Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Energy has been channelled into standardising interfaces between structural and other
components such as cladding, services and lifts, and on increasing customisation
without compromising manufacturing efficiency. Information technology is seen as a
major driver, and its role is investigated. The research will lead to the development of
new systems involving skeletal, planar and modular components, including supporting
design information.
KI-NA-23860-EN-S
Modern steel buildings require a high degree of pre-fabrication and effective integration
of key components. The concept of open building systems in steel is developed with
a focus on the multi-storey residential sector. This research concentrated on providing
enabling or supporting technologies and on basic performance data to assist in the
development of these systems.
EUR23860
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Directorate-General for Research
Research Fund for Coal and Steel Unit
Contact: RFCS publications
Address: European Commission, CDMA 0/124, 1049 Brussels, BELGIUM
Fax +32 22965987; e-mail: rtd-steel@ec.europa.eu
European Commission
O. Vassart
ArcelorMittal Esch, R & D
66, rue de Luxembourg, 4009 Esch/Alzette, LUXEMBOURG
C. Harper
CORUS UK LTD
Moorgate Road, Rotherham S60 3AR, UK
P. Beguin, S. Herbin
CTICM
Espace technologique, Lorme des merisiers Immeuble Apollo, 91193 Saint-Aubin, FRANCE
A. Seppnen
RUUKKI
Fredrikinkatu 51-53, FI-00101 Helsinki, FINLAND
M. Lawson, E. Yandzio
The Steel Construction Institute
Silwood Park, Ascot SL5 7QN, Berkshire, UK
F. Scheublin, W. Bakens
CIB
Kruisplein 25 G, 3000 BV Rotterdam, NETHERLANDS
Contract No RFSR-CT-2004-00042
1 July 2004 to 31 December 2007
Final report
Directorate-General for Research
2009
EUR 23860 EN
LEGAL NOTICE
Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission
is responsible for the use which might be made of the following information.
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11
(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed.
Agreat deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet.
It can be accessed through the Europa server (http://europa.eu).
Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication.
Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2009
ISBN 978-92-79-11319-2
DOI 10.2777/41420
ISSN 1018-5593
European Communities, 2009
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.
Printed in Luxembourg
Printed on white chlorine-free paper
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................ 5
Final Summary ............................................................................................................................. 6
Scientific and technical description of the results........................................................................ 9
Objectives of the project .......................................................................................................... 9
Comparison of initially planned activities and work accomplished ...................................... 12
Description of activities and discussion ................................................................................. 13
WP 1: Establishment of Open Building Architecture ........................................................ 13
WP 1.1: Technology base............................................................................................... 13
1.1.1 Definition of Open Building ............................................................................. 13
1.1.2 Overview of open building systems .................................................................. 16
1.1.3 Review of Integrated Steel Options .................................................................. 18
1.1.5 Opportunities for OBS in steel in various sectors ............................................. 21
WP1.2: Development of Open Building Architecture ................................................... 22
1.2.1 Criteria for dimensional planning ..................................................................... 24
1.2.2 Protocol for Open Building Systems................................................................. 25
WP 2: Development of Systemised Approach................................................................... 27
WP2.1: Develop Interface Technology.......................................................................... 27
WP2.2: Investigate whole building design..................................................................... 49
WP 3: Investigation of opportunities for Customisation.................................................... 51
WP 3.1: Information Technology................................................................................... 51
3.1.1 Existing protocols for data exchange ................................................................ 51
3.1.2 Investigate customisation (or user input) in the design process through I.T..... 57
3.1.3 Standard component and connection design by using modelling tools ............ 60
3.1.4 Transfer of information from design to manufacture........................................ 63
3.1.5 I.T. requirements for the procurement process ................................................. 63
WP 3.2: Opportunities for Customisation ...................................................................... 63
3.2.1 Opportunities for customisation within a standardised product range and interface details.................................................................................................................. 63
3.2.2 Design or construction limitations as influenced by the manufacturing........... 67
3.2.3 Applications for typical building forms ............................................................ 70
WP 4: Investigation of Value-benefits and Sustainability Arguments and Case Examples
............................................................................................................................................ 71
WP 4.1: Establish Value and Sustainability Criteria...................................................... 71
4.1.1 Sustainability and construction: general aspects............................................... 71
4.1.2 Investigation on sustainability existing systems ............................................... 72
4.1.3 INPREST sustainability table for assessment: focus on 10 criteria .................. 74
4.1.4 Opportunities axes for steel construction .......................................................... 77
4.1.5 Value benefits.................................................................................................... 77
WP 4.2: Case Studies of Innovative Projects................................................................. 79
4.2.1 Short presentation of case studies ..................................................................... 79
4.2.2 Use of Inprest Sustainability Table ................................................................... 80
4.2.3 Extension to Building passport ......................................................................... 82
WP 5: Establishment of Basic Performance Data and Physical Modelling....................... 84
WP 5.1: Performance Criteria ........................................................................................ 84
WP 5.2: Physical Modelling and Testing....................................................................... 86
3
Abstract
Modern steel buildings require a high degree of pre-fabrication and effective integration of the key
components. The concept of Open Building systems in steel is developed, aimed primarily at the multistorey residential sector. The research concentrated on providing enabling or supporting technologies
and on basic performance data to assist in the development of these systems.
Effort are put into standardisation of interfaces between structural and other components such as cladding, services and lifts, and on increasing customisation without compromising manufacturing efficiency. Information Technology is seen as a major driver which are investigated. The research will lead
to the development of new systems involving skeletal, planar and modular components, including supporting design information.
Final Summary
The INPREST project focuses mainly on two aspects of modern construction systems: The flexibility
for the user (internal layout, servicing, internal and external appearance) and the flexibility concerning
the suppliers and inter-change of components. Construction systems, that fulfil these objectives, are
considered as Open Building Systems. However, the definition of Open Building Systems (OBS) in
the context of integrated steel technologies is not clear cut, and therefore in WP 1, an approach for a
suitable definition was formulated, based on a protocol of essential and optional requirements. Examples of Open Building systems in all materials were reviewed, and possible structural options in steel
and solutions for faades were presented.
During the development of a systemized approach for OBS (WP2) it became evident that existing products and systems have to be considered for further developments as it is not possible to develop a completely new open building technology, except at a concept level. A general categorisation based on 1-,
2- and 3-dimensional elements was introduced and the main elements and existing systems were placed
in this scheme.
Four parallel types of Open Building approaches were addressed based on existing technologies (country of origin noted) : Nordicon (FIN), Corus Open Building Systems (UK) and PRISM (F) are systems
based on existing products and close to the market. Additionally a steel intensive solution by RWTH
Aachen (D), which is more on a research level, was also considered. Based on the description of the
different concepts and relevant elements, proposals for their incorporation in whole building design are
presented.
The subsequent WPs 3 to 5 are essential tasks to bring forward the OBS concept in the building market: The prefabrication and modularity of components enables and requires extensive use of information
technology (WP3). Existing software models were investigated and data structure, that is suitable for
OBS was identified. The use of software tools improves the abilities for customised design based on
prefabricated and industrialised production. Information on the appropriate levels of customisation that
ca be achieved are presented.
A new stimulus for developments in the construction sector is sustainability. In the concept of sustainability the performance of a building in three levels (environmental social economic) over its whole
life is assessed according to various criteria, primarily concerned with the energy consumption, choice
of materials and the building performance. The basic idea has become accepted internationally, but
there is variety of methodologies concerning the indicators and assessment methods. In WP 4, the main
indicators are identified. For steel buildings using the open building concept, good sustainability performance can be expected, and the main beneficial aspects are: demountable construction, recyclability
of materials, flexibility and adaptability concerning long term use and improvements in quality by offsite manufacture.
The technical performance of Open building systems was investigated in WP 5, beginning with an
analysis of the specific requirements of Open Building Systems. Relevant performance criteria were
investigated numerically or by testing. These tests include structural performance, fire resistance and
thermal performance, as influenced by possible cold bridging and interfaces between the structural
components and facades.
In WP6, the most important information that has been gathered in the project, is condensed into the
essential features in the form of a Design Guide for Pre-fabricated Open Building Systems in Steel.
The main principles, technical solutions and examples of technologies that may form part or all of Open
Building systems are shown. This design guide is presented as a stand-alone document and could be
used by architects, engineers and building owners in the early phases of the design process, when the
general decisions regarding structure and floor plan have to be made.
In conclusion, this project has resulted in an overview of open building systems in steel and has shown
how current steel technologies may be used as part of an open building concept. Ideas for future development of open building systems are presented, based on use of an integrated range of one-, two- and
three-dimensional steel components. No current integrated system exists and there are opportunities to
standardise the dimensional requirements, interface details and possible inter-change of components in
order to create new opportunities for steelintensive systems across Europe.
The volume of the final report was limited, therefore not all information gathered or worked out during
the project is presented within this document. A list of all background-documents is attached as Appendix 1, the full documents are provided on a separate CD.
The Open Building systems will be extendable to various sectors by establishing a protocol for standardisation and interface details, which will be the first step in international standardisation.
10
11
12
13
Developments in commercial construction are now moving into the residential sector. In Europe, Asia
and North America, residential Open Building principles, variously known as OB, S/I (Support/Infill),
Skeleton Housing, Supports and Detachables, Houses that Grow, etc. - are now spearheading the reorganization of the design and construction of residential buildings in parallel ways. In many cases, residential Open Building is based on the reintroduction of principles intrinsic to sustainable historic environments around the world. These have been reinterpreted and updated to harness benefits of state-ofthe-art industrial production, emerging information technologies, improved logistics, and changing social values and market structures.
Residential Open Building is a new multi-disciplinary approach to the design, financing, construction,
fit-out and long-term management processes of residential buildings, including mixed-use structures. Its
goals include creating varied, fine-grained and sustainable environment, and increasing individual
choice and responsibility within it. In Open Building, responsibility for decision-making is distributed
on various levels. New product interfaces and new permitting and inspection processes disentangle
subsystems toward the ends of simplifying construction, reducing conflict, affording individual choice,
and promoting overall environmental coherence. Residential OB thus combines a set of technical tools
with a deliberate social stance toward environmental intervention.
Residential Open Building practices are rapidly evolving throughout the world. As new consumeroriented infill systems appear and become more widely available, governments, housing and finance
corporations and manufacturers are joining developers, sustainability advocates and academics in endorsing and advancing a new open architecture. From improved decision-making and increased choice,
to standardized interfaces between building systems that are compatible and sustainable, the broadlyshared benefits of the new wave in building (Proveniers and Fassbinder, n.d.) are increasingly in evidence throughout the world.
Stephen Kendall is founder and coordinator of CIB Working Commission 104, on Open Building Implementation. Teicher is a member of this working Commission. In their book they mainly deal with
residential building, but most of their definition is also applicable to non residential building. In the
definition the focus is on enabling consumers to partition and install their own domain. The Open
Building strategy is strongly focussing on building load bearing structures with long spans and a minimum of embedded services in the privately owned domain. The open building movement is not only
interested in the interior design. Also consumer influence on exterior design and city planning are fields
of interest.
A strategic field of interest for Open Buildings is the development of standardised connections between
the structural elements that form together the base building. This connections are usually referred to as
the building knot. Building knots are the connection between load bearing walls and floors, between
facades and load bearing walls, between roof and walls. Most suppliers of building systems have standardised the knot in their system. But there are no standards for the connection of elements from different systems. Building Systems are in this respect closed systems. Modification of buildings is possible,
elements can be replaced by others, as long as the client deals with the owner of the system. Buying
from other suppliers is hindered by a misfit of connections.
Unlike the base building knot, there is in the Open Building movement no special focus on the development of standardised connections between base building and infill. It is assumed that most infill systems fit to any support system. And this assumption is right. Consumer products like partition systems,
inner doors, kitchen equipment and sanitary fixtures are designed to fit in all buildings and under all
circumstances.
14
In Open Building there are two interest groups to be observed. On one side there are the home owners
and tenants (The clients). On the other side there are the manufacturers of building systems and components (The suppliers). Clients are interested in internal flexibility. They want in the design stage the
opportunity to personalise the lay-out and outfit of their new build house. Later, after some years of
occupancy, they need the possibility to modify their home, to adapt it to a new era in their family life
cycle or to new technological features.
Suppliers want the possibility to supply elements - facades, sanitary modules, attics etc.- to existing
houses independent of the system by which the house was build. They need open systems to enlarge
their market. Clients may benefit from such supplier independent systems through the competition
among suppliers.
The interconnection of building elements is not limited to flat elements such as floors, walls and roofs.
Also 3-dimensional units containing complete bathrooms, kitchens or even bedrooms should be taken
into consideration. Units of different brands and origin should be designed to be stacked together in one
building. This is an openess that goes far further than the traditional Open Building philosophy.
A real Open Building system is a system that uses standardised connections. Connections that are used
by most if not all producers of building units and building elements. The stacking of sea containers is a
perfect example of such a system. The connectors are independent of the means of transport. They fit
trains, trucks, shipdecks and overhead cranes. And stacking in many stories is possible.
One of the major problems in residential Open Building is the place where cables and ducts are located.
In traditional buildings the cables are embedded in the walls and ceilings. Future re-arrangement of
these cables is hardly possible. The Open Building movement advocates easy accessible cables and
ducts. In particular, raised floor systems are considered to allow easy access and re-arrangement. Aim is
that consumers should be able to rearrange their systems without expert help. In practice most raised
floor systems are to expensive for residential use. Though in non residential buildings these systems are
often applied and considered to be feasible. Also connectors for cables and ducts in a Open Building
system should be universally standardised. The connections between individual units in an apartment
building to the main feaders and risers should be open systems as well.
For the INPREST project, it is important to take both the clients, and the suppliers, requirements into
account.
15
2. The 7 Heavens
3. Space Box
4. CD20
16
6. Domino system
7. Ino hospital
8. Next 21
9. Sekisui Heim
17
Inside face
of module
Electrical box
22
17
150
150
Floor of module
C section used
as raised floor
130
280 ASB
300
300
Composite slab
Rebar
30 - 60
Floor
200 - 250
Gap
150
dia.
