Friday, 26 May 2017

All at sea

As part of our series examining the extraordinary winners of the 2017 Building Performance Awards in February, CIBSE Technical Director Dr Hywel Davies revisits the Collaborative Working Partnership award - claimed by Hoare Lea for their work on RNLI Porthdinllaen in Wales - a challenging project in unforgiving conditions.

Better collaboration always results in better outcomes in a project, but sometimes it can mean the difference between success and failure: As Hoare Lea discovered in their project alongside contractor BAM Nuttall and the client Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI) on the new lifeboat station at Porthdinllaen in Wales. This project won the Collaborative Working Partnership award at the 2017 CIBSE Building Performance Awards, and is an outstanding example of what can be achieved if all parties are committed to a truly open construction process.

The team — comprising RNLI, BAM Nuttall Ltd, Opus, Clive Moore Architecture, Royal Haskoning, Hoare Lea and the whole supply chain—demonstrated both commitment and agility to overcome significant challenges and create a design fit for an area of outstanding natural beauty, with minimal impact to the environment itself. The project also championed a high-level of engagement with the local community to enable visitors to come and continue to enjoy the peninsular, whilst work progressed on-site. Delivery of all primary material and plant was by sea, avoiding impact to the local villages and sustainability was always front of mind.

The site's challenging location meant that materials were delivered by sea
The project had little room for error in its requirements, fulfilling as it does a vital role in saving lives at sea in the area – on top of its responsibility to the environment in an area of natural beauty, and the inherent challenges in building a structure that must withstand extreme weather and a challenging construction site. Underpinning the whole project was the BIM model developed by BAM Nuttall, which drove the design and will remain in place post-delivery to guide maintenance for the life of the building with Hoare Lea’s continuing input.

Using the model required very open and responsive collaboration from all parties to react to issues during the build, and was facilitated using a cloud-based platform called The Box, an initiative by Royal Haskoning, enabling all project information to be stored in one place. Requests for information on this project were managed via the Box and parties could upload revised drawings, seek other disciplines drawings and specifications. When unexpected anomalies in the rock strata stalled construction of the foundations, it was this approach which allowed a quick re-design that was approved by all parties: A radical ‘V’ column arrangement that was still within budget.

This openness extended to ensuring that the building’s performance fell within the various requirements set by all parties, from Hoare Lea’s commitments to low energy in-use, to the RNLI’s requirements around cost and durability. Using this collaborative model, Hoare Lea were able to work with RNLI’s preferred suppliers Jupiter Heating to supply the underfloor heating and base flooring system. Following on from Hoare Lea’s heat loss calculations and outline scheme design, Jupiter provided system installation drawings particular to each project. 

Extreme weather and rock strata anomalies impeded work on the site 
The building’s heating requirements are supplied by an installed Ground Source Heat Pump, which was chosen with the lifetime performance of the building in mind. It also required the teams to work with the client and the occupants to balance efficiency with the comfort of the volunteer crew members who work in the building, which replaces an outdated and inefficient boathouse built in 1888. To achieve this, the heat pump provides underfloor heating to the living areas of the station that are regularly occupied, but not to the main operational areas such as the boat hall. This was singled out by users in particular, who found the new building “well insulated, warm, comfortable”.

The RNLI’s material requirements also necessitated extraordinary commitment and agility to overcome them – balancing Hoare Lea’s engineering input, with BAM Nuttall’s experience as a contractor and the strict durability and cost needs of the RNLI team. Given the harsh conditions in which the RNLI operate, materials had to be carefully selected to minimise lifetime maintenance and keep costs down – which required the design and installation of a series of specialised materials; including Siberian Larch with a vacuum pressure impregnated preservative, timber framing to increase thermal performance and copper cladding on the roof.

Specialised materials were chosen to minimise expensive maintenance 
These needs were constantly balanced against budgetary requirements, which was facilitated by a very open partnership that checked the pricing on the activity schedule against prices in the open market by the employer’s cost consultants – McNaughts. Instances where the budget was overtopped, stimulated intense efforts to value engineer solutions to meet the remit of all parties.

In this project, the RNLI team – highly successful, client-focused and design-led – was underpinned by Hoare Lea’s commitment to excellence and its passion for innovative, sustainable, low carbon design. By committing to an extremely open and collaborative model from the start of the project to past the point of delivery, the parties involved were able to overcome potentially serious problems and the Client’s aspirations were met from both an estates and operational perspective.

Thursday, 11 May 2017

The art of engineering

Following his inaugural speech at the CIBSE AGM, held at the Royal Society of Engineering in London, new CIBSE President Peter Wong sets out the principles that will guide him through his presidential year, and the key priorities he has in his time as leader.

