Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
SUSTAINABILITY BY
INTEGRASPEC ICF
Target Performance Tier: LEED PLATINUM
LEED LEED Mission Statement:
Sustainable, Healthy Construction.
TM
Leadership in
Energy and
Environmental
Design
Where did LEED come from?
Build Green Energy Star EnviroHome Healthy Home CMHC USBGC Sustainable Design Kyoto Compatible R-2000 EnerQuality Corporation Super "E" Cassa Clima Green Globe
Cassa Clima
"The Climate House"
Originated in the Italian Alps in a small community called Bolzano. Three pillars of construction similar to a baseball diamond.
One must prove arrival at first base prior to advancing. First Base: Structural Stability
Adios straw bales, wood construction, and unreinforced CMUs.
A simple mental test…how much backfill can you place against a wall constructed this way and how much snow load will it carry?
Facts to follow…
INTEGRASPEC® "The User Friendly ICF"
Specify Integrity in your next project:
Please visit us at www.integraspec.com
PRODUCT
LINE
Commercial 90o Corners
90o Corners
Standard Panels 45o Corners
Inserts/ Furring Strips
Headers
Santa Fe Bucks
IntegraBucks
Brickledge
Taper Panels
“H” Clips
Webs/Spacers
IntegraClip - Thick Wall Construction
INTEGRASPEC® "The User Friendly ICF"
Specify Integrity in your next project:
Please visit us at www.integraspec.com
IntegraECF (Exposed Concrete Face)
INTEGRASPEC®
"The User Friendly ICF"
Specify Integrity in your next project:
Please visit us at www.integraspec.com
ICF Wall Setup
Day 1: Form & pour the slab. Received the concrete only at 3:00 in the afternoon. While waiting for concrete, the platform for the overhead slab was prepared. Day 2: Formed the walls in heavy rain & snow then installed decking cover the top with a tarp & called by 11:10 a.m., with approximately 1 hour of work remaining to finish the box. Day 3: Finished & poured our box. While we were on site, ECO Block, IntegraSpec, Nudura & TF Form were also poured. In total, there were 10 ICFs participating. IntegraSpec, Eco Block, Royal Plastic, Polysteel with two boxes, Nudura, TF Form, Logix, Phoenix, Quad Lock & Super Form
ICFA Blast Demo
Conducted by
FPED - Force Protection Exposition and Demonstration a bi-annual Military and Homeland Security exposition and trade show
Blast Day
ICFA Blast Demo
Conducted by
FPED - Force Protection Exposition and Demonstration a bi-annual Military and Homeland Security exposition and trade show
IntegraSpec’s box (on the left) after the blast test
Participants could witness the blasting from a safe distance
Performance
ICFA Blast Demo
Conducted by
FPED - Force Protection Exposition and Demonstration a bi-annual Military and Homeland Security exposition and trade show
In March 2005, at the invitation of the ICFA, Marc Philippe and Bill Naegeli participated in a “Blast” Demonstrationfor the Force Protection Exposition and Demo, a bi-annual Military and Homeland Security exposition and trade show held at Quantico Marine Base in Virginia, with 9 other ICF manufacturers. The IntegraSpec structure was quickly erected and poured without incident. (Which could not be said of all ICFs) In April 2005, our team, along with Mark Ross of ART Inc. witnessed a spectacular display of fortitude. Each ICF structure was directly hit with 50 lbs. of TNT, from a distance of approx. 6 feet. US Marine Corp detonation team conducted, supervised, and recorded details of the performance of each ICF structure. Evaluations were not published, however, to negate any focus on competition. IntegraSpec performed to the highest standards. Our structure had very little damage. (Left) IntegraSpec’s wall remained intact without holes, corner failures or other structural failures. Our strength could be contributed to solid consolidation with our easy flow through web design and the continuous contact of EPS to the concrete face facilitated by our interior dovetail grooves. Here’s one for the good guys!
U.S. Department of JusticeNational Institute of Justice
Ballistic ResistantProtective Materials
NIJ Standard 0108.01
National Instituteof Justice
Technology AssessmentProgram
FEATURE PROJECT ICF BUILDER 2006 BEST HEAVY COMMERCIAL PROJECT
Project: Grande Caribbean Condominium Orange Beach, AL
Architect: David Lindsey, Architect Fairhope, AL
General Contractor: Coastal Builders Inc. Mobile, AL
ICF Distributor: IntegraSpec GulfSouth Fairhope, AL Features: This 160,000 ft², condominium was constructed in a hurricane / tidal surge prone area.
The Grande Caribbean features 101 units with ground level and underground parking, unique parapet walls and IntegraColumns.
Benefits: Fast construction with very little waste. IntegraSpec® totally eliminated the need for
cranes and other heavy equipment. This project attracted 100% presales from clientele who wanted a quiet, safe, healthy, and energy efficient condo. In 2004 this area of Alabama was hard hit by Hurricane Ivan, the inhabitants of this condominium only suffer minimal damage to roof sheathing, the IntegraSpec walls kept everyone safe from the storm, while other surrounding buildings were devastated.
