Adjacent Digital Politics Launches March issue of PBC Today for Northern Ireland

March 2015

Supported by

PLANNING& BUILDING CONTROL TODAYPLANNING& BUILDING CONTROL TODAY

ADJACENT

IN THIS ISSUE

Professor Alister Scott believes keyparticipants need to embrace the driversof development in a more joined-updiscussion about the housing crisis

05 | THE DISINTEGRATION OF THE HOUSING DEBATE Sam Ibbott, Deputy Public Affairs Director at

Environmental Industries Commissionexamines the latest government consultationon SuDs and the new approach of delivering itthrough the planning system

08 | PLANNING FOR SUDS

Sarah Birchall, Sustainability Engineer with theresearch and consultancy organisationBSRIA Ltd, describes what is required byGovernment Soft Landings

22 | GOVERNMENT SOFT LANDINGSWITHIN THE BIM ENVIRONMENT

How BIM can enable the landscape architect

NORTHERN IRELAND

QUICK SUSTAINABLECLEAN COST EFFECTIVE

PARTY WALL

The Party Wall Full Fill Blown Solution

ROBUST DETAIL E-WM-28™

www.knaufinsulation.co.uk

Technical Support Team

TEL: 01744 766 [email protected]

Download a QR reader for free from your App Store and then scan the QR for more information.

The

ll

PARTY WALL

WWty Par

PARTY WALL

Blown Fill Full

Solution

ROBUST DET

The

E-WM-28™

ROBUST DET

all WWall ty ParThe

E-WM-28™

AIL

Blown Fill Full

ET TAILE-WM-28™

Flexible Edge Seal

Solution

Cavity Stop

Blown

y 50mm (min) Masonrcavity filled with

Supafil 34

Block 100mm (min)

• E-WM-28 is the first unique Supafil parwall blown wool Robust Detail solution

• Contributes to a zero efwhen compiling SAP calculations

• ficient and quick installation by Efapproved technicians

• y installation processDr

, L y, Masonr

E-WM-28 is the first unique Supafil parwall blown wool Robust Detail solution

fective U-value Contributes to a zero efwhen compiling SAP calculations

ficient and quick installation by approved technicians

y installation process

, Light weight aggregate block work, min. 100mm cavity

ty E-WM-28 is the first unique Supafil parwall blown wool Robust Detail solution

fective U-value when compiling SAP calculations

ficient and quick installation by


Gypsum based boards


• No product storage on site

• No parge coat required

• Fully fills the cavity

• Unique “Supafil Parso you know you have the right material for the right per

• No requirement for pre-completion acoustic testing


No product storage on site

No parge coat required

Fully fills the cavity

all” blue ty W Wall” blue colouration Unique “Supafil Parso you know you have the right material for

mance.forthe right per

No requirement for pre-completion acoustic testing

e colour material for

ion acou

100mm (min) Par

Gypsum based boards (min density 8kg/m2)

mounted on dabs

TARGE COA ATNO P PARGE COA

ty wall cavity filled with 100mm (min) Par

llfil


For full information on E-WM-28 visit Robust Details website www//http:


For full information on E-WM-28 visit Robust Details website andbook/RobuseHtdetails.com/Th.robuswww

andbook/Robus

ion acou

obust De tD

QUICK

echnica TTechnical Suppor

TEL: 01744 766 666

AINABLESUSTCLEAN

eamt T Teamechnical Suppor

TEL: 01744 766 666

AINABLE CO

KINE2431ADV

wwwwww


-V1214

knaufinsulatio

VV-V1214

.knaufinsulatiowww.knaufinsulation.co.ukw


on.co.ukon co uk

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.knaufinsulation.co.uk

http://www.www

IntroductionWelcome to the March edition of

Planning and Building ControlToday – Northern Ireland.

Northern Ireland’s planning system ison the cusp of momentous changeswith local government reforms seeing11 new councils holding planningpowers by 1st April 2015. It is an exciting time, but one not withoutchallenges. Not least of those chal-lenges is ensuring that the transfer ofpowers from the Department of the Environment, to the councils is doneas seamlessly as possible. The ultimateresult of the new planning systemshould see huge benefits, not only forcommunities, but for developers alike.NILGA, the Northern Ireland LocalGovernment Association is confidentthat the new plan-led system will provide greater clarity for all, and will encourage the formation ofhealthy working relationships between the various participants in the planning process.

One area that must be addressedthrough the planning system is that offlooding which is a national infrastruc-ture concern. This issue examines thelatest government consultation on the SuDs programme with Sam Ibbottof the Environmental Industries Commission who looks at how this willbe delivered through the planningsystem. With an ever-increasing call for more housing to be built, and allpolitical parties likely to make a related

commitment in their general electionmanifestos this year, it is important toget SuDS regulations in place as soonas possible as our towns, cities, andurban spaces become ever moredensely populated.

In terms of BIM, this year has seen theDigital Plan of Work toolkit releasedalong with PAS 1192-5. This issue con-tains an article from Stephen Hamil,Director of Design and Innovation andHead of BIM at RIBA Enterprises, dis-cussing the Digital Plan of Work toolkit.Steve Thompson, Chair of BIM4M2 and Market Manager for Construction& Infrastructure at Tata Steel evaluatesthe product information required andhow it can be delivered, and Sarah Birchall of BSRIA describes what isrequired by Government Soft Landings.We also have a very interesting articlefrom Martyn Horne of the LandscapeInstitute’s BIM Working Group high-lighting how landscape architects cancollaborate and share information withtheir project teams in the evolvingprocess of BIM.

This edition also looks at energy efficiency with articles detailing fuelpoverty and mitigating energy losseswithin buildings – another key topicfor this time of year.

Whatever your profession, I hope youfind something of interest in this issueand look forward to hearing yourthoughts and comments. ■

Production CoordinatorNick Wilde

DesignerAndrew Bosworth

SalesGlyn Jackson

The editor does not necessarily agreewith or endorse any of the views orcontents of the articles and featureswithin this document. All articles andeditorials remain the copyright of theauthors, organisations and otherrelevant authorities by whose kindpermission they are reproduced. Allinformation has been checked and iscorrect at the time of going to press.The publisher will not be liable forany loss suffered directly or indirectlyas a result of the use of or reliance onthe information contained herein.

© Adjacent Digital Politics Ltd 2015

Adjacent Digital Politics Ltd and itssuppliers collect and process personalinformation for the purposes of cus-tomer analysis and market research.Our group/affiliate companies mayalso wish to contact you about ourproducts or services, or the productsof carefully selected third parties thatwe think you may be interested in.

Adjacent Digital Politics LtdDatum HouseElectra WayCrewe Business ParkCrewe Cheshire CW1 6ZF

Registered in England & Wales.Company Reg No. 8667479. VAT Registration No. 169 9152 64.

Lisa Carnwell

Laura Evans

Editorial Team

Contents

Index

Mar

ch 2

015

Planning for SuDsSam Ibbott, Deputy Public AffairsDirector at Environmental IndustriesCommission examines the latest

government consultation on SuDs and the newapproach of delivering it through the planningsystem

08

BIM and the landscapearchitectMartyn Horne of the LandscapeInstitute’s BIM Working Group

highlights how landscape architects cancollaborate and share information with theirproject teams in the evolving process of BIM

20

The toolkit for BIM –completing the jigsawStephen Hamil, Director of Designand Innovation at NBS, discusses the

digital toolkit that will complete the Level 2 BIMsuite and how it will enable everyone in theindustry to use BIM as an integral part of theireveryday working lives

16

Government Soft Landingswithin the BIM environmentSarah Birchall, Sustainability Engineerwith the research and consultancy

organisation BSRIA Ltd, describes what is requiredby Government Soft Landings

22

BIM and the data challengeIn developing data solutions for BIMMaturity Level 2, we also need tohave in mind the future needs of

Level 3 and beyond. Steve Thompson, Chair ofBIM4M2 and Market Manager for Construction &Infrastructure at Tata Steel evaluates the productinformation required and how it can be delivered

10

CDM2015 and domesticprojectsJames Ritchie of The Association forProject Safety answers the questions

most raised about the new CDM Regulations withregard to domestic projects

25

A solution to combat fuelpovertyThe NIA is calling on all politicalparties to recognise that home energy

efficiency needs to be defined as a NationalInfrastructure Priority to combat fuel poverty

28

For low energy officebuildings, keep it simpleThe design, construction and operationof low energy buildings should favour

a simple ‘fabric first’ approach wherever possiblewrites Tom De Saulles, building physicist at TheConcrete Centre

32

The challenges of thermalbridgingAlex Taylor, NHBC Senior EnergyConsultant, examines the challenges

that thermal bridging presents from an energyassessors point of view

36

Zero Carbon Buildings –the final countdownMatthew Evans, Technical Manager atKingspan TEK considers alternative

methods of construction which can meet the legalrequirements of zero carbon buildings

39

Insulating party wall cavities –a crucial stepWith the welcome announcementfrom DECC that insulating existing

party wall cavities is now included as a measure inthe latest RdSAP calculations for both the GreenDeal and ECO funding, Nick Ralph from MIMAexplains why measures such as this are so crucial

44

Capital allowances – boostingyour bottom-lineSteven Bone, Director at The CapitalAllowances Partnership Ltd explains

the tax relief on offer under the capital allowancescheme and what it can mean for businesses

46

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

BUILDING CONTROL

FINANCE

ENERGY EFFICIENCY

The Disintegration of theHousing DebateIn addressing the urgent need formore housing, Professor of

Environment and Spatial Planning, Alister Scottbelieves that key participants in the housingquestion need to embrace the economic, socialand environmental drivers of development in amore joined-up discussion

05

10D Ltd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18, 19BIMobject UK Ltd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13, OBCJCB Finance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49KNAUF Insulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IFC, 42, 43Saint Gobain Isover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34, 35Schöck Ltd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29, 30, 31Solibri UK Ltd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14, 15The Association of Project Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27Viewpoint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18, 19

| 5Planning and Development

In addressing the urgent need for more housing, Professor of Environmentand Spatial Planning, Alister Scott believes that key participants in thehousing question need to embrace the economic, social and environmentaldrivers of development in a more joined-up discussion…

As we move inexorably towards the generalelection in 2015, the issue of housing policyand delivery will become increasingly important

in political debates. Current estimates of futurehousing need reveal an annual need for some265,000 additional dwellings but, due to significantpast undersupply, this figure may well need to rise to300,000 (RTPI, 2014). Invariably, building houses on thisscale will invoke negative political and public response.But how and where should these homes be built?

In my view, there are no ‘magic bullet’ solutions asthe housing question is complex demanding muchmore cross-sector thinking; but this type of approachis something conspicuously absent in contemporary

policy and decision-making processes. Unfortunately,this is also a view that does not sit well with themedia, politicians or the public.

Arguably, we have reached this impasse becausethe ‘wrong’ question is being asked. Leaving asidethe intractable issue of how ‘need’ is measured, thequestion should not be how many houses do weneed to build; rather it should be: what kind of futureplaces do we want to create? But this fundamentalsocietal question is increasingly overlooked as thehousing debate becomes increasingly disintegrated.New development is viewed in isolated pieces without reference to its place in the overall built andnatural environment jigsaw. The fetish for housing

The Disintegration of the Housing Debate

numbers alone pays little reference to the infra-structure, community, economic and environmentalservices needed to support them. This is sympto-matic of a wider agency and sectoral myopia.

Potential solutions of new garden cities such as Ebbsfleet and Bicester have been heavily promotedby parts of the government. Yet the government isalso providing renewed policy support for protectinggreen belt from new housing incursions; such politicalposturing and potential contradictions generates significant scope for land-use conflict and uncertainty.

This is exacerbated by the vacuum in strategic planningand where some 70% of local authorities are yet tomake their local plans fully NPPF compliant (Source:PINS December 2014). Increasingly, questions are beingasked about the competency of the Duty to Cooperatein resolving unmet housing demand, together withother fundamental components of the housing questionsuch as speeding up the development pipeline,overcoming landbanking by developers, identifyingviable delivery mechanisms, and delivering affordabilityand social and environmental justice through newschemes such as help to buy.

So I want to explore a different way to frame andmanage the housing opportunity/problem. In doingthis, however, the key participants in the housingquestion need to go beyond the current Duty toCooperate models; moving out of establishedsector-based comfort zones and embracing theeconomic, social and environmental drivers ofdevelopment in a more joined-up discussion.

First, there needs to be a more holistic approach toobjective assessments of housing need. At present,too many assessments are made by the local author-ity in isolation resulting in challenges at examination.Unfortunately, the guidance and metrics for housingneed assessments are beset by statistical anomaliesand dubious econometrics, making any derivedfigure disputable. A collaborative approach such asthat pursued by the joint housing study of the Birmingham and Black Country LEPS provides auseful model forward under the auspices of theDuty to Cooperate. However, there is a powerful

6 | Planning and Development


case for making such models more transparent andunderstandable and also linking them to transport,employment, waste and climate projections.

Secondly, there needs to be strategic considerationand assessment of different growth models, setwithin the opportunities and constraints of housingmarket areas, not just within single local authoritieswhich do not represent functional geographies.Despite claims to the contrary, there is no way thatsolutions based on garden city ideas alone canaddress the housing requirement nor, equally, thatbrownfield sites alone can meet the projected housing need. So we need to bundle several optionstogether within housing market areas that delivermultiple economic, social and environmental benefits.Here a potential option mix might include new towns,urban extensions, urban densification, public transportextensions and dispersed development for example.

Thirdly, we need to move away from any one-size-fits-all approaches that restrict such options. In particular,the green belt has moved past its ‘use by’ date. I have argued elsewhere that we need to sensitivelyrethink the value of the green belt in order to maximise its environmental and social benefits, butonly as part of a wider discussion of placemaking. Suchgreen components form a vital link in developmentconsiderations: not as bolt-ons, but rather as coreinfrastructure to help promote liveability and growth.

