Building the Future - Forschungsinitiative Zukunft Bau

Transcription

Building the Future
The Magazine of the 2013 Building Research Initiative
Inspiring
Efficiency and Change
With the landmark social policy decision to meet our
future energy needs as far as possible from renewable energy sources and significant increases in energy efficiency,
Germany is taking a leadership role in Europe and in the
world. With its current energy plan, the German federal
government is showing the way to securing a future
energy supply at a reasonable cost. The goal is to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions by 40% by 2020 and by at least
80% by 2050. The share of renewable energies in our gross
energy consumption is expected to rise to 18% by 2020
and 60% by 2050. And it is the construction and transportation industries which can and, indeed, must make a
significant contribution to this effort.
The energy revolution which has found broad consensus
across our society cannot be accomplished solely with
regulations or financial aid. We need new technologies and concepts to make it happen. For this reason,
the Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban
Development (BMVBS) has strengthened its Zukunft Bau
Research Initiative.
Zukunft Bau, German for „the future of construction,“
now consists of three different areas:
• research on behalf of the Ministry;
• applied research; and
• the „Efficiency House Plus“ prototypes.
Applied research, in particular, thrives on a spirit of innovation and realignment of the construction industry. This
is where the best ideas are put into practice together with
business, science and government.
The Zukunft Bau Research Initiative has been highly
successful. Since its launch in 2006, some 500 research
projects worth approximately €53 million have been commissioned. At the same time, an entirely new building
standard was established in the current legislative period:
„Efficiency House Plus“. The efficient houses already built
with KfW grants to restore the country‘s infrastructure,
with ratings of 70, 55 or 40, are now being combined
with systems that collect more energy than is needed in
the house—thus creating energy surpluses. We defined
the standard in „Paths to the Efficiency House Plus“ and
currently 31 model projects are in research. This program
is not just about the construction of new single family
homes, but also multi-family homes and the complete
2
Zukunft Bau Research Initiative
modernization of older structures. The Ministry has also
constructed its own building for research purposes. This
allows us to demonstrate how innovative building and
electric mobility can be coupled together. But another
theme is shown in our pilot project in Berlin: the BMVBS
Efficiency House Plus is 100% recyclable. This is a first for
such a modern building and sets a new direction for the
industry. Apart from energy efficiency, the pressing issues
of our time include resource conservation, recycling and
preparing for demographic shifts.
This magazine gives a cross-section of the current issues
being researched as part of Zukunft Bau, with which my
Ministry is doing its part to address the issues facing our
society‘s future. The results of the research are impressive and will shortly be turned into practical, everyday
solutions.
I wish you an informative and pleasurable read.
Dr. Peter Ramsauer, MP
Federal Minister of Transport, Building and
Urban Development
3
Contents
The Brave New World of Energy Plus Construction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Glass hybrid elements with translucent intermediate layers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Innovative Techniques for Building-Integrated Photovoltaics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
The New Connector:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Photobioreactor Facade. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Joining Technologies for Fiber Composite Profiles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Exempla docent.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
ULTRASLIM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
„Masonry Has a Future.“. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Permanently stuck? Separability of hybrid building elements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
User Satisfaction as Indicator to Describe and Assess
the Social Dimension of Sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Vacuum-insulated façade elements made from textile concrete. . . . . . . . . . . . 68
„Proven sustainability will convince investors.“. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Absorption of low-frequency impact sound through
Helmholtz resonators integrted into wood-beamed ceilings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
Guideline for Sustainable Building 2011. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Ready – prepared for living at any age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
WECOBIS and Ökobau.dat:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Standards and Guidelines - an International Comparison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Knowing what‘s in building materials.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Senior Living - Market Processes and Need for Housing Policy Action. . . . . . 78
„Sustainability and building philosophy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Efficiency House Plus Pilot Projects:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
must always go hand-in-hand.“. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
the New World of Energy Plus Combines Buildings and Cars. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Energy-Optimized 19th Century Houses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
EnerWert . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
4
5
The Brave New World of Energy
Plus Construction
In its energy plan released on September 28, 2010, the German government formulated guidelines for an environmentally friendly, reliable and affordable energy supply and described for the first time the
way forward into the age of renewable energies. Compared to 2008,
primary energy consumption should drop by 20% by 2020 and 50% by
2050, when the share of renewable energies should have risen to 60%.
This means that, by 2050, Germany‘s greenhouse gas emissions will
have been reduced by at least 80% compared to 1990.
State Secretary
Rainer Bomba, MBA, MS Engineering
Federal Ministry of Transport,
Building and Urban Development
6
7
These ambitious targets for energy consumption and
environmental policy will be unattainable without effective increases in energy efficiency and the increased use
of renewable energies in construction and transportation,
because, between them, the two sectors are responsible
for 70% of the total energy consumption in Germany. For
this reason it was important that the Federal Ministry of
Transport, Building and Urban Development (the BMVBS,
an acronym for its German name) has begun developing
its own detailed energy and climate protection strategies.
This strategic plan, which includes both the transportation and construction industries, is based on 5 pillars
which address:
• e fficient decentralized energy supply in buildings and
increased efficiency in building construction;
• t he energy efficient renovation of buildings and neighborhoods, particularly through the program of the
Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau (KfW);
• t he innovative combination of electric mobility and
high-performance standards in construction;
• a broad application of electric-powered vehicles; and
• t he national fuel strategy.
In all respects, the federal government has not only forged
concepts but has also begun to put them into place. The
energy concept of the German government calls for an
„ambitious increase in efficiency standards for buildings,
wherever it is economically feasible.“ Economic feasibility
has always been a cornerstone of the Energy Conservation Law and was a cornerstone of the BMVBS energy
strategy. The most recent amendment to the Energy
Saving Regulations (EnEV) took effect on 10/01/2009.
The markets have adjusted accordingly. The new EnEV
regulations for 2013 will therefore be moderate, reasonable, and attainable. An important aspect of this development is the implementation of the directive on energy
performance of buildings. This has made changes to the
EnEV regulations and the Energy Savings in Buildings
Act (EnEG). A particular focus on the future will be the
long-term implementation of the zero-energy building
standards for new buildings which will come into effect
in 2021 (and in 2019 for public buildings). Starting in 2013,
the energy rating of a building must be included in real
estate and rental advertising. In addition, the require-
8
ments to display energy certificates will be extended to
smaller government buildings as well as private facilities with heavy public traffic (such as department stores,
banks, restaurants). It is an independent control system
for energy performance certificates and air conditioning
inspection reports. These regulations will be implemented by the German states. The working drafts of the new
law and regulations (EnEG and EnEV) are currently being
fine-tined among the ministries and then will be sent to
the Bundestag for its approval.
It has become clear that administrative regulations
are not sufficient to lead to a breakthrough. In order to
achieve the required efficiency standards, targeted support and a proper policy for innovations is needed. The
KfW programs for energy-efficient construction and
renovation launched as part of the energy strategy are
environmental and economic success stories. More than
50% of new residential buildings are already receiving
funding from the KfW and are being built to a significantly better standard built than required by the 2009 EnEV
regulations. The KfW grants will continued to funded at a
high level of about €1.5 billion by 2014.
The Zukunft Bau Research Initiative
In addition to financial support, there is a need for development and research of new technologies and concepts.
These innovations are being used in many fields. It is
for this reason that the BMVBS established its Zukunft
Bau Research Initiative. Zukunft Bau is German for „the
future of construction.“ The initiative for research in construction practices covers ministry-level and contracted
research projects with numbers that speak for themselves:
In the first five years since the start of the program in
2006, some 500 research projects with a contract or
funding level of a total of €52 million have been funded.
Since August 2011, the initiative has received additional
research funding for Efficiency Plus Homes with a budget
of €1.2 million a year. The Ministry is thus supporting the
introduction of buildings that produce significantly more
energy per year than is necessary for their operation. The
projects will be evaluated as part of a scientific support
program. The results should result in improved energy
management in modern buildings and lead to the devel-
9
opment of the necessary components for energy-efficient
building envelopes and the use of renewable energies.
With this new program, the BMVBS is building on outstanding projects which had been previously funded by
the Zukunft Bau Research Initiative. In addition to the
many components which have been developed, one of the
star projects were the model buildings of the Darmstadt
University of Applied Sciences which twice won the Solar
Decathlon competition in Washington, DC. The Darmstadt buildings were models designed to demonstrate
the feasibility of the plus-energy standards in attractive
architecture.
The BMVBS Efficiency House Plus with Electric
Mobility in Berlin
The Ministry decided in 2010 to make its own contribution to research with a project to create a permanent
showcase of the plus energy house standard for the
public and tradespeople. The project aims to promote
closer interdisciplinary collaboration in the architecture, automotive, energy supply and building technology industries. The goal was not only to feed the excess
electricity produced by the house back into the grid,
but also to use it to power up electric vehicles. With this
target in mind, the Ministry set up an interdisciplinary competition in the summer of 2010 for the building
of such a house in combination with electric mobility.
The contest was designed as an open, interdisciplinary
planning competition for universities in collaboration
with consultants. Building on the existing BMVBS/KfW
„Efficiency House“ brand, the new standard is called
„Efficiency House Plus,“ or „Efficiency House Plus with
Electric Mobility“. The competition was designed to
demonstrate that the house has achieved this standard
and also allows multiple vehicles with an average annual
mileage of about 18,000 miles to be fueled solely from
environmental energy.
The competition came to a close in the fall of 2010. The
first prize went to the University of Stuttgart in collaboration with Werner Sobek Stuttgart GmbH and Werner
Sobek Green Technology GmbH Stuttgart. The Ministry
signed a planning agreement with the winning team
early in 2011. By early June 2011, the planning phase was
complete and a general contractor for the construction
10
was hired. In July 2011, the construction began and the
building was finished in September 2011 in a central
location in Berlin, at Fasanenstraße 87a, 10623 Berlin
City West. A house for a family of four with approx. 1500
sq. ft. of living space. In front of the house is a carport
for parking electric cars and their charging infrastructure. To illustrate the electric mobility possibilities, two
electric cars and an electric motorbike were included. On
December 7, 2011, Chancellor Angela Merkel and Federal
Minister for Transport, Building and Urban Development Ramsauer officially opened the building. In the
nine weeks that it was open to the public, nearly 10,000
visitors experienced the house.
The building is equipped with a highly insulated envelope as required for KfW-40 houses or passive houses.
Other Energy Plus projects show that this standard
requires a shell of at least KfW-55. The thermal transmittance coefficients (U-values) of the wood panel
construction insulated with cellulose fibers was in the
opaque area 0.11 W/m2K. It was a two-story wooden
building in timber panel construction and ventilated
cladding. The facade surfaces on the southwest side consisted of thin film solar modules. The facade surfaces on
the northeast side consisted of glass panels coated with
black on the back side. The glass facades on the northwest and southeast sides were constructed with triple
glazing. The U-value here was 0.7 W/m2K. The glazing
was held on four sides. Floor to ceiling openings such as
revolving doors partially opened up the facade. Rooftop
monocrystalline solar modules provided an efficiency of
about 15% for electricity production. Both the roof (98
m2 of monocrystalline modules) and the facade (73 m2
thin film modules with 12% efficiency) can be expected
to generate a current yield of about 17 MWh per year. It
was predicted that the house needs about 10 MWh top
operate and the vehicles 6 MWh. The house has central
heating with an air-water heat pump. The heat is distributed via an underfloor heating system. In addition, an
air supply and exhaust system is installed. Each room is
individually controlled. A building automation system
centrally prepares all of the data measurements and an
open, programmable system provides targeted energy
management. Users can communicate with the system
via touchpads and smartphones.
Particularly important in the overall concept was the
installation of a backup battery. This battery ensures that
the house can use the electricity it generates. The backup
battery used for the BMVBS model house had a storage
capacity of 40 kWh. It was assembled from used battery
cells from the electric vehicles. Electric vehicles require
a battery to be replaced once its storage capacity drops
below 80%. These battery cells then get a „second life“
when used in stationary applications. The battery is
therefore a prototype and was assembled from 7250 used
cells.
Through an intelligent charging management, the
charging time for a vehicle to travel 60 miles can be
reduced to 30 minutes through conductive charging. In
addition, inductive charging was tested in the building.
With inductive charging, the charging current is transmitted electromagnetically from one reel to another
reel. Advances in power electronics are making high
transmission frequencies of 50 kHz and above possible,
which will result in expected efficiencies in excess of 90
degrees.
In addition to the energy problem, the project was also
to tackle issues of sustainability. One of the goals was,
for example, for the house to be completely recyclable.
But being recyclable and flexible should not mean compromises in the highest standard of comfort. This was
clearly achieved in this project. When the house is dismantled in 2015, all of its components will be returned
for reuse or recycled in their entirety, thus going back
into the economic cycle.
When a real family of four moved in on March 4, 2012,
the new technologies were now put to a real test. All
of the technical details, the current energy status, the
experiences of the family, and much more can be read on
the Ministry‘s website (www.bmvbs.de).
There‘s no doubt that the house is only a prototype. Certainly not everything on display is ready for the market
and available at acceptable prices. But that will change
rapidly with time. Good ideas always have a future and
sometimes take on a life of their own.
Grant Program for Efficiency Plus Homes – initial
projects in prefab housing in Cologne
The aim of the BMVBS is not only to create unique projects, but to give them trial runs in a network of different
solutions and different technologies to improve them
even more. It is for this reason that BMVBS is funding
research in „Efficiency Plus Homes“. The program currently only funds residential buildings (one-, two- and
multi-family homes) being built in Germany. The buildings should be able to operate all the functions of the
house, such as heating, hot water, lighting, household
electricity and the electricity needs of external users,
such as electric vehicles. They need to be tested and
evaluated under real, i.e. living conditions. This is why a
working group is set up to support each of the Ministry‘s
funding recipients to help with the evaluation of the
project.
The research results will be subsequently released. This
research funding can be coupled with the KfW funding. The hope is that promising ideas, technologies and
materials will more quickly find their way into practice.
For this they must be tested and evaluated. These buildings will help gather experiences and address issues of
economic feasibility. In the medium term it is envisioned to build zero-energy and Efficiency Plus homes at
affordable prices. The object of this funding is to collect
evidence for the plans for the Energy Plus standard,
• the design and installation of the necessary sensors,
including a weather station, based on the guidelines
for monitoring,
• the implementation, documentation and analysis of
the measurements,
• cost-benefit analysis of the technical concept and
• t he risk balance from using expensive new technologies vs. continuing to use technology that is no longer
state of the art. These techniques include, for example,
thin-film solar modules for the facade, built-in roof
solar panels, small wind turbines, electric batteries,
battery technology and components for smart grids.
Further details will be posted on the BMVBS website and
its construction research portal at
www.forschungsinitiative.de.
11
Grants for 100% of the costs to implement these scientific
and monitoring area available for a maximum of €70,000.
The bases for measurement are the cost and financing
budgets of the planners and research institutions that
been hired. A grant of 20% of investment costs from
equity financing, to a maximum of €300 per m2 of living
space, is also available.
Under the coordination of the Federal Association of
German Prefabricated Housing (BDF), a new model home
village has been built in Cologne-Frechen: „The World of
Prefab“ Six of the 20 houses will be entirely Efficiency Plus
houses and outfitted with monitoring equipment. A total
of five projects received funding in 2011. The following
companies have begun operating their Efficiency Plus
homes: Huf-Haus, Fingerhaus, Schwörer-Haus, Weberhaus
and the Bien Zenker building. The Lux-Haus project is still
being built. These houses are single-family homes already
on the market. They are for sale at €340,000 - €560,000
and have living space ranging between 1,900–3,000 sq.
ft. At present, they represent only a pilot project for an
upscale segment. Nevertheless, it is encouraging that the
industry is willing to experiment, collect experiences and
evaluate the way forward.
Appling Energy-Plus standards to existing buildings
from top:
Weberhaus, BienZenker
right: HUF
I am convinced that the activities of the BMVBS are the
right step to prepare us for future developments. This is
only way that we will be take the technological lead for
the next decade. „My House – My Car Charger“ is no longer a vision, but is gradually becoming a reality.
12
13
Innovative Techniques for
Building-Integrated Photovoltaics
For building-integrated photovoltaics (BIPV) to take off, architects
and planners will need both specific expertise about how these
systems operate and also a sufficient range of product options. The
following three research projects have therefore addressed this need
by creating the prerequisites for the development of innovative PV
technologies and materials for use in facades and roofs.
Prof. Bernhard Weller, TU Dresden
Photovoltaic Rainscreens: Rainscreen cladding with photovoltaic module
1 cover glass
thin-film PV cell
glass substrate
2 carrier plate
3 T-Profile
4 insulation
5 exterior wall
14
15
Adaptation and development of thin-film photovoltaic technology for composite panels
in EIFS
Research Center: Project Partners
Total cost
Federal Grant
Duration
Technical University of Dresden, Department of Construction
Engineering, Prof. Bernhard Weller, Dr. Susanne Rexroth
TU Dresden, Department of Construction Management, Prof.
Peter Jehle
StoVerotec GmbH, Würth Solar GmbH & Co. KG, Center for
Solar Energy and Hydrogen Research (ZSW)
€383,000
50% share
10/2006-2/2008
Integration of CIS photovoltaics in EIFS
PV Rainscreen Cladding Research Plan
