building envelopes meet thegreen scene...joe strazzullo [email protected]...

Fall 2007

Can

ada

Pos

t P

ublic

atio

ns A

gree

men

t N

umbe

r: 4

0609

661

Building Envelopes Meet the Green Scene

Building Envelopes Meet the Green Scene

ALSO IN THIS ISSUE:Energy Efficiency and SEX

Modern Building Science Meets Heritage BuildingsPaperless Drywall

Setting the StandardRegional Roundups

And much more

Pushing the Envelope 5

Pushing the EnvelopeA publication of the Ontario BuildingEnvelope CouncilFall 2007

Published For:OBEC685 McCowan RoadPO Box 66541Scarborough, ON M1J 3N8Phone: 416-438-2588Fax: [email protected]

Published By:Matrix Group Inc.Return all undeliverable addresses to:52 Donald StreetWinnipeg, MB R3C 1L6Toll Free: 1-866-999-1299Toll Free Fax: 1-866-244-2544www.matrixgroupinc.netPublications Agreement Number 40609661

President & CEOJack Andress

Senior PublisherMaurice LaBorde

Publisher & Director of SalesJoe [email protected]

Editor-in-ChiefShannon [email protected]

EditorJon Waldman

Finance/AdministrationShoshana Weinberg, Nathan Redekop, Pat [email protected]

Director of Marketing & CirculationJim Hamilton

Sales ManagerNeil Gottfred

Sales Team LeaderAlbert Brydges

Matrix Group Inc. Account ExecutivesTravis Bevan, Lewis Daigle, David Giesbrecht, Miles Meagher, Marlene Moshenko, Declan O’Donovan, Ken Percival, Brian Saiko,Peter Schulz, Vicki Sutton

Layout & DesignJ. Peters

Advertising DesignJames Robinson

©2007 Matrix Group Inc. All rights reserved.Contents may not be reproduced by any means,in whole or in part, without the prior writtenpermission of the publisher. The opinionsexpressed in this publication are not necessarilythose of Matrix Group Inc. Printed in Canada.

Messages:Message from OBEC President David De Rose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Features:Energy Efficiency and SEX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9Modern Building Science Tools Applied to Rehabilitating Heritage Buildings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17Update: Bill 124 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20The Benefits of Insulated Concrete Forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21Tools of the Trade: Paperless Drywall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25Presidential Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26

Regional Roundup:North by Northwest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27The Capital Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27Toronto and Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28Central Ontario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29The Southern Tip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29

Back to You:Setting the Standard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30The Importance of BSSO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30Upcoming Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30OBEC Crossword Puzzle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31Beckie Award Honours Building Science Researcher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32

Membership Application Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33Buyer’s Guide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34

Table ofContents

OBEC does not specifically endorse the editorial, products or services contained within this magazine. These products and services arepresented here as an indication of the various possibilities in the Marketplace. OBEC wishes to advise the reader that sound BuildingScience Practices should be applied to any and all product or service selections. OBEC does not make or imply any warrantees as to thesuitability of any of these products or services for any specific situation. Furthermore, the opinions expressed in this magazine's editorialcontent may not necessarily reflect the opinions of OBEC.

ON THE COVER: HumberCollege Urban EcologyCentre, located in Toronto,Ontario features radiantfloor heating, enhancedbuilding envelope insulation,improved air sealing of thebuilding envelope, outdoorair ventilation rates to meetASHRAE Standard 62-2004,and energy recoveryventilators to recover heatfrom exhaust air. All thesefeatures combined result in aminimum annual energysavings of 61 per cent, whichtranslates into nine LEED®

points. Photo courtesy ofEnermodal.

Where’s “The Beckie” ContestSomewhere, hidden amongst

the pages of this issue of PushingThe Envelope can be found a tinyimage of the OBEC President’sAward (otherwise know as the“Beckie”). Be the first to fax a copyof the magazine page clearly identi-fying the location of the Beckie tothe OBEC office and you win aprize. Please make sure that youprovide contact information. Win-ners in the Toronto area willreceive a free pass to an upcomingOBEC dinner seminar or theirchoice. Other winners will receivean OBEC gift.


The first 20

August 2007 marked OBEC’s 20th

anniversary. Over this period, OBEChas grown into a valuable forum forthose striving for excellence in buildingenvelope design, construction andpreservation. It has also become amodel for similar organizations acrossother Canadian provinces and through-out the United States. OBEC organ-ized some special activities this year inorder to commemorate this auspiciousmilestone.

OBEC was pleased to host all for-mer OBEC Presidents as special guestsat the May Dinner meeting held at theUniversity of Toronto Faculty Club. AllPast Presidents took a few moments atthe podium to share their key accom-plishments or memories from theirtenure. A common theme that evolvedfrom the various discourse was thetremendous dedication and hard workof many directors over the years. Evenwith the organization’s growth, therewas however, a sense that more couldhave been accomplished if not con-strained by the resources associatedwith a volunteer organization. Thisevening made me realize that eventhough we have come a long way,OBEC’s tremendous potential has yetto be realized.

OBEC also compared the list ofcurrent members to those that werearound when it all began in 1987. Wetook the opportunity to invite these 20year members to our President’s AwardDinner in September 2007 where theywere honoured with a special gift.Those that were able to attend werepresented with an Inukshuk figurine(Inukshuk is an Inuit word that means“Stone man that points the way”).Inukshuks were built across Canada toshow direction or guide the way. It alsosymbolizes our dependence on eachother and the value of strong relation-ships. OBEC is proud to thank these

individuals for their vision, passion, andloyalty to our organization.

The next 20

Current OBEC directors collectivelydecided to look back before lookingforward at the Association’s next 20years. We revisited minutes from anOBEC strategic planning session held afew years ago at Deerhurst Resort. Wehave also engaged a professional mar-keting firm to help us chart our futuredirection. Together, we will be revisit-ing our vision and mission statementsand we will prepare business and mar-keting plans. In the short term, we willbe looking at ways to increase our asso-ciation’s awareness, branding and ourmembership base. We will identifystrategies that will enable us to getbeyond past resource limitations sothat we can realize OBEC’s full poten-tial in providing education and allowingour members to network with leadingindustry professionals.

Our future depends on our abilityto: stay relevant, distinguish ourselvesamongst rival associations, and reachout to new young members. OBEC willbe developing a student outreach pro-gram. Look for more dinner meetingsat Universities and Colleges across theprovince. This grass roots approach willstrengthen our current and futuremembership base. In return, studentswill be able to network with potentialemployers, gain a practical viewpointinto our industry, and be exposed totimely and relevant seminars from keyindustry personnel. Ignoring Universi-ties and Colleges would be like a hock-ey team who trades away their top draftpicks to maintain present day medioc-rity. We all know how far the Leafshave gone with that strategy. I hate tosay it but we need to be more likeOntario’s other hockey team and pickup some franchise players that we canbuild with.

In closing, please remember thatOBEC is here to serve its members.Your comments and suggestions arealways welcome! ■

Message from the President

David De Rose, P.Eng., BSSO

2007 OBEC Board of Directors

PresidentDavid De Rose, P. Eng.Halsall Associates Ltd.

Vice PresidentPaul Tomkinson

Norquest Contracting Group Ltd.

Past PresidentRobert J. Rymell, P. Eng.

RBS Consulting Engineering Group Inc.

TreasurerNancy Wiskel

DuPont Canada

SecretaryPaul Johannesson, A.Sc.T., BSSO

R.J. Burnside & Associates Ltd.

DirectorsBrian Abbey, MAATO, BSSO,

AMSST, CSC, BCQAdtek Building Consultants

Ted KesikUniversity of Toronto

Alen VrabecMorrison Hershfield Ltd.

Marc AllaireRolf BrockmanDr. R.J. Drysdale Jerry GengeTed Kesik Allan Larden

Bob Rymell Paul Sandori Mike Van DusenKeith Wilson Tony Woods

Building for the Next 20Years With 20/20 Vision

Long-Term Members: 20 Years

What does sex have to do with the

building envelope?

You may not have thought about itbefore, but the building envelope canhave a great deal to do with sex, espe-cially for those who live in buildingswhere the envelope isn’t performing.Imagine being snuggled up in bed withyour special someone when a cold draftseeps in under the window sill. Nextthing you know, the clothes are back onand you’re both shivering under theduvet. The mood is ruined and thebuilding envelope is to blame.

