LEAD: Jesse

Welcome. We’re here to talk about what we learned from the WSOC project.

Envelope commissioning is one of the big success stories of this project. Some of us have

been working on this for four years, so please let us know if we slip into project specific

jargon or if we start to lose you. We’ve arranged this presentation roughly as a

chronological narrative, from design through testing.

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

1

LEAD: Jesse

• Largest state office complex, now home to Agency of Human Services

• Project currently nearing completion, some parts occupied

• Note the round buildings at the ends of the historic portion

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

2

LEAD: Jesse

• Point out round buildings, show site area,

• note the river, Rt 2, I-89 just below the screen

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

3

LEAD: Jesse

• Sunday, August 28, 2011- just before labor day, TS Irene

• Flooded 47 of 48 buildings

• Big part of state workforce- 1,250 people

• Agency of Natural Resources

• Agency of Human Services

• State Mental Health hospital, patients had to evac by boat

Animation Note:

Click – Water table with guy

4

LEAD: Jesse

• Not the first flood

• Original built on highest ground and only the basements flooded

• Some buildings had flooding on lowest *2* levels

• Serious questions about whether to rebuild on this site

Animation Note:

Click – Zoom in of barn

Click – Zoom in of flood damage

Click – Red bar elevation

5

LEAD: Jesse

• Considered different sites- images show greenfield site & current Dept of Labor in

Montpelier

• Greenfield site costly, need to create a lot of infrastructure to support ~1,000 people

• DOL site also flood prone & costly midrise building with structured parking

• Offsite options would not get FEMA funds

• Considered leasing instead of building

• Economist, River scientist, real estate market analyst on team for initial analysis along with

Arch, MEP, Struct, Civil, Geotech

• ……

• In the end, best option was to demo many buildings at Waterbury with little usable space

below 431.5’

• New buildings at higher elevation, historic buildings heavily renovated with basements

filled in

• Change in FEMA rules which would have required rebuilding brick-for-brick, even in a

floodplain

Animation Note:

Click – South elevation

6

LEAD: Jesse

• $96M construction

• 4 main components

• Plant and infrastructure also serves pre-existing DPS and Forensics buildings

Animation Note:

Click – Central Plant

Click – Historic Core

Click – New Office Building

7

LEAD: Jesse

Project Goals:

• Energy efficiency was key, economic analysis showed impact of operational costs

• Resilience- building usable during and after future disasters

• Flood resistant and air tight enclosure key to resilience on this site

• Quality enclosure can be done right just once… costly and difficult to fix once constructed

• Most important part of building, more so than systems for energy efficiency- so

should be commissioned like systems

• Surprisingly Small air leak can negate much of your insulation.

• Operable windows with triple pane and good thermal break @ New; continued ongoing

window replacement at Reno but better install details.

• Mineral fiber insulation, 6” continuous, impaled on plastic pins for initial install to

minimize bridging

• Ultimately held in place by stainless steel, thermally broken masonry ties with disc

incorporated to hold insulation

• All structure within insulation, or, where not possible, with structural thermal breaks.

• ***BGS got CM and BECx on board early to ensure we could meet these goals. These

services were bid competitively, but price was only a part of the score- Reputation &

experience played a big role.

8

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

8

LEAD: Jon

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Jon Notes:

BECx Process:

Review Owner’s Project requirements (OPR) and basis of Design BoD

Plan and spec review

Submittal review

Kick off meeting(s)

Mockup and QA testing

Inspections

Compliance testing

Train building operators

Pre warranty check

Maintenance schedules and checklists

9

LEAD: Jon

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Jon Notes:

What is being commissioned?

Envelope: Walls, roof/ceiling, slab and foundation

4 Control layers: thermal, air, vapor, and moisture

10

LEAD: Jon

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Jon Notes:

BECx value proposition

Energy savings

Increased durability by anticipating common problems

Optimize envelope while its easy and cheap to do

Downsize HVAC

Prepare for renewable technology

Building resilience to weather changes and power outages

Animation Note:

Pictures will show up on their own

11

LEAD: Jesse

• To emphasize envelope importance, diagram placed right on the cover sheet

• Reinforced by specs

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Animation Note:

Lines will zoom in on their own

12

LEAD: Jesse

• Project specs spell out what gets commissioned (we did commission mechanical systems,

lighting, and the controls for both as well)

• Sets expectations for contractor and subs

• Lists tests to be done and required passing results

• Would have liked a more aggressive spec for overall air leakage but feared scaring off

bidders

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Animation Note:

Click – Line will appear around note

13

LEAD: Andy

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

14

LEAD: Andy

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Animation Note:

Click – Line will appear around ETA

15

LEAD: Anne

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Anne Notes:

• PC was hired early.