It is a real honour for me to be the first CIBSE President from the Hong Kong Branch.  And I am delighted that several members from Hong Kong have been able to join me here tonight.
As the new CIBSE President, I would like to take a few minutes to outline my vision for the Institution for the coming year.

I’d like to start by posing a question:  Is engineering art? Michelangelo's David manifests determination, beauty and potent strength.  It is also structurally sound and demonstrates perfect proportions.  We call it a piece of art.

Few would contend that Michelangelo's David is art  
Look at the Beijing National Stadium, built for the 2008 Beijing Olympics and colloquially known as the Bird's Nest stadium.  A structure built for a purpose, a venue awaiting the display of sporting strength.  It is also structurally sound, with its famous commensurate loading curves.  If it is not an image of David manifesting determination and potent strength, what is?  But why don’t we call it art?

In CIBSE, we think it IS art.  In our Charter, we say ‘we exist to support the Science, Art and Practice of building services engineering’.

But surely, if we get the ‘science’ and ‘practice’ right – why does the art matter? If the problem is solved and the solution works, what does art have to do with it?  The answer is that the artistry brings our work innately alive and vibrant.

The Beijing National Stadium is both a building and a piece of sculpture
Well I’d also like to argue that for Chartered Engineers, ‘art’ is the most important word in that sentence. There are many building services engineering projects that could illustrate my point well. I shall first look at some winners of our CIBSE Building Performance Awards. The International Commerce Centre in Hong Kong is an impressive example.

The building has 2.5 million square feet of office and hotel space. It’s about 1,600 feet high, and divided over 118 floors – many thousands of people live, work and play there day-in and day-out.   I shall skip the scientific and practical skill it took to build the world’s seventh tallest building as that is obvious.  But day-in, day-out the building’s tenants are engaged in creating a sustainable environment. Food waste is collected, and condensation from the air handling units is used to flush the toilets.  From the design to its operation, the mission of the building services engineers involved was to create a living, breathing building that works alongside its occupants.

2015 Building Performance Award winner the ICC in Hong Kong
The other recent Award winner, the University of Bradford, is a double winner of the CIBSE Building Performance Champion Award.  The estate was mostly built in the 60s and early 70s and delivered sub-optimal performance for many years.  But, by tearing up the rule book on what we thought was appropriate with older buildings, the skills of the building services engineers delivered the only University campus in the world with three ‘BREEAM Outstanding’ buildings and a Passivhaus building within 100 metres of each other.

The completed project has rejuvenated the campus and the art of engineering is spread across the whole University. It is now not merely functional: it goes above and beyond, to help generations of young people flourish and develop in a positive learning environment for years to come.

Art is often about making a breakthrough, not merely a successful copy.  CIBSE members are ready and prepared to go beyond what we thought was possible.  Let’s look at another example.

The University of Bradford's Estates and Facilities team redefined what
we thought was possible with refurbishment
The Gardens by the Bay project in Singapore, which won a CIBSE Building Performance Award in 2014, demonstrates exceptionally what can be achieved by marrying science, practice and art:
The project is impressive scientifically because it has enormous sculptural towers called ‘supertrees’ which carry out functions from heat dissipation to power generation with their integrated systems. It is impressive practically because the botanical gardens re-create a Mediterranean springtime with mild, dry days and cool nights in a city that neighbours the Equator.  These two factors alone make it a remarkable project, but the hidden ‘art’ is that it uses no more power than an average Singaporean office block.  Yes, it was about building a city inside a city.

A technical marvel, Gardens by the Bay re-creates a Mediterranean climate
in a city on the equator 
The other example, on the other hand, is a city outside a city: The Dutch City of Amsterdam, where the municipal administration preserves the artistic ambience of the inner city while deploying a huge array of futuristic technologies for the benefit of its residents; including rainwater recycling, demand-responsive street lighting, and integration of transport and logistics management while keeping commuters living outside the city ring road.

In a way, the principles behind the Amsterdam Smart City are the same as the ones behind the Beijing stadium, but on a larger scale. They are both designed to create a high performing project that is at once a functional building, and a piece of sculpture.

Both the Bradford and Amsterdam projects show us that our existing building stock can be sustainable.  Both the ICC and Gardens by the Bay projects go well beyond statutory requirements.

Amsterdam's Smart City project aims to advance the city's services while
maintaining its historic centre
The reason we marvel at the art of Michelangelo’s statue, Picasso’s paintings and Mozart’s symphonies is because they are alive: each encounter to them it brings us fresh sensations and different meanings; they are still alive irrespective of their age.