PV-EIFS Research Plan
The pre-hung rear-ventilated rainscreen facade is a
multilayer design consisting of rear-ventilated cladding
elements, an insulated substructure, and anchoring
elements. In this design, the PV element replaces the
cladding component of a rainscreen facade.
Research has been underway since 2010 in integrating PV
elements into integration in exterior insulation and finishing systems (EIFS). EIFS systems have been used for more
than 40 years to improve the energy efficiency of exterior
walls and, with more than 40 million m2 used annually
in Germany, they are the most common cladding systems
used in energy-efficient construction and renovation.
Rainscreen facades are particularly suited for the application of photovoltaic modules, since the rear ventilation promotes lower module temperatures and therefore
improved efficiencies. In windowless facades, the grid
dimensions can be adapted to the standard module sizes,
thereby optimizing costs.
In addition, the PV rainscreen facade makes electrical
connections simple in the area out of the line of sight
behind the module. An important result of the project
completed in 2008 was the development of a prototype
with advanced thin-film modules based on CIS solar
cells, whose homogeneous, colored surfaces enhance
design possibilities. The thin-film modules are bonded to
an expanded glass carrier plate over the entire surface.
With rear girder sections, they can be adjustably hung in
the substructure such that a consistently uniform front
side results.
Parts of the project included customizing the appearance, ensuring the colors, the electric coupling, and the
analysis and determination of the requirements for the
adhesive layer to bind the elements. In addition, a lifecycle analysis was conducted to establish the potential
applications of thin-film technology. The photovoltaic
facade has since been used in several projects. Figures 2
and 3 show two completed examples. Their usability has
thus far been demonstrated via zoning variances, but a
general approval for construction use is currently under
review.
16
Because EIFS have to be so lightweight, it is important to
offer flexible, glass-free modules with CIS thin-film solar
cells. Unlike traditional glazed PV elements, these flexible
solar elements pose no risk of injury from glass breakage
and falling glass in case of fire. In addition, the modules are
flexible, come in variable sizes and allow a homogeneous
design to be implemented. The possible variations in gap
and colors in the plaster surfaces between the modules offer great architectural design possibilities.
The solar modules are connected to the insulating plate
with adhesives. To ensure a consistent adhesive bond,
prefabrication is done in a dust-free and temperature-controlled environment.
At the construction site, the element can be installed like
a EIFS. It is adhered to the substrate and no additional
anchoring is necessary. In existing buildings, an initial,
doweled insulation is laid first to provide a sufficiently
stable base.
The PV EIFS can be used both in new buildings and in
uninsulated or poorly insulated existing structures.
ETFE PV Research Plan
Membrane structures allow very cost-efficient, aesthetic
and lightweight building envelopes to be made in any
form. The integration of photovoltaics requires light and
flexible modules. So far, there are no solutions ready for
Research Center
Project Partners
projected cost
Federal Grant
projected duration
Engineering, Prof. Bernhard Weller, Ms. Jasmin Fischer
CIS Solar GmbH & Co. KG, Sto AG, Central Association of the
German Building Industry
€574,000
63% share
9/2010-6/2012
Development of light, flexible photovoltaic elements
based on ETFE and CIGS thin-film solar cells for architecture
Research Center
Project partners
projected total cost
Federal Grant
projected duration
Engineering, Prof. Bernhard Weller
Nowofol Plastic GmbH and Co. KG, Solarion AG
€344,000
70 % share
2/2012-8/2013
market. Starting in 2013, the ETFE PV project will begin research and development of PV laminates made of highly flexible film solar cells and find
methods to integrate them into single-layer, mechanically pre-stretched
membranes and multilayer air-cushioned ethylene-tetrafluoroethylene
(ETFE) pillows.
Conclusion
Photovolatics (PV) are being used more and more in construction as the
population becomes increasingly aware of the need for energy efficiency
and sustainability. In order to meet architectural needs, solutions integrated
in the roof or facade are preferable. When integrated, the PV element replaces the component in whole or in part and assumes its functions in such
a way that building-integrated photovoltaics can meet complex engineering
requirements as well. The research projects will help to accelerate the development of appropriate techniques and materials for the building-integrate
photovoltaics and promote their wider use.
PV EIFS: Photovoltaic Exterior Insulation
and Finishing System
1 CIS solar modules
2 Insulation
3 Bonding
4 insulation
5 Exterior wall
17
Photobioreactor Facade
Building-integrated production and use of energy and heat from
algal biomass and sunlight
Jan Wurm, Arup Berlin
The purpose of this research project is to develop a new facade system
made of photobioreactors (PBR). The PBR elements are used to cultivate microalgae and collect solar thermal energy in the building envelope. The biomass of microalgae as well as the solar heat can be made
available for distribution to the entire the building. This improves the
building‘s energy balance and helps achieve the 2020 climate targets.
Rendering of the PBR facade concept
18
Concept design for a PBR element and substructure
19
Specification for the facade system were developed based
on energy design, structural engineering, and building
physics as well as building technology and architectural
integration needs. After conducting and evaluating a
solar radiation simulation, the PBR elements were placed
on the south, southwest, and southeast facades of both
residential and storage buildings.
values calculated beforehand. These successful preliminary tests confirmed
the suitability of the PBR concept for the first generation prototype.
The PBR prototypes have been undergoing testing since mid-November
2011 at the test facility of SSC GmbH in Hamburg-Reitbrook. Data is being
collected about various parameters such as tightness, stability and performance in the conversion of solar radiation into heat and biomass, which will
form the basis for future development of the PBR elements. The first field
trial will initially include four PBR elements which will be connected in
parallel pairs and mounted on supports (about 6 m2). The support systems
can be pivoted so that the different radiation conditions on south, southeast,
and southwest facades can be simulated. Data on the production of biomass
and heat in particular radiation scenarios is being collected in different trial
runs.
Adjusting the PBR elements by rotating them in line with
the sun‘s level around a vertical central axis can improve
the ability to catch and use the sunshine that is available
on a given day. This also helps prevent shadows developing among the PBR elements.
Insulation of the facade element to prevent heat loss in
winter is part of the overall concept (see fig. to the right).
The PBR-element runs in a high format to ensure that
there is adequate circulation to produce an optimal algae
yield and to reduce the risk of biofouling. Refined flat
glass is used for the PBR walls, chosen for its high durability and mechanical strength with high radiolucency and
non-flammability and its position as an established facade
material.
Permanent exposure to a water column of about 3 m,
corresponding to a pressure of about 0.3 bar, was considered in the design of the PBR facade element. Additional strains on the system included local transitory
loads (wind, ice) and temperature fluctuations. The PBR
body is basically designed like double glazing. The edge
seal provides a spacer made of aluminum with inserted
O-ring lacings for tightness. Additional glass panes as
well as heat-resistant coatings on the front and back sides
insulate the PBR element to improve its heat efficiency.
The light and energy throughput is increased by low-iron
glass panes.
The supply technology (inflows and outflows) and a safety
overflow are invisibly integrated into the frame and are
centered by the PBR‘s fulcrum into the substructure. The
substructure consists of horizontal beams mounted on
brackets on the facade for each floor of the building. The
piping is hidden by being integrated into these beams.
20
Conclusion
Beam system with installed plastic PBR panels at the SSC pilot site
in Hamburg-Reitbrook
To pre-assess the structural adequacy of the PBR components and especially the glass components, a test structure was examined using various load scenarios. The
stresses of installation and filling with water filling were
the basis of the load-bearing experiments. The test structure we used the body was composed of two glass panes
held together on all sides by a metal clamping frame and
separated by a spacer along the edge. For ease of handling,
only the lower third of the PBR-element, which experiences the largest loads, was modeled in the test structure.
The first test was conducted at the nominal load, which
occurs when inserted at overall heights of up to 2.5 m
(about 0.25 bar). A creep test with about 0.30 bar, and a
maximum load (about 0.37 bar) test were also conducted.
The test piece consistently withstood all of the loads
placed on it and the deformations corresponded with the
The concept of a ventilated facade made of PBR elements was verified with
the detailed design of the first generation PBR prototype. The detailed design and the construction and preliminary tests confirm the proposed PBR
concept. The test of the prototypes from mid-November 2011 will provide
important insights for optimizing the design with regard to the proposed
model facade. The design, construction and operation of the model facade
will test and optimize the fundamentals of the manufacturing process,
process control and the software-based control system.
Illustration of thermal simulation
PBR element, cross-section with glass and
frame
Photobioreactor construction - Building-integrated energy production from algae
Researcher Project Head:
Total costs:
Federal grant share:
Duration:
Dr. Martin Kerner (SSC GmbH),
Manfred Starlinger (COLT GmbH)
Dr. Jan Wurm (Arup GmbH)
Cornelius Schneider (Arup GmbH)
Dr. Jan Wurm (Arup GmbH),
€497,588.48
€249,923.30
through 12/2012
21
Exempla docent.
Examples teach.
(Marcus Lucius Annaeus Seneca 4 BCE–65 CE)
Petra Alten, Dipl.-Ing. Architect, Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development
The Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development (BMVBS) targets national energy and
climate goals with its Zukunft Bau („The Future of Construction“) Research Initiative. Pilot projects funded
since 2007 have included successful national and international research projects in the latest energy concepts such as the Passive House, the Zero-Energy House and the Energy Plus House (since August 2011 also
called Efficiency House Plus). These projects advocate publicly for sustainable, energy-efficient construction
and are promoting dialog within the society.
The first pilot projects to receive BMVBS funding were
conducted by the TU Darmstadt under the leadership
of Prof. Hegger. They were crowned world solar power
champions at both the 2007 and 2009 biennial Solar Decathlon in Washington, DC. To promote this new generation of buildings that produce in one year more energy
than necessary for the operation of the building, the
Ministry had a replica model built and put the prototype
design on tour as a traveling exhibition in six major cities
throughout Germany (Berlin, Munich, Hamburg, Frankfurt, Düsseldorf and Hannover) from 2009 to 2011. The
pilot project was designed to give information, demonstrate the possibilities, and serve as exhibition and event
space. The entire public was invited to take a free tour of
the prototype.
At the end of its touring exhibition where proposals for its
future use were collected, the building was handed over
to its new owner, municipal power company Dortmunder
Energie- und Wasserversorgung GmbH (DEW21). The
House of the Future is now open at its permanent home
daily except Mondays from 11 am to 6 pm at Am Remberg 84, Dortmund-Hörde. It continues to be a hands-on
example of innovative building open to anyone who is
interested. DEW, in collaboration with the North Rhine
Westphalia state ecology center offers a regional network
and an extensive program on energy-efficient, sustainable
building. This includes an exhibit, daily tours as well as
qualified advice and events such as lectures. Contact DEW
at: www.dew21.de/de/Privat--und-Gewerbekunden/
Energieeffizienz/Energiehaus.htm
In numbers: 90% of a total of an approx. 90,000 visitors
of the pilot project were inspired by this hands-on way
of sharing information. Current construction policies
were presented at more than 1,000 events in the House
in the form of tours, lectures, discussions, workshops
and exhibitions. Directly showing the future requirements for construction industry in a form free of legal
jargon convinced visitors that sustainable construction
is necessary and consistent with aesthetics, quality of
life and functionality. The model also helped to reduce
fears of innovative technologies and the use of renewable
energies in buildings The public developed an awareness
of the issues and also interest in future-oriented solutions.
Current technical possibilities and their promotion was
made tangible and understandable. In addition, a network
of professional experts was developed to spread the word
further.
The Energy Plus Pilot Project
22
The interior of the building uses modern video and presentation technology and cutaway models of the building
components to provide multi-sensory information to the
visitors. An integrated exhibition is aimed primarily at
consumers, builders and owners of single-family homes.
Other topics covered in this exhibit included energysaving construction (energy saving regulations, energy
performance certificates, the Renewable Energy Sources
Act), current grants and other government support options (CO2 building renovation program, KfW aid for
rebuilding infrastructure), the latest technical solutions
in energy-saving construction (the Zukunft Bau Research
Initiative) as well as various concepts in energy efficient
construction and renovation. The barrier-free model
building consists primarily of renewable, natural and
recyclable materials.
The design of the house is based on the winning entry
of the Technical University of Darmstadt, prepared and
implemented by students under the direction of Professor
Manfred Hegger.
A House on Tour
The BMVBS Roadshow achieved its goals. The house with
its clear architecture and the use of innovative technologies was a tangible advertisement for energy efficient
and sustainable construction according to the Efficiency
Plus standard. The six stops on the house‘s tour offered a
platform for dialog in the media and the public in general
about key issues in the building policy debate. The tour
helped to break down prejudices and uncertainties, converted many with their positive experiences in the house
and promoted imitation. More than 100,000 people in 6
The house sensibly combines modern architecture and
energy efficiency. The focus is in particular on the technical innovations of the power-producing solar house. All
of its exterior walls, the roof and the windows are highly
insulating. Heat storage in the form of phase change materials (PCM) in the walls and roof provide for a balanced
room climate. They absorb the heat from the sun and that
generated internally and release it over time. Modern
building technology minimizes the energy requirement
and electricity is supplied via photovoltaic panels on the
roof and in the facade. The excess electricity not used by
the building is fed into the grid. A flat plate solar collector is also integrated into the roof to heat hot water. This
intelligent composition of the latest technologies makes
an astounding energy balance possible.
23
locations across the country visited the house: half were
professionals, the other half interested members of the
public. More than 1,000 events addressed numerous visitors and helped build positive awareness of the issues.
solely from environmental energy collected by the building‘s PV system
and can still be „more than just a house“ with quality of life: The house has
various key features which help it meet the national energy and climate
goals: a protective envelope, an aesthetic oasis of wellbeing, autonomous
small power plant, smart energy manager, 24-hour car charging station and
reliable usefulness through all stages of life.
The house illustrates the importance of application-oriented, broad-based construction research to promote the
continuous development of modern construction policy
in Germany. In the end, the BMVBS Energy Plus House
Roadshow had a clearly positive result:
• T he exhibition has stoked great interest in futureoriented solutions for energy efficient architecture by
integrating and presenting various technologies in a
real, complete and attractive building.
• It makes the current possibilities of technology directly
tangible experiences for the general public, laypeople
and professionals alike.
• T he tangible experience combined with information
and explanation counters skepticism about passive
energy buildings and the technology used in persons
planning or who are currently building or remodeling.
• Coordinated events and networking opportunities,
lectures, industry meetings, collaborations with schools
and energy consultants helped to inform and create
networks of professionals who will then spread their
enthusiasm to others.
• T he pilot project allowed future regulations to speak for
themselves without being bogged down in legal jargon.
It made it clear that the Energy Plus House represents
a necessary, new generation of buildings which could
replace the current generation of passive energy and
zero-energy houses.
After opening on December 7, 2011, the public was offered a comprehensive
program of events until the end of February 2012. In March 2012, a family of
four selected from a public application process moved into the house for the
next 15 months. The house is under constant scientific monitoring, including a social-psychological study of the test family. Experiences are being collected to prepare for the market launch of this new generation of buildings
and vehicles, which is targeted for the near future.
This goal also supports the new BMVBS funding guidelines which promote
public-private partnerships in piloting the Efficiency House Plus standard,
the use of innovative technology and their scientific study. The goals is to set
up a nationwide network to promote the constant exchange of information
and experiences among policymakers, scientists and the general public. This
will then, in turn, promote the expansion of long-term sustainable development in the building sector.
The next stage...
Efficiency House Plus with Electric Mobility (EP+EM)
The Energy Plus House‘s successor, the „Efficiency House
Plus with Electric Mobility“ (EP+EM) in Berlin explored
future synergies between buildings and transportation
from 2011-2013. Publicly supported, it provides clear
information about the opportunities and limits of this
model for the future with respect to practicality and
marketability. The prototype was designed to show that
a house built according to the Efficiency House Plus
standard can provide power for itself, its four residents
and their vehicles (for a total of about 18,000 miles/year)
24
Evaluation of the BMVBS Energy Plus House Roadtour
Stops on the Germany Roadtrip: including Berlin, Frankfurt, Munich, Hanover
Bottom right: Efficiency House Plus Electric Mobility in Berlin
Researcher
Total cost
Duration:
Thomas Quast (Com.X, Bochum)
€29,500 (general departmental research)
2010-2011
25
„Masonry Has a Future.“
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Wolfram Jäger is Professor of Structural Engineering at the Technical University Dresden. His
research is focused on masonry in both historic and new buildings
Professor Jäger, compared to other countries, the
construction industry in Germany uses very heterogeneous methods in wall construction. Wood
construction, masonry construction, poured
systems filled with fresh concrete, etc. New homes
being built as part of Efficiency House Plus are
currently being built primarily of wood. How do
you see the chances for masonry?
First, I would remind you that in the past and currently,
solid wall construction have a share of about 85% of the
housing market in the Federal Republic of Germany. But
you are correct that the Efficiency House Plus systems
have to date been primarily lightweight, highly insulated
and non-solid wall constructions and there were concerns
that masonry could no longer meet the new requirements for energy efficiency. In recent years, however,
there have been enormous strides made in the field of
masonry construction to develop competitive, innovative
solutions. Hollow chamber blocks which are then filled
with insulating material have been developed to combine
the insulating and heat storage properties missing in
lightweight construction. Being comfortable is playing
an increasingly important role at both home and work.
26
Another development are multilayer blocks which have
separated the structural and insulating functions into
layers, which are nonetheless fully integrated. They are
laid as a homogeneous block and meet the standards for
Efficiency Plus houses.
Sure, the masonry pilot projects currently underway
have not received as much media coverage and scientific
attention as the Efficiency Plus House built by BMVBS
with Werner Sobek in Berlin. I’m thinking of a project for
an energy self-sufficient house” by HELMA Eigenheimbau
AG in Lehrte which used brick construction or the Efficiency Plus house by XELLA.
In masonry construction, particularly for brick
manufacturers, has there been a trend to reduce
the vertical and horizontal joints? How will this
play out?
Joints are a necessary evil in masonry to compensate the
tolerances of the blocks and to ensure a non-positive,
full connection in vertical and horizontal directions.
However, they also create thermal bridges that can be
rather unpleasant, so the aim is to reduce the joint thick-
27
Being tested: a fully recyclable, modular, solid construction system
