Innovation Nation

A Message from The Hagerman Group

Everyone can innovate. Incorporating innovation can help us save time and money, and give us the competitive advantage to grow and adapt our business in the marketplace. While statistics show that the construction industry is one of the least innovative (they say we still construct buildings today the way we built them 50 years ago), Hagerman constantly looks at ways we can differentiate ourselves from the “norm.”

What is innovation? Innovation generally refers to changing or creating more effective processes, products and ideas, and can increase the likelihood of a business succeeding. Businesses that innovate create more efficient work processes and have better productivity and performance.

But being innovative does not mean inventing; innovation can mean changing our business model and adapting to changes in our environment to deliver better products or services. Successful innovation is built into our business strategy and the strategic vision, where we create an environment and lead in innovative thinking and creative problem solving.

Three categories of innovation have been implemented at Hagerman over the past few years. They are:

INCREMENTAL

·         Upgrading software for improved productivity

·         Revised approach to strategic plan

·         Different approach to business development/closing the deal

·         Implementing lean processes

RADICAL

·         Video conferencing to make better use of time

·         Hiring a president with no construction experience

·         Implementing Building Information Modeling (BIM)

·         Placing tower crane on Hagerman job for visibility

BUSINESS MODEL

·         Focus on smaller, private, negotiated projects vs. huge educational projects

·         Focus on masonry work in Ohio

·         Addition of site selection/negotiation talent

·         Geographic growth plan

Remember, innovation is the key to competitive advantage.

Reasons for Fireworks

July and fireworks: Well, it is sort of a tradition around here, whether that be on the pages of this column, or the deeply held beliefs of the men and women of the masonry industry: Independence Day is huge for all of us. The reasons may be varied, but they all tend to be related and amazingly similar!

The American Fourth of July celebration does tend to focus on the patriotism and desire for freedom boiling up in the 1770s and before. Rightly so. If not for then, the today would be completely different. We’d be talking about our royal family, and not our current concept of a republican form of government, coupled with the rights of the people. Amazingly enough, that truly American ideal has persevered for some 237 years – unprecedented in the history of this world.

Our main battle, back then, was with the British Crown. Many thought is simply to be foolish. And those naysayers were close to being correct. If not for a little luck now and then – some would say divine intervention – the uprising would have been short lived. 

A saying we are familiar with is that “freedom is not free.” Our freedoms only began in 1776. The battle to preserve and guarantee them continues to this day. As I write this, people we all know personally are either deployed or serving in the military at this minute, getting ready to go (again?) or are just returning. They are people in our neighborhoods, churches and synagogues, community service clubs, recent graduates from high school and college – carrying that same torch of freedom and ensuring our liberties.

American history is filled to overflowing with accounts of the heroism and valor, which have saved and preserved this nation, along with her traditions and values. Let me share the names of just a few. Our freedoms of today can be traced directly to the battlefields at Lexington and Concord, Gettysburg, the Western Front, from the sands of Iwo Jima to the Battle of the Bulge, the Chosin Reservoir, Khe Sanh and so many others. It is almost a sin to not list more.

I’m recently reminded that some 69 years ago, the landing of Allied troops at Normandy (D-Day) occurred. An important part of this was the mission of a company of U.S. Army Rangers to take over a position currently held by a German machine gun and artillery emplacement. Their guns would be trained on the troops coming ashore, so their removal was mandatory. 

Please realize that this group of about 225 Rangers was to attack these guns at a place called Pointe du Hoc. If you Google this term, you will see the enormity of the task, because the Pointe was protected by 100-foot-high, vertical cliffs, just off of a short beach. You’ve just gotta see the picture.

So, their mission was to come ashore, scale these cliffs in the face of overwhelming machine gun and rifle fire, down the cliffs and at the Rangers, as they climbed up. About 100 of the Rangers actually survived and went on to complete the mission. Over half were lost. And let’s not forget this: Every Ranger was a volunteer. Such is the heritage of our country.

Bringing this back to the present day, compare your lot in life to that of a young, Army Ranger, while he is contemplating the enormity of the task before him. Sometimes it feels like the competition is playing dirty; things are not fair; the economy sucks; your business is just hanging on by a thread; life is tough! You finish the sentence – because it’s your life. 