350
350
60
Module
100
Plasterboard ceiling
Module
100
Module
150
Floor
200 - 250
30 - 50
130-150
Floor
200 - 250
240-350
200-250
150 dia.
Gap
130 - 150
150
100
Hollow-core slab
HE 240 to HE 350
Slab
720
C-62 x 2.0
Module
190
50
125
Recessed base
Variable
10 to 30
22
750
44 5
5 55
Floor cassette
280 ASB
10
150
150 x 150 L
60
C-220 x 2.0
Shims
244
150
Variable
40
68
Concrete
Mesh reinforcement
75
40
70
300
Site infill
C-220 x 2.0
220
60
1m
150
typ
ica
lly
18
150 x 150 L
Module
HE profile
IFB profile
Module
Module
Module
Floor
Module
RHS profile
Floor
SHS profile
Module
I-core
19
Module
Module
The review of faade options which might be relevant for the design of Open Building systems contains
12 possible solutions (Table 1).
Table 1 : Faade options OBS
Size of panel
Weight
kg/m2
Kingspan (UK)
and others
Metal panels
of 0.5 to 2 m
30-60
Weber/Sto/Dryvit
Site installed
render often
onto light
steel framing
50-80
Argiton (Fr)
Clay tiles on
horizontal
rails or brick
slips on metal
sheeting
60-100
Light steel
infill wall.
Site constructed
brickwork
restrained by
wall
150-200
Light steel
wall panel of
3-6 m width
x 2.5 -3 m
height with
lightweight
facia
40-70
Examples of
Technology
Ruukki (Fn)
Corium (UK)
- Metsec (UK)
and
others
5. Large pre-fabricated
panels
Light steel panels
and lightweight
faade material
Skanska (Sw)
Ruukki (Fin)
PRISM (Fr)
Prefabricated
See this project in
brick panel of
Bristol (UK)
3-4 m width
Hanson (UK)
2.5-3 m
height
6. Large pre-fabricated
panels
Brickwork panels
20
100-150
Examples of
Technology
Size of panel
Weight
kg/m2
Panels attached
to primary steel
frame
200-300
Composite
panel of
0.9-1.2 m
width
x 6-12 m in
length
60-80
Curtain walling
2.5-4.5 m
height
70-100
Double glass
faade
2.7-3.5 m
height
80-120
Conventional
brickwork often
used in housing.
Not applicable
200-300
Stainless steel
angles by Halfen
etc
Can be prefabricated
(see 6.)
200-300
7. Large prefabricated
concrete panels
Kingspan (UK)
Ruukki (Fin)
PAB (Fr)
and others
Schmidlin (Sw)
9. Curtain walling
(metal/glass)
Gartner (D)
Permasteelisa (It)
21
Housing
Residential
Buildings
Hospitals
Education
Public
Buildings
Commercial
Building
Modular units
Roof units
Balconies
Likely to be used
May be used
4
4
3.4
4.7
3.3
4.3
3.8
2.8
3.4
3.5
22
Aspect of building
3.2
4.0
3.2
4.4
4.7
4.5
3.0
3.9
4.4
4.9
3.7
3.25
3.3
4.1
4.2
4.2
23
4.1
3.3
4.2
4.1
3.3
3.8
4.7
4.5
UK
France
2.4 m
2.5 m
Netherlands
2.5 m
2.6 m
Depending on use
Depending on use
2.8 m
2.7 m-3 m
2.7 m-3 m
6m
3.6 m
3 to 4 m
3 to 4 m
2
4 without
lift, 7 with
lift
2-3
2-3
4-8
4 to 6
4 to 6
9m
13m
0.6 m
12m
12m
?
max 15m
max 15m
?
12 m residential
0.9 m
0.45 or
0.6 m
0.6m
0.6m
0.3 m
5.0 or 7.5 m
8.1 m
4.8 or 7.2 m
5.0 or 7.5 m
2.7 m-3 m
Houses
2.5 m min. -4 m
typical
2-3
Residential
4-6
4-8
8m
13m
0.6 m
12m
12m
0.6 m
Planning dimensions
0.6 m
Car parking
Controlling Criterion for
Planning
4.8 or 7.2 m
Brick
dimensions
Depth of
Houses
floor
Residential
Secondary support to
Luxembourg
2.9 m-3.3
m
2.7 m-3 m
Typical
number
of floors
Belgium
2.5 m
3.3 m or 4 m
typical
2-3
Germany Finland
12m
0.6 m
24
2.8 m
6 m (related to
windows)
2-3
UK
France
Germany
Belgium
Luxembourg
Room height
2.7m-3m
2.7m
2.7m
2.7m - 3m
2.7m - 3m
2.7m
Floor-floor height
3.6-4.2m
3-3.7m
3.2-3.5m
3.6m - 4 m
3.6m - 4 m
3.2-3.9m
Room depth
6m
6m
6m
6m
6m
5.4m
6-8
up to 9
up to 4 with no lift
up to 7 with lift
upt to 7
up to 7
5-8
0.6m
0.6m
0.6
0.6
1.2m
Depth of floor
plate
13-18m
14-17m
12-14m
12 to 16m
12 to 16m
12-14m
Planning
1.5m
1.2m
1.2m
1.2m
3.6m
7.5m
7.2m
7.5m
7.2m
Typical number
Typical
of floors (fire
number
fighters)
of floors
Secondary
(fire
support to
fighters)
facade
Depth of
floor
plate
Parking
Finland
Netherlands
Essential
requirement
Optional
requirement
General
requirement
Beneficiary
Client
Client
Client
Client/supplier
Supplier
Supplier
Client
Client
Speed of construction
25
Client
Supplier
Client
Supplier
Client/supplier
Essential
requirement
General
requirement
Beneficiary
Client/supplier
Client/supplier
Cost competitiveness
Client/supplier
Client
Optional
requirement
This protocol defines the essential and optional requirements for open building systems. Essential requirements are those that are fundamental to open building systems. Optional requirements are not essential but are desirable. General requirements are those requirements common to all building systems
and are not only specific to open building systems.
26
27
Generally we may regard the components in a building as 1 dimensional, 2 dimensional or 3 dimensional. These are defined in Table 10. These primary components may be combined in many different
ways to give different solutions to the building problem. Figure 5 shows the possible combinations in
the form of a Venn diagram.
The systems identified in WP1 are plotted on this diagram as are the solutions addressed in this work
package. Table 11 describes the possible systems that may be created from the components outlined in
Table 10.
Table 10 : Definition of elements of a building system
1D
These are essentially line elements that link 2 points in space such as beams or columns in
a structural frame. They usually occupy small volumes in the completed building and usually support other members.
2D
These are elements that essentially connect 4 points in space and have a thickness such as
walls and floors. They occupy greater volume than 1D elements and may or may not support other members.
3D
These are elements that connect at least 6 points in space but more usually 8 and are sometimes called volumetric spaces. Volumetric modules are the main component that fall into
this category. They may be designed to support other elements, particularly other volumetric modules in typical modular construction or may be designed as non load-bearing, generally only being required to carry their own weight during transportation (often called
pods)
Figure 5 : Venn diagram showing the components of a system and their interactions
28
This approach is typical of traditional approaches where most of the components are
brought to site and assembled there. This is not to say that the approach is not open because clearly most of the essential requirements of the protocol can be met. However, the
approach does not readily lend itself to off site construction deemed to be an optional but
very important characteristic of the INPREST project aims.
1D/2D
These may be called frame and panel approaches. They are probably the most common of
all systems since these are typical of traditional approaches. The progress in this category
is to move the panel items off site so that the frame is erected in a traditional manner and
floors and walls are brought to site in varying degrees of completeness. Prism, Corus Open
Building System 1 and RWTH Modular Research Building are typical of this approach.
The Prism system described below is being developed using this approach.
2D
It is possible that only 2D elements are used to create a building. Here the major elements:
walls, floors and roofs are fabricated off site and brought together to create the structure of
the building very rapidly with most of the elements being finished off site requiring very
little on site finishing work. The Nordicon system described later is typical of this approach.
2D/3D
3D volumetric modules are combined with 2D planar elements. The modules are used for
the highly serviced parts of the building and the panels are used to construct the open areas
of the building. This approach has been called the hybrid approach. Normally both the
modules and the planar elements are load bearing and is ideally suited to cold formed steel
modules and walls. Example of this type is the Corus Open Building System 2.
3D
3D volumetric modules are used as the primary building blocks for the building. This
methodology has become commonly known as modular construction. Modules are usually
full room elements often containing inbuilt bathrooms. These are stacked on top of one
another to form complete building structures. The external facades are normally completed
after the primary boxes are erected although some examples are fully finished including
the external parts. The methodology is typical of the hotel, student accommodation and
military barrack block sectors where the primary functional unit is the en-suite bedroom.
There are many examples of such systems e.g. Space Box.
1D/3D
1D/2D/3D
All of the components are used together in some way and there are many possible variations. This is the system that was anticipated at the start of the project and is described in
more detail later as the Corus Open Building System. It combined a traditional steel skeletal frame with modules and planar elements.
Study of the many available systems leads to the conclusion that no one dimension is more open or
indeed better than another and most practical systems will use a combination such as those outlined
above to define the system. The key to the openness of a system is the ease with which the elements
may be interchanged and in the case of the INPREST project the degree of off site manufacture possible
to give the most efficient production process.
It is by no means proven however, that fully offsite manufactured buildings are the most practical or
efficient. Nor would they necessarily reduce costs and time for production. Experience would suggest
that some aspects of the building production process are more suited to factory production such as
modules and large wall and floor panels, whereas some aspects may be better completed on site such as
the connection between modules or panels and final boarding and interior finishes. Items best suited to
manufacture tend to have a high degree of repeatability, whereas items that do not tend to be best suited
to a craft based approach.
29
The most efficient solution is therefore likely to be one that combines a high degree of site technology
with highly efficient on site processes where the construction site becomes a highly efficient on site
assembly facility rather than a building site in the traditional sense. One of the major elements in
achieving this is to learn from the manufacturing facility so that for example materials arrive on site cut
to size and labelled rather than being cut on site.
The INPREST project has explored these concepts in some detail for floors, walls, modules and facades
especially in WP1 and WP2. Examples of such systems are presented here to illustrate open building
systems and the approach to developing them.
Four systems have been investigated and developed by partners in the project: the PRISM system, the
Nordicon system, the RWTH Aachen system and the Corus Open Building System. These are indicated
on the Venn diagram in Figure 5.
The PRISM system is a French example of how a primarily traditional and inherently open system may
be designed to be more manufacturable by using off-site components in conjunction with traditional
approaches. This is described in the section entitled PRISM below.
The Nordicon system from Finland illustrates the use of large panel construction based on the Ruukki
Nordicon wall element with other large panels for the other elements such as floors and roofs. It is
combined with steel frames where necessary and uses a degree of on site activities to complete the
building. The Nordicon system is described in section entitled Nordicon below.
The RWTH Aachen example utilises a regularised steel frame approach with infill panels which may be
manufactured on or off site. Its particular focus in this project was the use of all steel floor components
and traditional steel cladding panels used as part of the open building system. The system is described
in the section entitled RWTH Aachen system.
The Corus Open Building System illustrates how 1D, 2D and 3D components may be combined to create systems for open manufactured buildings. The system is a prototype utilising some existing, some
second generation and some newly developed components and is described in detail in the section entitled Corus Open Building System.
One of the key aspects of the development of any building system is how the main components and
assemblies fit together i.e. the interfaces. In each of the systems developed, the partners have carried out
work to identify and detail the main interfaces of the respective system. Space allows that only one or
two of these can be shown in this document but reference should be made to the respective partners for
further details.
A pre-requisite of any system is that it must comply with the regulatory framework applicable to the
location of the building. Many of the key aspects of compliance have been carried out by partners
through documentation, modelling and in some cases testing and prototyping. These include initial design tools for the PRISM system and the Corus Open Building system. Some of these are illustrated in
this document and again reference to the appropriate partner should be made for full details.
As with any systematic approach to building especially new or evolving ones there will inevitably be a
requirement to test new concepts and ideas either by modelling or physical testing and prototyping. The
requirements for testing have been identified and in some cases carried out during the project. The Nordicon system has undergone significant testing and the Corus Open Building System has undergone
some testing and prototyping, both of the individual components and a full scale prototype of a part of a
building.
30
A systematic approach to building especially where there is a significant manufacturing content requires
the use of supporting ICT. In both the Nordicon system and the Corus Open Building system there has
been significant development of ICT tools to support the design and manufacturing processes. The
PRISM system uses existing ICT to provide a web portal to information about the system and tools that
support the use of the system. The ICT is described in more detail in section 3.
PRISM
PRISM is a French system; the word is an acronym for PRoduits Industriels et Structures Manufacturees (industrial products and manufactured structures)
The main objective of the system is to use existing, proven and available components used in the construction of buildings and use them in a systematic approach to open building. Solutions are offered for
the main building elements - the frame, floors, walls, roof, and foundations, which are then combined to
propose whole building solutions. Each of the elements is designed to be compatible with the other
components to which it is connected within the system.
Many of the elements are supported by design tools which are made available via the PRISM web site
(www.acierconstruction.com ) and deal with such issues as beam and column design, facade selection,
internal partition selection and the selection of mechanical and electrical systems for a particular building configuration.
The main components of the system are shown in Table 12 and the current solutions offered for each.
The system is extensible as each sub element can be extended or replaced as long as the performance
criteria for the element are addressed and the interfaces with the other components are defined.
Table 12 : Main components of the PRISM system and tools available
Main Frame
Slabs
Facades
Roofs
Partitions
Energy system
The structure of the building including all beams columns and bracing system. Design guidance is given to French Standards and Eurocodes.
PrediPrism is an excel spreadsheet for initial design of beams and columns.
A range of at least seven slabs is available to the system. These are shown
in Figure 6
The main families of faade options are available light facades, double
skin, sandwich panels. Detailed documents are available on acoustic, fire
safety, thermal behaviour and corrosion. An Excel tool is available presenting the characteristics of the faade options.
The main families of roof options are presented including the specifications
for each type of roof. . Detailed documents are available on acoustic, fire
safety, thermal behaviour and corrosion.