“IntegraSpec®’s versatility and strength were appreciated every step of the way. This project’s demanding design and Coastal Builders’ insistence on accuracy eliminated other construction methods and concrete forms. IntegraSpec®’s per square foot installed cost ensured our profit margins were maintained. My clients are already planning more of these incredible buildings. ”
– David Lindsey, M. Arch.
Specify Integrity in your next project:
(800) 382-9102 Please visit us at www.integraspec.com
INTEGRASPEC®
"The User Friendly ICF"
Ivan the Terrible versus IntegraSpec®
Orange Beach, Alabama - October 2004
INTEGRASPEC®
"The User Friendly ICF"
Specify Integrity in your next project:
Please visit us at www.integraspec.com
IntegraSpec® Gulfsouth’s Grande Caribbean Condo Project in Orange Beach, Alabama goes ten rounds with Ivan the Terrible and wins with only minor roof panel injuries.
Ivan’s wrath was devastating to various traditionally constructed buildings on Orange Beach.
Various Tests and Compliance Reports
General Construction Approvals, Compliance Reports, and Testing Canadian Construction Materials Centre, (CCMC) Evaluation Report – in English and in French
Confirmatory Testing of Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) Foam: Density, Flexural, and Compression Strength – Intertek ETL SEMKO
Compliance with the International Building Code (IBC), the International Residential Code (IRC), and the Accumulative Supplement to the International Building Code: ICC Evaluation Services - ICC ESR 1147 Report for the selected requirements of CCMC Technical Guide MasterFormat 03 11 19.01, Modular,
Expanded Polystyrene Concrete Forms, Appendix B – Forming Capacity Test Methods Acceptance Criteria for Foam Plastic Insulation – ICBO ES AC12, in conjunction with
Standard Specifications for Rigid, Cellular Polystyrene Thermal Insulation - ASTM C578-01 CAN/ULC S701-01 Compliance Report - Standard for Thermal Insulation, Polystyrene Boards,
and Pipe Coverings, testing flexural strength, compressive strength, and density
New York City approval MEA 633 – 06 - M
Florida Approval (Dade County, HVHZ) – FL6236
Wisconsin Approval – Evaluation # 200809-I
City of Los Angeles approval – RR 25571
Ruling of the Minister Ontario Building Code Act 04 19 123 12938-R
ASTM D1761-88 Standard Test Methods for Mechanical Fasteners in Wood
R2000 Air Test – Nova Scotia residence
British Board of Agrément (BBA) Certificate – 11/4820 (UK)
Fire Information, Testing, and Ratings Three (3) Hour Fire Resistance Rating -Intertek ASTM E119-98, NFPA251, and CAN/ULC S101-M89
Two (2) Hour Fire Resistance Rating for 4” concrete core Intertek ASTM E119-98, NFPA251, and CAN/ULC S101-M89
Report on Ignition Properties Tests – BASF - Underwriters Laboratories
Flame Spread and Smoke Developed Index – Intertek
Room Corner Burn Test Approval Letter – Intertek
Room Corner Burn Test Compliance Report (UBC Standard 26-3, 1997) – Intertek
Surface Burning Characteristics - Underwriter's Lab Listing - BASF BFL-327
Portland Cement Association’s Residential Technology Brief - Fire Resistance of Concrete Homes
Various Other Information Insulating Concrete Form Association’s (ICFA) clarification of general requirements of Section 1916
of the Florida Building Code 2001, the use of insulating concrete forms for above grade walls
ICC – ES AC353 Fastener Strength Testing on IntegraSpec ICF Panels
Insulating Concrete Form Building System - Acoustic Field Sound Transmission Class Test Report
Standard Test Method for Water Vapour Transmission of Materials (Desiccant Method) - ASTM E96-00 Compliance Report
American Society of Concrete Contractors position statement on the Free Fall of Concrete
EIFS Category II Construction
Material Safety Data Sheets
Investigation of WindProjectile Resistance ofInsulating Concrete FormHomes
By Ernst W. Keesling, Ph.D., P.E. and
Russell Carter, BSCE, EIT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Debris driven by high winds presents the greatest hazard to homeowners and their homesduring tornadoes and hurricanes. Insulating concrete form (ICF) wall systems provide muchgreater resistance to the impact of tornado debris than conventional frame construction.Recent laboratory testing at the Wind Engineering Research Center, Texas Tech University,compared the impact resistance of residential concrete wall construction versus conventionally framed walls. The frame walls failed to stop wind driven debris from penetrating. Theconcrete walls successfully demonstrated the strength and mass to resist the impact of winddriven debris. As a result, the disaster resistance of homes built with ICF wall systems is a significant advantage of this construction technology.
Ten wall specimens were subjected to the impact of a 15-pound 2 x 4 wood stud traveling atspeeds as high as 119 miles per hour. The Research Center has determined this to be equiva-lent to the weight and velocity of debris generated during a tornado with 250 mile per hourwinds. Wind speeds are less in 99 per cent of tornadoes occurring in the United States.
Hurricane wind speeds will be less than the equivalent speeds modeled here. Missile testingdesigned to mitigate property damage losses from hurricanes use a criterion of a 9-poundmissile traveling about 34 miles per hour.