Not only does a properly sealed andconstructed building envelope create ahappier, healthier home for occupantsto live in, the building envelope is also a

key aspect of “green” building — and atno time before has being green, energyefficient and environmentally friendlybeen so sexy.

Energy efficiency is a very hot topic.Even the Ontario Power Authority(OPA) is getting into the “green is sexy”groove with its “Every Kilowatt Counts”campaign. Fall radio ads are encourag-ing listeners—in a Barry White-esquebaritone—to dim their lights and “letthe savings and the love begin”.

As stakeholders in the Canadian con-struction market we building envelopeexperts can contribute to more environ-mentally responsible building practicesand set the bar for high-performancebuildings.

The key to ensuring the buildingenvelope plays its vital role in “green”building is, of course, understandingthat everything is connected. The build-ing envelope is vital to high-perform-ance building. But in order for it tofunction to its full potential, it must bebuilt beyond minimum Code and its rolefully understood by all players in theprocess.

HVAC and the envelope: Working

together

On the same theme, relationships arevery important. Understanding the onebetween envelope and mechanical sys-tem is key to improving a building’shealth, safety, durability, comfort andenergy efficiency, according to RickQuirouette, B. Arch., of QuirouetteBuilding Specialist Ltd. These are thetrue goals of creating a more energy-effi-cient, and therefore “greener”, building.

Although better building techniqueshelp to meet these goals, these tech-niques can only truly be achieved if theyare accompanied by new approaches toventilation. It’s a catchphrase building-envelope specialists are fond of: “Buildtight; ventilate right”.

Mechanical engineers need to workwith architects and specifiers to matchup design to performance. Failure to

understand the relationship betweenmechanical systems and the buildingenvelope causes other indoor air qualityand comfort issues, such as dry indoorair, static electricity and inconsistentindoor temperatures and humidity lev-els.

Wagdy Anis is one of the authors ofthe 2005 National Institute of Standardsand Technology (NIST) report Investiga-tion of the Impact of Commercial Build-ing Envelope Airtightness on HVAC Ener-gy Use, and a Principal and Director ofTechnical Resources at Boston architec-tural firm Shepley Bulfinch Richardsonand Abbott. He’s a driving force behindthe initiative to include air barrier lan-guage in the American Society of Heat-ing, Refrigeration and Air ConditioningEngineers (ASHRAE) Standard 90.1and a proponent for more collaborationamong trades to raise the bar in buildingperformance.

In the ASHRAE Journal, December2001, his article The Impact of Airtight-ness on System Design concluded thatthe building envelope is designed oftenby architects, who do not realize theinteraction between the envelope andthe mechanical system. It is then built bymany contracting trades to what theythink is required by the design, withoutparticular concern for air tightness. Forthis reason, an informed collaboration isessential between all, particularly whenthe desired result is effective tighteningof the building envelope.

Trades working together

Right now, we face not only the chal-lenge of the lack of trade awareness ofbuilding envelope issues, but the grow-ing shortage of trades people educatedin energy-efficient design.

The Clean Air Partnership addressedthis topic in a 2007 report titled Skills forEnergy Efficient Construction: A report onTrades Training for Energy EfficientBuildings in the Greater Toronto Area.Principle author Jennifer Penney pre-sented the report at the Toronto


By Tony Woods, President, Canam BuildingEnvelope Specialists

Energy EfficiencyEnergy EfficiencyEverything you ever

wanted to knowabout health, safety,durability, comfort,

energy efficiency,the environment

and SEX

…but wereafraid to ask

and SEXSEX

Regional Sustainable Building Confer-ence 07 in June. The report focused onthe challenges faced by local industry inthe new, more environmentally awareworld and made recommendations onhow to meet them.

“The market for energy efficiency inthe construction of new buildings andretrofit of existing buildings is growingrapidly, especially in the institutionalsector,” the report states. This growthcan be attributed to a number of factors,including the rising cost of energy, agreater commitment to environmental-ly-minded design and incentive pro-grams offered via agencies such as theBuilding Owners and Managers Associ-ation (BOMA), the Better BuildingsPartnership (BBP) and OPA. This, inturn, has created a higher demand fortradespeople with skills in energy effi-cient construction.

“Energy efficiency principles andunderstanding of the building-as-a-sys-tem are an important foundation for allconstruction trades and building opera-tors training and need to be introducedas foundation knowledge in existing

training programs,” the report recom-mends. “Trades need a more integratedunderstanding of how their work affectsthe energy efficiency of the buildingsthey construct or renovate and how itimpacts on the work of other tradeslooking to achieve the same result.”

We need to work together to attracttalent to our industry and train peopleto understand the “building-as-a-sys-tem” concept.

Occupant behaviour and energy

efficiency

Education doesn’t stop with thosewho are building or retrofitting high-risecommercial or residential buildings. Asthe OPA advocates, the people who liveand work in the buildings have to get onboard as well. We need to educate occu-pants, owners and property managersabout how even small changes to theenvelope can affect energy consump-tion. Do tenants and owners understandthat renovations to their unit can affectits energy efficiency? Are they in the“green is sexy” mindset?

Occupant comfort is directly affected

by the condition of the building enve-lope, but this isn’t often communicateddirectly to those living or working in theunit. They only feel the symptoms of thecompromise: drafts, stuffy noses frompollutants, poor temperature control.Maybe their love life is being affected bya drafty bedroom! You never know!Tenants and unit owners are a valuableresource for assessing a building’s per-formance. As many property managershave found, caring for the building enve-lope can result in much happier tenantswho complain far less frequently.

One of our responsibilities in thecontracting business is to help our cus-tomers “find the pain”. Interaction withthe occupants is one of the best ways todiscover what is affecting their lifestyleand how we can help them change it.

Saving money has corporate sex

appeal

The impetus behind building enve-lope improvements can be comfort orindoor air quality, but if we want build-ing owners to spend money, we have tobe able to show return on investment.


Whole-building energy-use simulationsoftware provides a clear picture ofbefore-and-after energy usage and turnscomplex building science into informa-tion clients can use to plan budgets andsway committee members.

Let’s look at an example: a condo-minium building in Mississauga,Ontario, Canada, to which the author’scompany was called to assess suitabilityfor a retrofit. Using a three-step process,the following results were achieved:

Field survey

Major air leakage paths were discov-ered at exterior doors, window joints,duct penetrations, interior doors,roof/wall intersections, conduits passingthrough floors and elevator shafts andvents on the roof. Air sealing measuresincluded: weatherstripping common areadoors, smoke shaft, stairwell, exteriorand underground doors, doors toroof/elevator, garbage and mechanicalrooms, re-weatherstripping windows,and also sealing and caulking, soffit/walljoints, fire cabinets, and around win-dows.

Air leakage flow rates

It was discovered that the condomini-um has an air leakage area of about 58.3ft2 (5.4185 m2) or about 5.111in2/ft2 (2.9cm2/m2) of envelope area—indicating thebuilding envelope can be described as“loose” 1 using this classification:• Tight building: less than 1.18 in2/ft2

(0.7 cm2/m2) of building envelope area• Average: 1.18 in2/ft2 to 2.79 in2/ft2 (0.7

to 1.6 cm2/m2) of building envelopearea

• Loose: 2.9 in2/ft2 to 6.34 in2/ft2 (1.7 to3.6 cm2/m2) of building envelope areaThe total air leakage area 58.3ft2

(5.418 m2) was distributed as per the fieldobservations. Major air leakage pathswere found at the below grade and theground floor levels and at the top floorand penthouse level.

The estimated monthly average airleakage rate was shown to be 7.43m3/s,taking into account a heating seasonassumed from mid-September to the endof May. Higher indoor/outdoor tempera-ture differences during the wintermonths of December to February lead tohigher air leakage rates.

