Stories about façade design, technology, materials, history and performance. From architecture to building envelope physics to maintenance to you name it... Plus lists of façade consultants and façade contractors around the world.
26 September 2010
Introduction to Architectural Science
Introduction to Architectural Science
Steven V Szokolay is an Australian architect and energy / environmental consultant who has worked in Sydney and London, and teached in Liverpool, London and finally Queensland. In this university he was the founding director of the Architectural Science Unit, as well as Head of the Department of Architecture. He is now retired.
This book is a great introduction to the facts, concepts and numbers of heat, light, sound and energy applied to architecture. The second edition from 2008 is the most recent one. The reader can be a practising designer or an undergraduate student; both will benefit from a clear presentation of facts, examples and data sheets. But the best in my opinion is how difficult issues are treated in a way that sounds as if they were being taught for the first time. Just one example: the description of glare (part 2.2.4, page 148). Szokolay aptly describes the differences between glare due to saturation and glare due to contrast, as well as discomfort vs disability glare. Another clear definition is that of daylight factor (part 2.4.2), also belonging to the lighting chapter. But probably the most useful part of the book is Part 4, Resources. Here we can find the basics of energy, renewable energy, energy use in buildings, water, waste, and sustainibility issues. Short and to the point.
Szokolay has also co-authored with Andris Auliciems a 60 pages booklet on thermal confort. The thesis is very attractive: nowadays lifestyles, clothing, technology in building construction and microclimate controls have tended towards homogenizing indoor environments to which humans are exposed. These developments may be driven by market forces, but the result is that humans are becoming adapted to a very narrow band of conditions. This may be a threat to our survival as species: within a changing environment, survivability is greater among the adaptable than the adapted. Which trend is being favoured by technological development and thermal design?
The booklet is available on the net. Do yourself a favour and have a look at it here: Thermal comfort
25 September 2010
Metal curtain walls
One more example of a great old document, this time from 1955 and related to a then start-up facade system, the metal curtain walls in the United States.
This time it's a book (fully available to us thanks to the 'make no evil' Google guys) with the title 'Metal curtain walls'. It is a compilation of the papers and discussions presented at a conference in Washington in September 1955, organized by the Building Research Institute, then a division of the National Academy of Sciences.

Let's start with the obvious: this conference seems to have been a well organized event, the presenters were among the best available specialists at the time, and the response of the public was overwhelming, judging by the number of companies and experts that attended the conference. It was definitely a good time to talk about the matter. Ten years after the end of the war, and just one year after the Lever House opened at 5th Avenue, there was a lot to say and to learn about curtain walls.
The presenters at the conference came from different grounds. There were architects, some big firms and some from academia. Among the former was Max Abramovitz, partner at Harrison Abramovitz in New York and responsible for the planning process of the United Nations headquarters in Manhattan between 1947 and 1952. There was also a partner from SOM, describing the firm's design method for curtain walls at the Ford Motor headquarter in Detroit. The result of an investigation from the School of Architecture at Princeton University about stainless steel curtain walls (conducted in 1954) was also presented.
There were several specialists from different manufacturing companies and some other experts on thermal and acoustic issues. One presentation discussed the role of curtain wall erectors. It is surprising to see how little things have changed in this regard: the poor chaps who installed facades were experiencing the same problems and showing the same clear logic as their equals do today.
The general impression among the panelists was that curtain walls were going to be the next big thing in facades design and construction for the years to come. They were damn right. One might expect here a lot of naive comments on the advantages of the new technology. Instead, there was surprisingly very few self-praising; quite the opposite, presenters with different technical backgrounds were rather clear in assessing the many problems still unresolved for lightweight cladding.
It seems that at the time architects and owners had fallen in love with glazed facades, whilst contractors and specialists seemed already worried about the limitations of the technology in terms of thermal & acoustic insulation, air tightness, water leakage, metal corrosion and coating durability. The summary of a survey on metal cladding panels, conducted that same years among owners and contractors, shows it cristal clear. Only 2.5% of building owners were dissatisfied, while 13% of contractors would not recommend using curtain walls again. See the details here below.
Things were bound to change in the years to come, with owners becoming less and less interested in curtain walls - but this was still 1955. The Seagram Building details were at Mies' desk by then, and Tom Wolfe had not the least idea that 25 years later he would be writing 'From Bauhaus to our house'.
The architect's view
Max Abramovitz's text is very interesting. We are literally attending to an architect's explanation of modern architecture provided to an audience of builders and manufacturers. He could be outspoken and not too academical. He started saying that the idea of curtain wall was not new, but a development of wooden skeletons and non-bearing stone veneers or other lightweight walls. He then described the factors that made curtain walls so appealing to architects. The list deserves a quotation:
This time it's a book (fully available to us thanks to the 'make no evil' Google guys) with the title 'Metal curtain walls'. It is a compilation of the papers and discussions presented at a conference in Washington in September 1955, organized by the Building Research Institute, then a division of the National Academy of Sciences.