Information on insulation products, internal partition walls, ceilings is presented together with a catalogue of details for each part. Detailed documents
are available on acoustic, fire safety, thermal behaviour and corrosion.
Again Excel tools are available for internal partitions, external light skin
walls and ceilings.
Information on electrical heating and cooling systems is presented. Links to
other sources of information is available.
31
A - Concrete Slab
C-D
E-G
40
30
20
10
Porte du
plancher en m
32
In common with all systems whether deemed to be open or not the regulatory framework governing in
the location of the building must be adhered to. This is achieved in the PRISM system by designing
each of the parameters according to the local standards in force and providing technical information to
allow the designer to easily provide the required compliance information. Information for the scheme
design stage is readily available via the PRISM web site. An example of the beam design tables for
initial design and selection is shown in Table 13.
Table 13 : Example of Column design tables from the PRISM system
The PRISM system may be defined as predominantly a 1D/2D system with no use of 3D volumetric
elements at present. This is shown on the Venn diagram as described previously. However, there is
33
much information available in WP1 and WP2 to enable volumetric modules to be added to the system
should the client demand in France become strong.
Table 14 shows how well the PRISM system fits with the essential requirements of the protocol for
open building systems developed as part of WP1.
Table 14 : PRISM fit with essential requirements of open building systems protocol
Flexibility in use of
private space (inc.
moveable partitions)
This would depend on the floor system used but if long span floors are used
then there is no reason why this can not be achieved. The floor and frame
design would need to be designed to allow for the moveable partitions.
This is built into the system by allowing many faade systems to be chosen.
Moreover, the system is based on a steel frame built on site thereby allowing
many different architectural solutions.
Flexibility of servicing
(and maintenance of
services)
The current floor options allow for many variations in servicing strategies at
the design phase i.e. before build but do not allow for refurbishment without
disruption to the occupants.
Familiar technology
(design information and
common interfaces)
The system is based on current, available technologies so has a string fit with
this requirement.
Inter-changeability and
compatibility of components
The PRISM system is a French based system and whilst the system is not
currently designed for other locations, the components are generic across the
world and could therefore be adapted to any countrys particular standards.
Customisation (input by
user in design/design
flexibility)
There is no facility to allow for user input into the design process at the moment.
Nordicon
Nordicon is a Finnish building system for multi-storey residential building projects. These may be
apartments or houses depending on the particular requirements of the developer. The system has been
developed from the Plus Home system as described in [2-1]. The concept makes use of the Nordicon
outer wall element which is used as the primary building element. The Nordicon exterior wall element
as its name suggests is used for the outer load bearing walls of a building. There are few internal loadbearing walls leading to a highly flexible internal space which can be configured and re-configured by
the eventual owners of the apartment. The external wall elements include any necessary structural elements to perform the function of the wall including structural columns that would traditionally lie outside of the wall. The walls are used to support all of the floors and roof of the building. The Nordicon
walls are manufactured offsite in a factory environment and arrive on site with all of the sub-elements
of the walls in place including windows, doors and supports for the facade where this is not part of the
Nordicon wall. Figure 9 shows a schematic of the Nordicon external wall element.
34
35
Figure 10 : The double layer floor system as used in the Nordicon system
The interior walls are generally non load bearing; this allows greater flexibility in the use of the interior
space both at the initial design phase where the end user may be involved in the layout of his apartment
and in the choice of interior materials, fixtures and fittings and after construction when the building is in
use and occupied. In fact if the double layer floor system is used the interior of an apartment may be
totally reconfigured without affecting any of the other occupants of the apartment building.
The system offers several architectural choices such as balconies, window systems, glazing and facade
options such as brickwork or render. Many of the facade options described in WP1 are available should
the developer wish to choose them. These choices allow the system to offer architecturally diverse
buildings from a predominantly manufactured building system.
The Nordicon system is supported by a well developed ICT system based on the Finnish modelling
package Tekla Structures. This is described in detail in section 3. The system gives easy access for user
customisation and enables efficient transfer of information from the design process to the manufacturing process. Extensive information is also available for the designer to be able to use the system, an
example of a Nordicon design chart is shown in Figure 11.
36
37
The Nordicon system would be generally classified as predominantly planar or 2D and this is where it is
shown on the Venn diagram shown earlier. However, depending on the structural requirements 1D elements may be built into the walls to provide greater capacity thus it may also fit into the 1D/2D space.
The Nordicon system is a manufacturer specific solution to the problem of applying industrialised processes to building construction and this limits its openness in strict terms. However, since the components used (other than the Nordicon wall element) are essentially off the shelf, they may be replaced
with any available suitable component as long as they meet the performance requirements and interface
requirements of the elements. Moreover the concept is open to be copied by another manufacturer who
is willing to put the time and effort into developing the necessary design, manufacturing and construction details required of the system. Table 15 shows how well the Nordicon fits with the open building
protocol from WP1
Table 15 : Nordicon fit with essential requirements of open building systems protocol
Flexibility in use of private space (inc. moveable
partitions)
Flexibility in architectural
solutions (inc. facades)
Flexibility of servicing
(and maintenance of services)
Familiar technology (design information and
common interfaces)
Inter-changeability and
compatibility of components
Wide geographical applications (Regulations/climate)
Ability to extend/modify
the building in the future
Customisation (input by
user in design/design
flexibility)
This is one of the design features of the system. The building is designed
such that the interior space is very flexible.
Many architectural solutions are available including faade, window designs and balcony options.
If the double layer floor system is used a high degree of flexibility in servicing is achieved which is very easy to modify and maintain.
The Nordicon wall is proprietary and unfamiliar; the double layer floors
are new and unfamiliar. Many of the other components are existing available technologies
Clearly the Nordicon wall is the main feature of the system and is not interchangeable. Other elements of the system are.
Although the system is Finnish in origin and design there is no reason why
the system cannot be adapted to the needs of other countries.
It would be difficult to modify any of the major components. The internal
spaces could be modified easily as described above.
This is again one of the features of the system which is achieved by user
involvement in the design process from the outset supported by sophisticated ICT systems.
38
The kit of parts is shown in Table 16 and has options for floors, walls, facades, foundations, skeletal
frame, modules, roof and a structural core. In addition architectural variation may be achieved by utilising architectural additions together with variation in layouts as described later.
The main work addressed in INPREST has been the development of the second generation light steel
composite floor system; Quantum and the development of an open sided corner supported module and
applying this and the other parts from the kit to the multi- storey residential sector. The concept is currently undergoing detailed design where many of the parts of the system are being designed to meet the
regulatory standards in force. The floor and module of the system are described below.
Table 16 : The Corus Open Building System kit of parts
Building Element
Floor
Option
Light steel/concrete composite
Light steel/timber composite
Ceilings
Integrated
Light steel independent
Suspended
Skeletal Frame
Modules
Core
Roof
Foundations
Facades
Infill walls
Interior walls
Balconies
Traditional
Small Bore CHS
Screwfast piles
Light steel infill walls (site assembled with external cladding)
Metallic cladding e.g cassette
Insulated render
Brick slips or clay tiles
Large pre-fabricated light steel wall panel systems
Light steel walls and light weight facia material
Pre-fabricated brickwork panels
Pre-cast concrete panels
Brickwork and block-work (site constructed)
Supported at floors
Ground supported
Light steel boarded
Composite panels
Light steel boarded
Cantilever
Propped cantilever
Independent
The details of Quantum floor are illustrated in Figure 13. It comprises light steel C sections embedded
in a thin concrete slab and is typically 300 mm deep for a 7.2 m clear span. Support is provided by a
steel angle fabricated as part of the floor, and the on site attachment is made by bolts to the flange at the
supporting beams.
39
720
C-62 x 2.0
750
445
555
C-220 x 2.0
150 x 150 L
(a) Isometric view of floor
Concrete
Mesh reinforcement
40
40
150 x 150 L
70
C-220 x 2.0
220
Figure 13 : Details of the Quantum floor System from the Corus Open Building System
The main module type used in the system is of the corner-supported type (Figure 14). This gives the
advantage that all of the sides of the module can be open including the floor and ceiling if necessary,
providing a volumetric space that is very flexible in its use. The major components of the Corus module
design are the frame, four infill wall panels, a floor panel and a ceiling panel.
40
Structural design aids have been developed to allow designers to quickly select floor options and beam
and column sizes to fit within the current system framework. Examples of these aids are shown in
Figure 15 and Figure 16.
Figure 15 : Corus Open Building System initial beam sizing chart example
41
The system may be applied to any building layout but to illustrate its use it has been applied to two
common layouts in current use in the multi-storey residential sector; the shallow plan form and the deep
plan form. The shallow plan form shown in Figure 17 uses a cluster of apartments around a stair or lift
core. This functional unit usually comprises 4 - 8 apartments per floor, each block being repeated on a
site. The deep plan form, where apartments are arranged along a central corridor is typical of the hotel
and student accommodation sector but not exclusively so. The deep plan form is shown in Figure 18.
4800
7200
3900
7200
3500
Span of Quantum
floor
7000
300 PFC
3500
15900
300 PFC
Module 1
Module 2
Module 3
5000
Module 4
Module 5
280 ASB 100
6000
7200
6000
Figure 17 : Residential building with apartments around a stair/lift core shallow plan form
7500
5400
7500
2100
4800
1 Bed Flat
1 Bed Flat
Module 1
Module 2
2500
2100
16500
Module 3
Module 6
Module 4
Module 5
5000
2 Bed Flat
2 Bed Flat
Span of Quantum
floor
6500
7400
6500
Figure 18 : Residential building with apartments either side of a central corridor deep plan form
42
Moreover the system components may be combined to fit into any of the categories within the generic
open building framework established earlier. For example a 1D/2D system may be created by utilising
the planar elements of the system together with a conventional structural frame. A 1D/2D/3D variant
may be created by combining the open sided module with the planar floor and wall elements and a
skeletal framework. A 2D/3D variant may be produced by combining the open sided module with the
planar elements. An example of the 1D/2D/3D variation is shown in Figure 19.
Figure 19 : Layout for 1D/2D/3D variation of the Corus Open Building System
One of the most important aspects of the design of such a system is the effort applied to the detailing of
the system components and the interfaces between those components. The main interfaces between the
primary components have been identified and detailed - one of these is shown in Figure 20. The full list
of interfaces is shown in Table 17.
Figure 20 : Interface at the module to module to panelised area in the Corus Open Building System
43
Table 17 : List of interfaces identified for the Corus Open Building System
Floor to core
Beam to column
Floor to module
Service integration
Balconies
Fire details
Roof to building
Core to foundations
Floor to floor
Wall Panel to External Faade
Floor panel to module
Floor to floor at module/room interface
Module to module
Roof to Building
Roof to Faade
Module to ceiling
Floor to beam
Floor to cladding
Floor to separating wall
Cladding to frame
Walkways
Acoustic details
Frame to foundations
Wall panel to frame
Wall to support beams in main frame
Frame to Foundation
Module to foundation
Party Wall to Party Wall
Roof to module
Service holes
The system components are currently limited to those identified in Table 16 above but this does not
preclude future additions. Any replacement component will need to meet the performance requirements
and interface requirements appropriate to that element to be included in the system. In this way the system is very open even though the concept is manufacturer specific. Table 18 shows the fit of the Corus
Open Building System with the open building system protocol.
44
Table 18 : Corus Open Building System fit with essential requirements of open building systems protocol
Flexibility in use of private space (inc. moveable
partitions)
The interior space can be easily modified especially in the planar i.e. non
module based areas.
Flexibility in architectural
solutions (inc. facades)
Whilst the system is essentially modular in its approach flexibility in architecture is achieved by allowing many different layouts and combinations
of parts to be used.
Flexibility of servicing
(and maintenance of services)
The servicing strategy for the building is based around central cores for the
main distribution runs and specific service paths within the apartment. This
allows for very simple design and maintenance of the apartment services.
The technologies used are generally familiar although some of the components are new and unfamiliar.
Inter-changeability and
compatibility of components
This is one of the specific design features of the system. All walls components and floor components are fully interchangeable and there are many
options for facades and foundations.
The concept does not have any specific geographical base although some
of the current components are specific to the UK. The methodology could
be easily extended to a wider geographical base with the addition of design
to other standards and regulations.
Ability to extend/modify
the building in the future
The system is designed with future modification in mind both at the interior space level as described above and at the building level where interfaces have been defined for current and future building needs. A selection
of user extensions has been defined to be included in the system such as
new interior wall panels and modular extensions.
Customisation (input by
user in design/design
flexibility)
As with the Nordicon system the Corus Open Building System is supported by a sophisticated ICT system that allows user customisation of the
building or apartment at any stage in the design process.
The Corus Open Building System, like Nordicon is supported by a sophisticated ICT system: Model
Manager, which is a parametric, hierarchical building information manager developed by Corus. The
module and interface diagram above were output from the ICT system which is also illustrated in WP 3.
45
South
Figure 21 : RWTH Aachen research facility schematic of steel frame
One of the first test components for the facility has been the I-Core floor system. This is an all steel
floor panel which is composed of top and bottom plates connected together with intermediate webs.
Figure 22 shows the finished I-Core panel.
46
Table 19 : RWTH Aachen research facility fit with essential requirements of open building systems
protocol
Flexibility in use of private space (inc. moveable
partitions)
Since all of the interior panels are infill panels the interior space would be
easily modified. However, with the current design this would be encumbered with columns from the structure.
Flexibility in architectural
solutions (inc. facades)
The building is designed with the flexibility to attach any faade system
although the structural form is fixed.
Flexibility of servicing
(and maintenance of services)
Services can be easily modified and maintained as they are separate from
the structure and other elements of the building.
Inter-changeability and
compatibility of components
Ability to extend/modify
the building in the future
Customisation (input by
user in design/design
flexibility)
47
2.4 ext.
0.1
Half landing
1.1
0.2
1.0
1.0
1.7
4.2 ext.
