Pushing the Envelope Spring2013...Pushing the Envelope Canada 5 OBEC does not specifically endorse...

Improving Efficiency, Addressing Failures

andRestorationRenewal:

EnvelopePushing the

EnvelopeCanadaA publication of the Ontario

Building Envelope CouncilSpring 2013

Pushing the Envelope Canada 5

OBEC does not specifically endorse the editorial, products or services contained within this magazine. These products and services are presented here as an indication of the various possibilities in the Marketplace. OBEC wishes to advise the reader that sound Building Science Practices should be applied to any and all product or service selections. OBEC does not make or imply any warranties as to the suitability of any of these products or services for any specific situation. Furthermore, the opinions expressed in this magazine’s editorial content may not necessarily reflect the opinions of OBEC.

n n n Table of ConTenTs

Up Front:

Message from the President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Meet the OBEC Board of Directors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Features:

Rejuvenating a Landmark: Giving First Canadian Place

a New Look and a New Way of Operating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

What’s Behind the Wall: Why Do Curtain Walls Cry? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

Restoration From the Contractor’s Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

Balcony Glazing 101: What Happened & Where Are We Now? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

News & Views:

Genge’s Gripe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Building a Better Tomorrow Begins Today! Part III: Islands of Hope . . . . . . . . .32

The Sky’s the Limit: Getting Your BSSO Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Expanding Operations: OBEC Chapter Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Offering Diverse Experiences: A Technical Committee Update . . . . . . . . . . . . .40

BEC Roundup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

The 2013 Beckie Award . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44

Take Action:

Your Invitation to CCBST 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Attend the Restoration & Renewal Seminar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

Join the Ontario Building Envelope Council . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48

Buyer’s Guide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49

ON THE COVER:At 72-storeys tall, First Canadian Place

is an architectural icon, unrivalled as the tallest building in Canada since 1975. The 3.5-million sq. ft. building provides office and retail space for roughly 9,000 tenants in Toronto’s financial district.

In 2009, a multi-million dollar rejuvenation to enhance the building’s environmental profile began. Halsall Associates—which provided the cover photo—was engaged in two of the most significant initiatives: the $100M build-ing envelope facelift, which involved replacing 45,000 Italian marble panels with roughly 375,000 sq. ft. of glass spandrel panels, and the design and implementation of an energy reduction plan, reducing the building’s energy consumption by 24 per cent.

Pushing the Envelope Canada A publication of the Ontario Building Envelope Council Spring 2013

Published For: The Ontario Building Envelope Council 2175 Sheppard Avenue, East Suite 310 Toronto, ON M2J 1W8 Phone: 647-317-5754 Fax: 416-491-1670 info@obec .on .ca www .obec .on .ca Published By: Matrix Group Publishing Inc . Return all undeliverable addresses to: 52 Donald Street, Suite 300 Winnipeg, MB R3C 1L6 Toll Free: 1-866-999-1299 Toll Free Fax: 1-866-244-2544 www .matrixgroupinc .net Publications Agreement Number 40609661

President & CEO Jack Andress

Chief Operating OfficerJessica Potterjpotter@matrixgroupinc.net

PublisherPeter Schulz

Editor-in-Chief Shannon Savory ssavory@matrixgroupinc.net

EditorAlexandra Walldawalld@matrixgroupinc.net

Finance/Administration Shoshana Weinberg, Nathan Redekop, Pat Andress, Lloyd Weinberg accounting@matrixgroupinc.net

Director of Marketing & Circulation Shoshana Weinberg

Sales Manager – WinnipegNeil Gottfred

Sales Manager – Hamilton Brian Davey

Sales Team LeaderDavid Roddie

Matrix Group Publishing Inc. Account ExecutivesAlbert Peltola, Bonnie Petrosky, Brian MacIntyre, Brodie Armes, Cate Motley, Christopher Smith, Colleen Bell, Colin Graham, Declan O’Donovan, Jason Waggoner, Jeff Cash, Jim Hamilton, John Price, Miles Meagher, Monique Simons, Ned Swift, Rick Kuzie, Robert Allan, Robert Choi, Ronald Guerra, Sandra Monahan, Wilma Gray-Rose

Layout & Design Cody Chomiak

Advertising Design James Robinson

©2013 Matrix Group Publishing Inc. All rights reserved. Contents may not be reproduced by any means, in whole or in part, without the prior written permission of the publisher. The opinions expressed in this publication are not necessarily those of Matrix Group Publishing Inc. Printed in Canada.

BSSO Members are eligible to receive 2.5 ConEd Credits for attending this seminarOAA Members are eligible to receive 3 ConEd Learning Hours for attending this seminar

Registration Information: � Mr. � Ms. � Mrs. � Dr. � Prof. � Other

First Name: Last Name:

Company:

Address:

City: Province/State: Postal Code:

Telephone: ( ) Fax: ( )

Email:

Payment:� Cheque or money order enclosed payable to: Ontario Building Envelope Council

� Please charge my credit card � � �

Card Number

Expiry Date /

Print Name on Credit Card:

Signature:

HST #124383076

Ontario Building Envelope Council2175 Sheppard Ave. E., Suite #310

Toronto, ON M2J 1W8Tel: (416) 491-2886 Fax: (416) 491-1670

Register Online at: www.obec.on.ca

� OBEC Member � OAA Member � OBEC Non Member

RESTORATION & RENEWALPRESENTATION

LOCATIONDays Hotel & Conference Centre

185 Yorkland Blvd. Toronto, ON

SEMINAR FEEOBEC / OAA Members:

$75 + $9.75 HST = $84.75

Non Members: $99 + $12.87 HST = $111.87

SCHEDULEApril 10, 20138:00 am Registration / Continental Breakfast

8:30 am Opening Remarks – Sandra Burnell, OBEC President

8:45 am – 9:30 am Toronto City Hall: Design and Installation of a Retrofit Glazing System– Rob Wood, C3 Polymeric Limited

9:30 am – 10:15 am Restoration from the Contractor’s Perspective – Craig Bowie, Bowie Contracting; Kevin Day, Dryvitand Brian Shedden, GRG

10:15 am – 10:30 am Refreshment Break

10:30 am – 11:15 am Balcony Glazing – What Happened and Where Are We Now? – Greg Hildebrand, exp.

11:15 am – 12:00 pm Historic Hotel Rehabilitation – A Look at Building Enclosure Design Decisions – Mark Lawton, Morrison Hershfield

REGISTRATION FORM

APRIL 10, 2013OBEC

SEMINAR

JOIN US FOR A

Restoration & Renewal Seminar Reg Form 2013_v7_Layout 1 13-01-28 3:16 PM Page 1

I n 1877, William Morris formed the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB) . At the

time, they were concerned about the preservation of ancient structures in Naples and London . I wonder what Morris would think about our current strategy of rejuvenating structures that are just slightly over 30 years old, in order to significantly reduce their energy consumption . In my books, next to designing energy-efficient structures from the outset, reducing energy consumption through effec-tive restoration is an exemplary way to reduce the impact excessive energy consumption will have on future gen-erations .

Examples of effective design are highlighted in our Building a Better Tomorrow Begins Today series, which concludes with the introduction of two Islands of Hope. The rejuvenation of the First Canadian Place is another example of the positive results stem-ming from this new age thinking . You can read all about the makeover of this icon in Toronto’s skyline on page 10 .

This issue also explores how the use of modeling and mock-ups has

OBEC PresidentSandra Burnell, BES, B.Arch, OAA

Message from the President

n n n Up fronT

“It has been most truly said at our meetings that

these old buildings do not belong to us only, they

have belonged to our forefathers, and they will

belong to our descendants unless we play them

false. They are not in any sense our property to do

as we like with. We are only trustees for those that

come after us.”

William Morris, extracted from SPAB’s 12th

Annual Meeting

facilitated the designer’s intent . With both the designers and contractors working together, the impact of the restoration work on the occupants has also been minimized .

On one hand, a restoration proj-ect may be the result of a desire to increase an owner’s environmental profile; on the other hand, it may be a response to unanticipated fail-ures . The balcony guard nightmare is an example of such a failure . It began in the summer of 2011 with the spontaneous breakage of monolithic tempered safety glass employed in balcony guard infill panels or balus-trades . The current state of affairs regarding balcony guards is explored further in this edition; you can read all about it on page 22 .

The unhappy curtain wall is anoth-er issue which might necessitate building envelope restoration work . The happier our curtain wall, the less chance for unanticipated failures .

With the publication of Pushing the Envelope Canada being extended across the country, as well as to archi-tects across Ontario, our Board of Directors realized that a number of recipients may not be familiar with

PresidentSandra Burnell, BES, BArch, OAARevay and Associates Ltd .

Past PresidentGerald R . Genge (Jerry), P .Eng ., C .Eng ., BDS, BSSO, C .Arb ., Q .Med .GRG Building Consultants Inc .

President ElectPaul J . Pushman, B . Tech . (Arch . Sc .)exp

Secretary/TreasurerAlen Vrabec, P .Eng ., BSSOCity of Toronto

Director of MarketingScott WylieWytech Building Envelope Solutions

Technical CommitteeJeremy Nixon, P .Eng ., BSSOBrown & Beattie Ltd .

Director of Academic/BSSO CommitteeKim PressnailUniversity of Toronto, Department ofCivil Engineering

Director at LargeCynthia Fletcher, P .Eng ., BSSO, PMPCity of Kitchener

Director at LargeIan Miller, P .Eng ., LEED AP O+MRead Jones Christoffersen Ltd .

Director at LargeMarco Guzzo, Dipl . Tech .Morrison Hershfield Ltd .