Estimates of energy and

cost savings

Estimated total cost of air leakagecontrol measures was $99,846 CAD.Assumptions used to estimate2 energyand cost savings included:• Air sealing measures at 60 per cent

effectiveness based on previousfield experience;

• Weather data based on 30-year cli-mate normals and monthly averagefor Mississauga;

• Fuel prices and calculated cost sav-ings using utility data provided forthe previous calendar year. Cur-rent, and any indicated priceincrease in energy costs, is used;

• Building operating data and sched-ules as provided by property man-agement;

• Overall building interactive effects(solar and internal gains and otherloads) and purchased space heatingconsumption estimated at 67 percent of total heat losses; and

• Retrofit measures assumed toreduce overall air leakage by 40 percent.


Occupants, owners and investors expecttheir buildings to last. Specifying andcommissioning a high-quality building

envelope is one of the bestways to make a commit-ment to durability.

This, in turn, has a con-nection to everything we’ve

talked about: occupant comfort andhealth, energy efficiency and safety. It’simportant to note that safety is connect-ed to everything we do. Fire-ratedsealants are a part of the NationalBuilding Code, but they must be main-tained over time to ensure they willalways work as specified. Why are firedoors never weatherstripped?

How do you best achieve durabilityin the building envelope? Bob Marshallof Jacques Whitford is a recognizedbuilding envelope expert who specializesin durable building envelope design. Healso presented at the Sustainable Build-ings 07 Conference in Toronto to ham-mer home the importance of specifyinga durable building envelope. His “6 Ds”checklist is a good guide for workingtoward that goal: • Deflection;• Drainage;

Figure 1 shows the total energy sav-ings associated with air-sealing meas-ures.

Energy analysis showed the air seal-ing measures would reduce the peakspace heating demand by about 275 kW(about 940 kBtu/hr) on the coldest daysduring the winter. Air-sealing upgradeswould reduce the utility bills (mainlynatural gas) by $17,394USD ($20,580CAD) every year, resulting in a simplepayback period of about 4.9 years. Theannual space heating cost savings wouldbe about 14 per cent of the total naturalgas bill (see Figure 2).

Figure 3 shows the summary of ener-gy-use calculation software analysis.

Build it right: building envelope

durability

Durability is a key focus and a perfectexample of everything being connected.

• Drying;• Durable Materials;• Details that Work; and• Documentation.

Ensuring, through communicationwith all trades involved, that the build-ing envelope is built with Marshall’sguidelines in mind is a key way we canwork towards better, “greener” build-ings. Again, everything is connected: • Reduced materials deterioration =

less junk in landfills;• Healthier buildings = healthier

occupants;• Durable buildings = safer build-

ings; and • Durable envelope that doesn’t leak

= energy efficiency.

Share the love

The definition of an energy effi-cient building is one that is healthy,safe, durable and comfortable with thelowest operating cost achievable with-out adversely affecting the above fourparameters. By examining each aspectof that definition and its role in thebig, “building-as-a-system” picture, weare all working toward greener build-ings simply by doing the best jobs wecan. Remember, green is sexy and ifthe OPA isn’t afraid to flaunt it, weshouldn’t be either!

References1CMHC Surveys of mid- and high-riseapartment buildings. CMHC, Ottawa.2Determination of Peak Demand andEnergy Savings Associated with AirLeakage Measures for High-riseApartment Buildings, Ontario Hydro,by Scanada Consultants Limited. ■


Figure 2

Summary of energy-use calculation software analysis

Installation Costs $99,846 CAD

Cost Savings $20,580 CAD

Simple Payback (years) 4.9

Fuel Savings 79,153 m3

Environmental Savings

CO2 88,510kg

Methane 2,030kg

This table outlines the forecasted return on investment(ROI) attainable by performing air leakage control retrofitsto the building envelope, showing a simple payback of 4.9years.

Figure 3

Assumptions used to generate forecastsFuel Costs 0.2600$/m3

$0.0486 per kWh heating

Degree Day 4,100 ˚C-Days heating

Air Sealing Equivalence 60 per cent

Use Pattern 14 hours per day

This table shows the estimated values used to ascertainthe energy savings forecast, including fuel prices, buildingoperating data and weather data for the area based on 30-year climate normals.

Figure 1Degree Days Energy Savings

Natural Gas, ft3 Cost savings

Totals for the year 4,100 ˚C 79,153 m3 $20,580 CAD

16 Fall 2007 • Ontario Building Envelope Council

Introduction

“They sure don’t build them like they use to…” Rewind100 years when insulating exterior walls was optionaland rarely implemented, air leakage was consideredmerely a nuisance and exterior walls were commonlythree wythes of loadbearing brick—serving as thebuilding envelope’s primary moisture manage-ment system. More recently, buildingenvelopes have been engineered to perform“better with less”—but at what cost? Thetransition from multi-wythe masonry towardusing thin cladding skins and/or less robustmaterials is intended to achieve better eco-nomic value.

“Value” is best defined as achievingdesired good practice and code-mandatedperformance by balancing three fundamen-tal design considerations: aesthetics (andheritage considerations for older buildings),durability or service life, and maintenance/capital costs (Figure 1).

Furthermore, when rehabilitating older buildings, a proposedchange in building use/function may be desired. However, func-tional or program requirements do not always take into accountmodern performance requirements. Preserving a heritage build-ing’s visible form may intrinsically dictate durability and mainte-nance/capital expectations. However, assessing factors affectingthermal/energy performance prior to repairs is an important stepto ensure the capital invested in repairs is well-spent.

Engineering value

An owner realizes the absolute value of building envelopeengineering when the durability, function and cost objectives inFigure 1 are balanced. As with any retrofit project, the absenceof empirical data and/or experience (with how a given buildingassembly will perform) dictates that building envelope specialistsassess performance using proposed interior environmental con-ditions and expected exterior environmental scenarios.

It would be cavalier to rehabilitate a heritage masonry wall by“increasing” performance without careful assessment of the pro-posed intervention. In this case, repairs could result in accelerat-ed deterioration. In a cold climate example, installing a new airbarrier and/or insulation on the inboard wall surface can alterexterior wall performance, as the masonry may be colder andwetter once the insulation is installed. This can result in acceler-ated masonry freeze/thaw deterioration, embedded metal tiecorrosion, interior plaster finish deterioration and/or increasedpotential for mould growth.

An intuitive counterpoint to interior intervention is to recladthick masonry walls with insulated cladding or EIFS from the

exterior. This strategy may resolve thermal, moistureand air control issues without disrupting occupants

and interior finishes. However, recladding heritagewalls will drastically alter the building’s architec-ture and could deter from its cultural significance.

For buildings with heritage designation,recladding may not be allowed by govern-

ment authorities or heritage boards.

Computer models and material

testing

Modern building science practiceincludes using design tools for both newconstruction and building rehabilitation(including heritage buildings). Computersoftware such as WUFI (hygrothermalanalysis software that models heat and


By Kevin Day, Sarah Gray, P.Eng., and David De Rose, P.Eng

Modern Building Science Tools Appliedto Rehabilitating Heritage Buildings

Figure 2: Three-wythe brick solid masonry wall in a cold climate.

Figure 3: Example Sensor Installation and Centralized Data LoggingEquipment.

Figure 1: Aligning Building Science withBuilding Objectives. Convergence of allthree objectives is desired for heritage andmodern envelope systems.


moisture transport) can be applied toevaluate expected performance and com-pare deterioration risks with variousoptions. However, it is crucial to under-stand the limits of this and other designtools. The results are only as realistic asthe inputs and often several assumptionsare made for material properties andenvironmental loads.

Hygrothermal computational analysismay be refined by evaluating materialproperties, specifically those propertiesrelating to moisture absorption, moisture

storage (changes in material moisturecontent versus relative humidity is alsoknown as a sorption isotherm), vapourpermeability and thermal conductivity.Testing for moisture absorption and stor-age for bricks and mortar (both existingand repair materials) can also provideinsight into the hygric capacity of thesematerials. Checking these, and other,material properties as well as collectingon-site weather data could all be consid-ered when using software to providemore realistic results. Collecting refined

input data could be limited to those itemswhere results may be sensitive to the cor-responding material or environmentalinputs.

When there is confidence that thematerial property and environmentalinputs are more representative of the siteconditions, computation models fromWUFI could provide expected tempera-ture, moisture levels and drying poten-tials as a function of time at variousdepths within a wall assembly.