Up
1.2
0.1
0.3
0.9
1.2
Figure 23 : Modular stairs, dimensions of module (left), use of false landing of intermediate module(right)
Lifts have become essential for all residential buildings more than 3 storeys high and should include for
disabled access. Modular lifts may be designed as separate units including guide rails and doors, and
may also be include in a larger module which comprises a lift lobby. Features of such lift modules are:
The external size of such a module is minimum 3.2 m x 3.4 m (lift-lobby module, medium rise residential building, see Figure 24).
Depending on the type of lift, a further lift base module (1.4 m depth) and a capping module incorporating the lift motor, are required (Exception: hydraulic lifts do not require capping module).
Guide-rails are pre-installed in the storey-high module (Figure 26).
3.2 ext.
0.1
0.1
Entrance H frames
Front wall and floor construction
2.0
1.9
Lift
0.2
3.4 ext.
1.6
Ancillary
equipment
1.2
0.1
0.3
0.9
2.0
Figure 24 : Lift module, dimensions of module (left), structure of light lift module (right)
Building services
The approach of Open buildings demands specific solutions for building services. This aspect has
been worked out in the mid-term report.
48
Step 5
Mounting of facade
insulation / cladding
Step 2
Stacking of modules
Step 6
Windows
Step 3
Further assembling
of modules
Step 7
Floor
Step 4
Adding of facade
panels
Step 8
Finishing of facade
49
50
Direct link between applications has been used for several decades. It is always based on case
by case programmed import functions in receiving application and export functions in sending
application. Typically this type data exchange is in most cases one-way only and it is based on
51
ASCII format file transfer. This practice is very suitable for solving special and/or limited data
exchange cases.
o
All-in-one applications have been available and used for long. They are based on high level of
integration of all (or most) needed design features in the same application environment. Typically different applications are able to use e.g. the same database(s). In this type applications
design (code checking) option or bi-directional link to external design software suitable for diversified design companies is often included. External data exchange is done via industry standards and/or international standards. As representatives of typical application ArchiCad, Allplan, Revit, Triforma, Tekla Structures can be mentioned.
Standardized data exchange solutions are the other main type which can be based on either so called
industry standards or on internationally accepted data exchange standards.
o
Industry standardised (open) data exchange has been used for long. They are based on commonly used application specific but commonly accepted file formats. These kinds of formats
are suitable for low level data exchange and typically only graphical information (geometric)
information is exchanged. Typical use is for checking compatibility of different 2D drawings or
e.g. combining different 3D models for e.g. clash checking purposes. Examples of these formats are DXF, DWG, DGN/OpenDGN, SDNF, DSTV etc.
Last recognised but may be most remarkable data exchange protocols from OBS point of view
are standardised (open) data exchange formats based on international standards. They are
based on common international exchange data format definitions and they are very suitable also
for high level data exchange. Most commonly they are used to combine different 3D product
models i.e. so called BIMs (= Building Information Models). Approach differs totally from geometry oriented (points, lines, surfaces) data and it is based on object data, where every object
can have attributes, and visual graphical information is just one way to view the model. Most
widely used format are CIS/2, IFC and at the moment IFC format developed very actively and
supported and most widely implemented.
52
possibility to get exact and reliable quantity estimation already in early stage
possibility to make exact and reliable cost estimations in early stage
customer can get reliable visualisation of what will be the result
customer can get reliable information and analysis of performance and life cycle cost of the
building
compatibility of design between different design domains (architectural, structural, HVAC, etc.)
can be improved greatly and the amounts mistakes reduced dramatically
speed up design and construction productivity
Industry standardised data exchange format can be used for exchange model data (export and import)
between different software packages. Two examples of quite commonly industry standards are PDMS
format used widely in plant design applications and SDNF format used for transferring steel design data
between different designers. Figure 3.3 illustrates the basic idea of these isolated exchange formats.
Software 3
Export format 2
Software 1
Export format 1
Software 2
Import format
Figure 30 : Data exchange based on independent solutions
53
Even though this method has benefits compared to exchanging only drawing files (2D data) due to great
amount of different software products it cannot be the solution for common data exchange demand or
interoperability.
Second protocol for data exchange between building (information) models is based on common international standards. From the few existing ones IFC (Industrial Foundation Classes) format developed by
IAI (International Alliance of Interoperability) seems to be the most widely accepted to be the basis of
model data exchange implementations. Figure 31 illustrates what the basic idea of model data exchange
using standardised formats means.
Software 3
IFC model
Software 1
Software 2
IFC model
Software 3
Software 1
Model server
Software 2
54
55
56
Table 20 : Status of electronic data transfer in manufacture of light steel framing and modular units
Company
Products
Metsec
Fusion
Kingspan
Metek
Framing Solutions
(Corus/Redrow)
Banro
Ayrshire Framing
Modular units
Autocad to Inventor, a 3D
graphics/detailing package
Modular units
Terrapin
Modular units
Yorkon
Caledonian
Manufacture
3.1.2 Investigate customisation (or user input) in the design process through I.T.
By utilising modern I.T. tools customisation and user input can be taken into account in many different
ways. Because of very wide scope of objective only a few applications could be examined and established during this project. Possibilities were anyway recognised to be huge and utilisation of I.T. tools is
having a lot future potential. Two different possible and promising approaches were investigated during
this project and are presented here.
The first application was done by utilising general Geometric Description Language (GDL) basically
developed by company named Graphisoft. Because the major aim was to increase user input selection
of piloting building type was not so important and it was done by using standardised steel hall concept
but approach is totally universal and can be adopted generally for any other type constructions (multistorey). Application uses ArchiCads GDL parametric objects, that can be edited and building can be
extended in fixed modules. Buildings consist of office blocks and hall blocks and customer can choose
the colours and surface materials and get quick and direct quantity and cost information of used components. Building consists of steel frame structure with rectangular hollow section columns and trusses.
57
Exterior walls are made of sandwich panels. All changes and selections can be viewed in 3D. It is also
possible to get all main drawings directly. Figure 34 and Figure 35 are illustrating the graphical user
interface and visualisation possibilities of used developed software tool.
58
security demand was covered by placing all strategic applications in one server behind the firewall.
Also software integration and data exchange was studied by both developing XML based data exchange
file format using existing COM interfaces of used software components. In Figure 36 is a schematic
presentation of developed environment and used software components.
59
60
61
Table 21 summarizes the generally published design tools that exist for the structural and building
physics design of components of open building systems. Besides these there exist a great amount of
local (national) application for different components and different national codes.
Table 21 : Design tools for Open Building Systems
Aspect of Design
Structural Design - steel Software for steel and composite beams Cobec from Arcelor
frame
and columns to Eurocodes 3 and 4
BDES from Corus/SCI
Cellbeam from Westok
Acoustic Performance
Standard details for floors and walls, See typical details given in WP5
based on site tests
Thermal Performance
details
for
U-values
<
3D thermal analysis tools for U-value and Commercial FEM- software for thermal
cold bridging calculations
analyses
Thermal analysis of whole building (En- Commercial building simulation tools (e.g.
ergy, indoor climate)
TRNSYS, TAS)
Fire Resistance
Standard floor and wall configurations Standard details, for example,. from plasbased on R30 and R60 fire tests
terboard suppliers
Fire resistance analysis tools for mixed Specialist software tools such as Ozone,
structural systems to EC 4-1-2
FDS
Design Tables
Sustainability
ments
62
UK
63
the architect would normally have some knowledge of the chosen manufacturing technology, but the
precise details of the components would not be fixed until the manufacturer / supplier had been engaged
under a formal contract. This would occur generally after planning approval for the project and after the
main contractor had been appointed.
Therefore in a more traditional contract, when the manufacturer / supplier is chosen, some elements of
re-design would be required in order that the building design is aligned closely with the particular components and manufacturing technology of the supplier. This is the case particularly for modular units.
Based on these facts one of the basic conclusion here is that the opportunity for customisation is limited
if the manufacturer / supplier is not involved early in the decision making process.
It follows that user choice potentially increases if the manufacturer is involved early in the design process, and conversely, the later the manufacturer is involved in the design process, the lower the possibility of user input. This is true of an industry in which the components are unique to a particular manufacturer. In an industry where components are highly standardised in terms of dimensions and interfaces,
there are more opportunities for user choice. This is the case for fabricated steelwork where standard
sections and connections are used, but much less so in the light steel framing and modular industries. In
Table 22 is an example from steel beam selection of PRISM system.
Table 22 : 6 level building, urban collective housing, 3PM system (Main beams)
Basic table for beams = Build-up beams, pinned supports, deflection
design, buckling check,
active loads =150 daN/m
Span
Width (m)
Beam section : see below
(m)
A
B
C
D
E
6
6
5
4
3
6
5
4
3
6
5
4
3
6
5
4
3
64
Build-up sections :
Basic dimensions: Upper flange > 120 mm, Lower flange 300 mm, Web height: 215 mm. These data
are deduced from technological consideration from the slab (sound insulation, thermal, etc.).
Table 23 : Specific data main beams
(e1: minimum thickness where local plate buckling is taken into account, according to CM66 [3-2])
e web
[mm]
e lower flange
[mm]
e upper flange
[mm]
e1
e1
16
e1
10
25
e1
12
30
10
16
40
10
16
50
In this project the named main steel construction components or building elements for a multi-storey
residential building are a load-bearing steel frame, walls and partitions, cladding and roofing, windows,
doors and services, and possibly also modular units. The inter-relationship between the design decisions
and the choice of these components for a multi-storey building is illustrated in Figure 41, which indicates also the primary and secondary building components. In this case, the primary structure is fabricated steelwork and the walls are in light steel framing.
65
Figure 41 : Primary and secondary components and the interrelations of design decisions
It was also recognised that in this context some parameters need to be set as fixed as others may be set
as variables. The variable and fixed parameters in the structural system, and the opportunities for
customisation, are presented in Figure 42. Some of the fixed parameters are dependent on the particular manufacturing technology and others are related more to the practicability of transport and installation. Most fitments that are installed on site can be chosen by the client, but those that are included as
the pre-manufactured components are essentially fixed and not subject to significant user choice.
66
Design Parameters
Fixed parameters
Opportunities for
customisation
Structural design
Structural components
Optimising of structural
design
Building geometry
Standardisation of
dimensions
e.g. 150 mm steps
Manufacturing process
and components
Choice of internal
fitments
Choice of bathroom
fitments
Location of service
outlets
External appearance
67
Fixed Parameters
Building geometry
Primary structure
Planar components
Modular components
Faade types
Brickwork
Insulated render
Openings
Performance characteristics
Loading
Imposed
Wind
Services, etc.
1.5 to 3 kN/m2
0.5 to 1.5 kN/m2
0.2 to 0.5 kN/m2
Fire resistance
Table 25 and Table 26 extend this explanation for external walls (supporting the faade) and for internal
separating walls.
68
Fixed Parameters
Limited range of C sections, e.g. 70, 100 and 150 mm depth in 1.0
to 2.4 mm thick
Allow for relative vertical movement in non load-bearing applications of beam span/500 but not less than 10 mm
Window sizes
Type of cladding
Interface connections
Variable parameters are those that may be subject to some degree of customisation in the design
process. Fixed parameters are constraints on the degree of customisation, mainly due to the manufacturing technology.
69
Fixed Parameters
Allow for relative vertical movement in non load-bearing applications of beam span/500 but not less than 10 mm
Acoustic performance
Fire resistance
Interface connections
70
71
Paris in February 2007, the experts claim that the reduction must be 50% over 50 years in order to avoid
large-scale climate changes.
The usage of energy during the buildings service, called operational energy, is one of the most important sustainability issues for the construction sector. Energy primarily affects the environment due to the
mining, production and distribution of energy in its various forms and water for heating and cooling.
The thermal performance and overall energy efficiency have an effect on the economical and environmental performance of the building, and thereby its competitiveness.
Construction needs much material input: as natural resources and as recycled material. Materials primarily affect the environment through the refining processes from raw materials to building components, and also by transports. Natural resources are not infinite and recycling leads in most cases to
improved environmental performance. The construction sector generates an enormous amount of waste
and the demands for improved recycling are increasing. Therefore, in many countries the sustainability
focus is on recyclability.
Sustainable construction does not have to mean new big investments or inventing new materials, just to
use the right materials in the right combinations in the right place. Sustainability improvements will
often generate economical benefits, e.g. lower costs for heating and maintenance, skill and market advantages, and also a future world where we can live.
For all those previous arguments, steel, as well as material as a way of building, is seen like a good
solution; but now these advantages have to become reality due to the development of systems integrating all the products (steel and related) and into the precise analysis of the environmental aspects to lead
to practical solutions.
Those information have be compared with others international sustainability systems, as LEED (USA)
or Green Building Challenge (Canada), see Table 27.
72
Thus, 451 indicators were identified starting from 31 sustainable systems of 16 different countries or
entities. In order to choose suitable indicators for an application in steel construction, we have proposed
to establish some relevant characteristics for our INPREST indicators by presenting this following definition:
73
Definition of an indicator
A parameter or a value derived from parameters, which points to describe the state of a phenomenon,
environment, area with a significance extending beyond that directly associated with a parameter
value. OECD Definition.
According to us, an indicator must be relevant and effective. It could be presented as a synthetic variable, giving indications or describing a situation; in another way, it could be expressed in clear and precise terms, measuring unit through which monitoring can be assessed (we have proposed some characteristics for an indicator):
Permit to define a sustainability criteria,
Relevant to every specific project or program,
Permit to measure an appropriate data concerning the building environment or the construction site,
Understandable for project team and to be easy for use by actors,
Measurable by a standard method (quality control).
In addition to present a way of choice for sustainable criteria, a summary of each following sustainability assessment methods can be find in annex 4.
VTT Prop Building Finland
CIB Agenda 21 Netherlands
BRE ECO Home Criteria United Kingdom
Carbon Balance France
HQE method - France
74
Energy
Allocation for co-products
Transportation
Recycling
Life Cycle Impact Assessment
Interpretation
Reporting
Critical review
In the case of the components and systems relevant to INPREST, it is appropriate to highlight the aspects of Integrated Design which integrates material, component, and structure design and considers
selected relevant criterions for technical solutions from a wide range of sustainability criteria sorted in
the three basic groups: environmental, economical and social. (Due to the character of the research project the social aspects will only be considered sketchy).