Operations ManagerSherry DeneshaOBEC

8 Spring 2013 • Ontario Building Envelope Council

opportunity to have hands-on experi-ence working with the installation of various building components . Design-ers, manufacturers and contractors are asked to keep their eyes open for information regarding opportunities to participate .

Finally, with the receipt of numerous abstract submissions for the 2014 Canadian Conference on Building Science and Technol-ogy (CCBST), we look forward to a dynamic event .

Continuing to make OBEC “the source” for all building envelope-related issues, we recognize that our strength lies in our membership . If anyone is interested in contributing to upcoming events, please feel free to contact Sherry Denesha at sher-ryd@taylorenterprises .com and she will point you in the right direction .

With our winter gear put away and spring cleaning underway, I invite you to take a break from the hustle and bustle of your daily life and share in the wisdom and experience offered by our distinguished authors . n

discussions prompted by the com-mittees . OBEC welcomes individuals to step forward and join one of the various committees, in which you will surround yourself with the most tal-ented and knowledgeable individuals in their field .

As the year progresses, we look forward to OBEC’s continued dinner sessions, the half-day spring seminar, the June tour and full-day seminar in the fall . With continuing education certificates now being presented to OAA members, these sessions facili-tate not only BSSO requirements but also OAA core learning hour require-ments .

I look forward to seeing everyone at the following upcoming events:• April 10 – Restoration and renewal

half-day seminar;• May 15 – Peak Green? The Death

of LEED by Joseph Lstiburek; and• June 12 – Elastosil tour .

Planning is also underway for OBEC’s first Boot Camp, which is scheduled for September 18 . It is our intent to offer participants the

OBEC’s Building Science Specialists of Ontario (BSSO) program . Jerry Genge’s BSSO article, found on page page 36, highlights the benefits of obtaining such a designation, while Genge’s Gripe addresses the ideals of recent graduates vs . the reality of the building science .

Continuing with our mission to expand OBEC’s horizons, we welcome the introduction of our new Chapter Development Committee chaired by former Director Gauss Wong . Gauss was instrumental in assisting Ian Mill-er and our newest Director, Cynthia Fletcher, in the development of our Grand Valley Chapter . As noted in the Chapter Development Update on page 39, we look forward to sharing our educational sessions with par-ticipants across the province . Anyone interested in starting a remote chap-ter is encouraged to contact Gauss at gwong@maximgroup .on .ca .

Jeremy Nixon’s Technical Com-mittee update on page 40 notes that the maximum benefit of the commit-tee is gained by participating in the

Up fronT nn n

At 72-storeys tall, First Canadian Place (FCP) is an architectural icon, unrivalled as the tallest building in

Canada since 1975 . As a premier busi-ness centre, the 3 .5-million sq . ft . building provides office and retail space for roughly 9,000 tenants in Toronto’s financial district .

In 2009, the building owners initiated a multi-million dollar rejuvenation program to enhance the building’s environmental profile . Halsall Associates was engaged in two of the program’s most significant initia-tives: the $100M building envelope facelift, which involved replacing 45,000 Italian marble panels with roughly 375,000 sq . ft . of glass spandrel panels, and the design and implementation of a strategic energy reduction plan, which reduced the build-ing’s energy consumption by 32 per cent .

A facelift for Canada’s tallest buildingUpdating the façade of Canada’s tallest

building was not only a daunting project; it was a long time coming . FCP first began showing signs of strength loss and weather-ing back in the 1980s . At that time, a main-tenance program was initiated to maintain the building envelope through to the end of the cladding service life .

In 2005, Halsall was engaged to evaluate the maintenance program and develop op-tions for addressing the cladding’s future . After reviewing several options, the build-ing owners decided to replace the origi-nal 45,000 white Carrara marble panels with 5,600 large (8 ft . x 10 ft .) glass panels .

Halsall was part of the design team retained for the project .

FCP’s new façade, which was designed by Moed de Armas & Shannon Architects and completed in 2012, both modernized and preserved the original architectural de-sign . It also enhanced the tower’s safety and building performance to meet new contem-porary standards .

Despite the building’s simple new look, the recladding project was incredibly com-plex . Highlights of the project challenges include wind loads, cavity pressure mea-surement, glass design and modeling, glare effect modeling, construction impact and balancing aesthetics renewal .

Wind loadsThe advancement of wind engineering

and modeling technology 30 years after the building was designed, paired with signifi-cant changes to the building density around FCP, meant one thing for certain: a major increase in the anticipated wind load .

Wind load scale model tests were per-formed to determine the most appropri-ate building design . Halsall partnered with world-leading wind experts at the Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel Laboratory (BLWTL), and RWDI consulting engineers, to deter-mine the appropriate peak to be a 50-year return cladding load .

Cavity pressure measurementThe increased wind loads, which ap-

plied to the full height of FCP, required

feaTUre nn n

Rejuvenating a Landmark: Giving First Canadian Place a New Look and a New Way of OperatingBy David DeRose, M.A.Sc., P.Eng., BSSO, and Adrien Deveau, M.A.Sc., P.Eng., Halsall Associates

Glass design and modelingThe architect’s original design concept

included insulated glass units (IGUs) . How-ever, because of the post-breakage behavior of IGUs, an alternative design solution was proposed: triple-laminated, heat-treated glass . Triple-laminated glass was chosen pri-marily because of its durability, its allowance for redundancy in case of impact/breakage due to overload, and its compatibility with the architect’s original design .

Glare effect modelingReplacing the marble with white glass

meant that the cladding surface would change from a low to relatively high re-flectivity, which would potentially impact neighbouring buildings, public spaces and traffic . Halsall prepared a computer simu-lation model to quantify the impact of glare from reflected light, and found that FCP’s new fritted-glass façade produced 50-60 per cent less glare than similarly clad buildings in the area . Moreover, FCP yielded no val-ues in excess of the “glare threshold,” i .e .,

careful analysis for air/wind pressures in the cavities behind the new cladding .

To verify the results of that analysis, Halsall designed, installed and moni-tored a wind pressure instrumentation system for the existing cladding . The system had over 100 sensors, measuring wind pressures at six zones on the build-ing at a rate of three times per second, for a one-year period . Halsall and BLWTL analyzed the results to develop relation-ships between the exterior pressures and the corresponding pressures behind the cladding (cavity) .

The findings showed that significant cavity pressures could develop across the new cladding where unimpeded cavity air flow was allowed to occur . This was particularly critical at building corners where cavity pressures could enhance total suction loads on the cladding ele-ments . Compartment closures and vent areas were designed to mitigate and re-duce pressures on the proposed cladding elements .

n n n feaTUre

Wind load study results.

First Canadian Place rejuvenated.

building’s retro-commissioning poten-tial . The energy analysis examined possible energy reductions through changes in not only the building sys-tems, but also in tenant operations, which is an important part of energy strategies in commercial buildings . This unique approach identified mea-sures to reduce energy consumption by 26 per cent, while offering an average payback period of 6 .5 years .

Retro-commissioning: design and implementation

Retro-commissioning is the pro-cess of investigating building systems, operations and maintenance proce-dures to improve energy performance, indoor air quality and occupant com-fort . In this case, the retro-commis-sioning process was instrumental in synchronizing FCP’s building opera-tions to building use . Through the retro-commissioning process, a team of consultants, engineers, technicians and building operators identified hun-dreds of potential energy conservation measures (ECMs) .

cladding system that fulfilled the building owners’ requirements for both safety and aesthetics, and the rejuvenation of a Ca-nadian landmark .

Reducing energy consumptionIn 2009, Halsall and other green

building professionals were engaged to assist Brookfield Office Properties in its pursuit of LEED Gold certification at FCP . The strategic energy reduction pro-gram was the largest part of this initia-tive .

The results of the energy reduction program were nothing short of remark-able . Since 2009, the building has saved roughly 42M kWh of electricity and natural gas, which is enough to power approximately 1,400 average sized Cana-dian homes for one year . The following are highlights of the work performed to achieve this significant goal .

Identifying opportunities through energy simulation modeling

To identify energy saving oppor-tunities, Halsall developed an energy simulation model and evaluated the

feaTUre nn n

the level of glare that causes visual discom-fort to onlookers .

Construction impactThe recladding project was planned

to proceed 24 hours per day, five days per week, while the building remained fully operational . Halsall coordinated remedi-al work trials during the pre-construction stage to assess the impact of construction on tenants and site crew . These trials included exterior and interior acoustic tests; tenant view studies; air sampling to check for lead, VOC and odour lev-els; material cure times and performance studies (including behaviour in cold weather); trials to determine base re-quirements to achieve reliable welds; and testing to check the impact of welding operations on the interior fireproofing .

Balancing aesthetics and renewalThe FCP recladding project relied on

exhaustive analysis, technical innovation and extensive collaboration between the design team and other industry leaders in research, manufacturing, fabrication and glazing . The result: a state-of-the-art

buildings . Halsall was proud to be a part of such a significant undertaking . n

David DeRose is the National Restoration Practice Leader at Halsall Associates. Dave can be reached at (416) 644-0341 or dderose@halsall.com.

Adrien Deveau is Halsall’s Green Plan-ning and Design Services Business Man-ager for the Greater Toronto Area Region. Adrien can be reached at (416) 644-0343 or adeveau@halsall.com.

A version of this article appeared in the Decem-ber 2012 issue of Canadian Consulting Engineer.

Design and implementation of ECMsHalsall, in partnership with other con-

sultants including The Mitchell Partner-ship, and The Aquila Group, designed and implemented the ECMs which pro-vided the highest value . Key upgrades included reducing office tower lighting, calibrating and replacing sensors, adjust-ing the pressure in the building pumping systems and updating operation sched-ules and strategies .

