Jurnal 3

Architecture Construction and Industrialization, Coursework 1
A sustainable approach to materials and construction systems: Engineered Timber
Andrea Botti MSc Advanced Sustainable Design, year 2011/2012 Edinburgh School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture University of Edinburgh
[1]
Table of contents
Table of contents ........................................................................................................................ 1 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Timber: traditionally sustainable .......................................................................................... 2 Ecological impact of timber and other construction methods ............................................... 3 From tradition to innovation: engineered timber................................................................... 5 Ecological impact of engineered timber products and wood-based panels ........................ 17 Contemporary use of timber .............................................................................................. 22 Case studies ..................................................................................................................... 25 References ........................................................................................................................ 27
University of Edinburgh
MSc Advanced Sustainable Design, year 11/12
[2]
1. Timber: traditionally sustainable

The Italian architect Matteo Thun claims that wood is the material of the 21st century, and, as the sole regenerable material used in architecture and design, one could hardly imagine being without it (Thun, 2010, p.554). It seems hard to disagree with him, since it is acknowledged that wood is the oldest and the most widely used building material. It can be found almost everywhere in the world, and its characteristics make it suitable to be used in a broad range of applications. Around a third of Europes total land area is covered in forests; the figure is around 16% in Scotland, with predominance of species such as Sitka Spruce and Scots Pine (Wilson, 2001). Softwoods
Sitka Spruce Pines (mainly Scots Pine, but also Lodgepole and Corsican) Larches (mainly European and Japanese) Douglas Fir Norway Spruce
Hardwoods
Oaks (pedunculate and sessile) Beech Sycamore Ash Elm Birch
Table 1. Most common commercial tree species in Scotland (adapted from Wilson, 2001).
One of the greatest aspects of timber is that it is a renewable resource: if the wood resource comes from sustainably managed forests, it will be available indefinitely. Thanks to sustainable forestry practices, Scotland, for instance, is growing more timber than it harvests (Wilson 2001). As we engage with a sustainable agenda, it seems appropriate to carefully evaluate a construction material whose environmental benefits are matched by few others. The Edinburgh Centre for Carbon Management estimates that for every cubic metre of timber used instead of other building materials, between 0.7 and 1.1 tonnes of carbon dioxide is saved (TRADA Technology, 2008, p.9). The aim of this report is to provide a review on the whole range of derivative timber products, to which we can inclusively refer to as engineered timber, with regards to their sustainability potential. With this scope, a comparison of the ecological impact of timber structures with other construction methods namely steel and concrete is reported in first instance. After an overview of the engineered timber products and their general characteristics, the report focuses on how those products behave environmentally, according to their degree of technology and processing from the original material - wood. An overview of the products assessment and application in sustainable construction is presented. In the last section, some observations on the role of timber in contemporary architecture, more specifically on how engineered timber applies to modern methods of construction and reusable/adaptable structures, are followed by two case studies that are representative of the novelty of application.
[3]
2. Ecological impact of timber and other construction methods

Comparative analysis is probably the most effective means to assess the ecological footprint of different construction methods. The short summary here presented includes seven different Life-Cycle Assessment studies on residential buildings, that compared timber frame with alternatively steel and concrete structures in terms of energy use and green-house gas emissions (the latter expressed as Global Warming Potential, or GWP) (Eriksson, 2004).
Cradle to gate
Recyclable energy
Total energy use excluding usage phase
GWP (CO2 equivalent)
1 Environmental Assessment of Trhus 2001, Trtek Trhus 2001 Concrete design Wood design Steel design Concrete design Wood design Steel design Wood design Steel design 960 2260 1140 1740 2520 969 1604 580 810 n/a n/a n/a n/a 1460 490 -530 1770 30 400 280 340 420 207 309 100 170
2 Residential Case Study, Athena Sustainable Material Institute
3 Environmental Impact of a Single Family Building Shell, Minneapolis
4 Environmental Impact of a Single Family Building Shell, Atlanta
5 Environmental and Energy Balances of Wood Products and Substitutes, ECEFAO Wood design Brick design 910 1090 n/a n/a 660 840
6 Energy Use and Environmental Impact of New Residential Buildings, Lund Institute of Technology Wood design Concrete design 4540 3020 2160 1120 2380 1900
7 LCA of Building Frame Structures Environmental Impact over the Life Cycle of Wooden and Concrete Frames, Chalmers Univ. of Technology Wood design Concrete design 1310 1430 n/a n/a 40 110
Table 2. Results summary for LCA studies (data retrieved from Eriksson, 2004).
[4]
The results of comparative analysis are clear: timber frame structures perform significantly better, with respect to energy use and GWP. In order to reasonably quantify the differences between the cases, the boundaries for the LCA cases were divided into four categories, as indicated below.
- Excluding energy recycling - Including wood feedstock energy
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Case 7a Case 6a
- Including energy recycling - Including wood feedstock energy
- Excluding energy recycling - Excluding wood feedstock energy

Case 1a Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Case 5a Case 6b Case 7b
- Including energy recycling - Excluding wood feedstock energy

Case 1b
Case 5b Case 6c
Energy difference (MJ/m2)

Steel - Wood 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 1a 1b 2 3 4 5 6a 6b 6c 7a 7b Concrete - Wood
Figure 1 Energy usage differences between timber, steel and concrete structures (adapted from Eriksson, 2004).
GWP difference (Kg/m2) - CO2 equivalent