ness as far as the tolerances allow. Unfortunately, if one
reduces the thickness of the mortar, the compensation
provided by the joint against peak stresses is lost. Because
of the amount of work required, in the past people didn’t
bother to fill the vertical joints with mortar. If one doesn’t
mortar the horizontal joints, then we’re talking about dry
masonry which is, however, associated with a decrease
in strength. This is why mortaring the joints will still be
needed in the future, at least for light-weight concrete, porous concrete and brick masonry. One possibility is using
PURSchaum as mortar, for example, but this leads to an
insoluble compound that causes difficulties at the end of
the building’s useful life. We need a mortar in the future
that can be applied thinly and efficiently, will keep out
as much moisture as possible, will have the required mechanical properties, in particular the bond shear strength,
and can still be easily dissolved when the bond is no longer needed. I’m still hoping to inspire someone with this
vision, which I don’t think is all that unrealistic.
28
One of your current projects in the research
initiative focuses on improving the thermal storage capacity of masonry with latent heat storage.
Are we on the verge of a construction industry
revolution?
Previously, it was always the goal to reduce the heat
losses caused by transmission through the walls and the
adjacent structural members. With the increasing interest
in year-round heat protection and comfort, the heat-retaining properties of solid masonry construction are once
again becoming the focus of our considerations. The main
question about heat and energy storage in the energy
self-sufficient house remains as the rates paid for energy
fed back to the grid continue to drop. In my opinion,
therefore, we’re not on the verge of a revolution not just in
building materials, but also in construction design. The
integration of decentralized thermal and energy storage
into one’s own building will be the solution of the future
to which masonry can and will make a significant contribution. My team wants to start the project by combining
the structural, insulating and storage functions in the
wall and then come to the design aspects later on.
Research and teaching closely connected. What
priorities do you see as a university teacher when
it comes to training the next generation?
We urgently need to place more stress on the new trends
in construction without forgetting the foundations or
neglecting the artistic aspect. The results from the research
initiatives should be more widely integrated. My team and I
have definitely had positive experiences in this regard. The
students are also highly interested in sustainable building
and they love experimenting. If one wants to work with the
students on issues of sustainability and energy efficiency
with an understanding of the contexts surrounding the
issues, they must have some knowledge of construction,
from design and planning processes. While construction
physics is now very strongly oriented to issues of energy
loss and its reduction and has reached a high level, it still
needs to address issues about the life cycles of building
materials, building design and the individual types of
construction. It is our responsibility as a professor not to
promote what we’re already doing, but to help our future
graduates to rethink. Who else, if not our graduates, are
going to achieve the changes required in what is a very
traditional industry from client to contractor?
Final questions: Can you describe your living
space? Have you fulfilled your dreams?
It’s very nice to be able to live in an old vineyard house in
the Elbe Valley in Radebeul. My family restored the house
before the Wall fell. The house was built after the Thirty
Years’ War around 1654 as a two-story timber-framed
structure with a steep hipped roof. It is among the first
in the area. And you can imagine that it is as difficult to
make changes in and around the house to help reduce
its current energy consumption. So, I still have things to
work on. Technically, we want to do something about it,
maybe reinforce the internal insulation of the exterior
walls and use the summer heat in the roof space.
29
Energy efficient office buildings need to be highly functional and offer the best temperature and air conditions for a conducive working
environment. There has previously not been an adequate method to
collect and evaluate data about user satisfaction in office buildings
which can then be integrated into the Sustainable Building Rating
System (BNB) for office and administrative buildings.
User Satisfaction
as Indicator
to Describe and
Assess
the Social Dimension
of Sustainability
Evaluating socio-cultural aspects of sustainable building operations
with user surveys
German Chancellery
30
30
Karin Schakib-Ekbatan,
KIT Karlsruhe Institute of Technology –
Department of Building Physics and Technical Development
31
With a focus on energy-optimized construction, the Department of Building Physics and Technical Development
at the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology has surveyed
users of 45 buildings constructed according to different energy standards about their level of comfort in the
workplace. A key finding is that there is often a significant
gap between the predicted social aspect of a building
and users’ experiences in the building as actually used.
In addition, the need became clear for a cost- and timesaving survey instrument that would be compatible with
the “socio-cultural quality” sections of the Sustainable
Building Rating System (BNB) for office and administrative buildings.
We have developed a practical method for assessing
building performance from the users’ perspective that
provides reliable information about everyday experiences with comfort conditions in the users’ immediate
workplace and the building as a whole. In addition, an
overall index was developed which can be used to derive
the benchmarks for the building assessment. The index is
being made available to orient the public and help them
set decision criteria to analyze their real estate portfolios,
manage their inventory, and make evaluations when leasing. The project resulted in a user survey instrument on
workplace comfort (Instrument für Nutzerbefragungen
zum Komfort am Arbeitsplatz–INKA for short). The materials include a questionnaire in both paper and online
versions, a report sheet (see fig. 1) as well as a guide with
information on conducting and analyzing the survey.
The materials are available for download and have been
updated as part of the project presented here.
The project, entitled “Evaluating socio-cultural aspects
of sustainable building operations with user surveys,”
focused on reviewing the comfort levels forecast as part
of the planning stage. The central question is: How has
the building lived up to its potential from a user perspective? With the help of user satisfaction surveys, subjective
evaluations are collected and compared to the results
obtained from the new building certification process.
Training of auditors
Comparison of the survey content with the criteria for
“sociocultural and functional quality”
We recommend training building auditors in the basics
of conducting building surveys as part of the certification
process.
The aspects of comfort such as temperature, light, air
quality and acoustic comfort included in the survey are
largely compatible with the socio-cultural characteristics
in the BNB for office and administrative buildings. This
includes the ability of users to influence their environment, a factor shown in many studies to be extremely
important for the satisfaction rating. Moreover, the
furniture and design of offices and the spatial conditions
were highly relevant factors in the satisfaction rating (see
fig. 2 and 3).
Identifying potential modifications based on the
certification criteria (such as range of individual
criteria, weighting factors)
Overall conditions (workplace)
Large office
> 15 persons
(n = 158)
Daylight in the space
Small group office
5–15 persons
(n = 341)
Temperature
Small office
2-4 persons
(n = 161)
Breaking the survey instrument into several modules
(process quality)
Acoustics/noise levels
Space
Integration user survey results in the rating system for
existing buildings (property standards)
Single office
(n = 2,055)
-2
-1
very dissatisfied
32
1
2
very satisfied
The ongoing operation of buildings has helped build up
pressure to meet the objectives for sustainable workplace
comfort. The involvement of users in building monitoring is an important source of information to instigate
improvement of processes. As a systematic procedure, the
INKA instrument represents an essential step towards a
comprehensive rating of building sustainability from the
user perspective. It should be considered an important
component of the certification process, a practical evaluation method for the real estate industry, and will help
build a comprehensive database for comparative building
analysis
A key finding is that a simple weighting of the acoustic
aspect in the certification process significantly underestimates its true significance for the user experience. This
indicates a need for an adjustment in the certification
process.
After conducting the initial comprehensive survey as
recommended, the data shows reduced surveys partially
indexed to ambient conditions (temperature, air quality,
lighting and acoustics/noise) could be performed every
three years or as needed, say, after an air quality improvement project.
Air quality
conversion (see Schakib-Ekbatan, Wagner & Lützkendorf, 2011) takes into consideration previous field studies,
makes arguments for the content and sees itself as a tentative process. We recommend collecting more building
data and modifying the reference values as required.
Surveys were conducted at six certified buildings in summer 2010 and winter 2011 and integrated into the evaluation system. For meaningful analyses, the departmental
database from field studies of energy-optimized and
conventional existing buildings done from 2004 to 2011
were added. The project objectives, results and recommendations are presented in detail below.
Determining reference values for subjective user experience is, of course, not without problems. Because of
the small building sample, it is difficult to determine
the maximum attainable in user surveys. The proposed
33
Architect Hans Otto Kraus is Technical Director of
GWG, Munich’s municipal building society. Mr. Kraus
is the moderator of the Sustainable Housing working group, which has developed a rating system for
sustainable housing with scientific support from a
Project 1 Short Title: Z 6 – 10.08.18.7-08.8/II 2 – F20-08-09
Researchers
Assistance
Project Head
Total cost
Federal grant
Industry partner
Project duration
KIT Karlsruhe Institute of Technology – Department
of Building Physics and Technical Development
Karin Schakib-Ekbatan, Cédrine Lussac, Thomas Gropp
KIT Karlsruhe Institute of Technology – Chair
of Residential Construction Economics and Ecology of housing)
Prof. T. Lützkendorf, Jan Zak
KIT Karlsruhe Institute of Technology – Department of
Building Physics and Technical Development
Prof. A. Wagner
€108,600
€76,020
bauperfomance GmbH
through 2010
Project 2 Short Title: NuBeFra Az SF – 10.08.18.7-10.8
Researchers
Assistance
Project Head
Total cost
Federal grant
Project duration
Karin Schakib-Ekbatan, Cédrine
Lussac, Thomas Gropp
KIT Karlsruhe Institute of Technology – Chair of Residential
Construction Economics and Ecology of housing)
Prof. T. Lützkendorf, Matthias
Prof. A. Wagner
€116,623.00
€80,533.00
through 2011
project of the Zukunft Bau Research Initiative.
“Proven
sustainability
will convince
investors.”
What were the reasons for the housing industry to begin working on assessing sustainable
residential construction? What opportunities and
challenges were revealed?
The organized housing industry was faced with the
fact that the German Society for Sustainable Building
(DGNB) had developed a certification system for residential buildings without the involvement of the housing
industry.Because the housing industry has been engaged
in sustainable practices for decades, it saw itself as a key
player who needed to bring its experience and expertise to
this area. In collaboration with the BMVBS, we developed
a method to assess the sustainability of new residential
construction. The challenges in such an endeavor are
numerous: developing consistent criteria, not initiating
any additional costly standards, and having the indicators
correctly reflect the values of society. The opportunities include increasing transparency and comparability
in the products, generating guidelines for builders and
the building industry, improving the sustainable design,
construction and use of buildings, and finally starting the
discussion on sustainable building.
Who were the members of the working group and
how did that affect the tasks you undertook?
Besides the representatives of the BMVBS and the Federal
Office for Building and Regional Planning (BBR), the
housing industry associations, including the National
Construction Industry Association (GdW) and the National Association of Independent Builders and Estate
Agents (BFW) as well as other representatives from the
housing, real estate and construction industries. Consumer representatives included the German Tenants’ Association (Deutsche Mieterverbund) and the Consumer Center
(Verbraucherzentrale). The task, therefore, was to develop
the broadest and most detailed view of sustainability possible and to weigh individual interests thoroughly. What
became important for us was to consider the needs of the
portfolio manager committed to social housing.
34
35
www.nawoh.de
Guideline for Sustainable
Building 2011
Sustainable federal buildings – on the road to success
Dipl.-Ing. Andreas Rietz, architect BDB
The Federal Institute for Research on Building, Urban Affairs and Spatial Development
(BBSR)
What issues were at the forefront of system development? What qualities play a particular role
from the perspective of the housing industry?
Special attention was devoted to questions of how we
should measure various criteria. Due partly to a lack of
objective data and indicators, we decided to evaluate measurable and non-measurable properties only in a descriptive way. The housing industry was particularly interested
in analyzing housing quality, long-term performance,
and profitability. In addition, we were working to create a
system to document that sustainability is worth the effort
and the cost for smaller construction projects.
The ratings system differs markedly from the
BNB rating system for office and administrative
buildings. What sets the sustainable housing rating system apart?
The biggest difference probably lies in the assessment of
long-term economic viability and the assessment of the
stability of value. In addition, the criteria allow one to
create a strength/weakness profile of the buildings which
can model the over-achievement of individual criteria.
Who will take over the future ownership of the
sustainable housing rating system and how will it
be put into practice in the future?
The various organizations that were involved in the project have formed a new organization called “Nawoh” which
will have the necessary structures in place to manage the
necessary procedures, approvals, regulations, and costs.
The GdW will be taking a lead role in that project. The
certification will take the form of the “Sustainable Housing Quality Seal.” Now that the pilot phase has ended, we
expect that private builders or housing companies will
apply to have their projects certified and tested for the
seal. Once sustainability is tested and proved, investors
will be convinced that the property has been properly developed and users will be able to affirm that the property
they have rented or purchased is actually sustainable.
Can you describe your living space? Have you
fulfilled your dreams?
I currently rent a space in the city and am very satisfied.
The balcony offers views and a space for outdoor living
and it’s a short walk to the city center and the river Isar.
Environmental and climate protection, efficient use of energy and resources, climate-adapted construction, and demographic changes require
innovative design concepts for the buildings of tomorrow. With the updated
Guideline for Sustainable Building, holistic consideration and evaluation
of federal buildings has taken on a particular importance. Since its launch
in March 2011, important steps for implementing the guideline in federal
building have been under way.
The Federal Government has long been committed to its exemplary role in
sustainable and energy-efficient construction. The Guideline for Sustainable Building was extensively revised and made mandatory for federal
construction projects with a March 2011 order from the Federal Ministry
of Transport, Building and Urban Development (BMVBS). Thus the Federal
Government is putting sustainable construction into concrete administrative action. The guideline provides introductory general principles for sustainable construction (Part A) and serves as guidelines for the highest levels
of building management in the Federal Government. The guidelines defines
the mandatory minimum requirements and targets and regulates the
implementation of sustainable design from the initial planning phase to the
sustainability assessment after completion of the building (Part B). The basis
for this is the Federal Sustainable Building Rating System (BNB). As of May
14, 2012, the Guideline for Sustainable Building must now be adhered to in
all major new construction projects of office and administrative buildings.
The rating system has been evaluated in an initial
application. How have the results been considered
as you plan further practical application?
The initial use of the system has shown that properties that
have been planned and built without the currently established criteria may well be certifiable as sustainable. The
pilot projects were consistently carefully and responsibly
developed, both with private financing and public funding,
which were within the general cost framework. It was also
clear that advance application of the criteria list can save
significant effort in data collection and documentation.
Furthermore, all of the users have confirmed that working
through the criteria lists enabled a high-quality project
development and execution. This has provided a meaningful and useful guide for everyone involved.
36
37
The BMVBS was able to inspire industry professionals to
begin significant work on sustainable construction with
its first Guideline for Sustainable Building released in
2001. The new guideline has evolved into an instrument
of quality management and control in conjunction with
the BNB ratings system. The methods and procedures
formulated in the guidelines are chronologically organized
according to the standard stages for planning new
construction in the Guidelines for Federal Construction
Projects (RBBau) and the Fee Schedule for Architects
and Engineers (HOAI). With the addition of parts C
“Recommendations for the Sustainable Use and Operation
of Buildings” and D “Existing Buildings” at the beginning
of 2013, a complex set of guidelines for sustainable building
have come into force. At the same time ensures, the
corresponding assessment modules and detailed criteria
have become available.
Successful implementation can only be achieved with a
high level of professional competence among the federal
building authorities. With the development of a curriculum
in 2011, a training process in the current federal project
guidelines has been initiated. Training as a BNB sustainability coordinator consists of four two-day consecutive
learning modules, a base module and three specialist
modules on the use of sustainable building rating system.
The trainees must demonstrate that they have learned the
information presented with practical homework and an
oral and written examination. More than 140 employees of
the federal building departments have already successfully
completed the training program and are now putting their
knowledge into practice in various federal projects.
Left: Hamburg Central Customs Office
above: Paul Wunderlich Haus, Eberswalde
middle: University of Regensburg
below: Rosenheim Central Customs Office
38
With a “Network for Sustainable Federal Building,” an
internal platform for collaboration among sustainability
coordinators is being set up as part of the sustainable
building information portal. The goal is to make practical
project experiences available and to encourage interdepartmental discussion of substantive issues arising from
the implementation of the ratings system. The Federal
Government must do more than just develop a theoretical
basis for sustainable buildings and offer corresponding
training. In order to fulfill the Federal Government’s
exemplary role, the Guideline for Sustainable Building and
its mandatory requirements must be realized in concrete
construction projects that will reach a minimum rating
of silver in new construction. The following projects
for administrative buildings currently in planning and
construction are receiving intensive support:
• Federal Ministry for Education and Research in Berlin,
• Federal Environment Agency, replacement building,
Berlin,
• Federal Environment Agency, expansion and
renovation of existing properties, Berlin,
• United Nations campus, expansion, Bonn,
• Federal Ministry of Justice, expansion, Bonn,
• Federal Environment Agency, expansion, Dessau,
• Federal Radiation Protection Agency, expansion,
Salzgitter
• Federal Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs, expansion,
Berlin,
In addition, the BNB ratings system has been voluntarily
applied to construction projects for which the BMVBS has
not yet developed any regulations:
• German Center for Aerospace , new building
construction grant, Cologne,
• Federal Environment Agency, replacement monitoring
station “Schauinsland”
• Federal Environment Agency, new monitoring station
“Zingst”; and
• the German Embassy in Washington, full renovation.
Questions about environmental, economic, socio-cultural
and functional aspects, the technical quality and process
quality have already begun to be included in the competitive bidding processes, in addition to the usual questions
about urban planning and design qualities. Similarly,
estimates for environmental life cycle assessment and costing as well as socio-cultural issues are now being addressed
as mandatory requirements in the planning competitions.