Now, 48 criteria are defined in the sustainable criteria table for assessment and distributed according
to the three classical topics:
Environmental with 6 items (energy, climate, resources & raw materials, water, soil & landscape,
waste),
Economic with 2 items (cost & development, access & integration),
Social with 1 items (comfort).
Criteria linked to urban issues were not retained in the continuation of this project and the social aspect
could however be excluded as being outside the scope of the INPREST project.
In general, the capacity to gather information remains the principal difficulty, particularly in connection
with economy. Because the more there are actors, the more information is dispersed, the first questions
may be: Which information is available? Near which?
As the sustainability approach may concerning all the life of a product, from natural resources to the
recycling, the intention of INPREST partners is to focus on the construction period. Taking account that
each country can have different approaches of the stake of sustainability, the final table for assessment
can introduce the common part and also consider local requirements for sustainability.
By the end, INPREST partners have chosen to focus on a selection of criteria dealing with steel as material or impacts of construction site.
The selection was operating from two main criteria:
Importance: the relationship between the definition and actors of steel (steel industrials or fabricators,
designers, clients) and the influence,
Effect: impact of this criterion on project process or what is significant on ecological balance.
Table 28 shows the final selection of 24 criteria for sustainable assessment in INPREST.
75
Table 28 : Global view of final draft of Sustainable Table for Assessment (environmental issues)
SUSTAINABILITY TABLE FOR ASSESSMENT
draft number 5
GENERAL
LIST OF CRITERIA
IMPORTANCE
EFFECT
COMMENTS
Heat energy
High
Neutral
Electrical Energy
High
Neutral
High
Neutral
High
Neutral
Medium
High
High
Medium
High
Med / High
High
High
High
High
High
Neut / Poor
Medium
Neutral
Medium
Neutral
Med / High
High
Adaptable Building
ENVIRONMENTAL
ENERGY
RESOURCE
WATER
SOIL
WASTE
High
High
factory waste
Building Waste
High
High
Cost of building
High
High
Cost of refurbishment
High
High
High
High
Easier to maintain
High
Neutral
High
High
Neutral
High
High
High
Neutral
ECONOMIC
COST
In the last draft of Sustainable Assessment Tool, all the actors are identified as they have influence or
control on each topic (see background-document In108).
76
OPPORTUNITIES
CHALLENGES
To increase the use of prefabricated units will enhance the benefits for steel as to consumption of
ground, thus increase the market for steel
77
generally highly pre-fabricated and lead to benefits both in the construction process and in improved
quality and in-service performance. The overall financial benefits depend first on the economy of
scale in production and also, on the size and location of the project. These overall benefits and potential financial gains are summarised below:
The value-benefits of open building systems may be presented under various financial and tangible
benefits, as well as other intangible but important social benefits. These open building technologies are
generally highly pre-fabricated and lead to benefits both in the construction process and in improved
quality and in-service performance. The overall financial benefits depend also on the economy of
scale in production and on the size and location of the project.
These overall benefits and potential financial gains are summarized below (Table 30).
Table 30 : Value benefits of open building systems
Financial or Value-Benefits
Economy in multiple repeated
manufacturing units
To the Client
To the Constructor
Pre-fabrication is important
when extending existing buildings
Energy savings
Future adaptability
78
79
80
Table 31 : Assessment of previous case studies with INPREST Table (presented in Table 28)
Rheims
Evreux
GENERAL
LIST OF CRITERIA
Open House
Plus Home
Topic
CASE STUDIES
draft number 5
La Fenetre
IMPORTANCE
EFFECT
High
High
High
Neutral
Electrical Energy
High
Neutral
High
Neutral
High
Neutral
Medium
High
High
Medium
High
Med / High
High
High
Recycled materials
High
High
High
Neut / Poor
Medium
Neutral
Medium
Neutral
Med / High
High
Adaptable Building
COMMENTS
ENVIRONMENTAL
ENERGY
WATER
X
Can be designed with renewable energy
systems
SOIL
Plot Ratio
WASTE
High
High
factory waste
Building Waste
High
High
Cost of building
High
High
Cost of refurbishment
High
High
High
High
Easier to maintain
High
Neutral
High
High
Neutral
High
High
High
Neutral
ECONOMIC
COST
X
X
81
82
Generic
Select
your own
nominal
weighting
values.
Mandatory
Instructions:
First decide if you want to use the defaults
If you want to set your own weights
1. First set relative importance for highest level Issues
2. Then set values for Categories within each Issue area
3. To set lowest level weights, go to WtB
Design Phase
Active
Issues
A
1.3
8.1%
3.6
22.5%
Environmental Loadings
4.3
27.0%
2.9
18.0%
Service Quality
2.6
16.2%
0.9
5.4%
0.4
2.7%
Categories (note that some categories are only operational in certain phases)
A1 Site Selection
A2 Project Planning
A3 Urban Design and Site Development
.
B Energy and Resource Consumption
B1 Total Life Cycle Non-Renewable Energy
B2 Electrical peak demand for facility operations
B3 Renewable Energy
B4 Materials
B5 Potable Water
.
C Environmental
Weighted
Percent
within
Issue
Use your
values
3
3
3
9.0
9.0
9.0
33.3%
33.3%
33.3%
0
3
3
5
3
3
3
3
2.0
0.6
1.2
6.0
1.2
18.2%
5.5%
10.9%
54.5%
10.9%
5
3
3
3
3
5
3
3
3
3
3
1.7
1.5
1.0
1.5
2.5
2.5
15.6%
14.1%
9.4%
14.1%
23.4%
23.4%
5
3
3
3
3
3
5
4
3
3
3
8.0
3.2
1.2
1.8
2.4
48.2%
19.3%
7.2%
10.8%
14.5%
5
4
3
3
3
M
M
3
3
3
3
2
3
0.5
1.0
2.0
2.5
0.3
4.0
4.8%
9.7%
19.4%
24.2%
3.2%
38.7%
3
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
10.5
7.5
58.3%
41.7%
3
3
4.5
100.0%
M
M
Loadings
Social Aspects
Cost and Economics
F1
Weights
Suggested
adjusted
Default
for active
values
Criteria
.
G1 Culture & Heritage
83
The work is a necessary step in European Technical Approval for these innovative building design.
84
Change of function
1 - independent
5 - strongly dependent
1
2
2 Acoustic
Acoustic properties of walls including interfaces with
floor and ceiling
3 Fire safety
1
Fire resistance of building components
5
Means of escape
4 Thermal performance
Heat transfer, including thermal bridging
1
5 Air-tightness
1
Air-tightness of joints and junctions and whole
building performance
6 Internal climate
4
Design of building services and expected thermal
comfort
7 Energy efficiency
The aspects mentioned above (thermal
performance, air-tightness, internal climate)
determine the energy efficiency
85
Comments
Identify key areas where physical modelling or testing is required e.g. in faade interfaces
Beneath the sensitivity regarding the flexibility of floor plan and function the prefabricated, modular
construction is of specific interest. These aspects have to be investigated in detail:
Fire safety
The fire safety requirements have to be fulfilled, otherwise this is a knockout criterion. Therefore a
detailed analysis of some interesting systems will be performed.
Heat / Energy
In the regular area, prefabricated, light weight constructions are very capable concerning heat transfer
and air-tightness. Mainly the joints of elements have to be designed carefully (thermal bridges, airtightness, acoustic bridges).
Indoor climate
The indoor climate of light-weight buildings is more critical than of other buildings to the reduced heat
and moisture capacities.
86
Digital prototype
Figure 44 : Interfaces at the corner of the Corus Open Building System module
Analysis and testing has been carried out on these elements for example the connection of the joist to
encasing channel has been tested for pull out under various conditions. Table 35 shows the results of the
tests to pull out.
87
Table 35 : Results of pull out tests on the Corus light steel joint
Test Specimen
75mm Stud/ 78mm Encasing Channel (loaded
to failure)
75mm Stud/ 78mm Encasing Channel (loaded
to failure)
75mm Stud/ 78mm Encasing Channel(7.5 kN
cycled load (3 x), then to failure)
75mm Stud/ 78mm Encasing Channel(7.5 kN
cycled load (3 x), then to failure)
75mm Stud/ 78mm Encasing Channel(7.5 kN
cycled load (3 x), then to failure)
single 220mm Joist/224mm encasing channel
(loaded to failure)
single 220mm Joist/224mm encasing channel
(loaded to failure)
single 220mm Joist/224mm encasing channel
(loaded to failure)
single 220mm Joist/224mm encasing channel
(10 kN cycled loaded (3 x), then to failure)
single 220mm Joist/224mm encasing channel
(10 kN cycled loaded (3 x), then to failure)
double 220mm Joist/224mm encasing channel
(loaded to failure)
double 220mm Joist/224mm encasing channel
(loaded to failure)
double 220mm Joist/224mm encasing channel
(loaded to failure)
double 220mm Joist/224mm encasing channel
(20 kN cycled loaded (3 x), then to failure)
double 220mm Joist/224mm encasing channel
(20 kN cycled loaded (3 x), then to failure)
double 220mm Joist/224mm encasing channel
(20 kN cycled loaded (3 x), then to failure)
Q.A.
Number
Max Load
kN
6SB20
12.56
6SB21
13.36
6SB22
12.71
6SB23
14.04
6SB24
13.80
6SB25
19.64
19.80
6SB30
6SB31
29.81
6SB31A
33.62
33.60
6SB26
6SB27
6SB28
6SB29
6SB32
6SB33
6SB34
18.46
18.54
15.74
28.00
30.22
32.86
One of the products of the development work was a new connection of two light steel components similar to that used in Figure 44. This can be used for the connection of any two light steel elements such as
the floor joist to encasing channel shown above or for studs to encasing channels in walls. The joint in
each case requires different configurations and several of these have been prototyped and tested. A patent for the joint has been applied for.
One of the design aspects for the building system is how the stability of the building may be achieved.
The joint between the beam ring and the column shown in Table 35 is semi-rigid and gives some contribution to the overall stability of the system. Another aspect are the infill wall panels; if they can be
attached to the surrounding frame in an acceptable way, then they too potentially provide some contribution to the stability system of the building. Testing of the racking ability of light steel walls has been
carried out before but usually on walls with steel frameworks that in themselves have some resistance to
racking. With the Corus Open Building System the infill wall panels have no internal bracing; therefore
it was necessary to establish the racking characteristics of a wall panel where the steel framework has
no resistance to racking. Table 36 shows the results of racking tests on such a wall panel using several
different coverings.
88
Table 36 : Wall panel racking tests for Corus Open Building System
Test
Load at 4.8mm
deflection
Make-up
Residual def
Failure Load
mm
kN
kN
1
Frame only
0.03
3.14
3.01
1.49
3.7
6.06
2.12
9.6
3.07
1.45
5.79
0.80
13.8
6.83
0.35
18.7
6.36
0.20
15.9
7.10
0.60
14.5
89
Nr. Structure
1
2
Measured
EN 140-5
Dn,w + Ctr [dB]
40
Calculated
EN 12354-3
D2m,n,w + Ctr
[dB]
36
49
40
37
36
56
40
39
40
56
40
41
41
Rw +Ctr
[dB]
Window
Rw +Ctr [dB]
43
90
38
Details are given in Research of faade airborne sound insulation with calculations and field measurements [5-2].
SOLIDS PLOT
SOLIDS PLOT
FRONTIERS PLOT
STEELEC3
STEELEC3
F20
FISO
The radiation inside the cavity is taken into account for the thermal calculation. The section is exposed
to a temperature following the ISO 834 curve of Eurocode 1-2 on the lower face and to a flux corresponding to a cold environment on the upper face. The FEM software calculates the evolution of the
temperature inside the steel profile during 7200sec. The following figures show different temperature
values inside the section at given time steps:
Diamond 2004 for SAFIR
FILE: Icore
NODES: 1017
ELEMENTS: 1302
SOLIDS PLOT
900
STEELEC3
800
Temperature [C]
Node 407
Node 478
700
600
Node 407
Node 478
Node 602
500
400
300
200
Node 602
100
0
600
1200
1800 2400
3000 3600
4200 4800
5400
6000 6600
7200
Time [sec]
91
The following graphs show the evolution of the temperature at different points in the steel section. Following an analysis of this graph, a conclusion can be directly drawn that a problem of thermal insulation will occur on the upper face because the average temperature of the upper face cannot be higher
than 140C. In order to solve this problem, glass fibre and Fermacell flooring element shall be added
onto the upper face. It will be studied during the next period.
A 2d structural model is built in SAFIR in order to assess the thermo-mechanical behaviour of the ICore system:
Time - Displacements Plot
-0.0
Displacement[m]
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
Node 18
-0.8
-1.0
-1.2
-1.4
0
600
1200
1800
2400
3000
3600
4200
4800
Time [sec]
SOLIDS PLOT
STEELEC3
STEELEC2
SILCONCEC2
STEELEC3
STEELEC2
SILCONCEC2
FISO
F20
Figure 55 : FEM-model
This section is exposed to a temperature following the ISO 834 curve of Eurocode 1-2 on the lower face
and to a flux corresponding to a cold environment on the upper face. The FEM software calculates the
evolution of the temperature inside the steel profile during 7200sec. The following graphs show the
evolution of the temperature at different points in the section:
92
Node 311
1200
SOLIDS PLOT
1000
Temperature [C]
STEELEC3
STEELEC2
SILCONCEC2
Node 328
800
Node 311
Node 328
Node 717
600
400
200
Node 717
600
1200 1800 2400 3000 3600 4200 4800 5400 6000 6600 7200
Time [sec]
Following an analysis of this graph, a conclusion can be directly drawn that a problem of thermal insulation will occur on the upper face because the average temperature of the upper face cannot be higher
than 140C. To solve this problem, different systems can be used and will be presented later.