Sub-metering to inform and empower tenants

An extensive energy sub-metering program is being implemented at FCP, enabling tenants to monitor their energy use and make informed decisions when implementing energy-saving measures in their spaces . Once fully implemented, tenants will be able to view real-time energy use of their spaces through an online Tenant Energy Reporting Portal .

Ongoing monitoringTo fully understand energy use pat-

terns and assess the impact of the retro-commissioning changes made at FCP, Halsall is currently tracking energy con-sumption and monitoring ongoing prog-ress towards set energy targets . This is key to ensuring the effectiveness of the energy reduction program, and to identifying opportunities for additional improvements .

As “modern” buildings of the 1970s and 1980s enter middle-age, they are increasingly appreciated for their design aesthetics . However, the cladding and building systems of many of these build-ings are reaching the end of their service life . The recladding and energy reduction program of FCP demonstrates how clad-ding renewal and building performance enhancements can be achieved success-fully without compromising the original beauty of these architectural icons .

Today, FCP is an energy-conscious business centre and building perfor-mance leader in the commercial real estate industry . With a new, modern yet historic architectural design and signifi-cantly enhanced building performance, the multi-million dollar rejuvenation project at FCP has set a precedent for commercial real estate property owners facing similar challenges with their aging

n n n feaTUre

Progress of the recladding at First Canadian Place.

In the past, a curtain wall was known as the low wall outside the outer wall of a castle, serving as a first line of

defense against enemies . Although this is a military definition, it embodies the current architectural definition of a cur-tain wall . In strict architectural verbalism, a curtain wall is any non-load bearing exterior wall that hangs from the face of floor slabs, usually referring to aluminum-framed systems carrying glass, panels and, occasionally, granite or marble .

In Canada, these systems are typi-cally designed as rain screen systems, serving as a back-up line of defense against enemies such as water entry and air leakage . This rain screen approach is based upon two distinct functional planes that make up the exterior wall: outer water shedding planes and inte-rior drainage planes .

Modern rain screen curtain wall systems are designed and built to drain

feaTUre nn n

What’s Behind the Wall: Why Do Curtain Walls Cry? By Tonya De Castro, Morrison Hershfield

Figure 1: Evidence of water stored within the system,

being forced to find an alternative outlet. This can

lead to failure of connections and fastener penetrations

resulting in water at the building interior.

Figure 2: Water drainage was likely restricted at the top of

the spandrel unit and forced to find an alternative outlet, resulting in water down the

interior side of the backpan.

elements and water testing led to a diagnosis .

To begin, an inadequate number of drainage holes were provided along the curtain wall rails, resulting in high volumes of retained water . This water eventually reached the top of the IG units through an arbitrary gap between the ends of the horizontal screw splines and vertical joints . Once on top of the IG units, vertical drainage was restricted

A seven-year-old, five-storey com-mercial building in Markham, ON was clad with a good example of an unhap-py curtain wall that illustrates this phe-nomenon . The curtain wall cladding is a mix of vision glazing and aluminum and glass spandrel panels . The build-ing experienced ongoing water leakage issues through the curtain wall system, frustrating the owners since construc-tion . Some strategic removals of wall

a small volume of incidental water that penetrates their outer water shedding planes . Typically, drainage of this inci-dental water is achieved from above the screw spline along each horizon-tal rail through drainage holes in the pressure plate . Water that bypasses this drainage plane can find itself at the top of an IG unit and is typically directed to either side of the IG and down the verticals, directed out of the wall at the drainage plane below . Most systems are designed to have numerous possible drainage paths to the exterior .

Problems occur if drainage is restricted . A significant volume of water can accumulate at the top of the IG, motivating water to find an alternative outlet . Sadly, this can lead to interior water leakage, premature deterioration of seals or IG units and/or failure of connections and fastener penetrations that were never designed to accommodate significant water exposure . Ultimately, it drives the cur-tain wall to cry, with the trace of those tears often seen at interior glass sur-faces and mullions .

Loose pressure plates will allow additional water entry into the system, further compromising

both air and water seals at dry gaskets, which rely on

compression for proper function.

n n n feaTUre

This example is just one of many unhappy curtain wall systems we have investigated in recent years . For the most part, curtain walls are professionally-designed systems that perform well in regards to mois-ture control . However, for curtain wall systems to perform well in the physical world, some key participants should be involved . The curtain wall manufacturer should be present dur-ing construction, providing support both on- and off-site . Trades actu-ally installing these systems should be skilled trades with a solid under-standing of the system and how it works . Lastly, the presence of quali-fied field reviewers who know what they are looking for while on-site is crucial . If all of these roles are ful-filled, chances are good that you’re going to end up with one happy cur-tain wall . n

Tonya De Castro is a Building Sci-ence Consultant at Morrison Hershfield in Ontario. She can be reached at tdecastro@morrisonhershfield.com.

that did not develop enough force to adequately anchor the glass . Loose pres-sure plates will allow additional water entry into the system, further compro-mising both air and water seals at dry gaskets, which rely on compression for proper function .

by an inadequately-sized backer rod with excess sealant at the joint between the IG units . Ultimately, the water was trapped .

Additionally, many pressure plate fas-teners were poorly sized and installed incorrectly, resulting in pressure plates

feaTUre nn n

Restoration is known by sever-al names . Some call it repair, others call it renewal; whatever

you choose to call it, it always involves carrying out major work on an occu-pied building .

This is what sets the restoration firms apart from those which carry out new construction . The following is a story about a project that Bowie Con-tracting is currently involved in .

YCC 118 is a twin tower condomin-ium site located in south Etobicoke, ON . The building, constructed in 1972, featured the typical construction of its time—exposed slab edges, undrained masonry walls, single-glazed windows and virtually no insulation . The restora-tion project was designed and tendered on behalf of YCC 118 by GRG Building Consultants and Bowie Contracting was invited as one of six prospective bidders .

The project was tendered in three phases over three years and essential-ly included an Exterior Insulation and Finish System (EIFS) overclad, as well as window and patio door replacement . Post tender, the board invited the two lowest bidders to an interview, after which Bowie was awarded the contract for Phase 1, to begin immediately .

Now, EIFS overcladding is not a new idea . In fact, the City of Toronto has a

Tower Renewal Office, which specializes in promoting the concept of revitalizing our huge inventory of existing high-rise residential stock; much of the focus of the Tower Renewal concept deals with the increased energy efficiency afforded by projects such as EIFS overcladding . This was our first major hurdle . The city’s building department rejected our initial building permit application on the basis that they believed EIFS

The mock-up process, while it can be time consuming, expensive and frustrating at

times, ensures that all design and installation procedures and methodologies are

standardized and perfected.

feaTUre nn n

Restoration from the Contractor’s PerspectiveBy Craig Bowie, CEC, Bowie Contracting Ltd.

The restoration project was designed and

tendered on behalf of YCC 118 by GRG

Building Consultants and Bowie Contracting was

the successful bidder.

n n n feaTUre

A full-scale, two storey mock-up of the EIFS system allowed for all connection details, window heads and sills, joints and finishes to be subjected to rigorous scrutiny from the board, GRG and Bowie.

suites—hundreds of local, on-site build-ing inspectors and all of the challenges that the real world offers in terms of hours of work, site cleanliness, safe-ty, processes, suite access, protection, inspection and deficiency correction . A daunting task, to be sure! When your

firm’s name is on the site sign and every-one has a phone or e-mail account, you can rest assured that—whether it’s real or not—you are going to hear about every little detail that the residents con-sider, from their point of view, to be important .

could not be used on structures over three-storeys high! We—Bowie, Dryvit and GRG—worked to assuage the minds of the building department and, in time, received our building permit .

As mentioned earlier, these are fully occupied towers with 325

One of the key aspects of this pro-ject—which we fully endorse—was GRG’s insistence that mock-ups of each major system be completed, and that they be completed by the same trades that will be working on the project . A full-scale, two storey mock-up of the EIFS system allowed for all connection details, window heads and sills, joints and finishes to be subjected to rigorous scrutiny from the board, GRG and Bowie .

Window and door mock-ups for installations, flashing, sealants, fasteners and finish hardware were also installed, and then site-tested to CSA-A440 stan-dards by an independent testing agency . This process is paramount, as site testing often reveals different results than lab-oratory testing does .

Upon completion, the initial testing revealed that the windows did not meet the specified standards and that further modification to the mock-up windows was required . Further tests and improve-ments were done by Bowie and the manufacturer until the specified stan-dards were met . The improvements and modifications made during the mock-up process were incorporated into the project . As a result of our testing and fine-tuning, the manufacturer has now incorporated the improvements into their product .

The mock-up process, while it can be time consuming, expensive and frustrat-ing at times, ensures that all design and installation procedures and methodol-ogies are standardized and perfected . While we, the restoration contractor, did not originally build or design the original building, it is our goal to “get it right” the second time around .

The late start to the project made com-pleting the EIFS work ahead of the winter weather impossible, as we need ambient temperatures in excess of 5°C to work with EIFS . However, the attention to detail and responsiveness to the occupied site resulted in Bowie being awarded Phase 2 of the work, which will begin in the spring of 2013 . The project is expected to be completed the following year, in 2014 . n

Craig Bowie, CEC, is Vice-President of Bowie Contracting Ltd. in Gormley, ON. For more information on this project, go to www.bowiecontracting.com.

feaTUre nn n

Site-testing components to CSA-A440 standards is paramount. For this project, testing revealed that the windows did not meet specified standards and further modification to the mock-up was required until they met the standards.