The Guideline sets core criteria to be included in the competitive bidding process, the inclusion of which allows the
requirements for sustainability to be reviewed at an early
stage in the planning process.
Subsequent monitoring of how the requirements set forth
in the competition are being implemented documents the
comparison of what was promised in the bid and what is
actually delivered. Important aspects are the weight given
39
to individual competitive criteria and the ensuring that the
jury of experts has the necessary prior knowledge about the
sustainability qualities listed in the tender.
As part of Bautec 2012, the main customs office in Hamburg was issued a certificate with a rating of 1.9, which
corresponds to “silver” in the 2011 BNB ratings system.
The call for competitive bids in December 2006 already
included reference to selected building criteria in the 2001
Guideline. The building received very high marks in life
cycle assessment and building-related life cycle costs. The
latter is mainly due to the very low production costs. But
other individual aspects document the good standard. For
example, the entire building including the garage is barrierfree. Marks for process quality in terms of planning integration, complexity and optimization were very positive.
The Federal Government as role model. Individual states
are increasing their activities in terms of sustainability assessment of selected state construction projects. An intensive exchange among the states is ensured with the office
of Sustainable Construction in the project group “Building
for the Future - Sustainable Building” in the Committee on
Government Building (ASH) of the federal conference of
state building ministers. Among the issues discussed, questions on unified regulations are discussed.
Rating System for Sustainable Building Trial of “Sustainable Educational Buildings”
Researchers
Project Management Total costs
Project duration
Life Cycle Engineering Experts GmbH (LCEE)
Dr. Carmen Schneider
Torsten Mielecke
€68,955
08/2011 to 11/2012
Development and testing of a rating system
“BNB for Research and Laboratory Buildings”
Researchers
Project Management
Assistance
Total cost
Project duration
ee concept GmbH
Andrea Georgi-Tomas
Laura Rechert
€59,464
08/2011 to 04/2013
Development of “BNB for Extra-Company Training Centers “
Researchers
Project Management
Assistance
Total cost
Project duration
Steinbeis-Hochschule-Berlin GmbH,
Steinbeis-Transfer-Institut Bauund Immobilienwirtschaft
Bernd Landgraf
Gerd Priebe Architects and Consultants (GPAC)
€54,978
08/2012 to 12/2012
As part of the Zukunft Bau Research Initiative, the BMVBS
has helped to continue developing the existing instruments
and tools. Currently being developed and tested are ratings
systems variants for:
• “New Educational Buildings” and
• “Research and laboratory buildings.”
A system proposal for “extra-company training centers” is
expected later this year which will subsequently undergo
a trial period and, if found ready for implementation,
be released by the end of 2013. In addition to introducing and offering training in completed system variants,
focus will now turn to improving the user experience and
networking existing instruments. The Sustainable Building
information portal will be expanded as will the Network
for Sustainable Federal Building with the development of a
computer-based assessment and documentation tool that
will ensure efficient implementation of the Guideline for
Sustainable Building requirements in every project phase.
40
41
WECOBIS and Ökobau.dat: Knowing what’s in building
With WECOBIS, the web-based ecological building materials information system and Ökobau.dat, a building
materials database used to determine global ecological environmental effects, the Federal Government has
provided two tools which make available important environmental and health-related data and information relevant to finding the right building materials. Both information platforms are used in the Sustainable
Building Ratings System for Federal Buildings (BNB) of the Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban
Development (BMVBS). Both WECOBIS and Ökobau.dat were initiated as part of the Zukunft Bau Research
Initiative and are constantly supplemented with new or updated data and adapted to current developments,
such as European standardization processes.
Tanja Brock, Claus Asam, Federal Institute for Research on Building, Urban Affairs and Spatial Planning at the Federal Office for Building and Regional Planning
(BBSR)
WECOBIS
Taking ecological and health-related concerns into
consideration is playing an increasingly important role
in the planning process. Given the abundance of available
information, such as environmental labels, certifications,
product data sheets, supplier information and rules and
regulations, it is difficult to zero in on the best source of
information. The WECOBIS internet platform,
operated in cooperation with the BMVBS and the Bavarian Chamber of Architects (ByAK), has been offering
important assistance since 2013 with its newly revised
version by providing vendor-neutral information on environmental and health aspects of major building product
groups in a structured and consistent presentation.
Users will find the latest updates on new product groups
(such as aerogels) in WECOBIS. They will also finds
answers to typical questions: Is there an eco-label for
the product in question? How much energy is in a brick?
Which paints are safe?
are discussed, including the types of raw materials, the
manufacturing, processing and utilization of building
materials to their reuse/recycling/disposal. In addition to
standard information such as product and concept definitions, information is given for vendor-neutral ecological
product selection, environmental product declarations
and values from Ökobau.dat. Practical processing recommendations and occupational hygiene risks are added as
part of long-standing cooperation with the professional
trade association of the construction industry. The life
cycle information finish with notes on reuse or recycling
of materials, and the environmental and health risks associated with use and reuse.
If requested information is not available, the WECOBIS
office is ready to fill the knowledge gap. In addition to
consultation, the WECOBIS office set up by the BBSR has
assumed joint responsibility with the Bavarian Chamber
of Architects for editing the official building product
group information. The extensive posts are drafted by
specialist editors. In addition, a scientific advisory board
ensures transparency and provides additional technical
input for the development of WECOBIS.
With information organized according to building product groups and raw materials (Table 1), it is now possible
to describe a building in terms of its materials almost
completely.
Ökobau.dat
WECOBIS describes all material records organized according to their life cycle phases. This means that environmental and health-related information will be provided for each life cycle phase of all building product groups
and types of raw materials. A number of individual issues
The BMVBS has made the evaluation of the environmental quality of a building, an essential part of the Sustainable Building Ratings System for Federal Buildings (BNB).
The ecological quality is divided here into global and local
environmental impacts determined by appropriate quantification methods. The following global environmental
42
43
WECOBIS –
Building product groups and raw materials
Building product groups (133 records)
• Structural panels
(Based on plaster, cement, wood, plastic)
• Flooring
(Textile, resilient, mineral, wood base)
• Insulation
(Mineral, synthetic, renewable)
• Seals
• (Paints, flooring, sealants)
• Wood and wood products
(Fasteners, planed goods, clamping materials, fiber
impacts provide a basis for the calculations: potentials
for greenhouse gas, ozone depletion, ozone formation,
acidification and eutrophication. By calculating the environmental impact of building materials identified by LCA
methodology, the respective material units are assigned
corresponding environmental impacts, expressed in
equivalents. Ökobau.dat currently lists the environmental
impacts of around 1,000 building materials / construction
and transport processes in the following categories:
• Mineral construction materials
• Insulation
• Wood
• Metals
• Coatings
• Plastics
• Components of windows and curtain walls
• Building technology
• Other
ological foundations, etc. is centrally provided. Currently,
Ökobau.dat is being adjusted to European standard DIN
EN 15804, which requires among other things an adaptation of environmental indicators and recalculating the
data. In addition, the records are being restructured and
arranged according to the life cycle modules as formulated in DIN EN 15804.
Each record contains background information on the
source data, the reference unit, validity period, and data
quality. A distinctive feature is the adequate sampling,
comparability and consistency of the records that were
generated and calculated using a uniform and standardcompliant methodology. The records were created in a
format (XML file format) that enables integration into the
existing life cycle calculation tools on the building level.
The use of the data provided in Ökobau.dat is intended
for LCA under the Sustainable Building Rating System for
Federal Buildings (BNB) if specific environmental product
certificates or other verified data are not available.
Conclusion
In addition to the GaBi database which currently provides
the background to Ökobau.dat, DIN EN 15804 allows the
addition of other background data sets. This will help
determine whether the required pre-verification of background information will highlight possible differences in
life cycle assessments.
www.wecobis.de
This will be lead to new requirements and criteria for the
data quality of Ökobau.dat that will require future adjustment,
www.nachhaltigesbauen.de/baustoff-und-gebaeudedaten.html
materials, laminates)
• Adhesives
(such as dispersed, epoxy resin adhesives)
• Solid materials
(such as concrete, limestone, brick, clay)
• Mortar and screeds
(Mortar, plaster, screed)
• Surface treatments
(Paints, varnishes, lacquers)
• Glazing
(Basic glasses, functional glass)
Basic Materials (30 records)
• Binders
(Cement, gypsum, lime, magnesia, bitumen)
• Aggregates
(such as natural aggregates, recycled glass)
• Plastics
(such as elastomers, epoxy resins, polyesters)
• Metals
(such as steel, aluminum, copper, zinc, lead)
44
Ökobau.dat was published as part of the Zukunft Bau
Research Initiative by PE International GmbH with support from the German construction industry in 2009. An
updated version of Ökobau.dat was released in January
2011. The 2011 updated was extended with 288 EPD data
sets and made more user-friendly.
The technical information and data from WECOBIS and
Ökobau.dat are available to the public via the Sustainable
Building information portal. They make the knowledge
available for sustainable federal buildings as well as for
private builders, architects and engineers which will allow environmental impacts to be considered at an early
stage in planning while still selected building materials
and products.
Deploying LCA data
Researchers
Project Head
Total cost
Project duration PE INTERNATIONAL AG, Johannes
Kreißig, Steffen Schulz
PE International AG, Johannes Kreißig
€14,999.95
through 2011
WECOBIS Update: CMS conversion from Jahia to TYPO 3 / New
design, layout and programming of Internet application / table and
graphics design / development of comparison module
Researchers
Assistance
The data can be easily accessed via the online version of
the 2011 Ökobau.dat is available at
www.nachhaltigesbauen.de/oekobaudat/.
Project Head Total cost
In addition to search and sort functions, explanatory
information on environmental indicators and method-
Federal grant
Project duration
ByAK researchers for the comparison
module
Bavarian Chamber of Architects
(content-related development);
OnlineNow (technical realization); fine
design (structural and graphic design)
Claus Asam
€48,992.00 euros plus ByAK share (as
part of a cooperation agreement
2012/2013, ByAK will contribute
€10,000 per year)
€48,992.00
09/2011 to 08/2012
45
“Sustainability and building
philosophy
must always go hand-in-hand.”
Building certification systems are popping up
everywhere like daffodils on a hillside. There are
certification models such as DGNB, LEED, BREEAM and the Sustainable Building Rating System
for Federal Buildings (BNB). Efforts to harmonize
standards across Europe and internationally are
underway. What are the sticking points? How do
the systems differ?
Worldwide, there are hundreds of evaluation and certification methods. The best-known systems are the American
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED),
the Building Research Establishment Environmental
Assessment Method (BREEAM) in the UK, and the German seals of approval from the German Association for
Sustainable Building (DGNB) and the BNB. But there are
other methods such as the Swiss Minergie or the French
Haute Qualité Environnementale (HQE) criteria have been
determining the sustainable construction market for
years. While a successful marketing campaign has made
LEED better known around the world that the other instruments, if one considers, however, the number of buildings certified so far, BREEAM is leading with more than
250,000 rated buildings. This is because the UK requires
all new housing and government construction projects to
undergo BREEAM assessments.
Even if the methods listed share a common goal of
improving the sustainability performance of buildings, the grading systems differ enormously in terms of
their design, structure, and content. Generally, one can
distinguish between first generation ratings systems, such
as LEED or BREEAM, and second generation systems. The
BNB and the DGNB certificate are second generation systems. Unlike BREEAM and LEED, where the ecology and
energy efficiency are in the forefront, the two German systems take a holistic sustainable building approach, which
considers the entire life cycle of a building, including its
construction, its operation and the end-of-life phase.
Each label has been developed specifically for the climate,
political, social and historical aspects of the construction industry in its respective country of origin. This also
explains why the rating systems, despite similar structures
and approaches, still mostly focus on different content
areas and draw on different laws, standards and databases.
This is why the BNB and DGNB systems rate energy effi-
46
ciency based on German DIN V 18599 while LEED is based
on the American ASHRAE standards. In addition, aspects
such as life cycle costs (LCC) and life cycle assessment
(LCA), i.e. the evaluation of environmental impacts over
the entire life cycle of a building (construction, operation
and end-of-life), are currently only assessed in the German
DGNB and BNB certification systems. For this reason,
what constitutes a certified building is hardly comparable.
There is currently a push for a harmonization of the
systems at the European level. Both the European Commission (EU), European standardization authorities and
private initiatives, such as the SB Alliance, have made
numerous efforts in recent years in this regard and are
beginning to see their first successes. Uniform core criteria
for Europe are beginning to emerge within the context
of European research initiatives, such as the EU OPEN
HOUSE or SuPerBuildings projects. The OPEN HOUSE
research project, under the technical coordination of the
Fraunhofer Institute for Building Physics, is currently conducting 67 case studies throughout Europe and evaluating
them with a European criteria catalog. The results will be
available early next year and we can expect initial statements on the status of sustainable construction in Europe
at that time. Also, the European Commission is planning
to publish core indicators for rating the sustainability of
buildings, either as separate directive or as a road map to
be released in mid-2013.
Each rating system is based on accumulated
knowledge about the mechanisms and consequences of effects. Are the effects of sustainability
adequately known from a scientific perspective?
The German certifications are the first to include not only
ecological but also economic, socio-cultural as well as
process-and site-specific aspects in the ratings process.
Because the system is still relatively young, building-specific statements about the interactions and consequences
of the individual criteria have not yet been demonstrated.
Initial approaches have been developed in recent years;
however, they have not yet received adequate empirical
verification due to a lack of collected experiences. In addition, the sustainable building topics are often not assessed
as a single criterion in the rating system shown, but are
measured by many different indicators, which in turn are
Dr.-Ing. Natalie Essig, architect and DGNB auditor
studied architecture at the TU Darmstadt and the
Politecnicco di Torino and earned a joint doctorate from there and the University of Technology,
Sydney in 2010 on the subject of sustainable building. She works as a sustainability consultant and
certifier for federal and private sector construction
projects. Her specialty is assessing athletic facilities.
She currently works at the Department of Building Physics at Technical University of Munich (Prof.
Hauser) and the Fraunhofer Institute for Building
Physics (IBP) and will join the Architecture Faculty
of the University of Munich at the beginning of
2013.
47
interact with each other. For example, the issue of energy
efficiency is reflected in the LCA criteria (ecological quality) and the life cycle cost analysis (economic quality), as
well as in the socio-cultural and functional qualities, and
in some aspects of the planning process (process quality). In addition, the different weighting factors assigned
to the criteria in the ratings matrix interact with one
another. If a change is made to the planning process, this
will affect not only the net result of a single criterion, but
will also have a strong impact on the overall rating due to
the linkages among the different criteria in the system.
In addition, we have to note that the actual operation
of a building does not always perfectly reflect the result
of the ratings process. Studies and experience in recent
years with the American certification have shown that
the majority of the rated buildings in the U.S. have not
always maintained the LEED rated values when in actual
use; indeed, some have performed significantly worse in
actual operation. User behavior plays a significant role in
this regard. We are not yet able to draw conclusions about
the BNB system due to a lack of empirical data.
In summary, however, we can make the following statement: The sooner the criteria of rating systems are used in
the planning process, the easier and affordable it will be
to include sustainability concerns in the planning, construction and operation of a building. Moreover, it is clear
that the use of ratings criteria can better structure the
planning process and make it significantly more transparent. Defining planning goals early on and subjecting
them to continuous review as part of the rating process
has, in my experience, already led to considerable success
in improving the energy efficiency. Because who wants a
“silver” rating, when you can get a “gold?”
Your specialty is assessing athletic facilities. Do
you have a policy recommendation for the construction of sustainable sports facilities?
The current sporting facility construction market is driven by the substantial needs for rehabilitation and the high
maintenance costs of many legacy sports facilities. There’s
also a lack of expertise, lack of opportunities for consultation, and a large number of regulations and requirements
for sports facility construction, which are both difficult to
track down and do not reflect the current state of the art.
48
Added to this are new challenges to sports buildings made
by new types of sport, focus on multi-functional playing,
sports, and movement facilities, the transfer of numerous
sports facilities from government management to clubs,
new models for funding and support, as well as new demands for energy-efficient and sustainable design. While
sports center consultancy positions were common in the
70s and 80s, the financing for such positions has been
cut back drastically in the past 20 years. The universities
were indeed researching the topics of sports development
planning and exercise science, but the field of sports facility construction has been ignored in favor of residential,
office and industrial construction.
As far as sustainable building and planning of sports
facilities is concerned, one of the main approaches would
have to begin including sports facility development in our
education programs and developing new, contemporary
criteria for sustainable new and existing sports facilities
for amateur and professional sports. With a list of rating
criteria specially adapted to sports facility assessment,
ecological, economic, and socio-cultural processes could
be integrated into sporting-specific functional criteria in
sports facility planning. We will have to make a distinction here between buildings for amateur sports and
competition venues. In addition, the development of a
variant of the BNB system for sports facilities, perhaps
in combination with that for school buildings, would
represent an important milestone. The DGNB has already
set up a working group which will start its work next
year. The National Standards Committee for Sustainable
Construction is currently discussing the establishment of
a working group for sustainable large venue construction.
The amount of space dedicated to recreation,
including sports facilities, increased by more than
10 million sq. ft. a year from 2006 to 2010, according to the Federal Statistical Office. How does this
increased use of space viewed from a sustainable
sports architecture perspective?
This question is difficult to answer, because the topic is
rarely discussed in sport facility construction circles.
Currently other problems are being discussed, such as
refurbishing and maintaining gyms when the coffers are
running empty and still keep up the offerings necessary
for people’s physical well-being. Unfortunately, the use of
space has barely played any role in this discussion.
But let’s take a closer look at the numbers: Sports facilities
statistics can be divided into two groups, namely, buildings and outdoor spaces. “Recreational areas” includes