The projects I have talked about – The International Commerce Centre, Gardens by the Bay, the University of Bradford’s estate and Amsterdam de-urbanization– are recognised examples of CIBSE members engineering skill.  Creating beautiful environments and experiences for the people who live, work, learn and play in them.  Every day millions of people benefit from CIBSE members’ commitment to professional standards and serving the public good.

In addition to the technical skills we have learned, all these examples demonstrate the ‘art’ of the building services engineering profession.  What marks these projects out as ‘extraordinary’ is not just the undoubtedly impressive engineering it took to create them, but the way that the core values of Engineers were upheld throughout – prestige, professionalism and public interest.

Hong Kong Harbour in the 1980s
Construction has transformed Hong Kong beyond recognition since I first started work there. It has become a beautiful urban jungle of towers, but not all changes have been good. The urban environment is less healthy, the air is still and humid.

If building services engineers were allowed to emulate these Award winning projects more often, then the skyline of Hong Kong would remain as beautiful as it is, but the health of the city would be much improved.

Hong Kong Harbour in 2017
Are Engineers artists? This question is a tough one.  Imagine me asking other people this question, what they would see is a dull and boring person. You will never get any answer except “why would you ever ask such a stupid question?’

Luckily you are not as dull and boring as I am. Seriously, the Art part lies within our practice - and fuelled by our core values and beliefs. We need to tell others we are artists, and explain why we call ourselves that, and now is the time to do so.

Picasso never hid that he was a Cubist, and Dali never hid that he was a surrealist.  Artists are proud of their movements, and believe that their principles can change the world – and we need to borrow some of that inspiration and apply it to our roles as Building Services Engineers.

Building services can be ornamental as
well as functional
We should tell others art can be more than ornamental, it can also be functional as well - in the form of a building and built environment.  The functional aspects often hidden away are actually the most creative work an engineer will do in their careers.

In my presidential year, it is my aim to celebrate and elevate the exceptional work that our members do to inspire.  That CIBSE promotes the art and science of building services: we are engineers; we talk about the science and we practice art.  The art of collaboration, intuition, invention and creative thinking to challenge and inspire the public and each other.

I am extremely proud to be a  CIBSE Fellow and Chartered Engineer. I think it is important that we understand the difference between being made a Chartered Engineer, Incorporated Engineer and Engineering Technician, in the UK and the ‘registration’ process elsewhere.

In the UK CEng, IEng and EngTech are a status that the engineering profession is proud of, that the public respects, and that is valued in the industry, and registration implies acceptance of professional values. In many places elsewhere, registration is often just a licence to practice – the legal minimum required to be allowed to work as an engineer.

The UK system embraces a person who is ready to take on professional responsibility and the liability of malpractice.  It is personal.  It marks professionals out because of the quality we aspire to and the values of professionalism we commit to uphold; in addition to basic compliance, standards and safeguarding of the public interest.

A licence to practice often merely relies on successful attainment of some entry requirements.  One may argue that the license also penalises malpractice, but it’s only after malpractice has occurred that offenders are caught and punished.  Professionalism is about instilling values in an engineer that prevent them even thinking about malpractice in the first place.

As a Chartered Institution, CIBSE helps define and protect those values and principles of professionalism.

Chartership encourages engineers to go above and beyond the basic requirements
Membership is one of the key pillars of our 2020 CIBSE vision, because everything that CIBSE does for the industry, for the public, and for engineering at large, flows from the strength of our membership.  It is the members who are the experts that are delivering new knowledge, sharing guidance and introducing new expertise. It is the members who go out into the world and apply the knowledge that we publish, for the good of society.

More importantly, we are willing to share our knowledge and expertise world-wide. The Knowledge Portal is one of our best assets, because it allows anyone who has an interest in CIBSE anywhere in the world to benefit from and contribute to CIBSE’s wider Knowledge offering.  The language of engineering has no boundaries, and CIBSE takes pride in sharing and learning from others.  All the better if CIBSE could help those with less developed engineering sectors to springboard to the future of low carbon buildings in the years to come.

CIBSE has 21,000 members in 100 countries
But despite this, we shouldn’t be complacent. CIBSE and its members can’t know everything and be everywhere, and the best way to change that is to bring new members on board around the globe.  And with them, to bring in new knowledge about industries, technologies, regions and markets that can ensure that we offer the deepest and most diverse pool of knowledge.

Of course, we don’t just exist to distribute Guides. We exist to spread what we believe and say in our Charter, ‘we exist to support the Science, Art and Practice of building services engineering’.

My presidential pledge is to inspire the industry to embody the spirit and values of being a CIBSE member and to promote the positive message of the values we believe in, the professionalism we treasure and the aspiration of exchanging best practice among like-minded professionals worldwide.