How did those Rangers get to the top? They wanted their goal more than the enemy wanted to deny them. And that’s a big part of the secret of life, isn’t it? Plus, the Rangers had a secret weapon. They had artillery of their own. Offshore lay the U.S. Navy, which could deliver a barrage of its own. They had plenty of ammo, the best guns, and more experienced people. The Rangers had the Navy in their corner of the ring. Just had to make the call and ask for the help.

So here’s the thing. For us in the masonry industry, we’ve got our own version of the Navy. We happen to call it the MCAA. They’ve got plenty of ammo, know how to deliver it, and have the best people around to make it all happen. These days, it’s a much easier call to make than the one that the Rangers’ radio man made. 

Let’s face facts: Even with the Navy’s help, the task before the Rangers was daunting and not likely to succeed. But it had to succeed. There was no Plan B. This made their accomplishment all the more remarkable. Actually, the enormity of the mission probably helped the Rangers, as the German artillery overlooked this possibility, at first, thinking it impossible, until they were completely overrun. 

You have got to believe that you make it. To help you with that, remember where you came from, everything that your country has gone through, and the paths laid out by the pioneers ahead of you. Happy Independence Day, America!

June is National Safety Month

Awareness is understood as an ability to perceive direct consequences of an event; safety awareness is an extension of this definition. Safety awareness highlights a direct relationship between knowing the facts and the wellbeing of a common workplace. The goal of safety awareness is to reduce workplace injuries, illnesses and deaths through a network of understanding employees. Every year the National Safety Council promotes June as National Safety Month. Safety is everyone’s responsibility. At work, at home, and driving down the road there is always a need to be safe. We can all raise awareness about important safety issues such as slips and falls, workplace and employee safety, and emergency preparedness.

Safety cultures consist of shared beliefs, practices, and attitudes that exist at an establishment. In a strong safety culture, everyone feels responsible for safety and pursues it on a daily basis. Developing strong safety cultures have the single greatest impact on accident reduction of any process. A company with a strong safety culture typically experiences few at-risk behaviors, consequently they also experience low accident rates, low turn-over, low absenteeism, and high productivity. Creating a strong safety culture is hard work and takes time. Some factors that help establish a positive safety culture include:

• Management and employee assumptions and beliefs
• Management and employee attitudes
• Values, myths, stories
• Policies and procedures
• Supervisor priorities, responsibilities and accountability
• Production and bottom line pressures vs. quality issues
• Actions or lack of action to correct unsafe behaviors
• Employee training and motivation
• Employee involvement or "buy-in."

Any process that brings all levels of the organization together to work on a common goal that everyone holds in high value will strengthen the organizational culture.  At the beginning of the process to building a safety culture, companies may exhibit development through safety awareness.  Safety posters, warning signs and safety alerts are examples. With more time and commitment, devoted companies address physical hazards and may start incentive programs, establish safety committees and develop safety recognition programs.  All workers at every level should be concerned with safety and work together as safely as possible.

Safety benefits everyone and by incorporating rules employees avoid injury and illness from exposure to hazardous substances. With fewer injuries a business can be more productive and profitable. This will enhance the welfare of the community by providing clean air and water and less chance of dangerous accidents that puts lives and property at risk. 

How A Corporate Wellness Program Can Help Maximize Productivity

It’s no secret—construction is hard work that requires unrelenting physical and mental toughness. Whether you’re in the field or behind a desk, men and women who take on a career in construction must exert high levels of physical and mental energy to consistently meet industry demands. Construction is tough, and your employees need to be tougher. A fit, powerful team is the foundation of a high-performing company that reaches its greatest potential. Follow these rules to get the most out of your employee-wellness initiatives.

Make it competitive. In the right environment, people can harness their powerful energy as a vehicle to attain wellness success. Some people thrive in competitive, robust environments, so standard social weight-loss and bite-size corporate wellness programs just won’t cut it. Give your crew something they can sink their teeth into: competition, contests and challenges that motivate and drive them to achieve both individual and company-wide greatness.