Figure 2 illustrates three-wythe bricksolid masonry wall in a cold climate(Toronto) after spray-applied polyure-thane foam insulation (also serving as theair barrier) applied to the inboard face ofthe exterior wall. The insulated masonryis likely to retain more moisture duringcolder seasons than the uninsulated wall(refer to the elevated moisture contentlevels shown by the red arrows in Figure2). Increased moisture retention makesthe outer brick wythe and mortar collarjoint more likely to experience freeze-thaw deterioration.

After evaluating all deteriorationrisks, the design team could assess strate-gies to reduce wetting of the wall if dete-rioration is likely and the interior insula-tion is required to improve thermalperformance. Removing moisturesources (e.g. leaking gutters, overhangingtrees or clinging ivy), adding sheet metalflashings to divert water run-off, and/orchemically treating exterior wall surfacesare a few ways to reduce exterior wetting.However, these options may have aes-thetic impacts that are not desirable interms of the building’s heritage appear-ance. For example, penetrating sealersapplied to the exterior masonry surfacemay repel rainwater and reduce theamount of absorbed moisture. However,the design team should assess if the seal-er will discolour the surface or make thewall look more “glossy”. Reversibility andre-treatability (e.g. when the sealers effi-cacy diminishes over time) should also becarefully examined in sample areasbefore general wall treatment.

In-situ trains and monitoring

After repair strategies are formulatedbased on computational analysis, pro-posed retrofit performance can also be measured on site. Constructing a

mock-up or installing a trial repair at thebuilding allows the client and designteam to observe how interior/exteriorsurfaces will look after the retrofit isinstalled. Embedded sensors could alsoprovide real data on the wall’s perform-ance during the mock-up phase. Resultscan confirm modeling assumptions andidentify conditions that vary from soft-ware outputs. The models could berefined and then extrapolated to showhow results are expected to change withdifferent interior conditions or insulationstrategies without having to build moremock-ups.

Selecting the right sensors, placingthem in appropriate locations within thewall, and gathering and interpreting datacan be a fickle exercise, but the time andeffort could be valuable investmentsgiven the significance and prestige forsome of our heritage buildings.

Using software and monitoringprobes are just two ways to assess a pro-posed retrofit. Other evaluation methodscan be used, such as infrared thermogra-phy and air leakage testing. Non-destruc-tive testing, such as ground penetratingradar or acoustic applications, can beused to check for mortar joint and/orbrick deterioration (based on continu-ity/discontinuity of materials surveyed)before and after repairs.

Building science in its truest form

In the case of retrofitting existingcladding, combining hygrothermal analy-sis, materials testing and in-situ perform-ance monitoring at a trial repair beforeimplementing a general retrofit could beconsidered a wise investment to assesshow the wall will perform with proposedupgrades. If a retrofit strategy works onone building, the hasty assumption is thatthe same strategy will work at another.However, each building has its own sub-tle idiosyncrasies and exposure/loads thatwill influence how the retrofit will per-form.

As with contemporary structures,rehabilitating heritage buildings requiresa firm grasp of accepted conservationpractices, building science andintended/required performance upgradesto ensure continued longevity and dura-bility. In a disposable society wherebuildings are torn down when economics

dictate, it’s nice to know that software,sensor probes and other technologyimprove ways to assess repair options.Escalating energy costs and increasedvalue placed on “embodied energy” ofexisting structures will ultimately favourkeeping old buildings and making themoperate more efficiently. ■

Kevin Day is a building science special-ist with Halsall. His role is to passionatelyshare knowledge in all aspects of buildingscience. Day would be pleased to discuss

Halsall’s cladding services with you. Hecan be reached at [email protected].

Sarah Gray is a building science andheritage specialist with Halsall. She enjoysworking on both contemporary and olderbuildings.

David De Rose is a building sciencespecialist with Halsall and certified BSSO(Building Science Specialist Ontario). Hemanages both restoration and new con-struction projects, and is also the currentPresident of the Ontario Building EnvelopeCouncil.


Court decision on PEO Application,

overview

On March 20, 2006, the Associationof Professional Engineers of Ontario(PEO) filed a Notice of Applicationwith the Divisional Court seeking toquestion the application of BuildingCode qualification and registrationamendments as they apply to profes-sional engineers. These amendmentsarose from changes to the BuildingCode Act, 1992 set out in Bill 124,which received Royal Assent in 2002.

On October 4, 2006, the DivisionalCourt granted the Ontario Associationof Architects (OAA) permission tointervene as an added party in the PEOJudicial Review Application. The Min-istry of Municipal Affairs and Housingdid not oppose OAA’s request to inter-vene.

On October 26 and 27, 2006, theCourt heard arguments from PEO,OAA and the Province, and reserved itsdecision. Then, on May 17, 2007 theDivisional Court released its decisionon the application.

The government has decided to notappeal the decision of the court.

The Ministry’s official position isthat it, “intends to work with stakehold-ers including engineers, architects andbuilding officials to monitor the impli-cations of the court’s decision on theadministration and enforcement of theBuilding Code Act, 1992 and the Build-ing Code.”

The decision

On May 17, 2007 the DivisionalCourt released its decision in the PEO’sjudicial review application. In that deci-sion the Court made the following decla-rations:

1. Article 2.3.1.1 of the Building Codeis not authorized by s. 34 (1)10 ofthe Building Code Act and is invalidto the extent that it purports toallocate responsibility for designsbetween professional engineers andarchitects.

2. Article 2.3.1.1 (4) of the BuildingCode is not authorized by s. 34 ofthe Building Code Act and is invalid.

3. Clause 1.1 (1)(c), subsection 1.1(2), clause 8 (2)(c), and subsections15.11 (5) to (7) of the BuildingCode Act conflict with the exclusiveregulatory jurisdiction of the Asso-ciation of Professional Engineers ofOntario and do not apply to anyholder of any licence or certificateissued under the Professional Engi-neers Act.

4. Article 2.17 of the Building Codeconflicts with the exclusive regula-tory jurisdiction of the Associationof Professional Engineers ofOntario and does not apply to anyholder of any license or certificateissued under the Professional Engi-neers Act.

The Ontario Association of Architectsintervened as an added party in thePEO’s judicial review application. In

addition to making the above declara-tions, the Court stated that, “the analysisin these reasons for judgment appliesequally to the intervenor architects.”

Examinations, qualification and

registration

As a result of the court’s decision, pro-fessional engineers and engineering firmsare not subject to qualification/ registra-tion under the Building Code Act andBuilding Code. The Divisional Courtdeclared that subsections 15.11(5) to (7)of the Building Code Act, 1992 and formerSection 2.17 (now Section 3.2 of DivisionC of the 2006 Building Code) do not applyto any holder of any licence or certificateissued under the Professional EngineersAct.

The Ontario Association of Architectsintervened as an added party in the PEO’sjudicial review application to the Division-al Court. The Court in its decision of May17, 2007 declared that subsections15.11(5) to (7) of the Building Code Act,1992 and former Section 2.17 (now Sec-tion 3.2 of Division C of the 2006 BuildingCode) do not apply to any holder of anylicense or certificate issued under the Pro-fessional Engineers Act. The Court statedthat the analysis in the reasons for judg-ment, “applies equally to the intervenorarchitects.” ■

This is just a brief overview of the court’sdecision. For more information go towww.obc.mah.gov.on.ca/Page1400.aspx.


Update: Bill 124The Ministry’s position

At one time, the decision tobuild an energy efficienthome or to use “greenbuilding” technologies was

driven by the consumer. They wouldoften drag their chosen designer andcontractor into using products and mate-rials they had no interest in using andquite often, found more costly or diffi-cult to work with.

These roles are now reversing, ascontractors and specifiers are the onesintroducing innovative technologies tothose constructing new buildings. Moreand more, builders and developers arefinding that there are systems out therethat not only are envi-ronmentally friendly,but also are faster toinstall and can cost thesame or less as a build-ing built the traditionalway.

Some of these products have beenaround for many years and would previ-ously have been considered an expensiveupgrade. But with ever increasing coderequirements (including health and safe-ty), experienced builders are able tooffer their customers better-built homesat similar pricing as a traditionally builthome.

Walls built with ICF’s (InsulatedConcrete Forms) have gained much pop-ularity for these reasons. Now ICF’s forfloors, both suspended and slab-on-grade, are being used.