Fourthly, we urgently need to consider how housingand employment developments are to be financedand delivered. All too often, the debate revolvesaround the perceived problem of securing planningpermission, but this is only one part of the overalldevelopment pipeline. Significantly, the developmentof 10,000 homes at Northstowe is being deliveringby the Homes and Communities Agency aslandowner on former RAF land – hence a brownfield,and previously-developed site. In many ways thismight provide an instructive way of overcomingsome of the stagnation observed in the developmentpipeline. Significantly, the TCPA has provided somemuch-needed leadership on this issue within its New Town Act manifesto with the idea of a revitaliseddevelopment corporation delivery vehicle.

Finally, we need to think about the quality of life forresidents and users of the new places we create. Alltoo often the social and environmental componentsare seen as luxury bolt-ons to new developments.Yet, in reality, they need to be integral componentsof the mix from the start. Issues of climate changeand health demand that we rethink how our cities,towns and countryside are designed and plannedto avoid costs and disruption further down the line;flooding, drought and extreme weather conditionsdemand more proactive responses. These are allissues that will greatly add to the sustainability andliveability of our settlements.

At the heart of the housing debate lies the need fora culture change from agency and sectoral insularityto more cooperative and collaborative venturesacross the built and natural environment professionsand the wider public to understand, view and assessbetter the housing picture within the wider eco-nomic, social and environmental settings in which itsits. This is far from some academic navel gazingexercise, but rather a new set of discussions thathave been missing from the current debate, which isbecoming increasingly sterile and polarised as theelection draws near. ■

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Alister Scott BA PhD MRTPIProfessor of Environment and Spatial PlanningBirmingham City [email protected]/built-environmentwww.twitter.com/bcualisterscott


http://www.bcu.ac.uk/built-environment

http://www.twitter.com/bcualisterscott

Planning for SuDsSam Ibbott, Deputy Public Affairs Director at Environmental IndustriesCommission examines the latest government consultation on SuDs andthe new approach of delivering it through the planning system…

The photo-op, when staged, can be a politiciansdream. If you follow politics, particularly at alocal level, they can often be unintentionally

hilarious – such as the classic pose of an MPcrouched down and pointing at a pothole with a lookof horror on his or her face as if the pothole had justsaid something rather untoward about their mother.So when the country saw widespread flooding lastyear it was unsurprising that MPs of all colours hastilydonned waders and took the opportunity to getphotos of themselves looking sympathetic next topeople whose lives had at best been inconveniencedand, at worst, devastated by rising water levels.

Flooding is a national infrastructure concern, andwith the issue so high in the public’s consciousnessit would have been an opportune moment toannounce at least one practical step forward – theimplementation of Sustainable Drainage Systems(SuDS). SuDS are the process of dealing with excesssurface water by mimicking natural processes whichslow the movement of water before it enters riversor streams, or stores the water so it can either soakinto the ground or evaporate. Not in themselves theanswer to all flooding concerns by any means, butSuDS have an important role to play – particularly inan urban environment.

The independent Pitt Review on flooding, which firstrecommended the greater uptake of SuDS, waspublished in 2008 and they were formally legislatedfor two years later in the Flood & Water ManagementAct (2010). An initial consultation on their implemen-tation (as required by Schedule 3 of the legislation)closed in early 2012, and two ‘go live’ dates weresubsequently announced and later rescinded.

Then in September of last year the governmentwent to consultation again with a new approach forimplementation which intends to deliver SuDSthrough the planning system. The governmentpublished its formal response to this consultation inlate December.

The consultation saw a diverse range of submissionsfrom local authorities, water companies, propertydevelopers, consultants, community groups andtrade associations (including the EnvironmentalIndustries Commission (EIC)). At EIC we raised anumber of concerns, many of which were at leastacknowledged in the government’s response and/orsubsequently dealt with to varying degrees. Chiefamong the issues we raised were that:

The latest consultation document framed SuDS•almost exclusively in terms of flooding, and didnot take into account their potential impact onwater quality;

Whilst the consultation’s focus on the ongoing•maintenance of SuDS is welcome, hastily deliveredbut inappropriate or poorly installed SuDS havethe potential for much higher maintenance costsin the long run;

Local planning conditions have not always been•effective in the past – with houses being built onflood plains for example;

There is a potential loophole in the proposed•exemption from SuDS requirements for ‘micro’developments (fewer than nine properties) inthat a major development could be reclassified as



numerous smaller ones. There will also be anonus on the local planning authority to monitorthe cumulative impact of numerous micro developments in their area.

In a Written Ministerial Statement published alongsidethe consultation response, the government madeclear their “expectation” that sustainable drainageshould now be included as part of major new devel-opments “unless demonstrated to be inappropriate”– which could, for example, be the result of ongoingSuDS maintenance not being “economically propor-tionate”; if SuDS were to impair the deliverabilityof the development; or if they were to place “anexcessive burden on business.”

Despite this, EIC welcomed the government’s emphasison a requirement for SuDS to be maintained overthe lifetime of a development. Although the marketin third party SuDS maintenance is relatively immatureand there are potential difficulties in gauging therobustness of maintenance providers and theirexpertise, we feel it is an important principle to haveset out from the start. There is in any case a suite ofmaintenance options for developers to choosefrom, allowing a level of flexibility in the methods by which this maintenance will be funded and delivered. Responsibility for putting an arrangementin place, whatever its make-up, however, remainsthe responsibility of the developer as part of theplanning application process.

Responses to the consultation did however raiseconcerns over a lack of technical expertise at localgovernment level, particularly in smaller local authorities, to determine the suitability of sustainabledrainage proposals when assessing planning applica-tions – which can lead to inconsistencies. Althoughnot originally proposed in the consultation documentas a channel for securing the required expert advice,the government has subsequently accepted that theLead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) are well placed toprovide advice on such issues due to recent provisionsin the Flood and Water Management Act which givesthese bodies overall strategic responsibility for localflood risk management, including surface water.The government now intends to consult on making

LLFAs a statutory consultee for planning applicationson surface water management.

These changes to planning will take effect from the6th April 2015 and the government intends topublish revised planning guidance in advance of thisdate, in addition to engaging with local governmenton a capacity building programme.

By this time it will have been seven years fromrecommendation to implementation – far longer thanhad been hoped. The new approach of deliveringSuDS through the planning system will likely seethem delivered more quickly, if not automatically toa high standard given the disparity of resourcesand expertise within and across local authorities. It isthe path of least resistance, but whilst not ideal it isworkable and certainly preferable to even furtherdelays by going back to the drawing board.

With an ever-increasing call for more housing to bebuilt, and all political parties likely to make a relatedcommitment in their general election manifestos thisyear, it is important to get SuDS regulations in placeas soon as possible as our towns, cities, and urbanspaces become ever more densely populated. If theresult of a wider spread use of SuDS is fewer photoopportunities for MPs, that’s a price worth paying. ■

EIC is the trade association for the UK’s environmental technologies

and services sector.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sam IbbottDeputy Public Affairs DirectorEnvironmental Industries Commission (EIC)Tel: 020 7222 [email protected]/EICUKtweets


http://www.eic-uk.co.uk

http://www.twitter.com/EICUKtweets

BIM and the data challengeIn developing data solutions for BIM Maturity Level 2, we also need to have in mind thefuture needs of Level 3 and beyond. Steve Thompson, Chair of BIM4M2 and MarketManager for Construction & Infrastructure at Tata Steel evaluates the productinformation required and how it can be delivered…

One of the most interesting aspects of digitisation of the construction industry forme is the potential to see a more complete

picture of the reasons for a project and how anasset can be delivered, operated and maintained tomaximum benefit. With my architect’s hat on I see theBIM process as potentially providing a more completeand detailed brief to work with, with access to theinformation I need to make real-time decisions. Withmy product manufacturer’s hat on I see it as a wayof helping project teams ensure they have the rightproduct to meet their specific needs, as defined bythe whole project team throughout the asset’s life-cycle. This may sound idealistic, but on both countsthese scenarios have already been achieved manytimes over, they’re just not yet the norm.

To illustrate the bigger picture and the direction oftravel, it’s worth looking at the number of thingsconnected to the Internet, and how this is predictedto increase exponentially over the coming years. Thereare already significantly more things connected tothe Internet than there are humans on the planet,and the impact of this is that things and humans canmore easily communicate and interact.

In addition to the predicted significant increase inconnectivity, the United Nations are predicting aglobal urban population growth of over 2.5 billionbetween 2014 and 2050 (United Nations PopulationDivision, 2014). In short, that means that if we housethe increase in population at an average of 100people per building, we will need to build just under2,000 residential buildings every single day for thenext 35 years.

The reason for this slight detour is to highlight thepoint that when BIM maturity Level 2 becomes thenorm, we are still only at basecamp in terms of thepotential that can be achieved. It also means that indeveloping data solutions for Level 2, we need tohave in mind the future climb to make sure we don’tkeep heading back to basecamp and starting again.From a delivery perspective, it means that with thescale of the physical construction challenge ahead,we need those tasked with delivery to be involved indefining the information that they will need to succeed,working with those who have the product data(manufacturers) to identify the data available and itspotential benefits.

To get to the Level 2 basecamp we need structured,accurate, reliable and accessible product data that


Devices connected to the Internet over time. Source: CISCOIBSG, 2013


not only clearly describes what a product is and howit performs, where it comes from and how it needsto be maintained, but also helps in the specification,supply and construction stages of its lifecycle. Thechallenge for the manufacturer amongst others, isto provide the right information in a suitable formatto support a vast range of players, across differentsectors and in different territories, using differentapproaches. If that is going to be achieved, thereare a few key issues to address:

Clearly defining what a product is, so that everyone•and everything knows what they are looking at;

Understanding the information requirements of•different players (e.g. architects, engineers, supplychain partners, contractors, clients) and providinganswers to those requirements;

Understanding the most suitable format for •exchange and use of information;

Understanding how information requirements•change in different countries or applications;

Delivering the information required to address all•of these issues, and understanding the potentialresources and investment required.

It is certainly crucial that product information can beexchanged across software platforms and regions, sothere needs to be clear mapping to open standards,including IFC (the Industry Foundation Classes). Inaddition, there needs to be clear mapping to anynationally mandated or required exchange formatssuch as COBie in the UK. The terminology used inthese systems is still inaccessible to a large proportionof those who need to use them, including the majorityof product manufacturers. Describing the thicknessof a profiled composite cladding panel highlightsthe need for clear descriptions and definitions ofparameters. Whilst generally described to the sameISO standard, a quoted panel thickness can mean

the core thickness (without the depth of the profile),or overall thickness (including the profile depth).This means that if a parameter is simply describedas thickness, there may be two very different valuesused in comparisons, potentially leading to incorrectspecifications.

This is where the concept of Plain Language Questions(PLQs) comes in. If a manufacturer understands thequestions they are being asked and in a languagethat they are familiar with, they are much morelikely to be able to provide the right information toanswer the question.

This is the concept behind PDTs and PDSs (ProductData Templates, which become Product Data Sheetswhen completed with a manufacturer’s productinformation). Originally developed by CIBSE, thePDT Steering Group now consists of representativesfrom other professional institutes, content providers,BIM4M2, BIM4 Fit Out, BIM4Water and BIM4DC (DataCentres). The focus is on having a cross-project teamthat has experience of a product or system type todevelop templates based on what is required toeffectively deliver that product, in commonly usedlanguage that is accessible to all. The BIM4M2 DataWorking Group is working with others to significantlybroaden out the reach of the templates to otherproduct types.

In developing PDTs, the starting point is alwaysCOBie or SPie (Specifiers Product InformationExchange) templates where they already exist toensure the minimum information requirements aremet, and direct links to open standards. However, tomaintain accessibility the complexity of mapping fromthe Plain Language Questions to these standardscan, and is dealt with away, from the simplicity ofthe main data sheets.

The sheets are developed in a controlled environmentbetween members of the design, manufacturing,contracting and FM communities, and then openedout to industry for wider consultation, meaning thatthe templates are created for industry, by industry.

There can be location-specific or sector-specificPLQs, all which are completed in Excel, and canthen be used across all software platforms.

One of the key benefits of this approach is thatthe information only needs to be supplied by themanufacturer once for every product, and it canthen be used in many applications, with projectteams defining what information they require ateach project stage.

The format can also be used as part of the selectionprocess to filter products that meet the specifiedrequirements. This may be achieved in the UKthrough the likes of the forthcoming Digital Plan ofWorks (DPoW), which whilst not mandated is likely tobe used on public projects and will be a useful tool.However, as manufacturers who supply productsinto different territories, we need to provide data in away that can be used in several formats and platforms,thus supporting both the Government’s 2025 Strategyto increase exports of construction products andthose private sector clients in the UK that are alreadyusing alternative approaches to developing MIDPs(Master Information Delivery Plans), and differentformats of information. By providing information ina format that can be easily mapped to suit thesediffering requirements we are likely to arrive at amore efficient solution all round. ■

For more information on Product Data Templates, visit

www.bimtalk.co.uk or the BIM4M2 website.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Steve Thompson RIBAChairBIM4M2 – BIM4 Manufacturers and [email protected]/SGThompsonBIMwww.twitter.com/bim4m2www.linkedin.com/company/bim4m2


http://www.bimtalk.co.uk


http://www.bim4m2.co.uk

http://www.twitter.com/SGThompsonBIM

http://www.twitter.com/bim4m2

http://www.linkedin.com/company/bim4m2

www.bimobject.com

Thousands of free BIM objects from almost300 manufacturers across Europe. Over 60,000architects and designers are using theseintelligent and configurable objects, withautomatic alerts when objects change.

