Integrated Design for Buildings

[caluna]

Hi,
In my department we are supposedly doing integrated design with our building projects. However, I know our methods are not quite "book perfect", and as result we have glitches and delays -mostly due to poor communication and goodness knows what else. We do not do design in-house, but provide the RFP, and then monitor the consultant's dwgs and specs at several stages for compliance to the design parameters and to our (gov't) design standards. My section consists of technical specialists in various disciplines (I am mechanical)...I would be very interested to hear how HVAC designers, or those in similar position to my section (review and guidance), are enjoying working with integrated design method. (For us, it still seems like mechanical gets the tiny leftover spaces and then only after quite a bit of vying for room..) And even though we do energy modelling for life cycle costing, it is hard to get clients to see past the "capital" cost only.. Any comments? Thanks!

 

[GMcD]

If you are still getting the "usual" leftover mechanical spaces, then you are NOT getting an Integrated Design result or process. There are a number of Integrated Design Process handbooks and Guidelines out there with a simple Google search. The Canadian C-2000 IDP process back in the early 1990's were some of the root documents for many of the guidelines out there. A truly integrated design process can only result if all the design team members are on an even level and the importance of mech/elec stuff is given the same priority as architectural and structural issues. A good IDP process requires experienced design team members that can understand and blance cost-effectiveness against other building systems. I've been doing it for years both formally and informally as a mechnaical building systems engineer and it can be tough depending on the willingmess and open-mindedness (or lack of) in the Design Team.

It will take at least a generation or two to actually get towards better integrated building design, since the culture of building design and consulting has been so entrenched in "the usual way of doing things" for so long that it will take a lot of effort to chnage things around.

I agree that getting Clients educated around life-cycle costs vs capital costs is a long hard battle. The trick is to get better life cycle costs and mower energy for the same capital cost as a "conventional building", but that requires doing the design process much differently than we do it now.

 

[caluna]

Thanks! that gives me some hope!

Part of our problem here as Govt dept, our clienst are Govt too and their budgets, it should be mentioned, come from separate "pots" for Capital and O&M..they are voted on quite separately in the legislature.. so no wonder these departemnts have no reason to reduce maintenance and operating expenses in the initial design.
Some of our jobs are Design Build. But I wish they could go out as "Design Build Maintain" , as I have heard happens in some places....

 

[RossABQ]

Ditto McD's comments on leftovers for Mech/Elec. Part of this is that Architects are historically the lead discipline and essentially performing project management or client management functions. It really helps to have strong, vocal Mech/Elec leads who take their requirements to the Arch's at an early stage and insist on their requirements being met. On industrial projects this is much more prevalent than in commercial practice, IMO. PM's should be supporting this practice because it can cost big bucks to fix problems when Mech/Elec don't fit in their allocated spaces. It really helps to have a construction person (particularly HVAC oriented) do a constructability review at no later than the 50% point.

 

[ChrisConley]

I've found that Owner commitment is the most impotant area of 'Integrated Design' that gets left out. Often because the Architect is the lead discipline they tend to have the attitude: I know what the owner wants (i.e. 12' ceilings, tiny mechanical spaces, broomclosets for server rooms, hidden electrical rooms, sweeping multi-storey atria without ductwork or sprinklers to mar the appearance, etc.).

In actual fact, the owner may prefer a 9' ceiling that allows easy access to ceiling mounted mechancial equipment. They may have plans for expansion that mean large well designed server rooms. They may find multi-storey atria a pointless extravagence.

M/E/S/A are all used to fighting for space, but ultimately the Owner needs to decide what is important to them, and what they are willing to pay for.

 

[caluna]

We have found that too. And once the Architect has a fancy design (which may be overkill) it is harder to "take it back".Getting the Program requirements right (before the design process begins) is another thing..