Steel - Wood 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 1a 1b 2 3 4 5a 5b 6 7 Concrete - Wood
Figure 2 GWP differences between timber, steel and concrete structures (adapted from Eriksson, 2004).
[5]
3. From tradition to innovation: engineered timber

The development of engineered timber has been historically related to economic advantages. Investigation and research on ways and means of using the wood more efficiently has generally been considered to be driven by the increasing cost of sawn timber and green logs. Despite constantly increasing their efficiency, sawmills still produce considerable amounts of residues - from 35% of each log - in forms of low grade logs or thinnings, chips, slabs and sawdust (see table 3); those can be used to manufacture many kinds of wood-based panels. Tree part or product Left in the forest: Top, branches and foliage Stump (excluding roots) Sawdust Sawmilling: Slabs, edgings and off-cuts Sawdust and fines Various losses Bark Sawn timber Total 17 7.5 4.0 5.5 28 100 23 10 5 Portion (%)
Table 3. Division of a typical tree harvested for sawn timber (source FAO).
While that is certainly true, it would be it quite reductive to consider the technological progresses on timber solely in terms of economic savings. To respond to a need of diverse applicability and improved performance, the construction industry has identified manifold technical reasons to guide the application of engineering processes onto sawn timber and overcome its shortcomings.
Mechanical properties
Wood is an orthotropic material, having unique and independent mechanical properties i.e. elastic, strength, vibration properties - in the directions of three mutually perpendicular axes: longitudinal (fibres direction), radial and tangential. Moreover those differ greatly from species to species. Engineered timber products offer more homogeneous properties and consequently they find much wider application in a variety of building elements (Kretschmann, 2010).
Dimensional limitations
They are part of its nature and are counted as weaknesses only in comparison with materials, such as steel and concrete, that offer considerable structural spans.
[6]
Performance, structural properties and dimensional stability Direction to grain or board length Parallel (%) Perpendicular (%) 2.0-2.4 2.6-5.2 0.24 0.33 0.25 0.21 0.27 0.31 0.25 Thickness (%) 2.0-2.4 2.6-5.2 2.0 4.7 3.9 3.3 7-11 4-9 4-8
Solid timber Douglas fir Beech Plywood Douglas fir Particleboard UF bonded PF bonded MF/UF bonded Fibreboard Tempered Standard MDF
negligible negligible 0.24 0.33 0.25 0.21 0.21 0.28 0.24
Table 4. Dimensional stability of timber and boards. Change in dimensions from 30% to 90% relative humidity (adapted from Dinwoodie, 2000).
Bending Strength (MPa) Thickness (mm) Solid timber Douglas fir Plywood Douglas fir Douglas fir Particleboard UF bonded PF bonded MF/UF bonded Fibreboard Tempered Standard MDF 20 4.8 19 18.6 19.2 18.1 3.2 3.2 9-10 Density (kg/m3) 500 520 600 720 680 660 1030 1000 680 par. per.
Bending Stiffness (MPa) par. per.
80 73 60 11.5 18.0 27.1 69 54 18.7
2.2 16 33 11.5 18.0 27.1 65 52 19.2
12700 12090 10750 1930 2830 3460 4600 -
800 890 3310 1930 2830 3460 4600 -
Table 5. Strength properties of timber and boards (adapted from Dinwoodie, 2000).
Optimise the use of the renewable resource
The manufacturing processes of wood-based panels use a very high percentage of the initial log through thinnings, chips, slabs - thus making full use of the resource and minimising waste (Thoemen et al., 2010).
[7]
Engineering wood products can be divided in four main categories:
1. Structural Timber Composites

Double and triple laminated beams Glued laminated timber Parallel strand lumber
2. Laminates
Cross Laminated Timber Solid wood panel Laminated Veneer Lumber Plywood
3. Fibre composites
Hardboard Softboard Fibreboard (MDF)
4. Particle composites
Oriented Strand Board (OSB) Wood particleboard (or chipboard) Cement-bonded particleboard Laminated Strand Lumber (LSL)
Figure 3 Various composite products derived from timber (Stark et al., 2010).
[8]
Double and triple laminated beams (Duobeams and Triobeams)

They consist of two or three timber lamellae, rigidly bonded together after visual or machine strength grading. After being glued, they are side-dressed and chamfered on 4 sides. Individual lamellae can be finger-jointed. (HFA, OG 2010b)
Figure 4 (HFA, OG 2010b)
Glued laminated timber (Glulam)

Glued laminated timber is manufactured from laminates of sawn timber, or lamellae, kiln dried, planed and glued together with parallel fibre orientation. The process of finger jointing allows individual laminates to be end-jointed to produce long lengths. High resistance and dimensional stability properties make glulam particularly suitable for elements bearing
Figure 5 (HFA, NEU 2010b)
high stresses or spanning large distances. The choice of the adhesive has to be accurate in order to fulfil the European standard requirements for loadbearing timber components. (HFA, NEU 2010b)
Parallel strand lumber (Parallam)