Keep it simple. In the construction field, you and your employees are always on the go. Of course, you want to save on health care costs, but your employees don’t have time to track their calories, fill out spreadsheets with daily step counts or attend multiple health and wellness seminars throughout the year. Your wellness program should, therefore, leverage technology that allows even the busiest people to participate from anywhere, at any time. Participants need to be able to play along from their cellphones or home computers, checking in before/after work or during their breaks. Wireless tracking devices also act as the ultimate referees in workplace competitions, making each contest fun, fair, validated and regulated. By incorporating technology into your health program, you eliminate the hassle and legwork of traditional corporate initiatives.

 Remember—an effective health and wellness program aims to increase productivity, not interrupt it.

Spread the word. In a fast-paced atmosphere, communication techniques can make or break a team (even an entire company). With much of your team on the jobsite, communicating important information to everyone in a timely manner can be difficult. Employee health should be a top priority that demands a foolproof communication strategy—one that is customized to your company’s demographic needs. An effective communication strategy incorporates email, posters, flyers, health calendars, pre-shift announcements, manager-initiated group activities and online alerts.

Walk the talk. As a visible leader, your job is to establish and commit to upholding company standards. Deciding exactly how to implement a corporate wellness program and choosing which groups to include can be difficult. Is the program designed only for those on medical plans? Is it for full-timers only or part-timers too? Your wellness program always should be offered to 100 percent of full-time employees, whether or not they elect medical coverage. Part-timers and dependents/spouses are important to include as well. Why? Because employee wellness affects more than just medical claims—it impacts job performance, productivity, absenteeism, company culture and morale. Just as a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, a company’s success is determined by the successes of its employees from the top down. Lead the wellness revolution by example. You might be surprised how much your open involvement pushes others to join.

Buddy up. Getting healthy shouldn’t add to your stress—it should be energizing and should relieve your stress. Your corporate wellness initiatives should encourage teamwork and camaraderie, which build and improve company culture. Organized, health-based challenges create synergies that allow employees to work together, compete and communicate in ways they otherwise would not. Mix up your teams with each competition to build an even deeper layer of communication.

Spread your focus. Wellness is a valuable employee benefit, but let’s face it—you’re still concerned with how it affects the bottom line. Health care costs are rising at an unsustainable rate, so construction companies are making employee health and wellness a strategic business initiative—encouraging healthy employee behaviors to curb health care costs while creating a more efficient workforce. True ROI is likely your ultimate goal, but implementing a corporate wellness program is about more than just health care savings. Construction is among the most demanding industries, requiring ingenuity, persistence, strength and endurance. Healthy employees are more productive, stronger, less likely to injure themselves and require fewer sick days than their unhealthy coworkers. Plus, studies show that healthy people are actually happier overall—both at work and at home. So, while employee wellness is certainly a viable way to save some cash, it’s also a powerful tool that can help build a team of top producers.

Written by:

Danna Korn

Training Construction Workers With Video Games?

Gaming technology and animation software are transforming the way contractors perform training and simulation.

The idea of construction workers playing video games on the jobsite would make most construction professionals cringe. Most construction executives who walked on a jobsite and saw workers playing video games would likely fire those workers immediately. But what if those employees were looking at a video game showing an instructional video on window flashing, a jobsite safety animation or a demonstration of how to best access a site for a large delivery?

All of these applications for video games (and many more) are coming to the construction industry quicker than you can say “Pac-Man.” 

Most people who work in construction are aware that the generation that will be taking over the industry grew up on computers and video games. If you look at your staff, the people under the age of 35 probably have at least 25 years of experience in a video game and technological world. As this group enters the most productive years of their careers, they expect technology to be a part of their lives. This generation is familiar with user graphical interface and comfortable with maneuvering through virtual environments. Interacting with a gaming interface for visualization or for instructional purposes is second nature to this and subsequent generations. This generation also expects data at their fingertips.