A 2d structural model is built in SAFIR in order to assess the thermo-mechanical behaviour of the
Quantum system:
Diamond 2004 for SAFIR
FILE: Icore_struct_3,1
NODES: 71
BEAMS: 35
TRUSSES: 0
SHELLS: 0
SOILS: 0
BEAMS PLOT
IMPOSED DOF PLOT
. 0
0
-
00
3
00
6
00
9
20
1
50
1
80
1
10
2
40
2
70
2
00
3
. 2
0
-
Beam Element
Displacement [m]
6m span
. 4
0
-
. 6
0
-
oe
N
d1
2
. 8
0
-
. 0
1
-
. 2
1
-
. 4
1
-
m
i
T
[s
e
c]
e
Time [sec]
The first simulation takes into account the load combination in case of fire (3.25kN/m2). The following
figure shows the deflection in function of the time at mid span of the slab system:
Second Meshing in the FEM Software SAFIR
A new numerical thermal model is build in the FEM Software SAFIR in order to calculate the evolution of the temperatures inside the steel slab by taking into account a gypsum board fixed at the lower
part of the slab. This section is exposed to a temperature following the ISO 834 curve of Eurocode 1-2
on the lower face and to a flux corresponding to a cold environment on the upper face.
93
SOLIDS PLOT
STEELEC3
STEELEC2
SILCONCEC2
INSULATION
STEELEC3
STEELEC2
SILCONCEC2
INSULATION
F20
FISO
Figure 61 : FEM-model
The FEM software calculates the evolution of the temperature inside the steel profile during 7200sec by
taking into account the radiation inside the internal cavity. The following graphs show the evolution of
the temperature at different points in the section:
Time - Temperature Plot
500
SOLIDS PLOT
Node 1091
400
Temperature [C]
Node 1006
450
STEELEC3
STEELEC2
SILCONCEC2
INSULATION
350
300
250
Node 1006
Node 1091
Node 1366
200
150
100
Node 1366
50
0
0
600
Time [sec]
Analysing this graph, we can directly conclude that the thermal insulation will not be a problem. Moreover, we can also add insulation between the gypsum board and the concrete.
A 2d structural model is built in SAFIR in order to assess the thermo-mechanical behaviour of the
Quantum system. The first simulation takes into account the load combination in case of fire
(3.25kN/m2). The following figure shows the deflection in function of the time at mid span of the slab
system:
94
0.00
BEAMS PLOT
IMPOSED DOF PLOT
-0.01
Beam Element
-0.02
Displacement[m]
6m span
-0.03
-0.04
Node 20
-0.05
-0.06
-0.07
-0.08
-0.09
600
Time [sec]
This calculation takes into account a simply supported beam and the horizontal displacements are compatible with the support system. But local instabilities in the web of the C sections are not taken into
account. In order to assess the fire resistance in real practice, a 3D SHELL model must be built in the
software SAFIR.
95
The main result of the laboratory test is, that the air-tightness of the joints is extremely differing depending on the type of the sandwich element, the width of the joint and the properties of the sealing
band.
96
10
0.1
0.01
0.001
10
100
1000
pressure difference [ Pa ]
requirements
test
6mm
specimen
Fuge
97
V 50
Air flow at 50 Pa pressure difference between inside and outside related to the interior heated volume of a building
m3
h
n50
V
= 50
V
1
h
Air flow at 50 Pa pressure difference between inside and outside related to the net space area (all levels) of a building
V50 m 3
w50 =
AF h m 2
Air flow at 50 Pa pressure difference between inside and outside related to the interior envelope surface area of a building
m3
V
q50 = 50
AE h m 2
Figure 73 shows the test results of one pressurization test of the Modular Research Building in Steel
according to EN 13829. The result is described as test curve showing the air flow at different pressure
differences between inside and outside. Using this curve the air flow at 50 Pa pressure difference can be
evaluated.
98
Air flow
[ m/h ]
Pressure difference [ Pa ]
Figure 73 : Air flow at different pressure differences Test curve of Modular Research Building
By using the following data of the Modular Research Building
Interior Volume:
Interior Envelope Surface Area:
Net space area (both levels):
V = 332 m
A = 289 m
AG = 108 m
the values n50, w50 and q50 according to EN 13829 can be calculated. Table 39 shows all requirements
according to EN 13829 and two measurements of the whole building air-tightness of the modular research building.
Table 39 : Requirements and test results of whole building air-tightness
Requirements acc. to
EN 13829
Measurement
30.05.06
Measurement
12.06.06
n50 [1/h]
3,0
1,21
1,31
w50 [m(hm)
7,8
3,73
4,05
q50 [m(hm)
3,0
1,39
1,51
Beneath the estimation of the air-tightness of the whole building the Blower Door is also useful to
identify local weak points. For this objective a fogger or infrared camera have to be used additionally.
These investigations were performed for the modular research building.
99
Joint Type A
Joint Type B
60
1,04
1,16
80
1,04
1 ,10
120
1,03
1,06
160
1,03
1,05
Thickness
[ mm ]
100
Figure 74 : Corner
Infrared surveys
During winter infrared surveys of the of the modular research building were carried out.
101
30
20 mm bolt hole
Mineral
wool infill
End diaphragm
ASB cut away by 55 mm
(if necessary)
Figure 78 : ASB edge beam supporting Slimdek
Mineral wool
Linear bridging
FRSi
Brick supports
400 mm cs
at
Between flanges
0.246
18
0.90
Brick supports
400 mm cs
at
0.260
18
0.90
Brick supports
1 m centres
at
Between flanges
0.126
18.5
0.927
Equivalent U values for a 3.6 m high wall are increased by an additional U value of 0.06 W/m2C for
stainless steel supports at 400 mm centres, which is lower than that for a PFC edge beam.
102
[W/mK]
50.000
50.000
14.700
14.700
1.500
0.770
0.402
0.207
0.207
0.160
0.160
0.057
0.026
0.026
Stainless steel angles at 900 mm spacing. Mineral wool between flanges of I beam.
Stainless steel angles at 600 mm spacing. No mineral wool between flanges of I beam.
The results are presented in Table 42 in terms of the heat loss through linear thermal bridging , the
minimum surface temperature on the wall (relative to a room temperature of 20C) and fRSi which defines the temperature variation over the surface, given by:
fsi =
min ext
int ext
where
min
ext
int
103
Mineral wool
Linear bridging
FRSi
Brick supports
600 mm cs
at
Between flanges
0.341
17.7
0.885
Brick supports
900 mm cs
at
Between flanges
0.262
18.0
0.901
Brick supports
600 mm cs
at
0.348
17.6
0.884
The linear thermal bridge occurs at each floor at approximately 3.6 m vertical spacing. Dividing the
value by 3.6 m shows that the average heat loss through thermal bridging is equivalent to an additional
U value of 0.09 W/m2C in comparison to the basic U value of 0.22 W/m2C for the brickwork faade
with its light steel infill walls. Therefore linear thermal bridging represents 40% additional heat loss for
brickwork supports at 600 mm centres and approximately 30% for brickwork supports at 900 mm centres.
The internal and external temperature distributions are illustrated in Figure 80 and Figure 81 for support
angles at 600 mm spacing.
104
2 x 12.5 mm plasterboard
200 x 100 x 10 L
200 mm x 10 mm thick
plate welded to PFC
at 600 mm centres
70
Quantum floor
180
Brickwork
10
2x12.5
380 x 100
x 54 kg/m PFC
Strainless steel
brick support system
20 gap
Inter-stud mineral wool insulation
Closed cell insulation board
102 40 50 100
2x12.5
Figure 82 : Detail of PFC edge beam and brick support system in Quantum floor
The details of the thermal model for this configuration are presented in Figure 83, based on the crosssection in Figure 82.
[W/mK]
52.000
52.000
52.000
14.700
1.553
1.552
1.500
0.770
0.204
0.179
0.160
0.065
0.038
0.037
0.025
0.025
Figure 83 : Model configuration and materials used for PFC edge beam
As previously, brickwork support angles are located at 600 or 900 mm spacing along the PFC edge
beam. The analysis for linear thermal bridging was compared to the case without a stainless steel
brickwork support angle in order to calculate the additional heat loss.
The results are presented in Table 43 in terms of the heat loss through linear thermal bridging , the
minimum surface temperature on the wall (relative to a room temperature of 20C) and fsi (see earlier
definition).
105
Mineral wool
Linear bridging
FRSi
Brick supports
600 mm cs
at
Between flanges
0.338
17.2
0.860
Brick supports
900 mm cs
at
Between flanges
0.273
17.5
0.876
Brick supports
600 mm cs
at
0.343
17.1
0.859
Equivalent U values for a 3.6 m high wall and increased by an additional U value of 0.09 W/m2C,
which is similar to the case of an I section edge beam supporting a composite slab (see earlier). Increasing the spacing of the brick support angles by 50% decreases the linear thermal bridging by 19%. The
influence of mineral wool between the flanges of the PFC is negligible.
The temperature factor FRSi is within the limit of 0.5 for offices and 0.75 for residential buildings. Internal and external temperatures are illustrated in Figure 84 and Figure 85.
106
107
108
Effective
height of wall
Moment capacity
Mcx
(m)
(kNm)
(kN)
(kN)
(kN)
32.3
18.2
27.5
16.5
70 x 45 x 1.2
2.50
70 x 45 x 1.2
2.75
70 x 45 x 1.2
3.00
23.6
15.0
100 x 45 x 1.2
2.50
32.7
19.2
100 x 45 x 1.2
2.75
30.0
18.5
100 x 45 x 1.2
3.00
26.8
16.8
100 x 45 x 1.6
2.50
53.2
28.9
100 x 45 x 1.6
2.75
47.5
27.0
100 x 45 x 1.6
3.00
40.0
24.4
1.38
57.9
2.27
58.9
3.13
88.8
(Note: Modified buckling resistances in Table 44 includes the effect of eccentricity of the load application acting at the face of the C section)
Typical data for various C sections are presented in Table 45.The top of the wall panel is restrained by a
bracket attached at not more than 600 mm centres, which allows for relative vertical movement of up to
10 mm.
109
Table 45 : Design tables for infill (non load bearing walls) supporting brickwork
(a) Maximum height (m) of wall using 150 1.6 C wall studs
Wind pressure (kN/m2)
Stud Spacing
(mm)
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
600
4.6
4.2
3.9
3.6
400
5.2
4.7
4.4
4.1
300
5.7
5.2
4.9
4.6
(b) Maximum height (m) of wall using 100 1.6 C wall studs
Wind pressure (kN/m2)
Stud Spacing
(mm)
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
600
3.3
3.0
2.8
2.6
400
3.8
3.4
3.1
2.9
300
4.2
3.8
3.5
3.2
(c) Maximum height (m) of wall using 100 1.2 C wall studs
Wind pressure (kN/m2)
Stud Spacing
(mm)
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
600
3.0
2.7
2.5
2.3
400
3.4
3.0
2.8
2.6
300
3.7
3.4
3.1
2.7
110
111
114
List of tables
Table 1 : Faade options OBS
20
Table 2 : Application of open building technologies in various building types
22
Table 3 : Questionnaire part 1
22
Table 4 : Questionnaire part 2
23
Table 5 : Questionnaire part 3
23
Table 6 : Questionnaire part 4
24
Table 7 : Relevant dimensions residential buildings
24
Table 8 : Relevant dimensions office buildings
25
Table 9 : Protocol for Open Building Systems
25
Table 10 : Definition of elements of a building system
28
Table 11 : Combinations of components to create systems
29
Table 12 : Main components of the PRISM system and tools available
31
Table 13 : Example of Column design tables from the PRISM system
33
Table 14 : PRISM fit with essential requirements of open building systems protocol
34
Table 15 : Nordicon fit with essential requirements of open building systems protocol
38
Table 16 : The Corus Open Building System kit of parts
39
Table 17 : List of interfaces identified for the Corus Open Building System
44
Table 18 : Corus Open Building System fit with essential requirements of open building
systems protocol
45
Table 19 : RWTH Aachen research facility fit with essential requirements of open building
systems protocol
47
Table 20 : Status of electronic data transfer in manufacture of light steel framing and modular
units
57
Table 21 : Design tools for Open Building Systems
62
Table 22 : 6 level building, urban collective housing, 3PM system (Main beams)
64
Table 23 : Specific data main beams (e1: minimum thickness where local plate buckling is
taken into account, according to CM66 [3-2])
65
Table 24 : Overall design parameters
68
Table 25 : Overall design parameters Example of customisation - external walls
69
Table 26 : Example of customisation - separating walls
70
Table 27 : Summary of Sustainable system of Assessment for Building
73
Table 28 : Global view of final draft of Sustainable Table for Assessment (environmental
issues)
76
Table 29 : Summary of opportunities for steel construction
77
Table 30 : Value benefits of open building systems
78
Table 31 : Assessment of previous case studies with INPREST Table (presented in Table 28)81
Table 32 : Building Certification (Ref.: Extract from Sustainability Guideline, Federal Ministry
of Transport, Building and Housing, Germany [4-1])
82
Table 33 : Building Certification (Ref.:IISBE, Canada [4-2])
83
Table 34 : Performance criteria affected by Open Building approach
85
Table 35 : Results of pull out tests on the Corus light steel joint
88
Table 36 : Wall panel racking tests for Corus Open Building System
89
Table 37 : Acoustic performance of external walls for Open Building Systems
90
Table 38 : Relevant quantities for air-tightness acc. EN 13829