Let's start with the obvious: this conference seems to have been a well organized event, the presenters were among the best available specialists at the time, and the response of the public was overwhelming, judging by the number of companies and experts that attended the conference. It was definitely a good time to talk about the matter. Ten years after the end of the war, and just one year after the Lever House opened at 5th Avenue, there was a lot to say and to learn about curtain walls.
The presenters at the conference came from different grounds. There were architects, some big firms and some from academia. Among the former was Max Abramovitz, partner at Harrison Abramovitz in New York and responsible for the planning process of the United Nations headquarters in Manhattan between 1947 and 1952. There was also a partner from SOM, describing the firm's design method for curtain walls at the Ford Motor headquarter in Detroit. The result of an investigation from the School of Architecture at Princeton University about stainless steel curtain walls (conducted in 1954) was also presented.
There were several specialists from different manufacturing companies and some other experts on thermal and acoustic issues. One presentation discussed the role of curtain wall erectors. It is surprising to see how little things have changed in this regard: the poor chaps who installed facades were experiencing the same problems and showing the same clear logic as their equals do today.
![]() |
| Poorly insulated curtain walls have a two times better U-value than non-insulated brick facades. It all depends on the comparison you select to do... |
The general impression among the panelists was that curtain walls were going to be the next big thing in facades design and construction for the years to come. They were damn right. One might expect here a lot of naive comments on the advantages of the new technology. Instead, there was surprisingly very few self-praising; quite the opposite, presenters with different technical backgrounds were rather clear in assessing the many problems still unresolved for lightweight cladding.
It seems that at the time architects and owners had fallen in love with glazed facades, whilst contractors and specialists seemed already worried about the limitations of the technology in terms of thermal & acoustic insulation, air tightness, water leakage, metal corrosion and coating durability. The summary of a survey on metal cladding panels, conducted that same years among owners and contractors, shows it cristal clear. Only 2.5% of building owners were dissatisfied, while 13% of contractors would not recommend using curtain walls again. See the details here below.
Things were bound to change in the years to come, with owners becoming less and less interested in curtain walls - but this was still 1955. The Seagram Building details were at Mies' desk by then, and Tom Wolfe had not the least idea that 25 years later he would be writing 'From Bauhaus to our house'.
The architect's view
Max Abramovitz's text is very interesting. We are literally attending to an architect's explanation of modern architecture provided to an audience of builders and manufacturers. He could be outspoken and not too academical. He started saying that the idea of curtain wall was not new, but a development of wooden skeletons and non-bearing stone veneers or other lightweight walls. He then described the factors that made curtain walls so appealing to architects. The list deserves a quotation:
- The dry wall, allowing facade construction to proceed even in wet and cold weather.
- Lightweight, saving in construction manpower and load to support.
- Larger units, thus reducing the number of joints in the facade. For him joints were an architect's headache: the less of them the better.
- Non-corrosive and fire resistant materials, that is, metals. A curtain wall wasn't more fire safe then than today, but architects have always found it difficult to distinguish between fire reaction and fire resistance.
- Prefabrication, very neatly expressed: 'We will get more construction for our money'.
The facade contractor's view
My favourite presentation, though, is the one given by the erectors representative, a such Mr. Collier, president of a facade contracting company. Among many interesting things in his text, there is a lateral comment that struck my attention. Remember, we are in 1955. Weather proofing concepts such as rain screen or pressure equalization had not been identified yet, and do not appear along the conference proceedings. On the other hand, selants based on silicone had not been developed at the time. Facade joints were caulked with Thiokol at best. Mr Collier, though, was not happy with the then predominant solution of open joints in lightweight facade panels to allow for movement, with an internal air and water sealed barrier. He prefered, based on his personal experience, an externally sealed wall to prevent water to come into the building in the first place. Well, of all the predictions made in this interesting book, the preference of Mr. Collier for externally sealed facades was going to become the mainstream solution in the US, as soon as silicone became available, and lasting until today. Dow Corning was going to be more convincing to American builders and architects than the rain screen principle.
We Europeans laugh at the Americans love for sealed joints in stone or aluminium veneer facades. But apparently Americans prefered the reasoning of Mr. Collier, an entrepreneur, to that of G.K. Garden in 1963, a researcher from a Canadian building institution and the father of the open joint design in modern facades. And they still do...
20 September 2010
The facades of the future
This is a post under construction. In fact, it may be under construction for years, since its theme will always remain open. What are the key indicators of the facades of the future? What will matter - and what won't - in relation to how we design building envelopes today?
The following is a list (yes, I love lists) of the issues that will define facades design in the near and longer future. Let's put a time lag to this: by 2020? That's rather soon. 2030 is better: twenty years from now.
1. Image:
a) Media facades - they tell us a changing message. See below and here for a video of Ned Kahn's facade moved by the wind:
b) Interactive facades - we can ask them for something, and they will answer. See above and here for more information.
c) Dynamic facades - they will move, in order to perform better, but also in a way we will consider aesthetically pleasant - as it should be: utilitas & venustas. See below and here for the video.