I n the summer of 2011, there were a high number of incidents of spontane-ous breakage of monolithic tempered

safety glass employed in balcony guard infill panels or balustrades . As some of these occurrences were located in the heart of the one of the busiest urban centers in the country, the subject of balcony guard glass became a front and center media obsession . For the balcony guard designers and manufacturers, glass processors, building developers, building officials and regulators and condominium owners, the subject became a nightmare .

Initially, armed with few facts regarding the nature and extent of the problem, devel-opers of properties apparently afflicted with spontaneous glass breakage issues—or fail-ure of the entire guard assembly—reacted

What Happened & Where Are We Now?

feaTUre nn n

Balcony Glazing 101: By Greg Hildebrand, C.E.T., M.Sc. (Eng.), exp

Many cases of spontaneous breakage of monolithic tempered safety glass in balcony guard infill panels or balustrades in the summer of 2011 made balcony guard glass a front and center media obsession.

To this end, the Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) established an Expert Advisory Panel to conduct a review and provide advice to the Ministry on Building Code stan-dards for glass panels in balcony guards . According to the MMAH’s report on the panel, the panel’s mandate was “to make recommendations on whether and how the Building Code may be amended to address the problem of the breakage of balcony glass and its risk to persons near-by . It was not the mandate of the panel to make findings of fault or assign blame .”

This committee, chaired by MMAH Building and Development Branch staff consisted of approximately 25 stakehold-ers, including engineering consultants, building code consultants, developers and contractors, professional designers, munic-ipal building departments, the insurance sector (TarionWarranty Corp . and the insurance provider for architects), codes and standards (the National Building Code and the Canadian Standards Association) . After several meetings, the expert commit-tee developed seven recommendations for consideration, which include: 1 . “That the Building Code be amended

to provide supplementary prescriptive requirements for all glazing in interi-or and exterior guards in all buildings, except houses (this excludes detached houses, semi-detached houses, duplexes, triplexes, townhouses and row houses) .

2 . That consideration be given to clarify-ing that direct glass contact with any metal or similar hard elements is to be avoided and to require sufficient allowances for deflection and move-ment under loads and temperature changes . This clarification could be included as a note in the Appendix to the Building Code .

3 . Where it is incorporated in a guard, glazing located beyond the edge of a floor, or within 50mm of the edge of a floor, shall be heat-strengthened, laminated glass that is designed, fabri-cated and erected so that, at the time of failure of the glass, the glazing does not dislodge from the support framing .

4 . Where it is incorporated in a guard, glazing located more than 50mm to 150mm inward from the edge of a floor shall be fully heat-soaked tempered glass or heat-strengthened laminated

• Data relating to actual wind loads acting on guard rail assemblies is not currently available .

• There are a number of lucid argu-ments from other jurisdictions that support the practice of employing guard and wind loads independently .

• There is no specific guidance given in existing codes and standards regarding the use of tempered and laminated safety glass for use in balcony guard rail systems .

• There is no mandated guidance regarding post-breakage retention for glass infill or balustrades .

• There are no mandated test proce-dures to evaluate a balcony guard system for guard load, wind load and impact testing .

• There is little to no guidance regarding the materials and design of balcony guard rail assemblies . Based on these initial findings, it was

clear there was a need to develop a Cana-dian standard for guards in buildings; however, in view of the fact that standards development time is usually measured in months or years, it was obvious that some temporary measure was required in the interim .

by requesting that access to the glass clad balconies be restricted to protect the unit occupants .

To potentially protect the public, they then moved to either secure the remaining glass with safety netting for the short-term or, in some cases, the original monolithic tempered glass was completely replaced with heat strengthened laminated glass, which, in theory, would remain in place in the event of breakage . (This action, of course, raised the question of the ability of a specific guard rail design to retain the broken laminated glass until replacement) .

As one can imagine, these actions were costly, with the industry shouldering millions of dollars in temporary measures and remediation costs . What was more troubling was that the industry had no definitive clear path forward, as the engi-neering community was only beginning to understand the nature and magnitude of the problem . This factor had a further effect on the building industry in that their production was paralyzed, as regu-lators rightly mandated that developers provide them with proper engineering rationale to ensure that they would serve their intended purpose . As it happened, this turned out to be a problem .

Notwithstanding, the obvious mate-rial issues associated with the failed glass (i .e ., nickel sulphide-induced spontaneous breakage of the tempered glass), the engi-neering community subsequently deter-mined, among other things, the following:• There is no substantive guidance regard-

ing the design and use of balcony guard rail systems other than the information given in the building code (i .e ., there is no applicable reference standard) .

• Designers follow different protocols in the design of their guard rail sys-tems . Some consider the guard loads independently, some consider guard and wind loads separately,while some consider the combination of both .

• For wind, two methods are employed to establish load . The first method involves the calculation of the wind load according to the procedure given in Part 4 of the code . The second meth-od involves obtaining estimates using a wind tunnel study . The first method results in overly conservative loads, while the wind tunnel study results are varied (but still conservative) .

…it was clear there was a need

to develop a Canadian standard

for guards in buildings . . . it

was obvious that some temporary

measure was required in the

interim.

n n n feaTUre

Despite the fact that these seven rec-ommendations did not receive unani-mous support within the expert panel, the prescriptive elements of the rec-ommendations were incorporated into the 2006 Ontario Building Code in the form of Supplemental Standard SB-13, “Glass in Guards,” which came into effect on July 1, 2012 (referenced in

7 . That the Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing:

a) Support the development of the pro-posed CSA Group Standard on Bal-cony Guard Rails; and

b) Will consider referencing the CSA Group Standard on Balcony Guard Rails, once it is published, in the Build-ing Code .”

glass that is designed, fabricated and erected so that, at the time of failure of the glass, the laminated glazing does not dislodge from the support framing .

5 . Where it is incorporated in a guard, glazing located more than 150mm inward from the edge of a floor shall be heat-strengthened laminated glass or heat-soaked tempered glass . How-ever, tempered glass is permitted where the glazing does not exceed 6mm in thickness . Guards using heat-strengthened laminated glass must be designed, fabricated and erected so that, in the event of failure of the glass, the glass does not dislodge from the support framing .

6 . That the memorandum, dated March 8, 2012, from Cathy Taraschuk, P . Eng ., reporting on the advice of the Task Group on Live Loads Due to Use and Occupancy of the Standing Committee on Structural Design on the applicability of the load com-binations listed in Table 4 .1 .3 .2 .A . of Division B of the 2010 model National Building Code be included as an Appendix to the Building Code .

feaTUre nn n

Table 2.1.1.1.Selection of Glass in a GuardForming Part of Sentence 2 .1 .1 .1 .(2)

Location of Glass in a Guard Type of Glass Required

Glass located beyond the edge of a floor or within 50mm of the edge of a floor .

Heat-strengthened laminated glass .

Glass located more than 50mm inward from the edge of a floor .

Heat-soaked tempered glass .

Glass located more than 150mm inward from the edge of a floor .

Heat-soaked tempered glass .

Tempered glass not more than 6mm thick .

2.1.1.1. Safety GlassGlass other than safety glass shall not be used in a guard. Glass in a guard shall conform to Table 2.1.1.1.

Sentence 3 .1 .20 .1 .(1) of Division B of the Building Code) .

In addition to setting out the glass type requirements, it also references a European DIN Standard (DIN EN 14179-1, “Heat Soaked Thermally Toughened Soda Lime Silicate Safety Glass, Septem-ber 2005”) for a heat soak process to be carried out for monolithic tempered glass to reduce the residual risk of spontaneous breakage due to nickel sulphide inclusions in the glass . Prior to this reference, there was no mandated heat-soak requirement in North America, in spite of the fact that spontaneous glass breakage is well known in the industry and that the procedure is often carried out by some manufactur-ers for safety glass used for this type of application .

Concurrent to the work being carried out by the Ministry’s expert panel, CSA was working with the engineering commu-nity to initiate the development of a new standard to cover all aspects of building guards, including the subject of glass in guards .

The first task in the development of the standard was to establish a budget and solicit funding from various stakeholders, and to this end, a meeting of potential con-tributors was held at CSA’s Rexdale facil-ity on November 22, 2011 . At that meeting, in addition to background information, the group was given a preliminary outline of the potential content of the new standard:• An introduction discussing applicabil-

ity, specification guidance and perfor-mance parameters .

• A general scope, with terminology unique to the subject .

• Referenced publications (e .g ., BSI or ASTM Standards) for materials and testing .

n n n feaTUre

In addition to the Ministry’s expert panel, CSA is developing a new standard to

cover all aspects of building guards, including the subject of glass in guards.

• Materials, components and meth-ods of design and construction (i .e ., fastening anchorage and connec-tions, materials, review and com-parison of relevant codes and stan-dards);

• Preliminary considerations (i .e ., cat-egories and locations of guards, dura-bility and lifecycle of assembly, safety and risk assessment);

• Design criteria (i .e ., loads and their combinations, design parameters, including loads, vibration, deflection, post breakage, and guard layout);

• Testing (i .e ., testing procedures);• Installation (assembly installation

requirements); and• Inspection (construction and post-con-

struction review) .In addition, the standard will include

informative sections (annexes) address-ing such items as repair and maintenance of guards .

The CSA A500 standard technical committee has tentatively established a conservative schedule of 24 months to complete the standard . At this stage, the committee is moving forward at a reasonable speed and, accordingly, a 2014 publication date should be antici-pated . n

Greg Hildebrand, C.E.T., M.Sc. (Eng.), is the Head of the Façade Engineering Group at exp. He can be reached at greg.hildebrand@exp.com.

• Definitions, providing for loads (guards and wind), assembly types, applications .

• General requirements for specific applications and assembly types, includ-ing loading requirements .

• Test requirements, including sequence, test specimen sizes and details, and testing methodologies .