undeveloped assets such as sports fields, ice rinks, and golf
courses. Sports buildings, such as gyms, swimming pools
and stadiums, are included in the figures for recreation
buildings and spaces. Overall, these “recreational area”
(the sum of recreation areas and buildings) were 6.5% of
area with residential and commercial zoning in 2004.
Currently, recreational areas are at a level of 8.4% and
were a major contributor to the significant increase (over
75 acres/day) in areas zoned residential and commercial
between 2007 and 2010. While the daily rates of growth in
buildings and open space has steadily declined in recent
years, and commercial space has fluctuated considerably,
recreational areas are permanently increasing. In fact,
currently there is a tendency to feel that more and more
cities are building new multi-purpose gyms, swimming
pools, stadiums and sports fields as part of their green
space projects. Whether this makes sense, if they will
always receive sufficient use and whether the location is
well chosen, are other questions that need to be solved. To
counteract this development, assessing sports facilities in
terms of sustainability will surely have to deal in detail
with land use issues. As part of the BNB rating system,
land use when it has involved the rehabilitation of brownfield sites or pre-used land has been evaluated positively.
In sports facilities, other aspects should be fed into the
assessment, such as the implementation of a sports facility development planning. This is a kind of master plan,
which on the one hand should consider the sports needs
of each region and draw some conclusions about the
quantity and type of construction needed. It must also be
questioned if a three-span gymnasium or multi-purpose
arena is always what’s needed, since so much amateur
sport can be done anywhere, even outside.
renovate listed buildings, you really do come up against
the limits of improving energy efficiency and sustainability. Sustainability and our building philosophy must
always be seen hand-in-hand. With existing buildings,
we have to be very careful in dealing with this issue and
developing new individual concepts.
Holistic approaches to improve energy efficiency, which
include not only a building, but entire neighborhoods are
therefore urgently needed. We’re already far ahead when
it comes to sustainable new construction–the next topic
will be the buildings we already have!
Final questions: Can you describe your living
space? Have you fulfilled your dreams?
I live in a Franconian half-timbered house. From my own
experience as an architect, I can say that when trying to
49
Energy-Optimized
19th Century Houses
Practical, detailed construction solutions for interior insulation in light of the Energy Conservation
Ordinance of April 2009
Prof. Rainer Oswald, Géraldine Liebert, Silke Sous, Matthias Zöller, Aachen
Date of Modernization
1. The Issue
Large potentials for energy savings are hidden in older
buildings facing modernization. Many residential buildings in the centers of our cities and towns are protected
historical monuments and are a key part of the cityscape.
If one wants to save on heating costs and cut loss of heat
through building envelopes, this can often only be done
with interior insulation. The Energy Saving Ordinance
of April 2009 (EnEV 2009) limits the installation interior
insulation layers in existing buildings to a heat transfer
coefficient U of 0.35 W/(m2K). To achieve this goal, however, would require, given the state of insulation technology, thicker insulation layers than are currently allowed.
2. The Research Project and Conclusion
Calcium silicate board
2
Fiberboard
2
2009-later
2002-2008
Cork insulation
1986-2001
Mineral insulation
5
6
lation
4
Cellulose
2
4
Polystyrene insulation
2
PUR insulation panel
Ten houses were visited. The results showed that none of
the buildings in our survey had any observable damage which could be attributed to the installation of the
interior insulation. Twelve of the 28 buildings meet the
requirements of EnEV 2009 (U-value ≤ 0.35 W/(m2K)). Five
With professional planning and careful execution, it is
possible to achieve high levels of interior heat within
the requirements of EnEV 2009 without damaging these
historic structures, especially if pays special attention
to window joints and the fasteners used. The influence
Permeable
Moisture adaptive
vapor barrier
6
4
5
3
2
7
Mineral wool insu-
VIP
6
1
The Aachen Institute for Building Damage Research and
Applied Physics (AIBau gGmbH), which has been active
in its field for 30 years, has presented practical, detailed
construction solutions for interior insulation, funded by
a grant from the Federal Office for Building and Regional
Planning (BBR) under the Zukunft Bau Research Initiative. The aim of the study was to investigate currently
installed interior insulation projects to determine the
conditions that would ensure the functional reliability of
interior insulation measure that meet EnEV 2009 requirements. This study focused on late 19th century houses
which represent a large portion of the existing building
inventory and face the typical problems associated with
internal insulation when attempting to make them more
energy efficient. Thirty-six properties were identified
for this research project as a result of a survey of 1,135
architects and experts. Detailed information was available about twenty-eight of the buildings, including their
age and date of their most recent modernization, essential
design features, and the type of materials used for interior
insulation and installed insulation systems (see Fig. 1).
50
1 1
1
12
(36 %)
5
(15 %)
6
(49 %)
Diffusion resistance
Figure 1: Type and frequency of interior insulation materials used
(above) and the type and frequency of installed insulation systems
(below)
of these buildings were modernized before EnEV 2002
went into effect, providing long-term evidence of the construction practices used. Ten other buildings are within
the marginal values given in EnEV 2002 - 2007 of ≤ 0.45
W/(m2K) (see Fig. 2).
U-Value
< 0.35 W/m2K (EnEV 2009)
< 0.36–0.45 W/m2K (EnEV 2002-2007)
> 0.46 W/m2K
of thermal bridge losses increases substantially, however, with increasing level of insulation. The results of
the AIBau surveys show that permeable systems have
only been occasionally installed. In almost all buildings
inspected, the heating system and the windows were replaced as part of the modernization measures. A material
with low thermal conductivity was most often used in the
building’s soffits. The heavy components of the exterior
walls were almost always treated with flanking insulation. In the most interior insulation applications in 19th
century buildings, vapor barrier systems are not absolutely required. Their upper limit at about 10 cm thickness of
insulation (λ = 0.035 W/(mK)) is under conventional thermal bridge losses. With a markedly increased structural
complexity in terms of thermal bridges and an extensive
reduction of thermal loss, insulation thicknesses of up to
15 cm can be recommended.
Window frames should be included in the insulation.
The mold levels set in DIN 4108 can be achieved with the
conditions formulated there without additional design
measures. The outer joint of windows between the window frame and window fittings needs to be tight against
driving rain. The air tightness level is determined by the
window’s structure. The window recess including its
connection to the frame must be insulated to meet at least
the minimum requirements of the thermal insulation.
Installing new windows as part of an interior insulation
project helps the physics of the structure because the sur-
Fig. 2. Number of properties, modernization date and U-values in
actual exterior walls
rounding surface temperatures will drop less. Integrated
masonry walls can be added to achieve sufficient surface
temperatures without requiring flanking insulation
and without causing damage to the structure. Flanking
insulation is, however, a sensible solution if one hopes to
achieve high levels of heat insulation. Insulation of the
embedding point is usually required even in reinforced
concrete structures.
In buildings with wooden beams connecting to exterior
walls with interior insulation, the exterior wall needs
to be adequately protected against driving rain to avoid
damage to ends of the timbers. In addition, convective
currents must be used to prevent ambient moisture in the
room from penetrating. Before installing any internal insulation, the ends of the beams need to checked that their
load-bearing capacity has not been compromised.
To reduce heat losses, the insulation needs to be continued in the ceiling structure. The conditions nonetheless
vary in each individual case. Interior insulation must be
planned carefully and with expert advice.
Practical, detailed construction solutions for interior insulation
Project Head
Editors/Authors Total cost
Federal grant share Project duration Prof. Rainer Oswald,
Matthias Zöller
Géraldine Liebert, Silke Sous
€22,650
€44,000
through November 2010
51
EnerWert
The influence of energy characteristics on real estate market values
Tim Wameling, Hannover
The energy efficiency rating parameter is coming increasingly to the attention of the real estate
sector. Even though energetic properties can exert
an enormous influence on running costs and building evaluation, they are not adequately considered
in property appraisals. This is due, amongst other
factors, to the appraisal process itself. The Real
Estate Valuation Ordinance (ImmoWertV) and local
property market reports do provide blanket starting
points, but lack concrete energy value adjustments.
Research was carried out into the influence of energy
efficiency on the market value of property via statistical
and energy studies on 375 residential building transactions in two field studies. In addition to correlating
market prices and energy efficiency data, the determining
economic and normative factors were examined. The fact
that, in future, energetic features will have to be increasingly incorporated into valuations is demonstrated by
the following example: For two almost identical semidetached houses built in 1977 with 150 m2 living space
in the same area of Hannover, the 2011 property market
report shows a comparison value of €260,000. Following
energy efficiency modernization, item A had an annual
energy consumption rating of 70 kWh/m2a. Item B was
well maintained, but only modernized internally. It has
a rating of 190 kWh/m2a. In 2011, the 120 kWh/m2a difference translates into a yearly heating cost difference of
approximately €1,600. This figure is well above the full
financing monthly rate for €260,000 at 4 % per annum
with a 10-year fixed interest rate. Assuming that the price
for gas heating will increase to the current household
electricity price of €0.24/kWh, the annual difference in
cost of heating will be €4,320.
The performance of existing and new buildings across
Germany was studied by the Federal Statistical Office.
Whereas new structures reported an increase of 6%
between 2004 and 2007, prices for older structures fell
linearly by 5% in the same time period. At the same time,
fuel and energy prices increased disproportionately. This
52
general development suggests that the trend towards the
depreciation of unmodernized housing with the simultaneous increase in value of new structures is also due to
energy efficiency considerations.
Analyzing the selling prices of 197 one and two-family
homes in the city of Nienburg and 178 apartment buildings in Hannover, which exchanged hands on the market
between 2003 and 2008, should yield answers to the
question whether the influence on pricing of the “energy
efficiency” parameter is detectable in the market, and
how it may be quantified. In examining the Nienburg
sample, an iterative multiple regression analysis was used,
whose parameters have a significant influence on the selling price/m2 living space command variable. The results
show that there is a relationship between the annual
energy requirement [QE [kWh/m2a]) and the selling price.
However, it must be noted that there is a very high correlation between the annual energy requirement and the
year of construction. The price impact of energy demand
is easily measured using the rate of change in value w’.
This is the rate of change in value according to energy
conservation (or expressed in units) €/m2/kWh/m2a or
€a/kWh. Of interest is the increased influence on selling
price exerted by the energy efficiency attribute in years of
sale from 2005 onwards compared to the earlier years of
2003–2005. While a value increase based on living space
of, on average, €1.10/m2 per kWh/m2a can be identified
for the “2003 – 2007 Purchases” sample, the average value
increase in the “2005-2007” subsample is €1.26/m2 per
kWh/m2a. This suggests that property buyers are attaching increased importance to energy efficiency.
In the regression analysis of apartment buildings in Hannover, the influence of the heating energy requirement
parameter (QH[kWh/m2a]) per building usable area. The
Hannover Apartment Building Sample shows heating
energy results of a w’ value of €1.22/m2 per saved kWh/
m2a if the reduction in energy requirement is based on
the living space. The average QE/QH ratio of 1.5 gives a
final energy values of w`= €0.81/m2 per kWh/m2a. As
expected, the final energy value for w’ in the apartment
Correlation between energy need/living space and purchase price of one- and two-family homes
Purchase price (€/m2)
1,400
1,300
1,200
1,100
1,000
Sample 2003–2008
f(x) = -1.10*x
900
800
700
Sample 2005–2008
f(x) = -1.26*x
600
100
200
300
400
500
600
Heating energy required (kWh/m2 a)
buildings is below the level for owner-occupied one and
two-family homes from the Nienburg sample.
Conclusion
With regard to detached and semi-detached houses,
investigations demonstrated a final energy value change
rate w’ of, on average, €1.20 per saved kWh p. a. The
tendency to increase is striking, however the statistically demonstrable changes in value did not attain to the
average required cost of construction (€1.38 /saved kWh
p. a.) or the, dynamic in terms of investment, achievable
change in value (€1.59/kWh p. a). In rented apartment
buildings, results are less pronounced. Statistical investigation show average final energy values w’ which are
clearly lower than €0.81 per saved kWh p. a.. Due to the
favorable A/Ve ratios, the construction cost of energy
efficient building skins in this sector is lower. In the final
practical section part, methods are explained in a tabular
manner to account for the results regarding property
valuation procedures.
Short Title: EnerWert
Researcher/Project Head: Researcher: Staff
Total cost:
Federal share:
Project duration:
Dr. Tim Wameling, Lower Saxony Architects Association
Gerd Ruzyzka-Schwob, GAG Sulingen, Dirk Rose, GAG Hannover
Mario Horn, Lower Saxony Architects Association,
Katja Wulf, GAG Sulingen,
Rene Seemann, GAG Sulingen
€35,897.00
€16,600.00
2006 through 2008
53
Glass hybrid elements with
translucent intermediate layers to
improve the energy efficiency of
building envelopes
Prof. Andrea Dimmig-Osburg, Bauhaus University Weimar
Currently transparent facade elements exist only in the form of single, double or multiple-layer glazing. The structure of
these elements limits their heat transfer coefficient. These components are extremely transparent, but also have an extremely high component weight. In many applications, a high level of transparency is not the goal, but only that a certain
percentage of the available natural light is able to penetrate the building envelope. The effect of light scattering is even
explicitly desired in many cases, in which case, additional sun protection can be omitted, if desired.
One approach to the development of glass hybrid elements is setting up a translucent intermediate layer with
high thermal resistance between two glass panes. The
research was focused on different technically producible
and durable insulation, insulating materials, and their
possible combinations.
Scope of the Project
1
5
2
6
To select suitable insulating structures, advance tests of different
variants were conducted. These showed the variant with tubular
insulation (version 6) to be particularly favorable from both thermal
and economic aspects.
54
3
7
Mechanical and building physical data were measured
from different configurations of test elements to expand
what we know about the effect of insulation materials
and potential evacuation techniques for facade elements
designed in this way. A second focus of the project was to
conduct precise numerical simulations of heat transfers.
The results of the experiments were incorporated into a
materials database and used to validate the simulation.
4
To select suitable insulating structures, advance tests of
different variants were conducted. These showed the variant with tubular insulation (version 6) to be particularly
favorable from both thermal and economic aspects.
8
glass
plastic foam
insulation
plastic foam
glass
To determine the experimental results, corresponding
test elements were prepared in which the outer layers on
both sides were made of floating glass panes. The insulating materials in the test elements were separated from
the surface layers with a layer of plastic foam. This plastic
foam layer provides advantages in terms of heat transfer
and reduces mechanical stress peaks. The individual components of the elements were then connected together
with an adhesive.
To determine the thermal conductivity, a test bed was
developed with a heat flow measuring device. The tests
investigated the insulation of the gaps and tubes as well
as the insulation material and the ratio of wall thickness to tube diameter. The different combinations of
insulation for the cavities were needed to be able to use
numerical simulations to determine the differentials for
components relevant to heat conduction, convection,
and radiation. The starting point for the investigations
was a design with open glass tubes and air in all of its
cavities. By completely filling these cavities with aerogel, the thermal conductivity could be reduced by about
40%. The second design had plastic tubes instead of glass
ones. This represented an improvement over the original design of around 10%. A variant of this plastic-tube
element was also investigated where all the cavities were
filled with aerogel. This element assembly gave the lowest
thermal conductivity of all the different variants, which
represents an improvement of about 60% to the starting
variant.
For the planned application of hybrid elements, the flexural strength was of particular interest. The uniaxial orientation of the glass tubes resulted in anisotropic material
behavior. In the flex tests, a 1:4 ratio of breaking strength
of SBrk transverse to SBrk long was determined.
Numerical simulations and targeted tests of parameters
helped to optimize time-and cost-intensive experiments.
For precise calculations, however, the validation of the
calculation results based on selected data was required.
The results of practical tests were used for this purpose.
The targeted modification of individual input parameters
allowed a realistic depiction of the specimens in the finite
element model. Overall, the calculated differences between the calculated values of the numerical simulation
and the results of experiments were, with few exceptions,
in the range of up to 10 percent. This represents a very
good simulation with numerical modeling of the behavior
of the test elements covered in the experiment. With the
combination of the most favorable parameters with numerical simulations for the hybrid elements with tubular
insulation, U-values under U=0.36 W/(m2•K) could be
calculated.
55
Conclusion
The aim of the project was to create a basis for the development of translucent insulating facade elements which
would have both the necessary load-bearing capacity for
use as wall panels and also heat-insulating properties that
allow effective use even in large-scale applications. These
elements should not be the primary replacement for
transparent window and facade components, but as a new
kind of translucent surface to improve the use of natural
light, thus making the building easier and more comfortable to use. Given the current debate on climate change,
these components must have a high thermal resistance to
be a building material for the future.
To achieve this goal, different material combinations
were tested for their suitability. The basic principle of
the glass hybrid element consists in the arrangement of
suitable insulating layers and filling between two outer
layers of soda-lime floating glass. The individual parts
of this design are joined by glue. A particularly advantageous insulation came in the form of glass and plastic
tubes.
To decouple the insulation layers from the outer layers,
a foam layer was inserted. The experimental determination of the thermal conductivity was carried out on
different variations in a specially designed test rig. The
results of these experiments validated and refined the
numerical simulations conducted in parallel.
We were able to develop a glass-hybrid element which
was one of the objectives of the research project which
basically meets the heat insulating and mechanical
requirements for use as a facade element in buildings.
To apply the findings of the numerical simulation and
experiments into everyday practice, the use of less thick
insulating layers and surfaces that reflect infrared radiation will be necessary. Currently, such tubes are not available on the market.
A continuation of the research project is planned to
integrate the experimental building X.STAHL in Weimar
with large-format prototypes of the glass-plastic hybrid
tube elements with the necessary instrumentation.
This will lay the groundwork to collect data about these
building components under real conditions and thus expand and clarify the models for numerical simulations.
Only under these conditions will it be possible to collect
the data required for all relevant parameters.
Glass hybrid elements with translucent intermediate layers
Applicant/Researcher Project Management:
Editor
Total cost:
Federal grant:
Duration:
Bauhaus University Weimar
FA Finger-Institute for Building Materials Science
Chair of Polymer Materials
Prof. Andrea Dimmig-Osburg
Institute of Structural Engineering, Chair in Steel Construction
Prof. Frank Werner
Prof. Andrea Dimmig-Osburg, Prof. Frank Werner
Prof. Jörg Hildebrand
Alexander Gypser
Björn Wittor,
Martina Wolf
€396,905.00
€219,100.00
07/01/2009 – 03/31/2011
Numerical simulation: heat flow density of a variant element with a temperature differential of 40 K