With clever BIMobject®

APPs, the objects are available directly fromwithin market leading BIM solutions including Revit, ArchiCAD,Autocad and SketchUp Pro. Other formats are also supported.

Make sure you’re not missing out by going to www.bimobject.comor, to find out more, enter BIMobject into search on YouTube.

BIMobject UK LtdTom Newman – +44 (0)7427 162 204 – [email protected]

A

http://www.bimobject.com



How did you first become aware of theGovernment BIM and COBie requirements? ‘We had been working in a BIM environment for a numberof years and as one of our key client groups is government,in particular justice and defence, we were aware of the newCOBie requirement as a government directive from theoutset. To help improve our knowledge, we’ve attendednumerous conferences and seminars and disseminatedthe information internally to raise our overall companyawareness. We knew this was going to be important andthat it would involve developing new working practices, sowe wanted to be properly informed.’

When/how were you first involved in a COBie project? ‘In 2012 we were appointed to deliver one of HMGovernment’s Early Adopter projects. Our appointment wasas the technical delivery architect, initially to deliver thescheme to COBie data exchange stage 3 (representing thetechnical design solution). This changed however and wewere eventually became tasked with fully coordinating theBIM process and COBie data requirement (with the leadcontractor, other consultants and the supply chain) to stage6 – i.e. practical completion.’

What were your individual roles in the project?Anthony Walsh: ‘I am a Senior Associate and Stride Treglown’sSector Lead for Public & Community, which incorporatesthis particular work stream.’

Dean Hunt: ‘I am Stride Treglown’s BIM Co-ordinatorresponsible for directing the project team in a collaborativeBIM environment to ensure that the geometric coordinationand data requirements were achieved and fully coordinated.I needed to develop new workflows and strategies toachieve the COBie data requirements for the project.’

How did this project change the way you worked? ‘We were already familiar with current BIM processes, suchas coordinating geometry and clash detection. However, thenew process required us to output intelligent data in a formatthat could be easily accessible to all. This necessitatedimplementing new working practices and protocols to ensurethat these outputs could be incorporated into the COBieschema. Technically, we had to invest in additional add-insfor authoring tools to enable a more efficient workflow. Wealso had to invest time working with other project partnersto help them deliver the data requirements.’

Stride Treglown is an international architectural practicewith overseas offices in Dubai and Abu Dhabi and eightoffices in the UK including London, Cardiff and Bristol, makingthem the 10th largest architectural practice in the UK.

Sustainability influences the way Stride Treglown runs itspractice and since 2009 they have reduced their carbonfootprint by 40%. Their expertise covers most sectors andthey apply commercial awareness to balance the sometimesconflicting aspects of time, cost and quality to achieve thebest outcome for our clients.

Stride Treglown have always invested in technology andare at the forefront of BIM implementation.

In 2012, architects Stride Treglown wereappointed to deliver a UK Government earlyadopter BIM project. As ‘pathfinders’ workingwith newly defined processes and deliveringCOBie outputs, Stride Treglown faced anumber of challenges. To find out how StrideTreglown successfully implemented theproject, Solibri UK Managing Director DavidJellings, chatted with Anthony Walsh, SeniorAssociate and Sector Lead for Public &Community Projects and Dean Hunt, BIM Co-ordinator for Stride Treglown.

COBIE – UK CASE STUDYSTRIDE TREGLOWN

What was the main initial challenge? ‘This was a new way of working, not just for us, but everyonefrom the client down. The biggest challenge at the start ofthe process was the initial lack of understanding by theproject team. The information requirements and formatswere at first ambiguous, but after research into therequirements of COBie, the required levels of data becameclearer and more understandable to us all.’

And the wider challenges? ‘The whole team were fully committed to delivering theproject, but not having previously worked with COBie, it wasa steep learning curve for everyone involved, including themechanical & electrical engineers, civil & structural engineers,catering suppliers and key supply chain partners. All were veryenthusiastic about working in a collaborative environment.We believe our lead role was instrumental in ensuring that allparties were fully integrated into the process.’

How did Solibri become involved? ‘We were aware of the options available to output COBiedata, including directly from the authoring software itself.Initially this seemed like the obvious and easiest option butunfortunately it did not satisfy the requirements. It wasimportant to us that we found a way of automating whatwas essentially a very manual process, in order to developa repeatable workflow for our future COBie requirements.We originally became aware of Solibri Model Checker fromour attendance at the ICE BIM Conference in 2012 and itseemed to provide the solution to many of our problems.’

How was Solibri Model Checker (SMC) applied inthe project? ‘One of the main problems we faced was how to ensure thatthe model contained the complete and correct COBie data.It is very inefficient to spend time validating, and checkingCOBie outputs only to have to correct them further downthe line. Using SMC rule sets, we were able to validate thecompleteness of the COBie output before exporting to thedata sheets. Using the classification tables to coordinate all

consultant models is a particularly powerful feature of SMC,furthermore, SMCs infinitely configurable user interfacemakes coordinating data straight forward and particularlyexcels when using IFC models prepared by varyingauthoring software. Within SMC we were able to federateall discipline models using IFC, which is the industrystandard exchange format and also a requirement of theCOBie deliverable. At every stage, the Solibri UK teamworked with us closely to optimise these solutions.’

How successful was the application of SMC? ‘We believe we successfully implemented the workflow thatwe initially set out to achieve. We strongly believe that COBieshould be an output provided by data in the authoringsoftware which is then federated, coordinated, validated,and checked by SMC, which then automates the export tothe completed COBie sheets. By eliminating any manualdata entry in the final COBie sheets we not only save a hugeamount of time, but more importantly eliminate user errorfrom the process. Large projects that require data outputfrom many maintainable assets becomes almost impossibleto achieve without using automation software such as SMC.’

How do you see the future for COBie and Solbri’srole in its implementation? ‘Being championed by government, COBie will be businessas usual from 2016 and we are already seeing elements ofCOBie being requested by some private clients. We feelultimately that Excel as the output will gradually disappear;however, COBie data will remain and become the universaldelivery method across all projects. Stride Treglown has nowadopted SMC software to undertake internal coordinationso that as a practice we can deliver fully co-ordinatedbuildings. We feel confident that SMCs communicationmethod is far superior to its competitors and will be anessential component of future project deliveries.’

“Early engagement of the whole project team is essentialto ensure productive output. The management andcollaborative culture of the team is just as important as thetechnical manipulation of the data.”

Anthony Walsh, Senior Associate, Stride Treglown

“It was important to us that we found a way of automatingthe process, creating a workflow that was repeatable. It wasimperative to generate the data requirement via industrystandard IFC format as COBie data is a subset of IFC. Westrongly believe COBie data should reside in the authoringsoftware which can then be federated, coordinated, validated,and checked by Solibri Model Checker”.

Dean Hunt, BIM Co-ordinator, Stride Treglown

Solibri UK Ltd Phone: +44 (0) 844 854 9250 [email protected] | Sales: +44 (0) 844 854 9250 [email protected]

www.solibri.com

http://www.solibri.com



The toolkit for BIM –completing the jigsawStephen Hamil, Director of Design and Innovation at NBS, discusses the digitaltoolkit that will complete the Level 2 BIM suite and how it will enable everyone inthe industry to use BIM as an integral part of their everyday working lives…

The previous issue of BIM Today carried thenews that the NBS-led team had beenappointed to develop the digital toolkit that

will complete Level 2 BIM; now we are almost halfway through the process and on track for a Spring2015 launch.

So what is the toolkit? What will it do and whyis it important?At the outset, it is important to remember thatBuilding Information Modelling (BIM) is not an endin itself. The Government’s Construction Strategyidentifies predicted growth of 70% in the globalconstruction market and is determined that UK busi-nesses will be well placed to take advantage of this.

By delivering projects quicker, more cheaply andmore sustainably, the industry can take the lead in amarket where it already has a strong competitiveedge and drive up exports. More broadly, BIM has arole within the burgeoning digital economy, as UKconstruction businesses need to be in a position tocompete for the £200bn per annum market forintegrated city systems that is forecast for 2030.

It is within this context that we are developing anddelivering the digital toolkit on behalf of the UK BIMTask Group and Department for Business, Industryand Skills to sit alongside the five existing pieces ofguidance that make up the Level 2 ‘suite’.

Collaboration is at the heart of BIM and at the heartof the toolkit. As David Philp, Head of UK BIM TaskGroup, said in BIM Today at the end of last year,BIM is a behavioural change programme which willenable and promote the closer integration of disciplines and it is this that will lead to the improve-

ments in project delivery that lie at the heart of theconstruction strategy.

Up to now, BIM has been seen by many as thepreserve of a few, rather ‘techy’ people, but thismisses the point and the industry runs a risk ofgetting side-tracked by almost endless technicaldiscussions held by small groups.

The digital toolkit is aimed at addressing this: it willsimplify processes and be intuitive and easy to use,enabling everyone to use BIM as an integral part oftheir everyday working lives, whatever stage of BIMadoption they are currently at. The toolkit will be fitfor purpose right across the industry, including alldisciplines and all scales of projects from largeinfrastructure schemes to small, domestic scaleworks, so no-one should feel that it is “not for them”.

While the mandated use of BIM on central-Governmentfunded projects from April next year is clearly providingmuch momentum, discussions with architects,contractors, engineers, clients, manufacturers andfacilities managers have reiterated that there’s a realneed for this initiative across the board.

At a recent roundtable held at NBS Live, the widespread view was that, although everyone’scurrent processes allow projects to get built, thereare many holes in these existing methods of working.It’s these holes that the digital toolkit aims to fill,providing the missing pieces of the BIM jigsaw.

This kind of discussion makes the team hugelyoptimistic that it will be used in the private sectoras well as public, because it’s just a smarter wayof working.



So what exactly is the digital tookit? Put simply, theproject involves devising a standardised and digitally-enabled classification system and a digital plan of workstool. This will create a unified, single, classificationsystem for use within construction and will providean easy to use web portal which guides usersthrough the construction process.

The first piece, the classification system, will be anew version of Uniclass which will be based on theinternational ISO/DIS 12006-2 framework. This willbuild on the work NBS has already carried out overrecent years under commission from the ConstructionInformation Committee (CPIC). By completing this,the industry will have a unified structure which willprovide mapping and guidance so objects can beconfigured at a project level to have the correctmultiple classifications where required.

Some 5,000 templates will be developed, setting outguidance for Levels of Detail (LOD) and Levels ofInformation (LOI) for construction objects. Initiallythese will be spaces, systems and products for archi-tecture, building services, structural engineering,

landscape design and civil engineering. These will befreely available online and will also be available inboth IFC and MS Excel format. These will form the“construction language” that all project teams canuse to define their information exchanges for aparticular stage of a project.

The second piece, the digital plan of work, will enablethe project leader to clearly define the team, respon-sibilities, and an information delivery plan for eachstage of a project, who, what and when – in terms ofdocuments, geometry and property-sets.

Over the next few months the project team willcontinue conversations with representatives of alldisciplines and will be asking for feedback on progress.To assist this, events, webinars and seminars will beorganised by NBS in partnership with the professionalbodies that sit on our steering group.

The digital toolkit is for the whole industry and tohave the greatest chance of success, we want it to bedeveloped by the industry. To get involved and tokeep up with latest developments, please visit theNBS website ( www.thenbs.com/bimtoolkit ) and theNBS BIM Toolkit and Digital Plan of Work DiscussionGroup on LinkedIn. ■

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Stephen HamilDirector of Design and InnovationNBS

For inquiriesTel: 0191 244 [email protected]/TheNBSwww.twitter.com/StephenHamilNBS

Stephen Hamil, Director of Design and Innovation at NBS

http://www.thenbs.com/bimtoolkit


http://www.thenbs.com

http://www.twitter.com/TheNBS

http://www.twitter.com/StephenHamilNBS

18 PROFILE

At the Viewpoint North American userconference in Portland Oregon earlierthis year I presented the theory behind

Viewpoint’s BIM strategy. Because our goalof developing the best Common Data Envi-ronment in global construction is heavilyinfluenced by the UK BIM mandate, the diagrams and processes of PAS1192:2/3 featured heavily, and information exchangeand activities either side of the contract linewere discussed in some depth. Nowadays,the audience rates the speakers on mobiledevices and comments were captured insnappy tweet sized snippets, so the feedbackwasn’t long in coming. The most fascinatingwas ‘Very informative, but the session wasn’tabout BIM’. If the process of building aninformation model as a team to inform andenrich the design – build – operate lifecycleisn’t BIM, what then is?

It’s clear that BIM means many things tomany people.

This seemingly bizarre comment made methink. Words and concepts behind acronymsare overshadowed by the desire to adoptnew technologies to improve the processesand parts of the project puzzle the beholderoccupies. The designers see reusable designartefacts, the contractors see the greatlyimproved design review process, estimatorscan see the quantity take-off potential, andthe clients are promised better handoverinformation. It’s rather similar to the Indianfable of The Blind Men and the Elephant – thetrue form of BIM is masked by perspective.

At 4Projects by Viewpoint in Newcastle we see the whole picture, or indeed, the elephant in the room, every day. Our usersspan the entire asset lifecycle from conceptsketches, through construction and use todemolition. The B555 roadmap describes

the need for a common data environmenton both sides of the contract line so thatinformation in the project information model(PIM) can be curated collaboratively by thetier 1 appointments and their supply chains,before being passed into an asset informa-tion model (AIM) for the clients operationaluse. Critically this AIM information should bestructured in the same way as PIM. When thenext project starts, the information can bechurned back into the project as a key element of the briefing and tender process.But the self-populating employers informationrequirements (EIR) based on learnt wisdomfrom previous projects is currently a long wayfrom fruition.