During the last 14 years, we have seen the design and construction industry transition from the 2D plan to the 3D-modeled world. This 3D technology has been a valuable visualization tool for owners, designers and the construction industry. The development of this 3D modeling technology and the creation of low-cost, accessible “game engine” software has created the perfect opportunity to combine visualization and education. The combination of these technologies has made experimenting with game development technology for construction applications accessible. The traditional 3D fly-through architectural animation presents a predetermined fixed route selected by the creator. By contrast, a game engine gives the user a first-person walk-through experience. Through the use of a mouse, touch pad and keyboard, users can actually control the movement of the camera as though they are walking through the environment. This allows users to focus on what they are interested in seeing from multiple angles, if necessary. They can select the elements of the physical building they want to see in the model, as opposed to being limited to seeing a determined animation. This can be a useful tool for visualization, but the following examples depict a much deeper benefit of this application.

Example 1:

Recently, a design-build client came to us with a common site planning issue. They were designing a parking lot for a commercial building renovation. The dilemma was providing enough parking while allowing semi-trailer trucks access to the back of the building. This procedure required the truck to make multiple turns while backing up, complicating the approach. Clearly, this would be an expensive issue to fix if the company constructed the parking lot only to find that the trucks were unable to navigate it. To ensure they provided sufficient parking and circulation space, we needed to find a way to simulate a truck driving through the lot with a realistic turning radius. Rather than picking a point of view, putting in a camera and setting it to render, we used gaming technology to create simulations. We were able to clearly show the owner, engineer and project manager the tight spots so adjustments could be made. In the old days, this was done with a radius chart, but the chart did not always show the technical hitches of backing up a truck. In order to save time testing multiple options, we showed them this simulation in a game engine application. This allowed the project stakeholders to mimic the truck backing up through various scenarios while viewing the process from the driver’s seat, the loading dock or the parking lot. They were also able to control the playback of the simulation with the arrow keys on their computer’s keyboard and then use the mouse to rotate the camera around the vehicle to get the point of view that most clearly showed the problem areas. This simple application allowed the engineer to avoid spending time on redesigning. The owner was able to understand the issue and the implications, and the contractor was able to build the parking lot correctly the first time.

Example 2:

We are currently working with a company that builds partially prefabricated agricultural buildings. Initially, they asked us to create animations from their construction manual. The intention was that these animations would more clearly illustrate to their field crews how to build one of their buildings. This has now expanded into running these animations in a game engine application. Beyond the visualization, we are now making the animations interactive instructional videos. The application allows users to step through the construction process at their speed and to review prior steps if necessary. The user has the ability to maneuver the camera around the action in each step to see how the more complicated assemblies are completed.

The next step in the process is to embed a series of questions into the “video game” that tests people to see how well they understood what they have just watched. Once the users have finished watching the instructional component, they can either review the instructional component or take the test. The test takes them back through the assembly instructions, requiring them to answer questions relevant to each step in order to progress to the following step. A user’s score can then be tracked and saved in a database, allowing the company to track progress and document training.

Example 3:

Another application is the video game for jobsite safety instruction and testing. Many scientists agree that the majority of people are visual learners. When dealing with something as important as safety, training materials must be presented in the best possible way. Implementing the safety training application in a video game format allows the user to interact with the instructional information. This visual interaction can boost the user’s ability to retain instructions.

We are currently working with a general contractor in the Midwest to animate some of their most critical safety applications such as fall protection. In this application, users can move through the instructions at a pace that is comfortable for them. Additionally, the ability to control the position of the camera allows the user to watch the animation from any conceivable angle. This ensures that the animation will be as clear as possible for each user. Once again, the testing module has been added to help the contractor evaluate the employee’s comprehension and retention. These instructional videos also can be made multilingual with the click of a mouse, a critical requirement in today’s world. Finally, since new safety regulations are continually implemented, the game engine can provide immediate updates to the latest adaptations or changes to safety instructions via the web.

What is next?

With new hardware technologies such as gesture reading devices that allow users to control computer interface interaction with simple hand movements, smartphones more powerful than computers of just a few years ago, and the development of virtual reality headsets, access to these video game applications is becoming easier by the day. The potential for using video game technology for construction simulation is continuing to reach new heights, and we can expect to see exciting applications of the technology in the near future.