• This gave PC time to really focus on the details and figure out the best way to buy the

project out. The IFBs were issued January 24th 2014 and the project was bought out

by the end of April 2014.

• 7 Sub-Projects

• Demolition

• Site work

• Small MEP - Forensics/DPS

• Small MEP and little architectural - Hanks/Weeks

• Central Plant

• New Office Building

• Historic Core Renovation

• 100 Subcontracts

• Each division of work bought out separately for each sub-project

16

• 3 drywall subcontractors, one for CP, RENO and NOB

• Same roofer for CP and NOB

• Focus on employing Vermont (New England) Subcontractors

• Limited amount of subcontractors available as well as potential overloading

subcontractors

• Bondable

• Scopes were bought/combined with project efficiency and cost effectiveness as the main

factors

• To statisfy these was challenging. We tried to make sure all details were sequenced in

a way that would be most efficient but such as the parapet detail this was not always

the case. In the future I may have the roofer be responsible for the waterproofing

under the parpapet. This would make the detail more efficient but possible more

expensive.

• All of these different envelope subcontractors has some involvement with the coordination

of BECx (Compatibility Matrix).

• CP and NOB had many similar materials. Historic core was unique. This created

another level of complexity to make sure PC has ALL the details required and an

added level of review for the design team. Lots of hands in the pot.

16

LEAD: Anne

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Anne Notes:

• FFF & PC hub for all correspondence

• PC and ZBD would communicate directly as well, but the review cycles hinged on FFF/PC

• FFF was responsible for combining/communicating all review comments from the owner

and design consultants including Energry Balance and Zero By Degrees

• PC was responsible for creating all submittals/communicating all review comments back to

the subcontractors

• FFF created all the design documents and gave them to PC who in turn make sure all

documents were updated and in the subs hands

• Each sub was required to first submit product data with samples to PC whom would check

to make sure the product meets the specifications along with the applicable compatibility

matrix (more on this later)

• The submittal would then be sent through Submittal Exchange (more details later) to FFF

• Once the product data is approved, the shop drawings would start

• Many times this would create a revision cycle where Charretting would occur

17

• Once the shop drawings are approved, the fabrication would commence

• The revised details would be conformed into the drawings/specs which would be

continuously synced with the kiosks in the field.

• Construction starts!

Animation Note:

Click – Revision Cycle

17

LEAD: Anne

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Anne Notes:

In the field we had these blue boxes or plywood boxes that we built. Inside would be a

computer with a printer for all to use! The PC had access to Submittal Exchange. This is

where all documents were submitted reviewed and archieved. No paper submittals. When

something is submitted via submittal exchange, the system would automatically notify the

applicable party for review. The document lives there until it has matured and been approve

at which time PC would down load the approved submittal or RFI and put it on the kiosk for

easy access. At the kiosk you have a simple folder system where you can find anything. And

you can follow this path for the conformed drawing set. As a foreman, you can go to the

drawings, zoom in on the detail you want your guys to build, print it off right there on the

spot and hand it to your guys to build. You have everything you need right at the kiosk. No

need for paper in the field…Other than the details you are printing for your men. When you

go to build, you know you are always looking at the most updated drawings.

Animation Note:

18

Click – Printer zoom

Click – Drill down menu appear

18

LEAD: Jesse

• Can’t say enough good things about electronic contract docs and how they were managed

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

19

LEAD: Anne

SPEAKER #1: Andy

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Anne Notes:

• Compatibility Matrix

• First time for many subcontractors

• Nicom (waterproofing subcontractor) had the most involvement as the

Waterproofing sub

• Drives in direction of single source compatibily certification

Animation Note:

Click – Zoom in of matrix

20

LEAD: Andy

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

21

LEAD: Andy

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

22

LEAD: Andy

SPEAKER #1: Jesse

• Many of the subs had worked together before, and knew capabilities

• Getting layers sequenced correctly was critical

• The bid documents showed everything necessary to meet spec, but seeing us be willing to

change to simplify sequencing or installation really helped get sub buy-in\

• Input of subs made the details better

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

23

LEAD: Andy

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Animation Note:

Click – Rev 2

Click – Rev 3

24

LEAD: Anne

SPEAKER #1: Andy

SPEAKER #2: Jesse

SPEAKER #3:

Anne Notes:

• 6 Subcontractors involved in parapet detail.