Car manufacturers have already createdcleaner flows of products and data frominception to the hands of consumers. A newcar comes with a handbook on operation andmaintenance, the specification of the wiringor chassis is not relevant to the owner. In asimilar way a building should be deliveredwith a well ordered handbook of relevantinformation. COBie is designed for this pur-pose; although each building is unique andrequires tailoring of the required elements.

Why, also, do major construction companiesand design practices adopt an internal facingstrategy for BIM, when the government isencouraging a more external facing collabo-rative approach? Moving past this phase aswe approach 2016 is the key challenge, andno one business can do it alone.

Perhaps delivering Level 2 ahead of the mandate is stalling for some because theybelieve their partners haven’t completed therequired work to reach this level, and focustherefore on matters that can be addressedtoday like developing a clash detection strategy,or deploying new BIM authoring software.

BIM: The bigger picture

One of the most commonly cited shortcomingsis the quality of EIRs. Lacking a fundamentaldigital project briefing document draws thefocus away from creating a rigorous COBiedelivery process. This is a symptom however,rather than the cause. How can a client preparean adequate EIR when they don’t know whatdata they need, or are able to, procure.

Contractor

Client

Consultants

PROFILE 19

With prime responsibility are the facilitiesmanagement software vendors. It is oftensaid that until the FM tools can take COBie,the requirements cannot be set and, in turndelivered. FM software vendors refute this.They say that as soon as they know whichparts of COBie their customers care about,they’ll happily map COBie to their tool with-out risking access to legacy data. The FMworld is aware of BIM and its consequences,but delivering BIM for FM tools which arefully ‘COBie ready’ is like designing HD readytelevisions in the days when we only had 4channels. The recent release of BS1192:4was a key step towards BIM for FM in the UK,but software is not developed overnight anduntil this standard takes hold in live contractsthe scope of works will remain incomplete.

Clients also take issue with the project teamfor not offering a menu of data for them tochoose from; a kind of data takeaway menuallowing decisions to be made at the tenderstage about which bidder offers not only thebest price and value in terms of the physicalproject, but allowing the data product onoffer to be judged as part of the process. Butas with the FM conundrum the contractorcounters with the need to understand thescope of works before pricing the job. As itis, BIM consultants are currently workinghard to uncover the client’s data needs byplaying the role of a digital archaeologist, andthe resultant bespoke EIRs lack consistency.

The government is also to blame for weakBIM Execution Plans leading to BIM projectsresembling traditional projects but with moremodels and some new software tools. ‘Theyhaven’t even finished Level 2, so how can wework to it?’ This is true; it isn’t all there yetdespite 2016 approaching fast, and the situ-ation described may appear to be a Mexicanstandoff, but the government has addressed

the issues they are charged with resolvingbelieving it will have a domino effect on theother issues that prevent progress. Theybelieve that through standardisation and amandated process, a world leading construc-tion industry will prosper in the UK, sellingits services to the world whilst deliveringbetter projects at home.

Substantial investment in UK constructionhas delivered the right platform to delivermore efficient, more predictable and betterinformed projects than ever before. The1192 suite of documents has been designedand delivered to address the situations discussed above. The classification systemrequired to unify the way we order workacross the supply chain to deliver informa-tion exchanges has been chosen and is onits way to delivery. The dPoW work is under-way to allow clients to plan their projects andspecify their requirements in a standardisedway. All this with the COBie schema man-dated some time ago to offer a frameworkfor passing information from PIM to AIM,combined with the imminent EIR templatemake for a compelling description and facil-itator for Level 2 BIM maturity. When all ofthis effort is outlined, or even distilled intothe Bew-Richards wedge, which firstappeared in 2008 it is no wonder the worldis paying attention, this includes global software providers like Viewpoint.

Although UK defined, these are not just UKspecific issues. Every modern constructionindustry needs to extract structured data fromtheir projects, distilling it into information,which, combined and interrogated producesknowledge, impacting their business withwisdom won.

As for BIM, has the concept outgrown itsacronym? Maybe it’s just ‘Big Data’ with BIM

John AdamsBIM Product Owner4Projects by Viewpoint Tel: +44 (0)845 330 [email protected]

processes as a mere source. We now havesoftware as a service (SaaS) databases forconstruction, offering cross project knowledgecapture and the collaborative data captureas and when it is created either on site, inthe office or in the factory. This is why View-point, as a software company that focussessolely on construction and which has awealth of experience in SaaS and databases,is really focussing its energy in the BIM arena.We know construction and understand howchallenging every day can be in your busi-ness and develop tools to help. We arealready the home of thousands of live proj-ects with all of the complex needs this brings.However, as construction industry processesevolve, the more structured data the supplychain will be able to produce to clientsdemand, creates a need for construction tohave software tools that facilitate the deliveryand acceptance of a digital product alongsidethe built fabric. So if you want to talk abouthow to construct, procure and take advan-tage of the ‘I’ in BIM call the 4Projects byViewpoint team.


http://www.4projects.com

BIM and the landscape architectMartyn Horne of the Landscape Institute’s BIM Working Group highlightshow landscape architects can collaborate and share information with theirproject teams in the evolving process of BIM…

A ny person or company setting out on theBIM journey may understandably think thatBIM and its associated term, the Building

Information Model, refers directly to buildings ormore specifically, architecture. They may also beforgiven for thinking that it also refers to a particularfile format or specific piece of software. However,BIM is not a file format, it is not a piece of softwareand it is not even an information technology. Ratherit is a business process that is defined by a series ofworkflows (that may vary from project to project)and these workflows are enabled by informationtechnology. Furthermore, the building referred to inits name is not a noun as in ‘the building’, but a verb,as in ‘to build’. This is the first step to understandinghow landscape architecture fits into the BIM.

Collaboration and communicationA key aim of the BIM process is to facilitate collabora-tion, communication and the effective exchange ofdata between different members of the constructionteam.

A typical visual definition of BIM is heavily focused onthe architecture and it’s often shown without even abasic terrain. But a building cannot, and does notexist as a separate entity to its site. As seen in Fig. 1,even at a basic planning level stage, the 3D modeland its linked 2D plans, elevations, sections andinformation schedules communicate so much moreinformation because they involve the site.

At the Landscape Institute we recognise the needto collaborate in order to get schemes built. TheBuilding Information Model itself, can be seen as amanifestation of that collaborative process of

communication and information exchange. It is mosteasily understood by the image below (Fig. 2), whichshows a three dimensional digital model of theproject to be constructed.

From this model it is possible for the various partiesinvolved in the project to extract both visual anddata-based information back out of the model. Forexample, plans, elevation and sections can be takenor cut through the model and information can be


Fig. 1

Fig. 2


generated in the form of reports and schedules.Crucially, because the information can be taken fromthe live model, a great deal of the repetitive workencountered in traditional 2D CAD based drawingand schedule creation can be reduced and just asimportantly, errors can be reduced or eliminated.

What can landscape BIM offer specifically?In addition to the traditional documentation stage,the landscape BIM can offer terrain water flowanalysis, minimum and maximum grading analysis,site cut and fill calculations, water volumes, existingtree survey and tree protection planning, plantingschedules, material quantities, maintenance reportsand clash avoidance with underground services.

Both the Landscape Institute and the UK Governmentrecognise that the software required to design anddocument architecture and engineering is not nec-essarily going to be the best software for landscapearchitects. It is one of the reasons that both institu-tions support the move to certified, but neutral fileformats such as IFC and data exchange standardssuch as COBie and Product Data Templates.

Helping the industry changeOne of the remits of the Landscape Institute’s BIMWorking Group, which was set up approximately twoyears ago, is to develop change within the industry.

To highlight a couple of the group’s recent activities, weare currently running a series of BIM Masterclassesaround the country to present the BIM workflowwithin the context of the UK Government’s Mandatefor BIM Level 2, and the Digital Plan of Work withinlandscape architecture. The group is also involved indeveloping a series of Landscape Industries ProductData Templates which will feed directly into BIMLevel 2 COBie datasets.

ConclusionChange can be disruptive. Without a doubt, BIMwill require an understanding of new processes andpossibly the acquisition of new skills. But it is alsoimportant that as a design profession, we alsomaintain the values that make us unique. Too often,conversations about BIM exclude reference toquality of design, creativity and visual communicationand it is really important that as we explore digitalapproaches and embrace the efficiencies of the new,that we also maintain the best of our traditionaltechniques and skills and expertise at the same time.It is an interesting time for landscape architectureas it is for the entire construction industry, but therehas probably never been a time when the holisticperspective of the landscape architect has beenmore valuable. ■

For more information, please visit the BIM section of the LI website at:

http://www.landscapeinstitute.org/knowledge/BIMOpenProject.php.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Martyn HorneLandscape InstituteTel: +44 (0)207 685 2640www.landscapeinstitute.orgwww.twitter.com/talklandscape

Fig. 3

http://www.landscapeinstitute.org/knowledge/BIMOpenProject.php

http://www.landscapeinstitute.org

http://www.twitter.com/talklandscape

Government Soft Landings within the BIM environmentSarah Birchall, Sustainability Engineer with the research and consultancy organisationBSRIA Ltd, describes what is required by Government Soft Landings…

The word BIM is everywhere at the moment,and every now and then Government SoftLandings (GSL) is also mentioned in the same

sentence, but there is still some confusion withinthe industry around what BIM and GSL are.

The UK construction sector is interested in thesesubjects because the UK Government has specifiedthat all central government departments will berequired to adopt fully collaborative 3D BIM (in termsof BIM maturity, this is Level 2 BIM which means,among other things, that all project and asset information, documentation and data is worked onelectronically and collaboratively) on their projectsas a minimum by 2016. Government has refinedits definition of Level 2 BIM as compliance with thefollowing seven components, one of which is GSL:

1. PAS 1192-2: 2013 Specification for informationmanagement for the capital/delivery phase ofconstruction projects using building informationmodelling

2. PAS 1192-3: 2014 Specification for informationmanagement for the operational phase of assetsusing building information modelling (BIM)

3. BS 1192-4: 2014 Collaborative production ofinformation Part 4: Fulfilling employers informationexchange requirements using COBie – Code ofpractice

4. Building Information Model (BIM ) StandardProtocol for use in projects using Building Infor-mation Models

5. Government Soft Landings (GSL)

6. Digital Plan of Work

7. Classification

On the UK Government’s BIM Task Group websiteBIM is defined as “value creating collaborationthrough the entire life-cycle of an asset, underpinnedby the creation, collation and exchange of shared3D models and intelligent, structured data attachedto them”. BSRIA views it more simply as a managedapproach to the collection and exploitation ofinformation about built assets.

GSL is a UK Government client requirement onprojects that has been drawn up from the principlesof a BSRIA published document called Soft LandingsFramework BG54/2014. These requirements havebeen developed for use within Central Government’sown procurement strategy. The key objective is about“aligning the interests of those who design and con-struct an asset with those who subsequently use it”.

Although the GSL process generally follows the SoftLandings methodology described in the publication,it also adds the use of metrics to demonstratecompliance with construction project outcomes.

Under GSL, government departments will berequired to define a series of high-level outcomes atthe very beginning of a project. GSL also provides keyquestions that will need to be asked by the governmentdepartment’s GSL project champion (an individualassigned to each project to see the GSL process isfollowed through) and answered by the constructionteam as the project progresses. It is designed to aiddecision making and focus on the defined project



outcomes. There are four areas that these outcomesneed to link with and each will need targets andmonitoring throughout the project stages:

1. Functionality and Effectiveness: the needsof occupiers/users of the building must be meteffectively.

2. Environmental performance: performance targets in terms of energy efficiency, water usageand waste reduction must be met.

3. Facilities Management: a clear, cost efficientstrategy for managing the operations of thebuilding is vital.

4. Commissioning, Training and Handover: it isimportant that projects are delivered, handed

over and supported to meet the needs of the endusers, operators and maintainers.

Exactly how the metrics will be set is still work inprogress but GSL, along with its measurements forbuilding performance, will help ensure that thebuilding delivered meets the client’s aspirationsand objectives. GSLs main benefit is around meet-ing the needs of the end users and the requiredoperational outcomes.

Further information about BIM, Government Soft Landings and Soft

Landings can be found at the following websites:

http://www.bimtaskgroup.org/gsl/

https://www.bsria.co.uk/services/design/soft-landings/free-guidance/

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sarah BirchallSustainability Engineer BSRIA LtdTel: 01344 [email protected]/BSRIALtd

In 2009, BSRIA and the Usable Buildings Trustdeveloped the core principles and published theSoft Landings Framework. The idea behind it is tomake buildings perform better from day one.

The Soft Landings approach identifies specificgateways in the design and construction processwhere the performance needs to be reviewed andany issues addressed. By using the gateways to makechanges and monitor improvements, a buildingcan pass more smoothly from its build phase intooccupation. This creates a “soft landing” rather thana “crash landing”.

Sarah Birchall, Sustainability Engineer, BSRIA

http://www.bimtaskgroup.org/gsl/

https://www.bsria.co.uk/services/design/soft-landings/free-guidance/


http://www.bsria.co.uk

http://www.twitter.com/BSRIALtd

| 25Building Control

CDM2015 and domestic projectsJames Ritchie of The Association for Project Safety answers the questions mostraised about the new CDM Regulations with regard to domestic projects…

Frankly, the APS phone line has been red hotsince the beginning of the year. Everyonewants to know the implications of the new CDM

Regulations; what they mean for their jobs, clients,designers and contractors. Can I be a PrincipalDesigner? My client wants to appoint me to carry ongiving him advice on his construction projects – isthat allowed? How strict is the Principal Designerduty to ensure designers comply with the regulations?What is going to happen on domestic projects? Whatif my domestic client appoints all the contractorsseparately?

