The architectural, engineering and construction
industry is buzzing with discussions about various
trends these days. Look at a trade magazine, or browse through a brochure for a seminar, and you’ll see jargon and acronyms like BIM , lean, high-performance, LEED , and of course, integrated design. When I talk to practitioners in our industry, I often hear them say they have always practiced integrated design, even before it was the “in thing” to do. However, many of these professionals are practicing a form of integrated design based on
their own definitions and sets of rules.
Unlike BIM, or Building Information Modeling, which has very specific parameters and uses, many of the tools of our trade are open to interpretation. Terms and concepts such as sustainability, design-build, high performance and integrated design may have different definitions depending on the user. There are often similar actions that take place during many of these processes, but when it comes to integrated design, it is often very difficult to assemble a team of like-minded individuals who are able to remain primarily focused on the bigger picture-the delivery of a sustainable, high-performance project that fully meets the owner’s intent-rather than on the few individual factors that affect their scope of work.
The Precursor to Integrated Delivery
It is easy to look at buildings as collections of materials and equipment that have been assembled to create shade and shelter for those who use them. The amount of thought and analysis that goes into creating a building is often easily overlooked. Even a simple building is much more than a collection of materials. Buildings are amazingly complex-so complex that any person who makes a decision to construct a facility deserves to have a team that practices not only integrated design, but also integrated delivery. However, before jumping ahead to integrated delivery, it is important that owners and project teams understand the importance of integrated design and the factors that often make it so difficult in practice.
Defining Integrated Design
A simple definition of integrated design is a design that takes into account all aspects of a building. Some practitioners take the ecosystem, heritage, future proofing, and cultural and socioeconomic impacts into account in their definition. Others limit the scope of integration to the disciplines needed to design a building, ignoring many of the external influences that may affect a building or its occupants. For the purposes of this piece, I will limit the definition of integrated design to the materials and equipment needed to create the building, and narrow the scope even further by examining only one system within the building: the heating, ventilation and air conditioning (mechanical) system.
The selection of a mechanical system is dependent on many variables. In a non-integrated design process, a designer may look at code compliance, first cost, size, noise, maintenance, warranty, service providers, owner preference, load conditions, experience with the vendor and controllability. Once the system is sized for the anticipated load, the designer sets out the duct routing from the location of the central unit(s). These activities are typically done without much consideration to other design disciplines, and the other disciplines may not take into consideration the needs of the mechanical designer. For example, a designer may locate a mechanical room on a floor plan in an area that is not large enough to house the equipment, let alone provide adequate access to that equipment for maintenance.
There could be many reasons for this disconnect between the team members, but the likely culprits are time and space. Both are rare commodities in today’s design timelines and building layouts. Design teams are asked to design their portion of projects in shorter and shorter times. Owners want efficiency in their buildings, and they do not want to spend money on non-leasable or non-usable space. These factors often result in well-qualified designers working in a silo to get their portion of the project complete. They are cognizant of the other members of the team, but when dealing with these constraints, they are forced to respond the best way they can. Many professionals contend that some of these problems can be alleviated when a project uses BIM software. This may be true, but projects can fall into these same traps even when using the latest software. BIM is only a tool, and tools are only as good as the skilled people who use them.
When designers work on integrated teams striving for energy-efficient, whole building systems, they must also consider other aspects often disregarded in traditional design: local microclimate, solar orientation, building envelope, window-to-wall ratio, glass type, lighting, plug loads, aesthetics, floor layout and personnel adjacencies. Mechanical designers following an integrated process must consider all of these variables, as well as understand how their choices will affect all of the other design elements. For variables such as the following, an integrated design process requiring each discipline to discuss the issues with the entire team, design with consideration to all other disciplines in the project and act in a manner that ultimately supports the final product:
- Placement of intake louvers on the exterior of the building
- Screening of roof-mounted equipment
- Comfort level of building occupants
- Interior space allocation for mechanical equipment
- Equipment noise and vibration potentially disturbing building occupants
- Ability of facility operators to access the equipment for maintenance
True Teamwork
Designers who are mired in tradition may be threatened by an integrated approach. Integrated design forces people to check their egos at the door and truly work as a team. It may take more effort when working collectively together instead of as individuals, but this process fosters innovation through team synergy. Teamwork does not end with the design completion and construction commencement, nor does it end through contract administration. Project success using an integrated design is not the mere completion of the design activities-success is marked by the creation of a building that deeply satisfies the owner. Anyone willing to pay a team to create a building deserves this level of deliberation and attention. Look at it this way-if you were paying for a building, wouldn’t you want a team that is carefully thinking through every aspect of the building, understanding how all those individual elements come together to create a higher value than just the material cost used to build it? How satisfied would you be if you reached the end of your project and were handed the keys to something that met some of your needs but not all of them? Now think about how it would feel to walk into your new building to find that it not only met all of your needs but also met or even surpassed every one of your expectations.
Telling someone you practice integrated design and actually practicing integrated design can be two completely different things. There are definitely those in the AEC community that have the integrated approach down to an art form and others who struggle. In the end, it is like any of the other new things that come about in our industry. It is a tool, and in the hands of a skilled professional, it can be used to create just about anything.
Thomas Taylor, a 29-year veteran of the construction industry and noted expert on sustainability, is the general manager of St. Louis-based Vertegy. His recent book, “Guide to LEED 2009: Estimating and Preconstruction Strategies,” provides step-by-step information about the LEED 2009 for New Construction process. To learn more about Vertegy or Taylor’s new book, visit www.vertegyconsultants.com for more information.