It is manufactured from 3 mm thick and 15 mm wide strips of veneer, bond together with phenolic resin. The strips are bundled with fibres oriented primarily parallel to the major axis of the beam. They are processed in a continuous press to form an endless beam. Parallel strand lumber is designed to be used in structures with long free spans. PSL elements can be bonded together, to obtain components with large cross-sections. (HFA, NEU 2010c)
Figure 6. (HFA, NEU 2010c)
[9]
Cross Laminated Timber: a deeper look

Cross Laminated Timber (CLT) consists of several layers (3, 5, 7 or more) of softwood timber planks, also called lamellas, joined with glue or through dowels. The directions of the grain of adjacent planks form an angle of 90, with a symmetrical layup around the middle layer. Planks may be joined by edge-gluing and may also be finger-jointed in the longitudinal direction.
Figure 7 (HFA, NEU 2010a)
CLT is now being considered where masonry, concrete and steel have historically been the usual forms of construction, presenting some key advantages: it is dimensionally stable, solid and capable of resisting very high racking and vertical loads, extending the potential of timber in structures previously possible only in other materials (see Table 1). Furthermore, its combination of strength, ductility and light weight makes it an excellent construction system for anti-seismic buildings; it eliminates the main disadvantages connected with normal wood construction, such as swelling, shrinkage, warp, and creep; short assembly time at the site, with consequential economic benefits, since it is manufactured off-site, under factory conditions and with efficiency automation; it can be standardised to be used for ceilings, roofing or walls or can be designed for tailormade components of the entire buildings (big companies like RikoHaus and Rubner produce catalogues of tailor-made prefabricated wooden houses); good thermal properties: unlike conventional timber framing alone, CLT makes a contribution to the U value. It has similar thermal conductivity and greater specific heat capacity than lightweight concrete block materials; high thermal mass; when the design maximizes passive solar gain, CLT is suitable to be used to collect and store energy during the day for emission later in the cycle; very good acoustic insulation; because its manufacturing process consumes low amounts of electricity, CLT has very favourable ecological assessment. Overall the utilization of adhesives is very limited, which also reduces the total impact on the environment. Formaldehyde-free panels are largely available on the market. (HFA, NEU 2010a; TRADA Technology, 2011)
[10]
Material Steel Concrete Masonry Platform timber frame CLT panels
Floor span capability 7m for metal deck floors 9m for solid slabs 7.5m for hollow core floor 6m for engineered timber joists 8m for panels
Height capacity > 100 storeys > 100 storeys 7 storeys 7 storeys or 20 m 12 storeys
Table 6. Span and height capabilities of mainstream structural materials in multi-storey buildings (TRADA Technology, 2011)
Solid Wood Panel

It is a multi-layered board, with a symmetric lay-up consisting of parallel outer layers and at least one core layer, oriented perpendicularly to them. The individual lamellae are sorted, planed prior to their assembly into the boards, thus minimising swelling and shrinkage due to climatic changes (HFA, OG 2010g).
Figure 8 (HFA, OG 2010g)
Laminated Veneer Lumber (LVL)

LVL is manufactured in a continuous process, that consists in bonding individual - spruce or pine veneers with their individual ends offset and with fibres primarily in the same direction. PF resins are generally used as adhesives. LVL finds application as bracing element in loadbearing floors and ceilings, and can be used in the same applications as glulam (HFA, OG 2010c).
Figure 9 (HFA, OG 2010c)
[11]
Plywood
Veneer plywood
Plywood is a panel consisting of an assembly of layers glued together, usually odd in number (3, 5 or 7) and not exceeding 7 mm in thickness. Each veneer is laid down with its grain at right angles to the adjacent layer, and all the veneers are orientated with their plane parallel to the surface of the panel. Plywood is a very versatile product: it offers high strength to weight
Figure 10 (HFA, OG 2010f)
properties and it performs well under severe exposure conditions; the choice of the adhesives for its manufacturing determines the panels suitability for internal or external use. Four types of plywood are commonly available in the UK: marine plywood (BS 1088), structural plywood, utility plywood, decorative / overlaid plywood. Production varies depending on several factors, but it usually includes the following sequence of processes: Log conditioning Peeling Clipping Drying Jointing or veneer repair Grading Adhesive application Pressing Trimming, filling and sanding
Core plywood (Blockboard / Laminboard)

Blockboard uses for its core strips of wood, each not more than 30 mm wide; laminboard cores are composed of strips of veneer on edge (or occasionally strips cut from plywood). The strips are laid separately and glued or otherwise joined together to form a slab. One or more veneers is glued to each face with the direction of the grain of the core strips running at right angles to that of the adjacent veneers. Introduction of block or laminboard manufacturing facilities by ply mills is aimed to utilise residues to produce low cost types of panel suited to interior purposes. The technique of manufacturing core plywood developed alongside the plywood industry from the turn of the century and the method of production is similar to that for plywood. (HFA, OG 2010f; TRADA Technology, 2003; Thoemen et al., 2010)
[12]
Fibreboards
They are manufactured from fibres of ligno-cellulosic material. According to the manufacturing process, they are divided into two main categories: wet process and dry process boards.
Wet process boards

Generally produced without the addition of a synthetic resin; the primary
Figure 11 (HFA, OG 2010d)
bond derives from the felting of the fibres and their inherent adhesive properties. The boards are classified according to their density: Hardboards: > 900kg/m3 Mediumboards: 400kg/m3 < < 900kg/m3 Softboards: 230kg/m3 < < 400kg/m3.
The production process is essentially as follows: Chipping Reduction to fibres Board (wet lap) forming Pressing and curing (hardboards and medium boards) Curing insulating board Finishing
(TRADA Technology, 2003; Thoemen et al., 2010)
Dry process boards

