Discover Top Posts Tagged with #weareprojectre_

Popular Recent

As mentioned in Srinjoy’s last post, the UDBS was completely consumed with the deconstruction of the former BxA Administrative Offices/2005 CMU Solar Decathlon Prototype. This is the beginning of a backlog of posts that relate to the work that involved deconstruction and the associated research so that we can catch everyone up on the work that was included in the exhibit.

These photos were taken on Monday, October 8th. Alex, Richard, and I worked with Brian Swearingen from Construction Junction to remove some of the windows from the loft of the Solar Decathlon House. The process is pretty simple and goes like this: 1) Remove any window trim that is concealing the frame or hanger hardware; 2) Once the window hangers are exposed, you remove the mounting screws; 3) A reciprocating saw can be used to cut through any backer rods, insulation and high range sealant that may be used at the perimeter of the windows; 4) Once the edges are released with the saw, the windows can be pried free of surrounding wall framing with a crowbar and pushed to the exterior of the building for reclamation (this is for externally glazed units - internally glazed units would need to move toward the interior of the building). This process was used for three of the windows that we were within safe reach. The remainder of the windows in this area were removed after the upper loft module was removed and placed on the ground. Future posts will illustrate that process.

Having the physical experience of removing the windows from the building has given me a better understanding of how they are installed and detailed - something that was completely unfamiliar to me beforehand. I also understand the amount of manpower it will take.

Last View RE_VIEW (in this state)

As mentioned previously, on October 5th, Yashwitha, Alex, and I began deconstructing SOUTHERN EXPOSURE : RE_VIEW. It is a the first prototype and proof of concept project executed by members of the UDBS 2013 class. It is a pre-fabricated modular wall system that is intended to provide passive ventilation, shading, and solar access while enhancing the visual connection to landscape in existing regional vernacular homes that turn their back to the environment. We hope to reinstall the prototype at a different location and have been taking the system apart as carefully as possible.

As Yashwitha mentioned in her post on Tuesday, we have run into some trouble due to the use of construction adhesives. We are trying to keep the pieces as intact as possible but it has proven very difficult. We began by removing the interior plywood caps and plates and will continue by eventually removing the exterior galvanized solar collars and cladding. Stay tuned for more updates on how the removal process went. In the meantime I thought i would share some of the last views of it installed at the BxA Offices/2005 Solar Decathlon House as we removed interior elements.

“Having one person decide what you want all day is bizarre”

The headline is a quote from Stephen Behling included in his talk, ARCHITECTURE AND THE SCIENCE OF SENSES - (TEDxGoodenoughCollege). I think the point raised, and one of the images he presented, very clearly illustrates the kind of places and buildings where we spend most of our days. In the image, the high rises are vertical submarines with no exposure to the exterior. It occurred to me that in an attempt to ‘drive towards modernity’, many new single family house models are starting to demonstrate similar sensibilities. There is a concerted effort to exclude the inhabitants from the existing context. This is alarming in a country where 87% of the time is spent indoors. During our first RE_CON 01 comparable houses tour earlier this semester (mentioned previously in many posts) the UDBS visited new housing as well as restored/renovated housing. In all cases the houses fortified the ground level and elevated the living spaces above the street. Porches were replaced with garages. And, outdoor gathering spaces were at roof level of in the air with artificial landscaping. Those strategies remind me of what Stefan Behling so clearly points out; being inside a building with a glass facade puts us close to the outside, but we are not able to breathe any fresh air.

“Architects could truly make a difference” - Stefan Behling.

More People: The Residents of Mount Oliver

Yesterday I posted about some of the people we have been working with on DE_CON 01. It made me think about some other people I came into contact with earlier this semester, when we were working on MAPPING BLIGHT. During that component of work, my team and I spent some time in the South Pittsburgh neighborhood of Mount Oliver. We were mapping the ocations and conditions of properties on the Condemned Buildings Register. The first time we were in the community, my group, which included UDBS students and IDeATe Reality Computing students, focused on gathering information about buildings. The second time we went out we focused on people; those who make the community.

I met Ms. Marsha, Scott, John, Von, Devon, and Poof. Conversations ranged from issues with slumlords and surviving cancer to danger within the parks and the Steelers.

“I was born in the Steel Mill, I was baptized in the Allegheny River, I bleed Black and Gold.” – Devon.