X.STAHL experimental building in Weimar 56
57
The New Connector:
Joining Technologies for Fiber
Composite Profiles
Development of material-specific joining technologies for fiber composite profiles by
transferring matrix material from polymer resins to metals at the load transfer point
Jürgen Denonville, University of Stuttgart
Schematic representation of the upper and lower part of the cavity developed
58
59
The joining of fiber-plastic composite components on the construction site represents one of the major
barriers to their use in construction As part of the proposed research project, the participating institutes are
developing a new compound technology. The polymeric matrix is substituted with a metallic matrix at the
load transfer point of the fiber composite component. Existing design rules and dimensioning requirements
may be applied with minor modifications.
In essence, the research project is divided into lines of inquiry. The first is to develop a method that generally allows
a metallic matrix to be partially inserted in the bundles
of glass and carbon fibers without impairing the intrinsic
material properties of the fibers. The second is to investigate on the basis of this material and its properties the
structural design and viability of such joints.
Shaping in a semi-solid state was identified and used as the
method for producing this metallic composite material. A
significant advantage of this method is that a low viscosity of the material to be formed is reached at relatively low
process temperatures. The low process temperature allows
the mechanical properties of the fibers to be maintained
because these are highly temperature-dependent, especially fiberglass fibers. A low viscosity allows a good infiltration
of the fiber bundle.
As part of this project, the standard method for shaping
in the semi-solid state was changed so that the cavity is
open on two sides (Fig. 1). This makes it possible to pass
the fibers through the cavity and partially insert the metal
matrix. So that the partially molten material is not allowed
to emerge freely on the open sides under the high pressure
process, the underside of the cavity is heated and cooled so
that a defined, gradual longitudinal temperature profile is
set which leads to the targeted material solidification. Additionally the component dimensions are set for structural
reasons such that the shape of the open sides tapers. This
tapering causes a compression of the semi-solid material.
The combination of material solidification and material
compression leads to the self-sealing of the cavity during
the shaping process.
A focus was on minimizing the stress concentrations in the
joint area given the structural formation of such a joint.
This objective led to the formation of as uniform a transition as possible from the fibers to the matrix. A continuous
variation of the quantitative fiber volume changed the
rigidity differentials of the joining partners and thus to the
desired homogeneous distribution of stress.
The variation of the fiber volume content can be effected
by a graduation of the fibers in the anchoring region, as
well as through the continuous variation of the geometric
dimensions of the matrix at a constant amount of fiber.
60
With regard to the technical advantages of varying the
component dimensions mentioned in relation to the
cavity’s self-closure, this variant was used in the course of
this research project. However, in a first stage, the transition was gradual.
Due to the usually thin-walled component cross sections
of fiber-plastic profiles, the method for panel-shaped components with unidirectional fiber arrangement was tested
as a basis for general joints.
To preserve the position of the fibers during the shaping
process, it is necessary to bias the fibers. The degree of bias
and the gaps it provides between the fibers has a significant impact on the quality of infiltration. This is shown
by how the outer fiber bundles are not as well infiltrated
and the bias is less due to the winding process than at the
adjacent fiber bundles. In Figure 2, the lower infiltration
of peripheral fibers is clearly shown with the darker gray
color. Visual checks of the fiber cuts with a microscope
shows the light gray fiber bundles had very good infiltration.
As part of the metallurgical studies, the mechanical
properties were determined for the composite and the
unreinforced aluminum alloy. In addition, the analysis of
the composite is based on pullout tests. These parameters
were used as input variables in the numerical simulation
of the structural behavior of the joint. It has been possible to verify the feasibility of the method with regard
to infiltration of glass and carbon fibers and determine
the process-relevant parameters relevant here. With this
method, the metal matrix composites with different fiber
volume contents are up to 22% replicable. Visual checks of
the samples by means of the microscope (1000× magnification) shows a very good infiltration of the fibers with
good location fidelity. For the evaluation of the joint, the
mechanical characteristics of the composite material
need to be analyzed and simulations conducted to verify
the structural behavior.
From the perspective of the authors, the current state of
the research indicates very promising joining technology
which will facilitate the use of fiber composite profiles in
building construction.
Cross section of a building component
Microscopic photos of a fiber bundle at different magnifications
Material-appropriate joints of fiber composite profiles
Researcher/Project Management: University of Stuttgart, Institute for Lightweight Structures and Conceptual Design
(Project Management)
Prof. Werner Sobek (Director), Walter Haase (Researcher), Jürgen Denonville (Project Staff)
Institute of Forming Technology - University of Stuttgart
Prof. Mathias Liewald (Director), Kim Riedmüller (Researcher)
Total cost:
€403,690.00
Federal grant share:
€265,579.00
Project duration:
through August 2013
61
ULTRASLIM
Development of an ultra-thin energy-efficient window system made of
fiberglass reinforced plastic (FRP) and vacuum-insulated glass (VIG)
Christian Lüken, FH Dortmund
Advanced thermal protection windows with triple
glazing (passive house windows) offer low U-values,
but come with a lot of their own dead weight. This
can make them difficult to install in existing buildings. Wide profiles for plastic frames are necessary
to supporting the three layers of glazing which
affects the appearance of the facade. ULTRASLIM
remedies this situation by combining slender frames
made of FRP with novel thin VIG glazing.
The ULTRASLIM project draws on the of the previous
PROFAKU project which focused on developing FRP
frames for textile building envelopes. PROFAKU resulted
in the design of a new window profile further improved
in ULTRASLIM. The Fiber Institute of Bremen (FIBRE)
brought its experience in the field of fiber-reinforced composites, while the team of Prof. Rogall at the Dortmund
University of Applied Sciences worked on the requirements for window systems from a structural engineering
design perspective.
The ULTRASLIM window system should not only be
slim and aesthetically pleasing, but also meet the high
demands of modern window technology as detailed
below. The materials used play a key role. FRP offers high
62
mechanical strength combined with low density and
thermal conductivity. A window made of FRP therefore combines advantages of today’s metal and plastic
windows. FRP also has thermal expansion very similar to
that of glass, so that thermal stresses in the material can
be kept low. Window systems currently available on the
market are often the result of a decades-long process of
development. As building requirements change, the existing design is modified, for example, by adding additional
air chambers to reduce the U-value of a plastic frame.
The frame has, after so many changes, grown so much
that additional structural reinforcement is needed before
installing.
The aim of ULTRASLIM however is a complete redesign
and development of a window system. The high demands
on the windows can only be met if the design, dimensioning and joints of the components match the materials used. First, of course, the mechanical safety of the
window must be guaranteed. Static and dynamic loads,
as well as operating forces, are simulated in FEM calculations. The profile is optimized based on these FEM data. A
large gain in structural rigidity is obtained by a frictional
adhesion of the frame and glazing on all sides. Currently,
stability reserves are available for installations in up to 20
m (67 feet) height.
A central requirement of modern windows is heat protection. The newly developed vacuum-insulated glass (VIG)
is used to glaze the ULTRASLIM windows. VIG is an
alternative to the classic three-pane insulating glass filled
with inert gas: There is a vacuum in the very narrow space
between the two panes of glass separated by grid spacers,
which greatly reduces the heat transfer. Eliminating the
third pane saves almost half of the window’s weight. VIG
glazing will be produced in the future with U-values of up
to 0.4 W/m2K, but these are currently still in the development phase. The Pilkington Company is the first to bring
VIG onto the German market with its SpaciaTM window.
With 1.4 W/m2K, its U-value is in the range of double
insulated glazing units, with a total thickness of only 6.5
mm. This glazing will initially be used in ULTRASLIM,
but the system can be adapted without modification to
future VIG glazings with improved U-values. At the wafer
edge composite, the thermal vulnerability spot in glazing
units, the frame and glazing overlap in ULTRASLIM and
mutually reinforce the insulating effect.
Structural fire protection makes no special demands on
the window frame (see sample building regulations). A
higher fire rating can be achieved later by adding flame
retardants to the matrix or corresponding coatings. A
high-grade UV protection of the frame is also provided
with UV additives to the matrix, a film coating on the
frame or, easiest of all, by finishing with UV-resistant
paint. Special attention is being paid to how the window
is attached to the building and different ways of opening.
The installation of the window should be easy and quick.
The ULTRASLIM profile is designed so that no modifications are needed as different hardware and mechanisms
are included and different opening modes can be realized.
structures. A working prototype of the ULTRASLIM window will be presented at the BAU 2013 trade fair, which
also marks the middle of the research project and should
be considered an interim study. In the further course of
the project, fire protection will be improved, others types
of openings and glazing will be tested, and a new seal
developed by 3M will be given a trial run. Also a further
optimization of the FRP material used is planned.
ULTRASLIM
Applicant / researcher: Conclusion
Many partial demands on the ULTRASLIM windows have
already been solved. The mechanical stability is already
sufficient for most standard installations in residential
Total cost: Federal grant: Project duration: Faserinstitut Bremen (FIBRE)
Prof. Axel S. Hermann
Ralf Bäumer
Dortmund University of Applied Science,
Department of Architecture
Prof. Armin D. Rogall
Prof. Luis Ocanto
Dr. Christian Lüken
€421,220.00
€268,220.00
1/1/2012–12/31/2013
63
System Limit
Building Part
Requiring Renovation
The approach for this research project is to examine energy and material consumption in the context of repairs and modernization during the life cycle of a building. To this end, energy and material consumption will
be considered using various combinations of materials from the building element being rehabilitated including deconstruction and the production of the finished substrate for the application of the new siding.
Removal of
Covering
Preparing the
Support Layer
Wall structures and coverings
Support Layer
Previous Tile
Covering
Wallpaper
Paint
Wood
average
average
average
New
Covering
Permanently stuck? Separability of
hybrid building elements
Plasterboard light
walls
Brick masonry with
cement plaster
Analysis of the separability of the material layers of hybrid internal building elements during repairs and
modernization – creating a practical database
Brick masonry with
plasterboard
Frank Ritter , TU Darmstadt
As part of the research project, 28 representative wall
structures and 16 floor structures were examined along
with the accompanying repairs. It was necessary to
establish which wall and floor structures to examine as
well as defining the determining parameters and system
boundaries for each trial.
The corresponding wall and floor systems were set up as a
building element experiment and deconstructed in controlled conditions. The ensuing energy and material consumption was recorded and documented. To achieve an
ecological evaluation of the detected material flows, the
recorded material constants were pulled from the Federal
Environmental Life Cycle Assessment database, “Ökobau.dat”. To achieve the best practical evaluation of the
repairs and modernization, it was necessary to compare
and account for all identified values. Such an assessment
was conducted using a methodology based on the System
of Determining Factors from the DGNB Steckbriefen für
Büro– und Verwaltungsbauten Version 2009 [DGNB e.
V. (Hrsg.)]. These determining factors allow for a weight-
64
ing of the individual environmental effects working on
each other, which was added to the working hours of the
professional staff in the context of this project in terms of
cost shares.
It is clear from Table 1 that removing tiles produces
significantly greater effects than for the various other
wall coverings. It should be noted that in the context
of the experiments the cement plaster had to be totally
removed when removing the tiles, something which has
significant effects for all relevant areas. This is similar for
the necessary replacement of plasterboard after the tiles
are removed, though the effort required is somewhat less.
Paint and wallpaper as wall cladding behave relatively
similarly and only have low environmental impact in
contrast to tiles and wooden cladding. Removing wooden
cladding from a wall can have a negative effect regarding
resource consumption due to the burning of the cladding and substructure, having a positive effect on the life
cycle analysis. In addition, a carefully removed wooden
cladding can also be reused, depending on age and look,
Lime-sand concrete
masonry with lime
cement plaster
Lime-sand concrete
masonry with plasterboard
Reinforced-steel concrete wall with lime
cement plaster
Reinforced-steel
concrete wall with
plasterboard
Tile
average
Wallpaper
very good
very good
very good
very good
Paint
very good
very good
very good
very good
Wood
very good
very good
very good
very good
Tile
very poor
very poor
very poor
very poor
Wallpaper
very good
very good
very good
very good
Paint
very good
very good
very good
very good
Wood
very good
very good
very good
very good
Tile
very good
good
good
very good
Wallpaper
very good
very good
very good
very good
Paint
very good
very good
very good
very good
Wood
very good
very good
very good
very good
Tile
very poor
very poor
very poor
very poor
Wallpaper
very good
very good
very good
very good
Paint
very good
very good
very good
very good
Wood
very good
very good
very good
very good
Tile
very good
very good
very good
very good
Wallpaper
very good
very good
very good
very good
Paint
very good
very good
very good
very good
Wood
very good
very good
very good
very good
Tile
poor
very poor
very poor
very poor
Wallpaper
very good
very good
very good
very good
Paint
very good
very good
very good
very good
Wood
very good
very good
very good
very good
Tile
very good
very good
very good
very good
Wallpaper
very good
very good
very good
very good
Paint
very good
very good
very good
very good
Wood
very good
very good
very good
very good
65
which leads to a lengthening of life cycle and to an additionally positive effect on the life cycle analysis. Verifying
the results on various real objects demonstrated when
removing tiles that the complete removal of cement plaster is not completely necessary, something which must be
examined further at this point, which may be carried out
in the near future.
The floors in the study were completely adhered with the
relative substrate and nearly all of them had to be worked
on with an electric stripper. Laminate and textile floor
coverings are only rarely used as glue-down, however in
repair and modernizing work, such well-adhered coverings can be met with. The evaluation of the floors yields a
somewhat different result from the walls (see floor tables),
with the relevant total replacement of dry lining after the
removal of tiles, laminate and natural stone influencing
the result.
In this project, the initial trials on the separability of
various material layers in composite components clearly
indicate that the current approach, where it is assumed
that there is complete detachability for individual layers,
does not correspond to the present state of technology
for all wall and floor coverings. All adhered and wet-laid
bonds require closer examination, with this research being a first step.
Further investigation by the researcher which looked at
the specific component life cycles led to ecological and
economic results regarding the complete life cycles of
individual surfaces and coverings.
Conclusion
Using the research results, an evaluation method was
established, using which objective principles can be determined, permitting sustainable repairs and modernization
of wall and floor structures by reducing energy and material consumption. The methodology can be implemented
from the planning stage of a building and contributes to a
reduction in environmental impact over the life cycle.
In addition, a supplement to the existing building parts
catalog regarding the environmental impact of repairs
and modernization is being prepared, something which
may contribute to reducing the cost of building certification.
Floor structure and coverings
Support Layer
Previous Tile
Covering
Laminate
Textile
Natural stone
New
Covering
Cement screed
Brick masonry with
cement plaster
Brick masonry with
plasterboard
Lime-sand concrete
masonry with lime
cement plaster
Tile
average
average
average
average
Laminate*
average
average
average
average
Textile
very good
very good
very good
very good
Stone
good
good
good
good
Tile
average
average
average
average
Laminate*
good
good
good
good
Textile
very good
very good
very good
very good
Stone
good
good
good
good
Tile
average
average
average
average
Laminate*
good
good
good
good
Textile
good
good
good
good
Stone
good
good
good
good
Tile
poor
average
average
poor
Laminate*
poor
average
average
poor
Textile
very good
very good
very good
very good
Stone
poor
average
average
poor
* attached completely 66
LCA of Maintenance and Modernization Measures
Researcher/Project Head: Project Head: Total cost: Federal share: Project duration: Prof. Carl-Alexander Graubner
TU Darmstadt
Dr. Frank Ritter
€130,230.00
€82,730.00
through 09/30/2010
67
vakutex
Vacuum-insulated façade elements
made from textile concrete
S. Kirmse, A. Kahnt, S. Huth, M. Tietze, F. Hülsmeier, HTWK Leipzig
Reduced view
angle
Heavy look
Loss of ground surface area,
less marketable space
90° window opening angle
The world population is constantly growing and with
it the amounts of energy and non-energy raw materials extracted is rising significantly. The active usage
phase of buildings alone is responsible for 40% of
the world’s primary energy consumption. Thus the
search for savings and optimization potentials represents the central role for the construction industry
The research was incited by the increasing urbanization
that is affecting nearly every region in the world. The
consequent densification is driving up the base area prices
in urban areas. As a result, the demand for slim, spacesaving exterior wall constructions is growing.
Moreover, the demands on the building envelope increase
with every new energy saving ordinance. Using conventional materials, this means a continuous reinforcement of the exterior wall structures. In the solid house
construction sector this is resulting in total exterior wall
thicknesses of up to 50 cm. To avoid such massive external
wall constructions, we need new materials that enable
slim and energy-efficient structures.
Based on the use of highly efficient composite materials
(textile concrete, vacuum insulation panels, fiberglass,
etc.) recently developed in Germany, the interdisciplinary
energy design research group of the University for Technology, Economy and Culture of Leipzig (HTWK) worked
on an extremely lightweight, energy efficient building
envelope adapted to the local climate and that looks like
exposed concrete. This was done as part of the research
project “vacuum-insulated facade elements made from
textile concrete, or simply, ‘vakutex’”.
Design aspects
From a design perspective, conventional façades in the
passive house standard appear extremely clunky. By using the new combinations of the highly efficient textile
concrete composites and vacuum insulation panels under
study as facade elements, it was possible on the other
hand to achieve minimal wall thicknesses of only 9 – 11
cm, creating a feeling of lightness and openness. Since
wall and frameless window run in a plane, the vantage
68
angle and the entry of daylight are considerably enlarged.
This thereby increases the natural solar gains and so less
artificial light is needed.
The formation of the outer element layers in exposed
concrete provides a high degree of design options for the
surfaces. In addition, thanks to the lightness of the facade
element, much larger plate dimensions are possible.
Through its slimness and light weight the elements are
particularly suitable for urban-planning densifications.
Smaller daylight entry,
smaller solar gains,
more need for artificial lighting
Magnified view
angle
Lighter look
Technical aspects
The prototype of the vakutex facade was realized as nonstructural curtain facade with a minimal thickness of 11
cm. The textile concrete panels with textile support bases
made of alkali-resistant glass (AR glass) cannot corrode,
as is the case when reinforcing steel with insufficient concrete cover. Thus panel thickness of only 1.5 cm (outside)
and 3 cm (inside) are needed. This savings in materials
significantly simplifies transport and installation.
Fiberglass-reinforced plastic was used for the substructure, in order to reduce the thermal bridges resulting