These technologies are valuable tools in the world of construction, providing information and simulations that help construction professionals avoid costly mistakes and oversights. The world of the video game in the family room 20 years ago was the nucleus of the transition of this technology from simple games to better communication and training on our jobsites. Construction might not be the first thing that comes to mind when you think about video games. But gaming technology, with its interactive simulations and detailed information, is a tool you cannot afford to ignore.

Written by:

Michael Whaley and Kirk Mullis

Committee Urges Hiring Commitment For $81M MSA Tower Project

A proposal by Flaherty & Collins Properties to build an $81 million, 28-story apartment tower on part of the former Market Square Arena site passed a major hurdle Monday evening.

Members of the Indianapolis City-County Council’s Metropolitan and Economic Development Committee recommended to the full council that the project be built, with one key stipulation. The vote was 6-2, with Democrats Leroy Robinson and Zach Adamson voting against it.

Flaherty & Collins must commit in a letter to Mayor Greg Ballard before a council vote that 30 percent of the workers that it hires to build the project must live in Marion County.

The developer would only be penalized, though, if it fails to hit a 25-percent benchmark for local hires.

“If that’s the only hiring requirement and it doesn’t go up at the council meeting, I would think the developer could live with 30 [percent],” said Deron Kintner, the city’s deputy mayor for economic development.

David Flaherty, CEO of Flaherty & Collins, said the developer can achieve the hiring goal.

“We have a very good track record of hiring locally and training locally,” he said.

The committee also recommended the city help fund the project with a 25-year, $23 million bond, of which $17.5 million will go directly to construction costs while the remainder will be held as a safety net to fund unexpected expenses.

The committee had delayed action on the development’s financing and hiring goals after failing to receive information it requested from Flaherty & Collins.

The proposed Market Square Tower—if it’s built as planned at 28 stories and 370 feet—will be one of the 10 tallest buildings in Indianapolis. It would rank as the tallest apartment building in Indianapolis.

The tower would include 300 luxury apartments renting for $1,300 to $2,400 per month. About 500 parking spaces and 43,000 square feet of ground-floor retail space would be included. Flaherty & Collins said it prefers that a specialty grocer occupy the space and is pursuing Whole Foods as a tenant.

The development would be backed by a combination of public and private funds, with the city agreeing to contribute funding from the bond sale and land for the project appraised at $5.6 million.

But before the city commits, committee members had asked that Flaherty & Collins provide it information on the project’s financing structure, plans to hire local contractors and parking specifics.

City-County Council member Vop Osili, who represents the district in which the project would be built, said he supports Flaherty & Collins’ commitment to ensure that 30 percent of workers are local.

“You have my commitment that I won’t ask for a dot over 30 [percent],” he said.

Kintner has said he believes real estate taxes on the $81 million project, estimated at $1.3 million per year, will be adequate to cover payments on the 25-year bond.

The deal is essentially tax-increment financing, but Kintner said it hasn’t yet been decided whether to expand the downtown TIF district to encompass the site. By law, tax revenue can be captured outside a TIF district, as long as it benefits the district, he said.

The remainder would be financed by Flaherty & Collins, which requested the second-lowest amount of public incentives of five development teams vying to develop the nearly 2-acre property. The city chose Flaherty's proposal in July.

by: Scott Olson

Telling Great Stories

Do you remember way back when you were four or five. You’d had your bath, you were cozy in your pajamas and Mom or Dad was tucking you into bed? Remember as you snuggled under the covers while they read you a bullet point list?

Of course you don’t - what a ludicrous notion! No child would put up with something so crushingly boring as to be read a list! No, your Mom read you stories. She read stories because stories are interesting, they’re entertaining, they have fascinating characters who face and overcome challenges. But most important, stories teach lessons. They have morals that allow us to see and understand things that we didn’t before.

Stories are a whole lot more interesting and valuable as agents of communication than are lists. Lists are not only boring to read, they don’t provide any insight into the value you brought to the project. Generic descriptions are, well, generic and fail to get anyone excited.