The dry process was developed from the traditional wet process and the fibre is produced in the same way. However, an adhesive is added to the fibres and they are dried to below 20% moisture content before mat forming and pressing. Differences in the production process are: Resin application Drying / storage Mat-forming Pressing Trimming and sanding
[13]
Medium density fibreboard (MDF)

In MDF the fibres of ligno-cellulosic material are felted together with the primary bond normally derived from a bonding agent. The properties of the material can be modified or enhanced by changing the composition of the synthetic binder or by incorporation of other additives during or after manufacture. MDF is the most common dry process board. The particular machining and finishing attributes, combined with good working properties and a wide range of available sheet thicknesses and sizes allow MDF to find multiple applications in construction, e.g. skirtings, architraves, window boards, wall linings and decorative facades. (HFA, OG 2010d; TRADA Technology, 2003; Thoemen et al., 2010)
Oriented Strand Board (OSB)

OSB is a multi-layered wood-based composite, with each layer made from long slender wood strands bonded by a polymeric adhesive. Similarly to plywood, the strands are orientated in each layer in the main axis of the board. Due to the high aspect ratio of the strands (length to width up to 10:1), the board's bending strength is particularly high in the direction of the strand.
Figure 12 (HFA, OG 2010e)
Oriented Strand Boards are widely used for wall sheathing, flooring underlays, roof sheathing and decking. Four classes of boards are defined according to BS EN Standards, serving from general purpose to heavy duty load-bearing for use in humid conditions. However they are not recognised in the standards as being suitable for exterior use. The process of producing wood strands and of aligning them along the length of the board was developed during the 1970s in Germany and replaced the original waferboard production. OSB manufacture has many similarities with that of particleboard. It includes: Debarking Waferising, strand cutting and drying Blending Mat forming Pressing Trimming, conditioning and sanding
(HFA, OG 2010e; TRADA Technology 2003; Thoemen et al. 2010)
[14]
Wood particleboard (or chipboard)

Wood particleboard is manufactured from small wood particles or particles from lignocellulosic raw materials and a binder (usually a synthetic resin). The particles are not aligned in a particular way, but generally oriented parallel to the plane of the board. It is usually referred to in the UK as chipboard. Boards can be of uniform construction, of graded density or of distinct 3 or 5-layer construction. Their final thicknesses vary from 3 to 50 mm. The European Standard (BS EN 312) defines six categories of boards, according to their suitability: from furniture to loadbearing types and humid interior conditions. The production of wood particleboard originated in Germany at the beginning of the 20th century, following the discovery of synthetic thermo-setting adhesives. It entails mechanically breaking up wood mostly green logs - and reconstituting it by the means of the adhesives. The process is usually highly automated and is not very demanding in terms of raw materials and skilled labour (unlike, for instance that of plywood). The basic stages are: Debarking Chipping or milling (often from green logs, but at the present time increasing levels of recycled timber are being used) Drying Sifting / particle classification Glue blending Mat forming Pressing Trimming and sanding Extruded Particleboard
Figure 13 (HFA, OG 2010h)
(HFA, OG 2010h; TRADA Technology, 2003; Thoemen et al., 2010)
[15]
Cement-bonded particleboard
Cement-bonded particleboard is a wood composite consisting of small wood particles and a mineral bonding agent (e.g. Portland or magnesite cement). Boards are manufactured as single-layered or multilayered and also as sandwich composites (e.g. in combination with rigid foam or cork insulation boards). Boards density can vary according to finality; they can be used for thermal and acoustic insulation, as internal walls or load-bearing and bracing panelling. Thanks to the mineral content, cement-bonded particleboard offer a superior behaviour in fire and are suitable for exterior use: they are highly resistant to weathering, insects and fungi. The production is quite different from other particleboards, because wood content is low (2030% by weight) and the boards are pressed at a relatively low temperature. It includes the following stages: Raw materials Flaking and milling Sifting / screening Blending and forming Pressing and curing Trimming, maturing / conditioning
Figure 14 (HFA, OG 2010a)
(HFA, OG 2010a; TRADA Technology, 2003; Thoemen et al., 2010)
[16]
Structural Insulated Panels (SIP)

Structural Insulated Panels are prefabricated lightweight building units. They combine engineered timber with rigid foam, thus providing structural support and thermal insulation in one system. They are sandwich panels made of:
face layers core layer face layer 70 to 250mm
Two high density face layers, e.g.: oriented strand boards, such as OSB cement particle board
A central core of rigid cellular insulation e.g.: Polyurethane (PUR) Polyisocyanurate (PIR) Phenolic foam (PF) Expanded polystyrene (EPS) Extruded polystyrene (XPS)
with thicknesses of 8 to 15mm.
Like other massive timber elements, SIPs can serve as walls or roof. They are usually manufactured off-site, due to the fact that a high quality standard of production is needed to meet their performance requirements. Two different fabrication techniques exist: 1. The foam core is pre-cut and is cold pressed between two facing OSB boards, after the application of the adhesive. 2. The foam is poured into pre-spaced facing, thus binding them together. SIPs are often employed as principal loadbearing components and are currently used in domestic and light industrial construction of up to three storeys. SIPs are a very interesting modern method of construction; thanks to their characteristics they can meet markets pressing demands for thermal efficiency and speed of construction. (Hairstans, 2010; BRE, 2004)
[17]
4. Ecological impact of engineered timber products and wood-based panels