98
Table 39 : Requirements and test results of whole building air-tightness
99
Table 40 : Factor for additional heat losses over joints of composite panels
100
Table 41 : Results of thermal analyses of ASB supporting Slimdek
102
Table 42 : Results of thermal analyses of I beam supporting brickwork
104
Table 43 : Results of thermal analyses of PFC supporting Quantum floor
106
Table 44 : Example of compression resistance of load bearing walls using C sections
109
Table 45 : Design tables for infill (non load bearing walls) supporting brickwork
110
115
List of references
[1-1]
[1-2]
Kendall, S., Teicher, J., Residential Open Building, E & FN Spon, 2000
European Commission - Technical Steel Research, Euro-Build in steel - Evaluation
of client demand, sustainability and future regulations on the next generation of
building design in steel, Final report EUR 22959 EN, Luxemburg, 2007
[2-1]
www.pluskoti.com
[3-1]
[3-2]
[4-1]
[4-2]
[5-1]
[5-2]
Federal Office for Building and Regional Planing, Guideline for Sustainable Building, Berlin, 2001
IISBE (International Initiative for Sustainable Built Environment),
http://greenbuilding.ca/iisbe/start/iisbe.htm
Visscher, H., Meijer, F., Building regulation for housing quality in Europe, Confercence: Housing in an expanding Europe: Theory, policy, participation and implementation", Ljubljana, 2006
Promethor, Research of faade airborne sound insulation with calculations and field
measurements (research report, not published), Turku, 2006
117
Appendices
Appendix 1: List of documents distributed in the frame of INPREST
(full documents are provide on CD INPREST background-documents)
In001
Date of
distribution
25.10.04
In002
25.10.04
In003
25.10.04
In004
In005
In006
In007
In008
In009
In010
In011
In012
In013
In014
In015
25.10.04
25.10.04
25.10.04
25.10.04
25.10.04
25.10.04
25.10.04
25.10.04
25.10.04
22.12.04
09.11.04
16.02.05
In016
16.02.05
In017
16.02.05
In018
16.02.05
In019
16.02.05
In020
16.02.05
In021
16.02.05
In022
16.02.05
InX
Case Studies on Innovative Construction Technologies in the Residential Sector, hard copy distributed by Mark Lawson, SCI, on the KickOff-Meeting in Aachen, 25./26.10.2004
Open Building Systems in the Netherlands, hard copy distributed by
Mark Lawson, SCI, on the Kick-Off-Meeting in Aachen, 25./26.10.2004
RWTH presentation, Agenda 1st Meeting, Administrative matters,
25/10/04
RWTH presentation, Review of technical annex, Future works, 25/10/04
CORUS presentation, 25/10/04
RUUKKI presentation, 1st part, 25/10/04
RUUKKI presentation, 2nd part, 25/10/04
CTICM presentation, 25/10/04
RWTH presentation, 25/10/04
SCI presentation, 1st part, 25/10/04
SCI presentation, 2nd part, 25/10/04
SCI presentation, 3rd part, 25/10/04
Minutes 1st Meeting, RWTH, 22.12.04
What is residential open building?, Frits Scheublin, 09.11.04
"Database of buildings pre-fabricated buildings - Case examples from
UK", hard copy distributed by Mark Lawson, SCI, on the 2nd Meeting in
Rotterdam, 16./17.02.2005
"Sustainability criteria", hard copy distributed by Mark Lawson, SCI, on
the 2nd Meeting in Rotterdam, 16./17.02.2005
"Light steel framing and modular suppliers", hard copy distributed by
Mark Lawson, SCI, on the 2nd Meeting in Rotterdam, 16./17.02.2005
ECSC-project "Steel in residential buildings for adaptable and sustainable construction": "New way of building for urban residential projects", hard copy distributed by Mark Lawson, SCI, on the 2nd Meeting
in Rotterdam, 16./17.02.2005
"Structural options for medium to high-rise buildings using 'mixed' technologies, hard copy distributed by Mark Lawson, SCI, on the 2nd Meeting in Rotterdam, 16./17.02.2005
"Existing solutions of Open Building in the Netherlands - Smart
House", hard copy distributed by Frits Scheublin, CIB, on the 2nd Meeting in Rotterdam, 16./17.02.2005
"Existing solutions of Open Building in the Netherlands - The 7 Heavens", hard copy distributed by Frits Scheublin, CIB, on the 2nd Meeting
in Rotterdam, 16./17.02.2005
"The INO Hospital Bern Switzerland", CD, distributed by Patrice
Goudenou, CIB, on the 2nd Meeting in Rotterdam, 16./17.02.2005
119
In023
16.02.05
In024
16.02.05
In025
In026
16.02.05
16.02.05
In027
16.02.05
In028
02.03.05
In029
16.02.05
In030
In031
In032
In033
In034
In035
In036
In037
In038
16.02.05
16.02.05
16.02.05
16.02.05
16.02.05
16.02.05
16.02.05
18.02.05
15.06.05
In039
15.06.05
In040
15.06.05
In041
15.06.05
In042
15.06.05
In043
15.06.05
In044
15.06.05
In045
15.06.05
"Open Building and Sustainable Environment", CD, Proceedings Conference CIB 104, Paris, September 2004, distributed by Patrice Goudenou, CIB, on the 2nd Meeting in Rotterdam, 16./17.02.2005
"Market survey on Standardised Solutions for Steel in Low-Rise Buildings within Europe", Final report, December 2003, VRC Project 0213 Standardised Solutions for Steel in Low-rise Buildings, hard copy distributed by Olivier Vassart, Arcelor, on the 2nd Meeting in Rotterdam,
16./17.02.2005
Example UK, distributed by Andy Stevens
"Structural Steel Contributions toward obtaining a LEEDTM rating,
hard copy distributed by Stephane Herbin, CTICM, on the 2nd Meeting
in Rotterdam, 16./17.02.2005
"Guideline for Sustainable Building", Federal Office for Building and
Housing on behalf of Ministry of Transport, Building and Housing, Germany
"Existing solutions of Open Building in the Netherlands - Space boxes",
e-mail Frits Scheublin, 02.03.2005
RWTH presentation, Agenda 2nd Meeting and Administrative Matters,16/02/05
SCI presentation, 2nd Meeting Rotterdam, 16/02/05
Arbed presentation, 2nd Meeting Rotterdam, 16/02/05
Corus presentation, 2nd Meeting Rotterdam,16/02/05
Ruuki presentation, 2nd Meeting Rotterdam, 16/02/05
Ruuki QuickPlace quick info, 16/02/05
CTICM presentation, 2nd Meeting Rotterdam, 16/02/05
RWTH presentation, 2nd Meeting Rotterdam, 16/02/05
Minutes 2nd Meeting Rotterdam, 18/02/05
Les Cahiers DAcier Construction, hard copy distributed by Philippe
Beguin and Stephane Herbin, CTICM, on the 3rd Meeting in Helsinki,
15./16.06.2005
PRISM Produits Industriels et Structures Manufactures Lacier
dans le rsidentiel, hard copy distributed by Philippe Beguin and Stephane Herbin, CTICM, on the 3rd Meeting in Helsinki, 15./16.06.2005
Review of Integrated Structural Options for Open Building Systems,
distributed by Mark Lawson, SCI, on the 3rd Meeting in Helsinki,
15./16.06.2005
Sustainability General Presentation of the approach for INPREST
project, hard copy distributed by Philippe Beguin and Stephane Herbin,
CTICM, on the 3rd Meeting in Helsinki, 15./16.06.2005
Sustainability - The CRISP European Thematic Network Summary, hard copy distributed by Philippe Beguin and Stephane Herbin,
CTICM, on the 3rd Meeting in Helsinki, 15./16.06.2005
Sustainability Presentation of sustainable systems, hard copy distributed by Philippe Beguin and Stephane Herbin, CTICM, on the 3rd
Meeting in Helsinki, 15./16.06.2005
Sustainability - The LEEDTM Rating System, hard copy distributed by
Philippe Beguin and Stephane Herbin, CTICM, on the 3rd Meeting in
Helsinki, 15./16.06.2005
Sustainability Sustainable Issues and targets, hard copy distributed
by Philippe Beguin and Stephane Herbin, CTICM, on the 3rd Meeting in
Helsinki, 15./16.06.2005
120
In046
15.06.05
In047 15.06.05
In048 15.06.05
In049 16.06.05
In050 16.06.05
In051 16.06.05
In052 16.06.05
In053 17.06.05
In054a 22.06.05
In054b 11.01.06
In055
22.06.05
In056
In057
In058
31.03.05
30.09.05
23.09.05
In059
23.09.05
In060
02.01.06
In061
11.01.06
In062
11.01.06
In063
11.01.06
In064
In065
11.01.06
In066
11.01.06
In067
11.01.06
In068
11.01.06
In069
In070
In071
In072
In073
In074
In075
In076
12.01.06
12.01.06
12.01.06
12.01.06
12.01.06
12.01.06
13.01.06
31.03.06
In077
27.06.06
In078
27.06.06
In079
27.06.06
In080
27.06.06
In081
27.06.06
In082
27.06.06
In083
In084
In085
In086
In087
In088
In089
In090
In091
In092
In093
27.06.06
27.06.06
27.06.06
27.06.06
27.06.06
27.06.06
27.06.06
27.06.06
28.06.06
28.06.06
28.06.06
In094
In095
In096
18.09.06
30.09.06
10.01.07
In097
10.01.07
In098
10.01.07
In099
10.01.07
In100
10.01.07
In101
10.01.07
In102
In103
In104
In105
In106
10.01.07
10.01.07
27.03.07
31.03.07
31.03.08
European Lightweight Steel-framed Construction, hard copy distributed by Olivier Vassart, PARE, on the 5th Meeting in Paris,
27./28.06.2006
Modular Construction in France, distributed by St. Herbin and Ph.
Beguin, CTICM, on the 5th Meeting in Paris, 27./28.06.2006
Life Cycle Cost Analysis and Sustainability, hard copy distributed by
St. Herbin and Ph. Beguin, CTICM, on the 5th Meeting in Paris,
27./28.06.2006
Cold bridging through Brick Support Angles at PFC edge beams in
Quantum floor, hard copy distributed by Mark Lawson, SCI, on the 5th
Meeting in Paris, 27./28.06.2006
COREFAST as part of integrated construction system, distributed by
Mark Lawson, SCI, on the 5th Meeting in Paris, 27./28.06.2006
RWTH presentation, Agenda 5th Meeting and Administrative Matters,
27/06/06
Inprest Midterm TGS8 Presentation
CORUS 1st presentation, 5th Meeting Paris, 27/06/06
PARE presentation, 5th Meeting Paris, 27/06/06
CTICM 1st presentation, 5th Meeting Paris, 27/06/06
RWTH 1st presentation, 5th Meeting Paris, 27/06/06
Ruukki presentation, 5th Meeting Paris, 27/06/06
CTICM 2nd presentation, 5th Meeting Paris, 27/06/06
CTICM 3rd presentation, 5th Meeting Paris, 27/06/06
RWTH 2nd presentation, 5th Meeting Paris, 28/06/06
CORUS 2nd presentation, 5th Meeting Paris, 28/06/06
Sustainability Table for Assessment, distributed by St. Herbin and Ph.
Beguin, CTICM, on the 5th Meeting in Paris, 27./28.06.2006
Minutes 5th Meeting Paris, 18/09/06
Six-monthly Report 01.01.06 30.06.06
Nordicon exterior wall element Design Installation, distributed by
Aarne Seppnen, Ruukki, on the 6th Meeting in Esch-sur-Alzette,
10./11.01.2007
Corefast as part of integrated construction system, distributed by
Mark Lawson, SCI, on the 6th Meeting in Esch-sur-Alzette,
10./11.01.2007
Large Pre-fabricated Faade Panels in Light Steel Framing, distributed by Mark Lawson, SCI, on the 6th Meeting in Esch-sur-Alzette,
10./11.01.2007
Hybrid Buildings using Modular Stairs and Lifts, hard copy distributed by Mark Lawson, SCI, on the 6th Meeting in Esch-sur-Alzette,
10./11.01.2007
Tall Residential Buildings using Corefast and Modular Construction,
hard copy distributed by Mark Lawson, SCI, on the 6th Meeting in
Esch-sur-Alzette, 10./11.01.2007
RWTH presentation, Agenda 6th Meeting and Administrative Matters,
10/01/07
CTICM presentation, 6th Meeting Esch-sur-Alzette, 10/01/07
Ruukki presentation, 6th Meeting Esch-sur-Alzette, 10/01/07
Minutes 6th Meeting Paris, 27/03/07
Six-monthly Report 01.07.06 31.12.06
Minutes 7th Meeting Ascot, 25/10/07
122
In107
In108
31.03.08
31.03.08
123
125
KEY BENEFITS
The characteristics that influence the
choice of a highly pre-fabricated
construction technology, are as
follows:
This Design Guide reviews the principle forms of construction using prefabricated steel technologies and their key design and interface issues.
126
Application
Residential buildings and commercial buildings requiring a
primary steel frame and a prefabricated dry construction
system often incorporating services, as in INFRAPlus and
Kvantti. Quantum floors may also be used as the base of
a module.
Figure 2
Figure 1
127
35
Figure 4
Figure 5
20
Floor boards
Battens
Kvantti floor
Service zone
250
Insulation
Pre cast slab
60
(a) Kvantti floor
Figure 3
128
Figure 7
Figure 6
Figure 8
129
6 - 7.5 m
300 x 100 x 46 kg/m PFC
280 ASB 136
Span of
Quantum
floor
6 - 7.5 m
Module
Module
Corridor
7 50
445
5 55
150 x 150 L
C-220 x 2.0
40
Module
Concrete
Mesh reinforcement
40
Module
150 x 150 L
70
C-220 x 2.0
Figure 9
220
200 approx.
150
75
Floor
200 - 250
Gap
225
130 - 150
Shallow
decking
Deep
decking
3000 - 3500
Module
100
Module
30 - 5
Floor
200 - 250
200-25
150 dia.
Gap
Hollow-core slab
150
Pre-cast inverted floor
130
50
Four-sided modules
Form of construction
Modules may be designed to transfer loads continuously
through their longitudinal walls. In this form of construction,
modules are manufactured with four closed sides to create
cellular-type buildings. The maximum width of the module
that is suitable for transportation and installation limits the
cellular space that is provided.
The modules are designed for combined vertical load due
to the modules that are supported above and in-plane
loads due to wind action. The maximum height of buildings
is 6-8 storeys, depending on location and exposure to wind
loading
Application:
Cellular buildings, such as hotels, student residences and
key worker accommodation.
Technical details
Modules are manufactured from a series of 2D-panels,
beginning with the floor cassette to which the four wall
panels and ceiling panel are attached. The walls transfer
vertical loads and therefore the longitudinal walls of the
upper module are designed to sit on the walls of the
module below. An example of this type of module is
illustrated in Figure 3.