CDM2015 is aimed at small and domestic projects –the very area where most construction accidentsand incidents are occurring – and many of the callsare about this area.

So what do Domestic Clients Need to do?CDM2015 understands that most domestic clients willnot be familiar with design or construction projectsor associated legislation. If someone is about to alteror extend their house or buildings, thinking of puttingup a new one or demolishing an existing one, thenthe Construction (Design and Management) Regula-tions 2015 (CDM2015) place a number of specificduties on them as a construction Client.

The aim of the CDM2015 Regulations is to makehealth & safety an essential and integral part of theplanning and management of projects and to makesure that everyone works together to reduce the riskto the health or safety of those who work on thestructure, who may be affected by these works, orwho will use it once it’s completed. A domestic clientis someone who has construction work done on their

own home, or the home of a family member which isnot in connection with a business. Unlike CDM2007,domestic clients have duties under CDM2015.

The extent of these duties varies with the type ofproject involved. On projects that are likely to involvemore than one contractor, the domestic client isrequired to appoint a Principal Designer beforesignificant detailed design work starts so that theycan advise and assist the client with their healthand safety duties and plan, manage, monitor and co-ordinate the health & safety of the pre-constructionphase of the project. The Principal Designer is adesigner (architect, building surveyor or engineer forexample) who can demonstrate to the client that theyhave knowledge, skill and experience of CDM2015 andunderstand the process of design risk management.

When clients are talking to a designer or designersabout their project they should check that thedesigner has the capability and experience to do thework. A designer might be a member of one of thefollowing professional bodies - ARB, RIBA, RIAS, CIAT,RICS, IStructE etc. and, in order to carry out thePrincipal Designer role, should have an accreditationin construction health & safety risk management(Registered membership of APS for example) or canprovide evidence of having undertaken appropriatetraining on CDM2015.

The Regulations recognise that Clients hold thepower to influence and control the designers andcontractors they engage or appoint on a project, andtherefore that the ultimate responsibility for theachievement of a safe and healthy project is in yourhands as much as theirs.

The Regulations are about making sure that there is:

Early appointment or engagement of capable key•people or organisations that have sufficient skills,knowledge, experience and resources;

A realistic project programme which gives enough•time for planning and programming as well ascarrying out the work itself;

Early identification and reduction of construction•risks and proper management of those that remain, so that construction is safe and does notdamage the health of workers or others;

Co-operation between all involved in a project•and effective coordination regarding health &safety issues;

Adequate welfare facilities provided from the start•and throughout the construction phase; and that

Appropriate information is made available to the•right people at the right time so that work can becarried out safely and without risk to health.

However, it is very important that the amount ofeffort devoted to managing health & safety is keptappropriate and proportionate to the complexityof the project and level of risks. It is particularlyimportant to be aware of, and avoid, unnecessarypaperwork. Most domestic work should be relativelysimple and therefore require minimal paperwork.

What type of domestic project is being planned?Irrespective of size or duration, the CDM2015 regulations separate construction projects into twotypes – dependent on how many contractors willbe involved in the project.

The two types are:

Projects with only one contractor – where theproject will only require one contractor working onthe site. An example of this might be an electricianrewiring the house or a plumber installing a replace-ment boiler, when no other trades are required todo any work. Where the project only involves one

contractor, the client duties specified in CDM2015Regulation 4(1) to (7) and Regulation 6, must becarried out by the contractor. The contractor needsto undertake these duties in addition to their ownduties as a contractor.

When clients are selecting a contractor, they shouldensure that the contractor is aware of the client dutiesunder CDM2015 as well as their own contractor duties.Clients are advised to ask for examples of how thecontractor has done this on previous projects.

Projects that are likely to involve more thanone contractor – this will be the majority of projects. For example, if the work will require abricklayer, electrician, plumber, roofer and plasterer,then that is five contractors.

If it is likely that the project will require more than onecontractor, then the client must appoint a designerwith control over the pre-construction phase asPrincipal Designer and a contractor with controlover the construction phase as Principal Contractor.These appointments must be made as soon aspracticable and before the construction phase begins.If the client fails to make these appointments, thenthe designer in control of the pre-construction phaseis deemed to be the Principal Designer and thecontractor in control of the construction phase isdeemed to be the Principal Contractor.

If the client is in doubt, they should assume that theproject will require more than one contractor. Theappointed designer or contractor should be ableto help clients decide or alternatively clients cancontact the free Public CDM Helpline as a source ofindependent advice on 0333 088 2015. ■

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . James Ritchie BA BArch RIBA RMaPSHead of External Affairs and Deputy Chief ExecutiveThe Association for Project SafetyTel: 0845 [email protected]

26 | Building Control


http://www.aps.org.uk

WILL YOU HAVE THE SKILLS TO BE A PRINCIPAL DESIGNER?

Industry recognised advice, guidance & trainingFIND OUT MORE AT www.aps.org.uk

http://www.aps.org.uk

A solution to combat fuel povertyThe NIA is calling on all political parties to recognise that home energyefficiency needs to be defined as a National Infrastructure Priority tocombat fuel poverty…

T he National Insulation Association (NIA) isadvising that energy efficiency interventionsprovide the best long term solution to reduce

energy bills and tackle fuel poverty. They are also themost cost effective way to reduce carbon emissions.

Neil Marshall, Chief Executive at the National InsulationAssociation said: “Following the significant reductionin insulation activity under the Energy CompanyObligation and the closure of the SWI funding in the2nd phase of the Green Deal Home improvementFund, the government has to rethink its stop startschemes and incentives. It really needs to put inplace a long term plan and funding mechanism ifwe are to insulate the UK housing stock in a timelymanner. With over 7 million homes having inade-quate loft insulation, over 5 million that requirecavity call insulation and almost 8 million homesthat need solid wall insulation, we need to significantly strengthen energy efficiency policiesand programmes.”

Make Energy Efficiency retrofit an Infrastructure PriorityThe Energy Bill Revolution Campaign which the NIAsupports is calling for 2 million low income homes tobe brought up to EPC Band C by 2020, and 6 millionlow income UK homes up to EPC Band C by 2025.

To achieve these targets energy efficiency needs tobe made a UK infrastructure investment priorityon a par with energy generation and transport etc.To meet the 2020 target requires increasing annualinvestment to £2bn per year. This could be achievedby supplementing the ECO with either half of the£2bn annual proceeds of carbon revenue from the

Carbon Emissions Trading Scheme and Carbon FloorPrice projected for 2015 to 2020, or by using a smallpercentage of the UK infrastructure budget. An extra£1bn of government investment each year onlyrepresents 2% of the annual £45bn governmentinfrastructure budget. Investment in retrofitting homesto make them energy efficient not only provides thebest way to cut energy bills, reduce carbon emissionsand tackle fuel poverty, it also represents one of thebest economic investments the government canmake in terms of growth, jobs created, value for moneyand tax revenue. The government’s infrastructureprogramme and budget should be prioritisedaccordingly.

Marshall added: “The NIA is calling on all politicalparties to recognise that home energy efficiencyneeds to be defined as a National InfrastructurePriority with public investment to support the mostvulnerable households and to create the confidencefor the industry to scale up investment over thelong term.” ■

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . National Insulation Association (NIA)Tel: 08451 [email protected]/NIALtd

28 | Energy Efficiency


http://www.nia-uk.org

http://www.twitter.com/NIALtd

PROFILE 29

As a leading specialist in the provision of advancedsolutions for thermal energy structural insulation,Schöck demands extremely high product perform-ance standards. The company always ensures thatall solutions exceed the necessary building regula-tions and that any performance claims are verifi-able. To guarantee the accuracy of its currentperformance values, Schöck has submitted threeof its main connectivity solutions for independentevaluation by the Oxford Institute for SustainableDevelopment (OISD), at Oxford Brookes University.One of the UK’s largest research institutes dedi-cated to sustainable development research in thebuilt and natural environments.

To identify areas where there is a risk of conden-sation and therefore mould growth in differentdesign situations, a ‘surface temperature factor’(fRsi) can be used. It allows surveys under any thermalconditions and compares the temperature dropacross the building fabric, with the total tempera-ture drop between the inside and outside air. Theratio is described in BRE IP1/06; a document citedin Building Regulations Approved Documents PartL1 and L2 and Section 6 in Scotland. Using the formula, the recommended (fRsi) value for officesand retail premises is equal to or greater than 0.5;and to ensure higher standards of comfort foroccupants in residential buildings, equal to orgreater than 0.75.

Three connectivity types were submitted for eval-uation. Namely, concrete balcony connections(type K), steel balcony connections (type KS14) andsteel beam connections (type KST). All three weretested using different construction methods. Thepurpose of the investigation being to determinethe resultant heat loss, minimum surface temper-ature and therefore temperature factor (fRsi) tocomply with UK Building Regulations Part L.

With the type K thermal break element, two situa-tions were modelled. The first represents was awall construction with balcony slab formed by

Schöck performance values independently verified by the OISD

projecting concrete floor slab through wall withbalcony door. The second is the same wall con-struction, but with a Schöck type K50 isolating thebalcony slab from the floor slab with balcony door.

The results obtained show a temperature factor of0.725 for the connection without Isokorb and0.912 for the connection with Isokorb. As in theUK, the temperature factor (fRsi) must be greaterthan or equal to 0.75 for residential buildings, thetype K50 exceeds these values and meets therequirements of Building Regulations ApprovedDocuments L1 and L2. The result for the modelwith no connector was a failure in this application.

The type KS14 modelled four situations. (1) Directconnection of balcony support bracket to concretefloor slab; (2) a 10mm ‘thermal pad’ using weldedendplate on balcony support bracket; (3) a 20mm‘thermal pad’ using welded endplate on balconysupport bracket and (4) a KS14 unit connecting balcony support bracket to concrete slab.

Results: WithoutIsokorb

WithIsokorb K50

Temperature factor(based on wall surface)

0.725 0.912

Results:

Description Min surfacetemp ºC

Temperaturefactor fRSi

No balcony connection 0.949

Model 1Direct connection

13.62 0.681

Model 2Pad connection 10mm

14.26 0.713

Model 3Pad connection 20mm

14.11 0.706

Model 4KS14 H200

18.07 0.904

It is evident that the performance of the IsokorbKS14 is the only solution, with fRsi = 0.904, to exceedthese values by some margin and will thereforemeet the requirements of Building RegulationsApproved Documents L1 and L2. Further, theresults demonstrate that where no unit is used (fRsi= 0.681) and also with the 10mm and 20mm padconnections (fRsi = 0.713 and 0.706 respectively) –all three would fail against the criteria required forresidential buildings.

The third product to be studied was the KSTmodule. A steel I-beam is assumed to passthrough an 80mm layer of insulation, which could

(All of the images show display Fig numbers as they appear in the published OISD report).

Fig 8. Direct connection (Case 1). This detail DOES NOT con-form with UK Building Regulations Part L requirements forminimum temperature factor in dwellings (fRSi = 0.75) Fig 2. Schöck KS14 unit used with masonry wall and

concrete slab

Fig 11. KS14 H200 connection (Case 4) where this detailDOES CONFORM with UK Building Regulations Part Lrequirements for minimum temperature factor indwellings (fRSi = 0.75)

Fig 3. The KS14 unit SOLIDO model (surrounding constructionomitted for clarity)

Fig 10. 20mm pad connection (Case 3). This detail DOES NOTconform with UK Building Regulations Part L requirementsfor minimum temperature factor in dwellings (fRSi = 0.75)

30 PROFILE

PROFILE 31

represent a roof beam running through the buildingenvelope to support an exterior canopy or overhang.Here three types of situation were studied. First anHEA200 I-beam separated by thermal isolator unitIsokorb KST16 and a HEA240 I-beam separated bythermal break unit Isokorb KST22. Second, a singleHEA200 I-beam and a single HEA240 I-beam passingstraight through the insulation layer. Third, anHEA240 I-beam divided by a PTFE ‘thermal pad’.

The Isokorb KST16 and KST22 units, with fRsi = 0.82and 0.81, are the only solutions to exceed the requiredvalues, whereas the results for the continuousbeams and beams separated by PTFE pads aremarginal/failures for commercial buildings and aredefinitely failures for residential buildings.

The independent test results from OISD thereforeall verify the product performance standardsclaimed by Schöck, with the various Isokorb solutionsexceeding the necessary building regulations.

Technical Support DataFor the type K Isokorb, SOLIDO software from Physibelwas used to construct three dimensional models of theapplications described, in accordance with BS EN ISO10211:1 (1996) Thermal Bridges in Building Construction– Heat flows and Surface Temperatures, General Calcu-lation Methods BSI, 1996. Half a unit was modelledabout its axis of symmetry. Steady state solution was bymeans of the iterative finite difference method.

Schöck LtdTel: 01865 290 890Fax: 01865 290 [email protected]

For the type KS14 Isokorb, SOLIDO v3.1 software fromPhysibel was used to construct three dimensionalmodels of the applications described, in accordancewith BS EN ISO 10211:1 (1996) Thermal Bridges inBuilding Construction – Heat flows and Surface Temper-atures, General Calculation Methods BSI, 1996. Steadystate solution was by means of the iterative finite differ-ence method.

For the type KST Isokorb, TRISCO software from Physibelwas used to construct three dimensional models of theapplications described, in accordance with BS EN ISO10211:1 (1996) Thermal Bridges in Building Construction– Heat flows and Surface Temperatures, General Calcu-lation Methods BSI, 1996. Steady state solution was bymeans of the iterative finite difference method.

Full test results are available on request:

Type K Report Reference: 121212SCH

Type KS14 Report Reference: 120927SCH

Type KST Report Reference: 060814SCH

The report findings are based on the basic standard detailwith cavity wall below the slab and glazing above.