• Materials requirements, setting out the prescriptive requirements for the bal-cony guard rail system components .

• Component requirements, outlining how specific guard load components are to be used in-situ . Upon receiving sufficient financial sup-

port, potential technical committee mem-bers were identified and the inaugural meeting of the new CSA A500 “Building Guards” technical committee was held on June 8, 2012 . At that meeting, a final tech-nical committee of 32 voting and nine non-voting (i .e ., associate) members were con-firmed . The mandate of the technical com-mittee was also established and is as follows: “1 – Scope; 1 .1 – This standard specifies requirements for permanent guards in and about buildings; 1 .2 – This standard does not apply to: a) temporary guards; b) bar-riers for resisting impact from vehicles; or c) barriers used in building operations and works of engineering construction .”

At present, the technical committee has been broken down into a number of task groups to specifically develop techni-cal content for the standard . These task group categories and topics include:

feaTUre nn n

E lsewhere in this magazine, I’ve pulled together an article on the BSSO . So, I’m not going to re-ex-

plain what that is; you’ll just have to read that article (which you can find on page 36) . I’m a big fan of the BSSO—at least now . For a while, I felt it was somewhat, well, dumbed-down to be brutal about it, and had lost value .

Now, after rejigging the academ-ic program, it includes prerequisite advanced courses on building science, windows and curtainwall, roofing, build-ing envelope materials and HVAC . It includes mandated practical experience and mandated maintenance require-ments and will cost you at least as much as a Master’s Degree in Building Sci-ence and, frankly, will have taught you a great deal more about buildings .

Now, I fully expect the hair is stand-ing on end on many an academic’s neck, and that the juices of indignation are flowing freely . Well, I hope so . But I hope it is for the right reasons . I’m not

carving you up for your effort . Good for you for hanging in there in an unappre-ciated field of study .

I’m carving the institution for not making Building Engineering or Build-ing Science a dedicated stream of study, like structural, mechanical, electrical, etc . Because, sadly, the Master’s degree in Building Science falls way short of the mark . But what would one expect from a measly 40 hours of undergraduate study and a few hours in the post-graduate programs?

So, what is a fresh-faced grad shining with potential and promise, who costs over $70,000 per year—with all the mandatory payroll burdens and benefits—but who has learned nothing of value about the building code, building standards, how anything goes together, why it fails, what it costs or the implications and linkages of any of those issues to do? I get the ques-tion a lot from the grads which have come to the realization that their degree has not prepared them to do anything .

Well, the industry has recognized the cavern between the post-secondary degree and the real world, and we have a program tailored to provide the prac-tical foundation for designing, assessing and repairing buildings supplemented by some real work experience . The Uni-versity of Toronto School of Continuing Studies (U of T SCS) has the Building Science Certificate program and (after retooling) it is the only program recog-nized thus far as providing the academ-ic foundation needed toward a BSSO, while a Master’s in Building Science may earn three of the required six credits—maybe .

The U of T SCS certificate program is a true Building Science Specialist Pro-gram and it demands a high level of focused study . Add to the formal certifi-cate 2,000 hours of practical experience and a commitment to continue to learn through continuing education (largely provided by the BECs across Canada) and you can get a BSSO . “Aha!” says

Why Don’t Post-Secondary Schools Get Serious About Building Science? We Have!

Genge’s Gripe

news & views nn n

By Gerald R. Genge, P.Eng., BDS, BSSO, C.Arb., Q.Med.

schools . I have been told by people in schools of architecture that little details like “details” need to be dismissed as they “confine creative thinking” or are a “construction issue” or even, “focus too much on minutia .” So, with wid-ening eyes, and after I clamp my jaw back closed, I say, “Hope you’re on good terms with your insurer .” Then, wait for their lawyer to hire me on their multi-million dollar negligence claim .

The way I see it, nobody who gradu-ates from any school of architecture

Science Specialist designation, along with many others, but for some reason, dropped the program altogether . Now they have a Building Design Specialist designation but in reality, that has more to do with responding to the (illegal) BCIN law than it does with a special understanding of building design .

This gripe has been carving away at the inability of engineering schools to meet the needs of the building sci-ence industry; but the real culprits in the industry are—yep—architectural

you, “but the new engineering grad is an intern that also must work with a griz-zled, licensed professional and can’t be a licensed engineer his/herself unless they have four years of real experience .

“Phhhgh!” says I, “that experience can be in areas of practice that have zero to do with building science, envelope design or anything of any actual value to building science firms . Experience in structural design won’t get you the credit needed for your BSSO . It has to be building science-related .

Well, if a BSSO is so good, why haven’t the professional associations recognized a building science specialty, like they have in many jurisdictions for structural or mechanical engineering, for instance? That’s a really good ques-tion, and one I’ve asked for a long, long time . Why don’t the engineering associ-ations take the bull by the horns, knock heads with their architectural colleagues and come up with a design professional designation that recognizes people who specialize in building science?

Nearly 30 years ago, the Engineer’s Association in Ontario had a Building

The way I see it, nobody who graduates from any school of architecture

should get to practice until they have the BSSO designation. Lack of basic

building science knowledge is the basis of most of the claims.

n n n news & views

ongoing education requirements have left the fold . Unlike a degree, you can lose it if it isn’t kept current . And that is what makes it credible .

So, we have two major hurdles to cross . The first is to get universities to rec-ognize the opportunity to fill a big gap in their engineering programs . The second is to get licensing bodies to, well, do the same . Envelopes represent around 25 to 30 per cent of the cost of the building when new, and between 25 and 30 per cent of the cost to maintain during the service life . That’s no small potatoes . So, let’s build a specialty that is regulated and supported formally for what it is: a sen-ior science that keeps us warm, dry and comfortable, and makes our buildings, attractive, durable and valuable .

Until the universities come around, per-haps students could be taken out of the class for a week in the spring and sent on a construction camp (like survey or map-ping camp) . Maybe take them to a Home Depot . Show them what a waterproofing membrane looks like; let them see and touch a window and learn its parts; have them see for themselves the difference between the various batt insulations and rigid boards; take them to the sealant aisle and explain why there are different sealants; show them what OSB is and how it differs from cement board or plywood; and have them see what any of these things actually cost just to have in your hand .

Then take them to a boot camp to build some of this stuff . If a university does this, it may help people like me choose to hire from those schools over ones that don’t provide that value . Stu-dents, schools and employers benefit . It’s a win-win-win .

Until then, anyone out there wanting to practice any sort of building science work and who wants to show credibility should get themselves armed with a BSSO . I’m looking for it, and if you’re hiring, you should be, too . n

Gerald R. Genge, P.Eng. C.Eng., BDS, BSSO, C.Arb., Q.Med. is Past-President of the OBEC and has been active in stan-dards development, education and con-sulting for over 35 years. He is a Principal of GRG Building Consultants Inc. and ArbiTECH ADR, and he can be reached at jgenge@grgbuilding.com.

I can’t fault you for not getting the edu-cation you need to be of immediate value to the building science firms competing—and we do—for your—albeit limited—skills . But if you really want to show you know what you’re talking about, get a credential that has some 200 hours of practical science contact time that can be translated into real world work .

There are 80 or so BSSOs in Ontario now . It’s not an easy or inexpensive path and some applicants are turned down . Some others who once earned a BSSO and haven’t wanted to maintain the

should get to practice until they have the BSSO designation . Lack of basic building science knowledge is the basis of most of the claims . There, I said it . Incidentally, their insurers know this to be true .

Alright, I know: a BSSO is a construct of the Ontario Building Envelope Coun-cil and what we really need is a national credential of sorts . But that isn’t coming any time soon, so we have to conquer one hill at a time—though a BSSC would be the eventual target .

For you new grads in engineering, architecture or construction technology,

news & views nn n

In Part I and Part II of this series—which you can find in the Spring 2012 issue of Pushing the Envel-

ope Canada on page 24, and the Fall 2012 edition on page 45, respective-ly—we wrote of the “twin challenges” of global warming and the depletion of cheap oil .

Given that Canadian buildings account for 31 per cent of secondary energy use and 28 per cent of green-house gas (GHG) emissions, the build-ing industry can help address these twin challenges by building better, more energy-efficient buildings . We concluded Part II by writing that it was time for designers to stand up, speak up and lead!

Fortunately, in Canada, there are many designers and constructors who

are already leading and are design-ing and constructing buildings that far exceed the minimum energy stan-dards established by building codes . In this closing article, we have chosen to briefly describe two better-built buildings: one is a new-build and one is a retrofit . As we enter the age of building more responsibly, we consider these two inspiring cases to be “Islands of Hope .”

A Grander ViewThe first illustrative case involves

the integrated design and construction of Enermodal Engineering’s 2,150m2 corporate head office, a Class A com-mercial building . As a company dedi-cated to more responsible building design, Enermodal—a MMM Group

news & views nn n

Building a Better Tomorrow Begins Today! Part III: Islands of Hope

By K.D. Pressnail & M.F. Touchie

ABOVE: The exterior of Enermodal Engineering’s corporate head office, called A Grander View. Photo provided by Enermodal Engineering.

As all good things must come to an end, so must this series on building a better tomorrow.

company—set out to practise what it had been preaching . Constructed in 2009, the office building known as A Grander View uses 20 per cent of the energy and nine per cent of the water that an average Canadian building uses . The total energy intensity of the building is an industry-leading 69kWh/m2 of floor area .