from the currently used aluminum or steel profiles. GFK
I profiles were selected for the frame and the inner brace
profile. This revealed, however, a problem from a fire
safety viewpoint, since fiberglass-reinforced plastic can
only be classified to the B2 (flammable) class. However, in
the fire protection test and classification as a composite
element, the vakutex facade element was able to attain an
A2 building material class (non-flammable). In order to
achieve a passive house-compliant heat transfer coefficient (U-value) of 0.15 W/(m2K), conventional insulation
thickness of ca. 25 cm have to be used. By contrast, by using vacuum insulation panels, this thickness is reduced to
5 cm (without thermal bridges). Due to the extreme sensitivity of the vacuum insulation panels to the slightest
damage, attachment points were placed on the edge of the
element construction. Thus the inner area remains free of
the intersection points, so that the panels can be laid freely. It is also possible to lay the built-in double-layer panels
in a staggered way, to optimize the thermal bridges. The
complete production at the plant ensures that the vacuum
insulation is damage-free. To accommodate manufac-
Increased ground
surface area, more marketable space
180° window opening angle
Greater daylight entry,
larger solar gains,
less need for artificial lighting
Through acidification, varnishing, staining
or the use of structural matrices, a very
individual look and feel can be achieved,
and photographic concretes are an added
option
69
1
3
2
vakutex
OKFF
Applicant
Leipzig University of Applied Sciences
Faculty of Civil Engineering, Department of Building, Energy Concepts and Building Physics.
Project managers and staff Prof. Frank Hülsmeier (Subject Managers)
Alexander Kahnt (project manager)
Stefan Huth, Susanne Kirmse, Matthias Tietze
Total cost
€258,716
German Federal Grant share €178,400
Project duration
03/2010 through 05/2012
1
2
3
0
0
5 0 cm
5 cm
turing deviations, changes in length and facade element
deformations, a customized coupling system was developed and provided for a three-dimensionally adjustable
element suspension. The problem of low sound insulation
inherent to lightweight construction was solved by applying additional absorbent layers and decoupled fasteners.
Exploratory soundproofing measurements revealed Rw,P
sound reduction measurements of 47 dB for the variant
“glued outer plate” and 56 dB for the variant “decoupled
outer plate”. Thus it even satisfies the sound insulation
requirements for high ambient noise level areas.
5 cm
Detailschnitte horizontal und vertikal
installation energy connected to the construction component) has thus far been inadequately considered.
Ecological aspects
The new materials combination of vakutex leads to a
reduction of raw materials extraction by a factor of 5
compared to comparable reinforced concrete facades.
This means that the greenhouse gas emissions can be
reduced by a sixth, halving the acidification potential. The
primary energy necessary for the manufacture, repair
and disposal of the vakutex elements is, only one-third
of that for reinforced concrete elements. Savings are thus
mainly achieved through reduced raw material extraction
and recyclable building materials.
In addition to the legal requirements for useful energy
(heating, hot water, lighting etc.), the so-called grey energy (from raw materials, manufacturing, transport and
A comparative analysis of the grey energy and the useful
energy of the facade elements revealed an ecologically
504
Textile concrete façade element
Reinforced steel façade element
0.48
0,33
202
1976
0.14
0.11
95
724
35
Weight
[kg]
70
Soil sealing
[m2]
Primary energy
[MJ]
Greenhouse gas
potential
[kg CO2-Eq.]
Acidification
potential
[kg SO2-Eq.]
significant vacuum insulation thickness of 5.5 cm. Thus
the entire façade, including the constructive thermal
bridges, achieves a U-value of 0.17 W/(m2K). The slightly
below passive house standard of 0.15 W/(m2K) is therefore
not achieved. Depending on the window surface areas,
the orientation, the heating concept, etc., a U-value of
0.15 W/(m2K) is not always required and environmentally
meaningful. However using the vakutex facades, the currently required U-value for exterior walls of 0.28 W/(m2K)
as per EnEV 2009 and the values of the future EnEV can
be safely maintained.
At the moment, the rather short life of the vacuum
insulation panels (still estimated at 30 years) unfavorable
impacts the ecology of the building components. Conventional insulating materials, by contrast, have a statistical
lifecycle of 40 years.
Economic aspects
From an economic perspective, the expenses for the manufacture of vakutex-finished parts is much higher than
for reinforced concrete elements. This cost drawback is
currently due to the as yet limited degree of automation
in the manufacturing and the high cost of the materials.
In the life cycle perspective, the slender prefabricated
parts represent however a lowered cost through savings in transport, installation and de-installation and
recycling. Furthermore, up to 15% more usable surface
area can be generated by the minimalized wall thickness
for the same gross floor area. One dynamic investment
analysis based on this fundamental area gain and the
additional costs of the vakutex facade showed that from
a cold rent of €9/m2 for the latest 13 years, the vakutex
facade proved an advantage over to the comparative
construction, although the initial investment of about
€490 /m2 facade surface is initially higher by 40%. Consequently its use mainly makes economic sense in dense
urban development areas. A high quality of workmanship
can be ensured due to the complete manufacturing plant
and the elements delivered and installed at the ideal time.
This ensures an optimized construction flow and shortens the construction time.
Conclusion
The result of the two-year research project was the development of a vakutex prototype with dimensions 1.50
m x 3.20 m. Despite the minimal thickness of only 11 cm,
vakutex can satisfy all requirements concerning current and future facades and through minimal use of raw
materials make a significant contribution to sustainable
construction. The façade element is durable, easy to clean
and of uniform high quality, also numerous formats and
finishes are possible.
There is a need for research for a wide field of application, especially for a more robust and more cost-efficient
vacuum insulation and the thermal optimization of the
element joints.. Through partial automation in manufacturing and the expansion of the application to existing
buildings as well, in future new ecological and economic
potentials will become available.
After successful development and testing in the regional
climate, the next step should be a transfer to other
climates around the world and also open up potential
markets with this innovation.
71
Absorption of low-frequency
impact sound through Helmholtz
resonators integrated into woodbeamed ceilings
Low-frequency impact sound absorption
Researcher/Project Management: University of Applied Sciences Rosenheim
Faculty of Applied Natural Sciences and the Humanities
Laboratory for Sound Measurement
Project Head: Prof. Ulrich Schanda
Project Staff: Markus Schramm
Total cost: €134,401.00
Federal grant share: €98,048.00
Project duration: 03/01/2009 to 01/31/2011
Prof. Ulrich Schanda, Rosenheim University of Applied Sciences
Compared with the flat ceilings of solid construction, wooden ceilings are deficient in providing insulation
against low-frequency impact sound. From the ear’s perspective, steps from above are often perceived as
crashing or rumbling sounds. Walking on floor decks typically sets off low-frequency noise. The aim of the
research project was to improve the sound insulation in wood-beamed ceilings with integrated Helmholtz
absorbers.
Wooden ceilings are known for their high levels of
impact noise at low frequencies, especially below 100
Hz Spectrum adaptation terms (CI,50-2500) extended to
frequency range from 50 Hz sometimes reach values of
up to 20 dB and demonstrate the poor sound insulation at
low frequencies. Design measures to improve the situation are difficult and often linked to a significant increase
in mass per unit area. An alternative measure could be
using Helmholtz resonators tuned to the frequency range
between 50–100 Hz as a structural component designed
to absorb the low-frequency impact noise from the floor
decking above.
The Helmholtz resonators were made of plasterboard
with a built-in volume of approximately 60 l. This research project was designed to develop such resonators
and to investigate their effectiveness in insulating against
impact noise. In a first step, the Helmholtz resonators
were measured for their vibroacoustic properties. The
72
Helmholtz resonators were designed as rectangular boxes
made of plasterboard, typically with a slotted opening
(resonator neck).
It was found that the standard dimensions given in the
literature were usable, but required modification for material and technical reasons as well as application-specific
constraints such as installation location and size.
A detailed study was made of the influence played by the
density and positioning of the resonator box, dampening the resonator cavity, and the dampening, geometry
and the positioning of the resonator neck. The sound
absorbing effect was detectable through different tests to
measure the absorption properties, both in free-field and
in a pressure chamber representing a ceiling cavity.
quency sound insulation of the entire wood-beamed ceiling. It was found that coupling the Helmholtz resonator
to the ceiling cavity yielded significantly better results.
To this end, many varieties of Helmholtz resonators with
respect to their installation position, positioning, location of the resonator neck, etc. were used. Airborne and
impact sound measurements were performed according
to the standards DIN EN ISO 140 and were measured with
footfalls generated by persons walking on the floor deck
above.
Significant improvements in overall sound reduction and
in standard impact noise levels at low frequencies were
achieved. Specifically in the frequency range to which the
resonators were tuned (50 to 100 Hz), improvements in
overhead walking sound levels improved 5–10 dB in the
different octave bands.
Conclusion
The research project developed physically relevant
planning parameters and structural design principles
for compact, integrable ceiling cavity components. The
Helmholtz resonators were made of plasterboard with a
built-in volume of approximately 60 l and are a building
component that is easily manufactured.
A comparison between measurements with active and
inactive resonators in individual octave bands showed
improvements of almost 10 dB. The total value Ln,w
+CI,50-2500 improved by 3 dB. A similar effect was also
had in airborne sound insulation. In particular, the impact noise generated by actual persons walking which is
limited primarily to the low frequencies, can be reduced
by up to 6 dB over all octave bands from 50 Hz to 100 Hz.
In a second step, the sound-absorbing properties of the
Helmholtz resonators was studied to improve the low fre-
73
Ready –
prepared for living at any age
Dr. Thomas Jocher is Professor at the University of
Stuttgart, Chair of the Department of Housing and
Design, an advisory professor at Tongji University
in Shanghai and a visiting professor at UC Berkeley.
His design firm Fink+Jocher, established in 1991,
has earned a national and international reputation.
Prof. Jocher was an expert on the Advisory Board of
the Research Initiative.
In your current project at the Research Initiative
“’Ready’ – Preparing for Age-Appropriate Housing,” you suggested that we do not need to build
housing specifically for old age, but actually only
need to observe certain points. What are they?
Our idea is to make new housing construction ready for
the very diverse needs of an increasingly older population. This is far less expensive than retrofitting older
buildings. We are trying to establish minimum standards
for construction that meets our needs as we age. Moreover, we are developing a phased approach to make any
requirements for residential structures not only “ready,”
but also up to the level of comfort we have become used
to. Our concept is that a “normal” home can be turned
into a home suitable for senior citizens and their needs
within just a few days. Without major moves, without
a lot of dirt, after just a brief vacation for the resident.
Because older people prefer to stay in their usual surroundings.
You mentioned as part of this research project an
interesting example from Switzerland. Can you
tell us more?
Switzerland has, in fact, come up with a great planning
strategy for age-appropriate construction. The concept is
to set the requirements slightly lower than we have here
in Germany while bringing almost the entire building
industry on board. They’re going for a more broad-based
approach across the housing market rather than focusing
solely on the particular, growing niche market of senior
housing. An especially interesting requirement in Switzerland is making it possible for a person in a wheelchair
to visit any home. This isn’t about setting up an entirely
74
wheelchair-accessible apartment in accordance with DIN,
but a “light” version in every household. The Swiss have
been very successful in implementing this affordable,
but also traceable key component for senior-appropriate
housing across the broad housing market.
Residential construction is currently undergoing dynamic changes. What forms of housing are
ready for the future?
The focus on urban, denser structures will continue to
grow strongly. This is the only way that the inevitable
needs to save energy can be realized to the extent required. Modern housing typologies are best represented
in urban multi-story apartment buildings. Using rural
space that is sparsely populated and removed from public
transport is becoming more and more obsolete. There’s
even a risk that socially marginalized groups who can no
longer afford to live in supposedly (and really) expensive
inner cities will be pushed out to these marginal areas.
The precarious conditions in some American suburbs
with their one-sided social structures should be a warning to us.
To what human needs will building in the future
have to be more responsive? (Mobile homes, less
expensive housing, vacant housing and as much
as living space we want, regulation and control of
all house system functions)
in Germany by international standards? Are the
others more clever than us?
If you look at the overall international rankings of
universities, we’re really just in the weak midfield. As
far as architecture goes, however, I see it a little differently. Our training in Germany is much more thorough
and knowledge-based than in many other countries. The
large influx of students from non-European countries
can’t be explained only in terms of the low tuition fees.
Our degrees enjoy worldwide recognition. I currently on
my way to Tongji University in Shanghai to observe how
the top Chinese universities are make enormous strides
to achieve world-class excellence.
Can you describe your living space? Have you
fulfilled your dreams?
I don’t really have much of a living space. I’d prefer to say
that I overnight in various locations. You might find me
more often in the village and on the slopes. By village, I
mean the Olympic Village, now a large housing estate in
Munich, in deep need of restoration. As far as slopes go, I
hang out on Stuttgart’s Kriegsberg and am happy spending peaceful evenings in charming Stuttgart.
Even if costs have not been in the foreground for a long
time, they will become increasingly important as the
population ages. We will have a lot of work to do on
poverty in old age. We like to avoid talking about it
because it makes us uncomfortable, but the population
is becoming smaller, more diverse and poorer. No one’s
currently paying attention to cultural diversity when it
comes to planning housing, even though the proportion
of the population that are migrants or are descended
from recent migrants is well over 30% in many cities.
This development could be reflected in our construction
industry, at least a little, and the housing market.
Your academic activities span the globe, so to
speak. How would you rate university education
75
Standards and Guidelines an International Comparison
Public toilets – comparison ADA and DIN 18040-1. The approach to
the toilet areas are significantly reduced in comparison with ADA.
Turning within this space is not possible for wheelchair users. The
DIN generally prefers sliding onto the toilet from either the right or
left side.
Gerhard Loeschcke, Karlsruhe
When this research looked into regulations and
guidelines from Europe and overseas, it was noted
just how divergent and differently structured they
are in terms of objectives and scope. A direct comparison of the requirements as formulated was possible for specific areas, but not always. We focused
on the norms for public and residential buildings.
Building for accessibility, implementing the new
standards
While DIN 18040-1 stands up well is in comparison to the
other standards looked at, the situation for DIN 18040-2
(residential construction) is far more complicated because it distinguishes between “generally accessible” and
“wheelchair-accessible” housing. It is still open to debate
whether it is justifiable from a social perspective to distinguish between more or less “handicapped” individuals
and whether we need to take an integrative or inclusive
approach to these issues. In some documents (both from
Europe and from overseas), adapting of existing buildings
is included and relevant requirements are formulated.
The need to consider additional non-European standards
and guidelines demonstrated sometimes very divergent
representations of ergonomic data material. This serves as
the basis for planning recommendations independent of
specific planning issues.
free apartments in Germany as well. More serious are
the different views on door handles. One finds mounting
heights ranging between 80 and 120 cm (31.5 – 47 in). DIN
18040 gives a fixed and inflexible mounting height of 85 cm
(33.5 in), which also proves to be problematic in many cases.
It is interesting that in some countries there are two types
of barrier-free toilets specified. The wheelchair-accessible
toilet stall is usually less spacious than specified in DIN
18040. In addition, a toilet for ambulatory, but physically
disabled people is often also required. These toilet stalls
generally correspond to customary toilet stalls, but are
equipped with support bars. The doors must generally open
outwards. Requirements for barrier-free urinals, taken for
granted in many countries, in contrast to Germany, are
limited in principle to providing support bars and mounting at different heights. There is general agreement about
the design of washing areas. Being able to roll a chair under
the sink is mandatory.
For residential and personal rooms in housing, typically
little information is provided. In Switzerland, planning
guidelines for spatial proportions and dimensions directly
provide for user-neutral conditions. Minimum room
widths of 300 cm (10 ft) and a minimum area of 14 m2
(150 sq. ft.) are required, enabling flexible furnishings for
different needs and ensuring enough space to move. This
is a very pragmatic approach that allows flexible furnishings and avoids the discussion of space to move around
furniture.
The European take on the issue is very different from that
taken overseas. Within Europe, the German-speaking
countries are relatively homogeneous, but differ in the fact
that German standards do cover existing buildings. The
major distinction in residential construction, and here Germany stands alone, is between wheelchair-accessible and
generally accessible apartments. There is more flexibility
when it comes to the renovation of public buildings outside
of Germany. This makes more economical, more universal
and pragmatic solutions possible. The step towards European standardization seems to be a good and proper way
forward.
The SIA 500 is the only relevant work to address the issue
of permissible tolerances. This clarifies this important
issue key to guaranteeing accessibility. This issue is not
addressed in the German standards. DIN 18202 (Tolerances
in high-rise construction) does not provide suitable advice
on this topic. A uniform standard is set for elevator dimensions in new construction (110/140 cm). Requirements for
existing buildings (adaptation) are found only in part. For
example, SIA 500 contains exemptions allowing elevator
cars at 100/125 cm. For Austria and Spain, there are statements about adaptation for stair lifts.
Passage widths and door clearances are very divergent
across the globe. As a rule, clearances of approx. 80 cm (31.5
in) are considered sufficient. Germany’s required clearance
of 90 cm (35.5 in) represents a higher requirement. This
generally applies to publicly accessible buildings and for the
entrance areas of barrier-free apartments and homes for
wheelchair users. 80 cm is sufficient in generally barrier76
Standards and Guidelines - an International Comparison
Researcher/Project Management: Prof. Gerhard Loeschcke, Karlsruhe
Daniela Pourat
Project Head: Prof. Gerhard Loeschcke
Total cost: €49,994.04 (general departmental research)
Project duration: 2008 - 2009
77
Senior Living Market Processes and Need
for Housing Policy Action
Caption: 22.6% of respondents have physical movement restrictions
Verena Lihs, Federal Institute for Research on Building, Urban Affairs and Spatial Planning at the Federal Office for Building and Regional
Planning (BBSR)
A changing demographic change means landlords
and housing policy are facing the need to develop
new concepts for age-appropriate housing. The
number of Germans over the age of 65 will increase
to approximately 22.3 million by 2030. The number
over the age of 80 will have increased to approximately 6.4 million. The KDA, a senior citizens’ advocacy group, was commissioned by BMVBS and BBSR
to determines the existing inventory and needs for
age-appropriate housing. They also determined
factors that are promoting and limiting the creation
of an adequate age-appropriate housing supply and
made housing policy recommendations.
Living at home – the preferred form of housing in old
93% „normal“ apartment
4% nursing home
2% assisted living
< 1% small group homes
< 1% communal living
< 1% traditional senior housing
Many people combine housing for the elderly with special
types of residences, but the most common form of housing in old age is the “normal” home. 93 percent of people