For the above and for your free copy of the Schöck Specifiers Guide and/or the Technical Guide, contact thecompany on 01865 290 890 or visit www.schoeck.co.uk

Results:

Description Temperaturefactor fRSi

Isokorb KST16 0.82

Steel I-beam HEA200 passing through insulation

0.51

Isokorb KST22 0.81

Steel I-beam HEA240 passing through insulation

0.50

http://www.schoeck.co.uk


http://www.schoeck.co.uk

For low energy office buildings,keep it simpleThe design, construction and operation of low energy buildings should favoura simple ‘fabric first’ approach wherever possible writes Tom De Saulles,building physicist at The Concrete Centre…

For effective long-term sustainability you need toget the fundamentals of building design right.Increasingly, architects and their clients are

returning to fundamental passive design principlesthat allow fabric performance to be fully optimised.This integrates the thermal mass of exposed structuralelements with the design of glazing, ventilation,shading and mechanical systems. This helps ensurecomfortable conditions can be maintained duringspring and summer, whilst avoiding or minimisingthe need for mechanical cooling.

In practice, thermal mass is typically provided byheavy-weight floors synonymous with concrete framebuildings. Lightweight timber construction and typicalsteel frame buildings cannot match the performanceprovided by concrete floors, which can be constructedwith an exposed soffit to fully access its inherentthermal mass. The large surface area of the soffitabsorbs unwanted heat, helping regulate the internaltemperature and peak cooling demand. Using concrete floor slabs in this way makes good sense,as they typically provide by far the greatest source ofthermal mass in non-residential buildings and canreadily absorb heat during the day and release it atnight with the aid of night-time ventilation.

A question often asked by architects and designers is‘how much concrete do you need to provide thermalmass?’ The answer largely depends on the extentto which you want to optimise the building design.It is sometimes thought that 100mm of concrete issufficient, but this fails to take account of a range offactors including how buildings actually respond toreal weather conditions. For example, a naturallyventilated office with exposed 100mm composite

floors (steel decking/soffit with in-situ concrete topping) should have sufficient heat capacity to copewith a simple 24 hour heating and cooling cycle.However, in addition to a building’s daily cycle, thereare also longer cycles related to a typical hot spell(usually three to five days) and also the five workingdays per week cycle, from which heat will reach different depths within the available thermal mass.

In the case of floors in a non-air conditioned buildingfor example, the greater the slab depth, the longerthe time period it responds to; the core of a 300mmthick concrete slab responds to the monthly averagecondition and draws heat in deeper over an extendedperiod of hot weather. For longer time periods thesefactors are important because it is the longer-termaverage room temperatures that define the thermalstorage core temperature and hence the temperaturegradient that draws heat in. So, whilst a 100mm ofconcrete offers some element of thermal mass,the thicker slabs used in concrete frame buildingsprovide greater temperature stability and increasedcooling performance across a range of conditions,including hot periods.

In terms of embodied CO2, research shows there islittle difference between concrete and steel frameoffice buildings. Perhaps of more relevance, is theoperational CO2 savings provided by thermal mass,through its ability to avoid or minimise the need forair conditioning. Over a 20 year period the savingsachieved can account for around 75% of the initialembodied CO2 of the concrete, or in other terms,the whole life CO2 performance of a concrete frameoffice building is a tiny fraction of its initial embodiedCO2 when the thermal mass is exploited.


When another factor known as carbonation (theabsorption of CO2 by concrete) is factored in, alongwith a slightly longer life span, the initial embodiedCO2 of the concrete can be fully offset. As thisdemonstrates, it is always more useful to view concrete buildings in whole life terms.

So there you have it, the simplest approach in officedesign, which utilises thermal mass can significantlyreduce energy consumption, help maintain comfort-able conditions and deliver impressive whole life CO2

performance. ■

Related Information:

Publication: Utilisation of Thermal Mass in Non Residential Buildings

http://www.concretecentre.com/online_services/publication_library/p

ublication_details.aspx?PublicationId=786

Publication: Concrete Floor Solutions for Passive and Active Cooling



Publication: Thermal Mass Explained (2012 update)



The Concrete Centre will be exhibiting as part of the Concrete and

Masonry Pavillion at Ecobuild – 3-5th March 2015, ExCel, London.

North Arena.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tom De SaullesBuilding PhysicistMPA The Concrete CentreTel: +44 (0)207 963 [email protected]

The Exchange by Burwell Deakins Architects





http://www.concretecentre.com

ISOVER Saint Gobain is a global leader insustainable insulation solutions, creatingefficient thermal and acoustic insulation

solutions to design energy efficient construc-tions – providing safe comfort for users andto helping to protect the environment.

ISOVER have just launched their new ISOVERResidential Product and Solutions Guidewhich is a Complete Guide to SustainableResidential Solutions across New Build andRenovation.

You’ll find a comprehensive overview of oursolutions and plenty of other handy informa-tion including:

Building Regulations: Northern Ireland &•Republic of Ireland

Applications Guides: Pitched Roof, Walls,•Floors including U Value Calculations

Solutions & Installation Guides: Airtight-•ness, Drylining, Attic and Rafter Solutions

Products & Systems: A Guide to our full•Residential Range

Reference Projects: Case Studies from our•ISOVER Energy Efficiency Awards

Technical Academy: Technical Team and•ISOVER Training Courses

ISOVER Demonstration and Installation•Movies: Links to our suite of YouTube Demos

A digital version of this guide is available onour website www.isover.ie

For more information on our sustainableinsulation range and Self Build or RenovationSolutions log onto www.isover.ie.

Isover IrelandTel: +353 1 [email protected]

ISOVER INSULATION –Sustainable Residential Solutions

34 PROFILE

http://www.isover.ie




www.isover.ie

Our TECHNICAL TEAM are here to help & advise

1800 744 480NI Phone0845 399 0159

Looking to Insulate?Try ISOVER G3 Touch – High Performance, Soft Touch, Recycled!

ISOVER G3 TOUCH MINERAL WOOL INSULATION

Awarded the Highest Standard for Indoor Air Quality

Great Performance

Gentle to Use

Good for Our Environment

NEW GENERATION

MINERAL WOOL INSULATION

Great Performance

Awarded the Highest

Soe,ormancferHigh Pouch TTouch – VER G3 y ISOrT

o Insulatooking L

cled!ecy Rouch,TTouch,tfft Soouch –

te?o Insula

re

Gr

Ge

entl Peat Ptl

W ENNE

MIINN W Goo

EEW NINE

anc

le

d for Ou Performan

ur En Perf

le to Use

Ou

IONO TION TTI

AN

IOAAT

TILLANSUUL

RAE I

AEROL I IN NERN

W GEN NO AL OAL GW

ERRA

AT

TTI

AS

AT INRA

L W NE

od f ur nvironment

Standard for Indoor Air Quality

Our TECHNICAL TEAM

Awarded the Highest

Our TECHNICAL TEAM

Standard for Indoor Air Quality

.ierevo.iswww

0845 399 0159NI Phone

44 1800 7 744 480are here to help & advise Our TECHNICAL TEAM

0845 399 0159

44 480are here to help & advise Our TECHNICAL TEAM


The challenges of thermal bridging Alex Taylor, NHBC Senior Energy Consultant, examines the challenges that thermalbridging presents from an energy assessors point of view…

The Standard Assessment Procedure (SAP) nowcontains 42 separate definitions for thermalbridging details. As part of an energy asses-

sor’s role, they need to understand how each detailis applied whilst assessing a dwelling for compliancewith Part L1a 2013.

It is unlikely, but not completely impossible, thatany one dwelling will contain all junctions, butspread across a single development all 42 may beencountered.

What does this all mean, and why has so mucheffort gone into this seemingly dark art? In 2006 asbuilding regulations turned their attention to reducingcarbon dioxide emissions, the amount of insulationgoing into a typical dwelling rose by 20%. This hadan unfortunate consequence of exacerbating theeffect of thermal bridges at junctions in the buildingfabric and at structural openings. These possiblyunchecked paths had the potential for significantcold spots within the dwelling which could lead tointernal condensation and mould growth.

At the time, Accredited Construction Details (ACDs)were introduced as design/construction detailsaimed at preventing these problems. Additionalheat loss from the dwelling was modelled in SAP bymultiplying the total exposed area by a heat lossfactor (or ‘y-value’) of 0.08 W/m²K. If ACDs were notfollowed, the additional heat loss almost doubledto a default y-value of 0.15 W/m²K. An alternativeoption in SAP 2005 was for the designer to providea set of psi values for their proposed constructions(a psi value provides a measure of the heat loss perunit length of a junction). Once in receipt of these

details the additional heat loss from thermal bridgingwould be determined by the SAP assessor bymeasuring the length of each junction (thermalbridge) and multiplying by the appropriate psi value.The summation of the heat loss from all junctions,


Where combination steel box lintels are commonly used,considerable heat loss may occur because of the proportionof steel, the minimal and discontinuous insulation, and thelength of the bridge

minimum 25 mmminimum 25 mmminimum 25 mm

min

. 215

mm

| 37Energy Efficiency

expressed over the total exposed area, would givethe dwelling’s y-value.

At this time SAP 2005 considered 16 junctions –many common junctions were excluded, and SAPconventions sought to plug the gap – any ‘junction’which did not appear in SAP or have a conventionwas ignored (in the SAP calculation).

From Part L1a 2010 (SAP 2009) the y-value approachbased on the adoption of a standard detail set wasno longer permitted, and in order to determine heatloss through thermal bridging, the energy assessorhad to adopt the ‘lengthy’ approach detailed above.In SAP 2009 the number of junctions also rose to23 – now recognising that flat roofs and junctionsto party walls had a part to play in this uncontrolledheat loss - and further conventions continued toaddress ‘unreferenced junctions’.

Psi values can be provided from a multitude ofsources, and although they should be prepared tothe same standard (BRE 497) there is no formalaccreditation scheme and therefore it is unlikely anenergy assessor would be able to question thevalues presented. Energy assessors can be presentedwith psi values from a variety of sources:

SAP Appendix K Default values – in the absence•of a detail the assessor must resort to these –compliance with Part L 2013 is very unlikely if thisis the sole source;

SAP Appendix K Accredited Values – by adopting•the ACDs published to support Part L in 2006,more favourable psi values can be adopted;

Publicly-available details, such as those published•by NHBC Foundation (Part L 2013 – Where to

Start – Masonry & Timber Frame Construction),Constructive Details Limited, Concrete Block Association, Scottish Building Standards to namebut a few;

Product Specific Details – for example a lintel•manufacturer may have commissioned details foruse alongside their product;

Bespoke Details – most likely the final resort (as•the calculations can be quite expensive, and maynot always return a favourable answer), thesemay be commissioned for junctions which areunique to a particular builder or development.

During the design of the project there needs to beconsultation between the energy assessor and thebuilder’s design team to provide a fully workingspecification which will deliver compliance withPart L. At the end of this work the SAP Ratings andsupporting documentation should be provided to

the builder for submission to building control anddelivery to site. Within the package of informationthere should be a summary of all thermal bridgedetails used in the energy calculations with appropriatereferences. The builder should now be absolutelyclear on what has been used to determine complianceand therefore what they need to build on site – if theyare not it is very likely the performance gap betweenthe SAP and EPC and the constructed dwelling willcontinue to exist.

In accordance with Regulation 27, building work shouldonly commence once the above has been completed.So in order to ensure the dwellings continue tocomply and to provide a degree of checking on site,what should Building Control be looking for?

Is a detailed specification available on site which•relates to the energy assessments?

Does the specification include references to •thermal bridges?

Does the drawing pack on site include details of•the referenced thermal bridges?

If the answer to any of the above is ‘no’, it is highlyunlikely the homes are going to be constructed asper the specification agreed at the design stage.Does this mean the homes are going to be lessenergy efficient? Not necessarily, but any variationsneed to be fed back through the design office andremodelled within SAP, to ensure continued compliance with the requirements. ■

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Alex TaylorSenior Energy ConsultantNHBCTel: 0800 035 6422www.nhbc.co.ukwww.twitter.com/NHBC


Alex Taylor, Senior Energy Consultant

http://www.nhbc.co.uk

http://www.twitter.com/NHBC

Matthew Evans, Technical Manager at Kingspan TEK considers alternative methodsof construction which can meet the legal requirements of zero carbon buildings…

After several years of preparation, the introductionof the Zero Carbon Housing Standard in Englandis now just a year away. Whilst the legislation

poses new challenges for the industry, it is also anopportunity to properly consider alternative methodsof construction which have been specifically developedfor highly energy efficient buildings, such as StructuralInsulated Panels (SIPs).

Zero Carbon Housing StandardAs indicated in the documents which accompaniedThe Queen’s Speech1, the 2016 Zero CarbonHome Standard will be set at Level 5 of the Code forSustainable Homes. It will, however, still be possibleto achieve Code Level 4 provided the remainingcarbon is offset through off-site allowable solutionsschemes.

Even with the allowable solutions schemes, the newregulations still require a 19% reduction in carbonemissions compared with ADL1A 2013, whilst thecurrent 15% relaxation in the Target Fabric EnergyEfficiency is expected to be removed. As a result,traditional construction approaches may struggleto bridge the gap without significant reliance onrenewable technologies.

A Modern SolutionTo look at this in more detail, three compliant scenarioshave been modelled with SAP 2012 in Figure 1.Scenario 1 is a masonry construction, Scenario 2 is atimber frame construction, and Scenario 3 featuresa SIP construction with an additional 75mm of rigidurethane insulation. All three scenarios focus on afabric-first approach to compliance, raising U-values

Zero Carbon Buildings –the final countdown

The Kingspan TEK® BuildingSystem and Kingspan TEK®Cladding Panels contributedtowards a final wall U-value of0.10 W/m2.K and an airleakage rate below 0.6 airchanges per hour @ 50 Pa

above the minimal level to limit reliance on renewabletechnologies.