The wall specimens were representative of the type of construction now used to build framehomes and concrete homes in the U.S. Four of the test walls consisted of conventional woodor steel framing. Gypsum board was the interior finish for all walls. On the exterior, the specimens were clad in vinyl siding or brick veneer over 3/4” plywood sheathing, or synthet-ic stucco over gypsum board sheathing.
Six concrete walls were constructed. Two were reinforced concrete walls built with removableforms. They were tested with no finishes applied.
The remaining concrete walls were constructed with stay in place insulating concrete forms(ICFs). Steel reinforcing bars were placed at common intervals for ICF construction.
A standard ICF concrete mix design was specified for the test: a 3000 psi compressivestrength, a maximum aggregate size of 3/4”, and a 6” slump.
The Wind Engineering Research Center’s compressed air cannon was used to propel a 2 x 4wood stud debris “missile” at the test walls. At all velocities, the missile penetrated throughthe frame wall assembly.
All of the concrete walls were subjected to at least one impact, with two of the ICF walls tested twice, once on each of the front and rear faces. The velocities of the missiles fired at he concrete walls were all above 96 mph. No cracking, front face scabbing, or back face spallingwas observed in any concrete wall tested
iv
TARGET EIGHT: “WOOD STUD CONSTRUCTION WITH BRICK VENEER”
Interior Finish: 5/8 in. gypsum board attached directly to wood studs spaced at 16 in. on center. 3 1/2 in. fiberglass batt insulation was placed between the studs.Exterior Finish: 3/4 in. plywood sheathing attached to the studs with a 3 in. brick veneer. The veneer was attached to the sheathing with metal ties spaced 16 in. on center horizontally and 12 in. on center vertically with a 1 in. air space between the brick and the sheathing.
Test Observations: Target was impacted at 69.4 MPH. The missile perforated completelythough the brick veneer, exterior and interior sheathing. The brick veneer was cracked horizontally and vertically from the point of impact. There was little damage to the missile.
Figure 8a. Exterior impact, penetrationof masonry veneer
Figure 8b. Interior penetration, imbeddedmissile, exposed insulation, broken gypsum board
12
TARGET THREE: “6-INCH THICK FLAT ICF WALL”
Vertical Reinforcement: #4 rebar at 12 in. on center.
Horizontal Reinforcement: #4 rebar one at top and one at bottom of a 4-foot section.
Interior Finish: None.
Exterior Finish: Vinyl siding attached directly to ICF fastening strips.
Test Observations: Target was impacted at 103.8 MPH. No cracking, front face scabbing or back face spalling of the concrete core was observed. The missile penetrated the vinyl sidingand the foam insulation of the form. The missile broke and splintered into pieces on impact.
Figure 3a. Impact site with missile Figure 3b. Missile and foam removedto expose udamaged concrete
5
Revised on9/3/2009
INTEGRASPEC ICF BY PHIL-INSUL CORPORATION
ICC-ES AC353 Fastener Strength Testingon IntegraSpec ICF Panels
8/20/2009
Date: 7/17/2009 Project No.: 2009-583Client: IntegraSpec ICF by Phil-Insul Corp. Temp.: 72°
Humidity: 46% R.H.Specimen: IntegraSpec ICF Load Rate: .1" per minute
Test: Withdrawal Testing
UltimateSample No. Load (lbf)
Sample 1 234Sample 2 214Sample 3 226Sample 4 221Sample 5 215Sample 6 214Sample 7 216Sample 8 231Sample 9 215Sample 10 229Average 222
Failure:
ASTM D1761-06 Screw Withdrawal Test
In all cases the screw pulled out of the flange with residual plastic remaining in the threads.
Date: Project No.: 2009-583Client: IntegraSpec ICF by Phil-Insul Corp. Temp.: 69 °F
Humidity: 54% R.H.Specimen: IntegraSpec ICF Load Rate: .1" per minute
Test: Lateral Strength Testing
Ultimate Proportional Load at Sample No. Load (lbf) Limit* (lbf) 1/8" Defl. (lbf)
Sample 1 171 30 55Sample 2 179 42 66Sample 3 128 55 76Sample 4 113 41 60Sample 5 192 103 112Sample 6 188 37 53Sample 7 231 61 79Sample 8 123 34 47Sample 9 241 70 92Sample 10 286 65 93Average 185 54 73
Coefficient of Variation (COV): 30.11%
Allowable Load (lbf)**: 33
Failure:
1-2COV2.24
Fall = Allowable Load, poundsCOV = s/F = Coefficient of variation in a test seriess = Standard Deviation in a test seriesF = Average ultimate load in test series, pounds
** - The allowable load was derived using the following formula, provided in AC 353 Section 4.1.3.22.
Fall =( )
ASTM D1761-06 Lateral Screw Resistance Test
* - The Proportional Limit Load was derived using the initial straight-line portion of the load-deflection curve as shown onthe attached charts.
The failure mode was consistent with Mode III as defined in ANSI/AF&PA NDS-2005 for single shear,with the fastener pulling out of nailing flange.
6/20/2009
Cassa Clima
"The Climate House"
Originated in the Italian Alps in a small community called Bolzano. Three pillars of construction similar to a baseball diamond.