• Small area, lot of different scopes involved, overlapping quickly

• Need to get the building weather tight

• Framer, waterproofer and roofer

• Sequencing of work vs. subcontractors involved

• New detail for all

• Everyone learned quickly that the envelope details here required extra attention

• Initially slows down the subs – high quality of work

• Subs had buy-in in the detail

• Empowered them to do a good job

• Details are improving – so must our attention to the details

25

LEAD: Andy

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Animation Note:

Click – Zoom in on detail

26

LEAD: Once we’d figured out our detail sequencing, completed product submittals and the

compatibility matrix, we started to build… a mock-up. Important to build and test a mock-

up before construction begins, especially on a large project.

SPEAKER #1: Anne

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Anne Notes:

• Typically seen as a hassle, waste of time and money – I can honestly say I thought the

same at first. But we were able to see where we had weaknesses. Such as the ETA….So

when it came to the mock-up it was hard to see the long term benefits, but it truly did

make our construction details improve and our quality of construction better. All in all, I

won’t “mock the mock-up” again.

• Masonry transitions, flashing were revised to be constructed more efficiently

• Wood buck on curtainwall openings were revised to allow an even plane for the ETA to

adhere

27

LEAD: Andy

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Animation Note:

Click – Picture of ETA with arrows

28

LEAD: Jon

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Jon Notes:

Not to be missed opportunity to validate design and workmanship. Very important to do

and use the brain trust of everyone to resolve issues. Found a an important issue with the

ETA at windows that allowed us to have a better solution on the building.

Test mockup before exterior cladding/ finishes

Order window samples early!!!! They are often the holdup.

29

LEAD: Andy or Anne? After the envelope kickoff, revised details were issued and shop

drawings submitted.

Shops were first reviewed by Anne, then passed to the design team for simultaneous review

by Andy & Jesse

Note path of ETA….

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

30

LEAD: Here’s that ETA, which changed as a result of the mockup testing; remember the fold

in the ETA in the mockup? We brought the plywood buck supporting the curtainwall back

to align with the “bite” where the ETA gets locked into the curtainwall system- point out

location of ETA

Allows ETA to function optimally, will handle expansion/ contraction much better than

caulking alone and keep envelope integrity around openings tight for many years.

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Animation Note:

Click – Revision made to detail

31

LEAD: Andy

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

32

LEAD: ANNE… Early on in the envelope testing. Another lesson learned was that the liquid

applied barrier may not be ideal for VT climate. Needs a long time to dry, even rain 24 hours

after application could create thin spots in barrier.

PC voluntarily switched to an all “blueskin” peel and stick A/V barrier; more costly for the

product , but quicker installation much less dependent on our variable weather

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

33

LEAD: Jon

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Jon Notes:

Clear, timely, and regular communication

Issue logs

Follow up

34

LEAD: Jon

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Jon Notes:

Fog testing 1st instance details

Allows us to see things we might miss with visual

IR testing when the conditions allow- allows us to see a lot in one trip

No substitute for just showing up and looking around.

Animation Note:

Pictures will appear on their own

35

LEAD: Jon

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Jon Notes:

Test as early as possible to avoid repeated issues and before exterior finishes are on.

Get some of the glazing ordered and installed early to test. Glazing is often installed late

and by then many finishes are in.

Leave off the gyp returns on the test windows.

Anne Notes:

As a lessons learned from the Construction Management side – Keep glazing as a top

priority consistently throughout buyout. During buyout we changed manufacturers, which

changed glass types, which cost us time. By the time we had developed the final

construction documents for the glazing systems our glazing manufacturer delayed the

delivery which affect the timing of our window testing. As a result we were able to get them

to phase the deliveries of glazing which solved many issues. Things all worked out in the end

36

(testing was able to be performed, and the building was kept water tight through out all

weather condiditons) but in the future I will make sure this scope of work is made a top

prioriy.

36

LEAD: Jon

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Jon Notes:

37

LEAD: Jon

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Jon Notes:

Per test preparations:

Meeting

Who will do HVAC shutdown?

Who will mask intentional penetrations?

Animation Note:

Pictures will appear on their own

38

LEAD: Jon

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Jon Notes:

Our typical setup- blower door, fans, bbq grill. Make sure to close all doors except the

garage door.

Animation Note:

Click – Results chart

39

LEAD: Jon

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

Jon Notes:

Our typical setup- blower door, fans, bbq grill. Make sure to close all doors except the

garage door.

Animation Note:

Click – Results chart

40

LEAD: Jesse

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

41

LEAD: Jesse

• Describe images

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

42

LEAD: Jesse

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

43

LEAD: Jesse

SPEAKER #1:

SPEAKER #2:

SPEAKER #3:

44