Despite the high level of thermal performance, bothmasonry and timber frame constructions requireseveral additional technologies to achieve compliance.This reflects the difficulty in minimising thermalbridging and improving airtightness performance inthese constructions.

To achieve lower air tightness levels, masonry constructions require parge coats, whilst timberframe constructions would require lapping andsealing of air barriers around all openings and penetrations such as switches, sockets and ceilingroses. In contrast, SIPs’ inherent jointing arrangement

and OSB facing allows them to achieve the requiredperformance virtually out of the box.

The level of airtightness in all three scenarios neces-sitates the use of an MVHR (mechanical ventilationwith heat recovery) system. These systems use theheat from outgoing stale air to warm incoming freshair, reducing the heating demand and ensuring aconstant supply of fresh air. The SIP constructionrequires no other renewable technology to achievethe standard.

With construction space extremely limited, it is alsoessential to get the most out of every available metreof land. As Figure 2 shows, the SIP construction offersnotable wall and roof construction depth reductions.

Scenario 1Masonry with XPS

Scenario 2Timber Frame with XPS

Scenario 3SIPs with rigid urethane

insulation

Floor U-Value W/m2.K 0.11 0.11 0.13

Wall U-Value W/m2.K 0.11 0.12 0.10

Roof U-Value W/m2.K 0.11 0.11 0.11

Airtightnessm³/m²/hr @ 50pa 3.0 m³/m²/hr @ 50pa 3.0 m³/m²/hr @ 50pa 1.0 m³/m²/hr @ 50pa

Thermal Mass Medium (250) Medium (250) Low (100)

Thermal Bridging 29.332 (y=0.088) 29.332 (y=0.088) 17.707 (y=0.053)

Additional Measures

MVHR, 2.24m² flat platesolar hot water with verylittle overshading, 90 litresolar storage, waste water

heat recovery

MVHR, 2.24m² flat platesolar hot water with verylittle overshading, 90 litresolar storage, waste water

heat recovery

MVHR

TER 12.54 12.54 12.54

ADER 12.49 12.44 12.36

TFEE 48.26 48.26 48.26

DFEE 43.80 43.10 37.70

Figure 1. Example Specification Comparison2



Keeping It SimpleAs with any change in legislation, the challenge is tofind a cost effective solution which can consistentlymeet the new requirements. Whilst there will be atemptation to simply top-up traditional constructionapproaches with renewable technologies, theseoften prove costly in the short term and have a limited lifespan. In contrast, a fabric-first approachshould deliver maximum savings to homeownersover the long-term. SIPs offer a tried and testedroute to achieving this quickly and easily. ■

1 UK Government – The Queen’s Speech: what it means for you

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/queens-speech-2014-

what-it-means-for-you/queens-speech-2014-what-it-means-for-

you%E2%80%8E

2 All scenarios assume: regular condensing boiler with a room sealed

fanned flume (89.5% efficient), weather compensator, A-rated fuel

heating pump, no secondary heating, 300 litre hot water cylinder

(2.31 kWh/day loss factor), primary pipework fully insulated, 100%

low energy lighting.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Matthew EvansTechnical ManagerKingspan TEKTel: +44 (0)1544 387 384literature@kingspantek.co.ukwww.kingspantek.co.ukwww.twitter.com/KingspanTEK_UK

Scenario 1 Masonry Wallwith Mineral Fibre Full Fill

and Sloping Roof with Mineral Fibre Between

and Under Rafters

Scenario 2 Timber FrameWall with Mineral Fibre

Between and Inside Studsand Sloping Roof with

Mineral Fibre Between andUnder Rafters

Scenario 3 SIPs with Rigid Urethane Insulation

Lining

Wall (mm) 555.5 484.5 407.5

Roof (mm) 418.5 418.5 323.0

Figure 2: Total build-up thicknesses

The Kingspan TEK® BuildingSystem and Kingspan TEK®

Cladding Panels comprise highlyinsulated Structural Insulated

Panels and were recentlyinstalled on the Passivhaus

certified Greenhausesdevelopment in London.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/queens-speech-2014-what-it-means-for-you/queens-speech-2014-what-it-means-for-you%E2%80%8E





http://www.kingspantek.co.uk

http://www.twitter.com/KingspanTEK_UK

42 PROFILE

When it comes to installing any formof insulation, the performancecharacteristics of a product must

always be considered. Indeed, whenapproaching a masonry cavity wall application,the fire and thermal performance of theinsulation, in addition to the prevention ofwater penetration are vital issues that mustbe addressed – the selection of appropriatematerials and jointing methods for the outerleaf are therefore crucial.

Alongside these factors, another key consid-eration can be cost. Fundamentally, house-builders and developers require highperforming products that can save themtime and money. With this in mind, there isa solution that ticks every box. The recom-mended masonry cavity wall solution is full-fill mineral wool insulation, either injected(such as Supafil) or built in slabs (such asEarthwool DriTherm Cavity Slabs).

These systems not only provide U-values thatcomply with Building Regulations, but theyare also the lowest in cost. Even with denseconcrete blocks it is possible to achieve veryhigh thermal performance in a manageablewall width; and a full-fill solution is suitablefor all types of buildings.

Full-fill solutions are the most commonlyused in the market with approximately 55%of new build cavity walls incorporating them,and 85% of all residential cavity walls whenincluding refurbishment.1

Housebuilders using full-fill solutions willmake significant savings, whilst still achievingthe thermal performance required to meetcompliance with Building Regulations. In fact,compared to partial fill solutions, specifiers

can save up to 50 per cent of the cost, whichcan equate to up to £535 per plot – a sub-stantial cost saving for housebuilders whenthey are building multiple plots.

Meanwhile, mineral wool insulation productsare non-combustible and classified as Euro-class A1 to BS EN ISO 13501-1 – the highestpossible “Reaction to Fire” classification –compared to a D or E typically achieved byfoam plastic insulation materials.

Furthermore, there is a common misconceptionthat water can bridge the cavity and a full-fillsolution cannot be used in severe exposurezones. In reality, there are mineral wool insu-lation products available on the market thatcontain a water-repellent silicone additive toensure that no liquid water is able to passthrough and reach the inner leaf of masonry.Specifiers should only choose those productsthat are BBA certified for all exposure zones

– even when a site is being insured by theNHBC 2.

Undeniably, a full-fill mineral wool insulationto cavity walls offers the most practical, highperforming and cost effective solution. Thisall helps in contributing to keeping propertieswarmer and for the homeowner, savingmoney on their energy bills in the long run.

For more information please visitwww.knaufinsulation.co.uk

1 Building Insulation Market,Construction Markets 2011

2 Consult NHBC Standards for guidance regarding wall constructionin each exposure zone

Full Fill for the perfect fit How fully filling with a mineral wool insulation can be themost practical and cost effective solution


QUICK SUSTAINABLECLEAN COST EFFECTIVE

PARTY WALL

The Party Wall Full Fill Blown Solution

ROBUST DETAIL E-WM-28™

www.knaufinsulation.co.uk

Technical Support Team


Download a QR reader for free from your App Store and then scan the QR for more information.

The

ll

PARTY WALL

WWty Par

PARTY WALL

Blown Fill Full

Solution

ROBUST DET

The

E-WM-28™

ROBUST DET

all WWall ty ParThe

E-WM-28™

AIL

Blown Fill Full

ET TAILE-WM-28™

Flexible Edge Seal

Solution

Cavity Stop

Blown

y 50mm (min) Masonrcavity filled with

Supafil 34

Block 100mm (min)

• E-WM-28 is the first unique Supafil parwall blown wool Robust Detail solution

• Contributes to a zero efwhen compiling SAP calculations

• ficient and quick installation by Efapproved technicians


, L y, Masonr

E-WM-28 is the first unique Supafil parwall blown wool Robust Detail solution

fective U-value Contributes to a zero efwhen compiling SAP calculations

ficient and quick installation by approved technicians



ty E-WM-28 is the first unique Supafil parwall blown wool Robust Detail solution

fective U-value when compiling SAP calculations

ficient and quick installation by


Gypsum based boards


• No product storage on site

• No parge coat required

• Fully fills the cavity

• Unique “Supafil Parso you know you have the right material for the right per



No product storage on site

No parge coat required

Fully fills the cavity

all” blue ty W Wall” blue colouration Unique “Supafil Parso you know you have the right material for

mance.forthe right per


e colour material for

ion acou

100mm (min) Par

Gypsum based boards (min density 8kg/m2)

mounted on dabs

TARGE COA ATNO P PARGE COA

ty wall cavity filled with 100mm (min) Par

llfil


For full information on E-WM-28 visit Robust Details website www//http:


For full information on E-WM-28 visit Robust Details website andbook/RobuseHtdetails.com/Th.robuswww

andbook/Robus

ion acou

obust De tD

QUICK

echnica TTechnical Suppor

TEL: 01744 766 666

AINABLESUSTCLEAN

eamt T Teamechnical Suppor

TEL: 01744 766 666

AINABLE CO

KINE2431ADV

wwwwww


-V1214

knaufinsulatio

VV-V1214

.knaufinsulatiowww.knaufinsulation.co.ukw


on.co.ukon co uk



http://www.www

Insulating party wall cavities – a crucial stepWith the welcome announcement from DECC that insulating existing party wallcavities is now included as a measure in the latest RdSAP calculations for boththe Green Deal and ECO funding, Nick Ralph from MIMA explains why measuressuch as this are so crucial…

MIMA was instrumental in influencing thelatest changes to RdSAP, through its workwith Leeds Beckett University and the BRE;

which proved the case for retrofitting existing partycavity walls using blown fibre mineral wool.

Over recent years MIMA has funded a series of co-heating trials and forensic investigations by theBuildings and Sustainability Group of the School of theBuilt Environment at Leeds Beckett University, to gaina detailed understanding of the factors influencingand contributing to party wall bypass, as well asquantifying its effect.

Historically, there was an assumption that cavityparty walls were an area of thermal equilibriumbetween two heated spaces and not a source ofheat loss. However, initial studies between 2005 and2007 showed that, for example, in a mid-terracedwelling the heat lost through the untreated partycavity walls could be greater than that which is lostthrough all of the other external elements combined.

The study demonstrated that heat energy from bothdwellings can escape into the party wall cavity. Thiscauses free moving air in the cavity to warm and riseup through the cavity, bypassing the loft insulationand – in a majority of cases – continuing to the roofline where the air and heat energy escape to theexternal environment.

Where cold air enters the uninsulated cavity atexposed edges, the uninsulated cavity creates a‘chimney stack effect’ as the cold air rises and is

warmed by heat conducted through the leaves ofthe party wall from the adjoining homes, beforeescaping from the cavity to the external environment– either into the loft space or through the roof.Additionally, windy conditions can induce differentialpressure that leads not only to heat losses at thejunction of the party cavity with both external wallsand suspended floors, but also increased heat lossdue to the stack effect of the cavity.

Once this highly detailed work had been undertakenand widely accepted, it was possible to monitor anumber of dwellings in lower detail, whilst still makingquantitative measurements of heat flux, to show thatthe heat loss phenomenon was common to all partywalls with cavities to the roof. The quantum of heatlosses was also considered to be consistent.

Leeds Beckett University’s work also demonstratedthat filling the cavity with insulation would consistentlyreduce this heat loss. Taking a mid-terrace house,which was built between 1990 and 2001, the studydemonstrated an annual saving of 1,978 kWh ofenergy and 0.38 tonnes of CO2 – equating to a £70reduction in household energy costs. RdSAP attributesa heat loss equivalent to an effective U-value of 0.50W/m2K to an unfilled party wall with a cavity to theloft and a U-value of 0.20 W/m2K when it is filled.

When you take into account estimates that there are3.77million bypass walls in England alone, equatingto 5 million households, the potential to reduce fuelusage and CO2 emissions through filling party cavitywalls with blown fibre mineral wool is therefore



huge. In fact, the BRE has estimated it would saveapproximately £465m per year and 2.5 milliontonnes of CO2.

Putting that into the context of increasing fuel povertyand the government’s ambitious CO2 emissionreduction targets and the importance of such ameasure being included in RdSAP becomes clear.

According to a recent report from Cambridge Econo-metrics, millions of people are living in fuel poverty inthe UK; and one of the biggest causes is the poorcondition of our housing stock, which is one of theleast energy efficient in Western Europe.

The report undertook detailed modelling to assessthe economic, fiscal and environmental impact of arecommended investment programme aimed atbringing homes up to Band C on an Energy PerformanceCertificate. Included within the recommendations isa national super-insulation scheme that would resultin £8.5bn annual energy bill savings for Britishhouseholds.

In addition to making all low income householdshighly energy efficient and reducing the level of fuelpoverty, it also demonstrates the comprehensive

economic benefits of taking radical action to fixBritain’s energy wasting homes. Overall, it is estimatedthat a radical programme to make all homes highlyenergy efficient would add £13.9bn annually to theUK economy by 2030, with the government receiving£3.20 through increased GDP for every poundthey invest.

With the UK’s existing housing stock posing thegreatest barrier to us achieving ambitious CO2

reduction targets and over 5,000 people a year dyingfrom cold housing, recognising those measures thatcan make a significant contribution to improving theenergy efficiency of our housing stock – such asinsulating existing party wall cavities – is crucial. Andas per the Cambridge Econometrics report, tacklingthese measures has an economic benefit too. ■

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nick RalphMineral Wool Insulation ManufacturersAssociation (MIMA)Tel: 020 7935 [email protected]


http://www.mima.info

Capital allowances – boostingyour bottom-lineSteven Bone, Director at The Capital Allowances Partnership Ltd explainsthe tax relief on offer under the capital allowance scheme and what it canmean for businesses…

Clients with building projects can save substantialamounts of tax by claiming capital allowances.This is tantamount to securing a Government-

funded discount on the overall cost of their building,which improves the financial viability of projects andensures that build quality remains high.