A Grander View cost $255/ft2 to construct . This cost is competitive with other Class A commercial buildings that just meet the energy provisions of the building code . Construction cost savings were identified during the design phase, when a higher per-formance envelope was chosen . For example, instead of using double-glazed windows, triple-glazed, low-E, argon-filled, fibreglass windows were selected . By choosing these higher-per-formance windows, it was found that a variable refrigerant-flow, heat-pump system was sufficient to both heat and

n n n news & views

A Grander View office reduces electrical loads

through the natural daylighting system seen here, which includes a

large central skylight. Photo provided by Enermodal

Engineering.

cool the building . Thus, a net cost sav-ings resulted when a supplementary heating system was no longer needed .

Energy savings were also achieved through the use of insulated concrete forms and through a variety of innov-ative mechanical systems . Ventilation air is pre-heated or pre-cooled using a series of concrete earth tubes . Energy is also recovered from the stale air through energy-recovery ventilation units .

Further, fresh air is supplied only when and where it is needed through a dedicated outdoor air system that is

independent of the heating and cool-ing system . As well, electrical loads are reduced through a natural daylighting system, which includes a large central skylight . Overall, A Grander View serves as a gentle reminder that lower energy, more responsible buildings can be cost efficient as well!

Recognizing that new construction makes up a very small proportion of the total building stock and that all buildings will be with us for generations, improving the performance of our exist-ing building stock is important, too .

Retrofitting for the betterThe second illustrative case involves

the retrofit of an 11-storey, 136-unit apartment building that was constructed in the 1970s . Located in Toronto, ON, the building was originally electric-ally-heated . High heating costs due, in part, to minimal insulation and exposed slab edges, were incurred . The building lacked a central cooling system, and ventilation was accomplished by opening the aluminum slider windows .

Aptly named the Green Phoenix Pro-ject, the owners embarked on an inte-grated design process to generate ideas for improving comfort, while reducing energy costs . The final retrofit strategy included stucco over-cladding (EIFS), with four additional inches of insulation that cut off the exposed slab thermal bridges . The windows were replaced with low-emissivity, argon-filled, fibreglass frame units .

Improvements to the mechanical sys-tem included replacement of the original boilers with higher-efficiency models, installation of fan coil units in each suite, and installation of an enthalpy wheel, which captures energy from the central exhaust and transfers it to the fresh make-up air .

To reduce electricity consumption, an energy-efficient lighting retrofit was also completed . A building automation system was installed to help regulate all of these new systems . Additionally, a solar thermal wall was mounted on the south façade to pre-heat incoming municipal water and a ground-source heat exchange system was installed to help manage peak heating and cooling loads .

The construction took about a year-and-a-half to complete and the total project costs were just under $4M . When compared to pre-retrofit energy costs from 2007, in 2012, they saved almost 40 per cent on their natural gas bills, despite declining natural gas prices in the period . They also saved about 16 per cent on their electricity bills . In reducing energy costs, the managing foundation has not only reduced their exposure to the risk of increasing energy prices but they have provided a more comfortable environment for their tenants .

news & views nn n

The original 11-storey, 136-unit apartment building, seen here, was built in the 1970s, and had minimal

insulation and exposed slab edges.

There are many other buildings that could have been presented in this article, and in the years to come, there will be many more “Islands of Hope .” Perhaps a building that you are designing or build-ing today will inspire others to build a better tomorrow, today! n

K.D. Pressnail is a Civil Engineering Professor at the University of Toronto.

M.F. Touchie is a PhD. Candidate in Civil Engineering at the University of Toronto.

n n n news & views

As part of the Green Phoenix Project retrofit, a solar thermal wall was mounted on the south façade to pre-heat incoming municipal water. Green Phoenix Project photos provided by Rod Layman.

References:Natural Resources Canada . 2012 . A

Grander View of the Future: A Case Study of Enermodal Engineering’s New Building. Available at: http://oee .nrcan .gc .ca/sites/oee .nrcan .gc .ca/files/files/pdf/publica-tions/commercial/Grander_View_e .pdf .

R . Layman . 2010 . Green Phoenix Case Study prepared for the City of Toronto Tower Renewal Project.

P . Milenkovic . January 2013 . Per-sonal Communication .

H ave you been looking for a way to upgrade your skills and obtain a recognizable creden-

tial showing your strength in building science? You could join over 80 other highly skilled professional members of the Ontario Building Envelope Council by earning a Building Science Specialist Ontario (BSSO) Designation . The cours-es, practical experience and mandat-ed continuing education requirements make the BSSO a unique designation that identifies you as someone that has unique qualifications .

Getting your BSSO: Education Education . First, you must have the

basic academic foundation . The School of Continuing Studies (SCS) at the Uni-versity of Toronto has the only (current-ly) recognized academic program . On successful completion of the six courses, you earn a Building Science Certificate .

If you aren’t familiar with the cours-es, they include Building Science I and Building Science II, Building Envelope Materials, Roofing, Window and Wall Systems, and HVAC and the Building Envelope . Check out the current Uni-versity of Toronto SCS Building Science Certificate program calendar for the times and locations that programs are offered .

You may have earned some of the prerequisite credits . If you have taken advanced course in the subject matter . Your application should fully explain what university level courses you have taken that cover the subject matter .

Getting your BSSO: ExperienceIn addition to an academic founda-

tion, you must have obtained at least 2,000 hours of practical experience dir-ectly related to the practice of building science . This experience must be aligned with the academic work so that you can show you’ve been applying that basic knowledge to real world situations .

Your experience may also qualify for academic equivalency . Ordinarily, one is required to obtain a Building Science Certificate . Since hands-on experience can also be a great teacher, an applicant may be exempted from the certificate requirement if they can show 20 or more years of continuous Building Science experience in at least four of the core areas of Building Science practice repre-sented by the six core courses .

Who decides if you are qualified? In the absence of a regulatory framework, an academic Advisory Committee has been established independent of, and reporting to, the OBEC Board of Direc-tors . This committee includes members

from the industry, academia and the OBEC board, and have absolute discre-tion over applications for the BSSO .

Keeping your BSSO: Continuing education

BSSO designees are required to be active in continuing education . While OBEC offers credits for attending seminars, some courses and semin-ars offered by other associations can go toward the continuing education credits . Check with OBEC for specific course credits . If you’re interested in finding out more, additional informa-tion is available on the OBEC website at www .obec .on .ca .

Membership structure BSSO holders are individual “profes-

sional members” of OBEC and pay a single fee for their membership that covers both the BSSO designation and the OBEC membership fee . These fees may be tax deductible; check with your tax advisor .

Code of ethics A BSSO has a duty to the public,

their employer, their clients and to other BSSO holders . As such, they must adhere to a code of ethics and standards of conduct . These are clearly spelled out in the application and are

news & views nn n

The Sky’s the Limit: Getting Your BSSO DesignationBy Gerald R. Genge, P.Eng., BDS, BSSO, C.Arb., Q.Med.

the following link: http://obec .on .ca/bsso/PDF/OBEC%20Application%20for%20BSSO_v11 .pdf . n

Gerald R. Genge, P.Eng. C.Eng., BDS, BSSO, C.Arb., Q.Med. is Past-President of the Ontario Building Envelope Coun-cil and has been active in standards development, education and consulting for over 35 years. He is a Principal of GRG Building Consultants Inc. and ArbiTECH ADR, and he can be reached at jgenge@grgbuilding.com.

architectural disciplines, it is vitally important that a substantial and credible credential exist to demonstrate to the industry a level of technical maturity and substantiated reputation that overlays that of basic academic standing and accomplishment .

If you are interested in joining this group of industry-leading professionals, start your path toward getting a BSSO today . Everything you need to know in order to prepare your application can be found on the OBEC website, by going to

enforceable by OBEC . Any person that is found to have breached the code may be disciplined and may lose their BSSO . Being a BSSO is more than having achieved a credential; it is a commitment to a way of practicing building science .

Why become a BSSO? What is the value of having a BSSO?

As there is currently no regulated building science specialist program in either the professional engineering or

n n n news & views

Maintaining Your BSSOUpon meeting the eligibility requirements and submitting a complete application, the BSSO candidate’s name will be forwarded to

the Advisory Committee . Representatives from industry, academia and the OBEC Board of Directors make up the BSSO Advisory Committee .

Once they receive their designation, Building Science Specialists of Ontario must adhere to the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct for BSSO, maintain an up-to-date membership in OBEC, pay annual BSSO administration dues and provide proof of required continued education annually from the year of accreditation .

Continuing education credits can be acquired by various means, including the following:• Attendance at an evening Building Science-related event (1 .0 credit);• Presenting for a half-hour at an OBEC event (2 .0 credits);• Presenting for 45 minutes at an OBEC event (2 .5 credits);• Attendance at a half-day Building Science-related event (2 .5 credits);• Writing a published paper/article (3 .0 credits);• Writing a published Peer Reviewed Technical Paper (10 .0 credits);• Attendance at a full-day Building Science-related seminar (5 .0 credits);• Attendance at a Building Science-related university course for a minimum of 20 hours (15 .0 credits);• Giving a three-hour technical presentation (3 .0 credits); and• Giving a three-hour to full-day technical presentation/course (10 .0 credits) .

Acceptance of any and all continuing professional education credits shall be subject to review by the Advisory Committee, and the Advisory Committee reserves the right, in its absolute discretion, to request additional information from the applicant and/or to refuse the request for accreditation .

More information on the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct for BSSO can be found in the BSSO application on the OBEC website—just go to www.obec.on.ca and click on the BSSO link in the menu on the left-hand side.

By Ian Miller, P.Eng., LEED AP O+M, Read Jones Christoffersen

T he Ontario Building Envelope Council has been working since 1987 to help designers, product

manufacturers and contractors to design and build better buildings through col-laboration and education . The organiza-tion serves all of Ontario but it has been criticized as being too Toronto-centric in the past . The majority of OBEC events take place in the Greater Toronto Area, due to the fact that the largest concentra-tion of building envelope professionals in Ontario work in this part of the province .