One must prove arrival at first base prior to advancing. First Base: Structural Stability
Adios straw bales, wood construction, and unreinforced CMUs.
A simple mental test…how much backfill can you place against a wall constructed this way and how much snow load will it carry? Second Base: Indoor Air QUALITY (IAQ)
Mold / mildew, condensation, dew point transfer, organic food source, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), glues, resins, OSB chipboard. Cassa Clima includes a "Quiet Standard"…Quiet Shelter from the Storm…
Therefore the insulation specified in a project serves two purposes
Facts to follow…
ORTECH __________________________________________ __
Build Green and Conventional Materials Off~Gassing Tests for Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp.
Page 7 of21 Reporr No. 94~G53-BOI06
Gypsum wallboard emissions from the three samples are presented in Figure 6. The two conventional drywall materials were obtained from commercial outlets and not from the manufacturer. The higher VOC and formaldehyde emissions are probably the result of these samples having acted as sinks at the commercial outlet. The gypsum wallboard could potentially absorb VOCs and formaldehyde emitted from other building materials such as plywood, particle board, etc. During testing, these compounds obtained in the building material storage area, are then released and measured during testing. There are also no materials emissions guidelines for gypsum wallboard.
The results data for the category of foundation materials are presented graphically in Figure 7. There were no measurable formaldehyde emission from the foundation materials. The cast-in-place concrete had one of the highest VOC emissions of all materials. This was not from the concrete, but from an oil product that is used with concrete forms. The oil is applied to the fonns so that the concrete does not adhere to fonns. Some of this oil lubricant remains with the surface of the concrete when the forms are removed and then releases oil based hydrocarbons. There are no materials emission guidelines for foundation materials.
The water extract formaldehyde analysis results were compared to the formaldehyde emission rate results to detennine if a relationship exists. An evaluation of the data indicated that there is no relationship for this set of test results.
The analysis of the multi-adsorbent tubes for volatile organic compounds identified the main chemicals released. The majority of the compounds were branched hydrocarbons from C-6 to C-12. Toluene and xylene were the most frequently occurring compounds from this analysis. No chlorinated hydrocarbons were detected. Fonnaldehyde emissions were detected in 22 out of 37 materials. Toluene, xylene and formaldehyde are common industrial solvents.
This test program evaluated emission from a total of 37 materials. However, with this total distributed among eight material categories. there were only a few samples per category group. Also. only one test per sample was conducted. With this small sample size, these results can only be considered to be indicative for the materials tested.
Components:
Concrete
Steel
EPS II
HIPs Plastic
REP ICF STC test.doc 1of5
STATE OF THE ART ACOUSTIK INC.43 – 1010 Polytek Street Ottawa, ON K1J 9J3 www.sota.ca E:[email protected] T:613-745-2003 F: 613-745-9687
2003 03 12
C/o Michel Philippe
IntegraSpec Insulating Concrete Forms (ICF)Building SystemBy: Phil-Insul Corporation735 Arlington Park Place, 11UKingston, ON, K7M 8M8
TEL: (613) 634-1319FAX: (613) 835-3227E-mail:[email protected]
ICF/Building System FSTC TestReport
Dear Mr. Philippe,
Measurement Instruments
The sound level measuring system was calibrated prior to the first test. Following the lasttest, a calibration check was carried out to determine any deviation in the system from itsfirst calibration. There was no deviation found in sound levels between the firstcalibration and the final calibration check.
REP ICF STC test.doc 4of5
STATE OF THE ART ACOUSTIK INC.43 – 1010 Polytek Street Ottawa, ON K1J 9J3 www.sota.ca E:[email protected] T:613-745-2003 F: 613-745-9687
Measurement Results
NOTE:
Cassa Clima
"The Climate House"
Originated in the Italian Alps in a small community called Bolzano. Three pillars of construction similar to a baseball diamond. One must prove arrival at first base prior to advancing. First Base: Structural Stability Adios straw bales, wood construction, and unreinforced CMUs. A simple mental test…how much backfill can you place against a wall constructed this way and how much snow load will it carry? Second Base: Indoor Air QUALITY (IAQ) Mold / mildew, condensation, dew point transfer, organic food source, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), glues, resins, OSB chipboard. Cassa Clima includes a "Quiet Standard"…Quiet Shelter from the Storm…Therefore the insulation specified in a project serves two purposes Third Base: Energy Efficiency IntegraSpec’s Brealey Residence… If this is the most Energy Efficient home ever tested in Canada and Canadians are prolific "Testers", is this the most Energy Efficient home on the .................?
Facts to follow…
FEATURE PROJECT
Project: Brealey Residence Perth, Ontario
Designer: Lagois Drafting Inc. North Gower, Ontario
ICF Distributor: IntegraSpec Rideau Westport, Ontario
Contractor: Teixeira Construction Inc. Portland, Ontario (Three time R-2000 Award Winner)
Features: IntegraSpec® wallsystem foundation and main floor level. Radiant heated concrete floors on both levels. R-2000 EnerQuality Corporation, Environmental Excellence Award Winner, 2000. Cement Association of Canada, National Outstanding Energy Efficiency Award, 2001. Canadian Home Builders Association EnviroHome Award. CMHC Healthy Home Award.