Abiotic resource [g Sb eq]
Cement-bonded p.board Particleboard humid Particleboard dry OSB (PF adh) OSB (MUPF/PMDI adh) Plywood (PF adh) Plywood (UF adh) CLT (PF adh) CLT (UF adh) Glue laminated timber Duo&Trio, planed, kiln-dried Duo&Trio, sawn, kiln-dried Duo&Trio, sawn, air-dried Figure 15 2409 3137 2403 2580 2361 5214 4542 2538 2244 1660 628 447 145
Photosmog [g C2H2]
Global Warming Potential [kg CO2 eq]

Cement-bonded p.board Particleboard humid Particleboard dry OSB (PF adh) OSB (MUPF/PMDI adh) Plywood (PF adh) Plywood (UF adh) CLT (PF adh) CLT (UF adh) Glue laminated timber Duo&Trio, planed, kiln-dried Duo&Trio, sawn, kiln-dried Duo&Trio, sawn, air-dried Figure 17 804 270 206 250 296 538 459 271 236 202 95 68 20 -775 -810 -788 -875 -786 -740
Global Warming Potential [kg CO2 eq]*

Cement-bonded p.board Particleboard humid Particleboard dry OSB (PF adh) OSB (MUPF/PMDI adh) Plywood (PF adh) -424 Plywood (UF adh) -504 CLT (PF adh) CLT (UF adh) Glue laminated timber -571 Duo&Trio, planed, kiln-dried Duo&Trio, sawn, kiln-dried Duo&Trio, sawn, air-dried 281
-701 -728 -775
Figure 18. * values take into account the storage of carbon in wood
[18]
Acidification [g SO2 eq]

Over-fertilization [g PO4 - eq]

PEI non-renewable [MJ]

PEI renewable [MJ]

Figures 15-22 show the assessment of ecological impact for engineered timber products (collected and adapted from IB, 2002).
[19]
It is relevant to look more in detail at the Global Warming Potential, expressing the percentage contributions of each process. This represents quite effectively the level of technology embedded in each wood-based product, and consequently it can reveal how manufacturing processes affect the ecological footprint of engineered timber.
Breakdown of GWP contributions

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Glue Laminated Timber Cross Laminated Timber Plywood (PF adh) Particleboard P5 (PF adh) OSB (MUPF/PMDI adh) Cement-bonded p.board
Other Transport Electric Energy Thermal Energy Adhesives Raw materials
Figure 23 Chart showing the GWP potential for wood-based products (collected and adapted from IB, 2002).
[20]
global warming potential [Kg CO2 equivalent]
-1
sawn timber (12% moisture) OSB glue-laminated timber softwood (12% moisture) laminated beams softwood three-ply board (12% moisture) sawn timber (65% moisture) plywood chipboard P2
-0.5
technology input
structural solid timber softwood (15% moisture)
0.5
1.5
MDF
wood-cement board
2
Figure 24 Chart showing the GWP potential for wood-based products (adapted from Hartwig et al., 2009).
As indicated on the charts, it can be stated in conclusion that the more processed is timber, in manufacturing engineered products, the higher the loss of ecological benefits - in terms of LCA and GWP - associated with its native properties. This challenges the popular idea that woodbased products can be universally sustainable, regardless of their application in construction (see table 7).
[21]
Material / application Solid wood panel
LoadColumns / beams bearing/ planking o
Dry screed
Interior finish o
Furniture
Ecological Assessment Low to moderate potential impact in most environmental favourable criteria. Considerable energy consumption during the kiln drying of timber. The product is untreated product and has a low proportion of binding agent. gen. favourable, weaknesses exist Low impact in most of the environmental criteria, although the substantial amounts of electricity consumed during the manufacturing process result in a high acidification potential. Use of adhesives is relatively low.
Glue-laminated timber +
Veneer plywood; Blockboard/Laminboard
Manufacturing process of veneers is energy intensive, esp. with regards to electrical energy. Adhesives are used in a high medium proportion and form an important part of the product; they favourable further contribute to the total environmental impact. High potential impact in most of the environmental criteria medium assessed, due to a very energy intensive manufacturing favourable process; adhesives contribute to total impact. gen. favourable, weaknesses exist Low impact in most of the environmental criteria, although it presents high acidification potential. The relatively high use of adhesives contributes to the total environmental impact, since they might contain formaldehyde.
Laminated veneer lumber
Laminated flat-pressed board
Cement chipboard o o o
Very high potentials in GWP, acidification and overmedium fertilization. The high energy consumption in the manufacture favourable of the binding agent (cement) contributes significantly to the overall impact. Boards are not recyclable. favourable, weaknesses exist Low to moderate potential impact in most of the environmental criteria assessed, thanks to a moderate utilization of adhesives. Nevertheless the manufacturing involves a considerable consumption of electrical energy.
Oriented strand board (OSB)
Medium-density fibreboard (MDF) +: low environmental impact
medium Made from thinnings. High proportion of adhesives that might favourable contain formaldehyde. - : high environmental impact, compared to other products.
o: low environmental impact
Table 7. Applications and environmental assessment for wood-based products (Hartwig et al., 2009; IB, 2002).
[22]
5. Contemporary use of timber