As building science has continued to grow in all areas of the province, OBEC has recognized this problem but only recently has technology allowed the organ-ization to really do something about it .

In early 2012, the OBEC board began looking at options and beta-testing meth-ods of broadcasting the monthly dinner meeting presentations to a remote audi-ence . This was soon extended to a small audience in the Grand Valley area (Kitch-ener / Waterloo / Cambridge / Guelph / Hamilton), which served as a test audi-ence while the kinks were worked out and things were tweaked to create a better experience for those in attendance .

Since that time, the Grand Valley Chapter has been fully established and a small (but growing) group gathers each month when a dinner presentation is host-ed in Toronto . The Grand Valley Chapter group utilizes videoconferencing software to view a remote broadcast of the Toron-to-based presentation, and the software allows the remote group to ask questions of the presenter just as anyone in the local

audience would . After the presentation finishes, the group then discusses the pres-entation topic and other building envel-ope issues among themselves .

The formation of the Grand Valley Chapter has given more value to existing OBEC members who live in that part of the province, giving them a local venue to participate in the monthly presenta-tion meetings . The chapter has offered a gathering place for building envelope professionals to discuss advances in build-ing envelope technologies and to network among peers .

It also serves to introduce others to the organization, bringing together people who may not have previously known about OBEC or what it does . Finally, the remote broadcast of the presentations provides those living in the Grand Valley area with a way to earn both OAA and/or BSSO continuing education credits .

The OBEC board believes that the remote broadcast setup has been refined now to the point that the presentations can be shared with more audiences around the province . Inquiries have already been made in southwestern, eastern and north-ern Ontario; and a Chapter Development Committee has been formed . This com-mittee has created a document that out-lines the formation of chapters and the procedures for gathering an audience for a presentation remote viewing . It will work to facilitate groups to form new chapters across the province .

The OBEC board has encouraged the formation of the Grand Valley Chapter and looks forward to the establishment of other chapters across Ontario . It is our goal that eventually all Ontario building envelope pro-fessionals will have the ability to attend a meeting at their local chapter, where they can learn from and exchange ideas, not only with colleagues in their own area, but with those in other chapters across the province as well .

If you would like more information about attending a local meeting or helping in the formation of your own local chapter, please contact Gauss Wong, Chair of the Chap-ter Development Committee at gwong@maximgroup .on .ca, the author, Ian Miller, at imiller@rjc .ca or any other member of the OBEC Board of Directors . You can find an up-to-date list of OBEC’s Board of Directors on page seven of this magazine . n

Ian Miller, P.Eng., LEED AP O+M, is an OBEC Director-at-Large and a Project Engineer at Read Jones Christoffersen Ltd. in Kitchener, ON.

...eventually all Ontario building

envelope professionals will

have the ability to attend a

meeting at their local chapter,

where they can learn from and

exchange ideas, not only with

colleagues in their own area,

but with those in other chapters

across the province as well.

n n n news & views

Expanding Operations: OBEC Chapter Development

S ince the last technical committee update, the roofing and cladding sub-committees remain active .

The roofing sub-committee continues to explore everything “green roofs” and anticipates having a submission ready for the board to review in the near future .

The cladding sub-committee has been working through their topic on “spray-foam” and expects to conclude it shortly and move onto the next topic, which is still to be determined but may include masonry, exterior insulation finishing systems (EIFS), metal cladding, whole building claddings systems (such as EIFS vs . precast, etc .) or insulated concrete form . Other topics to consider include detailing, component and trade inter-section, energy code, fire code and site safety .

With these committees well into their second year of operation, it is becom-ing clear that the maximum benefit is being gained by the individuals who par-take in related discussions . We therefore encourage participation from anyone looking for other avenues for learning . There are extremely talented and knowl-edgeable individuals on these commit-tees with diverse experiences that this author, at least, is finding invaluable to rub elbows with .

Longer term goals still remain to use these committees as one of the vehicles for OBEC (and all Canadian BECs) to be “the source” for all matters related to the building envelope, including compre-hensive website(s) with links to relevant outside technical information, such as codes, research, case studies, etc ., as well as content produced from within the BECs . These are perhaps lofty goals for a group of volunteers alone to achieve but nonetheless remain out there as something to strive for .

Another long-term goal is that our association will be represented “at the table” on relevant industry and govern-ment committees that have influence on codes, which would likely result from the work of these sub-committees .

In the shorter term, the maximum benefit will remain with those who

are active on the sub-committees and who view them as a means to network, exchange ideas and experiences, and enjoy fellowship with other like-minded individuals . We encourage anyone who is interested to get involved by contact-ing OBEC’s management team at info@obec .on .ca or (647) 317-5754 .

The committees are also creating excellent topical ideas for dinner meet-ings, seminars, field trips, etc ., which is invaluable to planning for the Board of Directors . If anyone has a desire to see certain topics or discussions explored, we encourage them to get involved or to drop us a line . n

Jeremy Nixon, P.Eng., BSSO, is the Technical Committee Chair for the Ontar-io Building Envelope Council and Manag-ing Engineer at Brown & Beattie Ltd.

We therefore encourage participation from anyone looking for other avenues for learning. There are extremely talented and

knowledgeable individuals on these committees with diverse experiences…

news & views nn n

Offering Diverse Experiences: A Technical Committee UpdateBy Jeremy Nixon, P.Eng., BSSO, Brown & Beattie Ltd.

Please support our advertisers who help make this publication possible.

RoundupBuilding better buildings

The Manitoba Building Envelope Council recently held a session for architects and designers, commercial general contractors, trades and building suppliers, building officials, appraisers adn energy raters on Building Better Buildings . It outlined the principles of building high performance buildings

that are simultaneously healthier, safer, more comfortable, more dur-able and more energy efficient without compromising cost effectiveness .

The workshop, held at the Red River College Princess Street Campus helped participants understand the key building science rules that architects and engin-eers use to evaluate and specify building

envelope components, which, in turn, will empower participants to make more cost-effective building decisions and avoid many of the risks associated with ever-changing building technologies .

Participants learned more about understanding the physics of how build-ings work—the flow of air, heat and moisture and how this affects building performance; how buildings work as a system with checks and balances; defin-ing the most important, cost effective, technical aspects of high performance buildings—the 10 things you should be doing by now and where we are head-ed; and identifying case studies of the most effective construction details and methods to meet new code requirements and access green and energy efficiency programs such as ENERGY STAR or LEED building .

The session included a presentation from special guest speaker Gord Cooke, a Professional Engineer with over 25 years’ experience in the residential build-ing industry, and an advocate for imple-menting better building practices and products .

BCBEC awards BCIT Building Science graduate student

The BC Building Envelope Coun-cil (BCBEC) was proud to present the Tom Morstead Memorial Award to BCIT Building Science graduate student Shahrzad Pedram at the scholarships and awards ceremony in November . Shahr-zad, a student in the Master of Applied

news & views nn n

RoundupBECBEC

Nikbakht has worked in the field of materials construction for over 13 years, beginning in the concrete indus-try and geosynthetics . With six years’ experience in the building envelope, she has civil engineering training, and has gained expertise in technical mar-keting and product development . n

If you have any exciting news you'd like to share, please send it to awalld@matrixgroupinc.net. All submissions are subject to approval and will be edited for spelling, grammar, etc.

external walls—the BEC’s 200th technical conference took place last September on the rooftop terrace of the Palais des Congrès in Montreal .

Their most recent session provid-ed participants with updated informa-tion on humidity control in exterior walls and revisions for the various relevant requirements in force . Those in attendance also learned more about the analysis software iSelect .

A keynote presentation was given by Mahnaz P . Nikbakht, Dipl .-Ing ., a technical advisor in Cosella-Dörken .

Science in Building Science program, received the first-ever master’s degree award for her high academic standing, leadership, service and best all-round performance in building science .

The award was established by the BCBEC last year and is based on a combination of high academic stand-ing, leadership, service and best all-round performance in Levels 1 and 2 of the program, as selected by Pro-gram Director Dr . Fitsum Tariku and his faculty . BCBEC supports educa-tional programs which provide learn-ing opportunities for students in the field of building science .

QBEC holds session on controlling moisture in external walls

The Quebec Building Envelope Council recently held its 201st technical conference on controlling moisture in

n n n news & views

BC Building Envelope Council President Jason Teetaert presents student Shahrzad Pedram with the Tom Morstead Memorial Award.

T he annual Beckie Award recognizes individuals making significant contributions to the design, construction and performance of the building envelope . As a career achievement award, it is not based on a single contribution . Named after Tony

Woods, who created and nicknamed it “The Beckie,” it is OBEC’s premier award .In the shape of a pyramid, it symbolizes the oldest form of structure, the tent, and one

of the most durable, the pyramids . The recess in the pyramid represents shelter; the crystal ball symbolizes people and possessions . The base hints at a solid foundation, snowflakes represent sophisticated engineering, and acrylic plastic represents modern materials and letting light into buildings .