2. Performance:
Future facades will be extremely performant. We have almost reached the limit of tectonics nowadays (what can be done to make any element structurally resistant and stable) but we have just started to grasp the surface of the non-tectonic issues (what can be done to improve the capacity of building elements to reduce thermal transmission, reduce emissivity, limit noise transmission, avoid air and water penetrations, maximize visible light transmittance whilst blocking UV and infrared rays, etc etc).
We are so behind in non-techtonic related issues that there isn't even a name for those (let me suggest one: herkonics, from 'herkos', building fence and interface in Greek)
3. Sustainability:
If a building envelope performs well in terms of energy, it should already be sustainable, right? Well, in the future that won't be enough. As long as we will achieve zero-energy buildings (by both passive and active means) other issues will become more important than what they are now. That's the case with materials carbon footprint, re-usability of elements as per the cradle to cradle mantra, water retaining and reusing, etc.
4. Buildability:
Facades will always have to be fabricated, transported and installed on site. That must be made in a more efficent way - to reduce their carbon footprint, to reduce time, to reduce costs, to reduce uncertainty and risk of malfunction. This is really difficult and will consume the 20 years period I have given for this list to become reality. Can you imagine a robotic factory? You surely can. Now try to imagine a complete robotic jobsite!
Joints and interfaces between facade elements will become even more critical in the future. Again , this is science fiction, regardless the fact that we have been dicussing it since the 50's.
5. Post-occupancy:
This involves first of all facades design that allows user comfort, adaptability and dynamic response to different needs.
Second, it means that our envelopes should be easy to maintain, but really so; reducing the costs, the effort and the spill of water and consumables we need now. And easy to replace: when something breaks or underperforms, the system detects it and the substitution is done together with the cleaning... Sounds futuristic, doesn't it?
And, last but not least, durable facades. This is the Holy Grial of the whole story. Sustainable in Darwinian terms means lasting. Our facades today are creationists, not evolucionists. We act like gods, but gods without the power - and our 'creatures' disappear swallowed by the harshness of the real world. Some day our building envelopes will again, as in the past, be durable. It will definitely take time: I don't care if it's more than 20 years, as long as the trend goes in that direction.
The following is a list (yes, I love lists) of the issues that will define facades design in the near and longer future. Let's put a time lag to this: by 2020? That's rather soon. 2030 is better: twenty years from now.
1. Image:
a) Media facades - they tell us a changing message. See below and here for a video of Ned Kahn's facade moved by the wind:
![]() |
| Ned Kahn, Technorama facade - Swiss Science Centre, Winthertur |
c) Dynamic facades - they will move, in order to perform better, but also in a way we will consider aesthetically pleasant - as it should be: utilitas & venustas. See below and here for the video.
![]() |
| Kiefer Technic Showroom, Giselbrecht + Partners - The louvers move constanty depending on the day and light conditions, and on the inner use of the rooms. |
Future facades will be extremely performant. We have almost reached the limit of tectonics nowadays (what can be done to make any element structurally resistant and stable) but we have just started to grasp the surface of the non-tectonic issues (what can be done to improve the capacity of building elements to reduce thermal transmission, reduce emissivity, limit noise transmission, avoid air and water penetrations, maximize visible light transmittance whilst blocking UV and infrared rays, etc etc).
We are so behind in non-techtonic related issues that there isn't even a name for those (let me suggest one: herkonics, from 'herkos', building fence and interface in Greek)
3. Sustainability:
If a building envelope performs well in terms of energy, it should already be sustainable, right? Well, in the future that won't be enough. As long as we will achieve zero-energy buildings (by both passive and active means) other issues will become more important than what they are now. That's the case with materials carbon footprint, re-usability of elements as per the cradle to cradle mantra, water retaining and reusing, etc.
4. Buildability:
Facades will always have to be fabricated, transported and installed on site. That must be made in a more efficent way - to reduce their carbon footprint, to reduce time, to reduce costs, to reduce uncertainty and risk of malfunction. This is really difficult and will consume the 20 years period I have given for this list to become reality. Can you imagine a robotic factory? You surely can. Now try to imagine a complete robotic jobsite!
Joints and interfaces between facade elements will become even more critical in the future. Again , this is science fiction, regardless the fact that we have been dicussing it since the 50's.
5. Post-occupancy:
This involves first of all facades design that allows user comfort, adaptability and dynamic response to different needs.
Second, it means that our envelopes should be easy to maintain, but really so; reducing the costs, the effort and the spill of water and consumables we need now. And easy to replace: when something breaks or underperforms, the system detects it and the substitution is done together with the cleaning... Sounds futuristic, doesn't it?
And, last but not least, durable facades. This is the Holy Grial of the whole story. Sustainable in Darwinian terms means lasting. Our facades today are creationists, not evolucionists. We act like gods, but gods without the power - and our 'creatures' disappear swallowed by the harshness of the real world. Some day our building envelopes will again, as in the past, be durable. It will definitely take time: I don't care if it's more than 20 years, as long as the trend goes in that direction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)