Modern methods of construction
Office of the Deputy of the Prime Minister (OPDM) defined MMC as a process to produce more, better quality homes in less time (Hairstans 2010, p.11); the definition gives a fairly good idea about how the demand for efficiency and product quality prompted major investigations of off-site techniques. MMC can be broken down into four main categories: 1 Panellised Construction
Units are produced in a factory environment and assembled on-site to produce a three dimensional structure. CLT, SWP or SIPs panels are suitable. Only a skeletal structure is produced. It involves a higher degree of prefabrication. Advanced panels that incorporate services, doors, windows, insulation, internal finishes and external cladding. It involves the factory manufacturing of three dimensional structures prior their transportation to site. Modules can be empty shells or fully complete with services, internal features & external finishes. They combine both panelised and volumetric approaches. Areas that are typically highly service or more repeatable, such as kitchens and bathrooms (also known as pods), are fully fitted out with all sinks, sanitary ware and tiling. The rest of the dwelling is usually built using panellised units.
Open Panels Closed Panels
2 Volumetric Construction
3 Hybrid techniques
4 Other / Non Off-site Methods of Constructions that use floor or roof cassettes, pre-cast concrete foundation assemblies, mechanical engineering Construction
composites etc.
The evolution of construction techniques, both timber frame (see figures 25, 26) and massive timber (figures 27, 28), has proceeded along with an increasing share of off-site manufacturing prior to the installation on-site. Varying forms of off-site construction for engineered timber have progressed to become modern methods of construction (Hairstans, 2010).
Figure 25 Platform frame
Figure 26 Closed panel platform frame
Figure 27 Square log
Figure 28 Cross laminated timber
Figures 25, 26, 27, 28. Evolution of construction techniques based on timber (Hairstans, 2010).
[23]
Figure 29 Wall panels
Figure 30 Floor cassette
Figure 31 Roof system
Figures 29, 30, 31. Crane erections of off-site produced components (Hairstans, 2010).
Reusable and adaptable structures

Following the comparative overview of engineered timber products based on their technological input, it can result interesting to consider their benefits with regards to their use in the short and in the long terms. Long-term applications To maintain a high level of carbon storage, it is required that the timber is re-used a number of times, following a cascade principle. For that purpose, chemical treatments (i.e. preservatives and coatings) should be minimised so as to allow extensive re-use. Design musts deal with the inner qualities of the material, and provide intelligent solutions using a reduced range of components. Short-term applications Temporary or short-term constructions tend to bring with them a very efficient use of material. The native qualities and the ageing characteristics of timber components do not represent such a critical factor as the rapid turnover of material. As a result, high-tech wood-based products are highly suitable for these applications.
Table 8. Design principles for short-term and long-term timber structures (Hartwig et al., 2009).
Moving up the scale and looking at structures, or whole buildings, reuse implies that they are no longer needed for their original purpose and will need to adapt to new functions. Adaptability exists when a building can be modified internally for change of use, or when a structure can be disassembled and reerected in a new form.
Figure 32. 2005 Serpentine Gallery, London (Baumans, 2005) All rights reserved.
[24]
With regards to that, there are some key criteria that, if followed from the early stages of design, would let timber structures to be adapted or reassembled for reuse. Horizontally, panel and component sizes have to be taken into account when preparing the layout. M&E services should be distributed with minimal perforation of the structure. Vertically, module heights and provision for floor and ceiling systems have to be considered. Panelisation and connection Panel dimensions usually depend on ease of handling and installation, together with the dimensions of material in stock. Structures designed for factory production are generally likely to be adaptable for reuse. Commonly the construction consists in connecting together prefabricated modules on site. The process can be reversed and the modules disassembled, provided that connections are accessible without damages to the finishes. Cladding, finishes and fixing Cladding should respect the structural panels. Wet trades or, for instance, plasterboard would limit the reusability and thus should be replaced by dry systems of cladding. It is advisable to design systems that have the least impact to the ground. Therefore suspended floor cassette systems supported from piles are to be preferred to integral concrete foundation and slab systems. The use of ducts will permit to minimise perforation of the structure and linings. Selection of durable materials is necessary if the structure has to endure several cycles of use.
Modular planning
Foundations
Building services Durability and robustness
Table 9. Design principles for adaptability and reuse (adapted from TRADA Technology, 2008).
[25]
6. Case studies
Cross-laminated timber panel school, Open Academy, Norwich