Lightweight, insulated forms for sus-pended concrete floors are being seenmore regularly as ICF companies areexpanding their product lines and areproviding one-stop shopping for bothwall and floor systems. This type of floorhas an advantage over traditional con-crete floor systems for the following rea-sons:

• It provides the thermal breakrequired for proper heating designwhen radiant floor heating is used;

• Its lightweight structure also meansthat the panels can be placed at afraction of the cost of craned in-placesystems;

• In some cases temporary shoring isrequired but can be placed at 6’ o.c.as opposed to the standard practiceof 4’ o.c. when forming conventional-ly; and

• Sturdy concrete floors, with little orno deflection or camber, also providean exceptional sound barrier and aone hour (or more) fire rating.

These floor panels are made fromvarying thicknesses of EPS with lightgauge steel studs moulded into the pan-els. Each two foot wide panel is orderedto size and 2-4 1/2” chases run the lengthof each form making it easy to installservices. The steel studs provide attach-ment strips for the installation of dry-wall. The panel’s cost will vary between$3.75 and $7.00 a square foot, dependingon the span, and installed will costbetween $9.00 and $14.00.

Rick Ksander P.Eng., from Peterbor-ough, automatically specifies this type ofsystem whenever he is asked to design aroom below a garage. “It’s an easychoice,” says Ksander. “There’s no guesswork and the contractors find the instal-lation and reinforcing placement simple.Bar placement is easy to review andthere is little chance of error for the con-tractor.”

The lighter weight of these floor

types also substantially reduces the over-all weight of a building. This also reducesthe size of footings and the foundationrequirements, ultimately saving moneyin other areas.

Frost Protected Shallow Foundations(FPSFs) are also becoming popular.More people are now interested in singlelevel living as empty nesters are nolonger wanting a large storage areabelow ground or require the additionalliving space that costs more to finish, fur-nish and heat. The fact that there is less“good land” to build on and becauseareas with high water tables (or evenland fill sites) are quite often turned into

in-fill subdivisions,FPSFs are becoming asmart choice for theeducated builder.

Scott Perry P.Eng.from Legalett in Corn-wall has seen a marked

increase in the demand for FPSFs overthe last two years. “The supply andinstall cost of this type of system is typi-cally $18.00 per square foot for an aver-age 1,800 square foot bungalow. Thatincludes excavation, materials, labour,concrete finishing and the heating sys-tem. This compares very favourably toother types of foundations and providesmany additional benefits”

Where soil conditions are usuallyrequired to accept 2,000 pounds persquare foot of loading, Perry says that,“advancements in engineering nowallows for little change to the existingsoils and eliminates the need for footingsand frost walls or even the need of athickened slab edge.” This type of designcan even accommodate up to 100,000pound point loads, making it ideal forlarge commercial structures.

Rick Caldwell, who worked on a 17home subdivision at Akwesasne, had this


The Benefits ofInsulated Concrete Forms Insulated Concrete Forms

By Ken Williams, North River Distributing

“We discovered too late that the soil at this site would only

support 300 pounds per square foot, and had it not been for this

type of engineering, these homes would not have been built.”

Benefits

to say: “We discovered too late that thesoil at this site would only support 300pounds per square foot, and had it notbeen for this type of engineering, thesehomes would not have been built. Thedesign of the slab allows for the totalload of the building to be spread evenlyover the full footprint. Six inches of EPSsits under the five inch, reinforced con-crete slab and eight inches of clear stoneprovides a drainage layer and protectsthe foundation from the effects of frost.Plus, even though we had differentworkers on site every day, including stu-dents from the local trade school, itworked out great. There was a veryshort learning curve and the design wasfool proof. Every one of our slabs cameout perfect. Reinforcing consisted oftwo, four foot wide bands of 6 by 6, 6/6WWS around the perimeter and a con-tinuous top layer of the same.”

Combined with in-floor radiant heat-ing FPSF’s are fast and easy, eliminatingthe forming contractor and much of theusual site work. In most cases, the samecrew that will be installing the walls androof is constructing the foundation.

Tom Kerr of Tom Kerr Heating andAir-conditioning builds in the Kincardinarea and uses pre-assembled framedwall sections. He can have trusses up intwo days after a slab is poured. Kerrstarted using FPSFs in the spring of2007 and quickly realised the advan-tages. “Our seven man crew can turn asix-plex around from breaking ground,to handing the keys over to the newhome owner, in eight to ten weeks” saysKerr. “Since we get paid when theymove in, time is everything!” ■


Q Why was paperless drywallcreated?

APaperless drywall was created toaddress the limitations of paperfaced gypsum board. Traditional

paper faced gypsum board is composedof a gypsum core with paper adhesivelybonded to the front and back. Whenpaper faced gypsum board is exposed tomoisture for a prolonged period of time,this adhesive bond will weaken and itwill delaminate (the facer will separatefrom the gypsum core). Since most ofthe strength of paper faced gypsumboard comes from the paper facers, itwill lose its integrity and disintegrate.Paper is a highly processed form of cel-lulose and is an easily digestible foodsource for mould. In the presence ofmould spores, the proper temperaturerange, moisture and a food source suchas cellulose, mould will flourish. Paper-less wallboard is composed of a mois-ture resistant gypsum core with fiber-glass mat facers mechanically bonded tothe front and back. Since the core tofacer bond is mechanical and not anadhesive bond the facers will not delam-inate when exposed to moisture. Theelimination of paper facers means thefood source is eliminated and one of theconditions necessary for mould growthhas been removed.

Q What benefits does it provideto the builders that use it?

APaperless wallboard providesthe builder an alternative to tra-ditional wallboard in areas that

may be exposed to moisture either dur-ing the construction process or in nor-mal use of the building. During the con-struction process, drywall may beexposed to moisture either due to

improper storage before installation, itmay be installed in a wet state due toscheduling pressures, or it can beexposed to moisture after installation inareas that have not been “dried in”.Removal of moisture damaged drywallis a costly and time consuming endeav-our that builders would prefer to avoid.Paperless wallboard carries a three-month exposure warranty which givesthe builder confidence that this productwill not warp or delaminate whenexposed to the elements, and due to thelack of an adequate food source, willnot support mould growth. It can alsobe used to replace drywall in areas thatcan be expected to receive moistureexposure or elevated humidity in thenormal operation of a building.

Q Are there any installation orusage differences between itand conventional drywall?

APaperless drywall is installed ina similar manner to traditionalpaper-faced drywall. It can be

cut easily using a regular drywall knifeby scoring the facer, folding the panelback at the cut, and cutting the backmat. Nails and screws should be drivenwith the heads slightly below the surfaceof the panel. To further reduce thepotential for mould growth and main-tain a completely paperless wall surface,fiberglass tape should be used to finishthe joints.

Q Why is the use of paperlessdrywall beneficial to con-sumers?

AWhen tested, as manufacturedin accordance with ASTM D3273, paperless wallboard pan-

els scored a 10, the highest level of per-formance for mould resistance underthis test method. The score of 10 indi-

cates no mould growth in a 4-week con-trolled laboratory test. The quality ofindoor air is greatly improved if build-ing materials are used that do not sup-port mould growth throughout their lifespan.

Q Is there a big cost differencebetween paperless drywalland conventional drywall?

APaperless drywall is approxi-mately 40 per cent more expen-sive than traditional paper

faced drywall. It is comparable in priceto Moisture Resistant Drywall or“greenboard”, as it is more commonlyknown.

Q Why should builders choose aproduct like this, versus tra-ditional drywall?

ABuilders should choose a product like this for several reasons:

• Due to its exposure warranty it canbe installed before a building is“dried in” which at a minimum mayallows a project to continue onschedule or may in fact help toaccelerate the construction sched-ule.

• The mechanical (not adhesive) bondbetween the facer and core in con-junction with the moisture resistantcore virtually eliminates the costlyremoval of moisture damaged dry-wall during the construction process.

• The use of paperless drywall canplay an integral part of a buildersrisk management plan by reducingthe possibility of mould related liti-gation.

• The builder can deliver a finishedproduct to his client with durablewallboard that will help maintaingood indoor air quality.