I asked these community stakeholders, “If you could re-design your neighborhood, what would it look like and what would be in it?” Common themes included:

A. Eliminating the sense of hopelessness that snakes through their neighborhood.

B. Solutions for blighted and condemned properties.

C. Eradicate violence. Especially the kind that sucks children into the mix.

The Residents stressed keeping children and youth involved through local community centers that address educational literacy, extracurricular activities, and introduction to different career opportunities. Von talked about using the vacant lots as mini parks where children could play and teens could chill. John recommended the city tear down condemned homes. He also suggested that the city be active in assisting residents in gaining access to funding that will allow them to repair their homes. He said a first step would be getting the city to write stuff in a language that the residents could understand. A number of the solutions offered opportunity to recreate a tax base, others were about safe third places. What was interesting is how consistently the solutions were proposed, and how they seemed viable for many of the neighborhoods we visited.

PEOPLE

Working on DE_CON 01 is as much about people as anything. From Day 1 started working with Shawn, James, Kenny, Clarence, and 2 other Landforce trainees not pictured here. Brian (pictured above) and Sammy from CJ were with my group on the interior. Everyone on site seems so familiar as we bond through jokes and talk - even simple stuff like how your morning is going, what's your passion, and favorite part of the day. Brian spoke about how he enjoys construction management as we pieced off exterior wall cladding from the north end of the Solar House. Shawn wished for music as Kenny and Clarence joked about buying lunch for one another. James revealed how he likes working with his hands through construction and making trails around Pittsburgh. While loading oak flooring into CJ’s truck, Sammy and I cackled about how my first group of oak flooring was my only one thus far; my goofy response, “I know what I’m good at.” That naturally snowballed into thinking about many other things we both were good at while loading the other groups of oak flooring on the truck. He confessed with pride how he is great at deconstruction, construction management, empathizing with other individuals and many other talents. All of this happened just because we had access to one another that would not have been possible without common objectives with the project.

TEAMWORK

Deconstruction is a huge responsibility. Deconstruction requires as much craft as construction. And, Deconstruction requires immense coordination and collaboration. At times, we might imagine that certain tasks can be managed individually. DE_CON 01 has made me realize how important working collaboratively is. It can be something as simple as needing colleagues to help hand tools up and down scaffolding (pictured above), or as complex as networks of organizations that provide specific expertise that others do not have. Experience with this project in just the first few days tangibly demonstrated why it is important to have UDBS work with RYCON Construction, CMUFMCS, Construction Junction, Auberle, LandForce, Tri-Rivers Electric, and Ruthrauf Sauer to accomplish common goals.

DETAILING FOR DISASSEMBLY

Each day on the DE_CON 01 job site, UDBS students are rotated through, and participate in work stations that focused on different aspects of deconstruction. What has stuck with me is an issue that is constantly being brought up: what does design for disassembly look like? The last few posts have shared experiences with different kinds of assemblies that have highlighted this issue.

As architects, a part of our job should be to find the best way to construct the design work. Since the UDBS focuses on Design For Disassembly (DFD), it is important that we think about how pieces come together as well as how they can come back apart. This makes joints between systems and materials incredibly important.

This has become really apparent in our experiences with DE_CON 01. Although the building was designed for deconstruction and reconstruction, in its final assembly, the 2005 Solar Decathlon House/BxA Offices were put together without its next deconstruction, or final deconstruction in mind. For example, many of the doors were held to their frames with a very thick layer of sealant. This method of assembly makes the disassembly difficult and requires more steps in the processing of materials. Had an alternative method of weatherizing the doors been employed, the door would have been easier to uninstall and the framing would have been readily reusable. Now, all of the wood that came into contact with the adhesive will need to be scraped or sanded down before it can be reused. In this house, this is not a big deal, but at a larger scale this loss of time can cost a deconstruction team a lot. The cost of deconstruction is already much higher than normal demolition, so any inefficiencies, whether it be due to weather, workforce, or the original construction of the house can severely affect the profitability of deconstruction - and by extension, it’s viability over demolition. This is why it is important to design and detail with the building’s end of life in mind.

Spray foam insulation, shown in the image behind Dave Bennick and at the right, is a highly desirable product for high performance building envelopes. It has a Resistance Value (R-Value) of at least R-6 per inch thickness, which is among high performing R-Values for commercially available air-tight products. According to data, the many benefits of the air tight seal that spray foam provides include, 1) 30-50% annual energy savings, 2) related downsizing of HVAC systems, 3) sound absorption, and 4) reduction in potential for moisture related mold growth.

However, in a complete building disassembly, to elemental components, it can be undesirable. In the image above, Dave Bennick is speaking to a group of UDBS students about the best way to manage spray foam assemblies on a deconstruction project. Because the foam sticks to frame elements and cannot be removed without specific solvents, it makes more sense to keep entire sections of walls like this intact for reuse. As we deconstruct the project, even though we have been disassembling everything to linear components, in areas like this, we will be keeping panels intact for future use at PROJECT RE.