131
Stability
The stabilising system depends on the geometric form of
the building, but various solutions may be used:
Form of Modular
Construction
Single line of
modules
Double line of
modules
Central corridor
Bracing
Requirements
No additional
bracing
With additional
bracing in
gables
With additional
stabilising core
No additional
bracing
With additional
bracing in
gables
With additional
stabilising core
No limit
28
2 10
10
No limit
Floor cassette
screw fixed to
studs in wall panel
Recessed corner
with angle section
Floor surface
Insulation
18
150
10
Insulation
20 65
gap
300 mm
Overall depth
of floor
30
1 or 2 layers of fire-rated plasterbaord
Ceiling joist
300
(b) Cross - section through floor and ceiling
132
Technical details
The form of construction is similar to that of 4-sided modules,
except for the use of additional posts, generally in the form of
70 70 to 100 100 SHS members.
133
Ceiling span
Bedroom
Living/Dining
One bedroom unit
200
Corner angle
e
n sid
Ope
SHS
post
Floor
span
Storage
Kitchen
Hall
Bathroom
3.0
m
max
.
2.8 m
e
n sid
Ope
Edge member
m
3.0
Edge
member
m
3.0
.
max
.
max
(a) Open-sided module using modified C section edge member and SHS post
100
90 x 90 SHS post
Bathroom
20
Kitchen
200
150
Storage
Stiffener
200
Living/Dining
Bedroom 1
Bedroom 2
Balcony
134
Technical details
Open-sided modules comprise a primary steel framework
and the longitudinal edge beams supporting the floor
cassette are typically 300 to 450 mm deep, depending on
their span of typically 5 to 8 m. Some systems use heavy
cold formed sections, and others use PFC sections. The
edge beams supporting the ceiling cassette are shallower,
but the combined depth of the edge beams the ceiling and
floor can be as high as 600 to 800 mm.
Design flexibility is provided by the open-sided modules
and 3 to 3.6 m are typical widths, which can create rooms
of 6 to 12 m width by combining modules.
The corner posts provide the compression resistance and
are typically based on 100 x 100 SHS. The edge beams
may be connected to these posts by fin plates which
provide nominal bending resistance. End plates and
Hollobolts to the SHS may also be used. The corner posts
possess sufficient compression resistance for use in
buildings up to 4 storeys in height.
Open-sided modules are only stable for one or two
storeys, unless additional bracing is introduced. For open
plan buildings, the modules are stabilised by both a
vertical and horizontal bracing system. In-plane forces can
be transferred by the floor and ceiling cassettes and
suitable connections at the corners of the modules.
Details of the internal framework of an open-sided module
using PFC beams and SHS posts are presented in
Figures 27 and 28. Installation of an open-sided module is
shown in Figure 29.
135
100
150
200 x 90 PFC
100 x 100
x 6 SHS
3000
External wall
200
250
300 x 90 PFC
Inset C
3600
600
200 x 90 PFC
100 x 1.6 C
600
100 x 100
x 6 SHS
300
600
Open side
Internal wall
400
600
2700
300 x 90 PFC
150 x 1.6 C
7500 max.
Ceiling panel
using 100 x 1.6 C
Wall panel
using 100 x 1.6 C
150
22 mm chipboard
20 gap
100
70 opening
Floor
(200 x 1.6 C)
Overall depth
450 mm
300 x 150 x 20
connector plate
250 x 150
RHS
20 mm dia.
bolt
10 mm CPB
95
Ceiling
(100 x 1.6 C)
2 x 12.5 mm
plasterboard
136
Technical details
The modular core of the building can be designed
efficiently to accommodate the highly serviced and higher
value parts of the building, such as lifts, stairs, bedrooms
and kitchens. This core provides the primary load-bearing
and stabilising function to the whole building. Modules are
usually arranged so that they occupy the full depth of
buildings of terraced form.
Floor cassettes can be designed to span 4 to 6 m between
the modules or load-bearing walls, and the space between
the modules can be partitioned independently of the
structure in order to create more flexible space. This
concept was used in the design of the Corus
demonstration building, shown in Figure 32.
The overall depth of the floor cassette (and the combined
floor and ceiling depth of the module) is 300 - 450 mm. The
floor cassette spans up to 6 m. Additional SHS posts are
introduced in the modules to transfer the higher load
adjacent to the open sides of the modules. The walls of the
modules are braced to provide overall stability to the
building. The faade walls can be designed as non-load
bearing and can be installed as large pre-fabricated panels
with their lightweight cladding attached.
A recent project in Fulham used load-bearing bathroom
modules that supported the floor cassettes, as illustrated in
Figures 33 and 34.
Figure 31
137
Technical details
The OpenHouse system uses modules with recessed
corners and sides which accommodate Square Hollow
Section columns that are installed first. These columns
provide the compression resistance, and edge beams
manufactured without the modules create the opportunity
for partially open sides. The layout of a typical apartment
using this technology is illustrated in Figure 37.All the
internal space is adaptable as open-sided modules can be
manufactured and combined, as shown.
Application:
Social and private housing, where more flexible space is
provided using a regular column grid. A 500 apartment
project in Malmo is shown in Figure 36.
Kitchen
Bathroom
Bathroom
Bedroom
Store
Store
Living room
Bedroom
Kitchen/Living room
Balcony
Balcony
Figure 38
138
139
3-3
.6 m
2.8 m
3m
Modules
6m
Core for
stairs/lifts
5400
7500
m
4.5
m
4.5
2m
2100
4800
300 PFC
1 Bed Flat
1 Bed Flat
Module 1
Module 2
16500
2100
18 m
12 f
o
n
Spa
2500
300
300
Span of Quantum
floor
300 PFC
Module 3
Module 6
Module 4
Module 5
5000
2 Bed Flat
2 Bed Flat
Span of Quantum
floor
6500
7400
6500
140
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
Module
Module
6.0
1.2
Internal corridor
2.5
1.5
2.5
1.7
3.3
0.2
Core
wall
6.6
3.3
0.2
Internal corridor
1.2
Module
Module
1.5
2.5
0.2
0.2
0.3
Lift
0.1
Services
1.8
1.2
0.1
Lift
0.1
6.0
2.4
Lobby
Application
Tall residential buildings often used in combination with an
additional steel frame for compression resistance. The
building form is such that the modules are directly attached
to the core, which also provides lifts and stairs.
Technical Details
The structural arrangement of a concrete core with directly
attached modules is shown in Figure . In this case,
additional corner posts are also used to provide the
required compression resistance.
Lift
Stairs
Infill
wall
1.2
0.6
141
Application:
Toilet/bathroom units, plant rooms, other serviced units.
Stair module
Form of construction
Stairs may be designed as fully modular units and by their
nature, comprise landings and half landings. A primary
steel frame may be used to support the stairs, in which
case the light steel components are used as infills.
Technical details
The structure of the non-load bearing module is lighter
than in fully modular construction, but the module (or pod)
must still be sufficiently rigid to be installed. The walls and
floor of these pods are relatively thin (typically less than
100 mm). An example of a pod used in a light steel
structure is shown in Figure 52. The depth of the floor is
relatively shallow, and it is usually necessary for its floor
depth to be level with the rest of the floor in the building.
Application:
Modular stairs may be used in buildings using fully
modular construction up to 4 storeys in height.
Technical details
The modules rely for their stability on a base and top which
leads to use of a false landing. The walls may require
additional strengthening members at the half and
full-landing positions. The open top and base of the wall
may also be strengthened by a T, L or similar members to
transfer out of plane loads to the landing. The stairs can be
fully or partially finished before delivery to site. Square
Hollow Section posts and bracing can be introduced in the
walls to provide for overall stability.
Figure 52 Toilet pod used with light steel framing (by RB Farquhar)
142
1 or 2 layers of plasterboard
Insulated sheathing
board with foil face
or breather membrane
Wall ties
TH
W a /2
TH
Plasterboard
W a /2
W a /2
W a /2
W a /2
FV
Insulation
board
FV+ (W a/2)
W a /2
Vertical
rail
Cladding
Various forms of cladding may be used, such as:
brickwork, generally in-situ
metallic fascia
insulated render
board materials
Typical details of various cladding systems are shown in
Figures 54 to 57. Lightweight cladding can be
pre-attached to the modules.
143
Balconies
Balconies may be attached to modules in various ways:
Self-standing steel structure to support the balconies that
is ground supported
Balconies attached between adjacent modules
Balconies that are attached to corner posts in the module
Integrated balconies within an open sided module.
These applications are presented in the following figures.
Balcony
Sheathing
boards
22 mm T & G chipboard
144
Dimensional planning
25-30
Optional
boards
Floor joist
Insulation
150 - 200
Boards
Optional board
Board
450
overall
140 (typ.)
10
100
Ceiling joist
Gap
300 overall
25
a) Wall dimensions
b) Floor dimensions
Cladding requirements
Brickwork design is generally based on a standard unit of
225 mm width and 75 mm depth. Therefore, it may be
important to design a floor-floor depth to a multiple of
75 mm in order to avoid non-standard coursing of bricks.
The multiple of 225 mm in horizontal brickwork coursing
width is more difficult to achieve in combination with the
window sizes and at corners or brickwork returns.
Internal walls
Internal walls may be designed for a standard 300 mm
face-face overall width, which incorporates the various
boards and insulation (see Figure 62(a)). The gap
between the walls is a variable, depending on the number
and thickness of boards and size of the wall studs.
For internal planar walls, a planning dimension of 150mm
may be used.
Table 2
Application
25
Boards
The factors that influence the dimensional planning of prefabricated steel systems in general building design may be
summarised as:
100 50 100
Internal
Internal wall
module width
height (mm)
(mm)
Internal
module
length
Ceiling-floor
zone (typical)
Study
bedrooms
2400
25002700
5.4 to 6 m
300 m
Apartments
2400
3600
6 to 9 m
450 mm
450 mm
Hotels
24002700
3300-3600
5.4 to
7.5 m
Schools
27003000
30003600
open-sided
9 to 12 m
600 mm
Offices
27003000
3600
6 to 12 m
600750 mm
Health sector
27003000
3000-3600
open-sided
9 to 12 m
600750 mm
Transportation
The following basic requirements for transportation should be
considered when designing large pre-fabricated units:
Components exceeding 2.95 m width require 2 days police
notice
Components exceeding 3.5 m width require a drivers
mate and 2 days police notice
Components exceeding 4.1 m width require police escort
The maximum height of the load (including the lorry)is
4.95 m for motorway bridges.
These limits may vary in different countries and stricter limits
may be required for local roads, particularly in urban areas.
Standard container vehicles are typically 6.2 m or 12.2 m long.
It follows from these dimensions that in modular construction, a
3.6 m internal module width (or approximately 3.85 m in
external dimension) does not require a police escort and may
be considered to be the optimum width for many applications.
145
Attachment points
The generic forms of attachment using angles at the
corners of modules are presented in Figure 65. The
angles are built into the recessed corners of the modules
and provide for lifting and attachment points.
450 mm
600 mm
900 mm
Bolt and
connector plate
100 x 100
x 10 L
Bolt hole
Plan
Elevation
Connector
plate
100 x 100
x 10 L
Plan
Elevation
400
Corner post
Floor
600
80
200
60
Gap
Ceiling
SHS
50 dia. access
hole
100 x 100
x 10 SHS
End plate
Connecting plate
3600
Connecting bolt
C section
Plan
1200
1200/1800
300
900
600
3300
3300
2400/2700
Elevation
146
Servicing Strategy
In fully modular buildings, services attachments are usually
located in designated zones, generally adjacent to and
along corridors, in order to facilitate horizontal distribution.
Water and drainage services are distributed vertically, and
these services can be accessed from the corridor for
maintenance. The ceiling of the corridor is often lower (by
100 200 mm) than the adjacent rooms in order to provide
for electrical distribution and other services.
Various strategies may be employed for the location of the
service risers in modular construction, dependent on the
size of the module and provision of corner posts. They
influence the design and manufacture of the modules, and
the generic options are illustrated in Figure 67, as follows:
corner recess built into the module and its floor
internal void within the module
external void with a separate enclosure
900 approx.
Service distribution
Although the main services within the pre-fabricated
component are generally installed in the factory, provision
must be made for the vertical and horizontal distribution of
services throughout the building. This may result in
service ducts penetrating separating walls and floors. The
detailing of such openings must ensure that the
performance of the separating elements is not
compromised in terms of fire resistance and acoustic
insulation.
The final service connections between modules are made
on site. These activities are time consuming in traditional
construction and often on the 'critical path'.
300 approx.
100
2700
(a) Service riser in corner of module
1200
400
Fan to bathroom
Air duct
Access door
147
Floating floor
Light steel
floor joist
Mineral wool
Plasterboard
ceiling
Flexible fire
stopping
Angle pre-fixed
to module
Floor
200
Cassette floor
450
Services zone
100
Roof
Suspended ceiling
148
149
European Commission
EUR 23860 Integrated pre-fabricated steel technologies for the multi-storey sector
B. Dring, M. Kuhnhenne, O. Vassart, C. Harper, P. Beguin, S. Herbin, A. Seppnen, M. Lawson, E. Yandzio,
F. Scheublin, W. Bakens
Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities
2009 149 pp. 21 29.7 cm
Research Fund for Coal and Steel series
ISBN 978-92-79-11319-2
DOI 10.2777/41420
ISSN 1018-5593
Price (excluding VAT) in Luxembourg: EUR 20
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Directorate-General for Research
Research Fund for Coal and Steel Unit
Contact: RFCS publications
Address: European Commission, CDMA 0/124, 1049 Brussels, BELGIUM
Fax +32 22965987; e-mail: rtd-steel@ec.europa.eu
EC
Energy has been channelled into standardising interfaces between structural and other
components such as cladding, services and lifts, and on increasing customisation
without compromising manufacturing efficiency. Information technology is seen as a
major driver, and its role is investigated. The research will lead to the development of
new systems involving skeletal, planar and modular components, including supporting
design information.
KI-NA-23860-EN-S
Modern steel buildings require a high degree of pre-fabrication and effective integration
of key components. The concept of open building systems in steel is developed with
a focus on the multi-storey residential sector. This research concentrated on providing
enabling or supporting technologies and on basic performance data to assist in the
development of these systems.
EUR23860