The Open Academy is the currently the largest solid timber panel building in the UK. Crucial for the contractors bidding success were the key advantages offered by massive timber construction: sensible savings in construction time and major environmental benefits.
Figure 33 View during the construction of Open Academy, Norwich (KLH UK, 2009).
Thanks to its versatile structural capabilities, CLT applied really well to most significant features of the design: cantilevered stairs: exposed timber treads underneath and exposed timber walls; curved walls: facetted CL panels, provided in 2.4m lengths; atrium roof: CL panels, acting as a rigid horizontal diaphragm; they are supported by 12 glulam arches. The CL panels are 162mm thick in the walls, 230mm thick in floors and flat roofs, and 78mm thick in the atrium roof. The structure is stiff and stable, thanks to the inherent properties of the geometry. Horizontal wind loading is transferred through diaphragm action of the floor and roof plates. The wall panels withstand axial, racking and bending loads effectively; additionally they provide lateral stability and transfer horizontal loads to the foundations. CLT presented higher initial costs but subsequent valuable economies, such as a shorter programme, pre-cut openings, made off-site and ready to host windows and doors without additional framing, simplified fixing for services, no need of scaffolding and finally reduced risks for the workforce.
[26]
With regards to the environmental impact, as illustrated in the previous chapters, massive timber has the lowest embodied energy of any building material. The carbon footprint of the Open Academy has been calculated to be approximately half that of an analogous steel or concrete structure. Thanks to the additional estimated 3000t of CO2 sequestration, the building results to have a negative carbon footprint. The chosen environmental strategies of passive solar design and natural ventilation required high performance for the building fabric and reduction of heating, cooling and artificial lighting demands. CL panels guaranteed air tightness of less than 5 m3/hm2, half of the building regulations requirement (TRADA Technology, 2010).
Re-Thinking School, BRE Innovation Park, 2007

Constructed in the BRE Innovation Park in Watford, this mini school embeds sustainability as a core element of its curriculum. It aimed to be demonstrative of all the building principles that shall guide the schools of the future; as a result, every part of the design, construction and operation was looked at as an educational opportunity.
Figure 34. Re-thinking School, BRE Innovation Park (NBT, 2007).
The school was conceived to showcase the potential of modern methods of constructions to be sustainable, low operational and embodied energy, cost effective and aesthetically valuable. Designed to be relocated, the school is built in Solid Wood Panels (SWP) manufactured off-site from recycled off-cuts and then assembled on site through screwed butt joints. The timber structure lies on a steel frame with screw piles foundations, which facilitate removal prior to relocation. The building in Watford has two and a half storeys, but the solid timber systems could potentially go up to ten. Post-completion tests demonstrated that, thanks to the state of the art cutting and joining of the panels, the structure achieved a high level of air tightness, delivered the desired acoustic performance and benefitted from excellent thermal behaviour of the solid wood panels (TRADA Technology, 2008).
[27]
7. References
BRE, 2004. An introduction to building with Structural Insulated Panels (SIPs), Watford: BRE. Dinwoodie, J.M., 2000. Timber, its nature and behaviour, Taylor & Francis. Eriksson, P.E., 2004. Comparative LCAs for wood and other construction methods. In Proceedings of World Conference on Timber Engineering. Hairstans, R., 2010. Off-site and Modern Methods of Timber Construction: A Sustainable Approach, TRADA Technology Ltd. Hartwig, J., Zeumer, M. & Viola, J., 2009. Sustainable use of materials: wood and wood-based products. DETAIL Green, (2/2009), pp.56-59. HFA, NEU, 2010a. Cross laminated timber. Available at: http://www.dataholz.com/Public/Baustoffe/Datenblaetter/en/bsp_en.pdf [Accessed November 19, 2011]. HFA, NEU, 2010b. Glued laminated timber. Available at: http://www.dataholz.com/Public/Baustoffe/Datenblaetter/en/bsh_en.pdf [Accessed November 19, 2011]. HFA, NEU, 2010c. PSL (Parallam). Available at: http://www.dataholz.com/Public/Baustoffe/Datenblaetter/en/fsh_en.pdf [Accessed November 19, 2011]. HFA, OG, 2010a. Cement-bonded Particleboard. Available at: http://www.dataholz.com/Public/Baustoffe/Datenblaetter/en/spz_en.pdf [Accessed November 19, 2011]. HFA, OG, 2010b. Double and triple laminated beams (Duo-& Triobeams). Available at: http://www.dataholz.com/Public/Baustoffe/Datenblaetter/en/dtb_en.pdf [Accessed November 19, 2011]. HFA, OG, 2010c. Laminated veneer lumber (LVL). Available at: http://www.dataholz.com/Public/Baustoffe/Datenblaetter/en/lvl_en.pdf [Accessed November 19, 2011]. HFA, OG, 2010d. MDF. Available at: http://www.dataholz.com/Public/Baustoffe/Datenblaetter/en/mdf_en.pdf [Accessed November 19, 2011]. HFA, OG, 2010e. Oriented Strand Board. Available at: http://www.dataholz.com/Public/Baustoffe/Datenblaetter/en/osb_en.pdf [Accessed November 19, 2011]. HFA, OG, 2010f. Plywood. Available at: http://www.dataholz.com/Public/Baustoffe/Datenblaetter/en/bfu_en.pdf [Accessed November 19, 2011]. HFA, OG, 2010g. Solid wood panel. Available at: http://www.dataholz.com/Public/Baustoffe/Datenblaetter/en/swp_en.pdf [Accessed November 19, 2011].
[28]
HFA, OG, 2010h. Wood Particleboard. Available at: http://www.dataholz.com/Public/Baustoffe/Datenblaetter/en/spa_en.pdf [Accessed November 19, 2011]. KLH UK, 2009. Open Academy, Norwich, Available at: http://www.klhuk.com/media/3139/openacademynorwich06.jpg [Accessed November 25, 2011]. Kretschmann, D.E., 2010. Mechanical Properties of Wood. In Forest Products Laboratory, ed. Wood Handbook. Wood as an Engineering Material. Madison, WI: US Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory, pp. 100-145. NBT, 2007. Re-Thinking School, BRE Innovation Park, Available at: http://www.naturalbuilding.co.uk/images/nbt_images_large/School-for-the-future-eco-school.jpg. IB, 2002. kologische Kennwerte von Holz und Holzwerkstoffen in sterreich, sterreichisches Institut fr Baubiologie und kologie GmbH. Stark, N., Cai, Z. & Carll, C., 2010. Wood-Based Composite Materials. In Forest Products Laboratory, ed. Wood Handbook. Wood as an Engineering Material. Madison, WI: US Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory, pp. 252-279. Thoemen, H., Irle, M. & Sernek, M., 2010. Wood-based Panels. An Introduction for Specialists, Brunel University Press. Available at: http://www.ahb.bfh.ch/NR/rdonlyres/6388C45C8399-47AA-A833589576D903BA/0/WoodBased_PanelsThoemen_et_alISBN9781902316826.pdf. Thun, M., 2010. Wood in Architecture, Interior and - Product Design a Homage to a Building Material. DETAIL, (06/2010), pp.552-670. TRADA Technology, 2010. Cross-laminated timber panel school. Open Academy, Norwich. Available at: http://www.trada.co.uk/casestudies/overview/CL_Academy_Norwich/ [Accessed November 25, 2011]. TRADA Technology, 2011. Cross-laminated timber: introduction for specifiers, High Wycombe: TRADA Technology. TRADA Technology, 2003. Introduction to wood-based panel products, High Wycombe: TRADA Technology. TRADA Technology, 2008. Reusable and adaptable wood structures: sustainable solutions for a changing world, High Wycombe: TRADA Technology. Wilson, P.L., 2001. Designing with timber, adleader in association with ARCA the Journal of Scottish Architecture. Available at: http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/designingwithtimber.pdf/$FILE/designingwithtimber.pdf.