Benefits: The EnerQuality Corporation reports this 1920 ft2 bungalow to be 61% more heat efficient than conventionally built houses, and 45% more heat efficient than R-2000 targets. These results make this the most energy efficient home in Canada. The awards were based on an amazing air test performance of .55 air exchanges per hour in concert with IntegraSpec® wallsystem’s insulated thermal mass. IntegraSpec®’s unique design also controlled waste on site and provided superior indoor air quality. IntegraSpec® is “Green Product” and “Healthy Home” recognized. Given these impressive consumer advantages, the Contractor further notes:
Specify Integrity in your next project:
Please visit us at www.integraspec.com
“IntegraSpec®’s patented design makes every step easier, including transportation, site storage, layout, setup, concrete placement, alignment, interior and exterior finishing. IntegraSpec really is the strongest ICF”.
- John Teixeira Teixeira Construction Inc.
INTEGRASPEC®
"The User Friendly ICF"
Posted originally, 9/28/2011
54 | Advanced Energy Design Guide for K-12 School Buildings
Educational Features
Each building at the school has seasonal- and forest-related themes in the classrooms and corri-dors. Signs and building cutaways illustrate and explain the building systems—pipes arepainted red and blue analogous to human veins and arteries. A green-light system tied to theBAS signals when classroom windows can be opened to provide natural ventilation and allowsstudents to become directly involved in energy conservation. Signs adjacent to the systemdescribe attributes and benefits of both daylighting and natural ventilation.
The principal water retention area can be used as an outdoor classroom or performancestage. Other exterior learning spaces allow students to explore the surrounding landscape.Maps on the grounds illustrate how rainwater flows through nearby rivers. A mural on the sideof the cistern shows the rainwater system and explains the water cycle.
Additional information on the Manassas Park Elementary School and the how the buildingprovides educational opportunities can be found in the Fall 2010 issue of High PerformanceBuildings (Knox and Davis 2010).
Richardsville Elementary School, a 74,000 ft2, two-story school that accommodates 500 stu-dents, is the culmination of 10 years of energy successes for Warren County Public Schools inBowling Green, KY. Envisioned as a net zero energy building, the school design focused onachieving an energy consumption goal of 17 kBtu/ft2/yr.
An integrated design process was used that involved participants including school districtofficials, building users, the architectural/engineering design team, the state department of edu-cation, and the local power generation company. In order to design and operate a net zeroenergy school within a public school budget, all of these entities had to understand the visionand be willing to implement strategies to make energy reduction feasible and make a solarpower generation system affordable.
A leader in reducing energy consumption, the Warren County School District’s first stepwas to hire a district energy manager whose task was to educate and empower the staff onbuilding operation. Successive construction projects over an eight-year period showed a contin-uous improvement in energy consumption. With a focus on better thermal envelopes, improvedgeothermal system designs, and efficient building operation, the district employed new con-struction techniques to improve building energy efficiency.
Thermal Envelope
Insulated concrete form (ICF) was used for the wall assemblies because of its improved ther-mal performance, reduced air infiltration, and high speed of construction. Richardsville furtherimproved the thermal envelope by making the building a two-story rectangular shape to reduceexterior wall and roof area.
Table 3-4 Building Data for Manassas Park Elementary School and Prekindergarten
Building Data
Energy use intensity (site) 37.28 kBtu/ft2
Annual energy cost index (ECI) $1.14/ft2
Total construction cost$24,698,200 $28,026,925 (with site work)
Cost per square foot$175.83$199.53 (total hard costs)
RICHARDSVILLE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Chapter 3—Performance Targets and Case Studies | 57
Measurement & Verification
Many of the new strategies developed for this project required post-occupancy power measure-ments, so Richardsville was designed with a power monitoring system. Individual systems thatcan be trended for energy consumption include HVAC, DOAS, exterior and interior lighting,kitchen, IT rooms, and plug loads. Consumption can be measured hourly, daily, monthly, orannually and compared to the energy model results. The first unexpected trend identified wasthe unoccupied hours’ power consumption. The effect that the 24/7 operation of the kitchenrefrigeration equipment, IT servers and other parasitic loads, has on annual power usage aresignificant.
The building’s power consumption has been on target with projected usage. The first twomonths were higher while the school was being commissioned and time schedules set cor-rectly. The average usage to date is 1.55 kBtu/month. The building is generally unoccupied inthe summer, so the targeted 17 kBtu/ft2·yr appears to be tracking well.
Power Generation
The power generation design was delayed until the energy consumption goal was met. The finalenergy model indicated that the annual consumption would be 421,300 kWh. Solar power is gen-erated via thin film and crystalline panels: 208 kW of thin film was placed on the building’s flatroof, and 140 kW of crystalline panels were installed on an adjacent shade structure. The totalcost of the system was $2,650,000. Warren County received a $1,400,000 stimulus grant to helpsupport the system’s cost. In support of the net zero energy design, the local power utility (Ten-nessee Valley Authority) agreed to purchase all power generated at a price $0.12/kW greater thanthe cost they sell power. This agreement improved the financial model of the project.