Fortunately, there are other ways to show your experience and the value you bring to your clients.

The RFP stated: Please address your firm’s approach to creative problem solving.

The response could have been a generic description such as:

Acme Engineers is dedicated to bringing a creative approach to problem solving. We begin by assembling a team of experts who study the problem from as many angles as possible. We then convene a brainstorming session in which creative ideas are encouraged and recorded. The ideas are then ranked using a voting mechanism, which identifies the top five ideas.

Projects on which we’ve utilized creative problem solving include:

• Followed by the predictable, boring and uninspiring list

Not very interesting, engaging or convincing. So how about something like this instead?

The Farmers Are Planting Drywall!

When Beaumont Health Systems wanted a new office building, they specified that the project should be LEED Certified. This had implications for the building, but also for the waste stream that every construction project generates. The goal was set at diverting at least 50% of the waste from landfills.

Never content to simply meet the goals, we set up an in-house contest with teams assigned to each component of the waste stream. Who could divert the largest volume of waste?

By the time we were finished, we’d diverted 350 tons of concrete, brick and block from the landfill and crushed it off-site for fill and other appropriate applications. We worked with the waste management company to begin a sorting process for the general trash, leading to waste diversion of close to 80%. But the winning team, with the most creative solution, had located a landscape supplier who took the gypsum from the old drywall to be ground up and resold as farm fertilizer.

The project is currently diverting 75% of the construction waste from the landfill, which earned the project two LEED credits, allowed Beaumont to leave a minimal impact on the environment and raised awareness within the construction workforce, Beaumont employees and the community at large.

A story like this ensures that the client will actually read it. Who, browsing through a proposal and coming across a headline like that, would not? Also, the story clearly demonstrated the firm’s creative problem solving ability in a way that no generic description or list ever could. And that’s all you need. No boring lists. No generic descriptions. Just an engaging tale of remarkable accomplishment. The kind you achieve every day.

www.stoneandcompany.net

Creating Buildings That Deliver On Progressively More Ambitious Environmental Goals Will Require Energy Simulations That Reliably Predict Post-Occupancy Consumption

Photo © Lara Swimmer

Higher energy performance has evolved from an aspiration to an expectation. Owners of buildings—especially those certified under rating systems like LEED—increasingly count on an energy savings payback. And a wave of “net zero energy” buildings promises to generate enough energy on-site from renewable sources to equal or exceed demand. As a result, predictive energy models face new scrutiny. “In the last five years, energy modelers have learned that they will have to answer for their models,” says Laurie Canup, an associate with Portland, Oregon–based THA Architecture.

Energy modeling depends on physics-based simulation to predict how energy will flow through a building, taking account of mechanical systems, materials, control schemes, occupants, and weather. The software packages were created to help architects and engineers choose among competing design options, and they do that well. As Matthew Herman, an energy-modeling expert with engineering firm Buro Happold puts it: “The models are more than accurate enough to consistently drive design teams toward the right decision.”

However, predicting the raw kilowatt-hours of electricity or cubic feet of heating fuel that a building will consume is another story. Some recent projects show sizable gaps between prediction and performance. The primary problem is the unpredictable nature of humans. For example, users may occupy a building differently from how they were expected to, while owners routinely skimp on commissioning to find and fix faulty equipment. And building managers may reprogram controls, sacrificing energy performance for occupant comfort. “Modeling isn’t rocket science,” says Dennis Creech, executive director of Atlanta’s Southface Energy Institute. “It’s harder because there are people involved.”

In the past, some modelers exploited the resulting uncertainty by selecting assumptions that yielded trimmer energy predictions. Such “gaming” is on the decline, according to both architects and modelers. “There was a period where people were clearly greenwashing and making crazy claims,” says Herman. “A lot of that stopped during the recession.”

Model Early and Often

Despite the uncertainties and challenges involved, energy modeling has been riding an upswing over the past decade. Mitchell Dec has experienced that first hand. Dec was the only energy modeler at Glumac when he joined the Portland, Oregon–based engineering firm in 2005. In those early years, Dec was brought on to projects primarily after construction documents were already well advanced. His job was to assess whether a design could beat code-mandated performance to improve its LEED rating, and to tweak designs that fell short. “We’d count the beans. We were an afterthought,” he recalls.