Tools of the Trade:

Chris Davidson, Architectural Manager for the Eastern Canadian division of Georgia PacificGypsum, answers Pushing the Envelope’s questions on paperless drywall.

Paperless DrywallPaperless Drywall

The first meeting of what was to become OBEC tookplace early in 1987. The “moving spirit” behind itwas Michel Perreault, then with Morrison Hersh-field, who was inspired by the recently formed

ABEC in Alberta.I was very keen on the idea. At the time I received Michel’s invitation, I was teaching

structures, building construction and some basic building sci-ence in the School of Architecture at the University of Toron-to. I felt it could be an important resource both for my teach-ing and my emerging architectural practice.

I still have the Minutes of the General Meeting of October13, 1987. At that meeting, the newly formed Board of Direc-tors elected me President for 1987/88, a great honour consid-ering my relatively short experience in the construction indus-try in Canada.

The OBEC logo that I designed at that time is still beingused. It was done on my Macintosh computer (the first modelhad a nine inch screen and and no hard drive, and the operat-ing system came on a 400k floppy which also includedMacWrite and MacDraw!). For the record, the logo consist ofthe word OBEC in the “Bookman” font squeezed horizontal-ly to fit into a square box.

No major issues were addressed during my time as Presi-dent. The most important item on the agenda during thoseearly days was to get ourselves known in the industry, showthe relevance of the organization, and to attract membership.The first step towards that goal was the “Open Forum onRoofing and Waterproofing”, held on January 12, 1988. It wasvery well attended and provided the funds we needed to keepOBEC going until the membership fees started rolling in.

What I enjoy most about OBEC is the people I meet:down to earth, knowledgeable people, who are also good

friends. Just as important, are the young people who are thefuture leaders of the construction industry.

Looking towards the future

I believe OBEC is doing very well. However, I have threesuggestions. First, forge links with the College of Construc-tion Lawyers. Lawyers are now an integral part of construc-tion, whether we like it or not, and we could learn a lot fromthem about the pitfalls waiting just around the next corner.They could also learn from us about the realities of construc-tion.

Second, I think we should organize a major seminar forhomeowners, home buyers and home builders. My litigationexperience has convinced me that there are far too manyavoidable disputes in the industry, due to a large extent toignorance and unreasonable expectations.

I have on my shelf at work three awards from OBEC: arectangular tower reminding me of my term as President, aninukshuk which I recently got as one of the original membersof OBEC, and a red pyramid informally called “Beckie” butofficially known as the President’s Award.

Beckie is full of symbolic features which its initiator, TonyWoods, explains in great detail at the award meeting everyyear. Over the years, the recipients of Beckie have been themost prominent building scientists and researchers inOntario—I’m still uncertain how I got mixed up in this worthygroup.

My conviction, however, is that OBEC must recognizewith this reward in equal measure the contribution of thatother group of knowledgeable and diligent members whosepresence makes OBEC so much broader and more valuablein many respects than other associations: the people whobuild things, and those who provide us with materials to buildwith. ■

Sandori is a principal with Revay and Associates Limited.The firm started in 1970 as claims consultants. Currently, muchof its work is in project management (for the last ten years Revaywas part of the team that built the new Terminal 1 at the PearsonAirport). Sandori is very active as an expert witness in litigation,and as mediator or arbitrator.

Paul Sandori started his professional life as a structural engi-neer, and even wrote a book on structural mechanics that waspublished in the US in 1982, followed by a French edition soonafter. Early on, he decided that architects had more fun, passedthe RIBA examinations in England and became an architect. In1974, he came to Canada, passed the professional examinationsonce again, and became a member of the OAA in 1977. In 1993,he was elected Fellow of the Royal Architectural Institute ofCanada.


By Paul Sandori OAA FRAIC, Revay and Associates LimitedPresidential Profile


The Capital Region

Living Building Conference a success

Sudbury—In September 2007 CambrianCollege hosted the Living Building Confer-ence and Trade Show. This one-day confer-ence explored the history of energy-efficientbuilding design and construction in NorthernOntario, and looked at the future of greenbuilding and its role in ensuring a sustainablefuture.

Speakers featured at the conference includ-ed the CEO of the Cascadia Green BuildingCouncil, Jason F. McLennan, and Ontario’s ChiefEnergy Conservation Officer, Peter Love.

“This conference dealt with the emergence of a powerfulidea based on a simple metaphor—that of the living build-ing,” said John Hood, Cambrian’s Sustainable Energy CentreProject Manager. “It looked at the future of the buildingindustry and focused on how buildings should be built inorder to ensure a sustainable future.”

“With so much attention given to transportation andindustry, many people are surprised to learn that buildingsare the single largest contributor to global warming,” Hoodcontinued. “In North America, buildings, as a group, con-sume approximately 48 percent of the energy produced.”

North byNorthw

est

Inauguration of Collège Boréal’s Trades and

Apprenticeship Information Centre

Kapuskasing—Collège Boréal officially opened aTrades and Apprenticeship Information Centre(CIMA) in Kapuskasing, in spring 2007. Partlyfunded by Job Connect, this initiative is intended toraise awareness among young people and the gener-al public about employment opportunities in thetrades and apprenticeship field.

In a context of a skilled labour shortage, CIMAintends to provide the population with frequentlyupdated resources on employment opportunities inthis sector. Among other services are job profilesand qualification requirements. As a school-to-worktransition tool, CIMA’s goal is to provide specificsolutions that facilitate adaptation and integrationto the Northern Ontario employment market.

Louise Gingras, Director of Collège Boréal inKapuskasing, stresses how relevant such a centre isfor the region: “It is now possible for residents ofKapuskasing and its surrounding areas to remaininformed about the numerous opportunities offeredby the trades and apprenticeship sector.”

Plan ahead

National—May 2009 iscloser than you think.That’s why it’s time to startplanning to attend the 12thCanadian Conference onBuilding Science and Tech-nology, co-hosted by theNational Building Enve-lope Council of Canadaand the Quebec BuildingEnvelope Council.

The conference themeis “Integrating Sustainabil-ity” and submissions forabstracts are due in May2008. If you want moreinformation, check outwww.cebq.org.

Apprenticeship Training Tax Credit

Ottawa—Changes to the Apprenticeship Training Tax Credit in the 2007Ontario Budget have made six new trades eligible for the Apprenticeship Train-ing Tax Credit. They are: 269E - Entertainment Industry Power Technician, 455A- Exterior Insulated Finishing Systems Mechanic, 634E - Information TechnologyContact Centre - Customer Care Agent, 634D - Information Technology ContactCentre - Inside Sales Agent, 246R Process Operator Power and 638A - TractorTrailer Commercial Driver. The credit has now been extended to eligibleapprentices who are registered before January 1, 2012. Employers will still beable to apply for this credit for a 36 month period; however the deadline will beJanuary 1, 2015.

Ottawa BEC hosts seminar

In September 2007 BECOR hosted a seminar called: Venting Effectively, ItNot Just About Getting Rid of Hot Air. The seminar was described as: Canadianwinters produce favourable conditions for the building up of moisture, conden-sation and potential rot in organic building materials in attics and roof assem-blies. These enclosure assemblies need to deal with resultant air leaks from ceil-ing and wall assemblies in addition to ensuring suitable roof conditions tomitigate ice damming. Although out of sight, they should not be placed out ofmind. This presentation discussed problems and solutions to effective ventila-tion of attic assemblies.

Files from this presentation are available for download at: www.becor.orgBECOR events are free to attend! Make sure to take advantage of these

informative sessions!


Toro

nto

and

Area

Class is in session

Classes at the University of Toronto for the Building ScienceCertificate Program are now in session.