Table 3-5 Richardsville Elementary School Power Consumption by Month
Month Power Consumed
October 2010 37,200 Kwh
November 2010 35,200 Kwh
December 2010 32,000 Kwh
January 2011 28,400 Kwh
February 2011 33,800 Kwh
Monthly Average 33,800 Kwh
Table 3-6 Building Data for Richardsville Elementary School
Building Data
Single-ply membrane with rigid insulation on metal deckingOverall R-value = R-30
Reflectivity = 95
ICF exterior walls Overall R-value = R-28.6
View windows (center of glass)U-factor – 0.29SHGC – 0.40
Daylighting windows (center of glass)U-factor – 0.47SHGC – 0.78
Energy use intensity 17 kBtu/ft2
Total construction cost $14.2 million
Cost per square foot $197/ft2
98 | Advanced Energy Design Guide for K-12 School Buildings
Designers should keep in mind that the occupants will be the final determinants of a build-ing system’s usability, including the effects of thermal mass. Changing the use of internalspaces and surfaces can drastically reduce the effectiveness of thermal storage. The final use ofthe space must be considered when making the heating and cooling load calculations andincorporating possible energy savings from thermal mass effects.
EN6 Walls—Steel Framed (Climate Zones: all)
Cold-formed steel framing members are thermal bridges to the cavity insulation. Adding exte-rior foam sheathing as c.i. is the preferred method to upgrade the wall thermal performancebecause it is not degraded by the thermal bridges.
Insulated Concrete Form Exterior Wall Assembly
Construction of an Insulated Concrete Form Wall
Alvaton Elementary school, a 70,000 ft2 facility in Bowling Green, Kentucky, was the first school in thestate to utilize an insulated concrete form (ICF) exterior wall assembly in lieu of the more traditionalblock/brick wall assembly. Since this school was completed in 2005, ICF has become a common exte-rior wall construction technique used in approximately 50 other education facilities in the state.
ICF exterior wall construction was originally chosen by the district to improve the thermal performanceof the envelope. After one year of successful operation, the energy use intensity (EUI) was the lowestknown for any school in Kentucky at that time.
While the ICF wall assembly bid was more expensive than that of traditional exterior wall systems, sev-eral surprises became apparent once construction began. First, construction was significantly fasterwhich allowed the contractor to improve the project schedule. Second, while a traditional block wallsystem required an electrical contractor to work alongside the block contractor to install conduit in thewall, the electrical contractor was not required to be on site for the ICF walls construction, whichresulted in savings on contractor labor. The construction costs for subsequent ICF projects became socompetitive with brick and block projects that the ICF system is now being used for interior walls onmany projects.
32 | Advanced Energy Design Guide for K-12 School Buildings
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Department of Energy ENERGYSTAR™ Portfolio Manager rating
• Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) for new, average buildings• California End Use Survey (CEUS)
It is possible to benchmark the proposed design against the BAU and its pre-existing peersto demonstrate that substantial steps have been taken toward energy use reduction. Designersoften successfully compare their designs to the “typical” equivalent building in the pre-existingstock, or to the number of houses that could be powered on the energy savings, to make it easierfor lay people to understand the magnitude of energy savings.
Historic data, however, is not the inspiration for future good design. This is where moreaspirational benchmarking can benefit the project team. The most frequently used benchmarksare as follows:
• Energy savings as designated by percentage annual costs savings as compared toASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 Appendix G (typically used by codes and policies, also usedby USGBC LEED rating systems)
Cost Control Strategies and Best Practices
This guide provides information for achieving high-performance building design in K-12 school projects. Ownersshould not expect energy-efficient schools to cost more. They can cost more, but they shouldn’t have to. Thesedesigns can be accomplished without a serious cost premium. The following strategies and best practices detailapproaches for controlling costs in high performance K-12 school projects.
Integrated Design
• Align program, budget, and energy goal at the beginning of the project.• Have a good understanding of cost before significant design work has been done.• Analyze costs as energy decisions are being made.• At a minimum, integrate in cost estimators and design engineers at the 50% schematic design phase.• Coordinate system placement (structural, mechanical, electrical, etc.) to reduce building volume costs.• Plan for future integration of renewable energy by designing to be renewable-ready. Examples include the
following:• Providing large, unobstructed roof area, either south facing or flat, for future photovoltaic (PV)
mounting.• Providing electrical conduit chases to possible future renewable sites.
Life-Cycle Cost Analysis
• Include initial cost, operating cost, replacement cost, and maintenance cost over the life of the building when cost justifying low-energy systems. Previously successful examples include the following:• Additional first costs of ground-coupled systems can partially be offset by reduced maintenance costs
of well fields, as compared to traditional cooling towers or heat-rejection condensers.• Additional first cost of light-emitting diode (LED) fixtures can partially be offset by reduced re-lamping
and maintenance costs, as compared to traditional exterior lighting fixtures.
Cost Trade-Offs
• Include installation and labor costs with material costs when evaluating total system costs. Previously successful examples include the following:• Insulated concrete form (ICF) walls may be more expensive from a material standpoint, but the
additional expense can be partially offset by reduced installation time and the fact that the electrical contractor does not have to be on site during wall framing.