Jurnal 3

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Jurnal 3

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Architecture Construction and Industrialization, Coursework 1

A sustainable approach to materials and construction systems: Engineered Timber

A sustainable approach to materials and construction systems: Engineered Timber

MSc Advanced Sustainable Design, year 11/12

A sustainable approach to materials and construction systems: Engineered Timber

1. Timber: traditionally sustainable

MSc Advanced Sustainable Design, year 11/12

A sustainable approach to materials and construction systems: Engineered Timber

2. Ecological impact of timber and other construction methods

Total energy use excluding usage phase

GWP (CO2 equivalent)

2 Residential Case Study, Athena Sustainable Material Institute

3 Environmental Impact of a Single Family Building Shell, Minneapolis

4 Environmental Impact of a Single Family Building Shell, Atlanta

MSc Advanced Sustainable Design, year 11/12

A sustainable approach to materials and construction systems: Engineered Timber

- Including energy recycling - Including wood feedstock energy

- Excluding energy recycling - Excluding wood feedstock energy

- Including energy recycling - Excluding wood feedstock energy

Energy difference (MJ/m2)

GWP difference (Kg/m2) - CO2 equivalent

MSc Advanced Sustainable Design, year 11/12

A sustainable approach to materials and construction systems: Engineered Timber

3. From tradition to innovation: engineered timber

MSc Advanced Sustainable Design, year 11/12

A sustainable approach to materials and construction systems: Engineered Timber

negligible negligible 0.24 0.33 0.25 0.21 0.21 0.28 0.24

Bending Stiffness (MPa) par. per.

80 73 60 11.5 18.0 27.1 69 54 18.7

2.2 16 33 11.5 18.0 27.1 65 52 19.2

12700 12090 10750 1930 2830 3460 4600 -

800 890 3310 1930 2830 3460 4600 -

Optimise the use of the renewable resource

MSc Advanced Sustainable Design, year 11/12

A sustainable approach to materials and construction systems: Engineered Timber

Engineering wood products can be divided in four main categories:

1. Structural Timber Composites

MSc Advanced Sustainable Design, year 11/12

A sustainable approach to materials and construction systems: Engineered Timber

Double and triple laminated beams (Duobeams and Triobeams)

Figure 4 (HFA, OG 2010b)

Glued laminated timber (Glulam)

Parallel strand lumber (Parallam)

MSc Advanced Sustainable Design, year 11/12

A sustainable approach to materials and construction systems: Engineered Timber

Cross Laminated Timber: a deeper look

MSc Advanced Sustainable Design, year 11/12

A sustainable approach to materials and construction systems: Engineered Timber

Material Steel Concrete Masonry Platform timber frame CLT panels

Solid Wood Panel

Figure 8 (HFA, OG 2010g)

Laminated Veneer Lumber (LVL)

MSc Advanced Sustainable Design, year 11/12

A sustainable approach to materials and construction systems: Engineered Timber

Core plywood (Blockboard / Laminboard)

MSc Advanced Sustainable Design, year 11/12

A sustainable approach to materials and construction systems: Engineered Timber

Wet process boards

Figure 11 (HFA, OG 2010d)

(TRADA Technology, 2003; Thoemen et al., 2010)

Dry process boards

MSc Advanced Sustainable Design, year 11/12