But I can’t do this alone.

CIBSE now represent nearly 21,000 members bringing out the ART in building services engineering worldwide. I also have an eye on our Young Engineers Network around the world.  For one thing, they don’t look as dull and boring as I do. And they will be our ambassadors for many years to come.
Building Services Engineers are one of the most important professions for the future health of the planet, and the world is depending on what we do to ensure that we have healthy and productive places to live and work for generations.

Reach out.  It is a big world out there. Spread the CIBSE message.


Friday, 5 May 2017

Checks and balances

As part of our ongoing series on the future of heat in the UK, Phil Jones, Chair of the CIBSE CHP/District Heating Group, writes for us about the next step in deploying the Heat Networks Code of Practice and where it fits into the supply chain

Lack of take-up in the UK results in a lack of data,
creating a vicious circle of uncertainty 
When CP1: Heat Networks: Code of Practice for the UK, was launched in 2015 it sought to address a key problem that had been bogging down the technology ever since it was first introduced in the UK: lack of confidence. It is a fitting topic for the first ever Code of Practice that CIBSE has produced, because the technology is set to play a major part in the Government’s strategy to reduce the UK’s reliance on fossil fuels for heating, and this strategy depends on making heat networks more widely used.

The Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers (CIBSE) and the Association for Decentralised Energy (ADE) have now begun the second stage of the process to improve the image of heat networks and to make it into a first-choice option for developers in suitable sites, by conducting a consultation on the Code’s checklists. It is hoped that these new tools will help everyone in the supply chain know and agree what is expected of them, and hold every stakeholder to account.

It is essential that stakeholders can check that CP1 has been met and the checklists are a key part in this process. Heat networks have suffered from low uptake in the past: A reputation for not delivering on the original promises made about their performance. This was due to failures across the supply chain, from designers recommending inappropriate projects to installers fitting them badly, and FMs failing to maintain them properly.

One only needs to look to Scandinavia to see that it doesn’t always have to be this way. Heat networks in Europe are a much more mature concern; Amsterdam in the Netherlands, Malmo in Sweden and Denmark’s capital Copenhagen use heat networks to supply close to 100% of their heating, while the UK languishes far behind with less than 2% supplied that way.

The Code of Practice was originally produced to counter these problems, providing minimum standards on the topic where nothing substantial existed before. As with any technology a lack of information leads to low adoption rates among sceptical clients, engineers are less inclined to become experts in an unpopular system, and so there are few experts to publish more information and few active examples of the technology to provide in-use data. Thus, the cycle begins again. The checklist is the business end of this process, actually holding stakeholders to account on their ability and willingness to follow the Code.

Heat Networks are much more mature in European cities such as Amsterdam
The checklists were drafted and trialed during the latter part of 2016, and their effectiveness is currently under scrutiny to ensure that they’ll do their jobs properly, but they won’t be able to do the job on their own – no matter how well they work. The checklist methodology also creates a useful evidence pack that runs throughout the stages of thee project from briefing right through to operation. This connects the supply chain and provides an audit trail of decisions.

The checklists are also underpinned by the developer setting performance targets at the initial briefing stage that can actually be used to measure a heat network’s anticipated performance at feasibility, design but then actual performance in-use. This combination of checking the code requirement have been met, an evidence pack has been produced and the original performance expectations have been met provides a new foundation for the sector.

Clearly, this starts with the clients/developers, as it is their responsibility to ensure that use of the Code and the assembly of an evidence pack is specified at the start of the project, but the support and advice of engineers is required to keep it on track. For it to be truly effective, the engineer needs to continuously measure against the original developer's targets and this approach strengthens the Evidence Pack. It is recommended that this whole process is monitored by employing a trained heat networks assessor to ensure compliance, highlight deficiencies but also to encourage a move beyond minimum standards in delivering the project.

The Code can only be truly effective if pro-active clients work to assemble
an evidence pack of information
Though the original publication of the Code was a big step back in 2015, it was really only the start of the process that will ultimately result in heat networks becoming a mainstream option. The need for a clear process to hold stakeholders to account has already been stated, but potentially more important is the will to drive the use and application of the Code from all sides involved in construction. Though it is the client’s job to ask for it and to monitor its implementation, all stakeholders need to be willing partners to make the process of following CP1 as smooth as possible.

Ultimately, the success or failure of CP1 checklist process will determine the future of heat networks in the UK. The potential is there to create sustainable, low carbon heat networks and a world leading specialism for UK engineers. But it requires the industry to grasp the nettle and embrace the Code, and cooperate with its minimum standards and checking processes.