOopSGh4xH9L8h5ipmHNnihjaOghOYOeRqdCtQJ9t6zUjVgYINOdC [Accessed 02/11/24

RICS, 2024. Whole life carbon

assessment for the
built environment. UK: RICS.

SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT, 2023. Building standards - non-domestic buildings - ventilation: research. [online]. Available from: https://www.gov.scot/publications/identify-effective-ventilation-guidance-practice-mitigate-indoor-air-
borne-transmission-infectious-diseases-new-build-non-domestic-buildings/pages/3/ [Accessed 29/11/24

SCOTTISH WOOD, 2024. Scottish Wood. [online]. Available from: https://www.scottishwood.co.uk/cladding [Accessed 10.10.24

STEVEN, 2021. Whole Life Carbon Assessment, RICS & Greater London Authority. OneClick LCA: OneClick LCA.

THAI, R., 2024. A building's sharing layers concept and how it relates to the circular economy. [online]. Available from: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/buildings-sharing-layers-concept-how-relates-circular-richard-thai-xrzvc [Ac-
cessed 04/11/24