aged 65 and older live in “normal” homes. Even two-thirds
of those in their nineties live in “normal” housing stock,
even if they require care. Numerous studies show that
most seniors want to live independently as long as possible in their homes and in familiar neighborhoods.
Many of these buildings are, however, not age-appropriate. Around three quarters of senior households have
to negotiate steps and stairs to get into their apartment
buildings and about half must also cope with indoor stairs
to their apartment door, but only one out of ten households has access to technical aids. Many seniors even have
to overcome barriers within the living space. About half
of senior households have no threshold-free access to a
balcony, terrace or garden. Bathroom fittings are another
key criterion. About a quarter of respondents have too
little freedom of movement in the bathroom. Only 15 percent of bathrooms are equipped with a floor-level shower.
Minimal number of age-appropriate apartments
Just 5 percent of the households surveyed lived in barrierfree homes. With currently 11 million senior households,
this corresponds to only about 570,000 barrier-free units.
83 percent have significant barriers and a considerable
need for adaptation.
The concept of age-appropriate living includes not only
construction requirements but also requirements for
barrier-free or reduced-barrier designs for living space,
infrastructural and social services on site, and the option
to access support services, if necessary. The investigation confirmed that walkways to bus and train stations,
doctors, pharmacies and grocery stores are not considered easily accessible by up to a quarter of seniors. In the
future, it will be even more important not to see housing
construction as an isolated task but rather in connection
with the development of the infrastructure to support
independent living in manageable neighborhoods.
conditions that promote and inhibit the provision of ageappropriate dwellings was investigated and recommendations to increase the available age-appropriate housing
were developed. We have primarily made recommendations for changes to statutory regulations and funding
policies as well as better informing the stakeholders about
the issues that have to be addressed.
10.2 %
Walker
17.8 %
Walking stick
Conclusion
Ensuring a future housing supply that will meet our
needs will require significant investment. Homeowners,
private landlords, and institutional housing companies
as well as local authorities, charities, tradespeople, and
designers are all challenged to initiate age-appropriate
transformations of the housing stock and the environment of residential neighborhoods. The rapid aging of
society and regional pressure to act are making this a
widespread need across Germany. The creation of age-appropriate housing and support services is thus a challenge
for our entire society. Adapting the housing stock to have
fewer barriers not only represents added value to seniors,
but also increased comfort for families.
4.4 %
Wheelchair
The need for age-appropriate housing and
recommendations
no separation between
building and apartment
door
no steps
up to 3 steps
11.4 %
40.3 %
12.5 %
more than to 3 steps
78
35.6 %
The need for age-appropriate housing is great and will
continue to grow. Even if only accounts for elderly with
movement restrictions, the current housing stock on offer
would already have to increase by four to five times to
fulfill a need for about 2.5 million barrier-free / reducedbarrier apartments. The need is expected to increase to
approximately 3 million by 2020. The age-appropriate
adaptation of the required 2.5 million homes will require
a specific additional expenditure of €18 billion to bring
the total investment to nearly €39 billion. Finally, the
Senior Living
Researchers: Project Director: Total cost: Project duration: Ursula Kremer-Preiss, KDA Consulting and Research Association for the Elderly mbH, Cologne
Verena Lihs, BBSR
€147,793.00 (general departmental research)
November 2008 - May 2011
79
Efficiency House Plus
Pilot Projects:
the New World of
Energy Plus Combines
Buildings and Cars
Hans-Dieter Hegner, Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development
80
80
81
1. Previous Research
The Zukunft Bau Research Initiative is not limited to the
exploration of new building products and technologies,
but is also dedicated to the intensive interaction between
construction and systems engineering including the
integration of renewable energy. The first decisive factor
is reduce the building’s energy demand with a highly
efficient building envelope. Efficient provision of space
heating, hot water, auxiliary and household electricity are
then adapted accordingly. This then leads to the already
widely available passive-energy houses and efficient
houses currently receiving public support in Germany,
both of which have very low energy demand (supporting
KfW Efficient Houses with ratings of 70, 55 or 40 efficiency or passive-energy houses). If one combines low energy
needs with systems that produce energy, buildings can
also achieve energy surpluses.
As part of the Zukunft Bau Research Initiative, the
Technical University of Darmstadt developed Energy
Plus Houses in both 2007 and 2009 for the prestigious
“Solar Decathlon” in Washington, D.C. The most important objectives of these pilot projects, the performance
of which was tested in 10 disciplines, is to generate more
energy than the house would consume under full use.
TU Darmstadt won this competition in 2007 and 2009.
Based on the designs of the TU Darmstadt, BMVBS set up
its own lecture and exhibition pavilion which went on a
roadshow across Germany from 2009 to 2011 to introduced the concept of Energy Plus Houses to six metropolitan areas. The TU Darmstadt building from 2009 with 19
kw in photovoltaic cells can produce almost 14,000 kWh/
year. A Daimler “smart-ed” electric car consumes just 0.14
kWh/km. This means a theoretical mileage of almost
80,000 km (50,000 mi) per year would be possible. This set
the stage to create a practical combination of real estate
and modern electric mobility.
2. The BMVBS Competition and the New Brand
The first projects showed that individual components
were at advanced stages of development. What was still
missing was an integrated implementation of residential
and transportation into an equally durable pilot. With
this objective, BMVBS launched an interdisciplinary
competition to build an Energy Plus House with Electric
82
Mobility. The model building needed to demonstrate that
it met the modern residential needs for a 4-person household, its role as an energy supplier and integrate covered
parking spaces for electric vehicles. The project was also
intended to give a clear answer to issues around sustainability. One of the goals was, for example, for the house to
be completely recyclable. But being recyclable and flexible
should not mean compromises in the highest standard of
comfort. A full sustainability assessment was carried out
as part of the planning and construction processes in this
pilot project.
The introduction of a new standard was closely linked
to the debate on a clear definition of “Efficiency House
Plus.” There were several interpretations what was meant
by “plus-houses.” As part of research conducted by the
Fraunhofer Institute, the BMBVS construction advisory
board proposed a solution after extensive discussion in
a BMVBS brochure entitled “Paths to Efficiency House
Plus,” released in August 2011. The following requirements were laid out in this brochure:
the Efficiency House Plus standard is reached when both
a negative annual primary energy demand (ΣQp < 0
kWh/m2a) and a negative year-end energy demand (ΣQe
< 0 kWh/m2a) are achieved. All other conditions of the
Energy Savings Ordinance of (EnEV 2009), such as the
requirements for protection against summer heat, are
followed. Compared to EnEV 2009, the primary energy
factors for the non-renewable share are to be used according to the new DIN 18599 (issued December 2011 and will
be included in EnEV 2012). The total electricity fed to the
grid is to be evaluated analogously to the mix of displaced
electricity. As with EnEV, evidence was to be based on
German averages.
However, in addition to EnEV, Efficiency Plus Houses
must take into account the primary energy requirements for residential lighting, household appliances and
systems. Assumed were a standard value of 20 kWh/m2a
(including lighting: 3 kWh/m2a; appliances: 10 kWh/m2a;
cooking: 3 kWh/m2a; other: 4 kWh/m2a), but no more
than 2,500 kWh/yr per housing unit. Including household
electricity and lighting in the balance sheet was only for
research and development purposes, but it is completely
The Efficiency House Plus of Nassau Building Association, Frankfurt
appropriate. The simulation and the practical implementation of such buildings shows that the proportion of energy for lighting and electrical power is about the same as
the amount used for heating. If one wants to achieve a real
plus for consumers and users, these components of energy
consumption not included in the EnEV balance sheet
ought to be included. Once you take them into account,
the “plus” in the “Efficiency House Plus” clearly produces
a positive annual balance. This is not to say the Efficiency
House Plus is self-sufficient and can be disconnected
from the grid. It is quite clear that energy surpluses and
requirements arise at different times, so compensations
from the grid or from stored electricity have to be made.
Everyone involved in the research of this new generation
of building is keen to maximize the amount of self-produced renewable energy actually used by the house. This
is why the ratio of internally-used, self-generated renewable energy needs to be shown on the balance sheet in
addition to the annual primary energy consumption and
year-end energy consumption figures. The calculations
are to be based on monthly balances akin to the EnEV
method. The should also help to promote the use of power
storage technologies.
3. The BMVBS Project in Berlin
The competition winner was announced on October 27,
2010. The first prize went to the University of Stuttgart,
Institute for Lightweight Construction and Design in collaboration with Werner Sobek Stuttgart GmbH, Stuttgart.
The Ministry signed a planning agreement with the winning team in January, 2011. By early June 2011, the planning phase was complete and a general contractor for the
construction was hired. The construction was finished by
the end of November 2011. Scientific monitoring of the
entire project was assigned to the Fraunhofer Institute.
The client is the Federal Republic of Germany. A “test
family” moved into the house for a period of 15 months
on March 4, 2013.
The building as constructed was a single-family residence for a family of four with about 130 m2 (1400 sq. ft.)
of living space on two levels. There was a carport placed
in front of the house to park the electric cars and house
their charging infrastructure. To demonstrate a family’s
mobility requirements, the project included two electric
cars, supplemented with an electric scooter. A conductive
rapid charging system and an inductive charging system
were both installed. This demonstrates the current state
of charging technology which could then be included in
the study.
The quick-charge system allows for the rapid charging
of vehicle batteries with high power using the back-up
batteries in the system. The inductive charging system
operates automatically and without contact-plugs and
cables, when the vehicle is in its parking spot. As a result,
the vehicle is more closely integrated in the house’s energy system and managed charging made easier without
user action required. This carport also serves as a “shop
window” to provide information to the interested public.
Between the two-story living area and the “shop window”
is the energy core of the building, which contains all the
building services and the wet rooms that require extensive services.
The building will produce the energy needed for air
conditioning, hot water supply, lighting, appliances, other
electrical devices (small appliances, multimedia equipment, etc.) and the vehicles, but will also be connected to
the national grid (no stand-alone operation).
83
The inner-city Efficiency House Plus , ABG Building Association, Frankfurt
4. The Network
The aim of the BMVBS is not only to create unique showcase projects, but to give them trial runs in a network of
different solutions and different technologies to improve
them even further. It is for this reason that BMVBS is
funding research in “Efficiency Plus Homes”. The program currently only funds residential buildings (one-,
two- and multi-family homes) being built in Germany.
The buildings should be able to operate all the functions of the house, such as heating, hot water, lighting,
household electricity and the electricity needs of external
users, such as electric vehicles. They need to be tested and
evaluated under real, i.e. living conditions. This is why a
working group is set up to support each of the Ministry’s
funding recipients to help with the evaluation of the project. The research results will be subsequently released.
This research funding can be coupled with the KfW funding. The hope is that promising ideas, technologies and
materials will more quickly find their way into practice.
These buildings will help gather experiences and address
issues of economic feasibility. In the medium term it is
envisioned to build zero-energy and efficient-plus homes
at affordable prices. Grants for 100% of the costs to implement these scientific and monitoring area available for a
maximum of €70,000. The bases for measurement are the
cost and financing budgets of the planners and research
institutions that been hired. A grant of 20% of investment
costs from equity financing, to a maximum of €300 per
m2 of living space, is also available. Thirty-one buildings
are already participating in this new network as of the
date this article was written. These include residential
buildings built as a private initiative, such as the Efficiency House Plus by Prof. Fisch Kleinberg near Stuttgart
or the VELUX “Light-Active House” in Hamburg. Particularly active in the introduction of the new standards was
84
the Federal Association of German Prefabricated Housing (BDF). Six of the 20 houses in the new prefab housing
development in Cologne-Frechen will be Efficiency Plus
houses and outfitted with monitoring equipment. These
houses are single-family homes already on the market.
They are for sale at €340,000 - €560,000 and have living
space ranging between 180 and 280 m2 (1,900–3,000 sq.
ft.). At present, they represent only a pilot project for an
upscale segment. Nevertheless, it is encouraging that the
industry is willing to experiment, collect experiences and
evaluate the way forward.
The Fraunhofer Institute for Building Physics has been
commissioned by the BMVBS to conduct research on
these developments and communicate their results
online. The technical characteristics and data of all the
buildings currently in use can be found on the website of
the BMVBS.
The first masonry structures are now joining the field
of pilot projects. The M1 Project was launched by the
Elbehaus Company at the end of 2012 near Berlin. It
originated with the help of innovative porous concrete
elements from the Xella company. There are many projects currently underway, including the first Efficiency
Plus multi-family homes, currently under construction in
Frankfurt. The Nassausche Heimstätte is currently building a multi-family Efficiency Plus House in Riedberg and
the ABG Builder’s Association is building a large innercity apartment building as an Efficiency House Plus. In
both cases, electric mobility and car sharing options are
being made available to tenants.
The goal of establishing the Efficiency House Plus across
Germany is on the right path. Now it’s time to turn atten-
tion to transferring these technologies to modernizing
existing housing stock. In February 2012, BMVBS held a
design contest for a modernization of an existing structure to the Efficiency House Plus standard. The Neu-Ulm
Builder’s Association (NUWOG) made small apartment
buildings available for this project. The focus was on using the latest technologies for the Energy Plus standard in
the renovation. The contest winners were also expected
to provide electricity to the neighborhood or for charging
electric vehicles from the power generated in excess of
the energy needed. So the city of New Ulm will soon have
another attraction. First, the apartment buildings will be
modernized so that they produce more energy than they
need for their operation. The contest was juried at July 6,
2012 under the chair of Prof. Lydia Haack, University of
Constance.
The two winning teams are:
• University of West Ruhr in Mülheim an der Ruhr,
Institute of Energy Systems and Energy Economics,
Prof. Viktor Grinewitschus together with Werner Sobek
Stuttgart GmbH and with Oehler Archkom – Solar
Architecture
• Technical University of Darmstadt, College of Architecture, Department of Design and Energy Efficient Construction, Prof. Manfred Hegger with o5 architekten
bda – raab hafke lang und der ina Planungsgesellschaft
mbH.
Both teams succeeded with innovative Energy Plus designs for the multi-family homes in need of rehabilitation,
which are currently using an enormous 507 kWh/m2a
end energy. The surplus energy will be produced using
building-integrated photovoltaics. A special feature of
the University of West Ruhr entry is the integration of all
building services in the outer shell. This will help create
a prefabricated facade system with high levels of thermal
insulation fitted with all the necessary components to the
current exterior wall. This removes supply lines from the
main floor space and avoids adding additional shafts and
openings in the interior. Photovoltaics will be mounted
on the south-facing roof surfaces. A new electrical management system will control the electricity produced in
the building and make it available to the neighborhood.
TU Darmstadt was also successful as it turned a technologically backward house into a small power plant. The
main system components of the house technology will
be integrated into the roof space. A striking feature of
this design is its decided careful treatment of the existing structure and making sure that enough daylight is
available to the building. The planned use of materials is
strictly in accordance with the specifications of a model
life cycle assessment: the good environmental performance and the ease of maintenance, separability and
disposal of materials used in the structure are without
question. A total of four buildings will be renovated: both
winning designs will be implemented in two existing
buildings in a row of houses. Completion is scheduled for
2013. The restored buildings will then be monitored for
two years as part of the competition.
The network aims to expand its scope and volume as
well in 2013. The plan is to include educational buildings.
More attention will also begin to be paid to networking neighborhoods. Studies on the Garching campus of
the Technical University of Munich will provide initial
groundwork for an entire Energy Plus neighborhood. The
paths to an efficient future and combining buildings and
modern mobility are set.
85
Photo/illustration credits
1 WOODCUBE® Team 05
3 BMVBS, Frank Ossenbrink
6 BMVBS, Ulrich Schwarz
9 above left BMVBS, EVV Essen
9 above right BMVBS, König
9 below BMVBS, Ulrich Schwarz
12 above Weberhaus
12 below BienZenker
13 HUF
15 Institut für Baukonstruktion,
TU Dresden
14 Hank und Hirth Freie Architekten;
Foto: Oliver Starke
16 SchwörerHaus KG, Foto: Heiner Orth
17 Institut für Baukonstruktion,
TU Dresden
18 left Arup Deutschland GmbH
18 right Arup Deutschland GmbH
19 Arup Deutschland GmbH
20 Arup Deutschland GmbH
21 right Arup Deutschland GmbH
24
BMVBS, Leon Schmidt
25 right BMVBS, Leon Schmidt
25 above Klimaschutzagentur Region Hannover
GmbH
25 middle BMVBS
25 below BMVBS
25 below BMVBS, Oliver Tjaden
27–29 (2) Prof. Wolfram Jäger, Dresden
30 Bundeskanzleramt
32 Karlsruher Institut für Technologie KIT
35–36 (2) GWG München
37 Christoph Gebler
38 above Martin Duckek, Ulm
38 middle Stefan Hanke,Sinzing
38 below BBSR
40 BMVBS
43 Thomas Lenzen, München
46 Fox/Völkner
50–51 (2) achener Institut für
Bauschadensforschung und angewandte
Bauphysik gGmbH
53 Tim Wameling, Hannover
54–57 (5) Bauhaus-Universität Weimar/B. Rudolf
58–61 (3) 62–63 (4) 64 69 above 69 middle 69 below 70-71 (3) 72-73 (5) 74 76 77 80 83-84 (2) Institut für Leichtbau, Entwerfen und
Konstruiere, Stuttgart / Institut für
Umformtechnik, Stuttgart
FH Dortmund
Ritter, Darmstadt
HTWK Leipzig
HTWK Leipzig
T. Krettek, filmaton.tv
HTWK Leipzig
FH Rosenheim
Thomas Jocher, Stuttgart
Keuco
Loeschcke/DIN 18040
Werner Sobek, Stuttgart
Büro HHS
Forschungsinitiative Zukunft Bau
Contact
Bundesinstitut für Bau-, Stadt-, und Raumforschung
Im Bundesamt für Bauwesen und Raumordnung
Referat II 3 - Forschung im Bauwesen, Gebäudemanagement
Federal Institute for Building, Urban and Regional Planning Research
The Federal Agency for Building and Regional Planning
Office II 3 – Research in Construction and Building Management
Kurt Speelmanns
Deichmanns Aue 31-37
53179 Bonn
Telefon +49 228 99401-2730
kurt.speelmanns@bbr.bund.de
www.forschungsinitiative.de
Publisher:
Federal Ministry for Transport,
Building and Urban Development
Office B13 Construction Engineering, Research and Sustainable Building
Krausenstraße 17-20
10117 Berlin
Represented by:
Deichmanns Aue 31-37
53179 Bonn
Project Management:
Federal Ministry for Transport, Building and Urban Development
Office, Mr Hans-Dieter Hegner
Editing:
Office II 3, Guido Hagel
Design: BBGK Berliner Botschaft
Printing: DCM Druck Center Meckenheim GmbH
Current as of: December 2012
Publication, in whole or in part, is only permitted with the prior consent on the
publisher.
Cover Photo : The WOODCUBE is a 4- or 5-story residential building with a flexible
number of units in solid wood construction. All of the units can be adapted to the
needs of the future users.
86
87
www.bmvbs.de
88

Building the Future - Forschungsinitiative Zukunft Bau

Transcription

Similar documents

BesNet Center - Professionals

Astro-Foil RI bro

Catch Of The Month Graceland Portable Buildings

pdf

Heritage Category: Listing List Entry No : 1227165 Grade: II County

Building the Future The magazine of the Zukunft Bau research

2014 October - morningsidecondos.com

20.1.2015 Dr. Duygu Erten, PE LEED Faculty Member of

Jetons De Poker Ceramiques Casino Replica

midboro management