What are capital allowances?A business pays tax on its profits, ie income lessexpenditure. However ‘capital’ expenditure is not atax-deductible expense. Capital expenditure ismoney spent with a longer-term outlook, such asconstructing new buildings or extensions, or alteringor fitting out existing buildings (as opposed tomaintenance or repairs).

Instead, tax relief is available through ‘capitalallowances’ - which are given to property investors,owner-occupiers and tenants. The most commonallowance in practice is something called ‘plant andmachinery allowances’. This provides tax relief whenthe business or investor spends money on ‘plant’ or‘machinery’ (P&M). It does not assist for moneyspent to buy or alter land, or on bricks and mortarsuch as the substructure and superstructure (eg, walls, floors, ceilings, doors, windows and stairs).

What assets qualify as machinery or plant?‘Machinery’ takes its dictionary meaning and mostconstruction projects include lots of obviousmachinery, such as pumps, motors, fans and thelike, as well as more obscure machines such as doorhandles or closers with moving parts. Because theseare all machinery, the money spent on them qualifiesfor tax relief.

‘Plant’ is more difficult to identify though. It is some-times defined by statute, but generally by more than100 years of case law. In essence, ‘plant’ is apparatusused in a business. The surprising thing though isthat most of the assets which qualify for tax relief inbuildings are standard fixtures that you would findin almost any commercial property. These includesanitary and water installations, heating, ventilationand air conditioning systems; electrical installations;lifts and conveyors; fire protection; communication,security and control systems; and many furnishings,finishes and fittings.

What types of properties benefit?Because the definition is so wide, most commercialbuildings contain P&M. However, some propertytypes are more P&M-rich than others. For these,between 20% and 45% of the money spent can beallocated to P&M. Particularly good buildings froma capital allowances perspective are those whichare fitted out to a high standard, including (amongstothers):

Hospitality – hotels, public houses, restaurants;•

Healthcare – care homes, doctors and dentists•practices, veterinary facilities;

Offices.•

In most cases, capital allowances statute preventstax relief being claimed for residential property.And because capital allowances are a tax relief theycan only be claimed by businesses or investors whopay income tax or corporation tax. Therefore, they

46 | Finance

| 47Finance

cannot be claimed by not-for-profit owners oroccupiers, such as central or local government,charities or the like.

What is the benefit?Capital allowances are a tax adjustment only anddo not affect the market value of the property, or thebusiness’s financial accounts.

In effect, capital allowances reduce the taxable profitsof the business or investor. This saves tax at whatevertax rate they pay. For example, if a company paying20% corporation tax spends £100,000 on P&M andclaims capital allowances, this can reduce its taxableprofits by £100,000 and therefore save tax of£20,000 (ie, £100,000 x 20%).

For the vast majority of businesses all (or most) ofthe tax savings are immediate. This is because of anaccelerated capital allowance called the ‘AnnualInvestment Allowance’ (AIA). The AIA is available forexpenditure on P&M up to an annual limit or cap,which is currently £500,000. When working out thebusiness’s tax bill the AIA allows up to £500,000 ofexpenditure on P&M to be written-off for tax at100%. In addition, certain energy-saving and waterconserving or quality improving P&M qualifies for100% relief under a scheme called ‘enhanced capitalallowances’ (ECAs) – based mainly on specifyingparticular products listed on government websites.

To the extent that the money spent on P&M exceedsthe AIA cap, or is not eligible under the ECA rules, taxrelief is given over several years at either 18% or 8%a year. The 8% rate mostly applies to so-called ‘integralfeatures’. These are the electrical system (includingpower and lighting); cold and hot water systems;heating, ventilation and air conditioning; lifts andescalators; and external solar shading. Other plantusually attracts the 18% rate.

Why is this relevant?Whilst there is an old saying in tax that “you shouldnever let the tax tail wag the commercial dog”, in anyconstruction project there are always choices. Thesecan affect the tax savings available to the buildingemployer. If the client can identify ways to save taxthis boosts the bottom-line and ultimately makes theproject more viable. Taking an early interest in capitalallowances permits the design and specification tobe ‘tweaked’ to improve its tax-efficiency (for example,some floor finishes qualify for relief, whereas othersdo not; or ECA-qualifying assets can be chosen). It also allows the right paper trail to be put in placeso the client can meet its tax obligation to submit acorrect and complete tax return and avoid the time,hassle and cost of an unfavourable HM Revenuecompliance check.

However, to ensure proper identification and compi-lation of a claim, it is often wise to obtain specialistinput beyond the involvement of generalist quantitysurveyors and accountants.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Steven Bone BSc(Hons) PGDip.BA FRICS ATTDirectorThe Capital Allowances Partnership LtdTel: 0333 123 [email protected]

Steven BoneBSc(Hons) PGDip.BA FRICS ATTDirectorThe Capital AllowancesPartnership Ltd


http://www.cap-allow.com

www.adjacentgovernment.co.uk

Whether you agree, disagree, or have anotherviewpoint with any news and features on our website, we want to hear from you.

Leaving a comment on any item on our website iseasy, so please engage and join the debate today.

YOUR OPINIONMATTERS

http://www.adjacentgovernment.co.uk

Our aim is to ensure that our UK customersbenefit from over 40 years of knowledge andexperience in the construction sector. Since

1970 we have remained true to our customers – helpingthem to survive 4 recessions. In the good times we arealso there to help businesses grow. We will always focuson the needs of our customers and treating them fairly.

JCB Finance’s nationwide field force is able to offer alocal service in tune with local conditions.* Our aim isto help you preserve your vital working capital whilstspreading the cost of machinery acquisition in the mostcost effective and tax efficient manner. After all – youwouldn’t pay your staff three years wages in advance sowhy do the same for your plant – paying cash won’t makeit work any harder on day one. In 2012 we financed 52%of all JCB machines sold in the UK.

We offer the full suite of asset finance options fromHire Purchase through to Leasing. Some of these haveunique features and benefits to suit the constructionindustry. Our finance options are not restricted to JCBequipment but are also available for other new non-competitive machinery and all used machinery pluscars, 4x4’s, commercial vehicles, access equipmentand a whole lot more.

JCB Finance Key Stats:

• Total lending 1970-2012 – just over £8.0 billion

• Total lending in downturn (2008-2012) – c. £2.75billion plus 4,604 new customers

• Many reports show that SME’s have found it hard toaccess traditional sources of lending but in 2012 ourlending grew by 31.7% with total turnover of £748million

• In 2012 a total of 22,236 assets across 16,654 agree-ments were financed

• In 1993 we entered the Local Authority market lendingc. £270m to date – current balances with 158 differentLocal Authorities

• Asset mix – JCB 62% and Others 38%

• In 2012 JCB Finance provided 21.3% (some monthstouching 40%) of all HP and Lease finance in the UKconstruction machinery market (according to Financeand Leasing Association asset finance statistics).

* JCB Finance Ltd is regulated and authorised by the Financial Conduct Authority.JCB Finance only provides asset finance facilities to businesses in the UK.

Fast Flexible Finance

Building RegulationsNorthern Ireland

The Northern Ireland Building Regulations are legal requirements made by theDepartment of Finance and Personnel (DFP) and administered by 26 District Councils:http://www.buildingcontrol-ni.com//assets/pdf/building-regulations-ni-2012.pdf . TheRegulations are intended to ensure the safety, health, welfare and convenience ofpeople in and around buildings. They are also designed to further the conservation offuel and energy.

DFP publish Technical Booklets for guidance in support of the Building Regulations:http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/index/buildings-energy-efficiency-buildings/building-regulations/content_-_building_regulations-newpage-3.htm . There is no obligation tofollow the methods or comply with the standards set out in the technical booklets.You may adopt any form of construction you wish, however you will have todemonstrate to the satisfaction of district councils that the requirements of thebuilding regulations have been met.

They allow the Department to set certain standards of performance and to provide adegree of predictability and certainty as to what methods and standards of buildingwhich, if followed, will satisfy the requirements of building regulations.

50 | Building Regulations

http://www.buildingcontrol-ni.com//assets/pdf/building-regulations-ni-2012.pdf

http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/index/buildings-energy-efficiency-buildings/building-regulations/content_-_building_regulations-newpage-3.htm



TECHNICAL BOOKLET B – Materials and workmanship:http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tb_b_guidance_booklet_2013_final_version.pdf

Including:

• Fitness of materials and workmanship

• Urea formaldehyde foam

TECHNICAL BOOKLET C – Site preparation and resistance tocontaminants and moisture:http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tb_c_online_version.pdf

Including:

• Site preparation and resistance to contaminants

• Subsoil drainage

• Resistance to moisture and weather

• Condensation

TECHNICAL BOOKLET D – Structure:http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tbd_online_version.pdf

Including:

• Stability

• Disproportionate collapse

TECHNICAL BOOKLET E – Fire Safety:http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tbe_online_version.pdf

Including:

• Means of escape

• Internal fire spread – Linings

• Internal fire spread – Structure

• External fire spread

• Facilities and access for the Fire and Rescue Service

| 51Building Regulations

http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tb_b_guidance_booklet_2013_final_version.pdf

http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tb_c_online_version.pdf

http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tbd_online_version.pdf

http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tbe_online_version.pdf

TECHNICAL BOOKLET F1 – Conservation of fuel and power in dwellings:http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tb_f1_online_version.pdf and updated guidance here:

http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/amendment_to_technical_booklets_-_2014.pdf

Including:

• Conservation measures

• Target carbon dioxide emission rate

• Consequential improvements

• Change of energy status

• Renovation of thermal elements

• Notice of air pressure test

• Notice of commissioning

• Notice of emission rate

• Provision of information

TECHNICAL BOOKLET F2 – Conservation of fuel and power in buildings other than dwellings:http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tb_f2_online_version-2.pdf and updated guidance here:


Including:

• Conservation measures

• Target carbon dioxide emission rate

• Consequential improvements

• Change of energy status

• Renovation of thermal elements

• Notice of air pressure test

• Notice of commissioning

• Notice of emission rate



http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tb_f1_online_version.pdf


http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tb_f2_online_version-2.pdf


TECHNICAL BOOKLET G – Resistance to the passage of sound:http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tb_g_online_version.pdf

Including:

• Protection against sound from other parts of the building and from adjoining buildings

• Protection against sound within a dwelling or room for residential purposes

• Reverberation in the common internal parts of buildings containing flats or rooms for residential purposes

• Acoustic conditions in schools

• Sound insulation testing and notice of results

TECHINICAL BOOKLET H – Stairs, ramps, guarding and protection from impacthttp://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tbh_online_version_pdf.pdf

Including:

• Provision of stairs in dwellings

• Stairs, ladders, ramps and landings

• Guarding

• Vehicle loading bays

• Protection against impact from and trapping by doors

• Protection from collision with open windows, skylights or ventilators

TECHNICAL BOOKLET J – Solid waste in buildings:http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tb_j_online_version.pdf

Including:

• Solid waste storage

• Waste chute systems


http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tb_g_online_version.pdf

http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tbh_online_version_pdf.pdf

http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tb_j_online_version.pdf

TECHNICAL BOOKLET K – Ventilationhttp://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tb_k_online_version.pdf

Including:

• Means of ventilation

• Ventilation of car parks

• Notification of testing and commissioning


TECHNICAL BOOKLET L – Combustion appliances and fuelstorage systems:http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tb_l_online_version.pdf

Including:

• Air supply

• Discharge of products of combustion

• Warning of the presence of carbon monoxide gas

• Protection of people and buildings


• Protection of liquid fuel storage tanks

• Protection against pollution

• Prevention of smoke emission

TECHNICAL BOOKLET N – Drainage:http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tb_n_online_version.pdf

Including:

• Drainage systems

• Sanitary pipework

• Underground foul drainage

• Rainwater drainage

• Cesspools, septic tanks and similar structures


http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tb_k_online_version.pdf

http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tb_l_online_version.pdf

http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tb_n_online_version.pdf

TECHNICAL BOOKLET P – Sanitary appliances, unvented hotwater storage systems and reducing the risk of scalding:http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tb_p_online_version.pdf

Including:

• Provision of sanitary appliances

• Sanitary appliances

• Sanitary accommodation

• Unvented hot water storage systems

• Reducing the risk of scalding

TECHNICAL BOOKLET R – Access to and use of buildings:http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tbr_online_version.pdf

Including:

• Access and use

• Access to extensions

• Sanitary accommodation in extensions

• Sanitary conveniences in dwellings

TECHNICAL BOOKLET V – Glazinghttp://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tbv_online_version.pdf

Including:

• Impact with glazing

• Transparent glazing

• Safe opening and closing of windows, skylights and ventilators

• Safe means of access for cleaning glazing


http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tb_p_online_version.pdf

http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tbr_online_version.pdf

http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/tbv_online_version.pdf

www.bimobject.com

Thousands of free BIM objects from almost300 manufacturers across Europe. Over 60,000architects and designers are using theseintelligent and configurable objects, withautomatic alerts when objects change.

With clever BIMobject®

APPs, the objects are available directly fromwithin market leading BIM solutions including Revit, ArchiCAD,Autocad and SketchUp Pro. Other formats are also supported.

Make sure you’re not missing out by going to www.bimobject.comor, to find out more, enter BIMobject into search on YouTube.

BIMobject UK LtdTom Newman – +44 (0)7427 162 204 – [email protected]

A




Adjacent Digital Politics Launches March issue of PBC Today for Northern Ireland

News & Politics

Transcript of Adjacent Digital Politics Launches March issue of PBC Today for Northern Ireland