Today Dec leads a 13-person energy-modeling group whose members engage at even the earliest stages of design. “Energy modeling early and often is the workflow for buildings that are 50 to 60 percent more efficient than code versus 15 to 20 percent better,” says Dec.

Stefano Schiavon, a modeling expert with the Center for the Built Environment at the University of California, Berkeley, agrees, adding that today’s highest-performing buildings could not exist otherwise. Without simulation, says Schiavon, it is impossible to predict the impact that largely passive energy-saving techniques such as natural ventilation and thermal storage will deliver.

The need to get these passive strategies right is driving software improvements. Older simulation packages such as eQuest are being eclipsed by more powerful tools. Commercial options include Virtual Environment, offered by London-based IES, and the TRNSYS code developed by the University of Wisconsin and applied most notably by German sustainable-design firm Transsolar. A new graphical user interface, meanwhile, is spurring adoption of EnergyPlus—an open-source upgrade of the U.S. Department of Energy modeling engines that underpin eQuest.

Schiavon says that the more sophisticated tools have enhanced capabilities for simulating daylighting and thermal properties and can model in two-to-three-minute intervals rather than hourly. This enables a more accurate understanding of the buoyancy effects that designers might exploit in atriums or solar chimneys, as well as better apprehension of the transfer of heat at work in features such as radiant floors.

High-performance buildings that meet or beat expectations show that models can accurately predict real energy use. Dec cites the 103,000-square-foot Lewis Integrative Science Building at the University of Oregon in Eugene completed in 2012, which was designed by a joint venture of Omaha, Nebraska–based HDR and THA and modeled by Glumac.

One component that involved extensive modeling is the lab building’s glass-covered atrium, where scientists mix and meet. THA wanted to take advantage of buoyancy to condition the three-story space by drawing in air, along with excess heat and cooling from adjacent labs. 

Making it work required extensive computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis to predict air and smoke movements during a fire.

The CFD models showed that passive ventilation alone might not clear smoke from the top level, necessitating ceiling fans to supplement the buoyancy-driven airflow. Nevertheless, even with the fans, the atrium cut the building’s predicted annual energy use per square foot—its energy use intensity or EUI—by 33 kBtus (33,000 British thermal units). Predicted EUI for the entire facility was 168 kBtus per square foot per year—60 percent better than the national average for lab buildings in 2003 and thus meeting the goal of the Architecture 2030 Challenge, which seeks to make new buildings carbon neutral by 2030. After one year of occupation, performance is slightly ahead of expectations, with an EUI of 163.

Tucson-based architect Jerry Yudelson, coauthor of The World’s Greenest Buildings: Promise Versus Performance in Sustainable Design, points to the Research Support Facility at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) in Golden, Colorado, which is making good on its net zero design goal. “They’re pretty much right on the money,” says Yudelson. For the support facility’s first phase, which came online in 2010, modelers at engineering firm Stantec predicted an EUI of 35.1 kBtus. It consumed 35.4 during the first two years of operation. The second wing, completed less than one year ago, is beating expectations.

Reality Bites

While models can hit their marks, reality can also outwit simulation. Consider the 58,000-square-foot Health Professions and Student Services Building on the Danvers, Massachusetts, campus of North Shore Community College, which was one of the largest buildings to go for net zero energy when completed in 2011. Boston-based DiMella Shaffer was the architect, RDK Engineers designed the mechanical systems, and Buro Happold delivered energy modeling.

Modeling via EnergyPlus was supplemented with advanced CFD and lighting simulation to evaluate a wide range of options that would maximize on-site energy production and minimize consumption. Modeling showed that a demand for acoustically isolated classrooms precluded passive ventilation, pointing the design team toward a geothermal system instead. The building’s heat pump exchanges thermal energy between 500-foot wells drilled under the parking lot and interior chilled beams.

Modeling also drove the clerestory windows in the upper walls. “Energy modeling proved that it was desirable to have more daylight and thus less electricity running artificial lights,” recalls DiMella Shaffer principal Peter Shaffer.