This is the perfect way to, “build your foundation to success.”Learn the fundamentals of building science and their practicalapplication to building systems and components. The program pro-vides the key competencies required to effectively design, repairand maintain buildings. Building science education is traditionallytaught to a limited extent in schools of engineering and architec-ture. There often remains an education gap for those who practice

in the construction industry, where the building is thought of as asystem. If the interaction of the many different elements and compo-

nents of a building and the environments to which they are exposed are not consid-ered as a whole, building failures can and do result. The need for specialized build-ing science education is clear. If you or your firm provide building design or designreview services, investigate building failures and recommend remedial repairs,develop long-term capital cost plans for building portfolios, or construct buildingsof any kind, the Building Science Certificate Program will provide the educationalbackground that is needed to meet the growing demands of this industry.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

Upon successful completion of the course,participants will be able to:• Understand the characteristics of outdoor

and indoor environments and their relation-ship to building materials;

• Understand methods of managing air andmoisture penetration and movement within abuilding;

• Understand factors that impact on the per-formance of building components and sys-tems;

• Create accurate specifications for compo-nents and systems based on a sound knowl-edge of performance requirements, codesand standards; and

• Understand the key elements of typical con-tract documents used in construction proj-ects.Members of OBEC receive a discount of 15

per cent off the regular fee for each module ofthe University of Toronto Building Science Cer-tificate Program. Fax your registration form tothe Professional Development Centre at (416)971-2141, or toll-free to (888-863-8233, alongwith proof of membership.

For more details on the program, check outwww.pdc.utoronto.ca.

WHO SHOULD ATTEND

• Architects Building and home inspectors; • Construction managers; • Consultants; • Contractors; • Engineers; • Facility managers; • Site supervisors; • Architectural and construction technologists; • Risk managers; and • Technical sales professionals.


Central OntarioThe Southern Tip

CMHC releases comprehensive report on housing in

Canada

Canada—Building greener homes in higher-density neighbourhoods near public transit, rather than in sprawlingsuburbs, is key to reducing the housing sector’s impact on theenvironment and lowering greenhouse gas emissions, accordingto the 2007 Canadian Housing Observer released in October byCanada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC).

The 2007 Canadian Housing Observer analyzes the relation-ship between environment-friendly housing construction, neigh-bourhood design and transportation. It found that downtown liv-ing, which provides easy access to workplaces, schools, and shops,as well as housing located close to public transit, lead to reducedautomobile use. Also, better design of the suburbs results in lessshort-distance driving and lower greenhouse gas emissions.

Key findings of this year’s Canadian Housing Observerinclude:• Housing-related spending grew by 6.1 per cent in 2006,

contributing more than $275 billion tothe Canadian economy;

• Total mortgage credit outstanding in2006 reached an annual average of $694billion, up 10.7 per cent from 2005. This ismainly due to increased property values,which in turn increased the average mort-gage amount approved;

• Environment-friendly, energy-efficienthousing is expected to become more theCanadian norm in the future thanks to ini-tiatives such as CMHC’s EQuilibrium sustain-able housing initiative; and

• All of the fastest-growing metropolitan areas in recentyears were in Alberta, Ontario and British Columbia, withthe exceptions of Moncton, New Brunswick and Sher-brooke, Québec. You can view the findings at www.cmhc.ca.

Got news? Let us know!

Do you have something going on inOntario that’s related to the construc-tion industry? If yes, Pushing the Enve-lope is looking for short news blurbs for each of the areas focused on the

magazine: northern Ontario, the capi-tal region, Toronto and area, centralOntario and the southern tip.

Pushing the Envelope is publishedevery spring and fall so make sure tohave your news in by March and

September of each year. All entriesare subject to review and approvalby the Ontario Building EnvelopeCouncil.

Send your submissions to [email protected]

Windsor building permits running 1/2 of

last year

Windsor—According to a September2007 article in the Windsor Star newspaper,Windsor’s building department has issuedalmost 50 per cent fewer building permitsthan last year.

So far this year, $131,658,005 permitshave been issued, while last year during thesame time $251,818,825 were issued. Resi-dential permits have fallen from $89.5 mil-lion to $45 million, industrials have droppedfrom $55.7 million to just $3.9 million andgovernment and institutional have fallenfrom $86 million to $56.2 million. Only com-mercial increased, showing a jump from$20.5 million to $26.5 million.

Among the major projects to come online in August were construction of a HomeDepot on Division Road for $6.05 million,construction of a Future Shop at 4115 Walk-er for $1.69 million, exterior renovations atthe Roundhouse Centre on Howard Avenuefor $1.6 million, construction of four newclassrooms at Monseigneur Jean Noel schoolon California Avenue for $1.2 million, con-struction of three retail business at 4115Walker Rd. for $800,000.

2008 WSIB construction rates finalized

The WSIB has released the final version of the 2008 assessment rates, andthere have been no changes from the draft rates released in June 2007. Howev-er, the annual maximum earnings ceiling has been revised and is finalized at$73,300.

Please see the chart below for a sample of the 2008 WSIB Premium Rates.The average construction rate decreased approximately one per cent due to theindustry’s reduction of Lost Time Injuries (LTI’s). Although the LTI frequencyis declining, the average cost per claim is increasing at a similar rate; thereforeplacing significant financial pressures on the WSIB system. If such financialpressures do not subside over the next year premium rates may be adjustedaccordingly for 2009.

Rate Description 2008 2007 Per centGroup Premium Premium Change

Rate ($) Rate ($) 704 Electrical and incidental

construction services 3.29 3.25 1.2% 707 Mechanical and sheet metal work 4.02 4.02 0.0% 719 Inside finishing 6.75 6.75 0.0% 723 Industrial, commercial &

institutional construction 4.35 4.58 -5.0% 728 Roofing 12.98 12.98 0.0% 748 Form work and demolition 16.02 16.02 0.0% 751 Siding and outside finishing 8.90 8.90 0.0% 764 Homebuilding 8.80 9.22 -4.6%

By definition, a standard is thecondition which exists when thejob is done well.

In practice, high-rise residentialbuildings have a very low standard whenit comes to the condition of their build-ing envelopes, the consumption of ener-gy to both heat and cool these struc-tures, and the comfort and health oftheir occupants.

In particular, I would like to take alook at the run of the mill TorontoHousing Corporation (TCHC) build-ing—you know the type, fifteen to twen-ty stories high, exposed concrete slabedge, rusting balcony panels, slidersover fixed windows, no parapets,exposed reinforcing bar in the balconyslab edges, wood exterior doors. Getthe picture?

If the success of a society can bejudged by the conditions in which its

weakest members live, I submit that oursociety is missing the boat…and notbecause of financial reasons.

As one of the largest landlords in thecountry, TCHC sets the standard forthe condition of its buildings. Regard-less of whether downloading or upload-ing or loading of any type results in thefact that the city of Toronto is the land-lord or the province of Ontario, thebuildings are right where they havealways been and they are not gettingany better. Housing strategies aside,once a building is constructed, it isthere and must be operated or torndown.

With little or no insulation in theexterior walls, windows that have notfunctioned properly since they wereinstalled, drywall and plaster that iscontaminated with mould, exposed con-crete that conducts the heat and thecold directly into each unit and centralboilers that were chic during WWII, is it

just me or can’t an awful lot of work bedone that not only improves the per-formance and livability of the units, butalso looks forward to future energycosts and asset values?

I bet there can!As I sit down to write this piece, the

Writ has just been dropped for a provin-cial election to be held on October 10,2007. The big issue: Who do you thinkyou can trust? So, no change there.

In the city of Toronto, Mayor DavidMiller is trying to figure out how tofund a half-billion dollar budget deficit,by either cutting services or raisingtaxes…neither of which will work.

So, how about this—of the hundredsof address in the TCHC portfolio, letspick just one (just one!) address and seeif everything that we have ever learnedabout building science really works ornot!

You see, this is the thing with


Back to You!Setting the StandardBy Brian Shedden, BSSO, J. McBride & Sons

Upcoming Events

The Importance of BSSO

For those who have earned it, the letters BSSO behindtheir names signifies an ongoing commitment to and expertisein the field of building science. BSSO (Building Science Spe-cialist of Ontario), which is fully supported by the OntarioBuilding Envelope Council, recognizes those who meet thestrict educational and practical requirements set forth by theBSSO Advisory Board. It has, since its beginning, quicklybecome the benchmark qualification of building science prac-titioners.

In order to receive the BSSO designation, professionalshave to apply to the Advisory Board. Subjects must be a

member in good standing, must adhere to the Code of Ethicsand Standards of Conduct for Building Science Specialists ofOntario, must maintain an up-to-date membership in OBEC,must pay annual BSSO administration dues, and must provideproof of required continued education within every two-yearperiod of accreditation.