• Focus on modular, pre-built systems to reduce installation costs and construction time.• Re-invest first-costs savings from removing unnecessary amenities (overly glazed facades, excessive
finishes, water fountains, etc.) for efficiency upgrades.
Super-Insulated Thermal Mass and Air Infiltration Control Enables More Efficient Passive BTU Heating and Cooling
BUILDING LEAKAGE TEST
Date of Test: 12/22/05 Technician: PM Test File: GOMEZ Customer: LES PERVIL Building Address: PRETEST 12 STRATHAVEN BEDFORD
Phone _________________________________________________________________________________________________Test Results
1. Airflow at 50 Pascals: 135 CFM ( +/- 0.9 %) (50 Pa = 0.2 w.c.) 0.26 ACH (Air Changes per Hour) 2. Leakage Areas: 13.5 in2 ( +/- 3.8 %) Canadian EqLA @ 10 Pa
7.0 in2 ( +/- 6.2 %) LBL ELA @ 4 Pa
3. Minneapolis Leakage Ratio: 4. Building Leakage Curve: Flow Coefficient (C) = 9.8 ( +/- 9.8 %)
Exponent (n) = 0.670 ( +/- 0.026 ) Correlation Coefficient = 0.99614
5. Test Settings: Test Standard: = CGSB Test Mode: = Depressurization Equipment = Model 3 Minneapolis Blower Door
Infiltration Estimates 1. Estimated Average Annual Infiltration Rate: 2. Estimated Design Infiltration Rate: 3. Recommended Minimum Ventilation Guideline: Cost Estimates 1. Estimated Cost of Air Leakage for Heating:
2. Estimated Cost of Air Leakage for Cooling:
® IntegraSpec
Insulating Concrete Forms
11U - 735 Arlington Park Place, Kingston, Ontario (Canada) K7M 8M8 voice (800) 382-9102 fax (613) 634-2291 January 31, 2012 NEWS RELEASE
IntegraSpec ICF Zero Energy Home Wins Coveted Unlimited Residential Award
World of Concrete, Las Vegas, Nevada - January 25, 2012 IntegraSpec ICF was honoured to receive another ICF Builder Award at the World of Concrete, Las Vegas, Nevada. This award celebrates an impressive 10,750 ft2 home, the first Zero Energy residence in Maryland. Mr. Clark Ricks, Director, ICF Builder, Mapleton, Utah, presented the Award to Mr. Dave Kellam, North America Manager, IntegraSpec ICF, on behalf of Dr. Poon, home owner, and William Naegeli, IntegraSpec Distributor. The Judging criteria considers; Use of ICFs, Architecture, Construction and Site Considerations, “Milestone Nature”, Size, and Sustainability. Mr. Allen Winters, President of Winters Concrete in Sebastopol, California, states, “This project represents everything we have been searching for. When you consider the size of this zero energy project and compare it to the automotive industry, you have the equivalent of a luxurious, powerful SUV driving from LA to NY with zero energy consumption. Truly amazing!” Mr. Bill Naegeli, President of IntegraSpec Chesapeake proudly states, “We impressed all parties with the thirty day speed and accuracy of the IntegraSpec foundation and tall main floor walls. The exterior envelope sections were completed in one step, and provide the insulated thermal mass and air infiltration control that is the platform of zero energy.” The prestigious award is a very welcome addition to the numerous Energy Efficiency, ICFA Excellence, Healthy Home, Global Traders, EnviroHome, Environmental Excellence, EnerQuality Corporation Design Excellence, Earth Preserver, and ICF Builder Awards received for IntegraSpec ICF projects and products since 1997. IntegraSpec ICF wallsystem is on permanent display in the National Museum of Science and Technology. IntegraSpec ICF has numerous North American and International manufacturing locations, and is recognized globally as a leader in Insulated Concrete Form Technology.
IntegraSpec ICF products are Patent Protected.
www.integraspec.com [email protected]
by:
FEATURE PROJECT
Project: Dr. Poon Residence Cockeysville, Maryland Architect: Phil Gugliuzza, Creative Outlooks Taneytown, Maryland ICF Installer: Great Naegeli Properties, Inc. Riva, Maryland IntegraSpec Distributor: IntegraSpec Chesapeake Riva, Maryland
Features: First Net-Zero Energy Home built in Maryland, 10,750 ft2 Luxury Custom Built Home.
Completely finished basement and attics. This six bedroom residence features 5½ baths, 10' main level ceilings and basement ceilings of 8'. Dr. Poon requested radiant floor heat throughout and extensive ceramic tile to enhance the comfort and economical benefits of owning this home. Total ICF construction, Geothermal HVAC, PV-Solar, and Solar Thermal Hot Water.