Nominations for the 2013 Beckie Award are due by 4:00 p .m ., September 27, 2013 . Further details can be found at www .obec .on .ca/awards/pdf/2013-beckieaward-form .pdf .

news & views nn n

The 2013 Beckie Award

BSSO Members are eligible to receive 2.5 ConEd Credits for attending this seminarOAA Members are eligible to receive 3 ConEd Learning Hours for attending this seminar

Registration Information: � Mr. � Ms. � Mrs. � Dr. � Prof. � Other

First Name: Last Name:

Company:

Address:

City: Province/State: Postal Code:

Telephone: ( ) Fax: ( )

Email:

Payment:� Cheque or money order enclosed payable to: Ontario Building Envelope Council

� Please charge my credit card � � �

Card Number

Expiry Date /

Print Name on Credit Card:

Signature:

HST #124383076

Ontario Building Envelope Council2175 Sheppard Ave. E., Suite #310

Toronto, ON M2J 1W8Tel: (416) 491-2886 Fax: (416) 491-1670

Register Online at: www.obec.on.ca

� OBEC Member � OAA Member � OBEC Non Member

RESTORATION & RENEWALPRESENTATION

LOCATIONDays Hotel & Conference Centre

185 Yorkland Blvd. Toronto, ON

SEMINAR FEEOBEC / OAA Members:

$75 + $9.75 HST = $84.75

Non Members: $99 + $12.87 HST = $111.87

SCHEDULEApril 10, 20138:00 am Registration / Continental Breakfast

8:30 am Opening Remarks – Sandra Burnell, OBEC President

8:45 am – 9:30 am Toronto City Hall: Design and Installation of a Retrofit Glazing System– Rob Wood, C3 Polymeric Limited

9:30 am – 10:15 am Restoration from the Contractor’s Perspective – Craig Bowie, Bowie Contracting; Kevin Day, Dryvitand Brian Shedden, GRG

10:15 am – 10:30 am Refreshment Break

10:30 am – 11:15 am Balcony Glazing – What Happened and Where Are We Now? – Greg Hildebrand, exp.

11:15 am – 12:00 pm Historic Hotel Rehabilitation – A Look at Building Enclosure Design Decisions – Mark Lawton, Morrison Hershfield

REGISTRATION FORM

APRIL 10, 2013OBEC

SEMINAR

JOIN US FOR A

Restoration & Renewal Seminar Reg Form 2013_v7_Layout 1 13-01-28 3:16 PM Page 1

Air Barrier SystemsW.R. Meadows ......................................... 21BASF ........................................................... 4

Air Barriers, Highly BreathableBuilding Resources SRP Canada .......... 26

Architectural Aluminum Building ProductsAlumicor Ltd. ........................................... 31

Automatic Entrance SystemsHorton Automatics of Ontario ................ 24

Backwater ValvesMainline Backflow Products Inc. ........... 41

Balcony Enclosure Solutions / FaçadeLumon North America Inc. ..................... 42

Building Envelope ConsultingThe Fishburn Group ................................. 38

Building Envelope Restoration SpecialistWall Savers Ltd. ....................................... 49

Building FaçadeEngineered Assemblies Inc. ................... 46

Building Façade Maintenance EquipmentTractel Ltd. ................................................ 19

Building ProductsThames Valley Brick & Tile ...................... 17

Building RestorationTritan Inc. ................................................. 41

Building Science and RehabilitationRemy Consulting Engineers Ltd. ........... 44

Building Science and Restoration ConsultantsRead Jones Christoffersen ..................... 17

Civil EngineeringUniversity of Toronto ............................... 35

Commercial Roofing SystemsDuro-Last Roofing ................................... 30

Concrete ProductsBarsplice Products Inc. .......................... 25

ConstructionBarsplice Products Inc. .......................... 25

Construction SoftwareExplorer Software Inc. ............................. 46

Consulting EngineersBelanger Engineering ............................. 37Construction Control Inc. ....................... 24

Crack Repair and WaterproofingD&D Crack Repair Ltd. ............................ 33

Dry Ice Cleaning TechnologiesThe Contractors Depot ............................ 40

EIFS and Restoration ProductsDryvit Systems Canada ........................... 16DuraBond Products Ltd. .....................OBC

Energy Efficient Spray Foam InsulationDemilec .................................................... 15

Energy Saving Insulation / Finishing SystemsThermal Design ......................................... 9

Engineering and Technical ServicesPeto MacCallum Ltd. ............................... 44

Engineering ConsultantsBrown & Beattie Ltd. ............................... 41Davroc & Associates .........................13, 38

Morrison Hershfield Ltd. ......................... 16SPG Engineering ..................................... 44

Exterior Cladding Solutions for New Construction / RestorationSto-Corp ..................................................IBC

Exterior Veneers and SidingRaymond & Associates Inc. .................... 44

Geotechnical, Environmental Consulting EngineersSPL Consultants Ltd. ............................... 40

Green Roofing SpecialistsZinCo Canada Inc. ................................... 17

Continued on page 50

n n n bUyer’s GUide

Restoration ContractorsBrook Restoration Ltd. .............................. 8Paranis Construction Inc. ....................... 44Bowie Contracting Ltd. ........................... 19

Restoration SpecialistsWall-Tech Restoration Inc. ..................... 50

Roof Consulting and Building Envelope TechnologyLVM ........................................................... 35

Roof Top Fall ProtectionKee Safety Ltd. ......................................... 38

Roofing SolutionsTremco Canada........................................ 41Viana Roofing & Sheetmetal Ltd. ........... 26

Roofing-Breathable UnderlaymentBuilding Resources SRP Canada .......... 26

Roxul Distribution SpecialistsTotal-R Inc. ............................................... 43

Scaffold Systems and PlatformsTOPS Scaffold & Shoring Supply Ltd. .... 49

Scaffolding, Swing Stages, MCWP, Lifts and BoomsSteepleJack Services ............................... 12

Scientific Testing & Monitoring EquipmentHoskin Scientific...................................... 43

Solutions for the Building EnvelopeVicwest ..................................................... 50

Steel Framing ManufacturerScafco Steel Stud Manufacturing Co. ... 29

Steel Roofing, Cladding and Decking SystemsVicwest ..................................................... 50

Stone Wall InsulationRoxul Inc. ............................................... IFC

Structural Engineering ConsultantsJablonsky Ast and Partners .................... 44

Structural RestorationUniversal Structural Restoration Ltd. .... 41

Testing EquipmentR.M. Group LLC ....................................... 20

Testing LaboratoryCan-Best ................................................... 31

Urethane Foam ContractorsC.U.F.C.A. ................................................... 6

Vapour BarrierE.I. DuPont Canada ................................. 27

Window ManufacturerSilvester Glass & Aluminum Products Ltd. ........................................ 46

Masonry Anchors, Ties and AccessoriesBlok-Lok Ltd. ............................................. 31

Masonry and Brick Laying Contractors, Building Repair and RestorationMJV Masonry & Contracting ................... 31

Mechanical ConnectorsBarsplice Products Inc. .......................... 25

Metal Ceilings / Interior FinishesChicago Metallic Corp. ........................... 31

Mineral Wool Insulation ManufacturersThermafiber Inc. ...................................... 16

Rental EquipmentL.M. Temperature Control Inc. ............... 38

Hazardous Building MaterialsSafe Tech Environmental Ltd. ................ 46

Hydraulic Mast-Climbing Work PlatformsKlimer ....................................................... 46

Insulating Glass Sealants and ComponentsFenzi North America Inc. ........................ 38

InsulationOntario Panelization ................................ 46

Leak DetectionInternational Leak Detection ................................................. 3

bUyer’s GUide nn n

Pushing the Envelope Spring2013...Pushing the Envelope Canada 5 OBEC does not specifically endorse...

Documents

Transcript of Pushing the Envelope Spring2013...Pushing the Envelope Canada 5 OBEC does not specifically endorse...

Pushing the Envelope Observation and Inference. Pushing the Envelope The Principle of Uniformitarianism: The present is the key to the past.

Pushing the Envelope -- Managing Very Large Projects

Pushing the shade envelope: Indiana Gardening Magazine

Let’s stop pushing the envelope and start addressing it: a … · 2004. 8. 18. · Let’s stop pushing the envelope and start addressing ... Newman, 1994). The analysis so far

Community Wind: Once Again Pushing the Envelope of Project ...

Pushing the Envelope · 10 • Pushing the Envelope: Go Paperless This Year | Digital technology has come such a long way, going paperless is easier than you might think. We'll show

Pushing the Envelope in Graph Compression · Pushing the Envelope in Graph Compression Panagiotis Liakos 1Katia Papakonstantinopoulou Michael Sioutis2 1University of Athens, 2Universit

Community Resilience: Pushing the Envelope

PUSHING THE TAR SANDS ENVELOPE: KINDER MORGAN’S …

"Bang for Your Marketing Buck! Pushing the e-Envelope"

CENTRIFUGAL COMPRESSORS Pushing the Envelope · PDF fileCENTRIFUGAL COMPRESSORS ... Pushing the Envelope ... tionary components of a new centrifugal compressor design . 2013 ANSYS,

Standard Printing Techniques Pushing the Envelope to 75 mg ... · Standard Printing Techniques – Pushing the Envelope to 75 mg Paste per Cell ... HPM-TFD-PV | May 7th 2013 Page

Pushing the Envelope of In Situ Transmission Electron ...espinosa.mech.northwestern.edu/publications/papers/Pushing the En… · Transmission Electron Microscopy ... Recent major

Pushing the Methodological Envelope

Pushing the Envelope - Aside

SolarWall - Pushing the Envelope Magazine Article - Ontario Building Envelope Council

KDOT COLUMN EXPERT: PUSHING THE ENVELOPE TO … › conferences.k-state...KDOT COLUMN EXPERT: PUSHING THE ENVELOPE TO EXTREME EVENTS Hayder A. Rasheed, Ph.D., P.E., Fellow ASCE Kansas

Pushing the Mathematical Envelope

Synchronicity: Pushing the Envelope of Fine-Grained ...discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1452477/1/p43-xiong.pdfSynchronicity: Pushing the Envelope of Fine-Grained Localization with Distributed

eFolder Expert Series webinar — Pushing the Envelope: Bringing Email Continuity to Clients