According to Brian Shedden, Past President of OBEC,“the BSSO designation represents the first initiative in Cana-da to identify and sustain a commitment to the specializedfield of building science. Whether in new construction orrestoration, the specialized education, experience and com-mitment to ongoing education in the field of building scienceare the hallmarks of a BSSO.”

He continues, “in consulting, the BSSO represents a com-mitment to the design of an envelope system that integratesall facets and impact on the building envelope, from the out-door environment to its relationship with the building’s occu-pants, right through to the mechanical systems that sustainthe indoor environment. In contracting, the BSSO representsa commitment to executing the design in a manner that willtruly impact total building performance and occupant use.”

next page >>

OBEC will be hosting a joint conference withCSC/AATO, scheduled for April. Check outwww.obec.on.ca for more details as theybecome available!


ACROSS2. An Inuit word meaning “Stone man

that points the way”4. To fill a joint or crack A thick sealer

used to fill joints and cracks5. A moisture and/ or air induced bub-

ble or bulge that usually indicatesthe presence of delamination

7. Drywall that has no risk of mould9. This year’s Beckie Award winner11. Start-up of a building that includes

testing and adjusting HVAC, electri-cal, plumbing, and other systems toassure proper functioning andadherence to design criteria

12. Vertical framing members13. OBEC President elected in 87/88.

Paul_____14. A membrane installed beneath sid-

ing to prevent the penetration ofweather driven water into a struc-ture

DOWN1. “Build tight; ______ right”3. Controls that vary airflow through

an air outlet, inlet, or duct6. Applied science that investigates

the impact of people’s physicalenvironment on their health andcomfort (e.g., determining theproper chair height for computeroperators)

8. To install or fit (a device or system,for example) for use in or on Toinstall or fit (a device or system, forexample) for use in an existingstructure, especially an olderdwelling

10. A semi-impervious membraneinstalled over the exterior sheeting

13. The exposed underside of any ele-ment of a structure

OBEC Crossword

Puzzle

science…it can be measured andrepeated and if it works, we don’t needa politician to ring the bell we just needa civil servant who wants to serve thepublic by actually getting somethingpositive done!

Let’s do this: pick just one buildingand conduct the following 10 pointplan:• Building envelope condition survey;• Energy audit;

• Residential “livability” audit (yup…that’s a new one!);

• Design a restoration action plan;• Calculate the energy savings;• Quantify the new “livability index”;• Price it all out;• Contract for the work to be done;• Study the results for three years; and• Get the whole inventory rolling!

OBEC and its members are specifi-cally dedicated to addressing these

issues. I think it is high time that boththe province and the city not only takeup this 10 point challenge, but actuallyjoin the OBEC membership. Whoknows, maybe a little good can come ofit!

Brian Shedden, BSSO is V.P. of ClientServices for J. McBride & Sons Ltd. He isalso a Past President of the OntarioBuilding Envelope Council.


Don Fugler accepts the Beckie Awardfrom OBEC President, David De Rose.

Beckie Award Honours Building

Science Researcher

The Ontario Building EnvelopeCouncil awarded this year’s President’sAward—affectionately known as the“Beckie”—to Don Fugler, a SeniorResearcher in Policy and Research withthe Canada Mortgage and HousingCorporation (CMHC), in October 2007.The award recognizes building envelopeexcellence in research, design, construc-tion and rehabilitation.

Fugler, who has been with CMHC

since 1985, is an expert in many fieldsincluding a wide array of low-rise resi-dential construction issues, straw balehouses, contaminated lands, basementflooding, indoor air quality, moistureproblems and energy use. Some of hismost prominent work involves icedamming, which occurs when heat leaksinto the attic of improperly insulatedhomes. This causes snow on the roof tomelt and leak into the attic. Fugler’sresearch on this issue has led to the pub-lishing of leaflets for consumers, so they

can check their homes and know how toprevent leaking in the future.

“I like to make a contribution withthe research I do,” says Fugler. “And astechnologies keep changing, improvingand evolving, so too does our work.”

Right now Fugler has been doingquite a bit of work on Net Zero, EQui-librium and achieving energy efficiency.He says that while the media attentionon this subject has grown, consumersaren’t quite there yet. “We have to fig-ure out cost-effective ways to achieveenergy efficiency on both new buildingsand those being retro-fitted. That’s theonly way that the public will jump onboard.”

Fugler intends to keep working onthis, as well as other issues he findsinteresting. “I don’t plan on retiring justyet,” he says. “I have lots more to do!” ■

Please support the

advertisers who help

make this

publication possible.

Ontario Building Envelope Council✃

✃

Name:

Title:

Company (School if student):

Address:

City: Province: Postal Code:

Telephone: ( ) Ext. Fax: ( )

E-mail Address:

Mr. Miss Mrs.Ms. Dr. Prof.

Membership Application Form

A B C D

Membership Type Annual Fee After January 1 Fee Owing

Individual $165.00 $82.50

Corporate $660.00 $330.00

Student $25.00/school year

Cardholder's Name: ______________________________________________________________________________

Card Number: __________________________________________________________________________________

Expiry Date:______________________ Signature:____________________________________________________

Payment Method: Cheque Visa Mastercard Amex

6% GSTGST No. 124383076

TOTAL

Please mail your membership application formwith cheque to: OBEC, 685 McCowan Road, P.O.

Box #66541, Scarborough, ON M1J 3N8

Payment by credit card may be faxed to: 416-438-1718 or 1-877-230-4256

Please complete for payment by credit card:

Questions? Please contact OBEC Administrator, Jennifer McDonald at 416-438-2588 or 1-877-235-6232.

Buyer’s GuideACOUSTIC INSULATION PRODUCTSBuilding Products of Canada Corp. . . . . . . . . . .inside back cover

AIR, HEAT & MOISTURE CONTROLDRYVIT Systems Canada . . . .inside front cover

BUILDING ENVELOPE CONSULTANTSJohn Bate & Associates Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . .20

BUILDING RESTORATIONColonial Building Restoration . . . . . . . . . . .18J. McBride & Sons Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16Wall-Tech Restoration Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . .20

BUILDING SCIENCE & RESTORATIONCONSULTANTSRead Jones Christoffersen Ltd. . . . . . . . . .16Halsall Associates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGPROTECTIONSoprema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

COMMERCIAL SEALANTS &WATERPROOFINGTremco Incorporated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32

CONCRETE PRODUCTSFisher Wavy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28

CONCRETE RESTORATION CONTRACTORSRestorex Contracting Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

CONSULTING ENGINEERING FIRMSPG Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

CONSULTING ENGINEERSKleinfeldt Consultants Limited . . . . . . . . . .34Morrison Hershfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34

DRYWALLMagnesiacore Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

EIFS & RESTORATION PRODUCTSDurabond Products

Limited . . . . . . . . . . . . .outside back cover

ENGINEERSBelanger Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

ENGINEERING & PROJECT MANAGEMENTSERVICESHalsall Associates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

FIRST PROTECTED SHALLOW FOUNDATIONSLegalett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

GREEN ARCHITECTUREAlgonquin College . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

HYDRAULIC MAST - CLIMBING WORKPLATFORMSKlimer Manufacturing Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

INFRARED ELECTRICAL MECHANICALSCANNING OF ROOF AND BUILDINGENVELOPESIRIS Infrared Imaging Solutions . . . . . . . . .28

INTERIOR / EXTERIOR MOULDINGSCanamould . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

MASONRYMortar Net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

METAL WALL SYSTEMS & ROOFINGFLYNN Canada Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

PANELIZED LIGHT STEEL FRAMINGKML Building Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

RESTORATION CONTRACTORUnique Restoration Ltd. . . . . . . . . . .11,13,15

RESTORATION SERVICESALTO Restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

ROOF CONSULTING & BUILDING ENVELOPETECHNOLOGYPremier / Levaque . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

ROOFING SYSTEMS & ACCESSORIESIKO Industries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

ROOFING SYSTEMS INFORMATIONSERVICESTremco Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

STONEArriscraft International . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

TAPERED ROOFING INSULATIONEverest Supply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

URETHANE FOAM CONTRACTORCanadian Urethane Foam ContractorsAssociation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

VAPOUR BARRIEREI DuPont Canada Corporation . . . . . . . . . . .4


building envelopes meet thegreen scene...joe strazzullo [email protected]...

Documents