After two years of occupation, however, the building is not operating at net zero energy. It is consuming 57 kBtu per square foot per year, double the modeled EUI. Offsetting the unexpected consumption would require more than double the 342 kilowatts of photovoltaics (PVs) installed.

The primary issue, says Shaffer, is an inefficient geothermal heat pump, which will be swapped out this winter. More chilled beams will also be installed to accelerate heating and cooling, in response to occupant complaints that prompted managers to keep the entire building conditioned overnight.

Peter Fourtounis, the project’s lead architect and now at Boston’s Elkus Manfredi Architects, adds that post-design decisions, including the addition of a computer lab and higher-than-expected plug loads, contributed to the performance gap. He also points out that the project had been designed for a PV array that was 15 percent larger.

User behavior has had a more positive impact on energy use at Hawaii Preparatory Academy’s Energy Laboratory in Kamuela, designed by Boston-based Flansburgh Architects, with energy modeling by Buro Happold. The building, completed in 2010, was shaped to enhance natural ventilation using CFD analysis. The structure backs into the prevailing wind, and air forced over its shed roofs creates negative pressure, pulling fresh air through automated louvers and windows. The results of that passive scheme, coupled with solar power, far exceed the building’s net zero energy goal. The building is operating without any mechanical cooling and consuming just over half as much energy as predicted.

What did the modeling miss? The site’s microclimate has been milder than Buro Happold’s assumptions, which were based on weather data collected on-site during design and from the nearby airport. But the bigger piece, according to Herman, is that the occupants tolerate conditions that are hotter and more humid than those outlined in ASHRAE Standard 55, which defines a range of indoor thermal conditions acceptable to most people. “They just wear Hawaiian shirts all the time. Even up to 82 or 83 degrees, they are still perfectly comfortable and don’t turn on the AC,” he says.

Occupant behavior was also a surprise for the historic warehouse renovation in Portland, Oregon, that architects GBD and Ankrom Moisan designed for Danish wind turbine manufacturer Vestas. The LEED Platinum–targeted project, completed in 2012, is slightly ahead of modeled energy performance overall, but the pattern of use was unanticipated, says Dec at Glumac, the project’s energy modeler: electricity consumption is about two thirds of what was modeled, while gas use runs 10 to 20 times higher in heating season.

Dec attributes the low power use, in part, to the behavior of reflected light. It’s a weak point for energy models, and the building’s daylit atrium is simply directing more light into adjacent offices than predicted. But he says bigger savings come from the ever-increasing efficiency of office computing equipment, which he calls a moving target.

Better office equipment and less electric lighting help explain the increased gas use, says Dec. With lighting and machines contributing less heat in cold weather, natural gas-fired heating has to make up the difference.

Feeding Back

Vestas got lucky, since lower power use more than offsets their increased gas consumption. Assuring greater accuracy up front, however, will require a closer fit between the assumptions modelers make and the behavior that follows.

Last year the Seattle-based New Buildings Institute offered one solution: national guidelines for those parameters not already defined by codes or standards. Mark Frankel, the institute’s technical director, says they based their COMNET guidelines on informed analysis of such factors as the number of computers in offices and how many stay on overnight.

Another accuracy-boosting strategy is to extend the model’s use beyond the design process. Modelers can help tune control systems, educate building users, and identify equipment malfunctions. Extended modeling is one reason NREL’s new structures are performing, says Tom Hootman, director of sustainability for Denver-based RNL, the project architect. Updated “as-built” energy models of each wing delivered by Stantec following construction give NREL what Hootman calls “a road map for net zero energy operation.”

Future projects benefit too, since prolonged involvement creates a feedback loop for validation of modeling tools and assumptions. A growing number of designers argue that, at the very least, design and engineering contracts should require owners to share post-occupancy energy data. Yudelson notes that such feedback is one key to meeting the stringent goals of the Architecture 2030 Challenge. “There’s a lot of learning that’s got to take place in the next five years,” he says. “This is serious stuff, and we’re not treating it seriously.”

By Peter Fairley