“This project represents everything we have been searching for. When you consider the size of this zero energy project and compare it to the automotive industry, you have the equivalent of a luxurious, powerful SUV driving from LA to NY with zero energy consumption. Truly amazing!” Mr. Allen Winters, President of Winters Concrete in Sebastopol, California “We impressed all parties with the thirty day speed and accuracy of the IntegraSpec foundation and tall main floor walls. The exterior envelope sections were completed in one step, and provide the insulated thermal mass and air infiltration control that is the platform of zero energy.” Mr. Bill Naegeli, President of IntegraSpec Chesapeake
Winner of 2011 ICF Builder Award – Best Unlimited Residential – World of Concrete, Las Vegas, Nevada
Specify Integrity in your next project:
Please visit us at www.integraspec.com
INTEGRASPEC® "The User Friendly ICF"
Totally Insulated Window and Door Openings Ensure Insulated Thermal
Mass and Air Filtration Control
The Andrew, New Green Rental Development in Rego Park, Queens, Named a Top Energy
Efficient Building in New York State Press Release Issued by The Bluestone Organization
New York, NY - February 10, 2011 – The Bluestone Organization, a full-service real estate development company, today announced that its new rental development, The Andrew, was labeled by Steven Winter Associates, Inc. (SWA), a leading architectural and engineering research and consulting firm that specializes in making buildings more efficient, as being the “best performing building in a multifamily new construction four stories or greater” that SWA has ever worked on in that category.
Based on SWA’s studies of a sampling of buildings constructed in the past 15 years, The Andrew performs over 50% better than conventional non-ENERGY STAR® construction. Tracking a heating index of 4.4 BTU per square foot per Heating Degree Day through mid-January, the apartments only cost $200 per year to heat and the total annual utility costs for common area electricity were only sixty cents per square foot. SWA has studied hundreds of building across New York and works to make buildings safer, more energy efficient, more affordable and overall, more sustainable.
Located at 65-54 Austin Street in Rego Park, Queens, The Andrew is a new 50-unit multifamily rental building. According to the lead developer, Steven Bluestone, principal of The Bluestone Organization, “The Andrew sets a new benchmark in energy savings. The efficient and innovative construction of the building was achieved at the same cost of construction as that of a conventional building and is responsible for giving residents some of the lowest energy bills in a multifamily building in all of New York State.”
Bluestone attributes the bulk of the cost savings to the building’s unique “envelope” design which was created using an insulated concrete form (ICF) system. The ICF completely encloses the exterior of the building greatly reducing costs to heat and cools the apartments by providing exceptional insulation and air and water tight walls. An added benefit of the ICF system is that it provides an exceptionally quiet living environment for residents.
“While the ICF system has gained popularity across the country for its high performance attributes, namely superior air-tightness and insulation, it has only been used in a handful of New York City residential buildings with more than four units,” said Ryan Merkin, senior project manager of SWA. “The cost of building the ICF system was the same as that of a conventional building that has fewer sustainability features, so we know this design will set the standard for efficiency in the future.”
The Andrew was constructed with several other green benefits, including special windows (many of which were triple and quadruple glazed) for superior noise reduction, ENERGY STAR window air conditioners with removable insulated covers to prevent heat loss in the winter, and motion sensor lighting in the common hallways to decrease electricity consumption rates.
Major elements of the building’s mechanical systems were designed by Henry Gifford, a highly regarded leader in conservation and green building. Gifford’s simple yet effective changes to the design of the building’s
pumps, boilers, and piping systems added to the overall effect of energy savings. Gifford designed smaller pipes and pumps that created fewer valves resulting in less friction. The use of smaller individual fans for each apartment in lieu of large rooftop fans also helped increase energy savings.
The Andrew has made notable achievements incorporating several energy saving innovations. The development is ENERGY STAR certified, and participated in New York State Energy Research Development Agency’s (NYSERDA) Multifamily Performance Program, a state program that works in conjunction with developers, building owners and representatives to improve the energy efficiency, health, safety, and security to the residential buildings with five or more residential units in a cost effective manner.
“Bluestone is at the forefront of green design by creating energy efficient buildings that help the environment and help our residents,” added Bluestone. “We have received awards and certificates for The Andrew, but we adopted these practices primarily to save on energy costs for our residents and create a smaller carbon footprint. Since green design does not require significant cost increases, we know that these practices will become more widespread for all new construction.”
The Andrew was developed by The Bluestone Organization. GF55 Partners served as the lead architect on the project, Henry Gifford worked on various mechanical design elements, and Lamar Lighting supplied the Occusmart light fixtures used throughout most of the public areas. Construction was completed in March of 2010.
About Bluestone Organization:
The Bluestone Organization is a full service real estate development company with experience and expertise in site selection, planning, financing, construction, sale, marketing and management. The organization has financed, designed, built and managed buildings throughout the greater New York area including luxury condominiums, rental and mix-use buildings, as well as affordable one, two and three family homes. For more information, please visit: http://www.bluestoneorg.com.
About Steven Winter Associates:
Steven Winter Associates, Inc. is a 38-year old architectural/engineering research and consulting firm, with specialized expertise in technologies and procedures that improve the safety, performance and cost effectiveness of buildings. SWA’s staff that encompasses over 80 architects, engineers, and building scientists work to make buildings safer, more energy efficient, more durable, more affordable, more accessible, and overall, more sustainable. For more information, please visit: http://www.swinter.com.
Published 02/14/2011 14: 0:0: ConnectPress, Ltd © 2011
Energy Efficiency=Insulated Thermal Mass+Air Infiltration Control
E E = I T M + A I C
this is the "ICF Effect".
Please remember IntegraSpec's
Dovetailed Groove Interior Face Design.
